D    J   I,  •      !    1     n' 
>,  f     I   )     "     '      If 


I   ';    '■  r;  ^ 


I:, 


5",  l^'L.co, 


Srom  f  ^e  feiBrari?  of 

Q5equeaf  3^b  6g  ^tm  to 
f  ^e  feifirarg  of 

gprinceton  C^eofo^icaf  ^eminarg 


DICTIONARY    OF    THE    BIBLE 


COMPRISING    ITS 


ANTIQUITIES,   BIOGRAPHY,   GEOGRAPHY, 
AND    NATURAL    HISTORY. 


EDITE 


By    WILLIAM    SMITH,    LL.D., 

EDITOR  01'  THE   DICTIONARIES  OP    "GREEK    AND   ROMAN    ANTIQUITIES."    "BIOGRAPHY    AND    MYTHOLOGY, 

AND   "GEOGirAI'tn." 


IN   THEEE   VOLUMES.— Vol.  II. 
KABZEEL— RED-HEIFER. 


BOSTON: 
LITTLE,  BROWN,  AND  COMPANY. 

1863. 


DIRECTIONS  TO  BINDER. 


Plate  I.,  Specimens  of  Greek  MSS.  from  the  1st  to  the  Vlth  century,  to  be 

placed  between  pages  516  and  517. 
Plate  II.,  Specimens  of  Greek  MSS.  from  the  Xth  to  the  XIV th  century,  to  be 

placed  between  pages  518  and  519. 


LIST*  OF    WRITEES. 


H.  A.  Very  Eev.  Henry  Alfoed,  D.D., 

Dean  of  Canterbury. 

H.  B.  Eev.  Henry  Bailey,  B.D., 

Warden  of  St.  Augustine's  College,  Canterbury  ;  late  Fellow 
of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 

H.  B.  Eev.  HoRATius  Bonar,  D.D., 

Kelso,  N.  B. ;  Author  of  'The  Land  of  Promise.' 

QThe  geographical  articles,  signed  H.  B.,  are  written  by  Dr.  Bonar:  those  on  other  subjects, 
signed  H.  B.,  are  written  by  Mr.  Bailey.] 

A.  B.  Eev.  Alfred  Barry,  B.D., 

Principal  of  Cheltenham  College  ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

W.  L.  B.     Eev.  William  Latham  Bevan,  M.A., 
Vicar  of  Hay,  Brecknockshire. 

J.  W.  B.     Eev.  Joseph  Williams  Blakesley,  B.D., 

Canon  of  Canterbury ;  Vicar  of  Ware  ;  late  Fellow  and  Tutor 
of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge. 

T.  E.  B.       Eev.  Thomas  Edward  Brown,  M.A., 

Vice-Principal  of  King  William's  College,  Isle  of  Man  ;  late 
Fellow  of  Oriel  College,  Oxford. 

E.  W.  B.      Ven.  Egbert  William  Browne,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Bath ;  Canon  of  Wells ;  Eector  of  Weston- 
super-Mare  ;  Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Bath 
and  Wells ,  Chaplain  to  Her  Majesty's  Forces. 

E.  H.  B.      Eev.  Edward  Harold  Browne,  B.D., 

Norrisian  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge  ;  Canon  of  Exeter. 

W.  T.  B.     Eev.  William  Thomas  Bullock,  M.A., 

Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 

S.  C.  Eev.  Samuel  Clark,  M.A., 

Vicar  of  Bredwardine  with  Brobtiry,  Herefordshire. 

F.  C.  C.       Eev.  F.  C.  Cook,  M.A., 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  one  of  Her  Majesty's 
Inspectors  of  Schools ;  Preacher  to  the  Hon.  Society  of 
Lincoln's  Inn;  Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of 
Lincoln. 

G.  E.  L.  C.  Eight  Eev.  George  Edward  Lynch  Cotton,  D.D., 

Lord  Bishop  of  Calcutta  and  Metropolitan  of  India. 

J,  LI.  D.      Eev.  John  Llewelyn  Davies,  M.A., 

Eector  of  Christ  Church,  Marylebone  ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 


iv  LIST  OF  WRITERS. 

INITIALS.  NAMES. 

E.  D.  Emanuel  Deutsch,  M.E.A.S., 

British  Museum. 

G.  E.  D.      Eev.  G.  E.  Day,  D.D., 

Lane  Seminary,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

W.  D.  Eev.  William  Drake,  M.A,, 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  Hon.  Canon  of  ^Yorcester ; 
Rural  Dean  ;  Vicar  of  Holy  Trinity,  Coventry 

E.  P.  E.       Eev.  Edward  Paroissien  Eddrup,  ]\I.A., 

Prebendary  of  Salisbury ;  Principal  of  the  Theological 
College,  Salisbury. 

C.  J.  E.       Eight  Eev.  Charles  James  Ellicott,  D.D., 
Lord  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol. 

F.  W.  F.      Eev.  Frederick  "William  Farrar,  M.A., 

Assistant  Master  of  Harrow  School  ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

J.  F.  James  Fergusson,  F.E.S.,  F.E.A.S., 

Fellow  of  the  Eoyal  Institute  of  British  Architects. 

E.  S.  Ff.      Edward  S.  Ffoulkes,  M.A., 

late  Fellow  of  Jesus  College,  Oxford 

W.  F.  Eight  Eev.  William  Fitzgerald,  D.D., 

Lord  Bishop  of  Killaloe.  , 

F,  G.  Eev.  Francis  Garden,  M.A., 

Subdean  of  Her  Majesty's  Chapels  Eoyal. 

F.  W.  G.     Eev.  William  Gotch,  LL.D., 

late  Hebrew  Examiner  in  the  L^niversity  of  London. 

G.  George  Grove, 

Crystal  Palace,  Sydenham. 

H.  B.  H.      Eev.  H.  B.  Hackett,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Biblical  Literature,  Newton,  Massachusetts. 

E.  H — s.      Eev.  Ernest  Hawkins,  B.D., 

Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's ;  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 

H.  H.  Eev.  Henry  Hayman,  B.D., 

Head  Master  of  the  Grammar  School,  Cheltenham ;  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Oxford. 

A.  C.  H.      Ven.  Lord  Arthur  C.  Hervey,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Sudbury,  and  Eector  of  Ickworth. 

J.  A.  H.       Rev.  James  Augustus  Hessey,  D.C.L., 

Head  Master  of  Merchant  Taylors'  School ;  Preacher  to  the 
Hon.  Society  of  Gray's  Inn ;  Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's ; 
Bampton  Lecturer  for  1860. 

J.  D.  H.      Joseph  D.  Hooker,  M.D.,  F.E.S., 
Eoyal  Botanic  Gardens,  Kew. 


LIST  OF  WRITERS.  V 

INITIALS.  NAMES.  • 

J.  J.  H.        Eev.  James  John  Hornby,  M.A., 

Fellow  of  Brasenose  College,  Oxford  ;  Principal  of  Bishop 
Cosin's  Hall ;  Tutor  in  the  University  of  Durham. 

W.  H.  Kev.  William  Houghton,  M.A.,  F.L.S., 

Eector  of  Preston  on  the  Weald  Moors,  Salop. 
J.  S.  H.        Eev.  John  Saul  Howson,  D.D., 

Principal  of  the  Collegiate  Institution,  Liverpool ;  Hulseau 
Lecturer  for  I860. 

E.  H.  Eev.  Edgar  Huxtable,  M.A., 

Subdean  of  Wells. 
W.  B.  J.      Eev.  William  Basil  Jones,  M.A., 

Prebendary  of  York  and  of  St.  David's ;    late  Fellow  and 

Tutor    of    University    College,     Oxford  ;     Examining 

Chaplain  to  the  Archbishop  of  York. 

A.  H.  L.      Austen  Henry  Layard,  D.C.L.,  M.P. 

S.  L.  Eev.  Stanley  Leathes,  M.A.,  M.E.S.L., 

Hebrew  Lecturer  in  King's  College,  London. 
J.  B.  L.        Eev.  Joseph  Barber  Lightfoot,  M.A., 

Hulsean  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge  ;  Fellow  of 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge ;  Examining  Chaplain  to 
the  Bishop  of  London. 

D.  W.  M.     Eev.  D  W.  Marks, 

Professor  of  Hebrew  in  University  College,  London. 

F.  M.  Eev.  Frederick  Meyrick,  M.A., 

One  of  Her  Majesty's  Inspectors  of  Schools ;  late  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Trinity  College,  Oxford. 

Oppert.         Professor  Oppert,  of  Paris. 

E.  E,  0.       Eev.  Edward  Eedman  Orger,  M.A., 

Fellow  and  Tutor  of  St.  Augustine's  College,  Canterbuiy. 

T.  J.  0.       Veil,  Thomas  Johnson  Ormerod,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Suftblk ;  late  Fellow  of  Brasenose  College, 
Oxford. 

J.  J.  S.  P.   Eev.  John  James  Stewart  Perowne,  B.D., 

Vice-Principal  of  St.  David's  College,  Lampeter  ;  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich. 

T.  T,  p.       Eev.  Thomas  Thomason  Perowne,  B.D., 

Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge ; 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich. 

H.  W.  P.     Eev.  Henry  Wright  Phillott,  M.A., 

Eector  of  Staunton-on-Wye,  Herefordshire ;  Eural  Dean ; 
late  Student  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

E.  H.  P.      Eev.  Edward  Hayes  Plumptee,  M.A., 

Professor  of  Divinity  in  King's  College,  London  ;  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol. 

E.  S.  P.        Edward  Stanley  Poole,  M.E.A.S., 

South  Kensington  Museum. 


Yi  LIST  OF  WRITEES. 

INITIALS.  NAMES. 

E.  S,  P.        Eeginald  Stuakt  Poole, 
British  Museum. 

J.  L.  P.       Eev.  J.  L.  Porter,  M.A., 

Author  of  '  Handbook  of  Syria  and  Palestine,'  and  '  Fi^-e 
Years  in  Damascus.' 

C.  P.  Eev.  Charles  Pritchard,  M.A.,  F.E.S., 

Hon.  Secretary  of  the  Eoyal  Astronomical  Society ;  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 

G.  E.  Eev.  George  Eawlinson,  M,A,, 

Camden  Professor  of  Ancient  History,  Oxford ;  Bampton 
Lecturer  for  1859. 

H.  J.  E.      Eev.  Henry  John  Eose,  B.D., 

Eural  Dean,  and  Eector  of  Houghton  Conquest,  Bedfordshire. 

^V.  S.  Eev.  William  Selwtn,  D.D., 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  Lady  Margaret's  Pro- 
fessor of  Divinity,  Cambridge  ;    Canon  of  Ely. 

A.  P.  S.        Eev.  Arthur  Penrhyn  Stanley,  D.D., 

Eegins  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  and  Canon  of 
Christ  Church,  Oxford;  Deputy  Clerk  of  the  Closet; 
Chaplain  to  His  Eoyal  Highness  the  Prince  of  Wales ; 
Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  London. 

C.  E.  S.        Eev.  Calvin  E.  Stowe,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Sacred  Literature,  Andover,  Massachusetts. 

J.  P.  T.        Eev.  J.  P.  Thompson,  D.D., 
New  York. 

W.  T.  Most  Eev.  William  Thomson,  D.D., 

Lord  Archbishop  of  York. 

S.  P.  T.       S.  P.  Tregelles,  LL.D., 

Author  of  '  An  Account  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the  Greek 
Xew  Testament.' 

H.  B.  T.      Eev.  H.  B.  Tristram,  M.A.,  F.L.S., 

Master  of  Greatham  Hospital. 
J.  F.  T.       Eev.  Joseph  Francis  Thrupp,  M.A., 

Vicar  of  Barrington  ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Camb. 
E.  T.  Hon.  Edward  T.  B.  Twisleton,  M.A., 

Late  Fellow  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford. 
E.  V.     .       Eev.  Edmund  Venables,  M.A., 

Bonchurch,  Isle  of  Wight. 

B.  F.  W.      Eev.  Brooke  Foss  Westcott,  M.A., 

Assistant  Master  of  Harrow  School ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

C.  W.  Eev.  Christopher  Wordsworth,  D.D., 

Canon  of  Westminster. 
\V.  A.  W.     William  Aldis  Wright,  M.A., 

Librarian  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge ;  Hebrew  Examiner 
in  the  University  of  London. 


DICTIONAEY 

OF 

BIBLICAL  ANTIQUITIES,  BIOGRiVPHY,  GEOGKAPHY, 
AND  NATURAL  HISTORY. 


K 

KABZEE'L  c'?!!?V?i?  '■  ^aiaeKeiiX,  KajSetreijA., 
Koj3a(ra7)A ;  Alex.  Ka(r0ei)\ :  Cabseel,  Gapsad), 
one  of  the  "  cities  "  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  ;  the  first 
named  in  the  enumeration  of  those  next  Edom,  and 
apparently  the  farthest  south  (Josh.  xv.  21). 
Taken  as  Hebrew,  the  word  signifies  "  collected  by 
God,"  and  may  be  compared  with  Joktiieel,  the 
name  bestowed  by  the  Jews  on  an  Edomite  city. 
Kabzeel  is  memorable  as  the  native  place  of  the 
great  hero  BENAiAil-ben-Jehoiada,  in  connexion 
with  whom  it  is  twice  mentioned  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20  ; 
1  Chr.  xi.  22).  After  the  captivity  it  was  rein- 
habitrd  by  the  Jews,  and  appears  as  Jekabzeel. 

It  is  twice  mentioned  in  the  Ouomasticon — as 
Ka^aeiiX  and  Orpseel ;  the  fii'st  time  by  Eusebius 
only,  and  apparently  confounded  with  Carmel,  un- 
less the  conjecture  of  Le  Clerc  in  his  notes  on  the 
p;vssao;e  be  accepted,  which  would  identify  it  with 
the  site  of  Elijah's  sleep  and  vision,  between  Beer- 
sheba  and  Horeb.  No  trace  of  it  appears  to  have 
been  discovered  in  modern  times.  [^'0 

KA'DESH,  KA'DESH  BAR'NEA  {^"IJ), 
pis  V~\\> :  KaSTjs,  KoStjs  Bap;/?],  Ki£5r/J  tov 
Bapvri).  This  place,  the  scene  of  Miriam's  death,  was 
the  farthest  point  to  which  the  Israelites  reached  in 
their  direct  road  to  Canaan  ;  it  was  also  that  whence 
the  spies  were  sent,  and  where,  on  their  return.,  the 
people  broke  out  into  murmuring,  upon  which  their 
strictly  penal  tei'm  of  wandering  began  (Num.  xiii. 
?,,  26,  xiv.  29-33,  xx.  1  ;  Deut.  ii.  14).  It  is  pro- 
bable that  the  term  "  Kadesh,"  though  applied  to 
signify  a  "  city,"  yet  had  also  a.  wider  application 
to  a  region,  in  which  Kadesh-Meribah  certainly, 
and  Kadesh-Barnea  probably,  indicates  a  precise 
spot.  Thus  Kadesh  appears  as  a  limit  eastward  of 
the  same  tract  which  was  limited  westward  by 
Shur  (Gen.  xx.  1).  Shur  is  possibly  the  same  as 
Sihor,  "which  is  before  Egypt"  (xxv.  18  ;  Josh, 
xiii.  o  ;  Jer.  ii.  18),  and  was  the  first  portion  of  the 
wilderness  on  which  the  people  emerged  from  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea.  [SiiUR.]  "  Between  Ka- 
desh and  Bered  "  is  another  indication  of  the  site  of 
Kadesh  as  an  eastern  limit  (Gen.  xvi.  14),  for  the 
point  ijo  fixed  is  "  the  fountain  on  the  way  to  Shur" 
V.  7),  and  the  range  of  limits  is  nan  owed  by  se- 
lecting the  western  one  not  so  far  to  the  west,  while 
the  eastern  one,  Kadesh,  is  unchanged.     Again,  we 

tj      have  Kadesh  as  the  point  to  which  the  foray  of 

S^         VOL  n. 


KADESH 

Chedorlaomer  "  returned  " — a  word  which  does  not 
imply  that  they  had  previously  visited  it,  but  that 
it  lay  in  the  direction,  as  viewed  from  Mount  Seir 
and  Paran  mentioned  next  before  it,  which  was 
that  of  the  point  from  which  Chedorlaomer  had 
come,  viz.  the  North.  Chedorlaomer,  it  seems, 
coming  down  by  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea 
smote  the  Zuzims  (Ammon,  Gen.  xiv.  5  ;  Deut.  ii. 
20),  and  the  Emims  (Moab,  Deut.  ii.  11),  and  the 
Horites  in  Mount  Seir,  to  the  south  of  that  sea, 
unto  "  El-Paran  that  is  by  the  wilderness."  He 
drove  these  Horites  over  the  Aiabah  into  the  Et- 
Tth  region.  Then  "  returned,"  i.  e.  went  north- 
ward to  Kadesh  and  Hazazon  Tamar,  or  Engedi 
(comp.  Gen.  xiv.  7  ;  2  Chr.  xx.  2).  lu  Gen.  xiv.  7 
Kadesh  is  identified  with  En-Mishpat,  the  "  foun- 
tain of  judgment,"  and  is  connected  with  Tamar,  or 
Hazazon  Tamar,  just  as  we  find  these  two  in  the 
comparatively  late  book  of  Ezekiel,  as  designed  to 
mark  the  southern  border  of  Judah,  drawn  through 
them  and  terminating  seaward  at  the  "  River  to," 
or  "  toward  the  Great  Sea."  Precisely  thus  stands 
Kadesh-Barnea  in  the  books  of  Numbers  and  Joshua 
(comp.  Ezek.  xlvii.  19,  xlviii.  28  ;  Num.  xxxiv.  4 ; 
Josh.  x-v.  3).  Unless  then  we  are  prepared  to  make 
a  double  Kadesh  for  the  book  of  Genesis,  it  seems  idle 
with  Reland  {Palestma,  p.  114-7)  to  distinguish 
the  "  En-Mishpat,  which  is  Kadesh,"  from  that  to 
which  the  spies  returned.  For  there  is  an  identity 
about  all  the  connexions  of  the  two.  which,  if  not 
conclusive,  will  compel  us  to  abandon  all  possible 
inquiries.  This  holds  especially  as  regards  Paran 
and  Tamar,  and  in  respect  of  its  being  the  eastern 
limit  of  a  region,  and  also  of  being  the  first  point  of 
impoi'tance  found  by  Chedorlaomer  on  passing  round 
the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea.  In  a  strik- 
ingly similar  manner  we  have  the  limits  of  a  route, 
apparently  a  well-known  one  at  the  time,  indicated 
by  three  points,  Horeb,  Mount  Seir,  Kadesh-Barnea, 
in  Deut.  i.  2,  the  distance  between  the  extremes 
being  fi.\ed  at  "11  days' journey,"  or  about  165 
miles,  allowing  15  miles  to  an  average  day's 
journey.  This  is  one  element  for  determining  the 
site  of  Kadesh,  assuming  of  course  the  position  of 
Horeb  ascertained.  The  name  of  the  place  to 
which  the  spies  returned  is  "  Kadesh"  simply,  in 
Num.  xiii.  26,  and  is  there  closely  connected  with 
the  "wilderness  of  Paran;"  yet  the  "wilderness 
of  Zin"  stands  in  near  conjunction,  as  the  point 
whence  the  "  search  "  of  the  spies  commenced  (ver. 
2n      Aeain,  in  Num.  xxxii.  8,  we  find  that  it  was 

J  5  g 


2  KADESH 

from  Kadesh-Bai-nea  that  the  mission  of  the  spies 
commenced,  and  in  the  rehearsed  narrative  of  the 
same  event  in  Dout.  i.  19,  and  ix.  23,  the  name 
"  Barnea"  is  also  added.  Thus  far  there  seems  no 
reasonable  doubt  of  the  identity  of  this  Kadesh  with 
that  of  Genesis.  Again,  in  Num.  xx.,  we  find  the 
people  encamped  in  Kadesh  after  reaching  the  wil- 
derness of  Zin.  For  the  question  whether  this  was 
a  second  visit  (supposing  the  Kadesh  identical  with 
that  of  the  spies),  or  a  continued  occupanc}',  see 
Wilderness  of  Wandering.  The  mention  of 
the  "  wildeniess  of  Zin  "  is  in  favour  of  the  identity 
of  this  place  with  that  of  Num.  xiii.  The  reasons 
which  seem  to  have  fostered  a  contrary  opinion  are 
the  absence  of  water  (ver.  2)  and  the  position  as- 
signed— "in  the  uttermost  of"  the  "border"  of 
Edom.  Yet  the  murmuring  seems  to  have  arisen, 
or  to  have  been  more  intense  on  account  of  their 
having  encamped  there  in  the  expectation  of  finding 
water  ;  which  aflbrds  again  a  presumption  of  iden- 
tity. Further,  "the  wilderness  of  Zin  along  by 
the  coast  of  Edom "  (Num.  xxxiv.  3 ;  Josh,  xv.) 
destroys  any  presumption  to  the  contrary  arising 
from  that  position.  Jeiome  clearly  knows  of  but  one 
and  tlie  same  Kadesh — "  where  Moses  smote  the 
rock,"  where  "  Miriam's  monument,"  he  says,  "  was 
still  shown,  and  where  Chedorlaomer  smote  the 
rulers  of  Amalek."  It  is  true  Jerome  gives  a  dis- 
tinct article  on  KoSStjs,  evda  t]  i77)yr\  t^s  Kpi- 
ffites,  i.e.  En-mishpat,"  but  only  perhaps  in  order  to 
record  the  fountain  as  a  distinct  local  fact.  The 
apparent  ambiguity  of  the  position,  first,  in  the 
wilderness  of  Paran,  or  in  Paran ;  and  secondly  in 
that  of  Zin,  is  no  real  increase  to  the  dilficulty. 
For  whether  these  tracts  were  contiguous,  and  Ka- 
desh on  their  common  border,  or  ran  into  each 
other,  and  embraced  a  common  territory,  to  which 
the  name  "  Kadesh,"  in  an  extended  sense,  might 
be  given,  is  comparatively  unimportant.  It  may, 
however,  be  observed,  that  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
commences.  Num.  x.  12,  where  that  of  Sinai  ends, 
and  that  it  extends  to  the  point,  whence  in  ch.  xiii. 
the  spies  set  out,  though  the  only  positive  identifi- 
cation of  Kadesh  with  it  is  that  in  xiii.  26,  when 
on  their  rctui'n  to  lejoin  JMoses  they  come  "to  the 
wilderness  of  Paran,  to  Kadesh."  Paran  then  was 
evidently  the  general  name  of  the  great  tract  south 
of  Palestine,  commencing  soon  after  Sinai,  as  the 
people  advanced  northwards, — that  perhaps  now 
known  as  the  desert  Et-  Tih.  Hence,  when  the  spies 
are  returning  southwards  they  return  to  Kadesh, 
viewed  as  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran ;  though,  in 
the  same  chapter,  when  starting  northwards  on 
their  journey,  they  commence  from  that  of  Zin.  It 
seems  almost  to  follow  that  the  wilderness  of  Zin 
must  have  overlapped  that  of  Paran  on  the  north  side; 
or  must,  if  they  were  parallel  and  lay  respectively  east 
and  west,  have  had  a  further  extension  northwards 
than  this  latter.  In  the  designation  of  the  southern 
border  of  the  Israelites  also,  it  is  observable  that 
the  wilderness  of  Zin  is  mentioned  as  a  limit,  but 
nowhere  that  of  Paran i"  (Num.  xxxiv.  3  ;  Josh.  xv. 


KADESH 

1),  unless  the  dwelling  of  Ishmael  "in  the  wilder- 
ness of  Paran"  (Gen.  xxi.  21)  indicates  that,  on 
the  western  portion  of  the  southern  border,  which 
the  story  of  Hagar  indicates  as  his  dwelling-place, 
the  Paran  nomenclature  prevailed. 

If  it  be  allowed,  in  the  dearth  of  positive  test'-  . 
mony,  to  follow  great  natural  boundaries  in  suggest- 
ing an  answer  to  the  question  of  the  situation  of 
these  adjacent  or  perhaps  overlapping  wildernesses,  it 
will  be  seen,  on  retierence  to  Kiepert's  map  (in  Pobin- 
son,  vol.  i. ;  see  also  Russeger's  map  of  the  same 
region),  that  the  Ai  abah  itself  and  the  plateau  west^ 
ward  of  it  are,  when  we  leave  out  the  commonly 
so-called  Sinaitic  peninsula  (here  considered  as  cor- 
responding in  its  wider  or  northerly  portion  to  "  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai"),  the  two  parts  of  the  whole 
I'egion  most  sti  ongly  partitioned  off  fi'om  and  con- 
trasted with  one  another.  On  this  western  plateau 
is  indeed  superimposed  another,  no  less  clearly 
marked  out,  to  judge  from  the  map,  as  distinct 
from  the  former  as  this  from  the  Arabah ;  but 
this  higher  ground,  it  will  be  further  seen,  pi'obably 
cori-esponds  with  "  the  mountain  of  the  Amoiites." 
The  Arabah,  and  its  limiting  barrier  of  high  ground  •■ 
on  the  western  side,  differ  by  about  400  or  500  feet 
in  elevation  at  the  part  where  Robinson,  advancing 
firom  Petra  towards  Hebron,  ascended  that  barrier 
by  the  pass  el  Khurdr.  At  the  N.W.  angle  of  the 
Arabah  the  regularity  of  this  bari'ier  is  much  brol;en 
by  the  great  wadys  which  converge  thither ;  but 
from  its  edge  at  cl  Khurdr  the  great  floor  stretches 
westward,  with  no  great  interruption  of  elevation, 
if  we  omit  the  s\tperimposed  plateau,  to  the  Egyp- 
tian frontier,  and  northward  to  Khinocolura  and  Gaza. 
Speaking  of  it  apparently  from  the  point  of  view  at 
el  Khurdr,  Robinson  (ii.  58(3-7)  saj's  it  is  "not 
exactly  a  table-land,  but  a  higher  tract  of  country, 
forming  the  first  of  the  several  steps  or  offsets  into 
which  the  ascent  of  the  mountains  in  this  part  is 
divided."  It  is  now  known  as  the  wilderness  Et- 
j  Tih.  A  general  descrijition  of  it  occurs  in  Robinson 
(i.  261-2),  together  with  a  mention  of  the  several 
travellers  who' had  then  previously  visited  it:  its 
configuration  is  given,  ih.  294.  If  this  Et-  Tih  region 
represent  the  wilderness  of  Paran,  then  the  Arabah 
itself,  including  all  tlie  low  ground  at  the  southern 
and  south-westein  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea,  may 
stand  for  the  wilderness  of  Zin.  The  superimposed 
plateau  has  an  eastern  border  converging,  towards 
the  north,  with  that  of  the  general  elevated  tract 
on  which  it  stands,  i.  e.  with  the  western  barrier 
aforesaid  of  the  Arabah,  but  losing  towaids  its  higher 
or  northern  extremity  its  elevation  and  pieciseness, 
in  proportion  as  the  general  tiact  on  which  it  stands 
appears  to  rise,  till,  neai-  the  S.W.  curve  of  the 


»  Another  short  article  of  Jerome's,  apparently 
referred  to  by  Stanley  [S.  ^  P.  93  note),  as  relating 
likewise  to  En-mishpat,  should  seem  to  mean  some- 
thin?  wholly  different,  viz.,  the  well  of  Isaac  and 
Abimclech  in  Gerar  :  (^peo-p  KpCa-eios  ei?  en  viv  eVri 
KoifiT)   BjjpSav   (^puteus  jildicis)    KaAoufxeVr;  cf  TJj  Fepa- 

"  There  is  a  remarkable  interpolation  in  the  LXX., 
or  (as  seems  less  probable)  omission  in  the  jn-esent 
Heb.  text  of  Num.  xxxiii.  36,  where,  in  following  the 


various  stages  of  the  march,  we  find  respectively  as 

follows  : — 

Hebrew. 

K'ni^  N"in  IV 

Greek. 

KaX  airripav  ix  Tea^ioiv  Td^ep  Kal  napeve^aXov  ev  Tfj 
ep-qfKi}  'StV,  Kai  arrripai'  ck  t^5  eprjiiov  2tV,  KaX  wapere- 
/SoAoir  ci;  TT71'  eprjfjiov  •I'apai'*  aiir^  e<7Ti   KaSrjs. 

The  LXX.  would  make  them  approach  the  wilderness 
of  Sin  first,  and  that  of  Paran  secondly,  thus  reversing 
the  effect  of  the  above  observations. 

■^  Culled,  at  least  throughout  a  portion  of  its  course, 
Jcbel  cl  Beydneh. 


KADESH 

Dead  Sea,  the  higher  plateau  and  the  general  tract 
appear  to  blend.  The  convergency  in  question  arises 
fiom  the  general  tract  having,  on  its  eastern  side, 
I.  c.  where  it  is  to  the  Arabah  a  western  limit,  a 
barrier  running  more  nearly  N.  and  ,S.  than  that  ol 
the  superimposed  plateau,  which  runs  about  E.N.K. 
and  W.S.W.  This  highest  of  the  two  steps  on 
whicli  this  terrace  stands  is  described  by  \Villiams 
{JIolu  Citi/,  i.  46o-4),  who  approached  it  from 
Hebron — the  opposite  direction  to  that  in  which 
Robinson,  mounting  towards  Hebron  by  the  higliei- 
p;iss  Es-Sufdh,-^  came  upon  it— as  "'  a  gigantic  na- 
tural rampart  of  lotty  mountains,  which  we  could 
distinctly  trace  for  many  miles'^  E.  and  W.  of  the 
spot  on  which  we  stood,  whose  precipitous  })romon- 
tories  of  naked  rock,  forming  as  it  wei'e  bastions  of 
Cyclopean  architecture,  jutted  forth  in  irregular 
masses  from  the  mountain-barrier  into  the  southern 
wilderness,  a  confused  chaos  of  chalk."  *  Below  the 
traveller  lay  the  W(((l!/  Mnrre/i,  running  into  that 
i;alled  El-Fikreh,  identifying  the  spot  with  that  de- 
scribed by  Robinson  (ii-.  587)  as  "  a  formidable 
barrier  supporting  a  third  plateau  "  (reckoning  ap- 
parently tlie  Arabah  as  one),  rising  on  the  other, 
i.  c.  northern  side  of  the  Wady  el-Fikreh.  But 
the  southern  face  of  this  highest  plateau  is  a  still 
more  strongly  defined  wall  of  mountains.  "The 
Israelites  must  probably  have  faced  it,  or  wandered 
along  it,  at  some  period  of  their  advance  from  the 
wildeiness  of  Sinai  to  the  more  northern  desert  of 
Paran.  There  is  no  such  boldly-marked  line  of  clifls 
north  of  the  Et-Tik  and  El-Odjmcli  ranges,  exce))t 
perhaps  Jlount  Seir,  the  eastern  limit  of  the  Arabah. 
There  is  a  strongly  marked  expression  in  Dent.  i. 
7,  19,  20,  "  the  mountain  of  the  Araorites,"  which 
besides  those  of  Seir  and  Hor,  is  the  only  one  men- 
tioned by  name  after  Sinai,  and  which  is  there  closely 
connected  with  Kadesh  Barnea.  The  wilderness 
(that  of  Paran)  "great  and  terrible,"  which  they 
passed  through  after  quitting  Horeb  (vers.  6,  7, 
19),  was  "  by  the  way  of"  this  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites."  "  We  came,"  says  Moses,  "  to  Kadesh 
Barnea ;  and  I  said  unto  you,  ye  are  come  unto  the 
mountain  of  the  Amorites."  Also  in  ver.  7,  the 
adjacent  territories  of  this  mountain-region  seem 
not  obscurely  intimated  ;  we  have  the  Shephelah 
("plain")  and  the  Arabah  ("vale"),  with  the 
"  hills"  ("  hill-country  of  Judah")  between  them  ; 
and  "  the  South"  is  added  as  that  debateable  out- 
lying region,  in  which  the  wilderness  strives  with 
the  inroads  of  life  and  cidtm-e.  There  is  no  natural 
feature  to  correspond  so  well  to  this  mountain  of 
the  Amorites  as  this  smaller  higher  plateau  super- 
imposed on  Et-Tih,  forming  the  watershed  of  the 
two  great  systems  of  wadys,  those  north-westward 
towards  the  great  Wadii-el-Arish,  and  those  north- 
eastward tovvards  the  Wadij  Jerafeh  and  the  great 
Wadij-el-Jeih.  Indeed,  in  tliese  converging  wady- 
systems  on  either  side  of  the  "  mouutain,"we  have 
a  desert-continuation  of  the  same  configuration  of 
country,  which  the  Shephelah  and  Arabah  with 
their  interposed  watershedding  highlands  present 
further  north.  And  even  as  the  name  Auabah 
is  plainly  continued  from  the  Joidan  valley,  so  as 
to  mean  the  great  arid  trough  between  the  Dead 
Sea  and  Elath ;  so  perhaps  the  Shefelah  ("  vale  ") 


^  There  are  three  nearly  parallel  passes  leading  to 
the  same  level  :  this  is  the  middle  one  of  the  three. 
Schubert  [Reise,  ii.  441-3)  appears  to  have  taken  tlie 
same  path  ;  Bcrtou  that  on  the  W.  side.  El  Yemen. 

'  This  is  only  the  direction,  or  apparent  direction, 


KADESH  3 

might  naturally  be  viewed  as  continued  to  the 
"  river  of  Egypt."  And  thus  the  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites "  would  merely  continue  the  mountain- 
mass  of  Judah  and  Ephraim,  as  forming  ]iait 
of  the  land  "  which  the  Lord  our  God  doth  give 
unto  us."  The  south-western  angle  of  this  higher 
plateau  is  well  defined  by  the  bluff  peak  of 
Jebel  'Aidif,  standing  in  about  30°  22'  N.,  by 
34°  30'  E.  Assumuig  the  region  from  Wady 
Fciran  to  the  Jehcl  Moiisa  as  a  general  basis 
for  the  position  of  Horeb,  nothing  farther  south 
than  this  Jabel  'Ardif  appears  to  give  the  neces- 
sary distance  from  it  for  Kadesh,  nor  would  any 
point  on  the  west  side  of  the  western  face  of  this 
mountain  region  suit,  until  we  get  quite  high  up 
towards  Beersheba.  Nor,  if  any  site  in  tliis  direc- 
tion is  to  be  chosen,  is  it  easy  to  accoimt  for  "  the 
way  of  Mount  Seir  "  being  mentioned  as  it  is,  Deut. 
i.  2,  apparently  as  the  customary  route  "  from 
Horeb"  thither.  But  if,  as  further  reasons  will 
suggest,  Kadesh  lay  probably  near  the  S.W.  curve 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  then  "  Mount  Seir "  will  be  with- 
in sight  on  the  E.  during  all  the  latter  part  of  the 
journey  "from  Horeb"  thither.  This  mountain 
region  is  in  Kiepert's  map  laid  down  as  the  territory 
of  the  Azaziineh,  but  is  said  to  be  so  wild  and 
rugged  that  the  Bedouins  of  all  other  tribes  avoid 
it,  nor  has  any  i-oad  ever  traversed  it  (Robinson, 
i.  186).  Across  this  then  there  was  no  pass ;  the 
choice  of  I'outes  lay  between  the  road  which  leading 
from  Elath  to  Gaza  and  the  Shephelah,  passes  to 
the  west  of  it,  and  that  which  ascends  trom  the 
northern  extremity  of  the  Arabah  by  the  Ma'aleh 
Akrabbim  towards  Hebron.  The  reasons  for  think- 
ing that  the  Israelites  took  this  latter  course  are, 
that  if  they  had  taken  the  western,  Beersheba  would 
seem  to  have  been  the  most  natural  route  of  their 
first  attempted  attack  ( Robinson,  i.  187).  It-  would 
also  have  brought  them  too  near  to  the  land  of  tlie 
Philistines,  which  it  seems  to  have  been  the  Divine 
purpose  that  they  should  avoid.  But  above  all,  the 
features  of  the  country,  scantily  as  they  are  noticed 
in  Num.,  are  in  favour  of  the  eastern  route  from 
the  Arabah  and  Dead  Sea. 

One  site  fixed  on  for  Kadesh  is  the  Ain  es  Shey- 
dbeh  on  the  south  side  of  this  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites,"  and  therefore  too  near  Horeb  to  fulKl 
the  conditions  of  Deut.  i.  2.  Messrs.  Rowlands  and 
Williams  (Holy  City,  i.  463-8^  argue  strongly  in 
flivour  of  a  site  for  Kadesh  on  the  west  side  of  this 
whole  mountain  region,  towards  Jebel  Helal,  where 
they  found  "  a  large  single  mass  or  small  hill  of  solid 
rock,  a  spur  of  the  mountain  to  the  north  of  it, 
immediately  rising  above  it,  the  only  visible  naked 
rock  in  the  whole  district."  They  found  salient 
water  rushing  from  this  rock  into  a  basin,  but  soon 
losing  itself  in  the  sand,  and  a  grand  space  for  the 
encampment  of  a  host  on  the  S.W.  side  of  it.  In 
favour  of  it  they  allege,  1,  the  name  Kddes  or 
KMes,  pronounced  in  English  Kddddse  or  Kudddsc, 
as  being  exactly  the  foim  of  the  Hebrew  name 
Kadesh  ;  2,  the  position,  in  the  line  of  the  southern 
boundary  of  .Judah  ;  3,  the  correspondence  with 
the  order  of  the  places  mentioned,  especially  the 
places  Adar  and  Azmon,  which  these  travellers  re- 
cognize in  Adeirat  and  Aseimch,  otherwise  (as  in 


of  the  range  at  the  spot,  its  general  one  being  as  above 
stated.     See  the  maps. 

'  So  Robinson,  before  ascending,  remarks  (ii.  SS.'j) 
that  the  hills  consisted  of  chalky  stone  and  conglo- 
merate. 

B  2 


L 


4 


KADESH 


Kiepert's  map)  Kadeirat  and  Kafteimch  ;  4,  its  po- 
sition with  regard  to  Jehcl  d-Hahd,  or  Jehcl  Ildal ; 
5,  its  position  witli  regard  to  the  mountain  of  the 
Amorites  (which  they  seem  to  identify  with  the 
ivestern  face  of  the  plateau)  ;  6,  its  situation  with 
regard  to  the  grand  S.W.  route  to  Palestine  by 
Beer-lahai-roi  from  Egypt ;  7, its  distance  from  Sinai, 
and  the  goo  Iness  of  the  way  thither;  8,  the  accessi- 
bility of  Mount  Hor  from  this  region.  Of  these, 
2,  4,  5,  and  8,  seem  of  no  weight  ;g  1  is  a  good  deal 
weakened  by  the  fact  that  some  such  name  seems 
to  have  a  wide  range''  in  this  region  ;  3  is  of  con- 
siderable force,  but  seems  overbalanced  by  the  fact 
that  the  whole  position  seems  too  far  west ;  argu- 
ments 6  and  7  rather  tend  against  than  for  the  view 
in  question,  any  westei'u  route  being  unlikely  (see 
text  above),  and  the  "goodness"  of  the  road  not 
being  discoverable,  but  rather  the  reverse,  from  the 
Mosaic  record.  But,  above  all,  how  would  this 
accord  with  "  the  way  of  Mount  Seir  "  being  that 
from  Sinai  to  Kadesh  Barnea?  (Deut.  i.  2.) 

In  the  map  to  Robinson's  last  edition,  a  Jebel  el 
Kudeis  is  given  on  the  authority  of  Abeken.  But 
this  spot  would  be  too  far  to  the  west  for  the  fixed 
point  intended  in  Deut.  i.  2  as  Kadesh  Barnea. 
Still,  taken  in  connexion  with  the  region  endea- 
voured to  be  identified  with  the  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites,"  it  may  be  a  general  testimony  to  the 
prevalence  of  the  name  Kadesh  within  certain 
limits  ;  which  is  further  supported  by  the  names 
given  below  C"). ' 

The  indications  of  locality  strongly  point  to  a  site 
near  where  the  mountain  of  the  Amorites  descends 
to  the  low  region  of  the  Arabah  and  Dead  Sea. 
Tell  Arad  is  perhaps  as  clear  a  local  monument  of 
the  event  of  Num.  xxi.  1,  as  we  can  expect  to 
find.  [Arad]  .  "  The  Canaanitish  king  of  Arad  " 
found  that  Israel  was  coming  "  by  tlie  way  of  the 
spies,"  and  "fought  against"  and  "  took  some  of 
them  prisoners."  The  subsequent  defeat  of  this 
king  is  clearly  connected  with  the  pass  Es-Sufn, 
between  wliich  and  the  Tell  Arad  a  line  drawn 
ought  to  give  us  the  direction  of  loute  intended 
by  "  by  the  way  of  the  spie^ ;"  accordingly,  within 
a  day's  journey  on  either  side  of  this  line  pro- 
duced towards  tlie  Arabah,  Kadesh-Barnea  should 
be  sought  for.  [HouM  a  h]  .  Nearly  the  same  ground 
appears  to  have  been  the  scene  of  the  pi'evious  dis- 
comfiture of  the  Israelites  rebelliously  attempting 
to  force  their  way  by  this  pass  to  occupy  the 
"mountain"  wheie  "the  Amalekites  and  Amo- 
rites" were  "  befbi'e  them"  (Num.  xiv.  45;  Judg. 
i.  17);  further,  however,  this  defeat  is  said  to  have 
been  "in  Seir"  (Deut.  i.  44).  Now,  whether  we 
admit  or  not  with  Stanley  {S.  t|-  P.  94  note)  that 
Edom  had  at  this  period  no  territoiy  west  of  tlie 
Arabah,  which  is  ])erhaps  doubtful,  vet  there  can 
be  no  room  for  doubt  that  "  the  mountain  of  the 
Amorites"    must   at   any  rate  be  taken  as  their 


R  What  is  more  disputable  than  the  S.  boundary 
line  ?  Jebel  Helal  derives  its  sole  siprnificance  from 
a  passage  not  specified  in  Jercmiali.  The  "mountain 
of  tlie  Amorites,"  as  sliown  above,  need  not  be  that 
western  face.    Mt.  Ilor  is  as  accessible  from  elsewhere. 

^  Seetzen's  last  map  shows  a  W<idii  Kidicsc  corre- 
sponding in  position  nearly  with  Jcbcl  el  Kudcisc 
given  in  Kiepert's,  on  the  authority  of  Abeken. 
Zimmermann's  Atlas,  sect,  x.,  gives  cl  Cadossah  as 
another  name  for  the  well-Unnwn  hill  iladiirah,  or 
Moderah,  lying  within  view  of  the  point  described 
above,  from  Williams's  Huhj  City,  i.  403-4.  This  is 
towards  the  Eiust,  a  good  deal  nearer  the  Dead  Sea, 


KADESH 

western  limit.  Hence  the  overthrow  in  Seir 
must  be  ea.st  of  that  mountain,  or,  at  furthest,  on 
its  eastern  edge.  The  "Seir"  alluded  to  may  be 
the  western  edge  of  the  Arabah  below  the  Es-Sufa 
pass.  When  thus  driven  back,  they  "  abode  in 
Kadesh  many  days"  (Deut.  i.  46).  The  city,  whe- 
ther we  prefer  Kadesh  simply,  or  Kadesh-Barnea, 
as  its  designation,  cannot  have  belonged  to  the 
Amorites,  for  these  after  their  victory  would  pro- 
bably have  disputed  possession  of  it ;  nor  could  it, 
if  ])laiuly  Amoritish,  have  been  "  in  the  uttermost 
of  the  border  "  of  Edom.  It  may  be  conjectured 
that  it  lay  in  the  debateable  ground  between  the 
Amorites  and  Edom,  which  the  Israelites  in  a  mes- 
sage of  courtesy  to  Edom  might  naturally  assign  to 
tjie  latter,  ami  that  it  was  possibly  then  occupied  in 
fact  by  neither,  but  by  a  remnant  of  those  Horites 
whom  Edom  (Dent.  ii.  12)  dislodged  from  the 
"mount"  Seir,  but  who  remained  as  refugees  in 
that  arid  and  unenviable  region,  which  perhaps 
was  the  sole  remnant  of  their  previous  possessions, 
and  which  they  still  called  by  the  name  of  "  Seir," 
their  patriarch.  This  would  not  be  inconsistent 
with  "  the  edge  of  the  land  of  Edom  "  still  being 
at  Mount  Hor  (Num.  xxxiii.  37),  nor  with  the 
Israelites  regarding  this  debateable  ground,  after 
dispossessing  the  Amorites  from  "  their  mountain," 
as  pertaining  to  their  own  "  south  quarter."  If  this 
view  be  admissible,  we  might  regaid  "Barnea"  as 
a  Hebraized  remnant  of  the  Horite  language,  or  of 
some  Horite  name. 

The  neaiest  approximation,  then,  which  can  be 
given  to  a  site  for  the  city  of  Kadesh,  may  be 
probably  attained  by  drawing  a  circle,  from  the  pass 
Es-Sufa,  at  the  radius  of  about  a  day's  journey ; 
its  south-western  quadrant  will  intersect  the  "  wil- 
derness of  Paran,"  or  Et-Tih,  which  is  theie  over- 
hung by  the  supei-imposed  plateau  of  the  mountain 
of  the  Amorites;  while  its  south-eastern  one  will 
cross  what  has  been  designated  as  the  "  wilderness 
of  Ziu."  This  seems  to  satisfy  all  the  conditions 
of  the  passages  of  (genesis,  Numbei's,  and  Deuter- 
onomy, which  refer  to  it.  The  nearest  site  in  har- 
mony with  this  view,  which  lias  yet  been  suggested 
(Robinson,  ii.  175),  is  undoubtedly  the  Ain  el- 
Wcibeli.  To  this,  however,  is  opposed  the  remark 
of  a  traveller  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.  95)  who  went 
probably  with  a  deliberate  intention  of  testing  the 
local  features  in  reference  to  this  suggestion,  that 
it  does  not  afford  among  its  "  stony  shelves  of  three 

or  four  feet  high"  any  proper  "  cliff"  (J?7D),  such 

as  is  the  word  specially  describing  that  "  rock " 
(A.  V.)  from  which  the  water  gushed.  It  is  how- 
ever nearly  opposite  the  Wadij  Ghuweir,  the  great 
opening  into  the  steep  eastern  wall  of  the  Arabah, 
and  therefore  the  most  probable  "  highway "  by 
which  to  "pass  through  the  border"  of  Edom. 
But  until  further  examination  of  local  features  has 


and  so  far  more  suitable.  Further,  Robertson's  map 
in  Stewart's  The  Tent  and  the  Khan  places  an  'Ain 
Khades  near  the  junction  of  the  Wady  Ahyad,  with 
the  Wady  el  Arish ;  but  in  this  map  are  tokens  of 
some  confusion  in  the  drawing. 

'  Furst  has  suggested  J?-'|J"n3,  "  son  of  wander- 
ing "  =:  Bedouin  ;  but  ^3  does  not  occur  as  "  son  " 
in  the  writings  of  Moses.  The  reading  of  the  LX.v. 
in  Num.  xxxiv.  4,  KaSTjs  tov  Bapi-T),  seems  to  favour 
tlie  notion  that  it  was  regarded  by  them  as  a  man's 
name.  The  name  "Meribah"  is  accounted  for  in 
Num.  XX.  13.     [Mkuibah.] 


KADESH 

been  made,  which  owing  to  the  fj-ightfully  desolate 
cliaracter  of  the  region  deems  very  difficult,  it  would 
be  unwise  to  push  identification  further. 

Notice  is  due  to  the  attem])t  to  discovei  Kadesh 
in  Petra,  the  nieti'oi)olis  of  the  Nabathaeans  (Stan- 
ley, S.  and  P.  94j,  embedded  in  the  mountains  to 
which  the  name  of  Mount  Seir  is  admitted  by  all 
authoiities  to  apply,  and  almost  overhung  by 
Mount  Hor.  Xo  doubt  the  word  Seld,  "  cliff,"  is 
used  as  a  proper  name  occasionally,  and  may  pro- 
bably in  2  K.  xiv.  7;  Is.  xvi.  1,  be  identified  with 
a  city  or  s])ot  of  territory  belonging  to  Edom.  But 
the  tw(j  sites  of  Peti-a  and  Jlount  Hor  are  surely  far 
too  close  for  each  to  be  a  distinct  camping  station,  as 
in  Num.  xxxiii.  36,  37.  The  camp  of  Israel  would 
have  probably  covered  the  site  of  the  city,  the 
mountain,  and  several  adjacent  valleys.  But,  fur- 
ther, the  site  of  Petra  must  have  been  as  thoroughly 
I'^domitish  territoiy  as  was  that  of  Bozhah, 
the  tlien  capital,  and  could  not  be  described 
as  being  "in  the  uttermost"  of  their  border. 
"  Mount  Seir"  was  "  given  to  Esau  for  a  jjosses- 
sion,"  in  which  he  was  to  be  immolested,  and  not 
a  "  foot's  breadth "  of  his  land  was  to  be  taken. 
This  seems  irreconcileable  with  the  quiet  encamp- 
ment of  the  whole  of  Israel  and  permanency  there 
for  "  many  days,"  as  also  with  their  subsequent 
territorial  possession  of  it,  for  Kadash  is  always 
reckoned  as  a  town  in  the  southern  border  belong- 
ing to  Israel.  Neither  does  a  friendly  request  to  be 
allowed  to  pass  through  the  land  of  Kdom  come 
suitably  from  an  invader  who  had  seized,  and  was 
occnj)ying  one  of  its  most  difficult  passes ;  nor, 
again,  is  the  evident  temper  of  the  Edomites  and 
their  precautions,  if  they  contemplated,  as  they 
certainly  did,  armed  resistance  to  the  violation  of 
their  territory,  consistent  with  that  invader  being 
allowed  to  settle  himself  by  anticipation  in  such  a 
])osition  without  a  stand  being  made  against  him. 
But,  lastly,  the  conjunction  of  the  city  Kadesh  with 
"the  mountain  of  the  Amorites,"  and  its  connexion 
with  the  assault  repulsed  by  the  Amalekit-s  and 
Canaanites  (Deut.  i.  44;  Num.  xiv.  43),  points  to 
a  site  wholly  away  from  Mount  Seir. 

A  paper  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature, 
April,  1860,  entitled  A  Critical  Enquiry  into  the 
Route  of  the  Exodus,  discards  all  the  received  sites 
for  Sinai,  even  that  of  Mount  Hor,  and  fixes  on  Elusa 
(ElKulesah)  as  that  of  Kadesh.  The  arguments  of 
this  writer  will  be  considered,  as  a  whole,  under 
Wilderness  of  Wandering. 

Kadesh  appears  to  have  maintained  itself,  at  least 
as  a  name  to  the  days  of  the  prophet  Ezekiel, 
(I.  c.)  and  those  of  the  writer  of  the  apocryphal  book 


''  It  may  be  perhaps  a  Ilorite  -word,  corrupted  so 
OS  to  bear  a  signification  in  the  Heb.  and  Arab. ;  but, 
assuming  it  to  be  from  the  root  meaning  "  holiness," 
which  exists  in  various  forms  in  the  Heb.  and  Arab., 
there  may  be  some  connexion  between  that  name, 
supposed  to  indicate  a  shrine,  and  the  En-Mishpat  = 
Fountain  of  Judgment.  The  connexion  of  the  priestly 
and  judicial  function,  having  for  its  root  the  regard- 
ing us  sacred  whatever  is  authoritative,  or  the  de- 
ducing all  subordinate  authority  from  the  Highest, 
would  support  this  view.  Compare  also  the  double 
functions  united  in  Sheikh  and  Cadi.  Further,  on  this 
supposition,  a  more  forcible  sense  accrues  to  the  name 
Kadesh  Mcriba?i  =  strife  or  contention,  being  as  it 
were  a -perversion  oi  Mishpat  =  judgment — a  taking 
it  in  partem  dcteriorem.  For  the  Heb.  and  Arab,  de- 
rivatives from  this  same  root  see  Gesen.  Lex.  s.  v. 
t^Tp,  varying  in  senses  of  to  be  holy,  or  (piel)  to 


KADMONITES,  THE  5 

of  Judith  'i.  9).  The  "wilderness  of  Kadesh" 
occurs  only  in  Ps.  xxix.  8,  and  is  probably  undis- 
tinguishable  from  that  of  Zin.  As  regards  the 
name  "  Kadesh,"  thei-e  seems  some  doubt  whetner 
it  be  originally  Hebrew.'' 

Almost  any  probable  situation  for  Kadesh  on  the 
grounds  of  the  Scri]itural  narrative,  is  equally  op- 
posed to  the  impression  deriveil  from  the  aspect  of 
the  region  thereabouts.  No  spot  perhaps,  in  the 
locality  above  indicated,  could  now  be  au  eligible  site 
for  the  host  of  the  Israelites  "  for  many  days."  Je- 
rome speaks  of  it  as  a  "  desert"  in  his  day,  and 
makes  no  allusion  to  any  city  there,  although  the 
tomb  of  Miriam,  of  which  no  modern  traveller  has 
found  any  vestige,  had  there  its  traditional  site.  It 
is  possible  that  the  great  volume  of  water  which  in 
the  rainy  season  sweeps  by  the  great  El-.Jeib  and 
other  wadys  into  the  S.W.  comer  of  the  Ghor, 
might,  if  duly  husbanded,  have  once  created  an  arti- 
ficial oasis,  of  which,  with  the  neglect  of  such  in- 
dustry, every  trace  has  since  been  lost.  But,  as 
no  attempt  is  made  here  to  fix  on  a  definite  site  for 
Kadesh  as  a  city,  it  is  enough  to  observe  that  the 
objection  applies  in  nearly  equal  Ibrce  to  nearly  all 
solutions  of  the  question  of  which  the  Scriptural 
narrative  admits.  [H.  H.] 

KAD'MIEL  (bK/Onip  :  Ku5^irj\:  Ccdmihel), 
one  of  the  Levites  who  with  his  family  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel,  and  apparently  a 
representative  of  the  descendants  of  Hodaviah,  or, 
as  he  is  elsewhere  called,  Hodaveh  or  Judah  (Ezr. 
ii.  40  ;  Neh.  vii.  43).  In  the  first  attempt  which 
was  made  to  rebuild  the  Temple,  Kadmiel  and 
Jeshua,  piobablj'  an  elder  member  of  the  same 
house,  were,  together  with  their  families,  appointed 
by  Zerubbabel  to  superintend  the  workmen,  and 
orticiated  in  the  thanksgiving-service  by  which  the 
laying  of  the  foundation  was  solemnized  (Ezr.  iii.  9). 
His  house  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  conlession  of 
the  people  on  the  day  of  humiliation  (Neh.  ix.  4,  5), 
and  with  the  other  Levites  joined  the  princes  and 
priests  in  a  solemn  compact  to  separate  themselves 
to  walk  in  God's  law  (Neh.  x.  9j.  In  the  parallel 
lists  of  1  Esdr.  he  is  called  Cadjiiel. 

KAD'MONITES,  THE  03b"!|'5n,  i.e.  "the 
Kadmonite ;"  rovs  KeS/j-wvaiovs  ;  Alex,  omits : 
Cedmonaeos),  a  people  named  in  (^en.  xv.  19  only; 
one  of  the  nations  who  at  that  time  occupied  the 
land  promised  to  the  descendants  of  Abram.  The 
name  is  from  a  root  Kcdem,  signifying  "  eastern," 
and  also  "ancient"  (Ges.  Thes.  1195). 

Bochart  {Chan.  i.  19  ;  Fhal.  iv.  36)  derives  the 


sanctify,  as  a  priest,  or  to  keep  holy,  as  the  sab- 
bath, and  (pual)  its  passive  ;  also  Golii  Lex.  Aral. 

Lot.  Lugd.   Bat.   1553,  s.  v.  ^^Jo-      The  derived 

sense,  tjhp,  a  male  prostitute,  fern,  nt^np.  ^  harlot, 

does  not  appear  to  occur  in  the  Arab.  :  it  is  to  be 
referred  to  the  notion  of  prostitution  in  honour  of  an 
idol,  as  the  Syrians  in  that  of  Astartc,  the  Babylonians 
in  that  of  Mylitta  (Herod,  i.  199),  and  is  conveyed 
in  the  Greek  iepoSouXos.  [Idolatuy,  vol.  i.  8586.]  This 
repulsive  custom  seems  more  suited  to  tho-c  populous 
and  luxurious  regions  than  to  the  hard  bare  life  of  the 
desert.  As  an  example  of  Kastern  nomenclature 
travelling  far  west  at  an  early  period,  Cadiz  may 
perhaps  be  suggested  as  based  upon  Kadesh,  and 
carried  to  Spain  by  the  I'ha-nicians. 


6 


KALLAI 


•Kadmonites  from  Cadmus,  and  furtlier  identities 
them  with  the  Hivites  (whose  phice  they  iill  in  the 
above  list  of  nations),  on  the  ground  that  the 
Hivites  occupied  Mount  Hermon,  "  the  most  easterly 
part  of  Can;un."  But  Hermon  cannot  be  said  to 
be  on  the  east  of  Canaan,  nor,  if  it  were,  did  the 
Hivites  live  there  so  exclusively  as  to  entitle  them 
to  an  appellation  derived  from  that  circumstance  (see 
vol.  i.  820).  It  is  more  probable  that  the  name 
Kadmonite  in  its  one  occurrence  is  a  synonym  for 
the  Bexe-Kedem — the  "  children  of  the  East,"  the 
general  name  which  in  the  Bible  appears  to  be  gaven 
to  the  tribes  who  roved  in  the  great  waste  tracts  ou 
the  east  and  south-east  of  Palestine.  [G.] 

KALLA'I  CipD:  KaWai:  Celdi),  a  priest  in 
the  days  of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua.  He  was 
one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  fothers,  and  represented  the 
family  of  Sallai  (Neb.  xii.  '2U). 

KA'NAH  (n:p:  KavOau;  Alex.  Kara:  Cane), 
one  of  the  places  which  formed  the  landmarks  of 
the  boundary  of  Asher;  apparently  next  to  Zidon- 
rabbah,  or  "great  Zidon"  (Josh.  xix.  28  only).  If 
this  inference  is  correct,  then  Kanah  can  hardly  be 
identified  in  the  modem  village  Kana,  six  miles 
inland,  not  from  Zidon,  but  from  Tyre,  nearly  20 
miles  south  thereof.  The  identification,  first  pro- 
posed by  Robinson  {B.  li.  ii.  450),  has  been  gene- 
rally accepted  by  travellers  (Wilson,  Lands,  ii. 
230  ;  Porter,  Handbook,  395  ;  ."^chwarz,  192;  Van 
de  Velde,  i.  180).  Van  de  Velde  (i.  209)  also 
treats  it  as  the  native  place  of  the  "  woman,  of 
Canaan "  (yvvr]  XavavaTa)  who  cried  after  our 
Lord.  But  the  former  identification,  not  to  speak 
of  the  latter — in  which  a  connexion  is  assumed  be- 
tween two  words  radically  distinct—  seems  un- 
tenable. An  Am-Kana  is  maiked  in  the  map  of 
Van  de  Velde,  about  8  miles  S.E.  of  Saida  (Zidon), 
close  to  the  conspicuous  village  Jwjua,  at  which 
latter  place  Zidon  lies  full  in  view  (Van  de  Velde, 
ii.  437).  This  at  least  answers  more  nearly  the 
requirements  of  the  text.  But  it  is  put  forward  as 
a  mere  conjecture,  and  must  abide  further  investi- 
gation. [G.] 

KA'NAH,  THE  RIVER  (ni]^  ^HJ  =  the 
ton-ent  or  wady  K. :  'S.fXKava,  (papay^  Kapavd  ; 
Alex.  x^'V^P^"^  Kavd  and  (papay^  Kavd  :  Vallis 
arundineti),a  stream  tailing  into  the  Jlediteiranean, 
which  foniied  the  division  between  the  tenitories 
of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  the  foi  mer  on  the  south, 
the  latter  on  the  north  (Josh.  xvi.  8,  xvii.  9).  No 
light  appears  to  be  thrown  on  its  situation  by  tlie 
Ancient  Versions  or  the  Onomasticon.  Dr.  Robin- 
son (iii.  135)  identifies  it  "without  doubt"  with  a 
wady,  which  taking  its  rise  in  the  central  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim,  near  Ahrabeh,  some  7  miles 
S.E.  of  Wahlus,  crosses  the  country  and  enters  the 
sea  just  above  Jaffa  as  Nnhr-el-A>ijch ;  beai-ing 
during  part  of  its  course  the  name  of  Wadi/  Kanah. 
But  this,  though  perhaps  sufficiently  import;uit  to 
serve  as  a  boundary  between  two  tribes,  and  tliough 
the  I'etention  of  the  name  is  in  its  favour,  is  surely 
too  far  south  to  have  been  the  boundary  between 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh.  The  conjecture  of  Schwarz 
(51)  is  more  plausible — that  it  is  a  wady  which 
commences  west  of  and  close  to  Kabltis,  at  Ain-el- 
Khass'ib,  and  falls  into  the  sea  as  Nahr  Falaik, 
and  which  bears  also  the  name  of  Wcuhj  al-Kliassab 
— the  reedy  stream.  This  has  its  more  northerly 
position  in  its  favour,  and  also  tlie  agreement  in 
3ignific;itioii   of  the    names  (Kanah  meaning  also 


KARTAH 

reedy).  But  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  the 
name  Ehassnb  is  borne  by  a  large  tract  of  the  mari- 
time plain  at  this  part '(Stanfey,  S.  ^-  F.  260). 
Porter  pronounces  for  N.  Akhdar,  close  below 
Caesarea.  [G.] 

KARE'AH  (TTIp:  Kaprje:  Caree),  the  father 
of  Johanan  and  Jonathan,  who  supported  Gedaliah's 
authoritv  and  avenged  his  murder  (Jer.  xl.  8,  13, 
15,  16,  xli.  11,  13,'^14,  16,  xlii.  1,  8,  xlin.  2,  4,  5). 
He  is  elsewhere  called  C  are  ah. 

KARKA'A    (with   the   def.   article,  yip")!?!]  : 

KaSj]  J,  in  both  ]\ISS. ;  Symm.  translating,  e^aipos : 
Carcaa),  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  south  boun- 
dary of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  3),  and  there- 
foie  of  the  Holy  Land  itself.  It  lay  between  Addar 
and  Azmon,  Azmon  being  the  next  point  to  the 
Meditenanean  (  Wady  el-Arish').  Karkaa,  however, 
is  not  found  in  the  specification  of  the  boundary  in 
Num.  xx.xiv.,  and  it  is  worth  notice  that  while  in 
Joshua  the  line  is  said  to  make  a  detour  (33D)  to 
Karkaa,  in  Numbers  it  runs  to  Azmou.  Nor  does 
the  name  occur  in  the  subsequent  lists  of  the 
southern  cities  in  Josh.  xv.  21-32,  or  xix.  2-8,  or  in 
Neh.  xi.  25,  &c.  Eusebius  (^Onomasticon,  'PiKapKos) 
perhaps  speaks  of  it  as  then  e.xisting  {kcciitj  iffriv), 
but  at  any  rate  no  subsequent  traveller  or  geo- 
grapher appears  to  have  mentioned  it.  [G.] 

KAR'KOR    (with   the   def.   article,    "I'pniPn : 

KapKap ;  Alex.  Kap/ca :  Vulg.  translating,  re- 
quic'scebant),  the  place  in  which  the  remnant  of  the 
host  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  which  had  escaped  the 
I'out  of  the  Jordan  valley  were  encamped,  when 
Gideon  burst  upon  and  again  dispersed  them 
(Judg.  viii.  10).  It  must  have  been  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan,  beyond  the  district  of  the  towns,  in 
the  open  wastes  inhabited  by  the  nomad  tribes — • 
"  them  that  dwelt  in  tents  on  the  east  of  Nobah 
and  Jogbehah "  (ver.  11).  But  it  is  difiicult  to 
believe  that  it  can  have  been  so  tar  to  the  south  as 
it  is  placed  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomast. 
KapKd  and  "  Carcar  "),  namely  one  day's  journey 
(about  15  miles)  north  of  Petra,  where  in  their 
time  stood  the  fortress  of  Carcaria,  as  in  ours  the 
castle  of  Kcrck  cl-Shobak  (Burckhardt,  19  Aug. 
1812).  The  name  is  somewhat  similar  to  that  of 
Chauaca,  or  Chaiax,  a  place  on  the  east  of  the 
Jordiui,  mentioned  once  in  the  Maccabean  history  ; 
but  there  is  nothing  to  be  said  either  for  or  against 
the  identification  of  the  two. 

If  Kimawat  be  Kenath,  on  which  Nobah  be- 
stowed his  own  name  (with  the  usual  tate  of  such 
innovations  in  Palestine),  then  we  should  look  for 
Karkor  in  the  desert  to  the  east  of  that  place ; 
which  is  quite  far  enough  from  the  Jordan  valley, 
the  scene  of  the  first  encounter,  to  justify  both 
Josephus's  expression,  7r(5/3pcD  ttoAu  (^Ant.  vii.  6, 
§5),  and  the  careless  "  security  "  of  the  Midianites. 
But  no  traces  of  such  a  name  have  yet  been  disco- 
vered in  that  direction,  or  any  other  than  that  above 
mentioned.  [G,] 

KAR'TAH  (nn~!|5 :  ^  KiSTjs  ;  Alex.Kopect: 
Chartha),  a  town  of  Zebulun,  which  with  its 
"  suburbs "  was  allotted  to  the  Merarite  Levites 
(,Tosh.  xxi.  34).  It  is  not  mentioned  either  in  the 
general  list  of  the  towns  of  this  tribe  (xix.  10-16), 
or  in  the  parallel  catalogue  of  Levitical  cities  in 
1  Chr.  vi.,  nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  recog- 
nised since.  [G.] 


K ART AN 

KAR'TAN  (|n"lp  :  Qeixfidv ;   Alex,  tio^fxixdiv : 

Carthan),  a  city  of  Naphtali,  allotted  with  its 
"suburbs"  to  the  Geishonite  Levites  (Josh.  sxi. 
32).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  vi.  the  name 
appeal's  iu  the  more  expanded  form  of  KiRjA- 
TiiAiM  (ver.  7G),  of  which  Kartan  may  be  either 
a  piovincialism  or  a  contraction.  A  similar  change 
is  observable  in  Dothan  and  Dothaim.  The  LXX. 
evidently  had  a  diH'erent  Hebrew  text  from  the 
present.  [G.] 

KATT'ATH  (DtSp  :  Karavde  ;  Alex.  KaTrdO  : 
Cateth),  one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of  Zebuhin 
(Josh.  xix.  15).  It  is  not  mentioned  iu  the  Ouo- 
masticon.  Schwarz  (172)  i-eports  that  in  the  Je- 
rusalem Me(]ilkih,  Kattath  "  is  said  to  be  the  mo- 
dern Katunilh,"  which  he  seeks  to  identify  with 
Kaiia  el-JelU, — most  probably  the  Cana  of  Ga- 
lilee of  the  N.  T. —  5  miles  north  of  Seffurieh, 
partly  on  the  ground  that  Cana  is  given  iu  the 
byriac  as  Katna,  and  partly  for  other  but  not  veiy 
palpable  leasons.  [^0 

KE'DAR  ("inp,  "  black  skin,  black-skinned 
man,"  Ges. :  KTjSap  :  Cedar"),  the  second  in  order 
of  the  sons  of  Ishmael  ((!en.  xxv.  l.'i ;  1  Chr.  i.  29), 
and  the  name  of  a  great  tribe  of  the  Ai'abs,  settled 
on  the  north-west  of  the  peninsula  and  the  coutines 
of  Palestine.  This  tribe  seems  to  have  been,  with 
Tenia,  the  chief  representative  of  Ishmael's  sons  in 
the  western  portion  of  the  land  they  originally  peo- 
pled. The  "glory  of  Kedar"  is  recorded  by  the 
prophet  Isaiali  (xxi.  13-17)  in  the  burden  upon 
Arabia  ;  and  its  importance  may  also  be  inferred 
from  the  "  princes  of  Kedar,"  mentioned  by  Ez. 
(xxvii.  21),  as  well  as  the  pastoral  character  of  the 
tribe:  "  Arabia,  and  all  the  princes  of  Kedar,  they 
occupied  with  thee  iu  lambs,  and  rams,  and  goats : 
in  these  [were  they]  thy  merchants."  But  this 
characteristic  is  maintained  in  several  other  remark- 
able passages.  In  Cant.  i.  5,  the  black  tents  of 
Kedar,  black  like  the  goat's  or  camel's-hair  tents  of 
the  modern  Bedawee,  are  forcibly  mentioned,  "  1 
[am]  black,  but  comely,  O  ye  daughters  of  Jeru- 
salem, as  the  tents  of  Kedar,  as  the  curtains  of  So- 
lomon." In  Is.  Ix.  7,  we  find  the  "  flocks  of  Kedar," 
together  with  the  rams  of  Nebaioth  ;  and  in  Jer. 
xlix.  28,  "concerning  Kedar,  and  concerning  the 
kingdoms  of  Hazou,"  it  is  written,  "  Arise  ye,  go 
up  to  Kedar,  and  spoil  the  men  of  the  East  [the 
Bene-Kedejij.  Their  tents  and  their  flocks  shall 
they  take  away  ;  they  shall  take  to  themselves  their 
tent-curtains,  and  all  their  vessels,  and  their  camels  " 
(2H,  29).  They  aj)pear  also  to  have  been,  like  the 
wandering  tribes  of  the  present  day,  "archers"  and 
"mighty men"  (Is. xxi.  17;  comp.  Ps.cxx.5).  That 
they  also  settled  in  villages  or  towns,  we  find  from 
that  magnificent  passage  of  Isaiah  (xlii.  11  ),  "  Let 
the  wilderness  and  the  cities  thereof  lilt  up  [theii' 
voice],  the  villages  [that]  Kedar  doth  inhabit:  let 
the  iuhal.itants  of  the  rock  sing,  let  them  shout 
from  the  tup  of  the  mountains  ;" — unless  encamp- 
ments are  here  intended."  But  dwelling  in  more 
Ijerinaneiit  habitations  than  tents  is  JList  what 
we  should  expect  from  a  far-stretching  tribe  such 
as  Kedar  certainly  was,  covering  in  their  pasture- 
lands  and  watering'  places  the  great  western  desert, 
settling  on  the  borders  of  Palestine,  and  penetrating 

"  D^iyn.    Comp.  usa^c  of  Arabic,  J^  ^,  Karyeh. 

^  Hence  "lip  \'\^h,    Kabbin.    use   of   the  Arabic 
lauKUuge  (Cics.  Lejc.  ciX.  Tregellcs). 


KEDEMOTH  7 

I  into  the  Arabian  peninsula,  where  they  were  to  be 
]  the  fathers  of  a  great  nation.  The  archers  and 
warriors  of  this  tribe  were  probably  engaged  in  many 
of  the  wars  which  the  "  men  of  the  East "  (of  whom 
Kedar  most  likely  foimed  a  partj  waged,  in  alliance 
with  Midianites  and  others  of  the  Bene-Kedem, 
with  Israel  (see  M.  Caussin  de  Perceval's  Essai,  i. 
180-1,  on  the  war  of  Gideon,  &c.).  The  tribe 
seems  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  conspicuous  of 
all  the  Ishmaelite  tiibes,  and  hence  the  Rabbins 
call  the  Arabians  universally  by  this  name.'' 

In  Is.  xxi.  17,  the  descendants  of  Kedar  are 
called  the  Bene-Kedar. 

As  a  link  between  Bible  history  and  Mohammadan 
traditions,  the  tribe  of  Kedar  is  probably  found  in 
the  people  called  the  Cediei  by  Pliny,  on  the  con- 
fines of  Arabia  Peti-aea  fo  the  south  {N.  H.  v.  11)  ; 
but  they  have,  since  classical  times,  become  mergecl 
into  the  Arab  nation,  of  which  so  great  a  part  must 
have  sprung  from  them.  In  the  Mohammadan  tra- 
ditions, Kedar'  is  the  ancestor  of  Mohammad  ;  and 
through  him,  although  the  genealogy  is  broken  for 
many  generations,  the  ancestry  of  the  latter  fi-oni 
Ishmael  is  carried.  (See  Caussin,  Essai,  i.  175, 
seqci.)  The  descent  of  the  bulk  of^  the  Arabs  from 
Islimael  we  have  elsewhere  shown  to  rest  on  in- 
disputable giouuds.    [Ishmael.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

KE'DEMAH  (HOnp,  i.  e.  "eastward :"  KeS/xc^: 
Cedma),  the  youngest  of  the  sons  of  Ishmael  (Gen. 
xxv.  15  ;   1  Chr.  i.  31). 

KE'DEMOTII  (in  Deut.  an.l  Chron.  niOlp ; 
in  Josh.  nbTp  :  KeSa^w^,  BaK^S/xcce,  7]  A€Kfj.(ii', 
7)  KaSfiwO ;  Alex.  Ked/xovd,  KeSrificvd,  KafxriSiiO, 
TiS(rd!>v :  Ccdemoth,  Gadcmotk),  one  of  tlie  towns 
in  the  district  east  of  the  Dead  Sea  allotted  f  o  the 
tribe  of  Keuben  (Josh.  xiii.  18)  ;  given  with  its 
"suburbs"  to  the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  37  ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  79  ;  in  the  former  of  these  passages  the 
name,  with  the  rest  of  verses  36  and  37,  is  omitted 
from  the  l.'ec.  Hebrew  Text,  and  from  the  Vulg.). 
It  possibly  conferred  its  name  on  the  "  wilderness, 
or  imcultivated  pasture  land  {Midhar),  of  Kede- 
moth,"  in  which  Israel  was  encami)ed  when  Moses 
asked  permission  of  Sihon  to  pass  through  the 
country  of  the  Amorites;  although,  if  Kedemoth  be 
treated  as  a  Hebrew  word,  and  translated  "  Eastern," 
the  same  circumstance  may  have  given  its  name 
both  to  the  city  and  the  district.  And  this  is  moi-e 
probably  the  case,  since  "  Aroer  on  the  brink  of 
the  torrent  Anion  "  is  mentioned  as  the  extreme 
(south)  limit  of  Sihon's  kingdom  and  of  the  territory 
of  Reuben,  and  the  north  limit  of  Jloab,  Kede- 
moth, Jahazah,  Heshbon,  and  other  towns,  being 
apparently  north  of  it  (Josh.  xiii.  IG,  Ike),  while 
the  wilderness  of  Kedemoth  was  certainly  outside 
the  territory  of  Sihon  (Deut.  ii.  20,  27,  &c.),  and 
therefore  south  of  the  Arnon.  This  is  supported  bv 
the  terms  of  Num.  xxi.  23,  from  which  it  would 
appear  as  if  Sihon  had  come  out  of  his  territory 
info  the  wilderness  ;  although  on  the  other  hand, 
from  the  fact  of  Jahaz  (or  Jahazah)  being  said  to 
be  "in  the  wilderness"  (Num.  xxi.  23),  it  seems 
doubtful  whether  the  towns  named  iu  Josh.  xiii. 
16-21,  were  all  north  of  Arnon.  As  in  other  cases 
we  must  await  further  investigation  on  the  east  of 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  place  is  but  casually  men- 
tioned in  the  Onoinasticon  ("  Cademoth"),  but  yet 


A'tv/(M»-,     IjsaS- 


8  KEDESH 

so  as  to  imply  a  distinction  between  the  town  and 
the  wilderness.  No  other  traveller  appears  to  have 
noticed  it.  (See  Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  271.)  [Jahaz.] 
KE'DESH  (P''}\>),  the  name  borne  by  three 
cities  in  Palestine. 

1.  (KaSrjs;  Alex.  BeXe'0:  Cedes')  in  the  extreme 
south  of  Judah  (.Josh.  xv.  23).  Whether  this  is 
identical  -with  Kadesh-Barnea,  whicli  was  actually 
one  of  the  points  on  the  south  boundary  of  the  tribe 
(xv.  .3  ;  Num.  xxxiv.  4),  it  is  impossible  to  say. 
Against  the  identification  is  the  dift'erence  of  the 
na°me, — hardly  likely  to  be  altered  if  the  famous 
Kadesh  was  intended,  <uid  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
elsewhere  showing  that  it  was  of  common  use. 

2.  (Ke'Scs;  Alex.  Ke'See  :  C«?(?s),  a  city  of  Issa- 
char,  which  according  to  the  catalogue  of  1  C"hr. 
vi.  was  allotted  to  the^Gershonite  Levites  (ver.  72). 
In  the  parallel  list  (Josh.  xsi.  28)  the  name  is 
KiSHON,  one  of  the  variations  met  with  in  these 
lists,  for  which  it  is  impossible  satisfactoiily  to 
account.  The  Kedesh  mentioned  among  the  cities 
whose  kings  were  slain  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  22 1, 
in  com.pany  with  IMegiddo  and  Jokneam  of  Carmel, 
would  seem  to  have  been  this  city  of  Issachar,  and 
not,  as  is  commonly  accepted,  the  northern  place  of 
the  same  name  in  Naphtali,  the  position  of  which 
in  the  catalogue  would  naturally  have  been  with 
Hazor  and  Shimi'on-Meron.  But  this,  though  pro- 
bable, is  not  conclusive. 

3.  Kedesh  (Ka5€S,  KbStjs,  Ke'Ses,"  Kej/ef; 
Alex,  also  KeiSey  ;  Cedes) :  also  Kedesii  in  Ga- 
lilee (7^p32'p,  2.e.  "K.  intheGalil;"^  Ka5»)seV 
T^  TaXiXaia  ;  Cedes  in  Galilaea)  :  and  once,  Judg. 
iv.  6,  Kedesii-Nai'HTALI  CpRDyjH  ;  KaSrjjNe^- 
QaXi;  Cedes  Nephthali).  One  of  the  fortified  cities 
of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  named  between  Hazor  and 
Edrei  (Josh  xix.  o7)  ;  appointed  as  a  city  of  refuge, 
and  allotted  with  its  "suburbs"  to  the  Gershonite 
Levites  (xs.  7,  .\xi.  32  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  76).  In 
Josephus's  account  of  the  northern  wars  of  Joshua 
(^Ant.  V.  1,  §18j,  he  apparently  refers  to  it  as 
marking  the  site  of  the  battle  of  Merom,  if  Merom 
be  intended  under  the  foi-m  Beroth.''  It  was  the 
residence  of  Barak  (Judg.  iv.  G),  and  there  he 
and  Deborah  assembled  the  tribes  of  Zebulun  and 
Naphtali  before  the  conflict  (9,  10).  Near  it  was 
the  tree  of  Zaananim,  where  wa.s  pitched  the  tent 
of  the  Kenites  Heber  and  Jael,  in  which  Sisera  met 
his  death  (ver.  11).  It  was  probably,  as  its  name 
implies,  a  "  holy  '■  place"  of  great  antiquity,  which 
would  explain  its  selection  as  one  of  the  cities  of 
refuge,  and  its  being  chosen  by  the  prophetess  as 
the  spot  at  which  to  meet  the  waniors  of  the  tribes 

»  Some  of  the  variations  in  the  I,XX.  are  remark- 
able. In  Judg.  iv.  9,  10,  Vat.  has  KaSr;?,  and  Alex. 
Kei'Se?  ;  but  in  ver.  11,  they  both  have  Kt'Ses.  in 
2  K.  XV.  29,  both  have  Kefe'f.  In  Judg.  iv.  and  else- 
where the  Peschito  Version  has  llecem-Naphtali  for 
Kedesh,  Recem  being  the  name  which  in  the  Targums 
is  commonly  used  for  the  Southern  Kadesh,  K.  Bar- 
nea.     (Sea  Stanley,  -S.  ^  P.  94  note.) 

■"  Etpb?  BjjpwSt)  TToVtt  T^s  roAiAat'as  r^s  avia,  KeSe'cn)? 
oil  iroppji.  J.  D.  Michaclis  (Orient,  und  Excget. 
Bibliothek,  1773,  No.  84)  argues  strenuously  for  the 
identity  of  Beroth  and  Kedcs  in  this  passage  with 
Bcrytus  {Beirut)  and  Kedesh,  near  Emessa  (see 
above) ;  but  interesting  and  ingenious  as  is  the  at- 
tempt, the  conclusion  cannot  be  tenable.  (See  also  a 
subsequent  paper  in  1774,  No.  116.) 

<^  From   the   root   K'lp,   common    to   the  Semitic 


KEDESH 

before  the  commencement  of  the  struggle  "  for  Je- 
hovah against  the  mighty."  It  was  one  of  the 
places  taken  by  Tiglath-Fileser  in  the  reign  of 
Fekah(Jos.  ylnf.ix.'ll,§l,  KvSiffa;  2K.xv.  29); 
and  here  ao-ain  it  is  mentioned  in  immediate  con- 
nexion with  Hazor.  Its  next  and  last  appearance 
in  the  Bible  is  as  the  scene  of  a  battle  between 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus  and  the  forces  of  Demetrius 
(1  Mace.  xi.  (33,  73,  A.  V.  Cades;  Jos.  Ant. 
xiii.  5,  §0,  7).  After  this  time  it  is  spoken  of 
by  Josephus  {B.  J.  ii.  18,  §1 ;  iv.  2,  §3,  irpos 
KvSv(TiTo7s)  as  in  the  possession  of  the  Tyrians — 
"  a  strong  inland''  village,"  well  fortified,  and  with 
a  gi-eat  number  of  inhabitants ;  and  he  mentions 
that  during  the  siege  of  Giscala,  Titus  removed  his 
camp  thither — a  distance  of  about  7  miles,  if  the 
two  places  are  correctly  identified — a  movement 
which  allowed  John  to  make  his  escape. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomast.  "Cedes") 
it  is  described  as  lying  near  Paneas,  and  20  miles 
( Eusebius  says  8 — ri — but  this  must  be  wnong)  from 
Tyre,  and  as  called  Kudossos  or  Cidissus.  Bro- 
cardus  (Descr.  ch.  iv.),  describes  it,  evidently  from 
personal  knowledge,  as  4  leagues  north  of  Safet, 
and  as  abounding  in  ruins.  It  was  visited  by  the 
Jewish  travellers,  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (a.D.  1170), 
and  ha-Parchi  (A.D.  1315).  The  former  places  it 
one  day's,  and  the  latter  half-a-day's,  joume)'  from 
Banias"  (Benj.  of  Tudela  by  Asher,  i.  82,  ii.  109, 
420).  Making  allowances  for  imperfect  knowledge 
and  errors  in  transcription,  theie  is  a  tolerable  agi'ee- 
ment  between  the  above  accounts,  recognisable  now 
that  Dr.  Kobiiison  has  with  great  probability  iden- 
tified the  spot.  This  he  has  done  at  Kadcs,  a 
village  situated  on  the  westein  edge  of  the  basin  of 
the  Ard-el-Hideh,  the  great  depressed  basin  or 
tract  through  which  the  Jordan  makes  its  way  into 
the  Sea  of  Mei'om.  Kades  lies  10  English  miles 
N.  of  Safed,  4  to  the  N.W.  of  the  upper  part  of  the 
Sea  of  Merom,  and  12  or  13  S.  of  Banias.  The 
village  itself  ''  is  situated  on  a  rather  high  ridge, 
jutting  out  from  the  western  hills,  and  overlooking 
a  small  gi-een  vale  or  basin.  .  .  Its  site  is  a 
sjjlendid  one,  well  watered  and  siuTOunded  by  fertile 
plains."  There  are  numerous  sarcophagi,  and  other 
ancient  remains  (Kob.  iii.  366-8  ;  see  also  Van  de 
Velde,  ii.  417  ;  Stanley,  365,  390). 

In  the  Greek  (KuSi'cox)  and  Syriac  {Kedesh 
de  Naphtali)  texts  of  Tob.  i.  2, — though  not  in  the 
Vulgate  or  A.  V. — Kedesh  is  introduced  as  the 
birthplace  of  Tobias.  The  text  is  exceedingly  cor- 
rupt, but  some  little  support  is  lent  to  this  reading 
by  the  Vulgate,  which,  although  omitting  Kedesh, 
mentions  Safed — post  viain  quae  dticit  ad  Occi- 
dentem,  in  sinistra  hahens  civitatem  Saphet. 


languages  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1195,  8).  "Whether  there 
was  any  difference  of  signification  between  Kadesh 
and  Kedesh  does  not  seem  at  all  clear.  Gesenius 
places  the  former  in  connexion  with  a  similar  word 
which  would  seem  to  mean  a  person  or  thing  devoted 
to  the  infamous  rites  of  ancient  heathen  worship^ — 
"  Scortum  sacrum,  idque  masculum ;"  but  he  does  not 
absolutely  say  that  the  bad  force  resided  in  the  name 
of  the  place  Kadesh.  To  Kedesh  he  gives  a  favour- 
able interpretation — "  Sacrarium."  The  older  in- 
terpreters, as  Hiller  and  Simonis,  do  not  recognise 
the  distinction. 

''  Thomson,  Tlie  land  and  the  Book,  ch.  xix.,  has 
some  strange  comments  on  this  passage.  lie  has  taken 
Whiston's  translation  of  neo-dyetos — "mediterranean" 
—  as  referring  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea!  and  has 
drawn  his  inferences  accordingly. 


KEHELATHAH 

The  name  Kedesh  exists  much  I'arther  north  than 
the  possessions  of  Naphtali  would  appear  to  have 
extended,  attached  to  a  lake  of  considerable  size  on 
theOrontes,  a  few  miles  south  of  Hums,  the  ancient 
Emessa  (Rob.  iii.  549  ;  Thomson,  in  Ritter,  Da- 
mascus, 1002, 4).  The  lake  was  well  known  under 
that  name  to  the  Arabic  geographers  (see,  besides 
the  authorities  quoted  by  Robinson,  Abulfeda  in 
SchyAiena'  Tudex  Geot)r.  "Fluvius  Orontes"  and 
"Kudsum"),  and  they  connect  it  in  part  with 
■  Alexander  the  Great.  But  this  and  the  origin  of 
the  name  are  alike  uncertain.  At  the  lower  end  of 
the  lake  is  an  island  which,  as  already  remarked,  is 
possibly  the  site  of  Ketesh,  the  capture  of  which  by 
tiethee  I.  is  preserved  in  the  records  of  that  Egyp- 
tian king.     [Jerusalem,  vol.  i.  989  note.]    [G.] 

KEHE'LATHAH  (nJl^Hp:  MaK€AAc£0:  Ce- 

clatha),  a  desert  encampment  of  the  Israelites  (Num. 
xxxiii.  2'2),  of  which  nothing  is  known.*     [H.  H.] 

KEI'LAH  (jh'<V\>,   but   iu  1  Sam.  xxiii.   5, 

ri/iyp:  KeeiAa/x,  ?;  Kei'Xci;  Alex.  Ke€tAa ;  Joseph. 

K'lKKa,  and  the  people  ol  KiWavoi  and  ol  KiWlrat : 

Ceila  :  Luth.  Kegila),  a  city  of  the  Shefelah  or 
lowland  district  of  Judah,  named,  in  company  with 
Nezib  and  Mareshaii,  in  the  next  group  to  the 
Philistine  cities  (Josh.  xv.  44).  Its  main  interest 
consists  in  its  connexion  with  David.  He  rescued 
it  from  an  attack  of  the  Philistines,  who  had  fallen 
upon  the  town  at  the  beginning  of  the  harvest 
f  Jos.  Ant.  vi.  13,  §1),  plundered  the  corn  from  its 
threshing-floor,  and  driven  off  the  cattle  (1  Sam. 
xxiii.  1).  The  prey  was  recovered  by  David  (2-5), 
who  then  remained  in  the  city  till  tlie  comple- 
tion of  the  in-gathering.  It  was  then  a  fortilied 
place,''  with  walls,  gates,  and  bars  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  7, 
and  Joseph.).  During  this  time  the  massacre  of 
Nob  was  perpetrated,  and  Keilah  became  the  re- 
pository of  the  sacred  Ephod,  which  Abiathar  the 
priest,  the  sole  survivor,  had  carried  off  witli  him 
(ver.  6).  But  it  was  not  destined  long  to  enjoy  the 
presence  of  these  brave  and  hallowed  inmates,  nor 
indeed  was  it  worthy  of  such  good  fortune,  for  the 
inhabitants  soon  plotted  David's  betrayal  to  Saul, 
then  on  his  road  to  besiege  the  place.  Of  this 
intention  David  was  warned  by  Divine  intimation. 
•He  therefore  left  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  7-13.) 

It  will  be  observed  tjiat  the  word  Bauli  is  used  by 
David  to  denote  the  inhabitants  of  Keilah,  in  this 
passage  (ver.  11,  12;  A.V.  "men");  possibly 
pointing  to  the  existence  of  Canaanites  in  the  place 
[Baal,  p.  1466]. 

We  catch  only  one  more  glimpse  of  the  town,  in 
the  times  after  the  Captivity,  when  Hashabiah,  the 
ruler  of  one  half  the  district  of  Keilah  (or  whatever 
the  word  Pelec,  A.V.,  "part"  may  mean),  and 
Bavai  beu-Henadad,  ruler'of  the  other  half,  assisted 
Nehemiah  in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  17,  18).  Keilah  appears  to  have  been 
known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  They  describe  it  in 
the  Onumasticon  as  existing  under  the  name  K7jA.a, 
or  Ceila,  on  the  road  from  Eleutheropolis  to  Hebron, 

*  The  name  may  possibly  be  derived  from  n?np 
a  congregation,  with  the  local  suffix  H,  which  maiiy 
of  these  names  carry.  Compare  the  name  of  another 
place^of  encampment,  TwT\p1^,  which  appeirs  to  be 
fi'om  the  same  root. 

^  This  is  said  by  Gescnius  and  others  to  l)e  the  sig- 
nitication  of  Ihc  name  "  Keilah."  If  this  be  so,  there 
would   almost  ajjpear  to  be  a  reference  to  tliis  and 


KENATH 


9 


at  8  •=  miles  distance  from  the  fbi-mer.  In  the  map  of 
Lieut.  Van  de  Veide  (1858),  the  name  Kila  occurs 
attached  to  a  site  with  ruins,  on  the  lower  road  from 
Beit  Jihrin  to  Hebron,  at  very  nearly  the  right 
distance  from  B.  Jihrin  (almost  certainly  Eleu- 
theropolis), and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Beit  Nusib 
(Nezib)  and  Maresa  (Mareshaii).  The  name  was 
only  reported  to  Lieut.  V.  (see  his  Memoir,  p. 
328),  but  it  has  been  since  visited  by  the  inde- 
fatigable Tobler,  who  completely  confirms  the  iden- 
tification, merely  remarking  that  Kila  is  placed  a 
little  too  far  south  on  the  map.  Thus  another  is 
added  to  the  list  of  places  wliich,  though  specified 
as  in  the  "  lowland,"  are  yet  actually  found  in  the 
mountains :  a  puzzling  fact  in  our  present  ignorance 
of  the  principles  of  the  ancient  boundaries.  [Jii'H- 
tah  ;  Judah,  p.  11566.] 

In  the  4th  century  a  tradition  existed  that  the 
prophet  Habbakuk  was  buried  at  Keilah  (Onomas- 
ticon,  "  Ceila ;"  Nicephorus,  H.  E.  xii.  48  ;  Cas- 
siodorus,  in  Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  29) ;  but  an- 
other tradition  gives  that  honour  to  HUKKOK. 

In  1  Chr.  iv.  19,  "  Keilah  the  Garmite  "  is 
mentioned,  apparently — though  it  is  impossible  to 
say  with  certainty — as  a  descendant  of  the  great 
Caleb  (ver.  15).  But  the  passage  is  extremely  ob- 
scure, and  there  is  no  ajiparent  connexion  with  the 
town  Keilah.  [G.] 

KELAI'AH  (n'''?i;5:  KcoA/a;  Alex.  KcoAaa: 
Cod.  Fred.  Aug.  KccAeia,  and  KwXUv:  C'claiu)  = 
Keltta  (Ezr.  X.  23).  In  the  parallei  list  of  1  Esd. 
his  name  appears  as  COLIUS. 

KE'LITA  (ND^^p:  KoiAiras ;  KaXirdv  in 
Neh.  X.  10  :  Celita;  Calita  in  Ezr.  x.  23),  one  of 
the  Levites  who  returned  fiom  the  captivity  with 
Ezra,  and  had  intermarried  with  the  people  of  the 
land  (Ezr.  x.  23).  In  company  with  the  other 
Levites  he  assisted  Ezra  in  expounding  the  law 
(Neh.  viii.  7),  and  entered  into  a  solemn  league  and 
covenant  to  follow  the  law  of  God,  and  separate 
from  admixture  with  foreign  nations  (Neh.  x.  10). 
He  is  also  called  Kelaiah,  and  in  the  parallel  list 
of  1  Esdr.  his  name  appears  as  CalitaS. 

KEM'UEL  ('P5<-1JDiP :  Ko/xourjA :  Camuel). 
1.  The  sou  of  Nahor  by  Milcah,  and  father  of  Aram, 
whom  Ewald  {Gcsch.  i.  414,  note)  identifies  with 
Ham  of  Job  xxxii.  2,  to  whose  family  Elihu  belonged 
(Gen.  xxii.  21). 

2.  The  son  of  Shiphtan,  and  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Ephraim  ;  one  of  the  twelve  men  appointed  by 
Moses  to  divide  the  land  of  Canaan  among  the  tribes 
(Num.  xxxiv.  24). 

3.  A  Levite,  father  of  Hashabiah,  prince  of  the 
tribe  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  17). 

KE'NAN  (p''p  :   Kaivav  :   Cainan)  =  Cainan 

the  son  of  Enos  (1  Chr.  i.  2),  whose  name  is  also 
correctly  given  in  this  form  in  the  margin  of 
Gen.  v.  9. 

KEN'ATH  (nj)P  :  71  Kade  ;  Alex.  7?  KaamO  ; 
in  Chron.  both  MSS.  Kavdd  :  Chanath,  CanatlC),  one 


the  contemporary  circumstances  of  David's  life,  in  Ps. 
xxxi. ;  not  only  in  the  expression  (ver.  21),  "mar- 
vellous kindness  in  a  strong  city"  ("11  YD  "I'V),  hut 
also  in  ver.  8,  and  in  the  general  tenour  of  the  Psalm. 

"  This  is  Jerome's  correction  of  Eusebius,  who  gives 
17 — manifestly  wrong,  as  the  whole  (iistuiice  between 
Hebron  and  licit-Jihriii  is  not  more  than  15  Itoraau 
miles. 


10 


KENAZ 


of  the  cities  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  with  its 
"  daughter -to  was"  (A.  V.  "  villages")  taken  pos- 
session of  by  a  certain  Nobah,  who  then  called 
it  by  his  own  name  (Num.  xxxii.  42).  At  a  later 
period  these  towns,  with  those  of  Jair,  were  recap- 
tured by  Geshur  and  Aram  (1  Chr.  ii.  23*).  In 
the  days  of  Eusebiiis  (Onom.  "Canath")  it  was 
still  called  Kanatha,  and  he  speaks  of  it  as  "  a 
village  of  Arabia  ....  near  Bozra."  Its  site  has 
been  recovered  with  tolerable  certairiy  in  our  own 
times  at  Kenawdt,  a  ruined  town  at  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  Lcjah,  about  20  miles  N.  of 
Busrah,  which  was  Hist  visited  by  Burckhardt  in 
1810  {Syria,  83-86),  and  more  recently  by  Porter 
(Damascus,  ii.  87-115;  Handhk.  512-14),  the  latter 
of  whom  gives  a  lengthened  description  and  identi- 
fication of  the  place.  The  suggestion  that  Kenawat 
was  Kenath  seems,  however,  to  have  been  first  made 
by  Gesenius  in  his  notes  to  Burckhardt  (  a.d.  1823, 
p.  505).  Another  Kenawat  is  marked  on  Van  de 
Velde's  map,  about  10  miles  farther  to  the  west. 

The  name  furnishes  an  interesting  example  of 
the  permanence  of  an  original  appellation.  Nobaii, 
though  confeiTed  by  the  conqueror,  and  apparently 
at  one  time  the  received  name  of  the  spot  (Jiulg. 
viii.  11),  has  long  since  given  way  to  the  older 
title.     Compare  AcCHO,  Kirjath-arba,  &c.  [G.] 

KENAZ  (T^p:    Kivi^:    Cenez).      1.  Son  of 

Kliphaz,  the  son  of  Esau.  He  was  one  of  the  dukes 
of  Edom,  according  to  both  lists,  that  in  Gen. 
xxxvi.  15,42,  and  that  in  1  Chr.  i.  53,  and  the 
founder  of  a  tribe  or  family,  who  were  called  from 
him  Kenezites  (Josh.  xiv.  14,  &c.).  Caleb,  the  son 
of  Jephunneh,  and  Othniel,  were  the  two  most  re- 
markable of  his  descendants.     [Caleb.] 

2.  One  of  the  same  famil}',  a  grandson  of  Caleb, 
according  to  1  Chr.  iv.  15,  where,  however,  the 
Hel)rew  text  is  corrupt.  Another  name  has  possibly 
fallen  out  before  Kenaz.  [A.  C.  H.] 

KE'NEZITE  1  written  KENIZZITE,  A.  V. 
Gen.  XV.  19  :  "'•IJp  :  Kci/e^atos  :  Cenezaens'),  an 
Edomitish  tribe  (Num.  xxxii.  12;  Josh.  xiv.  6, 
14).  [Kenaz.]  It  is  difficult  to  account  for  the 
Kenezites  existing  as  a  tribe  so  early  as  before  the 
birth  of  Isaac,  as  they  appear  to  have  done  from 
Gen.  XV.  19.  If  this  tribe  really  existed  then,  and 
the  enumeration  of  tribes  in  ver.  19-21  formed  a 
part  of  what  the  Lord  said  to  Abram,  it  can  only 
be  said,  with  Bochart  {Phaleg,  iv.  36),  that  these 
Kenezites  are  mentioned  here  only,  that  they  had 
ceased  to  exist  in  the  time  of  Moses  and  Joshua, 
and  that  nothing  whatever  is  known  of  their  origin 
or  place  of  abode.     But  it  is  worth  consideration 

»  This  passage  is  erroneously  translated  in  the 
A.  v.  It  should  be,  "  And  Geshur  and  Aram  took 
the  Havvoth-Jair,  with  Kenath  and  her  daughters, 
sixty  cities."  See  Bcrtheau,  Chronik  ;  Zunz's  version  ; 
Targum  of  Joseph,  &c.  &c. 

''  Josephus  gives  the  name  KeFertfie?  [Ant.  v.  5,  §4) ; 
but  in  his  notice  of  Saul's  expedition  (vi.  7,  §3)  he  has 
TO  TO)!/  2t/<i|u,iTa)i/  idvo'; — the  form  in  which  he  else- 
where gives  that  of  the  Shechemites.  No  explanation 
of  this  presents  itself  to  the  writer.  The  Targums  of 
Onkelos,  Jonathan,  and  Pseudojon.  uniformly  render 
the  Kenite  by  HND/'ti'  =  Salmaite,  possibly  because 
in  the  genealogy  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  55)  a  branch  of 
the  Kenites  come  under  Salma,  son  of  Caleb.  The 
same  name  is  introduced  in  the  Samarit.  Vers,  before 
"  the  Kenite  "  in  Gen.  xv.  1 9  only. 

■^  This  passage  is  incorrectly  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
It  should  be,    "  And  llibcr  the  Keuite  had  severed 


KENITE,  THE 

whether  the  enumeration  may  not  be  a  later  ex- 
planatory addition  by  Moses  or  some  later  editor, 
and  so  these  Kenezites  be  descendants  of  Kenaz, 
whose  adoption  into  Israel  took  place  in  the  time 
of  Caleb,  which  was  the  reason  of  their  insertion 
in  this  place.  [A.  C.  H.] 

KE'NITE,  THE,   and  KE'NITES,    THE 

(*3''j3n   and   "'Jpil,  i.e.  "the  Kenite;"  in  Chron. 

DTpn  ;  but  in  Num.  xxiv.  22,  and  in  Jiidg.  iv. 

116,  |''p,  Kain :  ol  Kivaioi,  6  Kivaios,  ol  Kiuaioi : 

Chiaetis),^  a  tribe  or  nation  whose  history  is 
strangely  interwoven  with  that  of  the  chosen  people. 
In  the  genealogical  table  of  Gen.  x.  they  do  not 
appear.  The  first  mention  of  them  is  in  company 
with  the  Kenizzites  and  Kadmonites,  in  the  list  of 
the  nations  who  then  occupied  the  Promised  Land 
(Gen.  XV.  19).  Their  origin,  therefore,  like  that 
of  the  two  tribes  just  named,  and  of  the  Avvim 
(AviTES)  is  hidden  from  us.  But  we  may  fairly 
infer  that  they  were  a  branch  of  the  larger  nation 
of  MiDiAN — from  the  fact  that  Jethro,  the  father 
of  Jloses's  wife,  who  in  the  records  of  Exodus  (see 
ii.  15,  16,  iv.  19,  &c.)  is  represented  as  dwelling 
in  the  land  of  Jlidian,  and  as  priest  or  prince  ot' 
that  nation,  is  in  the  narrative  of  Judges  (i.  16, 
iv.  11  ■=)  as  distinctly  said  to  have  been  a  Kenite. 
As  Midianites  they  were  therefore  descended  imme- 
diately from  Abraham  by  his  wife  Keturah,  and  in 
this  relationship  aud  their  connexion  with  Moses  we 
find  the  key  to  their  continued  alliance  with  Israel. 
The  important  services  rendered  by  the  sheikh  of 
the  Kenites  to  Moses  during  a  time  of  great  pressure 
and  difficulty,  were  rewarded  by  the  latter  with  a 
promise  of  fimi  friendship  between  the  two  peoples 
— "  what  goodness  Jehovah  shall  do  unto  us,  the 
same  will  we  do  to  thee."  And  this  promise  was 
gratefully  remembered  long  after  to  the  advantage 
of  the  Kenites  (1  Sam.  xv.  6).  The  connexion 
then  commenced  lasted  as  firmly  as  a  connexion 
could  last  between  a  .settled  people  like  Israel  and 
one  whose  tendencies  were  so  ineradicably  nomadic 
as  the  Kenites.  They  seem  to  have  accompanied 
the  Hebrews  during  their  wanderings.  At  any  rate 
they  were  with  them  at  the  time  of  their  entrance  on 
the  Promised  Land.  Their  encampment — separate 
and  distinct  from  the  rest  of  the  people — was  within 
Balaam's  view  when  he  delivered  his  prophecy  '^ 
(Niun.  xxiv.  21,  22),  and  we  may  infer  that  they 
a.ssisted  in  the  capture  of  Jericho,*  the  "  city  of  palm- 
trees"  (Judg.  i.  16  ;  comp.  2  Chr.  xxviii.  15).  But 
the  wanderings  of  Israel  over,  they  forsook  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  towns,  aud  betook  themselves  to 
freer   air — to   "the   wilderness   of   Judah,   wliich 


himself  from  Kaln  of  the  children  of  Hobab,  the 
father-in-law  of  Moses,  and  pitched,"  &c. 

d  If  it  be  necessary  to  look  for  a  literal  "  fulfilment " 
of  this  sentence  of  Balaam's,  we  shall  best  find  it  in 
the  accounts  of  the  latter  days  of  Jerusalem  uudcr 
Jehoiakim,  when  the  Kenite  Rechabites  were  so  far 
"wasted"  by  the  invading  army  of  Assyria  as  to  he 
driven  to  take  refuge  within  the  walls  of  the  city,  a 
step  to  which  we  may  be  sure  nothing  short  of  actual 
extremity  could  have  forced  these  Children  of  the 
Desert.  Whether  "  Asshur  carried  them  away  cap- 
tive" with  the  other  inhabitants  we  are  not  told,  but 
it  is  at  least  probable. 

^  It  has  been  pointed  out  under  Hobab  that  one 
of  the  wadys  opposite  Jericho,  the  same  by  which, 
according  to  the  local  tradition,  the  Bcne-Israel  de- 
scended to  the  Jordan,  retains  the  name  of  iShu'cili, 
the  Mussulman  version  of  Hobab 


KENIZZITE 

is  to  the  south  of  Arad"  (Jiidg.  i.  16),  where 
"they  dwelt  among  the  people"  of  the  district" — 
the  Amalekites  who  wandered  in  that  dry  region, 
and  among  whom  they  weie  living  centuries  later 
when  yaul  made  his  expedition  there  (1  Sam. 
XV.  6).  Their  alliance  with  Israel  at  this  later 
date  is  shown  no  less  by  Saul's  friendly  warning 
than  bv  David's  feigned  attack  (s.xvii.  10,  and  see 
XXX.  29). 

But  one  of  the  sheikhs  of  the  tribe,  Heber  by 
name,  had  wandered  north  instead  of  south,  and  at 
the  time  of  the  great  struggle  between  the  northern 
tribes  and  Jabin  king  of  Hazor,  his  tents  were 
pitched  under  the  ti'ee  of  Zaanaira,  near  Kedesh 
(Judg.  iv.  11).  Heber  was  in  alliance  with  both 
the  contending  parties,  but  in  the  hour  of  extremity 
the  ties  of  blood-relationship  and  ancient  com- 
panionship proved  strongest,  and  Sisera  fell  a 
victim  to  the  hammer  and  the  nail  of  Jael. 

The  most  remarkable  development  of  this  people, 
exemplifying  most  completely  their  characteristics 
— their  ISedouin  hatred  of  the  restraints  of  civiliza- 
tion, their  lier-^e  determination,  their  attachment 
to  Israel,  together  with  a  peculiar  serai-monastic 
austerity  not  observable  in  tlieir  earlier  proceedings — 
is  to  be  found  in  the  sect  or  family  of  the  Kech- 
ABITES,  founded  by  h'echab,  or  Jonadab  his  son, 
who  come  prominent!}'  forward  on  more  than  one 
occasion  in  the  later  history.  [Jehonadab  ; 
Regiiawtes.] 

The  founder  of  the  flimily  appears  to  have  been 
a  certain  Hammath  (A.  V.  Hemath)  and  a  sin- 
gular testimony  is  furnished  to  the  connexion  which 
e.xisted  between  this  tribe  of  Midianite  wanderers 
and  the  nation  of  Israel,  by  the  fact  that  their 
name  and  descent  are  actually  included  in  the  ge- 
nealogies of  the  great  house  of  .ludah  (1  Chr.  ii.  55). 

No  further  notices  would  seem  to  be  extiuit  of  this 
interesting  people.  The  name  of  Ba-Kain  (abbre- 
viated from  Bene  eUKain)  is  mentioned  by  Ewald 
{^Gesch.  i.  337  note)  as  borne  in  comparativelv 
modern  days  by  one  of  the  tribes  of  the  desert ;  but 
little  or  no  inference  can  be  drawn  from  such 
similarity  in  names.  [G.] 

KE'NIZZITE.  Gen.  xv.  19.  [Kenezite.] 
KE'REN-HAPTUCH  CT]1sri-n,^:  'Af^aX- 
dalas  Kepas :  Cornustibii),  the  youngest  of  the 
daughters  of  Job,  born  to  him  during  the  period  of 
his  reviving  prosperity  (Job  xlii.  14),  and  so  called 
probably  ti-om  her  great  beauty.  The  \'ulgate  has 
correctly  rendered  her  name  "  horn  of  antimony," 
the  pigment  used  by  Eastern  ladies  to  colour  their 
eyelashes ;  but  the  LXX.,  unless  they  had  a  diflerent 
reading,  adopted  a  current  expression  of  their  own 
age,  without  regard  to  strict  accuracy,  in  repre- 
senting Keren-happuch  by  "  the  horn  of  Amalthaea," 
or  "  horn  of  plenty." 

KE'RIOTH  (ninp,  i.  c.  Keriyoth).  1.  {at 
iriKeis  ;  Alex.  ttoXls  :  Carioth),  a  name  which 
occurs  among  the  lists  of  the  towns  in  the  southern 
district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  25).  According  to 
the  A.  V.  ("Keiioth,'"  and  Eezvon")  it  denotes  a 
distinct  place  from  the  name  which  follows  it  ;  but 
this  separation  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  ac- 

*  A  place  named  Kinah,  possibly  derived  from  the 
same  root  as  the  Kcnitcs,  is  mentioned  in  the  lists  of 
the  cities  of  "the  south"  of  Judah.  But  there  is 
nothing  to  imply  any  connexion  between  the  two. 
[Kinah.] 

'■  In  the  A.  V.  of  16 U   the  punctuation  was. still 


KERIOTH 


11 


centuation  of  the  Rec.  Hebrew  text,  and  is  now 
generally  abandoned  (see  Keil,  Josua,  ad  loc.  and 
Reland,  Pal.  700,  708  ;  the  versions  of  Zunz,  Cahen, 
ike),  and  the  name  taken  as  "  Keriyoth-Hezron, 
which  is  Hazor,"  i.  e.  its  name  before  the  conquest 
was  Hazor,  for  which  was  afterwards  substituted 
Keriyoth-Hezron — the  "  cities  of  H." 

Dr.  Robinson  [B.  B.  ii.  101),  and  Lieut.  Van  de 
Velde  (ii.  82)  propose  to  identify  it  with  Knrije- 
tein  ("  the  two  cities  " ),  a  ruined  site  which  stands 
about  10  miles  S.  from  Hebron,  and  3  from  3fain 
(Maon). 

Kerioth  furnishes  one,  and  that  perhaps  the 
oldest  and  most  usual,  of  the  explanations  proposed 
for  the  title  "  Iscariot,"  and  which  are  enumerated 
under  Jl'das  Iscariot,  vol.  i.  11606.  But  if 
Kerioth  is  to  be  read  in  conjunction  with  Hezron, 
as  stated  above,  another  difficulty  is  thrown  in  the 
way  of  this  explanation. 

2.  (Kaptajd  ;  Cariut/i),  a  city  of  Moab,  named  in 
the  denunciations  of  Jeremiah — and  there  only — in 
company  with  Dibon,  Beth-diblathaim,  Bethmeon, 
Bozrah,  and  other  places  "  far  and  near "  (Jer. 
xlviii.  24).  None  of  the  ancient  interpreters  ap- 
pear to  give  any  clue  to  the  position  of  this  place. 
By  Mr.  Porter,  however,  it  is  unhesitatingly  iden- 
tified with  Kiuciiielt,  a  ruined  town  of  some  extent 
lying  between  Basrah  and  S'dhhad,  in  the  southern 
part  of  the  Hauran  {Five  Years  &c.  ii.  191-198; 
Handbook,  523,  4).  The  chief  argument  in  favour 
of  this  is  the  proximity  of  Kurciyeh  to  Busrah, 
which  Mr.  Porter  accepts  as  identical  with  the 
BozRAii  of  the  same  passage  of  Jeremiah.  But 
there  are  some  considerations  which  stand  very 
much  in  the  way  of  these  identifications.  Jere- 
miah is  speaking  (xlviii.  2 1 )  expressly  of  the  cities 
of  the  "  Mishor  "  (A.  V.  "  plain-country  "),  that  is, 
the  district  of  level  downs  east  of  the  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea,  which  probably  answered  in  whole  or  in 
part  to  the  Belka  of  the  modern  Arabs.  In  this 
region  were  situated  Heshbon,  Dibon,  Elealeh, 
Beth-meon,  Kir-heres — the  only  places  named  in 
the  passage  in  question,  the  positions  of  which  are 
known  with  certainty.  The  most  uorthem  of  these 
(Heshbon)  is  not  farther  north  than  the  upper  end 
of  the  Dead  Sea ;  the  most  southern  (Kir)  lay  near 
its  lower  extremity.  Nor  is  there  anything  in  the 
parallel  denunciation  ofJIoab  by  Isaiah  (ch.  xvi.)  to 
indicate  that  the  limits  of  Moab  extended  tlivther  to 
the  north.  But  Busrah  and  Kureii/eh  are  no  less 
than  60  miles  to  the  N.N.E.  of  Heshbon  itself, 
beyond  the  limits  even  of  the  modern  Belka  (see 
Kiepert's  map  to  Wetzstein's  Hauran  und  die  Trach- 
onen,  1860),  and  in  a  country  of  an  entirely  oppo- 
site character  from  the  "  flat  downs,  of  smooth  and 
even  turf"  which  characterise  that  district — "a 
savage  and  forbidding  aspect  .  .  .  nothing  but 
stones  and  jagged  black  rocks  .  .  .  the  whole 
country  around  Kureiyeh  covered  with  heaps  of 
loose  stones,"  &c.  (Porter,  ii.  189,  193).  A 
more  plausible  identification  would  be  Kureiyat, 
at  the  western  foot  of  Jebel  Attar  us,  and  but 
a  short  distance  from  either  Dibon,  Bethmeon,  or 
Heslrbon. 

But  on  the  other  hand  it  should  not  be  over- 
looked that  Jeremiah  uses  the  expression  "  far  and 


more  marked — "and  Kerioth  :  and  Ilczron,  which  is 
Ilazor."  This  agrees  with  the  version  of  Junius  and 
Tremellius — "  et  Kerijothae  (Chetzron  ea  est  Chat- 
zor),"  and  with  that  of  Luther.  Castellio,  on  the 
other  hand,  has  "  Curiothesron,  quae  alias  Hasor." 


12 


KEROS 


near"  (ver.  24),  and  also  tliat  if  Busrah  and 
Kureiyali.  arc  not  Bozrah  and  Kerioth,  those  im- 
portant places  have  apparent!}'  flouiished  without 
any  notice  from  the  iSacred  writers.  This  is  one 
of  the  points  which  further  investigation  by  com- 
petent persons,  east  of  the  Jordan,  may  ]irobably 
set  at  rest. 

Kerioth  occurs  in  the  A.  V.,  also  in  ver.  41 .  Here 
however  it  bears  the  definite  article  (Di'lpn  :  Alex. 
'AKKapiuQ :  Carioth),  and  would  appear  to  signify  not 
any  one  definite  place,  but  "  the  cities"  of  Moab" — 
as  may  also  be  the  case  with  the  same  word  in 
Amosii.  2.     [KiRioTii.]  [G.] 

KE'EOS  {dlp^ :  KdSTis  ;  Alex.  Krjpaos  in  Ezr. 
ii.  44,  DT'p  :  Kipds;  Alex.  Keipas  in  Neh.  vii.  47: 
Ceros),  one  of  the  Nethiuim,  wliose  descendants 
returned  with  Zerubbabel. 

KETTLE  (l-IT:  Xe^ris:  caldaria),  a  vessel 
for  culinary  or  sacrificial  purposes  (1  iSam.  ii.  14). 
The  Hebrew  word  is  also  rendered  "  basket"  in 
.Jer.  xxiv.  2,  "caldron"  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13,  and 
"  pot "  in  Job  sli.  20.    [Caldron.]    [H.  W.  P.] 

KETU'RAH  (nn-ltDp,  "  incense,"  Ges. :  Xer- 
rovpa:  Cetura),  the  "wife"  whom  Abraham 
"  added  and  took  "  (A.  V.  "  again  took")  besides, 
or  after  the  death  of,  Sarah  (Vien.  xxv.  1 ;  1  Chr. 
i.  32).  Gesenius  and  others  adopt  the  theory  that 
Abraham  took  Keturah  after  Sarah's  death  ;  but 
probability  seems  against  it  (compare  (ien.  xvii. 
17,  xviii.  11  ;  Rom.  iv.  19  ;  and  Heb.  xi.  12),  and 
we  incline  to  the  belief  tliat  the  passage  commencing 
with  xxv.  1,  and  comprising  perhaps  the  whole 
chapter,  or  at  least  as  far  as  ver.  10,  is  placed  out 
of  "its  chronological  sequence  in  order  not  to  break 
the  main  narrati\'e  ;  and  that  Abraham  took  Keturah 
during  Sarah's  lifetime.  That  she  was  sti-ictly  speak- 
ing his  wife  is  also  very  uncertain.  The  Hebrew 
word  so  tianslated  in  this  place  in  the  A.  V.,  and 
by  many  scholars,  is  Ishah^  of  which  the  first 
meaning  given  by  Gesenius  is  "  a  v-oman,  of  every 
age  and  condition,  whether  man'ied  or  not;"  and 
although  it  is  commonly  used  with  the  signification 
of  "wife,"  as  opposed  to  husband,  in  Gen.  xxx.  4, 
it  occurs  with  the  signification  of  concubine,  "  and 
she  gave  him  Bilhah  her  handmaid  to  wife."  In 
the  recoi-d  in  1  Chr.  i.  32,  Keturah  is  called  a 
"  concubuie,"  and  it  is  also  said,  in  the  two  verses 
immediately  following  the  genealogy  of  Keturah, 
that  "  Abiaham  gave  all  that  he  had  unto  Isaac. 
But  unto  the  sons  of  the  concubines,  which  Abra- 
ham had,  Abraham  gave  gifts,  and  sent  them  away 
from  Isaac  his  son,  while  he  yet  lived,  eastward, 
unto  the  east  country"  (Gen.  xxv.  5,  6).  Except 
Hagar,  Keturah  is  the  only  person  mentioned  to 
whom  this  passage  can  relate ;  and  in  coniimration 
of  this  supposition  we  find  strong  evidence  of  a  wide 
spread  of  the  tribes  sprung  from  Keturah,  bearing 
the  names  of  her  sons,  as  we  have  mentioned  in 
other  articles.  These  sons  were  "  Zimran,  and 
Jokshan,  and  Medan,  and  iMidian,  and  Ishbak,  and 
Shuah"  (ver.  2);  besides  the  sons  and  grandsons 
of  Jokshan,  and  the  sons  of  Midian.  They  evi- 
dently crossed  the  desert  to  the  Persian  Gulf  and 
occupied  the  whole  inteimediate  country,  where 
traces  of. their  names  are  frequent,  while  Midian 
extended  south  into  the  peninsula  of  Arabia  Proper. 


So  Ewaid,  prophctcn,  "  Die  Stiidte  Moabs." 


KEY 

The  elder  branch  of  the  "  sons  of  the  concubines," 
however,  was  that  of  Ishraael.  He  has  ever  stood  as 
the  representative  of  the  bondwoman's  sons ;  and  as 
such  his  name  has  become  generally  applied  by  the 
Arabs  to  all  the  Abrahamic  settlers  north  of  the 
Peninsula — besides  the  great  Ishmaelite  element  of 
the  nation. 

In  searching  the  works  of  Arab  writers  for  any 
information  respecting  these  tribes,  we  must  be 
contented  to  find  them  named  as  Abrahamic,  or 
even  Ishmaelite,  for  under  the  latter  appellation 
almost  all  t.'^^e  ibrmer  are  confounded  by  their  de- 
scendants. Keturah*^  herself  is  by  them  mentioned 
very  rarely  and  vaguely,  and  evidently  only  in  quot- 
ing from  a  rabbinical  writer.  (In  the  Kdmoos  the 
name  is  said  to  be  that  of  the  TurJcs,  and  that  of  a 
young  gill  (or  slave]  of  Abraham  ;  and,  it  is  added, 
her  descendants  are  the  lurks!)  M.  Caussin  do 
Perceval  {Essui,  i.  179)  has  endeavoured  to  identify 
her  with  the  name  of  a  tribe  of  the  Amalekites  (the 
1st  Anialek)  called  Katoora,'^  but  his  arguments  arc 
not  of  any  weight.  They  rest  on  a  weak  etymology, 
and  are  contradicted  by  the  statements  of  Arab 
authors  as  well  as  by  the  fact  that  the  early  tribes 
of  Arabia  (of  which  is  Katoora)  have  not,  with  the 
single  exception  of  Anialek,  been  identified  with  any 
historical  names  ;  while  the  exception  of  Amalek 
is  that  of  an  apparently  aboriginal  people  whose 
name  is  recorded  in  the  Bible ;  and  there  are 
reasons  for  supposing  that  these  early  tribes  were 
aboriginal.  [E..  S.  P.] 

KEY  (nriSD,  from  nnS,  "to  open,"  Ges.  p. 

1 138 :  K\ils  ;  clatis).  The  key  of  a  native  Oriental 
lock  is  a  piece  of  wood,  from  7  inches  to  2  feet  in 
length,  fitted  with  wires  or  short  nails,  which,  being 
inserted  laterally  into  the  hollow  bolt  which  serves 
as  a  lock,  raises  other  pins  within  the  staple  so  as 
to  allow  the  bolt  to  be  drawn  back.  But  it  is  not 
difficult  to  open  a  lock  of  this  kind  even  without 
a  key,  viz.  with  the  finger  dipped  in  paste  or  other 
adhesive  substiince.  The  passage  Cant.  v.  4,  5,  is 
thus  probably  explained  (Harmer,  Obs.  iii.  31 ;  vol. 
i.  394,  ed.  Clarke;  RauwoUtf,  ap.  Kay,  Trav.  ii. 
17).  [Lock.]  The  key,  so  obvious  a  symbol  of 
authority,  both  in  ancient  and  modern  times,  is 
named  more  than  once  in  the  Bible,  especially  Is. 
xxii.  22,  a  passage  to  which  allusion  is  probably 
made  in  Rev.  iii.  7.  The  expression  "  bearing  the 
key  on  the  shoulder  "  is  thus  a  phrase  used,  some- 
times perhaps  in  the  literal  sense,  to  denote  pos- 
session of  office  ;  but  there  seems  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose, with  Grotius,  any  figure  of  a  key  embroidered 
on  the  garment  of  the  office-bearer  (see  Is.  ix.  6). 
In  Talmudic  phraseology  the  Almighty  was  repre- 
sented as  "  holding  the  keys  "  of  various  operations 
of  nature,  e.  g.  rain,  death,  &c.,  i.  e.  exercising 
dominion  over  them.  The  delivery  of  the  key  is 
therefore  an  act  expressive  of  authority  confeiTed, 
and  the  possession  of  it  implies  authority  of  some  kind 
held  by  the  receiver.  The  term  "  chamberlain," 
an  officer  whose  mark  of  office  is  sometimes  in  modern 
times  an  actual  key,  is  explained  under  EoNUCH 
(Grotius,  Calmet,  Knobel,  on  Is.  xxii.  22  ;  Ham- 
mond ;  Lightfoot,  Ilor.  Ilebr.  •  De  Wette  on  Matt, 
xvi.  19  ;  Carpzov  on  Goodwin,  Moses  and  Aaron,  pp. 
141,  632  ;  Diet,  of  Aiitiq.  art.  "  Matrimonium;*" 
Ovid,  Fast.  i.  99,  118,  125,  139;  Hofmann,  Lex, 


(Sj^ojji 


.\j^- 


KEZIA 

"Camerarius;"  Chanibei-s,  Diet.  "Chamberlain;'" 
Reland,  Ant.  Hehr.  ii.  3,  5.)  [H.  W.  P.] 


KIDKON,  THE  BROOK 


13 


KEZI'A  (ny^'p :  Kaaia  ;  Alex.  Katrj-ia  : 
Cassia),  the  second  of  the  daughters  of  Job,  born 
to  him  after  his  recovery  f  Job  xlii.  1-i). 

KEZrZ,  THE  VALLEY  OF  (}>>Vi?  ?^V.  : 
'AfxeKaa-is;  Alex. 'AfieKicaffeis:  Vallis  Casis),  one 
of  the  "  cities"  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  21).  That 
it' was  the  eastern  border  of  the  tribe,  is  evident  from 
its  mention  in  company  vith  Beth-hoglah  and 
Beth-ha-Arabah.  The  name  does  not  re-apppear 
in  the  0.  T.,  but  it  is  possibly  intended  under  the 
corrupted  form  Beth-kasi,  in  1  Mace.  ix.  62,  Gi. 
The  name,  if  Hebrew,  is  derivable  from  a  root 
meaninf;  to  cut  oti'  (Ges.  Thes.  1229  ;  Simonis, 
OnoM.lO).  Is  it  possible  that  it  can  have  any 
connexion  with  the  general  circumcision  which  toolv 
place  at  Gilgal,  certainly  in  the  same  neighbourhood, 
after  the  Jordan  was  crossed  (Josh.  v.  2-9)  ?   [G.] 

KIB'EOTH  -  HATTA'AVAH  (Tinnp 
mXnn  :  /xfri/iara  rrjs  iindv/jLtas  :  sepulchra  con- 
cup'isccntiae).  Num.  xi.  34  ;  marg.  "  the  graves  of 
lust"  (comp.  xsxiii.  17).  From  there  being  no 
change  of  spot  mentioned  between  it  and  Taberali 
in  xi.  'A,  it  is  probably,  like  tlie  latter,  about  three 
days'  journey  from  Sinai  (x.  .33)  ;  and  from  the  sea 
beino- twice  mentioned  in  the  course  of  the  narrative 
(xi.  22,  31),  a  maritime  proximity  may  perhaps  be 
inferred.  Here  it  seems  they  abode  a  whole  mouth, 
during  which  they  went  on  eating  quails,  and  perhajis 
suffering  from  the  plague  which  followed.  If  the 
conjecture  of  Hudhera  (Burckhardt,  p.  495;  Robin- 
son, i.  151)  as  a  site  for  Hazeroth  [see  Hazeroth] 
be  adopted,  then  "  the  graves  of  lust "  may  be 
perhaps  within  a  day's  journey  thence  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Sinai,  and  would  lie  within  15  miles  of  the 
Gulf  of  Akabah  ;  but  no  traces  of  any  graves  have 
ever  been  detected  in  the  region."  Both  Schubert, 
between  Sinai  and  the  Wadij  Mwrrah  {Reisen,  360), 
and  Stanley  (<S^.  ^  P.  82),  just  before  reaching 
Hudhera,  encountei-ed  flights  of  birds — the  latter 
says  of  "  red-legged  cranes."  Ritter  '•  speaks  of  such 
flights  as  a  consfcuit  phenomenon,  both  in  this  penin- 
sula and  in  the  liiuphrates  region.  Burckhardt, 
Travels  in  Syria,   406,  8   Aug.,  quotes   Russell's 


"  Save  one  of  a  Mahommedan  saint  (Stanley,  S. 
<.J-  P.  78),  which  does  not  assist  the  question. 

''  He  remarks  on  the  continuance  of  the  law  of 
nature  in  animal  habits  through  a  course  of  thousands 
of  years   (xiv.  261). 

"  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist.  x.  33,  says  quails  settle  on  the 
sails  of  ships  by  nif^ht,  so  as  to  sink  sometimes  the 
ships  in  the  neighbouring  sea.  So  Diod.  Sic.  i.  p.  38: 
Tos  fjripat;  Tto*'  opTvyitii^  cttoloOi/to,  e(^e'poi'T6  re  ouTot 
KttT  ayeAag.  fiiC^owi  e/c  ToO  n^Kdyov;  (Lepsius,  Thebes 
to  Sinai,  23).    Comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  1,  }a  ;  and  Frey- 

tag.  Lex.  Arab.  s.  v.  It-iV  ;   also  Kalisch  on  Ex.  xvi. 

13,  where  an  incidental  mention  of  the  bird  occurs. 
The  Linnean  name  ajipcavs  to  be  Tctrao  Alchata. 

d  The  name  is  derived  by  Gesenius  and  others  from 
Tip,  "black;"  cither,  according  to  Robinson,  from 


Aleppo,  ii.  194,  and  says  tlie  bird  Katta  is  found 
in  great  numbers  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Tufileh. 
[ToPiiEi..]  He  calls  it  a  species  of  partridge,  or 
" not  improbably  the  (S'efoMa  or  quail."  Boys  not 
uncommonly  kill  three  or  four  of  them  at  one  throw 
with  a  stick."  [H.  H.] 

KIBZA'IM  (D^Vlp  :  Vat.  omits  ;  Alex,  t)  Kai8- 

ffaei/x  :  Ccbsaini),  a  city  of  Mount-Ephraim,  not 
named  in  the  meagre,  and  probably  imperfect,  lists 
of  the  towns  of  that  great  tribe  (see  Josh,  xvi.), 
but  mentioned  elsewhere  as  having  been  given  up 
with  its  "  suburbs"  to  the  Kohathite  Levites  (xxi. 
22).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  vi.  Jokjieam 
is  substituted  for  Kibzaim  (ver.  68),  an  exchange 
which,  as  already  pointed  out  under  the  former 
name,  may  have  arisen  from  tlie  similarity  between 
the  two  in  the  original.  Jokmeam  would  appear 
to  have  been  situated  at  the  eastein  quarter  of 
Ephraim.  But  this  is  meiely  inference,  no  trace 
having  been  hitherto  discovered  of  either  name. 

Interpreted  as  a  Hebrew  word,  Kibzaim  signifies 
"  two  heaps."  [G.] 

KID.     [Goat:  see  Appendix  A.] 

KID'EON,  THE  BROOK  (pip  "pn:*:  6 
X^ifi-o-ppos  KiSpoDU  and  toiu  K^Spwv  ;  in  Jer.  only 
NaxaA  K^Spaiv,  and  Alex,  -xfilfiiappos  Na^"^  K.  : 
torrens  Cedron),  a  torrent  or  valley — not  a  "  brook," 
as  in  the  A.  V.- — in  immediate  proximity  to  Jeru- 
salem. It  is  not  named  in  the  earlier  records  of 
the  country,  or  in  the  specification  of  the  boundaries 
of  Benjamin  or  Judah,  but  comes  forward  in  con- 
nexion with  some  remarkable  events  of  the  history. 
It  lay  between  the  city  mid  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  was  crossed  by  David  in  his  flight  (2  Sam.  xv. 
23,  comp.  30),  and  by  our  Lord  on  His  way  to 
Gethsemane  (John  xviii.  1  ; ''  comp.  Mark  xiv.  26  ; 
Luke  xxii.  39).  Its  connexion  with  these  two  oc- 
currences is  alone  sufficient  to  leave  no  doubt  that  the 
Nachal-Kidron  is  the  deep  ravine  on  the  east  of 
Jerusalem,  now  commonly  known  as  the  "  Valley 
of  Jehoshaphat."  But  it  would  seem  as  if  the 
name  were  formerly  applied  also  to  the  ravines 
sunounding  other  portions  of  Jerusalem — the  south 
or  the  west ;  since  Solomon's  prohibition  to  Sliimei 
to  "  pass  over  the  torrent  Kidron  "  (1  K.  ii.  37; 
Jos.  Ant.  viii.  1,  §5)  is  said  to  have  been  broken  by 
the  latter  when  he  went  in  the  direction  of  Gatli 
to  seek  his  fugitive  slaves  (41,  42).  Now  a  peison 
going  to  Gath  would  certainly  not  go  by  the  way 
of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  or  approach  the  eastern  side 
of  the  city  at  all.  The  route — whether  Gath  were 
at  Beit- J ibriii  or  at  Tell  es-SaJieh — would  be  by  the 

the  turbidness  of  its  stream  (comp.  Job  vi.  1 6  ;  though 
the  words  of  Job  imply  that  this  was  a  condition  of  all 
brooks  when  frozen)  ;  or  more  appropriately,  with 
Stanley,  from  the  depth  and  obscurity  of  the  ravine 
{S.  4-  P.  172)  ;  possibly  also— though  this  is  proposed 
with  hesitation— from  the  impurity  which  seenls  to 
have  attached  to  it  from  a  very  early  date. 

"VVe  cannot,  however,  too  often  insist  on  the  great 
uncertainty  which  attends  ihe  derivations  of  these 
ancient  names ;  and  in  treating  Kidron  as  a  Hebrew 
word,  we  may  be  making  a  mistake  almost  as  absurd 
■  as  that  of  the  copyists  who  altered  it  into  twi/  KeSpuv, 
believing  that  it  arose  from  the  presence  of  cedars. 

"  Here,  and  here  only,  the  form  used  in  the  A.  V. 
is  Ckdron.  The  variations  in  the  Greek  text  are 
very  curious.  Codex  A  has  tou  KeSpu)v ;  B,  rCiv  xeSfiMf  ; 
D,  ToO  KeSpov,  and  in  some  cursive  MSS.  quoted  by 
Tischenrtorf  wc  even  find  nn>  Sei'Spitiv. 


14 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 


Bethleheni-gatc,  and  then  nearly  due  west.  Perhaps 
the  prohibition  may  have  been  a  more  general  one 
than  is  implied  in  ver.  37  (comp.  the  king's  reitera- 
tion of  it  in  ver.  42),  the  Kidron  being  in  that  case 
specially  mentioned  because  it  was  on  tlie  road  to 
Bahurim,  Shimei's  home,  and  the  scene  of  his  crime. 
At  any  rate,  beyond  the  passige  in  question,  there 
is  no  evi.lence  of  the  name  Kidron  having  been 
applied  to  the  southern  or  western  ravines  of  the  city. 
The  distinguishing  peculiarity  of  the  Kidron 
valley — that  in  resjiect  to  which  it  is  most  fre- 
quently mentioned  in  the  0.  '1'.— is  the  impurity 
which  appears  to  have  been  asci'ibed  to  it.  Ex- 
cepting the  two  casual  notices  already  ((uoted,  we 
first  meet  with  it  as  the  place  in  which  King  Asa 
demolished  and  burnt  the  obscene  phallic  idol  (vol.  i. 
849a)  of  his  mother  (1  K.  xv.  13;  2  Chr.  xv. 
1(5).  Next  we  find  the  wicked  Athaliah  hurried 
thither  to  execution  (Jos.  Ant.  ix.  7,  §3;  2  K.  xi. 
16).  It  then  becomes  the  regular  receptacle  for 
the  impurities  and  abominations  of  the  idol-worship, 
when  removed  from  the  Temple  and  destroyed  by 
the  adherents  of  Jehovah''  (2  Chr.  xxix.  16,  sxx. 
14;  2  K.  xxiii.  4,  6,  12).  In  the  course  of  these 
narratives  the  statement  of  Josephus  just  quoted 
as  to  ^he  death  of  Athaliah  is  supported  by  the  fact 
tiiat  in  the  time  of  Josiah  it  was  the  common 
cemetery  of  the  city  (2  K.  xxiii.  6  ;  comp.  Jer. 
xxvi.  23,  "  graves  of  the  common  people"),  perhaps 
the  "valley  of  dead  bodies"  mentioned  by  Jeremiah 
(xxxi.  40)  in  close  connexion  with  the  "  fields  "  of 
Kidron ;  and  the  restoration  of  which  to  sanctity 
was  to  be  one  of  the  miracles  of  future  times  (ibid.). 

How  long  the  valley  continued  to  be  used  for  a 
buryiug-place  it  is  very  hard  to  ascertain.  After 
Jie  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  1099  the  bodies  of  the 
slain  were  buried  outside  the  Golden  Gateway 
(Mislin,  ii.  487;  Tobler,  Umgebnmjen,  218)  ;  but 
what  had  been  the  practice  in  the  interval  the 
writer  has  not  succeeded  in  tracing.  To  the  date 
of  the  monume]its  at  the  foot  of  Olivet  we  have 
at  present  no  clue ;  but  even  if  they  are  of  pre- 
Christian  times  there  is  no  proof  that  they  are 
tombs.  From  the  date  just  mentioned,  howevei-, 
the  burials  ajipear  to  have  been  constant,  and  at 
present  it  is  the  favourite  resting-place  of  Moslems 
and  Jews,  the  former  on  the  west,  the  latter  on  the 
east  of  the  valley.  The  Moslems  are  mostly  con- 
fined to  the  narrow  level  spot  between  the  loot  of 
the  wall  and  the  commencement  of  the  precipitous 
slope ;  while  the  Jews  have  possession  of  the  lower 
part  of  the  slopes  of  Olivet,  where  their  scantv 
tombstones  are  crowded  so  thick  together  as  liteially 
to  cover  the  surface  like  a  jiavement. 

The  term  Nachal^  is  in  the  0.  T.,  with  one 
single  exception  (2  K.  xxiii.  4),  attached  to  the 
name  of  Kidron,  and  apparently  to  that  alone  of 
the  valleys  or  ravines  of  Jerusalem.  Hinnom  is 
always  tlie  Ge.  This  enables  us  to  infer  with 
great  piobability  that  the  Kidiou  is  intended  in 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  4,  by  the  "■brook  (Nachal)  which 
ran  through  the  midst  of  the  land;"  and  that 
Hezekiah's  preparations  for  the  siege  consisted  in 
sealing   the    source   of  the    Kidron — "  the   upper 

Tlie  Targ:uTii  appears  to  understand  tlie  obscure 
passage  Zoph.  i.  1 1,  as  referring  to  the  destruction  of 
the  Idolatrous  worship  in  Kidron,  for  it  renders  it, 
"Howl  all  ye  that  dwUe  in  the  Naehal  Kidron,  for  all 
the  people  are  brolien  whose  woiks  were  like  the  works 
of  the  peoule  of  the  land  of  Canaan."  [Maktksii.] 
•>  Nachal  is  untranslateable  in  English  unless  by 


IQDRON,  THE  BROOK 

springhead  (not  '  watercourse,' as  A.  V.)  of  Gihon," 
where  it  burst  out  in  the  wady  some  distance  north 
of  the  city,  and  leading  it  by  a  subterranean  channel 
to  the  interior  of  the  city.  If  this  is  so,  there  is  no 
dilliculty  in  accounting  for  the  fact  of  the  subse- 
quent wmit  of  water  in  the  ancient  bed  of  the 
Kiilron.  In  accordance  vvith  this  also  is  the  speci- 
fication of  Gihon  as  "  Gihon-in-the-Nachal  " — that 
is,  in  the  Kidron  valley — though  this  was  probably 
the  lower  of  two  outlets  of  the  same  name. 
[GiHON'.]  By  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon,  it  is 
mentioned  as  ''  close  to  Jerusalem  on  the  eastern 
side,  and  spoken  of  by  John  the  Evangelist."  But 
the  favourite  name  of  this  valley  at  the  time  of 
Jerome,  and  for  several  centuries  after,  was  "  the 
valley  of  Jehoshaphat,"  and  the  name  Kidron,  or, 
in  accordance  with  the  orthography  of  the  Vulgafe, 
Cedron,  is  not  invariably  found  in  the  travellers 
(see  Arculf,  E.  Trao.  1  ;  Saewulf,  41  ;  Benjamin 
ofTudela;  Maundeville,  ^.  Tmy.  176;  Thietmar, 
27  :  but  not  the  Bordeaux  Pilgrim,  the  Citez  de 
Jherusalem,  Willibald,  &c.). 

The  following  description  of  the  valley  of  Kidron 
in  its  modern  state — at  once  the  earliest  and  the 
most  accurate  which  we  possess— is  taken  from 
Dr.  Robinson  {B.  R.  i.  269):— 

"  In  approaching  Jerusalem  from  the  high  mosk 
of  Ncbif  Samicil  in  the  N.W.  the  traveller  first 
descends  and  crosses  the  bed  of  the  great  Wcdi/ 
Beit  Hanlna  already  described.  He  then  ascends 
again  towards  the  S.E.  by  a  small  side  wady  and 
ah)ng  a  rocky  slojie  for  tv/enty-five  minutes,  when 
he  reaches  the  Tombs  of  the  Judges,  lying  in  a 
small  gap  or  depression  of  the  ridge,  still  half  an 
hour  distant  from  the  northern  gate  of  the  city. 
A  few  steps  further  he  reaches  the  watershed  be- 
tween the  great  wady  behind  him  and  the  tract 
before  him ;  and  here  is  the  liead  of  the  N'alley  of 
Jehoshaphat.  From  this  point  the  dome  of  the 
Holy  Se])ulchre  bears  S.  by  E.  The  tract  around 
this  s])ot  is  very  rocky;  and  the  rocks  have  been 
much  cut  away,  partly  in  quarrying  building-stone, 
and  partly  in  the  formation  of  sepulchres.  The 
region  is  full  of  excavated  tombs ;  and  these  con- 
tinue with  more  or  less  frequency  on  both  sides  of 
the  valley,  all  the  way  down  to  Jerusalem.  The 
valley  runs  for  15  minutes  directly  towanis  the 
city ;  ^'  it  is  here  shallow  and  broad,  and  in  some 
parts  tilled,  though  very  stony.  The  road  follows 
along  its  bottom  to  the  same  point.  The  valley 
now  turns  nearly  east,  almost  at  a  right  angle,  and 
passes  to  the  northward  of  the  Tombs  of  the  Kings 
and  the  Muslim  Welii  before  mentioned.  Here  it 
is  about  200  rods  distant  from  the  city ;  and  the 
tract  between  is  tolerably  level  ground,  planted 
with  olive-trees.  The  Ndhulus  road  crosses  it  in 
this  part,  and  ascends  the  hill  on  the  north.  The 
valley  is  here  still  shallow,  and  runs  in  the  same 
direction  for  about  10  minutes.  It  then  bends 
again  to  the  south,  and,  following  this  general 
course,  passes  between  the  city  and  the  Mount  of 
Olives. 

"  Before  reaching  the  city,  and  also  opposite  its 
northern  part,  the  valley  spreads  out  into  a  basin 


"Wady,"  to  which  it  answers  exactly,  and  which  bids 
fair  to  become  shortly  an  English  word.  It  does  not 
signify  the  stream,  or  the  valley  which  contained  the 
bod  of  the  stream,  and  was  its  receptacle  when  swollen 
by  winter-rains — but  both.     [Rivkr.] 

■=  Sec  a  slight  correction  of  this  by  Tobler,   Umge- 
hiiii(/rti,  22. 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 

of  some  breadth,  which  is  tilled,  and  contains 
plantations  of  olive  and  other  fniit-trecs.  In  this 
part  it  is  crossed  obliquely  liy  a  road  leading  from 
the  N.E.  corner  of  Jerusalem  across  the  northern 
part  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  to  'Anat.a.  Its  sides 
are  still  full  of  excavated  tombs.  As  the  valley 
descends,  the  steep  side  upon  the  right  becomes 
more  and  more  elevated  above  it;  until,  at  the 
gate  of  St.  Stephen,  the  height  of  this  brow'  is 
about  100  feet.  Here  a  path  winds  down  from 
the  gate  on  a  course  S.E  by  E.,  and  crosses  the 
valley  by  a  bridge ;  beyond  which  are  the  church 
with  the  Tomb  of  the  Virgin,  Gethsemane,  and 
other  plantations  of  olive-trees,  already  described. 
The  path  ami  bi-idge  are  on  a  causeway,  or  rather 
terrace,  built  up  across  the  valley,  perpendicular 
on  the  soutli  side ;  the  earth  being  tilled  in  on  tlie 
northern  side  up  to  the  level  of  the  bridge.  The 
bridge  itself  consists  of  an  arch,  open  on  the  south 
side,  and  17  feet  high  fi'om  the  bed  of  the  channel 
below ;  but  the  north  side  is  built  up,  with  two 
subterranean  drains  entering  it  from  above ;  one  of 
which  comes  from  the  sunken  couit  of  the  Virgin's 
Tomb,  and  the  other  from  the  fields  further  in  the 
north-west.  The  breadth  of  the  valley  at  this 
point  will  appear  from  the  measurements  which  I 
took  from  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  Gethsemane,  along 
the  path,  viz.—  E^s-k^^- 

1.  From  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  brow  of  the 

descent,  level 135 

2.  Bottom  of  the  slope,  the  angle  of  the  descent 

being  16i°        415 

3.  Bridge,  level      140 

4.  N.W.  comer  of  Gethsemane,  slight  rise       ..  145 

5.  N.E.  corner  of         do.  do 150 

The  last  three  numbers  give  the  breadth  of  the 
proper  bottom  of  the  valley  at  this  spot,  viz.  435 
feet,  or  145  yards.  Further  north  it  is  somewhat 
broader. 

"  Below  the  bridge  the  valley  contracts  gradually, 
and  sinks  more  rapidly.  The  first  continuous  traces 
of  a  water-course  or  torrent-bed  commence  at  the 
bridge,  though  they  occur  likewise  at  intervals 
higher  up.  The  western  hill  becomes  steeper  and 
more  elevated  ;  while  on  the  east  the  Mount  of 
Olives  rises  much  higher,  but  is  not  so  steep.  At 
the  distance  of  1000  feet  from  the  bridge  on  a 
course  S.  10°  W.  the  bottom  of  the  valley  has 
become  merely  a  deep  gully,  the  narrow  bed  of  a 
torrent,  from  which  the  hills  rise  directly  on  each 
side.  Here  another  bridge  '^  is  thrown  across  it  on 
an  arch  ;  and  just  by  on  the  left  are  the  alleged 
tombs  of  Jehoshaphat,  Abialom,  and  others ;  as 
also  the  Jewish  cemetery.  The  valley  now  con- 
tinues of  the  same  character,  and  follows  the  same 
course  (S.  10°  W.)  for  550  feet  further;  where  it 
makes  a  sharp  turn  for  a  moment  towanis  the 
right.  This  portion  is  the  narrowest  of  all ;  it  is 
here  a  mere  I'avine  between  high  mountains.  The 
S.E.  corner  of  the  area  of  the  mosk  overhangs  this 
part,  the  corner  of  the  wall  standing  upon  the  vei'y 
brink  of  the  declivity.  From  it  to  the  bottom,  on 
a  course- S.E.  the  angle  of  depression  is  27°,  and 
the  distance  450  feet,  giving  an  elevation  of  128 
feet  at  that  point;  to  which  may  be  added  20  feet 
or  more  lor  the  rise  of  ground  just  north  along  the 
wall;  making  in  all  an  elevation  of  about  150  feet. 
This,  however,  is  the  highest  point  above  the  val- 
ley ;  for  further  south  the  narrow  ridge  of  Ophel 

t"  For  a  minute  account  of  the  two  bridges,  see 
Tobler,  Umgehuiigen,  35-39. 

^  A  list  of  some  of  the  plants  found  in  this  valley 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 


15 


slopes  down  as  rapidly  as  the  valley  it.self.  In  this 
part  of  the  valley  one  woul<l  expect  to  find,  if  any- 
where, traces  of  ruins  thrown  down  from  above, 
and  the  ground  raised  by  the  rubbish  thus  accu- 
mulated. Occasional  blocks  of  stone  are  indeed 
seen  ;  but  neither  the  surface  of  the  ground,  nor 
the  bed  of  the  torrent,  exhibits  any  special  appear- 
ance of  having  been  raised  or  interrupted  by  masses 
of  ruins. 

"  Below  the  short  turn  above  mentioned,  a  line 
of  1025  feet  on  a  course  S.W.  brings  us  to  the 
Fountain  of  the  Virgin,  lying  deep  under  the 
western  hill.  The  valley  has  now  opened  a  little; 
but  its  bottom  is  still  occupied  only  by  the  bed 
of  the  torrent.  From  here  a  course  S.  20°  W. 
carried  us  along  the  village  of  Siloam  {Kefr  Selwdn) 
on  the  eastern  side,  and  at  1170  feet  we  were 
opposite  the  mouth  of  the  Tyropoeon  and  the  Pool 
of  Siloam,  which  lies  255  feet  within  it.  The 
mouth  of  this  valley  is  still  40  or  50  feet  higher 
than  the  bed  of  the  Kidron.  The  steep  descent 
between  the  two  has  been  already  described  as  built 
up  in  terraces,  which,  as  well  as  the  strip  of  level 
ground  below,  are  occupied  with  gardens  belonging 
to  the  village  of  Siloam.  These  are  irrigated  by 
the  waters  of  the  Pool  of  Siloam,  which  at  this 
time  were  lost  in  them.  In  these  gardens  the 
stones  have  been  removed,  and  the  soil  is  a  fine 
mould.  They  are  planted  with  fig  and  other  fruit- 
trees,  and  furnish  also  vegetables  for  the  city. 
Elsewhere  the  bottom  of  the  valley  is  thickly 
strewed  with  small  stones. 

"  Further  down,  the  valley  opens  more  and  is 
tilled.  A  line  of  685  feet  on  the  same  course 
(S.  20°  W.)  brought  us  to  a  rocky  point  of  the 
eastern  hill,  here  called  the  Mount  of  OU'ence,  over 
against  the  entrance  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom. 
Thence  to  the  well  of  Job  or  Nehemiah  is  275  feet 
due  south.  At  the  junction  of  the  two  valleys  the 
bottom  forms  an  oblong  plat,  e.xtending  from  the 
gardens  above  mentioned  nearly  to  the  well  of  Job, 
and  being  150  yards  or  more  in  breadth.  The 
western  and  north-western  parts  of  this  plat  are  in 
like  manner  occupied  by  gardens ;  many  of  which 
are  also  on  terraces,  and  receive  a  poi'tiou  of  the 
waters  of  Siloam. 

"  Below  the  well  of  Nehemiah  the  Valley  of 
Jehoshaphat  continues  to  run  S.S.W.  between  the 
Mount  of  Offence  and  the  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  so 
called.  At  130  feet  is  a  small  cavity  or  outlet  by 
which  the  Vv-ater  of  the  well  sometimes  runs  oH. 
At  about  1200  feet,  or  400  yards,  from  the  well 
is  a  place  under  the  western  hill,  wheie  in  the 
rainy  season  water  flows  out  as  from  a  foimtain. 
At  about  1500  feet  or  500  yards  below  the  well 
the  valley  bends  off  S.  75°  E.  for  half  a  mile  or 
more,  and  then  tuins  again  moie  to  the  south,  and 
pursues  its  way  to  the  Dead  Sea.  At  the  angle 
where  it  thus  b^nds  eastward  a  small  wady  comes 
in  from  the  west,  from  behind  the  Hill  of  Evil 
Counsel.  The  width  of  the  main  valley  below  the 
well,  as  far  as  to  the  turn,  varies  from  50  to  100 
yards;  it  is  full  of  olive  and  fig-trees,  and  is  in 
most  parts  ploughed  and  sown  with  grain.  Further 
down  it  takes  the  name  among  the  Arabs  of  Wady 
er-Iidhib.  '  Jlonks'  Valley,'  from  the  convent  of 
St.  Saba  situated  on  it ;  and  still  nearer  to  the  Dead 
Sea  it  is  also  allied  Wad;/  en-Ndr,  '  Fire  Valley.'  " 


is  given  by  Mislin  (iil.  209) ;  and  some  scraps  of  in- 
formation about  the  valley  itself  at  p.  199. 


16 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 


"  The  channel  of  the  Valley  of  Jehnshaphat,  the 
Brook  Kidron  of  the  Scriptures,  is  nothing  more 
tlian  the  dry  bed  of  a  wintry  torrent,  bearing  marks 
of  being  occasionally  swept  over  by  a  large  volume 
of  water.  No  stream  flows  here  now  except  during 
the  heavy  rains  of  wintei-,  when  the  waters  descend 
into  it  from  the  neighbouring  hills.  Yet  even  in 
winter  there  is  no  constant  flow  ;  and  our  friends, 
who  had  i-esided  several  yeare  in  the  city,  had 
never  seen  a  stream  running  through  the  valley. 
Nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  there  (vas  anciently 
more  water  in  it  than  at  present.  Like  the  wadys 
of  the  desert,  the  valley  probably  served  of  old, 
as  now,  only  to  drain  otf  the  waters  of  the  rainy 
season." 

One  point  is  unnoticed  in  Dr.  Robinson's  de- 
scription, sufficiently  curious  aiid  well-attested  to 
merit  further  careful  investigation — the  possibility 
that  the  Kedron  flows  below  the  present  surface 
of  the  ground.  Dr.  Barclay  {City,  &c.  :102)  men- 
tions "  a  fountain  that  bursts  forth  duiing  the 
winter  in  a  v<illey  entering  the  Kedron  from  the 
north,  and  flows  several  hundred  yards  before  it 
sinks ;"  and  again  he  testifies  that  at  a  point  in 
the  valley  about  two  miles  below  the  city  the 
murmurings  of  a  stream  deep  below  the  giound 
may  be  distinctly  heard,  which  stre;rra,  on  excava- 
tion, he  actually  discovered  (ibid.).  His  inference  is 
that  between  the  two  points  the  brook  is  flowing 
in  a  subterianeous  channel,  as  is  "  not  at  all  un- 
frequent  in  Palestine"  (p.  303).  Nor  is  this  a 
modern  discovery,  for  it  is  spoken  of  by  William 
of  Tyre ,  by  Brocardus  (  Descr.  cap.  viii.),  as  audible 
near  the  "  Tomb  of  the  Virgin ;"  and  also  by  Fabri 
(i.  370),  Marinus  Sanutus  (3,  14,  9),  and  others. 

That  which  Dr.  liobinson  complains  that  neither 
he  nor  his  fi  lends  were  fortunate  enough  to  witness 
has  since  taken  place.  In  the  winter  of  1853-4  so 
heavy  weie  the  rains,  that  not  only  did  the  lower 
part  of  the  Kidron,  below  the  so-called  well  of 
Nehemiah  or  Joab,  run  with  a  considerable  stream 
for  the  whole  of  the  month  of  March  (Barclay,  515), 
but  also  the  upper  part,  "in  the  middle  section  of 
the  \'alley  of  Jehoshaphat,  flowed  for  a  day  or  two" 
(Stewart,  Tent  cj-  Khun,  316).  The  Well  of  Joab 
is  probably  one  of  the  outlets  of  the  mysterious 
spring  which  flows  below  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and 


f  "  During  the  latter  rains  of  February  and  March 
the  well  Aiii  Ayiib  is  a  subject  of  much,  speculation 
and  interest  to  all  dwellers  in  the  city.  If  it  over- 
flows and  discharges  its  waters  down  the  Wady-en- 
Nar,  the  lower  part  of  the  Kidron,  then  they  are 
certain  that  they  will  have  abundance  of  water  during 
the  summer  ;  if  tliere  is  no  overflow,  their  minds  are 
filled  with  forebodings."    (Stewart,  316.) 

"  1.  [n)  INK',  "flesh;"  o'lKelo';;  caro.  (J)  mXCi>, 
"  kinswoman,"  also  "  kindred,"  inKiia,  caro,  from 
"IXti',  "  to  swell,"  also  "  to  remain,"  i.  e.  "  be  super- 
fluous." Whence  comes  "ISti'j  "  remainder,"  Ges. 
1349-50.  Hence,  in  Lev.  xviii.  G,  A.  V.  has  in 
margin  "  remainder." 

2.  "^^2,  "flesh,"  o-apf,  caro,  from  ~ll)'3,  "be 
joyful,"  i.  e.  conveying  the  notion  of  beauty,  Ges. 
p.  248. 

3.  nriQC'D,  "family,"  </)vA.r),/«;H(7Ja,  applied  both 
to  races ^ and  single  families  of  mankind,  and  also  to 
animals. 

4.  (n)  yn'lD.  yib,  and  in  Keri  yi'lD,  from 
yn*,  "  see  "  "  know."  (*)  Also,  from  same  root, 
nV"liJO,    "  kindred  ;"     and    hence    "  kinsman,"    or 


KINDRED 

its  overflow  is  comparati\'ely  common  ;f  but  the 
flowing  of  a  stream  in  the  upper  part  of  the  valley 
woulil  seem  not  to  have  taken  place  for  many  years 
before  the  occasion  in  question,  although  it  oc- 
curred also  in  the  following  winter  (Jewish  Intelli- 
gencer, May  1856,  p.  1 37  iwte),  and,  as  the  writer  is 
infomied,  has  since  become  almost  periodical.  [G.] 

KrNAH(nri5: 'Irea^u;  Alex.  Kici:  Cina),  a 
city  of  Judah,  one  of  those  which  lay  on  the  ex- 
treme south  boundary  of  the  tribe,  next  to  Edom 
(Josh.  XV.  22).  It  is  mentioned  in  the  Onoinas- 
ticon  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  but  not  so  as  to 
imply  that  they  had  any  actual  knowledge  of  it. 
With  the  sole  exception  of  Schwarz  (99),  it  appears 
to  be  unmentioned  by  any  traveller,  and  the  "  town 
Cinah  situated  near  the  wilderness  of  Ziu  "  with 
which  he  would  identify  it,  is  not  to  be  found  in  his 
own  or  any  other  map. 

Piofessor  Stimley  (5.  4"  -P-  160)  very  ingeniously 
connects  Kinah  with  theKeuites  ("'3''i^),  who  settled 
in  this  district  (Judg.  i.  16).  But  it  should  not 
be  overlooked  that  the  list  in  Josh.  xv.  purports  to 
record  the  towns  as  the}'  were  at  the  conquest, 
while  the  settlement  of  the  Kenites  probably  (though 
not  certainly)  did  not  take  place  till  after  it.     [G.] 

KINDRED."*  I.  Ofthe  special  names  denoting 
relation  by  consanguinity,  the  principal  will  be 
found  explained  under  their  proper  heads.  Father, 
Brother,  &c.  It  will  be  there  seen  that  the 
words  which  denote  near  relation  in  the  direct  line 
are  used  also  for  the  other  superior  or  inferior 
degrees  in  that  line,  as  grandfather,  grandson,  &c. 

On  the  meaning  of  the  expression  Sh'er  basar 
(see  below  1  and  2)  much  controversy  has  arisen. 
Sh'er,  as  shown  below,  is  in  Lev.  xviii.  6,  in  marg. 
of  A.  v.,  "  remainder."  The  rendering,  however, 
of  Sh'er  basar  in  text  of  A.  V.,  "  near  of  kin,"  may 
be  taken  as  correct,  but,  as  Michaelis  shows,  vfith- 
out  determining  the  precise  extent  to  which  the 
e.?pression  itself  is  applicable  (Mich.  Laics  of  Moses, 
ii.  48,  ed.  Smith;  Knobel  on  Leviticus;  see  also 
Lev.  XXV.  49  ;   Num.  xxvii.  11). 

II.  The  words  which  express  collateral  consan- 
guinity are — 1.  uncle;''  2.  aunt ;  <=  3.  nephew;'' 
4.  niece  (not  in  A.  V.)  ;  5.  cousin.^  • 


"kinswoman,"  used,  like  "acquaintance,"  in  both 
senses,  Ges.  p.  574.  But  Buxtorf  limits  (J)  to  the 
abstract  sense,  [a]  to  the  concrete,  yyiopifios,  pru- 
pinquus. 

5.  mriN,     "  brotherhood,"     StaSij/crj,    germanitas, 

Ges.  p.  63. 

Nearly  allied  with  the  foregoing  in  sense  are  the 
following  general  terms  : — • 

6.  Slip,  "  near,"  hence  "  a  relative,"  6  cvyvs, 
propinquus,  Ges.  p.  1234. 

7.  h^h  from  bX5,  "  redeem,"  Ges.  p.  253, 
6  a.yxL(rTtviuv ,  "  a  kinsman,"  i.  e.  the  relative  to 
whom  belonged  the  right  of  redemption  or  of  ven- 
geance. 

*>  ITn,  otSeAiJibs  TOu  Trarpos,  olxetos  ;  patruus. 

"  mn  or  HTH'  V  cruvyerjjs,  vxor  patrul. 

'^  jO,  in  connexion  with  1D3,  "offspring;"  but  see 
JocHEBED.  It  is  rendered  "  nephew  "  in  A.  V.,  but 
indicates  a  descendant  in  general,  and  is  usually  so 
rendered  by  LXX.  and  Vulg.     See  Ges.  p.  864. 

•■  auyyerv;?,  corjnatiis,  Luke  i.  36,  58. 


KINE 

III.  The  terms  of  aOiiiity  arc — 1.  (a)  father-in- 
law,'  (6)  mother-in-law  ;  8  '2.  (a)  sou-in-law,''  {b) 
daughter-iu-law ; ;  3.  (a)  lirother-in-law,''  (b)  sister- 
in-law."" 

The  relations  of  kindred,  expressed  by  few  woids, 
and  imperfectly  defined  in  the  earliest  ages,  ac- 
quired in  course  of  time  greater  significance  and 
wider  influence.  The  full  list  of  relatives  either 
by  consanguinity,  i.  e.  as  arising  from  a  common 
ancestor,  or  by  affinity,  i.  e.  as  created  by  marriage, 
may  be  seen  detailed  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Civ.  Dhjest. 
lib.  xx.ia'iii.  tit.  10,  de  Orndibus ;  see  also  Corp. 
Jiir.  Canon.  Beer.  ii.  c.  xxxv.  9,  5. 

The  domestic  and  economical  questions  arising 
out  of  kiudi-ed  may  be  classed  under  the  three  heads 
of  Maruiage,  Inheritance,  and  Blood-Ue- 
VENGE,  and  the  render  is  referred  to  the  articles  on 
those  subjects  for  information  thereon.  It  is  clear 
that  the  tendency  of  the  Mosaic  Law  was  to  increase 
the  restrictions  on  marriage,  by  defining  moi-e  pre- 
cisely the  relations  created  by  it,  as  is  shown  by  the 
oiises  of  Abraham  and  Moses.  [Iscah;  .Jociiebed.] 
For  information  on  the  general  subject  of  kindred 
and  its  obligations,  see  Selden,  de  Jure  Naturali, 
lib.  V. ;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  ed.  Smith, 
ii.  36 ;  Knobel  on  Lev.  xviii.  ;  Philo,  de  Spec.  I^cg. 
iii.  3,  4,  5,  vol.  ii.  301-3U4-,  ed.  Mangey  ;  Burck- 
hardt,  Arab  Tribes,  i.  150;  Keil,  Bibl.  Arch.  ii. 
p.  50,  §106,  107.  [H.  W.  P.] 

KINE.     [Cow:  See  Appendix  A.] 

KINGr  ("^7^,  melck  :  fiacnAevs :  rex),  the 
name  of  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  Hebrews  during 
a  period  of  about  500"  years  previous  to  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  586.  It  was  borne 
first  by  the  Ruler  of  the  12  Tribes  united,  and  then 
by  the  Kuleis  of  Judah  and  Israel  separately. 

The  immediate  occasion  of  the  substitution  of  a 
regal  form  of  government  for  that  of  the  Judges, 
seems  to  have  been  the  siege  of  Jabesh-(jilead  by 
Nahash,  king  of  the  Ammonites  (1  Sara.  xi.  1,  xii. 
12),  and  the  refusal  to  allow  the  inhabitants  of  that 
city  to  capitulate,  except  on  humiliating  and  cruel 
conditions  (1  Sam.  xi.  2,  4-6).  The  conviction 
seems  to  have  forced  itself  on  the  Israelites  that 
they  could  not  resist  their  formidable  neighbour 
unless  they  placed  themselves  under  the  sway  of  a 
king,  like  surrounding  nations.  Concurrently  with 
this  conviction,  disgust  had  been  excited  by  the 
corrupt  administration  of  justice  under  the  sons  of 
Samuel,  and  a  radical  change  was  desired  by  them 
ill  this  respect  also  (1  Sam.  viii.  3-5).  Accord- 
ingly the  original  idea  of  a  Hebrew  king  was  two- 
fold :  first,  that  he  should  lead  the  people  to  battle 
in  time  of  war ;    and,  2ndlv,  that  he  should  ex- 


KING 


17' 


ecute  judgment  and  justice  to  them  in  war  and  in 
peace  (1  Sam.  viii.  20).  In  both  respects  the 
desired  end  was  attained.  The  righteous  wrath 
and  military  capacity  of  Saul  were  immediately 
triumphant  over  the  Ammonites ;  and  though  ulti- 
mately he  was  defeated  and  slain  in  battle  with  the 
Philistines,  he  put  even  them  to  flight  on  more 
than  one  occasion  (1  Sam.  xiv.  23,  xvii.  52),  and 
geneially  waged  successful  war  against  the  sur- 
rounding nations  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  His  successor, 
David,  entered  on  a  series  of  brilliant  conquests 
over  the  Philistines,  Moabites,  Syrians,  Edomites, 
and  Ammonites  [see  David,  vol.  i.  410]  ;  and  the 
Israelites,  no  longer  confined  within  the  narrow 
bounds  of  Palestine,  had  an  empire  extending  from 
the  river  Euphrates  to  Gaza,  and  from  the  entering 
in  of  Hamath  to  the  river  of  Egypt  (1  K.  iv.  21). 
In  the  meanwhile  complaints  cease  of  the  corrup- 
tion of  justice  ;  and  Solomon  not  only  consolidated  and 
maintained  in  peace  the  empire  of  his  father,  David, 
but  left  an  enduring  reputation  for  his  wisdom  as  a 
judge.  Under  this  expression,  however,  we  must  re- 
gard him,  not  meiely  as  pronouncing  decisions,  pri- 
marily, or  in  the  last  resort,  in  civil  and  criminal 
cases,  but  likewise  as  holding  public  levees  and  trans- 
acting public  business  "  at  the  gate,"  when  he  would 
receive  petitions,  hear  complaints,  and  give  summary 
decisions  on  various  points,  which  in  a  modern 
European  kingdom  would  come  under  the  cogni- 
zance of  numerous  distinct  public  departments. 

To  form  a  correct  idea  of  a  Hebrew  king,  we 
must  abstract  ourselves  fi-om  the  notions  of  modern 
Europe,  and  realise  the  position  of  Oriental  sove- 
reigns. It  would  be  a  mistake  to  regard  the 
Hebrew  government  as  a  limited  monarchy,  in  the 
English  sense  of  the  expression.  It  is  stated  in 
1  Sam.  X.  25,  that  Samuel  "told  the  people  the 
manner  *>  of  the  kingdom,  and  wrote  it  in  the  book 
and  laid  it  before  the  Lord,"  and  it  is  barely  pos- 
sible that  this  may  refer  to  some  statement  respect- 
ing the  boundaries  of  the  kingly  power.  But  no 
such  document  has  come  down  to  us ;  and  if  it  ever 
existed,  and  contained  restrictions  of  any  moment 
on  the  kingly  power,  it  was  piobably  disregarded 
in  practice.  The  following  passage  of  Sir  John 
Malcolm  respecting  the  Shahs  of  Persia,  may,  with 
some  slight  modifications,  be  regarded  as  f;urly 
applicable  to  the  Hebrew  monarchy  under  David 
and  Solomon: — "The  monarch  of  Persia  has  been 
pronounced  to  be  one  of  the  most  absolute  in  the 
world.  His  word  has  ever  been  deemed  a  law  : 
and  he  has  probably  never  had  any  fmiher  restraint 
upon  the  free  exercise  of  his  vast  authority  than 
has  arisen  from  his  regard  for  religion,  his  respect 
for  established  usages,  his  desire  of  reputation,  and 


'^  Dn>  Tei'flepd?,  socer. 

^  mOn>  TtvBepi,  socrus. 

''  jnn.  yafi^po's,  socer,  from  jnn,  "  g-ive  in  mar- 
riage," whence  come  part,  in  Kal.  jriH,  m.,  and 
n^nn,  f.  fattier-ln-law  and  mother-in-law,  i.  e. 
parents  who  give  a  daughter  in  marriage. 

'   n?3'  ^'"l^'i'i}^  ntirus. 

^  D3''>  a5eX0bs  ToO  ai/Spos,  levir. 

™  nD3''.  yvn  toO  iSeA^oO,  uxor  fratris. 

*  The  pi'ecisc  period  depends  on  the  length  of  the 
reign  of  iSaul,  for  estimating  which  there  are  no  cer- 
tain data.  In  the  O.  T.  the  exact  length  is  nowhere 
mentioned.  In  Acts  xiii.  21  forty  years  are  specified; 
^     VOL.  n. 


but  this  is  in  a  speech,  and  statistical  accuracy  may 
have  been  foreign  to  the  speaker's  ideas  on  that  occa- 
sion. And  there  are  difficulties  in  admitting  that  he 
reigned  so  long  as  forty  years.  See  Winer  siib  voc, 
and  the  article  Saul  in  this  volume.  It  is  only  in 
the  reign  of  David  that  mention  is  first  made  of  the 
"recorder"  or  "chronicler"  of  the  king  (2  Sam.  viii. 
16).  Terhaps  the  contemporary  notation  of  dates  may 
have  cormncnccd  in  Da^•id's  reign. 

b  The  word  L23Ei'p,  translated  "manner"  in  the 
A.  v.,  is  translated  in  the  LXX.  Stxaiw/xa,  ;.  c. 
statute  or  ordinance  (see  Ecclus.  iv.  17,  Bar.  ii.  12, 
iv.  13).  But  Josephus  seems  to  have  regarded  the 
document  as  a  prophetical  statement,  read  before  the 
king,  of  the  calamities  which  were  to  arise  from  the 
kingly  powoi^  as  a  kind  of  protest  recorded  for  suc- 
ceeding ages  (see  Ant.  vi.  4,  §0). 

c 


18 


KING 


his  fear  of  exriting  an  opposition  that  might  be 
dangerous  to  his  power,  or  to  his  life"  (Malcolm's 
Persia,  vol.  ii.  3(j;3  ;  compare  Elphinstone's  India, 
or  the  Indian  Mahometan  Empire,  book  viii.  c.  3). 
It  must  not,  however,  be  supposed  to  have  been 
either  the  understanding,  or  the  practice,  that  the 
sovereign  might  seize  at  his  discretion  the  p-.ivate 
property  of  individuals.     Ahab  did  not  venture  to 
seize  the  vineyard  of  Naboth  till,  through  the  testi- 
mony of  false  witnesses,  Naboth  had  been  convicted 
of  blasphemy  ;  and  possibly  his  -vnneyard  may  have 
been  seized   as   a  confiscation,   without  flagrantly 
outraging  public  sentiment  in  those  who  did  not 
know  the  truth  (1  K.  xi.  (3).     But  no  monarchy 
perhaps  ever  existed  in  which    it   would    not  be 
vetravded  as  an  outrage,  that  the  monarch  should 
from  co\-etousness  seize  the  private  property  of  an 
innocent  subject  in  no  ways  dangerous  to  the  state. 
And  geueialiy,  when  Sir  John  Malcolm  proceeds  as 
follows,  in  re'feience  to  "  one  of  the  most  absolute  " 
monarchs  in  the  world,  it  will  be  understood  that 
the  Hebrew  king,  whose  power  might  be  described 
in  the  same  way,  is  not,   on   account  of  certain 
rest,raints  which  exist  in  the  nature  of  things,  to  be 
regarded  as  "  a  limited  monaich  "  in  the  European 
use   of  the   words.     "  We  may  assume  that  the 
power  of  the  king  of  Persia  is  by  usage  absolute 
over  the  property  and  lives  of  his  conquered  enemies, 
his  rebellious  subjects,  his  ou:n  family,  his  ministers, 
over  public  officers  civil  and  military,  and  all  the 
numerous   train  of  domestics;  and  that  he  may 
punish  any  person  of  these  classes,  without  exami- 
nation or  formal  procedure  of  any  kind:  in  all 
other  cases  that  are  capital,  the  forms  piesciibed 
by  law  and  custom  are  observed  ;  the  monarch  only 
commands,   when  the  evidence  has  been  examined 
arid  the  law  declared,  that  the  sentence  shall  be  put 
in  execution,  or  that  the  condemned  culprit  shall 
be  pardoned "  (vol.  ii.  306).     In  accordance  with 
such  usages,  David  ordered  Uriah  to  bo  treacher- 
ously exposed  to  death  in  the  forefront  of  the  hottest 
battle  (2   Sam.    xi.  15);    he  caused    Rechab  and 
Baanah  to  be  slain  instantly,  when  they  brought 
him  the  head  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  iv.  12);  iind 
he  is  represented  as  having  on  his  death-bed  recom- 
mended Solomon  to  put  Joab  and  Shimei  to  death 
(1  K.  ii.  5-9).     In  like  manner,  Solomon  caused  to 
be  killed,  without  trial,  not  only  his  elder  brother 
Adonijah,  and  Joab,  whose  execution  might  be  re- 
garded as  the  exceptional  acts  of  a  dismal  state- 
policy  in  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  but  likewise 
Shimei,  after  havmg  been  seated  on  the  throne  three 
years.     And  King  Saul,  in  resentment  at  their  con- 
nivance  with    David's    escape,    put  to   death    85 
priests,  and  caused  a  massacre  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Nob,   including   women,    children,    and   sucklings 
(1  Sam.  xxii.  18,  19). 

Besides  being  commander-in-chief  of  the  army, 
supreme  judge,  and  absolute  master,  as  it  were,  of 
the  lives  of  his  subjects,  the  king  exercised  the 
power  of  imposing  taxes  on  them,  and  of  exacting 
from  them  personal  service  and  labour.  Both  these 
points  seem  clear  from  the  account  given  (1  Sam. 
viii.  11-17)  of  the  evils  which  would  arise  from 
the  kingly  power ;  and  are  confirmed  in  various 
ways.     Whatever  mention  may  be  made  of  con- 


KING 

suiting  "  old  men,"  or  "  elders  of  Israel,"  we  never 
read  of  their  deciding  such  points  as  these.  When 
Pul,  the  king  of  Assyria,  imposed  a  tribute  on  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  "  Menahem,  the  king,"  exacted 
the  money  of  all  the  mighty  men  of  wealth,  of  each 
man  50  shekels  of  silver  (2  K.  xv.  19).  And  when 
Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  gave  his  tribute  of  silver 
and  gold  to  Pharaoh,  he  taxed  the  land  to  give  the 
money  ;  he  exacted  the  silver  and  gold  of  the  penple 
of  every  one  according  to  his  taxation  (2  K.  xxiii. 
35).  And  the  degree  to  which  the  exaction  of  per- 
sonal labour  might  be  canied  on  a  special  occasion, 
is  illustrated  by  King  Solomon's  requirements  for 
building  the  temple.  He  raised  a  levy  of  30,000 
men,  and  sent  them  to  Lebanon  by  courses  of  ten 
thousand  a  month  ;  and  he  had  70,000  that  baj  e 
burdens,  and  80,000  hewers  in  the  mountains  (1  K. 
v.  13-15).  Judged  by  the  Oriental  standard,  there 
is  nothing  improbable  in  these  numbers.  In  our 
own  days,  for  the  purpose  of  constructing  the  Mah- 
moodeyeh  Canal  in  Egypt,  Mehemet  Ali,  by  orders 
given  to  the  various  sheikhs  of  the  provinces  of 
Sakarah,  Ghizeh,  Mensouiah,  Sharkieh,  Menouf, 
Bahyreh,  and  some  others,  caused  300,000  men, 
women,  and  chiMren,  to  be  assembled  along  the  site 
of  the  intended  canal. <^  This  was  120,000  more 
than  the  levy  of  Solomon. 

In  addition  to  these  earthly  powers,  the  King  of 
Israel  had  a  more  awful  claim  to  respect  and  obe- 
dience. He  was  the  vicegerent  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam. 
X.  1,  xvi.  13),  and  as  it  were  His  son,  if  just  and 
holy  (2  Sam.  vii.  14;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  26,  27,  ii.  6,  7). 
He  had  been  set  apart  as  a  consecrated  ruler.  Upon 
his  head  had  been  poured  the  holy  anointing  oil, 
composed  of  olive-oil,  myrrh,  cinnamon,  sweet  ca- 
lamus, and  cassia, which  had  hitherto  been  reser\ed 
exclusively  for  the  priests  of  Jehovah,  especially 
the  high-priest,  or  had  been  solely  used  to  anoint 
the  Tabernacle  of  the  Congiegation,  the  Aik  of  the 
Testimony,  and  the  vessels  of  the  Tabernacle  (Ex. 
XXX.  23-33,  xl.  9;  Lev.  xxi.  10;  1  K.  i.  39).  He 
had  become,  in  fact,  emphatically  "  the  Lord's 
Anointed."  At  the  coronation  of  sovereigns  in 
modem  Europe,  holy  oil  has  been  frequently  used, 
as  a  symbol  of  divine  right ;  but  this  has  been 
mainly  regarded  as  a  mere  form  ;  and  the  use  of  it 
was  undoubtedly  introduced  in  imitation  of  the 
Hebrew  custom.  But,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy,  a  living  real  signi- 
ficance was  attached  to  consecration  by  this  holy 
anointing  oil.  From  well-known  anecdotes  related 
of  David, — and  perhaps,  from  words  in  his  lamen- 
tation over  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i.  21) — it 
results  that  a  certain  sacredness  invested  the  person 
of  Saul,  the  first  king,  as  the  Lord's  anointed  ;  and 
that,  on  this  account,  it  was  deemed  sacrilegious  to 
kill  him,  even  at  his  own  request  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  6, 
10,  xx^^.  9,  16;  2  Sam.  i.  14).  And,  after  the 
destruction  of  the  first  Temple,  in  the  Book  of  La- 
mentations over  the  calamities  of  the  Hebrew 
people,  it  is  by  the  name  of  "  the.  Lord's  Anointed  " 
that  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah,  is  bewailed 
(Lam.  iv.  20).  Again,  more  than  600  years  after 
the  capture  of  Zedekiah,  the  name  of  the  Anointed, 
though  never  so  used  in  the  Old  Testament — yet 
suggested  probably  by  Ps.  ii.  2,  Dan.  ix.  26 — had 


■^  See  The  Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  by  Mrs.  Toole, 
vol.  ii.  p.  219.  Owing  to  insufficient  provisions,  bad 
treatment,  and  neglect  of  proper  arrangements,  30,000 
of  this  number  perished  in  seven  numth^(p.  220).    In 


compulsory  levies  of  labour,  it  is  piobtihly  diffioult  to    xx.  2-1). 


prevent  gross  instances  of  oppression.  At  the  rebel- 
lion of  the  ten  tribes,  Adoniram,  called  also  Adoram, 
who  was  over  the  levy  of  30,000  men  for  Lebanon, 
was  stoned  to  death  (1  K.  xii.  18 ;  1  K.  v.  14 ;  2  Sam. 


KING  KING  19 

become  appropriated  to  the  expected  kiug,  who  was 
to  restore  the  kingdom  of  David,  and  inaugurate  a 
period  when  Edom,  Moab,  tlie  Ammonites,  and  tlie 
Philistines,  would  again  be  incoi'porated  with  the 
Hebrew  monarch}-,  which  would  extend  fiom  the 
Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea  and  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth  (Acts  i.  6  ;  John  i.  41,  iv.  25  ;  Is.  xi. 
12-14  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  8).  And  thus  the  identical  He- 
brew word  which  signifies  anointed,''  through  its 
Ai-amaic  form  adopted  into  Greek  and  Latin,  is  still 
preserved  to  us  in  the  English  word  Messiah.  (See 
Gesenius's  I'hesaurus,  p.  825.) 

A  ruler  in  whom  so  much  authoi'ity,  human  and 
divine,  was  embodied,  was  naturally  distinguished 
by  outward  honours  and  luxuries.  He  had  a  court 
of  Oriental  magnificence.  When  the  power  of  the 
kingdom  was  at  its  height,  he  sat  on  a  throne  of 
ivory,  covered  with  pure  gold,  at  tlie  feet  of  which 
were  two  figures  of  lions.  Tlie  throne  was  ap- 
proached by  G  steps,  guarded  by  12  figures  of 
lions,  two  on  each  step.  The  king  was  dressed  in 
royal'  robes  (1  K.  xxii.  10  ;  2  Chr.  xviii.  9) ;  his 
iusiu-nia  were,  a  crown  or  diadem  of  pure  gold,  or 
perhaps  radiant  with  precious  gems  (2  Sam.  i. 
10,  xii.  30  ;  2  K.  xi.  12  ;  Ps.  .xxi.  3),  and  a  royal 
sceptre  (Ez.  xix.  11  ;  Is.  xiv.  5  ;  Ps.  xlv.  6;  Am. 
i.  5,  8).  Those  who  approached  him  did  him 
obeisance,  bowing  down  and  touching  the  ground 
with  their  foreheads  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  8  ;  2  Sam.  xix. 
24)  ;  and  this  was  done  even  by  a  king's  wife,  the 
mother  of  Solomon  (1  K.  i.  16).  Their  officers  and 
subjects  called  themselves  his  servants  or  slaves, 
though  they  do  not  seem  habitually  to  have  given 
way  to  such  extravagant  salutations  as  in  the  Chal- 
daean  and  Persian  courts  (1  Sam.  xvii.  32,  34, 
30,  .XX.  8  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  20  ;  Dan.  ii.  4).  As  in  the 
East  at  present,  a  kiss  was  a  sign  of  respect  and 
homage  (1  Sam.  x.  1,  perhaps  Ps.  ii.  12).  He 
lived  in  a  spleudid  palace,  with  porches  and  columns 
(1  K.  vii.  2-7).  All  his  drinking  vessels  were  of 
gold  (1  K.  X.  21).  He  had  a  large  harem ^  which 
in  the  time  of  Solomon  must  have  been  the  source 
of  enormous  expense,  if  we  accept  as  statistically 
accurate  the  round  number  of  700  wives  and  300 
concubines,  in  all  1000,  attributed  to  him  in  the 
Book  of  Kings  (1  K.  xi.  3).  As  is  invariably  the 
case  in  the  great  eastern  monarchies  at  present,  his 
harem  was  guarded  by  eunuchs;  translated  "officers" 
in  the  A.  V.  for  the  most  part  (1  Sam.  viii.  15; 
2  K.  xxiv.  12,  15  ;  1  K.  .xxii.  9  ;  2  K.  viii.  6,  ix. 
32,  33,  .XX.  18,  xxiii.  11  ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  7). 

The  main  practical  restraints  on  the  kings  seem 
to  have  arisen  from  the  prophets  and  the  pro- 
phetical order,  though  in  this  respect,  as  in  many 
others,  a  distinction  must  be  made  between  difl'erait 
periods  and  ditferent  reigns.  Indeed,  under  all  cir- 
cumstances, much  would  depend  on  the  individual 
character  of  the  king  or  the  prophet.  No  trans- 
action of  importance,  however,  was  entered  on  with- 
out consulting  the  will  of  Jehovah,  either  by  Urim 
and  Thummim  or  by  the  prophets ;  and  it  was  the 
general  persuasion  that  the  prophet  was  in  an 
especial  sense  the  servant  and  messenger  of  Jehovah, 
to  whom  Jehovah  had  declared  his  will  (Is.  xliv.  26  ; 
Am.  iii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  6,  ix.  6 :  see  Prophets). 

<*  It  is  supposed  both  by  Jahn  [Archaol.  Bib.  §222)  the  case  {see  2  K.  xxiii.  30),  and  there  does  not  seem 
and  Bauer  (in  his  Ileh.  Alteiihiimcr,  §20)  that  a  king-  sufficient  reason  to  doubt  that  each  individual  kinsr 
was  only  anointed  when  a  new  family  came  to  the  was  anointed.  There  can  be  little  doubt,  likewise, 
throne,  or  when  the  right  to  the  crown  was  disputed,  that  the  kings  of  Israel  were  anointed,  though  this  is 
It  is  usually  on  such  occasions  only  that  the  anointing  |  not  specified  by  the  writers  of  Kings  and  Chronicles, 
is  specified ;  as  in  1  Sam.  x.  1,  2  Sam.  ii.  4,  1  K.  i.  39,  who  wo\ild  deem  such  anointing  invalid. 
2  K.  ix.  3,   2  K.  xi.  12  :   but   this  is   not   inrorinh/i/  < 

C  2 


The  prophets  not  only  rebuked  the  king  with 
boldness  for  individual  acts  of  wickedness,  as  after 
the  murders  of  Uriah  and  of  Naboth ;  but  also,  by 
interposing  their  denunciations  or  exhortations  at 
critical  periods  of  history,  they  swayed  permanently 
the  destinies  of  tlie  state.  When,  after  the  vevoft 
of  the  ten  tribes,  Itehoboam  had  under  him  at  Je- 
rusalem an  army  stated  to  consist  of  180,000  men, 
Sheinaiah,  as  iuterpreter  of  the  divine  will,  caused 
the  army  to  separate  without  attempting  to  put 
down  the  rebellion  (1  K.  xii.  21-24).  When  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  were  in  imminent  peril  from  ihe 
invasion  of  Sennacherib,  the  prophetical  utterance 
of  Isaiah  encouraged  Hezekiah  to  a  successful  re- 
sistance (Is.  xxxvii.  22-36).  On  the  other  hand, 
at  the  invasion  of  Judaea  by  the  Clialdees,  Jeremiali 
prophetically  announced  impending  woe  and  cala- 
mities in  a  strain  which  tended  to  paralyse  patriotic 
resistance  to  the  power  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  4,  2).  And  Jeremiah  evidently  produced 
an  impression  on  the  king's  mind  contrary  to  the 
counsels  of  the  i)rinces,  or  what  might  be  called  the 
war-party  in  Jerusalem  (Jer.  .xx.xviii.  14-27). 

The  law  of  succession  to  the  throne  is  somewhat 
obscure,  but  it  seems  most  probable  that  the  king 
during  his  lifetime  named  his  successor.  This  was 
certainly  the  case  with  David,  who  passed  over  his 
elder  son  Adonijah,  the  son  of  Haggith,  in  favour 
of  Solomon,  the  son  of  Bathsheba  (1  K.  i.  30,  ii. 
22)  ;  and  with  Kehoboam,  of  whom  it  is  said  that 
he  loved  Rhiachah  the  daughter  of  Absalom  above 
all  liis  wives  and  concubines,  and  that  he  made 
Abijah  her  son  to  be  ruler  among  his  brethren,  to 
make  him  king  (2  Chr.  xi.  21,  22).  The  succession 
of  the  first-born  has  been  inferred  from  a  passage 
in  2  Chr.  xxi.  3,  4,  in  which  Jehoshaphat  is  said 
to  have  given  the  kingdom  to  Jehorain  "  because 
he  was  the  first-born."  But  this  very  passage  tends 
to  show  that  Jehoshaphat  had  the  power  of  naming 
his  successor ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  Jeho- 
ram,  on  his  coming  to  the  throne,  put  to  death  all 
his  brothers,  which  he  would  scarcely,  perhaps, 
have  done  if  the  succession  of  the  first-born  had 
been  the  law  of  the  land.  From  the  conciseness  of 
the  narratives  in  the  books  of  Kings  no  inference 
either  way  can  be  drawn  from  the  ordinary  formula 
in  which  the  death  of  the  father  and  succession  of 
his  son  is  recorded  (1  K.  xy.  8).  At  the  same 
time,  if  no  partiality  for  a  favourite  wife  or  son 
intervened,  there  would  always  be  a  natural  bias 
of  affection  in  favour  of  the  eldest  son.  There 
appears  to  have  been  some  prominence  given  to  tlie 
mother  of  the  king  (2  K.  xxiv.  12,  15  ;  1  K.  ii.  19), 
and  it  is  possible  that  the  mother  may  have  been 
regent  during  the  minority  of  a  son.  Indeetl  some 
such  custom  best  explains  the  possibility  of  the 
audacious  usurpation  of  Athaliah  on  the  death  of 
her  son  Ahaziah :  an  usurpation  which  lasted  six 
years  after  the  destruction  of  all  the  seed-royal 
except  the  young  Jehoash  (2  K.  xi.  ],  3). 

The  following  is  a  list  of  some  of  the  officers  of 
the  king : — 

1.  The  Recorder  or  Chroniclei",  who  was  jierhaps 
analogous  to  the  Historiographer  whom  Sir  John 
Malcolm  mentions  as  an  officer  of  the  Persian  court. 


20 


lONGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


whose  duty  it  is  to  write  the  annalri  of  the  king's 
veigu  {ffistori/  of  Persia,  c.  23).  Ceiiain  it  is 
that  there  is  no  regular  series  of  minute  dates  in 
Hebrew  history  until  we  read  of  this  recorder,  or 
remembrancer,  as  the  word  niazkir  is  translated  in 
a  marginal  note  of  the  English  version.  He  sig- 
nities  one  who  keeps  the  memory  of  events  alive, 
in  accordance  with  a  motive  assigned  by  Herodotus 
ibr  writing  his'  history,  \'iz.  that  the  acts  of  men 
might  not  become  extinct  by  time  (Herod,  i.  1  ; 
2  Sara.  \nii.  16;  1  K.  iv.  H;  2  K.  xviii.  18;  Is. 
xxxvi.  3,  22). 

2.  The  Scribe  or  Secretary,  whose  dut)'  would 
be  to  answer  letters  or  petitions  in  the  name  of  the 
King,  to  write  despatches,  and  to  draw  up  edicts 
(2  Sam.  viii.  17,  xx.  25;  2  K.  xii.  10,  xix.  2, 
xxii.  8). 

3.  The  oflicer  who  was  over  the  house  (Is.  xxxii. 
15,  xxxvi.  3).  His  duties  would  be  those  of  chief 
steward  of  the  household,  and  would  embrace  all 
the  internal  economical  aiTangements  of  the  palace, 
the  superintendence  of  the  king's  sen'ants,  and  the 
custody  of  his  costly  vessels  of  gold  and  silver.  He 
seems  to  have  worn  a  distinctive  robe  of  office  and 
girdle.  It  was  against  Shebna,  who  held  this  office, 
that  Isaiah  uttered  his  personal  prophecy  (xxii. 
15-25),  the  only  instance  of  the  kind  in  his  writings 
(see  Ges.  Com.  on  Isaiah,  p.  69+). 

4.  The  king's  friend  (1  K.  iv.  5),  called  like- 
wise the  king's  companion.  It  is  evident  from 
the  name  that  this  officer  must  have  stood  in 
confidential  relation  to  the  king,  but  his  duties  are 
nowhere  specified. 

5.  The  keeper  of  the  vestry  or  wardrobe  (2  K. 
X.  22). 

6.  The  captain  of  the  body-guard  (2  Sam.  xx. 
23).  The  importance  of  this  officer  requires  no 
comment.  It  was  he  who  obeyed  Solomon  in 
putting  to  death  Adonijah,  Joab,  and  Shimei  (1  K. 
li.  25,  34,  46). 

7.  Distinct  officers  over  the  king's  treasures — his 
storehouses,  labourers,  vineyards,  olive-trees,  and 
sycamore-trees,  herds,  camels,  and  flocks  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  25-31). 

8.  The  officer  over  all  the  host  or  army  of  Israel, 
the  commander-in-chief  of  the  armv,  who  com- 
manded it  in  person  during  the  king's  absence 
(2  Sara.  XX.  23 ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  34 ;  2  Sam.  .xi.  1). 
As  an  instance  of  the  foimidable  power  which  a 
general  might  acquire  in  this  office,  see  the  narra- 
tive in  2  Sam.  iii.  30-37,  when  David  deemed  him- 
self obliged  to  tolerate  the  murder  of  Abner  by 
Joab  and  Abishai. 

9.  The  royal  counsellors  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32  ;  Is. 
iii.  3,  xix.  11,  13).  Ahithophel  is  a  specimen  of 
how  much  such  an  officer  might  effect  for  evil  or 
for  good  ;  but  whether  there  existed  under  Hebrew 
king.s  any  body  cm-responding,  even  distantly,  to  the 
English  Privy  Council,  in  fomier  times,  does  not 
appear  (2  Sam.  xvi.  20-23,  xvii.  1-14). 

The  following  is  a  statement  of  the  sources  of 
the  royal  revenues : — 

1 .  The  royal  demesnes,  corn-fields,  vineyards,  and 
olive-gardens.  Some  at  least  of  these  seem  to  have 
been  taken  from  pinvate  individuals,  but  whether  as 
the  punishment  of  rebellion,  or  on  any  other  plausible 
pretext,  is  not  specified  (1  Sara.  viii.  14;  1  Chr. 
xxvii.  26-28).  2.  The  produce  of  the  royal  flocks 
(1  Sam.  xxi.  7;  2  Sam.  xiii.  23;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10; 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  25).  3.  A  nominal  tenth  of  the  pro- 
duce of  corn-land  and  vineyards  and  of  sheep  (1  Sam. 
I'iii.  15,  17).     4.    A  tribute  from  meirhant  who 


passed  through  the  Hebrew  territory  (1  K.  x.  14) 
5.  Presents  made  bv  his  subjects  (I  Sam.  xvi.  20 
1  Sam.  X.  27  ;  1  K."  x.  25  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  10).  There 
is  perhaps  no  gi'eater  distinction  in  the  usages  ot 
eastern  and  western  nations  than  on  what  relates  to 
the  giving  and  receiving  of  presents.  When  made 
regularly  they  do  in  fact  amount  to  a  regular  tax. 
Thus,  in  the  passage  last  referred  to  in  the  book  ot 
Kings,  it  is  stated  that  they  brought  to  Solomon 
"  every  man  his  present,  vessels  of  silver  and  ves- 
sels of  gold,  and  garments,  and  armour,  and  spices, 
horses  and  mules,  a  rate  year  by  year."  6.  In  the 
time  of  Solomon,  the  king  had  trading  vessels  of  his 
own  at  sea,  which,  starting  from  Eziongeber,  biought 
back  once  in  three  years  gold  and  silver,  ivoi'v, 
apes,  and  peacocks  (1  K.  x.  22).  It  is  probable 
that  Solomon  and  some  other  kings  may  have 
derived  some  revenue  from  commercial  ventures 
(1  K.  ix.  28).  7.  The  spoils  of  war  taken  from 
conquered  nations  and  the  tribute  paid  by  them 
(2  Sara.  viii.  2,  7,  8,  10;  1  K.  iv.  21  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvii.  5).  8.  Lastly,  an  undefined  power  of  exact- 
ing compulsory  labour,  to  which  I'eference  has  been 
already  made  (1  Sam.  viii.  12,  13,  16).  As  far  as 
this  power  was  exercised  it  was  equivalent  to  so 
much  income.  There  is  nothing  in  1  Sam.  x.  25, 
or  in  2  Sam.  v.  3,  to  justify  the  statement  that 
the  Hebrews  defined  in  express  terms,  or  in  any 
terms,  b}'  a  particular  agreement  or  covenant  for 
that  purpose,  what  sendees  should  be  rendered 
to  the  king,  or  what  he,  could  legally  require. 
(See  Jahn,  Archaologia  Biblica ;  Bauer,  Lehr- 
huch  der  Hebrdischen  Alterthiimer ;  Winer,  s.  v. 
Kbnig.) 

It  only  lemains  to  add,  that  in  Deuteronomy  xvii. 
14-20  there  is  a  document  containing  some  direc- 
tions as  to  what  any  king  who  might  be  appointed 
by  the  Hebrtiws  was  to  do  and  not  to  do.  The 
proper  appreciation  of  this  document  would  mainly 
depend  on  its  date.  It  is  the  opinion  of  many 
modern  writers — Geseaius,  De  Wette,  Winer, 
Ewald,  and  others — that  the  book  which  contains 
the  document  was  composed  lopg  after  the  time  of 
Moses.  See,  however,  Deuteronomy  in  the  1st 
vol.  of  this  work  ;  and  compare  Gesenius,  Ges- 
chichte  der  Hcbraischen  Sprache  und  Schrift, 
p.  32  :  De  Wette,  Einleitung  in  die  Bibel,  "  Deii- 
teronomium";  Winer,  s.  v.  Kouig  ;  Ewald,  Ge- 
schichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  iii.  381.  [E.  T.J 

KINGS,  FIRST  and  SECOND  BOOKS 

OF,  originally  only  one  book  in  the  Hebrew  Canon, 
and  first  edited  in  Hebrew  as  two  by  Bomberg, 
after  the  model  of  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate 
(De  Wette  and  0.  Theiiius,  Einleitnng).  They  are 
called  by  the  LXX.,  Origen,  &c.,  'Baa-iKtiSiv  rp'nii 
and  rerdpTri,  third  and  fourth  of  the  Kingdoms 
(the  books  of  Samuel  being  the  first  and  second), 
but  by  the  Latins,  with  few  exceptions,  tertius  et 
quartus  Regnm  liber.  Jerome,  though  in  the  head- 
ing of  his  translation  of  the  Scriptures,  he  follows 
the  Hebrew  name,  and  calls  them  Liber  Malachim 
Primus  and  Secundus,  yet  elsewhere  usually  follows 
the  common  usage  of  the  church  in  his  day.  In 
his  Prologus  Gale;itus  he  places  them  as  the  fourth 
of  the  second  order  of  the  sacred  books,  i.e.  of  the 
Prophets: — "  Quartus,  Malachim,  i.  e.  Kegum,  qui 
tertio  el  quarto  Itegum  volumine  continetur.  Me- 
liusque  raulto  est  Malachim,  i.  e.  Begum,  qukm 
Mamelachoth,  i.  e.  Begnoruin,  dicere.  Non  enim 
multarum  gentium  desciihit  regna;  sed  unius  Is- 
raelitici  populi,  qui  tribubus  duodecira  continetur." 
In  his  epistle  to    Paulinus  he  thus  describes  the 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


21 


contents  of  these  two  boolvs : — "  Malachim,  i.  e. 
tertius  et  quartus  Regum  liber,  a  Salomone  usque 
ad  Jechoniam,  et  a  Jeroboam  tilio  Nabat  usque  ad 
Osee  qui  ductus  est  in  Assyrios,  regnum  Juda  et 
reguum  describit  Israel.  Si  historiam  respicias, 
verba  simplicia  suut :  si  in  Uteris  seusum  lateulem 
inspexeris,  Ecclesiae  paucitas,  et  hei'eticoram  contra 
ecclesiam  bella,  nanantur."  The  division  into  two 
books,  being  purely  artificial  and  as  it  were  me- 
chanical, may  be  overlooked  in  speaking  of  them  ; 
and  it  must  also  be  remembered  that  the  division 
between  the  books  of  Kings  and  Samuel  is  equally 
artificial,  and  that  in  point  of  fact  the  historical 
books  commencing  with  Judges  and  ending  with 
2  Kings  present  the  appeanmce  of  one  work," 
giving  a  continuous  history  of  Israel  from  the  times 
of  Joshua  to  the  death  of  Jehoiachin.  It  must 
suflice  here  to  mention,  in  support  of  this  assertion, 
the  frequent  allusion  ui  the  book  of  Judges  to  the 
times  of  the  kings  of  Israel  (xvii.  6,  xviii.  1,  xix.  1, 
xxi.  '2o)  ;  the  concurrent  evidence  of  ch.  ii.  that  the 
writer  lived  in  <m  age  when  he  could  take  a  retro- 
spect of  the  whole  time  during  which  the  judges 
ruled  (ver.  16-19),  i.  e.  that  he  lived  after  the 
monarchy  had  been  established ;  the  occurrence  in 
the  book  of  Judges,  for  the  first  time,  of  the  phrase 
"  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  "  (iii.  10),  which  is  repeated 
often  in  the  book  (vi.  34,  xi.  29,  xiii.  25,  xiv.  6, 
iSjc),  and  is  of.  frequent  use  in  Samuel  and  Kings, 
{e.g.  1  Sam.  x.  6,  xvi.  13, 14,  xix.  9  ;  2  Smii.  xxiii. 
2  ;  IK.  xxii.  24  ;  2  K.  ii.  16,  &c.)  ;  the  allusion  in 
i.  21  to  the  capture  of  Jebus,  and  the  continuance 
of  a  Jebusite  population  (see  2  Sam.  xxiv.  16j ;  the 
reference  in  xx.  27  to  the  removal  of  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  from  Shiloh  to  Jerusalem,  and  the  expres- 
sion "  in  those  days,"  pointing,  as  in  xvii.  6,  &c.,  to 
remote  times;  tlie  distinct  reference  in  xviii.  30  to 
the  captivity  of  Israel  by  Shalmaneser;  with  the 
fact  that  the  books  of  Judges,  Ruth,  Samuel,  Kings, 
form  one  unbroken  narrative,  similar  in  general 
character,  which 'has  no  beginning  except  at  Judg.  i., 
while,  it  may  be  added,  the  book  of  Judges  is 
not  a  continuation  of  Joshua,  but  opens  with  a 
repetition  of  the  same  events  with  which  Joshua 
closes.  In  like  manner  the  book  of  Ruth  clearly 
forms  part  of  those  of  Samuel,  supplying  as  it 
does  the  essential  point  of  David's  genealogy  and 
early  family  history,  and  is  no  less  clearly  connected 
with  the  book  of  Judges  by  its  opening  verse,  and 
the  epoch  to  which  the  whole  book  relates. *>  Other 
links  connecting  the  books  of  Kings  with  the  pre- 
ceding may  be  found  in  the  comparison,  suggested 
by  De  Wette,  of  1  K.  ii.  26  with  1  Sam.  ii.  35; 
ii.  11  with  2  Sam.  v.  5 ;  1  K.  ii.  3,  4,  v.  17,  18, 
viii.  18,  19,  25,  with  2  Sam.  vii.  12-16;  and  1  K. 
iv.  1-6  with  2  Sam.  viii.  15-18.  Also  2  K.  xvii. 
41  may  be  compared  with  Judg.  ii.  19 ;  1  Sam.  ii. 
27  with  Judg.  xiii.  6 ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  17,  20,  xix.  27, 
with  Judg.  xiii.  6;  1  Sam.  ix.  21  with  Judg.  vi. 
15,  and  xx. ;  1  K.  viii.  1  with  2  Sam.  vi.  17,  and 
v.  7,  9  ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  12  with  liuth  iv.  17  ;  Ruth 
i.  1  with  Judg.  xvii.  7,  8,  9,  xix.  1,  2  (Bethlehem- 
Judah)  ;  the  use  in  Judg.  xiii.  6,  8,  of  the  }ihrase 
'•the  man  of  God"  (in  the  earlier  books  applied  to 
Moses  only,  and  that  only  in  Ueut.  xxxiii.  1  and  Josh, 
xiv.  6),  may  be  compared  with  the  very  frequent 

^  De  Wette's  reasons  for  reckoniner  Kings  as  a 
separate  work  seem  to  tlie  writer  quite  inconclusive. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  book  of  Joshua  seems  to  be  an 
independent  book.  Ewald  classes  these  books  together 
exactly  as  is  done  above  {Gcsch.  i.  175),  and  calls  them 


use  of  it  in  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  as  the 
common  designation  of  a  prophet,  whereas  only 
Jeremiah  besides  (xxxv.  4)  so  uses  it  before  the 
captivity."  The  phrase,  "  God  do  so  to  me,  and 
more  also,"  is  common  to  Ruth,  Samuel,  and  Kings, 
.and  "  till  they  weie  ashamed  "  to  Judges  and  Kings 
(iii.  25;  2  K.  ii.  17,  viii.  11").  And  generally  the 
style  of  the  narrative,  oi'dinarily  quiet  and  simple,  but 
rising  to  great  vigour  and  spirit  when  stirring  deeds 
are  described  (as  in  Judg.  iv.*,  vii.,  xi.,  &c. ;  1  Sam. 
iv.,  xvii.,  xx.xi.,  &c. ;  1  K.  viii.,  xviii.,  xix.,  &c.), 
and  the  inti eduction  of  poetry  or  poetic  style  in 
the  midst  of  the  narrative  (as  in  Judg.  v.,  1  Sam. 
ii.,  2  Sam.  i.  17,  &c.,  1  K.  xxii.  17,  &c.),  consti- 
tute such  strong  features  of  resemblance  as  lead  to 
the  conclusion  that  these  several  books  form  but 
one  work.  Indeed  the  very  iianies  of  the  books 
sufficiently  indicate  that  they  were  all  imposed  by 
the  same  authority  for  the  convenience  of  division, 
and  with  reference  to  the  subject  treated  of  in  each 
division,  ;ind  not  that  they  were  origin;d  titles  of 
independent  works. 

But  to  confine  ourselves  to  the  books  of  Kings. 
We  shall  consider — 

I.  Tlieir  historical  and  chronological  range ; 
II.  Their    peculiarities    of  diction,    and    other 
features  in  their  literary  aspect ; 

III.  Their  authorship,  and  the  sources  of  the 

author's  information ; 

IV.  Theii'  relation  to  the  books  of  Chronicles  ; 
V.  Their  place  in  the  canon,  and  the  references 

to  them  in  the  New  Testament. 
I.  The  books  of  Kings  range  from  David's  death 
and  Solomon's  Recession  to  the  throne  of  Israel, 
commonly  reckoned  as  B.C.  1015,  but  according  to 
Lepsius  B.C.  993  (Koniysb.  d.  Acijypt.  p.  102),  to 
the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  and  the 
desolation  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  burning  of  the 
Temple,  according  to  the  .same  reckoning  B.C.  588, 
(B.C.  586,  Lep.Mus,  p.  107 j — a  period  of  427  (or 
405)  yeai's:  with  a  supplemental  notice  of  an  event 
that  occurred  after  an  interval  of  26  years,  viz. 
the  liberation  of  Jehoiachin  from  his  prison  at 
Babylon,  and  a  still  further  extension  to  Jehoi- 
achin's  death,  the  time  of  which  is  not  known,  but 
which  was  probably  not  long  after  his  liberation. 
The  histoiy  therefore  comprehends  the  whole  time 
of  the  Israelitish  monarchy,  exclusive  of  the  reigns 
of  Saul  and  David,  whether  existing  as  one  kingdom 
as  under  Solomon  and  the  eight  last  kings,  or  di- 
vided into  the  two  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah. 
It  exhibits  the  Isiaelites  in  the  two  extremes  of 
power  and  weakness ;  under  Solomon  extending 
their  dominion  over  tributary  Idngdoms  from  the 
Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean  and  the  border 
of  Egypt  (IK.  iv.  21);  under  the  last  kings  re- 
duced to  a  miserable  remnant,  subject  alternately 
to  Egypt  and  Assyria,  till  at  length  they  were 
rooted  up  from  their  own  laud.  As  the  cause  of 
this  decadence  it  points  out  the  division  of  Solo- 
mon's monarchy  into  two  parts,  followed  by  the 
religious  schism  and  idolatrous  worship  brought 
about  from  political  motives  by  Jeroboam.  How 
the  consequent  wai's  between  the  two  kingdoms 
necessarily  weakened  both  ;  how  they  lal  to  calling 
in  the  stranger  to  their  aid  whenever  their  power 


"  the  great  Book  of  the  Kings." 

^  EiehUorn  attributes  Kuth  (o  the  author  of  the 
books  of  Samuel  (Th.  Parker's  De  Wette,  ii.  320). 

"  In  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nchcmiah,  it  repeatedly 
oeeiirs. 


22  KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 

wl  equally  balauce.l,  ot  which  the  result  was  the  i  of  the  contemporary  Israelitish  and  foreign  potei 


-       -  „  i.;„„,inm  and  then  of  the  !  tates,  receive  especial  illustration  ;  in  the  latter,  and 

destruction  '^^'f^^^l^^^^,^^^^^^^^  greater  extent,  the  reigns  of  Jehoiakim 

:v^"Lro;ti^  o'^^^thTidlS::  superstitions  of   and  Zedekiah,  and  those  of  their  heathen  conte.po- 
Urheathen  nations  whose  friendship  and  protection    rar-,es.     An  intmrate  acquamtance  w.  h  these  pro- 

h  .  soSt,  by  which  they  forfeited  the  Divine  |  phets  >s  of  the  utmost  nioment  tor  elucdatrng  the 
Section -all  this  is  with  great   clearness   and  |  conc.se  narrative  of  the  books  of  lungs      The  two 
£1    ty   set  forth    in   these  ^books,  which  treat    together  give  us  a  real  y  fnll  view  of  the  events 
equally   of  the  two  kingdoms  while  they  lasted,    ot  the  tmnes  at  honre  and  abroad 
The    doch-ine    of   the    theocracy    is  also   clearly        It  mus,  however,  be  admitted  that    he  chrono- 

ine    uu(,Liiiio  ..  j.^_  29,  30,    logical  details  expressly  given  in  the  books  ot  Kings 


SJSialf'lt'^hf  ie'Jhri  ;.;tinuance  \  whidj  is  giv*,  that  of  the  foundation  of  Solomon's 
of  the  kmcd'om  of  Judah,  and  the  permanence  of  |  temple  (1  K  v.  1)  is  manifestly  en-oneous,  as 
the  Snast?  of  David,  are  contrasted  with  the  fre-  being  irreconcileable  with  any  view  of  the  chrono- 
q  lent  changes  of  dynasty,  and  the  far  shorter  dura-  logy  ot  the  imes  of  the  Judges,  or  with  St.  Paul  s 
Tn  of  the  kingdon(  of  lLel,thoughthe  latter  was    cd^^^^^^^^ 


the  more  popufous  and  powerful  kingdom  ot  the  two 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  9).     As  regards  the  affairs  of  foreign 
nations,  and  the  relation  of  Israel  to  them,  the  his- 
torical notices  in  these  books,  though  in  the  earlier 
times  scanty,  are  most  valuable,  and;  as  has  been 
lately  fully  shown  (Riiwlinson's  Baiapton  Lectures, 
1859),  in  striking  accordance  with  the  latest  addi- 
tions to  our   knowledge  of  contemporary   profane 
history.   Thus  the  patronage  extended  to  Hadad  the 
Edomite  by  Psinaches  king  of  Egypt  (1  K.  xi.  19, 
20) ;    the  alliance  of  Solomon  with  his  successor 
Psusennes,  who  reigned  35  years ;  the  accession  of 
Shishak,  or  Sesonchis  I.,  towards  the  close  of  Solo- 
mon's reign  ( 1  K.  xi.  40),  and  his  invasion  and  con- 
quest of  Judaea  in  the  reign  of  liehoboam,  of  which 
a   monument  still  exists  on  the  walls  of  Karnac 
(Koniqsh.  p.   114);    the   time  of  the  Aethiopian 
kings  So  (Sabak)  and  Tirhakah,  of  the  25th  dynasty ; 
theorise  and  speedy  fall  of  the  power  of  Syria ;  the 
I'apid  growth  of  the  Assyrian  monai'chy  which  over- 
shadowed it;  Assyria's  struggles  with  Egypt,  and 
the  sudden  ascendancy  of  the  Babylonian   empire 
under  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  the  destruction  both  of 
Assyria  and  Egypt,  as  we  find  these  events  in  the 
books  of  Kings,  fit  in  exactly  with  what  we  now 
know  of  Egyptian,   Syi'ian,   Assyrian,  and  Baby- 
Ionian  history.     The  names  of  Omii,  Jehu,  Mena- 
hem,  Hoshea,  Hezekiah,  &c.,  are  believed  to  have 
been  deciphered  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  which 
also  contain  pretty  full  accounts  of  the  campaigns 
of  Tiglath-Pileser,  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esar- 
haddon :  Shalmaneser's  name  has  not  yet  been  dis- 
covered,  though    two   inscriptions   in  the    British 
Museum  are  f;hought  to  refer  to  his  reign.     These 
valuable  additions  "to  our  knowledge  of  profane  his- 
tory, which  we  may  hope  will  shortly  be  increased 
both  in  number  and  in  certainty,  together  with  the 
fragments  of  ancient  historians,  which  are  now  be- 
coming better  understood,  are  of  great  assistance  in 
explaining  the  brief  allusions  in  these  books,  while 
tliey  aflbrd  an  in-efragable  testimony  to  their  his- 
torical truth. 

Another  most  important  aid  to  a  right  under- 
standing of  the  history  in  these  books,  and  to  the 
filling  up  of  its  outline,  is  to  be  found  in  the 
prophets,  and  especially  in  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah. 
In  the  former  the  reigns  of  Ahaz  and  Hezekiah,  and 


by  almost  all  chronologists,  whatever  school  they 
belong  to,  whether  ancient  or  modern,  and  is  utterly 
ignored  by  Josephus.      [Chronology,  vol.  i.  323, 
324  a,  325.]   Jloreover,  when  the  text  is  examined, 
it  immediately  appears  that  this  date  of  480  years 
is  both  unnecessary  and  quite  out  of  place.     The 
reference  to  the  Exodus  is  gratuitous,  and  alien  to 
all  the  other  notes  of  time,  whi;;h  refer  merely  to 
Solomon's  accession.     If  it  is  left  out,  the  text  will 
be  quite  perfect  without  it,^  and  will  agree  exactly 
with  the  resume'  in  ver.  37,  38,  and  also  with  the 
parallel   passage   in    2  Chr.  iii.  2.      The  evidence 
therefoie  of  its  being  an  interpolation  is  wonderfully 
strong.     But  if  so,  it  must  have  been  inserted  by  a 
professed  chronologist,  whose  object  was  to  reduce 
the  Scripture  history  to  an  exact  system  of  chrono- 
logy.   It  is  likely  therefore  that  we  shall  find  traces 
of  the  same  hand  in  other  parts  of  the  books.    Now 
De  Wette  {Einleit.  p.  235),  among  the  evidences 
which  he  puts  forward  as  marking  the  books  of 
Kings  as  in  his  opinion  a  separate 'work  from  those 
of  Samuel,  mentions,  though  eiToneously,  as  2  Sam. 
V.  4,  5  shows,  the  sudden  introduction  of  "  a  chro- 
nological  system "    {die  genauere    zeit-rechnxmg). 
When  therefore   we  find  that  the  very  first  date 
introduced  is  erroneous,  and  that  numerous  other 
dates  are  also  certainly  wrong,  because  contradictory, 
it  seems  a  not  unfair  conclusion  that  such  dates 
are  the  work  of  an  interpolator,  trying  to  bring  the 
history  within    his   own   chronological   system :    a 
conclusion  somewhat  confirmed  by  the  alterations 
and   omissions   of  these   dates   in  the   LXX.'    As 
regards,  however,  these  chronological  tlifficulties,  it 
must  be  observed  they  are  of  two  essentially  different 
kinds.     One  kind  is  merely  the  want  of  the  data 
necessary  for  chronological  exactness.     Such  is  the 
absence,  apparently,  of  any  uniform  rule  for  dealing 
with  the  fragments  of  years  at  the  beginning  and 
end  of  the  reigns.     Such  might  also  be  a  deficiency 
iri  the  sum  of  the  regnal  years  of  Israel  as  com- 
pared with  the  synchronistic  years  of  Judah,  caused 
by   unnoticed    interregna,    if  any   such   really  oc- 
curred.    And   this  class   of  difficulties   may   pro- 
bably have  belonged  to  these  books  in  their  original 
state,  in  which  exact  scientific  chronology  was  not 
aimed  at.     But  the  other  kind  of  difficulty  is  of  a 
totally  different  character,  and  embraces  dates  which 


^  The  MSS.  A.  B.  C.  have,  however,  a  difFcrent  1  Solomon's  reigrn  over  Israel,  in  the  month  Zif,  which 
reading  which  is  adopted  by  Lachmaiin  and  Words-  is  tlie  second  month,  that  he  bpfjan  to  build  the  house 
worth..'  ]  of  the  Lord." 

«  ''•  And  it  cume  to  pass  ....  in  the  fouith  year  of  i       ''  See  1  K.  xvi.  8,  15,  29  ;   vi.  1. 


KINGS,  FIKST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


23 


ai'e  verij  exact  in  tlieir  mode  of  expression,  but  are 
erroneous  and  contradictory.  Some  of  these  are 
pointed  out  below ;  and  it  is  such  which  it  seems 
reasonable  to  ascribe  to  the  interpolation  of  later 
professed  chronologists.  But  it  is  necessary  to  give 
specimens  of  each  of  these  kinds  of  difficulty,  both 
with  a  view  to  approximating  to  a  true  chronology, 
and  also  to  show  the  actual  condition  of  the  books 
mider  consideration. 

(1.)  When  we  sum  up  the  years  of  all  the  reigns 
of  the  kings  of  Israel  as  given  iu  the  books  of  Kings, 
and  then  all  the  years  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings 
of  Judah  from  the  1st  of  Kehoboam  to  the  6th  of 
Hezekiah,  we  find  that,  instead  of  the  two  sums 
agreeing,  there  is  an  excess  of  19  or  20  years  in 
Judah — the  reigns  of  the  latter  amounting  to' 261 
years,  while  the  former  make  up  only  242.  But 
we  are  able  to  get  somewhat  nearer  to  the  seat  of 
tiiis  disagreement,  because  it  so  happens  that  the 
parallel  histories  of  Israel  and  Judah  touch  in  four 
or  five  points  where  the  synchronisms  are  precisely 
marked.  These  points  are  (1)  at  the  simultaneous 
accessions  of  Jeroboam  and  Rehoboam  ;  (2)  at  the 
simultaneous  deaths  of  Jehoram  and  Ahaziah,  or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  the  simultaneous  acces- 
sions of  Jehu  and  Athaliah  ;  (3)  at  the  15th  year 
of  Amaziah,  which  was  the  1st  of  Jeroboam  II. 
(2  K.  xiv.  17)  ;  (4)  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  which 
was  contemporary  with  some  part  of  Pekah's,  viz. 
according  to  the  text  of  2  K.  xvi.  1,  the  three 
first  years  of  Ahaz  with  the  three  last  of  Pekah  ; 
and  (5)  at  the  6th  of  Hezekiah,  which  was  the 
9th  of  Hoshea ;  the  two  last  points,  however,  being 
less  certain  than  the  others,  at  least  as  to  tlie  pre- 
cision of  the  synchronisms,  depending  as  this  does 
on  the  correctness  of  the  numerals  in  the  text. 

Hence,  instead  of  lumping  the  whole  periods  of 
261  years  and  242  years  together,  and  comparing 
their  difl'erence,  it  is  clearly  expedient  to  compare 
the  different  sub-periods,  which  are  defined  by  com- 
mon termini.  Beginning  therefore  with  the  sub- 
pcriotl  which  commences  with  the  double  accession 
of  Kehoboam  and  Jeroboam,  and  closes  with  the 
double  death  of  Ahaziah  and  Jehoram,  and  summing 
up  the  number  of  years  assigned  to  the  different 
reigns  in  each  kingdom,  we  find  that  the  six  reigns 
in  Judah  make  up  95  years,  and  the  eight  reigns  in 
Israel  make  up  98  years.  Here  there  is  an  excess 
of  3  years  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  may, 
however,  be  readily  accounted  for  by  the  frequent 
changes  of  dynasty  there,  and  the  probability  of 
fragments  of  years  being  reckoned  as  whole  years, 
thus  causing  the  same  year  to  be  reckoned  twice 
over.  The  95  years  of  Judah,  or  even  a  less  num- 
ber, will  hence  appear  to  be  the  true  number  of 
whole  years  (see  too  Clinton,  F.  H.  ii.  314,  &c.). 

Beginning,  again,  at  the  double  accession  of  Atha- 
li;di  and  Jehu,  we  have  in  Judah  74-4l)-|-14  first 
years  of  Amaziah  =  61,  to  correspond  with  28-1-17 
-f  16  =  61,  ending  with  the  last  year  of  Jeboash  in 
Israel.  Starting  again  with  the  15th  of  Amaziah  = 
1  Jeroboain  II.,  we  have  15-f  52-1- 16-|-3  =  86  (to 
the  3rd  year  of  Ahtiz),  to  correspond  with  41-|-  1  -|- 
lO-F2-f20  =  74  (to  the  close  of  Pekah's  leign), 
where  we  at  once  detect  a  deficiency  on  the  part  of 
Israel  of  (86-74=)  12  years,  if  at  least  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  really  corresponded  with  the  20th  of  Pekah. 
And  lastly,  starting  with  the  year  following  that 
lust  named,  we  have  13  last  years  of  Ahaz -|- 7  first 
of  Hezekiah  =  20,  to  correspond  with  tlie  9  years 
of  Hoshea,  where  we  find  another  deficiency  in  Israel 
of  11  years. 


The  two  first  of  the  above  periods  may  then  be 
said  to  agree  together,  and  to  give  95-1-61  =  156 
yeais  from  the  accession  of  Kehoboam  and  Jeroboam 
to  the  15th  of  Amaziah  in  Judah,  and  the  death 
of  Jehoash  in  Israel,  and  we  observe  that  the  dis- 
crepance of  12  years  first  occurs  in  the  third  period, 
in  which  tlie  breaking  up  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
began  at  the  close  of  Jehu's  dynasty.  Putting  aside 
the  synchronistic  arrangement  of  the  years  as  we 
now  find  them  in  2  K.  xv.  seq.,  there  would  be 
no  difficulty  whatever  in  supposing  that  the  reigns 
of  the  kings  of  Israel  at  this  time  -were  not  con- 
tinuous, and  that  for  several  years  after  the  death 
of  Zachariah,  or  Shallum,  or  both,  the  goverimient 
may  either  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the  king  of 
Syria,  or  broken  up  amongst  contending  parties,  till 
at  length  Menahem  was  able  to  establish  himself  on 
the  throne  by  the  help  of  Pul,  king  of  Assyria,  and 
transmit  his  tributary  throne  to  his  son  Pekahiah. 

But  there  is  another  mode  of  bringing  this  thir'd 
period  into  harmony,  which  violates  no  historical 
probability,  and  is  in  fact  strongly  indicated  by  the 
fluctuations  of  the  text.  We  are  told  in  2  K.  xv.  8 
that  Zachariah  began  to  reign  in  the  38th  of 
Uzziah,  and  (xiv.  23)  that  his  father  Jeroboam 
began  to  reign  in  the  15th  of  Amaziah.  Jeroboam 
must  therelbie  have  reigned  52  or  53  years,  not 
41:  for  the  idea  of  an  interregnum  of  11  or  12 
years  between  Jeroboam  and  his  son  Zachariah  is 
absurd.  But  the  addition  of  these  12  years  to 
Jeroboam's  reign  exactly  equalizes  the  period  in  the 
two  kingdoms,  which  would  thus  contain  86  years, 
and  makes  up  242  years  from  the  accession  of 
Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam  to  the  3rd  of  Ahaz  and 
20th  of  Pekah,  supposing  always  that  these  last- 
named  years  really  synchronize. 

As  regards  the  disciepance  of  11  years  in  the 
last  period,  nothing  can  in  itself  be  more  probable 
than  that  either  during  some  part  of  Pekah's  life- 
time, or  after  his  death,  a  period,  not  included  in 
the  regnal  years  of  either  Pekah  or  Hoshea,  should 
liave  elapsed,  when  there  was  either  a  state  of 
anarchy,  or  the  government  was  administered  by  an 
Assyrian  oHrcer.  There  are  also  several  passages 
in  the  contemporary  prophets  Isaiah  and  Hosea, 
which  would  fall  in  with  this  view,  as  Hos.  x.  3, 
7  ;  Is.  ix.  9-19.  But  it  is  impossible  to  assert 
peiemptoiily  that  such  was  the  case.  The  decision 
must  await  some  more  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
chronology  of  the  times  from  heathen  sources.  The 
addition  of  these  last  20  years  makes  up  for  the 
whole  duration  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  261  or 
262  years,  more  or  less.  Now  the  interval,  ac- 
cording to  Lepsius's  tables,  from  the  accession  of 
Sesonchis,  or  Shishak,  to  that  of  Sabacon,  or  So 
(2  K.  xvii.  4),  is  245  years.  Allowing  Sesonchis 
to  have  reigned  7  years  contemporaneously  with 
Solomon,  and  Sabaco,  who  reigned  12  years,e  to 
have  reigned  9  before  Shalmaneser  came  up  the 
second  time  against  Samaria  (245-l-7-|-9  =  261), 
the  chronology  of  Kgypt  would  exactly  tally  with 
that  here  given.  It  may,  however,  tuin  out  that 
the  time  thus  allowed  for  the  duration  of  the 
Israelitish  monarchy  is  somewhat  too  long,  and 
that  the  time  indicated  by  the  years  of  the  Israelitish 
kings,  without  any  interregnum,  is  nearer  the  truth. 
If  so,  a  ready  way  of  reducing  the  sum  of  the 
reigns  of  the  kings  of  Judah  would  be  to  assign 
41  years  to  that^'of  Uzziah,  instead  of  52  (as  if 
the  numbers   of   Uzziah   and   Jeroboam  had  been 


8  Lcijsius,  K'unigsh.  p.  87 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


accidentally  interchanged) :  an  arrangeinent  whicli 
interferes  with  no  known  historical  truth,  though  it 
would  distiu'b  the  doubtful  synchronism  of  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  with  the  20th  of  I'ekah,  and  make  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  coiTespond  with  about  tlie  9th  or  10th  of 
Pekah.  Indeed  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  it' we 
neglect  this  synchronism,  and  consider  as  one  the 
period  fiom  the  accession  of  Atlialiah  and  Jeliii  to 
tiie  7th  of  Hezekiah  and  9tli  of  Hosliea,  the  sums 
of  the  reigns  iu  the  two  kingdoms  agree  exactly, 
when  we  reckon  41  years  for  Uzziah,  and  52  for 
Jeroboam,  viz.  155  years,  or  250  for  the  whole 
time  of  the  Israelitish  monarchy.  Another  advan- 
tage of  this  arrangement  would  be  to  reduce  the  age 
of  Uzziah  at  the-  birth  of  his  son  and  heir  Jotham 
from  the  improbable  age  of  42  or  43  to  31  or  32. 
It  may  be  added  that  the  date  in  2  K.  xv.  1,  which 
assigns  the  1st  of  Uzziah  to  the  27th  of  Jeroboam, 
seems  to  indicate  that  the  author  of  it  only  reckoned 
41  years  for  Uzziah's  reign,  since  from  the  27th  of 
Jeroboam  to  the  1st  of  Pekah  is  just  41  years  (see 
Lepsius's  table,  Koiiigsb.  p.  103  '').  Also  that  2  K. 
xvii.  1.  which  makes  the  12th  of  Ahaz  =  1st  of 
Hoshea,  implies  that  the  1st  of  Ahaz  =  9th  of 
Pekah. 

(2.)  Turning  next  to  the  other  class  of  ditiiculties 
mentioned  above,  the  following  instances  will  per- 
haps be  thought  to  justify  the  opinion  that  the 
dates  in  these  books  which  are  intended  to  establish 
a  precise  chronology  are  the  work  of  a  much  later 
hand  or  hands  than  the  books  themselves. 

The  date  in  1  K.  vi.  1  is  one  which  is  obviously 
intended  for  strictly  chronological  purposes.  If  cor- 
rect, it  would,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  sub- 
sequent notes  of  time  in  the  books  of  Kings,  sup- 
posing them  to  be  coirect  also,  give  to  a  year  the 
length  of  the  time  fiom  the  Exodus  to  the  Baby- 
lonian caijtivity,  and  establish  a  perfect  connexion 
between  sacred  and  profane  history.  But  so  little 
is  this  the  case,  that  this  date  is  quite  irreconcileable 
with  Egyptian  history,  and  is,  as  stated  above,  by 
almost  universal  consent  rejected  by  chronologists, 
even  on  ])urely  !>'criptural  gronnds.  'J'his  date  is 
followed  by  precise  synchronistic  definitions  of  the 
parallel  reigns  of  Israel  and  Judah,  the  effect  of 
which  would  be,  and  must  have  been  designed  to 
be,  to  supply  the  want  of  accvu-acy  in  stating  the 
length  of  the  reigns  without  reference  to  the  odd 
months.  But  these  synchronistic  definitions  are  in 
continual  discord  with  the  statement  of  the  length 
of  reigns.  According  to  1  K.  xxii.  51  Ahaziah  suc- 
ceeded Ahab  in  the  17th  year  of  Jehoshaphat.  But 
according  to  the  statement  of  the  length  of  Ahab's 
reign  in  xvi.  29,  Ahab  died  in  the  iSth  of  Jeho- 
shaphat;  while  according  to  2  K.  i.  17,  Jehoram 
the  son  of  Ahaziah  succeeded  his  brother  (after  his 
2  years'  reign)  in  the  second  year  of  Jehoram  the 
son  of  Jehoshaphat,  though,  according  to  the  length 
of  the  reigns,  he  must  have  succeeded  in  the  18th 
or  19th  of  Jehoshaphat  (see  2  K.  iii.  1),  who 
reigned  in  all  25  years  (xxii.  42).  [Jehoram.] 
As  regards  Jehoram  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  the 
statements  are  so  contiadictory  tliat  Archbishop 
Usher  actually  makes  three  distinct  beginnings  to 
his  regnal  sera :  the  first  when  he  was  made  prorex, 
to  meet  2  K.  i.  17;  the  second  when  he  was  asso- 
ciated with  his  father,  5  years  later,  to  meet  2  K. 
viii.  16  ;  the  third  when  his  sole  reign  commenced, 


to  meet  1  K.  xxii.  50,  compared  with  42.  But  as 
the  only  pui-pose  of  these  synchronisms  is  to  give 
an  accurate  measure  of  time,  nothing  can  be  more 
absurd  than  to  suppose  such  variations  in  the  time 
from  which  the  commencement  of  tlie  regnal  year 
is  dated.  It  may  also  here  be  remarked  that  the 
whole  notion  of  these  joint  reigns  has  not  the 
smallest  foundation  in  fact,  and  unluckily  does  not 
come  into  play  in  the  only  cases  where  there  might 
be  any  historical  probability  of  their  having  oc- 
curred, as  in  the  case  of  Asa's  iUness  and  Uzziah's 
leprosy.  From  the  length  of  Amaziah's  reign,  as 
given  2  K.  xiv.  2,  17,  23,  it  is  manifest  that  Jero- 
boam II.  began  to  reign  in  the  15th  year  of  Ama- 
ziah,  and  that  Uzziali  began  to  reign  in  the  16  th 
of  Jeroboam.  But  2  K.  xv.  1  places  the  com- 
mencement of  Uzziah's  reign  in  the  27th  of  Jero- 
boam, and  the  accession  of  Zachariah  =  the  close  of 
Jeroboam's  reign,  in  the  38th  of  Uzziah — state- 
meiits  utterly  contradictory  and  in-econcileable. 

Other  grave  chronological  difficulties  seem  to 
have  their  source  in  the  same  erroneous  calculations 
on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  chronologist.  For  ex- 
ample, one  of  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  tells  us 
that  Menahem  paid  tribute  to  Assyria  in  the  8th 
year  of  Tiglath-Pileser  (Kawl.  Herod,  i.  469),  and 
the  same  inscription  passes  on  directly  to  speak  of 
the  overthrow  of  Kezin,  who  we  know  was  Pekah's 
ally.  Now  this  is  scarcely  compatible  with  the 
supposition  that  the  remainder  of  Menahem's  reign, 
the  2  years  of  Pekahiah,  and  18  or  19  years  of 
Pekah's  reign  intervened,  as  must  have  been  the 
case  according  to  2  K.  xvi.  1,  xv.  32.  But  if  the 
invasion  of  Judea  was  one  of  the  early  acts  of 
Pekah's  reign,  and  the  destruction  of  Kezin  fol- 
lowed .soon  after,  then  we  should  have  a  very 
intelligible  course  of  events  as  follows.  Menahem 
paid  his  last  tribute  to  Assyria  in  the  Sfh  of 
Tiglath-Pileser,  his  suzerain  (2  K.  xv.  19),  which, 
as  he  reigned  for  some  time  under  Pul,  and  only 
reigned  10  }ears  in  all,  we  may  assume  to  have 
been  his  own  hist  year.  On  the  accession  of  his 
son  Pekahiah,  Pekah, -one  of  his  captains,  rebelled 
against  him,  made  an  alliance  with  llezin  king  of 
yyria  to  throw  off  the  yoke  of  Assyiia,  in  the 
course  of  a  few  months  dethroned  and  killed  Pe- 
kahiah, and  reigned  in  his  stead,  and  rapidly  fol- 
lowed up  his  success  by  a  joint  expedition  against 
Judah,  the  object  of  which  was  to  set  up  a  king 
who  should  strengthen  his  hands  in  his  i-ebellion 
against  Assyria.  The  king  of  Assyria,  on  learning 
this,  and  receiving  Ahaz's  message  for  help,  imme- 
diately marches  to  Syria,  take.s  Damascus,  conquers 
and  kills  Rezin,  invades  Israel,  and  carries  away  a 
large  body  of  captives  (2  K.  xv.  29),  and  leaves 
Pekah  to  reign  as  tributary  king  over  the  enfeebled 
remnant,  till  a  conspiracy  dcpiived  him  of  his  life. 
Such  a  course  of  events  would  he  consistent  with 
the  cuneifbiTO  inscription,  and  with  everything  iu 
the  i^'cripture  nairative,  except  the  synchronistic 
anangement  of  the  leigns.  But  of  course  it  is 
impossible  to  affiim  that  the  above  was  the  true 
state  of  the  case.  Only  at  present  the  text  and 
the  cuneiform  inscription  do  not  agree,  and  few 
people  will  be  satisfied  with  the  explanation  sug- 
gested by  Mr.  Rawlinson,  that  "the  official  who 
composed,  or  the  workman  who  engi-aved,  the  As- 
syrian document,  made  a  mistake  in  the  name," 


''  Lepsius  suggests  that  Azariah  and  Uzziah  may  i  beyond  the  confusion  of  the  names  there  is  nothiny: 
possibly  be  cHfferent  and  successive  kings,  the  former  i  to  supi)ort  such  a  notion, 
of  w  hum  reigned  1 1  years,   and  the  latter  4 1 .     But 


KINGS,  FIHST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


25 


and  put  Menahem  when  lie  should  have  put  Pekah 
{Bampt.  Led.  pp.  136,  409;  Herod,  i.  468-471). 
Again :  "  Scripture  places  only  8  years  between 
the  fall  of  Samaria  and  the  iirst  invasion  of  Judaea 
by  Sennacherib  "  {i.  e.  from  the  6th  to  the  14th  of 
Hezekiah).  "  The  insciiptions  (cuneifomi)  assign- 
ing the  fall  of  Samaria  to  the  first  year  of  Sargon, 
giving  Sargon  a  reign  of  at  least  15  years,  and 
assigning  the  first  attack  on  Hezekiah  to  Senna- 
cherib's third  year,  put  an  interval  of  at  least  18 
years  between  the  two  events"  (Rawl.  Herod,  i. 
479).  This  interval  is  further  shown  by  reference 
to  the  canon  of  Ptolemy  to  have  amounted  in  facf 
to  22  years.  Again,  Lepsius  {Konigsb.  p.  95-97) 
shows  with  remaikable  force  of  argument  that  the 
14th  of  Hezekiah  could  not  by  possibility  fi\ll 
earlier  than  B.C.  692,  with  reference  to  Tirhakah's 
accession ;  but  that  the  additional  date  of  the  3rd 
of  Sennacherib  furnished  by  the  cuneiform  inscrip- 
tions, coupled  with  the  fact  given  by  Berosus  that 
the  year  B.C.  693  was  the  year  of  Sennacheiib's 
accession^  fi.\es  the  year  B.C.  691  as  that  of  Semia- 
cherib's  invasion,  and  consequently  as  the  14th  of 
Hezekiah.  But  from  B.C.  691  to  B.C.  586,  when 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  an 
interval  of  only  105  yeai's  ;  whereas  the  sum  of  the 
regnal  years  of  Judah  for  the  same  inter\-al  amounts 
to  125  years.'  From  which  calculations  it  neces- 
sarily follows,  both  that  there  is  an  error  in  those 
figures  in  the  book  of  ]\ings  which  assign  the 
relative  positions  of  the  destruction  of  Samaria  and 
Sennacherib's  invasion,  and  also  in  those  which  mea- 
sure the  distance  between  the  in^'asion  of  Senna- 
cherib and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  should 
however  be  noted  that  there  is  nothing  to  fi.\  the 
fall  of  Samaria  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  but  the 
statement  of  the  synchronism ;  and  2  Chr  xxx.  6, 
18,  &c.,  seems  rather  to  indicate  that  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  had  quite  ceased  in  the  1st  of  Hezekiah. 
Many  other  numbers  have  the  same  stamp  of 
incorrectness.  Rehoboam's  age  is  given  as  41 
at  his  accession,  1  K.  xiv.  21,  and  yet  we  read 
at  2  Chr.  .xiii.  7  that  he  was  "  young  and  tender- 
hearted "  when  he  came  to  the  throne.  Moreover, 
if  41  when  he  became  king,  he  must  have  been 
born  before  Solomon  came  to  the  throne,  which 
seems  improbable,  especially  in  connexion  with 
his  Ammonitish  mother.  In  The  apocryplial 
passage  moreover  in  the  Cod.  Vat.  of  the  LXX  , 
which  follows  2  K.  xii.  24,  his  age  is  said  to 
have  been  16  at  his  accession,  which  is  much 
more  probable.  According  to  the  statement  in 
2  K.  XV.  33,  compared  with  ver.  2,  Uzziah's 
son  and  heir  Jotham  was  not  born  till  his  father 
was  42  years  old;  aii<l  according  to  2  K.  xxi.  1, 
compared  with  ver.  19,  Manasseh's  son  and  heir 
Aiuon  was  not  born  till  his  father  was  in  his  45th 
year.  Still  more  improbable  is  the  statement  in 
2  K.  xN'iii.  2,  compared  with  xvi.  2,  which  makes 
Hezekiah  to  have  been  born  when  his  father  was 
11  years  old:  a  statement  which  Bochart  has  en- 
deavoured, to  defend  with  his  usual  vast  erudition, 
but  with  little  success  (Opera,  i.  921).  But  not 
only  does  the  incorrectness  of  the  numbers  testify 
against  their  genuineness,  but  in  some  passages  the 
structure  of  the  sentence  seems  to  betray  the  fact 
of  a  later  insertion  of  the  chronological  element. 
We  have  seen  one  instance  in  1  K.  vi.  1.     In  like 


'  Lepsius  proposes  reducing  the  reign  of  Manassch 
to  35  years.  lie  observes  with  truth  tlic  imi)r()ha- 
hility  of  Anion  having  been  born  iu  the   lolh  Acar 


manner  at  1  K.  xiv.  31,  xv.  1,  2,  we  can  see  that 
at  some  time  or  other  xv.  1  has  been  inserted  be- 
tween the  two  other  verses.  So  again  ver.  9  has 
been  inserted  between  8  and  10;  and  xv.  24  must 
have  once  stood  next  to  xxii.  42,  as  xxii.  50  did  to 
2  K.  viii.  17,  at  which  time  the  corrupt  ver.  16 
had  no  existence.  Yet  more  manifestly  viii.  24,  26, 
were  once  consecutive  verses,  though  they  are  now 
parted  by  25,  which  is  repeated,  with  a  variation 
in  the  nimieral,  at  ix.  29.  So  also  xvi.  1  has  been 
interposed  between  sv.  38  and  xvi.  2.  xviii.  2  is 
consecutive  with  xvi.  20.  But  the  plainest  instance 
of  all  is  2  K.  xi.  21,  xii.  1  (xii.  1,  seq.,  Heb.), 
where  the  words  "  In  the  seventh  year  of  Jehu, 
Jehoash  began  to  reign,"  could  not  possibly  have 
formed  part  of  the  original  sentence,  which  may  be 
seen  in  its  integrity  2  Chr.  xxiv.  1.  The  disturb- 
ance caused  in  2  K.  xii.  by  the  intrusion  of  this 
clause  is  somewhat  disguised  in  the  LXX.  and  the 
A.  V.  by  the  division  of  Heb.  xii.  1  into  two  verses, 
and  separate  chapters,  but  is  still  palpable.  A 
similar  instance  is  pointed  out  by  Movers  in  2  Sam. 
v.,  where  ver.  3  and  6  ai-e  parted  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  ver.  4,  5  (p.  190).  But  the  difficulty  re- 
mains of  deciding  in  which  of  the  above  aises  the 
insertion  was  by  the  hand  of  the  original  compiler, 
and  in  which  by  a  later  chronologist. 

Now  when  to  all  this  we  add  that  the  pages  of 
Josephus  are  full,  in  like  manner,  of  a  multitude 
of  inconsistent  chronological  schemes,  which  prevent 
his  being  of  any  use,  in  spite  of  Hales's  praises,  in 
clearing  up  chronological  difficulties,  the  proper 
inference  seems  to  be,  that  no  authoritative,  correct, 
systematic  chronology  was  originally  contained  in 
the  books  of  Kings,  and  that  the  attempt  to  supply 
such  afterwards  led  to  the  introduction  of  many 
erroneous  dates,  and  probably  to  the  corruption  of 
some  true  ones  which  were  originally  there.  Cer- 
tiunly  the  present  text  contains  what  are  either 
conflicting  calculations  of  antagonistic  chronologists, 
or  eiTors  of  careless  copyists,  which  uo  learning  or 
ingenuity  has  ever  been  able  to  reduce  to  the  con- 
sistency of  truth. 

II.  The  peculiarities  of  diction  in  them,  and  other 
features  in  their  literary  history,  may  be  briefly  dis- 
posed of.  The  words  noticed  by  De  Wette,  §185,  as 
indicating  their  modern  date,  are  the  following : — 
'PlX  for  nx,  1  K.  xiv.  2.  (But  this  form  is  also 
found  in  Judg.  x\'ii.  2,  Jer.  iv.  30,  Ez.  xxxvi.  13,  and 
not  once  in  the  later  books.)  '\r\'lii  for  IRK,  2  K.  i. 
15.  (But  this  form  of  HX  is  found  in  Lev.  xv.  18, 
24;  Josh.  xiv.  12;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24;  Is.  lix.  21; 
Jer.  X.  5,  xii.  1,  xix.  10,  xx.  11,  xxiii.  9,  xxxv.  2; 
Ez.  xiv.  4,  x.xvii.  26.)  DK'?  for  Db^S  1  K.  ix.  8. 
(But  Jer.  xix.  8,  xlix.  17,  are  identical  in  phrase 
and  orthography.)   jt^fT  for  D^^l,  2  K.  xi.  13.  (But 

everywhere  else  in  Kings,  e.  g.  2  K.  xi.  6,  &c.,  D''V"I, 
which  is  also  universal  in  Chronicles,  an  avowedly 
later  book;  and  here,  as  in  PJIV'  ^  ^^-  ^''  ^■^'  there 
is  every  appearance  of  the  |  being  a  clerical  error 
for  the  copulative  1 ;  see  Thenius,  I.  c.)  ni3'''lD^ 
1  K.  XX.  14.  (But  this  word  occurs  Lam.  i.  1,  and 
there  is  every  appearance  of  its  being  a  techniciil 
word  in  1  K.  xx.  14,  and  therefore  as  old  as  the 
reign  of  Ahab.)   "13  for  lOh,  1  K.  iv.  22.    (But  13 


of  his  father's  life.  Mr.  Bosanquet  would  lower  the 
date  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  the  year  u.c. 
355. 


20  KINGS,  FIRST  AND 

is  used  by  ¥.z.  xlv.  14,  and  homer  seems  to  have  been 
then  already  obsolete.)  DnH,  1  K.  xxi.  8,  11. 
(Occurs  in  Is.  and  Jer.)  31,  2  K.  xxv.  8.  (But 
as  the  term  evidently  came  in  with  the  Chaldees, 
as  seen  in  liab-shakeh,  Rah-saris,  llab-mag,  its  ap- 
plication to  the  Chaldee  general  is  no  evidence  of  a 
time  later  than  the  person  to  whom  the  title  is 
given.)  DX',  1  K.  viii.  61,  &c.  (But  there  is 
not  a  shadow  of  proof  that  this  expression  belongs 
to  late  Hebr.  It  is  found,  among  other  places,  in 
Is.  xxxviii.  3  ;  a  passage  against  the  authenticity  of 
which  there  is  also  not  a  shadow  of  proof,  except 
upon  the  presumi)tion  that  prophetic  mtimations 
and  supernatural  interventions  on  the  part  of  God 
are  impossible.)  "p^SbTl,  2  K,  xviii.  7.  (On  what 
grounds  this  word  is  adduced  it  is  impossible  to 
guess,  since  it  occurs  in  this  sense  in  Josh.,  Is., 
Sam.,  and  Jer.:  vid.  Geseu.)  liPItSS,  2  K.  xviii. 
19.  (Is.  xxxvi.  4,  Eccles.  ix.  4.)  n''*1-inS  2  K. 
xviii.  26.  (But  why  should  not  a  Jew,  in  Hezekiah's 
reign,  as  well  as  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  have 
called  his  mother-tongue  "  the  Jews'  language,"  in 
opposition  to  the  Aramean  ?  There  was  nothing  in 
the  Babylonish  captivity  to  give  it  the  name,  if 
it  had  it  not  before ;  nor  is  there  a  single  earlier 
instance  —  Is.  xix.  18  might  have  furnished  one 
— of  an;/  name  given  to  the  language  spoken  by 
all  the  Israelites^  and  which  in  later  times  was 
called  Hebrew  :  'E/Spaifrr/,  Prolog.  Ecclus.  ;  Luke 
xxiii.  38  ;  John  v.  2,  &«.)"  DN  DSEJ'D  n^'l,  2  K. 
XXV.  6.  (Frequent  in  Jer.  iv.  12,  xxxix.  5,  &c.) 
Theod.  Parker  adds  nnS  (see,  too,  Thenius,  Einl. 
§6),  1  K.  X.  15,  XX.  24  ;  2  K.  xviii.  24,  on  the 
presumption  probably  of  its  being  of  Persian  de- 
rivation ;  but  the  etymology  and  origin  of  the 
word  are  quite  uncertain,  and  it  is  repeatedly  used 
in  Jer.  li.,  as  well  as  Is.  xxxvi.  9.  With  better 
reason  might  XIH  have  been  adduced,  1  K.  xii. 
33.  The  expression  "in3n  "I^J?,  in  1  K.  iv.  24  is 
also  a  difficult  one  to  form  an  impartial  opinion 
about.  It  is  doubtful,  as  De  Wette  admits,  whether 
the  phrase  necessarily  implies  its  being  used  by  one 
to  the  east  of  the  Euphrates,  because  the  use  varies 
in  Num.  xxxii.  19,  xxxv.  14;  Josh,  i,  14  seq.,  v.  1, 
xii.  1,  7,  xxii.  7  ;  1  Chr.  xxvi.  30;  Deut.  i.  1,  5, 
&c.  It  is  also  conceivable  that  the  phrase  might  be 
used  as  a  mere  geographical  designation  by  those  who 
belonged  to  one  of  "  the  provinces  beyond  the  river  " 
subject  to  Babylon  :  and  at  the  time  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  Judaea  had  been  such  a  province 
foi-  at  least  23  years,  and  pi-obably  longer.  We  may 
safely  affirm  therefore,  tliat  on  the  whole  the  pecu- 
liarities of  diction  in  these  books  do  not  indicate  a 
time  after  the  captivity,  or  towards  the  close  of  it, 
but  on  the  contrary  point  pretty  distinctly  to  the 
ao-e  of  Jeremiah.  And  it  may  be  added,  that  the 
marked  and  systematic  dilforences  between  the  lan- 
guage of  Chronicles  and  that  of  Kings,  tiiken  witli  the 
fact  that  all  attempts  to  prove  the  Chronicles  later 
than  Ezra  have  utterly  failed,  lead  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion. (See  many  examples  in  Movers,  p.  200,  seq.) 
Other  peculiar  or  rare  expressions  in  these  books  are 
the  proverbial  ones:  "I''jp3  P^ll^O,  found  only  in 
them  and  in  1  Sara.  xxv.'22,  34,  "  slept  with  his 
fathers,"   "  him  that  dieth   in  the  city,  the  dogs 


^  See  Uiidiger's  Gesen.  Ileh.  Qramm.  Eng.  tr.  p.  6  ; 
Kcil,  Chrun.  p.  40. 


SECOND  BOOKS  OF 

shall  eat,"  &c.  ;  "!pN  r\^V.\  nS,  1  K.  ii.  23,  &c.  ; 
also  rT'lp,  1  K.  i.  41,  45  ;  elsewhere  only  in  poetry, 
and  in  the  composition  of  proper  names,  except 
Deut.  ii.  36.  n^ni,  i.  9.  Dn2"13,  "  fowl,"  iv.  23. 
nhN, "  stalls,"  V!  6 ;  2  Chr.  ix.  25.  DO  T^VJ}.,  '^^ 
13,ix.l5,21.  yD?0,  "  a  stone-quarry,"  (Gesen.)  vi. 
7.  '•Jq'?'  ^'i- 17.  \T\Th,  19.  D^Vi^S  and  ni^i^S, 
"  wild  cucumbers,"  vi.  18,  vii.  24,  2  K.  iv.  39. 
nipli,  X.  28  ;  the  names  of  the  mouths  D''3nK 
viii'.  2,  It,  "P-ia,  vi.  37,  38.  ^12,  "  to  invent," 
xii.  33,  Neh.  vi.  8,  in  both  cases  joined  with  2??3. 
nvbap,  "  an  idol,"  XV.  13.  "Ij;3  and  T'V^n, 
followed  by  "iinN,  "  to  destroy,"  xiv.  10,  xvi.  o, 
xxi.  21.  D*p31,  "joints  of  the  armour,"  xxii.  34. 
i,'^f^,  "a  pursuit,"  xviii.  27.  "1115,  "to  bend  one- 
self," xviii.  42,  2  K.  iv.  34,  35.  D3K>,  "  to  gird 
up,"  xviii.  46.  1DK,  "  a  head-baud,"  xx.  38,  42. 
pSb*,  "  to  suffice,"  XX.  10.  tO?n,  incert.  signif. 
XX.  33.  HD-lSo  n^'y,"  to  reign,"  xxi.  7.  nTT^V, 
"  a  dish,"  2  K.  ii.  20.  d"?!!,  "  to  fold  up,"  ib.  8. 
"Ip3,  "  a  herdsman,"  iii.  4,  Am.  i.  1.  Tl-IDX,  "  an 
oil-cup,"  iv.  2.  ?{^  "nn,  "  to  have  a  care  for," 
13  ;  "in'T,  "  to  sneeze,"  35  ;  I'l^pV.  "  a  tag,"  42. 
tD'"in,  "  a  monej'-bag,"  v.  23.  n^Pin,  "  an  en- 
ramping  "  (?)  vi.  8  ;  n"l3,  "  a  feast,"  23  ;  riPIJ, 
"  descending,"  9  ;  3p,  '"  a  cab,"  25  ;  D^^V  ^n, 
"  dove's  dung,"  ib.  "ISSJD,  perhaps  "  a  fly-net," 
viii.  15.  Dlil  (in  sense  of  "  self,"  as  in  Chald.  and 
Samar.),  ix.  i3.  "l-13y,  "  a  heap,"  x.  8  ;  UnripO, 
"  a  vestry,"  22  ;  HNinD,  "a  draught-house,"  27. 
na,  "  Cherethites,"  xi.'  4,  19,  and  2  Sam.  xx.  23, 
cethib.  nS?3,  "  a  keeping  off,"  xi.  fi.  "|3D,  "  an 
acquaintance,"  sii.  6.  The  form  IV,  from  m*', 
"to  shoot,"  xiii.  17.  nniy.nn  ""^a,  "hostages," 
xiv.  14,  2  Chr.  xxv.  24.  rT'K'Dnn'  T,%  "  sick- 
house,"  XV.  5,  2  Chr.  xxvi.  21.  b'^.p,  "before," 
XV.  10.  pK'JO-'n,  "  Damascus,"  xvi.  10  (perhaps 
only  a  false  reading).  nQV"l?0,  "  a  pavement," 
xvi.  17.  T]D-1D,  or  TjD^D,  "  a  covered  way,"  xvi. 
18.  t^Sn  in  Pih.  "  to  do  secretly,"  xvii.  9. 
n"l''t"X,  with  ■>,  16,  only  besides  Deut.  vii.  5,  ]\Iic.  v. 

14'.  N«n3,  i.  q.  rr\x  xvii.  21  (cethib).  D''3'-iDb', 

"  Samaritans,"  29.  IDfnj,  "  Nehustan,"  xviii.  4. 
njpS,  "a  pillar,"  16."  HDin  li^V,  "to  mal« 
peace,"  31,  Is.  xxxvi.  16.  tJ'TID,  "  that  which 
grows  up  the  third  year,"  xix.  29,  Is.  xxxvii.  30. 
riDJ  IT'S,  "  treasure-house,"  xx.  13,  Is.  xxxix.  2. 
n3^D,  part  of  Jerusalem  so  called,  xxi.  14,  Zejih. 
i.  10,  Neh.  xi.  9.  riV-TD,  "signs  of  the  Zodiac," 
xxiii.  5.  "1112,  "a  suburb,"  xxiii.  11.  D''33. 
"ploughmen,"  xxv.  12,  cethib.  N3^,  for  HSJi', 
"  to  change,"  xxv.  9.  To  which  may  be  added 
the    architectural    terms    in    1    K.    vi.,  vii.,    and 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


27 


the  names  of  foreign  idols  in  2  K.  xvu.  The 
general  character  of  the  language  is,  most  dis- 
tinctly, that  of  the  time  before  the  Babylonish 
captivity.  But  it  is  worth  consideration  whether 
some  traces  of  dialectic  varieties  in  Judah  and 
Israel,  and  of  an  e;irlier  admixture  of  Syriasms  in 
the  language  of  Israel,  may  not  be  discovered  m 
those  portions  of  these  books  which  refer  to  the 
Icingdom  of  Israel.  As  regards  the  text,  it  is  far 
from  beins:  perfect.  Besides  the  errors  in  numerals, 
some  of  vVhich  are  probably  to  be  traced  to  this 
source,  such  passages  as  1  K.  xv.  6  ;  v.  10,  compared 
with  V.  2  ;  2  K.  xv.  30,  viii.  10,  xvii.  34,  are  mani- 
fest corruptions  of  transcribers.  In  some  instances 
the  parallel  passage  in  Chronicles  corrects  the  error, 
as  1  K.  iv.  26  is  corrected  by  2  Chr.  ix.  25  ;  2  K. 
xiv.  21,  &c.,  by  2  Chr.  xxvi.  1,  &c.  So  the  pro- 
bable misplacement  of  the  section  2  K.  xxiii.  4-20 
IS  corrected  bv  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  3-7.  The  substitution 
of  Azariah  for  Uzziah  in  2  K.  xiv.  21,  and  through- 
out 2  K.  XV.  1-30,  except  ver.  13,  followed  by  the  use 
of  the  right  name,  Uzziah,  in  vers.  30,  32,  34,  is  a 
very  curFous  circumsfcince.  in  Isaiah,  in  Zechariah 
(xiv.  5),  and  in  the  Chronicles  (except  1  Chr.  iii. 
12),  it  is  uniformly  Uzziah.  Perhaps  no  other  cause 
is  to  be  sought  tlian  the  close  resemblance  between 
n''My  and  nnTj;,  and  the  fact  that  the  latter 
name,  Azariah,  might  suggest  itself  more  readily 
to  a  Levitical  scribe.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  Uzziali  was  the  king's  true  name,  Azariah 
that  of  the  high-priest,  (But  see  Theuius  on  1  K. 
siv.  21.) 

In  connexion  with  these  literary  peculiarities  may 
be  mentioned  also  some  remarkable  variations  in  the 
version  of  the  LXX.  These  consist  of  transpositions, 
omissions,  and  some  considerable  additions,  of  all 
which  Thenius  gives  some  useful  notices  in  his 
Introduction  to  the  book  of  Kings. 

The  most  important  transpositions  are  the  history 
of  Shimei's  death,  1  K.  ii.  36-46,  which  in  the  LXX. 
(Cod.  Vat.)  comes  after  iii.  1,  and  divers  scraps  from 
chs.  iv.,  v.,  and  ix.,  accompanied  by  one  or  two 
remarks  of  the  translators. 

The  sections  1  K.  iv.  20-25,  2-6,  26,  21,  1,  are 
strung  together  and  precede  1  K.  iii.  2-28,  but  are 
many  of  them  repeated  again  in  their  proper  places. 
The  sections  1  K.  iii.  1,  ix.   16,17,  are  strung 
together,  and  placed  between  iv.  34  and  v.  1. 
"The  section  1  K.  vii.  1-12  is  placed  after  vii.  51. 
Section  viii.  12,  13,  is  placed  after  53. 
Section  ix.  15-22  is  placed  after  x.  22. 
Section  xi.  43,  xii.  1 ,  2,  3,  is  much  transposed 
and  confused  in  LXX.  xi.  43,  44,  xii.  1-3. 

Section  xiv.  1-21  is  placed  in  the  midst  of  the 
long  addition  to  Chr.  xii.  mentioned  below. 

Section  xxii.  42-50  is  placed  after  xvi.  28. 
Chaps.  XX.  and  xxi.  are  transposed. 

Section  2  K.  iii.  1-3  is  placed  after  2  K.  i.  18. 
The  omissions  are  few. 

Section  1  K.  vi.  11-14  is  entirely  omitted,  and 
37,  38,  are  only  slightly  alluded  to  at  the  opening 
of  ch.  iii..  The  erroneous  clause  1  K.  xv.  6  is  omitted  ; 
and  so  are  the  dates  of  Asa's  reign  in  xvi.  8  and  15  ; 
and  there  are  a  few  verbal  omissions  of  no  con- 
sequence. 

The  chief  interest  lies  in  the  additions,  of  which 
the  principal  are  the  following.  The  supposed 
mention  of  a  fountain  as  among  Solomon's  works  in 
the  Temple  in  the  ])assage  after  1  K.  ii.  35  ;  of  a 
paved  causeway  on  Lebanon,  iii.  46  ;  of  Solomon 
pointing  to  the  sun  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temple, 
before  he  uttered  the  prayer,   "  The  Lord  said   he 


would  dwell  in  the  thick  darkness,"  &c.,  viii.  12, 
13    (a^'ter,  53   LXX.),    with   a   reference   to   the 
piQXtov  rijy  (fiSrjs,  a    passage  on  which  Thenius 
relies  as  proving  that  the  Alexandrian  had  access 
to  original  documents  now   lost ;  the  information 
that   "Joram  his   brother"  perished  with  Tibni, 
xvi.  22  ;   an   additional  date   "  in   the  24th  year 
of  Jeroboam,"  xv.  8;   numerous  verbal   additions, 
as   xi.    29,    xvii.    1,    &c. ;    and   lastly,    tlie   long 
passage   concerning   Jeroboam    the   son   of  Nebat, 
inserted  between  xii.  24  and  25.     There  are  also 
many  glosses   of  the   translator,    explanatory,    or 
necessary  in  consequence  of  transpositions,  as  c.  g. 
1  K.  ii.  35,  viii.  1,  xi.  43,  xvii.  20,  xix.  2,  &c.     Of 
the  above,  from  the  recapitulatory  character  of  the 
passage  after  1  K.  ii.  35,  containing  in  brief  the  sum 
of  the'thincrs  detailed  in  ch.  vii.  2.1-23,  it  seems  far 
more  probable  that  KPHNHN  TH2  AYAH2  is  only 
a  corruption  of  KPINON  TOY  AIAAM,  there  men- 
tioned.    The  obscure  passage  about  Lebanon  after 
iii.  46,  seems  no  less  certainly  to  represent  what  in 
the  Heb.  is  ix.  18,  19,  as  appears  by  the  triple  con- 
currence of  Tadmor,  Lebanon,  and  SvvacrTevfxaTa, 
representing  in'pt^'bO.    The  strange  mention  of  the 
sun  seems  to  be  introduced  by  the  translator  to 
give  significance  to  Solomon's  mention  of  the  House 
which  he  had  built  for  God,  who  had  said  He  would 
dwell  in   the  thick  darkness ;   not  therefore  under 
the  unveiled  light  of  the  sun  ;  and  the  reference  to 
"  the  book  of  s°ong"  can  surely  mean  nothing  else 
than  to  point  out  that  the  passage  to  which  Solo- 
mon referred  was  Ps.  xcvii.  2.     Of  the  other  addi- 
tions the  mention  of  Tibni's  brother  Joram  is  the 
one  which  has  most  the  semblance  of  an  historical^ 
fact,  or  makes  the  existence  of  any  other  source  of 
history  probable.    See  too  1  K.  xx.  19,  2  K.  xv.  25. 
There  remains  only  the  long  passage  about  Jero- 
boam.    That  this  account  is  only  an   apocryphal 
version  made  up  of  the  existing  materials  in  the 
Hebiew  Scriptures,  after  the  manner  of  1  Esdras, 
Bel   and  the  Dragon,  the   apocryphal  Esther,  the 
Targums,  &c.,  may  be  inferred   on  the  following 
grounds.     The  frame-work   of  the  story  is   given 
in  the  very  words  of  the  Hebrew   narrative,  and 
that  very  copiously,  and  the  new  matter  is   only 
worked  in  here  and  there.     Demonstrably  therefoi'e 
the  Hebrew  account  existed  when  the  Greek  one 
was  framed,  and  was  the  original  one.     The  prin- 
cipal new  facts  introduced,  the  marriage  of  Jero- 
boam to  the  sister  of  Shishak's  wife,  and  his  request 
to  be  permitted  to  return,  is  a  manifest  imitation 
of  the  story  of  Hadad.     The  misplacement  of  the 
story  of  Abijah's  sickness,  and  the  visit  of  Jero- 
boam's   wife'  to   Ahijah  the  Shilouite,  makes  the 
whole  history  out  of  keeping— the  disguise  of  the 
queen,  the  rebuke  of  Jeroboam's  idolatry  (which  is 
accordingly  left  out  from  Ahijah's  prophecy,  as  is 
the  mention  at  v.  2  of  his  having  told  Jeroboam  he 
should  be  king),  and  the  king's  anxiety  about  the 
recovery  of  his  son  and  heir.     The  embellishments 
of  the  story,  Jeroboam's  chariots,  the  amplification 
of  Ahijah's  address  to  Ano,  the  request  asked  of 
Pharaoh,  the  new  garment  not  v-ashcd  in  water, 
are  precisely  such  as  an  embroiderer  would  add,  as 
we  may  see  bv  the  apocryphal  books  above  cited. 
Then   the  fiising  down   the   three  Hebrew   names 
miV,  ny-IIV'  and  nVin,  into  one  2apip<£,  thus 
giving  the  same  name  to  tiie  mother  of  Jeroboam, 
and  to  the  city  where  she  dwelt,  shows  how  com- 
paratively modern  the  story  is,  and  how  completely 
of  Greek  growth.     A  yet  plainer  indication  is  the 


28 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


coufounding  Shemaiah  of  1  K.  xii.  2'2,  with  She- 
maiah  the  Nehelamite  of  Jer.  xxix.  24,  ;J1,  and 
putting  Ahijah's  prophecy  iuto  his  mouth.  For 
beyond  all  question  'Ei/Xa/^i,  1  K.  xii.,  is  only  an- 
other fonii  of  AlXa/xirris  (Jer.  sx-xvi.  24,  LXX.). 
Then  again  the  story  is  self-contradictory.  For  if 
Jeroboam's  child  Abijam  was  not  born  till  a  year 
or  so  after  Solomon's  death,  how  could  "  any  good 
thing  toward  the  Lord  God  of  Israel"  have  been 
found  in  him  before  Jeroboam  became  king  ?  The 
one  thing  in  the  story  that  is  more  like  truth  than 
the  Hebrew  narrative  is  the  age  given  to  Rehoboam, 
16  years,  which  may  have  been  preserved  in  the 
MS.  which  the  writer  of  this  romance  had  before 
him.  The  calling  Jeroboam's  mother  yvyri  irSpvri, 
instead  of  ywy  X'hpO'^  ^^'f>s  probably  accidental. 

On  the  w^hoie  then  it  aj^jjears  that  the  great  va- 
riations in  the  LXX.  contribute  little  or  nothing  to 
the  elucidation  of  the  history  contained  in  these 
books,  nor  much  even  to  the  text.  The  Hebrew 
text  and  aiTangement  is  not  in  the  least  shaken  in 
its  main  points,  nor  is  there  the  slightest  cloud  cast 
on  the  accuracy  of  the  history,  or  the  truthfulness 
of  the  prophecies  contained  in  it.  But  these  varia- 
tions illustrate  a  characteristic  tendency  of  the 
Jewish  mind  to  make  interesting  portions  of  the 
Scriptures  tl;e  groundwork  of  separate  religious 
tales,  which  they  altered  or  added  to  accorduig  to 
their  fancy,  without  any  regard  to  history  or  chro- 
nology, and  in  which  they  exercised  a  peculiar  kind 
of  ingenuity  in  working  up  the  Scriptm-e  materials, 
or  in  inventing  circumstances  calculated  as  they 
thought  to  m:ike  the  main  history  more  probable. 
The  story  of  Zerubbabel's  answer  in  1  Esdr.  about 
truth,  to  prepare  the  way  for  his  mission  by  Darius ; 
of  the  discovery  of  the  imposture  of  Bel's  priests  by 
Daniel,  in  Bel  and  the  Dragon  ;  of  Mordecai's  dream 
in  the  Apocr.  Esther,  and  the  paragraph  in  the 
Talmud  inserted  to  connect  1  K.  xvi.  34,  with 
xvii.  1  (Smith's  Sacr.  Ann.,  vol.  ii.  p.  421),  are 
instances  of  this.  And  the  reign  of  Solomon,™ 
and  the  remarkable  rise  of  Jeroboam  were  not  un- 
likely to  exercise  this  propensity  of  the  Hellenistic 
Jews.  It  is  to  the  existence  of  .such  woiks  that 
the  variations  in  the  LXX.  account  of  Solomon  and 
Jei'oboam  may  most  probably  be  attributed. 

Another  feature  in  the  liteiary  condition  of  our 
books  must  just  be  noticed,  viz.  that  the  compiler, 
in  arranging  his  materials,  and  adopting  the  very 
words  of  the  documents  used  by  him,  has  not  always 
been  careful  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  contradic- 
tion. Thus  the  mention  of  the  staves  of  the  aik 
remaining  in  their  place  "  unto  this  day,"  1  K. 
viii.  8,  does  not  accord  with  the  account  of  the  de- 
struction of  the  Temple  2.K.  xxv.  9.  The  mention 
of  Elijah  as  the  only  prophet  of  the  Lord  left,  1  K. 
xviii.  22,  xix.  10,  has  an  appearance  of  disagree- 
ment with  XX.  13,  28,  35,  &c.,  though  xviii.  4, 
xix.  18,  supply,  it  is  true,  a  ready  answer.  In 
1  K.  xxi.  13,  only  Naboth  is  mentioned,  while  in 


2  K.  ix.  26,  his  sons  are  added.  The  prediction 
in  1  K.  xix.  15-17  has  no  perlect  fulfilment  in  the 
following  chapters.  1  K.  xxii.  SB,  does  not  seem 
to  be  a  fulfilment  of  xxi.  19.°  The  declaration  in 
1  K.  ix.  22  does  not  seem  in  harmony  with  xi.  28. 
There  are  also  some  singular  repetitions,  as  1  K. 
xiv.  21  compared  with  31 ;  2  K.  ix.  29  v/ith  viii. 
25;  xiv.  15,  16  with  xiii.  12,  13.  But  it  is 
enough  just  to  have  pointed  these  out,  as  no  real 
difficulty  can  be  found  in  them. 

III.  As  regards  the  authorship  of  these  books, 
but  little  difficulty  presents  itself.  The  Jewish 
tradition  which  ascribes  them  to  Jeremiah,  is  borne 
out  by  the  strongest  internal  eA'idence,  in  addition 
to  that  of  the  language.  The  last  chapter,  espe- 
cially as  compared  with  the  last  chapter  of  the 
Chronicles,  bears  distinct  traces  of  having  been 
written  by  one  who  did  not  go  into  captivity,  but 
remained  in  Judea,  after  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  This  suits  Jeremiah."  The  events  singled 
out  for  mention  in  the  concise  narrative,  are  pre- 
cisely those  of  which  he  had  personal  knowledge, 
and  in  which  he  took  special  interest.  The  famine 
in  2  K.  xxv.  3  was  one  which  had  nearly  cost  Jere- 
miah his  life  (Jer.  xxx\'iii.  9).  The  rapture  of  the 
city,  the  flight  and  capture  of  Zedekiah,  the  judg- 
ment and  punishment  ol'  Zedekiah  and  his  sons  at 
Kiblah,  are  related  in  2  K.  xxv.  1-7,  in  almost  the 
identical  words  which  we  read  in  Jer.  xsxix.  1-7. 
So  are  the  breaking  down  and  burning  of  the  Temple, 
the  king's  palace,  and  the  houses  of  the  gTeat  men, 
the  deportation  to  Babylon  of  the  fugitives  and  the 
surviving  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  and  Judea.  The 
intimate  knowledge  of  what  Nebuzar-adan  did,  both 
in  respect  to  those  selected  for  capital  punishment, 
and  those  carried  away  captive,  and  those  poor 
whom  he  left  in  the  land,  displayed  by  the  writer 
of  2  K.  xxv.  11,  12,  18-21,  is  fully  explained  by 
Jer.  xxxix.  10-14,  xl.  1-5,  where  we  read  that  Je- 
remiah was  actually  one  of  the  captives  who  Ibl- 
lowed  Nebuzar-adan  as  far  as  Ramah,  and  was  veiy 
kindly  treated  by  him.  The  careful  enumeration 
of  the  pillars  and  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple 
which  were  plundered  by  the  Chaldaeans,  tallies 
exactly  with  the  prediction  of  Jeremiah  concerning 
them,  xxvii.  19-22.  The  paragraph  concerning  the 
appointment  of  Gedaliah  as  governor  of  the  rem- 
nant, and  his  murder  by  Ishmael,  and  the  flight  of 
the  Jews  into  Egypt,  is  merely  an  abridged  account 
of  what  Jeremiah  tells  us  more  fully,  xl.- xliii.  7, 
and  are  events  in  which  he  was  personally  deeply 
concerned.  The  writer  in  Kings  has  nothing  more 
to  tell  us  concerning  the  Jews  or  Chaldees  in  the 
land  of  Judah,  which  exactly  agrees  with  the  hypo- 
thesis that  he  is  Jeremiah,  who  we  know  was  ranied 
down  to  Egypt  with  the  fugitives.  In  fact,  the 
date  of  the  writing  and  the -position  of  the  writer, 
seem  as  cleai'ly  marked  by  the  termination  of  the 
narrative  at  v.  26,  a-s  in  the  case  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles.P     It  may  be  added,  though  the  argument 


™  A  later  tale  of  Solomon's  wisdom,  in  imitation  of 
the  judgment  of  the  two  women,  told  in  the  Talmud, 
may  be  seen  in  Curiosities  uf  Literature,  1.  22ft.  The 
Talmud  contains  many  more. 

°  For  a  discussion  of  this  ditRculty  see  [Naboth] 
[Jezeeel].  The  simplest  explanation  is  that  Naboth 
was  stoned  at  Samaria,  since  we  find  the  elders  of 
Jezreel  at  Samaria,  2  K.  x.  1.  Thus  both  tlio  spot 
where  Naboth's  blood  flowed,  and  his  vineyard  at 
Jezreel,  were  the  scene  of  riifhteous  retribution. 

"  De  AVette  cites  from  Hiivernick  and  Movers, 
1  K.  ix.  S,  'J,  ci.-mp.  with  Jer.  xxii.  8  ;  2  K.  wii.  13, 


14,  comp.  with  Jer.  vii.  13,  24  ;  2  K.  xxi.  12,  comp. 
with  Jer.  xix.  3 ;  and  the  identity  of  Jer.  lii.  with 
2  K.  xxiv.  18,  seq.  xxv.,  as  the  strongest  passages 
in  favour  of  Jeremiah's  authorship,  which,  however, 
he  repudiates,  en  the  ground  that  2  K.  xxv.  27-30 
conld  not  liave  been  written  by  biin.  A  weaker  ground 
can  scarcely  be  imagined.  Jer.  xv.  1  may  also  be  cited 
as  connecting  the  compilation  of  the  books  of  Samuel 
with  Jeremiah.  Compare  further  1  K.  viii.  51  with 
Jer.  xi.  4. 

P  The  four  last  verses,  relative  to  Jehoiachin,  are 
equally  a  supplement  whether  added  by  the  author  or 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  COOKS  OF 


29 


is  of  less  •weicrht,  that  the  annexation  of  this  chapter 
to  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  so  as  to  form  Jer.  lii. 
(with  the  additional  clause  contained  28-30)  is  an 
evidence  of  a  very  ancient,  if  not  a  contemporary- 
belief,  that  Jeremiali  was  the  author  of  it.  Again, 
the  special  mention  of  Seraiah  the  high-priest,  and 
Zephaniah  the  second  priest,  as  slain  by  iS'ebuzar- 
adan  (v.  18),  together  with  three  other  priests,''  is 
very  significant  when  taken  in  connexion  with  Jer. 
xxi.  1,  xxix.  25-29,  passages  which  sliow  that  Ze- 
phaniah belonged  to  the  faction  which  opjiosed  the 
prophet,  a  taction  which  was  headed  by  priests  and 
fiilse  prophets  (Jer.  xxvi.  7,  8.  11,  16).  Going 
back  to  the  xxivth  chapter,  we  find  in  ver.  14  an 
enumeration  of  the  captives  taken  with  Jehoiachin 
identical  with  that  in  Jer.  xxi  v.  1;  in  ver.  13,  a 
reference  to  the  vessels  of  the  Temple  precisely 
similar  to  that  in  Jer.  xxvii.  18-20,  xxviii.  3-,  tj, 
and.  in  ver.  3,  4,  a  reference  to  the  idolatries  and 
bloodshed  of  Manasseh  very  similar  to  those  in  Jer. 
ii.  34,  xix.  4-8,  &c.,  a  reference  which  also  con- 
nects oh.  xxiv.  with  xxi.  6,  13-16.  In  ver.  2  the 
enumeration  of  the  hostile  nations,  and  the  re- 
ference to  the  prophets  of  God,  point  directly 
to  Jer.  XXV.  9,  20,  21,  and  the  reference  to 
Pharaoh  Necho  in  ver.  7  points  to  ver.  19,  and  to 
xlvi.  1-12.  Brief  as  the  narrative  is,  it  brings 
out  all  the  chief  points  in  the  political  events  of 
the  time  which  we  know  were  much  in  Jeremiah's 
mind ;  and  yet,  which  is  exceedingly  remai-kable, 
Jeremiah  is  never  once  named  (as  he  is  in  2  Chr. 
xxxvi.  12,  21),  although  the  manner  of  the  writer 
is  frequently  to  connect  the  sufieiings  of  Judah 
with  their  sins  and  their  neglect  of  the  Word  of 
God,  2  K.  xvii.  13,  seq.,  xxiv.  2,  3,  &c.  And  this 
leads  to  another  striking  coincidence  between  that 
portion  of  the  history  which  belongs  to  Jeremiah's 
times,  and  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  himself.  De 
VVette  speaks  of  the  superficial  character  of  the 
history  of  Jeremiah's  times  as  hostile  to  the  theory 
of  Jeremiah's  authorship.  Now,  considering  the 
natui-e  of  these  annals,  and  their  conciseness,  this 
criticism  seems  very  unfounded  as  regards  the  reigns 
of  Josiah,  Jehoahaz,  Jehoiachin,  and  Zedekiah.  It 
must,  however,  be  acknowledged  that  as  regards 
Jehoiakim's  reign,  and  especially  the  latter  part  of 
it,  and  the  way  in  which  he  came  by  his  death,  the 
narrative  is  much  more  meagre  than  one  would 
have  expected  from  a  contemporary  writer,  living 
on  the  spot.  But  exactly  the  same  paucity  of  in- 
formation is  found  in  those  otherwise  copious  notices 
of  contemporary  events  with  which  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phecies are  interspersed.  Let  any  one  open,  e.  g. 
Townshend's  "  ^rTO«.//ewicn<,"  or  Geneste's  ^^  Pa- 
rallel Histories,"  and  he  will  see  at  a  glance  how 
remarkably  little  light  Jeremiah's  narrative  or  pro- 
phecies throw  upon  the  latter  part  of  Jehoiakim's 


by  some  later  hand.  There  is  nothing  impossible  in 
the  supposition  of  Jeremiah  having  survived  till  the 
37th  of  Jchoiachin's  captivity,  though  he  would  have 
been  bet^yecn  80  and  90.  There  is  something  touch- 
ing in  the  idea  of  this  gleanr  of  joy  having  reached 
the  prophet  in  his  old  age,  and  of  his  having  addetl 
these  few  words  to  his  long-finished  history  of  his 
nation. 

1  These  .priests,  of  very  high  rank,  called  *^Oti' 
PiDn,  "keepers  of  the  jloor,"  i.  e.  of  the  three  prin- 
cipal entrances  to  the  Temple,  are  not  to  be  con- 
founded witli  the  porters,  who  were  Levites.  We  are 
expressly  told  in  2  K.  xii.  10  (9,  A.  V.)  that  these 
"keepers"  were  priests.  2  K.  xxii.  4,  xxiii.  4,  with 
xii.  10  and  xxv.  l.S,   clearly  point  out   the   rank  of 


reign.  The  cause  of  this  silence  may  bo  difficult 
to  assign,  but  whatever  it  was,  whether  aljsence 
from  Jerusalem,  jwssibly  on  the  mission  described, 
Jer.  xiii.,"'  or  imprisonment,  or  any  other  impedi- 
ment, it  operated  equally  on  Jeremiah  and  on  the 
writer  of  2  K.  xxiv.  When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that 
the  writer  of  2  K.  was  a  contemporary  writer,  and, 
if  not  Jeremiah,  must  have  had  independent  means 
of  information,  this  coincidence  will  have  great 
weight. 

Going  back  to  the  reign  of  Josiah,  in  the  xxiii. 
and  xxii.  chapters,  the  connexion  of  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  with  Manasseh's  transgressions,  and 
the  comparison  of  it  to  the  destruction  of  Samaria, 
ver.  26,  27,  lead  us  back  to  xxi.  10-13,  and  that 
passage  leads  us  to  Jer.  vii.  15,  xv.  4,  xix.  3, 
4,  &c.  The  particular  account  of  Josiah 's  pass- 
over,  and  his  other  good  works,  the  reference  in 
ver.  24,  25  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  finding  ot 
the  Book  by  Hilkiah  the  priest,  with  the  fuller 
account  of  that  discovery  in  ch.  xxii.,  exactly  suit 
Jeremiah,  who  began  his  prophetic  ofince  in  the 
13th  of  Josiah  ;  whose  xith  chap,  refers  repeatedly 
to  the  book  thus  found  ;  and  who  showed  his  attach- 
ment to  Josiah  by  writing  a  lamentation  on  his 
death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25),  and  whose  writings  show 
how  much  he  made  use  of  the  copy  of  Deutero- 
nomy so  found.  [Jeremiah,  Hilkiah.]  With  Jo- 
siah's  reign  (although  we  may  even  in  earlier  times 
hit  upon  occasional  resemblances,  such  for  instance 
as  the  silence  concerning  Manasseh's  repentance  in 
both),  necessarily  cease  all  strongly  marked  cha- 
racters of  Jeremiah's  authorship.  For  though  the 
general  unity  and  continuity  of  plan  (which,  as 
already  observed,  pervades  not  only  the  books  of 
Kings,  but  those  of  Samuel,  Kuth,  and  Judges  like- 
wise) lead  us  to  assign  the  whole  history  in  a 
certain  sense  to  one  author,  and  enable  us  to  carry 
to  the  account  of  the  whole  book  the  proofs  derived 
from  the  closing  chapters,  yet  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  authorship  of  those  parts  of  the  his- 
tory of  which  Jeremiali  was  not  an  eye-witness, 
that  is,  of  all  before  the  reign  of  Josiah,  would 
have  consisted  merely  in  selecting,  arranging,  in- 
serting the  connecting  phrases,  and,  when  necessary, 
slightly  modernising  (see  Thenius,  Einleit.  §  2) 
the  old  histories  which  had  been  drawn  up  by  con- 
temporary prophets  thi'ough  the  whole  jieriod  of 
time.  See  e.  g.  1  K.  xiii.  32.  For,  as  regards  the 
sources  of  information,  it  may  truly  be  said  that 
we  have  the  narrative  of  contemporary  writers 
throughout.  It  has  already  been  observed 
[Chronicles]  that  there  was  a  regular  series 
of  state-annals  botli  for  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
and  for  that  of  Israel,  which  embraced  the 
whole  time  comprehended  in  the  Books  of  Kings, 
or  at  least  to  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakini, 


these  officers  as  next  in  dignity  to  the  second  priest,  or 
sagan.  [High-Priest,  vol.  1.  p.  808.]  Josephus  calls 
them  Toii;  (^uAaereroi'Tas  to  Upov  i^yeiu.di'as.  The  ex- 
pression PlDn  ''^JDti'  is  however  also  applied  to  the 
Levites  in  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9,  1  Chr.  ix.  19.  [Korahite.] 
"■  The  prophet  does  not  tell  us  that  he  returned  to 
Jerusalem  after  hiding  his  girdle  in  the  Euphrates. 
The  "many  days"  spoken  of  in  ver.  6  may  have  been 
spent  among  the  captivity  at  Babylon.  [.Ieremiah,  p. 
9G9  a.]  He  may  have  returned  just  after  Jehoiakim's 
death;  and  "the  king  and  the  queen,"  in  ver.  IS, 
may  mean  Jehoiachin  and  his  mother.  Conip.  2  K. 
xxiv.  12,  15,  which  would  be  the  fulfilment  of  Jer. 
xiii.  IS,  19. 


30 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOK-S  OF 


2  K.  xxiv.  5.  These  annals  are  constantly  cited 
by  name  as  "  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon," 
1  K.  xi.  41  ;  and,  after  Solomon,  "  the  Book  of  the 
Chronicles  of  the  Kinsjs  of  Judah,  or,  Israel,"  e.  g. 
1  K.  xiv.  29,x\r.  7,xvi.  5, 14,  20;  2  K.  x.  34,  xxiv. 
5,  &c.,  and  it  is  manifest  that  the  author  of  Kings 
had  them  both  before  him,  while  he  drew  up  his  his- 
tory, in  which  the  reigns  of  the  two  kingdoms  are 
harmonised,  and  these  annals  constantly  appealed 
to.  But  in  addition  to  these  national  annals,  thei'e 
were  also  extant,  at  the  time  that  the  Books  of 
Kings  were  compiled,  separate  works  of  the  several 
prophets  who  had  lived  in  Judah  and  Israel,  and^ 
which  probably  bore  the  same  relation  to  the  annals, 
which  the  historical  parts  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
bear  to  those  portions  of  the  annals  presei-ved  in  the 
Books  of  Kings,  i.  e.  were,  in  some  instances  at 
least,  fuller  and  more  copious  accounts  of  the  cur- 
rent events,  by  the  same  hands  which  drew  up  the 
more  concise  narrative  of  the  annals,  though  in 
others  perhaps  mere  duplicates.  Thus  the  acts  of 
Uzziah,  wiitten  by  Isaiah,  were  very  likely  iden- 
tical with  the  history  of  his  reign  in  the  national 
chronicles  ;  and  part  of  the  history  of  Hezekiah 
we  know  was  identical  in  the  chionicles  and  in  the 
prophet.  The  chapter  in  Jeieniiah  relating  to  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple  (lii.)  is  identical  with 
that  in  2  K.  xxiv.,  xxv.  In  later  times  we  have 
supposed  that  a  chapter  in  the  prophecies  of  Daniel 
was  used  for  the  national  chionicles,  and  appears  as 
Ezr.  ch.  i.  [Ezra,  Book  of.]  Compare  also  2  K., 
xvi.  5,  with  Is.  vii.  1  ;  2  K.  xviii.  8,  with  Is. 
xiv.  28-32.  As  an  instance  of  verbal  agi'eement, 
coupled  with  greater  fullness  in  the  prophetic  ac- 
count, see  2  K.  xx.  comj)ared  with  Is.  xxx-viii.,  in 
which  latter  alone  is  Hezekiah's  writing  given. 

These  other  works,  then,  as  far  as  the  memory  of 
them  has  been  preserved  to  us,  were  as  follows  (see 
Keil's  Apolog.  Vers.).  For  the  time  of  David,  the 
book  of  Samuel  the  seer,  the  book  of  Nathan  the 
prophet,  and  the  book  of  Gad  the  seer  (2  Sam. 
xxi.-xxiv.  with  1  K.  1,  being  probably  extracted 
from  Nathan's  book),  which  seem  to  have  been 
collected — at  least  that  portion  of  them  relating 
to  David — into  one  work  called  "  the  Acts  of 
David  the  King,"  1  Chr.  xxix.  29.  For  the  time 
of  Solomon,  "  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon," 

1  K.  xi.  41,  consisting  probably  of  parts  of  the 
"  Book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  the  prophecy  of 
Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  the  visions  of  Iddo  the 
seer,"  2  Chr.  ix.  29.  For  the  time  of  Rehobcam, 
"  the  words  of  Shemaiah  the  piophet,  and  of 
Iddo  the  seer  concerning  genealogies,"  2  Chr.  xii. 

15.    For  the  time  of  Abijah,  "  the  story  (K'TIO)  ' 

of  the  prophet  Iddo,"  2  Chr.  xiii.  22.  For  the 
time  of  jehoshaphat,  "  the  words  of  Jehu  the 
son  of  Hanani,"  2  Chr.  xx.  34.  For  the  time  of 
Uzziah,    "  the  writings    of  Isaiah   the    pro])het," 

2  Chr.  xxvi.  22.  For  the  time  of  Hezekiah, 
"  the  vision  of  Isaiah  the  prophet,  the  son  of 
Amoz,"  2  Chr.  xxxii.  VI.  For  the  time  of  Man- 
asseh,  a  book  called  "  the  sayings  of  the  seers," 
as  the  A.  Y.,  following  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Kimchi, 
&c.,  rightly  renders  the  passage,  in  accordance 
with  ver.  18,  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  19,  though  others, 
following  the  grammar  too  servilely,  make  CAozaia 
pioper  name,  because  of  the  absence  of  the  article. 


[Chronicles,  vol.  i.  p.  3 1 0."]  For  the  time  of  Jero- 
boam II.,  a  prophecy  of  "  .Jonah,  the  son  of  Amittai 
the  prophet,  of  Gath-hcpher,"  is  cited,  2  K.  xiv. 
25  ;  and  it  seems  likely  that  there  were  books  con- 
taining special  histories  of  the  acts  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha,  seeing  that  the  times  of  these  prophets  are 
describe!)  with  such  copiousness.  Of  the  latter  Gehazi 
might  well  have  been  the  author,  to  judge  from  2  K. 
viii.  4,  5,  as  Elisha  himself  might  have  been  of  the 
former.  Possibly  too  the  prophecies  of  Azariah 
the  son  of  Oded,  in  Asa's  reign,  2  Chr.  xv.  1,  imd 
of  Hanani  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7),  (unless  this  latter  is 
the  same  as  Jehu  son  of  Hanani,  as  Oded  is  put  for 
Azariah  in  xv.  8),  and  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
in  Ahab's  reign ;  and  Eliezer  the  son  of  Dodavah, 
m  Jehoshaphat's ;  and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Je- 
hoiada,  in  Jehoash's  ;  and  Oded,  in  Pekah's  ;  and 
Zechaiiah,  in  Uzziah's  reign ;  of  the  prophetess 
Huldah,  in  Josiah's,  and  others,  may  have  been 
preserved  in  writing,  some  or  all  of  tliem.  These 
works,  or  at  least  manv  of  them,  must  have  been 
extant  at  the  time  when  the  Books  of  Kings  were 
compiled,  as  they  certainly  were  much  later  when 
the  Books  of  Chronicles  were  put  together  by  Ezra. 
But  whether  the  author  used  them  all,  or  only 
those  duplicate  portions  of  them  which  wei'e  em- 
bodied in  the  national  chronicles,  it  is  impossible  to 
say,  seeing  he  quotes  none  of  them  by  name  except 
the  acts  of  Solomon,  and  the  prophecy  of  Jonah. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  infer  from  his  silence 
that  these  books  were  unused  by  him,  seeing  that 
neither  does  he  quote  by  name  the  Vision  of  Isaiah 
as  the  Chionicler  does,  though  he  must,  from  its 
recent  date,  have  been  familiar  with  it,  and  that  so 
many  parts  of  his  narrative  have  every  appearance 
of  being  extracted  from  these  books  of  the  prophets, 
and  contain  narratives  which  it  is  not  likely  would 
have  found  a  jilace  in  the  chronicles  of  the  kings. 
(See  1  K.  xiv.  4,  &c.,  xvi.  1,  &c.,  xi. ;  2  K. 
xvii.,  &c.) 

With  regard  to  the  work  so  often  cited  in  the 
Chronicles  as  "the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah,"  1  Chr.  ix.  1;  2  Chr.  xvi.  11,  xxvii.  7, 
xxviii.  26,  xxxii.  32,  xxxv.  27,  xxxvi.  8,  it  has 
been  thought  by  some  that  it  was  a  separate  col- 
lection containing  the  joint  histories  of  the  two 
kingdoms ;  by  others  that  it  is  our  Books  of  Kings 
which  answer  to  this  description  ;  but  by  Eichhorn, 
that  it  is  the  same  as  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings 
of  Judah  so  constantly  cited  in  the  Books  of  Kings  ; 
and  this  last  opinion  seems  the  best  founded.  For 
in  2  Chr.  xvi.  11,  the  same  book  is  called  "the 
book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel,"  which  in 
the  parallel  passage,  1  K.  xv.  23,  is  called  "  the 
Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah."  So 
again,  2  Chr.  xxvii.  7,  comp.  with  2  K.  xv.  36 ; 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  26,  comp.  with  2  K.  xvi.  19  ; 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  32,  comp.  with  2  K.  xx.  20 ; 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  27,  with  2  K.  xxiii.  28  ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
8,  with  2  K.  xxiv.  5.  Moreover  the  book  so 
quoted  refers  exclusively  to  the  affairs  of  Judah  ; 
and  even  in  the  one  passage  where  reference  is  made 
to  it  as  "the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,"  2  Chr. 
XX.  34,  it  is  for  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  that  it  is 
cited.  Obviously  therefore  it  is  the  same  work 
which  is  elsewhere  described  as  the  Chr.  of  Israel 
and  Judah,  and  of  Judah  and  Israel.^  Nor 
is  this  an  unreasonable  title  to  give  to  these  chro- 


•  Movers  thinks  the  term  Si'inD  implies  transla- 
tion from  older  works. 

'  Thenius  comes  to  the  same  conclusion  [Einldt. 


§3).  It  is  cited  in  2  Chr.  xxiv.  27  as  "the  story' 
—the  Midrash  —  U'H'O,  of  the  book  of  the  Kings 
Comp.  2K.  xii.  U). 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


31 


nicies      Saul,  David,  Solomon,  and  in  some  sense 
Hezekiah,  2  Chr.  xxx.  1,  5,  6,  and  all  his  succ^sors 
were  kings  of  Israel  as  well  as  of  Judah,  and  there- 
fore it  is  very  conceivable  that  in  Ezra's  time  the 
chronicles  of  Judah  should  have  acquired  the  name 
of  the  Book   of  the   Kinjrs  of  Israel  and   Judah. 
Even  with  regard  to  a  portion  of  Israel  in  the  days 
of  Rehoboam,'"the  chronicler  remarks,  apparently  as  a 
matter  of  gi  atulation,  that  "  Rehoboam  reigned  over 
them,"  2  Chr.  x.  17  ;  he  notices  Abijah's  authority 
in  portions  of  the  Israelitish  territory,  2  Chr.  xiii. 
18,   19,  XV.  8,  9;  he  not  unfrequently  speaks  of 
Israel,  when  the  kin<rdom  of  Judah  is  the  matter 
in  hand,  as  2  Chr.  xfi.  1,  xxi.  4,  xxiii.  2,  &c.,  and 
even  calls  Jehoshaphat  "  King  of  Isiael,     2  Chr. 
xxi.  2,  and  distinguishes  "  Israel  and  Judah,     from 
"  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,"  xxx.  1  ;  he  notices  He- 
zekiah's  authority  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  2  Chr. 
xxx.  5,  and  Josiah's  destruction  of  idols  through- 
out all  the  land  of  Israel,  xxxiv.  6-9,  and  his  pass- 
over  for  all  Israel,  xxxv.  17,  18,  and  seems  to  pa- 
rade the  title  ''King  of  Israel"  in  connexion  with 
David  and  Solomon,  xxxv.  3,  4,  and  the  relation  of 
the  Levites  to  "  all  Israel,"  ver.  3  ;  and  therefore 
it  is  only  in  accordance  with  the  feeling  displayed 
in  such  passages  that  the  name,  "  the  Book  of  the 
Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  "  should  be  given  to  the 
chronicles  of  the  Jewish  kingdom.^    The  use  of  this 
term  in  speaking  of  the  "  Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah 
who  were  carried  away  to  Babylon  for  their  trans- 
gression," 1  Chr.  ix.  1 ,  would  be  conclusive,  if  the 
construction  of  the   sentence    were  certain.     But 
though  it  is  absurd  to  separate  the  words  "  and 
Judah"  from  Israel,  as  Bertheau  does  {Kurzgef. 
Exeg.  Handb.),  following  the  Masoretic  punctua- 
tion, seeing  that  the  "  Book  of  the  Kimjs  of  Israel- 
ami  Judah,"  is  cited  in  at  least  six  other  places  in 
Chr.,   still  it   is   possible    that   Israel    and   Judah 
migh't  be  the  antecedent  to  tfie  pronoun  understood 
before  •IPJn.     It  seems,  however,  much  more  likely 
that  the  antecedent   to   IpJ?  is  "n''1  "li^  ''3?J3. 
On  the  whole  therefore  there  is  no  evidence  of  the 
existence  in  the  time  of  the  chronicler  of  a  history, 
since  lost,  of  the  two  kingdoms,  nor  are  the  Books 
of  Kings  the  work  so  quoted  by   the  chronicler, 
seeing  he  often  refers  to  it  for  "  the  rest  of  the  acts  " 
of  Kings,  when  he  has  already  given  all  that  is  con- 
tained in  our  Books  of  Kings.     He  refers  therefore 
to  the  chronicles  of  Judah.     From  the  above  au- 
thentic sources  then  was  compiled  the  history  in  the 
books  under  consideration.     Judging  from  the  facts 
that  we  have  in  2  K.  xviii.  xix.,  xx.,  the  history  of 
Hezekiah  in  the  very  words  of  Isaiah,  xxxvi.-xxxix. ; 
that,  as  stated  above,  we  have  several  passages  from 
Jeremiah  in  duplicate  in  2  K.,  and  the  whole  of 
Jer.   Hi.    in   2  K.  xxiv.   18,  &c.,   x.xv. ;    that    so 
large  a  portion  of  the  Books  of  Kings  is  repeated  in 
the"  Books  of  Chronicles,  though  the  writer  of  Chro- 
nicles had  the  original  Chronicles  also  before  him, 
.   as  well  as  from  the  whole  internal  character  of  the 
narrative,  and  even  some  of  the  blemishes  referred 
to  under  the  2nd  head  •„  we  may  conclude  with 
certainty  that  we  have  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  not 
only  in  the  main  the  history  faithfully  preserved 
to  us  from   the  ancient  chronicles,  but  most  fre- 
quently whole  passages  transfeiTed  verbatim   into 
them.     Occasionally,  no  doubt,  we  have  the  com- 
piler's own  comments,  or  reflexions  thrown  in,  as 
at  2  K.  x.xi.  10-16,  xvii.  10-15,  xiii.  23,  xvii.  7-41, 


"   V.  32.     The  phrase  "  the  cities  of  iSiuuaria  "  of 
course  cannot  belong  to  the  age  of  Jeroboam. 


&c.     We  connect  the  insertion  of  the  prophecy  in 
1  K.  xiii.  with  the  fact  that  the  compiler  himself 
was  an  eye-witness  of  the  fulfilment  of  it,  and  can 
even  see  how  the  words  ascribed  to  the  old  prophet 
are  of  the  age  of  the  compiler."     We  can  perhaps 
see  his  hand  in  the  frequent  repetition  on  the  review 
of  each  reign  of  the  remark,  "  the  high  places  were 
not  taken  away,  the  people  still  sacrificed  and  burnt 
incense  on  the  high   places,"   1  K.  xxii.  43  ;  2  K. 
xii.  3,  xiv.  4,  xv.  4,  35 ;  cf.  1  K.  iii.  3,  and  in  the 
repeated  observation   that  such   and    such   things, 
as   the  staves  by  which  the  ark  was    borne,  tlie 
revolt   of  the   10   tribes,  the   rebellion    of   Edoni, 
&c.,  continue  "  unto    this   day,"  though    it   may 
be  perhaps   doubted  in  some  cases  whether  these 
words  were  not  in  the  old  chronicle  (2  Chr.  v.  9"). 
See  1  K.  viii.  8,  i.x.  13,  21,  x.  12,  xii.  19;  2  K.  ii. 
22,  viii.  22,  x.  27,  xiii.  23,  xiv.  7,  xvi.  6,  .xvii.  23, 
34,  41,  xxiii.  25.     It  is  however  remarkable  that 
in  no  instance  does  the  use  of  this  phrase  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  it  was  penned  after  the  destruction  of 
the  Temple :   in  sevei'al  of  the  above  instances  the 
phrase  necessarily  supposes  that  the  Temple  and 
the  kingdom  of  Judah  were  still  standing.     If  the 
phrase  then  is  the  compiler's,  it  proves  him  to  have 
written  before  the  Babylonish  captivity  ;  if  it  was  a 
part  of  the  chronicle  he  was  quoting,  it  shows  how 
exactly  he  transferred  its  contents  to  his  own  pages. 
IV.  As  regards  the  relation  of  the  Books  of  Kings 
to  those  of  Chronicles,  it  is  manifest,  and  is  univer- 
sally admitted,  that  the  former  is  by  far  the  older 
work.     The  language,  which  is  quite  free  from  the 
Persicisms  of  the  Chronicles  and  their  late  ortho- 
graphy, and  is  not  at  all  more  Aramaic  than  the 
language  of  Jeremiah,  as  has  been  shown  above  (II.), 
clearly  points  out  its  relative  superiority  in  regard 
to  age.     Its  subject  also,  embracing  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  as  well  as  Judah,  is  another  indication  of 
its  composition   befoie  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was 
Ibrgotten,    and    before  the  Jewish  enmity  to  Sa- 
maria, which  is  apparent  in  such  passages  as  2  Chr. 
XX.  37,  XXV.,  and  in  those  chapters  of  Ezra  ,(i.-vi.) 
which  bekmg  to  Chronicles,  was  brought  to  ma- 
turity.    While   the  Books  of  Chronicles  therefore 
were  written  especially  for  the  Jews  after  their 
return    from  Babylon,    the    Book    of  Kings    was 
written  for  the  whole  of  Israel,  before  their  common 
national  existence  was  hopelessly  quenched. 

Another  comparison  of  considerable  interest  be- 
tween the  two  histories  may  be  drawn  in  respect 
to  the  main  design,  that  design  having  a  marked 
relation  both  to  the  individual  station  of  the  sup- 
posed writers,  and  the  peculiar  circumstances  of 
their  country  at  the  times  of  their  writing. 

Jeremiah  was  himself  a  prophet.  He  lived  while 
the  prophetic  office  was  in  full  vigour,  in  his  own 
person,  in  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  and  many  others, 
both  true  and  false.  In  his  eyes,  as  in  truth,  tlie 
main  cause  of  the  fearful  calamities  of  his  country- 
men was  their  rejection  and  contempt  of  the  Word 
of  God  in  his  mouth  and  that  of  the  other  ]iro- 
phets  ;  and  the  one  hope  of  deliverance  lay  in  their 
hearkening  to  the  prophets  who  still  continued  to 
speak  to  them  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  Accord- 
ingly, we  find  in  the  Books  of  Kings  gieat  promi- 
nence given  to  the  prophetic  office.  Not  only  are 
some  fourteen  chapters  devoted  more  or  less  to  the 
history  of  Elijah  and  Elislia,  the  former  of  whom  is 
but  once  nained,  and  the  latter  not  once  in  the 
Chronicles  ;  but  besides  the  many  jiassages  in  which 
the  names  and  sayings  of  prophets  are  recorded 
alike  in  both  histories,' the  'following  may  be  cited 


32 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


as  instances  in  which  the  compiler  of  Kings  has  no- 
tices of  the  prophets  which  aie  peculiar  to  himself. 
The  history  of  the  prophet  who  went  from  Judah 
to  Bethel  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam,  and  of  the  old 
prophet  and  his  sons  who  dwelt  at  Bethel,  1  K. 
xiii. ;  the  story  of  Ahijah  the  prophet  and  Jei'o- 
boam's  wife  in  1  K.  xiv.  ;  the  prophecy  of  Jehu  the 
son  of  Hanani  concerning  the  house  of  Baasha,  1  K. 
xvi. ;  the  refei'ence  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  Word 
of  God  in  the  termination  of  Jehu's  dynasty,  in 
2  K.  XV.  12  ;  the  reflexions  in  2  K.  xvii.  7-2.3  ;  and 
above  all,  as  relating  entirely  to  Judah,  the  narra- 
tive of  Hezekiah's  sickness  and  recovery  in  2  K.  xx. 
as  contrasted  with  that  in  2  Chr.  xxxii.,  may  be 
cited  as  instances  of  that  prominence  given  to  pro- 
phecy and  prophets  by  the  compiler  of  the  book  of 
Kings,  which  is  also  especially  noticed  by  De  Wette, 
§183,  and  Parker,  transl.  p.  233. 

This  view  is  fnrther  confirmed  if  we  take  into  ac- 
count the  lengthened  history  of  Samuel  the  prophet, 
in  1  Sam.  (while  he  is  but  barel}'  named  two  or 
three  times  in  the  Chronicles),  a  circumstance,  by 
the  way,  strongly  cohnecting  the  books  of  Samuel 
with  those  of  Kings. 

Ezra,  on  the  contrary,  was  only  a  priest.     In  his 
days    the   prophetic  oHice  had  wholly  fallen  into 
abeyance.     That   evidence  of  the  Jews  being  the 
people  of  God,  which  consisted  in  the  presence  of 
prophets  among  them,  was  no  more.     But  to  the 
men  of  his  generation,  the  distinctive  mark  of  the 
continuance  of  God's  favour  to  their  race  was  the 
rebuilding  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  the  restora- 
tion of  the  daily  sacrifice  and  the  Levitical  worship, 
anc\  the  wonderful  and  providential  renewal  of  the 
Mosaic  institutions.     The  chief  instrument,  too,  for 
preserving   the   Jewish   remnant   from    absorption 
into  the  mass  of  Heathenism,  and  for  maintaining 
their  national  life  till  the  coming  of  Messiah,  was 
the  maintenance  of  the  Temple,  its  mmisters,  and 
its  services.     Hence  we  see  at  once  that  the  chief 
care  of  a  good  and  enlightened  Jew  of  the  age  of 
Ezra,  and  all  the  more  if  he  were  himself  a  priest, 
would  naturally  be  to  enhance  the  value  of  the  Le- 
vitical ritual,  and  the  dignity  of  the  Levitical  caste. 
And  in  compiling  a  history  of  the  past  glories  of  his 
race,  he  would  as  naturally  select  such  passages 
as  especially  bore  upon  the  sanctity  of  the  priestly 
office,  and  showed  the  deep  concern  taken  by  their 
ancestors  in  all  that  related  to  the  honour  of  God's 
House,  and  the  support  of  His  ministering  servants. 
Hence  the  Levitical  character  of  the  Books  of  Chro- 
nicles, and  the  presence  of  several  detailed  narratives 
not  found  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  and  the  more  fre- 
rjuent   reference    to    the  Mosaic    institutions,  may 
most  naturally  and  simply  be  accounted  for,  without 
resoi'ting  to  the  absurd  hypothesis  that  the  cere- 
monial law  was  an  invention  subsequent  to  the  cap- 
tivity.   2  Chr.  xxnx.,  xxx.,  xxxi.   compared   with 
2  K.  xviii.  is  perhaps  as  good  a  specimen  as  can  be 
selected  of  the  distinctive  spirit  of  the  Chronicles. 
See  also  2  Chr.  xxvi.  16-21,  comp.  with  2  K.  xv. 
.'');   2  Chr.  xi.   13-17,  xiii.  9-20,  xv.  1-15,  xxiii. 
2-8,   comp.  with   2  K.  xi.  5-9,  and  vers.  18,  19, 
comp.  with  ver.   18,    and   many  other   passages. 
Moreover,  upon  the  principle  that  the  sacred  writers 
were  influenced  by  natural  feelings  in  their  selec- 
tion of  their  materials,  it  seems  most  appropriate 
that  while  the  prophetical  writer  in  Kings  deals 
very  fully  with  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  in  which  the 
prophets  were  much  more  illustrious  than  in  Judah, 
the  Levitical  writer,  on  the  contrary,  should  con- 
ccutrat*  all    his   thoughts  round  Jerusalem  where 


alone  the  Levitical  caste  had  all  its  power  and  func- 
tions, and  should  dwell  upon  all  the  instances  pre- 
served in  existing  muniments  of  the  deeds  and  even 
the  minutest  ministrations  of  the  priests  and  Levites, 
as  well  as  of  their  faithfulness  and  sufferings  in  the 
cause  of  truth.  This  professional  bias  is  so  true  to 
nature,  that  it  is  surprising  that  any  one  should  be 
found  to  raise  an  objection  from  it.  Its  subserviency 
in  this  instance  to  the  Divine  purposes  and  the  in- 
struction of  the  Church,  is  an  interesting  example  of 
the  providential  government  of  God.  It  may  be 
fuither  mentioned  as  tending  to  account  simply  and 
naturally  for  the  diffeience  in  some  of  the  nar- 
ratives in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  re- 
spectively, that  whereas  the  compiler  of  Kings 
usually  quotes  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the 
Kings  of  Judah,  the  writer  of  Chronicles  very  fre- 
quently refers  to  those  books  of  the  contemporary 
prophets  which  we  presume  to  have  contained 
more  copious  accounts  of  the  same  reigns.  This 
appears  remarkably  in  the  j)arallel  passages  in  1  K. 
xi.  41  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  29,  where  the  writer  of  Kihgs 
refers  for  "the  rest  of  Solomon's  acts"  to  the 
''  book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon,"  while  the  writer 
of  Chronicles  refers  to  "  the  book  of  Nathan  the 
prophet "  and  "  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah  the  Shi- 
lonite,"  and  "  the  visions  of  Iddo  the  seer  against 
Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat ;"  and  in  I  K.  xiv,  29, 
and  2  Chr.  xii.  15,  where  the  writer  of  Kings  sums 
up  his  history  of  Ilehoboam  with  the  words,  "  Now 
the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Rehoboam  and  all  that  he 
did,  are  they  not  written  in  the  Book  of  the  Chro- 
nicles of  the  Kiwjs  of  Judah  f  whereas  the  chro- 
nicler substitutes  "  in  the  Book  of  Shemaiah  the 
prophet,  and  of  Iddo  the  seer  concerning  gcnea- 
loijies ;"  and  in  1  K.  xxii.  45,  whei-e  "  the  Book  of 
the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  stands  instead 
of  "  the  Book  of  Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani,"  in  2  Chr. 
XX.  34.  Besides  whidh,  the  very  fomiula  so  fre- 
quently used,  "  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  so  and  so, 
and  all  that  he  did,"  &c.,  necessarily  supposes  that 
there  were  in  the  chrwiicles  of  each  reign,  and  in 
the  other  works  cited,  many  things  recorded  which 
the  compiler  did  not  transcribe,  and  which  of  course 
it  was  open  to  any  other  compiler  to  insert  in  his 
narrative  if  he  pleased.  If  then  the  chronicler, 
writing  with  a  diftei-ent  motive  and  difl'erent  pre- 
dilections, and  in  a  difl'erent  age,  had  access  to  the 
same  original  documents  from  which  the  author  of 
Kings  drew  his  materials,  it  is  onlj'  what  was  to 
be  expected,  that  he  should  omit  or  abridge  some 
things  given  in  detail  in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and 
should  insert,  or  give  in  detail,  some  things  which  the 
author  of  Kings  had  omitted,  or  given  very  briefly. 
The  following  passages  which  are  placed  side  by  side 
are  examples  of  these  opposite  methods  of  treating 
the  same  subject  on  the  part  of  the  two  writers: — 


Full  in  Aings. 

1  K.  i.  ii.  give  in  detail 
the  circumstances  of  Solo- 
mnn's  accession,  the  con- 
spiracy of  Adonijah,  Joab, 
Abiathar,  &c.,  and  subsli-  ' 
tuti'in  of  Zadolc  in  the 
priest's  office  in  room  of 
Abiathar,  the  sutmiission 
of  Adonijali  Jind  all  his 
party,  Joab's  death,  &c. 


Short  in  Chronicles. 

1  Chr.  xxix.  22-24. 

"  And  they  made  Solomon 
the  son  of  David  king  the 
second  time,  and  anointed 
Lim  unto  the  Lord  to  be  the 
chief  governor,  and  Zadok 
to  be  priest.  Then  Solo- 
mon sat  on  the  throne  of 
the  Lord  as  king  instead 
of  David  his  father,  and 
prospered,  and  all  Israel 
obeyed  hiin.  And  all  the 
princes  and  the  mighty 
men,  and  all  the  sons  like- 
wise of  king  David,  sub- 
mitted themselves  unto 
Solomon  the  king." 


full  ill  Kill(/S. 

1  K.  in.  5-14. 

Vev.  6.  "  And  Solomon 
s;iiil.  Thou  Iiast  slioweil  unto 
t!iy  servant  David  my  father 
great  mercy,  according  as 
lie  walked  before  Thte  in 
truth,  and  in  righteousness, 
and  in  uprightness  of  licart 
with  Thee  ;  and  Thou  hast 
kept  for  him  this  great 
kindness,  that  Thou  hast 
given  him  a  son  to  sit  on 
his  throne,  as  it  is  this  day." 

7,  8,  9,  10.  "  And  the 
speecl;  pleased  the  Lord, 
that  Solomon  had  asked 
this  tiling." 

11.  "  And  God  said  uulo 
him,"  v^tc. 

13.  "...  like  unto  thee 
all  thy  days." 

14.  "  And  if  thou  wilt 
walk  in  my  ways,  and  keep 
my  statutes  and  my  com- 
mandments as  thy  father 
David  did  walk,  then  I  will 
lengthen  thy  days." 

15.  "  And  Solomon  awoke, 
and  behold  it  was  a  dream. 
And  he  came  to  Jerusalem, 
and  stood  before  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord, 
and  offered  up  burnt-offer- 
ings, and  offered  peace- 
offerings,  and  made  a  feast 
to  all  his  servants." 

16-2!i.  Solomon's  judg- 
ment. 

iv.  1.  "So  king  Solomon 
was  king  over  all  Israel." 

2-19.  Containing  a  list  of 
Solomon's  officers. 

xi.  1-40.  Containing  his- 
tory of  Solomon's  idolatry, 
and  the  enmity  of  Hadad, 
and  Rezon,  and  Jeroboam 
against  him. 

xii.  2.  "  Who  was  yet  in 
Kgypt."  The  omission  of 
the  word  "yet"  in  Chron. 
is  of  course  accounted  for 
by  his  flight  to  Egypt  not 
having  been  naixated  by  the 
chronicler. 

1  K.  xiv.  22-24. 
A  detailed  account  of  the 
idolatries  of  Judi\h  in   the 
reign  of  Rchoboam. 


1  K.  XV.  IS. 
"  Then  Asa  took  all  the 
silver  and  the  guld  that 
were  left  in  the  treasures 
of  the  house  of  the  Lord, 
and  the  treasures  of  the 
king's  house,  and  delivered 
them  into  the  hand  of  his 
servants ;  and  king  Asa  sent 
them  to  lienhadad  the  sou 
of  Tabrimon,  the  son  of 
Hezion,  king  of  Syria,  that 
dwelt  at  Damascus,  saying, 
There  is  a  league,"  &c. 

2  K.  xvi.  10-16. 
A  detailed  account  of 
Ahaz's  visit  to  Damascus, 
and  setting  up  an  altar  in 
the  temple  at  Jerusalem 
after  the  pattern  of  one  at 
Damascus.  Urijah's  sub- 
serviency, S;c. 


KINGS,  FIKST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 

Full  in  Kings. 
XX.  1-19. 
Hezekiah's  sickness, 
prayer,  and  recovery,  wiih 
Isaiah's  prophecy,  and  the 
sign  of  the  shadow  on  the 
dial ;  the  visit  of  the  Baby- 
lonish ambassadors ;  Heze- 
kiah's pride,  Isaiah's  re- 
buke, and  Hezekiah's  sub- 
mission. Throughout  the 
history  of  Hezekiah  the 
narrative  in  2  K.  and  Isaiah 
is  much  fuller  than  in 
Chronicles. 


33 


short  in  Cltronicles. 

2  Chr.  i.  7-12. 
^''er.  8.    "  And   Solomon 
said  unto  God,  Thou  hast 
shewed  great  mercy  unto 
David  my  father, 


and   hast    made    me    to 
reign  in  his  stead." 


"i         VOL    11 


11.  "  And  God    said  to 
Sulduiiin,"  .vc. 

12.  "...  anj'  after  thee 
have  the  like.'' 


13.  "  Then  Solomon  came 
from  his  journey  to  the  high 
place  that  was  at  Gibeon  to 
Jerusalem,  from  before  the 
tab'ruacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, 


and  reigned  over  Israel." 

Omitted  in  Chronicles. 

Wholly  omitted  in  Chro- 
nicles, except  tlie  allusion 
in  2  Chr.  x.  2,  "  It  came  to 
p;tss,  when  Jeroboam  the 
son  of  Nebat,  who  was  in 
Egypt,  whither  he  had  fled 
from  the  presence  of  Solo- 
mon the  king,"  &c. 


2  Chr.  xii.  1. 
"  And  it  came  to  pass 
when  Rehoboam  had  esta- 
blished the  kingdom,  and 
had  strengthened  himself, 
he  forsook  the  law  of  the 
Lord,  and  all  Israel  with 
him." 

2  Chr.  xvi.  2. 
"  Then  Asa  brought  out 
silver  and  gold  out  of  the 
treasures  of  the  house  of 
the  Lord,  and  of  the  king's 
house,  and 


sent  to  Benhadad 

king  of  Syria,  that  dwelt  at 
Damascu.s,  saying,  There  is 
a  league,"  &c. 

2  Chr.  xxviii.  22,  23. 
"  And  in  the  time  of  his 
distress  did  he  trespass  yet 
more  against  the  Lord  :  this 
is  that  king  Ahaz.  For  he 
sacrificed  unto  the  gods  of 
]  )amascu8  which  smote  him. 
And  ho  said.  Because  the 
gods  of  Syria  help  them, 
therefore  will  I  sacrifice  to 
them,  that  they  may  help 
me." 


Short  in  Chronicles. 


xxi.  10-16. 
Message    from    God    to 
Manasseh  by  His  prophets. 
Manasseh's  sin. 

2  K.  xxiii.  4-25. 
Detailed  account  of  the 
destruction  of  Baal-worship 
and  other  idolatrous  rites 
and  places  in  Judah  and 
Israel,  by  Josiah,  "  that  he 
might  perform  the  words  of 
the  law  which  were  written 
in  the  book  that  Hilkiah  the 
priest  found  in  the  house 
of  the  Lord." 


x.xxii.  21-26. 
"In  tho,se  days  Hezekiah 
was  sick  to  the  death,  and 
prayed  unto  the  Lord,  and 
He  spake  unto  him  and  gave 
him  a  sign.  But  Hezekiah 
rendered  not  again  accord- 
ing to  the  benefit  done  unto 
him  ;  for  his  heart  was 
lifted  up  r  therefore  there 
was  wrath  upon  him,  and 
upon  Judah  and  Jerusalem. 
Notwithstanding,  Hezekiah 
humbled  himself  for  the 
pride  of  his  heart,  both  he 
and  the  inhabitants  of  Jeru- 
salem, so  thai  the  wrath 
of  the  Lord  came  not  upon 
them  in  the  davs  of  Heze- 
kiah." Ver.  31.'  "  Howbeit 
in  the  business  of  the  am- 
bassadors of  the  princes  of 
Babylon,  who  sent  unto  him 
io  enquire  of  the  wonder 
done  in  the  land,  God  left 
him  to  try  him,  that  he 
might  know  all  that  was  in 
his  heart." 

2  Chr.  xxxiii.  10. 
"  And  the  Lord  spake  to 
Manasseh  and  his  people  : 
but  they  would  not  hearken. 

2  Chr.  xxxiv.  32,  33. 
"  And  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem  did  according  to 
the  covenant  of  God,  the 
God  of  their  fathers.  Arid 
Josiah  took  away  all  the 
abominations  out  of  all  the 
countries  that  pertained  to 
the  chikhen  of  Israel,  and 
made  all  that  were  present 
in  Israel  to  serve,  even  to 
serve  the  Lord  their  God." 

In  like  manner  a  comparison  of  the  hi.story  of  the 
reigns  of  Jehoahaz,  Jehoialdm,  Jehoiachin,  and  Ze- 
dekinh,  will  show,  that,  except  in  tlie  matter  of 
Jehoiakim's  capture  in  the  4th  year  of  his  reign, 
and  deportation  to  (or  towards)  Babylon,  in  which 
the  author  of  Chronicles  follows  Daniel  and  Ezekiel 
(Dan.  i.  1,  2  ;  Ez.  xix.  9|,  the  narrative  in  Chronicles 
is  chiefly  an  abridgment  of  that  in  Kings.  Compare 
2  K.  x.xiii.  30-37,  with  2  Chr.  x.xxvi.  1-5  ;  2  K. 
xxiv.  1-7,  with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  6-8  ;  2  K.  xxiv.  10-17, 
with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  10.  From  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  13, 
however,  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  is  rather  a  com- 
ment upon  the  history  in  2  K.  xxv.  1-21,  than  an 
abridgment  of  it. 

Under  this  head  should  be  noticed  also  what  may 
be  called  systematic  abridgments ;  as  when  the  state- 
ments in  Kings  concerning  high-place  worship  in  the 
several  reigns  (2  K.  xii.  2,  3  ;  xiv.  3,  4;  xv.  3,  4, 
35)  are  either  wholly  omitted,  or  more  cursorily 
glanced  at,  as  at  2  Chr.  xxv.  2,  xxvii.  2;  or  when 
the  name  of  the  queen-mother  is  omitted,  as  in  tlie 
case  of  the  seven  last  kings  from  Manasseh  down- 
wards, whose  mothers  are  given  by  the  author  of 
Kings,  but  struck  out  by  the  author  of  Chronicles." 

"  The  annexed  list  of  kings'  mothers  shows  which  are 
named  in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  which  in  Kings  alone : — 
Solomon     son  of  Bathsheba,  K.  and  Chr.  (I.  iii.  5). 
Rehoboam      „       Naamah,  K.  and  Chr. 
Abijah  „       Maachah  or  Alichaiah,  K.  and  Chr. 

*Asa  „       Maachah,  da  of  Absalom,  K.  and  Chr. 

Jehoshaphat  „       Azubah,  K.  and  Chr. 

Jehoram  „       

Ahaziuh  „       Atlialiah,  K.  and  Chr. 

Joash  „       Zihiali,  K.  and  Chr. 

Ainaziah         „       .(ehoaddan,  K.  and  Chr. 

Uzziah 
D 


34 


IQNGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


Theie  is  something  systematic  also  in  the  omitted 
or  abbreviated  accounts  of  tlie  idolatries  in  the  reigns 
of  Solomon,  Kehoboam,  and  Ahaz.  It  may  not 
always  be  easy  to  assign  the  exact  motives  which 
influence  a  writer,  who  is  abbreviating,  in  his  selec- 
tion of  passages  to  be  shortened  or  left  out ;  but  an 
obvious  motive  in  the  case  of  these  idolatries,  as  well 
as  the  high-places,  may  be  found  in  the  circumstance 
fliat  the  idolatrous  tendencies  of  the  Jews  had  wholly 
ceased  during  the  captivity,  and  that  the  details  and 
repetition  of  the  same  remark  relating  to  them  were 
t"herefore  less  suited  to  the  reiiuirements  of  the  age. 
To  see  a  design  on  the  part  of  the  Chronicler  to  de- 
ceive and  mislead,  is  to  draw  a  conclusion  not  from 
the  facts  betbre  us,  but  from  one's  own  prejudices. 
It  is  not  criticism,  but  invention. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  subjoined  passages  present 
some  instances  in  which  the  Books  of  Kings  give 
the  short  account,  and  the  Books  of  Chronicles  the 
full  one. 

Short  in  Kings.  Full  in  Chronicles. 

1  K.  viii.  2  Chr.  v 

Ver  10.  "  And  it  came  to         Ver.  11.  "  And  it  came  to 

pass  when  the  priests  were     pass  when  the  priests  were 

come  out  of  the  holy  place,     come  out  of  the  holy  place  : 

(for  all  the  priests  that  were 

present  were  sanctified,  and 

did  not  then  wait  by  course  : 

12.  "  Also    the    I.evites 
'                   which  were  the  singers,  all 

of  them  of  Asaph,  of  Heman, 
of   Jediithun,    with     their 
•  ,  sons    and    their    brethren, 

being  arrayed  in  white 
linen,  having  cymbals  and 
psalteries  and  harps,  stood 
at  the  east  end  of  the  altar, 
and  with  them  120  priests, 
sounding  with  trumpets :) 

13.  "  It  came  even  to 
pass,  as  the  trumpeters  and 
singers  were  as  one,  to 
make  one  sound  to  be  heard 
in  praising  and  thatiking 
the  Lord ;  and  when  they 
lilted  up  their  voice  with 
the  trumpets  and  cymbals 
and  instruments  of  music,y 
and  praised  the  Lord,  say- 
ing, For  He  is  good,  for  His 
mercy  endureth  for  ever ; 
that  then  the  house  was 
filled  with  a  cloud,  even  the 
house  of  the  Lord. 

14.  "So  that  the  priests 
could  not  stand  to  minister 
by  reason  of  the  cloud  ;  for 
the  glory  of  the  Lord  had 
filled  the  house  of  God. 
Then  said  Solomon,"  &c. 

2  Chr.  vi.,  vii. 
I  Ver.  41.  "  Xow  therefore 
arise,  0  Lord  God,  into  thy 
resting  place,  thou,  and  the 
arli  of  thy  strength :  let 
thy  priests,  0  Lord  God,  be 
clothed  with  sulVadon,  and 
thy  saints  rejoice  in  good- 
ness. 
42,  "  0  Lord  Gotl,   turn 


that    the    cloud  filled   the 
house  of  the  Lyrd, 

11.  "So  that  the  priests 
could  not  stand  to  minister 
because  of  the  cloud :  for 
the  glory  of  the  Lord  had 
filled  the  house  of  tho  Lord. 

12.  "Then  said  Solomon," 
&c. 

1  K.  viii. 
Ver.  .52  coiTCsponds  with 
2  Chr.  vi.  40.      Ver.  53   is 
omitted  in  Chr. 


Uzziah        SOI, 

if  Jecoliah,  K.  and  Chr. 

.lolham           „ 

Jernsha,  K.  a)Hl  Chr. 

Ahaz 

Hezekiah        „ 

Abi,  K.  and  Clir. 

Manasseh        „ 

Hephzi-bah.  K. 

Amon              „ 

MeshuUenieth,  K, 

Jo.siiili 

Jedidah,  K. 

Jehoahaz 

Hamutal,  IC. 

Jehoiakim 

Zebudah,  K. 

Jehoiachin      „ 

Nelnishta,  K. 

Zedekiah 

Hamutal,  Iv. 

Short  in  Kings. 


54.  "  Aiid  it  was  so  that 
ivhen  Solomon  had  made  an 
end  of  praying  all  this 
prayer  and  supplication 
luito  the  Lord,  he  arose 
from  before  the  altar  ot  the 
Lord,  from  kneeling  on  his 
knees  with  his  hands  spread 
up  to  heaven." 


55-61.  "  And  he  stood 
and  blessed  all  the  congre- 
gation," Jfec. 

62.  "And  the  king,  ami 
all  Israel  with  him,  offered 
sacrifices  before  the  Lord." 

1  K.  xii.  24  corresponds  with  2  Chr.  xi.  4. 


Full  in  Chronicles. 

not  away  the  face  of  thine 
anointed ;  remember  the 
mercies  of  David  thy  ser- 
vant. 

1.  "  yow  uhen  Solomon 
had  made  an  end  of  pray- 
ing, the  fire  came  down  from 
heaven,  and  consumed  the 
burnt-ojfering  and  the  sacri- 
fices, and  the  glory  of  the 
Lord  filled  the  house,  and 
the  priests  ciJUld  not  enter 
into  the  house  of  the  Lord, 
because  the  glory  of  the 
Lord  had  filled  the  Lord's 
house.2  And  when  all  the 
children  of  Israel  saw  how 
the  fire  came  down,  and  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  upon  the 
house,  they  bowed  them- 
selves with  their  faces  to 
the  ground,  upon  the  pave- 
ment, anil  worshipped  and 
praised  the  Lord,  saying. 
For  He  is  good,  for  His 
mercy  endureth  for  ever. 

4.  "Then  the  king  and 
nil  the  people  offered  sacri- 
fice before  the  Lord." 


■\V1wlly  omitted  in  Kings, 
where  irom  xii.  25  to  xiv. 
20  is  occupied  with  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  and 
seems  to  be  not  impro- 
bably kiken  from  the  book 
of  Ahijah  the  Shilouite. 

xiv.  25,  26. 
A  very  brief  mention  of 
Shishak's     invasion,      and 
plunder  of  the  sacred  and 
royal  treasures. 


1  K.  XV, 
Ver.  7.  "  And  there  was 
war  between  Abijara  and 
Jeroboam." 


7.  "And  the  rest  of  ihe 
acts  of  Abijam,  ami  all  that 
he  did,  are  they  not  written 
in  the  bi)ok  of  the  Chronicles 
of  the  Kings  of  .Jndah,"  kc. 

8.  "  And  Abijam  slept 
with  his  fathers,"  &c. 

I  K.  XV. 

12.  (Asa)  "  took  away 
the  sodomites  out  of  the 


2  Chr.  xi.  5-23. 
Containing  particulars  of 
the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  and 
the  gathering  of  priests  and 
Levites  to  Jerusalem,  dur- 
ing his  three  first  years, 
very  likely  irom  the  book 
of  Iddo,  as  this  passage  has 
a  genealogical  form. 

xii.  2-9. 
A  more  detailed  account 
of  Shishak's  invasion,  of  the 
number  and  nature  of  his 
troops,  the  capture  of  the 
fenced  cities  of  Judab,  and 
the  propliecying  of  She- 
maiah  on  the  occasion ; 
evidently  exti-acted  from 
the  book  of  Shemaiah. 

2  Chron.  xiii. 

Ver.  2.  "And  there  was 
war  between  Abijah  and 
Jeroboam." 

3-21  contains  a  detailed 
account  of  the  war  between 
the  two  kings  ;  of  Abijah 's 
speech  to  the  Israelites, 
upbraitfing  them  with  for- 
saking the  Levitical  wor- 
ship, and  glorying  in  the 
retention  of  the  same  by 
Judah ;  his  victories,  and 
his  family. 

22.  "  And  the  rest  of  the 
acts  of  Abijah,  and  his  ways 
and  his  sayings,  are  written 
in  the  storj'  (midrash)  of 
the  prophet  Iddo." 

23.  "  And  Abijah  slept 
with  his  fathers,"  &c. 
(xiv.  1,  A.  V.) 

xiv.  3-15,  XV.  1-16. 
A  detiiiled  account  of  the 
removal  of  the  idols  ;   the 


.'^  A  cm-ious  incidental  confirmation  of  the  fact  of  this 
copious  use  of  musical  instruments  in  Solomon's  time 
may  be  found  in  1  K.  x.  11,  12,  where  we  read  that  Solo- 
mon made  of  the  "  great  plenty  of  almug-trees  "  which 
came  from  Ophir  "  harps  and  psalteries  for  singers." 
Several  able  critics  (as  Ewald)  have  inferred  from  the 
frequent  mention  of  the  Levitical  musical  services,  that 
the  author  of  Chronicles  was  one  of  the  singers  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi  himself. 

2  This  is  obviously  repeated  here,  because  at  this 
moment  the  priests  ought  to  have  entere<l  into  tlie  house, 
but  could  not  because  of  the  gUiry. 


KINGS,  FIllST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


Shurt  in  Kings. 

lai'.d,  and  \emoved  all  the 
idols  that  bis  fatbers  bad 
made." 

Entirely  omitted. 

16-23.  His  war  with 
Bmisba. 

23.  "  Nevertlieless  in  the 
time  of  his  old  age  he  was 
diseased  in  his  feet," 


24.  "  And  Asa  slept  with 
bis  fathers." 


1  IC.  xxii.  41-50. 
"  Jehoshapbat  was  35 
years  old  when  he  began 
to  reign,"  &c.  These  few 
vers<'S  are  all  the  accoimt 
of  .Jeboshaphat's  reign,  ex- 
cept what  is  contained  in 
ilie  history  of  Israel. 


All  omitted  in  Kings. 

1  K.  xxii.  (from  history  of 
All  omitted  in  Kings. 


All  omitted  in  King 


1  K.  x.Nii.  48, 


Fall  in  Chronicles. 

forti  Tying  the  cities  of 
Judah  ;  of  A  sa's  army ;  tlie 
invasion  of  Zerah  the  Ethio- 
pian ;  Asa's  victory ;  Aza- 
riah  the  son  of  Oded's  pro- 
phecy ;  Asa's  (urther  re- 
forms in  the  15th  year  of 
his  reign. 

xvi.  7-14. 

Hanani's  prophecy  against 
Asa,  for  calling  in  the  aid 
of  Tabrimon  king  of  Syria : 
Asa's  wrath,  distase,  death 
embalrainc;,  and  burial. 

'"  And  Asa  slept  with  his 
fathers,  and  died  in  the  41st 
year  of  his  reign." 

2  Chr.  xvii. 

1.  "  And  Jehoshapbat  his 
son  reigned  in  his  stead." 

2-19  describes  how  the 
King  strengthened  himself 
against  Israel  by  putting 
gaiTisons  in  the  fortified 
towns  of  Judab,  and  some 
in  Ephraini;  bis  wealth; 
his  zeal  in  destroying  ido- 
latry ;  bis  measures  tor  in- 
structing the  people  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord  by  means 
of  priests  and  Levites;  bis 
captains,  and  the  numbers 
of  bis  troops. 

Israel)  =  1  Chr.  xviii. 

2  Cbr.  xix. 
Jeboshaphat's  reproof  by 
Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani. 
His  renewed  zeal  against 
idolatry.  His  appointment 
of  judges,  and  bis  charge  to 
them.  Priests  and  Levites 
appointed  as  judges  at  Jeru- 
salem under  Amariah  the 
high-priest. 

2  Chr.  XX.  1-30. 
Invasion  of  Moabites  and 
Ammonites.  Jehosbapbat's 
fast ;  bis  prayer  to  God  for 
aid.  The  prophecy  of  Jaha- 
ziel.  Blinistration  of  the 
Levites  with  the  army. 
Discomfiture  and  plunder 
of  the  enemy.  Keturn  to 
Jerusalem.  Levitical  pro- 
cession. 

50  =  2  Cbr.  XX.  35,  36,  xxi.  1. 


Shwt  in  Kings. 

with  bis  fathers  in  the  city 
of  David." 


Omitted  in  Kings.  The 
refusal  of  Jehoshapbat  was 
■xfUr  the  prophecy  of  Eli- 
ezer. 

Omitted  in  kings. 


Ooiilii-d  in  Kings. 


2  K.  ix.  27. 

"  And  when  Abaziah  the 
iving  of  Judah  saw  this,  he 
tied  by  the  way  of  the 
garden-house. '  And  Jehu 
followed  after  him,  and 
said,  Smite  him  also  in  the 
chariot.  And  they  did  so 
at  tfie  going  up  to  (Jur, 
which  is  by  Ibleam.  And 
be  lied  to  Megiddo,  and 
died  there.  And  bis  ser- 
\ants  carried  him  in  a 
chariot  to  .lerusalcm,  and 
liuried  him  iu  bis  sepukhre 


2  Cbr.  XX.  37. 
Prophecy  of  Eliezer. 


2  Chr.  xxi.  2-4. 
Additional      hislnry     of 
Jeboshapiiat's  family. 
2  Chr.  xxi.  11-19,  xxii,  1. 
Idolatries    of    Jehorani. 
Writing  of  Elijah.  Invasion 
of  Judah  by  Philistines  and 
Arabians.    Slaughter  of  tlie 
king's  sons.  Miserable  sick- 
ness and  dealli  of  Jehoram. 

2  Chr.  xxii.  7-9. 
"  And  the  destruction  of 
^Vliaziab  was  of  God  by 
coming  to  Jorani:  for  when 
he  w'as  come,  he  went  out 
with  Jehoram  against  .John 
the  son  of  Nimshi,  whom 
the  Lord  bad  anointed  to 
cut  off  the  house  of  Abab. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that 
when  Jehu  was  executing 
judgment  upon  the  house 
of  Abab,  and  found  the 
princes  of  Judah  and  the 
sons    of    the    bn'tbivn    of 


FtOl  in  CJirovich'S. 

Abaziah,  that  ministered 
to  Abaziah,  be  slew  them. 
And  he  sought  Abaziah 
and  they  caught  him  (tor 
be  was  bid  in  Samaria), 
and  they  brought  him  to 
Jehu ;  and  when  they  bad 
slain  him  they  buried  him, 
because  said  they  he  is  the 
son  of  .Jehoshapbat,  who 
sought  the  Lord  with  all 
his  heart.  So  the  bouse  of 
Abaziah  had  no  power  still 
to  keep  the  kingdom." 

With  reference  to  tlie  above  two  accounts  of  the 
ileatli  of  Ahaziali,  which  liave  been  thouglit  irre- 
toncileable  (Ewald,  iii.  .529 ;  Parker's  De  VVette, 
■-'70;  Thenius,  &c.),  it  may  be  here  ieni;uked,  that 
tlie  order  of  the  events  is  sullicieutly  intelligible  if 
we  talje  the  account  in  Chronicles,  where  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  is  the  main  subject,  as  e.xplanatory 
of  the  brief  notice  in  Kings,  where  it  is  only  inci- 
dentally mentioned  in  the  history  of  Israel.  The 
order  is  clearly  as  follows : — Ahaziah  was  with 
Jehoram  at  .Tezreel  wlien  Jehu  attacked  and  killed 
him.  Ahaziah  escaped  and  fled  by  the  Beth-gan 
road  to  Samaria,  where  the  partisans  of  the 
house  of  Ahab  were  sti'ongest,  and  where  his  own 
brethren  were,  and  there  concealed  himself.  But 
when  the  sons  of  Ahab  were  ail  put  to  death  iu 
•Samaria,  and  the  house  of  Ahab  had  hopelessly  lost 
the  kingdom,  he  determined  to  make  his  submission 
to  Jehu,  and  sent  his  brethren  to  salute  the  children 
of  Jehu"  (2  K.  X.  13),  iu  token  of  his  acknow- 
ledgment of  him  as  king  of  Israel.  Jehu,  instead 
of  accepting  this  submission,  had  thein  all  put  to 
death,  and  hastened  on  to  Samaria  to  take  Ahaziah 
also,  who  he  had  probably  learnt  from  some_  of  the 
attendants,  or  as  he  already  knew,  was  at  Samaria. 
Ahaziah  again  took  to  flight  northwards,  towards 
Megiddo,  perhaps  in  hope  of  reaching  the  dominions 
of  the  king  of  the  Sidonians,  his  kinsman,  or  more 
probably  to  reach  the  coast  where  the  direct  road 
from  Tyre  to  Egypt  would  bring  him  to  Judah. 
[Caesarea.]  He  was  hotly  pursued  by  Jehn  and 
his  followers,  and  overtaken  near  Ibleam,  and  mor- 
tally wounded,  but  managed  to  get  as  far  as  ]Me- 
giddo,"  where  it  should  .seem  Jehu  followed  in  pur- 
suit of  him,  and  where  he  was  brought  to  him  as 
his  prisoner.  There  he  died  of  his  wounds.  In 
consideration  of  his  descent  from  Jehoshapbat, 
"  who  sought  Jehovah  with  all  his  heart,"  Jehu, 
who  was  at  this  time  very  forwaid  in  displaying 
his  zeal  for  Jehovah,  himded  over  the  corpse  to  his 
followers,  with  permission  to  carry  it  to  Jerusalem, 
which  they  did,  and  buried  him  in  the  city  of 
David.  The  whole  difficulty  arises  fi'om  the  ac- 
count in  Kings  being  abridged,  and  so  bringing 
together  two  incidents  which  were  not  consecutive 
in  the  original  account.  But  if  2  K.  'ix.  27  had 
been  even  divided  into  two  verses,  the  first  ending 
at  "  garden-house,"  and  the  next  beginning  "  and 
Jehu  followed  after  him,"  the  difficulty  would  al- 
most disappear.  Jehu's  pursuit  of  Ahaziah  would 
only  be  interrupted  by  a  day  or  two,  and  there 
wfuild  be  nothing  the  least  unusual  in  the  omi.ssion 
to  notice  this  interval  of  time  in  the  concise  abridged 
narrative.  We  should  then  umlerstand  that  the 
word  also  in  the  oriciinal  narrative  referred  not  to 
Jehoram,  but  to  the  brethren  of  Ahaziah,  who  had 

^  Not,  as  Thenius  and  others,  the  children  of  Je- 
horam, and  of  Jezebel  the  (|Ucen-motlicr. 

D  2 


36 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


just  before  been  smitten,  and  tlie  death  of  Ahiiziah 
would  flill  under  2  K.  x.  17.  If  Beth-gan  (A.  V. 
"  gardwi-house")  be  the  same  as  En-gannnn,  now 
Jeain,  it  lay  directly  on  the  road  from  Jezreel  to 
Samaria,  and  is  also  the  place  at  which  the  road  to 
Megiddo  and  the  coast,  where  Caesarea  afterwards 
stood,  tui'ns  off  from  the  road  between  Jezreel  and 
Samaria.*'  In  this  case  the  mention  of  Beth-gan  in 
Kings  as  the  direction  of  Ahaziah's  flight  is  a  con- 
firmation of  the  statement  in  Chronicles  that  he 
concealed  himself  in  Samaria.  This  is  also  sub- 
stantially Keil's  explanation  (p.  288-9).  Hovers 
proposes  an  alteration  of  the  te.\t  (p.  92,  note), 
but  not  very  successfully  (ni-iriv  N-IH  Kh*1  in- 
stead of  •ln''_-'?N  ^^2*1). 

The  other  principal  additions  in  the  Books  of 
Chronicles  to  the  facts  stated  in  Kings  are  the  fol- 
lowing. In  2  Chr.  xxiv.  17-24  there  is  an  account 
of  Joash's  relapse  into  iilolatry  after  the  death  of 
Jehoiada,  of  Zechariah's  prophetic  rebuke  of  him, 
and  of  the  stoning  of  Zechariah  by  the  king's  com- 
mand in  the  very  court  of  the  Temple ;  and  the 
Syrian  invasion,  and  the  consequent  calamities  of 
the  close  of  Joash's  reign  are  stated  to  have  been 
the  consequence  of  this  iniquity.  The  Book  of 
Kings  gives  the  history  of  the  Syrian  invasion  at 
the  close  of  Joash's  reign,  but  omits  all  mention  of 
Zechariah's  death.  In  the  account  of  the  Syrian 
invasion  also  some  details  are  given  of  a  battle  in 
which  Jehoasli  was  defeated,  which  are  not  men- 
tioned in  Ivings,  and  repeated  reference  is  made  to 
the  sin  of  the  king  and  people  as  having  drawn 
down  this  judgment  upon  them.  But  though  the 
apostasy  of  Jehoash  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Book 
of  Kings,  yet  it  is  clearly  implied  in  the  expression 
(2  K.  xii.  2),  "  Jehoash  did  that  which  was  right 
in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah  all  his  days,  wherein 
Jehoiada  the  priest  instracted  him."  The  silence 
of  Ivings  is  perhaps  to  be  accounted  for  by  the 
author  following  here  the  Chronicle  of  the  Kings, 
in  which  Zechariah's  death  was  not  given.  And 
the  truth  of  the  nan-ative  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles 
is  confinned  by  the  distinct  reference  to  the  death 
of  Zechariah,  Luke  xi.  49-51. 

2  Chr.  XXV.  5-16  contains  a  statement  of  a  ge- 
nealogical character, "=  and  in  connexion  with  it  an 
account  of  the  hiring  of  100,000  mercenaries  out 
of  Israel,  and  their  dismissal  by  Amaziah  on  the 
bidding  of  a  man  of  God.  This  is  followed  by  an 
account  (in  greater  detail  than  that  in  Kings)  of 
Amaziah's  victory  over  the  Edomites,  the  plunder 
of  certain  cities  in  Judah  by  the  rejected  mer- 
cenaries of  Israel,  the  idolatry  of  Amaziah  with  the 
idols  of  Edoni,  and  his  rebuke  by  a  prophet. 

2  Chr.  xxvi.  5-20  contains  particulars  of  the 
reign  of  Uzziah,  his  wars  with  the  Philistines,  his 
towers  and  walls  which  he  built  in  Jerusalem  and 
Judah,  and  other  statistics  concerning  his  kingdom, 
somewhat  of  a  genealogical  character;  and  lastlv, 
of  his  invasion  of  the  priestly  olHce,  the  resistance 
of  Azariah  the  priest,  and  the  lepi'osy  of  the  king. 
Of  all  tiiis  nothing  is  mentioned  in  Kings  except 
the  fiict  of  Uzziah's  leprosy  in  the  latter  part  of  his 
reign ;  a  fact  which  confirms  the  history  in  (Chro- 
nicles.    The  silence  of  the  Book  of  Kings  may  most 

^  See  Van  de  Velde's  map  of  the  Holy  Land,  and 
Stanlej',  S.  4-  P.  p.  342. 

'■  From  1  Chr.  ix.  1,  it  appears  that  "The  Rook  of 
the  Chr-mlcles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  contained  a 
copious  colk'ctioii  of  KcnoiUo.a'ics. 


probably  be  explained  here  on  the  mere  piinciple  of 
abridgment. 

2  Chr.  xxvii.  2-6  contains  some  particulars  of  the 
reign  of  Jotham,  especially  of  the  building  done  by 
him,  and  the  tribute  paid  by  the  Ammonites,  which 
are  not  contained  in  Kings. 

2  Chr.  xx\'iii.  17-19  gives  details  of  invasions  by 
Edomites  and  Philistines,  and  of  cities  of  Judah 
taken  by  them  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  which  are  not 
recorded  in  Kings.  2  K.  xvi.  5  speaks  only  of  the 
hostile  attacks  of  Rezin  and  Pekah.  But  2  Chr. 
xxLx.-xxxi.  contains  by  far  the  longest  and  most 
important  addition  to  the  nanative  in  the  Book  of 
Kings.  It  is  a  detailed  and  circumstantial  account 
of  the  purification  of  tlie  Temple  by  Hezekiah's 
ordeis  in  the  first  year  of  his  reign,  with  the  names 
of  all  the  principal  Levites  who  took  part  in  it,  and 
the  solenm  sacrifices  and  musical  services  with 
which  the  Temple  was  reopened,  and  the  worship 
of  God  reinstated,  after  the  desuetude  and  idolatries 
of  Ahaz's  reign.  It  then  gives  a  full  account  of  the 
celebration  of  a  great  Passover  at  Jerusalem  in  the 
second  month,  kept  by  all  the  tribes,  telling  us  that 
"  since  the  time  of  Solomon  the  son  of  David  king 
of  Israel  there  was  not  the  like  in  Jerusalem  ;"  and 
goes  on  to  describe  the  destruction  of  idols  both  in 
Judah  and  Israel ;  the  revival  of  the  courses  of 
priests  and  Levites,  with  the  order  foi-  their  proper 
maintenance,  and  the  due  supply  of  the  daily, 
weekly,  and  monthly  sacrifices ;  the  preparation  of 
chambers  in  the  Temple  for  the  reception  of  the 
tithes  and  dedicated  things,  with  the  names  of  the 
various  Levites  appointed  to  different  charges  con- 
nected with  them.  Of  this  there  is  no  mention  in 
Kings:  only  the  high  religious  character  and  zeal, 
and  the  attachment  to  the  law  of  Moses,  ascribed 
to  him  in  2  K.  xviii.  4-6,  is  in  exact  accordance 
with  these  details. 

2  Chr.  xxxii.  2-8  supplies  some  interesting  facts 
connected  with  the  defence  of  Jerusalem,  and  its 
supplies  of  water,  in  Hezekiah's  reign,  which  are 
not  mentioned  in  2  K.  xviii. 

2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11-19  contains  the  history  of  Ma- 
nasseh's  captivity,  depoitation  to  Babylon,  repent- 
ance and  restoration  to  his  throne,  and  an  account 
of  his  buildings  in  Jerusalem  after  his  retuni.  The 
omission  of  this  remarkable  passage  of  history  in 
the  Book  of  Kings  is  perhaps  one  of  the  most  diffi- 
cult to  account  for.  But  since  the  circumstances 
are,  in  the  main,  in  harmony  with  the  narrative  in 
Kings,  and  with  what  we  know  of  the  profane  his- 
tory of  the  times  (as  Keil  has  shown,  p.  427),  and 
since  we  have  seen  numerous  other  omissions  of 
important  events  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  to  disbelieve 
or  reject  it  on  that  account,  or  to  make  it  a  ground 
of  discrediting  the  Book  of  Chronicles,  is  entirely 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  sound  criticism. '  Indeed 
all  the  soberer  German  critics  accept  it  as  truth, 
and  place  INIanasseh's  captivity  under  Esarhaddon 
(Bertheau,  in  loc.)A  Bertheau  suggests  that  some 
support  to  the  account  may  jierhaps  be  found  in 
2  K.  XX.  17,  seq.  Movers,  while  he  defends  the 
truth  of  Manasseh's  exile  to  Babylon,  seems  to  give 
up  the  story  of  his  rejjentance,  and  -reduces  it  to 
the  level  of  a  moral  romance,  such  as  the  books  of 
Tobit  and  Judith.     But  such  a  mode  of  explaining 

■*  In  like  manner  the  Book  of  Kings  is  silent  con- 
cerning- Jehoiakim's  being  carried  to  Babylon  ;  and 
yet  Dan.  i.  2,  Ez.  xix.  9,  both  e.vpressly  mention  it, 
in  acconliiuce  with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  6. 


KINGS,  FIIIST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


37 


awav  plain  liistoiical  statements  of  a'  triistworthy 
iiist<3iian,  who  cites  coutomporaiy  documents  as  his 
authority  (let  alone  the  peculiar  character  of  the 
Bible  histories  as  "  given  by  inspiration  of  God"), 
cannot  reasonably  be  accepted.  There  is  doubtless 
some  reason  why  the  repentance  of  Manasseh  for 
his  dreadful  and  heinous  wickedness  was  not  re- 
corded in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and  why  it  was 
recorded  in  Chronicles  ;  just  as  there  is  some  reason 
why  the  repentance  of  the  thief  on  the  cross  is  only 
recorded  by  one  evangelist,  and  why  the  raising  of 
Lazarus  is  passed  over  in  silence  in  the  three  first 
Gospels,  it  may  be  amoral  reason:  it  may  have 
been  that  Munasseli's  guilt  being  permanent  in  its 
fatal  eliects  ui)on  his  countiy,  he  was  to  be  handed 
ilown  to  posterity  in  the  national  record  as  the 
SINFUL  KING,  though,  having  obtained  mercy  as  a 
penitent  man,  his  repentance  and  pardon  were  to 
have  a  record  in  the  more  private  chronicle  of  the 
church  of  Israel.  But,  whatever  the  cause  of  this 
silence  iu  the  Book  of  Kings  may  be,  there  is 
nothiuo-  to  jiistifj'  the  rejection  as  non-historical 
of  aiiv  part  of  this  narrative  in  the  Book  of 
Chronicles. 

Passing  over  seveial  other  minor  additions,  such 
as  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12-14,  xxxv.  25,  xxxvi.  tJ,  7,  13, 
17,  it  may  sutfice  to  notice  in  the  last  place  the  cir- 
cumstantial account  of  Josiah's  Passover  in 
2  Chr.  XXXV.  1-19,  as  compared  with  2  K.  xx'iii. 
21-23.  'J'his  addition  has  the  same  strong  Levi- 
tical  character  that  appears  in  some  of  the  other 
additions  ;  contains  the  names  of  many  Levites,  and 
especially,  as  in  so  many  other  passages  of  Chro- 
nicles, the  names  of  singers  ;  but  is  in  every  respect, 
except  as  to  the  time,^  confirmatory  of  the  biief 
account  in  Kings.  It  refers,  curiously  enough,  to  a 
great  Passover  held  in  the  days  of  Samuel  (thus 
detining  the  looser  expressions  in  2  K.  xxiii.  22, 
"  the  days  of  the  judges  "),  of  which  the  memorial, 
like  that  of  Joab's  terrible  campaign  in  Edom  (1  K. 
xi.  15,  16),  has  not  been  preserved  in  the  books  of 
Samuel,  and  enables  us  to  reconcile  one  of  those 
little  verbal  apparent  discrepancies  which  are  jumped 
at  by  hostile  and  unscrupulous  criticism.  For  the 
detailed  account  of  the  two  Passovers  iu  the  reigns 
of  Hezekiah  and  Josiah  enables  us  to  see,  that,  while 
Hezekiah's  was  most  remarkable  tor  the  extensive 
feasting  and  joy  with  which  it  was  celebrated,  Jo- 
siah's was  more  to  be  praised  for  the  exact  order  in 
which  everything  was  done,  and  the  fuller  union 
of  all  the  tribes  in  the  celebration  of  it  (2  Chr.  xxx. 
26,  XXXV.  18  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  22).  As  regards  discre- 
pancies which  have  been  imagined  to  exist  between 
the  narratives  in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  besides  those 
already  noticed,  and  besides  those  which  are  too 
trifling  to  require  notice,  the  account  of  the  repair 
of  the  Temple  by  King  Joash,  and  that  of  the  in- 
vasion of  Judah  by  Ilazael  in  the  same  reign  may 
be  noticed.  For  the  latter,  see  Joash.  As  regai'ds 
the  former,  the  only  real  difficulty  is  the  position 
of  the  chest  for  receiving  the  contributions.  The 
writer  of  2  'K.  xii.  9,  seems  to  place  it  in  the  inner 
court,  close  to  the  brazen  altar,  and  says  that  the 
jiriests  who  kept  the  door  put  therein  all  the  money 
that  was  brought  into  the  house  of  Jehovah.  The 
writer  of  2  Chr.  xxiv.  8,  places  it  aiipaiently  in  the 


outer  court,  at  the  entrance  into  the  inner  court, 
and  makes  the  princes  and  people  cast  the  money 
into  it  themselves.  Bertheau  thinks  there  were  two 
chests.  Lightfoot,  that  it  was  first  placed  by  the 
altar,  and  afterwartls  ren;oved  outsitle  at  the  gate 
(ix.  374-5),  but  whether  either  of  these  be  the  true 
explanation,  or  whether  rather  the  same  spot  be 
not  intended  by  the  two  descriptions,  the  point  is 
too  unimportant  to  require  further  consideration  in 
this  place. 

From  the  above  comparison  of  parallel  nairatix'es 
in  the  two  books,  which,  if  given  at  all,  it  was  neces- 
sary to  give  somewhat  fully,  in  order  to  give  them 
fairly,  it  appears  that  the  results  are  precisely  what 
would  naturally  arise  fi  om  the  circumstances  of  the 
case.  The  writer  of  Chronicles,  having  the  books 
of  Kings  before  him,*^  and  to  a  great  extent  making 
those  books  the  basis  of  his  own,  but  also  having 
ills  own  personal  views,  predilecti'ins,  and  motives 
in  writing,  writing  for  a  diiierent  age,  and  for 
people  under  very  ditlerent  circumstances;  and, 
moreover,  having  before  him  the  original  autho- 
rities from  which  the  books  of  Kings  were  com- 
piled, as  well  as  some  otliers,  naturally  learranged 
the  older  narrative  as  suited  his  purpose,  and  his 
tastes ;  gave  in  full  passages  which  the  other  had 
abridged,  inserted  what  had  been  wholly  omitted, 
omitted  some  things  which  the  other  had  hiserted, 
including  everything  relating  to  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  and  showed  the  colour  of  his  own  mind,  not 
only  in  the  nature  of  the  passages  which  he  selected 
from  the  ancient  documents,  but  in  the  reflections 
which  he  frequently  adds  upon  the  events  "which 
he  relates,  and  possibly  also  iu  the  turn  given  to 
some  of  the  speeches  which  he  records.  But  to 
say,  as  has  been  said  or  insinuated,  that  a  difierent 
view  of  supernatural  agency  and  Divine  interposition, 
or  of  theMosaic  institutions  and  the  Levitical  worship, 
is  given  in  the  two  books,  or  that  a  less  historical  cha- 
racter belongs  to  one  than  to  the  other,  is  to  say  what 
has  not  the  least  foundation  in  fact.  !su])ernatural 
agency,  as  in  the  cloud  which  filled  the  temple  of  Solo- 
mon, 1  K.  viii.  10,  11,  the  appearance  of  the  Lord 
to  Solomon,  iii.  5,  11,  ix.  2,  scq.  ;  the  withering  of 
Jeroboam's  hand,  xiii.  3-6  ;  the  fire  fiom  heaven 
which  consumed  Elijah's  sacrifice,  xviii.  38,  and 
numerous  other  incidents  in  the  lives  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha  ;  the  smiting  of  Sennacherib's  army,  2  K. 
xix.  i'lb  ;  the  going  back  of  the  shadow  on  the  dial 
of  Ahaz,  XX.- 11,  and  in  the  very  frequent  prophe- 
cies uttered  and  fulfilled,  is  really  more  often  ad- 
duced in  these  books  than  in  the  Chronicles.  The 
selection  therefore  of  one  or  two  insfauices  of  mira- 
culous agency  which  happen  to  be  mentioned  in 
Chronicles  and  not  in  Kings,  as  indications  of  the 
superstitious  credulous  disposition  of  the  Jews  after 
the  captivity,  can  have  no  efii?ct  but  to  mislead. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  a  selection'  of  passages  in 
Chronicles  in  which  the  mention  of  Jewish  idolatry 
is  omitted.  It  conveys  a  false  inference,  because 
the  truth  is  that  the  Chronicler  does  expose  the 
idolatry  of  Judah  as  severely  as  the  author  of 
Kings,  and  traces  the  destruction  of  Judah  to  such 
idolatry  quite  as  clearly  and  forcibly  (2  ("hr.  xxxvi. 
14,  sc(i.).  The  author  of  Kings  again  is  quite  as 
explicit  in  his  references  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and 


■^    See  "above,  under  II.  this  1  K.  xiv.  31,  xv.  1,  compared  with  2  Chr.  xii.  16, 

'  Tliis  appear^  by  comparing  the  parallel  passages,  xiii.  1,  2,  is  another  striking  proof.  So  is  the  repetition 
and  especially  noticing  how  tlie  fornuihi,  "  Now  the  1  of  rare  words  found  in  K.  by  the  Chronitler.  Com]), 
rest  of  the  acts,"  &c.,  comes  in  in  hotli  books.  See,  I  2  xiv.  14  with  2  Chr.  xxv.  24,  xv.  5,  with  x.vvi.  21. 
e.  g.   1  K.  XV.   23,   24,  and   2   Chr.  xvi.  11,  12.     Of  !  1  v.  fi,  with  2  ix.  2.5. 


^ 


38 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


h:is  many  allusions  to  the  Levitical  ritual,  though 
he  does  not  dwell  so  copiously  upon  the  details. 
See  e.g.  1  K.  ii.  3,  iii.  14,  viii.  2,  4,  9,  53,  56,  ix. 
9,  20i  X.  12,  xi.  2,  xii.  31,  32  ;  2  K.  xi.  5-7, 
12,  xii.  5,  11,  13,  16,  xiv.  6,  xvi.  13,  15,  x^'ii. 
7-12,  13-15,  34-39,  xviii.  4,  6,  xxii.  4,  5.  8,  seq.. 
xxiii.  21,  &c.,  besides  the  constant  references  to 
the  Temjile,  and  to  the  illegality  of  high-place  wor- 
ship. So  that  remarks  on  the  Levitical  tone  of 
Chronicles,  when  made  for  the  purpose  of  supporting 
the  notion  that  the  law  of  Moses  was  a  late  inven- 
tion, and  that  the  Levitical  worship  was  of  post- 
Babylonian  growth,  are  made  in  the  teeth  of  the 
testimony  of  the  books  of  Kings,  as  well  as  those  of 
.loshua,  ."judges,  and  Samuel.  The  opinion  that  these 
books  wei-e  compiled  "  towards  the  end  of  the  Baby- 
lonian exile,"  is  doubtless  also  adopted  in  order  to 
weaken  as  much  as  possible  the  force  of  tliis  testi- 
mony (De  Wette,  ii.  p.  248  ;  Th.  Parker's  transL). 
As  regai-ds  the  weight  to  be  given  to  the  judgment 
of  critics  "  of  the  liberal  school,"  on  such  questions, 
it  may  be  observed  by  the  way  that  they  com- 
mence every  such  investigation  with  this  axiom  as 
a  starting  point,  "  Nothing  supernatural  can  be 
true."  All  prophecy  is  of  course  comprehended 
under  this  axiom.  Every  writing  therefore  con- 
taining any  reference  to  the  captivity  of  the  Jews, 
as  1  k.  viii.  46,  47,  ix.  7,  8,  must  have  been 
written  after  the  events  referred  to.  No  events  of 
a  supernatural  kind  could  be  attested  in  contempo- 
rary historical  documents.  All  the  narratives  there- 
fore in  which  such  events  are  narrated  do  not  belong 
to  the'ancient  annals,  but  must  be  of  later  growth, 
and  so  on.  How  for  the  mind  of  a  critic,  who  has 
such  an  axiom  to  start  with,  is  free  to  appreciate 
the  other  and  more  delicate  kinds  of  evidence  by 
which  the  date  of  documents  is  decided  it  is  easy  to 
perceive.  However,  these  remarks  are  made  here 
solely  to  assist  the  reader  in  coming  to  a  right  deci- 
sion on  questions  connected  with  the  criticism  of  the 
books  of  Kings. 

V.  The  last  point  for  our  consideration  is  the 
place  of  these  books  in  the  Canon,  and  the  references 
to  them  in  the  N.  T.  Their  canonical  authority 
having  never  been  disputed,  it  is  needless  to  bring 
forward  the  testimonies  to  their  authenticity  which 
mav  be  found  in  Josephus,  Eusebius,  Jerome,  Au- 
gustine, &c.,  or  in  Bp.  Cosin,  or  any  other  modern 
work  on  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  [Canon.]  They 
are  reckoned,  as  has  been  already  noticed,  among  the 
Prophets  [BiBLE^  vol.  i.  211«],  in  the  threefold  divi- 
sion of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ;  a  position  in  accordance 
with  the  supposition  that  they  were  compiled  by 
Jei-emiah,  and  contain  the  narratives  of  the  diilerent 
prophets  in  succ&ssion.  They  are  frequently  cited 
by  our  Lord  and  by  the  Apostles.  Thus  the  allu- 
sions to  Solomon's  glory  (llatt.  vi.  29) ;  to  the 
queen  of  Sheba's  visit  to  Solomon  to  hear  his  wis- 
dom (xii.  42)  ;  to  tl:e  Temple  (Acts  vii.  47,  48)  ; 
to  the  great'  drought  in  the  days  of  Elijah,  and 
the  widow  of  Sarepta  (Luke  iv.  25,  26)  ;  to  the 
cleansing  of  Naiunan  the  Syrian  (ver.  27^  ;  to  the 
charge  of  Elisha  to  (jehazi  (2  K.  iv.  29,  comp. 
with"  Luke  x.  4);  to  the  dress  of  Elijah  (Mark  i. 
6,  comp.  with  2  K.  i.  8) ;  to  the  complaint  of 
Elijah,  and  God's  answer  to  him  (Iiom.  xi.  3, 
4) :  to  the  raising  of  the  Shunamite's  son  from 
the  dead  (Heb.  xi.  35) ;  to  the  giving  and  with- 


s  The  miracle  of  the  loaves  and  fishes  (Luke  ix.  13, 
2  K.  iv.  42,  John  vi.  9,  2'  K.  iv.  43),  and  the  catuh- 
ing'  away  of  Philip,  Acts  ix.  39,  40,  as  compared  with 


holding  the  rain  in  answer  to  Elijah's  prayer  (.lam. 
V.  17,  18  ;  Rev.  xi.  6);  to  Jezebel  (Kev.  ii.  20); 
are  all  derived  from  the  Books  of  Kings,  and,  'with 
the  statement  of  Elijah's  presence  at  the  Transfi- 
guration, are  a  striking  testimony  to  their  value 
for  the  purpose  of  religious  teaching,  and  to  their 
autheuticitv  as  a  portion  of  the  Wo)d  of  God.s 

On  the  whole  then,  in  this  portion  of  the  history 
of  the  Israelitish  people  to  which  the  name  of  the 
Books  of  Kimjs  has  been  given,  we  have  (if  we 
except  those  eiTors  in  numbers,  which  are  either 
later  additions  to  the  original  woik,  or  accidental 
corruptions  of  the  text),  a  most  important  and  ac- 
curate account  of  that  people  during  upwards  of 
four  hundred  years  of  their  national  existence,  deli- 
vered for  the  most  part  by  contemporary  writers, 
and  guaranteed  by  the  authority  of  one  of  the  most 
eminent  of  the  Jewish  prophets.  Considering  the 
conciseness  of  the  narrative,  and  the  simplicity  of 
the  style,  the  amount  of  knowledge  which  these 
books  convey  of  the  characters,  conduct,  and  man- 
ners of  kings  and  people  during  so  long  a  period  is 
truly  wonderful.  The  insight  they  give  us  into 
the  aspect  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  both  natural 
and  artificial,  into  the  religious,  military,  and  civil 
institutions  of  the  people,  their  arts  and  manu- 
factures, the  state  of  education  and  learning  among 
them,  their  resources,  commerce,  exploits,  alliances, 
the  causes  of  their  decadence,  and  finally  of  their 
ruin,  is  most  cleai',  interesting,  and  instructive.  In 
a  few  brief  sentences  we  acquire  more  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  affairs  of  Egypt,  Tyre,  Syria, 
Assyria,  Babylon,  and  other  neighbouring  nations, 
than  had  been  preserved  to  us  in  all  the  other  re- 
mains of  antiquity  up  to  the  recent  discoveries  in 
hieroglyphical  and  cuneiform  monuments.  If  we 
seek  in  them  a  system  of  scientific  chronology,  v/e 
may  indeed  be  disappointed  ;  but  if  we  are  content 
to  read  accurate  and  truthful  history,  I'eady  to  fit 
into  its  proper  place  whenever  the  exact  chronology 
of  the  times  sliall  have  been  settled  from  other 
sources,  then  we  shall  assinedly  find  they  will 
abimdantly  repay  the  most  laborious  stud}-  which 
we  can  bestow  upon  them. 

But  it  is  for  their  deep  religious  teaching,  and  for 
the  insight  which  they  give  us  into  God's  provi- 
dential and  moral  gr.  vernment  of  the  world,  that  they 
are  above  all  valuaule.  The  books  which  describe 
the  wisdom  .and  the  glory  of  Solomon,  and  yet  record 
his  fall ;  which  make  us  acquainted  with  the  painful 
ministry  of  Elijah,  and  his  translation  into  heaven  ; 
and  which  tell  us  how  the  most  magnificent  temple 
ever  built  for  God's  glory,  and  of  which  He  vouch- 
safed to  take  possession  by  a  visible  symbol  of  His 
presence,  was  consigned  to  the  flames  and  to  desola- 
tion, for  the  sins  of  those  who  worshipped  iu  it,  read 
us  such  lessons  concerning  both  God  and  man,  as  are 
the  best  evidence  of  their  divine  origin,  and  make 
them  the  richest  treasure  to  every  Christian  man. 

On  the  points  discussed  in  the  preceding  article 
see  Ussher's  Chronologia  Sacra ;  Hales'  Analysis ; 
Clinton's  Fust.  Ildlen.  vol.  i. ;  Lepsius,  Konigsbuch 
d.  ^gi/pt. ;  Bertheau's  Bitch,  d.  Chronik. ;  Keil, 
Chronik ;  Movcis,  Krit.  Untersuch.  ii.  d.  Bibl. 
Chronik ;  l)e  Wette,  Einleitung ;  Ewald's  Ges- 
chichte  dcs  Isr.  Volk. ;  Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place  in 
Hist.;  Geneste's  Parallel  Histories;  Rawlinson's 
Herodotus,  and    Bampton  Led. ;   J.  W.  Bosan- 


1    K.  xviii.  12,  2  K.  ii.   16,  are  also,  in  a  difTerent 
waj',  N.  T.  references  to  the  Books  of  Kings. 


KIR 

quet,  Clironologii  of  Times  of  Ezr.,  Transact,  of 
Chronolog.  Ins'tit.  No.  iii. ;  Maurice,  Kings  and 
Prophets.  [A-  ^-  H.] 

KIR  O^p :  Xappdv :  Cgrenc)  is  mentioned  by 
Amos  (ix.  7)  as  the  land  from  which  the  Syrians 
(Aramaeans)  were   once  "  brought  up ;"  «.  e.  ap- 
parently, as  the  country  where  they  had  dwelt 
before  migrating  to  the  region  north  of  Palestme. 
It  was  also,  cui-iously  enough,  the  land  to  which 
the  captive  Syrians  of  Damaj^cus  were  removed  by 
Tio-lath-Pileser  on  his  conquest  of  that  city  (2  K. 
xvt  9  ;  comp.  Am.  i.  5).      Isaiah  joins  it  with 
Ehmi  in  a  passage  where  Jerusalem  is  tlireateued 
with  an   attack   from   a   foreign   army  (xxii.  6). 
These  notices,  and  the  word  itself,  are  all  the  data 
we  'wssess  for  determining  the  site.     A  variety  of 
conjectures  have  been  offered  on  this  point,  grounded 
on  some  similarity  of  name.       Rennell  suggested 
^"(wdistan    {Geography   of   Herodotus,    p.   391): 
Vitrin-a,    Canne,    a    town    of    Media;    Bochait 
{Fhaleg,  iv.  32,  p.  293),  Curena.  or  Curna,  like- 
wise in  Media.     But  the  common  opmion  among 
recent  commentators  has  been  that  a  tract  on  the 
river  Kur  or  Cyrus  (KCpos)  is  intended.     This  is 
the  view  of  Kosenmiiller,  Michaelis,  and  Gesenius. 
Winer  sensibly  remarks  that  the  tract  to  which 
these  writers  'refer  "  never  belonged  to  Assyria," 
and   so   cannot   possibly   have    been    the    country 
whereto   Tiglath-Pileser   transported    his   captives 
(Beahrortei-buch,  i.  658).     He  might  have  added, 
that  all  we  know  of  the  Semites  and  their  migra- 
tions is  repugnant  to  a  theory  which  would  make 
Northern  Armenia  one  of  their  original  settlements. 
The  Semites,  whether  Aramaeans,  Assyrians,  Phoe- 
nicians, or  Jews,  seem  to  have  come  originally  from 
lower  Mesopotamia — the  country  about  the  mouths 
of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  rivers.     Here  exactly 
was  Elam  or  Elymais,  with  which  Kir  is  so  closely 
connected    by    Isaiah.      May  not  Kir  then  be  a 
variant  for  Kish  or  Knsh   (Cush),  and  represent 
tlie  eastern  Ethiopia,  the  Cissia  {Ki(T<Tia)   of  He- 
rodotus? [G-  H.] 

KIR-HARA'SETH  (nbnn  T-ipn:  Tohs  \i- 
6jvs  too  Toixov  Ka6r]p7ifj.€vovs  ;  Alex.  .  .  .  Kadri- 
uevovs  :  murus  fictilis),  2  K.  iii.  25. 

KIR-HA'RESH  (b^nn  'p,  i.  e.  Kir-hares: 
Teixos  iveKaiviffas ;  Alex,  r^xo^  o  iveKevLcras : 
ad  mtirum  cocti  lateris),  Is.  xvi.  11. 

KIR-HARE'SETH  (nbnn  'p :  to7s  kixtoi- 
Kovcri  5e  2£0  ix.€\€T-i]<Teis  :  Diuras  cocti  lateris), 
Is.  xvi.  7. 

KIR-HERES  (V^n  'ip:  /ceipdSes  avxi^-ov  : 
murus  fictilis),  Jer.  xlvii'i.  31,  36.  This  name  and 
the  three  precaling,  all  slight  variations  of  it,  are 
all  applieil  to  one  place,  probably  KiR-MOAU. 
Whether  Cheres  refers  to  a  worship  of  the  sun 
carried  on  there  is  uncertain ;  we  are  without  clue 
to  the  me:ming  of  the  name. 


KIRJATH 


89 


KIR'IAH  (n'''liP),  apparently  an  ancient  or 
archaic  word,  meaning  a  city  or  town.  The  grounds 
for  considering  it  a  more  ancient  word  than  Ir  (T*!?) 
or  Ar  ("IJ?)  are — (1.)  Its  more  frequent  occurrence 
in  the  names  of  places  existing  in  the  country  at  the 
time  of  the  conciuest.  These  will  be  found  below. 
(2.)  Ito  rare  occun-ence  as  a  mere  appellative, 
except  in  poetry,  where  old  words  and  forms 
are  often  preserved  after  they  become  obsolete  in 


ordinary  language.  Out  of  the  36  times  tiiat  it 
is  found  in  the  O.  T.  (both  in  its  original  and  its 
Chaldee  form)  4  only  are  in  the  narrative  of  the 
earlier  books  (Deut.  ii.  36,  iii.  4  ,•  1  K.  i.  41,  4.5), 
24  are  in  poetical  passages  (Num.  xxi.  28;  Ps. 
xlviii.  2  ;  Is.  i.  26,  &c.  &c.),  and  8  in  the  boolc 
of  Ezra,  either  in  speaking  of  Samaria  (iv.  10),  or 
in  the  letter  of  the  Samaritans  (iv.  12-21),  imply- 
ing that  it  had  become  a  provincialism.  In  this  it 
is  unlike  Ir,  which  is  the  ordinary  term  for  a  city 
in  narrative  or  chronicle,  while  it  enters  into  the 
composition  of  early  names  in  a  far  smaller  propor- 
tion of  cases.  For  illustration — though  for  tluit 
only— Kiryah  may  perhaps  be  compared  to  the 
word  "  burg,"  or  "  bury,"  in  our  own  language. 

Closely  related  to  Kiryah  is  Kereth  (Dnp^  a]>pa- 
rently  a  Phoenician  form,  which  occurs  occasion- 
ally (Job  xxix.  7  ;  Prov.  viii.  3).  Tliis  is  tamiliar 
to  us  in  the  Latin  garb  of  Carthago,  and  in  the 
Partliian  and  Armenian  names  Cirta,  Tigrano  Certa 
(Bochart,  Chanaan,  ii.  cap.  x;  Gesenius,  T/tes. 
1236-7). 

As  a  proper  name  it  appears  in  the  Bible  under 
the  forms  of  Kerioth,  Kartah,  Kai  tan  ;  besides  those 
immediately  following.  [G.] 

KIRIATHA'IM  (D^nnip,  but  in  the  Cethih 
of  Ez.  XXV.  9,  Dnnp:  Kapladffx,  in  Vat.  of  Jer. 
xlviii.  1  ;  elsewhere  with  Alex.  Kopia0aiV :  <-''"'- 
iathaim),  one  of  the  towns  of  Moab  which  were  the 
"  glory  of  the  country ;"  named  amongst  the  de- 
nunciations of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1 ,  23)  and  Ezekiel 
(.\xv.  9).  It  is  the  same  place  as  Kirjathaim,  in 
which  ibrm  the  name  elsewhere  occurs  in  the  A.  V. 
Taken  as  a  Hebrew  word  this  would  mean  "  double 
city ;"  but  the  original  reading  of  the  text  of  Ez. 
XXV.  9,  Kiriathrtni,  taken  with  that  of  the  Vat. 
LXX.  at  Num.  xxxii.  37,  prompts  the  suspicion 
that  that  may  be  nearer  its  original  form,  and  that 
the  aim — the  Hebrew  dual — is  a  later  accommoda- 
tion, in  obedience  to  the  ever-existing  tendency  in 
the  names  of  places  to  adopt  an  intelligible  shape. 
In  the  original  edition  (a.D.  1611)  of  the  A.  V.  the 
name  Kirjath,  with  its  compounds,  is  given  as 
Kiriath,  the  yod  being  there,  as  elsewhere  in  that 
edition,  represented  by  i.  Kiriathaim  is  one  of  the 
few  of  these  names  which  in  the  subsequent  editions 
have  escaped  the  alteration  of*  to  j.  [G.] 

KIRIATHIA'RIUS  {Kapiadipi ;  Alex.  Ka- 
piadidptos:  Crearpatros),  1  Esd.  v.  19.  [KiR- 
JATH-JEARIM,  and  K.  Arim.] 

KIR'IOTH  (nVnpn,  with  the  definite  article, 
i.  e.  hak-Keriyoth :  ai  Tr6\€is  avrris  :  Carioth), 
a  place  in  IMoab  the  palaces  of  which  were  de- 
nounced by  Amos  with  destruction  by  fire  (Am.  ii. 
2)  ;  unless  indeed  it  be  safer  to  treat  the  word  as 
meanmg  simply,  "  the  cities  " — which  is  probably 
the  case  also  in  Jer.  xlviii.  41,  where  the  word  is 
in  the  original  exactly  similar  to  the  above,  though 
given  in  the  A.  V.  "'Kerioth."  [KERiorn.]  [G.] 
KIR'JATH  (nnp  :  'lapi/j.;  Alex.TrSXLs'laplfi: 
Cariath),  the  last  of  the  cities  enumerated  as  be- 
longing to  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  28), 
one  of  the  group  which  contains  both  Gibeon  and 
Jerusalem.  It  is  named  with  Gibeath.  but  with- 
out any  copulative — "  Gibeath,  Kirjath,"  a  circum- 
stance which,  in  the  absence  of  any  further  men- 
tion of  the  place,  has  given  rise  to  several  explana- 
tions. (1.)  That  of  Eusebius  in  the  Ononuisiicon 
{KaptdO),  that  it  w;is  under  the  protection  of  Gibcali 


40 


KIEJATHAIM 


f  yTrb  MriTpoir6\iv  Ta^aOd).  This,  however,  seems 
to  be  a  mere  supposition.  (2.)  That  of  Schwarz 
and  others,  that  the  two  names  form  the  title  of 
one  place,  "  Gibeath-Kirjath"  (the  hill- town). 
Against  this  is  the  fact  that  the  towns  in  this 
group  are  summed  up  as  14;  but  the  objection  has 
not  much  force,  and  there  are  several  considerations 
in  favour  of  the  view.  [See  Gibeath,  6896.]  But 
whether  there  is  any  connexion  between  these  two 
names  or  not,  there  seems  a  strong  probability  that 
Kirjath  is  identical  with  the  better-known  place 
Kikjath-Jeaium,  and  that  the  latter  part  of  the 
name  has  been  omitted  by  copyists  at  some  very 
early  period.  Such  an  omission  would  be  very 
likely  to  arise  from  the  fact  that  the  word  for 
"  cities,"  which  in  Hebrew  follows  Kirjath,  is  al- 
most identical  with  Jearim  ;*  and  that  it  has  arisen 
we  have  the  testimony  of  the  LXX.  in  both  MSS. 
(the  Alex,  most  complete),  as  well  as  of  some  Hebrew 
MSS.  still  existing  (Davidson,  Ilehr.  Text,  ad  loc). 
In  addition,  it  may  be  asked  why  Kirjath  should  be 
in  the  "  construct  state  "  if  no  word  follows  it  to 
be  in  construction  with  ?  In  that  case  it  would  be 
Kiriah.  True,  Kirjath-jearim  is  enumerated  as  a 
city  of  Judah  ^  (Jbsh.  xv.  9,  60,  xviii.  14),  but  so 
are  several  towns  which  weie  Simeon's  and  Dan's, 
and  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  these  places  never 
changed  hands.  [G.] 

laEJATHA'IM  (D^nnp),  the  name  of  two 
cities  of  ancient  Palestine. 

1.  (KapiaOdfj.'^  (in  Num.),  Kapiadaiix:  Caria- 
thaim.)  On  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  one  of  the 
places  which  were  fciken  possession  of  and  rebuilt 
by  the  Reubenites,  and  had  fresh  names  conferred  on 
them  (Num.'  xxxii.  37,  and  see  38).  Here  it  is 
mentioni'd  between  Elealeh,  Nebo,  and  Baal-meon, 
the  fii'st  ami  last  of  which  are  known  with  some 
tolerable  degi-ee  of  certainty.  But  on  its  next 
occurrence  (Josh.  xii.  19)  the  same  order  of  men- 
tion is  not  maintained,  and  it  appears  in  company 
with  Mephaath  and  Sibmah,  of  which  at  present 
nothing  is  known.  It  is  possibly  the  same  place 
as  that  which  gave  its  name  to  the  ancient  Shaveh- 
Kiriathaim,  though  this  is  mei'e  conjecture.  It 
existed  in  tlie  time  of  Jeremiah  (slviii.  1,  23)  and 
Ezekiel  (xxv.  9 — iu  these  three  passages  the  A.  V. 
gives  the  name  Kiriathaim).  Botli  these  prophets 
include  it  in  their  denunciations  against  Moab,  in 
whose  hands  it  then  was,  prominent  among  the 
cities  which  were  "  the  glory  of  the  country " 
(Ez.  xxv.  9). 

By  Eusebius  it  appeal's  to  have  been  well  known. 
He  describes  it  (Onom.  Kapiadiei/j.)  as  a  village 
entirely  of  Christians,  10  miles  west  of  Medeba, 
"  close  to  the  Baris  "  ( eTrl  rhv  Bdpiv).  Burcidiardt 
(p.  367,  July  13)  when  at  Madeha  (Medeba)  was 


»  The  text  now  stands  D''~iy  ^"'^pl ;  in  the 
above  view  it  originally  stood  D''"iy  Q''"li?''  Jl^lp- 

^  It  is  as  well  to  observe,  though  we  may  not  be 
able  yet  to  draw  any  inference  from  the  fact,  that  on 
both  occasions  of  its  being  attributed  to  Judali,  it  is 
called  by  another  name, — "Kiejath-baal,  which  is 
Kirjath-jearim." 

•=  This  i-eading  of  the  LXX.  suggests  that  the  dual 
termination  "  aim "  may  have  been  a  later  accom- 
modation of  the  name  to  Hebrew  forms,  as  was  pos- 
sibly the  case  with  Jerushalaim  (vol.  i.  982o).  It  is 
supported  by  the  Hebrew  text :  cf.  Ez.  xxv.  9,  and 
the  Vat.  LXX.  of  Jer.  xlviii.  1.     [KiniAinAiM.] 

*  There  is  some  uncertainty  about  Bjirckhardt's 
route  at  this  part.     In  order  to  see  Madeba,  which  is 


KIEJATHAEBA 

told  by  his  guide''  of  a  place,  et-Teijin,  about  half  an 
hour  {\^  mile  English,  or  barely  2  miles  Roman) 
therefrom,  which  he  suggests  was  identical  with 
Kirjathaim.  This  is  supported  by  Gesenius  (see 
his  notes  on  Burckhardt  in  the  Germ,  transl. 
p.  1003),  who  passes  by  the  discrepancy  in  the  dis- 
tance by  saying  that  Eusebius's  measurements  are 
seldom  accurate.  Seetzen  also  names  half  an  hour 
as  the  distance  [Eeisen,  i.  408). 

But  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  evidence  for 
the  identity  of  the  two  is  not  veiy  convincing,  and 
appears  to  rest  entirely  on  the  similaiity  iu  sound 
between  the  termination  of  Kirjathaim  and  the 
name  of  et-Teym.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  the 
name  was  Karias — having  retained,  as  would  be 
expected,  the  first  and  chief  part  of  the  word. 
Porter  {Hdhook,  300)  pronoimces  confidently  tor 
Eureiyat,  under  the  southern  side  oi  Jehel  Attar  us, 
as  being  identical  both  with  Kirjathaim  and  Kirjath- 
Huzoth ;  but  he  adduces  no  arguments  in  support 
of  his  conclusion,  which  is  entirely  at  variance 
with  Eusebius ;  while  the  name,  or  a  similar  one 
(see  Kerioth,  Kirioth,  in  addition  to  those  named 
alread}'),  having  been  a  common  one  east  of  the 
Jordan,  as  it  still  is  (witness  Kureiyeh,  Kureiyetein, 
&c.),  Eureiyat  may  be  the  representative  of  some 
other  place. 

What  was  the  "  Baris  "  which  Eusebius  places 
so  close  to  Kirjathaim?  Was  it  a  palace  or  fortress 
(m^3,  Bctpis),  or  is  it  merely  the  corruption  of  a 
name?  If  the  latter,  then  it  is  slightly  m  accord- 
ance with  Beresha,  the  reading  of  the  Targum 
Pseudojon.  at  Num.  :«sii.  37."  But  where  to  find 
Beresha  we  do  not  at  present  know.  A  village 
named  Burazin  is  marked  in  the  maps  of  Robinson 
(1856)  and  Van  de  Velde,  but  about  9  miles  east 
of  Heshcin,  and  therefore  not  in  a  suitable  position. 

2.  (t]  KapiaOa'ifx.)  A  town  in  Naphtali  not 
mentioned  in  the  original  lists  of  the  possession 
allotted  to  the  tribe  (see  Josh.  xix.  32-39),  but 
inserted  in  the  list  of  cities  given  to  the  Gershonite 
Levites,  in  1  Chr.  (vi.  76),  in  place  of  Kahtan  in 
the  parallel  catalogue,  Kartan  being  probably  only  a 
contraction  thereof.  [G.J 

KIE'JATH-AE'BA  iV^^i  'i?,  and  once,  Neh. 

xi.  25,  'KH  'p  :  iroKis  *Apj8({/c,  ir.  'Apy6&  ;  Alex. 

'ApP6  and  'ApjSoa ;  t]  Kapa9ap$6K  ;  KapiaOap- 
^oKcretpep,  but  Mai  Kapiai3<i|  'E<p€p  ;  Alex.  Kapiap- 
P6k  ff€(p4p :  Civitas  Arbce,  Cariut-Arhe),  an  early 
name  of  the  city  which  after  the  conquest  is  gene- 
rally known  as  Hebron  (Josh.  xiv.  15;  Judg.  i. 
10).  Possibly,  however,  not  Kirjath-arba,  but 
■JIamre,  was  its  earliest  appellation  (Gen.  xxxv. 
27),  though  the  latter  name  may  have  been  that 
of  the  sacred  grove  near  the  town,  which  would 


shewn  on  the  maps  as  nearly  S.  of  ITcshthi,  he  left 
the  great  road  at  the  latter  place,  and  went  through 
Djehoul,  es-Sameh,  and  other  places  which  are  shewn- 
as  on  the  road  eastward,  in  an  entirely  dift'ercnt 
direction  from  Madeha,  and  then  after  8  hours, 
without  noting  any  change  of  direction,  he  arrives 
at  Madeba,  which  appears  from  the  maps  to  be  only 
about  I5  hour  from  Hesbdn. 

"=  The  following  is  the  full  synonym  of  this  Targum 
for  Kirjathaim  : — "  And  the  city  of  two  streets  paved 
with  marble,  the  same  is  Beresha"  (NK^H^S).  This 
is  almost  identical  with  the  rendering  given  in  the 
same  Targum  on  Num.  xxii.  39,  for  Kirjatli-lluzoth. 
Can  Beresha  contain  an  allusion  to  Gerasa,  tlie 
modern  Jernsh ' 


KIRJATH-ARBA 

occasionally  transfer  its  title  to  the  whole  spot. 
[Mamre.] 

The  identity  of  Kirjath-Arba  with  Hebron  is 
consfcintly  asserted  (Gen.  xxiii.  2,  xxxv.  27 ;  Josh, 
xiv.  15,  XV.  13,  54,  xx.  7,  xxi.  11),"  the  only  men- 
tion of  it  without  that  qualification  being,  as  is 
somewhat  remarkable,  after  the  return  fiom  the 
captivity  (Xeh.  xi.  25),  a  date  so  late  that  we 
mig-ht  naturally  have  supposed  the  aboriginal  name 
would  have  become  extinct.  But  it  lasted  far 
longer  than  that,  for  when  Sir  John  Maundeville 
visited  the  place  (cir.  1322)  he  found  that  "the 
Saracens  call  the  place  in  their  language  Karicarba, 
but  the  Jews  call  it  Arbotha  "  {Early  Trav.  161). 
Thus  too  in  Jerome's  time  would  Debir  seem  to 
have  been  still  called  by  its  original  title,  Kiijath- 
.Scpher.  So  impossible  does  it  appear  to  extinguish 
the  name  originally  bestowed  on  a  place  ! '' 

The  signification  of  Kirjatli-Ai'ba  is,  to  say  the 
least,  doubtful.  In  favour  of  its  being  derived 
from  some  ancient  hero  is  the  statement  that  "  Arba 
was  the  great  man  among  the  Anakim  "  (Josh.  xiv. 
15) — the  "father  of  Anak"  (xxi.  11).  Against  it 
are  («)  tlie  peculiarity  of  the  expression  in  the 
first  of  these  two  passages,  where  the  term  Adam 
(?^J^  mxri) — usually  employed  for  the  species, 
the  human  race — is  used  instead  of  Ish,  which 
comriionly  denotes  an  individual.  (6)  The  con- 
sideration that  the  term  "father"  is  a  metaphor  fre- 
quently employed  in  the  Bible — as  in  other  Oriental 
writings — for  an  originator  or  author,  whether  of 
a  town  or  a  quality,  quite  as  often  as  of  an  indi- 
vidual. The  LXX.  certainly  so  understood  both 
the  passages  in  Joshua,  since  they  have  in  each 
fir]Tp6Tro\is,  "mother-city."  (c)  The  constant 
tendency  to  personification  so  familiar  to  students 
of  the  topographical  philology  of  other  countries 
than  Palestine,  and  which  in  the  present  case  must 
liave  had  some  centuries  in  which  to  exercise  its 
influence.  In  the  lists  of  1  Chron.  Hebron  itself  is 
personified  (ii.  42)  as  the  son  of  Mareshah,  a  neigh- 
bouring town,  and  the  father  of  Tappuah  and 
other  places  in  the  same  locality ;  and  the  same 
thing  occurs  with  Betli-zur  (ver.  45),  Ziph  (42), 
MacUmannah  and  Gibea  (49),  &c.  &c.  (d)  Ou  more 
than  one  occasion  (Gen.  xxxv.  27;  Josh.  xv.  13; 
Neh.  xi.  25)  the  name  Arba  has  the  definite  article 
prefixed  to  it.  This  is  very  rarely,  if  ever,  the 
case  with  the  name  of  a  man  (see  Reland,  Pal. 
724).  (e)  With  the  exception  of  the  Ir-David — 
the  city  of  David,  Zion — the  writer  does  not  recal 
any  city  of  Palestine  named  after  a  man.  Neither 
Joshua,  Caleb,  Solomon,  nor  any  other  of  the 
heroes  or  kings  of  Israel,  conferred  their  names  on 
places;  neither  did  Og,  Jabin,  or  other  Canaanite 
leaders.  The  "city  of  Sihon,"  for  Heshbon  (Num. 
xxi.  27),  is  hardly  an  exception,  for  it  occurs  in  a 
very  fervid  burst  of  poetry,  ditlering  entirely  from 
the  matterrof-fact  documents  we  are  now  considering. 
(/)  The  general  consent- of  the  Jewish  writers  ina 
diflerent  interpi-etation  is  itself  a  strong  argument 
against  the  personality  of  Arba,  howeverabsurd 


KIRJATH-HUZOTH 


41 


»  In  Gen.  xxxv.  27,  the  A.  V.  has  "the  city  of 
Arbah;"  in.  Josh.  xv.  13,  and  xxi,  11,  "the  city  of 
Arba." 

''  A  curious  parallel  to  this  tenacity  is  found  in  our 
own  country,  where  many  a  village  is  still  known  to 
its  rustic  inhabitants  by  the  identical  name  by  which 
it  is  inscribed  in  Domesday  Book,  while  they  are 
actually  unaware  of  the  later  name  by  which  the 
place  has  been  currently  known  in  maps  imd  docu- 


(according  to  our  ideas)  may  be  their  ways  of  ac- 
counting lor  that  interpretation.  They  take  Arba 
to  be  the  Hebrew  word  tor  "  four,"  and  Kirjath- 
Arba  therefore  to  be  the  "  city  of  four;"  and  this 
they  explain  as  retijrring  to  four  great  saints  who 
were  buried  there — Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and 
Adam — whose  burial  there  they  prove,  by  the  words 
already  quoted  from  Josh.  xiv.  15  {Boresh.  rahha, 
quoted  by  Beer,  Lehen  Abrahams,  189,  and  by 
Keil,  ac?  foe. ;  Bochart,  Phalcg,  iv.  34,  &c.).  In 
this  explanation  Jerome  constantly  concurs,  not 
only  in  commentaries  (as  Quucst.  in  Genesim,xxiii. 
2;  Comin.  in  Matt,  xrvii. ;  Epit.  Faulae,  §11; 
Oiiomast.  "  Arboch"  and  "  ("ariatharbe,"  &c.),  but 
also  in  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  at  this  passage — 
Adam  maximus  ibi  inter  Enucim  situs  est.  With 
this  too  agrees  the  Veneto-Greek  version,  irSXei  twv 
reTTapciiv  (Gen.  xxiii.  2,  xxxv.  27).  It  is  also 
adopted  by  Bochart  {Chanaan,  i.  1),  in  whose 
opinion  the  "four"  are  Auak,  Ahiman,  Sheshai, 
and  Talmai. 

The  fact  at  the  bottom  of  the  whole  matter  pro- 
bably is,  that  Arba  was  neither  a  man  nor  a 
numeral,  but  that  (as  we  have  so  often  had  occa- 
sion to  remark  in  similar  cases)  it  was  an  archaic 
Canaanite  name,  most  likely  referring  to  the  situa- 
tion or  nature  of  the  place,  which  the  Hebrews 
adopted,  and  then  explained  in  their  own  fashion. 
[See  Jegar-sahadutha,  &c.] 

In  Gen.  xxiii.  2,  the  LXX.  (both  MSS.)  inseit 
f)  effTiy  ev  rcfi  KoiKco^ari;  and  in  xxxv.  27  they 
render  K.  Arba  by  els  ttSXiu  tov  ireSlov.  In  the 
fonner  of  these  the  addition  may  be  an  explanation 
of  the  subsequent  words,  "  in  the  land  of  C'anaan  " 
— the  explanation  having  slipped  into  the  text  in 
its  wrong  place.  Its  occurrence  in  both  MSS. 
shows  its  great  antiquity.  It  is  found  also  in  the 
Samaritan  Codex  and  Version.  In  xxxv.  27  TreSiof 
ma}'  have  arisen  from  the  translators  reading  Hmy 
for  y^-li^.  [G\]" 

KIR'JATH-A'RIM  (Onr'i?:  Kapiaeiaplix  ; 
Alex.  KapiaOiapeifji :  Cariathiarim),  an  abbreviated 
form  of  the  name  Kirjath-jeahim,  which  occurs 
only  in  Ezr.  ii.  25.  In  the  parallel  passage  of 
Nehemiah  the  name  is  in  its  usual  form,  and  in 
Esdras  it  is  Kiriatiiiarius.  [G.] 

KIR'JATH-BA'AL  (by^-'i?  =  town  of  Baal: 
Kapiad  Bda\:  Cariathbaal),  an  alternative  name 
of  tiie  place  usually  called  Kirjath-jearim  (Josh.  xv. 
60,  xviii.  14),  but  also  Baalah,  and  once  Baali;- 
OF-Judah.  These  names  doubtless  point  to  the 
existence  of  a  sanctuary  of  Baal  at  this  spot  licfoi-e 
the  conquest.  They  were  still  attached  to  it  con- 
siilerably  later,  for  they  alone  are  used,  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  (probably)  newly-bestowed  name 
of  Kirjath-jearim,  in  the  description  of  the  lenioval 
of  the  ark  thence  (2  Sam.  vi.).  [G.] 

KIE'JATH-HU'ZOTH  (nivn 'i?  :  7r.iA«s 
iiravXeav :  urbs  quae  in  extremis  regni  ejus  Jini- 
bus  erat),    a   place   to    which  Balak   accompanied 

ments,  and  in  the  general  language  of  all  but  their 
own  class  for  centuries.  If  this  is  the  case  with  Kir- 
jath-Arba and  Hebron,  the  occurrence  of  the  former 
in  Nehemiah,  noticed  above,  is  easily  understood. 
It  was  simply  the  effort  of  the  original  name  to  as- 
sert its  rights  and  assume  its  position,  as  soon  as  the 
temporary  absence  of  the  Israelites  at  Babylon  had 
left  the  Canaanite  rustics  to  themselves. 


42 


KIEJATH-JEARIM 


Balaam  immediately  aftej-  his  arrival  in  Moab 
(Num.  xxii.  39),  and  which  is  nowhere  else  men- 
tioned. It  appears  to  have  lain' between  the  Arnon 
(  Wadij  Mojeb)  and  Bamotii-Baal  (comp.  ver.  36 
and  41),  probably *north  of  the  former,  since  there 
is  some,  though  only  slight,  ground  for  supposing 
that  Bamoth-Baal  lay  between  Dibon  and  Beth- 
baal-meon  (see  Josh.  xiii.  17).  The  passage  (Num. 
xxii.  39)  is  obscure  in  every  way.  It  is  not  obvious 
why  sacrifices  should  have  been  offered  there,  or 
how,  when  Balaam  accompanied  Balak  thither, 
Balak  could  have  "sent"  thence  to  him  and  to  the 
princes  who  were  with  him  (40). 

No  trace  of  the  name  has  been  discovered  in  later 
times.  It  is  usually  interpreted  to  mean  "  city  of 
streets,"  from  the  Hebrew  word  |*-in,  chutz,  which 
has  sometimes  this  meaning  (Gesenius,  Thes.  456a  ; 
margin  of  A.  V. ;  and  so  Luther,  die  Gassenstadt ; 
so  also  the  Veneto-Greek)  ;  but  Jerome,  in  the 
Vulgate,  has  adopted  another  signification  of  the 
root.  The  LXX.  seem  to  have  read  miVH,  "  vil- 
lages," the  word  which  they  usually  render  by 
cTrayAeij,  and  which  is  -also  the  reading  of  the 
Peschito.  The  Samaritan  Codex  and  Version,  the 
former  by  its  reading  nifH,  "  visions,"  and  the 
latter,  ^n,  "  mysteries,"  seein  to  favour  the  idea — 
which  is  pei'ha]is  the  explanation  of  the  sacrifices 
there — that  Kiijath-Chutzoth  was  a  place  of  sacred 
or  oracular  reputation.  The  Targum  Pseudojon. 
gives  it  as  "  the  streets  of  the  great  city,  the  city 
of  Sihou,  the  same  is  Birosa,"  apparently  identifying 
it  with  Kirjathaim  (see  note  to  p.  406).  [^'0 

KTR'JATH-JEA'RIM  (Qny;-  'p:  TrSMs'lapifj. 
and  'lapiy,  Kapiadiapifi,  and  once  woAis  Kapiad- 
lapifj. ;  Alex,  tlie  amie,  excepting  the  termination 
ei|U  ;  Joseph .  Kapia0iapiju.a :  Cariathiarim),  !\.  cMj 
which  played  a  not  unimportant  part  in  the  histoiy 
of  the  Chosen  People.  We  first  encounter  it  as  one 
of  the  four  cities  of  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.  17) :  it 
next  occm's  as  one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  northern 
boundary  of  Judah  (xv".  9),  and  as  the  point  at 
which  the  western  and  southern  boundaries  of  Ben- 
jamin coincided  ('xviii,  14,  15);  and  in  the  two 
last  passages  we  find  that  it  bore  another,  perliaps 
earlier,  name — that  of  the  great  Canaanite  deity 
Baal,  namely  Baalah^  and  Kikjath-Baal.  It  is 
included  among  the  towns  of  Judah  (xv.  60),  and 
there  is  some  reason  for  believing  that  under  the 
shortened  form  of  Kirjath  it  is  also  named  among 
those  of  Benjamin,  as  might  almost  be  expected 
from  the  position  it  occupied  on  the  confines  of 
each.  Some  considerations  bearing  on  this  will  be 
found  under  KiRJAXii  and  Gibe  a  si.  It  is  included 
iu  the  genealogies  of  Jn.dah  (1  Chr.  ii.  50,  52)  as 
fdinuled  by,  or  descended  from,  Shobal,  the  son  of 
Calebben-Hur,  and  as  having  in  its  turn  sent  out 
the  colonies  of  the  Ithrites,  Puhites,  Shumathites, 
and  Mishraites,  and  those  of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 
"  Behind  Kirjath-jearim "  the  band  of  Danites 
pitched  their  camp  before  their  expedition  to  Slount 
Ephraim  and  Laish,  leaving  their  name  attached 
to  the  spot  for  long  after  (Judg.  xviii.  12). 
[Mahaneh-dan.]     Hitherto,    beyond    the    early 

*  In  1  Chr.  xiii.  G,  the  Vulgate  has  coUis  Cariath- 
iarim  for  the  Baalah  of  the  Hebrew  text. 

*>  Kirjath-jearim  is  not  stated  to  have  been  allotted 
to  the  Levitcs,  but  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  Abi- 
nadab  and  Eleazar  were  not  Levites.  This  question, 
diid  the  force  of  the  word  rendered  "  sanctified  "  (vii. 
I),  will  be  noticed  under  Lkvites.    On  the  other  hand 


KIRJATH-JEARBl 

sanctity  implied  in  its  beai'iug  the  name  of  Baal, 
tliere  is  nothing  remarkable  in  Kirjath-jearim.  It 
was  no  doubt  this  reputation  for  sanctity  which 
made  the  people  of  Beth-shemesh  appeal  to  its  in- 
habitants to  relieve  them  of  the  Ark  of  Jehovah, 
which  was  bringing  such  calamities  on  their  un- 
tutored inexperience.  From  their  place  in  the 
valley  they  looked  anxiously  for  some  eminence, 
which,  according  to  the  belief  of  those  days,  should 
be  the  appropriate  seat  for  so  powerful  a  Deity — 
"  Who  is  able  to  stand  before  the  face  of  Jehovah, 
this  holy  God,  and  to  whom  shall  He  (or,  LXX., 
the  ark  of  Jehovah)  go  up  from  us?"  "And 
they  sent  to  the  inhabitants  of  Kiijath-jearim,  say- 
ing, the  Philistines  have  brought  back  the  ark  of 
Jehovah,  come  yc  down  and  fetch  it  up  to  you  " 
(1  Sam.  vi.  20,  21).  In  this  high-place — "the 
hill  "  (nyi!in) — under  the  charge  of  Eleazar,  son 

of  Abinadab,''  the  ark  remained  for  twenty  years 
(vii.  2),  during  which  period  the  spot  became  the 
resort  of  pilgrims  from  all  parts,  anxious  to  ofier 
sacrifices  and  perform  vows  to  Jehovah  (Joseph. 
Ant.  vi.  2,  §1).  At  the  close  of  that  time  Kirjath- 
jearim  lost  its  sacred  treasure,  on  its  removal  by 
David  to  the  house  of  Obed-edom  the  Gittite 
(1  Chr.  xiii.  5,  6  ;  2  Chr.  i.  4;  2  Sam.  vl.  2, 
&c.).  It  is  very  remarkable  and  suggestive  that  in 
the  account  of  this  transaction  ihe  ancient  and 
heathen  name  Baal  is  retained.  In  fact,  in  2  Sam. 
vi.  2 — probably  the  original  statement — the  name 
Baale  is  used  without  any  ex])lauation,  and  to  the 
exclusion  of  that  of  Kirjath-jeaiim.  In  the  allusion 
to  this  transaction  in  Ps.  exxxii.  6,  the  name  is 
obscurely  indicated  as  the  "wood" — yaar,  the 
root  of  Kirjath-jearim.  We  are  further  told  that 
its  people,  with  those  of  Chephirah  and  Beeroth, 
743  in  number,  returned  from  captivity  (Neli.  vii. 
29 ;  and  see  Ezra  ii.  25,  where  the  name  is 
K-ARiM,  and  1  EsJr.  v.  19,  Kiriathiarius). 
We  also  hear  of  a  prophet  URiJAH-ben-Shemaiah, 
a  native  of  the  place,  who  enforced  the  warnings 
of  Jeremiah,  and  was  cruelly  murdered  by  Jehoiakim 
(Jer.  xxvi.  20,  &c.),  but  of  the  place  we  know  nothing 
beyond  what  has  been  already  said.  A  tradition  is 
mentioned  by  Adrichomius  [Descr.  T.  S.  Dan, 
§17),  though  without  stating  his  authority,  that 
it  was  the  native  place  of  "  Zechariah,  son  of 
Jehoiada,  who  was  slain  between,  the  altar  and  the 
Temple."  ' 

To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onom.  Cariathiarim) 
it  appears  to  have  been  well  known.  They  describe 
it  as  a  village  at  the  ninth  (or,  s.  v.  "Baal,"  tenth) 
mile  between  Jerusalem  and  Diospolis  (Lydda). 
With  this  description,  and  the  foi-mer  of  these  two 
distances  agrees  Procopius  (see  Reland,  503).  It 
was  reserved  for  Dr.  Robinson  {B.  Ii.  ii.  11)  to 
discover  that  these  requirements  are  exactly  ful- 
filled in  the  modern  village  of  Kuriet-el-Enah — • 
now  usually  known  as  Abu  Gosh,  from  the  robber- 
chief  whose  head-quarters  it  was — at  the  eastern  end 
of  the  Wady  Aly,  on  the  road  from  Jallii  to  Jeru- 
salem. And,  indeed,  if  the  statement  of  Eusebius 
contained  the  only  conditions  to  be  met,  the  identi- 
fication would  be  certain.     It  does  not,  however,  so 


it  is  remarkable  that  Beth-shemesh,  from  which  the 
Ark  was  sent  away,  was  a  eity  of  the  priests. 

•^  The  mention  of  KaptaSiapeiV  (Alex.  KapiaOLapCfx.) 
ill  the  LXX.  of  Josh.  iii.  16,  possibly  proceeds  from 
a  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  Kirjath-Adain,  "  the  uity 
Adam,"  as  has  been  pointed  out  under  Adam,  vol.  i. 
20';. 


KIRJATH-SANNAH 

well  agree  with  the  lequiiements  of  1  Snm.  vi. 
The  distance  from  Bethshemesh  {Am  Shems)  is  con- 
siderable—not less  than  10  miles— through  a  very 
uneven  country,  with  no  appearance  of  any  road 
ever  having  existed  (Rob.  iii.  157).  Neither  is  it 
at  all  in  proximity  to  Bethlehem  (Ephratah),  which 
would  seem  to  be  implied  in  Ps.  cxxxii.  6 ;  though 
this  latter  passage  is  very  obscure.  Williams  {Hulij 
Citij)  endeavours  to  identify  Kirjath-jearim  with 
Deir-el-Huwa,  east  of  A  in  Shcms.  But  this,  though 
sufficiently  near  the  latter  place,  docs  not  answer  to 
the  other  conditions.  We  may  therefore,  for  the 
present,  consider  Kurlct-d-Enab  as  the  rui>resenta- 
tive  of  Kirjath-jearim. 

The  modern  name,  differing  from  the  ancient  only 
in  its  latter  portion,  signifies  the  "  city  of  grapes  ;" 
the  ancient  name,  if  interpreted  as  Hebrew,  the  "  city 
of  forests."  Such  interpretations  of  these  very 
antique  names  must  be  i-eceived  with  great  caution 
on  account  of  the  tendency  which  exists  universally 
to  alter  the  names  of  places  and  persons  so  that 
they  shall  contain  a  meaning  in  the  language  of 
the  country.  In  the  present  case  we  have  the  play 
on  the  name  ill  Ts.  cxxxii.  6,  ab-eady  noticed,  the 
authority  of  Jerome  {Comm.  in  Is.  xxix.  1),  who 
renders  it  villa  silvanim,  and  the  testimony  of  a 
a  recent  traveller  (Tobler,  Dritte  Wcmdent7iij,  178. 
187),  who  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood,  on  the 
ridge  probably  answering  to  Mount  Jearim,  states 
that,  "  for  real  genuine  [cchtes)  woods,  so  thick  and 
so  solifciry,  he  had  seen  nothing  like  them  since  he 
left  Germany." 

It  remains  yet  to  be  seen  if  any  separate  or  defi- 
nite eminence  answering  to  the  hill  or  high-place 
on  which  the  ark  was  deposited  is  recognisable  at 
Kuriet-el-Enah.  [f^.] 

KIR'JATH-SAN'NAH  (nSD'i?:  ■K6\is'ypaix.- 

fxaTcev:  Cariathsenna),  a  name  which  occurs  once 
only  (.Josh.  xv.  49),  as  another,  and  probably  an  ear- 
lier, ai)pellation  for  Debir,  an  important  pilace  in 
the  mountains  of  Judah,  not  far  from  Hebron,  and 
which  also  bore  the  name  of  Kirjath-Sepiiee. 
Whence  the  name  is  derived  we  have  no  clue,  and 
its  meaning  has  given  rise  to  a  variety  of  conjec- 
tures (see  Keil,  Josua,  on  x.  40  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  i. 
324:  note).  That  of  Gesenius  {Thcs.  9G2)  is,  that 
sannah  is  a  contraction  of  sansannah  =  a  palm- 
branch,  and  thus  that  Kirjath-sannah  is  the  "  city 
of  palms."  But  this,  though  adopted  by  Stanie}'' 
(S.  ^  P.  161,  5'24),  is  open  to  the  objection  that 
l)alms  were  not  trees  of  the  mountain  district,  where 
Kirjath-sannah  was  situated,  but  of  the  valleys 
{S.  4-  P.  145). 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  LXX.  interpret  both 
this  name  and  Kirjath-sepher  alike.  [G.] 

KIR'JATH-SETHER  030 '[? :  in  Judg.  i. 

11,  Kapiad(j€(pip  ttoAis  Tpa/xixdTwv ;  in  ver.  12, 
and  in  Josh,  the  first  word  is  omitted:  Cariath- 
seplicr),  the  early  name  of  the  city  Debir,  which 
further  had  the  name — doubtless  also  an  early  one — 
of  lUHJATH-SANNAll.  Kiijath-seplier  occurs  only 
in  the  account  of  the  capture  of  the  jjlace  by  Othniel, 
who  gained  thereby  the  hand  of  his  wife  Achsah, 
Caleb's  daughter  (Josh.  .\v.  15,  H) ;  and  in  the  exact 


KIR  OF  MOAB 


43 


repetition  of  the  narrative,  Ju.dg.  i.  11.  12).  In 
this  narrative,  a  document  of  unmistakably  early 
character  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  373,  4),  it  is  stated 
that  "  the  name  of  Debir  before  was  Kirjath-sepher." 
iMvald  conjectures  that  the  new  name  was  given  it  by 
the  conquerors  on  account  of  its  retired  position  on 
the  back" — the  south  or  south-western  slopes — of  the 
mountains,  possibly  at  or  about  the  modern  el-Burj, 
a  few  miles  W.  of  cd-Dliohcrhjch  {Gesch.  ii.  o7o 
note).  But  whatever  the  interpretation  of  the 
Hebrew  name  of  the  place  may  be,  that  of  the  Ca- 
naanite  name  must  certainly  be  more  obscure.  It 
is  generally  assumed  to  mean  "  city  of  book  "  (from 
the  Hebrew  word  ^'e7j/i(?;'= book),  and  it  has  been 
made  the  foundation  for  theories  of  the  amount  of 
literary  culture  possessed  by  the  Canaanites  (Keil. 
Josua,  X.  39  ;  Ewald,  i.  324).  But  such  theories 
are,  to  say  the  least,  prematiue  during  the  extreme 
uncertainty  as  to  the  meaning  of  these  very  ancient 
names.'' 

The  old  name  Avoukl  appear  to  have  been  still  in 
existence  in  Jerome's  time,  if  we  may  understand 
his  allusion  in  the  ejiitaph  of  I'aula  (§11),  whe-'O 
he  translates  it  vinculum  litteraruni.     [Comp.  KiR- 

JATII-ARUA.] 

KIR  OF  MOAB  (nKIO  Tj? :  rh  nTxos  t^9 

Moia^iTiSos :  vmriis  Moab),  one  of  the  two  chief 
strongholds  of  Moab,  the  other  being  Ar  of  Moab. 
The  name  occurs  only  in  Is.  xv.  1,  though  the  place 
is  probably  refei'red  to  under  the  names  of  Kiii- 
HERES,  Kiu-HARASETH,  &c.  The  chie  to  its  iden- 
tification is  given  us  by  the  Targum  on  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah,  which  for  the  above  names  has  K3^2), 
Cracca,  "n"l3,  Crac,  almost  identical  with  the 
name  Kerak,  by  which  the  site  of  an  important 
city  in  a  high  and  very  strong  position  at  the  S.E. 
of  tlie  Dead  Sea  is  known  at  this  day.  The  chain 
of  evidence  for  the  identification  of  Kcrak  with 
Kir-JIoab  is  very  satisfactory.  Undtjr  the  name 
of  XapaKficii^a  it  is  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem.  A.D.  536  {Kehnd,  Pal.  .533), 
by  the  geographers  Ptolemy  and  Stejihanus  of  By- 
zantium" (Keland,  463,  705).  In  A.u.  1131,  under 
King  Fulco,  a  castle  was  built  there  which  became 
an  impoitant  station  for  the  Crusaders.  Here,  in 
A.D.  1183,  they  sustained  a  fruitless  attack  from 
Saladin  and  his  brother  (Bohaefldin,  Vit.  Sal.  ch. 
25),  the  place  being  as  impregnable  as  it  had  been 
in  the  days  of  Elisha  (2  K.  iii.  25).  It  was  then 
the  chief  city  of  Ara6«rt  Secunda  or  Petracensis  ;  it 
is  specified  as  in  the  Belha,  and  is  distinguished 
from  "  Jloab"  or  "  Itabbat,"  the  ancient  Ar-Moab, 
and  from  the  Mons  regalis  (Schultens,  Index 
Geogr.  "Caracha";  see  also  the  remarks  of  Ge- 
senius, Jesain,  517,  and  his  notes  to  the  Geiman 
transl.  of  Burckhardl'=).  Tlie  Crusaders  in  error 
lielieved  it  to  be  Petra,  and  that  lianie  is  frequently 
attached  to  it  in  the  writings  of  William  of  Tyre 
and  Jacob  de  ^'itry  (see  quotations  in  Itob.  Bib. 
Pes.  ii.  167).  This  error  is  peipetuated  in  the 
Greek  Church  to  the  present  day;  and  the  bishop 
of  Petra,  whose  office,  as  representative  of  the  Pa- 
tiiarch,  it  is  to  produce  the  holy  fire  at  Easter  iii 
tlie   "  Church   of   the   Sepulchre"   at   Jerusalem 


"■  Taking  Debir  to  mean  an  adytnm,  or  innermost 
recess,  as  it  does  in  1  K.  vi.  5,  19,  &c.  (A.  V. 
"  oracle"). 

''  In  the  Targuin  it  is  rcndcrcil  by  '•3~IX  p,  "  city 
ol'ininces"  (ap\ai).     See  Buxtorf,  Lcr.  'fniiii.  217. 


"=  Gesenius  expresses  it  as  follows  :  "  Ar-Moab, 
Stadt  Moabs  gleichsam  aarv  oiler  mhs  MiHihiturum 
.  .  .  und  die  Burg  ties  L.mdcs  Kir-Moub"  (Burckliarilt, 
von  Gesenius,  10G4j. 


44 


KISH 


(Stanley,  S.  ^  P.  467),  is  in  reality  bishop  of  Keiiik 
(Seetzeu,  Eeisen,  ii.  1358  ;  Burckh.  o87). 

The  modern  Kerak  is  known  to  us  through  the 
descriptions  of  Burckhardt  (379-390),  Irby  (ch. 
vii.),  Seetzen  {Reisen,  i.  412,  3),  and  De  Saulcy 
(  La  Mer  Mortc,  i.  355,  &c.)  ;  and  these  fully  bear 
out  the  interpretation  given  above  to  the  name — 
the  "  foi-tress,"  as  contradistinguished  fiom  the 
"metropolis"  (Ar)  of  the  country,  i.e.  Kabbath- 
Moab,  the  modern  Eahba.  It  lies  about  6  miles 
S.  of  the  List-named  place,  and  some  10  miles 
from  the  Dead  Sea,  upon  the  plateau  of  highlamis 
which  forms  this  part  of  the  country,  not  far  fiom 
the  western  edge  of  the  plateau.  Its  situation  is 
truly  remarkable.  It  is  built  upon  the  top  of  a 
steep  hill,  surrounded  on  all  sides  by  a  deep  and 
narrow  valley,  which  again  is  completely  inclosed 
by  mountains  rising  higher  than  the  town,  and 
overlooking  it  on  all  sides.  It  must  have  been  from 
these  surrounding  heights  tliat  the  Israelite  slingers 
hui-led  their  voUies  of  stones  after  the  capture  of 
the  place  had  proved  impossible  (2  K.  lii.  25). 
The  town  itself  is  encompassed  by  a  wall,  to  which, 
vvhen  perfect,  there  were  but  two  entrances,  one  to 
the  south  and  the  other  to  the  north,  cut  or  tun- 
nelled thi-ough  the  ridge  of  the  natural  rock  below 
the  wall  for  a  length  of  100  to  120  feet.  The 
wall  is  defended  by  several  large  towers,  and  the 
western  extremity  of. the  town  is  occupied  by  an 
enormous  mass  of  buildings — on  the  south  the  castle 
or  keep,  on  the  north  the  seraglio  of  El-Melek  edh- 
Dhahir.  Between  these  two  buildings  is  apparently 
a  third  exit,  leading  to  the  Dead  Sea.  (A  map  of 
the  site  and  a  view  of  part  of  the  keep  will  be 
found  iu  the  Atlas  to  De  Saulcy,  La  Mer  Morte, 
&c.,  feuilles  8,  20).  The  latter  shows  well  the 
way  in  which  the  town  is  inclosed.  The  walls,  the 
keep,  and  seraglio  are  mentioned  by  Lynch  {Report, 
May  2,  p.  19,  20),  whose  account,  though  interest- 
ing, contains  nothing  new.  The  elevation  of  the 
town  can  hardly  be  less  than  3000  feet  above  the 
sea  (Porter,  Hdbk.  6u).  From  the  heights  imme- 
diately outside  it,  near  a  ruined  mosque,  a  view  is 
obtained  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  in  clear  weather  of 
Bethlehem  and  Jerusdem  (Seetzen,  Reisen,  i.  413: 
Schwavz,  217).  '  [O.]  ' 

KISH  (^y  :  Kls  :  Cis,  Vulg.  and  A.  V., 
Acts  xiii.  21).  1.  A  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin_ 
and  the  family  of  Matri,  according  to  1  Sam.  x. 
21,  though  descended  fi-om  Becher  according  to 
1  Chr.  vii.  8,  compared  with  1  Sam.  ix.  1.  [Be- 
CHER.]  He  was  son  of  Ner,  brother  to  Abner,  and 
father  to  King  Saul.  Gibeah  or  (jibeon  seems  to 
have  been  the  seat  'of  the  family  from  the  time  of 
Jehiel,  otherwise  called  Abiel  (I  Sam.  xiv.  51), 
Kish's  grandfather  (1  Chr.  ix.  35). 

2.  Son  of  Jehiel,  and  uncle  to  the  preceding 
(1  Chr.  ix.  36). 

3.  A  Benjamite,  great  grandfather  of  Jlordecai, 
who  w;^s  taken  captive  at  the  time  that  Jeconiah 
was  carried  to  Babylon  (Esth.  ii.  5). 

4.  A  Merarite,  of  the  house  of  Mahli,  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi.  His  sons  married  the  daughters  of 
his  brother  Eleazar  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  22,  xxiv.  28, 
29),  apparently  about  the  time  of  King  Saul,  or 

»  Kishon  is  from  K'ip>  to  be  bent,  or  tortuous  ; 
Kishion  from  HK'p,  to  be  hard  {Thes.  1211,  1243). 

t"  By  some  this  was— with  the  usual  craviiijir  to 
make  the  name  of  a  jjlace  mean  something — developed 
into  X-  "'"'  Kio-ffu)!',  "  the  torrent  of  the  ivy  bushes  " 


KISHON,  THE  RIVER 

early  in  the  reign  of  David,  since  Jeduthun  the 
singer  was  the  son  of  Kish  (1  Chr.  vi.  44,  A.  V., 
compared  with  2  Chr.  xxix.  12).  In  the  last  cited 
place,  "  Kish  the  son  of  Abdi,"  in  the  reign  ot 
Hezekiah,  must  denote  the  Levitical  house  or  divi- 
sion, under  its  cliief,  rather  than  an  individual. 
[.Jeshua.]  The  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  vi.  shows 
that,  though  Kish  is  called  "  the  son  of  Mahli " 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  21),  yet  eight  generations  intervened 
between  him  and  Jlahli.  In  the  coiTupt  text  of 
1  Chr.  XV.  the  name  is  written  Kushaiah  at  ver.  17, 
and  tor  Jeduthun  is  written  Ethan.  [Jeduthun.] 
At  1  Chr.  vi.  29  (44,  A.  V.)  it  is  written  Kishi. 
It  is  not  impi'obable  that  the  name  Kish  may  have 
passed  into  the  tribe  of  Levi  from  that  of  Benjamin, 
owing  to  the  residence  of  the  latter  in  the  immediate 
neighbourhood  ot  Jerusalem,  which  might  lead  to 
intermarriages  (1  Chr.  viii.  28,  32).     [A.  C.  H.] 

KISH'I  (*K>''ip :  Kitra;  Alex.  Knadv:  Cusi), 
a  Merarite,  and  father  or  ancestor  of  Ethan  the 
minstrel  (1  Chr.  vi.  44).  The  fonn  in  wliicli  his 
name  appears  in  the  Vulg.  is  supported  by  22  of 
Kennicott's  MSS.  In  1  Chr.  xv.  17  he  is  called 
Kushaiah,  and  Kisn  in  1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  29. 

KISH'ION  (fWj?:  Ki<T<iv ;  Alex.  Keaidv: 
Cesion),  one  of  the  towns  on  the  boundary  of  the 
tribe  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xix.  20),  which  with  its 
suburbs  was  allotted  to  the  Gershonite  Levites  (xxi. 
28  ;  though  in  this  place  the  name — identical  in 
the  original — is  incorrectly  given  in  the  A.  V. 
Kisiion).  If  the  judgment  of  Gesenius  may  be 
accepted,  theie  is  no  connexion  between  the  name 
Kishion  and  that  of  the  river  Kishon,  since  as  He- 
brew words  they  aie  derivable  from  distinct  roots." 
But  it  would  seem  very  questionable  how  far  .so 
archaic  a  name  as  that  of  the  Kishon,  mentioned,  as  it 
is,  in  one  of  the  earliest  records  we  possess  ( Judg.  v.) 
can  be  treated  as  Hebrevt.  No  trace  of  the  situation 
of  Kishion  however  exists,  nor  can  it  be  infei'red  so  as 
to  enable  us  to  ascertiiiu  whether  any  conneiion  was 
likely  to  have  existed  between  the  town  and  the  river. 

KISH'ON  (I'VK^p  :  rj  Kicrdv  ;  Alex,  v  Kicrtiif  : 

Cesion),  im  inaccurate  mode  of  representing  (Josh. 
xxi.  28)  the  name  which  on  its  other  occurrence  is 
correctly  given  as  Kishion.  In  the  list  of  Levi- 
tical cities  in  1  Chr.  vi.  its  place  is  occupied  by 
Kebesh  (ver.  72). 

KISH'ON,   THE   RIVER  (flK^'-ip  h   \ :    & 

XftfJLCL^povs  KiffSiv,  Kiacrwv,^  and  Keicrciv  ;  Alex, 
usually  Keifro!;/ :  torrens  Cison),  a  torrent  or  winter 
stream  of  central  Palestine,  the  scene  of  two  of  the 
grandest  achievements  of  Israelite  history — the  de- 
feat of  Sisera,  and  the  destruction  of  the  prophets 
of  Baal  by  Elijah. 

Unless  it  be  alluded  to  in  Josh.  xix.  1 1,  as  "  the 
torrent  facing  Jokneam  " — and  if  Kaiman  be  .lok- 
neam,  the  description  is  veiy  accurate — the  Kishon 
is  not  mentioned  in  desci'ibing  the  possessions  of  the 
tril)es.  Indeed  its  name  occurs  only  in  connexion 
with  the  two  gieat  events  just  refei-red  to  (Judg. 
iv.  7,  13,  V.  21  ;«  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9 — here  inaccurately 
"Kison;"  and  1  K.  xviii.  40). 

The  Nahr  MukHtta,  the  modern  representative 


' 


(Suidas,  s.  V.  'lajStV),  just  as  the  name  of  Kidron 
(Ke'gpiur)  was  made  Tfaiv  Ke'Spui',  "  of  the  cedars." 
[Ckdkon  ;  KiDKON.] 

'^  Tlie  term  coupled  with  the  Kishon  in  Judg.  v.  21, 
COnpn,  in  A.  V.   "  th.it  aiivie/U  river,"  has  been 


laSHON,  THE  KIVEE 

of  the  Kishon,  is  the  drain  by  which  the  waters 
(if  the  plain  of  Esdi'aelon,  and  of  tlie  mountains 
which  enclose  that  plain,  namely,  Cai'mel  and  the 
Samaria  range  on  the  south,  the  mountains  of 
Galilee  on  the  north,  andGilboa,  "  Little  Hermon  " 
(so  called),  and  Tabor  on  the  east,  find  their  way  to 
the  Mediterranean.  Its  course  is  in  a  direction 
nearly  due  N.W.  along  the  lower  part  of  the  plain 
nearest  the  foot  of  the  Samarian  hills,  and  close 
beneath  the  very  cliti's  of  Carmel  (Tliomson,  L.  i}-  B. 
2nd  cd.  436),  breaking  through  the  hills  which 
separate  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  from  the  maritime 
plain  of  Acre,  by  a  very  narrow  pass,  beneath  the 
eminence  of  Harothieh  or  Harti,  whicli  is  believed 
still  to  retain  a  trace  of  the  name  of  Harosheth  of 
the  Gentiles  (Thomson,  4o7).  It  has  two  principal 
feeders:  the  fii'st  from  Debwieh  (Daberath),  on 
Mount  Tabor,  the  N.E.  angle  of  the  plain  ;  and 
secondly,  from  Jelb'j,n  (Gilboa)  and  Jenin  (En- 
gamiim)  on  the  S.E.  The  very  large  perennial 
spring  of  the  last-named  place  may  be  said  to  be  the 
origin  of  the  remote  part  of  the  Kishon  (Thomson, 
435).  It  is  also  fed  by  the  copious  spring  of 
Lfjjun,  the  stream  from  which  is  probably  the 
"waters  of  Megiddo"  (Van  de  Velde,  353;  Porter, 
Handbook,  385).  Dm-ing  the  winter  and  spring,  and 
after  sudden  storms  of  rain  the  upper  part  of  the 
Kishon  flows  with  a  very  strong  torrent;  so  strong, 
that  in  tlie  battle  of  Mount  Tabor,  April  16,  1799, 
some  of  the  circumstances  of  the  defeat  of  Sisera 
were  reproduced,  many  of  the  fugitive  Turks  being 
drowned  in  the  wady  from  Dehnrieh,  which  then  in- 
undated a  part  of  the  plain  (Burckhardt,  339).  At 
the  same  seasons  the  giounds  about  Lcjjun  (Me- 
giddo) where  the  principal  encounter  with  Sisera 
would  seem  to  have  taken  place,  becomes  a  moi-ass, 
impassable  for  even  single  travellers,  and  truly  de- 
structive'' for  a  huge  horde  like  his  army  (Prokesch, 
in  liob.  ii.  364 ;  Thomson,  436). 

But  like  most  of  the  so-called  "  rivers"'  of  Pales- 
tine, the  perennial  stream  forms  but  a  small  part  of 
the  Kishon.  During  the  greater  part  of  the  year  its 
upper  portion  is  dry,  and  the  stream  confined  to  a 
few  miles  next  the  sea.  The  sources  of  tlus  perennial 
portion  proceed  from  the  roots  of  Carmel — the 
"  vast  fountains  called  Sa'adiyeh,  about  three  miles 
east  of  Chaita"  (Thomson,  435)  and  those,  ap- 
parently still  more  copious,  described  by  Shaw  (Rob. 


KISHON,  THE  EIVER 


45 


very  variously  rendered  bj-  the  old  interpreters.  1.  It 
is  taken  as  a  proper  name,  and  thus  apparently  that 
of  a  distinct  stream — in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX., 
KaSr^fieCf/.  (see  Barhdt's  Hexapla)  ;  by  Jerome,  in  the 
Vulgate,  torrens  Cadumim  ;  in  the  Peshito  and  Arabic 
versions,  Carinin.  This  view  is  also  taken  by  Ben- 
jamin of  Tudela,  who  speaks  of  the  river  close  to 
Acre  (doubtless  meaning  thereby  the  Belus)  as  the 

D''tOnp  ml-  2.  As  an  epithet  of  the  Kishon  itself : 
LXX.,  Xf'/u-ttppo"?  apxauav;  Aquila,  Kaucruii'ajy,  jierhaps 
intending  to  imply  a  scorching  -wind  or  simoom  as 
accompanying  the  rising  of  the  waters  ;  Symmachus, 
aiyiuiv  or  axyuiv,  perhaps  alluding  to  the  swift  spring- 
ing of  the  torrent  (alyes  is  used  for  high  waves  by 
Artemidorus).  The  Targum,  adhering  to  the  signifi- 
cation "  ancient,"  expands  the  sentence — "  the  toi'- 
rent  in  which  were  shewn  signs  and  wonders  to 
Israel  of  old  ;"  and  this  miraculous  torrent  a  later 
Jewish  tradition  (preserved  in  the  Cominentarius  in 
Canticum  Debborae,  ascribed  to  Jerome)  would  iden- 
tify with  the  Ked  Sea,  the  scene  of  the  greatest  mar- 
vels in  Israel's  history.  The  rendering  of  the  A.  V. 
is  supported  by  Mendelssohn,  (Jcsenius,  Ewald,  and 
other  eminent  modern  scholars.      But  is  it  not  pos- 


ii.  365),''*  as  bursting  forth  from  beneath  the  eastern 
brow  of  Carmel,  and  discharging  of  themselves  "  a 
river  half  as  big  as  the  Isis."  It  enters  the  sea  at 
the  lower  part  of  the  bay  of  Akka,  about  two  miles 
east  of  Cliaifa  "  in  a  deep  tortuous  bed  between 
banks  of  loamy  soil  some  15  feet  high,  and  15  to  20 
yards  apait"  (Porter,  Handbook,  383,  4).  Be- 
tween the  mouth  and  the  town  tlie  shore  is  lined 
by  an  extensive  grove  of  date-palms,  one  of  the 
finest  in  Palestine  (Van  de  Velde,  289). 

The  pai-t  of  the  Kishon  at  which  the  prophets  of 
Baal  were  slaughtered  by  Elijah  was  doubtless 
close  below  the  spot  on  Carmel  where  the  sacrilice 
hail  taken  place.  This  spot  is  now  fixed  with  all 
but  ceitainty,  as  at  the  extreme  east  end  of  tlie 
mountain,  to  which  the  name  is  still  attached  of 
El-Mahraka,  "the  burning."  [Cakmel.]  Ko- 
where  does  the  Kishon  run  so  close  to  the  mountain 
as  just  beneath  this  spot  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  324). 
It  is  about  1000  feet  above  the  river,  and  a  preci- 
pitous ravine  leads  directly  down,  by  which  the 
victims  were  perhaps  hurried  from  the  sacred  pre- 
ciucts  of  the  altar  of  Jehovah  to  their  doom  in  the  tor- 
rent lied  below,  at  the  loot  of  the  mound,  which  from 
this  circumstance  may  be  called  Tell  Kusis,  the  hill 
of  the  priests.  Whether  the  Kishon  contained  any 
water  at  this  time  we  are  not  told ;  that  required 
for  Elijah's  sacrilice  was  in  all  probability  obtained 
from  the  spring  on  the  mountain  side  below  the 
plateau  of  El-Mahrakah.    [Carmel,  vol.  i.  2796.] 

Of  the  identity  of  the  Kishon  with  the  present 
Naht'  Mukutta  there  can  be  no  question.  The  existence 
of  the  sites  of  Taanach  and  Megiddo  along  its  course, 
and  the  complete  agreement  of  the  circiunstances 
just  named  with  the  requirements  of  the  story  of 
Elijah,  are  sulticient  to  satisfy  us  that  the  two  are 
one  and  the  same.  But  it  is  very  remarkable  what 
an  absence  there  is  of  any  continuous  or  traditional 
evidence  on  the  point.  By  Josephus  the  Kishon  is 
never  named,  neither  does  the  name  occur  in  the 
early  Itineraries  of  Antoninus  Augustus,  or  the 
Bourdeaux  Pilgrim.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  dismiss 
it  in  a  few  words,  and  note  only  its  origin  in  Tabor 
( Onum.  "  Cison  "),  or  such  pai't  of  it  as  can  be  seen 
thence  {Ep.  ad  Eustochium,  §13),  passing  by  en- 
tirely its  connexion  with  Carmel.  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  visited  Akka  and  Carmel.  He  mentions  the 
river  by  name  as  "Kachal  Kishon  ;"'  but  only  in  the 


sible  that  the  term  may  refer  to  an  ancient  tribe  of 
Kedumim  —  wanderers  from  the  Eastern  deserts  — 
who  had  in  remote  antiquity  settled  on  the  Kishon  or 
one  of  its  tributary  wadys  ? 

<*  "  The  Kishon,  considered,  on  account  of  its 
quicksands,  the  most  dangerous  river  in  the  land" 
(Van  de  Velde,  i.  289). 

"  The  report  of  Shaw  that  this  spring  is  called  by 
the  people  of  the  place  Ras  el-Kishon,  though  dis- 
missed with  contempt  by  Robinson  in  his  note,  on  the 
ground  that  the  name  K.  is  not  known  to  the  Arabs, 
has  been  confirmed  to  the  writer  by  the  Kev.  W.  Lea, 
who  rccentlj'  visited  the  spot. 

'■  The  English  reader  should  be  on  his  guard  not 
to  rely  on  the  translation  of  Benjamin  contained  in 
the  edition  of  Asher  (Berlin,  184U).  In  the  part  of 
the  work  above  referred  to  two  serious  errors  occur. 
(1)  □'•D-np  ^n3  is  rendered  "Nahr  elKelb;"  most 
erroneously,  for  the  N.  cl  Kdb  (Lycus)  is  more  than  80 
miles  farther  noith.  (2)  \'\^'<\>  7113  is  rendered 
"  the  river  Mukattvui."  Other  renderings  no  less 
inexact  occur  elsewhere,  which  need  not  be  noted 
here. 


46 


KISON 


most  cursory  manner.  Broairdus  (cir.  1500)  de- 
scribes the  western  portion  of  the  stream  with  a  little 
more  fullness,  but  enlarges  most  on  its  upper  or 
eastern  part,  which,  with"  the  victory  of  Baralc,  he 
places  on  the  east  of  Tabor  and  Hermon,  as  dis- 
charging the  water  of  those  mounUiins  into  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  {Descr.  Terrae  S.  cap.  G,  7).  This  has 
l)een  shown  by  Dr.  Robinson  {B.  R.  ii.  364)  to  allude 
to  the  Wady  el  Bireh,  which  runs  down  to  the 
.Jordan  a  few  miles  above  .Scythopolis.  For  the 
descriptions  of  modern  travellers,  see  JIauudiell 
{Early  Trav.  430);  Robinson  (ii.  862,  &c.,  iii. 
116,  17);  Van  de  Velde  (324,  &c.)  ;  Stanley 
(336,  339,  355),  and  Thomson  {Land  and  Booh, 
chap.  .xxix.).  [G.] 

KIS'ON  (liti''|'P  :  Keio-a-v  ;  Alex.  KiffffHv  ;  Ci- 
son),  an  inaccurate  mode  of  representing  the  name 
elsewhere  correctly  given  in  the  A.  V.  Kishon 
(  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9  only).  An  additional  inconsistency 
is  the  expression  "  the  bi-ook  of  Kison" — the  word 
"of"  benig  redundant  both  here  and  in  Judg.  iv. 
13,  and  V.  21.  (G.] 

KISS.''  Kissing  the  lips  by  way  of  affectionate 
salufcition  was  not  only  permitted,  but  customary, 
amongst  near  relatives  of  both  sexes,  both  in  Patri- 
archal and  in  later  times  (Gen.  xxix.  1 1  ;  Cant, 
viii.  1).  Between  individuals  of  the  same  sex,  and 
in  a  limited  degree  between  those  of  different  sexes, 
the  kiss  on  the  cheek  as  a  mark  of  respect  or  an  act 
of  salutation  has  at  all  times  been  customary  in  the 
East,  and  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  extinct  even  in 
Europe.  Mention  is  made  of  it  (1)  between  parents 
and  children  (Gen.  .xxvii.  26,  27,  xx.xi.  28,  55, 
xlviii.  10,  1.  1  ;  Ex.  xviii.  7  ;  Ruth  i.  9, 14;  2  Sam. 
xiv.  33;  IK.  xix.  20;  Luke  xv.  20;  Tob.  vii.  6, 
X.  12)  :  (2)  between  brothers  or  near  male  relatives 
or  intimate  friends  (Gen.  xxix.  13,  xxxiii.  4,  xlv. 
15;  Ex.  iv.  27;  1  Sam.  .\x.  41):  (3)  the  same 
mode  of  salutation  between  persons  not  related,  but 
of  equal  rank,  whether  friendly  or  deceitful,  is  men- 
tioned (2  Sam.  XX.  9  ;  Ps.  l.xxv.  10  ;  Prov.  xxvii. 
6;  Luke  vii.  45  (1st  clause),  xxii.  48;  Acts  .\x. 
37) :  (4)  as  a  mark  of  real  or  affected  condescension 
(2  Sam.  XV.  5,  xix.  39) :  (5)  respect  from  an  in- 
ferior (Luke  vii.  38,  45,  and  perhaps  viii.  44). 

In  the  Christian  Church  the  kiss  of  charity  was 
practised  not  only  as  a  friendly  salutation,  but  as 
an  act  symbolical  of  love  and  Christian  brotherhood 
(Rom.  xvi.  16;  1  Cor.  xvi.  20;  2  Cor.  xiii.  12; 
1  Thess.  V.  26  ;  1  Pet.  v.  14).  It  was  embodied 
in  the  early  Christian  offices,  and  has  been  con- 
tinued in  some  of  those  now  in  use  (Apost.  Constit. 
ii.  57,  viii.  11;  Just.  Mart.  Apol.  i.  65;  Palmer, 
On. Lit.  ii.  102,  and  note  from  Du  Gauge;  Bing- 
ham, Christ.  Antiq.  b.  xii.  c.  iv.  §5,  vol.  iv.  49, 
b.  iL  c.  xi.  §10,  vol.  i.  161,  b.  ii.  c.  xix.  §17,  vol. 
i.  272,  b.  iv.  c.  vi.  §14,  vol.  i.  526,  b.  xxii.  c.  iii. 
§6,  vol.  vii.  316;  see  also  Cod.  Just.  V.  Tit.  iii. 
16,  de  Don.  ante  Nupt. ;  Brande,  Pop.  Antiq.  ii. 
87). 

Between  persons  of  unequal  rank,  the  kiss,  as  a 
mark  either  of  condescension  on  the  one  hand,  or 
of  respect  on  the  other,  can  hardly  be'saiil  to  sur- 
vive in  Europe  except  in  the  case  of  royal  per- 
sonages. In  the  East  it  has  been  continued  with 
little  diminution  to  the  present  day.     The  ancient 

"  1.  Verb.  pt^J  :  LXX.  and  N.  T.  <^iA.e'(o,  Kara- 
<\>iKiui  :  oscular,  deosculor.  2.  Siihs.  r\p''CZ,  the 
notion  being- of  extension,  or  possibly  from  the  sound, 
Gesen.  p.  924  :   LXX.  and  N.  T.  <t>C\r,ij.a  ;  o^rKhim. 


KITE 

Persian  custom  among  relatives  is  mentioned  by 
Xenophon  {Cyrgp.  i.  4,  §27),  and  among  iuteiiors 
towards  superiors,  whose  feet  and  hands  they  kissed 
(ii.  vii.  5,  §32 ;  Dion  Cass.  lix.  27).  Among  the 
Arabs  the  women  and  children  kiss  the  beai-ds  of 
their  husbands  or  fathers.  The  superioi-  returns 
the  salute  by  a  kiss  on  the  forehead.  In  Egvpt 
im  inferior  kisses  the  hand  of  a  superior,  generally 
on  the  back,  but  sometimes,  as  a  special  favour,  on 
the  palm  also.  To  testify  abject  submission,  and 
in  asking  favours,  the  feet  are  often  kissed  instead 
of  the  liand.  "  The  son  kisses  the  hand  of  his 
flrther,  the  wife  tliat  of  her  husband,  the  slave, 
and  often  the  fiee  servant,  that  of  the  master. 
The  slaves  and  servants  of  a  gi-andee  kiss  their 
lord's  sleeve  or  the  skirt  of  his  clothing"  (L;uie, 
Mod.  Eg.  ii.  9;  An'ieux,  Trav.  p.  151;  Burck- 
haa-dt,  Trav.  i.  369  ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  329,  ii.  93  ; 
Lfyard,  Nin.  i.  174;  Wellsted,  Arabia,  i.  341  ; 
I^Lilcolm,  Sketches  of  Persia,  p.  271;  see  above 
(5)). 

The  v/ritten  decrees  of  a  sovereign  are  kissed  in 
token  of  resjiect ;  even  the  ground  is  sometimes 
kissed  by  Orientals  in  the  fulness  of  their  sub- 
mission (Gen.  iii.  40  ;  1  Sam.  xxiv.  8  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  9  ; 
Is.  xlix.  23;  Mic.  vii.  17;  Matt,  xxviii.  9;  Wil- 
kinson, Anc.  Eg.  ii.  203 ;  Layard,  Nin.  i.  274 ; 
Maimer,  Obs.  i.  336). 

Friends  saluting  each  other  join  the  right  hand, 
then  each  kisses  his  own  hand,  and  puts  it  to  his 
lips  and  forehead,  or  breast;  after  a  long  absence 
they  embi'ace  each  other,  kissing  first  on  the  right 
side  of  the  face  or  neck,  and  then  on  the  left,  or  on 
both  sides  of  the  beard  (Lane,  ii.  9, 10  ;  Irby  and 
Mangles,  p.  116;  Chardin,  Voy.  iii.  421;  Ai-vneux, 
I.e.;  Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  369  ;  Russell,  Aleppo, 
i.  240). 

Kissing  is  spoken  of  in  Scripture  as  a  mark  of 
respect  or  adoration  to  idols  (1  K.  six.  18;  Hos. 
xiii.  2  ;  comp.  Cic.  Vcrr.  iv.  43  ;  Tacitus,  speaking 
of  an  Eastern  custom.  Hist.  iii.  24,  and  the  Mo- 
hammedan custom  of  kissing  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca  ; 
Burckhardt,  Travels,  i.  250,  298,  323  ;  Crichton, 
Arabia,  ii.  215),  [H.  W.  P.] 

KITE  (IT'X,  ayyah :  IktIvos,  yv\f/ :  vultur, 
milcus?).  'The  Hebrew  word  thus  rendered  occurs 
in  three  passages,  Lev.  xi.  14,  Deut.  xiv.  13,  and 
Job  xxviii.  7 :  in  the  two  former  it  is  translated 
"  kite"  in  the  A.  V.,  in  the  lattei  "vulture."  It 
is  enumerated  among  the  twenty  names  of  birds 
mentioned  ui  Deut.  xiv.^  (belonging  for  the  most 
part  to  the  order  Raptores),  which  were  consideied 
unclean  by  the  Mosaic  Law,  and  forbidden  to  be 
used  as  food  by  the  Israelites.  The  allusion  in  Job 
alone  affords  a  clue  to  its  identification.  The  deep 
mines  in  the  lecesses  of  the  mountains  from  which 
the  labour  of  man  extracts  the  treasures  of  the 
earth  are  there  described  as  "a  track  which  the 
bird  of  prey  hath  not  known,  nor  hath  the  eye  of 
the  ayyah  looked  upon  it."  Among  all  birds 
of  prey,  which  are  proverbially  clearsighted, 
the  ayyah  is  thus  distinguished  as  possessed  of 
jieculiar  keenness  of  vision,  and  by  this  attribute 
alone  is  it  marked.  Translators  have  been  sin- 
gularly at  variance  with  regard  to  this  bird.  In 
the  LXX.    of  Lev.  and   Deut.  ayyah  is  rendered 


■^  In  the  parallel  passage  of  Lev.  xi.  the  ylede 
(ilNI)  is  omitted;  but  the  Hebrew  word  has  in  all 
probability  crept  into  the  text  by  an  error  of  some 
transcriber.      (See  Gesen.  s.  r.,  and  Oi.ede.) 


KITE 

"  kite,''  »  while  in  Job  it  is  "  vulture,"  which  tlie 
A.  V.  has  t'ullowed.  The  Vulg.  give  "  vulture  "  in 
all  three  passages,  unless,  as  Drusius  suggests  (on 
Lev.  xi.  14),  the  order  of  the  words  in  Lev.  and  Deut. 
is  changed ;  but  even  in  this  case  there  remains 
the  rendering  "  vulture "  in  Job,  and  the  reason 
ad\-anced  by  Drusius  for  the  transposition  is  not 
conclusive.  The  Targ.  Onkelos  vaguely  renders  it 
"  bird  of  prey  ;"  Targ.  Pseudo-Jonathan,  "  black 
vulture ;"  Targ.  Jerus.  by  a  word  which  Buxtorf 
translates  "  a  pie,"  in  which  he  is  supported  by  the 
authority  of  Kimchi,  but  which  Bochart  considers 
to  be  identical  in  meaning  with  the  preceding,  and 
which  is  employed  in  Targ.  Onkelos  as  the  e(iuiva- 
lent  of  the  word  rendered  "  heion"  in  A.  V.  of  Lev. 
xi.  19.  It  is  impossible  to  saj:  what  the  rendeiing 
of  the  Peshito  Syriac  in  Lev.  and  Deut.  may  be,  in 
consequence  of  an  evident  confusion  in  the  text; 
iu  Job  ayyah  is  translated  by  davtho^  "  a  kite"  or 
"  vulture  "  as  some  have  it,  whicli  is  the  repre- 
sentative of  "  vulture"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Is.  xxxiv. 
15.  The  Arabic  versions  of  Saadias  and  Abulwalid 
give  "  the  night-owl ;"  and  Aben  Ezra,  deriving  it 
from  a  root  "•'  signifying  "  an  island,"  explains  it 
as  "  the  island  bird,"  without  however  identifying 
it  with  any  individual  of  the  feathered  tribes. 
Robertson  (Jjlavis  Pent.ateuchi)  derives  ayi/ah  from 
the  Heb.  H^X,  an  obsolete  root,  which  he  connects 
with  an  Arabic  word,**  tlie  primary  meaning  of 
which,  accordmg  to  Schultens,  is  "  to  turn."  If 
this  derivation  be  the  true  one,  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  "kite"  is  the  correct  rendering.  The 
habit  which  birds  of  this  genus  have  of  "  sailing  in 
circles,  with  the  rudder-like  tail  by  its  inclination 
governing  the' curve,"  as  Yarrell  says,  accords  with 
the  Arabic  derivation.'^ 

Bochart,  regarding  the  etymology  of  the  word, 
connected  it  with  the  Arabic  al  ijuiju,  a  kind  of 
hawk  so  called  from  its  cry  ydijd,  described  by 
Damir  as  a  small  bird  with  a  short  tail,  used  in 
hunting,  and  remarkable  for  its  great  courage,  the 
swiftness  of  its  flight,  and  the  keenness  of  its  vision, 
which  is  made  the  subject  of  praise  in  an  Arabic 
stanza  quoted  by  Damir.  From  tliese  considerations 
Bochart  identities  it  with  the  merlin,  or  Falco 
aesalon  of  Linnaeus,  which  is  the  same  as  the  Greek 
alffaXdv  and  Latin  aesalo.  It  must  be  confessed, 
however,  that  the  gi'ounds  for  identifying  the 
ayijah  with  any  individual  species  are  too  slight  to 
enable  us  to  regard  with  confidence  any  conclusions 
which  may  be  based  upon  them ;  and  from  the  ex- 
pression which  follows  in  Lev.  and  Deut.,  "  after 
its  kind,"  it  is  evident  that  the  term  is  generic. 
Tlie  Talmud  goes  so  far  as  to  assert  that  the  four 
Hebrew  words  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  vulture," 
"glede,"  and  "kite,"  denote  one  and  the  same  bird 
(Lewysohn,  Zoologie  des  Talmnds,  §196).  Seetzen 
(i.  310)  mentions  a  species  of  falcon  used  in  Syria 
for  hunting  gazelles  and  hares,  and  a  smaller  kind 
for  hunting  hares  in  the  desert.  Russell  (^Aleppo, 
ii.  196)  enumerates  seven  dift'erent  kinds  employed 
by  the  natives  for  the  same  purpose. 


KNIFE 


47 


*  In  ornithological  languaj?e  "  kite  "  ^  "  glede  " 
[Milvus  vulgaris)  ;  but  "  glede "  is  applied  by  the 
common  people  in  Ireland  to  the  common  buzzard 
[Buteo  vulgaris],  the  "  kite  "  not  being  indigenous  to 
that  country.  So,  too,  the  translators  of  the  A.  V. 
considered  the  terms  "  kite  "  and  "  glede"  as  distinct, 
for  they  render  HXT  "  glede,"  and  n*N  "  kite," 
"  and  the  glede  and  the  kite  "  (Deut.  xiv.  13). 
4  '-   \^^}.  "  ■'X. 


Two  persons  are  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  whose 
names  are  derived  from  this  bird.  [AjAll.]  Fiirst 
{Handw.  s.  v.)  compares  the  parallel  inst;mces  of 
S/icbin,  a  kind  of  falcon,  used  as  a  proper  name  by 
tlie  Persians  and  Turks,  and  the  Latin  Mikin's. 
To  these  wo  may  add  Falco  and  Ftdconia  among 
the  Romans,  and  the  names  of  Hawke,  Falcou, 
Falconer,  Kite,  &c.  &c.,  in  our  own  language  (see 
Lower's  Historical  Essays  on  English  Surnames  '\. 

[\V.  A.  W.'] 


KITH'LISH  (Iir-'pn!),  i.  e.  Cithlish  :  Uaaxws : 
Alex.  xa9A.c6s  :  Cethlis'),  one  of  tlie  towns  of  Judah, 
in  the  Shefelah  or  lowland  (Josh.  xv.  40),  named 
in  the  same  group  with  Eglon,  Gederoth,  and  Mak- 
kedah.  It  is  not  named  by  Eusebius  or  Jerome, 
nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  either  sought  or 
found  by  any  later  traveller.  [G.] 

KIT'EON  (fnpi? :  Ke'Spwy :  Alex.,  with  un- 
usual departure  from  the  Heb.  text,  XePpuv.  Cetron), 
a  town  which,  though  not  mentioned  in  the  specifi- 
cation of  the  possessions  of  Zebulun  in  Josh,  xix.,  is 
catalogued  in  Judg.  i.  30  as  one  of  the  towns  from 
which  Zebulun  did  not  expel  the  Canaanites.  It  I's 
here  named  next  to  Nahalol,  a  position  occupietl  in 
Josh.  xix.  1 5,  by  Kattath.  Kitrou  may  be  a  cor- 
ruption of  this,  or  it  may  be  an  independent  place 
omitted  for  some  reason  ii-om  the  other  list.  In 
the  Talmud  {Megillah,  as  quoted  by  Schwarz, 
173)  it  is  identified  with  "  Zippori,"  i.e.  Sepphoris, 
now  Seffurieh.  [G-] 

KIT'TIM  (Cna  :  Kvtiol,  Gen.  x.  4  ;  Khioi, 
1  Chr.  i.  7  :  Ccthim).  Twice  written  in  the  A.  V. 
for  Chittim. 

KNEADING-TEOUGHS.    [Bread.] 

KNIFE. f  1.  The  knives  of  the  Egyptians,  and 
of  other  nations  in  early  times,  were  probably  only 
of  hard  stone,  and  the  use  of  the  Hint  or  stone 


^  Gesenius  traces  the  word  to  the  unused  root 
niK  =  Arab.  (^^^,  "to  howl  like  a  dog  or  wolf." 

'■  1.  3"in,  Gesen.  p.  51G  :  ixdx°-tpa:  gladiits,  cutter. 
2.  ri|?DXD,  from'  "pDN,  "  eat,"  Gcsen.  pp.  89,  92  : 
pdn<()aia  :  glailius. 


48 


KNIFE 


knife  was  sometimes  retained  for  sacred  purposes 
after  the  introduction  of  iron  and  steel  (Plin. 
H.  N.  xxsv.  12,  §165).  Herodotus  (ii.  86) 
mentions  knives  both  of  iron  and  of  stone*  in 
dill'erent  stages  of  the  same  process  of  embalming. 
The  same  may  perhaps  be  said  to  some  extent  of 
the  Hebrews.'' 

2.  In  their  meals  the  Jews,  like  other  Orientals, 
made  little  use  of  knives,  but  they  weie  required 
both  for  slaughtering  animals  either  for  food  or 
sacrifice,  as  well  as  cutting  up  the  carcase  (Lev. 
vii.  3.3,  34,  viii.  15,  20,  25,  ix.  13;  Num.  xviii. 
18  ;  1  Sam.  is.  24;  Ez.  xxiv.  4;  Ezr.  i.  9;  Matt. 
xx%'i.  23  ;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  172;  Wilkinson,  i. 
169;  Mischn.  Tumid,  iv.  ?>). 

3.  Smaller  knives  were  in  use  for  paring  fruit 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  7 ;  B.J.  i.  33,  §7)  and  for 
sharpening  pens<^  (Jer.  xxxvi.  23). 


I,  2.  Egyptian  Flint  Knives  in  Musi-um  at  Kcrlin. 
3.  Egyptian  Knife  represented  in  Hieroglyphics. 

4.  The  razor  •*  was  often  used  for  Nazaritic  pur- 
poses, for  which  a  special  chamber  was  reserved  in 
the  Temple  (Num.  vi.  5,  9,  19  ;  Ez.  v.  1 ;  Is.  vii. 
20  ;  Jer.  xxxvi.  23  ;  Acts  xviii.  18,  xxi.  24  ;  Mischn. 
Midd.  ii.  5). 


E{,7pti!in  Knife.     (British  Museum.) 

5.  The  piuning-hooks  of  Is.  xviii.  5  "^  were  pro- 
bably curved  knives. 

"    Al'floS    AlfllOTTlKOS. 

^  "Vi  (I'x.iv.  25)  is  in  LX';.  "^ij^o?,  in  which  Syr. 
and  other  versions  agree  ;  as  also  W'Xi  T\')1'^T\^ 
Gcs.  p.  1160;  iJ-axalpw:  -erptVas  ek  TreVpo.s  oKpOTO/iOtx;, 
Josh.  V.  2.  See  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg',  ii.  Ib4  ;  rre.scott, 
Mexico,  i.  63. 

'  "IQDT  "lyj^.  "  tlic  knife  of  :>  scribe." 


KNOP 

6.    The   lancets'    of  the   priests   of  Baal   were 
doubtleiss  pointed  knives  (1  K.  xviii.  28). 


Assyrian  KnivL-s.     (From  Originals  in  flritisli  .MiidvUm.) 

Asiatics  usually  carry  about  with  them  a  knife 
or  dagger,  often  with  a  highly  ornamented  handle, 
which  may  be  used  when  required  for  eating  pur- 
poses (Ju'dg.  iii.  21 ;  Layard,  Nin.  ii.  342,  299  ; 
Wilkinson,  i.  358,  360  ;  Chardin,  Vorj.  iv.  18 ; 
Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  340,  pi.  71).  [H.  W.  P.] 

KNOP,  that  is  Knob  (A.  S.  cncep).  A  woid  cm- 
ployed  in  the  A.  V.  to  translate  two  terms,  of  the  leal 
meaning  of  which  all  that  we  can  say  with  ceitainty 
is  that  they  refer  to  some  architectural  or  ornameiital 
object,  and  that  they  have  nothing  in  common. 

1.  Cap/dor  (liriQS).  This  occurs  in  the  de- 
scription of  the  candlestick  of  the  sacred  tent  in 
Ex.  XXV.  31-36,  and  sxxvii.  17-22,  the  two  passages 
being  identical.  The  knops  are  here  distinguished 
fiom  the  shaft,  branches,  bowls,  and  flowers  of  the 
candlestick  ;  but  the  knop  and  the  flower  go  together, 
and  seem  intended  to  imitate  the  produce  of  an 
almond-tree.  In  another  part  of  the  work  they 
appear  to  form  a  boss,  from  which  the  branches  are 
to  spring  out  from  the  main  stem.  In  Am.  ix.  1 
the  same  word  is  rendered,  with  doubtful  accuracy, 
"  lintel."  The  same  rendering  is  used  in  Zeph.  ii. 
14,  where  the  reference  is  to  some  part  of  the  palaces 
of  Nineveh,  to  be  exposed  when  the  wooden  upper 
.story — the  "cedar  work" — was  destroyed.  The 
Hebrew  word  seems  to  contain  the  sense  of  "  co- 
vering" and  "crowning"  (Gesenius,  Thes.  709). 
Josephus's  description  (^Ant.  iii.  6,  §7)  names  both 
balls  (cr^aipia)  and  pomegranates  {poicTKoi),  either 
of  which  may  be  the  cuphtor.  TheTargumS  agi'ees 
with  the  latter,  the  LXX.  {(r(paipo}TTJpes)  with  the 
fonner.      [Lintel.] 

2.  The  second  term,  Pckaim  (D''ypS),  is  ibund 
only  in  1  K.  vi.  18  and  vii  24.  It  refers  in  the 
former  to  cai-vings  executed  in  the  cedar  wainscot 
of  the  interior  of  the  Temple,  and,  as  m  the  pi  e- 
ceding  word,  is  associated  with  flowers.  In  the 
latter  case  it  denotes  an  ornament  cast  round  the 


<*  D''n^'5n  nj;n,  cesen.  p.  loeg. 

"  riilOTD,  Gesen.  p.  421  :  Spevavo.  :  falces. 
'    D^nO"!  :   <Tti.pojx6.a-Tai  :   lanceoli.. 
^  "l-ITn,  an  apple,  or  other  fruit  of  a  round  form  ; 
both  in  Onkelos  and  Pscudojon. 


KOA 

great  reservoir  or  "  sea"  of  Solomon's  Temple  below 
the  biiin  :  there  was  a  double  row  of  them,  tea  to 
a  cubit,  or  about  2  inches  from  centre  to  centre. 

The  word  no  doubt  signifies  some  globular  thing 
i-esenibling  a  small  gourd,"  or  an  egg,"*  though  as  to 
the  character  of  the  ornament  we  are  quite  in  the 
dark.  The  following  woodcut  of  a  portion  of  a 
richly  ornamented  door-step  or  slab  from  Konyunjik, 
probably  represents  somethmg  approximating  to  the 
"  knop  and  the  flower  "  of  Solomon's  Temple.  But 
as  the  building  from  which  this  is  taken  was  the 
work  of  a  king  at  least  as  late  as  the  son  of  Esar- 
haddon,  contemporary  with  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Manasseh,  it  is  only  natural  to  suppose  that 
the  character  of  the  ornament  would  have  under- 
gone considerable  modification  from  what  it  was  in 
the  time  of  Solomon.  We  must  await  some  future 
happy  discovery  in  Assyrian  or  Egyptian  art,  to 
throw  clearer  light  on  the  meaning  of  these  and  a 
hundred  other  terms  of  detail  in  the  descriptions  of 
the  buildings  and  hfe  of  the  Israelites.  [G.] 


W  @  tP  till  @  ®  ^^  @  ^^' 


Bi.iiIlt  oCa  Slab  from  Kouyunjik.     (Feri^ussun's  Architecture.) 

KO'A  (yip:  'Trxoue'")  is  aword  which  occursonly 
in  Ez.  xxiii.  23: — "The  Babylonians  and  all  the 
Chaldaeans,  Pekod,  and  Shoa,  and  Koa,  and  all  the 
Assyrians  with  them."  It  is  uncertain  if  the  word 
is  a  proper  name  or  no.  It  may  perhaps  designate 
a  place  otherwise  unknown,  which  we  must  suppose 
to  have  been  a  city  or  disti'ict  of  Babylonia.  Or  it 
may  be  a  common  noun,  signifying  "  prince"  or 
"nobleman,"  as  the  Vulgate  takes  it,  and  some  of 
the  Jewish  interpreters.  [G.  K.] 


KOHA'i'H  49 

KO'HATHJ  (nnp;  and,  Num.  .xvi.  ],  &c., 
nn|^:  Kde  and  Kadd :  Caliath:  "assembly"), 
second  of  the  three  sons  of  Levi  (Gershon,  Kohath, 
Merari),  from  whom  the  tiiree  principal  divisions  of 
the  Levitt's  derived  their  origin  and  their  name  (Gen. 
xlvi.  11  ;  Exod.  vi.  1(3,  18  ;  Num.  iii.  17  ;  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  12,  &c.).  Kohath  was  the  father  of  Am- 
ram,  and  he  of  Moses  and  Aaron.  From  him, 
therefore,  were  descended  all  the  priests ;  and  hence 
those  of  the  Kohathites  who  were  not  priests  were 
of  the  highest  rank  of  the  Levites,  though  not  the 
sons  of  Levi's  first-born.  Korah,  the  son  of  Izhar, 
was  a  Kohathite,  and  hence,  perhaps,  his  impa- 
tience of  the  superiority  of  his  relatives,  Moses  and 
Aaron.  In  the  journeyings  of  the  Tabernacle  the 
sons  of  Kohath  had  charge  of  the  most  holy  por- 
tion of  the  vessels,  to  carry  them  by  staves,  as 
the  vail,  the  ark,  the  tables  of  show-bread,  the 
golden-altar,  &c.  (Num.  iv.) ;  but  they  were  not 
to  touch  them  or  look  upon  them  "  lest  they  die." 
These  were  all  previously  covered. by  the  priests, 
the  sons  of  Aaron.  In  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  the 
Kohathites  are  mentioned  first  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12), 
as  they  are  also  1  Chr.  xv.  .5-7,  11,  when  Uria 
their  chief  assisted,  with  120  of  his  brethren,  in 
bringing  up  the  aik  to  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of 
David.  It  is  also  remarkable  that  in  this  last  list 
of  those  whom  David  calls  "  chief  of  the  fathers  of 
the  Levites,"  and  couples  with  "  Zadok  and  Abia- 
thar  the  priests,"  of  six  who  are  mentioned  by 
name  four  are  descendants  of  Kohath  ;  viz.,  besides 
Uriel,  Shemaiah  the  son  of  Elzaphan,  wi'th  200  of 
his  brethren ;  Eliel,  the  son  of  Hebron,  with  80  of 
his  brethren ;  and  Amminadab,  the  son  of  Uzziel, 
with  112  of  his  brethren.  For  it  appears  from  Ex. 
vi.  18-22,  compared  witli  1  Chr.  xxiii.  12,  xxvi. 
2d-32,  that  there  were  four  families  of  sons  of 
Kohath  —  Amramites,  Izharites,  Hebronites,  and 
Uzzielites;  and  of  the  above  names  Elzaphan  and 
Amminadab  were  both  Uzzielites  (Ex.  vi.  22),  and 
Eliel  a  Hebrouite.  The  verses  already  cited  from 
1  Chr.  xxvi. ;  Num.  iii.  19,  27  ;   1  Chr.  xxiii.  12, 


"  Compare   the   similar    word    JiypQ,    Pakkuoth, 

gourds,"  in  2  K.  iv.  39. 

"  This  is  tlie  rendering  of  tlie  Targum. 

=  The  conjunction  being-  taken  as  part  of  the  name. 


^  It  is  not  apparent  why  the  form  Kohath,  which 
occurs  hut  occasionally,  should  have  been  chosen  in 
the  A.  V.  in  preferenfce  to  the  more  usual  one  of  Ke- 
hath,  sanctioned  both  by  LXX.  and  Vulg. 


Gershon. 
Gershonitcs. 


LEVI. 

I 


Merari. 
Merari  tcs. 


A  dauj^hter,  .fochcbcd. 


=  Elisheba. 
.1 


■  =  Zippor: 


fellKI.OMITH, 

Tnt:meof  Diiviil 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  S5, 
26).  liut  "  I!e- 
habinli  "  w.-is 
chief  of  the  sons 
of  Khezer  in  tlie 
days  of  David, 
xxiii.  17 
of  the  80I 


time  of  David 
(and  xxiv.  22). 


id  Sliclomoth  \*a9 
of  Izliar  (xxiv.  22). 


Elltanali. 
Samuel. 

Sonn  ol  Hema 
(1  Chr.  vi 
3;i). 


Hebronites. 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  19; 
xxvi.  23,  30.  ser/.) 


aliitca. 

in.) 


Uzziel. 

Uzzielites. 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  20.) 


Amminaoab. 
(1  Chr.  XV.  10.) 


50 


KOLAIAH 


also  disclose  the  wealth  and  importance  of  the  Ko- 
hathites,  and  the  important  offices  filled  by  them  as 
keepers  of  the  dedicated  treasures,  as  judges,  oflicei's, 
and  rulers,  both  secular  and  sacred.  In  2  Chr.  xx. 
19,  they  appear  as  singers,  with  the  Korhites. 

The  number  of  the  sons  of  Kohath  between  the 
ages  of  30  and  50,  at  the  first  census  in  the  wilder- 
ness, was  2750,  and  the  whole  number  of  males 
from  a  month  old  was  8600  (Num.  iii.  28,  iv.  36). 
'  Their  number  is  not  given  at  the  second  numbering 
f  Num.  .xxvi.  57),  but  the  whole  number  of  Levites 
had  increased  by  1300,  viz.  from  22,000  to  23,300 
(Num.  iii.  39,  xxvi.  62).  The  place  of  the  sons  of 
Kohath  in  marching  and  encampment  was  south  of 
the  tabernacle  (Num.  iii.  29),  wliicli  was  also  the 
situation  of  the  Reubenites.  Samuel  was  a  Ko- 
hathite,  and  so  of  course  were  his  descendants.  He- 
man  the  singer  and  the  third  division  of  the  singers 
which  was  under  him.  [Heman  ;  Asaph  ;  Je- 
DUTHUN.]  Tlie  inheritance  of  those  sons  of  Ko- 
hath who  wei  e,  not  priests  lay  in  the  half  tribe 
of  JIanasseh,  in  Ephraim  (1  Chr.  vi.  61-7o),  and 
in  Dan  (Josh.  xxi.  5,  20-26).  Of  the  personal 
history  of  Kohath  we  know  nothing,  except  that  he 
came  down  to  Egypt  with  Levi  and  Jacob  (Gen. 
slvi.  11),  that  his  sister  was  Jochebed  (Ex.  vi.  20), 
and  that  he  lived  to  the  age  of  133  years  (Ex. 
vi.  18).  He  lived  about  80  or  90  years  in  Egypt 
during  Joseph's  lifetime,  and  about  30  more  after 
his  death.  He  may  have  been  some  20  years 
younger  than  Joseph  his  uncle.  Tlie  table  on  the 
preceding*page  shows  the  principal  descents  fiom 
Kohath  ;  a  fuller  table  may  be  seen  in  Burrington's 
GenealoijiesyTiih.X.No.l.  [Levites.]  [A. C.H.] 

KOLAT'AH  (n^^lp:  Kco\e'ia;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
KoXeta :  Coki'ia).  1.  A  Benjamite  whose  de- 
scendants settled  in  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from 
the  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

2.  The  father  of  Ahab  the  false  prophet,  who 
was  burnt  by  the  king  of  Babylon  (Jer.  xxix.  21). 

KO'RAH  (trip,  "baldness"^:  Kope:  Core). 
1.  Third  son  of  Esau  by  Aholibamah  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  5,  14-,  18;  1  Chr.  i.  35).  He  was  born  in 
Canaan  before  Esau  migrated  to  Mount  Seir  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  5-9),  and  was  one  of  the  "  dukes  "  of  Edom. 

2.  Another  Edomitish  duke  of  this  name,  sjnung 
from  Eliphaz,  Esau's  son  by  Adah  (Gen.  xxxvi.  16) ; 
but  this  is  not  confirmed  by  ver.  1 1,  nor  by  the  list 
in  1  Chr.  i.  36,  nor  is  it  probable  in  itself. 

3.  One  of  the  "sons  of  Hebron"  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
43  ;  but  whether,  in  this  obscure  passage,  Hebron 
is  the  name  of  a  man  or  of  a  city,  and  whether,  in 
the  latter  case,  Korah  is  the  same  as  the  son  of 
Izhar  (No.  4),  whose  children  may  have  been  located 
at  Hebron  among  those  Kohathites  who  were 
priests,  is  difficult  to  determine. 

4.  Son  of  Izhar,  the  son  of  Kohath,  the  son  of 
Levi.  He  was  leader  of  the  famous  rebellion  against 
his  cousins  Moses  and  Aaron  in  the  wilderness,  for 
which  he  paid  the  penalty  of  perishing  with  his 
followers  by  an  earthquake  and  fiames  of  fire  (Num. 


»  The  meaning  of  Korah's  name  (baldness)  has 
supplied  a  ready  handle  to  some  members  of  the 
Church  of  Kome  to  banter  Calvin  (Calvinus,  Calviis), 
as  being  homonjanous  witli  his  predecessor  in  schism  ; 
and  it  has  been  retorted  that  Korah's  baldness  has  a 
more  suitable  antitype  in  the  tonsure  of  the  llomish 
priests  (Simonis,  Onom.  s.  v.). 

b  avTiKoyia,  "contradiction,"  alluding  to  his  speech 
in  Num.  xvi.  3,  and  accompanying  rebellion.  Compare 
the  use  of  the  suinc  word  in  Iieb.  xii.  3,   I's.  cvi.  32, 


KOEAH 

xvi.  xxvi.  9-11).  The  details  of  this  rebellion  are 
too  well  known  to  need  reijetition  here,  but  it  may 
be  well  to  remaik,  that  the  particular  giievauce 
which  rankled  in  the  mind  of  Korah  and  his  com- 
pany was  their  exclusion  from  the  office  of  the 
priesthood,  and  their  being  confined — those  among 
them  who  were  Levites — to  the  inferior  service  of 
the  tabernacle,  as  appears  clearly,  both  from  the 
words  of  ]\loses  in  ver.  9,  and  fiom  the  test  resorted 
to  with  regard  to  the  censers  and  the  offering  of 
incense.  The  same  thing  also  ajipears  from  the 
subsequent  confirmation  of  the  pjiesthood  to  Aaron 
(ch.  xvii.).  The  appointment  of  Elizaphan  to  be 
chief  of  the  Kohathites  (Num.  iii.  30)  may  have 
further  inflamed  his  jealousy.  '  Korah's  position  as 
leader  in  this  rebellion  was  evidently  the  result  of 
his  personal  character,  which  was  that  of  a  bold, 
haughty,  and  ambitious  man.  This  appears  from  his 
addiess  to  Moses  in  ver.  3,  and  especially  from  his 
conduct  in  ver.  19,  where  both  his  daring  and  his 
influence  over  the  congregation  are  very  apparent. 
Were  it  not  for  this,  one  would  have  expected  the 
Gershonites — as  the  elder  branch  of  the  Levites — to 
have  supplied  a  leader  in  conjunction  with  the  sons 
of  Reuben,  rather  than  the  family  of  Izhar,  who  was 
Amram's  younger  brother.  From  some  cause 
which  does  not  clearly  appear,  the  children  of  Ko- 
rah were  not  involved  in  the  destruction  of  their 
father,  as  we  are  expressly  told  in  Num.  xxvi.  11, 
and  as  appears  fiom  the  continuance  of  the  family 
of  the  Korahites  to  the  reign,  at  least  of  Jeho- 
shaphat  (2  Chr.  xx.  19),  and  piobably  till  the  retmn 
from  the  captivity  (1  Chr.  ix.  19,  31).  [Kora- 
hites.] Perhaps  the  fissure  of  the  ground  which 
swallowed  up  the  tents  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  did 
not  extend  beronil  those  of  the  Reubenites.  From 
ver.  27  it  seems  clear  that  Korah  himself  was  not 
with  Dathan  and  Abiram  at  the  moment.  His  tent 
may  have  been  one  pitched  for  himself,  in  contempt 
of  the  orders  of  Moses,  by  the  side  of  his  fellow- 
rebels,  while  his  family  continued  to  reside  in  their 
proper  camp  nearer  the  tabernacle  ;  or  it  must  liave 
been  separated  b}'  a  considerable  space  fi'om  those 
of  l)athan  and  Abiram.  Or,  even  if  Korah's  family 
resided  amongst  the  Reubenites,  they  may  have 
fled,  at  Moses's  warning,  to  take  refuge  in  the  Ko- 
hathite  camp,  instead  of  remaining,  as  the  wives 
and  children  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  did  (ver.  27). 
Korah  himself  was  doubtless  with  the  250  men 
who  bare  censers  nearer  the  tabernacle  (ver.  19), 
and  perished  with  them  by  the  "  fire  fi-om  Je- 
hovah "  which  accompanied  the  earthquake.  It  is 
nowhei'e  said  that  he  was  one  of  those  who  "  went 
down  quick  into  the  pit"  (comp.  Ps.  cvi.  17,  18), 
and  it  is  natural  that  he  should  have  been  with  the 
censer-beai-ers.  That  lie  was  so  is  indeed  clearly 
implied  by  Num.  xvi.  16-19,  35,  4U,  compared  with 
xxvi.  9,  10.  In  the  N.  T.  (Jude  ver.  11)  Korah  is 
coupled  with  Cain  and  Balaam,  and  seems  to  be 
held  out  as  a  warning  to  those  who  "  despise  domi- 
nion and  speak  evil  of  dignities,"  of  whom  it  is  said 
that  they  "  perished  in  the  gainsaying  of  Core."  '' 

and  of  the  verb,  John  xix.  12,  and  Is.  xsii.  22, 
Ixv.  2  (LXX.),  in  which  latter  passage,  as  quoted 
Kom.  X.  21,  the  A.  V.  has  the  same  expression  of 
"gainsaying"  as  in  Jude.  The  Son  of  Siracli,  follow- 
ing Ps.  cvi.  16,  nL''J27  -IXSpV  iS-'c.  (otherwise  ren- 
dered however  by  LXX.,  Ts.  cvi.  Ifi,  TraouipyLO-av), 
describes  Korah  and  his  comjianions  as  envious  or 
jealous  of  Moses,  where  the  English  "maligned"  is 
hardly  an  equivalent  for  t'^'ijAwcrar. 


KOEAHITE 

Nothing  more  is  known  of  Korah's  personal  cha- 
racter or  career  previous  to  his  rebellion.  [A.  C.  H.] 
KORAHITE  ( 1  Chr.  ix.  19, 31),  KORHITE, 
or  KORATHITE  (iu  Hebrew  always  ^Hli?,  or  in 
plur.  D*n"lp  :  never  expressed  at  all  by  the  LXX., 
but  paraphrased  vioi,  Stj/xos,  or  yevecrfLS  Kope  : 
Coritae),  that  portion  of  the  Kohathites  who  were 
descended  from  Korah,  and  are  frequently  styled  by 
the  synonymous  phrase  Sons  of  Korah.  [Kohath.] 
It  would  appear,  at  first  sight,  from  Ex.  vi.  24, 
that  Korah  had  three  sons — Assir,  Elkanah,  and 
Abiasapli — as  Winer,  Kosenmiiller,  &c.,  also  under- 
stand it;  but  as  we  learn  from  1  Chr.  vi.  22,  23, 
;57,  that  Assir,  Elkanah,  and  Abiasaph,  were  re- 
s|)ectively  the  son,  grandson,  and  great-gi-andson  of 
Korah,  it  seems  obvious  that  Ex.  vi.  24,  gives  us 
the  chief  houses  sprung  from  Korah,  and  not  his 
actual  sous,  and  therefore  that  Elkanah  and  Abiasaph 
were  not  the  sons,  but  later  descendants  of  Korah. 
If,  however,  Abiasaph  was  the  grandson  of  Assir 
his  name  must  have  been  added  to  this  genealogy  in 
Exodus  later,  as  he  could  not  have  been  bom  at  that 
time.  Elkanah  might,  being  of  the  same  genera- 
tion as  rhinehas  (Ex.  vi.  25). 

The  offices  filled  by  the  sons  of  Korah,  as  far  as 
we  are  informed,  are  the  following.  They  weie  an 
important  branch  of  the  simjcrs  in  the  Kohathite 
division,  Heraan  himself  being  a  Korahite  (1  Chr. 
vi.  33),  and  the  Korahites  being  among  those  who, 
in  Jehoshaphat's  reign,  "stood  up  to  praise  the 
Lord  God  of  Israel  with  a  loud  voice  on  high" 
(2  Chr.  XX.  19).  [Heman.]  Hence  we  find  eleven 
Psalms  (or  twelve,  if  Ps.  43  is  included  under  the 
same  title  as  Ps.  42)  dedicated  or  assigned  to  the 
sons  of  Korah,  y\z.  Ps.  42,  44-49,  84,  85,  87,  88. 
Winer  describes  them  as  some  of  the  most  beautiful 
in  the  collection,  from  their  high  lyric  tone.  Origen 
says  it  was  a  remark  of  the  old  interpreters  that  all 
the  Psalms  inscribed  with  the  name  of  the  sons  of 
Korah  are  full  of  pleasant  and  cheerful  subjects, 
and  fi'ee  from  anything  sad  or  harsh  (^Homil.  on 
1  Kings,  i.  c.  1  Sam.),  and  on  Matt,  xviii.  20,  he 
ascribes  the  authorship  of  these  Psalms  to  "  the 
thi'ee  sons  of  Korah,"  who,  "because  they  agreed 
together  had  the  'Word  of  God  in  the  midst  of 
them"  (JIomiLxiy.)."  Of  modems,  Rosenmiitler 
thinks  that  the  sons  of  Korah,  especially  Heman, 
were  the  authors  of  these  Psalms,  which,  he  says, 
rise  to  greater  sublimity  and  breathe  more  vehe- 
ment feelings  than  the  Psalms  of  David,  and  quotes 
Hensler  and  Eichhorn  as  agreeing.  De  Wette  also 
considers  the  sons  of  Korah  as  the  authors  of  them 
(Eint.  335-339),  and  so  does  Just.  Olshausen  on 
the  Psalms  (Exeg.  Handb.  EM.  p.  22).  As, 
however,  the  language  of  several  of  these  Psalms — 
as  the  42nd,  84th,  &c. — is  manifestly  meant  to 
ap]>ly  to  David,  it  seems  much  simpler  to  explain 
the  title  "  for  the  sons  of  Korah,"  to  mean  that 
they  were  given  to  them  to  sing  in  the  temple- 
services.  If  their  style  of  music,  vocal  and  instru- 
mental, was  of  a  more  sublime  and  lyric  character 
than  that  of  the  sons  of  Merari  or  Gershon,  and 
Heman  had  more  fire  in  his  execution  than  Asaph 
and  Jeduthun,  it  is  perfectly  natural  that  David 
should  have  given  his  more  ]ioetic  and  elevated 


KUSHAIAH 


51 


strains  to  Heman  and  his  choir,  and  the  simpler  and 
quieter  psalms  to  the  other  choirs.  J.  van  Iperen 
(ap.  Kosenm.)  assigns  these  psalms  to  the  times  of 
.Tehoshaphat ;  others  to  those  of  the  Maccabees  ; 
Ewald  attributes  the  42nd  Psalm  to  Jeremiah. 
The  purpose  of  many  of  the  German  critics  seems 
to  be  to  reduce  the  antiquity  of  the  Scriptures  as 
low  as  possible. 

Others,  again,  of  the  sons  of  Korah  were  "por- 
ters," i.  e.  doorkeepers,  in  the  temple,  an  office  of 
considerable  dignity.  In  1  Chr.  ix.  17-19,  we  learn 
that  Shallum,  a  Koi-ahite  of  the  line  of  Ebiasaph, 
w;is  chief  of  the  doorkeepers,  and  that  he  and  his 
brethren  were  over  the  work  of  the  service,  keepers 
of  the  gates  of  the  tabernacle  (comp.  2  K.  xxv.  18) 
apparently  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonish 
captivity.  [Kings.]  See  also  1  Chr.  ix.  22-29  ; 
Jer.  XXXV.  4  ;  and  Ezr.  ii.  42.  But  in  1  Chr. 
xxvi.  we  find  that  this  official  station  of  the  Korah- 
ites dated  from  the  time  of  David,  and  that  their 
chief  was  then  Shelemiah  or  ]\Ieshelemiah,  the  son 
of  (Abi)asaph,  to  whose  custody  the  east  gate  fell 
by  lot,  being  the  principal  entrance.  Shelemiah  is 
doubtless  the  same  name  as  Shallum  in  1  Chr.  ix. 
17,  and,  perhaps,  MeshuUam,  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12, 
Neh.  xii.  25,  where,  as  in  so  many  other  places,  it 
designates,  not  the  individuals,  but  the  house  or 
family.  In  2  Clir.  xxxi.  14,  Kore,  the  son  of  Imnah 
the  Levite,  the  doorkeeper  towai-ds  the  east,  who  was 
over  the  freewill  oflerings  of  God  to  distribute  the 
oblations  of  the  Lord  and  the  most  holy  things,  w.xs 
probably  a  Korahite,  as  we  find  the  name  Kore  in 
the  family  of  Korah  in  1  Chr.  ix.  19.  In  1  Chr. 
ix.  31,  we  find  that  Mattithiah,  the  first-born  of 
Shallum  the  Korahite,  had  the  set  office  over  the 
things  that  were  made  in  the  pans  (Burrington's 
Genealogies ;  Patrick,  Comment,  on  Num.;  Lyell's 
Princ.  of  GeoL,  ch.  23,  24,  25,  on  Earthquakes; 
Rosenmiiller  and  Olshausen,  On  Psalms ;  De  Wette, 
Einl.).  [A.  C.  H.] 

KORATHITES,  THE  (^n-|i?n).  Num.  xxvi. 
58.  [Korahite.] 

KORHITES,  THE  CH"!]'?!]),  Ex.  vi.  24,  xxvi. 

]  ;   1  Chr.  xii.  6;  2  Chr.  xx.'  19.     [Korahite.] 

KO'RE  (Xnip  :  Kope;  Alex.  Xo^prj  in  1  Chr. 
ix.  19;  Alex.  Kop-qe,  1  Chr.  xxvi.  1:  Core), 
1.  A  Korahite,  ancestor  of  Shallum  and  Meshele- 
miah,  chief  porters  in  the  reign  of  David. 

2.  {Kop-fi:  Alex.  Kwpr].)  Son  of  Imnah,  a  Levite 
in  the  leign  of  Hezekiah,  appointed  over  the  fiee-will 
oHerings  and  most  holy  things,  and  a  gatekeeper  on 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Temple  after  the  reform  of 
worship  in  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  14). 

3.  In  the  A.  V.  of  1  Chr.  xxvi.  19,  "the  sons 
of  Kore  "  (following  the  Vulg.  Core),  should  pro- 
perly be  "  the  sons  of  the  Korhite." 

KOZ  (fip:  'Akkovs  in  Ezr.  ii.  61;  'Akkws, 
Neh.  iii.  4,  21  :  Accos  in  Ezr.,  'Accus  in  Neh.  iii.  4, 
Haccus  in  Neh  iii.  21)  =  Accoz  =  Coz  =  Hakkoz. 

KUSHAI'AH  (-in^K'-lp:  Kiffaias:  Casalis), 
The  same  as  Kisu  or  Kisiii,  the  father  of  Ethan 
the  Merarite  (1  Chr.  xv.  17). 


'  St.  AuG;vistine  has  a  still  more  fanciful  conceit, 
Nvhich  he  thinks  it  necessary  to  rejicat  in  almost  every 
homily  on  the  eleven  jisabus  inscribed  to  the  sons  of 
Kore.  Adverting  to  tlie  interpretation  of  Korah, 
Culvitks,  he  finds  in  it  a  prcat  mystery.  Under 
this  term  is  set  fortli  Christ,  who   is  intitled  Calvus, 


because  He  was  crucified  on  Calvary,  and  was  mocked 
by  the  bystanders,  as  Elisha  had  been  by  the  children 
who  cried  after  him  "  Calve,  calve .'"  and  who,  when 
they  said  "  Gu  up,  thou  bald  pate,"  had  profiprured  the 
crucifixion.  Tlie  sons  of  Korah  are  therefore  the 
children  of  Christ  the  hridogrooiu  {Homil.  on  Psalms). 

E   2 


52 


LAADAH 


LA 'ADAH  (n'ly'P:  AaaSct:  Laadd),  the  son 
of  Shelah,  and  grandson  of  Judah.  He  is  described 
as  tlie  "  father,""  or  founder,  of  SIareshaii  in  the 
lowlands  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  21). 

LA'ADAN  (nV^:  AaaSaf.  Alex.  TaXaaU 
and  AflaSa :  Laadtni).  1.  An  Ephraimite,  ancestor 
of  Joshua  the  son  of  Xun  (I  Chr.  vii.  26). 

2.  ('ESai';  Alex.  AeaSdv  ;  Lcedan,  1  Chr.  xxiii. 
7,  8,  9:  Ka5dv;  Alex.  AeSai/  and  haaSi,:  Lcdan, 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  21.)  The  son  of  Gershoni,  elsewhere 
called  LiBNi.  His  descendants  in  the  reign  of  David 
were  among  the  chief  fathers  of  his  tribe,  and 
formed  part  of  the  Temple-choir. 

LAB'AN  {]^b,  AdHav;  Joseph.  Aa^avos: 
Laban),  son  of  Bethuel,  grandson  of  Xahor  and 
"Milcah,  gi-and-nephew  of  Abraham,  brother  of  Re- 
bekah,  and  father  of  Leah  and  Rachel ;  by  whom 
and  their  handmaids  Bilhah  and  Zilpah  he  was  the 
natural  progenitor  of  three-fourths  of  the  nation  of 
the  Jews,  and  of  our  Blessed  Lord,  and  the  legal 
ancestor  of  the  whole. 

The  eldei-  branch  of  the  family  remained  at  Harau 
when  Abraham  removed  to  the  laud  of  Canaan,  and 
it  is  there  that  we  rii'st  meet  with  Laban,  as  taking 
the  leading  part  in  the  betrothal  of  his  sister  Re- 
bekah  to  her  cousin  Isaac  CGen.  xxiv.  10,  29-60, 
xxvii.  43,  xxix.  4).  Bethuel,  his  father,  plays  so 
insignificant  a  part  in  the  whole  transaction,  being 
in  fact  only  mentioned  once,  and  that  after  his  son 
(xxiv.  .">0),  that  various  conjectures  have  been  foi'med 
to  explain  it.  Josephus  asserts  that  Bethuel  was 
dead,  and  that  Laban  was  the  head  of  the  house  and 
his  sister's  natural  guardiiui  (Ant.  i.  16,  §2);  in 
which  case  "  Bethuel  "  must  have  crept  into  the 
text  inadvertently,  or  be  supposed,  with  some  (Adam 
Clai'ke,  in  loc),  to  be  the  name  of  another  brother  of 
Rebekah.  Le  Clerc  {in  Pent.)  mentions  the  conjec- 
ture that  Bethuel  was  absent  at  first,  but  returned  in 
time  to  give  his  consent  to  the  maiTiage.  The  mode 
adopted  by  Prof.  Blunt  (  Undesigned  Coincidences:, 
p.  35)  to  explain  what  he  teniis  "  the  consistent 
insignificance  of  Bethuel,"  viz.,  that  he  was  inca- 
pacitated from  taking  the  management  of  his  family 
by  age  or  imbecility,  is  most  ingenious ;  but  the 
prominence  of  Laban  may  be  sufliciently  explained 
by  the  custom  of  the  country,  which  then,  as  now 
(see  Niebuhr,  quoted  by  Roseumiiller  in  foe),  gave 
the  brothers  the  main  share  in  the  aiTangement 
of  their  sister's  marriage,  and  the  defence  of  her 
honour  (comp.Cen.xxxiv.  13;  Judg.xxi.22  ;  2Sam. 
siii.  20-29).     [Bethdel.] 

The  next  time  Laban  appears  in  the  sacred  nar- 
rative it  is  as  the  host  of  his  nephew  Jacob  at  Haran 
(Gen.  xxix.  13,  14).  The  subsequent  transactions 
by  which  he  secured  the  valuable  sen'ices  of  his 
nephew  for  fourteen  vears  in  return  for  his  two 
daughters,  and  for  six  years  as  the  price  of  his 
cattle,  together  with  tlie  disgraceful  artifice  by 
ivhich  he  palmed  off  his  elder  and  less  attractive 
daughter  on  the  unsuspecting  Jacob,  are  familial- 
to  all  (Gen.  xxix.,  xxx.). 

Laban  was  absent  shearing  his  sheep,  wdien  .Jacoli. 
having  gathered  together  all  his  possessions,  started 
with  his  wives  and  children  for  his  native  land  ;  and 
it  was  not  till  the  third  day  that  he  heard  of  their 
stealthy  depaiture.      In   hot  haste  he  sets  off  in 


LABAN 

pursuit  of  the  fugitives,  his  indignation  at  the 
prospect  of  losing  a  servant,  the  value  of  whose 
services  he  had  proved  by  experience  (xxx.  27),  and 
a  family  who  he  hoped  w^ould  have  increased  the 
power  of  his  t)-ibe,  being  increased  bv  the  discoverv 
of  the  loss  of  his  teraphim,  or  household  gods,  which 
Rachel  had  carried  off,  probably  with  the  view 
of  securing  a  prosperous  journey.  Jacob  and  his 
family  had  crossed  the  Euphrates,  and  were  already 
some  days'  march  in  advance  of  their  pursuei's  ; 
but  So  large  a  caravan,  encumbered  with  women 
and  children,  and  cattle,  would  travel  but  slowly 
(comp.  Gen.  xxxiii.  IS),  and  Laban  and  his  kinsmen 
came  up  with  the  retreating  party  on  the  east  side 
of  the  Jordan,  among  the  mountains  of  Gile.id.  The 
collision  with  his  irritated  father-in-law  might  have 
proved  dangerous  for  Jacob  but  for  a  divine  intima- 
tion to  Laban,  who,  with  chai'acteristic  hypocrisy, 
passes  over  in  silence  the  real  ground  of  his  dis- 
pleasure at  Jacob's  departui'e,  urging  only  its  clan- 
destine character,  which  had  prevented  his  sending 
him  away  with  marks  of  affection  and  honour,  and 
the  theft  of  his  gods.  After  some  shai-p  mutual  re- 
crimination, and  an  unsuccessful  search  for  the 
teraphim,  which  Finchel,  with  the  cunning  which 
characterized  the  whole  family,  knew  well  how  to 
hide,  a  covenant  of  peace  was  entered  into  between 
the  two  parties,  and  a  cairn  raised  about  a  pillar- 
stone  set  up  by  Jacob,  both  as  a  memorial  of  the 
covenant,  and  a  boundary  which  the  contracting 
parties  pledged  themselves  not  to  pass  with  hostile 
intentions.  After  this,  in  the  simple  and  beautiful 
words  of  Scripture,  "  Laban  rose  up  and  kissed  his 
sons  and  his  daughters,  and  blessed  them,  and  de- 
pai-ted,  and  returned  to  his  place ;"  and  he  thence- 
forward di.-appears  fj-om  the  Biblical  narrative. 

I''ew  Scriptural  characters  appear  in  more  re- 
pulsive colours  than  Laban,  who  seems  to  have 
concentrated  all  the  duplicity  and  acquisitiveness 
which  marked  the  family  of  Haran.  The  leading 
principle  of  his  conduct  was  evidently  self-interest, 
and  he  was  little  scrupulous  as  to  the  means  whereby 
his  ends  were  secured.  Nothing  can  excuse  the 
abominable  tiick  by  which  he  deceived  Jacob  in  the 
matter  of  his  wife,  and  there  is  much  of  harshness 
and  mean  selfishness  in  his  other  relations  with  him. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  impossible,  on  an  unbiassed 
view  of  the  whole  transactions,  to  acquit  Jacob  of 
blame,  or  to  assign  him  any  very  decided  superiority 
over  his  uncle  in  fair  and  generous  dealing.  In  the 
matter  of  the  fiocks  each  was  evidently  seeking  to 
outwit  the  other ;  and  though  the  whole  was  di- 
vinely overruled  to  work  out  important  issues  in 
securing  Jacob's  return  to  Canaan  in  wealth  and 
dignity,  our  moral  sense  revolts  from  what  Chalmers 
(Daily  Scr.  Readings,  i.  60)  does  not  shrink  from 
designating  the  "  sneaking  artifices  for  the  promo- 
tion of  his  own  selfishness,"  adopted  for  his  own 
enrichment  and  the  impoverishment  of  his  luicle ; 
while  we  can  well  excuse  Laban's  mortification  at 
seeing  himself  outdone  by  his  nephew  in  cunning, 
and  the  best  of  his  flocks  changing  hands.  In  .their 
mistaken  zeal  to  defend  Jacob,  Christian  writers 
have  unduly  depreciated  Laban  ;  and  even  the 
ready  hospitality  shewn  by  him  to  Abraham's  ser- 
vant, and  the  affectionate  reception  of  his  nephew 
(Gen.  xxiv.  30,  31,  .xxi.x.  13,  14),  have  been  mis- 
construed into  the  acts  of  a  selfish  man,  eager  to 
embrace  an  opportunity  of  a  lucrative  connexion. 
No  man,  however,  is  wholly  selfish ;  and  even 
Laban  was  capable  of  generous  impulses,  however 
mean  and  unprincipled  his  general  conduct.  [E.V.] 


LABAN 

LA'BAN  Qlh:  Ao^Sv:  Lahan),  one  of  the 
landmnrks  named  in  the  obscure  and  disputed 
passage,  Deut.  i.  1  :  "  Pavan,  and  Tophel,  and 
Laban,  and  Hazeroth,  and  Di-zahab."  The  mention 
of  Hazeroth  has  perhaps  led  to  the  only  conjecture 
i-egarding  Laban  of  whi'.-h  the  writer  is  aware, 
namely,  that  it  is  identical  with  Libxah  (Num. 
xxxiii.  20),  which  was  the  second  station  from 
Hazeroth. 

The  Syriac  Peschito  understands  the  name  as 
Lebanon.  The  Targums,  fi'om  Onkelos  downward, 
play  upon  the  five  names  in  this  passage,  connecting 
them  with  the  main  events  of  the  wanderings. 
Laban  in  this  way  suggests  the  manna,  because  of 
its  white  colour,  that  being  the  force  of  the  word 
in  Hebrew.  [<i-J 

LAB'ANA  {Ka^avd :  Lahana),  1  Esd.  v.  29, 
[Lebana.] 

LACEDEMO'NIANS  (STraprmraj;  once  Ao- 
Kihaifjiovioi,  2  Mace.  v.  9  :  Spartiatac,  Spartmii, 
Lacedncmonae),  the  inhabitants  of  Sparta  or  Lace- 
daemon,  with  whom  the  Jews  claimed  kindred 
(1  Mace.  sii.  2,  5,  6,  20,  21  ;  xiv.  20,  23;  xv.  23; 
2  Mace.  V.  9).     [Sparta.] 

LA'CHISH  (p'^'lh  :  Aax^s ;  but  in  Vat.  of 
Josh.  XV.  Maxvs  ;"  Joseph.  Aaxeica  :  Lachis),  a 
city  of  the  Amorites,  the  king  of  which  joined  with 
four  others,  at  the  invitation  of  Adonizedek  king  of 
Jerusalem,  to  chastise  the  Gibeonites  for  their  leagife 
with  Israel  (Josh.  x.  3,  5).  They  were  however 
routed  by  Joshua  at  Beth-horon,  and  the  king  of 
Lachish  fell  a  victim  with  the  others  under  the 
trees  at  Makkedah  (ver.  26).  The  destruction  of 
the  town  seems  to  have  shortly  followed  the  death 
of  the  king :  it  w;is  attacked  in  its  turn,  immediately 
after  the  fall  of  Libnah,  and  notwithstanding  an 
etfort  to  relieve  it  by  Horam  king  of  Gezer,  was 
taken,  and  every  soul  put  to  the  sword  (ver.  31-33). 
in  the  special  statement  that  the  attack  lasted  two 
days,  in  contradistinction  to  the  other  cities  which 
were  taken  in  one  (see  ver.  35),  we  gain  our  tii'st 
glimpse  of  that  strength  of  position  for  which 
Lachish  was  afterwards  remarkable.  In  the  catii- 
logue  of  the  kings  slain  by  Joshua  (.\ii.   10-12), 


LACHISH 


63 


Lachish  occurs  in  the  same  place  with  legard  to  the 
others  as  in  the  narrative  just  quoted ;  but  m  Josh. 
XV.,  where  the  towns  are  separated  into  groups,  it 
is  placed  in  the  Shefelah,  or  lowland  district,  and 
in  the  same  gi'oup  with  Eglon  and  Makkedah  (ver. 
39),  apart  from  its  tbrmer  companions.  It  should 
not  be  overlooked  that,  though  included  in  the  low- 
land district,  Lachish  was  a  town  of  the  Amorites, 
who  appear  to  have  been  essentially  mountaineers. 
Its  king  is  expi-essly  named  as  one  of  the  "  kings  of 
the  Amorites  who  dwell  in  the  mountains"  (Josh. 
X.  6).  A  similar  remark  has  already  bten  made  of 
Jarmuth;  Keilah,  and  others;  and  see  Judah, 
vol.  i.  1156  b.  Its  proximity  to  Libnah  is  im- 
plied many  centuries  later  (2  K.  xix.  8).  Lachish 
was  one  of  the  cities  fortified  and  garrisoned  by 
Rehoboam  after  the  revolt  of  the  northern  king- 
dom (2  Chr.  xi.  9).  What  was  its  fate  during  the 
invasion  of  Shishak — who  no  doubt  advanced  by  the 
usual  route  through  the  maritime  lowland,  which 
would  bring  him  under  its  very  walls — we  are  not 
told.  But  it  is  probable  that  it  did  not  materially 
sufi'er,  for  it  was  evidently  a  place  of  security  later, 
when  it  was  chosen  as  a  refuge  by  Amaziah  king 
of  Judah  from  the  conspirators  who  threatened 
him  in  Jerusalem,  and  to  whom  he  at  last  fell  a 
victim  at  Lachish  (2  K.  xiv.  19,  2  Chr.  xxv.  27). 
Later  still,  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  it  was  o"ne  of 
the  cities  taken  by  Sennacherib  when  on  his  way 
from  Phoenicia  to  Egypt  (Ii'awlinson's  Herod,  i.  477). 
It  is  specially  meutfuned  that  he  laid  siege  to  it 
"with  all  his  power"  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  9)  ;  and  here 
"  the  great  King"  himself  remained,  while  his  officers 
only  were  dispatched  to  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  9  ; 
2  K.  xviii.  17). 

This  siege  is  considered  by  Layard  and  Hincks 
to  be  depicted  on  the  slabs  found  by  the  former  in 
one  of  the  chambers  of  the  palace  at  Kouyunjik, 
which  bear  the  inscription  "  Sennacherib,  the  mighty 
king,  king  of  the  country  of  Assyria,  sitting  on  the 
throne  of  jiuigment  before  (or  at  the  entrance  of) 
the  city  of  Lacliish  (Lakhisha).  I  give  permission 
for  its  slaughter "  (Layard,  N.  ^  B.  149-52,  and 
153,  note).  These  slabs  contain  a  view  of  a  city 
which,  if  the  inscription  is  correctly  interpreted, 
must  be  Lachish  itself. 


Fig.  1.  The  city  nf  Lacliish  rtpi-Uiiis  tin 
Bttack  of  Sennacherib.  From  I.ayaril's  Monu- 
ments of  Nineveh,  4nd  Scries,  vlute  -21. 


7jV///A 


a  The  ordinary  editions  of.the  Vatican  LXX.,  rischen-  I  throughout.  In  Josh.  xv.  ;i9,  all  trace  ol'  Tinchish  lias  dis 
il.ivt't  iiuludeil,  give  Aax".  ""d  the  Alex.  Aaxei's  ;  but  appeared  in  tlie  eommuii  editions ;  but  in  l\l;ii's,  Mav»;<;  i 
Uie  edition  of  tlie  former  by  Uaidinal  Mai  has  the  Aaxeis  !  inserted  between  'laxaptijA  and  icai  Bao-rjoufl. 


54 


LACIIISH 


Another  slab  seems  to  show  the  ground-plan  of 
the  same  city  after  its  occupation  by  the  con- 
querors— the  Assyrian  tents  pitched  within  the 
walls,  and  the  foreign  worship  going  on.  The 
features  of  the  town  appear  to  be  accurately  given. 
At  any  rate  there  is  considerable  agreement  be- 
tween the  two  views  in  the  character  of  the  walls 
and  towers,  and  both  are  milike  those  represented  on 
other  slabs.  Both  support  in  a  remarkable  manner 
the  conclusions  above  drawn  from  the  statement  of 


LACUNUS 

the  Bible  as  to  the  position  of  Lachish.  The  eleva- 
tion of  the  town,  tig.  1,  shows  that  it  was  on  hilly 
ground,  one  part  higher  than  the  other.  This  is 
also  testified  to  by  the  backgi-ound  of  the  scene  in 
fig.  2,  which  is  too  remote  to  be  included  in  the 
limits  of  the  woodcut,  but  which  in  the  original 
shows  a  very  hilly  country  covered  with  vineyards 
and  fig-trees.  On  the  other  hand  the  palms  roiuid 
the  town  in  fig.  2  ])oint  to  the  proximity  of  the 
maritime  plain,  in  which  palms  flourished — and  still 


of  Lachiph(?)  ai\er  its  capture.    From  the  &ame  work,  plate  £4. 


flourish — more  than  in  any  other  region  of  Palestine. 
But  though  the  Assyrian  recoi'ds  thus  appear  ••  to 
assert  the  capture  of  Lachish,  no  statement  is  to  be 
found  either  in  the  Bible  or  Josephus  that  it  was 
taken.  Indeed  some  expi'essious  in  the  former  would 
almost  seem  to  imply  the  reverse  (see  "  thought  to  win 
them,"  2  Chr.  xxxii.  1 ;  "departed"^  from  Lachish," 
2  K.  xix.  8  ;  and  especially  Jer.  xxsiv.  7). 

The  warning  of  Micah  (i.  13)"*  was  perhaps  de- 
livered at  this  time.  Obscure  as  the  passage  is,  it 
plainly  implies  that  from  Lachish  some  form  of 
idolatry,  possibly  belonging  to  the  northern  kingdom, 
had  been  imported  into  Jernsrdem. 

After  the  return  from  captivity,  Lachish  with 
its  surroimding  "  fields "  was  re-occupied  by  the 
Jews  (Neh.  xi.  30).  It  is  not  however  named  in 
the  books  of  the  Maccabees,  nor  indeed  does  its  name 
I'eappear  in  the  Bible. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon, 
Lachish  is  mentioned  as  "  7  miles  from  Eleuthero- 
polis,  towards  Daroma,"  i.  e.  towards  the  south.  No 
ti"ice  of  the  name  has  yet  been  found  in  any  position 
at  all  corresponding  to  this.  A  site  called  Um-Ldkis, 
situated  on  a  "  low  round  swell  or  knoll,"  and  dis- 
playing a  few  columns  and  other  fragments  of  ancient 
buildings,  is  found  between  Gaza  and  Beit-Jibrin, 
probably  the  ancient  Eleuthei-opolis,  at  the  distance 


^  Col.  Rawlinson  seems  to  read  the  name  as  Lubana, 
i.  e.  Libnali  (Layard,  ^V.  <t  B.  153,  note). 

"^  This  is  also  the  opinion  of  llawlinson  (Ilerud.  i.  480 
BOto  6). 


of  1 1  miles  (14  Roman  miles),  and  in  a  direction  not 
>S.,  but  about  W.S.W.  fiom  the  latter.  Two  miles 
east  of  Uin-Lakis  is  a  site  of  similar  character,  called 
'Ajldn  (Rob.  ii.  46,  7).  Among  modern  travellers, 
these  sites  appear  to  have  been  first  discovered  by 
Dr.  Robinson.  While  admitting  the  identity  of  Ajlan 
with  Eglon,  he  disputes  that  of  Um-Lakis,  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  at  variance  with  the  statement  of 
Eusebius,  as  above  quoted ;  and  further  that  the 
remains  are  not  those  of  a  fortified  city  able  to  brave 
an  Assyrian  army  (47).  On  the  other  hand,  in  fwour 
of  the  identification  are  the  proximity  of  Eglon  (if 
'Ajldn  be  it),  and  the  situation  of  Um-Ldkis  in  the 
middle  of  the  plain,  right  in  the  road  from  Egypt, 
By  "  Daroma  "  also  Eusebius  may  have  intended,  not 
the  southern  district,  but  a  place  of  that  name,  which 
is  mentioned  in  the  Talmud,  and  is  placed  by  the 
accurate  old  traveller  hap-Farchi  .as  two  hours  south 
of  Gaza  (Zunz  in  Benj.  of  Tadela,  by  Asher,  ii.  442). 
With  regard  to  the  weakness  of  Um-Ldkis,  Mr. 
Porter  has  a  good  comparison  between  it  and  Ash- 
dod  (Handbk.'2ij\).  [G.] 

LACU'NUS  (AaKKovvos :  CUdcus^,  one  of  the 
sons  of  Addi,  who  returned  with  Ezra,  and  had 
married  a  foreign  wife  (1  Esd.  ix.  31).  The  name 
does  not  occur  in  this  form  in  the  parallel  lists  of 
Ezr.  X.,  but  it  apparently  occupies   the    place  of 

■'  The  play  <)1'  the  words  is  between  tjacish  and  Kecesli 
(D*D"1.  A.  v.  "swift  beast''),  ami  Ihc  o.Kliortation  is  to 
fligh't.''" 


LADAN 

CilELAL  (ver.  30),  as  is  indicated  by  tlio  Cakits 
of  the  Vulg. 

LA'DAN  (Aa\aJ',  Tisch.,  but  'Aaciv  iu  Mai's 
ed. :  Dalanis),  I  Esd.  v.  37.   [Delaiah,  2.] 

LADDER  OF  TYRUS,    THE  {v  kA/M«I 

Tvpov  :  a  tcrminis  Tijri,  possibly  reading  /cAiV"). 
one  of  the  extremities  (the  northern)  of  the  district 
over  wliieh  Simon  Maccabaeus  was  made  captain 
{aTpaTr]y6s)  by  Antiochus  VI.  (or  Theos),  veiy 
shortly  after  his  coming  to  the  throne ;  the  other 
being  "  the  borders  of  Egypt"  (1  Mace.  xi.  59). 
The  Ladder  of  Tyre,*  or  of  the  Tyrians,  was  the  local 
name  for  a  high  mountain,  the  highest  in  that 
ueighbourhood,"a  hundred  stadia  north  of  Ptolemais, 
tiie  modern  Akka  or  Acre  (Joseph.  B.J.  ii.  10,  §2). 
Tiie  position  of  the  Eas-en-Nahhumh  agi-ees  very 
nearly  with  this,  as  it  lies  10  miles,  or  about  120 
sfcidia,  from  Aklza,  and  is  characterised  by  travellers 
fjom  Parchi  downwards  as  very  high  and  steep. 
Both  the  Eas-m-Nahhnrah,  and  the  Ras-el-Abyad, 
i.e.  the  White  Cape,  sometimes  called  Cape  Blanco,  a 
headland  (5  miles  still  farther  north,  are  sumiounted 
by  a  path  cut  in  zigzags  ;  that  over  the  latter  is 
attributed  to  Alexander  the  Great.  It  is  possibly 
from  tills  circumstance  that  the  Ras-el-Abyad,^  is 
by  some  travellers  (Irby,  Van  do  Velde,  &c.)  treated 
as  the  ladder  of  the  Tyrians.  But  by  the  early  and 
accurate  Jewish  traveller,  hap-Parchi^  (Zunz,  402), 
aud  in  our  own  times  by  Kobinson  (iii.  89),  Mislin 
{Les  Saints  Lieux,  ii.  9),  Porter  {Ildhk.  389), 
Schwarz  (76),  Stanley  {S.  iSf  P.  264),  the  Ras-cn- 
Nahhurah  is  identified  with  the  ladder;  the  last- 
named  traveller  pointing  out  well  that  the  reason 
tbi-  the  name  is  the  fact  of  its  "  differing  from 
Carmel  in  that  it  leaves  no  beach  between  itself  and 
the  sea,  and  thus,  by  cutting  off  all  communication 
round  its  base,  acts  as  the  natural  barrier  between 
the  Bay  of  Acre  and  the  maritime  plain  to  the 
noi-th — in  other  words,  between  Palestine  and  Phoe- 
nicia" (comp.  p.  266).  [G.] 

LA'EL  ('?n'?  :  AatjA :  Lael),  the  father  of 
Eliasaph,  prince  of  the  Gershonites  at  the  time  of 
the  Exodus  (Num.  iii.  24). 

LA'HAD  (in'?:  AaaS  ;  Ales.  Ad5 :  Laad), 
son  of  Jahath,  one  of  the  descendants  of  Judah, 
from  whom  sprung  the  Zorathites,  a  branch  of  the 
tribe  who  settled  at  Zorah,  according  to  the  Targ. 
of  R.  Joseph  (1  Chr.  iv.  2). 

LAHA'I-ROI,  THE  WELL  CN")  ••n'^  IXS  : 
t6  <f>p4ap  rrjs  opdcrews  :  puteus,  cujns  nomen  est 
Viucntis  et  Videntis).  In  this  form  is  given  in  the 
A.  V.  of  Gen.  xxiv.  (32,  and  .\.xv.  11,  the  name  of 
the  famous  well  of  Hagar's  relief,  in  the  oasis  of 
verdure  round  which  Isaac  afterwai'ds  resided.  In 
xvi.  14 — the  only  other  occurrence  of  the  name — 
it  is  represented  in  the  full  Hebrew  form  of  Beer- 
LAHAI-ROI.  In  the  Mussulman  traditions  the  well 
Zemzem  in  the  Beit-allah  ot'Mecca  is  identical  with 
it.     [Lehi.]  [G.] 


LATSH  55 

LAH'MAM   (DOn^:    Maxes    Koi    Maax<i>s; 

A\e-x.  Aafxds :  Leheman,  Leemas),  a  town  in  the 
lowland  district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  40)  named 
between  Cabeon  and  Kithlish,  and  in  the  same 
group  with  Laciiish.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Oiiomasticon,  nor  does  it  appear  that  any  traveller 
has  sought  for  or  discovered  its  site. 

In  many  MSS.  and  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible, 
amongst  them  the  llec.  Test  of  Van  der  Hooght,  the 
name  is  given  with  a  final  s — Lachmas."*  Corrupt 
as  the  LXX.  text  is  here,  it  will  be  obsen-ed  that 
both  MSS.  exhibit  the  s.  This  is  the  case  also  in 
the  Targum  and  the  other  Oriental  versions.  The 
ordinary  copies  of  the  Vulgate  have  Leheman,  but 
the  text  published  in  the  Benedictine  Edition  of 
Jerome  Leemas.  [G.] 

LAH'MI  COn^ :  rhv  'E\€jU6e  ;  Alex,  -rhv 
Aeefxei:  Bcth-\ehem-ites),  the  brother  of  Goliath 
the  Gittite,  slain  by  Elhanan  the  son  of  Jair,  or  Jaor 
(1  Chr.  XX.  5).  In  the  parallel  narrative  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  19),  amongst  other  diiTerences,  Lahmi  disappears 
iu  the  word  Beth  hal-lachmi,  i.  e.  the  Bethlehemite. 
This  reading  is  imported  into  the  Vulgate  of  the 
Chron.  (see  above).  What  was  the  original  foim 
of  the  passage  has  been  the  subject  of  much  debate  ; 
the  wiiter  has  not  however  seen  cause  to  alter  the 
conclusion  to  which  he  came  under  Elhanan — that 
the  text  of  Chronicles  is  the  more  correct  of  the  two. 
In  addition  to  the  LXX.,  the  Peschito  and  the  Tar- 
gum both  agree  with  the  Hebrew  in  reading  Lachmi. 
The  latter  contains  a  tradition  that  he  was  slain  on 
the  same  day  with  his  bi other.  [G.] 

LA'ISH  {^h  ;  in  Isaiah,  7]fh  :  Aalaa ;  Judg. 
xviii.  29,  OhKaixals ;'  Alex.  Aaei'y:  Lais),  the  city 
which  was  taken  by  the  Danites,  and  under  its  new 
name  of  Dan  became  famous  as  the  northern  limit 
of  the  nation,  and  as  the  depository,  first  of  the 
gi-aven  image  of  Micah  (Judg.  xviii.  7,  14,  27,  29), 
and  subsequently  of  one  of  the  calves  of  Jeroboam. 
In  another  account  of  the  conquest  the  name  is 
givon,  with  a  variation  in  the  foim,  as  Leshem 
(Josh.  xix.  47).  It  is  natm'al  to  presume  that 
Laish  was  an  ancient  sanctuary,  before  its  appio- 
priation  for  that  puipose  by  the  Danites,  and  we 
should  look  for  some  explanation  of  the  mention  of 
Dan  instead  of  Laish  in  Gen.  xiv. ;  but  nothing  is  as 
yet  forthcoming  on  these  points.  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  situation  of  the  place  was  at  or 
very  near  that  of  the  modem  Banias.     [Dan.] 

In  the  A.  V.  Laish  is  again  mentioned  in  the 
graphic  account  by  Isaiah  of  Sennacherib's  march 
on  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  30)  : — "  Lift  up  thy  voice, 
0  daughter  of  Gallim  !  cause  it  to  be  heard  unto 
Laish,  oh  poor  Anatlioth !" — that  is,  cry  so  loud 
that  your  shrieks  shall  be  heard  to  the  very  confines 
of  the  land.  This  translation — in  which  our  trans- 
lators followed  the  version  of  Junius  and  Tremellius, 
and  the  comment  of  Grotius — is  adopted  because 
the  last  syllable  of  the  name  which  appears  here  as 
Laishah  is  taken  to  be  the  Hebrew  particle  of  mo- 


"  This  name  is  found  in  the  Talnnul,  "^')^^*"^  HD^D- 
See  Zunz  {Benj.  of  Tud.  402). 

b  Maundrell,  oriliuarily  so  exact  (March  17),  places  "  the 
mountain  climax"  at  an  hour  and  a  quarter  south  of  the 
NaJir  Ibrahim  Bassa  {.\i\ox\\A  l{lver),nieaning  therefore  the 
headland  which  encloses  on  the  north  the  bay  of  Juneh 
above  Beirut  1  On  tlie  otlier  hand,  Irby  and  Mangles  1 
(Oct.  21)  \\ith  c(|ually  unusual  inaccuracy,  give  the  name 
ril  Cape  Blanco  to  the  lias  .\'akurali—a,\\  hour's  ride  from  Exactly  llie  same  thing  is  dune  in  Ihe  case  of  Luz,  (!cii. 
Ks-Zib,  the  ancient  Ecdiiipa.     Wilson  also  (ii.  232)  has  i  xxviii.  19. 


fallen  into  a  curious  confusion  between  the  two. 

'=  He  gives  the  name  as  Al-Aavakir,  probably  a  nn  re 
corruption  of  En-Nakura. 

*  ^"Orh  f''»"  DDn^,  by  interchangf  of  D  and  D- 
*■   Tlie    LXX.    liave    here    transferred    literally    the 
Hibrovv    wdrds    J;>>^    dSINV    "  •i'"^'    indeed    Laish." 


56 


LAISH 


tion,  "  to  LUish,"  as  is  unJoubtedly  the  case  in  Judg. 
xviii.  7.  But  such  a  rendering  is  found  neither  in 
any  of  the  ancient  versions,  nor  in  those  of  modern 
scholars,  as  Gesenius,  Ewald,  Zunz,  &c. ;  nor  is 
the  Hebrew  woru  '  here  rendered  "  cause  it  to  be 
heard,"  found  elsewhere  in  that  voice,  but  alwpys 
absolute — "hearken,"  or  "attend."  There  is  a 
certain  violence  in  the  sudden  introduction  amongst 
these  little  Benjamite  villages  of  the  fiontier  town  so 
very  far  remote,  and  not  less  in  the  use  of  its  ancient 
name,  elsewhere  so  constantly  superseded  by  Dan. 
(See  Jer.  viii.  16.)  On  the  whole  it  seems  more 
consonant  with  the  tenor  of  the  whole  passage  to  talce 
Laishah  as  the  name  of  a  small  village  lying  between 
(jallim  and  Anathoth,  and  of  which  hitherto,  as  is 
still  the  case  with  the  former,  and  until  1831  was 
the  case  with  the  latter,  no  traces  have  been  found. 
In  1  'Since,  ix.  5  a  village  named  Alasa  (Mai,  and 
Alex.  'A\aaa  •  A.  V.  Eleasa)  is  mentioned  as  the 
scene  of  the  battle  in  which  Judas  was  killed.  In 
the  Vulgate  it  is  gi\-en  as  Laisa.  If  the-Bei'ea  at 
which  Demetrius  was  encamped  on  the  same  occasion 
was  Beeroth — and  from  the  Peschito  reading  this 
seems  likelv — then  Alasa  or  Laisha  was  somewhere 
on  the  northein  road,  10  or  12  miles  from  Jerusalem, 
about  the  spot  at  which  a  village  named  Adasa 
existed  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  D  (A) 
and  L  (A)  are  so  often  interchanged  in  Greek  manu- 
scripts, that  the  two  names  may  indicate  one  and 
the  same  place,  and  that  the  Laisliah  of  Isaiah. 
Such  an  identification  would  be  to  a  certain  extent 
consistent  with  the  requirements  of  Is.  x.  30,  while 
it  would  throw  some  light  on  the  uncert;\in  topo- 
graphy of  the  last  struggle  of  Judas  Maccabaeus. 
But  it  must  be  admitted  that  at  present  it  is  but 
conjectural ;  and  that  the  neighbourhood  of  Beeroth 
\s  at  the  best  somewhat  far  removed  from  the  narrow 
circle  of  the  A'illages  eniunerated  by  Isaiah.      [^J-] 

LA'ISH  [^"h  ;  in  2  Sam.  the  orig.  test,  Cethih, 

has  ^r? :  'Afifis,  SeWijs ;  Alex.  Aats,  Aaeis  : 
Lais),  father  of  Phaltiel,  to  whom  Saul  had  given 
Michal,  David's  wife  (1  Sam.  x.xv.  44;  2  Sam.  iii. 
15).  He  was  a  native  of  Gallim.  It  is  very 
remarkable  that  the  names  of  Laish  (Laishah)  and 
Gallim  should  be  found  in  conjunction  at  a  much 
later  date  (Is.  x.  30).  [G.] 

LAKES.     [Palestixe.] 

LA'KUM  (D-1|?^,  i.e.  Lakkum :  AaiUix;  Ale.x. 
— unusually  wide  of  the  Hebrew  —  eas  'A/cpou  : 
Lecuin),  one  of  the  places  which  formed  the  land- 
marks of  the  boundary  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  33), 
named  next  to  Jabneel,  and  apparently  between  it 
and  the  .loi-dan :  but  the  whole  statement  is  exceed- 
ingly obscure,  and  few,  if  any,  of  the  names  have 
yet  been  recognised.  Lakkum  is  but  casually  named 
in  the  Onomasticon,  and  no  one  since  has  discovered 
its  situation.  The  rendering  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  is 
worth  remark.  [G.l 

LAMB.     1.  1J3N,  iminar,  is  the  Chaldee  eijui- 

valent  of  the  Hebrew  cebcs.  See  fcelow,  No.  3  (Ezr. 
vi.  9,  17;  vii.  17). 

2.  rhvi,  tdleh  (1  Sam.  vii.  9;  Is.  Ixv.  25),  a 
young  sucking  lamb ;  originally  the  young  of  any 
animal.  The  noun  from  the  same  root  in  Arabic 
signifies  "a  fawn,"  in  Ethiopic  "  a  kid,"'  in  Sama- 
ritan "  a  boy;"  while  in  Syriac  it  dcnotos  "  a 
boy,"  and  in  the  fem.   "  a  girl."    Hence  "  Talitha 


f  IQICJ^pn.  Inphil  imp.,  from  22J'p- 


LAMECH 

kurai,"  "  Damsel,  arise  !"  (Mark  v.  41).  The  plural 
of  a  cognate  form  occurs  in  Is.  xl.  11. 

3.  Ci*33,  cehes,  35^3,  ceseh,  and  the  feminines 
nK03,  cibsdh,  or  nb'lS,  cabsdh,  and  HUb'S,  cis- 
hah,  respectively  denote  a  male  and  female  lamb  from 
the  first  to  the  third  year.  The  former  perhaps 
more  nearly  coincide  with  the  provincial  term  hof) 
or  hogi/et,  which  is  applied  to  a  young  ram  before  he 
is  shorn.  The  corresponding  word  in  Arabic,  accord- 
ing to  Gesenius,  denotes  a  ram  at  that  pei'iod  when 
he  has  lost  his  first  two  teeth  and  four  others  make 
their  appearance,  which  happens  in  the  second  or 
third  year.  Young  rams  of  this  age  termed  an  im- 
portant part  of  almost  every  sacrifice.  They  were 
offered  at  the  daily  morning  and  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  38-41),  on  the  .sabbath  day  (Num.  xxviii. 
9),  at  the  feasts  of  the  new  moon  (Num.  xxviii.  11), 
of  trumpets  (Num.  x,xix.  2),  of  tabernacles  (Num. 
xxix.  13-40),  of  Pentecost  (Lev.  xxiii.  18-20),  and 
of  the  Passover  (Ex.  xii.  5).  They  were  brought 
by  the  princes  of  the  congregation  as  burnt-offerings 
at  the  dedication  of  the  tabernacle  fXum.  vii.),  and 
were  offered  on  solemn  occasions  like  the  consecia- 
tion  of  Aaron  (Lev.  ix.  3),  the  coiouation  of  Solomon 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  21),  the  purification  of  the  temple 
under  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  21),  and  the  great 
passover  held  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  7). 
They  formed  part  of  the  sacrifice  offered  at  the  puii- 
fication  of  women  after  childbirtli  (Lev.  xii.  6),  and 
at  the  cleansing  of  a  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  10-25).  They 
accompanied  the  presentation  of  first-fruits  (Lev. 
xxiii.  12).  When  the  Nazarites  commenced  their 
period  of  separation  they  offered  a  he-lamb  for  a 
trespass-offering  (Num.  vi.  12) ;  and  at  its  conclu- 
sion a  he-lamb  was  sacrificeil  as  a  burnt-offering, 
and  an  ewe-lamb  as  a  sin-olfeiing  (v.  14).  An  ewe- 
lamb  was  also  the  ofllering  for  the  sin  of  ignorimce 
(Lev.  iv.  32). 

4.  "13,  car,  a  fat  ram,  or  more  probably 
"  wether,"  as  the  word  is  generally  employed  in 
opposition  to  ai/il,  which  strictly  denotes  a  "  ram  " 
(Deut.  xxxii.  14;  2  K.  iii.  4;  Is.  xxxiv.  6).  Mesha 
king  of  Moab  sent  tribute  to  the  king  of  Israel 
100,000  fat  wethers;  and  this  circumstance  is  made 
use  of  by  R.  Jo.seph  Kimchi  to  e.xplain  Is.  xvi.  1, 
which  he  regards  as  an  exhortation  to  the  Jloabites 
to  renew  their  tribute.  TheTyiians  obtained  their 
supply  from  Arabia  and  Kedar  (Ez.  x.xvii.  21),  and 
the  pastures  of  Bashan  were  famous  as  grazing 
grounds  (Ez.  xxxix.  18). 

5.  |NX,  tson,  rendered  "lamb"  in  Ex.  xii.  21, 
is  properly  a  collective  term  deaioting  a  "  flock  "  of 
small  cattle,  sheep  and  goats,  in  distinction  from 
herds  of  the  larger  animals  ( Eccl.  ii.  7  ;  Ez.  xlv.  1 5). 
In  opposition  to  this  collective  term  the  word 

6.  nCJ',  seh,  is  applied  to  denote  the  indi\iduals 

of  a  flock,  whether  sheep  or  goats ;  an<l  hence,  though 
"  lamb "  is  in  many  passages  the  rendering  of  the 
A.  v.,  the  marginal  leading  gives  "kid  ''  (Gen.  s.xii. 
7,  8  ;  Ex.  xii.  3,  .xxii.  1,  &c.).     [Sheep.] 

On  the  Paschal  Lamb  see  PASSOVER.  [\V.  A.  VV.] 

LAM'ECH  ("?1D^  :  Aa^e'x:  Lamecli),  properly 

Lemech,  the  name  of  two  persons  in  antediluvian 
history.  1.  The  fifth  lineal  descendant  from  Cain 
(Gen.  iv.  18-24).  He  is  the  only  one  except  Enoch, 
of  the  posterity  of  Cain,  whose  history  is  i-elated 
with  some  detjiil.  He  is  the  first  polygamist  on 
record.  His  two  wives,  Adah  and  Zillah,  and  his 
daughter  Naamah,  are,  with  Eve,  the  only  antedi- 


LAMECH 

luvian  women  whose  names  are  mentioned  by  Moses. 
His  three  sons — Jaual,  Juual,  and  Tubal-cain, 
are  celebrated  in  Scripture  as  authors  of  useful  in- 
ventions. The  Targum  of  Jonathan  adds,  that  his 
daughter  was  "  the'mistress  of  sounds  and  songs," 
I.  e.'^the  first  poetess.  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  2,  §2) 
relates  that  the  number  of  his  sons  was  seventy- 
sevgu,  and  Jerome  records  the  same  tradition,  add- 
ino-  that  they  were  all  cut  off  by  the  Deluge,  and 
that  this  was  the  seventy-and-sevenfold  vengeance 
which  Lamech  imprecated. 

Tlie  remarkable  poem  which  Lamech  uttered  has 
not  vet  been  explained  quite  satisfactorily.  It  is  the 
subject  of  a  dissertation  by  HiUiger  in  Thesaurus 
Tkeoloijico-Philol.  i.  141,  and  is  discussed  at  length 
by  the  various  commentators  on  Genesis.  The 
history  of  the  descendants  of  Cain  closes  with  a 
sont;,  which  at  least  threatens  bloodshed.  Delitzsch 
observes,  that  a5  the  arts  which  were  afterwards 
consecrated  by  pious  men  to  a  heavenly  use,  had 
their  origin  in  the  family  of  Cain,  so  this  early 
etfbrt  of  poetry  is  composed  in  honour,  not  of  God, 
but  of  some  deadly  weapon.  It  is  the  only  extant 
specimen  of  antediluvian  poetry;  it  came  down, 
perhaps  as  a  popular  song,  to  the  generation  for 
whom  Moses  wrote,  and  he  inserts  it  in  its  proper 
place  in  his  history.  Delitzsch  traces  in  it  all  the 
peculiar  features  of  later  Semitic  poetry  ;  rhythm, 
assonance,  parallelism,  strophe,  and  poetic  diction. 
It  may  be  rendered  : — 

Adah  and  Zillah  !   hear  my  voice, 

Ye  wives  of  Lamech  1    give  ear  unto  my  speech  ; 
For  a  man  bad  1  slain  for  smiting  me, 

And  a  youth  for  wounding  me  : 
Surely  sevenfold  shall  Cain  be  avenged, 

But  Lamech  seventy  and  seven. 

The  A.  v.  makes  Lamech  declare  liimself  a  mur- 
derer, "  I  have  slain  a  man  to  my  wounding,"  &c. 
This  is  the  view  taken  in  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate. 
Chrysostom  {Horn.  xx.  in  Gen.)  regards  Lamech  as 
a  murderer  stung  by  remorse,  driven  to  make  public 
confession  of  his  guilt  solely  to  ease  his  conscience, 
and  afterwards  {Horn,  in  Ps.  vi.)  obtaining  mercy. 
Theodoret  (Quaest.  in  Gen.  xliv.)  sets  him  down  as 
a  murderer.  Basil  [Ep.  260  [317],  §5)  interprets 
Lamech's  words  to  mean  that  he  had  committed 
two  murders,  and  that  he  deserved  a  much  severer 
punishment  than  Cain,  as  having  sinned  after  plainer 
warning ;  Basil  adds,  that  some  persons  interpret 
the  last  lines  of  the  poem  as  meaning,  that  whereas 
Cain's  sin  increased,  and  was  followed  after  seven 
generations  by  the  punishment  of  the  Deluge  wash- 
ing out  the  foulness  of  the  world,  so  Lamech's  sin 
shall  be  followed  in  the  seventy-seventh  (see  St. 
Luke  iii.  23-1)8)  generation  by  the  coming  of  Ilim 
who  tiiketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  Jerome 
(Ep.  xxxvi.  ad  I)amaswn,  t.  i.  p.  Uil)  relates  as  a 
tradition  of  his  predecessors  and  of  the  Jews,  that 
Cain  was  accidentally  slain  by  Lamech  in  the  seventh 
generation  from  Adam.  This  legend  is  told  with 
fuller  details  by  Jarclii.  According  to  him,  the 
occasion  of  the  poem  was  the  refusal  of  Lamech's 
wives  to  assoc-iate  with  him  in  consequence  of  his 
having  killed  Cain  and  Tubal-cain ;  Lamech,  it  is 
said,  was  blind,  and  was  led  about  by  Tubal-cain  ; 
when  the  latter  saw  in  the  thicket  what  he  sup- 
posed to  be  a  wild-beast,  Lamech,  by  his  son's 
direction,  shot  an  arrow  at  it,  and  thus  slew  Cain  ; 
in  alarm  and  indignation  at  the  deed,  he  kille<l  his 
son  ;  hence  his  wives  refused  to  associate  with  him ; 
and  he  excuses  himself  as  having   acted  without 


LAMENTATIONS  57 

a  vengeful  or  murderous  pui-pose.  Luther  con- 
siders the  occasion  of  the  poem  to  be  the  deliberate 
murder  of  Cain  by  Lamech.  Lightfoot  {Decas 
Chorogr.  Marc,  praem.  §  iv.)  considers  Lamech  as 
expressing  remorse  for  having,  as  the  tii-st  poly- 
gamist,  introduced  moi'e  destruction  and  murder 
than  Cain  was  the  author  of  into  the  world.  Pfeift'er 
(Diff.  Scrip.  Loc.  p.  25)  collects  different  opinions 
with  his  usual  diligence,  and  concludes  that  the 
poem  is  Lamech's  vindication  of  himself  to  his 
wives,  who  were  in  terror  for  the  possible  couse- 
quences  of  his  having  slain  two  of  the  posterity  of 
Seth.  Lowth  {De  8.  Foesi  Hch.  iv.)  and  Michaelis 
think  that  Lamech  is  excusing  himself  for  some 
murder  which  he  had  committed  in  self-defence, 
"  for  a  wound  inflicted  on  me." 

A  rather  milder  interpretation  has  been  given  to_ 
the  poem  Ijy  some,  whose  opinions  are  perhaps  of 
greater  weight  than  the  preceding  in  a  question  of 
Hebrew  criticism.  Onkelos,  followed  by  Pseudo- 
jonathan,  paraphrases  it,  "  I  have  not  slain  a  man  that 
"l  should  bear  sin  on  his  account."  The  Arab,  ^'er. 
(Saadia)  puts  it  in  an  interrogative  form,  "  Have  I 
slain  a  man  ?"  &c.  These  two  versions,  which  are 
substantially  the  same,  are  adopted  by  De  Dieu  and 
Bishop  Patrick.  Aben-Ezra,  Calvin,  Drusius,  and 
Cartwright,  interpret  it  in  the  future  tense  as  a 
threat,  "*'  I  will  slay  any  man  who  wounds  me." 
This  version  is  adopted  by  Herder;  whose  hypo- 
thesis as  to  the  occasion  of  the  poem  was  partly 
anticipated  by  Hess,  and  has  been  received  by  Ro- 
senmliller,  Ewald,  and  Delitzsch.  Herder  regards  it 
as  Lamech's  song  of  exultation  on  the  invention  of 
the  sword  by  his  son  Tubal-cain,  in  the  possession 
of  which  he  foresaw  a  great  advantage  to  himself 
and  his  family  over  any  enemies.  This  interpreta- 
tion appears,  on  the  whole,  to  be  the  best  tliat  has 
been  suggested.  But  whatever  interpretation  be 
preferred,  all  persons  will  agree  in  the  remark  of 
Bp.  Kidder  that  the  occasion  of  the  poem  not  being 
revealed,  no  man  can  be  expected  to  determine  the 
full  sense  of  it ;  thus  much  is  plain,  that  they  are 
vaunting  words  in  which  Lamech  seems,  from 
Cain's  indemnity,  to  encourage  himself  in  violence 
and  wickedness. 

2.  The  father  of  Noah  (Gen.  v.  29).  Chrysostom 
{Senn.  ix.  in  Gen.  and  Horn.  xxi.  in  Gen.),  perhaps 
thinking  of  the  character  of  the  other  Lamech, 
speaks  of  this  as  an  unrighteous  man,  though  moved 
by  a  divine  impulse  to  give  a  prophetic  name  to  his 
son.  Buttman  and  others,  observing  that  the  names 
of  Lamech  and  Enoch  are  found  in  the  list  of 
Seth's,  as  well  as  in  the  list  of  Cain's  flimily,  infer 
that  the  two  lists  are  merely  different  versions  or 
recensions  of  one  original  list, — traces  of  two  con- 
flicting histories  of  the  first  human  family.  This 
theory  is  deservedlv  repudiated  by  Delitzsch  on 
Genfv.  '  [W-  T.  B.] 

'  LAMENTATIONS.  The  Hebrew  title  of  this 
Book,  Ec/iah  (^D''^{),  is  t;il«n,  like  those  of  the  Hve 
Books  of  Closes,  from  the  Heljrew  word  with  which 
it  opens,  and  which  appears  to  have  been  almost  a 
received  formula  for  the  commencement  of  d.  song  of 
wailing  (comp.  2  Sam.  i.  19-27).  The  Septuagint 
translators  found  themselves  obliged,  as  in  the 
other  cases  referred  to,  to  substitute  some  title  more 
significant,  and  adopted  dprn'ot  'Upen'iov  as  the  equi- 
valent of  ICinoth  ',nb''p,  "  lamentations"),  which 
they  found  in  Jer.  vii.  29,  ix.  10,  20;  2  Chr. 
XXXV.   25,  and  which  had  probably   been  applied 


58  LAMENTATIONS 

familiarly,  as  it  was  afterwards  by  Jewish  com- 
mentators, to  the  Book  itself.  The  Vulgate  gives 
the  Greek  word  and  explains  it  ( Tkrcni,  id  est, 
Lamcntationes  Jercmiae  Prophetae).  Luther  and 
the  A.  V.  have  given  the  translation  only,  in  Klag- 
licder  and  Lamentations  respectively. 

The  poems  included  in  this  collection  appear  in 
the  Hebrew  canon  with  no  name  attached  to  them, 
and  there  is  no  direct  external  evidence  that  they 
were  written  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  earlier  than 
the  date  given  in  the  prefatoiy  verse  which  ap- 
pears in  the  Septuagint.*  This  represents,  how- 
ever, the  established  belief  of  the  Jews  after  the 
completion  of  the  canon.  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  5,  §1) 
follows,  as  far  as  the  question  of  authorship  is  con- 
cerned, in  the  same  track,  and  the  absence  of  any 
tradition  or  probable  conjecture  to  the  contrary, 
leaves  the  consensus  of  critics  and  commentators 
almost  undisturbed.''  .  An  agreement  so  striking 
rests,  as  might  be  expected,  on  strong  internal  evi- 
dence. The  poems  belong  unmistakeably  to  the 
last  days  of  the  kingdom,  or  the  commencement  of 
the  exile..  They  are  written  by  one  who  speaks, 
with  the  vividness  and  intensity  of  an  eye-witness, 
of  the  misery  which  he  bewails.  It  might  almost 
be  enough  to  ask  who  else  then  living  could  have 
written  with  that  union  of  strong  passionate  feeling 
and  entire  submission  to  Jehovah  which  charac- 
terises both  the  Lamentations  and  the  Prophecy  of 
Jeremiah.  The  evidences  of  identity  are,  however, 
stronger  and  more  minute.  In  both  we  meet,  once 
and  again,  with  the  picture  of  the  "  Virgin-daughter 
of-  Zion,"  sitting  down  in  her  shame  and  misery 
(Lam.  i.  15,  ii.  13  ;  Jer.  xiv.  17).  In  both  there 
is  the  same  vehement  out-pouiing  of  sorrow.  The 
prophet's  eyes  flow  down  with  tears  (Lam.  i.  16, 
ii.  11,  iii.  4-8,  49;  Jer.  ix.  1,  xiii.  17,  xiv.  17). 
Thei-e  is  the  same  haunting  feeling  of  being  sw- 
rounded  with  fears  and  terrors  on  every  side  (Lam. 
ii.  22  ;  Jer.  vi.  25,  xlvi.  S).''  In  both  the  worst  of 
all  the  evils  is  the  iniquity  of  the  prophets  and  the 
pnests(Lani.ii.l4,iv.l3;Jer.v.30,31,xiv.l3, 14). 
The  sutierer  a]ipeals  for  vengeance  to  the  righteous 
Judge  (Lam.  iii.  64-66 ;  Jer.  xi.  20).  He  bids  the 
rival  nation  that  exulted  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem 
prepare  for  a  like  desolation  (Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Jer. 
xlix.  12).  We  can  well  understand,  with  all  these 
instances  before  us,  how  the  scribes  who  compiled 
the  Canon  after  the  return  from  Babylon  should 
have  been  led,  even  in  the  absence  of  external  testi- 
mony, to  assign  to  Jeremiah  the  authorship  of  the 
Lamentations. 

Assuming  this  as  sufficiently  established,  there 
come  the  questions — (1.)  When,  and  on  what  occa- 
sion did  he  write  it?  (2.)  In  what  relation  did  it 
stand  to  his  other  writings  ?  (3.)  What  light  does 
it  throw  on  his  personal  history,  or  on  that  of  the 
time  in  which  he  lived? 

I.  The  earliest  statement  on  this  point  is  tliat 
of  Josephus  {^Ant.  x.  5,  §1).  He  tiuds  .among  the 
books  which  were  extant  in  his  own  time  the  Imuen- 
tations  on  the  death  of  Josiah,  which  are  mentioned 
in  2  Chr.  xx.xv.  25.  As  there  aie  no  traces  of  any 
other  poem  of  this  kind  in  the  later  Jewish  litera- 

*  "  And  It  came  to  pass  that  after  Israel  was  led 
captive  and  Jerusalem  was  laid  waste,  Jeremiah  sat 
weeping,  and  lamented  with  this  lamentation  over 
Jerusalem,  and  said." 

^  The  (question  whether  all  the  five  poems  were  by 
the  same  writer  has  however  been  raised  by  Thenlus, 
Die  Klayelieder  erkliirt :  Vorbcmerk.  quoted  in  Da- 
vidson's Introd.  to  0.  T.,  p.  888. 


LAMENTATIONS 

ture,  it  has  been  inferred,  naturally  enough,  that 
he  speaks  of  this.  This  opinron  was  maintained 
also  by  Jerome,  and  has  been  defended  by  some 
modern  writers  (Ussliei-,  Dathe,  Michaelis,''  Notes  to 
Lowth,  Prael.  xxii. ;  Calovius,  P/'ofei/o/n.  ad  Thren. ; 
De  Wette,  Einl.  in  das  A.  T.,  KlagL).  It  does  not 
appear,  however,  to  rest  on  any  better  grounds 
than  a  hasty  conjecture,  arising  from  the  reluc- 
tance of  men  to  admit  that  any  work  by  an  inspired 
writer  can  have  perished,  or  the  arbitrary  assump- 
tion (De  Wette,  I.  c.)  that  the  same  man  could  not, 
twice  in  his  life,  have  been  the  spokesman  of  a 
great  national  sorrow.^  And  against  it  we  have  to 
set  (1)  the  tradition  on  the  other  side  embodied  in 
the  preface  of  the  Septuagint,  (2 )  the  contents  ot 
the  book  itself.  Admitting  that  some  of  the  cala- 
mities described  in  it  may  have  been  common  to 
the  invasions  of  Necho  and  Nebuchadnezzar,  we 
yet  look  in  vain  for  a  single  word  distinctive  of  a 
funeral  dirge  over  a  devout  and  zealous  reformer 
like  Josiah,  while  we  find,  step  by  step,  the  closest 
possible  hkeness  between  the  pictures  of  misery  in 
the  Lamentations  and  the  events  of  the  closing 
years  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah.  The  long  siege  had 
brought  on  the  famine  in  which  the  young  children 
fainted  for  hunger  (Lam.  ii.  11,  12,  20,  iv.  4,  9  ; 
2  K.  XXV.  .3).  The  city  was  taken  by  storm  (Lam. 
ii.  7,  iv.  12;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  17).  The  Temple 
itself  was  polluted  with  the  massacre  of  the  priests 
who  defended  it  (Lam.  ii.  20,  21 ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  17), 
and  then  destroyed  (^Lam.  ii.  6;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  19). 
The  fortresses  and  strongholds  of  Judah  were  thrown 
down.  The  anointed  of  the  Lord,  under  whose 
shadow  the  remnant  of  the  people  might  have  hoped 
to  live  in  safety,  was  taken  prisoner  (Lam.  iv.  20  ; 
Jer.  xxxix.  5).  The  chief  of  the  people  were  carried 
into  exile  (Lam.  i.  5,  ii.  9;  2  K.  xxv.  11).  The 
bitterest  gi-ief  was  found  in  the  malignant  exulta- 
tion of  the  Edomites  (Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7). 
Under  the  rule  of  the  stranger  the  Sabbaths  and 
solemn  feasts  were  forgotten  (Lam.  i.  4,  ii.  6),  as 
they  could  hardly  have  been  during  the  short  pei'iod 
in  which  Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Egyp- 
tians. Unless  we  adopt  the  strained  hypothesis 
that  the  whole  poem  is  prophetic  in  the  sense  of 
beipg  predictive,  the  writer  seeing  the  future  as  if 
it  were  actually  present,  or  the  still  wilder  con- 
jecture of  Jarclii,  that  this  was  the  roll  which  Je- 
hoiachin  destroyed,  and  which  was  re-written  by 
Baruch  or  Jeremiah  (Carpzov,  Introd.  ad  lib.  V.  T. 
iii.  c.  iv.),  we  are  compelled  to  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  coincidence  is  not  accidental,  and 
to  adopt  the  later,  not  the  earlier  of  the  dates.  At 
what  period  after  the  capture  of  the  city  the  pro- 
phet gave  this  utterance  to  his  sorrow  we  can  only 
conjecture,  and  the  materials  for  doing  so  with  any 
probability  are  but  scanty.  The  local  tradition 
which  pointed  out  a  cavern  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Jerusalem  as  the  refuge  to  which  Jeremiah  with- 
drew that  he  might  write  this  book  (Del  Rio,  Pro- 
leg,  in  Thren.,  quoted  by  Carpzov,  Introd.  I.  c), 
is  as  trustworthy  as  most  of  the  other  legends  of 
the  time  of  Helena.  The  ingenuity  which  aims  at 
attaching  each  mdividual  poem    to  some  definite 


"  More  detailed  coincidences  of  words  and  phrases 
are  given  hy  Keil  (quoting  from  Pareau)  in  his  Einl. 
in  diis  A.  T.    §129. 

'^  Jlichaelis  and  Dathe,  however,  afterwards  aban- 
doned this  hypothesis,  asd  adopted  t-hat  of  the  later 
date. 

■=  The  argument  that  iii.  27  imi)lics  the  youth  of  the 
writer  hardly  needs  to'be  confuted. 


LAMENTATIONS 


LAMENTATIONS 


59 


event  in  flu?  propliet'b  lite,  is  for  the  most  part 
simply  wasted/  He  may  have  written  it  imme- 
diately after  the  attack  was  over,  or  when  he  was 
with  Gedaliah  at  Mizpeh,  or  when  he  was  with  his 
countiymen  at  Tahpanhes. 

II.  It  is  well,  however,  to  be  reminded  by 
these  conjectures  that  we  have  before  us,  not  a 
book  in  Hve  chapters,  but  five  separate  poems, 
each  complete  in  itself,  each  having  a  distinct  sub- 
ject, yet  brouc;ht  at  tlie  same  time  under  a  plan 
which  includes  them  all.  It  is  clear,  before  entei- 
in<r  on  any  other  characteristics,  that  we  tind,  in 
fuTl  predominance,  that  strong  personal  emotion 
which  mingled  itself,  in  greater  or  less  measure, 
with  the  whole  prophetic  work  of  Jeremiah.  There 
is  here  no  "  word  of  Jehovah,"  no  direct  mess.ige 
to  a  sinful  people.  The  man  speaks  out  of  the 
fulness  of  his  heart,  and  though  a  higher  Spirit 
than  Ijis  own  heli)s  him  to  give  utterance  to  his 
sorrows,  it  is  yet  the  language  of  a  sufferer  rather 
than  of  a  teacher.  There  is  this  measure  of  truth 
in  the  technical  classification  which  placed  the  La- 
mentations among  the  Hagiographa  of  the  Hebrew 
Canon,  in  the  feeling  which  led  the  Kabbinic  writeis 
(Kimchi,  Prof,  in  Psalm.)  to  say  that  they  and  the 
other  books  of  that  gi-oup,  were  written  indeed  by 
the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  not  with  the  special 
gift  of  prophecy. 

Other  differences  between  the  two  books  that  bear 
the  prophet's  name  grew  out  of  this.  Here  there 
is  more  attention  to  Ibrm,  more  elaboration.  The 
rhythm  is  more  uniform  than  in  the  prophecies.  A 
compliciited  alphabetic  structure  pervades  nearly 
the  whole  book.  It  will  be  remembered  that  this 
acrostic  form  of  writing  was  not  peculiar  to  Jeremiah. 
Whatever  its  origin,  whether  it  had  been  adopted  <is 
a  help  to  the  toemory,  and  so  fitted  especially  for 
didactic  poems,  or  tor  such  as  were  to  be  sung  by 
great  bodies  of  people  (Lowth,  Pracl.  xxii.J,^  it 
had  been  a  received,  and  it  would  seem  popular, 
framework  for  poems  of  very  different  characters, 
and  extending  probably  over  a  considerable  period 
of  time.  The  119th  Psalm  is  the  great  monu- 
ment which  forces  itself  upon  our  notice  ;  but  it  is 
found  also  in  the  25th,  34th,  o7th,  111th,  112th, 
i45th_aud  in  the  singularly  beautiful  fi'agment 
appended  to  the  book  of  Proverbs  (Piov.  xxxi. 
U)-:U).  Traces  of  it,  as  if  the  work  had  been  left 
half-finished  (De  Wette,  Psalmen,  ad  loc.)  appear 
in  the  9th  and  10th.  In  the  Lamentations  (con- 
lining  ourselves  for  the  jiresent  to  the  structure) 
we  meet  with  some  remarkable  peculiarities. 

(1.)  Ch.  i.,  ii.,  and  iv.  contain  22  verses  each, 
arranged  in  alphabetic  order,  each  verse  falling  into 


three  nearly  balanced  clauses  (Ewald,  Poet.  Bitch. 
p.  147);  ii.  19  forrris  an  exception  as  having  a 
fourth  clause,  the  result  of  an  interpolation,  as  if 
the  writer  had  shaken  off  for  a  moment  the  re- 
straint of  his  self-imposed  law.  Possibly  the  in- 
version of  the  usual  order  of  J?  and  S  in  ch.  ii.,  iii., 
iv.,  may  have  arisen  from  a  like  forgetfulness. 
Grotius,  ad  loc,  explains  it  on  the  assumi)tion  that 
here  Jeretniah  followed  the  order  of  the  Chaldaean 
alphabet.'' 

(2.)  Ch.  iii.  contains  three  short  verses  under 
each  letter  of  the  alphabet,  the  initial  letter  being 
three  times  repeated. 

(:].)  Ch.  v.  contains  the  same  number  of  verses 
as  ch.  i.,  ii.,  iv.,  but  without  the  alphabetic  order. 
The  thought  suggests  itself  that  the  ear.iestness 
of  the  prayer  with  which  the  book  closes  may  have 
can-ied  the  writer  beyond  the  limits  within  which 
he  had  previously  confined  himself;  but  the  con- 
jecture (of  Ewald)  that  we  have  here,  as  in  Ps. 
ix.  and  x.,  the  rough  draught  of  what  was  intended 
to  have  been  finished  afterwards  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  others,  is  at  least  a  probable  one. 

III.  The  power  of  entering  into  the  spirit  and 
meaning  of  poems  such  as  these  depends  on  two 
distincfi  conditions.  We  must  seek  to  see,  as  with 
our  own  eyes,  the  desolation,  misery,  confusion, 
which  came  before  those  of  the  prophet.  We  must 
endeavour  also  to  feel  as  he  felt  when  he  looked  on 
them.  And  the  last  is  the  more  difficult  of  the 
two.  Jeremiah  was  not  merely  a  patriot-poet, 
weeping  over  the  ruin  of  his  country.  He  was  a 
prophet  who  had  s&en  all  this  coming,  and  had  fore- 
told it  as  inevitable.  He  had  urged  submission  to 
the  Chaldaeans  as  the  only  mode  of  diminishing  the 
terrors  of  that  "day  of  the  Lord."  And  now  the 
Chaldaeans  were  come,  irritated  by  the  perfidy  and 
rebellion  of  the  king  and  princes  of  Judah;  and  the 
actual  horrors  thatT  he  saw,  surpassed,  though  he 
had  predicted  them,  all  that  he  had  been  able  to 
imagine.  All  feeling  of  exultation  in  which,  as 
mere  prophet  of  evil,  he  might  have  indulged  at  the 
fulfilment  of  his  forebodings,  was  swallowed  up  in 
deep  overwhelming  sorrow.  Yet  sorrow,  not  less 
than  other  emotions,  works  on  men  according  to 
their  characters,  and  a  man  with  Jeremiah's  gifts 
of  utterance  could  not  sit  down  in  the  mere  silence 
and  stupor  of  a  hopeless  grief.  He  was  compelled 
to  give  expression  to  that  which  was  devouring 
his  "heart  and  the  heart  of '  his  people.  The  act 
itself  was  a  relief  to  him.  It  led  him  on  (as  will 
be  seen  hereafter)  to  a  calmer  and  serener  state.  It 
revived  the  faith  and  hope  which  had  been  nearly 
crushed  out. 


'  Parcau  (quoted  by  De  Wette,  I.  c.)  connects  the 
poems  in  the  life  as  follows  : — 

C.  I.  During  the  .siege  (.ler.  xxxvii.  5). 

C.  II.  After  the  destruction  of  the  Temple. 

C.  III.  At  the  time  of  .leremiah's  imprisonment  in 
the  dungeon  (.ler.  xxxviii.  6,  with  Lam.  iii.  55). 

C.  IV.,  After  the  capture  of  Zedekiah. 

C.  V.  After  the  destruction,  later  than  c.  ii. 

s  De  Wette  maintains  [Comment,  iihcr  die  Psalm. 
p.  50)  that  this  acrostic  form  of  writing  was  the  out- 
growth of  a  feeble  and  degenerate  age  dwelling  on 
the  outer  structure  of  poetry  when  the  soul  had  de- 
parted. His  judgment  as  to  the  origin  and  cha- 
racter of  the  alphabetic  form  is  shared  by  Kwald 
(I'oet.  Jliich.  i.  p.  140).  It  is  hard,  however,  to  re- 
concile tViis  estimate  with  the  impression  made  on  us 
by  such  Psalms  as  -the  25th  and  34th  ;  and  Ilwald 
himself,  in  his  translation  of  the  Aliihabetic  Psalms 


and  the  Lamentations,  has  shewn  how  compatible 
such  a  structure  is  with  the  highest  energy  and  beauty. 
With  some  of  these,  too,  it  must  be  added,  the  assign- 
ment of  a  later  date  than  the  time  of  David  rests  on 
the  foregone  conclusion  that  the  acrostic  structure  is 
itself  a  proof  of  it.  (Comp.  Delitzsch,  Commentar  iiber 
den  Psalter,  on  Ps.  ix.,  x.).  De  Wette  however  allows, 
condescendingly,  that  the  Lamentations,  in  spite  of 
their  degenerate  taste,  "  have  some  merit  in  thcit 
way"  ("  sind  zwar  in  ihrer  Art  von  einigen  Werthe  "). 
■i  Similar  anomalies  occur  in  Ps.  xxxvii.,  and  have 
received  a  like  explanation  (De  Wette,  Ps.  p.  57). 
It  is  however  a  mere  hypothesis  that  the  (^haldaean 
alphabet  differed  in  this  respect  from  the  Hebrew  ; 
nor  is  it  easy  to  sec  why  Jeremiah  should  have  chosen 
the  Hebrew  order  for  one  poem,  and  the  Chaldaean  for 
the  other  three. 


60 


LAMENTATIONS 


It  has  to  be  remembered  too,  that  in  thus  speak- 
ing he  was  doing  that  which  many  must  have 
looked  for  'from  him,  and  so  meeting  at  once  their 
expectations  and  their  wants.  Other  prophets  and 
poets  had  made  themselves  the  spokesmen  of 
the  nation's  feelings  on  the  death  of  kings  and 
heroes.  The  party  that  continued  faithful  to  the 
policy  and  principles  of  Josiah  remembered  how 
the  prophet  had  lamented  over  his  death.  The 
lamentations  of  that  period  (though  they  are  lost 
to  us)  had  been  accepted  as  a  great  national  dirge. 
Was  he  to  be  silent  now  that  a  more  terrible  cala- 
mity had  fallen  upon  the  people  ?  Did  not  the  exiles 
in  Babylon  need  tliis  form  of  consolation  ?  Does 
not  the  appearance  of  this  book  in  their  Canon  of 
Sacred  writings,  after  their  return  from  exile,  indi- 
Ciite  that  during  their  captivity  they  had  found 
that  consolation  in  it  ? 

The  choice  of  a  stnicture  so  artificial  as  that 
which  has  been  described  above,  may  at  first  sight 
appear  inconsistent  with  the  deep  intense  sorrow  of 
which  it  claims  to  be  the  utterance.  Some  wilder 
less  measured  rhythm  would  seem  to  us  to  have 
been  a  fitter  form  of  expiession.  It  would  belong, 
however,  to  a  very  shallow  and  hasty  criticism  to 
pass  this  judgment.  A  man  ti'ue  to  the  gift  he  has 
received  will  welcome  the  discipline  of  selt-imposed 
rules  for  deep  sorrow  as  well  as  for  other  strong 
emotions.  In  proportion  as  he  is  afraid  of  being 
carried  away  by  the  strong  current  of  feeling,  will 
he  be  anxious  to  make  the  laws  more  difficult,  the 
discipline  more  eii'ectual.  Something  of  this  kind 
is  traceable  in  the  fact  that  so  many  of  the  master- 
minds of  European  literature  have  chosen,  as  the 
fit  vehicle  for  their  deepest,  tenderest,  most  im- 
passioned thoughts,  the  complicated  structure  of  the 
sonnet ;  in  Dante's  selection  of  the  terza  riina  for 
his  vision  of  the  unseen  world.  What  the  sonnet 
was  to  Petrarch  and  to  Milton,  that  the  alphabetic 
verse-system  was  to  the  writers  of  Jeremiah's  time, 
the  most  difficult  among  the  recognised  fomis  of 
poetry,  and  yet  one  in  which  (assuming  the  earlier 
date  of  some  of  the  Psalms  above  referred  to)  some 
of  the  noblest  thoughts  of  that  poetry  had  been 
uttered.  We  need  not  wondei'  that  he  should  have 
employed  it  as  fitter  than  any  other  for  the  purpose 
for  which  he  used  it.  If  these  Lamentations  were 
intended  to  assuage  the  bitterness  of  the  Babylonian 
exile,  there  was,  besides  this,  the  subsidiary  ad- 
vantage that  it  supplied  the  memory  with  an  arti- 
ficial help.  Hymns  and  poems  of  this  kind,  once 
learnt,  are  not  easily  forgotten,  and  the  circum- 
stances of  the  captives  made  it  then,  more  than  ever, 
necessary  that  they  should  have  this  help  afforded 
them.' 

An  examination  of  the  five  poems  will  enable  us 
to  judge  how  far  each  stands  by  itself,  how  far 
they  are  connected  as  parts  forming  a  whole.  We 
must  deal  with  them  as  they  are,  not  forcing  our 
own  meanings  into  them ;  looking  on  them  not  as 
prophetic,  or  didactic,  or  historical,  but  simply  as 
lamentations,  exhibiting,  like  other  elegies,  the  dift'e- 
rent  phases  of  a  pervading  sorrow. 

I.  The  opening  verse  strikes  the  key-note  of  the 
whole  poem.  That  which  haimts  the  prophet's 
mind   is  the  solitude  in  which  he  finds   himself. 


'  The  re-appearance  of  this  structure  in  tne  later 
literature  of  the  East  is  not  without  interest.  Alpha- 
betic poems  are  found  among  tlie  hymns  of  Ephracm 
Syrus  (Assemani,  BihL  Orient,  iii.  p.  08)  and  other 
writers  ;  sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Kbcil-jesas,  witli 


LAMENTATIONS 

She  that  was  "princess  among  the  nations"  (1) 
sits  (like  the  judaea  capta  of  the  Koman  me- 
dals), "  solitary,"  "  as  a  widow."  Her  "  lovers  " 
(the  nations  with  whom  she  had  been  allied)  hold 
aloof  from  her  (2).  The  heathen  are  entered  into 
the  sanctuary,  and  mock  at  her  Sabbaths  (7,  10). 
After  the  manner  so  characteristic  of  Hebrew  poet'-y, 
the  personality  of  the  writer  now  recedes  and  now 
advances,  and  blends  by  hardly  perceptible  transi- 
tions with  that  of  the  city  which  he  personifies, 
and  with  which  he,  as  it  were,  identifies  himselt. 
At  one  time,  it  is  the  daughter  of  Zion  that  asks 
"  I?  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  p;iss  by?"  (12). 
At  another,  it  is  the  prophet  who  looks  on  her,  and 
portrays  her  as  "spreading  forth  her  hands,  and 
there  is  none  to  comfort  her"  (17).  Jlingling 
with  this  outburst  of  soitow  there  are  two  thoughts 
characteristic  both  of  the  man  and  the  time.  The 
calamities  which  the  nation  suffers  are  the  conse- 
quences of  its  sins.  There  must  be  the  confession 
of  those  sins :  "  The  Lord  is  righteous,  for  I  have 
rebelled  against  His  commandment "  (18).  There 
is  also,  at  any  rate,  this  gleam  of  consolation  that 
Judah  is  not  alone  in  her  sufferings.  Those  who 
have  exulted  in  her  destruction  shall  drink  of  the 
same  cup.  They  shall  be  like  unto  her  in  the  day 
that  the  Lord  shall  call  (21). 

II.  As  the  solitude  of  the  city  was  the  subject  of 
the  first  lamentation,  so  the  destruction  that  had  laid 
it  waste  is  that  which  is  most  conspicuous  in  tlie 
second.  Jehovah  had  thrown  down  in  his  wrath 
the  strongholds  of  the  daughter  of  Judah  (2).  The 
rampart  and  the  wall  lament  together  (8).  The 
walls  of  the  palace  are  given  up  into  the  hand  of  the 
enemy  (7).  The  breach  is  great  as  if  made  by  the 
inrushing  of  the  sea  (13).  With  this  there  had 
been  united  all  the  horrors  of  the  famine  and  the 
assault : — young  children  fainting  for  hunger  in  the 
top  of  every  street  (19)  ;  women  eating  their  own 
children,  and  so  fulfilling  the  curse  of  Deut.  xxTiii. 
53  (20);  the  priest  and  the  prophet  slain  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  Lord  (ibid.).  Added  to  all  this, 
there  was  the  remembrance  of  that  which  had  been 
all  along  the  gieat  trial  of  Jeremiah's  life,  against 
which  he  had  to  wage  continual  war.  The  prophets 
of  Jerusalem  had  seen  vain  and  foolish  tilings,  false 
burdens,  and  causes  of  banishment  (1-1).  A  right- 
eous judgment  had  fallen  on  them.  The  prophets 
found  no  vision  of  Jehovah  (9).  The  king  and  the 
piinces  who  had  listened  to  them  were  captive 
among  the  Gentiles. 

III.  The  difl'erence  in  the  structure  of  this  poem 
which  has  been  already  noticed,  indicates  a  corre- 
sponding difference  iu  its  substance.  In  the  two 
j)receding  poems,  Jeremiah  had  spoken  of  the  misery 
and  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  In  the  third  he  speaks 
chiefly,  though  not  exclusively,  of  his  own.  He 
himself  is  the  man  that  has  seen  atfliction  (1), 
who  has  been  brought  into  darkness  and  not  into 
light  (2).  He  looks  back  upon  the  long  life  of 
suflering  which  he  has  been  called  on  to  endure,  tlie 
scorn  and  derision  of  the  people,  the  bitterness  as 
of  one  drunken  with  wormwood  (14,  15).  But 
that  experience  was  not  one  which  had  ended  in 
darkness  and  despair.  Here,  as  in  the  prophecies, 
we  find  a  Gospel  for  the  weary  and  heavy-laden,  a 


a  much  more  complicated  plan  than  any  of  the  0.  T. 
poems  of  this  type  (ibid.  iii.  p.  328),  and  these  chiefly 
in  hymns  to  be  s\mg  by  boys  at  solemn  festivals,  or 
in  confessions  of  faith  which  wtre  meant  for  their 
instruction. 


LAMENTATIONS  LAMENTATIONS         61 

trust,  not  to  be  shaken,  in  the  mercy  and  righteous- 
ness of  Jehovah.     The  mercies  of  the  Lord  are  new 
every  morning  (22,  23).     He  is  good  to  them  that 
v/ait  for  Him  (25).     And  the   retrospect  of  tliat 
sharp  experience  showed  him  that  it  all  formed  part 
of  the  discipline  which  was  intended  to  lead  him  on 
to  a  higher  blessedness.     It  was  good  for  a  man  to 
beal-  the  yoke  in  his  youth,  good  that  he  should 
both  hope  and  quietly  wait  (26,  27).     With  this, 
equally  characteristic  of  the  prophet's  individuality, 
there  is  the  protest  against  the  wrong  which  had 
been  or  might  hereafter  be  committed  by   rulers 
and  princes  (34-86 ),  the  confession  that  all  that  had 
come  on  him  and  his  people  was  but  a  righteous  re- 
tribution, to  be  accepted  humbly,  with  searchings 
of  heart,  and  repentance  ( 39-42).    The  closing  verses 
may  refer  to  that  special   epoch  in  the  prophet's 
life  when   his   own   sufferings  had  been   sharpest 
("13-56)  and  the  cruelties  of  his  enemies  most  tri- 
umphant.    If  so,  we  can  enter  more  fully,  remem- 
bering this,  into  the  thanksgiving  with  which  he 
acknowledges    the    help,    deliverance,    redemption, 
which  he  "had  received  from  God  (57,  68).     And 
feeling  sure   that,   at   some  time  or  other,  there 
would  be  for  him  a  yet  higher  lesson,  we  can  enter 
with  some  measure   of  sympathy,    even    into  the 
terrible  earnestness  of  his  appeal  from  the  unjust 
juds^'ment  of  earth  tp  the  righteous  Judge,  inlo  his 
cry  for  a  retribiition  without  which  it  seemed  to  him 
that  the  Eternal  Righteousuess  would  fail  (64-66), 
IV.  It  might  seem,  at  first,  as  if  the  fourth  poem 
did  but  reproduce  the  pictures  and  the  thoughts  of 
the  first  and  second.     There  come  before  us,  once 
again,    the    famine,    the    misery,    the   desolation, 
that  had  fiillen  on  the  holy  city,  making  all  faces 
gather  blackness.     One  new  element  in  the  picture 
is  found  ;n  the  contrast  between  the  past  glory  of 
the  consecrated  families  of  the  kingly  and  priestly 
stocks  (Nazarites  in  A .  V.)  and  their  later  misery 
and  shame.     Some  changes  there  are,  however,  not 
without  interest  in  their  relation  to  the  poet's  .own 
life  and  to  the  history  of  his  time.     All  tlie  facts 

gain  a  new  signitican(,'e  hf  being  seen  in  the  light ,  the  book  of  remembrance.  On  the  ninth  day  of 
of  the  personal  experience  of  the  third  poem.  The  I  the  month  of  Ab  (July),  the  Lamentations  of  Jere- 
declaration  that  all  this  had  come  "  for  the  sins  of  the  I  miah  were  read,  year  by  year,  with  fasting  and 
prophets  and  the  iniquities  of  the  priests"  is  clearer  \  weeping,  to  coumiemorate  the  misery  out  of  which 
and  sharper  than  before  (13).  There  is  the  giving  up  the  people  had  been  delivered.  It  has  come  to  be 
of  the  last  hope  which    Jeremiah  had   cherished,    connected  with  the  thoughts  of  a  later  devastation. 


to  one  marked  characteristic  which  may  have  occa- 
sioned this  dif?tirence.  There  are  signs  also  of  a 
later  date  than  that  of  the  preceding  poems.  Though 
the  horrors  of  the  famine  are  inetiaceable,  yet  that 
which  he  has  before  him  is  rather  the  continued 
piotracted  sufl'ering  of  the  rule  of  the  Chaldaeans. 
The  mountain  of  Ziou  is  desolate,  and  the  foxes 
walk  on  it  (18).  Slaves  have  ruled  over  the 
people  of  Jehovah  (8).  Women  have  been  sub- 
jected to  intolerable  outrages  (11).  The  young 
men  have  been  taken  to  grind,™  and  the  children 
have  fallen  under  the  wood  (13).  But  in  this  also, 
deep  as  might  be  the  humiliation,  there  was  hope, 
even  as  there  had  been  in  the  dark  hours  of  the 
prophet's  own  life.  He  and  his  people  are  sustained 
by  the  old  thought  which  had  been  so  fruitful  of 
comfort  to  other  prophets  and  psalmists.  The 
periods  of  suffering  and  struggle  which  seemed  so 
long,  were  but  as  moments  in  the  lifetime  of  the 
Eternal  (19);  and  the  thought  of  that  eternity 
brought  with  it  the  hope  that  the  purposes  of  lo\'o 
which  had  been  declared  so  clearly  should  one  day 
be  fulfilled.  The  la^t  words  of  this  lamentation 
are  those  which  have  risen  so  often  from  broken  and 
contrite  hearts,  "  Turn  thou  us,  0  Lord,  and  we 
shall  be  turned.  Renew  our  days  as  of  old  "  (21). 
That  which  had  begun  with  wailing  and  weeping 
ends  (following  Ewald's  and  MichaeKs's  translation) 
with  the  question  of  hope,  "  Wilt  thou  utterly  reject 
us  ?  Wilt  thou  be  very  wroth  against  us  ?" 

There  are  perhaps  few  portions  of  the  0.  T. 
which  appear  to  have  done  the  work  they  were 
meant  to  do  more  effectually  than  this.  It  has  pre- 
sented but  scanty  materials  for  the  systems  and 
controversies  of  theology.  It  has  supplied  thou- 
sands with  the  fullest  utterance  for  their  sorrows  in 
the  critical  periods  of  national  or  individual  suffer- 
ing. We  may  well  believe  that  it  soothed  the 
weary  years  of  the  Babylonian  exile  (comp.  Zech.  i. 
6,  with  Lam.  ii.  17).  Whgn  they  returned  to 
their  own  land,  and  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem  was 
remembered  as  belonging  only  to  the  past,  this  was 


when  he  urged  on  Zedekiah  the  wisdom '  of  submi 
sion  to  the  Chaldaeans  (20).  The  closing  words 
indicate  the  strength  of  that  feeling  against  the 
Edomites  which  lasted  all  through  the  capti- 
vity'' (21,  22).  She,  the  daughter  of  Edom,  had 
rejoiced  in  the  fall  of  her  rival,  and  had  pressed  on 
the  work  of  destruction.  But  for  her  too  there 
was  the  doom  of  being  drunken  with  the  cup  of 
the  Lord's  wrath.  For  the  daughter  of  Zion  there 
was  hope  of  pardon,  when  discipline  should  have 
done  its  work  and  the  punishment  of  her  iniquity 
should  be  accomplished. 

V.  One  great  dif!erence  in  the  fifth  and  last  section 
of  the  poem  has  been  already  pointed  out.  It  ob- 
viously indicates  either  a  deliberate  abandonment  of 
the  alphabetic  structure,  or  the  unfinished  cha- 
racter of  the  concluding  elegy.  The  title  prefixed 
in  the  Vulgate,  "  OratioJercmiae  Prophetae,"  points 


''  Comp.  with  this  Obad.  vcr.  10,  and  Ps.  exxxvii.  7. 

■"  The  Vulgate  imports  into  this  verse  also  tlie 
thought  of  a  shameful  iufam}'.  It  must  bo  remem- 
bered, however,  that  the  literal  meaning  conveyed  to 

the  mind  of  an  Israelite  one  of  the  lowest  offices  of  |  tions  of  Jeremiah  arc  frrqiicntly  employed 
glave-labour  (comp.  Judg-.  xvi.  21). 


and  its  words  enter,  sometimes  at  least,  into  the 
prayers  of  the  pilgrim  Jews  who  meet  at  the  "  place 
of  wailing"  to  mourn  over  the  departed  glory  of 
their  city."  It  enters  largely  into  the  nobly-con- 
structed order  of  the  Latin  Church  for  the  services 
of  Passion-week  {^Brcviar.  Bom.  Feria  Quinta.  "  In 
Cccna  Domini ").  If  it  has  been  comparatively  in  the 
background  in  times  when  the  study  of  Scripture 
had  passed  into  casuistry  and  speculation,  it  has 
come  forward,  once  and  again,  in  times  of  danger 
and  suflering,  as  a  messenger  of  peace,  comforting 
men,  not  after  the  fiishion  of  the  friends  of  Job, 
with  formal  moralizings,  but  by  enabling  them  to 
express  themselves,  leading  them  to  feel  that  they 
might  give  utterance  to  the  deepest  and  s;iddest 
feelings  by  which  they  were  overwhelmed.  It  is 
striking,  as  we  cast  our  eye  over  the  list  of  writers 
who  have  treated  specially  of  the  book,  to  notice 


"  Is  there  any  uniform  practice  in  these  devotions  ? 
The  writer  hears  from  some  Jews  that  the  only  prayers 
said  are  those  that  would  have  been  said,  as  the  prayer 
of  the  day,  elsewhere ;  from  others,  that  the  Lamenta- 


62 


LAMP 


how  many  must  have  passed  tlirough  scenes  of  trial 
not  luilike  iu  kind  to  that  of  which  the  Lamenta- 
tions speak.  The  book  remains  to  do  its  work  for 
any  fLitiire  generation  that  may  be  exjiosed  to  ana- 
logous calamities. 

A  few  facts  connected  with  tlie  external  history 
of  the  Book  remain  to  be  stated.  The  position 
which  it  has  occupied  in  the  canon  of  the  0.  T.  has 
varied  from  time  to  time.  In  the  received  Hebrew 
arrangement  it  is  placed  among  the  Kethuhim  or 
Hagiographa,  between  liuth  and  Koheletli  (Eccle- 
siastes).  In  that  adopted  for  synagogue  use,  and 
reproduced  in  some  editions,  as  in  the  Bomberg 
Bible  of  1521,  it  stands  among  the  five  Megillotk 
after  the  books  of  Jloses.  The  LXX.  group  the 
writings  connected  with  the  name  of  Jeremiah  to- 
gether, but  the  Book  of  Baruch  comes  between  the 
prophecy  and  the  Lamentation.  On  the  hypothesis 
of  some  writers  that  Jer.  lii.  was  originally  the 
nitroductiou  to  the  poem,  and  not  the  conclusion  of 
the  prophecy,  and  that  the  preface  of  the  LXX. 
(which  is  not  found  either  in  the  Hebi'ew,  or  in 
the  Targum  of  Jonathan)  was  inserted  to  diminish 
the  abruptness  occasioned  by  this  separation  of  the 
book  from  that  with  which  it  had  been  originally 
connected,  it  would  follow  that  the  arrangement  of 
the  Vulg.  and  the  A.  V.  corresponds  more  closely 
than  any  other  to  that  which  we  must  look  on  as 
the  original  one. 

Literature. — Theodoret,  0pp.  ii.  p.  286  ;  Je- 
rome, 0pp.  V.  165 ;  Special  Commentaries  by 
Calvin  {Prol.  in  Thren.) ;  Bullinger  (Tigur. 
1575)  ;  Peter  Martyr  (Tigur.  1629) ;  Oecolampa- 
dius  (Argent.  1558);  Zuinglins  (Tigur.  1544); 
Maldonatus;  Pareau  {Threni  Jererniae,  Lugd.  Bat. 
1790);  Tarnovius  (1624);  Kalkar  (1836) ;  Neu- 
mann (Jeremias  u.  Kkujelieder,  1858).  Translated 
by  Ewald,  in  Poet.  Buck,  part  i.  [E.  H.  P.] 

LAMP."  1.  That  part  of  the  golden  candle- 
stick belonging  to  the  Tabernacle  which  bore  the 
light ;  also  of  each  of  the  ten  candlesticks  placed  by 
Solomon  in  the  Temple  before  the  Holy  of  Holies 
(Ex.  XXV.  :37  ;']  K.  vii.  49  ;  2  Chr.  iv.  20,  xiii.  11  ; 
Zech.  iv.  2).  The  lamps  were  lighted  every  evening, 
and  cleansed  every  morning  (Ex.  xxx.  7,  8 ;  Reland, 
Ant.  Hebr.  i.  v.  9,  and  vii.  8).  The  primary  sense 
of  light  (Gen.  xv.  17)  gives  rise  to  frequent  meta- 
pho  ical  usages,  indicating  life,  welflire,  guidance, 
as  e.  (/.  2  Sam.  xxi.  17;  Ps.  cxix.  105;  Prov.  vi. 
23,  xiii.  9. 

2.  A  torch  or  flambeau,  such  as  was  carried  by 
the.  soldiers  of  Gideon  (Judg.  vii.  16,20;  comp. 
XV.  4).     See  vol.  i.  p.  695,  note. 

3.  In  N.  T.  Xaix-rrdSes  is  in  A.  V.,  Acts  sx.  8, 
"lights;"  in  John  xviii.  3,  "torches;"  in  Matt. 
XXV.  1,  Rev.  iv.  5,  "  lamps." 

Herodotus,  speaking  of  Egyptian  lamps  used  at  a 
festival,  desci'ibes  them  as  vessels  tilled  with  salt 
and  olive  oil,  with 
floating  wicks,  but 
does  not  mention  the 
material  of  the  ves- 
sels (Herod,  ii.  62; 
Wilkinson,  Ana.  Eg. 
Abridg.  i.  298,ii.71). 
The  use  of  lamps 
fed  with  oil  at  mar- 
riage processions  is  al- 
luded toin  the  parable  of  the  ten  virgins  (  Matt,  xx  v.  1). 

"  "13,  once  TiJ  (2  Sam.  xxii.  29),  from  "|."|3, 
"  to  shine,"  Ges.  p.  8G7  :  Kv^vos  :   luccrna. 


Fgyptian  Lamp. 


LAODICEA 

Modern  Egyptian  lamps  consist  of  small  glass 
vessels  with  a  tube  at  the  bottom  containing  a 
cotton-wick  twisted  round  a  piece  of  straw.  Some 
water  is  poured  in  first,  and  then  oil.  For  night - 
travelling,  a  lantern  composed  of  waxed  -cloth 
straiiied  ovei-  a  sort  of  cylinder  of  wire-rings,  and  a 
top  and  bottom  of  perforated  copper.  This  would, 
iu  form  at  least,  answer  to  the  lamps  within 
pitchers  of  Gideon.  On  occasions  of  marriage  the 
street  oi-  quarter  wheie  the  bridegroom  lives  is 
illuminated  with  lamps  suspended  from  cords 
di'awn  across.  Sometimes  the  bridegroom  is  ac- 
companied to  a  mosque  by  men  bearing  flambeaux, 
consisting  of  frames  of  iron  fixed  on  staves,  and  filled 
with  burning  wood;  and  on  his  return,  by  others  bear- 
ing frames  with  many  lamps  suspended  from  them 
(Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  202  215,  224,  225,  230  ;  Mrs. 
Poole,  Englishio.  in  Eg.  in.  131).         [H.  W.  P.] 

LANCET.  This  word  is  found  in  1  K.  xviii. 
28  only.  The  Hebrew  term  is  Romach,  which  is 
elsewhere  rendered,  and  appears  to  mean  a  javelin, 
oi>  light  spear.  [See  Arms,  vol.  i.  p.  110  6.]  In 
the  original  edition  of  the  A.  V.  (1611)  this  mean- 
ing is  preserved,  the  word  being  ' '  lancers." 

LANGUAGE.    [Tongues,  Confusion  of.1 

LANGUAGES,  SEMITIC.     [Shem.] 

LANTERN  {<pavos)  occurs  only  in  John 
xviii.  3.     See  Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  Laterna. 

LAODICEA  rAaoSi'/cem).  The  two  passages 
in  the  N.  T.  where  this  city  is  mentioned  deline  its 
geographical  position  in  harmony  with  other  autho- 
rities. In  Kev.  i.  11,  iii.  14,  it  is  spoken  of  as 
belonging  to  the  general  district  which  contained 
Ephesus,  Smyrna,  Thyatira,  Pergamus,  Sardis,  and 
Philadelphia.  In  Col.  iv.  13,  15,  it  appears  in  still 
closer  association  with  Colossao  anil  Hierapolis.  And 
this  was  exactly  its  position.  It  was  a  town  of  some 
consequence  in  the  Koniau  province  of  Asia;  and  it 
was  situated  in  the  valley  of  the  Maeander,  on  a 
small  river  called  the  ^.ycus,  with  Coi.OSSae  and 
PIiERAi'OLiS  a  few  miles  distant  to  the  west. 

Built,  or  rather  lebuilt,  by  one  of  the  Selencid 
monarchs,  and  named  in  honour  of  his  wife,  Lao- 
dicea  became  under  the  Roman  government  a  place 
of  some  impni'tance.  Its  trade  was  considerable: 
it  la)'  on  the  line  of  a  great  road  ;  and  it  was  the 
seat  of  a  conventirs.  From  Kev.  iii.  17,  we  should 
gather  it  was  a  place  of  great  wealth.  The  damage 
which  was  caused  by  an  earthquake  in  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  (Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  27)  was  promptly  repaired 
by  the  energy  of  the  inhabitants.  It  was  soon  after 
this  occurrence  that  Christianity  was  introduced  into 
Laodicea,  not  however,  as  it  would  seem,  through  the 
direct  agency  of  St.  Paul.  We  have  good  I'eason 
for  believing  that  when,  in  writing  fi-om  Rome 
to  the  Christians  of  Colossae,  he  sent  a  greeting 
to  those  of  Laodicea,  he  had  not  personally  visited 
either  place.  But  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  at 
Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  19-xix.  41)  must  inevitably 
have  I'esulted  in  the  fomiation  of  churches  in  the 
neighbouring  cities,  especially  where  Jews  were 
settled  :  and  there  were  Jews  in  Laodicea  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  3,  §4  ;  xiv.  10,  §20).  In  subsequent  times 
it  became -a  Christian  city  of  eminence,  the  see  of  a 
bishop,  and  a  meeting-jilace  of  councils.  It  is  often 
mentioned  by  the  Byzantine  writers.  The  Mo- 
hammedan invaders  destroyed  it ;  and  it  is  now  a 
scene  of  utter  desolation :  but  the  extensive  ruins 
near  Denisln  justify  all  that  we  read  of  Laodicea 
in  (ireek  and    Roman   writers.      Many  travellers 


LAODICEANS 

(Pococke,  Chandler,  I.oake,  Arumlell,  Fellows)  have 
visited  and  described  the  place,  but  the  most  elabo- 
rate and  interesting  account  is  that  of  Hamilton. 

One  Biblical  subject  of  interest  is  connected  with 
Laodicea.  From  Col.  iv.  16  it  appears  that  St. 
Paul  wrote  a  letter  to  this  place  (Ji  e/c  AaoSiKeias) 
when  he  wrote  the  letter  to  Colossae.  The  question 
arises  whether  we  can  give  any  account  of  this 
Laodicean  epistle.  VVieseler's  theory  {AjMst.  Zcit- 
altcr,  p.  4.')0)  is  that  the  Epistle  to  Pliilemon  is 
meant ;  and  the  tradition  in  the  Apostolical  Consti- 
tutions that  he  was  bishop  of  this  see  is  adduced 
in  conHrination.  Another  view,  maintained  by 
Puley  and  others,  and  sngg-ested  by  a  manuscript 
variation  in  Kph.  i.  1,  is  that  the  Epistle  to  the 
I'^phesians  is  intended.  Ussher's  view  is  that  this 
last  epistle  was  a  circular  letter  sent  to  Laodicea 
anioiio-  other  places  (see  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
ii.  488,  with  Alford's  Prolegomena,  G.  T.  v.  iii. 
13-18).  None  of  these  opinions  can  be  maintained 
with  much  confidence.  It  may  however  be  said, 
without  hesitation,  that  the  apocryphal  Epistola  ad 
Laodicenses  is  a  late  and  clumsy  forgery.  It  exists 
only  in  Latin  SLSS.,  and  is  evidently  a  cento  from 
the  Galatians  and  Ephesians.  A  full  account  of  it 
is  given  by  Jones  {On  the  Canon,  ii.  31-49). 

The  subscription  at  the  end  of  tlic  First  Epistle 
to  Timothy  [iypi<pri  airh  AaoSiKsias,  t/jtis  iarrl 
IxrjTpSiroXts  4>pvyias  rris  UaKarLavris)  is  of  no 
authority;  but  it  is  worth  mentioning,  as  showing 
the  importance  of  Laodicea.  [J.  S.  H.] 

LAODICE'ANS  {AaodiKe7s :  Laodicenses),  the 
inhabitants  of  Laodicea  (Col.  iv.  16;   Piev.  iii.  14). 

LAP'IDOTH  (HiT'S^,  i.e.  Lappidoth :  Aa- 
cpeiSdd:  lAipidoth),  the  husband  of  Deborah  the 
prophetess  (Judg.  iv.  4  only).  The  word  rendered 
"  wife"  in  Uie  expression  "wife  of  Lapidoth"  has 
simply  the  force  of  "  woman  ;"  and  thus  lappidoth 
("torches")  has  been  by  some  understood  as  de- 
scriptive of  Deborah's  disposition,  and  even  of  her 
occupations.  [Deborah.]  But  there  is  no  real 
ground  for  supposing  it  to  mean  anything  but  wife, 
or  for  doubting  the  existence  of  her  husband.  True, 
the  termination  of  the  name  is  feminine;  but  this  is 
the  case  in  other  names  undoubtedly  borne  by  men, 
as  Meremoth,  Mahazioth,  &'C.  [G.] 

LAPWING (nQ''3-n,(/M%/if(iA;  67roi|/:  upupa) 
occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  19,  and  in  the  parallel  passage 
of  Deut.  xiv.  18,  amongst  the  list  of  those  birds  which 
were  forbidden  by  the  law  of  Moses  to  be  eaten  by> 
the  Israelites.  Commentators  generally  agree  with 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  that  the  Hoopoe  is  the  bird 
intended,  and  with  this  interpretation  the  Arabic 
versions «  coincide :  all  these  three  versions  give 
one  word,  Hoopoe,  as  the  meaning  of  dukiphath ; 
but  one  cannot  definitely  say  whether  the  Syriac 
leading,*'  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem,  Onkelos,  and 


LAPWING 


63 


"   (X^JyjJ!'  alhudhud,  from  root  ,S^iSi>'  "  t° 

moan  as  a  dove."  Hudhiid  is  the  modern  Ari^bic 
name  for  the  hoopoe.  At  Cairo  the  name  of 
this  bird  is  hidhid  (vid.  Forskal,  Dcscr.  Animal,  p. 
vii.). 

''    )*-^    ^  Q^^J^i.  (Syriac),  woorf/ajirf-cocA. 

''   K"l-1t3   "lilJ   (Clialdoe),  artifcx  month;  Gorman, 

hcrgmeister  (then,  gallus  monianus)  :  from  the  Ilah- 
binical   story  of  tlie  Hoopoe  and  the  Shamir.     (Sec 


Jonathan,*^  and  the  Jewish  doctors,  indicate  any 
particular  bird  or  not,  fur  they  merely  appear  to 
resolve  the  Hebrew  wpnl  into  its  component  parts, 
dukiphath  being  by  them  understood  as  the  ••  nioun- 
tain-cock,"  or  "  woodland-cock."  This  translation 
has,  as  may  be  supposed,  produced  considerable  dis- 
cussion as  to  the  kind  of  bird  represented  by  these 
terms — expressions  which  would,  before  the  date 
of  acknowledged  scientific  nomenclature,  have  a 
very  wide  meaning.  According  to  Bochart,  these 
four  different  interpretations  have  been  assigned  to 
dukiphath: — 1.  The  Sadducees  supposed  the  bird 
intended  to  be  the  common  hen,  which  they  tJiere- 
fbre  refused  to  eat.  2.  Another  interpretation 
understands  the  cock  of  the  woods  {tetrao  uro- 
gallus).  .3.  Other  interpreters  think  the  attagen 
is  meant.  4.  The  last  interpretation  is  that  which 
gives  the  Hoopoe  as  the  rendering  of  the  Hebrew 
word.'^' 


Hie  Hoopoe  (X'}mp.i  Epop"). 

As  to  the  value  of  1.  nothing  can  be  urged  in  its 
favour  except  that  the  first  part  of  the  word  diik 
or  d'lk  doep  in  Arabic  mean  a  cock.''  2.  With-almost 
as  little  reason  can  the  cock  of  the  icoods,  or 
capercailzie,  be  considered  to  have  any  claim  to  be 
the  bird  indicated ;  for  this  bird  is  an  inhabitant  of 
the  northern  parts  of  Europe  and  Asia,  and  althongh 
it  has  been  occasionally  found,  according  to  M. 
Temmink,  as  far  south  as  the  Ionian  Islands,  yet 
s;ich  occurrences  are  rare  indeed,  and  we  have  no 
record  of  its  ever  having  been  seen  in  Syria  or 
Egypt.  The  capercailzie  is  therefore  a  bird  not 
at"  all  likely  to  come  within  the  sphere  of  the 
observation  of  the  Jews.  3.  As  to  the  third  theory, 
it  is  certainly  at  least  as  much  a  question  what  is 
signified  by  attagen,  as  by  dukiphath.^ 

Many,  and  curious  in  some  instances,  are  the 
derivations  proposed  for  the  Hebrew  word,  but  the 
most  probable  one  is  that  which  was  alluded  to 
vibove,  viz.  the  mountain-cock.  Aeschylus  speaks 
of  the  Hoopoe  by  name,  and  expressly  calls  it  the 


Adamant,  in  Appendix,  and  Biixtorf,  Lex.  Chald. 
Talm.  s.  V.  njj.)  .     , 

■<i  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hoopoe  is  the 
bird  intended  by  duMphath  ;  for  the  Coptic  Kukiiphn, 
the  Syriac  Kikuplia,  which  stand  for  the  (Jpupa  i:pops, 
are  ahiiost  certainly  allied  to  the  Hebrew  nSO/H 
dukiphath. 

^    X  ^^  ,  . 'i ,   i5XJ.i  ■  !/fdli"a,  gallus. 

f  By  attagen  is  here  of  course  meant  the  a.TTo.ya': 
of  the  Greeks,  and  the  attagen  of  the  Komans  ;  not 
that  fiame  as  sometimes  applied  locally  to  the  piar- 
migan,  or  white  grouse. 


64 


LAPWING 


bird  of  the  rocks  [Fragm.  291,  quoted  by  Arist. 
//.  A.  ix.  49).  Aelian  (N.  A.  iii.  2G)  says  that 
these  birds  build  their  nests  ju  lofty  rooks.  Aris- 
totle's words  are  to  the  same  efl'ect,  for  he  writes, 
"  Now  some  animals  are  found  in  the  mountains, 
as  the  hoopoe  for  instance"  (ZT.  A.  i.  1).  When 
the  two  lawsuit-wearied  citizens  of  Athens,  Euel- 
pides  and  Pisthetaerus,  in  the  comedy  of  the  Birds 
of  Aristophanes  (20,  54),  are  on  their  search  for 
the  home  of  Epops,  king  of  birds,  their  ornitholo- 
gical conductors  lead  them  through  a  wild  desert  tract 
terminated  by  mountains  and  rocks,  in  which  is 
situated  the  i-oyal  aviary  of  Epops. 

It  must,  however,  be  remarked  that  the  observa- 
tions of  the  habits  of  the  hoopoe  recorded  by  modei'n 
zoologists  do  not  appear  to  warrant  the  assertion 
that  it  is  so  pre-eminently  a  mountain-bird  as  has 
been  implied  above.s  Marshy  ground,  ploughed  land, 
wooded  districts,  such  as  are  near  to  water,  are 
more  especially  its  favom-ite  haunts ;  but  perhaps 
more  extended  observation  on  its  habits  may  here- 
after confirm  the  accuracy  of  the  statements  of  the 
ancients. 

The  hoopoe  was  accounted  an  unclean  bird  by 
the  Jlosaic  law,  nor  is  it  now  eaten  ^  except  occa- 
sionally in  those  countries  where  it  is  abundantly 
found — Egypt,  France,  Spain,  &c.  &c.  Many  and 
strange  are  the  stories  which  are  told  of  the  hoopoe 
in  ancient  Oriental  fable,  and  some  of  these  stories 
are  by  no  means  to  its  credit.  '  It  seems  to  have  been 
always  regarded,  both  by  Arabians  and  Greeks,  with 
a  superstitious  reverence ' — a  circumstance  which  it 
owes  no  doubt  partly  to  its  crest  (Aristoph.  Birds, 
94;  comp.  Ov.  Met.  vi.  672),  which  certainly 
gives  it  a  most  imposing  appearance,  partly  to  the 
length  of  its  beak,  and  partly  also  to  its  habits. 
"  If  any  one  anointed  himself  with  its  blood,  and 
then  fell  asleep,  he  would  see  demons  suHbcating 
him" — "if  its  liver  were  eaten  with  rue,  the 
eater's  wits  would  be  sharpened,  and  pleasing  me- 
mories be  excited  " — are  superstitions  held  respect- 
ing this  bird.  One  more  fable  narrated  of  the 
hoopoe  is  given,  because  its  origin  can  be  traced  to 
a  peculiar  habit  of  the  bird.  The  Arabs  say  that 
the  hoopoe  is  a  betrayer  of  secrets  ;  that  it  is  able 
moreover  to  point  out  hidden  wells  and  fountains 
under  ground.  Now  the  hoopoe,  on  settling  upon 
the  ground,  has  a  strange  and  portentous-looking 
habit  of  bending  the  head  downwards  till  the  point 
of  the  beak  touches  the  gi-ouud,  raising  and  de- 
pressing its  crest  at  the  same  time.''  Hence  with 
much  probability  arose  the  Arabic  fable. 

These  stories,  absurd  as  they  ai-e,  are  here  men- 
tioned because  it  was  perhaps  in  a  great  measuie 
owing,  not  only  to  the  uncleanly  habits  of  the  bird, 
hut  also  to  the  superstitious  feeling  with  which  the 
hoopoe  was  regarded  by  the  P]gyptians  and  lieathen 
generally,  that  it  was  forbidden  as  food  to  the 
Israelites,  whose  affections  Jehovah  wished  to  wean 
from  the  land  of  their  bondage,  to  which,  as  we 
know,  they  fondly  clung. 


S  See  Maegillivray's  British  Birds,  vol.  iii.  43  ; 
Yarrell,  Brit.  B.  ii.  178,  2nd  edit.  ;  Lloyd's  Scandi- 
naritin  Adventures,  ii.  321  ;  Tristram  in  Ibis,  vol.  i. 
The  chief  grounds  for  all  the  filthy  habits  which  have 
been  ascribed  to  this  much-maligned  bird  arc  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  it  resorts  to  dunghills,  Szc,  in 
search  of  the  worms  and  insects  which  it  finds  there. 

''  .V  writer  in  Ibis,  vol.  i.  p.  49,  says,  "  We  found 
the  Hoopoe  a  very  good  bird  to  eat." 

»  Such  is  the  case  even  to  this  dav.     The  Kev.  II. 


LASAEA 

The  word  Hoopoe  is  evidently  onomatopoetic, 
being  derived  from  the  voice  of  the  bird,  which 
resembles  the  words  "  hoop,  hoop,"  softly  but 
rapidly  uttered.  Tlie  Germans  call  the  bird  Ein 
Hoiip,  the  French  La  Huppe,  wliich  is  particu- 
larly appropriate,  as  it  refers  both  to  the  crest 
and  note  of  the  bird.  In  Sweden  it  is  known  by 
the  name  of  Hdr-Fogel,  the  army-bird,  because, 
from  its  ominous  cry,  frequently  heard  in  the  wilds 
of  the  forest,  while  the  bird  itself  moves  off  as 
any  one  approaches,  the  common  people  have  sup- 
posed that  seasons  of  sciucitj'  and  war  are  impend- 
ing (Lloyd's  Scand.  Advent,  ii.  321). 

The  Hoopoe  is  an  occasional  visitor  to  this  coun- 
try, arriving  for  the  most  part  in  the  autumn,  but 
instances  are  on  record  of  its  having  been  seen  in 
the  spring.  Col.  Hamilton  Smith  has  supposed 
that  there  are  two  Egyptian  species  of  the  genus 
Upupa,  tiom  the  tact  that  some  birds  remain  perma- 
nently resident  about  human  habitations  in  Egypt, 
while  others  migrate :  he  sa3's  that  the  migratory 
species  is  eaten  in  Egypt,  but  that  the  stationary 
species  is  considered  inedible  (Kitto's  ('yd.  art. 
'Lapwing').  There  is,  however,  but  one  species 
of  Egyptian  hoopoe  known  to  ornithologists,  viz. 
Upupa  Epops.  Some  of  these  birds  migiate  north- 
wards from  Egypt,  but  a  large  number  remain  all 
the  year  round ;  all,  however,  belong  to  the  same 
species.  The  hoopoe  is  about  the  size  of  the 
missel-thrush  (^Tardus  viscivorus).  Its  crest  is  very 
elegant,  the  long  feathers  forming  it  are  each  of 
them  tipped  with  blacTj.  It  belongs  to  the  flmiily 
Upnpidae,  sijb-order  Tenuirostres,  and  order  Fas- 
seres.  [W.  H.] 

LASAE'A  (Aaaala).  Four  or  five  years  ago 
it  would  have  been  impossible  to  give  any  informa- 
tion i-egarding  this  Cretan  cit)',  except  indeed  that 
it  might  be  presumed  (Conybeare  and  Howson, 
St.  Paul,  ii.  394,  2nd  ed.)  to  be  identical  with 
the  "  Lisia"  mentioned  in  the  Peutingcr  Table 
as  16  miles  to  the  east  of  Gortyna.  This  cor- 
responds sufficiently  with  what  is  said  in  Acts 
xxvii.  8  of  its  proximity  to  Fair  Havens.  The 
whole  matter,  however,  has  been  recently  cleared  up. 
In  the  month  of  January,  1856,  a  yachting  party 
made  inquiries  at  Fair  Havens,  and  were  told  that 
the  name  Lasaea  was  still  given  to  some  ruins  a  few 
miles  to  the  eastward.  A  short  search  sufficed  to 
discover  these  ruins,  and  independent  testimony 
confirmed  the  name.  A  full  account  of  the  dis- 
covery, with  a  plan,  is  given  in  the  2nd  ed.  of 
Smith's  Voyage  and  Shijncreck  of  St.  Paul,  A  pp. 
iii.  pp.  262,  263.  Captain  Spratt,  K.N.,  had  pre- 
viously observed  some  remains,  which  probably 
represent  the  harbour  of  Lasaea  (see  pp.  80,  82, 
245).  And  it  ought  to  be  noticed  that  in  the 
Descrizione  dell'  Isolu  di  Candia,  a  Venetian  MS. 
of  the  16th  century,  as  published  by  Mr.  E.  Falkener 
in  the  Museum  of  Classical  Antiquities,  Sept.  1852 
(p.  287),  a  place  called  Lapsea,  with  a  "  temple  in 
ruins,"  and  "  other  vestiges  near  the  haibour,"  is 


B.  -Tristram,  who  visited  Palestine  in  the  spring  of 
1858,  says  of  the  Hoopoe  {Ibis,  1.  27)  :  "  The  Arabs 
have  a  superstitious  reverence  for  this  bird,  ^hich 
they  believe  to  possess  marvellous  medicinal  qualities, 
and  call  it  '  the  Doctor.'  Its  head  is  an  indispensable 
ingredient  in  all  charms,  and  in  the  practice  of  witch- 
craft." 

''  This  habit  of  inspecting  probably  first '  suggested 
the  Greek  word  eTroi//. 


lASHA 

tnentioneil  as  being  close  to  Fair  Havens.  This 
also  is  undoubtedly  St.  Luke's  Lasaea ;  and  we  see 
how  needless  it  is  (with  Cramer,  Ancient  Greece, 
iii.  374,  and  the  Edinburgh  Review,  No.  civ.  176) 
to  resort  to  Lachmann's  reading,  "  Alassa,"  or  to  the 
"  Thalassa"  of  tiie  Vulgate.  [Crete.]    [J.  S.  H.] 

LA'SHA  {V^h,  i.  e.  Lesha :  Aaffd :  Lesa),  a 
place  noticed  in  Gen.  x.  19  only,  as  marking  the 
limit  of  the  country  of  the  Canaanites.  From  the 
order  in  which  the  names  occur,  combined  with  the 
expression  "  even  unto  Lasha,"  we  should  infer  that 
it  lay  somewhere  in  the  south-east  of  Palestine.  Its 
exact  position  cannot,  in  the  absence  of  any  subse- 
quent notice  of  it,  be  satisfactorily  ascertained,  and 
hence  we  can  neither  absolutely  accept  or  reject  the 
opinion  of  Jerome  and  other  writers,  who  identify 
it  with  Callirhoe,  a  spot  famous  for  hot  springs 
near  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  It  may 
indeed  be  observed,  in  corroboration  of  Jerome's  view, 
that  the  name  Lasha,  which  signifies,  according  to 
Gesenius  {Thes.  p.  764),  "  a  fissure,"  is  strikingly 
appropriate  to  the  deep  chasm  of  the  Zerka  Main, 
tiirough  which  the  waters  of  Callirhoe  find  an  out- 
let to  "the  sea  (Lynch's  Exped.  p.  370).  No  town, 
however,  is  known  to  have  existed  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  the  springs,  unless  we  place  there  Machaerus, 
which  is  described  by  Josephus  {B.  J.  vii.  6,  §3) 
as  having  hot  springs  near  it.  That  there  was 
some  sort  of  a  settlement  at  Callirhoe  may  perhaps 
be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  springs  were 
visited  by  Herod  during  his  last  illness  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5)  ;  and  this  probability  is  supported 
by  the  discovery  of  tiles,  pottery,  and  coins  on  the 
spot.  But  no  traces  of  buildings  have  as  yet  been 
discovered  ;  and  the  valley  is  so  narrow  as  not  to 
offer  a  site  for  any  thing  like  a  town  (Irby  and 
Mangles  (ch.  viii.  June  8).  [W.  L.  B.] 

LASHA'RON  ()n#S,  i.  e.  Lassharon :  LXX. 

omits:  Saron;  but  in  the  Benedictine  text Zassaro/i), 
one  of  the  Canaanite  towns  whose  kings  were  killed 
by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  18).  Some  difference  of  opinion 
has  been  ex])resseJ  as  to  whether  the  first  syllable 
is  an  integral  part  of  the  name  or  the  Hebrew  pos- 
S9ssive  particle.  (See  Keil,  Josiia,  ad  loc.)  But 
there  seems  to  be  no  warrant  for  supposing  the 
existence  of  a  particle  before  this  one  name,  which 
certainly  does  not  exist  before  either  of  the  other 
thirty  names  in  the  list.  Such  at  least  is  the  con- 
clusion of  Bochart  {Hieroz.  i.  ch.  31),  Keland  {Pal. 
871),  and  others,  a  conclusion  supported  by  the 
reading  of  the  Targum,*  and  the  Arabic  version, 
and  also  by  Jerome,  if  the  Benedictine  text  can  be 
relied  on.  The  opposite  conclusion  of  the  Vulgate, 
given  above,  is  adopted  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  642  Jf), 
but  not  on  very  clear  grounds,  his  chief  argument 
ijeing  ap]iarently  that,  as  the  name  of  a  town, 
Sharon  would  not  require  the  article  affixed,  which, 
as  that  of  a  district,  it  always  bears.  But  this 
ajipears  to  be  begging  the  question.  The  name  has 
vanished  from  both  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  unless  a  trace 
exists  in  the  '0<p€KTi)-crapc!>K  of  the  Vat.      [G.] 

LAS'THENES  {Aacrdevris;  d.  Aa.-/xaxos),  an 
officer  who  stood  high  in  the  favour  of  Demetrius  II. 
Nicator.  He  is  described  as  "  cousin  "  {^fTvyyewfis, 
I  Mace.  xi.  31),  and  "father"  (1  Mace.  xi.  32; 
Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  3,  §9)of  the  king.  Both  words  may 
be  taken  as  titles  of  high  nobility  (comp.  Grimm  on 


LATTICE 


65 


jnCJ'^"'!  N3^D  =  "  king  of  Lassharon." 


1  Mace.  X.  89  ;  Diod.  xvii.  59  ;  Ges.  Thes.  s.  v.  3X, 
§4).  It  appears  from  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  4,  §3) 
that  he  was  a  Cretan,  to  whom  Demetrius  was 
indebted  for  a  large  body  of  mercenaries  (of.  1  Mace. 
X.  67),  when  he  assertal  his  claim  to  the  Syrian 
throne.  The  service  which  he  thus  rendered  makes 
it  likely  (Vales,  ad  loc.)  that  he  was  the  powerful 
fiivourita  whose  evil  counsels  afterwai'ds  issued  in 
the  ruin  of  his  master  (Diod.  Exc.  xxxii.  p.  692). 
But  theie  is  not  the  slightest  groimd  for  identifying 
him  with  the  nameless  Cnidian  to  whose  chaige 
Demetrius  I.  committed  his  sons  (Just.  xxxv.  2). 

[B.  F.  W.] 

LATCHET,  the  thong  or  fastening  by  which 
the  sandal  was  attached  to  the  foot.  The  English 
word  is  apparently  derived  from  th«  A.  Saxon 
laeccan,  "  to  catch  "  or  "  fasten  "  (Old  Eng.  "  to 
latch"),  as  "hatchet"  {rom  haccan,  "  to  hack  ;" 
whence  "  latch,"  the  fastening  of  a  door,  "  lock," 
and  others.  The  Fr.  lacet  approaches  most  nearly 
in  form  to  the  present  word.  The  Hebrew  "^Jllt^', 
seroc,  is  derived  from  a  root  which  signifies  "  to 
twist."  It  occurs  in  the  proverbial  expression  in 
Gen.  xiv.  23,  and  is  there  used  to  denote  some- 
thing trivial  or  worthless.  Gesenius  {JTies.  s.  v. 
tD-iri)  compares  the  Lat,  hiluvi  =  filnm,  and  quotes 
two  Arabic  proverbs  from  the  Hamasa  and  the 
Kamiis,  in  which  a  corresponding  word  is  simi- 
larly employed.  In  the  poetical  figure  in  Is.  v. 
27  the  "  latchet  "  occupies  the  same  position  with 
regard  to  the  shoes  as  the  girdle  to  the  long  flow- 
ing Oriental  di-ess,  and  was  as  essential  to  the 
comfort  and  expedition  of  the  traveller.  Another 
semi-proverbial  expression  in  Luke  iii.  16  points  to 
the  fact  that  the  office  of  bearing  and  unfastening 
the  shoes  of  great  personages  fell  to  the  meanest 
slaves.     [Shoe.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

LATIN,  the  language  spoken  by  the  Romans, 
is  mentioned  only  in  John  xix.  20,  and  Luke  xxiii. 
38  ;  the  former  passage  being  a  translation  of 
''PoifxaCffTi,  "  in  the  Roman  tongue,"  i.  e.  Latin  ;  and 
the  latter  of  the  adjective  'Pwyuai'/cols  {ypdiJ.fJ.a(nv). 

LATTICE.  The  rendering  in  A.  V.  of  three 
Hebrew  words. 

1.  IJtJ'N,  eshnab,  which  occm-s  but  twice,  Judg. 
V.  28,  and  Prov.  vii.  6,  and  in  the  latter  passage  is 
translated  "casement"  in  the  A.  V.  In  both  in- 
stances it  stands  in  parallelism  with  "  window." 
Gesenius,  following  Schultens,  connects  it  with  an 
Arab,  root,  which  signifies  "  to  be  cool,"  esp.  of  the 
day,  and  thus  attaches  to  eshnab  the  siguificaticjn 
of  a  "  latticed  window,"  through  which  the  cool 
breezes  enter  the  house,  such  as  is  seen  in  the  illus- 
trations to  the  article  House  (vol.  i.  p.  837).  But 
Fuerst  and  Meier  attach  to  the  I'oot  the  iilea  of 
twisting,  twining,  and  in  this  case  the  word  will 
be  synonymous  with  the  two  following,  which  are 
rendered  by  the  same  English  term,  "  lattice,"  in 
the  A.  V.  The  LXX.  in  judg.  v.  28  render  eshnab 
by  toIik6v,  which  is  explained  by  Jerome  {ad  Ez. 
xl.  16)  to  mean  a  small  arrow-shaped  aperture, 
narrow  on  the  outside,  but  widening  inwards,  by 
which  light  is  admitted.  Others  conjecture  that  it 
denoted  a  narrow  window,  like  those  in  the  castles 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  from  which  the  archers  could 
discharge  their  arrows  in  safety.  It  would  then 
correspond  with  the  "shot-window"  of  Chaucer 
("  Miller's  Tale  "),  according  to  the  interpretation 
which  some  give  to  that  obscuie  phrase. 

F 


66 


LAYER 


2.  D^3"in,  kharacciin  (Cant.  ii.  9),  is  apparently- 
synonymous  with  the  preceding,  though  a  word  of 
later  date.  The  Targum  gives  it,  in  the  Chaldee 
form,  as  the  eijuivalent  of  eshnah  iu  Prov.  vii.  6. 
Fuerst  {Cone.  s.  v.),  and  Michaelis  before  him, 
assign  to  the  root  the  same  notion  of  twisting  or 
weaving,  so  that  khdraccim  denotes  a  network  or 
jalousie  before  a  window. 

3.  nD12^',    sehacah,    is    simply    "  a   network " 

placed  before  a  window  or  balcony.  Perhaps  the 
network  through  which  Ahaziah.  fell  and  received 
his  mortal  injuiy  was  on  the  parapet  of  his  palace 
(2  K.  i.  2).  [House,  vol.  i.  838  6,  839  a.]  The  root 
involves  the  same  idea  of  weaving  or  twisting  as  in 
the  case  of  the  two  preceding  words.  Sehacah  is 
used  for  "  a  net"  in  Job  xviii.  8,  as  well  as  for  the 
network  ornaments  on  the  capitals  of  the  columns 
in  the  Temple.     [Window.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

LAYER."  1.  In  the  Tabemacle,  a  vessel  of 
brass  containing  water  for  the  priests  to  wash  their 
hands  and  feet  before  oflering  sacrifice.  It  stood 
in  the  court  between  the  altar  and  the  door  of  the 
Tabernacle,  and,  according  to  Jewish  tradition,  a 
little  to  the  south  (Ex.  xxx.  19,  21 ;  Reland,  Ant. 
Hehr.  pt.  i.  ch.  iv.  9  ;  Clemens,  de  Lahro  Aeneo,  iii. 
9  ;  ap.  Ugolini,  Thes.  vol.  xix.).  It  rested  on  a 
basis,!"  j\  g_  jj  fQQt^  though  by  some  explained  to  be  a 
cover  (Clemens,  ibid.  c.  iii.  5),  of  copper  or  brass, 
which,  as  well  as  the  laver  itself,  was  made  from  the 
mirrors  <=  of  the  women  who  assembled  "^  at  the  door 
of  the  Tabernacle-court  (Ex.  xxxviii.  8).  The  notion 
held  by  some  Jewish  writers,  and  i-eproduced  by  Fran- 
zius,  Bahr  (Symb.  i.  484),  and  others,  founded  on  the 
omission  of  the  word  "  women,"  that  the  brazen 
vessel,  being  polished,  served  as  a  mirror  to  the 
Levites,  is  untenable. = 

The  form  of  the  laver  is  not  specified,  but  may 
be  assumed  to  have  been  circular.  Like  the  other 
vessels  belonging  to  the  Tabernacle,  it  was,  together 
with  its  "  foot,"  consecrated  with  oil  (Lev.  viii.  10, 
11).  No  mention  is  found  in  the  Hebrew  text 
of  the  mode  of  transporting  it,  but  in  Num.  iv. 
14  a  passage  is  added  in  the  LXX.,  agreeing  with 
the  Samaritan  Pent,  and  the  Samaritan  version, 
which  prescribes  the  method  of  packing  it,  viz.  in 
a  pui-])le  cloth,  protected  by  a  skin  covering.  As 
no  mention  is  made  of  any  vessel  for  washing  the 
flesh  of  the  sacrificial  victims,  it  is  possible  that  the 

»  "11*3  and  ~1»3,  from  l-IS,  "  to  boil,"  Ges.  p.  67 1 : 
Kovrrjp  :   labrum.  ■ 

•>  J3,  pdcri';,  basis,  and  so  also  A.  V. 

*=  niXID.  KaroTTTpa,  specula. 

d  LXX.  roiv  irrjcrT£VO'a.(j'03V. 

*  See  the  parallel  passage,  1  Sam.  ii.  22,  ■where 
QtJJ>3,  ywaiKwv,  is  inserted ;  Gesenius  on  the  prep. 
3,  p.  172  ;  Keil,  Bibl.  Arch.  pt.  i.  c.  1,  §19  ;  Glassius, 
F/iil.  Sacr.  i.  p.  580,  ed.  Datlie  ;  Lightfoot,  Descr. 
Tempi,  e.  37, 1 ;  Jennings,  Jetv.  Antiq.  p.  302  ;  Knobel, 
Eurtzg.  Exeg.  Handb.  Exod.  xxxviii.  Philo,  Tit.  Mas. 
iii.  15,  ii.  156,  ed.  Mangey. 

'  ni-ib. 

^  ni33P,  pi-  of  .nyDJp  or  n^lDO,  from  |-"I3. 
"  stand  upright,"  Ges.  pp.  665,  670  ;  ^.^xtovM  ;  bases. 

^  nnilD'^  ;  o-vyKKiCaixara  ;  scuJpturae. 
■'   D^a^C',   e^exojaevo,  jVwcfi/i-or,  from  3?t^.  "cut 
in  notches,"  Ges.  p.  1411. 


LAVER 

laver  may  have  been  used  for  this  purpose  also 
(Reland,  Ant.  Hehr.  i.  iv.  9). 

2.  In  Solomon's  Temple,  besides  the  great  molten 
sea,  there  were  ten  lavers '  of  brass,  raised  on 
basess  (1  K.  vii.  27,  39),  five  on  the  N.  and  S. 
sides  respectively  of  the  court  of  the  priests.  Each 
laver  contained  40  of  the  measures  called  "bath" 
(Xf^aS;  LXX.  and  Josephus).  They  were  used  for 
washing  the  animals  to  be  offered  iu  burnt-ofterings 
(2  Chr.  iv.  G  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  3,  §6).  The  bases 
were  mutilated  by  Ahaz,  and  canied  away  as  plunder, 
or  at  least  what  remained  of  them,  by  Nebuzar-adan, 
after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xvi.  17  ;  xxv. 
13).  No  mention  is  made  in  Scripture  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  lavers  in  the  second  Temple,  nor  by 
Josephus  in  his  account  of  Heiod's  restoration 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  V.  5).     []\IOLTEN  Sea.] 

The  dimensions  of  the  bases  with  the  lavers,  as 
given  in  the  Hebrew  text,  are  4  cubits  in  length 
and  breadth,  and  3  in  height.  The  LXX.  gives 
4x4x6  in  height.  Josephus,  who  appears  to  have 
followed  a  var.  reading  of  the  LXX.,  makes  them 
5  in  length,  4  in  width,  and  6  in  height  (1  K.  vii. 
28;  Thenius,  ad  loc;  Joseph.  A7it.  viii.  3,  §3). 
There  were  to  each  4  wheels  of  1^  cubit  in  diameter, 
with  spokes,  &c.,  all  cast  in  one  piece.  The  prin- 
cipal parts  requiring  explanation  may  be  thus  enu- 
merated : — (a)  "Borders,"''  probably  panels.  Ge- 
senius (I'/ws.  938)  supposes  these  to  have  been  orna- 
ments like  square  shields  with  engiaved  work.  (6) 
"  Ledges,"  '  joints  in  corners  of  bases  or  fillets  cover- 
ing joints.''  (c)  "  Additions,"™  probably  festoons  ; 
Lightfoot  translates,  "marginesobliquedescendentes." 
(d)  Plates,"  probably  axles,  cast  in  the  same  piece  as 
the  wheels,  (e)  Undersetters,"  eitlier  the  naves  of 
the  wheels,  or  a  sort  of  handles  for  moving  the  whole 
machine ;  Lightfoot  renders  "  columnae  fulcientes 
lavaorum."  (/)  Naves.P  (g)  Spokes.*"  (A)  Felloes.'' 
(i)  Chapiter,*  peihaps  the  rim  of  the  circular  open- 
ing ("mouth,"  ver.  31)  in  the  convex  top.  (k)  A 
round  compass,'  perhaps  the  convex  roof  of  the  base. 
To  these  parts  Josephus  adds  chains,  which  may 
probably  be  the  festoons  above  mentioned  (Ant. 
viii.  3,  §6). 

Thenius,  with  whom  Keil  in  the  main  agrees, 
both  of  them  differing  from  Ewald,  in  a  minute 
examination  of  the  whole  passage,  but  not  without 
some  transposition,  chiefly  of  the  greater  part  of 
ver.  31  to  ver.  35,  deduces  a  construction  of  the 


^  Josephus  says  :  kiocio-koi  reTpdytavoi,  rd  jrAcupd 
7t)s  pdcreixi^  i^  e/tarepou  fiepov^  iv  auxots  e^ovTes  eflp- 
jU.oa"/xeVa. 

""  niv,  from  r\w,  "twine,"  Ges.  p.  746;  x'^P"' > 
lora ;  whence  Thenius  suggests  Auipot  or  Awpa  as  the 
true  reading. 

"  D^J"ID)   TTpoexovra,  axes,   Ges.  972  ;    Lightfoot, 

inassae  aereae  tetragonae. 

°  msri3,  <iM"»<-)  humeridi,  Ges.  y24. 

P  Dn-ICJ'n,  modioli;  and 

'  CptJ'n,    radii;    the    two    words    combined    in 

LXX.  1?  wpayiJ-areCa,  Ges.  p.  536  ;    Schlcusner,  Zex. 
V.  T.,  jrpay^x. 

'  D^311,  viiToi,  canthi,  Ges.  p.  256. 

*  mn'S,  Kei^oAls,  summitas,  G|S.  p.  725. 

'  3"'3D   ?iiy,    Ges.   935,    989;    orporyvAor  ku'kAw  ; 

riiiiinditns. 


LAW 

bases  and  la\-ers,  which  seeiiis  faiily  to  reconcile 
thn  very  gieut  difficulties  of  the  subject.  Following 
chiefly  his  description,  we  may  suppose  the  base  to 
have  been  a  quadi-ann;ular  hollow  frame,  connected 
at  its  corners  by  pilasters  (ledges),  and  moved  by 
4  wiieels  or  high  castors,  one  at  each  corner,  with 
handles  (plates')  for  drawing  the  machine.  The 
sides  of  this  frame  were  divided  into  3  vertic:d 
panels  or  compartments  (borders),  ornamented  with 
bas-reliefs  of  lions,  oxen,  and  cherubim.  The  top 
of  the  base  was  convex,  with  a  circular  opening 
of  U  cubit  diameter.  The  top  itself  was  covered 
with"  engraved  cherubim,  lions,  and  palm-trees  or 
branches^  The  height  of  the  convex  top  from  the 
upper  plane  of  the  base  was  ^  cubit,  and  the  space 
between  this  top  and  the  lower  surface  of  the  laver 
I  cubit  more.  The  laver  rested  on  supports  (under- 
setters)  rising  from  the  4  corners  of  the  base.  Each 
laver  contained  40  "baths,"  or  about  3(J0  gallons.  Its 
dimensions,  therefore,  to  be  in  proportion  to  7  feet 
(4  cubits,  ver.  38)  in  diameter,  must  have  been 
about  30  inches  in  depth.  The  great  height  of  the 
whole  machine  was  doubtless  in  order  to  bring  it 
near  the  height  of  the  altar  (2  Chr.  iv.  1 ;  Arias 
Wontanus,  de  Tcmpli  Fahrica,  Crit.  Sacr.  viii.  6'J6  ; 
],io-htfbot,  Descr.  Templi,  c  xxxvii.  3,  vol.  i.  646  ; 
Tirenius,  in  Knrzij.  Exeg.  Handb.  on  1  K.  vii.,  and 
App.  p  41;  Ewald,  GeschicJite,  iii.  313;  Keil, 
llandb'.der  Bibl.  Arch.  §24,  p.  128,  129  ;  Winer, 
s.  V.  Handfass).  [H.  W.  P.] 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


67 


'«l 

Sg 

<^ 

-A^ 

k 

fT     -fe.. 

JO^ 

'tiocas?' 

■«i)0£ 

\i 

i 

1 

1 
1 

a 

a 

« 

1 
\ 

bor.ii're;  /»,  ledges'; 
J,  n.iv™  ;  !j,  spoli 
ctimpass. 


LAW  (m'lFl  :  N(5^os).  The  word  is  propei'ly 
used,  in  Scriiiture  as  elsewhere,  to  express  a  definite 
commandment  laid  down  by  any  recognised  autho- 
rity.    The  commandment  may  be  general,  or  (as 


in  Lev.  vi.  9,  14,  &c.,  "  the  law  of  the  burnt- 
otiering,"  &c.)  particular  in  its  bearing ;  the  autho- 
rity either  human  or  divine.  But  when  the  word 
is  used  with  the  article,  and  without  any  words  of 
limitation,  it  refers  to  the  expressed  will  of  God, 
and,  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  to  the  Mosaic  Law, 
or  to  the  Pentateuch,  of  which  it  tonus  the  chief 
portion. 

The  Hebrew  word  (derived  from  the  root  iTT' 
"  to  point  out,"  and  so  "  to  direct  and  lead  ")  lays 
more  stress  on  its  moral  authority,  as  teaching  the 
truth,  and  guiding  in  the  right  way ;  the  Greek 
'NS/xos  (from  vefj-o),  "to  assign  or  appoint"),  on  its 
constraining  power,  as  imposed  and  enforced  by  a 
recognised  authority.  But  in  either  case  it  is  a 
commandment  proceeding  from  without,  and  dis- 
tinguished from  the  free  action  of  its  subjects, 
although  not  necessarily  opposed  thereto. 

The  sense  of  the  word,  however,  extends  its  scope, 
and  assumes  a  more  abstract  character  in  the 
writings  of  St.  Paul.  Nt^/tos,  when  used  by  him 
with  the  article,  still  refers  in  general  to  the  Law 
of  Jloses  ;  but  when  used  without  the  article,  so  as 
to  embrace  any  manifestation  of  "Law,"  it  includes 
all  powers  which  act  on  the  will  of  man  by  com- 
pulsion, or  by  the  pressure  of  external  motives, 
whether  their  commands  be  or  be  not  expressed  in 
definite  forms.  This  is  seen  in  the  constant  oppo- 
sition of  epya  vSfxov  ("  works  done  under  the  con- 
straint of  law")  to  faith,  or  "works  of  taith," 
that  is,  works  done  freely  by  the  internal  intluence 
of  faith.  A  still  more  remarkable  use  of  the  word 
is  found  in  Kom.  vii.  23,  where  the  power  of  evil 
over  the  will,  arising  from  the  corruption  of  man,  is 
spoken  of  as  a  "  law  of  sin,"  that  is,  an  unnatural 
tyranny  proceeding  from  an  evil  power  without. 

The  occasional  use  of  the  word  "law"  (as  in 
Rom.  iii.  27,  "law  of  faith;"  in  vii.  23,  "law  cf 
my  mind,"  tov  vo6s  ;  in  viii.  2,  "  law  of  the  spirit 
of  life ;"  and  in  Jam.  i.  25,  ii.  12,  "  a  perfect  law, 
the  law  of  liberty  ")  to  denote  an  internal  principle 
of  action,  does  not  really  militate  against  the  gene- 
ral rule.  For  in  each  case  it  will  be  seen,  that  such 
principle  is  spoken  of  in  contrast  with  some  formal 
law,  and  the  word  "  law  "  is  consequently  applied 
to  it  "  improperly,"  in  order  to  mark  this  oppo- 
sition, the  quidifying  words  which  follow  guarding 
against  any  danger  of  misapprehension  of  its  real 
character. 

It  should  also  be  noticed  that  the  title  "  the 
Law  "  is  occasionally  used  loosely  to  refer  to  the 
whole  of  the  Old  Testament  (as  in  John  x.  34, 
referring  to  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6  ;  in  John  xv.  25,  referring 
to  Ps.  XXXV.  19 ;  and  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  21,  referring  to 
Is.  xxviii.  11,  12).  This  usage  is  probably  due,  not 
only  to  desire  of  brevity  and  to  the  natural  ))rominence 
of  the  Pentateuch,  but  also  to  the  predominance  in 
the  older  Covenant  (when  considered  separately  from 
the  New,  for  which  it  was  the  preparation)  of  an 
external  and  legal  character.  [A.  B.] 

LAW  OF  MOSES.  It  will  be  the  object  of 
this  article,  not  to  enter  into  the  history  of  the 
giving  of  the  Law  (tor  which  see  MoSES,  THK 
Exodus,  &c.),  nor  to  examine  the  authorship  of 
the  books  in  which  it  is  contained  (for  which  see 
Pentateuch,  Exonus,  &c.),  nor  to  dwell  on  par- 
ticular ordinances,  which  are  treated  cf  under  their 
respective  heads ;  but  to  give  a  brief  analysis  of  its 
substance,  to  point  out  its  main  principles,  and  to 
explain  the  position  which  it  occupies  in  the  pro- 
o-ress  of  Divine  Revelation.      In  order  to  do  tins 

F  - 


68 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


the  more  clearly,  it  seems  best  to  speak  of  tlie  Law, 
1st,  in  relation  to  the  past ;  2ndly,  in  its  own 
intrinsic  character  ;  and,  3rdly,  in  its  relation  to  the 
future, 

(I.)  (a.)  In  reference  to  the  past,  it  is  all-import- 
ant, for  the  proper  understanding  of  the  Law,  to 
remember  its  entire  dependence  on  the  Abrahamic 
Covenant,  and  its  adaptation  thereto  (see  Gal.  iii. 
17-24).  That  covenant  had  a  twofold  character. 
It  contained  the  "  spiritual  promise  "  of  the  Mes- 
siah, which  was  given  to  the  Jews  as  representa- 
tives of  the  whole  human  race,  and  as  guardians  of 
a  treasure  in  which  "  all  families  of  the  earth 
should  be  blessed."  This  would  prepare  the  Jewish 
nation  to  be  the  centi-e  of  the  unity  of  all  mankind. 
But  it  contained  also  the  temporal  promises  sub- 
sidiary to  the  foiTiier,  and  needed  in  order  to  pre- 
serve intact  the  nation,  thiough  which  the  race  of 
man  should  be  educated  and  prepared  for  the 
coming  of  the  Redeemer.  These  promises  were 
special ,  given  distinctively  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation, 
and,  so  far  as  tiiey  wei'e  considered  in  themselves, 
calculated  to  separate  them  from  other  nations  of 
the  earth.  It  follows  that  there  should  be  in  the 
Law  a  corresponding  duality  of  natui-e.  There 
would  be  much  in  it  of  the  latter  character,  much 
(that  is)  peculiar  to  the  Jews,  local,  special,  and 
transitory ;  but  the  fundamental  principles  on 
which  it  was  based  must  be  universal,  because 
e.Kpressing  the  will  of  an  unchanging  God,  and 
springing  from  relations  to  Him,  inherent  in 
human  nature,  and  therefore  peipetual  and  uni- 
versal in  their  application. 

(6.)  The  nature  of  this  relation  of  the  Law  to 
the  promise  is  clearly  pointed  out.  Tha  belief  in 
God  as  the  Redeemer  of  man,  and  the  hope  of  His 
manifestation  as  sucli  in  the  person  of  the  Messiah, 
involved  the  belief  that  the  Spiritual  I'ower  must 
be  superior  to  all  carnal  obstructions,  and  that 
there  was  in  man  a  spiritual  element  which  could 
rule  his  life  by  communion  with  a  Spirit  from 
above.  But  it  involved  also  the  idea  of  an  antago- 
nistic Power  of  Evil,  from  which  man  was  to  be 
redeemed,  e.xisting  in  each  individual,  mid  existing 
also  in  the  world  at  large.  The  promise  was  the 
witness  of  the  one  truth,  the  Law  was  the  de- 
claration of  the  other.  It  was  "  added  because  of 
transgressions."  In  the  individual,  it  stood  between 
his  better  and  his  worser  self;  in  the  world,  between 
the  Jewish  nation,  as  the  witness  of  the  spiritual 
promise,  and  the  heathendom,  which  groaned  under 
the  power  of  the  flesh.  It  was  intended,  by  the 
gift  of  guidance  and  the  pressure  of  motives,  to 
strengthen  the  weakness  of  good,  while  it  curbed 
directly  the  power  of  evil.  It  followed  inevitably, 
that,  in  the  individual,  it  assumed  somewhat  of  a 
coercive,  and,  as  between  Israel  and  the  world, 
somewhat  of  an  antagonistic  and  isolating  cha- 
racter ;  and  hence  that,  viewed  without  reference 
to  the  promise  (as  it  was  viewed  by  the  later 
Jews),  it  might  actually  become  a  hindrance  to  the 
true  revelation  of  God,  and  to  the  mission  for 
which  the  nation  had  been  made  a  "  chosen  people." 

(c.)  Nor  is  it  less  essential  to  remark  the  period 
of  the  historii  at  which  it  was  given.  It  marked 
and  determined  the  transition  of  Israel  from  the 
condition  of  a  tribe  to  that  of  a  nation,  and  its 
definite  assumption  of  a  distinct  position  and  office 
in  the  history  of  the  world.  Jt  is  on  no  unreal 
metaphor  that  we  base  the  well-known  analogy 
between  the  stages  of  individual  life  and  those  of 
national  or  univeisal  existence.     In  Israel  the  pa- 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

triarchal  time  was  that  of  childhood,  ruled  chiefly 
through  the  affections  and  the  power  of  natural, 
relationship,  with  rules  few,  simple,  and  unsys- 
tematic. The  national  period  was  that  of  youth, 
in  which  this  indirect  teaching  and  influence  gives 
place  to  definite  assertions  of  right  and  responsi- 
bility, and  to  a  system  of  distinct  commandments, 
needed  to  control  its  vigorous  and  impulsive  action. 
The  fifty  days  of  their  wandering  alone  -with-  God 
in  the  silence  of  the  wilderness  represent  that 
awakening  to  the  difficulty,  the  responsibility,  and 
the  nobleness  of  life,  wliich  marks  the  "putting 
away  of  childish  things."  The  Law  is  the  sign  and 
the  seal  of  such  an  awakening. 

(rf.)  Yet,  though  new  in  its  general  conception, 
it  was  probably  not  ivholly  new  in  its  materials. 
Neither  in  His  material  nor  His  spiritual  providence 
does  God  proceed  per  saltum.  There  must  neces- 
sarily have  been,  before  the  Law,  commandments 
and  revelations  of  a  fragmentary  character,  under 
which  Israel  had  hitherto  grown  up.  Indications 
of  such  are  easily  found,  both  of  a  ceremonial  and 
moral  nature ;  as,  for  example,  in  the  jjcnalties 
against  murder,  adultery,  and  fornication  (Gen.  ix. 
6,  xxxviii.  24),  in  the  existence  of  the  Levirate  law 
(Gen.  xxxviii.  8),  in  the  distinction  of  clean  and 
unclean  animals  (Gen.  viii.  20),  and  probably  in 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  xvi.  23,  27-29). 
But,  even  without  such  indications,  our  knowledge 
of  the  existence  of  Israel  as  a  distinct  community 
in  Egypt  would  necessitate  the  conclusion,  that  it 
must  have  been  guided  by  some  laws  of  its  own, 
growing  out  of  the  old  patriarchal  customs,  which 
would  be  preserved  with  Orienta,l  tenacity,  and 
gradually  becoming  methodised  by  the  progress  of 
circumstances.  Nor  would  it  be  possible  for  the 
Israelites  to  be  in  contact  with  an  elaborate  system 
of  ritual  and  law,  such  as  that  which  existed  in 
Egypt,  without  being  influenced  by  its  general 
principles,  and,  in  less  degree,  by  its  minuter  de- 
ta,ils.  As  they  approached  nearer  to  the  condition 
of  a  nation  they  would  be  more  and  more  likely  to 
modify  their  patriarchal  customs  by  the  adoption 
from  Egypt  of  laws  which  were  fitted  for  national 
existence.  This  being  so,  it  is  hardly  conceivable 
that  the  Mosaic  legislation  should  have  embodied 
none  of  these  earlier  materials.  It  is  clear,  even 
to  human  wisdom,  that  the  only  constitution,  which 
can  be  efficient  and  permanent,  is  one  which  has 
grown  up  slowly,  and  so  been  assimilated  to  the 
character  of  a  people.  It  is  the  peculiar  mark  of 
legislative  genius  to  mould  by  fundamental  prin- 
ciples, and  animate  by  a  higher  inspiration,  ma- 
terials previously  existing  in  a  cruder  state.  The 
necessity  for  this  lies  in  the  nature,  not  of  the  legis- 
lator, but  of  the  subjects ;  and  the  argument  there- 
fore is  but  strengthened  by  the  acknowledgment  in 
the  case  of  Moses  of  a  divine  and  special  inspira- 
tion. So  far  therefore  as  they  were  consistent  with 
the  objects  of  the  Jewish  law,  the  customs  of 
Palestine  and  the  laws  of  Egypt  would  doubtless  be 
traceable  in  the  Mosaic  system. 

(e.)  In  close  connexion  with  and  almost  in  con- 
sequence of  this  reference  to  antiquity  we  find  an 
accomnuidation  of  the  Law  to  the  temper  and  cir- 
cumstances of  the  Israelites,  to  which  oiu-  Lord 
refers  in  the  case  of  divorce  (Matt.  xix.  7,  8)  as 
necessarily  interfering  with  its  absolute  perfection. 
In  many  cases  it  rather  should  be  said  to  guide  and 
modify  existing  usages  than  actually  to  sanction 
them  ;  and  the  ignorance  of  their  existence  may 
lead   to  a  conception  of  its   ordiiiances   not  only 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

erroneous,  but  actually  the  reverse  of  the  truth. 
Thus  the  punishment  of  filial  disobedience  appears 
severe  (Deut.  xxi.  18-21)  ;  yet  when  we  refer  to 
tiie  extent  of  parental  authority  in  a  patriarchal 
system,  or  (as  at  Home)  in  the  earlier  periods  of 
national  existence,  it  appears  more  like  a  limitation 
of  absolute  parental  authority  by  an  appeal  to  the 
judgment  of  the  community.  The  Levirate  Law 
again  appears  (see  Mich.  Mos.  Recht,  bk.  iii.  ch.  6, 
art.  98j  to  have  existed  in  a  far  more  general  form 
in  the  early  Asiatic  peoples,  and  to  have  been  rather 
limited  than  favoured  by  Moses.  The  law  of  the 
Avenger  of  blood  is  a  similar  instance  of  merciful 
limitation  and  distinction  in  the  exercise  of  an 
inuuemorial  usage,  probably  not  without  its  value 
and  meiining,  and  certainly  too  deep-seated  to  admit 
of  any  but  gradual  extinction.  Nor  is  it  less 
noticeable  that  the  degree  of  prominence,  given  to 
each  part  of  the  Mosaic  system,  has  a  similar  re- 
ference to  the  period  at  which  the  nation  had 
arrived.  The  ceremonial  portion  is  marked  out 
distinctly  and  with  elaboration ;  the  moi-al  and 
criminal  law  is  clearly  and  sternly  decisive ;  even 
the  civil  law,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  individuals,  is 
systematic :  because  all  these  were  called  for  by  the 
past  growth  of  the  nation,  and  needed  in  order  to 
settle  and  develope  its  resources.  But  the  political 
and  constitutional  law  is  comparatively  imperfect ; 
a  few  leading  principles  are  laid  down,  to  be  de- 
veloped hereafter ;  but  the  law  is  directed  rather 
to  sanction  the  various  powers  of  the  state,  than  to 
define  and  balance  their  operations.  Thus  the  ex- 
isting authorities  of  a  patiiarchal  nature  in  each 
tribe  and  family  are  recognised;  while  side  by  side 
with  them  is  established  the  priestly  and  Levitical 
power,  which  was  to  supersede  them  entirely  in 
sacerdotal,  and  partly  also  in  judicial  functions. 
The  supreme  civil  power  of  a  "  Judge,"  or  (here- 
after) a  King,  is  I'ecognised  distinctly,  although 
only  in  general  terms,  indicating  a  sovereign  and 
summary  jurisdiction  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20);  and  the 
prophetic  olHce.  in  its  political  as  well  as  its  moral 
aspect,  is  spoken  of  still  more  vaguely  as  future 
(r)eut.  xviii.  15-22).  These  powers,  being  recog- 
nised, are  left,  within  due  limits,  to  work  out  the 
political  system  of  Israel,  and  to  ascertain  by  ex- 
perience their  proper  spheres  of  exercise.  On  a 
careful  understanding  of  this  adaptation  of  the  Law 
to  the  national  growth  and  character  of  the  Jews 
(and  of  a  somewhat  similar  adaptation  to  their 
climate  and  physical  circumstances)  depends  the 
conect  appreciation  of  its  nature,  and  the  power  of 
distinguishing  in  it  what  is  local  and  temporary 
from  that  which  is  universal. 

(/.)  In  close  connexion  with  this  subject  we 
observe  also  the  gi-adual  process  by  ivMoh  the  Law 
vas  7-evealed  to  the  Israelites.  In  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.,  in 
direct  connexion  with  the  revelation  from  Mount 
.Sinai,  that  which  may  be  called  the  rough  outline 
of  the  Mosaic  Law  is  given  by  God,  solemnly  re- 
corded by  Moses,  and  accepted  by  the  people.  In 
Ks.  xxv.-xx.\i.  there  is  a  similar  outline  of  the 
Mosaic  ceremonial.  On  the  basis  of  these  it  may 
be  conceived  that  the  fabric  of  the  Mosaic  system 
gradually  grew  up  under  the  requirements  of  the 
time.  In  certain  cases  indeed  (as  e.  g.  in  Lev.  x. 
1,  2,  compared  with  8-1 1  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  11-16  ;  Num. 
ix.  6-12;  XV.  32-41;  xxvii.  1-11  compared  with 
xxxvi.  1-12)  we  actually  see  how  general  rules, 
civil,  criminal,  and  ceremonial,  originated  in  special 
circumstances ;  and  the  unconnected  nature  of  the 
records  of  laws  in  the  earlier  books  suggests  the 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


69 


idea  that  this  method  of  legislation  extended  to 
many  other  cases. 

The  first  revelation  of  the  Law  in  anything  like 
a  perfect  form  is  found  in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy, 
at  a  period  when  the  people,  educated  to  freedom 
and  national  responsibility,  were  prepared  to  re- 
ceive it,  and  carry  it  with  them  to  the  land  which 
was  now  prepared  for  them.  It  is  distinguished 
by  its  systematic  character  and  its  reference  to  first 
principles  ;  for  probably  even  by  Moses  himself,  cer- 
tainly by  the  people,  the  Law  had  not  befoie  this 
been  recognised  in  all  its  essential  characteristics  ; 
and  to  it  we  naturally  refer  in  attempting  to  ana- 
lyze its  various  parts.  [Deuteronomv.]  Yet  even 
then  the  revelation  was  not  final  ;  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  prophets  to  amend  and  explain  it  in  special 
points  (as  in  the  well-known  example  in  Ez.  xviii.), 
and  to  bring  out  more  clearly  its  great  principles, 
as  distinguished  from  the  external  rules  in  which  they 
were  embodied  ;  for  in  this  way,  as  in  others,  they 
prepared  the  way  of  Him,  who  "came  to  fulfil" 
(Tr\r\pu!ffai)  the  Law  of  old  time. 

The  relation,  then,  of  the  Law  to  the  Covenant, 
its  accommodation  to  the  time  and  circumstances 
of  its  promulgation,  its  adaptation  of  old  materials, 
and  its  gradual  development,  are  the  chief  points  to 
be  noticed  under  the  first  head. 

(II.)  In  CAamining  the  nature  of  the  Law  in 
itself,  it  is  customary  to  divide  it  into  the  Moral, 
Political,  and  Ceremonial.  But  this  division,  al- 
though valuable,  if  considered  as  a  distinction  merely 
subjective  (as  enabling  us,  that  is,  to  conceive  the 
objects  of  Law,  dealing  as  it  does  with  man  in  his 
social,  political,  and  religious  capacity),  is  wholly 
imaginary,  if  regarded  as  an  objective  separation  of 
various  classes  of  Laws.  Any  single  ordinance 
might  have  at  once  a  moral,  a  ceremonial,  and  a 
political  bearing ;  and  in  fact,  although  in  parti- 
cular cases  one  or  other  of  these  aspects  predomi- 
nated, yet  the  whole  principle  of  the  Mosaic  insti- 
tutions is  to  obliterate  any  such  supposed  separation 
of  laws,  and  refer  all  to  first  principles,  depending 
on  the  Will  of  God  and  the  nature  of  man. 

In  giving  an  analysis  of  the  substance  of  the  Law, 
it  will  probably  be  better  ta  ti'eat  it,  as  any  other 
system  of  laws  is  usually  treated,  by  dividing  it 
into^(l)  Laws  Civil  ;  (2)  Laws  Criminal  ;  (.3) 
Laws  Judicial  and  Constitutional ;  (4)  Laws  Eccle- 
siastical and  Ceremonial. 

(I.)  Laws  Civil, 

(A)  Of  Persons. 

(a)  Father  and  Son. 

The  power  of  a  Father  to  be  held  sacred  ;  curs- 
ing, or  smiting  (Ex.  xxi.  1.5,  17  ;  Lev.  .xx.  9),  or 
stubborn  and  wilful  disobedience  to  be  considered 
capital  crimes.  But  uncontrolled  power  of  life  and 
death  was  apparently  refused  to  the  father,  and  vested 
only  in  the  congregation  (Deut.  xxi.  18-21). 

liight  of  the  first-burn  to  a  double  portion  of  the 
inheritance  not  to  be  set  aside  by  partiality  (Deut. 
xxi.  15-17).« 

Tnlieritance  by  Daughters  to  be  allowed  in  default 
of  sons,  provided  (Num.  xxvii.  6-8,  conip.  x.xxvi.) 
that  heiresses  married  in  their  own  tribe. 

Daughters  unmarried  to  be  entirely  dependent 
on  their  father  (Num.  xxx.  3-5). 


"  For  an  example  of  the  authority  of  the  first-born 
sec  1  Sam.  xx.  29  ("my  brother,  he  hath  commanded 
tne  to  be  there"). 


70 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


{b)  HUSBAXD  AND  WiFE. 

The  power  of  a  Hushand  to  be  so  gi-eat  that  .1 
wife  could  never  be  sui  juris,  or  enter  independently 
into  any  engagement,  even  before  God  (Num.  sxx. 
6-15).  A  widow  or  divorced  wife  became  inde- 
pendent, and  did  not  again  fall  under  her  father's 
power  (ver.  9). 

Divorce  (for  uncleanness)  allowed,  but  to  be 
foi-mal  and  irrevocable  (Deut.  xxiv.  1-4). 

Marriage  vnthin  certain  degrees  forbidden  (Lev. 
xviii.  &c.). 

A  Slave  Wife,  whether  bought  or  captive,  not  to 
be  actual  property,  nor  to  be  sold  ;  if  ill-treated,  to 
be  ipso  facto  free  (Ex.  xxi.  7-9;  Deut.  xxi.  10-14). 
Slander  against  a  wife's  virginity,  to  be  punished 
by  fine,  and  by  deprival  of  power  of  divorce ;  on 
the  other  hand,  ante-connubial  uncleanness  in  her 
to  be  punished  by  death  (Deut.  xxii.  13-21). 

The  raising  up  of  seed  (Levirate  law)  a  formal^ 
right  to  be  claimed  by  the  widow,  under  pain  of 
infomy,  with  a  view  to  preservation  of  families 
(Deut.  xx\-.  5-10). 

(c)  Master  and  Slave. 
Power  of  Master  so  far  limited,  that  death  under 
actual  chastisement  was  punishable  (Ex.  xxi.  20) ; 
and  maiming  was  to  give  liberty  ipso  facto  (yer. 
26,  27). 

The  Hehreic  Slave  to  he  freed  at  the  sabbatical 
year,**  and  provided  with  necessaries  (his  wife  and 
children  to  go  with  him  only  if  they  came  to  his 
master  with  him),  unless  by  his  own  formal  act 
he  consented  to  be  a  perpetual  slave  (Ex.  xxi.  1-6  ; 
Deut.  XV.  12-18).  In  any  case  (it  would  seem)  to 
be  freed  at  the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  10),  with  his  chil- 
dren. If  sol<l  to  a  resident  alien,  to  be  always  re- 
deemable, at  a  price  proportional  to  the  distance  of 
the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  47-54). 

Foreign  Slaves  to  be  held  and  inherited  as  pro- 
perty for  ever  (Lev.  xxv.  45,  46);  and  fugitive 
slaves  from  foreign  nations  not  to  be  given  up 
(Deut.  xsiii.  15). 

(rf)  Strangers. 
They  seem  never  to  have  been  sui  juris,  or  able 
to  protect  themselves,  and   accordingly  protection 
and  kindness  towards  them  are  enjoined  as  a  sacred 
duty  (Ex.  xxii.  21  ;  Lev.  xix.  33,  34). 

(B)  Law  of  Things. 

(«)  Laws  of  Land  (and  Property). 

(1)  All  Land  to  be  the  property  of  God  alone, 

and  its  holders  to  be  deemed  His  tenants   (Lev. 

23). 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

and  unredeemed,  to  be  hallowed  at  the  jubilee  for 
ever,  and  given  to  the  priests  ;  if  only  by  a  possessor, 
to  return  to  the  owner  at  the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxvii. 
14-34). 

(4)  Inheritance. 


(2)  All  sold  Land  therefore  to  return  to  its  ori- 
ginal owners  at  the  jubilee,  and  the  price  of  sale  to 
be  calculated  accordingly ;  and  redemption  on  equit- 
able terms  to  be  allowed  at  all  times  (xxv.  25-27). 

A  Hume  sold  to  be  redeemable  within  a  year ; 
and,  if  not  redeemed,  to  pass  away  altogether  (xxv. 
29,  30). 

But  the  Houses  of  the  Levites,  or  those  m  un- 
walled  villages  to  be  redeemable  at  all  times,  in  the 
same  way  as  land ;  and  the  Levitical  suburbs  to  be 
inalienable  (xxv.  31-34). 

(3)  Land  or  Houses  sanctified,  or  tithes,  or  un- 
clean firstlings  to  be  capable  of  being  redeemed,  at  S 
value  (calculated  according  to  the  distance  from  the 
jubilee-yeai-  by  the  priest)  ;  if  devoted  by  the  owner 


(I)  Sons.  II  I  I 

(2)  Daughters.'  \  \ 

■    (3)   Brothers. 

(4)  Vitcles  on  the  Father's  side.  | 

(5)  jYext  Kinsmen,  generally. 

(6)  Laws  of  Debt. 

(1)  All  Debts  (to  an  Israelite)  to  be  relciised  at 
the  7th  (sabbatical)  year  ;  a  blessing  promised  to 
obedience,  and  a  curse  on  refusal  to  lend  (Deut.  xv. 
1-11). 

(2)  Uswy  (fiom  Israelites)  not  to  be  taken  (Ex. 
xxii.  25-27  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  19,  20). 

(3)  Pledges  not  to  be  insolently  or  ruinously  ex- 
acted (Deut.  xxiv.  6,  10-13,  17,  18). 

(c)  Taxation. 

(1)  Census-monei/,  a  poll-tax  (of  a  half-shekel),  to 

be  paid  for  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex. 
XXX.  12-16). 

All  spoil  in  war  to  be  halved ;  of  the  com- 
batant's half,  3^th,  of  the  people's,  .^th,  to  be 
paid  for  a  "  heave-ofl'ering"  to  .lehovah. 

(2)  Tithes. 

(a)  Tithes  of  all  produce  to  be  given  for 
maintenance  of  the  Levites  (Num.  s\'iii. 
20-24). 

(Of  this  .j^th  to  be  ])aid  as  a  heave-ofler- 
ing  (foi'  maintenance  of  the  priests)  .... 
24-32). 

(/3)  Second  Tithe  to  be  bestowed  in  religious 
feasting  and  charity,  either  at  the  Holy 
Place,  or  every  3rd  year  at  home  (?)  (Deut. 
xiv.  22-28). 

(7)  First- Fndts  of  corn,  wine,  and  oil  (at 
least  ^th,  generally  ^gth,  for  the  priests) 
to  be  ofteied  at  Jerusalem,  with  a  solemn 
declaration  of  dependence  on  God  the  King 
of  Israel  (Deut.  xxvi.  1-15;  Num.  .xviii. 
12,  13). 

Firstlings  of  clean  beasts ;  the  redenip- 
tion-money  (5  shekels)  of  man,  and  (J  she- 
kel, or  1  shekel)  of  unclean  beasts,  to  be 
given  to  the  priests  after  sacrifice  (Num. 
xviii.  15-18). 

(3)  Poor-Laws. 

(a)  Gleanings  (in  field  or  vineyard)  to  be  a 

legal  right  of  the  poor  (Lev.  xix.   9,   10 ; 

Deut.  xxiv.  19-22). 
ifi)  Slight   Trespass  (eating  on  the  spot)  to 

be  allowed  as  legal  (Deut.  xxiii.  24,  25). 
(7)  Second  Tithg  (see  2  )3) '  to  be  given  in 

charity. 
(5)    Wages  to  be  paid  day  by   day    (Deut. 

xxiv.  15). 

(4)  Maintenance  of  Priests  (Num.  xviii.  8-32). 
(a)   Tenth  of  Levites'  Tithe.     (See  2  a). 
(;3)   The   heave    and    wave-offerings    (breast 

and  right  shoulder  of  all  jieace-offerings). 
(7)   The  meat  aiul  sin-offerings,  to  be  eaten 

solemnly,  and  only  in  the  holy  place. 
(5)  First-Fruits  and  redemption  money.  (See 

2  7). 


**  The  difficulty  of  enforcing  this  law  is  seen  in        =  Heiresses  to  many   in   their  own   tribe   (Num. 
Jcr.  xxxiv.  8-16.  |  ^x^"»-  6-8,  xxxvi.). 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

(e)  I'ricc  of  all  devoted  things,  unless  spe- 
cially given  tor  a  sacretl  service.  A  man's 
service,  or  that  ot"  his  household,  to  be  re- 
deemed at  50  shekels  tor  man,  oO  lor  woman, 
20  for  boy,  and  10  for  girl. 

(II.)  Laws  Ckiminal. 

(A)  Offences  against   God   (of   the 

nature  of  treason). 

1  st  Couimand.  Acknowledgment  of  false  gods 
(E.\.  xxii.  20),  as  e.g.  Moloch  (Lev.  xx.  1-5),  aud 
generally  all  idolatri/  (Deut.  xiii.,  xvii.  2-5). 

2nd  Command.  Witchcraft  ami  false  prophecy 
(Ex.  xxii.  18  ;  Deut.  xviii.  9-22;  Lev.  xix.  31). 

iird  Command.    Blasphemij  (Lev.  xxiv.  15,  16). 

4th  Command.  Sahbath-breahing  (Num.  xv. 
32-36). 

Punishment  in  all  cases,  death  by  stoning.  Ido- 
latrous cities  to  be  utterly  destroyed. 

(B)  Offences  against  Man. 

5th  Command.  Disobedience  to  or  cursing  or 
smiting  of  jyrtrents  (Ex.  xxi.  15,  17  ;  Lev.  xx.  9; 
Deut.  xxi.  18-21),  to  be  punished  by  death  by 
stoning,  publicly  adjudged  and  inflicted  ;  so  also  of 
disobedience  to  the  priests  (as  judges)  or  Supreme 
■Judge.  Comp.  1  K.  xxi.  10-14  (Nliboth)  ;  2  Clir. 
xxiv.  21  (Zechariah). 

6th  Command.  (1)  Murder,  to  be  piuiished  by 
death  without  sanctuary  or  reprieve,  or  satisfaction 
(Ex.  xxi.  12,  14;  Deut.  xix.  11-13).  Death  of  a 
slave,  actually  under  the  rod,  to  be  punished  i^Kx. 
xxi.  20,  21). 

(2)  Death  by  negligence,  to  be  punished  bv 
death  (Ex.  xxi.  28-30). 

(3)  Accidental  Homicide ',  the  avenger  of  blood 
to  be  escaped  by  flight  to  the  cities  of  refuge  till 
the  death  of  the  high-priest  (Num.  xxxv.  9-28 ; 
Deut.  iv.  41-43,  xix.^i-10). 

("4)  Uncertain  Murder,  to  be  expiated  by  formal 
disavowal  and  sacrifice  by  the  elders  of  the  nearest 
city  (Deut.  xxi.  1-9). 

(5)  Assaidt  to  be  punished  by  lex  talionis,  or 
damages  (Ex.  xxi.  18,  19,  22-25;  Lev.  xxiv. 
19,  20). 

7th  Command.  (1)  Adultery  to  be  punished  by 
death  of  both  offenders ;  the  rape  of  a  married  or 
betrothed  woman,  by  death  of  the  otfender  (Deut. 
xxii.  13-27). 

(2)  Rape  or  Seduction  of  an  unbetrothed  virgin, 
to  be  compensated  by  marriage,  with  dowry  (50 
shekels),  and  without  power  of  divorce  ;  or,  if  she 
be  refused,  by  p.iyment  of  full  dowry  (Ex.  xxii.  16, 
17;  Deut.  x.\ii.  28,  29). 

(3)  Unlairful  Marriages  (incestuous,  &c.),to  be 
punished,  some  by  death,  some  by  childlessness 
(Lev.  XX.). 

Sth  Command.  (1)  Theft  to  be  punished  by 
fourfold  or  double  restitution  ;  a  nocturnal  robber 
might  be  slain  as  an  outlaw  (Ex.  xxii.  1-4). 

(2)  Trespass  and  injury  of  tilings  lent  to  be 
compensated  (Ex.  xxii.  5-15). 

(3)  Perversion  of  Justice  (by  bribes,  threats, 
&c.),  and  especially  oppression  of  strangers,  strictly 
forbidden  (Ex.  xxiii.  9,  &c.). 

(4)  Kidnapping  to  be  punished  by  death  (Deut. 
xxiv.  7). 

9th  Command.  False  Witness  ;  to  be  punished 
Dy  Icjc  talionis  (Ex.  xxiii.  1-3;  Deut.  xix.  16-21). 

Slander  of  a  wife's  chastity,  by  fine  and  loss  of 
power  of  divorci'  (Dent.  xxii.  18,  19). 


LAW  OP  MOSES 


71 


A  fuller  consideiation  of  the  tables  of  the  Ten 
Commandments  is  given  elsewhere.     [Ten  Com- 

JIANDMENTS.] 

(III.)  Laws  Judicial  and  Constitutional. 

(A)  Jurisdiction. 

(a)  Local  Judges  (generally  Levites,  as  more 
skilled  in  the  Law)  appointed,  for  ordinary  matters, 
probably  by  the  people  with  approbation  of  tlie  su- 
preme authority  (as  of  ]\Ioses  in  the  wilderness) 
(Ex.  xviii.  25;  Deut,  i.  15-18),  through  all  the 
land  (Deut.  xvi.  18). 

(6)  Appeal  to  the  Priests  (at  the  holy  place),  oi 
to  the  judge;  their  sentence  final,  and  to  be  ac- 
cepted under  pain  of  death.  See  Deut.  xvii.  8-13 
(comp.  appeal  to  Moses,  Ex.  xviii.  26.) 

(c)  Tu-o  witnesses  (at  least)  required  in  capital 
matters  (Num.  xxxv.  30;  Deut.  xvii.  6,  7). 

(d)  Punishment  (except  by  special  command) 
to  be  personal,  and  not  to  extend  to  the  family 
(Deut.  xxiv.  16). 

Stripes  allowed  and  limited  (Deut.  xxv.  1-3),  so 
as  to  avoid  outrage  on  the  luiman  frame. 

All  this  would  be  to  a  great  extent  set  aside — 

1st.  By  the  summary  jurisdiction  of  the  king.  See 
1  Sam.  xxii.  11-19  (Saul);  2  Sam.  xii.  1-5,  xiv. 
4-11  ;  1  K.  iii.  16-28;  which  extended  even  to  the 
deposition  of  the  high-priest  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17,  18; 
1  K.  ii.  26,  27). 

The  practical  ditficulty  of  its  being  carried  out  is 
seen  in  2  Sam.  xv.  2-6,  and  would  lead  of  course 
to  a  certain  delegation  of  his  power. 

2nd.  By  the  appointment  of  the  .Seventy  (Num. 
xi.  24-30)  with  a  solemn  religious  sanction.  (In 
later  times  there  was  a  local  Sanhediim  of  23  in  each 
city,  and  two  such  in  Jerusalem,  as  well  as  the 
Great  Sanhedrim,  consisting  of  70  members,  besides 
the  president,  who  was  to  be  the  high-priest  if  duly 
qualified,  and  controling  even  the  king  and  high- 
priest.  The  members  were  priests,  scribes  (Levites), 
and  elders  (of  other  tribes).  A  court  of  exactly 
this  nature  is  noticed,  as  appointed  to  supreme 
power  by  Jehoshaphat.     (See  2  Ch.  xix.  8-11.) 

(B)  Royal  Power. 

The  King's  Power  limited  by  the  Law,  as  written 
and  formally  accepted  by  the  king:  and  directly 
forbidden  to  be  despotic''  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20  ;  comp. 
1  Sam.  X.  25).  Yet  he  had  power  of  taxation  (to 
,Lth) ;  and  of  compulsory  service  (1  Sam.  viii.  lu- 
18;  the  declaration  of  war  (1  Sam.  xi.),  &c.  There 
are  distinct  traces  of  a  "  mutual  contiact "  (2  Sam. 
v.  3  (David);  a  "league"  (Joash),  2  K.  .xi.  17)  ; 
the  remonstrance  with  Rehob(jjim  being  clearly  not 
extraordinary  (1  K.  xii.  1-6). 

2'hc  Princes  of  the  Congregation.  The  heads  of 
the  tribes  (see  Josh.  ix.  15)  seem  to  have  had  au- 
thority under  Joshua  to  act  for  the  people  (comp. 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  16-22)  ;  and  in  the  later  times  "  the 
princes  of  Judah  "  seem  to  have  had  power  to  con- 
trol both  the  king  and  the  priests  (see  Jer.  xxvi. 
10-24,  xxxviii.  4,  5,  &c.). 

(C)  Royal  Revenue.   (See  Mich.  b.  ii. 
c.  7,  art.  59. 

(1)  Tenth  of  produce. 

(2)  Domain  land  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  26-29).  Note 
confiscation  of  criminal's  land  (1  K.  xxi.  15). 


*  Military  conquest  diseouraiied  by  the  prohibition 
of  the  use  of  liorscs.  (See  Josh.  xi.  G.)  For  an  ex- 
ample of  obcdioncc  to  tUis  liiw  see  2  Sam.  viii.  4,  and 
of  disobedience  to  it  in  1  K.  x.  26-20. 


72 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


(3)  Bond  service  (1  K.  v.  17,  18)   chieHy  on 
foreigners  (1  K.  ix.  20-22;  2  Cbr.  ii.  16,  17). 

(4)  Flocks  and  herds  (1  Chr.  .xxvii.  29-31). 

(5)  Tributes  (gifts)  from  foreign  kings. 

(6)  Commerce ;    especially    in    Solomon's   time 
(1  K.  X.  22,  29,  &c.). 

(IV.)  Ecclesiastical  and  Ceuejionial  Law. 

(A)  Law  of  Sacrifice  (considered  as  the  sign  and 
tlie  appointed  means  of  the  union  with  God, 
on  which  the  holiness  of  the  people  de- 
pended). 

(1)  Ordinary  Sacrifices. 

(a)  The  vhole  Bm-7it-0jfe>-ing  {Lev.  i.)  of  the 
herd  or  the  flock  ;  to  be  offered  continually 
(Ex.  xxi.x.  S8-42) ;  and  the  fire  on  the  altar 
never  to  be  extinguished  (Lev.  vi.  8-13). 
(;8)   The  Meat-Offering  (Lev.  ii.,  vi.  14-23) 
of  flour,  oil,  and  frankincense,  unleavened, 
and  seasoned  with  salt. 
(7)   The  Peace-Offering  (Lev.  iii.,vii.  11-21) 
of  the  herd  or  the  flock  ;   either  a  thank- 
offerins,  or  a  vow,  or  freewill  offering. 
(5)    The^ Sin-Offering,  or    Trespass- Offering 
(Lev.  iv.,  v.,  vi.). 

(a)  For  sins  committed  in  ignorance  (Lev. 

iv.). 
(6)  For   vows    unwittingly    made     and 
broken,    or    uncleanness    unwittingly 
contracted  (Lev.  v.). 
(c)  For  .gins  wittingly  committed  (Lev. 
vi.  1-7). 

(2)  Extraordinary  Sacrifices. 

(a)  At   the    Consecration   of  Priests   (Lev. 

viii.,  ix.). 
()3)  At  the  Purification  of  Women  (Lev.  xii.). 
(7)  At  the  Cleansing  of  Lepers  (Lev.  xiii., 

xiv.). 
(5)  On  the  Great  Dag  of  Atonement  (Lev. 

xvi.). 
(e)   On  the  great  Festivals  (Lev.  xxiii.). 

(B)  Law  of  Holiness  (arising   from  the  union 
with  God  through  sacrifice). 

(1)  Holiness  of  Persons. 

(a)  Holiness  of  the  whole  people  as  "  children 
of  God"  (Ex.  six.  5,  6  ;  Lev.  xi.-xv.,  xvii., 
xviii. ;  Deut.  xiv.  1-21)  shown  in 

(a)  The  Dedication  of  the  first-born  (Ex. 
xiii.  2,  12,  13,  xxii.  29,  30,  &c.);  and 
the  offering  of  all  firstlings  and  first- 
fruits  (IJeuf.  xxvi.,  &c.). 
(6)  Distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  food 
(Lev.  xi.;  Deut.  xiv.). 

(c)  Provision  for  purification  (Lev.  xii., 
xiii.,  xiv.,  XV.;  Deut.  xxiii.  1-14). 

(d)  Laws  against  disfigurement  (Lev. 
xix.  27 ;  Deut.  xiv.  1  ;  comp.  Deut. 
XXV.  3,  against  excessive  scourging). 

{e)  Laws    against   unnatural    marriages 
and  lusts  (Lev.  xviii.,  xx.). 
(^;S)   Holiness  of  the  Priests  {and  Levites). 

{a)  Their  consecration  (Lev.  viii.  ix. ; 
Ex.  X2ix.). 

(6),  Their  special  qualifications  and  re- 
strictions (Lev.  xxi.,  xxii.  1-9). 

(c)  Their  rights  (Deut.  xviii.  1-6;  Num. 
xviii.)  and  authority  (Dent.  xvii.  8-13). 

(2)  Holiness  of  Places  and  Things. 

<a)    The ^Tahermde y\\\\  the  ark,   the  vail. 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

the  altars,  the  laver,  the  priestly  robes,  i.^c. 
(Ex.  xxv.-xxviii.,  xxx). 
(jS)  The  Holy  Place  chosen  for  the  peima- 
nent  erection  of  the  tabernacle  (Deut.  xii., 
xiv.  22-29),  where  only  all  sacrifices  were  to 
be  oHered,  and  all  tithes,  first-fruits,  vows, 
&c.,  to  be  given  or  eaten. 

(3)  Holiness  of  Times. 

(a)    The  Sabbath  (Ex.  xx.  9-11,  xxiii.  12,  &c.). 
(j8)   The  Sitbbatical  Year  (Ex.  xxiii.  10,  11  ; 

Lev.  XXV    1-7,  &c.). 
(7)  The  Year  of  Jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  8-16,  &c.), 

(5)  The  Passover  (Ex.  .xii.  3-27:  Lev.  xxiii. 
4-14). 

(€)    The  Feast  of   Weeks    (Pentecost)    (Lev. 

xxiii.  15,  &c.). 
(fj   The   Feast  of   Tabernacles   (Lev.   xxiii. 

33-43. 
(ij)   The    Feast    of    Trumpets     (Lev.    xxiii. 

23-25). 

(6)  The  Day  of  Atonement  (Lev.  xxiii.  26- 
32,  &c.). 

On  this  pait  of  the  subject,  see  Festivals, 
Priests,  Tabernacle,  Sacrifice,  &c. 

Such  is  the  substance  of  the  Mosaic  Law ;  its 
details  must  be  studied  under  their  several  heads ; 
and  their  full  comprehension  requires  a  constant 
reference  to  the  circumstances,  physical  and  moral, 
of  the  nation,  and  a  comparison  with  the  correspond- 
ing ordinances  of  other  ancient  codes. 

The  leading  principle  of  the  whole  is  its  Theo- 
cratic character,  its  reference  (that  is)  of  all 
action  and  thoughts  of  men  directlg  and  immediately 
to  the  will  of  God.  All  law,  indeed,  must  ulti- 
mately make  this  reference.  If  it  bases  itself  on 
the  saeredness  of  human  authority,  it  must  finally 
trace  that  authority  to  God's  appointment;  if  on 
the  rights  of  the  individual  and  the  need  of  pro- 
tecting them,  it  must  consider  these  rights  as  in- 
herent and  sacred,  because  implanted  by  the  hand 
of  the  Creator.  But  it  is  characteristic  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  as  also. of  all  Biblical  history  and  pro- 
phecy, that  it  passes  over  all  the  intermediate  steps, 
and  refers  at  once  to  God's  commamhiient  as  the 
foundation  of  all  human  duty.  The  key  to  it  is 
found  in  the  ever-recurring  formula,  "  Ye  shall 
observe  all  these  statutes  ;  I  am  the  Lord." 

It  follows  from  this,  that  it  is  to  be  regarded 
not  merely  as  a  law,  that  is,  a  rule  ofcor^duct, 
based  on  known  truth  and  acknowledged  authority, 
but  also  as  a  Revelation  of  God's  nature  and  His 
dispensations.  In  this  view  of  it,  more  particu- 
larly, lies  its  connexion  with  the  rest  of  the  Old 
Testament.  As  a  law,  it  is  definite  and  (generally 
speaking)  final ;  as  a  revelation,  it  is  the  beginning 
of  the  great  system  of  prophecy,  and  indeed  bears 
within  itself  the  marks  of  gradual  development, 
from  the  first  simple  declaration  ("  I  am  the  Lord 
thy  God")  in  Exodus  to  the  full  and  solemn  decla- 
ration of  His  nature  and  will  in  Deuteronomy. 
With  this  peculiar  character  of  revelation  stamped 
upon  it,  it  naturally  ascends  from  rule  to  principle, 
and  regards  all  goodness  in  man  as  the  shadow  of 
the  Diviue  attributes,  "  Ye  shall  be  holy:  for  I  the 
Lord  your  God  am  holv  "  (Lev.  xix.  2,  &c. ;  comp. 
Matt.  v.  48). 

But  this  theocratic  character  of  the  law  depends 
necessarily  on  the  belief  in  God,  as  not  only  the 
Creator  and  sustainer  of  the  world,  but  as,  by 
special  covenant,  the  head  of  the  Jeuish  nation.  It 
is  not  indeed  doubted  that  He  is  the  king  of  all  the 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

cjirth,  and  that  all  earthly  authority  is  derived 
from  Him ;  but  here  again,  in  the  case  of  the 
Isiaelites, the  intermediate  steps  are  all  but  ignored, 
and  the  people  at  ouce  brought  face  to  face  with 
Him  as  their  ruler.  It  is  to  be  especially  noticed, 
that  (iod's  claim  (so  to  speak)  on  their  allegiance 
is  based  not  on  His  power  or  wisdom,  but  on  His 
especial  mercy  in  being  their  Saviour  from  Egyptian 
bondage.  Because  they  were  made  free  by  Him, 
theretbre  they  became  His  servants  (comp.  Kom. 
vi.  19-22)  ;  and  the  declaration,  which  st;inds  at 
the  opening  of  the  law  is,  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy 
God,  which  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt." ^ 
(Comp.  also  the  reason  given  for  the  observation  of 
the  sabbath  iu  Deut.  v.  15  ;  and  the  historiral  pre- 
faces of  the  delivery  of  the  second  law  (Deut.  i.-iii.)  ; 
of  the  renewal  of  the  covenant  by  Joshua  (Josh. 
xxiv.  1-13)  ;  and  of  the  rebuke  of  Samuel  at  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  (1  Sam.  xii.  6-15).  ) 
This  immediate  reference  to  God  as  their  king, 
is  clearly  seen  as  the  groundwork  of  their  whole 
polity.  The  foundation  of  the  whole  law  of  land, 
and  of  its  remarkable  provisions  against  alienation, 
lies  in  the  declaration,  "  The  land  is  mine,  and 
ye  are  strangers  and  sojourners  with  me "  (Lev. 
XXV.  23).  As  in  an-cient  Rome,  all  land  belonged 
properly  to  the  state,  and  under  the  feudal  system 
in  mediaeval  Europe  to  the  king ;  so  in  the  Jewish 
law  the  true  ownership  lay  in  Jehovah  alone. 
The  very  system  of  tithes  embodied  only  a  peculiar 
form  of  a  tribute  to  their  king,  such  as  they  were 
familiar  with  in  Egypt  (see  Gen.  xlvii.  23-26) ; 
and  the  offering  of  the  first-fruits,  with  the  remark- 
able declaration  by  which  it  was  accompanied  (see 
Deut.  xxvi.  5-10),  is  a  direct  acknowledgment  of 
God's  immediate  sovereignty.  And,  as  the  land, 
so  also  the  persons  of  the  Israelites  are  declared  to 
be  the  absolute  property  of  the  Lord,  by  the  dedi- 
cation and  ransom  of  the  first-born  (Ex.  xiii.  2- 
13,  &c.),  by  the  payment  of  the  half-shekel  at  the 
numbering  of  the  people,  "  as  a  ransom  for  their 
souls  to  the  Lord"  (Ex.  xxx.  11-16);  and  by  the 
limitation  of  power  over  Hebrew  slaves,  as  con- 
trasted with  the  absolute  mastership  permitted  over 
the  heathen  and  the  sojourner  (Lev.  xxv.  39-46). 

From  this  theociatic  nature  of  the  law  follow 
important  deductions  with  regard  to  (a)  the  view 
which  it  takes  of  political  society  ;  (6)  the  extent 
of  the  scope  of  the  law;  (c)  the  penalties  by  which 
it  is  enforced ;  and  (rf)  the  character  which  it  seeks 
to  impress  on  the  people. 

(a.)  The  basis  of  human  society  is  ordinarily 
sought,  by  law  or  philosophy,  either  in  the  I'ights 
of  the  individual,  and  the  partial  delegation  of  them 
to  political  authorities  ;  or  in  the  mutual  needs  of 
men,  and  the  relations  which  spring  from  them  ; 
or  in  the  actual  existence  of  povver  of  man  over 
man,  whether  arising  from  natural  relationship,  or 
from  benefits  conferred,  or  from  physical  or  intel- 
lectual ascendancy.  The  maintenance  of  society  is 
supposed  to  depend  on  a  "  social  compact"  between 
£;overnors  and  subjects  ;  a  compact,  true  as  an  ab- 
stract idea,  but  untrue  if  supposed  t«  have  been  a 
historical  reality.  The  Mosaic  Law  seeks  the  basis 
of  its  polity,  first,  in  the  absolute  sovereignty  of 
God,  next  in  the  relationship  of  each  individual  to 
God,  and  througli  God  to  his  countrymen.  It  is 
clear  that  such  a  doctrine,  while  it  contradicts  none 
of  the  common  theories,  yet  lies  beneath  them  all, 
and  sliows  why  each  of  them,  being  only  a  secondary 
deduction  from  an  ultimate  ti-uth,  cannot  be  in 
itself  sulficient ;   and,   if  it   claim  to  be  the  whole 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


73 


tnith,  will  become  an  absurdity.  It  is  the  doc- 
trine which  is  insisted  uix)n  and  developed  in  the 
whole  series  of  prophecy  ;  and  which  is  brought  to 
its  perfection  only  when  applied  to  that  universal 
and  spiritual  kingdom  for  which  the  Mosaic  system 
was  a  preparation. 

(b.)  The  law,  as  proceeding  directly  from  God, 
and  referring  directly  to  Him,  is  necessarily  abso- 
lute in  its  supremacy  and  unlimited  in  its  scope. 

It  is  supreme  over  the  governors,  as  being  only 
the  delegates  of  the  Lord,  and  therefore  it  is  incom- 
patible with  any  despotic  authority  in  them.  This 
is  seen  in  its  limitation  of  the  power  of  the  master 
over  the  slave,  in  the  restrictions  laid  on  the  priest- 
hood, and  the  ordination  of  the  "  manner  of  the 
kingdom  "  i^Deut.  xvii.  14-20  ;  comp.  1  Sam.  x.  25). 
By  its  establishment  of  the  hereditary  priesthood 
side  by  side  with  the  authority  of  the  heads  of 
tribes  ("  ihe  j)rinces"),  and  the  subsequent  sove- 
reignty of  the  king,  it  provides  a  balance  of  powers, 
all  of  which  are  regaided  as  subordinate.  The  ab- 
solute sovereignty  of  Jehovah  is  asserted  in  the 
earlier  times  in  the  dictatorship  of  the  Judge;  but 
much  more  clearly  under  the  kingdom  by  the 
spiritual  commission  of  the  prophet.  By  his  re- 
bukes of  priests,  princes,  and  kings,  for  abuse  of 
their  power,  he  was  not  only  defending  religion  and 
morality,  but  also  maintaining  the  divinely-ap- 
pointed constitution  of  Israel.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  supreme  over  the  governed,  recognising  no 
inherent  rights  in  the  individual,  as  prevailing 
against,  or  limiting  the  law.  It  is  therefore  unli- 
mited in  its  scope.  There  is  in  it  no  recognition, 
such  as  is  familiar  to  us,  that  there  is  one  cUiss  of 
actions  directly  subject  to  the  coeicive  power  of 
law,  while  other  classes  of  actions  and  the  whole 
realm  of  thought  are  to  be  indirectly  guided  by 
moral  and  spiritual  influence.  Nor  is  there  any 
distinction  of  the  temporal  authority  which  wields 
the  former  power,  from  the  spiritual  authoi-ity  to 
which  belongs  the  other.  In  tact  these  distinctions 
would  have  been  incompatible  with  the  character 
and  objects  of  the  law.  They  depend  partly  on 
the  want  of  foresight  and  power  in  the  lawgiver  ; 
they  could  have  no  place  in  a  system  traced  di- 
rectly to  God:  they  depend  also  partly  on  the 
tieedom  which  belongs  to  the  manhood  of  our  race  ; 
they  could  not  therelbi'e  be  appropriate  to  the  more 
imperfect  period  of  its  youth. 

Thus  the  law  regulated  the  whole  life  of  an 
Israelite.  His  house,  his  dress,  and  his  food,  his 
domestic  arrangements  and  the  distribution  of  his 
property,  all  were  determined.  la  the  laws  of 
the  release  of  debts,  and  the  prohibition  of  usury, 
the  dictates  of  self-interest  and  the  natural  course 
of  commercial  transactions  are  sternly  checked.  His 
actions  were  rewarded  and  punished  with  great  mi- 
nuteness and  strictness ;  and  that  according  to  the 
standard,  not  of  their  consequences,  but  of  tiieir  in- 
trinsic morality ;  so  that,  for  example,  fornication 
and  adultery  were  as  severely  visited  as  theft  or 
murder.  His  religious  worship  was  defined  and 
enforced  in  an  elaljoi'ato  and  unceasing  ceremonial. 
In  all  thuigs  it  is  clear,  that,  if  men  submitted  to 
it  merely  as  a  law,  imposed  under  penalties  by  an 
irresistible  authority,  and  did  not  regard  it  ;is  a 
means  to  the  knowledge  and  love  of  God,  and  a 
preparation  for  His  i-edemption,  it  would  well  de- 
serve from  Israelites  the  description  given  of  it  by 
St.  I'eter  (Acts  xv.  10),  as  "a  yoke  which  neither 
they  nor  their  fathers  were  able  to  bear." 

(c.J    21ic  pciuiltics   and  rewards   by  which   the 


74 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


law  is  enforced  ai'e  such  as  dejjend  ou  the  direct 
theocracy.  With  regard  to  individual  actions,  it 
iniiy  be  noticed  that,  as  generally  some  penalties 
are  inflicted  by  the  subordinate,  and  some  only  by 
the  supreme  authority,  so  among  the  Israelites 
some  penalties  came  from  the  hand  of  man,  some 
directly  from  the  Providence  of  God.  So  much 
is  this  the  case,  that  it  often  seems  doubtful 
whether  the  threat  that  a  "  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  Israel  "  refei-s  to  outlawry  and  excommunica- 
tion, or  to  such  miraculous  punishments  as  those  of 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  or  Koiah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram. 
In  dealing  with  the  nation  at  large,  Moses,  regu- 
larly and  as  a  matter  of  course,  refers  for  punish- 
ments and  rewards  to  the  providence  of  God.  This 
is  seen,  not  only  in  the  great  blessing  and  cui'se 
which  enforces  the  law  as  a  whole,  but  also  in 
special  instances,  as,  for  example,  in  the  promise  of 
unusual  feitility  to  compensate  tor  the  sabbatical 
year,  and  of  safety  of  the  country  fiom  attack 
when  left  undefended  at  the  three  gi'eat  festivals. 
Whether  these  were  to  come  fioni  natural  causes, 
i.  e.  laws  of  His  providence,  which  we  am  under- 
stand and  foresee,  or  from  causes  supernatural,  i.  e. 
incomprehensible  and  inscrutable  to  us,  is  not  in 
any  case  laid  down,  nor  indeed  does  it  atiect  this 
principle  of  the  law. 

The  heaimg  of  this  prmciple  on  the  inquiry  as  to 
the  revelation  of  a  future  life,  in  the  Pentateuch, 
is  easily  seen.  So  far  as  the  law  deals  with  the 
nation  as  a  whole,  it  is  obvious  that  its  penalties 
and  rewards  could  only  refer  to  this  life,  in  which 
alone  the  nation  exists.  So  far  as  it  relates  to  such 
individmd  acts  as  are  generally  cognizable  by 
human  laWj  and  capable  of  temporal  punishments, 
no  one  would  expect  that  its  divine  origin  should 
necessitate  any  reference  to  the  world  to  come. 
But  the  sphere  of  moral  and  religious  action  and 
•  tliought  t6  which  it  extends  is  beyond  the  cognizance 
(if  human  laws,  and  the  scope  of  their  ordinary 
penalties,  and  is  therefore  left  by  them  to  the  retribu- 
tion of  God's  inscrutable  justice,  which,  being  but 
imperfectly  seen  here,  is  contemplated  especially  as 
exercised  in  a  future  state.  Hence  arises  the 
expectation  of  a  direct  revelation  of  this  future 
state  in  the  Jlosaic  Law.  Such  a  revelation  is 
certainly  not  given.  Warburton  (in  his  Divine 
Legation  of  Moses)  even  builds  on  its  non-exist- 
ence an  argument  for  the  supernatural  power  and 
commission  of  the  law-giver,  who  could  promise 
and  threaten  retribution  from  the  providence  of 
(iod  in  this  life,  and  submit  his  predictions  to  the 
test  of  actual  experience.  The  truth  seems  to  be 
that,  in  a  law  which  appeals  directly  to  God  him- 
self for  its  authority  and  its  sanction,  there  caimot 
be  that  broad  line  of  demarcation  between  this  life 
and  the  next,  which  is  drawn  for  those  whose 
power  is  limited  by  the  grave.  Our  Lord  has 
taught  us  (Watt.  sxii.  31,  32)  that  in  the  very 
revelation  of  God,  as  the  "  God  of  Abraham  and 
Isaac  and  Jacob,"  the  promise  of  immortality  and 
future  retribution  was  implicitly  contained.  We 
may  apply  tliis  declaration  even  more  strongly  to 
a  law  in  which  God  was  revealed,  as  enteiihg  into 
covenant  with  Israel,  and  in  them  drawing  man- 
kind directly  under  His  immediate  government. 
His  blessings  and  curses,  by  the  very  fact  that  they 
came  from  Him,  would  be  felt  to  be  unlimited  by 
time ;  and  the  plain  and  immediate  fulfilment, 
which  they  found  in  this  life,  would  be  accepted  as 
an  earnest  of  a  deeper,  though  more  mysterious 
completion   in  the  world  to  come.     lUit  the  time 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

for  the  cle:ir  revelation  of  this  truth  was  not  yet 
come,  and,  theiefore,  while  the  future  life  aud  its 
retribution  is  implied,  yet  the  rewards  and  penalties 
of  the  present  life  are  those  which  are  plainly  held 
out  ;md  practically  dwelt  upon. 

(d.)  But  perhaps  the  most  important  consequence 
of  the  theocratic  nature  of  the  law  was  the 
peculiar  character  of  guodness  which  it  sought  to 
impress  on  the  people.  Goodness  in  its  relation 
to  man  takes  the  forms  of  righteousness  and  love  ; 
in  its  independence  of  all  relation,  the  form  of 
purity,  and  in  its  relation  to  God,  that  of  piety. 
Laws,  which  contemplate  men  chiefly  in  their 
mutual  relations,  endeavour  to  enforce  or  protect  in 
tl'.em  the  first  two  qualities;  the  Mosaic  Law, 
beginning  with  piety,  as  its  first  object,  enforces 
most  emphatically  the  purity  essential  to  those  who, 
by  their  union  with  God,  have  recovered  the  hope 
of  intrinsic  goodness,  while  it  views  righteousness 
and  love  rather  as  deductions  from  these  than  as 
independent  objects.  Not  that  it  neglects  these 
qualities ;  on  the  contnu-y  it  is  full  of  precepts 
which  show  a  high  conception  and  tender  care 
of  our  relative  duties  to  man ;''  but  these  can  hardly 
be  called  its  distinguishing  features.  It  is  most 
instructive  to  refer  to  the  religious  preface  of  the 
law  in  Deut.  vi.-xi.  (especially  to  vi.  4-13),  where 
all  is  based  ou  the  first  great  commandment,  and 
to  observe  the  subordinate  and  dependent  character 
of  "  the  second  that  is  like  unto  it," — "  Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself;  /  am  the  Lord" 
(Lev.  xix.  18).  On  the  contrary,  the  care  for  the 
purity  of  the  people  stands  out  remarkably,  not 
only  in  the  enforcement  of  ceremonial  "  cleanness," 
and  the  multitude  of  precautions  or  remedies  against 
any  breach  of  it,  but  also  in  the  sevei-ity  of  the 
laws  against  sensuality  and  self-pollution,  a  seve- 
rity which  distinguishes  the  Mosaic  code  before  all 
otliers  ancient  aud  modern.  In  punishing  these 
sins,  as  committed  against  a  man's  own  self,  without 
reference  to  their  etiect  on  others,  and  in  recognizing 
purity  as  having  a  substantive  value  and  glory,  it 
sets  up  a  standard  of  individual  morality,  such 
as,  even  in  Greece  and  Rome,  philosophy  resen-ed  for 
its  most  esoteric  teaching. 

Now  in  all  this  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the 
appeal  is  not  to  any  dignity  of  human  nature,  but 
to  the  obligations  of  communion  with  a  Holy  God. 
The  subordination,  theiefore,  of  this  idea  alos  to 
the  religious  idea  is  enforced  ;  and  so  long  as  the 
due  supremacy  of  the  latter  was  preserved,  all  other 
duties  would  find  their  places  in  proper  harmony. 
But  the  usurpation  of  that  supremacy  in  practice 
by  the  idea  of  pei'sonal  aud  national  sanctity  was 
that  which  gave  its  peculiar  colour  to  the  Jewish 
character.  In  that  character  there  was  intense 
religious  devotion  and  self-sacrifice ;  there  was 
a  high  standard  of  personal  holiness,  and  connected 
with  these  an  ardent  feeling  of  nationality,  based  ou 
a  great  idea,  and,  therefore,  finding  its  vent  in 
their  proverbial  spirit  of  proselytism.  But  there 
w;is  also  a  spirit  of  contempt  for  all  unbelievers, 
and  a  forgetfulness  of  the  existence  of  any  duties 
towards  them,  which  gave  even  to  their  religion  an 
antagonistic  spirit,  and  degraded  it  in  after-times  to 
a  ground  of  national  selt-glorification.  It  is  to  be 
traced  to  a  natural,  though  not  justifiable  perversion 
of  the  law,  by  those  who  made  it  their  all  ;  and 
both  in  its  strength  and  its  weaknesses  it  has  reap- 


d  See,  for  example,  Ex.  xxi.   7-11,  28-36;  xxiii. 
I-'J;    Ucut.  xxii.  1-4;   xxiv.  10-22,  &c.  &c. 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


peared  remarkably  among  those  Christians  who 
have  dwelt  on  the  0.  T.  to  the  neglect  of  the  New. 
It  is  evident  that  this  characteristic  of  the 
Israelites  would  tend  to  preserve  the  seclusion 
which,  inider  God's  providence,  was  intended  for 
them,  and  would  in  its  turn  be  fostered  by  it.  We 
may  notice,  in  connexion  with  this  part  of  the 
subject,  many  subordinate  provisions  tending  to  the 
same  direction.  Such  are  the  establishment  of  an 
agricultural  basis  of  society  and  property,  and  the 
provision  against  its  accumulation  in  a  few  hands ; 
the  discouragement  of  commerce  by  the  strict 
laws  as  to  usury,  and  of  foreign  conquest  by  the 
laws  against  the  maintenance  of  horses  and  chariots  ; 
as  well  as  the  direct  proliibition  of  intemiarriage 
with  idolaters,  and  the  indirect  prevention  of  all 
familiar  intercourse  with  them  by  the  laws  as  to 
meats — all  these  things  tended  to  impress  on  the 
Israelitish  polity  a  character  of  permanence,  stability, 
and  comparative  isolation.  Like  the  nature  and 
position  of  the  country  to  which  it  was  in  great 
measure  adapted,  it  was  intended  to  preserve  in 
purity  the  witness  borne  by  Isi'ael  for  Uod  in  the 
darkness  of  heathenism,  until  the  time  should  come 
for  the  gathering  in  of  all  nations  to  enjoy  the 
blessing  promised  to  Abraham. 

III.  In  considering  the  relation  of  the  Law  to 
the  future,  it  is  important  to  be  guided  by  the 
general  principle  laid  down  in  Heb.  vii.  19,  "  The 
Law  made  nothing  perfect"  (Oxj^\v  ireKiioicnv  b 
"aSjJLos).  Tliis  principle  will  be  applied  in  dilferent 
degrees  to  its  bearing  (a)  on  the  after-history  of 
the  Jewish  commonwealth  before  the  coming  of 
Christ;  {b)  on  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Himself; 
and  [g)  on  the  dispensation  of  the  Gospel. 

(a.)  To  that  after-history  the  Law  was,  to  a  great 
extent,  the  key ;  for  in  ceremonial  and  criminal  law 
it  was  complete  and  final ;  while,  even  in  civil  and 
constitutional  law,  it  laid  down  clearly  the  general 
principles  to  be  afterwards  more  fully  developed. 
It  was  indeed  often  neglected,  and  even  forgotten. 
Its  fundamental   assertion   of  the    Theocracy  was 
violated  by  the  constant  lapses  into  idolatry,  and  its 
provisions  for  the  good  of  man  overwhelmed  by  the 
natural  course  of  human  selfishness   (Jer.  xxxiv. 
12-17)  ;  till  at  last,  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  its  very 
existence  was  unknown,  and  its  discovery  was  to 
the  king  and  the  people  as  a  second  publication : 
yet  still  it  formed  the  standard  from  which  they 
knowingly  departed,  and  to  which  they  constantly 
returned ;  and  to  it  therefore  all  which  was  pecu- 
liar in  their  national  and  individual  character  was 
due.     Its  direct  influence  was   probably    greatest 
in  the  periods  before  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom, and  after  the  Babylonish  captivity.     The  last 
act  of  Joshua  was  to  bind  the  Israelites  to  it  as  the 
charter  of  their  occupation  of  the  conquered  land 
(Josh.  xxiv.  24-27) ;   and,  in  the  semi-anarchical 
period  of  the  Judges,  the  Law  and  the  Tabernacle 
were  the  only  centies   of  anything    like   national 
unity.     The  establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  due 
to  an  impatience  of  this  position,  and  a  desire  for  a 
visible  and  personal  centre  of  authority,  much  the 
same   in  nature  as   that  which  plunged  them  so 
often  in  idolatry.    The  people  were  warned  (1  Sam. 
xii.  G-2o)   that  it  involved  much  danger  of  their 
forgetting  and  rejecting  the  main  principle  of  the 
Law — that  "  Jehovah  their  God  was  their  King." 
The  truth  of  the  prediction  was  soon  shown.     Even 
under  Solomon,  as  soon  as  the  monarchy  became 
one  of  great  splendour  and  power,  it  assumed  a 
lioathenish  and  polytheistic  character,  breaking  the 


LAW  OF  MOSES  75 

Law,  both  by  its  dishonour  towards  God,  and  its 
forbidden  tyranny  over  man.  Indeed  if  the  Law 
was  looked  upon  as  a  collection  of  alistract  rules, 
and  not  as  a  means  of  knowletlge  of  a  Personal  God, 
it  was  inevitable  that  it  should  be  overborne  by  the 
presence  of  a  visible  and  personal  authority. 

Therefore  it  was,  that  from  the  time  of  the  esta- 
blishment of  the  kingdom  began  the  prophetic  office. 
Its  object  was  to  enforce  and  to  perfect  the  Law,  by 
bearing  witness  to  the  great  truths  on  which  it  was 
built,  viz.  the  truth  of  God's  government  over  all, 
kings,  priests,  and  people  alike,  and  the  consequent 
certainty  of  a  righteous  retribution.  It  is  plain 
that  at  the  same  time  this  witness  went  far  beyond 
the  Law  as  a  definite  code  of  institutions.  It 
dwelt  lather  on  its  great  principles,  which  were  to 
transcend  the  special  forms  in  which  they  were 
embodied.  It  frequently  contrasted  (as  in  Is.  i.,  &c.) 
the  external  observance  of  form  with  the  spiritual 
homage  of  the  heart.  It  tended  therefore,  at  least 
indirectly,  to  the  time  when,  according  to  the  well- 
known  contrast  drawn  by  Jeremiah,  the  Law  writ- 
ten on  the  tables  of  stone  should  give  place  to  a 
new  Covenant,  depending  on  a  law  written  on  the 
heart,  and  therefore  coercive  no  longer  (Jer.  xxxi. 
31-34).  In  this  they  did  but  carry  out  the  pre- 
diction of  the  Law  itself  (Deut.  xviii.  9-22),  and 
prepare  the  way  for  "  the  Prophet "  who  was  to 
come. 

Still  the  Law  remained  as  the  distinctive  standard 
of  the  people.  In  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  after  the 
separation,  the  deliberate  rejection  of  its  leading 
principles  by  Jeroboam  and  his  successors  was  the 
beginning  of  a  gradual  declension  into  idolatry  and 
heathenism.  But  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah  the 
very  division  of  the  monarchy  and  consequent  di- 
minution of  its  splendour,  and  the  need  of  a  prin- 
ciple to  assert  against  the  superior  material  po\ver 
of  Israel,  brought  out  the  Law  once  more  in  in- 
creased honour  and  influence.  In  the  days  of  Jeho- 
shaphat  we  iind,  for  the  first  time,  that  it  was  ti\ken 
by  the  Levites  in  their  circuits  through  the  land, 
and  the  people  taught  by  it  (2  Chr.  xvii.  9).  We 
find  it  especially  spoken  of  in  the  oath  taken  by 
the  king  "  at  his  pillar- "  in  the  temple,  and  made 
the  standard  of  reference  in  the  reformations  "of 
Hezekiah  and  Josiah  (2  K.  xi.  14,  xxiii.  3;  2  Chr. 
XXX.,  xxxiv.  14-31). 

Far  more  was  this  the  case  after  the  captivity. 
The  revival  of  the  existence  of  Israel  was  hallowed 
liy  the  new  and  solemn  publication  of  the  Law  by 
Ezra,  and  the  institution  of  the  synagogues,  through 
which  it  became  deeply  and  limiiliarly  known. 
[Ezra.]  The  loss  of  the  independent  monarchy, 
and  the  cessation  of  prophecy,  both  combined  to 
throw  the  Jews  back  uj)on  the  Law  alone,  as  their 
only  distinctive  pledge  of  nationality,  and  sure 
guide  to  truth.  The  more  they  mingled  with  the 
other  subject-nations  under  the  Persian  and  Grecian 
emj)ires,  the  more  eagerly  they  clung  to  it  as  their 
distinction  and  safeguard  ;  and  opening  the  know- 
ledge of  it  to  the  heathen,  by  the  translation  of  the 
LXX.,  based  on  it  their  proverbial  eagerness  to 
proselytize.  This  love  for  the  Law,  rather  than 
any  abstract  patriotism,  was  the  strength  of  the 
Maccabean  struggle  against  the  Syrians,"  and  the 
success  of  that  struggle,  enthroning  a  LeviticaJ 
power,  deepened  the  feeling  from  which  it  sprang. 
It  so  entered  into  .the  heart  of  the  people  that  open 


"■  Note  here  the  qiicstidn  as  to  llii 
on  the  Sabbath  in  tin:-  win'  >,  l  Mace  i 


lawfulness  of  war 
.  •j:!-41). 


76 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


idolatry  became  impossible.  'J'he  certainty  and  au- 
thority of  the  Law's  commandments  amidst  the 
pei-plexities  of  paganism,  and  the  spiiituality  of  its 
doctrine  as  contrasted  with  sensual  and  carnal 
idolatries,  were  the  favourite  boast  of  the  Jew,  and 
the  secret  of  his  influence  among  the  heathen.  The 
Law  thus  became  the  moulding  influence  of  the 
Jewish  character ;  and,  instead  of  being  looked  upon 
as  subsidiai'y  to  the  promise,  and  a  means  to  its 
fulfilment,  was  exalted  to  supreme  importance  as 
at  once  a  means  and  a  pledge  of  national  and  indi- 
vidual sanctity. 

This  feeling  laid  hold  of  and  satisfied  the  mass 
of  the  people,  hannonising  as  it  did  with  their 
ever-increa-sing  spirit  of  an  almost  fanatic  nation- 
ality, until  the  destruction  of  the  city.  The  Phari- 
sees, truly  representing  the  cliief  strength  of  the 
people,  systematized  tliis  feeling  ;  they  gave  it  fresh 
food,  and  assumed  a  predominant  leadership  over  it 
by  the  floating  mass  of  tradition  which  they  gra- 
dually accumulated  around  the  Law  as  a  nucleus. 
The  popular  use  of  the  word  "  lawless  "  (^j/o/xos) 
as  a  term  of  contempt  (Acts  ii.  23  ;  1  Cor.  ix.  21) 
for  the  heathen,  and  even  for  the  uneducated  mass 
of  their  followeis  (John  vii.  49),  marked  and  stereo- 
typed their  principle. 

Against  this  idolatry  of  the  Law  (which  when 
imported  into  the  Christian  Church  is  described  and 
vehemently  denounced  by  St.  Paul),  there  were  two 
reactions.  The  first  was  that  of  the  Sadducees; 
one  which  had  its  basis,  according  to  common  tra- 
dition, in  the  idea  of  a  higher  love  and  service  of 
God,  independent  of  the  Law  arid  its  sanctions  ;  but 
which  degenerated  into  a  speculative  infidelity,  and 
an  anti-national  system  of  politics,  and  which  pro- 
bably had  but  little  hold  of  the  people  The  other, 
tliat  of  the  EssENES,  was  an  attempt  to  burst 
the  bonds  of  the  formal  law,  and  assert  its  ideas  in 
all  fullness,  freedom,  and  purity.  In  its  practical 
form  it  assumed  the  character  of  high  and  ascetic 
devotion  to  God  ;  its  speculative  guise  is  seen  in  the 
school  of  Philo,  as  a  tendency  not  merely  to  treat 
the  commands  and  history  of  the  Law  on  a  sym- 
bolical principle,  but  actually  to  allegorise  them 
into  mere  abstractions.  In  neither  form  could  it 
be  permanent,  because  it  had  no  sufficient  rela- 
tion to  the  needs  and  realities  of  human  nature, 
or  to  the  personal  Subject  of  all  the  Jewish  pro- 
mises ;  but  it  was  still  a  declaration  of  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  Law  in  itself,  and  a  preparation  for  its 
absorption  into  a  higher  principle  of  unity.  Such 
was  the  history  of  the  Law  before  the  coming  of 
Christ.  It  was  full  of  effect  and  blessing,  when 
used  as  a  means ;  it  became  hollow  and  insuflicient, 
when  made  au  end. 

(6.)  The  relation  of  the  Law  to  the  advent  of 
Christ  is  also  laid  down  clearly  by  St.  Paul.  "  Tlie 
Law  was  the  XlaiSayoiybs  fls  Xpiffrhv,  the  servant 
(that  is),  whose  task  it  was  to  guide  the  child  to 
the  true  teacher  (Gal.  iii.  24)  ;  and  Christ  was  "  the 
end"  or  object  "  of  the  Law"  (IJom.  x.  4).  As 
being  subsidiary  to  the  promise,  it  had  accom- 
plished its  pui^pose  when  the  promise  was  fidfilled. 
In  its  national  aspect  it  had  existed  to  guard  the 
faith  in  the  theocracy.  The  chief  hindrance  to  that 
faith  had'been  the  difficulty  of  realising  the  invi- 
sible presence  of  God,  and  of  conceiving  a  commu- 
nion with  the  infinite  Godhead  which  should  not 
crush  or  absorb  the  finite  creature  (comp.  Deut.  v. 
24-27  ;  Num.  xvii.  12,  13;  Job  ix.  .^2-35,  xiii.  21, 
22;  Is.  xlv.  15,  Ixiv.  1,  &c.).  From  that  had 
come  in  earlier  times  open  idolatiy,  and  a  lialf-idol- 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

atrous  longing  for  and  trust  in  the  kingdom  ;  in 
after-times  the  substitution  of  the  law  for  the  pio- 
mise.  Tlus  difficulty  was  now  to  pass  away  for 
ever,  in  the  Incarnation  of  the  Godhead  in  One  truly 
and  visibly  man.  The  guardianship  of  the  Law 
was  no  longer  needed,  for  the  visible  and  personal 
presence  of  the  Messiah  required  no  further  witness. 
Moreover,  in  the  Law  itself  there  had  always  been  a 
tendency  of  the  fundamental  idea  to  burst  the  formal 
bonds  which  confined  it.  In  looking  to  God  as 
especially  their  King,  the  Israelites  were  inheriting 
a  privilege,  belonging  originally  to  all  mankind,  and 
destined  to  revert  to  them.  Yet  that  element  of 
the  Law  which  was  local  and  national,  now  most 
prized  of  all  by  the  Jews,  tended  to  limit  this  gift 
to  them,  and  place  them  in  a  position  antagonistic 
to  the  rest  of  the  world.  It  needed  thereibre  to 
pass  away,  before  all  men  could  be  brought  into  a 
kingdom  where  there  was  to  be  "  neither  Jew  nor 
Gentile,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  or  free." 

In  its  individual,  or  what  is  usually  called  its 
"moral"  aspect,  the  Law  bore  equally  the  stamp 
of  transitoriness  and  insufficiency.  It  had,  as  we 
have  seen,  declared  the  authority  of  truth  and  good- 
ness over  man's  will,  and  taken  for  gi-anted  in  man 
the  existence  of  a  spirit  which  could  recognise  that 
authority  ;  but  it  had  done  no  more.  Its  presence 
had  therefore  detected  the  existence  and  the  sinful- 
ness of  sin,  as  alien  alike  to  God's  will  and  man's 
true  nature  ;  but  it  had  also  brought  out  with  more 
vehement  and  desperate  antagonism  the  power  of 
sin  dwelling  in  man  as  fallen  (Kom.  vii.  7-2.5).  It 
only  showed  therefore  the  need  of  a  Saviour  from 
sin,  and  of  an  indwelling  power  which  should  en-  ■ 
able  the  spirit  of  man  to  conquer  the  "law"  of 
evil.  Hence  it  bore  witness  of  its  own  insufficiency, 
and  led  men  to  Christ.  Already  the  prophets, 
speaking  by  a  living  and  indwelling  spirit,  ever 
fresh  and  powerful,  had  been  passing  beyond  the 
dead  letter  of  the  law,  and  indirectly  condemning  it 
of  insufficiency.  But  theie  was  need  of  "  the  Pro- 
phet" who  sho\iId  not  only  have  the  fullness  of  the 
spirit  dwelling  in  Himself,  but  should  have  the 
power  to  give  it  to  others,  and  so  open  the  new 
dispensation  already  foretold.  When  He  had  come, 
and  by  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  implanted  in  man  a 
free  internal  power  of  action  tending  to  God,  the 
restraints  of  the  Law,  needful  to  train  the  childhood 
of  the  world,  became  unnecessary  and  even  injurious 
to  the  free  development  of  its  manhood. 

The  relation  of  the  Law  to  Christ  in  its  sacrificial 
and  ceremonial  aspect,  will  be  more  fully  consi- 
dered elsewhere.  [Sacrifice.]  It  is  here  only  ne- 
cessary to  remai'k  on  the  evidently  typical  character 
of  the  whole  system  of  sacrifices,  on  which  alone 
their  virtue  depended  ;  and  on  the  imperfect  embo- 
diment, in  any  body  of  mere  men,  of  the  great  truth 
which  was  represeiited  in  the  priesthood.  By  the 
former  declaring  tlie  need  of  Atonement,  by  the 
latter  the  possibility  of  Mediation,  and  yet  in  itself 
doing  nothing  adequately  to  realise  either,  the  Law 
again  led  men  to  Him,  who  was  at  once  the  only 
Mediator  and  the  true  Sacrifice. 

Thus  the  Law  had  trained  and  guided  man  to  the 
acceptance  of  tlie  Messiah  in  His  threefold  cha- 
racter of  King,  Prophet,  and  Priest ;  and  then,  its 
work  being  done,  it  became,  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  trusted  in  it,  not  only  an  encumbrance  but  a 
snare.  To  resist  its  claim  to  allegiance  was  there- 
fore a  matter  of  life  and  death  in  the  days  of  St. 
Paul,  and,  in  a  less  degiee,  in  after-ages  ol'  the 
Church. 


LAZARUS 


77 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

(c.)  It  remains  to  consider  how  far  it  has  any 
obligation  or  existence  under  the  dispensation  of  the 
Gospel.  As  a  means  of  justification  or  salvation, 
it  ought  never  to  have  been  regarded,  even  before 
Christ :  it  needs  no  proof  to  show  that  still  less 
can  this  be  so  since  He  has  come.  But  yet  the 
question  remains  whether  it  is  binding  on  Chris- 
tians, even  when  they  do  not  depend  on  it  for  sal- 
vation. 

It  seems  clear  enough,  tliat  its  formal  coercive 
authority  as  a  whole  ended  with  the  close  .of  the 
Jewish  dispensation.  It  is  impossible  to  separate, 
though  we  may  distinguish,  its  various  elements : 
it  must  be  regarded  as  a  whole,  for  he  who  ofiended 
"  in  one  point  against  it  was  guilty  of  all  "  (James 
ii.  10).  Yet  it  referred  throughout  to  the  Jewish 
covenant,  and  in  many  points  to  the  constitution, 
the  customs,  and  even  the  local  circumstances  of 
the  people.  That  covenant  was  preparatory  to  the 
Christian,  in  which  it  is  now  absorbed  ;  those  cus- 
toms and  observances  have  passed  away.  It  follows, 
by  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  that  the  formal  obli- 
gation to  the  Law  must  have  ceased  with  the  basis 
on  which  it  is  grounded.  This  conclusion  is  stamped 
most  unequivocally  with  the  authority  of  St.  Paul 
through  the  whole  argument  of  the  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  to  the  Galatians.  That  we  are  "  not 
under  law  "  (Kom.  vi.  14,  15  ;  Gal.  v.  18) ;  "  that 
we  are  dead  to  law"  (Ilom.  vii.  4-6  ;  Gal.  ii.  19), 
"redeemed  from  under  law  "  (Gal.  iv.  5),  &c.,  &c., 
is  not  only  st<ated  without  any  limitation  or  e.xcep- 
tion,  but  in  many  places  is  made  the  pi'ominent 
feature  of  the  contrast  between  the  earlier  and 
later  covenants.  It  is  impossible,  therefore,  to 
make  distinctions  in  this  respect  between  the  various 
parts  of  the  Law,  or  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that 
the  formal  code,  promulgated  by  Moses,  and  sealed 
with  the  prediction  of  the  blessing  and  the  curse, 
ctinnot,  as  u  law,  be  binding  on  the  Christian. 

But  what  then  becomes  of  the  declaration  of  our 
Lord,  that  He  came  "  not  to  destroy  the  Law,  but 
to  perfect  it,"  and  that  "  ngt  one  jot  or  one  tittle 
of  it  shall  pass  away  ?"  what  of  the  fact,  conse- 
quent upon  it,  that  the  Law  has  been  reverenced  in 
all  Christian  churches,  and  had  an  important  in- 
fluence on  much  Christian  legislation?  The  expla- 
nation of  the  apparent  contradiction  lies  in  the 
ditterence  between  positive  and  moral  obligation. 
The  positive  obligation  of  the  Law,  as  such,  has 
passed  away ;  but  every  revelation  of  God's  Will, 
and  of  the  righteousness  and  love  which  are  its 
elements,  imposes  a  moral  obligation,  by  the  very 
fact  of  its  being  known,  even  on  those  to  whom  it  is 
not  primarily  addressed.  So  far  as  the  Law  of 
Moses  is  such  a  revelation  of  the  will  of  God  to 
mankind  at  large,  occupying  a  certain  place  in  the 
education  of  the  world  ;is  a  whole,  so  flir  its  decla- 
rations i-emain  for  our  guidance,  though  their  coer- 
cion and  their  penalties  may  be  no  longer  needed. 
It  is  in  their  general  principle,  of  course,  that  they 
I'emain,  not  in  their  outward  form  ;  and  our  Lord  has 
taught  us,  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  that  these 
principles  should  be  accepted  by  us  in  a  more  ex- 
tended and  spiritual  development  than  they  could 
receive  in  the  time  of  Moses. 

To  apply  this  principle  practically  there  is  need 
of  much  study  and  discretion,  in  order  to  distin- 
guish what  is  local  and  temporary  from  what  is 
universal,  and.  what  is  mere  external  form  from  what 

"  As  the  "  Laying  on  of  liantls  "  was  considered  in 
the  Ancient  Church  as  tlie  "  Supplement  of  Baptism,"     the  latter  subject,  which  is  reserved  for  the  Appendix. 


is  the  essence  of  an  ordinance.  The  moral  law 
undoubtedly  must  be  most  permanent  in  its  in- 
fluence, because  it  is  based  on  the  nature  of  man 
generally,  although  at  the  same  time  it  is  modified 
by  the  greater  prominence  of  love  in  the  Christian 
system.  Yet  the  political  law,  in  the  main  prin- 
ciples which  it  lays  down  as  to  the  sacreduess  and 
responsibility  of  all  authorities,  and  the  rights 
which  belong  to  each  individual,  and  which  neither 
slavery  nor  even  guilt  can  quite  eradicate,  has  its 
piermanent  value.  Even  the  ceremonial  law,  by  its 
enforcement  of  the  purity  and  perfection  needed  in 
any  service  ofiered,  and  in  its  disregard  of  mere 
costliness  on  such  service,  and  limitation  of  it 
.strictly  to  the  prescribed  will  of  God,  is  still  in 
many  respects  our  best  guide.  In  special  cases 
(as  for  example  that  of  the  sabbatical  law  and  the 
prohibition  of  marriage  within  the  degrees)  the 
question  of  its  authority  must  depend  on  the  further 
inquiry,  whether  the  basis  of  such  laws  is  one 
common  to  all  human  nature,  or  one  pecuhar  to  the 
Jewish  people.  This  inquiry  will  be  difficult, 
especially  in  the  distinction  of  the  essence  from  the 
form  ;  but  by  it  alone  can  the  original  question  be 
thoroughly  and  satisfactorily  answered. 

Eor  the  chief  authorities,  see  Winer,  Bealw. 
"  Gesetz."  Michaelis  (ilfos.  Gerecht)  is  valuable 
for  facts  and  antiquities,  not  much  so  for  theory. 
Ewald,  G csch.  desVolkcs Israel,  vol.  ii.  pp.  124-205, 
is  most  instructive  and  suggestive  as  to  the  main 
ideas  of  the  Law.  But  after  all  the  most  important 
parts  of  the  subject  need  little  else  than  a  careful 
study  of  the  Law  itself,  and  the  relerences  to  it  con- 
tained in  the  N.  T.  [A.  B.] 

LAWYER  {voixlk6s).  The  title  "lawyer" 
IS  generally  supposed  to  be  equivalent  to  the  title 
"  scribe,"  both  on  account  of  its  etymological 
meaning,  and  also  because  the  man,  who  is  called  a 
"lawyer"  in  Matt.  xxii.  35  and  Luke  x.  25,  is 
called  "  one  of  the  scribes  "  in  Mark  xii.  28.  If 
the  common  reading  in  Luke  xi.  44,  45,  46,  be  cor- 
rect, it  will  be  decisive  against  this ;  foi'  there, 
after  our  Lord's  denunciation  of  the  "  scribes  and 
Pharisees,"  we  find  that  a  lawyer  said,  "  Master, 
thus  saying,  thou  reproachest  us  also.  And  Jesus 
said,  Woe  unto  you  also  ye  lawyers."  But  it 
is  likely  that  the  true  reading  refers  the  pas- 
sage to  the  Pharisees  alone.  By  the  use  of  the 
word  vofiiKSs  (in  Tit.  iij.  9)  as  a  simple  adjective, 
it  seems  more  probable  that  the  title  "  scribe"  was 
a  legal  and  official  designation,  but  that  the  name 
vo/jlikSs  was  properly  a  mere  epithet  signifying  one 
"learned  in  the  law"  (somewhat  like  the  ol  e'k 
v6fiov  in  Rom.  iv.  14),  and  only  used  as  a  title  in 
common  parlance  (comp.  the  use  of  it  iii  Tit.  iii. 
13,  "  Zenas  the  lawyer  ").  This  would  account  for 
the  comparative  unf'requency  of  the  word,  and  the 
fact  that  it  is  always  used  in  connexion  with 
"  Pharisees,"  never,  as  the  word  "  scribe"  so  often 
is,  in  connexion  with  "  chief  priests  "  and  "  elders." 
[ScuiBios.]  [A.  B.] 

LAYING  ON  OF  HANDS.  [See  Ap- 
pendix B,"] 

LAZ'ARUS  {AdCa-pos  :  Lazarus).  In  tliia 
name,  which  meets  us  as  belonging  to  two  cha- 
racters in  the  N.  T.,  wo  may  recognize  an  abbre- 
viated  form  of  the  old  Hebrew  Eleazar  (Tertuli. 


it  is  considered  better  to  treat  it  in  coimexion  with 


78  LAZARUS 

De  Idol., (i\-oii\\s  et  al.)  The  coiTespouding  ITV? 
nppears  in  the  Taimud  (Winer,  Eealwh.  s.  v.).  "^'in 
Josephus,  and  in  the  historical  books  of  the  Apo- 
crypha (1  ^lacc.  viii.  17  ;  2  IMacc.  vi.  18),  the  more 
frequent  foim  is  'EAeaCapoj  ;  but  Ad(apos  occurs 
also  {B.  J.  V.  13,  §7). 

1.  Lazarus  of  Bethany,  the  brother  of  Martha 
and  Mary  (John  xi.  1).  'All  that  we  know  of  him 
is  deri\-ed  from  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  and  that 
records  little  more  than  the  facts  of  his  death  and 
resurrection.  We  are  able,  however,  without  doing 
violence  to  the  principles  of  a  true  historical  cri- 
ticism, to  arrive  at  some  conclusions  helping  us, 
with  at  least  some  measure  of  probability,  to  fill  up 
these  scanty  outlines.  In  proportion  as  we  bring 
the  scattered  notices  together,  we  find  them  com- 
bining to  form  a  picture  iar  more  distinct  and 
interesting  than  at  fii-st  seemed  possible ;  and  the 
distinctness  in  this  case,  though  it  is  not  to  be  mis- 
taken for  certainty,  is  yet  less  misleading  than  that 
which,  in  other  cases,  seems  to  arise  from  the  strong 
statements  of  apocryphal  traditions.  (1.)  The  lan- 
guage of  .John,  xi.  I,  implies  that  the  sisters  were 
the  better  known.  Lazarus  is  "  of  lairh)  Bethany, 
of  the  village  (e/c  t^s  KciyUijs)  of  Mary  and  her 
sister  Martha."  No  stress  can  be  laid  on  the 
difference  of  the  prepositions  (Meyer  and  Lampe, 
m  foe.),  but  it  suggests  as  possible  the  inference 
that,  while  Lazarus  was,  at  the  time  of  St.  John's 
narrative,  of  Bethany,  he  was  yet  described  as  from 
the  KcifiT)  T($  of  Luke  x.  38,  already  known  as  the 
dwelling-place  of  the  two  sisters  (Greswell,  On  the 
Village  of  Martha  and  Mnry,  Dissert.  V.  ii.  54.5).» 
From  this,  and  from  the  order  of  the  three  names 
in  John  xi.  5,  we  may  reasonably  infer  that  Lazarus 
was  the  youngest  of  the  family.  The  absence  of 
the  name  from  the  uaiTative  of  Luke  x.  38-42,  and 
his  subordinate  position  (els  rS>v  avaKeifxivwv)  in 
the  feast  of  John  xii.  2  lead  to  the  same  conclusion. 
(2.)  The  house  in  which  the  feast  is  held  appears, 
from  John  xii.  2,  to  be  tliat  of  the  sisters.  Martha 
"sen-es,"  as  in  Luke  x.  38.  Mary  takes  upon  her- 
.self  that  which  was  the  special  duty  of  a  hostess 
towards  an  honoured  gue.^t  (comp.  Luke  vii.  46). 
The  impression  left  on  oin-  minds  by  this  account, 
if  it  stood  alone,  would  be  tliat  they  were  the  givers 
of  the  feast.  In  Matt.  xxvi.  6,  Mark  xiv.  3,  the 
same  fact ''  appears  as  occurring  in  "  the  house  of 
Simon  the  leper :"  but  a  leper,  as  such,  would 
have  been  compelled  to  lead  a  separate  life,  and 
certainly  could  not  have  given  a  feast  and  received 
a  multitude  of  guests.  Among  the  conjectural  ex- 
planations which  have  been  given  of  this  diiterence,"^ 
the  hypothesis  that  this  Simon  was  the  father  of 
the  two  sisters  and  of  Lazarus,  that  he  had  been 
smitten  with  leprosy,  and  that  actual  death,  or  the 
civil  death  that  followed  on  his  disease,  had  left  his 

=  By  most  commentators  (Trencli,  Alford,  Tholuck, 
LUcke)  the  distinction  which  GreswcU  insists  on  is  re- 
jected as  utterly  untenable.  It  may  be  urged,  however, 
(1)  that  it  is  the  distinction  drawn  by  a  scholar  like 
Hermann  ("  Ponitur  autem  airb  nonnisi  de  origine  se- 
ciuida,  cum  in  origine  prima  usurpetur  Ik,"  quoted  by 
Wahl,  Clawis  N.  T.);  (2)  that  though  both  might  come 
to  be  used  apart  with  hardly  any  shade  of  difference,  their 
use  in  close  juxtaposition  might  still  be  antithetic;il,  and 
that  this  was  more  likely  to  be  with  one  who,  though 
writing  in  Greek,  was  not  using  it  as  his  native  tongue  ; 
(3)  that  John  i.  45  is  open  to  the  same  doubt  as  this 
passage  ;  (4)  that  our  Lord  is  always  said  to  be  ciTrb, 
never  «  Nayiper. 

In  connexion  with  this  verse  may  be  noticed  also  the 


LAZARUS 

children  free  to  act  for  themselves,  is  at  least  as 
probable  as  any  other,  and  has  ^ome  support  in 
early  ecclesiastical  traditions  (Niceph.  H.  E.  i.  27  ; 
Theophyl.  in  loc.  ;  comp.  Ewald,  Gcschichte,  v. 
3.57).  Why,  if  this  were  so,  the  house  should  be 
described  by  St.  Matthevi^  and  St.  Mai'k  as  it  is ; 
why  the  name  of  the  sister  of  Lazarus  should  be 
altogether  passed  over,  will  be  questions  that  will 
meet  us  further  on.  (3.)  All  the  circumstances 
of  John  xi.  and  xii., — the  feast  for  so  many  guests, 
the  number  of  friends  who  come  from  Jerusalem 
to  condole  with  the  sisters,  left  with  female  rela- 
tions, but  without  a  brother  or  near  kinsman  (John 
xi.  19),  the  alabaster-box,  the  ointment  of  spike- 
nard very  costly,  the  funeral  vault  of  their  own, — 
]3oint  to  wealth  and  social  position  above  the  average 
(comp.  Trench,  Miracles,  29).  The  peculiar  sense 
which  attaches  to  St.  John's  use  of  ol  'lovSaloi 
(comp.  Meyer  on  John  xi.  19),  as  the  leaders  of  the 
opposition  to  the  teaching  of  Christ,  in  other  words" 
as  equivalent  to  Scribes  and  Elders  and  Pharisees, 
suggests  the  further  inference  that  these  visitors  or 
friends  belonged  to  that  class,  and  that  previous  rela- 
tions must  have  connected  them  with  the  family  of 
Bethany.  (4.)  A  comparison  of  Matt.  xxvi.  6,  Mark 
xiv.  3,  with  Luke  vii.  36,  44,  suggests  another  con- 
jecture that  harmonises  with  and  in  part  explains 
the  foiegoing.  To  assume  the  identity  of  the  anoint- 
ing of  the  latter  narrative  with  that  of  the  former  (so 
Grotius),  of  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner  with  ijarj 
the  sister  of  Lazarus,  and  of  one  or  both  of  these  with 
Mary  Magdalene  (Lightfoot,  Harm.  ^33,  vol.  iii. 
75),  is  indeed  (in  spite  of  the  authorities,  critical 
and  patristic,  which  may  be  arrayed  on  either  side) 
altogether  arbitrary  and  uncritical.  It  would  be 
hardly  less  so  to  infer,  from  tlie  mere  recurrence 
of  so  common  a  name  as  Simon,  the  identity  of  the 
leper  of  the  one  narrative  with  the  Pharisee  of  the 
other ;  nor  would  the  case  be  much  strengthened 
by  an  appeal  to  the  interpreters  who  have  main- 
tained that  opinion  (comp.  Chrysost.  Ifom.  in 
Matt.  Ixxx. ;  Grotius^-  in  Matt.  xxvi.  6  ;  Lightfoot, 
/.  c. ;  Winer,  Realuh.  s.  v.  Simon).  [Comp.  Mary 
Magdalene  and  Simon.]  There  are  however 
some  other  facts  which  fall  in  with  this  hypothesis, 
and  to  that  extent  confiiTn  it.  If  Simon  the  leper 
were  al.so  tlie  Pharisee,  it  would  explain  the  liict 
just  noticed  of  the  friendship  between  the  sisters 
of  Lazarus  and  the  members  of  that  party  in  Jeru- 
salem. It  would  account  also  for  the  i-eady  utter- 
ance by  Martha  of  the  chief  article  of  the  creed  of 
the  Pharisees  (John  xi.  24).  Mary's  lavish  act  of 
love  would  gain  a  fresh  interest  for  us  if  we  thought 
of  it  (as  this  conjecture  would  lead  us  to  think)  as 
growing  out  of  the  recollection  of  that  which  had 
been  offered  by  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner.  The 
disease  which  gave  occasion  to  the  later  name  may 


Vulg.  translation,  "  de  castello  Jlarthae,"  and  the  conse- 
quent traditions  of  a  Castle  of  Lazarus,  pointed  out  to 
mediaeval  pilgrims  among  the  ruins  of  the  village, 
which  had  become  famous  by  a  church  erected  in  his 
honour,  and  had  taken  its  Arab  name  (Lazarieh,  or  El- 
azarieh)  from  him.    [Bethany,  vol.  i.  195  &.] 

'"  The  identity  has  been  questioned  by  some  harmonists ; 
but  it  will  be  discussed  under  Simon. 

<^  Meyer  assumes  (on  Matt.  xxvi.  6)  that  St.  John,  as 
an  eye-witness,  gives  the  true  account,  St.  Matthew  and 
.St.  Mark  an  erroneous  one.  Paulus  and (ireswell  suggest 
that  Simon  was  the  husband,  living  or  deceased,  of 
Martha ;  Grotius  and  Kuinol,  that  he  was  a  kinsman,  or 
a  friend  who  gave  the  foast  for  them. 


LAZABUS 

have  supervened  after  the  incident  which  St.  Luke 
records.  The  difference  between  the  localities  of  the 
two  histories  (that  of  Luke  vii.  being  apparently  in 
Galilee  near  Nairn,  that  of  Matt.  xxvi.  and  Mark 
.\iv.  in  Bethany)  is  not  greater  than  that  which 
meets  us  on  comparing  Luke  x.  38  with  John  xi.  1 
(comp.  Greswell,  Diss.  I.  c).  It  would  follow  on 
this  assumption  that  the  Pharisee,  whom  we  thus 
far  identify  with  the  father  of  Lazarus,  was  pro- 
bably one  of  the  members  of  that  sect,  sent  down 
from  Jerusalem  to  watch  the  new  teacher  (comp. 
Ellicott's  Hulsean  Lectures,  p.  169)  ;  that  he  looked 
on  him  partly  witli  reverence,  partly  with  suspicion  ; 
that  in  his  dwelling  there  was  a  manifestation  of 
tlie  sympathy  and  love  of  Christ,  which  could  not 
but  leave  on  those  who  witnessed  or  heard  of  it, 
and  had  not  hardened  themselves  iu  formalism,  a 
deep  and  permanent  impression.  (5.)  One  other 
conjecture,  bolder  perhaps  than  the  others,  may  yet 
be  hazarded.  Admitting,  as  must  be  admitted,  the 
absence  at  once  of  all  direct  evidence  and  of  tra- 
ditional authority,  there  are  yet  some  coincidences, 
at  least  remarkable  enough  to  deserve  attention, 
and  which  suggest  the  identification  of  Lazarus 
with  the  young  ruler  that  had  great  possessions, 
of  Matt,  xix.,  Mark  x.,  Luke  xviii.<*  The  age 
{viavias.  Matt.  xix.  20,  2'2)  agrees  with  what  has 
(seen  before  infei-red  (see  above,  1),  as  does  the  fact 
of  wealth  above  the  average  with  what  we  know  of 
the  condition  of  the  family  at  Bethany  (see  2). 
If  the  father  were  an  influential  Pharisee,  if  there 
were  ties  of  some  kind  uniting  the  family  with  that 
body,  it  would  be  natural  enough  that  the  son, 
even  in  comparative  youth,  should  occupy  the  po- 
sition of  an  &pxeai'.  The  character  of  the  young 
ruler,  the  reverence  of  his  salutation  {SiSdcTKaAs 
hyade,  Mark  x.  17)  and  of  his  attitude  {youvTrerri- 
ffas,  ibid.)  his  eager  yearning  after  eternal  life,  the 
strict  training  of  his  youth  in  the  commandments 
of  God,  the  blameless  probity  of  his  outward  lilt;, 
ail  these  would  agree  with  what  we  might  expect 
in  the  sou  of  a  Pharisee,  in  the  brother  of  one  who 
had  chosen  "  the  good  part."  It  may  be  noticed 
further,  that  as  his  spiritual  condition  is  essentially 
that  which  we  find  about  the  same  period  in 
Martha,  so  the  answer  returned  to  him,  "  One  thing 
thou  lackest,"  and  that  given  to  her,  "  One  thing 
is  needful,"  are  substantially  identical. «  But  fur- 
ther, it  is  of  this  rich  young  man  that  St.  Mark 
uses  the  emphatic  word  ("  Jesus,  beholding  him, 
luved  him,"  yiyairriffev)  which  is  used  of  no  others 
in  the  Gospel-history,  save  of  the  beloved  apostle 
and  of  Lazarus  and  his  sisters  (John  xi.  5).  We 
can  hardly  dare  to  believe  that  that  love,  with  all 
the  yearning  pity  and  the  fervent  prayer  which  it 
implied,  would  be  altogether  fruitless.  There  might 
be  for  a  time  the  hesitation  of  a  divided  will,  but 
the  half-prophetic  words  "  with  God  all  things  are 
possible,"  "  there  are  last  that  shall  be  first,"  for- 
bid our  hasty  condemnation,  as  they  forbade  that 
of  the  disciples,  and  prepare  us  to  hope  that  some 
discipline  would  yet  be  found  to  overcome  the  evil 
which  was  eating  into  and  would  otherwise  destroy 


LAZARUS 


79 


*  The  arrangement  of  GresweU,  Tischendorf,  and  other 
harmonists,  which  places  the  inquiry  of  the  rich  ruler 
after  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  is  of  course 
destructive  of  tliis  hypothesis.  It  shoulj  be  rememberGd, 
however,  that  Greswell  assigns  the  same  position  to  the 
incident  of  Luke  x.  38-12.  The  order  here  followed  is  that 
given  in  the  present  work  by  Dr.  Thomson  under  Gospels 
and  Jesus  Christ,  by  Lightfoot,  and  by  Alford. 

=  The   resemblance  is  drawn   out  in  a  striking   ami 


so  noble  and  beautiful  a  soul.  However  strongly 
the  absence  of  the  name  of  Lazarus,  or  of  the  lo&dity 
to  which  he  belonged,  may  seem  to  militate  against 
this  liyjwthesis,  it  must  be  remembered  thatthere 
is  just  the  same  singular  and  perplexing  omission 
in  the  narrative  of  the  anointing  in  Matt.  xxvi.  and 
Mark  xiv. 

Combining  these  inferences  then,  we  get,  with 
some  measure  of  likelihood,  an  insight  into  one 
aspect  of  the  life  of  the  Divine  Teacher  and  Friend, 
full  of  the  most  living  interest.  The  village  of 
Bethany  and  its  neighbourhood  were, — probably 
from  the  first,  certainly  at  a  later  period  of  our 
Loid's  ministry,  —a  frequent  retreat  from  the  con- 
troversies and  tumults  of  Jerusalem  (John  xviii.  2  ; 
Luke  .xxi.  37,  xxii.  39).  At  some  time  or  other 
one  household,  wealthy,  honourable,  belonging  to 
the  better  or  Nicodemus  section  of  the  Pharisees  (see 
above,  1,  2,  3)  learns  to  know  and  reverence  him. 
There  may  have  been  within  their  knowledge  or  in 
tlieir  presence,  one  of  the  most  signal  proofs  of  His 
love  and  compassion  for  the  outcast  (sup.  4).  Disease 
or  death  removes  the  father  from  the  scene,  and  the 
two  sisters  are  left  with  their  younger  brother  to  do 
as  they  think  right.  They  appear  at  Bethany,  or 
in  some  other  village,  where  also  they  had  a  home 
(Luke  X.  38,  and  Gieswell,  /.  c),  as  loving  and 
reverential  disciples,  each  according  to  her  character. 
In  them  and  in  the  brother  over  wliom  they  watch. 
He  finds  that  which  is  worthy  of  His  love,  the 
craving  for  truth  and  holiness,  the  hungering  and 
thirsting  after  righteousness  which  shall  assuredly 
be  filled.  But  two  at  least  need  an  education  in 
the  spiritual  life.  Martha  tends  to  rest  in  outward 
activity  and  Pharisaic  dogmatism,  and  does  not 
rise  to  the  thought  of  an  eternal  life  as  actually 
present.  Lazarus  (see  5)  oscillates  between  the 
attractions  of  the  higher  life  and  those  of  the 
wealth  and  honour  which  suiTound  the  pathway  of 
his  life,  and  does  not  see  how  deep  and  wide  were 
the  commandments  which,  as  he  thought,  he  had 
"  kept  from  his  youth  up."  The  searching  words, 
the  loving  look  and  act,f  tail  to  undo  the  evil  which 
has  been  corroding  his  inner  life.  The  discipline 
which  could  provide  a  remedy  for  it  was  among 
the  things  that  were  "impossible  with  men,"  and 
"  possible  with  God  only."  A  few  weeks  pass 
away,  and  then  comes  the  sickness  of  John  xi. 
One  of  the  shai-p  malignant  fevers  of  Palestine  t^ 
cuts  otY  the  life  that  was  so  precious.  The  sisters 
know  how  truly  the  Di\'ine  Kriend  has  loved  him 
on  whom  their  love  and  their  hopes  centered. 
They  send  to  Him  in  the  belief  that  the  tidings  of 
the  sickness  will  at  once  diaw  Him  to  them  (John 
xi.  3).  Slowly,  and  in  words  which  (though  after- 
wards understood  otheiwise)  must  at  the  time  have 
seemed  to  the  disciples  those  of  one  upon  whom  the 
truth  came  not  at  once  but  by  degrees,  he  prepares 
them  for  the  worst.  "  This  sickness  is  not  unto 
death" — "  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth  " — "  Laza- 
rus is  dead."  The  work  which  He  was  doing  as  a 
teacher  or  a  healer  (John  x.  41,  42)  in  Bethabara, 
or  the  other  Bethany  (John  x.  40,  and  i.  28),  was 


beautiful  passage  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Quis  Dives, 
J 10). 

f  By  some  interpreters  the  word  was  taken  as  =  kotk^i- 
Atjctei'.  It  was  the  received  IJabbinic  custom  for  the  tcaclier 
to  kiss  the  brow  of  the  scholar  whose  answ(  rs  gave  special 
promise  of  wisdont  and  holiness.    Comp.  Grolius,  ad  loc. 

S  The  character  of  the  disease  is  inferred  from  its  rapid 
progress,  and  from  the  fiar  expressed  by  Martha  (John 
xi.  39).    Comp.  Lampe,  wl  loc. 


80 


LAZARUS 


not  inteiTupted,  and  continues  for  two  days  after 
the  message  reaches  him.  Then  comes  the  journey, 
occupying  two  days  more.  When  He  and  His  dis- 
ciples come,  three  days  have  passed  since  the  burial. 
The  liiends  from  Jerusalem,  chiefly  of  the  Pharisee 
and  ruler  class,  are  there  with  their  consolations. 
'J'he  sisters  leceive  the  Prophet,  each  according  to 
her  character,  JIartha  hastening  on  to  meet  Him, 
Mary  sitting  still  in  the  house,  both  giving  utter- 
ance to  the  sorrowful,  half-reproachful  thought, 
"  Lord,  if  thou  hadst  beeu  here  my  brother  had 
not  died"  (John  xi.  21-32 j.  His  sympathy  with 
their  sorrow  leads  Him  also  to  weep  as  if  he  felt  it 
in  all  the  power  of  its  hopelessness,  though  He 
came  with  the  pui-pose  and  the  power  to  remove  it. 
Men  wonder  at  what  they  look  on  as  a  sign  of  the 
intensity  of  His  affection  for  him  who  had  been  cut 
off  (John  xi.  35,  36).  They  do  not  perhaps  see 
that  with  this  emotion  there  mingles  indignation 
{iuePpifi'r^aaTO,  John  .xi.  33,  38)  at  their  want  of 
faith.  Then  comes  the  work  of  might  as  the 
answer  of  the  prayer  which  the  Son  otiers  to  the 
Father  (John  xi.  41 ,42).  The  stone  is  rolled  away 
from  the  mouth  of  the  rock-chamber  in  which  the 
body  had  been  placed.  The  Evangelist  writes  as  if 
he  were  once  again  living  through  every  sight  and 
sound  of  that  hour.  _  He  records  what  could  never 
lade  from  his  memory  any  more  than  could  the 
recollection  of  his  glance  into  that  other  sepulchre 
(comp.  John  xi.  44,  with  xx.  7).  "He  that  was 
dead  came  forth,  bound  hand  and  foot  with  grave- 
clothes  ;  and  his  face  was  bound  about  with  a 
napkin." 

It  is  well  not  to  break  in  upon  the  silence  which 
hangs  over  the  interval  of  that  "  four  days'  sleep" 
(comp.  Trench,  Miracles,  I.  c).  In  nothing  does 
the  Gospel  naiTative  contrast  more  strongly  with 
the  mythical  histories  which  men  have  imagined 
of  those  who  have  leturned  from  the  unseen  world,'' 
and  with  the  legends  which  in  a  later  age  have 
gathered  round  the  name  of  Lazarus  (Wright's 
St.  Patrick's  Purgatory,  p.  167),  than  in  this 
absence  oi  all  attempt  to  describe  the  experiences  of 
the  human  soul  that  had  passed  from  the  life  of 
sense  to  the  land  of  the  shadow  of  death.  But 
thus  much  at  least  must  be  borne  in  mind  in  order 
that  we  may  imderstand  what  has  yet  to  come, 
that  the  man  who  was  thus  recalled  as  on  eagle's 
wings  from  the  kingdom  of  the  grave  (comp.  the 
language  of  the  complaint  of  Hades  in  the  Apocry- 
phal Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  Tischendorf,  Evang. 
Apoc.  p.  305)  must  have  learut  "  what  it  is  to 
die  "  (comp.  a  passage  of  great  beauty  in  Tennyson's 
In  McinoriaM,  .xxxi.  xx.xii.).  The  soul  that  had 
looked  with  open  gaze  upon  the  things  behind  the 
vail  had  passed  through  a  discipline  sufficient  to 
burn  out  all  selfish  love  of  the  accidents  of  his 
outward  life.^  There  may  have  been  an  inward 
resuirectiou  parallel  with  the  outward  (comp.  01s- 
hausen,  ad  toe).  What  men  had  given  over  as 
impossible  had  been  shown  in  a  twofold  sense  to  be 
possible  with  God. 


h  The  return  of  Eros  the  Amienian  (Plato,  Bep.  x.) 
and  Cunnhigham  of  Melrose  (Bede,  £cd.  Hist.  v.  12) 
may  be  taken  as  two  typical  instances,  appearing  uiid^-r 
circumstances  the  most  contrasted  possible,  yet  having 
not  a  few  features  in  common. 

'  A  tradition  of  more  than  average  interest,  bearing  on 
this  point,  is  mentioned  (though  without  an  authority) 
by  Trench  (MircKles,  I.  f.).  The  first  question  aslced  by 
Lazarus,  on  his  retuni  to  life,  was  whether  he  should  die 
again.    He  heard  that  he  was  still  subject  to  the  common 


LAZARUS 

One  scene  more  meets  us,  and  then  the  life  of  tha 
family  which  has  come  before  us  with  such  day- 
light clearness  lapses  again  into  obscurity.  The 
fame  of  the  wonder  spreads  rapidly,  as  it  was  likely 
to  do,  among  the  ruling  class,  some  of  whom  had 
witnessed  it.  It  becoines  one  of  the  proximate 
occasions  of  the  plots  of  the  Sanhediim  agmnst  our 
Lord's  life  (John  xi.  47-53).  It  brings  Lazarus  no 
less  than  Jesus  within  the  range  of  their  enmity 
(John  xii.  lu),and  leads  perhaps  to  his  withdrawing 
for  a  time  fiom  Bethany  (Greswell).  They  per- 
suade themselves  apparently  that  they  see  in  him 
one  who  has  been  a  sharer  in  a  great  imposture,  or 
who  has  been  restored  to  life  through  some  demoniac 
agency.''  But  others  gather  round  to  wonder  and 
congratulate.  In  the  house  which,  though  it  still 
bore  the  father's  name  {sup.  1),  was  the  dwelling  of 
the  sisters  and  the  brother,  there  is  a  sapper, 
and  Lazarus  is  theie,  and  Martha  serves,  no  longer 
jealously,  and  Mary  pours  out  her  love  in  the 
costly  oti'eriug  of  the  spikenard  ointment,  and  finds 
herself  once  again  misjudged  and  hastily  condemned. 
The  conjecture  which  has  been  ventuied  on  above 
connects  itself  with  this  fact  also.  The  indignant 
question  of  Judas  and  the  other  disciples  implies 
the  expectation  of  a  lavish  distribution  among  the 
poor.  They  look  on  the  feast  as  like  tliat  which 
they  had  seen  in  the  house  of  Slatthew  the  ]jub- 
lican,  the  farewell  banquet  given  to  large  numbers 
(comp.  John  xii.  9,  12)  by  cue  who  was  renouncing 
the  habits  of  his  former  life.  If  they  had  in  their 
minds  the  recollection  of  the  words,  "  Sell  that  thou 
hast,  and  give  to  the  poor,"  we  can  understand  with 
what  a  sharpened  edge  their  reproach  would  come 
as  they  contrasted  the  command  which  their  Lord 
had  given  with  the  "waste"  which  He  thus 
approved.  After  this  all  direct  knowledge  of 
Lazarus  ceases.  We  may  think  of  him,  however, 
as  sharing  in  or  witnessing  the  kingly  march 
from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem  (Mark  xi.  1),  "en- 
during life  again  that  Passover  to  keep"  (Keble, 
Christian  Year,  Advent  Sunday).  The  sisters  and 
the-  brother  must  have  watched  eagerly,  during 
those  days  of  rapid  change  and  wonderful  expecta- 
tion, for  the  evening's  return  to  Bethany  and  the 
hours  during  which  "He  lodged  there"  (Matt. 
xxi.  17).  It  would  be  as  plausible  an  expkuiation 
of  the  strange  fact  recorded  by  St.  Mark  alone 
(xiv.  51)  as  any  other,  if  we  were  to  suppose  that 
Lazarus,  whose  home  was  near,  who  must  have 
known  the  place  to  which  the  Lord  "  oftentimes 
resorted,"  was  drawn  to  the  garden  of  GethsemaJie 
by  the  approach  of  the  officers  "  with  their  torches 
and  lauteins  and  weapons  "  (John  xviii.  3),  and  in 
the  haste  of  the  night-alarm,  rushed  eagerly  "  with 
the  linen  cloth  cast  about  his  naked  body,"  to  see 
whether  he  was  in  time  to  render  any  help.  Who- 
ever it  may  have  been,  it  was  not  one  of  the  com- 
pany of  professed  disciples.  It  was  one  who  was 
drawn  by  some  strong  impulse  to  follow  Jesus 
when  they,  all  of  them,  "  forsook  him  and  fled." 
It  was  one  whom  the  high-priest's  servants  wore 


doom  of  all  men,  and  was  never  afterwards  seen  to  smile, 
k  The  explanation,  "  lie  casteth  out  devils  by  Beel- 
zebub" (Matt.  ix.  34,  X.  25;  Mark  iii.  22,  &c.),  which 
originated  with  the  scribes  of  Jerusalem,  would  naturally 
be  applied  to  such  a  case  as  this.  That  it  was  so  ajuilied 
we  may  infer  from  the  statement  in  the  Sephtr  Toldoth 
.hshu  (the  Rabbinic  anticipation  of  another  J.eben  Jtsu), 
that  this  and  other  lilie  miracles  were  wrought  by  the 
mystic  power  of  the  cabbalistic  Slietuhamphorash,  or 
other  magical  formula  (Lampe,  Coimn.  in  J<jan.  xi.  44). 


LAZAEUS 

easier  to  seize,  as  if  destined  for  a  second  victim 
(comp.  John  xii.  10),  wlien  they  made  no  ellurt 
to  detain  any  other.      The  linen-cloth   (^(nvSwv). 
fomiing,  as  it  did,  one  of  the  "  soft  raiment  "   of 
Matt.  xi.  8,  used  in  the  dress  and  in  the  funerals  of 
the  rich  (Mark  xv.  46  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  59),  points  to 
a  form  of  life  like  that  which  we  have  seen  reason 
to  assign  to  Lazarus  (conip.  also  the  use  of  the  word 
in  the  LXX.  of  Judg.  xiv.  12,  .and  Prov.  xxxi.  24). 
Uncertain  as  all  inferences  of  this  kind  must  be, 
this  is  perhaps  at  least  as  plausible  as  those  which 
identify    the   form    that    appeared    so    startlingly 
with  St.  John  (Ambrose,  Chrysost.,  Greg.  Mag.)  ; 
or  St.  Mark    (Olshausen,    Lange,   Isaac  Williams 
{On  the  Passion,  p.  30);    or  James  the  brother 
of  the  Lord  (Epiphan.  Haer.  p.  87,  13;    conip. 
Meyer,  ad  he.)  ;   and,  on  this  hypothesis,  the  omis- 
sion of  the  name  is  in  harmony  with  the  notice- 
able reticence  of  the  first  three  Gospels  through- 
out as  to  the  members  of  the  family  at  Bethany. 
We  can  hardly  help  believing  that  to  them,  as  to 
others  ("the  fivehimdred  brethren  at  once,"  1  Cor. 
XV.  6),  was  manifested  the  presence  of  their  risen 
Lord  ;   that  they  musl  have  been   sharers  in  the 
Pentecostal  gifts,  and  have  taken  their  place  among 
the  members  of  the  infmit  Church  at  Jerusalem  in 
the  first  days  of  its  overflowing  love ;  that  then, 
if  not  before,  the  command,  "  Sell  that  thou  hast 
and  give  to  the  poor,"  was  obeyed  by  the  heir  of 
Bethany,  as  it  was  by  other  possessors  of  lands  or 
houses  (Acts  ii.  44,  45).     But  they  had   chosen 
now,  it  would  seem,  the  better  part  of  a  humble 
and  a  holy  life,  and  their  names  appear  no  more  in 
tiie  history  of  the  N.  T.     Apocryphal  traditions 
even  are  singularly  scanty  and  jejune,  as  if  the  silence 
which  "sealed  the  Hps  of  the   Evangelists"  had 
restrained  others  also.     We  almost  wonder,  looking 
at  the  wild  luxuriance  with    which    they  gather 
round  other  names,  that  they  have  nothing  more  to 
tell  of  Lazarus  than  the  meagre  tale  that  follows : 
— He  lived  for  thirty  years  after  his  resurrection, 
and  died  at  the  age  of  sixty  (Epiphan.  Haer.  i. 
652).     When  he  came  forth  from  the  tomb,  it  was 
with  the  bloom  and  fragrance  as  of  a  bridegroom 
{'Ava<l)opa.  UiXaTov,  Thilo,   Cod.  Apoc.  N.  T.  p. 
805).     He  and  his  sisters,  with  Mary  the  wife  of 
Cleophas,  and  other  disciples,  were  sent  out  to  sea 
by  the  Jews  in  a  leaky  boat,   but   miraculously 
escaped  destruction,   and  were  brought   safely   to 
Marseilles.     There   he   preached   the    Gospel,    and 
founded  a  church,  and  became  its  bishop.     After 
many  years,  he  suflered  martyrdom,  and  was  buried, 
some  said,  there;    others,  at  Citium    in  Cyprus. 
Finally  his  bones  and  those   of  Mary  Magdalene 
were  brought  from   Cyprus   to  Constantinople  by 
the  Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher,   and  a  church 
erected    to   his   honour.     Some  apocryphal   books 
were  extant  bearing  his  name  (comp.  Thilo,  Codex 
Apoc.  N.T.  p.  711  ;  Baronius,  ad  Martyrol.  Rom. 
Dec.  xvii. ;  and  for  some  wild  Proven9al  legends  as 
to  the  later  adventures  of  Martha,  Migne,  Diet,  de 
la  Bible,  s.  v.  "  Marthe  ").  These  traditions  have  no 
personal  or  historical  interest  for  us.     In  one  instance 
only  do  they  connect  themselves  with  any  fact  of 
importance  in  the  later  history  of  Christendom. 
The  Canons  of  St.Victor  at  Paris  occupied  a  Priory 
dedicated  (as  one  of  the  chief  churches  at  Marseilles 
had  been)  to  St.  Lazarus.     This  was  assigned,  in 
1633,  to  the  fraternity  of  the  Congregation  founded 
by  St.  Vincent  de  Paul,  and  the  mission-priests  sent 
forth  by  it  consequently  became  conspicuous  as  the 
Lazarists  (Bulle.-'s  Licis  of  the  t'^aiids,  July  xix.\ 

VOL.  II. 


LAZAKUS 


81 


The  question  why  the  first  three  Gospels  omit 
all  mention  of  so  wonderful  a  fact  as  the  resurrection 
of  Lazarus,  has  from  a  comparatively  early  peiiod 
forced  itself  upon  interpreters  and  apologists.     Ua- 
tionalist  critics  have  made  it  one  of  their  chief  points 
of  attack,  directly  on  the  trustworthiness  of  St.  John, 
indirectly  on  the  ciedibility  of  the  Gospel  history  as 
a  whole.    Spinoza  professed  to  make  this  the  ciucial 
instance  by  which,  if  he  had  hut  proof  of  it,  he 
would  be  determined  to  embrace  the  common  faith  of 
Christians  {'Bn.yle.Biot.  s.  v.  "  Spinoza").  Woolston, 
the  maledicentissinms  of  English  Deists,  asserts  that 
the  story  is  "  brimful!  of  absurdities,"  "  a  contexture 
of  folly  and  fraud"  {Dis.  on  Miracles,  v.  ;  comp. 
N.  Lardner's  Vindications,  Works,  ii.  1-54).  Strauss 
{Lehen  Jesu,  pt.  ii.  ch.  ix.    §100)  scatters  with 
triumphant  scorn  the  subterfuges  of  Paulus  and  the 
naturalisfc-inteipreters  (such,  for   example,  as  the 
hypothesis  of  suspended  animation),  and  pronounces 
the  nanative  to  have  all   the  characto'istics  of  a 
mythus.    Ewald  (Gesch.  v.  359)  speaks  (as  thiough- 
out  that  part  of  his  history)  with  a  faltering  tongue, 
touched  by  the  tenderness  and  beauty  of  St.  John's 
account,  yet  unable  to  recognise  in  it  more  than  a 
representation  of  the  idea  of  the  quickening  power  of 
Christ.     The  explanations  given  of  the  perplexing 
phenomenon  are   briefly  these:    (1)   That  tear  of 
drawing  down  persecution  on  one  already  singled  out 
for  it,  kept  the  three  Evangelists,  wiiting  during  the 
lifetime  of  Lazarus,  from  all  mention  of  him  ;   and 
that,  this  reason  for  silence  being  lemoved  by  his 
death,  St.  John  could  write  freely.    By  some  (Gro- 
tius,  ad  loc.)  this  has  perhaps  been  urged  too  ex- 
clusively.    By  others  (Alford,  ad  loc.  ;  Trench,  On 
Miracles,  1.  c.)  it  has  perhaps  been  too  hastily  re- 
jected as  extravagant.     (2)  That  the  writers  of  the 
first  three  Gospels  confine  themselves,  as  by  a  deli- 
berate plan,  to  the  miracles  wrought  in  Galilee  (that 
of  the  blind  man  at  Jericho  being  the  only  exception), 
and  that  they  therefore  abstained  from  all  mention 
of  any  fact,  however  interesting,  that  lay  outside  that 
limit  (Meyer,  ad  loc).    This  too  has  its  weight,  as 
showing  that,  in  this  omission,  the  three  Evangelists 
are  at  least  consistent  with  themselves,  but  it  leaves 
the  question,  "  what  led  to  that  consistency  ?"  un- 
answered.   (3)  That  the  narrative,  in  its  beauty  and 
simplicity,  its  human  sympathies  and  marvellous 
transparency,  carries  with  it  the  evidence  of  its  own 
truthfulness,  and  is  as  far  removed  as  possible  from 
the    embellishments   and   rhetoric   of  a  writer  of 
myths,  bent  upon  the  invention  of  a  miracle  which 
should  outdo  all  others  (Meyer,  I.  c).    In  this  there 
is  no  doubt  great  truth.     To  invent  and  tell  any 
story  as  this  is  told  would  require  a  power  equal  to 
that  of  the  highest  artistic  skill  of  our  later  age,  and 
that  skill  we  should  hardly  expect  to  find  combined 
at  once  with  the  deepest  yeainings  after  truth  and 
a  deliberate  ])erversion  of  it.    There  would  seem,  to 
any  but  a  rationalist  critic,  an  improbability  quite 
infinite,  in  the  union,  in  any  single  writer,  of  the 
characteristics  of  a    Goethe,  an    Ireland,    and    an 
a  Kempis.  (4)  Another  explanation,  suggested  by  the 
attempt  to  represent  to  one's-self  what  must  have 
been  the  sequel  of  such  a  fact  as  that  now  in  ques- 
tion upon  the  life  of  him  who  had  been  ati'ected  by 
it,  may  perhaps  be  added.    The  history  of  monastic 
orders,  of  sudden  conversions  alter  great  critical  de- 
liverances from  disease  or  danger,  oilers  an  analogy 
which  may  help  to  guide  us.     In  such  cases  it  has 
happened,  in  a  thousimd  instances,  that  the  man 
has  felt  as  if  the  thread  of  his  life  was  broken,  the 
past  buried  for  over    old   thi)igs   vanishcil  away. 

G 


82 


LAZARUS 


He  letiies  from  the  world,  changes  his  name,  speaks 
to  no  one,  or  speaks  only  in  hints,  of  all  that  belongs 
to  his  fornier  life,  shrinks  above  all  from  making  his 
conversion,  his  resnriection  from  the  death  of  sin,  the 
subject  of  common  talk.  The  instance  already  re- 
ferred to  in  Bede  offers  a  very  striking  illustration 
of  this.  Cunningham,  in  that  history,  gives  up  all 
to  his  wife,  his  children,  and  the  poor,  retires  to  the 
monastery  of  iMelrose,  takes  the  new  name  of  Drith- 
elm,  and  "  would  not  relate  these  and  other  things 
which  he  had  seen  to  slothful  persons  and  such  as 
lived  negligently."  Assume  only  that  the  laws  of 
the  spiritual  life  worked  in  some  such  way  on 
Lazarus ;  that  the  feeling  wou]^  be  strong  in  pro- 
portion to  the  greatness  of  the  wonder  to  which  it 
owed  its  birth;  that  there  was  the  recollection, 
in  him  and  in  others,  that,  in  the  nearest  parallel 
instance,  silence  and  secrecy  had  been  solemnly  en- 
joined (Mark  v.  43),  and  it  will  seem  hardly  won- 
derful that  such  a  man  should  shrink  from  publicity, 
and  should  wish  to  take  his  place  as  the  last  and  lowest 
in  the  company  of  believers.  Is  it  strange  that  it 
should  come  to  be  tacitly  recognised  among  the 
members  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  that,  so  long 
as  he  and  those  dear  to  him  sun-ived,  the  great 
wonder  of  their  lives  was  a  thing  to  be  remem- 
bered with  awe  by  those  wlio  knew  it,  not  to  be 
talked  or  wiitteii  about  to  those  who  knew  it  not? 

The  flicts  of  the  case  are,  at  any  rate,  singularly 
in  harmony  with  this  last  e.xplanation.  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Mark,  who  (the  one  writing  for  the  He- 
brews, the  other  under  the  guidance  of  St.  Peter) 
represent  what  may  be  described  as  the  feeling  of 
the  Jerusalem  Church,  omit  equally  all  mention 
of  the  three  names.  They  use  words  which  may 
indeed  have  been  <pa>va.vTa  ffweroiaiv,  but  they 
avoid  the  names.  Mary's  costly  offering  is  that  of 
"  a  woman  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  7  ;  Mark  xiv.  3).  The 
house  in  which  the  feast  was  made  is  described  so 
as  to  indicate  it  sufficiently  to  those  who  knew  the 
place,  and  yet  to  keep  the  name  of  Lazarus  out  of 
sight.  The  hypotheses  stated  above  would  add  two 
more  instances  of  the  same  reticence.  St.  Luke, 
coming  later  (probably  after  St.  BLatthew  and  St. 
Mark  had  left  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  with  the 
materials  afterwards  shaped  into  their  Gospels), 
collecting  from  all  informants  all  the  facts  they 
will  communicate,  comes  across  one  iu  which  the 
two  sisters  are  mentioned  by  name,  and  records 
it,  suppressing,  or  not  having  learnt,  that  of  the 
locality.  St.  John,  writing  long  afterwards,  when 
all  three  had  "  fallen  asleep,"  reels  that  the  restraint 
is  no  longer  necessary,  and  puts  on  record,  as  the 
Spirit  brings  all  things  to  his  remembrance,  the 
whole  of  the  wonderful  history.  The  circum- 
stances of  his  life,  too,  his  residence  in  or  near  Jeru- 
salem as  the  protector  of  the  bereaved  mother  of  his 
Lord  (John  xix.  27),  his  retirement  from  prominent 
activity  for  so  long  a  period  [John  the  Apostle], 
the  insight  we  find  he  had  into  the  thoughts  and 
feelings  of  those  who  would  be  the  natural  com- 
panions and  friends  of  the  sisters  of  Lazarus  (John 
XX.  1,  11-18) ;  all  these  indicate  that  he  more  than 
any  other  Evangelist  was  likely  to  have  lived  in  that 
inmost  circle  of  disciples,  where  these  things  would 
be  most  lovingly  and  reverently  remembered.  Thus 
much  of  truth  there  is,  as  usual,  in  the  idealism  of 
some  intei-preters,  that  what  to  most  other  disciples 
would  seem  simply  a  mirnde  (ripas^.,  a  work  of 
power  (Swafiis),  like  other  works,  and  therefore 
one  which  they  could  without  much  reluctance 
omit,  would  be  to  him  a  sign  ifftjfieTov"),   manifest - 


LAZARUS 

ing  the  glory  of  God,  witnessing  that  Jesus  was 
"  the  resurrection  and  the  life,"  which  he  could  in 
no  wise  pass  over,  but  must  when  the  right  time 
came  record  in  its  fulness.  (Comp.  tor  this  signiii- 
cance  of  the  miracle,  and  for  its  probable  use  in  the 
spiritual  education  of  Lazarus,  Olshausen,  ad  loc.) 
It  is  of  course  obvious,  that  if  this  supposition  ac- 
counts for  the  omission  in  the  three  Gospels  of  the 
name  and  history  of  Lazarus,  it  accounts  also  for  the 
chronological  dislocation  and  harmonistic  difficulties 
which  were  its  inevitable  consequences. 

2.  The  name  Lazarus  occurs  also  in  the  well- 
known  parable  of  Luke  xvi.  19-31.  What  is  there 
chiefly  remarkable  is,  that  while  in  all  other  cases 
persons  are  introduced  as  iu  certain  stations,  be- 
longing to  certain  classes,  here,  and  here  only,  we 
meet  with  a  proper  name.  Is  this  exceptional  fact 
to  be  looked  on  as  simply  one  of  the  accessories  of 
the  parable,  giving  as  it  were  a  dramatic  sem- 
blance of  reality  to  what  was,  like  other  parables, 
only  an  illustration  ?  Were  the  thoughts  of  men 
called  to  the  etymology  of  the  name,  as  signifying 
that  he  who  bore  it  had  in  his  poverty  no  help  but 
God  (comp.  Germ.  "Gotthilf"),  ov  as  meaning,  in 
the  shortened  form,  one  who  had  become  altogether 
"  helpless"  ?  (So  Theophyl.  ad  loc,  who  explains  it 
s.ii  =  d^o-fi6r)Tos,  recognising  possibly  the  derivation 
which    has   been   suggested  by  later  critics  from 

Ity  N7,  "  there  is  no  help."    Comp.  Suicer,  s.  v. ; 

Lampe,  ad  loc.)  Or  was  it  again  not  a  parable 
but,  iu  its  stai'ting-point  at  least,  a  history,  so  that 
Lazaras  was  some  actual  beggar,  like  him  who  lay 
at  the  beautiful  gate  of  the  Temple,  fltmiliar  there- 
foi'e  both  to  the  disciples  and  the  Pharisees  ?  (So 
Theophyl.  ad  loc.  :  Chrysost.,  Maldon. ;  Suicer, 
s.  V.  AdCapos.)  Whatever  the  merit  of  either  of 
these  suggestions,  no  one  of  them  can  be  accepted 
as  quite  satisfactory,  and  it  adds  something  to  the 
force  of  the '  hypothesis  ventnred  on  above,  to  find 
that  it  connects  itself  with  this  question  also. 
The  key  which  has  served  to  open  other  doors  fits 
into  the  wards  here.  If  we  assume  the  identity 
suggested  in  (5),  or  if,  leaving  that  as  unproved, 
we  remember  only  that  the  historic  Lazarus  be- 
longed by  bu-th  to  the  class  of  the  wealthy  and 
influential  Phaiisees,  as  in  (3),  then,  though  we 
may  not  think  of  him  as  among  those  who  were 
"  covetous,"  and  who  therefore  derided  by  scornful 
look  and  gesture  {e^efivKr-fipt^ov,  Luke  xvi*.  14) 
Him  who  taught  that  they  could  not  serve  God 
and  Mammon,  we  may  yet  look  on  him  as  one  of 
the  same  class,  known  to  them,  associating  with 
them,  only  too  liable,  in  spite  of  all  the  promise  of 
his  youth,  to  be  drawn  away  by  that  which  had 
cornipted  them.  Could  anything  be  more  signi- 
ficant, if  this  were  so,  than  the  introduction  of  this 
name  into  such  a  parable  ?  Not  Eleazar  the  Pha- 
risee, rich,  honoured,  blameless  among  men,  but 
Eleazar  the  beggar,  full  of  leprous  sores,  lying  at 
the  rich  man's  gate,  was  the  true  heir  of  blessedness, 
for  whom  was  reserved  the  glory  of  being  in  Abra- 
ham's bosom.  Very  striking  too,  it  must  be  added, 
is  the  coincidence  between  the  teaching  of  the  pa- 
rable and  of  the  history  iu  another  point.  The  La- 
zarus of  the  one  remains  in  Abraham's  bosom 
because  "  if  men  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
neither  will  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from 
the  dead."  The  Lazarus  of  the  other  returned  from 
it,  and  yet  bears  no  witness  to  the  unbelieving  Jews 
of  the  wonders  or  the  terrors  of  Hades. 

In  this  instance  also  the  name  of  Lazarus  ha.s 


LEAD 

been  perpetuated  in  an  institution  of  the  Christian 
Church.  The  parable  did  its  work,  even  in  the 
dark  days  of  her  life,  in  leading  men  to  dread  simply 
selfish  luxury,  and  to  help  even  the  most  loath- 
some forms  of  suttering.  The  leper  of  the  Middle 
Ages  appears  as  a  Lazzaro.''  Among  the  orders,  half- 
military  and  half-monastic,  of  the  12th  century, 
was  one  which  bore  the  title  of  the  Knights  of  St. 
Lazarus  (a.d.  11 19),  whose  special  work  it  was  to 
minister  to  the  lepers,  first  of  Syria,  and  afterwards  of 
Kurope.  The  use  of  lazaretto  and  lazar-house  for  the 
leper-hospitals  then  founded  in  all  parts  of  Western 
Christendom,  no  less  than  that  of  lazzarone  for  the 
mendicants  of  Italian  towns,  are  indications  of  the 
etlect  of  the  parable  upon  the  mind  of  Europe  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  thence  upon  its  later  speech. 
In  some  cases  there  seems  to  have  been  a  singular 
transfer  of  the  attributes  of  the  one  Lazarus  to  the 
other.  Thus  in  Paris  the  prison  of  St.  Lazare  (the 
Clos  S.  Lazare,  so  famous  in  1848)  had  been  ori- 
ginally an  hospital  for  lepers.  In  the  17th  century 
it  was  assigned  to  the  Society  of  Lazarists,  who 
took  their  name,  as  has  been  said,  from  Lazarus  of 
Bethany,  and  St.  Vincent  de  Paul  died  there  in 
1G60.  In  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  pri- 
son, however,  ai'o  two  streets,  the  Kue  d'Enfjr  and 
Rue  de  Paradis,  the  names  of  which  indicate  the 
earlier  associations  with  the  Lazarus  of  the  ]}arable. 

It  may  be  m.entioned  incidentally,  as  there  has 
been  no  article  under  the  head  of  Dives,  that  the 
occurrence  of  this  word,  used  as  a  quasi-proper 
name,  in  our  early  linglish  literatuie,  is  another 
proof  of  the  impression  which  was  made  on  the 
minds  of  men,  either  by  the  parable  itself,  or  by 
dramatic  representations  of  it  in  tlia  mediaeval 
mysteries.  The  writer  does  not  know  where  it  is 
found  for  the  first  time  in  this  sense,  but  it  appears 
as  early  as  Chaucer  ("  Lazar  and  Dives,"  Somp- 
noure's  Tale)  and  Piers  Ploughman  ("  Dives  in  the 
deyntees  lyvede,"  1.  9158),  and  in  later  theological 
literature  its  use  has  been  all  but  universal.  In  no 
other  instance  has  a  descriptive  adjective  passed  in 
this  way  into  the  received  name  of  an  individual. 
The  name'  Nimeusis,  which  Euthymius  gives  as  that 
of  the  rich  man  (Trench,  Parables,  I.  c),  seems 
never  to  have  come  into  any  general  use. 

[E.  H.  P.] 

LEAD  (n^aiy:  M<5A.t;8os, /i({Ai/85os),oneofthe 
most  common  of  metals,  found  generally  in  veins 
oi'  rocks,  though  seldom  in  a  metallic  "state,  and 
most  commonly  in  combination  with  sulphur.  It 
was  early  known  to  the  ancients,  and  the  allusions 
to  it  in  Scripture  indicate  that  the  Hebrews  were 
well  acquainted  with  its  uses.  The  rooks  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Sinai  yielded  it  in  large  quan^ties, 
and  it  was  found  in  Egypt.  That  it  was  common 
in  Palestine  is  shown  by  the  expression  in  Ecclus. 
.\lvii.  18,  where  it  is  said,  in  apostrophising  Solo- 
mon, "  Thou  didst  multiply  silver  as  lead ; "  the 
writer  having  in  view  the  hyperbolical  description 
of  Solomon's  wealth  in  1  K.  x.  27:  "the  kino- 
made  the  silver  to  be  in  Jerusalem  as  stones."  It 
was  among  the  spoils  of  the  Widianites  which  the 
children  ot  Israel  biought  with  them  to  the  i)lains 
of  Moab,  after  their  return  fiom  the  slaughter  of 
the  tribe  (Num.  xxxi.  22).  The  ships  of  Tarsliish 
supplied  the  market  of  Tyre  with  lead,  as  with 

^  it  is  interesting,  as  connected  with  the  traditions 
Riven  above  uiidor  (1),  to  find  that  tlie  first  occurrence  of 
the  name  with  tbis  generic  meaning  is  in  tljc  old  f'ro- 


LEAD 


83 


other  metals  (Ez.  xxvii.  12).  Its  heaviness,  to 
which  allusion  is  made  in  E.^.  xv.  10,  and  Ecclus. 
xxii.  14,  caused  it  to  be  used  for  weights,  which 
were  either  in  the  form  of  a  round  flat  cake  (Zech. 
V.  7),  or  a  rough  unfashioned  lump  or  "  stone  " 
(ver.  8)  ;  stones  having  in  ancient  times  ser\ed  the 
purpose  of  weights  (comp.  Prov.  xvi.  11).  This 
tact  may  perhaps  explain  the  substitution  of  "  lead  " 
for  "  stones  "  in  the  passage  of  Eeclesiasticus  above 
quoted  ;  the  commonest  use  of  the  commonest  metal 
being  present  to  the  mind  of  the  writer.  If  Gese- 
nius  is  correct  in  rendering  IjJX,  andc,  by  "  lead," 
in  Am.  vii.  7,  8,  we  have  another  instance  of  the 
purposes  to  which  this  metal  was  applied  in  form- 
ing the  ball  or  bob  of  the  plumb-line.  [Plumb- 
line.]  Its  use  for  weighting  fishing-lines  was 
known  in  the  time  of  Homer  {Fl.  xxiv.  80).  But 
Bochart  and  others  identify  andc  with  tin,  and  derive 
from  it  the  etymologv  of  "  Britain." 

In  modern  metallurgy  lead  is  used  with  tin  in 
the  composition  of  solder  for  fastening  metals  to- 
gether. That  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted 
with  the  use  of  solder  is  evident  fiom  the  descrip- 
tion given  by  the  prophet  Isaiah  of  the  processes 
which  accompanied  the  formation  of  an  image  for 
idolatrous  worship.  The  method  by  which  two 
jiieces  of  metal  were  joined  together  w;is  identical 
with  that  employed  in  modern  times ;  the  sub- 
stances to  be  united  being  first  clamped  before 
being  soldered.  No  hint  is  given  as  to  the  com- 
position of  the  solder,  but  in  all  probability  lead 
was  one  of  the  materials  employed,  its  usage  for 
such  a  purpose  being  of  gi'eat  antiquity.  The  an- 
cient Egyptians  used  it  for  fastening  stones  together 
in  the  rough  parts  of  a  building,  and  it  was  found 
by  Mr.  Layai'd  among  the  ruins  at  Nimroud  (Nin. 
and  Bab.  p.  357).  Mr.  Napier  {Metallurgy  of  the 
Bible,  p.  130)  conjectures  that  "  the  solder  used  in 
early  times  for  lead,  and  termed  lead,  was  the  same 
as  is  now  used — a  mixture  of  lead  and  tin." 

But,  in  addition  to  these  more  obvious  uses  of 
this  metal,  the  Hebrews  were  acquainted  with  an- 
other method  of  employing  it,  which  indicates  some 
ad\-ance  in  the  arts  at  an  early  period.  Job  (xix. 
24)  utters  a  wish  that  his  words,  "  with  a  pen  of 
iron  and  lead,  were  graven  in  the  rock  for  ever." 
The  allusion  is  supposed  to  be  to  the  practice  of 
carving  inscriptions  upon  stone,  and  pouring  molten 
lead  into  the  cavities  of  the  letters,  to  render  them 
legible,  and  at  the  same  time  preserve  them  from 
the  action  of  the  air.  Frequent  references  to  the 
use  of  leaden  tablets  for  inscriptions  are  found  in 
ancient  writers.  Pausanias  (ix.  31).  saw  Hesiod's 
Works  and  Days  graven  on  lead,  but  almost  illegible 
with  age.  Public  proclamations,  according  to  Pliny 
(xiii.  21),  were  written  on  lead,  and  the  name  of 
Germanicus  was  carved  on  leaden  tablets  (Tac.  Ann. 
ii.  69).  Eutychius  {Ann.  Ale.c.  p.  390)  relates 
that  the  history  of  the  Seven  Sleepeis  was  engraved 
on  lead  by  the  Cadi. 

Oxide  of  lead  is  employed  largely  in  modern 
pottery  for  the  formation  of  glazes,  and  its  presence 
has  been  discovered  in  analyzing  the  articles  of 
earthenware  found  in  Egypt  and  Nineveh,  proving 
that  the  ancients  were  acquainted  with  its  use  for 
the  same  purpose.  The  A.  V.  of  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  30 
assumes  that  the  usage  was  known  to  the  Hebrews, 


venial  dialect,  under   the   I'onu   l^adr 
Jioman.  Wuiicrbuch,  s.  v.  "  Lazzaro.") 


(Comp.  Uicz, 


G  2 


84 


LEBANA 


though  the  original  is  not  explicit  upon  the  point. 
Speaking  of  the  }X)ttei.-'s  art  in  finishing  off  his  work, 
"  he  applieth  himself  to  lead  it  over,"  is  the  render- 
ing of  what  in  the  Greek  is  simply  "  he  giveth  his 
heart  to  complete  tlie  smearing,"  the  material  em- 
ployed for  the  purpose  not  being  indicated. 

In  modern  metallurgy  lead  is  employed  for  the 
purpose  of  purifying  silver  from  other  mineral  pro- 
ducts. The  alloy  is  mixed  with  lead,  exposed  to 
fusion  upon  an  earthen  vessel,  and  submitted  to  a 
blast  of  air.  By  this  means  the  dross  is  consumed. 
This  process  is  called  the  cupelling  operation,  with 
which  the  desciiption  in  Ez.  xxii.  18-22,  in  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Napier  {Met.  of  Bible,  pp.  20-24), 
accurately  coincides.  "  The  vessel  containing  the 
alloy  is  suiTounded  by  the  fire,  or  placed  in  the 
midst  of  it,  and  the  blowing  is  not  applied  to  the 
fire,  but  to  the  fused  metals.  .  .  .  And  when  tliis  is 
done,  nothing  but  the  perfect  metals,  gold  and 
silver,  can  resist  the  scorifying  influence."  And  in 
support  of  his  conclusion  he  quotes  Jer.  vi.  28-30, 
adding,  "  This  descriiition  is  perfect.  If  we  take 
silver  having  the  impurities  in  it  described  in  the 
text,  namely  iron,  copper,  and  tin,  and  mix  it  with 
lead,  and  place  it  in  the  fire  upon  a  cupell,  it  soon 
melts ;  the  lead  will  oxidise  and  fomi  a  thick  coarse 
ci-ust  upon  the  surface,  and  thus  consume  away, 
but  effecting  no  purifying  influence.  The  alloy 
remains,  if  anything,  worse  than  before.  .  .  .  The 
silver  is  not  refined,  because  '  the  bellows  were 
burned' — there  existed  nothing  to  blow  upon  it. 
Lead  is  the  punfier,  but  only  so  in  connexion  with 
a  blast  blowing  upon  the  precious  metals."  An 
allusion  to  this  use  of  lead  is  to  be  found  in 
Theognis  (Gnom.  1127,  8  ;  ed.  Welcker),  and  it  is 
mentioned  by  Pliny  fxxxiii.  31)  as  indispensable  to 
the  purification  of  silver  from  alloy.    [W.  A.  W.] 

LEBA'NA  (Wn'? :  Aapavd;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
Aafidv  :  Lebana),  one  of  the  Nethinim  whose  de- 
scendants returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel 
(Neh.  vii.  48).  He  is  called  Labana  in  the  pa- 
rallel list  of  1  Esdras,  and 

LEBA'NAH  (nn*?:  ha^avd) :  Lehcma)  in 
Ezr.  ii.  45. 

LEAF,  LEAVES.  The  word  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  either  in  the  singular  or  plural  number  in 
three  different  senses — (1)  Leaf  or  leaves  of  trees. 
{2)' Leaves  of  the  doors  of  the  Temple.  (3)  Leaves 
of  the  roll  of  a  book. 

1 .  Leaf  (n'^y,"  dleh ;  ^llO,''  tcreph ;  ''Zi]}/  aphi : 
^vWov,  (TTeAexoS)  avd^aais:  folium,  frons,  cor- 
tex). The  olive-leaf  is  mentioned  in  Gen.  viii.  11. 
Fig-leaves  formed  the  first  covering  of  our  parents 
in'' Eden.  The  ban-en  fig-tree  (Matt.  xxi.  19; 
Mark  xi.  13)  on  the  road  between  Bethany  and 
Jerusalem  "had  on  it  nothing  but  leaves."  The 
fig-leaf  is  alluded  to  by  our  Lord  (Matt.  xxiv.  32 ; 
Mark  xiii.  28) :  "  When  his  Ijranch  is  yet  tender,  and 
putteth  forth  leaves,  ye  know  that  summer  is  nigh." 
The  oak-leaf  is  mentionwi  in  Is.  i.  30,  and  vi.  13. 
The  righteous  are  often  compared  to  green  leaves 
(Jer.  xvii.  8) :  "  her  leaf  shall  be  green  " — to  leaves 
that  fade  not  (Ps.  i.  3)—"  his  leaf  also  shall  not 


^  From  nSy.  to  ascend  or  grow  up.  Precisely 
identic^a  is  acaPao-ts,  from  iva^aCvinv,  to  ascend. 

I*  Strictly,  "  a  green  and  tender  leaf,"  "  one  easily 
plucked  off;"  from  f\-p,  "  to  tear,  or  pluck  off," 
wlieiicc  "  all  the  leaves  of  her  spring"  (Ez.  xvii.  9). 


LEAH 

wither."  The  ungodly  on  the  other  hand  are  as 
"  an  oak  whose  leaf  fadeth  ''  (Is.  i.  30)  ;  as  a  tree 
which  "shall  wither  in  all  the  leaves  of  her  spring" 
(Ez.  xvii.  9) ;  the  "  sound  of  a  shaken  leaf  shall 
chase  them"  (Lev.  xxvi.  36).  In  Ezekiel's  %'ision 
of  the  holy  waters,  the  blessings  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom  are  spoken  of  under  the  image  of  trees 
growing  on  a  river's  bank  ;  there  "  shall  grow  all 
trees  for  food,  whose  leaf  shall  not  fade"  (Ez. 
xlvii.  12).  In  this  passage  it  is  said  that  "  tlio 
fruit  of  these  trees  shall  be  for  food,  and  the  leaf 
thereof  for  medicine"  (margin,  for  bruises  and 
sores').  With  this  compare  (Rev.  xxii.  1,  2)  St. 
John's  Tision  of  the  heavenly  Jemsalem.  "  In  the 
midst  of  the  street  of  it,  and  on  either  side  of  the 
river,  was  there  the  tree  of  life  ....  and  the  leaves 
of  the  tree  were  for  the  healing  of  the  nations." 
There  is  probably  here  an  allusion  to  some  tree 
whose  leaves  were  used  by  the  Jews  as  a  medicine 
or  ointment ;  indeed,  it  is  very  likely  that  many 
plants  and  leaves  were  thus  made  use  of  by  them, 
as  by  the  old  English  herbalists. 

2.  Leaves   of  doors    (D''y?^,  tsel&im ;  Tw'^ 

deleth  :  irrvxh^  Ovpcc^a  :  ostium,  ostiolum).  The 
Hebrew  word,  which  occurs  \-ery  many  times  in  the 
Bible,  and  which  in  1  K.  \\.  32  (margin)  and  34 
is  translated  "  leaves  "  in  the  A.  V.,  signifies  beams, 
ribs,  sides,  &c.  In  Ez.  xli.  24,  "  And  the  doors 
had  two  leaves  apiece,"  the  Hebrew  word  deleth 
is  the  representative  of  both  doors  and  leaves.  By 
the  expression  two-leaved  doors,  we  are  no  doubt  to 
understand  what  we  term  folding-doors. 

3.  Leaves  of  a  book  or  roll  (n?'^,  deleth  : 
ceXis  :  parjella)  occurs  in  this  sense  only  in  Jei'. 
xsxvi.  23.  The  Hebrew  word  (literally  doors) 
would  perhaps  be  more  correctly  translated  columns. 
The  Latin  colianna,  and  the  English  column,  as 
applied  to  a  book,  are  probably  derived  from  re- 
semblance to  a  column  of  a  building.        [W.  H.] 

LE'AH  (nxb:  Aei'o,  Ai'a :  Lkt),  the  elder 
daughter  of  Laban  (Gen.  xxix.  16).  The  dulness  or 
weakness  of  her  eyes  was  so  notable,  that  it  is  men- 
tioned as  a  contrast  to  the  beautiful  form  and  ap- 
pearance of  her  younger  sister  Rachel.  Her  father 
took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  which  the  local 
marriage-rite  afforded  to  pass  her  off  in  her  sister's 
stead  on  the  unconscious  bridegi'oom,  and  excused 
himself  to  Jacob  by  alleging  that  the  custom  of  the 
country  forbade  the  younger  sister  to  be  given  first 
in  marriage.  Rosenmiiller  cites  instances  of  these 
customs  prevailing  to  this  day  in  some  parts  of  the 
East.  Jacob's  preference  of  Rachel  gi'ew  into  hatred 
of  Leah, after  hehad  married  both  sisters.  Leah,how- 
ever^ore  to  him  in  quick  succession  Reuben, Simeon, 
Levi,  Judah,  then  Issachar,  Zebulun,  and  Dinah, 
before  Rachel  had  a  child.  Leah  was  conscious 
and  resentful  (ch.  xxx.)  of  the  smaller  share  she  pos- 
sessed in  her  husband's  affections  ;  yet  in  Jacob's 
differences  with  his  father-in-law,  his  two  wives  ap- 
pear to  be  attached  to  him  with  equal  fidelity.  In  the 
critical  moment  when  he  expected  an  attack  from 
Esau,  his  discriminate  regard  for  the  several  mem- 
bers of  his  family  was  shown  by  his  placing  Rachel 


Comp.   tlie  Syr.   )^*-t)>  foUnm,  from    "^i-fe, 
strike  off  (Castell.  Ze; 
•=  From   the  unuse 

9 

jL2i.:i»;   Arab.  lie. 


strike  off  (Castell.  Lex.  Hept.  s.  v.). 

•=  From   the  unused  root    HSy,    to  flower :    Syr. 


LEASING 

and  her  child  hindermost,  in  the  least  exposed  situa- 
tion, Leali  and  her  cliildren  next,  and  the  two  hand- 
maids with  their  L-hildren  in  the  front.  Leali  pro- 
bably lived  to  witness  the  dishonour  of  her  daughter 
(ch.  xxxiv.),  so  cruelly  avenged  by  two  of  her  sons ; 
and  the  subsequent  deaths  of  Deborah  at  Bethel,  and 
of  Rachel  near  Bethlehem.  She  died  some  time  after 
Jacob  reached  the  south  country  in  which  iiis  father 
Isaac  lived.  Her  name  is  not  mentioned  in  the  list 
of  Jacob's  family  (ch.  xlvi.  5)  wlien  they  went  down 
into  Egypt.  She  was  buried  in  the  family  grave  in 
Machpelah  (ch.  xlix.  31).  [VV.  T.  B.] 

LEASING,  "  falsehood."    This  word  is  retained 
in  the  A.  V.  of  Ps.  iv.  2,   v.   6,   from   the  older 
English  versions ;   but  the   Hebrew  word  of  which 
it  is  the  rendering  is  elsewheie  almost  unifoi-mly 
translated  "  lies"  (Ps.  xl.  4,  Iviii.  3,  &c.).     It  is 
derived  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  leas,  "  false,"  whence 
leasimg,  "  leasing,"  "  falsehood,"  and  is  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  old   English  writers.      So  in   Piers 
Ploughman's  Vision,  2113 : 
"  Tel  me  no  tales, 
Ne  lesynge  to  laughen  of." 
And  in  Wiclif's   New  Testament,  John  viii.  44, 
"  Whanne  he  spekith  a  lesinge,  he  spekith  of  his 
owns  thingis,  for  he  is  a  lyiere,  and  fadir  of  it."    It  is 
used  both  by  Spenser  and  Shakspere.      [W.  A.  W.] 

LEATHEE  (lij/,  W).  The  notices  of  leather 
in  the  Bible  are  singularly  few  ;  indeed  the  word 
occurs  but  twice  in  the  A.  V.,  and  in  each  instance 
in  reference  to  the  same  object,  a  girdlt  (2  K.  i.  8 ; 
Matt.  iii.  4).  There  are,  however,  other  instances 
in  which  the  word  "  leather"  might  with  propriety 
be  substituted  for  "skin,"  as  in  the  passages  in 
which  vessels  (Lev.  xi.  32;  Num.  xxxi.  20)  or  rai- 
ment (Lev.  xiii.  48)  ai'e  spoken  of;  for  in  these 
cases  the  skins  must  have  been  prepared.  Though 
the  material  itself  is  seldom  noticed,  yet  we  cann'ot 
doubt  that  it  was  extensively  used  by  the  Jews  ; 
shoes,  bottles,  thongs,  garments,  kneading-troughs, 
ropes,  and  other  articles,  were  made  of  it.  For^'the 
mode  of  preparing  it  see  Tanner.        [W.  L.  B.] 

LEAVEN  {iitj^,  seor:  (i/xn:  fermentum). 
The  Hebrew  word  '  seor  has  the  radical  sense  of 
effervescence  or  fermentation,  and  therefore  corre- 
sponds in  point  of  etymology  to  the  Greek  (vixt) 
(from  fe'a,),  the  Latin  fermentum  (from  ferveo), 
and  the  English  leaven  (fiom  levare).  It  occurs 
only  five  times  in  the  Bible  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19,  xiii. 
l\    ^^■^■„"-  11  ;   r)eut.  xvi.  4),  and   is  translated 

leaven  in  the  first  four  of  the  passages  quoted, 
and  "leavened  bread"  in  the  last.  In  connexion 
with  it,  we  must  notice  the  terms  khametz »  and 
matzzoth,^  the  former  signifying  "fermented"  or 
"  leavened,"  literally  "sharpened,"  bread;  the  latter 
"  unleavened,"  the  radical  force  of  the  word  being 
variously  understood  to  signify  sweetness  or  purity . 
The  three  words  appear  in  juxtaposition  in  Ex. 
xiii.  7:  "Unleavened  bread  {m'ttzzoth)  shall  be 
eaten  seven  days ;  and  there  shall  no  lca\-ened  bread 
(khametz)  be  seen  with  thee,  neither  shall  there  be 
leaven  {seor)  seen  with  thee  in  all  thy  quarters." 
Various  substances  were  known  to  have  fermenting 
qualities ;  but  the  ordinary  leaven  consisted  of  a 
lump  of  old  dough  in  a  high  state  of  fermentation, 
which  was  inserted  into  the  mass  of  dough  prepared 

J*On.     Another  form  of  the  same  root,  khometz 
(^?0n),    is    applied     to     sharpened    or    sour    wine 


LEBANON 


85 


for  baking.  [Bread.]     As  the  process  of  producing 
the  leaven  itself,  or  even  of  leavening  bread  when 
the  substance  was  at  hand,  required  some  time,  un- 
leavened  cakes    were    more    usually   produced   on 
sudden  emergencies  (Gen.  xviii.  6;   Judg.  vi.  19). 
The  use  of  leaven  was    strictly  forbidden    in   all 
offerings  made  to  the  Lord  by  fire ;  as  in  the  case 
of  the  meat-offering   (Lev.  ii'.  11),    the  trespass- 
ofl'ering  (Lev.    vii.    12),    the   consecration-offering 
(Ex.  xxis.  2  ;   Lev.  viii.  2),    the  Nazarite-oliering 
(Num.  vi.  15),  and  more  particularly  in  regard  to 
the    feast   of  the    Passover,    when    the    Israelites 
were  not  only  prohibited  on  pain   of  death  from 
eating  leavened  bread,  but  even  from  having  any 
leaven  in  their  houses  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19)  or  in  their 
land  (Ex.  xiii.  7  ;  Deut.  xvi.  4)  during  seven  days 
commencing  with  the   14th  of  Nisan.     It  is  in  re- 
ference   to    these  prohibitions  that  Amos  (iv.   6) 
ironically  bids  the  Jews  of  his  day  to  "  offer  a  sa- 
crifice of  thanksgiving  with   leaven;"  and  hence 
even  honey  was  prohibited  (Lev.  ii.  11),  on  account 
of  its  occasionally  producing  fermentation.    In  othei- 
instances,  where  the  offering  was  to  be  consumed 
by  the  priests,  and  not  on  the  altar,  leaven  might 
be  used,  as  in  the  case  of  the  peace-offering  (Lev. 
vii.  13),  and  the  Pentecostal  loaves  (Lev.  xxiii.  17). 
Various  ideas  were  associated  with  tlie  prohibition 
of  leaven  in  the  instances  above  quoted  ;  in  the  feast 
of  the  Passover  it  served  to  remind  the  Israelites 
both  of  the  haste  with  which  they  fled  out  of  Egypt 
(Ex.  xii.  39),  and  of  the  sufferings  that  they  had 
undergone  in  that  land,  the  insipidity  of  unleavened 
bread  rendering  it  a  not  inapt  emblem  of  affliction 
(Deut.  xvi.  3).     But  the  most  prominent  idea,  and 
the  one  which'  applies  equally  to  all  the  cases  of 
prohibition,  is  connected  with  the  corruption  which 
leaven  itself  had  undergone,  and  which  it  commu- 
nicated to  bread  in  the  process  of  fermentation.     It 
is  to  this  property  of  leaven  that  our  Saviour  points 
when  he  speaks  of  the  "  leaven  (i.  e.  the  corrupt  doc- 
trine) of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees  "  (Matt. 
xvi.  6) ;   and  St.  Paul,  when  he  speaks  of  the  "  old 
leaven"  (1  Cor.  v.  7).     This  association  of  ideas 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jews;   it  was  familiar  to 
the  Romans,  who  forbade  the  priest  of  Jupiter  to 
touch   flour  mixed  with  leaven  (Gell.  x.  15,  19), 
and  who  occasionally  used  the  word  fermentum  as 
=  "  corruption  "  (Pers.  Sat.  i.  24).     Plutarch's  ex- 
planation is  very  much  to  the  point :  "  The  leaven 
itself  is  born   from  corruption,  and  corrupts   the 
mass  with  which  it  is  mixed  "  {Quaest.  Bom.  100). 
Another  quality  in  leaven  is  noticed  in  the  Bible, 
viz.  its  secretly  penetratimj  and  diffusive  power; 
hence  the  proverbial  saying,  "a  little  leaven  leav- 
eneth  the  whole  lump"  (1  Cor.  v.  6;  Gal.  v.  9). 
In  this  respect  it  was  emblematic  of  moral  influence 
generally,    whether  good  or    bad,  and    hence   our 
Saviour  adopts  it  as  illustrating  the  growth  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  in  the  individual  heart  and  in 
the  world  at  large  (Matt.  xiii.  33).      [W.  L.  B.] 

LEB'ANON  (in  prose  with  the  art.   jij^^'n, 

1  K.  V.  20  ;  in  poetry  without  tlie  art.   I'liSp,  I's. 

xxix.  0  :  Ai^avos :  Lihawis),  a  mountain  range  in 
the  north  of  Palestine,  'i'he  name  Lebanon  signifies 
"  white,"  and  was  applied  either  on  accomit  of  the 
snow,  which,  during  a  great  part  of  the  year,  covers 


[Vinegar]  :      khnmctz     is     applied     exclusively     to 
bread. 

^  nVvo. 


86 


LEBANON 


its  whole  summit,''  or  on  account  of  the  white 
colour  of  its  limestone  clilfs  and  peaks.  It  is  the 
"  white  mountain  "• — the  31ont  Blanc  of  Palestine; 
an  appellation  which  seems  to  be  given,  in  one«form 
or  another,  to  the  highest  mountains  in  all  the  coun- 
tries of  the  old  world.  Lebanon  is  represented  in 
Scripture  as  lying  upon  the  northern  border  of  the 
laud  of  Israel  (Deut.  i.  7,  xi.  24  ;  Josh.  i.  4).  Two 
distinct  ranges  bear  this  name.  They  both  begin 
in  lat.  oS""  20',  and  run  in  parallel  lines  from  S.W. 
to  N.E.  for  about  90  geog.  miles,  enclosing  between 
them  a  long  fertile  valley  from  5  to  8  miles  wide, 
anciently  called  Coele-Syria.  The  modern  name  is 
el-Bakaa,^  "  the  valley,"  corresponding  e.xactly  to 
"  the  valley  of  Lebanon"  in  Josluia  (xi.  17).''  It 
is  a  northern  prolongation  of  the  Jordan  valley, 
and  likewse  a  southern  prolongation  of  that  of  the 
Orontes  (Porter's  Hawlhook,  p.  xvi.).  The  Western 
range  is  the  "  Libanus  "  of  the  old  geographers,  and 
the  Lebanon  of  Scripture,  where  Solomon  got  timber 
for  the  temple  (1  K.  v.  9,  &c.),  and  where  the 
Hivites  and  Giblites  dwelt  (Judg.  iii.  .3 ;  Josh, 
xiii.  5).  The  eastern  range  was  called  "  Anti- 
Libanus"  by  geographers,  and  "  Lebanon  toward 
the  sun-rising"  by  the  sacred  writers  (Josh.  xiii.  5). 
Strabo  describes  (xvi.  p.  754)  the  two  as  commenc- 
ing near  the  Mediterranean — the  fonrier  at  Tripolis, 
and  the  latter  at  Sidon — -and  running  in  parallel 
lines  toward  Damascus  ;  and,  strange  to  say,  this 
error  has,  in  part  at  least,  been  followed  by  most 
modern  writers,  who  represent  the  mountain-range 
between  Tyre  and  the  lake  of  Merom  as  a  branch  of 
Anti-Libanus  (Winer,  Realwh.,  s.  v.  "Libanou;" 
Robuison,  1st  ed.  iii.  346  ;  but  see  the  corrections 
in  the  new  edition).  The  topography  of  Anti- 
Libauus  was  first  clearly  described  in  Porter's 
Damascus  (i.  297,  &c.,  ii.  309,  &c.).  A  deep 
valley  called  Wmly  et-Teiin  separates  the  southern 
section  of  Anti-Libanus  from  both  Lebanon  and  the 
hills  of  Galilee.'' 

Lebanon — the  western  range — commences  on  the 
south  at  the  deep  ravine  of  the  Litany,  the  ancient 
river  Leontes,  which  drains  the  valley  of  Coele-Syria, 
and  falls  into  the  Mediterranean  five  miles  north 
of  Tyre.  It  runs  N.E.  in  a  straight  line  parallel 
to  the  coast,  to  the  opening  from  the  Mediterranean 
into  the  plain  of  Emesa,  called  in  Scripture  the 
"Entrance  of  Hamath"  (Num.  xxxiv.  8).  Hei-e 
Nahr  el-Kebu — the  ancient  river  Eleutherus — 
sweeps  romid  its  northern  end,  as  the  Leontes  does 
round  its  southern.  The  average  elevation  of  the 
range  is  from  6000  to  8000  ft. ;  but  two  peaks  rise 
considerably  higher.  One  of  these  is  Sunnin,  nearly 
on  the  parallel  of  Bey  rout,  which  is  more  than  9000 
feet ;  the  other  is  Jebel  Mukhmel,  which  was  mea- 
sured in  September,  1860,  by  the  liydrographer  of 
the  Admiralty,  and  found  to  be  very  nearly  10,200 
feet  high  {Nat.  Hist.  Bcv.,  No.  V.  p.  11).  It  is 
the  highest  mountain  in  Syria.  On  the  summits 
of  both  these  peaks  the  snow  remains  in  patches 
during  the  whole  summer. 

The  centrid  ridge  or  backbone  of  Lebanon  hn? 
smooth,  barren  sides,  and  gray  rounded  summits. 


»  So  Tacftus  {mst.  V.  fi)  :  "  rraecipuum  montium 
Libanum  erigit,  niiruni  dictu,  timtos  inter  ardores 
opacum  fidumque  nivibus." 

•'  Pliny  was  more  accurate  than  Strabo.     He  says 


LEBANON 

It  is  entirely  destitute  of  venlure,  and  is  covered 
with  small  fragments  of  limestone,  from  which 
white  crowns  and  jagged  points  of  naked  rock  shoot 
up  at  intervals.  Here  and  there  a  few  stunted 
pine-trees  or  dwarf  oaks  are  met  with.  The  line  of 
cultivation  runs  along  at  the  height  of  about 
6000  ft. ;  and  below  this  the  features  of  the  western 
slopes  are  entirely  diflerent.  The  descent  is  gi-adual ; 
but  is  everywhere  broken  by  precipices  and  towei'- 
ing  rocks  which  time  and  the  elements  have  chiselled 
into  strange,  fantastic  shapes.  Ravines  of  singular 
wildness  and  grandeur  furrow  the  wliole  mountain 
side,  looking  in  many  places  like  huge  rents.  Here 
and  there,  too,  bold  promontories  shoot  out,  and 
dip  perpendicularly  into  the  bosom  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean. The  rugged  limestone  banks  are  scantily 
clothed  with  the  evergreen  oak,  and  the  sandstone 
with  pines  ;  while  every  available  spot  is  carefully 
cultivated.  The  cultivation  is  wonderful,  and 
shows  what  all  Syria  might  be  if  under  a  good  go- 
vernment. Bliniature  fields  of  grain  are  often  seen 
where  one  would  suppose  the  eagles  alone,  which 
hover  round  them,  could  have  planted  the  seed. 
Fig-trees  cling  to  the  naked  rock ;  vines  are  trained 
along  narrow  ledges  ;  long  ranges  of  midbeiTies,  on 
terraces  like  steps  of  stairs,  cover  the  more  gentle 
declivities ;  and  dense  groves  of  olives  fill  up  the 
bottoms  of  the  glens.  Hundreds  of  villages  are 
seen — here  built  amid  labyrinths  of  rocks;  there 
clinging  like  swallows' uests  to  the  sides  ofclitis; 
while  convents,  no  less  numerous,  are  perc'ned  on 
the  top  of  *very  peak.  When  viewed  from  the 
sea  on  a  morning  in  early  spring,  Lebanon  presents 
a  picture  which  once  seen  is  never  forgotten  ;  but 
deeper  still  is  the  impression  left  on  the  mind  when 
one  looks  down  over  its  tenaced  slopes  clothed  in 
their  gorgeous  foliage,  and  through  the  vistas  of  its 
magnificent  glens,  on  the  broad  and  bright  Medi- 
terranean. How  beautifully  do  these  noble  features 
illustrate  the  words  of  the  prophet :  "  Israel  shall 
grow  as  the  lily,  and  strike  forth  his  roots  as  Leba- 
non" (Hos.  xiv.  .^).  And  the  fresh  mountain 
breezes,  filled  in  early  summer  with  the  fragrance 
of  the  budding  vines,  and  throughout  the  year  witli 
the  rich  odours  of  numerous  aromatic  shrubs,  call 
to  mind  the  words  of  Solomon — "  The  smell  of  thy 
garments  is  like  the  smell  of  Lebanon  "  (Cant.  iv. 
11;  see  also  Hos.  xiv.  6).  When  the  plains  of 
Palestine  are  burned  up  with  the  scorching  sun, 
and  when  tlie  air  in  them  is  like  the  breath  of  a 
furnace,  the  snowy  tops  and  ice-cold  stre^is  of 
Lebanon  temper  the  breezes,  and  make  the  mountain- 
range  a  pleasant  and  luxurious  retreat, — "  Shall  a 
man  leave  the  snow  of  Lebanon  .  .  .  or  shall  tlie 
cold-flowing  waters  be  forsaken?"  (Jer.  xviii.  14). 
The  vine  is  still  largely  cultivated  in  every  part  of 
the  mountain;  and  the  wine  is  excellent,  notwith- 
standing the  clumsy  apparatus  and  unskilful  work- 
men employed  in  its  manufacture  (Hos.  .xiv.  7). 
Lebanon  also  abounds  in  olives,  figs,  and  mulberries ; 
while  some  remnants  exist  of  the  forests  of  pine, 
oak,  and  cedar,  which  formerly  covered  it  (1  K.  v. 
6;  Fs.  xxix.  5;  Is.  xiv.  8;   Ezr.  iii.  7;   Diod.  Sic. 


(v.  20)  :  "  A  terg-o  (Sidonis)  mons  Libanus  orsus, 
mille  quingcntis  stadiis  Simyram  usque  porrigitur, 
qua  Coclc-Syria  cognominatur.  Huic  par  iiitcrjaccnte 
valle  mons  adversus  obtenditur,  miivo  conjunctus." 
rtolcmy  (v.  15)  follows  Strabo  ;  but  Eusebius  (Onom. 
s.  v.  "  Antilibanus")  says,  'AvTiAi'^avos,  to.  virip  tov 
ACpat'ov  TTpb?  ai'diToAa?,  Trpbs  Aajaatricrji'wt'  xwp«>'- 


LEBANON 

xix.  58).  Consiilerable  numbers  of  wild  beasts  still 
inhabit  its  retired  glens  and  higher  peaks ;  the 
writer  has  seen  jackals,  hyenas,  wolves,  bears,  and 
panthers  (2  K.  xiv.  9  ;  Cant.  iv.  8  ;  Hab.  ii.  17). 

Some  noble  streams  of  classic  celebrity  have  their 
sources  high  up  in  Lebanon,  and  rush  down  in 
sheets  of  foam  through  sublime  glens,  to  stain  with 
their  ruddy  waters  the  transpai'ent  bosom  of  the 
Mediterranean.  The  Leontes  is  on  the  south. 
Next  comes  Nahr  Aiiwuly—the  "  graceful  Bos- 
trenos "  of  Dionysius  Periegetes  (905).  Then 
follows  the  Ddinur- — the  "Tamuras"  of  Strabo 
(xvi.  p.  726),  and  the  "  Damuras"  of  Polybius  (v. 
(58).  Next,  just  on  the  north  side  of  Beyrout, 
Nah>-  Beyrout,  the  "Magoras"  of  Pliny  (v.  20). 


LEBANON 


87 


A  few  miles  beyond  it  is  Nahr  el-Kelb,  the  "  Lycus 
fiumen  "  of  the  old  geographers  (Plin.  v.  20).  At 
its  mouth  is  the  celebrated  pass  where  Egyptian, 
Assyrian,  and  Roman  conquerors  have  left  on  tablets 
of  stone,  records  of  their  routes  and  their  victories 
(Porter's  Handbook,  p.  407).  Nahr  IJjrahtm,  the 
classic  river  "  Adonis,"  follows,  bursting  from  a 
cave  beneath  the  lofty  brow  of  Sunnm,  beside  the 
ruins  of  Apheca.     From  its  native  rock  it  runs 

"  Purple  to  the  sea,  supposed  with  blood 
Of  Thammuz,  j'early  wounded." 

(Lucian  de  Si/r.  Dea,  6-8;  Strab.  xvi.  755;  Plin. 
V.  17  ;  Porter's  Damascus,  ii.  295.)  Lastly,  we 
have    the    "  sacred    river,"    Kadisha — desceudino- 


from  the  side  of  the  loftiest  peak  in  the  whole 
lange,  through  a  gorge  of  smpassing  grandeur. 
Upon  its  banks,  in  a  notch  of  a  towering  cliff,  is 
perched  the  great  convent  of  Kanohin,  the  residence 
of  the  Marouite  patriarch. 

The  situation  of  the  little  group  of  cedars — the 
last  remnant  of  that  noble  forest,  once  the  glory  of 
Lebanon — is  very  remarkable.  Round  the  head  of 
the  sublime  valley  of  the  Kadisha  sweep  the  highest 
summits  of  Lebanon  in  the  form  of  a  semicircle. 
Their  sides  rise  np,  Iiare,  smooth,  majestic,  to  the 
rounded  snow-rapped  heads.  In  the  centre  of  this 
vast  recess,  far  removed  from  all  other  foliage  and 
verdure,  stand,  in  strange  solitude,  the  cedars  of 
Lebanon,  as  if  they  scorned  to  mingle  their  giant 
arms,  and  graceful  f;ui-like  branches,  with  the  de- 
generate trees  of  a  latei"  age.^ 

Along  the  base  of  Lebanon  runs  the  irregular 
plain  of  Phoenicia;  nowhere  more  than  two  miles 
wide,  and  often  interrupted  by  bold  rocky  spurs, 
that  dip  into  the  sea. 


The  eastern  slopes  of  Lebanon  are  much  less  im- 
posing and  less  fertile  than  the  western.  In  the 
southern  half  of  the  range  there  is  an  abrupt  descent 
from  the  summit  into  the  plain  of  Coele-Syria, 
which  has  an  elevation  of  about  2500  ft.  Along 
the  proper  base  of  the  northern  half  runs  a  low  side 
ridge  partially  covered  with  dwarf  oaks. 

The  northern  half  of  the  mountain-range  is  peo- 
pled, almost  exclusively,  by  Marouite  Christians— a 
brave,  industrious,  and  hardy  race ;  but  sadly  op- 
pressed by  an  ignorant  set  of  priests.  In  the  southern 
half  the  Druzes  predominate,  who,  though  they  num-^ 
ber  only  some  20,000  fighting  men,  form  one  of 
the  most  powerful  parties  in  Syria. 

The  main  ridge  of  Lebanon  is  composed  of  Jura 
limestone,  and  abounds  in  fossils.  Long  belts  of 
more  recent  sandstone  run  along  the  western  slopes, 
which  is  in  places  largely  impregnated  with  iron. 
Some  strata  towards  the  soutiiern  end  are  said  to 
yield  as  much  as  90  per  cent,  of  pure  iron  (Deut. 
viii.  9,  xxxiii.  25).     Coal  is  found  in  the  district  of 


"  The  height  of  the  grove  is  now  ascertained  to  he  0172  ft.  above  the  Meditenanean  (Dr.  Hooker,  in  .Vat.  Hist.  Rai., 
No.  V.  p.  11). 


88  LEBANON 

Metn,  east  of  Beijrout,  near  tlie  village  ot"  Kur- 
naijil.  A  mine  was  opened  by  Ibrahim  Pasha,  but 
soon  abandoned.  Cretaceous  strata  of  a  very  late 
period  lie  along  the  whole  western  fease  of  the  moun- 
tain-range. 

Lebanon  was  originally  inhabited  by  the  Hivites 
and  Giblites  (Judg.  iii.  3  ;  Josh.  xiii.  5,  6).  The 
latter  either  gave  their  name  to,  or  took  their  name 
from,  the  city  of  Gebal,  called  by  the  Greeks  Byblus 
(LXX.  of  Ez.  sxvii.  9  ;  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  755).  The 
old  city — now  almost  in  ruins, — and  a  small  district 
round  it,  still  bear  the  ancient  name,  in  the  Arabic 
form  Jehails  (Porter's  Handbook,  p.  586).  The 
whole  mountain  range  was  assigned  to  the  Israelites, 
but  was  never  conquered  by  them  (Josh.  xiii.  2-G  ; 
Judg.  iii.  1-3).  During  the  Jewish  monarchy  it  ap- 
pears to  have  been  subject  to  the  Phoenicians  ( 1  K. 
V.  2-G  ;  Ezr.  iii.  7).  From  the  Greek  conquest  until 
modern  times  Lebanon  had  no  separate  history. 

Anti-Lihanus. — The  main  chain  of  Anti-Libanus 
3ommences  in  the  plateau  of  Bashan,  near  the  pa- 
rallel of  Caesarea-Philippi,  runs  north  to  Hennon, 
and  then  north-east  in  a  straight  line  till  it  sinlcs 
down  into  the  great  plain  of  Emesa,  not  far  from 
the  site  of  Riblah.  Hermon  is  the  loftiest  peak, 
and  has  already  been  described ;  the  next  highest 
is  a  few  miles  north  of  the  site  of  Abila,  beside 
the  village  of  Bluddn,  and  has  an  elevation  of 
about  7000  ft.  The  rest  of  the  ridge  averages 
about  5000  ft. ;  it  is  in  general  bleak  and  barren, 
with  shelving  gray  declivities,  gray  clitfs,  and  gray 
rounded  summits.  Here  and  there  we  meet  with 
thin  forests  of  dwarf  oak  and  juniper.  The  western 
slopes  descend  abruptly  into  the  Buha'a ;  but  the 
features  of  the  eastern  are  entirely  different.  Three 
side-ridges  here  radiate  from  Hermon,  like  the  ribs 
of  an  open  fan,  and  form  the  supporting  walls  of 
three  great  terraces.  The  last  and  lowest  of  these 
ridges  takes  a  course  nearly  due  east,  bounding  the 
plain  of  Damascus,  and  running  out  into  the  desert 
as  flir  as  Palmyra.  The  greater  part  of  the  terraces 
thus  formed  are  parched  flinty  deserts,  though  here 
and  there  are  sections  with  a  rich  soil.  Anti-Liba- 
nus can  only  boast  of  two  streams — the  Pharpar, 
now  Ncdir  el-'Awaj,  which  rises  high  up  on  the  side  of 
Hermon ;  and  the  Abana,  now  called  Barada.  The 
fountain  of  the  latter  is  in  the  beautiful  little  plain 
of  Zehdany,  on  the  western  side  of  the  main  chain, 
tlirough  which  it  cuts  in  a  sublime  gorge,  and  then 
divides  successively  each  of  the  side-ridges  in  its 
course  to  Damascus.  A-  small  streamlet  flows  down 
the  valley  of  Helbon  parallel  to  the  Abana. 

Anti-Libanus  is  more  thinly  peopled  than  its 
sister  range ;  and  it  is  more  abundantly  stocked 
with  wild  beasts.  Eagles,  vultures,  and  other 
birds  of  prey,  may  be  seen  day  after  day  sweeping 
in  circles  round  the  beetling  cliffs.  Wild  swine  are 
numerous  ;  and  vast  herds  of  gazelles  roam  ovei-  the 
bleak  eastern  steppes. 

Anti-Libanus  is  only  once  distinctly  mentioned 
in  Scripture,  where  it  is  accurately  described  as 
■'  Lebanon  toward  the  sun-rising  "■»  (Josh.  xiii.  5)  ; 
but  the  southern  section  of  the  chain  is  frequently 


"  ^m!r]  nnto  Jin^ri. 


'  Amana  and  Abana  seem  to  be  identical,  for  in 
2  K,  V.  12  the  Kcri  reading  is  njfOX. 

^  The   Heb.    1D3    is   identical    with    the    Arabic 


^ 


J,  "  a  panther." 
Strabo  says  (xvi.  p.  755),    6  Mao-cnia?    exwi'   tiv 


LEBONAH 

referred  to  under  other  names.  [See  Hermon.] 
The  words  of  Solomon  in  Cant.  iv.  8  are  very 
striking — "  Look  from  the  top  of  Amana,  from  the 
top  of  Shenirand  Hermon,  from  the  lions'  den,  from 
the  mountains  of  the  leopards."  •  The  reference  is 
in  all  probability,  to  the  tvvo  highest  peaks  of  Anti- 
Libanus, — Hermon,  and  that  near  the  fountain  of 
the  Abana  ;  and  in  both  places  panthers''  still  exist, 
"  The  tower  of  Lebanon  which  looketh  toward 
Damascus"  (Cant.  vii.  4)  is  doubtless  Hermon, 
which  forms  the  most  striking  feature  in  the  whole 
panorama  lound  that  city.  Josephus  mentions 
Lebanon  as  lying  near  Dan  and  the  fountains  of  the 
Jordan  {Ant.  v.  3,  §1),  and  as  bounding  the  pro- 
vince of  Gaulanitis  on  the  north  {B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5) ; 
he  of  course  means  Anti-Libanus.'  The  old  city  of 
Abila  stood  in  one  of  the  wildest  glens  of  Anti- 
Libanus,  on  the  banks  of  the  Abana,  and  its  terri- 
tory embraced  a  large  section  of  the  range.  [Abi- 
lene.] Damascus  owes  its  existence  to  a  stream 
from  these  mountains ;  so  did  the  once  gi'eat  and 
splendid  city  of  Heliopolis ;  and  the  chief  sources  of 
both  the  Leontes  and  Orontes  lie  along  their  western 
base  (Porter's  Handbook,  pp.  xviii.,  xix.).  [J.  L.  P.] 

LEB'AOTH  (niX3^  :  Aai3c6s ;  Alex.  Aa/3a)0  : 
Lebnotli),  a  town  which  forms  one  of  the  last  group 
of  the  cities  of  "  the  South  "  in  the  enumeration  of 
the  possessions  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  32).  It  is  named 
between  Sansanuah  and  Shilhira ;  and  is  very  pi-o- 
bably  identical  with  Beth-LEBAOTH,  elsewhere 
called  Beth-birei.  No  trace  of  any  names  an- 
swering to  these  appears  to  have  been,  yet  disco- 
vered. If  we  may  adopt  the  Hebrew  Signification 
of  the  name  ("lionesses"),  it  furnishes  an  indi- 
cation of  the  existence  of  wild  animals  in  the  south 
of  Palestine.  [G.] 

LEBBAE'US.  This  name  occurs  in  Matt. 
X.  3,  according  to  Codex  D  (Bezae  Cantabrigiensis) 
of  the  sixth  century,  and  in  the  received  Text.  In 
Mark  iii.  18,  it  is  substituted  in  a  few  unimportant 
MSS.  for  Thaddeus.  The  words,  "  Lebbaeus  who 
is  called "  (Matt.  x.  3),  are  not  found  in  the  Va- 
tican MS.  (B),  and  Lachmann  rejects  them  as,  in 
his  opinion,  not  received  by  the  most  ancient  Eastern 
churches.  The  Vulgate  omits  them  ;  but  Jerome 
(Comm.  in  Matt.)  says  that  Thaddeus,  or  Judas 
the  brother  of  James,  is  elsewhere  called  Lebbaeus  ; 
and  lie  concludes  that  this  apostle  had  three  names. 
It  is  much  easier  to  suppose  that  a  strange  name  has 
been  omitted  than  that  it  has  been  inserted  by  later 
transcribers.  It  is  admitted  into  the  ancient  versions 
of  the  N.  T.,  and  into  all  the  English  versions  (except 
the  Khemish)  since  Tyndale's  in  1534.  For  the 
signification  of  the  name,  and  for  the  life  of  the 
apostle,  see  Jude,  vol.  i.  p.  1163.        [VV.  T.  B.] 

LEBO'NAH  (naU^  :  ttIs  XiHava;  Alex,  tov 

At^avou  T7JS  Ae^wva  :  Lchond),  a  place  named  in 
Judg.  xxi.  19  only ;  and  there  but  as  a  landmark  to 
determine  the  position  of  Shiloh,  which  is  stated  to 
have  lain  south  of  it.  Lebonah  has  survived  to  our 
times  under  the  almost  identical  form  of  el-Lubban. 


KoX  bpcivd,  Iv  OC5  ^  XaA.Kis,  axrirep  ctKpoffoAis  tou 
Ma(T(Tvov.  'Apxh  S'  auToO  AaoSiKeia  r)  Trpbs  AifSavui. 
From  this  it  appears  that  the  province  of  Massyas  in 
his  day  embraced  the  whole  of  Anti-Libanus  ;  for 
Laodicea  ad  Libanum  lies  at  the  northern  end  of  tlie 
ranffe  (Porter's  Damascus,  ii.  339),  and  the  site  of 
Chalcis  is  at  its  western  base,  twenty  miles  south  of 
Ba'alb-k  (id.  i.  14). 


LECAH 

It  lies  to  the  west  of,  .and  close  to,  the  JVabhts  road, 
about  eight  nrfles  north  of  Bcittn  (Bethel),  and  two 
from  Scilun  (Shiloh),  in  relation  to  which  it  stands, 
however,  nearer  W.  than  N.  The  village  is  on  the 
northern  acclivity  of  the  wady  to  which  it  gives 
its  name.  Its  appearance  is  ancient;  and  in  the  rocks 
above  it  are  excavated  sepulchres  (Itob.  ii.  272).  To 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
known.  The  earliest  mention  of  it  yet  met  with 
is  in  the  Itinerary  of  the  Jewish  traveller  hap- 
Parchi  (a.d.  cir.  1320),  who  describes  it  under  the 
name  oi' Lubin,  and  refers  especiallyj^o  its  correspond- 
ence with  the  passage  in  Judges  {See  Asher's  Benj. 
of  Tudela,  ii.  430).  It  was  visited  by  Maundrell 
(JIarch  24,  25),  who  mentions  the  identification 
with  Lebonah,  but  in  such  terms  as  may  imply 
that  he  was  only  repeating  a  tradition.  Since  then 
it  has  been  passed  and  noticed  by  most  travellers 
to  the  Holy  Land  (Rob.  ii.  272  ;  Wilson,  ii.  292,  3  ; 
,Bonar,  3C3  ;  Mislin,  iii.  319,  &c.  &c.).  [G.] 

LE'CAH  (HDJ?  :  AiJX"  ;  Alex.  AijxaS:  Lecha), 
a  name  mentioned  in  the  genealogies  of  Judali 
(1  Chr.  iv.  21  only)  as  one  of  the  descendants  of 
Shelah,  the  third  son  of  Judah  by  the  Canaanitess 
Bath-shua.  The  immediate  progenitor  of  Lecah 
was  Er.  ISLiny  of  the  names  in  this  genealogy, 
especially  when  the  word  "  father "  is  attached, 
are  towns  (comp.  Eshtemoa,  Keilah,  Mareshah,&c.) ; 
but  this,  though  piobably  the  case  with  Lecah,  is 
not  certain,  because  it  is  not  mentioned  again,  either 
in  the  Bible  or  the  Onoinnsticon,  nor  have  any  traces 
of  it  been  since  discovered.  [*3-] 

LEECH.     [Horse-Lekch,  Appendix  A.] 
LEEKS  O'V'^'  '^^^(^isir :   TO  Trpdffa,   Pordvr], 

XA.(5»),  x'^P'''''^^  X^^P^^  '•  ^'fi''&«,  pornis,  foenum, 
pratum).  The  word  chdtsir,  which  in  Num.  xi.  5 
is  translated  leeks,  occurs  twenty  times  in  the  He- 
brew text.  In  1  K.  xviii.  5  ;  Job  xl.  15;  Ps.  civ. 
14,  cxlvii.  8,  c.xxix.  6,  xxxvii.  2,  xc.  5,  ciii.  15  ;  Is. 
xxxvii.  27,  xl.  6,  7,  8,  xliv.  4,  Ii.  12,  it  is  rendered 
grass ;  m  Job  viii.  12,  it  is  rendered  herb  ;  in  Prov. 
xxvii.  25,  Is.  XV.  6,  it  is  erroneously  translated 
hay;  in  Is.  xxxiv.  14,  the  A.  V.  has  court  (see 
note).  The  word  leeks  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  only 
m  Num.  xi.  5 ;  it  is  there  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
good  things  of  Egypt  for  which  the  Israelites  longed 
in  their  journey  thiough  the  desert,  just  before  the 
terrible  plague  at  Kibroth-hattaavah,  ''  the  cucum- 
bers, and  the  melons,  and  the  leeks,  and  the  onions, 
and  the  garlic."  The  Hebrew  term,  which  properly 
denotes  grass,  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
be  green,"*  and  may  therefore  stand  in  this  passage 
for  any  green  food,  lettuce,  endive,  &c..  as  Ludolf 
and  Maillet  have  conjectured  ;  it  would  thus  be 
applied  somewhat  in  the  same  manner  as  we  use 
the  term  "  greens  ;"  yet  as  the  chdtsir  is  mentioned 
together  with  onions  and  garlick  in  the  text,  and 
as  the  most  ancient  versions,  Onkelos,  the  LXX., 
and  the  Vulgate,  together  with  the  Syriac  and  the 
Arabic  of  S;uvdias,''  unanimously  understand  leeks 
by  tlie  Hebrew  word,  we  may  be  satisfied  with  our 
own  translation.  Moreover,  chdtsir  would  apply  to 
the  leek  appropriately  enough,  both  from  its  green 
colour  and  the  crrass-like  form  of  the  leaves. 


LEEKS 


89 


Tliere  is,  however,  another  and  a  very  ingenious 
intei-pretatiou  of  chatsir,  first  proposed  by  Heng- 
stenberg,  and  received  bv  I)r.  Kitto  (Fictor.  Bible, 
Num.  xi.  5),  which  adopts  a  more  literal  tianslation 


"  ^!fn,  vlniit,  i.q.  Arab. 


,  (hadsir).  Gesenius 


has  shown  that  this  word  is  identical  with  ^^Pl 
circumvallit.  He  compares  the  Greek  xop''o?,  which 
-  primarily  means  a  conrt  (for  cattle) ;  hence,  a  pasture  ; 


Common  leek  CAlHum  purmrn). 

of  the  original  word,  for,  says  Dr.  Kitto,  "  among 
the  wonders  in  the  natural  history  of  Egypt,  it  is 
mentioned  by  travellers  that  the  common  people 
there  eat  witli  special  relish  a  kind  o{ grass  similar 
to  clover."  Mayer  [Beise  nach  Aegyptien,  p.  226) 
says  of  this  plant  (whose  scientific  name  is  Trigo- 
nella  foenum  Graecum,  belonging  to  the  natural 
oi-der  Leguminosae) ,  that  it  is  similar  to  clover, 
but  its  leaves  more  pointed,  and  that  great  quan- 
tities of  it  are  eaten  by  the  people.  Forskal  mentions 
the  Trigonella  as  being  gi-owii  in  the  gardens  at 
Cairo ;  its  native  name  is  Halbeh  {Flor.  Aegypt. 
p.  81). 


TiigonoUii  foiMiuin-graecuin. 


Sonnini  {Voyage,  i.  379)  says,  "  In  this  fertile 
country,  the  Egyptians  themselves  eat  i\\e  fenu-grcc 


But 


hence,  in  an  extended  sense,  yrass  or  herbage. 
see  the  different  derivation  of  Furst. 

>>  The  word  employed  here   is  still  the  name  in 
Egypt  for  leek  (Hasselquist,  562). 


90 


LEES 


so  largely,  that  it  may  be  properly  called  the  food 
of  man.  In  the  month  of  November  they  cry 
'  green  halbeh  for  sale  ! '  in  the  streets  of  the 
town  ;  it  is  tied  up  in  large  bunches,  which  the 
inhabitants  pm'chase  at  a  low  price,  and  which 
they  eat  with  incredible  greediness  without  any 
kind  of  seasoning." 

The  seeds  of  this  plant,  which  is  also  cultivated 
in  Greece,  are  often  used ;  they  are  eaten  boiled  or 
raW,  mixed  with  honey.  Forskal  includes  it  in  the 
Materia  Medica  of  Kgypt  {Mat.  Med.  Kahir.  p. 
155).  However  plausible  may  be  this  theory  of 
Hengstenberg,  there  does  not  appear  sufficient  reason 
for  ignoring  the  old  versions,  which  seem  all  agreed 
that  the  leek  is  the  plant  denoted  by  chdtsir,  a 
vegetable  from  the  earliest  times  a  great  favourite 
with  the  Egyptians,  as  both  a  nourishing  and 
savoury  food.  Some  have  olijected  that,  as  the 
Egyptians  held  the  leek,  onion,  &c.,  sacred,  they 
would  abstain  from  eating  these  vegetables  them- 
selves, and  would  not  allow  the  Israelites  to  use 
thern.'^  We  have,  however,  the  testimony  of  Hero- 
dotus (ii.  125)  to  show  that  onions  wete  eaten  by 
the  Egyptian  poor,  for  he  says  that  on  one  of  the 
pyramids  is  shown  an  inscription,  which  was  e.x-- 
plained  to  him  by  an  intei-preter,  showing  how  much 
money  was  spent  in  providing  radishes,  onions,  and 
garlic,  for  the  workmen.  The  priests  were  not 
allowed  to  eat  these  things,  and  Plutarch  (De  Is.  ct 
Osir.  ii.  p.  353)  tells  us  the  reasons.  The  Welshman 
reverences  his  leek,  and  wears  one  on  St.  David's 
Day — he  eats  the  leek  nevertheless  ,•  and  doubtless 
the  Egyptians  were  not  over-scrupulous  {Scrip. 
Herbal,  p.  230).  The  leek ''  is  too  well-known  to  need 
description.  Its  botanical  name  is  Allium  pornmi ; 
it  belongs  to  the  order  Liliaceae.  [W.  H.] 

LEES  (nnOEj' :  rpvylai :  faeces).  The  Hebrew 
shemer  bears  the  radical  sense  of  preservation,  and 
was  applied  to  "lees"  from  the  custom  of  allowing 
the  wine  to  stand  on  the  lees  in  order  that  its  colour 
and  body  might  be  better  preserved.  Hence  the 
expression  "  wine  on  the  lees,"  as  meaning  a  gener- 
ous full-bodied  liquor  (Is.  xxv.  6).  The  wine  in 
this  state  )'emained,  of  course,  undisturbed  in  its 
cask,  and  became  thick  and  syrupy ;  hence  the 
proverb,  "  to  settle  upon  one's  lees,"  to  express  the 
sloth,  indifference,  and  gross  stupidity  of  the  un- 
godly (Jer.  xlviii.  11;  Zeph.  i.  12).  Before  the 
wine  was  consumed,  it  was  necessary  to  strain  off 
the  lees  ;  such  wine  was  then  termed  "  well  refined  " 
(Is.  XXV.  6).  To  drink  the  lees,  or  "dregs,"  was  an 
expression  tor  the  endurance  of  extreme  punishment 
(Ps.  Ixxv.  8).  [W.  L.  B.] 

LEGION  (Aeyecor :  Legio),  the  chief  sub- 
division of  the  l\oman  army,  containing  about  6000 
infantry,  with  a  contingent  of  cavalry.  The  term 
does  not  occur  in  the  Bible  in  its  primary  sense, 
but  appears  to  have  been  adopted  in  order  to  express 
any  laige  number,  with  the  accessory  ideas  of  order 
and  subordination.     Thus  it  is  applied  by  our  Lord 


■=  Juvenal's  derision  of  the  Egyptians  for  the  re- 
verence they  paid  to  the  leek  may  here  be  quoted  : 
"  Porrum  et  coepe  nefas  violare  ac  fransrere  morsu, 

O  sanctas  pontes,  quibus  haee  nascuntur  in  hortis 

Numina!  " — Sat.  sv.  9. 
Cf.  Plln.  S.  iV.  xix.  6  ;  Celsii  Hicroh.  ii.  2G3  ;  lliller. 
Hierophyt.  pt.  ii.  p.  36  ;  Diosc.  ii.  4. 

*  "Leek"  is  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  Irac,  German 
Innch. 

^  This  application  of  the  term  is  illustrated  by  the 


LEHl 

to  the  angels  (Matt.  xxvi.  53),  and  in  this  sense  it 
answers  to  the  "  hosts  "  of  the  Old  Testament  (Gen. 
xxxii.  2;  Ps.  cxlviii.  2).«  It  is  again  the  name 
which  the  demoniac  assumes,  "  My  name  is  Legion 
{Aeyidv)  ;  for  we  are  many"  (Mark  v.  9),  imply- 
ing the  presence  of  a  spirit  of  superior  power  in  ad- 
dition to  subordinate  ones.  [W,  L.  B.] 

LEHA'BIM  (D'^nn'p  :  Aa/8(6i>  :  Laahim), 
occiu'ring  only  in  Gen.  x.  13,  the  name  of  a  Miz- 
raite  people  or  tribe,  supposed  to  be  the  same  as 
the  Lubim,  mentioned  in  seveial  places  in  the  Scrip- 
tures as  mercen»iries  or  allies  of  the  Egyptians. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Lubim  are  the  same 
as  the  KeBU  or  LeBU  of  the  Egyptian  inscriptions, 
and  that  from  them  Libya  and  the  Libyans  derived 
their  name.  These  primitive  Libyims  appear,  in  the 
period  at  which  they  are  mentioned  in  these  two  his- 
torical sources,  that  is  from  the  time  of  Menptah,  B.C. 
cir.  1250,  to  that  of  Jeremiah's  notice  of  them  late 
in  the  6th  century  B.C.,  and  probably  in  the  case  of* 
Daniel's,  prophetically  to  the  earlier  part  of  the  second 
century  B.C.,  to  have  inhabited  the  northern  part  of 
Africa  to  the  west  of  Egypt,  though  latterly  driven 
from  the  coast  by  the  Greek  colonists  of  the  Cyre- 
naica,  as  is  more  fully  shown  under  Lubim.  Philolo- 
gically,  the  interchange  of  H  as  the  middle  letter  of 
a  root  into  1  quiescent,  is  frequent,  although  it  is  im- 
portant to  remark  that  Geseuius  considers  the  form 
with  n  to  be  more  common  in  the  later  dialects, 
as  the  Semitic  languages  are  now  found  ( Thes. 
art.  n).  There  seems  however  to  be  strong  reason 
for  considering  many  of  these  later  forms  to  be  re- 
currences to  primitive  forms.  Geographically,  the 
position  of  the  Lehabim  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
Mizraites  immediately  before  the  Naphtuhim,  sug- 
gests that  they  at  fii'st  settled  to  the  westward  of 
Egypt,  and  nearer  to  it,  or  not  more  distant  fiom 
it  tlian  the  tribes  or  peojjles  mentioned  before  them. 
[MizRAiM.]  Historically  and  ethnologically,  the 
connexion  of  the  ReBU  and  Libyans  with  Egypt 
and  its  peojjie  suggests  their  kindred  origin  with 
the  Egyptians.  [Lubim.]  On  these  grounds  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  of  the  identity  of  the 
Lehabim  and  Lubim.  [K.  S.  P.] 

LE'HI  (with  the  def.  article,  Tl?!!,  except  in 

ver.  14 :  Aeuei,  in  ver.  9  ;  Alex.  Aeui ;  "^tayd'v : 
Lechi,  id  est  maxilla'),  a  place  in  Judah,  probably 
on  the  confines  of  the  Philistines'  country,  between 
it  and  the  cliff'  Etam ;  the  scene  of  Samson's  well- 
known  exploit  with  the  jawbone  (Judg.  xv.  9,  14, 
19).  It  contained  an  eminence — Ramath-lehi,  and  a 
spring  of  great  md  lasting  repute — En  hak-kore. 

Whether  the  name  existed  before  the  exploit  or 
the  exploit  originated  the  name  cannot  now  be  de- 
termined from  the  narrative."  On  the  one  hand,  in 
vers.  9  and  19,  Lehi  is  named  as  if  existing  before 
this  occurrence,  while  on  the  other  the  play  of  the 
story  and  the  statement  of  the  bestowal  of  the  name 
Kamath-lehi  look  as  if  the  reveise  were  intended. 
The  analogy  of  similar  names  in  other  countries  •*  is 


Rabbinical    usage    of    j'VJp    as  =:  "  leader,    chief" 
(Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  p.  1123). 

"  It  is  unusually  full  of  plays  and  paronomastic  turns. 
Thus  in?  signifies  a  jaw,  and  "ipi'?  is  the  name  of  the 
place ;    "li^DPI  is  both  a  he-ass  and  a  heap,  &c. 

*>  Compare  the  somewhat  parallel  case  of  Dunchurcli 
and  Dunsmoor,  which,  in  the  local  traditions,  derive  their 
names  from  an  exploit  of  Guy  of  Warwick. 


LEMUEL 

in  flivour  of  its  having  existed  .  previouslj'.  Even 
taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  "  Lcchi "  has  another 
meaning  besides  a  jawbone  ;  and  after  all  there  is 
tliroughout  a  difi'erence  between  the  two  words, 
which,  though  sliglit  to  our  ears,  would  be  much 
more  marked  to  those  of  a  Hebrew,  and  which  so 
far  betrays  the  accommodation.*^ 

A  similar  discrepancy  in  the  case  of  Beer  Laliai-roi, 
and  a  great  similarity  between  the  two  names  in  the 
original  (Gesen.  Thes.  175  h),  has  led  to  the  suppo- 
sition that  that  place  was  the  same  as  Lehi.  But  the 
situations  do  not  suit.  The  well  Lahai-roi  was  below 
Kadesh,  very  far  from  the  locality  to  which  Samson's 
adventures  seem  to  have  been  conhiied.  The  same 
consideration  would  also  appear  fatjil  to  the  identi- 
fication proposed  by  M.  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  343) 
at  Tell  cl-Lekhiyeh,  in  the  extreme  south  of  Pales- 
tine, only  four  miles  above  Beersheba,  a  distance  to 
wliich  we  have  no  authority  for  believing  that 
either  Samson's  achievements  or  the  possessions  of 
the  Philistines  (at  least  in  those  days)  extended. 
As  far  as  the  name  goes,  a  more  feasible  suggestion 
would  be  Beit-Li/di/eh,  a  village  on  the  northern 
slopes  of  the  great  Wady  Suleiman,  about  two  miles 
below  the  upper  Beth-horon  (see  Tobler,  ?>tte  Wan- 
derung).  Here  is  a  position  at  once  on  the  borders 
of  both  Judah  and  the  Philistines,  and  witliiu  rea- 
sonable proximity  to  Zorah,  Eslitaol,  Timnath,  and 
other  places  familiar  to  the  history  of  the  great 
Danite  hero.  On  this,  however,  we  must  await 
fm'ther  investigation  ;  and  in  the  meantime  it  should 
not  be  overlooked  that  there  are  reasons  for  placing 
the  cliff  Etam — which  seems  to  have  been  near  Lehi 
— in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem.      [Etam, 

THE  ROCK.] 

The  spring  of  En  hak-kore  is  mentioned  by  Jerome 
{Epitaph.  Faulae,  §14-)  in  such  terms  as  to  imply 
that  it  was  then  known,  and  that  it  was  near 
Morasthi,  the  native  place  of  the  prophet  Micah, 
which  he  elsewhere  {Onom.  s.  v. ;  Fref.  ad  Mich.) 
mentions  as  east  of  Eleutheropolis  {Beit  Jibrin). 

Lehi  is  possibly  mentioned  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11 — 
the  relation  of  another  encounter  with  tlie  Phi- 
listines hardly  less  disastrous  than  that  of  Samson. 
The  word"*  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "into  a  troop," 
by  alteration  of  the  vowel-points  becomes  "  to  Lehi," 
which  gives  a  new  and  certainly  an  appropriate 
sense.  This  reading  first  appears  in  Josephus  {Ant. 
vii.  12,  §4),  who  gives  it  "a  place  called  Siagona" 
— the  jaw — the  word  which  he  employs  in  the  story 
of  Samson  {Ant.  v.  8,  §9).  It  is  also  given  in  the 
Comphitensian"^  LXX.,  and  among  modern  inter- 
preters by  Bochart  {Hieroz.  i.  2,  ch.  13),  Kennicott 
{Dissert.  140),  J.  D.  Michaelis  {Bibel  fur  Un- 
gelehrt.),  Ewald  {Geschichto,  iii.  180,  note).  [G.] 

LEM'UEL  (^N-1»^  and  hiiVoh  :  Lamucl),  the 
name  of  an  unknown  king  to  whom  his  mother 
addressed  the  prudential  maxims  contained  in  Prov. 
xxxi.  1-9.  'The  version  of  this  chapter  in  the  LXX. 
is  so  obscure  that  it  is  difficult  to  discover  what 


LENTILES 


91 


"  *n7=l^echi,  Is  the  name  of  the  place  in  vers.  9, 14, 19, 
and  in  Hamath-Lehi,  ver.  \1 :  whereas  L'cLi,  *p]^,  is  the 
word  for  jawbone.  In  ver.  19  the  words  "  in  the  jaw  " 
should  ha  "  in  Leh! :"  the  original  is  *n?3.  exactly  as  in 
9  ;  not  ^n?3'  as  in  16.    See  Milton,  Sams.  Ag.,  line  582. 

'''iTn?.  as  if  rrri.  from  the  root  ^n  (Gesen.  llies. 

p.  470).     In  this  sense  the  word  very  rarely  occurs  (set- 
A.  V.  of  Ps  Ixviii.  10,  .fO;  Ixxiv.  19).     It  cisewliere  has 


text  they  could  have  had  before  them.  In  the  ren- 
dering of  Lemuel  by  virh  6eov,  in  Prov.  xxxi.  1, 
some  traces  of  the  original  are  discernible,  but  in 
ver.  4  it  is  entirely  lost.  The  Rabbinical  com- 
mentators identify  Lemuel  with  Solomon,  and  tell 
a  strange  tale  how  that  when  he  married  the 
daughter  of  Pharaoh,  on  the  day  of  the  dedication 
of  the  Temple,  he  assembled  musicians  of  all  kinds, 
and  passed  the  night  awake.  On  the  morrow  he 
slept  till  the  fourth  hour,  with  the  keys  of  the 
Temple  beneath  his  pillow,  when  his  mother  en- 
tered and  upbraided  him  in  the  words  of  Prov. 
xxxi.  2-9.  Grotius,  adopting  a  fiinciful  etymology 
from  the  Arabic,  makes  Lemuel  the  same  as  Heze- 
kiah.  Hitzig  and  others  regard  him  as  king  or 
chief  of  an  Arab  tribe  dwelling  on  the  borders  of 
Palestine,  and  elder  brother  of  Agur,  whose  name 
stands  at  the  head  of  Prov.  xxx.  [See  Jakeh.] 
According  to  this  view  massd  (A.  V.  "  the  pro- 
phecy " )  is  Massa  in  Arabia  ;  a  region  mentioned 
twice  in  close  connexion  with  Dumah,  and  peopled 
by  the  descendants  of  Ishmael.  In  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  a  roving  band  of  Simeonites  drove  out  the 
Amalekites  from  Mount  Seir  and  settled  in  their 
stead  (1  Chr.  iv.  38-43),  and  from  these  exiles  of 
Israelitish  origin  Hitzig  conjectures  that  Lemuel 
and  Agur  were  descended,  the  former  having  been 
born  in  the  land  of  Israel ;  and  that  the  name 
Lemuel  is  an  older  form  of  Nemuel,  the  first-born 
of  Simeon  {Die  Spruche  Salomos,  p.  310-314).  But 
it  is  more  probable,  as  Eichhorn  and  Ewald  suggest, 
that  Lemuel  is  a  poetical  appellation,  selected  by 
the  author  of  these  maxims  for  the  guidance  of  a 
kmg,  for  the  purpose  of  putting  in  a  striking  form 
the  lessons  which  they  conveyed.  Signifying  as  it 
does  "  to  God,"  i.  e.  dedicated  or  devoted  to  God, 
like  the  similar  word  Lael,  it  is  in  ke(_'ping  with  the 
whole  sense  of  the  passage,  which  contains  the 
portraiture  of  a  virtuous  and  righteous  king,  and 
belongs  to  the  latest  period  of  the  proverbial  litera- 
ture of  the  Hebrews.  [W.  A.  W.] 

LENTILES  (D''*^'nj?,at/dsAjm;  <paK6s:  lens). 

There  cannot  be  the  least  doubt  that  the  A.  V.  is 
coiTect  in  its  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  which 
occurs  in  the  four  following  passages: — Gen.  xxv. 
34,  2  Sam.  .xvii.  28,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11,  and  Ez.  iv.  9 ; 
from  which  last  we  learn  that  in  times  of  scarcity 
leutiles  were  sometimes  used  in  making  bread.  There 
are  thi-ee  or  four  kinds  of  lentiles,  all  of  which  are 
still  much  esteemed  in  those  countries  where  they 
are  gi'own,  viz.  the  South  of  Europe,  Asia,  and 
North  Africa :  the  red  lentile  is  still  a  favourite 
article  of  food  in  the  East ;  it  is  a  small  kind,  the 
seeds  of  which  after  being  decorticated,  are  com- 
monly sold  in  the  bazaars  of  India.  The  modern 
Arabic  name  of  this  plant  is  identical  with  the  He- 
brew ;  it  is  known  in  Egypt  and  Arabia,  Syria,  &c., 
by  the  name  'Adas,  as  wc  learn  from  the  testimony 
of  several  travellers.^  When  Dr.  Robinson  was 
staying  at   the  castle  of  'Akabah,  he  partook  of 


the  sense  of"  living,"  and  thence  of  wild  animals,  which 
is  adopted  by  the  LXX.  in  this  place,  as  remarked  above. 
In  ver.  13  it  is  again  rendered  "  troop."  In  the  parallel 
nan-ative  of  1  Chronicles  (xl.  16),  the  word  njPlD.  a 
"  camp,"  is  substituted. 

^  The  Vatican  and  Alex.  MSS.  read  eis  B-qpia  (<n)-  •"« 
if  the  Philistines  had  come  on  a  hunting  expedition. 

"  Sec  also  Catafago's  Arabic  Dictionary,  "  Lentiles,' 

(j,^Ae.  "fit's- 


92 


LENTILES 


lentiles,  which  lie  says  he  "  found  very  palatable, 
and  could  well  conceive  that  to  a  weary  liunter, 
faint  with  hunger,  they  would  be  quite  a  dainty  " 


{Bib.  Res.  1.  246).  Dr.  Kitto  also  says  that  he  has 
often  partaken  of  red  pottage,  prepared  by  seething 
the  lentiles  in  water,  and  then  adding  a  little  suet, 
to  give  them  a  flavour ;  and  that  he  found  it  better 
food  than  a  stranger  would  imagine  ;  "  the  mess," 
he  adds,  "  had  the  redness  which  gained  for  it  the 
name  of  adorn  "  {Pict.  Bib.,  Gen.  xxv.  30,34).  From 
Sonnini  we  leain  that  lentile  bread  is  still  eaten  by 
the  poor  of  Egypt,  even  as  it  was  in  the  time  of 
Ezekiel  ;  indeed,  that  towards  the  catai'acts  of  the 
Nile  there  is  scarce  any  other  biead  in  use,  because 
corn  is  very  rare ;  the'  people  generaUy  add  a  little 
barley  in  making  their  bread  of  lentiles,  which  "  is 
by  no  means  bad,  though  heavy  "  (Sonnini's  Travels, 
Hunter's  transl.  iii.  288).  Shaw  and  Russell  bear 
similar  testimony. 


LEOPARD 

of  a  mosque  there  a  daily  supply  of  lentile  soup  to 
travellers  and  poor  inhabitants  (D'Arvieux,  3Iem. 
ii.  237). 

The  lentile,  Ervum  lens,  is  much  used  with  other 
pulse  in  Roman  Catholic  countries  during  Lent ;  and 
some  say  that  from  hence  the  season  derives  its  name. 
It  is  occasionally  cultivated  in  England,  but  only  as 
fodder  for  cattle ;  it  is  also  importcK.1  from  Alexandria. 
From  the  quantity  of  gluten  the  ripe  seeds  contain 
they  must  be  highly  nutritious,  though  they  have 
the  character  of  being  heating  if  taken  in  large 
quantities.  In  Egypt  the  haulm  is  used  for  packing. 
The  lentile  belongs  to  the  natural  order  Lcgumi- 
nosae.  [W.  H.] 

LEOPARD  (^J^3,  ndmer :  irdpSaXis  :  pardus) 

is  invariably  given  by  the  A.  V.  as  the  translation 
of  the  Hebrew  word,"  which  occurs  in  the  seven 
following  passages, — Is.  xi.  6  ;  Jer.  v.  6,  xiii.  23; 
Dan.  vii.  6;  Hos.  xiii.  7  ;  Cant.  iv.  8  ;  Hab.i.  8. 
Leopard  occurs  also  in  Ecclus.  xxviii.  23,  and  in 
Re\".  xiii.  2.  The  swiftness  of  this  animal,  to  which 
Habakkuk  compares  the  Chaldaean  horses,  and  to 
which  Daniel  alludes  in  the  winged  leopard,  the 
emblem  in  his  vision  of  Alexander's  rapid  conquests, 
is  well  known  :  so  great  is  the  flexibility  of  its  body, 
that  it  is  able  to  take  surprising  leaps,  to  climb  trees, 
or  to  crawl  snake-like  upon  the  ground.  Jeremiah 
and  Hosea  allude  to  the  insidious  habit  of  this  animal, 
which  is  abundantly  confiiTned  by  the  observations 


Egjptians  cooking  Lentiles  (Wilkinton). 

The  Arabs  have  a  tradition  that  Hebron  is  the 
spot  where  Esau  sold  his  birthright,  and  in  memory 
of  this  event  the  dervises  distribute  from  the  kitchen 


*  The  word  "lOJ  means  "spotted"  (see  the  deri- 
vations of  Furst  and  Geseiiius).  The  same  word  for 
"  leopard"  occurs  in  all  the  cognate  languages.     Tlio 


Arabic  is 


J*" 


(namir). 


BO 


{nimr],  with  which  the 


Leopard  (^Lcopardus  iraritts). 

of  travellers  ;  the  leopai'd  will  take  up  its  position  in 
some  spot  near  a  village,  and  watch  for  some  favour- 
able opportunity  for  plunder.  From  the  passage 
of  Canticles,  quoted  above,  we  learn  that  the  hilly 
ranges  of  Lebanon  were  in  ancient  times  frequented 
by  these  animals,  and  it  is  now  not  uncommonly 
seen  in  and  about  Lebanon,  and  the  southern 
maritime  mountains  of  Syria  ^  (Kitto,  note  on 
Cant.  iv.  8).  Burckhardt  mentions  that  leopards 
have  sometimes  been  killed  in  "  the  low  and  rocky 
chain  of  the  Richel  mountain,"  but  he  calls  them 
ounces  (Burck.  Syria,  p.  132).  In  another  passage 
(p.  335)  he  says,  "  in  the  wooded  parts  of  Mount 
Tabor  are  wild  boai's  and  ounces."  JIariti  says  that 
the  "  grottoes  at  Kedron  cannot  be  entered  at  all 
seasons  without  danger,  for  in  the  middle  of  summer 
it  is  frequented  by  tigere,  who  retire  hither  to  shun 
the  heat"  (Mariti,  Trnv.  (translated),  iii.  58).  By 
tigers  he  undoubtedly  means  leopards,  for  the  tiger 
does  not   occur   in    Palestine.      Under   the   name 


modern  Arabic  is  identical,  though  this  name  is  also 
applied  to  the  tiger ;  hut  perhaps  "  tiger "  and 
"  leopard  "  are  synonymous  in  those  countries  where 
the  former  animal  is  not  found. 

''  Beth-nimrah,  Nimrah,  the  waters  of  Nimrim, 
possibly  derive  their  names  from  Namcr  (Bochart, 
Ilieroz.  ii.  107,  ed.  Rosenmiill.). 


LEPER 

namer,'  which  means  "  spotted,"  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  another  animal,  namely  the  cheetah 
i^Gueparda  jabatu),  maybe  included;  which  is 
tamed  by  the  Mahometans  of  Syria,  who  employ 
it  in  hunting  the  gazelle.  These  animals  are 
represented  on  the  Egyptian  monuments ;  they 
were  chased  as  an  amusement  for  the  sake  of  their 
skins,  which  were  worn  by  the  priests  during  their 
ceremonies,  or  they  were  hunted  as  enemies  of  the 
farmyard  (^Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  ch.  viii.  20). 
Sir  G.  Wilkinson  also  draws  attention  to  the  fact 
that  there  is  no  appearance  of  the  leopard  (cheetah), 
having  been  employed  for  the  purpose  of  the  chase, 
on  the  monuments  of  Egypt;''  nor  is  it  now  used 
by  any  of  the  Afiiam  races  for  hunting.  The 
natives  of  Africa  seem  in  some  way  to  connect 
the  leopard  skin  with  the  idea  of  royalty,  and  to 
look  upon  it  as  part  of  the  insignia  of  majesty 
(Wood's  Nat.  Hist.  i.  160).  The  leopard  {Leo- 
pardus  varius)  belongs  to  the  family  Felidae,  sub- 
order Di\7«Y(gra(ine,  order  Cartiivora.  The  panther 
is  now  considered  to  be  only  a  variety  of  the  same 
animal.  [W.  H.] 

LEPER,  LEPROSY.  The  Egyptian  and 
Syrian  climates,  but  especially  the  rainless  atmos- 
phere of  the  former,  are  very  prolific  in  skin-dis- 
eases ;  including,  in  an  exaggerated  form,  some 
which  are  common  in  the  cooler  regions  of  western 
Europe.  Tlie  heat  and  drought  acting  for  long 
periods  upon  the  skin,  and  the  exposure  of  a  large 
surface  of  the  latter  to  their  influence,  combine  to 
predispose  it  to  such  ati'ections.  Even  the  modified 
forms  known  to  our  western  hospitals  show  a  per 
plexing  variety,  and  at  times  a  wide  departure  fi-om 
the  best-known  and  recorded  types ;  much  more 
then  may  we  expect  departure  fi-om  any  routine  of 
symptoms  amidst  the  fatal  fecundity  of  the  Levant 
in  this  class  of  disorders  (Good's  Study  of  Medicine, 
vol.  iv.  p.  445,  &c.,  ed.  4th).  It  seems  likely  that 
diseases  also  tend  to  exhaust  their  old  types,  and  to 
reappear  under  new  modifications.  [Medicine.] 
This  special  region,  however,  exhibiting  in  wide  va- 
riety that  class  of  maladies  which  disfigures  the 
person  and  makes  the  presence  horrible  to  the  be- 
holder, it  is  no  wonder  that  notice  was  early  drawn 
to  their  more  popular  symptoms.  The  Greek  ima- 
gination dwelt  on  them  as  the  proper  scourge  of  an 
offended  deity,  and  perhaps  foreign  forms  of  disease 
may  be  implied  by  the  expressions  used  (Aeschyl. 
Coeph.  27],  &c.),  or  such  as  an  intercourse  with 
Persia  and  Egypt  would  introduce  to  the  (jreeks. 
But,  whatever  the  variety  of  form,  there  seems 
strong  general  testimony  to  the  cause  of  all  alike, 
as  being  to  be  sought  in  hard  labour  in  a  heated 
atmosphere,  amongst  dry  or  powdery  substances, 
rendering  the  proper  care  of  the  skin  difficult  or 
impossible.  This  would  be'  aggravated  by  unwhole- 
some or  innutiitious  diet,  want  of  personal  clean- 
liness, of  clean  garments,  &c.     Thus  a  "baker's" 


LEPER 


93 


■=  Tlie  leopard  is  called  by  the  natives  of  India 
lakree-baug,  "  tree-tig;er."  In  Africa  also  "  tiger  " 
is  applied  to  the  "  leopard,"  the  former  animal  not 
existing  there. 

^  The  lion  was  always  employed  by  the  Egyptians 
for  the  purpose  of  the  chase.  See  Diodor.  i.  48  ;  and 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eijxjii.  ch.  viii.  17. 

'  Tlie  use  of  the  word  J?JJ,  in  association  with  the 
proper  term,  nPIV,  marks  the  outward  appearance 
as  the  chief  test  of  the  maludy.  For  yjj  means 
"a  blow"  or  "touch,"  and  is  etymologieally  i-epre- 
sented  \>y  playa,  our  "  jilague." 

''  The  raw  flesh  of  xiii.  10  miijht  be  discovered  in 


and  a  "  bricklayer's  itch,"  are  recorded  by  the 
faculty  (Bateman,  On  Skin  Diseases,  Psoriasis ; 
Good's  Study  of  Med.,  ib.  p.  459  and  484).» 

The  predominant  and  characteristic  form  of  lei^osv 
in  Scripture  is  a  white  variety,  covering  either  the 
entire  body  or  a  large  tract  of  its  surface ;  which 
has  obtained  the  name  of  lepra  Mosaica.  Such 
were  the  cases  of  Moses,  Miriam,  Naaman,  and 
Gehazi  (Ex.  iv.  6;  Num.  xii.  10;  2  K.  v.  1,  27; 
comp.  Lev.  xiii.  13).  But,  remarkably  enough,  in 
the  Mosaic  ritual-diagnosis  of  the  disease  (Lev.  xiii., 
xiv),  this  kind,  when  overspreading  the  whole  sur- 
face, appears  to  be  regarded  as  "clean"  (xiii.  12, 
13,  16,  17).  The  first  question  which  occurs  as 
we  read  the  entire  passage  is,  have  we  any  right  to 
assume  one  disease  as  spoken  of  throughout  ?  or  ra- 
ther— for  the  point  of  view  in  the  whole  passage  is 
ceremonial,  not  medical — is  not  a  register  of  certain 
symptoms,  marking  the  alHicted  person  as  under  a 
Divine  judgment,  all  that  is  meant,  without  raising 
the  question  of  a  plurality  of  diseases  ?  But  beyond 
this  preliminary  question,  and  supposing  the  symp- 
toms ascertained,  there  are  circumstances  which, 
duly  weighed,  will  prevent  our  expecting  the  iden- 
tity of  these,  with  modern  symptoms  in  the  same 
class  of  maladies.  The  Egyptian  bondage,  with  its 
studied  degi'adations  and  privations,  and  especially 
the  work  of  the  kiln  under  an  Egyptian  sun,  must 
have  had  a  frightful  tendency  to  generate  this  class  of 
disorders;  hence  Manetho  (Joseph,  cont.  Ap.  i.  26) 
asserts  that  the  ICgyptians  drove  out  the  Israelites  as 
infected  with  leprosy — a  strange  reflex,  perhaps,  of 
the  Mosaic  naiTative  of  the  "  plagues  "  of  Egypt,  yet 
probably  also  containing  a  germ  of  truth.  The  sudden 
and  total  change  of  food,  air,  dwelling,  and  mode  of 
life,  caused  by  the  Exodus,  to  this  nation  of  newly- 
emancipated  slaves  may  possibly  have  had  a  further 
tendency  to  skin-disorders,  and  novel  and  severe  re- 
pressive measures  may  have  been  required  in  the 
desert-moving  camp  to  secure  the  public  health,  or 
to  allay  the  panic  of  infection.  Hence  it  is  possible 
that  many,  perhaps  most,  of  this  repertory  of  symp- 
toms may  have  disappeared  with  the  period  of  the 
Exodus,  and  the  snow-white  form,  which  had  pre- 
existed, may  alone  have  ordinarily  continued  in  a  later 
age.  But  it  is  observable  that,  amongst  these  Levitical 
symptoms,  the  scaling,  or  peeling  off  of  the  surface, 
is  nowhere  mentioned,  nor  is  there  any  expression 
in  the  Hebrew  text  which  points  to  exfohation  of  the 
cuticle.''  The  principal  morbid  features  are  a  rising  or 
swelling,''  a  scab  or  baldness,''  and  a  bright  or  white* 
spot  (xiii.  2).  [Baldness.]  But  especially  a 
white  swelling  in  the  skin,  with  a  change  of  the  hair 
of  the  part  from  the  natural  black  to  white  or  yellow 
(3,  10,  4,  20,  25,  30),  or  an  appearance  of  a  taint 
going  "  deeper  than  the  skin,"  or  again,  "  raw  flesh" 
appearing  in  the  swelling  (10,  14,  15),  were  critical 
signs  of  pollution.  The  mere  swelling,  or  scab,  or 
bright  spot,  was  remanded  for  a  week  as  doubtful  (4, 

this  way,  or  by  the  skin  merely  cracking,  an  abscess 
forming,  or  the  like.  Or — what  is  more  probable — 
"raw  flesh"  means  granulations  forming  on  patches 
where  the  surface  had  become  excoriated.  These 
granulations  would  form  into  a  fungous  flesh  which 
might  be  aptly  called  "  raw  flesh." 

■^  nnSD,  nn3pD.Gesenius,s.f.,  says,  "strictly  a 
bald  place  on  the  head  occasioned  by  the  scab  or  itch." 

"  mn3.  The  root  appears  to  be  "iri3,  which  in 
Chald.'and  Arab,  means  "to  be  white,  or  shining'' 
(ticscn.  i.  »'.). 


94 


LEPER 


21,  26,  31),  and  for  a  second  such  period,  if  it  had 
not  yet  pronounced  (5).  If  it  then  spread  (7,  22, 
27,  35),  it  was  decided  as  poUuting.  But  if  after 
the  second  period  of  quarantine  the  ti-ace  died  away  f 
and  showed  no  symptom  of  spreading,  it  was  a  mere 
scab,  and  he  was  adjudged  clean  (6,  23,  34).  This 
tendency  to  spread  seems  especially  to  have  been 
relied  on.  A  spot  most  innocent  in  all  other  re- 
spects, if  it  "spread  much  abroad,"  was  unclean  ; 
whereas,  as  before  remarkal,  the  man  so  wholly 
overspread  with  the  evil  that  it  could  find  no 
farther  range,  was  on  the  contrary  "clean"  (12, 
13).  These  two  opposite  criteria  seem  to  show, 
that  whilst  the  disease  manifested  activity,  the  Mosaic 
law  imputed  pollution  to  and  imposed  segregation  on 
the  sufterer,  but  that  the  point  at  which  it  might  be 
viewed  as  having  run  its  course  was  the  signal  for  his 
readmission  to  communion.  The  question  then  arises, 
supposing  contagion  were  dreaded,  and  the  suhbrer  on 
that  account  suspended  from  human  society,  would 
not  one  who  oflered  the  whole  area  of  his  body  as  a 
means  of  propagating  the  pest  be  more  shunned 
than  the  partially  afflicted  ?  This  leads  us  to  regard 
the  disease  in  its  sacred  character.  The  Hebrew  was 
reminded  on  every  side,  even  on  that  qf  disease,  that 
he  was  of  God's  peculiar  people.  His  time,  his  food 
and  raiment,  his  hair  and  beard,  his  field  and  fruit- 
tree,  all  were  touched  by  tlic  finger  of  ceremonial ; 
nor  was  his  bodi'y  condition  exempt.  Disease  itself 
had  its  sacred  relations  arbitrarily  imposed.  Cer- 
tainly contagion  need  not  be  the  basis  of  our  views 
in  tracing  these  relations.  In  the  contact  of  a  dead 
body  there  was  no  notion  of  contagion,  for  the  body 
the  moment  life  was  extinct  was  as  much  ceremo- 
nially unclean  as  in  a  state  of  decay.  Many  of 
the  unclean  of  beasts,  &c.,  are  as  wholesome  as  the 
clean.  Why  then  in  leprosy  must  we  have  recourse 
to  a  theory  of  contagion  ?  To  cherish  an  undefined 
lioiTor  in  the  mind  was  perhaps  the  primary  object ; 
such  horror,  however,  always  tends  to  some  definite 
dread,  in  this  case  most  naturally  to  the  dread  of 
contagion.  Thus  religious  awe  would  ally  itself 
with  and  rest  upon  a  lower  motive,  and  there 
would  thus  be  a  motive  to  weigh  with  carnal  and 
spiritual  natures  alike.  It  would  perhaps  be  nearer 
the  truth  to  say,  that  uncleanness  was  imputed, 
rather  to  inspire  the  di'ead  of  contagion,  than  in  order 
to  check  contamination  as  an  actual  process.  Thus 
this  disease  was  a  living  plague  set  in  the  man  by  the 
finger  of  God  whilst  it  showed  its  life  by  activity — 
bv  "spreading;"  but  when  no  more  showing  signs 
of  life,  it  lost  its  character  as  a  curse  from  Him. 
Such  as  dreaded  contagion — and  the  immense  ma- 
jority in  every  country  have  an  exaggerated  alarm 
of  it — would  feel  on  the  safe  side  through  the  Levi- 
tical  ordinance  ;  if  any  did  not  fear,  the  loathsome- 
ness of  the  aspect  of  the  malady  would  prevent 
them  from  wishing  to  infringe  the  ordinance. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  enter  into  the  question  whe- 
ther the  contagion  existed,  nor  is  there  perhaps  any 
more  vexed  question  in  pathology  than  how  to  fix  a 
rule  of  contagiousness  ;  but  whatever  was  currently 
believed,  unless  opposed  to  morals  or  humanity,  would 
have  been  a  sufficient  basis  for  the  lawgiver  on  this 
subject.  The  panic  of  infection  is  often  as  distress- 
ing, or  rather  far  more  so,  in  proportion  as  it  is  far 


f  The  -word  in  the  Ilcb.  is  iinS,  which  means  to 
languish  or  fade  away  ;  hence  the  A.  V.  hardly  con- 
veys the  sense  adequately  by  "  he  somewhat  dark." 
Perhaps  the  expressions  of  Hippocrates,  who  speaks 
of  a  fte'Aas  form  of  leprosy,  and  of  Celsus,  who  men- 


LEPER 

more  widely  diffused,  than  actual  disease.  Nor 
need  we  exclude  popular  notions,  so  far  as  tliey  do 
not  confiict  with  higher  views  of  the  Mosaic  eco- 
nomy. A  degree  of  deference  to  them  is  perhaps 
apparent  in  the  special  reference  to  the  "  head  ''  and 
"  beard  "  as  the  seat  of  some  form  of  polluting  dis- 
order. The  sanctity  and  honom-  attaching  to  the 
head  and  beard  ( 1  Cor.  xi.  3,  4,  5  ;  see  also  Beakd) 
made  a  scab  thereon  seem  a  heinous  disfigurement, 
and  even  baldness,  though  not  unclean,  yet  was  un- 
usual and  pi'ovoked  reproach  (2  K.  ii.  23),  and 
when  a  diseased  appearance  arose  "  out  of  a  bald- 
ness "  even  without  "  spreading  abroad,"  it  was  at 
once  adjudged  "  unclean."  On  the  whole,  though 
we  decline  to  rest  leprous  defilement  merely  on  po- 
pular notions  of  abhorrence,  dread  of  contagion, 
and  the  like,  yet  a  deference  to  them  may  be  ad- 
mitted to  have  been  shown,  especially  at  the  time 
when  the  people  were,  from  previous  habit  and 
associations,  up  to  the  moment  of  the  actual  Exodus, 
most  strongly  imbued  with  the  scrupulous  purity 
and  refined  ceremonial  example  of  the  Egyptians  on 
these  subjects. 

To  trace  the  symptoms,  so  far  as  they  are  re- 
corded, is  a  simple  task,  if  we  keep  merely  to  the 
text  of  Leviticus,  and  do  not  insist  on  finding  nice 
definitions  in  the  broad  and  simple  language  of  an 
early  period.  It  appears  that  not  only  the  l)efore- 
mentioned  appearances  but  any  open  sore  which 
exposed  raw  flesh  was  to  be  judged  by  its  effect 
on  the  hair,  by  its  being  in  sight  lower  than  the 
skin,  by  its  tendency  to  spread ;  and  that  any  one  of 
these  symptoms  would  argue  uncleanness.  It  seems 
also  that  from  a  boil  and  from  the  efiects  of  a  bum  a 
similar  disease  might  be  developed.  Nor  does  mo- 
dern pathology  lead  iis  to  doubt  that,  given  a  con- 
stitutional tendency,  such  causes  of  inflammation 
may  result  in  various  disorders  of  the  skin  or  tissues. 
Cicatrices  after  burns  are  known  sometimes  to  assume 
a  peculiar  tuberculated  appearance,  thickened  and 
raised  above  the  level  of  the  surrounding  skin — the 
keloid  tumour — which,  however,  may  also  appear  in- 
dependently of  a  burn. 

The  language  into  which  tlie  LXX.  has  rendered 
the  simple  phrases  of  the  Hebrew  text  shows  traces 
of  a  later  school  of  medicine,  and  suggests  an  ac- 
quaintance with  the  terminology  of  Hippocrates. 
This  has  given  a  hint,  on  which,  apparently  wishing 
to  reconcile  early  Biblical  notices  with  the  results 
of  later  observation.  Dr.  Mason  Good  and  some  other 
professional  expounders  of  leprosy  have  drawn  out 
a  comparative  table  of  parallel  terms.s 

It  is  clear  then  that  the  leprosy  of  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv. 
means  any  severe  disease  spreading  on  the  surface  of 
the  body  in  the  way  described,  and  so  shocking  of 
aspect,  or  so  generally  suspected  of  infection,  that 
public  feeUng  called  for  separation.  No  doubt  such 
diseases  as  syphilis,  elephantiasis,  cancer,  and  all 
others  which  not  merely  have  their  seat  in  the  skin, 
but  which  invade  and  disorganise  the  underlying 
and  deeper-seated  tissues,  would  have  been  classed 
Levitically  as  "leprosy,"  had  they  been  so  gene- 
rally prevalent  as  to  require  notice. 

It  is  now  imdoubted  that  the  "leprosy"  of 
modern  Syria,  and  which  has  a  wide  range  in  Spain, 
Greece,  and  Norway,  is  the  Elephantiasis  Graeco- 


tions  one  umbrae  similis,  may  have  led  our  translators 
to  endeavour  to  find  equivalents  for  them  in  the 
Hebrew. 

6  Thus  we  have  in  Kitto's  Ci/clopaedia  of  Eihlwal 
Literature  the  following  table,  based  apparently  on  a 


I.EPER 

rum.  The  Arabian  physicimis  perhaps  caused  the 
confusion  of  terms,  who,  when  they  translateil  the 
Greek  of  Hippocrates,  rendered  his  elephantiasis  by 
leprosy,  there  being  another  disease  to  which  they 
gave  a  name  derived  from  the  elephant,  and  which 
is  now  known  as  Elephantiasis  Arabum, — the  "Bar- 
badoes  leg,"  "  Boucnemia  Tropica."  The  Ele- 
phantiasis Graecornm  is  said  to  have  been  brought 
home  by  the  crusaders  into  the  various  countries  of 
Western  and  Noi-theru  Europe.  Thus  an  article 
on  "  Leprosy,"  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Royal  Me- 
dical and  Chirurgical  Society  of  Loudon,  Jan.  1860, 
A'ol.  iii.  3,  p.  164,  &c.,  by  Dr.  Webster,  describes 
what  is  evidently  this  disease.  Thus  Michaelis 
(Smith's  translation,  vol.  iii.  p.  283,  Art.  ccx.) 
speaks  of  what  he  calls  lepra  Arahuni,  the  symp- 
toms of  which  are  plainly  elephantisiac.  For  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  question  whether  this  disease  was 
known  in  the  early  Biblical  period,  see  Medicine. 
It  certainly  was  not  that  3istinctive  white  leprosy  of 
which  we  are  now  speaking,  nor  do  any  of  the  de- 
scribed symptoms  in  Lev.  xiii.  point  to  elephan- 
tiasis. "  White  as  snow  "  (2  K.  v.  27)  would  be 
as  inapplicable  to  elephantiasis  as  to  small-pox. 
Further,  the  most  striking  and  fearful  results  of 
this  modem  so-called  "  leprosy  "  are  wanting  in  the 
Mosaic  description — the  transformation  of  the  fea- 
tures to  a  leonine  expression,  and  the  corrosion  of 
the  joints,  so  that  the  fingers  drop  piecemeal,  from 

which  the  Arabic  name,   ^J  js^.,  Jtidhdin,  i.  e. 

mutilation,  seems  derived.''  Yet  before  we  dismiss 
the  question  of  the  affinity  of  this  disease  with  Mosaic 
leprosy,  a  description  of  liayer's  (  Traite  Theoriqne, 
4'C.,  des  Maladies  de  la  Peau,  s.  v.  Elephantiasis)  is 
worth  quoting.  He  mentions  two  characteristic  spe- 
cies, the  one  tuberculated,  probably  the  commoner 
kmd  at  present  (to  judge  trom  the  concurrence  of 
modern  authorities  in  describing  this  type),  the  other 
"  characterise'e  par  des  plaques  fauves,  larges,  e'tendues, 
fleti-ies,  ride'es,inseusibles,accompagnees  d'une  legfere 
desquamation  et  d'une  deformation  particuliere  des 
pieds  et  des  mains,"  and  which  he  deems  identical 
with  the  "l^pre  du  moyen  age."  This  certainly 
appears  to  be  at  least  a  link  between  the  tuber- 


LEPER 


95 


more  extensive  one  in  Dr.  Mason  Good  («6.  sup.  pp. 
448,  452),  -which  is  chiefly  characterised  by  an  at- 
tempt to  fix  modern  specific  meanings  on  the  general 

nnna,  Lev. 

comprehending 

(1)  \>rix 

(2)  njn^  nnn3, 

(3)  nn3  nnna. 

But  tlic  Hebrew  of  ( 1)  is  in  Lev.  xiii.  39  predicated 
of  a  sulijcct  compounded  of  the  phraseology  of  (2)  and 
(3),  whereas  the  (1),  (2),  and  (3)  of  Hipp,  and  of 
Celsus  are  respectively  distinct  and  mutually  exclusive 
of  one  another.  Further,  the  word  11(13  appears 
mistranslated  by  "  hlack  "  or  "dark ;"  meaning  rather 
"  languid,"  "  dim,"  as  an  old  man's  eyes,  an  expiring 
and  feeble  flame,  &c.  Now  it  is  remarkable  that  the 
Hippocratio  terms  a\ij)6<;  and  Aeuxr;  are  found  in  the 
LXX.  The  jjhrascology  of  the  latter  is  also  more 
specific  than  will  adequately  represent  the  Hebrew, 
suggesting  shades  of  meaning  *  where  this  has  a  wide 


culated  elephantiasis  and  the  Mosaic  leprosy.'  Cel- 
sus, after  distinguishing  the  three  Hippocratic  va- 
rieties of '(»'i«%o=  leprosy,  separately  describes  ele- 
phantiasis. Avicenna  (Dr.  Mead,  Medica  Sacra, 
"  the  Leprosy  ")  speaks  of  leprosy  as  a  sort  of  uni- 
versal cancer  of  the  whole  body.  But  amidst  the 
evidence  of  a  redundant  variety  of  diseases  of  the 
skin  and  adjacent  tissues,  and  of  the  probable  rapid 
production  and  evanescence  of  some  forms  of  them, 
it  would  be  rash  to  assert  the  identity  of  any  from 
such  resemblance  as  this. 

Nor  ought  we  in  the  question  of  identity  of 
symptoms  to  omit  from  view,  that  not  only  does 
observation  become  more  precise  with  accumulated 
experience  ;  but,  that  diseases  also,  in  proportion  as 
they  fix  their  abiding  seat  in  a  climate,  region,  or 
race  of  men,  tend  probably  to  diversity  of  type,  and 
that  in  the  course  of  centuries,  as  with  the  fauna 
and  flora,  varieties  originate  in  the  modifying  in- 
fluence of  circumstances,  so  that  Hippocrates  might 
find  three kindsof  leprosy,  where  one  vai  iety  only  had 
existed  before.  Whether,  therefore,  we  regard  Lev. 
xiii.  as  speaking  of  a  group  of  diseases  having  mu- 
tually a  mere  supei'ficial  resemblance,  or  a  real  affi- 
nity, it  need  not  perplex  us  that  they  do  not  corre- 
spond with  the  threefold  leprosy  of  Hippocrates  (the 
a\<p6s,  \evK7i,  and  /xeA.as),  which  are  said  by  Bate- 
man  {Ski7i  Diseases,  Plates  vii.  and  viii.)  to  prevail 
still  respectively  as  lepra  alphoides,  lepra  vulgaris, 
and  lepra  nigricans.  The  first  has  more  minute  and 
whiter  scales,  and  the  circular  patches  in  which  they 
form  are  smaller  than  those  of  the  vulgaris,  which 
appears  in  scaly  discs  of  different  sizes,  having  nearly 
always  a  circular  form,  first  presenting  small  distinct 
red  shining  elevations  of  the  cuticle,  then  white  scales 
which  accumulate  sometimes  into  a  thick  crust ;  or, 
as  Dr.  Mason  Good  describes  its  appearance  (vol.  iv. 
p.  451),  as  having  a  spreading  scale  upon  an  elevated 
base ;  the  elevations  depressed  in  the  middle,  but 
without  a  change  of  colour ;  the  black  hair  oa  the 
patches,  which  is  the  prevailing  colour  of  the  hair  in 
Palestine,  participating  in  the  whiteness,  and  the 
patches  themselves  prepetually  widening  in  their 
outline.  A  phosphate  of  lime  is  probably  what 
gives  their  bright  glossy  colour  to  the  scaly  patches, 


terms  of  Lev.  xiii. 
yj3,  ictus,  "blow' 


:  e.  g.  JIXK',  herpes,  or  tetter ; 
or  "  bruise,"  &c. 


\firpa,  Hipp. 

vitiligo,  Cels. 

comprehending 

comprehending 

(1) 
(••1) 

(  a\(p6s, 

XevKT],             - 
IJ,4\a?. 

(1) 
-      (2) 
"      (3) 

'  alhida, 

Candida, 
j  nigrescens,  or 
[     umbrae  similis. 

*  Thus  the  expression  Iti^^  11J?D  \yOVi  "  deeper 
than  the  skin  of  the  flesh,"  is  rendered  in  ver.  3  by 
ra.TT^ivy\  ctTrb  tou  fie'pjaaTo<r,  in  30  by  t^KotAortpa  toO 
5e'p/u.aT0?,  in  34  by  koiA>(  aTro  toO  <S. 


general  word,  or  substituting  a  word  denoting  one 
symptom  as  epaOcrjaa,-]'  "  crust,"  formed  probably  by 
humour  oozing,  for  pJlJ,  "  expilation." 

^  This  is  clearly  and  forcibly  pointed  out  in  an 
article  by  Dr.  Kobert  Sim  in  the  Medical  Times, 
April  14,  1860,  whose  long  hospital  experience  in 
Jerusalem  entitles  his  remarks  'o  great  weight. 

*  On  the  question  how  far  elephantiasis  may  pro- 
bably have  been  mixed  up  wiih  the  leprosy  of  the 
Jews,  see  PauL  Aegin.  vol.  ii.  p.  6  and  32,  33,  ed. 
Syd.  Soc.  

t  So  Dr.  M.  Good,  who  improves  on  the  Opaitrfia 
by  eKTreV/o-is,  "  suppuration,"  wishing  to  substitute 
moist  scall  for  the  "  dry  scall "  "f  the  A.  V.,  which 
latter  is  no  doubt  nearer  the  mark. 


06 


LEPER 


and  this  in  the  kindred  disease  of  iethyosis  is  depo- 
sited in  greiit  abundance  on  tlie  surface.  The  third, 
nigricanSj  or  rather  subfusca,^  is  rarer,  in  form  and 
distiibution,  resembling  the  second,  but  ditiering  in 
the  dark  livid  colour  of  the  patches.  The  scaly  in- 
crustations of  the  first  species  infest  the  flat  of  the 
fore-arm,  knee,  and  elbow  joints,  bat  on  the  face 
seldom  extend  beyond  the  forehead  and  temples ; 
conip.  2  Chr.  xxvi.  19  :  "  the  leprosy  rose  np  in  his 
forehead."  The  cure  of  this  is  not  difficult;  the  se- 
cond scarcely  ever  heals  (Celsus,  Be  Med.\.  28,  §19). 
The  third  is  always  accompanied  by  a  cachetic  con- 
dition of  body.  Further,  elephantiasis  itself  has  also 
passed  current  imderthe  name  of  the  ''  black  leprosy." 
It  is  possible  that  the  "  freckled  spot  "  of  the  A.  V. 
Lev.  -xiii.  39™  may  correspond  with  the  harmless 
1.  alphoides,  since  it  is  noted  as  "  clean."  The  ed. 
of  Paulus  Aegin.  by  the  Sydenham  Society  (vol.  ii. 
p.  17,  foil.)  gives  the  following  summary  of  the 
opinions  of  classical  medicine  on  this  subject: — 
"  Galen  is  very  deficient  on  the  subject  of  lepra, 
having  nowhere  given  a  complete  description  of  it, 
though  he  notices  it  incidentally  in  many  parts  of 
his  works.  In  one  place  he  calls  elephas,  leuce,  and 
alplios  cognate  affections.  Alphos,  he  says,  is  much 
more  superficial  tlian  leuce.  Psora  is  said  to  par- 
take more  of  the  nature  of  ulceration.  Accoi'ding 
to  Oribasius,  lepra  affects  mostly  the  deep-seated 
parts,  and  psora  the  superficial.  Aetins  on  the 
other  hand,  copying  Archigenes,  represents  lepra  as 
affecting  only  the  skin.  Actuarius  states  that  lepra 
IS  next  to  elephautia  in  malignity,  and  that  it  is 
distinguished  from  psoi'a  by  spreading  deeper  and 
having  scales  of  a  circular  shape  like  those  of  fishes. 
Leuce  holds  the  same  place  to  alphos  that  lepra 
does  to  psora ;  that  is  to  say,  leuce  is  more  decp- 
.seated  and  affects  the  colour  of  the  hair,  while 
alphos  is  more  superficial,  and  the  hair  in  general 
is  unchanged.  .  .  .  Alexander  Aphrodisiensis  men- 
tions psora  among  the  contagious  diseases,  but  says 
that  lepra  and  leuce  are  not  contagious.  Chrysostom 
alludes  to  the  common  opinion  that  psora  was 
among  the  contagious  diseases.  .  .  .  Celsus  describes 
alphos,  melas,  and  leuce,  very  intelligibly,  connecting 
them  together  by  the  generic  tenn  of  vitiligo."    ' 

There  is  a  remarkable  concurrence  between  the 
Aeschylean  description  of  the  disease  which  was  to 
produce  "  lichens  coursing  ov'er  the  flesh,  eroding 
with  fierce  voracity  the  former  natural  structure, 
and  white  hairs  shooting  up  over  the  part  diseased,"" 
antl  some  of  the  llosaic  symptoms ;  the  spreading 
energy  of  the  evil  is  dwelt  upon  both  by  Moses  and 
by  Aeschylus,  as  vindicating  its  character  as  a  scourge 
of  God.  But  the  symptoms  of  "  white  hairs  "  is  a 
curious  and  exact  confirmation  of  the  genuineness  of 
the  detail  in  the  Mosaic  account,  especially  as  the 
poet's  language  would  rather  imply  that  the  disease 
spoken  of  was  not  then  domesticated  in  Greece,  but 


^  Still  it  is  known  that  blaclv  secretions,  sometimes 
carried  to  the  extent  of  negro  blackness,  have  been 
produced  under  the  skin,  as  in  the  rete  mucosum  of 
tlie  African.  See  Medico-Chinirgkal  Rev.,  New  Series, 
vo!.  V.  p.  215,  Jan.  18-J7. 

"  Ilcb.  pn3  ;  Arab.'ii^  .. 

"  irapKuiv  c7raja)3aTijpa!  aypi'at;  ■yi'dftot; 

AeuKas  Se  Koptras  TJjS'  eTravTeAAeif  votrw. 

Choeph.  271-274. 

°  So Surcnh\isiiis  (Mishna,  JVf/yaiw)  says,  "Maculae 
aliquando  siibviridcs,  aIi<iuando  snbrubidae,  cujus- 
modi   vidcri  sclent  in  aegrotorum  indiisiis,  ct  pvac- 


LEPER 

the  strange  horror  of  some  other  land.  Still,  nothing 
very  remote  from  our  own  experience  is  implied  iu 
the  mere  changed  colour  of  the  hair ;  it  is  common  to 
see  horses  with  galled  backs,  &c.,  in  which  the  hair 
has  turned  white  through  the  destruction  of  those 
follicles  which  secrete  the  colouring  matter. 

There  lemains  a  cuilous  question,  before  we  quit 
Leviticus,  as  regards  the  leprosy  of  ganments  and 
houses.  Some  have  thought  garments  worn  by 
leprous  patients  intended.  The  discharges  of  the 
diseased  skin  absorbed  into  the  apparel  would,  if  in- 
fection were  possible,  probably  convey  disease  ;  and 
it  is  known  to  be  highly  dangerous  in  some  cases  to 
allow  clothes  which  have  so  imbibed  the  discharges 
of  an  ulcer  to  be  worn  again."  And  the  words  of 
Jude  V.  23,  may  seem  to  countenance  this,P  "  hating 
even  the  garment  spotted  by  the  flesh."  But  Istly, 
no  mention  of  infection  occurs  ;  2ndly,  no  con- 
nexion of  the  leprous  garment  with  a  lepi'ous  hu- 
man wearer  is  hinted  ix ;  3rdly,  this  would  not 
help  us  to  account  for  a  leprosy  of  stone-walls  and 
plaster.  Thus  Dr.  Mead  {ut  sup.')  speaks  at  any 
rate  plausibly  of  the  leprosy  of  garnients,  but  be- 
comes unreasonable  when  he  extends  his  explanation 
to  that  of  walls.  jMichaelis  thought  that  wool  from 
sheep  which  had  died  of  a  particular  disease  might 
fret  into  holes,  and  exhibit  an  appearance  like  tliat 
described.  Lev.  xiii.  47-59  (Michaelis,  art.  ccxi. 
iii.  290-1).  But  woollen  cloth  is  far  from  being 
the  only  material  mentioned  ;  nay,  there  is  even 
some  reason  to  think  that  the  words  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "  warp"  and  "  woof"  are  not  those  distinct 
parts  of  the  texture,  but  distinct  materials.  Linen, 
however,  and  leather  are  distinctly  particularised, 
and  the  latter  not  only  as  regards  garments,  but  "  any 
thing  (lit.  vessel)  made  of  skin,"  for  instance,  bottles. 
Tliis  classing  of  garments  and  house-walls  with  the 
human  epidermis,  as  leprous,  has  moved  the  mirth 
of  some,  and  the  wonder  of  others.  Yet  modern 
science  has  established  what  goes  far  to  vindicate 
the  Mosaic  classification  as  more  philosophical  than 
such  cavils.  It  is  now  known  that  there  are  some 
skin-diseases  which  originate  in  an  acarus,  and  others 
which  proceed  from  a  fungus.  In  these  we  may 
probably  find  the  solution  of  the  paradox.  Tlie  ana- 
logy between  the  insect  which  frets  the  human  skin 
and  that  which  frets  the  garment  that  covers  it,  be- 
tween the  fungous  giowth  that  lines  the  crevices  of 
the  epidermis  and  that  wliicli  ci'eeps  in  the  interstices 
of  masonry,^  is  close  enough  for  the  purposes  of  a 
ceremonial  law,  to  which  it  is  essential  that  there 
should  be  an  arbitrary  element  intermingled  with 
provisions  manifestly  reasonable.  Michaelis  {ib.  art. 
ccxi.  iii.  293-9)  has  suggested  a  nitrous  efflorescence 
on  the  surface  of  the  stone,  pro: luced  by  saltpetre, 
or  rather  au  acid  containing  it,  and  issiiing  in  red 
spots,  and  cites  the  example  of  a  house  in  Lubeck  ; 
he  mentions  also  exfoliation  of  the  stone  from  other 


cipue  ea  in  parte  ubi  vis  morbi  medicina  sudorifera  e 
corpore  exterius  prodierit." 

P  See,  however,  Lev.  xv.  3,  4,  which  suggests  an- 
other possible  meaning  of  the  words  of  St.  Jude'. 

■5  Tlie  word  AeixV'  (the  "lichen"  of  botany),  the 
.Aeschylean  word  to  express  the  dreaded  scourge  in 
Chnephor.  271-274  (comp.  Eiimcn.  785,  see  note  /i;,ls 
also  the  technical  term  for  a  disease  akin  to  leprosy. 
The  cd.  of  Paulus  Aegin.,  Sydenh.  Soc,  vol.  ii.  p.  19, 
says  that  the  poet  here  means  to  describe  leprosy.  In 
the  Isagoge,  generally  ascribed  to  Galon  (ih.  p.  25), 
two  varieties  are  described,  the  lichen  mitis  and  the 
lichen  agrins,  in  both  of  which  scales  are  formed 
upon  tlie  skin.  Galen  remarks  on  the  tendency  of 
this  disease  to  pass  into  lepra  and  scabies. 


LESHEM 

causes  ;  but  probably  these  appearances  would  not  be 
developed  without  a  greater  degree  of  damp  than  is 
common  in  Palestine  and  Arabia.  It  is  manifest  also 
that  a  disease  in  the  human  subject  caused  by  an 
ac<arus  or  by  a  fungus  would  be  certainly  contagious, 
since  the  propagative  cause  could  be  transferred  from 
person  to  person.  Some  phj'sicians  indeed  assert 
that  only  such  skin-diseases  are  contagious.  Hence 
perhaps  arose  a  further  reason  for  marking,  even  in 
their  analogues  among  lifeless  substances,  the  strict- 
ness with  which  forms  of  disease  so  arising  were  to 
be  shunned.  The  sacriHcial  law  attending  the  pur- 
gation of  the  leper  will  be  more  conveniently  treated 
of  under  Uncleannkss. 

The  lepers  of  the  New  Testament  do  not  seem  to 
offer  occasion  for  special  remark,  save  that  by  the 
N.  T.  period  the  disease,  as  known  in  Palestine,  pro- 
bably did  not  differ  materially  from  the  Hippocratic 
record  of  it,  and  that  when  St.  Luke  at  any  rate  uses 
the  words  Aftrpa,  \4Trf)os,  he  does  so  with  a  recog- 
nition of  their  strict  medical  signification. 

From  Surenhusius  (^Mishna,  Negalin),  we  find  that 
some  Kabbinical  commentators  enumerate  16,  36, 
or  72  diverse  species  of  leprosy,  but  they  do  so  by 
including  all  the  phases  which  each  passes  through, 
reckoning  a  red  and  a  green  variety  in  garments, 
the  same  in  a  house,  &c.,  and  counting  cakitinm, 
recalvatio,  adustio,  and  even  ulcus,  as  so  many  dis- 
tinct forms  of  leprosy. 

For  further  illustrations  of  this  subject  see 
Schilling,  de  Lepra-  Re\nha.Yd,  BibelArankheiten; 
Schmidt,  Bihlischer  Medecin;  Payer,  ut  sup.,  who 
refers  to  Roussille-Chamseru,  Ecclierches  sur  le  ve- 
ritable Caractere  de  la  Leprc  des  Hebreux,  and 
Relation  Chirurgicale  de  I'Annee  de  I' Orient, 
Paris,  1804;  Cazenave  and  Schedel,  Abreje  Pra- 
tique des  Maladies  de  la  Pean-  Dr.  Mead,  id  S)(p., 
who  refers  to  Aretaeus,'  Morb.  Chron.  ii.  \?< ;  Fra- 
castorius,  de  Morbis  Contagiosis ;  Johannes  Ma- 
nardus,  Epist.  Medic,  vii.  2,  and  to  iv.  3,  3,  §1  ; 
Avicenna,  de  Medicina,  v.  28,  §19;  also  Dr.  Sim 
in  tke  North  American  Chirur.  Rev.  Sept.  1859, 
p.  87G.  The  ancient  authorities  are  Hippocrates, 
Prorrhetica,  lib.  xii.  ap.  fin.;  Galen,  Explicatio 
Linguaruin  Hippocratis,  and  de  Art.  Curat,  lib. 
ii. ;  Celsus,  de  Medic,  v.  28,  §19.  [H.  H.] 

LE'SHEM  (Dki'7:  Lesen,.),  a  variation  in  the 
form  of  the  name  of  Laish,  afterwards  Dan, 
occun-ing  only  in  Josh.  xi.x.  47  (twice).  The  Vat. 
LXX.  is  very  corrupt,  having  AaxeiJ  and  Aeffevv- 
Mk  ("see  Mai's  ed.)  ;  but  the  Alex.,  as  usual,  is  in 
the  second  case  much  closer  to  the  Hebrew,  Aeffe/j. 
and  Aefffi/Saf. 

The  commentators  and  lexicogi-aphers  afford  no 
clue  to  the  reason  of  this  variation  in  form.     [G.] 

LETT'US  (AttTTous ;  Alex. 'Attovj:  Acchus), 
the  same  lbs  Hattush  (1  Esd.  viii.  29).  The 
Alex.  MS.  has  evidently  the  correct  reading,  of 
which  the  iKime  as  it  appears  in  the  Vat.  MS.  is 
an  easy  corruption,  from  the  similarity  of  the  uncial 
A  and  A. 

LETU'SHIM  (DLJ'-Id"?  :  AaTovatdij. :  Latu- 
sim,  Latiissim),  the  name  of  the  second  of  the 
sons  of  Dedan,  son  of  Jokshan,  Gen.  xxv.  3  (and 
1  Chr.  i.  32,  Vulg.).  Fresnel  (Jonrn.  Asiat.  HP 
se'rie,  vol.  vi.'p.  217,  8)   identifies  it  with  Tasw," 


LEVI 


97 


'  Dr.  Mead's  reference  is  de  Morbis  Contagiosis,  it. 
cap.  9.  There  is  no  such  title  extant  to  any  portion 
Aretaeus'  work ;  sec,  however,  the  Sydenham  So- 
ciety's edition  of  that  writer,  p.  370. 


one  of  the  ancient  and  extinct  tinbes  of  Arabia,  like 
as  he  compares  J.eummim  with  Umeiyim.  The 
names  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  commencing 
with  the  Hebrew  article.  Nevertheless,  the  identi- 
fication in  each  case  seems  to  be  quite  untenable. 
(Respecting  these  tribes,  see  Leummim  and  Arabia.) 
It  is  noteworthy  that  the  thi'ee  sons  of  the  Keturahite 
Dedan  are  named  in  the  plural  form,  evidently  as 
tribes  descended  from  him.  [E.  S.  P.] 

LEIBI'MTM  (D''»N^,  from  tfnh  :  Aaco^e.V : 
Zoomiiii,  Laomim),  the  name  of  the  third  of  the 
descendants  of  Dedan,  son  of  Jokshan,  Gen.  xxv.  3 
(1  Chr.  i.  32,  Vulg.),  being  in  the  plural  fomi  like 
his  brethren,  Asshurim  and  Letushim.  It  evidently 
refers  to  a  tribe  or  people  sprung  from  Dedan,  and 
indeed  in  its  present  form  literally  signifies  "  peo- 
ples," "  nations;"  but  it  has  been  observed  in  art. 
Letushim,  that  these  names  perhaps  commence 
with  the  Hebrew  article.  Leummim  has  been 
identified  with  the  'A\\ov/j.aiToJTat  of  Ptolemy  (vi. 
7.  §24 :  see  Diet,  of  Geogr.),  and  by  Fresnel  (in  the 
Journ.  Asiat.  IIP  serie,  vol.  vi.  p.  217)  with 
an  Arab  tribe  called  Umciyim.^  Of  the  former, 
the  writer  knows  no  historical  trace :  the  latter 
was  one  of  the  very  ancient  tribes  of  Arabia 
of  which  no  genealogy  is  given  by  the  Arabs,  and 
who  appear  to  have  been  aute-Abrahamic,  and 
possibly  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  the  country. 
[Akabia.]  [K.  S.  P.] 

LE'VI.  1.  CI*?  :  Afvel:  Levi),  the  name  of  the 
third  son  of  Jacob  by  his  wife  Leah.  This,  like 
most  other  names  in  the  patriarchal  history,  was 
connected  with  the  thouglits  and  feelings  that  ga- 
thered round  the  child's  birth.  As  derived  from 
ril7,  "  to  adhere,"  it  gave  utterance  to  the  hope  of 
the  mother  that  the  affections  of  her  husband, 
which  had  hitherto  rested  on  the  favoured  Piachel, 
would  at  last  be  drawn  to  her.  "  This  time  will 
my  husband  be  joined  unto  me,  because  I  have  borne 
him  three  sons"  (Gen.  xxix.  34).  The  new-born 
child  was  to  be  a  Koivavias  $ePaia)T-fis  (Jos.  Ant. 
i.  19,  §8),  a  new  link  binding  the  parents  to  each 
other  more  closely  than  before.'^  But  one  fact  is 
recorded  in  which  he  appears  prominent.  The  sons 
of  Jacob  have  come  from  Padan-Aram  to  Canaan 
with  their  father,  and  are  with  him  "  at  Shalem,  a 
city  of  Shechem."  Their  sister  Dinah  goes  out 
"  to  see  the  daughters  of  the  land  "  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
1),  i.  e.  as  the  words  probably  indicate,  and  as  Jo- 
sephus  distinctly  states  (Ant.  i.  21),  to  be  present 
at  one  of  their  great  annual  gatherings  for  some 
festival  of  nature-worship,  analogous  to  that  which 
we  meet  with  afterwards  among  the  Midianites 
(Num.  xxv.  2).  The  hcense  of  the  time  or  the 
absence  of  her  natural  guardians  exposes  her,  though 
yet  in  earliest  youth, 'to  lust  and  outrage.  A  stain 
is  left,  not  only  on  her,  but  on  the  honour  of  her 
kindred,  which,  according  to  the  rough  justice  of 
the  time,  nothing  but  blooil  could  wash  out.  The^ 
duty  of  extorting  that  revenge  fell,  as  in  the  case  of 
Amnon  and  Tamar  (2  Sam.  xiii.  22),  and  in  most 
other  states  of  society  in  which  polygamy  has  pre- 
vailed (comp.  for  the  customs  of  modern  Arabs, 
J.  D.  Michaelis,  quoted  by  Kurtz,  Hist,  of  Old 
Covenant,  i.  §82,  p.  340,  on  the  brothers  rather 


The  same  etymology  is  recognized,  though  with  a 
higher  significance,  in  Num.  .wiii.  2. 


08 


LEVI 


than  the  father,  just  as,  in  the  case  of  Rebekah,  it 
belonged  to  the  brother  to  comluct  the  negotiations 
for  the  marriage.  We  are  left  to  conjecture  why 
Reuben,  as  the  first-born,  was  not  foremost  in  the 
work,  but  the  sin  of  which  he  was  afterwards 
guilty,  makes  it  possible  that  his  zeal  for  his  sister's 
purity  was  not  so  sensitive  as  theirs.  The  same 
explanation  may  perhaps  apply  to  the  non-appear- 
ance of  Judah  in  the  history.  Simeon  and  Levi, 
as  the  next  in  succession  to  the  first-born,  take  the 
task  upon  themselves.  Though  not  named  in  the 
Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  till  xxxiv.  25,  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  they  were  "  the  sons  of 
Jacob  "  who  heard  from  their  father  the  wrong  over 
wliich  he  had  brooded  in  silence,  and  who  planned 
their  revenge  accordingly.  Tiie  LXX.  version  does 
introduce  their  names  in  ver.  14.  The  history  that 
follows  is  that  of  a  cowardly  and  repulsive  crime. 
The  two  brothers  exhibit,  in  its  broadest  contrasts, 
that  union  of  the  noble  and  the  base,  of  charac- 
teristics above  and  below  the  level  of  the  heathen 
tribes  around  them,  which  marks  the  whole  his- 
toiy  of  Israel.  They  have  learned  to  loathe  and 
scorn  the  impurity  in  the  midst  of  which  they 
lived,  to  regard  themselves  as  a  peculiar  people,  to 
glory  in  the  sign  of  the  covenant.  They  have 
learnt  only  too  well  from  Jacob  and  from  Laban, 
the  lessons  of  treachery  and  falsehood.  They  lie 
to  the  men  of  Shechem  as  the  Druses  and  the  Ma- 
ronites  lie  to  each  other  in  the  pi'bsecution  of  their 
blood-feuds.  For  the  offence  of  one  man,  they  de- 
stroy and  plunder  a  whole  city.  They  cover  their 
murderous  schemes  with  fair  words  and  professions 
of  friendship.  They  make  the  very  token  of  their 
religion  the  instrument  of  their  perfidy  and  re- 
venge."*  Their  father,  timid  and  anxious  as  ever, 
utters  a  feeble  lamentation  (Blunt's  Script.  Coin- 
cidences, Part  i.  §8),  "  Ye  have  made  me  to  stink 
among  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  ...  I  being 
few  in  number,  they  shall  gather  themselves  against 
me."  With  a  zeal  that,  though  mixed  with  baser 
elements,  foreshadows  the  zeal  of  Phinehas,  they 
glory  in  their  deed,  and  meet  all  remonstrance  with 
the  question,  "  Should  he  deal  with  our  sister  as 
with  a  harlot  ?"  Of  other  facts  in  the  life  of  Levi, 
there  are  none  in  which  he  takes,  as  in  this,  a  pro- 
minent and  distinct  part.  He  shares  in  the  hatred 
which  his  brothers  bear  to  Joseph,  and  joins  in  the 
plots  against  him  (Gen.  xxxvii.  4).  Reuben  and 
Judah  interfere  severally  to  prevent  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  crime  (Gen.  xxxvii.  21,  26).  Simeon 
appears,  as  being  made  afterwards  the  subject  of 
a  shai-per  discipline  than  the  others,  to  have  been 
foremost — as  his  position  among  the  sons  of  Leah 
made  it  likely  that  lie  would  be — in  this  attack  on 
the  favoured  son  of  Rachel ;  and  it  is  at  least  pro- 
bable that  in  this,  as  in  their  former  guilt,  Simeon 
and  Levi  were  brethren.  The  rivalry  of  the  mo- 
thers was  perpetuated  in  the  jealousies  of  their 
children;  and  the  two  who  had  shown  themselves  so 
keenly  sensitive  when  their  sister  had  been  wronged, 
make  themselves  the  insti'uments  and  accomplices 
of  the  hatred  which  originated,  we  are  told,  with 
the  baser-born  sons  of  the  concubines  (Gen.  xxxvii. 
2).  Then  comes  for  him,  as  for  the  others,  the  dis- 
cij)line  of  suffering  and  danger,  the  special  educa- 
tion by  which  the  brother  whom  they  had  wronged 
leads  them  back  to  faithfulness  and  natural  afi'ec- 

J  Josephus  (Aiit.  1.  c.)  characteristically  glosses  over 
all  that  connects  the  attack  with  the  circumcision  of  the 
Shcchemites,  and  represents  It  as  made  in  a  time  of  feast- 
ing and  rejoicing. 


LEVI 

tion.  'I'he  detention  of  Simeon  in  Egypt  may 
have  been  designed  at  once  to  be  the  punishment 
for  the  large  share  which  he  had  taken  in  the  com- 
mon crime,  and  to  separate  the  two  brothers  who 
had  hitherto  been  such  close  companions  in  evil. 
The  discipline  does  its  work.  Those  who  had  been 
relentless  to  Joseph  become  self-sacrificing  for  Ben- 
jamin. 

After  this  we  trace  Levi  as  joining  in  the  migra- 
tion of  the  tribe  that  owned  Jacob  as  its  patriarch. 
He,  with  his  three  sons,  Gershon,  Kohath,  Merari, 
went  down  into  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvi.  11).  As  one 
of  the  four  eldest  sons  we  may  think  of  him  as 
among  the  five  (Gen.  xlvii.  2)  that  were  specially 
presented  before  Pharaoh*.  Then  comes  the  last 
scene  in  which  his  name  appears.  When  his  father's 
death  draws  near,  and  the  sons  are  gathered  round 
him,  he  hears  the  old  crime  brought  up  again  to 
receive  its  sentence  from  the  lips  that  are  no  longer 
feeble  and  hesitating.  They,  no  less  than  the  in- 
cestuous first-born,  had  forfeited  the  privileges  of 
their  birthright.  "  In  their  anger  they  slew  men, 
and  in  their  wantonness  they  maimed  oxen  "  (marg. 
reading  of  A.  V.;  comp.  LXX.  evevp0K6in)a^av 
ravpov).  And  therefore  the  sentence  on  those  who 
had  been  united  for  evil  was,  that  they  were  to  be 
"  divided  in  Jacob  and  scattered  in  Israel."  How  that 
condemnation  was  at  once  fulfilled  and  turned  into 
■A  benediction,  how  the  zeal  of  the  patriarch  leap- 
peared  purified  and  strengthened  in  his  descendants; 
how  the  very  name  came  to  have  a  new  significance, 
will  be  found  elsewhere      [Levites.J 

The  history  of  Levi  has  been  dealt  with  here 
in  what  seems  the  only  true  and  natural  way  of 
treating  it,  as  a  history  of  an  individual  person. 
Of  the  theory  that  sees  in  the  sons  of  Jacob 
the  mythical  Eponymi  of  the  tribes  that  claimed 
descent  from  them- — vv'hich  finds  in  the  crimes  and 
chances  of  their  lives  the  outlines  of  a  national  or 
tribal  chronicle — which  refuses  to  recognise  that 
Jacob  had  twelve  sons,  and  insists  that  the  history 
of  Dinah  records  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Ca- 
naanites  to  enslave  and  degrade  a  Hebrew  tribe 
(Ewald,  Gcschichte,  i.  466-496) — of  this  one  may 
be  content  to  say,  as  the  author  says  of  other  hy- 
potheses hardly  more  extravagant,  "  die  Wissen- 
schaft  verscheucht  alle  solche  Gespeuster"  (/6k/. 
i.  466).  The  book  of  Genesis  tells  us  of  the  lives 
of  men  and  women,  not  of  ethnological  phantoms. 

A  yet  wilder  conjecture  has  been  hazarded  by 
another  German  critic.  P.  Redslob  {Die  alttesta- 
mentl.  Namen,  Ilamb.  1846,  p.  24,  25),  recog- 
nizing the  meaning  of  the  name  of  Levi  as  given 
above,  finds  in  it  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  con- 
federacy or  synod  of  the  priests  that  had  been  con- 
nected with  the  several  local  worships  of  Canaan, 
and  who,  in  the  time  of  Samuel  and  David,  were 
gathered  together,  joined,  "round  f^e  Central 
Pantheon  in  Jerusalem."  Here  also  we  may  boiTow 
the  terms  of  our  judgment  from  the  language  of  the 
writer  himself  If  there  are  "  abgeschmackten  ety- 
mologischen  Mahrchen  "  (Redslob,  p.  82)  connected 
with  the  name  of  Levi,  they  are  hardly  those  we 
meet  with  in  the  narrative  of  Genesis.    [E.  H.  P.] 

2.  (Aeuei;  Rec.  Text,  Aevt ;  Levi)  Sou  of 
Melchi,  one  of  the  near  ancestors  of  our  Lord,  in 
fact  the  great-gi-andfather  of  Joseph  (Luke  iii.  24). 
This  name  is  omitted  in  the  list  given  by  Africauus. 


"The  Jewish  tradition  (^Targ.  Pseutlojmi.)  states  the 
five  to  have  been  Zebulun,  Han,  Naphtali,  (!ad,  and 
Aslier. 


LEVIATHAN 

3.  A  more  remote  ancestor  of  Christ,  son  of 
Simeon  (Luke  iii.  29).  Lord  A.  Hervey  considers 
that  the  name  of  Levi  reappears  in  his  descendant 
Lebbaeus  (Geneal.  of  Christ,  132,  and  see  36,  46). 

4.  (Aewei's ;  R.  T.  Aeuis.)  Mark  ii.  14 ;  Luke 
V.  27,  29.  [Matthew.] 

LEVI'ATHAN  {\T\\i^,  Iwydthdn:  rh  fj.eya 

KrJTOs,  SpaKoov;  Complut.  Job  iii.  S,  Xf^iaOdy, 
leviathan,  draco)  occurs  five  times  in  the  text  of  tiie 
A.  v.,  and  once  in  the  margin  of  Job  iii.  8,  where 
the  text  has  "  mourning."  In  the  Hebrew  Bible 
the  word  lio'yathan,'^  which  is,  with  the  foregoing 
exception,  always  left  untranslated  in  the  A.  V.,  is 
found  only  in  the  following  passages:  Job  iii.  8,  xl. 
25  (xli.  1,  A.  v.);  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14,  civ.  26;  Is. 
x.xvii.  1.  In  the  margin  of  Job  iii.  8,  and  text  of 
Job  xli.  l,*"  the  crocodile  is  most  clearly  the  animal 
denoted  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14  also 
clearly  points  to  this  same  saurian.  The  context  of 
Ps.  civ.  26,  "There  go  the  ships:  there  is  that 
leviathan,  whom  thou  hast  made  to  play  therein," 
seems  to  show  that  in  this  passage  the  name  repre- 
sents some  animal  of  the  whale  tribe ;  but  it  is 
somewhat  uncertain  what  animal  is  denoted  in  Is. 
xxvii.  1 .  It  would  be  out  place  here  to  attempt  any 
detailed  explanation  of  the  passages  quoted  above, 
but  the  following  remarks  are  ofttjred.  The  pas- 
sage in  Job  iii.  8  is  beset  with  difficulties,  and  it  is 
evident  from  the  two  widely  different  readings  of 
the  text  -and  margin  that  our  translators  were  at  a 
loss.  There  can  however  be  little  doubt  that  the 
%-iargin  is  the  correct  rendering,  and  this  is  supported 
by  the  LXX.,  Aquila,  Theodotion,  Symmachus,  the 
Vulgate  and  the  Syriac.  There  appears  to  be  some 
reference  to  those  who  practised  enchantments. 
Job  is  lamenting  the  day  on  which  he  was  born, 
and  he  says,  "  Let  them  curse  it  that  curse  the 
day,  who  are  ready  to  raise  up  a  leviathau :"  i.  e. 
"  Let  those  be  hired  to  imprecate  evil  on  my  natal 
day  who  say  they  are  able  by  their  incantations  to 
render  days  propitious  or  unpi'opitious,  yea,  let 
such  as  are  skilful  enough  to  raise  up  even  leviathan 
(the  crocodile)  from  his  watery  bed  be  summoned 
to  curse  that  day :"  or,  as  Mason  Good  has  trans- 
lated the  passage,  "  Oh !  that  night !  let  it  be  a 
barren  rock  I  let  no  sprightliness  enter  into  it !  let 
the  sorcerers  of  the  day  curse  it !  the  expertest  among 
them  that  can  conjure  up  leviathan!" 

The  detailed  description  of  leviathan  given  in 
Job  .xli.  indisputably  belongs  to  the  crocodile,  and 
it  is  astonishing  that  it  should  ever  have  been  un- 
derstood to  apply  to  a  whale  or  a  dolphin ;  but 
Lee  {Comm.  on  JobxW.'),  following  Hasaeus  (i)iS(7. 
de  Lev.  Johi  et  Ceto  Jonae,"  Brem.  1723),  has 
laboured  hard,  though  unsuccessfully,  to  prove  that 
the  leviathan  of  this  p;issage  is  some  species  of 
whale,  probably,  he  says,  the  Delphinus  orca,  or 
common  grampus.     That  it  can  be  said  to  be  the 


LEVIATHAN 


99 


pride  of  any  cetacean  that  his  "  scales  shut  up  to- 
gether as  with  a  close  seal,"  is  an  assertion  that  no 
one  can  accept,  since  every  member  of  this  grou)5 
has  a  body  almost  bald  and  smooth. 


*  in^V.  from  rT'l?,  an  animal  wreathed. 

''  IVhirlpool,  i.  e.  some  sea-monster :  vid.  Trench's 
Select  Glossary,  p.  22G. 

<=  The  modern  Arabic  name  of  crocodile  is  Timsdh. 
The  word  is  derived  from  the  Coptic,  Smsah,  Amsah, 
whence  with  the  aspirate  x«^'('«'  (llerod.  ii.  69). 
Wilkins,  however  [de  L.  Copt.  p.  101),  contends 
that  the  word  is  of  Arabic  origin.  See  Jablonsk. 
Opera  i.  387,  287,  ed.  Te  Water,  1804. 

d  "The  people  inhabiting  the  wilderness "— a 
poetical  expression  to  denote  the  wild  beasts  :  comp. 
"  the  ants  are  a  pe,>j)le  not  strong,"  "  the  conies  arc 


Crocodile  of  the  Nile  (C.  imlgaris). 

The  Egyptian  crocodile  also  is  certainly  the 
animal  denoted  by  leviathan  in  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14:  <: 
■'  Thou,  0  God,  didst  destroy  the  princes  of  Pha- 
raoh, the  gi-eat  crocodile  or  '  dragon  that  lieth  in 
the  midst  of  his  rivers'  (Ez.  xxix.  3)  in  the  Ked 
Sea,  and  didst  give  their  bodies  to  be  food  for  the 
wild  beasts  of  the  desert."  ■*  The  leviathan  of  Ps. 
civ.  26  seems  clearly  enough  to  allude  to  some  great 
cetacean.  The  "  great  and  wide  sea"  must  surely  be 
the  Mediterranean,  "  the  great  sea,"  as  it  is  usually 
called  in  Scripture ;  it  would  certainly  be  stretch- 
ing the  point  too  far  to  understand  the  expression  to 
represent  any  part  of  the"  Nile.  The  crocodile,  as 
is  well  known,  is  a  fresh-water,  not  a  marine 
animal : «  it  is  very  probable  therefore  that  some 
whale  is  signified  by  the  term  leviathan  in  this 
passage,  and  it  is  quite  an  error  to  assert,  as  Dr. 
Harris  {Diet.  Nat.  Hist.  Bib.),  Mason  Good  {Book 
of  Job  translated),  Michaelis  {Snpp.  1297),  and  Ro- 
senmiiller  (quoting  Michaelis  in  not.  ad  Bochart  Hic- 
roz.  iii.  738)  have  done,  that  the  whale  is  not  found 
in  the  Mediterranean.  The  Orca  yladiator  (Gray)- — 
the  grampus  mentioned  above  by  Lee — the  Physalus 
antiquorum  (Gray),  or  the  lim-qual  de  la  Mediter- 
ranee  (Cuvier),  are  not  uncommon  in  the  Medi- 
terranean (Fischer,  Synops.  Mam.  b25,  and  Lace- 
p6de.  If.  N.  des  Cetac.  115),  and  in  ancient 
times  the  species  may  have  been  more  numerous. 

There  is  some  uncertainty  about  the  leviathan 
of  Is.  xxvii.  1.  Rosenmiiller  {Schol.  in  I.  c.)  thinks 
that  tlie  word  nachash,  heie  rendered  serpent,  is  to 
be  taken  in  a  wide  sense  as  applicable  to  any  great 
monster ;  and  that  the  prophet,  under  the  term 
"  leviathan  that  crooked  serpent,"  is  speaking  of 
Eo-vpt,  typified  by  the  crocodile,  the  usual  emblem 
of  the  jn-iuce  of  that  kingdom.  The  Chaldee  para- 
phrase understands  the  "  leviathan  that  piercing 
serpent"  to  refer  to  Pharaoh,  and  "leviathan  that 
crooked  serpent"  to  refer  to  Sennacherib. 

but  a  feeble  folk"  (Prov.  xxx.  25,  2()).  For  other 
interpretations  of  this  passage  see  KosenmiiU.  HchoL, 
and  Bochart,  Phaleg,  318. 

«  According  to  Warburton  [Cresc.  S,-  Or.  85)  the 
crocodile  is  ^never  now  seen  below  Minych,  but  it 
should  be  stated  that  Pliny  [N.  U.  viii.  25),  not  Ue- 
rodotus,  as  Mr.  Warburton  asserts,  speaks  of  croco- 
diles being  attacked  by  dolphins  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Nile.  Seneca  (iVa<.  Qiiaest.  iv.  2)  gives  an  account 
of  a  contest  between  these  animals.  Cuvier  thinks 
that  a  species  of  dog-fish  is  meant  {Acaiilliias  rul- 
garis),  on  account  of  the  dorsal  sjiines  of  which  Pliny 
speaks,  and  which  no  species  of  dolphin  possesses. 

H  2 


100 


LEVIS 


As  the  toim  leviathan  is  evidently  used  in  no 
limited  sense,  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  "  levi- 
athaa  the  piercing  seipent,"  or  "  leviathan  the 
crooked  sei-pent,"  may  denote  some  species  of  the 
great  rock-snakes  {Boidae)  which  are  common  in 
South  and  West  Africa,  perhaps  the  Hortulia  Sehae, 
which  Schneider  {Amph.  ii.  266),  under  the  sy- 
nonym Boa  hieroglyphica,  appears  to  identify  with 
the  huge  serpent  lepresented  on  the  Egyptian  mo- 
numents. This  python,  as  well  as  the  crocodile, 
was  worshipped  by  the  Egyptians,  and  may  well 
therefore  be  understood  in  this  passage  to  typify 
the  Egyptian  power.  Perhaps  the  English  word 
monster  may  be  considered  to  be  as  good  a  transla- 
tion of  liv'ydthdn  as  any  other  that  can  be  found ; 
and  though  the  crocodile  seems  to  be  the  animal 
more  particularly  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  term, 
yet,  as  has  been  shown,  the  loJiale,  and  perhaps  the 
rock-snnke  also,  may  be  signified  under  this  name.' 
[Whale.]  Bochart  (iii.  769,  ed.  Rosenmiiller)  says 
that  the  Talmudists  use  the  word  liv'i/dthdn  to 
denote  the  crocodile ;  this  however  is  denied  by 
Lewysohn  (^Zool.  dcs  Talm.  155,  o55),  who  says 
that  in  the  Talmud  it  always  denotes  a  whale,  and 
never  a  crocodile.  For  the  Talmudical  fables  about 
the  leviathan,  see  Lewysohn  [Zool.  des  Talm.),  in 
pi\ssages  refeiTed  to  above,  and  Buztorf,  Lex.  Glial. 

Talm.    s.  V.  |n'''l^.     [W.  H.] 

LEVIS  [Aevis  :  Levis),  improperly  given  as  a 
proper  name  in  1  E&d.  ix.  14.  It  is  simply  a  cor- 
ruption of"  the  Levite"  in  Ezr.  x.  15. 

LEV'ITES  (n»lbn  :    Aevlrai :    Lcvitae  :    also 

'17  '33 :   viol  Aevl :  filii  Levi).     The  analogy  of 

the  names  of  the  other  tribes  of  Israel  would 
lead  us  to  include  under  these  titles  the  whole 
tribe  that  traced  its  descent  from  Levi.  The 
existence  of  another  division,  however,  within  the 
tribe  itself,  in  the  higher  office  of  the  priesthood 
as  limited  to  the  "  sons  of  Aaron,"  gave  to  the 
common  form,  in  this  instance,  a  peculiar  meaning. 
Most  frequently  the  Levites  aie  distinguished,  as 
such,  from  the  priests  (1  K.  viii.  4;  Ezr.  ii.  70; 
John  i.  19,  &c.),  and  this  is  the  meaning  which 
has  perpetuated  itself.  Sometimes  the  word  extends 
to  the  whole  tribe,  the  priests  included  (Num.  xxxv. 
2  ;  Josh.  xxi.  3,  41  ;  Ex.  vi.  25;  Lev.  xxv.32,  &c.). 
Sometimes  again  it  is  added  as  an  epithet  of  the 
smaller  portion  of  the  tribe,  and  we  read  of  "  the 
priests  the  Levites"  (Josh.  iii.  3;  Ez.  xliv.  15^. 
The  history  of  the  tribe,  and  of  the  functions  at- 
taclied  to  its  several  orders,  is  obviously  essential 
to  any  right  apprehension  of  the  history  of  Isiael 
as  a  people.  They  are  the  representatives  of  its 
faith,  the  ministers  of  its  worship.  They  play  at 
least  as  prominent  a  ])art  in  the  growth  of  its  insti- 
tutions, in  fostering  or  repressing  the  higher  life  of 
the  nation,  as  the  clergy  of  the  Christian  Church 


'  The  Heb.  word  C^*n3  occurs  about  thirty  timts 
in  the  0.  T.,  and  it  seems  clear  enough  that  in  every 
case  its  use  is  limited  to  the  serpent  tribe.  If  the 
LXX.  interpretation  of  HIB  be  taken,  the  fleeing 
iind  not  piercing  serpent  Is  the  rendering  :  the  Heb. 
|in?pi?,  tortuosus,  is  more  applicable  to  a  serpent 
than  to  any  other  animal.  The  expression,  "  He  shall 
slay  the  dragon  that  is  in  the  sc;i,"  refers  also  to  the 
Egyptian  power,  and  is  mei'ely  expletive — the  dragon 
being  the  crocodile,  which  is  in  tliis  part  of  the  verse 
an  emblem  of  Pharaoh,  as  the  ser]ient  is  in  the  former 


LEVITES 

have  played  in  the  history  of  any  European  king- 
dom. It  will  be  the  object  of  this  article  to  trace 
the  outlines  of  that  history,  m.irking  out  the  func- 
tions which  at  diti'erent  periods  were  assigned  to  the 
tribe,  and  the  influence  which  its  members  exercised. 
This  is,  it  is  believed,  a  truer  method  than  that  which 
would  attempt  to  give  a  more  complete  picture  by 
combining  into  one  whole  the  fragmentary  notices 
which  are  separated  from  each  other  by  wide  inter- 
vals of  time,  or  treating  them  as  if  they  represented 
the  permanent  characteristics  of  the  order.  In  the 
history  of  all  priestly  or  quasi-priestly  bodies,  func- 
tions vary  with  the  changes  of  time  and  circum- 
stances, and  to  ignore  those  changes  is  a  sufficient 
proof  of  incompetency  for  dealing  with  the  history. 
As  a  matter  of  convenience,  whatever  belongs  ex- 
clusively to  the  functions  and  influence  of  the  priest- 
hood, will  be  found  under  that  head  [Priest]  ;  but 
it  is  proposed  to  treat  here  of  all  that  is  common  to  ^ 
the  priests  and  Levites,  as  being  together  the  sacer- 
dotal tribe,  the  clerisy  of  Israel.  The  history  will 
fall  naturally  into  four  great  periods. 

I.  The  time  of  the  Exodus. 
II.  The  period  of  the  Judges. 

III.  That  of  the  Monarchy. 

IV.  That  from  the  Captivity  to  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem. 

I.  The  absence  of  all  reference  to  the  consecrated 
character  of  the  Levites  in  the  book  of  Genesis  is 
noticeable  enough.  The  prophecy  ascribed  to  Jacob 
(Gen.  xlix.  5-7)  was  indeed  fnlfilled  with  singular 
precision  ;  but  the  tenns  of  the  prophecy  are  hardl]| 
such  as  would  have  been  framed  by  a  later  writer," 
after  the  tribe  had  gained  its  subsequent  pre-emi- 
nence ;  and  unless  we  frame  some  hypothesis  to 
account  for  this  omission  as  deliberate,  it  takes  its 
place,  so  far  ;is  it  goes,  among  the  evidence  of  the 
antiquity  of  that  section  of  Genesis  in  which  these 
prophecies  are  found.  The  only  occasion  on  which 
the  patriarch  of  the  tribe  appears — the  massacre  of 
the  Shechemites — may  indeed  have  contributed  to 
influence  the  history  of  his  descendants,  by  fostering 
in  them  the  same  fierce  wild  zeal  against  all  that 
threatened  to  violate  the  purity  of  their  lace;  but 
generally  what  strikes  us  is  the  absence  of  all  recog- 
nition of  the  later  character.  In  the  genealogy  of 
Gen.  xlvi.  11,  in  like  manner,  the  list  does  not  go 
lower  do^vn  than  the  three  sons  of  Levi,  and  they 
are  given  in  the  order  of  their  bii'th,  not  in  that 
which  would  have  corresponded  to  the  official  su- 
periority of  the  Kohathites.''  There  are  no  signs, 
again,  that  the  tribe  of  Levi  had  any  special  pre- 
eminence over  the  others  during  the  Egyptian  bond- 
age. As  tracing  its  descent  from  Leah,  it  would 
take  its  place  among  the  six  chief  tribes  sprung  from 
the  wives  of  Jacob,  and  share  with  them  a  recog- 
nised superiority  over  those  that  bore  the  names  of 
the  sons  of  Bilhah  and  Zilpah.  Within  the  tribe 
itself  there  are  some  slisrht  tokens  that  the  Ko- 


part  of  the  verse. 

^  Ewald  [Gesch.  ii.  454)  refers  the  language  of 
Gen.  xlix.  7  not  to  the  distribution  of  the  Levites 
in  their  48  cities,  but  to  the  time  when  they  had 
fallen  into  disrepute,  and  become,  as  in  Judg.  xvii., 
a  wandering,  half-mendicant  order.  But  see  Kalisch, 
Genesis,  ad  loc. 

b  The  later  genealogies,  it  should  be  noticed,  repro- 
duce the  same  order.  This  was  natural  enough  ;  but 
a  genealogy  originating  in  a  later  age,  and  reflecting 
its  feelings,  would  probably  have  changed  the  order. 
(Comp,  Kx.  vi.  16,  Num.  iii.  17,  1  Chr.  vi.  16.) 


LEVITES 

hathites  are  gainiug  the  first  jilace.  The  classifica- 
tion of  Ex.  vi.  16-25,  gives  to  that  section  of  the 
tribe  four  clans  or  houses,  while  those  of  Gershon 
and  Merari  have  but  two  each."^  To  it  belonged 
the  house  of  Amram  ;  'and  "  Aaron  the  Levite"  (Ex. 
iv.  14)  is  spoken  of  as  one  to  whom  the  people  will 
be  sure  to  listen.  He  marries  the  daughter  of  the 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Ex.  vi.  2.'5).  The  work 
accomplished  by  lilm,  and  b}'  his  yet  greater  brother, 
would  tend  naturally  to  give  prominence  to  the 
family  and  the  tribe  to  which  they  belonged ;  but 
as  yet  there  are  no  traces  of  a  caste-charactei-,  no 
signs  of  any  intention  to  establish  an  hereditary 
priesthood.  Up  to  this  time  the  Israelites  had  wor- 
shipped the  God  of  their  fathers  after  their  fathers' 
manner.  The  first-born  of  the  people  were  the 
priests  of  the  people.  The  eldest  son  of  each  house 
inherited  the  priestly  office.  His  youth  made  him, 
in  his  father's  lifetime,  the  representative  of  the 
purity  which  was  connected  from  the  beginning 
with  the  thought  of  worship  (Ewald,  Alterthiiin. 
273,  and  comp.  Priest).  It  was  apparently 
with  this  as  their  ancestral  worship  that  the  Israel- 
ites came  up  out  of  Egypt.  The  "  young  men  "  of 
the  sons  of  Israel  oti'er  sacrifices "^  (Ex.  xxiv.  5). 
Tliey,  we  may  infer,  are  the  priests  who  remain 
with  the  people  while  Moses  ascends  the  heights  of 
Sinai  (xix.  22-24).  They  represented  the  truth 
that  the  whole  people  were  "  a  kingdom  of  priests  " 
(xix.  6).  Neither  they,  nor  the  "  officers  and 
Judges  "  appointed  to  assist  Moses  in  administering 
justice  (xviii.  25)  are  connected  in  any  special 
manner  with  the  tribe  of  Levi.  The  first  step  to- 
wards a  change  was  made  in  the  institution  of  an 
hereditary  priesthood  in  the  family  of  Aaron,  during 
the  first  withdrawal  of  Moses  to  the  solitude  of 
Sinai  (xxviii.  1).  This,  however,  was  one  thing: 
it  was  quite  another  to  set  apart  a  whole  tribe  of 
Israel  as  a  priestly  caste.  The  directions  given  foi- 
the  construction  of  the  tabernacle  imply  no  pre- 
eminence of  the  Levites.  The  chief  workers  in  it  are 
from  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  of  Dan  (Ex.  xxxi.  2-6). 
The  next  extension  of  the  idea  of  the  priesthood  grew* 
out  of  the  terrible  crisis  of  Ex.  xxxii".  If  the  Levites 
had  been  shai'ers  in  the  sin  of  the  golden  calf,  they 
were  at  any  rate  the  foremost  to  rally  round  their 
leader  when  he  called  on  them  to  help  him  in  stem- 
ming the  progress  of  the  evil.  And  then  came  that 
terrible  consecration  of  themselves,  when  every  man 
was  against  his  son  and  against  his  brother,  and  the 
offering  with  which  they  filled  their  hands  (-1X70 
Q3T,  Ex.  x,\xii.  29,  comp.  Ex.  xxviii.  41)  was  the 


'  As  the  names  of  the  lesser  houses  recur,  some  of 
them  frequently,  it  may  be  well  to  give  them  here. 
(  Libiii 


Gershon  , 


\  Sbimel 


j  Izhar 


Hebron 


Uz/.iel  . 


{Moses 
Aaron  . 

I  Korah 
<  Nepheg 


I  :\Iishaol 
^  Klzar 


k  Elcazar 
\  Itbamar. 


Merari 


apban 
\  Zitbrl. 
(  JIabali 
\  Musbi. 

d  This  is  expressly  stated  in  the  Targ.  Pscudojon. 
on  this  verse  : — "  And  he  sent  the  first-born  of  the 
C'h.  of  Isr.,  for  even  to  that  time  the  worsliip  was  by 
the  first-born,  because  the  Tabernacle  was  not  yet 
made,  nor  the  priesthood  given  to  Aaron,"  &c. 


LEVITES  101 

bluod  of  their  nearest  of  kin.  The  tribe  stood 
forth,  separate  and  apart,  recognising  even  in 
this  stern  work  the  spiritual  as  higher  than 
the  natural,  and  therefore  counted  worthy  to 
be  the  representative  of  the  ideal  Win  of  the 
people,  "an  Israel  within  an  Israel"  (Ewald, 
Altert/iiim.  279),  chosen  in  its  higher  represen- 
tatives to  ofler  incense  and  burnt-sacrifice  before  the 
Lord  (Deut.  xxxiii.  9,  10),  not  without  a  share  in 
the  glory  of  the  Urim  and  Thummim  that  were 
worn  by  the  prince  and  chieftain  of  the  tribe. 
From  this  time  accordingly  they  occupied  a  dis- 
tinct position.  Experience  had  shown  how  easily 
the  people  might  fall  back  into  idolatry— -how 
necessary  it  was  that  there  should  be  a  body  of 
men,  an  order,  numerically  large,  and  when  the 
people  were  in  their  promised  home,  equally  difl'used 
throughout  the  country,  as  witnesses  and  guardians 
of  the  truth.  Without  this  the  individualism  of 
the  older  woiship  would  have  been  fi-uitful  in  an 
ever-multiplying  idolatry.  The  tribe  of  Levi  was 
therefore  to  take  the  place  of  that  earlier  priesthood 
of  the  first-born  as  representatives  of  the  holiness 
of  the  people.  The  minds  of  the  people  were  to  be 
drawn  to  the  rlict  of  the  substitution  by  the  close 
ntmierical  correspondence  of  the  consecrated  tribe 
with  that  of  those  whom  they  replaced.  The  first- 
born males  were  numbered,  and  found  to  be  22,273  ; 
the  census  of  the  Levites  gave  22,000,  reckoning  in 
each  case  from  children  of  one  month  upwards » 
(Num.  iii.).  The  fixed  price  for  the  redemption  of 
a  victim  vowed  in  sacrifice  (comp.  Lev.  xxvii.  6  ; 
Num.  xviii.  IG)  was  to  be  paid  for  each  of  the 
odd  number  by  which  the  first-born  were  in  excess 
of  the  Levites  (Num.  iii.  47).  In  this  way  the 
latter  obtained  a  sacrificial  as  well  as  a  priestly  cha- 
racter.' They  for  the  first-born  of  men,  and  their 
cattle  for  the  firstlings  of  beasts,  fulfilled  the  idea 
that  had  been  asserted  at  the  time  of  the  destruction 
of  the  first-born  of  Egypt  {Et  xiii.  12,  13).  The 
commencement  of  the  march  from  Sinai  gave  a 
prominence  to  their  new  character.  As  the  Taber- 
nacle was  the  sign  of  the  presence  among  the  people 
of  their  unseen  King,  so  the  Levites  were,  among 
the  other  ti'ibes  of  Isi-ael,  as  the  royal  guard  that 
waited  exclusively  on  Him.  The  wailike  title  of 
"  host"  is  specially  applied  to  them  (comp.  use  of 
Xny,  in  Num.  iv.  3,  30  ;  and  of  HJIID,  in  1  Chr. 

ix..l9).  As  such  they  were  not  included  in  the 
number  of  the  armies  of  Israel  (Num.  i.  47,  ii.  33, 
xxvi.  62),  but  reckoned  separately  by  themselves. 
When  the  people  were  at  rest  they  encamped  as 


"  The  separate  numbers  in  Num.  iii.  (Gershon,  7500; 
Kohath,  8600  ;  Merari,  6200)  Rive  a  total  of  23,300. 
The  received  solution  of  the  discrepancy  is  that  300 
were  the  first-horn  of  the  Levites,  who  as  such  were 
already  consecrated,  and  therefore  could  not  take  the 
place  of  others.  Talmudic  traditions  [Gciiuir.  Bah. 
tit.  Sanhedrim,  quoted  by  Patrick)  add  that  the  ques- 
tion, which  of  the  Israelites  should  be  redeemed  by  a 
Levite,  or  which  should  pay  the  five  shekels,  was 
settled  by  lot.  The  number  of  the  first-born  appears 
disproportionately  small,  as  compared  with  the  popu- 
lation. It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
conditions  to  be  fulfilled  were  that  tliey  should  be  at 
once  (1)  the  first  child  of  the  father,  (2)  the  first  child 
of  the  mother,  (3)  males.  (Comp.  on  this  question, 
and  on  that  of  the  difference  of  numbers,  Kurtz, 
llistunj  of  file  Old  Covenant,  iii.  201.) 

'  Comp.  the  recurrence  of  the  same  thought  in  the 
CKKArjcria  TrpioroTOKwi'  of  Hob.  xii.  23. 


102 


LEVITES 


guardians  round  the  sacied  tent ;  no  one  else  might 
come  near  it  under  pnin  of  death  (Num.  i.  51, 
xviii.  22).  They  were  to  occupy  a  middle  position 
in  that  ascending  scale  of  consecration,  which,  start- 
ing from  the  idea  of  the  whole  nation  as  a  priestly 
people,  reached  its  culminating  point  in  the  high- 
priest  who,  alone  of  all  the  people,  might  enter 
"within  the  veil."  The  Levites  might comenearer 
than  the  other  tiibes ;  but  they  might  not  sacrifice, 
nor  burn  incense,  nor  see  the  "  holy  things  "  of  the 
sanctuary  till  they  were  covered  (Num.  iv.  15). 
When  on  the  march,  no  hands  but  theirs  might 
strike  the  tent  at  the  commencement  of  the  day's 
journey,  or  carry  the  parts  of  its  structure 
during  it,  or  pitch  the  tent  once  again  when  they 
halted  (Num.  i.  61).  It  was  obviously  essential 
for  such  a  work  that  there  should  be  a  fixed  assign- 
ment of  duties :  and  now  accordingly  we  meet  with 
the  first  outlines  of  the  organisation  wliich  after- 
wards became  pei'manent.  The  division  of  the  tribe 
mto  the  three  sections  that  traced  their  descent 
from  the  sons  of  Levi,  formed  the  gi'oundwork  of 
it.  The  work  which  they  all  had  to  do  required  a 
man's  full  strength,  and  therefore,  though  twent}^ 
wris  the  starting-point  for  military  service  (Num. 
i.).  they  were  not  to  enter  on  their  active  service 
till  they  were  thirty  s  (Num.  iv.  23,  30,  35).  At 
fifty  they  were  to  be  free  from  all  duties  but  those 
of  superintendence  (Num.  viii.  25,  26).  The  result 
of  this  limitation  gave  to  the  Kohathites  2750  on 
active  service  out  of  8600  ;  to  the  sons  of  Gershon 
2630  out  of  7500  ;  to  those  of  Merari  3200  out  of 
6200  (Num.  iv.).  Of  these  the  Kohathites,  as 
nearest  of  kin  to  the  priests,  held  from  the  first  the 
highest  offices.  They  were  to  bear  all  the  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary,  the  ark  itself  included ''  (Num. 
iii.  31,  iv.  15;  Dent.  xxxi.  25),  after  the  priests 
had  covered  thtm  with  the  dark-blue  cloth  which 
was  to  hide  them  from  all  profane  gaze  ;  and  thus 
they  became  also  tWe  guardians  of  all  the  sacred 
treasures  which  the  people  had  so  freely  offered. 
The  Gershonites  in  their  turn,  had  to  carry  the 
tent-hangiugs  and  curtains  (Num.  iv.  22-26).  The 
heavier  burden  of  the  boards,  bars,  and  pillars  of 
the  tabernacle  fell  on  the  sons  of  Merari.  The  two 
latter  companies  were  allowed,  however,  to  use  the 
oxen  and  the  waggoas  which  were  offered  by  the 
congregation,  Merari,  in  consideration  of  its  heavier 
work,  having  two-thirds  of  the  number  (Num.  vii. 
1-9).  The  more  sacred  vessels  of  the  Kohathites 
were  to  be  borne  by  them  on  their  own  shoulders 
(Num.  vii.  9).  The  Kohathites  in  this  arrange- 
ment wei'B  placed  imder  the  command  of  Eleazar, 
Ger.'ihon  and  Merari  under  Ithamar  (Num.  iv.  28, 
33).  Before  the  march  began  the  whole  tribe  was 
once  again  solemnly  set  apart.  The  rites  (some  of 
them  at  least)  were  such  as  the  people  might 
have  witnessed  in  Egypt,  and  all  would  understand 
their  meaning.  Their  clothes  were  to  be  washed. 
They  themselves,  as  if  they  were,  prior  to  their 
separation,  polluted  and  unclean,  like  the  leper,  or 


B  The  mention  of  twenty-five  in  Num.  viii.  24,  as 
the  age  of  entrance,  must  be  understood  citlier  of  a 
probationary  period  during  which  thej'  were  trained 
for  their  duties,  or  of  the  lighter  work  of  keeping  the 
gates  of  the  tabernacle. 

^  On  more  solemn  occasions  the  priests  themselves 
appear  as  the  bearers  of  the  ark  (Josh.  Iii.  3,  15,  vi.  6  ; 
1  K.  viii.  6). 

'  Comp.  the  analogous  practice  (differing,  however, 
in  being  constantly  repeated)  of  the  Egyptian  priests 
(Ilerod.  ii.  37  ;  comp.  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Heb.  b.  iii.  c.  5). 


LEVITES 

those  that  had  touched  the  dead,  were  to  be  sprinkled 
with  "water  of  purifying"  (Num.  viii.  7,  comp. 
with  xix.  13  ;  Lev.  xiv.  8,  9),  and  to  shave  all  theii 
flesh.'  The  people  were  then  to  lay  their  hands 
upon  the  heads  of  the  conslfcrated  tribe  and  offer 
them  up  as  their  representatives  (Num.  viii.  10). 
Aaron,  as  high-priest,  was  then  to  present  them  as 
a  wave-ottering  (turning  them,  i.  e.  this  way  and 
that,  while  they  bowed  themselves  to  the  four  points 
of  the  compass  ;  comp.  Abarbanel  on  Num.  viii. 
11,  and  Kurtz,  iii.  208),  in  token  that  all  their  ' 
powers  of  mind  and  body  were  henceforth  to  be  de- 
voted to  that  service.''  They,  in  their  tum,  were 
to  lay  their  hands  on  the  two  bullocks  which  were 
to  be  slain  as  a  sin-offering  and  burnt-offering  for 
an  atonement  ("lS3,  Num.  viii.  12).  Then  they 
entered  on  their  work  ;  from  one  point  of  view  given 
by  the  people  to  Jehovah,  from  another  given  by 
Jehovah  to  Aaron  and  his  sons  (Num.  iii.  9,  viii. 
19,  xviii.  6).  Their  very  name  is  turned  into  an 
omen  that  they  will  cleave  to  the  service  of  the 
Lord  (comp.-  the  play  on  -11?^  and  *"|?  in  Num. 
xviii.  2,  4). 

The  new  institution  was,  however,  to  receive  a 
severe  shock  from  those  who  were  most  interested 
in  it.  The  section  of  the  Levites  whose  position 
brought  them  into  contact  with  the  tribe  of  Keuben ' 
conspired  with  it  to  reassert  the  old  patriarchal 
system  of  a  household  priesthood.  The  leader  of 
that  revolt  may  have  been  impelled  by  a  desire  to 
gain  the  same  height  as  that  which  Aaron  had 
attained  ;  but  the  ostensible  pretext,  that  the  "  whole 
congregation  were  holy"  (Num.  xvi.  3),  was  one 
which  would  have  cut  away  all  the  distinctive  pri- 
vileges of  the  trilje  of  which  he  was  a  member. 
When  their  self-willed  ambition  had  been  punished, 
when  all  danger  of  the  sons  of  Levi  "  taking  too 
much  upon  them"  was  for  the  time  checked,  it 
was  time  also  to  provide  more  definitely  for  them, 
and  so  to  give  them  more  reason  to  be  satisfied  ^vith 
what  they  actually  had  ;  and  this  involved  a  peniia- 
•nent  organisation  for  the  futm-e  as  well  as  for  the 
present.  If  they  were  to  have,  like  other  tribes,  a 
distinct  territory  assigned  to  them,  their  influence 
over  the  people  at  large  would  be  diminished, 
and  they  themselves  would  be  likely  to  forget,  in 
labours  common  to  them  with  others,  their  own 
peculiar  calling.  Jehovah  therefore  was  to  be  their 
inheritance  (Num.  xviii.  20  ;  Deut.  x.  9,  xviii.  2). 
They  were  to  have  no  territorial  possessions.  In 
place  of  them  they  were  to  receive  from  the  others 
the  tithes  of  the  produce  of  the  land,  ■  from  which 
they,  in  their  turn,  offered  a  tithe  to  the  priests,  as 
a  recognition  of  their  higher  consecration  (Num. 
xviii.  21,  24,  26  ;  Neh.  x.  37).  As  if  to  provide  for 
the  contingency  of  failing  crops  or  the  like,  and  the 
consequent  inadequacy  of  the  tithes  thus  assigned 
to  them,  the  Levite  not  less  than  the  widow  and  the 
oi-phan,  was  commended  to  the  special  kindness  of 
the  people  (Deut.  xii.  19,  xiv.  27,  29).     When  the 


''  Solemn  as  this  dedication  is,  it  fell  short  of  the 
consecration  of  the  priests,  and  was  expressed  by 
a  different  word.  [Priest.]  The  Levites  were  purified, 
not  consecrated  (comp.  Gesen.  s.  v.  "iHtJ  and  CTp 
and  Oehler,  *.  v.  "Levi,"  in  Herzog's  Real.  Encycl.). 

'  In  the  encampment  in  the  wilderness,  the  sons 
of  Aaron  occupied  the  foremost  jilace  of  honour  on  the 
east.  The  Kohathites  were  at  their  right,  on  the 
south,  the  Gershonites  on  the  west,  the  sons  of  Merari 
on  the  north  of  the  tabernacle.  On  the  south  were 
also  Reuben,  Simeon,  and  Gad  (Num.  ii.  and  iii.J. 


LEVITES 

wanderings  of  the  peopk'  should  be  ovei-  and  the 
tabernacle  have  a  settled  jilace,  great  part  of  the  labour 
that  had  fellen  on  them  would  come  to  an  end,  and 
they  too  would  need  a  fixed  abode.  Concentration 
round  the  tabeiuacle  would  lead  to  evils  nearly  as 
o-reat,  though  of  a  different  kind,  as  an  assignment 
of  special  territory.  Tlieir  ministerial  character 
might  thus  be  intensified,  but  their  pei-vading  in- 
fluence as  witnesses  and  teachers  would  be  sacrificed 
to  it.  Distinctness  and  diffusion  were  both  to  be 
secured  by  the  assignment  to  the  whole  tribe  (the 
priests  included)  of  forty-eight  cities,  with  an 
outlying  "suburb"  (ti'")jp,  irpodcrreia;  Num. 
xxxv.  2)  of  meadow-land  for  the  pasturage  of  their 
flocks  and  herds.™  The  reverence  of  the  people  lor 
them  was  to  be  heightened  by  the  selection  of  six  of 
these  as  cities  of  refuge,  in  wliich  the  Levites  were 
to  present  themselves  as  the  protectors  of  the  fugi- 
tives who,  though  they  had  not  incurred  the  guilt, 
were  yet  liable  to  the  punishment  of  murder." 
How  rapidly  the  feeling  of  reverence  gained  strength, 
we  may  judge  from  the  share  assigned  to  them  out 
of  the  "flocks  and  herds  and  women,  of  the  conquered 
Midianites  (Num.  xxxi.  27,  &c.).  The  same  victory 
led  to  the  dedication  of  gold  and  silver  vessels  of 
great  value,  and  thus  increased  the  importance 
of  the  tribe  as  guardians  of  the  national  treasures 
(Num.  xxxi.  50-54). 

The  book  of  Deuteronomy  is  interesting  as  in- 
dicating more  clearly  than  had  been  done  before 
the  other  functions,  over  and  above  their  ministra- 
tions in  the  tabernacle,  which  were  to  be  allotted 
to  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Througli  the  whole  land  they 
were  to  take  the  place  of  the  old  household  priests 
(subject,  of  course,  to  the  special  rights  of  the 
Aaronic  priesthood),  sharing  in  all  festivals  and  re- 
joicings (Deut.  xii.  19,  xiv.  26,  27,  xxvi.  11).  Every 
third  year  they  were  to  have  an  additional  share  in 
the  produce  of  the  land  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12). 
The  people  were  charged  never  to  forsake  them.  To 
"  the  priests  the  Levites""  was  to  belong  the  office 
of  pieserving,  transcribing,  and  intei"preting  the  law 
(Deut.  xvii.  9-12  ;  xxxi.  26).  They  were  solemnly 
to  read  it  every  seventh  year  at  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles (Deut.  xxxi.  9-1  o).  They  were  to  pronounce 
the  curses  from  Mount  Ebal  (Deut.  xxvii.  14). 

Such,  if  one  may  so  speak,  was  the  ideal  of  the 
religious  organisation  which  was  present  to  the 
mind  of  the  lawgiver.  Details  were  left  to  be  de- 
veloped as  the  altered  circumstances  of  the  people 
might  require. P  The  great  principle  was,  that  the 
warrior-caste  who  had  guarded  the  tent  of  the  cap- 
tain of  the  hosts  of  Israel,  should  be  throughout 
the  land  as  witnesses  that  the  people  still  owed 
allegiance  to  Him.  It  deserves  notice  that,  as  yet, 
witli  the  exception  of  the  few  passages  tliat  refer  to 

™  Heliopolis  (Strabo,  xvii.  1),  Thebes  and  Memphis 
in  Egypt,  and  Benares  in  Hindostan,  have  been  referred 
to  as  parallels.  The  aggresation  of  jiriests  round  a 
great  national  sanctuary,  so  as  to  make  it  as  it  were 
the  centre  of  a  collegiate  life,  was  however  different  in 
its  object  and  I'csults  from  that  of  the  polity  of  Israel. 
(Comp.  Ewald,  O'fscli.  ii.  402.) 

"■  The  importance  of  giving  a  sacred  character  to 
such  an  asylum  is  sufficient  to  account  for  the  assign- 
ment of  tlie  cities  of  refuge  to  the  Levites.  Philo, 
however,  with  his  characteristic  love  of  an  inner 
meaning,  sees  in  it  the  truth  that  the  Levites  them- 
selves were,  according  to  the  idea  of  their  lives, 
fugitives  from  the  world  of  sense,  who  had  found 
their  place  of  refuge  in  God. 

"  This  phraseology,  characteristic  of  Deuteronomy 


LEVITES 


103 


the  priests,  no  traces  appear  of  their  character  as  a 
learned  caste,  and  of  the  work  which  afteiwai'ds 
belonged  to  them  as  hymn-wi iters  and  musicians. 
The  hymns  of  tliis  period  were  probably  occasional, 
not  recurring  (comp.  Ex.  xv. ;  Num.  xxi.  17  ;  Deut. 
xxxii.).  Women  bore  a  large  share  in  singing  them 
(Ex.  XV.  20;  Ps.  Ixviii.  25).  It  is  not  unlikely 
that  the  wives  and  daughters  of  the  Levites,  who 
must  have  been  with  them  in  all  their  encampments, 
as  afterwards  in  their  cities,  took  the  foremost  part 
among  the  "  damsels  playing  with  their  timbrels," '< 
or  among  the  "  wise-hearted,"  who  wove  hangings 
for  the  decoration  of  the  tabernacle.  There  are  at 
any  rate  signs  of  their  presence  there,  in  the  mention 
of  the  "women  that  assembled"  at  its  door  (Ex. 
xxxviii.  8,  and  comp.  Ewald,  Alterthum.  p.  297). 

II.  The  successor  of  Moses,  though  belonging  to 
another  tribe,  did  faithfully  all  that  could  be  done  to 
convert  this  idea  into  a  reality.  The  submission  of 
the  Gibeonites,  after  they  had  obtained  a  promise 
that  their  lives  should  be  spared,  enabled  him  to  re- 
lieve the  tribe-divisions  of  (Jershon  and  Mei'ari  of  the 
most  burdensome  of  their  duties.  •  The  conquered 
Hivites  became  "  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of 
water  "  for  the  house  of  Jehovah  and  for  the  con- 
gregation (.Josh.  ix.  27).''  As  soon  as  the  con- 
querors had  advanced  far  enough  to  proceed  to  a 
partition  of  the  country,  the  forty-eight  cities  were 
assigned  to  them.  Whether  they  were  to  be  the 
sole  occupiers  of  the  cities  thus  allotted,  or  whether 
— as  the  rule  for  the  redemption  of  their  houses  in 
Lev.  xxv.  32  might  seem  to  indicate — others  were 
allowed  to  reside  when  they  had  been  provided  for, 
must  remain  uncertain.  The  principle  of  a  widely 
diffused  influence  was  maintained  by  allotting,  as  a 
rule,  four  cities  from  the  district  of  each  tribe  ;  but 
it  is  interesting  to  notice  how,  in  the  details  of  the 
distribution,  the  divisions  of  the  Levites  in  the  order 
of  their  precedence  coincided  with  the  relative  im- 
portance of  the  tribes  with  which  they  were  con- 
nected. The  following  table  will  help  the  reader 
to  form  a  judgment  on  this  point,  and  to  trace  the 
influence  of  the  tribe  in  the  subsequent  events  of 
Jewish  history. 


KOHATHITES  : 

A.  Priests 


C  Judah  and  Simeon   ....  9 
\  Benjamin       4 

{Ephraim 4 
Dun  4 
Half  Manasseh  (West)  . .  2 
iHalfManasseh(Kast)  ..  2 
Issachar  4 
Asher 4 
Naphtali 3 

j  Zebulun 4 

. .  <  Reuben 4 

(Gad     4 


4S 


II.  Gershonites 


III.  Merakites 


and  Joshua,  appears  to  indicate  that  the  functions 
spoken  of  belonged  to  them,  as  the  chief  members  of 
the  sacred  tiibe,  as  a  clerisy  rather  than  as  piiests  in 
the  narrower  sense  of  the  word. 

P  To  this  there  is  one  remarkable  exception.  Deut. 
xviii.  6  provides  for  a  permanent  dedication  as  the 
result  of  personal  zeal  going  beyond  the  fixed  period 
of  service  that  came  in  rotation,  and  entitled  accord- 
ingly to  its  reward. 

1  Comp.,  as  indicating  their  presence  and  functions 
at  a  later  date,  1  Chr.  xxv.  5,  6. 

■■  The  Nethinim  (Deo  dati)  of  1  Chr.  ix.  2,  Ezr. 
ii.  43,  were  probably  sprung  from  captives  taken  by 
David  in  later  wars,  who  were  assigned  to  the  service 
of  the  tabernacle,  replacing  possibly  the  Gibepnitra 
who  had  been  slain  by  Saul  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1). 


104 


LEVITES 


Tlie  scanty  memorials  that  are  left  us  in  the  booi< 
of  Judges  fail  to  show  how  tiir,  for  any  length  of 
time,  the  reality  answered  to  the  idea.  The  ravages 
of  invasion,  and  the  pressure  of  an  alien  rule, 
marred  the  working  of  the  organisation  whicli 
seemed  so  perfect.  Levitical  cities,  such  as  Aijalou 
(Josh.  xxi.  24  ;  Judg.  i.  35)  and  Gezer  (Josh.  sxi. 
21;  1  Chr.  vi.  67),  fall  into  the  hands  of  their 
enemies.  Sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Nob,  others 
apparently  took  their  place.  The  wandering  un- 
settled habits  of  the  Levites  who  are  mentioned  in 
the  later  cliapters  of  Judges  are  probably  to  be 
traced  to  this  loss  of  a  fixed  abode,  and  the  con- 
sequent necessity  of  taking  refuge  in  other  cities, 
even  though  their  tribe  as  such  had  no  portion  in 
them.  The  tendency  of  the  people  to  fall  into  the 
idolatry  of  the  neighbouring  nations  showed  either 
that  the  Levites  failed  to  bear  their  witness  to  the 
truth  or  had  no  power  to  enforce  it.  Even  in  the 
lifetime  of  Phiuehas,  when  the  high-priest  was  still 
consulted  as  an  oracle,  the  reverence  which  tlie 
people  felt  for  the  tribe  of  Levi  becomes  the  occa- 
sion of  a  rival  worship  (Judg.  xvii.).  The  old 
household  priesthood  revives,*  and  there  is  the  risk 
of  the  national  worship  breaking  up  into  indivi- 
dualism. Micah  first  consecrates  one  of  his  own 
sons,  and  then  tempts  a  homeless  Levite  to  dwell 
with  him  as  "  a  lather  and  a  priest"  for  little  more 
than  his  food  and  raiment.  The  Levite,  though  pro- 
bably the  gi-andson  of  Moses  himself,  j-epeats  the 
sin  of  Korah.  [Jonathan.]  First  in  the  house  of 
Micah,  and  then  for  the  emigrants  of  Dan,  he  exer- 
cises the  office  of  a  priest  with  "an  ephod,  and  a 
teraphira  and  a  graven  image."  With  this  excep- 
tion the  whole  tribe  appears  to  have  fallen  into  a 
condition  analogous  to  that  of  the  clergy  in  the 
darkest  period  and  in  the  most  outlying  districts 
of  the  Mediaeval  Church,  going  through  a  ritual 
routine,  but  exercising  no  influence  for  good,  at  once 
corrupted  and  corrupting.  The  shameless  license 
of  the  sons  of  Eli  may  be  looked  upon  as  the  resvdt 
of  a  long  period  of  decay,  affecting  the  whole  order. 
When  the  priests  were  such  as  Hophni  and  Phinehas, 
we  may  fairly  assume  that  the  Levites  were  not 
doing  much  to  sustain  the  moral  life  of  the  people. 

The  woik  of  .Samuel  was  the  starting-point  of  a 
better  time.  Himself  a  Levite,  and,  though  not  a 
priest,  belonging  to  that  section  of  the  Levites  which 
was  nearest  to  the  priesthood  (1  Chr.  vi.  28), 
adopted  as  it  were,  by  a  special  dedication  into  the 
priestly  line  and  trained  for  its  offices  (1  Sam.  ii. 
18),  he  appears  as  infusing  a  fresh  life,  the  author 
of  a  new  organisation.  There  is  no  reason  to  think, 
indeed,  that  the  companies  or  schools  of  the  sons  of 
the  prophets  which  appear  in  his  time  (1  Sam.  x. 
r>),  and  are  traditionally  said  to  have  been  founded 
by  him,  consisted  exclusively  of  Levites ;  but  there 
are  many  .-^igns  that  the  members  of  that  tribe 
formed  a  large  element  in  the  new  order,  and  re- 
ceived new  sti-ength  fiom  it.  It  e.^ihibited,  indeed, 
the  ideal  of  the  Levite  life  as  one  of  praise,  devotion, 
teaching,  standing  in  the  same  relation  to  the  priests 
and  Levites  generally  as  the  monastic  institutions  of 
the  fifth  century,  or  the  mendicant  orders  of  the  thir- 
teenth did  to  the  secular  clergy  of  Western  Europe. 


•  Compare,  on  the  extent  of  this  relapse  into  an 
earlier  system,  Kaliseh,  On  Genesis  xlix.  7. 

'  It  may  be  worth  while  to  indicate  the  extent  of 
this  connexion.  As  prophets,  who  are  also  priests, 
we  liave  Jeremiah  (Jer.  i.  1),  Kzekiel  (Ez.  i.  3), 
A>;ariah  the  son  of  Odecl  (2  Chr.  xv.  1),  Zechariah 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  20).      Internal,  evidence  tends  to  the 


LEVITES 

The  fact  that  the  Levites  were  thus  brought  under  the 
influence  of  a  system  which  addressed  itself  to  the 
mind  and  heart  in  a  greater  degree  than  the  sacri- 
ficial functions  of  the  priesthood,  may  possibly  have 
led  them  on  to  apprehend  the  higher  truths  as  to 
the  nature  of  worship  which  begin  to  be  asserted 
from  this  period,  and  which  are  nowhere  pro- 
claimed more  clearly  than  in  the  great  hymn 
that  bears  the  name  of  Asaph  (Ps.  1.  7-15).  The 
man  who  raises  the  name  of  prophet  to  a  new  signi- 
ficance is  himself  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ix.  9).  It  is 
among  them  that  we  find  the  first  signs  of  the  mu- 
sical skill  which  is  afterwards  so  conspicuous  in  the 
Levites  (1  Sam.  x.  5).  The  order  in  which  the 
Temple  services  were  arranged  is  ascribed  to  two  of 
the  prophets,  Nathan  and  Gad  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25), 
who  must  have  grown  up  under  Samuel's  super- 
intendence, and  in  part  to  Samuel  himself  (1  Chr. 
ix.  22).  Asaph  and  Heman,  the  Psalmists,  bear  the 
same  title  as  Samuel  the  Seer  (I  Chr.  xxv.  5  ;  2  Chi-, 
xxix.  30).  The  very  word  "  prophesying  "  is  applied 
not  only  to  sudden  bursts  of  song,  but  to  the  organ- 
ised psalmody  of  the  Temple  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2,  3).  Even 
of  those  who  bore  the  name  of  a  prophet  in  a  higher 
sense,  a  large  number  are  traceably  of  this  tribe.' 

IIL  The  capture  of  the  Ark  by  the  I'hilistines 
did  not  entirely  interrupt  the  worship  of  the 
Israelites,  and  the  ministrations  of  the  Levites  went 
on,  first  at  Shiloh  (1  Sam.  xiv.  3),  then  for  a  time 
at  Nob  (1  Sam.  xxii.  11),  afterwards  at  Gibeou 
(1  K.  iii.  2 ;  1  Chr.  xvi.  39).  The  history  of  the 
return  of  the  ark  to  Beth-shemesh  after  its  capture 
by  the  Philistines,  and  its  subsequent  I'emoval  to 
Kirjath-jearim,  points  apparently  to  some  strange 
complications,  rising  out  of  the  anomalies  of  this 
period,  and  affecting,  in  some  measure,  the  position 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Beth-shemesh  was,  by  the 
original  assignment  of  the  conquered  coimtry,  one 
of  the  cities  of  the  priests  (Josh.  xxi.  16).  They, 
however,  do  not  appear  in  the  narrative,  unless  we 
assume,  against  all  probability,  that  the  men  of 
Beth-shemesh  who  were  guilty  of  the  act  of  pro- 
fanation were  themselves  of  the  priestly  order. 
Levites  indeed  are  mentioned  as  doing  their  ap- 
pointed work  (1  Sam.  vi.  15),  buf^the  sacrifices 
and  burnt-oiferings  are  offered  by  the  men  of  the 
city,  as  though  the  special  function  of  the  priest- 
hood had  been  usui-ped  by  others ;  and  on  this  sup- 
position it  is  easier  to  understand  how  those  who 
had  set  aside  the  Law  of  Moses  by  one  offence 
should  defy  it  also  by  another.  The  singular  read- 
ing of  the  LXX.  in  1  Sam.  vi.  li)  {koI  ovk  f/cryue- 
ULcrav  ol  viol  'lex"*'''"^  ^^  '''"^^  HvSpacn  Baidffaixvs 
'6ri  elSov  KiPaiThu  Kvp'wv)  indicates,  if  we  assume 
that  it  rests  upon  some  corresponding  Hebrew  text, 
a  struggle  between  two  opposed  parties,  one  guilty 
of  the  profanation,  the  other—  possibly  the  Levites 
who  had  been  before  mentioned — zealous  in  their 
remonstrances  against  it.  Then  comes,  either  as 
the  result  of  this  collision,  or  by  direct  supernatural 
infliction,  the  great  slaughter  of  the  Beth-shemites, 
and  they  shrink  from  refciining  the  ark  any  longei 
among  them.  The  great  Eben  (stone)  becomes,  by  a 
slight  paronomastic  change  in  its  form,  the  "  great 
Abel "  (lamentation),  and  the  name  remains  as  a  me- 

same  conclusion  as  to  Joel,  Micah,  Hahakkuk,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  and  even  Isaiah  himself.  Jahai^iel  (2  Chr. 
XX.  11)  appears  as  al  once  a  prophet  and  a  Levite. 
There  is  a  balance  of  probability  on  the  same  side  as 
to  Jehu,  Hanani,  the  second  Oded,  and  Ahijah  of 
Shiloh. 


LEVITES 

moiial  of  the  sin  and  ol'  its  punislimeut.  [Bethshe- 
MESH.]     We  are  left  entirely  iu  the  dark  as  to  the 
reasons  which  led  theni,  after  this,  to  send  the  ark  of 
Jehovah,  not  to  Hebron  or  some  other  priestly  city, 
but  to  Kirjath-jearim,  round  wliich,  so  far  as  we  know, 
there  gathered  legitimately  no  sacred  associations. 
It  has  been  commonly  assumed  indeed  that  Abina- 
(lab,    under   whose    guai'dianship   it   remained    for 
twenty   years,  must  necessarily  have  been  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi.     [Abinadab.]     Of  this,  however, 
thei'e  is  not  the  slightest  direct  evidence,  and  against 
it  there  is  the  language  of  David  in  1  Chr.  xv.  2, 
"  None  ought  to  carry  the  ark    of  God    but  tlie 
Levites,  for  them    hath  Jehovah    chosen,"  which 
would  lose  lialf  its  tbice  if  it  were  not  meant  as  a 
protest  against  a  recent  innovation,  and  the  ground 
of  a  return  to  the  more  ancient  order.     So  tar  as 
one  can  see  one's  way  through  these  perplexities  of 
a  dark  period,  the  most  probable  explanation — al- 
ready suggested*  under  Kiiuath-jearim — seems 
to  be  the   following.     The  old  names   of   Baaleh 
(Josh.    XV.   9)  and   Kirjath-baal    (Josh.    xv.   GO) 
suggest  there  had  been  of  old  some  special  sanctity 
attached  to  the  ])lace  as  the  centre  of  a  Canaiinite 
local    worship.  The  fact    that  the  ark  was  taken 
to  the  house    of   Abinadab  in  the    Idll  (1    Sam. 
vii.  1),  the  Gibeah  of  2  Sam.  vi.  3,  connects  it- 
self with  that  old  Canaanitish  reverence  for  high 
places,  which,   through   the   whole  iiistory  of  the 
Israelites,  continued  to  have  such  strong  attractions 
for  them.     These  may  ha\-e  seemed  to  the  panic- 
stricken  inhabitants  of  that  district,  mingling  old 
things  and  new,  the  worship  of  Jehovah  with  the 
lingering   superstitions    of  the   conquered    people, 
sufficient  grounds  to  determine  their  choice  of  a 
locality.     The  consecration  (the  word  used  is  the 
special  sacerdotal  term)  of  Eleazar  as  the  guardian 
of  the  ark  is,  on  this  hypothesis,  analogous  in  its  way 
to  the  other  irregular  assumptions  which  characterise 
this  period,  though  here  the  oflence  was  less  flagrant, 
and  did  not  involve  ajjparently  the  performance  of 
any  sacrificial  acts.     \Vhile,  however,  this  aspect  of 
the  religious  condition  of  the  people  brings  the  Levi- 
tical  and  priestly  orders  before  us,  as  having  lost  the 
position  they  had  previously  occupied,  there  were 
other  influences  at  work  tending  to  reinstate  them. 
The  rule  of  Samuel  and  his  sons,  and  the  prophet- 
ical character  now  connected  with  the  tribe,  tended 
to  gi\'e  them  the  position  of  a  ruling  caste.     In  the 
strong  desire  of  the  people  for  a  king,  we  may  per- 
haps trace  a  protest  against  the  assumption  by  the 
Levites  of  a  higher  position  than  that  originally 
assigned.     The  reign  of  Saul,  in  its  later  period, 
was  at  any  rate  the  assertion  of  a  self-willed  power 
against  the  priestly  order.     The  assumption  of  the 
sacrificial  oilice,  tlie  massacre  of  the  priests  at  Nob, 
the  slaughter  of  the  Gibeonites  who  were  attached 
to  their  service,  were  parts  of  the  same  policy,  and 
the  narrative  of  the  condemnation  of  Saul  for  the 
two  former  sins,  no  less  than  of  the  expiation  re- 
quired for  the  latter  (2  Sam.  xxi.),  shows  by  what 
strong  measures  the  truthj  of  which  that  policy  was 
a  subversion,  had  to  be  impressed  on  the  minds  of 
the  Israelites.   The  reign  of  David,  however,  brought 
the  change  from  persecut  ion  to  honour.    The  Levites 
were  ready  to  welcome  a  king  who,  though  not  of 
their  tribe,  had  been  brought  up  under  their  train- 
ing,  was   skilled    in    their  arts,   ]jrepared  to  share 

'•'  There  arc  24  courses  of  the  priests,  24,000  Le- 
vites in  the  general  business  of  the  Teniplo  (1  Chr. 
\xiii.  4).  The  number  of  singers  is  288  =  12  x  24 
(1  Chr.  XXV.  7). 


I.EVTTES 


105 


even  in  some  of  their  ministrations,  and  to  array 
himself  in  theirapparel  (2  Sam.  vi.  14), and  4600  of 
their  number  with  3700  priests  waited  upon  David 
at  Hebron — itself,  it  should  be  remembered,  one  of 
the  pi'iestly  cities — to  tender  tlieir  allegiance  (1  Chr. 
xii.  26j.  When  his  kingdom  was  established,  there 
came  a  fuller  organisation  of  the  whole  tribe.  Its 
position  in  relation  to  the  priesthood  was  once  again 
definitely  recognised.  When  the  ark  was  carried  up 
to  its  new  resting-place  in  Jerusalem,  their  claim 
to  be  the  bearers  of  it  was  publicly  acknowledged 
(1  Chr.  XV.  2).  When  the  sin  of  Uzzah  stopped  the 
procession,  it  was  placed  for  a  time  mider  the  care 
of  Obed-Edom  of  Gath — probably  (iath-rimmon — 
as  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  Kohathites  (1  Chr.  xiii. 
13;   Josh.  xxi.  24  ;  1  Chr.  xv.  18). 

In  the  procession  which  attended  the  ultimate 
conveyance  of  the  ark  to  its  new  resting-place  the 
Levites  were  conspicuous,  wearing  their  linen  ephods, 
and  appearing  in  their  new  character  as  minstrels 
(1  Chr.  XV.  27,  28).  In  the  worship  of  the  taber- 
nacle under  David,  as  afterwards  in  that  of  the 
Temple,  we  may  trace  a  development  of  the  simpler 
arrangements  of  the  wilderness  and  of  Shiloh.  The 
Levites  were  the  gatekeepers,  vergers,  sacristans, 
choristers  of  the  central  sanctuary  of  the  nation. 
They  were,  iu  the  language  of  1  Chr.  xxiii.  24-32, 
to  which  we  may  refer  as  almost  the  locus  classicus 
on  this  subject,  "  to  wait  on  the  sons  of  Aaron 
for  the  service  of  the  house  of  Jeliovah,  in  the 
courts,  and  the  chambers,  and  the  ptu-ifying  of  all 
holy  things."  This  included  the  duty  of  providing 
"  for  the  shew-bread,  and  the  fine  flour  for  meat- 
ofi'ering,  and  for  the  unleavened  bread."  They 
were,  besides  this,  "to  stand  every  morning  to  thank 
and  praise  Jehovah,  and  likewise  at  even."  They 
were  lastly  "  to  oiler" — i.  e.  to  assist  the  priests  in 
offering — "  all  burnt-sacrifices  to  .lehovah  in  the  sab- 
baths and  on  the  set  feasts."  Tliey  lived  for  the  greater 
part  of  the  year  in  their  own  cities,  and  came  up  at 
fixed  periods  to  take  their  turn  of  work  (1  Chr.  xxv., 
xxvi.).  How  long  it  lasted  we  have  no  sutlicient 
data  for  determining.  The  predominance  of  the 
number  twelve  as  the  basis  of  classification  "  might 
seem  to  indicate  monthly  periods,  and  the  festivals 
of  the  new  moon  would  naturally  suggest  such  an 
arrangement.  The  analogous  order  in  the  civil  and 
military  administration  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  1)  would  tend 
to  the  same  conclusion.  It  appears,  indeed ,  that  there 
was  a  change  of  some  kind  every  week  (1  Chr.  is.  25  ; 
2  Chr.  xxiii.  4,  8) ;  but  this  is  of  course  compatible 
with  a  system  of  rotation,  which  would  give  to  each 
a  longer  period  of  residence,  or  with  the  permanent 
residence  of  the  leader  of  each  division  within  the 
precincts  of  the  sanctuary.  Whatever  may  have 
been  the  system,  we  must  bear  iu  mind  that  the 
duties  now  imposed  upon  the  Levites  were  such  as 
to  require  almost  continuous  practice.  Tliey  would 
need,  when  their  turn  came,  to  be  able  to  bear  their 
jiarts  in  the  great  choral  hynuis  of  the  T^'mple,  and 
to  take  each  his  appointed  share  in  tlie  complex 
structure  of  a  sacrificial  liturgy,  and  for  this  a 
special  study  would  be  required.  The  education 
which  the  Levites  received  for  their  peculiar  duties, 
no  less  than  their  connexion,  moie  or  loss  intimate, 
with  the  schools  of  the  prophets  (see  above),  would 
tend  to  make  them,  so  far  as  there  was  any  educa- 
tion at  nil,   the  teachers  of  the  others,"   the  tran- 


"  There  is,  however,  a  curious  Jewish  tradition  that 
the  schoolmasters  of  Israel  were  of  the  tribe  of 
Simeon  {Solom.  Jarchi  on  Gen.  xlix.  7,  in  Godwyu's 
Moses  and  Aaron). 


106 


LEVITES 


scribers  and  interpreters  of  the  Law,  the  chroniclers 
of  the  times  in  which  they  lived.  We  have  some 
striking  instances  of  their  appearance  in  this  new 
character.  One  of  them,  Ethan  the  Ezi'ahite,''  takes 
his  place  among  the  old  Hebrew  sages  who  were 
worthy  to  be  compared  with  Solomon,  and  (Ps. 
Ixxxix.  title)  his  name  appears  as  the  writer  of  the 
39th  Psalm  (1  K.  iv.  31 ;  1  Chr.  xv.  17).  One  of 
the  first  to  bear  the  title  of  "Scribe"  is  a  Levite 
(1  Chr.  sxiv.  6),  and  this  is  mentioned  as  one  of 
their  special  offices  under  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  13). 
They  are  described  as  "  officers  and  judges"  under 
David  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  29),  and  as  such  are  employed 
"  in  all  the  business  of  .Tehovah,  and  in  the  ser^nce 
of  the  king."  They  are  the  agents  of  Jehoshaphat 
and  Hezekiah  in  their  work  of  reformation,  and  are 
sent  forth  to  proclaim  and  enforce  the  law  (  2  Chr. 
xvii.  8,  XXX.  22).  Under  Josiah  the  function  has 
passed  into  a  title,  and  they  are  "  the  Levites  that 
taught  all  Israel"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  3).  The  two 
books  of  Chronicles  bear  unmistakeable  marks  of 
having  been  written  by  men  whose  interests  weie 
all  gathered  round  the  services  of  the  Temple,  and 
who  were  familiar  with  its  i-ecords.  The  materials 
from  which  they  compiled  their  narratives,  and  to 
which  they  refer  as  the  works  of  seers  and  prophets, 
were  written  by  men  who  were  probably  Le\ntes 
themselves,  or,  if  not,  were  associated  with  them. 

The  former  subdivisions  of  the  tribe  were  recog- 
nised in  the  assignment  of  the  new  duties,  and  the 
Kohathites  retained  their  old  pre-eminence.  They 
have  four  "  princes"  (1  Chr.  xv.  5-10),  while 
Merari  and  Gershon  have  but  one  each.  They  sup- 
plied, from  the  families  of  the  Izharites  and  Hebron- 
ites,  the  "  officers  and  judges  "  of  1  Chr.  xxvi.  30. 
To  them  belonged  the  sons  of  Korah,  with  Heman 
at  their  head  (1  Chr.  ix.  19),  playing  upon  psalteries 
and  harps.  They  were  "  over  the  work  of  the  ser- 
vice, keepers  of  the  gates  of  the  tabernacle"  (/.  c). 
It  was  their  work  to  prepare  the  shew-bread  every 
.Sabbath  (1  Chr.  ix.  32).  The  Gershonites  were 
represented  in  like  manner  in  the  Temple-choir  by 
the  sons  of  Asaph  (1  Chr.  \'i.  39,  xv.  17) ;  Merari 
by  the  sons  of  Ethan  or  Jeduthun  (1  Chr.  vi.  44, 
xvi.  42,  XXV.  1-7).  Now  that  the  heavier  work  of 
conveying  the  tabernacle  and  its  equipments  from 
place  to  place  was  no  longer  i-equired  of  them,  and 
that  psalmody  had  become  the  most  prominent  of 
their  duties,  they  weie  to  enter  on  their  work  at  the 
earlier  age  of  twenty  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  24-27).^ 

As  in  the  old  days  of  the  Exodus,  so  in  the 
organisation  under  David,  the  Levites  were  not 
included  in  the  general  census  of  the  people  (1  Chr. 
xxi.  6),  and  foiTned  accordingly  no  portion  of  its 
military  strength.  A  separate  census,  made  appa- 
rently before  the  change  of  age  just  mentioned 
(I  Chr.  xxiii.  3),  gives — 

24,000  over  the  work  of  the  Temple. 
6,000  officers  and  judges. 
4,000^orters,  i.  e.  gate-keepers,*  and,  as  such, 

y  In  I  Chr.  ii.  6  the  four  names  of  1  K.  iv.  31 
appear  as  belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  in  the 
third  generation  after  Jacob.  On  the  otlier  hand  the 
names  of  Heman  and  Ethan  are  prominent  among 
the  Levites  under  Solomon  (infra)  ;  and  two  psalms, 
one  of  which  belongs  manifestly  to  a  later  date,  are 
ascribed  to  them,  with  this  title  of  Ezrahite  attached 
(Ps.  Ixxxviii.  and  Ixxxix.).  The  difficulty  arises  pro- 
bably out  of  some  confusion  of  the  later  and  the  earlier 
names.  Ewald's  conjecture,  that  conspicuous  minstrels 
of  other  tribes  were  received  into  the  choir  of  the 
Temple,  and  then  reckoned  as  Levites,  would  give  a 


LEVITES 

bearing   arms    (1   Chr.  ix.   19 ;    2  Chr. 

xxxi.  2). 
4,000  praising  Jehovah  with  instruments. 
The  latter  number,  however,  must  have  included 
the  full  choruses  of  the  Temple.  The  more  skilled 
musicians  among  the  sons  of  Heman,  Asaph,  and 
Jeduthun  are  numbered  at  288,  in  24  sections  of 
12  each.  Here  again  the  Kohathites  are  prominent, 
ha\'ing  14  out  of  the  24  sections  ;  while  Gershon 
has  4  and  Jlerari  8  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2-4).  To  these 
288  were  assigned  apparently  a  more  peimauent 
residence  in  the  Temple  (1  Chr.  ix.  33),  and  in 
the  villages  of  the  Netophathites  near  Bethlehem 
(1  Chr.  ix.  1(3),  mentioned  long  afterwards  as  in- 
habited by  the  "  sons  of  the  singers"  (Neh.  xii.  28). 
The  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes,  and  the  policy  pur- 
sued by  Jeroboam,  led  to  a  great  change  in  the 
position  of  the  Levites.  They  were  the  witnesses 
of  an  appointed  order  and  of  a  central  worship. 
He  wished  to  make  the  priests  the  creatures  and 
instruments  of  the  king,  and  to  establish  a  pro- 
vincial and  divided  worship.  The  natural  result 
was,  that  they  left  the  cities  assigned  to  them  in 
the  territory  of  Israel,  and  gathered  round  the  me- 
tropolis of  Judah  (2  Chi-,  xi.  13,  14).  Their  in- 
fluence over  the  people  at  large  was  thus  diminished, 
and  the  design  of  the  Mosaic  polity  so  far  frus- 
trated ;  but  their  power  as  a  religious  order  was 
probably  increased  by  this  concentration  within 
nanower  limits.  In  the  kingdom  of  Judah  they 
were,  from  this  time  forward,  a  powerful  body, 
politically  as  well  as  ecclesiastically.  They  brought 
with  them  the  prophetic  element  of  influence,  in 
the  wider  as  well  as  in  the  higher  meaning  of  the 
word.  We  accordingly  find  them  prominent  in 
the  war  of  Abijah  against  Jeroboam  (2  Chr.  xiii. 
10-12).  They  are,  as  before  noticed,  sent  out  by 
Jehoshaphat  to  instruct  and  judge  the  people  (2  Chr. 
xix.  8-10).  Prophets  of  their  order  encourage  the 
king  in  his  war  against  Moab  and  Ammon,  and  go 
before  his  ai-my  with  their  loud  Hallelujahs  (2  Chr. 
XX.  21),  and  join  afterwards  in  the  triumph  of  his 
return.  The  apostasy  that  followed  on  the  mar- 
riage of  Jehoram  and  Athaliah  exposed  them  for  a 
time  to  the  dominance  of  a  hostile  system  ;  but  the 
services  of  the  Temple  appear  to  have  gone  on,  and 
the  Levites  were  again  conspicuous  in  the  counter- 
revolution effected  by  Jehoiada  (2  Chr.  xxiii.),  and 
in  restoring  the  Temple  to  its  former  stateliness 
uuder  Joash  (2  Chr.  xxi  v.  5).  They  shared  in  the 
disasters  of  the  reign  of  Araaziah  (2  Chr.  xxv.  24), 
and  in  the  pi-osperity  of  Uzziah,  and  were  ready, 
we  may  believe,  to  support  the  priests,  who,  as 
representing  their  order,  opposed  the  sacrilegious 
usurpation  of  the  latter  king  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  17). 
The  closing  of  the  Temple  under  Ahaz  involved  the 
cessation  at  once  of  their  work  and  of  their  privi- 
leges (2  Chr.  xxviii.  24).  Under  Hezekiah  they 
again  became  prominent,  as  consecrating  themselves 
to  the  special  work  of  cleansing  and  repairing  the 


new  aspect  to  the  influence  of  the  tribe.  (Comp. 
Poet.  Hiich.  i.  213  ;  De  Wefte,  Tsalmen,  JEinleit.  §  iii.) 

*  The  change  is  indicated  in  what  are  described  as 
the  "  last  words  of  David."  The  king  feel'*,  in  his 
old  age,  that  a  time  of  rest  has  come  for  himself  and 
for  the  people,  and  that  the  Levites  have  a  right  to 
share  in  it.  They  are  now  the  ministers — not,  as 
before,  the  warrior-host- — of  the  Vnseen  King. 

"  Ps.  cxxxiv.  acquires  a  fresh  interest  when  we 
think  of  it  as  the  song  of  the  night-sentries  of  the 
Temple. 


LEVITES 

Temple  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12-15);  and  the  hynius  of 
David  and  of  Asaph  were  attain  renewed.  In  this 
instance  it  was  thought  worthy  of  special  record 
that  those  who  were  simply  Levites  were  more 
•'upright  in  heart"  and  zealous  than  the  priests 
themselves  (2  Chr.  xxix.  34) ;  and  thus,  in  that 
great  passover,  they  took  the  place  of  the  unwilling 
or  unprepared  members  of  the  priesthood.  Their 
old  jirivileges  were  restored,  they  were  put  forward 
as  teachers  (2  Chr.  xxx.  22),  and  the  payment  of 
tithes,  which  had  probably  been  discontinued  under 
Ahaz,  was  renewed  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  4).  The  gene- 
alogies of  the  tribe  were  revised  (ver.  17),  atid  the 
old  classification  kept  its  ground.  The  reign  of 
Manasseh  was  for  them,  dui'ing  the  greater  part  of 
it,  a  period  of  depression.  That  of  Josiah  witnessed 
a  fresh  revival  and  reorganisation  (2  Chr.  xxxiv. 
8-13).  I'.i  the  great  passover  of  his  eighteenth 
vear  they  toolc  their  place  as  teachers  of  the  people, 
as  well  as  leaders  of  their  worship  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
3,  15).  Then  came  the  Egyptian  and  Clialdacan 
invasions,  and  the  rule  of  cowardly  and  apostate 
icings.  The  sacied  tribe  itself  sliowed  itself  un- 
taithful.  The  repeated  protests  of  the  priest  Ezekiel 
indicate  that  they  had  shared  in  the  idolatry  of  the 
people.  The  prominence  into  which  they  had  been 
brought  in  the  reigns  of  the  two  reforming  kings 
had  apparently  tempted  them  to  think  that  they 
might  encroach  permanently  on  the  special  func- 
tions of  the  priesthood,  and  the  sin  of  Korah  was 
renewed  (Ez.  xliv.  10-14,  xlviii.  11).  They  had, 
as  the  penalty  of  theii'  sin,  to  witness  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple,  and  to  tastethe  bitterness  of  exile. 
IV.  After  the  Captivity.  The  position  taken 
by  the  Levites  in  the  first  movements  of  the  return 
tiom  Babylon  indicates  that  they  had  cherished  the 
traditions  and  maintained  the  practices  of  their 
tribe.  They,  we  may  believe,  were  those  who  weie 
specially  called  on  to  sing  to  their  conquerors  one 
of  the  songs  of  Zion  (De  Wette  on  Ps.  cxxxvii.). 
It  is  noticeable,  however,  that  in  the  first  body  of 
returning  exiles  they  are  present  in  a  dispropor- 
tionately small  number  (Ezr.  ii.  36-42).  Those 
who  do  come  take  their  old  parts  at  the  foundation 
and  dedication  of  the  second  Temple  (Elzr.  iii.  10, 
vi.  18).  In  the  next  movement  under  Ezra  their 
reluctance  (whatever  may  have  been  its  origin  ^) 
was  even  more  strongly  marked.  None  of  them 
presented  themselves  at  the  first  great  gathering 
(Ezr.  viii.  15).  The  special  efforts  of  Ezra  did  not 
succeed  in  bringing  together  more  than  38,  and 
their  place  had  to  be  filled  by  220  of  the  Nethinim 
(ib.  20)."^  Those  who  returned  with  him  resumed 
their  functions  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  as 
teachers  and  interpreters  (Neh.  viii.  7),  and  those 
who  were  most  active  in  that  work  were  foremost 
also  in  chanting  the  hymn-like  prayer  which  appears 
in  Neh.  ix.  as  the  last  great  effort  of  Jewish  psalmody. 
They  are  recognised  in  the  great  national  covenant, 
and  the  offerings  and  tithes  which  were  their  due 
are  once  more  solemnly  secured  to  them  (Neh.  x. 
37-39).  They  take  their  old  places  in  the  Temple 
and  in  the  villages  near  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  29), 
and  are  present  in  full  array  at  the  great  feast  of 
the  Dedication  of  the  Wall.  The  two  prophets  who 
were  active  at  the  time  of  the  Keturn,  Haggai  and 


LEVITES 


107 


''  May  we  conjecture  that  the  language  of  Eze- 
kiel had  led  to  some  jealousy  between  the  two 
orders  ? 

"  There  is  a  Jewish  tradition  (Siu'cnhusius,  Mishna, 
Suta,  ix.  10)  to  the  ctfcct  that,  as  a  punishment  for 


Zechariah,  if  they  did  not  l)elong  to  the  tribe, 
helped  it  forward  in  the  work  of  restoration.  The 
strongest  measures  are  adopted  by  Nehemiah,  as 
before  by  Ezra,  to  guard  the  purity  of  their  blood 
from  the  contamination  of  mixed  marriages  ( Ezr.  x. 
23) ;  and  they  are  made  the  special  guardians  of 
the  holiness  of  the  Sabbath  (Neh.  xiii.  22).  The 
last  prophet  of  the  0.  T.  sees,  as  part  of  his  vision 
of  the  latter  days,  the  time  when  the  Lord  "  shall 
purify  the  sons  of  Levi  "  (Mai.  iii.  3). 

The  guidance  of  the  0.  T.  fails  us  at  this  point, 
and  the  history  of  the  Levites  in  relation  to  the 
national  life  becomes  consequently  a  matter  of  in- 
ference and  conjecture.  The  synagogue  worship, 
then  originated,  or  receiving  a  new  development, 
was  organised  irrespectively  of  them  [Synagogue], 
and  thus  throughout  the  whole  of  Palestine  there 
were  means  of  instruction  in  the  Law  with  which 
they  were  ijot  connected.  This  would  tend  na- 
turally to  diminish  their  peculiar  claim  on  the 
leverence  of  the  people ;  but  where  a  priest  oi- 
Levite  was  present  in  the  synagogue  they  were 
still  entitled  to  some  kind  of  precedence,  and  special 
sections  in  the  lessons  for  the  day  were  assigned 
to  them  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heh.  on  Matt.  iv.  23). 
During  the  period  that  followed  the  Captivity  they 
contributed  to  the  formation  of  the  so-called  Great 
Synagogue.  They,  with  the  priests,  theoretically 
constituted  and  practically  formed  the  majority  of 
the  permanent  Sanhedrim  (Maimonides  in  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Heh.  on  Matt.  xxvi.  3),  and  as  such  had  a  large 
share  in  the  administration  of  justice  even  in  capital 
cases.  In  the  characteristic  feature  of  this  period, 
as  an  age  of  scribes  succeeding  to  an  age  of  prophets, 
they  too  were  likely  to  be  sharers.  The  training 
and  previous  history  of  the  tribe  wo^ild  predispose 
them  to  attach  themselves  to  the  new  system  as 
they  had  done  to  the  old.  They  accordingly  may 
have  been  among  the  scribes  and  elders  who  accu- 
mulated traditions.  They  may  have  attached  them- 
selves to  the  sects  of  Pharisees  and  Sadducees.** 
F>ut  in  proportion  as  they  thus  acquired  fame  and 
reputation  individually,  their  functions  as  Levites 
became  subordinate,  and  they  were  known  simply 
as  the  inferior  ministers  of  the  Temple.  They  take 
no  prominent  part  in  the  Maccabaean  struggles, 
though  they  must  have  been  present  at  the  great 
purification  of  the  Temple. 

They  appear  but  seldom  in  the  history  of  the  N.  T. 
Where  we  meet  with  their  names  it  is  as  the  type  of 
a  formal  heartless  worship,  without  sympathy  and 
without  love  (Luke  x.  32).  The  same  parable  in- 
dicates Jericho  as  having  become — what  it  had  not 
been  originally  (see  Josh,  xxi.,  1  Chr.  vi.) — -one  of  the 
great  stations  at  which  they  and  the  priests  resided 
(Lightfoot,  Cent.  Chorograph.  c.  47).  In  John  i. 
19  they  appear  as  delegates  of  the  Jews,  that  is  of 
the  Sanhedrim,  coming  to  inquire  into  the  cre- 
dentials of  the  Baptist,  and  giving  utterance  to 
their  own  Messianic  expectations.  The  mention  of 
a  Levite  of  Cyprus  in  Acts  iv.  36  shows  that  the 
changes  of  the  previous  century  had  carried  that 
tribe  also  into  "  the  dispersed  among  the  Gentiles." 
The  conversion  of  Barnabas  and  Jlark  was  probably 
no  solitary  instance  of  the  recejition  by  them  of  the 
new  faith,  which  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  old. 

this  backwardness,  Ezra  deprived  them  of  their  tithes, 
and  transferred  the  right  to  the  priests. 

■•  The  life  of  .losephus  may  bo  taken  as  an  example 
of  the  education  of  the  higihci-  members  of  the  order 
(Jos.  Vitti,  c.  i.). 


108 


LEVITES 


If  "  a  great  company  of  the  priests  were  obedieut 
to  the  faith"  (Acts  vi.  7),  it  is  not  too  bold 
to  believe  that  their  influence  may  have  led  Levites 
to  follow  their  example;  and  thus  the  old  psalms, 
and  possibly  also  the  old  chants  of  the  Temple- 
serviee,  might  be  transmitted  through  the  agency 
of  those  who  had  been  specially  trained  in  them, 
to  be  the  inheritance  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Later  on  in  the  history  of  the  first  century,  when 
the  Temple  had  received  its  final  completion  under 
the  younger  Agrippa,  we  find  one  section  of  the  tribe 
engaged  in  a  new  movement.  With  that  strange 
unconsciousness  of  a  coming  doom  which  so  often 
marks  the  last  stage  of  a  decaying  system,  the  singers 
of  the  Temple  thought  it  a  fitting  time  to  apply 
for  the  right  of  wearing  the  same  linen  gannent  as 
the  priests,  and  persuaded  the  king  that  the  con- 
cession of  this  privilege  would  be  the  glory  of  his 
reign  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §6).  The  other  Levites 
at  the  same  time  asked  for  and  obtained  the  privi- 
lege of  joining  in  the  Temple  choruses,  from  which 
hitherto  they  had  been  excluded.''  The  destruction 
of  the  Temple  so  soon  after  they  had  attained  the 
object  of  their  desires  came  as  with  a  gi'im  irony 
to  sweep  away  their  occupation,  and  so  to  deprive 
them  of  every  vestige  of  that  which  had  distin- 
guished them  from  other  Israelites.  They  were 
merged  in  the  crowd  of  captives  that  were  scattered 
over  the  Roman  world,  and  disappear  from  the 
stage  of  history.  The  Rabbinic  schools,  that  rose 
out  of  the  ruins  of  the  Jewish  polity,  fostered  a 
studied  and  habitual  depreciation  of  the  Levite 
order  as  compaied  with  their  own  teachers  (M'Caul, 
Old  Paths,  p.  435).  Individual  families,  it  may 
be,  cherished  the  tradition  that  their  fathers,  as 
priests  or  Levites,  had  taken  part  in  the  services 
of  the  Temple. f  If  their  claims  were  recognised, 
they  received  the  old  marks  of  reverence  in  the 
worship  of  the  synagogue  (comp.  the  Regulations 
of  the  Great  Synagogue  of  London,  in  llargoliouth's 
History  of  Jews  in  Great  Britain,  iii.  270),  took 
precederice  in  reading  the  lessons  of  the  day  (Light- 
toot,  Jlor.  Hch.  on  Matt.  iv.  23),  and  pronounced 
the  blessing  at  the  close  (Basnage,  Hist,  des  Juifs, 
vi.  790).  Their  existence  was  acknowledged  in 
some  of  the  laws  of  the  Christian  emperors  (Basnage, 
/.  c).  The  tenacity  with  which  the  exiled  race 
eking  to  these  recollections  is  shown  in  the  pre- 
valence of  the  names  (Cohen,  and  Levita  or  Le^-y) 
which  imply  that  tliose  who  bear  them  are  of  the  sous 
of  Aai-on  or  the  tribe  of  Levi ;  and  in  the  custom 
which  exempts  the  first-born  of  priestly  or  Levite 
families  from  the  payments  which  are  still  offered, 
in  the  case  of  others,  as  the  redemption  of  the 
first-born  (Leo  of  Jlodena,  in  Picart's  Ceremonies 
Religieuses,  i.  26 ;  Allen's  Modern  Jmlaism,  p.  297). 
In  the  meantime  the  old  name  had  acquired  a  new 
signification.  The  early  writers  of  the  Christian 
Church  applied  to  the  later  hierarchy  the  language 
of  the  earlier,  and  gave  to  the  bishops  and  pres- 
byters the  title  (lepels)  that  had  belonged  to  the 
sons  of  Aaron ;  while  the  deacons  were  habitually 
spoken  of  as  Levites  (Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v.  Aei/tTTjs).? 
'l"he  extinction  or  absorption  of  a  tribe  which  had 


*  The  tone  of  Josephus  is  noticeable  as  being  that 
of  a  man  who  looked  on  the  change  as  a  dangerous 
innovation.  As  a  priest,  he  saw  in  this  movement  of 
the  I,evites  an  intrusion  on  the  privileges  of  his 
order  ;  and  this  was,  in  his  judgment,  one  of  the  sins 
which  brought  on  the  destruction  of  the  city  and  the 
Temple. 

^  Dr.    Joseph    Wolff,   in    his    recent    Tnirch    ami 


LEVITICUS 

borne  so  prominent  a  part  in  the  history  of  Israel, 
was,  like  other  such  changes,  an  instiuice  of  the 
order  in  which  the  shadow  is  succeeded  by  the 
substance — that  which  is  decayed,  is  waxing  old, 
and  ready  to  vanish  away,  by  a  new  ai\d  more 
living  organisation.  It  had  done  its  work,  and  it- 
had  lost  its  life.  It  was  bound  up  with  a  localised 
and  exclusive  worship,  and  had  no  place  to  occupy 
in  that  which  was  universal.  In  the  Christian 
Church — supposing,  by  any  effort  of  imagination, 
that  it  liad  had  a  recognised  existence  in  it — it  would 
have  been  simply  an  impediment.  Looking  at  the 
long  History  of  which  the  outline  has  been  here 
traced,  we  find  in  it  the  light  and  darkness,  the 
good  and  evil,  which  mingle  in  the  character  of 
most  corporate  or  caste  societies.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  Levites,  as  a  tribe,  tended  to  fall  into  a  formal 
worship,  a  narrow  and  exclusive  exaltation  of  them- 
selves and  of  their  country.  On  the  other  hand, 
we  must  not  forget  that  tliey  were  chosen,  together 
with  the  priesthood,  to  bear  witness  of  great  truths 
which  might  otherwise  have  perished  fi-om  remem- 
brance, and  that  they  bore  it  well  through  a  long 
succession  of  centuries.  To  members  of  this  tribe 
wo  owe  man}'  separate  books  of  the  0.  T.,  and  pro- 
bably also  in  great  measure  the  preseiTation  of  the 
whole.  The  hymns  which  they  sung,  in  part  pro- 
bably the  music  of  wliich  they  were  the  originators, 
have  been  perpetuated  in  the  worship  of  the  Christian 
Church.  In  the  company  of  prophets  who  have 
left  behind  them  no  written  records  they  appear 
conspicuous,  united  by  common  work  and  common 
interests  with  the  prophetic  order.  They  did  their 
work  as  a  national  clerisy,  instruments  in  raising 
the  people  to  a  higher  life,  educating  them  in  the 
knowledge  on  which  all  order  and  civilization 
rest.  It  is  not  often,  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
that  a  religious  caste  or  order  has  passed  away 
with  more  claims  to  the  respect  and  gratitude  of 
mankind  than  the  tribe  of  Levi. 

(On  the  subject  generally  may  be  consulted,  in 
addition  to  the  authorities  already  quoted,  Cai-pzov, 
Appar.  Crit.  b.  i.  c.  5,  and  Annotat. ;  Saalschiitz, 
Archdol.  der  Hehr.  c.  78 ;  Michaelis,  Comm.  on 
Laws  of  Moses,  i.  art.  .52.)  [ii.  H.  P.] 

LEVITICUS  (SniPfl),  the  first  word  in  the 
book  giving  it  its  name  :  Afv'iTiKoy :  Leviticus : 
called  also  by  the  later  Jews  D^JHS  miD,  "  Law 
of  the  prietss  ;"  and  n'"m~li^  hn'in,  "  Law  of 
offerings." 

Contents. — The  Book  consists  of  the  following 
principal  sections: — 

I.  The  laws  touching  sacrifices  (chap,  i.-vii.). 

II.  An  historical  section  containing,  first,  the 
consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  (chap,  viii.); 
next,  his  first  oftering  for  himself  and  the  people 
(chap,  ix.)  ;  and  lastly,  the  desti-uctiou  of  Nadab 
and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  for  their  presump- 
tuous offence  (chap.  x.). 

III.  The  laws  concerning  purity  and  impurity, 
and  the  appropriate  sacrifices  and  ordinances  for 
putting  away  impurity  (chap,  xi.-xvi.). 

Adventures  (p.  2),  claims  his  descent  from  this 
tribe. 

s  In  the  literature  of  a  later  period  the  same  name 
meets  us  applied  to  the  same  or  nearly  the  same  order, 
no  longer,  however,  as  the  language  of  reverence,  but 
as  that  of  a  cynical  contempt  for  the  less  worthy  por- 
tion of  the  clergy  of  the  English  Church  (Macaulay, 
Mist,  iif  Ejigland,  iii.  327). 


LEVITICUS 

IV.  Laws  chiolly  iiitemlod  to  mark  the  separation 
between  Israel  and  the  heatlieu  nations  (chap, 
xvii.-xx.). 

V.  Laws  concerning  the  priests  (xxi.,  xxii.)  ;  and 
certain  holy  days,  and  festivals  (xxiii.,  xxv.),  to- 
gether with  an  episode  (xxi v.).  The  section  extends 
from  chap.  xxi.  1  to  xxvi.  2. 

VI.  Promises  and  threats  (xxvi.  2-46). 

VII.  An  appendix  containing  the  laws  concerning 
vows  (xxvii.). 

I.  The  book  of  Exodus  concludes  with  the  account 
of  the  completion  of  the  tabernacle.  "  So  Moses 
finished  the  work,"  we  read  (xl.  33) :  and  imme- 
diately there  rests  upon  it  a  cloud,  and  it  is  filled 
witli  the  glory  of  Jehovah.  From  the  tabernacle, 
thus  I'eudercd  glorious  by  the  Divine  Presence, 
issues  the  legislation  contained  in  the  book  of  Levi- 
ticus. At  first  God  spake  to  the  peojjle  out  of  the 
thunder  and  lightning  of  Sinai,  and  gave  them  His 
holy  commandments  by  the  hand  of  a  mediator. 
But  henceforth  His  Presence  is  to  dwell  not  on  the 
secret  top  of  Sinai,  but  in  the  midst  of  His  people, 
both  in  their  wanderings  through  the  wilderness, 
and  afterwards  in  the  Land  of  Promise.  Hence 
the  first  directions  which  Moses  receives  after  the 
work  is  finished  have  reference  to  the  offerings 
which  were  to  be  brought  to  the  door  of  the  taber- 
nacle. As  Jehovah  draws  near  to  the  people  in 
the  tabernacle,  so  the  people  draw  near  to  Jehovah 
in  the  offering.  Without  offerings  none  may  ap- 
proach Him.  The  regulations  respecting  the  sacri- 
fices fall  into  three  grou]js,  and  each  of  these  groups 
again  consists  of  a  decalogtie  of  instructions.  Ber- 
theau  has  observed  that  this  principle  runs  through 
all  the  laws  of  Jloses.  They  are  all  modelled  after 
the  pattern  of  the  ten  commandments,  so  that  each 
distinct  subject  of  legislation  is  always  treated  of 
under  ten  several  enactments  or  provisions. 

BaumgarteJi  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, has  adopted  the  arrangement  of  Bertheau, 
as  set  forth  in  his  Sieben  Gruppcn  des  Mas.  Rechts. 
On  the  whole,  his  princijjle  seems  sound.  We  find 
Bunsen  acknowledging  it  in  jMirt,  ni  his  division  of 
the  19th  chapter  (see  below).  And  though  we 
cannot  always  agree  with  Bei-theau,  we  have  thought 
it  worth  while  to  give  his  arrangement  as  sug- 
gestive at  least  of  the  main  structure  of  the  Book. 

1.  The  first  group  of  regulations  (chap,  i.-iii.) 
deals  with  three  kinds  of  offerings :  the  burnt-offer- 
ing (nbiy),  the  meat-offeringa  (nn^O),  and  the 
thank-olfering  (D''DVK'  niT). 

i.  The  burnt-offering  (chap,  i.)  in  three  sections.  It 
might  be  either  ( 1 .)  a  male  without  blemish  from  the 
/(«/•&  Cli^Sn  |0),  ver.  3-9  ;  or  (2)  a  male  without 
blemish  from  theytoc/i3,  or  lesser  cattle  (fX-^Tl),  ver. 
10-13;  or  (&)  it  might  be  fowls,  an  offering  of 
turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons,  ver.  14-17.  The 
subdivisions  are  here  marked  clearly  enough,  not 
only  by  the  the  three  kinds  of  sacrifice,  but  also  by 
the  form  in  wliicli  the  enactment  is  put.     Each 

begins  with  l^llp QK,  "  If  his  offering,"  &c., 

and  each  ends  with  nin''7  n'HT'J  rT""!  HK'X  H^iy, 
"an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a  sweet  savour  unto 
Jehovah." 

The  next  group  (chap,  ii.)  presents  many  more 
difficulties.  Its  parts  are  not  .so  clearly  marked 
either  by  prominent  features  in  the  subject-matter, 

»  "  Meat "  is  uspd  by  our  translators  in  the  sense  of  food 
of  any  kind,  whether  flesb  or  farinaceous. 


LEVITICUS 


109 


or  by  the  more  technical  boundaries  of  certain  initial 
and  final  phrases.     We  have  here — 

ii.  Tlie  meat-offering,  or  bloodless  offering  in  four 
sections:  (1)  in  its  uncooked  form,  consistino- of 
fine  flour  with  oil  and  frankincense,  ver.  l-i  • 
(2)  in  its  cooked  form,  of  which  three  different 
kinds  are  specified — baked  in  the  oven,  fried  or 
boiled,  ver.  4-10  ;  (>})  the  prohibition  of  leaven, 
and  the  direction  to  use  salt  in  all  the  meat-otier- 
ings,  11-13  ;  (4)  the  oblation  of  first-fruits,  14-16. 
This  at  least  seems  on  the  whole  to  be  the  best 
arrangement  of  the  group,  though  we  offer  it  with 
some  hesitation. 

(a.)  Bertheau's  arrangement  is  difl"erent.  He 
divides  (1)  ver.  1-4  (thus  including  the  meat- 
offering baked  in  the  oven  with  the  uncooked  offer- 
ing ;  (2)  ver.  5  and  6,  the  meat-offering  when  fried 
in  the  pan ;  (3)  ver.  7-13,  the  meat-off'ering  when 
boiled;  (4)  ver.  14-16,  the  ofi'ering  of  the  first- 
fruits.  But  this  is  obviously  open  to  many  objec- 
tions. For,  first,  it  is  exceedingly  arbitrary  to  con- 
nect ver.  4  with  ver.  1-3,  raUier  than  with  the 
verses  which  follow.  Why  should  the  meat-offering 
baked  in  the  oven  be  classed  with  the  uncooked 
meat-ofl^ering  rather  than  with  the  other  two  which 
were  in  diflejent  ways  supposed  to  be  dressed  with 
fire  ?  Next,  two  of  the  divisions  of  the  chapter  are 
clearly  marked  by  the  recurrence  of  tlie  formula, 
"  It  is  a  thing  most  holy  of  the  ofl"erings  of  Jeliovah 
made  by  fire,"  ver.  3  and  10.  Lastly,  the  direc- 
tions in  ver.  11-13,  apply  to  every  form  of  meat- 
offering, not  only  to  that  immediately  preceding. 
The  Masoretic  arrangement  is  in  five  sections  :  vers. 
1-3;  4;   5,  6 ;   7-13  ;  14-16. 

iii.  The  Shelamim — "  peace-ofl"ering  "  (A.  V.),  or 
"  thank-offijring  "  (Ewald),  (chap,  iii.)  in  three  .sec- 
tions. Strictly  speaking  this  falls  under  two  heads  : 
first,  wlien  it  is  of  the  herd;  and  secondly,  when  it  is 
of  the  flock.  But  this  last  has  again  its  subdivision  ; 
for  the  offering  when  of  the  flock  may  be  either  a  lamb 
01"  a  goat.  Accordingly  the  three  sections  are,  vers. 
1-5;  7-11;  12-16.  Ver.  6  is  merely  introduc- 
tory to  the  second  class  of  sacrifices,  and  ver. 
17  a  general  conclusion,  as  in  the  case  of  other 
laws.  This  concludes  the  first  Decalogue  of  the 
book. 

2.  Chap,  iv.,  V.  The  laws  concerning  the  sin- 
offering  and  the  trepass-  (or  guilt-)  oft'ei-ing. 

The  sin-offering  (chap,  iv.)  is  treated  of  under  four 
specified  cases,  after  a  short  introduction  to  the 
whole  in  ver.  1,  2:  (1)  the  sin-offering  for  the 
priest,  3-12  ;  (2)  for  the  whole  congregation,  13- 
21;  (3)  for  a  ruler,  22-26;  (4)  for  one  of  the 
common  people,  27-35. 

After  these  four  cases  in  which  the  offering  is  to 
be  made  for  four  different  classes,  there  follow  pro- 
visions respecting  three  several  kinds  of  transgres- 
sion for  which  atonement  must  be  made.  It  is  not 
quite  clear  whether  these  sliould  be  ranked  under 
the  head  of  the  sin-offering  or  of  the  trespass -offer- 
ing (see  Winer,  liwh.).  We  may  however  follow 
Bertheau,  Baumgarten,  and  Knobel,  in  regai'ding 
them  as  special  instances  in  which  a  si«-offering 
was  to  be  brought.  The  three  cases  arc:  first, 
when  any  one  hears  a  curse  and  conceals  what  he 
heiu's  (v.  I);  secondly,  when  any  one  touches  with- 
out knowing  or  intending  it,  any  unclean  thing 
(vers.  2,  3)  ;  lastly,  when  any  one  takes  an  oath 
inconsiderately  (ver.  4).  For  each  nf  tRese  cases 
the  same  trespass-offering,  "  afemah?  from  the  flock, 
a  Iamb  or  kid  of  tlie  goats,"  is  appointed  ;  but  with 
that  meicifulness  which  chai-acterises  the  Mosaic  law, 


no 


LEVITICUS 


express  provision  is  made  for  a  less  costly  oU'ering 
where  the  oHerer  is  poor. 

The  Decalogue  is  then  completed  by  the  three 
regulations  respecting  the  guilt-offering  (or  trespass- 
oHering) :  first,  when  any  one  sins  "  through  igno- 
rance in  the  holy  things  of  Jehovah"  (ver.  14, 
16);  next,  when  a  person  without  knowing  it 
'•commits  any  of  these  things  which  are  forbidden 
to  be  done  by  the  commandments  of  Jehovah " 
(17-19)  ;  lastly,  when  a  man  lies  and  swears  falsely 
concerning  that  which  was  entrusted  to  him,  &c. 
(ver.  20-26)."  This  Decalogue,  like  the  preceding 
one,  has  its  characteristic  words  and  expressions. 
The  prominent  word  which  introduces  so  many  of 
the  enactments,  is  Si'DJ,  "  soul "  (see  iv.  2,  27,  v. 
1,  2,  4,  15,  17,  vi.  2)  ;  and  the  phrase,  "  if  a  soul 
shall  sin "  (iv.  2)  is,  with  occasional  variations 
having  an  equivalent  meaning,  the  distinctive  phrase 
of  the  section. 

As  iu  the  former  Decalogue,  the  nature  of  the  offer- 
ings, so  in  this  the  person  and  the  nature  of  the 
otifence  are  the  chief  features  iu  the  several  statutes. 

3.  Chap,  vi.,  vii.  Naturally  upon  the  law  of 
sacrifices  follows  the  law  of  the  priests'  duties  when 
they  offer  the  sacrifices.  Hence  we  find  Moses  di- 
rected to  address  himself  immediately*to  Aaron  and 
his  sons  (vi.  2,  18,=:vi.  9,  25,  A.  V.). 

In  tliis  group  the  different  kinds  of  offerings  are 
named  in  nearly  the  same  order  as  in  the  two  pre- 
ceding Decalogues,  except  that  the  offering  at  the 
consecration  of  a  priest  follows,  instead  of  the  thank- 
offering,  immediately  after  the  meat-offering,  which 
it  resembles  ;  and  the  thank-offering  now  appears 
after  the  trespass-offering.  There  are  therefore,  in 
all,  six  kinds  of  offering ;  and  in  the  case  of  each  of 
these  the  priest  has  his  distinct  duties.  Bertheau 
has  very  ingeniously  so  distributed  the  enactments 
in  which  these  duties  are  prescribed  as  to  arrange 
them  all  in  five  Decalogues.  We  will  briefiy  indi- 
cate his  arrangement.  , 

3.  (a.)  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  burnt-offering  " 
(vi.  9  ;  A.  V. )  in  five  enactments,  each  verse  (ver. 
9-13)  containing  a  separate  enactment. 

(&.)  "  And  this  is  the  law  of  the  meat-offering" 
(ver.  14),  again  in  fiye  enactments,  each  of  which  is, 
as  before,  contained  in  a  single  verse  (ver.  14-18). 

4.  The  next  Decalogue  is  contained  in  ver.  19-30. 
(a.)  Verse  19  is  merely  introductory  ;  then  follow, 

in  five  verses,  five  distinct  directions  with  regard 
to  the  offering  at  the  time  of  the  consecration  of 
the  priests,  the  first  iu  ver.  20,  the  next  two  in 
ver.  21,  the  fourth  in  the  former  part  of  ver.  22, 
and  the  last  in  the  latter  part  of  ver.  22  and  ver.  23. 
(6.)  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  sin-offering  "  (ver. 
25).  Then  the  five  enactments,  each  in  one  verse,  ex- 
cept that  two  verses  (27,  28)  are  given  to  the  third. 

5.  The  third  Decalogue  is  contained  in  chap.  vii. 
1-10,  the  laws  of  the  trespass-offering.  But  it  is 
impossible  to  avoid  a  misgiving  as  to  the  soundness 
of  Bertheau's  system  when  we  find  him  making  the 
words  "  It  is  most  holy,"  in  ver.  1 ,  the  first  of  die 
ten  enactments.  This  he  is  obliged  to  do,  as  ver. 
3  and  4  evidently  form  but  one. 

6.  The  fourth  Decalogue,  after  an  introductory 
verse  (ver.  11),  is  contained  in  ten  verses  (12-21). 

7.  The  last  Decalogue  consists  of  certain  general 
laws  about  the  fat,  the  blood,  the  wave-breast,  &c., 
and  is  comprised  again  in  ten  verses  (23-33),  the 
verses  as  before  marking  the  di\'isions. 


"  In  the  English  Version    this  is  chap.    vi.    1-7. 
This  is  only  one    of  those  instances   in  which  the 


LEVITICUS 

The  chapter  closes  with  a  brief  historical  notice 
of  the  tjict  that  these  several  commands  were  siven 
to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai  (ver.  35-38). 

II.  Chap,  viii.,  ix.,  x.  This  section  is  entirely 
historical.  In  chapter  viii.  we  have  the  account 
of  the  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  by  Moses 
before  the  whole  congregation.  They  are  washed  ; 
he  is  an-ayed  in  the  priestly  vestments  and  anointed 
with  the  holy  oil ;  his  sons  also  are  arrayed  in  their 
garments,  and  the  various  offerings  appointed  are 
offered.  In  chap.  ix.  Aaron  offers,  eight  days  after  his 
consecration,  his  first  offering  for  himself  and  the 
people:  this  comprises  for  himself  a  sin-  and  burnt- 
offering  (1-14),  for  the  people  a  sin-offering,  a 
burnt-offering,  and  a  peace-  (or  thank-)  offering.  He 
blesses  the  people,  and  fire  comes  down  from  heaven 
and  consumes  the  burnt-offering.  Chap.  x.  tells 
how  Nadab  and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  eager  to 
enjoy  the  pi-ivileges  of  their  new  oflice,  and  perhaps 
too  much  elated  by  its  dignity,  forgot  or  despised 
the  restrictions  by  which  it  was  fenced  round  (Ex. 
XXX.  7,  &c.),  and  daring  to  "  olfer  strange  fire  before 
Jehovah,"  perished  because  of  their  presumption. 

With  the  house  of  Aaron  began  this  wickedness 
in  the  sanctuary ;  with  them  therefore  began  also 
the  divine  punishment.  Very  touching  is  the  story 
which  follows.  Aaron,  though  forbidden  to  mourn 
his  loss  (ver.  6,  7),  will  not  eat  the  sin-offering 
in  the  holy  place;  and  when  rebuked  by  Moses, 
pleads  in  his  defence,  "  Such  things  have  befallen 
me:  and  if  I  had  eaten  the  sin-offering  to-day, 
should  it  have,  been  accepted  in  the  sight  of  Je- 
hovah ?"  And  iloses,  the  lawgiver  and  tlie  judge, 
admits  the  plea,  and  honours  the  natural  feeling  of 
the  father's  heart,  even  when  it  leads  to  a  violation 
of  the  letter  of  the  divine  commandment. 

III.  Chap,  xi.-xvi.  The  first  seven  Decalogues 
had  reference  to  the  putting  away  oi  guilt.  By  the 
appointed  sacrifices  the  separation  between  man  and 
God  was  healed.  The  next  seven  concern  them- 
selves with  the  putting  away  of  impurity.  That 
chapters  xi.-xv.  hang  together  so  as  to  form  one 
series  of  laws  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Besides  that 
they  treat  of  kindred  subjects,  they  have  their  cha- 
racteristic'  words,  XDt2-  ilNDD.  "unclean," 
"  uncleanness,"  ^1110.  "IHD.  "clean,"  which 
occur  in  almost  every  verse.  The  only  ques- 
tion is  about  chap,  xvi.,  which  by  its  ojjening  is 
connected  immediately  with  the  occurrence  related 
in  chap.  x.  Historically  it  would  seem  therefoie 
that  chap.  xvi.  ought  to  have  followed  chap.  x. 
And  as  this  order  is  neglected,  it  would  lead  us  to 
suspect  that  some  other  principle  of  arrangement 
than  that  of  historical  sequence  has  been  adopted. 
This  we  find  in  the  solemn  significance  of  the  Great 
Day  of  Atonement.  The  high-priest  on  that  day 
made  atonement,  "  because  of  the  uncleanness  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  and  because  of  their  ti-ans- 
gressions  in  all  their  sins"  (xvi.  16),  and  he  "  re- 
conciled the  holy  place  mid  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  and  tlie  altar"  (ver.  20).  Delivered 
from  their  guilt  and  cleansed  from  their  pollutions, 
from  that  day  forward  tlie  children  of  Israel  entered 
upon  a  new  and  holy  life.  This  was  typified  both 
by  the  ordinance  that  the  bullock  and  the  goat  for 
the  sin-offering  were  burnt  without  the  camp  (ver. 
27),  and  also  by  the  sending  away  of  the  goat  laden 
with  the  iniquities  of  the  people  into  the  wilderness. 
Hence  chap.  xvi.  seems  to  stand  most  fitly  at  the 
end  of  this  second  group  of  seven  Decalogues. 


reader   marvels  at  the    perversity  displayed  in  tlie 
division  of  chapters. 


LEVITICUS 

It  lias  reference,  we  believe,  uot  only  (as  Ber- 
theau  supposes)  to  tlie  putting  away,  as  by  one 
solemn  act,  ot'all  those  uneleaui. esses  mentioned  in 
chap,  xi.-xv.,  and  for  which  the  various  expiations 
and  cleansings  there  appointed  were  temporary  and 
insufficient ;  but  also  to  the  making  atonement,  in 
the  sense  of  hiding  sin  or  putting  away  its  guilt. 
For  not  only  do  we  find  the  idea  of  cleansing  as 
from  defilement,  but  far  more  prominently  the  idea 
of  reconciliation.  The  often-repeated  word  "ISD,  "to 
cover,  to  atone,"  is  the  great  word  of  the  section. 

1.  The  firet  Decalogue  in  this  group  refeis  to 
clean  and  unclean  flesh.  Five  classes  of  animals 
are  pronounced  unclean.  The  first  four  enactments 
declare  what  animals  may  and  may  not  be  eaten, 
whether  (1)  beasts  of  the  earth  (2-8),  or  (2)  fishes 
(9-12),  or  (3)  birds  (13-20),  or  (4)  creeping 
things  with  wings.  The  next  four  are  intended  to 
guard  against  pollution  by  contact  with  the  carcase 
of  any  of  these  animals  ;  (5)  ver.  2-1-26  ;  (6)  ver. 
27,  28  ;  f  7)  ver.  29-38  ;  (8)  ver.  39,  40.  The  ninth 
and  tenth  specify  the  last  class  of  animals  which  are 
luiclean  for  food,  (9)  41,  42,  and  forbid  any  other 
kind  of  pollution  by  means  of  them,  (10)  43-45. 
V^er.  46  and  47  are  merely  a  concluding  summary. 

2.  Chap.  xii.  Women's  purification  in  childbed. 
The  whole  of  this  chapter,  according  to  Bertheau, 
constitutes  the  first  law  of  this  Decalogue.  The 
remaining  nine  are  to  be  found  in  the  next  chapter, 
which  treats  of  the  signs  of  leprosy  in  man  and  in 
garments.  (2)  ver.  f-8  ;  (3)  ver.  9-17  ;  (4)  ver. 
18-23  ;  (5)  ver.  24-28  ;  (6)  ver.  29-37  ;  (7)  ver. 
38,  39  ;  (8)  ver.  40,  41 ;  (9)  ver.  42-46  ;  (10) 
ver.  47-59.  This  an-angement  of  the  several  sec- 
tions is  not  altogether  free  from  objection  ;  but  it  is 
certainly  supported  by  the  characteristic  mode  in 
which  each  section  opens.  Thus  for  instance,  chap, 
xii.  2,  begins  with  ynTH  i3  PIK'X  ;  chap.  xiii.  2, 

with  n;n;.  •'3  mx,  ver.  9,  n'^nn  -la  nyn^f  yjj, 

and  so  on,  the  same  order  being  always  observed, 
the  subst.  being  placed  first,  then  ""S,  and  then  the 
verb,  except  only  in  ver.  42,  where  the  subst.  is 
placed  after  the  verb. 

3.  Chap.  xiv.  1-32.  "  The  law  of  the  leper  in 
the  day  of  his  cleansing,"  i.  e.  the  law  which  the 
priest  is  to  observe  in  purifying  the  leper.  The 
priest  is  mentioned  in  ten  verses,  each  of  which 
begins  one  of  the  ten  sections  of  this  law :  ver.  3, 
4,  5,  11,  12,  14,  1.5,  16,  19,  20.  In  each  instance 
the  word  jnsn  is  preceded  by  1  consecut.  with  the 
perfect.  It  is  true  that  in  ver.  3,  and  also  in  ver. 
14,   the  word   jnbn   occurs  twice;   but  in  both 

verses  there  is  MS.  authority,  as  well  as  that  of 
tlie  Vulg.  and  Arab,  versions  for  the  absence  of  the 
second.  Verses  21-32  maybe  regarded  as  a  sup- 
plemental provision  in  cases  where  the  leper  is  too 
poor  to  bring  the  required  offering. 

4.  Chap.  xiv.  33-57.  The  leprosy  in  a  house. 
It  is  not  so  easy  here  to  trace  the  arrangement  no- 
ticed in  so  many  other  laws.  There  are  no  charac- 
teristic words  or  phrases  to  guide  us.  Bertheau'» 
division  is  as  follows:  (I )  ver.  34,  35  ;  (2)  ver. 
36,37;  (3)  ver.  38;  (4)  ver.  39;  (5)  ver.  40; 
(6)  ver.  41,  42  ;  (7)  ver.  43-45.  Then  as  usual 
follows  a  short  summary  which  closes  the  statute 
concerning  leprosy,  ver.  54-57. 

5.  Chap.  XV.  1-15.  G.  Chap.  xv.  16-31.  The 
law  of  uncleanness  by  issue,  &c.,  in  two  docalof  ues. 
The  division   is   cleailv   marked,  as    Bertheau   ob- 


LEVITICUS 


111 


j  serves,  by  the  form  of  cleansing,  which  is  so  exactly 
simiKir  in  the  two  princijial  cases,  and  which  closes 
each  series,    (1)  ver.  13-15;   (2)  ver.  28-30.     We 

I  again  give  his  arrangement,  though  we  do  not  profess 
to  regard  it  as  in  all  respects  satisfactory. 

6.  (1)  ver.  2,  3  ;  (2)  ver.  4  ;  (3)  ver.  5  ;  (4) 
ver.  6;  (5)  ver.  7;  (6)  ver.  8  ;  (7)  ver.  9  ;  (8) 
ver.  10  ;  (9)  ver.  11,12  ; — these  Bertheau  considers 
as  one  enactment,  because  it  is  another  way  of  say- 
ing that  either  the  man  or  thing  which  the  uncleiui 
person  touches  is  unclean  ;  but  on  the  same  prin- 
ciple ver.  4  and  5  might  just  as  well  form  one 
enactment— (10)  v.  13-15. 

6.  (1)  ver.  16  ;  •  f2)  ver.  17  ;  (3)  ver.  18  ;  (4) 
ver.  19  ;  (5)' ver.  20  ;  (6)  ver.  21  ;  (7)  ver.  22  ; 
(8)  ver.  23;  (9)  ver.  24:  (10)  ver.  28-30.  In 
order  to  complete  this  arrangement,  he  considers 
verses  25-27  as  a  kind  of  supplementary  enactment 
provided  for  an  irregular  uncleanness,  leaving  it  as 
quite  uncertain  however  whether  this  was  a  later 
addition  or  not.  Verses  32  and  33  form  merely 
the  same  general  conclusion  which  we  have  had 
before  in  xiv.  54-57. 

The  last  Decalogue  of  the  second  group  of  seven 
Decalogues  is  to  be  found  in  chap,  xvi.,  which  treats 
of  the  great  Day  of  Atonement.  The  Law  itself  is 
contained  in  ver.  1-28.  The  remaining  verses, 
29-34,  consist  of  an  exhortation  to  its  careful  ob- 
servance. In  the  act  of  atonement  three  persons 
are  concerned.  The  high-priest, — in  this  instance 
Aai'on  ;  the  man  who  leads  away  the  goat  for  Azazel 
into  the  wilderness  ;  and  he  who  burns  the  skin, 
flesh,  and  dung  of  the  bullock  and  goat  of  the  sin- 
offering  without  the  camp.  The  two  last  have 
special  purifications  assigned  them  ;  the  first  because 
he  has  touched  the  goat  laden  with  the  guilt  of 
Israel ;  the  last  because  he  has  come  in  contact 
with  the  sin-offering.  The  9th  and  10th  enactments 
prescribe  what  these  purifications  are,  each  of  them 
concluding  with  th^ame  foi-mula  :  Nl^''  p  nnNI 
n^nsn  ?X,  and   hence   distinguished    from    each 

other.  The  duties  of  Aaron  consequently  ought,  if 
the  division  into  decads  is  correct,  to  be  com- 
prised in  eight  enactments.  Now  the  name  of 
Aaron  is  repeated  eight  times,  and  in  six  of  these 
it  is  preceded  by  the  Perfect  with  1  consecut.  as 
we  observed  was  the  case  before  when  "  the  priest " 
was  the  prominent  figure.  According  to  this  then 
the  Decalogue  will  stand  thus: — (1)  ver.  2,  Aaron 
not  to  enter  the  Holy  Place  at  all  times  ;  (2)  ver. 
3-5,  With  what  sacrifices  and  in  what  dress  Aaron 
is  to  enter  the  Holy  Place ;  (3)  ver.  6,  7,  Aaron 
to  offer  the  bullock  for  himself,  and  to  set  the  two 
goats  before  Jehovah  ;  (4)  Aaron  to  cast  lots  on 
the  two  goats ;  (5)  ver.  9,  10,  Aaron  to  offer  the 
goat  on  which  the  lot  falls  for  Jehovah,  and  to 
send  away  the  goat  for  Azazel  into  the  wilderness  ; 
(6)  ver.  11-19,  Aaron  to  sprinkle  the  blood  both 
of  the  bullock  and  of  the  goat  to  make  atonement 
for  himself,  for  his  house,  and  for  the  whole  congre- 
gation, as  also  to  purify  the  altar  of  incense  with 
the  blood;  (7)  ver.  20-22,  Aaron  to  lay  hisiiands 
on  the  living  goat,  and  confess  over  it  all  the  sins  of 
the  children  of  Israel ;  (8)  ver.  23-25,  Aaron  after 
this  to  take  off'  his  linen  gamients,  bathe  himself, 
and  put  on  his  priestly  garments,  ami  then  oiler  his 
burnt-ollering  and  that  of  the  congregation  :  (9)  ver. 
26,  The  man  by  whom  the  goat  is  sent  into  the 
wilderness  to  purify  himself;  (10)  ver.  27,  28, 
What  is  to  be  done  by  him  who  burns  the  sin- 
otlering  without  the  camp. 


112 


LEVITICUS 


We  have  now  reached  the  great  central  point  of 
the  book.  All  going  before  was  but  a  preparation 
for  this.  Two  great  truths  have  been  established  ; 
first,  that  God  can  only  be  approached  by  means  of 
appointed  sacrifices  ;  next,  that  man  in  nature  and 
life  is  fu^l  of  pollution,  which  must  be  cleansed. 
And  now  a  third  is  taught,  viz.  that  not  by  several 
cleansings  for  several  sins  and  pollutions  can  guilt 
be  put  away.  The  several  acts  of  sin  are  but  so 
many  manifestations  of  the  sinful  nature.  For  this, 
therefore,  also  must  atonement  be  made;  one  solemn 
act,  which  shall  cover  all  transgressions,  and  turn 
awav  God's  righteous  displeasure  from  Israel. 

I  v.  Chap.  x\ii.-xx.  And  now  Israel  is  reminded 
that  it  is  the  holy  nation.  The  great  atonement 
offered,  it  is  to  enter  upon  a  new  life.  It  is  a 
separate  nation,  sanctified  and  set  apart  for  the  ser- 
vice of  God.  It  may  not  therefore  do  after  the 
abominations  of  the  heathen  by  whom  it  is  sur- 
rounded. Here  consequently  we  find  those  laws 
and  ordinances  which  especially  distinguish  the 
nation  of  Israel  from  all  other  nations  of  the  earth. 

Here  ao-ain  we  may  trace,  as  before,  a  group  of 
seven  decalogues.  But  the  several  decalogues  are 
not  so  clearly  markel ;  nor  are  the  characteristic 
phrases  and  the  introductions  and  conclusions  so 
common.  In  chap,  xviii.  there  are  twenty  enact- 
ments, and  in  chap.  xix.  thirty.  In  chap,  xvii.,  on 
the  other  hand,  there  are  only  six,  and  in  chap.  sx. 
there  are  fourteen.  As  it  is  quite  manifest  that  the 
enactments  in  chap,  xviii.  are  entirely  separated  by 
a  fi-esh  introduction  from  those  in  chap,  xvii.,  Ber- 
theau,  in  order  to  preserve  the  usual  arrangement 
of  the  laws  in  decalogues,  would  transpose  this 
chapter,  and  place  it  after  chapter  xix.  He  observes, 
that  the  laws  in  chap,  xvii.,  and  those  in  chap.  xx. 
1-9,  are  akin  to  one  another,  and  may  very  well 
constitute  a  single  decalogue ;  and,  what  is  of  more 
importance,  that  the  words  in  xviii.  1-5  form  the 
natural  introduction  to  this  whale  group  of  laws : 
"  And  Jehovah  spake  unto  Moses,  saying,  Speak 
uuto  the  chililren  of  Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  I 
am  Jehovah  your  God.  After  the  doings  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  wherein  ye  dwelt,  shall  ye  not  do : 
and  after  the  doings  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  whither 
1  bring  you,  shall  ye  not  do :  neither  shall  ye  walk 
in  their  ordinances,"  &c. 

There  is,  however,  a  point  of  connexion  between 
chaps,  xvii.  and  xviii.  which  must  not  be  over- 
looked, and  which  seems  to  indicate  that  their  posi- 
tion in  our  present  text  is  the  right  one.  All  the 
six  enactments  in  chap.  xvii.  (ver.  3-5,  ver.  6,  7. 
ver.  8,  9,  ver.  10-12,  ver.  13,  14,  ver.  15)  bear 
upon  the  nature  and  meaning  of  the  sacrifice  to  Je- 
hovah as  compared  with  the  sacrifices  offered  to  false 
o-ods.  It  would  seem  too  that  it  was  necessary  to 
guard  against  any  license  to  idolatrous   practices. 


*  The  interpretation  of  ver.  1 S  has  of  late  been  the 
subject  of  so  much  discussion,  that  we  may  perhaps 
be  permitted  to  say  a  word  upon  it,  even  in  a  work 
which  excludes  all  dogmatic  controversy.  The  ren- 
dering of  the  English  Version  is  supported  by  a  whole 
catena  of  authorities  of  the  first  rank,  as  may  be 
seen  by  reference  to  Dr.  iM 'Caul's  pamphlet,  The  An- 
cient Interpretation  of  Levitimts  XVIII.  IS,  &c.  We 
may  further  remark,  that  the  whole  controversy,  so 
far  as  the  Scriptural  question  is  concerned,  might 
have  been  avoided  if  the  Church  had  but  acted  in  the 
spirit  of  Luther's  golden  words  : — "  Ad  rem  vcniamus 
et  dicamus  Mosem  esse  mortuum,  vixisse  autem  po- 
pulo  Judaico,  nee  obligari  nos  legibus  illius.  Ideo 
quidquid  ex  Mose  ut  legislatore  nisi  idem  ex  legibus 


LEVITICUS 

which  might  possibly  be  drawn  trom  the  sending  of 
the  goat  for  Azazel  into  the  wilderness  [Atone- 
JIKNT,  Oav  of],  especialh'  perhaps  against  the 
Egyptian  custom  of  appeasing  the  Evil  Spirit  of  the 
wilderness  and  averting  his  malice  (Hengstenberg, 
Mose  u.  Aegijpten,  178;  Movers,  Phiinhier,  i. 
3(39).  To  this  there  may  be  an  allusion  in  ver.  7. 
Perhaps  however  it  is  better  and  more  simple  to 
reganl  the  enactments  in  these  two  chapters  (with 
Bunsen,  Bihebrerk,  2te  abth.,  Ite  th.  p.  245)  as 
directed  against  two  prevalent  heathen  practices, 
the  eating  of  blood  and  foi-nication.  It  is  remark- 
able, as  showing  how  intimately  moral  and  ritual 
observances  were  blended  together  in  the  Jewish 
mind,  that  abstinence  "  from  blood  and  things 
strangled,  and  fornication,"  was  laid  down  by  the 
Apostles  as  the  only  condition  of  communion  to  be 
required  of  Gentile  convft-fs  to  Christianity.  Before 
we  quit  this  chapter  one  observation  may  be  made. 
The  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  in  ver.  11,  "for  it  is 
the  blood  that  maketh  an  atonement  for  the  soul" 
should  be  "  for  it  is  the  blood  that  maketh  an  atone- 
ment h;i  means  of  the  life."  This  is  important.  It 
is  not  blood  merely  as  such,  but  blood  as  having  in  it 
the  principle  of  life  that  (jod  accepts  in  sacrifice.  P'or 
by  thus  giving  vicariously  the  life  of  thedumb  animal, 
the  sinner  confesses  that  his  own  life  is  forfeit. 

In  chap,  xviii.,  after  the  introduction  to  which  we 
have  aiieady  alluded,  ver.  1-5, — aud  in  which  God 
claims  obedience  on  the  double  ground  that  He  is  Is- 
rael's God,  and  that  to  keep  His  commandments  is  life 
(ver.  5), — there  follow  twenty  enactments  concern- 
ing unlawful  marriages  and  unnatural  lusts.  The 
first  ten  are  contained  one  in  each  verse,  vers.  6-15. 
The  next  ten  range  themselves  in  like  manner  with 
the  verses,  except  that  ver.  17  and  23  contain  each 
two.''     Of  the  twenty  the  first  fourteen  are  alike 

in  form,  as  well  as  iri  the  repeated  npJJl  N?  iTllJ/. 

Chap.  xix.  Three  Decalogues,  introduced  by  the 
words,  "  Ye  shall  be  holy,  for  I  Jehovah  your  God 
am  holy,"  and  ending  with,  "  Ye  shall  obseiwe  all 
my  statutes,  and  all  my  judgments,  and  do  them. 
I  am  Jehovah."  The  laws  here  are  of  a  very  mixed 
character,  and  many  of  them  a  repetition  merely  of 
previous  laws.  Of  the  three  Decalogues,  the  first 
is  comprised  in  ver.  3-13,  and  may  be  thus  distri- 
buted:— (1)  ver.  3,  to  honour  father  and  mother; 
(2)  ver.  3,  to  keep  the  sabbath;  (3)  ver.  4,  not  to 
turn  to  idols ;  (4)  ver.  4,  not  to  make  molten  gods 
(these  two  enactments  being  separated  on  the  same 
principle  as  the  first  and  second  commandments  of 
the  Great  Decalogue  or  Two  Tables) ;  (5)  ver.  5-8, 
of  thank-offerings  ;  (6)  ver.  9,  10,  of  gleaning;  (7) 
ver.  11,  not  to  steal  or  lie  ;  (8)  ver.  12,  not  to  swear 
falsely  ;  (9)  ver.  13,  not  to  defraud  one's  neighbour : 
(10)  ver.  13,  the  wages  of  him  that  is  hired,  ^'c."^ 

nostris,  e.  g.  natiiralibus  et  politicis  probetur,  non  ad- 
mittamus  nee  confundamus  totius  orbis  politias." — 
Bricfe,  De  AVette's  edit.  iv.  305. 

■=  It  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  six  of  these 
enactments  should  only  be  repetitions,  for  the  most 
part  in  a  shorter  form,  of  Commandments  contained 
in  the  Two  Tables.  This  can  only  be  accounted  for 
by  remembering  the  great  object  of  this  section, 
which  is  to  remind  Israel  that  it  is  a  separate  nation, 
its  laws  being  expressly  framed  to  bo  a  fence  and  a 
hedge  about  it,  keeping  it  from  profane  contact  with 
the  heathen.  Bunsen  divides  chapter  xix.  into  two 
tables  of  ten  commandments  each,  and  one  of  five. 
(Sec  his  Bibchvcrk.) 


LEVITICUS 

Tlie  next  Decxilogue,  vcr.  14-25,  Bertheau  ar- 
ranges fhus:  ver.  14,  ver.  15,  ver.  16a,  ver.  166, 
ver.  17,  ver.  18,  ver.  19«,  ver.  196,  ver.  20-22, 
ver.  23-25.  We  object,  however,  to  making  the 
words  iu  19a,  "  Ye  shall  keep  my  statutes,"  a  se- 
parate enactment.  There  is  no  reason  for  this.  A  much 
better  plan  would  be  to  consider  ver.  17  as  consist- 
ing of  two  enactments,  which  is  manifestly  the  case. 
The  third  decalogue  may  be  thus  distributed : — 
ver.  26a,  ver.  266,  ver.  27,  ver.  28,  ver.  29,  ver. 
30,  ver.  31,  ver.  32,  ver.  33,  34,  ver.  35,  36. 

We  have  thus  found  five  decalogues  iu  this  group. 
Bertheau  completes  the  number  seven  by  transpos- 
ing, as  we  have  seen,  chap,  xvii.,  and  placing  it 
immediately  before  chap.  xx.  He  also  transfers 
ver.  27  of  chapter  xx.  to  what  he  considers  its 
proper  place,  vi2.  after  ver.  6.  It  must  be  con- 
fessed that  the  enactment  in  ver.  27  stands  very 
awkwardly  at  the  end  of  the  chapter,  completely 
isolated  as  it  is  from  all  other  enactments  ;  for  ver. 
22-26  are  the  natural  conclusion  to  this  whole 
section.  But  admitting  this,  another  difficulty  re- 
mains, that  according  to  him  the  7th  decalogue  be- 
gins at  ver.  10,  and  another  transposition  is  neces- 
sary, so  that  ver.  7,  8,  may  stand  after  ver.  9,  and 
so  conclude  the  preceding  series  of  ten  enactments. 
It  is  better  perhaps  to  abandon  the  search  for  com- 
])lete  symmetry  than  to  adopt  a  method  so  violent 
in  order  to  obtain  it. 

It  should  be  observed  that  chap,  xviii.  6-23  and 
chap.  XX.  10-21  stand  in  this  relation  to  one  an- 
other ;  that  the  latter  declares  the  penalties  attached 
to  the  transgression  of  many  of  the  commandments 
given  in  the  former.  But  though  we  may  not  be 
able  to  trace  seven  decalogues,  in  accoi'dance  with 
the  theory  of  which  we  have  been  speaking,  in 
chap.  xvii. -XX.,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they 
form  a  distinct  section  of  themselves,  of  whicli 
XX.  22-26  is  the  proper  conclusion. 

Like  the  other  sections  it  has  some  characteristic 
expressions : — (a)  "  Ye  shall  keep  my  judgments 
and  my  statutes"  ('npn,  ''DSK'D)  occurs  xviii.  4, 
5,  26,  xix.  37,  xx.  8,  22,  but  is  not  met  with  either 
in  the  preceding  or  the  following  chapters.  (6)  The 
•constantly  recurring  phrases,  "  I  am  Jehovah  ;" 
"lam  Jehovah  your  God;"  "Be  ye  holy,  for  1 
am  holy ;"  "  I  am  Jehovah  which  hallow  you." 
Iu  the  earlier  sections  this  phraseology  is  only 
found  in  Lev.  .\i.  44,  45,  and  Ex.  xxxi.  13.  In  the 
section  which  follows  (xxi.-xxv.)  it  is  much  more 
common,  this  section  being  in  a  great  measure  a 
continuation  of  the  preceding. 

V.  We  come  now  to  the  last  gioup  of  decalogues 
— that  contained  in  ch.  xxi.-xx\^i.  2.  The  subjects 
comprised  in  these  enactments  are— First,  the  per- 
sonal purity  of  the  priests.  They  may  not  defile 
themselves  for  the  dead ;  their  wives  aiid  daughters 
must  be  pure,  and  they  themselves  must  be  free 
from  all  personal  blemish  (ch.  .xxi.).  Next,  the 
eating  of  the  holy  things  is  permitted  only  to 
])riests  who  are  free  from  all  uncleanness :  they  and 
their  household  only  may  eat  them  (xxii.  1-16). 
Thirdly,  the  olVerings  of  Israel  are  to  be  pure  and 
without  blemisli  (xxii.  17-33).  The  fouith  series 
provides  for  the  due  celebiation  of  the  great  festi- 
vals when  priests  and  jicople  wei-e  to  be  gathered 
together  before  .lehovah  in  holy  convocation. 

Up  to  this  ]5oint  we  trace  system  and  purpose  in 

the  order  of  the  legislation.      Thus,  for  instance, 

chap,  xi.-xvi.  treats  of  external  piuify  ;  ch.  xvii.-xx. 

of  moral  purity;  chap,  xxi.-xxiii.  of  the  lioliness  of 

VOL.  H. 


LEVITICUS 


113 


the  priests,  and  their  duties  with  regard  to  holy 
things ;  the  whole  concluding  with  provisions  for 
the  solemn  feasts  on  which  all  Israel  appeared 
before  Jehovah.  We  will  again  briefly  indicate 
Bertheau's  groups,  and  then  append  some  general 
observations  on  the  section. 

1.  Chap.  xxi.  Ten  laws,  as  follows: — (1)  ver 
1-3;   (2)  ver.  4;    (3)  ver.   5,  6;    (4)  ver.  7,  8-, 

(5)  ver.  9  ;  (6-)  ver.  10, 11 ;  (7)  ver.  12  ;  (8)  ver. 
13,  14;  (9)  ver.  17-21;  (10)  ver.  22,  23.  The 
first  five  laws  concern  all  the  priests ;  the  sixth  to 
the  eighth  the  high-priest ;  the  ninth  and  tenth  the 
eliects  of  bodily  blemish  in  particular  cases. 

2.  Chap.  xxii.  1-16.  (1)  ver.  2;  (2)  ver.  3; 
(3)  ver.  4  ;  (4)  ver.  4-7 ;  (5)  ver.  8,  9 ;  (6)  ver. 
10  ;  (7)  ver.  11  ;  (8)  ver.  12  ;  (9)  ver.  13;  (10) 
ver.  14-16. 

3.  Chap.  xxii.  17-33.     (1)  ver.  18-20;  (2)  ver. 

21  ;  (3)  ver.  22  ;  (4)  ver.  23  ;  (5)  ver.  24  ;  (6)  ver. 
25;  (7)  ver.  27;  (8)  ver.  28;  (9)  ver.  29;  (10) 
ver.  30  ;  and  a  general  conclusion  in  vcr.  31-33. 

4.  Chap,  xxiii.  (1)  ver.  3;  (2)  ver.  5-7;  (3) 
ver.  8;  (4)  ver.  9-14;   (5)  ver.  15-21  ;    (6)  ver. 

22  ;  (7)  ver.  24,  25  ;  (8)  ver.  27-32  ;  (9)  ver.  34, 
35;  (10)  ver.  36:  ver.  37,  38  contain  the  con- 
clusion or  general  summing  up  of  the  Decalogue. 
On  the  remainder  of  the  chapter,  as  well  as  chap, 
xxiv.,  see  below. 

5.  Chap.  XXV.  1-22.  (1)  ver.  2;  (2)  ver.  3,  4  ; 
(3)  ver.  5;  (4)  ver.  6;  (5)  ver.  8-10;  (6)  ver. 
11,  12;  (7)  ver.  13;  (8)  ver.  14;  (9)  ver.  15; 
(10)  ver.  16:  with  a  concluding  foimula  in  ver. 
18-22. 

6.  Chap.  XXV.  23-38.  (1)  ver.  23,  24;  (2)  ver. 
25  ;   (3)  ver.  26,  27  ;   (4)  ver.  28;   (5)  ver.  29  ; 

(6)  ver.  30;  (7)  ver.  31;  (8)  ver.  32,  33;  (9) 
ver.  34;  (10)  ver.  35-37:  the  conclusion  to  the 
whole  in  ver.  38. 

7.  Chap.  XXV.  39-xxvi.  2.  (1)  ver.  39;  (2) 
ver.  40-42;  (3)  ver.  43  ;  (4)  ver.  44,  45;  (5) 
ver.  46;  (6)  ver.  47-49  ;  (7)  ver.  50  ;  (8)  ver. 
51,  52;  (9)  ver.  53;   (10)  ver.  54. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  above  arrangement 
is  only  completed  by  omitting  the  latter  part  of 
chap,  xxiii.  and  the  whole  of  chap.  xxiv.  But  it  is 
clear  that  chap,  xxiii.  39-44  is  a  later  addition, 
containing  further  instructions  respecting  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles.  Ver.  39,  as  compared  with  ver.  34, 
shows  that  the  same  feast  is  refei-red  to;  whilst 
ver.  37,  38,  are  no  less  manifestly  the  oiiginal  con- 
clusion of  the  laws  lespecting  the  feasts  which  are 
enumerated  in  the  previous  part  of  the  chapter. 
Chap,  xxiv.,  again,  has  a  peculiar  character  of  its 
own.  First  we  have  a  command  concerning  the  oil 
to  be  used  in  the  lam]is  belonging  to  the  Tabernacle, 
which  is  only  a  repetition  of  aif  enactment  already 
given  in  Ex.  xxvii.  20,  21,  which  seems  to  be  it's 
natural  place.  Then  follow  dii-ections  about  the 
shew-bread.  These  do  rot  occur  jirevionsly.  In 
Ex.  the  shew-bread  is  spoj^en  of  always  as  a  "matter 
of  course,  concerning  which  no  regulations  are  ne- 
cessary (comp.  Ex.  XXV.  30,  xxxv.  13,  xxxix.  36). 
Lastly  come  certain  enactments  arising  out  of  an 
historical  occurrence.  The  son  of  an  Egyptian 
f\ither  by  an  Israelitish  woman  blasjihenies  the 
name  of  Jehovah,  and  Moses  is  commanded  to  stone 
him  in  consequence:  and  this  circumstance  is  the 
occasion  of  the  following  laws  being  given: — (1) 
That  a  blasphemer,  whether  Israelite  «r  sfranc;er, 
is  to  be  stoned  (comp.  Ex.  xxii.  281.  (2)  That  he  that 
kills  any  man  shall  surelv  be  ]iut  to  death  (comp. 
Ex.   xxi.   12-27).     (3)  that  he  tliat  kills  a  beast 


114 


LEVITICUS 


sliall  make  it  good  (not  found  where  we  might 
have  expected  it,  in  the  series  of  laws  Ex.  xxi.  28- 
xxii.  16).  (4)  That  if  a  man  cause  a  blemish  in 
liis  neighbour  he  shall  be  requited  in  like  manner 
(comp.  Ex.  xxi.  22-25).  (5)  We  have  then  a  repe- 
tition in  an  inverse  order  of  ver.  17,  18;  and  (0) 
the  injunction  that  there  shall  be  one  law  for  the 
stranger  and  the  Israelite.  Finally,  a  brief  notice 
of  the  infliction  of  the  punishment  in  the  case  of 
the  son  of  Shelomith,  who  blasphemed.  Not  an- 
other instance  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole  collection 
iu  which  any  historical  circumstance  is  made  the 
occasion  of  enacting  a  law.  Then  again  the  laws 
(2),  (3),  (4),  (5),  are  mostly  repetitions  of  existing 
laws,  and  seem  here  to  have  no  connexion  with  the 
event  to  which  they  are  referred.  Either  therefore 
some  other  circumstances  took  place  at  the  same 
time  with  which  we  are  not  acquainted,  or  these 
isolated  laws,  detached  from  their  proper  connexion, 
were  grouped  together  here,  in  obedience  perhaps  to 
some  traditional  association. 

VI.  The  seven  decalogues  are  now  fitly  closed 
by  words  of  promise  and  threat — promise  of  largest, 
richest  blessing  to  those  that  hearken  unto  and  do 
these  commandments ;  threats  of  utter  destruction 
to  those  that  break  the  covenant  of  their  God. 
Thus  the  second  great  division  of  the  Law  closes 
like  the  first,  except  that  the  first  part,  or  Book  of 
the  Covenant,  ends  (Ex.  xxiii.  20-33)  with  pro- 
mises of  blessing  only.  There  nothing  is  said  of 
the  judgments  which  are  to  follow  transgression, 
because  as  yet  the  Covenant  had  not  been  made. 
But  when  once  the  nation  had  freely  entered  into 
that  Covenant,  they  bound  themselves  to  accept  its 
sanctions,  its  penalties,  as  weU  as  its  rewai'ds.  And 
we  cannot  wonder  if  in  these  sanctions  the  punish- 
ment of  transgression  holds  a  larger  place  than  the 
rewards  of  obedience.  For  already  was  it  but  too 
plain  that  "  Israel  would  not  obey."  From  the 
first  they  were  a  stitfnecked  and  rebellious  race, 
and  from  the  first  the  doom  of  disobedience  hung 
like  some  fiery  sword  above  their  heads. 

VII.  The  legislation  is  evidently  completed  in 
the  last  words  of  the  preceding  chapter: — "  These 
are  the  statutes  and  judgments  and  laws  which  Je- 
hovah made  between  Him  and  the  children  of  Israel 
in  Mount  Sinai  by  the  hand  of  Moses."  Chap, 
xxvii.  is  a  later  appendix,  again  however  closed  by 
a  similar  formula,  which  at  least  shows  that  the 
transcriber  considered  it  to  be  an  integral  part  of 
the  original  Mosaic  legislation,  though  he  might  be 
at  a  loss  to  assign  it  its  place.  Bertheau  classes 
it  with  the  other  less  regularly  grouped  laws  at  the 
beginning  of  the  book  of  Numbers.  He  treats  the 
section  Lev.  xxvii.-Num.  x.  10  as  a  series  of  sup- 
plements to  the  Sinaitic  legislation. 

Integrity. — This  is  very  generally  admitted. 
Those  critics  e\en  who  are  in  favour  of  different 
documents  in  the  Pentateuch  assign  nearly  the 
whole  of  this  book  to  one  writer,  the  Elohist,  or 
author  of  the  original  document.  According  to 
Knobel  the  only  portions  which  are  not  to  be 
referred  to  the  Elohist  are — Moses'  rebuke  of  Aaron 
because  the  goat  of  the  sin-offering  had  been  burnt 
(x.  16-20) ;  the  group  of  laws  in  chap,  xvii.-xx. ; 
certain  additional  enactments  respecting  the  Sabbath 
and  the  Feasts  of  Weeks  and  of  Tabernacles  (xxiii., 
part  of  ver.  2,  from  HIH^  ■'Hl'IO,  and  ver.  3,  ver.  18, 
19,  22,  39-44);  the  punishments  ordained  for 
blasphemy,  murder,  &c.  (.xxiv.  10-23) ;  the  direc- 
tions respecting  the  Sabbatical   year  (xxv.  18-22), 


LEVITICUS 

and  the  pi'omises  and  warnings  contained  in  chap, 
xxvi. 

With  regard  to  the  section  chap,  xvii.-xx.,  he 
does  not  consider  the  whole  of  it  to  have  been  bor- 
rowed from  the  same  sources.  Chap.  xvii.  he 
believes  was  introduced  here  by  the  Jehovist  from 
some  ancient  document,  whilst  he  admits  neverthe- 
less that  it  contains  cei-tain  Elohistic  forms  of  ex- 
pression, as  "IK'2  ?3,  "  all  flesh,"  ver.  14;  ti'SJ, 
"soul,"  (in  the  sense  of  "  person"),  ver.  10-12, 
15;    n*n,    "  beast,"  ver.   13;    |3")p,   "offering," 

ver.  4 ;  mrT'J  iT""!,  "  a  sweet  savour,"  ver.  6  ;  "  a 
statute  for  ever,"  and  "  after  your  generations," 
ver.  7.  But  it  cannot  be  from  the  Elohist,  he 
argues,  because  (fl)  he  would  have  placed  it  after 
chap,  vii.,  or  at  least  after  chap.  xv. ;  (6)  he  would 
not  have  repeated  the  prohibition  of  blood,  &c., 
which  he  had  already  given ;  (c)  he  would  have 
taken  a  more  favourable  view  of  his  nation  than 
that  implied  in  ver.  7  ;  and  lastly  {d)  the  phrase- 
ology has  something  of  the  colouring  of  chap,  xviii.- 
XX.  and  xxvi.,  which  are  certainly  not  Elohistic. 
Such  reasons  are  too  transparently  unsatisfactory 
to  need  serious  discussion.  He  observes  further 
that  the  chapter  is  not  altogether  Blosaic.  The 
first  enactment  (ver.  1-7)  does  indeed  apply  only 
to  Israelites,  and  holds  good  therefore  for  the  time 
of  ]\Ioses.  But  the  remaining  three  contemplate 
the  case  of  strangers  living  amongst  the  people,  and 
have  a  reference  to  all  time. 

Chap,  xviii.-xx.,  though  it  has  a  Jehovistic  colour- 
ing, cannot  have  been  originally  from  the  Jehovist. 
The  following  peculiarities  of  language,  which 
are  worthy  of  notice,  according  to  Knobel  (Exod. 
u)id  Leviticus  erkldrt,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg.  Hdbuch, 
1857)  forbid  such  a  supposition,  the  more  so  as 
they  occur  nowhere  else  in  the  0.  T. : — V^T,  "  lie 
down  to  "  and  "  gender,"  xviii.  23,  xix.  19,  xx.  16 ; 
73F1,  "  confusion,"  xviii.  23,  XX.  12;  t2|?A  "  ga- 
ther," xix.  9,  xxiii.  22;  DHS,  "grape,"  xix.  10; 
niKti',  "  near  kinswomen,"  xviii.  17 ;  rfljPB, 
"  scourged,"  xix.  20  ;  nti'Qn,  "  fi-ee,"  ibid. ;  VpV'i^ 
n3h3,  "  print  marks,"  xix.  28  ;  N''ipn,  "vomit," 
in  the  metaphorical  sense,  xviii.  25,  28,  xx.  22 ; 
n?"iy,  "  uncircumeised,"  as  applied  to  fruit-trees, 
xix.  23  ;  and  JTiyiJO,  "  born,"  xviii.  9,  11 ;  as  well 
as  the  _  Egyptian  word  (for  such  it  probably  is) 
WI^V^,  "  "garment  of  divers  sorts,"  which,  how- 
ever, does  occur  once  beside  in  Deut.  xxii.  11. 

According  to  Bunsen,chap.  xix.  is  a  genuine  part 
of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  given  however  in  its 
original  form  not  on  Sinai,  but  on  the  east  side 
of  ^he  Jordan  ;  whilst  the  general  arrangement  of 
the  Mosaic  laws  may  perhaps  be  as  late  as  the  time 
of  the  Judges.  He  regards  it  as  a  very  ancient 
document,  based  on  tlw  Two  Tables,  of  which,  and 
especially  of  the  first,  it  is  in  f;ict  an  extension, 
and  consisting  of  two  decalogues  and  one  pentad 
of  laws.  Certain  expressions  in  it  he  considers 
imply  that  the  people  were  already  settled  in  the 
land  "(ver.  9,  10,  13,  15),  while  on  the  other  hand 
ver.  23  supposes  a  future  occupation  of  the  land. 
Hence  he  concludes  that  the  revision  of  this  docu- 
ment by  the  transcribers  was  incomplete :  whereas 
all  the  piissnges  may  fmrly  be  interpreted  as 
looking  forward  to  a  future  settlement  in  Canaan. 


T.IBANUS 

The  great  .simplicity  and  lolly  moral  character  of 
this  section  compel  us,  says  Bunsen,  to  refer  it  at 
least  to  the  earlier  time  of  the  Judges,  if  not  to  that 
of  Joshua  himself. 

We  must  not  quit  this  book  without  a  woi'd  on 
what  may  be  called  its  spiritual  meaning.  That 
so  elaborate  a  ritual  looked  beyond  itself  we  cannot 
doubt.  It  was  a  prophecy  of  things  to  come ;  a 
shadow  whereof  the  substance  was  Christ  and  His 
kingdom.  We  may  not  always  be  able  to  say  what 
the  exact  relation  is  between  the  type  and  the 
antitype.  Of  many  things  we  may  be  sure  that 
they  belonged  only  to  the  nation  to  whom  they 
were  given,  containing  no  prophetic  significance, 
but  serving  as  witnesses  and  signs  to  them  of  God's 
covenant  of  grace.  We  may  hesitate  to  pronounce 
with  Jerome  that  "  every  sacrifice,  nay  almost 
every  syllable — the  garments  of  Aaron  and  the 
whole  Levitical  system — breathe  of  heavenly  mys- 
teries." **  But  we  cannot  read  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  not  acknowledge  that  the  Levitical 
(ii'iests  "  served  the  pattern  and  type  of  heavenly 
things  " — that  the  sacrifices  of  the  Law  pointed  to 
and  found  their  interpretation  in  the  Lamb  of  God 
— that  the  ordinances  of  outward  purification  signi- 
fied the  true  inner  cleansing  of  the  heart  and  con- 
science from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God. 
One  idea  moreover  penetiates  the  whole  of  this 
vast  and  burdensome  ceremonial,  and  gives  it  a 
real  glory  even  apart  fi'om  any  prophetic  signifi- 
cance. Holiness  is  its  end.  Holiness  is  its  character. 
The  tabernacle  is  holy — the  vessels  are  holy — the 
oti'eringse  are  most  holy  unto  Jehovah — the  gar- 
ments of  the  in-iests  are  holy.'  All  who  approach 
Him  whose  name  is  "Holy,"  whether  priests s  who 
minister  unto  Him,  or  people  who  worship  Him, 
must  themselves  be  holy.''  It  would  seem  as  if, 
amid  the  camp  and  dwellings  of  Israel,  was  ever 
to  be  heard  an  echo  of  that  solemn  strain  which 
fills  the  courts  above,  where  the  seraphim  cry  one 
unto  another,  Holy,  Holy,  Holy.' 

Other  questions  connected  with  this  book,  such 
as  its  authorship,  its  probable  age  in  its  present 
fo)-m,  and  the  relation  of  the  laws  contained  in  it 
to  those,  either  supplementary  or  apparently  con- 
tradictory, found  in  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch, 
will  best  be  discussed  in  another  article,  where  op- 
portunity will  be  given  for  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  Mosaic  legislation  as  a  whole.  [Penta- 
■i-i^ucn.]  [J.  J.  s.  P.] 

LIB'ANUS  iSAlfiavos),  the  Greek  form  of  the 
name  Lebanon  (1  Esd.  iv.  48;  v.  55 ;  2  Esd.  .xv.  20  • 
.Jiid.  i.  7 ;  Ecclus.  xxiv.  13  ;  I.  12).  Anti-libanus 
('Aj'TiA.ijSavoy)  occurs  only  in  Jud.  i.  7.  [G.] 

LIBERTINES  (hi^iprtvoi :  Libertini).  This 
word  occurs  once  only  in  the  N.  T.  In  Acts  vi.  9, 
we  find  the  ojiponents  of  [Stephen's  preaching  de- 
scril)ed  as  rives  tS>v  Sk  tt/s  0-11^070177}?  rrjs  ^670- 
fievris  Ai^npTiVQiv,  ical  Kvp-nvaiaiv  ical  'AAe|aj/- 
Spewf  Kal  Twv  airh  KiXiKias  koI  'Aalas.  The 
question  is,  who  were  these  "  Libertines,"  and  in 
what  relation  did  they  stand  to  the  others  who  are 

''  "  In  promjitu  est  Leviticus  liber  in  quo  singula 
sacrifieia,  immo  singulae  pene  syllabae  et  vestes 
Aaron  et  tntus  ordo  Leviticus  spirant  caelcstia  saera- 
mcnta"  (Hieron.  /,'/).  ad  Pauiin.). 

'  ii.  3,  10;  vi.  17,  2.5,  29;  vii.  1,  6;  x.  12,  17; 
xiv.  13.  f  xvi.  4.  e  xxi.  fi-8,  15. 

''  vi.  18,  27  ;  vii.  21  ;  x.  3,  10  ;  xi.  43,  45  ;  xv.  31 
(xyiii.  21)  ;  xix.  2  ;  xx.  7,  2fi. 

'  In  cliaps.  xviii.-xxv.  observe  the  i)lirar-e,  "  I  am 


LIBERTINES 


115 


mentioned  with  them  ?  The  structure  of  the  passage 
leaves  it  doubtful  how  many  .synagogues  pre  implied 
in  it.  Some  (Calvin,  Beza,  Bengel)  have  taken  it 
as  if  there  were  but  one  synagogue,  including  men 
from  all  the  different  cities  that  are  named.  Winer 
(A^.  T.  Gramm.  p.  179),  on  gi-ammatical  grounds, 
takes  the  repetition  of  the  article  as  indicating  a 
fresh  group,  and  finds  accordingly  two  synagogues, 
one  including  Libertines,  Cyrenians,  Ale.xaudrians  ; 
the  other  those  of  Cilicia  and  Asia.  Meyer  {nd 
loc.)  thinks  it  unlikely  that  out  of  the  480  syna- 
gogues at  Jerusalem  (the  number  given  by  Rabbinic 
writers,  Megill.  §7:5,  4;  Kctub.  t.  105,  1),  there 
should  have  been  one,  or  even  two  only,  for  natives 
of  cities  and  districts  in  which  the  Jewish  popu- 
lation was  so  numerous,'!  and  on  that  ground  assigns 
a  separate  synagogue  to  each  of  the  proper  names. 

Of  the  name  itself  there  have  been  several  expla- 
nations. ( 1 .)  The  other  name  being  local,  this  also  has 
been  referred  to  a  town  of  Libertum  in  the  pro- 
consular province  of  Africa.  This,  it  is  said,  would 
explain  the  close  juxta-position  with  Cyrene.  Suidas 
recognises  At^eprTvoi  as  uvofia  edvovs,  and  in  the 
Council  of  Carthage  in  411  (Mansi.  vol.  iv.  p.  265- 
274,  quoted  in  Wiltsch,  Handhuch  dcr  Kirchlich. 
Geogr.  §9fi),  we  find  an  Episcopus  Libertinensis 
(Simon.  Onomast.  N.  T.  p.  99  ;  and  Gerdes.  de 
Synag.  Libert.  Groning.  1736,  in  Winer,  Etcb.). 
Against  this  hypothesis  it  has  been  urged,  (1)  that 
the  existence  of  a  toivn  Libertum,  in  the  first  cen- 
tury, is  not  established  ;  and  (2)  that  if  it  existed, 
it  can  hardly  have  been  important  enough  either  to 
have  a  synagogue  at  Jerusalem  for  the  Jews  be- 
longing to  it,  or  to  take  precedence  of  Cyrene  and 
Alexandria  in  a  synagogue  common  to  the  three.'' 

(2.)  Conjectural  readings  have  been  proposed. 
AiPucTTLfaiu  (Oecumen.,  Beza,  Clericus,  Valckenaer) 
Ai^vaiv  tS)v  Kara  Kvprivriv  (Schultness,  de  Char. 
Sp.  S.  p.  162,  in  Meyer,  ad  loc).  The  difficulty 
is  thus  removed  ;  but  eveiy  rale  of  te.vtual  criticism 
is  against  the  reception  of  a  reading  unsupported  by 
a  single  MS.  or  version. 

(3.)  Taking  the  word  in  its  received  meaning  as 
=  freedmen,  Lightfoot  finds  in  it  a  description  of 
natives  of  Palestine,  who  having  fallen  into  slavery, 
had  been  manumitted  by  Jewish  masters  (Exc.  on 
Acts  vi.  9).  In  this  case,  however,  it  is  hardly 
likely  that  a  body  of  men  so  circumstanced  would 
have  received  a  Roman  name. 

(4.)  Grotius  and  Vitringa  explain  the  word  as 
describing  Italian  freedmen  who  had  become  con- 
verts to  Judaism.  In  this  case,  however,  the  word 
"  proselytes  "  would  most  probably  have  been  used  ; 
and  it  is  at  least  unlikely  that  a  body  of  converts 
would  have  had  a  synagogue  to  themselves,  or  that 
proselytes  from  Italy  would  have  been  united  with 
Jews  from  Cyrene  and  Alexandria. 

(5.)  The  earliest  explanation  of  the  word  (Chry- 
sost.)  k  also  that  which  has  been  adopted  by  the 
most  recent  authorities  (Winer,  liwb.  s.  v. ;  Meyer, 
Comni.  ad  loc).  The  Libertini  are  Jews  who, 
having  been  taken  prisoners  by  Pompey  and  other 
Roman  generals  in  the  Synan  wars,  had  been  re- 


Jehovah,"  "  I  am  Jehovah  your  God."  Latter  part 
of  XXV.  and  xxvi.  somewhat  changed,  but  recurring 
in  xxvi.  The  reason  given  for  this  holiness,  "  1  am 
holy,"  xi.  44,  &c.,  xix.  2,  xx.  7,  20. 

"  In  Cyrene  one-fourth,  in  .\lexaudria  two-fifths  of 
the  whole  (Jos.  ^n?.  xiv.  7,  §2,  xiv.  10,  §1,  xix.  ">,  5;2  ; 
B.  J.  ii.  13,  §7  ;  c.  Ap.   2,  §4). 

'■  Wiltsch  gives  no  inform.-ition  lu'vond  the  f:<ct  just 
mentioned.  , 

1    . 


116 


I.IBNAH 


duced  to  slavery,  and  h;id  afterwards  been  emanci- 
pated, and  retui'ned,  peiinanently  or  for  a  time,  to 
the  country  of  their  tilth ers.  Of  the  existence  of  a 
large  body  of  Jews  in  tliis  position  at  Rome  we 
have  abundant  evidence.  Under  Tiberius,  the  Se- 
natus-Consultiim  for  the  suppression  of  Elgyptian 
and  Jewish  mysteries  led  to  the  banishment  of 
4000  "  libertini  generis "  to  Sardinia,  under  the 
pretence  of  military  or  police  duty,  but  really  in 
the  hope  that  the  malaria  of  the  island  might  be 
fatal  to  them.  Others  were  to  leave  Italy  unless 
they  abandoned  their  religion  (Tacit.  Atmal.  ii.  85; 
comp.  Suet.  Tiber,  c.  36).  Josephus  {Ant.  xviii. 
3,  §,5),  narrating  the  same  fact,  speaks  of  the  4000 
who  were  sent  to  Sardinia  as  Jews,  and  thus  iden- 
tifies them  with  the  "  libertinum  genus  "  of  Taoitus. 
rhilo  {Legat.  ad  Camm,  p.  1014,  C.)  in  like 
manner  says,  that  the  greater  part  of  the  Jews  of 
Rome  were  in  the  position  of  freedmen  (aTreXev- 
dfpcoOevres),  and  had  been  allowed  by  Augustus 
to  settle  in  the  Trans-Tiberine  part  of  the  city,  and 
to  follow  their  own  religious  customs  unmolested 
(comp.  Horace,  Sat.  i.  4,  143,  i.  9,  70).  The  ex- 
pulsion from  Rome  took  place  a.d.  19  ;  and  it  is 
an  ingenious  conjecture  of  Mr.  Humphrey's  (  Comm. 
on  Acts,  ad  loc.)  that  those  who  were  thus  banished 
from  Italy  may  have  found  their  way  to  Jerusalem, 
and  that,  as  having  suffered  for  the  sake  of  their 
religion,  they  were  likely  to  be  foremost  in  the  oppo- 
sition to  a  teacher  like  Stephen,  whom  they  looked 
on  as  impugning  the  sacredness  of  all  that  they 
most  revered.  [E.  H.  P.] 

LIB'NAH  (run'?  :   Af^ua,  also  Affiva,  A6fiva, 

Arifiua,  'Zevva;  Alex.  Ae/3/xj'a,  Ao^eva:  Lihna, 
Labana,  Lehii'i,  Lohim),  a  city  which  lay  in  the 
south-west  part  of  tlie  Holy  Land.  It  was  taken 
by  Joshua  immediately  after  the  rout  of  Beth-horon. 
That  eventful  day  was  ended  by  the  capture  and  de- 
struction of  Makkedaii  (Josh.  X.  28)  ;  and  then  the 
host — "  Joshua,  and  all  Israel  with  him  " — moved 
on  to  Libnah,  which  was  also  totally  destroyed,  its 
king  and  all  its  inhabitants  (Josh.  x.  29,  30,  32, 
39,  xii.  15).     The  next  place  taken  was  Lachish. 

Libnah  belonged  to  the  district  of  the  Shefelah, 
the  maritime  lowland  of  Judah,  among  the  cities  of 
which  district  it  is  enumerated  (.Josh.  xv.  42),  not 
in  close  connexion  witsh  either  Makkedah  or  Lachish, 
but  in  an  independent  group  of  nine  towns,  among 
which  are  Keilah,  Mareshah,  and  Nezib."  Libnah 
was  appropriated  with  its  "  suburbs"  to  the  priests 
(Josh.  xxi.  13;  1  Chr.  vi.  57).  In  the  reign  of 
.Tehoram  the  son  of  .lehoshaphat  it  "  revolted  "  from 
Judah  at  the  same  time  with  Edom  (2  K.  viii.  22  ; 
2  Chr.  xxi.  10) ;  but,  beyond  the  fact  of  their  simul- 
taneous occurrence,  there  is  no  apparent  connexion 
between  the  two  events.  On  completing  or  relin- 
quishing the  siege  of  Lachish — which  of  the  two 
is  not  quite  certain  —  Sennacherib  laid  siege  to 
Libnah  (2  K.  xix.  8  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  8).  While  there 
he  was  joined  by  Rabshakeh  and  the  part  of  the 
army  which  had  visited  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xix.  8;  Is. 
xxxvii.  8),  and  received  the  intelligence  of  Tirhakah's 
approach  ;  and  it  would  appear  that  at  Libnah  the 
destruction  of  the  Assyrian  army  took  place,  though 

"  The  sites  of  these  have  all  been  discovered,  not  in  the 
lowland,  as  they  are  specified,  but  in  the  mountains  imme- 
diately to  the  south  and  east  of  Beit-jilfrin. 

b  The  account  of  Berosus,  quoted  by  Josephus  (Atit.  x. 
1,55),  is  that  tlie  destruction  toolc  place  when  Sennacherib 
had  reached  Jerusalem,  after  liis  Kgyptian  expedition,  on 
the  first  night  of  the  siege.     His  words  are,  'YTrocrTpt\j/a<; 


LIBNAH 

the  statements  of  Herodotus  (ii.  141)  and  of  Jo- 
sephus {Ant,  X.  1,  §4)  place  it  at  Pelusium.''  (See 
Kawlinson,  Herod,  i.  480.) 

It  was  the  native  place  of  Hamutal,  or  Hamital, 
the  queen  of  Josi.ah,  and  mother  of  Jehoahaz  (2  K. 
xxiii.  31)  and  Zedekiah  (^xxiv.  18;  Jer.  Hi.  1).  11; 
is  in  this  connexion  th.at  its  name  appears  for  the 
last  time  in  the  Bible. 

Libnah  is  described  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  in 
the  Onomasticon  (s,t\  A^eva  and  "  Lebna")  merely 
as  a  village  of  the  district  of  Eleuthei'opolis.  Its 
site  has  hitherto  escaped  not  only  discovery,  but, 
until  lately,  even  conjecture.  Professor  Stanley 
{S.  (J"  -P.  207  note,  258  7iote),  on  the  ground  of  the 
accordance  of  the  name  Libnah  (white)  with  the 
"  Blanchegarde  "  of  the  Crusaders,  and  of  both  with 
the  appearance  of  the  place,  would  locate  it  at 
Tell  es-Snfieh,  "  a  white-faced  hill  .  .  .  which  forms 
a  conspicuous  object  in  the  eastern  part  of  the 
plain,"  and  is  situated  5  miles  N.W.  of  Beit- 
jibnn.  But  Tell  es-Safieh  has  claims  to  be  iden- 
tified with  Gatii,  which  are  considered  under 
that  head  in  this  work.  Van  de  Velde  places  it 
with  confidence  at  At  ah  el-Mens/di/eh,  a  hill  about 
4  miles  W.  oi  Beit-jib rin,  on  the  ground  of  its  being 
"  the  only  site  between  Sumeil  (Makkedah)  and 
Um  Lakh'is  (Lachish)  shewing  an  ancient  fortified 
position"  {Memoir,  S'.iO  •  in  his  Syria  and  Palestine 
it  is  not  named).  But  as  neither  Um  Lakhis  nor 
Sumeil,  especially  the  latter,  are  identified  with 
certainty,  the  conjecture  must  be  left  for  further 
exploration.  One  thing  must  not  be  oveilooked, 
that  although  Libnah  is  in  the  lists  of  Josh.  xv. 
specified  as  being  in  the  lowland,  yet  3  of  the 
8  towns  which  form  its  group  have  been  actually 
identified  as  situated  among  the  mountains  to  the 
immediate  S.  and  E.  of  Beit-jibrhi. — The  name  is 
also  found  in  Siiiuop.-Libnath.  [G.] 

LIB'NAH  (Tl^jh  ;   Sam.  HJn'p  ;  and  so  the 

LXX.  AeyucoyS;  Alex.  Ae/Soii'a:  Zebna),  one  o{  the 
stations,  at  which  the  Israelites  encamped,  on  their 
journey  between  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  and  Kadesh. 
It  was  the  fifth  in  the  series,  and  lay  between 
Rimmon-parez  and  Rissah  (Num.  xxxiii.  20,  21). 
If  el-Hudherah  be  Hazeroth,  then  Libnah  would  be 
situated  somewhere  on  the  western  border  of  the 
Aelanitic  arm  of  the  Red  Sea.  But  no  trace  of  the 
name  has  yet  been  discovered  ;  and  the  only  con- 
jecture which  appears  to  have  been  made  concerning 
it  is  that  it  was  identical  with  Laban,  mentioned  in 
Oeut.  i.  1.  The  word  in  Hebrew  signifies  "  white," 
and  in  that  case  may  point  either  to  the  colour  of 
the  spot  or  to  the  presence  of  white  poplar  (Stanley, 
S.  ^  P.  App.  §77).  Count  Bertou  in  his  recent 
Etude,  le  Mont  Hor,  &c.  1880,  endeavours  to  iden- 
tify Libnah  with  the  city  of  Judah  noticed  in  the 
foregoing  article.  But  there  is  little  in  his  argu- 
ments to  support  this  theory,  while  the  position 
assigned  to  Libnah  of  Judah — in  the  Shefelah  or 
maritime  district,  not  amongst  the  towns  of  "  the 
South,"  which  latter  form  a  distinct  divisipn  of  the 
teriitory  of  the  tribe,  in  proximity  to  Edom — seems 
of  itself  to  be  fatal  to  it. 

The  reading  of  the  Samaritan  Codex  and  \'ersion, 


et9    Ta  'Iepoo"oAujLia Kara    TTjr    irpcjnqv    Trj<; 

TToAiopKia?  vvKTa  Si.a<j>9fipovrai,  ^c.  Professor  .Stanley, 
on  ihe  other  hand,  inclines  to  agree  with  the  Jewish  tra- 
dition which  places  the  event  in  the  pass  of  Bethhoron, 
and  therefore  on  the  road  between  Libnah  and  Jerusalem 
{S.  it  /'.  207  noti). 


I 


LIBNI 

Lebonab,  is  siippoi'ted  by  the  LXX.,  but  not  apparently 
by  any  other  authority.  The  'I'argum  Pseudojonathan 
on  the  passage,  plays  with  tlie  name,  according  to  the 
custom  of  the  later  Jewish  writings :  "  Libnah,  a  place; 
the  boundary  of  which  is  a  building  of  briclcworii," 
as  if  the  name  were  nJ!l7,  Lebenah,  a  brick.   [G.] 

LIB'NI  Q^lb  :  Ao/Seri  :  Lohni,  and  once,  Num. 
iii.  18,  Lehni).  1.  The  eldest  son  of  Gershom,  the 
son  of  Levi  (Ex.  vi.  17  ;  Num.  iii.  18;  1  Chr.  vi. 
1 7,  20),  and  ancestor  of  the  family  of  the  Libnitks. 

2.  The  son  of  Mahli,  or  Wahali,  son  of  Mei-ari 
(I  Chr.  vi.  29),  as  the  Text  at  present  stands.  It 
is  probable,  however,  that  he  is  the  same  with  the 
preceding,  and  that  something  has  been  omitted 
(comp.  ver.  29  with  20,  42).     [Mahli,  1.] 

LIB'NITES,THE('':3j'n:  SAo^evi:  Lohni, 
Lebnitica,  sc.  familia),  tlie  descendants  of  Libni, 
eldest  son  of  Gershom,  who  formed  one  of  the  chief 
branches  of  the  great  Levitical  family  of  Gershonites 
(Num.  iii.  21,  x.wi.  58). 

LIB'YA  (AijSurj,  Alexia)  occurs  only  in  Acts 
li.  10,  in  the  periphrasis  "  the  parts  of  Libya  about 
Cyrene"  (to;  fx^pf]  t^?  Ai;3ur)S  ttJs  Kara.  Kvpi]vrjv), 
which  obviously  means  the  Cyrenaica.  Similar 
expressions  are  used  by  Dion  Cassius  {^Ai^vrj  ri  TrepJ 
KvpTjur^v,  liii.  12)  and  Josephus  [t]  irphs  Kvpi)i'r]i' 
Al^vt],  Ant.  xvi.  6,  §1),  as  noticed  in  the  article 
Cyrene.  The  name  Libya  is  applied  by  the  Greek 
and  Roman  writers  to  the  Africjin  continent,  gene- 
rally however  excluding  Egypt.  The  consideration 
of  this  and  its  more  restricted  uses  has  no  place  in 
this  work.  The  Hebrews,  whose  geography  deals 
with  nations  rather  than  countries,  and,  iu  accord- 
ance with  the  genius  of  .Sheraites,  never  generalizes, 
had  no  names  for  continents  or  other  large  tracts 
comprising  several  countries  ethnologically  or  other- 
wise distinct:  the  single  mention  is  therefore  of 
Gi'eek  origin.  kSome  account  of  the  Lubim,  or 
primitive  Libyans,  as  well  as  of  the  Jews  in  the 
Cyrenaica,  is  given  in  other  articles.  [LuBiM ; 
Cyrene.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

LiCE  (Q113,  C'DS,  D33  ;  chinnim,  chinnam  : 
(rKvi<pes,  aKv'nr€s:  sciniphes,  cinifes).  This  word 
occurs  in  the  A.  V.  only  in  Ex.  viii.  16,  17,  18, 
and  in  Ps.  cv.  31  ;  both  of  which  passages  have 
reference  to  the  third  great  plague  of  Egypt.  In 
Exodus  the  miracle  is  recorded,  while  in  the  Psalm 
grateful  remembrance  of  it  is  made.  The  Hebrew 
word,' — which,  with  some  slight  variation,  occurs 
only  in  Ex.  viii.  16,  17,  18,  and  in  Ps.  cv.  31 — has 
given  occasion  to  whole  pages  of  discussion ;  some 
commentators,  amongst  whom  may  be  cited  Mi- 
chaelis  {Siippl.  s.  v.),  Oedmann  (in  Vennisch. 
Snmm.  i.  vi.  p.  80),  Kosenmiiller  (Sclwl.  in  Ex.  viii. 
12),  Harenberg  {Obs.  Crit.  dc  0^33,  in  Miscell. 

»  Considerable  doubt  has  been  entertained  by  some 
scholars  as  to  the  ori<rin  of  the  word.  t>ce  the  re- 
marks of  Gcscnius  and  Fiirst. 

^  J-13.     But  see  Gcscn.  Tlies.  s.  v.  j3. 
=  De  Sabb.  cap.  14,  fol.  107,  6. 
'1  (TKviil/.  ^uiov  X'^'^po"  Te  (cat  TCTpoTrrepoi''    and 
Kvi'l  (Ki/a/().  ^woi'  TTTy)vov,  o/iioioi'  kiuvuiwl. 

(Ilcsych.  Li'X.  s.  v.) 
■Ki'li//,  iMV(}>iOV,  r;  yei'iKij  tov  kvitt'o^- 
KriVes,   '6fx.ixaTa  to.  TrtpijSe^pio/iiei'a,  KoX  fiou(J)io  rCiv 

(TKvi\\i,  ^Mov  xAwpo'r  Tt  KCLi  Terpd-n-Tepov .  ftooi'  Kuivto- 

(i>ov  MiKpbf  iv\6(j)ayotr.  (I'havoriu.  ,•!.  v.) 


LICE 


117 


Zips.  Nov.  vol.  li.  p.  iv.  p.  617),  Dr.  Geddes  {Crit 
Hem.  Ex.  viii.  17),  Dr.  Harris  {Diet.  Nat.  H.  of 
Bible),  to  which  is  to  be  added  the  authority 
of  Philo  {De  Vit.  Mas.  ii.  97,  ed.  Mangey)  and 
Origen  {Horn.  Tert.  in  Exod.~),  and  indeed  mo- 
dern writers  generally — -suppose  that  gnats  are  the 
animals  intended  b}'  the  original  word ;  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  Jewish  Rabbis,  Josephus 
{Ant.  ii.  14,  §^),  Bochart  {Hieroz.  iii.  457,  aL 
Rosenm.),  Montanus,  Munster  {Crit.  Sac.  in  E.\. 
viii.  12),  Bryant  {I'lagues  of  Egijpt,  p.  56),  and 
Dr.  Adam  Clai'ke  are  in  favour  of  the  translation 
of  the  A.  V.  The  old  versions,  the  Chaldee  para- 
phrase, the  Targums  of  Jonathan  and  Onkelos,  the 
>Syriac,  the  iSamaritan  Pentateuch,  the  Arabic,  are 
claimed  by  Bochart  as  supporting  the  opinion  that 
lice  are  here  intended.  Another  writer  believes 
he  can  identify  the  chinnim  with  some  worm-like 
creatures  (perhaps  some  kind  of  Scolopendridae) 
called  tarrentes,  mentioned  in  Vinisauf's  account 
of  the  expedition  of  Richard  I.  into  the  Holy  Land, 
and  which  by  their  bites  during  the  night-time  occa- 
sioned extreme  pain  (Harmer's  Observat,  Clarke's 
ed.  iii.  549).  With  regard  to  this  last  theory 
it  may  fairly  be  said  that,  as  it  has  not  a  word  of 
proof  or  authority  to  support  it,  it  may  at  once 
be  rejected  as  fanciful.  Those  who  believe  that 
the  plague  was  one  of  gnats  or  mosquitoes  appear 
to  ground  their  opinion  solely  on  the  authority 
of  the  LXX.,  or  rather  on  the  interpretation  of 
the  Greek  word  ffKvi(pfs,  as  given  by  Philo  {De 
Vit.  Mos.  ii.  97),  and  Origen  {Horn.  III.  in 
Exodum).  The  advocates  of  the  other  theory,  that 
lice  are  the  animals  meant  by  chinnim,  and  not 
gnats,  base  their  arguments  upon  these  facts: — (1) 
because  the  chinnim  sprang  from  the  dust,  whereas 
gnats  come  from  the  waters;  (2)  because  gnats, 
though  they  may  greatly  irritate  men  and  beasts, 
cannot  pioperly  be  said  to  be  "  in  "  them  ;  (3)  be- 
cause their  name  is  derived  from  a  root  ^  which 
signifies  "  to  establish,"  or  "to  lix,"  which  cannot 
be  said  of  gnats ;  (4)  because  if  gnats  aie  in- 
tended, then  the  fourth  plague  of  flies  would  be 
unduly  anticipated  ;  (5)  because  the  Talmudists  use 
the  woi'd  chinnah  in  the  singular  number  to  mean  a 
louse;  as  it  is  said  in  the  Treatise  on  the  Sabbath, 
"  As  is  the  man  who  slays  a  camel  on  the  Sabbath, 
so  is  he  who  slays  a  louse  on  the  Sabbath."  "^ 

Let  us  examine  these  ai'guments  as  briefly  as  pos- 
sible. Eiist,  the  LXX.  has  been  quoted  as  a  direct 
proof  that  chinnim  means  gnats ;  and  certmnly  in 
such  a  matter  as  the  one  before  us  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  exaggerate  the  authority  of  the  trans- 
lators, who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  and  tberefoie  must  be 
considered  good  authorities  on  this  subject.  But  is 
it  quite  clear  that  the  Greek  word  they  made  use 
of  has  so  limited  a  signification  ?  Does  the  Greek 
aKVL\p  or  Kvl\f/  mean  a  gnati^     Let    the  reader, 

Hhryn.  (Lob.)  400.  riut.  ii.  636,  P. 
Theophrastus  [Sisl.  I'iant.  ii.  cap.  ult.)  speaks  of 
<rKvine<;,  and  c;ills  tbem  ivorms.  Dioscorides  (iii. 
de  Ulmo)  speaks  of  the  well-known  viscid  secretion 
on  the  leaves  of  plants  and  trees,  and  says  that  when 
this  moisture  is  dried  up,  animalcules  like  !,'nats  appear 
(e^piSia  Kwi/wTrueiSij).  In  another  place  (v.  ISl)  he 
culls  them  o-KwArjKfs.  No  doubt  plant-lice  arc  meant. 
Aotius  (ii.  9)  speaks  of  (ci't^es,  by  whicli  word  he 
clearly  means  plant-lice,  or  aphides.^  .\ristopUanos 
associates  the  ki/otcs  (aphides)  with  "^ijf"  (gall-llics), 
and  speaks  of  them  as  injuring  the  youns  shoots  of 
the  vines  [Aves,  427).  Aristotle  {Hist.  An.  viii.  3, 
§9)    speaks  of  a  bird,  woodpecker,  which  Up  terms 


118 


LICE 


however,  read  carefully  the  passages  quoted  in  the 
foot-notes,  and  he  will  see  at  once  that  at  any  rate 
there  is  very  considerable  doubt  whether  any  one 
particular  animal  is  denoted  by  the  Greek  word, 
lu  the  few  passages  where  it  occurs  in  Greek 
authors  the  word  seems  to  point  in  some  instances 
clearly  enough  to  the  well-known  pests  of  field  and 
garden,  the  plant-lice  or  aphides.  By  the  (xkv\\\i  iv 
X'^Pf,  the  proverb  referred  to  in  the  note,  is  very 
likely  meant  one  of  those  small  active  jumping 
insects,  common  under  leaves  and  under  the  bark 
of  trees,  known  to  entomologists  by  the  name  of 
spring-tails  (Puduridae).  The  Greek  lexicographers, 
having  the  derivation  of  the  word  in  view,  gene- 
rally define  it  to  be  some  small  woi-m-like  creature 
that  eats  away  wood  ;  if  they  used  the  term  winged, 
the  winged  aphis  is  most  likely  intended,  and 
perhaps  rcrmicuhis  may  sometimes  refer  to  the 
wingless  individual.  Because,  however,  the  lexicons 
occasionally  say  that  the  (tkuI^  is  like  a  gnat  (the 
"  green  and  four-winged  insect"  of  Hesychius), 
many  commentators  have  come  to  the  hasty 
conclusion  that  some  species  of  gnat  is  denoted  by 
the  Greek  term ;  but  resemblance  by  no  means 
constitutes  identity,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  this 
insect,  the  aphis,  even  though  it  be  winged,  is  far 
more  closely  allied  to  the  wingless  louse  (^pediculus) 
than  it  is  to  the  gnat,  or  to  any  species  of  the  tii- 
mily  Culicidae ;  for  the  term  lice,  as  applied  to  the 
various  kinds  of  aphides  (^Phytophthiria,  as  is  their 
appropriate  scientific  name),  is  by  no  means  merely 
one  of  analogy.  The  wingless  aphis  is  in  appear- 
ance somewhat  similar  to  the  pedicidus  ;  and  indeed 
a  great  authority,  Burmeister,  arranges  the  Ano- 
plura,  the  order  to  which  the  pedicidus  belongs, 
with  the  Bhyncota,  which  contains  the  sub-order 
Ifomoptera,  to  which  the  aphides  belong.  Hence, 
by  an  appropriate  transfer,  the  same  word  which  in 
Arabic  means  pedicidus  is  applied  in  one  of  its 
significations  to  the  "  thistle  black  with  plant-lice." 
Every  one  who  has  observed  the  thistles  of  this 
country  black  with  the  peculiar  species  that  infests 
them  can  see  the  force  of  the  meaning  assigned  to 
it  in  the  Arabic  language.'' 

Again,  almost  all  the  passages  where  the  Greek 
word  occurs  speak  of  the  animal,  be  it  what  it 
may,  as  being  injurious  to  plants  or  trees;  it  can- 
not therefore  be  applied  in  a  restricted  sense  to  any 
gnat  {cidcj:  or  siimdium),  for  the  Culicidae  are 
eminently  blood-suckers,  not  vegetable-feeders.' 

Oedman  (  Vennisch.  Sammlung.  i.  ch.  vi.)  is 
of  opinion  that  the  species  of  mosquito  denoted  by 
the  chinnim  is  probably  some  minute  kind  allied 
to  the  Cnlex  reptans,  s.  pulicaris  of  Linnaeus. 
That  sucli  an  insect  might  have  been  the  instru- 
ment God  made  use  of  in  the  third  plague  with 


Ki'iTToAdyos.  Gnats  are  for  the  most  part  taken  on  the 
wins?  ;  but  the  KvtVes  here  alluded  to  are  doubtless 
the  various  Kinds  of  nuts,  larvae,  aphides,  lepismidae, 
coccinae,  oniscidae,  &c.  &o.,  which  are  found  on  the 
leaves  and  under  the  bark  of  trees. 

■=    V^Jj-       "  Nigricans    ct   quasi    pediculis  obsitus 

upparuit  carduus"  (Gol.  Arah.  Lex.  s.  v.). 

'  The  mosquito  and  gnat  belong  to  the  family  of 
Culicidae.  The  Simuliuin,  to  which  genus  the  Cidex 
rpptaim  (Lin.)  belongs,  is  comprised  under  the  family 
Tipulidae.  This  is  a  northern  species,  and  i)robably 
not  ib\uul  in  Egypt.  The  Siniu/ia,  or  sand-flics,  are 
most  inveterate  blood-suckers,  whose  bites  often  give 
rise  to  very  painful  swellings. 


LICE 

which  He  visited  the  Egyptians  is  readily  granted, 
so  far  as  the  irrititing  powers  of  the  creature  are 
concerned,  for  the  members  of  the  genus  Siinidiwtu 
(sand-fly)  are  a  terrible  pest  in  those  localities  where 
they  abound.  But  no  proof  at  all  can  be  brought 
forward  in  support  of  this  theory. 

Bryant,  in  illustrating  the  propriety  of  the 
plague  being  one  of  Hce,  has  the  following  very  just 
remarks : — "  The  Egyptians  affected  great  external 
purity,  and  were  very  nice  both  in  their  persons 
and  clothing.  .  .  .  Unconmion  care  was  taken  not 
to  harbour  any  vermin.  They  were  particularly 
solicitous  on  this  head ;  thinking  it  would  be  a 
great  profanation  of  the  temple  which  they  entered 
if  any  animalcule  of  this  sort  were  concealed  in 
their  garments."  And  we  learn  from  Herodotus 
that  so  scrupulous  were  the  priests  on  this  point 
that  they  used  to  shave  the  hair  off  their  heads  and 
bodies  every  third  day  for  fear  of  harbouring  any 
Imise  while  occupied  in  their  sacred  duties  (Herod, 
ii.  37).  "We  may  hence  see  what  an  abhorrence 
the  Egyptians  showed  towards  this  sort  of  vermin, 
and  that  the  judgments  inflicted  by  the  hand  of 
Moses  were  adapted  to  their  prejudices"  (Bryant's 
Observations,  &c.,  p.  5G). 

The  evidence  of  the  old  versions,  adduced  by 
Bochart  in  support  of  his  opinion,  has  been  called  in 
question  by  Kosenmiiller  and  Geddes,  wlio  will  not 
allow  that  the  words  used  by  the  Syriac,  theChaldee, 
and  the  Arabic  vei  sions,  as  the  representatives  of  the 
Hebrew  woi'd  chinnim,  can  properly  be  translated 
lice ;  but  the  interpretations  which  they  themselves 
allow  to  these  words  apply  better  to  ^jcethan  to  gnats; 
and  it  is  almost  ceitain  that  the  normal  meaning  of 
the  words  in  all  these  three  versions,  and  indis- 
putably in  the  Arabic,  applies  to  lice.  It  is  readily 
granted  that  some  of  the  arguments  brought  forward 
by  Bochart  {Hieroz.  iii.  457,  ed.  Rosenm.)  and  his 
consentients  ai'e  unsatisfactory.  As  the  plague  was 
certainly  miraculous,  nothing  can  be  deduced  from 
the  assertion  made  that  the  cliinnim  sprang  from 
the  dust ;  neither  is  Bochart's  derivation  of  the 
Hebrew  word  accepted  by  scholars  generally.  Much 
force  however  is  confcrined  in  the  Talmudical  use 
of  the  word  chinnah,  to  express  a  louse,  though 
Gesenius  asserts  that  nothing  can  be  adduced 
thence. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  this  much  appears  cer- 
tain, that  those  commentators  who  assert  that 
chinnim  means  gnats  have  arrived  at  this  conclu- 
sion without  sufficient  authority  ;  they  have  based 
their  argimients  solely  on  the  evidence  of  the  LXX., 
though  it  is  by  no  means  proved  that  the  Greek 
woi'd  used  by  these  translators  has  any  reference  to 
gnats :«  the  Greek  word,  which  probably  originally 
denoted  any  small  irritating  creature,  being  derived 


Although  Origen  and  Philo  both  understand  by 
the  Greek  a-Kvi.p  some  minute  winged  insect  that 
stings,  yet  their  testimony  by  no  means  proves  that 
a  similar  use  of  the  term  was  restricted  to  it  by  the 
LXX.  translators.  It  has  been  shown,  from  the  quo- 
tations given  above,  that  the  Greek  word  has  a  wide 
signification  :  it  is  an  aphis,  a  iro>-m,  a  Jlea,  or  a 
spring-tail— in  fact  any  small  insect-like  animal  that 
hites ;  and  all  therefore  that  should  legitimately  be 
deduced  from  the  words  of  these  two  writers  is  that 
they  applied  in  this  instance  to  some  irritating  winged 
insect  a  term  which,  from  its  derivation,  so  appro- 
priately describes  its  irritating  properties.  Their 
insect  seems  to  refer  to  some  species  of /nidge  [Cerato- 
ixigoii ) . 

K  If  the   LXX.   understood  gnats  by  the  Hebre'w 


LIEUTENANTS 

from  a  root  which  means  to  hite,  to  gnaw,  was 
used  ill  this  general  sense,  and  selected  by  the 
LXX.  translators  to  express  the  original  word, 
wliich  has  an  origin  kindred  to  that  of  the  Greei< 
word,  but  the  precise  meaning  of  wliich  they  did 
not  know.  They  had  in  view  the  derivation  of  the 
Hebrew  term  chinndh,  from  chdiiAh,  "  to  gnaw," 
and  most  appropriately  rendered  it  by  the  Greek 
word  Kvi^^,  fiom  Kvaai,  "  to  gnaw."  It  appears 
therefore  that  there  is  not  sutlicient  authority  for 
departing  from  the  translation  of  the  A.  V.,  wliich 
renders  the  Hebrew  word  by  lice ;  and  as  it  is  sup- 
ported by  the  evidence  of  many  of  the  old  versions, 
it  is  best  to  rest  contented  with  it.  At  any  rate  the 
point  is  still  open,  and  no  hasty  conclusion  can  be 
adopted  concerning  it.  [W.  H.] 

LIEUTENANTS  (D'-JS-l'^tJ'nN).  The  He- 
brew achashdrapan  was  the  official  title  of  the 
satraps*  or  viceroys  who  governed  the  provinces  of 
the  Persian  empire  ;  it  is  rendered  "  lieutenant "  in 
Esth.  iii.  12,  viii.  9,  ix.  3  ;  Ezr.  viii.  36,  and 
"  prince"  in  Dan.  iii.  2,  vi.  1,  kc.        [W.  L.  B.] 

LIGN  ALOES.    [Aloes.] 

LIGURE  (DCv,  Icshem  :  Kuyvpiov  ;  Aid.  apyv- 

pioi/J  Alex.  vaKivdos  :  ligurius).  A  precious  stone 
mentioned  in  Ex.  xxviii.  19,  xxxix.  12,  as  the  first 
in  the  third  row  of  the  high-priest's  breastplate. 
"  And  the  third  row,  a  ligure,  an  agate,  and  an 
amethyst."  It  is  impossible  to  say,  with  any  cer- 
tainty, what  stone  is  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  term. 
The  LXX.  version  generally,  the  Vulgate  and  Jo- 
sephus  (i). ./.  V.  5,  §7),  understand  the  liincurium  or 
liyurhuii ;  but  it  is  a  matter  of  consiilerable  difficulty 
to  identify  the  Ugurium  of  the  ancients  with  any 
known  precious  stone.  Dr.  Woodward  and  some  old 
commentators  have  supposed  that  it  was  some  kind 
of  helemnitc,  because,  as  these  fossils  contain  bitu- 
minous particles,  they  have  thought  that  they  have 
been  able  to  detect,  upon  heating  or  rubbing  pieces 
of  them,  the  absurd  origin  which  Theophrastus 
(F/-U(7.  li.  28,  31,xv.  2,  ed.  Schneider)  and  Pliny 
{H.  N.  xx.Kvii.  iii.)  ascribe  to  the  lyncurium.  Others 
have  imagined  that  amber  is  denoted  by  this  word  ; 
but  Theophrastus,  in  the  passage  cited  above,  has 
given  a  detailed  description  of  the  stone,  and  clearly 
distinguishes  it  from  electron,  or  amber.  Amber, 
moreover,  is  too  soft  for  engraving  upon ;  while  the 
Igncyirium  was  a  hard  stone,  out  of  wliich  seals  were 
made.  Another  interpretation  seeks  the  origin  of  the 
word  in  the  country  of  Liguria  (Genoa),  where  the 
stone  was  found,  but  makes  no  attempt  at  identifi- 
cation. Others  again,  without  reason,  suppose  the 
opal  to  be  meant  (kosenmiill.  Sch.  in  Ex.  xxviii.  19). 
Dr.  Watson  {Phil.  Trans,  vol.  li.  p.  394)  identifies 
it  with  the  tourmaline.  Beckmann  (Hist.  Invent,  i. 
87,  Bohn)  believes,  with  Brami,  Epiphanius,  and 
J.  de  Laet,  that  the  description  of  the  lyncurium 
agrees  well  with  the  hyacinth  stone  of  modern  mi- 


LIGUKE 


119 


term,  why  did  not  these  translators  use  some  well- 
known  Greek  name  for  giinf,  as  Kwrwi//  or  ejiTri's? 

*  The  LXX.  gives  o-aTpam)?,  o-TpaTrjyd;,  and  v7raT09 ; 
the  Vulgate  satraprs  and  prlnccps.  Both  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Greek  words  are  modifications  of  the  same 
Sanscrit  root  :  but  philolojfists  are  not  agreed  as  to 
the  form  or  meaning-  of  tlio  word.  Gescnius  [Thcs. 
p.  74)  adojjts  the  opinion  of  Von  Bohlen  that  it  comes 
from  kshatrijia-pati,  meaniiis;  "  w  arrior  of  the  host." 
Pott  [Etym.  Forsch.  I'ref.  p.  GS)   suggests  other  de- 


neralogists."*  With  this  supposition  Hill  {Notes 
on  Theophrastus  on  Stones,  §50,  p.  166)  and  Ko- 
senmiiller  {Mineral,  of  Bible,  p.  36,  Bib.  Cab.) 
agree.  It  must  be  confessed,  however,  that  this 
opinion  is  far  from  satisfactory.,  for  there  is  the 
following  difficulty  in  the  identification  of  the  I1/71- 
curiiim  with  the  hyacinth.  Theophrastus,  speaking 
of  the  properties  of  the  lijncurium,  savs  that  it 
attracts  not  only  light  particles  of  wood,  but  frag- 
ments of  iron  and  brass.  Now  there  is  no  peculiar 
attractive  power  in  the  hyacinth ;  nor  is  Beck- 
maun's  explanation  of  this  point  sufficient.  He 
says  :  "  If  we  consider  its  (the  lyncuriian  s)  attract- 
ing of  small  bodies  in  the  same  light  which  our 
hyacinth  has  iu  common  with  all  stones  of  the 
glassy  species,  I  cannot  see  anything  to  controvert 
this  opinion,  and  to  induce  us  to  believe  the  lyn- 
curinin  and  the  tourmaline  to  be  the  same."  But 
surely  the  lyncurium,  whatever  it  be,  had  in  a  ■ 
marked  manner  magnetic  properties ;  indeed  the  tenn 
was  applied  to  the  stone  on  this  very  account,  for  the 
Greek  name  ligurion  appears  to  be  derived  from 
Aelxeii',  "to  lick,"  "to  attract;"  and  doubtless 
was  selected  by  the  LXX.  translators  for  this  reason 
to  express  the  Hebrew  word,  which  has  a  similar 
derivatioii."=  More  piobable,  though  still  incon- 
clusive, ajipears  the  opinion  of  those  who  identify 
the  lyncurium  with  the  tourmaline,  or  more  defi- 
nitely with  the  red  variety  known  as  ruhellite,  which 
is  a  hard  stone  and  used  as  a  gem,  and  some- 
times sold  for  red  sapphire.  Tourmaline  becomes, 
as  is  well  known,  electrically  polar  when  heated. 
Beckmann's  objection,  that  "  had  Theophrastus  been 
acquainted  with  the  tourmaline,  he  would  have 
remarked  that  it  did  not  acquire  its  attractive 
power  till  it  was  heated,"  is  answered  by  his  own 
admission  on  the  passage,  quoted  from  the  Jlistoire 
de  r Academic  for  1717,  p.  7  (see  Beckmann,  i.  91). 

Tourmaline  is  a  mineral  found  in  many  parts  of 
the  world.  The  Duke  de  Noya  purchased  two  of 
these  stones  in  Holland,  which  are  there  called 
aschentrikker.  Linnaeus,  in  his  preface  to  the  Flora 
Zeylandica,  mentions  the  stone  under  the  name  of 
kqns  electricus  from  Ceylon.  The  natives  call  it 
tournamal  (vid.  Phil.  Trans,  in  loc.  cit.).  Many 
of  the  precious  stones  which  were  in  the  possession 
of  the  Israelites  during  their  wanderings  were  no 
doubt  obtained  from  the  Egyptians,  who  might 
have  pi'ocured  from  the  Tyrian  merchants  specimens 
from  even  India  and  Ceylon,  &c.  The  fine  specimen 
of  rnbellite  now  in  the  British  Museum  belonged 
formerly  to  the  King  of  Ava. 

The  word  ligure  is  unknown  iu  modem  mine- 
ralogy. Phillips  {Mineral.  87)  mentions  ligurite, 
the  fragments  of  which  are  uneven  and  transpai-ent, 
with  a  vitreous  lustre.  It  occurs  in  a  sort  of  talcose 
rock  in  the  banks  of  a  river  in  the  Apennines. 

The  claim  of  rubellite  to  be  the  lesheni  of  Scrip- 
ture is  very  uncertain,  but  it  is  perhaps  better  than 
that  of  the  other  minerals  which  writers  have  from 
time  to  time  endeavoured  to  identify  w'ith  it.  [W.  H.] 


rivations  more  in  consonance  with  the  position  of  the 
satraps  as  civil  rather  than  military  rulers. 

•>  Busching.  p.  342,  from  Dutens  Dcs  I'icrrex  pre- 
cieuses,  p.  61,  says  "  the  hyacinth  is  not  found  in 
the  East."  This  is  incorrect,  for  it  occurs  in  Egypt, 
Ceylon,  and  the  East  Indies  (v.  Mineral,  and  Crystall. 
Oxv''s  Circle  of  Sciences,  b\b). 

«  rhe.s.  s.  V.  Dt;'^.  Kiirst  says  of  nL**?.  ciijus  nos 
fiigit  origo.  Targ.  vcrtit,  '•TD^p-  ''.  e.  (ir.  Kiy\po<:,  do 
quo  Smiris  (Shumii)  gcncre  v.  Plin.  .\.\xiv.  t. 


1 20  LIKHI 

LIK'HI  ('np?  :  AoKi'/i;  Alex.  Aaiceia:  Led), 
a  Mannssite,  son  of  Shemida,  the  son  of  Manasseh 
(1  Chr.  vii.  19). 

LILY  [\m'^,  shushdn,  nV^')^,  shoshannah : 
Kpivov,  Matt.  vi.  28,  29).  The  Hebrew  word  is 
rendered  "rose"  in  the  Chaldee  Targuin,  and  by 
Maimonides  and  other  rabbinical  writers,  with  the 
exception  of  Kimchi  and  Ben  Melech,  who  in  1  K.  vii. 
19,  translated  it  by  "violet."  In  the  Judaeo- 
Spanish  version  of  the  Canticles,  shushdn  and  sho- 
shannah are  always  translated  by  rosa  ;  but  in 
Hos.  xiv.  5  the  latter  is  rendered  lirio.  But  Kplvov, 
or  "  lily,"  is  the  uniform  rendering  of  the  I>XX., 
and  is  in  all  probability  the  true  one,  as  it  is  sup- 
ported by  the  analogy  of  the  Arabic  and  Persian 
sasan,  which  has  the  same  meaning  to  this  da}',  and 
by  the  existence  of  the  same  word  in  Syriac  and 
Coptic.  The  Spanish  azugcna,  "a  white  lily,"  is 
merely  a  modification  of  the  Arabic. 

But  although  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  word 
denotes  some  plant  of  the  lily  species,  it  is  by  no 
means  certain  what  individual  of  tliis  class  it  espe- 
cially designates.  Father  Souciet  [Recueil  de  diss. 
Crit.  1715)  laboured  to  prove  that  the  lily  of 
.Scripture  is  the  "  crown-imperial,"  the  Persian 
tnsai,  the  Kpivov  fia<Ti\iK6v  of  the  Greeks,  and  the 
Fntilldria  impcrialis  of  Linnaeus.  So  common  was 
this  plant  in  Persia,  that  it  is  supposed  to  have 
given  its  name  to  Susa,  the  capital  (Athon.  xii.  1  ; 
Bochart,  Phaleg.  ii.  14).  But  there  is  no  proof 
that  it  was  at  any  time  common  in  Palestine,  and 
"  the  lily"  par  excellence  of  Persia  would  not  of 
necessity  be  "  the  lily"  of  the  Holy  Land.  Dios- 
coridcs  (i.  62)  bears  witness  to  the  beauty  of  the 
lilies  of  Syria  and  Pisidia,  from  which  the  best  per- 
fume was  made.  He  says  (iii.  106  [116])  of  the 
Kpivov  ^aaiKiKSv  that  the  Syrians  call  it  (Tacra 
( =  shiishan),  and  the  Africans  a^i^Xa^ov,  which 
Bochart  renders  in  Hebrew  characters  J37  2*3X' 
"  white  shoot."  Kiihu,  in  his  note  on  the  passage, 
identifies  the  plant  in  question  witli  the  Lilium 
candidum  of  Linnaeus.  It  is  probably  the  same  as 
that  called  in  the  Mishna  "king's  lily"  {Kilaim, 
V.  8).  Pliny  (xxi.  5)  defines  Kpivov  as  "  rubens 
lilium ;"  and  Dioscorides,  in  another  passage,  men- 
tions the  fact  that  there  are  lilies  with  pni-ple 
flowers ;  but  whether  by  this  he  intended  the 
Lilium  Martagon  or  Chalcedonicum,  Kiihn  leaves 
undecided.  Now  in  the  passage  of  Athenaens  above 
quoted  it  is  said,  "Siovaov  yap  dvai  rfj  'EXKijvwv 
(pwvrj  rh  Kpivov.  Jiut'm  the  Eti/moloijiciDnjilafpmm 
(s.  V.  'Xovffa)  wp  find  to  yap  Afi'pia  vtto  tSiv  <poi- 
viKCii:  ffovffa  Aeyerai.  As  the  shushan  is  thus 
identifier!  both  with  Kpivov,  the  red  or  purple  lily, 
and  with  Keipiov,  the  white  lily,  it  is  evidently 
impossible  from  the  word  itself  to  ascertain  exactly 
the  kind  of  lily  which  is  referred  to.  If  the  shnshnn 
or  shoshannah  of  the  0.  T.  and  the  Kpivov  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  be  identical,  which  there 
seems  no  reason  to  doubt,  the  plant  designated  by 
these  terms  must  have  been  a  conspicuous  object  on 
the  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  (Matt.  vi.  28  ; 
Luke  xii.  27) ;  it  must  have  flourished  in  the  deep 

a  According  to  another  opinion,  the  allusion  in  this 
verse  is  to  the  fragrance  and  not  the  colour  of  the  lily, 
and,  if  so,  the  passage  is  favourable  to  (he  claims  of  the 
L.  candidum,  which  is  highly  fragrant,  while  the  L. 
Chalcedonicum  is  almost  destitute  of  odour.-  The  lily  of 
the  N.  T.  may  still  be  the  latter. 

h  But  Strand  (Flor.  I'alaest.)  mentions  it  as  growing 
near  Joppa,  and  Kitto  {Phys.  BUt.  of  Pal.  219)  makes 


LILY 

broad  valleys  of  Palestine  (Cant.  ii.  1),  among  the 
thorny  shrubs  [ib.  it.  2)  and  pastm-es  of  the  desert 
(ib.  ii.  16,  iv.  5,  vi.  3),  and  must  have  been  re- 
markable for  its  rapid  and  luxuriant  gi-owth  (Hos. 
xiv.  5;  Ecclus.  xxxix.  14).  That  its  flowers  were 
brilliant  in  colour  would  seem  to  be  indicated  in 
Matt.  vi.  28,  where  it  is  compared  with  the  gorgeous 
robes  of  Solomon ;  and  that  this  colour  was  scarlet 
or  pui-ple  is  implied  in  Cant.  v.  13.'  There  appears 
to  be  no  species  of  lily  which  so  completely  answeis 
all  these  ri'(4uirementsas  the  Lilium  Chalcedonicum, 
or  Scarlet  Martagon,  which  grows  in  profusion  in 
the  Levant.  But  direct  evidence  on  the  point  is 
still  to  be  desired  from  the  obsen'ation  of  travellers. 
We  have,  however,  a  letter  from  Dr.  Bowring,  re- 
ferred to  {Gard.  Chron.  ii.  854),  in  which,  under 
the  name  of  Lilia  Syrinca.  Lindley  identifies  with 
the  L.  Chalcedonicum  a  flower  which  is  "  abundant 
in  the  district  of  GaHlee  "  in  the  months  of  April 
and  May.  Sprengel  {Ant.  Bot.  Spec.  i.  p.  9) 
identifies  the  Greek  Kpivov  with  the  L.  Martagon. 


With  regard  to  the  other  plants  which  have  been 
identified  with  the  shushan,  the  difficulties  are  many 
and  great.  Gesenius  derives  the  word  from  a  root 
signifying  "  to  be  white,"  and  it  has  hence  been 
inferred  that  the  shtishaii  is  the  wliite  lily.  But 
it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  the  Lilium  'can- 
didum gi'ows  wild  in  Palestine,  though  a  specimen 
was  found  by  Forskal  at  Zambak  in  Arabia  Felix.'' 
Dr.  Royle  (Kitto's  Cj/clop.  art.  "Shushan")  iden- 
tified the  "lily"  of  the  Canticles  with  the  lotus  of 
Egypt,  in  spite  of  the  many  allusions  to  "  feeding 
among  the  lilies."  The  purple  flowers  of  the  hhob, 
or  wild  artichoke,  which  abounds  in  the  plain  north 
of  Tabor  and  in  the  valley  of  Esdraelon,  have  been 
thought  by  some  to  be  the  "  lilies  of  the  field " 
alluded  to  in  Matt.  vi.  28  (Wilson,  Latids  of  the 
Bible,  ii.  1 10).  A  recent  traveller  mentions  a  plant, 
with  lilac  flowers  like  the  hyacinth,  and  called  by 
the  Arabs  usiceih,  which  he  considered  to  be  of  the 

especial  mention  of  the  L.  candidum  growing  in  Pales" 
tine;  and  in  connexion  with  the  habitat  given  by  Strand 
it  is  worth  observing  that  the  lily  is  mentioned  (Cant.  Ii. 
1)  with  the  rose  of  Sharon.  Now  let  this  be  compared 
with  Jerome's  Comment,  ad  Is.  x.xxiii.  9  :  "  Saron  omnis 
juxta  Joppcn  Lyddamque  appellatur  regio  in  qua  latis- 
simi  campi  fcrtilesquc  tcnduntnr."  [W.  H.] 


LILY 

s])ecies  denominated  lily  in  Scnpture  (Bonar,  Desert 
of  Sinai,  p.  329).  Lynch  enumerates  the  "lily  " 
as  among  the  plants  seen  by  him  on  the  shores  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  but  gives  no  details  which  could  lead 
to  its  identification  {Exped.  to  Jordan,  p.  286). 
He  liad  previously  obsen'ed  the  water-lily  on  the 
,'ordan  (p.  173),  but  omits  to  mention  whether  it 
was  the  yellow  {Nitphar  luted)  or  the  white  {Nym- 
phaea  alba).     "  The  only  '  lilies  '  which  I  saw  in 

n 


LINEN 


121 


LiUum  cund'tdum. 


Palestine,"  says  Prof.  Stanley,  "  in  the  months  of 
March  and  April,  were  large  yellow  water-lilies,  in 
the  clear  spring  of  'Ain  Mellahah,  near  the  Lake  of 
Merom  "  {S.  ^  P.  p.  429).  He  suggests  that  the 
name  "lily"  "  maj  include  the  numerous  flowers 
of  the  tulip  or  amaryllis  kind,  which  appear  in  the 
early  summer,  or  the  autumn  of  Palestine."  The 
following  description  of  the  Huleh-lily  by  Dr.  Thom- 
son {Tke  Land  and  the  Book,  i.  394),  were  it  more 
precise,  would  perhaps  have  enaljled  botanists  to 
iilentify  it :  "  This  Huleh-lily  is  very  large,  and  the 
three  inner  petals  meet  above  and  form  a  gorgeous 
canopy,  such  as  art  never  approached,  and  king 

never  sat  under,  even  in  his  utmost  glory 

We  call  it  Hiileh-lily,  because  it  was  here  that  it 
was  first  discovered.     Its  botanical  name,  if  it  have 

one,  I  am  unacquainted  with Our  fiower 

delights  most  in  the  valleys,  but  is  also  found  on 
the  mountains.  It  grows  among  thorns,  and  I  have 
sadly  lacerated  my  hands  iu  extricating  it  from 
them.  Nothing  can  be  in  higher  contrast  than  the 
luxuriant  velvety  softness  of  this  lilv,  and  the 
ciabbed  tangled  hedge  of  thorns  about  it.  Gazelles 
still  delight  to  feed  among  them  ;  and  you  can 
scarcely  ride  through  the  woods  north  of  Tabor, 
where  these  lilies  abound,  witliout  fiightening  them 
from  their  fiowery  pasture."  If  some  futui-o  traveller 
would  give  a  description  of  the  Huleh-lily  somewhat 
less  vague  than  the  above,  the  question  might  be  at 
once  resolved.     [l''LOWi;iis,  Appendix  A.] 

The  I'hoenician  architects  of  Solomon's  temple 
decorated  the  capitals  of  the  columns  with  "  liiy- 
work,"  that  is,  with  leaves  and  flowers  of  the  lily 
(1  K.  vii.),  corresponding  to  the  lotus-headed  ca- 
l)itiils  of  Egyptian  architecture.  The  rim  of  the 
"  brazen  sea"  was  possibly  wrought  in  the  form  of 
the  recurved  margin  of  a  lily  flower  (1  K.  vii.2t)). 
Whether  the  shos/umnim  and  shtishan  mentiom.'d  in 


the  titles  of  Ps.  xlv.,  Ix.,  Ixix.,  and  Ixxx.  were  musical 
instruments  in  the  form  of  lilies,  or  whether  the 
word  denote  a  musical  air,  will  be  discussed  under 
the  article  Shosiiannim.  [W.  A.  W.] 

LIME  (l^tJ' :  Kovia:  calx).  This  substance  is 
noticed  only  three  times  in  the  Bible,  viz.,  in  Dent, 
xxvii.  2,  4,  where  it  is  ordered  to  be  laid  on  the 
great  stones  whereon  the  law  was  to  be  written 
(A.  V.  "thou  shalt  plaister  them  with  plaister")  ; 
in  Is.  xxxiii.  12,  where  the  "burnings  of  lime" 
are  figuratively  used  to  expi'ess  complete  destruc- 
tion;  and  in  Am.  ii.  1,  where  the  prophet  describes 
the  outrage  committed  on  the  memory  of  the  king 
of  Edom  by  the  Moabites,  when  they  took  his  bones 
and  burned  them  into  lime,  i.  e.  calcined  them — 
an  indignity  of  which  we  have  another  instance  in 
2  K.  xxiii.  16.  That  the  Jews  were  acquainted 
with  the  use  of  the  lime-kiln,  has  been  already  no- 
ticed.   [FURNACB.]  [W.  L.  B.] 

LINEN.  Five  different  Hebrew  words  are  thus 
rendered,  and  it  is  difficult  to  assign  to  each  its 
precise  significance.  With  regard  to  the  Greek 
words  so  translated  in  the  N.  T.  there  is  less 
ambiguity, 

1.  As  Egypt  was  the  great  centre  of  the  linen 
manufacture  of  antiquity,  it  is  in  connexion  with 
that  country  that  we  find  the  first  allusion  to  it  in 
the  Bible.  Joseph,  when  promoted  to  the  dignity 
of  ruler  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  was  arrayed  "  in 
vestures  oi  fine  linen"  (s/jesA,"  marg,  "silk,"  Gen. 
xli.  42),  and  among  the  offeruigs  for  the  tabeinaole 
of  the  things  which  the  Israelites  had  brought  out 
of  Egypt  were  "  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and 
fine  linen"  (Ex.  xxv.  4,  xxxv.  6).  Of  twisted 
threads  of  this  material  were  composed  the  ten 
embroidered  hangings  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi. 
1),  the  vail  which  separated  the  holy  place  from 
the  holy  of  holies  (Ex.  xxvi.  31),  and  the  cur- 
tain for  the  entrance  (ver.  36),  wrought  with  needle- 
work. The  ephod  of  the  high-priest,  with  its 
"cujIous,"  or  embroidei'ed  girdle,  and  the  breast- 
plate of  judgment,  were  of  "fine  twined  linen" 
(Ex.  xxviii.  6,  8,  15).  Of  fine  linen  woven  in 
checker-work  were  made  the  high-priest's  tunic  and 
mitre  (Ex.  xxviii.  39).  The  tunics,  turbans,  aijd 
drawers  of  the  inferior  priests  (Ex.  xxxix.  27,  28) 
are  simply  described  as  of  woven  work  of  fine  linen. 

2.  But  in  Ex.  xxviii.  42,  and  Lev.  vi.  10,  the 
drawers  of  the  priests  and  their  flowing  robes  are 
said  to  be  of  linen  (bad^),  and  the  tunic  of  the 
high-priest,  his  girdle,  and  mitre,  which  he  wore  on 
the  day  of  atonement,  were  made  of  the  same  ma- 
terial (Lev.  xvi.  4).  Cuuaeus  {De  Sep.  ffebr.  ii. 
c.  i.)  maintained  that  the  robes  worn  by  the  high- 
priest  throughout  the  year,  which  are  called  by  the 
Talmudists  '•  the  golden  vestments,"  wore  thus 
named  because  they  were  made  of  a  moi'e  valuable 
kind'  of  linen  (shesh)  than  that  of  which  "  the 
white  vestments,"  worn  only  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, were  composed  {bad).  But  in  the  ]\Iishna 
(Cod.  Jama,  hi.  7)  it  is  said  that  the  dress  worn 
by  the  high-priest  on  the  morning  of  the  day  of 
atonement  was  of  linen  of  Pelusium,  that  is,  ot  the 
finest  description.  In  the  evening  of  the  same  day 
he  wore  garments  of  Indian  linen,  which  was  less 
costly  than  the  Egyptian.  From  a  comjiarison  of 
Ex.  xxviii.  42  with  xxxix.  28  it  seems  clear  that 
bad  and  sliesh  were  synonymous,  or,  if  there  be  any 
dilference  between   them,  the  latter  probably  de- 


"  K'K*.  <>'■  ■'EJ't^.  as  in  K/..  xvi.  13. 


bna. 


122 


LINEN 


notes  the  spun  threads,  while  tlie  fomier  is  the 
linen  woven  from  them.  Maimonides  {Celc  luini- 
viihdash,  c.  8)  considered  them  as  identical  with 
regard  to  the  material  of  which  they  were  com- 
posed, for  he  says,  "  wherever  in  the  Law  bad  or 
shesh  are  mentioned,  they  signify  flax,  that  is, 
byssus."  And  Abarbanel  (on  Ex.  xxv.)  deiines  shesh 
to  be  Egyptian  tlax,  and  distinguishes  it  as  com- 
posed of  six  (Heb.  shesh,  "  six  ")  threads  twisted 
together,  from  bad,  Avhich  was  single.  But  in  op- 
position to  this  may  be  quoted  Ex.  xxxix.  28,  where 
the  drawers  of  the  priests  are  said  to  be  liyien  {bad) 
of  fine  twined  linen  (shesh).  The  wise-hearted 
among  the  women  of  the  congregation  spun  the  flax 
which  was  used  by  Bezaleel  and  Aholiab  for  the 
hangings  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxxv.  25),  and  the 
making  of  linen  was  one  of  the  occupations  of 
women,  of  whose  dress  it  formed  a  conspicuous  part 
(PiDv.  xxxi.  22,  A.  V.  "  silk;".  Ez.  xvi.  10,  13; 
comp.  Rev.  xviii.  16).  In  Ez.  xxvii.  7  shesh  is 
enumerated  among  the  products  of  Egypt,  which 
the  Tyrians  imported  and  used  for  the  sails  of  their 
ships  ;  and  the  vessel  constructed  for  Ptolemy  Philo- 
pator  is  said  by  Athenaeus  to  have  had  a  sail  of 
byssus  {fiv(T(Tivov  ex'^"  ictIov,  Deipn.  i.  27  F). 
Hermippus  (quoted  by  Athenaeus)  describes  Egypt 
as  the  great  emporium  for  sails: — 

CK  5'  AtyvTTTOv  Ta  Kpe/xaaTa 

Cleopatra's  galley  at  the  battle  of  Actium  had  a 
sail  of  purple  canvas  (Plin.  xix.  5).  The  ephods 
worn  by  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  by  Samuel, 
though  he  was  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ii.  18),  and  by 
David  when  he  danced  before  the  ark  (2  Sam.  vi. 
14;  1  Chr.  xv.  27),  were  all  of  linen  [bad).  The 
man  whom  Daniel  saw  in  vision  by  the  river  Hid- 
dekel  was  clothed  in  linen  (bad,  Dan.  x.  5,  xii. 
6,  7;  comp.  Matt,  sxviii.  3).  In  no  case  is  bad 
used  for  other  than  a  dress  worn  in  religious  cere- 
monies, though  the  other  terms  rendered  "  linen  " 
are  applied  to  the  ordinary  dress  of  women  and  per- 
sons in  high  rank. 

3.  Buts,'^  always  translated  "  fine  linen,"  except 
2  Chr.  V.  12,  is  ai)parently  a  late  word,  and  pro- 
bably the  same  witli  the  Greek  jSucrcos,  by  which 
it  is  represented  by  the  LXX.  It  was  used  for  the 
dresses  of  the  Levite  choir  in  the  temple  (2  Chr.  v. 
12),  for  the  loose  upper  garment  worn  by  kings 
over  the  close-titting  tunic  (1  Chr.  xv.  27),  and  for 
the  vail  of  the  temple,  embroidered  by  the  skill  of 
the  Tyrian  artificers  (2  Chr.  iii.  14).  Mordecai 
was  ari'ayed  in  robes  of  fine  linen  (buts)  and  purple 
(Esth.  viii.  15)  when  honoured  by  the  Pereian  king, 
and  the  dress  of  the  rich  man  in  the  parable  was 
purple  and  fine  linen  (fivaffos,  Luke  xvi.  19).  The 
Tyrians  were  celebrated  for  their  skill  in  linen- 
embroidery  (2  Chr.  ii.  14),  and  the  house  of  Ashbea, 
a  family  of  the  descendants  of  Shelah  the  son  of 
Judah,  were  workers  in  fine  linen,  probably  in  the 
lowland  countiy  (1  Chr.  iv.  21).  Tradition  adds 
that  they  wove  the  robes  of  the  kings  and  priests 
(Targ.  Joseph),  and,  according  to  Jarchi,tho  hang- 
ings of  the  sanctuary.  The  coi'ds  of  the  canopy 
over  the  garden-court  of  the  palace  at  Shushan 
were  of  fine  linen  {buts,  Esth.  i.  G).  "  Purple  and 
broidered  work  and  fine  linen"  were  brought  by 


■^  V-13,  /Sucro-os,  byssus. 
•1  InG 


1  Gen.  xli.  42,  the  Targum  of  Oiikelos  gives  MS  as 
tlie  equivalent  of  t»>EJ>.    See  also  Ex.  xxv.  4,  xxxv.  35. 


LINEN 

the  Syrians  to  the  market  of  Tyie  (Ez.  xxvii.  10), 
the  bi'its  of  Syria  being  distinguished  from  the  shesh 
of  Egypt,  mentioned  in  ver.  7,  as  being  in  all  pro- 
bability an  Aramaic  word,  while  shesh  is  referred 
to  an  Egyptian  original.''  "  Fine  linen  "  (/Sutrtros), 
with  purple  and  silk  are  enumerated  in  Rev.  xviii.  12 
as  among  the  merchandise  of  the  mystical  Baby- 
lon ;  and  to  the  Lamb's  wife  (xix.  8)  it  "  was 
granted  that  she  should  be  arrayed  in  fine  linen 
{^vaaLvov)  clean  and  white:"  the  symbolical  sig- 
nificance of  this  vesture  being  immediately  ex- 
plained, "  for  the  fine  linen  is  the  righteousness  of 
saints."  And  probably  with  the  same  intent  the 
armies  in  heaven,  who  rode  upon  white  horses  and 
followeil  the  "  Faithful  and  True,"  were  clad  in 
"fine  linen,  white  and  clean,"  as  they  went  forth 
to  battle  with  the  beast  and  his  army  (Rev. 
xix.  14). 

4.  Etun^  occurs  but  once  (Prov.  vii.  16),  and  there 
in  connexion  with  Egypt.  Schultens  connects  it 
with  the  Greek  od6v7],  b66viov,  which  he  supposes 
were  derived  from  it.  The  Talmudists  translate  it 
by  73n,  chebel,  a  cord  or  rope,  in  consequence  of 

its  identity  in  form  with  atunJ  which  occurs  in  the 
Targ.  on  Josh.  ii.  15,  and  Esth.  i.  6.  R.  Paichon 
interprets  it  "  a  girdle  of  Egyptian  work."  But  in 
what  way  these  cords  were  applied  to  the  decora- 
tion of  beds  is  not  clear.  Probably  eh'in  was  a 
kind  of  thread  made  of  fine  Egyptian  fiax,  and 
used  for  ornamenting  the  coverings  of  beds  with 
tapestry-work.  In  support  of  this  may  be  quoted 
the  a.fi<piraTroi  of  the  LXX.,  and  the  pictae  tapetes 
of  the  Vulgate,  which  represent  the  J-1US?  nilOil 
of  the  Hebrew.  But  Celsius  renders  the  word 
"linen,"  and  appeals  to  the  Greek  oOovrj,  odouiov, 
as  decisive  upon  the  point.  See  Jablonski,  Opusc. 
i.  72,  73. 

Schultens  (Prov.  vii.  16)  suggests  that  the  Greek 
ffivSwv  is  derived  from  the  Hebrew  sddin.S  which  is 
used  of  the  thirty  linen  gaiments  w^hich  Samson 
promised  to  his  companions  (Judg.  xiv.  12,  13)  at 
his  wedding,  and  which  he  stripped  from  the  bodies 
of  the  Philistines  whom  he  slew  at  Ashkelou  (ver. 
19).  It  was  made  by  women  (Prov.  xxxi.  24),  and 
used  for  girdles  and  under-garments  (Is.  iii.  23  ; 
comp.  Mark  xiv.  51).  The  LXX.  in  Judg.  and 
Prov.  render  it  cti'Swu,  but  in  Judg.  xiv.  13 
oOSvia  is  used  synonymously ;  just  as  (XivSdiv  in 
Matt,  xxvii.  59,  JIark  xv.  46,  and  Luke  xxiii.  53, 
is  the  same  as  oBSvia  in  Luke  xxiv.  12  ;  John  xx.  5, 
6,  xix.  40.  In  these  passages  it  is  seen  that  linen 
was  used  for  the  winding-sheets  of  the  dead  by  the 
Hebrews  as  well  as  by  the  Greeks  (Horn.  //.  xviii. 
353,  xxiii.  254;  comp.  Eur.  Bacch.  819).  Towels 
were  made  of  it  [XivTiov,  John  xiii.  4,  5),  and 
napkins  (trouSapia,  John  xi.  44),  like  the  coarse 
linen  of  the  Egyptians.  The  dress  of  the  poor 
(Ecclus.  xl.  4)  was  probably  unbleached  flax  (aijx6- 
Xivov),  such  as  was  used  for  barbers'  towels  (Plut. 
Dc  Garrid.). 

The  general  term  which  included  all  those  already 
mentioned  was  pishteh,^  coiTesponding  to  the  Greek 
K'ivov,  which  was  employed — like  our  "  cotton  " — to 
denote  not  only  the  flax  (Judg.  xv.  14)  or  raw  ma- 
terial from  which  the  linen  was  made,  but  also  the 


8  PID-  Jablonski  {Opusc.  i.  297,  &c.)  claims  for  the 

word  an  Egyptian  origin.    The  Coptic  shcnto  is  the  repre- 
sentative of  a-t-vSiov  in  the  N.  T 


MDN- 


f  J.1t3X.  Vcneto-Gr.  trxoivos.  '      *"  nRK'S- 


LINEN 

plant  itself  (Josh.  ii.  UJ,  ami  i\w  manufacture  from  it. 
It  is  generally  opjiosed  to  wool,  as  a  vegetable  pro- 
duct to  an  animal  (Lev.  xiii.  47,  48,' 52,  59 ;  Deut. 
xxii.  11.;  Frov.  xxxi.  13;  Hos.  ii.  5,  9),  and  was 
used  for  nets  (Is.  xix.  9),  girdles  (Jer.  xiii.  1),  and 
measuring-lines  (p:z.  xl.  'Sf,  <\s  well  as  for  the  dress 
of  the  priests  (Ez.  xliv.  17,  18).  From  a  com- 
parison of  the  last-quoted  passages  with  Ex.  xxviii. 
42-,  and  Lev.  vi.  10  (3),  xvi.  4,  23,  it  is  evident 
that  b<icl  and  pishteh  denote  the  same  material,  the 


LINTEL 


123 


Philo  also  says  that  the  high-priest  wore  a  ganiient 
of  the  finest  byssus.  Combining  the  testimony  of 
Herodotus  as  to  the  mummy-cloths  with  the  results 
of  microscopic  examination,  it  seems  cleai-  that 
hi/ssus  was  linen,  and  not  cotton  ;  and  moreover,  that 
tile  dresses  of  the  Jewish  priests  were  made  of  the 
same,  the  purest  of  all  materials.  For  further  in- 
formation see  Dr.  Kalisch's  Comm.  on  Exodus,  pyi. 
487-489  ;  also  article  Woollen.        [W.  A.  W.] 


LINTEL.     The  beam  which  forms  the  upper 
imework  of  a  door.     In  the  A. 
is  the  rendering  of  three  Hebrew  words 


latter  being  the  more  general  term.     It  is  equally  ^^  ^^^  framework  of  a  door.     In  the  A.  V. 

apparent,  trom  a  conipanson  or  Kev.  xv.  0  witn  |  f,  ,.   ,  ,„  .    ,,  ,    . j,^- „„! j., 

xix.  8,  14,  that  \ivov  and  Pvaaiuov  are  essentially  ,  , 

the  same.       Mr.  Yates  {Textrinum   Antiqxm-um,  \      1.  TjA,  ayil  (1  K.  vi.  31);  translated  "post 
p.  276)  contends  that  Kivov  denotes  the  common    throughout  Ez.  xl.,  xli.     The  true  meaning  of  this 
flax,  and  ^vffffos  the  finer  variety,  and  that  in  this  ,  ^ord  is  extremely  doubtful.     In  the  LXX.  it  is 


■iense  the  terms  are  used  by  Pausanias  (vi.  26,  §4) 
Till  the  time  of  Dr.  Forster  it  was  never  doubted 
that  hyssus  was  a  kind  of  flax,  but  it  was  main- 
tained by  him  to  be  cotton.  That  the  mummy- 
cloths  used  by  the  Egyptians  were  cotton  and  not 
linen  was  first  asserted  by  Rouelle  {Mem.  de 
I' Acad.  Boy.  des  Scien.  1750),  and  he  was  sup- 
ported in  his  opinion  by  Dr.  Forster  and  Dr. 
Solander,  after  an  examination  of  the  mummies  in 
the  British  Museum.  But  a  more  careful  scrutiny 
by  Mr.  Bauer  of  about  400  specimens  of  mummy- 
cloth  has  shown  that  they  were  universally  linen. 
Dr.  Ure  arrived  independently  at  the  same  conclu-  I 
sion  (Yates,  Tcxtr.  Ant.  b.  ii.). 

One  word  remains  to  be  noticed,  which  our  A.  V. 
has  translated  "  lineu  yam"  (1  K.  x.  28;  2  Chr.  i. 
16),  brought  out  of  Egypt  by  Solomon's  merchants. 
The  Hebrew  7nikveh,^  or  mikve^  is  varioudy  ex- 
plained. In  the  LXX.  of  1  Kings  it  appears  as  a 
proper  name,  QeKove,  and  in  the  Vulgate  Coa,  a 
place  in  Arabia  Felix.  By  the  Syriac  (2  Chr.)  and 
Arabic  translators  it  was  also  regarded  as  the  name  of 
a  place.  Bochart  once  referred  it  to  Troglodyte  Egypt, 
anciently  called  JfwAoe,  according  to  Pliny  (vi.  34), 
but  afterwards  decided  that  it  signified  "  a  tax " 
{Hieroz.  pt.  1,  b.  2,  c.  9).  To  these  Michaelis  add^ 
a  conjecture  of  his  own,  that  Ku  in  the  interior  of 
Africa,  S.W.  of  Egypt,  might  be  the  place  referred 
to,  as  the  country  whence  Egypt  procured  its  horses 
{Laws  of  Moses,  trans.  Smith,  ii.  493).  In  trans- 
lating the  word  ^^  linen  yarn"  the  A.  V.  followed 
Junius  and  Tremellius,  who  are  supported  by 
Sebastian  Schmid,  De  Dieu,  and  Clericus.  Gesenius 
has  recourse  to  a  very  unnatural  construction,  and, 
rendering  the  word  "  troop,"  refers  it  in  the  first 
clause  to  the  king's  merchants,  and  in  the  second 
to  the  horses  whieh  they  bi'ought. 

From  time  immemorial  Egypt  was  celebrated  for 
its  linen  (Ez.  xxvii.  7).  It  was  the  dress  of  the 
Egyptian  priests  (Her.  ii.  37,  81),  and  was  worn 
by  them,  according  to  Plutarch  {Is.  et  Osir.  4), 
because  the  colour  of  the  flax-blossom  resembled 
that  of  the  circumambient  other  (comp.  Juv.  vi. 
533,  of  the  piiests  of  Isis).  Panopolis  or  Chemmis 
(the  modern  Akhmim)  was  anciently  inhabited  by 
linen-weavers  (Strabo,  xvii.  41,  p.  813).  According 
to  Herodotus  (ii.  86)  the  mummy-cloths  were  of 
byssus;  and  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  6,  §1)  mentions 
among  the  contributions  of  the  Israelites  for  the 
tiibernaclo,  "  byssus  of  flax  ;"  the  hangings  of  the 
tabernacle  were  "  siudon  of  byssus  "  (§2),  of  which 
material  the  tunics  of  the  priests  were  also  m.ad(; 
\Ant.  iii.  7,  §2),  the  drawers  being  o{  byssus  (§1). 


nip'D,  1  KiiiKs. 


NlpO,  2  Cliroii. 


left  untranslated  {aX\,  al\ev,  alAdfj.) ;  and  in  the 
Chaldee  version  it  is  represented  by  a  modifica- 
tion of  itself.  Throughout  the  passages  of  Ezekiel 
in  which  it  occurs  the  V'ulg.  uniformly  renders  it 
by  frons  ;  which  Gesenius  quotes  as  favourable  to 
his  own  view,  provided  that  by  frons  be  understood 
the  projections  in  front  of  the  building.  The  A.  V. 
of  1  K.  vi.  31,  "lintel,"  is  supported  by  the  ver- 
sions of'Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion  of 
Ez.  xl.  21  ;  while  Kimchi  explains  it  generally  by 
"  post."  The  Peshito-Syriac  uniformly  renders  the 
word  by  a  modification  of  the  Greek  trapaffrdSa, 
"  pillars."  Jarchi  understands  by  ayil  a  round  co- 
lumn like  a  large  tree  ;  Aquila  (Ez.  xl.  14),  having 
in  view  the  meaning  "  ram,"  which  the  word  else- 
where bears,  renders  it  Kpicofiu,  apparently  intend- 
ing thereby  to  denote  the  volutes  of  columns, 
curved  like  rams'  horns.  J.  D.  Michaehs  {Supp. 
ad  Lex.  s.  v.)  considers  it  to  be  the  tympanum  or 
triangular  area  of  the  pediment  above  a  gate, 
supported  by  columns.  Gesenius  himself,  after  re- 
viewing the  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs, 
arrives  at  the  conclusion  that  in  the  singular  it 
denotes  the  whole  projecting  framework  of  a  door 
or  gateway,  including  the  jambs  on  either  side,  the 
threshold,  and  the  lintel  or  architrave,  with  frieze 
and  cornice.  In  the  plural  it  is  applied  to  denote 
the  projections  along  the  front  of  an  edifice  orna- 
mented with  columns  or  palm-teees,  and  with  re- 
cesses or  intei-columniations  between  them  some- 
times filled  up  by  windows.  Under  the  former 
head  he  places  1  K.  vi.  31  ;  Ez.  xl.  9,  21,  24,  26, 
29,  31,  33,  34,  36-38,  48,  49,  -xh.  3;  while  to 
the  latter  he  refers  xl.  10,  14,  16,  xli.  1.  Another 
explanation  still  is  that  of  Boottcher  (quoted  by 
Winer,  i?ertte.  ii.  575),  who  says  that  oyil  is  the 
projecting  entrance-  and  passage-wall — which  might 
appropriately  be  divided  into  compartments  by  pa- 
nelling ;  and  this  view  is  adopted  by  Fiirst  {Handw. 

s.  v.): 

2.  nPlQ3,  caphtar  (Amos  ix.  1 ;  Zeph.  ii.  14). 
The  marginal  rendering,  "  chapiter  or  knop,"  of  both 
these  passages  is  undoubtedly  the  more  correct, 
and  in  all  other  cases  where  the  word  occurs  it  is 
translated  "  knop."     [Knop.] 

3.  fl'lpL'-'D,  mashkoph  (Ex.  xii.  22,  23)  ;  also  ren- 
dered "  upper  door-post"  in  Ex.  xii.  7.  That  this 
is  the  true  remiering  is  admitted  by  all  modern 
philologists,  who  connect  it  with  a  root  which  m 
Arabiclmd  the  cognate  dialects  signifies  "  to  over- 
lay with  beams."'  The  LXX.  and  Vulgate  coincide 
in  assigning  to  it  the  same  moaning.  Rabbi  Sol. 
Jarchi "  derives  it  from  a   Chaldee  root  signifying 

I  "  to  licat,"  because  the  door  in  being  shut  beats 


124 


LINUS 


against  it.  The  signification  "  to  look  "  or  "  peep," 
which  was  acquired  by  the  Hebrew  root,  induced 
Abeu  Ezra  to  translate  mashkoph  by  "  window," 
such  as  the  Arabs  have  over  the  doors  of  their 
houses  ;  and  in  assenting  to  this  rendering,  Bochart 
observes  "  that  it  was  so  called  on  account  of  the 
grates  and  railings  over  the  tops  of  the  doors, 
through  which  those  who  desire  entrance  into 
the  house  could  be  seen  before  they  were  ad- 
mitted" (Kalisch,  Exodus).  An  illustration  of 
one  of  these  windows  is  given  in  the  art.  House, 
vol.  i.  p.  837  a.  [W.  A.W.] 

LI'NTTS  (Aires),  a  Christian  at  Home,  known 

to  St.  Paul  and  to  timothy  (2  Tim.  iv.  21).  That 
the  lirst  bishop  of  Rome  after  the  apostles  was 
named  Linus  is  a  statement  in  which  all  ancient 
writers  agi-ee  {e.g.  Jerome,  De  Viris  Iliustr.  15; 
August.  Ep.  liii.  2).  The  early  and  unequivocal 
assertion  of  Irenaeus  (iii.  3,  §3),  corroborated  by 
Eusebius  (//.  E.  iii.  2)  and  Theodoret,  (m  2  Tim. 
iv.  21),  is  sufficient  to  prove  the  identity  of  the 
bishop  with  St.  Paul's  friend. 

The  date  of  his  appointment,  the  duration  of  his 
episcopate,  and  the  limits  to  which  his  episcopal 
authority  extended,  are  points  which  cannot  be 
regarded"  as  absolutely  settled,  although  they  have 
been  discussed  at  great  length.  Eusebius  and 
Theodoret,  followed  by  Baronius  and  Tillemont 
{Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  165  and  591),  state  that  he  became 
bishop  of  Rome  after  the  death  of  St.  Peter.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  words  of  Irenaeus — "  [Peter 
and  Paul]  when  they  founded  and  built  up  the 
church  [of  Rome]  committed  the  office  of  its 
episcopate  to  Linus  " — certainly  admit,  or  rather 
imply  the  meaning,  that  he  held  that  office  before 
the  death  of  St.  Peter:  as  if  the  two  great  apostles, 
having,  in  the  dischai-ge  of  their  own  peculiar  office, 
completed  the  organisation  of  the  church  at  Rome, 
left  it  under  the  government  of  Linus,  and  passed 
on  to  preach  and  teach  in  some  new  region.  This 
proceeding  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  prac- 
tice of  the  apostles  in  other  places.  And  the  earlier 
appointment  of  Linus  is  asserted  as  a  fact  by 
Ruffinus  (Praef.  in  Clem.  Recoijn.),  and  by  the 
author  of  ch.  xlvi.  bk.  vii.  of  the  Apostolic  Con- 
stitutions. It  is  accepted  as  the  true  statement  of 
the  case  by  Bishop  Pearson  {De  Serie  et  Successione 
Priorum  Pomae  Episcoporum,  ii.  5,  §1)  and  by 
Fleury  {Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  26).  Some  persons  have 
objected  that  the  undistinguished  mention  of  the 
name  of  Linus  between  the  names  of  two  other 
Roman  Christians  in  2  Tim.  iv.  21,  is  a  proof  that 
he  was  not  at  that  time  bishop  of  Rome.  But  even 
Tillemont  admits  that  such  a  way  of  introducing 
the  bishop's  name  is  in  accordance  with  the  sim- 
plicity of  that  early  age.  No  lofty  pre-eminence 
was  attributed  to  the  episcopal  office  in  the  apostolic 
times. 

The  arguments  by  which  the  exact  years  of  his 
episcopate  are  laid  down  are  too  long  and  minute 
to  be  recited  here.  Its  duration  is  given  by  Euse- 
bius (whose  //.  E.  iii.  16  and  Chronicon  give  in- 

^  Ruffnus'  statement  ought,  doubtless,  to  be  inter- 
preted in  accordance  with  tlut  of  his  contemporary  Epi- 
phanius  (Ado.  Ha.er.  xxvii.  6,  p.  107),  to  the  effect  that 
Linus  and  Clctus  were  bishops  of  Rome  in  succession,  not 
contemporaneously.  The  facts  were,  however,  differently 
viewed:  (1)  l)y  an  interpolater  of  the  Gcsta  Ponlificum 
Damasi,  quoted  by  J.  Voss  in  his  second  epistle  to  A. 
Rivet  (App.  to  I'carson's  Vindiciuc  I(pmliavai')  ;  (2)  by 
Bede  C  Vita  S.  Bcnedkli.  ^^7,  p.  14e,  ed.  Stevenson)  when 


LION 

consistent  evidence)  as  a.d.  68-80  ;  by  Tillemont, 
who  however  rejiroaches  Pearson  with  departing 
from  the  chronology  of  Eusebius,  as  66-78 ;  by 
Baronius  as  67-78 ;  and  by  Pearson  as  53-67. 
Pearson,  in  the  treatise  already  quoted  (i.  10), 
gives  weighty  reasons  for  distrusting  the  chronology 
of  Eusebius  as  regards  the  years  of  the  early  bishops 
of  Rome ;  and  he  derives  his  own  opinion  from 
certain  very  ancient  (but  inteijiolated)  lists  of  those 
bishops  (see  i.  13  and  ii.  5).  This  point  has  been 
subsequently  considered  by  Baraterius  {De  Suc- 
cessione Antiquissima  Episc.  Rom.  1740),  who  gives 
A.D.  56-67  its  the  date  of  the  episcopate  of  Linus. 

The  statement  of  Ruffinus,  that  Linus  and  Cletus 
were  bishops  in  Rome  whilst  St.  Peter  was  alive,* 
has  been  quoted  in  suppoit  of  a  theory  which 
sprang  up  in  the  17th  century,  received  the  sanc- 
tion even  of  Hammond  in  his  controversy  with 
Blondel  {Works,  ed.  1684,  iv.  825;  Episcopatus 
Jura,  v.  1,  §11),  was  held  with  some  slight  modi- 
fication by  Baraterius,  and  has  been  recently  revived. 
It  is  supposed  that  Linus  was  bishop  in  Rome  only 
of  the  Christians  of  Gentile  origin,  while  at  the  same 
time  another  bishojj  exercised  the  same  authority 
over  the  Jewish  Christians  there.  TertuUian's 
assertion  {De  Praescr.  Haeret.  §32)  that  Clement 
[the  third  bishop]  of  Rome  was  consecrated  by 
St.  Peter,  has  been  quoted  also  as  corroborating 
this  theory.  But  it  does  not  follow  from  the  words 
of  Tertullian  that  Clement's  consecration  took  place 
immediately  before  he  became  bishop  of  Rome :  and 
the  statement  of  Ruffinub,  so  far  as  it  lends  any 
support  to  the  above-named  theory,  is  shown  to  be 
without  foundation  by  Pearson  (ii.  3,  4).  Til- 
lemont's  observations  (p.  59(t)  in  reply  to  Pear- 
son only  show  that  the  establishment  of  two  con- 
temporary bishops  in  one  city  was  contemplated  in 
ancient  times  as  a  possible  pro\'isional  anangement 
to  meet  certain  temporary  difficulties.  The  actual 
limitation  of  the  authority  of  Linus  to  a  section  of 
the  church  in  Rome  remains  to  be  proved. 

Linus  is  reckoned  by  Pseudo-Hippolytus,  and  in 
the  Greek  Menaea,  among  the  seventy  disciples. 
Various  days  are  stated  by  difierent  authorities  in 
the  Western  Church,  and  by  the  Eastern  Church, 
as  the  day  of  his  death.  A  nanative  of  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  printed  in  the 
Bibltotheoa  Patrum,  and  certain  pontifical  decrees, 
are  incorrectly  ascribed  to  Linus.  He  is  said  to 
have  written  an  account  of  the  dispute  between 
St.  Peter  and  Simon  Magus.  [\V.  T.  B.] 

LION.  Rabbinical  writers  discover  in  the  0.  T. 
seven  names  of  the  lion,  which  they  assign  to  the 
animal  at  .seven  periods  of  its  life.  1.  *Vlil,  gur,  or 
"115,  gor,  a  cub  (Gen.  xlix.  9  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  22  ; 
Jer.  Ii.  38  ;  Nah.  ii.  12).  2.  T'SB,  cephir,  a  young 
lion  (Judg.  xiv.  5 ;  Job  iv.  10  ;  Ez.  xix.  2,  &c.). 
3.   ^■^^<,   aii,  or   n^N,   aryeh,  a  full-grown  lion 

(Gen.  xlix.  9  ;  Judg.  xiv.  5,  8,  &c.).  4.  "pne*, 
shakhal,  a  lion  more  advanced  in  age  and  strength 


he  was  seel^ing  a  precedent  for  two  contemporaneous 
abbots  presiding  in  one  monastery ;  and  (3)  by  I'.abanus 
Mauri's  {De  Chorepiscopis :  0pp.  cd.  Migne,  torn.  iv.  p. 
1197),  who  ingeniously  claims  primilive  authority  for  the 
institution  of  chorepiscopi  on  tlie  supposition  that  Linus 
and  Cletus  were  never  bishops  with  full  powers,  but  were 
contemporaneous  chorepiscopi  employed  by  St.  Peter  in 
liis  absence  from  Rome,  and  at  his  request,  to  ordahi 
clergymen  for  the  cluirch  at  Rouie. 


LION 

(Job  iv.  10;  Ts.  xci.  i:),  &f.).     5-  )*nC',  sAaMafo, 

a  lion  ill  full  vigour  (Job  xxviii.  8;.     6.  N''3>',  Idbl, 

or  N'37,  lebiyyd,  an  old  lion    (Gen.  slix.  9 ;   Job 

iv.  11,  &c.).     7.  ^''b,  laish,  a  lion  decrepit  with 

age  (Job  iv.  11;  Is.  xxx.  6,  &c.)  Well  might 
liochart  (Hieroz.  pi.  i.  b.  iii.  1)  say,  "Hie  gram- 
matici  videntur  mire  sibi  indulgere."  He  ditters 
from  this  arrangement  in  every  point  but  the 
second.  In  the  first  place,  gur  is  applied  to  the 
young  of  other  animals  besides  the  lion ;  for  in- 
stance, the  sea  monsters  in  Lam.  iv.  3.  Secondly, 
cep/tir  differs  from  r/ur,  as  juvencus  frpm  vitulus. 
Art  or  aryeh  is  a  generic  term,  applied  to  all  lions 
without  regard  to  age.  In  Judg.  xiv.  the  "  young 
lion  "  (cephir  ardi/oth)  of  ver.  5  is  in  ver.  8  called 
the  "  lion  "  {aryeli).  Bochart  is  palpably  wrong 
in  rendering  shakhal  "a  black  lion"  of  the  kind 
which,  according  to  Pliny  (viii.  17),  was  found  in 
Syria.  The  word  is  only  used  in  the  poetical  boolcs, 
and  most  probably  expresses  some  attribute  of  the 
lion.  It  is  connected  with  an  Arabic  root,  which 
signifies  "  to  bray  "  like  an  ass,  and  is  therefoiv 
simply  "  the  brayer."  Shakhats  does  not  denote  :i 
lion  at  all.  Labi  is  properly  a  "  lioness,"  and  is 
connected  with  the  Coptic  labai,  which  has  the 
same  signification.  Laish  (comp.  \7s,  Hom.  //. 
XV.  275j  is  another  poetic  name.  So  far  from  being 
applied  to  a  lion  weak  with  age,  it  denotes  one  in 
full  vigour  (Job  iv.  11  ;  Prov.  xxx.  30).  It  has 
been  derived  from  an  Arabic  root,  which  signifies 
"  to  be  strong,"  and,  if  this  etymology  be  true, 
the  word  would  be  an  epithet  of  the  lion,  "  the 
strong  one." 

At  present  lions  do  not  exist  in  Palestine,  though 
they  are  said  to  be  Ibund  in  the  desert  on  the 
road  to  Egypt  (Schwarz,  Desc.  of  Pal. :  see  Is. 
xxx.  6).  They  abound  on  the  banks  of  the  Eu- 
phrates between  Bussorah  and  Bagdad  (Russell, 
Aleppo,  p.  61),  and  in  the  marshes  and  jungles 
near  the  rivers  of  Babylonia  (Layard,  Nin.  i^  Bab. 
p.  566).  This  species,  according  to  Layard,  is 
without  the  dark  and  shaggy  mane  of  the  African 
lion  {id.  487),  though  he  adds  in  a  note  that  he 
had  seen  lions  on  the  river  Karoon  with  a  long 
black  mane. 

But,  though  lions  have  now  disappeared  from 
Palestine,  they  must  in  ancient  times  have  been 
numerous.     The  names  Lebaoth    (Josh.   xv.   32), 


LIOIS 


125 


Beth-Lebaotli  (.Tosh.  xix.  6),  Arieh  (2  K.  xv.  25), 
and  Laish  (Judg.  xviii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  44)  were 
probably  derived  from  the  presence  of  or  connexion 
with  lions,  and  point  to  the  fact  that  they  were  at  one 
time  common.  They  had  their  lairs  in  the  forests 
which  have  vanished  with  them  (Jer.  v.  «6,  xii. 
8  ;  Am.  iii.  4),  in  the  tangled  brushwood  (Jer. 
iv.  7,  xxv.  38  ;  Job  xxxviii.  40),  and  in  the  caves 
of  the  mountains  (Cant.  iv.  8  ;  Ez.  xix.  9  ;  Nah. 
ii.  12).  The  cane-brake  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan, 
the  "  pride "  of  the  i-iver,  was  their  favourite 
haunt  (Jer.  xlix.  19,  1.  44 ;  Zech.  xi.  3),  and 
in  this  reedy  covert  (Lam.  iii.  10)  they  were  to  be 
found  at  a  comparatively  recent  period ;  as  we 
learn  from  a  passage  of  Joluumes  Phocas,  who 
travelled  in  Palestine  towards  the  end  of  the  12th 
century  (Reland,  Pal.  i.  274).  They  abounded  in 
the  jungles  which  skirt  the  rivers  of  Mesopotamia 
(Ammian.  Marc,  xviii.  7,  §5),  and  in  the  time  ot 
Xenophon  (c/e  Venat.  xi.)  were  found  in  Nysa. 


PoSEian  Lion.     (Fn 


I  the  Zoological  Gardem-.^ 


Barbary  Lion.     (Krom  spti-inu'n  in  Zoolo-ical  Giinloni 


The  lion  of  Palestine  was  in  all  probability  the 
Asiatic  variety,  described  by  Aristotle  (//.  A. 
is.  44)  and  Pliny  (viii.  18),  as  distinguished  by  its 
short  ciu-ly  mane,  and  by  being  shorter  and  rounder 
in  shape,  like  the  sculptured  lion  found  at  Arban 
(Layard,  Nin.  cf-  Bab.  p.  278).  It  was  less  daring 
than  the  longer  maned  species,  but  when  driven  by 
hunger  it  not  only  ventured  to  attack  the  flocks  in 
the  desert  in  presence  of  the  shepherd  (Is.  xxxi.  4 ; 
1  Sam.  xvii.  34),  but  laid  w;iste  towns  and  villages 
(2  K.  xvii.  25,  26  ;  Prov.  xxh.  13,  xxvL  1-3),  and 
devoured  men  (IK.  xiii.  24,  xx.  36;  2  K.  xvii. 
25  ;  Ez.  xix.  3,  6).  The  shepherds  sometimes 
ventured  to  encounter  the  lion  single  handed 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  34),  and  the  vivid  figure  employed 
by  Amos  (iii.  12),  the  herdsman  of  Tekoa,  was  but 
tlie  transcript  of  a  scene  which  he  must  have  often 
witnessed.  At  other  times  they  pursued  the 
animal  in  large  bauds,  raising  loud  shouts  to  in- 
timidate him  (Is.  xxxi.  4),  and  drive  him  into  the 
net  or  pit  they  had  prepared  to  catch  him  (Ez. 
xix.  4,  8).  This  method  of  capturing  wild  beasts 
is  described  by  Xenophon  {dc  Ven.  xi.  4)  and  by 
Shaw,  who  says,  "  The  Arabs  dig  a  pit  where  they 
are  observed  to  enter  ;  and,  covering  it  over  lightly 
with  reeds  or  small  blanches  of  trees,  they  fre- 
(ptently  decoy  and  catch  them  "  ( Travels,  2nd  ed. 
p.  172).  Benaiah,  one  of  David's  heroic  body- 
guard, had  distinguished  himself  by  slaying  a  lion 
hi  his  den  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20).  The  kings  of  Persia 
had  a  menagerie  of  lions  (DJI,  gob,  Dan.  vi.  7,  &c.). 
When  captured  alive  they  were  put  in  a  cage 
(Ez.  xix.  9),  but  it  does  not  appear  tliat  they  were 
tamed.  In  the  hunting  scenes  at  Beni-Hassan  tame 
lions  are  represented  .is  usvd  in  hunting  (Wilkinson, 


126 


LION 


Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  17).  On  the  bas-reliefs  at  Kou- 
yunjik  a  lion  led  by  a  clmin  is  among  the  presents 
brought  by  the  conquered  to  their  victors  (Layard, 
Nin.^  Bah.  p.  138). 


Hunting  with  a  lion,  which  has  seized  an  ibex.    (From  Wilkinson's 
Egyptiam,\ol.  i.  p  221.) 

The  strength  (Judg.  .\iv.  18  ;  Prov.  xxx.  30;  2 
Sam.  i.  23),  courage  (2  Sam.  xvii.  10  ;  Prov.  xxviii. 
I ;  Is.  xxxi.  4  ;  Nah.  ii.  11),  and  ferocity  (Gen.  xlix. 
ft ;  Num.  x.\iv.  9),  of  the  lion  were  proverbial.  The 
"  lion-faced  "  warriors  of  Gad  were  among  David's 
most  valiant  troops  (1  Chr.  xii.  8);  and  the  hero 
.Judas  Maccabeus  is  described  as  "  like  a  lion,  and 
like  a  lion's  whelp  roaring  for  his  prey"  (1  Mace. 
iii.  4).  The  terrible  roar  of  the  lion  is  expressed  in 
Hebrew  by  fom-  different  words,  between  which  the 
following  distinction  appears  to  be  maintained : — 
HiiliJ',  shdag  (Judg.  xiv.  5  ;  Ps.  xxii.  13,  civ.  21  ; 
Am.  iii.  4),  also  used  of  the  thunder  (Job  xxxvii.  4), 
denotes  the  roar  of  the  lion  while  seeking  his  prey  ; 
UT}2,  naham  (Is,,  v.  29),  expresses  the  cry  which 
he  vittei's  wlien  he  seizes  his  victim ;  T\'iT],    hagali 

(Is.  xxxi.  4),  the  growl  with  which  he  defies  any 
attempt  to  snatch  the  prey  from  his  teeth ;  while 
"iy3,  nd'ar  (Jer.  li.  38),  which  in  Syriac  is  applied 

to  the  braying  of  the  ass  and  camel,  is  descripfive  of 
the  cry  of  the  young  lions.  If  this  distinction  be 
correct  the  meaning  attached  to  naham  will  give 
force  to  Prov.  xix.  12.  The  terms  which  describe 
the  movements  of  the  animal  are  equally  distinct : — 
y'Z\  rdbats  (Gen.  xlix.  9  ;  Ez.  xix.  2),  is  applied 
to  the  crouching  of  the  lion,  as  well  as  of  any  wild 
beast,  in  his  lair  ;  nHK',  shdchah,  2ti'*,  yds/tab 
(Job  xxxviii.  40),  and  3'IN,  drab  (Ps.  x.  9),  to  his 
lying  in  wait  in  his  den,  the  two  fonner  denoting  the 
position  of  the  animal,  and  the  latter  thesecrecy  of  the 
act ;  tJ'D"),  ramus  (Ps.  civ.  20),  is  used  of  the 
stealthy  creeping  of  the  lion  after  his  prey;  and 
p3T,  zinnek  (Deut.  xxxiii.  22)  of  the  leap  with 
which  he  hurls  himself  upon  it. 

The  lion  was  the  symbol  of  strength  and  sove- 
reignty, as  in  the  human-headed  figures  of  the 
Nimroud  gateway,  the  symbols  of  Nergjil,  the 
Assyrian  Mars,  and  tutelary  god  of  Babylon.  In 
Egypt  it  was  worshipped  at  the  city  of  Leontopolis, 
as  typical  of  Dom,  the  Egyptian  Hercules  (Wil- 
kinson, Anc.  Egypt,  v.  169).  Plutaixh  (de  Isid. 
§38)  says  that  the  I^gyptians  ornamented  their 
temples  with  gaping  lions'  mouths,  because  the  Nile 
began  to  rise  when  the  sun  was  in  the  constellation 


"   XJT'tDDC  i  "  stellio,  reptile  immundum." 

b  The  following  are  the  references  to  the  Greek  word 
acrKaAa(3(oTT)9  in  Aristot.  cle  Anim.  IJist.  (ed.  Schneider), 
iv.  11,^2;  viii.  17,^1;  viii.  19,  J2;  viii.  2ii,^2;  ix.  2,^5; 
ix.  10,  A2.  That  Aristotle  understands  some  species  of 
Gecko  by  the  Greek  word  is  clear ;  for  he  says  of  the 
woodpecker,  -woptviTai  cttI  tois  &iv&pf(Ti  raxe'ios  Kai 
UTTTio!,  KaOdncp  oi  acrKaAa^wTai  (ix.  10,  ^2).     He  alludos 


LIZARD 

Leo.  Among  the  Hebrews,  and  throughout  the 
O.  T.,  the  lion  was  the  achievement  of  the  princely 
tribe  of  Judah,  while  in  the  closing  book  of  the 
canon  it  received  a  deeper  significance  as  the  emblem 
of  him  who  "  prevailed  to  open  the  book  and  loose 
the  seven  seals  thereof"  (Rev.  v.  5).  On  the 
other  hand  its  fierceness  and  craelty  rendered  it  an 
appropriate  metaphor  for  a  fierce  and  malignant 
enemy  (Ps.  vii.  2,  xxii.  21,  Ivii.  4;  2  Tim.  iv.  17), 
and  hence  for  the  arch-fiend  himself  (1  Pet.  v.  8). 

The  figure  of  the  lion  was  employed  as  an  orna- 
ment both  in  architecture  and  sculpture.  On  each 
of  the  six  steps  leading  up  to  the  great  ivory 
throne  of  ."^olomon  stood  two  lions  on  either  side, 
carved  by  the  workmen  of  Hiram,  and  two  others 
were  beside  the  arms  of  the  throne  (1  K.  x.  19,20). 
The  great  brazen  laver  was  in  like  manner  adorned 
with  cherubim,  lions,  and  palm-trees  in  graven 
work  (1  K.  vii.  29,  36).  [W.  A.  W.] 

LIZ'AED  (nat^b,    letdah  :    Vat.    and    Alex. 

T  T  : 

Xa\al3ciTr]s  ;  Compl.  aaxo-^o-^ii'Tris  ;  Aid.  koKo- 
^coTTji:  stellio).  The  Hebrew  word,  which  with 
its  English  rendering  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  30, 
appears  to  be  correctly  translated  by  the  A .  V.  Some 
species  o{  lizard  is  mentioned  amongst  those  "  creep- 
ing things  that  creep  ujion  the  earth  "  which  were  to 
be  considered  unclean  by  the  Israelites. 

Lizards  of  various  kinds  abound  in  Egypt,  Pales- 
tine, and  Arabia ;  some  of  these  are  mentioned  in 
the  Bible  under  various  Hebrew  names,  notices  of 
which  will  be  found  under  other  articles.  [Fer- 
ret ;  Snail.]  All  the  old  versions  agree  in  iden- 
tifying the  letdah  with  some  saurian,  and  some 
concur  as  to  the  particular  gemis  indicated.  The 
LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  the  Targ,  of  Jonathan,"  with  the 
Arabic  versions,  understand  a  lizard  by  the  Hebrew 
word.  The  Syriac  has  a  word  which  is  generally 
translated  salamander,  but  probably  this  name  wa.s 
applied  also  to  the  lizard.  The  Greek  word,  with 
its  slight  variations,  which  the  LXX.  use  to  express 
the  letdah,  appears  from  what  may  be  gathered  fi'om 
Aristotle,''  and  perhaps  also  from  its  derivation,'^ 
to  point  to  some  lizard  belonging  to  the  Geckotidae. 


Feet  of  Gecko. 


Many  members  of  this  family  of  Saura  are  cha- 
racterised by  a  peculiar  lamellated  structure  on  the 
under  surface  of  the  toes,  by  means  of  which  they 
are  enabled  to  run  over  the  smoothest  surfaces,  and 


also  to  a  species  in  Italy,  perhaps  the  Hemidactylus  ver- 
nicalus,  whose  bite,  he  says,  is  fatal  (?). 

■^  'A<rKaA.a|3u)Ti)9,  Xijiv(j>LOV  eoiKos  aavpa  ev  tois  TOt^ots 
avepnov  twv  otKi)ju.aT(oi'.  This  seems  to  identify  it  with 
one  of  the  Geckotidae :  perhaps  the  Tarentola  was  best 
known  to  the  Greeks.  The  noiseless  (rjo-ux'"?)  ■'>"f'>  ^* 
times,  fixed  habits  of  this  lizard  are  icftriod  lo  lielow. 
(See  Gaisf.  Etyni.  Mag.) 


LIZARD 

even  in  an  invevted  position,  like  house-flies  on  a 
cieling.  Mr.  Broderip  observes  that  they  can  remain 
suspended  beneatli  the  large  leaves  of  the  tropical 
vegetation,  and  remain  for  hours  in  positions  as 
extraordinary  as  the  insects  for  which  they  vk^atch ; 
the  wonderful  apparatus  with  which  their  feet  are 
furnished  enabling  tliem  to  overcome  gravity.  Now 
fhe  Hebrew  letaah  appears  to  be  derived  from  a 
root  which,  though  not  extant  in  that  language, 
is  found  in  its  sister-tongue  the  Arabic :  this  root 
means  to  adhere  to  the  ground,'^  an  expression 
which  well  agrees  with  the  peculiar  sucker-like 
properties  of  the  feet  of  the  Geckos.  Bochart  has 
successfully  argued  that  the  lizard  denoted  by  the 
Hebrew  word  is  that  kind  which  the  Arabs  call 
vachara,  the  translation  of  which  term  is  thus  given 
by  Golius :  "  An  animal  like  a  lizard,  of  a  red  colour, 
and  adhering  to  the  ground,  cibo  potuive  venennm 
inspirat  qiiomcimque  contigerit."  This  description 
will  be  found  to  agree  with  the  character  of  the 
Ivui-Foot  Lizard  {Ptijodactijlus  Gecko),   which    is 


LOAN 


127 


The  Fan-Foot.     (^Vtyodactylus  Gecko.) 

common  in  Egypt  and  in  parts  of  Arabia,  and 
perhaps  is  also  found  in  Palestine.  It  is  reddish 
brown,  spotted  with  white. ^  Hasselquist  thus 
speaks  of  it :  "  The  poison  of  this  animal  is  very 
singular,  as  it  exhales  from  the  lohuli  of  the  toes. 
At  Cairo  I  had  an  opportunity  of  observing  how 
acrid  the  exhalations  of  the  toes  of  this  animal  are. 
As  it  ran  over  the  hand  of  a  man  who  was  endea- 
vouring to  catch  it,  there  immediately  rose  little 
red  pusttiles  over  all  those  parts  which  the  animal 
had  touched"  (  Voyages,  p.  220).  Forskal  {Descr. 
Aniin.  13)  says  that  the  Egyptians  call  this  lizard 
Abu  burs,  "  father  of  leprosy,"  in  allusion  to  the 
leprous  sores  which  contact  with  it  produces  ;  and 
to  this  day  the  same  term  is  used  by  the  Arabs 
to  denote  a  lizard,  probably  of  this  same  species.' 
The  Geckos  live  on  insects  and  worms,  which  tliey 
swallow  whole.  They  derive  their  name  from  the 
peculiar  sound  which  some  of  the  species  utter. 
This  sound  has  been  described  as  being  similar  to 
the  double  click  often  used  in  riding;  they  make  it 
by  some  movement  of  the  tongue  against  the  palate. 
The  Gechotidae  arc  nocturnal  in  their  habits,  and 
fi-equent  houses,  cracks  in  rocks,  &c.  They  move 
vcjy  rapidly,  and  without  making  the  .slightest 
sound  ;  hence  probably  the  derivation  of  the  Greek 

d  See  Gesen.  (TVies.  s.  v.).  A  similar  root  has  the  force 
of  "hiding;"  in  which  case  the  word  will  refer  to  the 
Gecko's  habit  of  frequenting  holes  in  walls,  &c. 

"  The  Gr.  ao-xaAa^uirr;;,  and  perhaps  Lat.  stellio. 
Indicate  the  genus,  the  red  colour  the  species. 

(jOJ  w»    «_(!•  "''"  burays.  Lizard.  (Catafago,  Arab. 
Diet.) 


word  for  this  lizard.  They  are  found  in  all  parts 
of  the  world ;  in  the  greatest  abundance  in  warm 
climates.  It  is  no  doubt  owing  to  their  repulsive 
appearance  that  they  have  the  character  of  being 
highly  venomous,  just  as  the  unscientific  in  England 
attach  similar  properties  to  toads,  newts,  blind 
worms,  &c.  &c.,  although  these  creatures  are  per- 
fectly harmless.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted tliat  there  may  be  species  of  lizards  which 
do  secrete  a  venomous  fluid,  the  effects  of  which  are 
no  doubt  aggravated  by  the  heat  of  the  climate,  the 
unhealthy  condition  of  the  subject,  or  other  causes. 
The  Geckos  belong  to  the  sub-order  Pachyglossae, 
order  Saura.  They  are  oviparous,  producing  a  round 
egg,  with  a  hard  calcareous  shell.  [W.  H.] 

LO-AM'MI  CJiiy  N?  :    oii  \a6s  fA.ov  :  non  po- 

pnlus  mens),  i.  e.  "  not  my  people,"  the  figurative 
name  given  by  the  prophet  Hosea  to  his  second  son 
by  Gomer,  the  daughter  of  Diblaim  (Hos.  i.  9),  to 
denote  the  rejection  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  by 
Jeliovah.    Its  significance  is  explained  in  ver.  9,  10. 

LOAN.  The  law  of  Moses  did  not  contemplate 
any  raising  of  loans  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining 
capital,  a  condition  perhaps  alluded  to  in  the  pa- 
rables of  the  "pearl"  and  "hidden  treasure" 
(Matt.  xiii.  44,  45  ;  MichaeHs,  Comm.  on  Laws 
of  Moses,  art.  147,  ii.  297,  ed.  Smith).  [Com- 
merce.] Such  persons  as  bankers  and  sureties,  in 
the  commercial  sense  (Prov.  xxii.  26 ;  Neh.  v.  3), 
were  unknown  to  the  earlier  ages  of  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth.  The  Law  strictly  forbade  any  in- 
terest to  be  taken  for  a  loan  to  any  poor  person, 
either  in  the  shape  of  money  or  of  produce,  and  at 
first,  as  it  seems,  even  in  the  case  of  a  foreigner ; 
but  this  prohibition  was  afterwards  limited  to 
Hebrews  only,  from  whom,  of  whatever  rank,  not 
only  was  no  usury  on  any  pretence  to  be  exacted, 
but  relief  to  the  poor  by  way  of  loan  was  enjoined, 
and  excuses  for  evading  this  duty  were  forbidden 
(Ex.  xxii.  25 ;  Lev.  xxv.  35,  37  ;  Deut.  xv.  3,  7-10, 
xxiii.  19,  20).  The  instances  of  extortionate  con- 
duct mentioned  with  disapprobation  in  the  book  of 
Job  probably  represent  a  state  of  things  previous  to 
the  Law,  and  such  as  the  Law  was  intended  to  remedy 
(Job  xxii.  6,  xxiv.  3,  7).  As  commerce  increased,  the 
practice  of  usury,  and  so  also  of  suretiship,  grew  up ; 
but  the  exaction  of  it  from  a  Hebrew  appears  to  have 
been  regarded  to  a  late  period  as  discreditable  (Prov. 
vi.  1,4,  xi.  15,  xvii.  18,  xx.  16,  xxii.  26  ;  Ps.  xv.  5, 
xxvii.  13  ;  Jer.  xv.  10  ;  Ez.  xviii.  13,  x.\ii.  12).  Sys- 
tematic breach  of  the  law  in  this  respect  was  coiTCcted 
by  Nehemiah  after  the  return  fi-om  captivity  (see  No. 
6)  (Neh.  V.  1,  13;  Michaelis,  ib.,  arts.  148,  151). 
In  later  times  the  practice  of  boiTOwing  money  appears 
to  have  prevailed  without  limitation  of  race,  and  to 
have  been  carried  on  on  systematic  principles,  tliough 
tlie  original  spirit  of  the  Law  was  approved  by  our 
Lord  (Matt.  v.  42,  xxv.  27  ;  Luke  vi.  35,  xix.  23). 
The  money-changers  {Kipixariarai,  and  koWv- 
Piffrai),  who  had  seats  and  tables  in  the  Temple, 
were  traders  whose  proHts  arose  chi(?fly  from  the 
excjiange  of  money  with  tliose  who  came  to  pay 
their  annual  half-shekel  (Pollux,  iii.  84,  vii.  170; 
Schleusner,  Lex.  N.  T.  s.  v. ;  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Ilebr. ; 
.Matt.  xxi.  12).  The  documents  relating  to  loans  of 
money  appear  to  have  been  deposited  in  public  offices 
in  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B. ./.  ii.  17,  §6). 

In  making  loans  no  proliibition  is  pronounced  in 
the  Law  against  taking  a  pledge  of  the  borrower, 
but  certain  limitations  are  prescribed  in  favour  of 
the  poor. 


128 


LOAVES 


1.  T?ie  outer  garment,  which  formed  the  poor 
man's  principal  covering  by  nii;ht  as  well  as  by  day, 
if  taken  in  pledge,  was  to  be  returned  before  sunset. 
A  bedstead,  however,  might  be  taken  (Ex.  xxii.  26, 
27  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  12,  13 :  comp.  Job  xxii.  6  ;  Prov. 
xxii.  27  ;  Shaw,  Trav.  224  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on 
Bed.  i.47, 231 ;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  del'Ar.  56;  Lane, 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  57,  58  ;  Ges.  Thes.  403  ;  Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  arts.  143  and  150). 

2.  The  proliibition  was  absolute  in  the  case  of 
(a)  the  widow's  garment  (Deut.  xxiv.  17),  and 
(6)  a  millstone  of  either  kind  (Deut.  xxiv.  6). 
Michaehs  (xci.  150,  ii.  321)  supposes  also  all  indis- 
pensable animals  and  utensils  of  agriculture ;  see  also 
Mishna,  Maaser  Sheni,  i. 

3.  A  creditor  was  forbidden  to  enter  a  house  to 
reclaim  a  pledge,  but  was  to  stand  outside  till  the 
borrower  should  come  forth  to  return  it  (Deut. 
xxiv.  10,  11). 

4.  The  original  Roman  law  of  debt  permitted  the 
debtor  to  be  enslaved  by  his  creditor  until  the  debt 
was  discharged  ;  and  he  might  even  be  put  to  death 
by  him,  though  this  extremity  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  ever  practised  (Gell.  xx.  1,  45,  52  ;  Diet, 
of  Antiq.  "  Bonorum  Cessio,"  "Nexum").  The 
Jewish  law,  as  it  did  not  forbid  temporary  bondage 
in  the  case  of  debtors,  so  it  forbade  a  Hebiew  debtor 
to  be  detained  as  a  bondsman  longer  than  the  7th 
year,  or  at  farthest  the  year  of  Jubilee  (Ex.  xxi.  2  ; 
Lev..  XXV.  39,  42  ;  Deut.  xv.  9).  If  a  Hebrew  was 
sold  in  this  way  to  a  foreign  sojourner,  he  might 
be  redeemed  at  a  valuation  at  any  time  previous  to 
the  Jubilee  year,  and  in  that  year  was,  under  any 
circumstances,  to  be  released.  Foreign  sojourners, 
however,  were  not  entitled  to  release  at  that  time 
(Lev.  XXV.  44,  46,  47,  54 ;  2  K.  iv.  2  ;  Is.  1.  1, 
lii.  3).  Land  sold  on  account  of  debt  was  redeem- 
able either  by  the  seller  himself,  or  by  a  Idnsman  in 

.  case  of  his  inability  to  repurchase.  Houses  in  walled 
towns,  except  such  as  belonged  to  Levites,  if  not 
redeemed  within  one  year  after  sale,  were  alienated 
for  ever.  Jlichaelis  doubts  whether  all  debt  was 
extinguished  by  the  Jubilee  ;  but  Josephus'  account 
is  very  precise  {Ant.  iii.  12,  §3  ;  Lev.  xxv.  23,  34  ; 
Kuth  iv.  4,  10;  Michaelis,  §158,  ii.  360).  In 
later  times  the  sabbatical  or  jubilee  release  was 
superseded  by  a  law,  probably  introduced  by  the 
Romans,  by  which  the  debtor  was  liable  to  be  de- 
tained in  prison  until  the  full  discharge  of  his  debt 
(Matt.  V.  26).  Michaelis  thinks  this  doubtful. 
The  case  imagined  in  the  pai'able  of  the  Unmerciful 
Sen'ant  belongs  rather  to  desjiotic  Oriental  than 
Jewish  manners  (Matt,  xviii.  34;  ]\Iichaelis,  ibid, 
art.  149  ;  Trench,  Parables,  p.  141).  Subsequent 
Jewish  opinions  on  loans  and  usury  may  be  seen  in 
the  Mishna,  Baba  Metziah,  c.  iii.x.     [Jubilee.] 

[H.  W.  P.] 

LOAVES.     [Bread.] 

LOCK.*  Where  European  locks  have  not  been 
introduced,  the  locks  of  Eastern  houses  are  usually 


"p-iyj 


sera;  Ges.  Thes.  892. 


b  Froni  tbe  Latin  locusta,  derived  by  the  old  etymolo- 
gists from  locus  and  ustus,  "  quod  tactu  niulta  urit,  morsu 
vero  omnia  erodat.'' 

•=  From  op06v  and  vrspov :  an  order  of  insects  charac- 
terized by  their  anterior  wings  being  semi-coriaceous 
and  overlapping  at  the  tips.  The  posterii>r  wings  are 
large  and  membranous,  and  lungitudinally  folded  when 
at  rest. 

d  In  the  year  1748  locusts  (the  Oedipoda  migratoria, 
doubtless)    invaded    Europe    in     immense    multitudis. 


LOCUST 

of  wood,  and  consist  of  a  partly  hollow  bolt  from 
14  inches  to  2  feet  long  for  external  doors  or  gates, 
or  ti'om  7  to  9  inches  for  interior  doors.  The  bolt 
passes  through  a  groove  in  a  piece  attached  to  the 
door  into  a  socket  in  the  door-post.  In  the  groove- 
piece  are  from  4  to  9  small  iron  or  wooden  sliding- 
pins  or  wires,  which  drop  into  corresponding  holes 
in  the  bolt,  and  fix  it  in  its  place.  The  key  is  a 
piece  of  wood  furnished  with  a  like  number  of  pins, 
which,  when  the  key  is  introduced  sideways,  raise 
the  sliding-pins  in  the  lock,  and  allow  the  bolt  to 
be  drawn  back.  Ancient  Egyptian  doors  were  fas- 
tened with  central  bolts,  and  sometimes  with  bars 
passing  from  one  door-post  to  the  other.  They  were 
also  sometimes  sealed  with  clay.  [Clay.]  Keys 
were  made  of  bronze  or  iron,  of  a  simple  construc- 
tion. The  gates  of  Jerusalem  set  up  under  Nehe- 
miah's  dii'ection  had  both  bolts  and  locks.  (Judg. 
iii.  23,  25 ;  Cant.  v.  5 ;  Neh.  iii.  3,  &c. ;  Rau- 
wollif,  Trav.  in  Ray,  ii.  17  ;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  22  ; 
Volney,  Travels,  ii.  438 ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  42  ; 
Chardin,  Voy.  iv.  123 ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg., 
abridgm.  i.  15,  16).  [H.  W.  P.] 

LOCUST,''  a  well-known  insect,  which  commits 
terrible  devastation  to  vegetation  in  the  countries 
which  it  visits.  In  the  Bible  there  are  frequent 
allusions  to  locusts  ;  and  there  are  nine  or  ten 
Hebrew  words  which  are  supposed  to  denote  dif- 
ferent varieties  or  species  of  this  destructive  fiimily. 
They  belong  to  that  order  of  insects  known  by  the 
term  Orthoptera."  This  order  is  divided  into  two 
large  groups  or  divisions,  viz.  Cursorta  and  Sal- 
tatoria.  The  first,  as  the  name  imports,  includes 
only  those  families  of  Orthoptera  which  have  legs 
formed  for  creeping,  and  which  were  considei-ed 
unclean  by  the  .Jewish  law.  Under  the  second  are 
comprised  those  whose  two  posterior  legs,  by  their 
peculiar'  sti'ucture,  enable  them  to  move  on  the 
groiuid  by  leaps.  This  group  contains,  according  to 
Serviile's  aiTangement,  three  families,  the  Gryllides, 
Locustariae,  and  the  Acridites,  distinguished  one 
from  the  other  by  some  peculiar'  modifications  of 
structure.  The  common  house-cricket  (Gri/llns  do- 
mcsticus,  Oliv.)  may  be  taken  as  an  illustration  of 
the  Gryllides  ;  the  green  giasshopper  [Locusta  viri- 
dissima,  Fabr.),  which  the  French  call  Sauterelle 
verte,  will  represent  the  family  Locustariae ; 
and  the  Acridites  may  be  typified  by  the  common 
migratory  locust  (  Oedipoda  migratoria,  Aud.  Serv."), 


Oedipoda  migratoriu. 

which  is  an  occasional  visitor  to  this  country  *     Of 
the  Gryllides,  G.  cerisyi  has  been  found  in  Egypt, 


Charles  XII.  and  his  ai-my,  then  in  Bessarabia,  were 
stopped  in  their  course.  It  is  said  that  the  swarms  were 
four  hours  passing  over  Breslau.  Nor  did  Kngland  escape, 
for  a  swarm  fell  near  Bristol,  and  ravaged  the  country  in 
the  month  of  July  of  the  same  year.  They  did  great 
damage  in  Shropshire  and  Staffordshire,  by  eating  the 
blosstjms  of  the  apple-trees,  and  especially  the  leaves  of 
oaks,  which  looked  as  bare  as  at  Christmas.  The  rooks 
did  a  good  service  in  this  case  at  least.  See  Gentleman's 
Magazine,  July  1748,  pp.  331  and  414 ;  also  The  Times. 
Oct.  4,  1845. 


LOCUST 

and  G .  domesticns,  on  the  authority  of  Dr.  Kitto, 
ill  Palestine ;  but  doubtless  other  species  also 
occur  in  these  countries.  Of  the  Locastariae, 
Fhaneroptera  falcata,  Serv.  {G.  falc.  Scopoli),  has 
also,  according  to  Kitto,  been  found  in  I'alestine, 
Bradijponis  dasypus  in  Asia  Minor,  Turkey,  &c., 
Saga  Natoliae  near  Smyrna.  Of  the  locusts  proper, 
or  Acriditcs,  four  species  of  the  genus  Truxalis  are 
recorded  as  having  been  seen  in  Egypt,  Syria,  or 
Arabia:  viz.  T.^nasuta,  T.  variabilis,  T.  procera, 
and  T.  miniata.  The  following  kinds  also  occur  :^ 
Opsomala  piscifonnis,  in  Egypt  and  the  oasis  of 
Harrat ;  Foekiloceros  hieroglyphicus,  P.  bufonius,^ 
P.  punoticentris,  P.  vulcanus,  in  the  deserts  of 
Cairo  ;  Dericorys  albidula  in  Egypt  and  Mount  Le- 
banon. Of  the  genus  Acridium,  A.  maestain,  the 
most  formitlable  perhaps  of  all  the  Acridites, 
A.  lineola  (  =  G.  Aegypt.  Lina.),  which  is  a  species 
commonly  sold  for  food  in  the  markets  of  Bagdad 


^r 


LOCUST 


129 


(Serv.  Orthop.  657),  A.  semifasciatum,  A.  piere- 
grinum,  one  of  the  most  destructive  of  the  species, 
and  A.  morbosuin,  occur  either  in  Egypt  or  Arabia. 
Calliptainv.s  serapis  and  Clirotogonus  higubris  are 
found  in  Egypt,  and  in  the  cultivated  lands  about 
Cairo ;  Ereinobia  carinata,  in  the  rocky  places 
about  Sinai.  E.  cisti,  E.  pulchripennis,  Ocdipoda 
ocfofasciata,  and  Oe.  migratoria  {  —  G.  migrat. 
Linn.),  complete  the  list  of  the  Saltatorial  Orthop- 
tera  of  the  Bible-lands.  From  the  above  catalogue 
it  will  be  seen  how  perfectly  unavailing,  for  the 
most  part,  must  be  any  attempt  to  identify  the 
Hebrew  names  with  ascertained  species,  especially 
when  it  is  remembered  that  some  of  these  names 
occur  but  seldom,  others  (Lev.  xi.  21)  only  once  in 
the  Bible^that  the  only  clue  is  in  many  instances 
the  mere  etymology  of  the  Hebrew  word — that 
such  etymology  has  of  necessity,  from  the  fact  of 
there  being  but  a  single  word,  a  very  wide  meaning 
— and  that  the  etymology  is  frequently  very  un- 
it It  !s  well  known  that  all  insects,  properly  so  called, 
have  six  feet.  Hut  the  Jews  considered  the  two  anterior 
pair  only  as  true  logs  Ui  the  locust  family,  regarding  them 
as  additional  inslrunients  for  leaping. 

'  1''^?'?'?  '^y'?'?  °'V^?  i'?  '^!^:  ■'■'"'  rendering 
of  the  A.  v.,  "  which  liave  legs  above  their  feet,"  is  cer- 
tainly awkward.  D"'y~lD>  which  occurs  only  in  the  dual 
number,  properly  denotes  "  that  part  of  the  leg  between 
the  knee  and  ankle  "  which  is  bent  in  bowing  down,  i.  e. 
the  tibiae.  'I'he  pi>ssage  may  be  thus  translated,  "  which 
have  iheir  tibixie  .so  placed  above  their  feet  [tarsi]  as  to 
VOL.  II. 


certain.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  do  not  contribute 
mucli  help,  for  the  words  used  there  are  themselves 
of  a  very  uncertain  signification,  and  moreover  em- 
ployed in  a  most  piomiscuous  manner.  Still, 
though  the  possibility  of  identifying  with  certainty 
any  one  of  the  Hebrew  names  is  a  hopeless  task, 
yet  in  one  or  two  instances  a  fair  appro,\imation  to 
identification  may  be  arrived  at. 

From  Lev.  .\i.  21,  22,  we  learn  the  Hebrew 
names  of  four  different  kinds  of  Saltatorial  Ortho- 
ptera.  "  These  may  ye  eat  of  every  flying  creeping 
thing  that  goeth  upon  all  four,'^  which  have  legs 
above  their  feet<^  to  leap  withal  upon  the  earth; 
even  those  of  them  ye  may  eat,  the  arbek  after  his 
kind,  and  the  sdldin  after  his  kind,  and  the  chargul 
(wrongly  translated  beetle  by  the  A.  V.,  an  insect 
which  would  be  included  amongst  the  flying  creep- 
ing things  forbidden  as  food  in  vers.  23  and  42) 
after  his  kind,  and  the  chdgdb  after  his  kind." 
Besides  the  names  mentioned  in  this  passage,  there 
occur  five  others  in  the  Bible,  all  of  which  Bochart 
(iii.  251,  &c.)  considers  to  represent  so  many 
distinct  species  of  locusts,  viz.  gob,  gazdm,  chasil, 
yelek,  and  tseldtsdl. 

(1.)    Arbeh    (n3"li<  :     aKpis,    ^povxos,    arri- 

X^^os,  a.TTe\al3os  ;  in  Joel  ii.  25,  epvffifir]  : 
locusta,  bruchus :  "locust,''  "grasshopper")  is 
the  most  common  name  for  locust,  tlie  word 
occurring  about  twenty  times  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  viz.,  in  Ex.  x.  4,  12,  1.3,  14,  19;  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12  ;  Lev.  xi.  22  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  38  ;  1  K. 
viii.  37  ;  2  Chr.  vi.  28  ;  Job  xxxix.  20  ;  Ps,  cv.  34, 
cix.  23,  lx.\viii.  46  ;  Prov.  xxx.  27  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  23  ; 
Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25 ;  Nah.  iii.  15,  17.  The  LXX.  ge- 
nerally render  arbeh  by  aKpis,  the  general  Greek 
name  for  locust :  in  two  passages,  however,  viz., 
Lev.  xi.  22,  and  1  K.  viii.  37,  they  use  ^povxos 
as  the  representative  of  the  original  word.  In  Nah. 
iii.  17,  arbeh  is  rendered  by  OTTeAeySos  ;  while  the 
Aldine  version,  in  Joel  ii.  25,  has  ipiKri^t),  mildcio. 
Tlie  Vulg.  has  locusta  in  every  instance  except  in 
Lev.  xi.  22,  where  it  has  bruchus.  The  A.  V.  in 
the  four  following  passages  has  grasshopper,  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12  ;  Job  xxxix.  20;  and  Jer.  xivi.  23: 
in  all  the  other  places  it  has  locust.  The  word 
arbeh,^  which  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
be  numerous,"  is  probably  sometimes  used  in  a 
wide  sense  to  express  any  of  the  larger  devastating 
species.  It  is  the  locust  of  the  Egyptian  plague. 
In  almost  every  passage  where  arbeh  occurs  le- 
fei-ence  is  made  to  its  terribly  destructive  powers.* 
It  is  one  of  the  flying  creeping  creatures  that  were 
allowed  as  food  by  the  law  of  Moses  (Lev.  xi.  21). 
In  this  passage  it  is  clearly  the  repi'esentativc  of 
some  species  of  winged  saltatorial  orthoptera,  which 
must  have  jwsscssed  indications  of  form  suillcient  to 
distinguish  the  insect  from  the  three  other  names 
which  belong  to  the  same  division  of  orthoptera,  and 
are  mentioned  in  the  same  context.     The  ojiinion 


enable  them  to  leap  upon  the  earth."  Dr.  Harris,  adopt- 
ing the  explanation  of  the  author  of  Scripture  Illustrated, 
understands  D>y"l3  to  moan  "joints,"  and  D'^PJI  " ''"'"l 
legs ;"  which  rendering  Niebuhr  (Quaest.  xx-n  )  gives. 
But  there  is  no  reason  for  a  departure  from  the  literal 
and  general  significations  of  the  Hebrew  temis. 

f  riBIN.  locust,  so  called  from  its  multitude,  nil"l. 
See  Geseii.  Thes.  s.  v.,  who  adopts  the  explanation  of 
Michaclis  that  the  four  names  in  Lev.  xi.  22  are  not 
the  representatives  of  four  ili.stinct  ■icnora  or  epccics,  but 
demote  (he  different  stages  of  growth. 

K 


130 


LOCUST 


of  Michaelis  {Snppl.  667,  910),  that  the  four 
words  mentionpd  in  Lev.  xi.  22  denote  the  same 
insect  in  four  different  ages  or  stages  of  its  growtii, 
is  quite  untenable,  for,  whatever  particular  species 
are  inteudeil  by  these  words,  it  is  quite  clear  from 
ver.  21  that  they  must  all  be  iringed  orthoptera. 
From  the  fact  that  almost  iu  e\"ery  instance  where 
the  word  arheh  occurs,  reference  is  made  either  to 
the  devouring  and  devastating  nature  of  this  insect, 
or  else  to  its  multiplying  powers  (Judg.  vi.  5,  vii.  12, 
wrongly  translated  "grasshopper"  by  the  A.  V., 
Nah.  iii.  15,  Jer.  xlvi.  23),  it  is  probable  that  either 
the  Acridium  peregriimin,s  or  the  Oedipodu  migra- 
toria  is  the  insect  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  word 
arheh,  for  these  two  species  are  the  most  destructive 
of  the  family.     Of  the  foimer  species  ]\I.  01i\ier 


(  Voyage  dans  V Empire  Othoman,  ii.  424)  thus 
'  writes :  "  With  the  burning  south  winds  (of 
Syria)  there  come  from  the  interior  of  Arabia  and 
from  the  most  southern  parts  of  Persia  clouds  of 
locusts  (Acridium  peregrinum),  whose  ravages  to 
these  countries  are  as  giievoiis  and  nearly  as  sudden 
as  those  of  the  heaviest  hail  in  Europe.  We  wit- 
nessed them  twice.  It  is  difficult  to  express  the 
effect  produced  on  us  by  the  sight  of  the  whole 
atmosphere  filled  on  all  sides  and  to  a  great  height 
by  an  innumerable  quantity  of  these  insects,  whose 
flight  was  slow  and  unifonii,  and  whose  noise  re- 
sembled that  of  rain :  the  sky  was  darkened,  and 
the  light  of  the  sun  considerably  weakened.  In  a 
moment  the  terraces  of  the  houses,  the  streets,  and 
all  the  fields  were  covered  by  these  insects,  and  in 
two  days  they  had  nearly  devoured  all  the  leaves 
of  the  plants.  Happily  they  lived  but  a  short  time, 
and  seemed  to  have  migrated  only  to  reproduce 
themselves  and  die;  in  fact,  nearly  all  those  we 
saw  the  next  day  had  paired,  and  the  day  follow- 
ing the  fields  were  covered  with  their  dead  bodies." 
This  species  is  found  in  Arabia,  Egypt,  Meso- 
potamia, and  Persia.  Or  perhaps  arbeh  may  de- 
note the  Oedipoda  migratoria,  the  Sauterelle  de 
passage,  concerning  which  Michaelis  inquired  of 
.Carsten  Niebuhr,  and  received  the  following  reply  : 
"  Sauterelle  de  passage  est  la  meme  que  les  Arabes 
mangent  et  la  meme  qn'on  a  vii  en  Allemague  " 
{liecneil,  quest.  32  in  Niehuhr's  Desc.  de  l' Arabic). 
This  species  appears  to  be  as  destructive  as  the 
Acridium  peregriniun. 

(2.)  C'hdjdb  (23n  :  aKpis  :  locnsta  :  "  grass- 
hopper," "locust"),  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  22,  Num. 
xiii.  33,  2  Chr.  vii.  13,  Eccl  xii.  5,  Is.  xl.  22  ;  iu  all 
of  which  passages  it  is  rendered  d.Kpis  by  the  LXX., 
and  locusta  by  the  Vulg.      In  2  Chr.  vii.  13  the 

g  The  Gryllus  gregarius  of  Forskal  (Desc.  Avim.  81)  Is 
perhaps  identical  with  the  Acrid  pereg.     Forskal  says, 
"  Ar.ibes  ubique  vocant  Djerad  (J^L-nje.)  et  Judael  ?n 
Yemen  habitantcs  ilium  esse  ^3^N  asseverabant." 
S  ^ 

*"  *^'^-    ^->~tV~^   Qiad^Xj),   qui  velum   ohtendit,   from 


intercrffit,  seclusit. 


LOCUST 

A.  V.  reads  "  locust,"  in  the  other  passages 
"  grasshopper."  From  the  use  of  the  word  in 
Chron.,  "  If  I  command  the  locusts  to  devoiu-  the 
land,"  compared  with  Lev.  xi.  22,  it  would  appear 
that  some  species  of  devastating  locust  is  intended. 
In  the  passage  of  Numbers,  "  There  we  saw  the 
giants  the  sons  of  Anak  ....  and  we  were  in  our 
own  sight  as  grasshoppers  "  {chdgdb),  as  well  as  in 
Ecclesiastes  and  Isaiah,  reference  seems  to  be  made 
to  some  small  species  of  locust ;  and  with  this  view 
Oedman  (Venn.  Samm.  ii.  90)  agrees.  Tychsen 
[Comment,  de  Locust,  p.  76)  supposes  that  chdgdb 
denotes  the  Gryllus  coronatus,  Linn. ;  but  this  is 
the  Acanthodis  coron.  of  Aud.  Serv.,  a  S.  American 
species,  and  probably  confined  to  that  continent. 
Michael  is  (Si(pp.  G6S\  who  derives  the  word  from 
an  Arabic  root  signifying  "to  veil,"''  conceives  that 
chdgdb  represents  either  a  locust  at  the  fourth 
stage  of  its  growth,  "  ante  quartas  exuvias  quod 
adhuc  velata  est,"  or  else  at  the  last  stage  of  its 
growth,  "  post  quartas  exuvias,  quod  jam  volans 
solem  ccebmique  obrelat."  To  the  first  theory  the 
passage  in  Lev.  xi.  is  opposed.  The  second  theory 
is  more  reasonable,  but  chdgdb  is  probably  derived 
not  from  the  Arabic  but  the  Hebrew.  From  what 
has  been  stated  above  it  will  appear  better  to  own 
our  complete  inability  to  say  vi'hat  species  of  locust 
chdgdb  denotes,  than  to  hazard  conjectures  which 
must  be  grounded  on  no  solid  foundation.  In  the 
Talmud '  chdgdb  is  a  collective  name  for  many  of 
the  locust  tribe,  no  less  than  eight  hundred  kinds 
of  chagdbim  being  supposed  by  the  Talmud  to  exist ! 
(Lewysohn,  Zoolog.  des  Tain.  §384).  Some  kinds 
of  locusts  are  beautifully  marked,  and  were  sought 
after  by  young  Jewish  children  as  playthings,  just 
as  butterflies  and  cockchafers  are  now-a-days.  M. 
L-ewysohn  says  (§384)  that  a  regular  tiafhc  used  to 
be  carried  on  with  the  chagdbim,  which  were  caught 
in  great  numbers,  and  sold  after  wine  had  been 
sprinkled  over  them  ;  he  adds  that  the  Israelites 
wei'e  only  allowed  to  buy  them  before  the  dealer 
had  thus  prepared  them.'' 

(3.)  Chargol  [Pl'Sr\ :  txpiofiaxv^'  ophiomacAus  : 
"  beetle ").  The  A.  V.  is  clearly  in  error  in 
translating  this  word  "  beetle  ;"  it  occurs  only  in 
Lev.  xi.  22,  but  it  is  clear  from  the  context  that  it 
denotes  some  species  of  winged  Saltatorial  orthopte- 
roHS  insect  which  the  Israelites  were  allowed  to  use 
as  food.  The  Greek  word  used  by  the  LXX.  is  one 
of  most  uncertain  meaning,  and  the  story  about  any 
kind  of  locust  attacking  a  serpent  is  an  absurdity 
which  requiies  no  Cuvier  to  refute  it.™  As  to  this 
word  see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  iii.  264  ;  Rosenm.  notes  ; 
the  Lexicons  of  Suidas,  Hesychius,  &c.,  Pliny  xi.  29  ; 
Adnotat.  ad  Arist.  H.  A.  tom.  iv.  47,  ed.  Schneider. 
Some  attempts  have  been  made  to  iilentify  the 
chdrgdl,  "  merse  conjectura' ! "  as  IJosenmiiller 
truly  remarks.  The  I.'ev.  J.  F.  Denham,  in  Ci/clop. 
Bib.  Lit.  (arts.  Chargol  and  Locust),  endeavours  to 
shew  that  the  (5reek  word  ophiom  ichus  denotes 
some  species  of  Truxalis,  perhaps  T. Nasutus.    "The 

'  Fiirst  derives  3Jn  •'"Lin  v.  hius.  33n>  *<^  jungere, 
coirenradice.gab.  3J,  to  which  root  he  refers  n3^X>  313 
andt^ijl- 

k  The  Talmudlsts  have  the  following  law :  "  He  that 
voweth  to  abstain  from  flesh  (^t^'^H  |D)  is  forbidden 
the  flesh  offish  and  of  locusts"  (Dt^Jni  Wll  "IK^D- 
f/ieros.  Nedar.  fol.  40,  2. 

■"  See  Pliny.    Paris,  1828,  ed.Grandsagne,  p.  451,  note. 


LOCUST 

word  instantly  suggests  a  ret'eieuce  to  the  ichneu- 
mon, the  celebrated  destroyer  of  serpents  ...  if 
then  any  species  of  locust  can  be  adduced  whose 
habits  resemble  those  of  the  ichneumon,  may  not 
this  resemblance  account  for  the  name,  quaai  the 
ichneumon  (locust),  just  as  the  whole  genus  (?) 
(timiily)  of  insects  called  fchneumonidae  were  so 
denominated  because  of  the  supposed  analogy  be- 
tween their  services  and  those  of  the  Egyptian 
ichneumon  ?  and  might  not  this  name  given  to 
that  species  (?)  of  locust  at  a  very  early  period  have 
afterwards  oiiginated  the  erroneous  notion  referred 
to  by  Aristotle  and  Pliny?"  But  is  it  a  fact  that 
the  genus  Trujxdis  is  an  exception  to  the  rest  of  the 
Acridites,  and  is  pre-eminently  insectivorous.  Ser- 
ville  {Orthopt.  579)  believes  that  in  their  manner 
of  living  the  Truxalides  resemble  the  i-est  of  the 
Acridites,  but  seems  to  allow  that  further  investiga- 
tion is  necessary.  Fischer  {Ortiwp.  Europ.  p.  292) 
says  that  the  nutriment  of  this  family  is  plants  of 
various  kinds.  Mr.  F.  Smith,  in  a  letter  to  the 
writer  of  this  article,  says  he  has  no  doubt  that  the 
Traxalides  feed  on  plants.  What  is  Mr.  Denham's 
authority  for  asserting  that  they  are  insectivorous  ? 
It  is  granted  that  there  is  a  quasi  resemblance  iu 
external  form  between  the  Truxalides  and  some  of 
the  larger  Ichneumonidae,  but  the  likeness  is  far 
from  striking.  Four  species  of  the  genus  Truxulis 
are  inhabitants  of  the  ISible  lands  (see  above). 


« 
LOCUST 


131 


Truxalis  Na^uta. 

The  Jews,  however,  interpret  chdrgol  to  mean  a 
species  oi' grasshopper,  German,  heusclireche,  which 
M.  Lewysohn  identities  with  Locusta  viridissima, 
adopting  the  etymology  of  Bochart  and  Geseuius, 
who  refer  tlie  name  to  an  Arabic  origin."  The 
Jewish  women  used  to  carry  the  eggs  of  the  chargol 
in  their  ears  to  preserve  them  fi-om  the  ear-ache, 
(Bu.\torf,  Lex.  Chald.  et  Rabbin,  s.  v.  chargol). 

(4.)  Sdldin  (Dy  pD  :  arraKfis,  Compl.  aTTa.K6s : 

attaciis:  "bald  locust")  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  22, 
as  one  of  the  four  edible  kinds  of  le,aping  insects. 
All  that  can  ])ossibly  be  known  of  it  is  that  it  is 
some  kind  of  Saltatorial  orthopterous  insect,  winged, 
and  good  for  food.  Tychsen,  however,  arguing  from 
what  is  said  of  the  sdldin  in  the  Talmud  (Tract, 
Cholin),  viz.  that  "  this  insect  has  a  smooth  head,° 
and  that  the  female  is  without  the  sword-shaped 
tail,"  conjectures  that  the  species  here  intended  is 
Gri/llus  eversor  (Asso),  a  synonym  that  it  is  difficult 
to  identify  with  any  recorded  species. 

(5.)  Gdzdm{D]i).    See  Palmer-worm. 

°  p|nn>  locustae  species  alata,  a  saltando.    Gesenius 
■  "  -•  -.  o  -- 

refers  the  word  to  the  Arabic  ^y=.>.>  {hardjal),  saliit, 
comparing  the  Germ.  Henschrecke  from  slirecken,  satire. 

°  Hence  perhaps  the  epithet  bald',  applied  to  sdldm  in 
the  text  of  the  A.  V. 

p  2\i,  according  to  Gesenius  (Tkes.  s.  v.),  is  from  an 


(6.)  6'o6(31il:P  di<pis,  iiriyofij  aKpiSuv  :  Aq. 
in  Am.  vii.  1,  BapdSuu :  locusta;  locustae  locus' 
tarum  =  '<2)2  315  in  Nah.  iii.  17:  "great  grass- 
hoppers;" "grasshoppers;"  margin  "green  worms," 
in  Ames).  This  word  is  found  only  in  Is. 
xxxiii  .  4,  and  in  the  two  places  cited  above. 
There  is  nothing  in  any  of  these  passages  that 
will  help  to  point  out  the  species  denoted. 
That  some  kind  of  locust  is  intended  seems  pro- 
bable from  the  passage  in  Kahum,  "  thy  wptaius 
are  as  the  great  gobai  which  aimp  in  the  hedges 
in  the  cool  of  the  day,  but  when  the  sun  ariseth 
they  flee  away,  and  their  place  is  not  known  where 
they  ai'e."  Some  writers  led  by  this  passage, 
have  believed  that  the  gobai  represent  the  larva 
state  of  bome  of  the  large  locusts  ;  the  habit  of  halting 
at  night,  however,  and  encamping  under  the  hedges, 
as  described  by  the  prophet,  in  all  probability  belongs 
to  the  ivinged  locust  as  well  as  to  the  larvae,  see 
Ex.  X.  13,  "  the  Lord  brought  an  east  wind  upon  the 
land  all  that  day,  and  all  that  night;  and  when  it 
was  morni7ig,  the  east  wind  brought  the  locusts." 
Jlr.  Barrow  (i.  257-8),  speaking  of  some  species 
of  S.  African  locusts,  says,  that  when  the  larvae, 
which  are  still  more  voracious  than  the  parent 
insect,  are  on  the  march,  it  is  impossible  to  make 
them  turn  out  of  the  way,  which  is  usually  that  of 
the  wind.  At  sunset  the  troop  halts  and  divides 
into  separate  groups,  each  occupying  in  bee-like 
clusters  the  neighbouring  eminences  for  the  night. 
It  is  quite  possible  that  the  gob  may  represent  the 
larva  or  nympha  state  of  the  insect ;  nor  is  the 
passage  from  Nahum,  "  when  the  sun  ariseth  they 
tlee  away,"  any  objection  to  this  supposition,  for  the 
last  stages  of  the  larva  diiler  but  slightly  from  the 
nympha,  both  which  states  may  therefore  be  compre- 
hended under  one  name;  the ^d6c«' of  A'ah.  iii.  17, may 


Locubt  flying. 

easily  have  been  the  nymphae  (which  in  all  the  Amc- 
tabola  continue  to  feed  as  in  their  laiTa  condition)  en- 
camping at  night  under  the  hedges,  and,  obtaining 
their  wings  as  the  sun  arose,  are  then  represented  as 
flying  away."!  It  certainly  is  improbable  that  the 
Jews  should  have  had  no  name  for  the  locust  in  its 


unused  root,  il^a-  the  Arab.  Ixi.,  to  emerge  from  the 

groimd.     Fiirst  refers  the  word  to  a  Hebrew  origin.    Sec 
nole,  Arbeh. 

1  Since  the  above  was  written  it  has  been  discovered 
that  Dr.  Kitto  (Pict.  Bible,  note  on  Nah.  lil.  17)  is  of  a 
similar  opinion,  that  die  i/db  probabl.v  denotes  the  nympha, 

K  2 


132 


LOCUST 


larva  or  nympha  stole,  for  they  must,  have  been 
quite  familiar  with  the  sight  of  such  devoui-eis  of 
every  green  thing,  the  larvae  being  even  more 
destructive  than  the  imago;  perhaps  some  of 
the  other  nine  names,  all  of  which  Bochart  cou- 
sidei'S  to  be  the  names  of  so  many  species,  denote 
the  insect  in  one  or  other  of  these  conditions. 
The  A.  V.  were  evidently  at  a  loss,  for  the  trans- 
lators read  "  green  worms,"  in  Am.  vii.  1.  Tychsen 
(p.  93)  identifies  the  gob  with  the  Gryllus  migra- 
torius,  Linn.,  "qua  vero  ratione  motus,"  observes 
Rosenmiiller, "  non  e.xponit." 

(7.)  C'handmdl  (/?2Jn  :  iv  rfj  irdxyri  ;  Aq.  if 
Kpv€i:  in  pruind;  "frost").  Some  writers  have 
supposed  that  this  word,  which  occurs  only  in  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  47,  denotes  some  kind  of  locust  (see  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  iii.  2.^5,  ed.  Kosenm.).  Mr.  J.  F.  Denham 
(in  Kitto,  s.  v.  Locust)  is  of  a  similar  opinion  ;  but 
surely  the  concurrent  testimony  of  the  old  versions, 
which  interpret  the  word  chandindl  to  signify  hail 
or  frost,  ought  to  forbid  the  conjecture.  We  have 
already  more  locusts  than  it  is  possible  to  identify ; 
let  chandmdl,  therefore,  be  understood  to  denote  hail 
or  frost,  as  it  is  rendered  by  the  A.  V.,  and  all  the 
important  old  versions. 

(8.)  Yelek  {pT-  ":  UKpls,  ^povxos :  briichus: 
bruchics  aculeatus,  in  Jer.  li.  27:  "  cankerworm," 
"  caterpillar")  occurs  in  Ps.  cv.  34;  Nah.  iii.  15, 16 ; 
Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25;  Jer.  li.  14,  27  ;  it  is  rendered  by 
the  A.  v.  cankericorm  in  four  of  these  places,  and 
caterpillar  in  the  two  remaining.  From  the  epithet 
of  ''  rough,"  which  is  applied  to  the  word  in  Jere- 
miah, some  have  supposed  the  yelek  to  be  the  larva 
of  some  of  the  destructive  Lepidoptera:  the  epithet 
samar,  however  (Jer.  li.  27),  more  properly  means 
having  spines,  which  agrees  with  the  Vulgate,  acu- 
leatus. Michaelis  {Suppl.  p.  1080)  believes  the 
yelek  to  be  the  cockchafer  (Maykafer).  Oed- 
man  (ii.  vi.  12(3)  having  in  view  this  spiny  cha- 
racter, identifies  the  word  with  the  Gryllus  cristatus, 
Linn.,  a  .species,  however,  which  is  found  only  in 
S.  America,  though  Linnaeus  has  erroneously  given 
Arabia  as  a  locality.  Tychsen  arguing  from  the 
epithet  rough,  believes  that  the  yelek  is  represented 
by  the  G.  haematopits,  Linn.  (^Calliptomus  hae- 
mat.  Aud.  Serv.)  a  species  found  in  S.  Africa. 

How  purely  conjectural  are  all  these  attempts  at 
identification  !  for  the  term  spincd  may  refer  not  to 
any  particular  species,  but  to  the  veiy  spinous 
nature  of  tlie  tibiae  in  all  the  locust  tribe,  and 
yelek,  the  cropping,  licking  off  insect  (Num.  xxii.  4), 
may  be  a  synonym  of  some  of  the  names  already 
mentioned,  or  the  word  may  denote  the  larvae  or 
pupae  of  the  locust,  which  from  Joel  i.  4,  seems  not 
improbable,  "  that  which  the  locust  {arbeh)  hath 
left,  hath  the  cankerworm  Q/elek)  eaten,"  after  the 
winged  arbch  had  departed,  the  young  lai-vae  of  the 
same  appeared  and  consumed  the  residue.  The 
passage  in  Nah.  iii.  16,  "  the  yelek  spreadeth  himself 
(niiirgin)  and  ileeth  away,"  is  no  objection  to  the 
opinion  that  the  yelek  may  represent  the  larva  oi- 
nympha  for  tiie  same  reason  as  was  given  in  a 
forme  *part  of  this  article  {Gob). 

(9.)   Chdsil  ('?''pn).     See  CaticrpillaPv. 

(10.)  Tseldtsdl  {b.f?)i  :  epicrv^n:  rubigo  :  "  lo- 

cust  ").    The  derivation  of  this  word  seems  to  imply 


■■  p7)*,  a.  v.  inus.  p7^  i-  q.  Dp?.  Unxit,  inde  lambendo 
(icpavit  (Gesen.  Tlies.  s.  v.). 


LOCUST 

that  some  kind  of  locust  is  indicated  by  it.  It 
occurs  only  in  this  sense  in  Deut.  xxviii.  42,  "  All 
thy  trees  and  fruit  of  thy  land  shall  the  locust  con- 
sume." In  the  other  passages  where  the  Hebrew 
word  occurs,  it  represents  some  kind  of  tinkling 
musical  instrument,  and  is  generally  translated 
cymbals  by  the  A.  V.  The  word  is  evidently  ono- 
matopoietic,  and  is  here  perhaps  a  synonym  for 
some  one  of  the  other  names  for  locust.  Blichaelis 
{Suppl.  p.  2094)  believes  the  word  is  identical 
with  chdsil,  which  he  says  denotes  perhaps  the 
mole-ciicket,  Gryllus  talpifonnis,  from  the  .stri- 
dulous  sound  it  produces.  Tychsen  (p.  79,  80) 
identifies  it  with  the  Gryllus  stridulus,  Linn. 
{=Ocdipoda  stridula,  Aud.  Serv.).  The  notion 
conveyed  by  the  Hebrew  word  will  however  apply 
to  almost  any  kind  of  locust,  and  indeed  to  many 
kinds  of  insects ;  a  similar  word  tsalsalza,  was  ap- 
plied by  the  Ethiopians  to  a  fly  which  the  Arabs 
called  zimb,  which  appears  to  be  identical  with  the 
tsetse  fly  of  Dr.  Livingstone  and  other  African  tra- 
vellers. All  that  can  be  positively  known  i-espect- 
ing  the  tselatsul  is,  that  it  is  some  kind  of  insect 
injuiious  to  trees  and  crops.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
understand  blu]ht  or  mildew  by  the  word. 

The  most  destructive  of  the  locust  tribe  that 
oi.'cur  in  the  Bible  lands  are  the  Oedipoda  migra- 
toria  aud  the  Acridiuin  peregrinum,  and  as  both 
these  species  occur  in  Syria  and  Arabia,  &c.,  it  is 
most  probable  that  one  or  other  is  denoted  in  those 
passages  which  speak  of  the  dreadful  devastations 
committed  by  these  insects ;  nor  is  there  any  occasion 
to  believe  with  Bochart,  Tj'chsen,  and  others,  that 
nine  or  ten  distinct  species  are  mentioned  in  the 
Bible.  Some  of  the  names  may  be  synonyms; 
others  may  indicate  the  larva  or  nympha  con- 
ditions of  the  two  pre-eminent  devourers  ah'eady 
named. 

Locusts  occur  in  great  numbers,  aud  sometimes 
obscure  the  sun — Ex.  x.  15  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  23  ;  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12  ;  Joel  ii.  10  ;  Kah.  iii.  15  ;  Livy,  xlii. 
2;  Aelian,  N.  A.  iii.  12;  Pliny,  N.  H.  xi.  29  ; 
Shaw's  Travels,  p.  187  (fol.  2nd  ed.)  ;  Ludolf,  Hist. 
Aethiop.  i.  13;  and  de  Lociistis,  i.  4;  Volney's 
Trav.  in  Sy)-ia,  i.  236. 

Their  voracity  is  alluded  to  in  Ex.  x.  12,  15  ; 
Joel  i.  4,  7,  12,  and  ii.  3 ;  Deut.  xxviii.  38  ;  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  46,  cv.  34;  Is,  xxxiii.  4;  Shaw's  Trav. 
187  ;  and  travellers  in  the  East,  jMSsim. 

They  are  compared  to  horses — Joel  ii.  4  ;  Rev. 
ix.  7.  The  Italians  call  the  locust  "  C'avaletta ;" 
and  Ray  says,  "  Caput  oblongum,  equi  instar  prona 
spectans."  Comp.  also  the  Arab's  description  to 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Arabie. 

They  malie  a  fearful  noise  in  their  flight — Joel 
ii.  5  ;  Rev.  ix.  9. 

ForskS,!,  Descr.  81,  "  transenntes  grylh  super 
verticem  nostrum  sono  magnae  cataractae  ferve- 
bant."     Volney,  Trav.  i.  235. 

They  have  no  king — Prov.  xxx.  27  ;  Kiiby  and 
Sp.  Int.  ii.  17. 

Their  irresistible  progress  is  referred  to  in  .Joel 
ii.  8,  9  ;  Shaw,  Trav.  187. 

They  enter  dwellings,  and  devour  even  the  wood- 
work of  houses— Ex",  x.  6  ;  Joel  ii.  9,  10  ;  Pliny, 
N.  H.  xi.  29." 

They  do  not  fly  in  the  night — Nah.  iii.  17; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  V  Arabic,  173. 

Birds  devour  them — Russel,  N.  Hist,  of  Aleppo, 

*  "  Omnia   vero   morsu    erodent.es,    et  fm-es   quoquc 

tectorum. 


LOCUST 


LOD 


133 


127;    Volney,  Trav. 
Pal.  (p.  410).' 


237  ;    Kitto's  Pkys.  Hist. 


Smurmur.     KosL-colourctl  SUirliiig.     (Pastor  losea^.) 

The  sea  destroys  the  greater  number — Ex.  x.  19  ; 
Joel  ii.  20  ;  Pliny,  xi.  35  ;  Hasselq.  Trav.  445 
(Enjil.  transl.  1766) ;  of.  also  Tliad,  xxi.  12. 

Their  dead  bodies  taint  the  air — Joel  ii.  20  ; 
Hasselq.  Trav.  445. 

They  are  used  as  food— Lev.  xi.  21,  22  ;  Matt, 
iii.  4  ;  Mark  i.  6 ;  Plin.  N.  H.  vi.  35,  xi.  35 ; 
Diod.  Sic.  iii.  29  (the  Acridophagi) ;  Aristoph. 
Achar.  1116;  Ludolf,  H.  Aethiop.  67  (Gent's 
transl.)  ;  Jackson's  Marocco,  52  ;  Niebiihr,  Descr. 
de  C Arable,  150  ;  Sparman's  Trav.  i.  367,  who  says 
the  Hottentots  aj-e  glad  when  the  locusts  come,  for 
they  fatten  upon  them;  Hasselq.  Trav.  232,  419  ; 
Kirby  and  Spence,  Entom.  i.  305. 

There  are  different  ways  of  preparing  locusts  for 
food :  sometimes  they  are  gi'ound  and  pounded,  and 
then  mixed  with  fiour  and  water  and  made  into 
cakes,  or  they  are  salted  and  then  eaten ;  sometimes 
sniolced ;  boiled  or  roasted ;  stewed,  or  fried  in 
butter.  Dr.  Kitto  {Pict.  Bib.  not.  on  Lev.  xi. 
21),  who  tasted  locusts,  says  they  are  more  like 
shrimps  than  anything  else ;  and  an  English  clergy- 
man, some  years  ago,  cooked  some  of  the  green  grass- 
hoppers, Lociista  viridissima,  boiling  them  in  water 
half  an  hour,  throwing  away  the  head,  wings,  and 
legs,  and  then  sprinkling  them  with  pepper  and  salt, 
and  adding  butter  ;  he  found  them  excellent.  How 
strange  then,  nay,  "  how  idle,"  to  quote  the  words  of 
Kirby  and  Spence  {Entom.  i.  305),  "  was  the  contro- 
versy concerning  the  locusts  which  formed  part  of  the 
sustenance  of  John  the  Baptist,  ....  and  how  apt 
even  learned  men  are  to  perplex  a  plain  question  from 
ignorance  of  the  customs  of  other  countries  "  !" 

The  Ibllowing  ai-e  some  of  the  works  which  treat 
of  locusts : — Ludolf,  Disscrtatio  de  Locustis,  Francof. 


'  The  locust-bird  (see  woodcut)  referred  to  by  tra- 
vellers, and  wliich  the  Arabs  cull  smm-mur,  is  no  doubt, 
from  Pr.  Kitto's  description,  the  "  rose-coloured  starling," 
J'afloi-  jwfiMS.  The  Uev.  H.  B.  Tristram  saw  one  spe- 
cimen in  the  orange  gi-ovesat  Jaffa  in  the  spring  of  1858  ; 
but  makes  no  allusion  to  its  devouring  lucusta.  Dr.  Kitto 
in  one  place  (p.  410)  says  the  locust-bird  is  about  the  size 
of  a  starling;  in  another  place  (p.  420)  he  compares  it  in 
size  to  a  swallow.  The  bird  is  about  eight  inches  and  a  half 
in  length.  Yarrell  (Brit.  Birds,  ii.  51,  2nd  ed.)  says  "  it  is 
held  sacred  at  Aleppo  because  it  feeds  on  the  locust;"  and 
Col.  Sykes  bears  testimony  to  the  immense  flocks  in  whicli 
lliey  Hy .     lie  says  (  Catahigue  of  Birds  uf  Dakhan)  "  they 

darken  the  air  by  their  mmibers forty  or  fifty  have 

bi'cn  killed  at  a  shot."  But  he  says  "  they  prove  a  cala- 
mity to  the  husbandman,  as  they  are  as  destructive  as 
locusts,  and  imt  nmch  less  numerous." 

"  There  are  people  at  this  day  who  gravely  assert  that 
the  locusts  which  formed  part  of  the  food  of  the  Baptist 
were  not  the  insect  of  that  name,  but  the  long  sweet  pods 
of  the   locust-tree  {Ceralimia  siliqua),  Johannis  brodt. 


ad  Moen.  1694.  This  author  believes  that  the  qimils 
which  fed  the  Israelites  in  tlie  wilderness  were 
locusts  (vid.  his  Diatriba  qua  sententia  nova  de 
Selavis,  sice  Locustis  defcnditur).  A  nioi-e  absurd 
opinion  was  that  lield  by  NoiTelius,  who  main- 
tained that  the  four  names  of  Lev.  xi.  22  were 
birds  (see  his  Schediasma  de  Avibiis  sacris,  Arbeh, 
Chagab,  Sol((m,  et  Chargol,  in  Bib.  Biem.  CI.  iii. 
p.  36).  Faber,  Be  Locustis  Biblicis,  et  sigillatim 
de  Avibus  Quadnipcdibus,  ex  Lev.  xi.  20,  Witteub. 
1710-11.  Asso's  Abhandlung  von  den  Lfeyschreckcn, 
Rostock,  1787 ;  and  Tychsen's  Comment,  de  Locustis. 
Oedman's  Verniischte  Samnilnng,  ii.  c.  vii.  Kirby 
and  ^pence's  Tntrod.  to  Entoinologg,  i.  305,  &c. 
Bochart's  Plierozoicon,  iii.  251,  &c.,  ed.  Kosenmiill. 
Kitto's  Fhys.  History  of  Palestine,  419,  420. 
Kitto's  Pictorial  Bible,  see  Index,  "  Locust." 
Dr.  Harris's  Natural  History  of  the  Bible,  ait. 
''  Locust,"  1833.  Kitto's  Gyclopaedia,  arts.  "  Lo- 
cust," "  Chesil,"  &c.  Harmer's  Observations,  Lon- 
don, 1797.  The  travels  of  Shaw,  Russel,  Hassel- 
quist,  Volney,  &c.  &c.  For  a  systematic  description 
of  the  Orthoptera,  see  Serville's  Monograph  in  the 
Suites  a  Buffon,  and  Fischer's  Orthoptera  Europaea ; 
and  for  an  excellent  summary,  see  Winer's  Bealuor- 
terbuch,  vol.  i.  p.  574,  art.  "  Heuschrecken."  For 
the  locusts  of  St.  John,  Mr.  Denham  refers  to  Suicer's 
Thesaurus,  i.  169,  179,  and  Gutherr,  De  Victu 
Johannis,  Franc.  1785 ;  and  for  the  symbolical 
locusts  of  Rev.  ix.,  to  Newton  On  Prophecies,  and 
Woodhouse  On  the  Apocalypse.^  [W.  H.j 

LOD  (i7:  T]  A($S;  'Aodapwe,  AoSaSia,  both  by 
inclusion  of  the  following  name ;  Alex,  in  Ezra, 
AvdSwv  AoSa^ib  :  Lod),  a  town  of  Benjamin,  stated 
to  have  been  founded  by  Shamed  or  Shamer  (1  Chr. 
viii.  12).  It  is  always  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
Ono,  and,  with  the  exception  of  the  passage  just 
quoted,  in  the  post-captivity  records  only.  It  would 
appear  that  after  the  boundariesof  Benjamin,  as  given 
iu  the  book  of  Joshua,  were  settled,  that  enterprising 
tribe  extended  itself  further  westward,  into  the  rich 
plain  of  Sharon,  between  the  central  hills  and  the 
sea,  and  occupied  or  foimded  the  towns  of  Lod,  Ono, 
Hadid,  and  others  named  only  in  the  later  li.sts. 
The  people  belonging  to  the  three  places  just  men- 
tioned returned  from  Babylon  to  the  number  of  725 
(Ezr.  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii.  37),  and  again  took  possession 
of  their  former  habitations  (Neh.  si.  35). 

Lod  has  retained  its  name  almost  unaltered  to 
the  present  day;  it  is  now  called  LUdd  ;  but  is  most 
familiar  to  us  from  its  occurrence  in  its  Greek 
garb,  as  Lydda,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  [G.] 

"  St.  John's  bread,"  as  the  monks  of  I'alestine  call  it. 
For  other  equally  erroneous  expUmations,  or  unauthorised 
alterations,  of  d/cpi'Ses,  see  Celsii  Hierob.  i.  74. 

»  For  tlie  judgment  of  locusts  referred  to  in  the  prophet 
Joel,  see  Dr.  Pusey's  "  Introduction  "  to  that  book.  This 
writer  maintains  that  the  prophet,  under  the  (ig\u-e  of  the 
locust,  foretold  "  a  judgment  far  greater,  an  enemy  far 
mightier  than  the  locust"  (p.  99),  namely,  the  Assyrian 
invasion  of  Palestine,  because  Joel  calls  the  scourge  the 
"  northern  army,"  which  Dr.  Pusey  says  caimot  be  said  of 
the  locusts,  because  almost  always  by  a  sort  of  law  of 
their  being  they  make  tlieir  inroads  from  their  birth- 
place in  ihe  south.  This  one  point,  however,  may  be 
fairly  questioned.  The  usual  direction  of  the  flight  of 
this  insect  is  from  East  to  West,  or  from  South  to 
Korth;  but  the  Ocdipoda  migratoria  is  believed  to 
have  its  birthplace  in  Tiu-tary  (Serv.  Orthop.  73S),  from 
whence  it  visits  Africa,  the  Mauritius,  an<i  part  of  tlic 
South  of  Europe.  If  this  species  be  considered  to  be 
the  locust  of  Joel,  the  expression  nortlicrn  armij  is  most 
applicable  to  it. 


134  LO-DEBAR 

LO-DE'BAR  (-inn  '■h;  but  iu  xvii.  27  "]  i6  : 
'0  AaSa^c'p,  AwSa^dp  :  Lodabar),  a  place  named 
with  Mahanaim,  Kogelim,  and  other  trans-Jordanic 
towns  (2  Sam.  xvii.  27),  and  therefore  no  doubt  on 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan.  It  was  the  native 
place  of  Macliir  ben-Ammiel,  in  whose  house  Mephi- 
bosheth  found  a  home  after  the  death  of  his  father 
and  the  ruin  of  his  grandfather's  house  (ix.  4,  5). 
Lo-debar  receives  a  bare  mention  in  the  Onomasticon, 
nor  has  any  trace  of  the  name  been  encountered  by  ■ 
any  later  traveller.  Indeed  it  has  probably  never 
been  sought  for.  Reland  {Pal.  734)  conjectures 
that  it  is  intended  in  Josh.  xiii.  26,  where  the  word 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  of  Debir  "  (inn?),  is  the 
same  in  its  consonants  as  Lodebar,  though  witli 
different  vowel-points.  In  favour  of  this  con- 
jecture, which  is  adopted  by  J.  D.  Michaelis  {Bib. 
fiir  Ungel.),  is  the  fact  that  such  a  use  of  the 

preposition  7  is  exceedingly  rare  (see  Keil,  Josua, 
ad  loc). 

If  taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  the  root  of  the  name  is 
possibly  "  pasture,"  the  driving  out  of  flocks  (Gesen. 
Thes.  7356  ,•  Stanley,  S.  8(  P.  App.  §9)  ;  but  this 
must  be  very  uncertain.  [G.] 

LODGE,  TO.  This  word  in  the  A.  V.— with 
one  exception  only,  to  be  noticed  below — is  used  to 
translate  the  Hebrew  verb  \yp  or  y?,  which  has, 
at  least  in  the  narrative  portions  of  the  Bible, 
almost  invariably  the  force  of  "passing  the  night." 
This  is  worthy  of  I'emark,  because  the  word  lodge 
— probably  only  another  form  of  the  Saxon  liggan, 
"  to  lie" — does  not  appear  to  have  had  exclusively 
that  force  in  other  English  literature  at  the  time  the 
Authorised  Version  was  made.  A  few  examples  of 
its  occurrence,  where  the  meaning  of  passing  the 
night  would  not  at  first  sight  suggest  itself  to  an 
English  reader,  may  be  of  seiTice : — 1  K.  xix.  9  ; 
1  Chr.  ix.  27  ;  Is.  x.  29  (where  it  marks  the  halt 
of  the  Assyrian  amiy  for  bivouac);  Neh.  iv.  22, 
xiii.  20,  21 ;  Cant.  vii.  11  ;  Job  xxiv.  7,  xxxi.  32, 
&c.  &c.  The  same  Hebrew  word  is  otherwise  trans- 
lated in  the  A.  V.  by  "  lie  all  night"  (2  Sam.  xii. 
10;  Cant.  i.  13;  Job  xxix.  19);  "  tarry  the  night " 
(Gen. xix.  2;  Judg.  xix.  10;  .Jer.xiv.8j;  "remain," 
i.  e.  until  the  morning  (Ex.  xxiii.  18). 

The  force  of  passing  the  night  is  also  present  in 
the  words  }-"l70,  "  a  sleeping-place,"  hence  an  Inn 
[vol.  i.  867  6],  and  nM7p,  "a  hut,"  erected  in 
vineyards  or  fruit-gardens  for  the  shelter  of  a  man 
who  watched  all  night  to  protect  the  fruit.  This 
is  rendered  "  lodge"  in  Is.  i.  8,  and  "  cottage"  in 
xxiv.  20,  the  only  two  passagesT  in  which  it  is  found. 

2.  The  one  exception  above-named  occurs  in  Josh. 
ii.  1,  where  the  word  in  the  original  is  33C^,  a  word 
elsewhere  rendered  "  to  lie,"  generally  in  allusion  to 
sexual  intercourse.  [G.] 

LOFT.     [House,  vol.  i.  8386.] 

LOG.     [Wi:iGiiTS  AND  Measures.] 

LO'IS  (A&)is),  the  grandmother  (/xo/u^t;)  of 
Timothy,  and  doubtless  the  mother  of  hva  mother 
Eunice  (2  Tim.  i.  5).  From  the  Greek  form  of 
these  three  names  we  should  naturally  infer  that 
the  family  had  been  Hellenistic  for  three  generations 
at  least.  It  seems  likely  also  that  Lois  had  resided 
long  at  Lystra ;  and  almost  certain  that  from  her. 


y  What  can  have  led  the  LXX.  to  translate  the  word 
D^*y  "  heap.-;,'' in  Pb.  Ixxix.  1,  bv  curajoodjuAaitioi'.  which 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

as  well  as  from  Eunice,  Timothy  obtained  his  inti- 
mate knowledge  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures  (2  Tim. 
iii.  15).  Whether  she  vras  surviving  at  either  of 
St.  Paul's  visits  to  Lystra,  we  cannot  say :  she  is  not 
alluded  to  in  the  Acts  :  nor  is  it  absolutely  certain, 
though  St.  Paul  speaks  of  her  "  faith,"  that  she 
became  a  Christian.  The  phrase  might  be  used  of  a 
pious  Jowess,who  was  ready  to  believe  in  the  Messiah. 
Calvin  has  a  good  note  on  this  subject.  [J.  S.  Il.J 
LOOKING-GLASSES.     [Mirrors.] 

LORD,  as  applied  to  the  Deity,  is  the  almost 
uniform  rendering  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  0.  T.  of 
tlie  Heb.  mn*,  Jehovah,  which  would  be  more 
properly  represented  as  a  proper  name.  The  re- 
verence which  the  Jews  entertained  for  the  .sacred 
name  of  God  forbade  them  to  pronounce  it,  and  in 
reading  they  substituted  for  it  either  Adonui, 
"  Lord,"  or  Elohim,  "  God,"  according  to  the  vowel- 
points  by  which  it  was  accompanied.  [Jehovah, 
vol.  i.  p.  9526],  This  custom  is  observed  in  the  ver- 
sion of  the  LXX.,  where  Jehovah  is  most  commonlv 
translated  by  Kvpios,  as  in  the  N.  T.  (Heb.  i.  10, 
&o.),  and  in  the  Vulgate,  where  Dominus  is  the 
iisual  equivalent.  The  title  Adonai  is  also  rendered 
"Lord"  in  the  A.  V.,  though  this,  as  applied  to  God, 
is  of  infrequent  occun-ence  in  the  historical  books. 
For  instance,  it  is  found  in  Genesis  only  in  xv.  2,  8, 
xviii.  3  (where  "  my  Lord  "  should  be  "  0  Lord  "), 
27,  30,  31,  32,  XX.  4  ;  once  in  Num.  xiv.  17; 
twice  in  Deut.  iii.  24,  ix.  26;  twice  in  Josh.  vii. 
7,  8  ;  four  times  in  Judges  ;  and  so  on.  In  other 
passages  of  these  books  "  Lord  "  is  the  translation 
of  "  Jehovah  ;"  except  Ex.  xxiii.  17,  xxxiv.  23  ; 
Deut.  X.  17;  Josh.  iii.  11,  13,  where  adon  is  so 
rendered.  But  in  the  poetical  and  historical  books 
it  is  more  frequent,  excepting  Job,  where  it  occurs 
only  in  xxviii.  28,  and  the  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
and  Song  of  Songs,  where  it  is  not  once  found. 

The  difference  between  Jehovah  and  Adonai  (or 
Adon)  is  generally  marked  in  the  A.  V.  by  printing 
the  word  in  small  capitals  (LORD)  when  it  repre- 
sents the  former  (Gen.  xv.  4,  &c.),  and  with  an 
initial  capital  only  when  it  is  the  translation  of  the 
latter  (Ps.  xcvii.  5;  Is.  i.  24,  x.  16)  ;  except  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  17,  xxxiv.  23,  where  "  the  Lord  God"  should 
be  more  consistently  "  the  Lord  Jehovah."  A  similar 
distinction  prevails  between  niri*_  (the  letters  of 
Jehovah  with  the  vowel-points  of  Elohim)  and 
DTi^N-  elohim  ;  the  former  being  represented  in 
the  A.  V.  by  "  God"  in  small  capitals  (Gen.  .xv. 
2,  &c.),  while  Elohim  is  "  God  "  with  an  initial 
c^npital  only.  And,  generally,  when  the  name  of  the 
Deity  is  printed  in  capitals,  it  indicates  that  the 
corresponding  Hebrew  is  niH'',  which  is  translated 
Lord  or  God  according  to  the  vowel-points  by 
which  it  is  accompanied. 

In  some  instances  it  is  difficult,  on  account  of 
the  pause  accent,  to  say  whether  Adonai  is  the 
title  of  the  Deity,  or  merely  one  of  resjiect  addressed 
to  men.  These  have  been  noticed  by  the  Mas'orites, 
who  distinguish  the  former  in  their  notes  as  "  holy," 
and  the  latter  as  "  profane."  (See  Gen.  rviii.  3, 
xix.  2,  18;  and  compare  the  Masoretic  notes  on 
Gen.  XX.  l;!.  Is.  xix.  4.)  [W.  A.  W.] 

LORD'S  DAY,  THE  ('H  Kvp^Kh  '}i/u.^pa; 
7)  fiia  (TaP^droiv).  It  has  been  questioned,  though 
not  seriously  until  of  late  years,  what  is  the  mean- 


they  employ  for  Hil/D  >"  '•'"^  above  two  piissages,  tlie 
writer  is  \iQable  to  conjecture. 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

ing  of  the  phrase  ri  KvpiaK^  'H/xe'pa,  which  occurs 
ill  one  passage  only  of  the  Holy  .Scripture,  Rev.  i. 
10,  and  is,  in  our  English  version,  tianslated  "  the 
Lord's  Day."  The  general  consent  both  of  Christian 
antiquity  and  of  modern  divines  has  referred  it  to 
the  weekly  festival  of  our  Lord's  resurrection,  and 
identified  it  with  "  the  first  day  of  the  week,"  on 
which  He  rose,  with  the  patristical  "  eiglith  day," 
or  "day  which  is  both  the  first  and  the  eighth,"  in 
fact  with  the  ^  tov  'H\iov  'U/x^pa,"  "  Solis  Dies," 
or  "  Sunday,"  of  every  age  of  the  Church. 

But  tlie  Views  antagonistic  to  this  general  consent 
deserve  at  least  a  passing  notice.     1.  Some  have 
supposed  St.  John  to  be  speaking,  in  the  passage 
above   referred    to,    of  the   Sabbath,   because   that 
institution    is   ci^lled    in  Isaiah   Iviii.    13,    by  the 
Almighty  Himself,  "  My  holy  day.""     To  this  it 
is  replied— If  St.  .John  had  intended  to  specify  the 
sabbath,   he  would   surely  have    used   that  word 
which  was  by  no  means  obsolete,  or  even  obso- 
lescent, at  the  time  of  his  composing  the  book  of  the 
Keveiation.       And  it  is  added,  that  if  an  apostle 
had  set  the  example  of  confounding  the  seventh  and 
the   first  days  of  the  week,  it  would  have  been 
strange  indeed  that  every  ecclesiastical  writer  for 
the  first  five  centuries  should  have  avoided   any 
approach  to  such  confusion.     They  do  avoid  it — 
for  as  2a/3)3oTOV  is  never  used  by  them  for  the 
first  day,  so   KvpiaK-f)  is  never  used  by  them  for 
the  seventh  day.     2.  Another  theory  is,  that  by 
"  the  Lord's  Day,"  St.  John  intended  "  the  day  of 
judmgent,"  to  which  a  large  portion  of  the  book 
of  Revelations  may  be  conceived   to  refer.     Thus 
"  I  was  in  the  spirit  on  the  Lord's  day  "  {iyev6- 
(junv  fv  irvfVfj.aTi  iv  Trj  KvpiaKTJ  'Hnipa)  would 
imply  that  he  was  rapt,  in  spiritual  vision,  to  the 
date  of  that  "  great  and  terrible  day,"  just  as  St. 
Paul  represents  himself  as  cai'ght  up  locally  into 
Paradise.     Now,  not  to  dispute  the  interpretation 
of  the  passage  from  which  the  illustration  is  drawn 
(2  Cor.  xii.  4),   the  abettors  of  this  view  seem  to 
have  put  out  of  sight  the  following  considerations. 
In  the  preceding  sentence,  St.  John  had  mentioned 
the  plac'e  in  which  he  was  writing,  Patmos,  and  the 
causes  which  had  brought  him  thither.     It  is  but 
natural   that  he  should   further  particularise  the 
circumstances    under   which   his  mysterious  work 
was  composed,  by  stating  the  exact  day  on  which 
tlie  Revelations   were  communicated  to  him,  and 
tlie  employment,  spiritual  musing,  in  which  he  was 
then  engaged.  To  suppose  a  mixture  of  the  metapho- 
rical and  the  literal  would  be  strangely  out  of  keep- 
ing.    And  though  it  be  conceded  that  the  day  of 
judgment  is  in  the   New  Testament  spoken  of  as 
'H  TOV  Kvpiov  'Hfxfpa,  the  employment  of  the  ad- 
jectival form  constitutes   a  remarkable   diflerence, 
which    was  observed   and  maiut;\ined    ever  after- 
wards.''    There  is  also  a  critical  objection  to  this 
interpretation. *=     This  second  theory  then,  which  is 
sanctioned  by  the  name  of  Augusti,  must  be  aban- 
doned.     8.  A  third  oj)iuiou  is,  that  St.  John  in- 
tended by  the  "  Lord's  Day,"  that  on  which  the 
Lord's  resurrection  was  annually  celebrated,  or,  as 


LOED'S  DAY,  THE 


135 


we  now  term  it,  Easter-day.  On  this  it  need  only 
be  obsei'ved,  that  though  it  was  never  questioned 
that  the  veekly  celebration  of  that  event  should 
take  place  on  the  first  day  of  the  hebdomadal  cycle, 
it  was  for  a  long  time  doubted  on  what  day  in  the 
annual  cycle  it  should  be  celebrated.  Two  schools 
at  least  existed  on  this  point  until  considerably  after 
the  death  of  St.  John,  it  therefore  seems  unlikely 
that,  ill  a  book  intended  for  the  whole  Church,  he 
would  have  cmj)loyed  a  method  of  dating  which  was 
far  from  generally  agreed  u])on.  And  it  is  to  be 
added  that  no  patristical  authority  can  be  quoted, 
either  for  the  interpretation  contended  for  in  this 
opinion,  or  for  the  employment  of  i)  Kupio/c'/y'Hyuc'pa 
to  denote  Easter-day. 

All  other  conjectures  upon  this  point  may  be 
permitted  to  confute  themselves  ;  but  the  following 
cavil  is  too  curious  to  be  omitted.  In  Scripture 
the  first  day  of  the  week  is  called  r/  fxia  (xa^^d- 
raiv,  in  post-Scriptural  writers  it  is  called  ri  Kv- 
pMK^  'Ufiepa  as  well;  therefore,  the  book  of  Reve- 
lations is  not  to  be  ascribed  to  an  apostle  ;  or  in 
other  words,  is  not  part  of  Scripture.  The  logic 
of  this  argument  is  only  to  be  surpassed  by  its 
boldness.  It  says,  in  efi'ect,  beaiuse  post-Scriptural 
writers  have  these  two  designations  for  the  first 
day  of  the  week;  therefore,  Scriptural  writers  must 
be  confined  to  one  of  them.  It  were  surely  more 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  adoption  by  post- 
Scriptural  wiiteib  of  a  phrase  so  pre-eminently 
Christian  as  t]  KvpiaK'^  'Hjue'pa  to  denote  the  first 
day  of  the  week,  and  a  day  so  especially  marked, 
can  be  traceable  to  nothing  else  than  an  apostle's 
use  of  that  phrase  in  the  same  nieaniiig. 

Supposing  then  that  ri  KupiaKrj  'H/xe'pa  of  St. 
John  is  the  Lord's  Day, — What  do  we  gather  from 
Holy  Scripture  concerning  that  institution?  How 
is  it  spoken  of  by  early  writers  up  to  the  time  of 
Constantine?  What  change,  if  any,  was  brought 
upon  it  by  the  celebrated  edict  of  that  emperor, 
whom  some  have  declared  to  have  been  its  ori- 
ginator ? 

1 .  Scripture  says  very  little  concerning  it.  But 
that  little  seems  to  indicate  that  the  divinely  in- 
spired apostles,  by  their  practice  and  by  their  pre- 
cepts, marked  the  first  day  of  the  week  as  a  day 
tor  meeting  together  to  break  bread,  for  communi- 
cating and  receiving  instruction,  for  laying  up  offer- 
ings in  store  for  charitable  purposes,  for  occupation 
in  holy  thought  and  prayer.  The  first  day  of  the 
week  so  devoted  seems  also  to  have  been  the  day 
of  the  Loi'd's  Resurrection,  and  therefore,  to  have 
been  especially  likely  to  be  chosen  for  such  purposes 
by  those  who  "  preached  Jesus  and  the  Resur- 
rection." " 

The  Lord  rose  on  the  first  day  of  tire  week  (rp 
fiia  ffa^Pdrcov),  and  ai)peared,  on  the  very  day  ot 
Hi's  rising,  to  His  followers  on  five  distinct  occa- 
sions— to  Mary  Magdalene,  to  the  other  women,  to 
the  two  disciples  on  the  road  to  Emmaus,  to  St. 
Peter  separately,  to  ten  Apostles  collec:ted  together. 
After  eight  days  i/xtd'  rj/xepas  oktoo),  that  is,  ai;- 
coiding  to  the  ordinary  reckoning,  on  the  first  day 


•  C'K'-Ii'^  D'I''). 

*'  -q  '  Huc'pa  ToO  Kvpiov  .  occurs  in  1  Cor.  i.  S,  and 
2  Thcss.  ii.  2,  with  tlie  words  ruidv  'IrjcroC  XptcrToO 
attached ;  in  1  Cor.  v.  5,  and  2  Cor.  i.  14,  with  the  word 
'IrjCToO  only  attached  ;  and  in  I  Thess.  v.  2,and  2  Pet.  iii.  10, 
with  the  article  toO  omitted.  Jn  one  place,  whore  both 
the  day  of  jndgmPiit,  and,  as  a  t'oreshadowiiig  of  it,  the 
day  of  vengeance  upun  .Jerusali  m,  seem  to  bo  alluded  to, 


the  Lord  himself  says,  oi/Tws  ecTrai  koX  6  vib?  tov  av- 
8puyirov  iv  rfj  ri^ep<}  avTov,  Luke  xvii.  24. 

'^  'E-yevojiirji/  would  necessarily  liave  to  be  constructed 
with  ei'  T/fxe'pa,  "  I  was  in  the  day  of  judgment,  i.  e.  I  was 
passing  the  day  of  judgment  spiritually."  Now  yiVeirSai 
iv  >)|ae'pa  is  never  used  for  diem  ayerc.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  construction  of  iya'6p.rii'  with  ec  rri/tv/iiaTi  is 
justified  by  a  parallel  pa^sige  in  Rev.  Iv.  2,  icat  eiiSiws 
eyev6tJ.-ql'  ep   TTi'evfJiaTi. 


136- 


LOED'S  DAY,  THE 


of  the  next  week,  He  ajipeared  to  the  eleven.  He 
J(ies  not  seem  to  have  appeared  in  the  interval — it 
may  be  to  render  that  day  especially  noticeable  by  the 
apostles,  or,  it  may  be  for  other  reasons.  But,  how- 
ovcv  this  question  be  settled,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
which  in  that  year  fell  on  the  first  day  of  the  week 
(see  Bramhall,  Disc,  of  the  Sabbath  and  Lord's 
Day,  in  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  51,  Oxford  edition), 
"they  were  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place,"' 
had  spiritual  gifts  conferred  on  them,  and  in 
their  turn  began  to  communicate  those  gifts, 
as  accompaniments  of  instruction,  to  others.  At 
Troas  (Acts  xx.  7),  many  years  after  the  occun-ence 
at  Pentecost,  when  Christianity  had  begun  to  as- 
sume something  like  a  settled  form,  St.  Luke  records 
the  following  circumstances.  St.  Paul  and  his 
companions  arrived  there,  and  "  abode,  seven  da3's, 
and  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week  when  the  dis- 
ciples came  together  to  break  bread,  Paul  preached 
unto  them."  In  1  Cor.  xvi.  1,  2,  that  same  St. 
Paul  writes  thus :  "  Now  concerning  the  collection 
for  the  saints,  as  I  have  given  order  to  the  churches 
in  Galatia,  even  so  do  ye.  Upon  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  let  every  one  of  you  lay  by  him  in  store, 
as  God  hath  prospered  him,  that  there  be  no  ga- 
therings when  I  come."  In  Heb.  x.  25,  the  cor- 
respondents of  the  wiiter  are  desired  "  not  to  forsake 
the  assembling  of  themselves  together,  as  the  manner 
of  some  is,  but  to  exhort  one  another,"  an  injunc- 
tion which  seems  to  imply  that  a  regular  day  for 
such  assembling  existed,  and  was  well  known  ;  for 
otherwise  no  rebuke  would  he.  And  lastly,  in  the 
passage  given  above,  St.  John  describes  himself  as 
being  in  the  Spirit  "  on  the  Lord's  Day." 

Taken  separately,  perhaps,  and  even  all  to- 
gether, these  passages  seem  scarcely  adequate  to 
prove  that  the  dedication  of  the  first  day  of  the 
week  to  the  purposes  above  mentioned  was  a  matter 
of  apostolic  institution,  or  even  of  apostolic  prac- 
tice. But,  it  may  be  observed,  that  it  is  at  any 
rate  an  extraordinaiy  coincidence,  that  almost  im- 
mediately we  emerge  from  Sci'ipture,  we  find  the 
same  day  mentioned  in  a  similar  manner,  and  di- 
rectly associated  with  the  Lord's  Resurrection  ;  that 
it  is  an  extraordinary  fact  that  we  never  find  its 
dedication  questioned  or  argued  about,  but  acce])ted 
as  something  equally  apostolic  with  Confirmation, 
with  Infant  Baptism,  with  Ordination,  or  at  least 
spoken  of  in  the  same  way.  And  as  to  direct  sup- 
port from  Holy  Scripture,  it  is  noticeable  that  those 
other  ordinances  which  are  usually  considered  Scrip- 
tural, and  in  support  of  which  Scripture  is  usually 
cited,  are  dependent,  so  far  as  mere  quotation  is 
concerned,  upon  fewer  texls  than  the  Lord's  Day  is. 
Stating  the  c;ise  at  the  vei'v  lowest,  the  Lord's  Day 
has  at  least  "  probable  insinuations  in  Scripture,"'' 
and  so  is  superior  to  any  other  holy  day,  whether 
of  hebdomadal  celebration,  as  Friday  in  memory  of 
the  Crucifixion,  or  of  annual  celebration,  as  Eastei- 
day  in  memory  of  the  Resurrection  itself.  These 
other  days  may  be,  and  are,  defensible  on  other 
grounils ;  but  they  do  not  possess  anything  like  a 
Scriptural  authority  for  their  observance.  And  if 
we  are  inclined  still  to  press  for  more  pertinent 
Scriptural  proof,  and  more  frequent  mention  of  the 
institution,  for  such  we  suppose  it  to  be,  in  the 
wi-itings  of  the  apostles,  we  must  recollect  how 
little  is  said  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  and 
how  vast  a  difference  is  naturally  to  be  expected  to 
exist  between  a  sketch  of  the  manners  and  habits 


This  phrase  is  cmpldved  by  Bishop  Sanderson. 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

of  their  age,  which  the  authois  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
did  not  write,  and  hints  as  to  life  and  conduct,  and 
regulation  of  known  practices,  which  they  did  write. 

2.  On  quitting  the  canonical  writings,  we  turn 
naturally  to  Clement  of  Rome.  He  does  not,  how- 
ever, directly  mention  "  the  Lord's  Day,"  but  in  1 
Cor.  i.  40,  he  says,  Travra  ra^n  Troiflv  6(pei\ofj.ev, 
and  he  speaks  of  oipifT^fVoi  Kaipol  Koi  Spai,  at  which 
the  Christian  Trpo(r<popal  Kal  \etTovpyiai  should  be 
made. 

Ignatius,  the  disciple  of  St.  John  (ad  Magn.  c. 
9),  contrasts  Judaism  and  Christianity,  and  as  an 
exemplification  of  the  contrast,  opposes  (Tafi^aTi- 
^uv  to  living  according  to  the  Lord's  life  {Kara. 

T7JI/  Kvf)l.aKT)V  Zco^v  f&ij'Tes). 

The  Epistle  ascribed  to  St.  Barnabas,  which, 
though  certainly  not  written  by  that  apostle,  was 
in  existence  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  2nd  century, 
has  (c.  15)  the  following  words,  "  We  celebrate  the 
eighth  day  with  joy,  on  which  too  Jesus  rose  from 
the  dead." «   • 

A  pagan  document  now  comes  into  view.  It  is 
the  well-known  letter  of  Pliny  to  Trajan,  written 
while  he  presided  over  Pontus  and  Bithynia.  '"The 
Christians  (says  he),  affirm  the  whole  of  their  guilt 
or  error  to  be,  that  they  were  accustomed  to  meet  to- 
gether on  a  stated  day  {stato  die),  before  it  was  light, 
and  to  sing  hymns  to  Christ  as  a  God,  and  to  bind 
themselves  by  a  Sacrainentum,  not  for  any  wicked 
pui-pose,  but  never  to  commit  fraud,  theft,  or  adul- 
tery ;  never  to  break  their  word,  or  to  refuse,  when 
called  upon  to  deliver  up  any  tnist ;  after  which  it 
was  their  custom  to  separate,  and  to  assemble  again 
to  take  a  meal,  but  a  general  one,  and  without 
guilty  purpose." 

A  thoroughly  Chiistian  authority,  Justin  JIartyr, 
who  flourished  a.d.  140,  stands  ne.xt  on  the  list- 
He  writes  thus  :  "  On  the  day  called  Sunday  (rp 
Tov  T]\iov  \^yofj.ivri  rifiepa),  is  an  assembly  of  all 
who  live  either  in  the  cities  or  in  the  iiiral  districts, 
and  the  memoirs  of  the  apostles  and  the  writings  of 
the  prophets  are  lead."  Then  he  goes  on  to  de- 
scribe the  particulars  of  the  religious  acts  which  are 
entered  upon  at  this  assembly.  They  consist  of 
prayer,  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  p]ucharist,  and 
of  collection  of  alms.  He  afterwards  assigns  the  rea- 
sons which  Christians  had  for  meeting  on  Sunday. 
These  are,  "  because  it  is  the  First  Ba'j,  on  which 
God  dispelled  the  darkness  (Tb  crKdros)  and  the 
original  state  of  things  {r^v  vAriv),  and  fonned  the 
world,  and  because  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  rose 
from  the  dead  upon  it"  (Apol.  Prim.).  In  an- 
other work  (Dial.  c.  Tryph.),  he  makes  circum- 
cision furnish  a  type  of  Sunday.  "  The  command 
to  circumcise  infants  on  the  eighth  day  was  a  type 
of  the  true  circumcision  by  which  we  are  circum- 
cised from  eiTor  and  wickedness  through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  I'ose  from  the  dead  on  the  first 
day  of  the  week  (rp  /j-iS  (ra^fidruv)  ;  therefore  it 
remains  the  chief  and  first  of  days."  As  for  tro)3- 
^aTi^eiv,  he  uses  that  with  exclusive  reference  to 
the  Jewish  law.  He  carefully  distinguishes  .Satur- 
day ii)  KpoviK^)),  the  day  after  which  our  Lord 
was  crucified,  from  Sumlay  (^  fiera  t^v  KpoviK^v 
I'tTis  ecTTiu  7]  roil  'HXiuv  Tififpa),  upon  which  He 
rose  from  the  dead.  I  If  any  surprise  is  felt  at 
Justin's  employment  of  'the  heathen  designations 
for  the  seventh  and  first  days  of  the  week,  it  may 
be  accounted  for  thus.     Before  the  death  of  Ha- 


Kat  o    IjjcToO?  avecTTTj  eK   I'^Kpwv. 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

dri.in,  A.D.  138,  the  hebdom;idal  division  (whicli 
Dion  Cassiiis,  writing  in  the  old  century,  deiives, 
together  with  its  nomenclature,  from  Egypt),  had 
in  matters  of  common  hfe,  almost  universally  su- 
perseded in  Greece,  and  even  in  Italy,  the  national 
divisions  of  the  lunar  month.  Justin  Martyr, 
writing  to  and  for  heathen,  as  well  as  to  and  for 
Jews,  employs  it,  therefore,  with  a  certainty  of 
being  understood.) 

The  sti-ange  heretic,  Bardesanes,  who  hpwever 
delighted  to  consider  himself  a  sort  of  Christian,  has 
the  following  words  in  his  book  on  "  Fate,"  or  on 
"  the  Laws  of  the  Countries,"  which  he  addressed  to 
the  Emperor  M.  Aurehus  Antoninus:  "  What  then 
shall  we  say  respecting  the  new  race  of  ourselves 
who  are  Christians,  whom  in  every  country  and  in 
every  region  the  ]\Iessiah  established  at  His  coming  ; 
for,  lo !  wherever  we  be,  all  of  us  are  called  by  the 
one  name  of  the  Messiah,  Christians ;  and  upon  one 
day,  which  is  the  first  of  the  week,  we  assemble 
ourseh-es  together,  and  on  the  appointed  days  we 
abstain  froin  food"  (Cureton's  Translation). 

Two  very  short  notices  stand  next  on  our  list, 
but  they  are  important  from  their  casual  and  un- 
studied character.  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Corinth, 
A.D.  170,  in  a  letter  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  a  frag- 
ment of  which  is  preserved  by  Eusebius,  says,  riji/ 
crri/x€pov  ovv  KvpiaKijv  aylav  rifj-fpav  SiriyayofJLfv, 
iv  fi  aviyvafjiiv  vfxwv  t^v  (TriffTo\^v.  And  Me- 
lito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  his  contemporary,  is  stated 
to  have  composed,  among  other  works,  a  treatise  on 
the  Lord's  Day  (6  Trepi  tijs  KvpiaKrjs  \6yos). 

The  next  writer  who  may  be  quoted  is  Irenaeus, 
bishop  of  Lyons,  A.D.  178.  He  asserts  that  the 
Sabbath  is  abolished ;  but  his  evidence  to  the  ex- 
istence of  the  Lord's  Day  is  clear  and  distinct.  It 
is  spoken  of  in  one  of  the  best  known  of  his  Frag- 
ments (see  Beaveu's  Irenaeus,  p.  20"2).  But  a 
record  in  Euseb.  (v.  23,  2)  of  the  part  which  he 
took  in  the  Quarta-Deciman  controversy,  shows  that 
in  his  time  it  was  an  institution  beyond  dispute. 
The  point  in  question  was  this :  Should  Easter  be 
celebrated  in  connexion  with  the  Jewish  Passover, 
on  whatever  day  of  the  week  that  might  happen  to 
fall,  with  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  and 
Mesopotamia;  or  on  the  Lord's  Day,  with  the  rest 
of  tlie  Christian  world  ?  The  Churches  of  Gaul, 
then  under  the  superintendence  of  Irenaeus,  agi'eed 
upon  a  synodical  epistle  to  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome, 
in  which  occurred  words  somewhat  to  this  etl'ect, 
"  The  mj^stery  of  the  Lord's  Resurrection  may  not 
be  celebrated  on  any  other  day  than  the  Lord's  Day, 
and  on  this  alone  should  we  observe  the  breaking  off 
of  the  Paschal  Fast."'  This  confirms  what  was 
said  above,  that  while,  even  towards  the  end  of  the 
2nd  century,  tradition  vai-ied  as  to  the  yearly  cele- 
bration of  Christ's  Resurrection,  the  v:eekly  celebra- 
tion of  it  waiione  upon  which  no  diversity  existed, 
or  was  even  hint(>d  at. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.D.  194,  comes  next. 
One  does  not  exjiect  anything  very  (lefinite  from  a 
writer  of  so  mystical  a  tendency,  but  he  has  some 
things  quite  to  our  purjiose.  In  his  Strum.,  {iv.  §3), 
he  speaks  of  r^v  apxiyovov  rj/jLepav,  Tr)v  r^  ovri 
avairavffiv  rj/j,a>v,  t-^v  Si]  Kal  irpoirriv  rdi  uvti 
ipoorhs  yeveaiv,  k.t.K.,  vvoids  which  Bishop  Kaye 

f  'ils  oil'  ixr)S'  iu  aAAj)  ttots  t^t  KupiaK^s  il"-fp?  to  tt)s 
€K  VGKPiiJv  afOLaraaeoj^  cTTtTeAotTO  toO  Kupcou  fxvo'TijptoVy 
KoX  07r<i>9  ev  Taiirr)  ;adi'rj  Tuiv  Kara  to  Trdaxo.  vri(TTeiujv 
<^vAaTTOt/jLe-0(x  Ta?  cTTtAuVet?. 

=  OBto?  t'l'ToAr)!'  ■njv  Kara  to  evayye\iov  Siawpa^d- 
WifO?,    KupKiKrji'    Ttji'    -qixtpar    iroici,    or'    ay    aTTo/iaAAi; 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 


137 


interprets  as  contrasting  the  seventh  day  of  the 
Law,  with  the  eighth  day  of  the  Gospel.  And,  as 
the  same  learned  prelate  observes,  "  When  Clement 
says  that  the  gnostic,  or  transcendental  Christian, 
does  not  pray  in  any  fixed  place,  or  on  any  stated 
days,  but  throughout  his  whole  life,  he  gives  us  to 
understand  that  Christians  in  general  did  meet  to- 
gether in  fixed  places  and  at  appointed  times  for  the 
purposes  of  prayer."  But  we  are  not  left  to  mei'e 
inference  on  this  important  point,  for  Clement 
speaks  of  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  well-known  and  cus- 
tomary festival,  and  in  one  place  gives  a  mystical 
interpretation  of  the  name.s 

Tertullian,  whose  date  is  assignable  to  the  close 
of  the  2nd  century,  may,  in  spite  of  his  conver- 
sion to  Moutanism,  be  quoted  as  a  witness  to  facts. 
He  terms  the  first  day  of  the  week  sometimes 
Sunday  (Dies  Solis),  sometimes  Dies  Dominions. 
He  speaks  of  it  as  a  day  of  joy  (Diem  Solis  laetitiae 
indulgemus,  Apol.  c.  16),  and  asserts  that  it  is 
wrong  to  fast  upon  it,  or  to  pray  standing  during 
its  continuance  (Die  Dominico  jejunium  nefas  du- 
cimus,  vel  de  geniculis  adorare,  De  Cor.  c.  3). 
"  Even  business  is  to  be  put  off,  lest  we  give  place 
to  the  devil"  (Differentes  etiam  negotia,  ne  quem 
Diabolo  locum  demus,  De  Orat.  c.  13). 

Origen  contends  that  the  Lord's  Day  had  its  su- 
periority to  the  Sabbath  indicated  by  manna  having 
been  given  on  it  to  the  Israelites,  while  it  was  with- 
held on  the  Sabbath.  It  is  one  of  the  marks  of  the 
perfect  Christian  to  keep  the  Lord's  Day. 

Minucius  Felix,  A.D.  210,  makes  the  heathen 
interlocutor,  in  his  dialogue  called  Octavius,  assert 
that  the  Christians  come  together  to  a  repast  "  on 
a  solemn  day"  (solenni  die). 

Cyprian  and  his  colleagues,  in  a  synodical  letter, 
A.D.  253,  make  the  Jewish  cirffiuncision  on  the 
eighth  day  prefigure  the  newness  of  life  of  the 
Christian,  to  which  Christ's  resurrection  introduces 
him,  and  point  to  the  Lord's  Day,  which  is  at  once 
the  eighth  and  the  first. 

Commodian,  circ.  A.D.  270,  mentions  the  Lord's 
Day. 

Victorinus,  A.D.  290,  contrasts  it,  in  a  very 
remarkable  passage,  with  the  Parasceve  and  the 
Sabbath  ; 

And  Peter,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  A.D.  300,  says 
of  it,  "  We  keep  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  day  of  joy, 
because  of  Him  who  rose  thereon."*' 

The  results  of  our  examination  of  the  principal 
writers  of  the  two  centuries  after  the  death  of  St. 
John  are  as  follows.  The  Lord's  Day  (a  name 
which  has  now  come  out  more  prominently,  and  is 
connected  more  explicitly  with  our  Lord's  resur- 
I'ection  than  before)  existed  during  these  two  cen- 
turies as  a  part  and  parcel  of  apostolical,  and  so  of 
Scriptural  Christianity.  It  was  never  defhidod,  for 
it  was  never  impugned,  or  at  least  only  impugned 
as  other  things  received  fi'om  the  apostles  were. 
It  was  never  confounded  with  the  Sabbath,  but 
carefully  distinguished  from  it,  (though  we  have 
not  quoted  nearly  all  the  passages  by  which  this 
point  might  lie  proved).  It  was  not  an  institiition 
of  severe  Sabbatical  character,  but  a  day  of  joy 
{xapfJ-o<rvvr\)  and  cheerfulness  [eiippoawt]),  rather 
encouraging  than  forbidding  relaxation.    Religiously 


<j>av\ov  vdrj/ixa  xal  yvixXTTiKov  irpocr\dpri,  r'riv  €i>  auTCji  TOV 
Kupi'ou  dv6i(TTa<7Lv  Sofa^wi',  (^fUroin.  v.). 

h  Trjv  yap  KVpiaKr)V  x<^Pf^°'r"'^^  ijucpar  dyop-fv,  JtA 
Toi'  ai/acrrai'Ta  eu  avrfj,  ev  )?  ovSe  yovara  KXCveiv  Trapei- 
\rj(j)aii€V. 


138 


LOED'S  DAY,  THE 


regarded,  it  was  a  day  of  solemn  meeting  for  the 
Holy  Eucharist,  for  united  prayer,  for  instruction , 
for  almsgiving ;  and  though,  being  an  institution 
luider  the  law  of  liberty,  work  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  formally  interdicted,  or  rest  formally 
enjoined,  TertuUiau  seems  to  indicate  that  the  cha- 
racter of  the  day  was  opposed  to  worldly  business. 
Finally,  whatever  analogy  may  be  supposed  to  exist 
between  the  Lord's  Day  and  tlie  .Sabbath,  in  no 
passage  tliat  has  come  down  to  us  is  the  Fourth 
Commandment  appealed  to  as  the  ground  of  the 
obligation  to  observe  the  Lord's  Day.  Ecclesiasticid 
writers  reiterate  again  and  again,  in  the  strictest  sense 
of  the  words,  "  Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you  in 
respect  of  an  holidav,  or  of  the  new  moon,  or  of 
the  sabbath  days"  (Mr)  tis  ufxas  Kpiviroi  ev  jJ-ip^i 
foprrjs,  ^  vovfXT]vlas,  ^  craji^aToiv,  Col.  ii.  16). 
Nor,  again,  is  it  referred  to  any  Sabbatical  foundation 
anterior  to  the  promulgation  of  the  Mosaic  economy. 
On  the  contraiy,  those  before  the  Mosaic  era  are 
constantly  assumed  to  have  had  neither  knowledge 
nor  observance  of  the  Sabbath.  And  as  little  is  it 
anywhere  asserted  that  the  Lord's  Day  is  merely  an 
ecclesiastical  institution,  dependent  on  the  post- 
apostolic  Church  for  its  origin,  and  by  consequence 
capable  of  being  done  away,  should  a  time  ever 
arrive  when  it  appears  to  be  no  longer  needed. 

Our  design  does  not  necessarily  lead  us  to  do 
more  than  state  facts  ;  but  if  the  facts  be  allowed 
to  speak  for  themselves,  they  indicate  that  the 
Lord's  Day  is  a  purely  Christian  institution,  sanc- 
tioned by  apostolic  practice,  mentioned  in  apostolic 
writings,  and  so  possessed  of  whatever  divine  au- 
thority all  apostolic  ordinances  and  docti-ines  (which 
were  not  obviously  temporary,  or  were  not  abro- 
gated by  the  apostles  themselvesj  can  be  supposed 
to  possess. 

■i.  But  on  whatever  grounds  "the  Lord's  Day" 
may  be  supposed  to  rest,  it  is  a  great  and  indis- 
putable tact  that  four  years  before  the  Oecumenical 
Council  of  Nicaea,  it  was  recognised  by  Constan- 
tino in  his  celebrated  edict,  as  "  the  venerable  Day 
of  the  Sun,"  The  terms  of  the  document  are 
these : — 

"  Imperator  Constantinus  Aug.  Uelpidio.  ' 
"  Omiies  judices  uibanatque  plebts  et  cunctarum  artium 
officia  vcncrabili  I >ie  Soils  qulescant.  lUui  tamen  poslti 
agrorum  ciiUurae  libere  licentcrque  Inservlant,  quoniam 
frequenter  evcnit  lit  non  aptius  alio  die  fnimenta  sulcis 
aut  vlneae  scroblbus  mandcntur,  ne  occasione  momenti 
pereat  cummoditas  cuelesti  provislone  coneessa." — Bat. 
.Von.  Mart.  Crispo  II.  et  Constantino  II.  Coss. 

Some  have  endeavoured  to  explain  away  this 
document  by  alleging — 1st,  that  "  Solis  Dies"  is 
not  the  Christian  name  of  the  Lord's  Day,  and  that 
Constantine  did  not  therefore  intend  to  acknowledo-e 
it  as  a  Christian  institution. 

2nd.  That,  before  his  conversion,  Constantine  had 
professed  himself  to  be  especially  under  the  guardian- 
shi])  of  the  sun,  and  that,  at  the  veiy  best,  he  in- 
tended to  make  a  religious  compromise  between 
sun-worshippers,  properly  so  called,  and  the  wor- 


'  Tt)i'  6e  KvpiaKriv  KaKovixerrji'  riiJ.epav,fii'  'Efipaiot.  i-pw- 
TTji'  T>j;  epSo/ia6o9  ovofjid^ovcri.i',  "EAATji'fs  5e  tu!  HAioj 
ai'aTLOeao-iu,  Kal  Tqi'  npb  rij?  e^66juL7j9,  tVojLto^eTTjae  5tKa- 
(TTTjpi'wi/  Kal  rCiP  aWiov  Trpay/xaTwr  (txoAtjv  dyetv  7rai/Ta9, 
Kat  €v  eu;^ats  ko.).  AtTat?  to  &€tov  ^epaTreueii/*  ert/j-a  6e 
TTif  KvpLaKriv,  to?  ef  Tavrrj  tov  XptCTToG  ai^aarrai'TOs  €k 
fcKpoji'.  Ty}v  Be  €Te'paz/,  u>9  €f  avrrj  (TravpuiOei^TO^  (Soz. 
A'aJ.  Hist.  i.  c.  8).  I$ut  on  tl'.is  passage  Siiicer  observes 
very  truly,  "Xuii  iliiit  a  CuiistaiUlnoapiiclUitam  KupioKiji/, 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

shippers    of    the    "  Sun    of    Righteousness,"    i.  e. 
Chi'istians. 

3rdly.  That  Constantine's  edict  was  purely  a 
kalendarial  one,  and  intended  to  reduce  the  number 
of  public  holidays,  "  Dies  Nefasti,"  or  "  Feriati, ' 
which  had,  so  long  ago  as  the  date  of  the  "  Actiones 
Verrinae,"  become  a  serious  impediment  to  the 
transaction  of  business.  And  that  this  was  to  be 
eti'ected  by  choosing  a  day  which,  while  it  would 
be  accepted  by  the  Paganism  then  in  fashion,  woulil 
of  course  be  agreeable  to  the  Christians. 

4thly.  That  Constantine  then  instituted  Sunday 
for  the  first  time  as  a  religious  day  for  Christians. 

The  fourth  of  these  statements  is  absolutely  re- 
futed, both  by  the  quotations  made  above  from 
writeis  of  the  second  and  third  ccntm-ies,  and  by 
tlie  tenns  of  the  edict  itself.  It  is  evident  that 
Constantine,  accepting  as  facts  the  existence  of  the 
"  Solis  Dies,"  and  the  reverence  paid  to  it  by  some 
one  or  other,  does  nothing  more  than  make  that 
reverence  practically  universal.  It  is  "  venerabilis" 
already.  And  it  is  probable  that  this  most  natural 
interpretation  would  never  have  been  disturbed,  had 
not  Sozomeu  asserted,  without  warrant  from  either 
the  Justinian  or  the  Theodosian  Code,  that  Con- 
stantine did  for  the  sixth  day  of  the  week  what  the 
codes  assert  he  did  for  the  first.' 

The  three  other  statements  concern  themselves 
rather  with  what  Constantine  meant  than  with 
what  he  did.  But  with  such  considerations  we 
have  little  or  nothing  to  do.  He  may  have  pur- 
posely selected  an  ambiguous  appellation.  He  may 
have  been  only  half  a  Christian,  wavering  between 
allegiance  to  Christ  and  allegiance  to  Mithras.  He 
may  have  affected  a  religious  syncretism.  He  may 
have  wished  his  people  to  adopt  such  syncretism. 
He  may  have  feared  to  offend  the  Pagans.  He  may 
have  hesitated  to  avow  too  openly  his  inward  lean- 
ings to  Christianity.  He  may  have  considered  that 
community  of  religious  days  might  lead  bye  and  bye 
to  community  of  religious  thought  and  feeling. 
And  he  may  have  had  in  view  the  rectification  of 
the  kalendar.  But  all  this  is  nothing  to  the  pur- 
pose. It  is  a  fact,  that  in  the  year  a.d.  321,  in  a 
public  edict,  which  was  to  apply  to  Cliristians  as 
well  as  to  Pagans,  he  put  especial  lionour  upon  a 
day  already  honoured  by  the  former — judiciously 
calling  it  by  a  name  which  Christians  had  long 
employed  without  scruple,  and  to  which,  as  it  was 
in  ordinary  use,  the  Pagans  could  scarcely  object. 
What  he  did  for  it  was  to  insist  that  worldly 
business,  whether  by  the  functionaries  of  the  law 
or  by  private  citizens,  should  be  intermitted  during 
its  continuance.  An  exception  indeed  was  made 
in  favour  of  the  rural  districts,  avowedly  from  the 
necessity  of  the  case,  coveitly  perhaps  to  prevent 
those  districts,  where  Paganism  (as  the  word  Pagus 
would  intimate)  still  prevailed  extensively,  fiom 
feeling  aggrieved  by  a  sudden  and  stringent  change. 
It  need  only  be  added  here,  that  the  readiness  with 
which  Christians  accjuiesced  in  the  interdiction  of 
business  on  the  Lord's  Day  affords  no  small  pre- 
sumption that  they  had  long  considered  it  to  be  a 

sod  'jam  ante  sic  vocatara  feriatam  esse  decrevlt.' "  There 
is  a  passage  also  in  Euscbius  ( Vit.  Const,  iv.  18)  which 
appears  to  assert  the  same  thing  of  Saturday.  It  is,  how- 
ever, manifestly  corrupt,  and  can  scarcely  be  translated  at 
all  except  by  the  employment  of  an  emendation  ;  while, 
if  we  do  thus  emend  it,  it  will  speak  of  Friday,  as  Sozomen 
does,  and  not  of  Saturday;  and,  what  is  more  to  our  pur- 
pose, to  whichever  of  those  days  it  does  refer,  what  is  said 
in  ii,  oonceming  'H  Kvpia/c".)  will  fall  under  Suiccr's  remark. 


LOED'S  SUPPER 

day  of  rest,  and  that,  so  far  as  circumstances  ad- 
mitted, they  had  made  it  so  long  before.  • 

Were  any  other  testimony  wanting  to  the  exist- 
ence of  Sunday  as  a  day  ol'  Christian  worship  at 
this  period,  it  might  be  supplied  by  the  Council  of 
Nicaea,  A.D.  oL'o.  The  Fathers  there  and  then  as- 
sembled make  no  doubt  of  the  obligation  of  that 
day — do  not  ordain  it — do  not  defend  it.  They 
assume  it  as  an  e.\isting  fact,  and  only  notice  it 
incidentally  in  order  to  regulate  an  indiffeitnt  mat- 
ter, the  jwsture  of  Christian  worshippers  upon  it.'' 

Richard  Baxter  has  well  suumied  up  the  history 
of  tlie  Lord's  Day  at  this  point,  and  his  words  may 
not  unaptly  be  inserted  here : — "  That  the  first 
Christian  emperor,  finding  all  Christians  unanimous 
in  the  possession  of  the  day,  should  make  a  law 
(as  our  kings  do)  for  the  due  observing  of  it,  and 
that  the  first  Christian  council  should  establish 
uniformity  in  the  very  gesture  of  worship  on  that 
day,  are  strong  confirmations  of  the  matter  of  fact, 
that  the  churches  imanimously  agreed  in  the  holy 
use  of  it  as  a  separated  day  even  from  and  in  the 
Apostles'  days"  (Richard  Baxter,  On  the  Divine 
Appointment  of  the  Lord's  Day,  p.  41.   1671). 

Here  we  conclude  our  inquiry.  If  patristical  or 
ecclesiastical  ground  has  been  touched  upon,  it  has 
been  only ,  so  far  as  appeared  necessary  for  the 
elucidation  of  the  Scripture  phrase,  ^  KvpiaK.)} 
'H/xepa.  What  became  of  the  Sabbath  after  Chris- 
tianity was  fairly  planted;  what  Christ  said  of  it 
in  the  Gospels,  and  how  His  words  are  to  be  inter- 
preted ;  what  the  apostles  said  of  that  day,  and 
how  they  treated  it ;  what  the  early  ecclesiastical 
writers  held  respecting  it ;  and  in  what  sense 
"There  remaineth  a  sabbatismus  ((rayS^aTiir/xbs, 
A.  V.  "rest")  to  the  people  of  God"  (Heb. 
iv.  9) :  these  are  questions  which  fail  rather 
under  the  head  of  Sabbath  than  under  that 
of  "  Lord's  Day."  And  as  no  debate  arose  in  apos- 
tolic or  in  primitive  times  respecting  the  relation, 
by  descent,  of  the  Lord's  Dav  to  the  Mosaic  Sabbath, 
)r  to  any  Sabbatical  institution  of  assumed  higher 
antiquity,  none  need   be  raised  here.      [See  Sab- 

BATH.] 

The  whole  subject  of  the  Lord's  Day,  including 
its  "  origin,  history,  and  present  obligation,"  is 
tieated  of  by  the  writer  of  this  article  in  the  Bamp- 
ton  Lecture  for  1860.  [J.  A.  H.] 

LORD'S  SUPPER  {KvpiaKhv  S^7Trvoy:  Coemx 
Dominica).  The  words  which  thus  describe  the 
great  central  act  of  the  worship  of  the  Christian 
t'hurch  occur  but  in  one  single  passage  of 
the  N.  T.  (1  Cor.  xi.  20)."  Of  the  fact  Vhich 
lies  under  the  name  we  have  several  notices, 
and  from  these,  incidental  and  fVagmenfcvry  as  they 
are,  it  is  possible  to  form  a  tolerably  distinct  picture. 
'I'o  examine  these  notices  in  their  relation  to  the  life 

^  "Enei.Sri  Tive'5  ilTiv  er  Tfl  (CupiaKT)  ■yocu  xAiVoi'Te!  Koi 
ev  rati  riy;  lIepT7^KO(7"T^?  i7jU,epai9,  VTrep  toO  irdvTa  ^v 
TrdoT)  nafiOLKif^  6/xoicu;  t^vKdrT^aOai,  ccrrwra?  eSo^e  rfj 
dyia  (TVfoSia  ras  euxas  a.no&i,S6vai  tw  ©ecu  (t'owc.  TVtc. 
Can.  211). 

"  M.ikionatus  (Comm.  on  Matt.  xxvi.  26)  is  bold  enough 
to  deny  that  tlie  "  l-ord's  Supper"  of  1  Cor.  .\i.  20  is  the 
same  as  the  "  Kucharistia"  of  the  later  Church,  and  iden- 
titifs  it  wiih  the  nn^al  that  followed.  The  phraseology  to 
which  we  are  aci  iiflouiwi  is  to  hiin  only  an  example  of 
the  "  rldicula  Calviiilstarum  et  Lutheranorum  hiscitia," 
imiovatinp;  on  the  received  language  of  the  Church.  The 
ki'iii  detector  of  heresy,  however,  is  in  tliis  instance  at 
variance  not  only  with  thi-  consensus  of  the  chief  fathers 
of  the  ancient  Church  (com|i.  Siiirer,  Thes.  s.  v.  StiTTi/ov), 


LORD'S  SUPPER 


139 


of  the  Christian  society  in  the  first  stages  of  its 
growth,  and  so  to  learn  what  "  the  Supper  of 
the  Lord  "  actually  was,  will  be  the  object  of  this 
article.  It  would  be  foreign  to  its  purpose  to  trace 
the  history  of  the  stately  liturgies  which  grew  up 
out  of  it  in  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries,  except  so  liir 
as  they  supply  or  suggest  evidence  as  to  the  customs 
of  the  earlier  period,  or  to  touch  upon  the  many 
controversies  which  then,  or  at  a  later  age,  have 
clustered  round  tlie  original  institution. 

I.  The  starting  point  of  this  inquiry  is  found  in 
the  history  of  that  night  when  Jesus  and  His  dis- 
ciples met  together  to  eat  the  Passover  .(Matt.  xxvi. 
ly;  Mark  xiv.  16;  Luke  xxii.  13).  The  manner 
in  which  the  Paschal  feast  was  kept  by  the  Jews 
of  that  period  differed  in  many  details  from  that 
originally  prescribed  by  the  rules  of  Ex.  .xii.  The 
multitudes  that  came  up  to  Jerusalem,  met,  as  they 
could  find  Accommodation,  family  by  family,  or  m 
groups  of  friends,  with  one  of  their  number  as  the 
celebrant,  or  "  proclaimer  "  of  the  feast.  The  cere- 
monies of  the  feast  took  place  in  the  following  order 
(Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  xiii. ;  Meyer,  Comm.  in 
Matt.  yi\\\.  26).  (1)  The  members  of  tlie  company 
that  were  joined  for  this  purpose  met  in  the  evening 
and  reclined  on  couches,  this  position  being  now  as 
much  a  matter  of  rule  as  standing  had  been  originally 
(comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  20,  aveKeiro  ;  Luke  xxii.  14  ; 
and  John  xiii.  23,  25).  The  head  of  the  house- 
hold, or  celebrant,  began  by  a  form  of  blessing 
"  for  the  day  and  for  the  wine,"  pronounced  over  a 
cup,  of  which  he  and  the  others  then  drank.  The 
wine  was,  according  to  Rabbiuic  traditions,  to  be 
mixed  with  water ;  not  for  any  mysterious  reason, 
but  because  that  was  regarded  as  the  best  way  of 
using  the  best  wine  (comp.  2  Mace.  xv.  39). 
(2)  All  who  were  present  then  washed  their  hands  ; 
this  also  having  a  special  benediction.  (3)  The 
table  was  then  set  out  with  the  paschal  lamb,  un- 
leavened bread,  bitter  herbs,  and  the  dish  known 
asCharoseth  (flDI'in),  a  sauce  made  of  dates,  figs, 
raisins,  and  vinegar,  and  designed  to  commemorate 
the  mortar  of  their  bondage  in  Kgvpt  (Buxtortf, 
Lex.  Rahb.  831).  (4)  The  celebrant  first,  and 
then  the  others,  dipped  a  portion  of  the  bitter  herbs 
into  the  Charoseth  and  ate  them.  (5)  The  dishes 
were  then  removed,  and  a  cup  of  wine  again 
brought.  Then  followed  an  interval  which  was 
allowed  theoretically  for  the  questions  that  might 
be  asked  by  children  or  proselytes,  who  were  asto- 
nished at  such  a  strange  beginning  of  a  feast,  and 
the  cup  was  passed  round  and  drunk  at  the  close 
of  it.  (6)  The  dishes  being  brought  on  again,  the 
celebrant  repeated  the  commemorative  words  which 
o}>enod  what  was  strictly  the  {>aschal  siipper,  and 
pronounced  a  solemn  thanksgiving,  followed  by  Ps. 
cxiii.  and  cxiv.''     (7)  Then  came  a  second  washing 

but  with  the  authoritative  teaching  of  his  own  (^Cattchism. 
Trident,  c.  iv.  qu.  5). 

b  Jt  may  be  interesting  to  give  the  words,  as  shewing 
what  kind  of  forms  may  have  served  as  types  for  the  first 
worship  of  the  Christian  Church. 

1.  This  is  the  passover,  which  we  eat  becjiuse  tlie  Lord 
passed  over  the  houses  of  our  fathers  in  Egypt. 

2.  These  are  the  bitter  herbs,  which  we  eat  in  remem- 
brance that  the  Egyptians  made  the  lives  of  our  fathers 
bitter  in  Egypt. 

3.  This  is  the  unleavened  bread,  which  we  eat,  because 
the  dough  of  our  fathers  had  not  time  to  be  leavened 
bi'fore  the  Lord  revealed  himself  and  redeemed  them  out 
of  hand. 

•I.  ■['licri'torc  are  wc  In. unci  to  givf  thanks,  to  prait.e,  to 


140 


LOKDS  SUPPEE 


of  the  hands,  with  a  short  form  of  blessing  as 
before,  and  the  celebrant  broke  one  of  the  two 
loaves  or  cakes  of  unleavened  bread,  ami  gave  thanks 
over  it.  All  then  took  portions  of  the  bread  and 
dipped  them,  together  with  the  bitter  herbs,  into 
the  Ciiaroseth,  and  so  ate  them.  (8)  After  this 
they  ate  the  flesh  of  the  paschal  lamb,  with  bread, 
&c.,  as  they  liked ;  and  after  another  blessing,  a 
third  cup,  known  especially  as  the  "cup  of  bless- 
ing," was  hainled  round.  (9)  This  was  succeeded 
by  a  fourth  cup,  and  the  recital  of  Ps.  cxv.-cxviii. 
followed  by  a  piayer,  and  this  was  accordingly 
known  as  the  cup  of  the  Hallel,  or  of  the  Song. 
(10)  There  might  be,  in  conclusion,  a  fifth  cup, 
provided  that  the  "  great  Hallel"  (possibly  Psalms 
cxx.-cxxxvii.)  was  sung  over  it. 

Compai-ing  the  ritual  thus  gathered  fi-om  Rab- 
binic writers  with  the  N.  T.,  and  assuming  (1) 
that  it  represents  substantially  the  common  practice 
of  our  Lord's  time  ;  and  (2)  that  the  meal  of  which 
He  and  His  disciples  partook,  was  either  the  pass- 
over  itself,  or  an  anticipation  of  it,'  conducted 
according  to  the  same  rules,  we  are  able  to  point, 
though  not  with  absolute  certainty,  to  the  points 
of  departure  which  the  old  practice  presented  for 
the  institution  of  the  new.  To  (1)  or  (3),  or  even 
to  (8),  we  may  refer  the  first  words  and  the  first 
distribution  of  the  cup  (Luke  xxii.  17,  18)  ;  to  (2) 
or  (7),  the  dipping  of  the  sop  {i^w/j.lov)  of  John 
siii.  26  ;  to  (7),  or  to  an  interval  during  or  after 
(8),  the  distribution  of  the  bread  (Matt-^xxvi.  26  ; 
Mark  xiv.  22  ;  Luke  xxii.  19  ;  1  Cor.  xi.  23,  24) ; 
to  (9)  or  (10)  ("after  supper,"  Luke  xxii.  20)  the 
thanksgiving,  and  distribution  of  the  cup,  and 
the  hymn  with  which  the  whole  was  ended.  It 
will  be  noticed  that,  according  to  this  order  of  suc- 
cession, the  question  whether  .Judas  partook  of 
what,  in  the  language  of  a  later  age,  would  be 
called  the  consecrated  elements,  is  most  probably  to 
be  answered  in  the  negative. 

The  narratives  of  the  Gospels  show  how  strongly 
the  disciples  were  impressed  with  the  words  which 
had  given  a  new  meaning  to  the  old  familiar  acts. 
They  leave  unnoticed  all  the  cei'emonies  of  the  Pass- 
over, except  those  which  had  thus  been  transferred  to 
the  Christian  Chui'ch  and  perpetuated  in  it.  Old 
things  were  passing  away,  and  all  things  becoming 
new.  They  had  looked  on  the  bread  and  the  wine 
as  niemoi'ials  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt.  They 
were  now  told  to  pai-take  of  them  "  in  remem- 
brance"  of  their  blaster  and  Lord.  The  festival 
had  been  annual.  No  rule  was  given  as  to  the  time 
and  frequency  of  the  new  feast  that  thus  supervened 
on  the  old,  but  the  command  "  Do  this  as  oft  as 
ye  drink  it"  (1  Cor.  xi.  25),  suggested  the  more 
continual  recuirence  of  that  which  was  to  be  their 
memorial  of  one  whom  they  would  wish  never  to 
forget.  The  words,  "  This  is  my  body,"  gave  to 
the  unleavened  bread  a  new  character.  They  had 
been  prepared  for  language  that  would  otherwise 


laud,  to  glorify,  to  extol,  to  honour,  to  praise,  to  magnify 
him  that  lialli  done  for  our  fathers,  and  for  us,  all  ihese 
wonders;  who  hath  brought  us  from  boiulage  to  free- 
dom, from  sorrow  to  rejoicing,  from  mourning  to  a  good 
day,  from  darkness  to  a  great  light,  irom  affliction  to 
redemption ;  therefore  must  we  say  before  him,  Hallelu- 
jah, praise  ye  the  Lord  ....  followed  by  I's.  cxiii.  (Light- 
foot,  I.  c). 

•^  This  reservation  is  made  as  being  a  possible  altema- 
tive  for  explaining  the  differencts  between  the  three 
lirst  Gospels  and  St.  John. 


LORD'S  SUPPEll 

have  been  so  startling,  by  the  teachmg  of  John  (vi. 
o2-5S),  and  they  were  thus  taught  to  see  in  the 
bread  that  was  broken  the  witness  of  the  closest 
possible  union  and  incorporation  with  their  Lord. 
The  cup  which  was  "the  new  testament"  (Sia- 
O'jj/crj)  "  in  His  blood,"  would  remind  them,  in  like 
manner,  of  the  wonderful  prophecy  in  which  that 
new  covenant  had  been  foretold  (Jer.  xxxi.  31-34) 
of  which  the  crowning  glory  was  in  the  promise, 
"  1  will'forgive  their  iniquity,  and  I  will  remember 
their  sin  no  more."  His  blood  shed,  as  He  told  them, 
"  for  them  and  for  many,"  for  that  remission  of 
sins  which  He  had  been  proclaiming  throughout  his 
whole  ministry,  was  to  be  to  the  new  covenant 
what  the  blood  of  sprinkling  had  been  to  that  of 
Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  8).  It  is  possible  that  there  may 
have  been  yet  another  thought  connected  with  these 
symbolic  acts.  The  funeral  customs  of  the  Jews 
involved,  at  or  after  the  burial,  the  admmistration 
to  the  mourners  of  bread  (comp.  Jer.  xvi.  7, 
"  neither  shall  they  break  bread  for  them  in  mourn- 
ing," in  marginal  reading  of  A.  V. ;  Ewald  and 
Hitzig,  ad  loc. ;  Ez.  xxiv.  17  ;  Hos.  ix.  4  ;  Tob.  iv. 
17),  and  of  wine,  known,  when  thus  given,  as 
"  the  cup  of  consolation."  May  not  the  bread  and 
the  wine  of  the  Last  Supper  have  had  something  of 
that  character,  preparing  the  minds  of  Christ's  dis- 
ciples for  His  departure  by  treating  it  as  already 
accomplished?  They  were  to  think  of  his  body  as 
already  anointed  for  the  burial  (Matt.  xxvi.  12  ; 
Mark  xiv.  8;  John  xii.  7),  of  his  body  as  already 
given  up  to  death,  of  his  blood  as  already  shed. 
The  passover-meal  was  also,  little  as  they  might 
di'eam  of  it,  a  funeral-feast.  The  bread  and  the 
wine  were  to  be  pledges  of  consolation  for  their 
sorrow,  analogous  to  the  verbal  promises  of  John 
xiv.  1,  27,  xvi.  20.  The  word  5ia0i7«;7j  might  even 
have  the  twofold  meaning  which  is  connected  with 
it  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

May  we  not  conjecture,  without  leaving  the 
region  of  history  for  that  of  controversy,  that  the 
thoughts,  desires,  emotions,  of  that  hour  of  divine 
sorrow  and  communion  would  be  such  as  to  load 
the  disciples  to  crave  earnestly  to  renew  them  ? 
Would  it  not  be  natural  that  they  should  seek  that 
renewal  in  the  way  which  their  Master  had  pointed 
out  to  them  ?  From  this  time,  accordingly,  the 
words  "  to  break  bread,"  appear  to  have  had  for 
the  disciples  a  new  significance.  It  may  not  have 
assumed  indeed,  as  yet,  the  character  of  a  distinct 
liturgical  act ;  but  when  they  met  to  break  bread, 
it  was  with  new  thoughts  and  hopes,  and  with 
the  memories  of  that  evening  fresh  on  them.  It 
would  be  natural  that  the  Twelve  should  transmit 
the  command  to  others  who  had  not  been  present, 
and  seek  to  lead  them  to  the  same  obedience  and 
the  same  blessings.  The  narrative  of  the  two  dis- 
ciples to  whom  their  Lord  made  himself  known  "  in 
breaking  of  bread  "  at  Emmaus  (Luke  xxiv.  30-35) 
would  strengthen  the  belief  that  this  was  the  way 
to  an  abiding  fellowship  with  Him."* 

d  The  general  consensus  of  patristic  and  Roman  Catholic 
interpreters  finds  in  this  also  a  solemn  celebration  of  the 
Kucharist.  Here,  they  say,  are  the  solemn  benediction, 
and  the  technical  words  for  the  distribution  of  the  elements 
as  in  the  original  institution,  and  as  in  the  later  notices 
of  the  Acts.  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
phrase  "  to  break  bread''  had  been  a  synonym  for  the  act 
of  any  one  presiding  at  a  meal  (comp.  Jer.  xvi.  1,  Lam. 
iv.  4),  and  that  the  Kabbinic  rule  required  a  blessing 
whenever  throe  persons  sat  down  togetlier  at  it.  (Comp. 
Maldonatiis  and  Moycr,  ad  loc). 


LORD'S  SUPPER 

II.  In  the  account  given  by  the  writer  of  the 
Acts  of  the  life  of  the  first  disciples  at  Jerusalem,  a 
prominent  place  is  given  to  tliis  act,  and  to  the 
phrase  which  indicated  it.  Writing,  we  must  re- 
member, with  the  definite  associations  that  had 
gathered  round  the  wordsduring  the  thirty  years  that 
followed  the  events  he  records,  he  describes  the 
baptized  members  of  the  Church  as  continuing 
steadfast  in  or  to  the  teaching  of  the  apostles,  in 
fellowship  with  them  and  with  each  other,"^  and  in 
breaking  of  bread  and  in  prayers  (Acts  ii.  42).  A 
few  verses  farther  on,  their  daily  life  is  described 
as  ranging  itself  under  two  heads:  (1)  that  of 
public  devotion,  which  still  belonged  to  them  as  Jews 
("continuing  daily  witli  one  accord  in  the  Temple") ; 
(2)  that  of  their  distinctive  acts  of  fellowship 
"  breaking  bread  fiom  house  to  house  (or  "  pri- 
vately," Meyer),  they  did  eat  their  meat  in  gladness 
and  singleness  of  heart,  praising  God,  and  having 
favour  with  all  the  people."  Taken  in  connexion 
with  the  account  given  in  the  preceding  verses  of 
the  love  which  made  them  live  as  having  all  things 
common,  we  can  scarcely  doubt  that  this  implies 
that  the  chief  actual  meal  of  each  day  was  one  in 
which  they  met  as  brothers,  and  which  was  either 
preceded  or  followed  by  the  more  solemn  comme- 
morative acts  of  the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  the 
drinking  of  the  cup.  It  will  be  convenient  to  anti- 
cipate the  language  and  the  thoughts  of  a  some- 
what later  date,  and  to  say  that,  apparently,  they 
thus  united  every  day  the  Agapfe '  or  feast  of  Love 
with  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist.  So  far  as  the 
former  was  concerned,  they  were  reproducing  in 
the  streets  of  Jerusalem  tlie  simple  and  brotherly 
life  which  the  Essenes  were  leading  in  their  seclu- 
sion on  the  shores  of  the  Dead  Sea.^  It  would  be 
natural  that  in  a  society  consisting  of  many  thou- 
sand members  there  should  be  many  places  of 
meeting.  These  might  be  rooms  hired  for  the  pur- 
pose, or  freely  given  by  those  members  of  the 
Church  who  had  them  to  dispose  of.  The  congre- 
gation assembling  in  each  place  would  come  to  be 
known  as  "  the  Church  "  in  this  or  that  man's  house 
(Rom.  xvi.  5,23;  1  Cor.  xvi.  19;  Col.  iv.  15; 
Philem.  ver.  2j.  When  they  met,  the  place  of  honour 
would  naturally  be  taken  by  one  of  the  apostles,  or 
some  elder  representing  him.  It  would  belong  to 
him  to  pronounce  the  blessing  (fiiXoyia)  and  thanks- 
giving {evxa.pi(rTia),  with  which  the  meals  of  de- 
vout Jews  always  began  and  ended.  The  materials 
for  the  meal  would  be  provided  out  of  the  common 
funds  of  the  Church,  or  the  liberality  of  individual 
members.  The  bread  (unless  the  converted  Jews 
were  to  think  of  themselves  as  keeping  a  perpetual 
passover)  would  be  such  as  they  habitually  used. 

e  The  meaning  of  KoiuuvCa  in  this  passage  is  probably 
explained  by  the  eXxov  an-ai/Ta  Koiva  that  follows  (comp. 
Meyer,  wl  he).  The  Vulg.  rendiTing,  "  et  communica- 
tionc  fractionis  panis,"  originated  probably  in  a  wish  to 
give  to  the  word  its  later  liturgical  sense. 

'  The  fact  is  traceable  to  the  earliest  days  of  the  Church. 
The  origin  of  the  name  is  obscure.  It  occurs  in  this  sense 
only  in  two  passages  of  the  N.  T.,  2  Pet.  ii.  13,  .fude  v. 
12 ;  and  there  the  reading  (though  supported  by  B  and 
other  groat  MSS.)  is  not  undisputed.  The  absence  ol'  any 
reference  to  it  in  St.  Paul's  memorable  chapter  on  'kyam) 
(1  Cor.  xiii.)  makes  it  improbable  that  it  was  then  and 
there  in  use.  In  the  ago  alter  the  apostles,  however,  it 
is  a  currently  awepted  word  for  the  meal  here  described 
(Ignat.  Kp.  ml  Smyrn.  c.  8;  Tertull.  Apol.  c.  39,  ad  J/arc. 
c.  2;  Cyprian,  Testiin.  ad  Quirin.  iii.  3). 

K  The  account  given  by  Josephus  (/lell.  Jud.  ii.  8)  de- 
serves to  be  studii'd,  both  as  coming  from  an  eye-witness 


LORD'S  SUPPER 


141 


The  wme  (probably  the  common  red  wine  of  Pales- 
tine, I'rov.  xxiii.  31)  would,  according  to  their 
usual  practice,  be  mixed  with  water.  Special  stress 
would  probably  be  laid  at  first  on  the  office  of 
breaking  and  distributing  the  bread,  as  that  which 
represented  the  fatherly  relation  of  the  pastor  to  his 
flock,  and  his  work  as  ministering  to  men  the  word 
of  life.  But  if  this  was  to  be  more  than  a  common 
meal  after  the  pattern  of  the  Essenes,  it  would  be 
necessary  to  introduce  words  that  would  show  that 
what  was  done  was  in  remembrance  of  their  Master. 
At  some  time,  before  or  after ''  the  meal  of  which 
they  partook  as  such,  the  bread  and  the  wine  would 
be  given  with  some  special  form  of  words  or  acts, 
to  indicate  its  character.  New  converts  would 
need  some  explanation  of  the  meaning  and  origin  of 
the  observance.  What  would  be  so  fitting  and  so 
much  in  harmony  with  the  precedents  of  the  Paschal 
feast  as  the  narrative  of  what  had  passed  on  the  night 
of  its  institution  (1  Cor.  xi.  23-27)?  With  tliis 
there  would  naturally  be  associated  (as  in  Acts  ii.  42) 
prayers  for  themselves  and  others.  Their  gladness 
would  show  itself  in  the  psalms  and  hymns  with 
which  they  praised  God  (Heb.  ii.  46,  47  ;  James 
V.  13).  The  analogy  of  the  Passover,  the  general 
feeling  of  the  Jews,  and  the  practice  of  the  Essenes 
may  possibly  have  suggested  ablutions,  partial  or 
entire,  as  a  preparation  for  the  feast  (Heb.  x.  22  ; 
John  xiii.  1-15  ;  comp.  Tertull.  de  Orat.  c.  xi. ;  and 
for  the  later  practice  of  the  Church,  August.  Serm. 
ccxliv.).  At  some  point  in  the  feast  those  who  were 
present,  men  and  women  sitting  apart,  would  rise 
to  salute  each  other  with  the  "holy  kiss"  (1  Cor. 
xvi.  20  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  12  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Paedagog.  iii. 
c.  11  ;  Tertull.  de  Orat.  c.  14 ;  Just.  M.  Apol  ii.). 
Of  the  stages  in  the  gi-owth  of  the  new  worship  we 
have,  it  is  true,  no  direct  evidence,  but  these  con- 
jectures from  antecedent  likelihood  are  confirmed 
by  the  fact  that  this  order  appears  as  the  common 
element  of  all  later  liturgies. 

The  nest  traces  that  meet  us  are  in  1  Cor.,  and 
the  fact  that  we  find  them  is  in  itself  significant. 
The  commemorative  feast  has  not  been  confined  to 
the  personal  disciples  of  Christ,  or  the  Jewish  COE- 
verts  whom  they  gathered  round  them  at  Jeru- 
salem. It  has  been  the  law  of  the  Church's  expan- 
sion that  this  should  form  part  of  its  life  every- 
where. Wherever  the  apostles  or  their  delegates 
have  gone,  they  have  taken  this  with  them.  The 
language  of  St.  Paul,  we  must  remember,  is  not 
that  of  a  man  who  is  setting  forth  a  new  truth, 
but  of  one  wlio  appeals  to  thoughts,  words,  phrases 
that  are  familiar  to  his  readers,  and  we  find  accord- 
ingly evidence  of  a  received  liturgical  terminology. 
The  title  of  the  "cup  of  blessing"   (1  Cor.  x.  16), 


(  Vila,  c.  2),  and  as  shewing  a  type  of  holiness  which 
could  hardly  have  been  unknown  to  the  first  Christiim 
disciples.  The  description  of  the  meals  of  tlie  Essenes 
might  almost  pass  for  that  of  an  Agape.  "  They  wash 
themselves  with  pure  water,  and  go  to  their  refectory  as 
to  a  holy  place  (Tc>te(/os),  and  sit  down  calmly  ....  The 
priest  begins  with  a  prayer  over  the  food,  and  it  is  uiilaw- 
lul  for  any  one  to  taste  of  it  before  the  prayer."  This  is 
the  early  meal.  The  Selirvov  is  in  the  same  order  (comp. 
Pliny,  £p.  ad  Tiaj.). 

^  E.xamplcs  of  both  are  fotuul  in  the  history  of  the 
early  Church  :  1  Cor.  xi.  is  an  example  of  the  Agape 
coming  before  the  Eucharist.  'I'he  order  of  the  two  words 
In  Ignat.  Episl.  ad  Smyrn.  c.  4  implies  priority.  The 
practice  continued  in  some  parts  of  I'^gypt  even  to  the 
time  of  Sozomeii  (Hist.  Eccl.  vii.  c.  I'.i),  and  the  rule  of 
the  Council  of  Caiihagc  (can.  xli.)  forbidding  it,  implies 
tliat  it  had  been  customary. 


142 


LORDS  SUPPER 


Hebrew  m  its  origin  and  form  (see  above),  has  been 
imported  into  the  Greek  Church.  The  synonym 
of  "the  cup  of  the  Lord"  (1  Cor.  x.  21)  distin- 
guishes it  from  the  other  cups  that  belonged  to  the 
Agape.  The  word  "  fellowship  "  (Koivuuia)  is  pass- 
ing by  degrees  into  the  special  signification  of  "  Com- 
munion." The  apostle  refers  to  his  own  office  as 
breaking  the  bi'ead  and  blessing  the  cup  (1  Cor. 
X.  16).'  The  table  on  which  the  bread  was  placed 
was  the  Lord's  Table,  and  that  title  was  to  the 
Jew  not,  as  later  controversies  have  made  it,  the 
antithesis  of  altar  (Qvcnacrrriptov),  but  as  nearly 
as  possible  a  synonym  (Mai.  i.  7,  12  ;  Ez.  xli.  22). 
But  the  practice  of  the  Agape,  as  well  as  the  ob- 
servance of  the  commemorative  feast,  had  been 
transferred  to  Corinth,  and  this  called  for  a  special 
notice.  Evils  had  sprung  up  which  had  to  be 
checked  at  once.  The  meeting  of  friends  for  a 
social  meal,  to  which  all  contributed,  was  a  suffi- 
ciently familiar  practice  in  the  common  life  of 
Greeks  of  this  period ;  and  these  club-feasts  were 
associated  with  plans  of  mutual  relief  or  charity  to 
the  poor  (comp.  Smith's  Dictionary  of  Antiquities, 
s.  V.  ''Y.pavoi).  The  Agapfe  of  the  new  society 
would  seem  to  them  to  be  such  a  feast,  and  hence 
came  a  disorder  that  altogether  frustrated  the  object 
of  the  Church  in  instituting  it.  Richer  members 
came,  bringing  their  supper  with  them,  or  appro- 
priating what  belonged  to  the  common  stock,  and  sat 
down  to  consume  it  without  waiting  till  others  were 
assembled  and  the  presiding  elder  had  taken  his 
place.  The  poor  were  put  to  shame,  and  defrauded 
of  their  share  in  the  feast.  Each  was  flunking  of 
his  own  supper,  not  of  that  to  which  we  now  find 
attached  the  distinguishing  title  of  "  the  Lord's 
Supper.''  And  when  the  time  for  that  came,  one  was 
hungry  enough  to  be  looking  to  it  with  physical  not 
spiritual  craving,  another  so  overpowered  with  wine 
as  to  be  incapable  of  receiving  it  with  any  reverence. 
It  is  quite  conceivable  that  a  life  of  excess  and  ex- 
citement, of  overwrought  emotion  and  unrestrained 
indulgence,  such  as  this  epistle  brings  before  us,  may 
have  proved  destructive  to  the  physical  as  well  as 
the  moral  health  of  those  who  were  atl'ected  by  it, 
and  so  the  sicknesses  and  the  de;iths  of  which  St. 
Paul  speaks  (1  Cor.  xi.  30),  as  the  consequences  of 
this  disorder  may  have  been  so,  not  by  supernatural 
infliction,  but  by  the  working  of  those  general  laws  of 
the  divine  government,  which  make  the  punishment 
the  traceable  consequence  of  the  sin.  In  any  case, 
what  the  Corinthians  needed  was,  to  be  taught  to 
come  to  the  Lord's  table  with  greater  reverence,  to 
distinguish  {^laKpivsiv)  the  Lord's  body  from  their 


»  The  plural  Kkui/j-ev  has  been  understood  as  implying 
that  the  congregation  took  part  in  the  act  of  bieaking 
(Stanley,  Corinthians ;  and  Estius,  ad  loc.).  It  may  be 
questioned,  however,  whether  this  is  suflncient  ground  fur 
an  interpretation  for  which  there  is  no  support  either  in 
the  analogous  custom  of  the  Jews  or  in  the  traditions  of 
the  Clmrch.  The  ev\oyoviJ.ev,  which  stands  parallel  to 
K\iofxev,  can  hardly  be  referred  to  the  whole  body  of 
partakers.  When  the  act  is  described  historically,  tlie  sin- 
gular is  always  used  (Acts  ,xx.  1 1,  xxvii.  35).  Tertullian,  in 
the  passage  to  which  Prof.  Stanley  refers,  speaks  of  the 
other  practice  ("nee  de  aliorum  quam  praesidentium  ma- 
nibus,"  de  CO)-.  J/i;.c.  3)  as  an  old  tradition,  not  as  a  changi^. 

k  The  word  xupia/cbs  appears  to  have  been  coined  for 
the  purpose  of  expressing  the  new  thought. 

■"It  has  been  ingeniously  contended  that  the  change 
from  evening  to  morning  was  the  direct  result  of  St.  Paul's 
intei-positiou  (Christian  Remembrancer,  art.  on  "Evening 
Communions,"  July,  1860). 

°   I'hat  presented  by  the  Council  of  Gaiigra  (can.  xi.)  is 


LORD'S  SUPPER 

common  food.  Unless  they  did  so,  they  would 
bring  upon  themselves  condemnation.  What  was 
to  be  the  remedy  for  this  terrible  and  growing  evil 
he  does  not  state  explicitly.  He  reseives  ibrmal 
regulations  for  a  later  personal  visit.  In  the  mean- 
time he  gives  a  rule  which  would  make  the  union 
of  the  Agapfe  and  the  Lord's  Supper  possible  with- 
out the  risk  of  profanation.  They  were  not  to  come 
even  to  the  former  with  the  keen  edge  of  appetite. 
They  were  to  wait  till  all  were  met,  instead  of 
scrambhng  tumult  uously  to  help  themselves  ( 1  Cor. 
si.  33,  34).  In  one  point,  however,  the  custom  of 
the  Church  of  Corinth  diti'ered  apparently  from  that 
of  Jerusalem.  The  meeting  for  the  Lord's  Supper 
was  no  longer  daily  (1  Cor.  xi.  20,  33).  The  direc- 
tions given  in  1  Cor.  xvi.  2,  suggest  the  constitution 
of  a  celebration  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  (comp. 
Just.  Mart.  Apol.  i.  67  ;  Pliny,  Ep.  ad  Traj.).  The 
meeting  at  Troas  is  on  the  same  day  (Acts  xx.  7). 

The  tendency  of  this  language,  and  therefore  pro- 
bably of  the  order  subsequently  established,  was  to 
separate  what  had  hitherto  been  united.™  We  stand 
as  it  were  at  the  dividing  point  of  the  history  of 
the  two  institutions,  and  henceforth  each  takes  its 
own  course.  One,  as  belonging  to  a  transient  phase 
of  the  Christian  life,  and  varying  in  its  efl'ects  with 
changes  in  national  character  or  forms  of  civilisation, 
passes  through  many  stages" — becomes  more  and 
more  a  meiely  local  custom — is  found  to  be  pro- 
ductive of  evil  rather  than  of  good — is  discouraged 
by  bishops  and  forbidden  by  coimcils — and  finally  dies 
out."  Traces  of  it  linger  in  some  of  the  traditional 
practices  of  the  Western  Church.?  There  have  been 
attempts  to  re'V'ive  it  among  the  Moravians  and 
other  religious  communities.  The  other  also  has 
its  changes.  The  morning  celebration  takes  the 
place  of  the  evening.  Kew  names — Eucharist, 
Sacrifice,  Altar,  Jlass,  Holy  Mysteries — gather 
round  it.  New  epithets  and  new  ceremonies 
express  the  growing  reverence  of  the  people.  The 
mode  of  celebration  at  the  high  altar  of  a  basilica 
in  the  4th  centuiy  differs  so  widely  from  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  original  institution,  that  a  care- 
less eye  would  have  found  it  hard  to  recognise  their 
identity.  Speculations,  controversies,  superstitions 
crystallise  round  this  as  their  nucleus.  Gi-eat  dis- 
ruptions and  changes  threaten  to  destroy  the  life 
and  unity  of  the  Church.  Still,  through  all  the 
changes,  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  vindicates  its  claim 
to  universality,  and  bears  a  permanent  witness  of 
the  truths  with  which  it  was  associated. 

In  Acts  xx.  11  we  have  an  example  of  the  way 
in  which  the  transition  may   have  been  etiiected. 

noticeable  as  an  attempt  to  preserve  the  primitive  custom 
of  an  Agape  in  church  agauist  the  assaults  of  a  false 
asceticism. 

°  The  histoi-y  of  the  Agapae,  in  their  connexion  with 
the  life  of  the  Church,  is  full  of  interest,  but  would  be  out 
of  place  here.  An  outline  of  it  may  be  found  in  Augusti, 
CkriUl.  Archa&jl.  iii.  7U4-711. 

P  The  practice  of  distributing  bread,  which  has  been 
blessed  but  not  consecrated,  to  the  congregation  generally 
(children  included),  at  the  greater  festivals  of  the  Church, 
presents  a  vestige,  or  at  least  an  analogue,  of  the  old 
Agape.  Liturgical  writers  refer  it  to  the  period  (a.d. 
158-385)  when  the  earlier  practice  was  falling  into  disuse, 
and  this  taking  its  place  as  the  expression  of  the  s.mie 
feeling.  The  bread  thus  distributed  is  known  in  the 
Eastern  Church  as  ev\oyia,  in  the  Western  as  the  pa-nis 
benedictus,  the  "  pain  beni "  of  the  modem  French  Cliurch. 
The  practice  is  still  common  in  France  and  other  parts  of 
Europe.  (Comp.  Moroni,  Dizionar.  JCccles.,  Pascal,  Liturg. 
Cathol.,  in  Migne's  Enajc.  Tlteol.,  s.v.  "Eulogie." 


LORD'S  SUPPER 

The  disciples  at  Troas  meet  together  to  break  bread. 
The  hour  is  not  definitely  stated,  but  the  fact  that 
St.  Paul's  discourse  was  protracted  till  past  mid- 
night, and  the  mention  of  the  many  lamps,  indicate 
a  later  time  than  that  commonly  fixed  for  the  Greek 
SflTTvov.  If  we  are  not  to  suppose  a  scene  at 
variance  with  St.  Paul's  rule  in  1  Cor.  .\i.  34,  they 
must  have  had  each  his  own  supper  before  they 
assembled.  Then  came  the  teaching.and  the  prayers, 
and  then,  towards  early  dawn,  tlie  breaking  of  bread, 
which  constituted  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  for  which 
they  were  gathered  together.  If  this  midnight 
meeting  may  be  taken  as  indicating  a  common  prac- 
tice, originating  in  reverence  for  an  ordinance  which 
Christ  had  enjoined,  we  can  easily  understand  how 
the  next  step  would  be  (as  circumstances  rendered 
the  midnight  gatherings  unnecessary  or  inexpedient) 
to  transfer  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  perma- 
nently to  the  morning  hour,  to  which  it  had  gra- 
dually been  approximating.''  Here  also  in  later 
times  there  were  traces  of  the  original  custom. 
Even  when  a  later  celebration  was  looked  on  as  at 
variance  with  the  general  custom  of  the  Church 
(Sozomen,  supra)  it  was  recognised  as  legitimate 
to  hold  aa  evening  communion,  as  a  special  com- 
memoration of  the  original  institution,  on  tlie 
Thursday  before  Easter  (August.  Ep.  118;  ad  Jan. 
c.  5-7) ;  and  again  on  Easter-eve,  the  celebration 
in  tiie  latter  case  probably  taking  place  "  very  early 
ill  the  morning  while  it  was  yet  dark  "  (Tertull. 
ad  Xfxor.  ii.  c.  4). 

The  recurrence  of  the  same  liturgical  words  in 
Acts  .txvii.  35  makes  it  probable,  though  not  cer- 
tain, that  the  food  of  which  St.  Paul  thus  partook 
was  intended  to  have,  for  himself  and  his  Christian 
comjjanions,  the  character  at  once  of  the  Agape  and 
the  Eucliarist.  The  heathen  soldiers  and  sailors,  it 
may  be  noticed,  are  said  to  have  followed  his  ex- 
ample, not  to  have  partaken  of  the  bread  which  he 
had  broken.  If  we  adopt  this  explanation,  we  have 
in  this  narrative  another  example  of  a  celebiatiou 
in  the  early  hours  between  midnight  and  dawn 
(corap.  V.  27,  39),  at  the  same  time,  i.  e.,  as  we 
have  met  with  in  the  meeting  at  Troas. 

Teraii 

I 


LOT 


143 


All  the  distinct  references  to  the  Lord's  Supper 
which  occur  within  the  limits  of  the  N.  T.  have, 
it  is  believed,  been  noticed.  To  find,  as  a  recent 
writer  has  done  {Christian  Rememhrancer  for  April, 
1860),  quotations  from  the  Liturgy  of  the  Eastern 
Church  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  involves  (ingeni- 
ously as  the  hypothesis  is  supported)  assumptions 
too  many  and  too  bold  to  justify  our  acceptance  of 
it.''  Extending  the  inquiry,  however,  to  the  times 
as  well  as  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.,  we  find  reason 
to  believe  that  we  can  trace  in  the  later  worship 
of  the  Church  some  fragments  of  that  which  be- 
longed to  it  from  the  beginning.  The  agieement 
of  the  four  great  families  of  litiu'gies  implies  the 
substratum  of  a  common  order.  To  that  order  may 
well  liave  belonged  tlie  Hebrew  words  Hallelujah, 
Amen,  Hosanna,  Lord  of  Sabaoth ;  the  salutations 
"  Peace  to  all,"  "  Peace  to  thee;"  the  Sursum 
Corda  (avS>  ffxHof'-ev  ras  KapSias),  the  Trisagion, 
the  Kyrie  Eleison.  We  are  justified  in  looking  at 
these  as  having  been  portions  of  a  liturgy  that  was 
really  primitive;  guarded  from  change  with  the 
tenacity  with  which  the  Christians  of  the  second 
century  clung  to  the  traditions  (the  TrapaS6(T€is  of 
2  Thess.  ii.  15,  iii.  6)  of  the  first,  forming  part  of 
the  great  deposit  (TrapaKaradriKr])  of  taitli  and 
worship  which  they  had  leceivcd  from  the  apostles 
and  have  transmitted  to  later  ages  (comp.  Bingham, 
Eccles.  Antiq.  b.  xv,  c.  7 ;  Augusti,  Christl.  Archdol. 
b.  viii. ;   Stanley  on  1  Cor.  x.  and  xi.).   [E.  H.  P.] 

LO-RUH'AMAH  (nonn  ^ :  ovK  vK^-nixiv-n : 

absque  misericordin),  i.e.  "the  uncompassionated," 
the  name  of  the  daughter  of  Hosea  the  prophet, 
given  to  denote  the  utterly  ruined  and  hopeless 
condition  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  on  whom 
Jehovah  would  no  more  have  mercy  (Hos.  i.  6). 

LOT  (D1? :  Ai&t;  Joseph.  Autos,  and  so 
Veneto-Greek  Vers. :  Lot),  the  son  of  Haran,  and 
therefore  the  nephew  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xi.  27, 
HI).  His  sisters  were  MiLCAH  the  wife  of  Nahor, 
and  ISCAH,  by  some  identified  with  Sarah.  The 
following  genealogy  exhibits  the  family  relations : — 


TIagar  =  Abram  —  Sarai 


Nahor  =  MiloaIi 


IsUniael      Isaac 


Jacob 


Lot  =  wife    Jlilcah  =  Nahor 


Kebc'liah       Labun 


Daughter 


Iscali 


Daughter 


Haran  died  before  the  emigi-ation  of  Terah  and  his  I  with  Abram  and  Sarai  to  Canaan  (xii.  4,  5).  With 
lamily  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (vei'.  28),  and  Lot  [  them  he  took  refuge  in  Egypt  from  a  fhmine,  and 
was  therefore  born  tliere.  He  removed  with  the  :  witli  them  returned",  first  to  the  "South"  (xiii.  1), 
rest  ot  Ins  kindred  to  Charan,  and  again  subsequently    and  then  to  their  original  settlement  between  Bethel 


"I  Comp.  the  "  anU-lucunis  coctibus"  of  Tertull  [de  Cor. 
Mil.  c.  3).  The  anialgnmation  hi  tho  ritual  of  the  mo- 
nastic orders,  of  the  Nocturns,  and  Matin-Lauds,  uito  the 
single  office  of  Matins,  presents  an  instance  of  an  ana- 
logous transition  (I'almer,  Orig.  Litiirg.  i.  2t)2), 

'  1  Oor.  ii.  9,  ciimpared  with  the  recurrence  of  the  same 
words  in  the  Liturgy  with  an  anteodent  to  the  relative 
which  appears  in  the  Kplstle  without  one,  is  the  passage 
on  which  most  stress  is  laid.  1  Pet.  Ii.  16,  and  Eph.  v.  14, 
are  adduced  as  further  instiuices. 


"  Terah's  sons  are  given  above  in  the  order  in  which 
they  occur  in  the  record  (Gen.  xi.  27-32).  But  the  facts 
that  Nahor  and  Isaac  (and  if  Lscah  be  Sarai,  Abram  also) 
manned  wives  not  of  their  own  gcneraticm,  but  of  the  next 
bi'low  them,  and  tbat  Abnun  and  Lot  tiiivel  together  and 
behave  as  if  exaclly  on  eriual  terms,  seem  to  show  that 
Haran  was  the  eldcstof  I'erah's  three  descendants,  and 
Abram  the  youngest.  It  would  be  a  parallel  to  the  case 
ofShem,  Ham,  and  Japhet,  where  .laphet  was  really  the 
eldest,  though  enumerated  last. 


144 


LOT 


and  Ai  (vev.  3,  4),  where  Abram  had  built  his  first 
altar  (siii.  4;  comp.  xii.  7),  and  invoked  on  it  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  But  the  pastures  of  the  hills 
of  Bethel,  which  had  with  ease  contained  the  two 
strangers  on  their  first  arrival,  were  not  able  any 
longer  to  bear  them,  so  much  had  their  possessions 
of  sheep,  goats,  and  cattle  increased  since  that  time. 
It  was  not  any  disagreement  between  Abi'am  and 
Lot — their  relations  continued  good  to  the  last ; 
but  between  the  slaves  who  tended  their  countless 
herds  disputes  arose,  and  a  parting  was  necessary. 
The  exact  equality  with  which  Abram  treats  Lot  is 
very  remarkable.  It  is  as  if  they  were  really, 
according  to  the  very  ancient  idiom  of  these  records 
(Ewald  on  Gen.  xxxi.),  "  brethren,"  instead  of  uncle 
and  nephew.  From  some  one  of  the  round  swelling 
hills  which  surround  Bethel — from  none  more  likely 
than  that  which  stands  immediately  on  its  east 
[Bethel,  vol.  i.  199]— the  two  Hebrews  looked 
over  the  comparatively  empty  land,  in  the  direction 
of  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  ;md  Zoar  (xiii.  10).  "  The  oc- 
casion was  to  the  two  lords  of  Palestine — then  almost 
'  free  before  them  where  to  choose ' — what  in  Grecian 
legends  is  represented  under  the  figui'e  of  the  Choice 
of  Hercules  ;  in  the  fables  of  Islam  under  the  story 
of  the  Prophet  turning  back  from  Damascus." 
And  Lot  lifted  up  his  eyes  towards  the  left,  and 
beheld  all  the  precinct  of  the  Jordan  that  it  was 
well  watered  everywhere ;  like  a  garden  of  Jehovah  ; 
like  that  unutterably  green  and  fertile  land  of 
Egypt  he  had  only  lately  quitted.  Even  from  thai 
distance,  through  the  clear  air  of  Palestine,  can  be 
distinctly  discovered  the  long  and  thick  masses  of 
vegetation  which  fringe  the  numerous  streams  that 
descend  from  the  hills  on  either  side,  to  meet 
the  central  stream  in  its  tropical  depths.  And  what 
it  now  is  immediately  opposite  Bethel,  such  it  seems 
then  to  have  been  "even  to  Zoar,"  to  the  fiirthest 
extremity  of  the  sea  which  now  covers  the  "  valley 
of  the  fields'' " — the  fields  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah. 
"  No  ci'ust  of  salt,  no  volcanic  convulsions,  had  as 
yet  blasted  its  verdure,  or  alarmed  the  secure  civi- 
lisation of  the  early  Phoem'cian  settlements  which 
had  struck  root  in  its  fertile  depths."  It  was 
exactly  the  prospect  to  tempt  a  man  who  had  no 
fixed  purpose  of  his  own,  who  had  not  like  Abram 
obeyed  a  stem  inward  call  of  duty.  So  Lot  left  his 
uncle  on  the  barren  hills  of  Bethel,  and  he  "  chose 
all  the  precinct  of  the  Jordan,  and  journeyed  east," 
down  the  ravines  which  give  access  to  the  Jordan 
valley  ;  and  then  when  he  reached  it  tmned  again 
southward  and  advanced  as  far  as  Sodom  (11,  12). 
Hei'e  he  "  pitched  his  tent,"  for  he  was  still  a 
nomad.  But  his  nomad  life  was  ratually  at 
an  end.  He  was  now  to  relinquish  the  freedom 
and  independence  of  the  simple  life  of  the  tent — a 
mode  of  life  destined  to  be  one  of  the  gi-eat  methods  of 
educating  the  descendants  of  Abram — and  encounter 
the  corruptions  which  seem  always  to  have  attended 
the  lite  of  cities  in  the  East — "the  men  of  Sodom  were 
wicked,  and  sinners  before  Jehovah  exceedingly." 

2.  The  next  occurrence  in  the  life  of  Lot  is  his 
capture  by  the  four  kings  of  the  East,  and  his  rescue 
by  Abram  (Gen.  xiv.).  Whatever  may  be  the  age 
of  this  chapter  in  relation  to  those  before  and  after 


i>  "  Valley  of  Siddini "— Siddim  =  fields. 

■^  The  stury  of  Baucis  and  Philemon,  who  unwittingly 
entertained  Jupiter  and  Mercury  (see  Diet,  of  Biographij, 
&c.),  has  been  often  compared  with  this. 

d  AiKaio;,  possibly  referring  to  Gen.  xviii.  23-33,  where 
the  LXX.  employ  iliis  wurd  throuKliout.    The  rabbinical 


LOT 

it,  there  is  no  doubt  that,  as  far  as  the  history  of 
Lot  is  concerned,  it  is  in  its  right  position  in  the 
narrati\'e.  The  events  which  it  narrates  must  have 
occurred  after  those  of  ch.  xiii.,  and  before  those  of 
xviii.  and  xix.  Abi'anl  has  moved  further  south, 
and  is  living  under  the  oaks  of  Mamre  the  Amorite, 
where  he  remained  till  the  destruction  of  Sodom.  There 
is  little  in  it  which  calls  for  remark  here.  The  term 
"  brother"  is  once  used  (ver.  16)  for  Lot's  relation 
to  Abram  (but  comp.  ver.  12,  "  brother's  son")  ; 
and  a  word  is  employed  for  the  possessions  of  Lot 
(ver.  11,  A.  V.  "goods"),  which  from  its  being  else- 
where in  these  early  records  (xlvi.  6  ;  Num.  xxxv. 
3 )  distinguished  from  "  cattle,"  and  employed  spe- 
cially for  the  spoil  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  may 
perhaps  denote  that  Lot  had  exchanged  the  wealth 
of  his  j)astoral  condition  for  other  possessions 
more  peculiar  to  his  new  abode.  Women  are  also 
named  (ver.  16),  though  these  may  belong  to  the 
people  of  Sodom. 

3.  The  last  scene  preserved  to  us  in  the  histoiy 
of  Lot  is  too  well  known  to  need  repetition.  He  is 
still  living  in  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.).  Some  years  have 
passed,  for  he  is  a  well-known  resident  in  the  town, 
with  wife,  sons,  and  daughters,  married  and  mai- 
riageable.  But  in  the  midst  of  the  licentious  cor- 
ruption of  Sodom — the  eating  and  drinking,  the 
buying  and  selhng,  the  planting  and  building  (Luke 
xvii.  28),  and  of  the  darker  evils  exposed  in  the 
ancient  narrative — he  still  preserves  some  of  the 
delightful  chai'acteristics  of  his  wandering  life,  his 
fervent  and  chivalrous  hospitality  (xix.  2,  8),  the 
unleavened  bread  of  the  tent  of  the  wilderness  (ver. 
3),  the  water  for  the  feet  of  the  wayfarers  (ver.  2), 
affording  his  guests  a  reception  identical  with  that 
which  they  had  experienced  that  very  morning  in 
Abraham's  tent  on  the  heights  of  Hebron  (comp.  xviii. 
3,  6):  It  is  this  hospitality  which  receives  the  com- 
mendation of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebiews 
in  words  which  have  passed  into  a  familiar  proverb, 
'•  be  not  forgetful  to  entertain  strangers,  for  thereby 
some  have  entertained  angels '^  unawares  "  ( Heb.  xiii. 
2).  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  his  deliverance  from  the 
guilty  and  condemned  city — the  one  just"*  man  in  that 
mob  of  sensual  lawless  wretches — which  points  the 
allusion  of  St.  Peter,  to  "  the  godly  delivered  out 
of  temptations,  the  unjust  reserved  unto  the  day 
of  judgment  to  be  punished,  an  ensample  to  those 
that  after  should  live  ungodly"  (2  Pet.  ii.  6-9). 
Where  Zoar  was  situated,  in  which  he  found  a  tem- 
porary refuge  during  the  destruction  of  the  other 
cities  of  the  plain,  we  do  uot  know  with  absolute 
certainty.  If,  as  is  most  probable,  it  was  at  the 
mouth  of  Wady  Eerak  (Rob.  ii.  188,  517),  then 
by  "  the  mountain "  is  meant  the  very  elevated 
ground  east  of  the  Dead  Sea.  If  with  De  Saulcy 
we  place  it  in  es-Zouara,  on  the  precipitous  descent 
from  Hebron,  "  the  mountain  "  was  the  high  groimd 
of  Judah.  Either  would  aflbrd  caves  for  his  sub- 
sequent dwelling.  The  former  situation — on  the 
eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea,  has  in  its  favour  the 
fact  that  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  position  sub- 
sequently occupied  by  the  Aminonites  and  Moabites. 
But  this  will  be  best  examined  imder  ZOAK. 

The  end  of  Lot's  wife  ^  is  commonly  ti-eated  as 


tradition  is  that  he  was  actually  "judge"  of  Sodom,  and 
sate  in  the  gate  in  that  capacity.  (Sec  quotations  in 
Otho,  lAx.  Rahb.  "  Loth,"  and  "  Sodomah.") 

"  In  the  Jewish  traditions  her  name  is  Edith--nl"Tiy 
One  of  the  daughters  was  called  Plutith— niJ^^pQ.  .See 
Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseiuhp.  V.  T.  131. 


LOT 

one  of  the  "  dillicdlties  "  of  the  Bible.  But  it  surely 
need  not  be  so.  It  cminot  be  necessary,  as  some  have 
done,  to  create  the  details  of  the  stoiy  where  none 
are  given — to  describe  "  the  unhappy  woman  struck 
dead" — "a  blackened  corpse — smothered  and  stif- 
fened as  she  stood,  and  tixed  for  the  time  to  the  soil 
by  saline  or  bituminous  incrustations^like  a  pillar 
of  salt."  On  these  points  the  record  is  silent.  Its 
words  are  simply  these:  "  His  wife  looked  back  from 
behind  him,^  ;md  became  a  pillar  of  salt ;" — words 
which  neither  in  themselves  nor  in  their  position 
in  the  narrative  afford  any  warrant  for  such 
speculiitions.  In  fact,  when  taken  with  what  has 
gone  before,  they  contradict  them,  for  it  seems 
jjlain,  from  vers.  '22,  23,  that  the  work  of  destruc- 
tion by  tire  did  not  commence  till  after  Lot  had 
entered  Zoar.  But  this,  like  the  rest  of  her  flite, 
is  left  in  mystery. 

The  value  and  the  significance  of  the  story  to 
us  are  contained  in  the  allusion  of  Christ  (Luke 
-wii.  32)  : — "  In  that  day  he  that  is  in  the  field 
let  him  not  return  back :  remember  Lot's  wife," 
who  did.  "  Whosoever  shall  seek  to  save  his  lite 
shall  lose  it."  It  will  be  observed  that  there  is 
no  attempt  in  the  narri'ative  to  invest  the  circum- 
stance with  permanence;  no  statement — as  in  the 
case  of  the  pillar  erected  over  Rachel's  grave 
(xxxv.  20) — that  it  was  to  be  seen  at  the  time  of 
the  compilation  of  the  history.  And  in  this  we 
surely  have  a  remarkable  instance  of  that  sobriety 
which  characterises  the  statements  of  Scripture, 
even  where  the  events  narrated  are  most  out  of 
the  ordinaiy  com'se. 

Latei-  ages  have  not  been  satisfied  so  to  leave 
the  matter,  but  have  insisted  on  identifying  the 
"pillar"  with  some  one  of  the  fleeting  forms 
which  the  perishable  rock  of  the  south  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea  is  constantly  assuming  in  its  process  of 
decomposition  and  liquefaction  (Anderson's  Off. 
Nan:  180,  1).  The  first  allusion  of  this  kind  is 
])erhaps  that  in  Wisd.  x.  7,  where  "  a  standing 
pillar  of  salt,  the  monument  {fivrjixeiov)  of  an  un- 
believing soul,"  is  mentioned  with  the  "  waste 
land  that  smoketh,"  and  the  "plants  bearius  fruit 
that  never  come  to  ripeness,"  as  remaining  to  that 
day,  a  testimony  to  the  wickedness  of  Sodom, 
.losephus  also  {Ant.  i.  \\,  §4)  says  that  he  had 
seen  it,  and  that  it  was  then  remaining.  So  too 
do  Clemens  Komanus  and  Irenaeus  (quoted  by 
Kitto,  Csicl.  "Lot").  S  So  does  Benjamin  of 
Tudela,  whose  account  is  more  than  usually  cir- 
cumstantial (ed.  Asher,  i.  72).l»  And  so  doubtless 
have  travellers  in  every  age — they  certainly  have  in 
our  own  times.  See  Miuuidrcll,  March  30  ;  Lynch, 
Report,  p.  l.S;  and  Anderson's  Off.  Narrative,  181, 
where  an  account  is  given  of  a  pillar  or  spur  stand- 
ing out  detached  troni  the  general  maas  of  the  Jehcl 
Usduin,  about  40  feet  in  height,  and  which  was 
recognized  by  the  sailors  of  the  expedition  as  "  Lot's 
wife." 

The  story  of  the  origin  of  the  nations  of  Moab 
and  Ammon  from  the  incestuous  intercourse  be- 
tween Lot  and  his  two  daughters,  with  which  his 
history  abruptly  concludes,  has  been  often  treated 


LOT 


145 


'  LXX.,  €is  Tol  oTTtVw  ;  comp.  Luke  ix.  62,  Phil.  iil.  13. 

V  See  the  quotations  from  the  Fathers  and  others  in 
Hofmaiin's  Lexkmi  (s.  v.  "  Lot "),  and  in  Mislin,  Lieux 
Saints  (iii.  221). 

ii  Rabbi  Put-iciiia,  on  the  other  hand,  looked  for  it 
but  "  did  not  see  it ;  it  no  longer  exists  "  (Ed.  Benisch, 
(il). 

VOL.   II. 


as  it  it  were  a  Hebrew  legend  which  owed  its  origin 
to  the  bitter  hatred  existing  from  the  earliest  to  the 
latest  times  between  the  "  Children  of  Lot"  and  the 
Childien  of  Israel.'  The  horrible  nature  of  the 
transaction — not  the  result  of  impulse  or  passion, 
but  a  plan  calculated  and  carried  out,  and  that  not 
once  but  twice,  would  prompt  the  wish  that  the 
legendary  theory  were  true.''  But  even  the  most 
destructive  critics  (as,  for  instance,  Tuch)  allow  that 
the  narrative  is  a  continuation  without  a  break  of  that 
which  precedes  it,  while  they  fail  to  point  out  any 
marks  of  later  date  in  the  language  of  this  portion  ; 
and  it  cannot  be  questioned  that  the  writer  records 
it  as  an  historical  fact. 

Even  if  the  legendary  theory  were  admissible, 
there  is  no  doubt  of  the  tact  that  Ammon  and  Jioab 
sprang  from  Lot.  It  is  affirmed  in  the  statements 
of  Deut.  ii.  9  and  19,  as  well  as  in  the  later  docu- 
ment of  Ps.  xxxiii.  8,  which  Ewald  ascribes  to  the 
time  when  Nehemiah  and  his  newly-returned 
colony  were  sutfering  from  the  attacks  and  obstruc- 
tions of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  and  Sanbalkt  the 
Horonite  (Ewald,  Dichter,  Ps.  83). 

The  Jlohammedan  traditions  of  Lot  are  contained 
in  the  Koran,  chiefly  in  chaps,  vii.  and  xi. :  others 
are  given  by  D'Herbelot  (s.  v.  "  Loth").  According 
to  these  statements  he  was  sent  to  the  inhabitants 
of  the  five  cities  as  a  preacher,  to  warn  them  against 
the  unnatural  and  horrible  sins  which  theyprac- 
tised — sins  which  Mohammed  is  continually  de- 
nouncing, but  with  less  success  than  that  of 
drunkenness,  since  the  formei-  is  perhaps  the  most 
common,  the  latter  the  rarest  vice,  of  Eastern 
cities.  From  Lot's  connexion  with  the  inhabitants 
of  Sodom,  his  name  is  now  given  not  only  to  the 
vice  in  question  (Freytag,  Lexicon,  iv.  136  a),  but 
also  to  the  people  of  "the  five  cities  themselves — the 
Lothi,  or  Kai'iin  Loth.  The  local  name  of  the  Dead 
Sea  is  Bahr  Lut — Sea  of  Lot.  [G.] 

LOT.  The  custom  of  deciding  doubtful  ques- 
tions by  lot  is  one  of  great  extent  and  high  antiquity, 
recommending  itself  as  a  sort  of  appeal  to  the  Al- 
mighty, secure  from  all  influence  of  passion  or  bias, 
and  is  a  sort  of  divination  employed  even  by  the  gods 
themselves  (Hom.  II.  xxii.  209  ;  Cic.  de  Div.  i.  34, 
ii.  41).  The  word  sors  is  thus  used  for  an  oracular 
response  (Cic.  de  Div.  ii.  56).  [Divination.] 
Among  heathen  instances  the  following  may  be 
cited: — 1.  Choice  of  a  champion  or  of  priority  in 
combat  (/;.  iii.  316,  vii.  171;  Her.  iii.  108). 
2.  Decision  of  fate  in  battle  {II.  xx.  209).  3.  Ap- 
pointment of  magistrates,  jurymen,  or  other  func- 
tionaries (Arist.  "Po/.  iv.  IG;  Schol.  On  Aristoph. 
Plut.  277  ;  Her.  vi.  109 ;  Xen.  Ctp-.  iv.  5,  55  ; 
Demosth.  c.  Aristog.  i.  p.  778,  1 ;  Diet,  of  Antiq. 
"  Dicastes").  4.  Priests  (Aesch.  in  Tim.  p.  188, 
Bekk.).  5.  A  German  practice  of  deciding  by 
marks  on  twigs,  mentioned  by  Tacitus  {Germ.  10). 
6.  Division  of  conquered  cr  colonized  land  (Thuc. 
iii.  50  ;  Plut.  Fericl.  84  ;  Boeckh,  Public  Econ.  of 
At/i.  ii.  170). 

Among  the  Jews  also  the  use  of  lots,  with  a 
religious  intention,  direct  or  indirect,  prevailed  ex- 
tensively.     The  religious  estimate  of  them   may 


>  See  Tnch,  Genesis,  369.  Von  Bulilen  ascribes  the 
legend  to  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Jusiah. 

''  For  the  pretty  legend  of  the  repentance  of  Lot,  and 
(if  the  tree  which  be  pUinted,  which,  bt'ing  cut  down  for 
use  in  the  building  of  the  Temple,  was  afterwards 
employed  for  the  Cross,  see  Fabricius,  Cod.  I'siAjuk^. 
V.  T.,  428  31. 


146 


LOTAN 


be  gathered  from  I'lov.  xv\.  33.  The  following 
historical  or  ritual  instances  correspond  in  most 
respects   to   those   of  a   heathen    kind   mentioned 

above  : —  /  t    j 

1.  Choice  of  men  for  an  invading  torce  (JuJg 

i.  1,'xx.  10). 

2.  Partition,  (a)  of  the  soil  of  Palestine  among 
the  tribes  (Num.  xxvi.  55  ;  Josh,  xviii.  10  ;  Acts 
xiii.  19).  (6)  of  Jerusalem;  i.  e.  probably  its  spoil 
or  captives  among  captors  (Obad.  11);  of  the 
land  itself  in   a   similar    way   (1   Mace.   lu.   3b). 

(c)  After  the  return  from  captivity,  Jerusalem  was 
populated  by  inhabitants  drawn  by  lot  in  the  pro- 
portion of  -A,  of  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Benjamin 
(Neh.  xi.  1,  2  ;   see  Ps.  xvi.   5,  6,   Ez.  xxiv.  b). 

(d)  Apportionment  of  possessions,  or  spoil,  or  ot  pri- 
soners, to  foreigners  or  captors  (Joel  iii.  3;  Kah.  in. 
10  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  35). 

3,  (a)  Settlement  of  doubtful   questions __(Prov. 
xvi.  33,  where  "  lap"  is  perhaps  =  urn ;  xviii.  18). 
(&)  A  mode  of  divination  among  heathens  by  means 
of  arrows,  two  inscribed,  and  one  without  mark, 
fiiKotiavreia  (Hos.  iv.  12  ;  Ez.  xxi.  21 ;  Mauritius, 
de  Sortitiom,  c.  14,  §4:  see  also  Esth.  in,  7,  ix. 
24-32;  Mishna,   Taanith,  ii.  10.     [Divination; 
PCRIM  1    (c)  Detection  of  a  criminal,  as  in  the  case 
of  Achan  (Josh.  vii.  14,  18).     A  notion  prevailed 
among  the  Jews  that  this  detection  was  performed 
by  observing  the  shining  of  the  stones  in  the  high- 
priest's  breastplate    (Mauritius,  c.   21,  §4).     Jo- 
nathan was  discovered  by  lot  (1  Sam.  xiv.  41,  42). 
id)  Appointment  of  persons  to  offices  or   duties. 
Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  20,  21),  said  to  have  been  chosen 
as  above  in  Achan's  case.     St.  Matthias,  to  replace 
Judas  among  the  Twelve  (Acts  i.  24-26).     Distri- 
bution   of   priestly  offices   in    the   Temple-service 
among  the  sixteen  of  the  family  of  Eleazar,  and  the 
eight°of  that  of  Ithamar  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  3,  5,  19  ; 
Luke  i.  9).    Also  of  the  Levites  for  similar  puiposes 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  28,  xxiv.  20-31,  xxv.  8,  xxvi.  13; 
Mishna,  Tamid,  i.  2,  iii.  1,  v.  2  ;  Joma,  ii.  2,  3,  4  ; 
Shabb.  xxiii.  2  ;   Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Luke  i. 
8,  9,  vol.  ii.  p.  489). 

Election  by  lot  appears  to  have  prevailed  in  the 
Christian  Church  as  late  as  the  7th  century  (Bing- 
ham, Eccles.  Antiq.  iv.  1,  1,  vol.  i.  p.  426  ;  Bruns, 
Cone.  ii.  66).  ,,      t^        c 

(e)  Selection  of  the  scape-goat  on  the  Day  ot 
Atonement  (Lev.  xvi.  8,  10).  The  two  inscribed 
tablets  of  boxwood,  afterwards  of  gold,  were  put 
into  an  urn,  which  was  shaken,  and  the  lots 
drawn  out  {Joma,  iii.  9,  iv.  1).  [Atonement, 
Day  of.] 

4.  The  use  of  words  heard  or  passages  chosen  at 
random  from  Scripture.  Sortes  Bihlicae,  like  the 
Sortes  Virgiliame,  prevailed  among  Jews,  as  they 
have  also  among  Christians,  though  denounced  by 
several  Councils  (Diet,  of  Antiq.  "  Sortes ;"  Johnson, 
"  Life  of  Cowley,"  Works,  ix.  8  ;  Bingham,  Eccl. 
Ant.  xvi.  5,  3,  id.  \'i.  53,  &c.  ;  Bruns,  Cone.  ii. 
145-154  166;  Mauiitius,  c.  15;  Hofmann,  Lex. 
-Sortes").  [H.W.P.] 

LO'TANdt^i*?:  hwrdv:  Lotan),  the  eldest 
son  of  Seir  the  Horite,  and  a  "  duke"  or  chief  of 
his  tribe  in  the  land  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  20,  22, 
29  ;  1  Chr.  i.  38,  39). 

LOTHASU'BUS  (Aa)0a<roi/j8os :  Abusthas, 
SabHs),  a  coiTuption  of  Hasucm  in  Xeh.  viii.  4, 
for  which  it  is  not  easy  to  account  (1  Esd.  ix.  44). 
The  Vulg.  is  a  further  corruption  of  the  LXX. 


LOZON 
LOTS,  FEAST  OF.     [Plrim.] 
LOVE-FEASTS  {ayairai :    epulie,  convivia  ; 
in  this  sense  used  only  twice,  Jude  12,  and  2  Pet. 
ii.  13,  in  which  latter  place,  however,  airdrai  is 
also  read),  an  entertainment  in  which  the  poorer 
members  of  the  Church  partook,  furnished  from  the 
contributions  of  Christians  resorting  to  the  Eiicha- 
ristic  celebration,  but   whether  before  or  after  it 
may  be  doubted.     The  true  account  of  the  matter 
is  probably  that  given  by  Chrysostom,  who  says 
that  after  the  early  community  of  goods  had  ceased, 
the  richer  members  brought  to  the  Church   con- 
tributions of  food  and  drink,  of  which,  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  ser\ices  and  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist,  all  partook  together,  by  this  means  help- 
ing to  promote  the  principle  of  love  among  Christians 
(Horn,  in  1  Cor.  xi.  19,  vol.  iii.  p.  293,  and  Horn. 
xx^^i.  in  1  Cor.  xi.  vol.  x.  p.  281,  ed.  Gaume). 
The  intimate  connexion,  especially  in  early  times, 
lietween  the  Eucharist  itself  and  the  love-feast,  has 
led  several  writers  to    speak   of  them    almost   as 
identical.     Of  those  who  either  take  this  view,  or 
regard  the  feast  as  subsequent  to  the  Eucharist, 
may  be  mentioned  Pliny,  who  says  the  Christians 
met  and  exchanged  sacramental  pledges  against  all 
sorts  of  immorality  ;   after  which  they  separated, 
and  met  agaui   to  partake  in   an   entertainment.* 
The  same  view   is  taken  by  Ignatius,  ad  Smyrn. 
c    8  ;  Tertull.  Apol.  39  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vii. 
322  (vol.  ii.  p.  892),  iii.  185  (vol.  i.  514),  but  m 
Faed.  ii.  61  (vol.  i.  p.  165)  he  seems  to  regard 
them  as  distinct ;    AjMst.  Const,   ii.   28,  1 :  and 
besides  these,  Jerome  on  1  Cor.  xi. ;  Theodoret  and 
Oecumenius,  quoted  by  Bingham,  who  considers 
that  the  Agape  was  subsequent   {Orig.Ecel.  xv. 
6,  7 ;  vol.  V.  p.  284)  ;  Ilofmann,  Lex.  "  Agapae. 
On  the  other  side  may  be  mentioned  Grotius  (on 
2  Pet.  ii.  13,  in  Crit.  Sacr.),  Suicer  (Thes.  Eccl. 
vol.  i.  s.  v.),  Hammond,  Whitby,  Corn,  a  Lapide, 
and  authorities  quoted  by  Bingham,  I.  c. J*      The 
almost  universal  custom  to  receive  the  Eucharist 
fastino-  proves  that  in  later   times  the  love-feasts 
must''ha\e  followed,   not  preceded,  the  Eucharist 
(Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  19;  Aug.  c.  Famt.  xx.  20  ; 
Ep.  liv.  (alias  cxviii.)  ;  ad  Januar.  c.  6,  vol.  ii. 
p  203,  ed.  Migne  ;    Cone.  Carth.    iii.  a.d.   397, 
c   29  ;  Brmis,  Cone.  i.  p.  127):  but  the  exception 
■of  one  day  from  the  general  rule  (the  day  called 
Coena  Domini,  or  Maunday  Thursday)  seems  to  argue 
a  previously  different  practice.    The  love-feasts  were 
forbidden  to  be  held  in  churches  by  the  Council  ot 
Laodicea,  A.D.   320,  Cone.   Quinisext.,   A.D.   692, 
c.  74,  Aix-la-Chapelle,  a.d.  816;  but  in  some  foim 
or  other  they  continued  !o  a  much   later  period. 
Entertainments   at   births,  deaths,   and   marriages 
were  also  in  use  under  the  names  of  agapae  nata- 
litiae,  nuptiales,  and  funeraks.     (Bede,  Hist.  Eccl. 
Gent.  Angl.  i.  30 ;  Ap.  Const,  viii.  44,  1  ;  Theo- 
doret, Evany.  Verit.  viii.  p.  923,  924,  ed.  Schulz ; 
Giw    Naz.  Ep.  i.   14,  and  Carm.  x. ;  Hofmann, 
Lellc.)  [H.W.P.] 

LOZ'ON  (AoCcJc  ••  Dedon),  one  of  the  sons  of. 
"  Solomon's  ser\ants  "  who  returned  with  Zorobabel 
(1  Esd.  V.  33).  The  name  corresponds  with  Dar- 
KON  in  the  parallel  lists  of  Ezr.  ii.  56  and  Keh. 
vii.  58,  and  the  variation  may  be  an  enor  of  the 


a  "  Promiscaum  et  innoxium,  quod  ipsuni"  (('.  e.  the 
entertainment,  surely  not  the  sacramctUum)  "  faceve  de- 
sisse  post  edictum  uieum"  (Jip-  x.  97). 

'>  This  subject  is  also  (iiscussed  under  Louu's  Suti-Eit. 


LUBIM 

tiiiuscnber,  which  is  easily  traceable  when  the  word 
is  written  in  the  uncial  character. 

LU'BIM  (D'-n-l'?,  2  Chr.  xii.  3,  xvi.  8;  Nah.  iii. 
1',  D''2?,  Dan.  xi.  43:  AtjSuej :  Lihyes;  except 
Daniel,  Libya'),  a  nation  nientiouod  as  contributing, 
tosether  with  Cushites  and  Sukkiim,  to  Shishak's 
army  (2  Chr.  xii.  3)  ;  and  apparently  as  fomiing 
with  Cushites  the  bulk  of  Zerah's  army  (xvi.  8), 
spoken  of  by  Nahum  (iii.  9)  with  Put  or  Phut, 
as  helping  No-Amou  (Thebes),  of  which  Cush  and 
I'^gypt  were  the  strength  ;  and  by  Daniel  (xi.  43) 
as  paying  court  with  the  Cushites  to  a  conqueror 
of  Egypt  or  the  Egyptians.  These  particulars 
imlicate  an  African  nation  under  tribute  to  Egypt, 
if  not  under  Egyptian  rule,  contributing,  in  the 
lUth  century  B.C.,  valuable  aid  in  mercenaries 
or  auxiliiu'ies  to  the  Egyptian  annies,  and  down  to 
Nahum's  time,  and  a  period  prophesied  of  by 
Daniel,  probabl)''  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
[Antiochus  IV.],  assisting,  either  politically  or 
commercially,  to  sustain  the  Egyptian  power,  or, 
in  the  last  case,  dependent  on  it.  These  indi- 
cations do  not  lix  the  geographical  position  of  the 
Lubim,  but  they  favour  the  supposition  that  their 
territory  was  near  Egypt,  either  to  the  west  or  south. 

For  more  precise  information  we  look  to  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  upon  whicli  we  find  repre- 
sent<itions  of  a  people  called  PtCBU,  or  LeBU  (R 
and  L  having  no  distinction  in  hieroglyphics),  who 
cannot  be  doubted  to  correspond  to  the  Lubim. 
These  Kebu  were  a  warlike  people,  with  whom 
Menptah  (the  son  and  successor  of  Kameses  11.) 
and  Kameses  III.,  who  both  ruled  in  the  13th 
century  B.C.,  waged  successful  ware.  The  latter 
king  routed  them  with  much  slaughter.  The  sculp- 
tures of  the  great  temple  he  raised  at  Thebes, 
now  callel  that  of  Medeenet  Haboo,  give  us  repre- 
sentations of  the  Rebu,  showing  that  they  were  fair, 
and  of  what  is  called  a  Semitic  type,  like  the 
Berbers  and  Kabyles.  They  are  distinguished  as 
northern,  that  is,  as  parallel  to,  or  north  of.  Lower 
Egypt.  Of  their  being  African  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt,  and  we  may  assign  them  to  the 
coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  commencing  not  tar  to 
the  westward  of  Egypt.  We  do  not  find  them  to  have 
been  mercenaries  of  Egypt  from  the  monuments, 
but  we  know  that  the  kindred  Mashawasha-u  wei-e 
so  employed  by  tlie  Bubastite  family,  to  which 
Shishak  and  probably  Zerah  also  belonged ;  and  it 
is  not  unlikely  that  the  latter  are  intended  by  the 
Lubim,  used  in  a  more  geneiic  sense  than  Rebu,  in 
the  Biblical  mention  of  the  armies  of  these  kings 
(Brugsch,  Gcoyr.  /uschr.  ii.  7i),  seq.).  We  have 
already  shown  that  the  Lubim  are  probably  tlie 
Mizraite  Lehabim  :  if  so,  their  so-called  Semitic 
l)hysical  characteristics,  as  represented  on  tlie 
Egyptian  mouuments,  afford  evidence  of  great  im- 
portance for  the  iiu[uiror  into  j)rimeval  history. 
The  mention  in  Manetho's  Dynasties  that,  under 
Neoherophes,  or  N('cherochis,  the  first  Memphite 
king,  mid  head  of  the  third  dynasty  (b.c.  cir.  2t!00\ 
the  Libyans  revolted  from  the  Egyptians,  but  re- 
turned to  their  allegiance  through  fear,  on  a  wonder- 
ful increase  of  the  moon,"  may  refer  to  the  Lubim, 
but  may  as  probably  relate  to  some  other  African 
people,  perhaps  the  Nai)htuliiin,  or  Phut  (Put). 


LUCIFER 


147 


^  Ncxcpw(|)r)s  .  .  .  c<fj'  ov  Ai(3ue5  iiTre'crrrjcrai'  AiyiurTtcov 
KoX  T^s  a-eA.))i'i)5  Trapa  Adyoi/  auf))9t-i'<n)9  Slo.  8<r'os  tauToii? 
irape'Soo-ai/  (Afr.  ap.  Cny,  Aiic.  Fnvj.  '^mcI  iil  p.  luy^ 
COilip,  101.) 


The  liistorical  indications  of  the  Egyptian  monu- 
ments thus  lead  us  to  place  the  seat  of  the  Lubim 
or  primitive  Libyans,  on  the  African  coast  to  the 
westward  of  Egypt,  perhaps  extending  far  beyond 
the  Cyrenaica.  From  the  earliest  ages  of  which 
we  have  any  record,  a  stream  of  colonization  has 
flowed  from  the  East  along  the  coast  of  Africa, 
north  of  the  Great  Desert,  as  far  as  the  Pillars 
of  Hercules.  The  oldest  of  these  colonists  of  this 
region  were  doubtless  the  Lubim  and  kindred  tribes, 
particularly  the  Mashawasha-u  and  Tahen-nu  of 
the  Egyptian  monuments,  all  of  which  appear 
to  have  ultimately  taken  their  common  name  of 
Libyans  from  the  Lubim.  They  seem  to  have  been 
first  reduced  by  the  Egyptians  about  1250  B.C., 
and  to  have  been  afterwards  driven  inland  by  the 
Phoenician  and  Greek  colonists.  Now,  they  still 
remain  on  the  northern  confines  of  the  Great  Desert, 
and  even  within  it,  and  in  the  niount;iius,  while 
their  later  Shemite  rivals  pasture  their  fiocks  in  the 
rich  plains.  Many  as  are  the  Arab  tribes  of  Africa, 
one  great  tribe,  that  of  the  Benee  'Alee,  extends 
from  P]gypt  to  Morocco,  illustrating  the  probable 
extent  of  the  territory  of  the  Lubim  and  their 
cognates.     It  is  possible  that  in  Ezek.  xxx.  5,  Lub, 

3-"l7,  should  be  read  for  Chub,.  3-13 ;  but  there  is 
no  other  instance  of  the  use  of  this  form :  as,  how- 
ever, n-"l?  and  DH-I?  are  used  for  one  people, 
apparently  the  Mizraite  Ludim,  most  probably  kin- 
dred to  the  Lubim,  this  objection  is  not  conclusive. 
[Chub;  Ludim.]  In  Jer.  xlvi.  9,  the  A.  V. 
renders  Phut  "  the  Libyans ;"  and  in  Ezek.  xxxviii. 
5,  "  Libya."  [R.  S.  P.] 

LU'CAS  (Aou/cas :  Lucas),  a  friend  and  com- 
panion of  St.  Paul  during  his  imprisonment  at 
Rome  (Philem.  24).  He  is  the  same  as  Luke,  the 
beloved  physician,  who  is  associated  with  Demas  iu 
Col.  iv.  14,  and  who  remained  faithful  to  the 
apostle  when  others  forsook  him  (2  Tim.  iv.  11), 
on  his  first  examination  before  the  emperor.  For 
the  grounds  of  his  identification  with  the  evtingelist 
St.  Luke,  see  article  Luke. 

LU'CIFEE('?^''n:  'Ew(T<p6pos:  Lucifer).  The 
name  is  found  in  Is.  xiv.  12,  coupled  with  the 
epithet  "  son  of  the  morning,"  and  (being  derived 
from  ?pn,  "to  shine")  clearly  signifies  a  "  bright 
star,"  and  probably  what  we  call  the  morning  star.* 
In  this  passage  it  is  a  symbolical  representation  of 
the  king  of  Babylon,  in  liis  splendour  and  in  his  fill ; 
perhaps  also  it  refers  to  his  glory  as  paling  before  tlie 
unveiled  presence  of  God.  Its  apjjlication  (from 
St.  .Terome  downwards)  to  Satan  in  his  fall  from 
heaven,  arises  probably  from  the  fact  that  the  Baby- 
lonian Empire  is  in  Scripture  represented  as  the 
type  of  tyrannical  and  self-idolising  power,  and 
especially  connected  with  the  empire  of  the  Evil 
One  in  the  Apocalypse.  The  fall  of  its  material 
power  before  the  unseen  woiking  of  the  providence 
of  God  is  therefore  a  type  of  tlie  defeat  of  all  mani- 
festations of  the  tyranny  of  Satan.  This  applica- 
tion of  the  name  "Lucifer"  as  a  proper  name  of 
the  devil  is  plainly  ungrounded  ;  but  the  magnifi- 
cence of  the  imagery  of  the  propliet,  fir  transcend- 
ing   in    grandeur   the  fall   of  Nebuchadnezzar  to 


"  The  other  interpretation,  which  makes  77*11  an 
imperative  of  the  verb  'pp'*,  in  tlie  sense  of  "wall"  or 
"  lumen t,"  injures  the  panillolism.  and  is  generally  rcgardoJ 
as  untenable. 

L   2 


148 


LUCIUS 


which  it  immediately  refers,  has  naturally  given  a  I 
colour  to  the  symbolical  interpretation  of  the  pas-  } 
sage,  and  fixed  that  application  in  our  modem 
language.  [A.  B.] 

LU'OIUS  (AevKios,  AovKios},  a  Roman  consul 
(viraros  'Pcojuaiaii/),  who  is  said  to  have  written 
the  letter  to  Ptolemy  (Eluergetes),  which  assured 
Simon  I.  of  the  protection  of  Rome  (cir.  B.C.  139-8  ; 
1  Mace.  XV.  10,  15-24).  The  whole  form  of  the 
letter — the  mention  of  one  consul  only,  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  consul  by  the  praenomen,  the  omission 
of  the  senate  and  of  the  date  (comp.  Werasdorf,  De 
fide  Mace.  §  cxix.)— shows  that  it  cannot  be  an 
accurate  copy  of  the  original  document ;  but  there 
is  nothing  in  the  substance  of  the  letter  which  is 
open  to  just  suspicion. 

The  imperfect  transcription  of  the  name  has  led 
to  the  identification  of  Lucius  with  three  distinct 
persons — fl.)  [Lucius]  Furius  Philus  (the  lists, 
Clinton,  Fasti  Hell.  ii.  112,  give  P.  Furius  Philus), 
who  was  not  consul  till  B.C.  136,  and  is  therefore 
at  once  excluded.  (2.)  Lucius  Caecilius  Metellus 
Calvus,  who  was  consul  in  B.C.  142,  immediately 
after  Simou  assumed  the  government.  On  this 
supposition  it  might  seem  not  unlil^ely  that  the 
answer  which  Simon  received  to  an  application  for 
protection,  which  he  made  to  Rome  directly  on  his 
assumption  of  power  (comp.  1  Mace.  xiv.  17. 18)  in 
the  consulship  of  Metellus,  has  been  combined  with 
the  answer  to  the  later  embassy  of  Xumenius 
(1  Mace.  xiv.  24,  xv.  18).  (3.)  But  the  third 
identification  with  Lucius  Calpumius  Piso,  who 
was  consul  B.C.  139,  is  most  probably  correct. 
The  date  exactly  corresponds,  and,  though  the 
praenomen  of  Calpurnius  is  not  established  beyond 
all  question,  the  balance  of  evidence  is  decidedly 
against  the  common  lists.  The  Fasti  Capifolini 
are  defective  for  this  year,  and  only  give  a  fragment 
of  the  name  of  PopiUius,  the  fellow-consul  of 
Calpurnius.  Cassiodorus  (Chron.),  as  edited,  gives 
Cn.  Calpurnius,  but  the  eye  of  the  scribe  (if  the 
reading  is  correct)  was  probably  misled  by  the 
names  in  the  years  immediately  before.  On  the 
other  hand  Valerius  Maximus  (i.  3)  is  wrongly 
quoted  from  the  printed  text  as  giving  the  same 
praenomen.  The  passage  in  which  the  name 
occurs  is  in  reality  no  part  of  Valerius  Maximus, 
but  a  piece  of  the  abstract  of  .Julius  Paris  inserted 
in  the  text.  Of  eleven  MSS.  of  Valerius  which  the 
writer  has  examined,  it  occurs  only  in  one  (Mus. 
Brit.  Burn.  209),  and  there  the  name  is  given  Lucius 
Calpurnius,  as  it  is  given  by  Mai  in  his  edition  of 
Julius  Paris  (Script.  Vet.  Nova  Coll.  iii.  7).  Sigo- 
nius  says  rightly  {Fasti  Cons.  p.  207 )  :  <'  Cassiodorus 
prodit  consules  Cn.  Pisonem  ....  epitoma  L. 
Calpumium"  ....  The  chance  of  an  enor  of  tran- 
scription in  Julius  Palis  is  ob\-iously  less  than  in  the 
Fasti  of  Cassiodorus  ;  and  even  if  the  evidence  were 
equal,  the  authority  of  1  Mace,  might  rightly  be 
urged  as  decisive  in  such  a  Ciise. 

Josephus  omits  all  mention  of  the  letter  of 
"  Lucius  "  in  his  account  of  Simon,  but  gives  one 
very  similar  in  contents  {Ant.  xiv.  8,  §5),  as  written 
on  the  motion  of  Zucids  Valerius  in  the  ninth 
(nineteenth)  year  of  Hyrcanus  II.  ;  and  unless  the 
two  letters  and  the  two  missions  which  led  to  them 
were  purposely  assimilated,  which  is  not  whollv 
improbable,  it  must  be  supposed  that  he  has  been 
guilty  of  a  strange  oversight  in  removing  the  incident 
from  its  proper  place.  [B.  F.  W.] 

LU'CIUS  {AovKios :    Lucius),   a    kinsman   or 


LUD 

fellow-tribesman  of  St.  Paul  (Rom.  xvi.  21),  by 
whom  he  is  said  by  tradition  to  have  been  ordained 
bishop  of  the  chufch  of  Cenchreae,  from  whence 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written  {Apost. 
Const,  vii.  46).  He  is  thought  by  some  to  be  the 
same  with  Lucius  of  Cyrene.  (See  the  following 
article.) 

LU'CIUS  OF  CYRE'NE  (AoiKios  6  Kvp-r,- 

va7os).  Lucius,  thus  distinguished  by  the  name  of 
his  city — the  capital  of  a  Greek  colony  in  Northern 
Africa,  and  remarkable  for  the  number  of  its  .Jewish 
inhabitants — is  first  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  in 
company  with  Barnabas,  Simeon  called  Niger, 
Manaen,  and  Saul,  who  are  described  as  prophets 
and  teachers  of  the  church  at  Antioch  (Acts  xiii.  1). 
These  honoured  disciples  having,  while  engaged  in 
the  office  of  common  worship,  received  command- 
ment from  the  Holy  Ghost  to  set  apart  Bamabas 
and  Saul  for  the  special  service  of  God,  proceeded, 
after  fasting  and  prayer,  to  lay  their  hands  upon 
them.  This  is  the  first  recorded  instance  of  a 
foi-mal  ordination  to  the  office  of  Evangelist,  but  it 
cannot  be  supposed  that  so  solemn  a  commission 
would  have  been  given  to  any  but  such  as  had 
themselves  been  ordained  to  the  ministry  of  the 
Word,  and  we  may  therefo'-e  assume  that  Lucius 
and  his  companions  were  already  of  that  number. 
Whether  Lucius  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples, 
as  stated  by  Pseudo-Hippolytus,  is  quite  a  matter 
of  conjecture,  but  it  is  highly  probable  that  he 
formed  one  of  the  congregation  to  whom  St.  Peter 
preached  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  10); 
and  there  can  hardly  be  a  doubt  that  he  was  one 
of  "  the  men  of  Cyrene "  who,  being  "  scattered 
abroad  upon  the  persecution  that  arose  about  Ste- 
phen," went  to  Antioch  preaching  the  Lord  Jesus 
(Acts  xi.  19,  20). 

It  is  commonly  supposed  that  Lucius  is  the  kins- 
man of  St.  Paul  mentioned  by  that  apostle  as  joining 
with  him  in  his  salutation  to  the  Roman  brethren 
(Rom.  xvi.  21).  There  is  certainly  no  sufficient 
reason  for  regarding  him  as  identical  with  St.  Luke 
the  Evangelist,  though  this  opinion  was  apparently 
held  liy  Origen  {in  loco),  and  is  supported  by 
Calmet,  as  well  as  by  Wetstein,  who  adduces  in 
confirmation  of  it  the  fact  reported  by  Herodotus 
(iii.  121),  that  the  Cyrenians  had  throughout 
Greece  a  high  reputation  as  physicians.  But  it 
must  be  observed  that  the  names  are  clearly  dis- 
tinct. The  missionary  companion  of  St.  Paul  was 
not  Lucius,  but  Lucas  or  Lucanus,  "  the  beloved 
physician,"  who,  though  named  in  three  ditlerent 
Epistles  (Col.  iv.  14;  2  Tim.  iv.  11  ;  Philem.  24), 
is  never  referred  to  as  a  relation.  Again,  it  is 
hardly  probable  that  St.  Luke,  who  suppresses  his 
own  name  as  the  companion  of  St.  Paul,  would 
have  mentioned  himself  as  one  among  the  more 
distinguished  prophets  and  teachers  at  Antioch. 
Olshausen,  indeed,  asserts  confidently  that  the  no- 
tion of  St.  Luke  and  Lucius  being  the  same  person 
has  nothing  whate\-er  to  support  it  (Clai'k's  Theol. 
Lib.  iv.  513).  In  the  Apostolical  Constitutions, 
vii.  46,  it  is  stated  that  St.  Paul  consecrated 
Lucius  bishop  of  Cenchreae.  Different  traditions 
make  Lucius  the  first  bishop  of  Cyrene  and  of 
Laodicea  in  Syria.  []<].  H — s.] 

LUD  ilr? :  Aot5S :  Ln&),  the  fourth  name  in 
the  list  of  the  children  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  22  ;  comp. 
1  Chr.  i.  17),  that  of  a  person  or  tribe,  or  both, 
descended  from  him.  It  has  been  siipposeil  that  Lud 
was  the  ancestor  of  the  Lydians  (Jos.  Ant.i.Q,  §  4), 


LUDIM 

and  thus  represented  by  tlie  Lydus  of  tlieir  mythical 
period  (Herod,  i.  7).  Tlie  iShemite  character  of 
ilieir  manners,  and  the  strong  orientalism  of  the  art 
of  the  Lydian  kingdom  during  its  latest  period  and 
after  the  Persian  conquest,  but  before  the  predomi- 
nance of  Greek  art  in  Asia  Minor,  favour  this  idea ; 
but,  on  the  otlier  hand,  the  Egyptian  monuments 
show  us  in  the  13th,  14th,  and  15th  centuries  B.C. 
a  powerful  people  called  Kuten  or  Ludicn,  pro- 
bably seated  near  Mesopotamia,  and  apparently 
north  of  Palestine,  whom  some,  however,  make  the 
Assyrians.  We  may  perhaps  conjecture  that  the 
Lydiaus  first  established  themselves  near  Palestine, 
and  atlerwards  spread  into  Asia  Minor ;  the  occupiers 
of  tlie  old  seat  of  the  race  being  destroyed  or  removed 
by  the  Assyrians.  For  the  question  whether  the 
Lud  or  Ludim  mentioned  by  the  prophets  be  of 
this  stock  or  the  Mizraite  Ludim  of  Gen.  x.,  see  the 
ne.\t  article.  [K.  S.  P.] 

LITDIM  (pn>h,  Geu.  x.  13,   D^ni!?,  1  Chr. 

i.  1 1  :  AovdteiijL:  Ludiiii),  a  Mizraite  people  or  tribe. 
From  their  position  at  tlie  head  of  the  list  of  the 
Mizraites,  it  is  probable  that  the  Ludim  were  settled 
to  the  west  of  Egypt,  perhaps  further  than  any  other 
Miziaite  tribe.  Lud  and  the  Ludim  are  mentioned 
in  four  passages  of  the  proj)hets.  It  is  important  to 
ascertain,  if  possible,  whether  the  Miziaite  Ludim  or 
the  Shemite  Lud  be  referred  to  in  each  of  these 
passages.  Isaiah  mentions  "  Tarshish,  Pul,  and  Lud, 
that  draw  the  bow  (n^'p  "'?t^'D),  Tubal,  and  Javan, 
the  isles  afar  off"  (Ixvi.  19).  Here  the  expression 
in  the  plural,  "  that  draw  the  bow  "  (teiidentes 
saijittuin,  Vulg.),  may  refer  only  to  Lud,  and  there- 
fore not  comiect  it  with  one  or  both  of  the  names 
preceding.  A  comparison  with  the  other  three  pas- 
sages, in  all  which  Phut  is  mentioned  immediately 
betbi-e  or  after  Lud  or  the  Ludim,  makes  it  almost 


LUDIM 


149 


"  The  manner  in  which  these  foreign  troops  in  the 
Kgyptian  army  are  chai'acterized  is  perfectly  in  accordance 
with  the  evidence  of  the  nioiiumeuts,  which,  although 
about  six  centuries  earlier  than  the  prophet's  time,  no 
(luubl  represent  the  same  comlitiun  of  military  matters. 
The  only  people  of  Africa  beyond  Egypt,  portrayed  on 
the  monuments,  whom  we  can  consider  as  most  probably 
of  the  same  stock  as  the  Egyptians,  are  the  ReBU,  who 
are  the  Luljim  of  the  Bible,  almost  certainly  the  same  as 
the  Mizraite  liehabira.  [Lehabim  ;  Lubim.]  Thei-efore 
we  may  take  the  Iti-BU  as  probably  illustrating  the 
Ludim,  supposing  the  latter  to  be  Mizraites,  in  which  case 
tlicy  may  Indeed  be  included  under  the  same  name  as  the 
Lubim,  if  the  appellation  RcBU  be  wider  than  the  Lubim 
of  the  Bible,  and  also  as  illustrating  Cush  and  Phut.  The 
last  two  are  spoken  of  as  handling  the  buckler.  The. 
Egyptians  are  generally  represented  with  small  shields, 
frequently  round;  the  KeBlJwith  small  round  shields,  for 
which  the  term  here  used,  pj3,  the  small  shield,  and 

the  expression  "that  handle,"  are  perfectly  appropriate. 
That  the  Ludim  should  have  been  archers,  and  a)i|)arcntly 
armed  with  a  long  bow  that  was  strung  witli  the  aid  of 
the  foot  by  treading  (nt^'p  *D"lM).  i^i  note-worthy, 
since  the  Africans  were  always  famous  for  their  archery. 
The  UeBlT,  and  one  other  of  the  foivign  nations  that  served 
in  the  Egyptian  iu-my — the  monumenls  show  the  former 
only  as  enemies — were  bowmen,  lieing  armed  with  a  bow 
of  moderate  length;  the  other  mercenaries — of  whom  we 
tan  only  identify  the  I'hilistino  Clicrethim,  though  they 
probably  include  certain  of  the  mercenaries  or  auxiliaries 
mentioned  in  the  Bible— carrying  swords  and  Javelins, 
but  not  bows.  These  points  of  agreement,  tbimded  on  our 
examination  of  the  momnnents,  are  of  no  little  weight,  us 
showing  the  accuracy  of  the  Bible. 


certain  that  the  LXX.  reading.  Phut,  ^oi^S,  for 
Pul,  a  word  not  occurring  in  any  other  passage  i.s 
the  trtie  one,  extraordinary  as  is  the  chano-efrom 
■•^^'O  to  Mofft^X-  [I'UL.]  Jei  emiah,  in  speaking 
of  Pharaoh  Necho's  army,  makes  mention  of  "  Cush 
and  Phut  that  handle  the  buckler  ;  and  the  Ludim 
that  handle  [and]  bend  the  bow"»  (xlvi.  9).  Here 
the  Ludim  are  associated  with  African  nations,  as 
merc-euaries  or  auxiliaries  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  and 
therefore  it  would  seem  probable,  ^r/md /a^-jc',  that 
the  Mizraite  Ludim  are  intended.  Ezekiel,  in  tlie 
description  of  Tyre,^  speaks  thus  of  Lud:  "  Persia 
and  Lud  and  Phut  were  in  thine  army,  thy  men 
of  war:  buckler  (JJD)  and  helmet  hung  they  up  in 
thee;  they  set  thine  adorning"  (xxvii.  10).  In 
this  place  Lud  might  seem  to  mean  the  Shemite 
Lud,  ebpecially  if  the  latter  be  conijected  with  Lydia  ; 
but  the  association  with  Phut  renders  it  as  likely 
that  the  nation  or  country  is  that  of  the  African 
Ludim.  In  the  prophecy  against  Gog  a  similar 
passage  occurs.  "  Persia,  Cush,  and  Phut  (A.V. 
"  Libya  ")  with  them  [the  army  of  Gog];  all  of  them 
[with]  buckler  (i30)  and  helmet"  (xxxviii.  5).  It 
seems  from  this  that  there  were  Persian  mercenaries 
at  this  time,  the  prophet  perhaps,  if  speaking  of  a 
remote  future  period,  using  their  name  and  that  of 
other  well-known  mercenaries  in  a  general  sense. 
The  association  of  Persia  and  Lud  in  the  former 
passage  loses  therefore  somewhat  of  its  weight.  In 
one  of  the  prophecies  against  Egypt  Lud  is  thus 
mentioned  among  the  supports  of  that  country : 
"  And  the  sword  shall  come  upon  Mizraim,  and 
great  pain  shall  be  in  Cush,  at  the  falling  of  the 
slain  in  Mizraim,  and  they  shall  take  away  her 
multitude  (nyiDn.),<=  and  her  foundations  shall  be 
broken  down.  Cush,  and  Phut,  and  Lud,  and  all 
the    mingled    people  (liy),   and   Chub,   and   the 


•>  The  description  of  Tyre  in  this  prophecy  of  Ezekiel 
receives  striking  illustration  from  what  we  believe  to  be 
its  earliest  coins.  These  coins  were  held  to  be  most 
probably  of  Tyre,  or  some  other  Phoenician  city,  or  pos- 
sibly of  Babylon,  on  numismatic  evidence  alone,  by  the 
writer's  lamented  colleague  at  the  British  Museum,  Mr. 
Burgon.  They  probably  date  during  the  5th  century  B.C. ; 
they  may  possibly  be  a  little  older  ;  but  it  is  most  reason- 
able to  consider  them  as  of  the  time  of,  and  issued  by 
Darius  Hystaspis.  The  chief  coins  are  octodrachms  of  the 
earlier  Phoenician  weight  [Money],  bearing,  on  the  ob- 
verse, a  war-galley  beneath  the  towered  walls  of  a  city, 
and,  on  the  reverse,  u  king  in  a  chariot,  witli  an  incuse 


goat  beneath.  This  combination  of  galley  and  city  is 
exactly  what  we  find  in  the  description  of  Tyre  in 
Ezekiel,  which  mainly  portrays  a  state-galley,  but  also 
refers  to  a  port,  and  speaks  of  towers  and  walls. 

e  There  may  perhaps  be  here;  a  reference  by  parono- 
masia  to  Anion,  the  chief  divinity  of  Thebes,  the  H<'l)rew 
name  of  which  j'lDN  NO  cunlains  his  name.     [.Amon.J 


150  LUDIM 

children  of  the  land  of  the  covenant,  shall  fall  by 
the  swonl  with  them"  (xxx.  4,  5).  Here  Lud  is 
associated  with  Cush  and  Phut,  as  though  an  African 
nation.  The  Ereb,  wliom  we  have  called  "  mingled 
people"  rather  than  "  strangers,"  appear  tohave  been 
an  Arab  population  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  perhaps 
including  Arab  or  half-Arab  tribes  of  the  Egyptian 
desert  to  the  east  of  the  Nile.  Chub  is  a  name 
nowhere  else  occurring,  which  perhaps  shoulil  be 
read  Lub,  for  the  country  oi-  nation  of  the  Lubim. 
[Chub  ;  Lubim.]  The  "  children  of  the  land  of  the 
covenant  "  may  be  some  league  of  tribes,  as  probably 
were  the  Nine  Bows  of  the  Egyptian  inscriptions ; 
or  the  expression  may  mean  nations  or  tribes  allied 
with  Egypt,  as  though  a  general  designation  for  the 
rest  of  "its  supporters  besides  those  specified.  It  is 
noticeable  that  in  this  passage,  although  Lud  is  placed 
among  the  close  allies  or  supporters  of  Egypt,  yet  it 
follow-s  African  nations,  and  is  followed  by  a  nation 
or  tribe  at  least  partly  inhabiting  Asia,  although 
possibly  also  partly  inhabiting  Africa. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  but  one  nation  is 
intended  in  these  passages,  and  it  seems  that  thus 
far  the  preponderance  of  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the 
Mizraite  Ludim.     There  are  no  indications  in  the 
Bible  known  to  be  positive  of  mercenary  or  allied 
troops  in  the  Egyptian  armies,  except  of  Africans, 
and  perhaps  of  tribes  bordering  Egypt  on  the  east. 
We  have  still  to  inquire  how  the  e\'idence  of  the 
Egyptian  monuments  and  of  profane  history  may 
artect  our  supposition.     From  the  former  we  learn 
that  several   foreign  nations  contributed  allies  or 
mercenaries  to  the  Egyptian  armies.     Among  them 
we  identify  the  Rebu  with  the  Lubim,  and  the 
Sharyatana  with  the  Cherethim,  who  also  sen-ed 
in  David's  amiy.     The  latter  were  probably  from 
the   coast  of  Palestine,  although   they  may  have 
been  drawn  in  the  case  of  the  Egyptian  army  from 
an  insular  portion  of  the  same  people.     The  rest  of 
these  foreign  troops  seem  to  have  been  of  African 
nations,  but  this  is  not  certain.    The  evidence  of  the 
monuments  reaches  no  lower  than  the  time  of  the 
Bubastite  line.     There  is  a  single  foreign  contem- 
porary inscribed  record   on   one  of  the   colossi  of 
the  temj)le  of  Aboo-Simbel  in  Nubia,  recording  the 
passasie  of  Greek  mercenaries  of  a  Psammetichus, 
probably  the  first  (Wilkinson,  Modern  Egupt  and 
Thebes,  ii.  329)  .^    From  the  Greek  writers,  who  give 
us  information  from  the  time  of  Psammetichus  I. 
downwards,  we  learn  that  Ionian,  Carian,  and  other 
Greek  mercenaries,  formed  an  important  element  in 
the  Egy])tian  army  in  all  times  when  the  country  was 
independent,  from  the  reign  of  that  king  until  the 
final  conquest  by  Ochus.     These  mercenaries  were 
even  settled  in  Egypt  by  Psammetichus.    There  does 
not  seem  to  be  any  mention  of  them  in  the  Bible, 
excepting  they  be  intended  by  Lud  and  the  Ludim 
in  the  passages  that  have  been  considered.     It  must 
be  recollected  that  it  is  reasonable  to  connect  the 
Shemite  Lud  with  the  Lydians,  and  that  at  the 
time  of  the  prophets  by  wliom  Lud  and  the  Ludim 
are  mentioned,  the  Lydian  kingdom  generally  or  al- 
ways included  the  more  westei-n  part  of  Asia  Mi- 
nor, so  that  the  terms  Lud  and  Ludim  might  well 
apply  to  the  Ionian  and  Carian  mercenaries  drawn 


LUKE 

from  this  tenitory.^  We  must- therefore  hesitate  be- 
fore absolutely  concluding  that  this  important  por- 
tion of  the  Esiyptian  mercenaries  is  not  mentioned  in 
the  Bible,  upon  the  prima  facie  evidence  that  the 
onlv  name  which  could  stand  for  it  would  seem  to 
be  "that  of  ah  African  nation.  [R.  S.  P.] 

LU'HITH,  THE  ASCENT  OF  (n|?yD 
riTI-l^n,  in  Isaiah  ;  and  so  also  in  the  Kri  or  cor- 
rected text  of  Jeremiah,  although  there  the  original 
text  has  n^Pl'pn,  i.  e.  hal-Luhoth :  i)  ava^aais, 
Aovfid  ;  in  Jeremiah,  'AXdid,'-  Alex.  'A\au>8 : 
ascensus  Luith),  a  place  in  Jloab ;  apparently  the 
ascent  to  a  sanctuary  or  holy  spot  on  an  eminence. 
It  occurs  only  in  Is.  xv.  5,  and  the  parallel  passage 
of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  5).  It  is  mentioned  with  Zoar 
and  HORONAIM,  but  whether  because  they  were 
locally  connected,  or  because  they  were  all  sanc- 
tuaries, is  doubtful.  In  the  days  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (  Onomasticon,  "  Luith  ")  it  was  still  known, 
and  stood  between  Areopolis  (Rabbath-JIoal))  and 
Zoar,  the  latter  being  probably  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Wady  Kerak.  M.  de  Saulcy  (  Voyage,  ii.  19,  .and 
Map,  sheet  9)  places  it  at  "  Kharbet-Nouehin  ;" 
but  this  is  north  of  Areopolis,  and  cannot  be  said 
to  lie  between  it  and  Zoar,  whether  we  take  Zoai' 
on  the  east  or  the  west  side  of  the  sea.  The  writer 
is  not  aware  that  any  one  else  has  attempted  to 
identify  the  place. 

The  signitication  of  the  name  hal-Luhith  must 
remain  doubtful.  As  a  Hebrew  word  it  signifies 
"made  of  boards  or  posts"  (Gesen.  Thes.  748); 
but  why  assume  that  a  Moabite  spot  shoirld  have 
a  Hebrew  name  ?  By  the  Syriac  intei-pieters  it  is 
rendered  "  paved  with  flagstones"  (Eichhorn,  Allg. 
Bibliothek,  i.  845,  872).  In  the  Targums  (Pseudo- 
jon.  and  Jems,  on  Num.  xxi.  16,  and  Jonathan  on 
Is.  XV.  1)  Lechi\iath  is  given  as  the  equivalent  of 
Ar-Moab.  This  may  contain  an  allusion  to  Luchith  ; 
or  it  may  point  to  the  use  of  a  tei-m  meaning  "jaw  " 
for  cei'tain  eminences,  not  only  in  the  case  of  the 
Lehi  of  Samson,  but  also  elsewhere.  (See  Michaelis, 
Suppl.  No.  1307  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  Buxtorf, 
Lex.  Rahh.  1134.)  It  is  probably,  like  Akrabbim, 
the  name  of  the  ascent,  and  not  of  any  town  at  the 
summit,  as  in  that  case  the  word  would  appear  as 
Luhithah,  with  the  particle  of  motion  added.  [G.I 

LUKE.  The  name  Luke  (AovKas),  is  an  ab- 
breviated form  of  Lucanus  or  of  Lucilius  (Meyer). 
It  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  Lucius  (Acts  xiii. 
1  ;  Rom.  x\'i.  21),  wliich  belongs  to  a  different 
person.  The  name  Luke  occurs  three  times  in  the 
New  Testament  (Col.  iv.  14  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  11 ;  Philem. 
24),  and  probably  in  all  three,  the  third  evangelist 
is  the  person  spoken  of.  To  the  Colossians  "he  is 
described  as  "  the  beloved  physician,"  probably 
because  he  had  been  known  to  them  in  that  faculty. 
Timothy  needs  Jio  additional  mark  for  identifica- 
tion ;  to  him  the  words  are,  "  only  Luke  is  with 
me."  To  Philemon  Luke  sends  his  salutation  in 
common  with  other  "  fellow-labourei-s  "  of  St.  Paul. 
As  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  Luke 
of  these  passages  is  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  as  well  as  of  the  Gospel  which  beai's  his 
name,  it  is  natural  to  seek  in  the  former  book  for 


a  The  leader  of  these  mercenaries  is  called  in  the  in- 
scription "  Psammatichus.sonof  Theocles;"  which  shows, 
in  the  adoption  of  ati  Egyptian  name,  the  domestication 
of  these  Greeks  in  Egypt. 

e  Any  indications  of  an  alliance  with  Lydia  under 
Amasis  are  insufficient  to  render  it  proijable  that  oven 


then  Lydians  fought  in  the  Egyptian  army,  and  throw 
no  light  on  the  earlier  relations  of  the  Egyptians  and 
Lydians. 

°  The  LXX.  follow  the  Cethih  rather  than  the  Kri,  as 
they  frequently  do  elsewliere,  and  also  include  the  definite 
article  of  the  Hcbrcvv. 


LUKE 

some  traces  of  that  connexion  with  St.  Paul  which 
these  passages  assume  to  exist ;  and  although  the 
name  of  St.  Luke  does  not  occur  in  the  Acts,  tliere 
is  reason  to  believe  that  under  the  pronoun  "  we," 
several  references  to  the  evangelist  are  to  be  added 
to  the  three  places  just  quoted. 

Combining  the  traditional  element  with  the 
scriptural,  the  uncertain  with  the  certain,  we  are 
able  to  trace  the  following  dim  outline  of  the  Evan- 
gelist's life.  He  was  born  at  Antioch  in  Syria 
(Eusebius,  Hist.  iii.  4);  in  what  condition  of  life 
is  uncertain.  That  he  was  taught  the  science  of 
medicine  does  not  prove  that  he  was  of  higher  birth 
than  the  rest  of  the  disciples ;  medicine  in  its  earlier 
and  ruder  state  was  sometimes  pi-actised  even  by  a 
slave.  The  well-known  tradition  that  Luke  was 
also  a  painter,  and  of  no  mean  skill,  rests  on  the 
authority  of  Nicephorus  (ii.  43),  of  th§  Menology 
of  the  Emperor  Basil,  drawn  up  in  980,  and  of  other 
late  writers  ;  but  none  of  them  are  of  historical  au- 
thority, and  the  Acts  and  Epistles  are  wholly  silent 
upon  a  point  so  likely  to  be  mentioned.  He  was 
not  born  a  Jew,  for  he  is  not  reckoned  among  them 
"  of  the  circumcision"  by  St.  Paul  (comp.  Col.  iv. 
1 1  with  ver.  14).  If  this  be  not  thought  con- 
clusive, nothing  can  be  argued  fi-oni  the  Greek 
idioms  in  his  style,  for  he  might  be  a  Hellenist 
.Jew,  nor  fi-om  the  Gentile  tendency  of  his  Gospel, 
i(I)r  this  it  would  share  with  the  inspired  writings 
of  St.  Paul,  a  Pharisee  brought  up  at  the  feet  of 
Gamaliel.  The  date  of  his  conversion  is  uncertain. 
He  was  not  indeed  "  an  eye-witness  and  minister  of 
the  word  from  the  beginning"  (Luke  i.  2),  or  he 
wouUl  have  rested  his  claim  as  an  evangelist  upon 
that  ground.  Still  he  may  have  been  converted, 
by  the  Lord  Himself,  some  time  before  His  de- 
parture; and  the  statement  of  Epiphanius  (C'o»^. 
Haer.  li.  11)  and  others,  that  he  was  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples,  has  nothing  very  improbable  in 
it;  whilst  that  which  Theophylact  adopts  (on  Luke 
xxiv.)  that  he  was  one  of  the  two  who  journeyed 
to  Emmaus  with  the  risen  Redeemer,  has  found 
modern  defenders.  TertuUian  assumes  that  the 
conversion  of  Luke  is  to  be  ascribed  to  Paul — 
"  Lucas  non  apostolus,  sed  apostolicus ;  nou  ma- 
gister,  sed  discipulus,  uti(;[ue  magistro  minor,  certe 
tanto  posterior  quanto  posterioris  Apostoli  sectator, 
Pauli  sinedubio"  (Afo.  Marcion,  iv.  2);  and  the 
balance  of  probability  is  on  this  side. 

The  first  ray  of  historical  light  tails  on  the  Evan- 
gelist when  he  joins  St.  Paul  at  Troas,  aiid  shares 
his  journey  into  Macedonia.  The  sudden  transition 
to  the  first  person  plural  in  Acts  xvi.  9,  is  most 
naturally  explained,  after  all  the  objections  that 
liave  been  urged,  by  supposing  that  Luke,  the 
wi'iter  of  the  Acts,  formed  one  of  St.  Paul's  com- 
j)any  from  this  point.  His  conversion  had  taken 
])lace  before,  since  he  silently  assumes  his  place 
among  the  great  Apostle's  followers  without  any 
hint  that  this  was  his  fii-st  admission  to  the  know- 
ledge and  nnnistry  of  Christ.  He  may  have  found 
liis  way  to  Troas  to  preach  the  Gospel,  sent  jios- 
sibly  by  St.  Paul  himself.  As  far  as  Philippi  the 
Evangelist  journeyed  with  the  Apostle.  The  re- 
sumption of  the  third  person  on  Paul's  departure 
from  that  place  (xvii.  1)  would  show  that  Luke 
was  now  left  behind.  During  the  rest  of  St. 
Paul's  second  missionary  journey  wo  hear  of 
Luke  no  more.  r>ut  on  the  third  journey  the 
same  indication  reminds  us  that  Luke  is  again  of 
the  comjiany  (Acts  xx.  5),  having  joined  it  appa- 
rently at  Pliilippi,  where  he  had  been  left.     With 


LUKE 


151 


the  Apostle  he  passed  through  Miletus,  Tyre,  and 
Caesarea  to  Jerusalem  (xx.  5,  xxi.  18).  Between 
the  two  visits  of  Paul  to  Philippi  seven  years  had 
elapsed  (a.d.  51  to  A.d.  58),  which  the  Evangelist 
may  have  spent  in  Philippi  and  its  neighbourhood, 
preaching  the  Gospel. 

There  remains  one  passage,  which,  if  it  refers  to 
St.  Luke,  must  belong  to  this  period.  "  We  have 
sent  with  him"  (i.  e.  Titus)  "the  brother  whose 
praise  is  in  the  gospel  throughout  all  the  churches  " 
(2  Cor.  viii.  18).  The  subscription  of  the  epistle 
sets  out  that  it  was  "  written  from  Philippi,  a  city 
of  Macedonia,  by  Titus  and  Lucas"  and  it  is  an 
old  opinion  that  Luke  was  the  companion  of  Titus, 
although  he  is  not  named  in  the  body  of  the  Epistle. 
If  this  be  so,  we  are  to  suppose  that  during  the 
"three  months"  of  Paul's  sojourn  at  Philippi 
(Acts  XX.  3)  Luke  was  sent  from  that  place  to  Co- 
rinth on  this  errand  ;  and  the  words  "  whose  praise 
is  in  the  Gospel  throughout  all  the  churches,"  en- 
able us  to  form  an  estimate  of  his  activity  during 
the  interval  in  which  he  has  not  been  otherwise 
mentioned.  It  is  needless  to  add  that  the  praise 
lay  in  the  activity  with  which  he  preached  the 
Gospel,  and  not,  as  Jerome  understands  the  passage, 
in  his  being  the  author  of  a  written  gospel.  "  Lu- 
cas .  .  .  scripsit  Evangelium  de  quo  idem  Paulus 
'  Misimus,  inquit,  cum  illo  fratrem,  cujus  laus  est 
in  Evangelic  per  omnes  ecclesias  '  "  (Z>e  Viris  III. 
ch.  7). 

He  again  appears  in  the  company  of  Paul  in  the 
memorable  journey  to  Home  (Acts  xxvii.  1).  He 
remained  at  his  side  during  his  first  imprisonment 
(Col.  iv.  14 ;  Philem.  24)  ;  and  if  it  i^  to  be  supposed 
that  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  was  written 
during  the  second  imprisonment,  then  the  testimony 
of  that  Epistle  (iv.  11)  shows  that  he  continued 
faithful  to  the  Apostle  to  the  end  of  his  afflictions. 

After  the  death  of  St.  Paul,  the  acts  of  his  faithful 
companion  are  hopelessly  obscure  to  us.  In  the 
well-known  passage  oi  Epiphauius  (^cont.  Haer. 
li.  11,  vol.  ii.  464,  in  Dindorf's  recent  edition),  we 
find  that  "  receiving  the  commission  to  preach  the 
Gospel,  [Luke]  preaches  first  in  Dalmatia  and 
Gallia,  in  Italy  and  Macedonia,  but  first  in  Gallia, 
as  Paul  himself  says  of  some  of  his  companions,  in 
his  epistles, '  Crescens  in  Gallia,'  for  we  are  not  to 
read  '  in  Galatia '  as  some  mistakenly  think,  but 
'  in  Gallia.'  "  But  there  seems  to  be  as  little  au- 
thority for  this  account  of  St.  Luke's  ministry  as 
there  is  for  the  reading  Gallia  in  2  Tim.  iv.  10. 
How  scanty  are  the  data,  and  how  vague  the  results, 
the  reader  may  find  by  referring  to  the  Acta  Sanc- 
torum, October,  vol.  viii.,  in  the  recent  Brussels 
edition.  It  is,  as  perhaps  the  Evangelist  wishes  it 
to  be :  we  only  know  him  whilst  he  stands  by  the 
side  of  his  beloved  Paul ;  when  the  master  departs 
the  history  of  the  follower  becomes  confusion  and 
fable.  As  to  the  age  and  death  of  the  Evangelist 
there  is  the  utmost  uncertainty.  It  seems  probable 
that  he  died  in  advanced  life ;  but  whether  he 
suliered  martyrdom  or  died  a  natural  ilcath ;  whe- 
ther Bithynia  or  Acliaia,  or  some  other  cmmtry. 
witnessed  "his  end,  it  is  impossible  to  determ'ine 
amidst  contradictory  voices.  That  he  died  a  martyr, 
between  a.d.  75  and  A.D.  lOO,  would  seem  to 
have  the  balance  of  suffrages  in  its  favour.  It  is 
enough  for  us,  so  far  as  regards  the  Gos])el  of  St. 
Luke,  to  know  that  the  writer  was  the  tried  and 
constant  friend  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  who'  shared 
his  labours,  and  was  not  driven  from  Jiis  side  by 
danger.  [W-  T.] 


152 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  third  Gospel  is 
ascribeil,  by  the  general  consent  of  ancient  Christen- 
dom, to  "  the  beloved  physician,"  Lulie,  the  fi-iend 
and  companion  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  In  the  well- 
known  Muratorian  fragment  (see  vol.  i.  p.  712)  we 
find  "  Tertio  evangelii  librum  secundum  Lucam. 
Lucas  iste  medicus  post  ascensura  Christi  ciim  eum 
Paulas,  quasi  ut  juris  studiosum  secundum  ad- 
sumsisset,  nomine  suo  ex  opinione  conscripsit.  Do- 
ininiun  tamen  nee  ipse  vidit  in  carne.  Et  idem 
prout,  assequi  potuit.  Ita  et  ab  nativitate  Johanuis 
iucipit  dicere."  (Here  Credner's  restoration  of  the 
text  is  followed ;  see  his  Geschichte  des  N.  T. 
Kanon,  p.  155,  §76;  comp.  Kouth's  Reliquine, 
vol.  iv.).  The  citations  of  Justin  Martyr  fi"om  the 
Gospel  narrative  show  an  acquaintance  with  and 
use  of  St.  Luke's  account  (see  Kirchhofer,  Quellen- 
sammliing,  p.  132,  for  the  passages).  Irenaeus 
(cont.  Haer.  iii.  1)  says  that  "  Luke,  the  follower 
of  Paul,  preserved  in  a  book  the  Gospel  which 
that  apostle  preached."  The  same  writer  affords 
(iii.  14)  an  account  of  the  contents  of  the  Gospel, 
which  proves  that  in  the  book  preserved  to  us  we 
possess  the  same  which  he  knew.  Eusebius  (iii.  iv.) 
speaks  without  doubting,  of  the  two  books,  the 
Gospel  and  the  Acts,  as  the  work  of  St.  Luke. 
Both  he  and  Jerome  (Cafal.  Script.  Eccl.  p.  7) 
mention  the  opinion  that  when  St.  Paul  uses  the 
words  "  according  to  my  Gospel "  it  is  to  the  work 
of  St.  Luke  that  he  refers :  both  mention  that 
St.  Luke  derived  his  knowledge  of  divine  things, 
not  from  Paul  only,  but  from  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles,  with  whom  (says  Eusebius)  he  had  active 
intercourse.  Although  St.  Paul's  words  refer  in  all 
probability  to  no  written  Gospel  at  all,  but  to  the 
substance  of  his  own  inspired  preaching,  the  error 
is  important,  as  showing  how  strong  was  the  opinion 
in  ancient  times  that  Paul  was  in  some  way  con- 
nected with  the  writing  of  the  third  Gospel. 

It  has  been  shown  already  [Gospels,  vol.  i.  p. 
712]  that  the  Gospels  were  in  use  as  one  collection, 
and  were  spoken  of  undoubtingly  as  the  work  of  those 
whose  names  they  bear,  towards  the  end  of  the 
second  century.  But  as  regards  the  genuineness  of 
St.  Luke  any  discussion  is  entangled  with  a  some- 
what difficult  question,  namely,  what  is  the  rela- 
tion of  the  (lospel  we  possess  to  that  which  was 
used  by  the  heretic  Maicion?  The  case  may  be 
briefly  stated. 

Tlie  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  announced  salvation 
to  Jew  and  Gentile,  through  Him  who  was  born 
a  Jew,  of  the  seed  of  David.  The  two  sides  of  this 
fact  produced  very  early  two  opposite  tendencies 
in  the  Church.  One  party  thought  of  Christ  as  the 
Messiah  of  the  Jews  ;  the  other  as  the  Redeemer  of 
the  human  race.  The  former  viewed  the  Lord  as 
the  Messiah  of  Jewish  prophecy  and  tradition;  the 
other  as  the  revealer  of  a  doctrine  wholly  new,  in 
which  atonement  and  salvation  and  enlightenment 
were  offered  to  men  for  the  first  time.  Marcion  of 
Sinope,  who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  second 
century,  expressed  strongly  the  tendency  opposed  to 
Judaism.  The  scheme  of  redemption,  so  full  of  divine 
compassion  and  love,  was  adopted  by  him,  though  in 
a  perverted  form,  with  his  whole  heart.  The  asper- 
sions on  his  sinceritv  are  thrown  out  in  the  loose  rhe- 


»  "Cerdon  autem  ....  docuit  eum  qui  a  lege  et  pro- 
p!ietis  annuntiatus  sit  Deus,  non  esse  patrem  Domini 
nostri  Cbristi  Jesu.      Hunc  enim  coguosci,  ilium  autem 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

toric  of  controversy,  and  are  to  lie  received  with 
something  more  than  caution.  The  heathen  world, 
into  the  discord  of  which  the  music  of  that  message 
had  never  come,  appeared  to  him  as  the  kingdom 
of  darkness  and  of  Satan.  So  far  Marcion  and  his 
opponents  would  go  together.  But  how  does  Mar- 
cion deal  with  the  0.  T.  ?  He  views  it,  not  as  a 
preparation  for  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  but  ;is 
something  hostile  in  spiiit  to  the  Gospel.  In 
God,  as  revealed  in  the  0.  T.,  he  saw  only  a  being 
jealous  and  cruel.  The  heretic  Cerdo  taught  that 
the  just  and  severe  God  of  the  Law  and  the  Pro- 
phets was  not  the  same  as  the  mei'ciful  Father 
of  the  Lord  Jesus.  This  dualism  Marcion  earned 
further,  and  blasphemously  argued  that  the  God 
of  the  0.  T.  was  represented  as  doing  evil  and 
delighting  in  strife,  as  repenting  of  His  decrees  and 
inconsistent  with  Himself.*  This  divoicement  of 
the  N .  T.  from  the  Old  was  at  the  root  of  Marcion's 
doctrine.  In  his  strange  system  the  God  of  the 
0.  T.  was  a  lower  being,  to  whom  he  gave  the 
name  of  ^■r]ixwvpy6s.  engaged  in  a  constant  con- 
flict with  matter  ("TAtj),  over  which  he  did  not 
gain  a  complete  victory.  But  the  holy  and  eternal 
God,  perfect  in  goodness  and  love,  comes  not  in 
contact  with  matter,  and  creates  only  what  is  like 
to  and  cognate  with  himself.  In  the  0.  T.  we  see 
the  "  Demiurgus  ;"  the  history  of  redemption  is  the 
history  of  the  operation  of  the  true  God.  Thus 
much  it  is  necessary  to  state  as  bearing  upon  what 
follows:  the  life  and  doctrine  of  Marcion  have 
received  a  much  fuller  elucidation  from  Neander, 
Kirchengeschichte,  vol.  ii.  ;  Antupiostikiis,  and 
Dogmengeschichte ;  and  from  Volckmar,  Das 
Evangelium  Marcions,  p.  25.  The  data  in  older 
writers  are  found  in  the  apology  of  Justin  ]\Iartyr, 
in  Tertullian  against  Marcion  i.-v.  ;  Irenaeus,  i. 
ch.  xxvii. ;    and  Epiphanius,  Haer.  xlii. 

For  the  present  purpose  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  a 
teachei',  determined  as  Marcion  was  to  sever  the 
connexion  between  the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
would  approach  the  Gospel  history  with  strong 
prejudices,  and  would  be  unable  to  accept  as  it 
stands  the  written  narrative  of  any  of  the  thiee 
Evangelists,  so  far  as  it  admitted  allusions  to  the 
Old  Testament  as  the  soil  and  root  of  the  New.  It 
is  clear,  in  tact,  that  he  regarded  Paul  as  the  only 
apostle  who  had  remained  faithful  to  his  calling. 
He  admitted  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  a  Gospel 
which  he  regarded  as  Pauline,  and  rejected  the  rest 
of  the  N.  T.,  not  from  any  idea  that  the  books 
were  not  genuine,  but  because  they  were,  as  he 
alleged,  the  genuine  works  of  men  who  were  not 
faithful  teachers  of  the  Gospel  they  had  received. 

But  what  was  the  Gospel  which  Marcion  used? 
The  ancient  testimony  is  very  strong  on  this  point ; 
it  was  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  altered  to  suit  his 
peculiar  tenets.  "  Et  super  haec,"  says  Irenaeus, 
"  id  quod  est  secundum  Lucam  E\-angelium  cir- 
cumcidens,  et  omnia  quae  sunt  de  generatioue 
Domini  conscripta  auferens,  et  de  doctrine  ser- 
monum  Domini  niulta  aut(?rens,  in  quibus  manifes- 
tissime  conditorem  hujusuniversitatis  smmi  Patrem 
confitens  Dominus  conscriptus  est ;  semetipsum  esse 
veraciorem  quam  sunt  hi,  qui  Evangelium  tradi- 
derunt  apostoii,  snasit  discipulis  suis  ;  non  Evange- 


doctrinam,  impndorate  blasphemans  eum,  qui  a  lege  et 
prophctis  annuntiatus  est  Deus ;  malorum  faetorem  et 
bellorum  concupiscentem  et  inconstantem  quoque  sen- 


ignorari;etalterumquidem,justum,alteruaiautcmbonum    tentia,  et  contrarium  sibi  ipsum  dicens"  (Irenaeus,  i. 
esse.     Succedens  autem  ei  Marcion  I'oiiticus  adamplia\it    xxvii.  1  and  2,  p.  256,  Sticreii's  ed.). 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

lium  sed  purticulam  Kvaiigelii  tradens  eis.  Similiter 
auteni  et  apostoli  Pauli  Epistolas  abscidit,  auferens 
quaecumque  inanifeste  dicta  sunt  ab  apostolo  de  eo 
Deo,  qui  mundum  fecit,  quouiam  hie  Pater  Domini 
nostri  Jesu  Cliiisti,  et  quaecumque  ex  propheticis 
meniovans  apostolus  docuit,  piaenuntiantibus  ad- 
ventum  Domini"  {cont.  Haer.  i.  xxvii.  2).  "  Lucam 
videtur  Marcion  elegisse,"  says  Tevtullian,  "quern 
caederet"  (cont.  Marc.  iv.  2;  comp  Oiigen,  cont. 
Celsum,  ii.  27;  Epiphanius,  ffaer.  xlii.  11  ;  Theo- 
dovet,  Haeret.  Fab.  i.  24).  Marcion,  however,  did 
not  ascribe  to  Luke  by  name  the  Gospel  thus  cor- 
rupted (Tert.  cont.  Alarc.  iv.  6),  calling  it  simply 
the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

From  these  passages  the  opinion  that  Marcion 
formed  for  himself  a  Gospel,  on  the  principle  of 
rejecting  all  that  savoured  of  Judaism  in  an  existing 
narrative,  and  that  he  selected  the  Gospel  of 
.St.  Lulie  as  needing  the  least  alteration,  seems  to 
have  been  held  universally  in  the  Church,  until 
Semler  started  a  doubt,  tlie  prolific  seed  of  a  large 
controversy ;  from  the  whole  result  of  which, 
however,  the  cause  of  truth  has  little  to  regret. 
His  opinion  was  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  and 
that  used  by  Marcion  were  drawn  from  one  and  the 
same  original  source,  neither  being  altered  fiom  the 
other.  He  thinks  that  Tertullian  erred  from  waiit 
of  historical  knowledge.  The  charge  of  Epipha- 
nius, of  omissions  in  Marcion's  Gospel,  he  meets  by 
the  fact  of  Tertullian's  silence.  Griesbach,  about 
tlie  same  time,  cast  doubt  upon  the  received  opinion. 
Eichhorn  applied  his  theory  of  an  "original 
Gospel"  [see  article  Gospels,  vol.  i.  p.  715]  to 
this  question,  and  maintained  that  the  F'athers  had 
mistaken  the  short  and  unadulterated  Gospel  used 
by  Marcion  for  an  abiidgment  of  St.  Luke,  whereas 
it  was  probably  more  near  the  "  original  Gospel  " 
than  St.  Luke.  Hahn  has  more  recently  shown, 
in  an  elaborate  work,  that  there  were  sufficient 
motives,  of  a  doctrinal  kind,  to  induce  Marcion  to 
wish  to  get  rid  of  parts  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  ;  and 
he  refutes  Eichhorn's  reasoning  on  several  passages 
which  he  had  misundei'stood  from  neglecting  Ter- 
tullian's testimony.  He  has  the  merit,  admitted  on 
all  hands,  of  being  the  first  to  collect  the  data  for 
a  restoration  of  Marcion's  text  in  a  satisfactory 
manner,  and  of  tracing  out  in  detail  the  bearing  of 
his  doctrines  on  particular  portions  of  it.  Many 
were  disposed  to  regard  Halm's  work  as  conclusive  ; 
and  certainly  most  of  its  results  are  still  undis- 
turbed. Ritschl,  however,  took  the  other  side,  and 
held  that  Marcion  only  used  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke 
in  an  older  and  more  primitive  form,  and  that  what 
are  charged  against  the  former  as  omissions  are 
often  interpolations  in  the  latter.  A  controversy, 
in  which  Baur,  Hiigenfekl,  and  Volckmar  took  part, 
has  resulted  in  the  confirmation,  by  an  overpowering 
weight  of  argument,  of  the  old  opinion  that  Marcion 
corrupted  the  Gospel  of  Luke  for  his  own  purposes. 
Volckmar,  whose  work  contains  the  best  account  of 
the  whole  controversy,  sweeps  away,  it  is  to  be 
hoped  for  ever,  the  opinion  of  Uitschl  and  Baur 
that  Marcion  quoted  the  "  original  Gosj)el  of  Luke," 
as  well  as  the  later  view  of  Baur,  for  which  there 
is  I'eally  not  a  paiticle  of  evidence,  that  the  Gospel 
had  passed  through  the  hands  of  two  authors  or 
editors,  the  former  witli  strong  inclinations  against 
Judaism,  a  zealous  tiiliower  of  St.  Paul,  and  the 
latter  with  leanings  to  Judaism  and  against  the 
Gnostics!  He  considers  the  Gosptd  of  St.  Luke,  as 
we  now  possess  it,  to  bo  in  all  its  general  features 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


153 


that  which  Marcion  found  ready  to  his  handy 
and  which  for  doctrinal  reasons  he  abridged  and 
altered.  In  certain  passages,  indeed,  he  considers 
that  the  Gospel  used  by  Marcion,  as  cited  by  Ter- 
tullian .and  Epiphanius,  may  be  employed  to  cor- 
rect our  pi-esent  text.  But  this  is  only  patting  the 
copy  used  by  IMarcion  on  the  footing  of  an  older 
MS.  The  passages  which  he  considers  to  have  cer- 
tainly sufl'ered  alteration  since  Marcion's  time  are 
only  these  : — Luke  x.  21  (evxaptcrru)  kol  i^ofioXo- 
yovixai),  22  {koL  oi/Sels  iyvai  rts  ^(ttlv  6 
7r<7.T-;;p  ei  jUtj  6  uids,  kcCl  r'ls  icrriv  6  vlhs  ei  fiT]  6 
vaTyip  Kol  ^  4av  0ov\T]Tai  k.  t.  A.),  xi.  2  (Shs 
TjiMv  rh  ayiov  irvev/xd  aou\  xii.  3S  {ttj  icnrfpiviy 
(pvXaKij),  xvii.  2  (supply  €(  fii]  iyivv'i)d-ri^  k.t.X.), 
xviii.  19  [fj.T)  fis  A4y€  ayaQ6v  efs  kariv  ayaQhs  o 
Trarr/p  o  iv  roii  ovpavois).  In  all  these  places  the 
deviations  are  such  as  may  be  found  to  exist  be- 
tween different  MSS.  A  new  witness  as  to  the 
last,  which  is  of  the  greatest  importance,  appears 
in  Hippolytus,  Rcfatatio  Haeresiinn,  p.  254,  Ox- 
ford edition,  where  the  rl  /xe  Ae'76T€  aya06v  appears. 
See,  on  all  these  passages,  Tischeudorf's  Greek 
Testament,  ed.  vii.,  and  critical  notes.  Of  four 
other  places  Volckmar  speaks  more  doubtfully,  as 
having  been  distui'bed,  but  possibly  befoie  Marcion 
(vi.  17,  xii.  32,  xvii.  12,  xxiii.  2). 

From  this  controversy  we  gain  the  following  re- 
sult : — Marcion  was  in  the  height  of  his  activity 
about  A.D.  lo8,  soon  after  which  Justin  Jlaiiyr 
wrote  his  Apology ;  and  he  had  probably  given  forth 
his  Gospel  some  years  before,  i.  e.  about  a.  d.  130. 
At  the  time  when  he  composed  it  he  found  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Luke  so  far  diffnsed  and  accepted  that  he 
based  his  own  Gospel  upon  it,  altering  and  omitting. 
Therefore  we  may  assume  that,  about  A.D.  120,  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Luke  which  we  possess  was  in  use, 
and  was  familiarly  known.  The  theory  that  it  was 
composed  about  the  middle  or  end  of  the  2nd 
century  is  thus  ovei'thiowu ;  and  there  is  no  posi- 
tive evidence  of  any  kind  to  set  against  the  har- 
monious assertion  of  all  the  ancient  Church  that  this 
Gospel  is  the  genuine  production  of  St.  Luke. 

(On  St.  Luke's  Gospel  in  its  relation  to  Marcion, 
see,  besides  the  fathers  quoted  above,  Hahu,  Diis 
Evangelium  Marcions,  Konigsberg,  1823;  Ols- 
hausen,  Echtheit  der  vier  Kanon.  Evangelien, 
Konigsberg,  1823;  ^\iic\\\.  Das  Evangelium  3Iar- 
cions,  &c.,  Tiibingen,  1846,  with  his  retracta- 
tion in  Theol.  Jahrb.  1851  ;  Baur,  Krit.  Unter- 
suchung  iihcr  d.  Kan.  Evangelien,  Tiibingen,  1847  ; 
Hilgenfeld,  Krit.  Untersuchungen  &c.,  Halle, 
1850;  Volckmar,  Das  Evaivjelium  Marcions, 
Leipzig,  1852  ;  Bishop  Thirlwall's  Introduction  to 
Schleiermacher  on  St.  Luke ;  De  Wette,  Zehr- 
buch  d.  N.  T.,  Berlin,  1848.  These  are  but  a 
part  of  the  writers  who  have  touched  the  subject. 
The  work  of  Volckmar  is  the  most  comprehensive 
and  thorough ;  and,  though  some  of  his  views 
cannot  be  adopted,  he  has  satisfactorily  proved 
that  our  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  existed  before  the  time 
of  Marcion.) 

II.  Date  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke. — We  have  seen 
that  this  Gospel  was  in  use  before  the  year  120. 
From  internal  evidence  the  date  cm  be  more  nearly 
fixed.  From  Acts  i.  1,  it  is  clear  that  it  was 
written  before  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  The  latest 
time  actually  mentioned  in  the  Acts  is  the  term  of 
two  years  during  which  Paul  dwelt  at  Rome  "  in 
his  own  hired  house,  and  received  all  that  came 
in  unto  him"  (xxviii.  30,  31).     The  writer,  who 


154 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


has  tracked  the  footsteps  of  Paul  hitheito  with  such 
exactness,  leaves  him  here  abruptly,  without  malting 
known  the  result  of  his  appeal  to  Caesar,  or  the 
works  in  wliich  he  engaged  afterwards,  is'o  other 
motive  for  this  silence  can  be  suggested  tlian  that 
the  writer,  at  the  time  when  he  published  the  Acts, 
had  no  more  to  tell ;  and  in  that  case  the  book  of 
the  Acts  was  completed  about  the  end  of  the  second 
year  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment,  that  is,  about 
A.D.  63  (Wieseler,  Olshausen,  Alford).  How  much 
earlier  the  Gospel,  described,  as  "  the  former  trea- 
tise "  (Acts  i.  1),  may  have  been  written  is  micer- 
tiin.  But  Dean  Alford  {Prolegomena)  remarks 
that  the  words  imply  some  considerable  interval 
between  the  two  productions.  The  opinion  of  tlie 
younger  Thiersch  {Christian  Church,  p.  148,  Car- 
lyle's  translation)  thus  becomes  very  probable,  that 
it  was  written  at  Caesarea  during  St.  Paul's  im- 
prisonment there,  A.D.  58-60.  The  Gospel  of  St. 
Mattliew  was  probably  written  about  the  same 
time;  and  neither  Evangelist  appears  to  have  used 
the  other,  although  both  made  use  of  that  form  of 
oral  teaching  which  the  apostles  had  gradually  come 
to  employ.  [Gospels.]  It  is  painful  to  remark 
how  the  o})inions  of  many  commentators,  who  refuse 
to  fix  the  date  of  this  Gospel  earlier  than  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  have  been  influenced  by  the 
detei-mination  that  nothing  like  prophecy  shall  be 
found  in  it.  Believing  that  our  Lord  did  really 
prophesy  that  event,  we  have  no  difficulty  in  be- 
lieving that  an  Evangelist  leported  the  prophecy 
before  it  was  fulfilled  (see  Meyer's  Commentary, 
Introduction). 

III.  Place  where  the  Gospel  icas  written. — If  the 
time  has  been  rightly  indicated,  the  place  would  be 
Caesarea.  Other  suppositions  are — that  it  was  com- 
posed in  Achaia  and  the  region  of  Boeotia  (Jerome), 
in  Alexandria  (Syriac  version),  in  Rome  (Ewald, 
&c.),  in  Achaia  and  Macedonia  (Hilgenfeld),  and 
Asia  Minor  (Kostlin).  It  is  impossible  to  verify 
these  traditions  and  conjectures. 

IV.  Origin  of  the  Gospel. — The  preface,  contained 
in  the  four-  first  verses  of  the  Gospel,  describes  the 
object  of  its  writer.  "  Forasmuch  as  many  have 
taken  in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration 
of  those  things  which  are  most  surely  believed 
among  us,  even  as  they  delivered  them  unto  us, 
which  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and 
ministeis  of  the  word ;  it 'seemed  good  to  me  also, 
having  had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from 
the  very  first,  to  write  unto  tliee  in  ordei-,  most 
excellent  Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest  know  the 
certainty  of  tliose  things  wherein  thou  hast  been 
instructed."  Here  are  several  facts  to  be  observed. 
There  were  many  narratives  of  the  life  of  our  Lord 
current  at  the  early  time  when  Luke  wrote  his 
Gospel.  The  word  "  many"  cannot  apply  to  Mat 
thew  and  Mark,  because  it  must  at  any  rate  include 
more  than  two,  and  because  it  is  implied  that 
former  labourers  leave  something  still  to  do,  and 
that  the  writer  will  supersede  or  supplement  them 
either  in  whole  or  in  pait.  Tlie  ground  of  fitness 
for  the  task  St.  Luke  places  in  his  having  carefullv 
followed  out  the  whole  course  of  events  fi-om  the 
beginning.  He  does  not  claim  the  character  of  an 
eye-witness  from  the  first ;  but  possibly  he  may 
have  been  a  witness  of  some  part  of  our  Lord's 
doings  (see  above  Luke,  Life). 

The  ancient  opinion,  that  Luke  wrote  his  Gospel 
under  the  influence  of  Paul,  rests  on  the  authority 
of  Iienaeus,  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  Eusebius.  The 
two   first  assert  that  we  liave  in  Luke  the  Gospel 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

preached  by  Paul  (Iren.  cont.  Hacr.  iii.  1  ;  Tert. 
cont.  Marc.  iv.  5)  ;  Origen  calls  it  "  the  Gospel 
quotexl  by  Paul,"  alluding  to  Rom.  ii.  16  (Euseb. 
E.  Hist.  vi.  25)  ;  and  Eusebius  refers  Paul's  woids, 
"  according  to  my  Gospel"  (2  Tim.  ii.  8),  to  that 
of  Luke  {E.  Hist.  iii.  4),  in  which  Jerome  concurs 
{De  Vir.  III.  7).  The  language  of  the  preface  is 
against  the  notion  of  any  exclusive  influence  of  St. 
Paul.  The  Evangelist,  a  man  on  whom  the  Spirit 
of  God  was,  made  the  history  of  the  Saviour's  lile 
the  subject  of  research,  and  with  materials  so  ob- 
tained wrote,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  that 
was  upon  him,  the  history  now  before  us.  The 
four  verses  could  not  have  been  put  at  the  head 
of  a  history  composed  under  the  exclusive  guidance 
of  Paul  oi'  of  any  one  apostle,  and  as  little  could 
they  have  introduced  a  gospel  simply  communicated 
by  another.  Yet  if  we  compare  St.  Paul's  account 
of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper  (1  Cor.  xi. 
23-25)  with  that  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  (xxii.  19, 
20),  none  will  think  the  verbal  similar-ity  could  be 
accidental.  A  less  obvious  parallel  between  1  Cor. 
XV.  3  and  Luke  xxiv.  26,  27,  more  of  thought  than 
of  expression,  tends  the  same  way.  The  truth  seems 
to  be  that  St.  Luke,  seeking  information  fiom' every 
quarter,  sought  it  from  the  preaching  of  his  beloved 
master,  St.  Paul ;  and  the  apostle  in  his  turn  em- 
])loyed  the  knowledge  acquired  from  other'  sour'ces 
by  his  disciple.  Thus  the  preacliing  of  the  apostle, 
founded  on  the  same  body  of  facts,  and  the  same 
arrangement  of  them  as  the  rest  of  the  apostles 
used,  became  assimilated  especially  to  that  which 
St.  Luke  set  forth  in  his  narrative.  This  does  not 
detract  from  the  worth  of  either.  The  preaching 
and  the  Gospel  proceeded  each  from  an  inspired 
man ;  for  it  is  certain  that  Luke,  employed  as  he 
was  by  Paul,  could  have  been  no  exception  in  that 
plentiful  effusion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  which  Paul 
himself  bears  witness.  That  the  teaching  of  two 
men  so  liirked  together  (see  Life)  should  have  be- 
come more  and  more  assimilated  is  just  what  would 
be  expected.  But  the  influence  was  mutual,  and  not 
one-sided  ;  and  Luke  still  claims  with  right  the  posi- 
tion of  an  independent  inquii'er  into  historic  facts. 

Upon  the  question  whether  Luke  made  use  of  the 
Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  no  opinion  given 
her-e  could  be  conclusive.  [Gospels,  vol.  i.  p.  714.] 
Each  reader  should  examine  it  for  himself,  with  the 
aid  of  a  Greek  Harmony.  It  is  probable  that  Mat- 
thew and  Luke  wrote  irrdepeirdently,  and  about  the 
same  time.  Some  of  their  coincidences  arise  from 
their  both  incorporating  the  oi'al  teaching  of  the 
apostles,  and  others,  it  may  be,  fr'om  their  common 
use  of  written  documents,  such  as  are  hinted  at  in 
Luke  i.  1.  As  r'egai'ds  St.  Mark,  some  regard  his 
Gospel  as  the  oldest  New  Testament  writing,  whilst 
other's  infer,  from  apparent  abbreviations  (Mark  i. 
12,  xvi.  12),  fi'om  insertions  of  matter-  from  other 
places  (Mark  iv.  10-34,  is.  38-48),  and  fi-om  the 
mode  in  which  additional  information  is  intr-o- 
duced — now  with  a  seeming  connexion  with  Mat- 
thew and  irow  with  Luke — that  Mark's  Gospel  is 
the  last,  and  has  beeir  framed  upon  the  other  two 
(De  Wette,  Einlcitung,  §94).  The  result  of  this 
controversy  should  be  to  inspire  distrust  of  all  such 
seeming  pr-oofs,  which  conduct  dilierent  critics  to 
exactly  opposite  results. 

V.  Purpose  for  which  the  Gospel  was  written. — 
The  Evangelist  professes  to  write  that  Theophilus 
"  might  know  the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein 
he  had  been  instr-ucted"  (i.  4).  Who  was  this 
Tlicdphilus  ?     Some  have  su]i]iosed  that  it  is  a  sig- 


T.UKE.  r40SPEL  OF 

iiificant  name,  api)li(;al)le  not.  to  one  man,  hut  to 
any  amans  Dei;  but  the  aiklition  of  (cpaTiirTos,  a 
term  of  honour  which  would  be  used  towards  a  man 
of  station,  or  sometimes  (see  passages  in  Kuinol 
and  Wetstein)  towanls  a  personal  friend,  seems 
against  this,  lie  was,  then,  an  existing  person.  Con- 
jecture lias  been  wildly  busy  in  endeavouring  to 
identify  him  with  some  person  known  to  history. 
Some  indications  are  given  in  the  Gospel  about 
him,  and  beyond  them  we  do  not  propose  to  go. 
He  was  not  an  inhabitant  of  Palestine,  for  the 
Evangelist  minutely  describes  the  position  of  places 
which  to  such  a  one  would  be  well  known.  It  is 
so  with  Capernaum  (iv.  31),  Nazareth  (i.  2G), 
Aiimathea  (xxiii.  51),  the  country  of  the  Gada- 
rones  (viii.  26),  the  distance  of  Mount  Olivet  and 
Emniaus  from  Jerusalem  (Acts  i.  12;  Luke  xxiv. 
V.\).  If  places  in  England — say  Bristol ,  and  Oxford, 
and  Ilampstead — were  mentioned  in  this  careful 
minute  way,  it  would  be  a  fair  inference  that  the 
writer  meant  his  work  for  other  than  English 
readers. 

By  the  same  test  he  probably  was  not  a  Macedo- 
nian (Acts  xvi.  12),  nor  an  Athenian  (Acts  xvii. 
21),  nor  a  Cretan  (Acts  sxvii.  8,  12).  But  that 
he  was  a  native  of  Italy,  and  perhaps  an  inhabitant 
of  Rome,  is  probable  from  similar  data.  In  tracing 
St.  Paul's  journey  to  Rome,  places  which  an  Italian 
might  be  supposed  not  to  know  are  described  mi- 
nutely (Acts  xxvii.  8,  12,  IG)  ;  but  when  lie  comes 
to  Sicily  and  Italy  this  is  neglected.  Syracuse  and 
Rhegium,  even  the  more  obscure  Puteoli,  and  Appii 
Forum  and  the  Three  Taverns,  are  mentioned  as  to 
one  likely  to  know  them.  (For  other  theories  see 
Marsh's  Michaelis,  vol.  iii.  Part  i.  p.  236  ;  Kui- 
nol's  Prolegomena,  and  Winer's  Rcalwhuch,  art. 
"  Thcophilus.")  All  that  emerges  from  this  argu- 
ment is,  that  the  person  for  whom  Luke  wrote  in 
the  first  instance  was  a  Gentile  reader.  We  must 
admit,  but  with  great  caution,  on  account  of- the 
abuses  to  which  the  notion  has  led,  that  there  are 
traces  in  the  Gospel  of  a  leaning  towards  Gentile 
rather  than  Jewish  converts.  The  genealogy  of 
Jesus  is  traced  to  Adam,  not  from  Abraham  ;  so  as 
to  connect  Him  with  the  whole  human  race,  and 
not  merely  with  the  Jews.  Luke  describes  the 
mission  of  the  Seventy,  which  number  has  been 
usually  supposed  to  be  typical  of  all  nations  ;  as 
twelve,  the  number  of  the  apostles,  represents  the 
.lews  and  their  twelve  tribes.  As  each  Gospel 
has  within  certain  limits  its  own  character  and 
mode  of  treatment,  we  sliall  recognise  with  01s- 
hausen  that  "  St.  Luke  has  the  peculiar  power  of 
exhibiting  with  great  clearness  of  conception  and 
truth  (especially  in  the  long  account  of  Christ's 
journey,  from  ix.  51  to  xviii.  34),  not  so  much  the 
discourses  of  Jesus  as  His  conversations,  with  all 
the  incidents  that  gave  rise  to  them,  with  the  re- 
marks of  those  who  were  present,'  and  with  the 
final  results." 

On  the  supposed  "doctrinal  tendency"  of  the 
Gospel,  however,  much  lias  been  written  which  it 
is  painful  to  dwell  on,  but  easy  to  refute.  Some 
have  endeavoured  to  see  in  this  divine  book  an 
attemjit  to  engraft  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  the 
Jewish  representations  of  the  Messiah,  and  to  elevate 
the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation,  of  which  Paul 
was  the  most  pnuninent  preacher,  over  the  Ju- 
daizing  tendencies,  and  to  put  St.  Paul  higher  than 
the  twelve  Apostles!  (See  Zeller,  .A/)orf. ;  Baur, 
Kannn.  Emnii. ;  and  Hilgenfeld.)  How  two  im- 
partial  historical  narratives,   the   Gospel   and    the 


LUKE,  GOSPETi  OF 


155 


Acts,  could  have  Ijeen  taken  for  two  tracts  written 
for  polemical  and  personal  ends,  is  to  an  English 
mind  hardly  conceivable.  Even  its  supporters  found 
that  the  inspired  author  had  carried  out  his  purpose 
so  badly,  that  they  were  forced  to  assume  that  a 
second  author  or  editor  had  altered  the  work  with 
a  view  to  work  up  together  Jewish  and  Pauliu-e 
elements  into  harmony  (Baur,  Kanon.  Evang.  p. 
502).  Of  this  editing  and  re-editing  there  is  no 
trace  whatever;  and  the  invention  of  the  second 
editor  is  a  gross  device  to  cover  the  failure  of  the 
first  hypothesis.  By  such  a  machinery,  it  will  be 
possible  to  prove  in  after  ages  that  Gibbon's  History 
was  originally  a  plea  for  Christianity,  or  any  similar 
paradox. 

The  passages  which  are  supposed  to  bear  out 
this  "  Pauline  tendency,"  are  brought  together  by 
Hilgenfeld  with  great  care  (Evangelien,  p.  220)  ; 
but  Keuss  has  shown,  by  passages  from  St.  Matthew 
which  have  the  same  "  tendency"  against  the  Jews, 
how  brittle  such  an  argument  is,  and  has  left  no 
room  ibr  doubt  that  the  two  Evangelists  \vrote 
facts  and  not  theories,  and  dealt  with  those  facts 
with  pure  historical  candour  (Reuss,  Ilistoire  de  la 
The'ologie,  vol.  ii.  b.  vi.  ch.  vi.).  Writing  to  a 
Gentile  convert,  and  through  him  addressing  other 
Gentiles,  St.  Luke  has  adapted  the  form  of  liis  nar- 
rative to"  their  needs ;  but  not  a  trace  of  a  subjective 
bias,  not  a  vestige  of  a  personal  motive,  has  been 
suffered  to  sully  the  inspired  page.  Had  the  in- 
fluence of  Paul  been  the  exclusive  or  principal 
source  of  this  Gospel,  we  should  have  found  in  it 
more  resemblance  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, 
which  contains  (so  to  speak)  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Paul. 

VI.  Language  and  style  of  the  Gospel. — It  has 
never  been  doubted  that  the  Evangelist  wrote  his 
Gospel  in  Greek.  Whilst  Hebraisms  are  frequent, 
classical  idioms  and  Greek  compound  words  abound. 
The  number  of  words  used  by  Luke  only  is  un- 
usually great,  and  many  of  them  ai'e  compound 
words  for  which  there  is  classical  authority  (see 
Dean  Alford's  valuable  Greek  Test.). 

Some  of  the  leading  peculiarities  of  style  are 
here  noted :  a  more  minute  examination  will  be 
found  in  Prof.  Davidson's  Introduction  to  N.  T. 
(Bagster,  1848). 

1.  The  very  frequent  use  of  iyeuero  in  intro- 
ducing a  new  narrative  or  a  transition,  and  of  iye- 
VETo  iv  T(j)  with  an  infinitive,  are  traceable  to  the 
Hebrew. 

2.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  frequent  use 
of  KapSla,  answering  to  the  Hebrew  37. 

3.  No/xi/coi,  used  six  times  instead  of  the  xisual 
ypaixfiarels,  and  eTTKrraTTjs  used  six  times  for 
pa;8/8i,  SiSd(TKa\os,  are  cases  of  a  preference  for 
words  more  intelligible  to  Greeks  or  Gentiles. 

4.  The  neuter  participle  is  used  frequently  for  a 
substantive,  both  in  the  Gospel  and  the  .Acts. 

5.  The 'infinitive  with  the  genitive  of  the  article, 
to  indicate  design  or  result,  as  in  i.  9,  is  frequent 
in  both  books. 

6.  The  frequent  use  of  Se  Kai,  for  the  sake  of 
emphasis,  as  in  iii.  9. 

7.  The  frequent  use  of  koI  avT6s,  as  in  i.  17. 

8.  The  preposition  ffvu  is  used  about  seventy-five 
times  in  Gospel  and  Act,«  :  in  the  other(;ospels  rarely. 

9.  'Arevi^eiv  is  usea  eleven  times  in  Gospel  and 
Acts;   elsewhere  only  twice,  by  St.  Paul  (2  Cor.). 

lU.  Es  Se  fj.'fi  ye  is  used  five  times  for  the  el  8e 
^17/  of  Mark  and  John. 


156 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


11..  E/'ire?;'  Trp6s,  which  is  frequent  in  St.  Luke, 
is  use:l  elsewhere  only  by  St.  John:  XaAelir  irpSs, 
also  frequent,  is  only  thrice  used  by  other  writers. 

12.  St.  Luke  very  frequently  uses  the  auxiliary 
verb  with  a  participle  lor  the  verb,  as  in  v.  17, 
i.  20. 

13.  He  makes  remarkable  use  of  verbs  com- 
pounded with  Sia  and  eVi. 

14.  XdpLS,  veiy  frequent  in  Luke,  is  only  used 
thrice  by  John,  and  not  at  all  by  Matthew  and 
Mark.  2a)T7)p,  ffwrripia,  (TuiTi)piov,  are  frequent 
with  Luke;  the  two  tiist  are  used  once  each  by 
John,  and  not  by  the  other  Evangelists. 

15.  The  same  may  be  said  of  euayyeXi^ecrflai, 
once  in  Matthew,  and  not  at  all  in  Mark  and 
John ;  virocrrpecpeii',  once  in  Mark,  not  in  other 
Gospels ;  ((piffTdvai,  not  used  in  the  other  three 
Gospels ;  Siepx^ffdai,  thirty-two  times  in  Luke's 
Gospel  and  the  Acts,  and  only  twice  each  in 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  John ;  TrapaxprnJ-a  frequent 
in  Luke,  and  only  twice  elsewhere,  in  Matthew. 

16.  The  words  6fj.oOvfxaS6v,  eirAajS'^r,  avrjp,  as  a 
form  of  addiess  and  bet'ore  substantives,  aie  also 
characteristic  of  Luke. 

17.  Some  Latin  words  are  used  by  Luke  :  Key^wv 
(viii.  30),  Z-qvdpwv  (x.  35),  (rovSdpiov  (xix.  20), 
KO\(i>vla  (Acts  xvi.  12). 

On  comparing  the  Gospel  with  the  Acts  it  is 
found  that  tlie  style  of  the  latter  is  more  pure  and 
fi-ee  from  Hebrew  idioms ;  and  the  style  of  the 
later  poitiou  of  the  Acts  is  more  pure  than  that 
of  the  former.  Where  Luke  used  the  materials  he 
derived  from  othei's,  oral  or  written,  or  both,  his 
style  reflects  the  Hebrew  idioms  of  them ;  but 
when  he  comes  to  scenes  of  which  he  was  an  eye- 
witness and  describes  entirely  in  his  own  words, 
these  disappear. 

VII.  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament. — In 
the  citations  from  the  0.  T.,  of  the  principal  of 
which  the  following  is  a  list,  there  are  plain  marks 
of  the  use  of  the  Septuagint  version: — 

Luke  i.  17.  Mai.  i v.  4,  5. 

„     ii.  23.  Ex.  xiii.  2. 

„     ii.  2).  Lev.  xii.  8. 

„     ill.  4,  5,  6.     Is.  xl.  3,  4,  5. 
„     Iv.  4.  Dent.  vili.  3. 

„     iv.  8.  Deut.  vi.  13. 

„     iv.  10,  11.      Ps.  xci.  11,  12. 
„     iv.  12.  Deut.  vi.  14. 

„     iv.  18.  Is.  Ixi.  1,  2. 

„     vii.  27.  Mai.  iii.  1. 

„     viii.  10.         Is.  vi.  9. 
„     X.  27.  Deut.  vi.  5;  Lev.  xix.  18. 

„     xviii.  20.        Ex  xx.  12. 
„     xix.  46.         Is.  Ivi.  7  ;  Jer.  viii.  11. 
„     XX.  17.  Ps.  cxviii.  22,  23. 

„     XX.  28.  Deut.  XXV.  5. 

„  XX.  42,  43.  Ps.  ex.  1. 
„  xxii.  37.  Is.  liii.  12. 
„     xxiii.  46.       Ps.  xxxi.  5. 

VIII.  Integrit;/  of  the  Gospel —  the  first  tu-o 
Chapters. — The  Gosjiel  of  Luke  is  quoted  by  Justin 
Martyrand  by  the  author  of  the  ('lementine  Homilies. 
The  silence  of  the  apostolic  fathers  only  indicates 
that  it  was  admitted  into  the  Canon  some-?\'hat  late, 
which  was  probably  the  case.  The  result  of  the 
Marcion  controversy  is,  as  we  have  seen,  that  our 
Go.spel  was  in  use  before  .\.D.  120.  A  special  ques- 
tion, however,  has  been  i-aised  about  the  two  first 
chapters.     The   critical   history    of  these    is   best 


LUZ 

drawn  out  perhaps  in  Meyer's  note.  The  chief  ob- 
jection against  them  is  foundeil  on  the  garbled  open- 
ing of  Marcion's  Gospel,  who  omits  the  two  first 
chaptei's,  and  connects  iii.  1  immediately  with  iv.  31. 
(So  Tertullian,  "  Anno  quintodecimo  principatus 
Tiberiani  proponit  Deum  descendisse  in  civitateni 
Galilaeae  Capharnaum,"  cant.  Marc.  iv.  7).  But 
any  objection  founded  on  this  would  apply  to  the 
third  chapter  as  well  ;  and  the  history  of  our  Lord's 
cliildhood  seems  to  have  been  known  to  and  quoted 
by  Justin  Martyr  (see  Apology,  i.  §H3,  and  ■  an 
allusion.  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  100)  about  the  time 
of  JIaicion.  There  is  therefore  no  real  ground  for 
distinguishing  between  the  two  first  chapters  and 
the  rest ;  and  the  arguments  tor  the  genuineness  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel  apply  to  the  whole  inspired  nar- 
rative as  we  now  possess  it  (see  Meyer's  note ;  also 
Volckmar,  p.  130). 

IX.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — This  Gospel  con- 
tiiins — 1.  A  preface,  i.  1-4.  2.  An  account  of  the 
time  preceding  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  i.  5  to  ii.  52. 

3.  Several  accounts  of  discourses  and  acts  of  our 
Lord,  common  to  Luke,  Matthew,  and  Mark,  related 
for  the  most  part  in  their  order,  and  belonging  to 
Capernaum  and  the  neighbourhood,  iii.  1  to  ix.  50. 

4.  A  collection  of  similar  accounts,  referring  to  a 
certain  journey  to  Jerusalem,  mo.st  of  them  peculiar 
to  Luke,  ix.  51  to  xviii.  14.  5.  An  aci^ount  of  the 
sufferings,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus,  common 
to  Luke  with  the  other  Evangelists,  except  as  to 
some  of  the  accounts  of  what  took  place  after  the 
resurrection,  xviii.  15  to  the  end. 

Sources.  Works  of  Irenaeus  (ed.  Stieren)  ; 
Justin  Martyr  (ed.  Otto)  ;  Tertullian,  Origen,  and 
Epiphanius  (ed.  Dindorf) ;  Hippolytus  (ed.  Miller)  ; 
and  Ensebius  (ed.  Valesius)  ;  Marsh's  Jfw/jae/is  ; 
De  Wette,  Einleitung  ;  Meyer,  Kommentar  ;  the 
work  of  Hahn,  Ritschl,  Baur,  and  Volckmar,  quoted 
above  ;  Credner,  Kanon ;  Dean  Alford's  Commen- 
tary ;  Dictionaries  of  Winer  and  Heizog  ;  Commen- 
taries of  Kuinol,  Wetstein,  and  others;  Thiersch, 
Church  History  (Eng.  Trans.);  Olshausen,  Echth- 
eit ;  Hug,  Einleitung ;  Weisse,  Evangelienfrage ; 
Greek  Testament,  Tischcndorf,  ed.  vii.,  and  notes 
there.  [W.  T,] 

LUNATICS  (a€K-t]viaCifJiivoi).  This  word  is 
used  twice  in  the  N.  T.  In  the  enumeration  of 
Matt.  iv.  24,  the  "  lunatics "  are  distinguished 
from  the  demoniacs ;  in  Matt.  xvii.  15,  the  name  is 
applied  to  a  boy  who  is  expressly  declared  to  have 
been  possessed.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the 
word  itself  refers  to  some  disease,  affecting  both  the 
body  and  the  mind,  which  might,  or  might  not,  be 
a  sign  of  possession  (see  on  this  subject  Demoniacs  ). 
By  "the  description  of  Mark  ix.  17-20,  it  is  con- 
cluded that  this  disease  was  epilepsy  (see  Winer, 
Realm.  "  Besessene  ;"  Trench,  On  the  Miraclcs^, 
p.  363).  The  origin  of  the  name  (as  of  (re\rj»'ia(cds 
and  ffe\7)v6^Xii)Tos  in  earlier  Greek,  "  lunaticus " 
in  Latin,  and  equivalent  words  in  moiiern  lan- 
guages), is  to  be  found  in  the  belief  that  diseases  of 
a  paroxysmal  character  were  affected  by  the  light, 
or  by  the  changes  of  the  moon.  [A.  B.] 

LUZ  (T-lS,  and  perhaps  nt-l?,*  «•  «.  Luzah, 
which  is  also  the  reading  of  the  Samar.  Codex  and 


*  The  ground  for  this  suggestion,  besides  the  remarlj- 
able  agreement  of  the  ancient  versions  as  given  above,  is 
Josh,  xviii.  13,  where  the  words  HT'I?  firi3"?N  slioukl, 
according  to  ordinary  usage,  be  rendered  "  to  the  shoulder 
of  Luzah;"  the  ah,  wliich  is  the  particle  of  motion  in  | 


Hebrew,  not  being  required  here,  as  it  is  in  the  fomier 
part  of  the  same  verse.  Other  names  are  found  both  with 
and  without  a  similar  termination,  as  Jolbah,  .Jotbathah; 
Tinmalh,  Timnathah ;  Kil'lah,  P>iblathah.  Laish  and 
Laishah  are  probal)ly  distinct  places. 


LUZ 

of  its  two  versions:  ot"  the  LXX.  and  Eusebius, 
Aov^d  and  Aov^ci  :^  and  the  Vulgate  Lnza).  The 
uncertainty  which  attends  the  name  attaches  in  a 
gieater  degree  to  the  phice  itself.  It  seems  impos- 
sible to  discover  with  precision  whether  Luz  and 
Bethel  represent  one  and  the  same  town — the  former 
the  Canaanite,  the  latter  the  Hebrew  name — or  whe- 
ther they  were  distinct  places,  though  in  close  proxi- 
mity. The  latter  is  the  natural  inference  from  two 
of  the  passages  iu  which  Luz  is  spoken  of.  Jacob 
"  called  the  name  of  the  place  Bethel,  but  the  name 
of  the  city  was  called  Luz  in  the  beginning"  (Gen. 
xxviii.  19);  as  if  the  spot — the  "  certjiin  place" — 
on  which  he  had  "  lighted,"  where  he  saw  his 
vii-ion  and  erected  his  pillai",  were  outside  the  walls 
of  the  Canaanite  town.  And  with  this  agree  the 
temis  of  the  specification  of  the  common  boundary 
of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin.  It  ran  "  fi-om  Bethel 
to  Luz"  (Josh.  xvi.  2),  or  "from  the  wilderness 
of  Bethaven  ...  to  Luz,  to  the  shoulder  of  Luzah 
southward,  that  is  Bethel"  (xviii.  13) ;  as  if  Bethel 
were  on  the  south  side  of  the  hill  on  which  the 
other  city  stood. 

Other  passages,  however,  seem'  to  speak  of  the 
two  as  identical — "  Luz  in  the  l;md  of  Canaan,  that 
is  Bethel"  (Gen.  xxxv.  6);  and  in  the  account  of 
tiie  capture  of  Bethel,  after  the  conquest  of  the 
country,  it  is  said  that  "  the  name  of  the  city 
before  was  Luz  "  ( Judg.  i.  23).  Nor  should  it  be 
overlooked  that  in  the  very  first  notice  of  Abram's 
arrival  in  Canaan,  Bethel  is  mentioned  without  Luz 
(Gen.  xii.  8,  xiii.  3),  just  as  Luz  is  mentioned  by 
Jacob  without  Bethel  (xlviii.  3). 

Perhaps  there  never  was  a  point  on  Vvhich  the 
evidence  was  so  curiously  contradictory.  In  the 
passages  just  quoted  we  tind  Bethel  mentioned  in 
the  most  express  manner  two  generations  before  the 
occurrence  of  the  event  which  gave  it  its  name ; 
while  the  patriarch  to  whom  that  event  occurred, 
ami  who  made  there  the  most  solemn  vow  of  his 
life,  in  recurring  to  that  very  circumstance,  calls 
the  place  by  its  heathen  name.  We  further  find 
the  Israelite  name  attached,  before  the  conquest  of 
the  country  by  the  Israelites,  to  a  city  of  the 
building  of  which  we  have  no  record,  and  which 
city  is  then  in  the  possession  of  the  Canaanites. 

The  conclusion  of  the  writer  is  that  the  two 
places  were,  during  the  times  preceding  the  con- 
quest, distinct,  Luz  being  the  city  and  Bethel  the 
pillar  and  altar  of  Jacob:  that  alter  the  destruction 
of  Luz  by  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  the  town  of  Bethel 
arose :  that  the  close  proximity  of  the  two  was 
sufficient  to  account  for  their  being  taken  as  iden- 
tiavl  in  cases  where  there  was  no  special  reason  for 
discriminating  them,  and  that  the  great  subsequent 
reputation  of  Bethel  will  account  for  the  occurrence 
of  its  name  iu  Abi-ams  history  iu  reference  to  a 
date  prior  to  its  existence,  as  well  as  iu  the  records 
of  the  conquest. 

2.  When  the  original  Luz  was  destroyed,  through 
the  treachery  of  one  of  its  inhabitants,  the  man 
who  had  introduced  the  Israelites  into  the  town 
went  into  the  "land  of  the  Hittites"  and  built  a 
city,  which  he  named  after  the  former  one. 
'I'his  city  was  standing  at  the  date  of  the  record 
(Judg.  i.  26).  But  its  situation,  as  well  as  that 
of  the  "  land  of  the  Hittites,"  has  never  been  dis- 


LYCAONIA 


157 


b  In  one  case  only  do  the  LXX.  omit  the  termination, 
namely,  in  Gen.  .xxviii.  19,  and  hero  tliey  give  tlie  name 
as  Oiilammaous,  OvKa.\j.ixaov^,  incoqjoratins;  with  it  the 
preci'diiig  Hebivw  word  Ulani,  D^-IJ},  as  they  have  also 


covered  since,  and  is  one  of  the  favourite  puzzles 
of  Scripture  geogi-aphers.  Eusebius  (  Onom.  Aov^d) 
mentions  a  place  of  the  name  as  standino-  near 
Shechem,  nine  (Jerome,  three)  miles  from  Neapolis 
{JSfabh(3).  The  objection  to  this  is  the  difficulty  of 
placing  in  central  Palestine,  and  at  that  period,  a 
district  exclusively  Hittite.  Some  have  imagined 
it  to  be  in  Cyprus,  as  if  Chittim  were  the  country 
of  the  Hittites  ;  others  in  Arabia,  as  at  Lysa,  a 
Roman  town  in  the  desert  south  of  Palestine,  on 
the  road  to  Akabah  (Rob.  i.  187). 

The  signification  of  the  name  is  quite  uncertain. 
It  is  usually  taken  as  meaning  "hazel,"  and  de- 
noting the  presence  of  such  trees ;  but  the  latest 
lexicographer  (Fuerst,  Hdivbh.  66t3)  has  returned  to 
the  opinion  of  an  earlier  scholar  (Hiller,  Onom.  70), 
that  the  notion  at  the  root  of  the  word  is  rather 
"  bending  "  or  "  sinking,"  as  of  a  valley.  [G.j 

LYOAO'NIA  (AvKauvla).  This  is  one  of  those 
districts  of  Asia  Minor,  which,  as  mentioned  in  the 
N.  T.,  are  to  be  understood  rather  in  an  ethno- 
logical than  a  strictly  political  sense.  From  what 
is  said  in  Acts  xiv.  1 1  of  "  the  speech  of  Lycaonia," 
it  is  evident  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  district,  in 
St.  Paul's  day,  spoke  something  very  dillerent  from 
ordinary  Greek.  Whether  this  language  was  some 
Syrian  dialect  [Cappadocia],  or  a  corrupt  fonn  of 
Greek,  has  been  much  debated  (Jablonsky,  Opnsc. 
iii.  3;  Gukling,  De  Ling.  Zijcaon.  n2tj).  The 
fact  that  the  Lycaonians  were  familiar  with  the 
Greek  mythology  is  consistent  with  either  suii}io- 
sition.  It  is  deeply  interesting  to  see  these  rude 
country  people,  when  Paul  and  Barnabas  worked 
miracles  among  them,  rushing  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  strangers  were  Mercury  and  Jupiter,  whose 
visit  to  this  very  neighbourhood  forms  the  subject 
of  one  of  Ovid's  most  charming  stories  (Ovid, 
Metam.  viii.  626).  Nor  can  we  fail  to  notice  how 
admirably  St.  Paul's  address  on  the  occasion  was 
adapted  to  a  simple  and  imperfectly  civilised  race 
(xiv.  15-17).  This  was  at  Lystra,  in  the  heart  of 
the  country.  Further  to  the  east  was  Derbe  (ver. 
6),  not  far  from  the  chief  pass  which  leads  up  through 
Taurus,  from  CiLiCiA  and  the  coast,  to  the  central 
table-land.  At  the  western  limit  of  Lycaonia  was 
IcoNiUM  (ver.  1),  in  the  direction  of  Antioch  in 
PiSiDiA.  A  good  Roman  road  intersected  the  dis- 
trict along  the  line  thus  indicated.  On  St.  Paul's 
first  missionary  journey  he  traversed  Lycaonia  fi'om 
west  to  east,  and  then  returned  on  his  steps  (ver.  21  ; 
see  2  Tim.  iii.  11).  On  the  second  and  third  journeys 
he  entered  it  from  the  east ;  and  after  leaving  it, 
ti-avelled  in  the  one  case  to  Troas  (Acts  xvi.  1-8), 
in  the  other  to  Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  23,  six.  1). 
Lycaonia  is  for  the  most  part  a  dreary  plain,  bare 
of  trees,  destitute  of  tVesh  water,  and  with  several 
salt  lakes.  It  is,  however,  very  favourable  to  sheep- 
farming.  In  the  first  notices  of  this  disti  ict,  which 
occur  in  connexion  with  Roman  history,  we  find  it 
under  the  rule  of  robber-chieftains.  After  the  provin- 
cial system  had  embraced  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor, 
the  boundaries  of  the  provinces  were  variable  ;  and 
Lycaonia  w;is,  politically,  sometimes  in  Cappadocia, 
sometimes  in  (ialatia.  A  question  has  been  raised, 
iu  connexion  with  this  point,  concerning  the  chro- 
nology of  parts  of  St.  Paul's  life.  This  subject  is 
noticed  in  the  article  on  Galatia.  [J.  S.  H.] 


done  in  the  case  of  I^aith  (sec  p.  55((  note).  The  eagerness 
with  which  .Feronie  iiltatks  this  monstnms  name  at 
every  possible  opportunity  is  very  curious  and  cliarac- 

ti'ristic. 


158 


LYCIA 


LYC'IA  (AvKia)  is  the  name  of  that  south- 
western region  of  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor  which 
is  immediately  opposite  the  island  of  Rhodes.  It  is  a 
remarkable  district  both  physically  and  historically. 
Tlie  last  eminences  of  the  range  of  Taurus  come 
down  here  in  majestic  masses  to  the  sea,  forming  the 
heights  of  Cragus  and  Antici'agus,  with  the  river 
Xanthus  winding  between  them,  and  ending  in  the 
long  series  of  promontories  called  by  modern  sailors 
the  "  seven  capes,"  among  which  are  deep  inlets 
favourable  to  seafaring  and  piracy.  In  this  district 
are  those  curious  and  very  ancient  architectural 
remains,  which  have  been  so  fully  illustrated  by 
our  English  travellers.  Sir  C.  Fellows,  and  Messrs. 
Spratt  and  Forbes,  and  many  specimens  of  which 
are  in  the  British  Museum.  ^V^hatever  may  have 
been  the  political  history  of  the  earliest  Lycians, 
their  country  was  incorporated  in  the  Persian  empire, 
and  their  ships  were  conspicuous  in  the  great  wai- 
against  the  Greeks  (Herod,  vii.  91,  92).  After  the 
death  of  Alexander  the  Great,  Lycia  was  included  in 
the  Greek  Seleucid  kingdom,  and  was  a  part  of  the 
tenitory  which  the  Romans  forced  Antiochus  to  cede 
(Liv.  xxxvii.  55).  It  was  made  in  the  first  place  one 
of  the  continental  possessions  of  Rhodes  [Garia]  : 
but  before  long  it  was  politically  separated  from  that 
island,  and  allowed  to  be  an  independent  state.  This 
has  been  called  the  golden  period  of  thi?  history  of 
Lycia.  It  is  in  this  pei  iod  that  we  find  it  mentioned 
(1  Mace.  XV.  23)  as  one  of  the  countries  to  which 
the  Romans  sent  despatches  in  favoui"  of  the  Jews 
under  Simon  JIaccabaeus.  It  was  not  till  the  reign 
of  Claudius  that  Lycia  became  part  of  the  Roman 
provincial  system.  At  first  it  was  combined  with 
Famphylia  :  and  the  governor  bore  the  title  of 
"  Proconsul  Lyciae  et  Pamphyliae"  (Gruter,  Thes. 
p.  458).  Such  seems  to  have  been  the  condition  of 
the  district  when  St.  Paul  visited  the  Lyciau  towns 
of  Patara  (Acts  xxi.  1)  and  Myea  (Acts  xxvii.  5). 
At  a  later  period  of  the  Roman  empire  it  was  a  sepa- 
rate province,  with  Myra  for  its  capitil.    [J.  S.  H.j 

LYD'DA  (AuS5a :  Lydda),  the  Greek  form  of 
the  name  which  originally  appears  in  the  Hebrew 
records  as  LOD.  It  is  familiar  to  us  as  the  scene  of 
one  of  St.  Peter's  acts  of  healing,  on  the  paralytic 
Aeneas,  one  of  "  the  saints  who  dwelt  at  Lydda  " 
(Acts  ix.  32),  the  consequence  of  which  was  the 
conversion  of  a  very  large  number  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  town  and  of  the  neighbouring  plain  of  Sharon 
(ver.  35).  Here  Peter  was  residing  when  the  dis- 
ciples of  Joppa  fetched  him  to  that  city  in  their 
distress  at  the  death  of  Tabitha  (ver.  38). 

Quite  in  accordance  with  these  and  the  other 
scattered  indications  of  Scripture  is  the  situation  of 
the  modern  town,  which  exactly  retains  its  name, 
and  probably  its  jiosition.  Lidd  {'Vohlei;  'Site.  Waml. 
69,  456),  or  Ludd  (Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  244),  stands 
in  the  Merj ,  or  meadow,  oUbn  Oinoir,  part  of  the 
great  maritime  plain  which  anciently  bore  tlie  name 
of  Sharon,  and  which,  when  covei'ed  with  its  crops 
of  corn,  reminds  the  traveller  of  the  rich  wheat- 
iields  of  our  own  Lincolnshire  (Rob.  iii.  145;  and 
see  Thomson,  L.  ^  B.  ch.  xx.xiv.).  It  is  9  miles 
flora  Joppa,  and  is  the  first  town  on  the  northern- 
most of  the  two  roads  between  that  place  ;uid  Jeru- 


"  Was  this  the  Diospolis  mentioned  by  Joseplius  {Ant. 
XV.  5,  }l,  and  B.  J.  i.  4,  $6  ?  But  it  is  difficult  to  discover 
if  two  places  are  not  intended,  possibly  neither  of  them 
identical  wiili  Lydda. 

Can  there  be  any  connexion,  ctymolo.aical  or  other, 
between  the  two  names?    In  the  Diet,  of  Gutxjy.  i.  77H,  a 


LYDDA 

salem.  Within  a  circle  of  4  miles  still  stand  Ouo 
{Kefr  Anna),  Hadid  (el-Haditlieli),  and  Neballat 
{Beit-Neballah),  three  places  constantly  associated 
with  Lod  in  the  ancient  records.  The  water- 
course outside  the  town  is  said  still  to  bear  the  name 
of  Abi-Butrus  (Peter),  in  memory  of  the  Apostle 
(Rob.  ii.  248;  Tobler,  471).  Lying  so  conspicuously 
in  this  fertile  plain,  and  upon  the  main  road  from  the 
sea  to  the  interior,  Lydda  could  hardly  escape  an 
eventful  history.  It  was  in  the  time  of  Josephus 
a  place  of  considerable  size,  which  gave  its  name  to 
one  of  the  three  (or  four,  xi.  57)  "governments" 
or  toparchies  (see  Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5)  which 
Demetrius  Soter  (B.C.  cir.  152),  at  the  request  of 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus,  released  from  tribute,  and 
transferred  from  Samaria  to  the  estate  of  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem  '(1  Mace.  xi.  34;  comp.  x.  30,  38; 
xi.  28,  57)  ;  though  by  whom  these  districts  were 
originally  defined  does  not  appear  (see  Michaelis, 
Bib.  fur  Ungel.).  A  century  later  (B.C.  cir.  45) 
Lydda,  with  Gophua,  Emmaus,  and  Thamna,  became 
the  prey  of  the  insatiable  Cassius,  by  whom  the 
whole  of  the  inhabitants  were  sold  into  slavery  to 
raise  the  exorbitant  taxes  imposed  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv. 
11,  §2).  From  this  they  were,  it  is  true,  soon  re- 
leased by  Antony  ;  but  a  few  years  only  elapsed 
before  their  city  (a.d.  66)  was  burnt  by  Ccstius 
Gallus  on  his  way  from  Caesarea  to  Jerusalem.  He 
entered  it  when  all  the  people  of  the  place  but  fifty 
were  absent  at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  Jerusalem 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  19,  §1).  He  must  have  passed 
the  hardly  cold  ruins  not  more  than  a  fortnight 
after,  when  flying  for  his  life  before  the  infuriated 
Jews  of  J&rusalem.  Some  repair  appears  to  have 
been  immediately  made,  for  in  less  than  two  years, 
early  in  A.D.  68,  it  was  in  a  condition  to  be  again 
taken  by  Vesjiasian,  then  on  his  way  to  his  cam- 
paign in  tire  south  of  Judaea.  Vespasian  introduced 
fresh  inhabitmts  from  the  prisoners  lately  taken  in 
Galilee  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §1).  But  the  sub- 
stantial rebuilding  of  the  town — lying  as  it  did  in 
the  road  of  every  invader  and  every  countennarch — 
can  hardly  have  been  effected  till  the  disorders  of 
this  unhappy  country  were  somewhat  composed. 
Hadriaji's  reign,  alter  the  suppression  of  the  revolt 
of  Bar-Cocheba  (a.d.  cir.  136),  when  Paganism  was 
triumphant,  and  Jerusalem  rebuilding  as  Aelia  Ca- 
pitolina,  would  not  be  an  improbable  time  for  this, 
and  for  the  bestowal  on  Lydda  of  the  new  name  of 
Diospolis  * — City  of  Zeus — which  is  stated  by  Je- 
rome to  have  aecompanied  the  rebuilding.  (See 
Qr.aresmius,  Peregr.  i.,  lib.  4,  cap.  3.)  We  have 
already  seen  that  this  new  name,  as  is  so  often  the 
case  in  Palestine,  has  disappeared  in  favour  of  the 
ancient  one.     [AcCHO;  Kenath,  &c.] 

When  Eusobius  wrote  (a.d.  320-330)  Diospolis 
was  a  well-Knowu  and  much-frequented  town,  to 
which  he  often  refers,  though  the  names  of  neither 
it  nor  Lydda  occur  in  the  actual  catalogue  of  his 
Onomasticon.  In  Jerome's  time  {Epitaph.  Paidae 
$8  ),^  A.D.  404,  it  was  an  episcopal  see.  Tradition 
reports  that  the  first  bishop  was  "  Zenas  the  lawyer" 
(Tit.  iii.  13),  originally  one  of  the  seventy  disciples 
( Dorotheus,  in  Relaud,  879) ;  but  the  first  historical 
mention  of  the  see  is  the  signature  of  "  Aetius  Lyd- 


modern  J^gyptian  village   is   mentioned  named  Lydda, 
of  which  the  ancient  name  was  also  Diospolis. 

b  Jerome  is  wrong  here  in  placing  the  raising  of  Dorc;is 
at  Lydda.  So  also  Rittcr  {faUistina,  651)  ascribes  the 
miracle  to  St.  Paul. 


LYDDA 

(leusis  "  to  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Nicaea  (a.d. 
325  ;  Reland,  878).  After  tliis  the  name  is  found, 
now  Diospolis,  now  Lydda,  amongst  the  lists  of  the 
Councils  down  to  a.d.  518  (Rob.  ii.  245;  Mislin, 
ii.  149).  The  bishop  of  Lydda,  origiually  subject 
to  Caesarea,  became  at  a  later  (.late  suffragan  to 
Jerusalem  (see  the  two  lists  in  Von  Kaumer,  401); 
and  this  is  still  the  case.  In  the  latter  end  of  415 
a  Council  of  14  bishops  was  held  here,  before  which 
Pelagius  appeared,  and  by  whom,  after  much  tumul- 
.tuous  debate,  and  in  the  absence  of  his  two  accusers, 
he  was  acquitted  of  heresy,  and  received  as  a 
Christian  brother  "  (Milner,  Hist,  of  Ch.  of  Christ, 
Cent.  V.  ch.  iii.).  St.  George,  the  patron  saint  of 
England,  was  a  native  of  Lydda.  After  his  martyr- 
dom his  remains  were  buried  there  (see  quotations 
by  Robinson,  ii.  245),  and  over  them  a  church  was 
afterwards  built  and  dedicated  to  his  honour.  The 
erection  of  this  church  is  commonly  ascribed  to 
Justinian,  but  there  seems  to  be  no  real  ground  for 
the  assertion,"*  and  at  present  it  is  quite  uncertain 
by  whom  it  was  built.  When  the  country  was 
taken  possession  of  by  the  Saracens  in  the  early  part 
of  the  8th  cent,  the  church  was  destroyed  ;  and  in 
this  ruined  condition  it  was  found  by  the  Crusaders 
in  A.D.  1099,  who  reinstituted  the  see,  and  added 
to  its  endowment  the  neighbouring  city  and  lands 
oiRamleh.  Apparently  at  the  same  time  the  church 
was  rebuilt  and  strongly  fortitned  (Rob.  ii.  247). 
It  appears  at  that  time  to  have  been  outside  the 
city.  Again  destroyed  by  Saladin  after  the  battle 
of  Hattin  in  1191,  it  was  again  rebuilt,  if  we  are 
to  believe  the  tradition,  which,  however,  is  not  so 
consistent  or  trustworthy  as  one  would  desire,  by 
Richard  Coeur-de-lion  (Will.  Tyr. ;  but  see  Rob.  ii. 
245,  246).  The  remains  of  the  church  still  form  the 
most  remarkable  object  in  the  modern  village.  A 
minute  and  picturesque  account  of  them  will  be 
found  in  Robinson  (ii.  244),  and  a  view  in  Van  dv! 
Velde's  Pans  cV  Israel  (plate  55).  The  town  is,  for 
a  Mohammedan  place,  busy  and  prosperous  (see 
Thomson,  Land  and  Book  ;  Van  de  Velde,  S.  ^  P. 
i.  244).  Buried  in  palms,  and  with  a  large  well 
close  to  the  entrance,  it  looks  from  a  distance  in- 
viting enough,  but  its  interior  is  very  repulsive  on 
account  of  the  extraordinary  number  of  persons, 
old  aivl  young,  whom  one  encounters  at  every  step, 
either  totally  blind  or  afllicted  with  loathsome  dis- 
eases of  the  eyes.  Indeed  it  is  proverbial  for  this ; 
and  the  writer  was  told  on  the  spot  in  1858,  as  a 
common  saying,  that  in  Lydd  every  man  has  either 
but  one  eye  or  none  at  all. 

Lydda  was,  for  some  time  previous  to  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  the  seat  of  a  very  famous 
Jewish  school,  scarcely  second  to  that  of  Jabneh. 
About  the  time  of  the  siege  it  was  presided  over  by 
Kabbi  Gamaliel,  second  of  the  name  (Lightfoot, 
Chor.  Cent,  xvi.).  Some  curious  anecdotes  and  short 
notices  from  the  Talmuds  concerning  it  are  preserved 
by  Lightfoot.  One  of  these  states  that  "  Queen  He- 
lena celebrated  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  there  "  ! 

As  the  city  of  St.  George,  who  is  one  with  the 
famous  personage  El-Klmdr,  Lydda  is  held  in  much 
honour  by  the  Muslims.  In  their  traditions  the  gate 
of  the  city  will  be  the  scene  of  the  tinal  combat 
between  Christ  and  Antichrist  (Sale's  Koran,  note 


LYSANIAS 


150 


"=  "Ilia  miserabilis  Synodus  Diospolitanus "  (Jerome, 
Ep.  ad  Ali/p.  et  Aug.  }2). 

'■  The  church  which  Justinian  Iniilt  to  St.  (Seorge  was 
in  Bizana  (ii>  Bt^afot?),  somowlit'i'c  in  Arnii'Uia  (Pro- 
ropins,  cfc  Ay.  ^«s<.  3,  4 ;  in  Itol).  210).     Sec  tlie  ri'inarlcs 


to  ch.  43  ;  and  Prel.  Disc.  iv.  §4  ;  also  Jalal  ;(,i-l)in, 
Temple  of  Jenisalem,  434).  p;."] 

LYD'IA  (AuSia),  a  maritime  province  in  the 
west  of  Asia  Minor,  bounded  by  Mysia  on  the  N. 
Phrygia  on  the  E.,  and  Caria  on  the  S.  The  name 
occurs  only  in  1  Mace.  viii.  8  (the  rendering  of  the 
A.  V.  in  Ez.  XXX.  5  being  incorrect  for  Ludim)  ; 
it  is  there  enumerated  among  the  districts  which 
the  Romans  took  away  from  Antiochus  the  Great 
after  the  battle  of  Magnesia  in  B.C.  190,  and  ti-ans- 
ferred  to  Eumeues  II.,  king  of  Pergamus.  Some 
dilhculty  arises  in  the  passage  referred  to  from  the 
names  "  India  and  Media  "  found  in  connexion  with 
it:  but  if  we  regard  these  as  incorrectly  given 
either  by  the  writer  or  by  a  copyist  for  "  Ionia  and 
Mysia,"  the  agreement  with  Livy's  account  of  the 
same  transaction  (xx.xvii.  56)  will  be  sufficiently 
established,  the  notice  of  the  maritime  provinces 
alone  in  the  book  of  Maccabees  being  explicable  on 
the  ground  of  their  being  best  known  to  the  in- 
habitants of  Palestine.  For  the  connexion  between 
Lydia  and  the  Lud  and  Ludim  of  the  0.  T.,  see 
Ludim.  Lydia  is  included  in  the  "  Asia"  of  the 
N.  T.  [VV.  L.  B.] 

LYD'IA  (Ai/5(a),  the  first  European  convert 
of  St.  Paul,  and  afterwards  his  hostess  during  his 
first  stay  at  Philippi  (Acts  xvi.  14,  15,  also  40). 
She  was  a  Jewish  proselyte  {ffefio^ivr]  rhv  @e6v) 
at  the  time  of  the  Apostle's  coming;  and  it  was  at 
the  Jewish  Sabbath-worship  by  the  side  of  a  stream 
(ver.  13)  that  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  reached 
her  heart.  She  was  probably  only  a  tempoiary  re- 
sident at  Philippi.  Her  native  place  was  Thyatira, 
in  the  province  of  Asia  (ver.  14  ;  Rev.  ii.  18) ;  and 
it  is  interesting  to  notice  that  through  her,  in- 
directly, the  Gospel  may  have  come  into  that  very 
district,  where  St.  Paul  himself  had  recently  been 
forbidden  directly  to  preach  it  (Acts  xvi.  6). 
Thyatira  was  famous  lor  its  dyeing-works ;  and 
Lydia  was  connected  with  this  trade  {irupcpvpd- 
TraAis),  either  as  a  seller  of  dye,  or  of  dyed  goods. 
We  infer  that  she  was  a  person  of  consideiable 
wealth,  partly  fi-om  the  fact  that  she  gave  a  home 
to  St.  Paul  and  his  companions,  partly  from  the 
mention  of  the  conversion  of  her  "  household," 
under  which  term,  whether  children  are  included 
or  not,  slaves  are  no  doubt  comprehended.  Of 
Lydia's  character  we  are  led  to  form  a  high  estimate, 
from  her  candid  reception  of  the  Gospel,  her  urgent 
hospitality,  and  her  continued  friendship  to  Paul 
and  Silas  when  they  were  pei'secuted.  Whether  she 
was  one  of  "those  women  who  laboured  with  Paul 
in  the  Gospel"  at  Philippi,  as  mentioned  afterwards 
in  the  Epistle  to  that  place  (Phil.  iv.  3),  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  As  regards  her  name,  though 
it  is  certainly  curious  that  Thyatira  was  in  the 
district  ancienfly  called  "  Lydia,"  there  seems  no 
reason  for  doubting  that  it  was  simply  a  propel 
name,  or  for  supposing  with  Grotius  that  she  was 
"  ita  dicta  a  solo  natali."  [J.  S.  H.] 

LYSA'NLA.S  {Avaavlas).  mentioned  by  St. 
Luke  in  one  of  his  chronological  passatres  (iii.  1)' 
as  being  tetrarch  of  Abilene  («.  e.  the  district 
round  Abila)  in  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius,  at  the 
time  when  Herod  Antipas  was  tetrarch  of  (Salilee, 


of  Robinson  against  the  possibility  of  Constantiiic  having 
built  the  church  at  Lydda.  Hut  were  there  not  probably 
two  churches  at  Lydda,  one  dedicated  to  St.  George,  and 
one  to  flic  Virgin  ?    See  Roland,  878. 


160 


LYSIAS 


and  Herod  Philip  totrarch  of  Ituraea  and  Tracho- 
uitis.  It  lia[ipens  that  Josephus  speaks  of  a  prince 
named  Lysauias  who  ruled  over  a  territory  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Lebanon  in  the  time  of  Antony 
and  Cleopatra,  and  that  he  also  mentions  Abilene 
as  associated  with  the  name  of  a  tetiarch  Lysanias, 
while  recounting  events  of  the  reigns  of  Caligula 
and  Claudius.  These  circumstances  have  given  to 
Strauss  and  others  an  opportunity  for  accusing  the 
Evangelist  of  confusion  and  error:  but  we  shall 
see  that  this  accusation  rests  on  a  groundless  as- 
sumption. 

What  Josephus  says  of  the  Lysanias  who  was 
contemixiraiy  with  Antony  and  Cleopatra  (i.  e.  who 
lived  60  yeiii-s  before  the  time  referred  to  by  St. 
Luke)  is,  that  he  succeeded  his  father  Ptolemy,  the 
son  of  Jlennaeus,  in  the  government  of  Ch;\lcis, 
mider  Mount  Lebanon  (-B.  /.  i.  13,  §1  ;  Ant.  .xiv. 
7,  §4)  ;  and  that  he  was  put  to  death  at  the  instance 
of  Cleopatra  {Ant.  sv.  4,  §1),  who  seems  to  have 
received  a  good  part  of  his  territory.  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  Abila  is  not  specified  here  at  all,  and 
that  Lysanias  is  not  called  tetrarch. 

What  Josephus  says  of  Abila  and  the  tetrarchy 
in  the  reigns  of  Caligula  and  Claudius  (i.  e.  about 
20  years  after  the  time  mentioned  in  St.  Luke's 
Gospel)  is,  that  the  former  empeior  promised  the 
"tetrarchy  of  Lysanias"  to  Agrippa  {Ant.  xviii.  6, 
§10),  and  that  the  latter  actually  gave  to  him 
"  Abila  of  Lysanias  "  and  the  tenitory  near  Lebanon 
{Ant.  xix.  5,  §1,  with  B.  J.  ii.  12,  §8). 

Now,  assuming  Abilene  to  be  included  in  both 
cases,  and  tlie  former  Lysanias  and  the  latter  to  be 
identical,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  a  prince  of  the 
same  name  and  family  from  having  reigned  as 
tetrarch  over  the  territory  in  the  intermediate  period. 
But  it  is  probable  that  the  Lysanias  mentioned  by 
Josephus  in  the  second  instance  is  actually  the 
prince  referred  to  by  St.  Luke.  Thus,  instead  of  a 
contradiction,  we  obtain  from  the  Jewish  historian 
a  confinnation  of  tlie  Evangelist ;  and  the  argument 
becomes  very  decisive  if,  as  some  think,  Abilene  is 
to  be  excluded  fi'om  the  territory  mentioned  in  tlie 
story  which  has  reference  to  Cleopatra. 

Fuller  details  are  given  in  Davidson's  Introduction 
to  the  iV.  T.  i.  214-'220;  and  there  is  a  good  brief 
notice  of  the  subject  in  Hawlinson's  Bampton  Lec- 
tures for  1859,  p.  2U3,  and  note  113.  [J.  S.  H.] 
LYS'IAS  {Avaias),  a  nobleman  of  the  blood- 
royal  (1  Mace.  iii.  32;  2  Mace.  xi.  1),  who  was 
entrusted  by  Antinchus  Epiphanes  (cir.  B.C.  166) 
with  the  government  of  southern  Syria,  and  the 
guardianship  of  his  son  Antiochus  Eupator  (1  Slacc. 
iii.  32  ;  2  Mace.  x.  11).  In  tlie  execution  of  his 
office  Lysias  armed  a  very  considerable  force  against 
Judas  Maccabaeus.  Two  detachments  of  this  army 
under  Nicanor  (2  Mace,  viii.)  and  Gorgias  were 
defeated  by  the  Jews  near  Emmaus  (1  JNIacc.  iv.), 
and  in  the  following  year  Lysias  himself  met  with 
a  much  more  serious  reverse  atBethsura  (B.C.  165), 
which  was  followed  by  the  purification  of  the 
Temple.  Shortly  after  this  Antiochus  I'lpiphanes 
died  (B.C.  164),  and  Lysias  assumed  the  government 
as  guardian  of  his  son,  who  was  yet  a  child  (App. 
Syr.  46,  ^vaiTfs  TraiSfoc;  1  Jlacc.  vi.  17).  The 
war  against  the  Jews  was  renewed,  and,  after  a 
severe  struggle,  Lysias,  who  took  the  young  king 
with  him,  captured  Bethsura,  and  was  besieging 
.lerusalem,  when  he  received  tidings  of  the  approach 
of  Philip,  to  whom  Antiochus  had  transferred  the 
guardianship  of  the  prince  (1  Mace.  vi.  18;  2 
Maco.  xiii.).     He  defeated  Philip  (B.C.  163),  and 


LYSTEA 

was  supported  at  Pome  ;  but  in  the  next  year,  to- 
gether with  his  ward,  fell  into  the  hands  of  Deme- 
trius Soter  [Demetrius  I.],  who  put  them  both  to 
death  (1  Mace.  vii.  2-4 ;  2  Mace.  xiv.  2  ;  Jos. 
Ant.  xii.  12,  §15,  16  ;  App.  Syr.  45-47  ;  Polyb. 
xxxi.  15,  19). 

There  are  considerable  differences  between  tlie 
first  and  second  books  of  Maccabees  with  reganl 
to  the  campaigns  of  Gorgias  and  the  subsequent 
one  of  Lysias :  the  former  places  the  defeat  of 
Lysias  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  before 
the  purification  of  the  Temple  (1  Mace.  iv.  26-35), 
the  latter  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator  after 
the  purification  (2  Mace.  x.  10,  xi.  1,  &c.).  There 
is  no  sufficient  ground  for  believing  that  the  events 
recorded  are  different  (Patricius,  De  Consensu 
Mace.  §xxvii.  xxxvii.),  for  the  mistake  of  date  in 
2  Maccabees  is  one  which  might  easily  arise  (comp. 
Wernsdorf,  De  fide  Mace.  §lxvi. ;  Grimm,  ad  2 
Mace.  xi.  1).  The  idea  of  Grotius  that  2  Mace.  xi. 
and  2  Mace.  xiii.  are  duplicate  records  of  the  same 
event,  in  spite  of  Ewald's  support  ( Geschichte,  iv. 
365  note),  is  scarcely  tenable,  and  leaves  half  the 
difficulty  unexplained.  [B.  F.  W.] 

LYSIM'ACHUS  {Avai/xaxos).  1.  "  A  son  of 
Ptolemaeus  of  Jerusalem  "  (A.  TlroXe/xaiov  6  iv 
'lepovaaA-fj/j.),  the  Greek  translator  of  the  book  of 
Esther  {iizicrroKi).  Comp.  Esth.  ix.  20),  according 
to  the  subscription  of  the  LXX.  There  is,  however, 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  translator  was  also 
the  author  of  the  additions  made  to  the  Hebrew 
text.     [Esther.] 

2.  A  brother  of  the  high-piiest  Menelaus,  who 
was  left  by  him  as  his  deputy  (StaSoxos)  during 
his  absence  at  the  court  of  Antiochus,  His 
tyranny  and  sacrilege  excited  an  insuiTection,  during 
which  he  fell  a  victim  to  the  fury  of  the  people 
cir.  B.C.  170(2  Mace.  iv.  29-42).  The  Vulgate,  by 
a  mistranslation  (Menelaus  amotus  est  a  sacerdotio, 
succedente  Lysimacho  fratre  suo,  2  Mace.  iv.  29) 
makes  Lysimachus  the  successor  instead  of  the  de- 
puty of  Menelaus.  [B.  F.  W.] 

LYSTEA  {KiiffTpa)  has  two  points  of  extreme 
interest  in  connexion  respectively  with  St.  Paul's 
first  and  second  missionary  journeys — (1)  as  the 
place  where  divine  honours  were  oflered  tp  him, 
mid  where  he  was  presently  stoned;  (2)  as  the 
home  of  his  chosen  companion  and  fellow-mis- 
sionaiy  TiMOTHEUS. 

We  are  told  in  the  14th  chapter  of  the  Acts, 
that  Paul  and  Barnabas,  driven  by  persecution  from 
IcoxiUM  (ver.  2),  proceeded  to  Lystra  and  its 
neighbourhood,  and  there  preached  the  Gospel.  In 
the  course  of  this  service  a  remarkable  miracle  was 
worked  in  the  healing  of  a  lame  man  (ver.  8).  This 
occurrence  produced  such  an  efiect  on  the  minds 
of  the  ignorant  and  superstitious  people  of  the 
place,  that  they  supposed  that  the  two  gods,  JIer- 
CURY  and  Jupiter,  who  were  said  by  the  poets  to 
have  formerly  visited  this  district  in  human  foiTa 
[Lycaoxia]  had  again  bestowed  on  it  the  same 
favour,  and  consequently  were  proceeding  to  oH'er 
sacrifice  to  the  sti-augers  (ver.  13).  The  apostles 
rejected  this  worship  with  horror  (ver.  14),  and 
St.  Paul  addressed  a  speech  to  them,  turning  their 
minds  to  the  true  Source  of  all  the  blessings  of 
natuie.  The  distinct  pioclamation  of  Christian 
doctrine  is  not  mentioned,  but  it  is  implied,  inas- 
much as  a  church  was  founded  at  Lystra.  The 
adoration  of  the  Lystrians  was  rapidly  followed  by 
a  change  of  feeling.     The  persecuting  Jews  arrived 


LYSTRA 

from  Antioch  in  Pisidia  and  Iconium,  and  had  such 
influence  that  Paul  was  stoned  and  left  for  dead 
(ver.  19).  On  his  recovery  he  withdrew,  with 
Barnabas,  to  Derbe  (ver.  20),  but  before  long 
retraced  his  steps  through  Lystra  (ver.  21),  en- 
couraging the  new  disciples  to  be  stedfast. 

It  is  evident  from  2  Tim.  iii.  10,  11,  that  Tinio- 
theus  was  one  of  those  who  witnessed  St.  Paul's 
sufferings  and  courage  on  this  occasion :  and  it  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  his  conversion  to  Chris- 
tianity resulted  partly  from  these  circumstances, 
combined,  with  the  teaching  of  his  Jewish  mother 
and  grandmother,  Eunice  and  Lois  (2  Tim.  i.  5). 
Thus,  when  the  apostle,  accompanied  by  vSilas,  came, 
on  his  second  missionary  journey,  to  this  phice  again 
(and  here  we  should  notice  how  accurately  Derbe  and 
Lystra  are  here  mentioned  in  the  inverse  order), 
'I'imotheus  was  already  a  Christian  (Acts  xvi.  1). 
Here  he  received  circumcision,  "  because  of  the 
Jews  in  those  parts"  (ver.  3);  and  from  this  point 
began  his  connexion  with  St.  Paul's  travels.  We 
are  doubly  reminded  here  of  Jewish  residents  in  and 
near  Lystra.  Their  first  settlement,  and  the  an- 
'  cestors  of  Timotheus  among  them,  may  very  pro- 
bably be  traced  to  the  establishment  of  Babylonian 
Jews  in  Phrygia  by  Antiochus  three  centuries  before 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §4).  Still  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  no  influential  Jewish  population  at 
Lystra :  no  mention  is  made  of  any  synagogue  ;  and 
the  whole  aspect  of  the  scene  described  by  St.  Luke 
(Acts  xiv.)  is  thoroughly  heathen.  With  regard  to 
St.  Paul,  it  is  not  absolutely  stated  that  he  was  ever 
in  Lystra  again,  but  from  the  general  description  of 
the  route  of  the  third  missionary  journey  (Acts 
xviii.  23)  it  is  almost  certain  that  he  was. 

Lystra  was  undoubtedly  in  the  eastern  part  of 
the  great  plain  of  Lycaonia ;  and  there  are  vei'y 
strong  reasons  for  identifying  its  site  with  the  ruins 
called  Bin-bir-Kilisseh,  at  the  base  of  a  conical 
mountain  of  volcanic  structure,  named  the  Kara- 
dagh  (Hamilton,  Res.  in  A.  M.  ii.  313).  Here  are 
the  remains  of  a  great  number  of  churches  :  and  it 
should  be  noticed  that  Lystra  has  its  post-apostolic 
Christian  history,  the  names  of  its  bishops  appearing 
in  the  records  of  early  councils. 

Pliny  (v.  42)  places  this  town  in  Galatia,  and 
Ptolemy  (v.  4,  12)  in  Isauria:  but  these  statements 
are  quite  consistent  with  its  being  placed  in  Ly- 
caonia by  St.  Luke,  as  it  is  by  Hierocles  (Synecd. 
p.  67.5).  As  to  its  condition  in  heathen  times,  it  is 
worth  while  to  notice  that  the  words  in  Acts  xiv. 
13  (toO  Albs  rod  ovros  irph  t^s  TrdAetos)  would 


MAACAH 


161 


»  Gesenius  (Tlies.  811a)  suggests  that  the  name  may 
have  been  originally  [13  ??3>  the  7  having  changed  into 
y,  in  accordance  with  Phoenician  custom.  (See  also 
Fiirst,  Ildab.  7666;  thongh  he  derives  the  name  itself 
from  a  root  signifying  depression— lowland.)  It  is  per- 
haps some  support  to  this  idea,  that  ^"usebiiis  in  the 
f)nomasticon  gives  the  name  MoAaica,  and  that  the  LXX. 
read  in  one  passage  "  Amalek,"  as  above.  Is  it  not  also 
possible  that  in  2  .Sam.  viii.  12  "  Amalek  "  may  more  accu- 
rately be  Maacah  ?  At  least,  no  campaign  against  Amalek 
is  recorded  in  these  wars— none  since  that  before  llie  death 
of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxx.),  which  can  hardly  be  referred  to  in 
this  catalogue. 

b  This  is  probably  the  origin  of  the  name  Cj-om  attached 
to  the  great  stony  plain  north  of  Marseilles. 

0  The  ancient  versions  do  not  assist  us  much  in  fi.\ing 
the  position  of  Maacah.     The  Syriac  Peshito  in  1  Chr. 

.xix.  has  Cliiirmi,  >*-a/.     If  this  could  be  identified  with 
VOL.  II. 


lead  us  to  conclude  that  it  was  under  the  tutelao-e  of 
Jupiter.  Walch,  in  his  Spicuegium  Antiquitatum 
Lystrensiiim  '{Diss,  in  Acta  Apostoloruni,  Jena, 
1761),  vol.  iii.),  thinks  that  in  this  pas.sage  a  statue, 
not  a  temple,  of  the  god  is  intended.  [J  S.  H.j 


M 

MA'ACAH  (n3y»:  Maaxa;  Alex.  Maax<f9 : 
Maacha).  1.  The  mother  of  Ab.^alom  =  Ma.\ciiah 
'•)  (2  Sam.  iii.  3). 

2.  Maacah,  and  (iu  Chron.)  Maachaii:  in 
Samuel  'A/xa\-l]K,'^  and  so  Josephus ;  in  Chron. 
Maixa  and  Moox« ,'  Alex,  in  both,  Maayo.  ■ 
Macliati,  Maacha.  A  small  kingdom  in  close 
proximity  to  Palestine,  which  appears  to  have  lain 
outside  Argob  (Deut.  iii.  14)  and  Bashan  (Josh, 
xii.  5).  These  districts,  probably  answering  to  the 
Lejali  and  Jaidan  of  modern  Syiia,  occupied  the 
space  from  the  Jordan  on  the  west  to  Salcah 
{Hulkhad)  on  the  east  and  Mount  Hermon  on  the 
north.  There  is  therefore  no  alternative  but  to 
place  Maacah  somewhere  to  the  east  of  the  Lcjah, 
in  the  country  that  lies  between  that  remarkable 
district  and  the  Sufd,  namely  the  stony  desert  of 
el-Krd^  (see  Kiepert's  inap  to Wetzstein's  Haurdn, 
&c.,  1860),  and  which  is  to  this  day  thickly  studded 
with  villages.  In  these  remote  eastern  regions  was 
also  probably  situated  Tibchath,  Tebach,  or  Betach, 
which  occurs  more  than  once  in  connexion  with 
Maacah  «  (1  Chr.  xviii.  8  ;  Gen.  xxii.  24;  2  Sam. 
viii.  8).  Maacah  is  sometimes  assumed  to  have 
been  situated  about  Abel-betii-Maacah  ;  but,  if 
Abil  be  the  modern  representative  of  that  town, 
this  is  hatdly  probable,  as  it  would  bring  the  king- 
dom of  Maacah  west  of  the  Joi-dan,  and  within  the 
actual  limits  of  Israel.  It  is  possible  that  the  town 
was  a  colony  of  the  nation,  though  even  this  is 
rendered  questionable  by  the  conduct  of  Joab  to- 
wards it  (2  Sam.  xx.  22).  That  implacable  soldier 
would  hardly  have  left  it  standing  and  unharmed 
had  it  been  the  city  of  those  who  took  so  promi- 
nent a  part  against  him  in  the  Ammonite  war. 

That  war  was  the  only  occasion  on  which  the 
Maacathites  came  into  contact  with  Israel,  when 
their  king  assisted  the  Bene-Ammon  against  Joab 
with  a  force  which  he  led  himself  (2  Sam.  x.  6,  8  ; 
1  Chr.  xix.  7.  In  the  first  of  these  passages  "  of" 
is  inaccurately  omitted  in  the  A.V.).     The  small 


El-Charra,  the  district  east  of  SiiU-had,  and  south  of  the 
Siifd  (see  Wetzstein,  and  Cyril  Graham),  it  would  support 
the  view  taken  in  the  text,  and  would  also  fall  in  with 
the  suggestion  of  Ewald  (Gefch.  iii.  197),  that  the  Su/d  is 
connected  with  Zobah.  In  Josh.  xiil.  the  Peshito  has  Kuros, 

«-QC10T0.0,  of  which  the  writer  can  make  nothing. 
The  Targums  of  Onkelos,  Jonathan,  and  Jerusalem  have 
Aphikcros,   DTlp'QX   (with  some  slight  variations  in 

spelling).  This  is  probably  intended  for  the  Ejri/caipoi;  of 
Ptolemy,  which  he  mentions  in  company  with  Livias, 
Callirhoe,  and  Ja/.er  (?).  (See  Reland,  Pal.  462  ;  and  com- 
pare the  expression  of  Josephus  with  regard  to  Machacrus, 
B.  J.  vii.  6,  }2).  But  this  would  surely  be  too  far  south 
for  Maacah.  The  Targura  Pseudojon.  has  A'nti\^exo&, 
DiT*p''t33K-  ^hich  remains  obscure.  It  will  be  ob- 
served, however,  that  every  one  of  these  names  contains 
A'?-  or  Clir. 

]\1 


1G2 


MAACHAH 


extent  of  tlie  country  may  be  inferred  from  a  com- 
parison of  the  number  of  this  force  with  tliat  of  the 
people  of  Zobah,  Islitob,  and  Rehob  (2  Sam.  x.  6), 
combined  with  tlie  expression  "  his  people  "  in  1  Chr. 
xix.  7,  which  perliaps  imply  that  a  thousand  men 
were  tlie  whole  strength  of  his  army.     [Maac- 

HATHI.] 

To  the  connexion  which  is  always  implied  between 
Maacah  and  Geshur  we  have  no  clue.  It  is  perhaps 
illustrated  by  the  tiict  of  the  daughter  of  the  king 
of  Geshur — wife  of  David  and  mother  of  Absalom — 
being  named  Maacah.  [G.] 

MA'ACHAH  (n3y?3  :  Moxa  ;  Alex.  Mox^: 
Maacha).  1.  The  daughter  of  Nahor  by  his  con- 
cubine Reumah  (Gen.  xxii.  24).  Kwald  connects 
her  name  with  the  district  of  Maachah  in  the  Hermon 
range  {Gcsch.  i.  414,  notu  1). 

2.  (Maaxa.)  The  father  of  Achish,  who  was 
king  of  Gath  at  the  beginning  of  Solomon's  reign 
(1  K.  ii.  39).    [MAOCir.] 

3.  The  daughter,  or  more  probably  grand- 
daughter, of  Absalom,  named  after  his  mother  ;  the 
third  and  favourite  wife  of  Rehoboani,  and  mother 
of  Abijah  (1  K.  xv.  2;  2  Chr.  xi.  20-22).  Ac- 
cording to  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  10.  §1)  her  mother 
was  Tamar,  Absalom's  daughter.  But  the  mother 
of  Abijah  is  elsewhere  called  "  Michaiah,  the 
daughter  of  Uriel  of  Gibeah"  (2  Chr.  xiii.  2). 
The  LXX.  and  Syriac,  in  the  latter  passage,  have 
Maachah,  as  in  xi.  20.  If  Michaiah  were  a  mere 
variation  of  Maachah,  as  has  been  asserted  (the 
resemblance  in  Englisli  characters  being  much  more 
close  than  in  Hebrew),  it  would  be  easy  to  under- 
stand that  Uriel  of  Gibeah  married  Tamar  the 
daughter  of  Absalom,  whose  gi'anddaughter  there- 
fore Maachah  was.  But  it  is  more, probable  that 
"  Michaiah "  is  the  error  of  a  transcriber,  and 
that  "  Maachah  "  is  the  true  reading  in  all  cases 
(Capelli,  Crit.  Sacr.  vi.  7,  §3).  Houbigant  pro- 
posed to  alter  the  text,  and  to  read  "  Maachah,  the 
daughter  of  Abishalom  (or  Absalom),  the  son  of 
Uriel."  During  the  reign  of  her  grandson  Asa  she 
occupied  at  the  court  of  Judah  the  high  position  of 
"King's  Mother"  (comp.  1  K,  ii.  19),  which  has 
been  compared  with  that  of  the  Sultana  Valide  in 
Turkey.  It  may  be  that  at  Abijah's  death,  after  a 
short  reign  of  three  years,  Asa  wa.s  left  a  minor, 
and  Maachali  acted  as  regent,  like  Athaliah  under 
similar  circumstances.  If  this  conjecture  be  correct, 
it  would  serve  to  explain  the  influence  by  which 
she  promoted  the  practice  of  idolatrous  worship. 
The  idol  or  "horror"  which  she  had  made  for 
Asherah  (1  K.  xv.  13  ;  2  Chr.  xv.  16)  is  supposed 
to  have  been  the  emblem  of  Priapus,  and  was  so 
understood  by  the  Vulgate.  [Idol,  vol.  i.  p.  849  «.] 
It  was  swept  away  in  Asa's  reformation,  and  Maa- 
chah was  removed  from  her  dignity.  Josephus  calls 
Jlaachah  y[axo.vr\,  perha])s  a  corruption  of  Max^i, 
and  makes  Asa  the  son  of  Maxc"'a-  See  Burrington's 
Genealogies,  i.  222-228,  where  the  two  Maachahs 
are  considered  distinct. 

4.  (Mcox"-;  The  concubine  of  Caleb  the  son  of 
Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  48). 

5.  (Maix«-)  The  daughter  of  Talmai,  king  of 
Geshur,  and  mother  of  Absalom  (1  Chr.  iii.  2): 
Also  called  Maacah  in  A.  V.  of  2  Sam.  iii.  3. 
Josephus  gives  her  name  MaxafJ-V  i-Ani.  vii.  1 ,  §4). 
She  is  said,  according  to  u  Hebrew  tradition  re- 
corded by  Jerome  {Qu.  Hehr.  in  Roj.),  to  have 
been  taken  by  David  in  battle  and  added  to  the 
number  of  his  wives. 


MAARATH 

6.  (Mo&ixa;  Alex.  Mooxa.)  The  wife  of  Ma- 
chjr  the  Manassite,  the  father  or  founder  of  Gilead, 
and  sister  of  Huppim  and  Shuppim  (1  Chr.  vii. 
15,  16),  who  were  of  the  tiibe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr. 
vii.  12).  In  the  Peshito  Syriac  Maacliah  is  made 
the  mother  of  Machir. 

7.  (Moaxa;  Alex.  Maaxa.)  The  wife  of  Jehiel, 
father  or  founder  of  Gibeon,  from  whom  was  de- 
scended the  family  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  29,  ix.  35). 

8.  (Mooixa;  Alex.  Moxa.)  The  father  of  Hanan, 
one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  body-guard  (1  Chr.  xi. 
43),  who  is  classed  among  the  warriors-  selected 
from  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan.  It  is  not 
impossible  that  Maachah  in  this  instance  may  be 
the  same  as  Syria-Maxvchah  in  1  Chr.  xix.  6,  7. 

9.  (Maoxa.)  A  Simeonite,  father  of  Shephatiah, 
prince  of  his  tribe  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  16).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAA'CHATHI,  and  MAA'CHATHITES, 

THE  CnDJJGn:  'Oyuaxa0et,  t)  Maxf'h  o  Ma- 
Xarei ;  Alex.  Maxafli :  Mitchathi,  Machati),  two 
words — the  former  taking  the  fomi  of  the  Hebrew — 
which  denote  the  inhabitants  of  the  small  kingdom 
of  Maachah  (Deut.  iii.  14;  Josh.  xii.  5,  xiii.  11, 
13).  Individual  Maachathites  were  not  unknown 
among  the  warriors  of  Israel.  One,  recorded  simply 
as  "  son  of  the  Maachathite,"  or  possibly  "  Eli- 
phelet,  sou  of  Ahasbai  the  Maachathite"  (see  Ken- 
nicott,  Dissertation,  205,  206),  was  a  member  of 
David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34).  Another,  Je- 
zaniah,  was  one  of  the  chiefs  who  rallied  round 
Gedaliah  the  superintendent,  after  the  first  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xl.  8  ;  2  K.  xxv.  23).  Esh- 
temoa  the  Maachathite  (1  Clir.  iv.  19)  more  pro- 
bably dei'ives  that  title  from  the  concubine  of 
Caleb  (ii.  48)  than  from  the  Svrian  kingdom. 
[Maacah,  2.]  '  [G.] 

MAADA'I  Q'\V^  •■  MooSi'a  ;  Alex.  MooSem  : 
Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  AeSla:  Maaddi),  one  of  the  sons  of 
Bani  who  returned  with  Ezra  and  had  intermarried 
with  the  people  of  the  land  (Ezr.  x.  34).  He  is 
called  Momdis  in  1  Esd.  ix.  34. 

MAADI'AH  (HJ'iyO  :  om.  in  Vat.  MS.:  Alex. 
MaaStas  :  Madia),  one  of  the  priests,  or  families  of 
priests,  who  retumed  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  5);   elsewhere  (v.  17)  called  Moadiah. 

MAA'I  (^yO  :  'Aia  :  Maai),  one  of  the  Bene- 
Asaph  who  took  part  in  the  solemn  musical  service 
by  which  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  was  dedicated  after 
it  had  been  rebuilt  by  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  36). 

MA'ALEH-ACRABBIM  (n''3"]py  nSyO : 
7]  Tvpoffava^acris  'AKpa/SeiV  ;  ascensus  Scorpionis). 
The  full  form  of  the  name  which  in  its  other  occur- 
rences (in  the  original  identical  with  the  above)  is 
given  in  the  A.  V.  as  "the  ascent  of,  or  the  going 
up  to,  Akrabbim."  It  is  found  only  in  Josh.  xv.  3. 
For  the  probable  situation  of  the  pass,  see  Akrab- 
bim. [G.] 

MA'ANI  (Baavi:  Banni),  1  Esd.  ix.  34  identi- 
cal with  Baxi,  4. 

MA'ARATH  (myp-.  MayapciS:*  Mareth), 
one  of  the  towns  of  Judah,  in  tlie  district  of  the 
mountains,  and  in  the  same  group  which  contains 
Halhul,  Beth-zur,  and  Gkdou  (Josh.  xv.  58). 
The  places  which  occur  in  company  with  it  have 


"  The  LXX.  here  represent  the  Hebrew  Ain  by  y :  com- 
pare Gomon-ali. 


MAASEIAH 

been  identified  at  a  few  miles  to  the  nortli  of 
Hebron,  bwt  Maiirath  has  hitherto  eluded  observa- 
tion. It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  known  to  Eu- 
sebius  or  Jerome,  although  its  name  is  mentioned 
by  them  {Onomasticon,  "Maroth"). 

By  Gesenius  {17ies.  1069a)  the  name  is  derived 
from  a  root  signifying  openness  or  bareness  ;  but 
may  it  not  with  equal  accuracy  and  greater  plausi- 
bility be  derived  from  that  which  h;is  produced 
the  similar  word,  Mearah,  a  cave?  It  would  thus 
point  to  a  characteristic  feature  of  the  mountainous 
districts  of  Palestine,  one  of  which,  the  Mearath- 
AduUam,  or  cave  of  Adullam,  was  probably  at  no 
gi'eat  distance  from  this  very  locality.  [(J.] 

MAASEI'AH  (n*b>J?0  :  ^aafria. ;  Alex.  Maa- 
<T7]ia.\  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maao-i^a :  Maasia).  1.  A 
descendant  of  Jeshua  the  priest,  who  in  the  time  of 
Ezra  had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  was  divorced 
from  her  (Ezr.  x.  18).  He  is  called  Matthelas 
in  1  Esd.  ix.  19,  but  in  the  margin,  Maasias. 

2.  (Ma(ra^7\;  Alex.  Maceias.)  A  priest,  of  the 
sons  of  Harim,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at 
Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  .x.  21).  Maasiah  in  margin 
of!  Esd.  ix.  19. 

3.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maairoia.)  A  priest,  of  the 
sons  of  Pashur,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  in 
tiie  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  s.  22).  He  is  called  Mas- 
SIAS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  22. 

4.  (Alex.  Moao-Tja;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maer^ :  Maa- 
sias.) One  of  the  laymen,  a  descendant  of  Pahath- 
Moab,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  in  the  time 
of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  30).  Apparently  the  same  as 
MoosiAS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  31. 

5.  (Maao-i'as;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  MaSac/jA. :  Maa- 
sias.) 'f  he  father  of  Azariah,  one  of  the  priests  from 
the  oasis  of  the  Jordan,  who  assisted  Kehemiah  in 
rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  23). 

6.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maotraia.)  One  of  those  who 
stood  on  the  right  hand  of  Ezra  when  he  read  the 
law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4).  He  was  probably 
a  priest,  but  whether  one  of  those  mentioned  in 
ch.  xii.  41,  42,  is  uncertain.  The  corresponding 
name  in  1  Esd.  ix.  43  is  BalaSAMUS. 

7.  (Om.  in  LXX.)  A  Le-inte  who  assisted  on  the 
same  occasion  in  expounding  the  law  to  the  people 
(Neh.  viii.  7).  He  is  called  MaianeaS  in  1  Esd. 
ix,  48. 

8.  (Alex.  MaaAo-ia;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maatrafa.) 
One  of  the  heads  of  the  people  whose  descendants 
signed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  25). 

9.  (Alex.  MaAo-ia.)  Son  of  Baruch  and  descend- 
ant of  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah.  His  family  dwelt 
in  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh. 
\i.  .5).  In  the  corresponding  narrative  of  1  Chr. 
ix.  f)  he  is  called  Asaiah. 

10.  (MaocTiay;  Masia.")  A  Benjamite,  ancestor 
of  Sallu,  who  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  after  the  captivity 
(Neh.  xi.  7). 

11.  (Om.  in  Vat.  MS. ;  Alex.  Maaffios.)  Two 
priests  of  this  name  are  mentioned  (^Neh.  xii.  41, 
42)  as  takincr  pait  in  the  musical  service  which 
accompanied  the  dediciition  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
under  Ezra.     One  of  them  is  probably  the  same  as  6. 

12.  (Bacrai'as;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maffeas  in  Jer. 
xxi.  1  ;  Maao-ai'os  ;  Alex.  Mairaias,  Jer.  xxxvii.  3.) 
Father  of  Zeiihaniah,  who  was  a  priest  in  the  I'eign 
of  Zedekiah  (Jer.  xxix.  25). 

13.  (Om.  in  LXX.)  The  fother  of  Zedekiah  the 
false  prophet,  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah 
\iex.  xxix.  21)- 

14.  (•irT'b'yO:      Uaacrdla;      Alex.     Maaffia  : 


MABDAI 


163 


Maasias),  one  of  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank, 
appointed  by  David  to  sound  "  with  psalteries  on 
Alamoth,"  when  the  ark  was  brought  from  the  house 
of  Obed-edom.  He  was  also  one  of  the  "porters" 
or  gate-keepers  for  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  18,  20). 

15.  (Alex.  Mao-ia.)  The  son  of  Adaiah,  and  one 
of  the  captains  of  hundreds  in  the  reign  of  Joash 
king  of  Judah.  He  assisted  Jehoiada  in  the  revo- 
lution by  which  Joash  was  placed  on  the  throne 
(2  Chr.  xxiii.  1). 

16.  (Maacrias;  Alex.  M.affffaias.)  An  officer  of 
high  rank  {s/ioter)  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah  (2  Chr. 
xxvi.  11).  He  was  probably  a  Levite  (comp.  1  Chr. 
xxiii.  4),  and  engaged  in  a  semi-military  capacity, 
corresponding  to  the  civic  functions  of  the  judges, 
with  whom  the  .•^hotenin  are  frequently  coupled. 

17.  (Maaffias;  Alex.  Macrm.)  The  "king's 
sou,"  killed  by  Zichri  the  Ephraimitish  hero  m  the 
invasion  of  Judah  by  Pekah  king  of  Isivael,  during 
the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  7).  The  personage 
thus  designated  is  twice  mentioned  in  connexion 
with  the  "  governor  of  the  city  "  (1  K.  xxii.  26  ; 
2  Chr.  xviii.  23),  and  appears  to  have  held  an  office 
of  importance  at  the  Jewish  court  (perhaps  acting 
as  vicei-oy  during  the  absence  of  the  king),  just  as 
the  queen  dowager  was  honoured  with  the  title  of 
"king's  mother"  (comp.  2  K.  xxiv.  12  with  Jer. 
xxix.  2),  or  gebirdh,  i.  e.  "mistress,"  or  "  powerful 
lady."  [Malchiah,  8.]  For  the  conjecture  of 
Geiger  see  JoASH,  4. 

18.  (IMaao-a.)  The  governor  of  Jerusalem  in  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  appointed  by  the  king,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Shaphan  and  Joah,  to  superintend  the 
restoration  of  the  temple  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8). 

19.  (Maatroias;  Alex.  Macaias.)  The  son  of 
Shallum,  a  priest  of  high  rank,  and  one  of  the  gate- 
keepers of  the  Temple  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim 
(Jer.  XXXV.  4  ;  comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  19). 

20.  (rfpnO:  Moacrttt'as:  Alex.  Matrcrias: 
Maasias,  Jer.  xsxii.  12  ;  Alex.  JMoaffiraias  ;  Masias, 
Jer.  li.  59).  A  priest;  ancestor  of  Baruch  and 
Seraiah,  the  sons  of  Neriah.  [W.  A.  W.J 

MAASIA'I  (^byO:  Maao-ai'a;  Alex.  Matrai' : 
J/artsai),  a  priest  who  after  the  return  from  Ba- 
bylon dwelt  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  ix.  12).  He  is 
apparently  the  same  as  Amasiiai  in  Neh.  xi.  13. 

MASSIAS  (Maatrai'as:  Massias).  The  same 
as  Massi:iah,  20,  the  ancestor  of  Baruch  (Bar.  i.  1). 

MA'AZ  ()^ya  :  Maas  :  Moos),  son  of  Paim,  the 
firstborn  of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  27-). 

MAAZI'AH  (nnyO  -.  UaaCla. ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
'A^'i'a:  Maazia).  l.'One  of  the  jiriests  who  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  8).  From 
the  coincidence  between  many  of  the  names  of  the 
priests  in  the  lists  of  the  twenty-four  courses  esta- 
blished by  David,  of  those  who  signed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.),  and  those  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.),  it  would  seem  eitlier 
that  these  names  were  hei-editary  in  families,  or 
that  they  were  applied  to  the  families  themselves. 
This  is  evidently  the  case  with  the  names  of  the 
"  heads  of  the  people"  enumerated  in  Neh.  x.  14-27. 

2.  (-innyO:  Maao-a^;  Alex.MooCaA:  Maaziau). 
A  priest  in  the  rei2;n  of  David,  head  of  the  twenty- 
fourth  course  (]  Chr.  xxiv.  18;.    See  the  preceding. 

MABDA'I  {Ua^Sdt;  Alex.  VlavSai:  Jhmeas). 
The  same  as  Bexatah  (1  Esd.  ix.  34;  see  Ezr. 
X.  35). 

M  2 


164 


MACALON 


MAC'ALON  {MaKaXuu,  in  both  MSS. :  Bas- 
taro),  \  Esd.  v.  21.  This  name  is  tiie  equivalent  of 
MiciiMASU  in  the  lists  of  iizra  and  Nehemiah.    [G.] 

MACCABEES,  THE  (ol  MuKKa^aloi).  This 
title,  which  was  oi-igiually  the  surname  of  Judas, 
one  of  the  sons  of  ]\lattathias  {infr.  §2),  was  after- 
wards extended  to  the  heroic  family  of  which  he 
was  one  of  the  noblest  representatives,  and  in  a  still 
wider  sense  to  the  Palestinian  martyrs  in  the  per- 
secution of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  [4  Maccabeks], 
and  even  to  the  Alexandrine  Jews  who  suffered  for 
their  faith  at  an  earlier  time  [3  Maccabees]. 
The  original  term  Maccabi  (o  MaKKa^aios)  has 
been  variously  derived.  Some  have  maintained  that 
it  was  formed  iVom  the  combination  of  the  initial 
letters  of  the  Hebrew  sentence,  "  Who  among  the 
gods  is  like  unto  thee,  Jehovah?"  (Ex.  xv.  11, 
Hebr.  "•,  2.  3-  O),  which  is  supposed  to  have  been 
inscribed  upon  the  banner  of  the  patriots  ;  or,  again, 
of  the  initials  of  the  simply  descriptive  title,  "  Mat- 
tathias,  a  priest,  the  sou  of  Johanan."  But  even 
if  the  custom  of  forming  such  words  was  in  use 
among  the  Jews  at  this  early  time,  it  is  obvious 
that  such  a  title  would  not  be  an  individual  title 
in  the  first  instance,  as  Maccabee  undoubtedly  was 
(1  Mace.  ii.  4),  and  still  remains  among  the  Jevi's 
(Raphall,   Hist,  of  Jews,  i.  249).      Moreover  the 


MACCABEES,  THE 

ortliography  of  the  woi-d  in  Greek  and  Syriac 
(Ewald,  Geschichte,  iv.  352  note)  points  to  the 
form  *3pD,  and  not  ^2130.  Another  derivation 
has  been  proposed,  which,  although  direct  evidence 
is  wanting,  seems  satisfactory.  According  to  this, 
the   word  is  foi-med  from    n3i?D,  "a  hammer" 

(like  Malachi,  Ewald,  353?iofe),  gi\nng  a  sense  not 
altogether  unlike  that  in  which  Charles  Martel 
derived  a  surname  from  his  favourite  weapon,  and 
still  more  like  the  Malleus  Scotoruin  and  Malleus 
Haereticorum  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Although  the  name  Maccabees  has  gained  the 
widest  currency,  that  of  Asmonaeans,  or  Ilasino- 
nacans,  is  the  proper  name  of  the  family.  The 
origin  of  this  name  also  has  been  disputed,  but  the 
obvious  derivation  from  Chashmon  (JOtiTI,  'Affafiio- 

vaios  ;  comp.  Ges.  Thes.  5346),  great-grandfather  of 
Mattathias,  seems  certainly  correct.  How  it  came 
to  pass  that  a  man,  otherwise  obscure,  gave  his  name 
to  the  family,  cannot  now  be  discovered  ;  but  no 
stress  can  be  laid  upon  this  difficulty,  nor  upon  the 
fact  that  iu  Jewish  prayers  (Herzfeld,  Gesch.  d.  Jud. 
i.  264)  Mattathias  himself  is  called  Hashmonai.^ 

The  connexion  of  the  various  members  of  the 
Jlaccabaeau  family  will  be  seen  from  the  accom- 
panying table : — 


The  Asmonaean  Fajitly. 

Chasmon  ('of  the  sons  of  .Joarib,'  comp.  1  Chron.  xxiv.  7). 

I 
.Johanan  ('looaw));). 

Simeon  {^vixeiliv,  Simon.     Comp.  2  Pet.  1. 1). 

Mattathias  (Jlattliias,  Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  1,  ^3.) 
t  167  B.C. 


Johanan  (Johannes)  Simon 

(Gaddis),  (Thassl) 

("Joseph"  in  2  Mace.  viii.  22),  f  135  B.C. 

t  161  B.C.  I 


Judas 
(Maccabajus), 

t  161  B.C. 


Eleazar 
(Avaran), 
t  163  BC. 


Jonathan 
(Apphus), 
+  143  B.C. 


Judas, 
f-  135  B.C. 


Johannes  H}'rcaniis  I. 

t  106  B.C. 


Mattathias 
t  135  B.C. 


Daughter  =  Ptolemseua 
(1  Mace.  xvi.  11,  12). 


Salome  (Ale.xandra)  =  Aristobulus  I.  Antiponus.  Janna?us  Alexander  =  Alexandra.  Son.  Son. 

t  105  B.C.  t  105  B.C.  t  'S  B.C.  I 


Hyrcanus  II. 

t  30  B.C. 

Aristobultis  11. 

t  49  B.C. 

1 

Alexandra  =  Alexander, 
t  2S  B.C.      1       t  49  B.C. 

Antigonus 
t  37  B.C. 

Mariamne  =  Herod  the  Great, 
t  29  B.C. 

Arlstobulus. 
t  35  B.C. 

The  original  authorities  for  the  history  of  the 
Maccabees  are  extremely  scanty  ;  but  for  the  course 
of  the  war  itself  the  first  book  of  Maccabees 
is  a  most  trustworthy,  if  an  incomplete  witness. 
[Maccabees,  Books  of.]  The  second  book  adds 
some  important  details  to  the  history  of  the  earlier 
part  of  the  struggle,  and  of  the  events  which  im- 
mediately preceded  it ;  but  all  the  statements  which 
it  contains  require  close  examination,  and  must  be 
received  with  caution.  Jo.sephus  tbllows  1  Mace, 
for  the  period  which  it  embraces,  very  closely,  but 
slight  additions  of  names  and  minute  particulars 


indicate  that  he  was  in  possession  of  other  materials, 
probably  oral  traditions,  which  have  not  been  else- 
where preserved.  On  the  other  hand  there  are 
cases,  in  which,  fiom  haste  or  carelessness,  he  lias 
misintei-preted  his  authority.  From  other  sources 
little  can  be  gleaned.  Hebrew  and  classical  litera- 
ture furnishes  nothing  more  than  a  few  trifling 
fragments  which  illustrate  Maccabaean  history.  So 
long  an  interval  elapsed  befoi-e  tlie  Hebrew  tra- 
ditions were  committed  to  writing,  that  facts,  when 
not  embodied  in  rites  or  precepts,  became  wholly 
distorted.    Classical  writers,  again,  were  little  likely 


Hfv/.l'pld  derives  the  name  from  DDH.  "  ">  temper  stei'l ;"  so  tlial  it  becomes  in  sense  a  synonym  of  "  Maccabee." 


MACCABEES,  THE 

to  chronicle  a  conflict  which  pi-obably  they  could 
not  have  understood.  Of  the  great  work  of  Poly- 
bius — who  alone  might  have  been  expected  to  ap- 
preciate tlie  importance  of  the  Jewish  war — only 
fragments  remain  which  refer  to  this  period  ;  but 
the  omission  of  all  mention  of  the  Maccabaean  cam- 
paign in  the  corresponding  sections  of  Livy,  who 
follows  very  closely  in  the  track  of  the  Greek  his- 
torian, seems  to  prove  that  Polybius  also  omitted 
them.  The  account  of  the  Syrian  kings  in  Appian 
is  too  meagi-e  to  make  his  silence  remarkable ;  but 
indifference  or  contempt  must  be  the  explanation 
of  a  general  silence  which  is  too  widespread  to  be 
accidental.  Even  when  the  fall  of  Jerasalem  had 
directed  unusual  attention  to  the  past  fortunes  of  its 
defenders,  Tacitus  was  able  to  dismiss  the  Macca- 
baean conflict  in  a  sentence  remarkable  for  scornful 
carelessness.  "  During  the  dominion  of  the  Assy- 
rians, the  Medes,  and  the  Persians,  the  Jews,"  he 
says,  "  were  the  most  abject  of  their  dependent  sub- 
jects. After  the  Macedonians  obtained  the  su- 
premacy of  the  East,  King  Antiochus  endeavoured 
to  do  away  with  their  superstition,  and  introduce 
(ireek  Jiabits,  but  was  hindered  by  a  Parthian  war 
from  reforming  a  most  repulsive  people "  (teter- 
riinam  f/entem,  Tac.  Hist.  v.  8).'' 

1.  The  essential  causes  of  the  Maccabaean  War 
have  been  already  pointed  out  [Antiochus  IV'. 
vol.  i.  p.  75'<].  The  annals  of  the  Maccabaean 
family,  "  by  whose  hand  deliverance  was  given  unto 
Israel"  (1  Mace.  v.  62),  present  the  record  of  its 
progress.  The  standai'd  of  independence  was  first 
i-aised  by  Mattathias,  a  priest"  of  the  course  of 
Joarib,  which  was  the  first  of  the  twenty-four 
courses  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7),  and  consequently  of  the 
noblest  blood  (comp.  Jos.  Vit.  i. ;  Grimm,  on  IMacc. 
ii.  1).  The  persecutions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
had  already  roused  his  indignation,  when  'emis- 
saries of  the  king,  headed  by  A]ielles  (Jos.  Ant. 
xii.  6,  §2),  came  to  Modin,  where  he  dwelt,  and  re- 
quired the  people  to  oH'er  idolatrous  sacrifice  (1  Mac. 
ii.  1 5,  &c. ).  Mattathias  rejected  the  overtures  which 
were  made  to  him  first,  and  when  a  Jew  came  to 
the  altar  to  renounce  his  faith,  slew  him,  and  after- 
wards Apelles,  "  as  Phinees — fiom  whom  he  was 
descended — did  unto  Zambri."  After  this  he  fled 
with  his  sons  to  the  mountains  (B.C.  168),  whither 
he  was  followed  by  numerous  bands  of  fugitives. 
Some  of  them,  not  in  close  connexion  with  Matta- 
thias, being  attacked  on  the  Sabbath,  offered  no 
resistance,  and  fell  to  the  number  of  a  thousand. 
When  Mattathias  heard  of  the  disaster  he  asserted 
the  duty  of  self-defence,  and  continued  the  war 
with  signal  success,  destroying  the  idolatrous  altars, 
and  lestoring  the  observance  of  the  Law.  He 
seems,  however,  to  have  been  already  advanced  in 
years  when  the  rising  was  made,  and  he  did  not 
long  survive  the  fatigues  of  active  service.  He  died 
li.C.  166,  and  "was  buried  in  the  sepulchre  of  his 
fathers  at  Modin."  The  speech  which  he  is  said  to 
have  addressed  to  his  sons  before  his  death  is  re- 
markable as  containing  the  first  distinct  allusion  to 
the  contents  of  Daniel,  a  book  which  seems  to  have 
exercised  the  most  powerful  influence  on  the  Macca- 


MACCABEES,  THE 


165 


•>  The  short  notice  of  the  Jews  in  Diodorus  Siculus  (Lib. 
xl.,  Eel.  1)  is  singularly  free  from  popular  misrepresenta- 
tions, many  of  which,  however,  lie  quotes  as  used  by  the 
cuunsellors  of  Antiuchus  to  urge  the  kirig  to  extirpate  the 
nation  (_I,ib.  xxxiv.,  Kcl.  1). 

■:  The  later  tradition,  liy  a  natural  exaggeration,  made 
hi)n  high-pnost.    C'nnip.  Herzfekl,  Gvncli.  i.  26),  379. 


baeaii  conflict   (1   Mace.   ii.   60;   conip.   Jos.  Ant. 
xii.  6,  §o). 

2.  Mattathias  himself  named  Judas — apparently 
his  third  son — as  his  successor  in  directing  the  war 
of  independence  (1  Mace.  ii.  66).  Tiie  energy  and 
skill  of  "THE  Maccabee"  (o  MaKKa^atos),  as 
Judas  is  often  called  in  2  Mace,  fully  justified,  his 
father's  preference.  It  appears  that  he  had  already 
taken  a  prominent  part  in  the  first  secession  to  the 
mountains  (2  Mace.  v.  27,  where  Mattathias  is  not 
mentioned) ;  and  on  receiving  the  chief  command 
he  devoted  himself  to  the  task  of  combining  for 
common  action  these  who  were  still  faithful  to  the 
religion  of  their  fathers  (2  Mace.  viii.  1).  His 
first  enterprises  were  night  attacks  and  sudden 
surprises,  which  were  best  suited  to  the  tioops  at 
his  disposal  (2  Mace.  viii.  6,  7);  and  when  his 
men  were  encouraged  by  these  means,  he  ventured 
on  more  important  opei'ations,  and  defeated  Apollo- 
nius  (1  JIacc.  iii.  10-12)  and  Seron  (1  Mace.  iii. 
13-24),  who  hearing  of  his  success  came  against 
him  with  very  superior  foices,  at  Bethhoron,  the 
scer.e  of  the  most  glorious  victories  of  the  Jews  in 
earlier  and  later  times.  [Beth-horon.]  Shortly 
afterwards  Antiochus  Epiphar.es,  whose  resources  had 
been  impoverished  by  the  war  (1  Mace.  iii.  27-31), 
left  the  government  of  the  Palestinimi  provinces  to 
Lysias,  while  he  himself  undertook  an  expedition 
against  Persia  in  the  hope  of  recruiting  his  treasury. 
Lysias  organised  an  expedition  against  Judas  ;  but 
his  army,  a  part  of  which  had  been  separated  from 
the  main  body  to  efiect  a  .surprise,  was  defeated  by 
Judas  at  Emmaus  with  great  loss  (B.C.  166),  after 
the  Jews  had  kept  a  solemn  fast  at  Mizpeh  (1  Mace. 
iii.  46-53);  and  in  the  next  year  Lysias  himself 
was  routed  at  Bethsura.  After  this  success  Judas 
was  able  to  occupy  Jerusalem,  except  the  "  tower  " 
(1  Mace.  vi.  18,  19),  and  ho  purified  the  Temple 
( 1  Mace.  iv.  36,  41-53)  on  the  '2bth  of  Cisleu,  exactly 
three  years  after  its  profitnation  (1  Mace.  i.  59 
[Dedication]  ;  Giimm,  on  1  Mace.  iv.  69). 
The  next  year  was  spent  in  wars  with  frontiei- 
nations  (1  Mace,  v.)  ;  but  in  spite  of  continued 
triumphs  the  position  of  Judas  was  still  precarious. 
In  B.C.  163  Lysias,  with  the  young  king  Antiochus 
Eupator,  took  Bethsura,  which  had  been  fortified 
by  Judas  as  the  key  of  the  Idumaean  border 
(1  Mace.  iv.  tjl),  after  having  defeated  the  patriots 
who  came  to  its  relief;  and  next  laid  siege  to  Jeru- 
salem. The  city  was  on  the  point  of  surrendering, 
when  the  approach  of  Philip,  who  claimed  the 
guardianship  of  the  king,  iniluced  Lysias  to  gua- 
rantee to  the  Jews  comjilefe  liberty  of  religion. 
The  compact  thus  made  was  soon  broken,  but 
shortly  afterwards  Lysias  fell  into  the  hands  of 
Demetrius,  a  new  claimant  of  the  throne,  and  was 
put  to  death.  The  accession  of  Demetrius  brought 
with  it  fiesh  troubles  to  the  patriot  Jews.  A 
large  party  of  their  countrymen,  with  Alcimi'S 
at  their  head,  gained  the  ear  of  the  king,  and  he 
sent  Nicanor  against  Judas.  Nicanor  was  defeated, 
first  at  Capharsalama,  and  again  in  a  decisive 
battle  at  Adasa,  near  to  the  glorious  field  of  Beth- 
horon (B.C.  161,  on  the  l.'Jth  Adar  ;  1  Mace.  vii. 
49  ;  2  Mace.  xv.  36),  where  he  was  slain.  This 
victory  was  tlie  greatest  of  Judas's  successes,  and 
practically  decided  the  question  of  Jewish  inde- 
pendence, but  it  was  followed  by  an  unexpected 
rever.se.  .Tudas  employed  tlie  short  interval  ot 
peace  which  followed  in  negotiating  a  favourable 
league  with  the  Koirians.  But- in  the  same  year, 
before  the  answer  of  the  senate  was  returned,  a  new 


166 


MACCABEES,  THE 


invasion  under  Baccliides  took  place.  The  Roman 
alliance  seems  to  havo  alienated  many  of  the  extreme 
Jewish  party  from  Judas  (Midr.  Hkanuka,  quoted 
by  Kajihall,  Hist,  of  Jews,  i.  325),  and  he  was  able 
only  to  gather  a  small  force  to  meet  the  sudden 
danger.  Of  this  a  large  part  deserted  him  on  the 
eve  of  the  battle;  but  the  courage  of  Judas  was 
unshaken,  and  he  tell  at  Eleasa,  the  Jewish  Themio- 
pylae,  fighting  at  desjieiate  odds  against  the  in- 
vaders. His  body  was  recovered  by  his  brothers, 
and  buried  at  Modiu  "in  the  sepulchre  of  his 
fathers"  (B.C.  161)."1 

3.  After  the  death  of  Judas  the  patriotic  party 
seems  to  have  been  for  a  short  time  wholly  dis- 
organised, and  it  was  only  by  the  pressure  ofj 
unparalleled  sufferings  that  they  were  driven  to 
renew  the  conflict.  For  this  purpose  they  offered 
the  command  to  JONATHAN,  suraamed  Apphus 
(b'-ISn,  tlie  wary),  the  youngest  son  of  Mattathias. 

The  policy  of  Jonathan  shows  the  gi-eatness  of  the 
loss  involveil  in  his  brother's  death.  He  made  no 
attempt  to  maintain  himself  in  the  open  country, 
but  retired  to  the  lowlands  of  the  Jordan  (1  Mace. 
ix.  42),  where  he  gained  some  advantage  over 
Bacchides  (B.C.  161 ),  who  made  an  attempt  to 
hem  in  and  destroy  his  whole  force.  Not  long 
afterwards  Alcimus  died  (B.C.  160),  and  BawAides 
losing,  as  it  appears,  the  active  support  of  the 
Grecizing  party,  retired  from  Palestine.  Mean- 
while Jonathan  made  such  use  of  the  interval  of 
rest  as  to  excite  the  feais  of  his  Jewish  enemies  ; 
and  after  two  years  Bacchides,  at  their  request, 
again  took  the  field  against  Jonathan  (B.C.  158). 
This  time  he  seems  to  have  been  but  feebly  sup- 
ported, and  after  an  unsuccessful  campaign  he 
accepted  terms  which  Jonathan  proposed  ;  ;md  after 
his  departure  Jonathan  "judged  the  people  at 
Michmash"  (1  Mace.  ix.  73),  and  gradually  extended 
his  power.  The  claim  of  Alexander  Balas  to  the 
.Svrian  crown  gave  a  new  importance  to  Jonathan 
and  his  adherents.  Demetrius  I.  empowered  him  to 
raise  an  army,  a  permission  which  was  followed  by 
the  evacuation  of  all  the  outposts  occupied  by  the 
Syrians  except  Bethsura,  but  Jonathan  espoused 
the  cause  of  Alexander,  and  refused  the  liberal 
ofl'ers  which  Demetrius  made,  when  he  heard  that 
the  Jews  had  resolved  to  join  his  rival  (B.C.  153). 
The  success  of  Alexander  led  to  the  elevation  of 
Jonathan,  who  assumed  the  high-priestly  office 
after  the  royal  nomination  *  at  the  feast  of  taber- 
nacles (1  Mace.  X.  21),  "the  greatest  and  holiest 
feast"  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  4,  §1);  and  not  long 
after  he  placed  the  king  under  fresh  obligations  by 
the  defeat  of  Apollonius,  a  general  of  the  younger 
Demetrius  (1  Mace.  X.).  [Apollonius.]  On  the 
death  of  Alexander,  Demetrius  II.,  in  spite  of  the 
reverse  which  he  had  experienced,  sought  to  gain 
the  support  of  the  Jews  (B.C.  145)  ;  but  after 
recoivincr  Importiuit  assistance  from  them  he  failed 
to  fulfil  his  promises,  and  on  the  appearance  of 
Antiochus  VI.,  Jonathan  attached  himself  to  his 


MACCABEES,  THE 

party,  and  though  he  fell  into  a  position  of  great 
peril  gained  an  important  victory  over  the  generals 
of  Demetrius.  He  then  strengthened  his  position  by 
alliances  with  Rome  and  "  the  Lacedaemonians " 
[Spartans],  and  gained  several  additional  suc- 
cesses in  the  field  (B.C.  144)  ;  but  at  last  fell  a 
victim  to  the  treachery  of  Tryphon  (B.C.  144). 
who  feared  that  he  would  prove  an  obstacle  to  the 
design  which  he  had  formed  of  usurping  the  ciown 
after  the  murder  of  the  young  Antiochus  (1  Mace, 
xi.  8-xii.  4). 

4.  As  soon  as  Simon,'  the  last  remaining 
brother  of  the  Maccabaean  f'amil}',  heard  of  the 
detention  of  Jonathan  in  Ptolemais  by  Tryphon, 
he  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  the  patriot  party, 
who  were  abeady  beginning  to  despond,  and 
efl'ectually  opposed  the  progress  of  the  Syrians. 
His  skill  in  war  had  been  proved  in  the  lifetime  of 
Judas  (1  Mace.  v.  17-23),  and  he  had  taken  an 
active  share  in  the  campaigns  of  Jonathan,  when 
he  was  intrusted  with  a  distinct  command  (1  Maec. 
xi.  59).  He  was  soon  enabled  to  consummate  the 
object  for  wliich  his  family  had  fought  gloriously, 
but  in  vain.  Tryphon,  after  carrying  Jonathan 
about  as  a  prisoner  for  some  little  time,  put  him  to 
death,  and  then,  having  murdered  Antiochus,  seized 
the  thi'one.  On  this  Simon  made  overtures  to 
Demetrius  II.  (B.C.  143),  which  were  favourably 
received,  and  the  independence  of  the  Jews  was  at 
length  formally  recognised.  The  long  struggle 
was  now  triumphantly  ended,  and  it  remained  only 
to  reap  the  fruits  of  victory.  This  Simon  hastened 
to  do.  In  the  next  year  he  reduced  "  the  tower  "  at 
Jerusalem,  which  up  to  this  time  had  always  been 
occupied  by  the  Syrian  faction ;  and  during  the 
remainder  of  his  command  extended  and  confirmed 
the  power  of  his  comiti-ymen  on  all  sides,  in  spite 
of  the  hostility  of  Antiochus  Sidetes,  who  after 
a  time  abandoned  the  policy  of  Demetrius.  [Cen- 
debaeus.]  The  prudence  and  wisdom  for  which 
he  was  alreaily  distingiushed  at  the  time  of  his 
father's  death  (1  Mace.  ii.  G5),  gained  for  the 
Jews  the  active  support  of  Rome  (1  Mace.  xr. 
16-21),  in  addition  to  the  confirmation  of  earlipr 
treaties.  After  settling  the  external  relations  of 
the  new  state  upon  a  sure  basis,  Simon  regulated 
its  internal  administration.  He  encouraged  trade 
and  agriculture,  and  secured  all  the  blessings  of 
peace  (1  Mace.  xiv.  4-15).  But  in  the  midst  of 
successes  abroad  and  prosperity  at  home,  he  fell  a 
victim  to  domestic  treachery.  Ptolemaeus,  the 
governor  of  Jericho,  his  son-in-law,  aspired  to 
usurp  the  supreme  power,  and  having  invited 
Simon  and  two  of  his  sons  to  a  banquet  in  his 
castle  at  D6k,_he  murdered  them  there  B.C.  135 
(1  Mace.  -xvi.  11-16). 

5.  The  treason  of  Ptolemaeus  failed  in  its  object. 
Johannes  Hvrcancs,  one  of  the  sons  of  Simon, 
escaped  from  the  plot  by  which  his  life  was 
threatened,  and  at  once  assumed  the  government 
(B.C.  135).  At  first  he  was  hard  pressed  by 
Antiochus  Sidetes,  and  only  able  to  preserve  Jeru- 


d  Judas  (like  Mattathias)  is  represented  in  later  times 
as  higli-priest.  Even  Josephus  {Ant.  xil.  11,  $2)  speaks  of 
the  hisli-priesthood  of  Judas,  and  also  says  tliat  lie  was 
elected  by  "  the  people  "  on  the  death  of  Alcimus  (xii.  10, 
$G).  But  it  is  evident  from  I  Alacc.  ix.  18,56,  that  Judas 
died  some  time  before  Alcimus;  lUid  elsewhere  {Ant.  xx. 
10,  J3)  Josephus  himself  says  that  the  high-priesthood  was 
vacant  for  seven  years  after  the  death  of  Alcimus,  and  that 
■Jonathan  was  the  first  of  the  Asuiunaeun  family  who  held 
the  office. 


'  It  does  not  appear  that  any  direct  claimant  to  the 
high- priesthood  rpmained.  Onias  the  younger,  who  inhe- 
rited the  claim  of  his  father  Ouias,  the  last  legitimate  high- 
priest,  had  retired  to  Kgypt. 

f  He  was  surnamed  "  Thassi "  (®aacri,  ©aao-i's)  ;  but 
the  meaning  of  the  title  is  uncertain.  Michaelis  (Grimm, 
on  1  Mace,  ii.)   thinks   that  It  represents   the  Chaidee 


MACCABEES,  THE 

salem  on  condition  of  dismantling  the  fortiHca- 
tions  and  submitting  to  a  tribute,  B.C.  133.  The 
ibreign  and  civil  wars  of  the  Seleucidae  gave  him 
afterwards  abundant  opportunities  to  retrieve  his 
losses.  He  reduced  Idumaea  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii. 
9,  §1),  confirmed  the  alliance  with  Rome,  and  at 
length  succeeded  in  destroying  Samaria,  the  hated 
rival  of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  109.  The  external  splen- 
dour of  his  government  was  marred  by  the  growth 
of  internal  divisions  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §5,  t!)  ;  but 
John  escaped  the  fate  of  all  the  older  members  of 
his  family,  and  died  in  peace  B.C.  10(5-5.  His 
eldest  son  Aristobulus  I.,  who  succeeded,  was  the 
first  who  assumed  the  kingly  title,  though  Simon 
had  enjoyed  the  fulness  of  the  kingly  power. 

6.  Two  of  the  first  generation  of  the  JIaccabaean 
lamily  still  remain  to  be  mentioned.  These,  though 
they  did  not  attain  to  the  leadership  of  their 
countrymen  like  their  brothei's,  shared  their  fate — 
Eleazer  [Eleazer,  8]  by  a  noble  act  of  self- 
devotion,  John  [John,  2],  apparently  the  eldest 
brother,  by  treachery.  The  sacrifice  of  the  family 
was  complete,  and  probably  history  offers  no  pa- 
rallel to  the  undaunted  courage  with  which  such  a 
band  dared  to  face  death,  one  by  one,  in  the  main- 
tenance of  a  holy  cause.  The  result  was  worthy 
of  the  sacrifice.  The  Maccabees  inspired  a  subject- 
people  with  independence  ;  they  found  a  few  per- 
sonal followers,  and  they  left  a  nation. 

7.  The  great  outlines  of  the  Maccabaean  contest, 
which  are  somewhat  hidden  in  the  annals  thus 
briefly  epitomised,  admit  of  being  traced  with  fair 
distinctness,  though  many  points  must  always 
remain  obscure  from  our  ignorance  of  the  numbeis 
and  distribution  of  the  Jewish  population,  and  of 
the  general  condition  of  the  people  at  the  time. 
The  disputed  succession  to  the  Syrian  throne 
(b  C.  153)  was  the  political  turning  point  of  the 
struggle,  which  may  thus  be  divided  into  two 
great  periods.  During  the  first  period  (B.C.  1(38- 
153)  the  patriots  maintained  their  cause  with 
varying  success  against  the  whole  strength  of 
Syria:  during  the  second  (B.C.  153-139),  they 
were  courted  by  rival  factions,  and  their  independ- 
ence was  acknowledged  from  time  to  time,  though 
pledges  given  in  times  of  danger  were  often  bioken 
when  the  danger  was  over.  The  paramount  im- 
portance of  Jerusalem  is  conspicuous  throughout 
the  whole  war.  The  loss  of  the  Holy  City  re- 
duced the  patriotic  party  at  once  to  the  condition  of 
mere  guerilla  bands,  issuing  from  "  the  mountains" 
or  "  the  wilderness,"  to  make  sudden  forays  on  the 
neighbouring  towns.  This  was  the  first  aspect  of 
the  war  (2  Mace.  viii.  1-7  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  li.  45) ; 
and  the  scene  of  the  early  exploits  of  Judas  was 
the  hill-country  to  the  N.E.  of  Jerusalem,  from 
which  he  drove  the  invading  armies  at  the  famous 
battle-fields  of  Betu-horon  and  Emmacs  (Nico- 
'polis).      Tiie  occupation  of  Jerusalem   closed   the 

first  act  of  the  war  (B.C.  165)  ;  and  after  this 
Judas  made  rapid  attacks  on  every  side — in  Idu- 
maea, Amnion,  Gilead,  Galilee— but  he  made  no 
permanent  settlement  in  the  countries  which  lie 
ravaged.  Bethsura  was  fortified  as  a  defence  of 
Jerusalem  on  the  S. ;  but  the  authority  of  Judas 
seems  to  have  been  limited  to  the  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood of  Jerusalem,  tliough  the  infiuence  of  his 
name  extended  more  widely  (1  Mace.  vii.  50,  t] 
yri  'lovSa).  On  the  death  of  Juda.s  the  patriots 
were  reduced  to  as  great  distress  as  at  their  first 
rising ;  and  as  Bacchides  held  the  keys  of  the 
"  mountains   of  Ephraim "    (ix.    50)    they    were 


MACCABEES,  THE 


107 


forced  to  find  a  refuge  in  the  lowlands  near  Jericho, 
and  after  some  slight  successes  Jonathan  was 
allowed  to  settle  at  Michmash  undisturbed,  though 
the  whole  country  remained  absolutelv  under  the 
sovereignty  of  Syria.  So  far  it  seemed  that  little 
had  been  gained  when  the  contest  between  Alex- 
ander Balas  and  Demetrius  I.  opened' a  new  period 
(B.C.  153).  Jonathan  was  empowered  to  raise 
troops  :  the  Jewish  hostages  were  restored  ;  many 
of  the  fortresses  were  abandoned  ;  and  apparently 
a  definite  district  was  assigned  to  the  government 
of  the  high-priest.  The  former  unfruitful  con- 
flicts at  length  produced  their  full  harvest.  The 
defeat  at  Eleasa,  like  the  Swiss  St.  Jacob,  had 
shown  the  worth  of  men  who  could  face  all  odds, 
and  no  price  seemed  too  great  to  secure  their  aid. 
When  the  Jewish  leaders  had  once  obtained  legiti- 
mate power  they  pi'oved  able  to  maintain  it,  though 
their  general  success  was  chequered  by  some  I'e- 
verses.  The  solid  power  of  the  national  party  was 
seen  by  the  slight  effect  which  was  produced  by  the 
treacherous  murder  of  Jonathan.  Simon  was  able 
at  once  to  occupy  his  place,  and  cany  out  his  plans. 
The  Syrian  garrison  was  withdrawn  from  Jeru- 
salem ;  Joppa  was  occupied  as  a  sea-port ;  and 
"four  governments"  (reffffapes  vofioi,  xi.  57, 
xiii.  37) — probably  the  central  parts  of  the  old 
kingdom  of  Judah,  with  three  districts  taken  from 
Samaria  (x.  38,  39) — were  subjected  to  the  sove- 
reign authority  of  the  high-priest. 

8.  The  war,  thus  brought  to  a  noble  issue,  if  less 
famous  is  not  less  glorious  than  any  of  those 
in  which  a  few  brave  men  have  successfully  mmn- 
tained  the  cause  of  freedom  or  religion  against  over- 
powering might.  The  answer  of  Judas  to  those 
who  counselled  retreat  (1  Mace.  ix.  10)  was  as 
true-hearted  as  that  of  Leonidas  ;  and  the  exploits 
of  his  followers  will  bear  favourable  comparison 
with  those  of  the  Swiss,  or  the  Dutch,  or  the 
Americans.  It  would  be  easy  to  point  out  pa- 
rallels in  Maccabaean  history  to  the  noblest  traits 
of  patriots  and  martyrs  in  other  countries ;  but  it 
may  be  enough  here  to  claim  for  the  contest  the 
attention  which  it  rarely  recei^'es,  It  seems, 
indeed,  as  if  the  indifl'erence  of  classical  writers 
were  perpetuated  in  our  own  days,  though  there  is 
no  struggle — not  even  the  wars  of  Joshua  or 
David— which  is  more  profoundly  interesting  to 
the  Christian  student.  For  it  is  not  only  in  their 
victory  over  external  difficulties  that  the  heroism  of 
the  Maccabees  is  conspicuous:  their  real  success 
was  as  much  imperilled  by  internal  divisions  as  by 
foreign  force.  They  had  to  contend  on  the  one 
hand  against  open  and  subtle  attempts  to  introduce 
Greek  customs,  and  on  the  other  against  an  extreme 
Pharisaic  party,  which  is  seen  from  time  to  time  op- 
posing their  counsels  (1  Mace.  vii.  12-18  ;  comp.  §2, 
end).  And  it  was  from  Judas  and  those  whom  he 
inspired  that  the  old  faith  received  its  last  develop- 
ment and  final  impress  before  the  coming  of  our  Lord. 

9.  For  that  view  of  the  Maccabaean  wm-  which 
regards  it  only  as  a  civil  and  not  as  a  religious 
conflict,  is  essentially  one-sided.  If  there  were  no 
other  evidence  than  the  book  of  Daniel — whatever 
opinion  be  held  as  to  the  date  of  it — that  alone 
would  show  how  deeply  the  noblest  hopes  of  the 
theocracy  were  centred  in  the  success  of  the  struggle. 
When  the  feelings  of  the  nation  were  thus  again 
turned  with  fresh  power  to  their  ancient  faith,  we 
might  expect  that  there  would  be  a  new  creative 
epoch  in  the  national  literature :  or,  if  the  form  of 
Hebrew  composition   w:is  ;dieady  fixed  by  sacred 


168 


MACCABEES,  THE 


types,  a  prophet  or  psalmist  would  express  the 
thoughts  ot'  the  new  age  after  the  models  of  old 
time.  Yet  in  part  at  least  the  leaders  of  Macca- 
baean  times  felt  that  they  were  separated  by  a  real 
chasm  fiom  the  times  of  the  kingdom  or  of  the 
exile.  If  they  looked  for  a  prophet  in  the  future, 
they  acknowledged  that  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
was  not  among  them.  The  volume  of  the  pio- 
plietic  writings  was  completed,  and,  as  far  as 
appears,  no  one  ventured  to  imitate  its  content.s. 
But  the  Hagiographa,  though  they  ■were  already 
long  fixed  as  a  definite  collection  [Canon],  were 
not  equally  far  removed  fiom  imitation.  The 
apocalyptic  visions  of  Daniel  [Daniel,  §1]  sensed 
as  a  pattern  for  the  visions  incorporated  in  the 
book  of  Enoch  [Enoch,  Book  of]  ;  and  it  has 
been  commonly  supposed  that  the  Psalter  contains 
compositions  of  the  Maccabaean  date.  This  sup- 
position, which  is  at  variance  with  the  best  evi- 
dence which  can  be  obtained  on  the  history  of  the 
Canon  can  only  be  received  upon  the  clearest  in- 
ternal C  proof;  and  it  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  the  hypotliesis  is  not  as  much  at  variance 
with  sound  interpretation  as  with  the  history  of 
the  Canon.  The  extreme  foims  of  the  hypothesis, 
as  that  of  Hitzig,  who  represents  Ps.  1,  2,  44,  60, 
and  all  the  last  three  boolcs  of  the  Psalms  (Ps. 
73-150)  as  Maccabaean  (Grimm,  1  Mace.  Einl. 
§9,  3),  or  of  Just.  Olshausen  (quoted  by  Lwald, 
Jakrh.  18,")3,  pp.  250  fF.),  who  is  inclined  to  bring 
the  whole  Psalter  with  very  few  exceptions  to  that 
date,  need  only  be  mentioned  as  indicating  the  kind 
of  conjecture  which  finds  currency  on  such  a  sub- 
ject. The  real  controversy  is  confined  to  a  much 
narrower  field ;  and  the  psalms  which  have  been 
referred  with  the  gi'eatest  show  of  re;ison  to  the 
Maccabaean  age  are  Ps.  44,  60,  74,  79,  80,  83. 
It  has  been  argued  that  all  these  speak  of  the 
dangers  to  whicli  the  house  and  people  of  God  were 
exposed  fi-om  heathen  enemies,  at  a  period  later  than 
the  captivity  ;  and  the  one  ground  for  referring 
them  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  is  the  general 
coincidence  which  they  present  with  some  featm-es 
of  the  Greek  oppression,  But  if  it  be  admitted 
that  the  psalms  in  question  are  of  a  later  date  than 
the  captivity,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  they  are 
Maccabaean.  On  the  contrary  they  do  not  contain 
the  slightest  trace  of  those  internal  divisions  of  the 
jjeople  which  were  the  most  marked  features  of  the 
^Maccabaean  struggle.  The  dangers  then  were  as 
much  from  within  as  from  without ;  and  party 
jealousies  bi'ought  the  divine  cause  to  the  greatest 
peril  (Ewald,  Psalmen,  355).  It  is  incredible 
that  a  series  of  Maccabaean  psalms  should  contain 
no  allusion  to  a  system  of  enforced  idolatry,  or  to  a 
temporising  priesthood,  or  to  a  faithless  multitude. 
And  while  the  obscurity  which  hangs  over  the 
history  of  the  Persian  supremacy  from  tlie  time  of 
Nehemiah  to  the  invasion  of  Alexander,  makes  it 
impossible  to  fix  with  any  pi-eeision  a  date  to  which 
the  psalms  can  be  referred,  the  one  glimpse  which 
is  given  of  the  state  of  Jerusalem  in  the  inten^al 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  7)  is  such  as  to  show  that  they 


g  The  historical  argument  for  the  oomplelion  of  tbe 
present  collection  of  the  Psalms  before  the  compilation  of 
Clu-ouicles  is  very  well  given  by  Ewald  (^Jahrb.  1853,  4, 
pp.  20-32)  In  1  Clir.  xvl.  7-36  passages  occur  which  are 
derived  from  Ps.  cv.,  cvi.,  xcvl.,  of  which  the  fust  two  are 
among  the  latest  hymns  in  the  Psalter. 

•■  It  must,  however,  be  noticed  that  the  fonnula  of  quo- 
tation prefixed  to  the  words  from  Ps.  Ixxix.  in  1  Mace, 
vli.  17  is  not  that  in  which  Scripture  is  quo  ed  in  later 
books,  as  is  commonly  said.     It  is  not  ws  yiypairrai.  <ir 


MACCABEES,  THE 

may  well  have  fbimd  some  suflicient  occasion  in 
the  wars  and  disorders  which  attended  the  decline 
of  the  Persian  power  (comp.  Ewald).  It  may, 
however,  be  doubted  whether  the  ai'guraents  for  a 
post-Babylonian  date  are  conclusive.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  psalms  themselves  which  may  not 
ajjply  to  the  circumstances  which  attended  tiie 
overthrow  of  the  kingdom  ;  and  it  seems  incredible 
that  the  desolation  of  the  Temple  should  have  given 
occasion  to  no  hymns  of  pious ''  sorrow. 

10.  The  collection  of  the  so-called  Psalms  of  So- 
lomon furnishes  a  strong  confirmation  of  the  belief 
that  all  the  canonical  Psalms  are  earlier  than  the 
Maccabaean  era.  This  collection,  which  bears  the 
cleai'est  tiaces  of  unity  of  authorship,  is,  almost 
beyond  question,  a  true  Maccabaean  work.  There 
is  every  reason  to  believe  (Ewald,  Geschichte,  iv, 
343)  that  the  book  was  onginally  composed  in 
Hebrew  ;  and  it  presents  e.\actly  those  characteristics 
which  are  wanting  in  the  other  (conjectural)  Macca^ 
baean  Psalms.  "  The  holy  ones"  (ol'Sfftoi,  DT'DH 
[.\SSIDAE.\NS]  ;  oi  (po^oviJLivoi  rhv  Kvpiov)  appear 
throughout  as  a  distinct  class,  struggling  against 
hypocrites  and  men-pleaseis,  who  make  the  observ- 
ance of  the  law  subservient  to  their  own  interests 
(  Ps.  Sol.  iv.,  xiii.-xv.).  The  sanctuary  is  polluted 
by  the  abominations  of  professing  servants  of  God 
before  it  is  polluted  by  the  heathen  (Ps.  Sol.  i.  8,  ii. 
1  &'.,  viii.  8  if.,  xvii.  15  ff.).  National  unfaithful- 
ness is  the  cause  of  national  punishment ;  and  the 
end  of  trial  is  the  "justification"  of  God  (Ps.  Sol.  ii. 
16,  iii.  3,  iv.  9,  viii.  7  fF.,  i.x.).  On  the  other  hand 
there  is  a  holiness  of  works  set  up  in  some  passages 
which  violates  the  divine  mean  of  Scripture  (Ps. 
Sol.  i.  2,  3,  iii.  9)  ;  and,  while  the  language  is  full  of 
echoes  of  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  impossible  not  to 
feel  that  it  wants  something  which  we  find  in  all 
the  canonical  writings.  The  historical  allusions  in 
the  Psalms  of  Solomon  are  as  unequivocal  as  the 
description  which  they  give  of  the  state  of  the 
Jewish  nation.  An  enemy  "  threw  down  the  strong 
walls  "  of  Jerusalein,  and  "  Gentiles  went  up  to  the 
altar"  (Ps.  Sol.  ii.  1-3  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  31).  In  his 
pride  "  he  wrought  all  things  in  Jerusalem,  as  the 
Gentiles  in  their  cities  do  for  their  gods"  (Ps.  Sol. 
xvii.  16).  "Those  who  loved  the  assemblies  of 
the  saints  {(Twayayas  oa-loov),  wandered  (lege 
iirKavS>vro)  in  deserts"  (Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  19  ;  comp. 
1  Mace.  i.  54,  ii.  28)  ;  and  there  "  was  no  one  in 
the  midst  of  Jerusalem  who  did  mercy  and  truth  " 
(Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  17  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  38).  One  Psalm 
(viii.)  appears  to  refer  to  a  somewhat  later  period. 
The  people  wi'ought  wickedly,  and  God  sent  upon 
them  a  spirit  of  error.  He  brought  one  "  from  the 
extremity  of  the  earth"  (viii.  16  ;  comp.  1  Marc, 
vii.  1, — "  Demetrius  from  Rome").  "The  princes 
of  the  land  met  him  with  joy  "  ( 1  Mace.  vii.  5-8)  ; 
and  he  entered  the  land  in  safety  (1  Mace.  vii. 
9-12, — Bacchides  his  general),  "as  a  father  in 
peace"  (1  Mace.  vii.  15).  Then  "he  slew  the 
princes  and  every  one  wise  in  counsel"  (1  Mace, 
vii.  16),  and  "  poured  out  the  blood  of  those  who 
dwelt  in  Jerusalem"  (1  Mace.  vii.  17).'  The  pur- 
Kara  TO  yeypafjLfjLfvov,  but  Kara  TOi/  \6yov  ov  eypa^e, 
which  is  variously  altered  by  different  authorities. 

'  The  proraiuence  given  to  the  slaughter  of  the  Assi- 
daeans  both  in  1  Mate,  and  in  the  psalm,  and  the  share 
which  the  Jews  had  directly  in  the  second  pollution  of 
Jerusalem,  seem  to  fix  the  events  of  the  psalm  to  the  time 
of  Demetrius  ;  but  the  close  similarity  (with  this  excep- 
tion) between  the  invasions  of  ApoUonius  and  Bacchides 
may  leave  some  doubt  as  to  the  identification.  (Compare 
1  Mace.  i.  29-38.  with  Ps.  Sol.  viii.  16-24.) 


MACCABEES,  THE 

port  oi'  these  evils,  as  a  retributive  aud  purilying 
judgment,  leads  to  the  most  remarkable  feature  ot' 
the  Psalms,  the  distinct  expression  of  Messianic 
hopes.  Ill  this  respect  they  offer  a  direct  contrast 
to  the  books  of  Maccabees  (1  Mace.  xiv.  41).  The 
sorrow  and  the  triumph  are  seen  together  in  their 
spiritual  aspect,  and  the  expectation  of  "  an  anointed 
Lord  "  (xpia-rhs  Kvpios,  Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  36  (xviii.  8) ; 
comp.  Luke  ii.  11)  follows  directly  after  the  de- 
sci'iptiou  of  the  impious  assaults  of  Gentile  enemies 
(Ps.  Sol.  xvii. ;  comp.  Dan.  xi.  45,  xii.).  "  Blessed," 
it  is  said,  "  are  they  who  are  born  in  those  days,  to 
see  the  good  things  which  the  Lord  shall  do  for  the 
generation  to  come.  [When  men  are  brought]  be- 
neath the  rod  of  correction  of  an  anointed  Lord  {or 
the  Lord's  anointed,  virh  pd^Sov  TraiSe/aj  xfCToQ 
Kupiov)  in  the  fear  of  his  Uod,  in  wisdom  of  spirit 
and  of  righteousness  and  of  might"  .  .  .  then 
there  shall  be  a  "  good  generation  in  the  fear  of 
t  (Jod,  in  the  days  of  mercy"  (Ps.  Sol.  xviii.  6-10). 
11.  Elsewhere  there  is  little  which  marks  the 
distinguishing  religious  character  of  the  era.  The 
notice  of  the  Maccabaean  heroes  in  the  book  of 
Daniel  is  much  more  general  and  brief  than  the  cor- 
responding notice  of  their  great  adversary;  but  it 
is  not  on  that  account  less  important  as  illustrating 
the  relation  of  the  famous  chapter  to  the  simple 
history  of  the  period  which  it  embraces.  Nowhere  is 
it  moi-e  evident  that  tiicts  are  shadowed  forth  by 
the  prophet  only  in  their  typical  bearing  on  the 
development  of  God's  kingdom.  In  this  aspect  the 
passage  itself  (Dan.  xi.  29-35)  will  supersede  in  a 
great  measure  the  necessity  of  a  detailed  comment. 
^^  At  the  time  appointed  [_m  the  s^pring  of  168  is.c] 
he  [Antiochus  Epiph.]  shall  return  ami  come  to- 
ward the  south  [Egypt]  ;  hut  it  shall  not  he  as  the 
jirst  time,  so  also  the  last  time  [though  his  first 
attempts  shall  be  successful,  in  the  end  he  shall  fail]. 
For  the  shij)s  of  Chittini  [the  Romans]  shall  come 
against  him,  and  he  shall  be  cast  doivn,  and  return, 
and  he  very  wroth  against  the  holy  covenant ;  and 
he  shall  do  [his  will]  ;  yea  he  shall  retwn,  and 
have  intelligence  with  them  that  forsake  the  holy 
covenant  (comp.  Dan.  viii.  24,  25).  And  forces  from 
him  [at  his  bidding]  shall  stand  [remain  in  Judaea  as 
garrisons  ;  comp.  1  JMacc.  i.  33,  34]  ;  aiul  they  shall 
pollute  the  sanctuary,  the  stronghold,  and  shall  take 
axoay  the  daily  [sacrifice] ;  and  they  shall  set  vp 
the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate  [1  Mace.  i. 
45-47].  And  such  as  do  wickedly  against  (or 
rather  such  as  condemn^  the  covenant  shall  he  cor- 
rupt [to  apostasy]  by  smooth  words  ;  hut  the  people 
that  know  their  (iod  shall  he  strong  and  do  [ex- 
ploits]. And  they  that  understand  [know  God  and 
His  law]  anwng  the  people,  shall  instruct  many : 
yet  they  shall  fall  by  the  suord  and  by  flame,  by 
captivity  and  by  spoil  [some]  days  (1  Mace.  i. 
60-1)4).  Now  tchen  they  shall  fall,  they  shall  he 
holpen  with  a  little  help  (1  Mace.  i.  28  ;  2  Mace, 
v.  27,  .Tudas  Mace,  with  nine  otheis  .  .  .  .) ;  and 
many  shall  cleave  to  them  [the  faithful  fcillowers  of 
the  law]  icith  hypocrisy  [dreading  the  prowess  of 
Judas :  1  Mace.  ii.  46,  and  yet  ready  to  fall  away 
at  the  first  opportunity,  1  Mace.  vii.  6].  And  some 
of  them  of  understanding  shall  fall,  to  make  trial 
among  them,  and  to  purge  and  to  make  them  lohite, 
unto  the  time  of  the  end  ;  because  [the  end  is]  yet 
for  a  time  appointed."  From  this  point  the  prophet 
describes  in  det;iil  the  godlessness  of  the  great  op- 
]>ressor  (ver.  36-39),  and  then  his  last  fortunes 
and  death  (ver.  40-45),  but  says  nothing  of  the 
ti'iumph  of  the   Maccabees  or  ot  the  restoration  of 


MACCABEES,  THE 


169 


the  Temple,  which  preceded  the  last  event  by  some 
months.  This  omission  is  scarcely  intelligible 
unless  we  regard  the  facts  as  symbolising  a  higher 
struggle — a  truth  wrongly  held  by  those  wlio  from 
early  times  referred  verses  36-45  only  to  Antichrist, 
the  antitype  of  Antiochus — in  which  that  recovery 
of  the  earthly  temple  had  no  place.  Aud  at  any 
rate  it  sliows  the  imperfection  of  that  view  of  the 
whole  cha]5ter  by  which  it  is  regarded  as  a  mere 
transcription  of  history. 

12.  The  history  of  the  Maccabees  does  not  con- 
tain much  which  illustrates  in  detail  the  religious 
or  social  progress  of  the  Jews.  It  is  obvious  that 
the  period  must  not  only  have  intensified  old  beliefs, 
but  also  have  called  out  elements  which  were  latent 
in  them.  One  doctrine  at  least,  that  of  a  resun'ec- 
tion,  and  even  of  a  material  resurrection  (2  Mace. 
xiv.  46),  was  brought  out  into  the  most  distinct 
apprehension  by  suli'ering.  "  It  is  good  to  look  foi- 
the  hope  from  God,  to  be  raised  up  again  by  Him" 
{■jToiKiv  ava(rT-{)(readai  vtt'  avrov),  was  the  sub- 
stance of  the  martyr's  answer  to  his  judge  ;  "  as  for 
thee,  thou  shalt  have  no  resurrection  to  life " 
{avdffTaffLs  els  C'^ijv,  2  Mace.  vii.  14;  comp.  vi. 
26,  xiv.  46).  "  Our  brethren,"  says  another,  "  have 
fallen,  having  endured  a  short  pain  leading  to  ever- 
lasting life,  being  under  the  covenant  of  God " 
(2  Mace.  vii.  36,  ■ir6vov  aevydov  C''>vs)-  And  as  it 
was  believed  that  an  interval  elapsed  between  death 
and  judgnient,  the  dead  were  supposed  to  be  in 
some  measure  still  capable  of  profiting  by  the  inter- 
cession of  the  living.  Thus  much  is  certainly  ex- 
pressed in  the  famous  passage,  2  Mace.  xii.  43-45, 
though  the  secondary  notion  of  a  purgatorial  state 
is  in  no  way  implied  in  it.  On  the  other  hand  it 
is  not  very  clear  how  far  the  future  judgment  was 
supposed  to  extend.  If  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked  heathen  in  another  life  had  formed  a  definite 
article  of  belief,. it  might  have  been  expected  to  be  * 
put  forward  more,  prominently  (2  Mace.  vii.  17, 
19,  35,  &c.),  though  the  passages  in  question  may 
be  understood  of  sufferings  after  death,  and  not 
only  of  earthly  sufferings ;  but  for  the  apostate 
Jews  there  was  a  certain  judgment  in  reserve  (vi. 
26).  The  firm  faith  in  the  righteous  providence  of 
God  shown  in  the  chastening  of  His  people,  as  con- 
trasted with  His  neglect  of  other  nations,  is  another 
proof  of  the  widening  view  of  the  spiritual  world, 
which  is  characteristic  of  the  epoch  (2  Mace.  iv. 
16,  17,  V.  17-20,  vi.  12-16,  &c.).  The  lessons  of 
the  captivity  were  reduced  to  moral  teaching;  and 
in  the  same  way  the  doctrine  of  the  ministry  of 
angels  a.ssumed  an  impoitarice  which  is  without 
parallel  except  in  patriarchal  times  [2  Maccabees]. 
It  was  perhaps  from  this  cause  also  that  the  Mes- 
sianic hope  wns  limited  in  its  range.  The  vivid 
perception  of  spiritual  truths  hindered  the  spread  of 

a  hope  which  had  been  cherished  in  a  material 
form ;  and  a  pause,  as  it  were,  was  made,  in  which 
men  gained  new  points  of  sight  from  which  to  con- 
template the  old  promises. 

13.  The  various  glimpses  of  national  life  which 
can  be  sained  during  the  period,  show  on  the  whole 
a  steady  adherence  to  the  Mosaic  law.  Probably 
the  law  was  never  more  rigorously  fulfilled.  The 
importance  of  tlie.Antioehian  persecution  in  fixing 
the  Canon  of  the  Old  Tesfciment  has  been  already 
noticed.  [Canox,  vol.  i.  251.]  The  books  of  the 
law  were  specially  sought  out  for  destniction  (1 
Mace.  i.  56,  57,  iii.  48);  and  their  distinctive 
value  was  in  consequence  jiroportioiiately  increased. 
To  use  the  words  of  1  J\Iacc.,   "the  holv  books" 


170 


MACCABEES,  THE 


(ra  ^i^\ia  to.  ayia  to  iv  x^po'^"  Vf^'^")  ^^^'"6  felt 
to  malce  all  other  comfort  supertiuous  (1  Mace.  sii. 
9).  The  strict  observance  of  the  sabbath  (1  Mace, 
ii.  32  ;  2  JIacc.  vi.  11,  viii.  2G,  &c.)  and  of  the  Sab- 
batical year  (1  Maee.  vi.  53),  the  law  of  the  Xazarltes 
(1  Mace.  iii.  49),  and  the  exemptious  from  military 
service  ( 1  Mace.  iii.  56),  the  solemn  prayer  and  fast- 
ing (1  Mace.  iii.  47  ;  2  Mace.  .x.  25,  &e.),  carry  us 
back  to  early  times.  The  provision  for  the  maimed, 
the  aged,  and  the  bereaved  (2  Mace.  viii.  28,  30),  was 
in  the  spirit  of  the  law ;  and  the  new  feast  of  the 
dedication  was  a  homage  to  the  old  rites  (2  Slacc. 
i.  9)  while  it  was  a  proof  of  independent  life.  The 
interruption  of  the  succession  to  the  high-priesthood 
was  the  most  important  innovation  which  was 
made,  and  one  which  prepared  the  way  for  the  dis- 
solution of  the  state.  After  various  arbitrary 
changes  the  office  was  left  vacant  for  seven. years 
upon  the  death  of  Alcimus.  The  last  descendant 
of  Jozadak  (Onias),  in  whose  family  it  had  been 
for  nearly  four  centuries,  fled  to  Egypt,  and  esta- 
blished a  schismatic  worship ;  and  at  last,  when  the 
support  of  the  Jews  became  important,  the  Macca- 
baean  leader,  Jonathan,  of  the  family  of  Joarib, 
was  elected  to  the  dignity  by  the  nomination  of  the 
Syrian  king  (1  Mace.  x.  20),  whose  will  was  con- 
firmed, as  it  appears,  by  the  voice  of  the  people 
(comp.  1  Jlacc.  xiv.  35). 

14.  Little  can  be  said  of  the  condition  of  litera- 
ture and  the  arts  which  has  not  been  already  anti- 
cipated. In  common  intercourse  the  Jews  used  the 
Aramaic  dialect  which  was  established  after  the 
return  :  this  was  "  their  own  language  "  (2  Mace, 
vii.  8,  21,  27,  xii.  37);  but  it  is  evident  from  the 
narrative  quoted  that  they  understood  Greek,  which 
must  have  spread  widely  through  the  influence  of 
Syrian  officers.  There  is  not,  however,  the  slightest 
evidence  that  Greek  was  employed  in  Palestinian 
literature  till  a  much  later  date.  The  description 
of  the  monument  which  was  erected  by  Simon  at 
Modin  in  memory  of  his  family  (1  Mace.  xiii. 
27-30),  is  the  only  recoitl  of  the  architecture  of 
the  time.  The  description  is  obscure,  but  in 
some  features  the  structui-e  appears  to  have  pre- 
sented a  resemblance  to  the  tombs  of  Porsena  and 
the  Curiatii  (Plin.  H.  iV.  xxxvi.  13),  and  perhaps 
to  one  still  found  in  Idumaea.  An  oblong  base- 
ment, of  which  the  two  chief  faces  were  bvxilt  of 
polished  white  marble  (Joseph,  yl/ii.  xiii.  6,  §5), 
supported  "  seven  pyramids  in  a  line  ranged  one 
against  another,"  equal  in  number  to  the  members 
of  the  Maccabaean  family,  including  Simou  himself. 
To  these  he  added  "  other  works-  of  ait  (jUTjxa*''^- 
fiara),  placing  round  (on  the  two  chief  faces?) 
great  columns,  (Josephus  adds,  each  of  a  single 
block),  bearing  trophies  of  arms,  and  sculptured 
ships,  which  might  be  visible  from  the  sea  below." 
The  language  of  1  Mace,  and  Josephus  miplics  that 
these  columns  were  placed  upon  the  basement, 
otherwise  it  might  be  supposed  that  the  columns 
rose  only  to  the  height  of  the  basement  supportincr 
the  trophies  on  the  same  level  as  the  pyramids.  So 
much  at  least  is  evident,  that  the  characteristics  of 
this  work — and  probably  of  later  Jewish  archi- 
tecture generally — bore  closer  affinity  to  the  styles 
of  Asia  Minor  and  Greece  than  of  Egypt  or  the 
East,  a  result  which  would  follow  equally  from  the 
Syriim  dominion  and  the  commerce  which  Simon 
opened  by  the  Mediterranean  (1  Mace.  xiv.  5). 

15.  The  only  recognised  relics  of  the  time  are  the 
coins  which  bear  the  name  of  "  Simon,"  or  "  Simon 
Prince  (iVasi)  of  Israel"  in  Samaritan  letters.    The 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

privilege  of  a  national  coinage  was  granted  to  Smion 
by  Antiochus  VII.  Sidetes  (1  Mace.  xv.  6,  K6fj,/xa 
iStov  vS/xtcTfji.a  rrj  %"'??)  i  '"^'^  numerous  examples 
occm-  which  have  the  dates  of  the  first,  second, 
third,  and  fourth  years  of  the  liberation  of  Jeru- 
salem (Israel,  Zion)  ;  and  it  is  a  remarkable  con- 
fimiation  of  their  genuineness,  that  in  the  first  year 
the  name  Zion  does  not  occur,  as  the  citadel  was 
not  recovered  till  the  second  year  of  Simon's  supre- 
macy, while  after  the  second  year  Zion  alone  is  foimd 
(Bayer,  de  jViimmis,  171).  The  privilege  was  first 
definitely  accorded  to  Simon  in  B.C.  140,  while  the 
first  year  of  Simon  was  B.C.  143  (1  Mace.  xiii.  42) ; 
but  this  discrepancy  causes  little  difficulty,  as  it  is 
not  unlikely  that  the  concession  of  Antiochus  was 
made  in  favour  of  a  practice  already  existing.  No 
date  is  given  later  than  the  fourth  year,  but  coins 
of  Simon  occur  without  a  date,  which  may  belong 
to  the  four  last  yeais  of  his  life.  The  emblems 
which  the  coins  beai-  have  generally  a  connexion 
with  Jewish  history — a  vine-leaf,  a  cluster  of 
gi'apes,  a  vase  (of  manna?),  a  trifid  flowering  rod, 
a  palm  branch  surrounded  by  a  wreath  of  laurel,  a 
lyre  (1  Mace.  xiii.  51),  a  bundle  of  branches  sym- 
bolic of  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  The  coins  issued 
in  the  last  war  of  independence  by  Bar-cochba,  repeat 
many  of  these  emblems,  and  theie  is  considerable 
difficulty  in  distinguishing  the  two  series.  The  au- 
thenticity of  all  the  Maccabaean  coins  was  impugned 
by  Tychsen  (JJie  JJndchtheit  d.  Jud.  Miinzen  .  .  . 
hewiesen  .  .  .  0.  G.  Tychsen,  1779),  but  on  in- 
sufficient grounds.  He  was  answered  by  Bayer, 
whose  admirable  essays  {De  Niimmis  Hebr.  Samu- 
ritanis,  \a[.  Ed.  1781;  Vindiciae  .  .  .  1790), 
give  the  most  complete  account  of  the  coins,  though 
he  reckons  some  apparently  later  types  as  ]\Iaeca- 
baean.  Eckhel  {Doctr.  Numm.  iii.  p.  455  fl'.)  has 
given  a  good  account  of  the  controversy,  and  an 
accurate  description  of  the  chief  types  of  the  coins. 
Comp.  De  Saulcy,  Numism.  Judaiqtie;  Ewald, 
Gesch.  vii.  366,  476.    [Money.] 

The  authorities  for  the  Maccabaean  history  have 
been  given  already.  Of  modern  works,  that  of 
Ewald  is  by  fai"  the  best.  Herzfeld  has  collected  a 
mass  of  details,  chiefly  from  late  sources,  which  are 
interesting  and  sometimes  valuable  ;  but  the  student 
of  the  period  cannot  but  feel  how  difficult  it  is  to 
realise  it  as  a  whole.  Indeed,  it  seems  that  the 
instinct  was  true  which  named  it  from  one  cliief 
hero.  In  this  last  stage  of  the  history  of  Israel,  as 
in  the  first,  all  life  came  from  the  leader ;  and  it  is 
the  greatest  gloiy  of  the  Maccabees  that  while  they 
found  at  first  all  turn  upon  their  personal  fortunes, 
they  left  a  nation  strong  enough  to  preserve  an  in- 
dependent faith  till  the  typical  kingdom  gave  place 
to  a  universal  Church.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF  (MaK/co)3oia)!' 
a,  /3',  &c.  Four  books  which  bear  the  common 
title  of  "  Maccabees,"  are  found  in  some  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.  Two  of  these  were  included  in  the 
early  current  Latin  versions  of  the  Bible,  and 
thence  passed  into  the  Vulgate.  As  fomiing  part 
of  the  Vulgate  they  were  received  as  canonical  by 
the  •  council  of  Trent,  and  retained  among  the 
apocrypha  by  the  refoimed  churches.  The  two 
other  books  obtained  no  such  wide  circulation,  and 
have  only  a  secondary  connexion  with  the  Mac- 
cabaean iiistory.  But  all  the  books,  though'  they 
difl'er  most  widely  in  character  and  date  and  worth, 
possess  points  of  interest  which  make  them  a  ti'uit- 
ful  field  for  studv.      If  the  historic   oider  were 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

observed,  the  so-called  third  book  would  come  first, 
the  fourth  would  be  an  appendix  to  the  second, 
which  would  retain  its  place,  and  the  first  would 
come  last ;  but  it  will  be  more  convenient  to  ex- 
amine the  books  in  the  order  in  which  they  ai'e 
found  in  the  MSS.,  which  was  probably  decided  by 
some  vague  tradition  of  their  relative  antiquity. 

The  controversy  as  to  the  mutual  relations  and 
historic  worth  of  the  first  two  books  of  Maccabees 
has  given  rise  to  much  very  ingenious  and  partial 
criticism.  The  subject  was  very  nearly  exhausted 
by  a  series  of  essays  published  in  the  last  century, 
which  contain  in  the  midst  of  much  unfair  reason- 
ing the  substance  of  what  has  been  written  since. 
The  discussion  was  occasioned  by  E.  Frblich's 
Annals  of  Syria  {Annales  ....  Syriae  .... 
niimis  veterihus  illustrati.  Vindob.  1744).  In 
this  great  work  the  author — a  Jesuit — had  claimed 
paramount  authority  for  the  books  of  Maccabees. 
This  claim  was  denied  by  E.  F.  Wernsdorf  in  his 
Prolusio  do  fontibics  historiae  Syriae  in  Lihris 
Mace.  (Lips.  1746).  Frolich  replied  to  this  essay 
in  another,  De  fontibus  hist.  Syriae  in  Libris 
Mace,  prolusio  ....  in  examen  vocata  (Vindob. 
1746)  ;  and  then  the  argument  fell  into  other 
hands.  Wernsdorfs  brother  (Gli. Wernsdorf)  under- 
took to  support  his  (^ause,  which  he  did  in  a 
Commentatio  historico-critica  de  fide  librorum 
Mace.  (Wratisl.  1747);  and  nothing  has  been 
written  on  the  same  side  which  can  be  compared 
with  his  work.  By  the  vigour  and  freedom  of  his 
style,  by  his  surprising  erudition  and  unwavering 
confidence — almost  worthy  of  Bentley — he  carries 
his  reader  often  beyond  the  bounds  of  true  criticism, 
and  it  is  only  after  reflection  that  the  littleness 
and  sophistry  of  many  of  his  arguments  are  appa- 
rent. But  in  spite  of  the  injustice  and  aiTogance 
of  the  book,  it  contains  very  much  which  is  of  the 
greatest  value,  and  no  abstract  can  give  an  ade- 
quate notion  of  its  power.  The  reply  to  Wernsdorf 
was  publisiied  anonymously  by  another  Jesuit : — 
Auctoritas  utriusquc  Libri  Mace,  canonico-historica 
adscrta  ....  a  quodam  Soc.  Jesu  sacerdote 
(Vindob.  1749).  The  authorship  of  this  was 
fixeil  upon  J.  Khell  (Welte,  Einl.  p.  23note) ;  and 
while  in  many  points  Khell  is  unequal  to  his  adver- 
sary, his  book  contains  some  very  useful  collections 
for  the  history  of  the  canon.  In  more  recent  times, 
F.  X.  Patritius  (another  Jesuit)  has  made  a  fresh 
attempt  to  establish  the  complete  harmony  of  the 
booics,  and,  on  the  whole,  his  essay  (Be  Consensu 
ntritisqiie  Libri  Mace.  Romae,  1856),  though  far 
from  satisfactory,  is  the  most  able  defence  of  the 
books  which  has  been  published. 

I.  The  First  Book  of  Maccabees. — 1.  The 
first  book  of  Maccabees  contains  a  history  of  the 
patriotic  stmggle,  from  the  first  resistance  of  Matta^ 
thias  to  the  settled  sovereignty  and  death  of  Simon, 
a  period  of  thirty-three  years  (B.C.  168-135). 
The  opening  (-hapter  gives  a  short  summary  of  the 
conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great  as  laying  the 
foundations  of  the  Greek  empire  in  the  East,  and 
describes  at  greater  length  the  oppression  of  An- 
tiochus  Fpiphanes,  culminating  in  his  desperate 
attcmj)t  to  extirpate  Judaism.  The  great  subject  of 
the  book  begins  with  the  enumeration  of  the  Jlacca- 
baean  family  (ii.  1-5),  which  is  followed  by  an 
account  of  the  ])art  which  the  ag&l  Mattathias  took 
in  rousing  and  guiding  the  spirit  of  his  countrymen 
(ii.  6-70).  The  remainder  of  the  narrative  is 
occupied  with  the  exploits  of  his  rive  sons,  three 
of  whom  in  succession  cai'ried  on  with  varying  for- 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        171 

tune  the  work  which  he  began,  till  it  reached  its 
triumphant  issue.  Each  of  the  three  divisions, 
into  which  the  main  portion  of  the  book  thus 
naturally  falls,  is  stamjied  with  an  individual 
character  derived  from  its  special  hero.  First 
Judas,  by  a  series  of  briUiant  successes,  and  scarcely 
less  noble  reverses,  fully  roused  his  countrymen  to 
their  work,  and  then  fell  at  a  Jewish  Thermopylae 
(iii.  1-ix.  22,  B.C.  167-161).  ]S'ext  Jonathan  con- 
firmed by  policy  the  advantages  which  his  brother 
had  gained  by  chivalrous  daring,  and  fell  not 
in  open  field,  but  by  the  treachery  of  a  usurper 
(ix.  23-xii.  53;  B.C.  161-143).  Last  of  all  Simon, 
by  wisdom  and  vigour,  gave  shape  and  order  to  the 
new  state,  and  was  formally  installed  in  the 
princely  office.  He  also  fell,  but  by  domestic  and 
not  by  foreign  treason  ;  and  his  son  succeeded  to 
his  power  (xiii.-xvi.  B.C.  143-135).  The  history, 
in  this  aspect,  presents  a  kind  of  epic  unity.  The 
passing  allusion  to  the  achievements  of  after  times 
(xvi.  23,  24)  relieves  the  impression  caused  by  the 
murder  of  Simon.  But  at  his  death  the  victory  was 
already  won :  the  life  of  Judaism  had  mastered  the 
tyranny  of  Greece. 

2.  While  the  giandeur  and  unity  of  the  subject 
invests  the  book  with  almost  an  epic  beauty,  it 
never  loses  the  character  of  history.  The  earlier 
part  of  the  narrative,  including  the  exploits  of 
Judas,  is  cast  in  a  more  poetic  mould  than  any 
other  part,  except  the  brief  eulogy  of  Simon 
(xiv.  4-15);  but  when  the  style  is  most  poetical 
(i.  37-40,  ii.  7-13,  49-68,  iii.  3-9,  18-22,  iv.  8-11, 
30-33,  38,  vi.  10-13,  vii.  37,  38,  41,  42)— and 
this  poetical  form  is  chiefly  observable  in  the 
speeches — it  seems  to  be  true  in  spirit.  The  great 
marks  of  trustworthiness  are  everywhere  conspi- 
cuous. Victory  and  failure  and  despondency  are, 
on  the  whole,  chronicled  with  the  same  candour. 
There  is  no  attempt  to  bring  into  open  display  the 
working  of  providence.  In  speaking  of  Antiochus 
Epiphaues  (i.  10  ff.)  the  writer  betrays  no  unjust 
violence,  while  he  marks  in  one  expressive  phrase 
(i.  10,p<^a  a,uapTaiA6s)  the  character  of  the  Syrian 
type  of  antichrist  (cf.  Is.  xi.  10  ;  Dan.  xi.  36)  ; 
and  if  no  mention  is  made  of  the  reckless  profligacy 
of  Alexander  Balas,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
his  relations  to  the  Jews  were  honourable  and 
liberal,  and  these  alone  fall  within  the  scope  of  the 
history.  So  far  as  the  circumstances  admit,  the 
general  accuracy  of  the  book  is  established  by  the 
evidence  of  other  authorities  ;  but  for  a  considerable 
period  it  is  the  single  source  of  our  information. 
And,  indeed,  it  has  little  need  of  exteraal  testimony  to 
its  worth.  Its  whole  character  bears  adequate  wit- 
ness to  its  essential  truthfulness ;  and  Luther — no 
servile  judge — expressed  himself  as  not  disinclineil, 
on  internal  grounds,  to  see  it  "  reckoned  among  the 
books  of  Holy  Scripture  "  ("  Diess  Buch  ....  fast 
eine  gleiche  Weise  hiilt  mit  Reden  und  Worten  wie 
andere  heilige  Biicher  und  nicht  unwiirdig  gcwest 
wiire,  hiueinzurechncn,  weil  es  ein  sehr  noting  und 
iiiitzlich  Buch  ist  zu  verstehen  don  I'rojjheten 
Daniel  im  11  Kapitel."  Werke,  vou  Walch,  xiv. 
94,  ap.  Grimm,  p.  xxii.). 

3.  There  are,  however,  some  points  in  which  the 
writer  appears  to  have  been  impei-foctly  informed, 
especially  in  the  history  of  foreign  nations ;  and 
some,  again,  iu  which  he  has  been  supposeil  to  have 
magnified  the  difficulties  and  successes  of  his 
countrymen.  Of  the  former  class  of  objections  two, 
which  turn  upon  the  description  given  of  the 
foundation   of   the  Greek   kingdoms   of  the   East 


172       MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

(1  Mace  i.  5-9),  and  of  the  power  of  Koine  (viii. 
1-16),  deserve  notice  from  their  intrinsic  interest. 
After  giving  a  rapid  summary  of  the  exploits  of 
Alexander — the  reading  and  interpretation  of  ver. 
1  are  too  uncertain  to  allow  of  objections  based 
upon  the  common  text — the  writer  states  that  the 
king,  conscious  of  apfiroaching  death  "  divided  his 
kingdom  among  his  sei-vants  who  had  been  brought 
up  with  him  from  his  youth"  (1  Macc.^  i.  6, 
SieiAer  a^roi?  r^v  ^acnXe'iav  aiiTov,  ein  {,S)vtos 
auTov)  .  .  .  .  "  and  after  his  death  they  all  put  on 
crowns."  Various  rumours,  it  is  known  (Curt. 
X.  10),  prevailed  about  a  will  of  Alexander,  which 
decided  the  distribution  of  the  provinces  of  his 
kingdom,  but  this  narrative  is  evidently  a  difi'erent 
and  independent  tradition.  It  may  rest  upon  some 
former  indication  of  the  king's  wishes,  but  in  the 
absence  of  all  con-oborative  evidence  it  can  scarcely 
be  accepted  as  a  historic  fact  (Patritius,  De  Cotis. 
Mace.  pref.  viii.),  though  it  is  a  remarkable  proof  of 
the  desire  which  men  felt  to  attribute  the  constitution 
of  the  Greek  power  to  the  immediate  counsels  of  its 
great  Ibunder.  In  this  instance  the  author  has  pro- 
bably accepted  without  inquiry  the  opinion  of  his 
countrymen ;  in  the  other  it  is  distinctly  said  that 
the  account  of  the  greatness  of  Rome  wa.s  brought 
to  Judas  by  common  report  (1  Mace.  viii.  1,  2, 
^Kovcrev  ....  Si-qyiiffavTo).  The  statements 
made  give  a  lively  impression  of  the  popular  esti- 
mate of  the  conquerors  of  the  west,  whose  character 
and  victories  are  described  chiefly  with  open  or 
covert  allusion  to  the  Greek  powers.  The  subjuga- 
tion of  the  Galatians,  who  were  the  terror  of  the 
neighbouring  people  (Liv.  xxxviii.  37),  and  the 
conquest  of  Spain,  the  Tarshish  (comp.  ver.  3)  of 
Phoenician  merchants,  are  noticed,  as  would  be 
natural  from  the  immediate  interest  of  the  events  ; 
but  the  wars  with  Carthage  are  wholly  omitted 
(.Josephus  adds  these  in  his  narrative,  Ant.  xii. 
10,  §6).  The  errors  in  detail — as  the  capture  of 
Antiochus  the  Great  by  the  Ilomans  (ver.  7),  the 
numbers  of  his  armament  (ver.  6),  the  constitution 
of  the  Pioman  senate  (ver.  1.5),  the  one  supreme 
yearly  officer  at  Home  (ver.  16  ;  comp.  xv.  16) — ai'e 
only  such  as  might  be  expected  in  oi'al  accounts; 
and  the  endurance  (ver.  4,  ixaicpodv^ia),  the  good 
tiiith  (ver.  11  "2),  and  the  simplicity  of  the  republic 
(ver.  14,  ovK  iir4deT0  ovdels  ainwv  Sia.57ifj.a  koI 
ov  irfpie^aKovro  iropipvpav  wffre  aSpvvdr]vai  iv 
avT-p,  contrast  i.  9),  were  features  likely  to  anest 
the  attention  of  orientals.  The  very  imperfection 
of  the  writer's  knowledge — for  it  seems  likely 
(ver.  11)  that  he  remodels  the  rumours  to  suit  his 
own  time — is  instructive,  as  afi'ording  a  glimpse  of 
the  extent  and  manner  in  which  fame  spread  the 
reputation  of  tlie  liomans  in  the  scene  of  their 
future  coiK|uests.  Nor  are  the  mistakes  as  to  the 
condition  of  foreign  states  calculated  to  weaken  the 
testimony  of  the  book  to  national  histoi-y.  They 
are  })eifectly  consistent  with  good  faitii  in  the 
narrator ;  and  even  if  there  are  inaccuracies  in 
lecording  the  relative  numbers  of  the  Jewish  and 
.Syrian  forces  (xi.  45-47  ;  vii.  46),  these  need  cairse 
little  surprise,  and  may  in  some  degi'ee  be  due  to 
errors  of  transcription." 

4.  Much  has  been  wi-itten  as  to  the  sources  from 
which  the  narrative  was  derived,  but  there  does  not 
seem  to  be  evidence  sufficient  to  indicate  them  with 


'  The  relation  of  the  history  of  Josephus  to  that  of 
1  Mace,  is  c;irefully  discussed  by  Grimm,  Exeg.  HamVi. 
Kinl.  }9  (5). 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

any  certainty.  In  one  passage  (ix.  22)  the  author 
implies  that  written  accounts  of  some  of  the  actions 
of  ,ludas  were  in  existence  (to,  Trfptffaa  .  .  ,  .  ou 
KareypdcpT]) ;  and  the  poetical  character  of  the 
tirst  section  of  the  book,  due  in  a  great  measure  to 
the  introduction  of  speeches,  was  probably  bor- 
rowed from  the  writings  on  which  that  part  was 
based.  It  appears,  again,  to  be  a  reasonable  con- 
clusion from  the  mention  of  the  otficial  records  of 
the  life  of  Hyrcanus  (xvi.  24,  Tavra  yeypairTai 
iirl  ;3i^Aia>  rifjupoov  dpxieptocruj'rjs  oiJtoD),  that 
similar'  records  existed  at  least  for  the  high-piiest- 
hood  of  Simon.  There  is  nothing  certainly  to 
indicate  that  the  writer  designed  to  till  up  any  gap 
in  the  history  ;  and  the  notice  of  the  change  of 
reckoning  which  attended  the  elevation  of  Simon 
(xiii.  42)  seems  to  suggest  the  existence  of  some 
kind  of  public  register.  The  constant  appeal  to 
official  documents  is  a  fuiiher  proof  both  of  the 
preservation  of  public  lecords  and  of  the  sense 
entertained  of  their  importi\nce.  Many  documents 
are  inserted  in  the  text  of  the  history,  but  even 
when  they  are  described  as  "copies"  {^a.vTiypa<pa) 
it  is  questionable  whether  the  writer  designed  to 
give  more  than  the  substance  of  the  originals. 
Some  bear  clear  marks  of  authenticity  (viii.  22-28, 
xii.  6-18),  while  others  are  open  to  grave  difficulties 
and  suspicion ;  but  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the 
letters  of  the  Syrian  kings  generally  appear  to  be 
genuine  (x.  18-20,  25-45,  .xi.  30-37,  xiii.  36-40, 
XV.  2-9).  What  has  been  said  will  show  the 
extent  to  which  the  writer  may  have  used  written 
authorities,  but  while  the  memory  of  the  events 
was  still  recent  it  is  not  possible  that  he  should 
have  confined  himself  to  them.  If  he  was  not 
himself  engaged  in  the  war  of  independence,  he 
must  have  been  familiar  with  those  who  were,  and 
their  information  would  supplement  and  connect  the 
naiTatives  which  were  already  curient,  and  which 
were  probably  confined  to  isolated  passages  in  the 
history.  But  whatever  were  the  sources  of  diffe- 
rent parts  of  the  book,  and  in  whatever  way  written, 
oral,  and  personal  information  was  combined  in  its 
structure,  the  writer  made  the  materials  which  he 
used  truly  his  own  ;  and  the  minute  exactness  of 
the  geogi'aphical  details  cnmes  the  conviction  that 
the  whole  finally  rests  ujjon  the  evidence  of  eye- 
witnesses. 

5.  The  language  of  the  book  does  not  present 
any  striking  peculiarities.  Both  in  diction  and 
structure  it  is  generally  simple  and  unaH'ected,  with 
a  marked  and  yet  not  harsh  hebraistic  character. 
The  number  of  peculiar  words  is  not  very  con- 
siderable, especially  when  compared  with  those 
in  2  Mace.  Some  of  these  are  late  fomis,  as: 
^oyiw  {i^ioyi^o)),  xi.  5,  11;  i^ovSevaicris,  i.  39; 
OTT A.o5uT6a),  xiv.  32  ;  aainSiffKr],  iv.  57  ;  SeiAoo/uai 
iv.  8,  21,  v.  4,  xvi.  6;  o/xripa,  viii.  7,  ix.  53,  &c.; 
a.(paipffj.a,  xv.  5  ;  nXoovi^aSai,  xiii.  39  ;  6|oucria- 
^ecrdat,  x.  70  ;  or  cunipoLaids,  such  as  airoaKopTTiQit 
xi.  55;  iTriffvffTpfCpti),  xiv.  44;  SeiA6\pvxos,  viii. 
15,  xvi.  5;  (povoKTovia,  i.  24.  Other  words  are 
used  in  new  or  strange  senses,  as  aSpvvce,  viii.  14  ; 
TTapdffTuais,  xv.  32 ;  SiaffroXri,  viii.  7.  Some 
plnascs  clearly  express  a  Semitic  idiom  (ii.  48 
Sovvat  Kepas  r^  afxapr.  vi.  23,  x.  62,  xii.  23), 
and  the  influence  of  the  LXX.  is  continually  per- 
ceptible (e.  g.  i.  .54,  ii.  63,  vii.  17,  ix.  23,  >:iv.  9) ; 
but  in  the  main  (comp.  §6)  the  hebraisms  which 
exist  are  such  as  might  have  been  nattualised  in  the 
Hebrew-Greek  of  Palestine.  Josephus  undoubtedly 
made  use  of  the  Greek  text  (Ant.  xii.  5  fF.)  ;  and, 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

apart  from  extfrnal  e\'iJence,  this  might  have  been 
supposed  to  be  the  original.     But, 

6.  The  testimony  of  antiquity  leaves  no  doubt  but 
that  the  book  was  first  written  in  Hebrew.  Origeu, 
in  his  famous  catalogue  of  the  books  of  Scripture 
(ap.  Euseb.  //.  E.  vi.  25),  after  enumerating  the 
contents  of  the  0.  T.  according  to  the  Hebiew 
canon,  adds:  "But  without  [i.e.  excluded  from 
the  uumber  of)  these  is  the  Maccabaean  history 
{to.  MaKKa^aiKa.),  which  is  entitled  Sarbetk 
■Sahanaieiy^  In  giving  the  names  of  the  books 
of  the  0.  T.  he  had  subjoined  the  Hebrew  to  the 
Greek  title  in  exactly  the  same  manner,  and  there 
can  be  therefore  no  question  but  that  he  was 
acquainted  with  a  Hebrew  original  for  the  Alaccci- 
hdica,  as  for  the  other  books.  The  term  Macca- 
haica  is,  however,  somewhat  vague,  though  the 
analogy  of  the  other  parts  of  the  list  requires  that  it 
should  be  limited  to  one  book ;  but  the  statement 
of  Jerome  is  quite  explicit: — "The  iirst  book  of 
Maccabees,"  he  says,  "  I  foimd  in  Hebrew ;  the 
second  is  Greek,  as  can  be  shewn  in  fact  from  its 
style  alone "  {Prol.  Gal.  ad  Libr.  Bcij.').  Ad- 
mitting the  evidence  of  these  two  fathers,  who 
were  alone  able  to  speak  with  authority  on  a  sub- 
ject of  Hebrew  literature  during  the  first  four  cen- 
turies, the  fact  of  the  Hebrew  original  of  the  book 
may  be  supported  by  several  internal  arguments 
which  would  be  in  themselves  insufficient  to  esta- 
blish it.  Some  of  the  hebraisms  are  such  as  sug- 
gest rather  the  immediate  influence  of  a  Hebrew 
text  than  the  free  adoption  of  a  Hebrew  idiom 
(i.  4,  fjevovTO  els  (popov ;  16,  {jToifiaffdi^  rj  /Sao". ; 
29,  Svo  errj  rjixepciv  ;  36,  eis  Sid^oXov  ■KovqpAv  ; 
58,  iv  TTavrl  jxrivl  koI  ixrjvl,  &c.  ;  ii.  57,  i.i.  9, 
a.TroWvfj.evovs  ;  iv.  2,  v.  o7,  fiira  to,  prifxaTa 
ravra,  &c.),  and  difficulties  in  the  Greek  text  are 
removed  by  a  recurrence  to  the  words  which  may 
be  supposed  to  have  been  used  in  the  original 
(i.  28,  'ttI  tovs  KCLTOiKovvras  for  \V2.'^'^'7V  '-,  '• 
36,  ii.  8,  iv.  19,  xvi.  3).  A  question,  however, 
might  be  raised  whether  the  book  was  wi'itten 
in  biblical  Hebrew,  or  in  the  later  Aramaic 
(Chaldee)  ;  but  it  seems  almost  certain  that  the 
writer  took  the  canonical  histories  as  his  model ; 
and  the  use  of  the  original  text  of  Scripture  by  the 
learned  class  would  preserve  the  Hebrew  as  a 
literary  language  when  it  liad  ceased  to  be  the  lan- 
guage of  common  life.  But  it  is  by  no  means 
unlikely  (Grimm,  Exeg.  Handb.  §4)  that  the 
Hebrew  was  corrupted  by  later  idioms,  as  in  the 
i;nost  recent  books  of  the  0.  T.  It  seems  almost 
ijicredible  that  any  one  should  have  Imagined 
that  the  worthless  Megillath  Antiochus,  of  which 
Bartolocci's  Latin  translation  is  printed  by  Fabri- 
cius  {Cod.  Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  1165-74),  was  the 
Hebrew  original  of  which  Origen  and  Jerome 
spoke.'  This  tract,  which  occurs  in  some  of  the 
Jewish  services  for  the  Feast  of  Dedication  (Fabri- 
cius,  I.  c),  is  a  perfectly  unhistorical  nan-ative  of 
some  of  the  incidents  of  the  Maccabaean  war,  in 
which  John  the  high-priest,  and  not  Judas,  plays  by 
far  the  most  conspicuous  part.     The  order  of  events 

b  2ap/3T|9  2aj3avai6A.  This  is  undoubtedly  the  true 
reading  without  llie  p.  All  the  explanations  of  the  word 
with  which  I  am  acquainted  start  from  the  false  reading 
—Sap/Safe— "  The  rod  of  the  renegades"  (7X''J!3"lDi 
Herzfeld),  "  The  sceptre  of  the  prince  of  the  sons  of  God" 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        173 

is  so  entii-ely  disregarded  in  it  that,  after  the  death 
of  Judas,  Mattathias  is  represented  as  leading  his 
other  sons  to  the  decisive  victory  whidi  preceded 
the  purification  of  the  Temple. 

7.  The  whole  structure  of  1  Mace,  points  to  Pa- 
lestine as  the  place  of  its  composition.  This  fact 
itself  is  a  strong  proof  lor  a  Hebrew  original,  for 
there  is  no  trace  of  a  Greek  Palestinian  literature 
during  the  Hasmonaean  dynasty,  though  the  wide 
use  of  the  LXX.  towards  the  close  of  the  period; 
prepared  the  way  for  the  apostolic  writings.  But 
though  the  country  of  the  writer  can  be  thus  fixed 
with  certainty,  there  is  considerable  doubt  as  to  his 
date.  At  the  close  of  the  book  he  mentions,  in  ge- 
neral tei'ms,  the  acts  of  Johannes  Hyrcanus  as 
written  "  in  the  chronicles  of  his  priesthood  from 
the  time  that  he  was  made  high-piiest  after  his 
father"  (xvi.  23,  24).  From  this  it  has  been  con- 
cluded that  he  must  have  written  after  the  death 
of  Hyrcanus,  B.C.  106  ;  and  the  note  in  xiii.  30 
(eojs  TTJs  ■^(ue'pas  TouTrjs),  implies  the  lapse  of  a 
considerable  time  since  the  accession  of  Simon  (B.C. 
143).  On  the  other  hand,  the  omission  of  all 
mention  of  the  close  of  the  government  of  Hyrcanus, 
when  the  note  of  its  commencement  is  given,  may 
be  urged  as  an  argument  for  placing  the  book  late 
in  his  long  reign,  but  before  his  death.  It  cannot 
certainly  have  been  composed  long  after  his  death ; 
for  it  would  have  been  almost  impossible  to  write  a 
history  so  full  of  simple  faith  and  joyous  triumph 
in  the  midst  of  the  troubles  which,  early  in  the  suc- 
ceeding reign,  threatened  too  distinctly  the  coming 
dissolution  of  the  state.  Combining  these  two 
limits,  we  may  place  the  date  of  the  original  book 
between  B.C.  120-100.  The  date  and  person  of  the 
Greek  translator  are  wholly  undetermined  ;  but  it 
is  unhkely  that  such  a  book  would  remain  long 
unknown  or  untranslated  at  Alexandria. 

8.  In  a  religious  aspect  the  book  is  more  remark- 
able negatively  than  positively.  The  historical  in- 
stinct of  the  writer  confines  him  to  the  bare  recital 
of  facts,  and  were  it  not  for  the  words  of  others 
which  he  records,  it  might  seem  that  the  true  theo- 
cratic aspect  of  national  life  had  been  lost.  Not 
only  does  he  relate  no  miracle,  such  as  occur  in 
2  Mace,  but  he  does  not  even  refer  the  trivmijihant 
successes  of  the  Jews  to  divine  interposition."*  It 
is  a  characteristic  of  the  same  kind  that  he  passes 
over  without  any  clear  notice  the  Messianic  hopes, 
whicli,  as  appears  from  the  Psalms  of  Solomon  and 
the  Book  of  Enoch,  were  raised  to  the  highest  pitch 
by  the  successful  struggle  for  independence.  Yet 
he  preserves  faint  traces  of  the  national  belief.  He 
mentions  the  time  from  which  "  a  prophet  was  not 
seen  among  them"  (1  Mace.  ix.  27,  ovk  SxpOri 
irpo(^T}T7js)  as  a  marked  epoch;  and  twice  he  anti- 
cipates the  futiu'e  coming  of  a  prophet  as  of  one  who 
should  make  a  direct  revelation  of  the  will  of  God 
to  His  people  (iv.  46,  fJ.exP'-  "^"v  'Kapaytvt]6rtvai 
irpoc/j^Trji/  Tov  airoKpidfivai.  irepl  avrmv),  and  su- 
persede the  temporary  arrangements  of  a  merely 
civil  dynasty  (xiv.  41,  tov  Hvai  'S.ifxwva  rjjov- 
fj-evov  Kal  apxifpio.  els  rhv  alSiivu  eais  tov  ai'aff- 

<=  The  book  is  found  not  only  in  Hebrew,  but  also  in 
Chaldee  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  441  note). 

d  The  passage  xi.  71,  2,  may  seem  to  contradict  this 
assertion  ;  but  though  somew  rltcrs,  even  from  early  times, 
have  regarded  the  event  as  miraculous,  the  tone  of  the 


W3  IK'.  Kwald)."The  history  of  the  prina^sof  the  sons  |  writer  seems  only  to  be  that  of  one  describing  a  noble  act 
of  God"  (1J2  *"1L*');  !ind  1  cannot  propose  any  satis-     of  successful  valour, 
factory  transcription  of  the  true  reading.  1 


174      maccabp:es,  books  of 

rrjvai  irpo't\>'t)Tr)v  Tn<TT6v).  But  tliu  hope  or  belief 
occupies  no  prominent  place  in  the  book  ;  mid,  like 
the  book  o£  Esther,  its  gi-eatest  merit  is,  that  it  is 
throughout  inspired  by  the  faith  to  which  it  gives 
no  definite  expression,  and  shows,  in  deed  rather 
than  in  word,  both  the  action  of  Providence  and  a 
sustaining  trust  in  His  power. 

9.  The  book  does  not  seem  to  have  been  much 
used  in  early  times.  It  offered  far  less  for  rhe- 
torical purposes  thau  the  second  book  ;  and  the  his- 
tory itself  lay  beyond  the  ordinary  limits  of  Chris- 
tian study.  Tertullian  alludes  generally  to  the 
conduct  of  the  Maccabaean  war  {adv.  Jiid.  4). 
Clement  of  Alexandria  speaks  of  "  the  book  of  the 
Macciibaean  history "  (rb  [/Si/SAioi/]  rwv  MuKKa- 
^a'CKuv,  Strom,  i.  §  123),  as  elsewhere  (Strom,  v. 
§98)  of  "the  epitome"  {rj  raiu  MaKKa^aiKaiv 
iirnofxi}).  Eusebius  assumes  an  acquaint;nice  with 
the  two  books  {Praep.  Ev.  viii.  9,  t)  Sevrepa  rwv 
McLKKajSaiccv)  ;  and  scanty  notices  of  the  first  book, 
but  more  of  the  second,  occur  in  later  writers. 

10.  The  books  of  Maccabees  were  not  included 
by  .lerome  in  his  translation  of  the  Bible.  "  The 
first  book,"  he  says,  "I  found  in  Hebrew" 
{Prol.  Gal.  in  Reg.),  but  he  takes  no  notice  of  the 
Latin  version,  and  certainly  did  not  revise  it.  The 
version  of  the  two  books  which  has  been  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Komish  Vulgate  was  consequently  de- 
rived from  the  old  Latin,  current  before  Jerome's 
time.  This  version  was  obviously  made  from  the 
Greek,  and  in  the  main  follows  it  closely.  Besides 
the  common  text,  Sabatier  has  published  a  version 
of  a  considerable  part  of  the  first  book  (cap.  i.-xiv. 
1)  from  a  very  ancient  Paris  MS.  {S.  Germ.  15) 
(ccnnorum  saltern  nongentorum,  in  1751),  which 
exhibits  an  earlier  form  of  the  text.  Grimm, 
strangely  misquoting  Sabatier  (Exeg.  Handb.  ^10), 
inverts  the  relation  of  the  two  versions  ;  but  a  com- 
parison of  the  two,  even  for  a  few  verses,  can  leave 
no  doubt  but  that  the  St.  Germain  MS.  represents 
the  most  ancient  text,  following  the  Greek  words 
and  idioms  with  a  slavish  fidelity  (Sabatier,  p.  1014, 
"  Quemadmodum  autem  etiamnum  inveniri  possunt 
MSS.  codices  qui  Psalmos  ante  omnem  Hieronymi 
correctionem  exhibeant,  ita,  pariter  inventus  est  a 
nobis  codex,  qui  libri  primi  Machabaeorum  partem 
continet  majorem,  minime  quidem  correctam,  sed 
qualis  olim  in  nonullis  MSS.  antiquis  reperiebatur"). 
Mai  {Spicil.  Bum.  ix.  App.  60)  has  published  a  frag- 
ment of  another  Latin  translation  (c.  ii.  49-64), 
which  Jitters  widely  from  both  texts.  The  Syriac 
version  given  in  the  Polyglotts  is,  like  the  Latin,  a 
close  rendering  of  the  Greek.  From  the  rendering 
of  the  proper  names,  it  has  been  supposed  that  the 
translator  lived  while  the  Semitic  forms  were  still 
current  (Grimm,  Einl.  §  10)  ;  but  the  arguments 
which  have  been  urged  to  show  that  the  Syriac 
was  derived  directly  from  the  Hebrew  original,  are 
of  no  weight  against  the  overwhelming  proof  of  the 
influence  of  the  Greek  text. 

11.  Of  the  early  commentators  on  the  frst  two 
books  of  Maccabees,  the  most  important  are  Di-usius 
and  Grotius,  whose  notes  are  reprinted  in  the 
Critici  Sacri.  The  annotations  of  Calmet  {Com- 
mentaire  literal,  &c.,  Paris,  1724)  and  Michaclis 
(  Uebersetzung  der  1  Blacc.  B.'s  mit  Anmerk.  Leipz. 
1778),  are  of  permanent  interest;  but  for  practical 
use  the  manual  of  Grimm  {Kiirzgefasslcs  Exeg. 
Handb.  zu  den  Apokrjiphen,  &c.,  Leipz.  1853-7) 
supplies  everything  which  the  student  can  require. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

The  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. — 1.  The 
history  of  the  Second  Book  of  the  Maccabees  begins 
some  years -earlier  than  that  of  the  First  Book,  and 
closes  with  the  victory  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  over 
Nicanor.  It  thus  embraces  a  period  of  twenty 
years,  from  B.C.  180  (?)  to  H.c.  161.  For  the 
ievf  events  noticed  during  the  earlier  years  it  is 
the  chief  authority  ;  dm  ing  the  remainder  of  the 
time  the  narrative  goes  over  the  same  ground  as 
1  Mace,  but  with  very  considerable  '  differences. 
The  first  two  chapters  are  taken  up  by  two  letters- 
supposed  to  be  addressed  by  the  Palestinian  to  the 
Alexandrine  Jews,  and  by  a  sketch  of  the  author's 
plan,  which  pi'oceeds  without  any  perceptible  break 
from  the  close  of  the  second  letter.  The  main  nar- 
rative occupies  the  remainder  of  the  book.  This 
presents  several  natural  divisions,  which  appear  to 
coincide  with  the  "  five  books  "  of  Jason  on  which 
it  was  based.  The  first  (c.  iii.)  contains  the  history 
of  Heliodorus,  as  illustrating  the  fortunes  of  the 
Temple  before  the  schism  and  apostasy  of  part  of 
the  nation  (cii-.  li.c.  180).  The  second  (iv.-vii.) 
gives  varied  details  of  the  beginning  and  course  of  the 
great  persecution — the  murder  of  Ouias,  Vhe  crimes 
of  Menelaus,  the  martyrdom  of  Eleazar,  and  of  the 
mother  with  her  seven  sons  (B.C.  175-167).  The 
third  (viii.-x.  9)  follows  the  fortunes  of  Judas  to 
the  triumphant  restoration  of  the  Temple  service 
(B.C.  166,  165).  The  fourth  (x.  10-xiii.)  includes 
the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator  (B.C.  164-162). 
The  fifth  (xiv.,  xv.)  records  the  treachery  of  Alci- 
mus,  the  mission  of  Nicanor,  and  the  crowning 
success  of  Judas  (B.C.  162,  161).  Each  of  these 
divisions  is  closed  by  a  phrase  which  seems  to  mark 
the  end  of  a  definite  subject  (iii.  40,  vii.  42,  x.  9, 
xiii.  26,  XV.  37) ;  and  they  correspond  in  fact  with 
distinct  stages  in  the  national  struggle. 

2.  The  relation  of  the  letters  with  which  the  book 
opens  to  the  substance  of  the  book  is  extremely 
obscure.  The  first  (i.  1-9)  is  a  solemn  invitation 
to  the  Egyptian  Jews  to  celebrate  "  the  feast  of 
tabernacles  in  the  month  Casleu"  (i.e.  the  feast  of 
the  Dedication,  i.  9),  as  before  they  had  sympathised 
with  their  brethren  in  Judaea  in  "  the  extremity  of 
their  trouble"  (i.  7).  The  second  (i.  10-ii.  18, 
according  to  the  received  division),  which  bears  a 
formal  salutation  from  "  the  council  and  Judas  "  to 
"  Aristobulus  .  .  .  and  the  Jews  iu  Egypt,"  is  a 
strange,  rambling  collection  of  legendary  stories  of 
the  death  of  "  Antiochus,"  of  the  preservation  of 
the  sacred  fire  and  its  recovery  by  Nehemiah,  of 
the  hiding  of  the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary  by  Jere- 
miah, ending — if  indeed  the  letter  can  be  said  to 
have  any  end-^with  the  same  exhortation  to  observe 
the  feast  of  dedication  (ii.  10-18).  For  it  is  im- 
possible to  point  out  any  break  in  the  construction 
or  style  after  ver.  19,  so  that  the  writer  passes 
insensibly  from  the  epistolary  form  in  ver.  16  to 
that  of  the  epitomator  in  ver.  29  (5okcS).  For 
this  I'eason  some  critics,  both  in  ancient  and  modei'n 
times  (Wernsdorf,  §  35,  123),  have  considered  that 
the  whole  book  is  intended  to  be  included  in  the 
letter.*  It  seems  more  natural  to  suppose  that  the 
author  found  the  letters  already  in  existence  when 
he  undertook  to  abridge  the  work  of  Jason,  and 
attached  his  own  introduction-  to  the  second  letter 
for  the  convenience  of  transition,  without  consider- 
ing that  this  would  necessai'ily  make  the  whole 
appear  to  be  a  letter.  The  letters  themselves  caa 
lay  no  claims  to  authenticity.     It  is  possible  that 


"  The  subscription  il<  Cod.  Alex.  is'IovSa  tou  MaK/ca/3aiou  -rrpa^etav  ima-roX-n ■ 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

tliey  may  rest  upon  some;  real  correspoudence  between 
Jerusalem  and  Alexandria  ;  but  the  extravagance  of 
the  fables  which  they  contain  makes  it  impossible 
to  accept  them  in  their  present  form  as  the  work  of 
the  Jewish  Council.  Though  it  may  readily  be 
admitted  that  the  fabulousness  of  the  contents  of 
a  letter  is  no  absolute  proof  of  its  spuriousness,  yet 
on  the  other  hand  the  stories  may  be  (as  in  this 
case)  so  entirely  unworthy  of  what  we  know  of  the 
position  of  the  alleged  writers,  as  to  betray  the 
work  of  an  impostor  or  an  interpolator.  Some  have 
supposed  that  the  original  language  of  one,'  or  of 
both  the  letters  was  Hebrew,  but  this  cannot  be 
made  out  by  any  conclusive  arguments.  On  the 
other  hand  there  is  no  ground  at  all  for  believing 
that  they  were  made  up  by  the  author  of  the  book. 

3.  The  writerhimself  distinctly  indicates  the  source 
of  his  nan-ative — "  the  five  books  of  Jason  of  Cyrene" 
(ii.  23),  of  which  he  designed  to  furnish  a  short 
and  agreeable  epitome  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
would  be  deterred  from  studying  the  larger  work. 
[Jasox.]  His  own  labour,  which  he  describes  in 
strong  terms  (ii.  26,  7  ;  comp.  xv.  38,  39),  was 
entirely  confined  to  condensation  and  selection  ;  all 
investigation  of  detail  he  declares  to  be  the  peculiar 
duty  of  the  original  historian.  It  is  of  course  im- 
possible to  determine  how  far  the  colouring  of  the 
events  is  due  to  Jason,  but  "  the  Divine  manifesta- 
tions "  in  behalf  of  the  Jews  are  enumerated  among 
the  subjects  of  which  he  treated  ;  and  no  sufficient, 
reasons  have  been  alleged  to  show  that  the  writer 
either  followed  any  other  authority  in  his  later 
chapters,  or  altered  the  general  character  of  the 
history  which  he  epitomized.  Of  Jason  himself 
nothing  more  is  known  than  may  be  gleaned  from 
this  mention  of  him.  It  has  been  conjectured 
(Herzfeld,  Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Isr.  i.  455)  that  he 
was  the  same  as  the  son  of  Eleazer  (1  Mace.  viii. 
17),  who  was  sent  by  Judas  as  envoy  to  Rome 
after  the  defeat  of  Nicanor ;  and  the  circumstance 
of  this  mission  has  been  used  to  explain  the  limit 
to  which  he  extended  his  history,  as  being  that 
which  coincided  with  the  extent  of  his  personal  ob- 
servation. There  ai'e  certainly  many  details  in  the 
book  which  show  a  close  and  accurate  knowledge 
(iv.  21,  29  ff.,  viii.  1  ff.,  ix.  29,  x.  12,  13,  siv.  1), 
and  the  errors  in  the  order  of  events  may  be  due 
wholly,  or  in  part,  to  the  epitomator.  The  ques- 
tionable interpretation  of  facts  in  2  Mace,  is  no 
objection  to  the  truth  of  the  facts  themselves  ;  and 
when  due  allowance  is  made  for  the  overwrought 
j-cndering  of  many  scenes,  and  for  the  obvious  eftbrt 
of  the  wiiter  todisco^'er  everywhere  signs  of  provi- 
dential interference,  the  historic  worth  of  the  book 
appears  to  be  considerably  greater  than  it  is  com- 
monly esteemed  to  be.  Though  Hei'zfeld's  con- 
jecture may  be  untenable,  the  original  work  of 
.fason  prolinbly  extended  no  farther  than  the  epi- 
tome, for  the  descrijition  of  its  contents  (2  Mace, 
ii.  19-22)  does  not  carry  us  beyond  the  close  of 
2  Mace.  The  "  brethren  "  of  Judas,  whose  exploits 
he  related,  were  already  distinguished  during  the 
lifetime  of  "  the  Maccabee"  (1  Mace.  v.  1 7  ff.,  24  IF., 
vi.  43-6;  2  Mace.  viii.  22-29). 

4.  The  district  of  Cyrene  was  most  closely  united 
with  that  of  Alexandria.  In  both  the  predominance 
of  Greek  literature  and  the(Jreek  language  was  abso- 
lute. The  work  of  Jason — like  the  jwems  of  Callima- 
ehus — must  therefore  have  been  composed  ui  Greek ; 

f  F.  SchlUnkes,  Epxstolae  quae,  2  ^Tac.  i.  1-9.  legitur 
explicatio.  Colon.  1S44. 


MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF         175 

antl  the  style  of  the  epitome,  as  Jerome  remarked, 
proves  beyond  doubt  that  the  Greek  text  is  the  original 
{Prol.  Gal.  "  Secundus  [Machabaeorum] Graecus est ; 
quod  ex  ipsa  quoque  (ppdcrfi  probari  potest").  It  is 
scarcely  less  certain  that  2  Mace,  was  compiled  at 
Alexandria.  The  characteristics  of  the  style  and 
language  are  essentially  Alexandrine  ;  and  though 
the  Alexandrine  style  may  have  prevailed  in  Cyre- 
naica,  the  form  of  the  allusion  to  Jason  shows 
clearly  that  the  compiler  was  not  his  fellow-coun- 
tryman. But  all  attempts  to  determine  more  ex- 
actly who  the  compiler  was  are  mere  groundless 
guesses,  without  even  the  semblance  of  plausibility. 

5.  The  style  of  the  book  is  extremely  uneven. 
At  times  it  is  elaborately  ornate  (iii.  15-39,  v.  20, 
vi.  12-16,  23-28,  vii.  &c.) ;  and  again,  it  is  so  rude 
and  broken,  as  to  seem  more  like  notes  for  an  epi- 
tome than  a  finished  composition  (xiii.  19-26)  ;  but 
it  nowhere  attains  to  the  simple  energy  and  pathos 
of  the  first  book.  The  vocabulary  eoiTesponds  to 
the  style.  It  abounds  in  new  or  unusual  words. 
Many  of  these  are  forms  which  belong  the  decay  of 
a  language,  as :  aWo(pv\tafi6s,  iv.  13,  vi.  24; 
'E\\rivi(Tfi6s,  vi.  13  (^ifi<pavia'ix6s,  iii.  9)  ;  irarr- 
fx6s,  vii.  37  ;  6ciipaKt(riJ.6s,  v.  3  ;  (rir\ayxvi(riJ.6s, 
vi.  7,  21;  vii.  42;  or  compounds  which  betray  a 
false  pursuit  of  emphasis  or  precision :  Sienirifj.- 
ttAtj/Ui,  iv.  40;  tirev\al3u(T0ai,  xiv.  18;  kutsv- 
9tKTe7u,  xiv.  43  ;  TrpoffavaXeyecrOat,  viii.  19  ; 
■Kpo(TVTrofj.iixvfi(TKCii ,  XV.  9  ;  (TvveKKfvrflv,  v.  26. 
Others  words  are  employed  in  novel  senses,  as : 
SevTepoXoye7i/,  xiii.  22;  flcrKVK\i7(r6aL,  ii.  24; 
(vanavrriTos,  xiv.  9  ;  ire^pevufxtvos,  xi.  4  ;  \f/vxt- 
Kus,  iv.  37,  xiv.  24.  '  Others  bear  a  sense  which  is 
common  in  late  Greek,  as :  a.K\7)pe7v,  xiv.  8 ;  ava- 
Cvyf),  ix.  2,  xiii.  26  ;  SiaAT/i^is,  iii.  32  ;  ivaire- 
peiSai,  ix.  4  ;  (ppvacrffofjiai,  vii.  34  ;  irepifrKvOi^w, 
vii.  4.  Others  appear  to  be  peculiar  to  this  book, 
as :  SidcrraXcrts,  xiii.  25 ;  SvcrireTTifia,  v.  20 ; 
TTpoairvpovv,  xiv.  11  ;  TToKeiJ,OTpo(pilv,  x.  14,  15  ; 
oirKoXoyelv,  viii.  27,  31  ;  aTTivQavari^nv,  vi.  28  ; 
So|iKos,  viii.  35  ;  avSpo\oyia,  xii.  43.  Hebraisms 
are  very  rare  (viii.  1.5,  ix.  5,  xiv.  24).  Idiomatic 
Greek  phrases  are  much  more  common  (iv.  40,  xii. 
22,  XV.  12,  &c.) ;  and  the  writer  evidently  had  a 
considerable  command  over  the  Greek  language, 
though  his  taste  was  deformed  by  a  love  of  rhe- 
torical effect. 

6.  In  the  absence  of  all  evidence  as  to  the  person 
of  Jason — for  the  conjecture  of  Herzfeld  (§3)  is 
wholly  unsupported  by  proof — there  are  no  dato 
which  fix  the  time  of  the  composition  of  his  ori- 
ginal work,  or  of  the  epitome  given  in.  2  Mace, 
within  very  naiTow  limits.  The  superior  limit  of 
the  age  of  the  epitome,  thougli  not  of  Jason's  work, 
is  determined  by  the  year  124  B.C.,  which  is  men- 
tioned in  one  of  the  introductory  letters  (i.  10); 
but  there  is  no  ground  for  assigning  so  great  an 
antiquity  to  the  present  book.  It  has,  indeed,  been 
concluded  from  xv.  37,  an  eKiivwv  rwv  KaipSiv 
KparriOiiaris  r^y  7i:6\€(iis  inrh  rSiv  ''E.^paiwv  — 
which  is  written  in  the  person  of  the  epitomator, 
that  it  must  have  been  composed  before  the  defeat 
and  death  of  Judas;  but  the  import  of  tlie  words 
appears  to  be  satisfied  by  the  religious  supremacy 
and  the  uninterrupted  celebration  of  the  Temple 
service,  which  the  Jews  maintained  till  the  final 
ruin  of  their  city  ;  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
is  the  only  inferior  limit,  below  which  the  book 
cannot  be  placed.  The  supposed  reference  to  the 
book  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ifebrews  (Heb.  xi.  35, 
"  and  others  were  tortured ;"  comp.  vi.  18-vii.  42) 


176        MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF 

may  perhaps  be  rather  a  reference  to  the  current 
tradition  than  to  the  written  text ;  and  Josephus  in 
his  history  shows  no  acquaintance  with  its  contents. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  probable  that  the  author  of 
4  Mace,  used  either  2  Mace,  or  the  work  of  Jason  ; 
but  this  at  most  could  only  determine  that  tlie 
book  was  written  belbre  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, which  is  already  clear  from  xv.  37.  There 
is  no  explicit  mention  of  the  book  before  the  time 
of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  v.  14,  §  98). 
Internal  evidence  is  quite  insufficient  to  settle  the 
date,  which  is  thus  left  undetermined  within  the 
limits  124  B.C — 70  A.C.  If  a  conjecture  be  ad- 
missible, I  should  be  inclined  to  place  the  original 
v/ork  of  Jason  not  later  than  100  B.C.,  and  the  epi- 
tome half  a  centmy.  later.  It  is  quite  credible  that 
a  work  mi2;ht  have  been  long  current  at  Alexandria 
before  it  was  known  to  the  Jews  of- Palestine. 

7.  In  order  to  estimate  the  historical  worth  of 
the  book  it  is  necessary  to  consider  separately  the 
two  divisions  into  which  it  falls.  The  narrative  in 
iii.-vii.  is  in  part  anterior  (iii.-iv.  6)  and  in  part 
(iv.  7-vii.)  supplementary  to  the  brief  summary  in 

1  Mace.  i.  10-64:  that  in  viii.-xv.  is,  as  a  whole, 
parallel  with  1  Mace,  iii.-vii.  In  the  first  section 
the  book  itself  is,  in  the  main,  the  sole  source  of  in- 
formation :  in  the  second,  its  contents  can  be  tested 
by  the  trustworthy  records  of  the  first  book.  It 
will  be  best  to  take  the  second  section  first,  for  the 
character  of  the  book  does  not  vary  much  ;  and  if 
this  can  once  be  determined  from  sufficient  evidence, 
the  result  may  be  extended  to  those  parts  which 
are  independent  of  other  testimony.  The  chief 
differences  between  the  fii'st  and  second  books  lie  in 
the  account  of  the  campaigns  of  Lysias  and  Timo- 
theus.  Differences  of  detail  will  always  arise  where 
the  means  of  information  are  partial  and  separate; 
but  the  differences  alleged  to  exist  as  to  these  events 
are  more  serious.  In  1  Mace.  iv.  26-35  we  read 
of  an  invasion  of  Judaea  by  Lysias  from  the  side  of 
Idumaea,  in  which  Judas  met  him  at  Bethsura  and 
inflicted  upon  him  a  severe  defeat.  In  consequence 
of  this  Lysias  retired  to  Antioch  to  make  greater 
preparations  for  a  new  attack,  while  Judas  under- 
took the  restoration  of  the  sanctuary.  In  2  Mace, 
the  first  mention  of  Lysias  is  on  the  accession  of 
Antiochus  Eupator  (x.  11).  Not  long  after  this 
he  is  said  to  have  invaded  Judaea  and  sufl'ered  a 
defeat  at  Bethsura,  in  consequence  of  which  he 
made  peace  with  Judas,  giving  him  favourable 
terms  (xi.).  A  later  invasion  is  mentioned  in  both 
books,  which  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus 
Eupator  (1  Mace.  vi.  17-50;  2  Mace.  xiii.  2  ff.), 
in  which  Bethsura  fell  into  the  hands  of  Lysias. 
It  is  then  necessary  either  to  suppose  that  there 
were  three  distinct  invasions,  of  which  the  first  is 
mentioned    only  in   1   Mace,  the   second    only  in 

2  Mace,  and  the  third  in  both ;  or  to  consider  the 
narrative  in  2  Mace.  x.  1  ff.  as  a  misplaced  version 
of  one  of  the  other  invasions  (for  the  history  iu 
1  Mace.  iv.  26-61  bears  every  mark  of  truth)  :  a 
supposition  which  is  confirmed  by  the  character  of 
the  details,  and  the  difficulty  of  reconciling  the  sup- 
posed results  with  the  events  which  immediately 
followed.  It  is  by  no  means  equally  clear  that 
there  is  any  mistake  in  2  Mace,  as  to  the  history 
of  Timotheus.  The  details  in  1  Mace.  v.  11  ff.  are 
quite  reconcileable  with  those  in  2  Mace.  xii.  2  if., 


g  The  following  is  the  parallelism  which  Piitritius  (Oe 
cows.  utri.  lib.  Mace.  175-246)  endeavours  to  establish  be- 
tween the  common  narratives  of  i.and  ii.  Mace.  When 
two  or  more  passages  aie  placed  oiiposite  lo  one,  it  Is  to  be 


MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF 

and  it  seems  certain  that  both  books  i-ecord  the 
same  events ;  but  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  for 
supposing  that  1  Mace.  v.  6  ff.  is  parallel  with 
2  Mace.  X.  24-37.  The  similarity  of  the  names 
Jazer  and  Gazara  probably  gave  rise  to  the  confu- 
sion of  the  two  events,  which  differ  in  fact  in 
almost  all  their  circumstances ;  though  the  identi- 
fication of  the  Timotheus  mentioned  in  2  Mace.  x. 
24,  with  the  one  mentioned  in  viii.  30,  seems  to 
have  been  designed  to  distinguish  him  from  some 
other  of  the,  same  name.  With  these  exceptions, 
the  general  outlines  of  the  history  in  the  two  books 
are  the  same ;  but  the  details  are  almost  always 
independent  and  different.  The  numbers  given  in 
2  Mace,  often  represent  incredible  results  :  e.  g.  viii. 
2u,  30  ;  X.  23,  31  ;  xi.  11 ;  xii.  16,  19,  23,  26,  28  ; 
XV.  27.  Some  of  the  statements  are  obviously  in- 
correct, and  seem  to  have  arisen  from  an  erroneous 
interpretation  and  embellishment  of  the  original 
source:  vii.  3  (the  presence  of  Antiochus  at  the 
death  of  the  Jewish  martyi's)  ;  ix.  (the  death  of 
Antiochus);  x.  11,  &c.  (the  relation  of  the  boy- 
king  Antiochus  Eupator  to  Lysias) ;  xv.  31,  35  (the 
recovery  of  Acra)  ;  xiv.  7  (the  forces  of  Demetrius) 
But  on  the  other  hand  many  of  the  peculiar  details 
seem  to  be  such  as  must  have  been  derived  from 
immediate  testimony:  iv.  29-50  (the  intrigues  of 
Menelaus)  ;  vi.  2  (the  temple  at  Gerizim)  ;  x.  12, 
13  ;  xiv.  1  (the  landing  of  Demetrius  at  Tripolis)  ; 
•viii.  1-7  (the  character  of  the  first  exploits  of  Judas). 
The  relation  between  the  two  books  may  be  not 
inaptly  represented  by  that  existing  between  the 
books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles.  In  each  case  the 
later  book  was  composed  with  a  special  design, 
which  regulated  the  character  of  the  materials 
employed  for  its  construction.  But  as  the  design 
in  2  Mace,  is  openly  avowed  by  the  compiler,  so  it 
seems  to  have  been  carried  out  with  considerable 
license.  Yet  his  errors  appear  to  be  those  of  one 
who  interprets  history  to  support  his  cause,  rather 
than  of  one  who  falsifies  its  substance.  The  ground- 
work of  facts  is  true,  but  the  dress  in  which  the 
tacts  are  presented  is  due  in  part  at  least  to  the 
narrator.  It  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  the  error 
with  regard  to  the  first  campaign  of  Lysias  arose 
from  the  mode  in  which  it  was  introduced  by  Jason 
as  an  introduction  to  the  more  important  measui-es 
of  Lysias  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator.  In 
other  places  (as  very  obviously  in  xiii.  19  ff.)  the 
compiler  may  have  disregarded  the  historical  de- 
pendence of  events  while  selecting  those  which 
were  best  suited  for  the  support  of  his  theme.  If 
these  remarks  are  true,  it  follows  that  2  Mace, 
viii.-xv.  is  to  be  regarded  not  as  a  connected  and 
complete  history,  but  as  a  series  of  special  incidents 
from  the  hfe  of  Judas,  illustrating  the  providential 
interference  of  God  in  behalf  of  His  people,  true  in 
substance,  but  embellished  in  form ;  and  this  view 
of  the  book  is  supported  by  the  character  of  the 
earlier  chapters,  in  which  the  narrative  is  un- 
checked by  independent  evidence.  There  is  not  any 
ground  for  questioning  the  main  facts  iu  the  history 
of  Heliodorus  (ch.  iii.)  or  Menelaus  (iv.);  and  while 
it  is  very  probable  that  the  narratives  of  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  martyrs  (vi.  vii.)  are  highly  coloured; 
yet  the  grounds  of  the  accusation,  the  replies  of  the 
accused,  and  the  forms  of  torture,  in  their  essential 
characteristics,  seem  perfectly  authentic.B 

understood  that  the  first  only  has  a  parallel  in  the  other 
narrative : — 

1  Macc.  2  Macc. 

i.  11-16.  Iv.  7-12:  13-20. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

8.  Besides  the  dilFerences  which  exist  between 
the  two  books  oC  Maccabees  as  to  the  sequence  and 
details  of  common  events,  there  is  considerable  diffi- 
culty as  to  the  chronological  data  which  they  give. 
Both  follow  the  Seleucian  era  ("  the  era  of  con- 
tracts;" "of  the  (ireek  kingdom;"  1  Mace.  i.  10, 
ivtrei  .  .  .  /BarriAeias 'EAA':^i'coi'),  but  ill  some  cases 
in  which  the  two  books  give  the  date  of  the  same 
event,  the  first  book  gives  a  date  one  year  later 
than  the  second  (1  Mace.  vi.  16  ||  2  Mace.  \\.  21, 
33;  1  Mace.  vi.  20  ||  2  Mace.  .xiii.  1)  ;  yet  on  the 
other  hand  they  agree  in  1  Jlacc.  vii.  1  ||  2  Mace. 
xiv.  4.  This  discrepancy  seems  to  be  due  not  to  a 
mere  error,  but  to  a  diH'erence  of  reckoning  ;  for  all 
attempts  to  explain  away  the  discrejsancy  are  un- 
tenable. The  true  era  of  the  Seleucidae  began  in 
October  {Dius)  B.C.  312 ;  but  there  is  evidence 
that  considerable  variations  existed  in  Syria  in  the 
reckoning  by  it.  It  is  then  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  discrepancies  in  the  books  of  Maccabees, 
which  proceeded  from  independent  and  widely- 
separated  sources,  are  to  be  referred  to  this  con- 
fusion ;  and  a  very  probable  mode  of  explaining  (at 
least  in  part)  the  origin  of  the  difference  has  been 
supported  by  most  of  the  best  chronologers.  Though 
the  Jews  may  have  reckoned  two  teginnings  to  the 
year  from  the  time  of  the  Exodus  [Chronology, 
vol.  i.  p.  315],  yet  it  appears  that  the  biblical  dates 
are  always  reckoned  by  the  so-called  ecclesiastical 
year,  which  began  with  Nisan  (April),  and  not  by 
the  civil  year,  which  was  afterwards  in  common  use 
(.los.  Ant.  i.  3,  §3),  which  began  with  Tisri  (Oc- 
tober: comp.  Patritius,  De  Cons.  Mace.  p.  33  fF.). 
Now  since  the  writer  of  1  Mace,  was  a  Palestinian 
Jew,  and  followed  the  ecclesiastical    year   in    his 


1  Macc. 

2  Macc.- 

i.  n. 

...  iv.  21a;  216-50;  v. 

1-4. 

i.  18-20. 

— 

— 

...  V.  ."i-lO. 

i.  21-240. 

...  V.  11-16;   17-20. 

i.  246. 

...  V.  21;  22-23. 

i.  30-32 ;  33-39. 

...  V.  24-26. 

i.  40a ;  406-42. 

...  V.  27. 

i.  43;  44-48. 

...  vi.  1. 

i.  49;  50-51. 

...  vi.  2. 

— 

...    vi.  3-7. 

i.  62-54;  55,56;  57-02. 

...  vi.  8,9. 

i.  63,  64. 

...  vi.  10;  12-17. 

i.  65-67. 

— 

— 

...  vi.  18-31. 

ii.  1-30. 



ii.  31 ;  32-37. 

...  vi.  lla. 

ii.  38. 

...  vi.  116. 

— 

...  vii.  1-42. 

ii.  39-70. 



iii.  1-9;  10-37. 

...  viii.  1-7. 

— 

...  viii.  8;  9-11. 

Iii.  3S,  39;  .40,  41. 



iii.  42. 

...  viii.  12a;  126-21. 

iii.  43-54. 



iii.  55  ;  56-60. 

...  viii.  22. 

iv.  1-12. 



iv.  13-16;  17-22. 

...   viii.  23-26. 

iv.  23-25. 

...  viii.  27  ;  28-36. 

vi.  lo;  iv.  26,  27. 



vi.  16-4. 

..    ix.  1-3;  4-10. 

iv.  28-35 

— 

iv.  35-43a;   1.16-4G. 

...  .\.  l-.3a. 

iv.  47-61. 

...  X.  .36-8;  9-13. 

vi.  5-8. 

— 

V.  l-5o. 

...   x.  14-18;   19-22. 

V.  56 :  6-8. 

...   X.  23 

vi.  9-13. 

...  ix.  11-17  ;  18-27. 

— 

...   X.  24-38;  xi.  1-4. 

MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        177 

reckoning  of  months  (1  Macc.  iv.  52),  it  is  pro- 
bable that  he  may  have  commenced  the  Seleucian 
year  not  in  autumn  {Tisri),  but  in  spring  {Nisan).^ 
Tlie  narrative  of  1  Macc.  x.  in  fact  demands  a 
longer  period  than  could  be  obtained  (1  Macc.  x.  1, 
21,  fourteen  days)  on  the  hypothe.sis  that  the  year 
began  with  Tisri.  If,  however,  the  year  began  in 
Nisan  (reckoning  from  spring  312  B.C.),'  the 
events  which  fell  in  the  last  half  of  the  true 
Seleucian  year  would  be  dated  a  year  forward, 
while  the  true  and  the  Jewish  dates  would  agree 
in  the  first  half  of  the  year.  Nor  is  there  any 
difficulty  in  supposing  that  the  two  events  assigned 
to  difrerent  years  (Wernsdorf,  De  Fide  Macc.  §9) 
happened  in  one  half  of  the  year.  On  other  grounds, 
indeed,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  dilference  in  the 
reckoning  of  the  two  books  is  still  greater  than  is 
thus  accounted  for.  The  C'haldaeans,  as  is  proved 
by  good  authority  (Ptol.  Ms^.  trvvr.  ap.  Clinton, 
F.  II.  Ill,  350,  370),  dated  their  Seleucian  eia 
one  year  later  than  the  true  time  from  311  B.C., 
and  probably  from  October  {Dius ;  comp.  2  Jlacc. 
xi.  21,  33).  If,  as  is  quite  possible,  the  writer  of 
2  Macc. — or  rather  Jason  of  Cyrcne,  whom  he 
epitomized — used  the  Chaldaean  dates,  there  may  be 
a  maximum  difference  between  the  two  Ijooks  of  a 
year  and  half,  which  is  sufficient  to  explain  the 
difficulties  of  the  chronology  of  the  events  connected 
with  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (Ideler,  i. 
531-534,  quoted  and  suppoited  by  Browne,  Ordo 
Saeclorum,  489,  490.  Comp.  Clinton,  Fasti  Hell. 
iii.  367  ff.,  who  takes  a  ditierent  view  ;  Patritius, 
I.  c. ;  and  Wernsdorf,  §ix.  fl'.,  who  states  the  diffi- 
culties with  great  acuteness). 

9.  The  most  interestincr  feature  in  2  Macc.  is  its 


1  Macc. 

vi.  14,  15. 
vi.  16;  17a. 

V.  9;  10-13;  14-20. 
vi.  176. 

v.  21a;  23a;  24;   25-28 

V.  29. 

v.  30-34;  216-23a;  35,36 

V.  55-62. 

V.  37-39;  40-43a. 

V.  436-44. 

V.  45-65a. 

V.  656-68;  vi.  18-27 

vi.  28-30. 

vi.  31 ;  32-48. 

vi.  49-51 ;  55-59. 

vi.  60-62a. 

vi.  626-63;  vii.  1-24. 

vii.  25. 
vii.  26. 
vii.  27-38. 
vii.  39,  40a. 
vii.  406-50. 


2  Macc 

...  ix.  28. 

...  xi.  5-12;  13-15a. 

...  xii.  1-5. 

...  xii.  6-17;  ix.  29. 

...  xi.  156-26;  27-38. 
...  xii.  176;  18,  19. 


..  xii.  20,  21. 
..  xii.  22-26. 
..   xii.  27-33;   34-46. 

..  xiii.  1,2;   3-17. 

..   xiii.  18-21. 

..  xiii.  22,  23a. 

..  xiii.  236-24. 

..  xiii.  25,  26. 

..  xiv.  1-2. 

,.  xiv.  3-5;  6-11. 

..  xiv.  12,  13  ;   14-29. 

..  xiv.30-36;  37-16;  XV.  1-21. 

..   XV.  22-40. 


This  arrangement,  however,  is  that  of  an  apologist  for 
tlie  boolcs ;  and  the  tesselation  of  passages,  no  less  than 
the  large  amount  of  passages  peculiar  to  each  boolc,  indi- 
cates how  little  real  parallelism  there  is  between  them. 

'>  In  2  Macc.  xv.  36  the  same  reckonins  of  niontlis  occurs, 
but  with  a  distinct  reference  to  the  Palestinian  decree. 

•  It  is,  liowever,  possible  that  the  years  may  liave  been 
dated  from  the  following  spring  (311  n.f.);  in  wliicli  ai.se 
tlie  Jewish  and  true  years  would  coincide  for  tlie  hist  lialf 
of  the  year,  and  during  tlio  first  half  tlio  .lewibli  date 
would  fall  sliovt  by  one  year  (Hcrzfcld,  (lack.  d.  Vulkcs 
Isr.  i.  419). 


178        MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

marked  religious  character,  by  which  it  is  clearly 
distinguished  from  the  first  book.      "  The  m:vni- 
lestations  iiTri<pdueiai)  made  from  heaven  on  behalf 
of  those  who  were  zealous  to  behave  manfully  in 
defence  of  Judaism"   (2  Mace.  ii.  21)   form   the 
staple  of  the  book.     The  events  which  are  relate! 
historically  in  the  former  book  are  in  this  regarded 
theocratically,  if  the  word  may  be  used.    The  cala- 
mities of  persecution  and  the  desolation  of  God's 
people  are  definitely  referred  to  a  temporai'v  visita- 
tion of  His  anger  (v.  17-20,  vi.  12-17,  vii.  32,  33), 
which  shows  itself  even  in  details  of  the  war  (xii.  40  ; 
comp.  Josh.  vii.).     Before  his  great  victory  Judas 
is  represented  as  addressing  "  the  Lord  that  worketh 
wonders"  {TepaTOiroi6s)  with  the  prayer  that,  as 
once  His  angel  slew  the  host  of  the  Assyrians,  so 
then  He  would  "  send   a   good    angel  before  His 
armies  for  a  fear  and  dread  to  their  enemies"  (xv. 
22-24;  comp.  1  Mace.  vii.  41,  42).    A  great  "mani- 
festation" wrought  the  punishment  of  Heliodorus 
(iii.  24-29):   a  similar  vision  announced  his  cure 
(iii.  33,  4).     Heavenly  portents  for  "  forty  days  " 
(eirKpavna,  v.  4)  fbreshewed  the  coming  judgment 
(v.  2,  3).     "  When  the  battle  waxed  strong  five 
comely  men  upon  horses  "  appear,  of  whom  two 
cover   Maccabaeus   from   all   danger    (xf  29,  30). 
Again,  in  answer  to  the  supplication  of  the  Jews 
for  "a  good  angel  to  deliver  them,"  "there  ap- 
peared   before   them   on    horseback   one    in    white 
clothing,"  and  "  they  marched  forward  "  to  triumph, 
"  having  an  helper  from  heaven  "  (xi.  6-11).    And 
where  no  special  vision  is  recorded,  the  rout  of  the 
enemy  is  still  referred  to  "  a  manifestation  of  Him 
that  seeth  all  things  "  (xii.  22).     Closely  connected 
with  this  belief  in  the  active  energy  of  the  beings 
of  the  unseen  world,  is  the  importance  assigned  to 
dreams  (sv.  11,  oveipov  d.^i6TricrToi'   Swap)  ;   and 
the  distinct  assertion,  not  only  of  a  personal  "  resur- 
rection   to    life "    (vii.   14,   dvda-Tacns    tis    (co'fiv ; 
V.  9,    aiiii/wi   ava^luxTis    C<^ris),    but  of  the  iu- 
fiuence  which  the  living  may  yet  exercise  on  the 
condition  of  the  dead  (xii.  4.3-45).     The  doctrine 
of  Providence  is  carried    out   in   a   most   minute 
parallelism  of  great  crimes  and  their  punishment. 
Thus,  Andronicus  was  put  to  death  on  the  \-ery  spot 
where  he  had  murdeied  Onias  (iv.  38,  tov  Kupiov 
r7)v  a^iav  avTi^  KoXaaiv  diroS6vTos)  :  Jason,  who 
had  "  driven  many  out  of  their  couiitrv,"  died  an 
exile,  without  "  solemn  funeral,"  as  he"  had  "  cast 
out   many   unl)uried"   (v.  9,  10):    the   torments 
suffered  by  .\iitiochus  are  likened  to  those  which  he 
had  inflicted  (ix.  5,  6):  Menelaus,  who  "had  com- 
mitted many  sins  about  the  altar,"  "  received  his 
death  in  ashes"  (xiii.  4-8):   the  hand  and  tongue 
of  Nicanor,  with  which  he  had   blasphemed,  were 
hung  up  "  as  an  evident  and  manifest  sign  unto  all 
of  the  help  of  the  Lord  "  (xv.  32-35).     On  a  larger 
scale  the  same  idea  is  presented  in  the  contrasted 
relations  of  Israel  and  the  heathen  to  the  Divine 
Power.      The  former  is  "  God's  people,"  "  God's 
portion"  (r)  fiepis,  i.  26  ;  xiv.  15),  who  are  chas- 
tised in  love :  the  latter  are  left  unpunished  till  the 
full  measure  of  their  sins  ends  in  destruction  (vi. 
12-17).     For  in  this  book,  ;is  in  1  Mace,  there  are 
no  traces  of  the  glorious  visions  of  the   prophets, 
who  foresaw  the  time  when  all  nations  should  be 
united  in  one  bonil  under  one  Lord. 

10.  The  histoiy  of  the  book,  as  has  been  already 
noticed  (§6),  is  extremely  obscure.  It  is  first  men- 
tioned by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (/.  c.) ;  and  Origen, 
in  a  Greek  fragment  of  his  commentaries  on  Exodus 
(PA'Koc.  2G),  quotes  vi.  12-16,  with  very  consider- 
able variations  of  text,  from  "the  JIaccabaean  his- 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

tory"  (to  Ma/c/ca/Sai'/ca :  comp.  1  Macc.  §6).  At 
a  later  time  the  history  of  the  martyred  brothers  was 
a  favourite  subject  with  Christian  writei-s  (Cypi'. 
Ep.  Ivi.  6,  &c.) ;  and  in  the  time  of  Jeiome  \Prol. 
Galeat.)  and  Augustine  (Dc  Doctr.  Christ,  ii.  8; 
De  Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  36)  the  book  was  in  common 
and  public  use  in  the  Western  Church,  where  it 
maintained  its  position  till  it  was  at  last  definitely 
declared  to  be  canonical  at  the  council  of  Trent. 
[Canon,  vol.  i.  p.  259.] 

11.  The  Latin  version  adopted  in  the  Vulgate, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  first  book,  is  that  current 
before  Jerome's  time,  which  Jerome  left  wholly 
untouched  in  the  apocryphal  books,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  Judith  and  Tobit.  The  St.  Germain  SIS., 
from  which  Sabatier  edited  an  earlier  text  of  1  Macc, 
does  not,  unfortunately,  contain  the  second  book, 
being  imperfect  at  the  end ;  but  the  quotations  of 
Lucifer  of  Cagliari  (Sabatier,  ad  Cupp.  vi.  vii.) 
and  a  fragment  published  by  ]Mai  {Spicil.  Horn.  1.  c. 
1  Macc.  §10),  indi(ate  the  existence  and  character 
of  such  a  text.  The  version  is  much  less  close  to 
the  Greek  than  in  the  foiTner  book,  and  often  gives 
no  more  than  the  sense  of  a  clause  (i.  13,  vi.  21, 
vii.  5,  &c.).  The  Syriac  version  is  of  still  less 
value.  The  Arabic  so-called  version  of  2  Macc. 
is  really  an  independent  work.     [Fifth  Book  of 

MaCCA13EI£S.] 

12.  The  chief  commentanes  on  2  Macc.  have 
been  already  noticed.  [First  Book  of  Maccabees, 
§11.]  The  special  edition  of  H;wse  (Jena,  1786), 
seems,  from  the  account  of  Grimm,  to  be  of  no 
value.  There  are,  however,  many  valuable  his- 
torical observations  in  the  essay  of  Patritius  {De 
Cunsensn,  &c.  already  cited.) 

III.  The  Third  Book  of  the  Maccabees 
contains  the  history  of  events  which  pieceded  the 
great  Maccabaean  sti'uggle.  After  the  decisive 
battle  of  Kaphia  (b.c.  217),  envoys  from  Jerusalem, 
following  the  example  of  other  cities,  hastened  to 
Ptolemy  Philopator  to  congratulate  him  on  his  suc- 
cess. After  receiving  them  the  king  resolved  to 
visit  the  holy  city.  He  offered  sacrifice  in  the 
Temple,  and  was  so  mu(;h  struck  by  its  majesty 
that  he  urgently  sought  permission  to  enter  the 
sanctuary.  When  this  was  refused  he  resolved 
to  gratify  his  curiosity  by  force,  legardless  of  the 
consternation  with  which  his  design  was  received 
(ch.  i.).  On  this  Simon  the  high-priest,  after  the 
people  had  been  with  ditiiculty  restrained  from  vio- 
lence, kneeling  in  fi'ont  of  the  Temple  implored 
divine  help.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  prayer  the 
king  fell  paralysed  into  the  arms  of  his  attendants, 
and  on  his  recovery  returned  at  once  to  Egypt 
without  prosecuting  his  intention.  But  angry  at 
his  failure  he  turned  his  vengeance  on  the  Alexan- 
drine Jews.  Hitherto  these  had  enjoyed  the  highest 
rights  of  citizenship,  but  the  king  commanded  that 
those  only  who  were  voluntarily  initiated  into  the 
heathen  mysteiies  should  be  on  an  equal  footing 
with  the  Alexandrians,  and  that  the  remainder 
should  be  enrolled  in  the  lowest  class  (els  \ao- 
ypaipiav  koI  oiKeriKiii'  Stddeaiv  oxfl^J'ai,  ii.  28), 
and  branded  with  an  ivy-leaf  (ch.  ii. ).  [DiONYSUS.] 
Not  content  with  this  order,  which  was  evaded  or 
desjiised,  he  commanded  all  the  Jews  in.  the  country 
to  be  arrested  and  sent  to  Alexandria  (ch.  iii.). 
This  was  done  as  well  as  might  be,  though  the 
greater  part  escaped  (iv.  18),  and  the  gathered 
multitudes  were  confined  in  the  Hippodrome  out- 
side the  city  (comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5). 
The  resident  Jews,  who  shewed  sympathy  for  their 
countrymen,  were  imprisoned  with  them ;  and  the 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

king  ordeied  the  names  oF  all  to  be  t;iken  down 
preparatory  to  their  execution.  Here  the  first 
marvel  happened  :  the  scribes  to  whom  the  task 
was  assigned  toiled  for  forty  days  from  morning 
till  evening,  till  at  last  leeds  and  paper  failed 
them,  and  the  king's  plan  w;ts  defeivted  (ch.  iv.). 
However,  regardless  of  this,  the  king  ordered  the 
keeper  of  his  elephants  to  diug  the  animals,  five 
hundred  in  number,  with  wine  and  incense,  that 
they  might  trample  the  prisoners  to  death  on  the 
morrow.  The  Jews  had  no  help  but  in  prayer; 
and  here  a  second  marvel  happened.  The  king 
was  overpowered  by  a  deep  sleep,  and  when  he 
awoke  tlie  next  day  it  was  already  time  for  the 
banquet  which  he  had  ordered  to  be  prepared,  so 
that  the  execution  was  deferred.  The  Jews  still 
prayed  for  help ;  but  when  the  dawn  came,  the 
multitudes  were  assembled  to  witness  their  destiuc- 
tion,  and  the  elephants  stood  ready  ibr  tlieir  bloody 
".vork.  Then  was  there  another  mar\'el.  The 
king  was  visited  by  deep  ibrgetfuluess,  and  chided 
the  keeper  of  the  elephants  for  the  preparations 
which  he  had  made,  and  the  Jews  weie  again 
saved.  But  at  the  evening  banquet  the  king 
lecalled  his  purpose,  and  with  terrible  threats 
prepared  for  its  immediate  accomplishment  at 
daybreak  (ch.  v.).  Then  Eleazer,  an  aged  priest, 
prayed  for  his  people,  and  as  he  ended  the  loyal 
train  came  to  the  Hippodiome.  On  this  there  was 
.seen  a  heavenly  vision  by  all  but  the  Jews  (vi.  18). 
The  elephants  trampled  down  their  attendant's,  and 
the  wrath  of  the  king  was  turned  to  pity.  iSo  the 
Jews  were  immediately  set  free,  and  a  great  feast 
was  prepared  for  them  ;  and  they  resolved  to  observe 
a  festival,  in  memory  of  their  deliverance,  during 
the  time  of  their  sojourn  iu  strange  lands  (ch.  vi.). 
A  royal  letter  to  the  governors  of  the  provinces  set 
forth  the  circumstances  of  their  escape,  and  assured 
them  of  the  king's  protection.  Permission  w.is  given 
to  them  to  take  vengeance  on  their  renegade  country- 
men, and  the  people  returned  to  their  homes  in  great 
triumph,  "  crowned  with  flowers,  mid  singing  praises 
to  the  God  of  their  fathers." 

2.  The  form  of  the  narrative,  even  in  this  bald 
outline,  sufficiently  shows  that  the  object  of  the 
book  has  modified  the  facts  which  it  records.  'J'he 
writer,  in  his  zeal  to  bring  out  the  action  of  Provi- 
dence, has  coloured  his  history,  so  that  it  has  lost 
all  semblance  of  truth.  In  this  respect  the  book 
offers  an  instructive  contrast  to  the  book  of  Esther, 
with  which  it  is  closely  connected  both  in  its  pur- 
pose and  in  the  geneial  character  of  its  incidents. 
In  both  a  terrible  calamity  is  averted  by  faithful 
prayer ;  loyal  anger  is  changed  to  royal  favour ; 
iuid  the  punishment  designed  for  the  innocent  is 
directed  to  the  guilty.  But  here  the  likeness  ends. 
The  divine  reserve,  which  is  the  peculiar  charac- 
teristic of  Esther,  is  exchanged  iu  3  ]\Iacc.  for  rhe- 
torical exaggeration ;  and  once  again  the  words  of 
inspiration  stand  ennobled  by  the  presence  of  their 
later  counterpart. 

3.  But  while  it  is  impossible  to  accept  the 
details  of  the  book  as  historical,  some  basis  of  truth 
must  be  supposed  to  lie  beneath  them.  The  yearly 
festival  (vi.  3G  ;  vii.  19)  can  hardly  have  been  a 
mere  fancy  of  the  writer ;  and  the  pillar  and 
synagogue  {irpoffevx^)  at  Ptolemais  (vii."20)  must 
have  been  connected  in  some  way  with  a  signal 
deliverance.  Besides  this,  Josephus  (c.  Ap.  ii.  5) 
relates  a  very  similar  occurrence  which  took  place 
in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  VII.  (Physcon).  "The 
king,"  iis  he  s;iys,  "  exasperated  by  the  opposition 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 


179 


which  Onias,  the  Jewish  general  of  the  royal  army, 
made  to  his  usurpation,  seized  all  the  Jews  in 
Alexandria  with  their  wives  and  children,  and 
exposed  them  to  intoxicated  elephants.  But  the 
animals  turned  upon  the  king's  friends  ;  and  forth- 
with the  king  saw  a  terrible  visage  which  foibad 
him  to  injure  the  Jews.  On  this  he  yielded  to 
the  prayers  of  his  mistress,  and  repented  of  his 
attempt ;  and  the  Alexandrine  Jews  observed  the 
day  of  their  deliverance  a.s  a  festival."  The  essen- 
tial points  of  the  story  are  the  same  as  those  in 
the  second  part  of  3  Jlacc,  and  there  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  Josephus  has  preserved  the  events 
which  the  writer  adapted  to  his  narrative.  If  it  be 
true  that  Ptolemy  Philopator  attempted  to  enter 
tile  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  was  frustrated  in  his 
design — a  supposition  which  is  open  to  no  reason- 
able objection — it  is  easily  conceivable  that  tiadi- 
tion  may  have  assigned  to  him  the  impious  design 
of  his  successor ;  or  the  author  of  3  l\Iacc.  may 
have  combined  the  two  events  for  the  sake  of  efiect. 

4.  Assuming  rightly  that  the  book  is  an  adapta- 
tion of  histoiy,  Ewald  and  (at  greater  length) 
Grimm  have  endeavoured  to  fix  exactly  the  cii- 
cumstances  by  which  it  was  called  fbith.  The 
writings  of  Philo,  occasioned  by  the  oppressions 
which  the  Alexandrine  Jews  sufieied  in  the  reign  of 
Caligula,  offer  seveial  points  of  connexion  with''  it; 
and  the  panic  which  was  occasioned  at  Jerusalem 
by  the  attempt  of  the  emperor  to  erect  his  statue  iu 
the  Temple  is  well  known  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  8, 
§2).  It  is  then  argued  that  the  writer  designed 
to  portray  Caligula  under  the  name  of  the  sensual 
tyrant  who  had  in  earlier  times  held  Egypt  and 
Syria,  while  he  sought  to  nerve  his  countrymen 
for  their  struggle  with  heathen  power,  by  remind- 
ing them  of  earlier  deliverances.  It  is  unnecessaiy 
to  urge  the  various  details  in  which  the  paiallel 
between  the  acts  of  Caligula  and  the  narrative  fail. 
Such  differences  may  have  been  part  of  the  writer's 
disguise;  but  it  may  be  well  questioned  whether 
the  position  of  the  Je.ws  in  the  early  time  of  the 
empire,  or  under  the  later  Ptolemies,  was  not 
generally  such  that  a  narrative  like  3  Mace,  would 
find  a  ready  auditory. 

5.  The  language  of  the  book  betrays  most  clearly 
its  Alexandrine  origin.  Both  in  vocabulary  and 
construction  it  is  rich,  affected,  and  exaggerated. 
Some  words  occur  nowhere  else  {\a(y)'pa(pia,  ii.  28  ; 
■KfioavcTTiWiadai,  ii.  29  ;  xnT&<ppiKos,  vi.  20  ; 
XapTTjpia,  iv.  20  ;  Pv6orpe<pris,  vi.  8  ;  \pvxovA- 
KelffBat,  V.  25 ;  fiiatiPpis,  vi.  9  ;  irovrS^poxos, 
vi.  4 ;  ixeyaKoKpdroip,  vi.  2  ;  fxvpu^pexris,  iv.  6  ; 
TTpoKaTaaicippovaBai,  iv.  1  ;  avfTricrrpeirTcus,  i. 
20)  ;  others  are  used  in  strange  senses  (e/cveueic. 
Met,  iii.  22;  Trapa^aai\evaj,  vi.  24;  ifA-Tropwdai, 
Met.  vii.  5)  ;  others  are  very  rare  or  characteristic 
of  late  Greek  writeis  ( eVi/Sab'po,  ii.  31  ;  KardirToi- 
(Tis,  ii.  14;  fvOea/jLos,  ii.  21;  airpSimoros,  iii. 
14  ;  aXoyicrrla,  v.  42  ;  airapaTroSiinos,  vi-  28 ; 
(ppiKacr/xds,  iii.  17  ;  /xeyaKofj-epO!,  vi.  33;  fficu\fx6s, 
iii.  25;  KLaa6<pv\\ov,  ii.  29  ;  i^airocrToAi],  iv.  4). 
The  form  of  the  sentences  is  strained  (c. g.i.  i  5,  1 7, 
ii.  31,  iii.  23,  iv.  11,  vii.  7,  19,  &c.),  ;uid  every 
description  is  loaded  with  rhetorical  ornameiit  (e.  (/. 
iv.  2,  5;  vi.  45).  As  a  natural  consequence  the 
meaning  is  often  obscure  [e.  j.  i.  9, 14, 19,  iv.  5, 14), 


k  These  are  poinled  out  at  length  by  Grimm  (Hiiil.  ^3) ; 
bill  the  rtliiliuii  of  the  Alexaiiilriuf  Jews  lo  a  piTseculing 
civil  power  would,  perkiiis,  always  jjresent  the  same 
general  I'eaUucs. 

y  2 


180        MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

and  the  writc'i-  is  led  into  exagger:\tioiTs  which  are  hi.s-  I 
torically  incoiTcct  (vii.  2,  20,  v.  2  ;  comp.  Grimm). 
6.  From  the  abruptness  of  the  commencement 
{b  5e  ^iXoiraToip)  it  has  been  thought  (P]wald, 
Gesch.  iv.  535)  that  the  book  is  a  mere  fragment  of  a 
hvrger  work.  7\gaiust  this  view  it  may  be  urged 
that  the  tenor  of  the  book  is  one  and  distinct,  and 
brought  to  a  perfect  issue.  It  must,  however,  be 
noticed  that  iu  some  MSS.  (44,  125,  Parsons)  the 
beginning  is  differently  worded :  "  Noiv  in  these 
days  king  Ptolemy  "  ;  and  the  reference  in  ii.  25 
(rav  ■KpoairoSfSeiy/j.^voov)  is  to  some  passage  not 
contained  in  the  present  narrative.  It  is  ])ossible 
that  the  nan-ative  may  have  formed  the  sequel 
to  an  earlier  history,  as  the  Ildlenica  continue, 
vvithout  break  or  repetition,  the  history  ofThucy- 
dides  (yU.6Ta  5e  raina,  Xen.  Hell.  i.  1) ;  or  we  may 
suppose  (Grimm,  Einl.  §4)  that  the  introductory 
chapter  lias  been  lost. 

7.  The  evid^ice  of  language,  which  is  quite 
sufficient  to  fix  the  place  of  the  composition  of  the 
book  at  Alexandria,  is  not  equally  decisive  as  to  tlie 
date.  It  might,  indeed,  seem  to  belong  to  the 
early  period  of  the  empire  (B.C.  40-70),  when  for  a 
Jew  all  hope  lay  in  the  record  of  past  triumphs, 
which  assumed  a  fabulous  grandeur  from  the  con- 
tiast  with  present  oppression.  But  such  a  date  is 
])urely  conjectural ;  and  in  the  absence  of  any 
direct  proof  it  is  unsafe  to  trust  to  an  impression 
which  cannot  claim  any  decisive  authority,  fi'om  the 
very  imperfect  knowledge  which  we  possess  of  the 
religious  history  of  the  Jews  of  the  dispersion. 
If,  however,  Ewjild's  theory  be  correct,  the  date 
falls  within  the  limits  which  have  been  suggested. 

8.  The  uncertainty  of  the  date  of  the  com- 
position of  the  book  corresponds  with  the  uncer- 
tainty of  its  history.  In  the  Apostolical  Canons 
(Can.  85)  "three  books  of  the  Maccabees"  are 
mentioned  {^HaKKu^aiteu  rpia,  one  MS.  reads  S'), 
of  which  tliis  is  probably  the  third,  as  it  occupies 
the  third  place  in  the  oldest  Greek  MSS.,  which 
contain  also  the  so-called  fourth  book.  It  is  found 
in  a  Syriac  translation,  and  is  quoted  with  marked 
respect  by  Theodoret  {ad  Dan.  xi.  7)  of  Antioch 
(died  cir.  a.d.  457).  "  Three  books  of  the  Mac- 
cabees "  (Ma/c/ca/Sai'Ka  y'  )  are  placed  at  the  head 
of  the  antilegomena  of  the  0.  T.  in  the  catalogue  of 
Nicephorus  ;  and  in  the  Synopsis,  falsely  ascribed 
to  Athanasius,  the  third  book  is  apparently  de- 
scribed as  "  Ptolemaica,"  from  the  name  of  the 
royal  hero,'  and  reckoned  doubtfully  among  the 
disputed  books.  On  the  other  hand  the  book  seems 
to  have  found  no  acceptance  in  the  Alexandrine 
or  Western  churches,  a  tact  which  confirms  the  late' 
date  assigned  to  it,  if  we  assume  its  Alexandrine 
origin.  It  is  not  quoted,  as  far  as  we  know,  in  any 
Latin  writer,  and  does  not  occur  in  the  lists  of 
canonical  and  apocryphal  books  in  the  Gelasian 
Decretals.  No  ancient  Latin  version  of  it  occurs ; 
and  as  it  is  not  contained  in  the  Vulgate  it  has  been 
excluded  from  the  canon  of  the  liomish  church. 

9.  In  modern  times  it  has  been  translated  into 
Latin  (first  in  the  Complutensiiui  Polyglott) ;  Ger- 
man (De  Wette  and  Augusti,  Bibeliibersetzumj , 
1st  ed. ;  and  in  an  earlier  version  "  by  Jo.  Circem- 
berger,  Wittenberg,  1554  ;"  Cotton,  Five  Books,  &c., 
p.  X.K.);  and  French  (Calmet).  The  first  English 
version  was  appended  to  "  A  briefe  and  compen- 


'  This  title  occurs  only  in  the  Synopids  of  the  I'aeudn- 
Athanasius  (p.  432,  oii.  Migne).  Athanasius  omits  the 
Maccabees  in  his  detailed  list.    The  text  at  present  stands 


MaKKa^ai/ca  ^i^Ai'a  S' .  ITToAefiaiKa.     But  Credner  (Zar  I  cursive  MSS. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

dious  table  .  .  .  opening  the  way  to  the  principal  1 
histories  of  the  whole  Bible  .  .  .  London,  1550." 
This  version  with  a  few  alterations  (Cotton,  p.  xx.) 
was  included  in  a  folio  Bible  published  next  year 
by  J.  Day  ;  and  the  book  was  again  jniblished  in 
1563.  A  better  translation  was  published  by  Whis- 
ton  in  his  Authentio  Documents  (1727);  and  a 
new  version,  with  short  notes  by  Dr.  Cotton  ( The 
five  books  of  Maccabees  in  Emjlish  .  .  .  Oxford, 
1832).  The  Commentary  of  Grimm  {Kurzgef. 
Handbuch)  gives  ample  notices  of  the  opinions  of 
earlier  commentators,  and  supersedes  the  necessity 
of  using  any  other. 

IV.  The  Fourth  Book  of  Maccabees  (Ma/c- 
Ka^aiciiu  5'.  ils  MaKKu^aiovs  Xoyos)  contains  a 
rhetorical  narrative  of  the  martvrdom  of  Eleazer  and 
of  the  "  Maccabaean  family,"  following  in  the  main 
the  same  outline  as  2  Mace.  The  second  title  of 
the  book.  On  the  Supreme  Sovereignty  of  Reason 
(rfpl  avroKpdropos  Koyiff/xov),  explains  the  moral 
use  which  is  made  of  the  history.  The  author  in 
the  introduction  discusses  the  nature  of  reason  and 
the  character  of  its  supremacy,  which  he  then  illus- 
trates by  examples  taken  from  Jewish  history 
(§1-3,  Hudson).  Then  turning  to  his  principd 
proof  of  the  triumphant  power  of  reason,  he  gives 
a  short  summary  of  the  causes  which  led  to  the 
persecution  of  Antiochus  (§  4),  and  in  the  remainder 
of  the  book  describes  at  length  the  death  of  Ele;izer 
(§  5-7),  of  the  seven  brethren  (8-14),  and  of  their 
mother  (15-19),  enforcing  the  lessons  which  he 
would  teach  by  the  words  of  the  martyrs  and  the 
reflections  which  spring  from  them.  The  last  sec- 
tion (20)  is  evidently  by  another  hand. 

2.  The  book  was  ascribed  in  early  times  to  Jo- 
sephus.  Eusebius  (//.  E.  iii.  10,  TTenovriTai  5e  Kai 
iiWo  ovK  aytvyhs  (TirovSa(rfj.a  tcS  dvSpl — i.  e.  'Ico- 
(rr]Trcf> — -mpl  avTOKpdropos  Xoyifffiov,  o  rives 
MuKKa^aiKov  eiriypai^iav),  and  Jerome,  following 
him  (De  Vir.  ill.  13,  "  Alius  quoque  liber  ejus,  qui 
inscribitur  -mpX  avTOKpcLropos  Koyicr/Mov  valde  ele- 
gans  habetur,  in  quo  et  Maccabaeorum  sunt  digesta 
martyria,"  comp.  Jerome,  adv.  Pal.  ii.),  also  Photius 
(ap.  Philostorg.  //.  E.  1,  rh  fievroLye  reraprov 
virb  'loiaiiTrov  yiypa<p6ai  koI  avrhs  (rvvoixoKoyHiv, 
so  that  at  that  time  the  judgment  was  disputed), 
and  Suidas  (s.  v.  'luicrriivos) — give  this  opinion 
without  reserve  ;  and  it  is  found  under  his  name  in 
many  MSS.  of  the  great  Jewish  historian.  On  the 
other  hand,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  quotes  the  book 
{Orat.  XV.  22)  as  though  he  was  unacquainted  with 
the  author,  and  in  the  Alexandrine  and  Sinaitic  MSS. 
it  is  called  simply  "  the  fourth  of  Maccabees."  The 
internal  evidence  against  the  authorship  by  Josephus 
is  so  great  as  to  outweigh  the  testimony  of  Eusebius, 
from  whom  it  is  probable  that  the  later  statements 
were  derived  ;  and  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  the  book  was  assigned  to  Josephus  by  a  mere 
conjecture,  which  the  style  and  contents  alike  shov?^ 
to  be  unfounded.  It  is  possible  that  a  tradition 
was  preserved  tliat  the  author's  name  was  .lo.vephus 
{'IwcrrfKos),  in  which  case  the  confusion  would  be 
more  easy. 

3.  If  we  may  assume  that  the  authorship  was 
attributed  to  Josephus  only  by  error,  no  evidence 
remains  to  fix  the  date  of  the  book.  It  is  only 
certain  that  it  was  written  before  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  probably  after  2  Mace.     The  cha- 

Gcsch.  d.  Kan.  Mi  note)  conjectures  with  great  pro- 
bability that  the  true  reading  is  MaicK.  jSt^A.  koX  IItoA.  : 
Kal  and  S'  can  frequently  be  scarcely  distinguished  in 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

racter  of  the  composition  leads  the  reader  to  suppose 
that  it  was  not  a  mere  rlietorical  exercise,  but  an 
earnest  eti'ort  to  animate  the  .Jewish  nation  to  face 
real  perils.  In  which  case  it  might  be  referred  not 
•  unnaturally,  to  the  troubled  times  which  immedi- 
ately preceded  the  war  with  Vespasian  (cir.  a.d.  67). 

4.  As  a  historical  document  the  narrative  is  of 
no  value.  Its  interest  centres  in  the  flict  that  it  is 
a  unique  example  of  the  didactic  use  which  the 
Jews  made  of  their  history,  fiwald  {Gesch.  iv. 
556)  rightly  compares  it  with  the  sermon  of  later 
times,  in  which  a  scriptural  theme  becomes  the 
subject  of  an  elaborate  and  practical  comment. 
The  style  is  very  ornate  and  laboured ;  but  it  is 
correct  and  vigorous,  and  truly  Greek.  The  rich- 
ness and  boldness  of  the  vocabulary  is  surprising. 
Many  words,  coined  in  an  antique  mould,  seem  to 
be  peculiar  to  the  book,  as  avToSeffTroros,  i6f6- 
ttAtjktos,  €irTafi7)TCi>p,  Kofffxo-KKrjd^s,  Kocrixo(pope7y, 
fxaAaKotpux^^Vt  olffTpriKaaia,  ■wa6oKpare7a'0ai,  iic. ; 
others  belong  to  later  types,  as  avTe^ovffiSTris,  apxie- 
paaOat ;  others  are  used  in  meanings  which  are 
found  in  late  writers,  as  ■wriSaXiouxe^i',  ayLffreia, 
a<t>riyri/jia  ;  and  the  number  of  prepositional  com- 
pounds is  very  large — ivairoappayi^eiv,  i^ev/xe- 
pl^etv,  eiriKapTroXoyuffdai,  iTri^^cayoKoyelcrdai, 
irpocreTTiKaTarfiveiv. 

5.  Tiie  philosophical  tone  of  the  book  is  essen- 
tially stoical ;  but  the  stoicism  is  that  of  a  stern 
legalist.  The  dictates  of  reason  are  supported  by 
the  remembrance  of  noble  traditions,  and  by  the 
hope  of  a  glorious  future.  The  prospect  of  the  life 
to  come  is  clear  and  wide.  The  faithful  are  seen 
to  rise  to  endless  bliss  ;  the  wicked  to  descend  to  end- 
less torment,  varying  in  intensity.  But  while  the 
writer  shows,  in  this  respect,  the  effects  of  the  full 
culture  of  the  Alexandrine  school,  and  in  part  advances 
beyond  his  predecessors,  he  offers  no  trace  of  that 
deep  spiritual  insight  which  was  quickened  by  Chris- 
tianity. The  Jew  stands  alone,  isolated  by  chai'ac- 
ter  and  by  blessing  (comp.  Gfrorer,  Pliilo,  &c.,  ii.  17o 
fF. ;  Daehne,  Jud.  Alex.  Reluj.  Philos.  ii.  190  ff.). 

6.  The  original  Greek  is  the  only  ancient  text  in 
which  the  book  has  been  published,  but  a  Syriac 
version  is  said  to  be  preserved  in  MS.  at  Milan 
(Grimm,  Einl.  §7).  In  recent  times  the  work  has 
hardly  received  so  much  attention  as  it  desei-ves.  The 
first  and  only  complete  commentary  is  that  of  Grimm 
(JSxeg.  Handbucli),  which  errs  only  by  extreme 
elaborateness.  An  English  translation  has  been  pub- 
lished by  Dr.  Cotton  (  The  five  books  of  Maccabees, 
Oxf.  1832).  The  text  is  given  in  the  best  form  by 
Bekker  in  his  edition  of  Josephus  (Lips.  1855-6). 

7.  Though  it  is  certain  that  our  present  book  is 
that  which  old  writers  described,  Sixtus  Senensis 
{Bibl.  Sancta,  p.  37,  ed.  1575)  gives  a  very  interest- 
ing account  of  another  fourth  book  of  Maccabees, 
which  he  saw  in  a  library  at  Lyons,  which  was  after- 
wards burnt.  It  was  in  Greek,  and  contained  the 
history  of  John  Hyrcanus,  continuing  the  narrative 
directly  after  the  close  of  the  first  book.  Si.xtus  quotes 
the  first  words:  koX  fiera  ro  awoKTauOrivai  rhv 
SijUtoj/a  iyevriOt}  'loidvris  vlbs  auTov  opxiepeus 
dvr'  avTov,  but  this  is  the  only  fragment  which 
remains  of  it.  The  history,  he  says,  was  nearly  the 
same  as  that  in  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.,  though  the  style 
was  very  different  from  his,  abounding  in  Hebrew 
idioms.  The  testimony  is  so  exact  :md  explicit, 
that  we  can  see  no  reason  for  (juestiouing  its  accu- 
racy, and  still  less  for  supposing  (with  Calmet) 
that  Sixtus  saw  only  the  so-called  fifth  book, 
which  is  at  present  preserved  in  Arabic. 


MACEDONIA 


181 


V.  The  Fifth  Book  of  Maccabees  just  men- 
tioned may  call  for  a  very  brief  notice.  It  is 
printed  in  Arabic  in  the  Paris  and  London  Poly- 
glotts  ;  and  contains  a  history  of  the  Jews  from  the 
attempt  of  Heliodorus  to  the  birth  of  our  Lord. 
The  writer  made  use  of  the  first  two  books  of  Mac- 
cabees and  of  Josephus,  and  has  no  claim  to  be  con- 
sidered an  independent  authority.  His  own  know- 
ledge was  very  imperfect,  and  he  perverts  the  state- 
ments which  he  derives  from  others.  He  must  have 
lived  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  probably  out 
of  Palestine,  though  the  translation  bears  very  clear 
traces  of  Hebrew  idioms,  so  that  it  has  been  supposed 
that  the  book  was  origindly  written  in  Hebrew,  or 
at  least  that  the  Greek  was  strongly  modified  by 
Hebrew  influence.  The  book  has  been  published  in 
English  by  Dr.  Cotton  {Five  books,^c.).   [B.  F.  VV.] 

MACEDO'NIA  (MaKeSocia),  the  first  part  of 
Europe  which  I'eceived  the  Gospel  directly  from 
St.  Paul,  and  an  important  scene  of  his  subsequent 
missionary  labours  and  the  labours  of  his  com- 
panions. So  closely  is  this  region  associated  with 
apostolic  journeys,  sufferings,  and  epistles,  that  it 
has  truly  been  called  by  one  of  our  English  tra- 
vellers a  kind  of  Holy  Land  (Clarke's  Travels,  ch. 
xi.).  For  details  see  Neapolis,  Philippi,  Amphi- 
POLIS,  Apollonia,  Thessalonica,  and  Berea. 
We  confine  ourselves  here  to  explaining  the  geo- 
graphical and  political  import  of  the  term  "  Mace- 
donia" as  employed  in  the  N.  T.,  with  some  allu- 
sion to  its  earlier  use  in  the  Apocrypha,  and  one  or 
two  general  remarks  on  St.  Paul's  joui-neys  through 
the  district,  and  the  churches  which  he  founded  there. 

In  a  rough  and  popular  description  it  is  enough 
to  say  that  Macedonia  is  the  region  bounded  inland 
by  the  range  of  Haemus  or  the  Balkan  northwards, 
and  the  chain  of  Pindus  westwards,  beyond  which 
the  streams  flow  respectively  to  the  Danube  and 
the  Adriatic  ;  that  it  is  separated  from  Thessaly  on 
the  south  by  the  Cambunian  hills,  running  easterly 
from  Pindus  to  Olympus  and  the  Aegean ;  and  that 
it  is  divided  on  the  east  from  Thrace  by  a  less 
definite  mountam-boundary  running  southwai'ds 
from  Haemus.  Of  the  space  thus  enclosed,  two 
of  tlie  most  remarkable  physical  features  are  two 
great  plains,  one  watered  by  the  Axius,  which 
comes  to  the  sea  at  the  Thermaic  gulf,  not  far 
from  Thessalonica ;  the  other  by  the  Strymon, 
which,  after  passing  near  Philippi,  flows  out  below 
Amphipolis.  Between  the  mouths  of  these  two 
riveis  a  remarkable  peninsula  projects,  dividing 
itself  into  three  points,  on  the  farthest  of  which 
Mount  Athos  rises  nearly  into  the  region  of  per- 
petual snow.  Across  the  neck  of  this  peninsula  St, 
Paul  travelled  more  than  once  with  his  companions. 

This  general  sketch  would  sufficiently  describe 
the  Macedonia  which  was  ruled  over  by  Philip  and 
Alexander,  and  which  the  Romans  conquered  from 
Perseus.  At  first  the  conquered  country  was  di- 
vided by  Aemilius  Paulus  into  four  districts.  Mace- 
donia Prima  was  on  the  east  of  the  Strymon,  mid 
had  Amphipolis  for  the  capital.  Macedonia  Secunda 
stretcheil  between  the  Strymon  and  the  Axius,  with 
Thessalonica  for  its  metropolis.  The  third  and 
fourth  districts  lay  to  the  south  and  the  west. 
This  division  was  only  temporary.  The  whole  of 
Macedonia,  along  with  Thessaly  and  a  large  tract 
along  the  Adriatic,  was  made  one  province  and 
centralised  luider  the  jurisdiction  of  a  proconsul, 
who  resided  at  Thessalonica.  We  have  now  reached 
tlie  definition  which  ourresiionds  with  the  usage  ol" 
the  temi    in   the    N.  T.   (Acts   xvi.    9,   10,    12, 


182 


MACEDONIA 


xviii.  5,  xix.  21,  22,  29,  xx.  1,  3,  xxvii.  2;  Rom. 
XV.  26;  1  Cor.  xvi.  5;  2  Cor.  i.  16,  ii.  13,  vii.  5, 
viii.  1,  ix.  2,  4,  xi.  9;  Phil.  iv.  15;  1  'I'hess  i. 
7,  8,  iv.  10;  1  Tim.  i.  3).  Three  Roman  provinces, 
all  very  familiar  to  us  in  the  writings  of  .St.  Paul, 
divided  the  whole  space  between  the  basin  of  the 
Danube  and  Cape  JIatapan.  The  border-town  of 
Illyricum  was  Lissus  on  the  Adriatic.  The 
boundary-line  of  Achaia  nearly  coincided,  except 
111  the  western  portion,  with  that  of  the  kingdom 
<jf  modern  Greece,  and  ran  in  an  irregular  line 
fi'om  the  Acroceraunian  promontoiy  to  the  bay  of 
'i'iiermopylae  and  the  north  of  luiboea.  By  sub- 
tracting these  two  provinces,  we  deKue  Macedonia. 

The  history  of  Macedonia  in  the  period  between 
the  Persian  wars  and  the  consolidation  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  the  Levant  is  touched  in  a  very  in- 
teresting maimer  by  passages  in  the  Apocrypha. 
In  Esth.  xvi.  10,  Haman  is  described  as  a  Mace- 
donian, and  in  xvi.  14  he  is  said  to  have  contrived 
his  plot  for  the  purpose  of  transferring  the  kingdom 
of  the  Persians  to  the  Macedonians.  This  suffi- 
ciently betrays  the  late  date  and  spurious  character 
of  these  apocryphal  chapters:  but  it  is  curious  thus 
to  have  our  attention  turned  to  the  early  struggle 
of  Persia  and  Greece.  Macedonia  played  a  great 
part  in  this  struggle,  and  there  is  little  doubt  that 
Ahasuerus  is  Xerxes.  The  history  of  the  Maccabees 
opens  with  vivid  allusions  to  Alexander  the  son  of 
Philip,  the  Macedonian  king  ('AAe'|ai/5pos  6  rov 
^iX'nnrnv  6  I3acn\evs  6  yiaK^Suiv;,  who  came  out 
of  the  land  of  Chettiim  and  smote  Darius  king  of 
the  Persians  and  Medes  (1  Mace.  i.  1),  and  who 
reigned  first  among  the  Grecians  (ib.  vi.  2).  A 
little  later  we  have  the  Roman  conquest  of  Perseus 
"  king  of  the  Citims  "  recorded  (ib.  viii.  5).  Subse- 
quently in  these  Jewish  annals  we  hud  the  term 
'•  Macedonians  "  used  for  the  soldiei's  of  the  Seleucid 
successors  of  Alexander  (2  Mace.  viii.  20).  In 
what  is  called  the  fifth  Book  of  Maccabees  this 
usage  of  the  word  is  very  frequent,  and  is  applied 
not  only  to  the  Seleucid  princes  at  Antioch,  but  to 
the  Ptolemies  at  Alexandria  (see  Cotton's  Five 
Books  of  Maccabees,  Oxford,  1832).  It  is  evident 
that  the  words  "Macedonia"  and  "Macedonian" 
were  fearfully  familiar  to  the  Jewish  mind  ;  and  this 
gives  a  new  significance  to  the  vision  by  which  St. 
Paul  was  invited  at  Troas  to  the  country  of  Philip 
and  Alexander. 

Nothing  can  exceed  the  interest  and  impressive- 
ness  of  the  occasion  (Acts  xvi.  9)  when  a  new  and 
religious  meaning  was  given  to  the  well-known 
av))p  M.aKi'Bwv  of  Demosthenes  {Phil.  i.  p.  43),  and 
when  this  part  of  Europe  was  designated  as  the 
lirst  to  be  trodden  by  an  Apostle.  The  account  of 
St.  Paul's  first  journey  through  Macedonia  (Acts 
xvi.  10-xvii.  15)  is  marked  by  copious  detail  and 
well-defined  incidents.  At  the  close  of  this  journey 
lie  returned  from  Corinth  to  Syria  by  sea.  On  the 
next  occasion  of  visiting  Europe,  though  he  both 
went  and  returned  through  Macedonia  (Acts  xx. 
1-8),  the  naiTative  is  a  very  slight  sketch,  and  the 
route  is  left  uncertain,  except  as  regards  Philippi. 
Many  years  elapsed  before  St.  Paul  visited  this  pro- 
vince again ;  but  from  1  Tim.  i.  3  it  is  evident 
that  he  did  accomplish  the  wish  expressed  duiing 
liis  first  imprisonment  (I''liil.  ii.  24). 

The  character  of  the  Macedonian  Christians  is  set 
before  us  in  Scripture  in  a  very  favourable  light. 
The  candour  of  the  Bereans  is  highly  commended 
(Acts  xvii.  11);  the  Thessalonians  were  evidently 
objects  of  St.  Paul's  peculiar  affection  (1  'i'hess.  ii. 


MACHIR 

8,  17-20,  iii.  10)  ;  and  the  Philippians,  besides 
their  general  freedom  from  Ijlame,  are  noted  as 
i-emarkable  for  their  liberality  and  self-denial  (Phil. 
iv.  10,  14-19 ;  see  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  xi.  9).  It  is  worth 
noticing,  as  a  fact  almost  typical  of  the  change 
which  Christianity  has  produced  in  the  social  life 
of  Europe,  that  the  fennale  element  is  conspicuous 
in  the  records  of  its  introduction  into  Macedonia. 
The  Gospel  was  first  preached  there  to  a  small  con- 
gregation of  women  (Acts  xvi.  13);  the  first  con- 
vert was  a  woman  (ib.  ver.  14) ;  and,  at  least  at 
Philippi,  women  were  prominent  as  active  workers 
in  the  cause  of  religion  (Phil.  iv.  2,  3). 

It  should  be  observed  that,  in  St.  Paul's  time, 
Macalonia  vvas  well  intersected  by  Roman  loads, 
especially  by  the  great  Via  Egnatia,  which  con- 
nected Philippi  and  Thessalonica,  and  also  led 
towards  lllyiioum  (Rom.  xv.  19).  The  antiquities 
of  the  countrv  liave  been  well  exjjlored  and  de- 
scribed by  many  travellers.  The  two  best  works 
are  those  of  Cousinery  (  Voijagc  dans  la  Macedoine, 
Paris,  1831)  and  Leake  {^Travels  in  Northern 
Greece,  London,  1835).  [J.  S.  H.] 


of  Macedonia. 


MACEDO'NIAN  (MawreScii')  occurs  in  A.V. 
only  ill  Act.s  xxvii.  2.  In  the  other  cases  (Acts 
xvi.  9,  xix.  29,  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  4)  our  translators  ren- 
der it "  of  Macedonia." 

MACHBANA'I  CaaSO  :  UtKxa^a.vat;  Alex. 

MaxaiSami:  Machhana/i),  one  of  the  lion-faced 
warriors  of  Gad  who  joined  the  fortunes  of  David 
when  living  in  retreat  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  13). 

MACHBE'NAH  (KJ330  :  MaxajSriro;  Alex. 

MaxaixTjvd:  ]i[achbe7in).  Slieva,  the  father  of 
Machbena.  is  named  in  the  gene;ilogical  list  of  Judah 
as  the  oft'spring  of  Maachah,  the  concubine  of  Caleb 
beu-Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  49).  Other  names  similarly 
mentioned  in  the  passage  are  known  to  be  those 
not  of  persons  bat  of  towns.  The  most  feasible 
inference  from  this  is,  that  Machbena  was  founded 
or  colonized  b_v  the  family  of  Maachah.  To  the 
position  of  the  town,  however,  whether  near  Gaza, 
like  M'admannah,  or  between  Jerusalem  and  He- 
bron, like  GiBEA,  we  possess  no  clue.  It  is  not 
named  by  Eusebius  or  Jerome,  and  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  met  with  by  any  later  traveller.  [G.j 

MA'CHI  (OD  :  Mo/cx' ;  Alex.  Maxi:  Machi), 
the  father  of  Geuel  the  Gadite,  who  went  with 
Caleb  and  Joshua  to  spy  out  the  land  of  Canaan 
(Num.  xiii.  15). 

MACH'IR  (T-DD :  MaxetV  :  Machir),  the 
eldest  son  (Josh.  xvii.  1)  of  the  patriarch  Manasseh 
by  an  Aramite  or  Syrian  concubine  (1  Chr.  vii.  14, 
and  the  LXX.  of  Gen.  xlvi.  20).  His  children  are 
commemorated  as  having  been  caress(?d  ^  by  Joseph 
before  his  death  (Gen.  1.  23).  His  wife's  name  is 
not  preserved,  but  she  was  a  Benjamite,  the  "  sister 


The  Targum  characteristically  says  "  circumcised.' 


MACHIRITES 

of  Iluppim  aucl  Sluippim"  (1  Chr.  vii.  15).  The 
only  chiklrflu  whose  names  are  given  are  his  son 
Gilead,''  who  is  rejieatedly  mentioned  (Num.  xxvi. 
29,  Axvii.  1,  xxxvi.  1;  Tchr.  vii.  14,  &c.),  and  a 
daughter,  Abinh,  who  married  a  chief  of  Judah 
named  Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  21,  2-1-).  The  connexion 
with  Benjamin  may  perhaps  have  led  to  the  selec- 
tion by  Abner  of  Mahanaim,  which  lay  on  the 
boundary  between  Gad  and  Manasseh,  as  the  resi- 
dence of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  ii.  8)  ;  and  that  with 
Judah  may  have  also  influenced  David  to  go  so 
far  north  when  driven  out  of  his  kingdom.  At 
the  time  of  the  conquest  the  family  of  Machir  had 
become  very  powerful,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
country  on  the  east  of  Jordan  was  subdued  by 
them  (Num.  xxxii.  39  ;  Deut.  iii.  15).  In  fact  to 
their  warlike  tendencies  it  is  probably  entirely  due 
that  the  tribe  was  divided,  and  that  only  the 
inferior  tamilies  crossed  the  Jordan.  So  great  was 
their  power  that  the  name  of  Machir  occasionally 
supeisedes  that  of  Manasseh,  not  only  for  the 
eastern  territory,  but  even  for  the  western  half  of 
the  tribe  also :  see  Judg.  v.  14,  where  Machir 
occui's  in  the  enumeration  of  the  western  tribes — 
"  Gilead  "  apparently  standing  for  the  eastern  5Ia- 
uasseh  in  ver.  17  ;  and  still  more  uiunistakeably  in 
Josh.  xiii.  31,  compareii  with  29. 

2.  The  son  of  Ammiel,  a  powerful  sheykh  of  one 
of  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes,  but  whether  of  Ma- 
nasseh — the  tribe  of  his  namesake — or  of  Gad,  must 
remain  uncertain  till  we  know  where  Lo-debar,  to 
which  place  he  belonged,  was  situated.  His  name 
occurs  but  twice,  but  the  part  which  he  plaved  was 
by  no  means  an  insignificant  one.  It  was  his  for- 
tLuie  to  render  essential  service  to  the  cause  of  Saul 
and  of  David  successively — in  each  case  vs^hen  they 
were  in  dilliculty.  Under  his  roof,  when  a  cripple 
and  friendless,  after  the  death  of  his  uncle  and  the 
ruin  of  his  ho^ise,  the  unfortunate  Mephibosheth 
found  a  home,  from  which  he  was  summoned  by 
David  to  the  honours  and  the  anxieties  of  a  resi- 
dence at  the  court  of  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  ix.  4,  5). 
When  David  himself,  some  yeai-s  later,  was  driven 
from  his  throne  to  Mahanaim,  Machir  was  one  of 
the  three  great  chiefs  who  lavished  on  the  exiled 
king  and  his  soldiers  the  wealth  of  the  rich  pastoral 
district  of  which  they  were  the  lords — "  wheat,  and 
barley,  and  flour,  and  pai'ched  corn,  and  beans,  and 
lentiles,  and  parched  pulse,  and  honey,  and  butter, 
and  sheep,  and  cows'-milk  cheese "  (2  Sam.  xvii. 
27-29) .  Josephus  calls  him  the  chief  of  the  countiy 
of  Gilead  (Ant.  vii.  9,  §8).  [G.] 

MACHIRITES,  THE  (''■)''3Sn  :  6  Maxipi ; 
Alex.  6  Maxeip'  :  Machiritae).  The  descendants 
of  Machir  the  fither  of  Gilead  (Num.  xxvi.  29). 

MACHMAS  (Moxiuas:  Machmas),  1  Mace, 
ix.  7:!.     [MiciriiAsii.] 

MACHNADEBA'I  (^nn^aO:  MaxoSj/a/Soi} ; 

i"  There  are  several  considerations  which  may  lead  us  to 
doubt  whether  we  are  warranted  by  the  Biblical  narrative 
in  affixing  a  personal  sense  to  the  name  of  Gilead,  such  as 
the  very  remote  period  from  which  that  name  as  attached 
to  the  district  dates  (Gen.  xxxi.),  and  also  such  passages 
as  Num.  xxxii.  39,  and  Dcut.  iii.  15.  (See  Ewald,  Gcsch. 
ii.  477,  478,  49;t.) 

*  The  story  of  the  purchase  current  amongst  the  mo- 
dern Arabs  of  Hebron,  as  told  by  Wilson  {Lands,  &c.,  i. 
361),  is  a  counterpart  of  the  legend  of  the  stratagem  by 
wliich  the  IMioenician  Dido  obtained  land  enough  for  her 
city  of  Byrs;v.  "  Ibrahim  asked  only  as  nnich  gromid  a.s 
could  be  covered  with  a  cow's  bide  ;  but  after  the  agrec- 


MACHPELAH 


183 


Alex.  Maxi'aSaoySoi) :  J/t'c/inecMoi),  one  of  the  sons 
of  Bani  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's 
command  (Ezr.  x.  40).  The  marginal  reading  of 
A.  V.  is  Mahnadebai,  which  is  found  in  some  copies. 
In  the  corresponding  list  of  1  Ksd.  ix.  34  the  place 
of  this  name  is  occupied  by  "  of  the  sous  of  Ozora," 
which  may  be  partly  traced  in  the  original. 


n^ 


MACH'PELAH  (always  with  the  article— 
n'?2Ill3n  :  rb  ^iirKovv,  also  rh  ^iirKovv  (rirr}\aiov ; 
dnplcx,  also  sixlunca  duplex),  the  spot  containing 
the  timbered  field,  in  the  end  of  which  was  the 
cave  which  Abraham  purchased*  from  the  Bene- 
Heth,  and  which  became  the  burial  place  of  Sarah, 
Abraham  himself,  Isaac,  Rebekah,  Leah,  and  Jacob. 
Abraham  resided  at  Bethel,  Hebron  and  Gerar, 
but  the  field  which  contained  his  tomb  was  the 
only  spot  which  positively  belonged  to  him  in  the 
Land  of  Piomise.  That  the  name  applied  to  the 
general  locality,  and  not  to  either  the  field  or  the 
cav-irn,'>  is  evident  from  Gen.  xxiii.  17,  "the  field 
of  Ephrou  which  was  in  Macpelah  .  .  .  the  field 
and  the  cave  which  was  therein,"  although  for 
convenience  of  expression  both  field  and  cave  are 
occasionally  called  by  the  name.  Its  position  is — 
with  one  exception  uniformly — specified  as  "  facing 
CJS-'pj!)    Mamre"  (Gen.   xxiii.   17,   19,    xxv.   9, 

xlix.  30,  1.  13).  What  the  meaning  of  this  ancient 
name — not  met  with  beyond  the  book  of  Gcuesis 
— may  be,  appears  quite  uncertain.  The  older 
intei-pretei-s,  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  Targums  of  Dn- 
kelos  and  Pseudo-jonathan,  Peschito,  Veneto-Greek, 
&c.,  explain  it  as  meaning  "  double" — the  double 
cave  or  the  double  field — but  the  modern  lexico- 
graphers interpret  it,  either  by  comparison- with  the 
Ethiopic,  as  Geseuius  {Thes.  704  6),  an  allotted  or 
separated  place ;  or  agam^as  Fiirst  {Handivb. 
733  a)— the  undulating  spot.  The  one  is  probably 
as  near  the  real  meaning  as  the  other. 

Beyond  the  passages  already  cited,  the  Bible  con- 
tains no  mention  either  of  the  name  Macj)elah  or 
of  the  sepulchre  of  the  Patriarchs.  Unless  this 
was  the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah  to  which  Absalom 
had  vowed  or  pretended  to  have  vowed  a  pilgri- 
mage, when  absent  in  the  remote  Geshur  (2  Sam. 
XV.  7),  "no  allusion  to  it  has  been  discovered  in 
the  records  of  David's  residence  at  Hebron,  nor 
yet  in  the  struggles  of  the  Maccabees,  so  many 
of  whose  battles  were  fought  in  and  around 
it.  It  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  absence 
among  the  ancient  Hebrews  of  that  veneiation 
for  holy  places  which  is  so  eminently  charac- 
teristic of  modern  Orientals.  But  there  aie  few,  if 
any,  of  the  ancient  sites  of  Palestine  of  whose  ge- 
nuineness we  can  feel  more  assured  than  Macpelah. 
The  traditional  spot  has  everything  in  its  favour  as 
far  as  position  goes  ;  while  the  wall  which  encloses 
the  Haram,  or  sacred  precinct  in  which  the  scpul- 


ment  was  concluded  he  cut  the  hide  into  thongs,  and  sur- 
rounded the  whole  of  the  space  now  forming  the  Haram." 
The  story  is  remarkable,  not  only  for  its  repetition  of  the 
older  Semitic  talc,  but  for  its  complete  dcpartm-e  from 
the  simple  and  open  character  of  Abraham,  ah  set  forth  In 
the  Biblical  narrative.  A  similar  story  is  tol<1  of  other 
p'lacts,  but,  like  Byrsa,  their  names  contain  something 
suggestive  of  the  hide.  The  writer  has  not  been  able  to 
trace  any  coraiexion  of  tliis  kind  in  any  of  the  ua.ucs  of 
MacpeUUi  or  Hebron. 

^  I'he  l.XX.  invariably  alUuh  the  name  to  the  cave : 
see  xxiii.  19,  kv  tu>  anrjKaiif  toO  oypoO  Tijj  £i7rA(|! .  This 
is  followed  bj'  Jerome. 


184 


MACIIPELAH 


Mu^que  .at  Hebron 


clires  themselves  are  reported,  and  prolxibly  with 
truth,  still  to  lie — and  which  is  the  only  part  at 
present  accessible  to  Christians — is  a  monument 
certainly  equal,  and  probably  superior  in  age  to 
anything  remaining  in  Palestine.  It  is  a  quadran- 
gular building  of  about  200  feet  in  length  by  115  in 
width,  its  dark  grey  walls  rising  50  or  60  in  height, 
without  window  or  opening  of  any  description, 
except  two  small  entrances  at  the  S.E.  and  S.W. 
corners.  It  stands  nearly  on  the  crest  of  the  hill 
which  forms  the  eastern  side  of  the  valley  on  the 
slopes  and  bottom  of  which  the  town  is  strewn,  and 
it  is  remarkable  how  this  venerable  structure,  quite 
affecting  in  its  hoary  grey*  colour  and  the  archaic 
forms  of  its  masonry,  thus  rising  above  the  meaner 
buildings  which  it  has  so  often  beheld  in  ruins, 
dignities,  and  so  to  speak  accentuates,  the  general  mo- 
notony of  the  town  of  Hebron.  The  ancient  Jewish 
tradition  '  ascribes  its  erection  to  David  (Jichns  ha- 
Aboth  in  Hottinger,  Cippi  Hehr.  30),  thus  making 
it  coeval  with  the  pool  in  the  valley  below ;  but, 
whatever  the  worth  of  this  tradition,  it  may  well 
be  of  the  age  of  Sulonion,"*  for  the  masonry  is  even 
more  antique  in  its  character  than  that  of  the 
lower  portion  of  the  south  and  south-western  walls 
of  the  Haram  at  Jerusalem,  and  which  many 
critics  ascribe  to  Solomon,  while  even  the  severest 


c  According  to  hap-Parcbi  (Asher's  Be>ij.  437),  "  the 
stones  had  formerly  belonged  to  the  Temple."  Ritter 
{Eidkuiide,  Palast.  240)  goes  so  far  as  to  suggest  Joseph  | 

d  The  peculiarities  of  the  masonry  are  those:— (1)  Some 
of  the  stones  are  very  large  :  Dr.  AVilson  mentions  one 
38  ft.  long,  and  3  ft.  4  in.  deep.  The  l.irgost  in  the  Haram 
wall  at  Jerusalem  is  2tift.  But  yet  (2)  the  surface— in 
splendid  preservation— is  very  finely  worked,  more  so  than 
the  finest  of  the  stones  at  the  south  and  south-west  portion 


allows  it  to  be  of  the  date  of  Herod.  The  date 
must  always  remain  a  mystery,  but  there  are  two 
considerations  which  may  weigh  in  favour  of  fixing 
it  very  early.  1.  That  often  as  the  town  of  Hebron 
may  have  been  destroyed,  this,  being  a  tomb,  would 
always  be  spared.  2.  It  cannot  on  architectural 
grounds  be  later  than  Herod's  time,  while  on  the 
other  hand  it  is  omitted  from  the  catalogue  given 
by  Josephus  of  the  places  which  he  rebuilt  or 
adorned.  Had  Herod  erected  the  enclosure  round  the 
tombs  of  the  fathers  of  the  nation,  it  is  hardly  con- 
ceivable that  Josephus  would  have  omitted  to  extol 
it,  especially  when  he  mentions  apparently  the  very 
structure  now  existing.  His  words  on  this  occasion 
are  "  the  monuments  {nvrifieia)  of  Abraham  and 
his  sons  are  still  to  bo  seen  in  the  town,  all  of  fine 
stone  and  admirably  wrought "  (iraKU  (caXTJs  fiap- 
fnapov  KoX  (pL\oTijxo3S  ilpyacrixiva,  B.J.  iv.  9,  §7). 
Of  the  contents  of  this  enclosure  we  have  only 
the  most  meagre  and  confused  accounts.  The  spot 
is  one  of  the  most  sacred  of  the  Moslem  sanctuaries, 
and  since  the  occupation  of  Palestine  by  them  it 
has  been  entirely  closed  to  Christians,  and  partially 
so  to  Jews,  who  are  allowed,  on  rare  occasions  only, 
to  look  in  through  a  hole.  A  great  part  of  the  area 
is  occupied  by  a  building  which  is  now  a  mosque, 
and  was  probably  originally  a  church,  but  of  its 

of  the  enclosure  at  Jenisalem ;  the  sunken  part  round  the 
edges  (absurdly  called  the  "  bevel ")  very  shallow,  with  no 
resemblance  at  all  to  more  modern  "  nistic  work."  (3)  The 
cross  joints  are  not  always  vertical,  but  some  are  at  an 
angle.  (4)  The  wall  is  divided  by  pilasters  about  2  ft.  6  in. 
wide,  and  5  ft.  apart,  running  the  entire  height  of  the 
ancient  wall.  It  is  very  much  to  be  wished  that  careful 
lart;o  photographs  were  taken  of  these  walls  from  a  near 
point.    The  writer  is  not  awaro  that  any  such  yet  exist. 


MADAI 

date  or  style  nothing  is  known.  The  sepnlclires  of 
Abraham  and  Sarah,  Isaac  and  Rebekali,  Jacob  and 
Leah,  are  sliown  on  the  floor  of  the  mosque,  covered 
in  the  usual  Mohammedan  style  with  rich  carpets ; 
but  the  real  sepulchres  are,  as  they  were  in  the 
12th  and  16th  centuries,  in  a  cave  below  the  floor 
(Benj.  ofTudela:  Jichus  ha-Ahuth:  Monro).  In 
this  they  resemble  the  tomb  of  Aaron  on  Mount 
Hor.  [See  vol.  i.  p.  824,  8"i5.]  The  cave,  according 
to  the  earliest  and  the  latest  testimony,  opens  to  the 
south.  This  was  tiie  report  of  Monro's  servant  in 
IBoo;  and  Arculf  particularly  mentions  the  tact 
that  the  bodies  lay  with  their  heads  to  the  north,  as 
they  would  do  if  deposited  from  the  south.  A  belief 
seems  to  prevail  in  the  town  that  the  cave  commu- 
nicates witli  some  one  of  the  modern  sepulchres  at 
a  considerable  distance,  outside  of  Hebron  (Loewe, 
in  ZcituiK)  des  Jmlenth.  June  1,  1839). 

The  accounts  of  the  sacred  enclosure  at  Hebron 
will  be  found  collected  by  Ritter  (Erdkunde,  Pa- 
Idatina,  209,  &o.,  but  especially  236-250)  ;  Wilson 
i^Litnds,  &c.,  i.  363-367);  Robinson  (Bib.  Ees.  ii. 
75-79).  The  chief  authorities  are  Arculf  (a.D. 
700);  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (A.D.cir.  1170);  the 
•lewish  tract  Jichus  ha-Ahoth  (in  Hottinger,  Cippi 
Hehraici ;  and  also  in  Wilson,  i.  365);  All  Bey  (  Tra- 
vels, A.D.  1807,  ii.  232,  233) ;  Giovanni  Finati  {Life 
by  Bankes,  ii.  236) ;  Blonro  {Summer  Ramble 
in  1833,  i.  243)  ;  Loewe,  in  Zeitung  des  Judenth. 
1839,  p.  272,  288.  In  a  note  by  Asher  to  his  edi- 
tion of  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (ii.  92),  mention  is 
made  of  an  Arabic  MS.  in  the  Bibliothfeque  Royale 
at  Paris,  containing  an  account  of  the  condition  of 
the  mosque  under  Saladin.  This  MS.  has  not  yet 
been  publislied.  The  travels  of  Ibrahim  el-Khijari 
in  1669,  70 — a  small  portion  of  which  from  the 
MS.  in  the  Ducal  Library  at  Gotha,  has  been  pub- 
lished by  Tuch,  with  Ti'anslation,  &c.  (Leipzig, 
Vogel,  1850),  are  said  to  contain  a  minute  descrip- 
tion of  the  Mosque  (Tuch,  p.  2). 

A  few  words  about  the  exterior,  a  sketch  of  the 
masonry,  and  a  view  of  the  town,  showing  the  en- 
closure standing  prominently  in  the  foreground, 
will  be  found  in  Bartlett's  Walks,  &c.,  216-219.  A 
photograph  of  the  exterior,  from  the  East  (?)  is  given 
as  No.  63  of  Palestine  as  it  is,  by  Rev.  G.  W. 
Bridges.  A  ground-plan  exhibiting  considerable 
detail,  made  by  two  Moslem  architects  who  lately 
superintended  some  repairs  in  the  Haram,  and  given 
by  them  to  Dr.  Barclay  of  Jerusalem,  is  engraved 
in  Osboru's  Pal.  Past  and  Present,  p.  364.    [G.] 

MACRON  (MciKpcoi/ :  Macer),  the  surname 
of  Ptolemeus,  or  Ptolemee,  the  son  of  Dorymenes 
(1  Mace.  iii.  38)  and  governor  of  Cyprus  under 
Ptolemy  Philometor  (2  Mace.  x.  12). 

MAD'AICID;  Mo5oh  Jfar/rtO- which  occurs 
in  Gen.  x.  2,  among  the  list  of  the  sons  of  Japhet, 
has  been  commonly  regarded  as  a  personal  appel- 
lation ;  and  most  commentators  call  Madai  the  third 
son  of  Japhet,  and  the  progenitor  of  the  Jledes. 
But  it  is  e.vtremely  doubtful  whether,  in  the  mind 
of  the  writer  of  Gen.  x.,  the  term  Madai  was  re- 
garded as  reijresenting  a  person.  That  the  gene- 
alogies in  the  chapter  are  to  some  extent  ethnic  is 
universally  allowed,  and  may  be  seen  even  in  our 
Authorized  Version  (ver.  16-18).     And  as  Gomer, 


MADMENAH 


185 


Magog,  Javan,  Tubal,  and  Meshech,  which  are  con- 
joined in  Gen.  x.  2  with  Madai,  are  elsewhere  in 
Scripture  always  ethnic  and  not  personal  appellatives 
(Ez.  xxvii.  13,  xxx-viii.  G,  x.xxix.  6;  Dan.  viii.  21  ; 
Joel  iii.  6  ;  Ps.  cxx.  5 ;  Is.  Ixvi.  19,  &c.),  so  it  is 
probable  that  they  stand  for  nations  rather  than 
persons  here.  In  that  case  no  one  would  legard 
Madai  as  a  person  ;  and  we  must  remember  that  it 
is  the  exact  word  used  elsewhere  throughout  Scrip- 
ture for  the  well-known  nation  of  the  Jledes.  Pro- 
bably therefore  all  that  the  writer. intends  to  assert 
in  Gen.  x.  2  is,  that  the  Medes,  as  well  as  the 
Gomerites,  Greeks,  Tibareni,  Moschi,  &c.,  descendetl 
from  Japhet.  Modern  science  has  found  that,  both 
in  physical  type  and  in  language,  the  Medes  belong 
to  that  family  of  the  human  race  which  embraces  the 
Cymry  and  the  Greco-Romans.  (See  Prichard's  Phys. 
Hist,  of  Mankind,  iv.  6-50  ;  Gh.  x.  §2-4 ;  and 
comp.  the  article  on  the  Medes.)  [G.  R.] 

MADI'ABUN  ('Hjua5a;3ow  ;  Alex.  'Ir^ffoC 
'HjuaSa/3ouy).  The  sons  of  MacUabuu,  according  to 
1  Esd.  V.  58,  were  among  the  Levites  who  super- 
intended the  restoration  of  the  Temple  under  Zoro- 
babel.  The  name  does  not  occur  in  the  parallel 
narrative  of  Ezr.  iii.  9,  and  is  also  omitted  in  the 
Vulgate  ;  nor  is  it  easy  to  conjecture  the  origin  of 
the  interpolation.  Our  translators  followed  the 
reading  of  the  Aldine  edition. 

MA'DIAN  (Ma5(a;u  :  Madian,  but  Cod.  Amiat. 
of  N.  T.  Madiam),   Jud.  ii.   26;    Acts  vii.  29. 

[MiDIAN.] 

MADMAN'NAH(n^JDn^:  MaxapeiV;  Alex. 
Be'5e^r\va:'^  Medemena),  one  of  the  towns  in  the 
south  district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  31).  It  is  named 
with  Hoi-mah,  Ziklag,  and  other  remote  places,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  identical  with  the  Madmenah 
of  Isaiah.  To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onornasticon, 
"  Jledemana")  it  appears  to  have  been  well-known. 
It  was  called  in  their  time  Menois,  and  was  not  far 
from  Gaza.  The  first  stage  southward  from  Gaza 
is  now  el-Minijdy  (Kob.  i.  602),  which,  in  defiiult 
of  a  better,  is  suggested  by  Kiepert  (in  his  Map, 
1856)  as  tlie  modern  lepresentative  of  Menois,  and 
therefore  of  JMadmannah. 

In  the  genealogical  lists  of  1  Chron.,  Madraannah 
is  derived  from  Caleb-ben-Hezron  through  his  con- 
cubine Maachah,  whose  son  Shaaph  is  recorded  as 
the  founder  of  the  town  (ii.  49). 

For  the  termination  compare  the  neighbouring 
place  Sansannah.  [G.] 

MAD'MEN  (101»  :>>  -wawis:  silens),  a  place 
in  Moab,  threatened  with  destruction  in  the  tle- 
nunciations  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  2),  but  not  elsewhere 
named,  and  of  which  nothing  is  yet  known.      [G.] 

MADMEN'AH  (njOnO:'=  MaSe/ST^m:  Mcde- 
mena),  one  of  the  Benjamite  villages  north  of 
Jerusalem,  the  inhabitants  of  which  weie  fright- 
ened away  by  the  approach  of  Sennacherib  along 
the  northern  road  (Is.  x.  31).  Like  others  of  (he 
places  mentioned  in  this  list,  Madmenah  is  not 
elsewhere  named  ;  for  to  Madmannah  and  Mad- 
men it  can  have  no  relation.  Gesenius  {Jesaia, 
414)  points  out  that  the  verb  in  the  sentence  is 


*  Note  the  change  of  m  into  6,  unusual  in  the  Alex, 
MS.,  which  -usually  follows  the  Hebrew  more  closely  than 
the  orilinary  LXX.  text :  compare  also  Madmenah. 

b  The  liXX.  have  translated  the  name  as  if  from  the 
same  root  with  the  verb  which  accompanies  it— JO^JO 


■•fSMri.  TravcTLv  irav'creTai :  in  which  they  are  followed  by 

the  Vulgate— but  the  roots,  though  similar,  are  really  ilis- 
tinct.    (See  Gesenius,  Then.  314a,  3 15a.) 
<:  For  the  change  of  »i  into  0  couii).  Madmannah. 


186 


MADNESS 


active — "  Madinenali  flics,"  not,  as  in  A.  V.,  "  is 
removed  "  (so  also  Michaelis,  Bibclfur  Ungelehrten). 
Jladmenah  is  not  inij)ossibly  alluded  to  by 
Isaiah  (xxv.  10)  in  his  denunciation  of  Moab,  whore 
the  word  rendered  in  A.  \'.  "  dunghill  "  is  identical 
with  that  name.  The  oricrjnal  text  (or  Cetliib),  by 
a  variation  in  the  preposition  (^D3  for  1D1},  reads 
the  "  watei's  of  jladmenah."  If  this  is  so,  the 
I'eference  may  be  either  to  the  Madmenah  of  Ben- 
jamin— one  of  the  towns  in  a  district  abounding 
with  corn  and  thresliing-floors — or  nioi-e  apjiro- 
priately  still  to  Madmen,  the  Moabite  town. 
Gesenius  {Jesaia,  786)  appears  to  have  ovei-looked 
this,  which  might  have  induced  him  to  regard  with 
more  favour  a  suggestion  which  seems  to  have  been 
first  made  by  Joseph  Kimchi.  [<;.] 

MADNESS.  The  words  rendered  by  "  mad," 
"  madman,"  "  madness,"  &c.,  in  the  A.  V.,  vary 
considerably  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  0.  T.  In  Deut. 
xxviii.  28,  34,  1  Sam.  sxi.  13,  14,  15,  &c.  {p.avia, 
&c.,  in  the  LXX.),  they  are  derivatives  of  the  root 
yjtJ*,  "  to  be  stirred  or  e.xcited ;"  in  Jer.  .xxv.  16, 
1.  38,  li.  7,  Eccl.  i.  17,  &c.  (irepi(/)opo,  LXX.),  from 
the  root  T>T\,  "  to  flash  out,"  applied  (like  the  Greek 
(pKeyeiv)  either  to  light  or  sound  ;  in  Is.  xliv.  25, 
from  ?3D,  "to  make  void  or  foolish"  {fiapaiveiv, 
LXX.);  in  Zech.  xii.  4,  from  HDn,  "  to  wander" 

(^Kcrraffis,  LXX.).  In  the  N.  T.  the}' are  generally 
used  to  render  fiaivecrdat  or  ixavla  (as  in  John  x. 
20  ;  Acts  xxvi.  24 ;  1  Cor.  xiv.  23) ;  but  in  2  Pet. 
ii.  16  the  word  is  irapacppoviu,  and  in  Luke  vi.  11 
&voia.  These  passages  show  tliat  in  Scripture 
"  madness "  is  recognised  as  a  derangement,  pro- 
ceeding either  from  weakness  and  misdirection  of 
intellect,  oi'  from  ungovernable  violence  of  passion  ; 
and  in  both  cases  it  is  spoken  of,  sometimes  as  arising 
from  the  will  and  action  of  man  himself,  some- 
times as  inflicted  judicially  by  the  liand  of  God. 
In  one  passage  alone  (John  x.  20)  is  madness  ex- 
pressly connected  wjth  demoniacal  possession,  b}' 
the  Jews  in  their  cavil  against  our  Lord  [see  De- 
moniacs] ;  in  none  is  it  referred  to  any  physical 
causes.  It  will  easily  be  seen  how  entirely  this 
usage  of  the  word  is  accordant  to  the  geneial  spirit 
and  object  of  Scripture^  in  passing  by  physical 
causes,  and  dwelling  on  the  moral  and  s]>iritual  in- 
fluences, by  which  men's  hearts  may  be  affected, 
either  from  within  or  tjom  without. 

It  is  well  known  that  among  Oi-ient;il,  as  among 
most  semi -civilised  nations,  madmen  were  looked 
upon  witli  a  kind  of  reverence,  as  possessed  of  a 
quasi-sacred  chaiacter.  This  arises  partly  no  doubt 
from  the  I'eeling,  that  one,  on  whom  Go<i's  hand  is 
laid  heavily,  should  be  safe  from  all  other  harm  ; 
but  partly  also  fiom  the  belief  that  the  loss  of  rea- 
son and  self-control  opened  the  mind  to  supernatural 
influence,  and  gave  it  therefoi-e  a  supernatural  sa- 
credness.  This  belief  was  strengthened  by  the 
enthusiastic  expression  of  idolatrous  worship  (see 
1  K.  xviii.  26,  28),  and  (occasionally)  of  real  in- 
spiration (see  1  Sam.  xix.  21-24;  comp.  the  appli- 
cation of  "mad  fellow"  in  2  K.  ix.  11,  and  see 
Jer.  xxix.  26;  Acts  ii.  13).  An  illustration  of  it 
may  be  seen  in  the  record  of  David's  pretended 
madness  at  the  court  of  Acbish  (1  Sam.  xxi.  13- 

"  It  is  not  necessary  to  do  more  tlian  mention  the  hy-  (or,  as  he  calls  it,  Syala),  east  of  Banias,  which  he  says 
]iotbesis  of  Procardus,  who  IdKUlifies  Magodan  and  Dal-  the  Saracens  call  Me-Dan,  or  water  of  Dan.  (See  Bro- 
maniUlia  witli  the  well  known  circular  pool  called  Phiala  '  cardus,  Ucsa:  cap.  ill.) 


MAGDALA 

15),  which  shows  it  to  be  not  inconsistent  with  a 
kind  of  contemptuous  forbearance,  such  as  is  often 
manifested  now,  especially  by  the  Turks,  towards 
real  or  supposed  madmen.  [A.  B.] 

MA'DON  (fnO  :  Mappiv  ;  Alex.  MaSav, 
Mapwv :  Madon),  one  of  the  principal  cities  of 
Canaan  before  the  conquest.  Its  king  joined  Jabin 
and  his  confederates  in  their  attempt  against  Joshua 
at  the  waters  of  Merom,  and  like  the  rest  was  killed 
(Josh.  xi.  1,  xii.  19).  No  later  mention  of  it  is 
found,  and  beyond  the  natural  inference  drawn 
from  its  occurrence  with  Ilazor,  Shimron,  &c.,  that 
it  was  in  the  north  of  the  country,  we  have  no  clue 
to  its  position.  .Schwarz  (90)  proposes  to  discover 
Bladon  at  Kefr  Menda,  a  village  with  extensive 
ancient  remains,  at  the  western  end  of  the  Plain  of 
Buttnnf,  4  or  5  miles  N.  of  Sepphoris.  His  grounds 
for  the  identification  ai  e  of  the  slightest :  {a)  the 
frequent  transposition  of  letters  in  Arabic,  and  (6) 
a  statement  of  the  early  Jewish  traveller  hap- 
Parchi  (Asher's  Benj.  of  Tadela,  430),  that  the 
Arabs  identify  Kefar  Mendi  with  "  Midian,"  or, 
as  Schwarz  would  read  it,  Madon.  The  reader  may 
judge  for  himself  what  worth  there  is  in  these 
suggestions. 

In  the  LXX.  version  of  2  Sam.  xxi.  20  the 
Hebrew  words  jn?0  IJ'"'K,  '"a  man  of  stature," 
are  rendered  a.v7)p  MaSi^j',  "a  man  of  Madon." 
This  may  refer  to  the  town  Madon,  or  may  be 
merely  an  instance  of  the  habit  which  these  trans- 
lators had  of  rendering  literally  in  Greek  letters 
Hebrew  words  which  they  did  not  understand. 
Othei-  instances  will  be  found  in  2  K.  vi.  8,  ix.  13, 
xii.  9,  XV.  10,  kc.  &c.  [G.] 

MAE'LUS  (MarjAos :  Michelus),  for  Miamin 
(1  Esd.  ix.  26 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  25). 

MAG'BISH  (:^•''25D■.  Uaye^ls:  3Iegbis).  A 
proper  name  in  Ezr.  ii.  30,  but  whether  of  a  man  or 
of  a  place  is  doubted  by  some ;  it  is  probably  the 
latter,  as  all  the  names  from  Ezr.  ii.  20  to  34, 
exce])t  Elam  and  Harim,  are  names  of  places.  The 
meaning  of  the  name  too,  which  ai>i)ears  to  be 
"  freezing"  or  "  congealing,"  seems  better  suited  to 
a  jilace  tlian  a  man.  One  hundred  and  fifty-six  of 
its  inhabitants,  called  the  children  of  Magbish,  are 
included  in  the  genealogical  roll  of  Ezr.  ii.,  but 
have  fallen  out  from  the  parallel  passage  in  Neh.  vii. 
Magpiash,  however,  is  named  (Neh.  x.  20)  as  one 
of  those  who  sealed  to  the  covenant,  where  Ana- 
thoth  and  JS'ebo  (Nebai)  also  appear  in  the  midst 
of  proper  names  of  men.  Why  in  these  three 
cases  the  names  of  the  places  ai'e  given  instead  of 
those  of  the  family,  or  house,  or  individual,  as 
in  the  case  of  all  the  other  signatures,  it  is  im- 
possible to  say  for  certain,  though  many  reasons 
might  be  guessed.  From  the  position  of  Magbish 
in  the  list  in  Ezr.  ii.,  next  to  Bethel,  Ai,  and  Nebo, 
and  before  Lod,  Hadid,  Ono,  and  Jericho,  it  would 
seem  to  be  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.      [A.  C.  H.] 

MAG'DALA  {MayaSau'-  in  MSS.  B,  D,  and  Si- 
nait. — A  being  defective  in  this  place ;  but  Rec.  Text, 
MaySa\d:  Syr.  Mai]edun\  Vulg.  Magedan). 

The  name  Magdala  does  not  really  exist  in  the 
Bible.  It  is  found  in  the  received  Greek  text 
and  the  A.  V.  of  Matt.  xv.  39  only  ;  but  the  chief 
MSS.  and  versions  exhibit  the  name  as  Magadan. 


MAGDALA 

Into  the  limits''  of  Magadan  Christ  came  by 
I)oat,  over  the  lake  of  Genuesareth,  after  His  miracle 
of  feeding  the  four  thousand  on  the  mountain  of  the 
eastern  side  (Matt.  xv.  39)  ;  and  from  thence,  after 
a  short  encounter  with  the  Pharisees  and  Sad- 
ducees,  He  returned  in  the  same  boat  to  the  ojipo- 
site  shore.  In  the  present  text  of  the  parallel  nar- 
rative of  St.  Mark  (viii.  10)  we  find  the  "  parts 
of  Dalmanutha,"  though  in  the  time  of  Eiisebius 
and  Jerome  the  two  were  in  agieement,  both  reading 
Magedan,  as  Mark  still  does  in  Codex  I).  They 
place  it  "round  Gerosa"  {Onomasticnn,  sub  voce), 
as  if  the  Maged  or  Maked  of  Maccabees;  but 
this  is  at  variance  with  the  requirements  of  the  nar- 
rative, which  indicates  a  place  close  to  the  water,  and 
on  its  western  side.  The  same,  as  far  as  distance  is 
concerned,  may  be  said  of  Megiddo — in  its  Greek 
form,  Mageddo,  or,  as  Josephus  spells  it,  Magedo— 
wliich,  as  a  well-known  locality  of  Lower  Galilee, 
might  not  unnaturally  suggest  itself. 

Dalmanutha  was  probably  at  or  near  Ain  el-Ba- 
rideh,  about  a  mile  below  cl-Mcjdel,  on  the  western 
edge  of  the  lake  of  Germesareth.  El-Mcjdel  is 
doubtless  the  representative  of  an  ancient  Migdol  or 
Jlagdala,  possibly  that  from  which  St.  Mary  came. 
Her  native  place  was  possibly  not  far  distant  from 
the  Magadan  of  our  Lord's  history,  and  we  can  only 
suppose  that,  owing  to  the  familiar  recurrence  of 
tlie  word  Magdalene,  the  less  known  name  was 
absorbed  in  the  better,  and  ]\Iagdala  usurped  the 
name,  and  possibly  also  the  position  of  Magadan. 
At  any  rate  it  has  prevented  any  search  being 
made  for  the  name,  which  may  very  possibly  still 
be  discovered  in  the  country,  though  so  strangely 
superseded  in  the  records.' 

The  Magdala  which  conferred  her  name  on 
"  Mary  the  Magdal-ene"  (M.  t)  VlaySaX-nvrj),  one 
of  the  numerous  Migdols,  i.  e.  towers,  which  stood 
in  Palestine — such  as  the  Migdal-el,  or  tower 
of  Ood,  in  Naphtali,  the  Migdal-gad  and  Migdal- 
EDAR  of  Judah — was  probably  the  place  of  that 
name  which  is  mentioned  in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud 
as  near  Tiberias  (Otho,  Lex.  Rahh.  353  ;  Schwarz, 
189),  and  this  again  is  as  probably  the  modern 
el-Mcjdel,  "a  nfiserable  little  Muslim  village," 
rather  more  than  an  hour,  or  about  three  miles,'' 
above  Tnbariyeh,  lying  on  the  water's  edge  at  the 
south-east  corner  of  the  plain  of  Gennesareth 
(Hob.  ii.  396,  397).  Professor  Stanley's  description 
seems  to  embrace  every  point  worth  notice.  "  Of 
all  the  numerous  towns  and  villages  in  what  must 
have  been  the  most  thickly  peopled  district  of  Pa- 
lestine one  only  remains.  A  collection  of  a  few 
iiovels  stands  at  the  south-east  corner  of  the  plain 
of  Gennesareth,  its  name  hardly  altered  fVom  the 
ancient  Magdala  or  Migdol,  so  allied  probably  from 
a  watch-tower,  of  which  ruins  appear  to  remain, 
that  guarded  the  entrance  to  the  plain.  Through 
its  connexion  with  her  whom  the  long  opinion  of 
the  Church  identifi&l  with  the  penitent  sinner,  the 
name  of  that  ancient  tower  has  now  been  incorpo- 
rated into  all  the  languages  of  Europe.  A  large 
•solitary  thorn-ti-ee  stands  beside  it.  'I'he  situation, 
otherwise  unmarked,  is  dignified  by  the  high  lime- 
stone rock  which  overhangs  it  on  the  south-west, 

b  TO.  opi.a.  Thus  the  present  t-J-J/cjieJ— whelhcr  iden- 
tical with  Magadan  or  Magdala  or  not— is  surrounded  by 
the  Ard  el-Mcjdel  (Wilson,  Lmds,  ii.  136). 

"  The  original  Ibrm  of  the  name  may  have  been  Mi- 
gron  ;  at  least  so  we  may  infrr  frnm  the  LXX.  version  of 
Migvon,  which  is  Magedo  or  Magdon. 


MAGI 


1S7 


perforated  witn  caves;  recalling,  by  a  curious  though 
doubtless  unintentional  coincidence,  the  scene  i  f 
Coreggio's  celebrated  picture."  These  caves  a]c  said 
by  Schwarz  (lS9i — though  on  no  clear  authority — 
to  bear  the  name  of  Teliman,  i.  e.  Talmanutha.  "  A 
clear  st)-eam  rushes  past  the  rock  into  the  sea, 
issuing  in  a  tangled  thicket  of  thorn  and  willow 
from  a  deep  ravine  at  the  back  of  the  plain"  (<S.  ^ 
P.  382,  383).  Jerome,  although  he  plays  upon  the 
name  Magdalene — "recte  vocatam  Magdaleneii,  id 
est  Turritam,  ob  ejus  singularem  fidei  ac  ardoris 
constantiam  " — does  not  appear  to  connect  it  with 
the  place   in   question.     By    the   Jews   the  word 

X^TiD  is  used  to  denote  a  person  who  platted  or 
twisted  hair,  a  practice  then  much  in  use  amongst 
women  of  loose  character.  A  certain  "  Miriam 
Magdala "  is  mentioned  by  the  Talmudists,  who 
is  probably  intended  for  St.  Mary.  (See  Otho, 
Lex.  llabb.  "Maria;"  and  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tcdm. 
389,  1459.)  Magdalum  is  mentioned  as  between 
Tiberias  and  Capernaum,  as  early  a.s  by  Willibald, 
A.d.  722  ;  since  that  time  it  is  occasionally  named 
by  travellers,  amongst  others  Quaiesmius,  Eluci- 
datio,  86G6 ;  Sir  R.  Guylforde,  Pylgrymage ; 
Breydenbach,  p.  29 ;  Bonar,  Land  of  Promise, 
433,  434,  and  549.  Buchanan  {Clerical  Furlough, 
375)  describes  well  the  striking  view  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  lake  which  is  obtained  fi-om  el- 
Mejdel. — A  ruined  site  called  Om  Moghdala  is 
pointed  out  at  about  2  hours  S.  of  Jerusalem,  appa- 
rently N.W.  of  Bethlehem  (Tobler,  Ztte  Wand.  81), 

ril.  B.  H.] 

MAG'DIEL  (7^jt'''^3» :  MayeSi-fi^,  in  Chron. 
Medi^\  ;  Alex.  MeroSi^X  :  Magdicl).  One  of  the 
"  dukes "  of  Edom,  descended  from  Esau  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  43  ;  1  Chr.  i.  54).  The  name  does  not  yet 
appear  to  have  been  met  with,  as  borne  by  either 
tribe  or  place, 

MA'GED  (MaK€5,  in  both  MSS. :  Magetli), 
the  form  in  which  the  name  Maked  appears  in 
the  A.  V.  on  its  second  occurrence  (1  Mace.  v.  36). 

MAGI  (A.V.  "wise  men:"  ^ayoi:  rrictgi). 
It  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  article 
to  enter  fully  into  the  history  of  the  Magi  as 
an  order,  and  of  the  relation  in  which  they 
stood  to  the  religion  of  Zoi'oaster.  Only  so  far 
as  they  come  within  the  horizon  of  a  student 
of  the  Bible,  and  present  points  of  contact  with  its 
history  and  language,  have  they  any  claim  for  notice 
in  this  place.  As  might  be  expected,  where  two 
forms  -of  faith  and  national  life  run  on,  for  a  long 
ijieriod,  side  by  side,  each  maintaining  its  distinct- 
ness, those  points  are  separated  from  each  other  by 
wide  intervals,  ;uid  it  is  hard  to  treat  of  them  with 
any  apparent  continuity.  What  has  to  be  said  will 
be  best  arranged  under  the  tour  following  heads: — 

I.  The  position  occupied  by  the  Magi  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  0.  T. 

il.  The  transition-stages  in  the  history  of  the  woi-d 
and  of  the  order  between  the  close  of  the  0.  T.  and 
the  time  of  the  N.  T.,  so  for  as  they  atlect  the  latter. 

III.  The  Magi  as  they  appear  in  the  N.  T. 

IV.  The  later  traditions  which  have  gathered 
round  the  Jlagi  of  Matt.  ii. 

d  The  statement  of  the  'I'almud  is,  that  a  pereon  pass- 
ing by  Magdala  could  hear  the  voice  of  tlie  crier  In  Ti- 
berias. At  three  miles'  distance  tliis  would  not  be  impos- 
sible in  Palestine,  where  sonnd  travels  to  a  distance  far 
greater  tliiin  in  this  country.  (See  Rob  iii.  17  ;  Stanley, 
S.  (j  I'. ;   I'liorasoM,  iMiid  and  Book.') 


188 


MAGI 


I.  In  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  the  word  occurs 
but  twice,  and  then  only  incidentally.  In  Jer.  xxxix. 
3  and  13  we  meet,  among  the  Chaldaean  officers 
sent  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to  Jerusalem,  one  with  the 
name  or  title  of  i;ab-Mag  ( JD'^"]).  This  word  is 
interpreted,  after  the  analogy  of  liab-shakeh  and 
l!ab-saris,  as  equivalent  to  chief  of  the  Magi  (Ewald, 
Propheten,  and  Hitzig,  in  loc,  taking  it  as  the 
title  ofNergal-Sharezer),  and  we  thus  find  both  the 
name  and  the  order  occupying  a  conspicuous  place 
under  the  government  of  the  Chaldaeans.  Many 
questions  of  some  difficulty  are  suggested  by  this  fact. 

Historically  the  Magi  are  conspicuous  chiefly  as 
a  Persian  religious  aiste.  Herodotus  connects  them 
with  another  people  by  reckoning  them  among  the 
six  tribes  of  the  Medes  (i.  101).  They  appear  in 
his  history  of  Astyages  as  interpreters  of  dreams 
(i.  120),  the  name  having  apparently  lost  its  ethno- 
logical and  acquired  a  aiste  significance.  But  in 
Jeremiah  they  appear  at  a  still  earlier  period  among 
the  retinue  of  the  Chaldaean  king.  The  very  word 
Kab-Mag  (if  the  received  etymology  of  Magi  be  cor- 
rect) presents  a  hybrid  formation.  The  first  syllable 
is  unquestionably  Semitic,  the  last  is  all  but  lui- 
questionably  Aryan.*  The  problem  thus  presented 
admits  of  two  solutions: — (1)  If  we  believe  the 
Chaldaeans  to  have  been  a  Hamitic  peo]ile,  closely 
connected  with  the  Babylonians  [Ciiai,daeans], 
we  must  then  suppose  that  the  colossal  schemes  of 
greatness  which  showed  themselves  in  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's conquests  led  him  to  gather  round  him 
the  wise  men  and  religious  teachers  of  the  nations 
which  he  subdued,  and  that  thus  the  sacred  tribe 
of  the  Medes  rose  under  his  rule  to  favour  and 
power.  His  treatment  of  those  who  bore  a  like 
character  among  the  Jews  (Dan.  i.  4)  makes  this 
hypothesis  a  natural  one  ;  and  the  alliance  which 
existed  between  the  Medes  and  the  Chaldaeans  at 
the  time  of  the  overthrow  of  the  old  Assyrian 
empire  would  account  for  the  interaiixture  of  reli- 
gious systems  belonging  to  two  different  races. 
(2)  If,  on  the  other  hand,  with  Renan  [Histoirc 
des  Loingucs  Seinittqncs,  pp.  ()6,  67),  following 
Lassen  and  Kitter,  we  look  on  the  Chaldaeans  as 
themselves  belonging  to  the  Aryan  family,  and  pos- 
sessing sti'ong  affinities  with  the  Medes,  there  is 
even  less  difficulty  in  explaining  the  presence  among 
the  one  people  of  the  religious  teachers  of  the 
other.  It  is  likely  enough,  in  either  case,  that  the 
simpler  Median  religion  which  the  Magi  brought 
with  them,  corresponding  more  or  less  closely  to 
the  faitli  of  the  Zendavesta,  lost  some  measure  of 
its  original  purity  through  this  contact  with  the 
darker  superstitions  of  the  old  Babylonian  popula- 
tion.    From  this  time  onward  it  is  noticeable  that 


^  In  the  Pehlvi  dialect  of  the  Zend,  Mogb  =  priest 
(Hyde,  Relig.  Vet.  Pers.  c.  31);  and  this  is  connected  by 
philologists  with  the  Sanskrit,  malcat  (great),  fxe'-ya^,  and 
magnus  (Gesenius,  s.v.  J  JO  ;  Anquetil  du  Perron's  Zenda- 
vesta, ii.  555).  The  coincidence  of  a  Sanskrit  mdi/a,  in 
the  sense  of  "  illusion,  magic,"  is  remarkable  ;  but  it  is 
probable  that  this,  as  well  as  the  analogous  Greek  word, 
is  the  derived,  rather  than  the  original  meaning  (comp. 
Eichhoff,  Vergleiehung  der  Sprache,  ed.  KaUschmidt,  p. 
231).  Hyde  (J.  c.)  notices  another  etymology,  given  by 
Arabian  authors,  which  makes  the  word  =  a-opt-eared 
(parvis  auribus),  but  rejects  it.  Prideaux,  on  the  other 
hand  (Ccmnexion,  under  uc.  522),  accepts  it,  and  seriously 
connects  it  with  the  story  of  the  Pseudu-Smerdis  who  had 
lost  his  ears  in  Herod,  iii.  69.  Spanheim  (Dub.  Evang. 
xviii.)  speaks  favourably,  though  not  decisively,  of  a  He- 
brew clymolugy. 


MAGI 

the  names  both  of  the  Magi  and  Chaldaeans  are 
identified  with  the  astrology,  divination,  interpreta- 
tion of  dreams,  which  had  impressed  themselves  on 
the  prophets  of  Israel  as  the  most  characteristic 
features  of  the  old  Babel-religion  (Is.  xliv.  25,  xlvii. 
13).  The  Magi  took  their  places  among  "  the  astro- 
logers and  star-gazers  and  monthly  prognosticators." 

It  is  with  such  men  that  we  have  to  think  of 
Daniel  and  his  fellow-exiles  as  associated.  They 
are  described  as  "  ten  times  wiser  than  all  the 
magicians  (LXX.  iiayovs)  and  astrologers"  (Dan. 
i.  20).  Daniel  himself  so  far  sympathises  with  the 
order  into  which  he  is  thus,  as  it  were,  enrolled, 
as  to  intercede  for  them  when  Nebuchadnezzar 
gives  the  order  for  their  death  (Dan.  ii.  24),  and 
accepts  an  office  which,  as  making  him  "  master 
of  the  magicians,''  astrologers,  Chaldaeans,  sooth- 
sayers" (Dan.  V.  11),  Wcis  probably  identical  with 
that  of  the  Kab-Mag  who  first  came  before  us. 
May  we  conjecture  that  he  found  in  the  belief 
which  the  Magi  had  brought  with  them  some 
elements  of  the  truth  that  had  been  revealed  to  his 
fathers,  and  that  the  way  was  thus  prepared  for 
the  sti'oug  sympathy  which  showed  itself  in  a 
himdred  ways  when  the  purest  Aryan  and  the 
purest  Semitic  faiths  were  brought  face  to  face 
with  each  other  (Dan.  vi.  3,  16,  26;  Ezr.  i.  1-4; 
Is.  xliv.  2<S),  agreeing  as  they  did  in  their  hatred 
of  idolatry  and  in  their  acknowledgment  of  the 
"  God  of  Heaven  "  ? 

The  name  of  the  Magi  does  not  meet  us  in  the 
Biblical  account  of  the  Jledo-Persian  kings.  If, 
however,  we  identify  the  Artaxerxes  who  stops  the 
Imilding  of  the  Temple  (Ezr.  iv.  17-22)  with  the 
Pseudo-Smei-dis  of  Herodotus  [Artaxerxes]  and 
the  Gomates  of  the  Behistun  inscription,  we  may 
see  here  also  another  point  of  contact.  The  Magian 
attempt  to  reassert  Median  supremacy,  and  with  it 
probably  a  corrupted  Chaldaized  form  of  Magianism, 
in  place  of  the  pui'er  faith  in  Ormuzd  of  which 
Cyrus  had  been  the  propagator,"^  would  naturally 
be  accompanied  by  antagonism  to  the  people  whom 
the  Persians  had  protected  and  supported.  The 
immediate  renewal  of  the  suspended  work  on  the 
triumph  of  Darius  (Ezr.  iv.  24,  v.  1,  2,  vi.  7,  8) 
falls  in,  it  need  haidly  be  added,  with  this  hypo- 
thesis. The  story  of  the  actual  massacre  of  the 
Magi  throughout  the  dominions  of  Darius,  and  of 
the  commemorative  Magophonia  (Herod,  iii.  79), 
with  whatever  exaggerations  it  may  be  mixed  up, 
indicates  in  like  manner  the  triumph  of  the  Zoro- 
astrian  system.  If  we  accept  the  ti'aditional  date 
of  Zoroaster  as  a  contempoiary  of  Darius,  we  may 
see  in  the  changes  which  he  effected  a  revival  of  the 
older  system."*     It  is  at  any  rate  striking  that  the 


"^  I^JSDTn   3T  i  apxovTO.  iiraoLSuiv  fidytov,  LXX. 

"^  Comp.'  "Sir  Henry  llawlinson's  translation  of  the  Be- 
hi^;tun  inscription  :  "  The  rites  which  Gomates  the  Magian 
had  introduced  1  prohibited.  I  restored  to  the  state  the 
chants,  and  the  worship,  and  to  those  families  which  Go- 
mates  the  Magian  had  deprived  of  them"  {Journal  of 
Asiatic  Son.,  vol.  x.,  and  Blakesley's  Herodotus,  Excurs.  on 
iii.  74). 

li  Tlie  opinion  that  Zoroaster  (otherwise  Zerduscht,  or 
Zarathrnst)  and  his  work  belonged  to  the  6th  century  b.(;. 
rests  chiefly  on  the  mention  in  his  life  and  in  the  Zenda- 
vesta of  a  king  Gustasp,  who  has  been  identified  with 
Hystaspes,  the  father  of  Darius  (Hyde,  c.  24  ;  Du  Perron, 
Zendavesta,  i.  29).  On  the  other  hand,  the  name  of  Zo- 
roaster does  not  appear  in  any  of  the  monumental  or 
historical  notices  of  Darius;  and  Bactria,  rather  than 
Persia,  appears  as  the  scene  of  bis  labours.  'I'be  Magi,  at 
any  rate,  appear  iis  a.  distinct  order,  and  with  a  definite 


MAGI 

woi'd  Magi  does  not  iippear  in  the  Zendavesta,  the 
priests  being  there  described  as  Athavva  (Guardians 
of  the  Fire),  and  that  there  are  multiplied  pro- 
hibitions in  it  of  all  fomis  of  the  magic  which,  in 
the  West,  and  possibly  in  the  East  also,  took  its 
name  fi-om  them,  and  with  which,  it  would  appear, 
they  had  already  become  tainted.  All  such  arts, 
auguries,  necromancy,  and  the  like,  are  looked  on 
as  evil,  and  emanating  from  Ahrimau,  and  are  pur- 
sued by  the  hero-king  Feridoun  with  the  most  per- 
sistent hostility  (Du  Perron,  Zendavesta,  vol.  i.  part 
2,  ]..  268,  424). 

The  name,  however,  kept  its  ground,  and  with  it 
probably  the  order  to  which  it  was  attached.  Under 
Xerxes,  the  Magi  occupy  a  position  which  indicates 
that  they  had  recovered  from  their  temporary  de- 
pression. They  are  consulted  by  him  as  soothsayeis 
(Herod,  vii,  19),  and  are  as  influential  as  they  had 
been  in  the  court  of  Astyages.  They  prescribe  the 
strange  and  terrible  sacrifices  at  the  Strymon  and 
the  Nine  Ways  (Herod,  vii.  114).  They  were  said 
to  have  urged  the  destruction  of  the  temples  of 
Greece  (Cic.  De  Legg.  ii.  10).  Traces  of  their  in- 
fluence may  perhaps  be  seen  in  the  regard  paid  by 
Mardonius  to  the  oracles  of  the  Greek  god  that 
ofiered  the  nearest  analogue  to  their  own  Mithras 
(Herod,  viii.  134),  and  in  the  like  reverence  which 
liad  previously  been  shown  by  the  Median  Datis 
towards  the  island  of  Delos  (Herod,  vi.  97).  They 
come  before  the  Greeks  as  the  representatives  of  the 
religion  of  the  Persians.  No  sacrifices  may  be 
offered  unless  one  oftheir  order  is  present  chanting 
the  piescribed  prayers,  as  in  the  ritual  of  the 
Zendavesta  (Hferod.  i.  132).  No  great  change  is 
traceable  in  their  position  during  the  decline  of  the 
Persian  monarchy.  The  position  of  Judaea  as  a 
Persian  province  must  have  kept  up  some  measure 
of  contact  between  the  two  religious  systems.  The 
histories  of  Esther  and  Nehemiah  point  to  the  in- 
fluence which  might  be  exercised  by  members  of 
the  subject-race.  It  might  well  be  that  the  religious 
minds  of  the  two  nations  would  learn  to  respect 
each  other,  and  that  some  measure  of  the  prophetic 
hopes  of  Israel  might  mingle  with  the  belief  of  the 
Magi.  As  an  order  they  perpetuated  themselves 
under  the  Parthian  kings.  The  name  rose  to  fresh 
honour  under  the  Sassanidae.  The  classification 
which  was  ascribed  to  Zoroaster  was  recognised  as 
the  basis  of  a  h'lerarchiad  system,  after  other  and 
lower  elements  had  mingled  with  the  earlier 
Dualism,  and  might  be  traced  even  in  the  religion 
and  worship  of  the  Parsees.  According  to  "this 
arrangement  the  Magi  were  divided— by  a  classi- 
fication which  has  been  compared  to  that  of  bishops, 
piiests,  and  deacons — into  disciples  (Harbeds), 
teachers  (Mobeds<^),  and  the  more  perfect  teachers 
of  a  higher  wisdom  (Destur  Mobeds).  This  too 
will  connect  itself  with  a  tradition  further  on 
(Hyde,  c.  28  ;  Du  Perron,  Zendavesta,  ii.  .555): 

II.  In  the  meantime  the  word  was  acquiring  a 
new  and  wider  signification.  It  presented  itself  to 
the  (J reeks  as  connected  with  a  foreign  system  of 


MAGI 


189 


faith,  before  this  time;  and  bis  worlt  iu  relation  to  them, 
if  contemporary  witli  IJarius,  must  have  been  that  of  the 
restorer  rather  than  the  founder  of  a  system.  The  liypo- 
tliesis  of  two  Zoroast«rs  is  hardly  more  than  an  attempt 
to  disentangle  the  conflicting  traditions  that  cluster  round 
the  name,  so  as  to  give  some  degree  of  historical  credibility 
to  each  group.  Most  of  these  traditions  lie  outside  the 
range  of  our  present  inquiry,  but  one  or  two  come  within 
the  horizon  of  Biblical  legend,  if  not  of  Biblical  history. 
Unable  to  account  fur  the  truth  they  recognized  in  his 
Gystem,  except  on  tlie  liypotliesis  that  it  had  been  derived 


divination,  and  the  religion  of  a  foe  whom  they  had 
conquered,  and  it  soon  became  a  bye-word  for  the 
worst  form  of  imposture.  The  rapid  growth  of  this 
feeling  is  traceable  perhaps  in  the  meanings  attached 
to  the  word  by  the  two  great  tragedians.  In  Aes- 
chylus {Fersae,  291)  it  retains  its  old  significance 
as  denoting  simply  a  tribe.  In  Sophocles  (Oed.  Tyr. 
387)  it  appears  among  the  epithets  of  reproach 
which  the  king  heaps  upon  Teiresias.  The  fact, 
however,  that  the  religion  with  which  the  word 
was  associated  still  maintained  its  ground  as  the 
faith  of  a  great  nation,  kept  it  from  falling  into 
utter  disrepute,  and  it  is  interesting  to  notice  how 
at  one  time  the  good,  and  at  another  the  bad,  side 
of  the  word  is  uppermost.  Thus  the  jxayeia  of 
Zoi'oaster  is  spoken  of  with  respect  by  Plato  as  a 
Q^S)v  Qepa-Keia,  forming  the  gi-oundwork  of  an  edu- 
cation which  he  praises  as  far  better  than  that  of 
the  Athenians  {Alcib.  i.  p.  122  a).  Xenophon,  in 
like  manner,  idealises  the  character  and  functions 
of  the  order  (Cyrop.  iv.  5,  §16  ;  6,  §6).  Both  mean- 
ings appear  in  the  later  lexicographers.  The  word 
Magos  is  equivalent  to  aTareoov  Kot  (|)ap/^aK€iiT'))s, 
but  it  is  also  used  for  the  6socre;87)S  /cat  6i6\oyos 
Ka\  iepevs  (Hesych.).  The  Magi  as  an  order  are 
ot  Trapa  Tlepffois  (piXoffocpoi  koI  <l)i\60eoi  (Suid.). 
The  word  thus  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  LXX., 
and  from  them  into  those  of  the  writers  of  the  N.  T., 
oscillating  between  the  two  meanings,  capable  of 
being  used  in  either.  The  relations  which  had 
existed  between  the  Jews  and  Persians  would  per- 
haps tend  to  give  a  prominence  to  the  more  favour- 
able associations  in  their  use  of  it.  In  Daniel  (i.  20, 
ii.  2,  10,  27,  V.  11)  it  is  used,  as  has  been  noticed, 
for  the  priestly  diviners  with  whom  the  prophet 
was  associated.  Philo,  in  like  manner  (^Qnod omnis 
probus  liber,  p.  792),  mentions  the  Magi  with 
warm  praise,  as  men  who  gave  themselves  to  the 
study  of  nature  and  the  contemplation  of  the  Divine 
perfections,  worthy  of  being  the  counsellors  of  kings. 
It  was  perhaps  natural  that  this  aspect  of  the  word 
should  commend  itself  to  the  theosophic  Jew  of 
Alexandria.  There  were,  however,  other  influences 
at  work  tending  to  drag  it  down.  The  swarms  of 
impostors  that  were  to  be  met  with  in  every  part 
of  the  Roman  einpire,  known  as  "  Chaldaei,"  "  Ma- 
thematici,"  and  the  like,  bore  this  name  also.  Their 
arts  were  "  artes  magicae."  Though  jihilosophers 
and  men  of  letters  might  recognise  the  better  mean- 
ing of  which  the  word  was  capable  (Cic.  De  Divin, 
i.  23,  41),  yet  in  the  language  of  public  documents 
and  of  historians,  they  were  treated  as  a  class  at  once 
hateful  and  contemptible  (Tacit.  Ann.  i.  32,  ii.  27, 
xii.  22,  xii.  59),  and  as  such  were  the  victims  of 
repeated  edicts  of  banishment. 

III.  We  need  not  wonder  accordingly  to  find  that 
this  is  the  predominant  meaning  of  the  word  a.s  it 
appears  in  the  N.  T.  The  noun  and  the  verb  de- 
rived from  it  (fiayela  and  fxayfvw)  are  used  by  St. 
Luke  in  describing  the  impostor,  who  is  therefore 
known  distinctively  as  Simon  Magus  (Acts  viii.  9). 
Another  of  the  same  class  (Bar-jesus)  is  described 

from  the  faith  of  Israel,  Christian  and  Mahometan  writers 
have  seen  in  him  the  disciple  of  one  of  the  prophets  of  the 
0.  T.  The  leper  Gehazi,  Baruch  ilie  fiiend  and  disciple 
of  Jeremiah,  some  unnamed  disciple  of  Kzra, — these  (wild 
as  it  may  sound)  have,  each  in  his  turn,  been  identified 
with  the  Bactrian  sage.  His  name  will  meet  us  again 
in  connexion  with  the  Magi  of  the  N.  T.  (Hyde,  I.  c. ; 
Tridcaux,  Conn.,  is.c.  5'21-4.s()). 

e  The  wiir<l  "Mobed,"  a  contraction  of  the  fuller  form 
Magovad,  is  apparently  identical  with  that  which  appears 
in  Greelv  as  Mayos. 


190 


MAGI 


(Acts  xiii.  8)  as  having,  in  his  cognomen  Elymas, 
a  title  which  was  equivalent  to  Magus.    [Elymas.] 

In  one  memorable  instance,  however,  the  word 
retains  (probably,  at  least)  its  better  meaning.  In  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  witten  (according  to  the  ge- 
neral belief  of  early  Christian  writers)  for  the  Hebrew 
Christians  of  Palestine,  we  find  it,  not  as  embody- 
ing the  contempt  which  the  frauds  of  impostors  had 
brought  upon  it  through  the  whole  Roman  empire, 
but  in  the  sense  which  it  had  had,  of  old,  as  asso- 
ciated with  a  religion  which  they  respected,  and  an 
order  of  which  one  of  their  own  prophets  had  been 
the  head.  In  spite  of  Fatiistic  authorities  on  the 
other  side,  asserting  the  Mdyoi  airh  avaToKSiv  of 
Matt.  ii.  1  to  have  been  sorceiers  whose  mys- 
terious knowledge  came  from  below,  not  fi'om 
above,  and  who  were  thus  translated  out  of  dark- 
ness into  light  (Just.  Martyr,  Chrysostom,  Theo- 
phylact,  in  Spanheim,  Dub.  Ecang.  xix. ;  Lightfbot, 
Ilor.  lieh.  in  Matt,  ii.)  we  are  justified,  not  less 
by  the  consensus  of  later  inteipreteis  (including 
even  Maldonatus)  than  by  the  general  tenor  of  St. 
Matthew's  narrative,  in  seeing  in  them  men  such  as 
those  that  were  in  the  minds  of  the  LXX.  trans- 
lators of  Daniel,  and  those  described  by  Philo — at 
once  astronomers  and  astrologers,  but  not  mingling 
any  conscious  fraud  with  their  ellbrts  after  a  higher 
knowledge.  The  vagueness  of  the  description  leaves 
their  country  midehned,  and  implies  that  probably 
the  Evangelist  himself  had  no  certain  information. 
The  same  phrase  is  used  as  in  passages  where 
the  express  object  is  to  include  a  wide  range  of 
country  (comp.  airh  avaroKSiv,  Matt.  viii.  11,  xxiv. 
27  ;  Luke  xiii.  29).  Probably  the  region  chiefly 
present  to  the  mind  of  the  Palestine  Jew  would  be 
the  tract  of  country  stretching  eastward  from  the 
Jordan  to  the  Euphrates,  the  land  of  "the  children 
of  the  East "  in  the  early  period  of  the  history  of 
the  0.  T.  (Gen.  xxix.  1 ;  "judg.  vi.  3,  vii.  12,  viii. 
10).  It  sliould  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
language  of  the  0.  T.,  and  therefore  probably  that 
of  St.  Mattliew,  included  under  this  name  coun- 
tiies  that  lay  considerably  to  the  north  as  well  as 
to  the  east  of  Palestine.  Balaam  came  from  "  the 
mountains  of  the  east,"  i.  e.  from  Pethor  on  the 
Euphrates  (Num.  xxiii.  7,  xxii.  5).  Abraham  (or 
Cyrus?)  is  the  righteous  man  raised  up  "  from  the 
east"  (Is.  xli.  2).  The  Persian  conqueror  is  called 
"  from  the  east,  from  a  far  country"  (Is.  xlvi.  11). 

We  cannot  wonder  that  thei'e  should  have  been 
very  varying  intei-pretations  given  of  words  that 
allowed  so  wide  a  field  foy  conjecture.  Some  of 
these  are,  for  various  reasons,  worth  noticing. 
(1)  The  feeling  of  some  early  writers  that  the 
coming  of  the  wise  men  was  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  which  spoke  of  the  gifts  of  the  men  of 
Sheba  and  Seba  (Ps.  Ixxii.  10,  15  ;  comp.  Is.  Ix.  6) 
led  them  to  fix  on  Arabia  as  the  country  of  tiie  Magi 
(Just.  Martyr,  TeiluUian,  Epiphanius,  Cyprian,  in 
Sjinnheim,  Duh.  Ecanif.  1.  c.),'  and  they  have  been 
followed  by   Baronius,    Maldonatus,   Grotius,  and 


f  This  Is  adopted  by  most  Romish  interpreters,  and  is 
all  but  authoritatively  recognized  in  the  services  of  the 
Latin  Church.  Througli  the  whole  Octave  of  the  Epiphany 
the  ever-recurring  antiphon  is,  "  Reges  Tliarsis  et  insulae 
munera  efferent.  Alleluia,  Alleluia.  Reges  Arabum  et 
Saba  dona  adducent  Alleluia,  Alleluia."— jBrea.  Eom.  in 
Kpiph. 

e  The  discordant  views  of  commentators  and  har- 
monists indicate  the  absence  of  any  trustworthy  data. 
The  time  of  their  arrival  at  Bethlehem  has  been  fixed  in 
each  case  on  grounds  so  utterly  insufRclent,  that  it  would 


MAGI 

Lightfbot.  (2^  Others  have  conjectured  Mesopo- 
tamia as  the  great  seat  of  Chaldaean  astrology 
(Origen,  Horn,  in  Matt.  vi.  and  vii.),  or  Egypt  as  the 
country  in  which  Magic  was  most  prevalent  (Meyer, 
ad  he).  (3)  The  historical  associations  of  the  word 
led  others  again,  with  greater  probability,  to  fix  on 
Persia,  and  to  see  in  these  Magi  members  of  the 
priestly  order,  to  which  the  name  of  right  belonged 
(Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Calviu,  Olshausen), 
while  Hyde  {Rel.  Pers.  1.  c.)  suggests  Parthia,  as 
being  at  that  time  the  conspicuous  eastern  monarchy 
in  which  the  I\Iagi  weie  recognised  and  honoured. 

It  is  pei'haps  a  legitimate  inference  fiom  the  nar- 
rative of  Matt.  ii.  that  in  these  Magi  we  may  recog- 
nise, as  the  Church  has  done  from  a  very  early  period, 
the  first  Gentile  worshippers  of  the  Christ.  The 
name,  by  itself,  indeed,  applied  as  it  is  in  Acts  xiii. 
8,  to  a  Jewish  false  prophet,  would  hardly  prove 
this  ;  but  the  distinctive  epithet  "  from  the  east  " 
was  probably  intended  to  mark  them  out  as  different 
in  character  and  race  fiom  the  Western  Magi, 
Jews,  and  others,  who  swarmed  over  the  Roman 
empire.  So,  when  they  come  to  Jerusalem  it  is  to 
ask  not  after  "  our  king"  or  "  the  king  of  Israel," 
but,  as  the  men  of  another  race  might  do,  after  "  the 
king  of  the  Jews."  The  language  of  the  0.  T. 
prophets  and  tlie  traditional  interpretation  of  it  are 
apparently  new  things  to  them. 

The  narrative  of  Matt.  ii.  supplies  us  with  an 
outline  which  we  may  legitimately  endeavour  to  fill 
up,  as  tar  as  our  knowledge  enables  us,  with  in- 
ference and  illustration. 

Some  time  after  the  birth  of  Jesus  K  there  ap- 
peared among  the  strangers  who  viSited  Jerus;dem 
these  men  from  the  far  East.  They  were  not  idol- 
ateis.  Their  form  of  worship  was  looked  upon  by 
the  Jews  with  greater  tolerance  and  sympathy  than 
that  of  any  other  Gentiles  (cojnp.  Wisd.  xiii.  6,  7). 
Whatever  may  have  been  their  country,  their  name 
indicates  that  they  would  be  watchers  of  the  stars, 
seeking  to  lead  in  them  the  destinies  of  nations. 
They  say  that  they  have  seen  a  star  in  whicli  they 
recognise  such  a  prognostic.  They  are  sure  tliat 
one  is  born  King  of  the  Jews,  and  they  come  to 
pay  their  homage.  It  may  have  been  simply  that 
the  quarter  of  the  heavens  in  which  the  star  ap- 
j)eaied  indicated  the  direction  of  Judaea.  It  may 
have  been  that  some  form  of  the  prophecy  of  Ba- 
laam that  a  "  star  should  rise  out  of  Jacob " 
(Num.  xxiv.  17)  had  reached  them,  either  through 
the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  or  through  traditions 
running  parallel  with  the  0.  T.,  and  that  this  led 
them  to  recognise  its  fulfilment  (Origen,  c.  Cels.  i. ; 
Horn,  in  Num.  xiii. ;  but  the  hypothesis  is  neither 
necessary  nor  satisfactory  ;  comp.  Ellicott,  Hulscan 
Lectures,  p.  77).  It  may  have  been,  lastly,  that 
the  traditional  predictions  ascribed  to  their  own 
prophet  Zoroaster,  leading  them  to  expect  a  suc- 
cession of  three  deliverers,  two  working  as  piophets 
to  reform  the  world  and  raise  up  a  kingdom 
(Tavernier,    Travels,   iv.   8),  the  third   (Zosiosh), 


be  idle  to  examine  them.  (1)  As  in  the  Church  Calendar, 
on  the  twelfth  day  after  the  nativity  (Baronius.  Ann.  i.  9). 
(2)  At  some  time  towards  tlie  close  of  the  forty  days 
before  the  Purification  (Spanlieim  and  Stolborg).  (3)  Four 
months  later  (Greswell),  on  the  hypothesis  that  they  saw 
the  star  at  the  nativity,  and  then  started  on  a  journey 
which  would  Uilce  that  time.  Or  (-1)  as  an  inference  from 
Matt.  ii.  16,  at  some  time  in  the  second  year  after  the  birth 
of  Christ  (comp.  Spanheim,  Dub.  Erang.  1.  c).  On  the  at 
tempt  to  find  a  chronological  datum  in  the  star  itself,  comp. 
Star  ix  the  E,vst  ;  also  Jesus  Chuist,  vol.  i.  p.  1072  b. 


MAGI 

the  greatest  of  the  three,  coming  to  be  the  head  of  the 
kingdom,  to  conquer  Ahriman  and  to  raise  the  dead 
{Da  Perron,  Zendav.  i.  '2.  p.  46  ;  Hyde,  c.  31 ;  Elli- 
cott,  Hulsean  Led.  1.  c),  and  in  strange  fantastic 
ways  connecting  these  redeemers  with  the  seed  of 
Abraham  (^Tavernier,  I.e.  ;  and  D'Herbelofc,  Bibliot. 
Orient,  s.  V.  Zerdasclit),  had  roused  their  minds 
to  an  attitude  of  expectancy,  and  that  their  contact 
with  a  people  cherisliiug  like  hopes  ou  stronger 
grounds,  may  have  prepared  them  to  see  in  a  king 
of  the  Jews,  the  Oshanderbeglia  {Homo  Muncli, 
Hyde,  I.e.),  or  the  Zosiosh  whom  they  expected,  hi 
any  case  they  shared  the  "  vetus  et  constans  opinio  " 
which  had  spread  itself  over  the  whole  East,  that 
the  Jews,  as  a  people,  crushed  and  broken  as  they 
were,  were  yet  destined  once  again  to  give  a  ruler 
to  the  nations.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  tliey  ap- 
j)eared,  occupying  the  position  of  Destur-Mobeds  in 
the  later  Zoroastrian  hierarchy,  as  the  represen- 
tatives of  many  others  who  shared  the  same  feeling. 
They  came,  at  any  rate,  to  pay  their  homage  to  the 
king  whose  birth  was  thus  indicated,  and  with  the 
gold  and  franldncense  and  myrrh,  which  were  the 
customary  gifts  of  subject  nations  (comp.  Gen. 
xliii.  11;  Ps.  Ixxii.  15;  1  K.  x.  2,  10  ;  2  Chr.  ix. 
24:;  Cant.  iii.  6,  iv.  14).  The  arrival  of  such  a 
company,  bound  on  so  stiange  an  o'rand,  in  the  last 
years  of  the  tyrannous  and  distrustful  Herod,  could 
hardly  tail  to  attract  notice  and  excite  a  people, 
among  whom  Messianic  expectations  had  already 
begun  to  show  themselves  (Luke  ii.  25,  38). 
"  Herod  was  troubled,  and  all  Jerusalem  with 
him."  The  Sanhedrim  was  convened,  and  the 
question  where  the  Messiah  was  to  be  born  was 
formally  placed  before  them.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  the  subtle,  fox-like  chai'acter  of  the  king  that 
he  should  pretend  to  share  the  expectations  of  the 
people  in  order  that  he  might  find  in  what  direction 
they  pointed,  and  then  take  whatever  steps  were 
necessary  to  crush  them  [comp.  Herod].  The 
answer  given,  based  upon  the  traditional  interpreta- 
tion of  Mic.  V.  2,  that  Bethlehem  was  to  be  the 
birthplace  of  the  Christ,  determined  the  king's 
plans.  He  had  found  out  the  locality.  It  remained 
to  determine  the  time:  with  what  was  probabl}' a 
real  belief  in  astrology,  he  inquired  of  them  dili- 
gently, when  they  had  first  seen  the  star.  If  he 
assumed  that  that  was  contemporaneous  with  the 
birth,  he  could  not  be  far  wrong.  The  Magi  ac- 
cordingly are  sent  on  to  Bethlehem,  as  if  they  were 
but  the  forerunners  of  the  king's  own  homage.  As 
they  journeyed  they  again  saw  the  star,  which  for 
a  tin)e,  it  would  seem,  they  had  lost  sight  of,  and  it 
guided  them  on  their  way.  [Comp.  Star  ix  thk 
EASr  for  this  an<l  all  otlier  questions  connected  with 
its  appeai-ance.]  The  pressure  of  the  crowds,  which 
a  fortnight,  or  four  months,  or  well-nigh  two  years 
before,  had  driven  Mary  and  .Joseph  to  the  rude 
stable  of  the  caravanserai  of  Bethlehem,  had  appa- 
rently abated,  and  the  Magi  entering  "  the  house" 
(Matt.  ii.  11)  fell  down  and  paid  tlieir  homage  and 
oftered  their  gifts.  Once  more  they  receive  guid- 
ance through  tiio  channel  which  their  work  and 
their  studies  had  made   familiar  to  them.     From 

h  It  is  perhaps  not  right  to  pass  over  the  supposed  tes- 
thiiiiny  of  heathen  authors.  Tliesc  are  found  (i)  in  the 
sayiiis  of  Augusius,  recorded  by  Macrobius  ("  ll  is  l)etter 
to  be  Herod's  swine  than  liis  son  "),  as  connected  with  the 
slauglitcr  of  a  child  under  two  years  of  age.  (2)  In  the 
remarlcable  passage  of  Chalcidius  {Comment,  in  Timaeus, 
vii.  iM25),  alluding  to  the  st;u'  which  had  heralded  the  birth, 


MAGI 


191 


first  to  last,  in  Media,  in  Babylon,  in  Persia,  the 
Magi  had  been  famous  as  the  interpreters  of  dreams. 
That  which  they  received  now  need  not  have  in- 
!  volved  a  disclosure  of  the  plans  of  Herod  to  them. 
!  It  was  enough  that  it  directed  them  to  "  return  to 
their  own  country  another  way."  With  this  their 
history,  so  far  as  the  N.  T.  carries  us,  comes  to  an 
end. 

It  need  hardly  be  said'  that  this  part  of  the 
Gospel  narrative  has  had  to  bear  the  brunt  of  the 
attacks  of  a  hostile  criticism.  The  omission  of  all 
mention  of  the  Magi  in  a  gospel  which  enters  so 
fully  into  all  the  circumstances  of  the  infancy  of 
Christ  as  that  of  St.  Luke,  and  the  difficulty  of  har- 
monising this  incident  with  those  which  he  narrates, 
have  been  urged  as  at  least  throwing  suspicion  on  what 
St.  Matthew  alone  has  recorded.  The  advocate  of  a 
"  mythical  theory  "  sees  in  this  almost  the  strongest 
conHrmatiou  of  it  (Strauss,  Lehen  Jcsu,  i.  p.  272). 
"  There  must  be  prodigies  gathering  round  the  ci-adle 
of  the  infant  Christ.  Other  heroes  and  kings  had  had 
their  stars,  and  so  must  he.  He  must  receive  in  his 
childhood  the  homage  of  the  representatives  of  other 
races  and  creeds.  The  facts  recorded  lie  outside 
the  lange  of  history,  and  ai e  not  mentioned  by  any 
contemporary  historian."  The  answers  to  these  ob- 
jections may  be  briefly  stated.  (1)  Assuming  the 
central  fact  of  the  early  chapters  of  St.  Matthew, 
no  objection  lies  against  any  of  its  accessories  on 
the  ground  of  their  being  wonderful  and  impro- 
bable. It  would  be  in  harmony  with  our  expecta- 
tions that  there  should  be  signs  and  wonders  indi- 
cating its  presence.  The  objection  therefore  pos- 
tulates the  absolute  incredibility  of  that  fact,  and 
begs  the  point  at  issue  (comp.  Trench,  Star  of  the 
Wise  Men,  p.  124).  (2)  The  question  whether 
this,  or  any  other  given  narrative  connected  with 
the  nativity  of  Christ,  bears  upon  it  the  stamp  of  a 
mi/thus,  is  thei'efore  one  to  be  determined  by  its 
own  merits,  on  its  own  evidence ;  and  then  the  case 
stands  thus : — A  mythical  story  is  characterised  for 
the  iiiost  part  by  a  large  admixture  of  what  is 
wild,  poetical,  fantastic.  A  comparison  of  Matt.  ii. 
with  the  Jewish  or  Mahometan  legends  of  a  later 
time,  or  even  with  the  Christian  mythology  which 
afterwards  gathered  round  this  very  chapter,  will 
show  how  wide  is  the  distitnce  tliat  separates  its 
simple  narrative,  without  ornament,  without  exag- 
geration, from  the  overflowing  luxuriance  of  those 
figments  (comp.  IV.  below).  (3)  The  absence  of 
any  direct  confirmatory  evidence  in  other  writers 
of  the  time  may  be  accounted  for,  paitly  at  least, 
by  the  want  of  any  full  chronicle  of  the  events  of 
the  later  years  of  Herod.  The  momentary  excite- 
ment of  the  arrival  of  such  travellers  as  the  Magi, 
or  of  the  slaughter  of  some  score  of  children  in  a 
small  Jewish  town,  would  easily  be  ellaced  by  the 
more  agitating  events  that  followed  [comp.  He  hod]. 
The  silence  of  Josephus  is  not  moic  conclusive 
against  this  fact  than  it  is  (assuming  the  spurious- 
ness  of  Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3)  against  the  fact  of  the 
Crucifixion  and  the  growth  of  the  sect  of  the  Naza- 
renes  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem.''  (4)  The 
moie  perj)lexing  absence  of  all  mention  of  the  Magi 


not  of  a  conqucnjr  or  dostriiyer.but  of  a  divine  and  righteous 
King.  The  facts  of  the  tiospel  history  may  have  been 
mixed  up  with  (1),  but  the  expression  of  Augustus  doss 
not  point  to  anything  beyond  Herod's  di)mi\stic  tragedies. 
The  genuineness  of  (2)  is  (lucstionable  ;  and  both  are  too 
remote  in  time  to  be  of  any  worth  as  evidence  (comp. 
W,  11. Mill,  I'aidhcistic  J'riiiciplts.  p.  :173) 


192 


MAGI 


in  St.  Luke's  Oospel   m:iy  yet  receive  some  pro- 
bable explanation.     So  far  as  we  cannot  explain  it, 
our  ignorance  of  all,  or  nearlj  all,  the  circum-^tances 
of  the  composition  of  the  Gospels   is  a  sullicieut 
answer.     It  is,  however, -at  least  possible  that  St. 
Luke,  knowing  that  the  facts  related  by  St.  JLatthew 
were  already  current  among  the  chinches,'  sought 
rather  to  add  what  was  not  yet  recorded.  Something 
too  may  have  been  due  to  the  leading  thoughts  of 
the  two  Gospels.    St.  Matthew,  dwelling  chiefly  on 
the  kingly  office  of  Christ  as  the  Son  of  David,  seizes 
naturally  on  the  first  recognition  of  that  character 
by  the  Magi  of  the  East  (comp.  on  the  fitness  of 
this  ]\Iill,    Fanthcistie  Principles,    p.    375).    St. 
Luke,  portraying  the  Sou  of  Man  in  His  sympathy 
with  common  men,  in  His  compassion  on  the  poor 
and  humble,  dwells  as  naturally  on  the  manifesta- 
tion to  the  shepherds  on  the  hills  of  Bethlehem. 
It  may  be  added  further,  that  everything  tends  to 
show  that  the  latter  Evangelist  derived  the  ma- 
terials for  this  part  of  his  history  much  more  di- 
rectly from  the  mother  of  the  Lord,  or  her  kindred, 
than' did  the  former;  and,  if  so,  it  is  not  difficult  to 
understand  how  she  might  come  to  dwell  on  that 
which   connected   itself  at  once   with  the  eternal 
blessedness  of  peace,   good-will,    salvation,   rather 
than  on  the  homage  and  ofterings  of  strangers,  which 
seemed  to  be  the  presage  of  an  earthly  kingdom,  and 
had  [iroved  to  be  the  prelude  to  a  life  of  poverty, 
and  to  the  death  upon  the  cross. 

IV.  In  this  instance,  as  in  others,  what  is  told 
by  the  Gospel-writers  in  plain  simple  words,  has 
become  the  nucleus  for  a  whole  cycle  of  legends.  A 
Christian  mythology  has  overshadowed  that  which 
itself  had  nothing  in  common  with  it.  The  love 
of  the  strange  and  man-ellous,  the  eager  desire  to 
fill  up  in  detail  a  narrative  which  had  been  left  in 
outline,  and  to  make  every  detail  the  representative 
of  an  idea — these,  which  tend  everywhere  to  the 
growth  of  the  mythical  element  within  the  region 
of  history,  fixed  themselves,  naturally  enough,  pre- 
ciselj''  on  those  portions  of  the  life  of  Christ  where 
the  written  records  were  the  least  complete.  The 
stages  of  this  development  present  themselves  in 
regular  succession. 

(1)  The  Magi  are  no  longer  thought  of  as  simply 
"  wise  men,"  members  of  a  sacred  ordei'.  The  pro- 
phecies of  Ps.  Ixxii. ;  Is.  xlix.  7,  23,  Ix.  16,  must  be 
fulfilled  in  them,  and  they  become  princes  ("  re- 
guli,"  Tertull.  c.  Jud.  9  ;  c".  2Iarc.  5).  This  tends 
more  and  more  to  be  the  dominant  thought.  When 
the  arrival  of  the  ^lagi,  rather  than  the  birth  or 
the  baptism  of  Christ,  as  the  firet  of  His  mighty 
works,  comes  to  be  looked  on  as  the  great  I'^piphany 
of  His  divine  power,  the  older  title  of  the  feast 
receives  as  a  synonym,  almost  as  a  substitute,  that 
of  the  Feast  of  the  Three  Kings.     (2)  Tiie  number 


MAGI 

of  the  Wise  Men,  which  St.'  l^Iatthew  leaves  alto- 
gether undefined,  was  arbitrarily  fixed.     They  were 
three  (Leo  Magn.  Serm.  ad  Epiph.),  because  thus 
they  became  a  symbol  of  the  mysterious  Trinity 
(Hilary  of  Aries),  or  because  then  the  number  cor- 
responded to  the  threefold  gifts,   or  to  the  three 
parts  of  the  earth,  or  the  three  great  divisions  of  the 
human  race  descended  from  the  sons  of  Noah  (Bede, 
De  Collect.).     (3)  Symbolic  meanings  were  found 
for  each  of  the  three  gifts.     The  gold  they  ofliered 
as  to  a  king.     AVith  the  myrrh  they  prefigured  the 
bitterness  of  the  Passion,  the  embalmment  for  the  . 
Burial.     With    the   frankincense   they  adored  the 
divinity  of  the  Son  of  God    (Suicer,    Thes.   s.  v. 
Mayoi;^  Brev.Rom.  in  Epiph. -passim).    (4)  Later 
on,  in  a  tradition  which,  though  appearing  in  a 
Western   writer,  is   traceable  probably  to  reports 
brought  back  by  pilgrims  fiom  Italy  or  the  East, 
the  names  are  added,  and  Caspar,  Melchior,  and 
Balthazar,  take  their  place  among  the  objects  of 
Christian  reverence,  and  are  honoured  as  the  patron 
saints  of  tmvelleis.     The  passage  from  Bede   {de 
Collect.)  is,  in  many  ways,  interesting,  and  as  it  is 
not  commonly  quoted  by  commentators,    though 
often  referred  to,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  give  it.' 
"  Primus  dicitur  fuisse  Melchior,  qui  senex  et  canus, 
barba  prolixa  et  capillis,  aurum  obtulit  regi  Do- 
mino.    Secundus,  nomine  Caspar,  juvenis  imberbis, 
rubicundus,  thure,  quasi  Deo  oblatione  digna,  Deum 
honoravit.     Tertius  fuscus,  integi'e  barbatus,  Bal- 
tassar  nomine,  per  myrrham   filium  homiifis  mori- 
turum  professus."     We  recognise  at  once  in  this 
description  the  received  types  of  the  early  pictorial 
art  of  Western  Europe.     It  is  open  to  believe  that 
both    the  description   and   the    art-types  may  be 
traced  to  early  quasi-dramatic  representations  of  the 
facts  of  the  Nativity.     In  any  such  representations 
names  of  some  kind  would  become  a  matter  of  ne- 
cessity, and   were  probably  invented    at  random. 
Familiar  as  the  names  .given  by  Bede  now  are  to 
us,  there  was  a  time  when  they  had  no  more  autho- 
rity than  Bithisarca,  IMelchior,  and  Gathaspar  (Mo- 
roni, Dizion.  s.  v.  "  Magi")  ;  Magalath,  Pangalath, 
Saracen ;  Appellius,  Amerius,  and  Damascus,  and  a 
score  of  others  (Spanheim,  Bub.  Evunfj.  ii.  p.  288)." 
In  the  Eastern  Church,  where,  it  would  seem, 
there  was  less  desire  to  find    symbolic  meanings 
than  to  magnify  the  circumstances  of  the  history, 
the  traditions  assume  a  different  character.     The 
Magi  arri\-e  at  Jerusalem  with  a  retinue  of  1000 
men,  having  left  behind  them,  on  the  further  bank 
of  the  Euphrates,  an  army  of  7000  (Jacob.  Edess. 
and  Bar-hebraeus,    in  Hyde,   I.  c).      They  have 
been  led  to  undertake  the  journey,  not  by  the  star 
only,  or  by  expectations  which  they  shared  with 
Israelites,  but  by  a  prophecy  of  the  founder  of  their 
own  faith.     Zoroaster  had  predicted  °  that  in  the 


i  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  is  altogether  a  distinct 
hj'pothesis  from  that  which  assumes  that  he  had  the  Gos- 
pel of  St.  Matthew  in  its  present  form  before  hiin. 

'^  This  was  the  prevalent  interpretation ;  but  others 
read  the  symbols  differentlj',  and  with  coarser  feeling. 
The  ,e;oid  helped  the  poverty  of  the  Holy  Family.  The 
incense  remedied  the  noisome  air  of  the  stable.  The  myrrh 
was  used,  it  was  said,  to  give  strength  and  firmness  to  the 
bodies  of  new-born  infants.  (Suicer,  I.  c). 

I'J'he  treatise  De  Collectancis  is  in  fact  a  miscel- 
laneous collection  of  memoranda  in  the  form  of  question 
and  answer.  The  desire  to  find  names  for  those  who  have 
none  given  them  is  very  noticeable  in  other  instances  as 
well  as  in  that  of  the  Magi :  e.  </.,  he  gives  those  of  the 
penitent  and  imiienitciit  thief.     The  passage  quoted  in 


the  text  is  followed  by  a  description  of  their  dress,  taken 
obviously  either  from  some  early  painting,  or  from  the 
decorations  of  a  miracle-play  (comp.  the  account  of  such  a 
performance  in  Trench,  Star  of  the  Wise  Men,  p.  7o).  The 
account  of  the  offerings,  it  will  be  noticed,  docs  not  agree 
with  the  traditional  hexameter  of  the  Latin  Church: — 
"  Gaspar  fert  myrrham,  thus  Melchior,  Balthasar  aurum." 

™  Hyde  quotes  from  Bar  Bahlul  the  names  of  the 
thirteen  who  appear  in  the  Kastem  traditions.  The  three 
which  the  legends  of  the  West  have  made  famous  are  not 
among  them. 

"  "  Vos  aiiteni,  0  filii  inei,  ante  oimies  gentes  ortiiai 
ejus  percepturi  estis"  (Abulphai'agius,  Dynast.  Lib.,  in 
Hyde,  c.  31). 


MAGI 

latter  days  there  sliould  be  a  Mighty  One  and  a 
Kedeemer,  and  that  his  descendants  should  see  the 
star  which  should  be  the  herald  of  his  coming. 
According  to  another  legend  (^Opus  imperf.  in 
Matt.  ii.  apiid  Chrysost.  t.  vi.  ed.  Montf'aucon) 
they  came  from  the  remotest  East,  near  the  borders 
of  the  ocean.  They  had  been  taught  to  expect  the 
star  by  a  writing  that  bore  the  name  of  Seth. 
That  expectation  was  handed  down  from  father  to 
son.  Twelve  of  the  holiest  of  them  were  appointed 
to  be  ever  on  the  watch.  Their  post  of  observation 
was  a  rock  known  as  the  Mount  of  Victory.  Night 
by  night  they  washed  in  pure  water,  and  prayed, 
and  looked  out  on  the  heavens.  At  last  the  star 
appeared,  and  in  it  the  form  of  a  young  child  bear- 
ing a  cross.  A  voice  came  from  it  and  bade  them 
proceed  to  Judaea.  They  started  on  their  two  years' 
journey,  and  during  all  that  time  the  meat  and  the 
drink  with  which  they  started  never  fiiiled  them. 
The  gifts  they  bring  are  those  which  Abraham  gave  to 
their  progenitors  the  sons  of  Keturali  (this,  of  course, 
on  the  hypothesis  that  they  were  Arabians),  which 
the  queen  of  Sheba  had  in  her  turn  presented  to 
Solomon,  and  which  had  found  their  way  back  again 
to  the  children  of  the  East  (Epiphan.  in  Comp. 
JJoctr.  in  Moroni,  Dizion.  1.  c).  They  return  from 
Bethlehem  to  their  own  country,  and  give  them- 
selves up  to  a  life  of  contemplation  and  prayer. 
When  the  twelve  apostles  leave  Jerusalem  to  carry 
on  their  work  as  preachers,  St.  Thomas  finds  them 
ni  Parthia.  They  ofier  themselves  for  baptism,  and 
become  evangelists  of  the  new  faith  ( Opus  imperf. 
in  Matt.  ii.  l.  c).  The  pilgrim-feeling  of  the 
4th  century  includes  them  also  within  its  range. 
Among  other  relics  supplied  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  market  which  the  devotion  of  Helena  had 
created,  the  bodies  of  the  Magi  are  discovered 
somewhere  in  the  East,  are  brought  to  Constan- 
tinople, and  placed  in  the  great  church  which,  as 
the  Mosque  of  St.  Sophia,  still  bears  in  its  name 
the  witness  of  its  original  dedication  to  the  Divine 
Wisdom.  The  favour  with  which  the  people  of 
Milan  had  received  the  emperor's  prefect  Eustorgius 
called  for  some  special  mark  of  favour,  and  on  his 
cousecratioQ  as  bishop  of  that  city,  he  obtained  for 
it  the  privilege  of  being  the  resting-place  of  the 
precious  relics.  There  the  fame  of  the  three  kings 
increased.  The  prominence  given  to  all  the  feasts 
connected  with  the  season  of  the  Nativity — the 
transfer  to  that  season  of  the  mirth  and  joy  of  the 
old  Saturnalia — the  setting  apart  of  a  distinct  day 
for  the  commemoration  of  the  Epiphany  in  the 
4th  century  p — all  this  added  to  the  veneration  with 
which  they  were  regarded.  When  Milan  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Frederick  Barbarossa  (a.d.  1162)  the 
influence  of  the  archbishop  of  Cologne  prevailed  on 
the  emperor  to  transfer  them  to  that  city.  The 
Milanese,  at  a  later  period,  consoled  themselves  by 
foiming  a  special  confraternity  for  perpetuating 
their  veneration  for  the  Magi  by  the  annual  per- 
formance of  a  "  Mystery  "  (Moroni,  /.  c.) ;  but  the 
glory  of  possessing  the  relics  of  the  first  Gentile 
worshippers  of  Christ  remained  with  Cologne."!  In 
that  proud  cathedral  which  is  the  glory  of  Teutonic 
art  the  shrine  of  the  Three  Kings  has,  for  six  cen- 
turies, been  shown  as  the  greatest  of  its  many 
treasures.     The  tabernacle  in  which  the  bones  of 


MAGIC 


193 


P  The  institution  of  the  Feast  of  the  Three  Kings  is 
ascribed  to  Pope  Julius,  a.d.  336  (Moroni,  Dizion.  1.  c). 

■1  For  tlie  later  mediaeval  developments  of  the  tradi- 
tions, comp.  Joan,   vcm   Ilildestieini  in   Quartcrlij  Rev. 
Ixxviii.  p.  433. 
VOL.  II. 


some  whose  real  name  and  history  are  lost  for  ever 
lie  enshrined  in  lionour,  bears  witness,  in  its  gold 
and  gems,  to  the  faith  with  which  the  storv  of^the 
w;mderings  of  the  Three  Kings  has  been  received. 
The  reverence  has  sometimes  taken  strancer  and 
more  grotesque  foi-ms.  As  the  patron-saiuts  of  tra- 
vellers they  have  given  a  name  to  the  inns  of  earlier 
or  later  date.  The  names  of  Melchior,  Caspar,  and 
Balthasar  were  used  as  a  charm  against  att<icks  of 
epilepsy  (Spanheim,  Dub.  Evimg.  xxi.). 

(Comp.,  in  addition  to  authorities  already  cited, 
Trench,  Star  of  the  Wise  Men  ;  J.  F.  Miiller,  in  Her- 
zog's  Real-E7icycl.  s.  v.  *'  Magi ;"  Triebel,  De  Magis 
advenient.,  and  Miegiiis,  Be  Stella,  ^c,  in  Crit. 
Sacri;  TAes.  iVou.  ii.  Ill,  118  ;  Stolhevg,  Dissert, 
de  Magis ;  and  Rhoden,  De  primis  Salv.  venerat., 
in  Crit.  Sacri ;  Thes.  Theol.  Phil.  ii.  69.   [E.  H.  P.] 

MAGIC,  MAGICIANS.  The  magical  arts 
spoken  of  in  the  Bible  are  those  practised  by  the 
Egyptians,  the  Canaanites,  and  their  neighbours, 
the  Hebrews,  the  Chaldaeans,  and  probably  the 
Gieeks.  We  therefore  begin  this  article  with  an 
endeavour  to  state  the  position  of  magic  in  relation 
to  religion  and  philosophy  with  the  several  races  of 
mankind. 

The  degree  of  the  civilisation  of  a  nation  is  not 
the  measure  of  the  importance  of  magic  in  its  con- 
victions. The  natural  features  of  a  country  are 
not  the  primary  causes  of.  what  is  termed  super- 
stition in  its  inhabitants.  With  nations  as  with 
men— and  the  analogy  of  Plato  in  the  '  Republic '  is 
not  always  false — the  feelings  on  which  magic 
fixes  its  hold  are  essential  to  the  mental  consti- 
tution. Contrary  as  are  these  assertions  to  the 
common  opinions  of  our  time,  inductive  reasoning 
forbids  our  doubting  them. 

With  the  lowest  race  magic  is  the  chief  pail;  of 
religion.  The  Nigi-itians,  or  blacks  of  this  race, 
show  this  in  their  extreme  use  of  amulets  and 
their  worship  of  objects  which  have  no  other  value 
in  their  eyes  but  as  having  a  supposed  magical 
character  through  the  influence  of  supernatural 
agents.  With  the  Turanians,  or  corresponding 
whites  of  the  same  great  family, — we  use  the  word 
white  for  a  group  of  nations  mainly  yellow,  in  con- 
tradistinction to  black,— Incantations  and  witchcraft 
occupy  the  same  place,  shamanism  characterizing 
their  tribes  in  both  hemispheres.  In  the  days  ol" 
Herodotus  the  distinction  in  this  matter  between  the 
Nigritians  and  the  Caucasian  population  of  north 
Africa  was  what  it  now  is.  In  his  remarkable  ac- 
count of  the  jom-ney  of  the  Nasamonian  young  men 
— the  Nasamones,  be  it  remembered,  were  "a  Libyan 
race"  and  dwellers  on  the  northern  coast,  as  the  his- 
torian here  says, — we  are  told  that  the  adventurers 
passed  through  the  inhabited  maritime  region,  and 
the  tract  occupied  by  wild  beasts,  and  the  desert,  and 
at  last  came  upon  a  plain  with  trees,  where  they 
wese  seized  by  men  of  small  stature  who  carried 
them  across  marshes  to  a  town  of  such  men 
black  in  complexion.  A  great  river,  running  from 
west  to  e;xst  and  containing  crocodiles,  flowed  by 
that  town,  and  all  that  nation  were  sorcerers  (e's 
Tovs  ouToi  airiKOVTO  dvdpiiirovs,  ydrjTas  fJvai  < 
TToivTw,  ii.  32,  33).  It  little  matters  whether  the 
conjecture  that  the  great  river  was  the  Niger  be 
true,  which  the  idea  adopted  by  Herodotus  that  it 
was  the  upper  Nile  seems  to  favour:"  it  is  quite 


"  It  is  perhaps  worthy  of  note  that  vEschylus  calls  the 
upper  Nile  irora/itos  PuOio^,  as  though  the  great  .Ethiopian 
liver  {I'rom.  Vinct.  809  ;  comp.  Soiiii.  3'_',  3(i). 

0 


194 


MAGIC 


evident  that  the  Nasamones  came  upon  a  nation  of 
Kigiitians  beyond  the  Great  Desert  and  weie  struck 
with  their  fetishism.  So,  in  our  own  days,  the 
traveller  is  astonished  at  the  height  to  which  this 
superstition  is  carried  among  the  Nigritians,  who 
have  no  religious  practices  that  are  not  of  the 
nature  of  sorcery,  nor  any  priests  who  are  not 
magicians,  and  magicians  alone.  The  strength  of 
this  belief  in  magic  in  these  two  great  divisions  of 
the  lowest  race  is  shown  in  the  case  of  each  by  its 
having  maintained  its  hold  in  an  instance  in  which 
its  tenacity  must  have  been  severely  tried.  The 
ancient  Egyptians  show  their  partly-Nigritian  origin 
not  alone  in  their  physical  characteristics  and  lan- 
guage but  in  their  religion.  They  retained  the 
strange  low  nature-worship  of  the  Nigritians,  forcibly 
combining  it  with  more  intellectual  kinds  of  belief, 
as  they  repi'esented  their  gods  with  the  heads  of 
animals  and  the  bodies  of  men,  and  even  connecting 
it  with  truths  which  point  to  a  primeval  revelation. 
The  liitual,  which  was  the  great  treasury  of  Egyptian 
belief  and  exjilaiued  the  means  of  gaining  future 
happiness,  is  full  of  charms  to  be  said,  and  contains 
directions  for  making  and  for  using  amulets.  As 
the  Nigritian  goes  on  a  journey  hung  about  with 
amulets,  so  amulets  were  placed  on  the  Egyptian's 
embalmed  body,  and  his  soul  went  on  its  myste- 
rious way  fortified  with  incantations  learnt  while 
on  earth.  In  China,  although  Buddhism  has  esta- 
blished itself,  and  the  system  of  Confucius  has 
gained  the  power  its  positivism  would  ensure  it 
with  a  highly-educated  people  of  low  type,  another 
belief  still  maintains  itself  which  there  is  strong 
•  reason  to  hold  to  be  older  than  the  other  two, 
although  it  is  usually  supposed  to  have  been  of  the 
same  age  as  Confucianism  ;  in  this  religion  magic  is 
of  the  highest  importance,  the  distinguishing  cha- 
racteristic by  which  it  is  known. 

With  the  Shemites  magic  takes  a  lower  place. 
Nowhere  is  it  even  part  of  religion  ;  yet  it  is 
looked  upon  as  a  powerful  engine,  and  generally 
unlawful  or  lawful  according  to  the  aid  invoked. 
Among  many  of  the  Shemite  peoples  there  linger 
the  remnants  of  a  primitive  fetishism.  Sacred 
trees  and  stones  are  reverenced  from  an  old  super- 
stition, of  which  they  do  not  always  know  the 
meaning,  derived  from  the  nations  whose  place  they 
have  taken.  Thus  fetishism  remains,  although  in  a 
kind  of  fossil  state.  The  importance  of  astrology 
with  the  Shemites  has  tended  to  raise  the  character 
of  their  magic,  which  deals  rather  with  the  dis- 
covery of  supposed  existing  influences  than  with 
the  production  of  new  influences.  The  only  direct 
association  of  magic  with  religion  is  where  the 
priests,  as  the  educated  class,  have  taken  the  func- 
tions of  magicians;  but  this  is  far  different  from 
the  case  of  the  Nigritians,  where  the  magicians  are 
the  only  priests.  The  Shemites,  however,  when  de- 
pending on  human  reason  alone,  seem  never  to  have 
doubted  the  efficacy  of  magical  arts,  yet  recourse  to 
their  aid  was  not  usually  with  them  the  first  idea 
of  a  man  in  doubt.  Though  the  case  of  Saul 
cannot  be  taken  as  applying  to  the  whole  race, 
yet,  even  with  the  heathen  Shemites,  prayers  must 
have  been  held  to  be  of  more  value  than  incan- 
tations. 

The  Iranians  assign  to  magic  a  still  less  important 
position.  It  can  scarcely  be  traced  in  the  relics  of 
old  nature-worship,  which  they  with  gi-eater  skill 
than  the  Egyptians  interwove  with  their  more  intel- 
lectual beliefs,  as  the  Greeks  gave  the  objects  of 
reverence  in  Arcadia  and  Crete  a  place  in  poetical  i 


MAGIC 

myths,  and  the  Scandinavians  animated  the  hard 
remains  of  primitive  superstition.  The  character  of 
the  ancient  belief  is  utterly  gone  with  the  assigning 
of  new  reasons  for  the  reverence  of  its  sacred  objects. 
Magic  always  maintained  some  hold  on  men's 
minds ;  but  the  stronger  intellects  despised  it, 
like  the  Roman  commander  who  threw  the  sacred 
chickens  overboard,  and  the  Greek  who  defied  an 
adverse  omen  at  the  beginning  of  a  gi-eat  battle. 
When  any,  oppressed  by  the  sight  of  the  cala- 
mities of  mankind,  sought  to  resolve  the  myste- 
rious problem,  they  fixed,  like  jEschylus,  not  upon 
the  childish  notion  of  a  chance-government  by 
many  conflicting  agencies,  but  upon  the  nobler 
iilea  of  a  dominating  fate.  Men  of  highly  sensitive 
temperaments  have  always  inclined  to  a  belief  in 
magic,  and  there  has  therefore  been  a  section  of 
Iranian  philosophers  in  all  ages  who  have  paid 
attention  to  its  practice  ;  but,  expelled  from  reli- 
gion, it  has  held  but  a  low  and  precarious  place  in 
philosophy. 

The  Hebrews  had  no  magic  of  their  own.  It 
was  so  strictly  forbidden  by  the  Law  that  it  could 
never  afterwards  have  had  any  recognised  existence, 
save  in  times  of  general  heresy  or  apostasy,  and  the 
same  was  doubtless  the  case  in  the  patriarchal  ages. 
The  magical  practices  which  obtained  among  the 
Hebrews  were  therefore  borrovped  fi-om  the  nations 
around.  The  hold  they  gained  was  such  as  we 
should  have  expected  with  a  Shemite  race,  making 
allowance  for  the  discredit  thrown  upon  them  by 
the  prohibitions  of  the  Law.  From  the  flrst  en- 
trance into  the  Land  of  Piomise  until  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  we  have  constant  glimpses  of 
magic  practised  in  secret,  or  I'esorted  to,  not  alone 
by  the  common  but  also  by  the  great.  The  Talmud 
abounds  in  notices  of  contemporary  magic  among 
the  Jews,  showing  that  it  sundved  idolatry  notwith- 
sfcinding  their  original  connexion,  and  was  supposed 
to  produce  real  effects.  The  Kur-dn  in  like  manner 
treats  charms  and  incantations  as  capable  of  pro- 
ducing evil  consequences  when  used  against  a 
man.*"  It  is  a  distinctive  characteristic  of  the 
Bible  that  from  first  to  last  it  waiTants  no  such 
trust  or  dread.  In  the  Psalms,  the  most  personal 
of  all  the  books  of  So'ipture,  there  is  no  prayer 
to  be  protected  against  magical  influences.  The 
believer  prays  to  be  delivered  from  every  kind  of 
evil  that  could  hurt  the  body  or  the  soul,  but  he 
says  nothing  of  the  machinations  of  sorcerers. 
Here  and  everywhere  magic  is  passed  by,  or  if 
mentioned,  mentioned  only  to  be  condemned  (comp. 
Ps.  cvi.  28).  Let  those  who  affii'm  that  they  see 
in  the  Psalms  merely  human  piety,  and  in  Job 
and  Ecclesiastes  merely  human  philosophy,  explain 
the  absence  in  them,  and  throughout  the  Scrip- 
tures, of  the  ex-pression  of  superstitious  feelings 
that  are  inherent  in  the  Shemite  mind.  Let  them 
explain  the  luxuriant  growth  in  the  after-literature  of 
the  Hebrews  and  Arabs,  and  notably  in  the  Talmud 
and  the  Kur-dn,  of  these  feelings  with  no  root  in 
those  older  writings  from  which  that  after-litera- 
ture was  derived.  If  the  Bible,  the  Talmud,  and 
the  Kur-dn,  be  but  several  expressions  of  the 
Shemite  mind,  differing  only  through  the  efl^ect  of 
tuue,  how  can  this  contrast  be  accounted  for? — the 
very  opposite  of  what  obtains  elsewhere;  for  super- 
stitions are  generally  strongest  in  the  earlier  lite- 


b  The  113th  chapter  of  the  Kur-an  was  written  when 
Mohammad  believed  that  the  magical  practices  of  certain 
persons  had  affected  him  with  a  kind  of  rheimiatism. 


MAGIC 

rature  of  a  race,  and  gradually  fade,  excepting  a  con- 
dition of  barbarism  restore  their  vigour.  Those 
wlio  see  in  the  Bible  a  Divine  work  can  understand 
how  a  God-taught  preacher  could  throw  aside  the 
miserable  fears  of  his  race,  and  boldly  tell  man  to 
trust  in  his  Maker  alone.  Here,  as  in  all  matters, 
the  history  of  the  Bible  confirms  its  doctrine.  In 
the  doctrinal  Scriptures  magic  is  passed  by  with 
contempt,  in  the  historical  Scrif)tures  the  reason- 
ableness of  this  contempt  is  shown.  Whenever  the 
practisers  of  magic  attempt  to  combat  the  servants 
of  God,  they  conspicuously  foil.  Pharaoh's  magic- 
ians bow  to  the  Divine  power  shown  in  the  won- 
ders wrought  by  Moses  and  Aaron.  Balaam,  the 
great  enchanter,  comes  fi-om  afar  to  cui'se  Israel  and 
is  forced  to  bless  them. 

In  examining  the  mentions  of  magic  in  the  Bible, 
we  must  keep  in  view  the  curious  inquiry  whether 
there  be  any  reality  in  the  art.  We  would  at  the 
outset  protest  against  the  idea,  once  very  prevalent, 
that  the  conviction  that  the  seen  and  unseen  worlds 
were  often  more  manifestly  in  contact  in  the  Bib- 
lical ages  than  now  necessitates  a  belief  in  the 
reality  of  the  magic  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures. 
We  do  indeed  see  a  connexion  of  a  supernatural 
agency  with  magic  in  such  a  case  as  that  of  the 
damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit  of  divination  men- 
tioned in  the  Acts ;  yet  there  the  agency  appears  to 
have  been  involuntary  in  the  damsel,  and  shrewdly 
made  profitable  by  her  employers.  This  does  not 
establish  the  possibility  of  man  being  able  at  his 
will  to  use  supernatural  powers  to  gain  his  own 
ends,  which  is  what  magic  has  always  pretended  to 
accomplish.  Thus  much  we  premise,  lest  we  should 
be  thought  to  hold  latitudinarian  opinions  because 
we  treat  the  reality  of  magic  as  an  open  question. 

Without  losing  sight  of  the  distinctions  we  have 
drawn  between  the  magic  of  different  races,  we  shall 
consider  the  notices  of  the  subject  in  the  Bible  in 
the  order  in  which  they  occur.  It  is  impossible  in 
every  case  to  assign  the  magical  practice  spoken  of 
to  a  particular  nation,  or  when  this  can  be  done  to 
determine  whether  it  be  native  or  borrowed,  and  the 
general  absence  of  details  renders  any  other  system 
of  classification  liable  to  error. 

The  theft  and  carrying  away  of  Laban's  tera- 
phim  (□'•Q'ln)  by  Rachel,  seems  to  indicate  the 
practice  of  magic  in  Padan-aram  at  this  early  time. 
It  appears  that  Laban  attached  great  value  to  these 
objects,  from  what  he  said  as  to  the  theft  and  his 
determined  search  for  them   (Gen.  xxxi.   19,   30, 


MAGIC 


195 


<^  Laban's  expression  in  Gen.  xxx.  27,  "  I  have  augured  " 
(^riEi^nj).  may  refer  to  divination;  but  the  context 
makes  it  more  reasonable  not  to  take  it  in  a  literal  sense. 

*  The  Arabic  root  O  >J  certainly  means  "  he  abounded 

in  the  comforts  of  life,"  and  the  like,  but  the  correspond- 
ing ancient  Egyptian  word  TERF  or  'I'REK,  "  to  dance," 
suggests  that  this  is  a  tropical  signification,  especially  as 
in  the  Indo-European  languages,  if  our  "  to  trip  "  preserve 
the  proper  sense  and  tlie  Sanskrit  trip  and  the  Greek 
Tipiro)  the  tropical  sense  of  the  root,  we  have  the  same 
word  with  the  two  meanings.  We  believe  also  that,  in 
point  of  age,  precedence  should  be  given  to  the  ancient 
Egyptian  word  beibre  the  Semitic,  and  that  in  the  former 
language  an  objective  sense  is  always  the  proper  sense, 
and  a  subjective  the  tropical,  when  a  word  is  used  in  both 
significations.  We  think  that  this  principle  is  equally  true 
of  the  Semitic  group,  although  it  may  be  contested  with 
reference  to  the  Indo-European  languages. 


32-35).  It  may  be  supposed  from  the  manner  in 
which  they  were  hidden  that  these  teraphim  were 
not  very  small.  Tlie  most  important  point  is 
that  Laban  calls  them  his  "gods"  (ibid.  30,  32), 
although  he  was  not  without  belief  in  the  true  God 
(24,  49-53)  ;  for  this  makes  it  almost  certain  that 
we  have  here  not  an  indication  of  the  worship  of 
strange  gods,  but  the  fiist  notice  of  a  superstition 
that  afterwards  obtained  among  those  Israelites  who 
added  corrui)t  practices  to  the  true  religion. •:  The 
dei-ivation  of  the  name  teraphim  is  extremely  ob- 
scure. Gesenius  takes  it  fiom  an  "unused"  root, 
P)^n,  which  he  supposes,  from  the  Arabic,  probably 

signified  "  to  live  pleasantly"  (Thes.  s.  v.).  It  may, 
however,  be  reasonably  conjectured  that  such  a  root 
would  have  had,  if  not  in  Hebrew,  in  the  language 
whence  the  Hebrews  took  it  or  its  derivative,  tlie 
proper  meaning  "  to  dance,"  corresponding  to  this, 
which  would  then  be  its  tropical  meaning. "^  We 
should  prefer,  if  no  other  derivation  be  found,  to 
suppose  that  the  name  teraphim  might  mean 
"dancers"  or  "causers  of  dancing,"  with  reference 
either  to  primitive  nature-worship®  or  its  magical 
rites  of  the  character  of  shamanism,  rather  than 
that  it  signifies,  as  Gesenius  suggests,  "  givers  of 
pleasant  life."  There  seems,  however,  to  be  a  cog- 
nate word,  unconnected  with  the  "  unused""  root 
just  mentioned,  in  ancient  Egyptian,  whence  we  may 
obtain  a  conjectural  derivation.  We  do  not  of  course 
trace  the  worship  of  teraphim  to  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt.  They  wei'e  probably  those  objects  of  the 
pre-Abrahamite  idolatry,  put  away  by  order  of 
Jacob  (Gen.  xxxv.  2-4),  yet  retained  even  in  Joshua's 
time  (Josh.  xxiv.  14)  ;  and,  if  so,  uotwithstanding 
his  exlrortaiion ,  abandoned  only  tor  a  space  (Judg. 
xvii.,  xviii.) ;  and  they  were  also  known  to  the 
Babylonians,  being  used  by  them  for  divination 
(Ez.  xxi.  21),  But  there  is  great  reason  for 
supposing  a  close  connexion  between  the  oldest 
language  and  religion  of  Chaldaea,  and  the  ancient 
Egyptian  language  and  religion.  The  Egyptian 
word  TER  signifies  "  a  shape,  type,  transforma- 
tion,"' and  has  for  its  determinative  a  mummy: 
it  is  used  in  the  Ritual,  where  the  various  transfor- 
mations of  the  deceased  in  Hades  are  described 
l^Todtenbuch,  ed.  Lepsius,  ch.  76  seg).  The  small 
mummy-shaped  figure,  SHEBTEE,  usually  made 
of  baked  clay  covered  with  a  blue  vitreous  varnish, 
representing  the  Egyptian  as  deceased,  is  of  a  na- 
ture connecting  it  with  magic,  since  it  was  made 
with  the  idea  that  it  secured  benefits  in  Hades  : 


^  In  the  fragments  ascribed  to  Sanchoniatho,  which, 
whatever  their  age  and  author,  caimot  be  doubted  to  be 
gentiine,  the  Baetulia  are  charactorisLd  in  a  manner  that 
illustrates  this  supposition.  The  Baetulia,  it  must  bo 
remembered,  were  sacred  stones,  tlie  reverence  of  which 
in  Syria  in  the  historical  times  was  a  relic  of  the  early 
low  nature-worship  with  which  fetishism  or  shamanism 
is  now  everywhere  associated.  The  words  used,  eirt vdrjo-e 
fltos  Oupacbs  BaiTvMa,  AWovs  efKpvxovi  jaT)xa>''J<''«/-'^''05 
(Cory,  Aiic.  Frag.  p.  12),  cannot  bo  held  to  mean  more  than 
that  Uranus  contrived  living  stones,  but  the  idea  of  contriv- 
ing and  the  term  "  living  "  imply  motion  in  tliose  stones. 

f  PJgyptologists  have  generally  read  tliis  word  TER. 
Mr.  Birch,  however,  reads  it  CHlil'ER  (SIIEI'ICR  accord- 
ing to  the  writer's  system  of  transcription).  The  balance 
Is  decided  by  the  discovery  of  the  Coptic  equivalent 
TCff  "  transmutare,"  in  which  the  absence  of  the 
final  R  is  explained  by  a  peculiar  but  regular  modification 
which  the  writer  was  the  first  to  point  out  (IltERO- 
GI.YPHICS,  Encyclopcedia  Hritannica ,  Hth  ert.  p.  421). 

O  2 


196 


MAGIC 


and  it  is  connected  with  the  word  TER,  for  it  repre- 
sents a  mummy,  the  determinative  of  that  word, 
and  was  considered  to  be  of  use  in  the  state 
in  which  the  deceased  passed  through  transforma- 
tions, TERU.  The  ditKculty  which  forbids  our 
doing  more  than  conjecture  a  relation  between 
TER  and  teraphim  is  the  want  in  the  former  of 
the  third  radical  of  the  latter ;  and  in  our  present 
state  of  ignorance  respecting  the  ancient  Egyptian 
and  the  primitive  language  of  Chaldaea  in  their 
verbal  relations  to  the  Semitic  family  it  is  impos- 
sible to  say  whether  it  is  likely  to  be  explained. 
The  possible  connexion  with  the  Egyptian  religious 
magic  is,  however,  not  to  be  slighted,  especially  as  it 
is  not  improbable  that  the  household  idolatry  of  the 
Hebrews  was  ancestral  worship,  and  the  SHEBTEE 
was  the  image  of  a  deceased  man  or  woman,  as  a 
mummy,  and  therefore  as  an  Osiris,  bearing  the 
insignia  of  that  divinity,  and  so  in  a  manner  as 
a  deified  dead  person,  although  we  do  not  know 
that  it  was  used  in  the  ancestral  worship  of  the 
Egyptians.  It  is  important  to  notice  that  no  sin- 
gular is  found  of  the  word  teraphim,  and  that  the 
plural  form  is  once  used  where  only  one  statue 
seems  to  be  meant  (1  Sam.  xix.  13,  10):  in  this 
case  it  may  be  a  "plural  of  excellence."  If  the 
latter  inference  be  true,  this  word  must  have  become 
thoroughly  Semiticized.  There  is  no  description  of 
these  images  ;  but  from  the  account  of  Michal's 
stratagem  to  deceive  Saul's  messengers,  it  is  evi- 
dent, if  only  one  image  be  there  meant,  as  is  very 
probable,  that  they  were  at  least  sometimes  of  the 
size  of  a  man,  and  perhaps  in  the  head  and  shoulders, 
if  not  lower,  of  human  shape,  or  of  a  similar  form 
{Id.  18-16). 

The  worship  or  use  of  teraphim  after  the  occu- 
pation of  the  Promised  Land  cannot  be  doubted 
to  have  been  one  of  the  corrupt  practices  of  those 
Hebrews  who  leant  to  idolatry,  but  did  not  abandon 
their  belief  in  the  God  of  Israel.  Although  the 
Scriptures  draw  no  marked  distinction  between 
those  who  forsook  their  religion  and  those  who 
added  to  it  such  corruptions,  it  is  evident  that 
the  latter  always  professed  to  be  orthodox.  Tera- 
phim therefore  cannot  be  regarded  as  among  the 
Hebrews  necessarily  connected  with  strange  gods, 
whatever  may  have  been  the  case  with  other 
nations.  The  account  of  Micah's  images  in  the 
Book  of  Judges,  compared  with  a  passage  in  Hosea, 
shows  our  conclusion  to  be  coiTect.  In  the  earliest 
days  of  the  occupation  of  the  Promised  Land,  in 
the  time  of  anarchv  that  followed  Joshua's  rule, 
Micah,  "a  man  of  mount  Ephiaim,"  made  certain 
images  and  other  objects  of  heretical  worship,  which 
were  stolen  from  him  by  those  Daiiites  who  took 
Laish  and  called  it  T>an,  there  setting  up  idolatry, 
where  it  continued  the  whole  time  that  the  ark  was 
at  Shiloh,  the  priests  retaining  their  post  "  until 
the  day  of  the  captivity  of  the  land"  (Judg.  xvii., 
xviii.,  esp.  30,  HI).  Probably  this  worship  was 
somewhat  changed,  although  not  in  its  essential 
character,  when  Jeroboam  set  up  the  golden  calf  at 
Dan.  Micah's  idolatrous  objects  were  a  graven 
image,  a  molten  image,  an  ephod,  and  teraphim 
(xviL  3,  4,  5,  -xviii.  U,  18,  20).  In  Hosea  there 
is  a  retrospect  of  this  period  where  the  prophet 
takes  a  harlot,  and  commands  her  to  be  faithful  to 

8  Kalisch,  in  bis  Commentary  on  Genesis  (pp.  533, 534), 
considers  the  use  of  teraphim  as  a  comparatively  liarm- 
less  form  of  idolatry,  and  explains  the  passage  in  Hosea 
quoted  above  as  meaning  that  the  Israelites  should  be 


MAGIC 

him  "  many  days."  It  is  added :  "  For  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  shall  abide  many  days  without  a 
king,  and  without  a  prince,  and  without  a  sacritice, 
and  without  an  image  [or  "pillar,"  HQ-'ifD],  and 
without  an  ephod,  and  teraphim:  afterward  shall 
the  children  of  Israel  return,  and  seek  Jehovah 
their  God,  and  David  their  king;  and  shall  fear 
Jehovah  and  His  goodness  in  the  latter  days"  (iii. 
esp.  4,  5).  The  apostate  people  are  long  to  be  with- 
out their  spurious  king  and  false  worship,  and  in  the 
end  are  to  return  to  their  loyalty  to  the  house  of 
David  and  their  faith  in  the  true  God.  That  Dan 
should  be  connected  with  Jeroboam  "  who  made  Israel 
to  sin,"  and  with  the  kingdom  which  he  founded, 
is  most  natural ;  and  it  is  therefore  worthy  of  note 
that  the  images,  ephod,  and  teraphim  made  by 
Micah  and  stolen  and  set  up  by  the  Danites  at  Dan 
should  so  nearly  conespond  with  the  objects  spoken 
of  by  the  prophet.  It  has  been  itiiagined  that  the 
use  of  teraphim  and  the  similar  abonunations  of  the 
heretical  Israelites  are  not  so  strongly  condemned  in 
the  Scriptures  as  the  worship  of  strange  gods.  This 
mistake  arises  from  the  mention  of  pious  kings 
who  did  not  suppress  the  high  places,  which  proves 
ooly  their  timidity,  and  not  any  lesser  sinfulness 
in  the  spurious  religion  than  in  false  systems  bor- 
rowed from  the  peoples  of  Canaan  and  neighbouring 
countries.  The  cruel  rites  of  the  heathen  are  indeed 
especially  reprobated,  but  the  heresy  of  the  Israelites 
is  too  emphatically  denounced,  by  Samuel  in  a  passage 
to  be  soon  examined,  and  in  the  repeated  condemna- 
tion of  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat  "  who  made  Israel 
to  sin,"  for  it  to  be  possible  that  we  should  take  a 
view  of  it  consistent  only  with  modern  sophistry .8 

We  pass  to  the  magical  use  of  teraphim.  By  the 
Israelites  they  were  consulted  for  oracular  answers. 
This  was  apparently  done  by  the  Danites  who  asked 
Micah's  Levite  to  inquire  as  to  the  success  of  their 
spying  expedition  (Judg.  xviii.  5,  6).  In  later 
times  this  is  distinctly  stated  of  the  Israelites  where 
Zechariah  says,  "  For  the  teraphim  have  spoken 
vanit}',  and  the  diviners  have  seen  a  lie,  and  have 
told  false  dreams  "  (x.  2).  It  cannot  be  supposed 
that,  as  this  first  positive  mention  of  the  use  of  te- 
raphim for  divination  by  the  Israelites  is  after  the 
return  from  Babylon,  and  as  that  use  obtained  with 
the  Babylonians  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
therefore  the  Israelites  borrowed  it  from  their  con- 
querors ;  for  these  objects  are  mentioned  in  earlier 
places  in  such  a  manner  that  their  connexion  with 
divination  must  be  intended,  if  we  bear  in  mind 
that  this  connexion  is  undoubted  in  a  subsequent  pe- 
riod. Samuel's  reproof  of  Saul  for  his  disobedience 
in  the  matter  of  Amalek,  associates  "  divination  " 
with  "vanity,"  or  "idols"  (|15<),  and"  teraphim," 

however  we  render  the  difficult  passage  where  those 
words  occur  (1  Sam.  xv.  22,  2.S).  (The  W'ord  ren- 
dered "  vanity,"  JIN,  is  especially  used  with  reference 

to  idols,  and  even  in  some  places  stands  alone  for 
an  idol  or  idols.)  When  Saul,  having  put  to  death 
the  workers  in  black  aits,  finding  himself  rejected 
of  God  in  his  extremity,  sought  the  witch  of  Endor, 
and  asked  to  see  Samuel,  the  prophet's  apparition 
denounced  his  doom  as  the  punishment  of  this  very 
disobedience  as  to  Amalek.  The  reproof  would  seem, 
therefore,  to  have  been  a  propliecy  that  the  self- 


deprived  not  alone  of  ti-ue  religion,  but  even  of  the  re- 
source of  their  mild  household  superstitions.  He  thus 
entirely  misses  the  sense  of  the  passage,  and  makes  the 
Bible  contradictory. 


MAGIC 

coufideat  king  would  at  the  last  alienate  himself 
from  God,  and  take  refuge  in  the  very  abominations 
he  despised.  This  apparent  reference  tends  to  con- 
iirm  the  inference  we  have  indicated.  As  to  a  later 
time,  when  Josiah's  reform  is  related,  he  is  said  to 
have  put  away  "  the  wizards,  and  the  tei'aphim, 
and  the  idols"  (2  K.  xxiii.  24)  ;  where  the  mention 
of  the  teraphim  immediately  after  the  wizards, 
and  as  distinct  from  the  idols,  seems  to  fevour  the 
inference  that  they  are  spoken  of  as  objects  used  in 
divination. 

The  only  account  of  the  act  of  divining  by  tera- 
phim is  in  a  remarkable  passage  of  Ezekiel  relat- 
ing to  Nebuchadnezzar's  advance  against  Jerusalem. 
"  Also,  thou  son  of  man,  appoint  thee  two  ways, 
that  the  swoid  of  the  king  of  Babylon  may  come : 
botli  twain  [two  swords]  shall  come  forth  out  of 
one  land :  and  choose  thou  a  place,  choose  [it]  at 
the  head  of  the  way  to  the  city.  Appoint  a  way, 
that  the  sword  may  come  to  Rabbath  of  the  Am- 
monites, and  to  Judah  in  Jerusalem  the  defenced. 
For  the  king  of  Babylon  stood  at  the  parting  of  the 
way,  at  the  head  of  the  two  ways,  to  use  divina- 
tion: he  shuffled  arrows,  he  consulted  with  tera- 
phim, he  looked  iu  the  liver.  At  his  right  hand 
wa.s  the  divination  for  Jerusalem"  (xxi.  19-22). 
The  mention  together  of  consulting  teraphim  and 
looking  into  the  liver,  may  not  indicate  that  the  vic- 
tim was  offered  to  teraphim  and  its  liver  then  looked 
into,  but  may  mean  two  separate  acts  of  divining. 
That  the  former  is  the  right  explanation  seems,  how- 
ever, probable  from  a  comparison  with  the  LXX. 
rendering  of  the  account  of  Michal's  stratagem.'' 
Perhaps  Michal  had  been  divining,  and  on  the 
coming  of  the  messengers  seized  the  image  and 
liver  and  hastily  put  them  in  the  bed. — The 
accounts  which  the  Rabbins  give  of  divining  by 
teraphim  are  worthless. 

Before  speaking  of  the  notices  of  the  Egyptian 
magicians  in  Genesis  and  Exodus,  there  is  one 
l)assage  that  may  be  examinetl  out  of  the  regular 
order.  Joseph,  when  his  brethren  left  after  their 
second  visit  to  buy  com,  ordered  his  steward  to 
hide  his  silver  cup  in  Benjamin's  sack,  and  after- 
wards sent  him  after  them,  ordering  him  to  claim 
it,  thus:  "  [Is]  not  this  [it]  in  which  my  lord 
drinketh,  and  whereby  indeed  he  divineth  ?"  '  (Gen. 
xliv.  5).  The  meaning  of  the  latter  clause  has  been 
contested,  Gesenius  translating  "  he  could  surely 
foresee  it"  (ap.  Barrett,  Synopsis,  in  he),  but  the 
other  rendering  seems  far  more  probable,  especially  as 
we  read  that  Joseph  afterwards  said  to  his  brethren, 
"  Wot  ye  not  that  such  a  man  as  I  can  certainly  tli- 
vine?"  (xliv.  IS), — the  same  word  being  used.  If  so 
the  reference  would  probably  be  to  the  use  of  the  cup 
in  divining,  and  we  should  have  to  infer  that  here 
Joseph  was  acting  on  his  own  judgment  [Joseph], 


MAGIC 


197 


i>  The  Masoretic  text  reads,  "And  Michal  took  the 
teraphim,  and  laid  [it]  upon  the  bed,  and  the  mattress 
('■  1^33)  of  she-goats  [or  goats'  hair]  she  put  at  its  head, 
and  she  covered  [it]  with  a  cloth"  [or  garment]  (1  Sam. 
xix.  13).  The  LXX.  has  "  the  liver  of  goats,"  having  ap- 
pai:ently  found  T33  instead  of  1^33  (Kai  eAajSei/  17 
MeiVxo^  Ta  KevOTai^na,  KaX  eSero  cttI  ttji'  K\Cvr)V,  Kai 
rjiTap  riov  aiyuv  (0eTO  Trpoi  xec^aAijs  auToO,  KaX  eKaAvi^ci/ 
auTci  tjuartoj.) 

k  The  modern  Persians  apply  the  word  Jim,  signifying 
a  Clip,  mirror,  or  oven  globe,  to  magiciil  vessels  of  this 
kind,  and  relate  marvels  of  two  which  ( licy  say  belonged  to 
their  ancient  liiug  Jembliecd  and  to  Alexander  the  Great. 


divination  being  not  alone  doubtless  a  forbidden  act, 
but  one  of  which  he  when  called  before  Pharaoh 
had  distinctly  disclaimed  the  practice.  Two  uses  of 
cups  or  the  like  for  magical  purposes  have  obtained 
in  the  East  from  ancient  times.  In  one  use  either 
the  cup  itself  bears  engraved  inscriptions,  supposed 
to  have  a  magical  influence,''  or  it  is  plain  and  such 
inscriptions  are  written  on  its  inner  surface  in  ink. 
In  both  cases  water  poured  into  the  cup  is  drunk 
by  those  wishing  to  derive  benefit,  as,  for  instance, 
the  cure  of  diseases,  from  the  inscriptions,  which, 
if  written,  are  dissolved."  This  use,  in  both  its 
forms,  obtains  among  the  Arabs  in  the  present  day, 
and  cups  bearing  Chaldaean  inscriptions  in  ink  have 
been  discovered  by  Blr.  Layard,  and  probably  show 
that  this  practice  existed  among  the  Jews  in  Baby- 
lonia in  about  the  7th  century  of  the  Christian  era." 
In  the  other  use  the  cup  or  bowl  was  of  very  secon- 
dary importance.  It  was  merely  the  receptacle  Ibr 
water,  in  which,  after  the  performance  of  magical 
rites,  a  boy  looked  to  see  what  the  magician  desired. 
This  is  precisely  the  same  as  the  practice  of  the  mo- 
dern Egyptian  magicians,  where  the  difference  that 
ink  is  employed  and  is  poured  into  the  palm  of  the 
boy's  h;ind  is  merely  accidental.  A  gnostic  papyrus 
in  Greek,  written  in  Egypt  in  the  earlier  centu- 
ries of  the  Christian  era,  now  preserved  in  the 
British  Museum,  describes  the  practice  of  the  boy 
with  a  bowl,  and  alleges  results  strikingly  similar 
to  the  alleged  results  of  the  well-known  modern 
Egyptian '  magician,  whose  divination  would  seem, 
therefore,  to  be  a  relic  of  the  famous  magic  of 
ancient  Egypt."  As  this  latter  use  only  is  of 
the  nature  of  divination,  it  is  probable  that  to  it 
Joseph  referred.  The  practice  may  have  been 
prevalent  in  his  time,  and  hieroglyphic  inscriptions 
upon  the  bowl  may  have  given  colour  to  the  idea 
that  it  had  magical  properties,  and  perhaps  even  that 
it  had  thus  led  to  the  discovery  of  its  place  of  con- 
cealment, a  discovery  which  must  have  struck 
Joseph's  brethren  with  the  utmost  astonishment. 

The  magicians  of  Egypt  are  spoken  of  as  a  class 
in  the  histories  of  Joseph  and  Moses.  When  Pha- 
raoh's officers  were  troubled  by  their  dreams,  being 
in  prison  they  were  at  a  loss  for  an  interpreter. 
Before  Joseph  explained  the  dreams  he  disclaimed 
the  power  of  interpreting  save  by  the  Divine  aid, 
saying,  "  [Do]  not  interpretations  [belong]  to  God? 
tell  me  [them],  1  pray  you "  (Gen.  xl.  8).  In 
like  manner  when  Pharaoh  had  his  two  dreams 
we  find  that  he  had  recourse  to  those  who  professed 
to  interpret  dreams.  We  read  :  "  He  sent  and  called 
for  all  the  scribes  of  Egypt,  and  all  the  wise  men 
thereof:  and  Pharaoh  told  them  his  dream;  but 
[there  was]  none  that  coulil  interpret  them  unto 
Pharaoh"  (xh.  8;  comp.  ver.  24).  Josejih,  being 
sent  for  on  the  report  of  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers, 


The  former  of  these,  called  Jilm-i-.Tem  or  .Ji£m-i-Jomsheed, 
is  famous  in  Persian  poetry.  D'llerbelot  quotes  a  Turliish 
poet  who  thus  alludes  to  this  belief  in  magical  cups : — 
"AVhen  I  shall  have  been  illuminated  by  the  liglit  of 
heaven  my  soul  will  become  the  mirror  of  the  world,  in 
which  1  shall  discover  the  most  hidden  secrets"  (BiUit}- 
theque  Orientale,  s.  v.  Giam). 

">  Modem  Egyptians,  5th  edit.  chap.  xi. 

"  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  509,  *:c.  There  is  an 
excellent  paper  on  these  bowls  by  Dr.  Levy  of  Breslau,  in 
the  ZHtschrift  dcr  Deutsch.  Morgeiiland.  Gt'selhchaft, 
ix.  p.  465,  &c. 

"  See  the  Modem  Egyptians,  5th  edit.  chap.  xii.  for  an 
account  of  the  performances  of  this  magician,  and  Mr. 
Lane's  opinion  as  to  the  causes  of  their  occasional  appa- 
rent success. 


198 


MAGIC 


was  told  by  Pharaoh  that  he  had  heard  that  he 
could  interpret  a  dream.  J'oseph  said,  "  [It  is]  not 
in  me :  God  shall  give  Pharaoh  an  answer  of  peace  " 
(ver.  16).  Thus,  from  the  expectations  of  the 
Egyptians  and  Joseph's  disavowals,  we  see  that  the 
interpretation  of  dreams  was  a  branch  of  the  know- 
ledge to  which  the  ancient  Egyptian  magicians  pre- 
tended. The  failure  of  the  Egyptians  in  the  case 
of  Pharaoh's  dreams  must  probably  be  regarded  as 
the  result  of  their  inability  to  give  a  satisfactory 
explanation,  for  it  is  unlikely  that  tliey  refused  to 
attempt  to  intei-pret.  The  two  words  used  to  de- 
signate the  interpreters  sent  for  by  Pharaoh  are 
D''Sp'in,  "  scribes"  (?)  and  0^)0311'  "  wise  men.'.'P 
We  again  hear  of  the  magicians  of  Egypt  in  the 
narrative  of  the  events  before  the  Exodus.  They 
were  summoned  by  Pharaoh  to  oppose  Moses.  The 
account  of  what  they  effected  requires  to  be  care- 
fully examined,  from  its  bearing  on  the  question 
whether  magic  be  an  imposture.  We  read:  "And 
the  Lord  spake  luito  Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying. 
When  Pharaoh  shall  speak  unto  you,  saying,  Show 
a  miracle  for  you  :  then  thou  shalt  say  unto  Aaron, 
Take  thy  rod,  and  cast  [it]  before  Pharaoh,  [and] 
it  shall  become  a  serpent."  i  It  is  then  related  that 
Aaron  did  thus,  and  afterwards  :  "  Then  Pharaoh 
also  called  the  wise  men  •■  and  the  enchanters :  ° 
now  they,  the  scribes '  of  Egypt,  did  so  by  their 
secret  arts  :"  for  they  cast  down  every  man  his  rod, 
and  they  became  serpents,  but  Aaron's  rod  swal- 
lowed up  their  rods"  (Ex.  vii.  8-12).  The  rods  were 
probably  long  staves  like  those  represented  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  not  much  less  than  the  height 
of  a  man.  If  the  word  used  mean  here  a  serpent, 
the  Egyptian  magicians  may  have  feigned  a  change : 
if  it  signify  a  crocodile  they  could  scarcely  have 
done  so.  The  names  by  which  the  magicians  are 
designated  are  to  be  noted.  That  which  we  render 
"  scribes"  seems  here  to  have  a  general  signification, 
including  wise  men  and  enchanters.  The  last  term  is 
more  definite  in  its  meaning,  denoting  users  of  in- 
cantations.^ On  the  occasion  of  the  first  plague,  the 
turning  the  rivers  and  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood, 
the  opposition  of  the  magicians  again  occurs.  "  And 
the  scribes  of  Egypt  did  so  oy  their  secret  arts " 
(vii.  22).     When  the  second  plague,  that  of  frogs. 


P  The  former  word  is  difficult  of  explanation.  It  is  to 
be  noticed  that  it  is  also  used  for  a  class  of  the  Baby. 
Ionian  magi  (Dan.  i.  20,  ii.  2) ;  so  that  it  can  scarcely  be 
supposed  to  be  an  Egyptian  word  Hebraicized.  Kgyptian 
equivalents  have  however  been  sought  for;  and .fablonsky 
suggests  6pX(JDASL.  tkaumatargus,  and  Ignatius 
Rossi  C<l.peCTCWAJL.  "guardian  of  secret  things" 
(ap.  Ges.  Tlies.  s.  v.),  both  of  wliich  are  far  too  unlike  the 
Hebrew  to  have    any  probability.      To  derive    it  from 

the  Persian  tX^LcJ^iit  "endued  with  wisdom,"  when 
occurring  in  Daniel,  is  puerile,  as  Gesenius  admits.  He 
suggests  a  Hebrew  origin,  and  takes  it  either  from  tD'in. 
"  a  pen  or  stylus,"  and  Q —  formative,  or  supposes  it  to 
be  a  qnadriliteral,  fonned  from  the  trilitcral  tD"in>  the 
"  unused "  root  of  tS'in.  and  D^H')  "  he  or  It  was 
sacred."  The  former  seems  far  more  probable  at  first 
sight ;  and  the  latter  would  not  have  had  any  weight 
were  it  not  for  its  likeness  to  the  Greek  lepoypaij.fjuO.TiV';, 
used  of  Kgyptian  religious  scribes  ;  a  resemblance  which, 
moreover,  loses  much  of  its  value  when  we  find  that 
in  hieroglyphics  there  is  no  exactly  corresponding  ex- 
pression. Notwithstanding  these  Hebrew  derivations, 
Gesenius  inclines  to  the  idea   thai   a  similar  Kgyptian 


MAGIC 

was  sent,  the  magicians  again  wade  the  same  oppo- 
sition (viii.  7).  Once  more  they  appear  in  the 
history.  The  plague  of  lice  came,  and  we  read 
that  when  Aaron  had  worked  the  wonder  the 
magicians  opposed  him :  "  And  the  scribes  did 
so  by  their  secret  arts  to  bring  forth  the  lice, 
but  they  could  not :  so  there  were  lice  upon  man 
and  upon  beast.  And  the  scribes  said  unto  Pharaoh, 
This  [is]  the  finger  of  God :  but  Pharaoh's  heart 
was  hardened,  and  he  hearkened  not  unto  them,  as 
the  Lord  had  said"  (viii.  18,  19,  Heb.  14,  \b). 
After  this  we  hear  no  more  of  the  magicians.  All 
we  can  gather  fi'om  the  narrative  is  that  the  ap- 
peai'ances  produced  by  them  were  sufficient  to 
deceive  Pharaoh  on  three  occasions.  It  is  no- 
where declared  that  they  actually  produced  won- 
ders, since  the  expression  "  the  scribes  did  so 
by  their  secret  arts "  is  used  on  the  occasion  of 
their  complete  failure.  Nor  is  their  statement 
that  in  the  wonders  wrought  by  Aaron  they  saw 
the  finger  of  God  any  proof  that  they  recognised  a 
power  superior  to  the  native  objects  of  worship 
they  invoked,  for  we  find  that  the  Egyptians  ft'e- 
quently  spoke  of  a  supreme  being  as  God.  It 
seems  rather  as  though  they  had  said,  "  Our  juggles 
are  of  no  avail  against  the  work  of  a  divinity." 
There  is  one  later  mention  of  these  transactions, 
which  adds  to  our  information,  but  does  not  decide 
the  main  question.  St.  Paul  mentions  Janncs  and 
.Tambres  as  ha\-ing  "  withstood  Moses,"  and  says 
that  their  folly  in  doing  so  became  manifest  (2  Tim. 
iii.  8,  9).  The  Egyptian  character  of  these  names, 
the  first  of  which  is,  in  our  opinion,  found  in  hiero- 
glyphics, does  not  favour  the  opinion,  which  seems 
inconsistent  with  the  character  of  an  inspired  record, 
that  the  Apostle  cited  a  prevalent  tradition  of  the 
Jews.     [Jannes  and  .Tambres.] 

We  turn  to  the  Egyptian  illustrations  of  this 
part  of  the  subject.  Magic,  as  we  have  before 
remarked,  was  inherent  in  the  ancient  Egvptian 
religion.  The  Ritual  is  a  system  of  incantations 
and  diiections  for  making  amulets,  with  the  object 
of  securing  the  future  happiness  of  the  disembodied 
soul.  However  obscure  the  belief  of  the  Egyptians 
as  to  the  actual  character  of  the  state  of  the  soul 
after  death  may  be  to  us,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 


word  was  imitated ;  instancing  Abrech,  Moses,  and 
behemoth  C^^ni^.  HK'O,  DIDn^)  ;  but  no  one  of 
these  can  be  proved  to  be  Kgyptian  in  origin,  and  there 
is  no  strong  ground  for  seeking  any  but  a  Hebrew  etymo- 
logy for  the  second  and  third  {Thes.  1.  c).  The  most 
similar  word  is  Hashmannim,  D''3?^C^'^  (Ps.  Ixviii.  31, 
Heb.  32),  which  we  suppose  to  be  Kgyptian,  meaning 
Hermopolites,  with  perhaps,  in  the  one  place  where  it 
occurs,  a  reierence  to  the  wisdom  of  the  citizens  of  Her- 
mopolis  Magna,  the  city  of  Thotb,  the  Kgj-ptian  Hermes. 
[Hashmannim.]  We  prefer  to  keep  to  the  Hebrew  deri- 
vation simply  from  t3^n.  and  to  read  "  scribes,"  the  idea 
of  magicians  being  probably  understood.  The  other  word, 
D^PDrii  does  not  seem  to  mean  any  special  class,  but 
merely  the  wise  men  of  Kgypt  generally. 

«  The  word  □'•pil?,  elsewhere  ti^'oP  (ver.  22,  viii. 
3,  14),  signifies  "secret"  or  "hidden  arts,"  from  ]yQ 

(DN7'  tSn?)'  "  he  or  it  covered  over,  hid,  or  wrapped 
up." 


MAGIC 

the  knowledge  and  use  of  the  magical  amulets  and 
incantations  treated  of  in  the  fiitual  was  held  to  be 
necessary  for  future  happiness,  although  it  was  not 
believed  that  they  alone  could  ensure  it,  since  to 
have  done  good  works,  or,  more  strictly,  not  to  have 
committed  certain  sins,  was  an  essential  condition 
of  the  acquittal  of  the  soul  in  the  great  trial  in  Hades. 
The  thoroughly  magical  character  of  the  Ritual 
is  most  strikingly  evident  in  the  minute  directions 
given  for, making  amulets  {Todteubuch,  ch.  100, 
12.9,  134),  and  the  secresy  enjoined  in  one  case  to 
those  thus  occupied  (133).  The  later  chapters  of 
the  Ritual  (163-165),  held  to  have  been  added 
after  the  compilation  or  composition  of  the  rest, 
which  theory,  as  M.  Chabas  has  well  remarked,  does 
not  pro\'e  their  much  more  modern  date  {Le  Papyrus 
Maijiqiie  Harris,  p.  1 62),  contain  mystical  names 
not  bearing  an  Egyptian  etymology.  These  names 
have  been  thought  to  be  Ethiopian ;  they  either 
have  no  signiKcation,  and  are  mere  magical  gibberish, 
or  else  they  are,  mainly  at  least,  of  foreign  origin. 
Besides  the  Ritual  the  ancient  Egyptians  had  books 
of  a  purely  magical  chai'acter,  such  as  that  which 
M.  Chabas  has  just  edited  in  his  work  referred  to 
above.  The  main  source  of  their  belief  in  the 
efficacy  of  magic  appears  to  have  been  the  idea  that 
the  souls  of  the  dead,  whether  justified  or  con- 
demned, had  the  power  of  revisiting  the  earth  and 
taking  various  forms.  This  belief  is  abundantly 
used  in  the  moral  tale  of  '  The  Two  Brothers,'  of 
which  the  text  has  been  recently  published  by  the 
Trustees  of  the  British  Museum  (^Select  Papyri, 
Part  11.),  and  we  learn /rom  this  ancient  papyrus 
the  age  and  source  of  much  of  the  machinery  of 
mediaeval  fictions,  both  eastern  and  western.  A 
likeness  that  strikes  us  at  once  in  the  ca-^e  of  a 
fiction  is  not  less  true  of  the  Ritual ;  and  the  perils 
encountered  by  the  soul  in  Hades  are  the  first  rude 
indications  of  the  adventures  of  the  heroes  of  Arab 
and  German  romance.  The  I'egions  of  terror  tra- 
versed, the  mystic  portals  that  open  alone  to  magical 
words,  and  the  monsters  whom  magic  alone  can 
deprive  of  their  power  to  injure,  are  here  already 
in  the  book  that  in  part  was  found  in  the  reign  of 
king  Mencheres  four  thousand  years  ago.  Bearing 
in  mind  the  Nigritian  nature  of  Egyptian  magic, 
we  may  look  for  the  source  of  these  ideas  in  primi- 
tive Africa.  There  we  find  the  realities  of  which 
the  ideal  form  is  not  greatly  distorted,  though 
greatly  intensified.  The  forests  that  clothe  the 
southern  slopes  of  snowy  Atlas,  full  of  fierce  beasts  ; 
the  vast  desert,  untenanted  save  by  harmful  rep- 
tiles, swept  by  sand-storms,  and  ever  burning  under 
an  unchanging  sun;  the  marshes  of  the  south,  teem- 
ing with  brutes  of  vast  size  and  strength,  are  the 
several  zones  of  the  Egyptian  Hades.  The  ci-eatures 
of  the  desert  and  the  plains  and  slopes,  tlie  crocodile, 
the  pachydermata,  the  lion,  perchance  the  gorilla, 
are  the  genii  that  hold  this  land  of  fear.  In  what 
dread  must  the  first  scanty  population  have  held 
dangers  and  enemies  still  feaied  by  their  swarming 
posterity.  No  wonder  then  that  the  imaginative 
Nigritians  were  struck  with  a  superstitious  fear 
that  certain  conditions  of  external  nature  always 
produce  with  races  of  a  low  typo,  where  a  higher 
feeling  would  only  be  touched  by  the  analogies  of 
life  and  death,  of  time  and  eternity.  No  wonder 
that,  so  struck,  the  primitive  race  imagined  tl)e 
evils  of  the  unseen  world  to  be  the  recurrence  of 
those  against  which  they  struggled  while  on  earth. 
'I'hat  there  is  some  ground  tor  our  theory,  besides 
the  gcneralisjitiou  wliich  led  us  to  it,  is  shown  bv 


MAGIC 


199 


a  usual  Egj'ptian  name  of  Hades,  "  the  West ;"  and 
that  the  wild  regions  west  of  Egypt  might  directly 
give  birth  to  such  fancies  as  form  the  common 
ground  of  the  machinery,  not  the  general  belief,  of 
the  Ritual,  as  well  as  of  the  machinery  of  mediaeval 
fiction,  is  shown  by  the  fables  that  the  rude  Arabs 
of  our  own  day  tell  of  the  wonders  they  have  seen. 

Like  all  nations  who  have  practised  mafic  gene- 
rally, the  Egyjftians  separated  it  into  a  lawfiiTkind 
and  an  unlawful.  M.Ohabas  has  proved  this  fiom 
a  papyrus  which  he  finds  to  contain  an  account  of 
the  prosecution,  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  III.,  (B.C. 
cir.  1220)  of  an  official  for  unlawfully  acquiring  and 
using  magical  books,  the  king's  property.  The 
culprit  was  convicted  and  punished  with  death 
(p.  169  seq.) 

A  belief  in  unlucky  and  lucky  daj's,  in  actions  to 
be  avoided  or  done  on  certain  days,  and  in  the 
fortune  attending  birth  on  certain  days,  was  ex- 
tremely strong,  as  we  learn  from  a  remarkable 
ancient  calendar  {Select  Papyri,  Part  I.)  and  the 
evidence  of  writers  of  antiquity.  A  religious  pre- 
judice, or  the  occurrence  of  some  great  calamity, 
probably  lay  at  the  root  of  this  observance  of  days. 
Of  the  former  the  birthday  of  Typhon,  the  fifth  of 
the  Epagomenae,  is  an  instance.  Astrology  was  ' 
also  held  in  high  honour,  as  the  calendars  of  certain 
of  the  tombs  of  the  kings,  stating  the  positions  of 
the  stars  and  their  influence  on  different  parts  of  the 
body,  show  us ;  but  it  seems  doubtful  whether  this 
branch  of  magical  arts  is  older  than  the  x^^iith 
dynasty,  although  certain  stars  were  held  in  le- 
vereuce  in  the  time  of  the  ivth  dynasty.  The  belief 
in  omens  probably  did  not  take  an  important  place 
in  Egyptian  magic,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  ab- 
sence of  direct  mention  of  them.  The  superstition 
as  to  "  the  evil  eye  "  appears  to  have  been  known, 
but  there  is  nothing  else  th3t  we  can  class  with 
phenomena  of  the  nature  of  animal  magnetism. 
Two  classes  of  learned  men  had  the  charge  of  the 
magical  books :  one  of  these,  the  name  of  which 
has  not  been  read  phonetically,  would  seem  to  cor- 
respond to  the  "  scribes,"  as  we  render  the  word, 
spoken  of  in  the  history  of  Joseph  ;  whereas  the 
other  has  the  general  sense  of  ''  wise  men,"  like 
the  other  class  there  mentioned.^ 

There  are  no  representations  on  the  monuments 
that  can  be  held  to  relate  directly  to  the  practice 
of  this  art,  but  the  secret  passages  in  the  thickness 
of  the  wall,  lately  opened  in  the  great  temple  of 
Dendarah,  seem  to  have  been  intended  for  some 
purpose  of  imposture. 

The  Law  contains  very  distinct  prohibitions  of 
all  magical  arts.  Besides  several  passages  con- 
demning them,  in  one  place  there  is  a  specifi- 
cation which  is  so  full  that  it  seems  evident  that 
its  object  is  to  include  every  kind  of  magical 
art.  The  reference  is  to  the  practices  of  Canaan, 
not  to  those  of  Egypt,  which  indeed  do  not  seem  to 
have  been  brought  awav  by  the  Israelites,  who,  it 
may  be  remarked,  apparently  did  n(>t  adopt  Higyptian 
idolatry,  but  only  that  of  foreigners  settled  in 
Egypt.     [Remimian.] 

The  Israelites  aie  commanded  in  the  place  referred 
to  not  to  learn  the  al)ominations  of  the  peoples  of 
the  Promised  Land.  Then  follows  this  prohibition : 
"  There  shall   not   be  found   with  thee   one  who 

y  For  tlie  facts  respecting  Egyptian  magic  here  stated 
we  are  greatly  indebted  to  M.  Chabas'  remarkable  work. 
We  do  not,  liowever,  .agree  with  some  of  liis  deductions; 
and  tbe  theory  we  have  put  forth  of  tlie  origin  of  Kgyptian 
magic  is  purely  our  own. 


200  MAGIC 

offereth  his  sou  or  his  daughter  by  fire,  a  practiser  1 
of  divinations  (CJODp  DDp),  a  worker  of  hidden 
arts  (piyD),  an  aug'urer  (L^'nJO),  an   enchanter 
(vJkJ'SQ),  or  a  fabricator  of  charms  ("llin  ~13n),  or 

an  inquirer  by  a  familiar  spirit  (HIN  7J^C^)>  or  a 
wizard  C^yny;,  or  a  consulter  of  the  dead  f  bx  ^"p 
DTllSri)."    It  is  added  that  these  are  abominations, 

and  that  on  account  of  their  practice  the  nations 
of  Canaan  were  to  be  driven  out  (Deut.  xviii.  9-14, 
esp.  10,  11).  It  is  remarkable  that  the  otlering  of 
children  should  be  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
magical  arts.  The  passage  in  Micah,  which  has 
been  supposed  to  preserve  a  question  of  Balak  and 
an  answer  of  Balaam,  when  the  soothsayer  was 
sent  for  to  curse  Israel,  should  be  here  noticed, 
tor  the  questioner  asks,  after  speaking  of  sacrifices 
of  usual  kinds,  "  Shall  I  give  my  first-born  [for] 
my  transgression,  the  fruit  of  my  body  [for]  the 
sin  of  my  soul?"  (vi.  5-8).  I'erhaps,  however, 
child-sacrifice  is  specified  on  account  of  its  atrocity, 
which  would  connect  it  with  secret  arts,  which  we 
know  were  frequently  in  later  times  the  causes  of 
cruelty.  The  terms  which  follow  appear  to  refer 
properly  to  eight  different  kinds  of  magic,  but  some 
of  them  are  elsewhere  used  in  a  general  sense. 
1.  C'ODp  DDp  is  literally  "adi\'iner  of  divinations." 

The  veib  DDp  is  used  of  false  prophets,  but  also 
in  a  general  sense  for  divining,  as  in  the  naiTative 
of  Saul's  consultation  of  the  witch  of  Endor,  where 

the  king  says  "  divine  unto  me  (v  N3"''?31Dp 
!31N3),  I  pray  thee, by  the  familiar  spirit"  (1  Sam. 
xxviii.  8).  2.  piyp  conveys  the  idea  of  "  one  vfho 
acts  covertly,"  and 'so  "  a  worker  of  hidden  arts." 
The  meaning  of  the  root  py  is  covering,  and  the 
supposed  connexion  with  fascination  by  the  eyes, 
like  the  notion  of  "  the  evil  eye,"  as  though  the 
original  root  were  "  the  eye"  (pj?).  seems  unten- 
able.* 3.  tJTIjp,  which  we  render  "  an  augurer," 
is  from  KTIJ,  which  is  literally  "  he  or  it  hissed  or 
whispered,"  and  in  Piel  is  applied  to  the  practice  of 
enchantments,  but  also  to  divining  generally,  as  in  the 
case  of  .Joseph's  cup,  ami  where,  evidently  refeiTing 
to  it,  he  tells  his  brethren  that  ho  could  divine,  al- 
though in  both  places  it  has  been  read  more  vaguelv 
with  the  sense  to  foresee  or  make  trial  (Gen.  xliv. 
.5,  16).  We  therefore  render  it  by  a  term  which 
seems  appropriate  but  not  too  definite.  The  sup- 
posed connexion  of  tJTl^  with  CiTIJ,  "a  serpent,"  as 
though  meaning  sei-jjent-divination,  must  be  rejected, 
the  latter  word  rather  coming  from  the  former,  with 
the  signification  "a  hisser."*  4.  tjK'DO  signifies 
"  an  enchanter :"  the  original  meaning  of  the  verb 
was  probabl}^  "he  prayed,"  and  the  strict  sense  of  this 
word  "  one  who  uses  incantations."  5.  "12n  ISH 
seems  to  mean  "  a  fabricator  of  material  charms  or 
amulets,"  if  13n,  when  used  of  practising  sorceiy. 


MAC4IC 

means  to  bind  magical  knots,  and  not  to  bind  a 
person  by  spells.  6.  HIX  PNti'  is  "  an  inquirer 
by  a  familiar  spirit."  The  second  tenn  signifies  a 
bottle,''  a  familiar  spirit  consulted  by  a  soothsayer, 
and  a  soothsayer  having  a  familiar  spirit.  The  LXX. 
usually  render  the  plural  niHN  by  iyyaaTpiixvOoi, 
which  has  been  rashly  translated  ventriloquists,  for 
it  may  not  signify  what  we  understand  by  the  latter, 
but  refer  to  the  mode  in  which  soothsayers  of  this 
kind  gare  out  their  responses :  to  this  subject  we 
shall  recur  later.  The  consulting  of  familiar  spirits 
mav  mean  no  more  than  invoking  them  ;  but  in  tlie 
Acts  we  read  of  a  damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit  of 
divination  (xvi.  16-18)  in  very  distinct  terms.  This 
kind  of  sorceiy — divination  by  a  familiar  spirit — was 
practised  by  the  witch  of  Plndor.  7.  ''^y'1%  which 
we  render  "  a  wizard,"  is  properly  "  a  wise  man," 
but  is  always  applied  to  wizards  and  false  pro- 
phets. Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v.)  supposes  that  in  Lev. 
XX.  27  it  is  used  of  a  familiar  spirit,  but  surely  the 
reading  "  a  wizard'  is  there  more  probable.  8.  The 
last  term,  D''n?3n"?N  K'"!"';  is  '^ery  explicit,  mean- 
ing "  a  consulter  of  the  dead  :"  necromancer  is  an 
exact  translation  if  the  original  signification  of  the 
latter  is  retained,  instead  of  the  more  general  one  it 
now  usually  bears.  In  the  Law  it  was  commanded 
that  a  man  or  woman  who  had  a  familiar  spirit,  or 
a  wizard,  should  be  stoned  (Lev.  xx.  27).  An 
"enchantress"  (nSt^DD)  was  not  to  live  (Ex. 
xxii.  18;  Heb.  17).  Using  augury  and  hidden 
arts  was  also  forbidden  (Lev.  xix.  26). 

The  history  of  Balaam  shows  the  belief  of  some 
ancient  nations  in  the  powers  of  soothsayers.  When 
the  Israelites  had  begun  to  conquer  the  Land  of  Pro- 
mise, Balak  the  king  of  Moab  and  the  elders  of 
Midian,  resorting  to  Pharaoh's  expedient,  sent  by 
messengers  with  "  the  rewards  of  divination 
(?  D^ODp)  in  their  hands  "  (Num.  xxii.  7)  for  Balaam 
the  diviner  (  DpIpH,  Josh.  xiii.  22),  whose  fame  was 
known  to  them  though  he  dwelt  in  Aram.  Balak 's 
message  shows  what  he  believed  Balaam's  powers  to 
be :  "  Behold,  there  is  a  people  come  out  from 
Egypt:  behold,  they  cover  the  tace  of  the  earth,  and 
they  abide  over  against  me :  come  now  therefore, 
I  pray  thee,  curse  me  this  people  ;  for  they  [are] 
too  mighty  for  me:  peradventure  I  shall  prevail, 
[that]  we  may  smite  them,  and  [that]  I  may  drive 
them  out  of  the  land :  for  I  wot  that  he  whom  thou 
blesscst  [is]  blessed :  and  he  whom  thou  cursest  is 
cursed"  (Num.  xxii.  5,  6).  We  are  told,  however, 
that  Balaam,  warned  of  God,  first  said  that  he  could 
not  spealr  of  himself,  and  then  by  inspiration  blessed 
those  whom  he  had  been  sent  for  to  curse.  He  appears 
to  have  received  inspiration  in  a  vision  or  a  trance. 
In  one  place  it  is  said,  "  And  Balaam  saw  that  it 
was  good  in  the  eyes  of  the  Loud  to  bless  Israel, 
and  he  went  not,  now  as  before,  to  the  meeting 
enchantments  (ClJ'riJ),  but  he  set  his  face  to  the 
wilderness"  (xxiv.  1).  From  this  it  would  seem 
that  it  was  his  wont  to  use  enchantments,  and  that 
when  on  other  occasions  he  went  away  after  the 


»  The  ancient  EgypUans  seem  to  have  held  the  super 
stition  of  the  evil  eye,  for  an  eye  is  the  determinative  of 
a  word  which  appears  to  sisnify  some  kind  of  magic  (Cha 
has.  Papyrus  JUagiqiie  Harris,  p.  170  and  note  4). 

"  The  name  Nahshon  (T1£i'n3)>  of  apriiiceof  Judah  in 
Ihcsecond  year  after  the  Kxodus  (Num.  i.  1 ;  Ex.  vi.23; 


Ruth  iv.  20,  &c.),  means  "  enchanter :"  it  was  probably 
used  as  a  proper  name  in  a  vague  sense. 

I"  This  meaning  suggests  the  probability  that  (he 
Arab  idea  of  the  evil  Jinn  having  been  enclosed  in 
bottles  by  Solomon  was  derived  from  some  Jewish  tra- 
dition. 


MAGIC 

sacrifices  had  been  offered,  he  hoped  that  he  could 
prevail  to  obtain  the  wish  of  those  who  had  sent 
for  him,  but  was  constantly  defeated.  The  building 
new  altars  of  the  mystic  number  of  seven,  and  the 
oU'ering  of  seven  oxen  and  seven  rams,  seem  to  show 
that  Balaam  had  some  such  idea  ;  and  the  marked 
•manner  in  which  he  declared  "  there  is  no  en- 
chantment (K^nO  )  against  Jacob,  and  no  divination 
^DDp)  against  Israel"  (xxiii.  23),  that  he  had  come  in 
the  hope  that  they  would  have  availed,  the  diviner 
here  being  made  to  declare  his  own  powerlessness 
while  he  blessed  those  whom  he  was  sent  for  to 
curse.  The  case  is  a  very  difficult  one,  since  it  shows 
a  man  who  was  nsed  as  an  instrument  of  declaring 
God's  will  trusting  in  practices  that  could  only 
have  incurred  His  displeasure.  The  simplest  expla- 
nation seems  to  be  that  Balaam  was  never  a  true 
prophet  but  on  this  occasion,  when  the  enemies  of 
Israel  were  to  be  signally  confounded.  This  history 
affords  a  notable  instance  of  the  failure  of  magicians 
in  attempting  to  resist  the  Divine  will. 

The  account  of  Saul's  consulting  the  witch  of 
Endor  is  the  foremost  place  in  Scripture  of  those 
which  refer  to  magic.  The  supernatural  terror 
with  which  it  is  full  cannot  however  be  proved  to 
be  due  to  this  art,  for  it  has  always  been  held  by 
sober  critics  that  the  appearing  of  Samuel  was  per- 
mitted for  the  purpose  of  declaring  the  doom  of  Sanl, 
and  not  that  it  was  caused  by  the  incantations  of  a 
sorceress.  As,  however,  the  narrative  is  allowed  to 
be  very  difficult,  we  may  look  for  a  moment  at  the 
evidence  of  its  authenticity.  The  details  are  strictly 
in  accordance  with  the  age:  there  is  a  simplicity  in 
the  manners  described  that  is  foreign  to  a  later 
time.  The  circumstances  are  agreeable  with  the 
rest  of  the  history,  and  especially  with  all  we  know 
of  Saul's  character.  Here,  as  ever,  he  is  seen  re- 
solved to  gain  his  ends  without  caring  what  wrong 
he  does :  he  wishes  to  consult  a  prophet,  and  asks 
a  witch  to  call  up  his  shade.  Most  of  all  the  vigour 
of  the  narrative,  showing  us  tlie  scene  in  a  few 
words,  proves  its  antiquity  and  genuineness.  We 
can  see  no  reason  whatever  for  suj)posing  that  it  is 
an  interpolation. 

"  Kow  Samuel  was  dead,  and  all  Israel  had  la- 
mented him,  and  buried  him  in  Ramah,  even  in  his 
own  city.  And  Saul  had  put  away  those  that  had 
.  familiar  spirits,  and  the  wizards,  out  of  the  land. 
And  the  Philistines  gathered  themselves  together, 
and  came  and  pitched  in  Shunem  ;  and  Saul  ga- 
thered all  Israel  together,  and  they  pitched  in  Gil- 
boa."  That  the  Philistines  should  have  advanced 
so  far,  spreading  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the 
garden  of  the  Holy  Land,  shows  the  straits  to  which 
Saul  had  come.  Here  in  times  of  fiiith  Sisera  was 
defeated  by  Barak,  and  the  Midianites  were  smitten 
by  Gideon,  some  of  the  army  of  the  former  perishing 
at  En-dor  itself  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9,  10).  •'  And  when  Saul 
saw  the  host  of  the  Philistines,  he  was  afraid,  and  his 
heart  greatly  trembled.  And  when  Saul  enquired  of 
the  Loud,  the  Lord  answered  him  not,  neithei'  by 
dreams,  nor  by  Urim,  nor  by  prophets.  Then  said 
Saul  unto  his  servants,  Seek  me  a  woman  that  hath 
a  familiar  spirit,  that  I  may  go  to  her,  and  enquire 
of  her.     And    his  servants  said  to  him,    Behold, 


MAGIC 


201 


"  Dor  is  said  to  have  taken  its  nama  from  Denis,  a  son 
of  Ni'ptuno,  whose  name  reminds  one  of  I'aras,  the 
founfior  of  'I'arentuiii. 

ii  We  may  instaiK-c  tlic  well-known  circumstimce  that 
men  who  have  been  near  death  by  drowning  have  asserted  !  w;is  actually  falling.    This  is  alluded  to  in  the  opilaph— 


[there  is]  a  woman  that  hath  a  familiar  spirit  at 
En-dor.  And  Saul  disguised  himself,  and  put  on 
other  raiment,  and  he  went,  and  two  men  with 
him,  and  they  came  to  the  woman  by  night."  En- 
dor  lay  in  the  territory  of  Issachar,  about  7  or  8 
miles  to  the  northward  of  Mount  Gilboa.  Its 
name,  the  "  fountain  of  Dor,"  may  connect  it  with 
the  Phoenician  city  Dor,  which  was  on  the  coast 
to  the  westward."  If  so,  it  may  have  retained  its 
stranger-population,  and  been  therefore  chosen  by 
the  witch  as  a  place  where  she  might  with  less  danger 
than  elsewhere  practise  her  arts.  It  has  been  noticed 
that  the  mountain  on  whose  slope  the  modern  village 
stands  is  hollowed  into  rock-hewn  caverns,  in  one  of 
which  the  witch  may  probably  have  dwelt.  [En- 
dor.]  Saul's  disguise,  and  his  journeying  by  night, 
seem  to  have  been  taken  that  he  might  not  alarm 
the  woman,  rather  than  because  he  may  have  passed 
through  a  part  of  the  Philistine  force.  The  Philis- 
tines held  the  plain,  having  their  camp  at  Shunem, 
whither  they  had  pushed  on  from  Aphek:  the 
Israelites  were  at  first  encamped  by  a  fountain  at 
Jezreel,  but  when  their  enemies  had  advanced  to 
Jezreel  they  apjjear  to  have  retired  to  the  slopes  of 
Gilboa,  whence  there  was  a  way  of  retreat  either 
into  the  mountains  to  the  south,  or  across  Jordan. 
The  latter  seems  to  have  been  the  line  of  flight,  as, 
though  Saul  was  slain  on  Mount  Gilboa,  his  body 
was  fastened  to  the  wall  of  Beth-shan.  Thus 
Saul  could  have  scarcely  reached  En-dor  with- 
out passing  at  least  very  near  the  army  of  the  Phi- 
listines. "  And  he  said,  divine  unto  me,  1  pray 
thee,  by  the  familiar  spirit,  and  bring  me  [him]  up, 
whom  I  shall  name  unto  thee."  It  is  noticeable 
that  here  witchcraft,  the  inquiring  by  a  familiar 
spirit,  and  necromancy,  are  all  connected  as  though 
but  a  single  art,  which  favours  the  idea  that  the 
prohibition  in  Deuteronomy  specifies  every  name  by 
whicli  magical  arts  were  known,  rather  than  so 
many  different  kinds  of  arts,  in  order  that  no  one 
should  attempt  to  evade  the  condemnation  of  such 
practices  by  any  subterfuge.  It  is  evident  that  Saul 
thought  he  might  bo  able  to  call  up  Samuel  by  the 
aid  of  the  witch  ;  but  this  does  not  prove  what  was 
his  own  general  conviction,  or  the  prevalent  con- 
viction of  the  Israelites  on  the  subject.  He  was  in 
a  great  extremity:  his  kingdom  in  danger:  himself 
forsaken  of  God:  he  was  weary  with  a  night-journey, 
perhaps  of  risk,  perhaps  of  great  length  to  avoid 
the  enemy,  and  faint  with  a  day's  fasting  :  he  was 
conscious  of  wrong  as,  probably  for  the  first  time, 
he  commanded  unholy  rites  and  heard  in  the  gloom 
unholy  incantations.  In  such  a  strait  no  man's 
judgment  is  steady,  and  Saul  may  have  asked  to 
see  Samuel  in  a  moment  of  sudden  desperation  when 
he  had  only  meant  to  demand  an  oracular  answer.  It 
may  even  be  thought  that,  yearning  for  the  counsel  of 
Samuel,  and  longing  to  learn  if  the  net  that  he  li'lt 
closing  about  him  were  one  from  which  he  should 
never  escape,  Saul  had  that  keener  sense  that 
some  say  comes  in  the  last  hours  of  life,  and  so, 
conscious  that  the  prophet's  shade  was  near,  or  was 
about  to  come,  at  once  sought  to  see  and  speak  with 
it,  though  this  had  not  been  before  purposed. 
Strange  things  we  know  occur  at  the  moment  when 
man  feels  he  is  about  to  die,''  and  if  there  be  any  time 

that  in  the  last  moments  of  consciousness  all  the  events 
of  their  lives  have  passed  before  their  minds.  A  friend' 
of  the  writer  assured  him  that  lie  experienced  this  sensa- 
tion, whenever  he  had  a  very  bad  fall  in  huntiiiR,  while  he 


202 


MAGIC 


when  tlie  unseen  world  is  felt  while  yet  unentered, 
it  is  when  the  soul  comes  first  within  the  chill  of 
its  long-projected  shadow.  "  And  tlie  woman  said 
unto  him,  Behold,  thou  knowest  what  Saul  hath 
done,  how  he  hath  cut  oil' those  that  have  familiar 
spirits,  and  the  wizards,  out  of  the  land  :  whei-efove 
then  layest  thou  a  snare  for  my  life,  to  cause  me  to 
die?  And  Saul  sware  to  her  by  the  Lord,  saying, 
[As]  the  Lord  liveth,  there  shall  no  punishment 
happen  to  thee  for  this  thing."  Nothing  more  shows 
Saul's  desperate  resolution  than  his  thus  swear- 
ing when  engaged  in  a  most  unholy  act,  a  terrible 
profanity  that  makes  the  horror  of  the  scene  com- 
plete. Everything  being  piepared,  the  final  act 
tidves  place.  "  Then  said  tlie  woman.  Whom  shall 
I  bring  up  unto  thee  ?  And  he  said.  Bring  me  up 
Samuel.  And  when  the  woman  saw  Samuel,  she 
cried  with  a  loud  voice :  and  the  woman  spake  to 
Saul,  saying,  Why  hast  thou  deceived  me  ?  for 
thou  [art]  Saul.  And  the  king  said  unto  her. 
Be  not  afi'aid :  for  what  sawest  thou  ?  And  the 
woman  said  unto  Saul,  I  saw  gods  ascending  out  of 
the  earth.  And  he  said  unto  her.  What  [is]  his 
form  ?  And  she  said,  An  old  man  cometh  up;  and 
he  [is]  covered  with  a  mantle.  And  Saul  per- 
•ceived  that  it  [was]  Samuel,  and  he  stooped  with 
[his]  face  to  the  ground,  and  bowed  himself.  And 
Samuel  said  to  Saul,  Why  hast  thou  disquieted  [or 
"  disturbed "]  me,  to  bring  me  up  ?  And  Saul 
answered,  I  am  sore  distressed  ;  for  the  Philistines 
make  war  against  me,  and  God  is  departed  from  me, 
and  answereth  me  no  more,  neither  by  prophets,  nor 
by  dreams:  therefore  I  have  called  thee,  that  thou 
mayest  make  known  unto  me  what  I  shall  do.  Then 
said  Samuel,  Wherefore  then  dost  thou  ask  of  me, 
seeing  the  Lord  is  departed  from  thee,  and  is  become 
thine  enemy  ?  And  the  Lord  hath  done  to  him, 
as  he  spalie  by  me :  for  the  Lord  hath  rent  the 
kingdom  out  of  thine  hand,  and  given  it  to  thy 
neighbour,  [even]  to  David:  because  thou  obeyedst 
not  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  nor  executedst  his  fierce 
wrath  upon  Amalek,  therefore  hath  the  Lord  done 
this  thing  unto  thee  this  day.  Moreover,  the  Lord 
will  also  deliver  Israel  with  thee  into  the  hand 
of  the  Philistines :  and  to-morrow  [shalt]  thou 
and  thy  sons  [be]  with  me :  the  Lord  also  shall 
deliver  the  host  of  Israel  into  the  hand  of  the  Phi- 
listines. Then  Saul  fell  straightway  all  along  on 
the  earth,  and  was  sore  afraid,  because  of  the  words 
of  Samuel :  and  theie  was  no  strength  in  him  ;  for 
he  had  eaten  no  bread  all  the  day,  nor  all  the 
night "  (1  Sam.  xxviu.  3-20).  The  woman  clearly 
was  terrified  by  an  unexpected  apparition  when  she 
saw  Samuel.  She  must  therefore  either  have  been 
a  mere  juggler,  or  one  who  had  no  power  of  working 
magical  wonders  at  wiU.  The  sight  of  Samuel  at 
once  showed  her  who  had  come  to  consult  her.  The 
prophet's  shade  seems  to  have  been  preceded  by  some 
majestic  shapes  which  the  witch  called  gods.  Saul, 
as  it  seems  interrupting  her,  asked  his  form,  and  she 
described  the  prophet  as  he  was  in  his  last  davs  on 
eai'th,  an  old  man,  covered  either  with  a  mantle, 
such  as  the  prophets  used  to  wear,  or  wrapped  in 
his  winding-sheet.  Then  Saul  knew  it  was  Samuel, 
and  bowed  to  the  gi-ound,  from  respect  or  fear.  It 
seems  that  the  woman  saw  the  appearances,  and  that 
Saul  only  knew  of  them  through  her,  perhaps  not 

"  Between  the  saddle  and  the  ground, 
I  mercy  sought,  and  mercy  found." 
If  this  phenomenon  be  not  invohintary,  but  the  result  of 
an  effort  of  will,  then  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be 
confined  to  the  last  moments  of  conseionsncss.     A  man 


MAGIC 

daring  to  look,  else  why  should  he  have  asked 
what  form  Samuel  had  ?  The  prophet's  com- 
plaint we  cannot  understand,  in  our  ignorance  as  to 
the  se})arate  state :  thus  much  we  know,  that  state 
is  always  described  as  one  of  perfect  rest  or  sleep. 
That  the  woman  should  have  been  able  to  call  him 
up  cannot  be  hence  inferred ;  her  astonishment 
shows  the  contrary ;  and  it  would  be  explanation 
enough  to  suppose  that  he  was  sent  to  give  Saul 
the  last  warning,  or  that  the  earnestness  of  the 
king's  wish  had  been  permitted  to  disquiet  him  in 
his  resting-place.  Although  the  word  "  disquieted  " 
need  not  be  pushed  to  an  extreme  sense,  and  seems 
to  mean  the  inteiTuption  of  a  state  of  rest,  our 
translators  wisely,  we  think,  preferring  this  render- 
ing to  "  disturbed,"  it  cannot  be  denied  that,  if  we 
hold  that  Samuel  appeared,  this  is  a  great  difficulty. 
If,  however,  we  suppose  that  the  prophet's  coming 
was  oi'dered,  it  is  not  unsurmountable.  The  de- 
claration of  Saul's  doom  agrees  with  what  Samuel 
had  said  before,  and  was  fulfilled  the  next  day, 
when  the  king  and  his  sons  fell  on  Mount  Gilboa. 
It  may,  however,  be  asked — Was  the  apparition  Sa- 
muel himself,  or  a  supernatural  messenger  in  his 
stead  ?  Some  may  even  object  to  our  holding  it  to 
have  been  aught  but  a  phantom  of  a  sick  brain  ;  but 
if  so,  what  can  we  make  of  the  woman's  conviction 
that  it  was  Samuel,  and  the  king's  horror  at  the 
words  he  heard,  or,  as  these  would  say,  that  he 
thought  he  heard  ?  It  was  not  only  the  hearing 
his  doom,  but  the  hearing  it  in  a  voice  from  the 
other  world  that  stretched  the  faithless  strong  man 
on  the  ground.  He  must  have  felt  the  presence  of 
the  dead,  and  heard  the  sound  of  a  sepulchral  voice. 
How  else  could  the  doom  have  come  true,  and  not 
the  kmg  alone,  but  his  sons,  have  gone  to  the  place 
of  disembodied  souls  on  the  morrow  ?  for  to  be 
with  the  dead  concerned  the  soul  not  the  body :  it 
is  no  difficulty  that  the  king's  corpse  was  unburied 
till  the  generous  men  of  Jabesh-gilead,  mindful  of 
his  old  kindness,  rescued  it  from  the  wall  of  Beth- 
shan.  If  then  the  apparition  was  real,  should  we 
suppose  it  Samuel's?  A  reasonable  criticism  would 
say  it  seems  to  have  been  so ;  for  the  supposition 
that  a  messenger  came  in  his  stead  must  be  re- 
jected, as  it  would  make  the  speech  a  mixture  of 
truth  and  untruth  ;  and  if  asked  what  suffi'cient 
cause  there  was  for  such  a  sending  forth  of  the 
prophet  from  his  rest,  would  I'eply  that  we  know  ' 
not  the  reason  for  such  warnings  as  abound  in  the 
Bilale,  and  that  perhaps  even  at  the  eleventh  hour, 
the  door  of  repentance  was  not  closed  against  the 
king,  and  his  impiety  might  have  been  pardoned  had 
he  repented.  Instead,  he  went  forth  in  despair,  and, 
when  his  sons  had  fallen  and  his  army  was  put  to 
the  rout,  sore  wounded  fell  on  his  own  sword. 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  this  strange 
history  we  have  no  warrant  for  attributing  super- 
natural power  to  magicians.  Viewed  reasonably,  it 
refers  to  the  question  of  apparitions  of  the  dead  as 
to  which  other  places  in  the  Bible  leave  no  doubt. 
The  connexion  with  magic  seems  purely  accidental. 
The  witch  is  no  more  than  a  bystander  after  the 
first:  she  sees  Samuel,  and  that  is  all.  The  appa- 
rition may  have  been  a  terrible  fulfilment  of  Saul's 
desii-e,  but  this  does  not  prove  that  the  measures 
he  used  were  of  any  power.     We  have  examined 


sure  of  his  doom  might  be  in  this  peculiar  and  unexplained 
mental  state  long  before.  Perhaps,  however,  the  mind 
before  death  experiences  a  change  of  condition.  Just  as, 
conversely,  every  physical  function  does  not  cease  at  once 
with  what  we  term  dissolution. 


MAGIC 

the  narrative  very  caret'uU}-,  tVom  its  detail  and  its 
remarkable  character:  the  result  leaves  the  main 
question  unanswered. 

In  the  later  days  of  the  two  kingdoms  magical 
practices  ofmany  kinds  prevailed  among  the  Hebrews, 
as  we  especially  learn  from  the  condemnation  of  them 
by  the  prophets.     Every  form  of  idolatry  which  the 
people  had  adopted  in  succession  doubtless  brought 
with  it  its  magic,  which  seems  always  to  have  re- 
mained with  a  strange  tenacity  that  probably  made 
it  outlive  the  false  worship  with  which  it  was  con- 
nected.   Thus  the  use  of  teraphim,  dating  from  tfie 
patriarchal  age,  was  not  abandoned  when  the  worship 
of  the  Canaanite,  Phoenician,  and  Syrian  idols  had 
been  successively  adopted.     In  the  historical  books 
of  Scripture  there  is  little  notice  of  magic,  except- 
ing that  wherever  the  false  propliets  are  mentioned 
we  have  no  doubt  an  indication  of  the  prevalence  of 
magical  practices.     We  are  especially  told  of  Josiah 
that  he  put  away  the  workers  with  familiar  spirits, 
the  wizards,  and  the  teraphim,  as  well  as  the  idols 
and  the  other  abominations  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem, 
in  performance  of  the  commands  of  the  book  of  the 
Law  which  had  been  found  (2  K.  xxiii.  24).     But 
in  the  prophets  we  find  several  notices  of  the  magic 
of  the  Hebrews  in  their   times,  and  some  of  the 
magic  of   foreign  nations.      Isaiah   says   that   the 
people  had  become  "  workers  of  hidden  arts  (D''33y) 
like  the  Philistines,"  and  apparently  alludes  in  the 
same  place  to  the  piactice  of  magic  by  the  Bene- 
Kedem  (ii.  6).     The  nation  had  not  only  abandoned 
true  religion,  but  had  become  generally  addicted  to 
magic   in    the   manner   of  the    Philistines,  whose 
Egyptian  origin  [Capiitor]  is  consistent  with  such 
a  condition.       The  origin  of  the  Bene-Kedem   is 
doubtful,  but  it  seems  certain  that  as  late  as  the  time 
of  the   Egyptian  wars  in  Syria,   under  the  .xixth 
dynasty,  B.C.  cir.  1300,  a  race,  partly  at  least  Mon- 
golian ,  inhabited  the  valley  of  the  Orontes,*  among 
whom  therefore  we  should  again  expect  a  national 
practice  of  magic,  and  its  prevalence  with  their 
neighbours.     Balaam,  too,  dwelt  with  the  Benee- 
Kedem,  though  he  may  not  have  been  of  theii'  race. 
In  another  place  the  prophet  reproves  the  people  for 
seeking  "  unto  them  tliat  have  familiar  spirits,  and 
unto  the  wizards  that  chirp,  and  that  mutter"  (viii. 
19).    The  practices  of  one  class  of  magicians  are  still 
more  distinctly  described,  where  it  is  thus  said  of 
Jerusalem  :  "  And  I  will  camp  against  thee  round 
about,  and  will  lay  siege  against  thee  with  a  mount, 
and  I  will  raise  forts  against  thee.    And  thou  shalt 
be  brought  down,   [and]    shalt    speak  out  of  the 
ground,  and  thy  speech  shall  be  low  out  of  the  dust, 
and  thy  yoice  shall  be,  as  of  one  that  hath  a  familiar 
spirit,    out  of  the  ground,  and  thy  speech    shall 
whisper  out  of  the  dust"  (xxix.  3,  4).     Isaiah  al- 
ludes to  the  magic  of  the  Egyptians  when  he  says 
that  in  their  calamity  "  they  shall  seek  to  the  idols, 
and  to  the  charmers  [D*LD!!4  ?],'  and  to  them  that 
have  ftmailiar  spirits,  and  to  the  wizards"  (x-ix.  3). 
And  in  the  same  manner  he  thus  taunts  Babylon  : 
"  Stand  now  with  thy  charms,  and  with  the  multi- 
tude  of  thine    enchantments,  wherein    thou  hast 
laboured  from  thy  youth  ;   if  so  be  thou  shalt  be 
able  to  profit,  if  so  be  thou  mayest  prevail.     Thou 


MAGIC 


203 


=  Let  those  wbo  doubt  this  examine  the  representation 
in  'Rosellim's  Mcmumenti  Storici,  i.  pi.  l.vxxviii.  seq.  of  the 
great  buttle  between  Uumescs  II.  and  the  Hittites  and 
their  confetlorates,  near  KIO'I'ESH,  on  the  Orontcs. 

f  This  word  may  mean  whisperers,  if  it  be  the  plural  of 
DX-  "  a  nnnmur." 


art  wearied  in  the  multitude  of  thy  comisels.  Let 
now  the  viewers  of  the  heavens  [or  astrologers], 
the,  stargazers,  the  monthly  prognosticators,  stand 
up,  and  save  thee  from  [these  things]  that  shall 
come  upon  thee"  (xlvii.  Vl,  13).  The  magic  of  Ba- 
bylon is  here  characterized  by  the  prominence  given 
to  astrology,  no  magicians  being  mentioned  except- 
ing practisers  of  this  art;  unlike  the  case  of  tlie 
Egyptians,  with  whom  astrology  seems  always  to 
have  held  a  lower  place  than  with  the  Chaldaean 
nation.  In  both  instiuices  the  folly  of  those  who 
seek  the  aid  of  magic  is  shown. 

Micah,  declaring  the  judgments  coming  for  the 
crimes  of  his  time,  speaks  of  the  prevalence  of 
divination  among  prophets  who  most  probably 
were  such  pretended  prophets  as  the  opponents  of 
Jeremiah,  not  avowed  prophets  of  idols,  as  Ahab's 
seem  to  have  been.  Concerning  these  prophets  it 
_is  said,  "  Night  [shall  be]  unto  you,  that  ye  shall 
not  have  a  vision  ;  and  it  shall  be  dark  unto  you, 
that  ye  shall  not  divine ;  and  the  sun  shall  go  down 
over  the  prophets,  and  the  day  shall  be  dark  over 
them.  Then  shall  the  seers  be  ashamed,  and  the 
diviners  confounded :  yea,  they  shall  all  cover  their 
lip;  for  [there  is]  no  answer  of  God "  (iii.  B,  7). 
Later  it  is  said  as  to  Jerusalem,  "  The  heads  thereof 
judge  for  reward,  and  the  priests  thereof  teach  for 
hire,  and  the  prophets  thereof  divine  for  money: 
yet  will  they  lean  upon  the  LoRD,  and  say,  [Is]  not 
the  Lord  among  us?  none  evil  can  come  upon  us  " 
(ver.  11).  These  prophets  seem  to  have  practised 
unlawful  arts,  and  yet  to  have  expected  revelations. 
Jeremiah  was  constantly  opposed  by  false  pro- 
phets, who  pretended  to  speak  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord,  saying  that  they  had  dreamt,  when  they  told 
false  visions,  and  who  practised  various  magical  arts 
(xiv.  14,xxiii.  25,  ad  fin.,  xxvii.  9,  10 — where  the 
several  designations  applied  to  those  who  counselled 
the  people  not  to  serve  the  king  of  Babylon  may  be 
used  in  contempt^of  the  false  prophets — xxix.  8,  9). 
Ezekiel,  as  we  should  have  expected,  artbrds 
some  remarkable  details  of  the  magic  of  his  time, 
in  the  clear  and  forcible  descriptions  of  his  visions. 
From  him  we  learn  that  fetishism  was  among 
the  idolatries  which  the  Hebrews,  in  the  latest 
days  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  had  adopted  from 
their  neighbours,  like  the  Komans  in  the  age 
of  general  corruption  that  caused  the  decline  of 
their  empire.  In  a  vision,  in  which  the  prophet 
saw  the  abominations  of  Jerusalem,  he  entered  the 
chambers  of  imagery  in  the  Temple  itself:  "  I  went 
in  and  saw ;  and  behold  every  form  of  creeping 
things,  and  abominable  beasts,  and  all  the  idols  of 
the  house  of  Israel,  pourtrayed  upon  the  wal' 
round  about."  Here  seventy  elders  were  offering- 
incense  in  the  dark  (viii.  7-12).  This  idolatry  wa.s 
probably  borrowed  from  Egypt,  for  the  description 
perfectly  answers  to  that  of  the  dark  sanctuaries  of 
Egyptian  temples,  with  the  sacred  animals  pour- 
trayed upon  their  walls,  and  does  not  accord  with 
the  character  of  the  Assyrian  sculptures,  _  where 
creeping  things  are  not  represented  as  objects  of 
worship.  With  this  low  form  of  idolatry  an  equally 
low  kind  of  magic  obtained,  practised  by  pro- 
phetesses who  for  small  rewards  made  amulets  by 
which  the  people  were  deceived  (xiii.  17  ad  fin.). 
The  passage  must  be  allowed  to  be  very  dillicult, 
.  but  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  imiulets  are  re- 
ferred to  which  were  made  and  sokl  1)V  these 
women,  ami  perhaps  also  worn  l>y  them.  We  may 
probably  read:  "Woe  to  the  [wimien]  that  sew 
pillows"  upon   all  joints  of  the    hands    [elbows  or 


204 


MAGIC 


armholes?],  and  make  kerchiefs  upon  the  head  of 
every  stature  to  hunt  souls!"  (xiii.  18).  If  so, 
we  have  a  practice  analogous  to  that  of  the  modern 
Egyptians,  who  hang  amulets  of  the  kind  called 
hegab  upon  the  right  side,  and  of  the  Nubians, 
who  hang  them  on  the  upper  part  of  the  arm. 
We  cannot,  in  any  case,  see  how  the  passage  can  be 
explained  as  simply  referring  to  the  luxurious  dress 
of  the  women  of  that  time,  since  the  prophet  dis- 
tinctly alludes  to  pretended  visions  and  to  divinations 
(ver.  23),  using  almost  the  same  expressions  that 
he  applies  in  another  place  to  the  practices  of  the 
false  prophets  (xxii.  28).  The  notice  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's divination  by  aiTows,  where  it  is  said  "  he 
shuffled  arrows"  (xxi.  21),  must  refer  to  a  prac- 
tice the  same  or  similar  to  the  kiad  of  divination 
by  aiTows  called  El-Meysar,  in  use  among  the 
pagan  Arabs,  and  forbidden  in  the  Kur-au.  [.See 
Hospitality.] 

The  references  to  magic  in  the  book  of  Daniel 
relate  wholly  to  that  of  Babylon,  and  not  so  much 
to  the  art  as  to  those  who  used  it.  Daniel,  when 
taken  captive,  was  instructed  in  the  learning  of  the 
Chaldaeans  and  placed  among  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon  (ii.  18),  by  whom  we  are  to  understand  the 

Magi  (733  ^D^SPI),  for  the  tei-m  is  used  as  in- 
cluding magicians  (D''J3tp"nn),  sorcerers  (D^Qt^K), 
enchanters    (D^D^DD),    astrologers    (|''*]TjI),   and 

Chaldaeans,  the  last  being  apparently  the  most  im- 
portant class  ai.  2,  4,  5,  10,  12,  14,  18,  24,  27  ; 
comp.  i.  20).  As  in  other  cases  the  true  prophet 
was  put  to  the  test  with  the  magicians,  and  he 
succeeded  where  they  utterly  fiiiled.  The  case  re- 
sembles Pharaoh's,  excepting  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
asked  a  harder  thing  of  the  wise  men.  Having  for- 
gotten his  dream,  he  not  only  required  of  them  an 
interpretation,  but  that  they  should  make  known 
the  dream  itself.  They  were  perfectly  ready  to  tell 
the  interpretation  if  only  they  heard  the  dream. 
The  king  at  once  saw  that  they  were  impostors, 
and  that  if  they  truly  had  supernatural  powers 
they  could  as  well  tell  him  his  dream  as  its 
meaning.  Therefore  he  decreed  the  death  of  all 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon ;  but  Daniel,  praying 
that  he  and  his  fellows  might  escape  this  de- 
struction, had  a  vision  in  which  the  matter  was 
revealed  to  him.  He  was  accordingly  brought 
before  the  king.  Like  Joseph,  he  disavowed  any 
knowledge  of  his  own.  "  The  secret  which  the 
king  hath  demanded,  the  wise  men,  the  sorcerers, 
the  magicians,  the  astrologers,  cannot  show  unto 
the  king ;  but  there  is  a  God  in  heaven  that  re- 
vealeth  secrets"  (vers.  27,  28).  "  But  as  for  me, 
this  secret  is  not  revealed  to  me  for  [any]  wisdom 
that  1  have  more  than  any  living"  (30).  He  then 
related  the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  and  was  set 
over  the  province  as  well  as  over  all  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon.  Again  the  king  dreamt ;  and  though  he 
told  them  the  dream  the  wise  men  could  not  interpret 
it,  and  Daniel  again  showed  the  meaning  (iv.  4, 
seqq.).  In  the  relation  of  this  event  we  read  that 
the  king  called  him  "  chief  of  the  scribes,"  the 
second  part  of  the  title  being  the  same  as  that 
applied  to  the  Egyptian  magicians  (iv.  9 ;  Chald. 
6).  A  third  time,  when  Belshazzar  saw  the  writ- 
ing on  the  wall,  were  the  wise  men  sent  for,  and 
on  their  failing  Daniel  was  brought  before  the  king 
and  the  interpretation  given  (v.).  These  events 
are  perfectly  consistent  with  what  always  occurred 
in  all  other  cases  recorded  iu  Scripture  when  the 


IVIAGIC 

practisers  of  magic  were  placed  in  opposition  to 
true  prophets.  It  may  be  asked  by  some  how 
Daniel  could  take  the  post  of  chief  of  the  wise  men 
when  he  had  himself  proved  their  imposture.  If, 
however,  as  we  cannot  doubt,  the  class  were  one  of 
the  learned  generally,  among  whom  some  practised 
magical  arts,  the  case  is  very  different  from  what  it 
would  have  been  had  these  wise  men  been  magicians 
only.  Besides,  it  seems  almost  certain  that  Daniel 
was  providentially  thus  placed  that,  like  another 
Joseph,  he  might  further  the  welfare  and  ultimate 
return  of  his  people.     [Magi.] 

After  the  Captivity  it  is  probable  that  the  Jews 
gradually  abandoned  the  practice  of  magic.  Zecha- 
riah  speaks  indeed  of  the  deceit  of  teraphira  and 
diviners  (x.  2),  and  foretells  a  time  when  the  very 
names  of  idols  should  be  forgotten  and  false  prophets 
have  virtually  ceased  (xiii.  1-4),  yet  in  neither  case 
does  it  seem  certain  that  he  is  alluding  to  the  usages 
of  his  own  day. 

In  the  Apocrypha  we  find  indictitions  that  in  the 
later  centuries  preceding  the  Christian  era  magic 
was  no  longer  practised  by  the  educated  Jews.  In 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  the  writer,  speaking  of  the 
Egyptian  magicians,  treats  their  art  as  an  impos- 
ture (xvii.  7).  The  book  of  Tobit  is  an  exceptional 
case.  If  we  hold  that  it  was  written  in  Peisia  or 
a  neighbouring  countiy,  and,  with  Ewald,  date  its 
composition  not  long  after  the  fall  of  the  Persian 
empire,  it  is  obvious  that  it  relates  to  a  ditier- 
ent  state  of  society  to  that  of  the  Jews  of  Egypt 
and  Palestine.  If,  however,  it  was  written  in 
Palestine  about  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  as  others 
suppose,  we  must  still  recollect  that  it  refers  rather 
to  the  superstitions  of  the  common  people  than  to 
those  of  the  learned.  In  either  case  its  pre- 
tensions make  it  unsafe  to  follow  as  indicating 
the  opinions  of  the  time  at  which  it  was  written.  It 
professes  to  relate  to  a  period  of  which  its  writer 
cduld  have  known  little,  and  borrows  its  idea  of  su- 
pernatural agency  from  Scripture,  adding  as  much 
as  was  judged  safe  of  ciurrent  superstition. 

In  the  N.T.  we  read  very  little  of  magic.  The 
coming  of  Magi  to  worship  Christ  is  indeed  related 
(Matt.  ii.  1-12),  but  we  have  no  warrant  for  sup- 
posing that  they  were  magicians  from  their  name, 
which  the  A.  V.  not  unreasonably  renders  "  wise 
men"  [Magi].  Our  Lord  is  not  said  to  have  been 
opposed  by  magicians,  and  the  Apostles  and  other 
early  teachers  of  the  Gospel  seem  to  have  rarely 
encountered  them.  Philip  the  deacon,  when  he 
preached  at  Samaria,  found  there  Simon  a  famous 
magician,  commonly  known  as  Simon  Magus,  who 
had  had  great  power  over  the  people ;  but  he  is  not 
said  to  have  been  able  to  work  wonders,  nor,  had 
it  been  so,  is  it  likely  that  he  would  have  soon 
been  admitted  into  the  Church  (viii.  9-24).  When 
St.  Barnabas  and  St.  Paul  were  at  Paphos,  as  they 
preached  to  the  proconsul  Sergius  Paulus,  Elymas, 
a  Jewish  sorcerer  and  false  prophet  {Ttva  6.pSpa 
jxayov  \p€vdoirpo<p^Tr}v)  withstood  them,  and  was 
sti'uck  blind  for  a  time  at  the  word  of  St.  Paul  (xiii. 
6-12).  At  Ephesus,  certain  Jewish  exorcists  signally 
failing,  both  Jews  and  Greeks  were  afraid,  and  aban- 
doned their  practice  of  magical  arts.  "  And  many 
that  believed  came,  and  confessed,  and  showed  their 
deeds.  Many  of  them  also  which  used  curious  arts 
brought  their  books  together,  and  burned  them 
before  all :  and  they  counted  the  price  of  them,  and 
found  [it]  fifty  thousand  [pieces]  of  silver"  (xix. 
18,  19).  Here  both  Jews  and  Greeks  seem  to  have 
been  greatly  addicted  to  magic,  even  after  they  had 


MAGOG 

nominally  joined  the  Chuicii.  In  all  these  cases  it 
appears  that  though  the  practisers  were  generally 
or  always  Jews,  the  tielil  of  their  success  was  with 
Gentiles,  sliowing  that  among  the  Jews  in  general, 
or  the  educated  class,  the  art  had  fallen  into  dis- 
repute. Here,  as  before,  there  is  no  evidence  of  any 
real  effect  produced  by  the  magicians.  We  have 
already  noticed  the  remarkable  case  of  the  "  danisel 
having  a  spirit  of  divination"  (ex"!"'''"'  ''^vivixa 
irvOuva)  "  which  biought  her  masters  much  gain 
by  foretelling"  {fiavTevofxivt]),  from  whom  St.  Paul 
cast  out  the  spirit  of  divination  (xvi.  16-18).  Tliis 
is  a  matter  belonging  to  another  subject  than  that 
of  magic. 

Our  e.xamination  of  the  various  notices  of  magic 
in  the  Bible  gives  us  this  general  result: — They  do 
not,  as  far  as  we  can  understand,  once  state  posi- 
tively that  any  but  illusive  results  were  produced 
by  magical  rites.  They  therefore  afford  no  evi- 
dence that  man  can  gain  supernatural  powers  to 
use  at  his  will.  This  consequence  goes  ^me  way 
towards  showing  that  we  may  conclude  that  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  real  magic;  for  although  it  is 
dangerous  to  reason  on  negative  evidence,  yet  in  a 
case  of  this  kind  it  is  especially  strong.  Had  any 
but  illusions  been  worked  by  magicians,  surely  the 
Scriptures  would  not  have  passed  over  a  fact  of  so 
much  importance,  and  one  which  would  have  ren- 
dered the  prohibition  of  these  arts  far  more  neces- 
sary. The  general  belief  of  mankind  in  magic,  or 
things  alciu  to  it,  is  of  no  worth,  since  the  holding 
such  current  superstition  in  some  of  its  branches, 
if  we  push  it  to  its  legitimate  consequences,  would 
lead  to  the  rejection  of  faith  in  God's  government 
of  the  world,  and  the  adoption  of  a  creed  far  below 
that  of  Plato. 

From  the  conclusion  at  which  we  have  arrived, 
that  there  is  no  evidence  in  the  Bible  of  real  results 
having  been  worked  by  supei-natural  agency  used  by 
magicians,  we  may  draw  this  important  inference, 
that  the  absence  of  any  proof  of  the  same  in  proiane 
literature,  ancient  or  modern,  in  no  way  militates 
against  the  credibility  of  the  miracles  recorded  in 
Scripture.  [R.  S.  P.] 

MA'GIDDO  (Ma7e55c5;  but  Mai,  /^era 'A5- 
SoCj ;  and  Alex.»  MeraeSSaous :  Magcddo),  the 
Greek  form  of  the  name  Megiddo.  It  occurs  only 
in  1  Esd.  i.  29.     [Megiddon.]  [G.] 

MA'GOG  (JliD  :  Uaydiy).  The  name  Magog 
is  applied  in  Scripture  both  to  a  person  and  to 
a  land  or  people.  In  Gen.  x.  2  Magog  appears  as 
the  second  son  of  Japheth  in  connexion  with 
Gomer  (the  Cimmerians)  and  Madai  (theMedes): 


MAGOG 


205 


»  This  is  one  of  a  great  number  of  cases  in  which  the 
readings  of  Mai's  edition  of  the  Vatican  Codex  depart  from 
the  ordinaiy  "  Vatican  Text,"  as  usually  edited,  and  agree 
more  or  less  closely  with  the  Alexandrine  (Codex  A). 

b  Von  Bohlen  (Intrnd.  to  Oen.  ii.  211)  represents  Gog 
as  the  people,  and  not  the  prince.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  in  Rev.  xx.  S  the  name  does  apply  to  a  people,  but 
this  is  not  the  case  in  Ezekiel. 

•^  In  the  A.  V.  Gog  is  represented  as  "  the  chief  prince" 
of  Meshech  and  Tubal :  but  It  is  pretty  well  agreed  that 
the  Hebrew  words  ti'NI  X^b'J  cannot  bear  the  meaning 
thus  affixed  to  them.  The  trae  rendering  is  "  prince  of 
Rosh,"  as  given  in  the  LXX.  (apxovra  "Pus).  The  other 
sense  was  adopted  by  the  Vulgate  in  consequence  of  the 
name  Ro.*h  not  occurring  elsewhere  in  Scripture.  [Rosh.] 

^  Various  etymologies  of  the  name  have  been  suggested, 
none  of  which  can  be  absolutely  accepted.  Knobel 
(_V6lhert.  p.  63)  proposes   the  Sanscrit  mah  or  malM, 


in  Ez.  xxxviii.  2,  xxxix.  1,  6,  it  appears  as  a 
coiuitry  or  people  of  which  Gog  was  tlio  prince,*" 
in  conjunction  with  Meshech<=  (the  Moschici),  Tubal 
(tlie  Tibareni),  and  Kosh  (the  Koxolani).  In  the 
latter  of  these  senses  there  is  evidently  iniplied  an 
etymological  connexion  between  Gog  and  Ma  =  gog, 
the  Ma  being  regarded  by  Ezekiel  as  a  prefix  signi- 
ficant of  a  country.  In  this  case  Gog  contains 
the  original  element  of  the  name,  which  mav 
possibly  have  its  origin  in  some  Persian  root.'*' 
'fhe  notices  of  Magog  would  lead  us  to  fix  a 
northern  locality :  not  only  did  all  the  tribes  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  it  belong  to  that  quarter, 
but  it  is  expressly  stated  by  Ezekiel  that  he  was  to 
come  up  from  "  the  sides  of  the  north  "  (xxxix.  2), 
from  a  country  adjacent  to  that  of  Togaimah  or 
Armenia  (xxxviii.  6),  and  not  far  fiom  "  the  isles  " 
or  maritime  regions  of  Europe  (xxxix.  6).  The 
people  of  Magog  further  appear  as  having  a  force  of 
cavalry  (xxxviii.  15),  and  as  armed  with  the  bow 
(xxxix.  3).  From  the  above  data,  combined  with 
the  consideration  of  the  time  at  whicli  Ezekiel 
lived,  the  conclusion  has  been  drawn  that  Magog 
represents  the  important  race  of  the  Scythians. 
Josephus  {Ant.  i.  6,  §1)  aiid  Jerome  (Quacst.  in 
Gen.  X.  2)  among  early  writers  adopted  this  view, 
and  they  have  been  followed  in  the  main  by 
modern  writers.  In  identifying  Magog  with  the 
Scythians,  however,  we  must  not  be  understood  as 
using  the  Jatter  term  in  a  strictly  ethnographical 
sense,  but  as  a  general  expression  for  the  tribes 
living  north  of  the  Caucasus.*  We  regard  Magog  as 
essentially  a  geographical  term,  just  as  it  was 
applied  by  the  Syrians  of  the  middle  ages  to 
Asiatic  Tartary,  and  by  tlie  Arabians  to  the  district 
between  the  Caspi;m  and  Euxine  seas  (Winer,  Eivb. 
s.  v.).  The  inhabitants  of  this  district  in  the  time 
of  Ezekiel  were  undoubtedly  the  people  generally 
known  by  the  classical  name  of  Scythians.  In 
the  latter  part  of  the  7th  century  B.C.  they 
had  become  well  known  as  a  formidable  power 
thiough  the  whole  of  western  Asia.  Forced  from 
their  original  quarters  north  of  the  Caucasian 
range  by  the  inroad  of  the  Massagetae,  they  de- 
scended into  Asia  Minor,  where  they  took  Sardis 
(B.C.  629),  and  maintained  a  long  war  with  the 
Lydian  monarchs:  thence  they  spread  into  Media 
(B.C.  624),  where  they  defeated  Cyaxares.  They 
then  directed  their  course  to  Egypt,  and  were 
bribed  off  by  Psammetichus  ;  on  their  return  f  they 
attacked  the  temple  of  Venus  Urania  at  Ascalon. 
They  were  finally  ejected  B.C.  .596,  after  having 
made  their  name  a  teiTor  to  the  whole  eastern 
world   (Herod,    i.    103    ff.).      The   Scythians   are 

"  great,"  and  a  Persian  word  signifying  "  mountain,"  in 
which  case  the  reference  would  be  to  the  Caucasian  range. 
The  terms  ghogh  and  inoyhef  are  still  applied  to  some  of 
the  heights  of  that  range.  This  etymology  is  supported 
by  Von  Bohlen  {Inttod.  to  Gen.  ii.  211).  On  the  other 
hand,  IWizifi  {Comm.  in  Ex.)  connects  the  first  syllable 
with  the  Coptic  ma,  "  place,"  or  the  Sanscrit  maha, 
"  land,"  and  the  second  with  a  Persian  root,  Jcoh-a,  "  the 
moon,"  as  though  the  term  had  reference  to  moon- 
worehippers. 

«  In  the  Koran  Gog  and  Magog  are  localized  north  of 
the  Caucasus.  There  appears  to  have  been  from  the 
earliest  times  a  legend  that  the  enemies  of  religion  and 
civilization  lived  in  that  quarter  {Baxtliausen^s  Tribes  of 
the  Caucasus,  p.  55). 

f  The  name  of  Scythopolis,  by  which  Beth-shean  was 
known  in  our  Saviour's  time,  was  regarded  as  a  trace  of 
the  Scythian  occupation  (I'lin.  v.  16);  this,  however,  is 

doubtful.      [SCYTHOPOI.IS.] 


206 


MAGOR-anSSABIB 


described  by  classical  writevs  as  skilful  in  the  use  of 
the  bow  (Herod,  i.  73,  iv.  132  ;  Xen.  Anab.  iii. 
4,  §15),  and  even  as  the  inventors  of  the  bow  and 
arrow  (I'lin.  vii.  57);  they  were  specially  famous 
as  mounted  bowmen  {'nnroro^Srat ;  Herod,  iv. 
4G  ;    Thucyd.  ii.   96)  ;    they  also  enjoyed  an   ill- 


Scythian  horseman  (from  Kcrtcli). 


fame  for  their  cruel  and  rapacious  habits  (Herod,  i. 
106).  With  the  memory  of  these  events  yet  tresh 
on  the  minds  of  his  countiymen,  Ezekiel  selects  the 
Scythians  as  the  symbol  of  earthly  violence,  ar- 
rayed against  the  people  of  God,  but  meeting  with 
a  signal  and  utter  overthrow.  He  depicts  their 
avarice  and  violence  (xxxviii.  7-13),  and  the 
fearful  vengeance  executed  upon  them  (xxxviii. 
14-23) — a  massacre  so  tremendous  that  seven 
months  would  hardly  suflice  for  the  burial  of  the 
corpses  in  the  valley  which  should  thenceforth  be 
named  Hamon-gog  (xxxix.  11-16).  The  imagery 
of  Ezekiel  has  been  transferred  in  the  Apocalypse  to 
describe  the  final  struggle  between  Christ  and  Anti- 
christ (Hcv.  XX.  8).  As  a  question  of  ethnology, 
the  origin  of  the  Scythians  presents  great  difficul- 
ties: many  eminent  writers,  with  Niebuhr  and 
Neumann  at  their  head,  regard  them  as  a  Mongolian, 
and  therefore  a  non-Japhetic  race.  It  is  unnecessary 
for  us  to  enter  into  the  general  question,  which  is 
complicated  by  the  undefined  and  varying  applica- 
tions of  the  name  Scythia  and  Scythians  among 
ancient  writers.  As  far  as  the  Biblical  notices 
are  concerned,  it  is  sufficient  to  sfeite  that  the 
Scythians  of  Ezekiel's  age — the  Scythians  of  Hero- 
dotus— were  in  all  probability  a  Japhetic  race. 
They  are  distinguished  on  the  one  hand  from  the 
Argippaei,  a  clearly  Mongolian  race  (Herod,  iv.  23), 
and  they  are  connected  on  the  other  hand  with  the 
Agathyrsi,  a  clearly  Indo-European  race  (iv.  10). 
The  inei'e  silence  of  so  observant  a  writer  as  Hero- 
dotus, as  to  any  striking  featui'es  in  the  physical 
conformation  of  the  Scythians,  must  further  be 
regarded  as  a  strong  ai'gumeut  in  favour  of  their 
Japhetic  origin.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MA'GOR-MIS'SABIB  {2'<2BKi  niiD  :  MeV- 
oiKos:  Pavorundiq>ie),\\ter:i\\y,  "terror  on  every 
side:"  the  name  given  by  Jeremiah  to  Pashur  the 
priest,  when  he  smote  him  and  put  him  in  the 
stocks  for  prophesying  against  the  idolatry  of  Jeru- 
salem (Jer.  XX.  3).  The  significance  of  the  appel- 
lation is  explained  in  the  denunciation  with  which 
it  was  accompanied  (ver.  4) :  "  Thus  saith  .lehovah. 
Behold  I  will  make  thee  a  terror  to  thyself  and  to 
all  thy  friends."  The  LXX.  must  have  coiiiiectod 
the  word  with  the  original  meaning  of  the  root 
"  to  wander,"  for  they  keeji  up  the    play  upon  the 


MAHALATH 

name  in  vei'.  4.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  same 
phrase  occurs  in  several  other  passages  of  Jeremiah 
(vi.  25,  XX.  10,  xlvi.  5,  xlix.  29  ;  Lam.  ii.  22), 
and  is  only  found  besides  in  Ps.  xxxi.  13'. 

MA'GPIASH  (t^y''SJD  :  Meyacfj^s  ;  Alex. 
Mayacpvs  ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Baya(piis:  Meijphias), 
one  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  signed  the 
covenant  with  Xehemiah  (Keh.  x.  20).  The  name 
is  probably  not  that  of  an  individual,  but  of  a 
family.  It  is  supposed  by  Calmet  and  Junius  to 
be  the  same  as  Magbish  in  Ezr.  ii.  30. 

MAHALAH  (n'pHD  :  MaeXci ;  Alex.  MooAct : 
Mohola),  one  of  the  three  children  of  Hammoleketh, 
the  sister  of  Gilead  (1  Chr.  vii.  18).  The  name  is 
probably  that  of  a  woman,  as  it  is  the  same  with 
that  of  lUahlah,  the  daughter  of  Zelophehad,  also  a 
descendant  of  Gilead  the  Manassite. 

MAHA'LALEEL  b^kVi^  •  ^a\i\e-f,\  : 
3'Ialaleel').  1.  The  fourth  in  descent  from  Adam, 
according  to  the  Sethite  genealogy,  and  sou  of 
Caiuan  (Gen.  v.  12,  13,  15-17^  1  Chr.  i.  2). 
In  the  LXX.  the  names  of  Mahalaleel  and  Mehujael, 
the  fourth  from  Adam  in  the  genealogy  of  the 
descendants  of  Cain,  are  identical.  Ewald  recog- 
nises in  Mahalaleel  the  sun-god,  or  Apollo  of  the 
antediluvian  mythology,  and  in  his  son  Jared  the 
god  of  water,  the  Indian  Varuna  (Gesch.  i.  357), 
but  his  assertions  are  perfectly  arbitrary. 

2.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Ma\e\i]ix).  A  descendant  of 
Perez,  or  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah,  and  ancestor  of 
Athaiah,  whose  family  resided  in  Jerusalem  after 
the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  xi.  4). 

MAH'ALATH  (n^ilO  ;  MaeXeB:  Maheleth), 
the  daughter  of  Ishmael,  and  one  of  the  wives  of 
Esau  (Gen.  xxviii.  9).  In  the  Edomite  genealogy 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  3,  4,  10,  13,  17)  she  is  called 
Bashemath,  sister  of  Nebajoth,  and  mother  of 
Reuel;  but  the  Hebraeo-Samaritan  text  has  Ma- 
halath  throughout.  On  the  other  hand  Bashemath, 
the  wife  of  Esau,  is  described  as  the  daughter  of 
Elon  the  Hittite  (Gen.  xxvi.  34).    [Bashemath.] 

MAHA'LATH  (H^nrO :  r)  Mo\aa0  ;  Alex. 
Mo\ad  :  Maalath),  one  of  the  eighteen  wives  of  king 
Rehoboam,  apparently  his  first  (2  Chr.  xi.  18  only). 
She  was  her  husband's  cousin,  being  the  daughter  of 
king  David's  son  Jerimoth,  who  was  pirobably  the  child 
of  a  concubine,  and  not  one  of  his  regular  family. 
Josephus,  without  naming  Mahalath,  speaks  of  her  as 
"  a  kinswoman"  {avyysvri  riva.  Ant.  viii.  10,  §1). 
No  children  are  attributed  to  the  marriage,  nor  is 
she  again  named.  The  ancient  Hebrew  text  (Ceihib) 
in  this  passage  has  "  son  "  instead  of  "  daughter." 
The  latter,  however,  is  the  correction  of  the  Kri, 
and  is  adopted  by  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  and  Targum, 
as  well  as  by  the  A.  V.  [G.] 

MAHALATH  (npnO:   MoeAeS:  Maeleth). 

The  title  of  Ps.  liii.,  in  which  this  rare  word  occurs, 
was  rendered  in  the  Geneva  version,  "  To  him  that 
excelleth  on  Mahalath;"  which  was  explained  in 
the  margin  to  be  "  an  instrument  or  kind  of  note." 
This  expresses  in  short  the  opinions  of  most  com- 
mentators.     Connecting    the    word    with   ?inO. 

^  T 

macliol  (Ex.  xv.  20;  Ps.  cl.  4),  rendered  "dance" 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  supposed  by  many  from  its  con- 
nexion with  instruments  of  music  to  be  one  itself 
(Dance,  vol.  i.  p.  389),  Jerome  renders  the  phrase 
"on   ]\!ahalath,"  by  "  per  c/iorwm,"  and  in  this  he 


MAHALATH 

is  supported  by  the  translations  of  Theodotion 
(virep  Trjs  x^P*'"^);  Synimuchus  (Bia  xopoS),  and 
Aquila  (eVi  xops'"?))  q^ioted  by  Theodoiet  (JJomm. 
in  Fs.  lii.).  Augustine  (Enarr.  in  Ps.  lii.)  gives 
the  title  of  the  Psalm,  "  In  finem  pro  Amalech  iu- 
tellectus  ipsi  David  ;"  explaining  "  pro  Amalech," 
as  he  says  from  the  Hebrew,  "  for  one  in  labour  or 
sorrow "  (pro  parturiente  sive  dolente),  by  whom 
he  understands  Christ,  as  the  subject  of  the  Psalm. 
But  in  another  passage  {Enarr.  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.)  he 
gives  the  word  in  the  form  melech,  and  interprets 
it  by  the  Latin  chorus :  having  in  the  first  instance 
made  some  confusion  with  ?0y,  'dmdl,  "  sorrow," 
whicli  fonns  part  of  the  proper  name  "  Amalek." 
The  title  of  Ps.  liii.  in  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  ver- 
sions contains  no  trace  of  the  word,  which  is  also 
omitted  in  the  almost  identical  Ps.  xiv.  Fiom  this 
fact  alone  it  might  be  inferred  that  it  was  not  in- 
tended to  point  enigmatically  to  the  contents  of  the 
psalm,  as  Hengstenberg  and  others  are  inclined  to 
believe.  Aben  Ezra  understands  by  it  the  name  of 
a  melody  to  which  the  Psalm  was  sung,  and  R.  So- 
lomon Jarchi  explains  it  as  "  the  name  of  a  musical 
instrument,"  adding  however  immediately,  with  a 
play  upon  the  word,  "  another  discourse  on  the 
sickness  (^machcJdh)  of  Israel  when  the  Temple  was 
laid  waste."  Calvin  and  J.  H.  Michaelis,  among 
others,  regarded  it  as  an  instrument  of  music  or  the 
commencement  of  a  melody.  Junius  derived  it 
from  the  root  7711,  chalal,  "  to  bore,  perforate," 
and  understood  by  it  a  wind  instrument  of  some 
kind,  like  Nehiloth  in  Ps.  vi. ;  but  his  etymology  is 
certainly  wrong.  Its  connexion  with  inachol  is 
equally  uncertain.  Joel  Bril,  in  the  second  preface 
to  his  notes  on  the  Psalms  in  Mendelssohn's  Bible, 
mentions  three  opinions  as  current  with  regard  to 
the  meaning  of  Mahalath ;  some  regarding  it  as  a 
feminine  form  of  mdchol,  others  as  one  of  the  wind 
instruments  (the  flute,  according  to  De  Wette's 
translation  of  Ps.  liii.),  and  others  again  as  a  stringed 
insti-ument.  Between  these  conflicting  conjectures, 
he  says,  it  is  impossible  to  decide.  That  it  was  a 
stringed  instrument,  played  either  with  the  fingers 
or  a  quill,  is  maintauied  by  Simonis  {Lex.  ffdir.), 

who  derives  it  from  an  unused  Arabic  root  J^J^ 

to  sweep.  But  the  most  ])robable  of  all  conjectures, 
and  one  which  Gesenius  approves,  is  that  of  Ludolf, 
who  quotes  the  Ethiopia  mdc/det,  by  which  the 
KiOoipa  of  the  LXX.  is  rendered  in  Gen.  iv.  21 
(Simonis,  Arcanum  Fo?-marum,  p.  475).  Fiirst 
{Handw.  s.  v.)  explains  Mahalath  as  the  name  of 
a  musical  corps  dwelling  at  Abe\-Meholah,  just 
as  by  Gittith  he  understands  the  band  of  Levite 
minstrels  at  Gath  llimmon. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  opinion  that  Mahalath 
contains  an  enigmatical  indication  of  the  subject  of 
the  Psalm,  which  we  have  seen  hinted  at  in  the 
quotations  from  Jarchi  given  above,  is  adopted  by 
Hengstenberg  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other.  He 
translates  "on  Mahalath"  by  "on  sickness,"  re- 
ferring to  the  spiritual  malady  of  the  sons  of  men 
{Conim.  iibcr  die  Psalm.).  Lcngerke  (die  Psalmen) 
adopts  the  same  view,  which  had  been  previously 
advanced  by  Arias  Montanus. 

A  third  theory  is  that  of  Delitzsch  {Comm.  iib. 
d.  Psalter),  who  considers  Mahalath  as  indicating 
to  the  choir  the  manner  in  which  the  Psalm  was  to 
be  sung,  and  compares  the  modern  terms  mesto, 
andante  mesto.  Ewald  leaves  it  untranslated  and 
unexplained,  regarding  it  as  probably  an  al)}>revia- 


MAHALATH  LEANNOTH 


207 


tion  of  a  longer  sentence  (Divhter  d.  Alt.  Bundes, 
i.  174).  The  latest  speculation  upon  the  subject 
is  that  of  Mr.  Thrupp,  who,  after  dismissing  as 
mere  conjecture  the  interpretation  of  Mahalath  as 
a  musical  instrument,  or  as  sickness,  projjeunds,  as 
more  probable  than  either,  that  it  is  "  a  proper  name 
borrowed  from  Gen.  xxviii.  9,  and  used  by  David 
as  an  enigmatical  designation  of  Abigail,  in  the  same 
manner  as  in  Psalms  vii.,  xxxiv.,  the  names  Cush 
and  Abimelech  are  employed  to  denote  Shimei  and 
'  Achish.  The  real  Mahalath,  Esau's  wife,  was  the 
sister  of  Nebajoth,  fi'om  whom  were  descended 
an  Arabian  tribe  famous  for  their  wealth  in  sheep  ; 
the  name  might  be  therefore  not  unfitly  applied  to 
one  who,  though  now  wedded  to  David,  had  till 
recently  been  the  wife  of  the  rich  sheep-owner  of 
the  village  of  Carmel"  (Introd.  to  the  Psabns,  i. 
314).  It  can  scarcely  be  said  that  Mr.  Thrupp  has 
replaced  conjecture  by  certainty.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAH'ALATHLEAN'NOTHCniiy"?  uhm- 
MaeAefl  rov  airoKptOrivai :  Mahelcth  ad  respon- 
dendum). The  Geneva  version  of  Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  in 
the  title  of  which  these  words  occur,  has  "  upon 
Malath  Leanuoth,"  and  in  the  margin,  "that  is,  to 
humble.  It  was  the  beginning  of  a  song,  by  the 
tune  whereof  this  Psalm  was  sung."  It  is  a  re- 
mai'kable  proof  of  the  obscurity  which  envelops 
the  former  of  the  two  words  that  the  same  com- 
mentator explains  it  differently  in  each  of  the  pas- 
sages in  which  it  occurs.  In  De  Wette's  transla- 
tion it  is  a  "flute"  in  Ps.  liii.,  a  "guitar"  in  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  ;  and  while  Jarchi  in  the  former  passage 
ex])lains  it  as  a  musical  instrument,  he  describes  the 
latter  as  referring  to  "  one  sick  of  love  and  affliction 
who  was  afflicted  with  the  punishments  of  the  cap- 
tivity." Symmachus,  again,  as  quoted  by  Theo- 
doret  {Comm.  in  Ps.  87),  has  Six^pov,  unless  this 
be  a  mistake  of  the  copyist  for  Sia  x^pov,  as  in 
Ps.  liii.  Augustine  and  Theodoret  both  understand 
Eefinnoth  of  responsive  singing.  Theophylact  says 
"they  danced  while  responding  to  the  music  of  the 
organ."  Jerome  in  his  version  of  the  Hebrew,  has 
"  per   chorum    ad   praecinendum."     The   Hebrew 

msy,  in    the  Piel  Couj.,  certainly  signifies   "  to 

sing,"  as  in  Ex.  x.xxii.  18  ;  Is.  xsvii.  2 ;  and  in  this 
sense  it  is  taken  by  Ewald  in  the  title  of  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  In  like  manner  Junius  and  Tremellius 
render  "  upon  Mahalath  Leannoth  "  "  to  be  sung 
to  the  wind  instruments."  There  is  nothing,  how- 
ever, in  the  construction  of  the  Psalm  to  show  that 
it  was  adapted  for  responsive  singing;  and  if /c'«k- 
noth  be  simply  "  to  sing,"  it  would  seem,  as  01s- 
hausen  observes,  almost  unnecessary.  It  has  refer- 
ence, more  probably,  to  the  character  of  the  psalm, 
and  might  be  rendered  "  to  humble,  or  afflict,"  in 
which  sense  the  I'oot  occurs  in  verse  7.  In  support 
of  this  may  be  compared,  "  to  bring  to  remem- 
brance," in  the  titles  of  Pss.  xxxviii.  and  Ixx. ;  and 
"to  thank,"  1  Chr.  xvi.  7.  Mr.  Thrupp  remarks 
that  this  Psalm  (Ixxxviii.)  "  should  be  regarded  as 
a  solemn  exercise  of  humiliation  ;  it  is  more  deeply 
melancholy  than  any  cjther  in  the  Ps;dter"  {Intr. 
to  the  Psalms,  ii.  99).  Hengstenberg,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  view  he  takes  of  Mahalath,  regards 
Ps.  Ixxxviii.  as  the  prayer  of  one  recovered  from 
severe  bodily  sickness,  I'endering  leannoth  "  con- 
cerning affliction,"  and  the  whole  "  on  the  sickness 
of  distress."  Lengerke  has  a  similar  exjjlanation, 
which  is  the  same  with  that  of  Piscator,  but  is  too 
fbrced.  [W.  A.  VV.] 


208  MAHALl 

MAH'ALI  {"hrp-.  MooXl;  Alex.  iAooXel: 
Moholi) ;  Mahli,  the  son  of  Meiari.  His  name 
occurs  in  the  A.  V.  but  once  in  this  foiin  (Ex. 
vi.  19). 

MAHANA'IM  (D.''3nO  =  two  camps  or  hosts: 
nape;Uj8oAai ;  Ka.ueiV;  Mayae'^;  MameiV;  Joseph. 
06oG  arpar6TVi^ov :  Manaim),  a  town  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan,  intimately  connected  with  the  early 
and  middle  history  of  the  nation  of  Israel.  It 
purports  to  have  received  its  name  at  the  most 
important  crisis  of  the  life  of  Jacob.  He  had 
parted  from  Labau  in  peace  after  their  hazardous 
encounter  on  Mount  Gilead  (Gen.  xxxi.),  and  the 
next  step  in  the  journey  to  Canaan  brings  him  to 
Mahanaim  :  "  Jacob  went  on  his  way ;  and  he  lifted 
up  his  eyes  and  saw  the  cainp  of  God  »  encamped ; 
and  the  angels  (or  messengers)  of  God  met  him. 
And  when  he  saw  them  he  said,  This  is  God's  host 
(inahaneh),  and  he  called  the  name  of  that  place 
Mahanaim."  It  is  but  rarely,  and  in  none  but  the 
earliest  of  these  ancient  records,  that  we  meet  with 
the  occ;i.sion  of  a  name  being  conferred ;  and  gene- 
rally, as  has  been  already  remarked,  such  narra- 
tives are  full  of  difficulties,  arising  from  the  pe- 
culiar turns  and  involutions  of  words,  which  foira 
a  very  prominent  feature  in  this  primeval  litera- 
ture, at  once  so  simple  and  so  artiricial.  [Beer 
LAiiAi  ROI,  En-hakkore,  &c.]  The  form  in  which 
the  history  of  Mahanaim  is  cast  is  no  exception  to  this 
rule.  It  is  in  some  respects  peihaps  more  character- 
istic and  more  pregnant  with  hidden  meaning  than 
any  other.  Thus  the  "  host "  of  angels — "  God's 
host"- — which  is  said  to  have  been  the  occasion  of 
the  name,  is  only  mentioned  in  a  cursory  manner, 
and  in  the  singular  number — "  the  [one]  host ;" 
while  the  "  two  hosts  "  into  which  Jacob  divided  his 
caravan  when  anticipating  an  attack  from  Esau,  the 
host  of  Leah  and  the  host  of  Kachel,  agreeing  in 
their  number  with  the  name  Mahanaim  ("  two 
hosts"),  are  dwelt  upon  with  constant  repetition 
and  emphasis.  So  also  the  same  word  is  employed 
for  the  "  messengers  "  of  God  and  the  "  messengers  " 
to  Esau  ;  and  so,  further  on  in  the  history,  the 
"  face  "  of  God  and  the  "  face  "  of  Esau  are  named 
by  the  same  word  (xxxiii.  30,  xxxiii.  10).  It  is  as 
if  there  were  a  correspondence  throughout  between 
the  human  and  the  divine,  the  inner  and  outer  parts 
of  the  event, — the  host  of  God  and  the  hosts  of 
Jacob  ;  the  messengers  of  God  and  the  messengers 
of  Jacob  ;  the  face  of  God  and  the  face  of  Esau.'' 
The  very  name  of  the  torrent  on  whose  banks  the 
event  took  place  seems  to  be  derived  from  the 
"  wrestling  "  '  of  the  patriarch  with  the  angel. 
The  whole  nari'ative  hovers  between  the  real  and 
the  ideal,  earth  and  heaven. 

How  or  when  the  town  of  Jlahanaim  arose  on 
the  spot  thus  signalized  we  are  not  told.  We  next 
meet  with  it  in  the  records  of  the  conquest.  The 
line  separating  Gad  from  Manasseh  would  appear 
to  have  run  through  or  close  to  it,  since  it  is  named 
in  the  specification  of  the  frontier  of  each  tribe  (Jot^h. 
xiii.  26  and  29).  It  was  also  on  the  southern 
boundary  of  the  district  of  Bashan  (vcr.  30).  But 
it  was  certainly  within  the  territory  of  Gad  (Josh. 
xxi.  38,  39),  and  therefore  on  the  south  side  of  the 
torrent  Jabbok,  as  indeed  we  should  infer  from  the 


*  This  paragraph  is  added  in  the  LXX. 
•>  For  this  observation  the  writer  is  indebted  to  a  sermop 
by  Prof.  Stanley  (Marlborough,  1853). 
e  Jabboli,  py  ;  "  wrestled  "  p^X''- 


MAHANAIM 

history  of  Genesis,  in  which  it  lies  between  Gilead — 
probably  the  modern  Jehel  Jilad — and  the  torrent 
The  town  with  its  "  suburbs  "  was  allotted  to  the 
service  of  the  Jlerarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  39  ; 
1  Chron.  vi.  80).  From  some  cause — the  sanc- 
tity of  its  original  foundation,  or  the  strength  of 
its  position  "^^Mahanaim  had  become  in  the  time 
of  the  monarchy  a  place  of  mark.  When,  after  the 
death  of  Saul,  Abner  undertook  the  est;iblishment 
of  the  kingdom  of  Ishbosheth,  unable  to  occupy  any 
of  the  towns  of  Benjamin  or  Ephraira,  which  weie 
then  in  the  hands  of  the  Philistines,  he  fixed  on 
Mahanaim  as  his  head-quarters.  There  the  new 
king  was  crowned  over  all  Israel,  east  as  well  as 
west  of  the  Jordan  (2  Sam.  ii.  9).  From  thence 
Abner  made  his  disastrous  expedition  to  Gibeon 
(ver.  12),  and  there  apparently  the  unfortunate 
Ishbosheth  was  murdered  (iv.  .5),  the  murderers 
making  off  to  Hebron  by  the  way  of  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan. 

The  same  causes  which  led  Abner  to  fix  Ish- 
bosheth's  residence  at  Malianaim  probably  induced 
David  to  take  refuge  there  when  driven  out  of  the 
western  part  of  his  kingdom  by  Absalom.  He  pro- 
ceals  thither  without  hesitation  or  inquiry,  but  as 
if  when  Jer^^alem  was  lost  it  was  the  one  alternative 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  24;  1  K.  ii.  8).  It  was  then  a  walled 
town,  capacious  enough  to  contain  tlie  "  hundreds  " 
and  the  "thousands"  of  David's  followers  (xviii. 
1,4;  and  compai'e  "  ten  thousand,"  ver.  3) ;  with 
gates,  and  the  usual  provision  for  the  watchman 
of  a  fortified  town  (see  the  remark  of  Josephus 
quoted  in  the  note).  But  its  associations  with  royal 
persons  were  not  fortunate.  One  king  had  already 
been  murdered  within  its  walls,  and  it  was  here 
that  David  received  the  news  of  the  death  of  Ab- 
salom, and  made  the  walls  of  the  "  chamber  over 
the  gate  "  resound  \vith  his  cries. 

Mahanaim  was  the  seat  of  one  of  Solomon's  com- 
missariat officers  (1  K.  iv.  14) ;  and  it  is  alluded  to 
in  the  Song  which  bears  his  name  (vi.  13),  in  terms 
which,  though  very  obscui'e,  seem  at  any  rate  to 
show  that  at  the  date  of  the  composition  of  that 
poem  it  was  still  in  repute  for  sanctity,  possibly 
tamous  for  some  ceremonial  commemorating  the 
original  vision  of  the  patriarch  :  "  What  will  ye  see 
in  the  Shulamite  ?  We  see  as  it  were  the  dance 
(mecholah,  a  word  usually  applied  to  dances  of  a 
religious  nature  ;  see  vol.  i.  p.  389)  of  the  two 
hosts  of  Mahanaim." 

On  the  monument  of  Sheshonk  (Shishak)  at 
Karnak,  in  the  22nd  cartouch — one  of  those  which 
are  behoved  to  contain  the  names  of  Israelite  cities 
conquered  by  that  king — a  name  appears  which  is 
read  as  M'^-ha-n-m'^ ,  that  is,  Mahanaim.  The 
adjoining  cartouches  contain  names  which  are  read 
as  Beth-shean,  Shunem,  Megiddo,  Beth-horon, 
Gibeon,  and  other  Israelite  names  (Brugsch,  Geogr. 
der  nachbarldnder  Aegi/ptens,  &c.,  p.  61).  If  this 
interpretation  may  be  relied  on  it  shows  that  the 
invasion  of  Shishak  was  more  extensive  than  we 
should  gather  from  the  records  of  the  Bible  (2  Chr. 
xii.),  which  are  occupied  mainly  with  occurrences 
at  the  metropolis.  Possibly  the  army  entered  by 
the  plains  of  Philistia  and  Sharon,  ravaged  Esdraelon 
and  some  towns  like  Mahanaim  just  beyond  Jordan, 
and  then  returned,  either  by  the  same  route  or  by 


^  To  the  latter  Josephus  testifies  :  Ilape/tijSoAat— .so  he 
renders  tlie  Hebrew  Mahanaim— (caAAi'crTr)  icai  oxwpt- 
TttTT)  TToAtS  {Aiit.  vii.  9,  §8). 


MAHANEH-DAN 

the  Jordan  valley,  to  Jerusalem,  attacking  it  last. 
This  would  account  for  liehoboam's  non-resistance, 
and  also  for  the  fact,  of  which  special  mention  is 
made,  that  many  of  the  chief  men  of  the  country 
had  taken  refuge  in  the  city.  It  should,  however, 
be  remarked  that  the  names  occur  in  most  pro- 
miscuous Older,  and  that  none  has  been  found  re- 
sembling Jerusalem. 

As  to  the  identification  of  Mahanaim  with  any 
modern  site  or  remains  little  can  be  said.  To  Eu- 
sebius  and  Jerome  it  appears  to  have  been  unknown. 
A  place  called  Mahneh  does  certainly  exist  among 
the  villages  of  the  east  of  Jordan,  though  its  exact 
position  is  not  so  certain.  The  earliest  mention  of 
it  appears  to  be  that  of  the  Jewish  ti-aveller  hap- 
Parchi,  according  to  whom  "  Machnajim  is  Macli- 
neh,  and  stands  about  half  a  day's  journey  in  a  due 
east  direction  from  Beth-san  "  (Zunz,  in  Asher's 
Benj.  of  Tudela,  408).  Mahneh  is  named  in  the 
lists  of  Dr.  Eli  Smith  among  the  places  of  Jebd 
Ajlun  (Rob.  B.  R.  1st  ed.,  iii.  App.  166).  It  is 
marked  on  Kiepert's  map  (1856)  as  exactly  east  of 
Bethshan,  but  about  30  miles  distant  therefrom 
— i.  e.  not  half  but  a  long  whole  day's  journey.  It 
is  also  mentioned,  and  its  identity  with  Mahanaim 
upheld,  by  Porter  (Handbook,  322).  But  the  dis- 
tance of  Mahneh  from  the  Jordan  and  from  both 
the  Wady  Zurka  and  the  Yarinuk—eAch.  of  which 
has  claims  to  represent  the  torrent  Jabbok — seems 
to  forbid  this  conclusion.  At  any  rate  the  point 
may  be  recommended  to  the  investigation  of  future 
travellers  east  of  the  Jordan.  [G.] 

MAH'ANEH-DAN  (irnJTO:  irapeixpoX^n 
Adv.  Castra  Dan:  the  "  Camp-of-Dau :"  Luth. 
das  Lager  Dans),  a  name  which  commemoi'ated  the 
last  encampment  of  the  band  of  six  hundred  Danite 
waiTiors  betbre  setting  out  on  their  expedition  to 
Laish.  The  position  of  the  spot  is  specified  with 
great  precision,  as  "  behind  Kirjath-jearim  "  (Judg. 
xviii.  12),  and  as  "  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaor' 
(xiii.  25  ;  here  the  name  is  translated  iu  the  A.  V.). 
Kirjath-jearim  is  identified  with  tolerable  certainty 
in  Kuriet-el-Enab,  and  Zorah  in  Sur'a,  about  7 
miles  S.W.  of  it.  But  no  site  has  yet  been  sug- 
gested for  Eshtaol  which  would  be  compatible  with 
the  above  conditions,  requiring  as  they  do  that 
Kirjath-jearim  should  lie  between  it  and  Zorah. 
In  Kustul,  a  "  remarkable  conical  hill  about  an  hour 
from  Kuriet-el-Enah,  towards  Jerusalem,"  south 
of  the  road,  we  have  a  site  which  is  not  dissimilar 
in  name  to  Eshtaol,  while  its  position  sufficiently 
answers  the  requirements.  Mr.  Williams  {Holij 
City,  i.  12  note)  was  shewn  a  site  on  the  north 
side  of  the  Wady  Ismail,  N.N.E.  from  Deir  el- 
//(;!(;«  —which  bore  the  name  of  Beit  Mahanem, 
and  which  he  suggests  may  be  identical  with  Ma- 
haueh  Dan.  The  position  is  certainly  very  suitable  ; 
but  the  name  does  not  occur  in  the  lists  or  maps 
of  other  travellers — not  even  of  Tobler  {Dritte 
Wandenmg,  1859) ;  and  the  question  must  be  left 
with  that  started  above,  of  the  identity  of  Kustul 
and  Eshtaol,  for  the  investigation  of  future  ex- 
plorers and  Arabic  scholars. 

The  statement  in  xviii.  12  of  the  origin  of  the 
name  is  so  precise,  and  has  so  historical  an  air, 
that  it  supplies  a  strong  reason  for  believing  that 
the  events  there  recorded  took  place  earlier  than 
those  in  xiii.  25,  though  in  the  present  arrangement 
of  the  book  of  Judges  they  come  after  them."[G.] 

MAHARA'I(nnD:    Noepe;   Alex.   Maepaei', 
VOL.  II.  "  ■•  " 


MAHLAH 


209 


in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  28  ;  Mapai ;  Alex.  Moo'p/i,  1  Chr. 
xi.  30;  Merjpa  ;  Alex,  ^oopa'i,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  13: 
Maharai,  Marai,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  13),  an  inhabitant 
of  Netophah  in  the  tribe  of  Juddi,  and  one  of 
David's  captains.  He  was  of  the  family  of  Zerah, 
and  commanded  the  tenth  monthly  division  of  the 
army. 

MA'HATH  (DHD  :  Maa0 :  Mahath).  1.  The 
son  of  Amasai,  a  Kohathite  of  the  house  of  Korah, 
and  ancestor  of  Heman  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  3.5), 
In  ver.  25  he  is  called  Ahimoth  (Hervey,  Geneal. 
p.  215). 

2.  (Alex.  Mae'e,  2  Chr.  s.xix.  12;  Vat.  MS. 
Nae'e,  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13).  Also  a  Kohathite,  who, 
in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  was  appointed,  as  one  of  the 
representatives  of  his  house,  to  assist  in  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  Levites,  by  which  they  prepared  them- 
selves to  cleanse  the  Temple  from  the  traces  of  idola- 
trous worship.  He  was  apparently  the  same  who, 
with  other  Levites,  had  the  charge  of  the  tithes 
and  dedicated  offerings,  under  the  superintendence  of 
Cononiah  and  Shimei. 

MAH'AVITE,  THE  (n''in»n,  i.  e.  "  the 
Machavites  "  :  6  Mf«  ;  Alex,  o  Vlawtiv :  Maumites), 
the  designation  of  Eliel,  one  of  the  warriors  of  king 
David's  guard,  whose  name  is  preserved  in  the  cata- 
logue of  1  Chroii.  only  (xi.  4Gj.  It  will  be  observed 
that  the  word  is  plural  in  the  Hebrew  text,  but  the 
whole  of  the  list  is  evidently  in  so  confused  a  state, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  draw  any  inference  from 
that  circumstance.     The  Targum  has  NTiriD  pi, 

"from  Machavua."  Kennicott  (Dissert.  231)  con- 
jectures that  originally  the  Hebrew  may  have  stood 
D''inn?3,  "  from  the  Hivites."  Others  have  pro- 
posed to  insert  an  N  and  read  "  the  Mahanaimite  " 
(Fiirst,  Hdwb.  721a;  Bertheau,  Chronik,  136).   [G.] 

MAHAZ'IOTH  (nixnnO :  M6aC"0;  Alex. 
Maa^tctifi:  Mahazioth),  one  of  the  14  sons  of 
Heman  the  Kohathite,  who  formed  part  of  the 
Temple  choir,  under  the  leadership  of  their  father 
with  Asaph  and  Jeduthun.  He  was  chief  of  the 
23rd  coui-se  of  twelve  musicians  (1  Chr.  .xxv.  4,  30), 
whose  office  it  was  to  blow  the  horns. 

MAHEE-SHALAL-HASH-BAZ  {hhu  "intO 
T3  KTl :  Ta^ews  CKikevcov  o^eais  irpoySfxevaov  : 
Accelera  spolia  detrahere  festina],  son  of  Isaiah, 
and  younger  brother  of  Shear-jashub,  of  whom 
nothing  more  is  known  than  that  his  name  was 
given  by  Divine  direction,  to  indicate  that  Damascus 
and  Samaria  were  soon  to  be  plundered  by  the  king 
uf  Assyria  (Is.  viii.  1-4;  comp.  vol.  i.  p.  880)". 
in  reference  to  the  grammatical  construction  of  the 
several  parts  of  the  name,  whether  the  verbal  parts 
are  imperatives,  indicatives,  infinitives,  or  verbal 
adjectives,  leading  versions,  as  well  as  the  opinions 
of  Clitics  difi'er,  though  all  agree  as  to  its  geneial 
import  (comp.  Di-echsler  in  he.).  [E.  H- — e.] 

MAH'LAH  (rhm  :  Ma\d,  Num.  sxvi.  33  ; 
MaaXd,  Num.  xxvii.  1 ;  Josh.  xvii.  3 ;  Ma\ad,  Num. 
xxxvi.  11  ;  MaeA.a;  Alex.  MooAa,  1  Chr.  vii.  18: 
Maala  iu  all  cases,  except  Mohola,  1  Chr.  vii.  18), 
the  eldest  of  the  five  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  the 
grandson  of  Manasseh,  in  whose  fiivoui-  the  law  ol' 
succession  to  an  inheritance  was  altered  (Num. 
xxvii.  1-11).  She  married  her  cousin,  and  re- 
ceived as  her  share  a  portion  of  the  territory  of 
Manasseli.  E.  of  the  Jordan. 

V 


210  MAHLI 

MAH'LI  i'hnO:  MooXl:  Mokolt).  1.  The 
son  of  Meraii,  the  son  of  Levi,  and  ancestor  of  the 
family  of  the  Mahlites  (Num.  iii.  20;  1  Chr.  vi. 
19,  29,  xxiv.  2()).  In  the  last  quoted  verse  there 
is  apparently  a  gap  in  the  text,  Libni  and  Shimei 
belonging  to  the  family  of  Gershom  (comp.  ver.  20, 
42),  and  Eleazar  and  Kish  being  afterwards  de- 
scribed as  the  sons  of  Mahh  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  21, 
.vxiv.  28).  One  of  his  descendants,  Sherebiah, 
w:is  appointed  one  of  the  ministers  of  the  Temple  in 
the  days  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  18).  He  is  called 
Mahali  in  the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  vi.  19,  MoLi  in  1  Esd. 
viii.  47,  and  Machli  in  the  margin. 

2.  The  son  of  Mushi,  and  grandson  of  Merari 
(1  Chr.  vi.  47,  xxiii.  23,  xxiv.  30j. 

MAH'LITES,  THE  C^nsn  :  o  MooAi:  Mo- 

holitae,  Moholi),  the  descendants  of  Mahli  the  son 
of  Merari  (Num.  iii.  33,  xxvi.  58). 

MAH'LON  (ji'pnO  :  UaaKwv :  Maalon),  the 
first  husband  of  Ruth.  He  and  his  brother  Chilion 
were  sous  of  Elimelech  and  Naomi,  and  are  de- 
scribed, exactly  in  the  same  terms  with  a  subse- 
quent member  of  their  house — Jesse — as  "  Ephrath- 
ites  of  Bethlehem-judah  "  (Ruth  i.  2,  5  ;  iv.  9,  10  ; 
comp.  1  Sam.  xvii.  12). 

It  is  uncertain  which  was  the  elder  of  the  two. 
In  the  narra'tive  (i.  2,  5)  Mahlon  is  mentioned 
first ;  but  in  his  formal  address  to  the  elders  in  the 
gate  (iv.  9),  Boaz  says  "  Chilion  and  Mahlou." 
Like  his  brother,  Mahlon  died  in  the  land  of  Moab 
without  offspring,  which  in  the  Targum  on  Ruth 
(i.  5)  is  ex-plaiued  to  have  been  a  judgment  for 
theii"  transgression  of  the  law  in  marrying  a  Moab- 
itess.  In  the  Targum  on  1  Chr.  iv.  22,  Mahlon  is 
identified  with  Joash,  possibly  on  account  of  the 
double  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  which  follows, 
and  which  signifies  both  "  had  dominion "  and 
'•  inarrieLl."     (See  that  passage.)  [G.] 

MA'HOL  (91110  :  MaA;  Ahx.MaovX:  Mahol). 
The  father  of  Ethan  the  Ezrahite,  and  Heman, 
Chalcol,  and  Darda,  the  four  men  most  famous  foi- 
wisdom  next  to  Solomon  himself  (1  K.  iv.  31),  who  in 
!  Chr.  ii.  6  are  the  sons  and  immediate  descendants  of 
Zorah.  Mahol  is  evidently  a  proper  name,  but  some 
consider  it  an  appellative,  and  translate  "  the  sons 
of  Mahol  "  by  "  the  sons  of  song,"  or  "  sons  of  the 
choir,"  in  reference  to  tlieir  skill  in  music.  In  this 
case  it  would  be  more  correct  to  render  it  "  sons  of  the 
dance  ;"  tndchdl  corresponding  to  the  Greek  x^P°^ 
in  its  original  sense  of  '•  a  dance  in  a  ring,"  though 
it  has  not  followed  the  meanings  which  have  been 
attached  to  its  derivatives  "  chorus  "  and  "  choir." 
Jarchi  sa3's  that  "  they  were  skilled  in  composing 
hymns  which  were  recited  in  the  dances  of  song." 
Another  explanation  still  is  that  Ethan  and  his 
brethren  the  minstrels  were  called  "  the  sons  of 
Mahol,"  because  mdclwl  is  the  name  of  an  instru- 
ment of  music  in  Ps.  cl.  4.  Josephus  (^Ant.  viii. 
2,  §5)  calls  him  'Uixawv.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAIA'NEAS  (Mctiawas  :  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
Maaseiah,  7  (1  Esd.  ix.  48) ;  probably  a  corrup- 
tion of  Maasias. 

MAK'AZ  (fpD  :  Maxe/^aJ  ;  Alex.  Max^w  : 
Macces),  a  place,  apparently  a  town,  named  once 
only  (1  K.  iv.  9),  in  the  specifiaition  of  the  jurisdic- 


»  E.  g.  Gideon's,  Saul's,  and  David's  attacks.     QScc  Kn- 
:ampments,  i.  551  a.] 
•>  The  Moslem  tradition  is  tliat  the  attack  tnok  place 


MAKKEDAH 

tion  of  Solomon's  commissariat  officer,  Ben-Dekar. 
The  places  which  accompany  it — Shaalbim,  Beth- 
sliemesh,  and  Elon-beth-hanan — seem  to  liave  been 
on  the  western  slopes  of  the  mountains  of  Judah 
and  Benjamin,  i.  e.  the  district  occupied  by  the  tribe 
of  Dan.  But  Makaz  has  not  been  discovered.  Mich- 
mash — the  reading  of  the  LXX.  (but  of  no  other 
version) — is  hardly  possible,  both  for  distance  and 
direction,  tliough  the  position  and  subsequent  im- 
portance of  Michmash,  and  the  great  fertility  of  its 
neighbourhood,  render  it  not  an  unlikely  seat  for  a 
commissariat  officer.  [ti-] 

MA'KED  (Ma/ce5;  Alex.  MaKe^:  Syr.  Mo/ior: 
Vulg.  Mageth), OIK  of  the  "sti'ong  and  great"  cities 
of  Gilead — Josephus  says  Galilee,  but  this  must  be 
an  error — into  which  the  Jews  were  driven  by  the 
Ammonites  under  Timotheus,  and  from  which  they 
were  delivered  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  v. 
26,  36  ;  in  the  latter  passage  the  name  is  given  in 
the  A.  V.  Maged.)  By  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  8,  §3,) 
it  is  not  mentioned.  Some  of  the  other  cities 
named  in  this  narrative  have  been  identified  ;  but 
no  name  corresponding  to  Slaked  has  yet  been  dis- 
covered; and  the  conjecture  of  Schwara  (p.  230) 
that  it  is  a  corruption  of  Minnith  {T)iJ2  for 
n^D),  though  ingenioiis,  can  hardly  be  accepted 
without  further  proof.  [G.] 

MAK'HELOTH  (Tihnpfp-.  MaKT^Xde:  Mace- 
loth),  a  place  only  mentioned  in  Num.  xxxiii.  25 
as  that  of  a  desert  encampment  of  the  Israelites. 
The  name  is  plural  in  form,  and  may  signify 
"  places  of  meeting."  [H.  H.] 

MAK'KEDAH  (mi?0  :  MaKrjSS,  once  Ma/cr)- 

Sav  ;  Alex.  Ma/crjSa :  Syr.  Mokor,  and  Nakoda  : 
Macedix),  a  place  memorable  in  the  annals  of  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  as  the  scene  of  the  execution  by 
Joshua  of  the  five  confederate  kings :  an  act  by 
which  the  victory  of  Beth-horon  was  sealed  and 
consummated,  and  the  subjection  of  the  entii'e 
southern  portion  of  the  country  ensured.  Makkedah 
is  first  mentioned  (Josh.  x.  10)  with  Azekah,  in  the 
narrative  of  the  battle  of  Beth-horon,  as  the  point  to 
which  the  rout  extended;  but  it  isdiificult  to  decide 
whether  this  refers  to  one  of  the  operations  in  the 
earlier  portion  of  the  (ight,  or  is  not  rather  an  anti- 
cipation of  its  close — of  the  circumstances  related 
in  detail  in  verses  11  and  16,  i^c.  But  with  regard 
to  the  event  which  has  conferred  immortality  on 
Makkedah — the  "  crowning  mercy  " — (if  we  may  be 
allowed  to  borrow  an  expression  from  a  not  dissimilar 
transaction  in  our  own  history) — there  is  fortu- 
nately no  obscurity  or  uncertainty.  It  unquestion- 
ably occurred  in  the  afternoon  of  that  tremendous 
day,  which  "  was  like  no  day  before  or  after  it."  The 
order  of  the  events  of  the  twenty-four  hours  which 
elapsed  after  the  departure  from  the  ark  and  taber- 
nacle at  the  camp  seems  to  have  been  as  follows. 
The  march  from  tlie  depths  of  the  Jordan  valley  at 
Gilgal,  through  the  rocky  clefts  of  the  ravines  which 
lead  up  to  the  central  hills,  was  made  during  the 
night.  By  or  before  dawn  they  had  reached  Gibeon  ; 
then — at  the  favourite  hour  for  such  surprises" — 
came  the  sudden  onset  and  the  first  carnage  *> ;  then 
the  chase  and  the  appeal  of  Joshua  to  the  rising  sun, 
just  darting  his  level  rays  over  the  ridge  of  tlie  hill  of 
Gibeon  in  the  rear  ;  then  the  furious  storm  assisting 
and  completing  the  rout.      In  the  meantime  the 


on  a  Friday,  and  that  tire  day  was  prolonged  by  one 
half,  to  prevent  the  Sabbath  being  encroached  upon. 
(See  Jalaladdin,  Temple  of  Jerusalem,  2S7.') 


MAKTESH 

iletectioii  of  tlie  five  chiefs  in  their  hiding-place  has 
been  communicated  to  Joshua,  and,  as  soou  as  the 
matter  iu  hand  will  allow,  he  rushes  on  with  the 
whole  ot"  his  force  to  Slakkedah  (ver.  21).  The  first 
tiling  to  be  done  is  to  form  a  regular  camp  (  njnJD). 
Tiie  next  to  dispose  of  the  five  chiefs,  and  that  by  no 
liurried  massacre,  but  in  so  deliberate  and  judicial  a 
manner  as  at  once  to  infuse  terror  into  the  Canaan- 
ites  and  confidence  into  his  own  followers,  to  show 
to  both  that  "  thus  shall  Jehovah  do  to  all  the 
enemies"  of  Israel.  The  cave  in  the  recesses  of 
which  the  wretched  kings  weie  hidden  was  a  well- 
known  one."^  It  was  close  to  the  town,''  we  may 
safely  conclude  that  the  whole  proceeding  was  in 
full  view  of  tlie  walls.  At  last  the  ceremonial  is 
over,  the  strange  and  significant  parable  has  been 
acted,  and  the  bodies  of  Adoni-zedek  and  his  com- 
])anions  are  swinging '  £iom  the  trees —  possibly  the 
trees  of  some  grove  sacred  to  the  abominable  rites 
of  the  Cana^inite  Ashtaroth — in  the  afternoon  sun. 
Tlien  Joshua  turns  to  the  town  itself.  To  force 
the  walls,  to  put  the  king  and  all  the  inhabitants  to 
the  sword  (ver.  28)  is  to  that  indomitable  energy, 
still  fresh  after  the  gigantic  labours  and  excitements 
of  tlie  last  twenty-four  hours — the  work  of  an  hour  or 
two.  And  now  the  evening  has  arrived,  the  sun  is  at 
last  sinking — the  first  sun  that  has  set  since  the  de- 
parture from  Gilgal, — and  the  tragedy  is  terminated 
by  cutting  down  the  five  bodies  from  the  trees,  and 
j'estoring  them  to  the  cave,  which  is  then  so  blocked 
up  with  stones  as  henceforth  never  again  to  become 
refuge  for  friend  or  foe  of  Israel. 

The  taking  of  Malckedah  was  the  first  in  that 
series  of  sieges  and  destructions  by  which  the  Great 
Captain  possessed  himself  of  the  main  points 
of  defence  throughout  this  portion  of  the  country. 
Its  situation  has  hitherto  eluded  discovery.  The 
catalogue  of  the  cities  of  Judah  in  Joshua  (xv.  41) 
places  it  in  the  Shefelah  or  maritime  plain,  but 
lui fortunately  it  forms  one  of  a  group  of  towns  of 
which  few  or  none  are  identified.  The  report  of 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Otioniasticoii,  "Maceda")  is 
that  it  lay  8  miles  to  the  east  of  Eleutheropolis, 
Beit-Jihrin,  a  position  irreconcileable  with  every 
requirement  of  the  narrative.  Porter  {Handbook, 
224,  251)  suggests  a  ruin  on  the  northern  slope  of 
the  Wady  es  Sumt,  bearing  the  somewhat  similar 
name  of  cl-KUdiah ;  but  it  is  difilcult  to  under- 
stand how  this  can  have  been  the  position  of  Mak- 
kedah,  which  we  should  imagine  would  be  found,  if  it 
ever  is  ibund,  considerably  nearer  Ramleh  or  Jimzu. 

Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  o'.Vl)  would  place  it  at 
Suineil,  a  villagfe  standing  on  a  low  hill  6  or  7 
miles  N.W.  of  Beit-Jibrin ;  but  the  only  claim  of 
this  site  appears  to  be  the  reported  existence  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  a  large  cavern,  while  its  position — 
at  lea.st  8  miles  further  from  Beth-horon  than  even 
d-Kledinh — would  make  the  view  of  the  narrative 
taken  above  impossible.  [^^-1 

MAK'TESH  (t^'riDSn,"  with  the  def.  article: 
7)  KaTaKeKOfi/xevri :  Piki),  a  place,  evidently  iu  Jeru- 


MALACHI 


211 


'^  It  is  throughout  distinguished  by  the  definite  article, 

mj;?3n> " "»« cave." 

'1  Tbe  preposition  usod  is  the  same  as  that  employed 
to  describe  the  position  of  the  five  kings  in  the  cave — 
mpD3.  "  '"  Maklcedah"— n-|J?D3>  "  i"  Itie  cave." 

<-■  The  word  H?]^,  rendered  "hung"  in  ver.  '26,  lias 

the  force  of  suspending.  See  Ps.  c.xxxvii.  2,  2  Sam.  xviii. 
10,  and  other  passages  where  it  must  have  this  meaning. 
It  is  an  entirely  distinct  term  from  ypi.  whicli,  Ihougli 


salem,  the  inhabitants  of  which  are  denounced  by 
Zephaniah  (i.  11).  Ewald  conjectures  {Propheten, 
364)  that  it  was  the  "  Phoenician  quarter"  of  the 
city,  in  which  the  traders  of  that  nation  —the  Ca- 
naanites  fA.  V.  "  merchants"),  who  in  this  passage 
are  associated  with  Mactesh — resided,  after  the  cus- 
tom in  Oriental  towns.  As  to  which  part  of  the  city 
this  quarter  occupied  we  have  little  or  no  indication. 
The  meaning  of  "  Mactesh  "  is  probably  a  deep  hollow, 
iitei-ally  a  "  mortar."''  This  the  Targum  identifies 
with  the  torrent  Kedron,  the  deep  basin  or  ravine  of 
which  sinks  down  below  the  eastern  wall  and  south- 
eastern corner  of  the  city.  The  Targum,  probably 
with  an  eye  to  the  traditional  uncleanness  of  this 
valley,  and  to  the  idol-worship  pei'petrated  at  its 
lower  end,  says,  "  Howl  ye  inhabitants  of  the  torrent 
Kedron,  foi-  all  the  people  are  broken  whose  works 
were  like  the  works  of  the  people  of  Canaan."  But 
may  it  not,  with  equal  piobability,  have  been  the 
deep  valley  which  separated  the  Temple  from  the 
upper  city,  and  which  at  the  time  of  Titus'  siege 
was,  as  it  still  is,  crowded  with  the  "  bazaars  "  of 
the  merchants  ?     (.See  vol.  i.  1012  6.)  [G.] 

MAL'ACHI  CDn"???  :  MaXaxias  in  the  title 
only  :  Malachias),  the  last,  and  therefore  called 
"  the  seal "  of  the  prophets,  as  his  prophecies  con- 
stitute the  closing  book  of  the  canon.  His  name  is 
probably  contracted  from  Malachijah,  "  messenger 
of  Jehovah,"  as  Abi  (2  K.  xviii.  2)  from  Abijah 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  1).  Of  his  personal  history  nothing 
is  known.  A  tradition  preserved  in  Pseudo-Epi- 
phanius  {De  Vitis  Proph.)  relates  that  Malachi  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  and  born  after  the  captivity 
at  Sopha  (2o(^a)  in  the  territory  of  that  tribe. 
According  to  the  same  apocryphal  story  he  died 
young,  and  was  buried  with  his  fathers  in  his  own 
country.  Jerome,  in  the  prefoce  to  his  Commentary 
on  Malachi,  mentions  a  belief  which  was  current 
among  the  Jews,  that  Malachi  was  identical  with 
Ezra  the  priest,  because  the  circumstances  re- 
corded in  the  narrative  of  the  latter  are  also  men- 
tioned by  the  prophet.  The  Targum  of  Jonathan 
ben  Uzziel,  on  the  words  "  by  the  hand  of  Malachi  " 
(i.  1),  gives  the  gloss  "  whose  name  is  called  Ezra 
the  scribe."  With  equal  probability  Malachi  has 
been  identified  with  Mordecai,  Nehemiali,  and  Ze- 
rubbabel.  The  LXX.  render  "  by  Malachi  "  (Mai. 
i.  1),  "  by  the  hand  of  his  angel ;"  and  this  transla- 
tion appears  to  have  given  rise  to  the  idea  that 
Malachi,  as  well  as  Haggai  and  John  the  Baptist, 
was  an  angel  in  human  shape  (comp.  Mai.  iii.  1 ; 
2  Esd.  i.  40;  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Hag.  i.  13).  Cyril 
alludes  to  this  belief  only  to  express  his  disappro- 
bation, and  characterizes  those  who  held  it  as 
romancers  {ot  jxar-qv  i^()a\pCf>S^Ka(nP  k.  t.  A.). 
Another  Hebrew  tradition  associated  Malachi  with 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  as  the  companions  of  Daniel 
when  he  saw  the  vision  recorded  in  Dan.  x.  7 
(Smith's  Select  Discourses,  p.  214  ;  a.d.  KiGO),  and 
as  among  the  first  members  of  the  Great  Synagogue, 
which  consisted  of  1 20  elders. 


also  translated  by  "hang"  iu  the  A.  V.,  really  means  to 
crucify.    See  MEPHiBoanETH. 

'^  One  of  the  few  cases  in  which  our  translators  have 
represented  the  Hebrew  letter  Cajth  by  K,  which  they 
commonly  reserve  for  Knph.    QSee  also  Mkkon'aii.] 

I'  The  literal  Aqnila  renders  the  words  by  tU  toc  oX- 
jaor;  Theodutiou,  tv  ™  pdOei.  The  Hebrew  term  is  the 
same  as  that  employed  in  .Judg.  xv.  19  for  the  hollow 
basin  or  combe  in  Lehi  Irom  w hiih  the  soring  burst  forth 
for  the  relief  of  Samson. 

P  2 


212 


MALACHI 


The  time  at  which  his  prophecies  were  delivered 
is  not  difficult  to  ascertain.  Cyril  makes  him  con- 
temporaiy  with  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  or  a  little 
later.  Syucellus  ("p.  240  B)  places  these  three  pro- 
phets under  Jobhua  the  son  of  Josedec.  That  Ma- 
lachi  was  contemporary  with  Nehemiali  is  rendered 
probable  by  a  comparison  of  ii.  8  with  Neh.  xiii. 
15 ;  ii.  10-16  with  Neh.  xiii.  23,  &c. ;  and  iii.  7-12 
with  Neh.  xiii.  10,  &c.  That  he  prophesied  after 
the  times  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  is  inferred  fi-om 
his  omitting  to  mention  the  restoration  of  the 
Temple,  and  from  no  allusion  being  made  to  him 
by  Ezra.  The  captivity  was  already  a  thing  of  the 
long  past,  and  is  not  referred  to.  The  existence  of 
the  Temple-service  is  presupposed  in  i.  10,  iii.  1,  10. 
The  Jewish  nation  had  still  a  political  chief  (i.  8 ), 
distinguished  by  the  same  title  as  that  borne  by 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  26),  to  which  Gesenius  assigns 
a  Persian  origin.  Hence  Vitringa  concludes  that 
Malachi  delivered  his  prophecies  after  the  second 
return  of  Nehemiah  from  Pei'sia  (Neh.  xiii.  6),  and 
subsequently  to  the  3'2nd  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longi- 
manus  (cir.  B.C.  420),  which  is  the  date  adojrted 
by  Kennicott  and  Hales,  and  approved  by  Davidson 
(Introd.  p.  985).  It  may  be  mentioned  that  in  the 
Seder  01am  Rabba  (p.  .55,  ed.  Meyer)  the  date  of 
Malachi's  prophecy  is  assigned,  with  that  of  Haggai 
and  Zechariah,  to  the  second  year  of  Darius ;  and 
his  death  in  the  Seder  01am  Zuta  (p.  105)  is 
placed,  with  that  of  the  same  two  prophets,  in  the 
52nd  year  of  the  Merles  and  Persians.  The  pinn- 
cipal  reasons  adduced  by  Vitringa,  and  which  appear 
conclusively  to  fix  the  time  of  Malachi's  prophecy 
as  contemporary  with  Nehemiah,  are  the  follow- 
ing:— The  offences  denounced  by  Malachi  as  pre- 
vailing among  the  people,  and  especially  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  priests  by  man-ying  foreign  wives, 
con-espond  with  the  actual  abuses  with  which 
Nehemiah  had  to  contend  in  his  efforts  to  bi-ing 
about  a  reformation  (comp.  Mai.  ii.  8  with  Neh. 
xiii.  29).  The  alliance  of  the  high-priesfs  fimiily 
with  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  (Neh.  xiii.  4,  28)  and 
Sanballat  the  Horonite  had  introduced  neglect  of 
the  customary  Temple-seivice,  and  the  offerings  and 
tithes  due  to  the  Levites  and  priests,  in  consequence 
of  which  the  Temple  was  forsaken  (Neh.  xiii.  4-13), 
and  the  Sabbath  openly  profaned  (id.  15-21).  The 
short  interval  of  Nehemiah 's  absence  from  Jeru- 
salem had  been  sufficient  for  the  growth  of  tliese 
coiTuptioDs,  and  on  his  return  he  found  it  necessary 
to  put  them  down  with  a  strong  hand,  and  to  do 
over  again  the  work  that  Ezra  had  done  a  few 
years  before.  From  the  striking  parallelism  be- 
tween the  state  of  things  indicated  in  Jlalachi's 
prophecies  and  that  actually  existing  on  Nehemiah's 
return  from  the  court  of  Artaxerxes,  it  is  on  all 
accounts  highly  probable  that  the  elTorts  of  the 
secular  governor  were  on  this  occasion  seconded  by 
the  preaching  of  "  Jehovah's  messenger,"  and  that 
Malachi  occupied  the  same  position  with  regard  to 
the  reformation  under  Nehemiah,  which  Isaiah  held 
in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  and  Jeremiah  in  that  of 
Josiah.  The  last  chapter  of  canonical  Jewish 
history  is  the  key  to  the  last  chapter  of  its  pro- 
phecy. 

The  book  of  Malachi  is  contained  in  four  chap- 
ter in  our  version,  as  in  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  and 
Peshito-Syriac.  In  the  Hebrew  the  3rd  and  4th 
form  but  one  chapter.  The  whole  prophecy  na- 
turally divides  itself  into  three  sections,  in  the  firet 
of  which  Jehovah  is  represented  as  the  loving  father 
and  ruler  of  His  people  (i.  2-ii.  9)  ;  in  the  second, 


MALACHI 

as  the  supreme  God  and  father  of  all  (ii.  10-16); 
and  in  the  third,  as  their  righteous  and  final  judge 
(ii.  17-end).  These  may  be  again  subdivided  into 
smaller  sections,  each  of  wliich  follows  a  ceilain 
order :  first,  a  short  sentence ;  then  the  sceptical 
questions  which  might  be  raised  by  the  people; 
and,  finally,  their  full  and  triumphant  refutation. 
The  formal  and  almost  scholastic  manner  of  the 
prophecy  seemed  to  Ewald  to  indicate  that  it  was 
rather  delivered  in  writing  than  spoken  publicly. 
But  though  this  may  be  true  of  the  prophecy  in  its 
present  shape,  which  probably  presents  the  sub- 
stance of  oral  discourses,  there  is  no  reason  tor  sai> 
posing  that  it  was  not  also  pronoimced  orally  in 
public,  like  the  warnings  and  denimciations  of  the 
older  prophets,  however  it  may  differ  from  them  in 
vigour  of  conception  and  high  poetic  diction.  The 
style  of  the  prophet's  language  is  suitable  to  the 
manner  of  his  prophecy.  Smooth  and  easy  to  a 
remarkable  degree,  it  is  the  style  of  the  reasoner 
rather  than  of  the  poet.  We  miss  the  fiery  pro- 
phetic eloquence  of  Isaiah,  and  have  in  its  stead  the 
calm  and  almost  ailificial  discourse  of  the  practised 
orator,  carefully  modelled  upon  those  of  the  ancient 
prophets:  thus  blending  in  one  the  characteristics 
of  the  old  prophetical  and  the  more  modern  dia- 
logistic  structures. 

I.  The  first  section  of  the  prophet's  message  con- 
sists of  two  parts;  the  first  (i.  1-8)  addressed  to 
the  people  generally,  in  which  Jehovah,  by  His 
messenger,  asserts  His  love  for  them,  and  proves  it, 
in  answer  to  their  reply,  "  Wherein  hast  thou  loved 
us  ? "  by  referring  to  the  punishment  of  Edom  as 
an  example.  The  second  part  (i.  6-ii.  9)  is  ad- 
dressed especially  to  the  priests,  who  had  despised 
the  name  of  Jehovah,  and  had  been  the  chief  movers 
of  the  defection  from  His  worship  and  covenant. 
They  are  rebuked  for  the  woithlessness  of  their 
.sacrifices  and  offerings,  and  their  profanation  of  the 
Temple  thereby  (i.  7-14).  The  denunciation  of  their 
offence  is  followed  by  the  threat  of  punishment  for 
future  neglect  (ii.  1-3),  and  the  chai'acter  of  the 
true  priest  is  drawn  as  the  companioa  pictm-e  to 
their  own  (ii.  5-9). 

II.  In  the  second  section  (ii.  10-16)  the  prophet 
reproves  the  people  for  their  intermamages  with 
the  idolatrous  heathen,  and  the  divorces  by  which 
they  separated  themselves  from  their  legitimate 
wives,  who  wept  at  the  altar  of  Jehovah  ;  in  viola- 
tion of  the  great  law  of  marriage  which  God,  the 
father  of  all,  established  at  the  beginning. 

III.  The  judgment,  which  the  people  hghtly  re- 
gard, is  announced  with  all  solemnity,  ushered  in 
by  the  advent  of  the  Messiah.  The  Lord,  preceded 
by  His  messenger,  shall  come  to  His  Temple  suddenly, 
to  purify  the  land  from  its  iniquity,  and  to  execute 
swift  judgment  upon  those  who  violate  their  duty 
to  God  and  their  neighbour.  The  first  part  (ii. 
17-iii.  5)  of  the  section  terminates  with  the  threat- 
ened punishment;  in  the  second  (iii.  6-12)  the 
faithfulness  of  God  to  his  promises  is  vindicated, 
and  the  people  exhorted  to  repentance,  with  its 
attendant  blessings;  in  the  third  (iii.  13-iv.  6) 
they  are  reproved  for  their  want  of  confidence  in 
God,  and  for  confusing  good  and  evil.  The  final 
severance  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked  is 
then  set  forth,  and  the  great  day  of  judgment  is 
depicted,  to  be  announced  by  the  coming  of  Elijah, 
or  John  the  Baptist,  the  forerunner  of  Christ  (Matt. 
xi.  14,  svii.  10-13). 

The  prophecy  of  Malachi  is  alluded  to  in  the 
N.  T.,  and   its    canonical   authority  thereby  esta- 


MALACHY 

blished  (comp.  Maik  i.  2,  is.  11,  12  ;  Luke  i.  17  ; 
Kom.  ii.  13).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAL'ACHY  {Malachias),  the  prophet  Malachi 
(2  E»d.  i.  4U). 

MAL'CHAM  (D3^0 :  M6\x"^ ;  Alex.  MeA.- 
Xo/i :  Molchom) .  1 .  One  of  the  heads  of  the  fatlieis 
(if  Benjamin,  and  son  of  Shaharaim  by  liis  wife 
llodesh  (1  Chr.  \m.  9),  whom  the  Targum  of 
K.  Joseph  identifies  with  Baara. 

2.  (o  fiacTiKevs  avT&v:  Melchom.)  The  idol 
Molech,  as  some  suppose  (Zeph.  i.  5).  The  word 
literally  signifies  "  their  king,"  as  the  margin  of 
our  version  gives  it,  and  is  referred  by  Gesenius  to 
an  idol  generally,  as  invested  with  regal  honous's  by 
its  worshippers.  He  quotes  Is.  viii.  21,  and  Am.  v. 
26,  in  support  of  this  view,  though  he  refers  Jer. 
slix.  1,  3,  to  Molech  (as  the  LXX.,  the  present 
reading  being  evidently  corrupt),  and  regards  Mal- 
cham  as  equivalent  to  Milcom  (1  K.  si.  5,  &c.). 
Hitzig  {Kurzg.  Hdb.  Jeiemia),  while  he  considers 
the  idol  Milcom  a.s  unquestionably  intended  in  Jer. 
xlix.  1,  renders  Malcham  literally  "their  king"  in 
ver.  3.  The  same  ambiguity  occurs  in  2  Sam. 
xii.  30,  where  David,  aftei-  his  conquest  of  the 
Ammonites,  is  said  to  have  taken  the  crown  of 
"their  king,"  or  "Malcham"  (see  LXX.  and. 
Vulg.  on  1  Chi-.  XX.  2).  A  legend  is  told  in 
Jerome's  Quaestiones  Hehr.  (1  Chr.  xx.  2j  how 
tliat,  as  it  was  unlawful  tor  a  Hebrew  to  touch 
anything  of  gold  or  silver  belonging  to  an  idol, 
Ittai  the  Gittite,  who  was  a  Philistine,  snatched 
the  crown  from  the  head  of  Milcom,  and  gave  it  to 
David,  who  thus  avoided  the  pollution.  [Ittai  ; 
Molech.] 

Again,  in  2  Sam.  xii.  31,  the  C'ethib  has 
]3^)33,  where  the  Keri  is  J2?!3il  (A.  V.  "  through 

the  brick-kiln  ").  Kimchi's  note  on  the  passage  is 
as  follows :  "  i.  e.  in  the  place  of  Molech,  in  the  fire 
which  the  children  of  Amnion  made  their  children 
pass  through  "to  Molech;  for  Milcom  was  the  abo- 
mination of  the  children  of  Ammon,  that  is  Molech, 
and  Milcom  and  Malcen  are  one."       [W.  A.  W.] 

MALCHI'AH  (n^sV? :  MeAxt'a:  Melchias). 
1.  A  descendant  of  Gershom,  the  sou  of  Levi,  and 
ancestor  of  Asaph  the  minstrel  (1  Chr.  vi.  40). 

2.  (Melclda.')  One  of  the  sous  of  Parosh,  who 
had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  put  her  away  at 
the  command  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  25).  Melchias  in 
1  Esd.  ix.  26. 

3.  (^Melchias?)  Enumeiated  among  the  sons  of 
Harim,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  and  had 
intermarried  with  the  people  of  the  land  (Ezr. 
X.  31).  In  1  Esd.  X.  32  he  appears  as  Melchias, 
and  in  Neh.  iii.  11  as  Malciiijaii  4. 

4.  Son  of  Rechab,  and  ruler  of  the  circuit  or 
environs  of  Bethhaccerem.  He  took  part  in  the 
rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Nehemiah, 
and  repaired  the  dung-gate  (Neh.  iii.  141. 

5.  "  The  goldsmith's  son,"  who  assisted  Nehe- 
miah in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (K'eh. 
iii.  31).  The  word  lendere'I  "the  goldsmith"  is 
taken  as  a  proper  name  by  the  LXX.  (Sapec^/),  and 
in  the  Pesliito-Syriac  Malchiah  is  called  "  the  son 
of  Zephaniah."  The  A.  V.  has  followed  the  Vul- 
gate and  Jarchi. 

6.  (MeAx'«^;  Alex.  ^eKxiias:  Mclchia.)  One 
of  the  priests  who  stood  at  the  left  hand  of  Ezra 
when  he  read  the  law  to  the  people  in  the  street 


MALCHIJAH 


213 


before  the  water-gate  (Neh.  viii.  4).  In  1  Esd. 
ix.  44  he  is  called  Melchias. 

7.  A  priest,  the  lather  of  Pashur  =  IM  alchijah  1 
(Neh.  xi.  12  ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  1),  and  Melchiah 
(Jer.  xxi.  1). 

8.  (-in'S^O.)    The  son  of  Ham-melech  (or  "  the 

king's  son,"  as  it  is  translated  in  1  K.  xxii.  26 ; 
2  Chr.  sxviii.  7),  into  whose  dungeon  or  cistern 
Jeremiah  was  cast  (Jer.  xxxviii.  6).  The  title 
"king's  son"  is  applied  to  Jerahmeel  (Jer.  xxxvi. 
26),  who  was  among  those  commissioned  by  the 
king  to  take  prisoners  Jeremiah  and  Baruch ;  to 
Joash,  who  appears  to  have-  held  an  office  inferior 
to  that  of  the  governor  of  the  city,  and  to  whose 
custody  Micaiah  was  committed  by  Ahab  (1  K. 
xxii.  26)  ;  and  to  Maaseiah  who  was  slain  by 
Zichri  the  Ephraimite  in  the  invasion  of  Judah  by 
Pekah,  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  7). 
It  would  seem  from  these  passages  that  the  title 
"king's  son"  was  official,  like  that  of  "king's 
mother,"  and  applied  to  one  of  the  royal  family, 
who  exercised  functions  somewhat  similar  to  those  of 
Potiphar  in  the  court  of  Pharaoh.        [W.  A.  W.] 

MAL'CHIEL{^N''3^0:  UiXx^iK,  Gen.  xlvi. 

17  ;•  M6Axl■)?^  in  Num.  and  Chr. ;  as  Alex,  in  all 
cases:  Melckiel),  the  son  of  Beriah,  the  son  of  Asher, 
and  ancesior  of  the  family  of  tlie  Malchielites 
(Num.  xxvi.  45).  In  1  Chr.  vii»  31  he  is  called 
the  father,  that  is  founder,  of  Birzavith  or  Berazith, 
as  is  the  reading  of  the  Targum  of  IJ.  Joseph. 
Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  7,  §4)  reckons  him  with  Heber 
among  the  six  sons  of  Asher,  thus  making  up  the 
number  of  Jacob's  children  and  grandchildren  to 
seventy,  without  reckoning  great-giandchildren. 

MAL'CHIELITES,  THE  (''^X''3^Sn :  MeA- 
X"jAi :  Melchielitae),  the  descendants  of  Malchiel, 
the  grandson  of  Asher  (Num.  xxvi.  45). 

MALCHI'JAH    (n^s'pO:     rnXx^a;    Alex. 

MeAxias:  Melchias).  1.  A  priest,  the  father  of 
Pashur  (1  Chr.  ix.  12)  ;  the  same  as  Malchiah 
7,  and  Melchiah. 

2.  {Mclchia.)  A  priest,  chief  of  the  fifth  of  the 
twenty-four  courses  appointed  by  David  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  9). 

3.  {'Acra^ia :  Jammebias.)  An  Israelite  \:\y- 
man  of  the  sons  of  Parosh,  who  at  f^zra's  command 
put  away  his  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  25).  In  1  Esd. 
ix.  26  he  is  called  AsiBiAS,  whicli  agrees  with  the 
leading  of  the  LXX. 

4.  (MeAxi'as ;  Alex.  MeAxeias:  Melchias.) 
Son,  that  is,  descendant  of  Harim,  who  with 
Hashub  repaired  the  tower  of  the  furnaces  when 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem  was  rebuilt  by  Ncheiiiiali 
(Neh.  iii.  11).  He  is  probably  the  same  as 
Malchiah  3. 

5.  (MeAxt'a;  Alex.  MeAxeia.)  One  of  the 
priests  who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  X.  3).  It  seems  probable  that  the  names  in 
the  list  referred  to  are  rather  those  of  families  than 
of  individuals  (comp.  1  Chr.  xxiv.  7-18,  and  Neh. 
xii.  1-7),  and  in  this  case  Malchijah  in  Noh.  x.  3 
would  be  the  same  with  the  head  of  the  fifth  course 
of  priests  =  Malchuah  2. 

6.  (om.  in  Vat.  MS.  ;  Alex.  MeAxeias :  Mcl- 
chia.) One  of  the  priests  who  assisted  in  the  solemn 
dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah  ("Neh.  xii.  42). 


214  MALCHIRAM 

MALCH'IRAM  (CI'I^b'?'?-  MeXx'P«M  ^  ^^^''- 
chiram),  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeconiah,  or  Jehoiachin, 
the  last  but  one  of  the  kings  of  Jiidah  (1  Chr.  iii.  18). 
MAL'CHI-SHUA  iV'^^-'^h'D :  me\x^<Tov4: 
Melchisuc),  one  of  the  sons  of  king  Saul.  His  posi- 
tion in  the  family  cannot  be  exactly  determined. 
In  the  two  genealogies  of  Saul's  house  preserved  m 
Chronicles  he  is  given  as  the  second  sou  next  below 
Jonathan  (I  Chr.  viii.  33,  ix.  39).  But  in  the 
account  of  Saul's  offspring  in  1  Samuel  he  is  named 
third— Ishui  being  between  him  and  Jonathan  (1 
Sam.  siv.  49),  and  on  the  remaining  occasion  the 
same  order  is  preserved,  but  Abinadab  is  substi- 
tuted for  Ishui  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  2).  In  both  these 
latter  passages  the  name  is  erroneously  given  in  the 
A  V  as  ifelchi-shua.  Nothing  is  known  of  Mal- 
chi-shua  bevond  the  fact  that  he  fell,  with  his  two 
brothers,  aiid  before  his  father  in  the  early  pai-t  of 
the  battle  of  Gilboa.  [G-] 

MAL'CHUS  (Ma\xoy  =  V^^,  ^^alluch,    m 
1  Chr.  vi.  44.  Neh.  x.  4,  kc.  ;  LXX.  UaKuix  or 
MaXoi^y;  and  Joseph.   UaXxos,  Ant.  xiii.   5,   §1, 
xiv    14,  §1)  is  the  name  of  the  servant  ot  the  high- 
priest,  whose  visht  ear  Peter  cut  off  at  the  time  of 
the  Saviour's  apprehension  in  the  garden.     See  the 
narrative  in  IMatt.  xxvi.  51  ;  Mark  xiv.  47  ;  Luke 
xxii.  49-51  ;  John  xviii.  10.     He  was  the  personal 
servant  (5oCA.os)  of  the  high-priest,  and  not  one  of 
the  bailiffs  or  apparitors   (uinjpeTrjs)  of  the  San- 
hedrim.    The  high-priest  intended  is  Caiaphas  no 
doubt  (though  Annas  is  called  apxi^p^is   in  the 
same  connexion)  ;    for  John,  who  was   personally 
known  to  the  former  (John  xviii.  15),  is  the  only 
one  of  the  evangelists  who  gives  the  name  of  Mal- 
chus.     This  servant  was  probably  stepping  forward 
at  the  moment  with   others  to  handcuti'  or  pinion 
Jesus,  when  the  zealous  Peter  struck  at  him  with 
his  sword.     The  blow  was  meant  undoubtedly  to 
be  more  effective,  but  reached   only  the  ear.     It 
may  be  as  Stier  remarks  (Eeden  Jesti,  vi.  268), 
that  the  man  seeing  the  danger,  threw  his  head  or 
body  to  tlie  left,  so  as  to  expose  the  right  ear  more 
than  the  other.     The  allegation  that  the  writers 
are  inconsistent  with  each  other,  because^ Matthew, 
Mark,  and  John  say  either  airiov,  or  wrdpiov  (as  li 
that  meant  the  kppet  or  tip  of  the  ear),  while  Luke 
says  oSs,  is  groundless.    The  Greek  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament age,like  the  modern  Romaic,  made  no  distinc- 
tion often  between  the  primitive  and  diminutive.    In 
fact,  Luke  himself  exchanges  the  one  term  for  the 
other  in  this  very  narrative.     The  Saviour,  as  His 
pursuers  were  about  to  seize  Him,  asked  to  bo  left  free 
for  a  moment  longer  (eare  ecos  tovtov),  and  that 
moment  He  used  "in  restoring  the  wounded  man  to 
soundness.     The  atj/d/iews  toD  in'oi/  may  indicate 
(whicliis  not  forbidden  hy  a<pe7Kfv,  aire/coil/ej/)  that 
the  ear  still  adhered  slightly  to  its  place.     It  is  no- 
ticeable that  Luke  the  physician  is  the  only  one  of 
the  writers  who  mentions  the  act  of  healing.     It  is 
a  touching  remembrance  that  this  was  our  Lord's 
last  miracle  for  the  relief  of  human  suifering.     The 
hands  which  had  been  stretched-  forth  so  often  to 
heal  and  bless  mankind,  were  then  bound,  and  His 
•    beneficial  ministry  in  that  form  of  its  exercise  was 
finished  for  ever.  [H.  B.  H.] 

a  From  n'PDCAnib.  ^^^Xx)).  "  sM" 

b  Old  editions  of  the  text  read  aki,ia,  instead  of  iAt^a, 


MALLOWS 

MAL'ELEEL  (MaXeXe^A:  MnlaleeT).  The 
same  as  JIahai-alekl,  the  son  of  Cainan  (Luke 
iii.  37  ;  Gen.  v.  12,  marg.). 

MAL'LOS,  THEY  OF  {naXK<iiTai : .  Jilal- 
lutae),  who,  with  the  people  of  Tarsus,  revolted 
from  Antiochus  Epiphanes  because  he  had  be- 
stowed them  on  one  of  his  concubines  (2  Mace.  iv. 
aO).  The  absence  of  the  king  from  Antioch  to  put 
down  the  insurrection,  gave  the  infamous  Menelans 
the  high-priest,  an  opportunity  of  purloining  some 
of  the\acred  vessels  from  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem 
(ver.  32,  39),  an  act  which  finally  led  to  the  mur- 
der of  the  good  Onias  (ver.  34,  35).  Mallos  was  an 
important  city  of  Cilicia,  lying  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Pyramus  {Seihun),  on  the  shore  of  the  Mediten-a- 
nean,  N.E.  of  Cyprus,  and  about  20  miles  from 
Tarsus  (  Tersus).  (See  Diet,  of  Geography.)  [G.] 

MALLO'THI  CnijiO  :  UaKAiOl ;  Alex.  Mea- 
XaOi,  and  MeAArjei :  Mcllothi),  a  Kohathite,  one 
of  the  fourteen  sons  of  Heman  the  singer,  and  chief 
of  the  nineteenth  course  of  twelve  Levites  into  which 
the  Temple  choir  was  divided  (1  Chr.  xxv.  4,  26). 

MALLOWS  (n-'l?0.''mciW«ac/i:  ^a.Kifj.a:  herbae 
et  arhorum  cortices).  By  the  Hebrew  word  we  are 
no  doubt  to  understand  some  species  of  Orache,  and 
in  all  probability  the  Atriplex  halimus  of  botanists. 
It  occm-s  only  in  Job  xxx.  4,  where  the  patriarch 
laments  that  he  is  exposed  to  the  derision  of  the 
lowest  of  the  people,  "  whose  fathers  he  would  have 
disdained  to  have  set  with  the  dogs  of  his  flock," 
and  who  fi-om  poverty  were  obliged  to  seek  their 
sustenance  in  desert  places  amongst  wild  herbs— 
"  who  pluck  off  the  sea  orache  near  the  hedges,"- 
and  eat  the   bitter  roots  of  the  Spanish  Broom." 


Mallow  (Corc/ioros  olUoriwi). 


Some  writers,  as  It.  Levi  (Job  xxx.)  and  Luther, 
with  the  Swedish  and  the  old  Danish  versions,  hence 
understood  "nettles"  to  be  denoted  hj  Mallmch, 
this  troublesome  weed  having  been  from  time  im- 
memorial an  article  of  occasional  diet  amongst  the 


as  from  i  priv.  and  Ai^os,  "hunger."    So Clirysostom : 
''■  rVVr'bV  some  translate  "on  the  branch."   See  Lee's 
Ciimment.  on  Job,  /.  c. 


MALLOWS 

jioor,  even  as  it  is  amongst  ourselves  at  tliis  day 
(I'lin.  N.  H.  xxi.  15  ;  Allien,  iv.  e.  ]  5).  Others  have 
conjectured  that  some  sjiecies  of  "  mallow  "  (malva) 
is  intended,  as  Deodatius,  and  the  A.  V.  Sprengel 
(^Mist.  Rei  herb.  14)  identifies  the  "  Jew's  mallow  " 
( Corchorus  olitoHus)  with  the  Malluach,  and  Lady 
Callcott  {Script.  Hevh.  p.  255)  is  of  a  similar  opi- 
nion. "  In  Purchase's  Pilgrims,"  observes  this 
writer,  "  there  is  a  letter  fi'om  Master  William  Bid- 
dulph,  who  was  travelling  fi-om  Aleppo  to  Jeru- 
salem in  IGOO,  in  which  he  says,  '  we  saw  many 
poor  people  gathering  mallows  and  three-leave.  I 
grasse,  and  asked  them  what  they  did  with  it,  <uid 
they  answered  that  it  was  all  their  food  and  they 
did  eate  it'"  (see  also  Ilarmer's  Observations,  iii. 
166).  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  same  mallow  is 
still  eaten  in  Arabia  and  Palestine,  the  leaves  and 
pods  being  used  as  a  pot-herb.  Dr.  Shaw  (  Travels, 
i.  258,  8vo.  1808)  mentions  Mellow-Keahs,  which 
he  says  is  the  same  with  the  Corchorus,  as  being 
cultivated  in  the  gardens  of  IJarbary,  and  draws  at- 
tention to  the  resemblance  of  this  word  with  the 
Malluach  of  Job,  but  he  thinks  "  some  other  plant 
of  a  more  saltish  taste"  is  rather  intended.  The 
Atriplex  halimus  has  undoubtedly  the  best  claim 
to  represent  the  Malluach,  as  Bochart  (ffieros.  ii. 
22S),  and  before  him  Drusius  (Quacst.  Hebr.  i.  qu. 
17)  have  proved.  Celsius  {Hierob.  ii.  97),  Hiller 
{Hierophyt.  i.  457),  Rosenmiiller  {Schol.  in  Job 
XXX.  4,  and  Botany  of  the  Bible,  p.  115),  and  Dr. 
Kitto  (  Pintor.  Bible  on  Job)  adopt  this  opinion.  The 
Greek  word  used  by  the  LXX.  is  applied  by  Diosco- 
rides  (i.  c.  1  20)  to  the  Atriplex  halimus,  as  Sprengel 


MAMRE 


215 


Atriplex  htilmiit.-. 

{Comment,  in  I.  c.)  has  shown.  Dioscorides  says  of 
this  plant,  that  "  it  is  a  shrub  which  is  used  for 
hedges,  and  resembles  the  Khamnus,  being  white  and 
without  thorns  ;  its  leaves  are  like  those  of  the  olive, 
but  broatler  and  smoother,  they  are  cooked  as  vege- 
tables ;  the  pl;uit  grows  near  the  sea,  and  in  hedges." 
See  also  the  quotation  from  the  Ai-abian  botanist. 


Aben-Beitar  (in  Bochart,  I.  c.  above),  who  says  that 
the  plant  which  Dioscorides  calls  "  halimus  "  is  the 
same  with  that  which  the  Syriaas  call  Maluch, 
Galen  (vi.  22),  Serapion  in  Bochart,  and  Prosper 
Alpinus  {De  Plant.  Acgypt.  cxxviii.  45). 

The  Hebrew  name,  like  the  Greek,  has  reference 
either  to  the  locality  wiiere  the  plant  grows — "  no- 
men  graecum  a  loco  natali  akifjiw,  irapaQu.Kaffaicf,'' 
says  Sprengel — or  to  its  saline  taste.  The  Atriplex 
halimus  is  a  shrub  from  four  to  five  feet  high  witii 
many  thick  branches ;  the  leaves  are  rather  sour  to 
the  taste ;  the  flowers  are  purple  and  very  small ; 
it  gi'ows  on  the  sea-coast  in  Greece,  Arabia,  Syria, 
&c.,  and  belongs  to  the  natui-al  Order  ChenojM- 
diaccae.  Atriplex  hortensis,  or  garden  Orach,  is 
often  cooked  and  eaten  as  spinach,  to  which  it  is  by 
some  persons  preferred.  [W.  H.] 

MALL'UCH  C^-I^D  :  UaXdix  ■  Maloch).  1.  A 
Levite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  and  ancestor  of 
Ethan  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  44). 

2.  (MaAovx:  Melluch.)  One  of  the  sons  of 
Bani,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  com- 
mand (Ezr.  X.  29).  He  was  probably  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  and  line  of  Pharez  (see  1  Chr.  ix.  4).  In 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  ix.  30,  he  is  called  Ma- 

MUCHUS. 

3.  (BoAoux  ;  Alex.  MaAovx"-  Maloch.)  One  of 
the  descendants  of  Harim  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  wlio 
had  married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  32). 

4.  {MaXovx  •  Melluch.)  ^  priest  or  family  of 
priests  who  signed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  X.  4). 

5.  One  of  the  "  heads  "  of  the  people  who  signed 
the  covenant  on  the  same  occasion  (Neh.  x.  27). 

6.  One  of  the  families  of  priests  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  2)  ;  probably  the  same 
as  No.  4.  It  was  represented  in  the  time  of  Joiakini 
by  Jonathan  (ver.  14).    The  same  as  Meliou. 

MAMAI'AS  (Sofiaia:  Samea),  apparently  the 
same  with  Shemaiah  in  Ezr.  viii.  16.  In  the 
Geneva  version  of  1  Esdi.  viii.  44,  it  is  written 
Samaian. 

MAM'MON  (I'lOD  :  Mafxaivas  :  Matt.  vi.  24, 
and  Luke  xvi.  9),  a  word  which  often  occurs  in  the 
Chaldee  Targums  of  Onkelos,  and  later  writers, 
and  in  the  Syriac  Version,  and  which  signifies 
"  riches."  This  meaning  of  the  word  is  given  by 
Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc.  iv.  33,  and  by  Augustine 
and  Jerome  commenting  on  St.  Matthew :  Au- 
gustine adds  that  it  was  in  use  as  a  Punic,  and 
Jerome  adds  that  it  was  a  Syriac  word.  There  is 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  idol  received  divine 
honours  in  the  east  undei-  this  name.  It  is  used  in 
St.  Matthew  as  a  personification  of  riches.  The 
derivation  of  the  word  is  discussed  by  A.  Pfeifl'cr, 
Opera,  p.  474.  [W.  T.  B.] 

MAMNITANAI'MUS  {MafiPirdvainos :  Ma- 
thaneus),  a  name  which  appears  in  the  lists  of 
1  Esdr.  ix.  34,  and  occupies  the  place  of  "  Matta- 
niah,  Mattenai,"  in  Ezr.  x.  37,  of  which  it  is  a 
corruption,  as  is  still  more  evident  from  the  foim 
"  Mamnimatanaius,"  in  which  it  appears  in  the 
Geneva  version. 

MAMRE  (N^pa :    Ma/xfipv  ;     Josepli.    Ma/J.- 

^prjs:    Mamre),  an  ancient  Amorite,"  who   with 


1  The  LXX.,  except  in  xiv.  24,  givo  the  name  with  the 
feminine  article.  They  do  the  same  in  other  cases;  e.g. 

Ruil. 


216 


MAMUCHUS 


who  with  his  brothers  Eshcol  and  Aner  vvas  in 
alliance  with  Abram  (Gen.  xiv.  13,  24),  and  under 
the  shade  of  whose  oak-grove  the  patriarch  dwelt 
in  the  interval  between  his  residence  at  Bethel  and 
at  Beersheba  (xiii.  18,  xviii.  1).  The  personality 
of  this  ancient  chieftain,  unmistakeably  though 
slightly  brought  out  ^  in  the  narrative  just  cited — 
a  narrative  regarded  by  Ewald  and  others  as  one 
of  the  most  ancient,  if  not  the  most  ancient,  docu- 
ments in  the  Bible— is  lost  in  the  subsequent  chap- 
ters. Mamre  is  there  a  mere  local  appellation— 
"  Mamre  which  faces  Machpelah"  (xxiii.  17,  19, 
XXV.  9.  xlix.  aO,  1.  13).  It  does  not  appear  beyond 
the  book  of  Genesis.  EshcOL  snr\'ived  to  the  date 
of  the  conquest — survives  possibly'still— but  Mamre 
and  Aner  have  vanished,  at  least  their  names  have 
not  yet  been  met  with.  If  the  field  and  cave  of 
Machpelah  were  on  the  hill  which  forms  the 
north-eastern  side  of  the  valley  of  Hebron— and  we 
need  not  doubt  that  they  were— then  Mamre,  as 
"  facing"  them,  must  have  been  on  the  opposite  slope, 
where  "the  residence  of  the  governor  now  stands. 

In  the  Vulgate  of  Jud.  ii.  14  (A.  V.  ii.  24), 
"  torrens  Mambre  "  is  found  for  the  Abronas  of  the 
original  text.  [y-] 

MAMU'CHUS  (Mu^oCxos :  Maluchiis),  the 
same  as  Malluch  2  (1  Esdr.  ix.  30).  The  LXX. 
was  probably  MoWoDxos  at  first,  which  would 
easily  be  corrupted  into  the  present  reading. 

MAN.  Four  Hebi-ew  temis  are  rendered  "  man  " 
in  the  A.  V.  1 .  Adam,  WVA.  (A)  The  name  of  the 
man  created  in  the  image  of  God.  It  appears  to  be 
derived  from  adam,^  "  he  or  it  was  red  or  ruddy," 
like  Edom.i'  The  epithet  rendered  by  us  "  red  "  has  I 
a  very  wide  signification. in  the  Semitic  languages,  ] 
and  must  not  be  limited  to  the  EngHsh  sense.  Thus 
the  Arabs  speak,  in  both  the  literary  and  the  vulgar 
language,  of  a  "  led  "  camel,  using  the  tei-m  ahnar,'^ 
their  common  word  for  "  red,"  just  as  they  speak 
of  a  "  green  "  ass,  meaning  in  the  one  case  a  shade 
of  brown,  and  in  the  other  a  kind  of  dingy  gray. 
When  they  apply  the  term  "  red"  to  man,  they 
always  mean  by  it  "  fair."  The  name  Adam  has  been 
supposed  by  .some  to  be  derived  from  adamdli,^ 
"  earth,"  or  "  ground,"  because  Adam  was  formed 
of  "  dustof  the  ground""  (Gen.  ii.  7)  ;  but  the  earth 
or  ground  derived  this  appellation  from  its  brown- 
ness,  which  the  Hebrews  would  call  "  redness."  In 
Egypt,  where  the  alluvial  earth  of  the  Nile-valley 
is  of  a  blackish-brown  colour,  the  name  of  the 
country,  KEM,  signifies  "  black "  in  the  ancient 

b  In  the  Jewlsli  traditions  he  appears  as  encouraging 
Abraham  to  \nidergo  tlie  pain  of  circumcision,  from 
which  his  brothers  would  have  dissuaded  him — by  a  re- 
ference to  the  deliverance  he  had  already  experienced 
from  far  greater  trials— the  furnace  of  Nimrod  and  the 
sword  of  Chedurlaomer.    (Beer,  Lehen  Abrahams,  36.) 


MAN 

Egyptian  and  in  (Coptic.  [Egypt.]  Others  have 
connected  the  name  of  Adam  with  demuthj  "  like- 
ness," from  ddmdh,S  "  he  or  it  was  or  became  like," 
on  account  of  the  use  of  this  word  in  both  nar- 
ratives of  his  creation :  "  And  God  said.  Let  us 
make  Adam  in  our  image,  after  our  likeness,"  •* 
(Gen.  i.  26).  "  In  the  day  of  God's  creating  Adam, 
in  the  likeness'  of  God  made  He  him"  (v.  1). 
It  should  be  observed  that  the  usual  opinion  that 
by  "image"  and  "likeness"  moral  qualities  are 
denoted,  is  perfectly  in  accordance  with  Semitic 
phraseology  :  the  contrary  idea,  arising  from  a 
misapprehension  of  anthropomorphism,  is  utterly 
repugnant  to  it.  This  derivation  seems  improbable, 
although  perhaps  more  agi'eeable  than  that  from 
ddam  with  the  derivations  of  antediluvian  names 
known  to  us.  (B)  The  name  of  Adam  and  his 
wife  (v.  1,  2:  comp.  i.  27,  in  which  case  there 
is  nothing  to  shew  that  more  than  one  pair  is 
intended).  (C)  A  collective  noun,  indeclinable, 
having  neither  construct  state,  plural,  nor  feminine 
form,  used  to  designate  any  or  all  of  the  descendants 
of  Adam. 

2.  TsJi,  y^X,  apparently  softened  fi-om  a  form  un- 
used in  the  singular  by  the  Hebrews,  enesh^  "man," 
"  woman,"  "  men."  It  corresponds  to  the  Arabic 
ins,"  "  man,"  insdn,^  softened  form  ccsdn,"  "  a 
man,"  "  a  woman,"  and  "  man  "  collectively  like 
ins\  and  perhaps  to  the  ancient  Egyptian  as,  "a 
noble. "P  The  variant  Enosh  (mentioned  in  the  note), 
occurs  as  the  proper  name  of  a  son  of  Seth  and 
grandson  of  Adam  (Gen.  iv.  26  ;  1  Chr  i.  1).  In 
the  A.  V.  it  is  written  Enos.  It  might  be  supposed 
that  this  was  a  case  like  that  of  Adam's  name  ; 
but  this  cannot  be  admitted,  since  the  variant  Ish 
and  the  fem.  fonn  Ishshdh  are  used  before  the  birth 
of  Enosh,  as  in  the  cases  of  the  naming  of  Eve 
(Gen.  ii.  23)  and  Cain  (iv.  1).  If  it  be  objected 
that  we  must  not  lay  too  much  stress  upon  verbal 
criticism,  we  reply  that  if  so  no  stress  can  be  laid 
upon  the  name  of  Enosh,  which  might  even  be  a 
translation,  and  that  such  forms  as  Methusael  and 
Methuselah,  which  have  the  characteristics  of  a 
primitive  state  of  Hebrew,  oblige  us  to  lay  the 
greatest  stress  upon  verbal  criticism  .s 

3.  Geber,  "1311,  "a  man,"  from  gdbar,^  "  to  be 

strong,"  generally  with  reference  to  his  strength, 
coiTesponding  to  vir  and  avijp. 

4.  Methim,  DTJD,^  "  men,"  always  masculine. 
The  singular  is  to  be  traced  in  the  antediluvian 


■^  r]^^^:^-])^  nay. . 


■^  K'3N  ;    fcin.    ntJ'K.   pi.    D^t?'^^'    variant  enosh, 
B'iSN-  which  some  take  to  be  the  primitive  form. 


u*^ 


(::* 


P  It  has  been  derived  from  K^JN-  "  he  was  sick,"  so  as 
to  mean  weak,  mortal;  to  which  Gesenius  objects  that 
this  verb  comes  from  the  theme  JJ^J  (Lex.  s.  v.  ti'JN)- 
The  opposite  signification,  strength  and  robustness,  has 
been  suggested  with  a  reference  to  the  theme  ^H  (Fiirst, 
Concord,  s.  v.  t^'"'N)•  It  seems  more  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose, with  Gesenius,  that  this  is  a  primitive  word  (_Lex. 
s.  v.  K'''X)'  Perhaps  the  idea  of  being  may  lie  at  its 
foundation. 

1  The  naming  of  Cain  (j^p)  may  suggest,  how  Enosh 
came  to  bear  a  name  signifying  "  man."  "  I  have  ob- 
tained a  man  Qi^'^ii  ''T]'*^p)  from  the  Lord"  (Gen.  iv.  1). 

"  Defective    DHOi    from  an  unused  singular,    TID 

or  nro- 


IVIANAEN 

proper  names  Methusael  and  Methuselah.'  Per- 
haps it  may  be  derived  from  the  root  muth,  "  he 
died,""  in  which  case  its  use  would  be  very  ap- 
propriate in  Is.  xli .  14,  "  Fear  not,  thou  worm 
Jacob,  ye  men  of  Israel."*  If  this  conjecture  be 
admitted,  tliis  word  would  correspond  to  jSporJs, 
and  might  be  read  "  mortal." 

MAN'AEN  {M.ava-r}v :  Manahen)  is  mentioned 
in  Acts  xiii.  1  as  one  of  the  teachers  and  propheb; 
in  the  church  at  Antioch  at  the  time  of  the  appoint- 
ment of  Saul  and  Barnabas  as  missionaries  to  the 
heathen.  He  is  not  known  out  of  this  passage.  The 
name  signifies  consoler  (DH^JD,  2  K.  xv.  17,  &c.) ; 
and  both  that  and  his  relation  to  Herod  render  it 
quite  certain  that  he  was  a  Jew.  The  Herod  witli 
whom  he  is  said  to  have  been  brought  up  {(rvvrpo- 
<j>os)  could  not  have  been  Herod  Agrippa  II.  (Acts 
XXV.  13),  for  as  he  was  only  seventeen  years  old  at 
the  time  of  the  death  of  his  father,  Herod  Agrippa  1. 
in-A.D.  44  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  9,  §1),  a  comrade  of 
that  age  would  have  been  too  young  to  be  so  pro- 
minent as  a  teacher  at  Antioch  as  Manaen  was  at 
the  date  of  Paul's  first  missionary  journey  (Acts 
xiii.  3).  The  Herod  in  question  must  have  been 
Herod  Antipas,  under  whose  jurisdictioTi  the  Saviour 
as  a  Galilean  lived,  and  who  beheaded  John  the 
Baptist.  Since  this  Antipas  was  older  than  Arche- 
laus,  who  succeeded  Herod  the  Great  soon  after  the 
birth  of  Christ,  Manaen  (his  avvTpo(pos)  must  have 
been  somewhat  advanced  in  years  in  a.d.  44,  when 
he  appears  before  us  in  Luke's  history — older  cer- 
tainly than  forty-five  or  fifty,  as  stated  in  Range's 
Bibelwerk  (v.  182).  The  point  of  chief  interest 
relating  to  him  conceiiis  the  sense  of  crvvrpoipos, 
which  the  historian  regarded  as  sufficiently  remark- 
able to  connect  with  his  name.  We  have  a  learned 
discussion  of  this  question  in  Watch's  Dissertationes 
in  Acta  Apostolorum  (de  Menachemo,  ii.  199-2.52). 
For  the  value  of  this  treatise  see  Tholuck's  Glauh- 
iDurdiijkeit,  p.  167. 

The  two  following  are  the  principal  views  that 
have  been  advanced,  and  have  .still  their  advocates. 
One  is  that  ffvvTpocpos  means  comrade,  associate, 
or,  more  strictly,  one  brought  up,  educated  with 
another.  This  is  the  more  frequent  sense  of  the 
word,  and  Calvin,  Grotius,  Schott,  Baumgarten, 
and  others,  adopt  it  here.  It  was  very  common  in 
ancient  times  for  persons  of  rank  to  associate  other 
children  with  their  own,  for  the  purpose  of  sharing 
then-  amusements  (hence  ffv/xTraiKTop^s  in  Xenoph. 
Cyropaed.  i.  3,  §14)  and  their  studies,  and  thus 
exciting  them  to  greater  activity  and  emulation. 
Josephus,  Plutarch,  Polybius,  and  others  speak  of 
this  custom.  Walch  shows  it  to  have  existed 
among  the  Medes,  Peisians,  Egyptians,  Greeks,  and 
Romans.  Herod  might  have  adojited  it  from  tlie 
Romans,  whom  he  was  so  inclined  to  imitate  (see 
Raphel's  Annotationcs,  ii.  80,  and  Wetstein,  ad 
Acta  xiii.  1). 

The  other  view  is  that  (TvvTpo<pos  denotes  foster- 
brother,  brought  up  at  the  same  breast  (6jU0- 
ydKaKTos,  collactanens),  and  as  so  t;iken  Manacn's 
mother,  or  the  woman  who  reared  him,  would  have 
been  also  Herod's  nurse.  So  Kuinool,  Olshausen, 
De  Wette,  Alford,  and  others.     Walch's  conclusion 


MANAEN 


217 


'  '?XK'-inQ  and  np^-inp,  where  the  word  is  not, 
nsGesonius  would  make  it,  changed  by  the  construct  state, 
but  has  a  case-ending  ),  to  bo  compared  to  the  Arabic  case- 
eDdlng  of  the  nominative,  un,  u,  S,  j. 

"  The  conjpctiu-e  of  Gcsenius  (^Lex.  s.  v.),  that  the  midille 


(not  correctly  represented  by  some  recent  writers), 
combines  in  a  measure  these  two  explanations.  He 
thinks  that  Manaen  was  educated  in  Heiod's  family 
along  with  Antipas  and  some  of  his  other  children, 
and  at  the  same  time  tluit  he  stood  in  tlie  stricter 
I'elation  to  Antipas  which  ffwrpopos  denotes  as 
collactaneus.  He  lays  particular  stress  on  the  state- 
ment of  Josephus  {^Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3)  that  the  bro- 
thers Antipas  and  Archelaus  were  educated  in  a 
private  way  at  Rome  {' Apx^^aos  5e  koI  'Avr'nras 
iirl  P(!>ix7)s  irapd  rivt  ISlwtt)  Tpo<pas  elxoy)t  though 
he  does  not  deem  it  necessary  to  deny  that  before 
their  departure  thither  Manaen  may  have  enjoyed 
the  same  course  of  discipline  and  instruction  {ffvv- 
rpo(pos  in  that  sense)  as  the  two  brothers,  who  are 
not  likely  to  have  been  separated  in  tlieir  earlier, 
any  more  than  in  their  latei-  education.  Yet  as 
Manaen  is  called  the  ffvvrpocpos  of  Herod  only, 
Walch  suggests  that  there  may  have  been  the  ad- 
ditional tie  in  their  case  which  resulted  from  their 
having  had  a  common  nurse. 

It  is  a  singular  circumstance,  to  say  the  least, 
that  Josephus  [Ard.  xv.  10,  §5)  mentions  a  certain 
Manaem  i  M.avdrifj.os),  who  was  in  high  repute  among 
the  Essenes  lor  wisdom  and  sanctity,  and  who  fore- 
told to  Herod  the  Great,  in  early  life,  that  he  was 
destined  to  attain  royal  honours.  After  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  prediction  the  king  treated  the  prophet 
with  special  tkvoui',  and  lionoured  the  entire  sect  on 
his  account  (TrdvTas  d7r'  ^Keiuov  robs  'Ecrffrivovs 
rifji.aiv  5i€re\ei).  There  was  a  class  of  the  Essenes 
who  had  families  (others  had  not) ;  and  it  has  been 
conjectured  with  some  plausibility  that,  as  one  of  the 
results  of  Herod's  friendship  for  the  lucky  soothsayer, 
he  may  have  adopted  one  of  his  sons  (who  took  the 
father's  name),  so  far  as  to  receive  him  into  his 
family,  and  make  him  the  companion  of  his  children 
(see  Walch,  p.  234,  &c.).  Lightfoot  surmises 
{Ilorae  Hehr.  ii.  726)  that  the  Manaen  of  Josephus 
may  be  the  one  mentioned  in  the  Acts  ;  but  the 
disparity  between  his  age  and  that  of  Herod  the 
Great,  to  say  nothing  of  other  difficulties,  puts  that 
supposition  out  of  the  question. 

The  precise  interest  which  led  Luke  to  recal  the 
Heroilian  connexion  is  not  cei'tain.  Meyer's  sug- 
gestion, that  it  may  have  been  the  contrast  between 
the  early  relationship  and  Manaen's  later  Christian 
position  (though  he  makes  it  of  the  first  only), 
applies  to  one  sense  of  avvrpocpos  as  well  as  the 
otlier.  A  far-fetched  motive  need  not  be  sought. 
Even  such  a  casual  .relation  to  the  great  Jewish 
family  of  the  age  (whether  it  was  that  of  a  foster- 
brother  or  a  companion  of  princes)  was  peculiar  and 
interesting,  and  would  be  mentioned  without  any 
special  object  merely  as  a  part  of  the  individual's 
history.  Walch's  citations  show  that  avvrpo<pos, 
as  used  of  such  intimacies  (crvvrpocpiat),  was  a  title 
gi'eatly  esteemed  among  the  ancients ;  that  it  was 
often  borne  through  life  as  a  sort  of  proper  name ; 
and  was  recounted  among  the  honours  of  the  epitaph 
after  death.  It  is  found  repeatedly  on  ancient  monu- 
ments. 

It  may  be  added  that  Manaen,  as  a  resident 
in  Palestine  (he  may  have  been  one  of  Herod's 
courtiers  till  his  banishment  to  Gaul),  could  hardly 
fail  to  have  had  some  personal  knowledge  of  the 

radical  of  J^!\}2  is  softened  from  r  is  not  borne  out  by  the 
Egyptian  form,  which  is  MET,  "  a  dead  one." 

"  7X"ltJ')'np  ;   oKi-yoa-TOi  'Itrparik.      For   the   word 

"  worm"  compare  Job  xxv.  6;  I's.  .\xii.  6. 


218 


MANAHATH 


Saviour's  ministry.  He  nmst  liave  spent  his  youth 
at  Jerusalem  or  in  that  neighbourhood ;  and  among 
his  recollections  of  that  period,  connected  as  he  was 
with  Herod's  family,  may  have  been  the  tragic  scene 
of  the  massacre  at  Bethlehem.  [H.  B.  H.] 

MANA'HATH  (nnjD :  Uaxavadei  :  Ma- 
naath),  a  place  named  in  1  Chr.  viii.  6  only,  in 
conne.xion  with  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin. The  passage  is  very  obscure,  and  is  not 
made  less  so  by  the  translation  of  the-  A.  V. ;  but 
the  meaning  probably  is  that  the  family  of  Ehud, 
the  heads  of  the  town  of  Geba,  migrated  thence, 
under  the  guidance  of  Naaman,  Ahiah,  and  Gera, 
and  settled  at  Manachatli.  Of  the  situation  of 
Manachath  we  know  little  or  nothing.  It  is  tempt- 
ing to  believe  it  identical  with  the  Menuchah  men- 
tioned, according  to  many  intei-preters,  in  Judg. 
XX-.  43"  (in  the  A.V.  translated  "with  ease"). 
This  has  in  its  favour  the  clo.-^e  proximity  in  which 
the  place,  if  a  place,  evidently  stood  to  Gibeah, 
which  was  one  of  the  chief  towns  of  Benjamin, 
even  if  not  identical  with  Geba.  Manachath  is 
usually  identified  with  a  place  of  similar  name  in 
.ludah,  but,  considering  how  hostile  the  relations 
of  Judahand  Benjamin  were  at  the  earlier  period 
of  the  history,  this  identification  is  difficult  to 
receive.  The"  Chaldee  Targum  adds,  "  in  the  land 
of  the  house  of  Esau,"  i.  e.  in  Edom.  The  Syriac 
and  Arabic  versions  connect  the  name  with  that 
immediately  following,  and  read  "  to  the  plain  or 
pasture  of  Naaman."  But  these  explana:tions  are 
no  less  obscure  than  that  which  they  seek  to  ex- 
plain.    [Manahethites.]  [G.] 

MANA'HATH  (nrarO  :  MaraxaS;  Alex.  Mw- 

vaxa.6  :  Manahnt :  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  23,  Maxa-vdd  ; 
Alex.  M.avaxa.6:  Manahath,  1  Chr.  i.  40),  one 
,of  the  sons  of  Shobal,  and  descendant  of  Seir  the 
Horite. 

MANA'HETHITES,  THE  (nimJSn,  i.  e. 

the  Menuchoth,  and  ''fin3?3n,  the  Manachti :  in  .54, 

rrjs  Ma\a6el ;  Alex,  ttjs  Mai/o9  :  Vulg.  translating, 
diiuidiitm  requietionnm).  "  Half  the  Manahethites" 
are  named  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah  as  descended 
from  Shobal,  the  father  of  Kirjath-jearim  (I  Chr. 
ii.  52),  and  half  from  Salma,  the  founder  of  Beth- 
lehem (ver.  54).  It  seems  to  be  generally  accepted 
that  the  same  pliice  is  referred  to  in  each  passage, 
though  why  the  vowels  should  be  so  ditterent — as 
it  will  be  seen  above  they  are — is  not  apparent. 
Nor  has  the  writer  succeeded  in  discovering  why 
the  translatois  of  thf  A.  V.  rendered  the  two  differ- 
ing Hebrew  words  b}'  tlie  same  English  one.'' 

Of  the  situation  or  nature  of  the  place  or  places 

■■V  The  Vat.  LXX.  has  iTrb  NoCa. 

•>  They  sometimes  loUow  Junius  and  Tremellius ;  but 
in  this  passage  those  translotors  liave  exactly  reversed 
the  A.  v.,  and  in  both  cases  use  the  form  Menuchot. 

''  This  seems  to  follow  from  the  expressions  of  xlviii.  5 
and  9 :  "  Thy  two  sons  who  were  born  unto  thee  in  the  land 
of  Egypt" — "  My  sons  whom  God  hath  given  rac  in  this 
place,"  and  from  the  solemn  invocation  over  them  of  Ja- 
cob's "  name,"  and  the  "  names  "  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 
(ver.  1 6),  combined  with  the  fact  of  Joseph  havingmarried 
an  Egyptian,  a  person  of  different  race  from  his  own.  The 
Jewish  commentators  overcome  the  difficulty  of  Joseph's 
marrying  an  entire  foreigner,  by  a  tradition  tliat  Asenath 
was  the  daughter  of  Dinah  tmd  Shechem.  See  Targimi 
Pseudojon.  on  Gen.  xli.  45. 

d  "And  like  fish  become  a  multitude."     Such  is  the 


MANASSEH 

we  have  as  yet  no  knowledge.  The  town  Mana- 
hath naturally  suggests  itself,  but  it  seems  im- 
possible to  identify  a  Benjamite  town  with  a  place 
occuriing  in  the  genealogies  of  Jndah,  and  appa- 
rently in  close  connexion  with  Bethlehem  and  with 
the  house  of  Joab,  the  gi-eat  opponent  and  miu-deicr 
of  Abner  the  Benjamite.  It  is  more  probably  iden- 
tical with  Manocho  (Mai/ox£i  =  ninjD),  one  of 
the  eleven  cities  which  in  the  LXX.  text  are  in- 
serted between  verses  59  and  GO  of  .Josh,  xv., 
Bethlehem  being  another  of  the  eleven.  The 
writer  of  the  Targum,  playing  on  the  word  as  if  it 
were  Minchah,  "an  oiiering,"  renders  the  passage 
in  1  Chr.  ii.  52,  "  the  disciples  and  priests  who 
looked  to  the  division  of  the  offerings."  His  in- 
I  terpretation  of  ver.  54  is  too  long  to  quote  here. 
See  the  editions  of  Wilkins  and  Beck,  with  the 
learned  notes  of  the  latter.  [G.] 

MANAS'SEAS  mavaffaias  ;  Alex.  Uavac- 
a-fias:  Manasses)  =  Manasseii  3,  of  the  sons. of 
I'ahath  Moab  (l,Esd.  ix.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30). 

MANAS'SEH  (,T]^yq,  i.e.  M'nassheh:   Ma- 

vaffffTJ :  Manasses),  the  elilest  son  of  Joseph  by  his 
wife  Asenath'the  Egyptian  (Gen.  xli.  51,  .xlvi.  20). 
The  birth  of  the  child  was  the  first  thing  which 
had  occurred  since  Joseph's  banishment  li-om  Canaan 
to  alleviate  his  sorrows  and  fill  the  void  left  by  the 
father  and  the  brother  he  so  longed  to  behold,  and 
it  was  natural  that  he  should  commemorate  his 
acquisition  in  thenameMANASSEH,  "  Forgetting" — 
"  For  God  hath-made-me-forget  {nasshani)  all  my 
toil  and  all  my  fither's  house."  Both  he  and  Ephraim 
w*re  born  before  the  commencement  of  the  famine. 
Whether  the  elder  of  the  two  sons  was  inferior  in 
form  or  promise  to  the  younger,  or  whether  there  w;is 
any  external  reason  to  justify  the  preference  of  Jacob, 
we  are  not  told.  It  is  only  certain  that  vv'hen  the 
youths  were  brought  before  their  aged  grandtiither  to 
receive  his  blessing  and  his  name,  and  be  adopted  as 
foreigners  ■=  into  his  family,  Manasseh  was  degi-aded, 
in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  Joseph,  into  the  second 
place.  [Ei'HRAiJi,  vol.  i.  5606.]  It  is  the  first  in- 
dication of  the  inferior  rank  in  the  nation  which  the 
tribe  descended  from  him  afterwards  held,  in  relation 
to  that  of  his  more  fortunate  brother.  But  though, 
like  his  grand-uncle  Esau,  Manasseh  had  lost  his 
birthright  in  favour  of  his  younger  brother,  he 
received,  as  Esau  had,  a  blessing  only  infi?rior  to  the 
birthright  itself.  Like  his  brother  he  was  to  increase 
with  the  fijrtility  of  the  fish  ^  which  swarmed  in  the 
great  Egyj^tian  stream,  to  "  become  a  people  and  also 
to  be  great" — the  "thousands  of  Manasseh,"  no 
less  than  those  of  Ephraim,  indeed  more,  were  to  be- 
come a  proverb  ^  in  the  nation,  his  name,  no  less  than 


literal  renderhig  of  the  words  2"l7  'l^l^?  (Gen.  xlviii. 

16),  which  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  are  "grow  into  a 
multitude."  The  sense  is  preserved  in  the  margin.  The 
expression  is  no  doubt  derived  from  that  which  is  to  this 
day  one  of  the  most  characteristic  things  in  Egypt.  Cer- 
tainly, next  to  the  vast  stream  itself,  nothing  could  strike 
a  native  of  Southern  Palestine  more,  on  his  first  visit  to 
the  banks  of  the  Nile,  than  the  abundance  of  its  fish. 

°  The  word  "thousand,"  ^*1?N)>  in  the  sense  of  "fa- 
mily," seems  to  be  more  frequently  applied  to  Manasseii 
than  to  any  of  tlic  other  tribes.  See  Ucut.  xxxiii.  17,  and 
compare  .Judg.  vi.  15,  whore  "  family"  should  be  "thou- 
sand " — "  my  thousand  is  the  poor  one  in  Manasseh  ;"  and 
1  Clir.  xii.  20. 


MANASSEII 

that  of  Epliraiiii,  was  to  bft  the  symbol  and  the  ex- 
pression of  the  richest  blessings  for  his  kindred  .^ 

At  the  time  of  this  interview  Manasseh  seems  to 
have  been  about  22  years  of  age.  Whether  he  mar- 
ried in  Egypt  we  are  not  told.  At  any  rate  the 
names  of  no  wives  or  lawi'ul  children  are  extant  in  the 
lists.  As  if  to  carry  out  most  literally  the  terms  of 
the  blessing  of  Jacob,  the  mother  of  JMachiu,  his 
eldest,  indeed  apparently  his  only  son — who  was  really 
the  foundation  of  the  "  thousimds  of  Manasseh  " — 
was  no  regular  wife,  but  a  Syrian  or  Aramite  concu- 
bine (1  Chr.  vii.  14),  possibly  a  prisoner  in  some  pre- 
datory expedition  into  Palestine,  like  that  in  which 
the  sons  of  Ephraim  lost  their  lives  (1  Chr.  vii.  21). 
It  is  i-ecorded  that  the  children  of  Machir  were 
embraced  s  by  Joseph  before'  his  death,  but  of  the 
personal  history  of  the  patriarch  Manasseh  himself 
no  trait  whatever  is  given  in  the  Bible,  either  iu 
the  Pentateuch  or  in  the  curious  records  preserved 
in  1  Chronicles.  The  ancient  Jewish  traditions  are, 
however,  less  reticent.  According  to  them  Manasseh 
was  the  steward  of  Joseph's  house,  and  the  inter- 
preter who  intervened  between  Joseph  and  his  bre- 
thren at  their  interview ;  and  the  extraordinary 
strength  which  he  (Jisplayed  in  the  struggle  with  and 
binding  of  Simeon,  first  caused  Judiih  to  suspect  that 
the  apparent  Egyptians  were  really  his  own  flesh  and 
blood  (see  Targums  Jerusalem  and  Pseudojon.  on 
(Jen.  xlii.  23,  xliii.  15  ;  also  the  quotations  in  Weil's 
£ibl.  legends,  SS.note). 

The  position  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  during  the 
march  to  Canaan  was  with  Ephraim  and  Benjamin 
on  the  west  side  of  the  sacred  Tent.  The  standard 
of  the  three  sons  of  Pache!  was  the  figure  of  a  boy 
with  the  inscription,  "  The  cloud  of  Jehovah  rested 
on  them  until  they  went  forth  out  of  the  camp" 
(Targ.  Pseudojon.  on  Num.  ii.  18).  The  Chief  of 
the  tribe  at  the  time  of  the  census  at  SLuai  was 
Gamaliel  ben-Pedahzur,  and  its  numbers  were  then 
:}2,200  (Num.  i.  10,  35,  ii.  20,  21,  vii.  54-59). 
The  numbers  of  Ephraim  weie  at  the  same  date 
40,500.  Forty  years  later,  on  the  banks  of  Jordan, 
these  proportions  were  reversed.  Manasseh  had  then 
increased  to  52,700,  while  Ephraim  had  diminished 
to  32,500  (Nmn.  xxvi.  34,  37).  On  this  occasion 
it  is  remarkable  that  Manasseh  resumes  his  position 
in  the  catalogue  as  the  eldest  son  of  Joseph. 
Possibly  this  is  due  to  the  prowess  which  the  tribe 
had  shown  in  the  conquest  of  Gilead,  for  Manasseh 
was  certainly  at  this  time  the  most  distinguished  of 
all  the  tribes.  Of  the  three  who  had  elected  to  re- 
main on  that  side  of  the  Jordan,  Reuben  and  (iad 
had  chosen  their  lot  because  the  country  was  suitable 
to  their  pastoral  possessions  and  tendencies.  But 
Machir,  Jail",  and  Nobah,  the  sons  of  Manasseh,  were 
no  shepherds.  They  were  pure  warriors,  who  had 
taken  the  most  prominent  part  in  the  conquest  of 
those  provinces  which  up  to  that  time  had  been  con- 
quered, and  whose  deeds  are  constantly  referred  to 
(Num.  xxxii.  39  ;  Deut.  iii.  13,  14,  15)  with  credit 
and  renown.  "Jair  the  son  of  Manasseh  took  all 
the  tract  of  Argob  .  .  .  sixty  great  cities  "  (Deut.  iii. 
14  ;  4).  "  Nobah  took  Kenath  and  the  daughter- 
towns  thereof,  and  called  it  after  his  own  name  " 
(Num.  .xxxii.  42).  "  Because  Machir  was  a  man  of 
war,  therefore  he  had  Gilead  and  Bashan"  (Josh..-jvii. 
1).     The  district  which  these  ancient  warriors  con- 

f  The  Tarfciim  Pseudojon.  on  xlviii.  20  seems  to  inti- 
mate that  the  words  of  that  verse  were  used  as  part  of  the 
formula  at  the  rite  of  circumcision.  They  do  not,  however, 
appear  in  any  of  tlie  accounts  of  tliat  ceremony,  as  given 


MANASSEH 


219 


quered  was  among  the  most  difficult,  if  not  the  most 
(iiificult,  in  the  whole  country.  It  embraced  the  hills 
of  Gilead  with  their  inaccessible  heights  and  impass- 
able ravines,  an<l  the  almost  impregnable  tract  of 
Argob,  whicli  derives  its  modern  name  of  Lejah  from 
the  secure  "asylum"  it  affords  to  those  who  take 
refuge  within  its  natural  fortifications.  Had  they 
not  remained  in  these  wild  and  inaccessible  districts, 
but  had  gone  forward  and  taken  their  lot  with  the 
rest,  who  shall  say  what  changes  might  not  have 
occurred  in  the  history  of  the  nation,  througli 
the  presence  of  such  energetic  and  warlike  spirits  ? 
The  few  personages  of  eminence  whom  we  can  with 
certainty  identify  as  Manassites,  such  as  Gideon  and 
Jephthah — tor  Elijah  and  others  may  with  equal 
probability  have  belonged  to  the  neighbouring  tribe 
of  Gad — were  among  the  most  remarkable  characters 
that  Israel  produced.  Gideon  was  in  fact  "  the 
greatest  of  the  judges,  and  his  children  all  but 
established  hereditary  monarchy  in  their  own  line  " 
(Stanley,  S.  ^  P.  230).  But  with  the  one  excep- 
tion of  Gideon  the  warlike  tendencies  of  Manasseh 
seem  to  have  been  confined  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan. 
There  they  throve  exceedingly,  pushing  their  way 
northward  over  the  rich  plains  of  Janldn  and  Jedur 
— the  Gaulauitis  and  Ituraea  of  the  Roman  period — 
to  the  foot  of  Mount  Hermon  (1  Chr.  v.  23).  At 
the  time  of  the  coronation  of  David  at  Hebron,  while 
the  western  Manasseh  sent  18,000,  and  Ephraim 
itself  20,800,  the  eastern  Manasseh,  with  Gad  and 
Reuben,-  mustered  to  the  number  of  120,000, 
thoroughly  armed — a  remarkable  demonstration  of 
strength,  still  more  remarkable  when  we  remember 
the  fact  that  Saul's  house,  with  the  great  Abner  at  its 
head,  was  then  residing  at  Jlahanaim  on  the  border 
of  Manasseh  and  Gad.  But,  though  thus  outwanfly 
prosperous,  a  similar  fate  awaited  them  in  the  end  to 
that  which  befel  Gad  and  Reuben  ;  they  gradually 
assimilated  themselves  to  the  old  inhabitants  of  the 
country — they  "  transgressed  against  the  God  of 
their  fathers,  and  went  a-whoring  after  the  gods  of 
the  people  of  the  land  whom  God  destroyed  before 
them  "  (ib.  25).  They  relinquished  too  the  settled 
mode  of  life  and  the  defined  limits  which  befitted 
the  members  of  a  federal  nation,  and  gradually 
became  Bedouins  of  the  wildei'ness,  spreading  them- 
selves over  the  vast, deserts  which  lay  between  the 
allotted  possessions  of  their  tribe  and  the  Euplirates, 
and  which  had  from  time  immemorial  been  the 
hunting-gi'ounds  and  pastures  of  the  wild  Hagarites, 
of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab  (I  Chr.  v.  19,  22). 
On  them  first  descended  the  pimishmeut  which  was 
ordained  to  be  the  inevitable  consequence  of  such 
misdoing.  They,  first  of  all  Israel,  were  carried 
away  by  Pul  and  Tiglath-Pileser,  and  settled  in  the 
Assyrian  territories  (ib.  2G).  The  connexion,  how- 
ever, between  east  and  west  had  been  kept  up  to  a 
certain  degree.  In  Bethshean,  the  most  easterly 
city  of  the  cis-Jordanic  Manasseh,  the  two  portions 
all  but  joined.  David  had  judges  or  ollicers  there 
for  all  matters  sacred  and  secular  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  32)  ; 
and  Solomon's  commissariat  officer,  Ben-(ieber,  ruled 
over  the  towns  of  Jair  and  the  whole  district  of 
Argob  (1  K.  iv.  13),  and  transmitted  their  pro- 
ductions, doubtless  not  without  their  people,  to  the 
court  of  Jerusalem. 

The  genealogies  of  the   tribe   are   preserved  in 


by  Buxtorf  and  others,  that  llic  writer  has  been  able  to 
discover. 
s  Tlie  Targiim  characteristically  says  circumoised. 


220 


MANASSEH 


Num.  xxvi.  28-34 ;  Josh.  xvii.  1 ,  &c. ;  and  1  Chr. 
vii.  14-19.  But  it  seems  impossible  to  unravel 
these  so  as  to  ascertain  for  instance  which  of  the 
families  remained  east  of  Jordan,  and  which  ad- 
vanced to  the  west.  From  the  fi;ct  that  Abi-ezer 
(the  family  of  Gideon),  Hepher  (possibly  Ophrah, 
the  native  place  of  the  same  hero),  and  Shechem 
(the  well-known  city  of  the  Bene-Joseph)  all  occur 
among  the  names  of  the  sons  of  Gilead  the  son  of 
Machir,  it  seems  probable  that  Gilead,  whose  name 
is  so  intimately  connected  with  the  eastern,  was 
also  the  immediate  progenitor  of  the  western  half 
of  the  tribe.'' 

Nor  is  it  less  difficult  to  fix  the  exact  position 
of  the  territory  allotted  to  the  western  half.  In  Josh. 
xvii.  14-18,  a  passage  usually  regarded  by  critics 
as  an  exceedingly  ancient  document,  we  find  the 
two  tribes  of  Joseph  complaining  that  only  one 
portion  had  been  allotted  to  them,  viz.  Mount 
Ephraim  (ver.  1.5),  and  that  they  could  not  extend 
into  the  plains  of  Jordan  or  Esdraelon,  because 
those  districts  were  still  in  the  possession  of  the 
Canaanites,  and  scoured  by  their  chariots.  In  reply 
Joshua  advises  them  to  go  up  into  the  forest  (ver. 
15,  A.  V.  "  wood  ") — mto  the  nioimtain  which  is  a 
forest  (ver.  1 8).  This  mountain  clothed  with  forest 
can  surely  be  nothing  but  Carmel,  the  "  moun- 
tain" closely  adjoining  the  portion  of  Ephraim, 
whose  richness  of  wood  was  so  proverbial.  And  it 
is  in  accordance  with  this  view  that  the  majority 
of  the  towns  of  llanasseh — which  as  the  weaker  por- 
tion of  the  tribe  would  naturally  be  pushed  to  seek 
its  fortunes  outside  the  limits  originally  bestowed — 
were  actually  on  the  slopes  either  of  Carmel  itself 
or  of  the  contiguous  ranges.  Thus  Taanach  and 
Meqiddo  were  on  the  northern  spm's  of  Carmel ; 
Ibleam  appears  to  have  been  on  the  eastern  con- 
tinuation of  the  range,  somewhere  near  the  present 
Jenin.  En-Dor  was  on  the  slopes  of  the  so-called 
"  Little  Hermon."  The  two  remaining  towns  men- 
tioned as  belonging  to  JIauasseh  formed  the  extreme 
eastern  and  western  limits  of  the  tribe ;  the  one, 
Betiishean*  (Josh.  xvii.  11),  was  in  the  hollow 
of  the  Ghor,  or  Jordan- Valley ;  the  other,  DoR 
(ibid.),  was  on  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  shel- 
tered behind  the  range  of  Cannel,  and  immediately 
opposite  the  bluff  or  shoulder  wiiich  forms  its  highest 
point.  The  whole  of  these  cities  are  specially  men- 
tioned as  standing  in  the  allotraents^of  other  tribes, 
though  inhabited  by  Manasseh  ;  and  this,  with  the 


•>  If  this  is  correct,  it  may  probably  furnish  the  clue  to 
the  real  meaning  of  the  difficult  allusion  lo  Gilead  in 
Judg.  vii.  3.    [See  vol.  i.  695a.] 

>  •'  Bethsan  in  Jlanasseli "  (Hap-Parchi,  in  Ashev's 
B.  of  T.  401). 

''  The  name  of  AsnEit,  as  attached  to  a  towii,  inde- 
pendent of  the  tribe,  was  overlooked  by  the  writer  at  the 
proper  time.  C"I^X  :  AriA.ai/a'9  :  Alex.  Acnjp :  Aser). 
It  is  mentioned  in  Josh.  xvii.  7  only  as  the  starting-point 
— evidently  at  its  eastern  end — of  the  Ixjundary  line  se- 
parating Ephraim  and  Manasseh.  It  cannot  have  been  at 
any  great  distance  from  Shcoheni,  because  the  next  point 
in  the  boundary  is  "  the  Michmethath  facing  Shechem." 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Ovnmasticon  (sub  voce 
'Aser"),  it  is  mentioned,  evidently  from  actual  know- 
ledge, as  still  retaining  its  name,  and  lying  on  the  hi £;h  road 
from  Neapolis  {Nablus),  that  is  Shechem,  to  Scythopolis 
(Beismi),  the  ancient  Bethshean,  fifteen  Komaa  miles  from 
the  former.  In  the  Itinerarium  Ilieros.  (587)  it  occurs, 
between  "  civitas  Sciopoli "  (i.  e.  Scythopolis)  and  "  civ. 
Neapolis"  as  "  Aser,  ubi  fuit  villa  Job."  Where  it  lay 
then,  it  lies  still.     Exactly  in  this  position  M.  Van  lie 


MANASSEH 

absence  of  any  attempt  to  define  a  limit  to  the  posses- 
sions of  the  tribe  on  the  north,  looks  as  if  no  boundary- 
line  had  existed  on  that  side,  but  as  if  the  territory 
faded  off  gradually  into  those  of  the  two  contiguous 
tribes  from  whom  it  had  borrowed  its  fairest  cities. 
On  the  south  side  the  boimdary  between  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim  is  more  definitely  described,  and  may  be  ge- 
nerally traced  with  tolerable  certainty.  It  began  on 
the  east  in  the  territory  of  Issachar  (xvii .  1 0)  at  a  place 
called  AsiiER,''  (ver.  7)  now  Yasir,  12  miles  N.E. 
of  Nahlus.  Thence  it  ran  to  Michmethah,  described 
as  facing  Shechem  (Nahlus),  though  now  unlcnown  ; 
then  went  to  the  right,  *.  c.  apparently  "^  north- 
ward, to  the  spring  of  Tappuah,  also  unknown  ; 
there  it  fell  in  with  the  watercourses  of  the  torrent 
Kanah — probably  the  Nahr  Falodk — along  which  it 
ran  to  the  Mediterranean. 

From  the  indications  of  the  history  it  would 
appear  that  Manasseh  took  very  little  part  in  public 
affairs.  They  either  left  all  that  to  Ephraim,  or 
were  so  far  removed  fi'om  the  centre  of  the  nation 
as  to  have  little  interest  in  what  was  taking  place. 
That  they  attended  David's  coronation  at  Hebron 
has  already  been  mentioned.  When  his  rule  was 
established  over  all  Israel,  each  half  had  its  distinct 
ruler — the  western,  Joel  hen-Pedaiah,  the  eastern, 
Iddo  ben-Zechariah  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  20,  2 1).  From  this 
time  the  eastern  Manasseh  fades  entirely  from  our 
view,  and  the  western  is  hardly  kept  before  us  by 
an  occasional  mention.  Such  scattered  notices  as 
we  do  find  have  almost  all  reference  to  the  part 
taken  by  members  of  the  tribe  in  the  reforms  of  the 
good  kings  of  Judah — the  Jehovah-revival  under 
Asa  (2  Chr.  xv.  9) — the  Passover  of  Hezekiah  (xsx. 
1,  10,  11,  18),  and  the  subsequent  enthusiasm 
against  idolatry  (xxxi.  1) — the  iconoclasms  of  Josiah 
(xxxiv.  6),  and  his  restoration  of  the  buildings  of 
the  Temple  (ver.  9).  It  is  gratifying  to  reflect  that 
these  notices,  faint  and  scattered  as  they  are,  are  all 
coloured  with  good,  and  exhibit  none  of  the  repulsive 
traits  of  that  most  repulsive  heathenism  into  which 
other  tribes  of  Israel  fell.  It  may  have  been  at  some 
such  time  of  revival,  whether  brought  about  by  the 
invitation  of  Judah,  or,  as  the  title  in  the  LXX. 
would  imply,  by  the  dread  of  invasion,  that  Ps. 
Ixxx.  was  composed.  But  on  the  other  hand,  the 
mention  of  Benjamin  as  in  alliance  with  Ephraim 
and  Jlanasseh,  points  to  an  earlier  date  than  the 
disruption  of  the  two  kingdoms.  Whatever  its  date 
may  prove  to  be,  theie  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 


Velde  {Syr.  and  Pal.  ii.  336)  has  discovered  a  village 
called  Tasir,  lying  in  the  centre  of  a  plain  or  basin,  sur- 
rounded on  the  north  and  west  by  mountains,  but  on  the 
east  sloping  away  into  a  Wady  called  the  Salt  Vallej', 
which  forms  a  near  and  direct  descent  to  the  Jordan 
Valley.  The  road  fi'om  A'ablus  to  Btisan  passes  by  the 
village.    Porter  [JJdbk.  348)  gives  the  name  as  Teydiir. 

It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  important  enough  to 
allow  us  to  suppose  that  its  inhabitants  are  the  Ashur- 
ITES,  or  Asherites  of  2  Sam.  ii.  9. 

Van  de  Velde  suggests  that  this  may  have  been  the 
spot  on  which  the  Midianites  encamped  when  surprised 
by  Gideon ;  but  that  was  surely  further  to  the  north, 
nearer  the  spring  of  Charod  and  the  plain  of  Esdraelon. 

"'  The  right  (^OTl)  is  generally  taken  to  signify  the 
South;  and  so  Keil  understands  it  in  this  place:  but  it 
seems  more  consonant  with  common  sense,  and  also 
with  the  probable  course  of  the  boundary— which  could 
hardly  have  gone  south  of  Shechem— to  take  it  as  the 
right  of  the  person  tracing  the  line  from  East  to  West, 
i.  e.  North. 


MANASSEH 

author  of  the  Psalm  was  a  member  of  tlie  house  of 
Joseph. 

A  positive  connexion  between  Manasseh  and  Ben- 
jamin is  implied  in  the  genealogies  of  1  Chr.  vii., 
where  Machir  is  said  to  have  married  into  the  family 
of  Huppim  and  Shuppim,  chief  houses  in  the  latter 
tribe  (ver.  lb).  No  record  of  any  such  relation 
appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered  iu  the  historical 
books,  nor  is  it  directly  alluded  to  except  in  the 
genealogy  just  quoted.  But  we  know  that  a  con- 
nexion existed  between  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  and 
the  town  of  Jabesh-Gilead,  inasmuch  as  from  that 
town  were  procm'ed  wives  for  four  hundred  out  of 
the  six  hundred  Benjamitxjs  who  survived  the  slaugh- 
ter of  Gibeah  (.Tadg.  xxi.  12);  and  if  Jabesh-Gilead 
was  a  town  of  Manasseh — as  is  very  probable, 
though  the  tact  is  certainly  nowhere  stated — it  does 
appear  very  possible  that  this  was  the  relationship 
referred  to  in  the  genealogies.  According  to  the 
statement  of  the  nai'rative  two-thirds  of  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin  must  have  been  directly  descended  from 
Manasseh.  Possibly  we  have  here  an  explanation 
of  the  apparent  connexion  between  King  t^aul  and 
the  people  of  Jabesh.  No  appeal  could  have  been 
more  forcible  to  an  Oriental  chieftain  than  that  of 
his  blood-relations  when  threatened  with  extermi- 
nation (1  Sam.  xi.  4,  5),  while  no  duty  was  more 
natural  than  that  which  they  in  their  turn  per- 
formed to  his  remains  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  11).        [G.] 

MANASSEH  (HL^'iD:    Macarrcrfjs:   3fams. 

ses),  the  thirteenth  king  of  Judah.  The  reign  of 
this  monarch  is  longer  than  that  of  any  other  of  the 
house  of  David.  There  is  none  of  which  we  know 
so  little.  In  part,  it  may  be,  this  was  the  direct 
result  of  the  character  and  policy  of  the  man.  In 
part,  doubtless,  it  is  to  be  traced  to  the  abhorrence 
with  which  the  following  generation  looked  back 
upon  it  as  the  period  of  lowest  degradation  to  which 
their  country  had  ever  fallen.  Chroniclers  and 
j)rophets  pass  it  over,  gathering  from  its  horrors 
<uid  disasters  the  great  broad  lessons  in  which 
they  saw  the  foot-prints  of  a  righteous  retribution, 
.  the  tokens  of  a  Divine  compassion,  and  then  they 
avert  their  eyes  and  will  see  and  say  no  more.  This 
is  in  itself  significant.  It  gives  a  meaning  and  a 
value  to  every  fiict  which  has  escaped  the  sentence 
.of  oblivion.  The  very  reticence  of  the  liistorians 
of  the  O.  T.  shows  how  free  they  were  from  the 
rhetorical  exaggerations  and  inaccuracies  of  a  later 
age.  The  struggle  of  opposing  worships  must  have 
been  as  tierce  under  Manasseh,  as  it  was  under  An- 
tiochus,  or  Decius,  or  Diocletian,  or  Mary.  Men 
must  have  suffered  and  died  in  that  struggle,  of 
whom  the  vs-orld  was  not  worthy,  and  yet  no  contrast 
can  be  greater  than  that  between  the  short  notices 
in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  and  the  martyrologies 
which  belong  to  those  other  periods  of  persecution. 

Tlie  birth  of  Manasseh  is  fixed  twelve  years  be- 
fore the  death  of  Hezekiah,  B.C.  710  (2  K.  xxi.  1).' 
We  must,  therefore,  infer  either  that  there  had  been 
no  heir  to  the  throne  up  to  that  comparatively 
late  period  in  his  reign,  or  that  any  that  had  been 
born  had  died,  or  that,  as  sometimes  happened  in 
the  succession  of  Jewish  and  other  Eastern  kings,  the 
elder  son  was  passed  over  for  the  younger.  There 
are  reasons  which  make  the  ftnmer  the  more 
probable  alternative.  The  exceeding  bitterness  of 
Hezekiah's  sorrow  at  the  threatened  approach  of 
death  (2  K.  xx.  2,  3  ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  24;  Is.  xxxviii. 
1-3),  is  more  natural  if  we  think  of  him  as  sink- 
ing under  the  thouglit  that  he  was  dying  childless, 


MANASSEH 


221 


leaving  no  heir  to  his  work  and  to  his  kingdom. 
When,  a  little  later,  Isaiah  wains  him  of  the  cap- 
tivity and  shame  which  will  fall  on  his  children,  he 
speaks  of  those  children  as  yet  future  (2  K.  xx.  18). 
This  circumstance  will  explain  one  or  two  facts  in 
the  contemporary  histoiy.  Hezekiah,  it  would 
seem,  recovering  from  his  sickness,  anxious  to  avoid 
the  danger  that  had  threatened  him  of  leaving  his 
kingdom  without  an  heir,  marries,  at  or  about  this 
time,  Hephzibah  (2  K.  xxi.  1),  the  daughter  of  one 
of  the  citizens  or  princes  of  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant. 
X.  o,  §1).  The  projihets,  we  miy  well  imagine, 
would  welcome  the  prospect  of  a  successor  named  by 
a  king  who  had  been  so  true  and  faithful.  Isaiah 
(in  a  passage  clearly  belonging  to  a  later  date  than 
the  early  portions  of  the  book,  and  apfiai-ently  sug- 
gested by  some  conspicuous  marriage)  with  his  cha- 
racteristic fondness  for  tracing  auguries  in  names, 
finds  in  that  of  the  new  queen  a  prophecy  of  the 
ultimate  restoration  of  Israel  and  the  glories  of  Je- 
rusalem (Is.  Ixii.  4,  5 ;  comp.  Blunt,  Scriptural 
Coinckl.  Part  iii.  5).  The  city  also  should  be  a 
Hephzibah,  a  delightsome  one.  As  the  bridegroom 
rejoiceth  over  the  bride,  so  would  Jehovah  rejoice 
over  His  people.'*  The  child  that  is  born  from 
this  union  is  called  Manasseh.  This  name  too  is 
strangely  significant.  It  appears  nowhere  else  in 
the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  The  only 
associations  connected  with  it  were,  that  it  belonged 
to  the  tribe  which  was  all  but  the  most  powerful 
of  the  hostile  kingdom  of  Israel.  How  are  we  to 
account  for  so  singular  and  unlikely  a  choice  ?  The 
answer  is,  that  the  name  embodied  what  had  been 
for  years  the  cherished  object  of  Hezekiah's  policy 
and  hope.  To  take  advantage  of  the  overthrow  of 
the  rival  kingdom  by  Shalmaneser,  and  the  T.narchv 
in  which  its  provinces  had  been  left,  to  gather 
round  him  the  remnant  of  the  population,  to  bring 
them  back  to  the  worship  and  faith  of  their  fathers, 
this  had  been  the  second  step  in  his  great  national 
reformation  (2  Chr.  xxx.  6).  It  was  at  least  par- 
tially successful.  "  Divers  of  Asher,  Manasseh,  and 
Zebulun,  humbled  themselves  and  came  to  Jeru- 
salem." They  were  there  at  the  great  passover. 
The  work  of  destroying  idols  went  on  in  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  as  well  as  in  Ju'iah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  1). 
What  could  be  a  more  acceptable  pledge  of  his 
desire  to  receive  the  fugitives  as  on  the  same  footing 
with  his  own  subjects  than  that  he  should  give  to 
the  heir  to  his  throne  the  name  in  which  one  of  their 
tribes  exulted  ?  What  could  better  show  the  desire 
to  let  all  past  discords  and  ollences  be  forgotten 
than  the  name  which  was  itself  an  amnesty?  (Ge- 
seiiius.) 

The  last  twelve  years  of  Hezekiah's  reign  were 
not,  however,  it  will  be  remembered,  those  which 
were  likely  to  influence  for  good  the  character  of  his 
successor.  His  policy  had  succeeded.  He  had  thrown 
ofl'  the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  which  Ahaz  had 
accepted,  had  defied  his  armies,  had  been  delivered 
from  extremest  danger,  and  had  made  himself  the 
head  of  an  independent  kingdom,  receiving  tribute 
from  neighbouring  piinces  instead  of  paying  it  to 
the  great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria.  But  he  goes  a 
step  further.  Not  content  with  independence,  he 
enters  on  a  policy  of  aggression.  He  contracts  an 
alliance  witli  the  rebellious  viceroy  of  Babylon 
against  their  common  enemy  (2   K.  xx.   12;   Is. 


"  The  bearing  of  this  passage  on  the  controversy  as  to 
the  authorship  and  date  of  the  laler  chaptei-s  of  Isaiab  is, 
at  least,  worth  considering. 


222 


MANASSEH 


xxxix.).  He  displays  the  ti-easurcs  of  his  kingdom 
to  the  ambassadors,  in  the  belief  that  that  will  show 
them  how  powerful  an  ally  he  can  prove  himself. 
Isaiah  protested  against  this  step,  but  the  ambition 
of  being  a  great  potentate  continued,  and  it  was  to 
the  results  of  this  ambition  that  the  boy  Manasseh 
succeeded  at  the  age  of  tweh'e.  His  accession  ap- 
pears to  have  been  the  signal  for  an  entire  change,  if 
not  in  the  foreign  policy,  at  any  rate  in  the  religious 
administration  of  the  kingdom.  At  so  early  an  age 
he  can  s<;arcely  have  been  the  spontaneous  author  of 
so  great  an  alteration,  and  we  may  infer  accordingly 
that  it  was  the  work  of  the  idolatrous,  or  Ahaz 
party,  which  liad  been  repressed  during  the  reign 
of  Hezekiah,  but  had  all  along,  like  the  Romish 
clergy  under  Edward  VI.  in  England,  looked  on 
the  reform  with  a  sullen  acquiescence,  and  thwarted 
it  when  they  dared.  The  change  which  the  king's 
measures  brought  about  was  after  all,  superficial. 
The  idolatry  which  was  publicly  discountenanced, 
was  practised  privately  (Is.  i.  29,  ii.  20,  l.w.  3). 
The  priests  and  the  prophets,  in  spite  of  their  out- 
ward oi-thodoxy,  were  too  often  little  better  than 
licentious  drunkards  (Is.  xxviii.  7).  The  nobles  of 
Judah  kejit  the  new  moons  and  sabbaths  much  in 
the  same  way  ;is  those  of  France  kept  their  Lents, 
when  Louis  XIV.  had  made  devotion  a  court  cere- 
monial (Is.  i.  13,  14).  There  are  signs  that  even 
among  the  king's  highest  officers  of  state  there  was 
one,  Shebna  the  scribe  (Is.  xxxvii.  2),  the  treasurer 
(Is.  xxii.  15)  "  over  the  house,"  whose  policy  was 
simply  that  of  a  selfish  ambition,  himself  possibly 
a  foreigner  (conip.  Blunt's  Script.  Coinc.  iii.  4), 
and  whom  Isaiah  saw  through  and  distrusted.  It 
was,  moreover,  the  traditional  policy  of"  the  princes 
of  Judah  "  (comp.  one  remarkable  instance  in  the 
reign  of  Joash,  2  Chr.  xxiv.  17),  to  favour  foreign 
alliances  and  tiie  toleration  of  foreign  worship,  as  it 
was  that  of  the  true  priests  and  prophets  to  protest 
against  it.  It  would  seem,  accordingly,  as  if  they 
urged  upon  the  yoimg  king  that  scheme  of  a  close 
alliance  with  Babylon  which  Isaiah  had  condemned, 
and  as  the  natural  consequence  of  this,  the  adop- 
tion, as  far  as  possible,  of  its  worshij),  and  that  of 
other  nations  whom  it  was  desirable  to  conciliate. 
The  morbid  desire  for  widening  the  range  of  their 
knowledge  and  penetrating  into  the  mysteries  of 
other  systems  of  belief,  may  possibly  have  couti-i- 
buted  now,  as  it  had  done  in  the  days  of  Solomon, 
to  increase  the  evil  (Jer.  ii.  10-25  ;  Ewald,  Gesch. 
Isr.  iii.  666j.  The  result  was  a  debasement  which 
had  not  been  equalled  even  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz, 
uniting  in  one  centre  the  abominations  which  else- 
where existed  separately.  Not  content  with  sanc- 
tioning their  presence  in  the  Holy  City,  as  Solo- 
mon and  Hehoboam  had  done,  he  defiled  with  it  the 
Sanctuary  itself  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  4).  The  worship 
thus  introduced  was,  as  has  been  said,  predomi- 
nantly Babylonian  in  its  character.  "  He  observed 
times,  and  used  enchantments,  and  used  witchcraft, 
and  dealt  with  a  familiar  spirit,  and  with  wizards  " 
(Jbid.  ver.  G).  The  worship  of  "  the  host  of  hea- 
ven," which  each  man  celebrated  for  himself  on  the 
roof  of  his  own  house,  took  the  place  of  that  of  the 
Lord  God  of  Sabaoth  (2  K.  xxiii.  12  ;  Is.  Ixv.  3, 
H  ;  Zeph.  i.  5;  Jer.  viii.  2,  xix.  13,  xxxii.  29). 
With  this,  however,  there  was  associated  the  old 
Molech  v/orship  of  the  Ammonites.  The  fires  were 
rekindled  in  the  valley  of  Ben-Hinnom.  Tophet 
was  (for  the  first  time,  appai-ently),  built  into  a 
stately  fabric  (2  K.  xvi.  3  ;  Is.  xxx.  33,  as  com- 
pared with  Jer.  vii.  31,  xix.  5  ;  Ewald,  Gcsch.  Isr. 


MANASSEH 

iii.  667).  Even  the  king's  sons,  instead  of  being 
presented  to  Jehovah,  received  a  horrible  fire-bap- 
tism dedicating  them  to  Molech  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  6), 
while  others  were  actually  slaughtered  (Ez.  xxiii. 
37,  39).  The  Baal  and  'Ashtaroth  ritual,  which 
had  been  imported  under  Solomon,  firom  the  Phoe- 
nicians, was  revived  with  fresh  splendour,  and  in  the 
worship  of  the  "  Queen  of  heaven,"  fixed  its  roots 
deep  into  the  habits  of  the  people  (Jer.  vii.  18). 
Worse  and  more  horrible  than  all,  the  Asherah,  the 
image  of  Astarte,  or  the  obscene  symbol  of  a  phallic 
worship  (comp.  Asherah,  and  in  addition  to  the 
authorities  there  cited,  Mayer,  De  Reform.  Josiae, 
&ic.,  in  the  Thes.  Theo.  philol.  Amstel.  1701) 
was  seen  in  the  house  of  which  Jehovah  had  said 
that  He  would  there  put  His  Name  for  ever  (2  K. 
xxi.  7).  All  this  was  accompanied  by  the  extremest 
moral  degradation.  The  worship  of  those  old  Eastern 
religions,  has  been  well  described  as  a  kind  of  "  sen- 
suous intoxication,"  simplj^  sensuous,  and  therefore 
associated  inevitably  with  a  fiendish  cruelty,  leading 
to  the  utter  annihilation  of  the  spiritual  life  of  men 
(Hegel,  Phllos.  of  History,  i.  3).  So  it  was  in  Je- 
rusalem in  the  days  of  Manasseh.  Rival  priests 
(the  Chemarim  of  Zeph.  i.  4)  were  consecrated  for 
this  hideous  worshrp.  Women  dedicating  them- 
selves to  a  cultiis  like  that  of  the  Babylonian  My- 
litta,  wove  hangings  for  the  Asherah,  as  they  sat 
there  (Mayer,  cap.  ii.  §4).  The  Kadeshim,  in  closest 
neighboui'hood  with  them,  gave  themselves  up  to 
yet  darker  abominations  (2  K.  xxiii.  7).  The  awful 
words  of  Isaiah  (i.  10)  had  a  terrible  truth  in  them. 
Those  to  whom  he  spoke  were  literally  "  rulers  of 
Sodom  and  princes  of  Gomorrah."  Every  faith 
was  tolerated  but  the  old  faith  of  Israel.  This  was 
abandoned  and  proscribed.  The  altar  of  Jehovah 
was  displaced  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  16).  The  very  ark  of 
the  covenant  was  removed  fi'om  the  sanctuary 
(2  Chr.  sxxv.  3).  The  sacred  books  of  the  people 
were  so  systematically  destroyed,  that  fifty  years 
later,  men  listened  to  the  Book  of  the  Law  of  Je- 
hovah as  a  newly  discovered  treasure  (2  K.  xxii.  8). 
It  may  well  be,  according  to  a  Jewish  tradition,  that 
this  fanaticism  of  idolatry  led  Manasseh  to  order  the 
name  Jehovah  to  be  erased  from  all  documents  and 
inscriptions  (Patrick,  ad  foe).  All  this  involved 
also  a  systematic  violation  of  the  weekly  Sabbatic 
rest  and  the  consequent  loss  of  one  witness  against 
a  merely  animal  life  (Is.  Ivi.  2,  Iviii.  13).  The 
tide  of  corruption  carried  away  some  even  of  those 
who  as  priests  and  prophets,  should  have  been  stead- 
fast in  resisting  it  (Zeph.  iii.  4;  Jer.  ii.  26,  v.  13, 
vi.  13).  _ 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  the  bitter  grief  and  burning  ' 
indignation  of  those  who  continued  faithful.  The 
fiercest  zeal  of  Huguenots  in  France,  of  Covenanters 
in  Scotland,  against  the  badges  and  symbols  of  the 
Latin  Chuich,  is  perhaps  but  a  faint  shadow  of 
that  which  grew  to  a  white  heat  in  the  hearts  of 
the  worshippers  of  Jehovah.  They  spoke  out  in 
words  of  corresponding  strength.  Evil  was  coming 
on  Jerusalem  which  should  make  the  ears  of  men 
to  tingle  (2  K.  xxi.  12).  The  line  of  Samaria  and 
the  j)lummet  of  the  house  of  Ahab  should  be  the 
doom  of  the  Holy  City.  Like  a  vessel  that  had 
once  been  full  of  precious  ointment  (comp.  the 
LXX.  aKa^aarpov),  but  had  afterwards  become 
foul,  Jerusalem  should  be  emptied  and  wiped  out, 
and  exposed  to  the  winds  of  Heaven  till  it  was 
cleansed.  Foremost,  we  may  well  bchcve,  among 
those  wl'.o  thus  bore  their  witness  was  the  old 
piophet,  now   bent  with  the  weight  of  fourscore 


T.IANASSEH 

years,  wlio  had  in  his  earlier  days  protested  with 
equal  courage  against  the  crimes  of  the  king's 
grandfather.  On  him  too,  according  to  the  old 
Jewish  tradition,  came  the  first  shocli  of  the  per- 
secution. [Isaiah.]  Habakkul^  may  have  shared 
liis  martyrdom  (Keil  on  2  K.  .\xi. ;  but  comp. 
Habakkuk).  But  the  pereecution  did  not  stop 
there.  It  attacked  the  whole  order  of  the  true 
prophets,  and  those  who  followed  them.  Every 
day  witnessed  an  execution  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  3,  §1). 
The  slaughter  was  like  that  under  Alva  or  Charles 
IX.  (2  K.  xxi.  16).  The  martyrs  who  were  faithful 
unto  death  had  to  endure  not  torture  only,  but  the 
mocks  and  taunts  of  a  godless  generation  (Is.  Ivii. 
1-4).  Long  afterwards  the  remembrance  of  that 
reign  of  terror  lingered  in  the  minds  of  men  as  a 
guilt  for  which  nothing  could  atone  (2  K.  xxiv. 
4).  The  persecution,  like  most  other  persecutions 
carried  on  with  entire  singleness  of  purpose,  was 
for  a  time  successful  (Jer.  ii.  30).  The  prophets 
appear  no  more  in  the  long  history  of  Manasseh's 
reign.  The  heart  and  the  intellect  of  the  nation 
were  crushed  out,  and  thei'e  would  seem  to  have 
been  no  chronicleis  left  to  record  this  portion  of  its 
history. 

Retribution  came  soon  in  the  natural  sequence 
of  events.  There  are  indications  that  the  neigh- 
bouring nations — Philistines,  Moabites,  Ammonites 
— who  had  been  tributary  under  Hezekiali,  revolted 
at  some  period  in  the  reign  of  llanasseh,  and 
asserted  their  independence  (Zeph.  ii.  4-19  ;  Jer. 
xlvii.  xlviii.  slix.).'  The  Babylonian  alliance  bore 
tlie  fruits  virhich  had  been  predicteil.  Hezekiah  had 
been  too  hasty  in  attaching  himself  to  the  cause  of 
the  rebel-prince  against  Assyria.  The  rebellion  of 
Merodach-Baladan  was  crushed,  and  then  the  wrath 
of  the  Assyrian  king  fell  on  those  who  had  supported 
him.  [EsARHADDON.]  Judaea  was  again  over- 
run by  the  Assyrian  armies,  and  this  time  the  in- 
\'iision  was  more  successful  than  that  of  Sennacherib. 
The  city  apparently  was  taken.  The  king  himself 
was  made  prisoner  and  carried  off  to  Babylon. 
There  his  eyes  were  opened,  and  he  repented,  and 
his  prayer  was  heard,  and  the  Lord  delivered  him 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  12,  13;  comp.  Maurice,  Prophets 
and  Kings,  p.  362). 

Two  questions  meet  us  at  this  point.  (1)  Have 
we  satisfactory  grounds  for  believing  that  tliis 
statement  is  historically  true?  (2)  If  we  accept 
it,  to  what  period  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  is  it  to 
be  assigned?  It  has  been  urged  in  regard  to  (1) 
that  the  silence  of  the  writer  of  the  books  of  Kings 
is  conclusive  against  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
narrative  of  2  Chronicles.  In  the  former  there  is 
no  mention  made  of  captivity  or  repentance  or 
return.  The  latter,  it  has  been  said,  yields  to  the 
temptation  of  pointing  a  moral,  of  making  history 
appear  more  in  harmony  with  his  own  notions  of 
the  Divine  government  than  it  actually  is.  His 
anxiety  to  deal  leniently  with  the  successors  of  David 
lea4s  him  to  invent  at  once  a  reformation  and  the 
aiptivity  which  is  represented  as  its  cause  (Winer, 
Rwh.  s.  v.  Manasseh  ;  liosenmiiller,  Bibl.  Alterth.  i. 
2,  p.  131  ;  Hitzig,  Begr.  d.  Kritih,  p.  130,  quoted 
by  Keil).  It  will  be  necessary  in  dealing  with 
this  objection  to  meet  the  sceptical  critic  on  his  own 
ground.  To  say  that  his  reasoning  contradicts  our 
belief  in  the  inspiration  of  the  historical  books  of 
Scripture,  and  is  destructive  of  all  leverence  for 
them,  would  involve  a  petitio  principii,  and  how- 
ever strongly  it  may  inHuenco  our  feelings,  we  are 
bound  to  find  anotlier  answer.     It  is  believed  that 


MANASSEH  223 

that  answer  is  not  t;u-  to  seek.  (1)  The  silence  of 
a  writer  who  sums  up  the  history  of  a  reign  of  55 
years  in  19  verses  as  to  one  alleged  event  in  it  is 
surely  a  weak  ground  for  refusing  to  accept  that 
event  on  the  authority  of  another  historian.  (2) 
The  omission  is  in  part  explained  by  the  character 
of  the  narrative  of  2  K.  xxi.  The  writer  deliberately 
turns  away  from  the  history  of  the  days  of  shame, 
and  not  less  from  the  personal  biogi'aphy  of  the 
king.  He  looks  on  the  reign  only  as  it  contributed 
to  the  corruption  and  final  overthrow  of  the  king- 
dom, and  no  after -repentance  was  able  to  undo  the 
mischief  that  had  been  done  at  first.  (3)  Still 
keeping  on  the  level  of  human  probabilities,  the 
character  of  the  writer  of  2  Chronicles,  obviously  a 
Levite,  and  looking  at  the  facts  of  the  history  from 
the  Levite  point  of  view,  would  lead  him  to  attach 
greater  impoitance  to  a  partial  reinstatement  of  the 
old  ritual  and  to  the  cessation  of  persecution,  and 
so  to  give  them  in  proportion  a  greater  prominence. 

(4)  There  is  one  peculiarity  in  the  history  which 
is,  in  some  measure,  of  the  nature  of  an  undesigned 
coincidence,  and  so  confirms  it.  The  captains  of 
the  host  of  Assyria  take  Manasseh  to  Babylon. 
Would  not  a  later  writer,  inventing  the  story,  have 
made  the  Assyrian,  and  not  the  Babylonian  capital, 
the  scene  of  the  captivity;  or  if  the  latter  were 
chosen  for  the  sake  of  harmony  with  the  prophecy 
of  Is.  xxxix.,  have  made  the  king  of  Babylon  rather 
than  of  Assyria  the  captor?  •>  As  it  is,  the  narra- 
tive fits  in,  with  the  utmost  accuracy,  to  the  facts 
of  Oriental  history.  The  first  attempt  of  Babylon 
to  assert  its  independence  of  Kineveh  tailed.  It  was 
crushed  by  Esarhaddon  (the  first  or  second  of  that 
name;  comp.  Esarhaddon,  and  Ewald,  Gesch.  Isr. 
iii.  675),  and  for  a  time  the  Assyrian  king  held  his 
court  at  Babjdon,  so  as  to  effect  more  completely 
the  reduction  of  the  rebellious  province.     There  is 

(5)  the  fact  of  agreement  with  the  intervention  of 
the  Assyrian  king  in  2  K.  xvii.  24,  just  at  the  same 
time.  The  king  is  not  named  there,  but  Ezra  iv. 
2,  10,  gives  Asnapper,  and  this  is  probably  only 
another  form  of  Asardanapar,  and  this  =  Esarhaddon 
(comp.  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  676:  Tob.  i.  21  gives 
Sarchedonus).  The  impo)'tation  of  tribes  from 
Eastern  Asia  thus  becomes  part  of  the  same  policy 
as  the  attack  on  Judah.  On  the  whole,  then,  the 
objection  may  well  be  dismissed  as  frivolous  and 
vexatious.  Like  many  other  difficulties  ui'ged  by 
the  same  school,  it  has  in  it  something  at  once 
captious  and  puerile.  Those  who  lay  undue  stress 
on  them  act  in  the  spirit  of  a  clever  boy  asking 
puzzling  questions,  or  a  sharp  advocate  getting  up 
a  case  against  the  evidence  on  the  other  side,  rather 
than  in  that  of  critics  who  ha\'e  learnt  how  to 
construct  a  history  and  to  value  its  materials 
rightly  (comp.  Keil,  Comm.  on  2  K.  xxi.).  Ewald, 
a  critic  of  a  nobler  stamp,  whose  fault  is  rather  that 
of  fantastic  reconstruction  than  needless  scepticism 
{Gesch.  Is)-.  iii.  678),  admits  the  groundwork  of 
truth.  Would  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  it  may  be 
asked,  have  been  recorded  and  preserved  it'  it  had  not 
been  fulfilled  ?  Might  not  Manasseh's  release  have 
been,  as  Ewald  suggests,  the  direct  consequence  of 
the  death  of  Esarhaddon  ?  , 

The  circumstance  just  noticed  enables  us  to  return 
an  approximate  answer  to  the  other  question.  The 
duration  of  Esarhaddou's  Babylonian  reign  is  calcu- 
lated as  from  B.C.  680-667  ;  and  Manasseh's  cap- 
fa  U  may  be  iiotiird  tliut  tliis  was  actually  done  in  later 
apiK-ryplial  traditions  (see  below). 


224 


MANASSEH 


tivity  must  therefore  have  fallen  within  those  limits. 
A  Jewish  tradition  (Seder  01am  Rabba,  c.  24)  fixes 
the  22nd  year  of  his  reign  as  the  exact  date ;  and 
this,  according  as  we  adopt  the  earlier  or  the  later 
date  of  his  accession,  would  give  B.C.  676  or  673. 

The  period  that  followed  is  dwelt  upon  by  the 
writer  of  2  Chr.  as  one  of  a  great  change  for  the 
better.  The  discipline  of  exile  made  the  king  feel 
that  the  gods  whom  he  had  chosen  were  powerless 
to  deliver,  and  he  turned  in  his  heart  to  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  his  fathers.  The  compassion  or  death  of 
Esarhaddon  led  to  his  release,  and  he  returned  after 
some  uncertain  interval  of  time  to  Jerusalem.  It 
is  not  improbable  that  Ins  absence  from  that  city  had 
given  a  breathing  time  to  the  oppressed  adherents  of 
the  ancient  creed,  and  possibly  had  brought  into  pi'O- 
mineuce,  as  the  provisional  ruler  and  defender  of  the 
city,  one  of  the  chief  members  of  the  party.  If  the 
prophecy  of  Is.  xxii.  15  received,  as  it  probably  did, 
its  fulfilment  in  Shebna's  sharing  the  captivity  of  his 
master,  there  is  nothing  extravagant  in  the  belief 
that  we  may  refer  to  the  same  period  the  noble 
words  which  speak  of  Eliakim  the  son  of  Hilkiah  as 
taking  the  place  which  Shebna  should  leave  vacant, 
and  rising  up  to  be  "  a  father  unto  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  house  of  Judah,"  having 
"  the  key  of  the  house  of  David  on  his  shoulder." 

The  return  of  Manasseh  was  at  any  rate  followed 
by  a  new  policy.  The  old  faith  of  Israel  was  no 
longer  persecuted.  Foreign  idolatries  were  no  longer 
thrust,  in  all  their  foulness,  into  the  Sanctuary  itself. 
The  altar  of  the  Lord  was  again  restored,  aad  peace- 
offerings  and  thank-oiferings  sacrificed  to  Jehovah 
(2  Chr.  xx.xiii.  15,  16).  But  beyond  this  the  re- 
fbi-mation  did  not  go.  The  ark  was  not  restored 
to  its  place.  The  book  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah 
remained  in  its  concealment.  Satisfied  with  the 
feeling  that  they  were  no  longer  worshipping  the 
gods  of  other  nations  by  name,  they  went  on  with 
a  mode  of  worship  essentially  idolatrous.  "  The 
people  did  sacrifice  still  in  the  high  places,  but  to 
Jehovah  their  God  only"  (ibid.  ver.  17). 

The  other  facts  known  of  Manasseh's  reign  con- 
nect themselves  with  the  state  of  the  world  round 
him.  The  Assyrian  monarchy  was  tottering  to  its 
fall,  and  the  king  of  Judah  seems  to  have  thouglit 
that  it  was  still  possible  for  him  to  rule  as  the  head 
of  a  strong  and  independent  kingdom.  If  he  had  to 
content  himself  with  a  smaller  territoiy,  he  might 
yet  guard  its  capital  against  attack,  by  a  new  wall 
defending  what  had  been  before  its  weak  side,  "  to 
the  entering  in  of  the  fish-gate,"  and  completing  the 
tower  of  Ophel,«  which  had  been  begun,  with  a  like 
purpose,  by  Jotham  (2  Chr.  xxvii.  3).  Nor  were  the 
jireparations  for  defence  limited  to  Jerusalem.  "  He 
put  captains  of  war  in  all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah." 
There  was,  it  must  be  remembered,  a  special  reason 


o  A  comparison  of  the  description  of  these  fortifications 
with  Zeph.  1.  10  givps  a  special  Interest  and  force  to  the 
prophet's  words,  ilanasseh  had  strengthened  the  city 
where  it  was  most  open  to  attack.  Zephaniah  points  to 
the  defences,  and  says  that  they  shall  avail  nothing.  It  is 
useless  to  trust  in  them:  "There  shall  be  the  noise  of  a 
cry  from  thejlsh-gate." 

^  The  passage  referred  to  occurs  in  the  opening  para- 
graphs of  the  letter  of  the  Pseudo-Aristeas.  He  is  speak- 
ing of  the  large  number  of  Jews  (100,000)  who  had  been 
brought  into  Egypt  by  Ptolemy,  the  son  of  Lagus.  "  They, 
howevt-r,"  he  says,  "were  not  the  only  Jews  there. 
Others,  though  not  so  many,  had  come  in  with  the  Per- 
sian. Before  that  troops  had  been  sent,  by  virtue  of  a 
treaty  of  alliance,    to  help   Psamniitichus   against   the 


MANASSEH 

for  this  attitude,  over  and  above  that  afibrded  by  the 
condition  of  Assyria.  Egypt  had  emerged  from  the 
chaos  of  the  Dodecarchy  and  the  Ethiopian  intruders, 
and  was  become  strong  and  aggressive  under  Psam- 
mitichus.  Pushing  his  arms  northwards,  he  attacked 
the  Philistines ;  and  the  twenty-nine  years'  siege  of 
Azotus  must  have  fallen  wholly  or  in  part  witliin  the 
reign  of  Manasseh.  So  far  his  progress  would  not 
be  unacceptable.  It  would  be  pleasant  to  see  the  old 
hereditary  enemies  of  Israel,  who  had  lately  grown 
insolent  and  defiant,  meet  with  their  masteis. 
About  this  time,  accordingly,  we  find  the  thought 
of  an  Egyptian  alliance  again  beginning  to  gain 
favour.  The  prophets,  and  those  who  were  guided 
by  them,  dreaded  this  more  than  anything,  and 
entered  their  protest  against  it.  Not  the  less, 
however,  from  this  time  forth,  did  it  continue  to 
be  the  favourite  idea  which  took  possession  of  the 
minds  of  the  lay-party  of  the  princes  of  Judah. 
The  very  name  of  Manasseh's  son,  Amon,  barely  ad- 
mitting a  possible  Heljrew  explanation,  but  identical 
in  form  and  sound  with  that  of  the  great  sun-god  of 
Egypt  (so  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  665),  is  probably  an 
indication  of  the  gladness  with  which  the  alliance 
of  Psamniitichus  was  welcomed.  As  one  of  its  con- 
sequences, it  involved  probably  the  supply  of  troops 
from  Judah  to  serve  in  the  armies  of  the  Egyptian 
king.  Without  adopting  Ewald's  hypothesis  that 
this  is  referred  to  in  Deut.  xxviii.  68,  it  is  yet 
likely  enough  in  itself,  and  Jer.  ii.  14-16  seems  to 
allude  to  some  such  state  of  things.  In  return  for 
this  Manasseh,  we  may  believe,  received  the  help  of 
the  chariots  and  horses  for  which  Egypt  was  always 
famous  (Is.  xxxi.  1).  (Comp.  Aristeas,  Epist.  ad 
Philocr.  in  Havercamp's  Josephus,  ii.  p.  104)."^  If 
this  was  the  close  of  IManasseh's  reign,  we  can  well 
imderstand  how  to  the  writer  of  the  books  of  Kings  it 
would  seem  hardly  better  than  the  beginning,  leaving 
the  root-evil  uncured,  preparing  the  way  for  worse 
evils  than  itself.  We  can  understand  how  it  was  that 
on  his  death  he  was  buried  as  Ahaz  had  been,  not 
with  the  burial  of  a  king,  in  the  sepulchres  of  the 
house  of  Darid,  but  in  the  garden  of  Uzza  (2  K. 
xxi.  26),  and  that,  long  afterwards,  in  spite  of  his 
repentance,  the  Jews  held  his  name  in  abhorrence,  as 
one  of  the  three  kings  [the  other  two  are  Jeroboam 
and  Ahab)  Avho  had  no  part  in  eternal  life  {Sanhedr. 
ch.  xi.  1,  quoted  by  Patrick  on  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  13). 

And  the  evil  was  irreparable.  The  habits  of  a 
sensuous  and  debased  worship  had  eaten  into  the 
life  of  the  people  ;  and  though  they  might  be  re- 
pressed for  a  time  by  force,  as  in  the  reformation  of 
Josiah,  they  burst  out  again,  when  the  pressure  was 
removed,  with  fresh  violence,  and  rendered  even  the 
zeal  of  the  best  of  the  Jewish  kings  fruitful  chiefly 
in  hypocrisy  and  unreality. 

The  intellectual  life  of  the  people  suffered  in  the 


Ethiopians."  The  direct  authority  of  this  writer  is,  of 
course,  not  very  great ;  but  the  absence  of  any  motive  for 
the  inventiun  of  such  a  fact  makes  it  prubable  that  he 
was  following  some  historical  records.  Ewald,  it  should 
be  mentioned,  claims  the  credit  of  having  been  the  first 
to  discover  the  bearing  of  this  fact  on  the  history  of  Ma- 
nasseh's reign.  Another  indication  that  Ethiopia  was 
looked  on,  about  this  time,  as  among  the  enemies  of  Judah, 
may  be  found  in  Zeph.  ii.  12,  while  in  Zeph.  iii.  10  we 
have  a  clear  statement  of  the  fact  that  a  great  multitude 
of  the  people  had  found  their  way  to  that  remote  country. 
The  story  told  by  Herodotus  of  the  revolt  of  the  Auto- 
moli  (ii.  30)  indicates  the  necessity  which  led  Psammi- 
tichus  to  gather  mercenary  troops  from  all  quarters  for 
defence  of  that  frontier  of  his  kmgdom. 


MANASSEH 

same  degree.  Tlie  persecutiou  cut  ofl'  all  who, 
trained  iu  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  were  the 
thinkers  and  teachers  of  the  peo[)le.  The  reign  of 
Manasseh  witnessed  the  close  of  the  work  of  Isaiah 
and  Habrtkkuk  at  its  beginning,  and  the  youth 
of  Jeremiah  and  Zepbaniah  at  its  conclusion,  but 
no  prophetic  writings  illumine  that  dreary  half 
century  of  debasement."^  The  most  fearful  symptom 
of  all  when  a  prophet's  voice  was  again  heard  during 
the  minoi-ity  of  Josiah,  was  the  atheism  which,  then 
as  in  other  ages,  followed  on  the  confused  adoption  of 
a  confluent  ))olytheism  (Zeph.  i.  12).  It  is  surely 
a  strained,  almost  a  iantastic  h3'pothesis,  to  assign 
(as  Ewald  does)  to  such  a  period  two  such  noble 
works  as  Deuteronomy  and  the  Book  of  Job.  Nor 
was  this  dying-out  of  a  true  faith  the  only  evil. 
The  systematic  persecution  of  the  worshippers  of 
Jehovah  accustomed  the  people  to  the  horrors  of 
a  religious  war ;  and  when  they  in  their  turn 
gained  the  ascendancy,  they  used  the  opportunity 
with  a  fiei'cer  sternness  than  had  been  known  before. 
Jehoshaphat  and  Hezekiah  in  their  reforms  had 
been  content  with  restoring  the  true  worship  and 
desti'oying  the  instruments  of  the  false.  In  that  of 
Josiah,  tlie  destruction  extends  to  the  priests  of  the 
high  places  whom  he  sacrifices  on  their  own  altars 
(2  K.  xxiii.  20). 

But  little  is  added  by  later  tradition  to  the 
0.  T.  narrative  of  Manasseh 's  reign.  The  prayer 
that  bears  his  name  among  the  apocryphal  books 
can  hardly,  in  the  absence  of  any  Hebrew  original, 
be  considered  as  identical  with  that  referred  to  in 
2  Chr.  xxxiii.,  and  is  probably  rather  the  result  of 
an  attempt  to  work  out  the  hint  there  supplied 
than  the  reproduction  of  an  older  document.  There 
are  reasons,  however,  for  believing  that  there  existed 
at  some  time  or  other,  a  fuller  history,  more  or  less 
legendary,  of  Jlanasseh  and  his  conversion,  from 
which  the  prayer  may  possibly  have  been  an  excerpt 
preserved  for  devotion;il  purposes  (it  appears  for 
the  first  time  iu  the  Apostolical  Constitutions)  when 
the  rest  was  rejected  as  worthless.  Scattered  here 
and  there,  we  And  the  disjecta  membra  of  such  a 
work.  Among  the  offences  of  Manasseh,  the  most 
prominent  is,  that  he  places  in  the  sanctuary  an 
ayaA/na.  TeTpairpdcrcoTrov  of  Zeus  (Suidas,  s.  v.  Ma- 
vaacrris;  Georg.  Syncellus,  Chronograph,  i.  404). 
The  charge  on  which  he  condemns  Isaiah  to  death 
is  that  of  blasjihemy,  the  words,  "  I  saw  the  Lord" 
(is.  vi.  1)  being  treated  as  a  presumptuous  boast 
at  variance  with  Ex.  xxxiii.  20  (Nic.  de  Lyra,  from 
a  Jewish  treatise:  Jebainoth,  quoted  by  Amama, 
in  Crit.  Sacri  on  2  K.  xxi.).  Isaiah  is  miracu- 
lously rescued.  A  cedar  opens  to  receive  him.  Then 
comes  the  order  that  the  cedar  should  be  sawn 
through  (ibid.).  That  which  made  this  sin  the 
greater  was,  that  the  king's  mother,  Hephzibah, 
was  the  daughter  of  Isaiah.  When  Manasseli  was 
taken  captive  by  Merodach  and  taken  to  Babylon 
(Suidas),  he  was  thrown  intx)  prison  and  fed  daily 
with  a  scanty  allowance  of  brmi-bread  and  water 
mixed  with  \anegar.  Then  came  his  condemnation. 
He  was  encased  in  a  brazen  image  (the  description 
suggests  a  punishment  like  that  of  the  bull  of  Pe- 
rillus),  but  he  repented  and  piayed,  and  the  image 
clave  asunder,  and  he  escaped  (Suidas  and  Georg. 
Syncellus).  Then  he  returned  to  Jerusalem  ;md 
lived  righteously  and  justly.  [K.  H.  P.] 

2.  (Mai/offff^:  Manassc.)  One  of  the  descendants 

*  There  Is  a  possible  exception  to  this  in  the  existence 
of  a  propliet  llozai  (tfie  Vulg.  rendering,  -where  the  \X\. 
VDL.   11. 


MANASSEH 


225 


of  Pahath-Moab,  who  in  the  days  of  Ezra  had  mar- 
ried a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  30).  In  1  Esd.  ix.  31 
he  is  allied  IManasseas. 

3.  One  of  the  laymen,  of  the  family  of  Hashum, 
who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  command 
(Ezr.  X.  33).  He  is  called  Manasses  in  1  Esd. 
ix.  33. 

4.  (Moyscs.)  In  the  Hebrew  text  of  Judg.  xviii. 
30,  the  name  of  the  priest  of  the  graven  inia2;e  of 
the  Danites  is  given  as  "  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Ger- 
shom,  the  sou  of  Manasseh"  ;  the  last  word  ))eing 
written  nt^^JO)  ^'^'^  *  Masoretic  note  calling  atten- 
tion to  the  "  nun  suspended."  "  The  fate  of  this 
superposititious  letter,"  says  Kennicott  (Z>iss.  ii. 
53),  "  has  been  very  various,  sometimes  placed 
over  the  word,  sometimes  suspended  half-way,  and 
sometimes  uniformly  inserted."  Jarchi's  note  upon 
the  passage  is  as  follows : — "  On  account  of  the 
honour  of  Jloses  he  wrote  Nun  to  change  the  name  ; 
and  it  is  written  suspended  to  signify  that  it  was 
not  Manasseh  but  Moses."  The  LXX.,  Peshito- 
Syriac,  and  Chaldee  all  read  "  Manasseh,"  but  the 
Vulgate  retains  the  original  and  undoubtedly  the 
true  reading,  Moyses.  Three  of  De  Rossi's  JISS. 
had  originally  iWO,  "  Moses ;"  and  this  was  also 
the  reading  "  of  three  Greek  MSS.  in  the  Library 
of  St.  Germain  at  Paris,  of  one  in  the  Library  of 
the  Cai-melites  of  the  same  place,  of  a  Greek  MS., 
No.  331,  in  the  Vatican,  and  of  a  MS.  of  the 
Octateuch  in  University  College  Librmy,  Oxford" 
(Burrington,  Genealogies,  i.  8G).  A  passage  in 
Theodoret  is  either  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the  two 
readings,  or  indicates  that  in  some  copies  at  least 
of  the  Greek  they  must  have  coexisted.  He  quotes 
the  clause  in  question  in  this  form,  'loivdOav  .  .  . 
vihs  MavaaaTJ  viov  Tripaaix  viov  Macrri ;  and  this 
appai'ently  gave  rise  to  the  assertion  of  Hiller 
(Arcanum  Keri  et  Keihib,  p.  187,  quoted  by 
Rosenmiiller  on  Judg.  xviii.  30),  that  the  "  Nun 
suspended  "  denotes  tiiat  the  previous  word  is  trans- 
posed. He  accordingly  proposes  to  read  p  IDJin'' 
DCJ'IJ  p  ^£^'Ja:  but  although  his  judgment  on 
the  point  is  accepted  as  finalby  Rosenmiiller  it  has 
not  the  smallest  authority.  Kennicott  attributes 
the  presence  of  the  iVww  to  the  corruption  of  MSS. 
by  Jewish  transcribers.  With  regard  to  the  chrono- 
logical difficulty  of  accounting  for  the  presence  of  a 
grandson  of  Moses  at  an  apparently  late  period,  there 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  last  five  chapters 
of  Judges  refer  to  earlier  events  than  those  after  which 
they  are  placed.  In  xx.  28  Phinehas  the  son  of 
Eleazar,  and  therefore  the  grandson  of  Aaron,  is  said 
to  have  stood  before  the  ark,  and  there  is  therefore 
no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  a  grandson  of  Moses 
might  be  alive  at  the  same  time,  which  was  not  long 
after  the  death  of  Joshua.  Josephus  places  the  episode 
of  the  Benjamites  before  that  of  the  Gadites,  and  in- 
troduces them  both  before  the  invasion  of  Chushan- 
rishathaim  and  the  deliverance  of  Israel  by  Othniel, 
narrated  iu  Judg.  iii.  (^Ant.  v.  2,  §8-v.  3,  §1 :  see 
also  Kennicott's  Dissertations,  ii.  51-57 ;  Dissert. 
Genor.  p.  10).  It  may  be  as  well  to  mention  a 
b'adition  recorded  by  R.  David  Kimchi,  that  in  the 
genealogy  of  Jonathan,  Manasseh  is  written  for 
Moses  because  he  did  the  deed  of  IManassch,  the 
idolatrous  king  of  Judah.  A  note  from  the  margin 
of  a  Hebrew  MS.  quoted  by  Kennicott  {Diss. 
Gen.  p.  10)  is  as  follows:—"  He  is  called  by  the 


has  tCiv  opijivTuiv,  and  the  A.  V.  "the  seers"  (2  Chr. 
xxxiii.  to) ;  but  nothing  else  is  linown  of  him. 

Q 


226 


MANASSES 


name  of  Manasseh  the  son  of  Hezeldah,  for  he  also 
made  the  graven  image  in  the  Temple."  It  must 
be  confessed  that  the  point  of  this  is  not  very- 
apparent.  [\V.  A.  VV.] 

MANAS'SES  (Mamcrcrris :  Manasses).  1. 
JManasseh  4,  of  the  sons  of  Hashum  (1  Esd.  i.x.  33  ; 
comp.  Ezr.  x.  33). 

2.  Manasseh,  king  of  Judah  (JIatt.  i.  10),  to 
whom  the  apocryphal  prayer  is  attributed. 

3.  ]\Ianasseh,  the  son  of  Joseph  (Rev.  vii.  6). 

4.  A  wealthy  inhabitant  of  Bethulia,  and  husband 
of  Judith,  according  to  the  legend.  He  was  smitten 
with  a  sunstroke  while  superintending  the  labourers 
in  his  fields,  leaving  Judith  a  widow  with  great 
possessions  (Jud.  viii.  2,  7,  x.  3,  xvi.  22,  23, 
24),  and  was  buried  between  Dothan  and  Baal- 
hamon. 

MANAS 'SES,  THE  PRAYER  OF  {irpotr- 
ivxh  Mai/atrcTT)').  1.  The  repentance  and  restora- 
tion of  Manasseh  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  12  ff.)  furnished 
the  subject  of  many  legendary  stories  (Fabric.  Cod. 
Apocr.  V.  T.  1101  f.).  "His  prayer  unto  his 
God  "  was  still  preserved  "  in  the  book  of  the  kings 
of  Israel"  when  the  Chronicles  were  compiled 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  18),  and,  after  this  record  was  lost, 
the  subject  was  likely  to  attract  the  notice  of  later 
writers.*  "  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh,"  which  is 
found  in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  is  the  work  of 
one  who  has  endeavoured  to  express,  not  without 
true  feeling,  the  thoughts  of  the  repentant  king. 
It  opens  with  a  description  of  the  majesty  of  God 
(1-5),  which  passes  into  a  description  of  His  mercy 
in  granting  repentance  to  sinners  (6-8,  e/xoJ  tsu 
a/uLapTciXcj}).  Then  follows  a  personal  confession 
and  supplication  to  God  as  "  the  God  of  them  that 
repent,"  "  hymned  by  all  the  powers  of  heaven," 
to  whom  belongs  "glory  for  ever"  (9-15,  crov 
ecrriv  7j  Sd|a  els  rohs  alSjvas).  "  And  the  Lord 
heard  the  voice  of  Manasses  and  pitied  him,"  the 
legend  continues,  "  and  there  cp.me  around  him  a 
flame  of  fire,  and  all  the  irons  about  him  (to  Trept 
avrhv  cridripa)  were  melted,  and  the  Lord  delivered 
him  out  of  his  affliction"  (Const.  Apost.  ii.  22; 
comp.  Jul.  Afric.  ap.  Ilouth,  Rd.  Sac.  ii.  288). 

2.  The  Greek  text  is  imdoubtedly  original,  and 
not  a  mere  translation  fi'om  the  Hebrew  ;  and  even 
within  the  small  space  of  fifteen  verses  some  pecu- 
liarities are  found  (SLffTiKTos,  K\'iveiv  yovv  Kap- 
Slas,  Trapopyi^eiv  rhv  6vfj,6v,  Tid^crOai  fj-erduoidu 
riPi).  Tiie  writer  was  well  acquainted  witlr  the 
LXX.  (ra  KUTwrara  rf/x  yys,  rh  irkriOos  ttjs 
XPt^ctcJttjtJs  (Tov,  iraffa  rj  diivajjits  tHjv  ohpa- 
vuv j ;  but  beyond  this  there  is  notliing  to  determine 
the  date  at  which  he  lived.  The  allusion  to  the 
patriarchs  (ver.  8,  SiKatoi ;  ver.  1,  rh  awep^ia  av- 
rSiv  rh  S'tKaiov)  appears  to  fix  the  authorship  on  a 
Jew ;  but  the  clear  teaching  on  repentance  points 
to  a  time  certainly  not  long  before  the  Christian 
era.  There  is  no  indic-ation  of  the  place  at  which  the 
Prayer  was  WTitten. 

3.  The  earliest  reference  to  the  Prayer  is  con- 
tained in  a  fragment  of  Julius  Africanus  (cir.  221 
A.D.),  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  words  in 
their  original  form  clearly  referred  to  the  present 
composition  (Jul.  Afric.  fr.  40).  It  is,  however, 
given  at  length  in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions 
(ii.  22),  in  which  it  is  followed  by  a  narrative  of 


»  Ewald  (^Gesch.  iii.  6T9)  is  inclined  to  think  that  the 
Greek  may  have  been  based  on  the  Hebrew.  There  is  at 
least  no  trace  of  such  an  crigin  of  the  Greek  text. 


MANDRAKES 

the  same  apocryphal  tacts  (§1)  as  are  quoted  from 
Afi-icanus.  The  Prayer  is  found  in  the  Alexandrine 
MS.  in  the  collection  of  hymns  and  metrical  prayers 
which  is  appended  to  the  Psalter — a  position  v.^hich 
it  generally  occupies ;  but  in  the  three  Latin  JISS. 
used  by  Sabatier  it  is  placed  at  the  end  of  2  Chr. 
(Sabat.  Bibl.  Lat.  iii.  1038). 

4.  The  Prayer  was  never  distinctly  recognised  as 
a  canonical  ^^'l•iting,  though  it  was  included  in  many 
MSS.  of  the  LXX.  and  of  the  Latin  version,  and 
has  been  deservedly  retained  among  the  apociypha 
in  A.  V.  and  by  Luther.  The  Latin  translation 
which  occui's  in  Vulgate  MSS.  is  not  by  the  hand 
of  Jerome,  and  has  some  remarkable  phrases  (insns- 
tentabilis,  importahilis  i  avvK6cnaTos^,  omnis  virtus 
coeloruin) ;  but  there  is  no  sufficient  internal  evi- 
dence to  show  whether  it  is  earlier  or  later  than  his 
time.  It  does  not,  however,  .seem  to  have  been  used 
by  any  Latin  writer  of  the  first  four  centm'ies,  and 
was  not  known  to  Victor  Tunonensis  in  the  6th 
(Ambrosius,  iv.  989,  ed.  Bligne). 

5.  The  Commentary  of  Fritzsche  {Exeg.  Handb. 
1851)  contains  all  that  is  necessary  for  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Prayer^  which  is,  indeed,  in  little 
need  of  explanation.  The  Alexandrine  text  seems  to 
have  been  intei-polated  in  some  places,  while  it  also 
omits  a  whole  clause ;  but  at  present  the  materials 
for  settling  a  satisfactory  text  have  not  been  col- 
lected. [B.  F.  W.] 

MANASS'ITES,  THE  CK'JSn,  i.  e.  "  the 

Manassite" :  6  Maj/actrr) :  Manasse),  that  is,  the 
members  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  The  word  occurs 
but  thrice  in  the  A.  V.  viz.  Deut.  iv.  43;  Judg. 
xii.  4;  and  2  K.  x.  33.  In  the  first  and  last  of 
these  the  original  is  as  given  above,  but  in  the  other 
it  is  "Manasseh" — "  Fugitives  of  Ephraim  are  you, 
Gilead;  in  the  midst  of  Ephraim,  in  the  midst  of 
Manasseh."  It  may  be  well  to  take  this  oppor- 
tunity of  remarking,  that  the  point  of  the  verse 
following  that  just  quoted  is  lost  in  the  A.  V., 
from  the  word  which  in  ver.  4  is  rightly  rendei-ed 
"  fugitive  "  being  there  given  as  "  those  which  were 
escaped."  Ver.  5  would  more  accurately  be,  "  And 
Gilead  seized  the  fords  of  the  Jordan-of-Ephraim ; 
and  it  was  so  that  when  fugitives  of  Ephraim  said, 
'  I  will  go  over,'  the  men  of  Gilead  said  to  him, 
'  Art  thou  an  Ephraimite?'  " — the  point  being  that 
the  taunt  of  the  Eplu-aimites  was  turned  against 
themselves.  [G.] 

MAN'DRAKES  (Q''Xnn,''  dudahn:    ixi]Ka 

fxavSpayopcov,  ol  fxavSpaySpai  :  mandragorae). 
"  It  were  a  wearisome  and  superfluous  task,"  says 
Oedmann  {Vcnnisch.  Sanvnl.  i.  v.  95),  "  to  quote 
and  pass  judgment  on  the  multitude  of  authors 
who  have  written  about  ditdaiiii:"  but  the  reader 
who  cares  to  know  the  literature  of  the  subject  will 
find  a  long  list  of  authorities  in  Celsius  {Ilierob. 
i.  1,  sq.)  and  in  Rudbeck  {Be  Dudaiin  Rubenis, 
Upsal,  1733).  See  also  Winer,  {Bibl  Realuort. 
"  Ahaun  ").  The  dudahn  (the  word  occurs  only 
in  th.e  plural  number)  are  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxx. 
14,  15,  16,  and  in  Cant.  vii.  13.  From  the  former 
passage  we  learn  that  they  were  found  in  the 
fields  of  Mesopotamia,  where  Jacob  and  his  wives 
were  at  one  time  living,  and  that  the  fruit 
{fjLTJXa  fj.avSpayopa>v,  LXX.)  was  gathered  "  in  the 

^  Various  etymologies  liave  been  proposed  for  this  word ; 
the  most  probable  is  that  it  comes  from  the  root  H-l'^, 
"  to  love,"  whence  ^1"^,  "  love." 


MANDEAKES 

days  of  wheat-hai  vest,"  i.  e.  in  Jlay.  There  is  &\i- 
(lently  also  an  allusion  to  the  supposed  properties 
of"  this  plant  to  promote  conception,  hence  Rachel's 
desire  of  obtiiiniug  the  fruit,  for  as  yet  she  had  not 
borne  children.  In  Cant.  vii.  13  it  is  said,  "  the 
duddtin  give  a  smell,  and  at  our  gates  are  all  man- 
ner of  pleasant  fi-uits  " — from  this  passage  we  learn 
that  the  jjlant  in  question  was  stroug-scented,  and 
that  it  grew  in  Palestine.  Various  attempts  have 
been  made  to  identify  the  dudahn.  Rudbeck  the 
younger — the  same  who  maintained  that  the  quails 
which  fed  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  were 
"  flying  tish,"  and  who,  as  Oedmann  has  truly  re- 
marked, seems  to  have  a  special  gift  for  demon- 
strating anything  he  pleases — supposed  the  duddhn 
were  "  bramble-ljerries  "  (^Ruhns  caesius,  Linn.),  a 
theory  which  deserves  no  serious  consideration. 
Celsius,  who  supposes  that  a  kind  of  Rharanus  is 
meant,  is  far  from  satisfactory  in  his  conclusions ; 
he  identifies  the  duddim  with  what  he  calls  Lotus 
Cyrenaica,  the  Sidra  of  Arabic  authors.  This  ap- 
pears to  be  the  lotus  of  the  ancients,  Zizyphus  lotus. 
See  Shaw's   Travels,  i.   263,   and  Sprengel,  Hist. 

so 
Eei  herb.  i.  251 ;   Freytag,  Ar.  Lex.  s.  v.  y\^. 

Celsius's  argument  is  based  entirely  upon  the  autho- 
rity of  a  certain  Kabbi  (see  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm. 
p.  1202),  who  asserts  the  dnddhn  to  be  the  fruit  of 
the  mayisch  (the  lotus?);''  but  the  autliority  of  a 
single  Rabbi  is  of  little  weight  against  the  almost 
unanimous  testimony  of  the  ancient  versions.  With 
still  less  reason  have  Castell  (Lex.  Hept.  p.  2052) 
and  Ludolf  {Hist.  Aeth.  i.  c.  9),  and  a  few  others, 
advanced  a  claim  for  the  Musa  paradisiaca,  the 
banana,  to  denote  the  duddhn.  Faber,  following 
Ant.  Deusing  {Dissert,  de  Dudairn),  thought  the 
duddim  were  small  sweet-scented  melons  {Cucwnis 
dudaim),  which  grow  in  Syria,  Egypt,  and  Persia, 
known  by  the  Persians  as  distembujeh,  a  word 
which  means  "  fragrance  in  the  hand  ;"  and  Sprengel 
{Hist.  i.  17)  appears  to  have  entertained  a  similar 
belief  This  theory  is  certainly  more  plausible 
than  many  otliers  that  have  been  adduced,  but  it 
is  unsupported  except  by  the  Persian  version  in 
Genesis.  Various  other  conjectures  have  from  time 
to  time  been  made,  as  that  the  duddhn  are 
"  lilies,"  or  "  citrons,"  or  "  baskets  of  figs  " — all 
mere  theories. 

The  most  satisfactory  attempt  at  identification  is 
certainly  that  which  supposes  the  mandrake  {Atropn 
rnandragorct)  to  be  the  plant  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
word.  The  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  the  Syriac,  and  the 
Arabic  versions,  the  Targums,  the  most  learned  of 
the  Rabbis,  and  many  later  commentators,  are  in 
favour  of  the  translation  of  the  A.  V.  The  argu- 
ments which  Celsius  has  adduced  against  the 
mandrake  being  the  dndahn  have  been  most  ably 
.inswered  by  Michaelis  (see  Snpp.  ad  Lex.  Heh. 
No.  451).  It  is  well  known  that  the  man- 
drake is  far  fiom  odoriferous,  the  whole  plant 
being,  in  European  estimation  at  all  events,  ver}- 
fetid ;  on  this  account  Celsius  objccfed  to  its  being 
the  duddhn,  which  he  supposed  were  said  in  the 
Canticles  to  be  fragrant.  Michaelis  has  shown  that 
nothing  of  the  kind  is  asserted  in  Scripture :  the 


MANDEAKES 


227 


h  ^>'<'0-    This  plant,  according  to  Abulfadii,  corre- 

sponds  with  the  Arabic  ,  ii,j,^,  which,  however,  Spren- 
gel identifies  with  Zizyphus  raliurus. 


duddhn  "  give  forth  an  odour,"  which,  however, 
may  be  one  of  no  fragrant  nature  ;  the  invitation 
to  the  "  beloved  to  go  forth  into  the  field  "  is  full 
of  force  if  we  suppose  the  duddim  ("  love  plants  ") 
to  denote  the  mandrake. <=  Again,  the  odour  or 
flavour  of  plants  is  after  all  a  matter  of  opinion,' 
far  Schuiz  {Leitung.  des  Hochsten,  v.  197j,  who 
found  mandrakes  on  Jlount  Tabor,  says  of  them, 
"  they  have  a  delightful  smell,  and  the  taste  is 
equally  agreeable,  though  not  to  everybody."  Mariti 
{Trav.  iii.  146)  foiuid  on  the  7th  of  May,  near  the 
hamlet  of  St.  John  in  "  Mount  Juda,"  mandrake 
plants,  the  fruit  of  which  he  says  "  is  of  the  size  and 
colour  of  a  small  apple,  ruddy  and  of  a  most  agree- 
able odour."  Oedmann,  after  quoting  a  number  of 
authorities  to  show  that  the  mandrakes  were  prized 
by  the  Arabs  for  their  odour,  makes  the  followino- 
just  remark: — "It  is  known  that  Orientals  set  an 
especial  value  on  strongly  smelling  things  that  to 
more  delicate  European  senses  are  unpleasing  .... 
The  intoxicating  qualities  of  the  mandrake,  far  from 
lessening  its  value,  would  rather  add  to  it,  for 
every  one  knows  with  what  relish  the  Orientals 
use  all  kinds  of  preparations  to  produce  intoxi- 
cation." 


The  Mandrake  (Alrop 


The  Arabic  version  of  Saadias  has  luffach ''  =  man- 
di-agora ;  in  Onkelos yabrmhin,  and  in  Spiacyahruch  ' 
express  the  Hebrew  duddhn :  now  we  learn  from 
Mariti  {Trav.  iii.  146,  ed.  Lond.  1792)  that  a  word 


•^  "  Qui  quidem  quod  hircinus  est  quodammodo,  vlresque 
mandragorae  in  Aplirodisiacis  laudantur,  anioribus  auras 
perflare  videtur  et  ad  cos  stimulare." 


-Ul. 


t^n-na"' 


Q2 


228 


MANEH 


similar  to  this  last  was  applied  by  the  Arabs  to  the 
mandrake — he  says  "  the  Arabs  call  it  jabrohak."^ 
Celsius  asserts  that  the  mandrake  has  not  the  pro- 
perty which  has  been  attributed  to  it :  it  is,  how- 
evei-,  a  matter  of  common  belief  in  the  East  that 
•  this  plant  has  the  power  to  aid  in  tl:e  procreation 
of  oftspring.  Schultz,  Maundrell,  JIariti,  all  allude 
to  it;  compare  also  Dioscorides,  iv.  76,  Sprengel's 
Annotations ;  and  Theophnistus,  Hist.  Plant,  ix.  9, 
§1.  Venus  was  called  Mandragoritis  by  the  an- 
cient Greeks  (Hesych.  s.  v.),  and  the  fruit  of  the 
plant  was  termed  "  apples  of  love." 

That  the  fruit  was  fit  to  be  gathered  at  the  time 
of  wheat-harvest  is  clear  from  the  testimony  of 
several  travellers.  Schultze  found  mandralve-apples 
on  the  15th  of  May.  Hasselquist  saw  them  at 
Nazareth  early  in  May.  He  says :  "  I  had  not  the 
pleasure  to  see  the  plant  in  blossom,  the  fruit  now 
[May  5,  0.  S.]  hanging  rip§  on  the  stem  which 
lay  withered  on  the  ground  " — he  conjectures  that 
they  are  Kachel's  dudatm.  Dr.  Thomson  ( The 
Land  and  the  Book,  p.  u77)  found  mandrakes  ripe 
on  the  lower  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon  towards 
the  end  of  April. 

From  a  certain  mde  resemblance  of  old  roots  of 
the  mandrake  to  the  human  form,  whence  Pytha- 
goras is  said  to  have  called  the  mandrake  du9punT6- 
IJi.op(pov,  and  Columella  (10,  19)  seinihomo,  some 
strange  superstitious  notions  have  ai'isen  concerning 
it.  Josephus  (Z?.  /.  vii.  6,  §3)  evidently  alludes  to 
one  of  these  superstitions,  though  he  calls  the  plant 
baaras.  In  a  Vienna  MS.  of  Dioscorides  is  a  curious 
drawing  which  represents  Euresis,  the  goddess  of 
discovery,  handing  to  Dioscorides  a  I'oot  of  the 
mandrake;  the  dog  employed  for  the  purpose  is 
depicted  in  the  agonies  of  death  (Daubeny's  Boman 
Husbandry,  p.  275). S 

The  mandrake  is  found  abundantly  in  the  Grecian 
islands,  and  in  some  parts  of  the  south  of  Europe. 
The  root  is  spindle-shaped  and  often  divided  iiito 
two  or  tlu-ee  foi'ks.  The  leaves,  which  are  lono-, 
sharp-pointed,  and  hairy,  rise  immediately  fiom 
the  ground  ;  they  are  of  a  dark-green  colour.  The 
flowers  are  dingy  white,  stained  with  veins  of 
purple.  The  fruit  is  of  a  pale  orange  colour,  and 
-about  the  size  of  a  nutmeg ;  but  it  would  appear 
that  the  plant  varies  considerably  in  appearance 
according  to  the  localities  where  it  grows.  The 
mandrake  {Atropn  mandragora)  is  closely  allied  to 
the  well-known  deadly  nightshade  (^1.  belladonna), 
and  belongs  to  the  order  Solanaceae.         [W.  H.] 

MANEH.    [Weights  and  Measurks.] 

MANGER.  This  word  occurs  only  in  con- 
nexion witli  the  birth  of  Christ,  in  Luke  ii.  7,  12, 
16.  The  original  term  is  (pdrvri,  which  is  found 
but  once  besides  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.  Luke  xiii.  15, 
where  it  is  rendered  by  "  stall."  The  word  in 
classiciil  Greek  undoubtedly  means  a  manger,  crib, 
or  feeding  tiough  (see  Liddell  and  Scott,  Lex. 
s.  v.);  but  according  to  Schleusner  its  real 
signification  in  the  N.  T.  is  the  open  court- 
yard, attached  to  the  inn  or  khan,  and  enclosed  by 
a  rough  fence  of  stones,  wattle,  or  other  slio-ht 
material,    into   which   the    cattle   would    be   shut 


f  The  Arabs  call  the  frnit  tuphach  el  sheitan,  "  the 
devil's  apple,"  from  its  power  to  excite  voluptuousness. 

s  Comp.  also  Shaksp.  Henry  JV.,  I't.  II.  Act  i.  Sc.  2; 
r.om.  and  Jul.,  Act  iv.  So.  3 ;  D'Hcrbelot,  Biblioth. 
Orient,  s.  v.  "  Abrousanam." 

"  Those  who  desire  to  see  all  that  can  be  said  on  the 


IMANLIUS,  T. 

at  night,  and  where  the  poorer  travellers  might 
unpack  their  animals  and  take  up  their  lodging, 
when  they  were  either  by  want  of  room  or  want  of 
means  excluded  from  the  house.  This  conclusion  is 
sujjported  by  the  rendering  of  the  Vulg. — praesepe 

—and    of  the  Peshito-Syriac,   p  »OJ,  both  which 

terms  mean  "  enclosures," — and  also  by  the  customs 
of  Palestine."  Stables  and  mangers  in  the  sense  in 
which  we  understand  them,  are  of  comparatively 
late  introduction  into  the  East  (see  the  quotations 
frorn  Chardin  and  others  in  Harmer's  Observations, 
ii.  205, 6),  and  although  they  have  furni>hed  material 
to  painters  and  poets,  did  not  enter  into  the  circum- 
stances attending  the  birth  of  Christ — and  are  hardly 
less  inaccurate  than  the  "  cradle"  and  the  "stable,"'' 
which  are  nained  in  some  descriptions  of  that  event. 

This  applies,  however,  only  to  the  painters  of  the 
later  schools.  The  early  Christian  artists  seem 
almost  invariably  to  represent  the  Nativity  as  in 
an  open  and  detached  court-yard.  A  crib  or  trough 
is  occasionally  shown,  but  not  prominently,  and 
more  as  if  symbolic  of  the  locality  than  as  actually 
existing. 

The  above  interpretation  of  (pdrvr]  is  of  course 
at  variance  with  the  tiaditional  belief  that  the  Na- 
tivity took  place  in  a  cave.  Professor  Stanley  has 
however  shown  (S.  ^  P.  440,  441 ;  see  also  153) 
how  destitute  of  foundation  this  tradition  is.  And 
it  should  not  be  oveilooked  that  the  two  apocry- 
phal Gospels  which  appear  to  be  its  main  founda- 
tion, the  Protevangelion  and  the  Gospel  of  the  In- 
fancy, do  not  represent  the  cave  as  belonging  to  the 
inn — in  fact,  do  not  mention  the  inn  in  connexion 
with  the  Nativity  at  all,  while  the  former  does 
not  intioduce  the  manger  and  the  inn  till  a  later 
period,  that  of  the  inassacre  of  the  innocents  (Piotev. 
chap.  xvi.).  [G.] 

MA'NI  (yiavi :  Banni).  The  same  as  Bani,  4 
(1  Esd.  ix.  30  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  29). 

MAN'LIUS,  T.  In  the  account  of  the  con- 
clusion of  the  campaign  of  Lysias  (b.O.  163)  against 
the  Jews  given  in  2  IMacc.  xi.,  four  letters  are  intro- 
duced, of  which  the  last  purports  to  be  fi'om  "  L. 
Memmius  and  Q.  Manlius,  ambassadors  (irpec/SC- 
Tttf)  of  the  Romans"  (ver.  34-38)  confirming 
the  concessions  made  by  Lysias.  There  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  the  letter  is  a  fabrication.  No 
such  names  occur  among  the  many  legates  to  Syria 
noticed  by  Polybius  ;  and  there  is  no  room  for 
the  mission  of  another  embassy  between  two  re- 
corded shortly  before  and  after  the  death  of  Auti- 
ochus  Epiphanes  (Polyb.  xxxi.  9,  6  ;  12,  9  ;  Grimm, 
ad  foe).  If,  as  seems  likely,  the  true  reading  is 
T.  Manius  (not  Manlius\  the  writer  was  probably 
thinking  of  the  former  embassy  when  C.  Sulpicius 
and  JIauius  Sergius  were  sent  to  Syria.  The  form 
of  the  letter  is  no  less  fatal  to  the  idea  of  its  au- 
thenticity than  the  names  in  which  it  is  written. 
The  use  of  the  aera  of  the  Seleucidae  to  fix  the  year, 
the  omission  of  the  name  of  the  place  at  which  it  was 
dated,  and  the  exact  coincidence  of  the  date  of  this 
letter  with  that  of  the  young  Antiochus,  are  all  suspi- 
cious circumstances.     Moreover,  the  first  intercourse 


meaning  of  ^arvri  in  the  N.  T.  and  in  the  LXX.,  as  bear- 
ing on  the  N.  T.,  will  find  it  in  the  16th  chapter  of  the 
2iid  book  of  P.  Horrei,  Miscell.  criticorum  libri  duo : 
Leoinrdiae,  1T33. 

b  See  for  example  Milton's   nymn  on  the  Xatinity, 
line  243. 


MANNA 

betAveea  the  Jews  and  Romans  is  marked  distinctly 
as  talcing  place  two  years  later  (1  Mace.  viii.  1  ff.), 
when  Judas  heard  of  their  power  and  fidelity. 

The  remaining  letters  are  of  no  more  worth, 
though  it  is  possible  tliat  some  facts  may  have  sug- 
gested special  details  (e.  g.  2  Mace.  xi.  29  ff.). 

(Werusdorf,  De  Fide  Mace.  §  66  ;  Grimm,  ad 
he. ;  and  on  the  other  side  Patritins,  De  Cons.  Mace. 
pp.  142,  280.)  [B.  F.  W.] 

MAN'NA  (|0,  man :  Mdvva :  Manhti,  Man, 
Manna).  The  most  important  passages  of  the  0.  T. 
on  this  topic  are  the  following: — Ex.  xvi.  14-36  ; 
Num.  xi.  7-9;  Deut.  viii.  3,  1  6 ;  Josh,  v.  12;  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  24,  25;  Wisd.  xvi.  20,  21.  From  these 
passages  we  learn  that  the  manna  came  every  morn- 
ing except  the  Sabbath,  in  the  form  of  a  small 
round  seea  resembling  the  hoar  frost ;  that  it  must 
be  gathered  early,  before  the  sun  became  so  hot  as 
to  melt  it ;  that  it  must  be  gathered  every  day 
except  the  Sabbath  ;  that  the  attempt  to  lay  aside 
for  a  succeeding  day,  except  on  the  day  immediately 
preceding  the  Sabbath,  failed  by  the  substance  be- 
coming wormy  and  oflf'ensive  ;  that  it  was  prepared 
for  food  by  grinding  and  baking ;  that  its  taste  was 
like  fresh  oil,  and  like  wafers  made  with  honey, 
equally  agreeable  to  all  palates ;  that  the  whole 
nation  subsisted  upon  it  for  forty  years  ;  that  it 
suddenly  ceased  when  they  first  got  the  new  corn 
of  the  land  of  Canaan  ;  and  that  it  was  always 
regarded  as  a  miraculous  gilt  directly  from  God, 
and  not  as  a  product  of  nature. 

The  natural  products  of  the  Arabian  deserts  and 
other  Oriental  regions,  which  bear  the  name  of 
manna,  have  not  the  qualities  or  uses  ascribed  to 
the  manna  of  Scripture.  They  are  all  condiments 
or  medicines  rather  than  food,  stimulating  or  pur 
gative  rather  than  nutritious  ;  they  are  produced 
only  three  or  four  months  in  the  year,  from  May  to 
August,  and  not  all  the  year  round  ;  they  come  only 
in  small  quantities,  never  atlbiding  anything  like 
15,000,000  of  pounds  a-week,  which  must  have 
been  requisite  for  the  subsistence  of  the  whole 
Israelitish  camp,  since  each  man  had  an  omer  (or 
three  English  quarts)  a-day,  and  that  for  forty  years  ; 
they  can  be  kept  for  a  long  time,  and  do  not  become 
useless  in  a  day  or  two ;  they  are  just  as  liable  to 
deteriorate  on  the  Sabbath  as  on  any  other  day ; 
nor  does  a  double  quantity  fall  on  the  day  preceding 
the  Sabbath  ;  nor  would  natuial  products  cease  at 
once  and  for  evei',  as  the  manna  is  represented  as 
ceasing  in  the  book  of  Joshua.  The  manna  of  Scrip- 
ture we  therefore  regard  as  wholly  miraculous,  and 
not  in  any  I'espect  a  product  of  natui-e. 

The  etymology  and  meaning  of  the  word  manna 
are  best  given  by  the  old  authorities,  the  Septuagint, 
the  Vulgate,  and  Joseph  us.  The  Septuagint  trans- 
lation of  Ex.  xvi.  15  is  this:  'l56vTis  5e  avrh  ol 
viol  'itrparyA.  fhav  eTipos  r(S  6T€p(i>,Tt  ecTi  rovro' 
ov  7af)  rjSeiffav  ri  7tv.  '"  But  the  children  of  Israel, 
seeintj  it,  said  one  to  another.  What  is  this  'I  for 
theij  knew  not  what  it  was."  The  Vidgate,  with  a 
very  careful  reference  to  the  Hebrew,  thus  :  "  Quod 
eum  vidissent  filii  Israel,  dixerunt  ad  invicem  tnanhu, 
quod  significat :  Quid  est  hoc  ?  ignorabant  enini 
quid  esset :"  i.  e.  '  Which  when  the  children  of 
Israel  saw,  they  said  one  to  another,  MAN  HIJ, 
which  signifies,  What  is  t/iis  ?  for  they  knew  not 
what  it  was."  In  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  I,  §6)  we  have 
the  following :  KaXovai  Se  'EI3pa7oi  rb  ^pwfxa 
TOVTO  ixdwa,  TO  yap  fxav  c7repa'T7)(ris  Kara  t?)!/ 
rjniTepav  SidKiKrov,  t'l  tout'  iariv,  avaKpivovau. 


MANNA 


229 


"  Now  the  Hebrews  call  this  food  manna,  for  the 
particle  man,  in  our  language,  is  the  asking  of  a 
question,  What  is  Tins?" 

According  to  all  these  authorities,  with  which  the 
Syriac  also  agrees,  the  Hebrew  word  mail,  by  which 
this  substance  is  always  designated  in  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures,  is  the  neuter  interrogative  pronoun 
(what?)  ;  and  the  name  is  derived  from  the  inquirv 
t^-in  JJ3  (jman  hu,  what  is  this?),  which  the  He- 
brews made  when  they  first  saw  it  upon  the  gi'ound. 
The  other  etymologies,  which  would  derive  the  word 
from  either  of  the  Hebrew  verbs    HJD  or  pJO,  are 

more  recent  and  less  worthy  of  confidence,  and  do 
not  agree  with  the  sacred  text ;  a  literal  translation 
of  which  (Ex.  xvi.  15)  is  this:  ^^  And  the  children 
of  Israel  saiv  and  said,  a  man  to  his  neighbour,  what 
is  this  (man  hu) ;  for  they  knew  not  uhat  it  was." 
The  Arabian  physician  Avicenna  gives  tlie  fol- 
lowing description  of  the  manna  which  in  his  time 
was  used  as  a  medicine: — "  Manna  is  a  dew  which 
falls  on  stones  or  bushes,  becomes  thick  like  honey, 
and  Ciin  be  hardened  so  as  to  be  like  grains  of  corn." 


The  substance  now  called  manna  in  the  Arab.an 
desert  through  which  the  Israelites  passed,  is^  col- 
lected in  the  month  of  June  from  the  tarfa  or 
tamarisk  shrub  {Tamarix  gallica).  According  to 
Burckhardt  it  drops  from  the  thorns  on  the  sticks 
and  leaves  with  which  the  ground  is  covered,  and 
must  be  gathered  earlv  in  the  day,  or  it  will  be 


230 


MANNA 


melted  by  the  sun.  The  Arabs  cleanse  and  boil  it, 
strain  it  through  a  cloth,  and  put  it  in  leathern 
bottles ;  and  in  this  way  it  can  be  kept  uninjured 
for  several  years.  They  use  it  like  honey  or  butter 
with  their  unleavened  bread,  but  never  make  it  into 
cakes  or  eat  it  by  itself.  It  abounds  only  in  very 
wet  years,  and  in  dry  seasons  it  sometimes  disappears 
entirely.  Various  shrubs,  all  through  the  oriental 
world,  from  India  to  Syria,  yield  a  substance  of  this 
kind.  The  tamarisk  gum  is  by  some  supposed  to 
be  produced  by  the  puncture  of  a  small  insect, 
which  Ehrenberg  has  examined  and  described  under 
the  name  of  Coccus  manniparus.  !See  Symbolac 
Physicae,  p.  i. ;  Transact,  of  Literary  Society  of 
Bombay,  i.  251.  This  surely  could  not  have  been 
the  food  of  the  Israelites  during  their  forty  years' 
sojourn  in  the  wilderness,  though  the  name  might 
have  been  derived  from  some  real  or  fancied  resem- 
blance to  it. 

Rauwolf  {Trav.  i.  94)  and  some  more  recent  tra- 
vellers have  observed  that  the  dried  gi-ains  of  the 
oriental  manna  were  like  the  coriander-seed.  Gmelin 
{Trav.  through  Russia  to  Persia,  pt.  iii.  p.  28)  re- 
marks this  of  the  manua  of  Persia,  which  he  says  is 
white  as  snow.  The  peasants  of  Ispahan  gather  the 
leave.'i  of  a  certain  thorny  shrub  (the  sweet  thorn) 
and  strike  them  with  a  stick,  and  the  grains  of 
manna  are  received  in  a  sieve.  Niebuhr  observed 
that  at  Jlardin  in  Mesopotamia,  the  manna  lies  like 
meal  on  the  leaves  of  a  tree  called  in  the  East  ballot 
and  ofs  or  as,  which  he  regards  as  a  species  of  oak." 
The  harvest  is  in  July  and  August,  and  much  more 
plentiful  in  wet  than  dry  seasons.  It  is  sometimes 
collected  before  sunrise  by  shaking  if  from  the  leaves 
on  to  a  clotli,  and  thus  collected  it  remains  very 
white  and  pure.  That  which  is  not  shaken  off'  in 
the  morning  melts  upon  the  leaves,  and  accumu- 
lates till  it  becomes  very  thick.  The  leaves  are 
then  gathered  and  put  in  boiling  water,  and  the 
manna  floats  like  oil  upon  the  surface.  This  the 
natives  call  manna  essemma,  i.  e.  heavenly  manna. 
In  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  Burckhardt  found  manna 
like  gum  on  tlie  lea\'es  and  branches  of  the  tree 
gharrob,^  which  is  as  large  as  the  olive-tree,  having 
a  leaf  like  the  poplar,  though  somewhat  broader. 
It  appears  like  dew  upon  the  leaves,  is  of  a  brown 
or  grey  colour,  and  drops  on  the  ground.  When 
first  gathered  it  is  sweet,  but  in  a  day  or  two  be- 
comes acid.  The  Arabs  use  it  like  honey  or  butter, 
and  eat  it  in  their  oatmeal  gruel.  They  also  use  it 
in  cleaning  their  leather  bottles  and  making  them 
air-tight.  The  season  for  gathering  tliis  is  May  or 
June.  Two  other  shrubs  which  have  been  supposed 
to  yield  the  manna  of  Scripture,  are  the  Alhagi 
maurorimi,  or  Persian  manna,  and  the  Alhagi  de- 
sertoruin, — thorny  plants  common  in  Syria. 

The  manna  of  European  commerce  comes  mostlv 
from  Calabria  and  Sicily.  It  is  gatliered  during 
the  months  of  June  and  July  from  some  species  of 
ash  {Ornus  Europaea  and  Ornus  rotundifolia), 
from  which  it  drops  in  consequence  of  a  puncture 
by  an  insect  resembling  the  locust,  but  distin- 
guished from  it  by  having  a  sting  under  its  body. 
The  substance  is  fluid  at  night,  and  resembles  the 
dew,  but  in  the  morning  it  begins  to  harden. 

5     ^t 

"»  ij5^^|,  which  Freytag,  however,  identifies  with 
some  species  of  Capparis. 

b  Sprengel  {Hist.  Rei  herh.  i.  270)  identifies  the  gharb 
or  gharab  with  the  Salix  bcCbylonica. 


MANOAH 

Compare  Rosenmiiller's  Alterthwnskunde,  iv.  p. 
316-29;  Winer,  Realworterbuch,  ii.  p.  53,  54;  and 
the  Oriental  tiavellers  above  referred  to.  [C.  E.  S.] 


MANO'AH  (nijD :  mavai  ;  Joseph.  Ma- 
vd)X'ns:  Manue),  the  father  of  Samson;  a  Danite, 
native  of  the  to^vn  of  Zorah  (Judg.  xiii.  2).  The 
narrative  of  the  Bible  (xiii.  1-23),  of  the  circum- 
stances which  preceded  the  birth  of  Samson,  supplies 
us  with  very  few  and  faint  traits  of  Manoah's  cha- 
racter or  habits.  He  seems  to  have  had  some  occu- 
pation which  separated  him  during  part  of  the  day 
from  his  wife,  though  that  wa.s  not  field  work,  be- 
cause it  was  iu  the  field  that  his  wife  was  found  by 
the  angel  during  his  absence.  He  was  hospitable, 
as  his  forefiither  Abram  had  been  before  him  ;  he 
was  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah,  and  reverent  to  a 
great  degree  of  fear.  These  faint  lineaments  arc 
brought  into  somewhat  greater  distinctness  by  Jo- 
sephus  (^Ant.  v.  8,  §2,  3),  on  what  authority  we  have 
no  means  of  judging,  though  his  account  is  doubtless 
founded  on  some  ancient  Jewish  tradition  or  record. 
"  There  was  a  certain  Manoches  who  was  without 
controversy  the  best  and  chiefest  pei'son  of  his 
country.  This  man  had  a  wife  of  exceeding  beaut}', 
surpassing  the  other  women  of  the  place.  Now. 
when  they  had  no  children,  and  were  much  dis- 
tressed thereat,  he  besought  God  that  He  would  gi-ant 
unto  them  a  lawful  heir,  and  for  that  purpose  re- 
sorted often  with  his  wife  to  the  suburb  *  {rh  irpod- 
ffreiov')  of  the  city.     And  in  that  place  was  the 


^  Possibly  to  consult  the  Levites,  whose  special  pro- 
perty the  suburbs  of  the  city  were.  But  Zorah  is  no- 
where stated  to  have  been  a  Levites'  citv. 


MANSLAYER 

great  plain.  Now  the  man  loved  his  wife  to  dis- 
traction, and  on  that  account  was  exceedingly  jealous 
of  her.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  his  wife  being 
alone,  an  angel  appeared  to  her  .  .  .  and  when  he 
Iwd  said  these  things  he  departed,  for  he  had  come 
by  the  command  of  (Jod.  When  her  husband  I'ame 
she  informed  him  of  all  things  concerning  the  aiigel, 
wondering  greatly  at  the  beauty  and  size  of  the 
youth,  insomuch  that  he  was  tilled  with  jealousy 
and  with  suspicion  thereat.  Then  the  woman  de- 
siring to  relieve  her  husband  of  his  excessive  grief, 
besought  God  that  He  wtjuld  send  again  the  angel, 
so  that  the  man  might  behold  him  as  well  as  she. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  when  they  were  in  the 
suburbs  again,  by  the  favour  of  God  the  angel  ap- 
peared the  second  time  to  the  woman,  while  her 
husband  was  absent.  And  she  having  prayed  him 
to  tarry  awhile  till  she  should  fetch  her  husband, 
went  and  brought  ]\Ianoches."  The  rest  of  the  story 
agrees  with  the  Bible. 

We  hear  of  Mauoah  once  again  in  connexion  with 
the  marriage  of  Samson  to  the  Philistine  of  Tim- 
nath.  His  father  and  his  mother  remonstrated  with 
him  thereon,  but  to  no  purpose  (xiv.  2,  3).  They 
then  accompanied  him  to  Timnath,  both  on  the  pre- 
liminary visit  (vers.  5,  0),  and  to  the  marriage  itself 
(9,  10).  Manoah  appears  not  to  have  survived  his 
son:  not  he,  but  Samson's  brothers,  went  down  to 
Gaza  for  the  body  of  the  hero,  and  bringing  it  up 
to  the  family  tomb  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  re- 
united the  tiither  to  the  son  (xvi.  31),  w-hose  birth 
had  been  the  subject  of  so  many  prayers  and  so  much 
anxiety.  Milton,  howe^'er,  does  not  take  this  view. 
In  Samson  Agonistes  Manoah  bears  a  prominent 
part  throughout,  and  lives  to  bmy  his  son.     [G.] 

IVIANSLAYEE.a  The  principle  on  which  the 
"  manslayer"  was  to  be  allowed  to  escape,  viz. 
that  the  person  slain  was  regarded  as  "  delivered 
into  his  hand"  by  the  Almighty,  was  obviously 
open  to  much  wilful  perversion  (1  Sara.  xxiv.  4,  18  ; 
xxvi.  8  ;  Philo,  Be  Spec.  Leg.  iii.  21,  vol.  ii.  320), 
though  the  cases  mentioned  appear  to  be  a  sufficient 
sample  of  the  intention  of  the  lawgiver,  a.  Death 
by  a  blow  in  a  sudden  quarrel  (Num.  sxxv.  22). 
b.  Death  by  a  stone  or  missile  tlirown  at  random 
(ib.  22,  23).  c.  By  the  blade  of  an  axe  flying  from 
its  handle  (Deut.  xix.  5).  d.  Whether  the  case  of  a 
person  liilled  by  falling  fiom  a  roof  unprovided  with 
a  parapet  involved  the  guilt  of  manslaughter  on  the 
owner,  is  not  clear ;  but  the  law  seems  intended  to 
prevent  the  imputation  of  malice  in  any  such  case, 
b}'  preventing  as  far  as  possible  the  occurrence  of 
the  tact  itself  (Deut.  xxii.  8).  (Michaelis,  On 
the  Laws  of  Moses,  arts.  223,  280,  ed.  Smith.) 
In  all  these  and  the  like  cases  the  manslayer  \vas 
allowed  to  retire  to  a  city  of  refuge.  [Cities  of 
Refuge.] 

Besides  these  the  following  may  be  mentioned  as 
cases  of  homicide,  a.  An  animal,  not  known  to  be 
vicious,  causing  death  to  a  human  being,  was  to  be 
])ut  to  death,  and  regarded  as  unclean.  But  if  it 
was  known  to  be  vicious,  the  owner  also  was  liable 
to  irne,audevendeath  (Ex.  xxi.28,  31).  b.  A  thief 
overtaken  at  night  in  the  act  might  law^"ully  be  put 
to  death,  but  if  the  sun  had  risen  the  act  of  killing 


MANTLE 


r.oi 
J.OX 


a  nXI.  P^rt.  of  ^V^.  "pierce"  or  "crush,"  Ges. 
p.  13i'7  ;  Aovevrri^  ;  homicida:  used  also  in  the  sense  of 
murderer.  The  phrase  n!l3p'3'  aKouai'us,  »w  igno- 
rantiam,G<i!i.  p.  1362,  must  tVefefore  be  included,  to  denote 
the  distinction  which  the  Law  drew  so  plainly  betwoon 


him  was  to  be  regarded  as  murder  (Ex.  xxii.  2,  3). 
Other  cases  are  added  bj-  the  Mishna,  whicli,  however, 
are  included  in  the  definitions  given  above.  {Sanh.  ix. 
1,  2,  3;  Maccoth,  ii.  2  ;  Otho,  Lex.  liahb.  "  Homi- 
cida."   [Murder.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

MANTLE.  The  word  employed  in  the  A.  V. 
to  translate  no  less  than  four  Hebrew  terms,  entirely 
distinct  and  independent  both  in  derivation  and 
meaning. 

1 .  iXy^'D^,  s'ndcah.   This  word  occurs  but  once, 

viz.  Judg.  iv.  18,  where  it  denotes  the  thing  witli 
which  Jael  covered  Sisera.  It  has  the  definite  article 
prefixed,  and  it  may  therefore  be  inferred  that  it 
was  some  part  of  the  regular  furniture  of  the  tent. 
The  clue  to  a  more  exact  signification  is  given  by 
the  Arabic  version  of  the  Polyglott,  which  renders 

it  by  alcatifah,  si/jajiji,  a  word  which  is  ex- 
plained by  Dozy,*  on  tlie  authority  of  Ibn  Batuta 
and  other  Oriental  authors,  to  mean  certain  articles 
of  a  thick  fabric,  in  shape  like  a  plaid  or  shawl, 
which  are  commonly  used  for  beds  by  the  Arabs : 
"  When  they  sleep  they  spread  them  on  the  ground." 
"  For  the  under  part  of  the  bed  they  are  doubled 
several  times,  and  one  longer  than  the  rest  is  used 
for  a  coverlid."  On  such  a  bed  on  the  floor  of 
Heber's  tent  no  doubt  the  weary  Sisera  threw  him- 
self, and  such  a  coverlid  must  the  semicah  have 
been  which  Jael  laid  over  him.  'The  A.  V.  perhaps 
derived  their  word  "  mantle "  fi'om  the  pallium  of 
the  Vulgate,  and  the  mantel  of  Luther. 

2.  ?^y)0,  meil.  (Rendered  "  mantle"  in  1  Sam. 
XV.  27,  xxviii.  14;  Ezr.  ix.  3,  5  ;  Job  i.  20,  ii.  12; 
and  Ps.  cix.  29.)  This  word  is  in  other  passages  of 
the  A.  V.  rendered  "  coat,"  "  cloak,"  and  "  robe.' 
This  inconsistency  is  undesirable ;  but  in  one  case 
only — that  of  Samuel — is  it  of  importance.  It 
is  interesting  to  know  that  the  garment  which  his 
mother  made  and  brought  to  the  infant  prophet  at 
her  annual  visit  to  the  Holy  Tent  at  Shiloh  was 
a  miniature  of  the  official  priestly  tunic  or  robe  ; 
the  same  that  the  great  Prophet  wore  in  mature 
years  (1  Sam,  sv.  27),  and  by  which  he  was  on 
one  occasion  actually  identified.  When  the  witch 
of  Endor,  in  answer  to  Saul's  inquiry,  told  him  that 
"  an  old  man  was  come  up,  covered  with  a  meil" 
this  of  itself  was  enough  to  inform  the  king  in  whose 
presence  he  stood — "  Saul  perceived  that  it  was 
Samuel "  (xxviii.  14). 

3.  naOyO,  maatapkah  (the  Hebrew  word  is 
found  in  Is.  iii.  22  only).  Apparently  some  article 
of  a  ''lady's  dress;  probably  an  exterior  tunic, 
longer  and  ampler  than  the  internal  one,  and  j)ro- 
vided  with  sleeves.  See  Gesenius,  Jesaia,  i.  214  ; 
Schroeder,  de  Vestitu  Hcbi-aearum,  ch.  xv.  §  1-5. 

But  the  most  remarkable  of  the  four  is  : 

4.  riTlX,  addereth  (rendered  "mantle"  in  1  K. 
xix.  13,  19  ;  2  K.  ii.  8,  13,  14;  elsewhere  "gar- 
ment" and  "robe");  since  by  it,  and  it  only,  is 
denoted  the  cape  or  wrapper  which,  with  tlie  ex- 
ception of  a  strip  of  skin  or  leather  round  his  loins. 


malicious  and  involuntary  homicide.  (Ks.  xxi.  13,  14  ; 
Lev.  iv.  22  ;   Num.  xxxv.  22,  23 ;  Diut.  xix.  4,  ."i. 

*  DictionnairedesVetementsArahes,\).2Z2.  AVe  gladly 
seize  this  opportunity  to  express  our  obligations  to  this 
admirable  work. 

b  But  see  the  curious  spcculalions  of  Pr.  JIaitland, 
Ks^aij  on  False  Worship,  p.  116,  A.'c.  it)l 


232 


MAOCH 


fonned,  as  we  have  every  reason  to  believe,  the  sole 
garment  of  the  prophet  Elijah. 

Such  clothing,  or  absence  of  clothing,  is  commonly 
assumed  by  those  who  aspire  to  extraordinary  sanc- 
tity in  the  East  at  the  present  day — "  Savage  figures, 
with  '  a  cloak  woven  of  camels'  hair  thrown  over 
the  shoulders,  and  tied  in  front  on  the  breast,  naked 
except  at  the  waist,  round  which  is  a  gh-dle  of  skin, 
the  hair  flowing  loose  about '^  the  head.'"  But 
a  description  still  more  exactly  in  accordance  with 
the  habit  of  the  great  Israelite  ^  dervish,  and  sup- 
porting in  a  remarkable  manner  the  view  of  the 
LXX.,  who  render  addereth  by  firjAccr^s,  i.  e. 
"  sheep-skin,"  is  found  in  the  account  of  a  French 
traveller*  in  the  16th  century: — "  L'enseigne  que 
les  dervis  portent  pour  montrer  qu'ils  sont  religieux, 
est  une  peau  de  bre'bis  sur  leurs  e'paules :  et  ne  por- 
tent autie  vetement  sur  eux  sinon  une  seule  peau 
de  mouton  ou  de  bre'bis,  et  quelque  chose  devant 
leur  pai-ties  honteuses." 

Inaccurately  as  the  word  "mantle"  represents 
such  a  garment  as  the  above,  it  has  yet  become  so 
identified  with  Elijah  that  it  is  impossible  now  to 
alter  it.  It  is  desirable  therefore  to  substitute 
"  mantle "  for  "  garment "  in  Zech.  xiii.  4 ;  a 
passage  from  which  it  would  appear  that  since  the 
time  of  Elijah  his  garb  had  become  the  recognized 
sign  of  a  prophet  of  Jehovah.  [G.] 

MA'OCH  CrjiyO  :  'A^yuax  ;  Alex.  Ma>a;8  : 
Maoch),  the  father  of  Achish,  king  of  Gath,  with 
whom  David  took  refuge  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  2).  In  the 
Syriac  vei'sion  he  is  called  I\lai\chah ;  and  in  1  K. 
ii.  39  we  find  Maachah  described  as  the  father  of 
Achish,  who  was  king  of  Gath  at  the  beginning  of 
Solomon's-  reign.  It  is  not  impossible  that  the  same 
Achish  may  be  intended  in  both  cases  (Keil,  Comm. 
ou  1  K.  ii.  39),  and  Maoch  and  Maachaii  would  then 
be  identical ;  or  Achish  may  have  been  a  title,  like 
Abimelech  and  Pharaoh,  which  would  still  leave 
Maoch  and  Maachah  the  same;  "  son"  in  either 
case  denoting  descendant. 

MA'ON  (l'"iy»  :    yiawp,   Maaf ;   Alex.   Moodj/  : 

Maon),  one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  in 
the  district  of  the  mountains ;  a  member  of  the 
same  group  which  contains  also  the  names  of  Car- 
mel  and  Zipli  (Josh.  xv.  55).  Its  interest  for  us 
lies  in  its  connexion  with  David.  It  was  in  the 
midbar  or  waste  pasture-ground  of  JIaon  (A.  V. 
"wilderness")  that  he  and  his  men  were  lurking 
when  the  treachery  of  the  Ziphites  brought  Saul 
upon  them,  and  they  had  the  narrow  escape  of  the 
cfiffof  ham-Machlekoth  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  24,  25).  It 
seems  from  these  passages  to  have  foi-med  part  of  a 
larger  district  called  "  the  Arabah"  (A.  V.  ver.  24, 
"  plain  "),  which  can  hardly  havebeen  the  depressed 
locality  round  the  Dead  Sea  usually  known  By  that 
name.  To  the  north  of  it  was  another  tract  or  sjiot 
called  "  the  Jeshimon,"  possibly  the  dreary  burnt- 
up  hills  lying  on  the  immediate  west  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  Close  by  was  the  hill  or  the  cliff  of  Hacilah, 
and  the  midbar  itself  probably  extended  over  and 
about  the  mountain  (ver.  26),  round  which  Saul 
was  pursuing  his  fugitives  when  the  sudden  alarm 
of  the  Philistine  incursion  drew  him  off.  Over  the 
pastures  of  Maon  and  Cannel  ranged  the  three  thou- 
sand sheep  and  the  thousand  goats  of  Nabal  (xxv. 

=  Light,    Travels  in  Egypt,  &c.,  quoted  by  Stanley, 
S.  &  P.  311. 
j|^     J  See  the  instructive  and  suggestive  remarks  of  Dr. 
Wolff,  on   the  points    of  correspondence  between   the 


MAONITES,  THE 

2).  Close  adjoining  was  the  midbar  of  Paran, 
which  the  LXX.  make  identical  with  Maon.  Jo- 
sephus's  version  of  the  passage  is  curious — "  a  cer- 
tain man  of  the  Ziphites  from  the  city  Emma" 
{Ant.  vi.  13,  §6). 

The  name  of  Maon  still  exists  all  but  unchanged 
in  the  mouths  of  the  Arab  herdsmen  and  peasants 
in  the  south  of  Palestine.  Main  is  a  lofty  conical 
hill,  south  of,  and  about  7  miles  distant  from, 
Hebron.  To  the  north  there  is  an  extensive  pros- 
pect— on  the  one  hand  over  the  region  bordering 
the  Dead  Sea,  on  the  other  as  far  as  Hebron. 
Close  in  front  is  the  lower  eminence  of  Kurmul, 
the  ancient  Carmel,  no  less  intimately  associated 
with  David's  fortunes  than  Maon  itself  (Kob.  i. 
493,  494). 

It  is  very  much  to  be  desired  that  some  traveller 
would  take  the  trouble  to  see  how  the  actual  lo- 
cality of  Main  agrees  with  the  minute  indications 
of  the  narrative  cited  above.    See  also  Hachilah. 

In  the  genealogical  records  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
in  1  Chronicles,  Maon  appears  as  a  descendant  of 
Hebron,  through  Rekem  and  Shammai,  and  in  its 
turn  the  "  father"  or  colonizer  of  Beth-zur  (Li.  45), 
Hebron  is  of  course  the  well-known  metropolis  of 
the  southern  country,  and  Beth-zm-  has  been  iden- 
tified in  Beit-sur,  4  miles  north  of  Hebron,  and 
therefore  about  1 1  from  Main. 

It  should  not  however  be  overlooked  that  in  the 
original  the  name  of  Maon  is  identical  with  that  of 
the  Mehunim,  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  before 
the  con(|uest  it  may  have  been  one  of  their  towns, 
just  as  in  the  more  central  districts  of  Palestine 
there  were  places  which  preserved  the  memory  of 
the  A^'ites,  the  Zemarites,  the  Ammonites,  and 
other  tribes  who  originally  founded  them.  [Ben- 
jamin, vol.  i.  188/j.]  [G.] 

MA'ONITES,  THE  (pyD,  i.  e.  Maon,  with- 
out the  article  :  MaSia^u.  in  both  MSS. :  Chanaan), 
a  people  mentioned  in  one  of  the  addresses  of  Jeho- 
vah to  the  repentant  Israelites,  as  having  at  some 
former  time  molested  them  :  "  the  Zidonians  also, 
and  Amaiek,  and  Maon  did  oppress  you,  and  ye 
cried  to  me,  and  I  delivered  you  out  of  their  hand  " 
(Judg.  X.  12).  The  name  agrees  with  that  of  a 
people  residing  in  the  desert  far  south  of  Palestine, 
elsewhere  in  the  A.  V.  called  Mehunim  ;  but,  as 
no  invasion  of  Israel  by  this  people  is  related  before 
the  date  of  the  passage  in  question,  various  ex- 
planations and  conjectures  have  been  offered.  The 
reading  of  the  LXX. — "  Midian  " — is  remarkable  as 
being  found  in  both  the  great  MSS.,  and  having  on 
that  account  a  strong  claim  to  be  considered  as  the 
reading  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  text.  Ewald  (Gesch. 
i.  322 note)  appears  to  incline  to  this,  which  has 
also  in  its  favom-,  that,  if  it  be  not  genuine,  Midian 
— whose  ravages  were  then  surely  too  recent  to  be  for- 
gotten—  is  omitted  altogether  from  the  enumeration. 
Still  it  is  remarkable  that  no  variation  has  hitherto 
been  found  in  the  Hebrew  MSS.  of  this  verse. 
M'ichaelis  {Bibelfiir  Unijelehrten  ;  n.nt\  Supplem.^o. 
1437),  on  the  other  hand,  accepts  the  current  reading, 
and  explains  the  dithculty  by  assuming  that  Maon  is 
included  among  the  Bene-Kedem,  or  "  children  of 
the  East,"  named  in  vi.  3 :  leaving,  however,  the 
equal  difficulty  of  the  omission  of  Israel's  great  foe, 
Midian,  unnoticed.     The  reason  which  would  lead 


ancient  Prophets  and  the  modern  Dervishes  (Travels,  &c., 
i.  483;  also  329,  531);  and  Stanley's  East.  Church,  397. 
"  Beion,  Observations  (Paris,  1588\  quoted  by  Dozy, 
Dictionnaire,  &c.,  p.  51. 


MAEA 

us  to  accept  Midiaii  would  lead  us  to  leject  the  read- 
ing of  the  Syriac  Peshito — "  Amnion," — the  Bene- 
Ammon  havmg  been  already  named.  "Canaan" 
was  probably  a  conjecture  of  Jerome's.     [Mehu- 

NIMS.] 

A  trace  of  the  residence  of  the  Slaonites  in  the 
south  of  Palestine  is  perhaps  extant  in  Maon,  now 
Main,  the  city  of  Judah  so  well  known  in  con- 
nexion with  David.  [0.] 

MA'EA  (X^0,  or,  according  to  the  correction 

of  the  Kri,  ITlDj,  the  name  which  Naomi  adopted 

in  the  exclamation  forced  from  her  by  the  recogni- 
tion of  her  fellow-citizens  at  Bethlehem  (Ruth  i.  20), 
"  Call  me  not  Naomi  (pleasant),  but  call  me  Mara 
(bitter),  for  Shaddai  hath  dealt-very-bitterly  (ha- 
mer)  with  me."  The  LXX.  have  preserved  the 
play  ....  TTiKpav,  '6ri  iiriKpavdri ....  6  iKavSs  ; 
though  hardly  as  well  as  Jerome,  "  Vacate  me  Mara 
{hoc  est  amaram)  quia  umaritudine  me  replevit 
Omnipotens."  Marah  is  often  assumed  to  have 
been  the  origin  of  the  name  MARy,  but  inaccurately, 
for  Mar)- — in  the  N.  T.  Mariam — is  merely  a  cor- 
ruption of  Miriam  (see  that  article).  [G.] 

MA'RAH  (mo  :  Meppa,  niKpia,  TliKpiai  : 
Mara),  a  place  which  lay  in  the  wilderness  of 
Shur  or  Etham,  three  days'  journey  distant  (Ex. 
XV.  22-24,  Num.  xxxiii.  8)  from  the  place  at  which 
tlie  Israelites  crossed  the  Ked  Sea,  and  where  was  a 
spring  of  bitter  water,  sweetened  subsequently  by 
the  casting  in  of  a  tree  which  "  the  Lord  showed  " 
to  Moses.  It  has  been  suggested  (Burckhardt, 
Syria,  474)  that  Moses  made  use  of  the  berries  of 
the  plant  Ghurkiid,^  and  which  still  it  is  implied 
would  be  found  similarly  to  operate.  Robinson, 
however  (i.  (37),  could  not  find  that  this  or  any  tree 
was  now  known  by  the  Arabs  to  possess  such  pro- 
perties ;  nor  would  those  berries,  he  says,  have  been 
found  so  early  in  the  season  as  the  time  when  the 
Israelites  reached  the  region.  It  may  be  added 
that,  had  any  such  resource  ever  existed,  its  eminent 
usefulness  to  the  supply  of  human  wants  would 
hai'dly  have  let  it  perish  from  the  traditions  of  the 
desert.  Further,  the  expression  "  the  Lord  shewed" 
seems  siu'ely  to  imply  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  transaction.  As  regards  the  identity  of 
Marah  with  any  modern  site,  all  travellers  appear 
to  look  out  for  water  which  is  bitter  at  this  day, 
whereas  if  miraculous,  the  effect  would  surely  have 
been  permanent,  as  it  clearly  is  intended  to  be  in 
2  K.  ii.  21.  On  this  supposition,  however,  Huw- 
arah,  distant  16|  hours  (Rob.  B.  Ii.,  i.  07)  from 
Ayoun  Mousa,  has  been  by  Robinson,  as  also  by 
Burckhardt  (April  27,  1816),  Schubert  (274),  and 
Wellsted,  identified  with  it,  apparently  because  it 
is  the  bitterest  water  in  the  neighbourhood.  Winer 
says  (s.  V.)  that  a  still  bitterer  well  lies  east  of 
Marah,  the  claims  of  which  Tischendorf,  it  appears, 
has  supported.  Lepsius  prefei's  W'ady  Ghurmidcl. 
Prof.  Stanley  thinks  that  the  claim  may  be  left  be- 
tween this  and  Howarah,  but  adds  in  a  note  a  men- 
tion of  a  spring  south  of  Ifoioarah,  "  so  bitter  that 
neither  men  nor  camels  could  drink  it,"  of  which 
"  Dr.  Graul  (vol.  ii.  p.  254)  was  told."  The  Ai/oicn 
Mousa,  "  wells  of  Moses,"  which  local  tradition 
assigns  to  Marah,  are  manifestly  too  close  to  the 
head  of  the  gulf,  and  probable  spot  of  crossing  it. 


MARBLE 


233 


"  Robinson  says  (i.  26),  "  peganum  retusum,"  Forsk., 
Flora  Aeg.  Arab.  p.  Ixvi.  Moi'e  correctly,  "  Xitraria  tri- 
dentata  "  of  Desl'onlaines,  Flora  Allant.  i.  'ill. 


to  suit  the  distance  of  "  three  days'  journey."  The 
soil  of  this  region  is  described  as  being  alternately 
gravelly,  stony,  and  sandy  ;  under  the  range  of  the 
Gcbel  Wardan  chalk  and  flints  are  plentiful,  and 
on  the  direct  line  of  route  between  Ayoun  Mousa 
and  Howarah  no  water  is  found  (Robinson,  i.  67) 

[H.  H.] 
MAR'ALAH  (n7y"!»:  MayeXSa;  Ales.  Ma- 
piKa :  Marala),  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  11), 
which,  with  most  of  the  places  accompanying  it,  is. 
unfortunately  hitherto  unknown.  Keil  {Josua,  ad" 
loc.)  infers,  though  on  the  slightest  grounds,  that  it 
was  somewhere  on  the  ridge  of  Carmel.  [G.] 

MARAN'ATHA  {Uapavadd),  an  expression 
used  by  St.  Paul  at  the  conclusion  of  his  first  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians  (xvi.  22).  It  is  a  Grecised 
form  of  the  Aramaic  words  NHN  pQ,  "  our  Lord 
cometh."  In  the  A.  V.  it  is'combined  wth  the 
preceding  "  anathema  ;  "  but  this  is  unnecessary  ; 
at  all  events  it  can  only  be  regarded  as  adding 
emphasis  to  the  previous  adjuration.  It  rather 
appears  to  be  added  "  as  a  weighty  watchword  "  to 
impress  upon  the  disciples  thelmportant  truth  that 
the  Lord  was  at  hand,  and  that  they  should  be  ready 
to  meet  Him  (Alford,  Gr.  Test,  in  loc).  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  phrase  be  taken  to  mean,  as  it  may, 
"  Our  Lord  has  come,"  theii  the  connection  is, 
"  the  curse  will  remain,  for  the  Lord  has  come 
who  will  take  vengeance  on  those  who  reject  Him." 
Thus  the  name  "  Maronite"  is  explained  by  a  tra- 
dition that  the  Jews,  in  expectation  of  a  Messiah, 
were  constantly  saying  Maran,  i.e.  Lord;  to  which 
the  Christians  answered  Maran  atha,  the  Lord  is 
come,  why  do  you  still  expect  Him?  (Stanley, 
Corinthians,  ad  loc).  [W.  L.  B.I 

MARBLE."     Like  the  Greek  fidpfiapos,  No.  1 

(see  foot-note),  the  generic  term  for  marble  may  pro- 
bably be  taken  to  mean  almost  any  shining  stone. 
The  so-called  marble  of  Solomon's  architectuial 
works,  which  Josephus  calls  AiOos  \{vk6s,  may 
thus  have  been  limestone — («)  from  near  Jerusalem  ; 
{b)  from  Lebanon  (Jura  limestone),  identical  with 
the  material  of  the  Sun  Temple  at  Baalbec ;  or  (c) 
white  marble  from  Arabia  or  elsewhere  (Joseph. 
Ant.  \aii.  3,  §2  ;  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  .52  ;  Plin.  M.  N.  xxxvi. 
12;  Jamieson,  3Iineralog ij,  4rl  ;  Raumer,  Pal.  28; 
Volney,  Trav.  ii.  241  ;  Kitto,  Fhys.  Geogr.  of  Pal. 
73,  88 ;  Robinson,  ii.  493,  iii.  508  ;  Stanley,  S.  (J-  P. 
307,  424 ;  Wellsted,  Trav.  i.  426,  ii.  143).  That 
this  stone  was  not  marble  seems  probable  from 
the  remark  of  Josephus,  that  whereas  Solomon  con- 
structed his  buildings  of  "  white  stone,"  he  caused 
the  roads  which  led  to  Jerusalem  to  be  made  of 
"  black  stone,"  probably  the  black  basalt  of 
the  Hauran ;  and  also  from  his  account  of  the 
porticoes  of  Herod's  temple,  which  he  says  were 
fiovoKidoi  \€VKOTr]Tris  /xap/xapov  (^Joseph.  Ant.  I.e., 
and  B.  J.   v.  5,   §1,   0;   Kitto,  pp.  74,  75,  80, 

"  1-  K'ti*,  or  ^t^  ;  Ilapios,  Udpivoi  At'Sos;  mannor 

Parium;  from  E»;."|J»;,  to  sbiiie  (Ges.  1384).    2.   niDD. 

from    "iHDi    t*  travel  round,  either  a  stone  used  in 

tessellated  pavements,  or  one  with  circular  spots  (Ges. 
947).    3.    "TTj ;  TiCi/vLvoi  A.t0os ;  probably  a  stone   with 

pearly  appearance,  like  alabaster  (Ges.  355).  4.  t^HS  • 
cr/uapayStTT)!  Ai'(?o5  ;  lapis  smaragdinus  (Ges.  1S2).  The 
three  last  words  used  only  in  Ksth.  i.  6.  5.  jnop/xopos ; 
marmor  CUcv.  xviii.  12). 


234 


MAECHESHVAN 


89).  But  whether  the  "  costly  stone  "  employed 
ill  Solomon's  buildings  was  maible  or  not,  it  seems 
clear  from  the  expressions  both  of  Scripture  and 
Josephus,  that  some  at  least  of  the  "great  stones," 
whose  weight  can  scarcely  have  been  less  than  40 
tons,  must  have  come  from  Lebanon  (1  K.  v.  14-18, 
vii.  10  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  2,  §9). 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Herod,  both  in  'the 
Temple  and  elsewhere,  employed  Parian  or  otlier 
marble.  Remains  of  marble  columns  still  exist  in 
abundance  at  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  9,  §4,  6, 
and  11,  §3,  5;  Wilhams,  Holy  City,  ii.  330; 
Sandys,  190;  Robinson,  i.  301,  305). 

The  marljle  pillars  and  tesserae  of  various  colours 
of  the  palace  at  Susa  came  doubtless  fiom  Persia 
itself,  where  marble  of  various  colours  is  found, 
especiallv  in  the  province  of  Hamadan,  Susiana. 
(Esth.  i'.  6 ;  Marco  Polo,  Travels,  78,  ed.  Bohn ; 
Chardin,  Voy.  iii.  280,  308,  358,  and  viii.  253 ; 
P.  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  ii.  250;  Winer,  s.  v. 
"  Marmor.")  [H.  W.  P.] 

MAECHESHVAN.     [Months.] 

MAE'CUS(Ma/)K:os:  Marcus).  The  Evangelist 
Mark,  who  was  cousin  to  Barnabas  (Col.  iv.  10), 
and  the  companion  and  fellow-labourer  of  the 
apostles  Paul  (Philem.  24)  and  Peter  (1  Pet.  v.  13). 
[Mark.] 

MAEDOCHE'llS  {MapSoxalos :  Mardo- 
chaeus).  1.  MoRDECAl,  the  uncle  of  Esther,  in 
the  apocryphal  additions  (Esth.  x.  1,  xi.  2,  12,  xii. 
1-6,  xvi.  13  ;  2  Mace.  xv.  36).  The  14th  of  the 
month  Adar,  on  which  the  feast  of  Purim  was 
celebrated,  is  called  in  the  last  passage  "  Mar- 
docheus'  day "  (j)  MapSoxo-^K^l  Vfxfpa ;  Mar- 
duchaei  dies). 

2.  {Mardoclieus)  =  Mordecai,  who  returned 
with  Zcrubbabel  and  Joshua  (1  Esdr.  v.  8  ;  comp. 
Ezr.  ii.  2). 

MAEE'SHAH  (H^'SinO,  in  Josh,  only ;  else- 
where in  the  shorter  form  of  Hk^O  :  BaOTjadp, 

T7]v  Mapeiffdv ;  Alex.  MaprjO'a :  Maresa),  one  of 
the  cities  of  Judah  in  the  district  of  the  Shefelah_ 
or  low  country ;  named  in  the  same  group  with 
Keilah  and  Nezib  (Josh.  xv.  44j.  If  we  may 
so  interpret  the  notices  of  the  1  Chronicles  (see 
below),  Hebron  itself  was  colonized  from  Mare- 
shah.  It  was  one  of  the  cities  fortified  and  gar- 
risoned by  liehoboam  after  the  rupture  with  tlie 
northern  kingdom  (2  Chr.  xi.  8).  The  natural 
inference  is,  that  it  commanded  some  pass  or 
position  of  approach,  an  inference  which  is  sup- 
ported by  the  fact  that  it  is  named  as  the  point 
to  which  the  enormous  horde  of  Zeiah  the  Cushite 
reached  in  his  invasion  of  Judaea,  before  he  was 
met  and  repulsed  by  Asa  (2  Chr.  xiv.  9).  A  ra- 
vine (ver.  10  ;  Go:  A.  \'.  "valley")  bearing  the 
name  of  Zephathah  was  near.  In  the  rout  which 
followed  the  encounter,  the  flying  Cushites  weie 
pursued  to  tlie  Bedouin  station  of  Gerar  (ver.  14, 
15). 

Marcshah  is  mentioned  once  or  twice  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Maccabaean  struggles.  .Judas  probably 
passed  through  it  on  his  way  from  Hebron  to  avenge 
the  defeat  of  Joseph  and  Azarias  (1  Mace.  v.  6!j. 
The  reading  of  the  LXX.  and  A.  V.  is  Samai-ia  ; 

"  Beiyamin  of  Tudela  (Asher,  i.  77)  identifies  Maresbali 
with  "  Beit  Gabrin."  Parchi,  with  unusual  inaccuracy, 
would  place  it  in  the  mountains  East  of  Jaffa. 


IMAKESHAH 

but  Josephus,  A7d.  xii.  8,  §6,  has  Marissa,  and  the 
position  is  exactly  suitable,  which  that  of  Samaria 
is  not.  The  same  exchange,  but  i-eversed,  will  be 
found  in  2  Mace.  xii.  35.) 

A  few  days  later  it  afibrded  a  refuge  to  Gorgias 
when  severely  wounded  in  the  attack  of  Dosi- 
theus  (2  Mace.  .xii.  35  ;  here,  as  just  remarked, 
the  Syriac  version  would  substitute  Samaria, — a 
change  quite  unallowable).  Its  subsequent  fortunes 
were  bad  enough,  but  hardly  worse  th;ui  might  be 
expected  for  a  place  which  lay  as  it  were  at  the 
junction  of  two  cross-roads,  north  and  south,  east 
and  west,  each  the  constant  thoroughfare  of  ai-mies. 
It  was  burnt  by  Judas  in  his  Idumaean  war,  in 
passing  from  Hebron  to  Azotus  {Ant.  xii.  8,  §6). 
About  the  year  110  B.C.  it  was  taken  from  the 
Idumaeans  by  John  Hyrcanus.  Some  forty  years 
after,  about  B.C.  63,  its  restoration  was  decreed  by 
the  clement  Pompey  {Ant.  xiv.  4,  §4),  though  it 
appears  not  to  have  been  really  reinstated  till  later 
(xiv.  5,  §3).  But  it  was  only  rebuilt  to  become 
again  a  victim  (B.C.  39),  this  time  to  the  Parthians, 
who  plundered  and  destroyed  it  in  their  rage  at  not 
finding  in  Jerusalem  the  treasure  they  anticipated 
{Ant.^'xW.  13,  §9;  B.  J.  i.  13,  §9).  It  was  in 
ruins  in  the  4th  century,  when  Eusebius  and  Je- 
rome describe  it  as  in  the  second  mile  from  Eleuthe- 
ropolis.  S.S.W.  of  Beit-jibrin — in  all  probability 
Eleutheropolis — and  a  little  over  a  Roman  mile 
therefrom,  is  a  site  called  Marash,  which  is  very 
possibly  the  representative  of  the  ancient  Maj'e- 
shah.  It  is  described  by  the  indefatigable  Tobler 
{Britte  Wand.  129,  142)  as  l}nng  on  a  gently 
swelling  hill  loading  down  from  the  mountains  to 
the  great  western  plain,  from  which  it  is  but  half 
an  hour  distant.  The  ruins  are  not  extensive,  and 
Dr.  Robinson,  to  whom  their  discovery  is  due,*  has 
ingeniously  conjectured  (on  grounds  for  which  the 
reader  is  referred  to  B.  R.  ii.  67,  68)  that  the  ma- 
terials were  employed  in  building  the  neighbouring 
Eleutheropolis. 

On  two  other  occasions  Mareshah  comes  forward 
in  the  0.  T.  It  was  the  native  place  of  Eliezer 
ben-Dodavah,  a  prophet  who  predicted  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  ships  which  king  Jehoshaphat  had  built 
in  conjunction  with  Ahaziah  of  Israel  (2  Chr. 
XX.  37).  It  is  included  by  the  prophet  Micah 
among  the  towns  of  the  low  country  which  he 
attempts  to  rouse  to  a  sense  of  the  dangers  their 
misconduct  is  bringing  upon  them  (Jlic.  i.  15). 
Like  the  rest,  the  apostrophe  to  Mareshah  is  a 
play  on  the  name :  "  I  will  bring  your  heir 
(yoresh)  to  you,  oh  city  of  inheritance "  {Mare- 
shah). The  following  verse  (16)  shows  that  the 
inhabitants  had  adopted  the  heathen  and  forbidden 
custom  of  cutting  off  the  back  hair  as  a  sign  of 
mourning. 

2.  (Mapetffa)  Father  of  Hebron,  and  appa- 
rently a  son  or  descendant  of  Caleb  the  brother 
of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  42),  who  derived  his  de- 
scent from  Judah  through  Phaiez.  "  The  sons  of 
Caleb  were  .  .  .  Mesha,  the  father  of  Ziph,  and  the 
sons  of  Maresha  father  of  Hebron."  It  is  difficult 
not  to  suppose  that  Mesha  may  have  been  a 
transcriber's  vai'iation  for  Maresha,  especially  as  the 
text  of  the  LXX. — both  MSS. — actually  stands  so. 
It  is  however  only  a  probable  conjecture.  The 
names  in  these  lists  are  many  of  them  no  doubt 
those  not  of  persons  bixt  of  towns,  and  whether 
Mesha  and  Mareshah  be  identical  or  not,  a  close 
relationship  is  equally  denoted  between  the  towns 
of  Hebron  and  Mareshah.     But 


MAEIMOTH 

3.  (Maix«;  Alex.  Maprjcra)  in  1  Chr.  iv.  21 
we  find  Mareshah  again  named  as  deriving;  its 
origin  from  Shelah,  the  third  son  of  Judah, 
through  Laadah.  Whether  this  Mareshah  be  a  man 
or  a  place,  identical  with  or  distinct  from  the  last- 
mentioned,  it  is  impossible  to  determine.         [G.] 

MAR'IMOTH  {Marimoth).  The  same  as  Me- 
UAIOTH  the  priest,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Ezra 
(2  Ksdr.  i.  2  ;  comp.  Ezr.  vii.  o).  He  is  also  called 
Mekemoth  (1  Esdr.  viii.  2). 

MA'RISA  (Mapicra  :  Jfacesa),  the  Greek  form 
of  the  name  Mareshah,  occurring  2  Mace.  xii.  35 
only.  [G.] 

MARK  {MdpKOs:  Marcus).  Mark  the  Evan- 
gelist is  probably  the  same  as  "  John  whose  surname 
was  Mark"  (Acts  xii.  12,  25).  Grotius  indeed  main- 
tains the  contrary,  on  the  ground  that  the  earliest 
historical  writers  nowhere  call  the  Evangelist  Ly 
the  name  of  John,  and  that  they  always  describe 
him  as  the  companion  of  Peter  and  not  of  Paul. 
But  John  was  the  Jewish  name,  <and  Mark,  a  name 
of  frequent  use  amongst  the  Romans,  was  adopted 
afterwards,  and  gradually  superseded  the  other. 
The  places  in  the  N.  T.  enable  us  to  trace  the 
process.  The  John  Mark  of  Acts  xii.  12,  25,  and 
the  John  of  Acts  xiii.  5,  13,  becomes  Mark  only  in 
Acts  XV.  39,  Col.  iv.  10,  2  Tim.  iv.  11,  Philem. 
24.  The  change  of  John  to  Mark  is  analogous 
to  that  of  Saul  to  Paul ;  and  we  cannot  doubt 
that  the  disuse  of  the  Jewish  name  in  favour  of 
the  other  is  intentional,  and  has  reference  to 
the  putting  away  of  his  former  life,  and  entrance 
upon  a  new  ministry.  No  inconsistency  arises 
from  the  accounts  of  his  ministering  to  two 
Apostles.  The  desertion  of  Paul  (Acts  xiii.  13) 
may  have  been  prompted  partly  by  a  wish  to 
rejoin  Peter  and  the  Apostles  engaged  in  preaching 
in  Palestine  (Benson;  see  Kiiinoel's  note),  though 
partly  from  a  disinclination  to  a  perilous  and 
doubtful  journey.  There  is  nothing  strange  in 
the  character  of  a  warm  impulsive  young  man, 
drawn  almost  equally  towards  the  two  great 
teachers  of  the  faith,  Paul  and  Peter.  Had  mere 
cowardice  been  the  cause  of  his  withdrawal, 
Barnabas  would  not  so  soon  after  have  cliosen 
him  for  another  journey,  nor  woidd  he  have 
accepted  the  choice. 

John  Mark  was  the  son  of  a  certain  Mary,  who 
dwelt  at  Jerusalem,  and  was  therefore  probably  born 
in  that  city  (Acts  xii.  12).  He  was  the  cousin  (dj-e- 
i^ios)  of  Barnabas  (Col.  iv.  10).  It  was  to  Mary's 
house,  as  to  a  familiar  haunt,  that  Peter  came  after 
his  deliverance  from  prison  (Acts  xii.  12),  and  there 
found  "many  gathered  together  praying;"  and 
probably  .John  Mark  was  converted  by  Peter  from 
meeting  him  in  his  mother's  hoiise,  for  he  speaks 
of  "Marcus  my  son"  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  This  natural 
link  of  connexion  between  the  two  passages  is  broken 
by  the  supposition  of  two  Jlarks,  which  is  on  all 
accounts  improbable.  The  thcor}'  that  ho  was  one 
of  the  seventy  disciples  is  without  any  warrant. 
Another  theory,  that  an  event  of  the  night  of  our 
Lord's  beti-ayal,  related  by  Mark  alone,  is  one  that 
befell  himself  (Olshausen,  Lange),  must  not  be  so 
promptly  dismissed.  "  There  followed  Him  a  cer- 
tain young  man,  having  a  linen  cloth  cast  about  his 
naked  body ;  and  the  young  men  laid  hold  on  him : 
and  he  left  the  linen  cloth,  and  tied  from  them 
naked"  (Mark  xiv.  51,  52).  The  detail  of  facts  is 
remarkably  minute,  the  name  only  is  wanting.  The 
most  probable  view  is  that  St.  Mark  suppressed  his 


MARK 


235 


owii  name,  whilst  telling  a  story  which  he  had  the 
best  means  of  knowing.  Awakeneil  out  of  sleeu, 
or  just  preparing  for  it,  in  some  house  in  the  valley 
of  Kedron,  he  comes  out  to  see  the  seizure  of  the 
betrayed  Teacher,  known  to  him  and  in  some  de- 
gree beloved  already.  He  is  so  deeply  interested 
in  His  fate  that  he  follows  Him  even  in  his  thin 
linen  robe.  His  demeanoui-  is  such  that  some  of 
the  crowd  are  about  to  arrest  him  ;  then,  "  fear 
overcoming  shame  "  (Bengel),  he  leaves  his  garment 
in  their  hands  and  flees.  We  can  only  say  that  if 
the  name  of  Mark  is  supplied  the  narrative  receives 
its  most  probable  explanation.  John  (i.  40,  xix. 
26;  intioduces  himself  in  this  unobtrusive  way, 
and  perhaps  Luke  the  same  (xxiv.  18).  Mary  the 
mother  of  Maik  seems  to  ha\'e  been  a  person  of 
some  means  and  influence,  and  her  house  a  rallying 
point  for  Christians  in  those  dangerous  days.  Her 
son,  already  an  inquirer,  would  soon  become  more. 
Anxious  to  work  for  Christ,  he  went  with  Paul  and 
Barnabas  as  their  "  minister  "  {inzripiryis)  on  their 
first  journey  ;  but  at  Perga,  as  we  have  seen  above, 
turned  back  (Acts  xii.  25,  xiii.  13).  On  the  second 
journey  Paul  would  not  accept  him  again  as  a  com- 
panion, but  Barnabas  his  kinsman  was  more  in- 
dulgent; and  thus  he  became  the  cause  of  the 
memorable  "  sharp  contention  "  between  them  (Acts 
XV.  36-40).  Whatever  was  the  cause  of  Mark's 
vacillation,  it  did  not  separate  him  for  ever  from 
Paul,  for  we  find  him  by  the  side  of  that  Apostle 
in  his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome  (Col.  iv.  10; 
Philem.  24).  In  the  former  place  a  possible  journey 
of  Mark  to  Asia  is  spoken  of.  Somewhat  later  he 
is  with  Peter  at  Babylon  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  Some 
consider  Babylon  to  be  a  name  here  given  to  Rome 
in  a  mystical  sense ;  surely  without  reason,  since 
the  date  of  a  letter  is  not  the  place  to  look  for  a 
figure  of  speech.  Of  the  causes  of  this  visit  to 
Babylon  there  is  no  evidence.  It  may  be  conjec- 
tured that  he  made  the  journey  to  Asia  Minor 
(Col.  iv.  10),  and  thence  went  on  to  join  Peter  at 
Babylon.  On  his  return  to  Asia  he  seems  to  have 
been  with  Timothy  at  Ephesus  when  Paul  wrote 
to  him  dming  his  second  imprisonment,  and  Paul 
was  anxious  for  his  retm-n  to  Rome  (2  Tim.  iv. 
11). 

When  we  desert  Scripture  we  find  the  facts 
doubtful  and  even  inconsistent.  If  Papias  be  trusted 
(quoted  in  Eusebius,  H.  E.  iii.  39),  Mark  never 
was  a  disciple  of  our  Loi'd ;  which  he  probably 
infers  from  1  Pet.  v.  13.  Epiphanius,  on  the  other 
hand,  willing  to  do  honour  to  the  EvangeHst,  adopts 
the  tradition  that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy-two 
disciples,  who  turned  back  from  our  Lord  at  the 
hard  saying  in  John  vi.  (Cowi.  Haer.  li.  6,  p.  457, 
Dindorf's  recent  edition).  The  same  had  been  said 
of  St.  Luke.  Nothing  can  be  decided  on  this  point. 
The  relation  of  Mark  to  Peter  is  of  great  import- 
ance for  our  view  of  his  Gospel.  Ancient  writers 
with  one  consent  make  the  Evangelist  the  inter- 
preter {epixrjvevriis)  of  the  Apostle  Peter  (Papias 
in  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39  ;  Irenaeus,  Haer.  iii.  1, 
iii.  10,  6  ;  Tertullian,  c.  Marc.  iv.  5;  Hieronymus, 
ad  Hedih.  ix.,  &c.).  Some  explain  this  word  to 
mean  that  the  office  of  Mark  was  to  translate  into 
the  Greek  tongue  the  Aramaic  discourses  of  the 
Apostle  (Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  &c.) ;  whilst  others 
adopt  the  more  probable  view  that  JIark  wrote  a 
Gospel  which  conformed  more  exactly  than  the 
others  to  Peter's  preaching,  and  thus  "  interpreted  " 
it  to  the  church  at  large  (Valesius,  Alford,  Lange, 
Fritasche,  Meyer,  &c.).    The  passage  from  Eusebius 


236 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 


favours  the  latter  view;  it  is  a  quotation  from 
Papias.  "  This  also  [John]  the  elder  said: — -Mark, 
Leing  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wi'ote  down  exactly 
whatever  things  he  remembered,  but  yet  not  in  the 
order  in  which  Christ  either  si)oke  or  did  them  ; 
for  he  was  neither  a  hearer  nor  a  follower  of  the 
Lord's,  but  he  was  afterwards,  as  I  [Papias]  said, 
a  follower  of  Peter."  The  words  in  italics  refer  to 
the  word  interpreter  above,  and  the  passage  de- 
scribes a  disciple  writing  down  what  his  master 
preached,  and  not  an  interpreter  orally  translating 
his  words.  This  tradition  will  be  further  examined 
below.  [Mark,  Gospel  of.]  The  report  that 
Mark  was  the  companion  of  Peter  at  Borne  is  no 
doubt  of  great  antiquity.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
is  quoted  by  Eusebius  as  giving  it  for  "  a  tradition 
which  he  had  received  of  the  elders  from  the  first " 
(jrapaSocTiv  tUv  aveKadev  wpicr^vTepoov,  Eusebius, 
//.  U.  vi.  14 ;  Clem.  Alex.  Hyp.  6).  Bat  the  force 
of  this  is  invalidated  by  the  suspicion  that  it  rests 
on  a  misunderstanding  of  1  Pet.  v.  13,  Babylon 
being  wrongly  taken  for  a  typical  name  of  Pome 
(Euseb.  If.  E.  ii.  15  ;  Hieron.  Le  Vir.  ill.  8).  Sent 
on  a  mission  to  Egypt  by  Peter  ( Epiphanius,  Haer. 
li.  6,  p.  457,  Dindorf ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  16),  Mark 
there  founded  the  church  of  Alexandria  (Hieron. 
De  Vir.  ill.  8),  and  preached  in  various  places 
(Niceph.  //.  E.  ii.  43),  then  returned  to  Alexandria, 
of  which  church  he  was  bishop,  and  suffered  a 
martyr's  death  (Niceph.  ibid.,  and  Hieron.  Dc  Vir. 
ill.  8).  But  none  of  these  later  details  rest  on 
sound  authority.  (Sources  : — The  works  on  the 
Gospels  referred  to  mider  Luke  and  Gospels  ;  also 
Fiitzsche,  In  Marouin,  Leipzig,  1830 ;  Lange,  Bibel- 
werk,  part  ii.,  &c.)  [W.  T.] 

MARK,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  characteristics 
of  this  (iospel,  the  shortest  of  the  four  inspired 
records,  will  appear  fVom  tlie  discussion  of  the 
various  questions  that  have  been  raised  about  it. 

L  Sources  of  this  Gospel. — The  tradition  that  it 
gives  the  teaching  of  Peter,  rather  than  of  the  rest 
of  the  Apostles,  has  been  alluded  to  above.  The 
witness  of  John  the  Presbyter,  quoted  by  Eusebius 
{H.  E.  iii.  39 )  through  Papias,  has  been  cited.  [See 
p.  235,  6.]  Irenaeus  calls  Mark  "  interpres  et  sec- 
tator  Petri,"  and  cites  the  opening  and  the  concluding 
words  of  the  Gospel  as  we  now  possess  them  (iii. 
X.  6).  He  also  alludes  to  a  sect  (the  Cerinthians ?) 
who  hold  "  impassibilem  perseverasse  Christum, 
passum  vero  Jesum,"  and  who  prefer  the  Gospel  of 
St.  Mark  to  the  rest  (iii.  xi.  7).  Eusebius  says,  on 
the  authoiity  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  that  the 
hearers  of  Peter  at  l.'ome  desiied  Mark,  the  follower 
of  Peter,  to  le<ive  with  them  a  record  of  his  teaching  ; 
upon  which  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel,  which  the 
Aposfle  afterwards  sanctioned  with  his  authority, 
and  directed  that  it  should  be  read  in  the  Churches 
(Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  15).  Elsewhere,  quoting  Clement 
again,  we  have  the  same  account,  except  that  Peter 
is  there  described  as  "  neither  hindering  nor  urging  " 
the  undertaking  {H.  E.  vi.  14).  The  apparent  con- 
tradiction has  been  conciliated  by  supposing  that 
Peter  neither  helped  nor  hindered  the  work  before 
it  was  completed,  but  gave  his  approval  afterwards 
("  licet  fieri  ipsum  non  jusserit,  tamen  factum  nor. 
prohibuit,"  Ruffinus  :  see  note  of  Valesius  in  loc. 
Eus.).  Tertullian  (Cont.  Marcionem,  iv.  5)  speaks 
of  the  Gospel  of  Mark  as  being  connected  with  Peter, 
"  cujus  interpres  Marcus,"  and  so  having  apostolic 
authority.  Epiphanius  says  that,  immediately  after 
St.  Matthew,  the  task  was  laid  on  St.  I\Iark,  "  the 


MARK   GOSPEL  OF 

follower  of  St.  Peter  at  Kome,"  of  writing  a  Gospel 
{Haer.  Ii.).  Hieronymus  {De  Vir.  ill.  8)  I'epeats  the 
story  of  Eusebius  ;  and  again  says  that  tlie  Gospel 
was  written,  "  Petro  narraute,  et  illo  scribeute" 
{Ad  Hedih.  2).  If  the  evidence  of  the  Apostle's 
connexion  with  this  Gospel  rested  wholly  on  these 
passages,  it  would  not  be  sufficient,  since  the  wit- 
nesses, though  many  in  number,  are  not  all  inde- 
pendent of  each  other,  and  theie  are  marks,  in  the 
former  of  the  passages  from  Eusebius,  of  a  wish  to 
enhance  the  authority  of  the  Gospel  by  Peter's  ap- 
proval, whilst  the  latter  passage  does  not  allege  the 
same  sanction.  But  there  are  peculiarities  in  the 
Gospel  which  are  best  explained  by  the  supposition 
tliat  Peter  in  some  way  superintended  its  compo- 
sition. Whilst  there  is  hardly  any  part  of  its  nar- 
lative  that  is  not  common  to  it  and  some  other 
Gospel,  in  the  manner  of  the  narrative  there  is 
often  a  marked  character,  which  puts  aside  at  once 
the  supposition  that  we  have  here  a  mere  epitome 
of  Matthew  and  Luke.  The  picture  of  the  same 
events  is  far  more  vi\'id  ;  touches  are  introduced 
such  as  could  only  be  noted  by  a  vigilant  eye- 
witness, and  such  as  make  us  almost  eye-witnesses 
of  the  Redeemer's  doings.  The  most  lemarkable 
case  of  this  is  the  account  of  the  demoniac  in  the 
coimtry  of  the  Gadarenes,  where  the  following  words 
are  peculiar  to  JIark:  "  And  no  man  could  bind  him, 
no  not  with  chains :  because  that  he  had  often  been 
bound  with  fetters  and  chains,  and  the  chains  had 
been  plucked  asunder  by  him,  and  the  fetters  broken 
in  pieces  :  neither  could  any  man  tame  him.  And 
always  night  and  day  he  was  in  the  mountains 
crying  and  cutting  himself  with  stones.  But  when 
he  saw  Jesus  afar  off,  he  ran,"  &c.  Here  we  are 
indebted  for  the  picture  of  the  fierce  and  hopeless 
wanderer  to  the  Evangelist  whose  work  is  the 
briefest,  and  whose  style  is  the  least  perfect.  He 
sometimes  adds  to  the  account  of  the  others  a 
notice  of  our  Lord's  look  (iii.  34,  viii.  33,  x.  21, 
x.  23)  ;  he  dwells  on  human  feelings  and  the  tokens 
of  them  ;  on  our  Lord's  pity  for  the  leper,  and  His 
strict  charge  not  to  publish  the  miracle  (i.  41,  44)  ; 
He  "  loved  "  the  rich  young  man  for  his  answers 
(x.  21);  He  "looked  round"  with  anger  when 
another  occasion  called  it  out  (iii.  5)  ;  He  groaned 
in  spirit  (vii.  34,  viii.  12).  All  these  are  peculiar 
to  IMark ;  and  they  would  be  explained  most  readily 
by  the  theory  that  one  of  the  disciples  most  near  to 
Jesus  had  supplied  them.  To  this  must  be  added 
that  whilst  Mark  goes  over  the  same  ground  for  the 
most  part  as  the  other  Evangelists,  and  especially 
Matthew,  there  are  many  facts  thrown  in  which 
prove  tliat  we  are  listening  to  an  independent  witness. 
Thus  tiie  humble  origin  of  Peter  is  made  known 
through  him  (i.  16-20),  and  his  connexion  with 
Capernaum  (i.  29) ;  he  tells  us  that  Levi  was  "  the 
son  of  Alphaeus"  (ii.  14j,  that  Peter  was  the  name 
given  by  our  Lord  to  Simon  (iii.  16),  and  Boanerges 
a  sm'name  added  by  Him  to  the  names  of  two  otheis 
(iii.  17);  he  assumes  the  existetice  of  another  body 
of  disciples  wider  than  the  Twelve  (iii.  32,  iv. 
10,  36,  viii.  34,  siv.  51,  52):  we  owe  to  him 
the  name  of  Jairus  (v.  22),  the  word  "  carpenter  " 
npjilied  to  our  Lord  (vi.  3),  the  nation  of  the 
"  Syrophoenician "  woman  (vii.  26) ;  he  substitutes 
Dalmanutlia  for  the  "Magdala"  of  Matthew  (viii. 
10) ;  he  names  Bartimaeus  (x.  46);  he  alone  men- 
tions that  our  Loid  would  not  sulfer  any  man  to 
carry  any  vessel  through  the  Tem]ile  (xi.  16) ;  and 
that  Simon  of  Cyrene  was  the  father  of  Alexande" 
and  Rufus  (xv.  21).     All  these  are  tokens  of  an  in- 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 

dependent  writer,  diUerent  from  Matthew  and  Luke, 
and  in  the  absence  of  other  traditions  it  is  natural 
to  look  to  Peter.  One  might  hope  that  much  light 
would  be  thrown  on  this  question  from  the  way  in 
which  Peter  is  mentioned  in  the  Gospel  ;  but  the 
evidence  is  not  so  clear  as  might  have  been  expected. 
Peter  is  often  mentioned  without  any  special  occa- 
sion for  it  (i.  36,  v.  37,  xi.  20-26,  xiii.  3,  xvi.  7)  ; 
but  on  the  other  hand  there  are  passages  from  which 
it  might  seem  that  the  writer  knew  less  of  the  great 
Apostle.  Thus  in  Matt.  xv.  15  we  have  "  Peter;" 
in  the  parallel  place  in  Mark  only  "  the  disciples." 
The  Apostle's  walking  on  the  sea  is  omitted  :  so  the 
blessing  pronounced  on  him  (Matt.  xvi.  17-19),  and 
the  promise  made  to  all  the  Apostles  in  answer  to 
him  (Matt.  xix.  28).  Peter  was  one  of  those  who 
were  sent  to  pi-epare  the  Passover  ;  yet  Mark  omits 
his  name.  The  word  "  bitterly "  of  Matthew  and 
Luke  is  omitted  by  Mark  from  the  record  of  Peter's 
rejientance  ;  whilst  the  account  of  his  denials  is  full 
and  circumstantial.  It  has  been  sought  to  account 
for  these  omissions  on  the  ground  of  humility  ;  but 
some  may  think  that  this  cannot  be  the  clue  to  all 
the  places.  But  what  we  generalize  from  these 
passages  is,  that  the  name  Peter  is  peculiarly  dealt 
with,  added  here,  and  there  withdrawn,  which 
would  be  explained  if  the  writer  had  access  to 
special  information  about  Peter.  On  the  whole,  in 
spite  of  the  doubtfulness  of  Eusebius'  sources,  and 
the  almost  self-contradiction  into  wliich  he  falls,  the 
internal  evidence  inclines  us  to  accept  the  account 
that  this  inspired  Gospel  has  some  connexion  with 
St.  Peter,  and  records  more  exactly  the  preaching 
which  he,  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  uttered  tor 
the  instruction  of  the  world. 

n.  Relation  of  Mark  to  Matthew  and  Luke. — 
The  results  of  criticism  as  to  the  relation  of  the 
three  Gospels  are  somewhat  humiliating.  Up  to 
this  day  three  views  are  maintained  with  equal 
ardour:  («)  that  Mark's  Gospel  is  the  original 
Gospel  out  of  which  the  other  two  have  been 
developed  ;  {b)  that  it  was  a  compilation  from  the 
other  two,  and  therefore  was  written  last;  and 
(c)  that  it  was  copied  from  that  of  Matthew,  and 
forms  a  link  of  transition  between  the  other  two. 
(a)  Of  the  first  view  Thiersch  may  serve  as  the 
expositor.  "  No  one,"  he  says,  "  will  now  venture 
to  call  Mark  a  mere  epitomizer  of  Matthew  and 
Luke.  Were  his  Gospel  an  epitome  of  theirs,  it 
would  bear  the  marks  of  the  attempt  to  combine 
in  one  the  excellences  of  both ;  else  the  labour  of 
epitome  would  have  been  without  an  object.  But 
the  very  opposite  is  the  case.  We  miss  the  pecu- 
liarities of  Matthew  and  Luke.  We  find  that 
which  is  common  to  both.  And  therefore,  were 
Mark's  Gospel  a  mere  epitome  of  the  others,  we 
should  have  a  third  re]ietition  of  that  which  had 
been  already  twice  related,  with  so  little  additional 
or  more  exact  matter,  that  the  intention  and  con- 
duct of  the  writer  would  remain  a  riddle.  This 
ditliculty  disappears,  and  a  great  step  is  made  in 
threading  the  labyrinth  of  the  Gospel  harmony, 
when  we  see  that  Mark  formed  the  basis  of  Mat- 
thew and  Luke.  Where  they  follow  him  they 
agree.  Where  they  do  not,  as  in  the  history  of 
our  Lord's  childhood,  iu  His  discourses,  and  in 
His  appearances  after  His  lesurrection,  they  differ 
widely,  and  each  takes  his  own  way "  (Thiersch, 
Church  History,  p.  04,  Carlyle's  translation).  But 
the  amount  of  independent  narrative  is  too  great, 
in  each  of  the  others,  to  admit  of  their  having 
derived  their  Gospels  from  Mark  ;  and  in  the  places 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF  237 

which  they  have  in  common,  each  treats  the  events 
in  an  independent  way,  and  not  as  a  copyist.  Stili 
this  opinion  has  been  held  by  Herder,  Storr,  Wilke, 
Weisse,  Reuss,  Ewald,  and  others.  (6)  The  theorv 
that  Mark's  Gospel  is  a  compilation  and  abrido-ment 
of  that  of  Matthew  is  maintained  by  Auo-ustin, 
and  after  him  by  Euthymius  and  Michaelis.  The 
facts  on  which  it  rests  are  clear  enough.  There 
are  in  St.  Mark  only  about  three  events  which 
.St.  Matthew  does  not  narrate  (Mark  i.  23,  viii.  22, 
xii.  41);  and  thus  the  matter  of  the  two  may  be 
regarded  as  almost  the  same.  But  the  foi-m  in 
St.  Mark  is,  as  we  have  seen,  much  briefer,  and 
the  omissions  are  many  and  important.  The  ex- 
planation is  that  Mark  had  the  work  of  Matthew 
before  him,  and  only  condensed  it.  But  many 
would  make  Mark  a  conjpiler  fi  om  both  the  others 
(Griesbach,  De  Wette,  &c.),  arguing  from  passages 
where  there  is  a  curious  resemblance  to  both  (see 
De  Wette,  Jfanclbuch,  §94a).  (c)  Lastly,  the 
theory  that  the  Gospel  before  us  forms  a  sort  of 
transition-link  between  the  other  two,  standing 
midway  between  the  Judaic  tendency  of  Matthew 
and  the  Universalist  or  Gentile  Gospel  of  St.  Luke, 
need  not  trouble  us  much  here  [see  above,  p.  155]. 
An  account  of  these  views  may  be  found  in  Hil- 
geufeld's  Eoamjelien.  It  is  obvious  that  they 
refute  one  another :  the  same  internal  evidence 
suHices  to  prove  that  Maik  is  the  first,  and  the 
last,  and  the  intermediate.  Let  us  return  to  the 
facts,  and,  taught  by  these  contradictions  what  is 
the  worth  of  "  internal  evidence,"  let  us  carry  our 
speculations  no  further  than  the  facts.  The  Gospel 
of  Mark  contains  scarcely  any  events  that  are  not 
recited  by  the  others.  There  are  verbal  coincidences 
with  eaeh  of  the  others,  and  sometimes  peculiar 
words  from  both  meet  together  in  the  parallel  plaee 
in  Mark.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  unmistake- 
able  marks  of  independence.  He  has  passages  pe- 
culiar to  himself  (as  iii.  20,  21,  iv.  26-29,  vii. 
31-37,  vin.  22-26,  xi.  11-14,  xiv.  51,  52,  xvi. 
9-11),  and  a  peculiar  fulness  of  detail  where  ho 
goes  over  the  same  ground  as  the  others.  The 
beginning  of  his  Gospel  is  peculiar;  so  is  the  end. 
Remarkable  is  the  absence  of  passages  quoted  from 
the  Old  Testament  by  the  writer  himself,  who, 
however,  recites  such  passages  when  used  by  our 
Lord.  There  are  only  two  exceptions  to  this, 
namely,  the  opening  verses  of  the  Gospel,  whej-e 
Mai.  iii.  1  and  Is.  xl.  3  are  cited ;  and  a  verse  in 
the  account  of  the  crucifixion  (xv.  28),  where  he 
quotes  the  words,  "  and  He  was  numbered  with  the 
transgi-essors "  (Is.  liii.  12);  but  this  is  rejected 
by  Alford  and  Tischendorf  as  spurious,  inserted 
here  from  Luke  xxii.  37.  After  deducting  these 
exceptions,  23  quotations  from  or  references  to  the 
0.  T.  remain,  in  all  of  which  it  is  either  our  Lord 
Himself  who  is  speaking,  or  some  one  addressing 
Him.  " 

The  hypothesis  which  best  meets  these  flicts  is, 
that  whilst  the  matter  common  to  all  three  Evan- 
gelists, or  to  two  of  them,*  is  derived  from  the  oral 
teaching  of  the  Apostles,  which  they  had  purposely 
reduced  to  a  common  form,  our  Evangelist  writes 
as  an  independent  witness  to  the  truth,  and  not  as 
a  compiler ;  and  that  the  tradition  tliat  the  Gospel 
was  written  under  the  sanction  of  Peter,  and  its 
matter  iu  some  degree  derived  from  him,  is  made 
probable  by  the  evident  traces  of  an  eye-wituess  in 


"  Mark  has  39  sections  common  to  all  three ;  23  common 
to  him  and  Matthew;  and  18  common  to  him  and  Luke. 


238 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 


many  of  the  narratives.  The  omission  and  abridg- 
ment of  our  Lord's  discourses,  and  the  sparing  use 
of  0.  T.  quotations,  might  be  accounted  for  by  the 
special  destination  of  the  Gospel,  if  we  had  sui-er 
data  for  ascertaining  it;  but  it  was  for  Gentiles, 
with  whom  illustrations  from  the  0.  T.  would 
have  less  weight,  and  tlie  purpose  of  the  writer 
was  to  present  a  clear  and  vivid  picture  of  the  acts 
of  our  Lord's  human  life,  rather  than  a  full  record 
of  His  divine  doctrine.  We  may  thankfully  own 
that,  with  little  that  is  in  substance  peculiar  to 
himself,  the  Evangelist  does  occupy  for  us  a  distinct 
position,  and  supply  a  definite  want,  in  virtue  of 
these  characteristics. 

in.  This  Gospel  irritten  prhnarily  for  Gen- 
tiles.— We  have  seen  that  the  Evangelist  scarcely 
refers  to  the  0.  T.  in  his  own  person.  The  word 
Law  (v6ixos)  does  not  once  occiu-.  The  genealogy 
of  our  Lord  is  likewise  omitted.  Other  matters 
interesting  chiefly  to  the  Jews  are  likewise  omitted  ; 
such  as  the  references  to  the  0.  T.  and  Law  in 
Matt.  xii.  5-7,  the  reflexions  on  the  request  of  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  for  a  sign.  Matt.  .xii.  38-45; 
the  parable  of  the  king's  son,  Matt.  .xxii.  1-14  ;  and 
the  awful  denunciation  of  the  Scribes  and  Pha- 
risees, in  Matt,  x.xiii.  Explanations  are  given  in 
some  places,  which  Jews  could  not  require :  thus, 
Jordan  is  a  "river"  (Mark  i.  5  ;  JIatt.  iii.  6)  ;  the 
Pharisees,  &c.  "used  to  fast"  (Mark  ii.  18  ;  Matt. 
ix.  14),  and  other  customs  of  theirs  are  described 
(Mark  vii.  1-4  ;  Matt.  xv.  1,  2) ;  "  the  time  of  figs 
was  not  yet,"  i.  e.  at  the  season  of  the  Passover 
(Mark  xi.  13  ;  Matt.  xxi.  19)  ;  the  Sadducees'  worst 
tenet  is  mentioned  (Mark  xii.  18);  the  Mount  of 
Olives  is  "  over  against  the  temple"  (Mark  xiii.  3  ; 
Matt.  xxiv.  3) ;  at  the  Passover  men  eat  "  unlea- 
vened bread"  (Mark  xiv.  1,  12;  Matt.  xxvi.  2, 
17),  and  explanations  are  given  which  Jews  would 
not  need  (Mark  xv.  6,  16,  42  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  15, 
27,  57).  Matter  that  might  offend  is  omitted,  as 
Matt.  s.  5,  6,  vi.  7,  8.  Passages,  not  always 
peculiar  to  Mark,  abound  in  his  Gospel,  in  which 
the  antagonism  between  the  pharisaic  legal  spirit 
and  the  Gospel  come  out  strongly  (i.  22,  ii.  19, 
22,  X.  5,  viii.  15),  which  liold  out  hopes  to  the 
heathen  of  admission  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  even 
without  the  Jews  (xii.  9),  and  which  put  ritual 
forms  below  the  worship  of  the  heart  (ii.  18,  iii.  1-5, 
vii.  5-23).  JIark  alone  preserves  those  words  of 
Jesus,  "  The  sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not 
man  for  the  sabbath  "  (ii.  27).  Whilst  he  omits  the 
invective  against  the  Pharisees,  he  indicates  by  a 
touch  of  his  own  how  Jesus  condemned  them  "  with 
anger"  (iii.  5).  When  the  Lord  purges  the  Temple 
of  those  that  polluted  it.  He  quotes  a  passage  of 
Isaiah  (Ivi.  7) ;  but  Mark  aloue  reports  as  part  of 
it  the  words  "  of  all  nations  "  (xi.  17j.  Mark  alone 
makes  the  Scribe  admit  that  love  is  better  than 
sacrifices  (xii.  33).  From  the  general  testimony 
of  these  places,  whatever  may  be  objected  to  an 
inference  from  one  or  other  amongst  them,  there 
is  little  doubt  but  that  the  Gospel  was  meant  for 
use  in  the  first  instance  amongst  Gentiles.  But 
the  facts  give  no  warrant  for  the  dream  that  the 
first  Evangelist  represents  the  Judaic  type  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  the  third  the  Pauline  ;  and  that  Mark 
occupies  an  intermediate  position,  marking  the 
transition  from  one  to  the  other !  In  St.  Mark  we 
have  the  Gospel  as  it  was  preached  to  all  the  world, 
and  it  is  so  presented  as  to  suit  the  wants  of  (5en- 
tiles.  But  there  is  not  a  trace  of  the  wish,  conscious 
or  unconscious,  to  assist  in  any  change  of  Christian 


MARK.  GOSPEL  OF 

belief  or  modes  of  thinking.     In  all  things  it  is  a 
calm  history,  not  a  polemical  pleading. 

IV.  Time  when  the  Gospel  was  written. — It  will 
be  understood  from  what  has  been  said,  that  no- 
thing positive  can  be  asserted  as  to  the  time  when 
this  Gospel  was  written.  The  traditions  are  con- 
tradictory. Irenaeus  says  that  it  was  wntten  after 
the  death  (e|oSoj',  but  Grabe  would  translate, 
wrongly,  departure  from  Rome)  of  the  apostle 
Peter  (Eusebius,  JI.  E.  v.  8)  ;  but  we  have  seen 
above,  that  in  other  passages  it  is  supposed  to  be 
written  during  Peter's  lifetime  (Eus.,  II.  E.  vi.  14, 
and  ii.  15).  In  the  Bible  there  is  nothing  to  decide 
the  question.  It  is  not  likely  that  it  dates  befo)e 
the  reference  to  Mark  in  the  epistle  to  the  Colos- 
sians  (iv.  10),  where  he  is  only  introduced  as  a 
relative  of  Barnabas,  as  if  this  were  his  gi-eatest 
distinction ;  and  this  epistle  was  written  about 
A.D.  62.  If  after  coming  to  Asia  Minor  on  Paul's 
sending  he  went  on  and  joined  Peter  at  Babylon, 
he  may  have  then  acquired,  or  i-ather  completed, 
that  knowledge  of  Peter's  preaching,  which  tradi- 
tion teaches  us  to  look  for  in  the  Gospel,  and  of 
which  there  is  so  much  internal  evidence ;  and  soon 
after  this  the  Gospel  may  have  been  composed. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  was  written  before  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  (xiii.  13,  24—30,  33,  &c.). 
Probably,  therefore,  it  was  written  between  A.D. 
63  and  70.  But  nothing  can  be  ceilainly  deter- 
mined on  this  point. 

V.  Place  where  the  Gospel  was  written. — The 
place  is  as  uncertain  as  the  time.  Clement,  Euse- 
bius, Jerome,  and  Epiphanius,  pronounce  for  Rome, 
and  man}^  moderns  take  the  same  view.  The  Latin 
expressions  in  the  Gospel  prove  nothing;  for  there 
is  little  doubt  that,  wherever  the  Gospel  was 
written,  the  writer  had  been  at  Rome,  and  so  knew 
its  language.  Chrysostom  thinks  Alexandria  ;  but 
this  is  not  confirmed  by  other  testimony. 

VI.  Language. — The  Gospel  was  written  in 
Greek ;  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt  if  ancient 
tcstimonv  is  to  weigh.  Baronius  indeed,  on  the 
authority  of  an  old  Syriac  translation,  asserts  that 
Latin  was  the  original  language ;  and  some  MSS. 
refered  to  in  Scholz  {Greek  Test.  p.  xxx.)  repeat 
the  same ;  but  this  arises  no  doubt  from  the  belief 
that  it  was  written  at  Rome  and  for  Gentiles.  This 
opinion  and  its  grounds  Wahl  has  travestied  by 
supposing  that  the  Gospel  was  written  at  Ales^ 
andria  in  Coptic.  A  Latin  Gospel  written  for  the 
use  of  Roman  Christians  would  not  have  been 
lost  without  any  mention  of  it  in  an  ancient 
writer. 

VII.  Genuineness  of  the  Gospel. — Schleiermacher 
was  the  first  perhaps  to  question  that  we  have  in 
our  present  Gospel  that  of  which  Papias  speaks, 
on  the  ground  that  his  words  would  apply  to  a 
simpler  and  less  orderly  composition  {Studien  u. 
Kritiken,  1832).  Accordingly  the  usual  assump- 
tion of  a  later  editor  is  brought  in.  as  in  the  case  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel  [see  p.  155].  But  the  words  of 
Papias  require  no  such  aid  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39), 
nor  would  such  authority  be  decisive  if  they  did. 
All  ancient  testimony  makes  Mark  the  author  of  a 
certain  Gosj)el,  and  that  this  is  the  Gospel  which 
has  come  down  to  us,  there  is  not  the  least  histo- 
rical ground  for  doubting.  Owing  to  the  very  few 
sections  peculiar  to  Mark,  evidence  fj-om  patristic 
quotation  is  somewhat  dilTicult  to  produce.  Justin 
Martyr,  however,  quotes  ch.  ix.  44,  46,  48,  xii.  30, 
and  iii.  17,  and  Irenaeus  cites  both  the  opening  and 
closing  words  (iii.  10.  6).  An  important  testimony  in 


MAIIK,  GOSPEL  OF 

auy  case,  but  doubly  so  from  the  doubt  that  has  been 
cast  on  the  closing  verses  (xvi.  9-19).  Concerning 
these  verses  see  Meyer's,  Alford's,  and  Tischendorf  s 
notes.  The  passage  is  rejected  by  the  majority  of 
modern  critics,  on  the  testimony  of  ]\1SS.  and  of  old 
writers  and  on  the  internal  evidence  of  the  diction. 
Though  it  is  probable  that  this  section  is  from  a 
difi'erent  hand,  and  was  annexed  to  the  Gospel  soon 
after  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  it  must  be  remem- 
bei  ed  that  it  is  lound  in  three  of  the  tour  great  uncial 
WSS.  (A.C.D),  and  is  quoted  without  any  question 
by  Irenaeus.  Among  late  critics  Olshausen  still 
pronounces  for  its  genuineness.  With  the  exception 
of  tliese  few  verses  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel 
is  placed  above  the  reach  of  reasonable  doubt. 

VIII.  Style  and  Diction. — Tlie  purpose  of  the 
Evangelist  seems  to  be  to  place  before  us  a  vivid 
picture  of  the  earthly  acts  of  Jesus.  The  style  is 
peculiarly  suitable  to  this.  He  uses  the  present 
tense  instead  of  the  narrative  aorist,  almost  in  every 
chapter.  The  word  evQiws,  "  straightway,"  is  used 
by  St.  Mark  forty-one  times.  The  first  person  is 
preferred  to  the'thiid  (iv.  39,  v.  8,  9,  12,  \'i.  2, 
o,  31,  33,  ix.  25,  33,  xii.  6).  Precise  and  minute 
details  as  to  persons,  places,  and  numbers,  abound 
in  the  narrative.  All  these  tend  to  give  force  and 
vividness  to  the  picture  of  the  human  life  of  our 
Lord.  On  the  other  sitie,  the  facts  are  not  very 
exactly  arranged ;  they  are  often  connected  by 
nothing  more  definite  than  koI  and  trdXiv.  Its 
conciseness  sometimes  makes  this  Gospel  more 
obscure  than  the  others  (i.  13,  ix.  5,  6,  iv. 
10-34). 

Many  peculiarities  of  diction  may  be  noticed  ; 
amongst  them  the  following: — 1.  Hebrew  (Ara- 
maic) words  are  used,  but  explained  for  Gentile 
readers  (iii.  17,  22,  v.  41,  vii.  11,  34,  ix.  43,  x. 
4t),  xiv.  36,  xv.'22,  34).  2.  Latin  words  are  very 
frequent,  as  ^t]vdpiov,  Keyewv,  ff-KeKovAarcop,  Kev- 
rvpiuiv,  KTJvffos,  KoSpdvrris,  (ppayyeWSco,  Trpai- 
rdpiov,  lecTTTjs.  3.  Unusual  words  or  phrases 
are  found  here  ;  as  e|a7rjra,  ix.  8  ;  iiriffvpTpix^iv, 
ix.  25;  vovviX'''^i  ^'fi-  '^"^  j  vdp^os  TnmiKT),  xiv. 
3;  iveiXeci),  xv.  46;  Tj(pie,  i.  34,  xi.  16;  irpoffKap- 
Tfpe7v  (of  a  thing),  iii.  9  ;  iwl  t5  TrpoffKecpdXatov 
KaOevBcov,  iv.  38  ;  TrpoeAajSe  ixvpicrai,  xiv.  8.  4. 
Diminutives  are  frequent.  5.  The  substantive  is 
often  repeated  instead  of  the  pronoun  ;  as  (to  cite 
from  ch.  ii.  only)  ii.  16,  18,  20,  22,  27,  28. 
6.  Negatives  are  accumulated  for  the  sake  of  em- 
phasis (vii.  12,  ix.  8,  xii.  34,  xv.  5,  i.  44  {ovKeri 
ov  fx^,  xiv.  25,  &c.,  &c.).  7.  VVords  are  often 
added  to  ad\-erbs  for  the  sake  of  emphasis  ;  as  to't€ 
ec  iicfiv-i]  Tp  rifj.4pa,  ii.  20  ;  SiaTravrhs  vvKrhs 
Kol  rjfi^pas,  V.  5;  euSeoiy  j-iera,  CTrouSijs,  vi.  25; 
also  vii.  21,  viii.  4,  x.  20,  xiii.  29,  xiv.  30,43. 
8.  The  same  idea  is  often  repeated  under  an- 
other expression,  as  i.  42,  ii.  25,  viii.  15,  xiv. 
68,  &c.  9.  And  sometimes  the  repetition  is 
effected  by  means  of  the  opposite,  as  in  i.  22,  44, 
and  many  other  places.  10.  Sometimes  emphasis 
is  given  by  simple  reiteration,  as  in  ii.  15,  19. 
11.  The  elliptic  use  of  ^ua,  like  that  of  Sirws  in 
classical  writers,  is  found,  v.  23.  12  The  word 
i'K€p<j>rav  is  used  twenty-five  times  in  this  Gospel. 
1 3.  Instead  of  avji^ovKiov  Xap.Q<xveiv  of  Matt. 
Mark  has  avix^ovXiov  TvoieTu,  iii.  6,  xv.  1.  13. 
There  are  many  words  peculiar  to  Mark  ;  thus 
&\a\os,  vii.  37,  ix.  17,  25;  iKdaij.l3i7a0ai,  ix. 
15,  xiv.  33,  xvi.  5,  G  ;  ivayKaXi^fcrOat,  ix.  36,  x. 
16  ;  KivTvplosv,  XV.  39,  44,  45;  -irpofxepifivav,  xiii. 
11;    irpoffTvopeveffdai,    x.    35;    (rri\^fti/,    ix.   3; 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF  239 

(TTOi^ds,  xi.  8  ;  avv6\l^€ii',  v.  24,  31  ;  (tkwKti^ 
ix.  44,  46,  48  ;  iraiSwdeu,  ix.  21  ;  aixvpvi^w, 
XV.  23. 

The  diction  of  St.  Mark  presents  the  difficulty 
that  whilst  it  abounds  in  Latin  words,  and  in 
expressions  that  recall  Latin  equivalents,  it  is  still 
much  more  iikin  to  the  Hebraistic  diction  of  St. 
Matthew  than  to  the  purer  style  of  St.  Luke. 

IX.  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament. — The 
following  list  of  relerences  to  the  Old  Testament  is 
nearly  or  quite  complete  : — 

Mark  i.    2.  Mai.  iii.  1. 

„     3.  Is.  Xl.  3. 

„  44.  Lev.  xiv.  2. 

ii.  25.  1  Sam.  xxi.  6. 

iv.  12.  Is.  vi.  10. 

vii.    6.  Is.  xxix.  13. 

„  10.  Ex.  XX.  12,  xxi.  17. 

is.  44.  Is.  Ixvi.  24. 

X.    4.  Deut.  xxiv.  1. 

„    1.  Gen.  ii.  24. 

„  19.  Ex.  XX.  12-17. 

xi.  17.  Is.  Ivi.  7;  Jer.  vii.  11. 

xii.  10.  Ps.  cxviii.  22. 

„   19.  Deut.  XXV.  5. 

„  20.  Ex.  iii.  6. 

„   29.  Deut.  vi.  4. 

„  31.  Lev.  xlx.  18. 

„   36.  Ps.  ex.  1. 

xiii.  14.  Dan.  ix.  27. 

„    24.  Is.  xiii.  10. 

xiv.  27.  Zech.  xiii.  7. 

„    62.  Dan.  vii.  13. 
XV,  2S(?)Is.  liii.  12. 

„  34.  Ps.  xxii.  1. 

X.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — Though  this  Gospel 
has  little  historical  matter  which  is  not  shared 
with  some  other,  it  would  be  a  great  error  to 
suppose  that  the  voice  of  Mark  could  have  been 
silenced  without  injury  to  the  divine  harmony. 
The  minute  painting  of  the  scenes  in  which  the 
Lord  took  part,  the  fresh  and  lively  mode  of  the 
narration,  the  very  absence  of  the  precious  dis- 
courses of  Jesus,  which,  interposed  between  His 
deeds,  would  have  delayed  the  action,  all  give  to 
this  Gospel  a  character  of  its  own.  It  is  the  his- 
tory of  the  war  of  Jesus  against  sin  and  evil  in  the 
world  during  the  time  that  He  dwelt  as  a  Man 
among  men.  Its  motto  might  well  be,  as  Lange 
oljserves,  those  words  of  Peter  :  "  How  God  anointed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with 
power;  who  went  about  doing  good,  and  healing 
all  that  were  oppressed  of  the  devil ;  for  God  was 
with  Him  "  (Acts  x.  38).  It  developes  a  series  of 
acts  of  this  conflict,  broken  by  times  of  rest  and 
refreshing,  in  the  wilderness  or  on  the  mountain. 
It  records  the  exploits  of  the  Son  of  God  in  the 
war  against  Satan,  and  the  retirement  in  which 
after  each  He  returned  to  commune  with  His 
Father,  and  bring  back  fresh  strength  for  new 
encounters.  Thus  the  passage  from  ii.  1  to  iii.  6 
describes  His  first  conflict  with  the  Pliarisces,  and 
it  ends  in  a  conspiracy  of  Pharisees  and  Herodinns 
for  His  destruction,  before  which  He  retires  to  the 
sea  (iii.  7).  The  pas.sage  from  iii.  13  to  vi.  6 
contains  the  account  of  his  conflict  with  the  un- 
belief of  His  own  countrymen,  ending  with  those 
remarkable  words,  "  And  Ho  could  there  do  no 
mighty  work,  save  that  Ho  laid  His  hands  ujmn  a 
few  sick  folk  and  healed  them  :"  then,  constrained 
(so  to  speak)  in  His  working  by  their  resistance, 

!  He  retired  for  that  time  from  the  struggle,  and 
"went  round  about  the  villages  teaching  "  (vi.  6). 


>40 


MARMOTH 


The  principal  divisions  in  the  Gospel  are  these : — 
1.  John  the  Baptist  and  Jesus  (i.  1-13).  2.  Acts 
of  Jesus  in  Galilee  (i.  14-ix.  50).  3.  Teaching  in 
Peraea,  where  the  spirit  of  the  new  kingdom  of 
the  Gospel  is  brought  out  (x.  1-34).  4.  Teaching, 
trials,  and  sufferings  in  Jerusalem.  Jesus  revealing 
Himself  as  Founder  of  the  new  kingdom  (x.  35- 
XV.  47).     5.  Resurrection  (xvi.). 

Sources. — The  works  quoted  mider  Luke,  and 
besides  them,  Davidson,  Introduction  to  N.  T. 
(Bagster,  1848);  Lauge,  Bihelwerk,  part  ii.,  and 
Lcben  Jesu  ;  Fritzsche  on  St.  Mark  (Leipzig,  1830)  ; 
Kuhn,  Leben  Jesu,  vol.  i.  (Mainz,  1838);  and 
Sepp,  Zeben  Jesu  (1843-6).  [VV.  T.] 

MAR'MOTH  (MapiJ.coel  ;  Alex.  UapfxaOi  ;_ 
Martmoth)  =  Mkrejioth  the  priest,  the  son  of 
Uriah  (1  Esdr.  viii.  62  ;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  33). 

MAR'OTH  (nnO :  656i>7i  in  both  MSS. :  and 
so  also  Jerome,  m  Amaritudinibns'),  one  of  the 
towns  of  the  western  lowland  of  Judah  whose 
names  are  alluded  to  or  played  upon  by  the  prophet 
Micah  in  the  warning  with  which  his  prophecy 
opens  (i.  12).  The  allusion  turns  on  tlje  significa- 
tion of  Maroth — "  bitternesses."  It  is  not  else- 
where mentioned,  nor  has  the  name  been  encoun- 
tered by  travellers.  Schwarz's  conjecture  (1 07)  that 
it  is  a  contraction  of  Maarath  is  not  very  happy,  as 
the  latter  contains  the  letter  ain,  which  but  very 
rarely  disappears  under  any  process  to  which  words 
are  subjected.  [C*-] 

MARRIAGE.  The  topics  which  this  subject 
presents  to  our  consideration  in  connexion  with 
Biblical  literature  may  be  most  conveniently  ar- 
ranged under  the  following  five  heads ; — ■ 

L  Its  origin  and  history. 

II.  The   conditions   under   which   it   could   be 
legally  effected. 

III.  The  modes  by  which  it  was  effected. 

IV.  The  social  and  domestic  relations  of  married 

life. 
V.  The    typical    and    allegorical   references   to 
marriage. 

I.  The  institution  of  marriage  is  founded  on 
the  requii'ements  of  man's  nature,  and  dates  from 
the  time  of  his  original  creation.  It  may  be  said 
to  have  been  ordained  by  God,  in  as  far  as  man's 
nature  was  ordained  by  Him ;  but  its  formal  ap- 
pointment was  the  work  of  man,  and  it  has  ever 
been  in  its  essence  a  natural  and  civil  institution, 
though  admitting  of  the  infusion  of  a  religious 
element  into  it.  This  view  of  marriage  is  exhibited 
in  the  histoijcal  account  of  its  origin  in  the  book 
of  Genesis:  the  peculiar  formation  of  man's  nature 
is  assigned  to  the  Creator,  who,  seeing  it  "  not  good 


*  1'^333>  literally,  "as  over  against,"  and  so  "corre- 
sponding to."  The  renderings.  In  the  A.  V.  "  meet  for 
him,"  in  the  LXX.  kolt  omt'ov,  o^iotos  avToI,  and  In  the 
Vulg.  simile  sibi,  are  inadequate. 

b  The  LX.X.  introduces  Svo  into  the  text  in  Gen.  ii.  24, 
and  is  Ibllowed  by  the  Vulgate. 

"  t^''X  and  nCi'X-  We  are  unable  to  express  the 
verbal  con'espondence  of  these  words  in  our  language. 
The  Vulgate  retains  the  etymological  identity  at  the 
expense  of  the  sense  :  "  Virago  quoniam  de  viro."  The 
old  Latin  term  vira  would  have  been  better.  Luther  is 
more  successful  with  mawji  icaiX  mcinnin ;  but  even  this 
fails  to  convey  the  douJjle  sense  of  ishshah  as  =  "  woman" 
and  "  wile,"  both  of  which  should  be  preserved,  as  in  the 


MARRIAGE 

for  man  to  be  alone,"  determined  to  form  an  "  help 
meet  for  him  "  (ii.  18),  and  accordingly  completed 
the  work  by  the  addition  of  the  female  to  the  male 
(i.  27).  The  necessity  for  this  step  appears  from 
the  words  used  in  the  declaration  of  the  Divine 
counsel.  Man,  as  an  intellectual  and  spiritual  being, 
would  not  have  been  a  worthy  representative  of  the 
Deity  on  earth,  so  long  as  he  lived  in  solitude,  or 
in  communion  only  with  beings  either  high  above 
him  in  the  scale  of  creation,  as  angels,  or  far  beneath 
him,  as  the  beasts  of  the  field.  It  was  absolutely 
necessary,  not  only  for  his  comfort  and  happiness, 
but  still  more  for  the  perfection  of  the  Divine 
work,  that  he  should  have  a  "  help  meet  for 
him,"  *  or,  as  the  words  more  properly  mean,  "  the 
exact  counterpart  of  himself" — a  Ijeing  capable 
of  receiving  and  reflecting  his  thoughts  and  affec- 
tions. No  sooner  was  the  formation  of  woman 
effected,  than  Adam  recognised  in  that  act  the  will 
of  the  Creator  as  to  man's  social  condition,  and  im- 
mediately enunciated  the  important  statement,  to 
which  his  posterity  might  refer  as  the  charter  of 
marriage  in  all  succeeding  ages,  "  Thei'efore  shall 
a  man  leave  his  i'ather  and  his  mother,  and  shall 
cleave  unto  his  wife:  and  they  shall  be  one  flesh" 
(ii.  24).  From  these  words,  coupled  with  the  cir- 
cumstances attendant  on  the  formation  of  the  first 
woman,  we  may  evolve  the  following  principles  :— 
(1)  The  unity  of  man  and  wife,  as  implied  in  her 
being  formed  out  of  man,  and  as  expressed  in  the 
words  "  one  flesh  ;"  (2)  the  indissolubleness  of  the 
marriage  bond,  except  on  the  strongest  gi'ounds 
(comp.  Matt.  xix.  9)  ;  (3)  monogamy,  as  the  ori- 
ginal law  of  marriage,  resulting  from  there  having 
been  but  one  original  couple,''  as  is  forcibly  ex- 
pressed in  the  subsequent  references  to  this  passage 
by  our  Lord  ("  they  twain,"  Matt.  xix.  5),  and  St. 
Paul  ("  tivo  shall  be  one  flesh,"  1  Cor.  vi.  16); 
(4)  the  social  equality  of  man  and  wife,  as  implied 
in  the  terms  tsh  and  ishshah,'^  the  one  being  the 
exact  correlative  of  the  other,  as  well  as  in  the 
words  "  help  meet  for  him  ;"  (5)  the  subordination 
of  the  wife  to  the  husband,  consequent  upon  her 
subsequent  formation  (1  Cor.  xi.  8,  9;  1  Tim.  ii. 
KSj ;  and  (6)  the  respective  duties  of  man  and  wife, 
as  implied  in  the  words  "  help  meet  for  him." 

The  introduction  of  sin  into  the  world  modified 
to  a  certain  extent  the  mutual  relations  of  man  and 
wife.  As  the  blame  of  seduction  to  sin  lay  on  the 
latter,  the  condition  of  subordination  was  turned 
into  subjection,  and  it  was  said  to  her  of  her  hus- 
band, "he  shall  rule  over  thee"  (Gen.  iii.  16) — a 
sentence  which,  i-egarded  as  a  prediction,  has  been 
strikingly  fulfilled  in  the  position  assigned  to  women 
in  Oriental  countries,''  but  which,  regarded  as  a 
rule  of  life,  is  fully  sustained  by  the  voice  of  nature 
and  by  the  teaching  of  Christianity  (1  Cor.  xiv.  34  ; 


German  wAb,  in  order  to  convey  the  full  force  of  the 
original.  We  may  here  observe  that  ishshah  was  the  only 
term  in  ordinary  use  among  the  Hebrews  for  "  wife." 

They  occasionally  used  ?3K'>  as  we  use  "consort,"  for  the 

wives  of  kings  (Ps.  xlv.  9 ;  Neh.  ii.  6 ;  Dan.  v.  2). 

*  The  relation  of  the  husband  to  the  wife  is  expressed  in 

the  Hebrew  term  baal  (?y3)>  literally  lord,  for  husband 

(Ex.  xxi.  3,  22;   Deut.  xxi.  13;   2  Sam.  xi.  26,  &c.  &c.). 

The  respectful  term  used  by  Sai'ah  to  Abraham  (^^HN. 

"my  lord,"  Gen.xviii.  12;  comp.  1  K.  i.  17, 18,  Ps. xlv.  11) 
furnishes  St.  Peter  with  an  illustration  of  the  wife's  proper 
position  (1  Pet.  iii.  6). 


MARRIAGE 

Eph.  V.  22,  2o;  1  Tim.  ii.  12).  The  evil  etiects 
of  the  tall  were  soon  apjjarent  in  the  coniipt  usages 
of  marriage :  the  unity  of  the  bond  was  impaired 
by  polygamy,  which  appears  to  have  originated 
among  the  Cainites  (Gen.  iv.  19);  and  its  purity 
was  deteriorated  by  the  promiscuous  intermarriage 
of  the  "  sons  of  God  "  with  the  "  daughters  of  men," 
i.  e.  of  the  Sethites  with  the  Cainites,  iu  the  days 
preceding  the  flood  (Gen.  vi.  2). 

In  the  post-diluvial  age  the  usages  of  marriage 
were  marked  with  the  simplicity  that  characterises 
a  patriarchal  state  of  society.  The  rule  of  mono- 
gamy was  re-established  by  the  example  of  Noah 
and  his  sons  (Gen.  vii.  13).  The  early  patriarchs 
selected  their  wives  from  their  own  family  (Gen. 
xi.  29,  xxiv.  4,  xxviii.  2),  and  the  necessity  tin- 
doing  this  on  religious  gi-oiiiids  superseded  the  pro- 
hibitions that  afterwards  held  good  against  such 
mai'riages  on  the  score  of  kindred  (Gen.  xx.  12  ; 
Ex.  vi.  20  ;  comp.  Lev.  xviii.  9,  12).  Polygamy 
prevailed  (Gen.  xvi.  4,  xxv.  1,  6,  xxviii.  9,  xxix. 
23,  28;  1  Chr.  vii.  14),  but  to  a  great  extent 
divested  of.  the  degradation  which  in  modern  times 
attaches  to  that  practice.  In  judging  of  it  we  must 
take  into  regard  the  following  considerations: — 
(1)  that  the  principle  of  monogamy  was  retained, 
even  in  the  practice  of  i)olygamy,  by  the  distinction 
made  between  the  chief  or  original  wife  and  the 
secondary  wives,  or,  as  the  A.  V.  terms  them, 
"concubines" — a  term  which  is  objectionable,  in- 
asmuch as  it  conveys  to  us  the  notion  of  an  illicit 
and  unrecognised  position,  whereas  the  secondary 
wife  was  regarded  by  the  Hebrews  as  a  wife,  and 
her  rights  were  secured  by  law ;  ^  (2)  that  the 
motive  which  led  to  polygamy  was  that  absorbing 
desire  of  progeny  which  is  prevalent  throughout 
Eastern  countries,  and  was  especially  powerful 
among  the  Hebrews  ;  and  (3)  that  the  power  of  a 
parent  over  his  child,  and  of  a  master  over  his  slave 
(,the  postesfas  pairia  and  doniinica  of  the  Romans), 
was  paramount  even  in  matters  of  marriage,  and 
led  in  many  cases  to  phases  of  polygamy  that  are 
otherwise  quite  unintelligible,  as,  for  instance,  to 
the  cases  where  it  was  adopted  by  the  husband  at 
the  request  of  his  wife,  under  the  idea  that  children 
born  to  a  slave  were  in  the  eye  of  the  law  the 
chUdren  of  the  mistress'  (Gen.  xvi.  3,  x.xx.  4,  9) ; 
or,  again,  to  cases  where  it  was  adopted  at  the 
instance  of  the  father  (^Gen.  xxix.  23,  28 ;  Ex.  xxi. 


MARRIAGE 


241 


«  The  position  of  the  Hebrew  concubine  may  be  com- 
pared with  that  of  the  concubine  of  the  early  Christian 
Church,  the  sole  distinction  between  her  and  the  wife 
consisting  in  this,  that  the  marriage  was  nut  in  accordance 
with  the  civil  law  :  In  tlie  eye  of  the  Church  the  marriage 
was  perfectly  valid  (Bingham,  Ant.  xi.  5,  $11).     It  is 

worthy  of  notice  that  the  term  pillegesh  (Ci'JpS  ;  A.  V. 
"concubine")  nowhere  occurs  in  the  Mosaic  law.  The 
terms  used  are  either  "  wife"  (Deut  .\xi.  15)  or  "maid- 
servant" (Kx.  xxi.  7) ;  the  latter  applying  to  a  purchased 
wile. 

'  The  language  in  1  Chr.  ii.  18,  "  these  are  her  sons," 
following  on  the  mention  of  his  two  wives,  admits  of  an 
interpretation  on  this  ground. 

g  The  Talnuidists  practically  set  aside  this  prohibition, 
(1)  by  explaining  the  word  "  multiply"  of  an  inordinate 
number  ;  and  (2)  by  treating  the  motive  for  it,  "  that  his 
heart  turn  nut  away,"  as  a  matter  of  discretion.  Tln'v 
considered  eighteen  the  maximum  to  be  allowed  a  king 
(Selden,  Fx.  Ehr.  i.  8).  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  high- 
priest  himself  authorizes  bigamy  iu  the  case  of  king  Joash 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  3). 

''  The  regulations  in  Ex.  xxi.  7-1 1  deserve  a  detailed 
VOL.  II. 


9,  10).  It  must  be  allowed  that  pol)'gamy,  thus 
legalised  and  systematised,  justified  to  a  certain 
extent  by  the  motive,  and  entered  into,  not  only 
without  offence  to,  but  actually  at  the  suggestion  of, 
those  who,  according  to  our  notions,  woulcTfcel  most 
deeply  injtired  by  it,  is  a  very  diflerent  thing  from 
what  polygamy  would  be  in  our  own  state  of  society. 

Divorce  also  prevailed  in  the  patriarchal  age, 
though  but  one  instance  of  it  is  recorded  (Gen.  \x\. 
14).  Of  this,  again,  we  must  not  judge  by  our 
own  standard.  Wherever  marriages  are  effected  by 
the  violent  exercise  of  the  patria  potestas,  or  with- 
out any  bond  of  affection  between  tlio  parties  con- 
cerned, ill-assorted  matches  must  be  of  frequent 
occurrence,  aud  without  the  I'emedy  of  divorce,  iu 
such  a  state  of  society,  we  can  understand  the 
truth  of  the  Apostles'  ]-emark  that  "  it  is  not  good 
to  marry"  (Matt.  xix.  10).  Hence  divorce  prevails 
to  a  great  extent  in  all  countries  where  marriage  is 
the  result  of  arbitrary  appointment  or  of  purchase: 
we  may  instance  the  Arabians  (Burckhardt's  Notes, 
i.  HI;  Lnjm-d's  Nineveh,  i.  357)  and  the  Egyp- 
tians (Lane,  i.  235  ff.).  From  the  enactments  of 
the  Mosaic  law  we  may  infer  that  divorce  was 
ed'ected  by  a  mere  verbal  declaration,  as  it  still  is 
iu  the  counti-ies  referred  to,  and  great  injustice  was 
tlius  committed  towards  the  wives. 

The  Mosaic  law  aimed  at  mitigating  rather  than 
removing  evils  which  were  inseparable  from  the 
state  of  society  in  that  day.  Its  enactments  were 
directed  (1)  to  the  discouragement  of  polygamy; 
(2)  to  obviate  the  injustice  frequently  consequent 
upon  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  a  father  or  a 
master ;  (3)  to  bring  divorce  under  some  I'estric- 
tion ;  and  (4)  to  enforce  purity  of  life  during  the 
maintenance  of  the  matrimonial  bond.  The  iirst  of 
these  objects  was  forwarded  by  the  following  enact- 
ments : — the  prohibition  imposed  upon  kings  against 
midtiplying  s  wives  (Deut.  xvii .  1 7  ) ;  the  prohibition 
against  marrying  two  sisters  together  ( Lev.  xviii. 
18)  ;  the  assertion  of  the  matrimonial  rights  of  each 
wife  (Ex.  x.\i.  10,  11);  the  slur  cast  upon  the 
eunuch  state,  which  has  been  ever  regarded  as  in- 
dispensable to  a  system  of  polygamy  (Deut.  xxiii. 
1)  ;  and  the  ritual  observances  entailed  on  a  man 
by  the  duty  of  marriage  (Lev.  xv.  18).  The  second 
object  was  attained  by  the  humane  regulations  rela- 
tive to  a  captive  whom  a  man  might  wish  to  many 
(Deut.  xxi.  10-14),  to  a  purchased  wife''  (Ex.  x.\i. 


notice,  as  exhibiting  the  extent  to  which  the  power  of  the 
head  of  a  family  might  be  carried.  It  must  be  premised 
that  the  maiden  was  born  of  Hebrew  parents,  was  under 
age  at  the  time  of  lier  sale  (otherwise  her  father  would 
have  no  power  to  sell),  and  that  the  object  of  the  purchase 
was  that  when  arrived  at  puberty  she  should  become  tlie 
wife  of  her  master,  as  is  implied  in  the  differpnce  in  the 
law  relating  to  her  (Ex.  xxi.  7),  and  to  a  slave  purchased 
for  ordinary  worlc  (Deut.  xv.  12-17),  as  well  as  in  the  term 
amah,  "  maid-servant,"  which  is  elsewhere  used  con- 
vertibly  with  "  concubine  "  (.Judg.  ix.  18  ;  comp.  viii.  31). 
With  regard  to  such  it  is  enacted  (1)  that  she  is  not  to 
"  go  out  as  the  men-servants,"  (i.  e.  be  fieed  after  six  years' 
service,  or  in  the  year  of  jubilee),  on  the  understanding  that 
her  master  either  already  has  made,  or  intends  to  make 
Iier  his  wife  (ver.  7):  (2)  but,  if  he  has  no  such  intention, 
he  is  not  entitled  to  retain  her  in  the  event  of  any  other 
person  of  the  Israelites  being  willing  to  purchase  her  of 
him  for  the  same  purpose  (ver.  H)  ;  (3)  he  might,  however, 
assign  her  to  his  son,  and  in  this  case  she  was  to  ho  treated 
as  a  daughter  and  not  as  a  slave  (ver.  9) ;  (4)  if  cither  he 
or  his  son,  having  married  her,  touk  another  wife,  she  was 
still  to  be  treated  as  a  wife  in  nil  respects  (ver.  10  ;  and, 
lastly,  if  neither  of  the  three  contingencies  took  place, 

k       R 


242 


MARRIAGE 


7-11),  and  to  a  slave  who  either  was  inan-ied  at 
the  time  of  their  purchase,  or  who,  having  since 
received  a  wife'  at  the  hands  of  his  master,  was 
unwilling  to  be  parted  from  her  (Ex.  xxi.  2-6), 
and,  lastly,  by  the  law  relating  to  the  legal  distri- 
bution of  property  among  the  children  of  the 
different  wives  (Deut.  xxi.  15-17).  The  third  object 
was  effected  by  rendering  divorce  a  formal  proceed- 
ing, not  to  be  done  by  word  of  mouth  as  heretofore, 
but  by  a  "bill  of  divorcement"  (Deut.  xxiv.  1), 
which  would  generally  demand  time  and  the  inter- 
vention of  a  third  party,  thus  rendering  divorce  a 
less  easy  process,  and  furnishing  the  wife,  in  the 
event  of  its  being  carried  out,  with  a  legal  evidence 
of  her  marriageabili'ty :  we  may  also  notice  that 
Moses  wholly  prohibited  divorce  in  case  the  wife 
had  been  seduced  prior  to  marriage  (Deut.  xxii.  29), 
or  her  chastity  had  been  groundlessly  impugned 
(Deut.  xxii.  19).  The  fourth  object  forms  the  sub- 
ject of  one  of  the  ten  commandments  (Ex.  xx.  14), 
any  violation  of  which  was  punishable  with  death 
(Lev.  XX.  10;  Deut.  xxii.  22),  even  in  the  case  of  a 
betrothed  person  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  4). 

The  practical  results  of  these  regulations  may 
have  been  very  salutary,  but  on  this  point  we  have 
but  small  opportunities  of  judging.  The  usages 
themselves,  to  which  we  have  referred,  remained  in 
full  force  to  a  late  period.  We  have  instances  of 
the  arbitrary  exercise  of  the  paternal  authority  in 
the  cases  of  Achsah  (Judg.  i.  12),  Ibzan  (Judg.  xii. 
9),  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  20,  xv.  2),  and  Jlichal 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  25).  The  case  of  Abishag,  and  the 
language  of  Adonijah  in  reference  to  her  (1  K.  i.  2, 
ii.  17),  prove  that  a  sen-ant  was  still  completely  at 
the  disposal  of  his  or  her  master.  Polygamy  also 
prevailed,  as  we  are  expressly  informed  in  reference 
to  Gideon  (Judg.  viii.  30),  Elkanah  (1  Sam.  i.  2), 
Saul  (2  Sam.  xii.  8),  David  (2  Sam.  v.  13),  Solo- 
mon (1  K.  xi.  3),  the  sons  of  Issachar  (1  Chr.  vii. 
4),  Shaharaim  (1  Chr.  viii.  8,  9),  Rehoboam  (2 
Chr.  xi.  21),  Abijah  (2  Chr.  xiii.  21),  and  Joash 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  3)  ;  and  as  we  may  also  infer  from 
the  number  of  children  in  the  cases  of  Jair,  Ibzan, 
and  Abdon  (Judg.  x.  4,  xii.  9,  14).  It  does  not, 
however,  follow  that  it  was  the  general  practice  of 
the  country  :  the  inconveniences  attendant  oh  poly- 
gamy in  small  houses  or  with  scanty  incomes  are 
so  great  as  to  put  a  serious  bar  to  its  general  adop- 
tion,'' and  hence  in  modern  countries  where  it  is 
fully  established  the  practice  is  restricted  to  com- 
paratively few  (Niebuhr,  Voyage,  p.  65  ;  Lane,  i. 
239).  The  same  rule  holds  good  with  regard  to 
ancient  times :  the  discomforts  of  polygamy  are  ex- 
hibited in  the  jealousies  between  the  wives  of  Abra- 
ham (Gen.  xvi.  6),  and  of  Elkanah  (1  Sam.  i.  6) ; 
and  the  cases  cited  above  rather  lead  to  the  in- 


t.  e.  if  he  neither  mairied  her  himself,  nor  gave  her  to 
his  son,  nor  had  her  redeemed,  then  the  maiden  was  lo 
become  absolutely  free  without  waiting  for  the  expiration 
of  the  six  years  or  for  the  year  of  jubilee  (ver.  11). 

■  In  this  case  we  must  assume  that  the  wife  assigned 
was  a  non-Israelitish  slave ;  otherwise,  the  wife  would, 
as  a  matter  of  course,  be  freed  along  with  her  husband  in 
the  year  of  jubilee.  In  this  case  the  wife  and  children 
would  be  the  absolute  property  of  the  master,  and  the 
position  of  the  wife  would  be  analogous  to  that  of  the 
Roman  conlubemalis,  who  was  not  supposed  capable  of 
any  conmihium.  The  issue  of  .'uch  a  marriage  would 
remain  slaves  in  accordance  with  the  maxim  of  the  Tal- 
mudists,  tliat  the  cliild  is  liable  to  its  mother's  disquali- 
fication {KiMush.  3,  ^12).  Josephus  {Ahl.  iv.8,^28)  states 
that  in  the  year  of  jubilee  the  slave,  ha\ing  married  during 


MARRIAGE 

ference  that  it  was  confined  to  the  wealthy.  Mean- 
while it  may  be  noted  that  the  theory  of  monogamy 
was  retained  and  comes  prominently  forward  in  the 
pictures  of  domestic  bliss  portrayed  in  the  poetical 
writings  of  this  period  (Ps.  cxxviii.  3  ;  Prov.  v.  18, 
xviii.  22,  xix.  14,  xxxi.  10-29;  Eccl.  ix.  9).  The 
sanctity  of  the  marriage-bond  was  but  too  fre- 
quently violated,  as  appears  from  the  frequent  allu- 
sions to  the  "  strange  woman"  in  the  book  of  Pro- 
verbs (ii.  16,  V.  20,  &c.),  and  in  the  denunciations 
of  the  prophets  against  the  prevalence  of  adultery 
(Jer.  V.  8  ;  Ez.  xviii.  11,  xxii.  11). 

In  the  post-Babylonian  period  monogamy  appears 
to  have  become  more  prevalent  than  at  any  previous 
time :  indeed  we  have  no  instance  of  polygamy  during 
this  period  on  record  in  the  Bible,  all  the  marriages 
noticed  being  with  single  wives  (Tob.  i.  9,  ii.  11  ; 
Susan,  vers.  29,  63;  Matt,  xviii.  25;  Luke  i.  5; 
Acts  V.  1).  During  the  same  period  the  theory  of 
monogamy  is  set  forth  in  Ecclus.  xxvi.  1-27.  The 
practice  of  polygamy  nevertheless  still  existed ; " 
Herod  the  Great  had  no  less  than  nine  wives  at  one 
time  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3);  the  Talmudists 
fl-equently  assume  it  as  a  well-known  fact  (e.  g. 
Ketuh.  10,  §1 ;  Yebam.  1,  §1)  ;  and  the  early  Chris- 
tian writers,  in  their  comments  on  1  Tim.  iii.  2, 
explain  it  of  polygamy  "in  terms  which  leave  no 
doubt  as  to  the  fact  of  its  prevalence  in  the  Apostolic 
age.  The  abuse  of  divorce  continued  unabated 
(Joseph.  Vit.  §76)  ;  and  under  the  Asmonaean 
dynasty  the  right  was  assumed  by  the  wife  as 
against  her  husband,  an  innovation  which  is  attri- 
buted to  Salome  by  Josephus  {Ant.  xv.  7,  §10), 
but  which  appears  to  have  been  prevalent  in  the 
Apostolic  age,  if  we  may  judge  from  passages  where 
the  language  implies  that  the  act  emanated  from 
the  wife  (Mark  x.  12  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  11),  as  well  as 
fi'om  some  of  the  comments  of  the  early  wiiters  on 
1  Tim.  V.  9.  Our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  re- 
established the  integrity  and  sanctity  of  the  mar- 
riage-bond by  the  following  measures: — (1)  by  the 
confirmation  of  the  oi-iginal  charter  of  marriage  as 
the  basis  on  which  all  regulations  were  to  be  framed 
(Matt.  xix.  4,  5)  ;  (2)  by  the  restriction  of  divorce 
to  the  case  of  fornication,  and  the  prohibition  of 
re-marriage  in  all  persons  divorced  on  improper 
grounds  (Matt.  v.  32,  xix.  9  ;  Rom.  vii.  3  ;  1  Cor. 
vii.  10,  11);  and  (3)  by  the  enforcement  of  moral 
purity  generally  (Heb.  xiii.  4,  &c.),  and  especially 
by  the  formal  condemnation  of  fornication,"  which 
appears  to  have  been  classed  among  acts  morally 
inditi'erent  {aZia(popa)  by  a  certain  party  in  the 
Church  (Acts  xv.  20). 

Shortly  before  the  Christian  era  an  important 
change  took  place  in  the  views  entertained  on  the 
question  of  marriage  as  affecting  the  spiritual  and 


service,  carried  off  his  wife  and  children  with  him  :  this, 
however,  may  refer  to  an  Israelite  maid-servant. 

k  The  Talmudists  limited  polygamists  to  four  wives. 
The  same  number  was  adopted  by  Mahomet  in  the  Koran, 
and  still  forms  the  rule  among  his  followers  (Niebuhr, 
Voyage,  p.  62). 

■"  Michaelis  (Laws  of  Moses,  iii.  5,  $95)  asserts  that  poly- 
gamy ceased  entirely  after  the  return  from  the  captivity ; 
Selden,  on  the  other  hand,  that  polygamy  prevailed  among 
the  Jews  until  the  time  of  Honorius  and  Arc^idius  (circ. 
A.D.  400),  when  It  was  prohibited  by  an  Imperial  edict 
(Tx.  Ebr.i.9-). 

"  The  term  iropveCa  is  occasionally  used  in  a  broad  sense 
to  include  both  adultery  (Matt.  v.  32)  and  incest  (1  Cor. 
V.  1).  In  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  .lerusalem  It  must 
be  regarded  in  its  usual  and  restricted  sense. 


MAERIAGE 

intellectual  parts  of  man's  nature.  Throughout 
the  Old  Testament  period  marriage  was  regarded  as 
the  indispensable  duty  of  every  man,  nor  was  it 
surmised  that  there  existed  in  it  any  drawback  to 
the  attainment  of  the  highest  degree  of  holiness. 
In  the  interval  that  elapsed  between  the  Old  and 
New  Testament  periods,  a  spirit  of  asceticism  had 
been  evolved,  probably  in  antagonism  to  the  foreign 
notions  with  which  the  Jews  were  brought  into 
close  and  painful  contact.  The  Esseues  were  the 
first  to  propound  any  doubts  as  to  the  propriety  of 
marriage :  some  of  them  avoided  it  altogether,  others 
availed  themselves  of  it  luider  restrictions  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  8,  §2,  13).  Similar  views  were  adopted 
by  the  Therapeutae,  and  at  a  later  period  by  the 
Gnostics  (Burton's  Lectures,  i.  214) ;  thence  they 
passed  into  the  Christian  Church,  forming  one  of 
the  distinctive  tenets  of  the  Encratites  (Burton,  ii. 
161),  and  finally  developing  into  the  system  of 
monachism.  The  philosophical  tenets  on  which  the 
pi'ohibition  of  marriage  was  based  are  generally 
condemned  in  Col.  ii.  16-23,  and  specifically  in 
1  Tim.  iv.  3.  The  geneial  propriety  of  marriage 
is  entbrced  on  numerous  occasions,  and  abstinence 
from  it  is  commended  only  in  cases  where  it  was 
rendered  expedient  by  the  calls  of  duty  (Matt.  xix. 
12  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  8,  26).  With  regard  to  re-marriage 
after  the  death  of  one  of  the  parties,  the  Jews,  in 
common  with  other  nations,  regarded  abstinence 
from  it,  particularly  in  the  case  of  a  widow,  laud- 
able, and  a  sign  of  hoHness  (Luke  ii.  36,  7  ;  Josepli. 
Ant.  xvii.  13,  §4,  xviii.  6,  §6);  but  it  is  clear 
from  the  example  of  Josephus  ( Vit.  §76)  that 
there  was  no  prohibition  even  in  tlje  case  of  a 
priest.  In  the  Apostolic  Church  re-marriage  was 
regarded  as  occasionally  undesirable  (1  Cor.  vii.  40), 
and  as  an  absolute  disqualification  for  holy  func- 
tions, whether  in  a  man  or  woman  (1  Tim.  iii.  2, 
12,  V.  9):  at  the  same  time  it  is  recommended  in 
m  the  case  of  young  widows  (1  Tim.  v.  14). 

II.  The  conditions  of  legal  marriage  are  decided 
by  the  prohibitions  which  the  law  of  any  countiy 
imposes  upon  its  citizens.  In  the  Hebrew  com- 
mouAvealth  these  prohibitions  were  of  two  kinds, 
according  as  they  i-egulated  marriage  (i.)  between  an 
Israelite  and  a  non-Israelite,  and  (ii.)  between  an 
Israelite  and  one  of  his  own  community. 

i.  The  prohibitions  relating  to  foreigners  were 
based  on  that  instinctive  feeling  of  exclusiveness, 
which  forms  one  of  the  bonds  of  every  social  body, 
and  whioli  prevails  with  peculiar  strength  in  a  rude 
state  of  society.  In  all  political  bodies  the  right  of 
marriage  {jus  connuhii)  becomes  iu  some  form  or 
other  a  constituent  element  of  citizenship,  and,  even 
where  its  nature  and  limits  are  not  defined  by  legal 
enactment,  it  is  supported  with  rigour  by  the  force 
of  public  opinion.  The  feeling  of  aversion  against 
intermari-iage  with  foreigners  becomes  more  in- 
tense, when  distinctions  of  religious  creed  supen'oue 
on  those  of  blood  and  language  ;  and  hence  wet^hould 
naturally  expect  to  find  it  more  than  usually  strong 
in  the  Hebrews,  who  were  endowed  with  a  peculiar 
position,  and  were  separated  from  suri'oimding  na- 
tions by  a  sharp  line  of  demarcation.  The  warnings 
of  past  history  and  the  examples  of  the  patriarchs 
came  in   support  of  natural  feeling:    on  the  one 

°  The  act  of  marriage  with  a  foreigner  is  described  In 
the  Hebrew  by  a  special  torni,  chdtan  (|nn),  expressive 
of  the  affinity  thus  produced,  as  appears  from  the  cognate 
tern)s,  chdtan,  choten,  and  choteneh,  for  "son-in-law," 
"  father-in-law,"  and  "  mother-in-law."      It  Is  used  in 


MARRIAGE 


243 


hand,  the  evil  effects  of  intermarriage  with  aliens 
were  exhibited  in  the  overwhelming  sinfulness  of 
the  generation  destroyed  by  the  flood  (Gen.  vi.  2-13): 
on  the  other  hand,  there  were  the  examples  of  the 
patriarchs  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  maiTying 
from  among  their  own  kindred  (Gen.  xx.  12,  sxiv. 
3  &c.,  xxviii.  2),  and  in  each  of  the  two  latter  cases 
there  is  a  contrast  between  these  carefully-sought 
imions  and  those  of  the  rejected  sous  Ishmael,  who 
married  an  Egyptian  (Gen.  xxi.  21),  and  Esau, 
whose  marriages  with  Hittite  women  were  "  a 
grief  of  mind"  to  his  parents  (Gen.  xxvi.  34,  35). 
The  marriages  of  Joseph  with  an  Egyptian  (Gen. 
xli.  45),  of  Man;vsseh  with  a  Syrian  secondary 
wife  (1  Chr.  vii.  14;  comp.  Gen.  xlvi.  20,  LXX.), 
and  of  Bloses  with  a  Blidianitish  woman  in  the  first 
instance  (Ex.  ii.  21),  and  afterwards  with  a  Cushite 
or  Ethiopian  woman  (Num.  xii.  1),  v/4re  of  an  ex- 
ceptional nature,  and  yet  the  last  was  the  cause  of 
great  dissatisfaction.  A  far  greater  objection  was 
entertained  against  the  marriage  of  an  Israelitish 
woman  with  a  man  of  another  tribe,  as  illustrated 
by  the  narrative  of  Shechem's  proposals  for  Dinah, 
the  ostensible  ground  of  their  rejection  being  the 
difference  in  religious  observances,  that  Shechem 
and  his  countrymen  were  uncircumcised  (Gen. 
xxxiv.  14). 

The  only  distinct  prohibition  in  the  Mosaic  law 
refers  to  the  Canaanites,  with  whom  the  Israelites 
were  not  to  marry"  on  the  ground  that  it  would 
lead  them  into  idolatry  (Ex.  xxxiv.  16  ;  Deut.  vii. 
3,  4) — a  result  which  actually  occurred  shortly 
after  their  settlement  in  the  Promised  Land  (Judg. 
iii.  6,  7).  But  beyond  this,  the  legal  disabilities 
to  which  the  Ammonites  and  Moabites  were  sub- 
jected (Deut.  xxiii.  3),  asted  as  a  virtual  bar  to 
intermarriage  with  them,  totally  preventing  (ac- 
cording to  the  interpretation  which  the  Jews  them- 
selves put  upon  that  passage)  the  marriage  of 
Israelitish  women  with  Moabites,  but  pennitting 
that  of  Israelites  with  Moabite  women,  such  as  that 
of  Mahlon  with  Ruth.  The  pi-ohibition  against 
mai'riages  with  the  Edomites  or  Egyptians  was  less 
stringent,  as  a  male  of  those  nations  received  the 
right  of  marriage  on  his  admission  to  the  full  citizen- 
ship in  the  third  generation  of  prosejytism  (Deut. 
xxiii.  7,  8).  There  were  thus  three  grades  of  pro- 
hibition— total  in  regard  to  the  Canaanites  on  either 
side  ;  total  on  the  side  of  the  males  in  regard  to  the 
Ammonites  and  Moabites ;  and  temporary  on  the 
side  of  the  males  in  regard  of  the  Edomites  and 
Egyptians,  marriages  with  females  in  the  two  latter 
instances  being  regarded  as  legal  (Selden,  de  Jur. 
Nat.  cap.  14).  Marriages  between  Israelite  women 
and  proselyted  foreigners  were  at  all  times  of  rare 
occurrence,  and  are  noticed  in  the  Bible,  as  though 
they  were  of  an  exceptional  nature,  such  as  that  of 
an  Egyptian  and  an  Israelitish  woman  (Lev.  xxiv. 
10),  of  Abigail  and  Jether  the  Ishmeelite,  contracted 
probably  when  Jesse's  family  was  sojourning  in 
Moab  (1  Chr.  ii.  17),  of  Sheshan's  daughter  and  an 
Egyptian,  who  was  staying  in  his  house  (1  Chr. 
ii.  36),  and  of  a  Naphthalite  woman  and  a  Tyrian, 
living  in  adjacent  districts  (1  K.  vii.  14).  In  the 
reverse  case,  viz.,  the  marriage  of  Israelites  with 
foreign  women  it  is,  of  course,  highly  probable  that 

Gen.  xx-xiv.  9  ;  Deut.  vii.  3;  Josh,  xxiii.  12  ;  1  K.  Iii.  1  ; 
Kzr.  ix.  14;  and  metaphorically  in  2  Clir.  xviii.  1.  The 
same  idea  comes  prominently  forward  in  llie  term  ch&tdn 
in  Ex.  iv.  26,  where  it  is  used  of  the  affinity  produced  by 
the  rite  of  circumcision  between  Jehovah  and  the  child. 

R2 


244 


aiAREIAGE 


the  wives  became  proselytes  after  their  mamage, 
as  instanced  in  the  case  of  Ruth  (i.  16) ;  but  this 
was  by  no  means  invariably  the  case.  On  the  con- 
trary we  find  that  the  Egyptian  wife  of  Solomon 
(1  K.  xi.  4),  and  the  Phoenician  wife  of  Ahab  (1  K. 
-\vi.  31),  retained  their  idolatrous  practices  and  in- 
troduced them  into  their  adopted  countries.  Pro- 
selytism  does  not  therefoi-e  appear  to  have  been  a 
sine  qua  non  in  the  case  of  a  wit'e,  though  it  was  so 
in  the  case  of  a  husband :  the  total  silence  of  the 
law  as  to  any  such  condition  in  regard  to  a  captive, 
whom  an  Israelite  might  wish  to  marry,  must  be 
regarded  as  evidence  of  the  reverse  (Deut.  xsi.  10- 
14),  nor  have  the  refinements  of  Rabbinical  writers 
on  that  passage  succeeded  in  establishing  the  neces- 
sity of  proselytism.  The  opposition  of  Samson's 
parents  to  his  maiTiage  with  a  Philistine  woman 
(Judg.  xiv.'  .3)  leads  to  the  same  conclusion.  So 
long  as,  such  unions  were  of  merely  occasional  occur- 
rence no  veto  was  placed  upon  them  by  public  au- 
thorit_y  ;  but,  when  after  the  return  fiom  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity  the  Jews  contracted  marriages  with 
the  heathen  inhabitants  of  Palestine  in  so  wholesale 
a  manner  as  to  endanger  their  national  existence, 
the  practice  was  severely  condemned  (Ezr.  ix.  2, 
X.  2),  and  the  law  of  jiositive  prohibition  origin- 
ally pronounced  only  against  the  Canaanites  was 
extended  to  the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Philis- 
tines (Neh.  xiii.  23-26).  Pubhc  feeling  was  thence- 
forth strongly  opposed  to  foreign  man'iages,  and 
the  union  of  Manasseh  with  a  Cuthaean  led  to  such 
animosity  as  to  produce  the  great  national  schism, 
which  had  its  focus  in  the  temple  on  Mount  Ge- 
rizim  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §2).  A  no  less  signal 
instance  of  the  same  feeling  is  exhibited  in  the  cases 
of  Joseph  {Ant.  xii.  4,  §6)  and  Anileus  {Ant.  xviii. 
9,  §5),  and  is  noticed  by  Tacitus  {Hist.  v.  5)  as 
one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  Jewish  nation  iu 
his  day.     In  the  N.  T.  no  special  directions  are 

P  The  term  erepofiryovt'Tes  (A.  X.  "  unequally  yoked 
with  ")  has  no  special  reference  to  marriage  :  its  meaning  i 
is  show-n  iu  the  coguate  term  erepofuyos  (Lev.  xix.  19  ; 
A.  v.  "of  a  diverse  kind").  It  is,  however,  correctly 
connected  in  the  A.  V.  with  the  notion  of  a  "  yoke,"  as 
explained  by  Hesycbius,  oi  nij  o-u^uyoOi'Tes,  and  not  with 
that  of  a  "balante,"  as  Theophylact. 

"■  Cognate  words  appear  in  Rabbinical  writers,  signifying 
(1)  to  spin  or  weave;  (2)  to  be  wrrupt,  as  an  addled  egg ; 
(3)  to  ripen.  The  important  point  to  be  observed  is  that 
the  word  does  not  betoken  bastardy  in  our  sense  of  the 
term,  but  simply  the  progeny  of  a  mixed  marriage  of  a 
Jew  and  a  foreigner.  It  may  be  with  a  special  reference 
to  this  word  that  the  Jews  boasted  that  they  v:ere  not 
bom  "of  fornication  "  Qk  Tropi'ei'a^,  John  viii.  41),  imply- 
ing that  there  was  no  admixture  of  fureign  blood,  or  conse- 
quently of  foreign  idolatries,  in  themselves. 

s  The  Hebrew  expression  1"1K'3  IXp'  (A.V. "  near  of 
kin"),  is  generally  regarded  as  applying  to  blood-relation- 
ship alone.  The  etymological  sense  of  the  term  sheer  is 
not  decided.  By  some  it  is  connected  with  shaiir,  "  to 
remain,"  as  by  Michaelis  {Lav.-s  of  Moses,  iii.  7,  ^2),  and  in 
the  marginal  translation  of  the  A.  V.  "remainder;"  but 
its  ordinary  sense  of  "  flesh  "  is  more  applicable.  Which- 
ever of  these  two  we  adopt,  the  idea  of  blood-relationship 
evidently  attaches  to  the  term  from  the  cases  in  which  it 
is  used  (vers.  12,  13,  11 ;  A.  V.  "near-kinswoman"),  as 
well  as  from  its  use  in  Lev.  xx.  19,  Num.  xxvii.  11.  The 
term  basar,  literally  "  flesh  "  or  "  body,"  is  also  peculiarly 
used  of  blood-relationship  (Gen.  xxix.  14,  xx.wii.  27  ■ 
Jndg.  ix.  2 ;  2  Sam.  v.  1 ;  l  Chr.  xi.  1).  The  two  terms', 
sheer  basar,  are  used  conjointly  ui  Lev.  xxv.  49  as  equi- 
valent to  mishparJtah,  "  family."    The  term  is  applicable 


MARRIAGE 

given  on  this  head,  but  the  general  precepts  of  se- 
paration between  believers  and  unbelievers  (2  Cor. 
vi.  14,  17)  P  would  apply  with  special  force  to  the 
case  of  mairiage  ;  and  the  pei-mission  to  dissolve 
mixed  marriages,  contracted  previously  to  the  con- 
version of  one  party,  at  the  instance  of  the  uncon- 
verted one,  cannot  but  be  regarded  as  implying 
the  impropiety  of  such  unions  subsequently  to  con- 
version (1  Cor.  vii.  12i. 

The  progeny  of  illegal  marriages  between  Israel- 
ites and  non-Israelites  was  described  under  a  pe- 
culiar term,  mamzeri  (A.V.  "bastard";  Deut. 
xxiii.  2),  the  etymological  meaning  of  which  is  un- 
certain,'' but  which  clearly  involves  the  notion  of 
"  foreigner,"  as  in  Zech.  ix.  6,  where  the  LXX.  has 
aWoyevels,  "  strangers."  Persons  born  in  this 
way  were  excluded  from  full  rights  of  citizenship 
until  the  tenth  generation  (Deut.  xxiii.  2).  It  follows 
hence  that  intei-marriage  with  such  persons  was  pro- 
hibited in  the  same  manner  as  with  an  Ammonite 
or  Jloabite  (comp.  Mishna,  Eiddnsh.  4,  §1). 

ii.  The  regulations  lelative  to  marriage  between  Is- 
raelites and  Israelites  may  be  divided  into  two  classes: 
(1)  general,  and  (2)  special — the  former  applying  to 
the  whole  population,  the  latter  to  paiticulai-  cases. 

1.  The  general  regulations  are  based  on  consi- 
derations of  relationship.  The  most  important  pas- 
sage relating  to  these  is  contained  in  Lev.  xviii. 
6-18,  wherein  we  have  in  the  first  place  a  general 
prohibition  against  marriages  between  a  man  and 
the  "  flesh  of  his  flesh,"  '  and  in  the  second  place 
special  prohibitions'  ac^ainst  man-iage  with  a  mo- 
ther, stepmother,  sister,  or  half-sister,  whether 
"  born  at  home  or  abroad,"  °  grand -daughter,  aunt, 
whether  by  consanguinity  on  either  side,  or  by 
marriage  on  the  father's  side,  daughtei-in-law,  bro- 
ther's wife,  step-daughter,  wife's  mother,  step- 
grand-daughter,  or  wife's  sister  during  the  lifetime 
of  the  wife.^     An  exception  is  subsequently  made 


to  relationship  by  afiBnity,  in  as  far  as  it  regards  the  blood- 
relations  of  a  wife.  The  relationships  specified  may  be 
classed  under  three  heads  :  (1)  blood-relationships  proper 
in  vers.  7-13;  (2)  the  wives  of  blood-relations  in  vers. 
14-16;  (3)  the  blood-relations  of  the  wife  "in  vers.  17,  18. 

*  The  daughter  is  omitted ;  whether  as  being  pre- 
eminently the  "  flesh  of  a  mau's  flesh,"  or  because  it  was 
thought  unnecessary  to  mention  such  a  connexion. 

"  The  expression  "  bom  at  home  or  abroad  "  has  been 
generally  understood  as  equivalent  to  "  in  or  out  of  wed- 
lock," i.  e.  the  daughter  of  a  father's  concubine ;  but  it 
may  also  be  regarded  as  a  re-statement  of  the  preceding 
words,  and  as  meaning  "  one  born  to  the  father,  or  mother, 
in  a  former  marriage  "  (comp.  Keil,  Archilol.  ii.  55).  The 
distinction  between  the  cases  specified  in  vers.  9  and  11 
is  not  very  evident:  it  probably  consists  in  this,  that 
ver.  9  prohibits  the  union  of  a  son  of  the  first  marriage 
with  a  daughter  of  the  second,  and  ver.  11  that  of  a  son 
of  the  second  with  a  daughter  of  the  first  (Keil). 
On  the  other  hand,  Knobel  {Comm.  in  loc.)  finds  the  dis- 
tinction in  the  words  "wife  of  thy  father"  (ver.  11), 
which  according  to  him  includes  the  mother  as  well  as 
the  stepmother,  and  thus  specifically  states  the/uK  sister, 
while  ver.  9  is  reserved  for  the  half-sister. 

»  The  sense  of  this  verse  has  been  much  canvassed,  in 
connexion  with  the  question  of  maiTiage  with  a  deceased 
wife's  sister.  It  has  been  urged  that  the  marginal  transla- 
tion, "  one  wife  to  another,"  is  the  correct  one,  and  that 
the  prohibition  is  really  directed  against  polygamy.  The 
foUuwiiig  considerations,  however,  support  the  renderiug 
of  the  text.  (1)  Tlie  writer  would  hardly  use  the  terms 
rendered  "wife"  and  "sister"  in  a  diiTerent  sense  in 
ver.  18  from  that  which  he  assigned  to  them  in  the  pre- 
vious verses.  (2)  The  usage  of  the  Hebrew  language 
and  indeed  of  every  language,  requires  that  thi'  expression 


MARKIAGE 

(Deut.  XXV.  5)  in  favour  of  marriage  with  a  bro- 
ther's wife  in  the  event  of  his  having  died  child- 
less :  to  tliis  we  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  at 
length.  Different  degrees  of  guiltiness  attached  to 
the  infringement  of  these  prohibitions,  as  implied 
both  in  the  different  terms  i  applied  to  the  various 
offences,  and  in  the  punishments  affixed  to  them, 
the  general  penalty  being  death  (Lev.  xx.  11-17), 
but  in  the  case  of  the  aunt  and  the  brother's  wife 
childlessness  (19-21),  involving  probably  the  stain  of 
illegitimacy  in  cases  where  there  was  an  issue,  while 
in  the  case  of  the  two  sisters  no  penalty  is  stated. 

The  moral  effect  of  the  prohibitions  extended  be- 
yond cases  of  formal  marriage  to  those  of  illicit  in- 
tercourse, and  gave  a  deeper  dye  of  guilt  to  such 
conduct  as  that  of  Lot's  daughters  (Gen.  xix.  33), 
of  lleuben  in  his  intercouise  with  his  father's  con- 
cubine (Gen.  XXXV.  '1'-),  and  of  Absalom  in  the  same 
act  (2  Sam.  xvi.  22)  ;  and  it  rendered  such  crimes 
tokens  of  the  greatest  national  disgrace  (Ez.  xxii. 
11).  The  Rabbinical  writers  considered  that  the 
prohibitions  were  abrogated  in  the  case  of  proselytes, 
inasmuch  as  their  change  of  religion  was  deemed 
equivalent  to  a  new  natural  liirth,  and  consequently 
involved  the  severing  of  all  ties  of  previous  rela- 
tionship :  it  was  necess;uy,  however,  in  such  a  case 
that  the  wife  as  W'ell  as  the  husliand,  should  have 
adopted  the  Jewish  faith. 

The  grounds  on  which  these  prohibitions  w-ere 
enacted  are  reducible  to  the  folloiving  three 
heads: — (1)  moral  propriety;  (2)  the  practices  of 
heathen  nations  ;  and  (3)  social  convenience.  The 
first  of  these  grounds  comes  prominently  forward 
in  the  expressions  by  which  the  various  oti'ences 
are  characterised,  as  well  as  in  the  genei'al  prohibi- 
tion against  approaching  "  the  flesh  of  his  flesh." 
The  use  of  such  expressions  undoubtedly  contains 
an  appeal  to  the  horror  naturalis,  or  that  repug- 
nance with  which  man  instinctively  shrinks  from 
matrimonial  union  with  one  with  whom  he  is  con- 
nected by  the  closest  ties  both  of  blood  and  of 
family  affection.  On  this  subject  we  need  say  no 
more  than  that  there  is  a  ditierence  in  kind  between 
the  affection  that  Ijjnds  the  members  of  a  family 


MARKIAGE 


245 


"  one  to  another  "  should  be  preceded  by  a  plural  noun. 
The  cases  in  which  the  expression  nnnN"?X  Hp'N 
is  equivalent  to  "  one  to  another,"  as  in  Ex.  xxvi.  3,  5,  6, 
17.  Ez.  i.  9,  2.'5,  iii.  13,  instead  of  favouring,  as  has  gene- 
rally been  supposed,  the  marginal  translation,  exliibit  the 
peculiarity  above  noted.  (3)  The  consent  of  the  ancient 
versions  is  unanimous,  including  the  LXX.  (yvvaiKa  eir' 
a.Se\<j>jj  ai/T^s),  the  Vulgate  (sororem  nxoris  tunc),  the 
Chaldec,  Syrlac,  &c.  (4)  The  Jews  themselves,  as  shown 
in  the  Mishna,  and  in  the  works  of  Philo,  permitted  the 
marriage.  (5)  Polygamy  was  recognised  by  the  Mosaic 
law,  and  cannot  consequently  be  forbid<len  in  this  passage. 
Another  interpretation,  by  which  the  sense  of  the  verse  is 
again  altered,  is  effected  by  attaching  the  words  "  in  her 
life-time  "  exclusively  to  the  verb  "  vox."  The  objections 
to  this  are  patent:  (1)  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  this  clause,  like  the  others,  would  depend  on  ihe 
principal  verb;  and  (2),  if  this  were  denied,  it  would  be 
but  reiisunable  to  attach  it  to  the  xcacefi  ("  uncover"), 
rather  than  the  more  remote  secondary  verb ;  which  would 
be  fatal  to  the  sense  of  the  passage. 

>•  These  terms  are-(l)  Zimmah  (HST  ;  A.V.  "  wick- 
edness"), applied  to  marriage  with  mother  or  daughter 
(Lev.  XX.  U),  with  mother-in-law,  step-daughter,  or  grand- 
step-daughter  (xviii.  17).  The  term  is  elsewhere  aiiplied 
to  gross  violations  of  decency  or  principle  (Lev.  xix.  29; 

.Tobxxxi.  11;  Ez.  xvi.  43,  xxli.  11).  (2)  Tebcl  (73^  ; 
A.  V.  "confusion  "),  applied  to  marriage  with  a  dauglitei- 


together,  and  that  which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  the 
matrimonial  bond,  and  that  the  amalgamation  of 
these  affections  cannot  take  place  without  a  serious 
shock  to  one  or  the  other  of  the  two ;  hence  the  de- 
sirability of  drawing  a  distinct  line  between  the 
provinces  of  each,  by  stating  definitely  where  the 
matrimonial  affection  may  legitimately  take  root. 
The  second  motive  to  laying  down  these  prohibi- 
tions was  that  the  Hebrews  might  be  preserved  as 
a  peculiar  people,  with  institutions  distinct  from 
those  of  the  Egyptians  ami  Canaanites  (Lev.  xviii. 
3),  as  well  as  of  other  heathen  nations  with  whom 
they  might  come  in  contact;.  Wantages  within  the 
proscribed  degrees  prevailed  in  many  civilized  coun- 
tries in  historical  times,  and  were  not  unusual 
among  the  Hebrews  themselves  in  the  pre-Mosaic 
age.  For  instance,  marriages  with  half-sisters  by 
the  same  father  were  allowed  at  Athens  (Plutarch 
C'im.  4,  Themistocl.  32),  with  lialf-sisters  by  the 
same  mother  at  Sparta  (Philo,  dc  Spec.  Leg.  p. 
779),  and  with  full  si.sters  in  Egypt  (Diod.  i.  27) 
and  Persia,  as  illustrated  in  the  well-known  in- 
stances of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  in  the  former 
(Paus.  i.  7,  §1),  and  Cambyses  in  the  latter  coiuitry 
(Herod,  iii.  31).  It  was  even  believed  that  in  some 
nations  marriages  between  a  son  and  his  mothei 
were  not  inmsual  (Ov.  Met.  x.  331  ;  Eurip.  An- 
drom.  174).  Among  the  Hebrews  wc  have  in- 
sliUices  of  marriage  with  a  half-sister  in  the  case  ol 
Abraham  (Gen.  xx.  12),  with  an  aunt  in  the  case 
of  Amram  (Ex.  vi.  20),  and  with  two  sisters  at  the 
same  time  in  the  case  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxix.  26). 
Such  cases  were  justifiable  previous  to  the  enact- 
ments of  Moses:  subsequently  to  them  we  have  no 
case  in  the  0.  T.  of  actual  marriage  within  the 
degi'ees,  though  the  language  of  Tamar  towards  her 
lialf-brother  Amnon  (2  Sam.  xiii.  13)  implies  the  jios- 
sibility  of  their  union  with  theconsent  of  their  father. 
The  Herods  committed  some  violent  breaches  of  the 
marriage  law.  Heiod  the  Great  married  his  half- 
sister  {Aid.  xvii.  1,  §3)  ;  Archelaus  his  brother's 
widow,  who  had  children  (xvii.  13,  §1);  Heroi 
Autipas  his  brothei-'s  wife  (xviii.  5,  §1  ;  Matt 
xiv.  3).     In  the  Christian  Church  we  have  an  in- 

in-law  (Lev.  xx.  12)  :  it  signifies  pollution,  and  is  applied 
to  the  weirst  kind  of  defilement  (Lev.  xviii.  23).     (3)  Ckesed 

(TDn  ;  A.V.  "  wicked  thing"),  applied  to  maiTiage  with 
a  sister  (Lev.  xx.  17) :  Its  proper  meaning  appears  to  be 
disgrace,  (i)  Niddah  (IT'lJ  ;  A.  V.  "  an  unclean  thing  "), 
applied  to  marriage  with  a  brother's  wife  (Lev.  xx.  21)  : 
it  conveys  the  notion  of  impurity.  Michaelis  (/>aHS  of 
Moses,  iii.  7,  $2)  asserts  that  these  temis  have  a  lorensic 
force ;  but  there  appears  to  be  no  ground  for  this.  The 
view  which  the  same  authority  propounds  (^4)  as  to 
the  reason  for  the  prohibitions,  viz.,  to  prevent  seduction 
under  the  promise  of  marriage  among  near  relations,  is 
singularly  inadequate  both  to  the  occasion  and  to  the  terms 
employed. 

'  Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  reconcile  this 
language  with  the  Levitical  law.  The  Rabbinical  expla- 
nation was  that  Tamar's  mother  was  a  heathen  at  the 
time  of  her  birth,  and  that  the  law  did  nut  apply  to  such 
a  case.  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  S,  §\)  regarded  it  as  a  mere 
ruse  on  the  part  of  Tamar  to  evaile  Amnon's  importunity  ; 
but,  if  the  marriage  were  out  of  the  question,  she  would 
hardly  have  tried  such  a  pour  device.  Thenius  {Comm. 
in  loc.)  considers  that  the  Levitical  prohibitions  applied 
only  to  cases  where  a  disruption  of  family  bonds  was  likely 
to  result,  or  where  the  motives  were  of  a  gross  character; 
an  argument  which  would  utterly  abrogate  the  authority 
of  this  and  every  other  absolute  law. 


246 


MARRIAGE 


stance  of  marriage  with  a  father's  wife  (1  Cor.  v. 
1),  which  St.  Paul  characterises  as  "  fornication  " 
(Tvopveia),  and  visits  with  the  sevei-est  condemna- 
tion. The  third  ground  of  the  prohibitions,  social 
convenience,  comes  forward  solely  in  the  case  of 
marriage  with  two  sisters  simultaneously,  the  effect 
of  which  would  be  to  "  vex  "  or  irritate  the  first 
wife,  and  produce  domestic  jai's.* 

A  remarkable  exception  to  these  prohibitions 
existed  in  favour  of  marriage  with  a  deceased  bro- 
ther's wife,  in  the  event  of  his  having  died  child- 
less. The  law  which  regulates  this  has  been  named 
the  "  Levirate,"  ^  from  the  Latin  levir,  "  brother- 
in-law."  The  custom  is  supposed  to  have  originated 
in  that  desire  of  perpetuating  a  name,"  which  pre- 
vails all  over  the  world,  but  with  more  than  oidi- 
nary  force  in  Eastern  countries,  and  pre-eminently 
among  Israelites,  who  each  wished  to  bear  part  in 
the  promise  made  to  •  Abraham  that  "  in  his  seed 
should  all  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed"  (Gen. 
xx\'i.  4).  The  first  instance  of  it  occurs  in  the  pa- 
triarchal period,  where  Onan  is  called  upon  to 
marry  his  brother  Er's  widow  (Gen.  xxxviii.  8). 
The  custom  was  confirmed  by  the  Mosaic  law, 
which  decreed  that  "  if  brethren  (i.  e.  sons  of  the 
same  father)  dwell  together  (either  in  one  family, 
in  one  house,  or,  as  the  Rabbins  explained  it,  in 
contiguous  properties ;  the  first  of  the  three  senses 
is  probably  correct),  and  one  of  them  die  and  leave 
no  child  {hen,  here  used  in  its  broad  sense,  and  not 
specifically  son ;  compare  Matt.  xxii.  25,  firi  ix"'" 
(Tirep/xa;  Mark  xii.  19;  Luke  xx.  28,  &TeKvos), 
the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not  marry  without  (i.  e. 
out  of  the  family)  unto  a  stranger  (one  unconnected 
by  ties  of  relationship)  ;  her  husband's  brother  shall 
go  In  unto  her  and  take  her  to  him  to  wife  ;"  not, 
however,  without  having  gone  through  the  usual 


MARRIAGE 

preliminaries  of  a  regular  man-iage.  The  first-born 
of  this  second  marriage  then  succeeded  in  the  name 
of  the  deceased  brother,"*  i.  e.  became  his  legal  heir, 
receiving  his  name  (according  to  Josephus,  Ant.  iv. 
8,  §23;  but  compare  Ruth  i.  2,  iv.  17),  and  his 
property  (Deut.  xxv.  5,  6).  Should  the  brother 
object  to  marrying  his  sister-in-law,  he  was  pub- 
licly to  signify  his  dissent  in  the  presence  of  the 
authorities  of  the  town,  to  which  the  widow  re- 
sponded by  the  significant  act  of  loosing  his  shoe 
and  spitting  in  his  face,  or  (as  the  Talmudists  ex- 
plained it)  on  the  ground  before  him  (  Yeham.  12, 
§6) — the  former  signifying  the  transfer  of  property 
from  one  person  to  another*  (as  usual  among  the 
Indians  and  old  Germans,  Keil,  Archdol.  ii.  66), 
the  latter  the  contempt  due  to  a  man  who  refused  to 
perform  his  just  obligations  (Deut.  xxv.  7-9  ;  Ruth 
iv.  6-11).  In  this  case  it  was  permitted  to  the 
next  of  kin  to  come  forward  and  to  claim  both  the 
wife  and  the  inheritance. 

The  Levirate  marriage  was  not  peculiar  to  the 
Jews ;  it  has  been  found  to  exist  in  many  eastern 
countries,'  particulai'ly  in  Arabia  (Burckhardt's 
Notes,  i.  112 ;  Niebuhr's  Voyage,  p.  61),  and 
among  the  tribes  of  the  Caucasus  (Haxthausen's 
Transcaucasia,  p.  403).  The  Mosaic  law  brings 
the  custom  into  hannony  with  the  general  prohibi- 
tion against  manying  a  brother's  wife  by  resti-ict- 
ing  it  to  cases  of  childlessness  ;  and  it  further  secures 
the  marriage  bond  as  founded  on  atiection  by  re- 
lieving the  brother  of  the  obligation  whenever  he 
was  averse  to  the  union,  instead  of  making  it  com- 
pulsory, as  in  the  case  of  Onan  (Gen.  xxxviii.  9). 
One  of  the  results  of  the  Levirate  marriage  would 
be  in  certain  cases  the  consolidation  of  two  pro- 
perties in  the  same  family  ;  but  this  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  the  object  contemplated. s 


^  The  expression  "nV7  admits  of  another  explanation, 
"  to  pack  together,"  or  combine  the  two  in  one  marriage, 
and  thus  confound  the  nature  of  their  relationship  to  one 
another.  This  is  in  one  respect  a  preferable  meaning, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  not  clear  why  two  sisters  should  be  more 
particularly  iiTitated  than  any  two  not  so  related.  The 
usage,  however,  of  the  cognate  word  mV'  in  1  Sam.  i.  6, 
favours  the  sense  usually  given ;  and  in  the  Mishna  nil^ 
is  the  usual  term  for  the  wives  of  a  polygamist  (Mishna, 
Teham.  i.  $1). 

b  The  Talmudical  term  for  the  obligation  was  yebum 
(D-13^)>  from  i/abani  (□3'').  "  husband's  brother :"  hence 
the  title  yehamoth  of  the  treatise  in  the  Mishna  for  the 
regulation  of  such  marriages.  From  the  same  root  comes 
the  term  yibbem  (D2^)'  to  contract  such  a  marriage  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  8). 

"  The  reason  here  assigned  is  hardly  a  satisfactory  one. 
May  it  not  rather  have  been  connected  with  the  purchase 
system,  which  would  reduce  a  wife  into  the  position  of  a 
chattel  or  mancipiuni,  and  give  the  survivors  a  rever- 
sionary interest  in  her  ?  This  view  derives  some  support 
from  the  statement  in  Haxthausen's  Transcaucasia,  p. 
404,  that  among  the  Ossetes,  who  have  a  Levirate  law  of 
their  own,  in  the  event  of  none  of  the  family  marrying 
the  widow,  they  are  entitled  to  a  certain  sum  from  any 
other  husband  whom  she  may  marry. 

d  The  position  of  the  issue  of  a  Levirate  marriage,  as 
compai-ed  with  other  branches  of  the  family,  is  exhibited 
in  the  case  of  Tamar,  whose  son  by  her  father-in-law, 
Judah,  became  the  head  of  the  family,  and  the  channel 
through  whom  the  Messiah  was  born  (Gen.  xxxviii.  29  ; 
Matt.  i.  3). 

"  The  technical  term  for  this  act  was  khaliUah 
(n^''7n).  from  khalaiz  (|^?n).  "  to  draw  off."     It  is 


of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  treatise  Yehamoth,  where 
minute  directions  are  given  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  act  was  to  be  performed ;  e.  g.  that  the  shoe  was  to 
be  of  leather,  or  a  sandal  furnished  with  a  heel-strap ; 
a  felt  shoe  or  a  sandal  without  a  strap  would  not  do 
{Tebam.  12,  $1,  2).  The  khalitzah  was  not  valid  when 
the  person  performing  it  was  deaf  and  dumb  (§4),  as  he 
could  not  learn  the  precise  formula  which  accompanied 
the  act.  The  custom  is  retained  by  the  modern  Jews, 
and  is  minutely  described  by  Picart  {Ceremonies  Reli- 
gieuses,  i.  243).  It  receives  illustration  from  the  ex- 
pression used  by  the  modern  Arabs,  in  speaking  of  a 
repudiated  wife,  "  She  was  my  slipper :  I  have  cast  her 
off"  (Burckhardt,  ^^otes,  i.  113). 

'  The  variations  in  the  usages  of  the  Levirate  marriage 
are  worthy  of  notice.  Among  the  Ossetes  in  Georgia  the 
marriage  of  the  widow  takes  place  if  there  are  children, 
and  may  be  contracted  by  tbe  father  as  well  as  the  brother 
of  the  deceased  husband.  If  the  widow  has  no  children, 
the  widow  is  purchaseable  by  another  husband,  as  already 
noticed  (Haxthausen,  pp.  403,  404).  In  Arabia,  the  right 
of  marriage  is  extended  from  the  brother's  widow  to  the 
cousin.  Neither  in  this  nor  in  the  case  of  the  brother's 
widow  is  the  marriage  compulsory  on  the  part  of  the 
woman,  though  in  the  former  the  man  can  put  a  veto 
upon  any  other  marriage  (Burckhardt,  yotes,  i.  112,  113). 
Another  development  of  the  Levirate  principle  may 
perhaps  be  noticed  in  the  privilege  which  the  king  en- 
joyed of  succeeding  to  the  wives  as  well  as  the  throne  of 
his  predecessor  (2  Sam.  xii.  8).  Hence  Absalom's  public 
seizure  of  his  father's  wives  was  not  only  a  breach  of 
morality,  but  betokened  his  usurpation  of  the  throne 
(2  Sam.  xvi.  22).  And  so,  again,  Adonijah's  request  for 
the  hand  of  Abishag  was  regarded  by  Solomon  as  almost 
equivalent  to  demanding  the  throne  (1  K.  ii.  22). 

E  The  historj'  of  Ruth's  marriage  has  led  to  some  mis- 
conception on  this  point.     Boaz  stood  to  Kuth  in   the 


MAERIAGE 

The  Levirate  law  offered  numerous  opportunities 
for  the  exercise  of  that  spirit  of  casuistry,  for  which 
the  Jewish  teachers  are  so  conspicuous.  One  such 
case  is  brought  forward  by  the  Sadducees  for  the 
sake  of  entangling  our  Lord,  and  turns  upon  tlie 
complications  which  would  arise  in  the  world  to 
come  (the  existence  of  which  the  Sadducees  sought 
to  invalidate)  from  the  circumstance  of  the  same 
woman  having  been  man'ied  to  several  brothers 
(Matt.  xxii.  23-30).  The  liiibbinical  solution  of 
this  difficulty  was  that  the  wife  would  revert  to 
the  first  husband  :  our  Lord  on  the  other  hand  sub- 
verts the  hypothesis  on  which  the  difficulty  was 
based,  viz.,  that  the  material  conditions  of  the 
present  life  were  to  be  carried  on  in  the  world  to 
come ;  and  thus  He  asserts  the  true  character  of 
marriage  as  a  temporary  and  merely  limiian  insti- 
tution. Numerous  difficulties  are  suggested,  and 
minute  regulations  laid  down  by  the  Talniudical 
writers,  the  chief  authority  on  the  subject  being 
the  book  of  the  Mishna,  entitled  Yeharnoth.  From 
this  we  gather  the  following  particulars,  as  illus- 
trating the  working  of  the  law.  If  a  man  stood 
within  the  proscribed  degrees  of  relationship  in  re- 
ference to  his  brother's  widow,  he  was  exempt  from 
the  operation  of  the  law  (2,  §3),  and  if  he  wore  on 
this  or  any  other  account  exempt  from  the  obligation 
to  marry  one  of  the  widows,  he  was  also  from  the 
obligation  to  marry  any  of  them  (1,  §1)  ;  it  is  also 
implied  that  it  was  only  necessary  for  one  brother 
to  marry  one  of  the  widows,  in  cases  where  there 
were  several  widows  left.  The  marriage  was  not 
to  take  place  within  three  months  of  the  husband's 
death  (4,  §10).  The  eldest  brother  ought  to  per- 
form the  duty  of  marriage  ;  but,  on  his  declining  it, 
a  younger  brother  might  also  do  it  (2,  §8,  4,  §5).- 
The  khalitzah  was  regarded  as  involving  future  rela- 
tionship ;  so  that  a  man  who  had  received  it  could 
not  marry  the  widow's  relations  within  the  prohi- 
bited degrees  (4,  §7).  Special  rules  are  laid  down 
for  cases  where  a  woman  married  under  a  false  im- 
pression as  to  her  husband's  death  (10,  §1),  or 
where  a  mistake  took  place  as  to  whether  her  son 
or  her  husband  died  first  (10,  §3),  for  in  the  latter 
case  the  Levirate  law  would  not  apjily ;  and  again 
as  to  the  evidence  of  the  husband's  death  to  be  pro- 
duced in  certiiin  cases  (caps.  15,  16). 

From  the  prohibitions  expressed  in  the  Bible, 
others  have  been  deduced  by  a  process  of  inferential 
reasoning.  Thus  the  Talmudists  added  to  the  Le- 
vitical  relationships  several  remoter  ones,  which 
they  termed  secondary,  such  as  grandmother  and 
great-grandmother,  great-grandchild,  &c. :  the  only 
points  in  which  they  at  all  touch&l  the  Levitical 
degrees  were,  that  they  added  (1)  the  wife  of  the 
fatiier's  titerine  brother  under  the  idea  that  in  the 
text  the  brother  described  was  only  by  the  same 
father,  and  (2)  the  mother's  brother's  wife,  for 
which  they  had  no  authority  (Selden,  Ux.  Ehr. 
i.  2).  Considerable  ditl'erences  of  opinion  have 
arisen  as  to  the  extent  to  which  this  process  of  rea- 
soning should  be  carried,  and  conflicting  laws  have 
been  made  in  diflerent  countries,  professedly  based 
on  the  same  original  authority.  It  does  not  fall 
within  our  province  to  do  more  than  endeavour  to 

position,  not  of  a  Levir  (for  he  was  only  her  husband's 
cousin),  but  of  a  Goiil,  or  roiloemer  in  tlie  second  degree 
(A.  V.  "  near  kinsman,"  iii.  9)  :  as  such,  lie  redeemed  tlie 
inheritance  of  Naomi,  after  the  refusal  of  the  redeemer 
in  the  nearest  degree,  in  conforniity  with  Lev.  xxv.  25. 
It  appears  to  have  been  customary  for  the  redeemer  at 
the  same  time  to  marry  the  heiress,  but  tliis  custom  is 


MARRIAGE 


247 


point  out  in  what  respects  and  to  what  extent  the 
Biblical  statements  bear  upon  the  subject.  In  the 
first  place  we  must  obsen'e  that  the  design  of  the 
legislator  apparently  was  to  give  an  exhaustive  list 
of  prohibitions  ;  for  he  not  only  gives  examples  of 
degrees  of  relationship^  but  he  specifies  the  pro- 
hibitions in  cases  which  are  strictly  parallel  to 
each  other,  e.  g.,  son's  daughter  and  daughter's 
daughter  (ver.  10),  wife's  son's  daughter  and  wife's 
daughter's  daughter  (ver.  17):  whereas,  had  he 
wished  only  to  exhibit  the  prohibited  degree,  one  of 
these  instances  would  have  been  sufficient.  In  the 
second  place  it  appears  certain  that  he  did  not 
regard  the  degi-ee  as  the  test  of  the  prohibition ;  for 
he  establishes  a  different  rule  in  regard  to  a  brother's 
willow  and  a  deceased  wife's  sister,  though  the 
degree  of  relationship  is  in  each  case  strictly  parallel. 
It  cannot,  therefore,  in  the  face  of  this  express  en- 
actment be  argued  that  Moses  designed  his  country- 
men to  infer  that  man-iage  with  a  niece  was  illegal 
because  that  with  the  aunt  was,  nor  yet  that  mar- 
riage with  a  mother's  brother's  wife  was  included  in 
the  prohibition  of  that  with  the  father's  brother's 
wife.  For,  though  no  explicit  statement  is  made 
as  to  the  legality  of  these  two  latter,  the  rule  of  in- 
terpretation casually  given  to  us  in  the  first  must 
be  held  to  apply  to  them  also.  In  the  third  place, 
it  must  be  assumed  that  there  were  some  tangible 
and  even  strong  grounds  for  the  distinctions  noted 
in  the  degrees  of  equal  distance ;  and  it  then  be- 
comes a  matter  of  importance  to  asceiiain  whether 
these  grounds  are  o{ perpetual  force,  or  arise  out  of 
a  peculiar  stttte  of  society  or  legislation  ;  if  the  latter, 
then  it  seems  justifiable  to  suppose  that  on  the 
alteration  of  that  state  we  may  recur  to  the  spirit 
i-ather  than  the  letter  of  the  enactment,  and  may 
infer  prohibitions  which,  though  not  existing  in  the 
Levitical  law,  may  yet  be  regarded  as  based  upon  it. 
The  cases  to  which  these  remarks  would  most 
pointedly  apply  are  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's 
sister,  a  niece,  whetlier  by  blood  or  by  marriage, 
and  a  maternal  uncle's  widow.  With  regard  to  the 
first  and  third  of  these,  we  may  observe  that  the 
Hebrews  regarded  the  relationship  existing  between 
the  wife  and  her  husband's  family,  as  of  a  closer 
nature  than  that  between  the  husband  and  his  wife's 
fiimily.  To  what  extent  this  difference  was  sup- 
posed to  hold  good  we  have  no  means  of  judging; 
but  as  illustrations  of  the  difference  we  may  note 

(1 )  that  the  husband's  brother  stood  in  the  special 
relation  of  levir  to  his  brother's  wife,  and  was  sub- 
ject to  the  law  of  Levirate  marriage  in  consequence  ; 

(2)  that  the  nearest  relation  on  the  husband's  side, 
whether  brother,  nephew,  or  cousin,  stood  in  the 
special  relation  of  goel,  or  avenger  of  blood  to  liis 
widow  ;  and  (3)  tliat  an  heiress  was  restricted  to  a 
marriage  with  a  relation  on  her  father's  side.  As 
no  corresponding  obligations  existed  in  reference  to 
the  wife's  or  the" mother's  family,  it  follows  almost 
as  a  matter  of  course  that  the  degree  of  relationship 
must  have  been  regarded  as  different  in  the  two 
cases,  and  that  prohibitions  might  on  this  account 
be  applied  to  the  one,  from  which  the  other  was 
exempt.  When,  however,  we  transplant  the  Levi- 
tical  lesulations    from    the  Hebrew  to  any  other 


not  founded  on  any  written  law.  The  writer  of  the  book 
of  Ituth,  accordins;  to  Selden  {De  Success,  cap.  15),  confuses 
the  laws  relating  to  the  Goel  and  the  I.evir,  as  Josephus 
iAnt.  V.  9,  {i4)  has  undoubtedly  done ;  but  this  is  an 
unnecessary  assumption  :  the  custom  is  one  that  may 
well  have  existed  in  conforniity  with  the  fpirit  of  the 
law  of  tlie  Tvcvirate  marriage. 


248 


MARRIAGE 


commonwealth,  we  are  fully  warranted  in  taking 
into  account  the  temporary  and  local  conditions  of 
relationship  in  each,  anil  in  extending  the  prohibi- 
tions to  cases  where  alterations  in  the  social  or 
legal  condition  have  taken  place.  The  question  to 
be  fairly  argued,  then,  is  not  simply  whether  mar- 
riage within  a  ceiiain  degree  is  or  is  not  permitted 
by  the  Levitical  law,  but  whether,  allowing  for 
the  altered  state  of  society,  imdatis  mutandis,  it  ap- 
pears in  conformity  with  the  general  spirit  of  that 
law.  The  ideas  of  dilierent  nations  as  to  relation- 
ship differ  wiiiely ;  and,  should  it  happen  that  in 
the  social  system  of  a  certain  country  a  relationship 
is,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  regarded  as  an  intimate  one, 
then  it  is  clearly  permissible  for  the  nilers  of  that 
country  to  prohibit  marriage  in  reference  to  it,  not 
on  the  ground  of  any  expressed  or  implied  prohibi- 
tion in  reference  to  it  in  particular  in  the  book  of  Le- 
viticus, but  on  the  general  ground  that  Moses  in- 
tended to  prohibit  marriage  among  near  relations. 
The  application  of  such  a  rule  in  some  cases  is  clear 
enough  ;  no  one  could  hesitate  for  a  moment  to  pro- 
nounce marriage  with  a  brother's  widow,  even  in 
cases  where  the  Mosaic  law  would  permit  it,  as  ab- 
solutely illegal  in  the  present  day :  inasmuch  as  the 
pecuUar  obligation  of  the  Levir  has  been  abolished. 
As  little  could  we  hesitate  to  extend  the  prohibition 
from  the  patenial  to  the  maternal  uncle's  widow, 
now  that  the  peculiar  differences  between  I'elatiou- 
shi])s  on  the  father's  and  the  mother's  side  are  abo- 
lished. With  regard  to  the  vexed  question  of  the 
deceased  wife's  sister  we  refrain  from  expressing  an 
opinion,  inasmuch  as  the  case  is  still  in  lite ;  under 
the  rule  of  interpretation  we  have  already  laid 
down,  the  case  stands  thus :  such  a  marriage  is  not 
only  not  prohibited,  but  actually  permitted  by  the 
letter  of  the  Mosaic  law  ;  but  it  remains  to  be  aigued 
(1)  whether  the  permission  was  granted  under  pe- 
culiar circumstances  ;  (2)  whethci-  those  or  strictly 
parallel  circumstances  exist  in  the  present  day ;  and 
(3)  whether,  if  they  do  not  exist,  the  general  tenour 
of  the  Mosaic  prohibitions  would,  or  would  not, 
justify  a  community  in  extending  'the  prohibition  to 
.such  a  relationship  on  the  authority  of  the  Levitical 
law.  In  what  has  been  said  on  this  point,  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that  we  are  viewing  the  question 
simply  in  its  relation  to  the  Levitical  law:  with  the 
other  arguments  j;ro  and  con  bearing  on  it,  we  have 
at  pi'esent  nothing  to  do.  With  regard  to  the  mar- 
riage with  the  niece,  we  have  some  difficulty  in 
•suggesting  any  sufficient  ground  on  which  it  was 
permitted  by  the  Mosaic  law.  The  Kabbinical  ex- 
planation, that  the  distinction  between  the  aunt  and 
the  niece  was  based  upon  the  respcctus  jiarentelae, 
which  would  not  jiermit  the  aunt  to  be  reduced 
from  her  natural  seniority,  but  at  the  same  time 
would  not  object  to  the  elevation  of  the  niece,  can- 
not be  regarded  as  satisfactory ;  for,  though  it  ex- 
plains to  a  certain  extent  the  difference  between  the 
two,  it  places  the  prohibition  of  mairiage  with  the 
aunt,  and  consequently  the  permission  of  that  with 
the  niece,  on  a  wrong  basis  ;  for  in  Lev.  xx.  19  con- 
sanguinity, and  iwi  respectiis parentclae,  is  stated  as 
the  ground  of  the  prohibition.  The  Jews  appear 
to  have  availed  themselves  of  the  privilege  without 
scruple:  in  the  Bible  it.self,  indeed,  we  have  but 
one  instance,  and  that  not  an  undoubted  one,  in  the 

^  From  Ez.  xliv.  22  it  appears  that  the  law  relative  to 
the  marriage  of  priests  was  afterwards  made  more  rigid  : 
they  could  marry  only  maidens  of  Israelitish  origin  or 
the  widows  of  priests. 


MARRIAGE 

case  of  Othniel,  who  was  probably  the  brother  of 
Caleb  (Josh.  xv.  17),  and,  if  so,  then  the  uncle  of 
Achsah  his  wife.  Several  such  mannages  are  no- 
ticed bv  Josephus,  as  in  the  case  of  Joseph,  the 
nephew  of  Onias  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §6),  Herod  the  Great 
(Ant.  XYi\.  1,  §3),  and  Herod  Phihp  (Ant.  xnii. 
5,  §1).  But  on  whatever  ground  they  were  for- 
merly permitted,  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the 
propriety  of  prohibiting  them  in  the  present  day. 

2.  Among  the  special  prohibitions  we  have  to 
notice  the  following.  (1)  The  high-priest  was  for- 
bidden to  marry  any  except  a  A'irgin  selected  from 
his  own  people,  i.  e.  an  Israelite  (Lev.  xxi.  13,  14). 
He  was  thus  exempt  from  the  action  of  the  Levirate 
law.  (2)  The  priests  were  loss  restricted  in  their 
choice  '■ ;  they  were  only  prohibited  from  maiTying 
prostitutes  and  divorced  women  (Lev.  xxi.  7). 
(3)  Heiresses  were  prohibited  from  maiTying  out  of 
their  own  tribe,'  with  the  view  of  keeping  the  pos- 
sessions of  the  several  tribes  intact  (Num.  xxxvi. 
5-9  ;  comp.  Tob.  ^ii.  10).  (4)  Persons  defective 
in  physical  powers  were  not  to  intennarry  with 
Israelites  by  virtue  of  the  regulations  in  Dent, 
xxiii.  1.  (5)  In  the  Christian  Church,  bishops  and 
deacons  were  prohibited  from  having  more  than 
one  wife  (1  Tim.  iii.  2,  12),  a  prohibition  of  an 
ambiguous  nature,  inasmuch  as  it  may  refer  (1)  to 
polygamy  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  term,  as  ex- 
plained by  Theodoret  (in  foe),  and  most  of  the 
Fathers;  (2)  to  maiTiage  after  the  decease  of  the 
first  wife;  or  (o)  to  man-iage  after  divorce  during 
the  hfetime  of  the  first  wife.  The  probable  sense 
is  second  marriage  of  any  kind  whatever,  including 
all  the  three  cases  alluded  to,  but  with  a  special 
reference  to  the  two  last,  which  were  allow- 
able in  the  case  of  the  laity,  while  the  first  was 
equally  forbidden  to  all.  The  early  Church  gene- 
rally regarded  second  maniage  as  a  disqualilication 
for  the  ministry,  though  on  this  point  there  was  not 
absolute  unanimity  (see  Bingham,  Ant.  iv.  5, 
§1-3).  (6)  A  similar  prohibition  applied  to  those 
who  were  candidates  for  admission  into  the  eccle- 
siastical order  of  widows,  whatever  that  order  may 
have  been  (1  Tim.  v.  9)  ;  in  this  case  the  words 
"wife  of  one  man"  can  be  applied  but  to  two 
cases,  (1)  to  re-marriage  after  the  decease  of  the 
husband,  or  (2)  after  divorce.  That  divorce  was 
obtained  sometimes  at  the  instance  of  the  wife,  is 
implied  in  Maik  x.  12,  and  1  Cor.  vii.  11,  and  is 
alluded  to  by  several  classical  writers  (see  Whitby, 
in  foe).  But  St.  Paul  probably  refers  to  the  ge- 
neral question  of  re-marriage.  (7)  With  regard  to 
the  general  question  of  the  re-maiTiage  of  divorced 
persons,  there  is  some  difficulty  in  ascertaining  the 
sense  of  .Scripture.  According  to  the  Mosaic  law, 
a  wife  divorced  at  the  instance  of  the  husband 
might  many  whom  she  liked  ;  but  if  her  second 
husband  died  or  divorced  her  she  could  not  revert 
to  her  first  husband,  on  the  ground  that,  as  far  as 
he  was  concerned,  she  was  "  defiled  "  (Deut.  xxiv. 
2-4)  ;  we  may  infer  from  the  statement  of  the 
ground  that  there  was  no  objection  to  the  re-mar- 
riage of  the  original  pai'ties,  if  the  divorced  wife 
had  remained  unmarried  in  the  interval.  If  the 
wife  was  divorced  on  the  gi'ound  of  adultery,  her 
re-marriage  was  impossible,  inasmuch  as  the  pu- 
nishment for   such   a   crime   was   death.     In  the 

'  The  close  analogy  of  this  regulation  to  the  Athenian 
law  respecting  the  ctti'kAjjpoi  has  been  already  noticed  in 
the  article  on  Heir. 


MARRIAGE 

N.  T.  there  are  no  direct  prece]>ts  on  the  subject  of 
the  ve-maniage  of  divoi-ced  persous.  All  the  re- 
marks bearing  upon  the  point  had  a  primary  refer- 
ence to  an  entirely  different  subject,  viz.  the  abuse 
of  divorce.  For  instance,  our  Lord's  declarations  in 
Matt.  V.  '62,  xi.\.  9,  applying  as  they  expressly  do 
to  the  case  of  a  wife  divorced  on  other  grounds 
than  that  of  unfaithfulness,  and  again  St.  Paul's, 
in  1  Cor.  vii.  11,  pre-supposing  a  contingency 
which  he  himself  had  prohibited  as  being  improper, 
cannot  be  regardeil  as  directed  to  the  general  ques- 
tion of  re-maiTiage.  In  applying  these  passages  to 
our  own  circumstances,  due  regard  must  be  had  to 
the  peculiar  nature  of  the  Jewish  divorce,  which 
w;is  not,  as  with  us,  a  judicial  proceeding  based  on 
evidence  and  pronounced  by  authority,  but  the 
ar.bitrary,  and  sometimes  capricious  act  of  an  indi- 
vidual. The  assertion  that  a  woman  divorced  on 
improper  and  trivial  gi'ounds  is  made  to  commit 
adultery,  does  not  thei-efore  bear  upon  the  question 
of  a  person  divorced  by  judicial  authority;  no  such 
case  as  oui'  Lord  supposes  can  now  talie  j)lace  ;  at 
all  events  it  would  take  place  only  in  conne.xion 
with  the  question  of  what  form  adequate  grounds 
fur  divorce.  The  early  Church  was  divided  in  its 
opinion  on  this  subject  (Bingham,  Ant.  xxii.  2,  §12). 

With  regard  to  age,  no  restriction  is  pronounced  in 
tiie  Bible.  Early  mai'riage  is  spoken  of  with  ap- 
proval in  several  passages  (Prov.  ii.  17,  v.  18  ;  Is. 
Ixii.  5),  and  in  reducing  this  general  statement  to 
the  more  definite  one  of  years,  we  must  take  into 
account  the  very  early  age  at  which  persons  arrive 
at  puberty  in  Oriental  countries.  In  modern  Egypt 
marriage  takes  place  in  general  before  the  bride 
has  attained  the  age  of  16,  frequently  when  she 
is  12  or  13,  and  occasionally  when  she  is  only  10 
(Lane,  i.  208).  The  Talmudists  forbade  marriage 
in  the  cRse  of  a  man  under  13  years  and  a  day, 
and  in  the  case  of  a  woman  under  12  years  and 
a  day  (Buxtorf,  Synagog.  cap.  7,  p.  143).  The 
usual  age  appears  to  have  been  higher,  about  18 
years. 

Certain  days  were  fixed  for  the  ceremonies  of 
betrothal  and  marriage — the  fourth  day  for  virgins, 
and  the  fifth  for  widows  (Mishna,  Ketub.  1,  §1).  The 
more  modern  Jews  similarly  appoint  different  days 
for  virgins  and  widows,  Wednesday  and  Friday  for 
the  tbrmer,  Thursday  for  the  latter  (Picart,  i.  240). 

III.  The  customs  of  the  Hebrews  and  of  Oriental 
nations  generally,  in  regard  to  the  preliminaries  of 
marriage,  as  well  as  the  ceremonies  attending  the 
rite  itself,  differ  in  many  respects  from  those  with 
which  we  are  familiar.  In  the  first  place,  the 
choice  of  the  bri<le  devolved  not  on  the  bridegroom 
himself,  but  on  his  relations  or  on  a  friend  deputed 
by  tiie  bridegroom  for  this  purpose.  Thus  Abra- 
liam  sends  Eliezer  to  find  a  suitable  bride  for  his 
son  Isaac,  and  the  narrative  of  his  mission  affords 
one  of  the  most  charming  pictures  of  patriarchal  life 


MARRIAGE 


249 


k  The  term  mohar  HilD)  occurs  only  thrice  in  the 
Bible  (Gen.  .\.\xiv.  12:  Ex.  xxii.  IV;  1  Sam.  xviii.  2.5). 
From  the  second  of  the  three  passages,  compared  with 
iJeut.  xxii.  29,  it  has  been  inl'crreii  that  the  sum  was  in  all 
cases  paiii  to  the  father  ;  but  this  inference  is  unfounded, 
because  the  sum  to  be  paid  according  to  that  passage  was 
not  the  proper  mohar,  but  a  sum  "  according  to,"  i.  e. 
equivalent  to  the  mohar,  and  this,  not  as  a  price  for  the 
bride,  but  as  a  penalty  for  the  offence  committed.  The 
origin  of  the  term,  and  consequently  its  specific  sense,  is 
uncertain.  Gesenius  (Thes.  p.  773)  has  evolved  the  sen>^ 
of  "  purchase-money  "  by  connecting  it  with  ^DD.  "  to 


(Gen.  xxiv.) ;  Hagar  chooses  a  wife  for  Ishmael 
(Gen.  xxi.  21) ;  Isaac  directs  Jacob  in  his  choice  (Gen. 
xxviii.  1);  and  Judah  selects  a  wife  for  Er  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  6).  It  does  not  follow  that  the  bridegroom  s 
wishes  were  not  consulted  in  this  arrangement ;  ou 
the  contraiy,  the  parents  made  proposals  at  the  in- 
stigation of  their  sons  in  the  instances  of  Shechem 
(Gen.  xxxiv.  4,  8)  and  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  1-10).  A 
marriage  contracted  without  the  parents'  inter- 
ference was  likelv  to  turn  out,  as  in  Esau's  case, 
"  a  grief  of  mind"  to  them  (Gen.  xxvi.  35,  xxvii. 
46).  As  a  general  rule  the  proposal  originated 
with  the  family  of  the  bridegroom  :  occasionally, 
when  there  was  a  difference  of  rank,  this  rule  was 
reversed,  and  the  bride  was  offered  by  her  father, 
as  by  Jethro  to  Moses  (Ex.  ii.  21),  by  Caleb  to 
Othniel  (Josh.  xv.  17),  and  by  Saul  to  David 
(1  Sam.  xviii.  27).  The  imaginary  case  of  women 
soliciting  husbands  (Is.  iv.  1)  was  designed  to  con- 
vey to  the  mind  a  picture  of  the  ravages  of  war, 
by  which  the  greater  part  of  the  males  had  fallen. 
The  consent  of  the  maiden  was  sometimes  asked 
(Gen.  xxiv.  58) ;  but  this  appears  to  have  been 
subordinate  to  the  previous  consent  of  the  father 
and  the  adult  brothers  (Gen.  xxiv.  51,  xxxiv.  11). 
Occasionally  the  whole  business  of  selecting  the 
wif(5  was  left  in  the  hands  of  a  friend,  and  hence 
the  case  might  arise  which  is  supposed  by  the  Tal- 
mudists (  Yeham.  2,  §6,  7),  that  a  man  might  not 
be  aware  to  which  of  two  sisters  he  was  betrothed. 
So  in  Egypt  at  the  present  day  the  choice  of  a  wife 
is  sometimes  entrusted  to  a  professional  woman 
styled  a  khdt'beh  :  and  it  is  seldom  that  the  bride- 
groom sees  the  features  of  his  bride  before  the 
marriage  has  taken  place  (Lane,  i.  209-211). 

The  selection  of  the  bride  was  followed  by  the 
espousal,  which  was  not  altogether  like  our  "  en- 
gagement," but  was  a  formal  proceeding,  under- 
taken by  a  friend  or  legal  representative  on  the 
part  of  the  bridegroom,  and  by  the  parents  on  tlie 
part  of  the  bride ;  it  was  confirmed  by  oaths,  and 
accompanied  with  presents  to  the  bride.  Thus 
Eliezer,  on  behalf  of  Isaac,  propitiates  the  favour 
of  Rebekah  by  presenting  her  in  anticipation  with  a 
massive  golden  nose-ring  and  two  bracelets ;  he 
then  proceeds  to  treat  with  the  parents,  and,  having 
obtained  theii-  consent,  he  brings  foith  the  more 
costly  and  formal  presents,  "jewels  of  silver,  and 
jewels  of  gold,  and  raiment,"  for  the  bride,  and 
presents  of  less  value  for  the  mother  and  brothers 
(Gen.  xxiv.  22,  53).  These  presents  were  described 
by  different  terms,  that  to  the  bride  by  wioAa/-'' 
(A.  V.  "dowry"),  and  that  to  the  i-elations  by 
mattan.^  Thus  Shechevn  offers  "  never  so  much 
dowry  and  gift"  (Gen.  xxxiv.  12),  the  former  for 
the  bride,  the  latter  for  the  relations.  It  has  been 
supposed  indeed  tliat  the  nioliar  was  a  price  paid 
down  to  the  father  for  the  sale  of  his  daughter. 
Such   a   custom    undoubtedly    prevails   in   certain 


sell."  It  has  also  been  connected  with  "IHO.  "  to  hasten," 
as  though  it  signified  a  present  haalihi  produced  for  the 
bride  when  her  consent  was  obtained ;  and  again  with 
■inO,  "  morrow,"  as  though  it  were  the  gift  presented 
to  the  bride  on  the  niorning  after  the  wedding,  like  the 
German  morgcn-gahe  (Sa;ilscliUtz,  Ardiiiol.  ii.  193). 

'"  ]Pi12-  The  importance  of  presents  at  the  time  of 
betrothal  appears  from  the  application  of  the  term  uras 
('CnX).  literally,  •'  to  make  a  present,"  in  the  special 
sense  of  "  to  betroth. ' 


250 


MAKRIAGE 


parts  of  the  East  at  the  present  day,  but  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  the  case  with  free  women  in 
patriarchal  times  ;  for  tlie  daughters  of  Laban  make 
it  a  matter  of  complaint  that  their  father  had 
bargained  for  the  services  of  Jacob  in  exchange  for 
their  hands,  just  as  if  the)'  were  "  strangers  "  (Gen. 
sxxi.  15);  and  the  permission  to  sell  a  daughter 
was  restricted  to  the  case  of  a  "  servant"  or 
secondary  wife  (Ex.  xxi.  7)  :  nor  does  David,  when 
complaining  of  the  non-completion  of  Saul's  bargain 
with  him,  use  the  expression  "  I  bought  for,"  but 
"  1  espoused  to  me  for  an  hundred  foreskins  of  the 
Philistines  (2  Sam.  iii.  14).  The  expressions  in 
Hos.  iii.  2,  "  So  I  bought  her  to  me,"  and  in  Ruth 
iv.  10,  "Ruth  have  1  lourchased  to  be  my  wife," 
ceilainly  appear  to  favour  the  opposite  view ;  it 
should  be  observed,  however,  that  in  the  former 
passage  great  doubt  exists  as  to  the  correctness  of 
the  translation ";  and  that  in  the  latter  the  case 
would  not  be  conclusive,  as  Ruth  might  well  be 
considered  as  included  in  the  purchase  T^f  her  pro- 
perty. It  would  undoubtedly  be  expected  that  the 
mohar  should  be  proportioned  to  the  position  of  the 
bride,  and  that  a  poor  man  could  not  on  that  ac- 
count aflbrd  to  marry  a  rich  wife  (1  Sam.  xviii. 
23).  Occasionally  the  bride  received  a  dowry" 
from  her  father,  as  instanced  in  the  cases  of  Caleb's 
(Judg.  i.  15)  and  Pharaoh's  (1  K.  ix.  16)  daugh- 
ters. A  "  settlement,"  in  the  modern  sense  of  the 
term,  i.  e.  a  written  document  securing  property 
to  the  wife,  did  not  come  into  use  until  the  post- 
Babylonian  period :  the  only  instance  we  have  of 
one  is  in  Tob.  vii.  14,  where  it  is  described  as  an 
"  instrument "  ((Tvyypafpr]).  Tiie  Talmudists  styled 
it  a  ketuhah,f  and  have  laid  down  minute  directions 
as  to  the  disposal  of  the  sum  secured,  in  a  treatise 
of  the  Mishna  expressly  on  that  subject,  from 
which  we  extract  the  following  particulars.  The 
peculiarity  of  the  Jewish  ketuhah  consisted  in  this, 
that  it  was  a  definite  sum,  varying  not  according 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  parties,  but  according 
to  the  state  of  the  bride,l  whether  she  be  a  spinster, 
a  widow,  or  a  divorced  woman''  (1,  §2);  and 
further,  that  the  dowry  could  not  be  claimed  until 
the  termination  of  the  marriage  by  the  death  of  the 
husband  or  by  divorce  (5,  §1),  though  advances 
might  be  made  to  the  wife  previously  (9,  §8). 
Subsequently  to  beti-othal  a  woman  lost  all  power 
over  her  property,  and  it  became  vested  in  the  hus- 
band, unless  he  had  previously  to  marriage  re- 
nounced his  right  to  it  (8,  §1  ;  9,  §1).  Stipulations 
were  entered  into  for  the  increase  of  the  hctuhah, 
when  the  bride  had  a  handsome  allowance  (6,  §3). 

°  The  term  used  (n"13)  has  a  general  sense  "  to  make 
an  agreement."  The  meaning  of  the  verse  appears  to  be 
this  : — the  Prophet  had  previously  married  a  wife,  named 
Gomer,  who  had  turned  out  unfaithful  to  him.  He  had 
separated  from  her ;  but  he  was  ordered  to  renew  his 
Intimacy  with  her,  and  previous  to  doing  this  he  places 
her  on  her  probation,  setting  her  apart  for  a  time,  and  for 
her  maintenance  agreeing  to  give  her  fifteen  pieces  of 
silver,  in  addition  to  a  certain  amount  of  food. 

"  The  technical  term  of  the  Talmndists  for  the  dowry 
which  the  wife  brought  to  her  husband,  answering  to  the 
dos  of  the  Latins,  was  JJ^jn]. 

''  ri3in3.  literally  "a  writing."  The  term  was  also 
specifically  applied  to  the  sum  settled  on  the  wife  by 
the  husband,  answering  to  the  Latin  donatio  propter 
miptias. 

1  The  practice  of  the  modern  Egyptians  illustrates  this ; 
for  with  them  the  dowry,  though  its  amount  differs 
according  to  the  wealth  of  the  suitor,  is  still  graduated 


MARRIAGE 

1  The  act  of  betrothal »  was  celebrated  by  a  feast 
I  (1,  §5),  and  among  the  more  modern  Jews  it  is  the 
custom  in  some  parts  for  the  bridegroom  to  place  a 
rhig  on  the  bride's  finger  (Picart.,  i.  239) — a  cus- 
tom which  also  pi-evaiied  among  the  Romans  {Diet, 
of  Ant.  p.  604).  Some  writers  have  endeavoured 
to  prove  that  the  rings  noticed  in  the  0.  T. 
(Ex.  XXXV.  22;  Is.  iii.  21)  were  nuptial  rings, 
but  there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  of  this. 
The  ring  was  nevertheless  regarded  among  the  He- 
brews as  a  token  of  fidelity  (Gen.  xli.  42),  and  of 
adoption  into  a  family  (Luke  xv.  22).  According 
to  Selden  it  was  originally  given  as  an  equi- 
valent for  dowry-money  {Uxor  Ehraic.  ii.  14). 
Between  the  betrothal  and  the  marriage  an  inteiTal 
elapsed,  varying  from  a  few  days  in  the  patriarchal 
age  (Gen.  xxiv.  55),  to  a  full  year  for  virgins  and  a 
month  for  widows  in  later  times.  During  this 
period  the  bride -elect  lived  with  her  finends,  and  all 
commimication  between  herself  and  her  future  hus- 
band was  carried  on  through  the  medium  of  a  friend 
deputed  for  the  purpose,  termed  the  "  friend  of  the 
bridegroom  "  (John  iii.  29).  She  was  now  vir- 
tually regarded  as  the  wife  of  her  future  husband  ; 
for  it  was  a  maxim  of  the  Jewish  law  that  betrothal 
was  of  equal  force  with  marriage  (Phil.  De  Spec. 
Leg.  p.  788).  Hence  faithlessness  on  her  part  was 
punishable  with  death  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  24),  the  hus- 
band having,  however,  the  option  of  "  putting  her 
away"  (Matt.  i.  19)  by  giving  her  a  bill  of  di- 
vorcement, in  case  he  did  not  wish  to  proceed  to 
such  an  extreme  punishment  (Deut.  xxiv.  1).  False 
accusations  on  this  gi-ound  were  punished  by  a 
severe  fine  and  the  forfeiture  of  the  right  of  chvorce 
(Deut.  xxii.  13-19).  The  betrothed  woman  could 
not  part  with  her  property  after  betrothal,  except 
in  certain  cases  {Ketub.  8,  §1):  and,  in  short,  the 
bond  of  matrimony  was  as  fully  entered  into  by 
betrothal,  as  with  us  by  marriage.  In  this  respect 
we  may  compare  the  practice  of  the  Athenians,  who 
regarded  the  formal  betrothal  as  indispensable  to 
the  validity  of  a  man-iage  contract  {Diet,  of  Ant. 
p.  598).  The  customs  of  the  Nestorians  atibrd 
several  points  of  similarity  in  respect  both  to  the 
mode  of  effecting  the  betrothal  and  the  importance 
attached  to  it  (Grant's  Nestorians,  pp.  197,  198). 

We  now  come  to  the  wedding  itself;  and  in  this 
the  most  observable  point  is,  that  there  were  no 
definite  religious  ceremonies  connected  with  it.' 
It  is  probable,  indeed,  that  some  formal  ratification 
of  the  espousal  with  an  oath  took  place,  as  implied 
in  some  allusions  to  marriage  (Ez.  xvi.  8  ;  Jlal.  ii. 
14),  particularly  in  the  expression,  "  the  covenant 


according  to  the  state  of  the  bride.  A  certain  portion 
only  of  the  dowry  is  paid  down,  the  rest  being  held  in 
reserve  (Lane,  i.  211).  Among  the  modem  Jews  also 
the  amount  of  the  dowry  varies  with  the  state  of  the 
bride,  according  to  a  fixed  scale  (Picart,  i.  240). 

>■  The  amount  of  the  dowry,  according  to  the  Mosaic 
law,  appears  to  have  been  fifty  shekels  (Ex.  xxii.  17, 
compared  with  Deut.  xxii.  29). 

s  The  technical  term  used  by  the  Talmudists  for  be- 
trothing was  JciddHshin  (|''^-1'lp)'  derived  from  K^'lp. 
"  to  set  apart."  There  is  a  treatise  in  the  Mishna  so 
entitled,  in  which  various  questions  of  casuistry  of  slight 
interest  to  us  are  discussed. 

'  It  is  worthy  of  observation  that  there  is  no  term  in 
the  Hebrew  language  to  express  the  ceremony  of  marriage. 
The  substantive  chatumiah  (nUrin)  occurs  but  once, 
and  then  in  connexion  with  the  day  (Cant.  iii.  11).  The 
word  "  wedding  "  does  not  occur  at  all  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Old  Testament. 


MARRIAGE 

of  her  God"  (Prov.  ii.  17),  as  applied  to  the  mar- 
riage bond,  and  that  a  blessing  was  pronounced 
(Gen.  xxiv.  60  ;  Ruth  iv.  11,  12)  sometimes  by  the 
parents  (Tob.  vii.  1:3).  But  the  essence  of  the 
marriage  ceremony  consisted  in  the  removal  of  the 
bride  ti'om  her  father's  house  to  that  of  the  bride- 
groom or  his  father." 

The  bridegroom  prepared  himself  for  the  occasion 
by  patting  on  a  festive  dress,  and  especially  by 
placing  on  his  head  the  handsome  turban  described 
by  the  term  peer  (Is.  Ixi.  10  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments  "), 
and  a  nuptial  crown  or  garland*  (Cant.  iii.  11): 
he  was  redolent  of  myrrh  and  frankincense  and 
"all  powders  of  the  merchant"  (Cant.  iii.  6). 
The  bride  prepared  herself  for  the  ceremony  by 
taking  a  bath,  generally  on  the  day  preceding  the 
wedding.  This  was  probably  in  ancient  as  in  mo- 
dern times  a  formal  proceeding,  accompanied  with 
considerable  pomp  (Picart,  i.  240  ;  Lane,  i.  217). 
The  notices  of  it  in  the  Bible  are  so  few  as  to  have 
escaped  general  observation  (Kuth  iii.  3  ;  Ez.  xxiii. 
4U  ;  Eph.  V.  26,  27)  ;  but  the  passages  cited  esta- 
blish the  antiquity  of  the  custom,  and  the  expres- 
sions in  the  last  ("  having  purified  her  by  the 
laver  of  water,"  "  not  having  spot  "),  have  evident 
reference  to  it.  A  similar  custom  prevailed  among 
the  Greeks  {Diet,  of  Ant.  s.  v.  Balneae,  p.  185). 
The  distinctive  feature  of  the  bride's  attire  was  the 
tsd'tphj  or  "  veil  " — a  light  robe  of  ample  dimen- 
sions, which  covered  not  only  the  face  but  the 
whole  person  (Gen.  xxiv.  65  ;  comp.  xxxviii.  14, 
15).  This  was  regarded  as  the  symbol  of  her  sub- 
mission to  her  husband,  and  hence  in  1  Cor.  xi.  10, 
the  veil  is  apparently  described  under  the  term 
e^ovaia,  "  authority."  She  also  wore  a  peculiar 
girdle,  named  kishshurim,^  the  "  attire  "  (A.  V.), 
which  no  bride  could  forget  (Jer.  ii.  32);  and  her 
head  was  crowned  with  a  chaplet,  which  was  again 
so  distinctive  of  the  bride,  that  the  Hebrew  term 

"  There  seems  Indeed  to  be  a  literal  truth  hi  the 
Hebrew  expression  "  to  take  "  a  wife  (Num.  xii.  1 ;  1  Chr. 
ii.  21)  ;  for  the  ceremony  appears  to  have  mainly 
consisted  in  the  taking.  Among  the  modern  Arabs  the 
same  custom  prevails,  the  capture  and  removal  of  the 
bride  being  effected  with  a  considerable  show  of  violence 
(Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  108). 

«  The  bridegroom's  crown  was  made  of  various  materials 
(gold  or  silver,  roses,  myrtle  or  olive),  according  to  his 
circumstances  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr.  ii.  15).  The  use  of  the 
crown  at  marriages  was  familiar  both  to  the  Greeks  and 
Komans  {Diet,  of  Ant.,  Corona). 

5'  Cl'^y^.    See  article  on  Diiess.    The  use  of  the  veil 

•      •     T 

was  nut  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews.  It  was  customary 
among  the  Greeks  and  Komans  ;  and  among  the  latter  it 
gave  rise  to  the  expression  nubo,  literally  "  to  veil,"  and 
hence  to  our  word  "  nuptial."  It  is  still  used  by  the  Jews 
(Picart,  i.  241).  The  modern  Egj^ptians  envelope  the 
bride  in  an  ample  shawl,  which  perhaps  more  than  any 
thing  else  resembles  the  Hebrew  tzaqjU  (Lane,  i.  220). 

^  □''llE^ip.  Some  difference  of  opinion  exists  as  to 
this  tenn.  [Gium.E.]  The  girdle  was  an  important  article 
of  tlie  bride's  dress  among  the  Romans,  ami  gave  rise  to 
the  expression  solvere  zonam. 

ri?3.  The  bride's  crown  was  either  of  gold  or  gilded. 
The  use  of  it  was  interdicted  after  the  destruction  of  the 
second  Temple,  as  a  token  of  humiliation  (Selden,  I'x.  Ebr 
ii.  ir>). 

''  D''J?^J3.  Winer  {Kab.  s.  v.  "Hochzeit")  identifies 
the  "children  of  the  bridechamber"  with  the  shoshbenim 
(□''33t;^'iC)  of  the  ■I'almudistiJ.  But  the  former  were 
the  attendants  on  the  brideKVuom  alone,  while  ihc  slwsh- 


MARRIAGE 


261 


callah,'^  "bride,"  originated  ft-om  it.  If  the  bride 
were  a  virgin,  she  wore  lier  hair  flowing  {Ketub. 
2,  §1).  Her  robes  were  white  (Rev.  six.  8),  and 
sometimes  embroidered  with  gold  thread  (Ps.  xlv. 
13,  14),  and  covered  with  perfumes  (Ps,  xlv.  8): 
she  was  further  decked  out  with  jewels  (Is.  xlix. 
18,  Ixi.  10;  Rev.  xxi.  2).  When  the  fixed  hour 
arrived,  which  was  generally  late  in  the  evening, 
the  bridegroom  set  forth  from  his  house,  attended 
by  his  groomsmen,  termed  in  Hebrew  mere  iin^ 
(A.  V.  "  companions  ;  Judg.  xiv.  11),  and  in  Greek 
viol  Tov  i/vfj.(pQ)vos  (A.  V.  "  children  of  the  bride- 
chamber  ;"  Matt.  ix.  15),  preceded  by  a  band  of 
musicians  or  singers  (Gen.  xxxi.  27  ;  Jer.  vii.  34, 
xvi.  9  ;  1  Mace.  ix.  39),  and  accompanied  by  per- 
sons bearing  flambeaux  <=  (2  Esdr.  x.  2  ;  Matt.  xxv. 
7^  compare  Jer.  xxv.  10  ;  Rev.  xviii.  23,  "the  light 
of  a  candle").  Having  reached  the  house  of  the 
bride,  who  with  her  maidens  anxiously  expected 
his  arrival  (Matt.  xxv.  6),  he  conducted  the  whole 
party  back  to  his  own  or  his  father's"*  house, 
with  every  demonstration  of  gladness  e  (Ps.  xlv.  15). 
On  their  way  back  they  were  joined  by  a  party  of 
maidens,  friends  of  the  bride  and  bridegroom,  who 
were  in  waiting  to  catch  the  procession  as  it  passed 
(Matt.  xxv.  6  ;  comp.  Trench  on  Parables,  p.  244 
note).  The  inhabitants  of  the  place  pressed  out 
into  the  streets  to  watch  the  procession  (Cant.  iii. 
11).  At  the  house  a  feast '  was  prepared,  to  which 
all  the  friends  and  neighbours  were  invited  (Gen. 
xxix.  22  ;  Matt.  xxii.  1-10  ;  Luke  xiv.  8  ;  John 
ii.  2),  and  the  festivities  were  protracted  for 
seven,  or  even  fourteen  days  (Judg.  xiv.  12;  Tob. 
viii.  19).  The  guests  were  provided  by  the  host 
with  fitting  robes  (Matt.  xxii.  'l  1  ;  comp.  Trench, 
Parables,  p.  230),  and  the  feast  was.  enlivened  with 
riddles  (Judg.  xiv.  12)  and  other  amusements.  The 
bridegroom  now  entered  into  direct  communication 
with  the  bride,  and  the  joy  of  the  friend  was  "  ful- 


benim  were  two  persons  selected  on  the  day  of  the  mar- 
riage to  represent  the  interests  of  bride  and  bridegroom, 
apparently  with  a  special  view  to  any  possible  litigation 
that  might  subsequently  arise  on  the  subject  noticed  in 
Deut.  xxii.  15-21  (Selden,  Ux.  Etn:  ii.  16). 

c  Compare  the  5a5es  wix<f>i.KaC  of  the  Greeks  (Aristoph. 
Pax,  1317).  The  lamps  described  in  Matt.  xxv.  7  would 
be  small  hand-lamps.  Without  them  none  could  join  the 
procession  (Trench's  Parables,  p.  257  note). 

*  The  bride  was  said  to  " go  to "  (?X  X13)  the  house 
of  her  husband  (Josh.  xv.  18  ;  Judg.  i.  14);  an  expression 
which  is  worthy  of  notice,  inasmuch  as  it  has  not  been 
rightly  understood  in  Dan.  xi.  6,  where  "  tliey  that  brought 
her"  is  an  expression  for  husband.  The  bringing  home  of 
the  bride  was  regarded  in  the  later  days  of  the  Roman 
empire  as  one  of  the  most  important  parts  of  the  marriage 
ceremony  (Bingham,  Ant.  xxii.  4,  ^7). 

"  From  the  joyous  sounds  used  on  these  occasions  the 
term  hdlal  ?7n)  is  applied  in  the  sense  of  marrying  in 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  63 ;  A.  V.  "  their  maidens  were  not  given  to 
marriage,"  literally,  "  were  not  praised,"  as  in  the  margin. 
This  sense  appears  preferable  to  that  of  the  LXX.,  ovk 
e-rrivdricrm',  which  is  adopted  by  Gesenius  (  Thes.  p.  596). 
The  noise  In  the  streets,  attendant  on  an  Oriental  wedding, 
is  excessive,  and  enables  us  to  understand  the  allusicms  in 
Jeremiah  to  the  "  voice  of  the  bridegroom  and  the  voice 
of  the  bride." 

'  The  fe:ist  was  regarded  as  so  essential  a  part  of  the 
marriage  ceremony,  that  naelu  ya.iJ.ou  acquired  the  spe- 
cific meaning  "to  celebrate  the  marriage-feast"  (Gen. 
xxix.  22;  Esth.  ii.  18 ;  Tob.  viii.  1!) ;  1  Mace.  ix.  37.  x.  58 ; 
LXX.,  Matt.  xxii.  4,  xxv.  10 ;  Liiko  xiv.  8),  and  sometimes 
to  celebrate  any  feast  (Estb.  ix.  22). 


252 


MARRIAGE 


filled "  at  hearing  the  voice  of  the  bridegroom 
(John  iii.  29)  conversing  with  her,  which  he  re- 
garded as  a  satisfactory  testimony  of  the  success  of 
his  share  in  the  work.  In  the  case  of  a  virgin, 
parched  corn  was  distributed  among  the  guests 
(Ketub.  2,  §1),  the  significance  of  which  is  not 
apparent ;  the  custom  bears  some  resemblance  to 
the  distribution  of  the  mustaceimi  (Juv.  vi.  202) 
among  the  guests  at  a  Roman  wedding.  The  modern 
Jews  have  a  custom  of  shattering  glasses  or  vessels, 
by  dashing  them  to  the  ground  (Picart,  i.  240). 


Lamp  suspended  at  a 


l:i(^l>tian  M  cddiD^.    (Lane.) 


The  last  act  in  the  ceremonial  was  the  conducting 
of  the  bride  to  the  bridal  chamber,  cheders  (Judg. 
XV.  1  ;  Joel  ii.  16),  where  a  canopy,  named  chup- 
pdh^  was  prepared  (Ps.  xix.  5;  Joel  ii.  16).  The 
bride  was  still  completely  veiled,  so  that  the  decep- 
tion practised  on  Jacob  (Gen.  xxix.  2lj)  was  very 
possible.  If  proof  could  be  subsequently  adduced 
that  the  bride  had  not  preserved  her  maiden  purity, 
the  case  was  investigated  ;  and,  if  she  was  convicted, 
she  was  stoned  to  death  before  her  father's  house 
(Deut.  xxii.  13-21).  A  newly  married  man  was 
exempt  from  military  service,  or  from  any  public 
business  which  might  draw  him  away  from  his 
home,  for  the  space  of  a  year  (Deut.  xxiv.  5) ;  a 
similar  privilege  was  granted  to  him  who  was  be- 
trothed (Deut.  XX.  7). 

Hitherto  we  have  described  the  usages  of  mar- 
ri;ige  .ns  well  as  they  can  be  ascertained  from  the 
Bible  itself  The  Talmudists  specify  three  modes 
by  which  marriage  might  be  eU'ected,  viz.,  money, 
marriage -contract,  and  consummation  {Kiddush.  i. 
§1).  The  first  was  by  the  presentation  of  a  sum 
of  money,  or  its  equivalent,  in  the  presence  of  wit- 
nesses, accompanied  by  a  mutual  declaiation  of  1^- 
trothal.  The  second  was  by  a  written,  instead  of  a 
verbal  agreement,  either  with  or  without  a  sum  of 
money.  The  third,  though  valid  in  point  of  law, 
was  discouraged   to  the  greatest  extent,   as  being 

"  ""in- 

*■  nSn.  'I'lie  term  occurs  in  tbe  Mislina  {Ketub.  4, 
J5),  and  is  explained  by  sonic  of  tlic  Jewish  cunimcntalurs 


MARRIAGE 

contrary  to  the  laws  of  morality  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr. 
ii.  1,2). 

IV.  In  considering  the  social  and  domestic  con- 
ditions of  married  life  among  the  Hebrews,  we  must 
in  the  first  place  take  into  account  the  position  as- 
signed to  women  generally  in  their  social  scale. 
Tiie  seclusion  of  the  harem  and  the  habits  conse- 
quent upon  it  wore  utterly  unknown  in  early  times, 
and  the  condition  of  the  Oriental  woman,  as  pic- 
tured to  us  in  the  Bible,  contrasts  most  favourably 
witli  that  of  her  modern  representative.  There  is 
abundant  evidence  that  women,  whether  manried 
or  unmarried,  went  about  with  their  faces  unveiled 
(Gen.  xii.  14,  xxiv.  IG,  65,  xxix.  11  ;  1  Sam.  i.  13). 
An  unmarried  woman  might  meet  and  converse  with 
men,  eveu  strangers,  in  a  public  place  (Gen.  xxiv. 
24,  45-7,  xxix.  9-12  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  11):  she  might 
be  found  alone  in  the  country  without  any  reflec- 
tion on  her  i:haracter  (Deut.  xxii.  25-27 ) :  or  she 
might  appear  in  a  court  of  justice  (Num.  xxvii.  2). 
Women  not  unfrequently  held  important  offices ; 
some  were  prophetesses,  as  Miriam,  Deborah,  Hul- 
dah,  Noadiah,  and  Anna;  of  others  advice  was 
sought  in  emergencies  (2  Sam.  xiv.  2,  xx.  16-22). 
They  took  their  part  in  matters  of  public  interest 
(Ex.  XV.  20 ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6,  7) :  in  short,  they 
enjoyed  as  much  freedom  in  ordinary  life  as  the 
women  of  our  own  country. 

If  such  was  her  general  position,  it  is  certain 
that  the  wife  must  have  exercised  an  important 
influence  in  her  own  home.  She  appears  to  have 
taken  her  part  in  famii}'  affairs,  and  even  to  have 
enjoyed  a  considerable  amount  of  independence.  For 
instance,  she  entertains  guests  at  her  own  desire 
(2  K.  iv.  8)  in  the  absence  of  her  husband  (Judg. 
iv.  18),  and  sometimes  even  in  defiance  of  his  wishes 
(1  Sam.  XXV.  14,  &c.) :  she  disposes  of  her  child  by 
a  vow  without  any  reference  to  her  husband  (1  Sam. 
i.  24) :  she  consults  with  him  as  to  the  maiTiage 
of  her  children  (Gen.  xxvii.  46) :  her  suggestions 
as  to  any  domestic  arrangements  meet  with  due 
attention  (2  K.  iv.  9)  :  and  occasionally  she  criticises 
the  conduct  of  her  husband  in  terms  of  great  severity 
(1  Sam.  xx-\'.  25  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  20). 

The  relations  of  husband  and  wife  appear  to  have 
been  characterised  by  affection  and  tenderness.  He 
is  occasionally  described  as  the  "  friend  "  of  his 
wife  (Jer.  iii.  20  ;  Hos.  iii.  1),  and  his  love  for  her 
is  frequently  noticed  (Gen.  xxiv.  67,  xxix.  18).  On 
the  other  hand,  the  wife  was  the  consolation  of  the 
husband  in  time  of  trouble  (Gen.  xxiv.  67),  and  her 
grief  at  his  loss  presented  a  picture  of  the  most  ab- 
ject woe  (Joel  i.  8).  No  stronger  testimony,  how- 
ever, can  be  afforded  as  to  the  ardent  affection  of 
husband  and  wife,  than  that  which  we  derive  from 
the  general  tenor  of  the  book  of  Canticles.  At  the 
same  time  we  cannot  but  think  that  the  exceptions 
to  this  state  of  affairs  were  more  numerous  than  is 
consistent  with  our  ideas  of  matrimonial  happiness. 
One  of  the  evils  inseparable  from  polygamy  is  the 
discomfort  arising  from  the  jealousies  and  «piarre]s 
of  the  several  wives,  as  instanced  in  the  households 
of  Abraham  and  Elkanah  (Gen.  xxi.  11  ;  1  Sam.  i. 
b).  The  purchase  of  wives,  and  the  small  amount 
of  liberty  allowed  to  daughters  in  the  choice  of 
husbands,  must  inevitably  have  led  to  unhappy 
unions.      The  allusions  to  the   misery  of  a  con- 


to  have  been  a  bower  of  roses  and  myrtles.  The  term  was 
also  applied  to  the  canopy  under  which  the  nuptial  bene- 
diction was  pronounced,  or  to  the  robe  spread  over  the 
heads  of  tlir  bride  and  bridegroom  (Selden,  ii.  15). 


MARRIAGE 

tentious  and  brawling  wife  in  the  Proverbs  (xix.  13, 
xxi.  9,  19,  xxvii.  15)  convey  the  impression  that 
the  iuriiction  was  of  frequent  occurrence  in  Hebrew 
households,  and  in  tlie  Mishna  (^Ketuh.  7,  §6)  the 
fact  of  a  woman  being  noisy  is  laid  down  as  an 
ailequate  ground  for  divorce.  lu  the  N.  T.  the 
mutual  relations  of  husband  and  wife  are  a  subject 
of  frequent  exhortation  (Eph.  v.  22-33  ;  Col.  iii. 
18,  19;  Tit.  ii.  4,  ."j ;  1  Pet.  iii.  1-7):  it  is  cer- 
tainly a  noticeable  coincidence  that  these  exhorta- 
tions should  be  found  exclusively  in  the  epistles 
addressed  to  Asiatics,  nor  is  it  improbable  that  they 
were  more  particularly  needed  for  them  than  for 
Europeans. 

The  duties  of  the  wife  in  the  Hebrew  household 
were  multifarious :  in  addition  to  the  general  super- 
intendence of  the  domestic  arrangements,  such  as 
cooking,  from  which  even  women  of  rank  were  not 
exempted  (Gen.  xviii.  6  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  8),  and  the 
distribution  of  food  at  meal-times  (Prov.  xxxi.  15), 
the  manufacture  of  the  clothing  and  the  various 
textures  required  in  an  Eastern  establishment  de- 
volved upon  her  (Prov.  xxxi.  13,  21,  22),  and  if 
she  were  a  model  of  activity  and  skill,  she  produced 
a  surplus  of  fine  linen  shirts  and  girdles,  which 
she  sold,  and  so,  like  a  well-freighted  merchant- 
ship,  brought  in  wealth  to  her  husband  from  afar 
(Prov.  xxxi.  14,  24).  The  poetical  description  of  a 
good  house-wife  drawn  in  the  last  chapter  of  the 
Proverbs  is  both  filled  up  and  in  some  measure 
illustrated  by  the  following  minute  description  of  a 
wife's  duties  towards  her  husband,  as  laid  down  in 
the  Mishna:  "  8he  must  grind  corn,  and  bake,  and 
wash,  and  cook,  and  suckle  his  child,  make  his  bed, 
and  work  in  wool.  If  she  brought  her  husband  one 
bondwoman,  she  need  not  grind,  bake,  or  wash :  if 
two,  she  need  not  cook  nor  suckle  his  child :  if 
three,  she  need  not  make  his  bed  nor  work  in  wool : 
if  four,  she  may  sit  in  her  chair  of  state  "  {Ketub. 
5,  §5).  Whatever  money  she  earned  by  her  labour 
belonged  to  her  husband  (ib.  6,  §1).  The  qua- 
lification not  only  of  working,  but  of  working  at 
home  (Tit.  ii.  5,  where  o'lKovpyovs  is  preferable 
to  oiKovpovs),  was  insisted  on  in  the  wife,  and  to 
.spin  in  the  street  was  I'egarded  as  a  violation  of 
.Jewish  customs  (^Kctuh.  7,  §6). 

The  legal  rights  of  the  wife  are  noticed  in  Ex. 
xxi.  10,  under  the  three  heads  of  food,  raiment, 
and  duty  of  marriage  or  conjugal  right.  These 
were  defined  with  great  precision  by  the  Jewish 
doctors ;  for  thus  only  could  one  of  the  most  cruel 
effects  of  polygamy  be  averted,  viz.,  the  sacrifice 
of  the  lights  of  the  many  in  favour  of  the  one 
whom  the  lord  of  the  modern  harem  selects  tor  his 
special  attention.  The  regulations  of  the  Talmndists 
founded  on  Ex.  xxi.  10  may  be  found  in  the  Mishna 
{Ketuh.  5,  §6-9). 

V.  The  allegorical  and  typical  allusions  to  mar- 
riage have  exclusive  reference  to  one  subject,  viz., 
to  exhibit  the  spiritual  relationship  between  God 
and  his  ])eoj)le.  The  earliest  form,  in  which  the 
image  is  implied,  is  in  the  exjn-essions  "  to  go  a 
whoring,"  and  "  whoredom,"  as  descriptive  of  the 
riipture  of  that  relationship  by  acts  of  idolatry. 
These  expressions  have  by  some  writers  been  taken 
in  their  primary  and  literal  sense,  as  pointing  to 
the  licentious  practices  of  idolaters.     But  this  de- 


MARSENA 


253 


i  The  term  zdnah  (HiT)'  in  its  ordinaiy  application, 
is  almost  without  exception  applied  to  the  act  of  the 
woman.  We  may  licrc  notice  the  only  e.\cep(ions  to 
the  ordhuuy  sense  of  this  term,  viz..  Is.  xxiii.  17,  where 


stroys  the  whole  point  of  the  comparison,  and  is 
opposed  to  the  plain  language  of  Scripture :  for 
(1)  Israel  is  described  as  the  false  wife'  "  playing 
the  harlot"  (Is.  i.  21  ;  Jer.  iii.  1,  0,  8)  ;  (2)  Je- 
hovah is  the  injured  husband,  who  therefore  di- 
vorces her  (Ps.  Ixxiii.  27  ;  Jer.  ii.  20  ;  Hos.  iv.  12, 
ix.  1) ;  and  (3)  the  other  party  in  the  adultery  is 
specified,  sometimes  generally,  as  idols  or  false  gods 
(Deut.  xxxi.  16  ;  Judg.  ii.  17  ;  1  Chr.  v.  25  ;  Ez. 
XX.  30,  xxiii.  30j,  and  sometimes  particularly,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  worship  of  goats  (A.  V.  "  devils,' 
Lev.  xvii.  7),  Molech  (Lev.  sx.  .5),  wizards  (Lev. 
XX.  6),  an  ephod  (Judg.  viii.  27),  Baalim  (Judg. 
viii.  33),  and  even  the  heart  and  eyes  (Num.  xv. 
39) — the  last  of  these  objects  being  such  as  wholly 
to  exclude  the  idea  of  actual  adultery.  The  image 
is  drawn  out  more  at  length  by  Ezekiel  (xxiii.), 
who  compares  the  kingdoms  of  .Samaria  and  Judah 
to  the  harlots  Aholah  and  Aholibah ;  and  again 
by  Hosea  (i.  iii.),  whose  marriage  with  an  adul- 
terous wife,  his  separation  from  her,  and  subse- 
quent reunion  with  her,  were  designed  to  be  a 
visible  lesson  to  the  Israelites  of  their  dealings  with 
Jehovah. 

The  direct  comparison  with  marriage  is  confined 
in  the  0.  T.  to  the  prophetic  writings,  unless  we 
regard  the  Canticles  as  an  allegorical  work.  [Can- 
ticles.] The  actual  relation  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people  is  generally  the  point  of  comparison 
(Is.  liv.  5,  Ixii.  4  ;  Jer.  iii.  14;  Hos.  ii.  19  ;  Mai. 
ii.  11) ;  but  sometimes  the  graces  consequent  thereon 
are  described  under  the  image  of  bridal  attire  (Is. 
xlix.  18,  Ixi.  10),  and  the  joy  of  Jehovah  in  His 
Church  under  that  of  the  joy  of  a  bridegroom 
(Is.  Ixii.  5). 

In 'the  N.  T.  the  image  of  the  bridegroom  is 
transferred  from  Jehovah  to  Christ  (Matt.  ix.  15; 
John  iii.  29),  and  that  of  the  bride  to  the  Church 
(2  Cor.  xi.  2;  Rev.  six.  7,  xxi.  2,  9,  xxii.  17),  and 
the  comparison  thus  established  is  converted  by  St. 
Paul  into  an  illustration  of  the  position  and  mutual 
duties  of  man  and  wife  (Eph.  v.  23-32).  The  sud- 
denness of  the  Messiah's  appearing,  particularly  at 
the  last  day,  and  the  necessity  of  watchfulness  are 
inculcated  in  the  parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins,  the 
imagery  of  which  is  borrowed  from  the  customs  of 
the  marriage  ceremony  (Matt.  xxv.  1-13).  The 
Father  prepares  the  marriage  feast  for  his  Son,  the 
joys  that  result  from  the  union  being  thus  repre- 
sented (Matt.  xxii.  1-14,  xxv.  10;  Rev.  xix.  9; 
comp.  Matt.  viii.  11),  while  the  quahfications  re- 
quisite for  admission  into  that  union  are  prefigured 
by  the.  marriage  garment  (Matt.  xxii.  11).  The 
breach  of  the  union  is,  as  before,  described  as  forni- 
cation or  whoredom  in  reference  to  the  mystical 
Babylon  (Rev.  xvii.  1,  2,  5). 

The  chief  authorities  on  this  subject  are  Seidell's 
Uxor  Ebraica ;  Michaelis'  CoiniHcntarics  ;  the 
Mishna,  particularly  the  books  Yehamoth,  Kctu- 
both,  Gittin,  and  Kiddushin  ;  Buxtorf's  Sponsal.  et 
Divort.  Among  the  writei  s  on  special  points  we 
may  notice  Beuary,  de  Hebr.  Leciratu,  Berlin, 
1835;  Redslob's  Leviratsehe,  Leipzig,  1836;  and 
Kurtz's  Ehe  des  Hosea,  Dorpat,  1859.    [W.  L.  B.] 

MARS'  HILL.     [Areopagus.] 

MAR'SENA  (XJpIO:  MaKivedp;  Alex.  Mo- 
it  means  "  commerce,"  and  Nab.  iii.  4,  where  it  is  equi- 
valent to  "crafty  policy,"  Just  as  in  '2  K.  ix  22  (he  parallel 
word  is  "witchcrafts." 


254 


MARTHA 


\ri<redp :  Marsana),  one  of  the  seven  princes  of 
Persia,  "  wise  men  which  knew  the  times,"  which 
saw  the  king's  face  and  sat  first  in  the  kingdom 
(Esth.  i.  14).  According  to  Josephus  they  had 
the  office  of  interpreters  of  the  laws  (Ant,  xi. 
6,  §1). 

IVIAR'THA  (Map0a:    Martha).      This  name, 
which  does  not  appear  in  the  0.  T.,  belongs  to  the 
later  Aramaic,  and  is  the  feminine  form  of  N"10 
Lord.     We  first  meet  with  it  towards  the  close  of 
the  2nd  century  B.C.     Marius,  the  Koman  dictator, 
was  attended  by  a  Syi-ian    or  Jewish  prophetess 
Martha  during  the  Numidian  war  and  in  his  cam- 
paign against  the  Cimbri  (Plutarch,  Marius,  xvii.). 
Of  the  Alaitha  of  the  N.  T.  there  is  comparatively 
little  to  be  said.     What  is  known  or  conjectured  as 
to  the  history  of  the  family  of  which  she  was  a 
member  may  be  seen  under  Lazarus.     The  facts 
recorded  in  Luke  s.  and  John  si.  indicate  a  cha- 
racter devout  after  the  customary  Jewish  type  of 
devotion,  sharing  in  Messianic  hopes  and  accepting 
Jesus  as  the  Christ ;  sharing  also  in  the  popular 
belief  in   a   resurrection    (John  xi.   24),  but  not 
rising,  as  her  sister  did,  to  the  belief  that  Christ 
was  making  the  eternal  life  to  belong,  not  to  the 
future  only,  but  to  the  present.     When  she  first 
comes  before  us  in  Luke  x.  38,  as  receiving  her 
Lord  into  her  house  (it  is  uncertain  whether  at 
Bethany  or  elsewhere),  she  loses  the  calmness  of 
her  spirit,  is  "  cumbered  with  much  serving,"  is 
"  careful  and  troubled  about  many  thuigs."     She 
is  indignant  that  her  sister  and  her  Lord  care  so 
little  for  that  for  which  she  cares  so  much.     She 
needs  the  reproof  "  one  thing  is  needful ;"  but  her 
love,  though  imperfect  in  its  form,  is  yet  recognised 
as  true,  and  she  too,  no  less  than  Lazarus  and  Mary, 
has  the  distinction  of  being  one  whom  Jesus  loved 
(John  xi.  3).    Her  position  here,  it  may  be  noticed, 
is  obviously  that  of  the  elder  sister,  the  head  and 
manager  of  the  household.     It  has  been  conjectui'ed 
that  she  was  the  wife  or  widow  of  "  Simon  the 
leper  "  of  Matt.  xxvi.  6  and  Mark  siv.  3  (Schulthess, 
in  Winer,  Rwh. ;  Paulus,  in  Meyer,  in  he. ;  Greswell, 
Diss,  on  Village  of  Martha  and  Mary).     The  same 
character  shows  itself  in  the  history  of  Jolm  xi. 
She  goes  to  meet  Jesus  as  soon  as  she  hears  that 
He  is  coming,  turning  away  from  all  the  Phai'isees 
and  rulers  who  had  come  with  their  topics  of  con- 
solation (ver.  19,  20).      The  same  spirit  of  com- 
plaint that  she  had  shown  before  finds  utterance 
again  (ver.  21),  but  there  is  now,  what  there  was 
not  before,  a  fuller  faith  at  once  in  His  .wisdom 
and  His  power  (ver.  22).     And  there  is  in  that 
sorrow  an  education  for  her  as  well  as  for  others. 
She  rises  from  the  formula  of  the  Pharisee's  creed 
to  the  confession  which  no  "  fiesh  and  blood,"  no 
human  traditions,  could  have  revealed  to  her  (ver. 
24-27).     It  was  an  immense  step  upward  from  the 
dull  stupor  of  a  grief  which  refused  to  be  comforted, 
that,  without  any  definite  assurance  of  an  imme- 
diate resurrection,  slie  should  now  think  of  her 
brother   as    living  still,   never  dying,   because  he 
had  believed  in  Christ.     The  transition  from  vain 
fruitless  regi'ets  to  this  assured  faith,  accounts  it 
may  be  for  the  words  spoken  by  her  at  the  sepulchre 
(ver.  39).     We  -judge  wrongly  of  her  if  we  see  in    not  have  expressed  himself  as  he  does  had  he  meant 


MARY  OF  CLEOPHAS 

them  the  utterance  of  an  impatient  or  desponding 
unbelief.  The  thought  of  that  true  victory  over 
death  lias  comforted  her,  and  she  is  no  longer  ex- 
pecting that  the  power  of  the  eternal  life  will  show 
itself  in  the  renewal  of  the  earthly.  The  wonder 
that  followed,  no  less  than  the  tears  which  pre- 
ceded, taught  her  how  deeply  her  Lord  sympathised 
with  the  passionate  human  sonows  of  which  He 
had  seemed  to  her  so  unmindful.  It  taught  her, 
as  it  teaches  us,  that  the  eteraal  life  in  which  she 
had  learnt  to  believe  was  no  absorption  of  the  indi- 
vidual being  in  that  of  the  spirit  of  the  universe — 
that  it  recognised  and  embraced  all  true  and  pure 
aflections. 

Her  name  appears  once  again  in  the  N.  T.  She 
is  present  at  the  supper  at  Bethany  as  "  sending  " 
(John  xii.  2).  The  old  character  shows  itself  still, 
but  it  has  been  freed  from  evil.  She  is  no  longer 
"  cumbered,"  no  longer  impatient.  Activity  has 
been  calmed  by  trust.  When  other  voices  are  raised 
against  her  sister's  overflowing  love,  hers  is  not 
heard  among  them. 

Tlie  traditions  connected  with  Martha  have  been 
already  mentioned.  [Lazarus.]  She  goes  with 
her  brotlier  and  other  disciples  to  Marseilles,  gathers 
round  her  a  society  of  devout  women,  and,  true  to 
her  former  character,  leads  them  to  a  life  of  active 
ministration.  The  wilder  Proven9al  legends  make 
her  victorious  over  a  dragon  that  laid  waste  the 
country.  The  town  of  Tarascon  boasted  of  possess- 
ing her  remains,  and  claimed  her  as  its  patron-saint 
{Acta  Sanctorum,  and  Brev.  Rom.  in  Jul.  29  ; 
Fabricii,  Lux  Evangel,  p.  388).     '        [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY  OF  CLEOPHAS.    So  in  A.  V.,  but 

accurately  "ofCi-Oi'As"  (Mapi'a  ■^  rov  KAcuttS). 
In  St.  John's  Gospel  we  read  that  "  there  stood 
by  the  cross  of  Jesus  His  mother,  and  His  mother's 
sister,  Mary  of  Clopas,  and  Mary  Magdalene  " 
(John  xix.  25).  The  same  group  of  women  is 
described  by  St.  Matthew  as  consisting  of  Mary 
Magdalene,  and  Mary  of  James  and  Joses,  and 
the  mother  of  Zebedee's  children"  (Matt,  xsvii. 
56)  ;  and  by  St.  Mark,  as  "  Mary  Magdalene,  ;md 
Mary  of  James  the  Little  and  of  Joses,  and  Sa- 
lome"* (Mark  xv.  40).  From  a  comparison  of 
these  passages,  it  appears  that  Mary  of  Clopas,  and 
Mary  of  James  the  Little  and  of  Joses,  are  the  same 
person,  and  that  she  was  the  sister  of  St.  Mary  the 
Virgin.  The  arguments,  preponderating  on  the 
affirmative  side,  for  this  Mary  being  (according  to 
the  A.  V.  translation),  the  wife  of  Clopas  or  Al- 
phaeus,  and  the  mother  of  James  the  Little,  Joses, 
Jude,  Simon,  and  their  sisters,  have  been  given 
under  the  heading  James.  There  is  an  apparent 
difficulty  in  the  fact  of  two  sisters  seeming  to 
bear  the  name  of  Mary.  To  escape  this  difficulty, 
it  has  been  suggested  (1)  that  the  two  clauses  "his 
mother's  sister"  and  "Mary  of  Clopas,"  are  not  in 
apposition,  and  that  St.  John  meant  to  designate  four 
persons  as  present — namely,  the  mother  of  Jesus  ; 
her  sister,  to  whom  he  does  not  assign  any  name ; 
Mary  of  Clopas ;  and  jMaiy  Magdalene  (Lange). 
And  it  has  been  further  suggested  that  this  sister's 
name  was  Salome,  wife  of  Zebedee  (Wieseler).  This 
is  avoiding,  not  solving  a  difficulty.     St.  John  could 


^  The  form  of  the    expression   "Mary    of  Clopas," 
"  Mary  of  James,"  in  its  more  colloquial  form  "  Clopiis' 
Mary,"   "James'  Mary"  is  familiar  to  every   one  ac- 
quainted with  English  village  life.   It  is  still  a  common  |  husband,    or    son,    e.  g. 
thing  for  the  unmarried,  and  sometimes  for  the  married  |  Mary."  &c. 


women  of  the  labouring  classes  in  a  country  town  or 

vill.Tge,  to  be  distinguished  from  their  namesakes,  not 

by  their  surnames,  but  by  the  name  of  their  father  or 

William's    Mary,"    "  John's 


MARY  OF  CLEOPHAS 

more  than  three  persons.  It  has  been  suggested 
(2)  that  the  word  aSi\^-{]  is  not  here  to  be  taken  in 
its  strict  sense,  but  rather  in  the  laxer  acceptation, 
which  it  clearly  does  bear  in  other  places.  Mary, 
wife  of  Clopas,  it  has  been  said,  was  not  the  sister, 
but  the  cousin  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin  (see  Words- 
worth, Gk.  Test.,  Preface  to  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James).  There  is  nothing  in  this  suggestion  which 
is  objectionable,  or  which  can  be  disproved.  But  it 
appears  unnecessary  and  unlikely :  unnecessary,  be- 
cause the  fact  of  two  sisters  having  the  same  name, 
though  unusual,  is  not  singular ;  and  unlikely,  be- 
cause we  find  the  two  fomilies  so  closely  united — 
living  together  in  the  same  house,  and  moving  about 
together  from  place  to  place — that  we  are  disposed 
rather  to  consider  them  connected  by  the  nearer  than 
the  more  distant  tie.  That  it  is  tar  from  impossible 
for  two  sisters  to  have  the  same  name,  may  be  seen 
by  any  one  who  will  cast  his  eye  over  Betham's  Ge- 
nealogical Tables.  To  name  no  others,  his  eye  will 
at  once  light  on  a  pair  of  Antonias  and  a  pair  of 
Octavias,  the  daughters  of  the  same  father,  and  in 
one  case  of  different  mothers,  in  the  other  of  the 
same  mother.  If  it  be  objected  that  these  are  merely 
gentilic  names,  another  table  will  give  two  Cleo- 
patras.  It  is  quite  possible  too  that  the  same  cause 
which  operates  at  present  in  Spain,  may  have  been 
at  work  formerly  in  Judea.  Miriam,  the  sister  of 
Moses,  may  have  been  the  holy  woman  after  whom 
Jewish  mothers  called  their  daughters,  just  as  Spanish 
mothers  not  unfrequently  give  the  name  of  Jlary  to 
their  children,  male  and  female  alike,  in  honour  of 
St.  Mary  the  Virgin.''  This  is  on  the  hypothesis 
that  the  two  names  are  identical,  but  on  a  close 
examination  of  the  Greek  text,  we  find  that  it  is 
possible  that  this  was  not  the  case.  St  Mary  the 
Virgin  is  Mapidfi. ;  her  sister  is  Mapla.  It  is  more 
than  possible  that  these  names  are  the  Greek  repre- 
sentatives of  two  forms  which  the  antique  D'^'IO 

had  then  taken  ;  and  as  in  pronunciation,  the  em- 
phasis would  have  been  thrown  on  the  last  syllable 
in  MapidiJ.,  while  the  final  letter  in  Mapia  would 
have  been  almost  unheard,  there  would,  upon  this 
hypothesis,  have  been  a  greater  difference  in  the 
sisters'  names  than  there  is  between  Mary  and 
Maria  among  ourselves.' 

Mary  of  C!lopas  was  probably  the  elder  sister 
of  the  Lord's  mother.  It  would  seem  that  she 
had  married  Clopas  or  Alphajus  while  her  sister 
was  still  a  girl.  She  had  four  sons,  and  at  least 
three  daughters.  The  names  of  the  daughters  are 
imknown  to  us:  those  of  the  sons  are  James, 
Joses,  Jude,  Simon,  two  of  whom  became  enrolled 
among  the  twelve  apostles  [James],  and  a  third 
(Simon),  may  have  succeeded  his  brother  in  the 
charge  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem.  Of  Joses  and 
the  daughters  we  know  nothing.  Mary  herself  is 
brought  before  us  for  the  first  time  on  the  day  of 
the  Crucifixion — in  the  parallel  passages  already 
quoted  fi-om  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark,  and  St.  .John. 
In  the  evening  of  the  same  day  we  find  her  sitting 
desolately  at  the  tomb  with  Mary  Magdalene  (Matt. 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


255 


b  Maria,  Maria-Pia,  and  Maria-Immacolata,  are  the 
first  names  of  three  of  the  sisters  of  the  late  king  of  the 
Two  Sicilies. 

c  The  ordinary  explanation  that  Mapia/x  is  the  Hebraic 
form,  and  Mapi'a  the  Greek  form,  and  that  tlie  difference 
is  in  the  use  of  tlie  Evaiiselists,  not  in  the  name  iUself, 
seems  scarcely  adequate :  for  why  should  the  Evangelists 
invariably  employ  tlie  Hebraic  form  when  writing  of  St. 
Mary  the  Virgin,  and  the  Greek  form  when  writing  about 


xxvii.  61  ;  Mark  xv.  47),  and  at  the  dawn  of  Easter 
morning  she  was  again  there  with  sweet  spices, 
which  she  had  prepared  on  the  Friday  night  (Matt. 
xxviii.  1 ;  Mark  xvi.  1  ;  Luke  xxiii.  56),  and  was  one 
of  those  who  had  "  a  vision  of  angels,  which  said 
that  lie  was  alive  "  (Luke  xxiv.  23).  These  are  all 
the  glimpses  that  we  have  of  her.  Clopas  or  Al- 
phaeus  is  not  mentioned  at  all,  except  as  designating 
Mary  and  James.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  dead 
before  the  ministry  of  our  Lord  commenced.  Joseph 
the  husband  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin,  was  likewise 
dead  ;  and  the  two  widowed  sisters,  as  was  natural 
both  for  comfort  and  for  protection,  were  in  the 
custom  of  living  together  in  one  house.  Thus  the 
two  families  came  to  be  regarded  as  one,  and  the 
children  of  Mary  and  Clopas  were  called  the  brothers 
and  sisters  of  Jesus.  How  soon  the  two  sisters  com- 
menced living  together  cannot  be  known.  It  is 
possible  that  her  sister's  house  at  Nazareth  was  St. 
Mary's  home  at  the  time  of  her  marriage,  for  we 
never  hear  of  the  Virgin's  parents.  Or  it  may  have 
been  on  their  return  from  Egypt  to  Nazareth  that 
Joseph  and  Mary  took  up  their  residence  with 
Mary  and  Clopas.  But  it.  is  more  hkely  that 
the  union  of  the  two  households  took  place  after 
the  death  of  Joseph  and  of  Clopas.  In  the  second 
year  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  we  find  that  they  had 
been  so  long  united  as  to  be  considered  one  by  their 
fellow  townsmen  (Matt.  xiii.  55)  and  other  Gali- 
leans (Matt.  xii.  47).  At  whatever  period  it  was 
that  this  joint  housekeeping  commenced,  it  would 
seem  to  have  continued  at  Nazareth  (Matt.  xiii.  55) 
and  at  Capernaum  (John  ii.  12),  and  elsewhere,  till 
St.  John  took  St.  Mary  the  Virgin  to  his  own  home 
in  Jerusalem,  A.D.  30.  After  this  time  Mary  of 
Clopas  would  probably  have  continued  living  with 
St.  James  the  Little  and  her  other  children  at  Jeru- 
salem until  her  death.  The  fact  of  her  name  being 
omitted  on  all  occasions  on  which  her  children  and 
her  sister  are  mentioned,  save  only  on  the  days  of 
the  Crucifixion  and  the  Resurrection,  would  indi- 
cate a  retiiing  disposition,  or  perhaps  an  advanced  age. 
That  his  cousins  were  older  than  Jesus,  and  conse- 
quently that  their  mother  was  the  elder  sister  of  the 
Virgin,  may  be  gathered  as  likely  from  Jlark  iii. 
21,  as  it  is  not  probable  that  if  they  had  been 
younger  than  Jesus,  they  would  have  ventured  to 
have  attempted  to  interfere  by  force  with  Him  for 
over-exerting  Himself,  as  they  thought,  in  the  pro- 
secution of  His  ministry.  We  may  note  that  the 
Gnostic  legends  of  the  early  ages,  and  the  me- 
diaeval fables  and  revelations  alike  refuse  to  acknow- 
ledge the  existence  of  a  sister  of  St.  Mary,  as 
interfering  with  the  miraculous  conception  and 
birth  of  the  latter.  [F.  M.] 

MARY  MAG'DALENE  (Mapia  t,  MaySa- 
Arjj'Tj :  Maria  Magdalene).  Four  diflh-ent  expla- 
nations have  been  given  of  this  name.  (1)  That 
which  at  first  suggests  itself  as  the  most  natural, 
that  she  came  from  the  town  of  Magdala.  The 
statement  that  the  women  with  whom  she  jour- 
neyed, followed  Jesus  in  Galilee  (M;uk  .xv.   41), 


all  the  other  Maries  in  the  Gospel  history?  It  is  true 
that  this  distinction  is  not  constantly  observed  in  the 
readings  of  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  the  Codex  Ephracmi, 
and  a  few  other  MSS. ;  but  there  is  sufficient  agreement 
in  tlie  majority  of  the  Codices  to  determine  the  usage. 
That  it  is  possible  for  a  name  to  develop  into  several 
kindred  forms,  and  for  these  forms  to  be  considered  suffi- 
ciently distinct  appellations  for  two  or  more  brothers  or 
sisters,  is  evidenced  by  our  daily  experience. 


256 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


agrees  with  this  notion.  (2)  Another  explana- 
tion has  been  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Talmudic 
writers  in  their  calumnies  against  the  Nazai-enes  make 
mention  of  a  Miriam  Megaddela  (N^TJIO),  and 
deriving  that  word  from  the  Pi  el  of  ?Til,  to  twine, 
explain  it  as  meaning  "  the  twiner  or  plaiter  of 
hair."  They  connect  with  this  name  a  story  which 
will  be  mentioned  later ;  but  the  derivation  has 
been  accepted  by  Lightfoot  (Hor.  Heh.  on  Matt. 
xxvi.  56  ;  Harm.  Evang.  on  Luke  viii.  3)  as  satis- 
factory, and  pointing  to  the  previous  worldliness  of 
"  Miriam  with  the  braided  locks,"  as  identical  with 
"  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner"  of  Luke  vii.  57. 
It  has  been  urged  in  favour  of  this,  that  the  ri 
KoKov^jiivri  of  Luke  viii.  3,  implies  something  pe- 
culiar, and  is  not  used  where  the  word  that  follows 
points  only  to  origin  or  residence.  (3)  Either  se- 
riously, or  with  the  patristic  fondness  for  parono- 
rtuma,  Jerome  sees  in  her  name,  and  in  that  of  her 
town,  the  old  Migdol  (=  a  watch-tower),  and 
dwells  on  the  coincidence  accordingh*.  The  name 
denotes  the  stedfastness  of  her  faith.  She  is  "  vere 
irvpylrTis,  vere  turris  candoris  et  Libani,  quae  pros- 
picit  in  taciem  Damasci  "  {Epist.  ad  Principiam).^ 
He  is  followed  in  this  by  later  Latin  writers,  and 
the  pun  forms  the  theme  of  a  panegyric  sermon  by 
Odo  of  Clugni  {Acta  Sanctorum,  Antwerp,  1727, 
July  12).     (4)  Origen,  lastly,  looking  to  the  more 

common  meaning  of  7T]I  (gddal,  to  be  great),  sees 
in  her  name  a  prophecy  of  her  .spiritual  greatness 
as  having  ministered  to  the  Lord,  and  been  the  first 
witness  of  His  resurrection  {Tract,  in  Matt,  x.xxv.). 
It  will  be  well  to  get  a  firm'  standing-ground  in  the 
facts  that  are  definitely  connected  in  the  N.  T. 
with  Mary  ilagdalene  before  entering  on  the  per- 
plexed and  bewildering  conjectures  that  gather  round 
her  name. 

I.  She  comes  before  us  for  the  first  ti-me  in  Luke 
viii.  2.  It  was  the  custom  of  Jewish  women 
(Jerome  on  1  Cor.  ix.  5)  to  contribute  to  the  sup- 
port of  Rabbis  whom  they  reverenced,  and  in  con- 
formity with  that  custom,  there  were  among  the 
disciples  of  Jesus,  women  who  "  ministered  unto 
Him  of  their  substance."  All  appear  to  have  occu- 
pied a  position  of  comparative  wealth.  With  all 
the  chief  motive  was  that  of  gratitude  for  their  de- 
liverance from  "  evil  spirits  and  infirmities."  Of 
Mary  it  is  said  specially  that  "  seven  devils  {SaifiS- 
pia)  went  out  of  her,"  and  the  number  indicates,  as 
in  Matt.  xii.  4.5,  and  the  "  Legion  "  of  the  Gadarene 
demoniac  (Mark  v.  9),  a  possession  of  more  than 
ordinary  malignity.  We  must  think  of  her,  accord- 
ingly as  having  had,  in  their  most  aggravated  forais, 
some  of  the  phenomena  of  mental  and  spiritual 
disease  which  we  meet  with  in  other  demoniacs,  the 
wretchedness  of  despair,  the  divided  consciousness, 
the  preternatural  frenzy,  the  long-continued  fits  of 
silence.  The  appearance  of  the  same  description  in 
Mark  xvi.  9  (whatever  opinion  we  may  fonn  as  to 
the  authorship  of  the  closing  section  of  that  Gospel), 
indicates  that  this  was  the  fact  most  intimately  con- 
nected witli  her  name  in  the  minds  of  the  early 
disciples.  From  that  state  of  misery  she  had  been 
set  free  by  the  presence  of  the  Healer,  and,  in  the 
absence,  as  we  may  infer,  of  other  ties  and  duties, 
she  found  her  safety  and  her  blessedness  in  follow- 
ing Him.     The  silence  of  the  Gospels  as  to  the  pre- 


*  The  writer  is  indebted  for  this  quotation,  and  for  one 
ortwo  references  in  the  course  of  the  article,  to  the  kind- 
ness of  Mr.  W.  A.  Wriglit. 


MARY  MAGDALENE 

sence  of  these  women  at  other  periods  of  the  Lord's 
ministry,  makes  it  probable  that  they  attended  on 
Him  chiefly  in  His  more  solemn  progresses  through 
the  towns  and  villages  of  Galilee,  while  at  other 
times  he  journeyed  to  and  fro  without  any  other 
attendants  than  tlie  Twelve,  and  sometimes  without 
even  them.  In  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  to 
which  so  many  had  been  looking  with  eager  expec- 
tation, they  again  accompanied  Him  (Matt,  xxvii. 
55;  Mark  XV.  41;  Luke  xxiii.  55,  xxiv.  10).  It 
will  explain  much  that  follows  if  we  remember 
that  this  life  of  ministration  must  have  brought 
Mary  Magdalene  into  companionship  of  the  closest 
nature  with  Salome  the  mother  of  James  and  John 
(Mark  xv.  40),  and  even  also  with  Mary  the  mother 
of  the  Lord  (John  xix.  25).  The  women  who  thus 
devoted  tliemselves  are  not  prominent  in  the  his- 
tory :  we  have  no  record  of  their  mode  of  life,  or 
abode,  or  hopes  or  fears  dining  the  few  momentous 
days  that  preceded  the  crucifixion.  From  that  hour, 
they  come  forth  for  a  brief  two  days'  space  into 
marvellous  distinctness.  They  "  stood  afar  off,  be- 
holding these  things"  (Luke  xxiii.  49)  during  the 
closing  hours  of  the  Agony  on  the  Cross.  Mary 
Magdalene,  Mary  the  mother  of  the  Lord,  and  the 
beloved  disciple  were  at  one  time  not  afar  off,  but 
close  to  the  cross,  within  hearing.  The  same  close 
association  which  drew  them  together  there  is  seen 
afterwards.  She  remains  by  the  cross  till  all  is 
over,  waits  till  the  body  is  taken  down,  and  wrapped 
in  the  linen-cloth  and  placed  in  the  garden-sepulchre 
of  Joseph  of  Arimathea.  She  remains  there  in 
the  dusk  of  the  evening  watching  what  she  must 
have  looked  on  as  the  final  resting-place  of  the 
Prophet  and  Teacher  whom  she  had  honoui'ed  (Matt, 
xxrii.  61 ;  Mark  xv.  47  ;  Luke  xxiii.  65).  Not  to 
her  had  there  been  given  the  hope  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion. The  disciples  to  whom  the  words  that  spoke 
of  it  had  been  addressed  had  failed  to  understand 
them,  and  were  not  likely  to  have  reported  them  to 
her.  The  sabbatli  tliat  followed  brought  an  enforced 
rest,  but  no  sooner  is  the  sunset  over  than  she,  with 
Salome  and  ]\Iary  the  mother  of  James,  "  brought 
sweet  spices  tliat  they  might  come  and  anoint"  the 
body,  the  interment  of  which  on  the  night  of  the 
crucifixion  they  looked  on  as  hasty  and  provisional 
(Mark  .xvi.  1). 

The  next  morning  accordingly,  in  the  earliest 
dawn  (Matt,  xxviii.  1  ;  Mark  xvi.  2)  they  come 
with  Mary  the  mother  of  James,  to  the  sepulchre. 
It  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  here  into  the 
hannonistic  discussions  which  gather  round  the 
history  of  the  Resurrection.  As  far  as  they  connect 
themselves  with  the  name  of  Mary  Magdalene,  the 
one  fact  which  St.  John  records  is  that  of  the 
chiefest  interest.  She  had  been  to  the  tomb  and  had 
found  it  empty,  had  seen  the  "vision  of  angels" 
(Matt,  xxviii.  5  ;  Mark  xvi.  5).  To  her,  however, 
after  the  first  moment  of  joy,  it  had  seemed  to  be 
but  a  vision.  She  went  witli  her  cry  of  soitow  to 
Peter  and  John  (let  us  remember  that  Salome  had 
been  with  her),  "  they  have  taken  away  the  Lord 
out  of  the  sepulchre,  and  we  know  not  where  they 
have  laid  Him"  (John  xx.  1,  2).  But  she  returns 
there.  She  follows  Peter  and  John,  and  remains 
when  they  go  back.  Tlie  one  thotighf  that  fills  her 
mind  is  still  that  the  body  is  not  there.  She  has 
been  robbed  of  that  task  of  reverential  love  on  which 
she  had  set  her  heart.  The  words  of  the  angels 
can  call  out  no  other  answer  than  that — "  They 
have  taken  away  my  Lord,  and  I  know  not  where 
they  have  laid  Him"  (Jolin  xx.  13).     This  intense 


MARY  MAGDALENE 

brooding  over  one  Hxed  tliought  was,  we  may  ven- 
ture to  say,  to  one  who  had  suffered  as  she  had 
suffered,  full  of  special  danger,  and  called  for  a 
special  discipline.  The  spirit  must  be  raised  out 
of  its  blank  despair,  or  else  the  "  seven  devils " 
might  come  in  once  again,  and  the  last  state  be 
worse  than  the  first.  The  utter  stupor  of  grief  is 
shown  in  her  want  of  power  to  recognise  at  first 
either  the  voice  or  the  foim  of  the  Lord  to  whom 
she  had  ministered  (John  xx.  14,  1-5).  At  last  her 
own  name  uttered  by  that  voice  as  she  had  heard  it 
uttered,  it  may  be,  in  the  hour  of  her  deejiest  misery, 
recalls  her  to  consciousness ;  and  then  follows  the 
cry  of  recognition,  with  the  strongest  word  of  re- 
veience  which  a  woman  of  Israel  could  use,  "  Fiab- 
boni,"  and  the  rush  forward  to  cling  to  His  feet. 
That,  however,  is  not  the  discipline  she  needs. 
Her  love  had  been  too  dependent  on  the  visible 
presence  of  her  Master.  She  had  the  same  lesson 
to  learn  as  the  other  disciples.  Though  they  had 
"  known  Christ  after  the  flesh,"  they  were  "hence- 
forth to  know  Him  so  no  more."  She  was  to  hear 
that  truth  in  its  highest  and  sharpest  foim.  "  Touch 
me  not,  for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my  Father." 
For  a  time,  till  the  earthly  affection  had  been 
raised  to  a  heavenly  one,  she  was  to  hold  back. 
When  He  had  finished  His  work  and  had  ascended 
to  the  Father,  there  should  be  no  barrier  then  to 
the  fullest  communion  that  the  most  devoted  love 
could  crave  for.  Those  who  sought,  might  draw 
near  and  touch  Him  then.  He  would  be  one  with 
them,  and  they  one  with  Him. — It  was  fit  that 
this  should  be  the  last  mention  of  Mary.  The  Evan- 
gelist, whose  position,  as  the  son  of  Salome,  must 
have  given  him  the  fullest  knowledge  at  once  of 
the  facts  of  her  after-history,  and  of  her  inmost 
thoughts,  bore  witness  by  his  silence,  in  this  case 
as  in  that  of  Lazarus,  to  the  truth  that  lives,  such 
as  theirs,  were  thenceforth  "  liid  with  Christ  in 
God." 

II.  What  follows  will  show  how  great  a  contrast 
there  is  between  the  spirit  in  which  he  wrote  and 
.  that  which  shows  itself  in  the  later  traditions. 
Out  of  those  few  facts  there  rise  a  multitude  of 
wild  conjectures ;  and  with  these  there  has  been 
constructed  a  whole  romance  of  hagiology. 

The  questions  which  meet  us  connect  themselves 
with  the  narratives  in  the  four  Gospels  of  women 
who  came  with  precious  ointment  to  anoint  the 
feet  or  the  head  of  Jesus.  Each  Gospel  contains 
an  account  of  one  such  anointing  ;  and  men  have 
iisked,  in  endeavouring  to  construct  a  harmony, 
"  Do  they  tell  us  of  four  distinct  acts,  or  of  thi  ee, 
or  of  two,  or  of  one  only  ?  On  any  supposition 
but  the  last,  are  the  distinct  acts  performed  by 
the  same  or  by  diU'ercnt  persons  ;  and  if  by  dif- 
ferent, then  by  how  many  ?  Furthei',  have  wc 
any  grounds  for  identifying  Mary  Magdalene  witli 
the  woman  or  with  any  one  of  the  women  whose 
acts  are  thus  brought  before  us?"  This  opens  a 
wide  range  of  possible  combinations,  but  the  limits 
of  the  inquiry  may,  without  much  difficulty,  be  nar- 
rowed. Although  the  opinion  seems  to  have  been 
at  one  time  maint;uned  (Origeu,  Tract,  in  Matt. 
XXXV.),  few  would  now  hold  that  5Iatt.  xxvi.  ;uid 
Mark  xiv.  aie  reports  of  two  distinct  events.  Few, 
except  critics  bent  like  Schleiermacher  and  Strauss 

b  The  difficulty  is  hardly  met  liy  the  portentous  con- 
jecture of  one  commentator,  that  the  word  afiapTwAo! 
does  not  mean  what  It  is  commonly  supposed  to  mean, 
and  that  tlie  •'  many  sins  "  consisted  cliiefiy  (as  the  name 
VOL.    IT. 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


257 


on  getting  up  a  case  against  the  historical  veracity 
of  the  Evangelists,  could  persuade  themselves  that 
the  narrative  of  Luke  vii.,  differing  as  it  does  in 
well-nigh  every  circumstance,  is  but  a  misplaced 
and  embellished  version  of  the  incident  which  the 
first  two  Gospels  connect  with  the  last  week  of 
our  Lord's  ministry.  The  supposition  that  there 
were  three  anointings  has  found  favour  with  Origen 
(/.  c.)  and  Lightfoot  {Harm.  Evamj.  in  loc,  and 
Hor.  Heb.  in  Matt,  xxvi.)  ;  but  while,  on  the  one 
hand,  it  removed  some  harmonistic  difficulties, 
there  is,  on  the  other,  something  impi'obable  to 
the  A'erge  of  being  inconceivable,  in  the  repetition 
within  three  days  of  the  same  scene,  at  the  same 
place,  with  precisely  the  same  murmur  and  the 
same  reproof.  We  are  left  to  the  conclusion 
adopted  by  the  great  majority  of  inteipieters,  that 
the  Gospels  record  two  anointings,  one  in  some 
city  unnamed  (Capernaum  or  Nain  have  been 
suggested)  during  our  Lord's  Galilean  ministry 
(Luke  vii.),  the  other  jit  Bethtmy,  before  the  last 
entry  into  Jerusalem  (Matt.  xx^i. ;  Mark  xiv. ; 
John  xii.).  We  come,  then,  to  the  question  whe- 
ther in  these  two  narratives  we  meet  with  one 
woman  or  with  two.  The  one  passage  adduced  for 
the  former  conclusion  is  John  xi.  2.  It  has  been 
urged  (Maldonatus  in  Matt.  xxvi.  and  Joan.  xi.  2, 
Acta  Sanctorum,  July  22nd)  that  the  words  which 
we  find  there  ("It  was  that  Mary  which  anointed 

the    Lord   with  ointment whose  brother 

Lazarus  was  sick ")  could  not  possibly  refer  by 
anticipation  to  the  history  which  was  about  to 
follow  in  ch.  xii.,  and  must  therefore  presuppose 
some  fact  known  through  the  other  Gospels  to  the 
Cliurch  at  large,  and  that  fact,  it  is  inferred,  is 
found  in  the  histoiy  of  Luke  vii.  Against  this  it 
has  been  said  on  the  other  side,  that  the  assumj> 
tion  thus  made  is  entirely  an  arbitrary  one,  and 
that  there  is  not  the  slightest  tiace  of  the  life  of 
Mary  of  Bethany  ever  having  been  one  of  open  and 
flagiant  inpurity.** 

There  is,  therefore,  but  slender  evidence  for  the 
assumption  that  the  two  anointings  were  the  acts 
of  one  and  the  same  woman,  and  that  woman  the 
sister  of  Lazarus.  There  is,  if  possible,  still  less 
for  the  identification  of  Mary  Magdalene  with  the 
chief  actor  in  either  history.  (1.)  When  hei-  name 
appears  in  Luke  viii.  ?>  there  is  not  one  word  to 
connect  it  with  the  history' that  immediately  pre- 
cedes. Though  possible,  it  is  at  least  unlikely 
that  such  an  one  as  the  "  sinner  "  would  at  once 
have  been  received  as  the  chosen  companion  of 
Joaima  and  Salome  and  have  gone  from  town  to 
town  with  them  and  the  disciples.  Lastly,  the 
description  that  is  given — "  Out  of  whom  went 
seven  devils " — points,  as  has  been  stated,  fo  a 
form  of  suffering  all  but  absolutely  incompatible 
with  the  life  implied  in  a/MapTuiXhs,  and  to  a  very 
different  work  of  healing  from  that  of  the  divine 
words  of  pardon — "Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee." 
To  say,  as  has  been  said,  that  the  "seven  devils" 
are  the  "many  sins"  (Greg.  Mag.  Hoin.  in  Evang. 
25  anil  5;]),  is  to  identify  two  things  which  are 
sepai-ated  in  the  whole  tenor  of  the  N.  T.  by  the 
clearest  line  of  demarcation.  The  argument  that 
because  Mary  Magdalene  is  mentioned  so  soon 
afterwards  she  must  be  the  same  as  the  woman  of 


Mamlalene,  according  to  the  etymology  noticed  above, 
implies)  in  her  giving  too  large  a  portion  of  the  Sabbath 
to  the  braiding  or  iilaitiiig  of  her  hair  (!).  Lainy,  in 
Lampc  on  John  xii.  2. 

S- 


258 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


Luke  vii.  (Butler's  Lives  of  the  Saints,  July  22), 
is  simply  puerile.  It  would  be  just  as  reasonable 
to  identity  "the  sinner''  with  Susanna.  Never,  per- 
haps, has  a  figment  so  utterly  baseless  obtained  so 
wide  an  acceptance  as  that  which  we  connect  with 
the  name  of  the  "  penitent  Magdalene."  It  is  to 
be  regretted  that  the  chapter-heading  of  the  A.  V. 
of  Luke  vii.  should  seem  to  give  a  quasi-authori- 
tative sanction  to  a  tradition  so  utteily  uncertain, 
and  that  it  should  have  been  perpetuated  in  con- 
nexion with  a  great  work  of  mercy.  (2.)  The 
belief  that  Mary  of  Bethany  and  Mary  Magdalene 
are  identical  is  yet  more  startling.  Not  one  single 
circumstance,  except  that  of  love  and  reverence  for 
their  Master,  is  common.  The  epithet  Magdalene, 
whatever  may  be  its  meaning,  seems  chosen  for 
the  express  purpose  of  distinguishing  her  fiom  all 
other  Maries.  No  one  Evangelist  gives  the  slight- 
est hint  of  identity.  St.  Luke  mentions  Martha 
and  her  sister  Mary  in  x.  38,  39,  as  though  neither 
had  been  named  before.  St.  John,  who  gives  the 
fullest  account  of  both,  keeps  their  distinct  indi- 
viduality most  prominent.  The  only  simulacrum 
of  an  argument  on  behalf  of  the  identity  is  that,  if 
W3  do  not  admit  it,  we  have  no  lecord  of  the 
sister  of  Lazarus  having  been  a  witness  of  the 
resimection. 

Nor  is  this  lack  of  evidence  in  the  N.T.  itself 
compensated  by  any  such  weight  of  authority  as 
would  indicate  a  really  trustwoi  tliy  tradition.  Two 
of  the  earliest  writers  who  allude  to  the  histories  of 
the  anointing — Clement  of  Alexandria  (Paedai/.  ii. 
8)  and  TertuUian  (cfc  Pudic.  ch.  8) — say  nothing 
thst  would  imply  that  they  accepted  it.  The  lan- 
guage of  Irenaeus  (iii.  4)  is  against  it.  Origen 
(/.  c.)  discusses  the  question  fully,  and  rejects  it. 
He  is  followed  by  the  whole  succession  of  the  e.x- 
positors  of  the  Eastern  Church  :  Theophilus  of  An- 
tioch,  Macarius,  Chrysostom,  Theophylact.  The 
traditions  of  that  Church,  when  they  wandered 
into  the  regions  of  conjecture,  took  another  direc- 
tion, and  suggested  the  identify  of  Mary  Magdalene 
with  the  daughter  of  the  Syro-Phoenician  woman 
of  Mark  vii.  26  (Nicephorus,  H.  E.  i.  33).  In  the 
Western  Churcli,  however,  the  other  belief  began  to 
spread.  At  first  it  is  mentioned  hesitatingly,  as  by 
Ambrose  [de  Virg.  Vel.  and  in  Luc.  lib.  vi.), 
Jerome  (in  Matt.  xxvi.  2;  contr.  Jovin.  c.  16). 
Augustine  at  one  time  inclines  to  it  (de  Consens. 
JUvang.  c.  69),  at  another  speaks  very  doubtingly 
(^Tract.  in  Joann.  49).  At  the  close  of  the  h'rst 
great  period  of  Church  history,  Gregory  the  Gi'eat 
■teikes  up  both  notions,  embodies  them  in  his  Homilies 
(inEv.  2.">,  53),  and  stamps  them  with  his  authority. 
The  reverence  felt  for  him,  and  the  constant  use  of 
his  works  as  a  text-book  of  theology  during  the 
whole  mediaeval  peiiod,  secured  for  the  hypothesis 
a  currency  which  it  never  would  have  gained  on  its 
own  merits.  The  services  of  the  feast  of  St.  Mary 
Magdalene  were  constructed  on  the  assumption  of 
its  truth  (Brev.  Rom.  in  Jul.  22).  Hymns  and 
paintings  and  sculptures  fixed  it  deep  in  the  minds 
of  the  Western  nations,  France  and  England  being 
foremost  in  their  I'everence  for  the  saint  whose  his- 
tory appealed  to  their  sympathies.  (See  below.) 
Well-nigh  all  ecclesiastical  writers,  after  the  time  of 
Gregory  the  Great  (Albert  the  Great  and  Tliomas 
Aquinas  are  exceptions),  take  it  for  gi-anted.  When 
it  was  first  questioned  by  Fevre  d'Etaples  (Faber 
Stapulensis)  in  the  early  Biblical  criticism  of  the 
lUth  century,  the  new  opinion  was  formally  con- 
demncti  by  the  Sorljonne  (Acta  Sanctorum,  1.  c. ), 


MARY  MAGDALENE 

and  denounced  by  Bishop  Fisher  of  Rochester.  The 
Prayer-Book  of  1549  follows  in  the  wake  of  the 
Breviary  ;  but  in  that  of  1552,  either  on  account  of 
the  uncertainty  or  for  other  reasons,  the  feast  dis- 
appears. The  Book  of  Homilies  gives  a  doubtful 
testimony.  In  one  passage  the  "  sinful  woman  "  is 
mentioned  without  any  notice  of  her  being  the  same 
as  the  Magdalene  (Serm.  on  Repentance,  Part  ii.)  ; 
in  another  it  depends  upon  a  comma  whether  the 
two  are  distinguished  or  identified  (Ibid.  Part  ii.). 
The  translators  under  James  I.,  as  has  been  stated, 
adopted  the  received  ti'adition.  Since  that  period 
there  has  been  a  gradually  accumulating  consensus 
against  it.  Calvin,  Grotius,  Hammond,  Casaubon, 
among  older  critics,  Bengel,  Lampe,  Greswell, 
Alfbrd,  Wordsworth,  Stier,  Meyer,  Ellicott,  01s- 
hausen,  among  later,  agree  in  rejecting  it.  Ro- 
maiiist  writers  even  (Tillemont,  Dupin,  Estius) 
have  borne  their  piotest  against  it  in  whole  or  in 
part ;  and  books  that  repi  esent  the  pi'esent  teaching 
of  the  Galilean  Church  reject  entirely  the  identifi- 
cation of  the  two  Maries  as  an  unhappy  mistake 
(Migne,  Diet,  de  le  Bible).  The  mediaeval  tr.idi- 
tion  has,  however,  found  defenders  in  Baronius,  the 
writers  of  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  Maldonatus, 
Bishop  Andrewes,  Lightfbot,  Isaac  Williams,  and 
Dr.  Pusey. 

It  remains  to  give  the  substance  of  the  legend 
formed  out  of  these  combinations.  At  some  time 
before  the  commencement  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  a 
great  sorrow  fell  upon  the  household  of  Bethany. 
The  younger  of  the  two  sisters  fell  from  her  purity 
and  sank  into  the  depths  of  shame.  Her  life  was 
that  of  one  possessed  by  the  "  seven  devils  "  of  un- 
cleanness.  From  the  city  to  .which  she  then  went, 
or  from  her  harlot-like  adornments,  she  was  known 
by  the  new  name  of  Magdalene.  Then  she  hears  of 
the  Deliverer,  and  repents  and  loves  and  is  forgiven. 
Then  she  is  received  at  once  into  the  fellowship  of 
the  holy  women  and  ministers  to  the  Lord,  and  is 
received  back  again  by  her  sister  and  dwells  with 
her,  and  shows  that  she  has  chosen  the  good  part. 
The  death  of  Lazarus  and  his  return  to  life  are  new 
motives  to  her  gratitude  and  love;  and  she  shows 
them,  as  she  had  shown  them  before,  anointing  no 
longer  the  feet  only,  but  the  head  also  of  her  Lord. 
She  watches  by  the  cioss,  and  is  present  at  the 
sepulchre  and  witnesses  the  resurrection.  Then 
(the  legend  goes  op,  when  the  woi'k  of  fantastic 
combination  is  completed),  after  some  years  of 
waiting,  she  goes  with  Lazarus  and  Martha  and 
Maximin  (one  of  the  Seventy)  to  Marseilles  [comp. 
Lazarus].  They  land,  there;  and  she,  leaving 
Martha  to  moie  active  woik,  retires  to  a  cave  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Aries,  and  there  leads  a  life  of 
penitence  for  thirty  years.  When  she  dies  a  church 
is  built  in  her  honour,  and  miracles  are  wrought 
at  her  tomb.  Clovis  the  Frank  is  healed  by  her 
intercession,  and  his  new  faith  is  strengthened  ;  and 
the  chivalry  of  F'lance  does  homage  to  her  name  as 
to  that  of  the  greater  Mary. 

Such  was  the  full-grown  foiin  of  the  Westeiu 
story.  In  the  East  there  was  a  difierent  ti-adition. 
Nicephorus  (//.  E.  ii.  10)  states  that  she  went  to 
Rome  to  accuse  Pilate  for  his  unrighteous  judg- 
ment;  Modestus,  patriarch  of  Constantinople  (Horn, 
in  Marias),  that  she  came  to  Epliesus  with  the 
Virgin  and  St.  John,  and  died  and  was  buried 
there.  The  Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher  (circ. 
890)  brought  her  body  from  that  city  to  Constan- 
tinople (Acta  Sanctorum,  1.  c). 

The   name   appears   to    have   been    conspicuous 


MARY,  MOTHER  OF  MARK 

enough,  either  among  tlie  living  members  of  the 
Ohuroh  of  Jerusalem  or  in  their  written  records, 
to  attract  the  notit:e  of  their  Jewish  opponents. 
The  Talmudists  record  a  tradition,  confused  enough, 
that  Stada  or  Satda,  whom  they  represent  as  the 
mother  of  the  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  was  known  by 
this  name  as  a  "plaiter  or  twiner  of  hair  ;"  that 
she  was  the  wife  of  Taphus  Ben-Jehudah,  a  con- 
temporary of  Gamaliel,  Joshua,  and  Akiba ;  and 
that  she  grieved  and  angered  him  by  her  wanton- 
ness (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hub.  on  Matt,  xxvi.,  Harm. 
Evang.  on  Luke  viii.  3).  It  seems,  however,  from 
the  fuller  report  given  by  Eisenmenger,  that  there 
were  two  women  to  whom  the  Talmudists  gave 
this  name,  and  the  wife  of  Paphus  is  not  the  one 
whom  they  identified  with  the  Mary  Magdalene  of 
the  Gospels  {Entdeckt.  Judenth.  i.  277). 

There  is  lastly  the  strange  supposition  (rising 
out  of  an  attempt  to  evade  some  of  the  harmonistic 
difficulties  of  the  resurrection  history)  that  there 
were  two  women  both  known  by  this  name,  and 
both  among  those  who  went  early  to  the  sepulchre 
(Lampe,  Corrun.  in  Joann. ;  Ambrose,  Comm.  in 
I.uc.  X.  24).  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY,  MOTHER  OF  MARK.  The  wo- 
man known  by  this  desciiption  must  have  been 
among  the  earliest  disciples.  We  learn  from  Col. 
iv.  lb  that  she  was  sister  to  Barnabas,  and  it 
would  appear  from  Acts  iv.  37,  xii.  12,  that, 
while  the  brother  gave  up  his  land  and  brought 
the  proceeds  of  the  sale  into  the  common  treasury 
of  the  Church,  the  sister  gave  up  her  house  to  be 
used  as  one  of  its  chief  places  of  meeting.  The 
fact  that  Peter  goes  to  that  house  on  his  release 
from  prison,  indicates  that  there  was  some  special 
intimacy  (Acts  xii.  12)  between  them,  and  this  is 
confirmed  by  the  language  which  he  uses  towards 
Jlark  as  being  his  "  son"  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  She,  it 
may  be  added,  must  have  been  like  Barnabas  of 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  and  may  have  been  connected, 
as  he  was,  with  Cyprus  (Acts  iv.  36).  It  has 
been  surmised  that  filial  anxiety  about  her  welfare 
during  the  persecutions  and  the  famine  which 
harassed  the  Church  at  Jerusalem,  was  the  chief 
cause  of  Mark's  withdi-awal  from  the  missionaiy 
labours  of  Paul  and  Barnabas.  The  tradition  of 
a  later  age  represented  the  place  of  meeting  for 
the  disciples,  and  therefore  probably  the  house  of 
Mary,  as  having  stood  on  the  upper  slope  of  Zion, 
and  affirmed  that  it  had  been  the  scene  of  the 
wonder  of  the  day  of  Pentecost,  had  escaped  the 
general  destruction  of  the  city  by  Titus,  and  was 
still  used  as  a  church  in  the  4th  century  (Epiphan. 
do  Pond,  et  Mens,  xiv.  ;  Cyril  Hierosol.  Catech. 
xvi.).  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY,    SISTER   OF   LAZARUS.      For 

much  of  the  information  connected  with  this  name, 
comp.  Lazarus  and  Mary  Magdalene.  The 
facts  strictlv  personal  to  her  are  but  few.  She  and 
her  sister  Martha,  appear  in  Luke  x.  40,  as  receiving 
Christ  in  their  house.  The  contrasted  tempera- 
ments of  the  two. sisters  have  been  already  in  part 
discussed  [Martha].  Mary  sat  listening  eagerly 
for  every  word  tiiat  fell  from  the  Divine  Teacher. 
She  had  chosen  the  good  part,  the  life  that  has 
found  its  unity,  the  "one  thing  needful,"  in  rising 
from  the  earthly  to  the  heavenly,  no  longer  dis- 
tracted by  the  "  many  things  "  of  earth.  The  same 
character  shows  itself  in  the  history  of  John  xi. 
Her  grief  is  de(>pi'r  but  less  active.  She  sits  still  in 
the  house.     She   will   not  go  U<  meet  the  friends 


MARY  THE  VIRGIISI 


259 


who  come  on  the  formal  visit  of  consolation.  But 
when  her  sister  tells  her  secretly  "  The  Master  is 
come  and  calleth  for  thee,"  she  rises  quickly  and 
goes  forth  at  once  (John  xi.  20,  28).  Those"  who 
have  watched  the  depth  of  her  grief  have  but  one 
explanation  for  the  sudden  change :  "  She  goeth  to 
the  grave  to  weep  there  !"  Her  lirst  thought  when 
sh"e  sees  the  Teacner  in  whose  power  and  love  she 
had  trusted,  is  one  of  complaint.  "  She  fell  down 
at  his  feet,  saying,  Lord  if  thou  hadst  been  here, 
my  brother  had  not  died."  Up  to  this  point,  her 
relation  to  the  Divine  Friend  had  been  one  of  reve- 
I'ence,  receiving  rather  than  giving,,  blessed  in  the 
consciousness  of  His  favour.  But  the  great  joy  and 
love  which  her  brother's  return  to  life  calls  up  in 
her,  pour  themselves  out  in  larger  measure  than 
had  been  seen  before.  The  treasured  alabaster-box 
of  ointment  is  brought  forth  at  the  final  feast  of 
Bethany,  John  xii.  3.  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark 
keep  back  her  name.  St.  John  records  it  as  though 
the  reason  for  the  silence  held  good  no  longer.  Of 
her  he  had  nothing  more  to  tell.  The  education  of 
her  spirit  was  completed.  The  love  which  had 
been  recipient  and  contemplative  shows  itself  in 
action. 

Of  her  after-history  we  know  nothing.  The 
ecclesiastical  traditions  about  her  are  based  on  the 
unfounded  hypothesis  of  her  identity  with  Mary 
Magdalene.  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY  THE  VIRGIN  (Mapic^^:  on  the 
form  of  the  name  see  p.  255).  There  is  no  person 
peihaps  in  sacred  or  in  profane  literature,  around 
whom  so  many  legends  have  been  grouped  as  the 
Virgin  Mary ;  and  there  are  few  whose  authentic 
history  is  more  concise.  The  very  simplicity  of 
the  evangelical  record  has  no  doubt  been  one  cause 
of  the  abundance  of  the  legendary  matter  of  which 
she  foims  the  central  figure.  Imagination  had  to 
be  called  in  to  supply  a  ciaving  which  authentic 
narrative  did  not  satisfy.  We  shall  divide  her  life 
into  three  periods.  I.  The  period  of  her  childhood, 
up  to  the  time  of  the  birth  of  our  Lord.  II.  The 
period  of  her  middle  age  contempoi'ary  vvith  the 
Bible  record.  III.  The  period  subsequent  to  the 
Ascension.  The  first  and  last  of  these  are  wholly 
legendary,  except  in  regard  to  one  fact  mentioned 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  the  second  will  contain 
her  real  history.  For  the  first  period  we  shall 
have  to  rely  on  the  early  apocryphal  gospels ; 
for  the  second  on  the  Bible  ;  for  the  thii-d  on  the 
traditions  and  tales  which  had  an  origin  external  to 
the  Church,  but  after  a  time  were  transplmited 
within  her  boundaries,  and  there  flourished  and 
increased  both  by  the  force  of  natural  growth,  and 
by  the  accretions  which  from  time  to  time  resulted 
from  supposed  visions  and  revelations. 

I.  The  cJiildhood  of  Mary,  wholly  legendary. — 
Joachim  and  Anna  were  both  of  the  race  of  David. 
The  abode  of  the  former  was  Nazareth  ;  the  latter 
passed  her  early  years  at  Bethlehem.  They  lived 
piously  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  faultlessly  before 
man,  dividing  their  substance  into  three  portions, 
one  of  which  they  devoted  to  the  ser\nce  of  the 
temple,  another  to  the  poor,  and  the  third  to  their 
own  wants.  And  so  twenty  yeais  of  their  lives 
passed  silently  awav.  But  at  the  end  of  this  period 
Joachim  went  to  Jerusalem  witii  some  others  of  his 
tribe,  to  make  his  usual  offering  at  the  Feast  of  the 
Dedication.  And  it  chanct'd  that  Is.s;)char  was  high- 
priest  (Gospel  of  Birth  of  Mary) ;  that  Keuben  was 
high-priest  (Protevangelion).     And  the  higli-priest 

S  2 


260 


MARY  THE  VIKGIN 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

M.) ;  he  betook  himself  to  his  ocoypation  of  building 
houses  (Pi'ot.);  while  Mary  went  back  to  her 
parents'  house  in  Galilee.  Then  it  clianced  that  the 
priests  needed  a  new  veil  for  the  Temple,  and  seven 
virgins  cast  lots  to  make  different  parts  of  it ;  and 
the  lot  to  spin  the  true  purple  fell  to  Mary.  And 
she  went  out  with  a  pitcher  to  draw  water.  And 
she  heard  a  voice,  saying  unto  her,  "  Kail,  thou 
that  art  highly  favoured,  the  Lord  is  with  thee. 
Blessed  art  thou  among  women  !"  and  she  looked 
round  with  tiembling  to  see  whence  the  voice  came, 
and  she  laid  down  the  pitcher  and  went  into  the 
house  and  took  the  purple  and  sat  down  to  work 
at  it.  And  behold  the  angel  Gabriel  stood  by  her 
and  filled  the  chamber  with  prodigious  light,  and 
said,  "  Fear  not,"  &c.  And  when  Slary  had  finished 
the  purple,  she  took  it  to  the  high-priest;  and 
having  received  his  blessing,  went  to  visit  her 
cousin  Elizabeth,  and  returned  back  again."  Then 
Joseph  retuined  to  his  home  from  building  houses 
(Prot.);  came  into  (ialilee,  to  marry  the  Virgin  to 
whom  he  was  betrothed  (0.  B.  M.),  and  finding 
her  wth  child,  he  resolved  to  put  her  away  pi'ivily  ; 
but  being  warned  in  a  dream,  he  relinquished  his 
purpose,  and  took  her  to  his  house.  Then  came 
Annas  the  scribe  to  visit  Joseph,  and  he  went 
back  and  told  the  priest  that  Joseph  had  committed 
a  great  crime,  for  he  had  privately  married  the 
Virgin  whom  he  had  received  out  of  the  Temple, 
and  had  not  made  it  known  to  the  children  of  Israel. 
And  the  priest  sent  his  servants,  and  they  found 
that  she  was  with  child  ;  and  he  called  them  to 
him,  and  Joseph  denied  that  the  child  was  his,  and 
the  priest  made  Joseph  drink  the  bitter  water  of 
trial  (Num.  v.  18),  and  sent  him  to  a  mountainous 
place  to  see  what  would  follow.  But  Joseph  re- 
turned in  perfect  health,  so  the  priest  sent  them 
away  to  their  home.  Then  after  three  months  Joseph 
put  Mary  on  an  ass  to  go  to  Bethlehem  to  be  taxed  ; 
and  as  they  were  going,  JMai'}^  besought  him  to  take 
her  down,  and  Joseph  took  her  down  and  cai-ixd 
her  into  a  cave,  and  leaving  her  thei'e  with  his  sons, 
he  went  to  seek  a  midwife.  And  as  he  went  he 
looked  up,  and  he  saw  the  clouds  astonished  and  all 
creatures  amazed.  The  fowls  stopped  in  their 
flight ;  the  working  people  sat  at  tlieir  food,  but  did 
not  eat ;  the  sheep  stood  still ;  the  shepherds'  lifted 
hands  became  fi.xed ;  the  kids  were  touching  the 
water  with  their  mouths,  but  did  not  drink.  And 
a  midwife  came  down  from  the  mountains,  and 
Joseph  took  her  with  him  to  the  cave,  and  a  bright 
cloud  overshadowed  the  cave,  and  the  cloud  became 
a  great  light,  and  when  the  bright  light  faded, 
I  there  appeared  an  infant  at  the  breast  of  Mary. 
1  Then  the  midwife  went  out  and  told  Salome  that  a 
I  Virgin  had  brought  forth,  and  Salome  would  not 
I  believe;  and  they  came  back  again  into  the  cave, 
!  and  Salome  received  satisfaction,  but  her  hand 
j  withered  away,  nor  was  it  restored,  until,  by  the 
command  of  an  angel,  she  touched  the  child,  where- 
upon she  was  straightway  cured.  (Giles,  Codex 
Apocnjphus  Ndvi  Tcstamenti,  pp.  33-47  and  66-81, 
Loud.  1852  ;  Jones,  On  the  New,  Testament,  ii.  c. 
xiii.  and  xv.,  Oxf  1827  ;  Thilo,  Codex  Apocryphus. 
See  also  Vita  glorississiniae  Matris  Annne  per  F. 

"  Three  spots  lay  claim  to  be  the  scene  of  the  Annun-  their  claim.  The  Latins  have  engraved  on  a  marble  slab 
ciation.  Two  of  these  are,  as  was  to  be  expected,  in  Na-  in  the  grotto  of  their  convent  in  Nazareth  the  words 
•/areth,  and  one,  as  everyone  knows,  is  in  Itiily.  The  rerhum /lic  ca)-o/as«Mni  e.-;*,  and  point  out  the  pillar  which 
Greeks  and  Latins  each  claim  to  be  the  guardians  of  the  '  marks  the  spot  where  the  angel  stood  ;  whilst  the  Head  of 
true  spot  in  Palestine;  the  third  claimant  is  tlie  holy  their  Church  is  irretrievably  TOmmitted  to  the  wild  legend 
house  of  Loretto.  The  Greeks  point  out  the  spring  of  '  of  Loretto.  (See  Stanley,  S.  if-  /'.  ch.  xiv). 
water  meutionul  in  the  Protevangelion  as  confirmatory  of  ', 


scorned  Joachim,  and  drove  him  rougldy  away, 
asking  how  he  dared  to  present  himself  in  company 
with  those  who  had  children,  while  he  had  none ; 
and  he  refused  to  accept  his  offerings  until  he 
should  have  begotten  a  child,  for  the  Scripture  said, 
"  Cursed  is  every  one  who  does  not  beget  a  man- 
child  in  Israel."  And  Joachim  was  shamed  before 
his  friends  and  neighbours,  and  he  retired  into  the 
wilderness  and  fixed  his  tent  there,  and  fasted  forty 
days  and  forty  nights.  And  at  the  end  of  this 
period  an  angel  appeared  to  him,  and  told  him  that 
his  wife  should  conceive,  and  should  bring  forth  a 
daughter,  and  he  should  call  her  name  Blary.  Anna 
meantime  was  much  distressed  at  her  husband's 
absence,  and  being  reproached  by  her  maid  Judith 
with  her  barrenness,  she  was  overcome  with  grief 
of  spirit.  And  in  her  sadness  she  went  into  her 
garden  to  walk,  dressed  in  her  wedding-dress.  And 
she  sat  down  under  a  laurel-tree,  and  looked  up  and 
spied  among  the  branches  a  sparrow's  nest,  and  she 
bemoaned  herself  as  more  miserable  than  the  very 
birds,  for  they  weie  fruitful  and  she  was  barren  ; 
and  she  prayed  that  she  might  have  a  child  even  as 
Sarai  was  blessed  with  Isaac.  And  two  angels  ap- 
peared to  her,  and  promised  her  that  she  should 
have  a  child  who  should  be  spoken  of  in  all  the 
world.  And  Joachim  returned  joyfully  to  his  home, 
and  when  the  time  was  accomplished,  Anna  brought 
forth  a  daughter,  and  tiiey  called  her  name  Mary. 
Now  the  child  Mary  increased  in  strength  day  by 
day,  and  at  nine  months  of  age  she  walked  nine 
steps.  And  when  she  was  three  years  old  her  pa- 
rents brought  hei-  to  the  Temple,  to  dedicate  her  to 
the  Lord.  And  there  were  fifteen  stairs  up  to  the 
Temple,  and  while  Joseph  and  SLary  were  changing 
their  dress,  she  walked  up  them  without  help ;  and 
the  high-p)'iest  placed  her  upon  the  thii'd  step  of 
the  altar,  and  she  danced  with  her  feet,  and  all  the 
house  of  Israel  loved  hei-.  Then  JIary  remained  at 
the  Temple  until  she  was  twelve  ( Prot.)  fourteen  (G. 
B.  M.)  years  old,  ministered  to  by  the  angels,  and 
advancing  in  perfection  as  in  years.  At  this  time 
the  high-priest  commanded  all  the  virgins  that 
were  in  the  Temple  to  return  to  their  homes  and  to 
be  married.  But  Mary  refused,  for  she  said  that  she 
had  vowed  viiginity  to  the  Lord.  Thus  the  high- 
priest  was  brought  into  a  perplexity,  and  he  had 
recourse  to  God  to  enquire  what  "he  should  do. 
Then  a  voice  from  the  ark  answered  him  (G.  B. 
M.),  an  angel  spake  unto  him  (Prot.);  and  they 
gathered  together  all  the  widowers  in  Isi-ael  (Prot.), 
all  the  marriageal)le  men  of  the  house  of  David 
(G.  B.  M.),  and  ilesired  them  to  bring  each  man 
his  rod.  And  amongst  them  came  ilosepii  and 
brought  his  rod,  but  he  shunned  to  present  it,  be- 
cause he  was  an  old  man  and  had  children.  There- 
fore the  other  rods  were  presented  and  no  sio-n 
occurred.  Then  it  was  ibund  that  Joseph  had  not 
presented  his  rod ;  and  behold,  as  soon  as  he  hafl  pre- 
sented it,  a  dove  came  forth  fi-om  the  rod  and  flew 
upon  the  head  of  Joseph  (Prot.) ;  a  dove  came  from 
heaven  and  pitched  on  the  rod  (G.  B.  M.).  And 
Joseph,  in  spite  of  his  reluctance,  was  compelled  to 
betroth  himself  to  Mary,  and  he  returned  to  Beth- 
lehem to  make  preparations  for  his  marriage  (G.  B. 


MAEY  THE  VIRGIN 

Pctrmn  Dorlando,  appended  to  LuJolph  of  Saxony's 
Vita  Christi,  Lyons,  164"2;  and  a  most  audacious 
Historia  Christi,  written  in  Persian  by  the  Jesuit 
I'.  Jerome  Xavier,  and  exposed  by  Louis  ile  Dieu, 
Lugd.  Bat.  1039). 

IL  The  red  history  of  Mary. — We  now  pass 
from  legend  to  that  period  of  St.  Mary's  life  which 
is  made  known  to  us  by  Holy  Scripture.  In  order 
to  give  a  single  view  of  all  that  we  know  of  lier 
who  was  chosen  to  be  the  mother  of  the  Saviour, 
we  shall  in  the  present  section  put  together  the 
wliole  of  her  authentic  history,  supplementing  it 
afterwards  by  the  more  prominent  legendary  cir- 
cumstances which  are  handed  down. 

We  are  wholly  ignorant  of  the  name  and  occupa- 
tion of  St.  Mary's  parents.  If  the  genealogy  given 
by  St.  Luke  is  that  of  St.  Mary  (Greswell,  &c.), 
her  father's  name  was  Heli,  which  is  another  form 
of  the  name  given  to  hei-  legendary  father,  Je- 
hoiakim  or  Joachim.  If  Jacob  and  Heli  were  the 
two  sons  of  Matthan  or  Matthat,  and  if  Joseph, 
being  the  son  of  the  younger  brother,  married  his 
cousin,  the  daughter  of  the  elder  brother  (Hervey, 
G enecdogies  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ),  her  father 
■was  Jacob.  The  e'^'angelist  does  not  tell  us,  and 
.  we  cannot  know.  She  was,  like  Joseph,  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  and  of  the  lineage  of  David  (Ps.  cxxxii. 
1 1 ;  Luke  i.  32  ;  Rom.  i.  3).  She  had  a  sister,  uamed 
probably  like  herself,  Mary  (John  xix.  25)  [Mary 
OF  Cleopiias],  and  she  was  connected  by  marriage 
{ffvyyevi]!,  Luke  i.  36)  with  Elisabeth,  who  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  of  the  lineage  of  Aaron. 
This  is  all  that  we  know  of  her  antecedents. 

In  the  sunmier  of  the  year  which  is  known 
as  15. c.  5,  Mary  was  living  at  Nazareth,  probably 
at  her  parents' — possibly  at  her  elder  sister's — 
house,  not  liaving  yet  been  taken  by  Joseph  to  his 
home.  Slie  was  at  this  time  betrothed  to  Joseph,  and 
was  therefore  regarded  by  the  Jewish  law  and  custom 
as  his  wife,  though  he  had  not  yet  a  husband's 
rights  over  her.  [Marriage,  p.  250,6.]  At  this 
time  the  angel  Gabriel  came  to  her  with  a  message 
from  God,  and  announced  to  her  that  she  was  to 
be  the  mother  of  the  long-expected  Messiah.  He 
probably  bore  the  form  of  an  ordinary  man,  like 
the  angels  who  manifested  themselves  to  Gideon 
and  to  Manoah  (Judg.  vi.,  xiii.).  This  would 
appear  both  from  the  expression  el(re\6ii>v,  "  he 
came  in  ;"  and  also  from  the  fact  of  her  being  trou- 
bled, not  at  his  presence,  but  at  the  meaning  of 
his  words.  The  scene  as  well  as  the  salutation  is 
very  similar  to  that  recounted  in  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  "Then  there  came  again  and  touched  me 
one  like  the  ai)pearance  of  a  man,  and  he  strengtli- 
enod  me,  and  said,  0  man  gieatly  beloved,  fear  not : 
]h'm:o  be  unto  thee,  be  strong,  yea,  be  strong !" 
(  Dan.  X.  18,  19).  The  exact  meaning  of /cexapiTcu- 
ixfvri  is  "  thou  that  hast  bestowed  upon  thee  a  free 
gift  of  grace."  The  A.  V.  rendering  of  "highly 
favoured  "  is  therefore  very  exact  and  much  nearer 
to  the  original  than  the  "■  gratia  plena"  of  the 
Vulgate,  on  which  a  huge  and  wholly  unsubstantial 
edifice  has  been  built  by  liomanist  devotional 
writers.  The  next  jjart  of  the  salutation,  '*  The 
Lord  is  with  thee,"  would  probably  have  been 
better  translated,  "  The  Lord  be  with  thee."  It  is 
the  sami!  salutation  as  that  with  which  the  angel 
accosts  (iideon  (Judg.  vi.  12).  "Blessed  art  thou 
among  women,"  is  nearly  the  same  expression  as 
that  useil  by  Ozias  to  Judith  (Jud.  xiii.  18).  Ga- 
briel ])roccpds  to  instruct  Mary  that  by  the  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  (Jhost  the  everlasting  Son  of  the 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


261 


Father  should  be  born  of  her;  that  hi  Him  the 
prophecies  relative  to  David's  throne  and  kuigdora 
sliould  be  accomplished ;  and  that  His  name  was  to 
be  called  Jesus.  He  further  informs  her,  perhaps 
as  a  sign  by  which  she  might  convince  herself  that 
his  prediction  with  regard  to  herself  would  come 
true,  that  her  relative  Elisabeth  was  within  three 
months  of  being  delivered  of  a  child. 

The  angel  left  Mary,  and  she  set  off  to  visit  Eli- 
sabeth either  at  Hebron  or  Juttah  (whichever  way 
,we  understand  the  els  ttjc  opeivriv  e(s  Tr6\ii/ 
'lovSa,  Luke  i.  39),  where  the  latter  ]i\ed  with  her 
husband  Zacharias,  about  20  miles  to  the  south  of 
Jerusalem,  and  therefore  at  a  very  considerable 
distance  from  Nazareth.  Immediately  on  her  en- 
trance into  the  house  she  was  saluted  by  Elisabeth 
as  the  mother  of  her  Lord,  and  had  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  the  angel's  saying  with  regard  to  her 
cousin.  She  embodied  her  feelings  of  exultation 
and  thankfulness  in  the  hymn  known  under  the  name 
of  the  Magnificat.  Whether  this  was  uttered  by  im- 
mediate inspiration,  in  reply  to  Elisabeth's  saluta- 
tion, or  composed  during  her  journey  from  Nazareth, 
or  was  written  at  a  later  period  of  her  three 
months'  visit  at  Hebron,  does  not  appear  for  certain. 
The  hymn  is  founded  on  Hannah's  song  of  thank- 
fulness (1  Sam.  ii.  1-10),  and  exhibits  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  Psalms,  prophetical  writiugr,,  and 
books  of  Moses,  from  which  sources  almost  every 
expression  in  it  is  drawn.  The  most  remarkable 
clause,  '•  From  henceforth  all  generations  shall  call 
me  blessed,"  is  borrowed  from  Leah's  exclamation 
on  the  birth  of  Asher  (Gen.  xxx.  13).  The  same 
sentiment  and  expression  are  also  found  in  Prov. 
xxxi.  28  ;  Mai.  iii.  12  ;  Jas.  v.  11.  In  the  latter 
place  the  vs'ord  fnaKapi^oi  is  rendered  with  great  ex- 
actness "  count  happy."  The  notion  that  there  is 
conveyed  in  the  word  any  anticipation  of  her  bearing 
the  title  of  "  Blessed  "  arises  solely  from  ignorance. 

Mary  returned  to  Nazareth  shortly  before  the 
birth  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  continued  living  at 
her  own  home.  In  the  course  of  a  few  months 
Joseph  became  aware  that  she  was  with  child,  and 
determined  on  giving  her  a  bill  of  divorcement, 
instead  of  yielding  her  up  to  the  law  to  sutler  the 
penalty  which  he  supposed  that  she  had  incurred. 
Being,  however,  warned  and  satisfied  by  an  angel 
who  appeared  to  him  in  a  diKmi,  he  took  her  to  his 
own  house.  It  was  soon  after  this,  as  it  would 
seem,  that  Augustus'  decree  was  promulgated,  and 
Joseph  and  Mary  travelled  to  Bethlehem  to  have 
their  names  enrolled  in  the  registers  (li.C.  4)  by 
way  of  preparation  for  the  ta.xing,  which  however 
was  not  completed  till  ten  years  afterwards  (a.d.  (!), 
in  the  governorship  of  Quirinus.  They  reached 
Bethlehem,  and  there  Marv  brnug-lit  forth  the 
Saviour  of  the  world;  and  luimbly  laitl  him  in  a 
manger. 

The  visit  of  the  shepherds,  the  circumcision,  the 
adoration  of  the  wise  men,  and  the  piesentation  in 
the  Temple,  are  rather  scenes  in  the  life  of  Christ 
than  in  that  of  his  mother.  The  ]>resentation  in 
the  Temple  might  not  take  place  till  forty  days 
after  the  birth  of  the  child.  During  this  period 
the  mother,  according  to  the  law  of  Moses,  was 
unclean  (Lev.  xii.).  In  the  present  case  there  could 
be  no  necessity  for  ofl'ering  the  sacrifice  and  making 
atonement  beyond  that  of  obedience  to  the  Mosaic 
precept;  but  "already  He,  and  His  mother  lor  Him, 
were  acting  upon  the  principle  of  fulfilling  all 
righteousness.  The  poverty  of  St.  Jlary  and  Jo- 
seph,  it  may  be  noted,  is  shown  by  their  making 


262 


MAKY  THE  VIRGIN 


the  oHering  of  the  poor.  The  song  of  Simeon  and 
the  thanksgiving  of  Anna,  like  the  wonder  of  the 
shepherds  and  the  adoration  of  the  magi,  only  in- 
cidentally refer  to  Mary.  One  passage  alone  in 
Simeon's  adth'ess  is  specially  directed  to  her,  "  Yea 
a  sword  shall  pierce  through  thy  own  soul  also." 
The  exact  purport  of  these  words  is  doubtful.  A 
common  patristic  explanation  refers  them  to  the 
pang  of  unbelief  which  shot  through  her  bosom  on 
seeing  her  Son  expire  on  the  cross  (Tertullian, 
Origen,  Basil,  Cyril,  &c.).  By  modern  interpretei-s 
it  is  more  commonly  referred  to  the  pangs  of  grief 
which  she  experienced  on  witnessing  the  sufferings 
of  her  Son. 

In  the  flight  into  Egypt,  Mary  and  the  babe  had 
the  support  and  protection  of  Joseph,  as  well  as  in 
their  return  from  thence,  in  the  following  year,  on 
the  death  of  Herod  the  Great  (B.C.  3).'>  It  appears 
to  have  been  the  intention  of  Joseph  to  have  settled 
at  Bethlehem  at  this  time,  as  his  home  at  Nazareth 
had  been  broken  up  for  more  than  a  year ;  but  on 
findina;  how  Herod's  dominions  had  been  disposed  of, 
he  changed  his  mind  and  returned  to  his  old  place 
of  abode,  thinking  that  the  child's  life  would  be 
safer  in  the  tetrarchy  of  Antipas  than  in  that  of 
Archelaus.  It  is  possible  that  Joseph  might  have 
been  himself  a  native  of  Bethlehem,  and  that  before 
this  time  he  had  been  only  a  visitor  at  Nazareth, 
drawn  thither  by  his  betrothal  and  marriage.  In 
that  case,  his  fear  of  Archelaus  would  make  him 
exchange  his  own  native  town  for  that  of  Mary.  It 
•may  be  that  the  holy  family  at  this  time  took  up 
their  residence  in  the  house  of  Mary's  sister,  the 
wife  of  Clopas. 

Henceforward,  until  the  beginning  of  our  Lord's 
ministry — i.  e.  from  B.C.  3  to  a.d.  26 — we  may 
picture  St.  Mary  to  ourselves  as  living  in  Nazareth, 
in  a  humble  sphere  of  life,  the  wife  of  Joseph  the 
carpenter,  pondering  over  the  sayings  of  the  angels, 
of  the  shepherds,  of  Simeon,  and  those  of  her  Son, 
as  the  latter  "  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature  and 
in  favour  with  God  and  man"  (Luke  ii.  52).  Two 
circumstii.nces  alone,  so  far  as  we  know,  broke  in 
on  the  otherwise  even  flow  of  the  still  waters  of 
her  life.  One  of  these  was  the  temporary  loss  of 
her  Son  when  he  remained  behind  in  Jerusalem, 
A.D.  8.  The  other  was  the  death  of  Joseph.  The 
exact  date  of  this  last  event  we  cannot  determine. 
But  it  was  probably  not  long  after  the  other. 

From  the  time  at  which  our  Lord's  ministry 
commenced,  St.  Mary  is  withdrawn  almost  wholly 
from  sight.  Four  times  only  is  the  veil  removed, 
which,  not  surely  without  a  reason,  is  thrown  over 
her.  These  four  occasions  are, — 1.  The  marriage 
at  Cana  of  (Jalilee  (John  ii.).  2.  The  attempt 
which  she  and  his  brethren  made  "to  speak  with 
him"  (Matt.  xii.  46;  Mark  iii.  21  and  31  ;  Luke 
viii.  19).  3.  The  Cinicifixion.  4.  The  days  suc- 
ceeding the  Ascension  (Acts  i.  14).  If  to  these  we 
add  two  references  to  her,  the  flrst  by  her  Nazarene 
fellow-citizens  (Matt.  xiii.  .54,  .5;  Mark  ^^.  1-3),  the 
second  by  a  woman  in  the  multitude  (Luke  xi.  27), 


*•  In  the  Gospel  of  the  Infancy,  which  seems  to  date 
from  the  2nd  century,  innumerable  miracles  are  made  to 
attend  on  St.  Mary  and  her  Son  during  their  sujonrn  in 
Egypt :  e.  g.,  Mary  Icioked  with  pity  on  a  woman  who  was 
possessed,  and  immediately  Satan  came  out  of  her  in  the 
form  of  a  young  man,  saying,  "  \Voe  is  me  because  of  thee, 
Mary,  and  thy  Son  !"  On  another  occasion  they  fell  in 
with  two  thieves,  named  Titus  and  Dumachus;  and  'I'itus 
w.Ts  gentle,  and  1  lumachus  was  harsh :  the  Lady  Mary 
theieloro  promised  Titus  that  Gud  should  receive  him  on 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

we  have  specified  every  event  known  to  us  in  hei" 
life.  It  is  noticeable  that,  on  every  occasion  of  our 
Lord's  addressing  her,  or  speaking  of  her,  there  is 
a  sound  of  reproof  in  His  words,  with  the  exception 
of  the  last  words  spoken  to  her  fi-om  the  cioss. 

1.  The  marriage  at  Cana  in  Galilee  took  place  in 
the  three  months  which  intervened  between  the 
baptism  of  Christ  and  the  passover  of  the  year  27. 
When  Jesus  was  found  by  his  mother  and  Joseph  in 
the  Temple  in  the  year  8,  we  find  him  repudiating 
the  name  of  "  father"  as  applied  to  Joseph.  "  T/nj 
father  and  I  have  sought  thee  sorrowing  " — "  How 
is  it  that  ye  sought  me?  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must 
be  about"  (not  Joseph's  and  yours,  but)  "my 
father's  business  ?"  (Luke  ii.  48,  9).  Now,  in  like 
manner,  at  His  first  miracle  which  inaugurates  His 
ministry,  He  solemnly  withdraws  himself  from  the 
authority  of  His  earthly  mother.  This  is  St.  Au- 
gustine's explanation  of  the  "  What  have  I  to  do 
with  thee  ?  my  hour  is  not  yet  come."  It  was 
His  humanity  not  His  di^nnity  which  came  from 
Mary.  While  therefore  He  was  acting  in  His  divine 
character  He  could  not  acknowledge  her,  nor  does 
He  acknowledge  her  again  until  He  was  hanging  on 
the  cross,  when,  in  that  nature  which  He  took  from 
her,  He  was  about  to  submit  to  death  (St.  Aug.  • 
Coinm.  in  Joan.  Evanj.  tract  viii.,  vol.  iii.  p.  1455, 
ed.  Migne,  Paris,  1845).     That  the  words  Ti  e'/uol 

Koi  ffo\;=\?\  V  nJD,  imply  reproof,  is  certain 
(cf.  Matt.  viii.  29  ;  M;u-k  i.  24  ;  and  LXX.,  Judg. 
xi.  12  ;  1  K.  xvii.  18  ;  2  K.  iii.  13),  and  such  is 
the  patristic  explanation  of  them  (see  Iren.  Adv. 
Haer.  iii.  18 ;  Apud  Bihl.  Pair.  Max.  torn,  ii., 
pt.  ii.  293  ;  S.  Chrys.  Horn,  in  Joan.  xxi.).  But 
the  reproof  is  of  a  gentle  kind  (Trench,  on  the  Mi- 
racles, p.  102,  Lond.  1856  ;  Alford,  Coinm.  in  he. ; 
Wordsworth,  Comm.  inloc.).  Mary  seems  to  have 
understood  it,  and  accordingly  to  have  drawn  back, 
desiring  the  servants  to  pay  attention  to  her  divine 
Son  (Olshausen,  Comm.  in  loo.).  The  modern  Ro- 
manist translation,  "  What  is  that  to  me  and  to 
thee  ?"  is  not  a  mistake,  because  it  is  a  wilful 
misrepresentation  (Douay  version;  Orsini,  IJfe  of 
Mary,  &c. ;  see  The  Catholic  Layman,  p.  117, 
Dublin,  1852). 

2.  Capernaum  (Johnii.  12),  and  Nazareth  (^latt. 
iv.  13,  xiii.  54;  Mark  vi.  1),  appear  to  have  been 
the  residence  of  St.  Mary  for  a  considerable  period. 
The  next  time  that  she  is  brought  before  us  we  find 
her  at  Capernaum.  It  is  the  autumn  of  the  year 
28,  more  than  a  year  and  a  half  after  the  miracle 
wrought  at  the  marriage  feast  in  Cana.  The  Lord 
had  in  the  meantime  attended  two  feasts  of  the 
passover,  and  had  twice  made  a  circuit  throughout 
Galilee,  teaching  and  working  miracles.  His  fairn' 
had  spread,  and  crowds  came  pressing  round  him, 
so  that  he  had  not  even  time  "  to  eat  bread."  Mary 
was  still  living  with  her  sister,  and  her  nephews 
and  nieces,  James,  Joses,  Simon,  Jude,  and  their 
three  sisters  (Matt.  xiii.  55) ;  and  she  and  they 
heard  of  the  toils  which  He  was  luidergoing,  and 


his  right  hand.  And  accordingly,  thirty-three  years  after- 
wards, Titus  was  the  penitent  thief  who  was  crucified  on 
the  right  hand,  and  Dumachus  was  crucific  d  on  the  left. 
These  are  sufScient  as  samples.  Throughout  the  book 
we  find  St,  Mary  associated  with  her  Son,  iu  the  strange 
freaks  of  power  attributed  to  them,  in  a  way  which  shows 
us  whence  the  culhis  of  St.  Mary  took  its  origin.  (See 
Junes,  On  the  New  Te/t.,  vol.  ii.  Oxf.  1827;  Giles,  CmUx 
Apocryphus ;  Thilo,  Codex  Apocrypkus). 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

they  unJei'stood  that  He  vviis  denying  himself  every 
relaxation  from  His  labours.  Their  human  affection 
conquered  their  faith.  They  thought  that  He  was 
killius;  Himself,  and  with  an  indignation  arising 
from  love,  they  exclaimed  that  He  was  beside  him- 
self, and  set  otf  to  bring  Him  home  either  by  entreaty 
or  compulsion.'  He  was  surrounded  by  eager 
crowds,  and  they  could  not  reach  Him.  They 
therefore  sent  a  message,  begging  Him  to  allow 
them  to  speak  to  Him.  This  message  was  handed 
on  from  one  person  in  the  crowd  to  another,  till  at 
length  it  was  reported  aloud  to  Him.  Again  He 
reproves.  Again  He  refuses  to  admit  any  authority 
on  the  part  of  his  relatives,  or  any  piivilege  on 
account  of  their  relationship.  "  Who  is  my  mo- 
ther, and  who  are  my  biethren?  And  He  stretched 
forth  His  hand  towards  His  disciples,  and  said.  Be- 
hold my  mother  and  my  bi-ethren  !  For  whosoever 
shall  do  the  will  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven, 
the  same  is  my  brother,  and  sister,  and  mother  " 
(Matt,  xii.48,49).  Comp.  Theoph.  inMarc.  iii.  o2 ; 
S.  Chrys.  Horn.  xliv.  in  Matt. ;  S.  Aug.  in  Joan. 
tract  X.,  who  all  of  them  point  out  that  the  blessed- 
ness of  St.  Mary  consists,  not  so  much  in  having 
borne  Christ,  as  in  believing  on  Him  and  in  obey- 
ing His  words  (see  also  Quaest.  et  Eesp.  ad  Orthod. 
cxxxvi.,  ap.  S.  Just.  Mart,  in  Bibl.  Max.  Fatr. 
torn.  ii.  pt.  ii.  p.  138).  This  indeed  is  the  lesson 
taught  directly  by  our  Lord  Himself  on  the  next 
occasion  on  which  reference  is  made,  to  St.  Mary. 
It  is  now  the  spring  of  the  year  30,  and  only  about 
a  month  before  the  time  of  His  crucifixion.  Christ 
had  set  out  on  His  last  journey  fi'om  Galilee,  which 
was  to  end  at  Jerusalem.  As  He  passed  along,  He, 
as  usual,  healed  the  sick,  and  preached  the  glad 
tidings  of  salvation.  In  the  midst,  or  at  the  com- 
pletion, of  one  of  His  addresses,  a  woman  of  the 
multitude,  whose  soul  had  been  stirred  by  His 
words,  cried  out,  "Blessed  is  the  womb  that  bare 
thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou  hast  sucked!"  Im- 
mediately the  Lord  replied,  "  Yea  rather,  blessed 
are  they  that  hear  the  word  of  God,  and  keep  it" 
(Luke  xi.  27).  He  does  not  either  affirm  or  deny 
anything  with  regard  to  the  direct  bearing  of  the 
woman's  exclamation,  but  passes  that  by  as  a  thing 
indifferent,  in  order  to  point  out  in  what  alone  the 
true  blessedness  of  His  mother  and  of  all  consists. 
This  is  the  full  foice  of  the  fievovvye,  with  which 
He  commences  his  reply. 

3.  The  next  scene  in  St.  Mai7's  life  brings  us  to 
the  foot  of  the  cross.  She  was  standing  there  with 
her  sister  Mary  and  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Salome, 
and  other  women,  having  no  doubt  followed  her 
Son  as  she  was  able  throughout  the  terrible  morn- 
ing of  Good  Friday.  It  was  about  3  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon,  and  He  was  about  to  give  up  His  spirit. 
His  divine  mission  was  now,  as  it  were,  accom- 
plished. While  His  ministry  was  in  progress  He 
had  withdrawn  Himself  from  her  that  He  might 
do  His  Father's  work.  But  now  the  hour  was  come 
when  His  human  relationship  might  be  again  recoo-- 
nised,  "  Tunc  enim  agnovit,"  says  St.  Augustine, 
"  quando  illud  quod  peperit  moriebatur"  (S.  Aug. 
Fii  Joan.  ix.).  Standing  near  the  company  of  the 
women  was  St.  .lohn  ;  and,  with  almost  His  last 
words,  Christ  commended  His  mother  to  the  aire  of 
him  who  had  borne  the  name  of  the  Disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved.     "  Woman,  behold  thy  son."     "  Com- 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


263 


"  It  is  a  mere  subterfuge  to  refer  the  wonis  el\cyov 
yap,  &c.,  to  the  people,  instead  of  to  Mary  and  his  brethren 
(Cdlmet  and  Migne,  Diet,  of  the  BibU). 


mendat  homo  homini  hominom,"  says  St.  Au- 
gustine. And  from  that  hour  St.  John  assuies  us 
that  he  took  her  to  his  own  abode.  If  by  "  that 
hour  "  the  Evangelist  means  immediately  after  tlie 
words  were  spoken,  Mary  was  not  present  at  the 
last  scene  of  all.  The  sword  had  sufficiently  pierced 
her  soul,  and  she  was  spai'ed  the  hearing  of  the  last 
loud  cry,  and  the  sight  of  the  bowed  head.  St.  Am- 
brose considers  the  chief  purpose  of  our  Lord's 
words  to  have  been  a  desire  to  make  manifest  the 
truth  that  the  Kedemption  was  His  woik  alone, 
while  He  gave  human  affection  to  His  mother.  "  Non 
egebat  adjutore  ad  omnium  redeniptionem.  Suscepit 
quidem  matiis  affectum,  sed  non  quaesivit  hominis 
auxilium"  (S.  Amh.'[!^xp.  Evang.  Luc.  x.  132). 

4.  A  veil  is  drawn  over  her  soriow  and  over 
her  joy  which  succeeiled  that  sorrow.  Mediaeval 
imagination  has  supposed,  but  Scripture  does  not 
state,  that  her  Son  appeared  to  Mary  after  His 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  (See  for  example  Lu- 
dolph  of  Saxony,  Vita  Ghristi,  p.  6(i6,  Lyons, 
1642;  and  Kuperti,  De  Divinis  Officv.s,  vii.  25, 
tom.  iv.  p.  92,  Venice,  1751).  St.  Ambrose  is  consi- 
dered to  be  the  first  writer  who  suggested  the  idea, 
and  reference  is  made  to  his  treatise,  De  Virgini- 
tate,  i.  3 ;  but  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  text  has 
been  ccn'upted,  and  that  it  is  of  Mary  Magdalene 
that  he  is  there  speaking.  (Comp.  his  Exposition  of 
St.  Luke,  X.  156.  See  note  of  the  Benedictine 
edition,  tom.  ii.  p.  217,  Paris,  1790.)  Another 
reference  is  usually  given  to  St.  Anselm.  The 
treatise  quoted  is  not  St.  Anselm's,  but  Eadmer's. 
(See  Eadmer.,  De  Excellentia  Mariae,  ch.  v.,  ap- 
pended to  Anselm's  Works,  p.  138,  Paris,  1721.) 
Ten  appearances  are  related  by  the  Evangelists  as 
having  occurred  in  the  40  days  intervening  between 
Easter  and  Ascension  Day,  but  none  to  Mary.  She 
was  doubtless  living  at  .lerusalem  with  John,  che- 
rished with  the  tenderness  which  her  tender  soul 
would  have  specially  needed,  and  which  undoubt- 
edly she  found  pre-eminently  in  St.  John.  We 
have  no  record  of  her  presence  at  the  Ascension. 
Aiator,  a  writer  of  the  6th  century,  desciibes  her 
as  being  at  the  time  not  on  the  sj>ot,  but  in  Jeru- 
salem (Arat.  De  Act.  Apost.  1.  50,  apud  Migne, 
tom.  Ixviii.  p.  95,  Paris,  1848,  quoted  by  Woi-ds- 
wo)-th,  G/;.  Test.  Com.  on  the  Acts,  i.  14).  We 
have  no  account  of  her  being  present  at  the  descent 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  What 
we  do  read  of  her  is,  that  she  remained  stedfast  in 
prayer  in  the  upper  room  at  Jerusalem  with  Mar^' 
Magdalene  and  Saloine,  and  those  known  as  the 
Lord's  brothers  and  the  apostles.  This  is  the  last 
view  that  we  have  of  her.  Holy  Sciipture  leaves 
her  engaged  in  prayer  (se'e  Wordsworth  as  cited 
above).  From  this  point  forwards  we  know  nothing 
of  her.  It  is  probable  that  the  rest  of  her  life  was 
spent  in  Jerusalem  with  St.  John  (see  Epiph.  Hacr. 
78).  According  to  one  tradition  thebeloveil  disciple 
would  not  leave  Palestine  until  she  had  expiied  in 
his  arms  (see  Tholuck  Light  from  the  Cross,  ii. 
Serm.  x.  p.  234,  Edinb.,  1857)  ;  and  it  is,a<ided  that 
she  lived  and  died  in  the  Coenaculum  in  what  is 
now  the  Mosque  of  the  Tomb  of  David,  the  tra- 
ditional chamber  of  the  Last  Sujiper  (Stanley, 
S.  ^  F.  ch.  xiv.  p.  456).  Other  tiaditlons  make 
her  journey  with  St.  John  to  Ephesus,  and  there 
die  in  extreme  old  age.  It  was  believed  by  some 
in  the  5th  century  that  she  was  burie<l  at  Ephesus 
(^see  Cone.  Ephes.,  Cone.  Labb.  tom.  iii.  p.  574  a) ; 
by  others,  in  the  same  century,  that  she  was  buried 
at  Gethsemane,  and  this  appears  to  have  been  the 


264 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


iiitbnnation  given  to  Marcian  and  Pulcheria  by 
Juvenal  of  Jerusalem.  As  soon  as  we  lose  the 
guidance  of  Scriptiiie,  we  have  nothing  fi'om  which 
we  can  derive  any  sure  knowledge  about  her.  The 
darkness  in  which  we  are  left  is  in  itself  most  in- 
structive. 

5.  The  character  of  St.  Mary  is  not  drawn  by  any 
of  the  Evangelists,  but  some  of  its  lineaments  are 
incidentally  manifested  in  the  fragmentary  record 
which  is  given  of  lier.  They  are  to  be  found  for 
the  most  part  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  whence  an 
attempt  has  been  made,  by  a  curious  mixture  oftho 
imaginative  and  rationalistic  methods  of  interpreta- 
tion, to  explain  the  old  legend  which  tells  vis  that 
St.  Luke  painted  the  Virgin's  portrait  (Calmet, 
Kitto,  Migne,  Mrs.  Jameson).  We  might  have  ex- 
))ected  greater  details  from  St.  John  than  fiom  the 
other  Evangelists  ;  but  in  his  Gospel  we  learn  no- 
thing of  her  except  wliat  may  be  gathered  from  the 
scene  at  Cana  and  at  the  cross.  It  is  clear  from 
St.  Luke's  account,  though  without  any  such  inti- 
mation we  might  rest  assured  of  the  fact,  that  her 
youth  had  been  spent  in  the  study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  that  she  had  set  Ijefore  her  the 
example  of  the  holy  women  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  her  model.  This  would  appear  from  the  Mag- 
nificat (Luke  i.  46).  The  same  hymn,  so  far  as 
it  emanated  from  hei'self,  would  show  no  little 
power  of  mind  as  well  as  warmth  of  spirit.  Her 
faith  and  humility  exhibit  themselves  in  her  imme- 
diate suiTender  of  herself  to  the  Divine  will,  though 
ignorant  how  that  will  should  be  accomplished 
(Luke  i.  38);  her  energy  and  earnestness,  in  her 
journey  from  Nazareth  to  Hebron  (Luke  i.  39)  ; 
her  happy  thankfulness,  in  her  song  of  joy  (Luke 
i.  48)  ;  her  silent  musing  thoughtfulness,  in  her 
pondering  over  the  shepherds'  visit  (Luke  ii.  19), 
and  in  her  keeping  her  Son's  words  in  her  heart 
(Luke  ii.  51)  though  she  could  not  fully  under- 
stand their  import.  Again,  her  humility  is  seen 
in  her  drawing  back,  yet  without  anger,  after  re- 
ceiving reproof  at  Cana  in  Galilee  (John  ii.  5),  and 
in  the  remarkable  manner  in  which  she  shuns 
putting  herself  tbrward  throughout  the  whole  of  her 
Son's  ministry,  or  after  his  removal  from  earth. 
Once  only  does  she  attempt  to  interfere  with  her 
Divine  Son's  freedom  of  action  (Matt.  xii.  46; 
Mark  iii.  31 ;  Luke  viii.  19)  ;  and  even  here  we  can 
hardly  blame,  for  she  seems  to  have  been  roused, 
not  by  arrogance  and  by  a  desire  to  show  her  au- 
thority and  relationship,  as  St.  Chrysostom  sup- 
poses (Horn.  xliv.  in  Matt.);  but  by  a  woman's 
and  a  mother's  feelings  of  afiection  and  fear  for  him 
whom  she  loved.  It  was  part  of  that  exquisite 
tenderness  which  appears  throughout  to  have  be- 
longed to  her.  In  a  word,  so  far  as  St.  Mary  is 
pourtiayed  to  us  in  Scripture,  she  is,  as  we  should 
have  expected,  the  most  tender,  the  most  faithful, 
humble,  patient,  and  loving  of  women,  but  a  woman 

still. 

HI.  Her  after  life,  u-hoUy  legendary. — ^\Ve  pass 
again  into  the  region  of  ffee  and  joyous  legend 
which  we  quitted  for  that  of  true  history  at  the 
period  of  the  Annunciation.  The  Gospel  record  con- 
fined the  play  of  imagination,  and  as  soon  as  this 
check  is  withdrawn  the  legend  bursts  out  afresh. 
The  legends  of  St.  Mary's  childhood  may  be  traced 
back  as  far  as  the  third  or  even  the  second  century, 
'fhose  of  her  death  are  probably  of  a  later  date. 
The  chief  legend  was  for  a  length  of  time  con- 
sidered to  be  a  veritable  history,  written  by 
'Mi'lito  Bishop  of  Sardis  in  the  'iuil  century.     It  is 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

to  be  found  in  the  Bibliotheca  Maxima  (torn.  ii. 
pt.  ii.  p.  212),  entitled  Sancti  Melitonis  Episcopt 
Sardensis  cle  Transitu  Virginis  Mariae  Liber ; 
and  there  certainly  existed  a  book  with  this  title  at 
the  end  of  the  5th  century,  which  was  condemned 
by  Pope  Gelasius  as  apocryphal  (Op.  Gelas.  apud 
Migne,  torn.  59,  p.  152).  Another  fonn  of  the 
same  legend  has  been  published  at  Elberfeld  in 
1854  by  Maximihan  Enger  in  Arabic.  He  supposes 
that  it  is  an  Arabic  translation  from  a  Syriac 
original.  It  was  found  in  the  library  at  Bonn, 
and  is  entitled  Joannis  Apostoli  de  Transitu  Beatac 
Mariae  Virginis  Liber.  It  is  perha])s  the  same  as 
that  referred  to  in  Assemani  (^Biblioth.  Orient. 
tom.  iii.  p.  287,  Rome,  1725),  under  the  name  of 
Historia  Dormitionis  et  Assumptionis  B.  Mariae 
Virginis  Joanni  Evangelistae  falso  inscripta.  We 
give  the  substance  of  the  legend  with  its  main 
variations. 

When  the  apostles  separated  in  order  to  evangelise 
the  world,  Mary  continued  to  live  with  St.  John's 
parents  in  their  house  near  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  every  day  she  went  out  to  pray  at  the  tomb  of 
Christ,  and  at  Golgotha.  But  the  Jews  had  placed 
a  watch  to  prevent  prayers  being  offered  at  thesi' 
spots,  and  the  watcli  went  into  the  city  and  told 
the  chief  priests  that  Mary  cam.e  daily  to  pray. 
Tlien  the  priests  commanded  the  watch  to  stone 
her.  But  at  this  time  king  Abgarus  wrote  to 
Tiberius  to  desiie  him  to  take  vengeance  on  the 
Jews  for  slaying  Christ.  They  feared  therefore  to 
add  to  his  wrath  by  slaying  Mary  also,  and  yet  they 
could  not  allow  her  to  continue  her  prayers  at 
Golgotha,  because  an  excitement  and  tumult  was 
thereby  made.  They  therefore  went  and  spoke 
softly  to  her,  and  she  consented  to  go  and  dwell  in 
Bethlehem  ;  and  thither  she  took  with  her  three 
holy  virgins  who  should  attend  upon  her.  And  in 
the  twenty-second  year  after  the  ascension  of  the 
Lord,  Mary  felt  her  heart  burn  with  an  inexpressible 
longing  to  be  with  her  Son ;  and  behold  an  angel 
appeared  to  her,  and  announced  to  her  that  her 
soul  should  be  taken  up  from  her  boily  on  the  third 
day,  and  he  placed  a  palm-branch  fi'om  paradise  in 
her  hands,  and  desired  that  it  should  be  carried 
before  her  bier.  And  Mary  besought  that  the  apostles 
might  be  gathered  round  her  before  she  died, 
and  the  angel  replied  that  they  should  come. 
Then  the  Holy  Spirit  caught  up  John  as  he 
was  preaching  at  Ephesus,  and  Peter  as  he  was 
offering  sacrifice  at  Kome,  and  Paul  as  he  was  dis- 
puting with  the  Jews  near  Rome,  and  Thomas 
in  the  extremity  of  India,  and  Matthew  and  James: 
these  were  all  of  the  apostles  who  were  still  living ; 
then  the  Holy  Spirit  awakened  the  dead,  Philip  and 
Andrew,  and  Luke  and  Simon,  and  Mark  and  Bar- 
tliolomew  ;  and  all  of  them  were  snatched  away  in 
a  bright  cloud  and  found  themselves  at  Bethlehem. 
And  angels  and  powers  without  number  descended 
from  heaven  and  stood  round  about  the  house  ; 
Gabriel  stood  at  blessed  Mary's  head,  and  Michael  at 
her  feet,  and  they  fanned  her  with  their  wings ; 
and  Peter  and  John  wiped  away  hei-  tears ;  and  there 
was  a  gieat  cry,  and  they  all  said  "  Hail  blessed 
one  !  blessed  is  the  fruit  of  thy  womb  ! "  And  the 
people  of  Bethlehem  brought  their  sick  to  the 
house,  and  they  were  all  healed.  Then  news  of 
these  things  was  carried  to  Jerusalem,  and  the  king 
sent  and  commanded  that  they  should  bring  Mary 
and  the  disciples  to  Jerusalem.  And  horsemen 
came  to  Bethlehem  to  seize  Mary,  but  they  did  not 
find  her,  for  the  Holy  Spirit  had   taken  her  and  the 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

ilisciplci;  iii  a  cloud  over  the  heads  of  the  horsemen 
to  Jerusalem.  Then  the  men  of  Jerusalem  saw 
angels  ascending  anil  descending  at  the  spot  where 
Mary's  house  was.  And  the  high-priests  went  to 
thegoveinor,  and  craved  permission  to  burn  her  and 
the  house  with  tire,  and  the  governor  gave  them 
permission,  and  they  brought  wood  and  tire  ;  but 
as  soon  as  they  came  near  to  the  house,  behold  there 
bui'st  forth  a  tire  upon  them  which  consumed  them 
utterly.  And  the  governor  saw  these  things  atar  ofl", 
and  in  the  evening  he  brought  his  son,  who  was  sick, 
_  to  Mary,  and  she  healed  him. 

Then,  on  the  sixth  day  of  the  week,  the  Holy 
Spirit  commanded  the  apostles  to  take  up  Mary, 
and  to  carry  her  from  Jerusalem  to  Gethsemane, 
and  as  they  went  the  Jews  Saw  them.  Then  drew 
near  Juphia,  one  of  the  higli-priests,  and  attempted 
to  overthrow  the  litter  on  which  she  was  being 
carried,  for  the  other  priests  had  conspired  with 
him,  and  they  hoped  to  cast  her  down  into  the 
valley,  and  to  throw  wood  upon  her,  and  to  burn 
her  body  with  tire.  But  as  soon  as  Juphia  had 
touched  the  litter  the  angel  snfijte  oft' his  arms  with 
a  tiery  swoi-d,  and  the  arms  remained  fastened  to 
the  litter.  Then  he  cried  to  the  disciples  and  Peter 
tor  help,  and  they  saiil,  "  Ask  it  of  the  Lady  Mary  ;" 
and  he  cried,  "  0  Lady,  0  Mother  of  Salvation, 
have  mercy  on  me!"  Then  she  said  to  I'eter, 
"Give  him  back  his  arms;"  and  they  were  re- 
stored whole.  But  the  disciples  pioceeded  onwards, 
and  they  laid  down  the  litter  in  a  cave,  as  they 
were  commanded,  and  gave  themselves  to  prayer. 

And  the  angel  (iabriel  announced  that  on  the 
iirst  day  of  the  week  Mary's  soul  should  be  removed 
from  this  world.  And  on  the  morning  of  .that  day 
there  came  Eve  and  Anne  and  Elisabeth,  and  they 
kissed  Mary  and  told  her  who  they  were:  came 
Adam,  Seth,  Shem,  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob, 
I  )avid,  and  the  rest  of  the  old  fathers :  came  Enoch 
and  Elias  and  I\loses :  came  twelve  chariots  of 
angels  innumerable :  and  then  appeared  the  Lord 
Chiist  in  his  humanity,  and  Mary  bowed  before 
him  and  said,  "  O  my  Lord  and  my  God,  place  thy 
hand  upon  me ;"  and  he  stretched  out  his  hand  and 
blessed  her ;  and  she  took  his  hand  and  kissed  it, 
and  placed  it  to  her  forehead  and  said,  "  I  bow 
before  this  right  hand,  which  has  made  heaven  and 
earth  and  all  that  in  them  is,  and  I  thank  thoe  and 
piaise  thee  that  thou  hast  thought  me  worthy  of 
this  hour."  Then  she  said,  "  0  Lord,  take  me  to 
thyself!"  And  he  said  to  her,  "Now  shall  thy 
body  be  in  para<iise  to  the  day  of  the  resurrection, 
and  angels  shall  serve  thee ;  but  thy  pure  spirit 
shall  shine  in  the  kingdom,  in  the  dwelling-place 
of  my  Father's  fulness."  Then  the  disciples  drew 
near  and  besought  her  to  pray  for  the  world  which 
she  was  about  vo  leave.  And  Maiy  prayed.  And 
atlei-  her  prayer  was  finished  hei'  f:ice  shone  with 
marvellous  brightness,  and  she  stretched  out  her 
hands  and  blessed  them  all ;  and  her  Son  put  forth 
his  hands  and  received  her  pure  soul,  and  bore  it 
into  his  Father's  treasure-house.  And  there  was  a 
light  and  a  sweet  smell,  sweeter  than  miything  on 
earth;  and  a  voice  from  heaven  saying,  "  Hail, 
blessed  one !  blessed  and  celebrated  art  thou  among 
women  !"  ^ 

And  the  apostles  au'ried  her  body  to  the  valley 
of  Jehoshaphat,  to  a  place  which  the  Lord  had  told 

fi  The  legend  ascribed  to  Melito  makes  her  soiil  to  be 
carried  to  paradise  by  (xubricl,  while  her  Son  returns  to 
heaven. 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN  265 

them  of,  and  John  went  before  and  carried  the 
palm-branch.  And  they  ])laced  her  in  a  new  tomb, 
and  sat  at  the  month  of  the  sepulchre,  as  the  Lord 
commanded  them  ;  and  suddenly  there  appeared 
the  Lord  Christ,  surrounded  by  a  multituile  of 
angels,  and  said  to  the  apostles,  "  What  will  ye 
that  I  should  do  with  her  whom  my  Father's  com- 
mand selected  out  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel  that 
I  should  dwell  in  her?"  And  Peter  and  the 
apostles  besought  him  that  he  would  raise  the 
body  of  Mary  and  take  it  with  him  in  glory  to 
heaven.  And  the  Saviour  said,  •'  Be  it  according 
to  your  word."  And  he  commanded  Michael  the 
archangel  to  bring  down  the  soul  of  Mary.  And 
Gabriel  rolled  away  the  stone,  and  the  Lord  said, 
"  Rise  up,  my  beloved,  thy  body  shall  not  sutler 
corruption  in  the  tomb."  And  immediately  Mary 
arose  and  bowed  herself  at  his  feet  and  worshijiped  ; 
and  the  Lor<l  kissed  her  and  gave  her  to  the  angels 
to  carry  her  to  paradise. 

But  Thomas  was  not  present  with  the  rest,  for 
at  the  moment  that  he  was  summoned  to  come  he 
was  baptising  Polodius,  who  was  the  son  of  the 
sister  of  the  king.  And  he  arrived  just  after  all 
these  things  were  accomplished,  and  he  demanded 
to  see  the  sepulchre  in  which  they  had  laid  his 
Lady  :  "  For  ye  know,"  said  he,  "  that  I  am  Thomas, 
and  unless  I  see  I  will  not  believe."  Then  Peter 
arose  in  hsiste  and  wrath,  and  the  other  disciples 
with  him,  and  they  opened  the  sepulchre  and  went 
in  ;  but  they  tbund  nothing  therein  save  that  in 
which  her  body  had  been  wrapped.  Then  Thomas 
confessed  that  he  too,  as  he  was  being  borne  in  the 
cloud  from  Lidia,  had  seen  her  holy  body  being 
carried  by  the  angels  with  great  triumph  into 
heaven ;  and  that  on  his  crying  to  her  for  hei- 
blessing,  she  had  bestowed  upon  him  her  precious 
Girdle,  wliich  when  the  apostles  saw  they  were 
glad."  Then  the  apostles  were  carried  back  each 
to  his  own  place. 

Joannis  Apostoli  de  Transitu  Beatae  Marine 
Virginis  Liber,  Elberfeldae,  1854  ;  S.  Melitmis 
Episc.  Sard,  de  Transitu,  V.  M.  Liber,  apud  Bibl. 
Max.  Patr.  torn.  ii.  pt.  ii.  p.  212,  Lugd.  1677; 
Jacobi  a  Voragine,  Legenda  Aurea,  ed.  Graesse,  ch-. 
cxix.  p.  504,  bre.sd.  1846;  John  Damasc.  Serin,  de 
iJormit.  Deiparae,  Op.  tom.  ii.  p.  857  seq.,  Venice, 
1 743  ;  Andrew  of  Crete,  In  Dorntit.  Deiparae  Serin. 
iii.  p.  115,  Pans,  1644;  Mrs.  Jameson,  Legends 
of  tlie  Madonna,  Lend.  1852  ;  Butler,  Lives  of  the 
Saints  in  Aug.  15;  Dressel,  Edita  et  inedita  Epi- 
phanii  Monachi  et  Presbgteri,  p.  105,  Paris,  1843. 

IV.  Jewish  traditions  respecting  her. — These  are 
of  a  very  different  nature  from  the  light-hearted 
fairy-tale- like  stories  which  we  have  recounted 
above.  We  should  expect  that  the  miraculous  birth 
of  our  Lord  would  be  an  occasion  of  scoffing  to  the 
unbelieving  Jews,  and  we  find  this  to  be  the  case. 
To  the  Clnistian  believer  the  Jewish  slander  be- 
comes in  the  present  case  only  a  confirmation  of  his 
faith.  The  most  <letinite  and  outspoken  of  these 
slanders  is  that  .which  is  contained  in  the  book 
called  ]})&•<  nnPin,  or  Tohloth  Jem.  It  was 
grasped  at  with  avidity  liy  Voltaire,  and  declared 
by  him  to  be  the  most  ancient  .Jewish  writing 
directed  against  Christianity,  and  apparently  of  the 
first  century.  It  was  wiitten,  ho  says,  before  the 
Gospels,  and  is  altogether  contrary  to  them  {Lettre 


0  For  the  story  of  tliis  Sacratii^simo  Cintolo,  still  pro- 
served  at  I'rat",  .see  Mrs.  Janicson's  I.etjends  of  the  Ma 
(Imma,  ]\  '3ii   Loud.  lf<f)'2. 


2G6 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


SU7'  les  Juifs).  It  is  proved  by  Animou  (  Bihlisch. 
Theologic,  p.  26.3,  Erl;mcr.  1801)  to  be  a  compo- 
sition of  the  lotii  ceutuiy,  aod  by  Wagenseil  {Tela 
ignca  Satanae  \  Confut.  Libr.  Toldo^  Jescku,\).\2, 
Altovf,  1681)  to  be  in-econcileable  with  the  earlier 
Jewish  tales.  In  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  other- 
wise called  the  Acts  of  Pilate,  we  find  the  Jews 
represented  as  charging  our  Lord  with  illegitimate 
birth  (c.  2).  The  date  of  this  Gospel  is  about  the 
end  of  the  third  century.  The  origin  of  the  charge 
is  referred  with  great  probability  by  Thilo  ( Codex 
Apocr.  p.  527,  Lips.  1832)  to  the  circular  letters 
of  the  Jews  mentioned  by  Grotius  {ad  Matt,  xxvii. 
63,  et  ad  Act.  Apost.  xxviii.  22  ;  Op.  ii.  278  and 
666,  Basil.  1732),  which  were  sent  from  Palestine 
to  all  the  .Jewish  synagogues  after  the  death  of 
Christ,  with  the  view  of  attacking  "  the  lawless 
and  atheistic  sect  which  had  taken  its  origin  from 
the  deceiver  Jesus  of  Galilee"  (Justin,  adv.  Tryph.). 
The  first  time  that  we  find  it  openly  proclaimed  is 
in  an  extract  made  by  Oiigen  from  the  work  of 
Celsus,  which  he  is  refuting.  Celsus  introduces  a 
.Jew  declaring  that  the  mother  of  Jesus  inrh  tov 
yriixai'Tos,  riKTovos  ttiv  Texvrjv  ovros,  i^ewaQai, 
iKeyxSuffav  ojj  ^iiioixevjxivqv  {Contra  Celsum, 
c.  28,  Origenis  Opera,  xviii.  59,  Berlin,  1845). 
And  again,  ?)  rod  Irjffov  |U'/;T7jp  Kvovffa,  i^oia9(:7(Ta 
virh  TOV  ixvT]ffTev(Ta/j,4vov  avTrjv  t^ktovos,  i\€yx- 
6e7cra  eTri  juoixei'a  Kal  TiKTovcra.  airo  rivos  arpari- 
dirov  Tlav67ipa  rovfOfia  (ibid.  32).  Stories  to  the 
same  effect  may  be  found  in  the  Talmud — not  in 
the  Mishna,  which  dates  from  the  second  centui'y, 
but  in  the  Gemara,  which  is  of  the  fifth  or  sixth 
(see  Tract.  Sanhedrin,  cap.  vii.  lol.  67,  col.  1 ;  Shab- 
bath,  cap.  xii.  fol.  104,  col.  2  ;  and  the  Midrash 
Koheleth,  cap.  x.  5).  Itabanus  Maurus,  in  the  ninth 
century,  refers  to  the  same  story: — "  Jesum  filium 
Ethnici  cujusdam  I'andera  adulteri,  more  lati'onum 
punitum  esse."  We  then  come  to  the  Toldoth  Jcstt, 
in  which  these  calumnies  were  intended  to  be 
summed  up  and  harmonised,  in  the  year  4671, 
the  story  runs,  in  the  reign  of  King  Jannoeus, 
there  was  one  Joseph  Pandera  who  lived  at  Beth- 
lehem. In  the  same  village  there  was  a  widow 
who  had  a  daughter  named  IMiriam,  who  was 
betrothed  to  a  (iod-fearing  man  named  Johanan. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  Joseph  Pandera  meeting 
with  JMiriam  when  it  was  dark,  deceived  her  into 
the  belief  that  he  was  Johanan  her  husband.  And 
after  three  months  Johanan  consulted  Rabbi  Simeon 
Shetachides  what  he  should  do  with  Miriam,  and 
the  rabbi  advised  him  to  bring  her  before  the  great 
council.  But  Johanan  was  ashamed  to  do  so,  and 
instead  he  left  his  home  and  went  and  lived  at 
Babylon ;  and  there  Miriam  brought  forth  a  son 
and  gave  him  the  name  of  Jchoshiia.  The  rest  of 
the  work,  which  has  no  merit  in  a  literary  aspect 
or  otherwise,  contains  an  account  of  how  this 
Jehoshua  gained  the  art  of  working  mii-acles  by 
stealing  the  knowledge  of  the  unmentionable  name 
from  the  Temple:  how  he  was  defeated  by  the 
superior  magical  arts  of  one  Juda ;  and  how  at  last 
he  was  crucified,  and  his  body  hidden  under  a 
watercourse.  It  is  offensive  to  make  use  of  sacred 
names  in  connexion  with  such  tales;  but  in  \Va- 
genseil's  quaint  words  we  may  recollect,  "  haec 
nomina  non  attinere  ad  SeiTatorem  Nostrum  aut 
be.atissimam  illius  matnni  coeterosque  quos  sig- 
nificare  videntur,  sed  designari  iis  a  Diabolo  sup- 
posita  Spectra,  T>arvas,  Lemures,  Lamias,  Stryges, 
aut  si  quid  tiupius  istis"  {Tela  Ljnca  Satanae, 
Liber  Toldos  Jeso/m,  p.  2,  Altorf,  1681).     It  is  a 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

curious  thing  that  a  Pandera  or  Panther  has  been 
introduced  into  the  genealogy  of  our  Lord  by  Epi- 
phanius  {ffaeres.  Ixxviii.),  who  makes  him  grand- 
father of  Joseph,  and  by  John  of  Damascus  (  />e  Fide 
orthodoxu,  iv.  15),  who  makes  him  the  father  of 
Barpanther  and  grandfather  of  St.  Mary. 

V.  Alahometan  Traditions. — These  are  again  cast 
in  a  totally  dilTerent  mould  from  those  of  the  Jews. 
The  ilahometans  had  no  purpose  to  sen-e  in  spread- 
ing calumnious  stories  as  to  the  birth  of  Jesus,  and 
accordingly  we  find  none  of  the  Jewish  malignity 
about  their  traditions.  Mahomet  and  his  followers 
appear  to  have  gathered  up  the  floating  Oriental  tra- 
ditions which  originated  in  the  legends  of  St.  M.ary's 
early  years,  given  above,  and  to  have  drawn  from 
them  and  from  the  Bible  inditleiently.  It  has  been 
suggested  that  the  Koran  had  an  object  in  magnify- 
ing St.  Mary,  and  that  this  was  to  insinuate  that 
the  Son  was  of  no  other  nature  than  the  mother. 
But  this  does  not  appear  to  be  the  case.  Mahomet 
seems  merely  to  have  written  down  what  had  come 
to  his  ears  about  her,  without  definite  theological 
purpose  or  inquiry. 

Mary  was,  according  to  the  Koran,  the  daughter 
of  Amram  (sur.  iii.)  and  the  sister  of  Aaron  (sur. 
xix.).  Mahomet  can  hardly  be  absolved  from  having 
here  confounded  Miriam  the  sister  of  Moses  ^\•ith 
]\Iary  the  mother  of  our  Lord.  It  is  possible  indeed 
that  he  may  have  meant  different  persons,  and  such 
is  the  opinion  of  Sale  {Koran,  jip.  38  and  251),  and 
of  D'Herbelot  (Bibl.  Orient,  in  voc.  "Miriam"); 
but  the  opposite  view  is  more  likely  (see  Guadagnoli, 
Apol.  pro  rel.  Christ,  c.  viii.  p.  277,  Rom.  1631). 
Indeed,  some  of  the  Mahometan  commentators  have 
been  driven  to  account  for  the  chronological  diffi- 
culty, by  saying  that  ]\Iiriam  was  miraculously  kept 
alive  from  the  days  of  Moses  in  order  that  slie  might 
be  the  mother  of  Jesus.  Her  mother  Hannah  dedi- 
cated her  to  the  Lord  while  still  in  the  womb,  and 
at  her  birth  "  commended  her  and  her  future  issue 
to  the  protection  of  God  against  Satan."  And 
Hannah  brought  the  child  to  the  Temple  to  be 
educated  by  the  priests,  and  the  priests  disputed 
among  themselves  who  should  take  charge  of  her. 
Zacharias  maintained  that  it  was  his  otHce,  because 
he  had  married  her  aunt.  But  when  the  others 
would  not  give  up  their  claims,  it  was  determined 
that  the  matter  should  be  decided  by  lot.  So  they 
went  to  the  river  Jordan,  twenty-seven  of  them,  each 
man  with  his  rod  ;  and  they  threw  their  rods  into 
the  river,  and  none  of  them  floated  save  that  of 
Zacharias,  whereupon  the  care  of  the  child  was 
committed  to  him  (AlBeidawi;  .lallalo'ddin).  Then 
Zacharias  placed  her  in  an  inner  chamber  by  herself; 
and  though  he  kept  seven  doois  ever  locked  upon 
herJ  he  always  found  her  abundantly  supplied  with 
provisions  winch  God  sent  her  from  paradise,  winter 
fruits  in  summer,  and  summer  fruits  in  winter. 
And  the  angels  said  unto  her,  "  0  Maiy,  verily  God 
hath  chosen  thee,  and  hath  purified  thee,  and  hath 
chosen  thee  above  all  the  women  of  the  world " 
(Koran,  sur.  iii.).  And  she  retired  to  a  place  to- 
wards the  East,  and  Gabriel  appeared  unto  her  and 
said,  "Verily  I  am  the  messenger  of  thy  Lord,  and 
am  sent  to  give  thee  a  holy  Son  "  (sur.  xix.).  And 
the  angels  said,  "  0  Mary,  verily  God  sendeth  thee 
good  tidings  that  thou  shalt  bear  the  Word  proceed- 
ing from  Himself:  His  name  shall  be  Christ  Jesus, 
the  son  of  Mary,  honourable  in  this  world  and  in 


f  Other  stories  make  the  only  entrance  to  bo  by  a  Lidder 
and  a  door  always  kept  locked. 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

the  world  to  come,  and  one  of  tliem  who  appi'o;ich 
near  to  the  presence  of  God :  and  he  shall  speak 
unto  men  in  his  cradle  and  when  he  is  grown  up ; 
and  he  shall  be  one  of  the  righteous."  And  she  said, 
"How  shall  I  have  a  son,  seeing  I  know  not  a  man  ?" 
The  angel  said,  "  So  God  createth  that  which  He 
pleaseth  :  when  He  decreeth  a  thing,  He  only  saith 
unto  it,  '  Be,'  and  it  is.  God  shall  teach  him  the 
scripture  and  wisdom,  and  the  law  and  the  gospel, 
and  shall  appoint  him  His  apostle  to  the  children  of 
Israel  "  (sur.  iii.).  ."^o  God  breathed  of  His  Spirit 
into  the  womb  of  Mary  s  ■  and  she  preserved  her 
chastity  (sur.  Ixvi.)  ;  for  the  Jews  have  spoken 
against  her  a  grievous  calumny  (sur.  iv.).  And  she 
conceiveil  a  son,  and  retired  with  him  apart  to  a 
distant  place  ;  and  the  pains  of  childbirth  came  upon 
her  near  the  trunk  of  a  pilm-tree  ;  and  (Jod  pro- 
vided a  rivulet  for  her,  and  she  shook  the  palm-tree, 
and  it  let  fall  ripe  dates,  and  she  ate  and  drank,  and 
was  calm.  Then  she  carried  the  child  in  her  arms 
to  her  people ;  but  they  said  that  it  was  a  strange 
thing  she  had  done.  Then  she  made  signs  to  the 
child  to  answer  them  ;  and  he  said,  "  Verily  I  am 
the  servant  of  God :  He  hath  given  me  the  book  of 
the  gospel,  and  hath  appointed  me  a  prophet ;  and  He 
hath  made  me  blessed,  wheresoever  I  shall  be  ;  and 
hath  commanded  me  to  observe  prayer  and  to  give 
alms  so  long  as  I  shall  live  ;  and  He  hath  made  me 
dutiful  towards  my  mother,  and  hath  not  made  me 
proud  or  unhappy :  and  peace  be  on  me  the  day 
whereon  I  was  born,  and  the  day  whereon  I  shall 
die,  and  the  day  whereon  1  shall  be  raised  to  life." 
This  was  Jesus  the  Son  of  Mar}-,  the  Word  of  Truth 
concerning  whom  they  doubt  (sur.  six.). 

Mahomet  is  reported  to  have  said  that  many  men 
have  arrived  at  perfection,  but  only  four  women  ; 
and  that  these  are,  Asia  the  wife  of  Pharaoh,  Mary 
the  "daughter  of  Amram,  his  first  wife  Khadijah, 
and  his  daughter  Fatima. 

The  commentators  on  the  Koran  tell  us  that 
every  person  who  comes  into  the  world  is  touched 
at  his  birth  by  the  devil,  and  therefore  cries  out ; 
but  that  God  placed  a  veil  between  Mary  and  her 
Son  and  the  Evil  Spirit,  so  that  he  could  not  reach 
them.  For  which  reason  they  were  neither  of  them 
guilty  of  sin,  like  the  rest  of  the  children  of  Adam. 
This  privilege  they  had  in  answer  to  Hannah's  prayer 
for  their  protection  from  Satan.  (Jallalo'ddin  ;  Al 
Beidawi ;  Kitada.)  The  Immaculate  Conception 
therefore,  we  may  note,  was  a  Mahomet<an  doc- 
trine six  centuries  before  any  Christian  theologians 
or  schoolmen  maintained  it. 

Sale,  Koran,  pp.  39,  79,  250,  458,  Lond.  1734-; 
Warner,  Compendium  Historicum  eorwn  quae  3fu- 
hammedani  de  Chr-isto  tradiderunt,  Lugd.  Bat. 
1643  ;  Guadagnoli,  Apologia  pro  Christiana  Reli- 
gione,  Rom.  1631  ;  D'Herbelot,  Bihliotheque  Orien- 
tale,  p.  583,  Paris,  1697  ;  Weil,  Diblische  Legenden 
der  Muselmdnner,  p.  230,  Frankf.  1845. 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


267 


<e  The  coramentators  have  explained  this  expression 
as  sigiiilying  the  breath  of  Gabriel  (Yahya;  .Jallalo'ddin). 
Hut  this  (loos  not  si'cra  to  have  been  MalKimct's  meaning. 

h  "Origen's  Lament,"  the  "  three  Discourses"  pulilished 
by  Vossius  as  the  work  of  Gregory  Thanmatnrgus,  the 
Homily  attributed  to  St.  Athanasius  containing  an  invo- 
cation of  St.  Mary,  the  Panegyric  attributed  to  St.  Epi- 
phanius,  the  "  Christ  Suffering,"  and  the  Oration  contain- 
ing the  story  of  Justina  and  St,  Cyprian,  attributed  to 
Gregory  Nazianz.en ;  the  Eulogy  of  the  Holy  Virgin, 
and  the  Prayer  attributed  to  Kphrem  Syrus;  the  Buok  of 
Meditjitioiis  attributed  to  St.  Augustine;  the  Two  Ser- 
mons supposed  to  have  been  delivered  by  I'ope  Leo  on 
the  Feast  of  the  Aniumciation, — arc  all  spurious.    See 


VI.  Emblems. —  There  was  a  time  in  the  history 
of  the  Church  when  all  the  expressions  used  in  the 
book  of  Canticles  were  applied  at  once  to  St.  Mary. 
Consequently  all  the  I'Lastern  metaphors  of  king 
Solotnon  have  been  hardened  into  symbols,  and  re- 
presented in  pictures  or  sculpture,  and  attached  to 
her  in  popular  litanies.  The  same  method  of  inter- 
pretation was  applied  to  certain  parts  of  the  book 
of  the  Revelation.  Her  chief  emblems  are  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars  (Rev.  xii.  1  ;  Cant.  vi.  10).  The 
name  of  Star  of  the  Sea  is  also  given  her,  from  a 
fanciful  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of  her  name. 
She  is  the  Rose  of  Sharon  (Cant.  ii.  1 ),  and  the  Lily 
(ii.  2),  the  Tower  of  David  (iv.  4),  the  Mountain 
of  Myn-h  and  the  Hill  of  Frankincense  (iv.  6),  the 
Garden  enclosed,  the  Spring  shut  up,  the  Fountain 
sealed  (iv.  12),  the  Tower  of  Ivory  (vii.  4),  the 
Palm-tree  (vii.  7),  the  Closed  Gate  (Ez.  xliv.  2). 
There  is  no  end  to  these  metaphorical  titles.  See 
Mrs.  Jameson's  Legends  of  the  Madonna,  and  the 
ordinary  Litanies  of  the  B.  Virgin. 

VII.  Cultus  of  the  Blessed  Virgin. — We  do  not 
enter  into  the  theological  bearings  of  the  worship  of 
St.  Mary ;  but  we  shall  have  left  our  task  incom- 
plete if  we  do  not  add  a  short  historical  sketch  of 
the  origin,  progress,  and  present  state  of  the  devo- 
tion to  her.  What  was  its  origin?  Certainly  not 
the  Bible.  There  is  not  a  word  there  fiom  which 
it  could  be  inferred  ;  nor  in  the  Creeds  ;  nor  in  the 
Fathers  of  the  first  five  centuries.  We  may  scan 
each  page  that  they  have  left  us,  and  we  shall  find, 
nothing  of  the  kind.  There  is  nothing  of  the  sort 
in  the  supposed  works  of  Hernias  and  Barnabas, 
nor  in  the  real  works  of  Clement,  Ignatius,  and 
Polycarp :  that  is,  the  doctrine  is  not  to  be  fotmd 
in  the  1  st  century.  There  is  nothing  of  the  sort 
in  Justin  Martyr,  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Theophilus, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian  :  that  is,  in  the 
2nd  century.  There  is  nothing  of  the  sort  in  Ori- 
gen,  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Cyprian,  Methodius, 
Lactantius :  that  is,  in  the  3rd  century.  There  is 
nothing  of  the  sort  in  Eusebius,  Athanasius,  Cyril 
of  Jerusalem,  Hilary,  JIacarius,  Epiphanius,  Basil, 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  Ephrem  Syrus,  Gregory  of 
Nyssa,  Ambrose :  that  is,  in  the  4th  century. 
There  is  nothing  of  the  sort  in  Chrysostom,  Augus- 
tine, Jerome,  Basil  of  Seleucia,  Orosius,  Seduiius. 
Isidore,  Theodoret,  Prosper,  Vincentius  Lirinensis, 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Popes  Leo,  Hilarus,  Siniplicius, 
Felix,  Oelasius,  Anastasius,  Symmachus :  that  is, 
in  the  5th  century.''  Whence,  then,  did  it  arise  ? 
There  is  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  that  the  origin  of 
the  worship  of  St.  Mary  is  to  be  found  in  the  apo- 
cryphal legends  of  her  birth  and  of  her  death  which 
we  have  given  above.  There  we  find  the  germ  of 
what  afterwards  expanded  into  its  present  portentous 
pioportions.  Some  of  the  legends  of  her  biith  are 
as  early  as  the  2nd  or  3rd  century.  They  were  the 
production  of  the  Gnostics,  and  weie  unanimously 

Moral  and  Devotional  Theology  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
(Mozley,  Ijond.  1857).  The  oration  of  Gregory,  cont^iin- 
ing  the  story  of  Justina  and  Cyprian,  is  retained  by  the 
Benedictine  editors  as  genuine  ;  and  they  pronounc<!  that 
nowhere  else  is  the  protection  of  the  Blessed  Virsin  Jlary 
so  clearly  and  explicitly  conimendod  in  the  llh  century. 
The  words  are  .-  "  Justina  . . .  meditating  on  those  instances 
(and  beseeching  the  Virgin  Mary  to  assist  a  virgin  in  peril), 
throws  before  her  the  charm  of  fasting."  It  is  shown  to  be 
spurious  by  Tyler  ( Worship  of  the  Blessed  Virtjin,  p.  378, 
Lond.  1844).  Even  s\lpl)o^e  it  were  genuine,  the  contrast 
between  the  stroTi^csl  passage  of  the  4th  century  and 
the  orditiary  language  of  the  I'.Hh  would  be  sumciently 
striking. 


268 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


and  firmly  rejectpd  by  the  Church  of  the  first  five 
centuries  as  fabulous  and  heretical.  The  Gnostic 
tradition  seems  to  have  been  handed  on  to  the 
Collyi-idians,  whom  we  find  denounced  by  Epi- 
phauius  for  worshipping  the  Vii-gin  Mary.  They 
were  regarded  as  distinctly  heretical.  The  words 
which  this  Father  uses  respecting  them  were  pro- 
bably expressive  of  the  sentiments  of  the  entire 
Church  in  the  4th  century.  "  The  whole  thing," 
he  says,  "  is  foolish  and  strange,  and  is  a  device  and 
deceit  of  the  devil.  Let  JIary  be  in  honour.  Let 
the  Lord  be  worshipped.  Let  no  one  worship  Mary" 
(Epiphan.  Haer.  Ix.xxix.,  Op.  p.  1066,  Paris,  1662). 
Down  to  the  time  of  the  Nestorian  controversy  the 
cultus  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  would  appear  to  have 
been  wholly  external  to  the  Church,  and  to  have 
been  regarded  as  heretical.  But  the  Nestorian  con- 
troversies produced  a  great  change  of  sentiment  in 
njen's  minds.  Nestorius  had  maintained,  or  at  least 
it  was  tlie  tendency  of  Kestorianism  to  maintain, 
not  only  that  our  Lord  had  two  natures,  the  divine 
and  the  human  (which  was  right),  but  also  that 
He  was  two  persons,  in  such  sort  that  the  child  born 
of  Mary  was  not  divine,  but  merely  an  ordinary 
human  being,  until  the  divinity  subsequently  united 
itself  to  Him.  This  was  condemned  by  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  in  the  year  431  ;  and  the  title  @€6tokos, 
loosely  translated  "  IMother  of  God,"  was  sanc- 
tioned. The  object  of  the  Council  and  of  the  Anti- 
Nestorians  was  in  no  sense  to  add  honour  to  the 
mother,  but  to  maintain  the  true  doctrine  with 
respect  to  the  Son.  Nevertheless  the  result  was 
to  magnify  the  mother,  and,  after  a  time,  at  the 
expense  of  the  Son.  For  now  the  title  0€ot({kos 
became  a  shibboleth  ;  and  in  art  the  representation  of 
the  Madonna  and  Child  became  the  expression  of  or- 
thodox belief.  Very  soon  the  purpose  for  which  the 
title  and  the  picture  were  first  sanctioned  became 
.forgotten,  and  the  veneration  of  St.  Mary  began  to 
spread  within  the  Church,  as  it  had  previously  ex- 
isted external  to  it.  The  legends  too  were  no  longer 
treated  so  roughly  as  before.  The  Gnostics  were 
not  now  objects  of  dread.  Nestorians,  and  afterwards 
Iconoclasts,  were  objects  of  hatred.  The  old  fables 
were  winked  at,  and  thus  they  "  became  the  mytho- 
logy of  Christianity,  universally  credited  among  the 
Southern  nations  of  Europe,  while  many  of  the 
doo-mas,  which  they  are  grounded  upon,  have,  as 
a  natural  consequence,  crept  into  the  faith  "  (Lord 
Lindsay,  Christian  Art,  i.  p.  xl.  Lond.  1847).  From 
this  time  the  worship  of  St.  Mary  grew  apace.  It 
Mt'reed  well  with  many  natural  aspirations  of  the 
heart.  To  paint  the  mother  of  the  Saviour  an  i(leal 
woman,  with  all  the  grace  and  tenderness  of  woman- 
hood, and  yet  with  none  of  its  weaknesses,  and  then 
to  fall  down  and  worship  the  image  which  the  ima- 
gination had  set  up,  was  what  might  easily  happen, 
:uid  what  did  happen.  Evidence  was  not  asked  tor. 
Perfection  "  was  becoming"  to  the  mother  of  the 
Lord;  therefore  she  was  perfect.  Adoration  "was 
befitting"  on  the  part  of  Christians ;  therefore  they 
gave  \i.  Any  tales  attributed  to  antiquity  were  re- 
ceived as  genuine  ;  any  revelations  supposed  to  be 
made  to  favoured  saints  were  accepted  as  true: 
and  the  Madonna  reignSd  as  queen  in  heaven,  in 
earth,  in  purgatory,  and  over  hell.  We  learn  the 
present  state  of  the  religious  regard  in  which  she  is 
hold  throughout  the  south  of  Europe  from  St.  Al- 
fonso de'  Liguori,  whose  every  word  is  vouched  for 
by  the  whole  weight  of  his  Church's  authoiity. 
From  the  Glories  of  Mari/,  ti'anslated  fiom  the 
original,  and  published  in  London  in  1852,  we  find 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

that  St.  Mary  is  Queen  of  Mercy  (p.  13)  and 
Mother  of  all  mankind  (p.  23),  our  Life  (p.  52),  , 
our  Protectress  in  death  (p.  71),  the  Hope  of  all 
(p.  79),  our  only  Kefuge,  Help,  and  Asylum  (p. 
81)  ;  the  Propitiatory  of  the  whole  world  (p.  81)  ; 
the  one  City  of  Refuge  (p.  89)  ;  the  Comlbrtress  of 
the  world,  the  Refuge  of  the  unfortunate  (p.  100)  ; 
our  Patroness  (p.  106);  Queen  of  Heaven  and  Hell 
(p.  110);  our  Protectress  from  the  Divine  Justice 
and  from  the  Devil  (p.  11.5);  the  Ladder  of  Para- 
dise, the  Gate  of  Heaven  fp.  121);  the  Mediatrix 
of  grace  (p.  124);  the  Dispenser  of  all  graces  (p. 
128)  ;  the  Helper  of  the  Redemption  (p.  133)  ;  the 
Co-operator  in  our  Justification  (p.  133);  a  tender 
Advocate  (p.  145)  ;  Omnipotent  (p.  146)  ;  the  sin- 
gular Refuge  of  the  lost  (p.  156)  ;  the  great  Peace- 
maker (p.  165)  ;  the  Throne  prepared  in  mercy 
(p.  165);  the  Way  of  Salvation  (p.  200);  the 
Mediatrix  of  Angels  (p.  278).  In  short,  she  is 
the  Way  (p.  200),  the  Door  (p.  583),  the  Mediator 
(p.  295),  the  Intercessor  (p.  129),  the  Advocate  (p. 
144),  the  Redeemer  (p.  275),  the  Saviour  (p.  343). 

Thus,  then,  in  the  worship  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
there  are  two  distinctly  mai'ked  periods.  The  first 
is  that  which  commences  with  the  apostolic  times, 
and  brings  us  down  to  the  close  of  the  centuiy  in 
which  the  Council  of  Ephesus  was  held,  during  which 
time  the  worship  of  St.  Mary  was  wholly  external  to 
the  Church,  and  was  regarded  by  the  Church  as  he- 
retictil,  and  confined  to  Gnostic  and  Collyridian  here- 
tics. The  second  period  commences  with  the  6th 
century,  when  it  began  to  spread  within  the  Church  ; 
and,  in  spite  of  the  shock  given  it  by  the  Reformation, 
has  continued  to  spread,  as  .shown  by  Liguori's 
teaching ;  and  is  spi-eading  still,  as  shown  by  thi' 
manner  in  which  the  papal  decree  of  Dec.  8,  1854, 
has  been,  not  rmiversally  indeed,  but  yet  generally, 
received.  Even  before  that  decree  was  issued}  the 
sound  of  the  word  "  deification  "  had  been  heard 
with  reference  to  St.  Mary  (Newman,  Essay  on 
Development,  p.  4o9,  Lond.  1846) ;  and  she  had 
been  placed  in  "  a  throne  far  above  all  created 
powers,  mediatorial,  intercessory ;"  she  had  been 
invested  with  "  a  title  archetypal  ;  with  a  crown 
bright  as  the  morning  star ;  a  glory  issuing  from 
the  Eternal  Throne ;  robes  puie  as  the  heavens  ; 
and  a  sceptre  over  all"  (^ibid.  p.  406). 

Mil.  Her  Assumption. — Not  only  religious  senti- 
ments, but  facts  grew  up  in  e.xactlv  the  same  way. 
The  Assumption  of  St.  Mary  is  a  fact,  or  an  alleged 
fact.  How  has  it  come  to  be  accepted  ?  At  the  end 
of  the  5th  century  we  find  that  there  existed  a  book, 
De  Transitu  Virginis  Mariae,  wliich  was  condemned 
by  Pope  Gelasius  as  apocryphal.  This  book  is  with- 
out doubt  the  oldest  form  of  the  legend,  of  which  the 
books  ascribed  to  St.  Melito  and  St.  John  are  varia- 
tions. Down  to  the  end  of  the  5th  century,  then, 
the  story  of  the  Assumption  was  external  to  the 
Church,  and  distinctly  looked  upon  by  the  Church 
as  belonging  to  the  heretics  and  not  to  her.  But 
then  came  the  change  of  sentiment  already  refen-ed 
to,  consequent  on  the  Nestorian  controversy.  The 
desire  to  protest  against  the  early  fables  which  had 
been  spiead  abroad  by  the  heretics  was  now  passed 
away,  and  had  been  succeecled  by  the  desire  to 
magnify  her  who  had  brought  forth  Him  who  was 
God.  Accordingly  a  writer,  whose  date  Baroiiius 
fixes  at  about  this  time  {An7i.  Ecc.l.  i.  347,  Lucca, 
1738),  suggested  the  possibiUty  of  the  Assumption, 
but  declared  his  inability  to  decide  the  question. 
The  letter  in  which  this  possibility  or  probability 
is  thrown  out  canie  to  be  attributed  to  St.  Jerome, 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

and  may  be  still  t'ouiul  among  his  works,  entitled 
Ad  Panlain  ct  Eustochium  ilo  Assumptione  II.  T  jV- 
^inis  (V.  8'2,  Paris,  1706).  About  the  same  time, 
piobably,  or  rather  later,  an  insertion  (now  recog- 
nized on  all  hands  to  be  a  forgery)  was  made  in 
Eusebius'  Chronicle,  to  the  efl'ect  that  "  in  the  year 
A.D.  48  Mary  the  Vii-gin  was  taken  up  into  heaven, 
as  some  wiote  that  they  had  had  it  revealed  to 
them."  Another  tract  was  written  to  prove  that 
the  Assumption  was  not  a  thing-  in  itself  unlikely ; 
and  this  came  to  be  attributed  to  St.  Augustine, 
and  may  be  found  in  the  appendix  to  his  works : 
and  a  sermon,  with  a  similar  purport,  was  ascribed 
to  St.  Athanasius.  Thus  the  names  of  Eusebius, 
Jerome,  Augustine,  Athanasius,  and  others,  came 
to  be  quoted  as  maintaining  the  truth  of  the 
Assumption.  The  first  writers  within  the  Church 
in  whose  extant  writings  we  find  the  Assumption 
asserted,  are  Gregory  of  Tours  in  the  6th  century, 
who  has  merely  copied  Melito's  book,  De  Transitu 
{De  Glor.  Mart.  lib.  i.  c.  4;  Migne,  71,  p.  708); 
Andrew  of  Crete,  who  probably  lived  in  the  7th 
century  ;  and  John  of  Damascus,  who  lived  at  the 
beginning  of  the  8th  century.  The  last  of  these 
authors  refers  to  the  Euthymiac  history  as  stating 
that  Marcian  and  Pulcheiia  being  in  search  of  the 
body  of  St.  Mary,  sent  to  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem  to 
inquire  for  it.  Juvenal  replied,  "  In  the  holy  and 
divinely  inspired  Scriptures,  indeed,  nothing  is  re- 
corded of  the  departure  of  the  holy  Mary,  Mother 
of  God.  But  from  an  ancient  and  most  true  tra- 
dition we  have  received,  that  at  the  time  of  her 
glorious  falling  asleep  all  the  holy  apostles,  who 
were  going  through  the  world  for  the  salvation  of 
the  nations,  borne  aloft  in  a  moment  of  time,  came 
together  to  Jerusalem :  and  when  they  were  near 
her  they  had  a  vision  of  angels,  and  divine  melody 
was  heard ;  and  then  with  divine  and  more  than 
heavenly  melody  she  delivered  her  holy  soul  into 
the  hands  of  God  in  an  unspeakable  manner.  But 
that  which  had  borne  God,  being  carried  with  angelic 
and  apostolic  psalmody,  with  funeral  rites,  was  de- 
jwsited  in  a  codiu  at  Gethsemane.  In  this  place  the 
chorus  and  singing  of  the  angels  continued  three 
whole  days.  But  after  three  days,  on  the  angelic 
music  ceasing,  those  of  the  apostles  who  were  present 
opened  the  tomb,  as  one  of  them,  Thomas,  had  been 
absent,  and  on  his  arrival  wished  to  adore  the  body 
which  had  borne  God.  But  her  all  glorious  body 
they  could  not  find  ;  but  fhey  found  the  linen  clothes 
lying,  and  they  were  filled  with  an  ineflflible  odoiu- 
of  sweetness  which  proceeded  from  them.  Then  they 
closed  the  coffin.  And  they  were  astonished  at  the 
mysterious  wonder ;  and  they  came  to  no  other 
conclusion  than  that  He  who  had  chosen  to  take 
flesh  of  the  \'irgin  Mary,  and  to  become  a  man, 
and  to  b(;  born  of  hei- — God  the  Word,  the  Lord  of 
Glory — and  had  preserved  her  virginity  after  birth, 
w.is  also  plea-sed,  after  her  dejjarture,  to  honour  her 
immaculate  and  unpolluted  bo<ly  with  incorruption, 
and  to  translate  her  before  the  common  resurrection 
of  all  men"  (St.  Joan.  Damasc.  0^.  ii.  880,  Venice, 
1748).  It  is  (juite  clear  that  this  is  the  same  legend 
as  that  which  wc  have  before  given.  Here,  then, 
we  see  it  brought  over  the  borders  and  planted 
within  the  Church,  if  this  "  Euthymiac  history  " 
is  to  be  accepted  as  veritable,  by  Juvenal  of  Jeru- 
salem in  the  5th  centnjy,  or  else  by  Gregory  of 
Tours  in  the  6th  century,  or  b}'  Andrew  of  Crete 


MAKY  THE  VIRGIN 


269 


■  This  "  Eulhyniiac  Histoi-y  "  is  invcilved  in  the  utmost 
confusion.     Cave  considers   tl)c  Iloinily  jiroved   spurious 


in  the  7th  century,  or  finally,  by  John  of  Da- 
mascus in  the  8th  century  (see  his  three  Homilies 
on  the  Sleep  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  Op.  ii. 
857-886).'  The  same  legend  is  given  in  a  slightly 
diflerent  form  as  veritable  history  by  Nicephorus 
Callistus  in  the  13th  century  ;^Niceph.  i.  171,  Paris, 
1630)  ;  and  the  fact  of  the  Assumption  is  stereo- 
typed in  the  Breviary  Services  for  Aug.  15th  {Brev. 
Rom.  Pars  aest.  p.  551,  Milan,  1851).  Here  again, 
then,  we  see  a  legend  oi'i^nated  by  heretics,  and 
i-emaining  extei-nal  to  the  Church  till  the  close  of 
the  5th  century,  creeping  into  the  Church  during 
the  6th  and  7th  centuries,  and  finally  ratified  by 
the  authority  both  of  Rome  and  Constantinople. 
SeeBaronius,  Ann.  Eccl.  (i.  344,  Lucca,  1738),  and 
Martyrolog-ium  (p.  314,  Paris,  1607). 

IX.  Her  Immaculate  Conception.  —  Similarly 
with  regard  to  the  sinlessness  of  St.  Mary,  which 
has  issued  in  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception. Down  to  the  close  of  the  5th  century 
the  sentiment  with  respect  to  her  was  identical 
with  that  which  is  expressed  by  theologians  of  the 
Church  of  England  (see  Pearson,  On  the  Creed).  She 
was  legarded  as  "  highly  favoured ;"  as  a  woman 
arriving  ari  near  the  perfection  of  womanhood  as  it 
was  possible  for  human  nature  to  arrive,  but  yet 
liable  to  the  infirmities  of  human  nature,  and  some- 
times led  away  by  them.  Thus,  in  the  2ud  cen- 
tury, Tertulliau  represents  her  as  guilty  of  unbelief 
[De  came  Christi,  vii.  315,  and  Adv.  Marcion. 
iv.  19,  p.  433,  Paris,  1695).  In  the  3rd  century, 
Origen  interprets  the  sword  which  was  to  pierce  her 
bosom  as  being  her  unbelief,  v^rhich  caused  her  to 
be  otiended  {Horn,  in  Luc.  xvii.  iii.  952,  Paris, 
1733).  In  the  4th  ceutury  St.  Basil  gives  the 
same  interpretation  of  Simeon's  words  {Ep.  260,  iii. 
400,  Paris,  1721);  and  St.  Hilary  speaks  of  her 
as  having  to  come  into  the  severity  of  the  final 
judgment  (In  Ps.  cxix.  p.  262,  Paris,  1693).  In 
the  5th  century  St.  Chrysostom  speaks  of  the 
"  excessive  ambition,"  "  foolish  arrogancy,"  and 
"  vain-glory,"  which  made  her  stand  and  desire 
to  speak  with  Him  (vii.  467,  Paris,  1718);  and 
St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  (so  entirely  is  he  misrepre- 
sented by  popular  writers)  speaks  of  her  as  failing  in 
faith  when  present  at  the  Passion — as  being  weaker 
in  the  spiritual  life  thau  St.  Peter — as  being  en- 
trusted to  St.  John,  because  he  was  capable  of 
explaining  to  her  the  mystery  of  the  Cross — as 
inferior  to  the  apostles  in  knowledge  and  belief  of 
the  resurrection  (iv.  1064,  vi.  391,  Paris,  1638). 
It  is  plain  from  these  and  other  passages,  which 
might  be  quoted,  that  the  idea  of  St.  Mary's  exemp- 
tion from  even  actual  sins  of  infirmity  and  irnperfec- 
tion,  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  external  to  the  Church. 
Nevertheless  there  grew  up,  as  was  most  natural,  a 
practice  of  looking  upon  St.  Mary  as  an  example  to 
other  women,  and  investing  her  with  an  ideal  cha- 
racter of  beauty  and  sweetness.  A  vei-y  beautiful 
picture  of  what  a  giil  ought  to  be  is  drawn  by 
St.  Ambiose  {De  Virgin,  ii.  2,  p.  164,  I'aris,  1690), 
•and  attiiched  to  St.  Mary.  It  is  drawn  wholly  from 
the  imagination  (as  may  be  seen  by  his  making  one 
of  her  characteristics  to  be  that  she  nerer  went  out 
of  iloors  except  when  she  accompanied  her  parents 
to  church),  but  there  is  nothing  in  it  which  is  in 
any  way  superhuman.  Sinfilarly  we  find  St.  .Je- 
rome speaking  of  the  clear  light  of  Mary  hiding  the 
little  fires  of  other  women,  such  as  Anna  and  Eli.sa- 

by  its  reference  to  it.  See  Historia  Literar.  i.  5S2,  G25, 
0x1.  1740. 


270 


MAKY 


beth  (vi.  671,  Verona,  1734).  St.  Augustine 
takes  us  a  step  further.  He  again  and  again  speaks 
of  her  as  under  original  sin  (iv.  241,  x.  654,  &c., 
Paris,  1700) ;  but  with  respect  to  her  actual  sin  he 
says  that  he  would  rather  not  enter  on  the  ques- 
tion, for  it  was  possible  (how  could  we  tell?)  that 
God  had  given  lier  sufficient  grace  to  keep  her  free 
from  actual  sin  (x.  144).  At  this  time  the  change 
of  mind  before  refen-ed  to,  sss  originated  by  the 
Nestorian  controversies,  was  spreading  within  the 
Church  ;  and  it  became  more  and  more  the  general 
belief  that  St.  Mary  was  preserved  fi'om  actual  sin 
by  the  grace  of  God.  This  opinion  had  become 
almost  universal  in  the  r2th  century.  And  now  a 
fuj-ther  step  was  taken.  It  was  maintained  by  St. 
Bernard  that  St.  Mary  was  conceived  in  original  sin, 
but  that  before  her  birth  she  was  cleansed  from  it, 
like  John  the  Baptist  and  Jeremiah.  This  was  the 
sentiment  of  the  13th  century,  as  shown  by  the 
works  of  Peter  Lombard  {Sentent.  lib.  iii.  dist.  3), 
Alexander  of  Hales  {Sum.  Theol.  num.  ii.  art.  2), 
Albertus  Magnus  (Sentent.  lib.  iii.  dist.  3),  and 
Thomas  Aquinas  (Sum.  Theol.  quaest.  xxvii.  art. 
1,  and  Coinia.  in  Lib.  Senient.  dist.  3,  quaest.  1). 
Early  in  the  14th  century  died  J.  Duns  Scotus,  and 
he  is  the  first  theologian  or  schoolman  who  threw 
out  as  a  possibility  the  idea  of  an  Immaculate  Con- 
ception, which  would  exempt  St.  Mary  from  original 
as  well  as  actual  sin.  This  opinion  had  been  growing 
up  for  the  two  previous  centuries,  having  originated 
apparently  in  France,  and  having  been  adopted,  to 
St.  Bernard's  indignation,  by  the  canons  of  Lyons. 
From  this  time  forward  there  was  a  struggle  between 
the  maculate  and  immaculate  conceptionists,  which 
has  led  at  length  to  the  decree  of  Dec.  8,  1854,  but 
which  has  not  ceased  with  that  decree.  Here,  then, 
we  may  mark  four  distinct  theories  with  respect  to 
the  sinlessness  of  St.  Mary.  The  first  is  that  of  the 
early  Church  to  the  close  of  the  5th  century.  It 
taught  that  vSt.  Mary  was  bom  in  original  sin,  was 
liable  to  actual  sin,  and  that  she  fell  into  sins  of 
infirmity.  The  second  extends  from  the  close  of  the 
5th  to  the  12th  century.  It  tiught  that  St.  Mary 
was  born  in  original  sin,  but  by  God's  grace  was 
saved  from  falling  into  actual  sins.  The  third  is 
par  excellence  that  of  the  13th  century.  It  tauglit 
that  St.  Mary  was  conceived  in  original  sin,  but  was 
sanctified  in  the  womb  before  birth.  The  fourth 
may  be  found  obscurely  existing,  but  only  existing 
to  be  condemned,  in  the  12th  and  13th  centuries  ; 
brought  into  the  light  by  the  speculations  of  Scotus 
and  his  followers  in  the  14th  century ;  thencefor- 
ward running  jiaiallel  with  and  struggling  with  the 
sanctificdta  in  utero  theoiy,  till  it  obtained  its  appa- 
rently final  victory,  so  lar  as  the  Roman  Chuich  is 
concerned,  in  the  1 9th  century,  and  in  the  lifetime  of 
ourselves.  It  teaches  that  St.  Mary  was  not  conceived 
or  boni  in  original  sin,  but  has  been  wholly  exempt 
from  all  sin,  oiiginal  and  actual,  in  her  conception 
and  birth,  throughout  her  life,  and  in  her  death. 

See  Laborde,  La  Croyance  a  f  l/nmaculee  Con- 
ception ne  pent  devenir  Dogme  de  Foi,  Paris,  1 855  ; 
Perrone,  De  Immaculato  B.  V.  M.  ConcepLu, 
Avenione,  1848 ;  Christian  Remembrancer,  vols, 
xxiii.  and  xxxvii.  ;  Bp.  Wilberforce,  Rome — her 
new  Dogma,  and  our  Duties,  Oxf.  1855;  Obser- 
vateur  Catholique,  Paris,  1855-60  ;  Fray  Morgaez, 
Examen  Bullae  Ineffabilis,  Paris,  1858.    [F.  M.] 

MARY  (Rec.  Text,  with  D,  Mapia/^ ;  Lach- 
niann,  with  ABC,  Mapia  :  Maria),  a  Roman 
Christian  who  is  gieeted  by  St.  Paul  in  his  E]iistle 
to  the  Romans  fxvi.  6)  as  having  toiled  hard  for 


MASCHIL 

him — or  according  to  some  MSS.  for  them.  No- 
thing more  is  known  other.  But  Professor  Jowett 
{The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  &c.  ad  loc.)  has  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  hers  is  the  only  Jewish 
name  in  the  list.  [G.] 

MAS'ALOTH  {MeffaXciO  ;  Alex.  neffaaXwO  : 
Masaloth),  a  place  in  Arbela,  which  Bacchides  and 
Alcimus,  the  two  generals  of  Demetrius,  besieged 
and  took  with  great  slaughter  on  their  way  from 
the  north  to  Gilgal  (1  Mace.  ix.  2).  Arbela  is  pro- 
bably the  modern  Irbid,  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Wadij  el-HUmdm,  about  3  miles  N.W.  of  Tiberias, 
and  half  that  distance  from  the  Lake.  The  name 
Mesaloth  is  omitted  liy  Josephus  (^Ant.  xii.  11,  §1), 
nor  has  any  trace  of  it  been  since  discovered;  but  the 
word  may,  as  Robinson  (B.  E.  ii.  398)  suggests,  have 
originally  signified  the  "  steps  "  or  "  terraces  "  (as  if 

m?DJD).     In  that  case  it  was  probably  a   name 

given  to  the  remarkable  caverns  still  existing  on 
the  northern  side  of  the  same  Wady,  and  now  called 
Knla'at  Ibn  Ma'an,  the  "fortress  of  the  son  of 
Maan" — caverns  which  actually  stood  a  remarkable 
siege  of  some  length,  by  the  forces  of  Herod  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  i.  16,  §4). 

A  town  \vith  the  similar  name  of  Mishal,  or 
Mashal,  occurs  in  the  list,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  but 
whether  its  position  was  near  that  assumed  above 
for  Masaloth,  we  have  no  means  of  judging.     [G.] 

MAS'CHIL  ('7''3b'0  :  ffive^is  :  intellectus, 
but  in  Ps.  liii.  intelligentict).  The  title  of  thirteen 
Psalms;  xxxii.,  xlii.,  xliv.,  xlv.,  lii.-lv.,  Ixxiv., 
lxx\'iii.,  Ixxxviii.,  Ixxsix.,  cxlii.  Jerome  in  his 
version  from  the  Hebrew  renders  it  uniformly  eru- 
ditio,  "  instruction,"  except  in  Pss.  xlii.,  Ixxxix., 
where  he  has  intellectus,  "  understanding."  The 
maigin  of  our  A.  V.  has  in  Pss.  Ixxiv.,  Ixxviii., 
Ixxxix.,  "  to  give  instruction ;"  and  in  Pss.  Ixxxviii., 
cxlii.,  "  giving  instruction."  In  other  passages  in 
which  the  word  occurs  it  is  rendered  "wise"  (Job 
xxii.  2  ;  Prov.  x.  5,  19,  &c.),  "  prudent"  (Prov. 
.xix.  14;  Am.  v.  13),  "expert"  (Jer.  iv.  9),  and 
"  skilful"  (Dan.  i.  4).  In  the  Psalm  in  which  it 
first  occurs  as  a  title,  the  root  of  the  word  is  found  in 
another  form  (Ps.  xxxii.  8),  "I  will  instruct 
thee,"  from  which  circumstance,  it  has  been  in- 
ferred, the  title  was  applied  to  the  whole  Psalm 
as  "  didactic."  But  since  "  Jlaschil"  is  affixed  to 
many  Psalms  which  would  scarcely  be  classed  as 
didactic,  Geseniiis  (or  rather  Roediger)  explains  it 
as  denoting  "  any  sacred  song,  relating  to  divine 
things,  whose  end  it  was  to  promote  wisdom  and 
piety"  {Thes.  p.  1330).  Ewald  {Dichter  d.  alt.  B. 
i.  25)  regards  Ps.  xlvii.  7  (A.  V.  "  sing  ye  praises 
ii:ith  imdcrstanding  ;"  Heb.  maschil),  as  the  key  to 
the  meaning  of  Maschil,  which  in  his  opinion  is  a 
musical  term,  denoting  a  melody  requiring  great 
skill  in  its  execution.  The  objection  to  the  expla- 
nation of  Roediger  is,  that  it  is  wanting  in  precision, 
and  would  allow  the  term  "  Maschil"  to  be  applied 
to  every  P.salin  ia  the  Psalter.  That  it  is  employed 
to  indicate  to  the  conductor  of  the  I'emple  choir  the 
manner  in  which  the  Psalm  was  to  be  sung,  or  the 
melody  to  which  it  was  adapted,- rather  than  as  de- 
scriptive of  its  contents,  seems  to  be  implied  in  the 
title  of  Ps.  xlv.,  where,  after  "  Jlaschil,"  is  added 
"  a  song  of  loves  "  to  denote  the  special  character  of 
the  Psalm.  Again,  with  few  exceptions,  it  is  asso- 
ciated with  directions  for  the  clioir,  "  to  the  chief 
musician,"  &c.,  and  occupies  the  same  position  in 
the  titles  as  Michtam  (Ps.  xvi.,  Ivi.-lx.),   Mizmor 


MASH 

(A.  V.  "  Psalm ;"  Ps.  iv.-vi.,  &c.),  and  Shiijfjaio7i 
(Ps.  vii.).  It',  therefore,  we  I'egard  it  as  nrioinally 
used,  in  the  sense  of  "  didactic,"  to  indicate  tlie  cha- 
racter of  one  particular  Psalm,  it  might  liave  been 
applied  to  others  as  being  set  to  the  melody  of  the  ori- 
ginal Maschil-l'salm.  But  the  suggestion  of  Ewald, 
given  above,  has  most  to  commend  it.  Comparing 
"  Maschil  "  with  the  musical  terms  already  alluded 
to,  and  obsen'ing  the  difi'erent  manner  in  which  the 
character  of  a  psalm  is  indicated  in  other  instances 
(1  Chr.  xvi.  7  ;  Pss.  xxxviii.,  Ixx.,  titles),  it  seems 
probable  that  it  was  used  to  convey  a  direction  to 
the  singers  as  to  the  mode  in  which  they  were  to 
sing.  There  appear  to  have  been  Maschils  of  dif- 
ferent kinds,  for  in  addition  to  those  of  David  which 
form  the  greater  number,  there  are  others  of  A±;aph 
(Pss.  L\xiv.,lxxviii.),  Heman  the  Ezrahite  (Ixxxviii.), 
and  Ethan  (Ixxxix.).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MASH  (C'D :  Moo-f^x  =  ^^''s)'  one  of  the  sons 
of  Aram,  and  the  brother  of  Uz,  Hul,  and  Gether 
(Gen.  X.  23).  In  1  Chr.  i.  17  the  name  appears  as 
Meshech,  and  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.,  as  above 
given,  leads  to  the  inference  that  a  similar  form  also 
existed  in  some  of  the  copies  of  Genesis.  It  may 
further  be  noticed  that  in  the  Chronicles,  Mash  and 
his  brothers  are  described  as  sons  of  Shem  to  the  omis- 
sion of  Aram  ;  this  discrepancy  is  easily  explained  : 
the  links  to  connect  the  names  are  omitted  in  othei- 
instances  (comp.  ver.  4),  the  ethnologist  evidently 
assumnig  that  they  were  familiar  to  his  readers. 
As  to  the  geographical  position  of  Mash,  Josephus 
{Ant.  i.  6,  §4)  connects  the  name  with  Mesene  in 
lower  Babylonia,  on  the  .shores  of  the  Persian 
Gulf — a  locality  too  remote,  however,  from  the 
other  branches  of  the  Aramaic  race.  The  more 
probable  opinion  is  that  which  has  been  adopted  by 
Bochait  {Phiil.  ii.  11),  Winer  [Rwb.  s.  v.),  and 
Knobel  {Volkcrt.  p.  2.37) — viz.  that  the  name 
Mash  is  represented  by  the  Mons  M-dsius  of 
classical  writers,  a  range  which  forms  the  northern 
boundary  of  Mesopotamia,  between  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates  (Strab.  xi.  pp.  50fi,  .527).  Knobel 
reconciles  this  view  with  that  of  Josephus  by  the 
supposition  of  a  migration  from  the  north  of  Meso- 
potamia to  the  south  of  Babylonia,  where  the  race 
may  have  been  known  in  later  times  under  the 
name  of  Meshech :  the  progress  of  the  population 
in  these  parts  was,  however,  in  an  opposite  direc- 
tion, from  south  to  north.  Kalisch  fComm.  on  Gen. 
J).  286)  connects  the  names  of  Mash  and  Mysia : 
this  is,  to  say  the  least,  extremely  doubtful ;  both 
the  Mysians  themselves  and, their  name  (  =  Moesiri) 
were  probably  of  European  origin.         [VV.  L.  B.] 

MASH'AL  {•'PC'D :  Moao-5  :  Masai),  the  con- 
tractual or  provincial  ((ialilcan)  form  in  which,  in 
the  later  list  of  Levitical  cities  (1  Chr.  vi.  74),  the 
name  of  the  town  appears,  which  in  the  earlier  re- 
cords is  given  as  Misiii;al  and  Mishal.  It  suggests 
the  Masalotii  of  the  Macaibean  history.        [G.] 

MASI'AS  (Mi(rams;  Alex.  Mocrias :  Malsith), 
one  ol' the  servants  of  Solomon,  whose  descendants 
returned  with  Zorobabel  (1  Esdr.  v.  34). 

MAS'MAN  (Mafr/ucti/;  Alex.  MaatTjUai' :  Mas- 
man^.  This  name,  occurs  for  Siikmaiaii  in  1  Esd. 
viii.  43  (comp.  Ezr.  viii.  It!).  The  Greek  text  is 
evidently  coirupt,  Sojuaias  (A.  V.  I\[.nnaias),  which 
is  the  true  reading,  being  misplaced  in  ver.  44  after 
Alnathan. 

MASORA.     [Oi,n  Ti.stamknt.] 


MASTICH-TREE 


271 


MASTHA.  1.  (Ma(ro-rj<^ae;  A\o\.ma.<Tff7](pa: 
Maspha.)  A  place  opposite  to  {Karevavri)  Jeru- 
salem, at  which  Judas  Maccabaeus  and  his  tbliowers 
assembled  themselves  to  bewail  the  desolation  oi 
the  city  and  the  s-anctuary,  and  to  inflame  their  re- 
sentment before  the  battle  of  Emmaus,  by  tlie  sight, 
not  only  of  the  distant  city,  which  was  probably 
visible  from  the  eminence,  but  also  of  the  Book  of 
the. Law  mutilated  and  profaned,  and  of  other 
objects  of  peculiar  preciousness  and  sanctity  ( 1  Mace, 
iii.  46).  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  is  identical 
with  MizPEH  of  Benjamin,  the  ancient  sanctuary 
at  which  Samuel  had  convened  the  people  on  an 
occasion  of  equal  emergency.  In  fact,  Maspha,  or 
more  accurately  Massepha,  is  merely  the  tbrm  in 
which  the  LXX.  uniformly  render  the  HebrAv 
name  Mizpeli. 

2.  (Maapcjjd  in  both  MSS.  ;  but  .losephus  Md\- 
Atjj/  :  Maspha.)  One  of  the  cities  which  were  taken 
from  the  Ammonites  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  in  his 
campaign  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Mace.  v.  35). 
It  is  jirobably  the  ancient  city  of  Mizpeh  of  Gilead. 
The   Syiiac   has    the   cui'ious    variation    of   Oliin, 

)Q^^J»  "  salt."  Perhaps  Josephus  also  reads  PITO 
"  salt."  ■  [G.j 

MASRE'KAH  (ni^X'D:  MaaaeKKus,  in 
Chron.  MaffeKKus,  and  so  Alex,  in  both  :  Mase- 
reca,  Maresca^,  an  ancient  place,  the  native  spot 
of  Samlah,  one  of  the  old  kings  of  the  Edomites 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  36 ;  1  Chr.  i.  47).  Interpreted  as 
Hebrew,  the  name  refers  to  vineyards — as  if  fi-om 
Sarak,  a  root  with  which  we  are  familiar  in  the 
"  vine  of  Sorek,"  that  is,  the  choice  vine  ;  and  led 
by  this,  Knobel  {Genesis,  257)  proposes  to  place 
Masrekah  in  the  district  of  the  Idumaean  mountains 
north  of  Petra,  and  along  the  Hadj  route,  where 
Burckliai'dt  found  "extensive  vineyards,"  and  "gieat 
quantities  of  dried  grapes,"  made  by  the  tribe  of  the 
Refaija  for  the  supjily  of  Gaza  and  for  the  Mecca 
pilgrims  (Burckhardt,  Si/ria,  Aug.  21).  But  this 
is  mere  conjecture,  as  no  name  at  all  corresponding 
with  Masrekah  has  been  yet  discovered  in  that  loca- 
lity. Schwarz  (215)  mentions  a  site  called  En- 
Masrak,  a  few  miles  south  of  Petra.  He  probably 
refers  to  the  place  marked  Ain  Mafrak  in  Palmer's 
Map,  and  Ain  el-  Usdaka  in  Kiepert's  (liobinson,  Bib. 
Res.  1856).  The  versions  are  unanimous  in  adhering 
moie  or  less  closely  to  the  Hebrew.  [G.] 

MAS'SA  (Nb)D :  Moo-o-^ :  Massa),  a  son  of 
Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv.  14;  1  Chr.  i.  30).  His  de- 
scendants were  not  improbably  the  Masani,  who 
are  placed  by  Ptolemy  (v.  19,  §2)  in  the  east  of 
Arabia,  near  the  bordeis  of  Babylonia.  [VV.  L.  B.] 

MASSAH  (HDD  :  Treipaanhs),  i.  e.  "  tempta- 
tion," a  name  given  to  the  spot,  also  called  Meri- 
BAII,  where  the  Israelites  "  tempted  Jehovah, 
saying,  Is  Jehovah  among  us  or  not?"  (Ex.  xvi. 
7).  The  name  also  occurs,  with  mention  of  the 
circumstances  which  occasioned  it,  in  Ps.  xi'v.  8,  9, 
and  its  Greek  equivalent  in  Ileb.  iii.  8.      [H.  H.] 

MASSI'AS  (-Mao-o-iuj :  Hismaenis)  =  Maa- 
Skiaii  ;i  (1  Esd.  ix.  22;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  22). 

MASTICH-TREE  {ax^vos,  Icntiscus)  occurs 
only  in  the  Apocrypha  (Susan,  ver.  54"),  where  the 

"  This  verse  contains  a  happy  play  upon  the  word. 
"  Undi-r  what  tree  sawpst  thou  thorn  ?  .  .  .  under  a  niustich- 
tree  (i'itto  (T,Yiroi).     Anil  UiuiicI  said  .  .  .  the  angel  of  God 


272 


MASTICH-TREE 


margin  of  the  A.  V.  has  lentisk.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  the  Greek  word  is  con-ectly  rendered,  as 
is  evident  from  the  description  of  it  by  Theophrastus 
{Hist.  Plant,  ix.  i.  §2,  4,  §7,  &c.) ;  Pliny  {N.  H. 
iii.  36,  xxiv.  28);  Dioscorides  (i.  90),  and  other 
writers.  Herodotus  (iv.  177)  compares  the  fruit 
of  the  lotus  (the  Rhamnus  lotus,  Linn.,  not  the 
Egyptian  Nelumhium  speciosurn)  in  size  with  the 
mastich  berry,  and  Babrius  (3,  5)  says  its  leaves 
are  browsed  by  goats.  The  fragrant  resin  known 
in  the  arts  as  "  mastick,"  and  which  is  obtained  by 
incisions  made  in  the  trunk  in  the  mouth  of  August, 
is  the  produce  of  this  tree,  whose  scientific  name  is 
Fistacia  lentiscus.  It  is  used  with  us  to  strengthen 
the  teeth  imd  gums,  and  was  so  applied  by  the 
ancients,  by  whom  it  was  much  prized  on  this  ac- 
count, and  for  its  many  supposed  medicinal  virtues. 
Lucian  {Le.ciph.  12)  uses  the  term  o'xit'OTpaJKTTjs 
of  one  who  chews  mastich  wood  in  order  to  whiten 
his  teeth.  Martial  {Ep.  xiv.  22)  recommends  a 
mastich  toothpick  {dentiscalpiuni).  Pliny  (xxiv. 
7)  speaks  of  the  leaves  of  this  tree  being  rubbed 
on  the  teeth  for  toothache.  Dioscorides  (i.  90) 
says  the  resin  is  often  mixed  wth  other  materials 
and  used  as  tooth-powder,  and  that  if  chewed,*  it 
imparts  a  sweet  odour  to  the  breath.  Both  Pliny 
and  Dioscorides  state  that  the  best  mastich  comes 
fi'om  Chios,  and  to  this  day  the  Arabs  prefer  that 
which  is  imported  from  that  island  (comp.  Nie- 
buhr,  Beschr.  von  Arab.  p.  144;  Galen,  de  fac. 
Simpl.  7,  p.  69).  Tournefort  (Voyages,  ii.  58-61, 
transl.  1741)  has  given  a  full  and  very  interesting 
account  of  the  Lentisks  or  Mastich  plants  of  Scio 
(Chiosj :  he  says  that  "  the  towns  of  the  island  are 
distinguished  into  three  classes,  those  del  Campo, 
those  o{  Apanomeria,  and  those  where  they  plant 
Lentisk-trees,  from  whence  the  mastick  in  tears  is 


Mastich  {Fhtacia  Lcntuia^y 


produced."  Tournefort  enimierates  several  Lentiak- 
tree  villages.  Of  the  trees  he  says,  "  these  trees  are 
very  wide  spread  and  .circular,  ten  or  twelve  foot 
tall,   comisting  of  several  branchy  stallcs  which  in 

hath  received  the  sentence  of  God  to  cut  thee  in  two 
(crxtVet  o-e  /xeVoi').  This  is  unfortunately  lost  in  our 
version  ;  but  it  is  preserved  by  the  Vulgate,  "  sub  schino 
.  .  scindot  te ;"  and  by  Luther,  "  Linde  .  .  .  finden."  A 
similar  play  occurs  in  vers.  58,  59,  between  Trplvov,  and 


iMATTAN 

time  grow  crooked.  The  biggest  trunks  are  a  foot 
diameter,   covered  with   a  bark,    gi-eyish,  rugged, 

chapt the  leaves  are  disposed  in  three  or  fom- 

couples  on  each  side,  about  an  inch  long,  naiTOw  at 
the  beginning,  pointed  at  their  extremity,  half  an 
inch  broad  about  the  middle.  From  the  junctures 
of  the  leaves  gi-ow  flowers  in  bunches  like  grapes 
(see  woodcut) ;  the  fruit  too  grows  like  bunches  of 
grapes,  in  each  berry  whereof  is  contained  a  white 
kernel.  These  trees  blow  in  May,  the  fruit  does  not 
ripen  but  in  autumn  and  winter."  This  writer 
gives  the  following  description  of  the  mode  in  which 
the  mastich  gum  is  procured.  "  They  begin  to  make 
incisions  in  these  trees  in  Scio  the  first  of  August, 
cutting  the  bark  crossways  with  huge  knives,  without 
touching  the  younger  branches ;  next  day  the  nutri- 
tious juice  distils  in  small  tears,  which  by  little  and 
little  form  the  mastick  grains ;  they  harden  on  the 
ground,  and  are  carefully  swept  up  from  under  the 
trees.  The  height  of  the  crop  is  about  the  middle  of 
August  if  it  be  dry  serene  weather,  but  if  it  be  rainy, 
the  tears  are  all  lost.  Likewise  towards  the  end  of 
September  the  same  incisions  furnish  mastick,  but 
in  lesser  quantities."  Besides  the  uses  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  above,  the  people  of  Scio  put 
grains  of  this  resin  in  perfumes,  and  in  their  bread 
before  it  goes  to  the  oven. 

Mastick  is  one  of  the  most  important  products  of 
the  East,  being  extensively  used  in  the  preparation 
of  spirits,  as  juniper  berries  are  with  us,  as  a  sweet- 
meat, as  a  masticatory  for  preserving  the  gtmis  and 
teeth,  as  an  antispasmodic  in  medicine,  and  as  an 
ingredient  in  varnishes.  The  Greek  writers  occa- 
sionally use  the  word  axlvos  for  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent plant,  viz.,  the  .Squill  {Scilla  maritiina) 
(see  Aristoph.  Flat.  715;  Sprengel,  Flor.  Hippoc. 
41  ;  Theophr.  Hist.  Flant.  v.  6,  §10).  The  Fis- 
tacia lentiscus  is  common  on  the  shores  of  the  Me- 
diteiTanean.  AccX)rding  to  Strand  (Flor.  Palaest. 
No.  559)  it  has  been  observed  at  Joppa,  both  by 
Rauwolf  and  Pococke.  The  Mastich-tree  belongs  to 
the  natural  order  Anacardiaceae.  [W.  H.] 

MATHANI'AS  (UaTdavias  :  Mathathias)  = 
Mattaniaii,  a  descendant  of  Pahath-Moab  (1  Esd. 
ix.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30). 

MATHU'SALA  (Maeou(rc{\a:  Mathusale)  = 
Methuselah,  the  son  of  Enoch  (Luke  iii.  37). 

MAT'KED  (H^PO:  MaTpaid;  Alex.  Marpafid: 
Matred),  a  daughter  of  Mezahab,  and  mother  of 
Mehetabel,  who  was  wife  of  Hadar  (or  Hadad)  of 
Pau,  king  of  Edom  (Gen.  xx.xvi.  39  ;  1  Chr.  i.  50). 
Respecting  the  kings  of  Edom  whose  records  ai"e 
contained  in  the  chapters  referred  to,  see  Hadad, 

IRAM,  &C.  [E.  S.  P.] 

MAT'RI  (npjsn,  with  the  art.  properly  "  the 

Matri:"  MarTopi;  Alex.  Marrapet  and  MoTTopetr: 
Metri),  a  family  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  to  which 
Saul  the  king  of  Israel  belonged  (1  Sam  x.  '21 ). 

MAT'TAN  (JPIO:  MaOdu  ;  Alex.  Maxdv  in 
Kings;  Mardav  in  Chron, :  Mathan).  1.  The 
priest  of  Baal  slain  before  his  altars  in  the  idol 
temple  at  Jenisalem,  at  the  time  when  Jelioiada 
swept  away  idolatry  from  Judah  (2  K.  xi.  18  : 
2  Chr.  xxiii.  17).     He  probably  accompanied  Atha- 


TrpCa-ai  a-e.    For  the  bearing  of  these  and  similar  charac- 
teristics on  the  date  and  origin  of  the  book,  see  Susanxa. 

*  Whence  the  derivation  of  mastich,  from  fiairrixVt  f^^ 
gum  of  the  cr;^r>'os,  from  fiacrraf,  fiacmxau),  ju-ao-aojiot, 
"  to  chew,"  "  to  masticate." 


MATTANAII 

liah  tVoni  Saniariu,  and  would  thus  he  the  iirst 
priest  of  the  Baal-worship  which  Jehoram  king  of 
Judah,  following  in  the  stops  of  his  father-in-law 
Ahab,  established  at  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxi.  6,  13). 
Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  7,  §3)  calls  him  MaaBav. 

2.  I'Ndeau.)  The  father  of  Shephatiah  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  1).  [W.  A.  \V.] 

MAT'TANAH  (n:nO:    Mapeavaeiv ;   Alex. 

T     T    - 

Mavdaveiv :  Mattliana),  a  station  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  (Num.  xxi. 
18,  19).  It  lay  next  beyond  the  well,  or  Beer,  and 
between  it  and  Nahaliel ;  Nahaliel  again  being  but 
one  day's  journey  from  the  Bamoth  or  heights  of 
Moab.  Mattanah  was  therefore  probably  situated 
to  the  S.E.  of  the  Dead  Sea,  but  no  name  like  it 
appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered.  The  meaning 
at  the  root  of  the  word  (if  taken  as  Hebrew)  is  a 
"  gift,"  and  accordingly  the  Targumists — Oukelos 
as  well  as  Pseudojonathan  and  the  Jerus;ilem — treat 
Mattanah  as  if  a  synonym  tor  Beer,  the  well 
which  was  "given"  to  the  people  (ver.  16).  In 
the  same  vein  they  further  translate  the  names  in 
verse  20  ;  and  treat  them  as  denoting  the  valleys 
(Nahaliel)  and  the  heights  (Bamoth),  to  which  the 
miraculous  well  followed  the  camp  in  its  journey- 
iugs.  The  legend  is  noticed  under  Beeu."  By 
I^e  Clerc  it  is  suggested  that  Mattanah  may  be  the 
same  with  the  mysterious  word  Vaheh  (ver.  14  ; 
A.  V.  "  what  He  did  ")■ — ^since  the  meaning  of  that 
word  in  Arabic  is  the  same  as  that  of  Mattanah  in 
Hebrew.  [G.] 

MATTANl'AH  (H^iriO:    BaTQavias;   Alex. 

MedBavia.'i :  Matthanias).  1.  The  original  name 
of  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah,  which  was  changed 
when  Nebuchadnezzar  placed  him  on  the  throne 
instead  of  his  nephew  Jehoiachin  (2  K.  xxiv.  17). 
In  like  manner  Pharaoh  had  changed  the  name  of 
his  brother  Eliakim  to  Jehoiakim  on  a  similar  occa- 
sion (2  K.  xxiii.  3-t),  when  he  restored  the  succes- 
sion to  the  elder  branch  of  the  royal  family  (comp. 
2  K.  xxiii.  31,  36). 

2.  {M.ardavias  in  Chr.,  and  Neh.  xi.  17  ;  Mar- 
6avia  Neh.  xii.  8,  35;  Alex.  'M.adQavias,  Neh.  xi. 
17,  Moflayfo,  Neh.  xii.  8,  MadOavia,  Neh.  xii.  35: 
Matlumia,  exc.  Neh.  xii.  8,  35,  Mathunias).  A 
Levite  singer  of  the  sons  of  Asaph  (1  Chr.  ix.  15). 
He  is  described  as  the  son  of  Micah,  Micha  (Neh. 
xi.  17),  or  Michaiah  (Neh.  xii.  35),  and  after  the 
i-eturu  fi'om  Babylon  lived  in  the  villages  of  the 
Netojthathites  (1  Chr.  ix.  16)  or  Netophathi  (Neh. 
xii.  28),  which  the  singers  had  built  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  29).  As  leader 
of  the  Temple  choir  after  its  restoration  (Neh.  xi. 
17,  xii.  8)  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  he  took  part 
in  the  musical  service  which  accompanied  the  dedi- 
cation of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  .\ii.  25,  35). 
We  find  him  among  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank, 
"  keepers  of  the  thresholds,"  an  office  which  fell  to 
the  singers  (comp.  1  Chr.  xv.  18,  21).  hi  Neh. 
xii.  35,  there  is  a  difficulty,  for  "  Mattaniah,  the 
son  of  Michaiah,  the  son  of  Zaccur,  the  son  of 
Asaph,"  is  apparently  the  same  with  "  Mattaniah, 
the  son  of  Micha,  the  son  of  Zabdi  the  son  of 
Asaph"  (Neh.  xi.  17),  and  with  the  Mattaniah  of 
Neh.  xii.  8,  25,  who,  as  in  xi.  17,  is  associated 


MATTATHIAS 


273 


"  Vol.  i.  179(1.  In  addition  to  the  authorities  there 
cited,  the  curious  reader  who  may  desire  to  investigate 
tliis  remarkable  tradition  will  find  it  exhausted  in  Bux- 
toif's  Kxi'rcilationes  (No.  v.  Tfist.  Petrae  in  Denertu). 

'>  The  word  "  priest "  is  apparently  applied  in  a  loss 
VOU.  11. 


with  Bakbukiah,  and  is  expressly  mentioned  as 
living  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah  and  Ezra  (Neh. 
xii.  26).  But,  if  the  reading  in  Neh.  xii.  35  be 
correct,  Zechariah,  the  gi-eat-gi  andson  of  Mattaniah 
(further  described  as  one  of  "  the  priests'  sons,"'' 
whereas  Mattaniah  was  a  Levite),  blew  the  trumpet 
at  the  head  of  the  procession  led  by  Ezra,  which 
marched  round  the  city  wall.  From  a  comparison 
of  Neh.  xii.  35  with  xii.  41,  42,  it  seems  probable 
that  the  former  is  corrupt,  that  Zechariah  in  verses 
35  and  41  is  the  same  priest,  and  that  the  clause 
in  which  the  name  of  Mattaniah  is  found  is  to  be 
connected  with  ver.  36,  in  which  are  enumerated 
his  "  bi'ethren"  alluded  to  in  ver.  8. 

3.  {Mardavias:  Mathanias.)  A  descendant  of 
Asaph,  and  ancestor  of  Jahaziel  the  Le'/ite  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chron.  xx.  14). 

4.  [MaTdavia;  Alex.  Maedavia:  Mathania.) 
One  of  the  sons  of  Elam  who  had  married  a 
foreign  wife  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  26). 
In  1  Esdr.  ix.  27  he  is  allied  Matthanias. 

5.  (MaTOavat;  Alex.  Maddavai.)  One  of  the 
sons  of  Zattu  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  who  put  away 
his  ibreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  27).  He  is  called  Otho- 
NiAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  28. 

6.  {MaTOafid ;  Alex.  MaOOavid:  Mathanias.') 
A  descendant  of  Pahath-Moab  who  lived  at  the 
same  time,  and  is  mentioned  under  the  same  cir- 
cumstances as  the  two  preceding  ( Ezr.  x.  30).  In 
1  Esdr.  ix.  31,  he  is  called  Mathanias. 

7.  One  of  the  sons  of  Bani,  who  like  the  three 
above  mentioned,  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at 
Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x.  37).  In  the  parallel  list 
of  Esdr.  ix.  34,  the  names  "  Mattaniah,  Mattenai," 
are  corrupted  into  Maiinitanaimus. 

8.  (MaTdavuias;  Alex.  Mad6avias.)  A  Levite, 
father  of  Zaccur,  and  ancestor  of  Hanan  the  undei- 
ti'easurer  who  had  charge  of  the  otl'erings  for  the 
Levites  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xiii.  13). 

9.  (■liT'JRt^  :   MaTOavias :   Mathaniaii,  1  Chr. 

XXV.  4  ;  Mathanias,  1  Chr.  xxv.  16),  one  of  the 
fourteen  sons  of  Henian  the  singer,  whose  office  it 
was  to  blow  the  horns  in  the  Temple  service  as  ap- 
pointed by  David.  He  was  the  chief  of  the  9th  di- 
vision of  twelve  Levites  who  were  "  instructed  in 
the  songs  of  Jehovah." 

10.  A  descendant  of  Asaph,  the  Levite  minstrel, 
who  assisted  in  the  purification  of  the  Temple  in 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13).  [W.  A.  W.J 

MAT'TATHA  (marraed:  Mathatha),  the  son 
of  Nathan,  and  grandson  of  David  in  the  genealogy 
of  our  Lord  (Luke  iii.  31). 

MAT'TATHAH  (nnri»  :    Uareaed  :  Alex. 

'UladdaQd:  Mathatha),  a  descendant  of  Hashum, 
who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  in  the  time  of  Ezra, 
and  was  separated  from  her  (Ezr.  x.  33).  He  is 
called  Matthias  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  33. 

MATTATHI'A8  (MaTrafl/as  :  Mathathias). 
1.  =Mattithiah,  who  stooil  at  Ezra's  right  hand 
when  he  read  the  law  to  the  people  (1  Esdr.  ix. 
43  ;  comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

2.  {Mathathias.)  The  father  of  the  Maccabees 
(1  Mace.  ii.  1,  14,  16,  17,  19,  24,  27,  39,  45,  49, 
xiv,  29).     [Maccabees,  165'a.] 


restricted  sense  in  later  times,  for  we  find  in  Ezr.  viil.  24 
Slierebiah  and  Hashabiah  described  as  amung  the  "chief 
of  the  priests,"  whereas,  in  vers.  IS,  IB,  (hey  are  Merarite 
l^evitcs  ;  if,  as  is  probable,  the  same  persons  are  alluded  to 
in  both  instances.   Comp.  also  Josh.  iil.  3  with  Num.  vii.  a. 

T 


274 


MATTENAl 


3.  (Mathathias.)  The  son  of  Absalom,  and  bro- 
ther of  Jonathan  14  (1  Mace.  xi.  70;  xiii.  11). 
In  the  battle  fought  by  Jonathan  the  high-priest 
with  the  forces  of  Demetrius  on  the  plain  of  Nasor 
(the  old  Hazor),  his  two  generals  Mattathias  and 
Judas  alone  stood  by  hiin,  when  his  army  was 
seized  with  a  panic  and  fled,  and  with  their 
assistance  the  ibrtunes  of  the  day  were  restored. 

4.  (Mathathias.)  The  son  of  Simon  Maccabeus, 
who  was  treacherously  mnrdeied,  together  with  his 
father  and  brother,  in  the  fortress  of  Docus,  by 
Ptolemeus  the  son  of  Abubus  (1  Mace.  xvi.  14). 

5.  (Matthias.)  One  of  the  three  envoys  sent  by 
Nicanor  to  treat  with  Judas  Maccabeus  (2  Mace, 
xiv.  19). 

6.  (Mathathias.)  Son  of  Amos,  in  the  genealogy 
of  Jesus  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25). 

7.  (Mathathias.)  Son  of  Semei,  in  the  same  cata- 
logue (Luke  iii.  2(5).  (W.  A.  W.) 

MATTENA'I  ClinO  :  nerOavia  ;   Alex.  Uad- 

davai :  Mathanai).  1.  One  of  the  family  of  Hashum, 
who  in  the  time  of  Ezra  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  X.  33).     In  1  Esdr.  ix.  33  he  is  called  Al- 

TANEUS. 

2.  (MaTBava'i;  Alex.  yiaOBavai:  Mathanai). 
A  descendant  of  Bani,  who  put  away  his  foreign 
wife  at  Ezra's  command  ( Kzr.  x.  37).  The  place 
of  this  name  and  of  Mattaniah  which  precedes  it  is 
occupied  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  34  by  Maiinitanaijius. 

3.  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joiakim  the  son  of 
Jeshua  (Neh.  xii.  19).  He  represented  the  house 
of  Joiarib. 

MAT'THAN  (Rec.  Text,  Maredv  \  Lachm. 
with  B,  Mo00ai' :  Mathan,  Matthan.)  The  son  of 
Eleazar,  and  grandfather  of  Joseph  "  tlie  husband 
of  Mary "  (Matt.  i.  1  5).  He  occupies  the  same 
place  in  the  genealogy  as  Matthat  in  Luke  iii.  24, 
with  whom  indeed  he  is  probably  identical  (Hervey, 
Genealogies  of  Christ,  129, 134,  &c.).  "  He  seems 
to  have  been  himself  descended  from  Joseph  the 
son  of  Judah,  of  Luke  iii.  26,  but  to  have  become 
the  heir  of  the  elder  branch  of  the  house  of  Abiud 
on  the  failure  of  Eleazar's  issue  "  (ib.  134). 

MATTHANI'AS  (MoT6lai/i'as)  =  Mattaniah, 
one  of  the  descendants  of  Elam  (1  Esdr.  ix.  27; 
comp.  Ezr.  x.  26).  In  the  Vulgate,  "  Ela,  Matha- 
nias,"  are  coiTupted  into  "  Jolaman,  Chamas," 
which  is  evidently  a  ti'anscriber's  error. 

MAT'THAT  (MoT0aT;  but  Tisch.  Ma00oT: 
Mathat,  Mattat,  Matthad,  &c.)  1.  Son  of  Levi 
and  gi'andfather  of  Joseph,  according  to  the  genealogy 
of  Luke  (iii.  24).  He  is  maintained  by  Lord  A. 
Hervey  to  have  been  the  same  person  as  the  Mat- 
than of  Matt.  i.  15  (see  Genealogies  of  Christ, 
137,  138,  &c.). 

2.  Also  the  son  of  a  Levi,  and  a  progenitor  of 
Joseph,  but  much  higher  up  in  the  line,  namely 
eleven  generations  fiom  David  (Luke  iii.  29).  No- 
thing is  known  of  him. 

It  should  be  remarked  that  no  fewer  than  five 
names  in  this  list  are  derived  from  the  same  Hebrew 
root  as  that  of  their  ancestor  Nathan  the  son  of 
David  (see  Hervey,  Genealogies,  &c.,  p.  150). 

.  MATTHE'LAS  (Mo9^\as  :  Maseas)=MKk- 
SEIAH  1  (1  Esd.  ix.  19;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  18).  The 
reading  of  the  LXX.  which  is  followed  in  the  A.  V. 
might  easily  arise  from  a  mistake  between  the  uncial 
0  and  2  (C). 

MAT'THEW  (Lachm.  with  BD.  Ma0eo7os  ;  AC 


MATTHEW 

and  Rec.  Text,  Viardaios :  Matthaeus.)  Matthew 
the  Apostle  and  Evangelist  is  the  same  as  Levi  (Luke 
V.  27-29)  the  son  of  a  certain  Alphaeus  (Mark  ii. 
14).  His  call  to  be  an  Apostle  is  related  by  all  three 
Evangelists  in  the  same  words,  except  that  Matthew 
(ix.  9)  gives  the  former,  and  Mark  (ii.  14)  and 
Luke  (v.  27)  the  latter  name.  If  there  were  two 
publicans,  both  called  solemnly  in  the  same  form 
at  the  same  place,  Capernaum,  then  one  of  them 
became  an  Apostle,  and  the  other  was  heard  of  no 
more  ;  for  Levi  is  not  mentioned  again  after  the 
feast  which  he  made  in  our  Lord's  honour  (Luke 
v.  29).  This  is  most  unlikely.  Euthymius  and 
many  other  commentators  of  note  identify  Alphaeus 
the  father  of  Matthew  with  Alj)haeus  the  father 
of  James  the  Less.  Against  this  is  to  be  set  the 
fact  that  in  the  lists  of  Apostles  (Matt.  x.  3  ;  Mark 
iii.  18  ;  Luke  vi.  15 ;  Acts  i.  13),  Matthew  and 
James  the  Less  are  never  named  together,  like 
other  pairs  of  brothers  in  the  apostolic  body.  It 
may  be,  as  in  other  cases,  that  the  name  Levi  was 
replaced  by  the  name  Matthew  at  the  time  of  the 
call.  According  to  Geseuius,  the  names  Matthaeus 
and  Matthias  are  both  contractions  of  Mattathias 
(  =  n''riRO,  "gift  of  Jehovah  ;"  ©eo'Stopos,  0e(J- 

^oTos),  a  common  Jewish  name  after  the  exile; 
but  the  true  derivation  is  not  certain  (see  Winer, 
Lange).  The  publicans,  properly  so  called  (^puh- 
licani),  were  persons  who  farmed  the  Roman 
taxes,  and  they  were  usually,  in  later  times, 
Roman  knights,  and  persons  of  wealth  and  credit. 
They  employed  under  them  inferior  officers,  natives 
of  the  province  where  the  taxes  were  collected, 
called  properly  portitores,  to  which  class  Matthew 
no  doubt  belonged.  These  latter  were  notorious  for 
impudent  exactions  everywhere  (Plautus,  Menaech. 
i.  2,  5 ;  Cie.  ad  Quint.  Fr.  i.  1  ;  Plut.  De  Curios. 
p.  518  e) ;  but  to  the  Jews  they  were  especially 
odious,  for  they  were  the  veiy  spot  where  the 
Roman  chain  galled  them,  the  visible  proof  of  the 
degraded  state  of  their  nation.  As  a  rule,  none  but 
the  lowest  would  accept  such  an  unpopular  office, 
and  thus  the  class  became  more  worthy  of  the 
hatred  with  which  in  any  case  the  Jews  would 
have  regarded  it.  The  readiness,  however,  with 
which  Matthew  obeyed  the  call  of  Jesus  seems  to 
show  that  his  heart  was  still  open  to  i-eligious  im- 
pressions. His  conversion  w;is  attended  by  a  great 
awakening  of  the  outcast  classes  of  the  Jews  (Matt. 
ix.  9,  10).  Matthew  in  his  Gospel  does  not  omit 
the  title  of  infamy  which  had  belonged  to  him 
(x.  3)  ;  but  neither  of  the  other  Evangelists  speaks 
of  "  Matthew  the  publican."  Of  the  exact  share 
which  fell  to  him  in  preaching  the  Gospel  we  have 
nothing  whatever  in  the  N.  T.,  and  other  sources 
of  infomiation  we  cannot  trust. 

Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii.  24)  mentions  that  after  our 
Lord's  ascension  Matthew  preached  in  Judaea  (some 
add  for  fifteen  years,  Clem.  Strom,  vi.),  and  then 
went  to  foreign  nations.  To  the  lot  of  Matthew  it 
fell  to  visit  Aethiopia,  saj-s  Socrates  .'-'cholasticus 
(H.  E.  i.  19;  Ruff.  //.  E.  x.  9).  But  Ambrose 
says  that  God  opened  to  him  the  country  of  the 
Persians  (/w  Ps.  45) ;  Isidore  the  Macedonians 
(Isidore  Hisp.  de  Sanct.  77)  ;  and  others  the  Par- 
thians,  the  Medes,  the  Pereians  of  the  Euphi-ates. 
Nothing  whatever  is  really  known.  Hei-acleon,  the 
disciple  of  Valentinus  (cited  by  Clemens  Alex. 
Strom,  iv.  9),  describes  him  as  dying  a  natural 
death,  which  Clement,  Origen,  and  Tertullian  seem 
to  accept :  the  tiadition  that  he  died  a  martyr,  be 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

it  true  or  false,  came  in  afterwards  (Niceph.  H.  E. 
ii.  41). 

If  the  first  feeling  on  reading  these  meagre  par- 
ticulars be  disappointment,  the  second  will  be  ad- 
miration for  those  who,  doing  their  part  under  God 
in  the  great  work  of  founding  the  Chuicli  on  earth, 
have  passed  away  to  their  Master  in  heaven  with- 
out so  much  as  an  eflbrt  to  redeem  tlieir  names 
from  silence  and  oblivion.  (For  authorities  see  the 
works  on  the  Gospels  refeiTed  to  under  Luke  and 
Gospels  ;  also  Fritzsche,  In  Mattliaeum,  Leipzic, 
1826  ;  Lange,  Bihdwerk,  part  i.)  [W.  T.] 

MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  Gospel 
which  bears  the  name  of  St.  Matthew  was  written 
by  the  Apostle,  according  to  the  testimony  of  all 
antiquity. 

I.  Language  in  ivhich  it  toas  first  written. — We 
are  told  on  the  authority  of  Papias,  Irenaeus,  Pan- 
taenus,  Origen,  FAisebius,  Epiphanius,  Jerome,  and 
many  other  Fathers,  that  the  Gospel  was  first 
written  in  Hebrew,  i.  e.  in  the  vernacular  language 
of  Palestine,  the  Aramaic,  a.  Papias  of  Hierapolis 
(who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  2nd  cen- 
tury) says,  "  Matthew  wa-ote  the  divine  oracles  (ra 
\6yia)  in  the  Hebrew  dialect ;  and  each  interpreted 
them  as  he  was  able"  (Eusebius,  H.  E.  iii.  39). 
It  has  been  held  that  ra  K6yia  is  to  be  understood 
as  a  collection  of  discourses,  and  that  therefore  the 
book  here  alluded  to,  contained  not  the  iicts  of  our 
Lord  but  His  speeches ;  but  this  tails  through,  for 
Papias  applies  the  same  word  to  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Mark,  and  he  uses  the  expression  K6yia  KvptaKci  in 
the  title  of  his  own  work,  which  we  know  from 
fragments  to  have  contained  facts  as  well  as  dis- 
courses (Studien  und  Kritiken,  1832,  p.  735 ; 
Meyer,  Einkitung  ;  De  Wette,  Einleitung,  §97  a  ; 
Alford's  Prolegomena  to  Gr.  Test.  p.  25).  Euse- 
bias,  indeed,  in  the  same  place  pronounces  Papias  to 
be  "  a  man  of  very  feeble  understanding,"  in  refer- 
ence to  some  false  opinions  which  he  held ;  but  it 
requires  little  critical  power  to  bear  witness  to  the 
fact  that  a  certain  Hebrew  book  was  in  use.  h. 
Irenaeus  says  (iii.  1),  that  "  whilst  Peter  and  Paul 
were  preaching  at  Rome  and  founding  the  Church, 
Matthew  put  forth  his  written  Gospel  amongst  the 
Hebrews  in  their  own  dialect."  It  is  objected  to 
this  testimony  that  Irenaeus  probably  drew  from 
the  same  source  as  Papias,  for  whom  he  had  great 
respect ;  this  assertion  can  neither  be  proved  nor 
refuted,  but  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus  is  in  itself  no 
mere  copy  of  that  of  Papias.  c.  According  to  Eu- 
sebius {H.  E.  V.  10),  Pantaenus  (who  flourished 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  2nd  century)  "  is  reported 
to  have  gone  to  the  Indians  "  (a.  c.  to  the  south  of 
Arabia?),"  where  it  is  said  that  he  found  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew  already  among  some  who  had  the  know- 
ledge of  Christ  there,  to  whom  Bartholomew,  one 
of  the  apostles,  had  preached,  and  lefl  them  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew  written  in  Hebrew,  which  was 
preserved  till  the  time  referred  to."  We  have  no 
writings  of  Pantaenus,  and  Eusebius  recites  the 
story  with  a  kind  of  doubt.  It  reappears  in  two 
ditlerent  forms : — Jerome  and  Rutlinus  say  that  Pan- 
taenus brought  back  with  him  this  Hebrew  (Gospel, 
and  Nicephorus  asserts  that  Bartholomew  dictated 
the  Gospel  of  Matthew  to  the  inhabitants  of  that 
country.  Upon  the  whole,  Pantaenus  contributes 
but  little  to  the  weight  of  the  argument,  d.  Origen 
says  (^Comment,  on  Unit.  i.  in  Eusebius,  //.  E.  vi. 
25),  "  As  I  have  learnt  by  tradition  concerning  the 
four  Gospels,  which  alone  are  received  without  dis- 
pute by  the  Church  of  God  under  heaven  :  the  first 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF       275 

was  written  by  St.  Matthew,  once  a  tax-gatherer, 
afterwards  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  pub- 
lished it  for  the  benefit  of  the  Jewish  converts,  com- 
posed in  the  Hebrew  language."  Jfhe  objections  to 
this  passage  brought  by  Masch,  are  disposed  of  by 
Michaelis  iii.  part  i.  p.  127  ;  the  "tradition"  does 
not  imj)ly  a  doubt,  and  there  is  no  reason  for  tracing 
this  witness  also  to  Papias.  e.  I'Aisebius  (//.  E.  iii. 
24)  gives  as  his  own  opinion  the  following: 
"  Matthew  having  first  preached  to  the  Hebrews, 
delivered  to  them,  when  he  was  preparing  to  depart 
to  other  countries,  his  Gospel,  composed  in  their 
native  language."  Otlier  passages  to  the  same  efl'ect 
occur  in  Cyril  (Catech.  14),  Epiphanius  [Haer.  \\. 
2, 1),  Hieronymus  (rfe  Vir.  ill.  ch.  3),  who  mentions 
the  Hebrew  original  in  seven  places  at  least  of  his 
works,  and  fiom  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Chrysostom, 
Augustine,  and  other  later  writers.  F'rom  all  these 
theie  is  no  doubt  that  the  old  opinion  was  that 
JIatthew  wrote  in  the  Hebrew  language.  To  whom 
we  are  to  attribute  the  Greek  translation,  is  not 
shown ;  but  the  quotation  of  Papias  proves  that  in 
the  time  of  John  the  P)esbyter,  and  probably  in 
that  of  Papias,  there-  was  no  translation  of  great 
authority,  and  Jerome  {de  Vir.  ill.  ch.  3)  ex- 
pressly says  that  the  translator's  name  was  un- 
certain. 

So  far  all  the  testimony  is  for  a  Hebrew  original. 
But  there  are  arguments  of  no  mean  weight  in 
favoLu-  of  the  Greek,  a  very  brief  account  of  which 
may  be  given  here.  1.  The  quotations  from  the 
0.  T.  in  this  Gospel,  which  are  very  numerous 
(see  below),  are  of  two  kinds:  those  introduced  into 
the  narrative  to  point  out  the  fulfilment  of  pro- 
phecies, &c.,  and  those  where  in  the  course  of  the 
narrative  the  persons  introduced,  and  especially  our 
Lord  Himself,  make  use  of  O.  T.  quotations.  Be- 
tween these  two  classes  a  difference  of  treatment  is 
observable.  In  the  latter  class,  where  the  citations 
occur  in  discourses,  the  Septuagint  version  is  fol- 
lowed, even  where  it  deviates  somewhat  from  the 
original  (as  iii.  3,  xiii.  14-),  or  where  it  ceases  to 
follow  the  very  words,  the  deviations  do  not  come 
from  a  closer  adherence  to  the  Hebrew  0.  T.  ;  ex- 
cept in  two  cases,  xi.  10  and  xxvi.  31.  The  quo- 
tations in  the  narrative,  however,  do  not  follow  the 
Septuagint,  but  appear  to  be  a  translation  from  the 
Hebrew  text.  Thus  we  have  the  remarkable  phe- 
nomenon that,  whereas  the  Gospels  agree  most  ex 
actly  in  the  speeches  of  persons,  and  most  of  all  in 
those  of  our  Lord,  the  quotations  in  these  speeches 
are  reproduced  not  by  the  closest  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew,  but  from  the  Septuagint  version,  although 
many  or  most  of  them  must  have  been  spoken  in 
the  vernacular  Hebrew,  and  could  have  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Septuagint.  A  mere  translator 
could  not  have  done  this.  But  an  independent 
writer,  using  the  Gieek  tongue,  and  wishing  to 
conform  his  narrative  to  the  oral  teaching  of  tlie 
Apostles  (see  vol.  i.  p.  718  «),  might  have  used  for 
the  quotations  the  well-known  Greek  O.  T.  used  by 
his  colleagues.  There  is  an  independence  in  the 
mode  of  dealing  with  citations  throughout,  which  is 
inconsistent  with  the  function  of  a  mere  translator. 
2.  But  tjiis  difficulty  is  to  be  got  over  by  assuming 
a  high  authority  for  this  translation,  as  though 
made  by  an  inspired  writer;  and  it  has  been  sug- 
gested that  this  writer  was  Matthew  himself  (Ben- 
gel,  Olshausen,  Lee,  and  others),  or  at  least  that  he 
directed  it  ((iuericke),  or  that  it  was  some  other 
apostle  (Gerhard),  or  James  the  brotlier  of  the 
Lord,  or  John,  or  the  cfenpral  body  of  the  Apostles, 

T  2 


276        MATTHEW.  GOSPEL  OF 

or  that  two  disciples  of  St.  Mattliew  wrote,  tron> 
him,  the  one  in  Aramaic  and  the  other  iu  Greek ! 
We  are  fiirthei-  invited  to  admit,  with  Dr.  Lee, 
that  the  Heljrew  book  "  belonged  to  that  class  of 
writings  which,  although  composed  by  inspired 
men,  were  never  designed  to  foi'm  part  of  the 
Canon"  {On  Inspiration,  p.  571).  But  supposing 
that  there  were  any  good  ground  for  considering 
these  suggestions  as  facts,  it  is  clear  that  in  the 
attempt  to  preseive  the  letter  of  the  tradition,  they 
have  quite  altered  the  spirit  of  it.  Papias  and  Je- 
rome make  a  Hebiew  original,  and  dependent  trans- 
lations ;  the  moderns  make  a  Greek  original,  which 
is  a  translation  only  in  name,  and  a  Hebiew  ori- 
ginal never  intended  to  be  preserved.  The  modern 
view  is  not  what  Papias  thought  or  uttered  ;  and 
the  question  would  be  one  of  mere  names,  for  the 
only  point  worthy  of  a  struggle  is  this,  whether 
the  Gospel  in  our  hands  is  or  is  not  of  apostolic 
autlioi-ity,  and  autlientic.  4.  Olshausen  remarks, 
"While  all  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  relate  that 
Matthew  has  written  in  Hebrew,  yet  they  univers- 
ally make  use  of  the  Greek  text,  as  a  genuine  apos- 
tolic composition,  without  remarking  what  relation 
the  Hebrew  Matthew  bears  to  our  Greek  Gospel. 
For  that  the  e:irlier  ecclesiastical  teachers  did  not 
possess  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  in  any  other 
form  than  we  now  have  it,  is  established"  (Ec/it- 
heit,  p.  3.5).  The  original  Hebrew  of  which  so 
many  speak,  no  one  of  the  witnesses  ever  saw  (Je- 
i-ome,  de  Vir.  ill.  3,  is  no  exception).  And  so 
little  store  has  tiie  Church  set  upon  it,  that  it  has 
utterly  peilshed.  5.  Were  there  no  explanation  of 
this  inconsistency  between  asseition  and  fact,  it 
would  be  hard  to  doubt  the  concurrent  testimony 
of  so  many  old  writers,  whose  belief  in  it  is  shown 
by  the  tenacity  with  which  they  held  it  in  spite  of 
their  own  experience.  But  it  is  certain  that  a 
gospel,  not  the  same  as  our  canonical  Matthew, 
sometimes  usurped  the  Apostle's  name ;  and  some 
of  the  witnesses  we  have  quoted  appear  to  have  re- 
ferred to  tills  in  one  or  other  of  its  various  forms  or 
names.  The  Christians  in  Palestine  still  held  th;,t 
the  Mosaic  ritual  was  binding  on  them,  even  after 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  At  the  close  of  the 
first  century  one  party  existed  who  held  that  the 
Mosaic  law  was  only  binding  on  Jewish  converts — 
this  was  the  Nazarenes.  Another,  the  Ebionites, 
held  that  it  was  of  universal  obligation  on  Chris- 
tians, and  rejected  St.  Paul's  Epistles  as  teaching 
the  opposite  doctrine.  These  two  sects,  who  di tiered 
also  in  the  most  important  tenets  ;is  to  our  Lord's 
person,  possessed  each  a  modification  of  the  same 
gospel,  which  no  doubt  each  altered  more  and  more, 
as  their  tenets  diverged,  and  which  bore  various 
names — the  Gospel  of  the  twelve  Apostles,  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Gospel  of 
Peter,  or  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew.  Enough 
is  known  to  decide  that  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews  was  not  identical  with  our  Gospel  of  Mat- 
thew. But  it  had  many  points  of  resemblance  to 
the  synoptical  gospels,  and  especially  to  Matthew. 
What  was  its  origin  it  is  impossible  to  say:  it  may 
have  been  a  description  oi  the  oral  teaching  of  the 
Apostles,  corrupted  by  degrees ;  it  may  have  come 
in  its  early  and  pure  form  from  the  hand  of  Mat- 
thew, or  it  may  have  been  a  version  of  the  Greek 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  as  the  Evangelist  who  wrote 
especially  for  Hebrews.  Now  this  Gospel,  "  the 
Proteus  of  criticism"  (Thiersch),  did  exist;  is  it  im- 
possible that  when  the  Hebrew  Matthew  is  spoken 
of,  this  questionable  document,  the  Gosjiel   of  the 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

Hebrews,  was  really  referred  to  ?  Obsen'e  that  all 
accounts  of  it  are  at  second  hand  (with  a  notable 
exception)  ;  no  one  quotes  it ;  in  ca-ses  of  doubt  about 
the  text,  Origen  even  does  not  appeal  from  the 
Greek  to  the  Hebrew.  All  that  is  certain  is,  that 
Nazarenes  or  Ebionites,  or  both,  boasted  that  they 
possessed  the  original  Gospel  of  Matthew.  Jerome 
is  the  exception  ;  and  him  we  can  convict  of  the 
very  mistake  of  contbundiug  the  two,  and  almost 
on  his  own  confession.  "  At  first  he  thought," 
says  an  anonymous  writer  {Edinburgh  Eevieic, 
1851,  July,  p.  :)9),  "  that  it  was  the  authentic  Mat- 
thew, and  translated  it  into  both  Greek  and  Latin 
from  a  copy  which  he  obtained  at  Beroea,  in  Syiia. 
This  appears  from  his  De  Vir.  ill.,  written  in  the 
year  392.  Six  years  later,  in  his  Commentary  on 
Matthew,  he  spoke  more  doubtfully  about  it, — 
"  quod  vocatur  a  plerisque  Matthaei  authenticum." 
Later  still  in  his  book  on  the  Pelagian  heresy, 
written  in  the  year  415,  he  modifies  his  account 
still  further,  describing  the  work  as  the  '  Evange- 
liunr  juxta  Hebraeos,  quod  Chaldaico  quidem  Sy- 
roque  sermone,  sed  Hehraicis  Uteris  conscriptum  est, 
quo  utuntur  usque  hodie  Nazareni  secundum  Apos- 
tolos,  sive  ut  plerique  autumant  juxta  Mattliaeum, 
quod  et  in  Caesariensi  habetur  Bibliotheca.'  " 
5.  Dr.  Lee  in  his  work  on  Inspiration  asserts,  by 
an  oversight  unusual  with  such  a  writer,  that 
the  theory  of  a  Hebrew  original  is  "  generally  re- 
ceived by  critics  as  the  only  legitimate  conclusion." 
Yet  there  have  pronounced  for  a  Greek  original — 
Erasmus,  Calvin,  Le  Clerc,  Fabricius,  Lighttbot, 
Wetstein,  Paulus,  Lardner,  Hey.  Hales,  Hug, 
Schott.  De  Wette,  Moses  Stuart,  Fritzsche,  Credner, 
Thiersch,  and  many  others.  <  ireat  names  ai e  ranged 
also  on  the  other  side;  as  Simon,  Mill,  Michaelis, 
Marsh,  Eichhorn,  Storr,  Olshausen,  and  others. 

With  these  arguments  we  leave  a  great  question 
unsettled  still,  feeling  convinced  of  the  early  accept- 
ance and  the  Apostolic  authority  of  our  "Gospel 
according  to  St.  INIatthevv ;"  and  far  from  convinced 
that  it  is  a  reproduction  of  another  Gospel  from  St. 
Jlatthew's  hand.  May  not  the  truth  l)e  that  Papias, 
knowing  of  more  than  one  Aramaic  Gospel  in  use 
among  the  Judaic  sects,  may  have  assumed  the 
existence  of  a  Hebrew  original  from  which  these 
were  supposed  to  be  taken,  and  knowing  also  the 
genuine  Greek  Gospel  may  have  looked  on  all  these, 
in  the  loose  uncritical  way  which  earned  for  him 
Eusebius'  description,  as  the  vai'ious  "  interpreta- 
tions" to  which  he  alludes? 

The  independence  of  the  style  and  diction  of  the 
Greek  Evangelist,  will  appe.u-  from  the  lemarks  in 
the  ue.xt  section. 

BiBLiOGUAVHY. — Hug's  Einlcitwiq,  with  the 
Notes  of  Professor  M.  Stuart,  Andover,  1836. 
Meyer,  Kovim.  Einleitung,  and  the  Commentaries 
of  Kuinol,  Fritzsche,  Alford,  and  others.  The  pas- 
sages from  the  Fathers  are  discussed  in  Michaelis 
(ed.  Marsh,  vol.  iii.  part  i.)  ;  and  they  will  be  found 
for  the  most  part  in  Kirchhofer,  Quellcnsammlimg ; 
where  will  also  be  found  the  passages  referring  to 
the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  p.  448.  (Jredner's 
Einleitung,  and  his  Beitrdge ;  and  the  often  cited 
works  on  the  Gospels,  of  Gieseler,  Baur,  Norton, 
Olshausen,  Weisse,  and  Hilgenfeld.  Also  Cureton's 
Syriac  Gospels ;  but  the  views  in  the  preface  must 
not  be  regai'ded  as  established.  Dr.  Lee  on  In- 
spiration, Appendix'P.,  London,  1857. 

H.  Stgle  and  Diction. — The  following  remarks 
on  the  style  of  St.  Matthew  are  founded  on  those 
of  Credner. 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

1.  Matthew  uses  the  expression  "  thit  it  might 
he  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the 
piophet"  (i.  22,  ii.  15).  lu  ii.  5,  aud  in  later 
passages  of  Matt,  it  is  abbreviated  (ii.  17,  iii.  3, 
iv.  14,  viii.  17,  xii.  17,  xiii.  14,  35,  xxi.  4,  xxvi. 
56,  xxvii.  9).  The  variation  vnb  tov  &eov  in 
xxii.  31,  is  notable;  and  also  the  tovto  Se  oAov 
yeyovev  of  i.  22,  not  found  in  other  Evangelists; 
but  c(>mi)are  Mark  xiv.  49  ;  Luke  xxiv.  44. 

2.  Tlie  referenee  to  the  Messiah  under  tlie  name 
"  Sou  of  David,"  occurs  in  Matthew  eight  times  ; 
and  three  times  each  in  Mark  and  Luke. 

3.  Jerusalem  is  called  "  the  holy  city,"  "  the 
holy  place"  (iv.  5,  xxiv.  15,  xxvii.  53). 

4.  The  expression  (Tvi/TfAeia  tov  alwvos  is  used 
five  times  ;  in  the  rest  of  the  N.  T.  only  once,  in 
Kp.  to  Hebrews. 

5.  The  phrase  "  kingdom  of  heaven,"  about 
thirty-three  times  ;  other  writers  use  "  kingdom  of 
God,"  which  is  found  also  in  Matthew. 

6.  '•  Heavenly  Father,"  used  about  six  times ; 
and  "  Father  in  heaven  "  about  sixteen,  and  with- 
out explanation,  point  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  speak- 
ing in  this  Gospel. 

7.  Matthew  alone  of  the  Evangelists  uses  rh 
pr]div,  ep()idr\  as  the  form  of  ((notation  from  0.  T. 
The  apparent  exception  in  Mark  xiii.  14,  is  re- 
jected by  Tisc:hendorf,  &c.  as  a  wrong  reading.  In 
Alatt.  about  twenty  times. 

8.  ' hvax<^pe1v  is  a  frequent  word  for  to  retire. 
Once  in  Mark. 

9.  Kar'  ovafi  used  six  times  ;  and  here  only. 

10.  The  use  of  irpoffepxecOat  preceding  an  inter- 
view, as  m  iv.  Ii,  is  much  more  frequent  with 
Matt,  than  Mai'k  and  Luke ;  once  only  in  John. 
Compare  the  same  use  of  iropevecrOai,  as  in  ii.  8, 
also  more  fiequent  in  Matt. 

1 1 .  'S,<p6Spa  after  a  verb,  or  participle,  six  times  ; 
the  same  word  used  once  each  by  Mark  and  Luke, 
but  after  adjectives. 

12.  With  St.  Matthew  the  particle  of  transition  is 
usually  the  indefinite  rl^re  ;  he  uses  it  ninety  times, 
against  six  times  in  Mark  and  fourteen  in  Luke. 

13.  Kal  iy4v€To  on,  vii.  28,  xi.  1,  xiii.  53, 
xix.  1,  xxvi.  1  ;  to  be  compared  with  the  ore  iye- 
V6T0  of  Luke. 

14.  Hoif'iv  ws,  &(nrep,  &,ti.,  is  characteiistic  of 
Matthew  :— i.  24,  vi.  2,  xx.  5,  xxi.  6,  xxvi.  19, 
xxviii.  15. 

15.  Ta<pos  six  times  in  this  G6s])el,  not  in  the 
others.  They  u.>e  fii/rj/xuov  fiequentiy,  wliich  is 
also  found  seven  times  in  .Matt. 

IG.  '^vfi^ovKiou  Aafi^dufif,  peculiar  to  Matt. 
2u;U.  Trots?!'  twice  in  Mark;  nowheie  else. 

17.  MoXoKia,  fxadr]Tfveiv,  o'eATji'iafeo-Oai,  pecu- 
liar to  Matt.  The  following  words  .■ne  either  used 
by  this  Evangelist  alone,  or  hy  him  moie  fiequentiy 
than  by  the  others: — (pp6viixos  olKiaKns,  vaTtpov, 
fKilBfU,  Siard^iiv,  KaTairovri^iaOai,  fx^raipav, 
l)aTTi^fiv,  (ppd^etv,  a-vvaipni'  \6yov. 

18.  The  frequent  use  of  /Sou  after  a  genitive 
absolute  (as  i.  20),  and  of  «al  i5ou  when  introduc- 
ing anything  new,  is  also  peculiar  to  St.  Matt. 

19.  -Adverbs  usually  st;uid  after  the  imperative, 
not  before  it;  except  outois,  which  stands  first. 
(Ih.  X.  1 1,  is  an  ex(:eptioii. 

20.  Tlpo(TKvve7v  takes  the  dative  in  St.  Matt., 
aud  elsewhere  more  rarely.  With  Luke  aud  John 
it  takes  the  accusjitive.  There  is  one  ajjparent  ex- 
ception in  J\Iatt.  (ix.  13),  but  it  is  a  ipiotation 
from  0.  T. 

21.  The    particijile    Kiyaiv    is    used    frequently 


MATTHEW,  GOSrEL  OF 


277 
ii.  2. 


without  the  dative  of  the  pei'son,  as  in 
Ch.  vii.  21  is  an  exception. 

22.  The  expression  bjxvva)  iv  or  ds  is  a  He- 
braism, frequent  in  Matt.,  and  unknown  to  the  other 
Evangelists. 

23.  'lipocyoXvfjia  is  the  name  of  the  holy  city 
with  Matt,  always,  except  xxiii.  37.  It  is  the 
same  in  Mark,  with  one  (doubtful)  exc^ition 
(xi.  1).  Luke  uses  this  foim  larely;  'lepovffaArifx 
frequently. 

III.  Citations  from  0.  T. — The  following  list  is 
nearly  complete. 


Matt, 
i.  23. 


•13. 
viii.    4. 

n. 

ix.  13. 
X.  35. 
xi.    5. 

10. 


Is.  vii.  1-1. 
Mic.  v.  2. 
Hos.  xi.  1. 
Jer.  xxxi.  15. 
Is.  xl.  3. 
I  tout.  viii.  3. 
Ps.  xi'i.  11. 
Deut.  vi.  16. 
Dcut.  vi.  13. 
Is.  viii.  2,3,  ix.  1. 
Ps.  xxxvii.  1 1. 
Ex.  XX.  13. 
Ex,  XX.  14. 
Deut.  xxiv.  1. 

Lev.  xix.  12,  Deut. 
xxiii.  23. 

Ex.  xxi.  24. 

Lev.  xix.  18. 

Lev.  xiv.  2. 

Is.  liii.  4. 

Hos.  vi.  6. 

Mic.  vii.  G. 

Is.  XXXV.  5,  xxix. 
18. 

Mai.  iii.  1. 

Mai.  iv.  5. 

1  Sam.  xxi.  6. 

Nrini.  xxviii.  9  (?) 

Hos.  vi.  6. 

Is.  xiii.  1. 

Jon.  i.  17. 

1  K.  X.  1. 

Is.  vi.  9. 

I's.  I.xxviii.  2. 

FjX.  XX.  12,  xxi.  17. 

Is.  xxix.  13. 


Matt, 
xvii.    ; 


11 

xviii.  15 

xix.    4 


xxii.  24. 

32. 


Ex.  xxxiv.  29. 

Mai.  iii.  1,  iv.  5. 
Lev.  xix.  17  (.?). 
Gen.  i.  27. 
Gen.  ii.  24. 
Deut.  xxiv.  1. 
Ex.  XX.  12,  Lev. 

xix.  18 
Zecb.  ix.  9. 
Ps.  c.wiii.  25. 
Is.  Ivi.  7,  Jer. 

vii.  11. 
IV.  viii.  2. 
Ps.  ex  viii.  22. 
Is.  viii.  14. 
Deut.  XXV.  5. 
Ex.  iii.  6. 

37.  Deut.  vi.  5. 
39.    Lev.  xix.  IS. 
44.     Ps.  ex.  I. 

35.     Gen.  iv.  8,  2Clir 
x.xiv.  21. 

38.  Ps.  Ixix.  25(?). 
Jer.  xii.  7,  xxii. 

5  (.?). 

39.  Ps.  cxviii.  26 
15.     Dan.  ix.  27. 
29.     Is.  xiii.  10. 
37.     Gen.  vi.  11. 
31.     Zech.  xiii.  7. 
52.     Gen.  ix.  6  (?). 
B4.    Dan.  vii.  13. 

9.     Zech.  xi.  13. 
35.     Ps.  xxii.  18. 
43.     Ps.  xxii.  8. 
4B.     Ps.  xxii.  1. 


The  number  of  passages  in  this  Gospel  which 
refer  to  the  0.  T.  are  about  t)5.  In  St.  Luke  they 
are' 43.  But  in  St.  Matthew  there  are  43  verbal 
citations  of  0.  T. ;  the  number  of  these  direct  ap- 
peals to  its  authority  in  St.  Luke  is  only  about  19. 
This  fact  is  very  significant  of  the  charactei-  and 
original  piupose  of  the  two  narratives. 

IV'.  Genuineness  of  the  Gospel. — Some  critics, 
admitting  the  apostolic  antiquity  of  apaitofthe 
Gospel,  apply  to  St.  Matthew  as  they  do  to  St.  Luke 
(see  above  p.  155)  the  gratuitous  supposition  of  a 
later  editor  or  compiler,  who  by  augmenting  and 
altering  the  earlier  document  produced  our  present 
(ilosi)el.  *Hilgeufeld  (p.  106)  endeavours  to  sepa- 
rate the  older  fioni  the  newer  work,  and  includes 
much  historical  matter  in  the  former:  since  Schleier- 
macher,  .several  critics,  misinterpreting  the  \6yia 
of  Papias,  consider  the  older  document  to  have  been 
a  collection  of  "  discourses  "  only.  We  are  asked  to 
believe  that  in  the  second  century  for  two  or  more 
of  the  (iospels,  new  woiks,  dilfering  fiom  them 
both  in  matter  and  compass,  were  substit\ited  for 
the  old,  and  that  about  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury our  present  Gospels  were  adopted  by  authority 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  and  that  hencetbrtli 
the  copies  of  the  older  works  entirely  disappeared, 
and  have  escaped  the  keenest  research  ever  since. 
Eichhorn's  notion  is  that  "  the  Church  "  sanctioned 
the  four  canonical  books,  and  by  its  authority  gave 
tliem  exclusive  currency  ;  but  there  existed  at  that 


278       MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

time  no  means  for  convening  a  Council ;  and  if  such 
a  body  could  have  met  and  decided,  it  would  not 
have  been  able  to  force  on  the  Churches  books  dis- 
crepant from  the  older  copies  to  wliich  they  had 
long  been  accustomed,  without  discussion,  protest, 
and  resistance  (see  Norton,  Genuineness.,  Chap.  I.). 
That  there  was  no  such  resistance  or  protest  we 
have  ample  evidence.  Ireuaeus  knows  the  four 
(uispels  only  [Haer.  iii.  ch.  i.).  Tatian,  who  died 
A.D.  170,  composed  a  harmony  of  the  Gospels,  lost 
to  us,  under  the  name  of  Diatessaron  (Eus.  H.  E. 
iv.  29).  Theophilus,  bishop  of  Antioch,  about 
168,  wrote  a  comment;iry  on  the  Gospels  (Hieron. 
ad  Alijasiam  and  de  Vir.  ill.),  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (flourished  about  189)  knew  the  four  Gospels, 
and  distinguished  between  them  and  the  uncano- 
nical  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians.  Tertul- 
lian  (bom  about  16U)  knew  the  four  Gospels,  and 
was  called  on  to  vindicate  the  text  of  one  of  them 
against  thecorruptionsof  Marcion  (see  above,  Luke). 
Origen  (born  185)  calls  the  four  Gospels  the  four 
elements  of  the  Christian  faith  ;  and  it  appears  that 
his  copy  of  Matthew  contained  the  genealogy 
{Comm.  in  Joan.).  I'assages  from  St.  Matthew 
are  quoted  by  Justin  Martyr,  by  the  author  of  the 
letter  to  Diognetus  (see  in  Otto's  Justin  Martyr, 
vol.  ii.),  by  Hegesippus,  Irenaeus,  Tatian,  Athena- 
goras,  Theophilus,  Clement,  Tertullian,  and  Origen. 
It  is  not  merely  from  the  matter  but  tlie  manner 
of  the  quotations,  from  the  calm  appeal  as  to  a 
settled  authority,  from  the  absence  of  all  hints  of 
doubt,  that  we  regard  it  as  proved  that  the  book 
we  possess  had  not  been  the  subject  of  any  sudden 
change.  Was  there  no  heretic  to  throw  back  with 
double  foi  ce  against  Tertullian  the  charge  of  altera- 
tion which  he  brings  against  Marcion  ?  Was  there 
no  orthodox  Church  or  member  of  a  Church  to 
complain,  that  instead  of  the  Matthew  and  the 
Luke  that  had  been  taught  to  them  and  their 
fatheis,  other  and  different  writings  were  now  im- 
posed on  them?  Neither  the  one  nor  the  other 
appeal's. 

The  citations  of  Justin  Martyr,  very  important 
for  this  subject,  have  been  thought  to  indicate  a 
.source  different  from  the  Gospels  which  we  now 
possess :  and  by  the  word  airofivriixovfvfjLaTa 
(memoirs),  he  has  been  supposed  to  indicate  that 
lost  work.  Space  is  not  given  here  to  show  that 
the  remains  referred  to  are  the  Gospels  which  we 
possess,  and  not  any  one  book ;  and  that  though 
Justin  quotes  the  Gospels  very  loosely,  so  that  his 
words  often  bear  but  a  slight  resemblance  to  the 
original,  the  same  is  true  of  his  quotations  from 
the  Septuagint.  He  transposes  words,  brino-s  se- 
parate passages  together,  attributes  the  words  of 
one  prophet  to  another,  and  even  quotes  tlie  Penta- 
teuch for  facts  not  recorded  in  it.  Many  of  the 
([notations  from  the  Septuagint  are  indeed  precise, 
but  these  are  chiefly  in  the  Dialogue  with  Trynho, 
where,  reasoning  with  a  Jew  on  the  0.  T.,  he  does 
not  trust  his  memory,  but  consults  the  text.  This 
question  is  disposed  of  in  Norton's  Genuineness, 
vol.  i.,  and  in  Hug's  Einleitunq. 

The  genuineness  of  the  two  first  chapters  of  the 
Gospel  has  been  (luestioned;  but  is  established  on 
satisfixctory  grounds  (see  Fritzsche,  on  Matt.,  Ex- 
cursus iii. ;  Meyer,  on  Matt.  p.  65).  i.  All  the  old 
MSS.  and  versions  contain  them  ;  and  they  are 
quoted  by  the  Fathers  of  the  2nd  and  Si-d  centuries 
(Irenaeus,  Clement  Alex.,  and  others).  Celsus 
also  knew  ch.  ii.  (see  Origen  cont.  Cels.  i.  38). 
ii.  Theii-  contents  would  naturally  form  part  of  a 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

Gospel  intended  primarily  for  the  Jews.  iii.  The 
commencement  of  ch.  iii.  is  dependent  on  ii.  23  ;  and 
in  iv.  13  there  is  a  refer-ence  to  ii.  23.  iv.  In  con- 
structions and  expressions  they  are  similar  to  the  rest 
of  the  Gospel  (see  examples  above,  in  II.  Style  and 
diction).  Professor  Norton  disputes  the  genuine- 
ness of  these  chapters  upon  the  ground  of  the  diffi- 
culty of  harmonising  them  with  St.  Luke's  nar- 
rative, and  upon  the  ground  that  a  lai-ge  number  of 
the  Jewish  Christians  did  not  possess  them  in  their 
vei'sion  of  the  Gospel.  The  former  objection  is  dis- 
cussed in  all  the  commentaries ;  the  arrswer  would 
require  much  space.  But,  1.  Such  questions  are  by 
no  means  confined  to  these  chapters,  but  are  found 
in  places  of  which  the  Apostolic  origin  is  admitted. 
2.  The  treatment  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  by  Marcion 
(above,  pp.  152,  153)  sirggests  how  the  Jewish 
Christians  dropped  out  of  their  version  an  account 
which  they  would  not  accept.  3.  Prof.  N.  standi 
alone,  among  those  who  object  to  the  two  chapters, 
in  assigning  the  genealogy  to  the  same  author  as 
the  rest  of  the  chapter's  (Hilgenfeld,  p.  46,  47). 
4.  The  difficulties  in  the  harmony  are  all  recon- 
cileable,  and  the  day  has  passed,  it  may  be  hoped, 
when  a  passage  can  be  struck  out,  against  all  the 
MSS.  and  the  testimony  of  early  writers,  for  sub- 
jective impi-essrons  about  its  contents. 

On  the  whole,  it  may  be  said  that  we  have  for 
the  genuineness  and  .Apostolic  origin  of  our  Greek 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  the  best  testimony  that  can  be 
given  for  any  book  whatever. 

V.  Time  when  the  Gospel  was  written. — No- 
thing can  be  said  on  this  point  with  certainty. 
Some  of  the  ancients  think  that  it  was  written  in 
the  eighth  year  after  the  Ascension  (Theophylact 
and  Euthymius);  others  in  the  fifteenth  (Nicc- 
phorus,  //.  E.  ii.  45);  whilst  Irenaeus  says  (iii.  1) 
that  it  was  written  "  when  Peter  and  Paul  were 
preaching  in  Rome,"  and  Eusebius  {H.  E.  iii.  24), 
at  the  time  when  Matthew  was  about  to  leave  Pa- 
lestine. From  two  passages  xxvii.  7,  8,  xxviii.  15, 
some  time  mrrst  have  elapsed  between  the  events 
and  the  description  of  them,  and  so  the  eighth  year 
seems  out  of  the  question  ;  but  a  term  of  fifteen  or 
twenty  yeais  would  satisfy  these  passages.  The 
testimony  of  old  writers  that  Matthew's  Gospel  is 
the  earliest  must  be  taken  into  account  (Oiigen  in 
Eus.  H.  E.  vi.  25;  Irenaeus  iii.  1 ;  comp.  Murato- 
rian  fi-agment,  ijs  far  as  it  remains,  in  Ci'edner's 
Kanon) ;  this  would  bring  it  befoi'e  A.i).  58-60 
(above,  p.  154),  the  supposed  date  of  St.  Luke. 
The  most  probable  supposition  is  that  it  was  written 
between  50  and  60 ;  the  exact  year  cannot  even  be 
guessed  at. 

VI.  Place  where  it  was  written. — There  is  not 
much  doubt  that  the  Gospel  was  written  in  Pales- 
tine. Hug  has  shown  elaborately,  from  the  diffu- 
sion of  the  Greek  element  over  and  abint  Palestine, 
that  there  is  no  iirconsistency  between  the  asser- 
tions that  it  was  written  for  Jews  in  Palestine,  and 
that  it  was  written  in  Greek  (Einleitung,  ii.,  ch.  i. 
§  10)  ;  the  facts  he  has  collected  are  woi-th  study. 

VII.  Ftirpose  of  the  Gospel. — The  Gospel  itself 
tells  us  by  plain  internal  evidence  that  it  was 
written  for  Jewish  converts,  to  show  them  in  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  the  Messiah  of  the  0.  T.  whom  they 
expected.  Jewish  converts  over  all  the  wor-ld  seem 
to  have  been  intended,  and  not  merely  Jews  in 
Palestine  (Irenaeus,  Origen,  and  Jerome  say  .simply 
that  it  was  written  "  for  the  Hebrews  ").  Jesus 
is  the  Messiah  of  the  0.  T.,  recognizable  by  Jews 
from  his  acts  as  such  (i.  22,  ii.  5,  15,  17,  iv.  14, 


MATTHIAS 

viii.  17,  xii.  17-21,  xiii.  35,  xxi.  4,  xxvii.  9). 
Knowledge  of  Jewish  customs  and  of  the  country 
is  presupposed  in  the  readers  (Matt.  xv.  1,  2  with 
Mark  vii.  1-4  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  62  with  Mark  xv.  42  ; 
Luke  xxiii.  54;  John  xix.  14,  31,  42,  and  other 
places).  Jerusalem  is  the  holy'  city  (see  above, 
Style  and  diction).  Jesus  is  the  son  of  David,  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham  (i.  1,  ix.  27,  xii.  23,  xv.  22, 
XX.  30,  xxi.  9,  15) ;  is  to  be  born  of  a  virgin  in 
David's  place,  Bethlehem  (i.  22,  ii.  6)  ;  must  flee 
into  Egypt  and  be  recalled  thence  (ii.  15,  19)  ; 
must  have  a  forerunner,  John  the  Ba]itist  (iii.  3, 
xi.  10) ;  was  to  labour  in  the  outcast  Galilee  that 
sat  in  darkness  (iv.  14-lG);  His  healing  was  a 
promised  mark  of  His  oflice  (viii.  17,  xii.  17);  and 
so  was  His  mode  of  teaching  in  parables  (xiii.  14); 
He  entered  the  holy  city  as  Messiah  (xxi.  5-lGj; 
was  rejected  by  the  people,  in  fulrilment  of  a  pro- 
phecy (xxi.  42)  ;  and  deserted  by  His  disciples  in 
the  same  way  (xxvi.  31,  5(5).  The  Gospel  is  per- 
vaded by  one  principle,  the  fulfilment  of  the  Law 
and  of  the  Messianic  prophecies  in  the  person  of 
.Jesus.  This  at  once  sets  it  in  opposition  to  the  Ju- 
daism of  the  time;  for  it  rebukeil  the  Pharisaic  in- 
terpretations of  the  Law  (v.,  xxiii.),  and  proclaimed 
Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Saviour  of  the 
worlil  through  His  blood,  ideas  which  were  strange 
to  the  cramped  and  limited  Judaism  of  the  Chiis- 
tian  era. 

VIII.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — There  are  traces 
in  this  Gospel  of  an  occasional  superseding  of  the 
chronological  order.  Its  princijial  divisions  are — 
I.  The  Introduction  to  the  Ministry,  i.-iv.  II. 
The  laying  down  of  the  new  Law  for  the  Church 
in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  v.-vii.  III.  Events 
in  historical  order,  showing  Him  as  the  worker  of 
Miracles,  viii.  and  ix.  IV.  The  appointment  of 
Apostles  to  preach  the  Kingdom,  x.  V.  The  doubts 
and  opposition  excited  by  His  activity  in  divers 
minds — in  John's  disciples,  in  sundry  cities,  in  the 
Pharisees,  .\i.  and  xii.  VI.  A  series  of  parables  on 
the  nature  of  the  Kingdom,  xiii.  VII.  Similar 
to  V.  The  etfects  of  His  ministry  on  His  country- 
men, on  Herod,  the  people  of  Genncsaret,  Sciibes 
and  Pharisees,  and  on  midtitudes,  whom  He  feeds, 
xiii.  53 — xvi.  12.  VIII.  Revelation  to  His  disciples 
of  His  sufferings.  His  instructions  to  them  there- 
upon, xvi.  13 — xviii.  35.  IX.  Events  of  a  journey 
to  Jerusalem,  xix.,  xx.  X.  Entrance  into  Jeru- 
salem and  resist;\nce  to  Him  there,  and  denuncia- 
tion of  the  Pharisees,  xxi.-xxiii.  XI.  Last  dis- 
courses ;  Jesus  as  Lord  and  Judge  of  Jerusalem, 
and  also  of  the  world,  xxiv.,  xxv.  XII.  Pa.ssion 
and  liesurrection,  xxvi.-xxviii. 

Sources. — The  works  quoted  under  Luke,  p. 
1 56 ;  and  Norton,  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels ; 
Fritzsche,  on  Matthew ;  Lange,  Bihelwerk  ;  Credner, 
Einleitttnij  and  Beitrdge.  [W.  T.] 

MATTHI'AS  (MaT0/as:  ilf(««/»"((s),  the  Apostle 
elected  to  fill  the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas  (Acts 
i.  26).  All  beyond  this  that  we  know  of  him  for 
certiiinty  is  that  he  had  been  a  constimt  attendant 
upon  the  Lord  Jesus  during  the  whole  course  of  His 
ministry ;  for  such  was  docl;ued  by  St.  Peter  to  be 
the  necessary  qualification  of  one  who  was  to  be  a 
witness  of  the  resm-rectiou.  The  name  of  Matthiiis 
occurs  in  no  other  place  in  the  N.  T.  We  may 
accept  as  probable  the  opinion  which  is  shared  by 
Eusebius  (//.  E.  lib.  i.  12)  and  Epiphanius  (i.  20) 
that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy  discii>les.  It  is  said 
that  he  preached  the  (.iospel  and  sull'ercd  martyrdom 


MATTOCK 


279 


in  Ethiopia  (Nicephor.  ii.  60).  Cave  believes  tha^ 
it  was  rather  in  Cappadocia.  An  apocryphal  gospel 
was  published  undei'  his  name  (Euseb.  //.  E.  iii.  23), 
and  Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  from  the  Tra- 
ditions of  Matthias  {Strom,  ii.  163,  &c.). 

Different  opinions  have  prevailed  as  to  the  manner 
of  the  election  of  Matthias.  The  most  natural  con- 
struction of  the  words  of  Scripture  seems  to  be 
this: — After  the  address  of  St.  Peter,  the  whole 
assembled  body  of  the  brethren,  amounting  in  num- 
ber to  about  120  (Acts  i.  15),  proceeded  to  nominate 
two,  namely,  Joseph  surnamed  Barsabas,  and  ]\Iat- 
thias,  who  answered  the  requirements  of  the  Apostle : 
the  subsequent  selection  between  the  two  was  referred 
in  prayer  to  Him  who,  knowing  the  hearts  of  men, 
knew  which  of  them  was  the  fitter  to  be  His  witness 
and  apostle.  The  brethren  then,  under  the  heavenly 
guidance  which  they  had  invoked,  proceeded  to  give 
forth  their  lots,  probably  by  each  writing  the  name  of 
one  of  the  candidates  on  a  tablet,  and  casting  it  into 
the  urn.  The  urn  was  then  shaken,  and  the  name 
that  first  came  out  decided  the  election.  Lightfoot 
{Hor.  Heb.  Luc.  i.  9 )  describes  another  way  of  casting 
lots  which  was  used  in  a.ssigning  to  the  priests  their 
several  parts  in  the  service  of  the  Temple.  The 
apostles,  it  will  lie  remembered,  had  not  yet  received 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  this  solemn  mode  of 
casting  the  lots,  in  accordance  with  a  practice  enjoined 
in  the  Levitical  law  (Lev.  xvi.  8),  is  to  be  regarded 
as  a  way  of  referring  the  decision  to  God  (comp. 
Prov.  xvi.  33).  St.  Chrysostom  remarks  that  it  was 
never  repeated  after  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  election  of  Matthias  is  discussed  by  Bishop 
Beveridge,  Works,  vol.  i.  serm.  2.  [E.  H— s.l 

MATTHI'AS  (MaTTaflias:  Mathathias)  = 
Mattathah,  of  the  descendants  of  Hashum 
(1  Esdr.  ix.  33  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  33). 

MATTITHI'AH  (H^Hj"^  :  UaTdadias ;  Alex. 

MaTTa0iar:  Mathathias).  1.  A  Levite,  the  first- 
born of  Shallum  the  Korhite,  who  presided  over 
the  offerings  made  in  the  pans  (1  Chr.  ix.  31  ; 
comp.  Lev.  vi.  20  [12],  &c.). 

2.  (MaTTadias.)  One  of  the  Levites  of  the  second 
rank  under  Asaph,  appointed  by  David  to  minister 
before  the  ark  in  the  musical  service  (1  Chr.  xvi.  5), 
"  with  harps  upon  Shemiuith  "  (comp.  1  Chr.  xv. 
21),  to  lead  the  choir.     See  below,  5. 

3.  (Mareavlas;  Alex.  MaeeaOias.)  One  of  the 
family  of  Nebo,  who  had  married  a  foreii;n  wife  in 
the  days  of  Ezra  (Neh.  x.  43).  He  is  called  Mazi- 
TiAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  35. 

4.  {Mardadias;  Alex,  marraeias.)  Probably 
a  priest,  who  stood  at  the  right  hand  of  Ezra  when 
he  read  the  law  to  the  people  (Ezr.  viii.  4).  In 
1  Esdr.  ix.  43,  he  appears  as  Mattathias. 

5.  (-InTiriO:     MaTeaeia;    Alex.    MoTTuOia ; 

1  Chr.  XV.  18,  MaTTaeias;  1  Chr.  xv.  21,  Mar- 
QaBias  ;  Alex.  MaTxaOias,  1  Chr.  xxv.  3  ;  MaT6/a.f, 
1  Chr.  xxv.  21).  The  same  as  2,  the  Hebrew  being 
in  the  lengthened  form.  He  was  a  Levite  of  the  ' 
second  rank,  and  a  doorkeeper  of  the  ark  (1  Chr. 
.xv.  18,  21).  As  one  of  the  six  sons  of  Jeduthun, 
he  was  appointed  to  preside  over  the  14th  division 
of  twelve  Levites  into  which  the  Temple  choir  was 
distributed  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3,  21). 

MATTOCK.*     The  tool   used   in  Arabia  for 


"  1.  T^yJ^  ;  sarcuhm,  fs.  vil.  25.     2.  HKHnO.  Spe- 
TTavov,  sarculum,  and  nii'^nO-  Otpiarjjptoi',  vomer,  both 


280 


MAUL 


loosening  the  ground,  described  b}' Niebnlir,  answers 
generally  to  our  mattock  or  grubbing-axe,  i.  e. 
a  single-headed  pickaxe,  the  sarculus  simplex,  as 
opposed  to  bicornis,  of  Palladius.  The  ancient 
Egyptian  hoe  was  of  wood,  and  answered  for  hoe, 
spade,  and  pick.  The  bhide  was  inserted  in  the 
handle,  and  the  two  were  attached  about  tlie  centre 
by  a  twisted  rope.  (Palladius,  de  Re  rust.  i.  43  ; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Ar.  p.  137  ;  Loudon,  Encycl. 
of  Gardening,  p.  517  ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii. 
16,  18,  abridgm. ;  comp.  Her.  ii.  14  ;  Ilasselquist, 
Trm.  p.  100.)     [Handicraft.]        [H.  W.  P.] 


Eg>-ptiari  hoes.     (Fi 


MAUL  («'.  c.  a  hammer  ;  a  variation  of  mall, 
from  malleus),  a  word  employe  1  by  our  translators 
to  render  the  Hebrew  term  |*^SD.  The  Hebrew 
and  English  alike  occur  in  Prov.  xxv.  18  only.  But 
a  derivative  from  tlie  same  root,  and  differing  but 
slightly  in  form,  viz.  ]*S0,  is  found  in  Jer.  Ii.  20, 
and  is  there  translated  by  "  battle-ax " — how  in- 
correctly is  shown  by  the  constant  repetition  of 
the  verb  derived  from  the  same  loot  in  the  next 
three  verses,  and  there  uniformly  rendered  "  break 
m  pieces."  The  root  |*DD  or  |'1S,  has  the  force  of 
dispersing  or  smashing,  and  there  is  no  doubt  that 
some  heavy  warlike  instrument,  a  mace  or  club,  is 
alluded  to.  Probably  such  as  that  which  is  said  to 
have  suggested  the  name  of  Charles  Martel. 

The  mace  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  accounts 
of  the  wars  of  the  Europeans  with  Saracens,  Turks, 
and  other  Orientals,  and  several  kinds  are  still  in 
use  among  the  Bedouin  Arabs  of  remoter  parts 
(Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  55.)  In  their 
European  wars  the  Turks  were  notorious  for  the  use 
they  made  of  the  mace  (Knollvs'  Hist,  of  the 
Turks). 

A  similar  word  is  ibund  once  again  in  the  original 
of  Ez.  ix.  2,  1*5)0  v3  =  weapon  of  smashing 
(A.  V.  "slaughter-weapon").  The  sequel  shows 
how  terrible  was  the  destruction  such  weapons 
could  effect.  [G.] 

MAUZ'ZIM  (nnj?0  :  MacofeiV  ;  Alex.  Mawfei': 
Maozim).    The  marginal  note  to  the  A.  V.  of  Dan. 


from  Cin.  "  carve,"  "engrave,"  1  Sam.  xiii.  20.  Wliidi 
of  these  is  tlie  ploughshare  and  which  the  mattock  cannot 
be  ascertiiiued.     See  Gcs.  p-  530. 


MAUZZIM 

xi.  38,  "  the  God  of  forces,"  gives,  as  the  equi- 
valent of  the  last  word,  "  Mauzzim,  or  gods  pro- 
tectors, or  munitions."  The  Geneva  version  renders 
the  Hebrew  as  a  proper  name  both  in  Dan,  xi.  38 
and  39,  where  the  word  occurs  again  (marg.  of 
A.  V.  "munitions").  In  the  Greek  version  of 
Theodotion,  given  above,  it  is  treated  as  a  proper 
name,  as  well  as  in  the  Vulgate.  The  LXX.  as  at 
present  printed  is  evidently  corrupt  in  tliis  passage, 
but  Iffxvpi  (ver.  37)  appears  to  re])resent  the  word 
in  question.  In  Jerome's  time  the  reading  was 
different,  and  he  gives  "  Deum  fortissimum  "  for  the 
Latin  translation  of  it,  and  "  Deum  tbrtitudinum  " 
for  that  of  Aquila.  He  ridicules  the  interpretation 
of  Porphyry,  who,  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  understood 
by  "  the  god  of  Mauzzim"  the  statue  of  Jupiter 
set  up  in  Modin,  the  city  of  Blattathias  and  his 
sons,  by  the  generals  of  Antiochus,  who  compelled 
the  Jews  to  sacrifice  to  it,  "  the  god  of  Modin." 
Theodoret  retains  the  reading  of  Theodotion  (Ma- 
Ccoeifji  being  evidently  for  Maojfeiju),  and  explains 
it  of  Antichrist,  "  a  god  strong  and  powerful."     The 

Peshito-Syriac  has  )LXa.O..^  JCTI^J,  "  the  strong 

god,"  and  Junius  and  Tremellius  render  it  "  Deum 
summi  roboris,"  considering  the  Hebrew  plural  as 
intensive,  and  interpreting  it  of  the  God  of  Israel. 
Thei'e  can  be  little  doubt  that  "  Mauzzim  "  is  to 
be  taken  in  its  literal  sense  of  "  fortresses,"  just  as 
in  Dan.  xi.  19,  39,  "  the  god  of  fortresses"  being 
then  the  deity  who  presided  over  strongholds.  But 
beyond  this  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  connect  an  ap- 
pellation so  general  with  any  special  object  of  idola- 
trous worship.  Grotius  conjectured  that  Mauzzim 
was  a  modification  of  the  name  "A^t^os,  the  war- 
god  of  the  Phoenicians,  mentioned  in  Julian's  h3'mn 
to  the  sun.  Calvin  suggested  that  it  denoted 
"  money,"  the  strongest  of  all  powers.  By  others 
it  has  been  supposed  to  be  Mars,  the  tutelary  deity 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  is  the  subject  of  allu- 
sion. The  onl}'  authority  for  this  supposition  exists 
in  two  coins  stiuck  at  Laodicoa,  which  are  believed 
to  have  on  the  obverse  the  head  of  Antiochus  with 
a  radiated  crown,  and  on  the  I'everse  the  figure  of 
Mars  with  a  spear.  But  it  is  asserted  on  the  con- 
trary that  all  known  coins  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
bear  his  name,  and  that  it  is  mere  conjecture  which 
attributes  these  to  him  ;  and  further,  that  there  is 
no  ancient  authority  to  show  that  a  tem])le  to  Mars 
was  built  by  Antiochus  at  Laodicea.  The  opinion 
of  Gesenius  is  more  probable,  that  "the  god  of 
fortresses"  was  Jupiter  Capitolinus,  for  whom  An- 
tiochus built  a  temple  at  Antioch  (Liv.  xli.  20). 
By  others  it  is  referred  to  Jupiter  Olympius,  to 
whom  Antiochus  dedicated  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem 
(2  Mace.  vi.  2).  But  all  these  are  simply  con- 
jectures. Fiirst  {Handw.  s.  v.),  comparing  Is. 
xxxiii.  4,  where  the  reference  is  to  Tyre,  "  the 
fortress  of  the  sea,"  makes  D^-tyO  equivalent  to 
DTl  tiyO,  or  even  proposes  to  read  for  the  fonner 
D''  t'yO,  the  god  of  the  "stronghold  of  the  sea" 
would  thus  be  Melkart,  the  Tyrian  Hercules.  A 
suggestion  made  by  Mr.  Layard  {Nin.  ii.  456,  note) 
is  worthy  of  being  recorded,  as  being  at  least  as 
well  founded  as  any  already  mentioned.  After  de- 
scribing Hera,  the  Assyrian  Venus,  as  "  standing 
erect  on  a  lion,  and  crowned  with  a  tower  or  mural 
coronet,  which,  w%  learn  from  Lucian,  was  peculiar 
til  the  Semitic  figure  of  tlie  goddess,"  he  adds  in  3 
note,  "  May  she  be  connected  with  the  '  El  Alao- 
zeni,'    (he  deity  presiding  over  bulwarks   and   for- 


MAZITIAS 

tresses,  the  'god  of  forces'  of  Dau.  xi.  38?" 
Pfeitter  {Dub.  Vex.  cent.  4,  loc.  72)  will  only  see 
in  it  "  the  idol  of  the  Mass  I  "  f  W.  A,W.] 

MAZITI'AS  {UaCtrias:  Mathathias)  =Mat- 
xniiiAH  o  (1  Esd.  ix.  35 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  43). 

MAZ'ZAROTH  (nn-TO  :  Ua^ovpcie :  Lucifor). 
The  margiu  of  the  A.  V.  of  Job  xxxviii.  32  gives 
"  the  twelve  signs"  as  the  equivalent  of  "  Mazza- 
rotli,"  and  this  is  in  all  probability  its  true  mean- 
ing.   The  Peshito-Syriac  renders  it  by  J-^v-^^^^, 

'ogalto,  "the  wain"  or  "Great  Bear;"  and  J.  D. 
Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  No.  1391)  is  fol- 
lowed by  Ewald  in  applying  it  to  the  stars  of  "  the 
northern  crown"  (Ewald  adds  "  the  southern"), 
deriving  the  word  from  ^p,  nezer,   "  a  crown." 

Fiirst  [Handle,  s.  v.)  understands  by  Mnzzaroth 
the  planet  .Jupiter,  the  same  as  the  "  star"  of  Amos 
V.  2t!.»  But  the  interpretation  given  in  the  margin 
of  our  version  is  supported  by  the  authority  of  Ge- 
senius  {Thes.  p.  8f]y).  On  referring  to  2  K.  xxiii. 
J,  we  find    the  word   ni>TD,  mazzaloth   (A.  V. 

"  the  planets "),  diffeiing  only  from  Mazzaroth  in 
having  the  liquid  /  for  r,  and  rendered  in  the  margin 
"  the  twelve  signs,"  as  in  the  Vulgate.  The  LXX. 
there  also  have  ixa^ovpeiO,  which  points  to  the 
same  reading  in  both  passages,  and  is  by  Suidas  ex- 
plained as  "  the  Zodiac,"  but  by  Procopius  of  Gaza 
as  probably  "  Lucifer,  the  morning  star,"  following 
the  Vulgate  of  Job  xxxviii.  32.  In  later  Jewish 
writings  mazzaloth  are  the  signs  of  the  Zodiac,  and 
the  singular,  mazzal,  is  used  to  denote  the  single 
signs,  as  well  as  the  planets,  and  also  the  influence 
which  they  were  believed  to  exercise  upon  human 
destiny  (Selden,  De  Bis  Sijr.  Synt.  i.  c.  1).  In 
consequence  of  this,  Jarchi,  and  the  Hebrew  com- 
mentators generally,  identify  mazzdrotk  and  mazza- 
loth, though  their  interpretations  vary.  Aben  Ezra 
understands  "stars"  generally;  but  R.  Levi  ben 
Gershon,  "  a  northern  constellation."  Gesenius 
himself  is  in  favour  of  regarding  mazzaroth  as  the 
older  form,  signifying  strictly  "  premonitions,"  and 
in  the  concrete  sense,  "  stais  that  give  warnings  or 
presages,"  from  the  usage  of  the  root  IT^j  ndzar,  in 
Ai'abic.  He  deciphered,  as  he  believed,  the  same 
word  on  some  Cilician  coins  in  the  inscription 
/V  "]t  T1TJ3,  which  he  renders  as  a  prayer,  "  may 
thy  pure  star  (shine)  over  (us)  "  {Man.  Plioen. 
p.  270,  t;ib.  36).  [W.  A.  W.J 

MEADOW.  This  word,  so  peculiarly  English, 
is  used  in  tlie  A.  V.  to  translate  two  words  which 
are  entirely  distinct  and  independent  of  each  other. 

1.  Gen.  xli.  2  and  18.  Here  the  word  in  the  ori- 
ginal is  -inNn  (with  the  definite  article),  ha-Achu. 

It  appears  to  be  an  Egyptian  term,  literally  trans- 
ferred into  the  Hebrew  text,  as  it  is  also  into  that 
of  the  Alexandrian  translators,  who  give  it  as  ry 
"Axfi.^  The  same  form  is  retained  by  the  Coptic 
version.  Its  use  in  Job  viii.  11  (A.  V.  "flag") 
— where  it  occurs  as  a  parallel  to  (jume  (A.  V. 
"rush"),  a  word  used  in  Ex.  ii.  3  for  the  "bul- 
rushes" of  which  Moses'  ark  was  composed — seems 


"  A  note  to  the  Hex,iplar  Syriac  version  of  Job  (ed. 
Middeldorpf,  1S35)  has  the  following :  "  Some  say  it  is 
the  dog  of  the  Riant  (Orion,  i.  e.  Canis  m.-yor),  others  that 
it  is  the  Zodiac." 

1)  Tliis  is  tlie  reading;  of  Codex  A.  Codex  15,  if  wc  may 
iiici'iil  the  edition  of  Mai.  lias  eAo5 ;  so  also  the  rendering  of 


MEAH,  THE  TOWER  OF        281 

to  shew  that  it  is  not  a  "  meadow,"  but  some  kind 
of  reed  or  water-plant.  This  the  LXX.  sujiport, 
both  by  rendering  iii  the  latter  passage  ^ovrofioy, 
and  also  by  introducing  "Ax^  as  the  equivalent  of 
the  word  rendered  "paper-reeds"  in  Is.  xix.'T. 
St.  Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  the  passage,  also 
confirms  this  meaning.  He  states  that  he  was  in- 
formed by  learned  Egyptians  that  the  word- acAi 
denoted  in  their  tongue  any  green  thing  that  o-rew 
in  a  marsh — omnc  quod  in  palude  virens  nascitur. 
But  as  during  high  inundations  of  the  Nile — such 
inundations  as  are  the  cause  of  fruitful  years — the 
whole  of  the  land  on  either  side  is  a  marsh,  and  as 
the  cultivation  extends  up  to  the  very  lip  of  the 
river,  is  it  not  possible  that  Achu  may  denote  the 
herbage  of  the  growing  crops?  'The  fact  that 
the  cows  of  Pharaoh's  vision  were  feeding  there 
would  seem  to  be  as  strong  a  figure  as  could  be 
piesented  to  an  Egyptian  of  the  extreme  fruitful- 
ness  of  the  season:  so  luxuriant  was  the  growth 
on  either  side  of  the  stream,  that  the  very  cows 
fed  amongst  it  unmolested.  The  lean  kine,  on  the 
other  hand,  merely  stand  on  the  dry  brink.  [Nile.] 
No  one  appears  yet  to  have  attempted  to  discover 
on  the  spot  what  the  signification  of  the  term  is. 

2.  Judg.  XX.  33only:  "  the  meadows  of  Gibeah." 
Here  the  word  is  H^yO,  Maareh,  which  occurs  no 
where  else  with  the  same  vowels  attached  to  it. 
The  sense  is  thus  doubly  uncertain.  "Meadows" 
around  Gibeah  can  certainly  never  have  existed : 
the  nearest  approach  to  that  sense  would  be  to  take 
maareh  as  meaning  an  open  plain.  This  is  the 
dictum  of  Gesenius  {Thes.  1069),  on  the  authority 
of  the  Targutn.  It  is  also  adopted  by  De  Wette 
{die  Plane  von  G.).  But  if  an  open  plain,  where 
could  the  ambush  have  concealed  itself? 

The  LXX.,  according  to  the  Alex.  MS.,=  read  a 
different  Hebrew  word— 3~iyj3— "  from  the  west 
of  Gibeah."  Tremellius,  taking  the  root  of  the  word 
in  a  figurative  sense,  reads  "  after  Gibeah  had  been 
left  open,"  i.  e.  by  the  quitting  of  its  inhabitants 
— post  denudationem  Gibliae.  This  is  adopted  by 
Bertheau  {Kurzrjef.  Handb.  ad  loc.)  But  the  most 
plausible  interpretation  is  that  of  the  Peshito-Syriac, 
which  by  a  slight  difference  in  the  vowel-points 
makes  the  word  myD,  "  the  cave  ;"  a  suggestion 
quite  in  keeping  with  the  locality,  which  is  very 
suitable  for  caves,  and  also  with  the  requirements 
of  the  ambush.  The  only  thing  that  can  be  said 
against  this  is  that  the  liers-in-wait  were  "  set 
round  about"  Gibeah,  as  if  not  in  one  spot,  but 
several.  [(; .] 

ME'AH,  THE  TOWER  OF  (nN?3n  "p-^lJO  : 
TTvpyoi  Tu>v  eKa,T6v :  tnrris  centum  cabituniiii, 
turrim  Emeth),  one  of  the  towers  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  when  rebuilt  by  Nehemiah  (iii.  1,  xii. 
39).  It  stood  between  the  tower  of  Hanancel  and 
the  sheep-gate,  and  appears  to  have  been  situated 
somewhere  at  the  north-east  j)art  of  the  city,  out- 
side of  the  walls  of  Zion  (see  the  diagram,  vol.  i. 
p.  1027).  The  name  in  Hebrew  means  "  the  tower 
of  the  hundred,"  but  whether  a  hiuidred  cubits  of 
distance  from  some  other  point,  or  a  hundred  in 
height  (Syriac  of  xii.  39),  or  a  hundred  heroes  com- 

Aquila  and  Symmachus,  and  of  Josephus  (Ant.  li.  5,  }5). 
Another  version,  quoted  in  the  fragments  of  the  Hexapla. 
attempts  to  reconcile  soiuid  and  sense  by  ox9>).  The 
Veneto-Greek  has  Aeijuwi'. 

<■  The   Vatican   Codex    transfers    the    word    literally 
— Mttpaaya3e'. 


282 


MEALS 


memorated  by  it,  we  are  not  told  or  enabled  to 
infer.  In  the  Arabic  version  it  is  rendered  Bab-el- 
bostdn,  the  gate  of  tlie  garden,  which  suggests  its 
identity  with  the  "  gate"  Gennath  " '•  of  Josephus. 
But  the  gate  Gennath  appears  to  have  lain  further 
round  towards  the  west,  nearer  the  spot  whei-e  the 
ruin  l<iiown  as  the  Kasr  Jalnd  now  stands.     [G.] 

MEALS.  Our  information  on  this  subject  is 
but  scanty:  the  early  Hebrews  do  not  seem  to  have 
given  special  names  to  their  several  meals,  for  the 
terms  rendered  "  dine"  and  "dinner"  in  the  A.  V. 
(Gen.  .\liii.  16  ;  Prov.  x\'.  17)  are  in  reality  general 
expressions,  which  might  more  correctly  be  rendered 
"eat"  and  "portion  of  food."  In  the  N.  T.  we 
have  the  Greek  terms  &pt(Trov  and  Selirvuv,  which 
the  A.  V.  rend'ers  respectively  "  dinner"  and  "sup- 
per"" (Lukexiv.  12  ;  John  xxi.  12),  but  which  are 
more  properly  "  breakfast "  and  "  dinner."  There 
is  some  uncertainty  as  to  the  hours  at  which  the 
meals  were  taken :  the  Egyptians  undoubtedly  took 


MEALS 

their  principal  meal  at  noon  (Gen.  xliii.  16):  la- 
bourers took  a  light  meal  at  that  time  (I'lUth  ii.  14; 
comp.  verse  17);  and  occasionally  that  early  houi 
was  devoted  to  excess  and  revelling  (1  K.  xx.  ItJ).  It 
has  been  inferred  from  those  passages  (somewhat  too 
ha.stily,  we  think)  tliat  the  principal  meal  generally 
took  place  at  noon:  the  Egyptians  do  indeed  still 
make  a  substantial  meal  at  that  time  ( Lane's  Mod. 
Egypt,  i.  189),  but  there  are  indications  that  the 
Jews  rather  followed  the  custom  that  pre\-ails  among 
the  Bedouins,  and  made  their  princii>al  meal  after 
sunset,  and  a  lighter  meal  at  about  9  or  10  A.M. 
(Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  64).  For  instance,  Lot  pi-e- 
pared  a  least  for  the  two  angels  "at  even"  (Gen. 
xix.  1-3)  :  Boaz  evidently  took  his  meal  late  in  the 
evening  (Ruth  iii.  7) :  the  Israelites  ate  flesh  in  the 
evening,  and  bread  only,  or  manna,  in  the  moi-ning 
(Ex.  xvi.  12):  the  context  seems  to  imply  that 
Jethro's  feast  wa.s  in  the  evening  (Ex.  xviii.  12,  14). 
But,  above  all,  the  institution  of  tlie  Paschal  feast 


An  ancient  Egyptian  dinner  party.     (Willtinson.) 
Tnl>lcs  witli  various  dishis.        t,  p.  Figs.        rf,  e.  q,  and  s.  Basl<ets  of  grapes.        Fig.  3  is  taliing  a  wing  from  a  goose. 
:.  4  liolds  a  joint  of  meat.        Figs.  .'J  and  7  are  eating  fisli.        Fig.  6  is  about  to  drinlt  water  from  an  eartlieu  vessel. 


in  the  evening  .seems  to  imply  that  the  principal 
meal  was  usually  taken  then  :  it  appears  highly  im- 
probable that  the  Jews  would  have  been  ordered  to 
eat  meat  at  an  unusual  time.  In  the  later  Biblical 
period  we  have  clearer  notices  to  the  same  effect : 
breakfjist  took  place  in  the  morning  (John  xxi.  4,  12), 
on  ordinary  days  not  before  9  o'clock,  which  was  the 
first  hour  of  prayer  (Acts  ii.  15),  and  on  the  Sivb- 
bath  not  before  1 2,  when  the  service  of  the  synagogue 
was  completed  (Joseph.  Vit.  §.54)  :  the  more  pi-o- 
longed  and  substantial  meal  took  place  in  the  evening 
(Joseph.  Vit.  §44 ;  B.  J.  i.  17,  §4).  The  general 
tenour  of  the  parable  of  the  great  supper  cei-tainly 
implies  that  the  feast  took  place  in  the  working  hours 
of  the  day  (Luke  xiv.  15-24):  but  we  may  regard 
this  perhaps  as  part  of  the  imageiy  of  the  parable, 
rather  than  as  a  picture  of  real  life. 


d  Tossibly  from  rii35.  ganndth,  "  gardens,"  perhaps 
alluding  to  the  gardens  which  lay  north  of  the  city. 

a  The  Greek  word  htUvov  was  used  indifferenily  in  the 
Homeric  age  for  the  early  or  the  late  meal,  its  special 
meaning  being  the  principal  meal.  Jn  later  times,  how- 
ever, the  term  was  applied  exclusively  to  the  late  meal, 
—  the  SopTrnr  of  the  Homeric  age. 


The  posture  at  meals  varied  at  various  periods : 
thei-e  is  sufficient  evidence  that  the  old  Hebrews  were 
in  the  habit  oi sittinij  (Gen.  xxvii.  19  ;  Judg.  xix.  6  ; 
1  Sam.  XX.  5,  24;.  1  K.  xiii.  20),  but  it  does  not 
hence  follow  that  they  sat  on  cliairs ;  they  may 
have  squatted  on  the  ground,  as  was  the  occasional, 
though  not  perhaps  the  general,  custom  of  the  ancient 
Egyptians  (Wilkinson,  Aiic.  Eg.  i.  58,  181).  The 
table  was  in  this  ca.se  but  slightly  elevated  above  the 
ground,  as  is  still  the  ca.se  in  Egypt.  At  the  same 
time  the  ('hair  ''  was  not  unknown  to  the  Hebrews, 
but  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  a  token  of  dignity. 
As  luxury  increased,  the  pi'actice  of  sitting  was  ex- 
changed for  that  of  reclining :  the  first  intimation 
of  this  occurs  in  the  prophecies  of  Amos,  who  repro- 
bates those  "  that  lie  upoii  beds  of  ivory,  and  stretch 
themselves  upon  their  couches  "  (vi.  4),  and  it  ap- 


l>  The  Hebrew  term  Is  kisse  (SE>3)-     There  is  only 

one  instance  of  its  biMng  mentioned  as  an  article  of  ordi- 
nary furniture,  viz.,  in  2  IC.  iv.  10,  where  the  A.  V.  incor- 
rectly renders  it  "  stool."  Kven  there  it  seems  probahle 
that  it  was  placed  more  as  a  mark  of  special  honour  to  the 
prophet  than  for  conmion  use. 


MEALS 

pears  that  the  couches  themselves  were  of  a  costly 
character — the  "  corners  ">•■  ov  (?c?(/es  (iii.  12)  being 
tiuished  \vith  ivory,  and  the  seat  covered  with  silk 
or  damask  coverlets.''  Ezekiel,  again,  inveighs  against 
one  who  sat  "  on  a  stiitely  bed  with  a  table  prepared 
before  it"  (xxiii.  41).  The  custom  may  have  been 
borrowed  in  the  first  instance  from  the  Babylonians 
and  Syrians,  among  whom  it  prevailed  at  an  early 
period  (Esth.  i.  6,  vii.  8).  A  similar  change  took 
place  in  the  habits  of  the  Greeks,  who  are  represented 
in  the  Heroic  age  as  sitting"  [Tl.  x.  578;  Od.  i. 
145),  but  who  afterwanls  adopted  the  habit  of 
reclining,  women  and  children  excepted.  In  the  time 
of  our  Saviour  reclining  was  the  universal  custom, 
as  is  implied  in  the  terms'  lused  tor  "  sitting  at  meat," 
as  the  A.  V.  incorrectly  has  it.  The  couch  itself 
(K\iv7i)  is  only  once  mentioned  (Mark  vii.  4  ;  A.  V. 
"  tables "),  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
Roman  triclinium  had  been  introduced,  and  that  the 
arrangements  of  the  table  i-esembled  those  described 
by  classical  writers.  Generally  speaking,  only  three 
persons  reclined  on  each  couch,  bat  occasionally  tiiur 
or  even  five.  The  couches  were  provided  with 
cushions  on  which  the  left  elbow  rested  in  support 
of  the  upper  part  of  the  body,  while  the  right  arm 
remained  li-ee :  a  room  provided  with  these  was 
described  as  iffrp(ojj.ivov,  lit.  "  spread  "  (Mark  xiv. 
15;  A.  V.  "  furnished  ").  As  several  guests  reclined 
on  the  same  couch,  each  overlapped  his  neighbour, 
:is  it  were,  and  rested  his  head  on  or  near  the  breast 
of  the  one  who  lay  behind  him :  he  was  then  said  to 
"  lean  on  the  bosom  "  of  his  neighbour  {^avaKelffQai 
ev  T«p  K6\ircf>,  John  xiii.  23,  xxi.  20  ;  comp.  Plin. 
Epist.  iv.  22).  The  close  proximity  into  which 
pereons  were  thus  brought  rendered  it  more  than 
usually  agreeable  that  friend  should  be  next  to  friend, 
and  it  gave  the  opportunity  of  making  confidential 
communications  (John  xiii.  25).  The  ordinary  ar- 
rangement of  the  couches  was  in  three  sides  of  a 
square,  the  fourth  being  left  open  for  the  sen-ants  to 
bring  up  the  dishes.  The  couches  were  denominated 
respectively  the  highest,  the  middle,  and  the  lowest 
couch  ;  the  three  guests  on  each  couch  were  also  de- 
nominated highest,  middle,  and  lowest — the  terms 
being  suggested  by  the  circumstance  of  the  guest  who 
reclined  on  another's  bosom  always  appearing  to  be 
helow  him.  The  protoklisia  (vpoiTOKKKTia,  Matt, 
xxiii.  (5),  which  the  Pharisees  so  much  coveted,  was 
not,  a.s  the  A.  V.  represents  it,  "  the  ujjpermost 
room,"  but  the  highest  seat  in  the  highest  couch — 
.  the  seat  numbered  I  in  the  annexed  diagram, 
lectus  medius 


2     3 

11 


MEALS 


283 


Some  douljt  attends  the  question  whether  the 
females  took  their  meals  along  with  the  males.  The 
present  state  of  society  in  the  E;ist  throws  no  light 
upon  this  subject,  as  the  customs  of  the  Harem 
date  fi-om  the  time  of  Mahomet.  The  cases  of 
Ruth  amid  the  reapers  (Ruth  ii.  14),  of  Elkanah 
with  his  wives  (1  Sam.  i.  4),  of  Job's  sons  and 
daughters  (Job  i.  4),  and  the  general  intermixture 
of  the  sexes  in  daily  life,  make  it  more  than  pro- 
bable that  they  did  so  join  ;  at  the  same  time,  as  the 
duty  of  attending  upon  the  guests  devolved  upon 
them  (Luke  x.  40),  they  probably  took  a  somewhat 
irregular  and  briefer  repast. 


sumnuis       7 

1 
medius      !  8 

imiis  9 


nnus 
medius 

sumnius 


<=  The  word  is  peali  (ilNB).  which  will  apply  to  the 

edge  iis  well  as  to  the  angle  of  a  couch.  That  the  seats 
and  couches  of  the  Assyrians  were  handsonuly  orna- 
rueiitcU,  appears  from  the  specimens  given  by  Layard 
(iVineveli,  ii.  300-2.). 

<i  The  A.  V.  has  "  in  Damascus  in  a  coiicli ;"  but  there 
can  bo  no  doubt,  thai  the  name  of  the  town  was  Inuis- 


Wishing  bcfoie  or  aftci  a  niPil     fTiom  Lane  s  MoJein  Fgi/pt 


Before  commencing  the  meal,  the  guests  washed 
their  hands.  This  custom  was  founded  on  natural 
decorum  ;  not  only  was  the  hand  the  substitute  for 
our  knife  and  fork,  but  the  hands  of  all  the  guests 
were  dipped  into  one  and  the  same  dish  ;  unclean- 
liness  in  such  a  case  would  be  intolerable.  Hence 
not  only  the  Jews,  but  the  Greeks  {Od.  i.  136),  the 
modern  Egyptians  (Lane,  i.  190),  and  many  other 
nations,  have  been  distinguished  by  this  practice ; 
the  Bedouins  in  particular  are  careful  to  wash  their 
hands  before,  but  are  indifferent  about  doing  so  after 
their  meals  (Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  63).  The  Pha- 
risees transfoimed  this  conventional  usage  into  a 
ritual  observance,  and  overlaid  it  with  burdensome 
regulations — a  wilful  perversion  which  our  J-ord 
reprobates  in  the  strongest  terms  (Mark  vii.  1-13). 
Another  preliminary  step  was  the  grace  or  blessing, 
of  which  we  have  but  one  instance  in  the  U.  T. 
(1  Sam.  ix.  13),  and  more  than  one  pronounced  by 
our  Lord  Himself  in  the  N.T.  (Matt.  xv.  36  ;  Luke 
ix.  16:  John  vi.  11);  it  consisted,  as  far  as  we 
may  judge  from  the  words  applied  to  it,  partly  of  a 
blessing  upon  the  food,  partly  of  thanks  to  the  Giver 
of  it.  Tlje  Rabbinical  writers  have,  as  usual,  laid 
down  most  minute  regulations  respecting  it,  which 
may  be  found  in  the  treatise  of  the  Mishna,  en- 
titled Berachoth,  chaps.  6-8. 

The  mode  of  taking  the  food  differed  in  no  ma- 
terial point  from  the  modern  usages  of  the  East : 
generally  there  was  a  single  dish  into  which  each 


ferred  to  the  silk  stuffs  manufactured  there,  which  are 
still  known  by  the  name  of  "  Damask." 

«  Sitting  aiipears  to  have  been  the  posture  usual  among 
the  Assyrians  on  the  occasion  of  great  festivals.  A  bas- 
relief  on  the  walls  of  KlioisabacI  represents  the  guests 
seated  on  high  chairs  (Layard,  Xhicvdt,  ii.  411). 

f  'AvaKiicrdai.,    KaraKfiaOai,     niaK^ivtaOai,     Karo/cAi- 


284: 


MEALS 


guest  dipped  his  hand  (Matt.  xxvi.  23) ;  occasion- 
ally separate'  portions  wore  served  out  to  each  (Gen. 
xliii.  3+;  Uuth  ii.  14;  1  Sam.  i.  4).  A  piece  of 
bread  was  held  between  the  thumb  and  two  fingers  of 
the  right  hand,  and  was  dipped  either  into  a  bowl  of 
melted  grease  (in  whi<h  case  it  was  termed  ^wfiiou, 
"  a  sop,"  John  xiii.  2(3),  or  into  the  dish  of  meat, 
whence  a  piece  was  conveyed  to  the  mouth  between 
the  layers  of  bread  (Lane,  i.  193,  194;  Burck-_ 
hardt's  Notes,  i.  63).  It  is  esteemed  an  act  of 
politeness  to  hand  over  to  a  friend  a  delicate  morsel 
(John  .xiii.  2fi  ;  Lane,  i.  194).  In  allusion  to  the 
above  method  of  eating,  Solomon  makes  it  a  charac- 
teristic of  the  sluggard,  that  "  hehideth  his  hand  in 
his  bosom  and  wi  1 1  not  so  much  as  bring  it  to  his  mouth 
again  "  (Prov.  xix.  24,  xxvi.  15).  At  the  conclusion 
of  the  meal,  grace  was  again  said  in  conformity  with 
Peut.  viii.  10,  and  the  hands  were  again  washed. 


'I'luis  fir  we  have  described  the  ordinary  meal  : 
on  state  occasions  more  ceremony  was  used,  and 
the  meal  was  enlivened  in  various  ways.  Such  oc- 
casions were  numerous,  in  "connexion  partly  with 
public,  partly  with  private  events :  in  the  first  class 
we  may  place — the  great  festivals  of  the  Jews  (Deut. 
.\vi.;  Tob.  ii.  1);  public  .sacrifices  (Deut.  xii.  7; 
xxvii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  13,  22  ;  1  K.  i.  9,  iii.  15  ; 
Zeph.  i.  7);  the  ratification  of  treaties  (Gen.  x.wi. 
30,  xxxi.  54) ;  the  otiering  of  the  tithes  (Deut. 
xiv.  26),  particularly  at  the  end  of  each  third  year 
(Deut.  xiv.  28):  in  the  second  class — marriages 
(Gen.  xxix.  22  ;  Judg.  xiv.  10  ;  Esth.  ii.  18  ;  Tob. 
viii.  19;  Matt.  xxii.  2;  John  ii.  1),  birth-days 
(Gen.  xl.  20  ;  Job  i.  4  ;  Matt.  xiv.  6,  9),  burials 
(2  .Sam.  iii.  35  ;  Jer.  xvi.  7  ;  Hos.  ix.  4  ;  Tob.  iv. 
17),  sheep-shearing  (1  Sam.  x.w.  2,  36;  2  Sam. 
xiii.  23),  the  vintage  (Judg.  ix.   27),    laying  the 

g  "  The  day  of  the  king"  in  thii,  passage  has  been  va- 
riously undirstood  as  his  birthday  or  his  coronation :  it 
may,  liowever,  be  equally  applied  to  any  other  event  of 
similar  importance. 

h  This  custom  prevailed  extensively  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans :  not  only  were  chaplets  worn  on  the  head, 
but  festoons  of  flowers  were  hung  over  the  neck  and  breast 
(Pint.  St/mp.  iii.  1,  ^3;  Mart.  x.  19:  Ov.  Fait.  ii.  139). 
They  were  generally  introduced  after  the  first  part  of  the 
entertaimnent  was  completed.  Thoy  are  noticed  in  several 


MEANI 

foundation  stone  of  a  house  (Prov.  ix.  1-5),  the 
reception    of  visitors    (Gen.    .wiii.    6-8,    xix.    3 ; 
2  Sam.  iii.  20,  xii.  4;    2  K.  vi.  23;  Tob.  vii.  9; 
1   Mace.  xvi.   15  ;    2   Mace.  ii.  27 ;  Luke  v.  29, 
XV.    23 ;    John    xii.   2),    or   any   event  connected 
with  the  sovereign  (Hos.  vii.  5).?     On  each  of  these 
occasions  a   sumptuous   repast  was  prepared;  the 
guests  were  previously  invited  (Esth.  v.  8;  Matt, 
xxii.  3),  and  on  the  day  of  the  t(>ast  a  second  invi- 
tation was  issued  to  those  that  were  bidden  (Esth. 
vi.  14;   Prov.  ix.  3  ;   Matt.  xxii.  3).     The  visitors 
were  received   with  a  kiss  (Tob.  vii.  6  ;   Luke  vii. 
45 ) ;  water  was  produced  for  them  to  wash  their 
feet  with  (Luke  vii.  44)  ;  the  head,  the  beard,  the 
feet,  and  sometimes  the  clothes,  were  perfumed  with 
ointment  (Ps.  xxiii.  5;  Am.  vi.  6;   Luke  vii.  38; 
John  xii.  3) ;   on  special  occasions  robes  were  pro- 
vided (Matt.  xxii.  11 ;  comp.  Trench  on  I'arahles, 
p.  230)  ;  and  the  head  was  decorated  with  wreaths'' 
(Is.  xxviii.  1  ;   Wisd.  ii.  7,  8;  Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  9, 
§1).     The  regulation  of  the  feast  was  under  the  su- 
perintendence of  a  special  officer,  named  apxtrpi- 
kAii/os'  (Johnii.8;  A.  V.  "governor  of  the  least"), 
whose  business   it   was  to  taste  the  food  and  the 
liquors  betbre  they  were  placed  on  the  table,  and  to 
settle  about  the  toasts  and  amusements  ;  he  was  ge- 
nerally one  of  the  guests  (Ecclus.  xxxii.  1,  2),  and 
might  therefore  take  part  in  the  conversation.    The 
places  of  the  guests  were  settled  according  to  their 
respective  rank    (Gen.  .xliii.  33;    1  Sam.  ix.  22; 
Luke  xiv.  8  ;   Mark  xii.  39  ;    John  xiii.  23)  ;  por- 
tions of  food  were  placed  before  each  (1  Sam.  i.  4; 
2  Sam.  vi.  19  ;    1  Chr.  xvi.  3),  the  most  honoui'ed 
guests  receiving  either  larger  (Gen.  xliii.  34  ;  comp. 
Herod,   vi.  57)  or  more  choice   (1  Sam.  ix.  24; 
comp.   n.  vii.  321)  portions  than  the  rest,     'i'he 
importance  of  the  least  was  marked  by  the  number 
of  the  guests  (Gen.  xxix.  22  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  22  ;  1  K. 
i.  9,  25;   Luke  v.  29,  xiv.  16),   by  the  splendour 
of  the  vessels  (Esth.  i.   7),  and  by  the  profusion 
or   the    excellence   of  the   viands    (Gen.   xviii.   6, 
xxvii.  9  ;  Judg.  vi.  19 ;   1  Sam.  ix.  24  ;  Is.  xxv.  6  ; 
Am.  vi.  4).     The  meal  was  enlivened  with  music, 
singing,  and  dancing  {'2  Sam.    xix.  35;   Ps.  Ixix. 
12;    is.  V.    12;    Am.  vi.  5 ;    Ecclus.   xxxii.   3-6; 
Matt.    xiv.    6 ;    Luke   xv.    25),    or   with    riddles 
(Judg.   xiv.    12);   and   amid  these  entertainments 
the  t&stival  was  prolonged  for  several  days  (Esth. 
i.  3,  4).     Entertainments  designed    almost    exclu- 
sively for  drinking  were  known  by  the  special  name 
of  mishteh^  •   instances  of  such  drinking-bouts  are 
noticed  in  1  Sam.  xxv.  36 ;   2  Sam.  xiii.  28  ;  Esth. 
i.  7 ;  Dan.  v.  1 ;  they  are  reprobated  by  the  pro- 
phets (Is.  v.  11;  Am.  vi.  6).  Somewhat  akin  to  the 
nishteh  of  the  Hebrews  was  the  komos™  (koi/jlos)  of 
the  apostolic  age,  in  which  gross  licentiousness  wa.s 
added  to  drinking,  and  which  is  frequently  made  the 
subject  of  warning  in  the  Epistles  (Horn.  xiii.  1 3  ;  Oal. 
V.  21  ;  Eph.  v.  18 ;  1  Pet.  iv.  3).  [W.  L.  B.] 

ME'ANI  fMoi/i  ;   Alex.  Maavi :  Ifanei).     The 
same  as  Mehunim  (1  Esdr.  v.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii. 


familiar  passages  of  the.Latin  poets  (Hor.  Cami.  ii.  7,  24  ; 
Sat.  ii.  3,  '256 ;  Juv.  v.  36). 

'  The  cUissical  designation  of  this  officer  among  the 
Greeks  was  crv;u.iroo-tapxos,  among  the  Romans  magisttr 
or  rex  convivii.  He  was  chosen  bj-  lot  out  of  the  guests 
(^Dict.  of  Ant.  p.  925).  k   nFlC^'O- 

■n  The  Kttj/ao?  resembled  the  coniissatio  of  the  Romans. 
It  took  place  after  the  supper,  and  was  a  mere  drinking 
revel,  with  only  so  much  fond  as  served  to  whet  the  palate 
for  wine  (Diet,  of  Ant.  p.  271 ). 


MEARAH 


MEAT-OFFERING 


285 


50).  In  the  margin  of  th<'  A.  V.  it  is  given  in  the  j  peace-oHering  (Lev.  ii.  \,kc.) — and  which  consisted 
form  "  Meuuim,"  as  in  Neh.  vii.  52.  I  solely  of  flour,  or  corn,  and  oil,  sacrifices  of  flesh 

T.T^T.  A  .T>  A  TT  ,^^»K^     T  ^' V         •*    V,  ft   MeiS  •  '  ^'^'""  confined  to  the  other  two.     The  word  thus 
MEARAH  (mUD:  LXX.  omit,  both  MSb. :  ,  i  ,.  j  ;    -in>i»^     i       i,  i      i  ,.  ,. 

^    tt:  I  translated  is  nnja,  elsewhere  rendered  "  present 

Maura),  a  place  named  in  Josh.  .xiii.  4  only,  in  a  r^y^ut\r^n ''  'c„a  A^,.i,r^A  a i     u-  ■  V 

•i-  •      ii    V        1     •       i'^i     1      1     I  •  1,  ,.„«,o;.-,o,l  1  ^'"^   'oblation,    and  derived  trom  a  root  whici  has 
specilymg  the  boundaries  of  the  land  which  lemW    ^^^  ^^^,^^  ^^  ,,  ^  „  ^^.  ^^  ^  „  ^^  ^ 

to  be  conciuered  after  the  subjugation  of  the   outh-    ^^  .^  ^^^^.^^^^^^  ^^^^^  ^^^^  ^^    ^  term  should 

ern  portion  of  I'alestme.     "s  description    s      Ma-    ^^    ^^  ^^^.^^   ^^^^^^^  avoid%his  ambiguity. 

rah  which  IS  to  the  Zidonians  («.  e.  which  belong.  ^  ,,  pi,j.'„,j.,,i^g  »  j,  hardly  admissible,  thoirgh  it 
to— 7:  the  "beside"  of  the  A.  V.  is  an  erroneous  jg  perhaps  preferable  to  "unbloody  or  bloodtess 
translation).     The  word  mearali  means  in  Hebrew  |  sacrifice." 

3.  There  are  several  other  words,  which  though 
entirely  distinct  in  the  original,  are  all  translated  in 
the  A.  V.  by  "  meat ;"  but  none  of  them  present 
any  special  interest  e.xcept  C]~1D.  Xhis  word,  fioui 
a  root  signifying  "to  tear,"  would  be  peihaps  more 
accurately  rendered  "  prey  "  or  "  booty."  Its  use 
in  Ps.  c.\i.  5,  especially  when  taken  in  connexion 
with  the  word  rendered  "  good  understanding "  in 
ver.  10,  which  should  rather  be,  as  in  the  margin, 
"  good  success,"  throws  a  new  and  unexpected  light 
over  the  familiar  phrases  of  that  beautiful  Psalm. 


a  cave,  and  it  is  commonly  assumed  that  the  refer 
ence  is  to  some  remarkable  caveni  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Zidon  ;  such  as  that  which  played  a  memor- 
able part  many  centuries  afterwards  in  the  history 
of  the  Crusades.  (See  William  of  Tyre,  xix.  11, 
quoted  by  Robinson,  ii.  474woie.)  But  there  is,  as 
we  have  often  remarKed,  danger  in  interpreting  these 
very  ancient  names  by  the  significations  which  they 
bore  in  later  Hebrew,  and  when  pointed  with  the 
vowels  of  the  still  later  Masorets.  Besides,  if  a 
cave  were  intended,  and  not  a  place  called  Mearah, 

the  name  would  surely  have  been  preceded  by  the  ,  ^^  ^  ^^^^^^^  ^^  ^,^^^^  ^^^^  inextinguishable  was  the 
definite  article,  and  would  have  stood  as  nnySn.  ^varlike  predatory  spirit  in  the  mind  of  the  writer, 
"  the  cave."  ,      t,t        i.  u      S*'"'^  Israelite  and  devout  worshipper  of  Jehovah  as 

Keland  {Pal.  896)  suggests  that  Mearah  may  be  j  ^e  was.   Late  as  he  lived  in  the  history  of  his  nation, 
the  same  with  Meroth,  a  village  named  by  Josephus  [  ],e  cannot  forget  the  "  power"  of  Jehovah's  "  works" 
{Ant.  iii.  3,  §1)  as  forming  the  limit  of  Galilee  on  ;  j^y  ^y],i^.j^  ^ih  forefathers  acquired  the  "  heritage  of 
the  west   (see  also  Ant.   ii.   '20,   §6),  and   which  ,  ^j^^,  heathen  ;"  and  to  him,  as  to  his  ancestors  when 
again  may  possibly  have  been  connected  with  the    conquering  the  country,  it  is  still  a  firm  article  of 
Waters  OF  Merom.    The  identification  is  not  im-    -   -    -  -        -  -     -       -^  - 

probable,  though  there  is  no  means  of  ascertaining 
the  fact. 

A  village  called  el-Mughar  is  found  in  the  moun- 
tains of  Naphtali,  some  ten  miles  W.  of  the  northern 
extremity  of  the  sea  of  Galilee,  which  may  possibly 
represent  an  ancient  Mearah  (Rob.  iii.  79,  80  ;  Van 
de  Velde's  map).  [G.] 

MEASURES.     [Weights  and  Measures.] 

MEAT.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  word 
"  meat"  is  used  in  any  one  instance  in  the  Autho- 
rized Version  of  either  the  0.  or  N.  Testament,  in 


belief  that  those  who  fear  Jehovah  shall  obtain  most  ' 
of  the  spoil  of  His  enemies — those  who  obey  His 
commandments  shall  have  the  best  success  in  the 
field. 

4.  In  the  N.  T.  the  variety  of  the  Greek  words 
thus  rendered  is  equally  great ;  but  dismissing  such 
terms  as  avaKf7(rdai  or  auaTr'nmiy,  which  are  ren- 
dered by  "  sit  at  meat" — <paye7v,  for  which  we  oc- 
casionally find  "meat" — rpdire^a  (Acts  xvi.  34), 
the  same — ilScoAoOvra,  "  meat  offered  to  idols  " — 
KAafffxaTa,  generally  "  fragments,"  but  twice 
"  broken   meat " — dismissing  these,   we   have  lett 


the  sense  which  it  now  almost  exclusively  bears  of'  'rpo<i>ri  and  ^pufia  (with  its  kindred  words,  Ppwcris, 

■  "  &c),  both  words  bearing  the  widest  possible  signi- 
fication, ami  meaning  every  thing  that  can  be  eaten, 
or  can  nourish  the  frame.  The  former  is  most  used 
in  the  Gospels  and  Acts.  The  latter  is  found  in 
St.  John  and  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  It  is  the 
word  employed  in  the  famous  sentences,  "  for  meat 
destroy  not  the  work  of  God,"  "  if  metit  make  my 
brother  to  oHend,"  &g.  '  [(!.] 

MEAT-OFFERING  (nHJO  :    dQimv  evaia, 
or  Bvcrla :  ablatio  sacrifieii,  or  sacrifcium).     The 


animal  food.     The  latter  is  denoted  uniformly  by 
"  flesh." 

1 .  The  only  possible  exceptions  to  this  assertion 
in  the  0.  T.  are: — 

(a.)  Gen.  xxvii.  4,  &c.,  "  savoury  meat." 

(b.)  lb.  xlv.  23,  "  corn  and  bread  and  meat." 

But  (a)  in  the  former  of  these  two  cases  the 
Hebrew  word,  D'')2J?t2?D,  which  in  this  form  appeals 
in  this  chapter  only,  is  derived  from  a  root  which 
has  exactly  the  force,  of  our  word  "  taste,"  and  is 

employed  in  reference  to  the  manna.    In  the  passage  j  u-ord  MincluVi'-  signifies  originally  a  gift  of  any 
in  question  tne  word  "  dainties"  would  be  perhaps  I  kind;  and  appeiu's  to  be  used  generally  of  a  gift 
more  apiiropriate.     (6)  In  the  second  case  the  ori- 
ginal word  is  one  of  almost  equal  rarity,  piO";  and 


if  the  Lexicons  did  not  shew  that  this  had  only  the 
iCeneral  force  of  food  in  all  the  other  Oriental  tongues, 
that  would  be  established  in  regard  to  Hebrew  by 
its  other  occurrences,  viz.,  2  Chr.  xi.  23,  where  it 
is  rendered  "victual  ;"  and  Dan.  iv.  12,  2],  where 
the  "meat"  spoken  of  is  that  to  be  furnished  by  a 

'*""*  The  only   real    and    inconvenient    ambiguity!  <^1?1^) '"  ^''^  *^^  ^"'''^  Minchah  restricted  to  an 


from  an  inferior  to  a  superior,  whether  God  or  man, 
Thus  in  (len.  xxxii.  13  it  is  used  of  the  present 
from  Jacob  to  Esau,  in  Gen.  xliii.  11  of  the  present 
sent  to  Joseph  in  Egypt,  in  2  Sam.  viii.  2,  H  of  the 
tribute  from  Moab  and  Syria  to  David,  &c.,  &c. ; 
and  in  Gen.  iv.  3,  4,  5  it  is  applied  to  the  sacrifices 
to  God,  ofTeied  by  Cain  and  Abel,  although  Abel's 
was  a  whole  burnt-offering.  Afterwards  this  ge- 
neral sense  became  attached  to  the  word  "  Corban 


caused  by  the  change  which  has  taken  place  in  the 
meaning  of  the  word  is  in  the  case  of  the  "  meat- 
olleriiig,"   the   second  of  the  three  great  divisions 
into  which  the  sacrifices  of  the  Law  were  divided  i 
—the  burnt-offering,    the    meat-offering,   and   the 


"  unbloody  offering  "  as  opposed  to  HIT,  a  "  bloody  " 
sacnfice.     It  is  constantly  spoken  of  in  connexion 

">  nn30.  from  tlie  obsolete  root  PIJO-  •'  to  distribute  '■ 
or  "  to  give." 


286 


MEAT-OFFERING 


with  the  Drink-offering  (1]D3  ;  a-vovS^ ;  Hba- 
men),  which  generally  accompanied  it,  and  which 
liad  the  same  meaning.  The  law  or  ceremonial  of 
the  meat-otfering  is  described  in  Lev.  ii.  and  vi. 
14-23.  It  was  to  be  composed  of  fine  flour,  sea- 
soned with  salt,  and  mixed  with  oil  and  frankin- 
cense, but  without  leaven  ;  and  it  was  generally 
accompanied  by  a  drink-offering  of  wine.  A  por- 
tion of  it,  including  all  the  frankincense,  was  to 
be  burnt  on  the  altar  as  "  a  memoiial ;"  the  i-est 
belonged  to  the  priest;  but  the  meat-oflerings 
oftered  by  the  priests  themselves  were  to  be  wholly 
burnt. 

Its  meaning  (which  is  analogous  to  that  of  the 
offering  of  the  tithes,  the  first-fruits,  and  the  shew- 
breadj  appeai-s'to  be  exactly  expressed  in  the  words 
of  David  (I  Chr.  xxix.  10-14),  "  All  that  is  in  the 

heaven   and   in    the   earth  is  Thine All 

things  come  of  Thee,  and  of  Thine  own  have  ice 
given  Thee."  It  recognised  the  sovereignty  of 
"the  Lord,  and  His  bounty  in  giving  them  all 
earthly  blessings,  by  dedicating  to  Him  the  best  of 
His  gifts:  the  flour,  as  the  main  support  of  life; 
oil,  as  the  symbol  of  richness;  and  wine  as  the 
symbol  of  vigour  and  refreshment  (see  Ps.  civ.  15). 
All  these  were  unleavened,  and  seasoned  with  salt, 
in  order  to  show  their  purity,  and  hallowed  by  the 
frankincense  for  God's  special  service.  This  recog- 
nition, implied  in  all  cases,  is  expressed  clearly  in 
the  fonii  of  offering  the  fii-st-fruits  prescribed  in 
Deut.  xxvi.  5-11. 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  meaning  involves  nei- 
ther of  the  main  ideas  of  sacrifice — the  atonement 
for  sin  and  the  self-dedication  to  God.  It  takes 
them  for  granted,  and  is  based  on  them.  Accord- 
ingly, the  meat-offering,  properly  so  called,  seems 
always  to  have  been  a  subsidiary  offering,  needing 
to  be  introduced  by  the  sin-offering,  which  repre- 
sented the  one  idea,  and  forming  an  ajipendage  to  the 
bimit-offering  which  represented  the  other. 

Thus,  in  the  case  of  public  sacrifices,  a  "  meat- 
ofl'ering"  was  enjoined  as  a  part  of — 

(1)  The  daily  morning  and  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  40,  41). 

(2)  Tlie  Sabbath-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  9,  10). 

(3)  Tlie  offering  at  the  new  moon  (Num.  xxviii. 
11-14). 

(4)  The  offerings  at  the  great  festivals  (Num. 
xxviii.  20,  28,  x.xix.  3,  4,  14,  15,  &c.). 

(5)  The  offerings  on  the  great  day  of  atonement 
(Num.  xxix.  9,  10). 

The  same  was  the  case  with  private  sacrifices, 
as  at — 

(1)  The  consecration  of  priests  (Ex.  xxix.  1,2; 
Lev.  A'i.  20,  viii.  2),  and  of  Levites  (Num.  viii.  Sj. 

(2)  The  cleansing  of  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  20). 

(3)  The  termination  of  the  Nazaritic  vow  (Num. 
vi,  15). 

The  unbloody  offerings  offered  alone  did  not  pio- 
perly  belong  to  the  regular  meat-offering.  They 
were  usually  substitutes  for  other  offerings.  Thus, 
for  example,  ui  Lev.  v.  11,  a  tenth  of  an  ephah  of 
flour  is  allowed  to  be  substituted  by  a  poor  man 
for  the  lamb  or  kid  of  a  trespass-offering:  in  Num. 
V.  15  the  same  offering  is  ordained  as  the  "  offering 
of  jealousy "  for  a  suspected  wife.  The  unusual 
character  of  the  offering  is  marked  in  both  cases  by 
the  absence  of  the  oil,  frankincense,  and  wine.  We 
find  also  at  certain  times  libations  of  water  poured 
out  before  God  ;  as  by  Sanmel's  conunand  at  Mizpcli 
during  the  fot  (1  Sam.  vii.  <!),  and  by  J)avi(l   at 


MEDAN 

Bethlehem  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  IG),  and  a  libation  of  oil 
poured  by  Jacob  on  the  pillar  at  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxv. 
14).  But  these  have  cleai'ly  especial  meanings, 
and  are  not  to  be  included  in  the  ordinary  drink- 
offerings.  The  same  remark  will  apply  to  the  re- 
markable libation  of  water  customaiy  at  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  [Tabernacles],  but  not  mentioned 
in  Scripture.  [A.  B.j 

MEBUN'NAI  CnO  :  e/c  tS>v  vlS>v  :  Mo- 
bonna'i).  In  this  fonn  appears,  in  one  passage  only 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  27),  the  name  of  one  of  David's 
guard,  who  is  elsewhere  called  Sibbeciiai  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  18  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  4)  or  Sibbecai  (1  Chr.  xi. 
29,  xxvii.  11)  in  the  A.  V.  The  reading  ♦' Sib- 
bechai "  (^33D),  is  evidently  the  true  one,  of  which 
"  Mebunuai"  was  an  easy  and  early  coiTuption,  for 
even  the  LXX.  translators  must  have  had  the 
same  consonants  before  them  though  they  pointed 
thus,   ^3313.      It  is   curious,    howevei-,   that   the 

Aldine  edition  has  'Zafiovxcd  (Kennicott.  Diss.  i. 
p.  186).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MECHER'ATHITE,  THE  OnnDSH:  Mo- 

X^p  ;  Alex.  (pepufxexovpaOi :  Mecherathites),  that 
is,  the  native  or  inhabitant  of  a  place  called  Me- 
cherah.  Only  one  such  is  mentioned,  namely 
Hepiier,  one  of  David's  thiiiy-seven  warriors 
(1  Chr.  xi.  36).  In  the  parallel  list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
the  name  appears,  with  other  variations,  as  "  the 
Maachathite  "  (ver.  34).  It  is  the  opinion  of  Ken- 
nicott, after  a  long  examination  of  the  passage,  that 
the  latter  is  the  conecter  of ^  the  two ;  and  as  no 
place  named  Mecherah  is  known  to  have  existed, 
while  the  Maachathites  had  a  certain  connexion  with 
Israel,  and  especially  with  David,  we  may  concur 
in  his  conclusion,  more  especially  as  his  guard 
contained  men  of  almost  every  nation  i-ound 
Palestine.  \S^-] 

ME'DABA  (MijSa^a  :  Madaba),  the  Greek 
form  of  the  name  Medeba.  It  occurs  only  in 
1  Mace.  ix.  36.  [G.] 

ME'DAD.     [Eldad  and  Medad.] 

ME'DAN  (pp,    "  strife,   contention,"    Ges. : 

MaSaA,  MaSa^t :  3£adan),  a  son  of  Abraham  and 
Keturah  (Gen.  sxv.  2  ;  1  Chr.  i.  32),  whose  name 
and  descendants  have  not  been  traced  beyond  this 
record.  It  has  been  supposed,  from  the  similarity 
of  the  name,  that  the  tribe  descended  fi-om  Medan 
was  more  closely  allied  to  Blidian  than  by  mere  blood- 
relation,  and  that  it  was  the  same  as,  or  a  portion 
of,  the. latter.  There  is,  however,  no  gi'ound  for  this 
theory  beyond  its  plausibility. — The  traditional  city 
Medyen  of  the  Aralj  geographers  (the  classical  ]\Io- 
diana),  situate  in  Arabia  on  the  ea.steru  shore  of  the 
gulf  of  Eyleh  must  be  held  to  have  been  Midi- 
anite,  not  Medauite  (but  Bunsen,  Bibelwerk,  sug- 
gests the  latter  identification).  It  has  been  else- 
where remarked  [Keturah]  that  many  of  the 
Keturahite  tribes  seem  to  have  merged  in  early 
times  into  the  Ishmaelite  tribes.  The  mention  of 
"  Ishmaelite  "  as  a  convertible  tei-m  with  "  Mi- 
dianite,"  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  36,  is  remarkable ;  but 
the  Midianite  of  the  A.  V^  in  ver.  28  is  Medauite 
in  the  Hebrew  (by  the  LXX.  rendered  MaSiTtvaioi 
and  in  the  Vulgate  Ismaelitae  and  Madianitae) ;  and 
we  may  have  here  a  trace  of  the  subject  of  this 
article,  though  Midianite  appears  on  the  whole  to 
be  more  likely  the  coriect  reading  in  the  passages 
referred  to.  [MiDiAX.]  [E.  S.  P.] 


MEDEBA 

ME'DEBA  (.N^n^D:   MaiSa^d  and  M-nSaPd"; 

Medaba),  a  town  en  t)ie  eastern  side  of  Jordan. 
Taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  Me-deba  means  "  waters  ^ 
of  quiet,"  but  except  the  tank  (see  below),  what 
waters  can  there  ever  have  been  on  that  high  pUiiu  ? 
The  Arabic  name,  though  similar  in  sound,  has  a 
different  signification. 

Medeba  is  first  alluded  to  in  the  fragment  of  a 
popular  song  of  the  time  of  the  conquest,  preserved 
in  Num.  xxi.  (see  ver.  'M).  Here  it  seems  to  denote 
the  limit  of  the  territory  of  Heshbon.  It  next  occurs 
in  the  enumeration  of  the  country  divided  amongst 
the  Transjordanic  tribes  (Josh.  xiii.  9),  as  giving  its 
name  to  a  district  of  level  downs  called  "  the  Mishor 
of  Medeba,"  or  "  the  Mishor  on  Medeba."  This  dis- 
trict tell  within  the  allotment  of  Reuben  (ver.  16). 
At  the  time  of  the  conquest  Medeba  belonged  to  the 
Amorites,  apparently  one  of  the  towns  taken  from 
Moab  by  them.  When  we  next  encounter  it,  four 
centuries  later,  it  is  again  in  the  hands  of  the 
Moabites,  or  which  is  nearly  the  same  thing,  of  the 
Ammonites.  It  was  before  the  gate  of  Medeba  tliat 
Joab  gained  his  victory  over  the  Ammonites,  and 
the  horde  of  Aramites  of  Maachah,  Mesopotamia,  and 
Zobah,  which  they  had  gathered  to  their  assistance 
after  the  insult  pei-petrated  by  Hanun  on  the  mes- 
sengers of  David  (1  Chr.  xix.  7,  compared  with 
2  Sam.  X.  8,  14,  &c.).  In  the  time  of  Ahaz  Medeba 
was  a  sanctuary  of  Moab  (Is.  xv.  2),  but  in  the 
denunciation  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.)  often  parallel 
with  that  of  Isaiah,  it  is  not  mentioned.  In  the 
Maccabaean  times  it  had  returned  into  the  hands  of 
4he  Amorites,  who  seem  most  probably  intended  by 
the  obscure  word  Jambri  in  1  Mace.  ix.  36.  (Here 
the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Medaba,  according 
to  the  Greek  spelling.)  It  was  the  scene  of  the 
capture,  and  possibly  the  death,  of  John  Maccii- 
baeus,  and  also  of  the  revenge  subsequently  taken  by 
Jonathan  and  Simon  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  1,  §4;  the 
name  is  omitted  in  Mace,  on  the  second  occasion, 
see  ver.  38).  About  110  years  B.C.  it  was  taken 
after  a  long  siege  by  John  Hyrcanus  (^Ant.  xiii.  9, 
§1 ;  B.  J.  i.  2,  §4)  and  then  appears  to  have  re- 
mained in  the  possession  of  the  Jews  for  at  least 
thirty  years,  till  the  time  of  Alexander  Jannaeus 
(xiii.  15,  §4);  and  it  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
twelve  cities,  by  the  promise  of  which  Aretas,  the 
king  of  Arabia,  was  induced  to  assist  Hyrcanus  II. 
to  recover  Jerusalem  fi'om  liis  brother  Aristobulus 
{Ant.  xiv.  1,  §4). 

^ledeba  h;is  retained  its  name  down  to  our  own 
times.  To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  [Onomast.  "  Me- 
daba ")  it  was  evidently  known.  ■  In  Christian  times 
it  was  a  noted  bishopric  of  the  patriarchate  of  "  Be- 
cerra,  or  Bitira  Arabiae,"  and  is  named  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (a.d.  451)  and  other 
Ecdesiastiud  Lists  (Keland,  217,  223,  226,  893. 
See  also  Le  Quien,  Oricns  Christ.).  Among  modern 
travellers  MAdeba  has  been  visited,  recognised,  and 
described  by  Burckhardt  {Si/ria,  July  13,  1812), 
Soetzen  (i.  407,  408,  iv.  223),  and  Irby  (145);  see 
also  Porter  {Handbook,  303).  It  is  in  the  pastoral 
disti'ict  of  tiie  Bclha,  which  probably  answers  to 
the  Mishor  of  the  Hebrews,  4  miles  S.E.  of  Ilcshbuu, 
and   like   it  lying    on   a  rounded    but   rocky  hill 

"  It  may  be  well  to  give  a  collation  of  the  passages  in 
the  LXX.  in  which  Medc^ba  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  text, 
which  will  shew  how  frequently  it  is  omitted :— Num. 
xxi.  30,  en-l  Mua/3 ;  Josh.  xiii.  9,  AaiSajSai/,  /Vlex.  Mat- 
oa^a;  ib.  16,  omit,  both  MSS. ;  1  Chr.  xix.  7,  Moi6a/3o, 
Alex.  Mrj5ajSa;  Is.  xv.  2,  •nj';  Mwa/SiViSos. 


MEDES 


287 


(Burckh.,  Seetzen).  A  large  tank,  columns,  and  ex- 
tensive fotmdations  are  still  to  be  seen  ;  the  remains 
of  a  Roman  road  exist  near  the  town,  which  seems 
formerly  to  have  connected  it  with  Heshbon.  [G.] 
MEDES  CnD:  M^Soj :  Medi),  one  of  the 
most  powerful  nations  of  Western  Asia  in  the  times 
anterior  to  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
Cyrus,  and  one  of  the  most  important  tribes  com- 
posing that  kingdom.  Their  geographical  position 
is  considered  mider  the  article  Media.  The  title 
by  which  they  appear  to  have  known  themselves 
was  Mada  ;  which  by  the  Semitic  races  was  made 
into  Madhi,  and  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans  into 
Medi,  whence  our  ",  Medes." 

1.  Primitive  History. — It  may  be  gathered  fi-om 
the  mention  of  the  Medes,  by  Moses,  among  the 
races  descended  from  Japhet  [see  Madai],  that 
they  were  a  nation  of  very  high  antiquity ;  and  it 
is  in  accordance  with  this  view  that  we  find  a 
notice  of  them  in  the  primitive  Babylonian  history 
of  Berosus,  who  says  that  the  Medes  conquered 
Babylon  at  a  very  remote  period  (circ.  B.C.  2458), 
and  that  eight  Median  monarchs  reigned  there  •con- 
secutively, over  a  space  of  224  years  (Beros.  ap. 
Euseb.  Cliron.  Can.  i.  4).  Wliatever  difficulties 
may  lie  in  the  way  of  our  accepting  this  statement 
as  historical — from  the  silence  of  other  authors,  fi'om 
the  atl'ectation  of  precision  in  respect  of  so  remote  a 
time,  and  from  the  subsequent  disappearance  of  the 
Medes  from  these  parts,  and  their  reappearance, 
after  1300  years,  in  a  different  locality — it  is  too 
definite  and  precise  a  statement,  and  comes  from 
too  good  an  authority,  to  be  safely  set  aside  as 
unmeaning.  There  are  independent  grounds  for 
thinking  that  an  Arian  element  existed  in  the  popu- 
lation of  the  Mesopotamian  valley,  side  by  side 
with  the  Cushite  and  Semitic  elements,  at  a  very 
early  date.^  It  is  therefore  not  at  all  impossible 
that  the  Medes  may  have  been  the  predominant 
race  there  for  a  time,  as  Berosus  states,  and  may 
afterwards  have  been  overpowered  and  driven  to 
the  mountains,  whence  they  may  have  spread  them- 
.selves  eastward,  northward,  and  westward,  so  as  to 
occupy  a  vast  number  of  localities  from  the  banks 
of  the  Indus  to  those  of  the  middle  Danube.  The 
term  Arians,  which  was  by  the  universal  consent 
of  their  neighbours  applied  to  the  Medes  in  the 
time  of  Herodotus  {Herod,  vii.  62),  connects  them 
with  the  early  Vedic  settlers  in  western  Hindustim ; 
the  Mati-iixix  of  Mount  Zagros,  the  Sauro-J/d^fk'  of 
the  steppe-country  between  the  Casi)iaii  and  the 
Euxine,  and  the  Maetae  or  Maeotae  of  the  Sea  of 
Azov,  mark  their  progress  towai'ds  the  north  ;  while 
the  Moedi  or  Mali  of  Thrace  seem  to  indicate  their 
spread  westward  into  Euiope,  which  was  directly 
attested  by  tlie  native  traditions  of  the  Sitcynnae 
{Herod.  V.  9). 

2.  Connexion  with  Assyria. — The  deepest  ols- 
scurity  hangs,  however,  over  these  movements,  and 
indeed  over  the  whole  histoi-y  of  the  IMedes  from 
the  time  of  their  bearing  sway  in  Babylonia  (B.C. 
2458-2234)  to  their  first  appearance  in  the  cunei- 
form insci'iptions  among  the  enemies  of  Assyria, 
about  B.C.  880.  They  then  inhabit  a  portion  of  the 
region  which  bore  their  name  down   to  the  Ma- 


•>  To  this  Burckhardt  seems  to  allude  when  he  observes 
{Syr.  3G6),  "  this  is  the  ancient  Medeba;  but  there  is  no 
river  near-it." 

«  See  the  remarks  of  Sir  H.  Kawlin.sou  in  Rawlinsoii's 
Herodotus,  i.  (521,  note. 


288 


MEDES 


horaetan  conquest  of  Persia ;  but  whether  they 
were  recent  immigrants  into  it,  or  haJ  held  it  In  mi 
a  remote  antiquity,  is  uncertain.  On  the  one  hand 
it  is  noted  that  their  absence  from  earlier  cuneifbi  m 
monuments  seems  to  suggest  tliat  their  arrival  was 
I'ecent  at  the  date  above  mentioned ;  on  the  othei', 
that  Ctesias  asserts  (ap.  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  1,  §9),  and 
He)-odotus  distinctly  implies  (i.  95),  that  they  had 
been  settled  in  this  part  of  Asia  at  least  from  the 
time  of  the  first  formation  of  tire  Assyrian  Empire 
(B.C.  1273).  However  this  was,  it  is  certain  that 
at  first,  and  for  a  long  series  of  years,  they  were 
very  inferioi-  in  power  to  the  great  empire  established 
upon  their  flank.  They  were  under  no  general  or 
centralised  government,  but  oonsisted  of  various 
jietty  tribes,  each  ruled  by  its  chief,  whose  do- 
minion was  over  a  single  small  town  and  perhaps 
a  few  villages.  The  AEs\'rian  monarchs  ravaged 
their  lands  at  pleasure,  and  took  tribute  from  their 
chiefs ;  while  the  Medes  could  in  no  way  retaliate 
upon  their  antagonists.  Between  them  and  Assyria 
lay  the  lofty  chain  of  Zagros,  inhabited  by  hardy 
mountaineers,  at  least  as  powerful  as  the  Medes 
therhselves,  who  would  not  tamely  have  suffered 
their  passage  through  their  territories.  Media,  how- 
ever, was  strong  enough,  and  stubborn  enough,  to 
maintain  her  nationality  throughout  the  whole 
period  of  the  Assyrian  sway,  and  was  never  ab- 
sorbed into  the  empire.  An  attempt  made  by 
iSargon  to  hold  the  country  in  pennanent  subjection 
by  means  of  a  number  of  military  colonies  jilanted 
in  cities  of  his  building  failed  [Sargon]  ;  and 
both  his  son  Sennacherib,  and  his  grandson  Esar- 
hacidon,  were  forced  to  lead  into  the  territory  hostile 
expeditions,  which  however  seem  to  have  left  no 
more  impression  than  previous  invasions.  Media 
was  reckoned  by  the  great  Assyrian  monarchs  of 
this  period  as  a  part  of  their  dominions ;  but  its 
subjection  seems  to  have  been  at  no  time  much 
more  than  nominal,  and  it  frequently  threw  off  the 
yoke  altogetlier. 

3.  Median  History  of  Herodotus. — Herodotus 
represents  the  deciidence  of  Assyria  as  greatly  ac- 
celerated by  a  formal  revolt  of  the  Medes,  following 
upon  a  period  of  contented  subjection,  and  jilaces 
this  revolt  more  than  218  years  before  the  battle 
of  Marathon,  or  a  little  befoi-e  B.C.  708.  Ctesias 
placed  the  commencement  of  Jledian  independence 
still  earlier,  declaring  that  the  Medes  had  destroyed 
Nineveh  and  established  themselves  on  the  ruins  of 
the  Assyrian  Empire,  as  far  back  as  B.C.  875.  No 
one  now  defends  this  latter  statement,  which  alike 
contiadicts  the  Hebrew  records  and  the  native  docu- 
ments. It  is  doubtful  whether  even  the  calculation 
of  Herodotus  does  not  throw  back  the  independence 
to  too  early  a  date :  his  chronology  of  the  period  is 
clearly  artificial ;  and  the  history,  as  he  relates  it,  is 
iiibulous.  According  to  him  the  Medes,  when  they 
first  shook  off  the  yoke,  established  no  government. 
For  a  time  there  was  neither  king  nor  prince  in  the 
land,  and  each  man  did  what  was  right  in  his  own 
eyes.  Quarrels  were  settled  by  arbitration,  and  a 
certiin  De'ioces,  having  obtained  a  reputation  in  this 
way,  contrived  after  a  while  to  get  himself  elected 
sovereign.  He  then  built  the  seven-walled  Ecbatana 
[Ecbataxa],  estiiblished  a  court  after  the  ordinary 
Orientiil  model,  and  had  a  prosperous  and  peaceful 
reign  of  53  years.  Deioces  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
I'hraortes,  an  ambitious  prince,  who  directly  after 
his  accession  began  a  career  of  conquest,  first  at- 
tacking and  subduing  the  Persians,  then  reducing 
nation  after  nation,   and    finally    perishing    in    an 


MEDES 

expedition  against  Assyria,  after  he  had  reigned 
22  years.  Cyaxares,  the  son  of  Phraoiies,  then 
moimted  the  throne.  Having  first  introduced  a 
new  mihtary  system,  he  proceeded  to  cany  out  his 
father's  designs  against  Assyria,  defeated  the  As- 
syiiau  army  in  the  field,  besieged  their  capital,  and 
was  only  prevented  from  capturing  it  on  this  first 
attack  bv  an  invasion  of  Scythians,  which  recalled 
him  to  the  defence  of  his  o\vn  country.  After  a 
desperate  struggle  during  eight-and-twenty  years 
with  these  new  enemies,  Cyaxares  succeeded  in  ex- 
pelling them  and  recovering  his  foimer  empire; 
whereupon  he  resumed  the  projects  which  their 
invasion  had  made  him  temporarily  abandon,  be- 
sieged and  took  Nineveh,  conquered  the  Assyrians, 
and  extended  his  dominion  to  the  Halys.  Nor  did 
these  successes  content  him.  Bent  on  establishing 
his  svk'ay  over  the  whole  of  Asia,  he  jiassed  the 
Halys,  and  engaged  in  a  war  with  Alyattes,  king 
of  Lydia,  the  father  of  Croesus,  with  whom  he 
long  maintained  a  stubborn  contest.  This  war  was 
terminated  at  length  by  an  eclipse  of  the  sun, 
which,  occurring  just  as  the  two  armies  were  en- 
gaged, furnished  an  occasion  for  negotiations,  and 
eventually  led  to  the  conclusion  of  a  peace  and  the 
foniiation  of  an  alliance  between  the  two  powers. 
The  independence  of  Lydia  and  the  other  kingdoms 
west  of  the  Halys  was  recognised  by  the  Medes, 
who  withdrew  within  their  own  borders,  having 
arranged  a  marriage  between  the  eldest  son  ot 
Cyaxares  and  a  daughter  of  the  Lydian  king,  which 
assured  them  of  a  friendly  neighbour  upon  this 
frontier.  Cyaxai'es,  soon  after  this,  died,  havinor 
reigned  in  all  40  years.  He  was  succeeded  by  his 
son  Astyages,  a  pacific  monarch,  of  whom  nothing 
is  related  beyond  the  fact  of  his  deposition  by  his 
own  grandson  Cyrus,  35  years  after  his  accession — 
an  event  by  which  the  Median  Empire  was  brought 
to  an  end,  and  the  Persian  established  upon  its 
ruins. 

4.  Its  imperfections. —  Such  is,  in  outline,  the 
Median  History  of  Herodotus.  It  has  been  accepted 
as  authentic  by  most  modern  writers,  not  so  much 
from  a  feeling  that 'it  is  re;illy  trustworthy,  as  from 
the  want  of  anything  more  satisfactory  to  put  in 
its  place.  That  the  story  of  De'ioces  is  a  romance 
has  been  seen  and  acknowledged  (Crete's  Greece, 
iii.  307,  308).  That  the  chronological  dates  arc 
improbable,  and  even  contradictory,  has  been  a 
frequent  subject  of  complaint.  Ii'ei:ently  it  has  been 
shown  that  the  whole  scheme  of  dates  is  artificial 
(Kawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  421,  422)  ;  and  that  the 
veiy  names  of  the  kings,  except  in  a  single  instance, 
are  unhistorical.  Though  the  cuneiform  records 
do  not  at  present  supply  the  actual  histoiy  of  the 
time,  they  enable  us  in  a  great  measure  to  test 
the  narrative  which  has  come  down  to  us  fi-om 
the  Greeks.  We  can  separate  in  that  narrative  the 
authentic  portions  trom  those  which  are  fabulous ; 
we  can  account  for  the  names  used,  and  in  most 
instances  for  the  numbers  given  ;  and  we  can  thus 
rid  ourselves  of  a  great  deal  that  is  fictitious, 
leaving  a  residuum  which  has  a  tair  right  to  be 
regarded  as  truth. 

The  records  of  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esar- 
haddon  clearly  show  that  the  Median  kingdom  did 
not  commence  so  early  as  Herodotus  imagined. 
These  three  princes,  whose  reigns  cover  the  space 
extending  from  B.C.  720  to  B.C.  (360,  all  carried 
their  arms  deep  into  Media,  and  found  it,*not  under 
the  dominion  of  a  single  powerful  monaich,  but 
under  the  rule  of  a  vast  nunilter  of  petty  chieftains. 


MEDES 

It  cannot  have  been  till  near  the  middle  of  the 
7th  centuv}'  B.C.  that  the  Median  kingdom  was 
consolidated,  and  became  formidable  to  its  neigh- 
bours. How  this  change  was  accomplished  is  un- 
certain :  the  most  probable  supposition  would  seem 
to  be,  that  about  this  time  a  fresh  Avian  immi- 
gration took  place  from  the  countries  east  of  the 
Caspian,  and  that  the  leader  of  the  immigrants 
established  his  authority  over  the  scattered  tribes 
of  his  race,  who  had  been  settled  previously  in  the 
district  between  the  Caspian  and  Mount  Zagros. 
There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  this  leader  was 
the  great  Cyaxares,  whom  Diodorus  speaks  of  in 
one  place  as  the  first  king  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  32),  and 
whom  Aeschylus  represents  as  the  founder  of  the 
Medo- Persic  empire  (Pers.  7&1).  The  Deioces  and 
I'hi-aortes  of  Herodotus  ai'o  thus  removed  from  the 
list  of  historical  personages  altogether,  and  must 
take  rank  with  the  early  kings  in  the  list  of  Ctesias,'' 
who  are  now  generally  admitted  to  be  inventions, 
in  the  case  of  Deioces  the  very  name  is  fictitious, 
being  the  Avian  dalidk,  "  biter  "  ov  "  snake,"  which 
was  a  title  of  honour  assumed  by  all  Median 
monarchs,  but  not  a  proper  name  of  any  individual. 
Phvaoites,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  true  name,  but  one 
which  has  been  transferred  to  this  period  from  a  later 
passage  of  Median  history,  to  which  reference  will 
lie  made  in  the  sequel.  (Kawliuson's  Herod,  i.  408.) 
5.  Development  of  Afedkm  power,  and  formation 
of  the  Empire. — It  is  evident  that  the  development 
of  Median  power  proceeded  pari  passu  with  the 
decline  of  Assyria,  of  which  it  was  in  part  an  effect, 
in  part  a  cause.  Cyaxares  must  have  been  con- 
temporary with  the  later  years  of  that  Assyrian 
monarch  who  passed  the  greater  portion  of  his  time 
in  hunting  expeditions  in  Susiana.  [Assyria, 
§11.]  His  first  conquests  weve  probably  under- 
talccn  at  this  time,  and  were  suffered  tamely  by  a 
prince  who  was  destitute  of  all  military  spiiit.  In 
order  to  consolidate  a  powerful  kingdom  in  the  dis- 
trict east  of  Assyria,  it  was  necessary  to  bring  into 
subjection  a  nimiber  of  Scythic  tribes,  who  disputed 
with  the  Arians  the  possession  of  the  mountain- 
country,  and  required  to  be  incorporated  before 
Media  could  be  ready  for  great  expeditions  and 
distant  conquests.  The  struggle  with  these  tribes 
may  be  the  real  event  lepvesented  in  Herodotus  by 
the  Scythic  war  of  Cyaxares,  or  possibly  his  nar- 
rative may  contiiin  a  still  larger  amount  of  truth. 
The  Scyths  of  Zagros  may  have  called  in  the  aid 
of  their  kindred  tribes  towards  the  north,  who  may 
have  imp&ded  for  a  while  the  progress  of  the 
Median  arms,  while  at  the  same  time  tliey  really 
prepared  the  way  foi-  their  success  by  weakening 
the  other  nations  of  this  region,  especially  the  As- 
syrians. According  to  Herodotus,  Cyaxares  at  last 
got  the  better  of  the  Scyths  by  inviting  their 
leiidei's  to  a  banquet,  and  there  treacherously  mur- 
dering them.  At  any  rate  it  is  clear  that  at  a 
tolerably  early  period  of  his  reign  they  ceased  to  be 
formidable,  and  he  was  able  to  direct  his  etlbrts 
agiiinst  other  enemies.  His  capture  of  Nineveh 
and  conquest  of  Assyria  are  facts  which  no  scep- 
ticism aui  doubt;  and  the  date  of  the  capture  may 
be  fixed  with  tolerable  certainty  to  the  year  li.c.  626. 
Abydenus  (probably  following  Bevosus)  infovms  us 
tliat  in  his  Assyrian  wav  Cyaxares   was  assisted 


MEDES 


289 


b  Ctesias  made  tlie  Median  nioiiarcliy  commence  about 
B.C.  875,  with  a  certain  Arbaces,  who  headed  the  rebellion 
against  Sardanapalus.  the  voUiptuary.  Arbaces  reigned 
•2S  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Mandaucas,  wlio  reigned 
50  years.  Then  followed  .Sosarmus  (."in  years),  Artias  (SO 
Voh.  u. 


by  the  Babylonians  undev  Nabopolassav,  between 
whom  and  Cyaxaves  an  intimate  alliance  was  formed, 
cemented  by  a  union  of  their  children ;  and  that 
a  result  of  their  success  was  the  establishment  of 
Nabopolassar  as  independent  king  on  the  throne  of 
Babylon,  an  event  which  we  know  to  belong  to  the 
above-mentioned  year.  It  was  undoubtedly  after 
this  that  Cyaxares  endeavoured  to  conquer  Lydia. 
His  conquest  of  Assyria  had  made  him  master  of 
the  whole  country  lying  between  Mount  Zagros 
and  the  river  Halys,  to  which  he  now  hoped  to  add 
the  tract  between  the  Halys  and  the  Aegean  Sea. 
It  is  surprising  that  he  failed,  more  especially  as  he 
seems  to  have  been  accompanied  by  the  forces  of 
the  Babylonians,  who  were  perhaps  commanded  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  on  the  occasion.  [Neblxiiiad- 
NEZZAR.]  After  a  war  which  lasted  six  years  he 
desisted  from  his  attempt,  and  concluded  the  treaty 
with  the  Lydiau  monarch,  of  which  we  have  already 
s]ioken.  Tlie  three  great  Oriental  monarchies, 
Media,  Lydia,  and  Babylon,  were  now  united  b)^ 
mutual  engagements  and  intermarriages,  and  con- 
tinued at  peace  with  one  another  during  the  re- 
mainder of  the  leign  of  Cyaxares,  and  during  that 
of  Astyages,  his  son  and  successor. 

6.  Extent  of  the  Empire. — The  limits  of  the 
Median  Empire  cannot  be  definitely  fixed ;  but  it  is 
not  difficult  to  give  a  general  idea  of  its  size  and 
position.  From  north  to  south  its  extent  was  in  no 
place  great,  since  it  was  certainly  confined  between 
the  Persian  Gulf  and  the  Euphrates  on  the  one  side, 
the  Black  and  Caspian  Seas  on  the  other.  From 
east  to  west  it  had,  however,  a  wide  expansion, 
since  it  reached  from  the  Halys  at  least  as  far  as 
the  Caspian  Gates,  and  possibly  further.  It  com- 
prised Persia,  Media  Magna,  Northern  Media, 
Matiene  or  Media  Mattiana,  Assyria,  Armenia, 
Cappadocia,  the  tract  between  Armenia  and  the 
Caucasus,  the  low  tract  along  the  south-west  and 
south  of  the  Caspian,  and  possibly  some  portion  of 
Hyrcania,  Parthia,  and  Sagartia.  It  was  separated 
from  Babylonia  either  by  the  Tigris,  ov  more  Jiro- 
bably  by  a  line  running  about  half-way  between 
that  river  and  the  Euphrates,  and  thus  did  not 
include  Syria,  Phoenicia,  or  Judaea,  which  fell  to 
Babylon  on  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  Empire. 
Its  greatest  length  may  be  reckoned  at  1500  miles 
from  N.W.  to  S.E.,  and  its  average  breadth  at 
400  or  450  miles.  Its  firea  would  tlms  be  about 
600,000  square  miles,  or  somewhat  greater  than 
that  of  modern  Persia. 

7.  Tts  character.— With  regard  to  the  nature  of 
the  government  established  by  the  Medes  over  the 
conqueied  nations,  we  possess  but  little  trustworthy 
evidence.  Herodotus  in  one  place  compares,  some- 
what vaguely,  the  Median  with  the  Persian  system 
(i.  134),  and  Ctesias  appeal's  to  have  asserted  the 
positive  introduction  of  the  satrapial  organization 
into  the  empire  at  its  first  foundation  by  his 
Arbaces  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  28)  ;  but  on  the  whole  it  is 
perhaps  most  piobable  that  the  Assyrian  organiza- 
tion was  continued  by  the  Medes,  the  subject-nations 
retaining  their  native  monarchs,  and  merely  acknow- 
ledging subjection  by  the  payment  of  an  minual 
tribute.  This  seems  certainly  to  have  been  the  cjise 
in  Persia,  where  Cyrus  and  his  fiithev  Cambyses 
were  monarchs,  holding  tlieir  crown  of  the  Median 


years),  Arbianes  (22  years),  Artacus  (40  years),  Artynes 
(22  years),  Astibaras  (40  years),  and  finally  Aspadas,  or 
Astyages,  the  last  king  (a;  years)  This  scheme  appears 
to  lie  a  clumsy  oxteneion  of  the  monarchy,  by  means  of 
repctiticiii,  from  the  data  furnished  by  Hero<loliis. 

U 


290' 


MEDES 


king,  before  the  revolt  of  the  foimer ;  and  there  is 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  remainder  of  the 
empire  was  organized  in  a  diflferent  manner.  .  The 
satiapial  organization  was  apparently  a  Persian  in- 
vention, begun  by  Cyrus,  continued  by  Cambyses, 
his  son,  but  first  adopted  as  the  regular  govern- 
mental system  by  Darius  Hystaspis. 

8.  Its  duration. —  Of  all  the  ancient  Oriental 
monarchies  the  Median  was  the  shortest  in  duration. 
It  commenced,  as  we  have  seen,  after  the  middle 
of  the  7th  century  B.C.,  and  it  terminated  B.C.  558. 
The  period  of  three-quarteis  of  a  century,  which 
Herodotus  assigns  to  the  reigns  of  Cyaxares  and 
Astyages,  may  be  taken  as  fairly  indicating  its 
probable  length,  though  we  cannot  feel  sure  that 
the  years  are  correctly  apportioned  between  the 
monarchs.  Two  kings  only  occupied  the  thione 
during  the  period  ;  for  the  Cyaxares  II.  of  Xenophon 
is  an  invention  of  that  amusing  writer. 

9.  Its  final  overthrow. — The  conquest  of  the 
Medes  by  a  sister-Iranic  race,  the  Persians,  under 
their  native  monarch  Cyrus,  is  another  of  those  in- 
disputable facts  of  remote  history,  which  make  the 
inquirer  feel  that  he  sometimes  attains  to  solid 
ground. in  these  difficult  investigations.  The  details 
of  the  struggle,  which  are  given  partially  by  He- 
rodotus (i.  127,  128),  at  greater  length  by  Nicolas 
of  Damascus  {Fr.  Hist.  Gr.  iii.  404-406),  probably 
following  Ctesias,  have  not  the  same  claim  to  ac- 
ceptance. We  may  gather  from  them,  however, 
that  the  contest  was  short,  though  severe.  The 
Medes  did  not  readily  relinquish  the  position  of 
superiority  which  they  had  enjoyed  tor  75  years  ; 
but  their  vigour  had  been  sapped  by  the  adoption 
of  Assyrian  manners,  and  they  were  now  no  match 
for  the  hardy  mountaineers  of  Persia.  After  many 
partial  engagements  a  great  battle  was  fought  be- 
tween the  two  armies,  and  the  result  was  the  com- 
plete defeat  of  the  Medes,  and  the  capture  of  their 
king,  Astyages,  by  Cyrus. 

10.  Position  of  Media  muler  Persia. — The  treat- 
ment of  the  Medes  by  the  victorious  Persians  was 
not  that  of  an  ordinary  conquered  nation.  Accord- 
ing to  some  writers  (as  Herodotus  and  Xenophon) 
there  was  a  close  relationship  between  Cyrus  and 
the  last  Median  monarch,  who  was  therefore  na- 
turally treated  with  more  than  common  tendeiiiess. 
The  fact  of  the  relationship  is,  however,  denied  by 
Ctesias ;  and  whether  it  existed  or  no,  at  any  rate 
the  peculiar  position  of  the  Medes  under  Persia  was 
not  really  owing  to  this  accident.  The  two  nations 
were  closely  akin  ;  they  had  the  same  Arian  or 
Iranic  origin,  the  same  early  traditions,  the  same 
language  (Strab.  xv.  2,  §8),  nearly  the  same  reli- 
gion, and  ultimately  the  same  manners  and  cus- 
toms, dress,  and  general  mode  of  life.  It  is  not 
surprising  therefore  that  they  were  drawn  together, 
and  that,  though  never  actually  coalescing,  they  still 
formed  to  some  extent  a  single  privileged  people. 
Medes  were  advanced  to  stations  of  high  honour  and 
imjjortance  under  Cyrus  and  his  successors,  an  ad- 
vantage shared  by  no  other  conquered  people.  The 
Median  capital  was  at  first  the  chief  royal  residence, 
and  always  remained  one  of  the  jjlaces  at  which  the 
court  spent  a  ])ortion  of  the  year ;  while  among  the 
provinces  Media  claimed  and  enjoyed  a  precedency, 
which  appears  equally  in  the  (i reek  writers  and  in 
the  native  records.  .Still,  it  would  .<eem  that  tlie 
nation,  so  lately  sovereign,  was  not  altogether  con- 
tent with  its  secondary  position.  On  the  first 
convenient  opportunity  Media  rebelled,  elevating  to 
the  throne  a  certain   Phraoiies  (Frawartish),  who 


MEDES 

called  himself  Xathrites,  and  claimed  to  be  a  de- 
scendant from  Cyaxares.  Darius  Hystaspis,  in  whose 
reign  this  rebellion  took  place,  had  great  difficulty 
in  suppressing  it.  After  vainly  endeavouring  to 
put  it  down  by  his  generals,  he  was  compelled  to 
take  the  field  himself.  He  defeated  Phiaortes  in  a 
pitched  battle,  pursued,  and  cajitured  him  near 
I-ihages,  mutilated  him,  kept  him  for  a  time  "  chained 
at  his  door,"  and  finally  crucified  him  at  Ecbatana, 
executing  at  the  same  time  his  chief  followers  (see 
the  Behistun  Inscription,  in  Rawlinson's  Herodotus, 
ii.  601,  602).  The  Medes  hereupon  submitted, 
and  quietly  bore  the  yoke  for  another  centuiy, 
when  they  made  a  second  attempt  to  free  them- 
selves, which  was,  suppressed  by  Darius  Nothus 
(Xen.  Hell.  i.  2,  §i9).  Henceforth  they  patiently 
acquiesced  in  their  subordinate  position,  and  fol- 
lowed through  its  various  shifts  and  changes  the 
fortune  of  Persia. 

11.  Internal  divisions. — According  to  Herodotus 
the  Median  nation  was  divided  into  six  tribes  {iQvri), 
called  the  Busae,  the  Paretaceni,  the  Stnichates, 
the  Arizanti,  the  Budii,  and  the  Magi.  It  is  doubt- 
ful, however,  in  what  sense  these  are  to  be  con- 
sidered as  ethnic  divisions.  The  Paretaceni  appear 
to  represent  a  geographical  district,  while  the  Magi 
were  certainly  a  priest-caste ;  of  the  rest  we  know 
little  or  nothing.  The  Arizanti,  whose  name  would 
signify  "  of  noble  descent,"  or  "  of  Arian  descent," 
must  (one  would  think)  have  been  the  leading 
tribe,  corresjionding  to  the  Pasargadae  in  Persia ; 
but  it  is  remarkaljle  that  they  have  only  the  fourth 
place  in  the  list  of  Herodotus.  The  Budii  are  fairly 
identified  with  the  eastern  Phut — the  Putiya  of 
the  Persian  inscriptions — whom  Scripture  joins  with 
Persia  in  two  places  (Ez.  xxvii.  10,  xxxviii.  5).  Of 
the  Busae  and  the  .Struchates  nothing  is  known 
beyond  the  statement  of  Herodotus.  We  may 
perhaps  assume,  from  the  order  of  Herodotus'  list, 
that  the  Busae,  Paretaceni,  Struchates,  and  Arizanti 
were ,  true  Medes,  of  genuine  Arian  descent,  while 
the  Budii  and  Magi  were  foreigners  admitted  into 
the  nation. 

12.  Religion. — The  original  religion  of  the  Medes 
must  undoubtedly  have  been  that  simple  creed 
which  is  placed  before  us  in  the  earlier  portions  of 
the  Zendavesta.  Its  peculiar  characteristic  was 
Dualism,  the  belief  in  the  existence  of  two  opposite 
principles  of  good  and  evil,  nearly  if  not  quite  on 
a  par  with  one  another.  Omiezd  and  Aiiriman 
were  both  self-caused  and  self-existent,  both  in- 
destructible, both  potent  to  woik  their  will — their 
warfare  had  been  from  all  eternity,  and  would  con- 
tinue to  all  eternity,  though  on  the  whole  the 
struggle  was  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Prince  of 
Darkness.  Ormazd  was  the  God  of  the  Arians,  the 
object  of  their  worship  and  trust ;  Ahriman  was 
their  enemy,  an  object  of  fear  and  abhorrence,  but 
not  of  any  religious  rite.  Besides  Ormazd,  the 
Arians  worshipped  the  Sun  and  Moon,  under  the 
names  of  j\Iithra  and  Homa ;'  and  they  believed  in 
the  existence  of  numerous  spirits  or  genii,  some 
good,  some  bad,  the  subjects  and  ministers  respec- 
tively of  the  two  powers  of  Good  and  Evil.  Their 
cult  was  simple,  consisting  in  processions,  religious 
chants  and  hymns,  and  a  few  simple  ofterings,  ex- 
pressions of  devotion  and  thankfulness.  Such  was 
the  worship  and  such  the  belief  which  the  whole 
Arian  race  brought  with  them  from  the  remote 
east  when  they  migrated  westwanl.  Their  migra- 
tion brought  them  into  contact  with  the  fire-wor- 
shippers   of  Armenia    raid    Mount  Zagros,  among 


MEDES 

whom  Magism  had  been  established  fi'om  a  remote 
antiquity.  The  result  was  either  a  combination  of 
the  two  religions,  or  in  some  cases  an  actual  con- 
version of  the  conquerors  to  the  faith  and  worship 
of  the  conquered.  So  far  as  can  be  gathered  from 
the  scanty  materials  in  our  possession,  the  latter 
was  the  case  with  the  Medes.  While  in  Persia  the 
true  Arian  creed  maintained  itself,  at  least  to  the 
time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  in  tolerable  purity,  iu 
the  neighbouring  kingdom  of  Media  it  w<is  early 
swallowed  up  in  Magism,  which  was  probably 
established  b)'  Cyaxares  or  his  successor  as  the 
religion  of  the  state.  The  essence  of  Magism  was 
the  worship  of  the  elements,  fire,  water,  air,  and 
earth,  with  a  special  preference  of  fire  to  the  re- 
mainder. Temples  were  not  allowed,  but  fire-altars 
were  maintained  on  various  sacred  sites,  generally 
mountain-tops,  where  sacrifices  were  continually 
ottered,  and  the  flame  was  never  suffered  to  go  out. 
A  hierarchy  naturally  followed,  to  perform  these 
constant  rites,  and  the  Magi  became  recognised  as  a 
sacred  caste  entitled  to  the  veneration  of  the  faith- 
ful. They  claimed  in  many  cases  a  power  of  di- 
vining the  future,  and  practised  largely  those  occult 
arts  which  are  still  called  by  their  name  in  most 
of  the  languages  of  modern  Europe.  The  fear  of 
polluting  the  elements  gave  rise  to  a  number  of 
curious  superstitions  among  the  professors  of  the 
Magian  religion  (Herod,  i.  138);  among  the  rest 
to  the  strange  practice 
of  neither  burying  nor 
burning  their  dead,  but 
exposing  them  to  be  de- 
voured by  beasts  or  birds 
of  prey  (Herod,  i.  140  ; 
Strab.  XV.  3,  §20).  This 
custom  is  still  observed 
by  their  I'epresentatives, 
the  modern  Parsees. 

13.  Manners, customs, 
and  national  character. 
— The  customs  of  the 
Medes  are  said  to  have 
nearly  resembled  those 
of  their  neighbours,  the 
Armenians  and  the  Per- 
sians ;  but  they  were  re- 
garded as  the  inventors, 
their  neighbours  as  the 
copyists  (Strab.  xi.  13, 
§9).  They  were  brave 
and  warlike,  excellent 
riders,  and  remarkably 
skilful  with  the  bow. 
The  flowing  robe,  so  well 
known  from  the  Perse- 
politau  sculptures,  was 
_  their  native  dress,  and 
iMuimu^'iits.)  was  certainly  among  the 
points  for  which  the  Per- 
sians were  beholden  to  them.  Their  whole  costume 
was  rich  and  splendid ;  they  were  fond  of  scarlet, 
and  decorated  themselves  with  a  quantity  of  gold,  in 
the  shape  of  chains,  collars,  armlets,  &c.  As  troops 
they  were  considei-ed  little  inferior  to  the  native 
Persians,  next  to  whom  they  were  usually  ranged 
in  the  battle-field.  They  fought  both  on  foot  and 
on  horseback,  and  carried,  not  bows  and  arrows 

o  See  EstU  i.  3,  \A,  18,  and  19.  The  only  passage  in 
Ksther  where  Media  takes  precedence  of  Persia  is  x.  2, 
where  wo  have  a  mention  of  "  the  book  of  the  chronicles 
of  the  kings  of  Media  and  Persia."     Ifere  the  order  is 


MEDIA 


291 


Mudiau  Dress.  (Fr 


only,  but  shields,  short  spears,  and  poniards.  It  is 
thought  that  they  must  have  excelled  in  the  manu- 
facture of  some  kiuds  of  stuffs. 

14.  licfercnces  to  the  Medes  in  Scripture. — The 
references  to  the  Medes  in  the  canonical  Scriptures 
are  not  very  numerous,  but  they  are  striking.  We 
first  hear  of  certain  "  cities  of  the  Medes,"  in  which 
the  captive  Israelites  were  placed  by  "  the  king  of 
Assyria"  on  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  B.C.  721 
(2  K.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  11).  This  implies  the  sub- 
jection of  Media  to  Assyria  at  the  time  of  Shal- 
maneser,  or  of  Sargon,  his  successor,  and  accords 
(as  we  have  shown)  very  closely  with  the  account 
given  by  the  latter  of  certain  military  colonies 
which  he  planted  in  the  Median  country.  Soon 
afterwards  Isaiah  piophesies  the  part  which  the 
Medes  shall  take  in  the  destruction  of  Babylon 
(Is.  xiii.  17,  xxi.  2)  ;  which  is  again  still  more  dis- 
tinctly declared  by  Jeremiah  (li.  11  and  28),  who 
sufficiently  indicates  the  independence  of  Media  in 
hisday  (xxv.  25).  Daniel  relates,  as  a  historian,  the 
fact  of  the  Medo-Persic  conquest  (v.  28,  31),  giving 
an  account  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  Mede,  who 
appears  to  have  been  made  viceroy  by  Cyrus  (vi. 
1-28).  In  Ezra  we  have  a  mention  of  Achmetha 
(Ecbatana),  "  the  palace  in  the  province  of  the 
Medes,"  where  the  decree  of  Cyrus  was  found  (vi. 
2-5) — a  notice  which  accords  with  the  known  facts 
that  the  Median  capital  was  the  seat  of  government 
under  Cyrus,  but  a  royal  residence  only  and  not 
the  seat  of  government  under  Darius  Hystaspis. 
Finally,  in  Esther,  the  high  rank  of  Media  under  the 
Pei-sian  kings,  yet  at  the  same  time  its  subordinate 
position,  are  marked  by  the  frequent  combination  of 
the  two  names  in  phrases  of  honour,  the  precedency 
being  in  every  case  assigned  to  the  Persians. ■= 

In  the  Apocryphal  Scriptures  the  Medes  occupy 
a  more  prominent  place.  The  chief  scene  of  one 
whole  book  (Tobit)  is  Media;  and  in  another 
(Judith)  a  very  striking  portion  of  the  narrative 
belongs  to  the  same  country.  But  the  historical 
character  of  both  these  books  is  with  reason  doubted  ; 
and  from  neithei-  can  we  derive  any  authentic  or 
satisfactory  information  concerning  the  people. 
From  the  story  of  Tobias  little  could  be  gathered, 
even  if  we  accepted  it  as  true;  while  the  history 
of  Arphaxad  (which  seems  to  be  merely  a  distorted 
account  of  the  struggle  between  the  rebel  Phraortes 
and  Darius  Hystaspis)  adds  nothing  to  our  know- 
ledge of  that  contest.  The  mention  of  Rhages  in 
both  narratives  as  a  Median  town  and  region  of 
importance  is  geographically  correct ;  and  it  is  his- 
torically true  that  Phraoites  suffered  his  overthrow 
in  the  Rhagian  district.  But  beyond  these  facts 
the  narratives  in  question  contain  little  that  eve-n 
illustrates  the  true  history  of  the  Median  nation. 
(See  the  articles  on  Judith  and  Tobias  in  Winer's 
Realworterhuch ;  and  on  the  general  subject  com- 
pare Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  401-422;  Bosan- 
quet's  Chronology  of  the  Medes,  read  before  the 
Royal  Asiatic  Society,  June  5,  1858 ;  Brandis, 
Rerum  Assyriarum  tempora  emendata,  pp.  1-14 ; 
Grote's  History  of  Greece,  iii.  pp.  301-312  ;  and 
Hupfeld's  E:rercitationum  Herodoteamm  Speciminci 
duo,  p.  56,  seq.)  [G.  R-J 

ME'DIA  (no,  «.<?.  Madai:   IvIrjSia:  Media),  ». 

country  the  general  situation  of  which  is  abundantly 

chronological.  As  the  Median  empire  preceded  the  Persian, 
its  chrouicles  came  first  in  "  the  book."  The  precedency 
in  Daniel  (v.  28,  and  vi.  8,  12.  Jtc.)  is  owinit  to  the  fact  of 
a  Median  viceroy  beiiii;  established  on  the  throne. 

U   2 


292 


MEDIA 


clear,  though  its  limits  may  not  be  capable  of  being 
precisely  determined.  Media  lay  north-west  of  Persia 
Proper,  south  and  south-west  of  the  Caspian,  east 
of  Armenia  and  Assyria,  west  and  north-west  of  the 
great  salt  desert  of  Irani.  Its  greatest  length  was 
from  north  to  south,  and  in  this  direction  it  ex- 
tended fiom  the  3'2nd  to  the  40th  parallel,  a  dis- 
tance of  550  miles.  In  width  it  reached  from  about 
long.  46^  to  53°;  but  its  average  breadth  was  not 
more  than  from  250  to  300  miles.  Its  area  may 
be  reckoned  at  about  150,000  square  miles,  or 
three-fourths  of  that  of  modern  France.  The  na- 
tural boundary  of  Media  on  the  north  was  the  river 
Aras ;  on  the  west  Zagi'os  and  the  mountain-chain 
which  connects  Zagros  with  Ararat ;  in  the  south 
Media  was  probably  separated  from  Persia  by  the 
desert  which  now  forms  the  boundary  between 
Farsistan  and  Irak  Ajcmi ;  on  the  east  its  natural 
limit  was  the  desert  and  the  Caspian  Gates.  West 
of  the  gates,  it  was  bounded,  not  (as  is  commonly 
said)  by  the  Caspian  Sea,  but  by  the  mountain 
range  south  of  that  sea,  which  separates  between, 
the  high  and  the  low  country.  It  thus  comprised 
the  modern  provinces  of  Irak  Ajeini,  Persian  Kur- 
distan, part  of  Luristan,  Azerbijan,  perhaps  Talish 
and  Ghilan,  but  not  Mazanderan  or  Asterabad, 

The  division  of  Media  commonly  recognised  by 
the  Greeks  and  Romans  was  that  into  Media  Magna, 
and  Jledia  Atropatene.  (Strab.  xi.  13,  §1  ;  comp. 
Polyb.  V.  44  ;  Pliu.  ff.  N.  vi.  13  ;  Ptol.  vi.  2,&c.) 
.1 .  Media  Atropatene,  so  named  fi-om  the  satrap 
\tropates,  who  became  independent  monarch  of  the 
province  on  the  destruction  of  the  Persi;m  empire 
by  Alexander  (Strab.  ut.  sup. ;  Diod.  Sic.  xviii.  3), 
corresponded  nearly  to  the  modern  Azerbijan,  being 
the  tract  situated  between  the  Caspian  and  tlie 
mountains  which  run  north  from  Zagros,  and  con- 
sisting mainly  of  the  rich  and  fertile  basin  of  Lake 
Urumiych,  with  the  valleys  of  the  Ai-as  and  the 
Sefid  Rud.  This  is  chiefly  a  liigh  tract,  varied 
between  mountains  and  plains,  and  lying  mostly 
three  or  four  thousand  feet  above  the  sea  level. 
The  basin  of  Lake  Urimuyeh  has  a  still  greater  ele- 
vation, the  surface  of  the  lake  itself,  into  which  all 
the  rivers  run,  being  as  much  as  4200  feet  jibove  the  j 
ocean.  The  country  is  fairly  fertile,  well-watered  ' 
in  most  places,  and  favourable  to  agriculture ;  its 
climate  is  temperate,  though  occasionally  severe  in 
winter ;  it  produces  rice,  corn  of  all  kinds,  wine, 
silk,  white  wax,  and  all  manner  of  delicious  fruits. 
Tabriz,  its  modern  capital,  forms  the  summer  re- 
sidence of  the  Persian  kings,  and  is  a  beautiful 
place,  situated  in  a  forest  of  orchards.  The  ancient 
Atropatene  may  have  included  also  the  countries  of 
Ghilan  and  Talish,  together  with  the  plain  of 
Moghan  at  the  mouth  of  the  combined  Kur  and 
Aras  rivers.  These  tracts  are  low  and  flat ;  tliat  of 
Moghan  is  sandy  and  sterile ;  Talish  is  more  pro- 
ductive ;  while  Ghilan  (like  Mazanderan)  is  rich 
and  fertile  in  the  highest  degi  ee.  The  climate  of 
Ghilan,  however,  is  unhealthy,  and  at  times  pesti- 
lential ;  the  streams  perpetually  overflow  their 
banks ;  and  the  waters  which  escape,  stagnate  in 
marshes,  whose  exhalations  spread  disease  and  death 
among  the  inhabitants.  2.  Media  Magna  lay  south 
and  east  of  Atropatene.  Its  northern  boundary  was 
the  range  of  Elburz  from  the  Caspian  (iatcs  to  the 
Rudbar  pass,  through  which  the  Hefid  Rud,  reaches 
the  low  country  of  Ghilan.  It  then  adjoined  upon 
Atropatene,  from  which  it  may  be  regarded  as  se- 
parated by  a  line  running  about  S.W.  by  W.  from 
the  bridge  of  Menjil  to  Zagros.     Here  it   touched 


MEDIA 

Assyria,  fioni  which  it  was  probably  di\ided  by  the 
last  line  of  hills  towards  the  west,  before  the  moun- 
tains sink  down  upon  the  plain.  On  the  south  it 
was  bounded  by  Susiana  and  Persia  Proper,  the 
former  of  which  it  met  in  the  modern  Laristan, 
probably  about  lat.  33°  30',  while  it  struck  the 
latter  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Zagros  range,  in 
lat.  320  or  32°  30'.  Towards  the  east  it  was 
closed  in  by  the  great  salt  desert,  which  Herodotus 
reckons  to  Sagartia,  and  later  writers  to  Parthia 
and  Carmania.  Media  Magna  thus  contained  great 
part  of  Kurdistan  and  Luristan,  with  all  Ardelan 
and  Irak  Ajeini.  Tlie  character  of  this  tract  is 
very  varied.  Towards  the  west,  in  Ardelan,  Kur- 
distan and  Luristan,  it  is  highly  mountainous,  but 
at  the  same  time  well-watered  and  richly  wooded, 
fertile  and  lovely  ;  on  the  north,  along  the  flank  of 
Elburz,  it  is  less  charming,  but  still  pleasant  and 
tolerably  productive ;  while  towards  the  east  and 
south-east  it  is  bare,  arid,  rocky,  and  sandy,  sup- 
porting with  difficulty  a  spare  and  wretched  popu- 
lation. The  present  productions  of  Zagros  are 
cotton,  tobacco,  hemp,  Indian  corn,  rice,  wheat, 
wine,  and  fruits  of  every  variety  ;  every  valley  is  a 
garden ;  and  besides  valleys,  extensive  plains  are 
often  found,  furnishing  the  most  excellent  pasturage. 
Here  weie  nuitured  the  valuable  breed  of  horses 
called  Nisaean,  which  the  Persians  cultivated  with 
sucli  especial  care,  and  from  which  the  horses  of  the 
monarch  were  always  chosen.  The  pasture-grounds 
of  Khawah  and  Alishtar  between  Bchistun  and 
Khorram-ahad,  probably  represent  the  "  Nisaean 
plain"  of  the  ancients,  which  seems  to  Tiave  taken 
its  name  fiom  a  town  Nisaea  {Nisaya),  mentioned 
in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions. 

Although  the  division  of  Media  into  these  two  ' 
provinces  can  only  be  distinctly  proved  to  have  ex- 
isted from  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  yet 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  it  was  more  ancient, 
dating  from  the  settlement  of  the  Medes  in  the 
country,  which  did  not  take  place  all  at  once,  but 
was  first  in  the  more  northern  and  afterwards  in 
the  southern  country.  It  is  indicative  of  the  divi- 
sion, that  there  were  two  Ecbatanas  —  one,  the 
northern,  at  Takht-i-Suleiman :  the  other,  the 
southern,  at  Hamadan,  on  the  flanks  of  Mount 
Oiontes  {Elwand) — respectively  the  capitals  of  the 
two  districts.     [Ecbatana.] 

Next  to  the  two  Ecbatanas,  the  chief  town  in 
Media  was  undoubtedly  Khages — the  Raga  of  the 
inscriptions.  Hither  the  rebel  Phraortes  fled  on  his 
defeat  by  Darius  Hvstaspis,  and  hither  too  came 
Darius  Codomannus  after  the  battle  of  Arbela,  on 
his  way  to  the  eastern  provinces  (Ait.  Exp.  Alex. 
iii.  20).  The  only  other  place  of  much  note  was 
Bagistana,  the  modern  Behistun,  which  guarded  the 
chief  pass  connecting  Media  with  the  Mesopota- 
mian  plain. 

No  doubt  both  parts  of  Media  weie  further  sub- 
divided into  provinces  ;  but  no  ti-ustworthy  account 
of  these  minor  divisions  has  come  down  to  us.  The 
ti'act  about  Khages  was  certainly  called  Khagiaua; 
and  the  mountain  tract  adjoining  Persia  seems  to 
have  been  known  as  Paraetacene,  or  the  country  of 
the  Paraetacae.  Ptolemy  gives  as  Median  districts 
Elymais,  Choromithrene,  Sigrina,  Daritis,  and  Sy- 
romedia  ;  but  these  names  are  little  known  to  other 
writers,  and  suspicions  attach  to  some  of  them.  On 
the  whole  it  would  seem  that  we  do  not  possess 
materials  for  a  minute  account  of  the  ancient  geo- 
graphy of  the  country,  which  is  very  imperfectly 
described  by  Strnbo,  and  almost  omitted  by  Pliny. 


MEDIAN 

(See  Sir  H.  Rawliiison's  Articles  in  the  Journal 
of  the  Geographical  Societij,  vol.  ix.  Art.  2,  and 
vol.  X.  Articles  1  and  2 ;  and  compare  Layard's 
Nineveh  and  Babi/lon,  chap.  xvii.  and  xviii.  ; 
Chesney's  Euphrates  Expedition,  i.  122,  &c. ; 
Kinneir's  Persian  Empire ;  Ker  Porter's  Travels ; 
and  Kawlinson's  Hirodotus,  vol  i.  Appendix,  Essay 
ix.)  [G.  R.] 

ME'DIAN  (XnO  ;  Kcri,  HXID :  d  MijSos  : 
Medus).  Darius,  "  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  the  seed 
of  the  Medes"  (Dau.  ix.  1)  or  "the  Mede"  (xi.  1), 
is  thus  described  in  Dan.  v.  31. 

MEDICINE.  I.  Next  to  care  for  food,  clothing, 
and  shelter,  the  curing  of  hurts  takes  precedence 
even  amongst  savage  nations.  At  a  later  period 
comes  the  treatment  of  sickness,  and  recognition  of 
states  of  disease  ;  and  these  mark  a  nascent  civiliza- 
tion. Internal  diseases,  and  all  for  which  an  ob- 
vious cause  cannot  be  assigned,  are  in  the  most  early 
period  viewed  as  the  visitation  of  God,  oi-  as  the  act 
of  some  malignant  power,  human — as  the  evil  eye — 
or  else  superhuman,  and  to  be  dealt  with  by  sorcery, 
or  some  other  occult  supposed  agency.  The  Indian 
notion  is  that  all  diseases  are  the  work  of  an  evil 
spirit  (Sprengel,  Gesch.  der  Arzeneikimde,  pt.  ii. 
48).  But  among  a  civilised  race  the  pre-eminence 
of  the  medical  art  is  confessed  in  proportion  to  the 
increased  value  set  on  human  life,  and  the  vastly 
greater  amount  of  comfort  and  enjoyment  of  which 
civilised  man  is  capable.  It  would  be  strange  if  their 
close  connexion  historically  with  Egvpt  had  not  im- 
bued the  Isiaelites  with  a  strong  appreciation  of  the 
value  of  this  art,  and  with  some  considerable  degree 
of  medical  culture.  From  the  most  ancient  testi- 
monies, sacred  and  secular,  Egypt,  from  whatever 
cause,  though  perhaps  from  necessity,  was  foremost 
among  the  nations  in  this  most  human  of  studies 
purely  physical.  Again,  as  the  active  intelligence 
of  Greece  flowed  in  upon  her,  and  mingled  with  the 
immense  store  of  pathological  records  which  must 
have  accumulated  under  the  system  described  by 
Herodotus, — Egypt,  especially  Alexandria,  became 
tiie  medical  repertory  and  museum  of  the  world. 
Thither  all  that  was  best  worth  pi'eserving  amid 
earlier  civilisations,  whether  her  own  or  foreign, 
had  been  attracted,  and  medicine  and  suigery 
flourished  amidst  political  decadence  and  artistic 
decline.  The  attempt  has  been  made  by  a  French 
writer  (Renouard,  Histoirede 
Medicine  depnis  son  Origine 
&c.)  to  arrange  in  periods  the 
growth  of  the  medical  art  as 
follows: — 1st.  The  Primi- 
tive or  Instinctive  Period, 
lasting  from  the  earliest  re- 
corded treatment  to  the  fall 
of  Troy.  2ndly.  The  Sacred 
in"  Mystic  Period,  lasting  till 

the  dispersion  of  the  Pythagorean  Society,  .oOO  B.C. 
3rdly.  The  Philosoj)hical  Peiiod,  closing  with  the 
foundation   of  the  Alexandrian  Library,  B.C.  o20. 

"  Recent  researches  at  Kouyunjik  have  given  proof,  it 
is  said,  of  the  use  of  tlie  microscope  in  minute  rtevices, 
and  yielded  up  even  specimens  of  magnifying  lenses. 
A  cone  engraved  with  a  table  of  cubes,  so  small  as  to  be 
inuntelligiblo  without  a  lens,  was  brought  home  by  Sir  H. 
Rawlinson,  and  is  now  in  the  British  Musouni.  As  to 
whether  the  invention  was  brought  to  bear  on  medical 
science,  proof  is  wanting.  f'robaLly  such  science  bail  not 
yet  been  puslied  to  the  point  at  which  the  microscope 
becomes    useful.      Only  those  who    have   quick    keen 


MEDICINE 


293 


4thly.  The  Anatomical  Period,  which  continued 
till  the  death  of  Galen,  A.D.  200.  But  these  arti- 
ficial lines  do  not  strictlj'  exhibit  the  truth  of  the 
matter.  Egypt  was  the  earliest  home  of  medical 
and  other  skill  for  the  region  of  the  Mediterranean 
basin,  and  every  If'.gyptian  mummy  of  the  more  ex- 
pensive and  elaborate  soit,  involved  a  process  of 
anatomy.  This  gave  opportunities  of  inspecting  a 
vast  number  of  bodies,  varying  in  every  possible  con- 
dition. Such  opportunities  were  sure  to  be  turned 
to  account  (Pliny,  AL  H.  xix.  5)  by  the  more  dili- 
gent ainong  the  faculty — tor  "  the  physicians " 
embalmed  ((ion.  I.  2).  The  intestines  had  a  sepa- 
rate receptacle  assigned  them,  or  were  restored  to 
the  body  through  the  ventral  incision  (Wilkinson, 
V.  4G8)  ;  and  every  such  process  which  we  can 
trace  in  the  mummies  discovered  shows  the  most 
minute  accuracy  of  manipulation.  Notwithstand- 
ing these  laborious  eflbrts,  we  have  no  trace  of  any 
philosophical  or  rational  system  of  Egyptian  origin  ; 
and  medicine  in  Egypt  was  a  mere  art  or  pro- 
fession. Of  science  the  Asclepiadae  of  Greece  were 
the  true  originators.  Hippocrates,  who  wrote  a 
book  on  "  Ancient  Medicine,"  and  who  seems  to 
have  had  many  opportunities  of  access  to  foreign 
sources,  gives  no  prominence  to  lilgypt.  It  was  no 
doubt  owing  to  the  repressive  influences  of  her  fixed 
institutions  that  this  country  did  not  attain  to  a 
vast  and  speedy  proficiency  in  medical  science,  when 
post  mortem  examination  was  so  general  a  rule  in- 
stead of  being  a  rare  exception.  Still  it  is  impos- 
sible to  believe  that  considerable  advances  in  physi- 
ology could  have  failed  to  be  made  there  from  time 
to  time,  and  similarly,  though  we  cannot  so  well 
determine  how  far,  in  Assyria.^  The  best  guarantee 
for  the  advance  of  medical  science  is,  after  all,  the 
interest  which  every  human  being  has  in  it ;  and 
this  is  most  strongly  felt  in  large  gregarious  masses 
of  population.  Compared  with  the  wild  countries 
around  them,  at  any  rate,  Egypt  must  have 
seemed  incalculably  advanced.  Hence  the  awe, 
with  which  Homer's  Greeks  speak  of  her  wealth,'' 
reL<ources,  and  medical  skill  ;  and  even  the  visit  of 
Abraham,  though  prior  to  this  period,  found  her 
no  doubt  in  advance  of  other  countries.  Repre- 
sentations of  early  Egyptian  surgeiy  apparently 
occur  on  some  of  the  monuments  of  Beni-Hassan. 
Flint  knives  used  for  embalming  have  been  re- 
covered— the  "  Ethiopic  stone''  of  Herodotus   ii.  8'! : 


Flint  Knives.     (Willcinnon.) 

comp.  Ex.  iv.  25)  w.as  probably  either  black  flint  or 
agate  ;  and  those  who  have  assisted  at  the  opening  of 
a  mummy  have  noticed  that  the  teeth  exhibited  a 

eyes  for  the  nature-world  feel  the  want  of  such  spec- 
tacles. 

b  n.  ix.  381 ;  Od.  iv.  229.  See  also  Herod.  11.  84,  and 
I.  77.  The  simple  heroes  had  reverence  for  the  healing 
skill  which  extended  only  to  wounds.  There  is  hardly  any 
recognition  of  disease  in  Homer.  There  Is  sudden  death, 
pestilence,  and  weary  old  age,  but  hardly  any  lixed  morbid 
condition,  save  in  a  simile  {Od.  v.  395).  Sie,  however,  a 
letter  He  rebus  ex  Uomero  mejVeis,  I).  G.  Wolf,  Wittenberg 
1791. 


294 


MEDICINE 


dentistry  not  inferior  in  execution  to  tlie  worlc  of  the 
best  modern  experts.  This  confirms  the  statement  of 
Herodotus  that  every  part  of  the  body  was  studied 
by  a  distinct  practitioner.  Pliuy  (vii.  57)  asserts 
that  tlie  Egyptians  claimed  the  invention  of  the 
liealing  art,  and  (x.wi.  1)  thinks  them  subject  to 
many  diseases.  Their  "many  medicines"  are  men- 
tioned (Jer.  xlvi.  11).     Many  valuable  drugs  may 


Doctors  (or  Biu'bers  ?)  and  Patients.     (WilkiiisonO 

be  derived  fi-om  the  plants  mentioned  by  Wilkinson 
(iv.  621),  and  the  senna  of  the  adjacent  interior  of 
Africa  still  excels  all  other.  Athothmes  II.,  king  of 
the  country,  is  said  to  have  written  on  the  subject 
of  anatomy.  Hermes  (who  may  perhaps  be  the 
.same  as  Athothmes,  intellect  personified,  only  dis- 
guised as  a  deity  instead  of  a  legendary  king),  was 


Exvotos.     (Wilkinson.) 

1.  Ivory  hand,  in  Mr.  Salt's  collection. 

2.  Stone  tablet,  dedic.ited  to  Amniire,  for  the  rccoverj-  of  ace 

3.  An  ear,  of  terra  cotta,  from  Thebes,  in  Sir  ,T.  Gardner  Will 


said  to  have  written  six  books  on  medicine ;  in 
which  an  entire  chapter  was  devoted  to  diseases  ot 
the  eye  (Kawlinson's  Herod.,  note  to  ii.  84),  and 

''  Comp.  the  letter  of  Benhadad  to  Joram,  2  K.  v.  6,  to 
procure  the  cure  of  Naaman. 

d  The  words  of  Heroil.  (iii.  66),  w  co-0aKe'Ai(je'  re  to 
hariov  Kal  6  /u.>jpb?  Tax"'"''a  icranrr],  .ippear  to  indkalc 
medical  treatment  by  the  terms  eiuployeil.  It  is  not 
unlikely  the  physician  may  have  taken  the  o])portunity 
to  avenge  the  wrongs  of  his  nation. 

'■  The  sex  is  clear  from  the  Hel).  siammatical  forms. 
The  names  of  two,  Sliiphrah  and  I'uah,  are  recorded. 
The  treatment  of  newborn  Hebrew  infants  is  mentioned 
(Kz.   xvi.   4)    as    consisting    in    washing,    salting,    and 


MEDICINE 

the  first  lialf  of  which  related  to  anatomy.     The 
various  recipes  known  to  have  been   beneficial  were 
recorded,  with  their  peculiar  cases,  in  the  memoirs 
of  physic,  inscribed  among  the  laws,  and  deposited 
in  the  principal  temples  of  the  place  (Wilkinson,  iii. 
396,  397).     The  reputation  of  its  practitioners  in 
historical  times  was  such    that'  both   Cyi"us   and 
Darius  sent  to  Eg;ypt  for  physicians  or  surgeons'' 
(Herod,  iii.  1,  129-132)  ;  and  by  one  of 
the  same  country,  no  doubt,  Cambyses' 
womid  was  "^  tended,  though  not  per- 
haps with  much  zeal  for  his  recovery. 

Of  midwifery   we    have  a   distinct 
notice  (Ex.  i.  15),  and  of  women  as 
its  practitioners,*  which  fact  may  also 
be  verified  from  the  sculptures  (Raw- 
linson's  note  on  Herod,  ii.  84).     The' 
physicians  had  salaries  from  the  public 
treasury,  and  treated  always  according 
to  established  precedents,  or  deviated 
from  these  at  their  peril,  in  case  of  a 
fatal    termination  ;     if,    however,   the 
patient  died  under  accredited  treatment 
no  blame  was  attached.     They  treated 
gi'atis  patients  when  travelling  or  on 
military  service.     Most  diseases   were 
by  them  ascribed   to   indigestion   and 
excessive  eating   (Diod.  Sicul.f  i.  82), 
and  when    their   science   failed   them  magics  was 
called  in.     On  i-ecovery  it  was  also  customary  to 
suspend  in  a  temple  an  exvoto,   which  was  com- 
monly a  model  of  the  jjart  affected  ;  and  such  offer- 
ings doubtless,  as   in  the  Coan  temple  of  Aescu- 
lapius, became  valuable   aids   to  the   pathological 
student.  The  Egyptians  who  lived  in  the  corn-grow- 
ing region  are  said  by  Hero- 
dotus, (ii.  77)  to  have  been 
specially  attentive  to  health. 
The  practice  of  circumcision 
is  traceable  on  monuments 
certainly  anterior  to  the  age 
of  .loseph.     Its  antiquity  is 
involved  in  obscurity ;   es- 
pecially as  all  we  know  of 
the  Egyptians  makes  it  un- 
ikely  that  they  would  have 
borrowed   such  a    practice, 
so    late   as    the   period    of 
Abraham,   from  any   mere 
sojourner  among  them.    Its 
beneficial     effects     in     the 
temperature  of  Egypt  and 
Syria  have  often  been  no- 
ticed, especially  as  a  pre- 
sen'ative  of  cleanliness,  &c. 
The    scrupulous    attention 
paid  to  the  dead  was  favour- 
able to  the  health   of  the 
living.    Such  powerful  drugs  as  asphaltum,  natron, 
resin,  pure  bitumen,  and  various  aromatic  gums, 
suppressed  or  counteracted  all  noxious  effluvia  from  *» 


nplnint  in  the  ear;  found  at  Thebes. 


swaddling:  this  last  was  not  used  in  Egypt  (Wilkin- 
son). 

f  The  same  author  adds  that  the  most  common  method 
of  treatment  was  by  kAuctiuoi;  Kal  I'rjo'Teiai;  koX  e/ie'rots. 

e  M.tgicians  and  physicians  both  belonged  to  the 
priestly  caste,  and  perhaps  united  their  professions  in 
one  person. 

h  •'  L'Egypte  moderne  ii'en  est  plus  l!i,  et,  comme  M. 
Parisct  I'a  si  bien  signale,  les  tombeaux  dcs  peres,  infiltres 
par  les  eaux  du  Nil.  so  coiivertisscnt  en  autant  de  foyers 
pcstilentiels  pour  Icurs  enfants  "  (Michel  Levy,  p.  12). 


MEDICINE 

tlie  corpse  ;  even  the  saw-ilust  of  the  floor,  on  which 
tlie  body  hail  been  cleansed,  was  collected  in  small 
linen  bags,  which,  to  the  number  of  twenty  or  thirty, 
were  deposited  in  vases  near  the  tomb  (Wilkinson,' 
V.  468,  469).  For  the  extent  to  v,  hich  these  practices 
were  imitated  among  the  Jews,  see  Embalming  ; 
at  any  rate  the  uncleanness  imputed  to  contact 
with  a  corpse  was  a  powerful  preservative''  against 
the  inoculation  of  the  living  frame  with  morbid 
"  humours.  But,  to  pursue  to  later  times  this  merely 
general  question,  it  appears  (Pliny,  iV.  H.  xix.  5"") 
that  the  Ptolemies  themselves  practised  dissection, 
and  that,  at  a  peiiod  when  Jewish  intercourse  with 
Egypt  was  complete  and  reciprocal,"  there  existed 
in  Ale,xandria  a  great  zeal  for  anatomical  study. 
The  only  influence  of  importance  which  would  tend 
to  check  the  Jews  from  sharing  this  was  the  cere- 
monial law,  the  special  reverence  of  Jewish  feeling 
towards  human  remains,  and  the  abhorrence  of 
"  uncleanness."  Yet  those  Jews — and  there  were 
at  all  times  since  the  captivity  not  a  few,  perhaps 
— who  tended  to  foreign  laxity,  and  affected  Greek 
pliilosophy  and  culture,  would  assuredly,  as  we 
shall  have  further  occasion  to  notice  that  they 
in  fact  did,  enlarge  their  anatomical  knowledge 
from  sources  which  repelled  their  stricter  bre- 
thren, and  the  result  would  be  apparent  in  the 
general  elevated  standard  of  that  profession,  even 
as  practised  in  Jerusalem.  The  diBusion  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  3rd  and  4th  centuries  exercised  a 
similar  but  more  universal  restraint  on  the  dis- 
secting-room, until  anatomy  as  a  pursuit  became 
extinct,  and  the  notion  of  profaneness  quelling 
everj'where  such  researches,  surgical  science  be- 
came stagnant  to  a  degi-ee  to  which  it  had  never 
previously  sunk  within  the  memory  of  human 
records. 

In  comparing  the  growth  of  medicine  in  the 
rest  of  the  ancient  world,  the  high  rank  of  its  prac- 
titioners— princes  and  heroes — settles  at  once  the 

This  may  perhaps  be  the  true  account  of  the  production 
of  the  modern  plague,  which,  however,  disappears  when 
the  temperature  rises  above  a  given  limit,  excessive  heat 
tending  to  dissipate  the  miasma. 

'  This  author  further  refers  to  Pcttigrew"s  History  of 
Egyptian  Mummies. 

^  Dr.  Ferguson,  iti  an  article  on  pestilential  infection. 
Quarterly  Review,  vol.  xlvi.,  1832,  insists  mi  actual  contact 
with  the  diseased  or  dead  as  the  condition  of  transmission 
of  the  disease.  But  compare  a  tract  by  Dr.  Macmichael, 
On  the  I'rof/ress  of  Opinion  on  the  Subject  of  Contagion. 
See  also  Essays  on  State  Medicine,  H.  W.  Rumsey,  London, 
1856,  ess.  iii.  p.  130,  &c.  For  ancient  opinions  on  the  matter, 
see  faMiMSJe£i'in.ed.  Sydenham  Society,  1.284  &c.  Thucy- 
dides,  in  his  description  of  the  Athenian  plague,  is  the  first 
who  alludes  to  it,  and  that  but  inferentially.  It  seems 
on  the  whole  most  likely  that  contagiousness  is  a  quality 
of  morbid  condition  which  may  be  present  or  absent. 
What  the  conditions  are  no  one  seems  able  to  say.  As  an 
instance,  elephantiasis  was  said  by  early  writers  {e.g. 
Aretaeus  and  Khazes)  to  be  contagious,  which  some 
modern  authorities  deny.  The  assertion  and  denial  are 
so  clear  and  circumstantial  in  either  case,  that  no  other 
solution  seems  open  to  the  ([ucstion. 

"'  "  Keglbui3  corpora  moriuorutn  ad  scrutandos  morbos 
insecantibus." 

"  Cyrcne,  the  well-known  Greek  African  colony,  had  a 
high  repute  lor  physicians  of  excellence  ;  and  some  of  its 
coins  bear  the  impress  of  the  otto';,  or  assiifoetidi,  a  me- 
dical drug  to  which  miraculous  virtues  were  jiscribed. 
Now  the  Cy leiiaica  was  a  home  for  the  Jews  of  the  disper-> 
sion  (Acts  ii.  10 ;   I'aul.  Aegin.  Sydenham  Society,  ill.  283). 

"  Ualen  himself  wrote  a  book,  Trcpl  t^;  Kaff  'Oft.ripov 
iaTpiKrj<;,  quoted  by  Alexander  of  Tralles,  lib.  ix.  cap.  4. 


MEDICINE 


295 


question  as  to  the  esteem  in  which  it  was  held  in 
the  Homeric"  and  pre-Homeric  p  period.  To  de- 
scend to  the  historical,  the  story  of  Democedes  1  at 
the  court  of  Darius  illustrates  the  practice  of  Greek 
surgery  before  the  period  of  Hippocrates  ;  anti- 
cipating in  its  gentler  waiting  upon '  nature,  as 
compared  (Herod,  iii.  130)  with  that  of  the  Per- 
sians and  Egyptians,  the  method  and  maxims  of  that 
Father  of  physic,  who  wrote  against  the  theories 
and  speculations  of  the  so-called  philosophical  school, 
and  was  a  true  Empiricist  before  that  sect  was 
formnlarized.  The  Dogmatic  school  was  founded 
after  his  time  by  his  disciples,  who  departed  from  his 
eminently  practical  and  inductive  method.  It  re- 
cognised hidden  causes  of  health  and  sickness  arising 
from  certain  supposed  principles  or  elements,  out  of 
which  bodies  were  composed,  and  by  virtue  of 
which  all  their  parts  and  members  were  attempered 
together  and  became  sympathetic.  He  has  soma 
curious  remarks  on  the  sympathy  of  men  with 
climate,  seasons,  &c.  Hippocrates  himself  rejected 
supernatural  accounts  of  disease,  and  especially  de- 
moniacal possession.  He  refers,  but  with  no  mystical 
sense,  to  numbers'  as  furnishing  a  rule  for  cases.  It 
is  remarkable  that  he  extols  the  discernment  of 
Orientals  above  Westerns,  and  of  Asiatics  above  Eu- 
ropeans, in  medical  diagnosis.'  The  empirical  school, 
which  arose  in  the  third  century  B.C.,  imder  the 
guidance  of  A cron  of  Agrigentum,  Serapion  of  Alex- 
andria, and  Philiuus  of  Cos,"  waited  for  the  symp- 
toms of  every  case,  disregarding  the  rules  of  practice 
based  on  dogmatic  principles.  Among  its  votaries 
was  a  Zachalias  (perhaps  Zacharias,  and  possibly  a 
Jew)  of  Babylon,  who  (Pliny,  N.  H.  xxxvii.  10, 
comp.  xxxvi.  10)  dedicated  a  book  on  medicine  to 
Mithridates  the  Great ;  its  views  were  also  sup- 
ported ^  by  Hei'odotus  of  Tarsus,  a  place  which,  next 
to  Alexandria,  became  distinguished  for  its  schools 
of  philosophy  and  medicine ;  as  also  by  a  Jew  named 
Theodas,  or  Theudas/  of  Laodicea,  but  a  student 


P  The  indistinctness  with  which  the  medical,  the  ma- 
gical, and  the  poisonous  were  confounded  under  the  word 
(jtapfiaKo.  by  the  early  Greeks  will  escape  no  one.  (So 
Ex.  .xxii.  18,  the  Heb.  word  for  "  witch  "  is  in  the  LXX. 
rendered  by  (jyapixaKo^.)  The  legend  of  the  Argonauts  and 
Medea  illustrates  this;  the  Homeric  Moly.and  Nepenthes, 
and  the  whole  story  of  Circe,  confirm  it. 

1  The  fame  which  he  had  acquired  in  Samos  had  reached 
Sardis  before  Darius  discovered  his  presence  among  the 
captives  taken  from  Oroetes  (Herod,  iii.  129). 

■■  The  best  known  name  amongst  the  pioneers  of  Greek 
medical  science  is  Herodicus  of  Selymbria,  "  qui  totam 
gymnasticara  medicinae  adjunxit ;"  for  which  he  was 
censured  by  Hippocrates  {Biblioth.  Script.  Med.  s.  v.).  The 
alliance,  however,  of  the  iarpi/CT)  with  the  yv/xvcLimK-i^  is 
familiar  to  us  from  the  Dialogues  of  Plato. 

s  Thus  the  product  of  seven  and  forty  gives  the  term 
of  the  days  of  gestation ;  in  his  vepl  j'ova-wv  S,  why  men 
died,  €v  TJjcn  irepia-ajjaL  rijyp  rip.epfwv,  is  discussed;  SO  the 
4th,  8th,  llUi,  and  17th,  are  noted  as  the  critical  days  in 
acute  diseases. 

'  Sprengel,  ub.  sup.  iv.  52-5,  speaks  of  an  Alexandrian 
school  of  medicine  as  having  carried  anatomy,  especially 
under  the  guidance  of  Hierophilus,  (o  its  highest  pitch  of 
ancient  perfection.  It  seems  not,  liDWcver.  to  have  claimed 
any  distinctive  principles,  but  stands  chronologically  be- 
tween the  Dogmatic  and  Kmpiric  schools. 

"  The  former  of  these  wrote  against  Hippocrates,  the 
latter  was  a  commentator  on  him  (Sprengel,  ub.  sup.  iv.  81). 

«  It  treats  of  a  stone  called  hematite,  to  which  the  author 
ascribes  great  virtues,  especially  as  regards  the  eyes. 

y  'I'he  authorities  for  these  statements  about  Theudas 
are  given  by  Wtuiderbar,  Hiblisch-Tatmudische  Medicin. 
Ites  Heft,  p.  25.    He  refers  anumg  others  to  Talmud,  Ti'. 


296 


MEDICINE 


of  Alexandria,  and  the  last,  or  nearly  >o,  of  the 
Empiricists  whom  its  schools  produced.  Tlie  re- 
marks of  Tlieudas  on  the  right  method  of  observing, 
and  the  value  of  experience,  and  his  book  on  medicine, 
now  lost,  in  which  he  arranged  his  subject  under  the 
heads  of  ind'icatoria,  curatoria,  and  sahihris,  earned 
him  high  repntiition  as  a.  champion  of  empiricism 
against  the  reproaches  of  the  dogmatists,  though  they 
were  subsequently  impugned  by  (lalen  and  Theo- 
dosius  of  Tripoli.  His  period  was  that  from  Titus  to 
■  Hadi'ian.  "  The  empiricists  held  that  observation 
and  the  application  of  known  remedies  in  one  case  to 
others  presumed  to  be  similar  constitute  the  whole 
art  of  cultivating  medicine.  Though  their  views 
were  narrow,  and  their  information  scanty  when 
compared  with  some  of  the  chiefs  of  the  other  sects, 
and  although  they  rejected  as  useless  and  unattain- 
able all  knowledge  of  the  causes  and  recondite  nature 
of  diseases,  it  is  undeniable  that,  besides  personal 
experience,  they  freely  availed  themselves  of  his- 
torical detail,  and  of  a  strict  analogy  founded  upon 
observation  and  the  resemblance  of  phenomena" 
(Dr.  Adams,  Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Sydenham  Soc). 

This  school,  however,  was  opposed  by  another, 
known  as  the  Methodic,  which  had  arisen  under  the 
leading  of  Themison,  also  of  Laodicea,  about  the 
period  of  Pompey  the  Great.^  Asclepiades  paved 
the  way  for  the  "  method  "  in  question,  finding  a 
theo;  etio  »  basis  in  the  corpuscular  or  atomic  theory 
of  physics  which  he  borrowed  fi-om  Heraclides  of 
Pontus.  He  had  passed  some  early  years  in  Alex- 
andria, and  thence  came  to  Rome  shortly  before 
Cicero's  time  (comp.  quo  nos  medico  amicoqiie  usi 
siirnus,  Crassus,  ap.  Cic.  do  Orat.  i.  14).  He  was 
a  transitional  link  between  the  Dogmatic  and  Em- 
piric schools  and  this  later  or  Methodic  (Sprengel, 
uh.  sup.  pt.  V.  16),  which  sought  to' rescue  medicine 
from  the  bewildering  mass  of  particulars  in  which 
empiricism  had  plmiged  it.  He  reduced  diseases  to 
two  classes,  chronic  and  acute,  and  endeavoured  like- 
wise to  simplify  remedies.  In  the  meanwhile  the 
most  judicious  of  medical  theorists  since  Hippocrates, 
Celsus  of  the  Augustan  period,  had  reviewed 
medicine  in  tlie  light  which  all  these  schools 
aftbrded,  and  not  professing  any  distinct  teaching, 
but  borrowing  from  all,  may  be  viewed  as  eclectic. 
He  translated  Hippocrates  largely  verbatim,  quoting 
in  a  less  degree  Asclepiades  and  others.  Antonius 
Musa,  whose  "  cold-water  cure,"  after  its  successful 
trial  on  Augustus  himself,  became  generally  popular, 
seems  to  have  had  little  of  scientific  basis ;  but  by 
the  usual  method,  or  the  usual  accidents,  became 
merely  the  fashionable  piactitioner  of  his  day  in 
Rome.''  Attalia,  near  Tarsus,  fm-nished  also, 
shortly  after  the  period  of  Celsus,  Athenaeus,  the 
leader  of  the  last  of  the  schools  of  me;licine  which 
divided  the  ancient  world,  under  tlie  name  of  the 
"  Pneumatic,"  holding  the   tenet    "  of  an    etherial 

NasCr,  52() ;  to  Tosiphla  Ghloth,  ^-iv. ;  and  to  Tr.  San- 
hedrin,  33a,  93tZ ;  Hechoroth,  286. 

^  "  Alia  est  Ilippocratis  secta  [the  Dogmatic],  alia  Ascle- 
niadis,  alia  Themisonis"  (Seneca,  Epist.  95;  comp.  Juv. 
Sat.  X.  221). 

"  For  his  remains  ^ee  Asclepiadis  Bithynici  Pragmenta, 
ed.  Chrisl.  Gottl.  Gumpert,  S".  Vinar.  1794. 

''  Female  medical  aid  appears  to  have  been  current  at 
Rome,  whether  m  midwifery  only  (the  obstetric),  or  in 
general  practice,  as  the  titles  viedica,  iarpCx-q,  would  seem 
to  imply  (see  Martial,  Ejjig.  xi.  72).  The  Greeks  wore  not 
strangers  to  female  study  of  medicine ;  e.  g.  some  frag- 
ments of  the  famous  Aspasia  on  women's  disorders  occur 
111  At  tins. 


MEDICINE 

prmciple  (irvevfia,)  residing  in  tlie  microcosm,  by 
means  of  which  the  mind  performed  the  functions 
of  the  body."  This  is  also  traceable  in  Hippo- 
crates, and  was  an  established  opinion  of  the 
Stoics.  It  was  exemplified  in  the  innate  heat,  Oepfx^ 
ifi(pvros,  (Aret.  de  Caus.  ct  Sign.  Morh.  Chron. 
ii.  13),  and  itvecalidum  innatum  of  modern  ])hysio- 
logists,  especially  in  the  17th  century  (Dr.  Adams, 
Pref.  Aretaeus,  ed.  Syd.  Soc).  It  is  clear  that 
all  these  schools  may  easily  have  contributed  to 
form  the  medical  opinions  current  at  the  period  of 
the  N.  T.,  that  the  two  earlier  among  them  may 
have  influenced  Rabbinical  teaching  on  that  sub- 
ject at  a  much  earlier  period,  and  that,  especially 
at  the  time  of  Alexander's  visit  to  Jerusalem,  the 
Jewish  people,  whom  he  favoured  and  protected,  had 
an  opportunity  of  largely  gathering  from  the  medical 
lore  of  the  west.  It  was  necessary  therefore  to 
pass  in  brief  review  the  growth  of  the  latter,  and 
especially  to  note  the  points  at  which  it  intersects 
the  medical  progress  of  the  Jews.  Greek  Asiatic 
medicine  culminated  in  Galen,  who  was,  however, 
still  but  a  commentator  on  his  western  predecessors, 
and  who  stands  literally  without  rival,  successor,  or 
disciple  of  note,  till  the  period  when  Greek  learning 
was  reawakened  by  the  Arabian  intellect.  Galen 
himself  <=  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Anto- 
nines,  but  he  appears  to  have  been  acquainted  with 
the  writings  of  Moses,  and  to  have  travelled  in 
quest  of  medical  experience  over  Egypt,  Syria,  and 
Palestine,  as  well  as  Greece,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
west,  and,  in  particular,  to  have  visited  the  banks 
of  the  Jordan  in  quest  of  opobalsamum,  and  the 
coasts  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  obtain  samples  of  bitumen. 
He  also  mentions  Palestine  as  producing  a  watery 
wine,  suited  for  the  drink  of  febrile  patients. 

II.  Having  thus  described  the  external  influences 
which,  if  any,  were  probably  most  influential  in 
forming  the  medical  practice  of  the  Hebrews, 
we  may  trace  next  its  internal  growth.  The 
cabalistic  legends  mix  up  the  names  of  Shem 
and  Heber  in  their  fables  about  healing,  and 
ascribe  to  those  patriarchs  a  knowledge  of  simples 
and  rare  roots,  with,  of  course,  magic  spells  and 
occult  jjowers,  such  as  have  clouded  the  history  of 
medicine  from  the  earliest  times  down  to  the 
17th  century.''  So  to  Abraham  is  ascribed  a  talis- 
man, the  touch  of  which  healed  all  disease.  We 
know  that  such  simple  surgical  skill  as  the  opera- 
tion for  circumcision  implies  was  Abraham's  ;  but 
severer  operations  than  this  are  constantly  required 
in  the  flock  and  hei'd,  and  those  who  watch  care- 
fully the  habits  of  animals  can  hardly  fail  to  amass 
some  guiding  piinciples  applicable  to  man  and 
beast  alike.  Beyond  this,  there  was  probably 
nothing  but  such  ordinary  obstetrical  craft  as  has 
always  been  traditional  among  the  women  of  rude 
tribes,  which  could  be  classed  as  medical  lore  in  the 


c  The  Arabs,  however,  continued  to  build  wholly  upon 
Hippocrates  and  Galen,  save  in  so  far  as  their  advance  in 
chemical  science  improved  their  pharmacopoeia :  this  nuiy 
be  seen  on  reference  to  the  works  of  Khazes,  a.d.  930,  and 
Haly  Abbas,  a.d.  980.  The  first  mention  of  smallpox  is 
ascribed  to  Khazes,  who,  however,  quotes  several  earlier 
writers  on  the  subject.  Mahomet  himself  is  said  to  have 
been  versed  in  medicine,  and  to  have  compiled  some 
aphorisms  upon  it ;  and  a  herbalist  literature  was  always 
extensively  followed  in  the  East  from  the  days  of  Solomon 
downwards  (Freind's  History  of  Medicine,  ii.  5,  27). 

d  See,  in  evidence  of  this,  KayaX  and  Practical  City- 
viistry,  in  three  treatises,  London,  1670. 


medicinp: 

fiiuiily  of  the  pxtriarch,  until  his  sojourn  brought 
him  among  the  more  cultivated  Philistines  and 
Egyptians.  Tlie  only  notices  which  Scripture 
affords  in  connexion  with  the  subject  are  the  cases 
of  diflicult  midwifery  in  the  successive  households 
of  Isiiac,^  Jacob,  and  Judah  (Gen.  xxv.  26,  xxxv. 
17,  xxxviii.  27),  and  so,  later,  in  that  of  Phinehas 
(1  Sam.  iv.  19).  The  tiaditional  value  ascribed  to 
the  mandrake,  in  regard  to  generative  functions, 
relates  to  the  same  branch  of  natural  medicine  ; 
but  throughout  this  period  occurs  no  trace  of  any 
attempt  to  study,  digest,  and  systematise  the  sub- 
ject. But,  as  Israel  grew  and  multiplied  in  Egypt, 
they  derived  doubtless  a  large  mental  cultivation 
from  their  position  until  cruel  policy  turned  it  into 
bondage  ;  even  then  Moses  was  rescued  from  the 
lot  of  hi.s  brethren,  and  became  learned  in  all 
the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  including,  of  course, 
medicine  and  cognate  sciences  (Clem.  Alox.  i.  p. 
413),  and  those  attainments  perhaps  became  sug- 
gestive of  future  laws.  Some  practical  skill  in 
metallurgy  is  evident  from  Ex.  xxxii.  20.  But,  if 
we  admit  Egyptian  learning  as  an  ingredient,  we 
should  also  notice  how  far  exalted  "above  it  is  the 
stiindard  of  the  whole  Jewish  legislative  iabric,  in 
its  exemption  from  the  blemishes  of  sorcery  and 
Juggling  pretences.  The  priest,  who  had  to  pro- 
nounce on  the  cure,  used  no  means  to  advance  it,  and 
the  whole  regulations  prescribed  exclude  the  notion 
of  trafficking  in  popular  superstition.  We  have  no 
occult  practices  reserved  in  the  hands  of  the  sacred 
caste.  It  is  God  alone  who  doeth  great  tilings, 
working  by  the  wand  of  Moses,  or  the  brazen 
serpent ;  but  the  very  mention  of  such  instruments 
is  such  as.  to  expel  all  pretence  of  mysterious  virtues 
in  the  things  themselves.  Hence  various  allusions 
to  God's  ''  healing  mercy,"  and  the  title  "  Jehovah 
that  healeth"  (Ex.  xv.  26  ;  Jer.  xvii.  14,  xxx.  17 ; 
Ps.  ciii.  3,  cxlvii.  3 ;  Is.  xxx.  26).  Nor  was  the 
practice  of  physic  a  privilege  of  the  Jewish  priest- 
hood. Any  one  might  practise  it,  and  this  pub- 
licity must  have  kept  it  pure.  Kay,  there  was 
no  scriptural  bar  to  its  practice  by  resident  aliens. 
We  read  of  "  physicians,"  "  healing,"  &c.,  in 
Ex.  xxi.  19 ;  2  Iv.  viii.  29 ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  12  ; 
Jerem.  viii.  22.  At  the  same  time  the  greater 
leisure  of  the  Levites  and  their  other  advantages 
would  make  them  the  students  of  the  nation,  as  a 
rule,  in  ail  science,  and  their  constant  residence  in 
cities  would  give  them  the  opportunity,  if  ciirried 
out  in  fact,  of  a  far  wider  field  of  observation. 
The  reign  of  peace  of  Solomon's  days  must  have 
opened,  especially  with  renewed  Egyptian  intei-- 
course,  new  facilities  for  the  study.  He  himself 
seems  to  have  included  in  his  favourite  natural 
history  some  knowledge  of  the  medicinal  uses  of  the 
creatures.  His  works  show  him  conversant  with 
the   notion  of  remedial   treatment   (I'rov.   iii.   8, 

0  Doubts  have  been  raised  as  to  the  possibility  of  twins 
being  born,  one  holding  the  other's  heel ;  but  there  does 
not  seem  any  such  limit  to  the  operations  of  nature 
as  any  obji'Ction  on  that  score  would  imply.  After  all, 
it  was  perhaps  only  just  such  a  relative  position  of  the 
limbs  of  tlie  infants  at  the  mere  moment  of  birth  as  would 
suggest  the  "  holding  by  the  heel.'  The  midwives,  it 
seems,  in  case  of  twins,  were  aiUed  upon  to  distinguish 
the  firsl-liorn,  to  whom  important  privileges  appertained. 
The  tying  on  a  thread  or  ribbon  was  an  easy  way  of  pre- 
venting mistake,  and  the  assistant  in  the  case  of  Tamar 
seized  the  earliest  possible  moment  for  doing  it.  *'  When 
the  hand  or  foot  of  a  living  child  protrudes,  it  is  to  he 
pushed  up  .  .  and  the  head  made  to  present "  {Paul.  Ae{iiv. 


MEDICINE 


297 


vi.  15,  xii.  18,  xvii.  22,  xx.  oO,  xxix.  1  ;  Eccles. 
iii.  3)  ;  and  one  passage  (see  p.  306)  indicates  con- 
siderable knowledge  of  anatomy.  His  repute  in 
magic  is  the  universal  f  theme  of  eastern  story.  It 
has  even  been  thouglit  he  had  recourse  to  tlte 
shrine  of  Aesculapius  at  Sidon,  and  enriched  his  re- 
sources by  its  records  or  relics  ;  but  there  seems 
some  doubt  whether  this  temple  was  of  such  high 
antiquity.  Solomon,  however,  we  cannot  doubt, 
would  have  turned  to  the  account,  not  ouly  of 
wealth  but  of  knowledge,  his  peaceful  reign,  wide 
dominion,  and  wider  renown,  and  would  have  sought 
to  traffic  in  learning,  as  well  as  in  wheat  and  gold. 
To  him  the  Talmudists  ascribe  a  "  volume  of  cures  " 
(mXISI  120),  of  which  they  make  frequent  men- 
tion (Fabricius,  Cod.  Fsendep.  V.  T.  1043,4).  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  viii.  2)  mentions  his  knowledge  of 
medicine,  and  the  use  of  spells  by  him  to  expel 
demons  who  cause  sicknesses,  "  which  is  contimied 
among  us,"  he  adds,  "  to  this  time."  The  dealings 
of  various  prophets  with  quasi-medical  agency  can- 
not be  regarded  as  other  than  the  mere  accidental 
form  which  their  miraculous  gifts  took  (1  K.  xiii. 
0,  xiv.  12,  xvii.  17  ;  2  K.  i.  4,  xx.  7  ;  Is.  xxxviii. 
21).  Jewish  tradition  has  invested  Elisha,  it 
would  seem,  with  a  ftmction  more  largely  medi- 
cinal than  that  of  the  other  servants  of  God ;  but 
the  Scriptural  evidence  on  the  point  is  scanty, 
save  that  he  appears  to  have  known  at  once  the 
proper  means  to  apply  to  heal  the  waters,  and 
temper  the  noxious  pottage  (2  K.  ii.  21,  iv.  39-41). 
His  healing  the  Shunammife's  son  has  been  dis- 
cussed as  a  case  of  suspended  animation,  and  of 
animal  magnetism  applied  to  resuscitate  it ;  but 
the  narrative  clearly  implies  that  the  death  was 
real.  As  regards  the  le]irosy,  had  the  Jordan  com- 
monly possessed  the  healing  power  which  Naaman's 
faith  and  obedience  found  in  it,  would  there 
have  been  "  many  lepers  in  Israel  in  the  days 
of  Eliseus  the  prophet,"  or  in  any  other  days  ? 
Further,  if  our  Lord's  words  (Luke  iv.  27)  are  to  be 
taken  literally,  Elisha's  reputation  could  not  have 
been  founded  on  any  succession  of  lepers  healed.  The 
washing  was  a  part  of  the  enjoined  lustration  of  the 
leper  after  his  cure  was  complete ;  Naaman  was  to 
act  as  though  clean,  like  the  "  ten  men  that  were 
lepers,"  bidden  to  "  go  and  show  themselves  to 
the  priest" — in  either  case  it  was  "as  thou  hast 
believed,  so  be  it  done  unto  thee." 

The  sickness  of  Benhadad  is  certainly  so  de- 
scribed as  to  imply  treachery  on  the  part  of  Hazael 
(2  K.  viii.  15).  Yet  the  observation  of  Bruce,  upon 
a  "cold-water  cure"  practised  among  the  people 
near  the  Red  Sea,  has  suggested  a  view  somewhat 
difierent.  The  bed-clothes  are  soaked  with  cold 
water,  and  kept  thoroughly  wet,  and  the  patient 
drinks  cold  water  freely.  But  the  crisis,  it  seems, 
occurs  on  the  third  day,  and  not  till  the  fifth  is  it 

ed.  Sydenh.  6oc.,  i.  048,  Hippocr.  quoted  by  Dr.  Adams). 
This  probably  the  midwife  did  ;  at  the  same  time  marl<ing 
himaslirst-born  in  virtue  of  being  thus  "iiresinied"  first. 
The  precise  meaning  of  llie  duubtiul  exiinssion  in  Gen. 
xxxviii.  27  and  niarg.  is  discussed  by  Wuiulcrliar,  ub.  nip. 
p.  50,  in  reference  both  to  the  children  and  U<  the  mother. 
Of  Kachel  a  Jewish  commentator  says,  "  Muliis  etiam 
ex  itincre  difficiiltatibus  pracgrossis,  viribiisque  post  din 
protractos  dolores  exhaustis,  atonia  uteri,  foi-sjui  (luideni 
haemiTrhagia  in  pariendo  mortua  est "  (ibid.). 

f  Josephus  (.•!»*.  viii.  2)  mentions  a  cure  of  one  im>s- 
sessed  with  a  devil  by  the  use  of  some  root,  the  knowledge 
of  which  was  referred  by  tradition  to  Solomon. 


298 


MEDICINE 


there  usual  to  apply  this  treatment.  If  the  cham- 
berlain, through  carelessness,  ignorance,  or  treachery, 
precipitated  the  application,  a  fatal  s  issue  may 
have  suddenly  resulted.  The  "  brazen  sei-pent," 
once  the  means  of  healing,  and  worehipped  idola- 
ti-ously  in  Hezekiah's  reign,  is  supposed  to  have  ac- 
quired those  honours  under  its  Aesculapian  aspect. 
This  notion  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  Scripture 
narrative,  though  not  therein  traceable.  It  is  sup- 
posed that  something  in  the  "  volume  of  cures," 
current  under  the  authority  of  Solomon,  may  have 
conduced  to  the  est<\blishment  of  these  rites,  and 
drawn  away  the  popular  homage,  especially  in 
prayers  during  sickness,  or  thanksgivings  after 
recovery,  from  Jehovah.  The  statement  that  King 
Asa  (2  Chr.  xvi.  12)  "sought  not  to  Jehovah  but 
to  the  ph3-sicians,"  may  seem  to  countenance  the 
notion  that  a  rivalry  of  actual  worship,  based  on 
some  medical  fiuicies,  had  been  set  up,  and  would  so 
far  support  the  Talmudical  tradition. 

Tlie  captivity  at  Babylon  brought  the  Jews 
in  contact  with  a  new  sphere  of  thought.  Their 
chief  men  rose  to  the  highest  honom-s,  and  an 
improved  mental  culture  among  a  large  section  of 
the  captives  was  no  doubt  the  result  which  they 
imported  on  their  return.''  We  know  too  little  of 
the  precise  state  of  medicine  in  Babylon,  Susa,  and 
the  "  cities  of  the  Medes,"  to  determine  the  direction 
in  which  the  impulse  so  derived  would  have  led  the 
exiles ;  but  the  confluence  of  streams  of  thought 
from  opposite  sources,  which  impregnate  each  other, 
would  surely  produce  a  tendency  to  sift  established 
practice  and  accepted  axioms,  to  set  up  a  new 
standard  bv  which  to  try  the  current  rules  of  art, 
and  to  determine  new  lines  of  inquiry  for  any  eager 
spirits  disposed  to  seai-ch  for  truth.  Thus  the  visit 
of  Democedes  to  the  court  of  Darius,  though  it 
seems  to  be  an  isolated  fact,  points  to  a  general 
opening  of  oriental  manners  to  Greek  influence, 
which  was  not  too  late  to  leave  its  traces  in  some 
pei-haps  of  the  contemporai'ies  of  Ezra.  That  great 
reformer,  with  the  leaders  of  national  tliought 
gathered  about  him,  could  not  fail  to  recognise 
medicine  among  the  salutary  measures  which  dis- 


S  Professor  Newman  remarks  on  the  manner  of  Ben- 
hadad's  recorded  death,  that  "  when  a  man  Is  so  near 
tc  death  that  this  will  kill  him,  we  need  good  evi- 
dence to  show  tliat  the  story  is  not  a  vulgar  scandal " 
{Jlehrew  Monarchy,  p.  180  note).  The  remark  seems 
to  betray  ignorance  of  what  is  meant  by  the  crisis  of  a 
fever. 

h  Wundcrbar,  whom  the  writer  has  followed  in  a  large 
portion  of  this  general  review  of  Jewish  medicine,  and 
his  obligations  to  whom  are  great,  has  here  set  up  a  view 
which  appears  untenable.  He  regards  the  Babylonian 
captivity  as  parallel  In  its  effects  to  the  Egyptian  bondage, 
and  seems  to  think  that  the  people  would  return  debased 
Irom  its  influence.  On  the  contrary,  those  whom  sub- 
jection had  made  ignoble  and  unpatriotic  would  remain. 
If  any  returned,  it  was  a  pledge  that  they  .were  not  so 
impaired ;  and,  if  not  impaired,  they  would  be  certainly 
iuiprovL'd  by  the  discipline  they  had  undergone.  He  also 
thinks  that  sorcery  had  the  largest  share  in  any  Baby- 
lonian or  Persian  system  of  medicine.  This  is  assuming 
too  much:  there  were  magicians  in  Egyjit,  but  physicians 
also  (see  above)  of  high  cultivation.  Human  nature  has 
so  great  an  interest  in  human  life,  that  only  in  the  savage 
rudimentaiy  societies  is  its  economy  left  thus  involved  in 
phantasms.  The  earliest  steps  of  civilizatiun  include 
something  of  medicine.  Of  course  superstitions  arc  Ibuiui 
copiously  involved  in  such  medical  tencti},  but  this  is  not 
ecjuivalent  to  abandoning  the  study  to  a  class  of  professed 
magicians.     Thus  in  the  Ucberreste  der  aUbahj/luiuscUoi 


MEDICINE 

tinguished  his  epoch.  And  whatever  advantages 
the  Levites  had  possessed  in  earlier  days  were  now 
speedily  lost  even  as  regards  the  study  of  the  divine 
law,  and  much  more  therefore  as  regards  that 
of  medicine ;  into  which  competitors  would  crowd 
in  proportion  to  its  broader  and  more  obvious 
human  interest,  and  eHectually  demolish  any 
narrowing  barriers  of  established  privilege,  if  such 
previously  existed. 

It  may  be  observed  that  the  priests  in  their  minis- 
trations, who  performed  at  all  seasons  of  the  year 
barefoot  on  stone  pavement,  and  without  perhaps 
any  variation  of  dress  to  meet  that  of  temperature, 
were  peculiarly  liable  to  sickness.'  Hence  the 
permanent  appointment  of  a  Temple  physician  has 
been  supposed  by  some,  and  a  certain  Ben-Ahijah  is 
mentioned  by  Wunderbar  as  occurring  in  the  Talmud 
in  that  capacity.  But  it  rather  appears  as  though 
such  an  officer's  appointment  were  precarious,  and 
varied  with  the  demands  of  the  ministrants. 

The  book  of  Ecclesiasticus  shows  the  increased 
regard  given  to  the  distinct  study  of  medicine,  by 
the  repeated  mention  of  physicians,  kc,  which  it 
contains,  and  w'hich,  as  probably  belonging  to  the 
period  of  the  Ptolemies,  it  might  be  expected  to 
show.  The  wisdom  of  prevention  is  recognised  in 
Ecclus.  .xviii.  19,  perhaps  also  in  x.  lo.  Rank 
and  honour  are  said  to  be  the  portion  of  the  physi- 
cian, and  his  office  to  be  from  the  Lord  (x.xxviii.  1, 
15,  12).  The  repeated  allusions  to  sickness  in  vii. 
35,  XXX.  17,  sxxi.  22,  xxxvii.  .'50,  x.x.xviii.  9,  coupled 
with  the  former  recognition  of  merit,  have  atused 
some  to  suppose  that  this  author  was  himself  a 
physician.  If  he  was  so,  the  power  of  mind  and 
wide  I'ange  of  observation  shown  in  his  work  would 
give  a  favourable  impression  of  the  standard  of 
practitioners ;  if  he  was  not,  the  great  general  po- 
pularity of  the  study  and  practice  may  be  inferred 
from  its  thus  becoming  a  common  topic  of  general 
advice  offered  by  a  non-professional  writer.  In 
Wisd.  xvi.  12,  plaister  is  spoken  of;  anointing,  as  a 
means  of  healing,  in  Tob.  vi.  8. 

To  bring  down  the  subject  to  the  period  of  the 
N.  T.      St.  Luke,''  "  the  beloved  physician,"  who 

Literatur,  p.  1 23,  by  D.  Chwolson,  St.  Petersb.  1859  (the 
value  of  which  is  not  however  yet  ascertained),  a 
writer  on  poisons  claims  to  have  a  magic  antidote,  but 
declines  stating  what  it  is,  as  it  is  not  his  business  to 
mention  such  things,  and  he  only  does  so  in  cases  where 
the  charm  is  in  connexion  with  medical  treatment  and 
resembles  it ;  the  magicians,  adds  the  same  writer  on 
another  occasion,  use  a  particular  means  of  cure,  but  he 
declines  to  impart  it,  having  a  repugnance  to  witchcraft. 
So  (pp.  125-6)  we  find  traces  of  channs  introduced  into 
Babylonish  treatises  on  medical  science,  but  apologetically, 
and  as  it  against  sounder  knowledge.  Similarly,  the  opinion 
of  fatalism  is  not  without  its  influence  on  medicine;  but  it 
is  chiefly  resorted  to  where,  as  in  pestilence  often  happens, 
all  known  aid  seems  useless. 

'  Thus  we  find  Kail,  De  Morbis  Sacerdotum,  Hafn.  1745, 
referred  to  by  Wunderb-ir,  Istes  Heft,  p.  60. 

'^  This  is  not  the  place  to  introduce  any  discussion  on  the 
language  of  St.  Jjuke ;  it  may  be  observed,  however  that 
it  appears  often  tinctured  by  his  early  studies :  c.  y.,  v.  18, 
TTapaAcAu/iie'i'o?,  the  correct  term,  instead  of  the  popular 
TrapaAuTiKo?  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark;  so  viii.  44, 
eo-TT)  y]  piio-i!,  instead  of  the  apparently  Hebraistic  phrase 
i^r\p6.v8y)  -q  injyr)  of  the  latter ;  so  vi.  19,  laro  ttovto?. 
where  Siea-<o0j;o-ai'  and  kcrui^ovro  are  used  by  the  others  ; 
and  viii.  55,  eizitTTp^'pe  to  Trvtvp-a  (the  breath  ?),  as  though 
a  token  of  animatioii  returning;  and  the  list  might  easily  be 
enlarged.  St.  T^uke  abcmuds  in  the  narratives  of  demoniacs, 
while  Hippocrates  repudiates  such  influence,  as  producing 


MEDICINE 

]iractiseJ  at  Aiitioch  whilst  the  body  was  his  e<are, 
could  hai-dly  have  failed  to  be  conveisant  with  all 
the  leading  opinions  current  down  to  his  own  time. 
Situated  between  the  great  schools  of  Alexandria 
and  C-ilicia,  within  easy  sea-transit  of  both,  as  well 
as  of  the  western  homes  of  science,  Antioch  enjoyed 
a  more  centi'al  position  than  any  great  city  of 
the  ancient  world,  and  in  it  accordingly  all  the 
streams  of  contemporary  medical  learning  may 
have  probably  found  a  point  of  confluence.  The 
medicine  of  the  N.  T.  is  not  solely,  nor  even  chiefly, 
Jewish  medicine  ;  and  even  if  it  were,  it  is  clear 
that  the  more  mankind  became  mixed  by  intercourse, 
the  more  medical  opinion  and  practice  must  have 
ceased  to  be  exclusive.  The  great  number  of  Jews 
resident  in  Rome  and  Greece  about  the  Christian  era, 
and  the  successive  decrees  by  which  their  banish- 
ment from  the  former  was  proclaimed,  must  have 
imported,  even  into  Palestine,  whatever  from  the 
west  was  best  worth  knowing ;  and  we  may  be  as 
sure  that  its  medicine  and  surgery  expanded  under 
these  influences,  as  that,  in  the  writings  of  the  Tal- 
mudists,  such  obligations  would  be  unacknowledged. 
But,  beyond  this,  the  growth  of  large  mercantile 
communities  such  as  existed  in  Rome,  Alexandria, 
Antioch,  and  Ephesus,  of  itself  involves  a  pecilliar 
sanitary  condition  from  the  mass  of  human  elements 
gathered  to  a  focus  mider  new  or  abnormal  circum- 
stances. Nor  are  the  words  in  which  an  eloquent 
modern  writer  describes  the  course  of  this  action  less 
applicable  to  the  case  of  an  ancient  than  to  that  of  a 
modern  metropolis.  "  Diseases  once  iniligenous  to 
a  section  of  humanity,  are  slowly  but  surely  creep- 
ing up  to  commercial  centres  from  whence  they 
will  be  rapidl}^  propagated.  One  form  of  Asiatic 
leprosy  is  approaching  the  Levant  fi'om  Arabia. 
The  history  of  every  disease  which  is  communicated 
from  man  to  man  establishes  this  melancholy  truth, 
that  ultimately  such  maladies  overleap  all  obstacles 
of  climate,  and  demonstrate  a  solidarity  in  evil  as 
well  as  in  good  among  the  brotherhood  of  nations."  ™ 
In  proportion  as  this  "  melancholy  truth  "  is  per- 
ceived, would  an  intercommunication  of  medical 
science  prevail  also. 

The  medicine  and  surgery  of  St.  Luke,  then,  Xvas 
probably  not  inferior  to  that  commonly  in  demand 
among  educated  Asiatic  Greeks,  and  must  have 
been,  a.s  regards  its  basis,  Greek  medicine,  and  not 
.Jewish.  Hence  a  standard  Gentile  medical  writei', 
if  any  is  to  be  found  of  that  period,  would  best  re- 
present the  profession  to  which  the  evangelist  be- 
longed. Without  absolute  certainty  as  to  date,"  we 
seem  to  have  such  a  writer  in  Aretaeus,  commonly 
called  "  the  Cappadocian,"  who  wrote  certainly  after 
Nero's  reign  began,  and  probably  floui'ished  shortly 
before  and  after  the  decade  in  which  St.  Paul 
reached  Rome  and  Jerusalem  i'ell.  If  he  were  of 
St.  Luke's  age,  it  is  striking  that  he  should  also  be 


MEDICINE 


299 


maniacal  and  epileptic  disorders.  See  this  subject  dis- 
cussed in  the  Notes  on  the  "  Sacred  Diseases "  in  the 
Sydenh.  See.  ed.  of  Ilippocr.  Aretaeus,  on  the  contrary, 
recognizes  the  upiiiioii  of  demoniac  agency  in  disease.  His 
words  are  :  ieprji'  Kix^ijcrKOvcri,  tiji'  jra'Otji''  arap  Kol  Si' 
aAAas  7rpo(/>ao'ta?,  >)  jue'-ye^os  tov  KaKov,  tt'pbi^  yap  to 
lieya-  r)  iijono?  oiiK  at'GptoTriri^  aWa  OtiT)!  ij  Sai- 
/xoi/o?  So^rj?  €?  rof  ai'dpuTTOf  etcroSov,  rj  ^viXTrduTtov  ojLtoi), 
•nji'Se  tKiKArjcTKoi/  lep^i'.  H«pl  e?riAr)i/(ii)?.  (l>e  Caus.  et 
Sign.  Morb,  Clirun.  i.  •).) 

■"  Dr.  Ferguson,  I'ref.  Ki^say  to  Oooch  on  Diseases  of 
iromen,  New  .Sydenham  Society,  London,  1,S59,  p.  xlvi. 
He  adds,  "  S\ich  lias  l)poii  the  case  with  sniallpo.x,  measles, 
scarlatina,  and  the  playuc  .  .  .   The  yellow  lever  has  lately 


perhaps  the  only  ancient  medical  authority  in  favour 
of  demoniacal  possession  as  a  possible  account  of 
epilepsy  (.see  p.  298,  note  k).  If  his  countiy  be 
rightly  indicated  by  his  surname,  we  know  that  it 
gave  him  the  means  of  intercouise  with  both  the 
Jews  and  the  Christians  of  the  Apostolic  period  (Acts 
ii.  9 ;  1  Pet.  i.  1).  It  is  very  likely  that  Tarsus^ 
the  nearest  place  of  academic  repute  to  that  legion. 
was  the  scene  of  at  any  rate  the  earlier  studies  of 
Aretaeus,  nor  would  any  chronological  difficulty 
prevent  his  having  been  a  pupil  in  medicine  there 
when  Paul  and  also,  perhaps,  Barnabas  were,  as  is 
probable,  pursuing  their  early  studies  in  other  sub- 
jects at  the  same  spot.  Aretaeus,  then,  assuming  the 
date  above  indicated,  may  be  taken  as  expounding 
the  medical  practice  of  the  Asiatic  Greeks  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  Hrst  century.  There  is,  however,  much 
of  strongly  marked  individuality  in  his  work,  more 
especially  in  the  minute  verbal  portraiture  of  disease. 
That  of  pulmouary  consumption  in  particular  is 
traced  with  the  careful  description  of  an  eye- 
witness, and  represents  with  a  curious  exactness 
the  curved  nails,  shrunken  fingers,  slender  sharpened 
nostrils,  hollow  glazy  eye,  cadaverous  look  and  hue, 
the  waste  of  muscle  and  startling  prominence  of 
bones,  the  scapula  standing  oft"  like  the  wing  of  a 
bird ;  as  also  the  habit  of  bod}'  marking  youthful 
predisposition  to  the  malady,  the  thin  veneer-like 
frames,  the  limbs  like  pinions,"  the  prominent 
throat  and  shallow  chest,  with  a  remark  that  moist 
and  cold  climates  are  the  haunts  of  it  (Aret.  irepi 
(l)di(reos).  His  work  e.xhibits  strong  traits  here  and 
there  of  the  Pneumatic  school,  as  in  his  statement 
regarding  lethargy,  that  it  is  frigidity  implanted 
by  natui'e  ;  concerning  elephantiasis  even  more  em- 
phatically, that  it  is  a  refrigeration  of  the  innate 
heat,  "  or  rather  a  congelation — as  it  were  one 
great  winter  of  the  system."  p  The  same  views 
betray  themselves  in  his  statement  regarding  the 
blood,  that  it  is  the  warming  principle  of  all  the 
parts ;  that  diabetes  is  a  sort  of  diopsy,  both  exhi- 
biting the  watery  principle  ;  and  that  the  efl'ect  of 
white  hellebore  is  as  that  of  tire :  "  so  that  what- 
ever Are  does  by  burning,  hellebore  elTects  still  more 
by  penetrating  inwardly."  The  last  remark  shows 
that  he  gave  some  scope  to  his  imagination,  which 
indeed  we  might  illustrate  fiom  some  of  his  patho- 
logical descriptions,  e.g.  that  of  elephanti;isis,  where 
Ihe  resemblance  of  the  beast  to  the  afflicted  human 
being  is  wrought  to  a  ihnciful  parallel.  Allowing 
for  such  overstrained  touches  here  and  there,  we 
may  say  that  he  generally  avoids  extravagmit 
crotchets,  and  rests  chiefly  on  wide  observation,  and 
on  the  common  sense  which  sobers  theory  and  ra- 
tionalises facts.  He  hardly  ever  quotes  an  authority  ; 
and  though  much  of  what  he  states  was  taught 
before,  it  is  dealt  with  as  the  common  property  of 
science,  or  as  become  sui  juris  through  being  proved 


ravaged  Lisbon  under  a  temperature  perfectly  similar  to 
that  of  London  or  Paris." 

°  The  date  here  given  is  favoured  by  the  introductory 
Review  of  Aretaeus'  life  and  writings  prcfl.\ed  to  Boer- 
haave's  edition  of  his  works,  and  by  Or.  Greeiihill  in 
Smith's  Dictionary  uf  /Hog.  ami  Mjith.  sub  voc.  .^Ire- 
taeus.  A  view  that  he  was  about  a  century  later— a  con- 
temporary, in  short,  of  Galen— is  advanced  in  the  Syd. 
Soc.  edition,  and  ably  supported.  Still  the  evidence,  being 
purely  negative,  is  sli'udor,  and  the  opposite  arguments 
are  not  taken  into  account.  "  jrTcpi;y«>6e«. 

V  ♦ufis  i<n\  rov  e/a</)VTOU  Bfpfioi  ov  fi-iKpa  Tf,  »j  koX 
irdyos,  u)s  cV  Tt  p.4ya  \<,ly.a  (Df  Caui.  it  Si<in.  Morb. 
CUrou.  ii.  13). 


300 


MEDICINE 


by  his  own  experience.  Tlie  freedom  with  wliich 
he  follows  or  rejects  earlier  opinions,  has  occasioned 
him  to  be  classed  by  some  amongst  the  eclectic 
school.  His  work  is  divided  into — 1.  the  causes  and 
signs  of  (1)  acute,  and  (2)  chronic  diseases;  and, 
JI.  the  curative  treatment  of  (1)  acute,  and  (2) 
chronic  diseases.  His  boldness  of  treatment  is  ex- 
empHHeil  in  his  selection  of  the  vein  to  be  opened 
in  a  wide  range  of  parts,  the  ami,  ancle,  tongue, 
nose,  &c.  He  first  has  a  distinct  mention  of 
leeches,  which  Themison  is  said  to  have  intro- 
duced ;  and  in  this  respect  his  surgical  resources 
appear  to  be  in  advance  of  Celsus.  He  was  familiar 
with  tiie  operation  for  the  stone  in  the  bladder 
and  prescribes,  as  Celsus  also  does,  the  use  of  the 
catheter,  where  its  insertion  is  not  prevented  by 
inflammation,  then  the  incision i  into  the  neck  of 
the  bladder,  nearly  as  in  modem  lithotomy.  His 
views  of  the  internal  economy  were  a  strange  mix- 
ture of  truth  and  error,  and  the  disuse  of  anatomy 
was  no  doubt  the  reason  why  this  was  the  weak 
point  of  his  teaching.  He  held  that  the  work  of 
producing  the  blood  pertained  to  tlie  liver,  "  which 
is  the  root  of  the  veins  ;"  that  the  bile  was  distri- 
buted from  the  gall  bladder  to  the  intestines ;  and, 
if  this  vesica  became  gorged,  the  bile  was  thrown 
back  into  the  veins,  and  by  them  diffused  over  the 
system.  He  regarded  the  nerves  as  the  source  of 
sensation  and  motion ;  and  had  some  notion  of  them 
as  branching  in  pairs  fiom  the  spine.'  Thus  he  has 
a  curious  statement  as  regards  paralysis,  that  in 
the  case  of  any  sensational  point  below  the  head, 
e.  g.  from  the  membrane  of  the  spinal  marrow  being 
afiected  injuriously,  the  parts  on  the  right  side  will 
be  paralj^sed  if  the  nerve  towards  the  right  side  be 
hurt,  and  similarly,  conversely,  of  the  left  side;  but 
that  if  the  head  itself  be  so  affected,  the  inverse  law 
of  consequence  holds  concerning  the  parts  related, 
since  each  nerve  passes  over  to  the  other  side  from 
that  of  its  origin,  decussating  each  other  in  the 
form  of  the  letter  X.  The  doctrine  of  the  Pneuma, 
or  etherial  principle  existing  in  the  microcosm  by 
which  the  mind  performs  all  the  functions  of  the 
body,  holds  a  more  prominent  position  in  the 
works  of  Aretaeus  than  in  those  of  any  of  the 
other  authorities  (Di-.  Adams'  pref.  to  Aret.  pp. 
X.  xi.).  He  was  aware  that  the  nervous  function 
of  sensation  was  distinct  from  the  motive  power; 
that  either  might  ce:ise  and  the  other  continue. 
His  pharmacopoeia  is  copious  and  reasonable,  and 
the  limits  of  the  usefulness  of  this  or  that 
drug  are  laid  down  judiciously.  He  makes  large 
use  of  wine,"  and  prescribing  the  kind  and  the 
number  of  cyuthi  to  be  taken  ;  and  some  words  of  his 
on  stomach  disorders  (Trcpl  Kap5ia\yir]s)  forcibly 
recall  those  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothv  (1  Tim.  v. 
23),  and  one  might  almost  suppose  them  to  have 
been  suggested  by  the  intenser  spirituality  of  his 
.Jewish  or  Christian  patients.  "  Such  disorders," 
he  says,  "  are  common  to  those  who  toil  in  teach- 
ing, whose  yearning  is  after  divine  instruction,  who 
despise  delicate  and  varied  diet,  whose  nourishment 
is  fasting,  and  whose  drink  is  water."  And  as  a 
purge  of  melancholy  he  prescribes  "  a  little  wine, 
and  some  other  more  liberal  sustenance."     In  his 


"!  Taiu.veii'  TTjv  rptxaSa  (cat  tw  tt)?  kuVtiSos  TpaxJjAov. 

'  Sprengel  (ub.  sup.  iv.  52-5)  thinks  that  an  approxi- 
mately riglit  conception  of  the  ner\'0us  system  was  attained 
l)y  Hieropliilus  of  the  Alexandrian  school  of  medicine. 

"  Galen  {Ifi/g.  v.)  slrennously  recommends  the  use  of 
wine  to  the  aged,  stating  the  wines  best  adapted  to  tlirm.  I 


MEDICINE 

essay  on  Kausus,  or  "  bi-ain  "  '  fever,  he  describes 
the  powers  acquired  by  the  soul  before  dissolution 
in  the  following  remarkable  words  :  "  Every  sense 
is  pure,  the  intellect  acute,  the  gnostic  powers  pro- 
phetic ;  for  they  prognosticate  to  themselves  in  the 
first  place  their  own  depaiture  frdim  life ;  then  tiiey 
foretell  what  will  aftenvards  take  place  to  those 
present,  who  fancy  sometimes  that  they  are  delirious : 
but  these  persons  wonder  at  the  result  of  what  has 
been  said.  Others,  also,  talk  to  certain  of  the  dead, 
perchance  they  alone  perceiving  them  to  be  present, 
in  virtue  of  tlieir  acute  and  pure  sense,  or  perchance 
from  their  soul  seeing  beforehand,  and  announcing 
the  men  with  whom  they  are  about  to  associate. 
For  formoiiy  they  were  immersed  in  humours,  as  il' 
in  mud  and  darkness  ;  but  when  the  disease  has 
drained  these  off,  and  taken  away  the  mist  from 
their  eyes,  they  perceive  those  things  which  are  in 
the  air,  and  through  the  soul  being  unencumbered 
become  true  prophets."  "  To  those  who  wish  fur- 
ther to  pursue  the  study  of  medicine  at  this  era, 
the  edition  of  Aretaeus  by  the  Sydenham  Society, 
and  in  a  less  degree  that  by  Boerhaave,  (Lugd.  Bat. 
1735),  to  which  the  references  have  here  been 
made,  may  be  recommended. 

As  the  general  science  of  medicine  and  surgeiy  of 
this  peiiod  may  be  represented  by  Aretaeus,  so  we 
have  nearly  a  representation  of  its  Materia  Medica 
by  Dioscorides.  He  too  was  of  the  same  general 
region — a  Cilician  Greek — and  his  first  lessons  were 
probably  learnt  at  Tai'sus.  His  period  is  tinged  by 
the  same  uncertainty  as  that  of  Aretaeus ;  but  he 
has  usually  been  assigned  to  the  end  of  the  1st 
or  beginning  of  the  2nd  century  (see  Diet,  of  Biog. 
ami  Mytliol.  s.  v.).  He  was  the  first  autlior  of 
high  mark  who  devoted  his  attention  to  Materia 
Medica.  Indeed  this  branch  of  ancient  science  re- 
mained as  he  left  it  till  the  times  of  the  Arabians; 
and  these,  though  they  enlarged  the  supply  of  drugs 
and  pharmacy,  yet  copy  and  repeat  Dioscorides,  as 
indeed  Galen  himself  often  does,  on  all  common 
subject  matter.  Above  90  mineials,  700  plants, 
and  168  animal  substances,  are  said  to  be  desciibed 
in  the  researches  of  Dioscorides,  displaying  an 
industry  and  skill  which  has  remained  the  marvel 
of  all  subsequent  commentators.  Pliny,  copious, 
rare,  and  cuiious  as  he  is,  yet  for  want  of  scientific 
medical  knowledge,  is  little  esteemed  in  this  parti- 
cular branch,  save  when  he  follows  Dioscorides. 
The  third  volume  of  Pauliis  Aegin.  (ed.  Sydenham 
Soc).  contains  a  catalogue  of  medicines  simple  and 
compound,  and  the  large  proportion  in  which  the 
authority  of  Dioscorides  has  contributed  to  form  it, 
will  be  manifest  at  the  most  cursory  inspection. 
To  abridge  such  a  subject  is  impossible,  and  to 
transcribe  it  in  the  most  meagre  form  would  be  far 
beyond  the  limits  of  this  article. 

Before  proceeding  to  the  examination  of  diseases 
in  detail,  it  may  be  well  to  obseiTe  that  the  ques- 
tion of  identity  between  any  ancient  maladv  known 
by  description,  and  any  modern  one  known  by  ex- 
perience, is  often  doubtful.  Some  diseases,  just  as 
some  plants  and  some  animals,  will  exist  almost  any- 
where ;  others  can  only  be  produced  within  narrow 
limits    depending   on   the    conditions    of    climate, 


Even  Plato  {Leg.  ii.)  allows  old  men  thus  to  restore  their 
youth,  and  correct  the  austerity  of  age 

'  So  Sir  H.  Halford  renders  it.  Essay  VI.,  in  which 
occur  some  valuable  comments  on  the  subject  treated  by 
Aretaeus. 

.\rct.  lU  Sign,  et  Caus.  Moib.  Aciit.  ii.  4. 


MEDICINE 

habit,  &c. ;  and  were  only  equal  observation  ajiplied 
to  the  two,  the  habitat  of  a  disease  might  be  mapped 
as  accurately  as  that  of  a  plant.  It  is  also  possible 
that  some  diseases  once  extensively  prevalent,  may 
run  their  course  and  die  out,  or  occur  only  ca- 
sually ;  just  as  it  seems  certain  that,  since  the 
middle  ages,  some  maladies  have  been  introduced 
into  Europe  which  were  previously  unknown  (  j5j- 
blioth.  Script.  Med.  Genev.  1731,  s.  v. ;  Hippocrates, 
Celsus,  Galen  ;  Leiderc's  History  of  Med.  Par.  1723, 
transl.  Lond.  1699;   YreinA'a  History  of  Med.). 

Eruptive  diseases  of  the  acute  kind  are  more  pi'e- 
valent  in  the  East  than  in  colder  climes.  They 
also  run  theii-  course  more  rapidly ;  e.  g.  common 
itch,  which  in  Scotland  remains  for  a  longer  time 
vesicular,  becomes,  in  Syria,  pustular  as  early 
sometimes  as  the  third  day.  The  oiigin  of  it  is 
now  supposed  to  be  an  acarus,  but  the  parasite  pe- 
rishes when  removed  ti-oin  the  skin.  Disease  of 
various  kinds  is  commonly  regarded  as  a  divine  in- 
fliction, or  denounced  as  a  penalty  for  ti'ansgression ; 
"  the  evil  diseases  of  Egypt"  (perhaps  in  reference 
to  some  of  the  ten  plagues)  are  especially  so  charac- 
terised (Gen.  XX.  18;  Ex.  xv.  26;  Lev.  xxvi.  16; 
Deut.  vii.  15,  xxviii.  60;  1  Cor.  .xi.  30);  so  the 
emerods  (see  Emerods)''  of  the  Philistines  (1  Sam. 
V.  0);  the  severe  dysentery '' (2  Chr.  xxi.  15,  19)  of 
Jehoram,  which  was  also  epidemic  [Blood,  issuk 
OF;  and  Fevkr],  the  peculiar  symptom  of  which 
may  perhaps  have  been  prolapsus  ani  (Dr.  Mason 
Good,  i.  311-13,  mentions  a  case  of  the  entire  colon 
exposed)  ;  or,  perhaps,  what  is  known  as  diarrhoea 
tubniaris,  formed  by  the  coagulation  of  fibrine  into 
a  membrane  discharged  from  the  inner  coat  of 
the  intestines,  which  takes  the  mould  of  the  bowel, 
and  is  thus  expelled  (Kitto,  s.  v.  "  Diseases  ")  ;  so  the 
sudden  deaths  of  Er,  Onan  (Gen.  xxxviii.  7,  10),  the 
Egyptian  first-born  (Ex.  xi.4,  5),  Nabal,  Bathshe- 
ba's  son,  and  Jeroboam's  (1  Sam.xxv.  38  ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  15;  1  K.  xiv.  1,  5),  are  ascribed  to  action  of  Je- 
hovah immediately,  or  through  a  prophet.  Pestilence 
(Hab.  iii.  5)  attends  His  path  (comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv. 
15),  and  is  innoxious  to  those  whom  He  shelters  (Ps. 
xci.  3-iu).  It  is  by  Jeremiah,  Ezckiel,  and  Amos 
associated  (as  historically  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13)  with 
"the  sword"  and  "famine"  Jer.  xiv.  12,  xv.  2, 
xxi.  7,  9,  x.\iv.  10,  xxvii.  8,  13,  xxviii.  8,  xxix. 
17,  18,  .xxxii.  24,  36,  xxxiv.  17,  xxxviii.  2,  xlii. 
17,  22,  .xliv.  13;  Ez.  v.  12,  17,  vi.  11,  12, 
vii.  15,  xii.  1(5,  xiv.  21,  xxxiii.  27 ;  Am.  iv.  6, 10). 

^  I'o  the  authorities  there  adduced  may  be  added  some 
remarks  by  Michel  Levy  {Traite  d'HygUnc,  206-'!).  wlio 
accribcs  them  to  a  plethoric  state  producing  a  congestion 
of  the  veins  of  the  rectum,  and  followed  by  piles.  Blood 
Is  discharged  from  them  periodically  or  contiimously ; 
thus  the  plethora  is  relieved,  and  hence  the  ancient 
opinion  that  hemorrhoids  were  beneticial.  Sanguineous 
flux  of  the  part  may,  however,  arise  from  other  causes 
tlian  tliese  varices^e.  g.  ulceration,  cancer,  &c.,  of  rectum. 
Wunderbar  (Bib.  Talin.  Med.  iii.  17  d)  mentions  a  blood- 
less kind,  distinguished  by  the  Talmudists  as  even  more 
dangerous,  and  these  he  supposes  meant  In  1  Sam. 
V.  To  these  is  added  (vi.  5,  U,  18)  a  mention  of 
D''^33y'  (A.  V.  "  mice ;")  but  according  to  Lichtensteiu 
(in  Eichhorn's  Jiihliotk.  vi.  407-66)  a  venomous  solpuga 
is  with  some  plausibility  intended,  so  large,  and  so 
similar  in  form  to  a  mouse,  as  to  admit  of  its  being 
denominated  by  the  same  word.  It  Is  said  to  destroy  and 
live  upon  scorpions,  ai\d  to  attack  in  the  parts  alluded  to. 
Tlie  reference  given  is  I'liny,  //.  .^'.  xxix.  4 ;  but  Pliny 
gives  merely  the  name,  "solpugii :"  the  rest  of  the  state- 
ment finds  no   foundation  in  him.     See  below,  p.  'JKib. 


MEDICINE 


301 


The  sicknesses  of  the  widow's  son  of  Zarepliatli,  of 
Ahaziah,  Beuhadad,  the  leprosy  of  Uzziah,  the  boil 
of  Hezekiah,  are  also  noticed  as  diseases  sent  by  Je- 
hovah, or  in  which  He  interposed,  1  K.  xvii.  17,  20  ; 
2  K.  i.  3,  XX.  1.  In  2  Sam.  iii.  29,  disease  is  in- 
voked as  a  curse,  and  in  Solomon's  prayer,  1  K. 
viii.  37  (comp.  2  Chr.  xx.  9),  anticipated  as  a  chas- 
tisement. Job  and  his  friends  agiee  in  ascribing 
his  disease  to  divine  infliction;  but  the  latter  tirge 
his  sins  as  the  cause.  So,  conversely,  the  healing 
cliaracter  of  God  is  invoked  or  promised,  Ps.  vi.  2, 
xii.  3,  ciii.  3;  Jer  xxx.  17.  Satanic  agency  appears 
also  as  procuring  disease.  Job  ii.  7  ;  Luke  xiii.  11, 
16.  Diseases  are  also  mentioned  as  ordinary  ralami- 
ties,  e.  g.  the  sickness  of  old  age,  headache  (perhaps 
by  sunstroke),  as  that  of  the  Shunammite's  son, 
that  of  Elisha,  and  that  of  Benhadad,  and  that  of 
Joram,  Gen.  xlviii.  1  ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  13;  2  K.  iv.  20, 
viii.  7,  29,  xiii.  14;  2  Chr.  .xxii.  6. 

Among  special  diseases  named  in  the  0.  T.  are, 
ophthalmia  (Gen.  xxix.  17,  D^3y  n'lPDP),  which 

is  perhaps  more  common  in  Syria  and  Egypt  than 
anywhere  else  in  the  world ;  especially  in  the  tig 
season,'^  the  juice  of  the  newly-ripe  fruit  having  the 
power  of  giving  it.  It  may  occasion  partial  or  total 
blindness  (2  K.  vi.  18).  The  eye-salve  {KoWvpiov, 
Kcv.  iii.  18;  Hor.  Sat.  i.),  was  a  remedy  common 
to  Orientals,  Greeks,  and  Romans  (see  Hippocr. 
KoWovpwv ;  Celsus,  vi.  8,  dc  oculorum  morbis, 
(2)  de  divei'sis  colbjriis).  Other  diseases  are — barren- 
ness of  women,  which  mandi'akes  were  supposed  to 
have  the  power  of  correcting  (Gen.  xx.  18;  comp. 
xii.  17,  xxx.  1,  2,  14-16)  — "  consumption,"" 
and  several,  the  names  of  which  are  derived  from 
various  words,  signifying  to  burn  or  to  be  hot 
(Lev.  x.xvi.  16 ;  Deut.  xxviii.  22 ;  see  Fever)  ; 
compare  the  kinds  of  fever  distinguished  by  Hippo- 
crates as  Kavffos  and  izvp.  The  "  luirning  boil," 
or  "of   a  boil"  (Lev.    xiii.   23,   priE'n  flllV. 

LXX.  oi'A.'J)  Tov  eA.rcoi;s)  is  again  merely  marked 
by  the  notion  of  an  effect  resetnbling  that  of  tire, 
like  the  Greek  (pXey/xovf),  or  our  "  carbuncle  ;"  it 
may  possibly  find  an  equivalent  in  the  Damascus 
boil  of  the  present  time.  The  "botch  (pPIK')  of 
Egypt"  (Deut.  xxviii.  27),  is  so  vague  a  term  as 
to  yield  a  most  uncertain  sense  ;  the  plague,  as 
known  by  its  attendant  bubo,  has  been  suggested 
by  Scheuchzer.^  It  is  possible  that  the  Elephantiasis 


Wunderbar  (3ttes  ffeft,  p.  19)  has  another  intei-pretation 
of  the  "  mice." 

y  See  a  singular  quotation  from  the  Talmud  Shahbath, 
82,  concerning  the  effect  of  tenesmus  on  the  sphincter, 
Wunderbar,  Bib.-Tal.  Med.  3ttes  Heft,  p.  17.  The  Tal- 
nuidists  say  that  those  who  die  of  such  sickness  as  Je- 
horam's  die  painfully,  but  with  lull  consciousness. 

»  Comp.  Hippocr.  Trepl  oi/kc-c.  a.  6i/)6aA/xt'r)s  Tiis  eire- 
Teiou  Kai  iv&qfiCcv  ^viJ-^dpEi.  KoSaptri;  Ke<^oA^s  <«■'■  ttjs 

KGlTtO    KOtAtTJS. 

"  Possibly  the  pulmonaiy  tuberculatlon  of  the  West, 
which  is  not  unknown  in  Syria,  and  common  enough  in 
Smyrna  and  in  Egypt.  The  word  flQlltJ'  is  Com  a  root 
meaning  "  to  waste  away."  In  Zech.  xiv.  12  a  plague  is 
described  answering  to  this  meaning,— an  intense  emacia- 
tion or  atrophy  ;  although  no  link  of  causation  Is  hinted  at, 
such  sometimes  results  from  seviM-e  internal  abscesses. 

b  It  should  be  noted  that  Hippocrates,  in  his  Fpidemics, 
makes  mention  of  fevers  attended  with  buboes,  which 
affords  presimiption  in  favour  of  plague  beuig  not  un- 
known. It  is  at  any  rate  as  old  as  the  1st  eenturj',  A.n. 
See  I.ittres  IUpi>wtatcf,  torn.  ii.  p.-'ixj,  and  iii.  p.  5.      I'he 


302 


MEDICINE 


Graeconim  may  be  intended  by  p^E^*,  understood 
in  the  widest  sense  of  a  continued  ulceration 
until  the  whole  body,  or  tlie  portion  affected, 
may  be  regarded  as  one   pHti'.       Of  this  disease 

some  further  notice  will  be  taken  below  ;  at  pre- 
sent it  is  observable  tlint  the  same  word  is  used 
to  express  the  "  boil  "  of  Hezekiah.  This  was  cer- 
tainly a  single  locally  confined  eruption,  and  was 
probably  a  carbuncle,  one  of  which  may  well  be 
fatal,  though  a  single  "  boil "  in  our  sense  of  the 
word  seldom  is  so.  Dr.  Mead  supposes  it  to  have 
been  a  fever  terminating  in  an  abscess.  The  diseases 
rendered  "scab""^  and  "scurvy"  in  Lev.  xxi.  20, 
xxii.  22,  Dent,  xxviii.  27,  may  be  almost  any  skin 
disease,  such  as  those  known  under  the  names  of 
lepra,  psoriaris,  pityriasis,  iethyosis,  favus,  or  common 
itch.  Some  of  these  inay  be  said  to  approach  the  type 
of  leprosy  [Leprosv]  as  laid  down  in  Scripture, 
although  tliey  do  not  appear  to  have  involved  cere- 
monial defilemejit,  but  only  a  blemish  disqualifying 
for  the  priestly  office.  The  quality  of  being  incurable 
is  added  as  a  special  curse,  for  these  diseases  are  not 
generally  so,  or  at  any  rate  are  common  in  milder 
forms.  The  "  running  of  the  reius "  (Lev.  xv.  2, 
■'!,  xxii.  4,  marg.)  may  perhaps  mean  gonorrhoea.'^ 
If  we  compare  Num.  xxv.  1,  xxxi.  7  with  Josh, 
xxii.  17,  there  is  ground  for  thinking  that  some 
disease  of  this  class,  derived  from  polluting  sexual 
intercourse,  remained  among  the  people.  The 
"issue"  of  XV.  19,  may  be  [Blood,  issue  of] 
the  menorrhagia,  the  din-ation  of  which  in  tlie  East 
is  sometimes,  wlien  not  checked  by  remedies,  for 
an  indefinite  period  (Matt.  ix.  20),  or  uterine  he- 
morrhage from  other  causes.  In  Deut.  xxviii.  35,  is 
mentioned  a  disease  attacking  the  "  knees  and  legs," 
consisting  in  a  "  sore  botch  which  cannot  be  healed," 
but  extended,  in  the  sequel  of  the  verse,  from  the 
"sole  of  the  foot  to  the  top  of  the  head."  Tlie 
latter  part  of  the  quotation  would  certainly  accord 
with  Elephantiasis   Graecorum;  but  this,  if  the 


plague  is  referred  to  by  writers  of  the  1st  century,  viz. 
I'osoiclonius  and  Rufus. 
o  Their  terms  in  the  respective  versions  are  : — 
^■^•1,  i^ojpa  dvpi'a,         scabies jugis. 

DD?"')        ^^'X')"'  impetigo. 

'1  Or  more  probably  hlennorrhoea  (mucous  discharge). 
The  existence  of  gonmrhoea  in  early  times — save  in  the 
mild  form — has  been  much  deputed.  M  ichel  Levy  ( Traite 
d'Hi/gUne,  p.  7)  considers  the  affirmative  as  established 
by  the  above  passage,  and  says  of  syphilis,  "  Que  pour 
noire  part,  nous  n'avons  jamais  pu  considerer  comme 
tmo  nouveautedu  xv.^  siecle."  He  cerUiinly  gives  some 
strong  historical  evidence  against  the  view  that  it  was 
introduced  into  France  by  Spanish  troops  under  Gonzalvo 
de  Cordova  on  their  return  from  the  New  Worlil,  and  so 
into  the  rest  of  Europe,  where  it  was  known  as  the 
morbus  Galliciis.  He  adds,  "  La  syphilis  est  perdue  con- 
fusement  dans  la  pathologie  ancienne  par  la  diversite  de 
sps  symptOmcs  et  de  ses  alterations;  leur  interpretation 
collective,  et  leur  redaction  en  une  seule  unite  morbide, 
a  fait  croire  k  I'introduction  d'une  maladio  nouvelle."  See 
also  Frelnd's  UisUrry  of  Med.,  Dr.  Mead,  Michaelis,  Rein- 
hart  {Bibelkrcmkhciteii).  Schmidt  (Uibliseher  Med.),  and 
others.  Wunderbar  {Bib.-Talm.  Med.  iii.  20,  comment- 
ing on  Lev.  xv.,  and  comparing  Mishnu,  Zabim,  ii.  2,  and 
Maimon.  ad  loc.)  thinks  that  gonorrhoea  bcnigna  was  in 
the  mind  of  the  latter  writers.  Lr.  Adams,  the  editor  of 
Paul.  Aegin.  (Sydenh.  Soc,  li.  14),  considers  syphilis  a 
modified  form  of  elephantiasis.  For  all  ancient  notices 
of  the  cognate  diseases  see  that  work,  i.  593  foil. 

*'  The  Arabs  call  Elephantiasis  Graecorum   ^i.4X;^^ 


MEDICINE 

whole  verse  be  a  mere  continuation  of  one  described 
malady,  would  be  in  contradiction  to  the  fact  that 
this  disease  commences  in  tlie  face,  not  in  the  lower 
members.  On  the  other  hand,  a  disease  which 
atlects  the  knees  and  legs,  or. more  commonly  one  of 
them  only — its  principal  feature  being  intumescence, 
dLstorting  and  altering  all  the  proportions — is  by  a 
mere  accident  of  language  known  as  Elephantiasis  "■ 
Arabum,  Bucncmia  Tropica  (IJayer,  vol.  iii.  820- 
841),  or  "  Barbadoes  leg,"  from  being  well  known 
in  that  island.  Supposing,  however,  that  the  affec- 
tion of  the  knees  and  legs  is  something  distinct, 
and  that  the  latter  part  of  the  description  applies 
to  the  Elephantiasis  Graecorum,^  the  incurable 
and  the  all-pervading  character  of  the  malady 
aie  well  expressed  by  it.  This  disease  is  what 
now  passes  under  the  name  of  "  leprosy  " 
(Michaelis,  iii.  259) — the  lepers,  e.g.  of  the  huts 
near  the  Zion  gate  of  modern  Jerusalem  arc 
elephantisiacs.g  It  has  been  asserted  that  there 
are  two  kinds,  one  painful,  the  other  painless ;  but 
as  regards  Syria  and  the  East  this  is  contradicted. 
There  the  parts  affected  are  quite  benumbed  and 
lose  seasation.  It  is  classed  as  a  tubercular  disease, 
not  confined  to  the  skin,  but  pervading  the  tissues 
and  destroying  the  bones.  It  is  not  confined  to 
any  age  or  either  sex.  It  first  appears  in  general, 
but  not  always,  about  the  face,  as  an  indurated 
nodule  (hence  it  is  improperly  called  tubercular), 
which  gradually  enlarges,  inflames,  and  ulcerates. 
Sometimes  it  commences  in  the  neck  or  arms.  The 
ulcers  will  heal  spontaneousl}',  but  only  after  a  long 
period,  and  after  destroying  a  great  deal  of  the 
neighbouring  parts.  U  a  joint  be  attacked,  the 
ulceration  will  go  on  till  its  destruction  is  com- 
plete, the  joints  of  finger,  toe,  &c.,  dropping  off  one 
by  one.  Frightful  dreams  and  fetid  breath  are 
symptoms  mentioned  by  some  pathologists.  Moi'e 
nodules  will  develope  themselves ;  and,  if  the  face 
be  the  chief  seat  of  the  disease,  it  assumes  a  leonine '' 
aspect,  loathsome  and  hideous ;  the  skin  becomes 


(jwdftdm)  =  mutilation,  from  the  gradual  dropping  off 
of  the  joints  of  the  extremities.    They  give  to  E.  Arabum 

the  name  of  VaxJ!  i.\^>  Dd'l-fil^ morbus  dephas, 
from  the  leg  when  swelled  resembling  that  of  the  animal ; 
but  the  latter  disease  is  quite  distinct  from  the  former. 

f  For  its  ancient  description  see  Celsus,  iii.  25,  de  Ele- 
phantiasi.  Galen  {deArte  Curatorid  ad  Glaucon,  lib.  ii. 
de  Cancro  et  Eleph.)  recommends  viper's  flesh,  gives  anec- 
dotes of  cases,  and  adds  that  tlie  disorder  was  common  in 
Alexandria.  In  Hippocr.  {I'rorrhetic.  ii.  ap.  fin.)  is 
mentioned  ij  poOo-o;  li  i^BiviKr)  KoAeo/xe'rrj,  but  in  the 
glossary  of  Galen  is  found,  17  <I>oii'iKir)  roOo-os-  t)  Kara 
'^OLViKriv  Kol  Kara  Ta  ai'aToAiKa  /xepi)  TrXiOva^ova'a. 
ArjKovirOai  Se  KavravOa  SoKel  r;  eAet^acTiacns. 

g  Schilling  de  Leprii,  Animadv.  in  Ousselium  ad 
}xix.  says,  "persuasum  habeo  lepram  ab  elephantiasi 
non  dififerre  nisi  gradii;  ad  ^xxiii.  he  illustrates  Num. 
xii.  12,  by  his  own  experience,  in  dissecting  a  woman  dead 
in  childbed,  as  follows : — "  Corrupti  fetus  dimidia  pars  in 
utero  adhuc  haerebat.  Aperfo  utero  tam  immanis  sparge- 
batur  fetor,  ut  non  solum  omnes  adstantes  aufugerent," 
&c.  He  thinks  that  the  point  of  Moses'  simile  is  the 
HI  odour,  which  lie  ascribes  to  lepers,  i.  e.  elephantisiacs. 

i»  Hence  called  also  heontiasis.  Many  have  attributed 
to  these  wretched  creatiires  a  libido  ineicplelnlis  (see 
Proceedings  of  Med.  and  Chirurg.  Soc.  of  London,  Jan. 
1860,  iii.  164,  from  which  some  of  the  above  remarks  are 
taken).  This  is  denied  by  Dr.  Robert  Sim  (from  a  close 
study  of  the  disease  in  Jerusalem),  save  in  so  far  as 
idleness  and  inactivity,  with  animal  wants  supplied, 
niav  conduce  to  it. 


MEDICINE 

thick,  rugose,  and  livi<l ;  the  eves  are  fierce  and 
staring,  and  the  hair  generally  falls  oft"  from  all  the 
parts  affected.  When  the  throat  is  attacked  the  voice 
shares  the  affection,  and  sinks  to  a  hoarse,  husky 
whisper.  These  two  symptoms  are  eminently  cha- 
racteristic. The  patient  will  become  bed-ridden, 
and,  though  a  mass  of  bodily  corruption,  seem 
happy  and  contented  with  his  sad  condition,  until 
sinking  exhausted  under  the  ravages  of  the  disease, 
he  is  generally  carried  off",  at  least  in  Syria,  by 
dianhoea.  It  is  hereditary,  and  may  be  inocu- 
lated, but  does  not  propagate  itself  by  the  closest 
contact ;'  e.  g.  two  women  in  the  aforesaid  leper- 
huts  remained  uncontaminated  though  their  hus- 
bands were  both  affected,  and  yet  the  children 
born  to  them  were,  like  the  fathers,  elephantisiac, 
and  became  so  in  early  life.  On  the  children  of 
diseased  parents  a  watch  for  the  ajjpearance  of  the 
malady  is  kept ;  but  no  one  is  afraid  of  infection, 
and  the  neighbours  mix  freely  with  them,  though, 
like  the  lepers  of  the  0.  T.,  they  live  "  in  a 
several  house."  It  became  first  prevalent  in  Eu- 
rope during  tlie  crusades,  and  by  their  means  was 
diffused,  and  the  ambiguity  of  designating  it  leprosy 
then  originated,  and  has  been  generally  since  re- 
tained. Fliny  {Nat.  Hist.  xxvi.  5)  asserts' that  it 
was  unknown  in  Italy  till  the  time  of  Pompey  the 
Great,  when  it  was  imported  from  Egypt,  but  soon 
became  extinct  {Paul.  Aiyiii.  ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.  ii.  6). 
It  is,  however,  broadly  distinguished  from  the 
At'irpo,  \fVKTi,  &c.  of  the  Greeks  by  name  and 
svm])toms,  no  less  than  by  Roman  medical  and  even 
popular  writers  ;  comp.  Lucretius,  whose  mention 
of  it  is  the  earliest — 

"  Est  elephas  morbus,  qui  propter  flumina  Nili, 
Gignitur  Aegypto  in  media,  neque  praeterea usquam." 
It  is  nearly  extinct  in  Europe,  save  in  Spain  and 
Norway.  A  case  was  seen  lately  In  the  Crimea,  but 
may  have  been  produced  elsewhere.  It  prevails  in 
Turkey  and  the  Greek  Archipelago.  One  case,  how- 
ever, indigenous  in  England,  is  recorded  amongst 
the  medical  fac-similes  at  Guy's  Hospital.  In 
Granada  it  was  generally  fxtal  after  eight  or  ten 
years,  whatever  the  treatment. 

This  favours  the  correspondence  of  this  disease 
with  one  of  those  evil  diseases  of  Egypt,''  possibly 
its  "  botch,"  threatened  Dent,  xxviii.  27,  '6b.  This 
"  botch,"  however,  seems  more  probably  to  mean 
the  foul  ulcer  mentioned  by  Aretaeus  (de  Sign,  et 
Cans.  Morh.  Acut.  i.  9),  and  called  by  him  &<pQa 
or  fffxiipv-  He  ascribes  its  frequency  in  Egypt  to 
the  mixed  vegetable  diet  there  followed,  and  to  the 
use  of  the  turbid  water  of  the  Nile,  but  adds  that  it 
is  common  in  Coelo-Syria.  The  Talmud  speaks  of 
the  Elephantiasis  {Baha  Kama,  80  6.)  as  being 
"moist  without  and  dry  within"  (Wunderbar, 
Bibiisch-Talmudische  Med.  3ttes  Heft,  10,  11). 
Advanced  cases  are  said  to  have  a  cancerous  aspect, 
and  some™  even  class  it  as  a  form  of  cancer,  a  dis- 
ease dependent  on  faidts  of  nutrition.     It  has  been 


MEDICINE 


303 


asserted  that  this,  which  is  perhaj)S  the  most  dreadful 
disease  of  the  East,  was  Job's  malady.  Origen, 
Hexapla  on  Job  ii.  7,  mentions,  that  one  of  the 
Greek  versions  gives  it,  loc.  cit.,  as  the  affliction 
which  befel  him.  Wunderbar  {at  sup.  p.  10)  sup- 
poses it  _  to  have  been  the  Tyrian  leprosy,  resting 
chiefly  on  the  itching"  implied,  as  he  supposes,  by 
Job  ii.  7,  8.  Schmidt  {Biblischer  Med.  iv.  4) 
thinks  the  "  sore  boil  "  may  indicate  some  graver  ° 
disease,  or  concurrence  of  diseases.  But  there  is  no 
need  to  go  beyond  the  statement  of  Scripture, 
which  speaks  not  only  of  this  "  boil,"  but  of  "  skin 
loathsome  and  broken,"  "  covered  with  worms  and 
clods  of  dust ;"  the  second  symptom  is  the  result 
of  the  first,  and  the  "  worms  "  are  probably  the 
larvae  of  some  fly,  known  so  to  infest  and  make 
its  nidus  in  any  wound  or  sore  exposed  to  the  air, 
and  to  increase  rapidly  in  size.  The  "  clods  of 
dust "  would  of  course  follow  from  his  "  sitting 
in  ashes."  The  "  breath  strange  to  his  wife,"  if  it 
be  not  a  figurative  expression  for  her  estrangement 
from  him,  may  imply  a  fetor,  which  in  such  a  state 
of  bod}'  hardly  requires  explanation.  The  expres- 
sion my  "  bowels  boiled"  (xxx.  27),  may  refer  to 
the  burning  sensation  in  the  stomach  and  bowels, 
caused  by  acrid  bile,  which  is  common  in  ague. 
Aretaeus  {de  Cur.  Morh.  Acut.  ii.  3)  has  a  similar 
expression,  OepfLafflri  twv  airXdyx^'^^  <'''^'"'  ^'"'^ 
TTvphs,  as  attending  syncope. 

The  "  scaring  dreams  "  and  "terrifying  visions," 
are  perhafis  a  mere  symptom  v  of  the  state  of  mind 
bewildered  by  unaccountable  afflictions.  The  in- 
tense emaciation  was  (xxxiii.  21)  perhaps  the  mere 
result  of  protracted  sickness. 

The  disease  of  king  Antiochus  (2  Mace.  ix.  5-10, 
&c.)  is  that  of  aboil  breeding  worms  {ulcus  l;ermi}io- 
suni).  So  Sulla,  Pherecydes,  and  Alcman  the  poet  are 
mentioned  (Plut.  vita  Bullae)  as  similar  cases.  The 
examples  of  both  the  Herods  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  6, 
§o,  B.J.  i.  33,  §5)  may  also  be  adduced,  as  that  of 
Pheretime  (Herod,  iv.  205).  There  is  some  doubt 
whether  this  disease  be  not  allied  to  phthiriasis, 
in  which  lice  are  bred,  and  cause  ulcers.  This  con- 
dition may  originate  either  in  a  sore,  or  in  a  morbid 
habit  of  body  brought  on  by  uncleauliness,  sup- 
pressed perspiration,  or  neglect ;  but  the  vermina- 
tion,  if  it  did  not  commence  in  a  sore,  would  pro- 
duce one.  Dr.  Mason  Good,  (iv.  504-6),  speaking  of 
/xaAis,  /xaA{0(r/x(5s  =  cutaneous  vermination,  men- 
tions a  case  in  the  Westminster  Infirmar}',  and  an 
opinion  that  universal  phthiriasis  was  no  unfrequent 
disease  among  the  ancients  ;  he  also  states  (p.  500) 
that  in  gangrenous  ulcers,  especially  in  warm  cli- 
mates, innumerable  grubs  or  maggots  will  appear 
almost  every  morning.  The  camel,  and  other 
creatures,  are  known  to  be  the  habitat  of  similar 
parasites.  Theie  are  also  cases  of  vermination 
without  any  wound  or  faulty  outvs^ard  state,  such  as 
the  Vena  Medinensis,  known  in  Africa  as  the  Guinea- 
woiTn,i  of  which  Galen  had  heard  only,  breeding 


'  Jabn  {Heb.  Ant.,  Upham's  traiisluliun,  p.  206)  denies 
this. 

k  The  editor  of  I'aul.  Aegln.  (Sydenham  Society,  it.  14) 
is  convinced  that  llic  sypliilis  of  inoiiern  times  is  a  mo- 
dified form  of  the  elephantiasis. 

"•  Such  is  the  opinion  of  Or.  U,  Sim,  expressed  in  a 
private  letter  to  the  writer,  liut  see  a  letter  of  his  to 
Med.  Times  and  (hizettc,  April  14,  1x60. 

"  The  suppuration,  kc,  of  ulcers,  appears  at  least 
equally  likely  to  be  intended. 

o  He  refers  to  Ilipimcr.  IJb.  dc  Add.  turn.  viii.  luci^'drwi' 
eo"Tt  rooTj/xaTwr. 


p  Hippocrates  mentions,  ii.  614,  ed.  Kiihii,  Lips.  1826, 
as  a  symptom  of  fever,  that  the  patient  <|)oj3e'eTai  airb 
evvirviiav.     See  also  i.  592,  irepl  tep^s  yotrou  .  .  .  Seiftaro 

VVKTO'S   Kol    (jiofioi. 

1  Rayer,  vol.  iii.  808-819  gives  a  list  of  parasites,  most 
of  tbem  in  the  skin.  This  "  Guinea-worm,"  it  appears, 
is  also  found  in  Arabia  I'ctraca,  on  the  coasts  of  the 
Caspian  and  Persian  Gulf,  on  the  Ganges,  in  Upper 
Egypt  and  Abyssinia  (ib.  814).  Dr.  Mea*1  refers  Herod's 
disease  to  ti/Tofuo,  or  intestinal  worms.  Shapler,  without 
due  foundation,  objects  that  the  word  in  that  cjise  should 
have  been  not  o-KoiArif,  but  evArj  (.Vedica  Sacra,  p.  188). 


304 


MEDICINE 


under  the  skin  and  needing  to  be  drawn  out  care- 
fully by  a  needle,  lest  it  break,  when  great  soreness 
and  suppuration  succeed  (Freiud,  Hist,  of  Med.  i. 
49  ;  Dc  B'landelslo's  Travels,  p.  4  ;  and /"«!</.  Aegin. 
t.  iv.  Sydenh.  Soc.  ed.). 

In  Deut.  xxviii.  65,  it  is  possible  that  a  palpi- 
tation of  the  heart  is  intended  to  be  spoken  of 
(comp.  Gen.  xlv.  26).  In  Mark  ix.  17  (compare 
Luke  ix.  38)  we  have  an  apparent  case  of  epilepsy, 
shown  especially  in  the  foaming,  falling,  wallowing, 
and  similar  violent  symptoms  mentioned  ;  this  might 
easily  be  a  fomi  of  demoniacal  manifestation.  The 
case  of  extreme  hunger  recorded,  1  Sam.  xiv.,  was 
merely  the  result  of  exhaustive  fatigue  ;  but  it  is 
remarkable  that  the  Bulimia  of  which  Xenophon 
speaks  (Awih.  iv.  5,  7),  was  remedied  by  an  appli- 
cation in  which  "honey"  (comp.  1  Sam.  xiv.  27) 
was  the  chief  ingredient. 

Be.sides  the  common  injuries  of  wounding,  bruis- 
ing, striking  out  eye,  tooth,  &c.,  we  have  in  Ex. 
xxi.  22,  the  case  of  miscarriage  produced  by  a 
blow,  push,  &c.,  damaging  the  fetus. 

The  plague  of  "boils  and  blains"  is  not  said  to 
have  been  fatal  to  man,  as  the  'murrain  preceding 
was  to  cattle  ;  this  alone  would  seem  to  contradict 
the  notion  of  Shapter  (Medic.  Sacr.  p.  113),  that 
the  disorder  in  question  was  smallpox,'  which, 
wherever  it  has  appeared,  until  mitigated  by  vacci- 
nation, has  been  fatal  to  a  great  part,  perhaps  a 
majority  of  those  seized.  The  smallpox  also  gene- 
rally takes  some  days  to  pronounce  and  mature, 
which  seems  opposed  to  the  Mosaic  account.  The 
expression  of  Ex.  ix.  10,  a  "boil"^  flourishing,  or 
ebullient  with  blains,  may  perhaps  be  a  disease 
analogous  to  phlegmonous  erysipelas,  or  even 
common  erysipelas,  which  is  often  accompanied  by 
vesications  such  as  the  word  "  blains  "  might  fitly 
describe.' 

The  "withered  hand"  of  Jeroboam  (1  K.  siii. 
4-6),  and  of  the  man.  Mat.  xii.  10-13  (comp.  Luke 
vi.  10),  is  such  an  effect  as  is  known  to  follow  from 
the  obliteration  of  the  main  artery  of  any  member, 
or  from  paralysis  of  the  principal  neiTe,  either 
through  disease  or  through  injury.  A  case  with  a 
symptom  exactly  parallel  to  that  of  Jeroboam  is 
mentioned  in  the  life  of  Gabriel,  an  Arab  physician. 
It  was  that  of  a  woman  whose  hand  had  become 
rigid  in  the  act  of  swinging,"  and  remained  in  the 
extended  posture.  The  most  remarkable  feature  in 
the  cai^e,  as  related,  is  the  remedy,  which  consisted 
in  alai'm  acting  on  the  nerves,  inducing  a  sudden 
and  spontaneous  effort  to  use  the  liml> — an  effort 
which,  like  that  of  the  dumb  son  of  Croesus  (Herod. 
i.  8.")),  was  paradoxically  successful.  The  case  of 
the  widow's  son  restored  by  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  19), 
was  probably  one  of  sunstroke. 

The   disease   of  Asa    "in   his    feet"    (Schmidt, 


"■  It  has  been  much  debated  whether  the  smallpox  be 
an  ancient  disease.  On  the  whole,  perhaps,  the  arguments 
in  favour  of  its  not  being  such  predominate,  chiefly  on 
account  of  the  strongly  marked  character  of  the  symp- 
toms, which  makes  the  negative  argument  of  unusual 

t  This  is  Dr.  Robert  .Sim's  opinion.  On  comparing, 
however,  the  means  used  to  produce  llae  disorder  (Ex.  ix. 
8),  an  .inalogy  is  perceptible  to  what  is  called  "  brick- 
layer's itch,"  and  therefore  to  leprosy.  [Lepkosv.]  A 
disease  involving  a  white  spot  breaking  forth  from  a  boil 
related  to  leprosy,  and  clean  or  unclean  according  to 
symptoms  .specified,  occurs  under  the  general  Incus  of 
It-prosy  (Lev.  xiii.  1.1-23). 


MEDICINE 

Bihlischer  Med.  iii.  .5,  §2),  which  attacked  him  in 
his  old  age  (1  K.  xv.  23  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  12)  and  became 
exceeding  great,  may  have  been  either  oedema,  swell- 
ing, or  podagra,  gout.  The  former  is  common  in 
aged  persons,  in  whom,  owing  to  the  dirticulty  of 
the  return  upwards  of  the  sluggish  blood,  its 
watery  part  stays  in  the  feet.  The  latter,  though 
rare  in  the  East  at  pi-esent,  is  mentioned  by  the 
Talmudists  (Sotah,  10  a,  and  Sanhedrin,  48  b), 
and  there  is  no  reason  why  it  may  not  have  been 
known  in  Asa's  time.  It  occurs  in  Hippocr.  Aphor. 
vi.,  Prognost.  15;  Celsus,  iv.  24;  Aretaeus,  Morh. 
Chron.  ii.  12,  and  other  ancient  writers.*^ 

In  1  Mace.  vi.  8,  occurs  a  mention  of  "  sickness  of 
grief;"  in  Ecclus.  xxx-yii.  30,  of  sickne.ss  caused  by 
excess,  which  require  only  a  passing  mention.  The 
disease  of  Nebuchadnezzar  has  been  ^-iewed  by  Jahn 
as  a  mental  and  purely  subjective  malady.  It  is 
not  easy  to  see  how  this  satisfies  the  plain  emphatic 
statement  of  I»an.  iv.  33,  which  seems  to  include, 
it  is  tnie,  mental  derangement,  but  to  assert  a  de- 
graded bodily  stated  to  some  extent,  and  a  coiTe- 
spouding  change  of  habits.  We  may  regard  it  a.s 
Mead  (Jlfed.  Sacr.  vii.),  following  Burton's  Ana- 
tomy of  Melancholy,  does,  as  a  species  of  the  melan- 
choly known  as  Lycanthropia ^  {Pauhis  Aegin.  iii. 
16;  Avicerina,  iii.  1,  5,  22).  Persons  so  affected 
wander  like  wolves  in  sepulchres  by  night,  and 
imitate  the  howling  of  a  wolf  or  a  dog.  Further, 
there  are  well  attested  accounts  of  wild  or  half-wild 
human  creatures,  of  either  sex,  who  have  lived  as 
beasts,  losing  human  consciousness,  and  acquiring  a, 
superhuman  ferocity,  activity,  and  swiftness.  Either 
the  lycanthropic  patients  or  these  latter  may  furnish 
a  partial  analogy  to  Nebuchaduezzai-,  in  regard  to 
the  various  points  of  modified  outward  appearance 
and  habits  ascribed  to  him.  Nor  would  it  seem 
impossible  that  a  sustained  lycanthropia  might  pro- 
duce this  latter  condition. 

Here  shoitld  be  noticed  the  mental  malady  of 
Saul."  His  melancholy  seems  to  have  had  its  oiigin 
in  his  sin ;  it  was  therefore  grounded  in  his  moral 
nature,  but  extended  its  efl'ects,  as  commonly,  to 
the  intellectual.  Tlie  "  evil  spirit  from  God,"  what- 
ever it  mean,  was  no  part  of  the  medical  featuies 
of  his  case,  and  may  therefore  be  excluded  from  the 
present  notice.  Music,  which  soothed  him  for 
a  while,  has  entered  largely  into  the  milder  modem 
treatment  of  lunacy. 

The  palsy  meets  us  in  the  N.  X.  only,  and  in 
features  too  familiar  to  need  special  remark.  The 
words  "  grievously  toiTnented "  (Matt.  viii.  6), 
have  been  commented  on  by  Baier  (de  Paral.  32), 
to  the  effect  that  examples  of  acutely  painful  para- 
lysis are  not  wanting  in  modem  pathology,  e.g.  when 
paralysis  is  complicated  with  neuralgia.  But  if  this 
statement  be  viewed  with  doubt,  we  might  under- 


"  "  Inter  jactaudum  se  funibus . . .  reraansit  ilia  (manus) 
extensa,  ita  ut  retrahere  ipsam  nequlret  (Freind's  JKst. 
Med.  ii.  Append,  p.  2). 

=>  Seneca  mentions' it  (Epist.  95)  as  an  extreme  note  of 
the  female  depravity  current  in  his  own  time,  that  even 
the  female  sex  \vas  become  liable  to  gout. 

y  The  "  eagles'  feathers"  .and  "birds'  claws"  are  pro- 
bably used  only  in  illustration,  not  necessarily  as  de- 
scribing a  new  type  to  which  the  hair,&c.,  approximated. 
Comp.  the  simile  of  Ps.  clii.  5,  and  that  of  2  K.  v.  14. 

»  Comp.  Virg.  Bucol.  viii.  97  : — 

"  Saepe  lupum  fieri  et  se  condere  silvis." 

*  The  Targ.  of  Jonathan  renders  the  Heb.  X33n*- 
1  Sam.  X.  10,  by  "he  was  mad  or  insane  "  (.Tahn,  Upham's 
transl.  212-3). 


MEDICINE 

stand  the  Greek  expression  (^acravL^oixevos)  as  used 
of  paralysis  agitans,  or  even  of  chorea'*  (St.  Vitus' 
dance),  in  both  of  which  the  patient,  being  never 
still  lor  a  moment  save  when  asleep,  might  well  be 
So  described.  The  woman's  case  who  was  "  bowed 
together  "  by  "  a  s))irit  of  infimiity,"  may  probably 
have  been  paralytic  (Luke  xiii.  11).  If  the  dorsal 
muscles  weie  affected,  those  of  the  chest  and  ab- 
domen, IVom  want  of  resistance  would  undergo 
contraction,  and  thus  cause  the  patient  to  sufl'er  as 
described.  * 

Gangrene  (ydyypatva,  Celsus,  vii.  3.'i,  de  gan- 
graend),  or  mortification  in  its  various  forms,  is  a 
totally  different  disorder  from  the  "  canker  "  of  the 
A.  V.  in  2  Tim.  ii.  17.  Both  gangrene  and  cancer 
were  common  in  all  the  countries  familiar  to  the 
Scriptural  writers,  and  neither  differs  from  the  mo- 
dern disease  of  the  same  name  (Dr.  M.  Good,  ii. 
669,  &c.,  and  579,  &c.). 

In  Is.  xxvi.  18  ;  Ps.  vii.  14,  there  seems  an  allu- 
sion to  false  conception,  in  which,  though  attended 
by  pains  of  quasi-labour  and  other  ordinary  symp- 
toms, the  womb  has  been  found  unimpregnated,  and 
no  delivery  has  followed.  The  medical  term  (Dr.  M. 
Good,  iv.  188)  ifj.irpevfi6.T0)ffis,  mola  ventosa,  sug- 
gests the  Scriptural  language,  "  we  have  as  it  were 
brought  forth  wind  ;"  the  whole  passage  is  figurative 
for  disappointment  after  great  etibrt.* 

Poison,  as  a  means  of  destroying  life,  hardly  occurs 
in  the  Bible,  save  as  a{)plied  to  arrows  (Job  vi.  4), 
In  Zech.  xii.  2,  the  marg.  gives  "  poison  "  as  an 
alternative  rendering,  which  does  not  seem  prefer- 
able ;  intoxication  being  probably  meant.  In  the 
annals  of  the  Herods  poisons  occur  as  the  resource 
of  stealth}'  murder.*' 

The  bite  or  sting  of  venomous  beasts  can  hardly 
be  treated  as  a  disease ;  but  in  connexion  with  the 
"fiery  {i.  e.  venomous)  serpents"  of  Num.  xxi.  6, 
and  the  deliverance  from  death  of  those  bitten,  it  de- 
serves a  notice.  Even  the  Talmud  acknowledges  that 
the  healing  power  lay  not  in  the  brazen  serpent  itself, 
but  "  as  soon  as  they  feared  the  Most  High,  and 
uplifted  their  hearts  to  their  Heavenly  Father  they 
were  healed,  and  in  default  of  this  were  brought  to 
nought."  Thus  the  brazen  figure  was  symbolical 
only  ;  or,  according  to  the  lovers  of  purely  natural 
explanation,   was  the  stage-trick   to  cover  a  false 


MEDICINE 


305 


b  Jiilin  (IJpham's  transl.  232)  suggests  that  cramp, 
twisting  the  limb  round  as  if  in  tortvire,  may  have  been 
intended.  This  suits  ^ao-ai/ifdfxei'os,  no  doubt,  but  not 
vapaKvTLKO^, 

"^  For  an  account  of  the  complaint,  see  Paul.  Mgin., 
ed.  Syd.  Soc.  i.  p.  632. 

d  In  Chwolson's  CebeiTeste  d.  Altbab.  Literatur,  p.  129, 
Ibn  Wahschijjah's  treatise  on  poisons  contains  references 
to  several  older  writings  by  authors  of  other  nations  on 
that  subject.  His  commentator,  Jarbilqa,  treats  of  the 
cxistenoi' and  effects  of  poisons  and  antidotes,  and  in  an 
independent  work  of  his  own  thus  classifies  the  subject: 
(1)  of  poisons  which  kill  at  sight  (wenn  sie  man  nur 
aiisieht) ;  (2)  of  those  which  kill  through  sound  (Schall 
Oder  Laut) ;  (:t)  of  those  which  kill  by  smelling;  (4)  of 
tliose  which  kill  by  reaching  the  interior  of  the  ll)ody; 
(.i)  of  those  which  kill  by  contact,  with  special  mention 
of  the  poisoning  of  garments. 

e  Comp.  Lucan,  I'liarsulia,  ix.  837-8  :  "  (Jiiis  calcare  tnas 
timeat  solpviga  latcbras,"  &c. 

f  His  words  are  :  "  Estet  formicarum  geinis  viiieiiatnni, 
non  fere  in  lUiliii:  solpugas  Cicero  appellat." 

x  He  says  that  tlie  solpuga  ciiuses  such  sv.ellings  on 
the  parts  of  the  female  camel,  and  that  they  arc  called 

by  the  same  word  in  Arabic  as  the  Heb.  D'/'Sy.  whldi 
vol,.  11. 


miracle.  It  was  customary  to  consecrate  the  image 
of  the  affliction,  either  in  its  cause  or  in  its  effect 
as  in  the  golden  emeiods,  golden  mice,  of  1  Sam.vi. 
4,  8,  and  in  the  ex-votos  common  in  Egypt  even 
before  the  exodus ;  and  these  may  be  compared  with 
this  setting  up  of  the  brazen  seipent.  Thus  we 
have  in  it  only  an  instance  of  the  curient  custom, 
fanciful  or  superstitious,  being  sublimed  to  a  hioher 
purpose. 

The  bite  of  a  white  she-mule,  perhaps  in  the 
rutting  season,  is  according  to  the  Talmudists 
tat;il ;  and  they  also  mention  that  of  a  mad  dog, 
with  certain,  symptoms  by  which  to  discern  hTs 
state  (Wunderbar,  ut  sup.  21).  The  scorpion  and 
centipede  are  natives  of  the  Levant  (Hev.  ix.  5,  lu), 
iind,  with  a  large  variety  of  serpents,  swarm  there. 
To  these,  according  to  Lichtenstein,  should  be  added 
a  venomous  solpuga,*  or  large  spider,  similar  to 
theCalabrian  Tarantula;  but  the  passage  in  Pliny' 
adduced  (//.iV.  xxix.  29 ),  gives  no  satisfactory  ground 
for  the  theory  based  upon  it,  that  its  bite  was  the 
cause  of  the  emerods.ir  It  is  however  lemarkable 
that  Pliny  mentions  with  some  fulness,  a  mus  ara- 
neus — not  a  spider  resembling  a  mouse,  but  a  mouse 
resembling  a  spider — the  shiew-mouse,  and  called 
araneus,  Isidorus''  says  from  this  resemblance,  or 
from  its  eating  spiders.  Its  bite  was  venomous, 
caused  mortification  of  the  part,  and  a  spreading 
ulcer  attended  with  inward  griping  pains,  and  when 
crushed  on  the  wound  was  its  own  best  antidote.' 

The  disease  of  old  age  has  acquii-ed  a  place  in 
Biblical  nosology  chiefly  owing  to  the  elegant  alle- 
gory into  which  "  The  Preacher  "  throws  the  suc- 
cessive tokens  of  the  ravage  of  time  on  man  (Eccl. 
xii.).  The  symptoms  enumerated  have  each  their 
significance  for  the  physician,  for,  tliough  his  art 
can  do  little  to  arrest  them,  they  yet  maik  an 
altered  condition  calling  for  a  treatment  of  its  own. 
"The  Preacher"  divides  the  sum  of  human  exist- 
ence into  that  period  which  involves  every  mode  of 
growth,  and  that  which  involves  every  mode  of  de- 
cline. The  first  reaches  from  the  point  of  birth  or 
even  of  generation,  onwards  to  the  attainment  of  the 
"  gi-and  climacteric,"  and  tlie  second  from  that  epoch 
backwards  through  a  conesponding  period  of  decline 
till  the  point  of  dissolution  is  reached.''  This  latter 
course  is  marked  in  metaphor  by  the  dai'kening  of  the 


simply  means  "  swellings."  He  supposes  the  men  might 
have  been  "  versetzt  bei  dei-  Befriedigung  natiirlicher 
Bediirfnisse."  He  seems  not  to  have  given  due  weight 
to  the  expression  of  1  Sam.  vi,  5,  "  mice  which  mar  the 
land,"  which  seems  to  distinguish  the  "land"  from  the 
people  in  a  way  fatal  to  the  ingenious  notion  he  supports. 
Kor  the  nuiUiplication  of  these  and  similar  creatures  to  ai^ 
ex  traordinary  and  fatal  degree,  comp.  Xavvu,  Fi  aym.  ap.Jiv. 
'•  M.  Varro  autor  est,  a  cuniculis  snlfossum  in  Hispaiiia 
oppidum,  a  talpis  in  The.ssalia,  ab  ranis  civitatem  in 
Gallia  pulsam,  ab  locuslis  in  Africa,  ex  tiyaro  Cyclaihnn 
insula  incolas  a  muribiisfngatos." 

''  His  words  are:  "  Mus  araneus  eujus  moisu  aranea 
nioritur  est  in  Sardinia  animal  perexigiunn  araneae  Ibrmii 
quae  solifuga dicitur,  eo quod  diem  fuglal"  (Oiig.  xii. 3;. 

'  As  regards  the  scorpion,  this  belief  and  practice  still 
prevails  in  Talestine.  I'liny  .says  (//.  A.  xxix.  27),  aflcr 
prescril^ing  the  aslies  of  a  nun's  hoof,  young  of  a  weasel, 
&c.,  "  si  jumenta  momorderit  mus  (i'.  ('.  araneus)  lecens 
cum  sale  impojiitur,  ant  fel  vesperlilionis  ex  acelo.  Et 
ipse  nnis  araneus  coiiti'a  se  remedio  est  divnisus  et  im- 
positus, '  S;c.  Jn  cold  climates,  it  seems,  the  ver;um  of  the 
shrew-mouse  is  not  perceptible.  . 

''  These  are  respectively  called  the  Hvyn  *D*  "i'-' 
't"^  riT'Oyn  ^D*  "''  "i^'  liii'j'Jnis  (Wunderhar,  2tes 
Heft).     The  same  idea  appears  in  Soph.  T^adn'n. 

X 


306 


MEDICINE 


great  lights  of  nature,  and  the  ensuing  season  of  life  is 
compared  to  the  broken  weather  of  the  wet  season, 
setting  in  when  summer  is  gone,  when  after  every 
shower  fresh  clouds  are  in  the  sky,  as  contrasted 
with  the  showers  of  other  seasons,  which  pass  away 
into  clearness.  Such  he  means  are  the  ailments 
and  troubles  of  declining  age,  as  compared  with 
those  of  advancing  life.  The  "  keepers  of  the 
house"  are  perhaps  the  ribs  which  support  the 
frame,  or  the  arms  and  shoulders  which  enwrap  and 
protect  it.  Their  "  trembling,"  especially  that  of 
the  arms,  &c.,  is  a  sure  sign  of  vigour  past.  The 
"strongmen"  are  its  supporters,  the  lower  limbs 
"  bowing  themselves  "  under  the  weight  they  once 
so  lightly  bore.  The  "  gi-indiug  "  hardly  needs  to 
be  explained  of  the  teeth  now  become  "  few."  The 
"lookers  from  the  windows"  are  the  pupils  of  the 
eyes,  now  "darkened,"  as  Isaac's  were,  and  Eli's  ; 
and  Moses,  though  spared  the  dimness,  was  yet  in 
that  very  exemption  a  mai-vel  (Gen.  xxvii.,  comp. 
xlviii.  10;  1  Sam.  iv.  15;  Dent,  xxxiv.  1).  The 
"  doors  shut  "  represent  the  dulness  of  those  other 
senses  which  are  the  portals  of  knowledge  ;  thus 
the  taste  and  smell,  as  in  the  case  of  Barzillai,  be- 
come impaired,  and  the  ears  stopped  against  sound. 
The  "  rising  up  at  the  voice  of  a  bird  "  pourtrays 
the  light,  soon-fleeting,  easily-broken  slumber  of  the 
aged  man  ;  or  possibly,  and  more  literally,  actual 
waking  in  the  early  morning,  when  first  the  cock 
crows,  may  be  intended.  The  "  daughters  of  music 
brouglit  low,"  suggest  tlie 

"  big  manly  voice 

Now  turn'd  again  to  childish  treble ;" 

and  also,  as  illustrated  again  by  Barzillai,  the  failure 
in  the  discernment  and  the  utterance  of  musical 
notes.  The  fears  of  old  age  are  next  noticed : 
"  They  shall  be  afraid  of  tliat  loldch  is  high  ;"■"  an 
obscure  expression,  perhaps,  for  w^hat  are  popularly 
called  "nervous"  terrors,  exaggerating  and  magni- 
fying every  object  of  alarm,  and  "  making,"  as  the 
saying  is,  "  mountains  of  molehills."  "  Fear  in 
the  way""  is  at  first  less  obvious;  but  we 
observe  that  nothing  unnerves  and  agitates  an 
old  person  more  than  the  prospect  of  a  long 
journey.  Thus  regarded,  it  becomes  a  fine  and 
subtile  touch  in  the  description  of  decrepitude.  All 
readiness  to  haste  is  arrested  and  a  numb  despond- 
ency succeeds.  The  "  flourishing  "  of  "  the  almond- 
tree  "  is  still  more  obscure ;  but  we  observe  this 
tree  in  Palestine  blossoming  when  others  show  no 
sign  of  vegetation,  and  when  it  is  dead  winter  all 
around — no  ill  type,  perhaps,  of  the  old  man  who 
has  survived  his  own  contemporaries  and  many  of 
nis  juniors."  Youthful  lusts  die  out,  and  their 
organs,  of  which  "  the  grasshopper  "  p  is  perhajis  a 
figure,  are  relaxed.  The  "  silver  cord "  may  be 
that  of  nervous  sensation,i  or  motion,  or  even  the 


"•  Or,  even  more  simply,  these  words  may  be  under- 
stood as  meaning  that  old  men  have  neither  vigour  nor 
breath  for  going  up  hills,  mountains,  or  anything  else  that 
is  "high;"  nay,  for  them  the  plain  even  road  has  its 
terrors — they  walk  timidly  and  cautiously  even  along 
that. 

"  Compare  also  perhaps  the  dictum  of  the  slothful  man, 
Prov.  xxii.  13,  "  There  is  a  lion  in  the  wa}'." 
1  In  the  same  strain  Juvenal  (Sat.  x.  243-5)  says  : — 
Haec  data  poena  diu  viventibus,  ut  renovata 
Semper  claile  domiis,  multis  in  luclibus  inqiie 
Perpetuo  moerore  et  nigrfl.  veste  senescaiit." 
P  Dr.  Mead  {Mcd.Saci-.  vll.)  thinks  that  the  scinlum. 


RIEDICINE 

spinal  marrow  itself.  Perliaps  some  incapacity  of 
retention  may  be  signified  by  the  "  golden  bowl 
broken  ;"  the  "  pitcher  broken  at  the  well "  suggests 
some  vital  supply  stopping  at  the  usual  source — de- 
rangement perhaps  of  the  digestion  or  of  the  respira- 
tion ;  the  "  wheel  shivered  at  the  cistern,"  conveys, 
through  the  image  of  the  water-lifting  process  fami- 
liar in  irrigation,  the  notion  of  the  blood,  pumped, 
as  it  were,  through  the  vessels,  and  fertilising  the 
whole  system  ;  for  "  the  blood  is  the  life." 
•  This  careful  register  of  the  tokens  of  decline 
might  lead  us  to  expect  great  care  for  tlie  preserva- 
tion of  health  and  strength  ;  and  this  indeed  is 
found  to  mark  the  Jlosaic  system,  in  the  regulations 
concerning  diet,''  the  "  divers  washings,"'  and  the 
pollution  imputed  to  a  corpse — nay,  even  in  cir- 
cumcision itself.  These  served  not  only  the  cere- 
monial purpose  of  imparting  self-consciousness  to 
the  Hebrew,  and  keeping  him  distinct  from  alien 
admixture,  but  had  a  sanitary  aspect  of  rare  wisdom, 
when  we  regard  the  country,  the  climate,  and  the 
age.  The  laws  of  diet  had  the  eflect  of  tempering 
by  a  just  admixture  of  the  organic  substances  of  the 
animal  and  vegetable  kingdoms  the  regimen  of  He- 
brew families,  and  thus  providing  for  the  vigour 
of  future  ages,  as  well  as  checking  the  stimulus 
which  the  predominant  use  of  animal  food  gives  to 
the  passions.  To  these  effects  may  be  ascribed  the 
immunity  often  enjoyed  by  the  Hebrew  race  • 
amidst  epidemics  devastating  the  countries  of  their 
sojourn.  The  best  and  often  the  sole  possible  exer- 
cise of  medicine  is  to  prevent  disease.  Closes  could 
not  legislate  for  cure,  but  his  rules  did  for  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  what  no  therapeutics  however 
consummate  could  do, — they  gave  the  best  security 
for  the  public  health  by  provisions  incorporated  in 
the  public  economy.  Whether  we  regard  the  laws 
which  secluded  the  leper,  as  designed  to  prevent 
infection  or  repress  the  dread  of  it,  their  wisdom 
is  nearly  equal,  for  of  all  terrors  the  imaginary  are 
the  most  terrible.  The  laws  restricting  marriage 
have  in  general  a  similar  tendency,  degeneracy 
being  the  penalty  of  a  departure  from  those  which 
forbid  commixture  of  near  kin.  Slichel  Le\y  re- 
marks on  the  salubrious  tendency  of  the  law  of 
marital  separation  (Lev.  xv.)  imposed  (Levy,  Traite 
d'lL/giine,  p.  8).  The  precept  also  concerning 
purity  on  the  necessary  occasions  in  a  desert  en- 
campment (Dent,  xxiii.  12-14),  enjoining  the  re- 
turn of  the  elements  of  pi-oiliictiveness  to  the  soil, 
would  probably  become  the  basis  of  the  muni- 
cipal regulations  having  for  their  object  a  similar 
purity  in  towns.  The  consequences  of  its  neglect 
in  such  encampments  is  shewn  by  an  example 
quoted  by  Michel  Levy,  as  mentioned  by  M.  de  La- 
martine  (ih.  8,  9).  Length  of  life  was  regai-ded  as 
a  mark  of  divine  favour,  and  the  divine  legislator 
had  pointed  out  the  means  of  ordinarily  ensuring  a 


swoln  by  a  rupture,  is  perhaps  meant  to  be  typified  by 
the  shape  of  the  grasshopper.     He  renders  the  Hebrew 

33nn  73rip_''1  after  the  LXX.  i-rraxwei]  rj  a/cpi's,  Vulg. 
impinguahitur  locusta.    Comp.  Hor.  Odes,  ii.  xi.  7,  8. 

1  We  find  hints  of  the  nerves  proceeding  in  pairs  from 
the  brain,  both  in  the  Talmudical  writere  and  in  Aretaeus. 
See  below  in  the  text. 

'  Michel  Levy  quotes  Halle  as  acknowledging  the  sa- 
lutary character  of  the  prohibition  to  eat  pork,  which  he 
says  is  "  sujet  a  une  alteration  du  tissu  graisseux  tres 
analogue  il  la  degenerescence  lepreuse." 

'  This  was  said  of  the  Jews  in  London  during  the 
cholera  attack  of  1849. 


MEDICINE 

fuller  measure  of  it  to  the  people  at  large  than 
could,  acconling  to  ])hysical  laws,  otherwise  be 
hoped  for.  Perhaps  the  extraordinary  means  taken 
to  prolong  vitality  may  be  referred  to  this  source 
(1  K.  i.  2),  and  there  is  no  I'easou  why  the  case  of 
David  should  be  deemed  a  singular  one.  We  may 
also  compare  the  apparent  influence  of  vital  warmth 
enhanced  to  a  miraculous  degree,  but  having,  per- 
haps, a  i)hysical  law  as  its  basis,  in  the  cases  of 
Elijah,  Elisha,  ;mcl  the  sons  of  the  widow  of  Za- 
rephath,  and  the  Shiuiammite.  Wunderbar'  has 
collected  several  examples  of  such  influence  simi- 
larly exerted,  which  however  he  seems  to  exag- 
gerate to  an  absurd  pitch.  Yet  it  would  seem  not 
against  analogy  to  suppose,  that,  as  pernicious  exha- 
lations, miasmata,  &c.,  may  pass  from  tlie  sick  and 
affect  the  healthy,  so  there  should  be  a  reciprocal 
action  in  favour  of  health.  The  climate  of  Pales- 
tine afforded  a  great  range  of  temperature  within  a 
narrow  compass, — e.  g.  a  long  sea-coast,  a  long  deep 
valley  (that  of  the  Jordan),  a  broad  flat  plain  (Es- 
draelon),  a  large  portion  of  table-land  (Judah  and 
Ephraim),  and  the  higher  elevations  of  Cai-mel, 
Tabor,  the  lesser  and  greater  Hennon,  kc.  Thus 
it  partakes  of  nearly  all  supportable  climates."  In 
October  its  rmny  season  begins  with  moist  westerly 
winds.  In  November  the  trees  are  bare.  In  De- 
cember snow  and  ice  are  often  found,  but  never  lie 
long,  and  only  during  the  north  wind's  prevalence. 
The  cold  disappears  at  the  end  of  February,  and  the 
"latter  rain"  sets  in,  lasting  through  March  to  the 
middle  of  April,  when  thunderstorms  are  common, 
torrents  swell,  and  the  heat  rises  in  the  low  grounds. 
At  the  end  of  April  the  hot  season  begins,  but  pre- 
serves moileration  till  June,  thence  till  September 
becomes  extreme;  and  during  all  this  period  rain 
seldom  occurs,  but  often  heavy  dews  prevail.  In 
September  it  commences  to  be  cool,  first  at  night, 
and  sometimes  the  rain  begins  to  fall  at  the  end  of 
it.  The  migration  with  the  season  from  an  inland 
to  a  sea-coast  position,  from  low  to  high  gi-ound, 
&c.,  was  a  point  of  social  development  never 
systematiciilly  reached  during  the  Scriptural  his- 
tory of  Palestine.  But  men  inhabiting  the  same 
regions  for  centuries  could  hardly  fail  to  notice  the 
connexion  between  the  air  and  moisture  of  a  place 
and  human  health,  and  those  favoured  by  circum- 
stances would  certainly  turn  their  knowledge  to 
account.  The  Talmudists  speak  of  the  iiortl)  wind 
as  preservative  of  liie,  and  the  south  and  east  winds 
:us  exhaustive,  but  the  south  as  the  most  insupport- 
able of  all,  coming  hot  and  dry  from  the  deserts, 
producing  abortion,  tiiinting  the  babe  yet  unborn, 
and  cori-oding  the  pearls  in  tlie  sea.  Further,  they 
dissuade  from  perfomiing  circumcision  or  venesec- 
tion during  its  prevalence  {JehanvAh,  72  a,  ap. 
Wunderbar,  2tes  Heft,  ii.  A.).  It  is  stated  that 
"  the  marriage-bed  placed  between  north  and  south 
will  be  blessed  with  mule  issue"  {Berachoth,  15, 
ib.),  which  may,  VViuiderbar  thinks,  be  interpreted 


MEDICINE 


307 


'  Biblisch-Talmud.  Med.  2tes  Heft,  I.  D.  pp.  15-17.  He 
speaks  of  the  result  ensuing  from  shaking  hands  with 
one's  friends,  &c. 

«  The  possession  of  an  abundance  of  salt  tended  to 
banish  much  disease  (Ps.  Ix.  2;  2  Sam.  viii.  l.S ;  l  Chr. 
xviii.  12).  Salt-pits  (Zeph.  ii.  9)  are  still  dug  by  the  Arabs 
on  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Soa.  For  the  use  of  salt  to  a 
new-born  infant,  Ez.  .xvi.  4,  comp.  Galen  de  Sanit.  lib.  i. 
cap.  7. 

■^  See  some  remarks  in  Michel  Levy,  Traite  d' Hygiene, 
Paris  1850 :  "  Kicn  de  plus  rebutant  que  cette  sorte  de 
malpropretd,  rien  de  plus  favorable  au  iloveloppemeut  des 


of  the  temperature  when  moderate,  and  in  neither 
extreme  (which  these  winds  respectively  represent), 
as  most  favouring  fecundity.  If  the  fact  be  so,  it 
is  more  probably  related  to  the  phenomena  of  mao-- 
netism,  in  connexion  with  which  the  same  theory 
has  been  lately  revived.  A  number  of  precepts  are 
given  by  the  same  authorities  in  reference  to  health, 
e.  g.  eating  slowly,  not  contracting  a  sedentary 
habit,  regularity  in  natural  operations,  cheerfulness 
of  temperament,  due  sleep  (especially  early  morn- 
ing sleep  is  recommended),  but  not  somnolence  by 
day  (Wunderbar,  ut  sup.). 

The  rite  of  circumcision,  besides  its  .special  sur- 
gical operation,  deserves  .some  notice  in  connexion 
with  the  general  question  of  the  health,  longevity, 
and  fecundity  of  the  race  with  whose  history  it  is 
identified.  Besides  being  a  mark  of  the  covenant 
and  a  symbol  of  puiity,  it  was  perhaps  also  a 
protest  against  the  phallus-worship,  which  has 
a  remote  antiquity  in  the  corruption  of  mankind, 
and  of  which  we  have  some  trace  in  the  Egyptian 
myth  of  Osiris.  It  has  been  asserted  also  "(Wun- 
derbar, 3tes  Heft,  p.  25)  that  it  distinctly  con- 
tributed to  increase  the  fruit  fulness  of  the  race, 
and  to  clieck  inordinate  desires  in  the  individual. 
Its  beneficial  effects  in  such  a  climate  as  that  of 
^-oJ?^  ■''"'i  Syria,  as  tending  to  promote  cleanliness, 
to  prevent  or  reduce  irritation,  and  theieby  to  stop 
the  way  against  various  disorders,  have  been  the 
subject  of  comment  to  various  writers  on  hygiene.*^ 
In  particular  a  troublesome  and  sometimes  fjital 
kind  of  boil  (phymosis  and  paraphymosis)  is  men- 
tioned as  occurring  commonly  in  those  regions, 
but  only  to  the  uncircumcised.  It  is  suited  bv 
Josephus  {Cont.  Ap.  ii.  13)  that  Apion,  against 
whom  he  wrote,  having  at  first  derided  circum- 
cision, was  circumcised  of  necessity  by  reason  of 
such  a  boil,  of  which,  after  suffering  great  pain, 
he  died.  Philo  also  appears  to  speak  of  the  same 
benefit  when  he  speaks  of  the  "  anthrax  "  infesting 
those  who  retain  the  foreskin.  Medical  authorities 
have  also  stated  that  the  capacity  of  imbibing 
syphilitic  virus  is  less,  and  that  this  has  been 
})roved  experimentally  by  comparing  Jewish  with 
other,  c.  g.  Christian  populations  (Wunderbar, 
Stes  Heft,  p.  27).  The  operation  itself  7  consisted  of 
originally  a  mere  "=  incision  ;  to  which  a  further 
stripping »  otf'the  skin  from  the  part,  and  a  custom 
of  sucking^  the  blood  from  the  wound  was  in  a  later 
period  added,  owing  to  the  attempts  of  .lews  of  the 
Maccabean  period,  and  later  (1  Mace.  i.  1  5  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  5,  §1  :  comp.  1  Cor.  vii.  8)  to  cultivate 
heathen  practices.  [Circumcision.]  The  reduc- 
tion of  the  remaining  portion  of  the  praeputium 
after  the  more  simple  operation,  so  as  to  cover  what 
it  had  exposed,  knovi^n  as  epispasmiis,  accomplished 
by  the  elasticity  of  the  skin  itself,  was  what  this 
anti-Judaic  practice  sought  to  effect,  and  what 
the  later,  more  complicated  and  severe,  operation 
frustrated.     To    these  were    subjoined  the  use   of 


accidents  syphilitiques."  Circumcision  is  said  to  be  also 
practised  among  the  natives  of  Madag.ascar,  "  qui  ne  pa- 
raissent  avoir  aucune  notion  du  Judaisrae  ni  du  Maho- 
metisme"  (p.  ll,  note). 

y  There  is  a  good  modern  accomit  of  circumcision  in  the 
Dublin  Medical  rres.%  May  19, 1858,  by  Dr.  Joseph  Hiisch- 
feld  (from  Ocstereich.  ZeitFchrift). 
'  Known  as  the  ^Dn.  <i  ^"rd  meaning  "  cut." 
"  Called  ihe  ]}'i~\Q,  from  yiQ,  ''  to  expose." 
>>  Called  Meziza,  fi-om  1'VD.  "  to  suck."  This  counter- 
acted a  tendency  to  inflauimation.  * 

X  2 


308 


MEDICINE 


the  warm-batli,  before  and  after  the  operation, 
pounded  cummin  as  a  styptic,  and  a  mixture  of 
wine  and  oil  to  heal  the  wound.  It  is  remarkable 
that  the  tightly-swathed  rollers  which  foi-med  the 
first  covei-ing  of  the  new-born  child  (Luke  ii.  7)  are 
still  retained  among  modern  Jews  at  the  circum- 
cision of  a  child,  etlectually  preventing  any  move- 
ment of  the  body  or  limbs  (Wunderbarj-^  p.  29). 
No  surgical  operation  beyond  this  finds  a  place  in 
Holy  Scripture,  unless  indeed  that  adverted  to 
under  the  article  Eunuch.  [EuNUCH.]  The  Tal- 
mudists  speak  of  two  operations  to  assist  birth,  one 
known  as  jDnn  nyip  (gastrotomin),  i\nd  intended 
to  assist  parturition,  not  necessarily  fatal  to  the 
mother;  the  other  known  as  |03n  ny''"lp,  {hystero- 
tomia,  sectio  caesarea),  which  was  seldom  prac- 
tised save  in  the  case  of  death  in  the  crisis  of  labour, 
or  if  attempted  on  the  living  was  either  fatal,  or  at 
least  destructive  of  the  powers  of  maternity.  An 
operation  is  also  mentioned  by  the  same  authoiities 
liaving  for  its  object  the  extraction  piecemeal  of  an 
otherwise  inextricable  foetus  {ibid.  pp.  53,  &c.). 
Wunderbar  enumerates  from  the  IMishna  and 
Talmud  tifty-six  surgical  instruments  or  pieces 
of  apparatus  ;  of  these,  however,  the  following 
only  are  at  all  alluded  to  in  Scripture.'^  A  cutting 
instrument,  called  "niV,  supposed  a  "  sharp  stone  " 
(Ex.  iv.  25).  Such  was  probably  the  "  Aethiopian 
stone"  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (ii.  86),  and  Fliny 
speaks  of  what  he  calls  Testa  samia,  as  a  similar 
implement.  Zipporah  seems  to  have  caught  up  the 
first  instrument  which  came  to  hand  in  her  appre- 
hension for  the  life  of  her  husband.  The  "  knife" 
(ri?3ND)  of  Josh.  V.  2  was  probably  a  more 
refined  instrument  for  the  same  purpose.  An  "  awl " 
(W"lD),  is  mentioned  (^Ex.  xxi.  6)  as  used  to  bore 
through  the  ear  of  the  bondman  who  refused  re- 
lease, and  is  supposed  to  have  been  a  surgical  in- 
strument. 

A  seat  of  delivery  called  in  Scripture  D'33X, 
Ex.  i.  16,  by  the  Talmudists  "l3t^'0  (comp.  2  K. 
six.  3),  "the  stools;"  but  some  have  doubted 
whether  the  word  used  by  Moses  does  not  mean 
rather  the  uterus  itself,  as  that  which  moulds'  and 
shapes  the  infant.  Delivery  upon  a  seat  or  stool 
is,  however,  a  common  practice  in  France  at  this 
day,  and  also  in  Palestine. 

The  "roller  to  bind"  of  Ez.  xxx.  21  was  lor 
a  broken  limb,  as  still  used.  Similar  bands  wound 
with  the  most  precise  accuracy  involve  the 
mummies. 


"=  This  writer  gives  a  full  account  of  the  entire  process 
as  now  in  practice,  witli  illustrations  from  the  Turkish 
mode  of  operating,  gathered,  it  seems,  from  a  fragment 
of  a  rare  work  on  the  healing  art  by  an  anonymous 
Turkish  author  of  the  16th  century,  in  the  public  lilirary 
at  Leipsic.  The  Persians,  Tartars,  &c.,  have  furnished 
him  with  further  illustrations. 

<•  Yet  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  rest  were  not 
known  in  Scriptural  times,  "  it  being  a  well-known  fact 
in  the  history  of  inventions  that  many  useful  discoveries 
have  long  been  kept  as  family  secrets."  Thus  an  obste- 
trical forceps  was  found  in  a  house  excavated  at  Pompeii, 
though  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  so  far  as  their  medical 
works  show,  were  xniaoquainted  with  the  instrument 
(Paul.  Aeg.  i.  652,  ed.  Sydenham  Soc). 

<^  In  Jer.  xviii.  3  the  same  woid  appears,  rendered 
"wheels"  in  the  A.  V. ;  margin,  "frames  or  seats;" 
that  which  gives  shape  to  the  work  of  the  potter. 

<■  Scj?  Tacit.  Hist.  v.  7,  and  Oielli  s  note  ad.  hx: 

e  Tacitus,  Ibid.  v.  6. 


MEDICINE 

A  scraper  (D"in\  for  whicli  the  "  potsherd  "  of 
Job  was  a  substitute  (Job  ii.  8). 

Ex.  xxx.  23-5  is  a  prescription  in  form.  It  may 
lie  worth  while  also  to  enumerate  the  leading  sub- 
stances which,  according  to  Wunderbar,  composed 
the  pharmacopoeia  of  the  Tahnudists — a  much  more 
limited  one — which  will  aftbrd  some  insight  into  the 
distance  which  separates  them  from  the  leaders  of 
Greek  medicine.  Besides  such  ordinary  appliances 
as  water,  wine  (Luke  x.  34),  beer,  vinegar,  honey, 
and  milk,  various  oils  are  found  ;  as  opobalsamum ' 
("balm  of  Gilead  "),  the  oil  of  olive,S  myrrh,  rose, 
palma  christi,  walnut,  sesamum,  colocynth,  and 
fish  ;  figs  (2  K.  XX.  7),  dates,  apples  (Cant.  ii.  5), 
pomegranates,  pistachio-nuts,*>  and  almonds  (a  pro- 
duce of  Syria,  but  not  of  Egypt,  Gen.  xliii.  11); 
wheat,  barley,  and  various  other  grains;  garlic, 
leeks,  onions,  and  some  other  common  herbs ; 
mustard,  pepper,  coriander  seed,  ginger,  preparations 
of  beet,  fish,  &c.,  steeped  in  wine  or  vinegar,  whey, 
eggs,  salt,  wax,  and  suet  (in  plaisters),  gall  offish' 
(Tob.  vi.  8,  XI.  1 1 ),  ashes,  cowdung,  &c. ;  fasting-sa- 
liva'', mine,  bat's  blood,  and  the  following  rarer  herbs, 
&c. :  amineisision,  menta  gcntilis,  safiron,  man- 
dragora,  Lawsonia  spinosa  (Arab.  «//ie«na),  juniper, 
broom,  poppy,  acacia,  pine,  lavender  or  rosemary, 
clover-root,  jujub,  hyssop,  fern,  snmpsuchum, 
milk-thistle,  laurel,  Enica  muralis,  absynth,  jas- 
mine, narcissus,  madder,  curled  mint,  fennel,  endive, 
oil  of  cotton,  myrtle,  myrrh,  aloes,  sweet  cane 
(acorus  calamus),  cinnamon,  canclla  alba,  cassia, 
ladanum,  galbanum,  frankincense,  storax,  nard, 
gum  of  various  trees,  musk,  blatta  byzantina; 
and  these  minerals — bitumen,  natrum,  borax,  altim, 
clay,  aetites,">  quicksilver,  litharge,  yellow  arsenic. 
The  following  preparations  were  also  well  known : — 
Thcriacas,  an  antidote  prepared  from  serpents ; 
various  medicinal  drinks,  e.g.  from  the  fruit-bear- 
ing rosemary  ;  decoction  of  wine  with  A^egetables  ; 
mixture  of  wine,  honey,  and  pepper:  of  oil,  wine, 
and  water ;  of  asparagus  and  other  roots  steeped  in 
wine  ;  emetics,  purging  draughts,  soporifics,  potions 
to  produce  abortion  or  fruitfulness ;  and  various 
salves,  some  used  cosmetically,"  c.  g.  to  remove 
hair;  some  for  wounds,  and  other  injuries."  The 
forms  of  medicaments  were  cataplasm,  electuary, 
liniment,  plaister  (Is.  i.  6;  Jer.  viii.  22,  xlvi.  11, 
Ii.  8;  Joseph.  7>.  J.  i.  33,  §5),  powder,  infusion, 
decoction,  essence,  syrup,  mixture. 

An  occasional  trace  occurs  of  some  chemical 
knowledge,  e.  g.  the  calcination  of  the  gold  by 
Moses;  the  effect  of  "vinegar  upon  nitre  "p  (Ex. 


•>  Commended  by  Plinj'  as  a  specific  for  the  bite  of  a 
serpent  (Plin.  H.  K.  xxiii.  78). 

i  Rhases  speaks  of  a  Bsh  named  sahnt,  the  gall  of  which 
healed  inflamed  eyes  (ix. '27);  and  I'liny  says,  "Callio- 
nymi  fel  cicatrices  sanat  et  carnes  oculorum  supervacuas 
consumit"  (A'.  H.  xxxii.  24). 

1^  Comp.  Mark  viii.  23,  .John  ix.  G;  aUo  the  mention  by- 
Tacitus  {Hist.  iv.  81)  of  a  request  made  of-Vespasian  at 
Alexandria.  Galen  {De  Simpl  FacuU.  i.  1 0)  and  Pliny 
(if.  N.  xxviii.  7)  ascribe  similar  virtues  to  it. 

■n  Said  by  Pliny  to  be  a  specific  against  abortion  (TV'.  H. 
xxx.  44). 

"  Antimony  was  and  is  used  as  a  dye  for  the  eye-lids,  the 
kohol.    See  Roscnmiiller  in  the  Biblical  Cabinet,  xxvii.  65. 

o  The  Arabs  suppose  that  a  cornelian  stoue  (the  Sardius 
lapis,  Ez.  xxviii.  13,  tat  in  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  7,  $5, 
Sardovyx)  laid  on  a  fresh  wound  will  stay  hemorrhago. 

''  "IDJ  meaning  natron  :  the  Egyptian  kind  was  foiuid 

in  two  laltes between  Naukratisand  JUuiiihis  {Hibl.  Cab. 
xxvii.  p.  7). 


MEDICINE 

Kxxii.  20  ;  Prov.  xxv.  20 ;  comp.  Jer.  ii.  22)  ;  the 
tneution  of  "  the  apothecary  "  (Ex.  xxx.  35  ;  Eccl. 
X.  1),  and  of  the  merchant  in  "powders"  (Caut. 
iii.  6),  shows  that  a  distinct  and  important  branch 
of  trade  was  set  up  in  these  wares,  in  which,  as  at 
a  modern  druggist's,  articles  of    luxury  &c.,  are 
combined  with  the  remedies  of  sickness  ;  see  further, 
Wunderbar,  Istes  Heft,  pp.  73,  ad  fin.    Among  the 
most  favourite  of  external  remedies  has  always  been 
the  bath.     As  a  preventive  of  numerous  disorders 
its  virtues  were  known  to  the  Egyptians,  and  the 
scrupulous  levitical  bathings  prescribed  by  Moses 
would  merely  enjoin  the  continuance  of  a  practice 
familiar  to  the  Jews,  I'rom  the  example  especially  of 
the  priests  in  that  country.    Besides  the  significance 
of  moral  purity  which  it  earned,  the  use  of  the  bath 
checked  the  tendency  to  become  unclean  by  violent 
perspirations  from  within  and  effluvia  from  without; 
it  kept  the  porous  system  in  play,  and  stopped  the 
outset  of  much  disease.     In  order  to  make  the  sanc- 
tion of  health  more  solemn,  most  oriental  nations 
have  enforced  purificatory  rites  by  religious  mandates 
— and  so  the  Jews.     A  treatise  collecting  all  the 
dicta  of  ancient  medicine  on  the  use  of  the  bath  has 
been  curi-ent  ever  since  the  i-evival  of  learning,  under 
the  title  De  Balneis.     According  to  it  Hippocrates 
and  (ialen  prescribe  the  bath  medicinally  in  peri- 
jmeumonia  rather  than  in  burning  fever,  as  tending  to 
allay  the  pain  of  the  sides,  chest,  and  back,  promoting 
various  secretions,  removing  lassitude,  and  suppling 
joints.     A  hot  bath  is  recommended  for  those  sufl'er- 
"ing  from  lichen  {De  Bain.  464).     Those,  on  the 
contrary,  who  have  l()oseness  of  the  bowels,  who  are 
languid,  loathe  their  food,  are  troubled  with  nausea 
or  bile,  should  not  use  it,  as    neither  should  the 
epileptic.     After  exhausting  journeys    in   the  sun 
the  bath  is  commended  as  the  restorative  of  moist- 
ure to  the  frame    (456-458).       The   four   objects 
which  ancient  authorities  chiefly  proposed  to  attain 
by  bathing  are — 1,   to   warm  and  distil   the  ele- 
ments of  the  body  throughout  the  whole  fi-ame,  to 
equalise  whatever  is  abnormal,  to  rarefy  the  skin, 
and  promote  evacuations  through  it;   2,  to  reduce 
a  dry  to  a  moister  habit ;   3   (the  cold-bath),   to 
cool  the  frame  and  brace  it;  4  (the  warm-bath), 
a  sudorific  to  expel  cold.  '   Exercise  before  bathing 
is  recommended,  and  in  the  season  from  April  till 
November  inclusive  it  is  the  most  conducive  to 
health  ;   if  it  be  kept  up  in  the  other  months   it 
should  then  be  but  once  a  week,  and  that  fasting. 
Of  natural  waters  some  are  nitrous,  some  saline, 
some  aluminous.i  some   sulphureous,   some   bitu- 
minous,  some   copperish,    some    ferruginous,    and 
some   coinpounded    of  these.     Of  all   the   natural 
waters   the    power   is,    on    the    whole,   desiccant 
and    calefacient ;    and   they   are    peculiarly  fitted 
for    those    of  a    humid    and    cold    habit.      Pliny 
(//.   N.    xxxi.)    gives   the    fullest   extant    account 
of  the  thermal  springs  of  the  ancients  {Paul.  Aegin. 
ed.  Sydeuh.  Soc.  i.  71).     Avicenna  gives  precepts 
for  salt  and  other  mineral  baths ;    the  former  he 
recommends  in  case  of  scurvy  and  itching,  as  rare- 
fying the  skin,  and  afterwards  condensing  it.  Water 
medicated  with  alum,   natron,  sulphur,  naphtha. 


MEDICINE 


309 


iron,  litharge,  vitriol,  and  vinegar,  are  also  specified 
by  him.  Friction  and  unction  are  prescribed,  and 
a  caution  given  against  staying  too  long  in  the 
water  {ibid.  338-340 ;  comp.  Aetius,  de  Bain. 
iv.  484).  A  sick  bather  should  lie  quiet,  and 
allow  others  to  rub  and  anoint  him,  and  use  no 
strisil  (the  common  instrument  for  scraping  the 
skin),  but  a  sponge  (456).  Maimonides  chiefly 
following  Galen,  recommends  the  bath,  especially 
for  phthisis  in  the  aged,  as  being  a  case  of  dryness 
with  cold  habit,  and  to  a  hectic  fever  patient  as 
being  a  case  of  dryness  with  hot  habit ;  also  in 
cases  of  ephemeral  and  tertian  fevers,  under  certain 
restrictions,  and  in  putrid  fevers,  with  the  caution 
not  to  incur  shivering.  Bathing  is  dangerous  to 
those  who  feel  pain  in  the  liver  after  eating.  He 
adds  cautions  regarding  the  kind  of  water,  but  these 
relate  chiefly  to  water  for  drinking  {De  Bain. 
438-9).  The  bath  of  oil  was  Ibrmed,  according  to 
Galen  and  Aetius,  by  adding  the  fifth  part  of  heated 
oil  to  a  water-bath.  Josephus  speaks  {B.  J.  i. 
33,  §5)  as  though  oil  had,  in  Herod's  case,  been  used 
pure. 

There  were  special  occasions  on  which  the  bath 
was  ceremonially  enjoined,  after  a  lejirous  eruption 
healed,  after  the  conjugal  act,  or  an  involuntaiy 
emission,  or  any  gonorrhoeal  discharge,  after  men- 
sti-uation,  child-bed,  or  touching  a  corpse ;  so  for  the 
priests  before  and  during  their  times  of  office  such  a  . 
duty  was  prescribed.  [Baths.]  The  Pharisees 
and  Essenes  aimed  at  scrupulous  strictness  of  all 
such  rules  (Matt.  xv.  2  ;  Mark  vii.  5  ;  Luke  xi. 
38).  River-bathing'  was  common,  but  houses  soon 
began  to  include  a  bath-room  (Lev.  xv.  13  ;  2  K. 
V.  10  ;  2  Sam.  si.  2  ;  Susanna  15).  Vapour-baths, 
as  among  the  Romans,  were  latterly  included  in 
these,  as  well  as  liot  and  cold-bath  apj)aratus,  and 
the  use  of  perfumes  and  oils  after  quitting  it  was 
everywhere  diffused  (Wunderbar,  2tes  Heft,  ii.  B. ). 
The  vapour  was  sometimes  sought  to  be  inhaled, 
though  this  was  reputed  mischievous  to  the  teeth. 
It  was  deemed  healthiest  aiter  a  warm  to  take 
also  a  cold  bath  (Paul,  Aegin.  ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.  i. 
68).  The  Talmud  has  it — "  Whoso  takes  a  warm- 
bath,  and  does  not  also  drink  thereupon  some  warm 
water,  is  like  a  stove  hot  only  from  without,  but 
not  heated  also  from  within.  Whoso  bathes  and 
does  not  withal  anoint,  is  like  the  liquor  outside 
a  vat.  Whoso  having  had  a  warm-bath  does  not 
also  immediately  pour  cold  water  over  him,  is  like 
an  iron  made  to  glow  in  the  fire,  but  not  thereafter 
hardened  in  the  water."  This  .succession  of  cold 
water  to  hot  vapom-  is  commonly  practised  in  Rus- 
sian and  Polish  baths,  and  is  said  to  contribute 
much  to  robust  health  (Wunderbar,  ibid.). 

Besides  the  usual  authorities  on  Hebrew  anti- 
quities, Talmudical  and  modern,  Wtmderbar  (lste«^ 
Heft,  pp.  57-69)  has  compiled  a  collection  of 
writers  on  the  special  subject  of  Scriptural  &c. 
medicine,  including  its  psychological  and  botanical 
aspects,  as  also  its  political  relations  ;  a  distinct 
section  of  thirteen  monographs  treats  of  the  leprosy  ; 
and  every  various  disease  mentioned  in  Scripture 
appears  elaborated  in  one  or  more  such  short  trea- 


1  Dr.  Adams  (Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Syd,  Soc.  i.  12)  says 
that  the  alum  of  the  ancients  found  in  mineral  springs 
cannot  have  been  the  alum  of  modem  commerce,  since  it 
is  very  rarely  to  be  detected  there  ;  but  the  alumcn  plu- 
vwsum,  or  hair  alum,  said  to  consist  chiefly  of  the  sul- 
phate of  magnesia  and  iron.  The  former  exists,  how- 
ever, in  great  abundaiicj  in  the  aluminous  spring  of  the 


Isle  of  Wight.    The  ancient  nitre  or  natron  was  a  native 
carbonate  of  soda  (flxVJ.). 

'  The  case  of  Naanian  may  be  paralleled  by  Herod. 
Iv.  90,  where  we  road  of  the  Tearus,  a  tributary  of  tJie 
Hebl-US — MyeraL  eiVat  iroTaixaiv  apio-T05,  Ta  re  aWa. 
h  aiceo-if  (j>epoi'Ta,  Kal  St}  Koi  afSpa.<TL  Ka\  innoLat 
'j/uipriv  aKtcraaOai. 


310 


MEDICINE 


tises.  Those  out  of  the  wholo  number  which 
appear  most  generally  in  esteem,  to  judge  tVom 
references  made  to  them,  are  the  following : — 

Rosenmiiller's  Natural  Histonj  of  the  Bible,  in 
the  Biblicnl  Cabinet,  vol.  xxvii. 

De  Wette,  Ilebrdisch  -  judische  Archiiologie, 
§2716. 

Calmet,  Augustin,  La  Medccine  et  les  Medecins 
des  uno.  Ilcbreux,  in  his  Coinm.  literale,  Paris, 
17-24-,  vol.  V. 

Idem,  Dissertation  sur  la  Sueur  du  Sang, 
Luke  xxii.  43-4. 

Fruner,  Krankhciten  des  Orients. 

Sprengel,  Kurt,  De  medic.  Ebraeorum,  Halle, 
1789.     8vo.     Also, 

Idem,  Beitraije  zur  GeschicMe  der  Medicin. 
Halle,  1794,  8vo. 

Idem,  Versuch  einer  pragm.  Geschichte  der 
Arzeneikunde.  Halle,  1792,  1803,  1821.  Also 
the  last  edition  by  Dr.  Rosenbaum,  Leipzig,  184G, 
8vo.  i.   §37-45. 

Idem,  Histor.  Rei  Ilerbar.  lib.  i.  cap.  i.  Flora 
Biblica. 

Bartholiui,  Thom.,  De  morbis  biblicis,  miscelhv 
nea  medica,  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxx.  p.  1521. 

Idem,  Paralijtici  novi  Testainenti,  in  Ugolini, 
vol.  xxx.  p.  1459. 

Schmidt,  Joh.  Jac,  BibUscher  Medicos.  Ziil- 
lichau,  1743,  8vo.  p.  761. 

Kail,  De  morbis  sacerciot.  V.  T.^Hafn.  1745.  4to. 

Keinhard,  Chr.  Tob.  Ephr.,  Bibelkranklioiten, 
welche  ini  alten  Testamentc  vorkommen.  Books 
i.  and  ii.  1767,  8vo.  p.  384.  Book  v.  1768,  8vo. 
p.  244. 

Chapter,  Thomas,  Medica  sacra,  or  short  exposi- 
tions of  the  more  important  diseases  mentioned 
in  the  sacred  loritings.     London,  1834. 

Wundeibar,  R.  J.,  Biblisch-talinudische  Medi- 
cin, in  4  parts,  Riga,  1850-3,  8vo.  Also  new 
series,  1857. 

Celsius,  01.,  Hierobotanicon  s.  de  plantis  sacrce 
so'iptura;  dissertationes  breves.  2  Pails.  Upsal, 
1745,  1747.  8vo.     Amstelod.  1748. 

Bochart,  Sam.,  Hierozoicon  s.  bipartitum  opus 
de  unimalihus  sacrce  scripturw.  London,  1665, 
fol.  Francf<»1675.  fol.  Also  edited  by,  and  with 
the  notes  oi',  Ern.  F.  G,  Rosenmiiller,  Lips.  1793, 
3  vols.  4to. 

Spencer,  Do  legibus  Hebraeorum  ritualibus.  Tu- 
bingen, 1732,  fol. 

Reinhard,  Mich.  H.,  De  cibis  Hcbrce  rum  prohi- 
bitii ;  Diss.  I.  respon.  Seb.  iiuller.  Viteb.  1697, 
4to.— Diss.  //.  respon.  Chr.  Liske,  ibid.  1697, 
4to. 

Eschenbach,  Chr.  Ehrenfr.,  Progr.  de  lepra 
Judaiorum.  Rostock,  1774.  4to.  in  his  Scripta 
medic,  bibl.  p.  17-41. 

Schilline,  G.  G.  De  lepra  commentationes,  rec. 
J.  D.  Hahn,  Lugd.  Bat.  1788,  8vo. 

Chamseru,  R.,  liecherches  sur  le  veritable 
cnractere  de  la  lepre  des  Hebreux,  in  Mem.  de  la 
Soc.  medic,  d' emulation  de  Paris,  1810,  iii.  335. 


'  This  writer  has  several  monographs  of  much  interest 
on  detached  points,  all  to  be  found  in  his  Dissertationes 
Acad.  Medic.    Jena,  17th  and  18th  centuries. 

'  This  writer  is  remarkable  for  carefully  abstaining 
from  any  rtfcrence  to  the  0.  T.,  even  where  such  would 
bo  most  apposite. 

"  The  writer  wishes  to  acknowledfce  his  obligations  to 
Iir.  UoUeston,  Linacre  Profos.<:or  of  I'hysiology ;  Dr.  Greon- 
hill  of  Hastings;  Dr.  Adams,  editor  of  several  of  the 
Sydenham  Society's  puWications ;    Mr.  H.   Rumsey  of 


MEGIDDO 

Relation  Cliirurgicale  De  l' Annie  dc  I' Orient, 
Paris,  1804. 

Wedel,'  Geo.  W.,  De  lepra  in  sucris,  Jena, 
1715.  4to.  in  his  Exercitat  med.  philolog.  Cent. 
II.  dec.  4.  S.  93-107. 

Idem,  Dc  morb.  HiskicB,  Jena,  1692,  4to  in 
his  Exercit.  med.  philol.  Cent.  I.  Dec.  7. 

Idem,  De  morbo  Jorami  exercit.  I.  IT.  Jen. 
1717.  4to.  in  his  Exercit.  med.  philol.  Cent.  II. 
Dec.  5. 

Idem,  De  Saulo  energumeno,  Jena,  1685,  in 
his  Exeroitat.  med,  jphilol.  Cent.  I.  dec.  II. 

Idem,  De  itwrbis  senum  Solomonwis,  Jen. 
1686,  4to.  in  his  Exercit.  med.  phil.  Cent.  1. 
dec.  3. 

Liclitensteiu,  Versuch,  cf'c.  in  Eichhorn's  Allgem. 
Bibliothek,  VI.  407-67. 

Mead,  Dr.  R.,  Medica  Sacra.     4to.     London. 

Gudius,  G.  F.,  Exercitatio  philologica  de  He- 
braica  obstetricum  oriqine,  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxx. 
p.  1061. 

Kail,  Dc  obstetricibus  matrum  Ilchrceorum  in 
jEgypto.     Hamburg,  1746,  4to. 

Israels,  Dr.  A.  H., '  Tentamen  historico-me- 
dicum,  exhibens  collectanea  Gyiuecologica,  quce  ex 
Talmude  Babijlonico  depromsit.  Gioninaien, 
1845,  8vo.  [H.  H.]» 

ME'EDA  (MeeSSa  :  Mcedda)  =  MEHIDA 
(1  Esdr.  v.  32j. 

MEGID'DO  ('njp;  in  Zech.  xii.  11,  fnJO  ; 

in  the  LXX.  Ma7e55u)  or  MayeSoo)!/,  except  in 
1  K.  ix.  15,  where  it  is  MaySw)  was  in  a  very 
marked  position  on  the  southern  rim  of  the  plain 
of  KSDiiAELON,  on  the  frontier-line  (speaking  gene- 
rally) of  the  territories  of  the  tribes  of  Issachau 
and  Maxasseii,  and  commanding  one  of  those 
passes  from  the  north  into  the  hill-country  which 
weie  of  such  critical  importance  on  various  occa- 
sions in  the  histoiy  of  Judaea  (ras  avafidcreis  rris 
opeivrjs,  oTi  Si'  avrciv  ■jqv  T]  e'iffoSos  e(S  Trjv 
'lovSaiav,  Judith  iv.  7). 

Megiddo  is  usually  spoken  of  in  connexion  with 
Taanach,  and  frequently  in  connexion  with  Betii- 
SHAN  and  Jezreel.  This  combination  suggests 
a  wide  view  alike  over  Jewish  scenery  and  Jewish 
history.  The  first  mention  occurs  in  Josh.  xii.  21, 
where  Megiddo  appears  as  the  city  of  one  of  the 
"  thirty  and  one  kings,"  or  petty  chieftains,  whom 
Joshua  defeated  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan.  This  was 
one  of  the  places  within  the  limits  of  Issachar  assigned 
to  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvii.  11  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  29).  "But 
the  arrangement  gave  only  an  imperfect  advantage 
to  the  latter  tribe,  lor  they  did  not  drive  out  the 
Canaanites,  and  were  only  able  to  make  them  tri- 
butary (Josh.  xvii.  12,  13  ;  Judg.  i.  27,  28).  The 
song  of  Deborah  brings  the  place  \'ivid]y  before  us, 
as  the  scene  of  the  great  conflict  between  Sisera 
and  Barak.  The  chariots  of  Sisera  were  gathered 
"  unto  the  river  of  Kishon"  (Judg.  iv.  13)  ;  Barak 
went  down  with  his  men  "from  Mount  Tabor  " 


Cheltenham,  and  Mr.  J.  Cooper  Forster  of  Guy's  Hospital, 
London,  for  their  kindness  in  revising  and  correcting  this 
article,  and  that  on  Lepkosy,  in  their  passage  through  the 
press ;  at  the  same  time  that  he  does  not  wish  to  imply 
any  responsibility  on  their  part  for  the  opinions  or  state- 
ments contained  in  them,  save  so  far  as  they  are  referred 
to  by  name.  Dr.  Robert  Sim  has  also  greatly  assisted 
him  with  the  results  of  large  actual  experience  in  Oriental 
pathology. 


MEGIDDO 

into  the  plain  (iv.  14);  "then  fought  the  kings  of 
(Janaaa  in  Taanach  by  tlie  waters  of  Megiddo" 
(v.  19).  The  course  of  the  Kishon  is  immediately 
in  front  of  this  position  ;  and  the  river  seems  to 
have  been  flooded  by  a  storm :  hence  what  fol- 
lows : — "  The  river  of  Kishon  swept  them  away, 
that  ancient  river,  the  river  Kishon"  (v.  21). 
Still  we  do  not  read  of  Megiddo  being  firmly  in  the 
occupation  of  the  Israelites,  and  perhaps  it  was  not 
really  so  till  the  time  of  Solomon.  That  monarch 
placed  one  of  his  twelve  commissariat  officers, 
named  Baana,  over  "  Taanach  and  Megiddo,"  with 
the  neighbourhood  of  13eth-shean  and  Jezreel  (1  K. 
iv.  12).  In  this  reign  it  appears  that  some  costly 
works  were  constructed  at  Megiddo  (ix.  15).  These 
were  probably  ibrtifications,  suggested  by  its  im- 
portant military  position.  All  the  subsequent  no- 
tices of  the  place  are  connected  with  military 
transactions.  To  this  place  Ahaziah  fled  when  his 
unfortunate  visit  to  Joram  had  brought  him  into 
collision  with  Jehu  ;  and  here  he  died  (2  K.  ix.  27) 
within  the  confines  oi"  what  is  elsewhere  called 
Samaria  (2  Chr.  xxii.  9). 

But  the  chief  historical  interest  of  Megiddo  is 
concentrated  in  Josiah's  death.  When  Pharaoh- 
Necho  came  fi-om  Egypt  against  the  king  of  As- 
syria, Josiah  joined  the  latter,  and  was  slain  at 
Megiddo  (2  K.  xxiii.  29),  and  his  body  was  carried 
from  thenee  to  Jerusalem  {ib.  30).  The  story  is 
told  in  the  Chronicles  in  more  detail  (2  Chr. 
XXXV.  22-24).  There  the  fatal  action  is  said  to  have 
taken  place  "  in  the  valley  of  Megiddo."  The 
words  in  the  LXX.  are,  iv  rai  ireSia)  ^[ayeSSdov. 
This  calamity  made  a  deep  and  permanent  imjjres- 
sion  on  the  Jews.  It  is  recounted  again  in  1  Esd. 
i.  25-31,  where  in  the  A.  V.  "the  plain  of  Ma- 
giddo"  represents  the  same  Greek  words.  The 
lamentations  for  this  good  king  became  "  an  ordi- 
nance in  Israel"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25).  "  In  all 
Jewry"  they  mouraed  for  him,  and  the  lamentation 
was  made  perpetual  "in  all  the  nation  of  Israel" 
(1  Esd.  i.  32).  "  Their  grief  was  no  land-flood  of 
present  passion,  but  a  constant  channell  of  continued 
sorrow,  streaming  from  an  annuall  fountain  "  (Ful- 
ler's Fisgah  Siijht  of  Palestine,  p.  165).  Thus,  in 
the  language  of  the  prophets  (Zech.  xii.  11),  "the 
mourning  of  Hadadrimmon  in  the  valley  (ireSiijj, 
LXX.)  of  Megiddou"  becomes  a  poetical  expression 
for  the  deepest  and  most  despairing  grief;  as  in  the 
Apocalypse  (Rev.  xvi.  16)  Armageddon,  in  con- 
tinuance of  the  same  imagery,  is  presented  as  the 
scene  of  terrible  and  final  conflict.  For  the  Septua- 
gintal  version  of  this  passage  of  Zechariah  we  may 
refer  to  Jerome's  note  on  the  passage.  "  Adad- 
remmon,  pro  quo  LXX.  transtuleruut  '^oSivos,  urbs 
est  juxta  Jesraelem,  quae  hoc  olim  vocabulo  nun- 
capata  est,  et  hodie  vocatur  Maximianopolis  in 
Campo  Mageddon."  That  the  prophet's  imagery 
is  drawn  from  the  occasion  of  Josiah's  death  thei-e 
can  be  no  doubt.  In  Stanley's  S.  ^  P.  (p.  347) 
this  calamitous  event  is  made  very  vivid  to  us  by 
an  allusion  to  the  "  Egyptian  archers,  in  their  long 
array,  so  well  known  from  their  sculptured  monu- 
ments." For  the  mistake  in  the  account  of  Pharaoh- 
Nccho's  campaign  in  Herodotus,  who  has  evidently 
put  Migdol  by  mistake  fo.r  Megiddo  (ii.  159),  it  is 
enough  to  refer  to  Biihr's  excursus  on  the  passage. 
The  Egyptian  king  may  have  landed  his  troops  at 
Acre ;  but  it  is  far  more  likely  that  he  marched 
noi-th wards  along  the  coast- plain,  and  then  turned 
round  Carmel  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  taking 
the  left  bank  of  the  Ivishou,  tuid  that  there  the 


MEGIDDON,  THE  VALLEY  OF     311 

.Jewish  king  came  upon  liim  by  the  gorge  of 
Megiddo. 

The  site  thus  associated  with  critical  passages  of 
Jewish  history  from  Joshua  to  Josiah  has  been 
identified  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt.  Robinson 
did  not  visit  this  corner  of  the  plain  on  his  first 
journey,  but  he  was  brought  confidently  to  the 
conclusion  that  Megiddo  was  the  modern  el-LeJjun, 
which  is  undoubtedly  the  Legio  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome,  an  important  and  well-known  place  in 
their  day,  since  they  assume  it  as  a  central  point 
from  which  to  mark  the  position  of  several  other 
places '  in  this  quarter  (^Bib.  lies.  ii.  328-330). 
Two  of  the  distances  are  given  thus  :  1 5  miles  from 
Niizareth  and  4  from  Taanach.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  identification  is  substantially  correct. 
The  p.4ya  ireSiov  Aeyecovos  {Onomast.  s.  v.  Ta^a- 
Qdv)  evidently  corresponds  with  the  "  plain  (or 
valley)  of  Megiddo"  of  the  0.  T.  Moreover  el- 
Lejjun  is  on  the  caravan-route  from  Egypt  to  Da- 
mascus, and  traces  of  a  lioman  road  are  found  near 
the  village.  Van  de  Velde  visited  the  spot  in  1852, 
approaching  it  through  the  hills  from  the  S.W. 
He  describes  the  view  of  the  plain  as  seen  from  the 
highest  point  between  it  and  the  sea, and  the  huge  tells 
which  mark  the  positions  of  the  "  key-fortresses " 
of  the  hills  and  the  plain,  Taanuk  and  el-Lejjun, 
the  latter  being  the  most  considerable,  and  having 
another  called  Tell-Metzellim,  half  an  hour  to  the 
N.W.  {Sijr.  ^  Pal.  i.  350-356).  About  a  month 
later  in  the  same  year  Dr.  Robinson  was  there,  and 
convinced  himself  of  the  correctness  of  his  former 
opinion.  He  too  describes  the  view  over  the  plain, 
northwards  to  the  wooded  hills  of  Galilee,  eastwards 
to  Jezreel,  and  southwards  to  Taanach,  Tell-Met- 
zelllm  being  also  mentioned  as  on  a  projecting  por- 
tion of  the  hills  which  are  continuous  with  Carmel, 
the  Kishon  being  just  below  {Bib.  Res.  ii.  116- 
119).  Both  writers  mention  a  copious  stream 
flowing  down  this  gorge  (March  and  April),  and 
turning  some  mills  before  joining  the  Kishon.  Here 
are  probably  the  "  waters  of  Megiddo  "  of  Judg.  v. 
19,  though  it  should  be  added  that  by  Professor 
Stanley  {S.  4'  P-  p.  339)  they  are  supposed  rather 
to  be  "  the  pools  in  the  bed  of  the  Kishon"  itself. 
The  same  author  regards  the  "  plain  (or  valley)  of 
Megiddo "  as  denoting  not  the  whole  of  the  Es- 
draelon level,  but  that  broadest  part  of  it  which  is 
immediately  opposite  the  place  we  are  describing 
(pp.  335,  336). 

The  passage  quoted  above  fi'om  Jerome  suggests 
a  further  question,  viz.  whether  Von  Raumer  is 
right  in  "  identifying  el-Lcjjun  also  with  Maxi- 
mianopolis, which  the  Jerusalem  Itinerary  places 
at  20  miles  from  Caesarea  and  10  from  Jezreel." 
Van  de  Velde  (Memoir,  p.  333)  holds  this  view  to 
be  correct.  He  thinks  he  has  found  the  tme 
Hadadrimmon  in  a  place  called  Rummaneh,  "  at 
the  foot  of  the  Megiddo-hills,  in  a  notch  or  valley 
about  an  hour  and  a  half  S.  of  Tell-Metzellim" 
and  would  place  the  old  fortified  Megiddo  on  this 
tell  itself,  suggesting  further  that  its  name,  "  the 
tell  of  the  Governor,"  may  possibly  retain  a  remi- 
niscence of  Solomon's  officer,  Ba;ma  the  son  of 
Ahilud.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MEGIDDON,  THE  VALLEY  OF  (DVpH 
j'nJO:  TreSiev  iKKOTTToixevov:  campus  Mageddon). 
The  extended  form  of  the  preceding  name.  It  occurs 
only  in  Zech.  xii.  11.  In  two  other  cases  the  LXX. 
retain  the  n  at  the  end  of  tlie  name,  viz.  2  K.  is. 
27,  and  2  Chr.  xxxv.  22,  though  it  is  not  their 


312 


MEHETABEEL 


general  custom.     In  this  passage  it  will  be  observed 
that  they  have  translated  the  word.  [G.] 

MEHETABEEL  (bxitSJ-nO :  MeraiSe^A.; 
Ale.x.  M€7/Ta;367JX :  Mctahccl).  Another  and  less 
correct  form  oI'Mehetabel.  The  ancestor  of 
Shemaiah  the  prophet  who  was  hired  against  Ne- 
hemiah  by  Tobiah  and  Sanballat  (Neh.  vi.  10). 
He  was  probably  of  priestly  descent ;  and  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  Delaiah,  who  is  called  his  son,  is  the 
same  as  the  head  of  the  23rd  course  of  priests  in 
the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  18). 

MEHE'TABEL  ('?X2D''nO:  Samaritan  Cod. 
^N^DTIO :  MereySeijA  :  ilcetabel).  The  daughter 
of  JIatred,  and  wife  of  Hadad,  or  Hadar,  the  eighth 
and  last-mentioned  king  of  Edom,  who  had  Pai  or 
Pau  for  his  birthplace  or  chief  city,  before  royalty 
was  established  among  the  Israelites  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
39).  Jerome  {de  Nomin.  Hebr.)  writes  the  name 
in  the  form  Mettabel,  which  he  renders  "  quam 
bonus  est  Deus." 

ME'HIDA  iNTTlD  :  UaovZd. ;  Alex.  M«S(£  ; 
in  Ezr.  Mi5a  ;  Alex.  MtejSa  in  Neh.:  Mahida), 
a  family  of  Nethinim,  the  descendants  of  Mehida, 
leturned  fi-om  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
52  ;  Neh.  vii.  54).  In  1  Esdr.  the  name  occurs  in 
the  form  Meeda. 

MEHI'R  (THD:  Max'tp;  Alex.  Max^lp : 
Mahir),  the  son  of  Chelub,  the  brother  of  Shuah, 
or  as  he  is  described  in  the  LXX.,  "  Caleb  the  father 
of  Ascha"  (1  Chr.  iv.  11).  In  the  Taigum  of  R. 
Joseph,  Jlehir  appears  as  "  Perug,"  its  Chaldee 
equivalent,  both  words  signifying  "  price." 

MEHOL'ATHITE,  THE  Cnynsn :  Alex. 
6  /xo6v\adfir7is  ;  Vat.  omits :  Molathita),  a  word 
occurring  once  only  (1  .'^am.  xviii.  19),  as  the  de- 
sciiption  of  Adriel,  son  of  Barzillai,  to  whom  Saul's 
daughter  Merab  was  married.  It  no  doubt  denotes 
that  he  belonged  to  a  place  called  Meholah,  but 
whether  that  was  Abel-Meholah  afterwards  the 
native  place  of  Elisha,  or  another,  is  as  uncertain  as 
it  is  whether  Adriel's  father  was  the  well-known 
Barzillai  the  Gileadite  or  not.  [G.] 

MEHU'JAEL  (b'^'^n'O  and  ^^"nO  :  Ma\e- 
\ii\\ ;  Alex.  MaiVjA :  Maviael),  the  son  of  Irad, 
and  fourth  in  descent  from  Cain  (Gen.  iv.  18). 
Ewald,  regarding  the  genealogies  in  Gen.  .v.  and  v. 
as  substantially  the  same,  follows  the  Vat.  LXX., 
considering  Mahalaleel  as  the  true  reading,  and  the 
variation  from  it  the  result  of  careless  transcrip- 
tion. It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  this  is  a 
gratuitous  assumption.  Tlie  Targura  of  Onkelos 
follows  the  Hebrew  even  in  the  various  forms  which 
the  name  assumes  in  the  same  verse.  The  Peshito- 
Syriac,  Vulgate,  and  a  few  MSS.  retain  the  former 
of  the  two  readings ;  while  the  Sam.  text  reads 
?Xn''D,  which  appears  to  have  been  followed  by 


»  The  instances  of  H  being  employed  to  render  the 
strange  Hebrew  guttural  Ain  are  not  frequent  in  the  A.  V. 
"  Hebrew "  (^"IDJ?)  —  which  in  earlier  versions  was 
"Ebrew"  (comp.  Shakspere,  Henry  IV.  Part  I.  Act  2, 
Sc.  4) — is  oftenest  encountered. 

^  \x^,  Ma'an,  all  but  identical  with  the  Hebrew 
Mami. 

<:  Here  the  Celliib.  or  original  Hebrew  text,  has  Heinim, 
which  Is  nearer  the  Greek  equivalent  than  Meunim  or 
Meanim. 


MEHUNIMS 

the  Aldiue  and  Complutensian  editions,  and  the 
Alex.  MS.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEH'UMAN  (^p-inp:  'Aiidv:  Maumam), 
one  of  the  seven  eunuchs  (A.  V.  "chamberlains,") 
who  served  before  AJiasuerus  (Esth.  i.  10).     The 

LXX.  appear  to  have  read  \'Orh  for  ]0'"inp^. 

MEH'UNIM  (□'•JiyO,  without  tlie  article: 
Wiavwiiiiiv  ;  Alex.  Moovvfifji-.^Munirn),  Ezr.  ii.  50. 
Elsewhere  called  Mehunims  and  Mednim  ;  and  in 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  Meani. 

MEH'UNIMS,   THE    (n^>1J?»n,    i.  e.    the 

Me'unim :  ol  Mnvaioi ;  Alex,  of  Mivatot :  Am- 
monitae),  a  people  against  whom  king  Uzziah  waged 
a  successful  war  (2  Chr.  xx^a.  7).  Although  so 
different  in  its  English"  dress,  yet  the  name  is  in 
the  original  merely  the  plural  of  Maon  (flVD),  a 
nation  named  amongst  those  who  in  the  earlier  days 
of  their  settlement  in  Palestine  harassed  and  op- 
pressed Isi'ael,  Maon,  or  the  Maonites,  probably 
inhabited  the  country  at  the  back  of  the  great 
range  of  Seir,  the  modern  esh-Sherah,  which  foiins 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Wady  el-Arahah,  where  at 
the  present  day  there  is  still  a  town  of  the  same 
name''  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  Aug.  24).  And  this  is 
quite  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  2  Chr.  xxvi.  7, 
where  the  Mehunim  are  mentioned  with  "  the  Ara- 
bians of  Gur-baal,"  or,  as  the  LXX.  render  it,  Petra. 

Another  notice  of  the  Mehunims  in  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  (cir.  B.C.  726-697)  is  found  in  1  Chr.  iv. 
41.'-'  Here  they  are  spoken  of  as  a  pastoral  people, 
either  themselves  Hamites,  or  in  alliance  with  Ha- 
mites,  quiet  and  peaceable,  dwelling  in  tents.  They 
had  been  settled  from  "  of  old,"  i.  e.  aboriginallj'', 
at  the  east  end  of  the  Valley  of  Gedor  or  Gerar,  in 
tlie  wilderness  south  of  Palestine.  A  connexion  with 
Mount  Seir  is  hinted  at,  though  obscurely  ( ver.  42). 
[See  vol.  i.  p.  669  «.]  Here,  however,  the  A.  V. 
— probably  following  the  translations  of  Luther  and 
Junius,  which  in  their  turn  follow  the  Targum — 
treats  the  word  as  an  ordinary  noun,  and  renders 
it  "habitations;"  a  reading  now  relinquished  by 
scholars,  who  understand  the  word  to  refer  to  the 
people  in  question  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1002a,  and 
Notes  on  Vurckhardt,  1069;  Bertheau,   Chronik). 

A  third  notice  of  the  Mehunim,  corroborative  of 
those  already  mentioned,  is  found  in  the  narrative 
of  2  Chr.  XX.  There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that 
in  ver.  1  "  the  Ammonites"  should  be  read  as  "  the 
^  Maonites,"  who  in  that  case  are  the  "  men  of  Mount 
Seir"  mentioned  later  in  the  narrative  (ver.  10,  22). 

In  all  these  passages,  including  the  last,  the  LXX. 
render  the  name  by  ol  Meivatoi — the  Minaeans — a 
nation  of  Arabia  lenowned  for  their  traflic  in  spices, 
who  are  named  by  Strabo,  Ptolemy,  and  other 
ancient  geographers,  and  whose  seat  is  now  ascer- 
tained to  have  been  the  S.W.  portion  of  the  great 
Arabian  peninsula,  the  western  half  of  the  modern 
Hadramaut    {Diet,    of    Geography,    "  Minaei "). 

d  The  text  of  this  passage  is  accurately  as  follows : — 
"  The  children  of  Bloab  and  the  children  of  Ammon,  and 
wi  th  them  of  the  Ammonites ;"  the  words  "  other  beside  " 
being  Interpolated  by  our  translators. 

The  change  from  "  Ammonites  "  to  "  Mehunim  "  is  not 
so  violent  as  it  looks  to  an  English  reader.  It  is  a  simple 
transposition  of  two  letters,  D'JiyO  f"r  D''J')JDy;  and 
it  is  supported  by  the  LXX  ,  and  by  Jowplnis  {Aid.  ix.  1, 
§2,'Apaj3es);  and  by  modern  scholars,  as  De  \Vette(/?i6e7), 
Ewald  (Gesch.  in.  474,  note).  A  reverse  transposition 
will  be  found  in  the  Syriac  version  of  Judg.  x.  12,  where 


MEHUNIMS 

Bochai't  has  pointed  out  {Fhale<i,  ii.  cap.  xxii.), 
with  reason,  tliat  distance  alone  renders  it  im- 
possible that  these  IMinaeans  can  be  the  IMeunim 
of  the  Bible,  and  also  that  the  people  of  the 
Arabian  peninsula  are  Shemites,  while  the  Meunim 
appear  to  have  been  descended  from  Ham  (\  Chr. 
iv.  41).  But  with  his  usual  turn  for  etymological 
speculation  he  endeavours  nevertheless  to  establish 
an  identity  between  the  two,  on  the  ground  that 
Cam  al-Manasil,  a  place  two  days'  journey  south 
of  Mecca,  one  of  the  towns  of  the  Minaeans,  signifies 
the  "  horn  of  habitations,"  and  might  theietore  be 
equivalent  to  the  Hebrew  Mconini. 

Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  10,  §o)  calls  them  "  the  Arabs 
who  adjoined  Egypt,"  and  speaks  of  a  city  built 
by  Uzziah  on  the  Red  Sea  to  overawe  them. 

Ewald  {Gcschichte,  i.  323 note)  suggests  that 
the  southern  Minaeans  were  a  colony  from  the 
Maonites  of  Mount  Seir,  who  in  their  turn  he 
appears  to  consider  a  remnant  of  the  Amorites  (see 
the  text  of  the  same  page). 

That  the  Minaeans  were  familiar  to  the  translators 
of  the  LXX.  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  they  not 
only  introduce  the  name  on  the  occasions  already 
mentioned,  but  that  they  further  use  it  as  equivalent 
to  Naamatiute.  Zophar  the  Naamathite,  one  of 
the  three  friends  of  Job,  is  by  them  presented  as 
"  Sophar  the  Minaean,"  and  "  Sophar  king  of  the 
Minaeans."  In  this  connexion  it  is  not  unworthy 
of  notice  that  as  there  was  a  town  called  JIaou  in 
the  mountain-district  of  Judah,  so  there  was  one 
called  Naaraah  in  the  lowland  of  the  same  tribe. 
El-Minydy,  which  is,  or  was,  the  first  station  south 
of  Gaza,  is  probably  identical  with  Minois,  a  place 
mentioned  with  distinction  in  the  Christian  records 
of  Palestine  in  the  5th  and  6th  centuries  (Reland, 
Falaestina,  899  ;  LeQuien,  Oriens  Christ,  iii.  669), 
and  both  may  retain  a  trace  of  the  Minaeans. 
Baal-meon,  a  town  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  near 
Heshbon,  still  called  Ma  in,  probably  also  retains  a 
trace  of  the  presence  of  the  Maonites  or  Mehunim 
north  of  their  proper  locality. 

The  latest  appearance  of  the  name  Meiiunims 
in  the  Bible  is  in  the  lists  of  those  who  returned 
from  the  Captivity  with  Zerubbabel.  Amongst  the 
non-Israelites  fi-om  whom  the  Nethinim — following 
the  precedent  of  what  seems  to  have  been  the 
foundation  of  the  ^  order — were  made  up,  we  find 
their  name  (Ezr.  ii.  50,  A.  V.  "  Mehunim  ;"  Neh. 
vii.  52,  A.  V.  "  Meunim").  Here  they  are  men- 
tioned with  the  Nephishim,  or  descendants  of 
Naphish,  an  Ishmaelite  people  whose  seat  appears 
to  have  been  on  the  east  of  Palestine  (1  Chr.  v.  19), 
and  therefore  certainly  not  far  distant  from  Ma'un 
the  chief  city  of  the  Maonites.  [G.] 


"  Ammon  "  is  read  for  the  "  Maon  "  of  the  Hebrew.  The 
LXX.  make  the  change  again  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  8 ;  but  here 
there  is  no  apparent  occasion  for  it. 

The  Jewish  gloss  on  2  Chr.  xx.  1  is  curious.  "  By 
Ammonites  Edomites  are  meant,  who,  out  of  respect  for 
the  fraternal  relalion  between  the  two  nations,  would  not 
come  against  Israel  in  their  own  dress,  but  disguised  them- 
selves as  Ammonites."    (Jerome,  Quaesl.  Ilebr.  ad  loc.) 

e  The  Institution  of  the  Nethiiiim,  i.  e.  "  the  given 
ones,"  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  Midianite  war 
(Num.  xxxi.)>  when  a  certain  portion  of  the  captives  was 
"given"  (the  word  In  the  original  is  the  same)  to  the 
IjCvites  who  kept  the  charge  of  the  Sacred  Tent  (vcr.  30, 
47).  The  Gibeonitos  wore  probably  the  next  accession, 
and  the  invaluable  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemlah  alluded  to 
above  seem  to  show  that  the  captivt's  from  many  a  foreign 
nation  went  to  swell  the  numbers  of  the  Order.     Sec 


MELCHIAS  313 

ME-JAR'KON  (|ip"l*n  ''D  :  edAatraa  'Upd- 
Kwv :  Aquae  Jercon),  a  town  in  the  territory  of 
L)an  (Josh.  xix.  46  only) ;  named  next  in  order  to 
(iath-rimmon,  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Joppa 
or  Japho.  The  lexicographers  interpret  the  name 
as  meaning  "  the  yellow  waters."  No  attempt  hits 
been  made  to  identify  it  with  any  existing  site.  It 
is  difficult  not  to  suspect  that  the  name  .following 
that  of  Me-hajjarkon,  har-Rakon  (A.  V.  I-fakkon),  is 
a  mere  corrupt  repetition  thereof,  as  the  two  bear  a 
very  close  similarity  to  each  other,  and  occur  no- 
where else.  [G.] 

MEKO'NAH  (Hibn  ^:  LXX.  omits:  Mochona), 
one  of  the  towns  which  were  re-inhabited  after  the 
captivity  by  the  men  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi.  28).  From 
its  being  coupled  with  Ziklag,  we  should  infer  that  it 
was  situated  tar  to  the  south,  while  the  mention  of 
the  "  daughter  towns"  (nii3,  A.  V.  "  villages") 
dependent  on  it,  seem  to  show  that  it  was  a  place  of 
some  magnitude.  Mekonah  is  not  mentioned  else- 
where, and  it  does  not  appear  that  any  name  corre- 
sponding with  it  has  been  yet  discovered.  The 
conjecture  of  Schwarz — that  it  is  identical  with  the 
Mechanum,  which  Jerome''  {Onomasticon,  "  Beth- 
macha  ")  locates  between  Eleutheropolis  and  Jeru- 
salem, at  eight  miles  from  the  former — is  entirely 
at  variance  with  the  above  inference.  [G.] 

MELATI'AH  (.Tpbp  :  MaXrias  :  Mcltias), 
a  Gibeonite,  who,  with  the  men  of  Gibeon  and 
Slizpah,  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jeru- 
salem under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  7). 

MEL'CHI  {MeXxei  in  Vat.  and  Alex.  MSS.  ; 
MeAxi,  Tisch. :  Melchi).  1.  The  son  of  Janna, 
and  ancestor  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Luke  iii.  24).-  In  the  list  given  by  Afri- 
canus  Melchi  appears  as  the  father,  of  Heli,  "the  in- 
tervening Levi  and  Matthat  being  omitted  (Hervey, 
Geneal.  p.  137). 

2.  The  son  of  Addi  in  the  same  genealogy  (Luke 
iii.  28). 

MELCHI'AH  (nj3^a:  MeAxias:  Mdchias), 
a  priest,  the  father  of  Pashur  (Jer.  xxi.  1).  He 
is  elsewhere  called  Malchiah  and  Malchijah.  (See 
Malchiah  7,  and  Malchijah  1.) 

MELCHI' AS  (MeAx'os :  Melchias).  1.  The 
same  as  Malchiah  2  (1  Esdr.  ix.  26). 

2.  =  Malchiah  3  and  Malchijah  4  (1  Esdr. 
ix.  32). 

3.  (Malachias).  The  same  as  Malchiah  6 
(1  Esdr.  ix.  44). 


Mehunim,  Nephusim,  Harsha,  Sisera,  and  other  foreign 
names  contained  in  these  lists. 

"  Our  translators  have  here  represented  the  Hebrew 
Caph  by  K,  which  they  usually  reserve  for  the  Kopli. 
Other  instances  are  Kitiilish  and  Kittim. 

b  This  passage  of  Jerome  is  one  of  those  which  com- 
pletely startle  the  reader,  and  incline  him  to  mistrust 
altogether  Jerome's  knowledge  of  sacred  topographj'.  He 
actually  places  the  Beth-niaacha,  in  which  Joab  besieged 
Sheba  the  son  of  Bichvi,  and  which  was  one  of  the  first 
places  taken  by  Tiglath-Pileser  on  his  entrance  into  the 
north  of  Palestine,  aniung  the  mountains  of  Judah,  south 
of  Jerusalem !  A  mistake  of  the  same  kind  is  found  In 
Benjumin  of  Tudela  and  Hap-Parchi,  who  place  the  Maon 
of  David's  adventures  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount 
Carmcl. 


314 


MELCHIEL 


MEL'CHIEL     {MeAx^iriX).       Chavmis,    the 

son  of  Melchiel,  was  cue  of  the  three  governors  of 
Bethulia  (Jud.  vi.  15).  The  Vulgate  has  a  dif- 
ferent reading,  and  the  Peshito  gives  the  name 
Manshajel. 

MELCHI'SEDEC  (mxx^ffeS^K),  the  form 
of  the  name  Melchizedek  adopted  in  the  A.V.  of 
the  New  Testament  (Heb.  v.  vi.  ^^i). 

MELCHI-SHUA  Cy-ltT^a'pp,  i.  e.  Malehishua : 

MeAxeto-a;  Alex.  MeA.X"''''"^  !  Joseph.  MeA-x'"""^  = 
Melchisua),  a  son  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  siv.  49,  xxxi.  2), 
An  eiToneous  manner  of  represeutmg  the  name, 
which  is  elsewhere  correctly  given  Malchishua. 

MELCHIZ'EDEK  (pnV-i3^?D,  i.  e.  Malci- 
tzedek:  MeAxureSfK: :  Mclchisedech),  Icing  of 
Salem  and  priest  of  the  Most  High  God,  who 
met  Abram  in  the  valley  of  Shaveh  [or,  the  level 
valley],  which  is  the  king's  valley,  brought  out 
bread  and  wine,  blessed  Abiam,  and  received 
tithes  from  him  (Gen.  .xiv.  18-20.).  The  other 
places  in  which  Melchizedek  is  mentioned  are  Ps. 
ex.  4,  where  Messiah  is  described  as  a  priest  for  ever, 
"  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,"  and  Heb.  v.,vi., 
\ii.,  where  these  two  passages  of  the  0.  T.  are 
quoted,  and  the  typical  relation  of  Melchizedek  to 
our  Lord  is  stated  at  great  length. 

There  is  something  surprising  and  mysterious  in 
the  first  appearance  of  Jlelchizedek,  and  in  the  sub- 
sequent references  to  him.  Bearing  a  title  which 
Jews  in  after  ages  would  recognize  as  designating 
their  own  sovereign,  bearing  gifts  which  recall  to 
Christians  the  Lord's  Supper,  this  Canaanite  crosses 
for  a  moment  the  path  of  Abram,  and  is  unhe- 
sitatingly recognized  as  a  person  of  higher  spiritual 
rank  than  the  friend  of  God.  Disappearing  as  sud- 
denly as  he  came  in,  he  is  lost  to  the  sacred  writings 
for  a  thousand  years ;  and  then  a  few  emphatic  words 
for  another  moment  bring  him  into  sight  as  a  type 
of  the  coming  Lord  of  David.  Once  more,  after 
another  thousand  yeais,  the  Hebrew  Christians  are 
taught  to  see  in  him  a  proof  that  it  was  the  con- 
sistent purpose  of  God  to  abolish  the  Levitical 
priesthood.  His  person,  his  office,  his  relation  to 
Christ,  and  the  seat  of  his  sovereignty,  have  given 
rise  to  innumerable  discussions,  which  even  now  can 
scarcely  be  considered  as  settled. 

The  faith  of  early  ages  ventured  to  invest  his 
person  with  superstitious  awe.  Perhaps  it  would 
be  too  much  to  ascribe  to  mere  national  jealousy 
the  fact  that  Jewish  tradition,  as  recorded  in  the 
Targums  of  Pseudo-Jonathan  and  Jerusalem,  and 
in  Kashi  on  Gen.  xiv.,  in  some  cabalistic  {apud 
Bochart,  Phaleg,  pt.  1,  b.  ii.  1,  §69)  and  Rab- 
binical {ap.  Schottgen,  Hor.  Heh.  ii.  645)  wi-iters, 
pronounces  Melchizedek  to  be  a  survivor  of  the 
r»eluge,  the  patriarch  Shem,  authorised  by  the 
superior  dignity  of  old  age  to  bless  even  the  father 
of  the  faithful,  and  entitled,  as  the  paramount  loid 
of  Canaan  (Gen.  ix.  26)  to  convey  (xiv.  19)  his  right 
to  Abram.  Jerome  in  his  Ep.  Ixxiii.  ad  Evangelum 
{0pp.  i.  438),  which  is  entirely  devoted  to  a  con- 
sideration of  the  person  and  dwelling-place  of  Mel- 
chizedek, states  that  this  was  the  prevailing  opinion 
of  the  Jews  in  his  time ;  and  it  is  ascribed  to  the 
Sainaiitans  by  Epiphanius,  Haer.  Iv.  0,  p.  472.  It 
was  afterwards  embraced  by  Luther  and  Jlelanch- 
thon,  by  our  own  countiymen,  H.  Broughton, 
Selden,  Lightfoot  {Chor.  Marco praem.  ch.  x.  1,  §2), 
Jackson  {On  tlie  Creed,  b.  ix.  §2),  and  by  many 
others.     It  should  be  noted  that  this  sujiposition 


MELCHIZEDEK 

does  not  appear  in  the  Targum  of  Onkelos, — a  pre- 
sumption that  it  was  not  received  by  the  Jews 
till  after  the  Christian  era — nor  has  it  found 
favour  with  the  Fathers.  Equally  old,  perhaps, 
but  less  widely  diffused,  is  the  supposition  not 
unknown  to  Augustine  {Quaest.  in  Gen.  Ix.xii. — 
0pp.  hi.  396),  and  ascribed  by  Jerome  (I.  c.)  to 
Origen  and  Didymus,  that  Melchizedek  was  an 
angel.  The  Fathers  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  (;entu- 
ries  record  with  reprobation  the  tenet  of  the  Mel- 
chizedekians  that  he  was  a  Power,  Virtue,  or 
Influence  of  God  (August,  de  Ilaeresibus  §34, 
0pp.  viii.  11;  Theodoret,  Haerct.  fab.  ii.  6,  p. 
332  ;  Epiphan.  Haer.  Iv.  1,  p.  468  ;  compare  Cyril 
Alex.  Glapjh.  in  Gen.  ii.  p.  57)  superior  to  Christ 
(Chi-ysost.  Horn,  in  Melchiz.  0pp.  vi.  p.  269), 
and  the  not  less  daring  conjecture  of  Hieracas  and 
,his  followers  that  Melchizedek  was  the  Holy  Ghost 
(Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixvii.  3,  p.  711  and  Iv.  5,  p. 
472).  Epiphanius  also  mentions  (Iv.  7,  p.  474) 
some  members  of  the  church  as  holding  the  erro- 
neous opinion  that  Melchizedek  was  the  Son  of 
God  appearing  in  human  form,  an  opinion  which 
St.  Anilirose  (De  Abroli.  i.  §3,  0pp.  t.  i.  p.  288) 
seems  willing  to  receive,  and  which  has  been  adopted 
by  many  modern  critics.  Similar  to  this  was  a 
Jewish  opinion  that  he  was  the  Messiah  {apud  Dey- 
ling,  06s.  iSacr.  ii.  73,  Schottgen, /.  c. ;  compare  the 
Book  Sohar  ap.  Wolf,  Curae  Phil,  in  Heb.  vii.  1). 
Jlodern  writers  have  added  to  these  conjectures 
that  he  may  have  been  Ham  (Jurieu),  or  a  de- 
scendimt  of  Japhet  (Owen),  or  of  Shem  {apud 
Deyling,  /.  c),  or  even  Enoch  (Hulse),  or  Job 
(Kohlreis).  Other  guesses  may  be  found  in  Deyling 
{I.  c.)  and  in  Pfeifter  {De  persona  Melch. — 0pp. 
p.  51).  All  these  opinions  are  unauthorised  addi- 
tions to  Holy  Scripture — many  of  them  seem  to  be 
irreconcileable  with  it.  It  is  an  essential  part  of 
the  Apostle's  argument  (Heb.  vii.  6)  that  Mel- 
-chizedek is  "  without  father,"  and  that  his  "  pedi- 
gree is  not  counted  from  the  sons  of  Levi  ;"  so 
that  neither  their  ancestor  Shem,  nor  any  other 
son  of  Noah  can  be  identified  with  Melchizedek ; 
and  again,  the  statements  that  he  fulfilled  on  earth 
the  offices  of  Priest  and  King  and  that  he  was 
"made  like  unto  the  Son  of  God"  would  hardly 
have  been  predicated  of  a  Divine  Person.  The  way 
in  which  he  is  mentioned  in  Genesis  would  rather 
lead  to  the  immediate  inference  that  Melchizedek 
was  of  one  blood  with  the  children  of  Ham,  among 
whom  he  lived,  chief  (like  the  King  of  Sodom)  of  a 
settled  Canaanitish  tribe.  Perhaps  it  is  not  too 
much  to  infer  from  the  silence  of  Philo  {Abraham, 
xl.)  and  Onkelos  {in  Gen.)  as  to  any  other  opinion, 
that  they  held  this.  It  certainly  was  the  opinion 
of  Josephus  {B.  J.  vii.  18),  of  most  of  the  early 
Fathers  {apud  .Jerome,  I.  c),  of  Theodoret  (m 
Gen.  Ixiv.  p.  77),  and  Epiphanius  {Haer,  Ixvii. 
p.  716),  and  is  now  generally  received  (see  Grotius 
m  Hebr. ;  Patrick's  Commentary  in  Gen. ;  Bleek, 
Hebrder,  ii.  303;  Ebrard,  Hcbraer ;  Fairbairn, 
Typology,  ii.  313,  ed.  1854).  And  as  Bala<mi  was 
a  projihet,  so  Melchizedek  was  a  priest  among  the 
corrupted  heathen  (Philo,  Abrah.  xxxix. ;  Euseb. 
Fraep.  Evang.  i.  9),  not  self-appointed  (as  Chry- 
sostom  suggests,  Horn,  in  Gen.  xxxv.  §5,  cf.  Heb.  v. 
4),  but  constituted  by  a  special  gift  from  God,  and 
recognised  as  such  by  Him. 

Slelchizedek  combined  the  offices  of  priest  and 
king,  as  was  not  uncommon  in  patriarchal  times. 
Nothing  is  said  to'  distinguish  his  kingship  from 
that  of  the  contemporary  kings  of  Canaan  ;  but  the 


MELCHIZEDEK 

finphiitic  words  in  which  he  is  tlcscribed,  by  a  title 
never  given  even  to  Abraham,  ns  a  "priest  of  the 
most  High  God,"  as  blessing  Abrani  and  receiving 
tithes  fiom  him,  seem  to  imply  that  liis  priesthood 
was  something  more  (see  Hengstenberg,  ChristoL, 
Ps.  ex.)  than  an  ordinary  patriarchal  priesthood, 
such  as  Abram  himself  and  other  lieads  of  families 
(Job  1.  5)  exercised.  Aud  although  it  has  been 
observed  (Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  p.  122,  ed.  184.'3) 
that  we  read  of  no  other  sacerdotal  act  per- 
formed by  Melchizedek,  b\it  only  that  of  blessing 
[and  receiving  tithes,  Pfeifi'er],  yet  it  may  be  as- 
sumed that  he  was  accustomed  to  discharge  all  the 
ordinary  duties  of  those  who  are  "  ordained  to  offer 
gifts  and  sacrifices,"  Heb.  viii.  3 ;  and  we  might 
concede  (with  Philo,  Grotius,  I.  c.  and  others)  that 
his  regal  hospitality  to  Abram  was  possibly  preceded 
by  an  unrecorded  sacerdotal  act  of  oblation  to  God, 
without  implying  that  his  hospitality  was  in  itself, 
as  recorded  in  Genesis,  a  sacrifice. 

The  "  order  of  Welchizedek,"  iu  Ps.  ex.  4,  is  ex- 
plained by  Gesenius  and  riosenmiiller  to  mean 
"manner"  =  likeness  in  official  dignity  =  a  king 
and  priest.  The  relation  between  Melchizedek  and 
Christ  as  type  and  antitype  is  made  in  the  Ep.  to 
the  Hebiews  to  consist  in  the  following  particulars. 
Each  was  a  priest,  (1)  not  of  the  Levitical  tribe; 
(2)  sui)erior  to  Abraham  ;  (3)  whose  beginning 
and  end  are  unknown  ;  (4)  who  is  not  only  a 
priest,  but  also  a  king  of  righteousness  and  peace. 
To  these  points  of  agreement,  noted  by  the  Apostle, 
human  ingenuity  has  added  others  which,  however, 
stand  in  need  of  the  evidence  of  either  an  inspired 
writer  or  an  eye-witness,  before  they  can  be  re- 
ceived as  facts  and  applied  to  establish  any  doctiine. 
Thus  J.  Johnson  {Unbhocbj  Sacrifice, -i.  123,  ed. 
1847)  asserts  on  very  slender  evidence,  that  the 
Fathers  who  refer  to  Gen.  xiv.  18,  understood  that 
Melchizedek  otiered  the  bread  and  wine  to  God; 
and  hence  he  infers  that  one  great  part  of  our  Sa- 
viour's Melchizedekian  priesthood  consisted  in  oti'er- 
iug  bread  and  wine.  And  Bellarmine  asks  iu  what 
other  respects  is  Christ  a  priest  after  the  order  of 
Melchizedek.  Waterland,  who  does  not  lose  sight 
of  the  deep  significancy  of  Melchizedek's  action,  has 
replied  to  Johnson  iu  his  Appendix  to  "the  Chris- 
tian Sacrillce  explained,"  ch.  iii.  §2,  Works,  v. 
165,  ed.  1843.  Bellarmine's  question  is  suffi- 
ciently answered  by  Whitaker,  Disputation  on 
Scripture,  Quest,  ii.  ch.  x,  168,  ed.  1849.  And 
the  sense  of  the  Fathers,  who  sometimes  expressed 
themselves  in  rhetorical  language,  is  cleared  from 
misinterprefation  by  Bp.  Jewel,  Reply  to  Harding, 
art.  xvii.  (  H'c;r/;s,  ii.  731,  ed.  1847).  In  Jackson 
vn  the  Creed;  Bk.  ix.  §2,  ch.  vi.-xi.  955,  et  sq., 
there  is  a  lengthy  but  valuable  account  of  the 
priesthood  of  Melchizedek ;  aud  the  views  of  two 
dill'erent  theological  schools  are  ably  stated  by 
Aquinas,  Snrnma  iii.  22,  §6,  and  Turretiuus,  Theo- 
lojia  vol.  ii.  p.  443-453. 

Another  fruitful  source  of  discussion  has  been 
found  in  the  site  of  Salem  and  Shaveh,  which  cer- 
tainly lay  in  Abram's  road  from  Hobah  to  the 
plain  of  Mamre,  and  which  are  assumed  to  be  near 
to  each  otlier.  The  various  theories  may  be  briefly 
enumerated  as  follows : — (1)  Salem  is  supposed  to 
have  occupied  in  Abraham's  time  the  ground  on 
which  attorvvards  Jebus  aud  then  Jerusalem  stood  ; 
and  Shaveh  to  be  the  valley  cast  of  Jerusalem  through 
which  (he  Kidron  flows.  This  opinion,  aban- 
doned by  llcland.  Pal.  8:!3,  but  adopted  by  Winer, 
is  supported  by  the  facts  that  Jerusalem  is  called 


MELITA 


815 


Salem  iu  I's.  Ixxvi.  2,  and  that  Joscphus  (Ant.  i.  10, 
§2)  and  the  Targums  distinctly  assert  tlieir  identity  : 
that  the  king's  dale  (2  Sam.  xviii.  18),  identified  in 
Gen.  xiv.  17  with  Shaveh,  is  placed  by  Josephus 
{Ant.  vii.  10,  §3),  and  by  mediaeval  and  modern 
tiadition  (see  Ewald,  Gcsch.  iii.  239)  in  the  imme- 
diate neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem :  that  the  name 
of  a  later  king  of  Jerusalem,  Adonizedek  (Josh.  x.  1, 
sounds  like  that  of  a  legitimate  successor  of  Mel- 
chizedek:  and  that  Jewish  writers  (ap.  Schottgen, 
Hor.  Heb.  in  Heb.  vii.  2)  claim  Zedek  =  righteous- 
ness, as  a  name  of  Jerusalem.  (2)  Jerome  {Oj}p. 
i.  446)  denies  that  Salem  is  Jerusalem,  and  as- 
serts that  it  is  identical  with  a  town  near  Scytho- 
polis  or  Bethshan,  which  in  his  time  retained  the 
name  of  Salem,  and  in  which  some  extensive  ruins 
were  shown  as  the  remains  of  Melchizedek's  palace. 
He  supports  this  view  by  quoting  Gen.  xxx.  18, 
where,  however,  the  translation  is  questionable ; 
compare  the  mention  of  Salem  iu  Judith  iv.  4,  and 
in  John  iii.  23.  (3)  Professor  Stanley  (S.  4'  P. 
•2?,7,  8)  is  of  opinion  that  there  is  eveiy  probability 
that  JIountGerizim  is  the  place  where  Melchizedek, 
the  priest  of  the  Most  High,  met  Abram.  Eupo- 
lemus  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Emng.  ix.  17),  in  a 
confused  version  of  this  story,  names  Argerizim, 
the  mount  of  the  Most  High,  as  the  place  in  which 
Abram  was  hospitably  entertained.  (4)  Ewald 
{Gesch.  iii.  239)  denies  positively  that  it  is  Jeru- 
salem, and  says  that  it  must  be  north  of  Jerusalem 
on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  (i.  410) :  an  opinion 
which  Eodiger  (Gesen.  Thesaurtis,  1422  6)  con- 
demns. Theie  too  Professor  Stanley  thinks  that 
the  king's  dale  was  situate,  near  the  spot  where 
Absalom  fell. 

Some  Jewish  writers  have  held  the  opinion  that 
Melchizedek  was  the  writer  and  Abram  the  subject 
of  Ps.  ex.     See  Deyling,  06s.  Sacr.  iii.  137. 

It  may  suffice  to  mention  that  there  is  a  fabulous 
life  of  Melchizedek  printed,  among  the  spurious 
works  of  Athanasius,  vol.  iv.  p.  189. 

Reference  may  be  made  to  the  following  works 
in  addition  to  those  already  mentioned :  two  tracts 
on  JJelchizedek  by  M.  J.  H.  von  Elswick,  in  the 
Thesmirus  Novus  Tiieolog .-philologicus ;  L.  Bor- 
gisius,  Ilistoria  Critica  Melchisedcci,  1706 : 
Gaillard,  llelchisedecus  Christus,  &c.,  1686:  M. 
C.  Hoffman,  i)e  Melchisedeco,  1669:  H.  Brough- 
ton,  Treatise  of  Melchizedek,  1591.  See  also 
J.  A.  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudepig.  V.  T. :  P.  Moli- 
naeus,  Vates,  &c.,  1640,  iv.  11 :  J.  H.  Heidegger, 
Hist.  Sacr.  Patriarcharnm,  1G71,  ii.  288:  Het- 
tinger, Ennead.  Disput.:  and  P.  Cunaeus,  DeRepuhl. 
Heb.  iii.  3,  apud  Crit.  Sacr.  vol.  v.      [W.  T.  B.] 

MEL'EA  (MeA€5  :  Melea').  The  son  of  Menan, 
and  ancestor  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Luke  iii.  31). 

MEL'ECH  ("^^0,  ="  king  "  :  MeA^x  ;  Alex. 
naXwd  ;  in  1  Chr.  Vi'ii.  35,  MaA.ax  ;  A'^'^-  MaAt^x. 
1  Chr.  ix.  41  :  Melech).  The  second  son  of  Micah, 
the  son  of  Merib-baal  or  Mephibosheth,  and  there- 
fore gitat-grandson  of  Jonathan  the  sou  of  Saul. 

MEL'ICU  (*3lbo ;  Keri,  ■13''^!0  :  'A^ahoix  ; 
Alex.  MaXovx :  Milicho).  The  same  as  MalluCH  6 
(Neh.  xii.  14;   comp.  ver.  2). 

MEL'ITA  (MeAiTu),  the  modern  Malta.  This 
islawl  has  an  illustrious  place  in  Scripture,  as  the 
scene  of  that  shipwreck  of  St.  Paul  which  is  de- 
scribed in  such  luinute  detail   in  the  Acts  of  the 


316 


MELITA 


MELITA 


Apostles.  An  attempt  has  been  made,  more  than 
once,  to  connect  this  occurrence  with  another  island, 
bearing  the  same  name,  in  the  Gulf  of  Venice  ;  and 
our  best  course  here  seems  to  be  to  give  brieHy  the 
points  of  evidence  by  which  the  true  state  of  the 
case  has  been  established. 

(1.)  We  take  St.  Paul's  ship  in  the  condition  in 
which  we  find  her  about  a  day  after  leaving  Fair 
Havens,  i.  e.  when  she  was  luider  the  lee  of  Claud  a 
(Acts  xxvii.  16),  laid-to  on  the  starboard  tack, 
and  strengthened  with  "  undergirders "  [Ship],  the 
boat  being  just  taken  on  board,  and  the  gale 
blowing  hard  from  the  E.N.E.  [EuroclvdonJ 
(2.)  Assuming ■  (what  every  practised  sailor  would 
allow)  that  the  ship's  direction  of  drift  would  be 
about  W.  by  N.,  and  her  rate  of  drift  about  a  mile 
and  a  half  an  hour,  we  come  at  once  to  the  con- 
clusion, by  measuring  the  distance  on  the  chart, , 
that  she  would  be  brought  to  the  const  of  Malta  on 
the  thirteenth  day  fsee  ver.  27).  (3.)  A  ship  drift- 
ing in  this  direction  to  the  place  traditionally  known 
as  St.  Paul's  Bay  would  come  to  that  spot  on  the 
coast  without  touching  any  other  pai-t  of  the  island 
previously.  The  coast,  in  fact,  trends  fr.oni  this  bay 
to  the  S.E.  This  may  be  seen  on  consulting  any 
map  or  chart  of  ISIalta.  (4.)  On  Koura  J'oint, 
which  is  the  south-easterly  extremity  of  the  bay, 
there  must  infallibly  have  been  breakers,  with  the 
wmd  blowing  from  the  N.E.  Now  the  alarm  was 
certiiinly  caused  by  breakers,  for  it  took  place  in  the 
night  (ver.  27),  :md  it  does  not  appear  that  tlie 
passengers  were  at  first  aware  of  the  danger  which 
became  sensible  to  the  quick  ear  of  the  "  sailors 
(5.)  Yet  the  vessel  did  not  strike:  and  this  coi 
responds  with  the  position  of  the  point,  which 
would  be  some  little  distance  on  the  port  side,  oi 
to  the  left,  of  the  vessel.  (6.)  Off  this  point  of  the 
coast  the  soundings  are  20  fathoms  (ver.  28),  and  a 
little  further,  in  the  direction  of  the  supposed  drift 
they  are  15  fathoms  (ib.).  (7.)  Though  the  dangei 
was  imminent,  we  shall  find  from  examining  the 
chart  that  there  would  still  be  time  to  anchfi 
(ver.  29)  before  striking  on  the  rocks  ahead.  (8  ) 
With  bad  hoUing  ground  there  would  have  been 
great  risk  of  the  ship  dragging  her  anchors.  But 
the  bottom  of  St.  Paul's  Bay  is  remarkably  tena- 
cious. In  Purdy's  Sailing  Directions  (p.  180)  it 
is  said  of  it  that  "  while  the  cables  hold  there  is 
no  danger,  as  the  anchors  will  never  start."  (9  j 
The  other  geological  characteristics  of  the  place  aie 
in  harmony  with  the  narrative,  which  describes  the 
creek  as  having  in  one  place  a  sandy  or  muddy 
beach  (K6\Trov  tx'^^'''"-  «'7'a^<^''>  ver.  39),  and 
which  states  that  the  bow  of  the  ship  was  held  fast 
in  the  shore,  while  the  stern  was  exposed  to  the 
action  of  the  waves  (ver.  41).  For  particulars  we 
must  refer  to  the  work  (mentioned  below)  of  ]\Ir. 
Smith,  an  accomplished  geologist.  (10.)  Another 
point  of  local  detail  is  of  considerable  interest — viz., 
that  as  the  ship  took  the  ground,  the  place  was 
observed  to  be  SiOaAacrcros,  i.  e.  a  connexion  was 
noticed  between  two  apparently  separate  pieces  of 
water.  We  shall  see,  on  looking  at  the  chart,  that 
this  would  be  the  case.  The  small  island  of  Sal- 
monetta  would  at  first  appear  to  be  a  part  of  Malta 
itself;  but  the  passage  would  open  on  the  right  as 
the  vessel  passed  to  the  place  of  shipwi'eck.  (11.) 
Malta  is  in  the  track  of  ships  between  Alexandria 
and  Puteoli:  and  this  corresponds  with  the  flict 
that  tlie  "  Castor  and  Pollux,"  an  Alexandrian  vessel 
which  ultimately  conveyed  St.  Paul  to  Italy,  had 
wintered    in    the    island   (Acts  xxviii.   11).     (12.) 


f    Z 


Finally,  the  couise  puisued  in  this  conclusion  of  the 
voyage,  first  to  Syracuse  and  then  to  Khegium,  con- 
tributes a  last  link  to  the  chain  of  arguments  by 
which  we  prove  that  Melita  is  Malta. 

The  case  is  established  to  demonstration.  Still  it 
may  be  worth  while  to  notice  one  or  two  objections. 
It  is  said,  in  reference  to  xxvii.  27,  that  the  wreck 
took  place  in  the  Adriatic,  or  Gulf  of  Venice.  It  is 
urged  that  a  well-known  island  like  Malta  could 
not  have  been  unrecognised  (xxvii.  39),  nor  its  in- 
habitants called  "  barbarous  "  (xxviii.  2).  And  as 
regards  the  occurrence  recorded  in  xxviii.  3,  stress 
is  laid  on  the  facts  that  Malta  has  no  poisonous 
sei-pents,  and  hardly  any  wood.  To  these  objections 
we  reply  at  once  that  Adria,  in  the  language  of 
the  period,  denotes  not  the  Gulf  of  Venice,  but  the 
open  sea  between  Crete  and  Sicily;  that  it  is  no 
wonder  if  the  sailors  did  not  recognise  a  strange 
part  of  the  coast  on  which  they  were  thrown  in 
stonny  weather,  and  that  they  did  recognise  the 
place  when,  they  did  leave  the  ship  (xxviii.  1)  ;  that 
the   kindness    recorded   of  the    natives   fxxviii.    2, 


MELITA 

10),  shows  they  were  nut  "barbarians"  iu  the 
sense  of  being  s;iA'ages<  and  that  the  word  denotes 
simply  that  they  did  not  speak  Greek ;  and  lastly, 
that  the  population  of  Jlalta  has  increased  iu  an 
extraordinary  manner  iu  recent  timas,  that  pro- 
bably there  was  abundant  wood  there  formerly, 
and  that  with  the  destruction  of  the  wood  many 
indigenous  animals  would  disappear. 

In  adducing  positive  arguments  and  answering 
objections,  we  have  indirectly  proved  that  Melita  in 
the  Gulf  of  Venice  was  not  the  scene  of  the  ship- 
wreck. But  we  may  add  that  this  island  could  not 
have  been  reached  without  a  miracle  under  the  cir- 
cumstiuices  of  weather  described  in  the  narrative  ; 
that  it  is  not  in  the  track  between  Alexandi-ia  and 
Puteoli  ;  that  it  would  not  be  natural  to  proceed 
from  it  to  Rome  by  means  of  a  voyage  embracing 
Syracuse ;  and  that  the  soimdiugs  on  its  shore  do 
not  agree  with  what  is  recorded  in  the  Acts. 

An  amusing  passage  in  Coleridge's  Table  Talk 
(p.  185)  is  worth  noticing  as  the  last  echo  of  what 
is  now  an  extinct  controversy.  The  question  has 
been  set  at  rest  for  ever  by  Mr.  Smith  of  Jordan 
Hill,  in  his  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul,  the 
first  published  work  in  which  it  was  thoroughly 
investigated  from  a  sailor's  point  of  view.  It  had, 
however,  been  previously  treated  in  the  same  man- 
ner, and  wth  the  same  results,  by  Admiral  Penrose, 
and  copious  not^s  from  his  MSS.  are  given  in  The 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  In  that  work  (2nd 
eil.  p.  426  note)  are  given  the  names  of  some  of 
those  who  carried  on  the  controversy  in  the  last 
century.  The  ringleader  on  the  Adriatic  side  of  the 
question,  not  unnaturally,  was  Padre  Georgi,  a 
Benedictine  monk  connected  with  the  V^enetian  or 
Austrian  Meleda,  and  his  Paulas  Navfragus  is 
extremely  curious.  He  was,  however,  not  the  first 
to  suggest  this  untenable  view.  We  find  it,  at  a 
much  earlier  period,  in  a  Byzantine  writer,  Const. 
Poi-phyrog.  Be  Adiii.  Imp.  (c.  3(3,  v.  iii.  p.  164 
of  the  Bonn  ed.). 

As  regards  the  condition  of  the  island  of  Melita, 
when  St.  Paul  was  there,  it  was  a  dependency  of 
the    Roman   province   of  Sicily.     Its  chief  officer 
(under  the  governor  of  Sicily)  appears  fiom  inscrip- 
tions to  have  had  the  title  of  irpSiTOS  MeXtraioov, 
or  Pridvis  Melitensium,  and  this  is  the  very  phrase 
which  St.  Lulce  uses  (xxviii.  7).     Mr.  Smith  could 
not  find  these  inscriptions.     There  seems,  however, 
no  reason  whatever  to  doubt  their  authenticity  (see 
Bochart,  Opera,  i.  .502  ;  Abela,  Descr.  Melitao,  p. 
146,  appended  to  the  last  volume  of  the  Antiqui- 
ties of  Graevius ;  and  Boeckh,  Corp.  Imc.  vol.  iii. 
5754).     Melita,  from  its  position  in  the  Mediter- 
i-nnean,    and   the   excellence   of   its   harbours,    has 
always  been    important    both   in    commerce     and 
war.     It   was    a    settlement   of    the    Phoenicians 
at  an  early  period,  and  their  language,  in  a  cor- 
rupted fomi,   continued  to  be  spoken  there  in  St. 
Paul's  day.     (Gesenius,  Versnch  iih.malt.  Sprachc, 
Leipz.  1810.)     From  the  Carthaginians  it  p;issed  to 
the   Romans   iu  the    Second   Punic  War.     It  was 
famous   for  its   honey   and  fruits,  for  its  cotton- 
fabrics,  for  excellent  building-stone,  and  for  a  well- 
known  breed  of  dogs.    A  few  years  before  St.  Paul's 
visit,  corsairs  from  his  native  province  of  Cilicia 
made  Melita  a  frequent  resort;  and  through  sub- 
sequent periods  of  its  history,  \'andal  and  Arabian, 
it  was  often  associated   witli   piracy.     The  Chris- 
tianity, however,  introduced  liy  St.  Paul  was  never 
extinct.     Tiiis  island  had  a  brilliant  period  under 
the  kuiglits  of  St.  John  ;   and  it  is  associated   with 


MELONS 


317 


the  most  exciting  passages  of  the  struggle  between 
the  French  and  I'^nglish  at  the  close  of  the  last 
century  and  the  beginning  of  the  present.  No  island 
so  small  has  so  great  'a  history,  whether  Biblical  or 
political.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MELONS  (Cntiini^.,''  ahattichim:    Treirwes: 

pepones)  are  mentioned  only  in  the  following  verse : 
"  We  remember  the  fish,  which  we  did  eat  in  Egjrpt 
freely ;  the  cucumbers,  and  the  melons,"  &c.  (Num.  si. 
5)  ;  by  the  Hebrew  word  we  are  probably  to  under- 
stand both  the  Melon  {Cttcumis  melo)  and  the  water 
Melon  (Ciicurhita  citrullus),  for  the  Arabic  noun 
singular,  hatekh,  which  is  identical  with  the  Hebrew 
word,  is  used  generic<ally,  as  we  learn  from  Prosper 
Alpiuus,  who  says  (lierum  Aegijpt.  Hist.  i.  17)  of 
the  Aegyptians  "  they  often  dine  and  sup  on  fruits 
alone,  such  as  cucumbers,  pumpkins,  melons,  whicli 
are  known  by  the  generic  name  batech."  The 
Greek  weiruv,  and  the  Latin  pepo,  appear  to  be 
also  occasionally  used  in  a  generic  sense.  Accord- 
ing to  Forskal  {Descr.  Plant,  p.  167)  and  Hassel- 
quist  (Trav.  255),  the  Arabs  designated  the  water 
melon  Batech,  while  the  same  word  was  used  with 
some  specific  epithet  to  denote  other  plants  belong- 
ing to_the  order  CucurUtaceae.  Though  the  water 
melon  is  now  quite  common  in  Asia,  Dr.  Royle 
thinks  it  doubtful  whether  it  was  known  to  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  as  no  distinct  mention  of  it  is 
made  in  Greek  wTiters ;  it  is  uncertain  at  what  time 
the  Greeks  applied  the  teiTn  kyyovpiov  (angiiria) 
to  the  water  melon,  but  it  was  probably  at  a  com- 
paratively recent  date.  The  modern  Greek  word 
tor  this  fruit  is  ayyovpi.  Galen  (de  P'ac.  Alirn. 
ii.  566)  speaks  of  the  common  melon  (Cucumis 
melo)  under  the  name  juTjAoTreVccj'.  Serapion,  ac- 
cording to  Sprengel  {Comment,  in  Dioscor.  ii.  162) 
restricts    the   Arabic  Batlkh  to  the  water  melon. 


Ciururbila  citrullus. 

The  water  melon  is  by  some  considered  to  lie  indi- 
genous to  India,  from  which  count  ly  it  may  have 
been  introduced  into  Egypt  in  very  early  times; 
according  to  Prosper  Alpiuus,  medical  Arabic  writers 
sometjjnes  use  the  term   batlkh- fiuli,    or  anguria 

"  From  root  pltDS.  transp.  for  n3D  (,^^xls)-  "  t° 

Clink."  Precisely  similar  is  the  dorivaliuii  of  niiruii',  from 
jreVTo).  Gesenius  compares  tlie  Spanish  budkcas,  the 
French  pasleques. 


318 


MELZAR 


MEMPHIS 


Indica,  to  denote  this  fruit,  whoso  common  Arabic  eunuchs  ;"  his  office  was  to  superintend  the  nurture 
name  is  according  to  the  same  authority,  batikli  cl  \  and  education  of  the  young ;  'he  thus  combined  the 
Maovi  (water) ;  but  Hasselquist  says  (  Trcw.  256)  duties  of  the  Greek  iraiSaycoySs  and  rpo(pevs,  and 
that  this  name  belongs  to  a  softer  variety,  the  juice  more  nearly  resembles  our  "  tutor"  than  any  other 
of  which  when  veiy  ripe,  and  almost  putrid,  is  I  officer.  As  to  the  orig;in  of  tlie  term,  there  is  some 
mixed  with  rose-water  and  sugar  and  given  in  doubt ;  it  is  generally  regarded  as  of  Persian  origin, 
fevers ;  he  observes  that  the  water-melon  is  culti-  i  the  words  mal,  qara  giving  the  sense  of  "  head  cup- 
vated  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile,  on  the  rich  clayey  \  bearer  ;"  Fiirst  (Lex.  s.  v.)  suggests  its  connexion 
eai-th  after  the  inundations,  from  the  beginning  of ,  with  the  Hebrew  «a;ar,  "  to  guard."     [W.L.  B.] 


May  to  the  end  of  July,  and  that  it  serves  the 
Egyptians  for  meat,  drink,  and  pliysic ;  the  fruit, 
however,  he  says,  should  be  eaten  "  with  great  cir- 
cumspection, for  if  it  be  taken  in  the  heat  of  the 
day  when  the  body  is  warm  bad  consequences  often 


MEM'MIUS,  QUINTUS  {K6Cvros  MsVos). 
2  Maec.  xi.  34.     [Manlius,  T.] 

MEMPHIS,  a  city  of  ancient  Egypt,  situated  on 
the  western  bank  of  the  Nile,  in  latitude  30°  6'  N. 


ensue."  This  observation  no  doubt  applies  only  to  i  It  is  mentioned  by  Isaiah  (xix.  13),  Jeremiah  (ii. 
persons  before  tliey  have  become  acclimatised,  tor  16,  xlvi.  14,  19),  and  Ezekiel  (xxx.  13,  16),  under 
the  native  Egyptians  eat  the  fruit  with  impunity.  |  the  name  of  Noph  ;  and  by  Hosea  (ix.  6)  vmder  the 

name  of  Moph  in  Hebrew,  and  Memphis  in 
oui  English  version.    The  name  is  compounded 
ot  two  hieroglyphics  "  Men  "  =  foundation,  sta- 
tion ,   and  "  A^o//-e  "  =  good.     It  is  variously 
mteipieted;  e.g.  "  haven  of  the  good;"  "tomb 
of  the  good  man  " — Osiris  ;  "  the  abode  of  the 
good,"  "the  gate  of  the  blessed."     Gesenius 
iLimiks  upon  the  two  interpretations  proposed 
1  y  Plutarch  {iJe  hid.  et  Os.  20) — viz.  opfios 
ayaBwv,    "  lla^'en   of  the    good,"    and    rdpos 
'0(Tip  Sos,  "  the  tomb  of  Osiris  " — that  "  both 
V     11    applicable  to  JMemphis,  as  the  sepulchre 
y  ut  Osiris,  the  Necropolis    of  the   Egyptians, 
and  hence  also  the  haven  of  the  blessed,  since 
the  light  of  burial  was  conceded  only  to  the 
good  "     Bunsen,  however,  prefers  to  trace  in 
the  name  of  the  city  a  connexion  with  Menes, 
its  founder.     The  Greek  coins  have  Memphis; 
the  Coptic  is  Meinfi  or  Mcnfi  and  Memf;  He- 
brew, sometimes  Moph  (Mph),  and  sometimes 
Noph ;  Arabic  Mcmf  or  Mcnf  (Bunsen,  Egypt's 
Place,  vol.   ii.   53).      There  can  be    no   question 
as  to  the  identity  of  the  Noph  of  the  Hebrew  pro- 
phets with  Memphis,  the  capital  of  lower  Egypt. 

Though  some  regard  Thebes  as  the  more  ancient 
city,  the  monuments  of  Memphis  are  of  higher  an- 
tiquity than  those  of  Thebes.  Herodotus  dates  its 
foundation  from  Menes,  the  first  really  historical 
king  of  Egypt.  The  era  of  Menes  is  not  satisfac- 
torily determined.  Birch,  Kenrick,  Poole,  Wilkin- 
son, and  the  English  school  of  Egyptologists  gene- 
rally, reduce  the  chronology  of  llanetho's  lists,  by 
mailing  several  of  his  dynasties  contemporaneous 
instead  of  successive.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  dates  the 
era  of  Manes  from  B.C.  2690 ;  Mr.  Stuart  Poole, 
B.C.  2717  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  342  ;  Poole, 
Horae  Aegypt.  p.  97).  The  German  Egyjjtolo- 
gists  assign  to  Egypt  a  much  longer  chronology. 
Bunsen  fixes  the  era  of  Menes  at  "B.C.  3643  {Egypt's 
Place,  vol.  ii.  579);  Brugsch  at  B.C.  4455  (His- 
toire  d'Egypte,  i.  287)  ;  and  Lepsius  at  B.C.  3S92 
[Konigsbuch  der  alien  Aegypter).  Lepsius  also 
registers  about  18,000  years  of  the  dynasties  of 
gods,  demigods,  and  pre-historic  kings,  before  the 
accession  of  Menes.  But  indeterminate,  and  conjec- 
tural, as  the  early  chronology  of  Egypt  yet  is,  all 
agree  that  the  known  history  of  the  empire  begins 
with  Menes,  who  founded  Memphis.  Tlie  city  be- 
longs to  the  earliest  periods  of  authentic  history. 

The  building  of  Memphis  is  associated  by  tradi- 
tion with  a  stupendous  work  of  art  which  has  per- 
manently changed  the  course  of  the  Nile  and  the 
face  of  the  Delta.  Before  the  time  of  Menes  the 
river  emerging  from  the  upper  valley  into  the  neck 
of  the  Delta,  bent  its  course  westward  toward  the 


The  common  melon  (  C'ncumis  melo)  is  cultivated  in 
the  same  places  and  ripens  at  the  same  time  with 
the  water-melon  ;  but  the  fruit  in  Egypt  is  not  so 
delicious  as  in  this  country  (see  Sonnini's  Travels, 
ii.  328)  ;  the  poor  in  Egypt  do  not  eat  this  melon. 
"  A  traveller  in  the  East,"  says  Kitto  (note  on 
Num.  xi.  5),  "  who  recollects  the  int^ise  gratitude 
which  a  gift  of  a  slice  of  melon  inspired  while  jour- 
neying over  the  hot  and  dry  plains,  will  readily 
comprehend  the  regret  with  which  the  Hebrews  in 
the  Araliian  desert  looked  back  upon  the  melons  of 
Egypt."  The  water-melon,  which  is  now  exten- 
sively cultivated  all  over  lii'lia  and  the  tropical  parts 
of  Africa  and  America,  and  indeed  in  hot  countries 
generally,  is  a  fruit  not  imlike  the  common  melon, 
but  the  leaves  are  deeply  lobed  and  gashed,  tlio  flesh 
is  pink  or  white,  and  contains  a  large  quantity  of 
cold  watery  juice  without  much  flavour;  the  seeds 
are  black.  The  melon  is  too  well  known  to  need 
description.  Both  these  plants  belong  to  the  order 
Cucurbitaceao,  the  Cucumber  family,  which  contains 
about  sixty  known  genera  and  300  species — Cu- 
curbita,  Bryonia,  Momordica,  Cucumis,  are  examples 
of  the  genera.  [Cucumber;  Gourd.]        [W.  H.] 

MEL'ZAR  (1V^?)-  '■''le  A.  V.  is  wong  in 
regarding  Melzar  as  a  proper  name  ;  it  is  rather  an 
oIKeial  title,  as  is  implied  in  the  addition  of  the 
article  in  each  case  where  the  name  occurs  (Ban.  i. 
11,  16):  the  marginal  reading,  "the  steward"  is 
therefore  more  correct.  The  LXX.  regards  the  ar- 
ticle as  a  part  of  the  name,  and  renders  it  'Afiep- 
crdp  ;  the  Vulgate,  however,  has  Malasar.  The 
inelzar  was    suliordinate    to  the    "  master  of  the 


MEMPHIS 

hills  of  the  Libyan  ilosert,  or  at  lenst  disclwrged  a 
lai'ge  portion  of  its  waters  through  an  arm  in  that 
direction.  Here  the  generous  Hood  whose  yearly 
inundation  gives  life  and  fertility  to  Egypt,  was 
largely  absorbed  in  the  sands  of  the  desert,  or 
wasted  in  stiignant  morasses.  It  is  even  conjectured 
that  up  to  the  time  of  Menes  the  whole  Delta  was 
an  uninhabitiible  marsh.  The  rivers  of  Damascus, 
the  Barada  and  'Awaj,  now  lose  themselves  in  the 
same  way  in  the  marshy  lakes  of  the  great  desert 
plain  south-east  of  the  city.  Herodotus  informs  us, 
upon  tlie  authority  of  tlie  Egyptian  priests  of  his 
time,  that  Menes  "  by  banking  up  the  river  at  the 
bend  which  it  forms  about  a  hundred  furlongs  south 
of  Memphis,  laid  tlie  ancient  channel  dry,  while  he 
dug  a  new  course  for  the  stream  halfway  between 
the  two  lines  of  hills.  To  this  day,"  he  continues, 
"the  elbow  wliich  the  Nile  forms  at  the  point 
where  it  is  forced  aside  into  the  new  channel  is 
guarded  with  the  greatest  care  by  the  Persians,  and 
strengtliened  every  year ;  tor  if  the  river  weie  to 


MEMPHIS 


31  y 


burst  out  at  tliis  place,  and  pour  over  the  mound, 
there  would  be  danger  of  IMemphis  being  completely 
overwhelmed  by  the  flood.  Men,  the  first  king, 
haviuo-  thus,  by  turning  the  river,  made  the  tract 
where"  it  used  to  run,  dry  land,  proceeded  in  the 
first  place  to  build  the  city  now  called  Memphis, 
which  lies  in  the  narrow  part  of  Egypt ;  after  wliich 
he  further  excavated  a  lake  outside  the  town,  to  the 
north  and  west,  communicating  with  the  river, 
which  was  itself  the  eastern  boundary"  (Herod, 
ii.  99).  From  this  description  it  appears,  that — like 
Amsterdam  dyked  in  from  the  Zuyder  Zee,  or  St. 
Petersburg  defended  by  the  mole  at  Cronstadt  fi-om 
the  gulf  of  Finland,  or  more  nearly  like  New  Orleans 
protected  by  its  levee  from  the  freshets  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi, and  drained  by  lake  Pontchartrain, — Mem- 
phis was  created  upon  a  marsh  reclaimed  by  the 
dyke  of  Menes  and  drained  by  his  artificial  lake. 
New  Orleans  is  situated  on  the  left  bank  of  tin- 
Mississippi,  about  90  miles  from  its  mouth,  and  is 
piotected   agiinst    imimlitinn    by  an   embankment 


1,')  teet  wide  mid  4  tl'et  high,  which  extends  from 
12()  miles  above  the  city  to  40  miles  below  it. 
Lake  Pontchartrain  aflbrds  a  natural  drain  for  the 
mai'shes  that  form  the  margin  of  the  city  upon  the 
east.  The  dyke  of  Menes  began  12  miles  south 
of  Memphis,  and  deflected  the  main  channel  of  the 
river  about  two  miles  to  the  eastward.  Upon  the 
rise  of  the  Nile,  a  conal  still  conducted  a  portion  of 
its  waters  westward  through  the  old  channel,  thus 
irrigating  the  plain  beyond  the  city  in  that  direc- 
tion, while  an  inundation  was  guarded  against  on 
that  side  by  a  large  artificial  lake  or  reservoir  at 
Abousir.  The  skill  in  engineering  which  these 
works  required,  and  which  their  remains  still  indi- 
(^ate,  argues  a  high  degree  of  material  civilisation,  at 
least  in  the  mechanic  arts,  in  the  earliest  known 
period  of  Egyptian  histoi'y. 

The  ])olitical  sagacity  of  Menes  appears  in  the 
loftition  of  his  capital  where  it  wouUl  at  once  com- 
mand the  Delta  and  hold  the  key  of  upper  Egypt, 
controlling  tlie  commerce  of  the  Nile,  defended  upon 


the  west  by  the  Libyan  mountains  and  desert,  and 
on  the  east  by  the  river  and  its  artificial  embank- 
ments. The  cluiiate  of  Memphis  may  be  infei-red 
from  that  of  the  modern  Cairo — about  10  miles  to 
the  north — which  is  the  most  equable  that  Egypt 
affords.  The  city  is  said  to  have  had  a  circum- 
ference of  about  19  miles  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  50),  and 
the  houses  or  inhabited  quarters,  as  was  usual  in 
the  great  cities  of  antiquity,  were  interspersed  with 
numerous  gardens  and  public  areas. 

Herodotus  states,  on  the  authority  of  the  priests, 
that  Menes  "  built  the  temple  of  Hepliaestus,  which 
stands  within  the  city,  a  vast  edifice,  well  worthy 
of  mention"  (ii.  99).  The  divinity  whom  Hero- 
dotus thus  identifies  with  Hephaestus  was  Ftah, 
"  the  .creative  power,  the  maker  of  all  material 
things"  (Wilkinson  in  Rawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  289; 
F>unsen,  Er/i/pt's  Place,  i.  3(37,  384).  J'tnh  was 
worshipped  in  all  Egypt,  but  under  dillerent  re- 
presenfcitions  in  different  Nomes;  ordinarily  "  as  a 
eod  holdino-  before  him  with  both  hands  the  Nilo- 


320 


MEMPHIS 


meter,  or  emblem  ot'  stability,  eoinbiaed  with  the 
sign  of  life  "  (Bunseu,  i.  382).  But  at  Jlemphis 
his  worship  was  so  prominent  that  the  primitive 
sanctuary  of  his  temple  w;is  built  by  Menos :  suc- 
cessive monarchs  greatly  enlarged  and  beautified 
the  structm'e,  by  the  addition  of  courts,  porches, 
and  colossal  oruameuts.  Herodotus  and  Diodorus 
describe  several  of  these  additions  and  restorations, 
but  nowhere  give  a  complete  description  of  the 
temple  with  measurements  of  its  various  dimensions 
(Herod,  ii.  99,  101,  108-110,  121, 136,  153,  176  ; 
Diod.  Sic.  i.  4.5,  51,  6'2,  67).  i\ccording  to  these 
authorities,  Moeris  built  the  northern  gateway  ;  Se- 
sostris  erected  in  front  of  the  temple  colossal  statues 
(varying  trom  30  to  50  feet  in  height)  of  himself, 
his  wife,  and  his  four  sons ;  Khampsinitus  built  the 
v?estern  gateway,  and  erected  before  it  the  colossal 
statues  of  Summer  and  Winter  ;  Asychis  built  the 
eastern  gateway,  which  "  in  size  and  beauty  far 
surpassed  the  other  three ;"  Psammetichus  built 
the  southern  gateway ;  and  Amosis  presented  to 
this  temple  "  a  recumbent  colossus  75  feet  long, 
and  two  upright  statues,  each  '20  feet  high."  The 
period  between  Menes  and  Amosis,  according  to 
Brugsch,  was  3731  years  ;  but  according  to  Wilkin- 
son only  about  2100  years  ;  but  upon  either  calcu- 
lation, the  temple  as  it  appeared  to  Strabo  was  the 
gi'owth  of  many  centuries.  Strabo  (xvii.  807)  de- 
scribes this  temple  as  "  built  in  a  very  smuptuous 
manner,  botli  as  regards  the  size  of  the  Naos  and  in 
other  respects."  The  Dromos,  or  grand  avenue 
leading  to  the  temple  of  Ptah,  was  used  for  the  cele- 
bration of  buU-flghts,  a  sport  pictured  in  the  tombs. 
But  these  fights  were  probably  between  animals 
alone — no  captive  or  gladiator  being  compelled  to 
enter  the  arena.  The  bulls  having  been  trained  for 
the  occasion,  were  brought  face  to  face  and  goaded 
on  by  their  masters ; — the  prize  being  awarded  to 
the  owner  of  the  victor.  But  though  the  bull  was 
thus  used  for  the  sport  of  the  people,  he  was  the 
sacred  animal  of  Slemphis. 

Apis  was  believed  to  be  an  incarnation  of  Osiris. 
The  sacred  bull  was  selected  by  certain  outward 
symbols  of  the  in-dwelling  divinity ;  his  colour 
being  black,  with  the  exception  of  white  spots  of  a 
peculiar  shape  upon  his  forehead  and  right  side. 
The  temple  of  Apis  was  one  of  the  most  noted 
structures  of  Jlemphis.  It  stood  opposite  the 
southern  portico  of  the  temple  of  Ptah  ;  and  Psam- 
metichus, who  built  that  gateway,  also  erected  in 
front  of  the  sanctuary  of  Apis  a  magnificent  colon- 
nade, supported  by  colossal  statues  or  Osiride  pillars, 
such  as  may  still  be  seen  at  the  temple  of  lledeenet 
Habou  at  Thebes  (Herod,  ii.  153).  Through  this 
colonnade  the  Apis  was  led  with  great  pomp  upon 
state  occasions.  Two  stables  adjoined  the  sacred 
vestibule  (Strab.  xvii.  807).  Diodorus  (i.  85)  de- 
scribes the  magnificence  with  which  a  decea.sed  Apis 
was  interred  ;md  his  successor  installed  at  ]\Iemphis. 
The  place  appropriated  to  the  burial  of  the  sacred 
l>ulls  was  a  gallery  some  2000  feet  in  length  by 
20  in  height  and  width,  hewn  in  the  rock  without 
the  city.  This  gallery  was  divided  into  numerous 
recesses  upon  each  side  ;  and  the  embalmed  bodies  of 
the  sacred  bulls,  each  in  its  own  sarcophagus  of 
granite,  were  deposited  in  these  "  sepulchral  stalls." 
A  few  years  since  this  burial  place  of  the'«sacred 
bulls  was  discovered  by  M.  JIariette,  and  a  laro;e 
number  of  the  sai'cophagi  have  already  been  opened. 
These  catacombs  of  niuinmieil  bulls  vvere  approached 
from  Memphis  by  a  paved  road,  having  colossal 
lions  upon  eithei-  side. 


MEMPHIS 

At  Jlemphis  was  the  reputed  bui-ial  place  of  Isis 
(Diod.  Sic.  i.  22),  it  had  also  a  temple  to  that 
"myriad-named"  divinity,  which  Herodotus  (ii. 
176)  describes  as  "  a  vast  structure,  well  worthy  of 
notice,"  but  inferior  to  that  consecrated  to  her  in 
Busiris,  a  chief  city  of  her  worship  (ii.  59).  Mem- 
phis had  also  its  Serapeium,  wliich  probably  stood 
in  the  western  quarter  of  the  city,  toward  the 
desert ;  since  Strabo  describes  it  as  very  much  ex- 
posed to  sand-di'ifts,  and  in  his  time  partly  buried 
by  masses  of  sand  heaped  up  by  the  wind  (xvii.  807). 
The  sacred  cubit  and  otiier  symbols  used  in  mea- 
suring the  rise  of  the  Nile,  were  deposited  in  the 
temple  of  Serapis. 

Herodotus  describes  "  a  beautiful  and  richly  orna- 
mented inclosure,"  situated  upon  the  south  side  of 
the  temple  of  Ptah,  which  was  sacred  to  Proteus,  a 
native  Memphite  king.  Within  this  enclosm-e  there 
was  a  temple  to  "  the  foreign  Venus  "  (Astarte  ?  ), 
concerning  which  the  historian  narrates  a  myth 
connected  with  the  Grecian  Helen.  In  this  enclosure 
was  "the  Tp-ian  Cimip"  (ii.  112).  A  temple  of 
Ra  or  Phrc,  the  Sun,  and  a  temple  of  the  Cabeiri, 
complete  the  enumeration  of  the  sacred  buildings  of 
Memphis. 

The  mythological  system  of  the  time  of  Menes  is 
ascribed  by  Bunsen  to  "  the  amalgamation  of  the  reli- 
gion of  Upper  and  Lower  Egypt ; " — religion  having 
"  already  united  the  two  provinces  before  the  power 
of  the  race  of  This  in  the  Thebaid  extended  itself  to 
Memphis,  and  before  the  giant  work  of  ]\Ienes  con- 
verted the  Delta  fi'om  a  desert,  chequered  over  with 
lakes  and  morasses,  into  a  blooming  garden."  The 
political  imion  of  the  two  divisions  of  the  country 
was  effected  by  the  builder  of  Memphis.  "  Menes 
founded  the  Umpire  of  Egypt,  by  raising  the  people 
who  inhabited  the  valley  of  the  Nile  from  a  little 
provincial  station  to  that  of  an  historical  nation  " 
(Egypt's  Place,  i.  441,  ii.  409). 

The  Necropolis,  adjacent  to  Memphis,  was  on  a 
scale  of  gi-andeur  corresponding  with  the  city  itself. 
The  "  city  of  the  pyramids  "  is  a  title  of  Memphis 
in  the  hieroglyphics  upon  the  monuments.  The 
great  field  or  plain  of  the  Pyramids  lies  wholly  upon 
the  western  bank  of  the  Nile,  and  extends  from 
Aboo-Iiocish,  a  little  to  the  north-west  of  Cairo,  to 
Meydoom,  about  40  miles  to  the  south,  and  thence 
in  a  south-westerly  direction  about  25  miles  farther, 
to  the  pyramids  of  Hoirara  and  of  Biahmii  in  the 
Fayoura.  Lepsius  comput.es  the  number  of  pyi'a- 
mids  in  this  district  at  sixty-seven  ;  but  in  this  he 
coimts  some  that  are  quite  small,  and  others  of  a 
doubtful  character.  Not  more  than  half  this  num- 
ber can  be  fairly  identified  upon  the  whole  field. 
But  the  jtrincipal  seat  of  the  pyramids,  the  Mem- 
phite Necropolis,  was  in  a  range  of  about  1 5  milee 
from  Sakkara  to  Gizc/t,  and  in  the  groups  here  re- 
maining nearly  thirty  are  probably  tombs  of  the  im- 
perial sovereigns  of  Memphis  (himsen.  Eg  ypt's  Place, 
ii.  88).  Lepsius  regards  the  "  Pyramid  fields  of 
Memphis"  as  a  most  important  testimony  to  the 
civilisation  of  Egypt  (Letters,  Bohn,  p.  25  ;  also 
Chronologie  cler  Aegypter,  vol.  i.).  These  royal 
pp-amids,  with  the  .subterranean  halls  of  Apis,  and 
mmierous  tombs  of  public  officers  erected  on  the 
plain  or  excavated  in  the  adjacent  hills,  gave  to 
]\Iemphis  the  pre-eminence  which  it  enjoyed  as  "  the 
haven  of  the  blessed." 

Memphis  long  held  its  ])lace  as  a  capital  ;  and 
tor  centuries  a  Memphite  dynasty  ruled  over  all 
Egypt.  Lepsius,  Bunsen,  and  Brugsch,  agree  in 
regarding  the  3rd,  4th,  6th,  7th,  and  8th  dynasties 


MEMUCAN 

of  the  Old  Empire  as  Memphite,  i-eaching  through  a 
period  of  abont  a  thousand  years.  During  a  portion 
of  this  period,  liowever,  the  chain  was  broken,  or 
there  were  contemporaneous  dynasties  in  other  parts 
of  Egypt. 

The  overthrow  of  Memphis  was  distinctly  pre- 
dicted by  the  Hebrew  prophets.  In  his  "  burden  of 
Egypt,"  Isaiah  says,  "  The  princes  of  Zoan  are- be- 
come fools,  the  princes  of  Noph  are  deceived  "  (Is.  xix. 
13).  Jeremiah  (xlvi.  1 9). declares  that  "  iVo/)A  shall 
be  waste  and  desolate  without  an  inhabitant."  Ezekiel 
predicts:  "  Thussaith  the  LordGod:  I  will  alsodestroy 
the  idols,  and  I  will  cause  [their]  images  to  cease  out 
of  Nojih ;  and  there  shall  be  no  more  a  prince  of  the 
land  of  Egypt."  The  latest  of  these  predictions  was  ut- 
tered nearly  600  years  before  Christ,  and  half  a  cen- 
tury before  the  invasion  of  Egypt  by  Cambyses  (cir. 
B.C.  525).  Herodotus  informs  us  that  Cambyses,  en- 
raged at  the  opposition  he  encountered  at  Memphis, 
committed  many  outrages  upon  the  city.  He  killed 
the  sacred  Apis,  and  caused  his  priests  to  be  scourged. 
"  He  opened  the  ancient  sepulchres,  and  examined 
the  bodies  that  were  buried  in  them.  He  likewise 
went  into  the  temple  of  Hephaestus  (Ptah)  and 
made  great  sport  of  the  image.  ...  He  went  also 
into  the  temple  of  the  Cabeiri,  which  it  is  unlawful 
for  any  one  to  enter  except  the  priests,  and  not  only 
made  sport  of  the  images  but  even  burnt  them  " 
(Her.  iii.  37).  Memphis  never  recovered  from  the 
blow  inflicted  by  Cambyses.  The  rise  of  Alexan- 
dria hastened  its  decline.  The  Caliph  conquerors 
founded  Fostat  (Old  Cairo)  upon  the  opposite  bank 
of  the  Nile,  a  few  miles  noith  of  Memphis,  and 
brought  materials  fi-om  the  old  city  to  build  their 
new  capital  (a.d.  638).  The  Arabian  physician, 
Abd-el-Latif,  who  visited  Memphis  in  the  13th 
centmy,  describes  its  ruins  as  then  marvellous  be- 
yond description  (see  De  Sacy's  translation,  cited  by 
Brugsch,  Histoire  d'Ef/i/pte,  p.  18).  Abulfeda,  in 
the  1-tth  century,  speaks  of  the  I'emains  of  Memphis 
as  immense ;  for  the  most  part  in  a  state  of  decay, 
though  some  sculptures  of  variegated  stone  still  re- 
tained a  remarkable  fieshncss  of  colour  {Descriptio 
Aegi/pti,  ed.  Michaelis,  1776).  At  length  so 
complete  was  the  ruin  of  Memphis,  that  foi-  a  long 
time  its  very  site  was  lost.  Pococke  could  find  no 
trace  of  it.  Recent  explorations,  especially  those  of 
Messrs.  Mariette  and  Linant,  have  brought  to  light 
many  of  its  antiquities,  which  have  been  dispersed 
to  the  museums  of  Elurope  and  America.  Some 
.specimens  of  sculpture  from  Memphis  adorn  the 
Egypti.m  hall  of  the  British  Museum  ;  other  monu- 
ments of  this  great  city  are  in  the  Abbott  Museum 
in  New  York.  The  dykes  and  canals  of  Menes  still 
form  the  basis  of  the  system  of  irrigation  for  Lower 
Egypt;  the  insignificant  village  of  Meet  Kaheeneh 
occupies  nearly  the  centre  of  the  ancient  capital. 
Thus  the  site  and  the  general  outlines  of  Memphis 
are  nearly  restored  ;  but  "  the  images  have  ceased 
out  of  Noph,  and  it  is  desolate,  without  inha- 
bitant." [.I.  P.  T.] 

MEM'UCAN ;  )>1Dp :  Movxaios :  Mamuchan). 

One  of  the  seven  princes  of  Persia  in  the  reign  of 
Ahasuerus,  who  "  saw  the  king's  face,"  and  sat 


MENAHEM 


321 


"  Ewakl  (Cesch.  nr.  iii.  .19S),  following  the  TAX., 
would  translate  ttie  latter  part  of  2  K.  xv.  10,  "  And  Kobo- 
lam  (or  Keblaam)  smote  bim,  and  slew  him,  and  reigned  in 
tiis  stead."  I'^vald  considers  the  fact  of  such  a  kind's  exist- 
ence a  help  to  the  interpretation  of  Zcch.  xi.  S ;  and  lie  ac- 
counts for  the  silence  of  Scripture  as  to  his  end  by  saying 
that  he  may  have  thrown  himself  across  tlie  Jordan,  and 
VOL.  Tl. 


first  in  the  kingdom  (Esth.  i.  14).  They  were 
"  wise  men  who  knew  the  times  "  (skilled  in  the 
planets,  according  to  Aben  Ezra),  and  appear  to 
have  formed  a  council  of  state ;  .Josephus  says  that 
one  of  their  offices  was  that  of  interpreting  the 
laws  {Ant.  si.  6,  §1).  This  may  also  be  inferred 
fi-om  the  manner  in  which  the  royal  question  is  put 
to  them  when  assembled  in  council ;  "  According 
to  law  what  is  to  be  done  with  the  queen  Vashti  ?  " 
Memucan  was  either  the  president  of  the  council  on 
this  occasion,  or  gave  his  opinion  first  in  conse- 
quence of  his  acknowledged  wisdom,  or  from  the 
respect  allowed  to  his  advanced  age.  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  cause  of  this  prioiity,  his  sen- 
tence for  Vashti's  disgrace  was  approved  by  the 
king  and  princes,  and  at  once  put  into  execution ; 
"  and  the  king  did  according  to  the  word  of  Me- 
mucan "  (Esth.  i.  16,  21).  The  Targum  of 
Esther  identifies  him  with  "  Haman  the  grandson 
of  Agacr."  The  reading  of  the  C'ethib,  or  written 
text,  in\er.  16  is  poVo.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEN' AHEM  (01130  :  Mo^aij^  :  Manaem), 
son  of  Gadi,  who"  slew  the  usurper  Shallum  and 
seized  the  vacant  throne  of  Israel,  B.C.  772.  His 
reigii,  which  lasted  ten  years,  is  briefly  recorded  in 
2  iv.  XV.  14-22.  It  has  been  inferred  from  the  ex- 
pression in  verse  14,  "  from  Tirzah,"  that  Menahem 
was  a  general  under  Zechariah  stationed  at  Tirzah, 
and  that  he  brought  up  his  troops  to  Samaria  and 
avenged  the  murder  of  his  master  by  Shallum 
(Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  11,  §1  ;  Keil,  Thenius). 

In  religion  Menahem  was  a  stedfast  adherent  of 
the  form  of  idolatry  established  in  Israel  by  Jero- 
boam. His  general  character  is  described  by  Jo- 
sephus as  rude  and  exceedingly  cruel.  The  con- 
temporary prophets,  Hosea  and  Amos,  have  left  a 
melancholy  picture  of  the  ungodliness,  demoralisa- 
tion, and  feebleness  of  Israel  ;  and  Ewald  adds  to 
their  testimony  some  doubtful  references  to  Isaiah 
and  Zechariah. 

In  the  brief  history  of  Menahem,  his  ferocious 
treatment  of  Tiphsah  occupies  a  conspicuous  place. 
The  time  of  the  occun-ence,  and  the  site  of  the  town 
have  been  doubted.  Keil  says  that  it  can  be  no 
other  place  than  the  remote  Thapsacus  on  the  Eu- 
phrates, the  north-east  boundary  (1  K.  iv.  24)  of 
Solomon's  dominions ;  and  certainly  no  other  place 
bearing  the  name  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Others 
suppose  that  it  may  have  been  some  town  which 
Menahem  took  in  his  way  as  he  went  from  Tirzah 
to  win  a  crown  in  Samaria  (Ewald) ;  or  that  it  is  a 
transcriber's  error  for  Tappuah  (Josh.  svii.  8),  and 
that  Menahem  laid  it  waste  when  he  returned  fi-om 
Samaria  to  Tirzah  (Thenius).  No  sufficient  reason 
appears  for  having  recourse  to  such  conjectures 
where  the  plain  text  presents  no  insuperable  diffi- 
culty. The  act,  whether  perpetr.ated  at  the  begin- 
ning of  Menahem's  reign  or  somewhat  later,  was 
doubtless  intended  to  strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of 
reluctant  subjects  throughout  the  whole  extent  of 
dominion  which  he  claimed.  A  precedent  for  such 
cruelty  might  be  found  in  the  border  wars  between 
Syria  and  Israel,  2  K.  viii.  12.  It  is  a  striking 
sign  of  the  increasing  degradation  of  the  land,  that  a 

disappeared  among  the  subjects  of  king  ITzxiah.  It  does 
not  appear,  however,  how  sucli  a  translation  can  be  made  to 
agi-ee  with  the  subsequent  mention  (ver.  13)  of  Shalliim, 
and  with  the  express  ascription  of  Sliallum's  death  (vor.  14) 
to  Menahem.  Thenius  excuses  tlie  translation  of  the  LXX. 
by  supposing  tliat  their  MSS.  may  have  been  in  a  defective 
state,  Ijut  ridicules  the  theorv  of  ICwald. 

V 


322 


MENAN 


king  of  Israel  practises  iipou  his  subjects  a  brutality 
from  the  mere  suggestion  of  which  the  unscrupulous 
Syrian  usurper  recoiled  with  indignation. 

But  the  most  remarkable  event  in  Menahem's 
reign  is  the  first  appearance  of  a  hostile  force  of 
Assyrians  on  the  north-east  frontier  of  Israel.  King 
Pul,  however,  withdrew,  having  been  converted  from 
an  enemy  into  an  ally  by  a  timely  gift  of  1 000 
talents  of  silver,  which  Jlenahem  exacted  by  an 
assessment  of  50  shekels  a  head  on  60,000  Israelites. 
It  seems  perhaps  too  much  to  infer  f)om  1  Chr.  v. 
26,  that  Pul  also  took  away  Israelite  captives.  Tlie 
name  of  Pul  (LXX.  Phaloch  or  Phalos)  appears 
according  to  Rawlinson  {Bampton  Lecture  for  1859, 
Lect.  iv.  p.  133)  in  an  Assyrian  inscription  of  a 
Ninevite  king,  as  Phallukha,  who  took  tribute  from 
Beth  Khumri  (  =  the  house  of  Omri  =  Samaria)  as 
well  as  from  Tyre,  Sidon,  Damascus,  Idumaea,  and 
Philistia  ;  the  king  of  Damascus  is  set  down  as 
giving  2300  talents  of  silver  besides  gold  and  copper, 
but  neither  the  name  of  Menahem,  nor  the  amount 
of  his  tribute  is  stated  in  the  inscription.  Rawlin- 
son  also  says  that  in  another  inscrijjtiou  the  name  of 
]\Ienahem  is  given,  probably  by  mistake  of  the  stone- 
cutter, as  a  tributary  of  Tiglath-pileser. 

Menahem  died  in  peace,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  sou  Pekahiah.  [W.  T.  B.] 

MEN' AN  {Mevva  :  Menna).  The  son  of  Mat- 
tatha,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy 
of  Jesus  Christ  (Luke  iii.  31).  This  name  and  the 
following  Melea  are  omitted  in  some  Latin  MSS., 
and  are  believed  by  Ld.  A.  Hervey  to  be  corrupt 
{Gene  dog ies,  p.  88). 

MENE'  (^<_JQ  :  Mavi),  Theodot. :  Mane).    The 

first  word  of  the  mysteiious  inscription  written 
upon  the  wall  of  Belshazzar's  palace,  in  which 
Daniel  read  the  doom  of  the  king  and  his  dynasty 
(Dan.  V.  25,  26).  It  is  the  Peal  past  participle  of  the 
Chaldee  1130,  mendh,  "  to  number,"  and  therefore 
signifies  "  numbered,"  as  in  Daniel's  interpretation, 
"  God  hath  numbered  (HJD,  mendh')  thy  kingdom 
and  finished  it."  ^  '  [W.  A.  W.] 

MENELA'US  (MereAaos),  a  usurping  high- 
priest  who  obtained  the  office  from  Autiochus  Epi- 
phanes  (c.  B.C.  172)  by  a  large  bribe  (2  Mace.  iv. 
23-5.),  and  drove  out  Jason,  who  had  obtained  it 
not  long  before  by  similar  means.  When  he  neg- 
lected to  pay  the  sum  which  he  had  promised,  he 
was  summoned  to  the  king's  presence,  and  by  plun- 
dering the  temple  gained  the  means  of  silencing  the 
accusations  which  were  brought  against  him.  By 
a  similar  sacrilege  he  secured  himself  against  the 
consequences  of  an  insurrection  which  his  tyranny 
had  excited,  and  also  procured  the  death  of  Onias 
(ver.  27-34).  He  was  afterwards  liard  pressed 
by  Jason,  who  taking  occasion  from  his  unpo- 
pularity, attempted  unsuccessfully  to  recover  the 
high-priesthood  (2  Alacc.  v.  5-10).  For  a  time  he 
then  disappears  from  the  histoiy  (yet  comp.  ver.  23\ 
but  at  last  he  met  with  a  violent  death  at  the  hands 
of  Autiochus  Eupator  (cir.  B.C.  163),  which  seemed 
in  a  peculiar  manner  a  providential  punishment  of 
his  sacrilege  (xiii.  3,  4). 

A.ccording  to  Josephus  {Ant.  sii.  5,  §1)  he  was 
a  younger  brother  of  Jason  and  Onias,  and,  like 
Jason,  changed  his  proper  name  Onias,  for  a  Greek 


"HAioi'  re  kol  ^eK-qmriv.    The  order  of  the  words  here 
seems  to  facour  the  received  reading  of  the  l^XX.;  wiiile 


MENI 

name.  In  2  Maccabees,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is 
called  a  brother  of  Simon  the  Benjamite  (2  Mace, 
iv.  23),  whose  treason  led  to  the  first  attempt  to 
plunder  the  temple.  If  this  account  be  correct,  the 
profanation  of  the  sacred  office  was  the  more  marked 
bv  the  fact  that  it  was  transfeired  from  the  family 
of  Aaron.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MENES'THEUS  (MeveaOei^  ;  Ales.  MeyeV- 
detris:  Mnestheus).  The  father  of  Apollonius  3 
(2  Mace.  iv.  21). 

MENI'.  The  last  clause  of  Is.  Lw.  11  is  ren- 
dered in  the  A..  V.  "  and  that  furnish  the  drink-offer- 
ing unto  that  number"  {^yu7),  the  marginal  reading 
for  the  last  word  being  "  Meni."  That  the  word  so 
rendered  is  a  proper  name,  and  also  the  proper  name 
of  an  object  of  idolatrous  worship  cultivated  by  the 
Jews  in  Babylon,  is  a  supposition  which  there  seems 
no  reason  to  question,  as  it  is  in  accordance  with 
the  context,  and  has  every  probability  to  recom- 
mend it.  But  the  identification  of  Meni  with  any 
known  heathen  god  is  still  uncertain.  The  versions 
are  at  variance.  In  the  LXX.  the  word  is  rendered 
T)  tvxVj  "  fortune  "  or  "  luck."  The  old  Latin  ver- 
sion of  the  clause  is  "  impletis  daemoni  potionem  ;" 
while  Symmachus  (as  quoted  by  Jeromej  must  have 
had  a  different  readuig,  ''3D,  minni,  "  without  me," 
which  Jerome  interprets  as  signifying  that  the  act 
of  woi'ship  implied  in  the  drink-offering  wa.s  not 
performed  for  God,  but  for  the  daemon  ("  ut  doceat 
non  sibi  fieri  sed  daemoni ").  The  Tai-gum  of  Jo- 
nathan is  very  vague — "  and  mingle  cups  for  their 
idols;"  and  the  Syriac  translators  either  omit  the 
word  altogether,  or  had  a  different  reading,  perhaps 
"ID?,  Id/no,  "  for  them."  Some  variation  of  the 
same  kind  apparently  gave  rise  to  the  super  earn 
of  the  Vulgate,  referring  to  the  "  table  "  mentioned 
in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse.  From  the  old  ver- 
sions we  come  to  the  commentators,  and  their  judg- 
ments are  equally  conflicting.  Jerome  ( Comm.  in  Is. 
Ixv.  11)  illustrates  the  passage  by  reference  to  an 
ancient  idolatrous  custom  which  prevailed  in  Egypt, 
and  especially  at  Alexandria,  on  the  last  day  of  the 
last  month  of  the  year,  of  placing  a  table  covered 
with  dishes  of  various  kinds,  and  a  cup  mixed  with 
mead,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  fertility  of  the  past 
year,  or  as  an  omen  of  that  wliich  was  to  come 
(comp.  Virg.  Aen.  ii.  763).  But  he  gives  no  clue 
to  the  identification  of  Meni,  and  his  explanation  is 
evidently  suggested  by  the  renderings  of  the  LXX. 
and  the  old  Latin  version ;  the  farmer,  as  he  quotes 
them,  translating  Gad  by  "  fortune,"  and  3feni 
by  "  daemon,"  in  which  they  are  followed  by  the 
latter.  In  the  later  mythology  of  Egypt,  as  we 
learn  from  Macrobius  (Saturn,  i.  19),  Aai/xoov  and 
Tl'Xt?  were  two  of  the  four  deities  who  presided 
over  birth,  and  represented  respectively  the  Sun 
and  Moon.  A  passage  quoted  by  Selden  {de  Dts 
Sijris,  Synt.  i.  c.  1)  from  a  MS.  of  Vettius  Valens 
of  Antioch,  an  ancient  astrologer,  goes  also  to  prove 
that  in  the  astrological  language  of  his  day  the  sun 
and  moon  were  indicated  by  Saifxuv  and  tv;^tj,  as 
being  the  arbiters  of  human  destiny."  This  cir- 
cumstance, coupled  with  the  simila~ity  between 
Meni  and  Mi]»'  or  Mijj'rj,  the  ancient  name  for 
the  moon,  has  induced  the  majority  of  commen- 
tators to  conclude  that  Meni  is  tlie  Jloon  god  or 


the  reading  given  by  Jerome  is  supported  by  the  fact  that, 
in  Gen.  xxx.  11,  T3,  gad,  is  rendered  rvxri. 


MENI 

goddess,  the  Deus  Lunus,  or  Dea  Luna  of  the  Ro- 
mans ;  masculine  as  regards  the  earth  which  slie 
illumines  {terrae  maritus),  feminine  with  respect 
to  the  sun  (Solis  uxor),  from  whom  she  receives  her 
light.  This  twofold  character  of  the  moon  is 
thought  by  David  Millius  to  be  indicated  in  the 
two  names  Gad  and  Meni,  the  former  feminine, 
the  latter  masculine  (Diss.  v.  §2o);  but  as  both 
are  masculine  in  Hebrew,  his  speculation  falls  to 
the  ground.  Le  Moyne,  on  the  other  hand,  re- 
garded both  words  as  denoting  the  sun,  and  his 
double  worship  among  tlie  Egyptians :  Gad  is  then 
the  goat  of  Mendes,  and  J/cMi  =  Mnevis  worshipped 
at  Heliopolis.  The  opinion  of  Huetius  that  the 
Meni  of  Isaiah  and  th%  Mtjv  of  Strabo  (.\ii.  c.  31)  both 
denoted  the  sun  was  refuted  by  Vitringa  and  others. 
Among  those  who  have  interpreted  the  word  lite- 
rally "  number,"  may  be  reckoned  Jarchi  and  Abar- 
banel,  who  understand  by  it  the  "number"  of  the 
priests  wj;io  formed  the  company  of  i-evcllers  at  the 
feast,  and  later  Hoheisel  {Obs.  ad.  diffic.  Jes.  loca, 
p.  349)  followed  in  the  same  track.  Kimchi,  in 
his  note  on  Is.  Isv.  11,  says  of  Meni,  "it  is  a  star, 
and  some  interpret  it  of  the  stars  which  are  num- 
bered, and  they  are  the  seven  stars  of  motion," 
i.  e.  the  planets.  Buxtorf  {Lex.  Hehr.)  applies  it  to 
the  "  number  "  of  the  stars  which  were  worshipped 
as  gods ;  Schindler  (Lex.  Pentagl.)  to  "  the  number 
and  multitude"  of  the  idols,  while  according  to 
others  it  refers  to  "  Mercury  the  god  of  numbers ;" 
all  which  are  mere  conjectures,  quot  homines,  tot 
sententiae,  and  take  their  origin  from  the  play 
upon  the  word  Meni,  which  is  found  in  tlie  verse 
next  following  that  in  which  it  occurs  ("  therefore 
will   I    namher    {^T\'^yiy\,   wnanUhi)    you    to   the 


MEONENM,  THE  PLAIN  OF      323 

year  of  the  Flight,  a  year  so  fatal  to  the  idols  of 
Arabia"  (Lane's  Sel.  from  the  Eur-dn,  pref.  pp. 
30,  31,  from  Pococke's  Spec.  Hist.  Ar.  p.  93,  ed. 
White).    But  Al  Zamakhshari,  the  commentator  on 

the  Koran,  derives  Manali  from  the  root      I^,  "  to 

flow,"  because  of  the  blood  which  flowed  at  the  sacri- 
fices to  this  idol,  or,  as  Millius  explains  it,  because 
the  ancient  idea  of  the  moon  was  that  it  was  a 
star  full  of  moisture,  with  which  it  filled  the  sLib- 
lunary  regions.^  The  etymology  given  by  Gesenius 
is  more  probable ;  and  Meni  would  then  be  the  per- 
sonification of  fate  or  destiny,  under  whatever  form 
it  was  worshipped.'  Whether  this  form,  as  Gesenius 
maintains,  was  the  planet  Venus,  which  was  known 
to  Arabic  astrologers  as  "  the  lesser  good  fortune" 
(the  planet  Japiter  being  the  "greater"),  it  is 
impossible  to  say  with  certainty ;  nor  is  it  safe  to 
reason  from  the  worship  of  Manah  by  tlie  Arabs  in 
the  times  before  Mohammad  to  that  of  Jleni  by  the 
Jews  more  than  a  thousand  years  earlier.  But  the 
coincidence  is  remarkable,  though  the  identifica- 
tion may  be  incomplete.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEON'ENIM,    THE    PLAIN   OF   (ji^N 

D^331J?D :    'UXoy/jLaaive/ieiv ;    Ales,    and   Aquila, 

Spvos  airo^K^TTOvruv :  quae  respicit  qtiercum),  an 
oak,  or  terebinth,  or  other  great  tree — for  the  trans- 
lation of  the  Hebrew  Lion  by  "  plain  "  is  most  pro- 
bably incorrect,  as  will  be  shown  under  the  head  of 
Plain — which  formed  a  well-known  object  in 
central  Palestine  in  the  days  of  the  Judges.     It  is 


mentioned — at  least  under  this  name — only  in  Judg. 
ix.  37,  where  Gaal  ben-Ebed  standing  in  the  gateway 

J  „^        J      1  .  ,    •  ■  ,  ,        •  i  j_    -i    ,       of  Shechem  sees  the  ambushes  of  Abimelech  comina: 

sword    ),  and  which  is  supposed  to  point  to  its  de- ;  .  i    ,i,      •,  ^     ii        -in     /•,!     i      ,        , 

.     , .     '^V.         ,,  ,    -\,L        .    i,     .  .         towards  the  city,  one  by  the  middle  of  the  land,  and 

rivation  from  the  verb  nJu,  manah,  to  number.  I  j->  j  > 

„    ,    ,,  .   .        »  ^,  ■" ""     p  ^T    1  •         •     !  another  "  by  the  wav  (TlTnO^  of  Elon-Meonenim." 

But  the  origin  or  the  name  ot  Noah,  as  given  in 


Gen.  V.  29,''  shows  that  such  plays  upon  words  are 
not  to  be  depended  upon  as  the  bases  of  etymology. 
On  the  supposition,  however,  that  in  this  case  the 
etymology  of  Meni  is  really  indicated,  its  mean- 
ing is  still  uncertain.  Those  who  understand  by 
it  the  moon,  derive  an  argument  for  their  theory 
fi-om  the  fact,  that  anciently,  years  were  num- 
bered by  the  courses  of  the  moon.  But  Gese- 
nius {Comm.  iib.  d.  Jesaia),  with  more  probability, 

while  admitting  the  same  origin  of  the  word,  gives  j  'dols  and  amulets  of  his  household,  before  going 
to  the  root  manah  the  sense  of  assigning,  or  dis-  i  iii^o  the  presence  of  God  at  the  consecrated  ground 
tribnting,'^  and  connects  it  with  manah, ^  one  of  the  |  of  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxv.  4).  But  the  inference  seems 
three  idols  worshipjjed  by  the  Arabs  before  the  time  I  hardly  a  sound  one,  for  meonenim  does  not  mean 


another  "  by  the  way  (TjTip)  of  Elon-Meonenim," 
that  is,  the  road  leading  to  it.  In  what  direction  it 
stood  with  regard  to  the  tovra  we  are  not  told. 

The  meaning  of  Meonenim,  if  interpreted  as  a 
Hebrew  word,  is  enchanters,*  or  "  observers  of 
times,"  as  it  is  elsewhere  rendered  (Deut.  xviii.  10. 
14;  in  Mic.  v.  12  it  is  "soothsayers").  This 
connexion  of  the  name  with  magioil  arts  has  led  to 
the  suggestion l>  that  the  tree  in  question  is  identical 
with  that   beneath  which    Jacob    hid  the  foreign 


of  Mohammad,  to  which  reference  is  made  in  the 
Koran  (Sura  53),  "What  think  ye  of  Allat,  and 
Al  Uzzah,  and  Manah,  that  other  third  goddess?" 
Manah  was  the  object  of  worship  of  "  the  tribes  of 
Hwlheyl  and  Khuzaah,  who  dwelt  between  Mekkeh 


enchantmenis "  but  "  enchaniti^rs,"  nor  is  there 
any  ground  for  connecting  it  in  any  way  with 
amulets  or  images  ;  and  there  is  the  positive  reason 
against  the  identification  that  while  this  tree  seems 
to  have  been  at  a  distance  from  the  town  of  She- 


and  Ei-Medeeneh,  and  as  some  say,  of  the  tribes  of  j  chem,  that  of  Jacob  was  in  it,  or  in  very  close 
Ovvs,  El-Khazraj,  and  Thakeek  also.  This  idol  was  '  proximity  to  it  (the  Hebrew  pai-ticle  used  is  DJ?, 
a  large  stone,  demolished  by  one  Saad,  in  the  8th  I  which  implies  this) 

•>  •'  And  he  called  his  name  Noah  (nj),  saying,  This  one 
shall  comfort  us,"  &c.  (IJDnjV  yenachdmenu).  Yet  no 
one  would  derive  TXi.  nOcteh,  from  0113,  luicliam.  The 
play  on  the  word  may  be  retained  without  detriment  to 
the  sense  if  wc  render  Meni  "destiny,"  and  the  following 
clause,  "  therefore  will  I  destine  you  for  ilie  sword." 


"=  Like  the  Arab.      I^,  mana,  whence  \j^^ 
XaJLc.  "fate,"  "destiny."  ''  aU^)- 


'  "  The  moist  star 

Upon  whose  influence  Neptune's  empire  stands." 

Shak.-,!-.  Jlaml.  i.  I. 
'  The  presence  of  the  article  seems  to  indicate  that 
"  Meni "  was  originally  an  appellative. 

»  Gesenius  (Tlies.  !jl  b),  incantatnres  and  Zauberer ; 
Michaelis  and  Fiirst,  Wahrsagei:  The  root  of  the  w'ord  is 
Jjy,  probably  connected  with  ]'']},  'he  eye,  which  bears 
so  prominent  a  part  in  E.astem  magic.  Of  this  there  is 
a  trace  in  the  respicit  of  the  Vulgate.  (See  Gesen.  Thes. 
1052,  3;  also  DivrNATiON,  vol.  i.  443,  444.) 
>>  See  Stanley,  S  &  I'-li-i. 

Y  2 


324 


MEONOTHAI 


Five  trees  are  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
Shecliem : — 

1.  The  oak  (not  "plain"  as  in  A.  V.)  of  Moreh, 
where  Abrara  made  his  first  halt  and  built  his  first 
altar  in  the  Promised  Land  (Gen.  sii.  6). 

2.  That  of  Jacob,  already  spoken  of. 

.3.  "  The  oak  which  was  in  the  holy  place  of  Je- 
hovah "  (Josh.  xxiv.  26),  beneath  which  Joshua  set 
up  the  stone  which  he  assured  the  people  had  heard 
all  his  words,  and  would  one  day  witness  against 
them. 

4.  The  Elon-Muttsab,  or  "oak  (not  "plain,"  as 
in  A.  V.)  of  the  pillar  in  Shechem,"  beneath  which 
Abimelech  was  made  king  (Judg.  ix.  6). 

5.  The  Elon-Meonenim. 

The  first  two  of  these  may,  with  great  proba- 
bility, be  identical.  The  second,  third,  and  fourth, 
agree  in  being  all  specified  as  in  or  close  to  the 
town.  Joshua's  is  mentioned  with  the  definite 
article — "  the  oak" — as  if  well  known  previously. 
It  is  therefore  possible  that  it  was  Jacob's  tree,  or 
its  successor.  And  it  seems  further  possible  that 
during  the  confusions  which  prevailed  in  the 
country  after  Joshua's  death,  the  stone  which  he 
had  erected  beneath  it,  and  which  he  invested,  even 
though  only  in  metaphor,  with  qualities  so  like 
those  which  the  Canaanites  attributed  to  the  stones 
they  worshipped — that  during  these  confused  times 
this  famous  block  may  have  become  sacred  among 
the  Canaanites,  one  of  their  "  mattsebahs  "  [see 
Idol,  vol.  i.  850,  §15],  and  thus  the  tree  have 
acquired  the  name  of  "  the  oak  of  Muttsab  "  from 
the  fetish  below  it. 

That  Jacob's  oak  and  Joshua's  oak  were  the  same 
ti'ee  seems  still  more  likely,  when  we  observe  the 
remarkable  correspondence  between  the  circumstances 
of  each  occuiTence.  The  point  of  Joshua's  address — 
his  summaiy  of  the  early  history  of  the  nation — is 
that  they  should  "  put  away  the  foreign  gods  which 
were  among  them,  and  incline  their  hearts  to  Je- 
hovah the  God  of  Israel."  Except  in  the  mention 
of  Jehovah,  who  had  not  revealed  Himself  till  the 
Exodus,  the  words  are  all  but  identical  with  those 
in  which  Jacob  had  addressed  his  followers ;  and  it 
seems  almost  impossible  not  to  believe  that  the  coin- 
cidence was  intentional  on  Joshua's  part,  and  that 
such  an  allusion  to  a  well-kno^vn  passage  in  the  life 
of  their  forefather,  and  which  had  occurred  on  the 
very  spot  where  they  were  standing,  must  have 
come  home  with  peculiar  force  to  his  hearers. 

But  while  four  of  these  were  thus  probably  one 
and  the  same  tree,  the  oak  of  ]\Ieonenim  for  the  rea- 
sons stated  above  seems  to  have  been  a  distinct  one. 

It  is  perhaps  possible  that  Meonenim  may  have 
originally  been  Maonim,  that  is  Maonites  or  Me- 
himim ;  a  tribe  or  nation  of  non-Israelites  elsewhere 
mentioned.  If  so  it  furnishes  an  interesting  trace 
of  the  presence  at  some  eai-ly  period  of  that  tribe 
in  Central  Palestine,  of  which  others  have  been  no- 
ticed in  the  case  of  the  Ammonites,  Avites,  Zema- 
rites,  &c.     [See  vol.  i.  ISSjioiec.]  [G.] 

MEONOTHA'I  Cn'yW^-.Mavaei:  MaonatM). 
One  of  the  sons  of  Othniel,  the  younger  brother  of 
Caleb  (1  Chr.  iv.  14).  In  the  text  as  it  now  stands 
there  is  probably  an  omission,  and  the  true  reading 


MEPHIBOSHETH 

of  ver.  13  and  14  should  be,  as  the  Vulgate  and  the 
Complutensian  edition  of  the  LXX.  give  it,  "  and 
the  sons  of  Othniel,  Hathath,  and  Meonothai ;  and 
Meonothai  begat  Ophrah."  It  is  not  clear  whether 
this  last  phrase  implies  that  he  founded  the  town 
of  Ophrah  or  not :  the  usage  of  the  word  "  father  " 
in  the  sense  of  "  founder,"  is  not  uncommon. 

MEPHA'ATH  (nyQD  ;  in  Chron.  and  Jerem. 

nyS^D  ;  in  the  latter  the  Cethih,  or  original  text, 

has    nyaiO:    Mai</)adS ;    Alex.  '■m-ii^aaO:    Me- 

phaath;  MephatK),  a  city  of  the  Reubenites,  one  of 
the  towns  dependent  on  Heshbon  (Josh.  xiii.  18),  ly- 
ing in  the  district  of  the  Mishor  (comp.  17,  and  Jer. 
xlviii.  21,  A.  V.  "  plain"),  which  probably  answered 
to  the  modern  Belka.  It  was  one  of  the  cities 
allotted  with  their  suburbs  to  the  Merarite  Levites 
(Josh.  xxi.  37  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  79  ;  the  former  does  not 
exist  in  the  Kec.  Hel^r.  Text).  At  the  time  of  the 
conquest  it  was  no  doubt,  like  HeshbAi,  in  the 
hands  of  the  Amorites  (Num.  xxi.  26),  but  when 
Jeremiah  delivered  his  denunciations  it  had  been 
recovered  by  its  original  possessors,  the  Moabites 
(xlviii.  21). 

Mephaath  is  named  in  the  above  passages  with 
Dibon,  Jahazah,  Kirjathaim,  and  other  towns,  which 
have  been  identified  with  tolerable  certainty  on  the 
north  of  the  Arnon  ( Wady  Mojch)  ;  but  no  one 
appears  yet  to  have  discovered  any  name  at  all 
resembling  it,  and  it  must  remain  for  the  further 
investigation  of  those  interesting  and  comparatively 
imtrodden  districts.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius 
(Onomast.  Mr](j>d.6)  it  was  used  as  a  military  post 
for  keeping  in  check  the  wandering  tribes  of  the 
desert,  which  surrounded,  as  it  still  surrounds,  the 
cultivated  land  of  this  district. 

The  extended,  and  possibly  later,  fonn  of  the 
name  which  occurs  in  Chronicles  and  Jeremiah,  as 
if  Mei  P/iaath,  "  waters  of  Phaath,"  may  be,  as  in 
other  cases,  an  attempt  to  fix  an  intelligible  meaning 
on  an  archaic  or  foreign  word.  [G.] 

MEPHIBO'SHETH    (nK'n''QtD :      Uefj.<pi- 

fioffde;  Joseph.  Me/icpi^ocrBos :  Miphihoseth),  the 
name  borne  by  two  members  of  the  family  of 
Saul — his  son  and  his  grandson. 

The  name  itself  is  perhaps  worth  a  brief  con- 
sideiation.  Bosheth  appears  to  liave  been  a  favourite 
appellation  in  Saul's  family,  for  it  foiTns  a  part  of 
the  names  of  no  fewer  than  three  members  of  it — • 
Ish-bosheth  and  the  two  IMephi-bosheths.  But  in 
the  genealogies  preserved  in  1  Chronicles  these 
name>  are  given  in  the  dift'erent  forms  of  Esh-baal 
and  Merib-baal.  The  variation  is  identical  with  that 
of  Jerub-baal  and  Jerub-besheth,  and  is  in  accord- 
ance with  passages  in  Jeremiah  (xi.  13)  and  Hosea 
(ix.  10),  where  Baal  and  Bosheth''  appear  to  be  con- 
vertible, or  at  least  related,  terms,  the  latter  being 
used  as  a  contemptaous  or  derisive  synonym  of  the 
former.  One  inference  from  this  would  be  /hat 
the  persons  in  question  were  originally '  named 
Baal ;  that  this  appeai-s  in  the  two  fragments  of 
the  family  records  preserved  in  Chronicles;  but 
that  in  Samuel  the  hateful  heathen  name  has  been 
uniformly  erased,  and  the  nickname  Bosheth  sub- 
stituted for  it.     It  is  some  support  to  this  to  find 


a  The  name  is  given  in  the  LXX.  as  follows: — Josh, 
xiii.  18,  Matt^aaS,  Alex.  Mi)(|)aa8;  xxi.  3Y,  Tr\v  Ma<|ja, 
Alex.  T.  Mao-<|)«;  1  Chr.  vi.  79,  ttjc  Moec^Aa,  Alex  t.  <I>aaS; 
■  U-r.  xlviii.  (xxxi.)  21,  Mw(J>as,  Alex.  Nwpa^. 

b  Translated  in  A.  V    "  shame." 


"  Some  of  the  ancient  Greek  versions  of  the  Hexnpla 
give  the  name  in  Samuel  as  Memphi-baal  (see  Bahrdt's 
Hexapla,  pp.  594,  599,  614).  Also  Procopius  Gazaeus, 
Scholia  on  2  Sam.  xvi.  No  trace  of  this,  however,  appears 
iti  any  MS.  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


MEPHIBOSHETH 

that  Saul  had  an  ancestor  named  Baal,  who  ap- 
jjears  in  the  lists  of  Chronicles  only  (I  Chr.  viii.  30, 
ix.  36).  But  such  a  change  in  the  record  supposes 
an  amount  of  editing  and  interpolation  which  would 
hardly  have  been  accomplished  without  leaving  more 
obvious  traces,  in  reasons  given  for  the  change,  &c. 
How  different  it  is,  for  example,  from  the  case  of 
Jerub-besheth,  where  the  alteration  is  mentioned 
and  commented  on.  Still  the  facts  are  as  above 
stated,  whatever  explanation  may  be  given  of  them. 

1.  Saul's  son  by  l;izpah  the  daughter  sf  Aiah, 
his  concubine  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8).  He  and  his  brother 
Armoni  were  among  the  seven  ^^ctims  who  were 
sun-endered  by  David  to  the  Oibeonites,  and  by 
them  crucified  •*  in  sacrifice  to  Jehovah,  to  avert  a 
famine  from  which  the  country  was  sutt'ering.  The 
seven  corpses,  protected  by  the  tender  care  of  the 
mother  of  Mephibosheth  from  the  attacks  of  bird 
and  beast,  were  exposed  on  their  crosses  to  the 
tierce  san"  of  at  least  five  of  the  midsummer 
months,  on  the  sacred  eminence  of  (jibeah.  At  the 
end  of  that  time  the  attention  of  David  was  called  to 
the  ■circumstance,  and  also  possibly  to  the  fact  that 
the  sacrifice  had  failed  in  its  purpose.  A  different 
method  was  tried :  the  bones  of  Saul  and  Jonathan 
were  disinterred  from  their  resting-place  at  the  foot 
of  the  great  tree  at  Jabesh-Qilead,  the  blanched 
and  withered  remains  of  Mephibosheth,  his  brother, 
aad  his  five  relatives,  were  taken  down  from  the 
crosses,  and  father,  son,  and  grandsons  found  at  last 
a  resting-place  together  in  the  ancestral  cave  of 
Kish  at  Zelah.  When  this  had  been  done,  "  God 
was  entreated  for  the  land,"  and  the  famine  ceased. 

[KlZPAH.] 

2.  The  son  of  Jonathan,  grandson  of  Saul,  and 
nephew  of  the  preceding. 

1.  His  life  seems  to  have  been,  from  beginning 
to  end,  one  of  trial  and  discomfort.  The  name  of 
his  mother  is  unknown.  There  is  reason  to  think 
that  she  died  shortly  after  his  birth,  and  that  he 
was  an  only  child.  At  any  rate  we  know  tor  cer- 
tain that  when  his  father  and  grandfather  were  slain 
on  Gilboa  he  was  an  infant  of  but  five  years  old. 
He  was  then  living  under  the  charge  of  his  nurse, 
probably  at  Gibeah,  the  regular  residence  of  Saul. 
The  tidings  that  the  army  was  destroyed,  the  king 
and  his  sons  slain,  and  that  the  Philistines,  spreading 
ti'om  hill  to  hill  of  the  country,  were  sv\^eeping  all 
before  them,  reached  the  royal  household.  TJie 
nurse  fled,  carrying  the  child  on  her  ^shoulder. 
But  in  her  panic  and  hurry  she  stumbled,  and 
Mephibosheth  was  precipitated  to  the  ground  with 
such  force  as  to  deprive  him  for  life  of  the  use  of 
both  s  feet  (2  Sam.  iv.  4).    These  early  misfortunes 


MEPHIBOSHETH 


326 


d  There  is  no  doubt  about  this  being  the  real  meaning 
of  the  word  Vp'',  translated  here  and  in  Num.  xxv.  4 

"  hanged  up."  (See  Michaelis'  ffupplcmcvt,  No.  1046 ;  also 
Gesenius,  Tlies.  620;  and  FUrst,  7/a))dio6.  5396 .)  Aquila 
has  a.vanriyvvii.1.,  understanding  them  to  have  Ijeen  not 
crucified  but  impaled.  The  Vulgate  reads  cruciftxerunt 
(ver.  9),  and  qui  ajjixi  fuerant  (13).  The  Hebrew  terra 
yp^  is  entirely  distinct  from  n?^,  also  rendered  "  to 
hang"  in  the  A.  V.,  which  is  its  real  signification.  It 
is  this  latter  word  which  is  employed  in  the  story  of  the 
five  kings  at  Makkedah  ;  in  the  account  of  the  indignities 
practised  on  Saul's  body,  2  Sam.  xxi.  12,  on  Baanah  and 
Kechab  by  David,  2  Sam.  iv.  12  ;  and  elsewhere. 

"  This  follows  from  the  statement  that  they  hung  from 
barley  harvest  (April)  till  the  commencement  of  the  rains 
(October)  ;  but  it  is  also  worthy  of  notice  that  the  hXX. 
have  employed  the  word  t^TjAiofeii/,  "  to  expose  to  the 


threw  a  shade  over  his  whole  life,  and  his  personal 
deformity— as  is  often  the  case  where  it  has  been 
the  result  of  accident — seems  to  have  exercised  a 
depressing  and  depreciatory  influence  on  his  cha- 
racter. He  can  never  forget  that  he  is  a  poor 
lame  slave  (2  Sam.  xix.  26),  and  unable  to  walk; 
a  dead  dog  (ix.  8)  ;  that  all  the  house  of  his  father 
were  dead  (xix.  28)  ;  that  the  king  is  an  angel  of 
God  (ib.  27),  and  he  his  abject  dependent  (ix. 
G,  8).  He  receives  tlie  slanders  of  Ziba  and  the 
liarshness  of  David  aliice  with  a  submissive  equa- 
nimity which  is  quite  touching,  and  which  effectually 
wins  our  sympathy. 

2.  After  the  accident  which  thus  embittered  his 
whole  existence,  Mephibosheth  was  carried  with 
the  rest  of  his  fnmiiy  beyond  the  Jordan  to  the 
mountains  of  Gilead,  where  he  found  a  refuge  in 
the  house  of  Machir  ben-Ammiel,  a  powerful  Gadite 
or  Manassite  sheykh  at  Lo-debar,  not  far  from 
Mahanaim,  which  during  the  reign  of  his  uncle 
Ishbosheth  was  the  head-quarters  of  his  family. 
By  Machir  he  was  brought  up  (Jos.  Ant.  vii.  .5, 
§5),  there  he  married,  and  there  he  was  living  at 
a  later  period,  when  David,  having  completed"  the 
subjugation  of  the  adversaries  of  Israel  on  every 
side,  had  leisure  to  turn  his  attention  to  claims  of 
other  and  hardly  less  pres.sing  descriptions.  The 
solemn  oath  which  he  had  sworn  to  the  father  of 
Mephibosheth  at  their  critical  interview  by  the 
.stone  Ezel,  that  he  "  would  not  cut  oft' his  kindness 
from  the  house  of  Jonathan  for  ever:  no!  not 
when  Jehovah  had  cut  off"  the  enemies  of  David 
each  one  from  the  face  of  the  earth"  (1  Sam.  xx. 
15) ;  and  again,  that  "  Jehovah  should  be  between 
Jonathan's  seed  and  his  seed  for  ever"  (ver.  42), 
was  naturally  the  first  tiling  that  occurred  to  him, 
anil  he  eagerly  inquired  who  was  left  of  the  house 
of  Saul,  that  he  might  show  kindness  to  him  for 
Jonathan's  sake  (2  Sam.  ix.  1).  So  completely  had 
the  family  of  the  late  king  vanished  from  the 
western  side  of  Jordan,  that  "the  only  person  to  be 
met  with  in  any  way  related  to  them  was  one 
ZiBA,  formerly  a  slave  of  the  royal  house,  but  now 
a  freed  man,  with  a  family  of  fifteen  sons,  who  by 
arts  which,  from  the  glimpse  we  subsequently  have 
of  his  character,  are  not  difficult  to  understand, 
must  have  acquired  considerable  substance,  since  he 
was  possessed  of  an  establishment  of  twenty  slaves 
of  hi.s  own.  [ZiBA.]  From  this  man  David  learnt 
of  the  existence  of  Mephibo.sheth.  Royal  messengers 
were  sent  to  the  house  of  JIachir  at  Lo-debar  in^'the 
mountains  of  Gilead,  and  by  them  the  prince  and 
his  infant  son  Micha  were  brought  to  Jerusalem. 
The  interview  with  David  was  marked  by  extreme 


sun."  It  is  also  remarkable  that  on  the  only  other  occa- 
sion on  which  this  Hebrew  term  is  used— Num.  xxv.  4 — 
an  express  command  was  given  that  the  victims  should 
be  crucified  "  in  front  of  the  sun." 

f  This  is  the  statement  of  Jcsephus — airo  tuiv  w/jloiv 
(Ant.  vii.  5,  $5);  but  it  is  hardly  necessary,  for  in  the 
Kast  children  are  always  carried  on  the  shoulder.  See 
the  woodcut  in  Lane's  Mod.  Egyptians,  ch.  i.  p.  52. 

s  It  is  a  remarkable  thing,  and  very  characteristic  of  the 
simplicity  and  unconsciousness  of  these  ancient  records, 
of  which  the  late  Professor  Blunt  has  happily  illustrated 
so  many  other  instances,  that  this  information  concerning 
Mcpbibosheth's  childhood,  which  contains  the  key  to  his 
whole  history,  is  inserted,  almost  as  if  by  accident,  in  the 
midst  of  the  narrative  of  his  uncle's  death,  with  no  appa- 
rent rcitson  for  the  insertion,  or  connexion  between  the 
two,  further  than  that  of  their  being  relatives  and  having 
somewhat  similar  names. 


326 


MEPfflBOSHETH 


kindness  on-  the  part  of  the  king,  and  on  that  of 
Mephibasheth  by  the  fear  and  humility  which  has 
been  pointed  out  as  characteristic  of  him.  He 
leaves  the  royal  presence  with  all  the  property  of 
his  grandfather  restored  to  him,  and  with  the  whole 
family  and  establishment  of  Ziba  as  his  slaves,  to 
cultivate  the  land  and  harvest  the  produce.  He 
himself  is.  to  be  a  daily  guest  at  David's  table. 
From  this  time  forward  he  resided  at  Jerusalem. 

3.  An  interval  of  about  seventeen  years  now  passes, 
and  the  crisis  of  David's  life  arrives.  Of  Mephi- 
bosheth's  behaviour  on  this  occasion  we  possess  tvi^o 
aceounts^his  own  (2  Sam.  xix.  24-30),  and  that  of 
Ziba  (xvi.  1-4).  They  are  naturally  at  variance 
with  each  other.  (1.)  Ziba  meets  the  king  on  his 
flight  at  the  most  opportune  moment,  just  as  David 
has  undergone  the  most  trying  part  of  that  trying 
day's  journey,  has  taken  the  last  look  at  the  city 
so  peculiarly  his  own,  and  completed  the  hot  and 
toilsome  ascent  of  the  Jlount  of  Olives.  He  is  on 
foot,  and  is  in  want  of  relief  and  refreshment.  The 
relief  and  refreshment  are  there.  There  stand  a 
couple  of  strong  he-asses  ready  saddled  for  the  king 
or  his  household  to  make  the  descent  upon;  and 
there  are  bread,  gi'apes,  melons,  and  a  skin  of  wine  , 
and  there — the  donor  of"  these  welcome  gifts — is 
Ziba,  with  respect  in  his  look  and  sympathy  on 
his  tongue.  Of  course  the  whole,  though  otiered 
as  Ziba's,  is  the  property  of  Mephibosheth :  the 
asses  are  his,  one  of  them  his  own  •'riding  ani- 
mal :  the  fruits  are  tVom  his  gardens  and  orchards. 
But  why  is  not  their  owner  here  in  person  ? 
Where  is  the  "  son  of  Saul "  ?  He,  says  Ziba, 
is  in  Jerusalem,  waiting  to  receive  from  the  nation 
the  throne  of  his  grandfather,  that  throne  from 
which  he  has  been  so  long  unjustly  excluded.  It 
must  be  confessed  that  the  tale  at  first  sight  is 
a  most  plausible  one,  and  that  the  answer  of 
David  is  no  more  tlian  was  to  be  expected.  So 
the  base  ingratitude  of  Mephiboshetli  is  requited 
with  the  ruin  he  deserves,  while  the  loyalty  and 
thoughtful  courtesy  of  Ziba  are  rewarded  by  the 
possessions  of  his  master,  thus  once  more  rein- 
stating him  in  the  position  from  which  he  had 
been  so  rudely  thrust  on  Mephibosheth's  arrival  in 
Judah.  (2.)  Mephibosheth's  story — which,  how- 
ever, he  had  not  the  opportunity  of  telhng  until 
several  days  later,  when  he  met  David  returning  to 
his  kingdom  at  the  western  bank  of  Jordan — was 
very  diiferent  to  Ziba's.  He  had  been  desirous  to 
fly  with  his  patron  and  benefactor,  and  had  ordered 
Ziba  to  make  ready  his  ass  that  he  might  join  the 
cortege.  But  Ziba  had  deceived  him,  had  left  him, 
and  not  returned  with  the  asses.  In  his  helpless 
condition  he  had  no  altei'native,  when  once  the  op- 
portunity of  accompanying  David  was  lost,  but  to 
remain  where  he  was.  The  swift  pursuit  which 
had  been  made  after  Ahimaaz  and  Jonathan  (2  Sain. 
xvii.)  had  shown  what  risks  even  a  strong  and 
able  man  must  run  who  would  try  to  follow  the 
kino-.  But  all  that  he  could  do  umler  the  cir- 
cumstances he  had  done.  He  had  gone  into  the 
deepest  mom-ning  possible  '  for  his  lost  friend.  From 
the  very  day  that  David  left  he  had  allowed  his 


h  The  word  used  both  in  xvi.  1,  2,  and  xix.  26,  is 

'niOn,  i.  e,  the  strong  he-ass,  a  farm  animal,  as  opposed 
to  the  she-ass,  more  commonly  used  for  riding.  For  the 
first  see  Issachak,  vol.  i.  p.  902  a;  for  the  secund,  Elisha, 
ibid.  .537  b. 

'  The  same  mourning  as  David  for  his  child  (xii.  20). 

^  A  singular  Jewish  tradition  is  preserved  by  Jerome 


MEPHIBOSHETH 

beard  to  grow  ragged,  his  crippled  feet  were  un- 
washed'' and  unteuded,  his  linen  remained  unchanged. 
That  David  did  not  disbelieve  this  story  is  shown 
by  his  revoking  the  judgment  he  had  previously 
given.  That  he  did  not  entirely  reverse  his  decision, 
but  allowed  Ziba  to  retain  possession  of  half  the 
lands  of  Mephibosheth,  is  probably  due  partly  to 
weariness  at  the  whole  transaction,  but  mainly  to 
the  conciliatory  frame  of  mind  in  which  he  was  at 
that  moment.  "  Shall  then  any  man  be  put  to 
death  this  day  ?  "  is  the  key-note  of  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding. Ziba  probably  was  a  rascal,  who  had  done 
his  best  to  injure  an  innocent  and  helpless  man : 
but  the  king  had  passed  his  word  that  no  one  was 
to  be  made  unhappy  on  this  joyful  day ;  and  so 
Mephibosheth,  who  believed  himself  ruined,  has 
half  his  property  restored  to  him,  while  Ziba  is 
better  off  than  he  was  before  the  king's  flight,  and 
far  better  off  than  he  deserved  to  be. 

4.  The  writer  is  aware  that  this  is  not  the  view 
generally  taken  of  Mephibosheth's  conduct,  and  in 
particular  the  opposite  side  has  been  maintained 
with  much  cogency  and  ingenuity  by  the  late  Pro- 
fessor Blunt  in  his  Undesigned  Coincidences  (part 
ii.  §17).  But  when  the  circumstances  on  both 
sides  are  weighed,  there  seems  to  be  no  escape  from 
the  conclusion  come  to  above.  Mephibosheth  could 
have  had  nothing  to  hope  for  from  the  revolution. 
It  was  not  a  mere  anarchical  scramble  in  which 
all  had  equal  chances  of  coming  to  the  top,  but 
a  civil  war  between  two  p.irties,  led  by  two  indi- 
viduals, Alisalom  on  one  side,  David  on  the  other. 
From  Absalom,  who  had  made  no  vow  to  Jona- 
than, it  is  obvious  that  he  had  nothing  to  hope. 
Moreover,  the  struggle  was  entirely  confined  to  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  and,  at  the  period  witli  which  alone 
we  are  concerned,  to  the  chief  city  of  Judah.  What 
chance  could  a  Benjamite  have  had  there  ? — more 
especially  one  whose  very  claim  was  his  descent 
from  a  man  known  only  to  the  people  of  Judah 
as  having  for  years  hunted  their  darling  David 
through  the  hills  and  woods  of  his  native  tribe ; 
least  of  all  when  that  Benjamite  was  a  poor  nervous 
timid  cripple,  as  opposed  to  Absalom,  the  handsomest, 
readiest,  and  most  popular  man  in  the  country. 
Again,  Mephibosheth's  story  is  throughout  valid 
and  consistent.  Every  tie,  both  of  interest  and  of 
gratitude,  combined  to  keep  him  faithful  to  David's 
cause.  As  not  merely  lame,  but  deprived  of  the  use 
of  both  feet,  he  must  have  been  entirely  dependent 
on  his  ass  and  his  servant :  a  position  which  Ziba 
showed  that  he  completely  appreciated  by  not  only 
making  off  himself,  bat  taking  the  asses  and  their 
equipments  with  him.  Of  the  impossibility  of 
flight,  after  the  king  and  the  troops  had  gone,  we 
have  already  spoken.  Lastly,  we  have,  not  his 
own  statement,  but  that  of  the  historian,  to  the 
fact  that  he  commenced  his  mourning,  not  when 
his  su))posed  designs  on  the  thione  proved  futile, 
but  on  the  very  day  of  David's  departure  (xix.  24). 

So  much  for  Jlephibosheth.  Ziba,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  everything  to  gain  and  nothing  to  lose 
by  an^  turn  atiairs  might  take.  As  a  Benjamite 
and  an   old   adherent  of  Saul   all   his   tendencies 


in  his  Quaest.  Heb.  on  this  passage,  to  the  effect  that  the 
correct  reading  of  the  Hebrew  is  not  "undressed,"  but 
rather  "ill-made" — non  illotis  jiedilms,  sed pedilus  in- 
/ecfis— alluding  to  false  wooden  feet  which  he  was  accus- 
tomed to  wear.  The  Hebrew  wurd — the  same  to  both 
feet  and  beard,  though  rendered  in  A.V.  "  dressed  "  and 
"  trimmed  "—is  HE^'y,  answering  to  our  word  "  done." 


MERAB 

must  have  been  hostile  to  David.  It  was  David, 
moreover,  who  had  thrust  him  down  from  his 
independent  position,  and  brought  liimselt'  and  his 
fit'teen  sons  back  into  the  bondage  from  which 
they  had  bctbre  escaped,  and  from  which  they 
could  now  be  deliver&l  only  by  the  tall  of  Mephi- 
bosheth.  He  had  thus  every  reason  to  wish  his 
master  cut  of  the  way,  and  human  nature  must 
be  different  to  what  it  is  if  we  can  believe  that 
either  his  good  offices  to  David  or  his  accusation 
of  Mephibosheth  was  the  result  of  anything  but 
calculation  and  interest. 

With  regard  to  the  absence  of  the  name  of  Mephi- 
bosheth from  the  dying  woids  of  David,  which  is 
the  main  occasion  of  Mr.  Blunt's  strictures,  it  is 
most  natural — at  any  rate  it  is  quite  allowable — 
to  suppose  that,  in  the  interval  of  eight  years  which 
elapsed  between  David's  return  to  Jerusalem  and 
his  death,  Mephibosheth's  painful  life  had  come  to 
an  end.  We  may  without  difficulty  believe  that 
he  did  not  long  survive  the  anxieties  and  annoy- 
ances which  Ziba's  treachery  had  brought  upon 
him.  [G.] 

ME'RAB  (3"]D  :  MfpJ;8,»  Alex,  also  Mepccl3  ; 
Joseph.  Mepi^/Srj  :  Meroh),  the  eldest  daughter, 
possibly  the  eldest  child,  of  king  Saul  (1  Sam.  xiv. 
49).  She  first  appeals  after  the  victory  over  Goliath 
and  the  Philistines,  when  David  had  become  an  in- 
mate in  Saul's  house  (1  Sam.  xviii.  2),  and  imme- 
diately after  the  commencement  of  his  friendship 
with  Jonathan.  In  accordance  with  the  promise 
which  he  made  before  the  engagement  with  (joliath 
(xvii.  25),  Saul  beb-othcd  Merab  to  David  (xviii.  17), 
but  it  is  evidently  implied  that  one  object  of  thus 
rewarding  his  valour  was  to  incite  him  to  further 
feats,  which  might  at  last  lead  to  his  death  by  the 
Philistines.  David's  hesitation  looks  as  if  he  did 
not  much  value  the  honour — at  any  rate  before  the 
marriage  Merab's  younger  sister  Michal  had  dis- 
played her  attachment  for  David,  and  Merab  was 
then  married  to  Adriel  the  Meholathite,  who  seems 
to  have  been  one  of  the  wealthy  sheikhs  of  the  eastern 
part  of  Palestine,  with  whom  the  house  of  Saul 
always  maintained  au  alliance.  To  Adriel  she  bore 
five  sons,  who  formed  live  of  the  seven  members 
of  the  house  of  Saul  who  were  given  up  to  the 
Gibeonites  by  David,  and  by  them  -crucified  to 
Jehovah  on  the  sacred  hill  of  Gibeah  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  8).    [RizPAH.] 

The  Authorized  V'ersion  of  this  last  passage  is  an 
accommodation.  The  Hebrew  text  has  "  the  five 
sons  of  Miohal,  daughter  of  Saul,  which  she  bare  to 
Adriel,"  and  this  is  followed  in  the  LXX.  and  Vul- 
gate. The  Targum  explains  the  discrepancy  thus  : — 
"  The  five  sons  of  Merab  (which  Michal,  Saul's 
daughter,  brought  up)  which  she  bare,"  &c.  The 
Peshito  substitutes  Merab  (in  the  present  state  of 
the  text  "  Nadab")  for  Michal.  J.  H.  Michaelis, 
in  his  Hebrew  Bible  (2  Sam.  xxi.  10),  suggests  that 
there  were  two  daughters  of  Saul  named  Michal,  as 
there  were  two  Elishamas  and  two  Eliphalets  among 
David's  sons.  Probably  the  most  feasible  solution 
of  the  difficulty  is  that  ''  Michal  "  is  the  mistake  of 
a  transcriber  for  "  Merab."  But  if  so  it  is  inanitest 
from  the  agreement  of  the  versions  and  of  Josephus 
{Ant.  vii.  4,  §30)  with  tlie  present  text,  that  the 
error  is  one  of  very  ancient  date. 

Is  it  not  possible  that  there  is  a  connexion  between 

"  The  nmission  of  the  name  in  the  LXX.  is  remarkable. 
In  the  Vatican  Codex  it  occurs  in  1  Sam  xiv.  -19  only. 


MEEARI 


327 


Merab's  name  and  that  of  her  nephew  Mkrib-Baal, 
or  Mephibosheth  as  he  is  ordinarily  called  ?    [G.l 

MEEAI'AH  (nnp  :  'Afiapia;  F.  A.  Mapala: 
Mamict).  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joiakim,  the  son 
of  Jeshua.  He  was  one  of  the  "  heads  of  the 
fathers,"  and  representative  of  the  priestly  family 
of  Seraiah,  to  which  Ezra  belonged  (Neh.  xii.  12). 
The  reading  of  the  LXX. — 'A/xapia,  is  supported  by 
the  Peshito-Syriac. 

MEEAI'OTH  (ninO:  Mapi^K,  in  1  Chr.  vi. 
6,  7,  52  ;  Mapatde,  1  Chr.  ix.  11  ;  TSIapeuiO,  Ezr. 
vii.  3  ;  Maptde,  JS'eli.  xi.  1 1  ;  Alex.  Mapaid>e,  1  Chr. 
vi.  6,  7,  Ezr.  vii.  3;  MepawO,  1  Chr.  vi.  52; 
Maptde,  1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Neh.  xi.  11:  Meraioth, 
except  1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Ezr.  vii.  3,  Maraioth).  1,  A 
descendant  of  Eleazar  the  son  of  Aaron,  and  head 
of  a  priestly  house.  It  was  thought  by  Lightfbot 
that  he  was  the  immediate  predecessor  of  Eli  in  the 
office  of  high-priest,  and  that  at  his  death  the 
high-priesthood  changed  from  the  line  of  Eleazar  to 
the  line  of  Ithamar  {Temple  Service,  iv.  §1). 
Among  his  illustrious  descendants  were  Zadok  and 
Ezra.  He  is  called  elsewhere  Meremoth  (1  Esdr. 
vii.  ;  2),  and  Marimoth  (2  Esdr.  i.  2).  It  is 
apparently  another  Meraioth  who  comes  in  between 
Zadok  and  Ahitub  in  the  genealogy,  of  Azariah 
(1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Neh.  xi.  11),  unless  the,  names 
Ahitub  and  Meraioth  are  transposed,  which  is  not 
improbable. 

2.  {UapidiQ:  Maraioth).  The  head  of  one  of  the 
houses  of  priests,  which  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the 
son  of  Jeshua  was  represented  by  Helkai  (Neh. 
xii.  15).  He  is  elsewhere  called  Meremoth  (Neh. 
xii.  3),  a  confusion  being  made  between  the  letters 
V  and  '0.  The  Peshito-.Syriac  has  Marmuth  in  both 
passages.  '  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEE'AN  (Mep/jaj/-.  Merrha).  The  merchants 
of  Meran  and  Theman  are  mentioned  with  the  Ha- 
garenes  (Bar.  iii.  23)  as  "searchers  out  of  under- 
standing." The  name  does  not  occur  elsewhere,  and 
is  probably  a  corruption  of  "  Medan  "  or  "  Midian." 
Junius  and  Tremellius  give  Medanaei,  and  their 
conjecture  is  supported  by  the  appearance  of  the 
Midianites  as  nomade  merchants  in  Gen.  xxxvii. 
Both  Medan  and  Midian  are  enumerated  among  the 
sons  of  Keturah  in  Gen.  xxv.  2,  and  are  closely 
connected  with  the  Dedanim,  whose  "  travelling 
companies,"  or  caravans,  are  frequently  alluded  to 
(Is.  xxi.  13  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  15).  Fritzsche  suggests  that 
it  is  the  il/a;-aw0  of  Pliny  (vi.  28,  32).    [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'ARI  ('•"lip  :  Mepapi :  unhappy,  sorrow- 
ful, or,  my  sorrow,  i.  e.  his  mother's),  third  son 
of  Levi,  and  head  of  the  third  great  division 
(nnSK'b)  of  the  Levites,  the  Merarites,  whose 
designation  in  Hebrew  is  the  same  as  that  of  their 
progenitor,  only  with  the  ai-ticle  prefixed,  viz., 
^"}^'?'7-  Of  Merari's  personal  history,  beyond  the 
fiict  of  his  birth  before  the  descent  of  Jacob  into 
J^gypti  'ind  of  his  being  one  of  the  seventy  who 
accompanied  Jacob  thither,  we  know  nothing  what- 
ever (Gen.  xlvi.  8,  11).  At  the  time  of  the  Exodus, 
and  the  numbering  in  the  wildeinos><,  the  JIcrarit£s 
consisted  of  two  families,  the  lAlahlites  and  the 
Mushites,  Mahli  and  Jlushi  being  either  the  two 
sous,  or  the  son  and  grandson,  of  Jlerari  (1  Chr. 


The  Alexandrine  MS.  omits  it  there,  and  inserts  it  in 
xviii.  17  and  19. 


328 


MERAKI 


vi.  19,  47).  Their  chief  at  that  time  was 
Zuriel,  and  the  whole  number  of  the  family,  from 
a  month  old  and  upwards,  was  G200 ;  those  from 
30  years  old  to  50  were  3200.  Their  charge  was 
the  boards,  bars,  pillars,  sockets,  pins,  and  cords  of 
the  tabernacle  and  the  court,  and  all  the  tools  con- 
nected with  setting  them  up.  In  the  encampment  their 
place  was  to  the  north  of  the  tabernacle  ;  and  both 
they  and  the  Gershonites  were  "  under  the  hand  " 
of  Ithamar  the  son  of  Aaron.  Owing  to  the  heavy 
nature  of  the  materials  which  they  had  to  carry, 
four  waggons  and  eight  oxen  were  assigned  to  them  ; 
and  in  the  march  both  they  and  the  Gershonites 


"  Their  cities  were  Jokneam,  Kartal:,  Dimnah,  Nahalal, 
in  Zebuliin ;  Bezer,  Jaliazah,  Kedemoth,  Mephaatli,  in 
Reuben ;  Ramotli,  Mahanaim,  Heshbon,  and  Jazer,  in  Gad. 


MERAEI 

followed  immediately  after  the  standard  of  Judah, 
and  before  that  of  lieuben,  that  they  might  set  up 
the  tabernacle  agaiast  the  arrival  of  the  Kohathites 
(Num.  iii.  20,  33-37,  iv.  29-33,  42-45,  vii.  8,  x. 
17,  21).  In  the  division  of  the  land  by  Joshua, 
the  Merarites  had  twelve  cities  assigned  to  them, 
out  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  Zebulim,  of  which  one  was 
ILimoth-Gilead,  a  city  of  refuge,  and  in  later 
times  a  fi'equent  subject  of  war  between  Israel 
and  Syria  (Josh.  xxi.  7,  34-40 ;  »  1  Chr.  vi.  63, 
77-81).  In  the  time  of  David  Asaiah  was  their 
chief,  and  assisted  with  220  of  his  fiimily  in  bring- 
ing up  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  6).    Afterwards  we  find 


But  in  1  Clir.  vi.,  instead  of  the  four  in  Zebulon,  only 
Rimmon  and  Tabor  are  named,  thougb  the  total  is  given 
as  twelve  in  ver.  63. 


Table  of  the  Merarites. 

Levi  (Exod.  vi.  16-19;  Num.  iii.  17-20). 

I 


Merari.. 

I 
Mushi. 


Mahli. 


Eder  Jerimoth 

(1  Chr.  xxiv.  30).      (tb.). 


Llbni. 

Shimei. 

I 
Uzza. 


Haggiah. 

I 

Asaiah,  chief  of 

220  Merarites  in 

the  time  of  David 

(1  Chr.  vi.  44,  45. 

XV.  6).     But  this 

genealogy  is  doubtless 

imperfect,  as  it  gives 

only  10  generations 

from  Levi  to  Asaiah 

inclusive 


Abihail. 

I 

Zuriel, 

chief  of  the  house  of  the 

father  of  the  families  of  Merari  in 

the  time  of  Moses 

(Num.  iii.  35). 


Shamer. 

Ban!  =  Bimui  (Neh.  xi.  15)? 

I 
Amzi. 

I 
Hilldah. 


Jcduthun  ? 

> 


Amaziah. 

I 
efeHashabiah. 


•      I  I 

.Jaaziah  or  Jaazlel  iChr.  xv.  18;  xxiv.  26,  27.  Malluch. 


1^1  I 

Shoham         Zaecur  or     Ibri  or  Abdi 
(xxiv.  27).      Zechariah         (vi.  44; 
(lb.  &  XV.  18).    xxiv.  27). 

SeeLXX.  ('AjSat). 


Eleazar  (xxiil.  21,  22 ;  xxiv.  28).        Kishi,  Kish  (xxiii.  21),  or  Kushaiah  (xv.  17). 


Hosah 
(xvi.  38, 42 ; 


Obed- 
Edom 


Galal  or 
Gedaliah 


xxvi.  10, 16).  (xvi.  38).   (xxv.  3,  9).  (ib.3,ll> 


Zeri  or    Jeshaiah  ■JifHashabiah    Matti- 
Izri     (ib.  3, 15).    (ib.  3,  19;      thiah 


vi.  45).    (ib.3,21). ; 


I  III 

Simri      Hilkiab  Teba-  Zecba-    S 
(xxvi.  10).  (ib.  11).   liah      riah       ( 
(ib.).     (ib.). 

"  Sons  of  Jeduthun,  Shemaiah  and  Uzziel," 

in  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  14). 

1 

"  Obadiah  (or  Abda)  the  son  of  ShemaiaU, 

the  son  of  Galal,  the  son  of  .Tedutbun," 

after  the  return  from  captivity 

(1  Chr.  jx,  16  ;  Neh.  xi.  17). 


J  I  I 

i  Jerabmeel    Ethan,  called 
:  (xxiv.  29).     also  Jediitbuii, 
;  head  of  the 

sinsjors  in  the  time  of 
'■  David  (vi.  44-47  ; 

;  XV.  17,  19  ;  xvi.  41,  42; 

I  xxv.  1,  3,  6). 


Kish  the  son  of  Abdi,  and  Azariah  the  sou 
of  Jehalelel,  in  reign  of  Hezekiah 
J  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

Azrikam. 


Sherebiah,  in  time  of  Ezra,  "  of  the  Jeshaiah,  of  the  sons 

sons  of  Mahli "  (Ezr.  viii.  18) ;  con-uptcd  to    of  Merari,  in  the  time 

Asebebia  (1  Esdr.  viii.  47).  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  19). 


Hasshub. 
I 
Shemaiah,  after  the  return  from  captivity 
(1  Chr.  ix.  14 ;  Neh.  xi.  15). 

Hashabiah,  of  the  sons  of  Merari,  in  the 

time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  19),  called  Asebi 

and  Assanias  (1  Esdr.  viii.  48,  54).. 


MERARI 

the  Merarites  still  sharing  with  the  two  other 
Levitiail  families  the  various  functions  of  their 
caste  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  6,  2 1-23).  Thus  a  third  part 
of  the  singers  and  musicians  were  Merarites,  and 
Ethan  or  Jeduthun  was  their  chief  in  the  time  of 
David.  [Jeduthun.]  A  third  part  of  the  door- 
keepei-s  were  Merarites  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  5,  G,  xxvi.  10, 
19),  unless  indeed  we  are  to  understand  from  ver.  19 
that  the  doorkeepers  wCTe  all  either  Koliathites  or 
Merarites,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Gershonites,  which 
does  not  seem  probable.  In  the  days  of  Hezekiah 
the  Merai'ites  were  still  flourishing,  and  Kish  the 
son  of  Abdi,  and  Azariah  the  sou  of  Jehalelel,took 
their  part  with  their  brethren  of  the  two  other 
Levitical  tamilios  in  promoting  the  reformation,  and 
purifying  the  house  of  the  Lord  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12, 
15).  After  the  return  from  captivity  Shemaiah 
represents  the  sons  of  Merari,  in  1  Chr.  ix.  14,  Neh. 
xi.  15,  and  is  said,  with  other  chiefs  of  the  Levites, 
to  have  "  had  the  oversight  of  the  outward  business 
of  the  house  of  God."  There  were  also  at  that  time 
sons  of  Jeduthun  under  Obadiah  or  Abda,  the  son 
of  Shemaiah  (1  Chr.  ix.  16;  Neh.  xi.  17).  A  little 
later  again,  iu  the  time  of  Ezra,  when  he  was  in 
great  want  of  Levites  to  accompany  him  ou  his 
journey  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem,  "  a  man  of 
good  imderstandmg  of  the  sons  of  Mahli"  was 
found,  whose  name,  if  the  text  hei-e  and  at  ver.  24 
is  correct,  is  not  given.  "  Jeshaiah  also  of  the  sons 
of  Merari,"  with  twenty  of  his  sons  and  brethren, 
came  with  him  at  the  same  time  (Ezr.  viii.  18, 19). 
But  it  seems  pretty  certain  that  Sherebiah,  m  ver. 
1 8,  is  the  name  of  the  Mahlite,  and  that  both  he 
and  Hashabiah,  as  well  as  Jeshaiah,  in  ver.  19,  were 
Levites  of  the  family  of  Merari,  and  not,  as  the 
actual  text  of  ver.  24  indicates,  priests.  The  copu- 
lative 1  has  fallen  out  before  their  names  iu  ver.  24, 
as  appears  fi-om  ver.  oO  (see  also  1  Chr.  ix.  14 ; 
Neh.  xii.  24). 

The  subjoined  table  gives  the  principal  de- 
scents, as  far  as  it  is  possible  to  ascertain  them. 
But  the  true  position  of  Jaaziah,  Mahli,  and 
Jeduthun  is  doubtful.  Here  too,  as  elsewhere, 
it  is  difficult  to  decide  when  a  given  name  indicates 
an  individual,  and  when  the  family  called  after  him, 
or  the  head  of  that  family.  It  is  sometimes  no  less 
difficult  to  decide  whether  any  name  which  occurs 
repeatedly  designates  the  same  person,  or  others  of 
the  family  who  bore  the  same  name,  as  e.  g.  in  the 
case  of  Mahli,  Hilkiah,  Shimri,  Kishi  or  Kish,  and 
others.  As  regards  the  confusion  between  Ethan 
and  Jeduthun,  it  may  perhaps  be  that  Jeduthun 
was  the  patronymic  title  of  the  house  of  which 
Ethan  was  the  head  in  the  time  of  David.  Jeduthun 
might  have  been  the  brother  of  one  of  Ethan's 
direct  ancestors  before  Hashabiah,  in  which  case 
Ha.shabiah  m  1  Chr.  xxv.  3,  19,  might  be  the  same 
as  Hashabiah  in  vi.  45.  Hosah  and  Obed-edom 
seem  to  have  been  other  descendants  or  clansmen 
of  Jeduthun,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  David  ;  and, 
if  we  may  argue  from  the  names  of  Hosah's  sons, 
Simri  and  Hilkiah,  that  they  were  descendants  of 
Sharner  and  Hilkiah,  in  the  line  of  Ethan,  the 
inference  would  be  that  Jeduthmi  was  a  son  either 
of  Hilkiah  or  Amaziah,  since  he  lived  after  Hilkiah, 
but  before  H;uilial)iali.  The  great  advantage  of  this 
supposition  is,  that  while  it  leaves  to  Eth;ui  the 
patronymic  designation  Jeduthmi,  it  draws  a  wide 
distinction  between  the  term  "  sons  of  Jeduthun  " 
and  "  sons  of  Ethan,"  and  explains  how  in  David's 
time  there  could  be  sons  of  those  who  are  called 
sons  of  Jeduthun  above  thirty  years  of  age  (since 


MERCY-SEAT 


329 


they  filled  offices,  1  Chr.  xxvi.  10),  at  the  same 
time  tliat  Jeduthun  was  said  to  be  the  chief  of  tlie 
singers.  In  like  manner  it  is  possible  tliat  Jaaziah 
may  have  been  a  brother  of  Malluch  or  of  Abdi, 
and  that  if  Abdi  or  Ibri  had  other  descendants 
besides  the  lines  of  Kish  and  Eleazar,  they  may 
have  been  reckoned  under  the  headship  of  Jaaziah. 
The  families  of  Merari  which  were  so  reckoned  were, 
according  to  1  Chr.  xxiv.  27,  Shoham,  Zaccur  (ap- 
parently the  same  as  Zechariah  in  1  Chr.  xv.  18, 
where  we  probably  ought  to  read  "  Z.  son  of 
Jaaziah,"  and  xxvi.  11),  and  Ibri,  where  the  LXX. 
liave  'n)35i,  'A/Saf,  and  'AjSSi.  [A.  C.  H.] 

2.  (Mepa/i  ;  Alex,  in  Jud.  viii.  1  Mepapei: 
Merari).  The  father  of  Judith  (Jud.  viii.  1,  xvi.  7). 

MERATHA'IM,  THE  LAND  OF  (f]Nn 

C'mtD  :  terra  dominantiitni),  that  is  "  of  double 

rebellion  "  (a  dual  form  from  the  root  niD  ;  Ge- 

senius,  Thes.  819a;  Flivst,  Ildwb.  7916),  alluding 
to  tlie  country  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  to  the  double 
aiptivity  which  it  hail  inflicted  ou  the  nation  of 
Israel  (Jer.  1.  21).  This  is  the  opinion  of  Gesenius, 
Fiirst,  Michaelis  (Bibel  fur  Ungelehrten),  &c.,  and 
in  this  sense  the  word  is  taken  by  all  the  versions 
which  the  writer  has  consulted,  excepting  that  of 
Junius  and  Tremellius,  whicli  the  A.  V. — as  in 
otlier  instances — has  followed  here.  The  LXX.  e-iri 
rfis  yrjs,  \eyei  K\)pios.  ir  i  k  p  co  s  eTri^rjOt,  &.C., 
take  the  root  in  its  second  sense  of  "  bitter."  [G.] 

MEROU'RIUS  {'Epfi^s :  Mermriv.s),  properly 
Hermes,  the  (Jreek  deity,  whom  the  Romans  iden- 
tified with  their  Mercmy  the  god  of  commerce  and 
bargains.  In  the  Greek  mythology  Hermes  was  the 
son  of  Zeus  and  Maia  the  daughter  of  Atlas,  and  is 
constantly  represented  as  the  companion  of  his 
father  in  his  wanderings  upon  earth.  On  one  of 
these  occasions  they  were  travelling  in  Phrygia,  and 
were  refused  hospitality  by'  all  save  Baucis  and 
Philemon,  the  two  aged  peasants  of  whom  Ovid 
tells  the  charming  episode  in  his  Metain.  viii. 
620-724,  which  appears  to  have  formed  part  of 
the  folk-lore  of  Asia  Minor,  and  strikingly  illus- 
trates the  readiness  with  which  the  simple  people 
of  Lystra  recognized  in  Barnabas  and  Paul  the 
gods  who,  according  to  their  wont,  had  come 
down  in  the  likeness  of  men  (Acts  xiv.  11). 
They  called  Paul  "  Hermes,  because  he  was  the 
chief  speaker,"  identifying  in  him  as  they  supposed 
by  this  characteristic,  the  herald  of  the  gods  (Hom. 
Od.  V.  28  ;  Hijm.  in  Herm.  b),  and  of  Zeus  {Od. 
i.  38,  84;  Tl.  xxiv.  333,  461),  the  eloquent  orator 
{Od.  i.  86;  Hor.  Od.  i.  10,  1),  inventor  of  letters, 
music,  and  the  arts.  He  was  usually  represented 
as  a  slender  beardless  youth,  but  in  an  older 
Pelasgic  figure  he  was  bearded.  Whether  .St.  Paul 
wore  a  beard  or  not  is  not  to  be  inferred  from  this, 
for  the  men  of  Lystra  identified  him  with  their  god 
Hermes,  not  from  any  accidental  resemblance  in 
figure  or  appearance  to  the  statues  of  that  deity, 
but  because  of  the  act  of  healing  which  had  been 
done  upon  the  man  who  was  lame  from  his 
birth.  [W.A.'W.] 

MERCY-SEAT  (n"}Q3  :  iXaffr-hpiov :  propi- 
tiatorium).  This  appears  to  have  been  merely  the 
fid  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  not  auotlier  surface 
affixed  thereto.  It  was  that  whereon  the  blood  of  the 
yearly  atonement  was  sprinkled  by  the  high-priest ; 
and  in  this  relation  it  is  doubtful  wliethcr  the  sense 
of  the  word  in  the  Heb.  is  based  on  the  material 


330 


MERED 


fact  of  its  "  covering  "  tlie  Ark,  or  from  this  notion 
of  its  reference  to  the  "  covering,"  ((.  e.  atonement) 
of  sin.  But  in  any  case  the  notion  of  a  "  seat,"  as 
conveyed  by  the  name  in  English,  seems  super- 
fluous and  likely  to  mislead.  Jehovah  is  indeed 
spoken  of  as  "dwelling"  and  even  as  "sitting" 
(l^s.  ]x.\x.  1,  xcix.  1)  between  the  cherubim,  but 
undoubtedly  his  seat  in  this  conception  would  not 
be  on  the  same  level  as  that  on  which  they  stood 
(Kx.  XXV.  18),  and  an  enthronement  in  the  glory 
above  it  must  be  supposed.  The  idea  with  which 
it  is  connected  is  not  merely  that  of  "  mercy,"  but 
of  formal  atonement  made  for  the  breach  of  the  co- 
venant (Lev.  xvi.  14),  which  the  Ark  contained  in 
its  material  vehicle — the  two  tables  of  stone.  The 
communications  made  to  Hoses  are  represented  as 
made  "  from  off  the  Mercy-Seat  that  was  upon  the 
Ark  of  the  Testimony  "  (Num.  vii.  89  ;  comp.  Ex. 
XXV.  22,  XXX.  6)  ;  a  sublime  illustration  of  the 
moral  relation  and  responsibility  into  which  the 
people  were  by  covenant  regarded  as  brought  before 
God.  .  ^[H.  H.] 

MER'ED  (nnD :  MojpciS,  1  Chr.  iv.  17  ;  Mc»- 

p'^S,  1  Chr.  iv.  18  :  McrecV).  This  name  occurs  in 
a  fragmentary  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  iv.  17,  18,  as 
that  of  one  of  the  sons  of  Ezra.  He  is  there  said 
to  have  taken  to  wife  Bithiah  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh,  who  is  enumerated  by  the  Rabbins 
among  the  nine  who  entered  Paradise  (Hottinger, 
Smegma  Orientale,  p.  315),  and  in  the  Targum  of 
R.  Joseph  on  Chronicles  is  said  to  have  been  a  pro- 
selyte. In  the  same  Targum  we  find  it  stated  that 
Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  was  called  Mered 
because  he  withstood  or  rebelled  against  (TlO),  the 

counsel  of  the  spies,  a  tradition  also  recorded  by 
Jarchi.  But  another  and  very  curious  tradition 
is  presei-\-ed  in  the  Quaestiones  inlibr.  Pared.,  attri- 
buted to  Jerome.  According  to  this,  Ezra  was 
Amram  ;  his  sons  Jether  and  Mered  were  Aaron 
and  Moses  ;  Epher  was  Eldad,  and  Jalon  Medad. 
The  tradition  goes  on  to  say  that  Moses,  after  re- 
ceiving the  law  in  the  desert,  enjoined  his  father  to 
put  away  his  mother  because  she  was  his  aunt, 
being  the  daughter  of  Levi :  that  Amram  did  so, 
married  again,  and  begat  Eldad  and  Medad. 
Bithiah,  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  is  said,  on  the 
same  authority,  to  have  been  "  taken  "  by  Moses, 
because  she  forsook  idols,  and  was  converted  to  the 
worship  of  the  true  God.  The  origin  of  all  this 
seems  to  have  been  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
"  Miriam"  in  1  Chr.  iv.  17,  which  was  referred  to 
Jliriam  the  sister  of  Moses.  Rabbi  D.  Kimchi 
would  put  the  first  clause  of  ver.  18  in  a  paren- 
thesis. He  makes  Bithiah  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh 
the  first  wife  of  Mered,  and  mother  of  Bliriam, 
Shammai,  and  Ishbah  ;  Jehudijah,  or  "  the  Jewess," 
being  his  second  wife.  But  the  whole  genealogy 
is  so  intricate  that  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  mi- 
vavel  it.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'EMOTH  (.ni^nO  :  Uepifx<!,d  ;  Alex. 
Map/J.d>8,  Ezr.  viii.  33  ;  Vap-diO,  Neh.  iii.  4  ;  Me- 
pa/xcod,  Neh.  iii.  21:  Meremotli).  1.  >*on  of  Uriah, 
01-  LFrijah,  the  priest,  of  the  family  of  Koz  or  Hak- 
koz,  the  head  of  the  sevontli  course  of  priests  as 
established  by  David.  On  the  return  fiom  Babvlon 
the  children  of  Koz  were  among  those  priests  who 
were  imable  to  establish  their  pedigree,  and  in  con- 
sequence were  put  from  the  priesthood  as  polluted 
(Ezr.  ii.  61,  02).  This  probably  applied  to  only 
one  familv  of  the  descendants  of  Koz,  ibr  in   Ezr. 


MERIBAH 

viii.  33,  Meremoth  is  clearly  recognised  as  a  priest, 
and  is  appointed  to  weigh  and  register  the  gold  and 
silver  vessels  belonging  to  the  Temple,  which  Ezra 
had  brought  from  Babylon,  a  function  which  priests 
and  Levites  alone  were  selected  to  discharge  (Ezr. 
viii.  24-30).  In  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Je- 
rusalem under  Nehemiah  we  find  Meremoth  taking 
an  active  part,  working  between  MeshuUam  and 
the  sons  of  Hassenaah  who  restored  the  fish-gate 
(Neh.  iii., 4),  and  himself  restoring  the  portion  of 
the  Temple  wall  on  which  abutted  the  house  of  the 
high-priest  Eliashib  (Neh.  iii.  21).  Burrington 
{Genealogies,  ii.  154)  is  inclined  to  consider  the  two 
mentioned  in  Neh.  iii.  by  the  same  name  as  distinct 
persons,  but  his  reasons  do  not  ajipear  sufficient. 

In  1  Esdr.  viii.  62,  he  is  called  "  Marmoth 
the  sou  of  Iri." 

2.  {MaptfidO:  Marimuth).  A  layman  of  the 
sons  of  Bani,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  after 
the  return  from  Babylon  and  put  her  away  at 
Ezra's  bidding  (Ezr.  x.  36). 

3.  (Mepa/ico0 :  Merimuth).  A  priest,  or  more 
probably  a  tamily  of  priests,  who  sealed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  5).  The  latter  supjiosi- 
tion  is  more  prolsable,  because  in  Neh.  xii.  3  the 
name  occurs,  with  many  others  of  the  same  list, 
among  those  who  went  up  with  Zerubbabel  a  cen- 
tury before.  In  the  next  generation,  that  is  in  the 
days  of  Joiakim  the  sou  of  Jeshua,  the  representative 
of  the  family  of  Meremoth  was  Helkai  (Neh.  xii. 
15)  ;  the  reading  Meraioth  in  that  passage  being  an 
error.  [Meraioth  2.]  The  A.  V.  of  lOlThad 
"  Merimoth"  in  Neh.  xii.  3,  like  the  Geneva  ver- 
sion. [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'ES  (D"]0  :  Mares).  One  of  the  seven 
counsellors  of  Ahasuerus  king  of  Persia,  "  wise  men 
which  knew  the  times"  (Esth.  i.  14).  His  name 
is  not  traceable  in  the  LXX.,  which  in  this  passage 
is  corrupt.  Benfey  (quoted  by  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v.) 
suggests  that  it  is  derived  from  the  Sanscrit  marsha, 
"  worthy,"  which  is  the  same  as  the  Zend  meresh, 
and  is  probably  also  the  origin  of  Marsena,  the 
name  of  another  Persian  counsellor.     [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'IBAH  (nnnp  :  AoiUprjffis  Ex.  xvii.  7  ; 
'avTiKoyia  Num.  xx  13,  xxvlL  14  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51 ; 
\oiSopia  Num.  xx.  24:  contradictio).  In  Ex.  xvii. 
7  we  read,  "  he  called  the  name  of  the  place  Massah 
and  Meribah,"  *  where  the  people  murmured,  and  the 
rock  was  smitten.  [For  the  situation  see  Rephidim.] 
The  name  is  also  given  to  Kadesh  (Num.  xx.  13,  24, 
xxvii.  14  ;  Deut.  xxii.  51  "  Meriliah-kadesh"),  be- 
cause there  also  the  people,  when  in  want  of  water, 
strove  with  God.  There,  however,  Moses  and  Aaron 
incuri'ed  the  Divine  displeasure  because  they  "  be- 
lieved not,"  because  they  "  rebelled,"  and  "  sanctified 
not  God  in  the  midst "  of  the  people.  Impatience 
and  self-willed  assumption  of  plenary  power  are  the 
prominent  featui'es  of  their  behaviour  in  Num.  xx. 
10  ;  the  "  speaking  to  the  rock  "  (which  perhaps 
was  to  have  been  in  Jehovah's  name)  was  neglected, 
and  another  symbol,  suggestive  rather  of  them- 
selves as  the  source  of  power,  was  substituted.  In 
spite  of  these  plain  and  distinctive  features  of  differ- 
ence between  the  event  at  Kadesh  and  that  at 
Rephidim  some  commentators  have  regarded  the 
one  as  a  mere  duplicate  of  the  other,  owing  to 
a  mixture  of  earlier  and  later  legend.  [H.  H.] 


»  Chicling,  or  strife,  n]3''"lf31  HDO  ;   Trctpacrfibs  (cal 
Aoi5dpi)<Tis,  also  a.vTi.\oyia  ;  marg.  "  timptation,"  Det'.t. 


MEEIB-BAAL 

MERIB-BA'AL  {bv2  nnO,  except  on  its  4th 
occurrence-,  and  there  less  accurately  7y!l"''"lD. 
i.  e.  Meri-baal,  though  in  many  MSS.  the  fuller 
form  is  presei-ved  :  Mepi^aaA.,  Mapei^da\  ;  Alex. 
]Vl€</)pi;3aaA,  MexP'^aaA  :  Jlcri-baal),  son  of  Jo- 
nathan the  son  of  Saul  (I  Chr.  viii.  34,  ix.  40), 
doubtless  the  same  person  who  in  the  narrative  of 
2  Samuel  is  called  Mephi-bosheth.  The  reasons 
for  the  identification  are,  that  in  the  history  no 
other  son  but  Mephibosheth  is  ascribed  to  Jonathan  ; 
that  Mephibosiieth,  like  Blerib-baal,  had  a  son  named 
Micah  ;  and  that  the  terms  "  bosheth  "  and  "  baal " 
appear  from  other  examples  (e.g.  Esh-Baal  =  Ish- 
bosheth)  to  be  convertible.  What  is  the  significance 
of  the  change  in  the  former  part  of  the  name,  and 
whether  it  is  more  than  a  clerical  error  between 
the  two  Hebrew  letters  S  and  1,  does  not  appeal'  to 
have  been  ascertained.  It  is  perhaps  in  favour  of 
the  latter  explanation  that  in  some  of  the  Greek 
versions  of  1  Chr.  viii.  and  ix.  the  name  is  given  as 
Memphi-baal.  A  trace  of  the  same  thing  is  visible 
in  the  reading  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  given  above.  If 
it  is  not  a  mere  error,  then  there  is  perhaps  some 
connexion  between  the  name  of  Merib-baal  and  that 
of  his  aunt  Merab. 

Neither  is  it  clear  why  this  name  and  that  of 
Ishbosheth  should  be  given  in  a  different  form  in 
these  genealogies  to  what  they  are  in  the  historical 
narrative.  But  for  this  see  Ish-bosheth  and 
Mephi-bosheth.  [G.] 

MEE'ODACHCqnnO:  Maipwddx:  Merodach) 

is  mentioned  once  only  in  Scripture,  namely  in  Jer. 
I.  2,  where  Bel  and  Merodach  are  coupled  together, 
and  threatened  with  destruction  in  the  fall  of  Ba- 
bylon. It  has  been  commonly  concluded  from  this 
passage  that  Bel  and  Merodach  were  separate  gods ; 
but  from  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  inscriptions 
it  appears  that  this  was  not  exactly  the  case.  Mei'o- 
dach  was  really  identical  with  the  famous  Babylo- 
nian Bel  or  Belus,  the  word  being  probably  at  Hi'st 
a  mere  epithet  of  the  god,  which  by  degrees  super- 
seded his  proper  appellation.  Still  a  certain  dis- 
tinction appears  to  have  been  maintained  between 
the  names.  The  golden  image  in  the  gi-eat  temple 
at  Babylon  seems  to  have  been  worshipped  distinctly 
as  Bel  rather  than  ]\Ierodach,  while  other  idols  of 
the  god  may  have  represented  him  as  Merodach 
rather  than  Bel.  It  is  not  known  what  the  word 
Merodach  means,  or  what  the  special  aspect  of  the 
god  was,  when  worshipped  under  that  title.  In  a 
general  way  Bel-Merodach  may  be  said  to  corre- 
spond to  the  Greek  Jupiter.  He  is  "  the  old  man 
of  the  gods,"  "  the  judge,"  and  has  the  gates  of 
heaven  under  his  especial  charge.  Nebuchadnezzar 
calls  him  "  the  great  lord,  the  senior  of  the  gods, 
the  most  ancient,"  and  Neriglissar  "  the  first-born, 
of  the  gods,  the  layer-up  of  treasures."  In  the 
earlier  period  of  Baliylonian  history  he  seems  to 
share  with  several  other  deities  (as  Nebo,  Nergal, 
Bel-Nimrod,  Anu,  &c.)  the  worship  of  the  people, 
but  in  the  later  times  he  is  regarded  as  the  source 
of  all  power  and  blessings,  and  thus  concentrates  in 
his  own  person  the  greater  part  of  that  homage  and 
respect  whicii  had  previously  been  divided  among 
the  various  gods  of  the  Pantheon.  Astronomically 
he  is  identified  with  the  planet  Jupiter.     His  name 


MERODACH-BA  LADAN 


331 


*  In  the  mici;il  writing  A  is  very  liable  to  be  mistaken 
for  A,  and  in  the  ordnimy  man\iscript  ch.-iracter  A  is  not 
unlike  S.     M.  Bunscn  was  (we  belii-ve)  the  first  to  suggest 


forms  a  freqnent  element  in  the  appellations  of  Ba- 
bylonian kings,  e.  g.  Merodach-Baladan,  Evil-Mero- 
dach,  Merodach-adin-akhi,  &c. ;  and  is  found  in  this 
position  as  early  as  B.C.  1650.  (See  the  Essaij  by 
Sir  H.  Rawlinson  "  Gn  the  Religion  of  the  Babylo- 
nians and  Assyrians,"  in  Kawliuson's  Herodotus,  i. 
627-631.)  [G.  li.] 

MER'ODACH-BAL'ADAN  Q'l^bz  Tl^N-ip  = 
MapaiSax-Ba\aSdi/ :  Merodach-Baladan)  is  men- 
tioned as  king  of  Babylon  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah, 
both  in  the  second  book  of  Kings  (xx.  12)  and  in 
Isaiah  (xxxix.  1).  In  the  former  place  he  is  called 
Berodach-Baladan,  by  the  ready  interchange  of  the 
letters  3  and  JD,  which  was  familiar  to  tlie  Jews, 
as  it  has  been  to  many  other  nations.  The  ortho- 
graphy "  Merodach  "  is,  however,  to  be  preferred  ; 
since  this  element  in  the  king's  name  is  undoubtedly 
identical  with  the  appellation  of  the  famous  Baby- 
lonian deity,  who  is  always  called  "  Merodach," 
both  by  the  Hebrews  and  by  the  native  writers. 
The  name  of  Merodach-Baladan  has  been  clearly  re- 
cognised in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions.  It  appears 
under  the  form  of  Marudachus-Baldanes,  or  Maru- 
dach-Baldan,  in  a  fragment  of  Polyhistor,  preserved 
by  Eusebius  {Chron.  Can.  pars  i.  v.  1) ;  and  under 
that  of  Mardoc-empad  (or  rather  Mardoc-empal ") 
in  the  famous  "  Canon  of  Ptolemy."  Josephus 
abbreviates  it  still  more,  and  calls  the  monarch 
simply  "Baladas"  (Ant.Jud.  x.  2,  §2). 

The  Canon  gives  Merodach-Baladan  {Mardoc- 
empal)  a  reign  of  12  years — from  B.C.  721  to  B.C. 
709 — and  makes  him  then  succeeded  by  a  certain 
Arceanus.  Polyhistor  assigns  him  a  six  months' 
reign,  immediately  before  Elibus,  or  Belibus,  who 
(according  to  the  Canon)  ascended  the  throne  B.C. 
702.  It  has  commonly  been  seen  that  these  must 
be  two  different  reigns,  and  that  Merodach-Baladan 
must  therefore  have  been  deposed  in  B.C.  709,  and 
have  recovered  his  throne  in  B.C.  702,  when  he  had 
a  second  peiiod  of  dominion  lasting  half  a  year. 
The  inscriptions  contain  express  mention  of  both 
reigns.  Sargon  states  that  in  the  twelfth  year  of  his 
own  reign  he  drove  Merodach-Baladan  out  of  Ba- 
bylon, after  he  had  ruled  over  it  for  twelve  years  ; 
and  Sennacherib  tells  us  that  in  his  first  yeai-  he  de- 
feated and  expelled  the  same  monarch,  setting  up  in 
his  place  "  a  man  named  Belib."  Putting  all  our 
notices  together,  it  becomes  apparent  that  Merodach- 
Baladan  was  the  head  of  the  popular  party,  which 
resisted  the  Assyrian  monarchs,  and  strove  to  main- 
tain the  independence  of  the  country.  It  is  uncei- 
tain  whether  he  was  self-raised  or  was  the  son  of  a 
foi-mer  king.  In  the  second  Book  of  Kings  he  is 
styled  "  the  son  of  Baladan  ;"  but  the  inscriptions 
call  him  "  the  son  of  Yagin ;"  whence  it  is  to  be 
presumed  that  Baladan  was  a  more  remote  ancestor. 
Yagin,  the  real  father  of  Merodach-Baladan,  is  pos- 
sibly represented  in  Ptolemy's  Canon  by  the  name 
Jugaeus — which  in  some  copies  replaces  the  name 
Elulaeus,  as  the  appellation  of  the  immediate  prede- 
cessor of  Jlerodach-Baladan.  At  any  rate,  from  the 
time  of  Sargon,  Merodach-B.dadan  and  his  family 
were  the  champions  of  Babylonian  independence 
and  fought  with  spirit  the  losing  battle  of  their 
country.  The  king  of  whom  we  are  here  treating 
sustained  two  contests  with  the  power  of  Assyria, 
was  twice  defeated,  and  twice  compelled  to  fly  liis 


that  there  had  been  a  substitution  of  the  S  for  the  A  in    p.  .Jiie,  note  I) 


this  instance.  See  his  work,  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal 
BlHory,  vol.  I.  p.  726,  E.  T.  The  al)bieviati<jn  of  the  name 
has  many  parallels.     (See  Uawlinson's  IlcroiMuis,  vol.  i. 


332 


MBEODACH-BALADAN 


country.  His  sons,  supported  by  the  king  of  Elam, 
or  Susiana,  continued  the  struggle,  and  are  found 
among  the  adversaries  of  Esar-Haddon,  Sennacherib's 
son  and  successor.  His  grandsons  contend  against 
Asshur-bani-pal,  the  son  of  Esar-Haddon.  It  is  not 
till  the  fourth  generation  that  the  family  seems  to 
become  extinct,  and  the  Babylonians,  having  no 
champion  to  maintain  their  cause,  contentedly 
acquiesce  in  the  yoke  of  the  stranger. 

There  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  time  at  which  Me- 
rodach-Baladan  sent  his  ambassadors  to  Hezekiah, 
for  the  purpose  of  enquiring  as  to  the  astronomical 
marvel  of  which  Judaea  had  been  the  scene  (2  Chr. 
xxxii.  31).  According  to  those  commentators  who 
connect  the  illness  of  Hezekiah  with  one  or  other  of 
Sennacherib's  expeditions  against  him,  the  embassy 
has  to  be  ascribed  to  Merodaoh-Baladan's  second  or 
shorter  reign,  when  alone  he  was  contemporary 
with  .Sennacherib.  If  however  we  may  be  allowed 
to  adopt  the  view  that  Hezekiah's  illness  preceded 
the  first  invasion  of  Sennacherib  by  several  years 
(see  above,  ad  voc.  Hezekiah,  and  compare  Kaw- 
linson's  Herodotus,  i.  479,  note  ^},  synchronising 
really  with  an  attack  of  Sargon,  we  must  assign  the 
embassy  to  Merodach-Baladan's  earlier  reign,  and 
bring  it  within  the  period,  B.C.  721-709,  which 
the  Canon  assigns  to  him.  Now  the  14th  year 
of  Hezekiah,  in  which  the  embassy  should  fall 
(2  K.  XX.  6  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  5),  appears  to  have  been 
B.C.  713.  This  was  the  year  of  Merodach-Baladan's 
first  reign. 

The  increasing  power  of  Assyria  was  at  this 
period  causing  alarm  to  her  neighbours,  and  the 
circumstances  of  tlie  time  were  such  as  would  tend 
to  draw  Judaea  and  Babylonia  together,  and  to  give 
rise  to  negotiations  between  them.  The  astrono- 
mical marvel,  whatever  it  was,  which  accompanied 
the  recovery  of  Hezekiah,  would  doubtless  have 
attracted  the  attention  of  the  Babylonians ;  but  it 
was  probably  rather  the  pretext  than  the  motive 
for  the  foi-mal  embassy  which  the  Chaldaean  king 
despatched  to  .lerusalem  on  the  occasion.  The  real 
object  of  the  mission  was  most  likely  to  effect  a 
league  between  Babylon,  Judaea,  and  Egypt  (Is. 
XX.  5,  6),  in  order  to  check  the  gi'owing  power  of 
the  Assyrians.!'  Hezekiah's  exhibition  of  "  all  his 
precious  things"  (2  K.  xx.  13)  would  thus  have 
been,  not  a  mere  display,  but  a  mode  of  satisfying 
the  Babylonian  ambassadors  of  his  ability  to  support 
the  expenses  of  a  war.  The  league,  however,  though 
designed,  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  effect.  Sargon, 
acquainted  pi-obably  with  the  intentions  of  his  ad- 
versaries, anticipated  them.  He  sent  expeditions 
both  into  vSyria  and  Babylonia — seized  the  strong- 
hold of  Ashdod  in  the  one,  and  completely  defeated 
Merodach-Baladan  in  the  other.  That  monarch 
sought  safety  in  flight,  and  lived  for  eight  years  in 
exile.  At  last  he  found  an  opportunity  to  return. 
In  B.C.  703  or  702,  Babylonia  was  plunged  iu 
anarchy — the  Assyrian  yoke  was  thrown  oft',  and 
various  native  leaders  struggled  for  the  masterv. 
Under  these  cii-cumstances  the  exiled  monarch  seems 
to  have  returned,  and  recovered  his  throne.     His 


•>  Josephus  e.xpressly  states  that  Merodach-Baladan 
sent  the  ambassadors  in  order  to  form  an  alliance  with 
Hezekiah  (Ant.  Jud.  x.  2,  §2). 

*  The  mention  of  the  name  in  the  Vulgate  of  Judg. 
V.  18— tw  regione  Merome—is  only  apparent.    It  is  a 

literal  transference  of  the  words  HISJ'  'J?'nO  ?y 
rightly  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  in  the  high  places  of  the 
field,"  and  has  no  connexion  with  Mcrom. 


MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF 

adversary,  Sargon,  was  dead  or  dying,  and  a  new 
and  untried  prince  was  about  to  rule  over  the  Assy- 
rians. He  might  hope  that  the  reins  of  government 
would  be  held  by  a  weaker  hand,  and  that  he  might 
stand  his  ground  against  the  son,  though  he  had 
been  forced  to  yield  to  the  father.  In  this  hope, 
however,  he  was  disappointed.  Sennacherib  had 
scarcely  established  himself  on  the  throne,  when  he 
proceeded  to  engage  his  people-  in  wars ;  and  it 
seems  that  his  very  first  step  was  to  invade  the 
kingdom  of  Babylon.  Merodach-Baladan  had  ob- 
tained a  body  of  troops  from  his  ally,  tlie  king  of 
Susiana;  but  Sennacherib  defeated  the  combined 
army  in  a  pitched  battle ;  after  which  he  ravaged 
the  entire  country,  destroying  79  walled  cities  and 
820  towns  and  villages,  and  cai'rying  vast  numbers 
of  the  people  into  captivity.  Merodach-Baladan 
fled  to  "  the  islands  at  the  mouth  of  the  Euphrates" 
(Fox  Talbot's  Assyrian  Texts,  p.  1) — tracts  pro- 
bably now  joined  to  the  continent — and  succeeded 
in  eluding  the  search  which  the  Assyrians  made 
for  him.  If  we  may  believe  Polyhistor  however, 
this  escape  availed  him  little.  That  writer  relates 
{ap.  Euseb.  Chron.  Can.  i.  5),  that  he  was  soon 
after  put  to  death  by  Elibus,  or  Belibus,  the  vice- 
roy whom  Sennacherib  appointed  to  represent  him 
at  Babylon.  At  any  rate  he  lost  his  recovered 
crown  after  wearing  it  for  about  six  months,  ar.d 
spent  the  remainder  of  his  days  iu  exile  and  ob- 
scurity. [G.  li.] 

MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF  (DhO  iD  : 

rh  vSwp  Mup^Zv ;  Alex,  in  ver.  5,  Meppcav:  aquae 
Merom),  a  place  memorable  in  the  history  of  the 
conquest  of  Palestine.  Here,  after  Joshua  had  gained 
possession  of  the  southern  portions  of  the  country,  a 
confederacy  of  the  northern  chiefs  assembled  under 
the  leadership  of  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor  (Josh.  xi.  5), 
and  here  they  were  encotmtered  by  Joshua,  and  com- 
pletely routed  (ver.  7).  The  battle  of  Merom  was 
to  the  north  of  Palestine  what  that  of  Bef h-horx)n 
had  been  to  the  south, —  indeed  more,  for  there  do 
not  appear  to  have  been  the  same  number  of  im- 
portant towns  to  be  taken  in  detail  after  this  vic- 
tory that  there  had  been  in  the  former  case. 

The  name  of  Merom  occurs  nowhere  in  the  Bible 
but  in  the  passage  above"  mentioned ;  nor  is  it  found 
in  Josephus.  In  his  account  of  the  battle  {Ant.  v. 
1,  §18),  the  confederate  kings  encamp  "  near  Beroth, 
a  city  of  upper  Galilee,  not  far  fi'om  Kedes ;"  nor  is 
there  any  mention  of  water.  In  the  Onomasticon 
of  Eusebius  the  name  is  given  as  "  Merran,"  and  it 
is  stated  to  be  "  a  village  twelve  miles  distant  from 
Sebaste  (Samaria),  and  near  Dothaim."  It  is  a  re- 
markable fact  that  though  by  common  consent  the 
"  waters  of  Merom  "  are  identified  with  the  lake 
through  which  the  Jordan  runs  between  Banias  and 
the  Sea  of  Galilee — the  Semechonitis  ^  of  Josephus, 
and  Bahr  el  Huleh  of  the  modern  Arabs- — yet  that 
identity  cannot  be  proved  by  any  ancient  record. 
The  nearest  approach  to  proof  is  an  inference  from 
the  statement  of  Josephus  (^Ant.  v.  5,  §1),  that  the 
second  Jabin  (Judg.  iv.  v.)  "  belonged  to  the  city 

•>  71  Senex^ftTts,  or  Se/icxtoi'tTtor,  Ki)xvT\  (Ant.  v.  5,  }1 ; 
B.  J.  iii.  10,  $7,  iv.  1,  ()\).  'ihis  name  does  not  occur  in 
any  part  of  the  Bible  ;  nor  has  it  been  discovered  in  any 
author  except  Josephus.  For  the  possible  derivations  of 
it,  see  Reland  {I'al.  262-4),  and  the  summary  of  Stanley 
(.?.  &  P.  391«o<e).  To  these  it  should  be  added  that  the 
name  Semalck  is  not  confined  to  this  lake.  A  wady  of 
that  name  is  the  principal  torrent  on  the  east  of  the  Sea 
of  Tiberias. 


MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF 

Asor  (Hazor),  which  lay  above  the  lake  of  Semech- 
onitis."  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  Hazor 
of  the  first  and  the  Hazor  of  the  second  Jabin  were 
one  and  the  same  place  ;  and  as  the  waters  of  Merom 
are  named  in  connexion  with  the  former,  it  is  allow- 
able to  infer  that  they  are  identical  with  the  lake  of 
Semechonitis.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that 
this  inference  is  really  all  the  proof  we  have,  while 
against  it  we  have  to  set  the  positive  statements  of 
Joscphus  and  Eusebius  just  quoted ;  and  also  the 
&ct  that  the  Hebrew  word  Me  is  not  that  commonly 
used  for  a  large  piece  of  standing  water,  but  rather 
Yam,  "  a  sea,"  which  was  even  employed  for  so 
small  a  body  of  water  as  the  artificial  pond  or  tank 
in  Solomon's  Temple.  This  remark  would  have 
still  more  force  if,  as  was  most  probably  the  case, 
the  lake  was  larger  in  the  time  of  Joshua  than  it  is 
at  present.  Another  and  greater  objection,  which 
should  not  be  overlooked,  is  the  difKculty  attend- 
ant on  a  flight  and  pursuit  across  a  country  so 
mountainous  and  impassable  to  any  large  numbers, 
as  the  district  wliich  intervenes  between  the  Hideh 
and  Sidon.  The  tremendous  ravine  of  the  Litany 
and  the  height  of  Kalat  es-ShuMf  are  only  two  of 
the  obstacles  which  stand  in  the  way  of  a  passage 
in  this  direction.  As  however  the  lake  in  question 
is  invariably  taken  to  be  the  "  waters  of  Merom," 
and  as  it  is  an  interesting  feature  in  the  geography 
"f  the  upper  part  of  the  Jordan,  it  may  be  well  here 
to  give  some  account  of  it. 

The  region  to  which  the  name  of  Hideh"  is 
attached — the  Ard  el-Huleh— is  a  depressed  plain 
or  basin,  commencing  on  tlie  north  of  the  foot 
of  the  slopes  which  lead  up  to  the  Merj  Ayun 
and  Tell  el-Kud;/,  and  extending  southwards  to 
the  bottom  of  the  lake  which  bears  the  same 
name — Dahr  el-Huleh.  On  the  east  and  west  it  is 
enclosed  between  two  parallel  ranges  of  hills;  on 
ihe  west  the  highlands  of  Upper  Galilee — the  Jehcl 
Safat ;  and  on  the  east  a  broad  ridge  or  table-land  of 
basalt,  thrown  off  by  the  southern  base  of  Hermon, 
and  extending  do%vuwards  beyond  the  Hulcli  till 
lost  in  the  high  groujid  east  of  the  lake  of  Tiberias. 
The  latter  rises  abruptly  from  the  low  ground,  but 
the  hills  on  the  western  side  break  down  more  gi-a- 
dually,  and  leave  a  tract  of  imdulating  table-land 
of  varying  breadth  between  them  and  the  plain. 
This  basin  is  in  all  about  15  miles  long  and  4  to  5 
wide,  and  thus  occupies  an  area  about  equal  to  that 
of  tlie  lake  of  Tiberias.  It  is  the  receptacle  for 
the  drainage  of  the  highlands  on  each  side,  but 
more  especially  for  the  waters  of  the  Merj  Ayun, 
an  elevated  plateau  which  lies  above  it  amongst  the 

*=  El  Ililleh,  ^»^|,  is  probablya  very  ancient  name, 

derived  from  or  connected  with  IIul,  or  more  accu- 
rately Chul,  who  appears  in  the  lists  of  Gen.  x.  as  one  of 
the  sons  of  Aram  (Syria,  ver.  23).  In  the  Arabic  version 
of  Saadiah  of  this  passage,  the  name  of  Hul  is  given 
exactly  in  the  form  of  the  modern  name — el-Httleh. 
Josephus  {Ant.  i.  6,  $+),  in  his  account  ot  the  descendants 
of  Noah,  gives  IIul  as  OSAos,  while  he  also  calls  the  dis- 
trict in  question  OvKaSa  {Ant.  xv.  10,  ()3)  The  word 
both  in  Hebrew  and  Arabic  seems  to  have  the  force  of 
depression— the  low  land  (see  Midiaelis,  Stippl.  Nos.  6S7, 
720) ;  and  Michaelis  most  ingeniously  suggests  that  it  is 
the  root  of  the  name  K  o  i  A  rjo-upc'a,  although  in  its  present 
form  it  may  liave  been  sufficiently  modified  to  transform 
it  into  an  intelligible  Greek  word  (Idem,  Spicilegium,  ii. 
137,  138). 

d  This  name  seems  sometimes  to  have  been  applied  to 
the  lake  itself.  See  the  quotation  from  William  of  Tyre, 
— "  lacum  Meleha  '—in  Rob.  ii.  135,  note.    Burckhardl 


MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF      333 

roots  of  the  great  northern  mountains  of  Palestine. 
In  fact  the  whole  district  is  an  enormous  swamp, 
which,  though  ptu-tially  solidified  at  its  upper  por- 
tion by  the  gradual  deposit  of  detritus  fi-om  the 
hills,  becomes  more  swampy  as  its  length  is  de- 
scended, and  at  last  terminates  in  the  lake  or  pool 
which  occupies  its  southern  extremity.  It  was  pro- 
bably at  one  time  all  covered  with  water,  and  even 
now  in  the  rainy  seasons  it  is  mostly  submerged. 
During  the  dry  season,  however,  the  upper  portions, 
and  those  immediately  at  the  foot  of  the  western 
hills,  are  sufficiently  firm  to  allow  the  Arabs  to 
encamp  and  pasture  their  cattle,  but  tlie  lower  part, 
more  immediately  bordering  on  the  lake,  is  abso- 
lutely impassable,  not  only  on  account  of  its  in- 
creasing marshiness,  but  also  from  the  very  dense 
thicket  of  reeds  which  covers  it.  At  this  part  it  is 
difficult  to  say  wb.ere  the  swamp  terminates  and  the 
lake  begins,  but  farther  down  on  both  sides  the 
shores  are  perfectly  well  defined. 

In  form  the  lake  is  not  far  from  a  triangle,  the 
base  being  at  the  north  and  the  apex  at  the  south. 
It  measures  about  3  miles  in  each  direction.  Its 
level  is  placed  by  Van  de  Velde  at  120  feet  above 
the  Mediterranean.  That  of  Tell  el  Kady,  20  miles 
above,  is  647  feet,  and  of  the  Lake  Tiberias, 
20  miles  below,  653  feet,  respectively  above  and 
below  the  same  datum  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
181).  Thus  the  whole  basin  has  a  considerable 
slope  southwards.  The  Hashany  river,  which  falls 
almost  due  south  from  its  source  in  the  great  Wudy 
et-Teim,  is  joined  at  the  north-east  corner  of  the 
Ard  el-Hulch  by  the  streams  from  Banias  and 
Tell  el-Kady,  and  the  united  stream  then  flows 
on  through  the  morass,  rather  nearer  its  eastern 
than  its  western  side,  until  it  enters  the  lake  close 
to  the  eastern  end  of  its  upper  side.  From  the 
apex  of  the  triangle  at  the  lower  end  tlie  Jordan 
flows  out.  In  addition  to  the  Hashany  and  to  the 
innumerable  smaller  watercourses  which  filter  into 
it  the  waters  of  the  swamp  above,  the  Inke  is  fed  by 
independent  springs  on  the  slopes  of  its  enclosing 
mountains.  Of  these  the  most  considerable  is  the 
Ain  el-Mellahali.^  near  the  upper  end  of  its  western 
side,  which  sends  down  a  stream  of  40  or  50  feet  in 
width.  The  water  of  the  lake  is  clear  and  sweet ; 
it  is  covered  in  parts  by  a  broad-leaved  plant,  and 
aboimds  in  water-fowl.  Owing  to  its  triangular 
form  a  considerable  space  is  left  between  the  lake 
and  the  mountains,  at  its  lower  end.  This  appears 
to  be  more  the  case  on  the  west  than  on  the  east, 
and  the  rolling  plain  thus  formed  is  very  fertile,  and 
cultivated  to  the  water's  edge.*     This  cultivated 


did  not  visit  it,  but  possibly  guided  by  the  meaning  of 
the  Arabic  word  (salt),  says  that  "  the  S.W.  shore  bears 
the  name  of  Melaha  from  the  ground  being  covered  with 
a  saline  crust"  (June  20,  1812).  The  same  thing  seems 
to  be  afBrmed  in  the  Talmud  (Ahaloth,  end  of  chap, 
iii.  quoted  by  Schwarz  p.  i2note);  but  nothing  of  the 
kind  appears  to  have  been  observed  by  other  tra\'pllers. 
See  especially  Wilson,  Lands,  &c.,  ii.  163.  By  Schwarz 
(p.  29)  the  name  is  given  as  "  Ein  al-Malcha,  the  King's 
spring."  If  tliis  could  be  substantiated,  it  would  be  allow- 
able to  see  in  it  a  traditional  reference  to  the  encampment 
of  the  Kings.  Schwarz  also  mentions  (pp.  41,  A2nute) 
the  following  names  fur  the  lake:  "Sihclii,"  perhaps  a 
mistake  for  "Somcho,"  i.e.  Semechonitis  ;  "  Kaldayeh, 
'  the  high,'  identical  with  the  Hebrew  Merom ;"  '•  Yam 

Chavilah,  n?'''in  Q'' ;"  though  this  may  merely  be  his 
translator's  blunder  for  Chuileh,  i.  e.  Hiileh. 

"  This  undulating  plain  appears  to  be  of  volcanic  origin. 
Van  de  Velde  {Syr.  tt  I'al.  415,  416),  speakiug  of  the  part 


334 


MERONOTHITE 


district  is  allied  the  Ard  el-Khait,  perhaps  "the 
undulating  land,"  el-Khait^  being  also  the  name 
which  the  Arabs  call  the  lake  (Thomson,  Bihl. 
Sacra,  199  ;  Rob.  Bib.  Res.  1st  ed.  iii.  App.  135, 
136).  In  fact  the  name  Hidch  appears  to  belong 
rather  to  the  district,  and  only  to  the  lake  a-s  oc- 
cupying a  portion  thereof.  It  is  not  restricted  to 
this  spot,  but  is  applied  to  another  very  fertile 
district  in  northern  Syria  lying  below  Hamah.  A 
town  of  the  same  name  is  also  found  south  of  and 
close  to  the  Kasimiyeh  river  a  few  mi-les  fi'om  the 
castle  of  ffiintii. 

Supposing  the  lake  to  be  identical  with  the 
"  waters  of  Jlerom,"  the  plain  just  spoken  of  on  its 
south-western  margin  is  the  only  spot  which  could 
have  been  the  site  of  Joshua's  victory,  though,  as  the 
Canaanites  chose  their  own  gi'ound,  it  is  difficult  to 
imagine  that  they  would  have  encamped  in  a  position 
fi'om  which  there  was  literally  no  escape.  But  this 
only  strengthens  the  difficulty  already  expressed  as 
to  the  identification.  Still  the  district  of  the  Huleh 
will  always  possess  an  interest  for  the  Biblical  stu- 
dent, fi'om  its  connexion  with  the  Jordan,  and  from 
the  cities  of  ancient  fame  which  stand  on  its  border 
— Kedesh,  Hazor,  Dan,  Laish,  Caesarea,  PhUippi,  &c. 

The  above  account  is  compiled  from  the  fol- 
lowing sources: — The  Sources  of  the  Jordan,  Sic, 
by  Rev.  \V.  M.  Thomson,  in  Bibl.  Sacra,  Feb.  1846, 
pp.  198-201;  Robinson's  Bib.  Res.  (1st  ed.  iii. 
341-343,  and  App.  135)  ii.  435,  436,  iii.  395,  396  ; 
Wilson,  Lands,  &c.  ii.  316  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Syria 
and  Pal.  ii.  416  ;  Stanley,  ,5'.  ^  P.  chap.  .xi. 

The  situation  of  the  Beroth,  at  which  Josephus 
(as  above)  places  Joshua's  victory,  is  debated  at 
some  length  by  Michaelis  {Allg.  Bibliothek  &c., 
No.  84)  with  a  strong  desire  to  prove  that  it  is 
Berytus,  the  modern  Beirut,  and  that  Kedesh  is  on 
the  Lake  of  Hums  (Emessa).  His  argument  is 
grounded  mainly  on  an  addition  of  Josephus  (^Ant. 
V.  1,  §18)  to  the  narrative  as  given  both  by  the 
Hebrew  and  I, XX.,  viz.  that  it  occupied  Joshua  five 
days  to  march  fi'om  Gilgal  to  the  encampment  of 
the  kings.  For  this  the  reader  must  be  referred  to 
jMichaelis  himself.  But  Josephus  elsewhere  men- 
tions a  town  called  Meroth,  which  may  possibly  be 
the  same  as  Beroth.  This  seems  to  have  been  a  place 
naturally  strong,  and  important  as  a  militaiy  post 
(Ff'ta,  §37  ;  B.  J.  ii.  20,  §6),  and  moreover  was 
the  western  limit  of  Upper  Galilee  {B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1). 
This  would  place  it  somewhere  about  the  plain  of 
Akka,  much  more  suitable  ground  for  the  chariots 
of  the  Canaanites  than  any  to  be  found  near  the 
Hnleh,  while  it  also  makes  the  account  of  the  pur- 
suit to  Sidon  more  intelligible.  [G.] 

MERON'OTHITE,  THE  (Tiy-ISri :  b  sk 
JA^padcav,  Alex.  MapaOwy  ;  in  Neh.  6  firipcc- 
yQide'iTris :  Mernnathites),  that  is,  the  native  of  a 
place  called  probably  Meronoth,  of  which,  however, 
no  furtlier  traces  have  yet  been  discovered.  Two 
Meronothites  are  named  in  the  Bible: — 1.  Jeh- 
DEIAII,  who  had  the  charge  of  the  royal  asses  of 
King  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  30)  ;  and  2.  Jadon,  one 
of  those  who  assisted  in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  the  captivity  (Nch. 
iii.  7).     In  the  latter  case  we  are  possibly  aflbrded 


below  the  Wady  Feralm,  a  few  miles  only  S.  of  the  lake 
calls  it  "  a  plain  entirely  compused  of  lava;"  and  at  the 
Jisr-Brnat-Tal-ub  lie  speaks  of  the  "  black  lava  sides  "  of 
the  Jordan.  Wilson,  however  (ii.  31G),  calls  the  soil  of  the 
same  part  the  "  debris  of  basaltic  rocks  and  dykes." 
f  The  writer  has  not  succeeded   in  ascertatiiiug  the 


MESECH 

a  clue  to  the  situation  of  Meronoth  by  the  fact  that 
Jadon  is  mentioned  between  a  Gibeonite  and  the 
men  of  (Jibeon,  who  again  are  followed  by  the  men 
of  Mizpah:  but  no  name  like  it  is  to  be  found 
among  the  towns  of  that  district,  either  in  the  lists 
of  Joshua  (xviii.  11-28),  of  Nehemiah  (.xi.  31-35), 
or  in  the  catalogue  of  modern  towns  given  by  Ro- 
binson {B.  R.  1st  ed.  iii.  Append.  121-125)."  For 
this  circumstance  compare  Mecherathite.  [G.] 

ME'EOZ(ThD:  Mrjpc^C;  Alex.  Ma^oop:  terra 
Meroz),  a  place  mentioned  only  in  the  Song  of 
Deborah  and  Barak  in  Judg.  v.  23,  and  there  de- 
nounced because  its  inhabitants  had  refused  to  take 
any  part  in  the  struggle  with  Sisera : — 

Curse  ye  Meroz,  said  the  messenger  of  Jehovah, 

Curse  ye,  curse  ye,  its  inhabitants ; 

Because  they  came  not  to  the  help  of  Jehovah, 

To  the  help  of  Jehovah  against  the  mighty. 

The  denimciation  of  this  faintheartedness  is  made  to 

form  a  pendant  to  the  blessing  proclaimed  on  the 

prompt  action  of  Jael. 

Meroz  must  have  been  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  the  Kishon,  but  its  real  position  is  not  known  : 
possibly  it  was  destroyed  in  obedience  to  the 
curse.  A  place  named  Merrus  (but  Eusebius  Mep- 
pav),  is  named  by  Jerome  {Onom.  "Merrom")  as 
12  miles  north  of  Sebaste,  near  Dothain,  but  this  is 
too  far  south  to  have  been  near  the  scene  of  the 
conflict.  Far  more  feasible  is  the  conjecture  of 
Schwarz  (168,  and  see  36)  that  Meroz  is  to  be 
found  at  Merasas — more  correctly  el-Murussus — 
a  ruined  site  about  4  miles  N.W.  of  Beisan,  on  the 
southern  slopes  of  the  hills,  which  are  the  continita- 
tion  of  the  so-called  "  Little  Hermou,"  and  form 
the  northern  side  of  the  valley  ( Wady  Jalud), 
which  leads  directly  from  the  plain  of  Jezreel  to 
the  Jordan.  The  town  must  have  commanded  the 
Pass,  and  if  any  of  Sisera's  people  attempted,  as  the 
Midianites  did  when  routed  by  Gideon,  to  escape  in 
that  direction,  its  inhabitants  might  no  doubt  have 
prevented  their  doing  so,  and  have  slaughtered 
them.  El-Murussus  is  mentioned  by  Burckhardt 
(July  2  :  he  calls  it  Meraszrasz),  Robinson  (ii.  356), 
and  others. 

Fiirst  [Ilandivb.  786a)  suggests  the  identity  of 
Meroz  with  Merom,  the  place  which  may  have  given 
its  name  to  the  waters  of  Merom,  in  the  neighboiu-- 
hood  of  which  Kedesh,  the  residence  of  Jael,  where 
Sisera  took  refuge,  was  situated.  But  putting  aside 
the  fact  of  the  non-existence  of  any  town  named 
Merom,  there  is  against  this  suggestion  the  con- 
sidei'ation  that  Sisera  left  his  army  and  fled  alone  in 
another  direction.  , 

In  the  Jewish  traditions  preserved  in  the  Com- 
mentary on  the  Song  of  Deborah  attributed  to  St. 
Jerome,  Meroz,  which  may  be  interpreted  as  secret, 
is  made  to  signify  the  evil  angels  wlio  led  on  the 
Canaanites,  who  are  cursed  by  Michael  the  angel  of 
Jehovah  the  leader  of  the  Israelites.  [G.] 

ME'RUTH  {'E/j-firipove  :  Emerus).  A  comip- 
tiou  of  Immer  1,  in  Ezr.  ii.  37  (1  Esd.  v.  24). 

MES'ECH,  MESH'ECH  (-rjE^'D  :  Uoff6x  : 
ilosocli),  a  son  of  Japheth  (Gen.  x.  2  ;  1  Chr.  i.  5), 
and  the  progenitor  of  a  race  fi-etjuently  noticed  in 


signification  of  this  Arabic  word.  By  Schwarz  (p.  47) 
it  is  given  as  "  Bachr  Chit,"  '  wheat  sea,'  because  miich 
wheat  is  sown  in  its  neighbourhood."  This  is  probably 
what  Prof.  Stanley  alludes  to  when  he  reports  the  name 
as  Bahr  Hit  or  '  sea  of  wheat "  (S.  &  P.  391  note). 


MESHA 

Scripture  in  connexion  with  Tubal,  Magog,  and 
other  northern  nations.  They  appear  as  allies  of 
Gog  (p]z.  xxxviii.  2,  3,  xxxix.  1),  and  as  supply- 
ing the  Tyrians  with  copper  and  slaves  (Ez.  xxvii. 
13  j  ;  in  Ps.  cxx.  5,*  they  are  noticed  as  one  of 
the  remotest,  and  at  the  same  time  rudest  nations 
of  the  world.  Both  tlie  name  and  the  associations 
are  in  flivour  of  the  identification  of  Meshech  with 
the  Moschi :  the  form  of  the  name  adopted  by  the 
LXX.  and  the  Vulg.  approaches  most  nearly  to  the 
classical  designation,  while  in  Procopius  {B.  G.  iv. 
2)  we  meet  with  another  form  (Me'trxoi)  which 
assimilates  to  the  Hebrew.  The'position  of  the  Moschi 
in  the  age  of  Ezekiel  was  probably  the  same  as  is 
described  by  Herodotus  (iii.  94),  viz.  on  the  bor- 
ders of  Colchis  and  Armenia,  where  a  mountain 
chain  connecting- Anti-Taurus  with  Caucasus,  was 
named  after  them  the  Moschici  Monies,  and  where 
was  also  a  district  named  by  Strabo  (xi.  497-499) 
Moschice.  In  the  same  neighbourhood  were  the 
Tibareni,  who  have  been  generally  identified  with 
the  Biblical  Tubal.  The  Colchian  tribes,  the  Cha- 
lybes  more  especially,  were  sjcilled  in  working  metals, 
and  hence  arose  the  trade  in  the  "  vessels  of  brass  " 
with  Tyre ;  nor  is  it  at  all  improbable  that  slaves 
were  largely  exported  thence  as  now  from  the  neigh- 
bouring district  of  Georgia.  Although  the  Moschi 
were  a  comparatively  unimportiint  race  in  classical 
times,  they  had  previously  been  one  of  the  most 
powerful  nations  of  Western  Asia.  Tlie  Assyi'ian 
monarchs  were  engaged  in  frequent  wars  with  them, 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  they  had  occupied  the 
whole  of  the  district  afterwards  named  Cappadocia. 
In  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  the  name  appears  under 
the  form  of  Muskai :  a  somewhat  similar  name  Ma- 
shoash  appears  in  an  Egyptian  inscription,  which  com- 
memorates the  achievements  of  the  third  Rameses 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Ei/.  i.  398,  Abridg.).  The  sub- 
sequent history  of  Meshech  is  unknown  ;  Knobol's 
attempt  to  connect  them  with  the  Ligurians 
(  Volkertaf.  p.  119  &c.)  is  devoid  of  all  solid  ground. 
As  far  as  the  name  and  locality  are  concerned,  Mus- 
covite is  a  more  probable  hypothesis  (Rawlinsou, 
Herod,  i.  652-3).  "  [W.  L.  B.] 

ME'SHA  (N^'D,  perhaps  =.  m'^'q,  "  re- 
treat," Ges. :  MaffffYj ;  Mcssa'),  the  name  of  one  of 
the  geographical  limits  of  the  .Joktanites  when  they 
first  settled  in  Arabia  :  "  And  their  dwelling  was 
from  Mesha  "^Dn^n  "in  nnsp  ri3N3  iS'L*'J5pj,  [as 
thou  goest]  unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  East  "  (Gen. 
X.  30).  The  position  of  the  early  Joktanite  colonists 
is  clearly  made  out  from  the  traces  they  have  left  in 
the  ethnology,  language,  and  monuments  of  Southern 
Arabia  ;  and  without  putting  too  precise  a  limita- 
tion on  the  possible  situation  of  Mesha  and  Sephar, 
we  may  suppose  that  these  places  must  have  fallen 
within  the  south-western  quarter  of  the  peninsula ; 
including  the  modern  Yemen  on  the  west,  and  the 
districts  of  'Oman,  JIahreh,  Shihr,  &c.,  as  far  as 
Hadramiivvt,  on  the  east.  These  general  boundaries 
are  strengthened  by  the  identification  of  Sephar 
.with  the  port  of  Zufari,  or  Dhafdri;  though  the 

"  Various  explanations  have  been  offered  to  account  for 
the  juxtaposition  of  two  such  remote  nations  as  Mescch 
and  Kedar  in  tliis  passage.  Tlie  LXX.  does  not  recognize 
it  as  a  proijcr  name,  but  renders  it  eixaKprne-q.  Hitzig 
BUffgests  the  identity  of  Mescch  with  Dammcsech,  or  Da- 
mascus. It  is,  however,  quite  possible  that  the  Psalmist 
selects  the  two  nations  for  the  very  reason  which  is  re- 
garded as  an  objection,  viz.,  their  remoteness  from  each 
otJier,  though  at  the  same  time  their  wild  and  uncivilized 


MESHA 


335 


site  of  Sephar  may  possibly  be  hereafter  connected 
with  the  old  Himyerite  metropolis  in  the  Yemen 
[see  Arabia,  p.  94,  and  Sephar],  but  this  would 
not  materially  alter  the  question.  In  Sephar  we 
believe  we  have  the  eastern  limit  of  the  early  set- 
tlers, whether  its  site  be  the  sea-poft  or  the  inland 
city  ;  and  the  correctness  of  this  supposition  appears 
from  the  Biblical  record,  in  which  the  migration  is 
apparently  from  west  to  east,  from  the  ])robable 
course  taken  by  the  immigrants,  and  from  the 
greater  importance  of  the  known  western  settle- 
ments of  the  Joktanites,  or  those  of  the  Yemen. 

If  then  Mesha  was  the  western  limit  of  the  Jok- 
tanites, it  must  be  sought  for  in  north-western 
Yemen.  But  the  identifications  that  have  been 
proposed  are  not  satisfactory.  The  sea-port  called 
Movaa  or  Mov{^a,  mentioned  by  Ptolemy,  Pliny, 
Arrian,  and  others  (see  the  Dictionary  of  Geography, 
s.  V.  Bluza)  presents  the  most  probable  site.  It 
was  a  town  of  note  in  classical  times,  but  has  since 
fallen  into  decay,  if  the  modern  Moosa  be  the  same 
place.  The  latter  is  situate  in  about  13°  40'  N. 
lat.,  43°  20'  E.  long.,  and  is  near  a  mountain  called 
the  Three  Sisters,  or  Jebel  Moosh,,  in  the  Admi- 
ralty Chart  of  the  Red  Sea,  drawn  from  the  sur- 
veys of  Captain  PuUen,  R.N.  Gesenius  thinks  this 
identification  probable,  but  he  appears  to  have  been 
unaware  of  the  existence  of  a  modern  site  called 
Moosa,  saying  that  Muza  was  nearly  where  now  is 
Maushid.  Bochart,  also,  holds  the  identification 
with  Muza  {Phaleg,  xxx.).  ]\Iesha  may  possibly 
have  lain  inland,  and  more  to  the  north-west  of 
Sephar  than  the  position  of  MoosJi  would  indicate  ; 
but  this  is  scarcely  to  be  assumed.  There  is,  how- 
ever, a  Mount  Moosh,"  situate  in  Nejd,  in  the  terri- 
tory of  the  tribe  of  Teiyi  {Mardsid  and  Mushtarak, 
s.  v.).  There  have  not  been  wanting  writers  among 
the  late  Jews  to  convert  IMesha  and  Sephar  into 
Mekkah  and  El-Medeeneh  {Phaleg,  I.e.).  [E.S.P.] 

ME'SHA  (1!^''D:  Uokto.;  Jos.  Mitral :  Mesa). 
1.  The  king  of  Moab  in  the  reigns  of  Ahab  and  his 
sons  Ahaziah  and  Jehoram,  kings  of  Israel  (2  K.  iii.  4), 
and  tributary  to  the  first.  Probably  the  allegiance 
of  Moab,  with  that  of  the  tribes  east  of  Jordan,  was 
transferred  to  the  northern  kingdom  of  Israel  upon 
the  division  of  the  monarchy,  for  there  is  no  account 
of  any  subjugation  of  the  countiy  subsequent  to  the 
war  of  extermination  with  which  it  was  visited  by 
David,  when  Benaiah  displayed  his  prowess  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  20),  and  "the  Moabites  became  David's  serv- 
ants, bearers  of  gifts"  (2  Sam.  viii.  2).  When 
Ahab  had  fallen  in  battle  at  llamoth  Gilead,  Mesha 
seized  the  opportunity  aflorded  by  the  confusion 
consequent  upon  this  disaster,  and  the  feeble  reign 
of  Ahaziah,  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of  Israel  and  free 
himself  from  the  burdensome  tribute  of  "  a  hundred 
thousand  wethers  and  a  hundred  thousand  rams 
with  tlieir  wool."  The  country  east  of  the  Jordan 
was  rich  in  pasture  for  cattle  (Num.  xxxii.  1),  the 
chief  wealth  of  the  Moabites  consisted  in  their  large 
flocks  of  sheep,  and  the  king  of  this  pastoral  people 
is  described   as  nohed  (1pi3),   "  a  sheep-master," 


character  may  have  been  the  groimd  of  the  selection,  as 
Hengstcnberg  (Comm.  in  loc.)  suggests.  We  have  already 
had  to  notice  luiobel's  idea,  that  the  Mesech  in  this  passage 
is  the  Meshech  of  1  CUr.  i.  5,  and  the  Babylonian  Mesene. 
[Mash.] 


w_yo 


336 


MESHA 


or  owner  of  herds."  About  the  signification  of  this 
word  nohecl  tliere  is  not  much  doubt,  but  its  origin 
is  obscure.  It  occurs  but  once  besides  in  Am.  i.  1, 
where  the  prophet  Amos  is  described  as  "  among 
th^henlmen  (D^lpiJ,  ndkedim)  ofTelwah."  On 
this  Kimchi  remarks  that  a  herdmau  was  called 
noked,  because  most  cattle  have  black  or  white 
spots  (comp.  nipJ,  nahod.  Gen.  sxx.  32,  A.  \. 
"speckled"),  or  as  Buxtorf  explains  it,  because 
sheep  are  generally  marked  with  certain  signs  so  as 
to  be  known.  But  it  is  highly  improbable  that 
any  such  etymology  should  be  correct,  and  Fiirst's 
conjecture  that  it  is  derived  from  an  obsolete  root, 
signifying  to  keep  or  feed  cattle,  is  more  likely  to 
be  true  {Concord,  s.  v.). 

When,  upon  the  death  of  Aliaziah,  his  brother 
Jehoram  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Israel,  one  of 
his  first  acts  was  to  secure  the  assistance  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  his  father's  ally,  in  reducing  the  Moabites 
to  their  former  condition  of  tributaries.  The  united 
armies  of  the  two  kings  marched  by  a  circuitous 
route  round  the  Dead  Sea,  and  were  joined  by  the 
forces  of  the  king  of  Edora.  [Jkhoram.]  The  dis- 
ordered soldiers  of  Moab,  eager  only  foi-  spoil,  were 
surprised  by  the  warriors  of  Israel  and  their  allies, 
and  becinie  an  easy  prey.  In  the  panic  which 
ensued  they  were  slaughtered  without  mercy,  their 
country  was  made  a  desert,  and  the  king  took  refuge 
in  liis  last  stronghold  and  defended  himself  with  the 
energy  of  despair.  With  700  fighting  men  he  made 
a  vigorous  attempt  to  cut  his  way  thrgugh  the  be- 
leaguering army,  and  when  beaten  back,  he  with- 
dre^w  to  the  wall  of  his  city,  and  there,  in  sight  of 
the  allied  host,  offered  his  first-born  son,  his  suc- 
cessor in  the  kingdom,  as  a  burnt-otfering  to  Che- 
mosh,  the  ruthless  fire-god  of  Moab.  His  bloody 
sacrifice  had  so  for  the  desired  effect  that  the  be- 
siegers retired  from  liim  to  their  own  land.  There 
appears  to  be  no  reason  for  supposing  that  tlie  son 
of  the  king  of  Edom  was  the  victim  ou  this  occa- 
sion, whether,  as  K.  Joseph  Kimchi  supposed,  he 
was  already  in  the  power  of  tlie  king  of  lloab,  and 
was  the  cause  of  the  Edomites  joining  the  armies  of 
Israel  and  Judah ;  or  whether,  as  R.  Sloses  Kimchi 
suggested,  he  was  taken  prisoner  in  the  sally  of  the 
Moabites,  and  sacrificed  out  of  revenge  for  its 
failure.  These  conjectures  appear  to  have  arisen 
from  an  attempt  to  find  in  this  incident  the  event 
to  which  allusion  is  made  in  Am.  ii.  1,  where  the 
Moabite  is  charged  with  buraing  the  bones  of  the 
king  of  Edom  into  lime.  It  is  more  natui'al,  and 
renders  the  nan-ative  more  vivid  and  consistent,  to 
suppose  that  the  king  of  Moab,  finding  his  last  re- 
source fail  him,  endeavoured  to  avert  the  wrath 
and  obtain  the  aid  of  his  god  by  the  most  costly 
sacrifice  in  his  power.    [MOAB.] 

2.  (yC'''?0 :  Mapio-a;  Alex.  Mapicraj :  Mesa). 
The  eldest  son  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron  by  liis 
wife  Azubah,  as  Kimchi  conjectures  (1  Chr.  ii.  42). 
He  is  called  the  father,  that  is  the  prince  or  founder, 


"  The  LXX.  leave  it  untranslated  (i/wk^S,  Alex,  vum-qe), 
MS  dot's  the  Peshlto  Syriac ;  but  Aiiuila  renders  it  irotn- 
j'ioTp6(|)0!,  and  Symraachus  rpithoiv  iSoo-K^/iara,  following 
the  Targum  and  Arabic,  and  themselves  followed  in  the 
margin  uf  the  Hexaplar  Syi'iac.  In  Am.  i.  1,  Synimachus 
has  simply  ttoi.ij.tiv.    The  Kamoos,  as  quoted  by  Bochart 

{Bieroz.  i.  c.  44),  gives  an  Arabic  word,  Jyjlj,  nakad,  not 
traced  to  any  origin,  which  denotes  an  inferior  kind  of 
sheep,  ugly  and  little  valued  except  for  its  wool.    The 


MESHACII 

of  Ziph.  Both  the  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  have 
"  Elishamai,"  apparently  from  the  previous  verse, 
while  the  LXX.,  unless  they  had  a  different  reading, 
yti^lD,  seem  to  have  repeated  "  Mareshah,"  which 
occurs  imm.ediately  afterwards. 

3.  (Nti'''0:  Uiffd;  Alex.  MttfO-o:  Mosa).  ABen- 
jamite,  son  of  Shaharaim,  by  his  wife  Hodesh,  who 
bare  him  in  the  land  of  Moab  (1  Chr.  viii.  9).  The 
Vulgate  and  Alex.  MS.  must  have  had  the  reading 
Nfia.  [W.  A.  W.] 

ME'SHACH  (■^^"•O:  Mio-ctx  ;  Alex.  Mio-ok: 
Misach).  The  name  given  to  Mishael,  one  of  the 
companions  of  Daniel,  and  like  him  of  the  blood-royal 
of  Judah,  who  with  three  others  was  chosen  from 
among  the  captives  to  be  taught  "  the  learning  and 
the  tongue*  of  the  Chaldaeans  "  (Dan.  i.  4),  so  that 
they  might  be  qualified  to  "  stand  before "  king 
Nebuchadnezzar-  (Dan.  i.  5)  as  his  personal  attendants 
and  advisers  (i.  20).  During  their  three  years  of 
preparation  they  were  maintained  at  the  king's  cost, 
under  the  charge  of  the  chief  of  the  eunuchs,  wbj 
placed  them  with  "  the  Melzar,"  or  chief  butler. 
The  story  of  their  simple  diet  is  well  known.  When 
the  time  of  their  probation  was  ended,  such  was 
"  the  knowledge  and  skill  in  all  learning  and  wisdom  " 
which  God  had  given  them,  that  the  king  found  them 
"  ten  times  better  than  all  the  magicians  and  astro- 
logers that  were  in  all  his  realm"  (i.  20).  Upon 
Daniel's  promotion  to  he  "  chief  of  the  magicians," 
his  three  companions,  by  his  influence,  were  set 
"  over  the  affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon"  (ii. 
49).  But,  notwithstanding  their  Chaldaean  education, 
these  three  young  Hebrews  were  strongly  attached 
to  the  religion  of  their  fathers  ;  and  their  refusal  to 
join  in  the  worship  of  the  image  on  the  plain  of 
Dura  gave  a  handle  of  accusation  to  the  Chaldaeans, 
who  were  jealous  of  their  advancement,  and  eagerly 
reported  to  the  king  the  heretical  conduct  of  these 
"  Jewish  men"  (iii.  12)  who  stood  so  high  iii  his 
favour.  The  rage  of  the  king,  the  swift  sentence 
of  condemnation  passed  upon  the  three  ofl^enders, 
their  miraculous  preservation  from  the  fiery  furnace 
heated  seven  times  hotter  than  usual,  the  king's 
acknowledgment  of  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abednego,  with  their  restoration  to  office,  are 
written  in  the  3rd  chapter  of  Daniel,  and  there  the 
history  leaves  them.  The  name  "  Meshach  "  is 
rendered  by  Fiirst  {Hcviidw.')  "  a  ram,"  and  derived 
from  the  .^anscrit  meshah.  He  goes  on  to  say  that 
it  was  the  name  of  the  Sun-god  of  the  Chaldaeans, 
without  giving  any  authority,  or  stopping  to  explain 
the  phenomenon  presented  by  the  name  of  a  Chaldaean 
divinity  with  an  Aryan  etymology.  That  Meshach 
was  the  name  of  some  god  of  the  Chaldaeans  is  ex- 
tremely probable,  from  the  fact  that  Daniel,  who 
had  the  name  of  Belteshazzar,  was  so  called  after 
the  god  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  iv.  8),  and  that 
Abednego  was  named  aftei-  Nego,  or  Nebo,  the  Chal- 
daean name  for  the  planet  Mercury.      [W.  A.  W.] 


keejicr  of  such  sheep  is  called  j^Lrj.  iralckad,  which 

Bochart  identifies  with  ndlced.  But  if  this  be  the  case, 
it  is  a  little  remarkable  that  the  Arabic  translator  should 
have  passed  over  a  word  apparently  so  appropriate,  and 
followed  the  version  of  the  Targum,  "an  owner  of  flocks." 
Gesenius  and  Lee,  however,  accept  this  as  the  solution. 

*  The  expression     3    jlEi'?-!    "1SD   73   includes  the 
whole  of  the  Chaldaean  literature,  written  and  spoken. 


\ 


mp:shelemiah 

MESHELEMI'AH  (n'O^PtJ^D:  Mo<ro\Aa/xi' ; 
Alex.  Mo(To\\d/j. :  Musollaiaiak,  1  Chr.  ix.  21  ; 
•in^P?tJ*p:  Mo(re\A.6;uia  ;  Alex.  MoffoAA-ct/^,  Ma- 

treWafiia,  Mfcro\\f/j.(a:  Mcscllemiah,  1  Chr.  xxvi. 
1,  2,  9j.  A  Korhite,  son  of  Kore,  of  the  sons  of 
Asaph,  who  witli  his  seven  sons  and  liis  brethren, 
"  sons  of  might,"  were  poi-ters  or  gate-keepers  of  the 
house  of  Jehovah  in  the  reign  of  David.  He  is  evi- 
dently the  same  as  Shelemiah  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  14),  to 
whose  custody  the  East-gate,  or  principal  entrance, 
vvas  committed,  and  whose  son  Zechariah  was  a 
wise  couusellor,  and  had  charge  of  the  north  gate. 
*'  Shallum  the  son  of  Kore,  the  son  of  Ebiasaph, 
the  son  of  Korah"  (1  Chr.  ix.  19),  who  was  chief 
of  the  porters  (17),  and  who  gave  his  name  to  a 
family  which  performed  the  same  office,  and  returned 
from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  42  ; 
Neh.  vii.  45),  is  apparently  identical  with  Shelemiah, 
Meshelemiuh,  and  Meshullam  (comp.  1  Chr.  ix.l7, 
with  Neh.  xii.  25).  -  [W.  A.  W.] 

MESHEZABE'EL  (^XnrK'O  :    MaCe^v\  ; 

Alex.  Mao-e^eiTjX;   F.  A.  Mao-efe/SrjA:  Mcsczebd). 

1.  Ancestor  of  Meshullam,  who  assisted  Nehe- 
miah  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh. 
iii.  4).    He  was  apparently  a  priest. 

2.  (JAeffu^i^r)\:  i^lesizahel).  One  of  the  "heads 
of  the  people,"  probably  a  family,  who  sealed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  21). 

3.  (Bao-Tj^a  :  ^-  A.  3rd  hand,  Ba(rri(a$fri\  : 
Mesezebel).  The  father  of  Pethahiah,  and  descendant 
of  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi.  24). 

MESHIL'LEIVJITH  (n"'O^K'D  :  maff€\fi<ie  : 

Alex.  MoffoWafj.uiO  :  Mosbllamith).  The  son  of 
Immer,  a  priest,  and  ancestor  of  Am;ishai  or  Mjuisiai, 
according  to  Neh.  xi.  13,  and  of  Pashurand  Adaiah, 
according  to  1  Chr.  ix.  12.  In  Neh.  xi.  13  he  is 
called  Meshillemoth. 

MESHIL'LEMOTH  (DIJO^t^'D  :     Mu,<To\a- 

(jLoid ;  Alex.  MoiToWafiwd :  Mowllamotli).  An 
Ephraimite,  ancestor  of  Berechiah,  one  of  the  chiefs 
of  the  tribe  in  the  reign  of  Pekah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  12). 
2.  (Meirapi^iS).  Neh.  xi.  13.  The  same  as 
Meshillemith. 

MESHUL'LAM  (D^K'P  :   Mco-oAActju  ;  Alex. 

Metro-aA-f)!' :  Messulam).  1.  Ancestor  of  Shaphan 
the  scribe  (2  K.  xxii.  3). 

2.  (MoffoWdn  ;  Alex.  MoaoWa/jios :  Mosollam). 
The  son  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  iii.  19). 

3.  (Vat.  and  Alex.  M.offoX\dfx).  A  Gadite,  one 
of  the  chief  men  of  the  tribe,  who  dwelt  in  Bashau 
at  the  time  the  genealogies  were  recorded  in  the 
reign  of  Jotham  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  v.  13). 

4.  A  Benjamite,  of  the  sons  of  Elpaal  (1  Chr. 
viii.  17). 

5.  (Mecrot/Aci/U  ;  F.  A. 'A/xecroi/Aa/i  in  Neh.).  A 
Benjamite,  the  son  of  Hodaviah  or  Joed,  and  father 
of  .Sallu,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe  who  settled 
at  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (1  Chr. 
ix.  7i  Neh.  xi.  7). 

6.  (Alex.  MatraAAa/i).  A  Benjamite,  son  of 
Shephathiah,  wlio  lived  at  Jerusalem  after  the  cap- 
tivity (1  Chr.  ix.  8). 

7.  (Mecroi'Aaju  in  Neh. ;  Alex.  Mo(roAAa/i).  The 
same  as  Shallum,  who  was  high-piiest  probably 
in  the  reign  of  Amon,  and  father  of  Hilkiah  ( 1  (,"hr. 
ix.  1 1  ;  Neh.  xi.  11).  His  descent  is  traced  through 
Zadok  and  Meraioth  to  Ahitub ;  or,  as  is  more  pi-o- 
bable,  the  names  Bleraioth   and    Ahitub  are   tinns- 

VOL.  11. 


MESOBAITE 


337 


I  posed,  and  his  descent  is  from  Meraioth  as  the  more 
!  remote  ancestor  (comp.  1  Chr.  vi.  7). 

8.  A  priest,  son  of  Meshillemith,  or  Meshil- 
lemoth, the  son  of  Immer,  and  ancestor  of  Maasiai 
or  Amashai  (1  Chr.  ix.  12;  comp.  Neh.  xi.  13). 
His  name  does  not  occur  in  the  parallel  list  of 
Nehemiah,  and  we  may  suppose  it  to  have  been 
omitted  by  a  transcriber  in  consequence  of  the  simi- 
larity of  the  napie  which  follows  ;  or  in  the  passage 
in  which  it  occurs  it  may  have  been  added  from  the 
same  cause. 

9.  A  Kohathite,  or  family  of  Kohathite  Levites, 
in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  wiio  were  among  the  over- 
seers of  the  work  of  restoration  in  the  Temj>le 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12). 

10.  (Mco-oAAa/i).  One  of  the  "  heads"  (A.  V. 
"  chief  men  ")  sent  by  Ezra  to  Iddo  "  the  head," 
to  gather  together  the  Levites  to  join  the  caravan 
about  to  return  to  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  IG). 
Called  MosoLLAMON  in  1  Esd.  viii.  44. 

11.  (Alex.  Merao-oAAa^ :  Alesollam).  A  chief 
man  in  the  time  of  tzia,  probably  a  Levite,  who 
assisted  Jonathan  and  Jahaziah  in  abolishing  the 
marriages  which  some  of  the  people  had  contracted 
with  foreign  wives  (Ezr.  x.  15).  Also  called 
Mosollam  in  1  Esd.  ix.  14. 

12.  (Moo-oAAaju:  Mosollam).  One  of  the  de- 
scendants of  Bani,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
and  put  her  away  (Ezr.  x.  29).  Olamus  in  1  Esd. 
ix.  3(),    is  a  fragment  of  this  name. 

13.  (Meo-oi/Act/t,  Neh.  iii.  30,  vi.  18).  The  son 
of  Berechiah,  who  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  4),  as  well  as  the  Temple  wall, 
adjoining  which  he  had  his  "chamber"  (Neh.  iii. 
30).  He  was  probably  a  priest,  and  his  daughter 
was  manied  to  Johanan  the  son  of  Tobiah  theAm- 
monite  (Neh.  vi.  18). 

14.  (Meo-ouAa/x).  The  son  of  Besodeiah  :  he 
assisted  Jehoiada  the  son  of  Paseah  in  restoring  the 
old  gate  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  6). 

15.  (M€o-oAAa;u;  Alex.  MoaoWd/x).  One  of 
those  who  stood  at  the  left  hand  of  Ezra  when  he 
read  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4). 

16.  {MeffovAdfi).  A  priest,  or  family  of  priests, 
who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh. 
X.  7). 

17.  (MecrovWdfj. ;  Alex.  MeaouXdn).  One  of 
the  heads  of  the  people  who  sealed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  20). 

18.  (MetrouAa^u).  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joia- 
kim  the  son  of  Jeshua,  and  representative  of  the 
house  of  Ezra  (Neh.  xii.  13). 

19.  (Meo-oAo^).  Likewise  a  priest  at  the  same 
time  as  the  preceding,  and  head  of  the  priestly 
family  of  Ginnethon  (Neh.  xii.  1(5). 

20.  (Omitted  in  LXX.).  A  family  of  porters, 
descendants  of  Meshullam  (Njh.  xii.  25),  who  is 
also  called  Meshelemiah  (1  Chi.  xxvi.  1),  Shelemiah 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  14),  and  Shallum  (Neh.  vii.  45). 

21.  (MfiToWdfj.;  Alex.  MuffoWd/x).  One  of  the 
princes  of  Judah  who  were  in  tiio  rigiit  hand  com- 
pany of  those  who  marched  on  the  wall  of  Joiu- 
salem  upon  the  occasion  of  its  solemn  dedication 
(Neh.  xii.  33).  [VV.  A.  W.] 

MESHULLEM'ETH  (n»k"»  :  Meo-oAAc^^  ; 
Alex.  Maffa-aXafjiele :  Mcasalemctli ).    The  daughter  • 
of  Haruz  of  Jotbah,  wife  of  Wanasseh  king  of  Judah, 
and  mother  of  his  successor  Amon  (2  K.  x.vi.  19). 

MESO'BAITE,  THE  (nnVSH,  i.e.  "the 
Metsobnyah  "  :     <5    Mfij/a/Sei'a  ;      \\v\.    Meorco/Bia  •. 

V. 


33a 


MESOPOTAIWIA 


de  Masohia),  a  title  which  occurs  only  once,  and  I 
then  attached  to  the  name  of  .Iasiel,  the  last  of 
David's  guard  in  the  extemled  list  of  1  Chronicles 
(xi.  47).  The  word  retains  strong  traces  of  ZoDAii, 
one  of  the  petty  Aramite  kingdoms,  in  which  there 
would  be  nothing  surprising,  as  David  had  a  cer- 
tain connexion  with  these  Aramite  states,  wliile 
this  very  catalogue  contains  the  names  of  Moabites, 
Ammonites,  and  other  foreigners.  But  on  this  it 
is  impossible  to  pronounce  with  any  certainty,  as 
the  original  text  of  the  pass;ige  is  probably  in  con- 
fusion. Kennicott's  conclusion  {Dissertation,  23;5, 
234)  is  that  originally  the  word  was  "  the  Metzo- 
baites  "  (D^SVsn),  and  applied  to  the  three  names 
preceding  it. 

It  is  an  unusual  thing  in  the  A.  V.  to  find  ^  (ts) 
rendered  by  s,  as  in  the  present  case.  Another 
instance  is  SiDOX.  [G-] 

MESOPOTA'MIA  (D^inrD^N :  Metroiro- 
rafxia :  Mesopotamia)  is  the  ordinary  Greek  ren- 
dering of  the  Hebrew  Aram-Naharaim,  or  "  Syria 
of  the  two  rivers,"  whereof  we  have  frequent  men- 
tion in  the  earlier  books  of  Scripture  (Gen.  xxiv.  10  ; 
Deut.  sxiii.  4;  Judg.  iii.  8,  10).  It  is  also  adopted 
by  the  LXX.  to  represent  the  DIN'pQ  {Paddan- 
Araiii)  of  the  Hebrew  text,  where  our  translators 
keep  the  term  used  in  the  original  (Gen.  xxv.  20, 
xxviii.  2,  5,  &c.). 

If  we  look  to  the  signification  of  the  name,  we 
must  regard  Jlesopotamia  as  the  entire  country 
between  the  two  rivers — the  Tigris  and  the  Eu- 
phrates. This  is  a  tract  nearly  700  miles  long, 
and  from  20  to  250  miles  broad,  e.xtending  in  a 
sputh-easterly  direction  from  Tclek  flat.  38°  23', 
long.  39°  18')  to  Kunuih  (lat.  31°,  long.  47°  30'). 
The  Arabian  geographers  term  it  "  the  Island,"  a 
name  which  is  almost  literally  correct,  since  a  few 
miles  only  intervene  between  the  source  of  the 
Tigris  and  the  Euphrates  at  Telek.  It  is  for  the 
most  part  a  vast  plain,  but  is  crossed  about  its 
centre  by  the  range  of  the  Sinjar  hills,  running 
nearly  east  and  west  from  about  JIosul  to  a  little 
below  Bakkeh  ;  and  in  its  northern  poition  it  is  even 
mountainous,  the  upper  Tigris  valley  being  sepa- 
rated from  the  Mesopotamian  plain  by  an  important 
range,  the  Mons  Masias  of  Strabo  (xi.  12,  §4;  14, 
§2,  &c.),  which  runs  from  Birehjik  to  Jezireh. 
This  district  is  always  charming  ;  but  the  remainder 
of  the  region  varies  gi'eatly  according  to  circum- 
stances. In. early  spring  a  tender  and  luxuriant 
herbage  covers  the  whole  plain,  while  tlowei-s  of  the 
most  brilliant  hues  spring  up  in  rapid  succession, 
imparting  their  colour  to  the  landscape,  which 
changes  from  day  to  day.  As  the  summer  draws 
on,  the  verdure  recedes  towards  the  streams  and 
mountains.  Vast  tracts  of  arid  plain,  yellow, 
])arched,  and  sapless,  fill  the  intermediate  space, 
which  ultimately  becomes  a  bare  and  uninhabitable 
desert.  In  the  Sinjar,  and  in  the  mountain-tract 
to  the  north,  springs  of  water  are  tolerably  abun- 
dant, and  corn,  ^^nes,  and  figs,  are  cultivated  by  a 
stationary  population  ;  but  the  greater  part  of  "the 
region  is  only  suited  to  the  nomadic  hordes,  which 
in  spring  spread  themselves  far  and  wide  over  the 
,  vast  flats,  so  utilising  the  early  verdure,  and  in 
summer  and  autumn  gather  along  the  banks  of  the 
two  main  streams  and  their  affluents,  where  a  deli- 
cious shade  and  a  rich  pasture  may  be  found  during 
the  greatest  heats.  Such  is  the  present  character 
of  the  region.     It  is  thought,  however,  that  by  a 


MESOPOTAMIA 

careful  water-system,  by  deriving  channels  from 
the  great  streams  or  their  affluents,  by  storing  the 
superfluous  spring-rains  in  tanks,  by  digging  wells, 
and  establishing  kandts,  or  subterraneous  aqueducts, 
the  whole  territory  might  be  brought  under  culti- 
vation, and  rendered  capable  of  sustaining  a  pei-ma- 
nent  population.  That  some  such  system  was  esta- 
blished in  early  times  by  the  Assyrian  monarchs 
seems  to  be  certain,  from  the  fact  that  the  whole 
level  country  on  both  sides  of  the  Sinjar  is  covered 
with  mounds  marking  the  sites  of  cities,  which 
'wherever  opened  have  presented  appearances  similar 
to  those  found  on  the  site  of  Nineveh.  [Assyria.] 
If  even  the  more  northern  portion  of  the  ]\Iesopota- 
mian  region  is  thus  capable  of  being  redeemed  from 
its  present  character  of  a  desert,  still  more  easily 
might  the  southern  division  be  reclaimed  and  con- 
veited  into  a  garden.  Between  the  35th  and  34th 
parallels,  the  chai'acter  of  the  Mesopotamian  plain 
suddenly  alters.  Above,  it  is  a  plain  of  a  certain 
elevation  above  the  courses  of  the  Tigi'is  and  Eu- 
phrates, which  are  separated  from  it  by  low  lime- 
stone ranges  ;  below,  it  is  a  mere  alluvium,  almost 
level  with  the  rivers,  which  frequently  overflow 
large  portions  of  it.  Consequently,  from  the  point 
indicated,  canalisation  becomes  easy.  A  skilful  ma- 
nagement of  the  two  rivers  would  readily  convey 
abundance  of  the  life-giving  fluid  to  every  portion 
of  the  Mesopotamian  tract  below  the  34th  parallel. 
And  the  innumerable  lines  of  embankment,  marking 
the  course  of  ancient  canals,  sufficiently  indicate 
that  in  the  flourishing  period  of  Babylonia  a  net- 
work of  artificial  channels  covered  the  country. 
[Babylonia.] 

To  this  description  of  Meso|K)tamia  in  the  most 
extended  sense  of  the  term,  it  seems  proper  to  append 
a  moi'e  particular  account  of  that  region,  which 
bears  the  name  par  excellence,  both  in  Scripture, 
and  in  the  classical  writers.  This  is  the  north- 
western poition  of  the  tract  already  described,  or 
the  country  between  the  great  bend  of  the  Euphrates 
(lat.  35°  to  37°  30')  and  the  upper  Tigris.  (See 
particularly  Ptolem.  Geograph.  v.  18  ;  and  compare 
Eratosth.  ap.  Strab.  ii.  1,  §29;  Arr.  Exp.  Al. 
iii.  7;  Dcxipp.  Fr.  1,  &c.)  It  consists  of  the 
mountain  country  extending  fi-om  Birehjik  to  Je- 
zireh  upon  the  north  ;  and,  upon  the  south,  of  the 
great  undulating  ]\Iesopotamian  plain,  as  far  as  the 
Sinjai'  hills,  and  the  river  Khahour.  The  northon 
range,  called  by  the  Arabs  Karajah  Dagh  towaixls 
the  west  and  Jehel  Tar  towards  the  east,  does  not 
attain  to  any  great  elevation.  It  is  in  places  rocky 
and  precipitous,  but  has  abundant  springs  and 
streams  which  support  a  rich  vegetation.  Forests 
of  chestnuts  and  pistachio-trees  occasionally  clothe 
the  mountain  sides ;  and  about  the  towns  and  vil- 
lages are  luxuriant  orchards  and  gai'dens,  producing 
abundance  of  excellent  fruit.  The  vine  is  cultivated 
with  success  ;  wheat  and  barley  yield  heavily  ;  and 
rice  is  grown  in  some  places.  The  streams  fi-om 
the  north  side  of  this  range  are  short,  and  fall  mostly 
into  the  Tigris.  Those  from  the  south  are  more 
important.  They  flow  down  at  very  moderate  in- 
tervals along  the  whole  course  of  the  range,  and 
gradually  collect  into  two  considerable  rivei-s — the 
Belik  (ancient  Bilichus),  and  the  Khahour  (Habor 
or  Chaboras) — which  empty  themselves  into  the 
Euphrates.  [Habor.]  South  of  the  mountains  is 
the  gi'eat  plain  already  described,  which  between 
the  Khahour  and  the  Tigris  is  interrupted  only  by 
the  Sinjar  range,  but  west  of  the  Khahour  is  broken 
by  several  spurs  from  the  Karajah  Dagh,  having  a 


MESOPOTAMIA 

general  direction  from  north  to  south.  In  this 
district  are  the  two  towns  of  Orfa  and  Ilarrun,  the 
fomier  of  which  is  thought  by  many  to  be  the 
native  city  of  Abraham,  while  the  latter  is  on  good 
grounds  identified  with  Haian,  his  resting-jjlace 
between  Chaldaea  and  Palestine.  [HaRan.]  Here 
we  must  ti.x  the  Padan-Aram  of  Scripture — the 
"  plain  Syria,"  or  "  district  stretching  away  from 
the  foot  of  tlie  hills"  (Stanley's  Sin.  ^  Pal.  p.  129 
7iote),  without,  however,  determining  the  e.xtent 
of  country  thus  designated.  Besides  Orfa  and 
Harran,  the  chief  cities  of  modern  Mesopotamia 
are  Mardin  and  Nisibin,  south  of  the  Jcbel  Tur, 
and  Diarbekr,  north  of  that  range,  upon  the  Tigris. 
Of  these  places  two,  Nisibin  and  Diarbekr,  were 
important  tiom  a  remote  antiquity,  Nisibin  being 
then  Nisibis,  and  Diarbekr  Amida. 

We  first  hear  of  Mesopotamia  in  Scripture  as  the 
country  where  Nahor  and  his  flimily  settled  after 
quitting  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (Gen.  .xxiv.  10).  Here 
lived  Bethuel  and  Laban ;  and  hither  Abraham 
sent  his  servant,  to  fetch  Isaac  a  wife  "  of  his  own 
kindred"  (ib.  ver.  58).  Hither  too,  a  century 
later,  came  Jacob  on  the  same  errand  ;  and  hence 
he  returned  with  his  two  wives  after  an  absence 
of  21  3'ears.  After  this  we  have  no  mention  of 
Mesopotamia,  till,  at  the  close  of  the  wanderings  in 
the  wilderness,  Balak  tlie  king  of  Moab  sends  for 
Balaam  "to  Pethor  of  Mesopotomia"  (Deut.  xxiii. 
4),  which  was  situated  among  "  the  mountains  of 
the  east"  (Num.  xxiii.  7),  by  a  river  (ib.  xxii.  5), 
probably  the  Euphrates.  About  half  a  century 
later,  we  find,  for  the  first  and  last  time,  Mesopo- 
tamia the  seat  of  a  poweii'ul  monarchy.  Chushan- 
Kishathaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia,  establishes  his 
dominion  over  Israel  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Joshua  (Judg.  iii.  8),  and  maintains  his  authority 
for  the  space  of  eight  years,  when  his  yoke  is  broken 
by  Othniel,  Caleb's  nephew  (ib.  vers.  9,  10). 
Finally,  the  children  of  Ammon,  liaN-ing  provoked  a 
war  with  David,  "  sent  a  thousand  talents  of  silver 
to  hire  them  chariots  and  horsemen  out  of  Mesopo- 
tamia, and  out  of  Syria  Maachah,  and  out  of  Zobah  " 
(1  Chr.  xix.  6).  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  Meso- 
potamians  were  persuaded  to  lend  their  aid  at  once. 
At  any  rate,  after  the  firet  great  victory  of  Joab 
over  Ammon  and  the  Syrians  who  took  their  part, 
these  last  "  drew  forth  the  Syrians  that  were  be- 
yond the  river  "  (ib.  ver.  16),  who  participated  in 
the  final  defeat  of  their  fellow-countrymen  at  the 
hands  of  David.  The  name  of  Mesopotamia  then 
passes  out  of  Scripture,  the  country  to  which  it 
had  applied  becoming  a  part,  first  of  Assyria,  and 
afterwards  of  the  Babylonian  empire. 

According  to  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  Mesopo- 
tamia was  inhabited  in  the  early  times  of  the  empire 
(B.C.  1200-1100)  by  avast  number  of  petty  tribes, 
each  under  its  own  prince,  and  all  quite  independent 
of  one  another.  The  Assyrian  monarchs  contended 
with  these  chiefs  at  great  advantage,  and  by  the 
time  of  Jehu  (B.C.  880)  had  fully  establislied  their 
dominion  over  them.  The  tribes  weie  all  called 
"  tribes  of  the  Nairi,"  a  terra  which  some  compare 
with  tlie  Naharaim  of  the  Jews,  and  translate 
"  tribes  of  the  stream-lands."  But  this  identificii- 
tion  is  very  uncertain.  It  appears,  however,  in 
close  accordance  with  Scripture,  first,  that  Mesopo- 
tamia was  independent  of  Assyria  till  after  the  time 
of  David  ;  secondly,  tliat  the  Mesopotaniians  were 
warlike  and  used  chariots  in  battle  ;  and  thirdly, 
that  not  long  after  the  time  of  David  they  lost  their 
independence,  their  country  being  absoibod  liv  As- 


MESSIAH 


339 


Syria,  of  which  it  was  thenceforth  commonly  reck- 
oned a  part. 

On  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  Meso- 
potamia seems  to  have  been  divided  between  the 
Medes  and  the  Babylonians.  The  conquests  of 
Cyrus  brought  it  wholly  under  the  Persian  yoke ; 
and  thus  it  continued  to  the  time  of  Alexander, 
being  comprised  (probably)  in  the  ninth,  or  Assyrian 
satrapy.  At  Alexander's  death,  it  fell  to  .Seleucus, 
and  formed  a  part  of  the  great  Syrian  kingdom  till 
wrested  from  Antiochus  V.  by  the  Parthians,  about 
B.C.  160.  Trajan  conquered  it  from  Partliia  in 
A.D.  11.5,  and  formed  it  into  a  lioman  province; 
but  in  A.D.  117  Adrian  relinquished  it  of  his  own 
accoi'd.  It  was  afterwards  more  than  once  recon- 
quered by  Rome,  but  never  continued  long  under  hei- 
sceptre,  and  finally  reverted  to  the  Persians  in  the 
reign  of  Jovian,  A.D.  363. 

(See  Quint.  Curt.  v.  1  ;  Dio  Cass,  l.xviii.  22-26  ; 
Amm.  Marc.  xv.  8,  &c. ;  and  for  the  description  of  the 
district,  compare  C.  Niebuhr's  Voyage  en  Arabic, 
iSjc,  vol.  ii.  pp.  300-334 ;  Pococke's  Description 
of  the  East,  vol.  ii.  part  i.  ch.  17  ;  and  Layard's 
Nineveh  and  Babylon,  chs.  xi.-xv.).  [G.  R.] 

MESSI'AH.      This  word  (n^K'D,   Masiach), 

which  answers  to  the  word  \piar6s  in  the  N.  T., 
means  anointed;  and  is  applicable  in  its  first  sense 
to  any  one  anointed  with  the  holy  oil.  It  is  applied 
to  the  high  priest  in  Lev.  iv.  3,  5,  16 ;  and  possibly 
to  the  shield  of  Saul  in  a  figurative  sense  in  2  Sam. 
i.  21.  The  kings  of  Israel  were  called  anointed, 
from  the  mode  of  their  consecration  (1  Sam.  ii. 
10,  35,  xii.  3,  5,  xvi.  6,  xxiv.  6,  10,  xxvi.  9,  11, 
23;  2  Sam.i.  14,  16,  xix.  21,  xxiii.  1). 

This  word  also  refere  to  the  expected  Prince  of 
the  chosen  people  who  was  to  complete  G'od's  pur- 
poses for  them,  and  to  redeem  them,  and  of  whose 
coming  the  prophets  of  the  old  covenant  in  all  time 
spoke.  It  is  twice  used  in  the  N.  T.  of  Jesus  (John 
i.  41,  iv.  25,  A.  V.  "Messi;\s");  but  the  Greek 
equivalent,  the  Christ,  is  constantly  applied,  at  first 
with  the  article  as  a  title,  exactly  the  Anointed 
One,  but  later  without  the  article,  as  a  proper 
name,  Jesus  Christ. 

Three  points  belong  to  this  subject:  1.  The  ex- 
pectation of  a  Messiah  among  the  Jews;  2.  The 
expectation  of  a  suffering  Messiah  ;  3.  The  nature 
and  power  of  the  expected  Messiah.  Of  these  the 
second  will  be  discussed  under  Saviour,  and  the 
third  under  Son  of  God.  The  present  article  will 
contain  a  rapid  survey  of  the  first  point  o.ly.  The 
uiterpretation  of  particular  passages  must  be  left  in 
a  great  measure  to  professed  commentators. 

The  earliest  gleam  of  the  Gospel  is  found  in  the 
account  of  the  fall,  where  it  is  said  to  the  serpent 
"  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman, 
and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed;  it  shall  biuise 
thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel"  (Gen. 
iii.  15).  The  tempter  emie  to  the  woman  in  the 
gLuse  of  a  serpent,  and  the  curse  thus  pronounced 
has  a  ref(»rence  both  to  the  serpent  which  was  the 
insti-ument,  and  to  the  tempter  that  employed  it ; 
to  the  natural  terror  and  enmity  of  man  against  the 
serpent,  and  to  the  confiict  between  mankind  re- 
deemed by  Christ  its  Head,  and  Satan  that  deceived 
mankind.  ]\Iany  interpreters  would  understand  by 
the  seed  of  the  woman,  the  Messiah  only ;  but  it  is 
easier  to  think  with  Calvin  that  mankind,  atier 
they  are  gathered  into  one  army  by  Jesus  the 
Christ,  the  Head  of  the  Church,  are  to  achieve  a 
vi(!tory  over  evil.     The  ]\Iessianic  character  of  this 

Z  2 


340 


MESSIAH 


prophecy  has  been  much  rjiiestioned  l)y  those  who 
see  in  the  history  of  the  tall  nothing  but  a  fable : 
to  those  who  accept  it  as  true,  this  passage  is  the 
primitive  germ  of  the  Gospel,  the  protevangelium. 

The  blessings  in  store  for  the  children  of  Shem 
are  remarkably  indicated  in  the  words  of  Noah, 
"  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem,"  or  (lit.) 
"  Blessed  be  Jehovah  the  God  of  Shem  "  (Gen.  ix. 
26),  where  instead  of  blessing  Shem,  as  he  had 
cursed  Canaan,  he  carries  up  the  blessing  to  the 
great  fountain  of  the  blessings  that  shall  follow 
.Shem.  Next  follows  the  promise  to  Abraham, 
wherein  the  blessings  to  Shem  are  turned  into  the 
narrower  channel  of  one  family — "  I  will  make  of 
thee  a  gi-eat  nation,  and  I  will  bless  thee,  and  m;ike 
thy  name  great ;  and  thou  shalt  be  a  blessing ;  and 
I  will  bless  them  that  bless  thee  and  curse  him  that 
curseth  thee ;  and  in  thee  shall  all  families  of  the 
eaith  be  blessed"  (Gen.  sii.  2,  3).  The  promise  is 
still  indefinite  5  but  it  tends  to  the  undoing  of 
the  euise  of  Adam,  by  a  blessing  to  all  the  earth 
through  the  seed  of  Abraham,  as  death  had  come 
on  the  whole  earth  through  Adam.  When  our 
Loi-d  says  "Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see 
my  day,  and  he  saw  it  and  was  glad"  (John  viii. 
5(5),  we  are  to  understand  that  this  promise  of  a 
I'eal  blessing  and  restoration  to  come  hereafter  was 
understood  in  a  spiritual  sense,  as  a  leading  back  to 
God,  as  a  coming  nearer  to  Him,  from  whom  the 
promise  came ;  and  he  desired  with  hope  and  re- 
joicing fgestivit  cum  desiderio,  Bengel)  to  behold 
the  day  of  it. 

A  great  step  is  made  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  "  The 
sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  law- 
giver from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come ;  and 
imto  him  shall  the  gathering  of  the  people  be." 
The  derivation  of  the  word  Shiloh  (ri?''l?')  is  pro- 
bably from  the  root  \w'\^  ;  and  if  so,  it  means  rest, 
or,  as  Hengstenberg  argues,  it  is  for  Shifow,  and  is  a 
proper  name,  the  man  of  pence  or  rest,  the  peace- 
maker. For  other  derivations  and  interpretations 
see  Gesenius  {Thesaurus,  sub  voc.)  and  Hengsten- 
berg (^Christologie,  vol.  i.).  Whilst  mxn  of  peace 
is  for  the  most  probable  meaning  of  the  name, 
those  old  versions  which  render  it  "  He  to  "whom 
the  sceptre  belongs,"  see  the  Messianic  application 
equally  with  ourselves.  This  then  is  the  first 
case  in  which  the  promises  distinctly  centre  in  one 
pei'son  ;  and  He  is  to  be  a  man  of  peace ;  He  is  to 
wield  and  retain  the  government,  and  tlie  nations 
shall  look  np  to  Hirn  and  obey  Him. 

The  next  passage  usually  quoted  is  the  prophecy 
of  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv.  17-19).  The  star  points 
indeed  to  the  glory,  as  the  sceptre  denotes  the  power, 
of  a  king.  And  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  (Pscudo)  see 
here  the  Messiah.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
jirophecy  is  not  fulfilled  in  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  2, 141; 
and  though  David  is  himself  a  type  of  Christ,  tlie 
direct  ]Messianic  application  of  this  place  is  by  no 
means  certain. 

The  prophecy  of  Moses  (Dcut.  xviii.  18)  "  I  will 
raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  bretliren, 
like  unto  thee,  and  will  put  my  words  in  his 
mouth ;  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I 
shall  command  him,"  claims  attention.  Does  this 
refer  to  the  Messiah  ?  The  reference  to  Moses  in 
John  v.  45-47 — "  He  wrote  of  me,"  seems  to 
point  to  this  passage ;  for  it  is  a  cold  and  forced 
interpretation  to  refer  it  to  the  whole  types  and 
symljols  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  Ou  the  other  hand, 
many  critics  would  f^iin  find  bore  the  divine  insti- 


MESSIAH 

tution  of  the  whole  prophetic  order,  which  if  not 
here,  does  not  occur  at  all.  Hengstenberg  thinks 
that  it  does  promise  that  an  order  of  prophets 
should  be  sent,  but  that  the  singular  is  used  iu 
direct  reference  to  the  greatest  of  the  prophets, 
Christ  himself,  without  whom  the  words  would  not 
have  been  fulfilled.  "  The  Spirit  of  Christ  spoke  in 
tlie  prophets,  and  Christ  is  in  a  sense  the  only 
prophet."  (1  Pet.  i.  11.)  Jews  in  earlier  times 
might  have  been  excused  for  refernng  the  words  to 
this  or  that  present  prophet ;  but  the  Jews  whom 
the  Lord  rebukes  (John  v.)  were  inexcusable ;  for, 
having  the  words  before  them,  and  the  works  of 
Christ  as  well,  they  should  have  known  that  no 
piophet  had  so  fulfilled  the  words  as  He  had. 

The  passages  in  the  Pentateuch  which  relate  to 
"  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  "  have  been  thought  by 
many  to  bear  reference  to  the  Messiah. 

The  second  period  of  Messianic  prophecy  would  in- 
clude the  time  of  David.  In  the  promises  of  a  king- 
dom to  Da^^d  and  bis  house  "  for  e^-er  "  (2  Sam.  vii. 
13),  there  is  more  than  could  be  fulfilled  save  by  the 
eternal  kingdom  in  which  that  of  David  merged ; 
and  David's  last  words  dwell  on  this  promise  of  an 
everlasting  throne  (2  Sam.  xxiii.).  Passages  in 
the  Psalms  are  numerous  which  are  applied  to  the 
Messiah  in  the  N.  T. :  such  are  Ps.  ii.,  xvi.,  xxii., 
xL,  ex.  Other  Psalms  quoted  in  the  N.  T.  appear  to 
refer  to  the  actual  history  of  another  king ;  but 
only  those  who  deny  the  existence  of  types  and  pro- 
phecy will  consider  this  as  an  evidence  against  an 
ulterior  allusion  to  Messiah  :  such  Psalms  are  xlv., 
Ixviii.,  Ixix.,  Ixxii.  The  advance  iu  clearness  in 
this  period  is  great.  The  name  of  Anointed,  i.  e. 
King,  comes  in,  and  the  Messiah  is  to  come  of  the 
lineage  of  David.  He  is  described  in  His  exaltation, 
with  His  great  kingdom  that  shall  be  spiritual 
rather  than  temporal,  Ps.  ii.,  xxi.,  xl.,  ex.  In  other 
])laces  He  is  seen  in  suffering  and  humiliation, 
Ps.  xxii.,  xvi.,  xl. 

After  the  time  of  David  the  predictions  of  the 
Messiah  ceased  for  a  time  ;  until  those  prophets 
arose  whose  works  we  possess  in  the  canon'  of 
Scripture.  They  nowhere  give  us  an  exact  and 
complete  account  of  the  nature  of  Messiah ;  but 
diti'erent  aspects  of  the  truth  are  produced  by  the 
various  needs  of  the  people,  and  so  they  are  led  to 
speak  of  Him  now  as  a  Conqueror  or  a  Judge,  or  a 
Redeemer  from  sin ;  it  is  from  the  study  of  the 
whole  of  them  that  we  gain  a  clear  ajid  complete 
image  of  His  Person  and  kingdom.  This  third 
period  lasts  from  the  reign  of  Uzziah  to  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity.  The  Messiah  is  a  king  and  Ruler  of 
David's  house,  who  should  come  to  reform  and 
restore  the  Jewish  nation  and  purify  the  church,  as 
in  Is.  xi.,  xl.-lxvi.  The  blessings  of  the  restora- 
tion, however,  will  not  be  confined  to  Jews;  the 
heathen  are  made  to  share  them  fully  (Is.  ii.  Ixvi.). 
Whatever  theories  have  been  attempted  about  Isaiah 
liii.,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  most  natural 
is  the  received  interpretation  that  it  refers  to  the 
sufJering  Redeemer ;  and  so  in  the  N.  T.  it  is 
always  considered  to  do.  The  passage  of  Micah  v. 
2  (comp.  Matt.  ii.  6)  left  no  doubt  in  the  mind  of 
the  Sanhedrim  as  to  the  birthplace  of  the  Messiah. 
The  lineage  of  David  is  again  alluded  to  in  Zecha- 
riah  xii.  10-14.  The  time  of  the  second  Temple  is 
fixed  by  Haggai  ii.  9  for  Messiah's  coming ;  and  the 
coming  of  the  Forerunner  and  of  the  Anointed  are 
cleaily  revealed  in  Mai.  iii.  1,  iv.  5,  C. 

The  fourtli  period  after  the  close  of  the  c<anon  of 
the  0.  T.  is  known  to  us  in  a  great  measure  from 


MESSIAH 

nllnsioiis  in  the  N.  T.  to  the  e.xpectation  of  the  Jews. 
From  such  passages  as  I's.  ii.  2,  6,  8 ;  Jer.  xxiii.  5, 
6  ;  Zech.  ix.  9,  the  Pharisees  and  those  of  the  Jews 
who  expected  Messiah  at  all,  looked  for  a  teinpoiai 
prince  only.  The  Apostles  themselves  were  in- 
fected with  this  opinion,  till  after  the  Resurrection, 
Matt.  XX.  20,  21;  Luke  xxiv.  21;  Acts  i.  6. 
Gleams  of  a  purer  faith  appear,  Luke  ii.  30,  xxiii. 
42 ;  Joh^i  iv.  25.  On  the  other  hand  there  was  a 
sceptical  school  which  had  discarded  the  expectation 
altogether.  No  mention  of  Messiah  appears  in  the 
Book  of  Wisdom,  nor  in  the  writings  of  Philo  ;  and 
Josephus  avoids  the  doctrine.  Intercourse  with 
heathens  had  made  some  Jews  ashamed  of  their 
fathers'  faith. 

The  expectation  of  a  golden  age  that  should  re- 
turn upon  the  earth,  was  common  in  heathen 
nations  (Hesiod,  Works  and  Bays,  109 ;  Ovid, 
Met.  i.  89  ;  Virg.  Eel.  iv. ;  and  passages  in  Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  i.  7,  xii.  13).  This  hope  the  Jews  also 
shared  ;  but  with  them  it  was  associated  with  the 
coming  of  a  particular  Person,  the  Messiah.  It  has 
been  asserted  that  in  Him  the  Jews  looked  for  an 
earthly  king,  and  that  the  existence  of  the  hope  of 
a  Messiah  may  thus  be  accounted  for  on  natural 
gi-ounds  and  without  a  divine  revelation.  But  the 
prophecies  refute  this ;  they  hold  out  not  a  Prophet 
only,  but  a  King  and  a  Priest,  whose  business  it 
should  be  to  set  the  people  free  from  sin,  and  to 
teach  them  the  ways  of  God,  as  in  Ps.  xxii.,  xl., 
ex. ;  Is.  ii.,  xi.,  liii.  In  these  and  other  places  too 
the  power  of  the  coming  One  reaches  beyond  the 
Jews  and  embraces  all  the  Gentiles,  which  is  con- 
trary to  the  exclusive  notions  of  Judaism.  A  fair 
consideration  of  all  the  passages  will  convince  that 
the  growth  of  the  Messianic  idea  in  the  prophecies  is 
owing  to  revelation  from  God.  The  witness  of  the 
N.  T.  to  the  0.  T.  prophecies  can  bear  no  other  mean- 
ing ;  it  is  summed  up  in  the  words  of  Peter — "  We 
have  also  a  more  sure  word  of  prophecy  ;  whereunto 
ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a  light  that 
shineth  in  a  dark  place,  until  the  day  dawn,  and  the 
day  star  arise  in  your  hearts :  knowing  this  first, 
that  no  prophecy  (if  the  Scripture  is  of  any  private 
interpretation.  For  the  prophecy  came  not  in  old 
time  by  the  will  of  man:  but  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost" 
(2  Pet.  i.  19-21  ;  compare  the  elaborate  essay  on 
this  text  in  Knapp's  Opuscula,  vol.  i.).  Our  Lord 
affirms  that  there  are  prophecies  of  the  Messiah 
in  0.  T.,  and  that  they  are  fulKlled  iu  Him, 
Matt.  xxvi.  54;  Mark  ix.  12;  Luke  xviii.  31-33, 
.\xii.  37,  xxiv.  27  ;  John  v.  39,  46.  The  Apostles 
preach  the  same  truth.  Acts  ii.  16,  25,  viii.  28-35, 
X.  43,  xiii.  23,  32,  xxvi.  22,  23;  1  Pet.  i.  11  ; 
and  in  many  passages  of  St.  Paul.  Even  if  in- 
ternal evidence  did  not  prove  that  the  prophecies 
were  much  more  than  vague  longings  after  better 
times,  the  N.  T.  proclaims  everywhere  that  althouoh 
the  Gospel  was  the  sun,  and  0.  T.  prophecy  the 
dim  light  of  a  candle,  yet  both  were  light,  and  both 
assisted  those  who  heeded  them,  to  see  aright ;  and 
that  the  prophets  interpreted,  not  the  private  long- 
ings of  their  own  hearts  but  the  will  of  God,  in 
speaking  as  they  did  (see  Knapp's  Essay  for  this  ex- 
planation) of  the  coming  kingdom. 

Our  own  theology  is  rich  in  projihetic  literature ; 
but  the  most  complete  view  of  this  whole  subject 
is  found  in  Hengstenberg's  Christologie,  the  second 
edition  of  which,  greatly  altered,  is  translated  in 
Clark's  Foreign  Theological  Librai  j.  [See  iis  ah  eady 
mentioned,  Saviouu  ;  Son  of  God.] 


METALS 


341 


MKSSI'AS  (Meo-o-fos:  Messias),  the  Greek 
form  of  Messiah  (John  i.  41  ;  iv.  25). 

METALS.  The  Hebrews,  in  common  with 
other  ancient  nations,  were  acquainted  with  nearly 
all  the  metals  known  to  modern  metalluigy,  whe- 
ther as  the  products  of  their  own  soil  or  the  results 
of  inteicourse  with  foreigners.  One  of  the  earliest 
geographical  definitions  is  that  which  describes  the 
country  of  Havilah  as  the  land  which  abounded  in 
gold,  and  the  gold  of  which  was  good  (Gen.  ii.  11, 
12).  The  first  artist  in  metals  was  a  Cainite, 
Tubal  Cain,  the  son  of  Lamech,  the  forger  or 
sharpener  of  every  instrument  of  copper  (A.  V. 
"brass")  and  iron  (Gen.  iv.  22).  "  Abram  was 
very  rich  in  cattle,  in  silver,  and  in  gold"  (Gen. 
xiii.  2)  ;  silver,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  being 
the  medium  of  commerce,  while  gold  existed  in  the 
shape  of  ornaments,  during  the  patriarchal  ages. 
Ti7i  is  first  mentioned  among  the  spoils  of  the 
Midianites  which  were  taken  when  Balaam  was 
slain  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  and  lead  is  used  to  heighten 
the  imagery  of  Moses'  triumphal  song  (Ex.  xv.  10). 
Whether  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted  with 
steel,  properly  so  called,  is  uncertain  ;  the  words  so 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  (2  Sam.  xxii.  35  ;  Job  xx.  24  ; 
Ps.  xviii.  34;  Jer.  xv.  12)  are  iu  all  other  passages 
translated  brass,  and  would  be  more  correctly 
copper.  The  "  northern  iron  "  of  Jer.  xv.  12  is 
believed  by  commentators  to  be  iron  hai'dened  and 
tempered  by  some  peculiar  process,  so  as  more 
nearly  to  coriespoud  to  what  we  call  steel  [vSteel]  ; 
and  the  "flaming  torches"  of  Nah.  ii.  3  are  pro- 
bably the  flashing  steel  scythes  of  the  war-chariots 
which  should  come  against  Nineveh.  Besides  the 
simple  metals,  it  is  supposed  that  the  Hebrews  used 
the  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  known  as  bronze,  and 
probably  in  all  cases  in  which  copper  is  mentioned 
as  in  any  way  manufactured,  bronze  is  to  be  under- 
stood as  the  metal  indicated.  But  with  regard  to 
the  chashmal  (A.  V.  "amber")  of  Ez.  i.  4,  27, 
viii.  2,  rendered  by  the  LXX.  ^X^KTpov,  and  the 
Vulg.  electrum,  by  which  our  translators  were 
misled,  there  is  considerable  difficulty.  Whatevir 
be  the  meaning  of  chashmal,  for  which  no  satis- 
factory etymology  has  been  proposed,  there  can  be 
but  little  doubt  that  by  ^Xe/crpoi/  the  LXX.  trans- 
lators intended,  not  the  fossil  resin  known  by 
that  name  to  the  Greeks  and  to  us  as  "  amber," 
but  the  metal  so  called,  which  consisted  of  a  mix- 
ture of  (bur  parts  of  gold  with  one  of  silvei',  de- 
scribed by  Pliny  (xxxiii.  23)  as  more  brilliant  than 
silver  by  lamp-light.  There  is  the  same  difliculty 
attending  the  x°-^'^oXl^auov  (Rev.  i.  15,  ii.  18, 
A.  V.  •'  tine  brass "),  which  has  hitherto  success- 
fully resisted  all  the  eflorts  of  commentators,  but 
which  is  explained  by  Suidas  as  a  kind  of  electron, 
more  precious  than  gold.  That  it  was  a  mixed 
metal  of  great  brilliancy  is  extremely  probable,  but 
it  has  hitherto  been  impossible  to  identity  it.  In 
addition  to  the  metals  actually  mentioned  in  the 
Bible,  it  has  been  supposed  that  mercury  is  alluded 
to  in  Num.  xxxi.  23,  as  "  the  water  of  separation," 
being  "  looked  upon  as  the  mother  by  which  all 
the  metids  were  fructified,  purified,  and  brought 
forth,"  and  on  this  account  kept  secret,  and  only 
mysteriously  hinted  at  {'Ha\>wi;  Metal,  of  the  Bible, 
Intr.  p.  6).  Mr.  Napier  adds,  "  there  is  not  the 
slightest  foundation  for  this  supposition." 

With  the  exception  of  iron,  gold  is  the  most 
widely  diffused  of  all  metals.  Almost  every  country 
in  the  world  has  in  its  turn  yielded  a  certain  supply, 
and  as  it  is  found  most  frei(uently  in  alluvial  soil. 


342 


METALS 


among  the  debris  of  rocks  washed  down  by  the  tor- 
rents, it  was  known  at  a  very  early  period,  and  was 
procured  with  little  difficulty.  The  existence  of 
gold  and  the  prevalence  of  gold  ornaments  in  eaily 
times  are  no  proof  of  a  high  slate  oi'  civilization, 
but  rather  the  reverse.  Gold  was  undoubtedly 
used  before  tlie  art  of  working  copper  or  iron  was 
discovered.  We  have  no  indications  of  gold  streams 
or  mines  in  Palestine.  The  Hebrews  obtained  their 
principal  SLip])ly  from  the  south  of  Arabia,  and  the 
commei'ce  of  tlie  Persian  Gulf.  The  ships  of  Hiram 
king  of  Tyre  brought  it  for  Solomon  (1  K.  ix. 
11,  X.  11),  and  at  a  later  period,  when  the  Hebrew 
monarch  had  equipped  a  fleet  and  manned  it  with 
Tyrian  sailors,  the  chief  of  their  freight  was  the 
gold  of  Ophir  (1  K.  ix.  27,  28).  It  was  brought 
thence  in  the  ships  of  Tarshish  (1  K.  xxii.  48),  the 
Indiamen  of  the  ancient  woi-]d ;  and  Parvaim  (2 
Chr.  iii.  6),  Raamah  (Ez.  xxvii.  22),  Sheba  (1  K.  x. 
2,  10  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  15 ;  Is.  Ix.  6 ;  Ez.  xxvii.  22),  and 
Uphaz  (Jer.  x.  9),  were  other  sources  of  gold  for 
the  markets  of  Palestine  and  Tyre.  It  was  pro- 
bably brought  in  the  form  of  ingots  (Josh.  vii.  21  ; 
A.  V.  "  wedge,"  lit.  "  tongue"),  and  was  rapidly 
converted  into  articles  of  ornament  and  use.  Ear- 
rings, or  rather  nose-rings,  were  made  of  it,  those 
given  to  Rebecca  were  half  a  shekel  (j  oz.)  in 
weight  (Gen.  xxiv.  22),  bracelets  (Gen.  xxiv.  22), 
chains  (Gen.  xli.  42),  signets  (Ex.  xxxv.  22),  bullae 
or  spherical  ornaments  suspended  from  the  neck 
(Ex.  xxxv.  22),  and  chains  for  the  legs  (Num.  xxxi. 
50;  comp.  Is.  iii.  18;  Plin.  xxxiii.  12).  It  was 
used  in  embroidery  (Ex.  xxxix.  3  ;  2  Sara  i.  24 ; 
Plin.  viii.  74)  ;  the  decorations  and  furniture  of  the 
tabernacle  were  enriched  with  the  gold  of  the  orna- 
ments which  the  Hebrews  willingly  ofi'ered  (Ex. 
xxxv.-xl.) ;  the  same  precious  meUU  was  lavished 
upon  the  Temple  (1  K.  vi.,  vii)  ;  Solomon's  throne 
was  overlaid  with  gold  (1  K.  x.  18),  his  drinking- 
cups  and  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  the  forest  of 
Lebanon  were  of  pure  gold  (1  K.  x.  21),  and  the 
neighbouring  piinces  brought  him  as  presents  ves- 
sels of  gold  and  of  silver  ( 1  K.  x.  25).  So  plentiful 
indeed  was  the  supply  of  the  precious  metals  during 
his  reign  that  silver  was  esteemed  of  little  worth 
(1  K.  X.  21,  27).  Gold  and  silver  were  devoted  to 
the  fashioning  of  idolatrous  images  (Ex.  xx.  23, 
xx.xii.  4;  Deut.  xxix.  17;  1  K.  xii.  28).  The  crown 
on  the  head  of  Malcham  (A .  V.  "  their  king  "),  the 
idol  of  the  Ammonites  at  Rabbah,  weighed  a  talent 
of  gold,  that  is  125  lbs.  troy,  a  weight  so  great  that 
it  could  not  have  been  worn  by  David  among  the 
ordinary  insignia  of  royalty  (2  Sam.  xii.  30).  The 
great  abundance  of  gold  in  early  times  is  indicated  by 
its  entering  into  the  composition  of  every  article  of 
ornament  and  almost  all  of  domestic  use.  Among 
the  spoils  of  the  Midianites  taken  by  the  Israelites,  in 
their  bloodless  victory  when  Balaam  was  slain,  were 
ear-rings  and  jewels  to  the  amount  of  16,750  shekels 
of  gold  (Num.  xxxi.  48-54),  equal  in  value  to  more 
than  30,000?.  of  our  present  money.  1700  shekels 
of  gold  (worth  more  than  3000?.)  in  nose  jewels 
(A.  V.  "ear-rings")  alone  were  taken  by  Gideon's 
army  from  the  slaughtered  Midianites  (Judg.  viii. 
2ti).  These  numbers,  tliough  large,  are  not  incre- 
dibly great,  when  we  consider  tJiat  the  country  of 
the  Midianites  was  at  that  time  rich  in  gold  streams 
which  have  been  since  exhausted,  and  that  like  the 

»  As  an  illustration  of  the  enonnous  wealth  wliich  it 
was  possible  for  one  man  to  collect,  we  may  quote  from 
Herodotus  (vii.  28)  the  instance  of  Fythius  the  Lydian, 
who  placed  at  the  disposal  of  Xerxes,  on  his  way  to  Greece, 


METALS 

Blalays  of  the  present  day,  and  the  Peruvians  of  the 
time  of  Pizarro,  tiiey  cariied  most  of  their  wealth 
about  them.  But  the  amount  of  treasure  accumu- 
lated by  David  from  spoils  taken  in  war,  is  so  enor- 
mous, that  we  are  tempted  to  conclude  the  numbers 
exaggerated.  Trom  the  gold  shields  of  Hadadezer's 
army  of  Syrians  and  other  sources  he  had  collected, 
according  to  the  chronicler  (1  Chr.  xxii.  14),  100,000 
talents  o>  gold,  and  1 ,000,000  talents  of  jjlver ;  to 
these  must  be  added  his  own  contribution  of  3000 
talents  of  gold  and  7(i00  of  silver  (1  Chr.  xxix. 
2-4),  and  the  additional  offerings  of  the  people, 
the  total  value  of  which,  estimating  the  weight  of 
a  talent  to  be  125  lbs.  Troy,  gold  at  73s.  per  oz., 
and  silver  at  4s.  4^(1  per  oz.,  is  reckoned  by  Mr. 
Napier  to  be  939,929,687/.  Some  idea  of  the  large- 
ness of  this  sum  may  be  formed  by  considering  that 
in  1855  the  total  amount  of  gold  in  use  in  the 
world  was  calculated  to  be  about  820,000,000/. 
Undoubtedly  the  quantity  of  the  precious  metals 
possessed  by  the  Israelites  might  be  greater  in  con- 
sequence of  their  commercial  inteicourse  with  the 
Phoenicians  who  were  masters  of  the  sea ;  but  in 
the  time  of  David  they  were  a  nation  struggling 
for  political  existence,  surrounded  by  powerful  ene- 
mies, and  without  the  leisure  necessaiy  for  deve- 
loping their  commercial  capabilities.  The  numbers 
given  by  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  14,  §2)  are  only  one- 
tenth  of  those  in  the  text,  but  the  sum,  even  when 
thus  reduced,  is  still  enormous. »  But  though  gold 
was  thus  common,  silver  appears  to  have  been  the 
ordinary  medium  of  commerce.  The  first  com- 
mercial transaction  of  which  we  possess  the  details 
was  the  purchase  of  Ephron'«  field  by  Abraham  for 
400  shekels  of  silver  (Gen.  xxiii.  16)  ;  slaves  were 
bought  with  silver  (Gen.  xvii.  12);  silver  was  the 
money  paid  by  Abimelech  as  a  coinpensation  to 
Abraham  (Gen.  xx.  16);  Joseph  was  sold  to  the 
Ishmaelite  merchants  for  twenty  pieces  of  se/ue/'  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  28)  ;  and  generally  in  the  Old  Testament, 
"  money  "  in  the  A.  V.  is  literally  silver.  The  first 
payment  in  gold  is  mentioned  in  1  Chr.  xxi.  25, 
where  David  buys  the  threshing-floor  of  Oman,  or 
Araunah,  the  Jebusite,  for  six  hundred  shekels  of 
gold  by  weight."''  But  in  the  parallel  narrative 
of  the  transaction  in  2  Sam.  jxiv.  24,  the  price  paid 
for  the  threshing-floor  and  the  oxen  is  fifty  shekels  of 
silver.  An  attempt  has  been  made  by  Keil  to  re- 
concile these  two  passages,  by  supposing  that  in 
the  former  the  puichase  refened  to  was  that  of  the 
entire  hill  on  which  the  threshing-floor  stood,  and 
in  the  latter  that  of  the  threshing-floor  itself.  But 
the  close  resemblance  between  the  two  narratives 
renders  it  ditticult  to  accept  this  explanation,  and  to 
imagine  that  two  difl'erent  circumstances  are  de- 
scribed. That  there  is  a  discrepancy  between  the 
numbers  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  9  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  5  is  ad- 
mitted, and  it  seems  impossible  to  avoid  the  con- 
clusion that  the  present  case  is  but  another  instance 
of  the  same  kind.  With  this  one  exception  there 
is  no  case  in  the  0.  T.  in  which  gold  is  alluded  to 
as  a  medium  of  connnerce  ;  the  Hebrew  coinage  may 
have  been  partly  gold,  but  we  have  no  proof  of  it. 

Silver  was  brought  into  Palestine  in  the  form  of 
plates  from  Tarshish,  with  gold  and  ivory  (IK. 
X.  22;  2  Chr.  ix.  21  ;  Jer.  x.  9'.  The  accumula- 
tion of  wealth  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  was  so  great 
that  silver  was  but  little  esteemed  ;  "  the  king  made 

2000  talents  of  silver,  and  3,993,000  gold  darics;  a  sum 
whicli  in  these  days  would  amount  to  about  54  millions 
of  pounds  sterling. 
^  I/terally,  '■  shekels  of  gold,  a  weight  of  COO." 


METALS 

silver  to  be  in  Jerusalem  as  stones"  (?  K.  x.  21, 
27).  With  the  treasures  which  were  brought  out 
of'Eg\'pt,  not  only  the  ornaments  but  the  ordinary 
metal-work  of  the  tabernacle  were  made.  Silver 
was  employed  for  the  sockets  of  the  boards  (Ex. 
xxvi.  19,  xxx^i.  24),  and  for  the  hooks  of  the  pillars 
and  their  lillets  (Ex.  xxxviii.  10)..  The  capitals  of 
the  pillars  were  overlaid  with  it  (Ex.  xxxviii.  17), 
the  chargers  and  bowls  offered  by  the  princes  at  the 
dedication  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  rii.  13,  &c.), 
the  trumpets  for  marshalling  the  host  (Num.  x.  2), 
and  some  of  the  candlesticks  and  tables  for  the 
Temple  were  of  silver  (1  Chr.  xx\nii.  15,  16).  It 
was  used  for  the  setting  of  gold  ornaments  (Prov. 
XXV.  11)  and  other  decorations  (Cant.  i.  11),  and 
for  the  pillare  of  Solomon's  gorgeous  chariot  or  pa- 
lanquin (Cant.  iii.  10). 

From  a  comparison  of  the  different  amounts  of 
gold  and  silver  collected  by  David,  it  appears  that 
the  proportion  of  the  former  to  the  latter  was  1  to  9 
nearly.  Three  hundred  talents  of  silver  and  thirty 
t;tlonts  of  gold  were  demanded  of  Hezekiah  by  Sen- 
nacherib (2  K.  xviii.  14)  ;  but  later,  when  Pharaoh- 
nechoh  took  Jehoahaz  prisoner,  he  imposed  upon  the 
land  a  tribute  of  100  talents  of  silver,  and  only  one 
talent  of  gold  (2  K.  xxiii.  33).  The  difference  in 
the  proportion  of  gold  to  silver  in  these  two  cases  is 
very  remarkable,  aiid  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
explained. 

Brass,  or  more  properly  copper,  was  a  native  pro- 
duct of  Palestine,  "  a  land  whose  stones  are  iron, 
and  out  of  whose  hills  thou  mayest  dig  copper  " 
(Deut.  viii.  9  ;  Job  xxviii.  2).  it  was  so  plentiful 
in  the  days  of  Solomon  that  the  quantity  employed 
in  the  Temple  could  uot  be  estimated,  it  was  so 
great  (1  K.  vii.  47).  Much  of  the  copper  which 
David  had  prepared  for  this  work  was  taken  fiom 
the  Syrians  after  the  defeat  of  Hadadezer  (2  Sam. 
viii.  8),  and  more  was  presented  by  Toi,  king  of 
Hamath.  The  market  of  Tyre  was  supplied  with 
vessels  of  the  same  metal  b)'  the  merchants  of 
Javan,  Tubal,  and  Meshech  (Ez.  xxvii.  13).  There 
is  strong  reason  to  believe  that  brass,  a  mixtm-e  of 
copper  and  zinc,  was  unknown  to  the  ancients.  To 
tiie  latter  metal  no  allusion  is  found.  But  tin  was 
well  known,  and  from  the  difficulty  which  attends 
the  toughening  pure  copper  so  as  to  render  it  fit 
for  hammering,  it  is  probable  that  the  mode  of 
deoxidising  copper  by  the  admixture  of  smalUguan- 
tities  of  tin  had  been  early  discovered.  "  We  are 
inclined  to  think,"  says  Mr.  Napier,  "  that  Moses 
used  no  copper  vessels  for  domestic  purposes,  but 
bronze,  the  use  of  which  is  less  objectionable. 
Bronze,  not  being  so  subject  to  tarnish,  takes  on  a 
finer  poUsh,  and  besides  being  much  more  easily 
melted  and  cast,  would  make  it  to  be  more  exten- 
sively used  than  copper  alone.  These  practical  con- 
siderations, and  the  fact  of  almost  all  the  antique 
castings  and  other  articles  in  metal  that  are  pre- 
sented from  these  ancient  times  being  composed  of 
bronze,  prove  in  our  opinion  that  where  the  word 
'brass'  occurs  in  Scripture,  except  where  it  refers 
to  an  ore,  such  as  Job  xx\dii.  2  and  Deut.  viii.  9,  it 
should  be  translated  bronze  "  {Metal,  of  the  Bible, 
p.  66).  Arms  (2  Sam.  xxi.  16;  Job  xx.  24;  Ps. 
xviii.  34)  and  ai-rhour  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5,  6,  38)  were 
made  of  this  metal,  which  was  capable  of  being  so 
wrought  as  to  admit  of  a  keen  and  hard  edge. 
The  Egyptians  employed  it  in  cutting  the  hardest 
gi'miite.  The  Mexicans,  before  the  discovery  of  iron, 
"  found  a  substitute  in  an  alloy  of  tin  and  copper; 
and  with  tools  made  of  this  bronze  could  cut  not 


METHEG-AMMAH 


343 


only  metals,  but,  with  the  aid  of  a  siliceous  dust, 
the  hardest  substances,  as  basalt,  porphyry,  ame- 
thysts, and  emeralds"  (Prescott,  C<mq.  of  Mexico, 
ch.  5).  The  great  skill  attained  by  the  Egyptians 
in  working  metals  at  a  very  eaily  period  throws 
light  upon  the  remarkable  facility  with  which  the 
Israelites,  during  their  wanderings  in  the  desert, 
elaborated  the  works  of  art  connected  with  the 
structure  of  the  tabernacle,  for  which  great  ac- 
quaintance with  metals  was  requisite.  In  the 
troublous  times  which  followed  their  entrance  into 
Palestine  this  knowledge  seems  to  have  been  lost, 
for  when  the  Temple  was  built  the  metal-workers 
employed  were  Phoenicians. 

Iron,  like  copper,  was  found  in  the  hills  of  Pales- 
tine. The  "  iron  mountain  "  in  the  trans-Jordanic 
region  is  described  by  Josephus  {B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2),  and 
was  remarkable  for  producing  a  particular  kind  of 
palm  (Mishna,  Succa,  ed.  Dachs,  p.  182).  Iron 
mines  are  still  worked  by  the  inhabitants  of  Kcfr 
Hiineh  in  the  S.  of  the  valley  Zahardni ;  smelting 
works  are  found  at  Shemuster,  3  hours  W.  of  Baal- 
bek, and  others  in  the  oak-woods  at  Masbek  (Ritter, 
Erdknnde,  \\i\.  73,  20l);  but  the  method  em- 
ployed is  the  simplest  possible,  like  that  of  the  old 
Samothracians,  and  the  iron  so  obtained  is  chiefly 
used  for  horse-shoes. 

Tin  and  lead  were  both  known  at  a  very  ea)']y 
period,  though  there  is  no  distinct  trace  of  them  in 
Palestine.  The  former  was  among  the  spoils  of  the 
Midianites  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  who  might  have  olj- 
tained  it  in  their  intercourse  with  the  Phoenician 
merchants  (comp.  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  36),  who  them- 
selves procured  it  from  Tarshish  (Ez.  xxvii.  12)  and 
the  tin  countries  of  the  west.  The  allusions  to  it 
in  the  Old  Testament  principally  point  to  its  ad- 
mixture with  the  ores  of  the  precious  metals  (Is.  i. 
25;  Ez.  xxii.  18,  20).  It  must  have  occurred  in 
the  composition  of  bronze :  the  Assyrian  bowls  and 
dishes  in  the  British  Museum  are  found  to  contain 
one  part  of  tin  to  ten  of  coppei-.  "  The  tin  was 
probably  obtained  from  Phoenicia,  and  consequently 
that  used  in  the  bronzes  in  th*  British  Museum 
may  actually  have  been  exported,  nearly  three  thou- 
sand years  ago,  fiom  the  British  Isles  "  (Layard, 
Nin.  and  Bab.  191). 

Antimony  (2  K.  ix.  30 ;  Jer.  iv.  30,  A.  V. 
"  painting  "),  in  the  fomi  of  powder,  was  used  by 
the  Hebrew  women,  like  the  kohl  of  the  Arabs,  for 
colouring  their  eyelids  and  eyebrows.     [Paint.] 

Further  information  will  be  found  in  the  articles 
upon  the  several  metals,  and  whatever  is  known  of 
the  metallurgy  of  the  Hebrews  will  be  discussed 
under  Mining.  [W.  A.  W.] 

METE'EUS  (BaiTTjpous).  According  to  the  list 
in  1  Esil.  V.  17,  "the  sons  of  Bleterus  "  returned 
with  Zorobabel.  There  is  no  corresponding  name 
in  the  hsts  of  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.,  nor  is  it  trace- 
able in  the  Vulgate. 

METH'EG-AM'MAH  (HBNn  JnO:     ri^v 

a(pwpiafi4vriv :  Froennm  trihidi),  a  place  which 
David  took  from  the  Philistines,  ajiparently  in  his 
last  war  with  them  (2  Sam.  viii.  1).  In  the 
parallel  passage  of  the  Chronicles  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1), 
"  Gath  and  her  daughter-towns  "  is  substituted  for 
Metheg  ha-Ammah. 

The  renderings  are  legion,  almost  each  translator 
having  his   own;*  but  the  interpretations  maybe 

"  A  large  collection  of  these  will  be  found  in  Glassii 
Fhihilogia  Sacra  (lib.  iv.  tr.  3,  obs.  17),  togetber  with  a 
singular  Jewish  tradition  bearing  >ipon  the  point.     The 


344 


METHUSAEL 


reduced  to  two: — 1.  That  adopted  by  Gesenius 
{Thesaur.  113)  and  Fiirst  {Handwh.  102  6),  in 
which  Ammah  is  fcikeii  as  meaning  "  mother-city  " 
or  "metropolis"  (comp.  2  Sam.  xx.  19),  and 
Metheg-ha-Ammah  "  the  bridle  of  the  mother-city" 
— viz.  of  Gath,  the  chief  town  of  the  Philistines. 
If  this  is  correct,  the  expression  "  daughter-towns  '' 
in  the  corresponding  passage  of  Chronicles  is  a 
closer  parallel,  and  more  characteristic,  than  it  ap- 
pears at  first  sight  to  be.  2.  That  of  Ewald 
'Gescli.'m.  190),  who,  taking  Ammah  as  meaning 
the  "  forearm,"  treats  the  words  as  a  metaphor  to 
express  the  perfect  manner  in  which  David  had 
smitten  and  humbled  his  foes,  had  torn  the  bndle 
fiom  their  arm,  and  thus  broken  for  ever  the  do- 
minion with  which  they  curbed  Israel,  as  a  rider 
manages  his  horse  by  the  rein  held  fast  on  his  arm. 
The  former  of  these  two  has  the  support  of  the 
parallel  passage  in  Chronicles ;  and  it  is  no  valid 
objection  to  it  to  say,  as  Ewald  in  his  note  to  the 
above  passage  does,  that  Gath  cannot  be  referred  to, 
because  it  had  its  own  king  still  in  the  days  of 
Solomon,  for  the  king  in  Solomon's  time  may  have 
been,  and  probably  was,  tributary  to  Israel,  as  the 
kings  "on  this  side  the  Euphrates"  (1  K.  iv.  24) 
were.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  an  obvious  ob- 
jection to  Ewald's  interpretation  that  to  control  his 
horse  a  rider  must  hold  the  bridle  not  on  his  arm 
but  fast  in  his  hand.  [G.] 

METHU'SAEL  (^S^inp,  "  man  of  God  :" 

MadovadKa :  Mathusael),  the  son  of  Mehujael, 
fourth  iu  descent  from  Cain,  and  father  of  Lamech 
(Gen.  iv.  18).  [A.  B.] 

METHU'SELAH  (n^li'-inO,  "  man  of  off- 
spring," or  possibly  "man  of  a  dart:"*  MaSou- 
aa.Ka :  Matlmsala),  the  son  of  Enoch,  si,>;th  in 
descent  from  Seth,  and  fiither  of  Lamech.  The  re- 
semblance of  the  name  to  the  preceding,  on  which 
(with  the  coincidence  of  the  name  Lamech  in  the 
next  generation  in  both  lines)  some  theories  have 
been  fomied,  seems  to  be  apparent  rather  than  real. 
The  life  of  Methuselah  is  fixed  by  Gen.  v.  27  at 
969  years,  a  period  exceeding  that  of  any  other 
patriarch,  and,  according  to  the  Hebrew  chronology, 
bi'inging  his  death  down  to  the  very  year  of  the 
Flood.  The  LXX.  reckoning  makes  him  die  six 
years  before  it ;  and  the  Samaritan,  although  shorten- 
ing his  life  to  720  years,  gives  the  same  result  as 
the  Hebrew.  [Chronology.]  On  the  subject  of 
Longevity,  see  Patriarchs.  [A.  B.] 

MEU'NIM  (CJ-iyp,  Meo-eirci^ ;  Alex.  Meei- 
viafji:  Munini),  Neh.  vii.  52.  Elsewhere  given  in 
A.  V.  as  Mehunim  and  Mehunijis. 

ME'ZAHAB  (nnr  "-O  •.  maiCo<i>^  ;  Alex.  Me- 
{bJ/S  in  Gen.,  omitted  in  1  Chr. :  Mezaah).     The 

most  singular  rendering,  perhaps,  is  that  of  Aquila, 
XoAtvos  ToO  v6poy(07iou,  "  the  bridle  of  the  aqueduct," 
perhaps  with  some  reference  to  the  irrigation  of  llie  rich 
district  in  which  Gath  was  situated.  Aqueduct  is  derived 
from  the  Chaldee  version,  NJipN,  which  has  that  signi- 
fication amongst  others.  Aquilaadopts  a  similar  rendering 
in  the  case  of  the  hill  Ajimah. 

»  There  is  some  difficulty  about  the  derivation  of  this 
name.  The  latter  portion  of  the  root  is  certainly  Tw^' 
(from  n7\^<  "  to  send  "),  used  for  a  "  missile  "  in  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  5,  Joel  ii.  8,  and  for  a  "branch"  in  Cant.  iv.  13, 
Is.  xvi.  ».     The  former  portion  is  deiived  Ijy  many  of  the 


MIBHAE 

father  of  Mntrcd  and  grandfather  of  Mehetabel,  who 
was  wife  of  Hadar  or  Hadad,  the  last  named  king 
of  Edom  (Gen.  sxxvi.  39  ;  1  Chr.  i.  50).  His  name, 
which,  if  it  be  Hebrew,  signifies  "  waters  of  gold," 
has  given  rise  to  much  speculation.  Jarchi  renders 
it,  "  what  is  gold  ?"  and  explains  it,  "  he  was  a 
rich  man,  and  gold  was  not  valued  in  his  eyes  at 
all."  Abarbanel  says  he  was  "  rich  and  gi'eat,  so 
that  on  this  accoiuit  he  was  called  Mezahab,  for  the 
gold  was  in  his  house  as  water."  "  Haggaon  " 
(writes  Aben  Ezra)  "  said  he  was  a  refiner  of  gold, 
but  others  said  that  it  pointed  to  those  who  make 
gold  from  brass."  The  Jerusalem  Targum  of  course 
could  not  resist  the  temptation  of  punning  upon  the 
name,  and  combined  the  explanations  given  by  Jarchi 
and  Haggaon.  The  latter  part  of  Gen.  xxxvi.  39 
is  thus  rendered :  "  the  name  of  his  wife  w;us 
Mehetabel,  daughter  of  Matred,  the  daughter  of  a 
refiner  of  gold,  who  was  wearied  with  labour 
(XTltOD,  rnatreda)  all  the  days  of  his  life ;  after 

he  had  eaten  and  was  filled,  he  tunied  and  said, 
what  is  gold?  and  what  is  silver?"  A  somewhat 
siinilar  paraphrase  is  given  in  the  Targum  of  the 
Pseudo- Jonathan,  except  that  it  is  theie  referred  to 
Matred,  and  not  to  Mezahab.  The  Arabic  Version 
translates  the  name  "  water  of  gold,"  which  must 
have  been  from  the  Hebrew,  while  in  the  Targum 
of  Onkelos  it  is  rendered  "a  refiner  of  gold,"  as  in 
the  Questiones  Hehraicae  in  Paralip.,  attributed 
to  Jerome,  and  the  traditions  given  above ;  which 
seems  to  indicate  that  originally  there  was  some- 
thing in  the  Hebrew  text,  now  wanting,  which  gave 
rise  to  this  rendering,  and  of  which  the  present 
reading,  "iJD,  me,  is  an  abbreviation.      [W.  A.  W.] 

MI'AMIN  (IP^p:  Meayufj/;  Alex.  Meajxifi: 
Miamin).  1.  A  layman  of  Israel  of  the  sons  of 
Parosh,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  and  put 
her  away  at  the  bidding  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  25).  He 
is  called  Maelus  in  1  Esd.  ix.  26. 

2.  (Omitted  in  Vat.  MS.;  Alex.  Mei'/ii';':  Mia- 
min). A  priest  or  family  of  priests  who  went  up 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  5) ;  pro- 
bably the  same  as  Mijamin  in  Neh.  x.  7.  In  Neh. 
xii.  17  the  name  appears  in  the  form  Miniamin. 

MIB'HAE  ("innO  :    Ui^aAx  ;  Alex,  ma^dp : 

Mihahar).  "  Mibhar  the  son  of  Haggeri "  is  the 
name^f  one  of  David's  heroes  in  the  list  given  iu 

1  Chr.  xi.  The  verse  (38)  in  which  it  occurs  appears 
to  be  corrupt,  for  in  the  corresponding  catalogue  of 

2  Sam.  xxiii.  36  we  find,  instead  of  "  Mibhar  the 
son  of  Haggeri,"  "  of  Zobah,  Bani  the  Gadite."  It 
is  easy  to  see,  if  the  latter  be  the  true  reading,  how 
niin  ''J3,  Bani  haggadi,  could  be  corrupted  into 

"'"liin"}3,  ben-haggeri ;  and   ""IJn  is  actually  the 

reading  of  three  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  in  1  Chr.,  as 
well  as  of  the  Syriac  and  Arab,  versions,  and  the 


older  Hebraists  from  niD,  "  to  die,"  and  various  inter- 
pretations given  accordingly.  See  in  Leusden's  Onomas- 
ticon,  "  mortem  siiam  misit,"  "  mortis  suae  arma,"  &c. 
Others  make  it,  "  he  dies,  and  it  [i.  e.  the  Flood]  is  sent," 
supposing  it  either  a  name  given  afterwards  from  the 
event,  or  one  given  in  prophetic  foresight  by  Enoch.  The 
later  Hebraists  (see  Ges.  Lex.)  derive  it  from  -Ifip,  the 
constructive  form  of  rlD,  "man,"  the  obsolete  singular, 
of  which  the  plural  D^J^P  is  found.  This  gives  one  or 
other  of  the  interpretations  in  the  text.  We  can  only 
decide  between  them  (if  at  alii  by  internal  probability, 
which  ?cems  to  incline  to  the  former. 


MIBSAM 

Targum  of  R.  Joseph.  But  thiit  "Mibhar"  is  a 
corruption  of  HH-VD  (or  N^^'D,  ace.  to  some  MSS.), 
mitstsobdh,  "  of  Zobah,"  as  Kennicott  (Dissert. 
p.  215)  and  Cappellns  [Crit.  Sacr.  i.  c.  5)  conclude, 
is  not  so  clear,  though  not  absolutely  impossible. 
It  would  seem  fiom  the  LXX.  of  2  Sam.,  where 
instead  of  "  of  Zobah  "  we  find  TroXvSvvdfj.eaJs,  that 
both  readings  oiiginally  co-existed,  and  were  read  by 
the  LXX.  XQ-'ikH  "iniJD,  viihchar  hatstsdba,  "choice 
of  the  host."  If  this  were  the  case,  the  verse  in  1 
Chr.  would  stand  thus :  "  Igal  the  brother  of  Nathan, 
flower  of  the  host ;  Bani  the  Gadite."   [W.  A.  W.] 

MIB'SAM  (Dbnp,  "  sweet  odour,"  Ges.  : 
yiacraajx:  Mahsam).  1.  A  son  of  Ishmael  (Gen. 
XXV.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.  29),  not  elsewhere  mentioned. 
The  signification  of  his  name  has  led  som^to  pro- 
pose an  identification  of  the  tribe  sprung  from  him 
with  some  one  of  the  Abrahamic  tribes  settled  in  Ara- 
bia aromatifera,  and  a  connexion  with  the  balsam 
of  Arabia  is  suggested  (Bunsen,  Bibelwerk ;  Kalisch, 
Gen.  483).  The  situation  of  Jlekkeh  is  well  adapted 
for  his  settlements,  surrounded  as  it  is  by  traces  of 
other  Ishmaelite  tribes ;  nevertheless  the  identifica- 
tion seems  fanciful  and  far-fetched. 

2.  A  son  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  25),  perhaps 
named  after  the  Ishmaelite  Mibsam,  for  one  of  his 
brothers  was  named  MiSHMA,  as  was  one  of  those 
of  the  older  Mibsam.  [E.  S.  P.] 

MIB'ZAR  0^*n?;) :   MaCdp  in  Gen.  ;  Ba/Sirap  ; 

Alex.  Ma^crdp  in  1  Chr. :  Mabsar).  One  of  the 
phylarchs  or  "dukes"  of  Edom  (1  Chr.  i.  53)  or 
Esau  (Gen.  ,\.xxvi.  42)  after  the  death  of  Hadad  or 
Hadar.  They  are  said  to  be  enumerated  "accord- 
ing to  theii  settlements  in  the  land  of  their  pos- 
session;" and  Knobel  (Genesis),  understanding 
Mibzar  (lit.  "  fortress ")  as  the  name  of  a  place, 
has  attempted  to  identify  it  with  the  rocky  fast- 
ness of  Petra,  "  the  strong  city  "  ("IVIip  T*]!?,  'ir 

mibtsar  Ps.  cviii.  1 1 ;  comp.  Ps.  Ix.  1 1 ),  "  the  cliftV 
the  chasms  of  which  were  the  chief  stronghold  of  the 
Edomites  (Jer.  xlix.  16 ;  Obad.  3).      [W.  A.  W.] 

MIC'AH(n3^0,  but  in  VM-s.  1  and  4,  -in^^^p, 
i.  e.  Micayehu :  Mixaias,  but  once  Meixaias ; 
Alex.  Mfixo,  but  once  Mixa  :  Michas,  Miclia),  an 
Israelite  whose  familiar  story  is  preserved  in  the 
xviith  and  xviiith  chapters  of  Judges.  That  it  is 
so  preserved  would  seem  to  be  owing  to  Micah's 
accidental  connexion  vrith  the  colony  of  Danites 
who  left  the  original  seat  of  their  tribe  to  conquer 
and  found  a  new  Dan  at  Laish — a  most  happy 
accident,  for  it  has  been  the  means  of  furnishing 
us  with  a  picture  of  the  "interior"  of  a  private 
lijraelite  family  of  the  rural  districts,  which  in 
many  respects  stands  quite  alone  in  the  sacred 
records,  and  has  probably  no  parallel  in  any  litera- 
ture of  equal  age. 

But  apart  fiom  this  the  naiTative  has  several 
points  of  special  interest  to  students  of  biblical  his- 
tory in  the  information  which  it  affords  as  to  the 


MICAH 


345 


"  One  of  a  thousand  cases  in  which  the  point  of  the 
sentence  is  lost  by  the  translation  of  "  Jehovah  "  by  "  the 

]X)KD." 

•■  It  does  not  seem  at  all  clear  that  the  words  "  molten 
image  "  and  "  graven  image  "  accurately  express  the  ori- 
gnial  words  Fese?  and  i/asseca/i.  [Idol,  vol.  i.  H51  ((.]  As 
the  Hebrew  text  now  stands,  the  "  graven  image  "  only 
was  carried  off  to  Laish,  and  the  "  molten  "  ime  remained 
behind  with  Micah  (xviii.  20,30;  comp.  18).     True  the 


condition  of  the  nation,  of  the  members  of  which 
Micah  was  probably  an  average  specimen. 

We  see  (1.)  how  completely  some  of  the  most 
solemn  and  characteristic  enactments  of  the  Law 
had  become  a  dead  lettei'.  Micah  was  evidently  a 
devout  believer  in  Jehovah.  While  the  Danites  in 
their  communications  use  the  general  term  Eloliim, 
"God"  ("ask  counsel  of  God,"  xviii.  5;  "God 
hath  given  it  into  your  bauds,"  ver.  10),  with 
Micah  and  his  hoBsehold  the  case  is  quite  diflerent. 
His  one  anxiety  is  to  enjoy  the  favour  of  Jehovah  » 
(xvii.  13);  the  fornuila  of  blessing  used  by  his 
mother  and  his  priest  invokes  the  same  awful  name 
(xvii.  2,  xviii.  6) ;  and  yet  so  completely  ignorant 
is  he  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah,  that  the  mode  whi(;h 
he  adopts  of  honouring  Him  is  to  make  a  molten 
imd  a  graven  image,  teraphim  or  images  of  domestic 
gods,  and  to  set  up  an  unauthorised  priesthood,  first 
in  his  own  family  (xvii.  5),  and  then  in  the  person 
of  a  Levite  not  of  the  priestly  line  (ver.  12) — thus 
disobeying,  in  the  most  flagrant  manner,  the  second 
of  the  Ten  Conmiandments,  and  the  pro\isions  for 
the  priesthood — both  laws  which  lay  in  a  peculiar 
manner  at  the  root  of  the  religious  existence  of  the 
nation.  Gideon  (viii.  27)  had  established  an  ephod  ; 
but  here  was  a  whole  chapel  of  idols,  a  "  house  of 
gods"  (xvii.  5),  and  all  dedicated  to  Jehovah. 

(2.)  The  story  also  throws  a  light  on  the  con- 
dition of  tlie  Levites.  They  were  indeed  "  divided 
in  Jacob  and  scattered  in  Israel"  in  a  more  literal 
sense  than  that  prediction  is  usually  taken  to  con- 
tain. Here  we  have  a  Levite  belonging  to  Beth- 
lehem-judah,  a  town  not  allotted  to  the  Levites, 
and  with  which  they  had,  as  far  as  we  know, 
no  connexion ;  next  wandering  forth,  with  the 
world  before  him,  to  take  up  his  abode  wherever 
he  could  find  a  residence  ;  then  undertaking,  with- 
out hesitation,  and  for  a  mere  pittance,  the  charge 
of  Micah's  idol-chapel ;  and  lastly,  carrying  oft'  the 
property  of  his  master  and  benefactor,  and  becoming 
the  first  priest  to  another  system  of  false  v^roi-ship, 
one  too  m  which  Jehovah  had  no  part,  and  which 
ultimately  bore  an  import;mt  share  in  the  disrup- 
tion of  the  two  kingdoms.'' 

But  the  transaction  becomes  still  more  remaik- 
able  when  we  consider  (3.)  that  this  was  no  obscure 
or  ordinary  Levite.  He  belonged  to  the  chief 
family  in  the  tribe,  nay,  we  may  say  to  the  chief 
family  of  the  nation,  for  though  not  himself  a 
priest,  he  was  closely  allied  to  the  priestly  house, 
and  was  the  grandson  of  no  less  a  person  than  the 
great  Moses  himself.  For  the  "  Manasseh  "  in  xviii. 
30  is  nothing  else  than  an  alteration  of  "  Moses,"  to 
shield  that  venerable  name  from  the  dis(.'redit  which 
such  a  descendant  would  cast  upon  it.  [Manasseh, 
No.  4 ;  p.  234  6.]  In  this  fact  we  possibly  have 
the  explanation  of  the  much-debated  passage,  xviii. 
3:  "  they  knew  the  voice'  of  the  young  man  the 
Levite."  The  grandson  of  the  Lawgiver  was  not 
unlikely  to  be  personally  known  to  the  Danites  ; 
when  they  heard  his  \-oice  (whether  in  casual 
speech  or  in  loud  devotion  w"e  are  not  told)  they 
recognized  it,  and  their  inquiries  as  to  who  bi  ought 

LXX.  add  the  molten  image  in  ver.  20,  but  in  ver.  30  they 
agree  with  the  Hebrew  text. 

c  ~)ip  =  voice.  The  explanation  of  J.  0.  Mieliiiclia 
{Bibel  fiir  Ungelehrten)  is  tliat  they  remarked  thai  he 
did  not  speak  with  the  accent  of  the  I<:i)hraimilcs.  But 
Gesenius  rejects  this  notion  as  repugnimt  alike  to  "  the 
expression  and  the  connexion,"  and  adopts  the  explana- 
tion given  above  (Gesch.  dtr  hebr.  S^rache,  }15,  2,  p.  55). 


346 


MICAH 


him  hither,  what  he  did  thei'e,  and  what  he  had 
there,  were  in  this  case  the  eager  questions  of  old 
acquaintances  long  separated. 

(4.)  The  narrative  gives  us  a  most  vivid  idea  of 
the  terrible  anarchy  in  which  the  country  was 
placed,  when  "  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  and 
every  man  did  what  was  right  in  his  own  eyes," 
and  shows  how  urgently  necessary  a  central  autho- 
rity had  become.  A  body  of  six  hundred  men  com- 
pletely armed,  besides  the  train  oi»'  their  families  and 
cattle,  traverses  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land, 
not  on  any  mission  for  the  ruler  or  the  nation,  as  on 
latter  occasions  (2  Sam.  ii.  12,  &c.,  xx.  7,  14),  but 
simply  for  their  private  ends.  Entirely  disregard- 
ing the  riglits  of  private  property,  they  burst  in 
wherever  they  please  along  their  route,  and  plun- 
dering the  valuables  and  carrying  off  persons,  reply 
to  all  remonstances  by  taunts  and  threats.  The 
Turkish  rule,  to  which  the  same  district  has  now 
the  misfortmie  to  be  subjected,  can  hardly  be  worse. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  startling  to  our  Western 
minds — accustomed  to  associate  the  blessings  of 
order  with  religion — to  obsen'e  how  religious  were 
these  lawless  freebooters : — "  Do  ye  know  that  in 
these  houses  there  is  an  ephod,  and  tejaphim,  and  a 
gi-aven  image,  and  a  molten  image?  Now  there- 
fore consider  what  ye  have  to  do"  (xviii.  14). 
"  Hold  thy  peace,  and  go  with  us,  and  be  to  us  a 
father  and  a  priest"  (lb.  19). 

As  to  the  date  of  these  interesting  events,  the  nar- 
rative gives  us  no  direct  information  beyond  the  fact 
that  it  was  before  the  beginning  of  the  monarchy  ; 
but  we  may  at  least  infer  that  it  was  also  before 
the  time  of  Samson,  because  iu  this  naiTative 
(xviii.  12)  we  meet  with  the  origin  of  the  name  of 
Mahaneh-dan,  a  place  which  already  bore  tliat  name 
iu  Samson's  childhood  (xiii.  25,  where  it  is  trans- 
lated in  the  A.  V.  "the  camp  of  Dan").  That 
the  Danites  had  opponents  to  tlieir  establishment  in 
their  proper  territory  before  the  Philistines  enter 
the  field  is  evident  from  .Judg.  i.  34.  Josephus 
entirely  omits  the  story  of  Micah,  but  he  places  the 
narrative  of  the  Levite  and  his  concubine,  and  the 
destruction  of  Gibeah  (chaps,  xix.  xx.  xxi.) — a 
document  generally  recognized  as  part  of  the 
same''  with  the  story  of  Micah,  and  that  document 
bv  a  different  hand  to  the  prenous  portions  of  the 
book — at  the  very  beginning  of  his  account  of  the 
period  of  the  Judges,  before  Deborah  or  eveu  Ehud. 
(See  Ant.  v.  2,  §8-12.)  The  writer  is  not  awaie 
that  this  aiTangement  has  been  found  in  any  MS.  of 
the  Hebrew  or  LXX.  text  of  the  book  of  Judges ; 
but  the  fact  of  its  existence  in  Josephus  has  a  cer- 
tain weight,  especially  considering  the  accuracy  of 
that  writer  when  his  interests  or  prejudices  are  not 
concerned ;  and  it  is  supported  by  the  mention  of 
Phinehas  the  grandson  of  Aaron  in  xx.  28.  An 
argument  against  the  date  being  before  the  time 
of  Deborah  is  drawn  by  Bertheau  (p.  197)  from 
the  fact  that  at  that  time  the  north  of  Palestine 
was  iu  the  possession  of  the  Canaanites— "  Jabin 
king  of  Canaan,  who  reigned  in  Hazor,"  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Laish.  The  records 
of  the  southern  Dan  are  too  scanty  to  permit  of 
oar  fixing  the  date  from  the  statement  tliat  the 
IXanites  had  not  yet  entered  on  their  allotment 
— that  is  to  say  the  allotment  specified  in  Josh. 

d  The  proofs  of  this  are  given  by  Bertheau  in  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Book  in  the  Kurzgef.  Exey.  Handb.  (iii. 
^2 ;  p.  192). 

<■  xviii.  I.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  words  "all 
tlieir"  are  interpolated  by  our  translators. 


MICAH 

xix.  40-48.  But  that  statement  strengthens  the 
conclusion  anived  at  from  other  passages,  that 
these  lists  in  Joshua  contain  the  towns  allotted, 
but  not  therefore  necess.arily  possessed  by  the 
various  tribes.  "  DiWde  the  land  first,  in  con- 
fidence, and  then  possess  it  afterwards,"  seems  to 
be  the  principle  implied  in  such  passages  as  Josh, 
xiii.  7  (comp.  1);  .\ix.  49,  51  (LXX.  "so  they 
went  to  take  possession  of  the  land  "). 

The  date  of  the  record  itself  may  perhaps  be 
more  neaily  arrived  at.  That,  on  the  one  hand,  it 
was  after  the  beginning  of  the  inonarchy  i.s  evident 
from  the  references  to  the  ante-monarchical  times 
(xviii.  1,  xix.  1,  xxi.  25);  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  may  perhaps  infer  from  the  name  of  Bethlehem 
being  given  as  "  Bethlehem-Judah," — that  it  was 
before  the  fame  of  David  had  conferred  on  it  a 
notoriety  which  would  render  any  such  affi.t  un- 
necessary. The  reference  to  the  establishment  of 
the  house  of  God  in  Shiloh  (xviii.  31)  seems  also  to 
point  to  the  early  part  of  Saul's  reign,  before  the 
incursions  of  the  Philistines  had  made  it  necessary 
to  remove  the  Tabernacle  and  Ephod  to  Nob,  in 
the  vicinity  of  Gibeah,  Saul's  head-quarters.    [G.] 

MI'CAH  (n3"'0,  n^S*-??,*  Cethib,  Jer.xxvi.  18: 

Mtxaias :  Michaeas).  The  sixth  in  order  of  the 
minor  prophets,  according  to  the  arrangement  in 
our  present  canon  ;  in  the  LXX.  he  is  placed  third, 
after  Hosea  and  Amos.  To  distinguish  him  fi-om 
Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah,  the  contemporary  of 
Elijah,  he  is  called  the  Morasthite,  that  is  a 
native  of  Jloresheth,  or  some  place  of  similar 
name,  which  Jeiome  and  Eusebius  call  Morasthi 
and  identify  with  a  small  village  near  Eleuthero- 
polis  to  the  east,  where  formerly  the  prophet's  tomb 
was  shown,  but  which  in  the  days  of  Jerome  had 
been  succeeded  by  a  church  {Epit.  Paulae,  c.  6). 
As  little  is  known  of  the  circumstances  of  Micah 's 
life  as  of  many  of  the  other  prophets.  Pseudo- 
Epiphanius  (Op.  ii.  p.  245)  makes  him,  contrary  to 
all  probability,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  ;  and  besides 
confounding  him  with  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
who  lived  more  than  a  century  before,  he  betrays 
additional  ignorance  in  describing  Aliab  as  king  of 
Judah.  For  rebuking  this  monarch's  sou  and  suc- 
cessor Jehoram  for  his  impieties,  Micah,  according  to 
the  same  authority,  was  thrown  from  a  precipice, 
and  buried  at  Morathi  in  his  own  country,  hard  by 
the  cemetery  of  Enakim  (^EvaKeifj.,  a  place  which 
apparently  exists  only  in  the  LXX.  of  Mic.  i. 
10),  where  his  sepulchre  was  still  to  be  seen. 
The  Chrouicon  Paschale  (p.  148  c)  tells  the  same 
tale.  Another  ecclesiastical  tradition  relates  that 
the  remains  of  Habakkuk  and  Micah  were  revealed 
in  a  vision  to  Zebennus  bishop  of  Eleutheropolis,  in 
the  reign  of  Theodosius  the  Great,  near  a  plage 
called  Berathsatia,  which  is  apparently  a  corruption 
of  Morasthi  (Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  29  ;  Nicephorus, 
H.  E.  xii.  48).  The  prophet's  tomb  was  called  by 
the  inhabitants  Ncphsameemana,  which  Sozomen 
renders  fxvrjixa  inarov. 

The  period  during  which  Micah  exercised  the 
prophetical  office  is  stated,  iu  the  superscription  to 

»  The  full  form  of  the  name  is  -iri'D^P,  Micdydhu, 
"  who  is  like  Jehovah,"  which  is  found  in  2  Cbr.  xiii.  2, 
xvii.  7.  This  is  abbreviated  to  •ln^3"'P,  Micuyehu,  in 
Judg.  xvii.  1,  4;  still  further  to  -in^^D,  Micdyehu 
(Jcr.  xxxvi.  11),  n^3''0,  Jllkch/dh  (1  K.  xxii.  13);  and 
liinlly  to  n3"'p,  Mkdii,  or  ayO,  iS/icd  (2. Sum.  i.x.  12). 


MICAH 

his  proi)hecies,  to  have  extended  over  the  reigns  of 
Jothani,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah,  giving 
thus  a  maximum  limit  of  59  years  (B.C.  756-<i97), 
from  the  accession  of  Jotham  to  the  death  of  Heze- 
kiah, and  a  minimum  hmit  of  16  years  (B.C.  742- 
726),  from  the  death  of  Jotham  to  the  accession  of 
Hezekiah.  In  either  case  he  would  be  contempo- 
rary with  Hosea  and  Amos  during  part  of  their 
ministry  in  Israel,  and  with  Isaiah  in  Judah. 
According  to  Ral)binical  tradition  he  transmitted  to 
the  prophets  Joel,  Nahum,  and  Habakkuk,  and  to 
Seraiah  the  piiest,  the  mysteries  of  the  Kabbala, 
which  lie  had  received  fi-om  Isaiah  (R.  David  Gauz, 
Tsemach  David),  and  by  Syncellus  (Chronogr.  p. 
199  c)  he  is  enumerated  in  the  reign  of  Jotham  as 
contemporary  with  Hosea,  Joel,  Isaiah,  and  Oded. 
With  respect  to  one  of  his  prophecies  (iii.  12)  it  is  dis- 
tinctly assigned  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (Jer.  xxvi. 
18),  and  was  probably  delivered  before  the  great 
passover  which  inaugurated  the  reformation  in 
Judah.  The  date  of  the  others  must  be  determined, 
if  at  all,  by  internal  evidence,  and  the  periods  to 
which  they  are  assigned  are  therefore  necessarily 
conjectural.  Reasons  will  be  given  hereafter  for 
considering  that  none  are  later  than  the  sixth  year 
of  Hezekiah.  Bertholdt,  indeed,  positively  denies 
that  any  of  the  prophecies  can  be  referred  to  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  assigns  the  two  earlier  of  the 
tour  portions  into  which  he  divides  the  book  to 
the  time  of  Ahaz,  and  the  two  later  to  that  of  Ma- 
nasseh  {Einleittmg,  §4-11),  because  the  idolatry 
which  prevailed  in  their  reigns  is  theiein  denounced. 
But  in  the  face  of  the  superscription,  the  genuine- 
ness of  which  there  is  no  reason  to  question,  and  of 
the  allusion  in  Jer.  xxvi.  18,  Bertholdt 's  conjecture 
cannot  be  allowed  to  have  much  weight.  The  time 
assigned  to  the  prophecies  by  the  only  direct  evidence 
which  we  possess,  agrees  so  well  with  their  contents 
that  it  may  faiily  be  accepted  as  coiTect.  Why 
any  discrepancy  should  be  perceived  between  the 
statement  in  Jeremiah,  that  "  Micah  the  Morasthite 
prophesied  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  king  of  Judah," 
and  the  title  of  his  book  which  tells  us  that  the 
word  of  the  Lord  came  to  him  "  in  the  days  of 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,"  it  is  difficult  to 
imagine.  The  former  does  not  limit  the  period  of 
Miciih's  prophecy,  and  at  most  applies  only  to  the 
passage  to  which  direct  allusion  is  made.  A  con- 
fusion appears  to  have  existed  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  see  in  the  prophecy  in  its  presentfomi  a  connected 
whole,  between  tlie  actual  delivery  of  the  several 
portions  of  it,  and  their  collection  and  transcription 
into  one  book.  In  the  case  of  Jeremiah  we  know 
that  he  dictated  to  Baruch  the  prophecies  which  he 
had  delivered  in  the  interval  between  the  13th  year 
of  Josiah  and  the  4th  of  Jehoiakim,  and  that  wlieu 
thus  committed  to  writing  they  were  read  before 
the  people  on  the  last  day  (Jer.  xxxvi.  2,  4,  6). 
There  is  reason  to  believe  that  a  similar  process 
took  place  with  the  prophecies  of  Amos.  It  is, 
therefore,  conceivable,  to  say  the  least,  that  certain 
jjortions  of  Micah's  prophecy  may  have  been  uttered 
HI  the  reiu;ns  of  Jotham  and  Ahaz,  and  for  the  pro- 
bability of  this  there  is  strong  internal  evidence, 
while  they  wei'e  collected  as  a  whole  in  the  reigu 
of  Hezekiah  and  committed  to  writing.  Caspari 
{Micha,  p.  78)  suggests  that  the  book  thus  w^ritteu 


MICAH 


347 


b  Knobcl  (Prophctiiimus,  ii.  §20)  imagines  that  the 
pvopbc'Cies  which  ivniaiii  belong  to  the  time  of  Hezekiah, 
and  tliat  those  deliveiod  under  Jothani  and  Aliaz  have 
perished. 


may  have  been  read  in  the  presence  of  the  king  and  tlie 
whole  people,  on  some  gieattastor  festival  day,  and 
that  this  circumstance  may  have  been  in  the  minds 
of  the  elders  of  the  land  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim, 
when  they  appealed  to  the  impunity  which  Micah 
enjoyed  under  Hezekiah.''  It  is  evident  from  Mic. 
i.  6,  that  the  section  of  the  piophecy  in  which  that 
veise  occurs  must  liave  been  delivered  before  the 
destruction  of  Samaria  by  Shalmaneser,  which  took 
place  in  the  6th  year  of  Hezekiah  (cir.  B.C.  722), 
and  connecting  the  "  high-places "  mentioned  in 
i.  5  with  those  which  existed  in  Judah  in  the  reigns 
of  Ahaz  (2  K.  xvi.  4  ;  2  Chr.  xxviii.  4,  25),  and 
Jotham  (2  K.  xv.  35),  we  may  be  justified  in 
assigning  ch.  i.  to  the  time  of  one  of  these  monarchs, 
probably  the  latter;  although,  if  ch.  ii.  be  consi- 
dered as  part  of  the  section  to  which  ch.  i.  belongs, 
the  utter  corruption  and  demoralisation  of  the 
people  there  depicted  agree  better  with  what  his- 
tory tells  us  of  the  times  of  Ahaz.  Caspari  main- 
tains that  of  the  two  parallel  passages,  Mic.  iv. 
1-5,  Is.  ii.  2-5,  the  former  is  the  original  and  the 
latter  belongs  to  the  times  of  Uzziah  and  Jotham."^ 
The  denunciation  of  the  horses  and  chariots  of 
Judah  (v.  10)  is  appropriate  to  the  state  of  the 
country  under  Jotham,  after  the  long  and  prosper- 
ous reign  of  Uzziah,  by  whom  the  military  strength 
of  the  people  had  been  greatly  developed  (2  Chr. 
xxvi.  11-15,  xxvii.  4-6).  Compare  Is.  ii.  7,  which 
belongs  to  the  same  period.  Again,  the  forms  in 
which  idolatry  manifested  itself  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz 
correspond  with  those  which  are  threatened  with 
destruction  in  Mic.  v.  12-14,  and  the  allusions  in 
vi.  16  to  the  "  statutes  of  Omri,"  and  the  "  works 
of  the  house  of  Ahab  "  seem  directly  pointed  at  the 
king,  of  whom  it  is  expressly  said  that  "  he  walked 
in  the  way  of  the  kings  of  Israel  "  (2  K.  xvi.  3).  It 
is  impossible  indealingwith  internal  evidence  to  assert 
positively  that  the  inferences  deduced  from  it  are 
correct ;  but  in  the  present  instance  they  at  least 
establish  a  probability,  that  in  placing  the  period  of 
Micah's  prophetical  activity  between  the  times  of 
Jotham  and  Hezekiah  the  superscription  is  cori'ect. 
In  the  first  years  of  Hezekiah's  reign  the  idolatry 
which  prevailed  in  the  tiine  of  Ahaz  was  not  eradi- 
cated, and  in  assigning  the  date  of  MicaR's  pi-o- 
phecy  to  this  period  there  is  no  anachronism  in 
the  allusions  to  idolatrous  practices.  Maurer  con- 
tends that  ch.  i.  was  written  not  long  before  the 
taking  of  Samaria,  but  the  3rd  and  following  cha]i- 
tei-s  he  places  in  the  interval  between  the  destruction 
of  Samaria  and  the  time  that  Jerusalem  was  me- 
naced by  the  army  of  Sennacherib  in  the  14th  year 
of  Hezekiah.  But  the  passages  which  he  quotesin 
support  of  his  conclusion  (iii.  12,  iv.  9,  &c.,  v. 
5,  &c.,  vi.  9,  &c.,  vii.  4,  12,  &c.)  do  not  appear  to 
be  more  suitable  to  that  period  than  to  the  first  years 
of  Hezekiah ,  while  the  context  in  many  cases  requires 
a  still  earlier  date.  In  the  arrangement  adopted  by 
Weljs  (pref.  to  Micah,  §  iv. — vi.)  ch.  i.  was  deli- 
vered in  the  contemporary  reigns  of  Jotham  king  of 
Judah  and  of  Pekah  king  of  Israel ;  ii.  1 — iv.  8  in 
those  of  Ahaz,  I'ekah,  and  Hosea;  iii.  12  being 
assigned  to  the  last  year  of  Ahaz,  and  the  remainder 
of  the  book  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 

But,  at  whatever   time    the   several  prophecies 
were  first  delivered,  they  ap[iear  in  their  present 


"^  Mic.  iv.  1-4  may  possibly,  as  Kwald  and  others  have 
suggested,  be  a  portion  of  an  older  prophecy  current  at 
the  time,  whfch  was  adopted  both  by  Micah  and  Isaiah 
(Is.  ii.  2-4). 


348 


MICAH 


form  as  nn  organic  whole,  marked  by  a  certain 
regularity  of  development.  Three  sections,  omit- 
ting the  superscription,  ai-e  introduced  by  the  same 
phi-ase,   •1VDC'   "hear   ye,"   and    represent    three 

natural  divisions  of  the  prophecy  —  i.,  ii.,  iii.-v., 
vi.-vii. — each  commencing  with  rebukes  and  threat- 
eiiings  and  closing  with  a  promise.  The  first  sec- 
tion opens  with  a  magnificent  description  of  the 
coming  of  Jehovah  to  judgment  for  the  sins  and 
idolatries  of  Israel  and  Judah  (i.  2-4),  and  the 
sentence  pronounced  upon  Samaria  (5-9)  by  the 
•Judge  Himself.  The  prophet,  whose  sympathies 
are  strong  with  Judah,  and  especially  with  the 
lowlands  which  gave  him  biith,  sees  the  danger 
which  threatens  his  country,  and  traces  in  imagina- 
tion the  devastating  march  of  the  Assyrian  con- 
(juerors  from  Samaria  onward  to  Jerusalem  and  the 
south  (i.  8-16).  The  impending  punishment  sug- 
gests its  cause,  and  the  prophet  denounces  a  woe 
upon  the  people  generally  for  the  coiTuption  and 
violence  which  were  rife  among  them,  and  upon 
the  false  prophets  who  led  them  astray  by  pan- 
dering to  their  appetites  and  luxuuy  (ii.  1-11). 
The  sentence  of  captivity  is  passed  upon  them  (10) 
but  is  followed  instantly  by  a  promise  of  restora- 
tion and  triumphant  return  (ii.  12,  13).  The 
second  section  is  addressed  especially  to  the  piinces 
and  heads  of  the  people,  their  avarice  and  rapacity 
are  rebuked  in  strong  terms,  and  as  they  have  been 
deaf  to  the  cry  of  the  suppliants  for  justice,  they 
too  "  shall  cry  unto  Jehovah,  but  He  will  not  hear 
them "  (iii.  1-4).  The  false  prophets  who  had 
deceived  others  should  themselves  be  deceived : 
"  the  sun  shall  go  down  over  the  prophets,  and 
the  day  shall  be  dark,  over  them  "  (iii.  6).  For 
this  perversio)!  of  justice  and  right,  and  the  cove- 
tousness  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  judged  for 
reward,  of  the  priests  who  taught  for  hire,  and  of 
the  prophets  who  divined  for  money,  Zinn  should 
"  be  ploughed  as  a  field,"  and  the  mountain  of 
the  temple  become  like  the  uncultivated  wood- 
land heights  (iii.  9-12).  But  the  threatening  is 
again  succeeded  by  a  promise  of  restoration,  and 
in  the  glories  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  the  j)rophet 
loses  sight  of  the  desolation  whicli  should  betal  his 
country.  Instead  of  the  temple  mountain  covered 
with  the  wild  growth  of  the  foiest,  he  sees  the 
mountain  of  the  house  of  .Jehovah  established  on 
the  top  of  the  mountains,  and  nations  flovv'ing  like 
rivei's  unto  it.  The  reign  of  peace  is  inaugurated 
by  the  recal  from  captivity,  and  Jehovah  sits  as 
king  in  Zion,  having  destroyed  the  nations  who 
had  rejoiced  in  her  overthrow.  The  predictions  in 
this  section  form  the  clim.ax  of  the  book,  and 
Ewald  arranges  them  in  four  strophes,  consisting 
of  from  seven  to  eight  verses  each  (iv.  1-8,  iv.  9- 
V.  2,  V.  3-9,  V.  10-15),  with  the  exception  of  the 
last,  which  is  shor''-er,  and  in  which  the  prophet 
reverts  to  the  point  whence  he  started :  all  objects 
of  politic  and  idolatrous  confidence  must  be  re- 
moved before  the  grand  consummation.  In  the 
last  section  (vi.  vii.)  Jehovah,  by  a  bold  poetical 
figure,  is  represented  as  holding  a  controversy  with 
His  people,  pleading  witlr  them  in  justification  of 
His  conduct  towards  them  and  the  reasonableness 
of  His  requirements.  The  dialogue  form  in  which 
chap.  vi.  is  cast  renders  the  picture  ver_v  dramatic 
and   striking.      In  vi.   3-5   Jehovah   .speaks ;    the 


|<  Ewald  now  maintains  that  Mic.  vi.  vii.  ts  liy  another 
liaiid ;  ))robubIy  written  in  the  course  of  liic  7th  cent,  is.c, 


MICAH 

inquiry  of  the  people  follows  in  vev.  6,  indicating 
their  entire  ignorance  of  what  was  required  of 
them ;  their  inquiry  is  met  by  the  almost  im- 
patient rejoinder,  "  Will  Jehovah  be  pleased  with 
thousands  of  rams,  with  myriads  of  torrents  of 
oil  ?"  The  still  greater  sacrifice  suggested  by  the 
people,  "  Shall  I  give  my  rii-stborri  for  my  trans- 
gression ?"  calls  forth  the  definition  of  their  true 
duty,  "  to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to 
walk  humbly  with  their  God."  How  far  they 
had  fallen  short  of  this  requirement  is  shown  in 
what  follows  (9-12),  and  judgment  is  pronounced 
upon  them  (13-16).  The  prophet  acknowledges 
and  bewails  the  justice  of  the  sentence  (vii.  1-6), 
the  people  in  repentance  patiently  look  to  God, 
confident  that  their  prayer  will  be  heard  (7-10), 
and  are  reassured  by  the  promise  of  deliverance 
announced  <is  following  their  punishment  (11-13) 
by  the  prophet,  who  in  his  turn  presents  his 
petition  to  Jehovah  for  the  restoration  of  His 
people  (14,  15).  The  whole  concludes  with  a 
tiiumphal  song  of  joy  at  the  great  deliverance, 
like  that  from  Egypt,  which  Jehovah  will  achieve, 
and  a  full  acknowledgment  of  His  mercy  and  faith- 
fulness to  His  promises  (16-20).  The  last  verse  is 
reproduced  in  the  song  of  Zacharias  (Luke  i.  72,  TS).* 

The  predictions  uttered  by  Micah  relate  to  the 
invasions  of  Shalmaneser  (i.  6-8  ;  2  K.  x^^i.  4,  6) 
and  Sennacherib  (i.  9-16;  2  K.  xviii.  13),  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  (iii.  12,  vii.  13),  the  cap- 
tivity in  Babylon  (iv.  10),  the  return  (iv.  1-8,  vii. 
11),  the  establishment  of  a  theocratic  kingdom  in 
Jerusalem  (iv.  8),  and  the  KuJer  who  should  spring 
fi-om  Bethlehem  (v.  2).  The  destruction  of  Assyria 
and  Babylon  is  suyiposed  to  be  refeiTed  to  in  v.  5,  6, 
vii.  8,  10.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  prophecies 
commence  with  the  last  words  recorded  of  the 
prophet's  namesake,  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
"  Hearken,  0  people,  every  one  of  you"  (1  K.  xxii. 
28).  From  this,  Bleek  {Einleihmq,  p.  539)  con- 
cludes that  the  author  of  the  history,  like  the  eccle- 
siastical historians,  confounded  Micah  the  Morasthite 
with  Micaiah;  while  Hengstenberg  (C'/i/'isio%*/,  i. 
409,  Eng.  tr.)  infers  that  the  coincidence  was  in- 
tentional on  the  part  of  the  later  prophet,  and  that 
"  by  this  very  circumstance  he  gives  intimation  of 
what  may  be  expected  from  him,  shows  that  his 
activity. is  to  be  considered  as  a  continuation  of  that 
of  his  predecessor,  who  was  so  jealous  for  God,  and 
that  he  had  more  in  common  with  him  than  the 
mere  name."  Either  conclusion  rests  on  the  ex- 
tremely slight  foundation  of  the  occurrence  of  Ji 
formula  which  was  at  once  the  most  simple  and  most 
natural  commencement  of  a  prophetic  discourse. 

The  style  of  Micah  has  been  compared  with  that 
of  Hosea  and  Isaiah.  The  similai'ity  of  their  sub- 
ject may  account  for  many  resemblances  in  language 
with  the  latter  prophet,  which  were  almost  un- 
avoidable (comp.  Mic.  i.  2  with  Is.  i.  2  ;  Mic.  ii.  2 
with  Is.  V.  8;  Mic.  ii.  6,  11  with  Is.  xxx.  10; 
Mic.  ii.  12  with  Is.  x.  20-22  ;  Mic.  vi.  6-8  with 
Is.  i.  11-17).  The  diction  of  Micah  is  vigorous  and 
forcible,  sometimes  obscure  from  the  abruptness  of 
its  transitions,  but  varied  and  rich  in  figures  dei'ived 
from  the  pastoral  (i.  8,  ii.  12,  v.  4,  5,  7,  8,  vii.  14) 
and  rural  life  of  the  lowland  country  (i.  6,  iii.  12, 
iv.  3,  12,  13,  vi.  15),  whose  vines  and  olives  and 
fig-trees  were  celebrated  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  27,  28),  and 
supply  the  prophet  with  so  many  striking  allusions 

and  that  v.  9-14  is  tlie  original  conclusion  of  Micah's  pro- 
phecy (Jahrb.  xi.  p.  20). 


MICAIAH 

(i.  6,  iv.  3,  4,  vi.  15,  vil.  1,  4)  as  to  suggest  that, 
like  Amos,  he  may  have  been  either  a  herdsman  or 
a  vine-dresser,  who  liad  heard  the  howling  of  the 
jackals  (i.  8,  A.  V.  "dragons")  as  he  watched  his 
Hocks  or  his  vines  by  night,  and  had  seen  the  lion:? 
slaughtering,  the  sheep  (v.  8).  One  peculiarity 
which  he  has  in  common  with  Isaiah  is  the  frequent 
use  of  paronomasia ;  in  i.  10-15  there  is  a  succes- 
sion of  instances  of  this  figure  in  the  plays  upon 
words  suggested  by  the  various  places  enumerated 
(comp.  also  ii.  4),  which  it  is  impossible  to  transfer 
to  English,  though  Ewald  has  attempted  to  render 
them  into  German  {Propheten  dcs  A.  B.  i.  329, 
830).  The  poetic  vigour  of  the  opening  scene  and  of 
the  dramatic  dialogue  sustained  throughout  the  last 
two  chapters  has  already  been  noticed. 

The  language  of  Micah  is  quoted  in  Matt.  ii.  5,  6, 
and  his  prophecies  alluded  to  in  Matt.  x.  35,  36  ; 
Mark  xiii.  12  ;  Luke  xii.  53  ;  John  vii.  42. 

2.  (Mixa:  Michci).  A  descendant  of  Joel  the 
Reubenite  [Joel,  5],  and  ancestor  of  Beerah,  who 
was  prince  of  his  tribe  at  the  time  of  the  captivity 
of  the  northern  kingdom  (1  Chr.  v.  5). 

3.  The  son  of  Merib-baal,  or  Mephibosheth,  the 
son  of  Jonathan  (1  Chr.  viii.  34',  35,  ix.  40,  41). 
In  2  Sam.  ix.  12  he  is  called  MiCHA. 

4.  A  Kohathite  Levite,  eldest  son  of  Uzziel  the 
brother  of  Amram,  and  therefore  cousin  to  Moses 
and  Aaron  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  20).  In  Ex.  vi.  22  neither 
Micah  nor  his  brother  Jesiah,  or  Isshiah,  appears 
among  the  sons  of  Uzziel,  who  are  there  said  to  be 
Mishael,  Elzaphan,  and  Zithri.  In  the  A.  V.  of 
1  Chr.  xxiv.  24,  25,  the  names  of  the  two  brothers 
are  written  Michah  and  Isshiah,  though  the 
Hebrew  forms  are  the  same  as  in  the  preceding 
chapter.  This  would  seem  to  indicate  that  chaps, 
xxiii.,  xxiv.,  were  translated  by  ditierent  hands. 

5.  iM.ixoda).  Thefatherof  Abdon,amanof high 
station  in  the  reign  of  Josiah.  In  2  K.  xxii.  12  he  is 
called  "MiCHAiAH  thefatherof  Achbor."  [W.A.W.] 

MICAI'AH  (•in^D'-p  :    mxaias :    Michaeas). 

There  are  seven  persons  of  this  name  in  the  O.T. 
besides  Micah  the  Levite,  to  whom  the  name  is 
twice  given  in  the  Hebrew  (Judg.  xvii.  1,  4); 
Micah  and  Micaiah  meaning  the  same  thing,  "  Who 
like  Jehovah  ?"  In  the  A.  V.  however,  with  the  one 
exception  following,  the  name  is  given  as  Michaiah. 
The  son  of  Imlah,  a  prophet  of  Samaria,  who, 
in  the  last  yeai-  of  the  reign  of  Ahab,  king  of  Israel, 
predicted  his  defeat  and  death,  B.C.  897.  The  cir- 
cumstances were  as  follows: — Three  years  after  the 
great  battle  with  Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  in  which 
the  extraordinary  number  of  100,000  Syrian  soldiers 
is  said  to  have  been  slain,  without  reckoning  the 
27,000,  who,  it  is  asserted,  were  killed  by  the  fall- 
ing of  the  wall  at  Aphek,  Ahab  proposed  to  Jeho- 
shaphat  king  of  Judah  that  they  should  jointly  go 
up  to  battle  against  Kamoth  Gilead  ;  which  Ben- 
hadad was,  apparently,  bound  by  treaty  to  restore 
to  Ahab.  Jehoshaphat,  whose  son  Jehoram  had 
mai'ried  Athaliah,  Ahab's  daughter,  assented  in 
cordial  words  to  the  proposal ;  but  suggested  that 
they  should  first  "  enqiure  at  the  word  of  Jeho- 
vah." Accordingly,  Ahab  assembled  400  pro- 
phets, while,  in  an  open  space  at  the  gate  of  the 
city  of  Samaria,  he  and  Jehoshaphat  sat  in  royal 
robes  to  meet  and   consult    them.     The  prophets 

a  As  the  definite  article  is  prefixed  in  Hebrew,  Thenius, 
Bertheau,  and  Bunsen  tninslatc  i/ic  Spirit,  unduinlersUuid 
a  personification  of  tlio  Spirit  of  I'ropliccy.  But  the  oi'i- 
Rinal  words  seem  to  be  merely  lui  extreme  instance  of  the 


MICAIAH 


340 


unanimously  gave  a  favourable  response  ;  and  among 
them,  ZedekiaJi  the  son  of  Chenaanah,  made  horns 
of  iron  as  a  symbol,  and  announced,  from  Jeho- 
vah, that  with  those  horns  Ahab  would  push  the 
Syrians  till  he  consumed  them.  For  some  reason 
which  is  vmexplaiued,  and  cjin  now  only  be  conjec- 
tured, Jehoshaphat  was  dissatisfied  with  the  answer, 
and  asked  if  there  was  no  other  prophet  of  Jehovah, 
at  Samaria?  Ahab  replied  that  there  was  yet 
one — Micaiah,  the  son  of  Imlah ;  but,  in  words 
which  obviously  call  to  mind  a  passage  in  the  Iliad 
(i.  106),  he  added,  "  I  hate  him,  for  he  does  not 
prophecy  good  concerning  me,  but  evil."  Micaiah 
was,  nevertheless,  sent  tor ;  and  after  an  attempt 
had  in  vain  been  made  to  tamper  with  him,  he  first 
ex])ressed  an  ironical  concurrence  with  the  400  pro- 
phets, and  then  openly  foretold  the  defeat  of  Ahab's 
army  and  the  death  of  Ahab  himself.  And  in  op- 
position to  the  other  prophets,  he  said,  that  he  had 
seen  Jehovah  sitting  on  His  throne,  and  all  the  host 
of  Heaven  standing  by  Him,  on  His  right  hand  and 
on  His  left :  that  Jehovah  said,  Who  shall  persuade 
Ahab  to  go  up  and  fall  at  Kamoth  Gilead ;  that  a 
Spirit "  came  forth  and  said  that  he  would  do  so  •, 
and  on  being  asked.  Wherewith  ?  he  answered,  that 
he  would  go  forth  and  Ise  a  lying  spirit  in  the 
mouth  of  all  the  prophets.  Irritated  by  the  account 
of  this  vision,  Zedekiah  sti-uck  Micaiah  on  the 
cheek,  and  Ahab  ordered  Micaiah  to  be  taken  to 
l)rison,  and  fed  on  bread  and  water,  till  his  return 
to  Samaria.  Ahab  then  went  up  with  his  army  to 
Ramoth  Gilead ;  and  in  the  battle  which  ensued,  Ben- 
hadad, who  could  not  have  failed  to  becomeacquainted 
with  Micaiah's  prophecy,  uttered  so  publicly, 
which  had  even  led  to  an  act  of  public,  personal, 
violence  on  the  part  of  Zedekiah,  gave  special  orders 
to  direct  the  attack  against  Ahab,  individually. 
Ahab,  on  the  other  hand,  requested  Jehoshaphat  to 
wear  his  royal  robes,  which  we  know  that  the  king 
of  Judah  had  brought  with  him  to  Samaria  (1  K. 
xxii.  10) ;  and  then  he  put  himself  into  disguise  for 
the  battle  ;  hoping  thus,  probably,  to  baffle  the  de- 
signs of  Benhadad,  and  the  prediction  of  Micaiah — 
but  he  was,  nevertheless,  struck  and  mortally  wounded 
in  the  combat  by  a  random  arrow.  See  1  K.  xxii. 
1-35  ;  and  2  Chr.  x\'iii. — the  two  accounts  in  which 
are  nearly  word  for  word  the  same. 

Josephus  dwells  emphatically  on  the  death  of 
Ahab,  as  showing  the  utility  of  prophecy,  and  the 
impossibility  of  escaping  destiny,  even  when  it  is 
revealed  beforehand  [Ant.  viii.  15,  §6).  He  says 
that  it  steals  on  human  souls,  flattering  them  with 
cheerful  hopes,  till  it  leads  them  round  to  the 
point  whence  it  will  gain  the  mastery  over  them. 
This  was  a  theme  flvmiliar  to  the  Greeks  in  many 
tragic  tales,  and  Josephus  uses  words  in  unison 
with  their  ideas.  (See  Euripides,  Hippolyt.  1256, 
and  compare  Herodot.  vii.  17,  viii.  77,  i.  91.) 
From  his  interest  in  the  story,  Josephus  relates 
several  details  not  confciiued  in  the  Bible,  some  of 
which  are  probable,  while  others  are  very  unlikely  ; 
but  for  none  of  which  does  he  give  any  authority. 
Thus,  he  says,  Micaiah  was  alreiuly  in  prison,  when 
sent  for  to  prophesy  before  Ahab  and  Jehoshaphat, 
and  that  it  was  Micaiah  who  had  predicted  death  by  a 
lion  to  the  son  of  a  prophet,  under  the  circumstances 
mentioned  in  1  K.  xx.  35,  36  ;  and  had  rebuked 
Ahab  after  his  brilliant  victory  over  the  Syrians  tor 

Hebrews  conceiving  as  definite  what  would  be  indefinite 
in  Knglish.  (See  Gesen.  Gram.  §1U7.  and  1  K.  iii.  24.)  The 
Siiiril  is  conceived  as  definite  from  its  corresponding  to  the 
requirements  in  the  preceding  question  of  Jehovah. 


350 


MIOAIAH 


not  putting  Benhadad  to  dnath.  And  there  is  no 
doubt  that  these  fiicts  would  be  not  only  consistent 
with  the  narrative  in  the  Bible,  but  would  throw 
additional  light  upon  it ;  for  the  rebuke  of  Ahab  in 
his  hour  (5f  triumph,  on  account  of  his  forbearance, 
was  calculated  to  excite  in  him  the  intonsest  feel- 
ings of  displeasure  and  mortification;  and  it  would 
at  once  explain  Ahab's  hati-ed  of  Micaiah,  if  Mioaiah 
was  tlie  prophet  by  whom  the  rebuke  was  given. 
And  it  ifi  not  unlikely  that  Ahab  in  his  resentment 
might  have  caused  Micaiah  to  be  thrown  into  prison, 
just  as  the  princes  of  Judah,  about  300  years  later, 
maltreated  Jeremiah  in  the  same  way  ( Jer.  xxxvii. 
15).  But  some  other  statements  of  Josephus  can- 
not so  i-eadily  be  regarded  as  probable.  Thus  he 
i-elates  that  when  Ahab  disguised  him.self,  he  gave 
his  own  royal  robes  to  be  worn  by  Jehoshaphat,  in 
the  battle  of  Kamoth  Gilead — an  act,  which  would 
have  been  so  unreasonable  and  cowai'dly  in  Ahab, 
and  would  have  shown  sucli  singular  complaisance 
in  Jehoshaphat,  that  although  supported  by  the 
translation  in  the  Septuagint,  it  cannot  be  received 
as  true.  The  fact  that  some  of  the  Syrian  captains 
mistook  Jehoshaphat  for  Ahab  is  fully  explained 
by  Jehoshaphat's  being  the  only  person,  in  the  arniy 
of  Israel,  who  wore  royal  robes.  Again,  Josephus 
informs  us,  that  Zedekiah  alleged,  as  a  reason  for 
disregarding  Micaiah's  prediction,  that  it  was  di- 
rectly at  variance  with  the  pvojihecy  of  Elijah,  that 
dogs  should  lick  the  blood  of  Ahab,  where  dogs  had 
licked  the  blood  of  Naboth,  in  the  city  of  Samaria : 
inasmuch  as  Ramoth  Gilead,  where,  according  to 
Micaiah,  Ahab  was  to  meet  his  doom,  was  distant 
from  Samaria  a  journey  of  three  days.  It  is  un- 
likely, however,  that  Zedekiah  would  have  founded 
an  argument  on  Elijah's  insulting  prophecy,  even 
to  the  meekest  of  kings  who  might  have  been  the 
subject  of  it ;  hut  that,  in  order  to  pi'ove  himself  in 
the  right  as  against  Micaiah,  ho  should  have  ven- 
tured on  such  an  allusion  to  a  person  of  Ahab's 
character,  is  absolutely  incredible. 

It  only  remains  to  add,  that  besides  what  is  dwelt 
on  by  Josephus,  the  history  of  Micaiah  offers  several 
points  of  interest,  among  which  the  two  following 
may  be  specified;  1st.  Micaiah's  vision  presents 
what  may  be  regarded  as  transitional  ideas  of  one 
origin  of  evil  actions.  In  Exodus,  Jehovah  Himself 
is  represented  as  directly  hardening  Pharaoh's  heart 
(vii.  3,  13,  xiv.  4,  17,  x.  20,  27.)  In  the  Book  of 
Job,  the  name  of  Satan  is  mentioned  ;  but  he  is 
admitted  without  rebuke,  among  the  sons  of  God, 
into  the  presence  of  Jehovah  (Job  i.  6-12).  After 
the  Captivity,  the  idea  of  Satan,  as  an  independent 
principle  of  evil,  in  direct  opposition  to  goodness, 
becomes  fully  established  (1  Chr.  x.\i.  1 ;  and 
compare  Wisd.  ii.  2-1).  [Satan.]  Now  the  ideas 
presented  in  the  vision  of  Micaiah  are  different 
from  each  of  these  three,  and  occupy  a  place  of 
their  own.  They  do  not  go  so  far  as  the  Book  of 
Job — much  less  so  far  as  the  ideas  current  after  the 
Captivity;  but  they  go  farther  than  Exodus.  See 
Ewald,  Poet.  Biicher,  3tter  Theil,  (55.  2ndly.  The 
history  of  Miciiiah  is  an  exemplification  in  practice, 
of  contradictory  predictions  being  made  by  different 
prophets.  Other  striking  instances  occur  in  the 
time  of  Jeremiah  (xiv.  13,  14  ;  xxviii.  1 5,  1 6  ;  xxiii. 
16,  25,  26).  The  only  rule  bearing  on  the  judtr- 
ment  to  be  foraied  under  such  ciicumstances,  seems 
to  have  been  a  negative  one,  which  would  be 
mainly  useful  after  the  event.  It  is  laid  down  in 
Oeut.  xviii.  21,  22,  where  the  question  is  asked, 
how  the  children  of  Israel  irere  to  know  the  word 


MICHAEL 

which  Jehovah  had  not  spoken?  And  the  solution 
is,  that  "  if  the  thing  folloio  not,  nor  come  to 
pass,  that  is  the  thing  which  Jehovah  has  not 
spoken."  [E.  T.] 

MI'CHA  {Hya  :  Mixa-  Micha).     1.  The  son 

of  Mephibosheth  (2  Sam.  ix.  12);  elsewhere  (1 
Ch.  ix.  40)  c;Uled  Micah. 

2.  A  Levite,  or  family  of  Levites,  who  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  11). 

3.  (Alex.  'A^eixa,  Neh.  xi.  22).  The  father  of 
Mattaniah,  a  Gershonite  Levite  and  descendant  of' 
Asaph  (Neh.  xi.  17,  22).  He  is  elsewhere  called 
MiCAH  (1  Ch.  ix.  15)  and  MiCHAiAH  (Neh.  xii.  35). 

4.  (Mixa  ;  Alex.  Xeifid:  Micha).  A  Simeonite; 
father  of  Ozias,  one  of  the  three  governors  of  the 
city  of  Bethulia  in  the  time  of  Judith  (Jud.  vi.  15). 
His  name  is  remarkable  as  being  connected  with 
one  of  the  few  specific  allusions  to  the  ten  tribes 
after  the  captivity. 

MI'CHAEL  ('PNS^P  :    MixaijA  :    Michael). 

1.  An  Asherite,  father  of  Sethur,  one  of  the  twelve 
spies  (Num.  xiii.  13). 

2.  The  son  of  Abihail,  one  of  the  Gadites  who 
settled  in  the  land  of  Bashan  (1  Chr.  v.  13). 

3.  Another  Gadite,  ancestor  of  Abihail  (1  Chr. 
V.  14). 

4.  A  Gershonite  Levite,  ancestor  of  Asaph  (1 
Chr.  vi.  40). 

5.  One  of  the  five  sons  of  Izrahiah  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar,  "  all  of  them  chief's,"  who  with  their 
"  troops  of  the  battle -host"  mustered  to  the  num- 
ber of  36,000  in  the  days  of  David  (1  Chr.  vii.  3). 

6.  A  Benjamite  of  the  sons  of  Beriah  (1  Chi', 
viii.  16). 

7.  One  of  the  captains  of  the  "thousands"  of 
Manasseh  who  joined  the  fortunes  of  David  at  Ziklag 
(1  Chr.  xii.  20). 

8.  The  father,  or  ancestor  of  Omri,  chief  of  the 
tribe  of  Issai;har  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  x.\vii. 
18);  possibly  the  same  as  No.  5. 

9.  One  of  the  sons  of  Jehoshaphat  who  were 
murdered  by  their  elder  brother  Jehoram  (2  Chr. 
xxi.  2,  4). 

10.  The  father  or  ancestor  of  Zehadiah  of  the 
sons  of  Shephatiah  who  returned  with  Ezra  (Ezr. 
viii.  8  ;  1  Esdr.  viii.  34).  [W.  A.  W.] 

11.  "  One,"  or  "  the  first  of  the  chief  princes  '" 
or  archangels  (Dan.  x.  13;  comp.  o  dpx'»7')'*^os 
in  Jude  9),  described  in  Dan.  x.  21  as  the  "  prince  " 
of  Israel,  and  in  xii.  1  as  "  the  great  prince  which 
standeth  "  m  time  of  conflict  "  for  the  children  of 
thy  people."  All  these  passages  in  the  0.  T.  belong 
to  that  late  period  of  its  Revelation  when,  to  the 
general  declai-ation  of  the  angelic  office,  was  added 
the  division  of  that  office  into  parts,  and  the  assign- 
ment of  them  to  individual  angels.  [See  Angels, 
vol.  i.  p.  70  a.]  This  assigimient  served,  not  only 
to  give  that  vividness  to  man's  faith  in  God's  super- 
natural agents,  which  was  so  much  needed  at  a  time 
of  captivity,  during  the  abeyance  of  His  local  mani- 
festations and  regular  agencies,  but  also  to  mark 
the  finite  and  ministerial  nature  of  the  angels,  lest 
they  should  be  worshipped  in  themselves.  Accord- 
ingly, as  Gabriel  represents  the  ministration  of  the 
angels  towards  man,  so  Michael  is  the  type  and 
leader  of  their  strife,  in  God's  name  and  His  strength, 
against  the  power  of  Satan.  In  the  0.  T.  tlierefore 
he  is  the  guardian  of  the  Jewish  people  in  their 
antagonism  to  godless  power  and  heathenism,  in 
the  N.  T.  (see  Rev.  xii.  7)  he  fights  in  heaven  against 


MICHAH 

the  dragon — "  that  old  serpent  called  the  Devil  and 
Satan,  which  deceivcth  the  xolwle  world-''  and  so 
bikes  part  in  that  struggle,  which  is  the  work  of  the 
Church  on  eartii.  The  nature  and  method  oi'  his 
war  against  Satan  are  not  explained,  because  the 
knowledge  would  be  unnecessary  and  perhaps 
impossible  to  us:  the  fact  itself  is  revealed  rarely, 
and  with  that  mysterious  vagueness  which  hangs 
over  all  angelic  ministration,  but  yet  with  plainness 
and  certainty. 

There  remains  still  one  passage  (Jude  9  ;  comp. 
2  Pet.  ii.  11)  in  which  we  are  told  that  "  Michael 
the  archangel,  when  contending  with  the  devil  he 
disputed  aljout  the  body  of  Moses,  durst  not  bring 
against  him  a  railing  accusation,  but  said.  The  Lord 
rebuke  thee."  The  allusion  seems  to  be  to  a  Jewish 
legend  attached  to  Ueut.  xxxiv.  6.  The  Targum 
of  Jonathan  attributes  the  burial  of  Moses  to  the 
hands  of  the  angels  of  God,  and  particularly  of  the 
ai'ohangel  Michael,  as  the  guardian  of  Israel.  Later 
traditions  (see  Oecumen.  in  Jud.  cap.  i.)  set  forth 
how  Satan  disputed  the  burial,  claiming  for  himself 
the  dead  body  because  of  the  blood  of  the  Egyptian 
(Ex.ii.  12)  which  was  on  Moses's  hands.  The  reply 
of  Michael  is  evidently  taken  from  Zech.  iii.  1, 
where,  on  Satan's  "  resisting"  Joshua  the  high- 
priest,  because  of  the  fdthy  garments  of  his  iniquity, 
Jehovah,  or  "the  angel  of  Jehovah"  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  68  6),  said  unto  Satan,  "Jehovah  lebuke  thee, 
0  Satan !  Is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  from  the 
fire  ?  "  The  spirit  of  the  answer  is  the  reference 
to  God's  mercy  alone  for  our  justification,  and  the 
leaving  of  all  vengeance  and  rebuke  to  Him ;  and 
in  this  spirit  it  is  quoted  by  the  Apostle." 

The  Kabbiniail  traditions  about  Michael  are  very 
numerous.  They  oppose  him  constantly  to  Sam- 
mael,  the  accuser  and  enemy  of  Israel,  as  disputing 
for  the  soul  of  Moses ;  as  bringing  the  ram  the  sub- 
stitute for  Isaac,  which  Sammael  sought  to  keep 
back,  &c.  &c. :  they  give  him  the  title  of  the  "  great 
high-priest  in  heaven,"  as  well  as  that  of  the  "  great 
prince  and  conqueror ;"  and  finally  lay  it  down 
that  "  wherever  Michael  is  said  to  have  appeared, 
there  the  glory  of  the  Shechinah  is  intended."  It 
is  clear  that  the  sounder  among  them,  in  making 
such  use  of  the  name,  intended  to  personify  the 
Divine  Power,  and  typify  the  Messiah  (see  Schoett- 
gen,  Hor.  Hehr.  i.  1079,  1119,  ii.  8,  15,  ed.  Dresd. 
1742).  But  these  traditions,  as  usual,  are  erected 
on  very  slender  Scriptoral  foundation.        [A.  B.] 

MI'CHAH  (n3''P  :  Mixa :  Micha),  eldest  sou 
of  Uzziel,  the  son  of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  24,  25), 
elsewhere  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  20)  called  MiCAH. 

MICHAI'AH  (n^D-ip  :  ^xaias  :  Micha). 
The  name  is  identical  with  that  elsewhere  rendered 
Michaiah.  1.  The  father  of  Achbor,  a  man  of  high 
rank  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  12).  He 
is  the  same  as  Micah  the  father  of  Abdon  (2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  20). 

2.  (Mixai'a;  Alex.  Wixa'ia:  Michdia).  The 
son  of  Zaixur,  a  descendant  of  Asaph  (Neh.  xii. 
'Ab).     He  is  the  same  ;is  Micah  the  son  of  Zichri 

"  From  unwillingness  to  acknowledge  a  reference  to  a 
mere  Jewish  tradition  (in  spite  of  vers.  14, 15),  some  have 
supposed  St.  Jude's  reference  to  be  to  Zech.  iii.  1,  and 
explained  the  "  body  of  Moses  "  to  be  the  Jewish,  as  the 
"  body  of  Christ "  is  the  Christian,  Church.  The  whole 
explanation  is  forced  ;  but  the  analogy  on  which  the  last 
part  is  based  is  absolutely  unwarrantable  ;  and  the  very 
attempt  to  draw  it  shews  a  forgetfnlncss  of  the  true 
meaning  of  that  communion  with  Christ,  which  is  iiupliid 
by  the  latter  expression.  * 


MICHAL 


351 


CI  Chr.  ix.  15)  and  Micha  the  son  of  Zabdi  (Neh. 
xi.  17). 

3.  (Omitted  m  Vat.  MS.  ;  Alex.  MiX"'foy : 
Michea).  One  of  the  priests  who  blew  the  trum- 
pets at  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  by 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  41). 

4.  (•in"'D''D:  Mactxa:  Michdia).  The  daughter 
of  Uriel  of  Gibeah,  wife  of  Rehoboam,  and  mother 
of  Abijah  king  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  siii.  2).  She 
is  elsewhere  called  "  Maachah  the  daughter  of 
Abishalom  "  (1  K.  xv.  2),  or  "  Absalom  "  (2  Chr, 
xi.  20),  being,  in  all  probability,  his  granddaughter, 
and  daughter  of  Tamar  according  to  Josephus. 
[Maachah,  3.]  The  reading  "  JIaachah  "  is  pro- 
bably the  true  one,  and  is  supported  by  the  LXX. 
and  Peshito-Syriac. 

5.  (Mixai'a:  Michaea).  One  of  the  princes  of 
Jehoshaphat  whom  he  sent  with  certain  priests  and 
Levites  to  teach  the  law  of  Jehovah  in  the  cities  of 
Judah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7).  [\V.  A.  W.] 

6.  (iripp:  Mixaias:  F.A.Mi%eas:  Michaeas). 
The  son  of  Gemariah.  He  is  only  mentioned  on 
one  occasion.  After  Baruch  had  read,  in  public, 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah  announcing  imminent  cala- 
mities, Michaiah  went  and  declared  them  to  all  the 
princes  assembled  in  king  Zedekiah's  house ;  and 
the  princes  forthwith  sent  tor  Baruch  to  read  the 
prophecies  to  them  (Jer.  xxxvi.  11-14).  IMichaiah 
\\as  the  third  in  descent  of  a  princely  family,  whose 
names  are  recorded  in  connexion  with  important 
religious  transactions.  His  grandfather  Shaphan 
was  the  scribe,  or  secretary  of  king  Josiah,  to  whom 
Hilkiah  the  high-priest  fii'st  delivered  the  book  of 
the  law  which  he  said  he  had  found  in  the  House 
of  Jehovah — Shaphan  first  perusing  the  book  him- 
self, and  then  reading  it  aloud  to  the  youthful  king 
(2  K.  xxii.  10).  And  it  was  from  his  father  Gema- 
riah's  chamber  in  the  Temple,  that  Baruc  bread  the 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  in  the  eai's  of  all  the  people. 
Moreover,  Gemariah  was  one  of  the  three  who 
made  intercession  to  king  Zedekiah,  although  in 
vain,  that  he  would  not  burn  the  roll  containing 
Jeremiah's  prophecies.  [E.  T.] 

MICH'AL  (?3''D  :  MeAx'^'^- ;  Joseph.  MixaAa: 
Michol),  the  younger  of  Saul's  two  daughters 
(1  Sam.  xiv.  49).  The  king  had  proposed  to 
bestow  on  David  his  eldest  daughter  Merab;  but 
before  the  marriage  could  be  arranged  an  unex- 
pected turn  was  given  to  the  matter  by  the  beha- 
viour of  Blichal,  who  fell  violently  in  love  with  the 
young  hero.  The  marriage  with  her  elder  sister 
was  at  once  put  aside.  Saul  eagerly  caught  at 
the  opportunity  which  the  change  atlbrded  him 
of  exposing  his  rival  to  the  risk  of  death.  The 
price  fixed  on  Michal's  hand  was  no  less  than  the 
slaughter  of  a  hundred  Philistines."  For  these  the 
usual  "  dowry  "  by  which,  according  to  the  cus- 
tom of  the  East,  from  the  time  of  Jacob  down  to 
the  present  day,  the  father  is  paid  for  his  daughter, 
was  relinquished.  David  by  a  brilliant  feat  doubled 
the  tale  of  victims,  and  i\Iichal  became  his  wife. 
What  her  age  was  we  do  not  know — her  husband 
cannot  have  been  more  than  sixteen. 

"  Perhaps  nothing  in  the  whole  Bible  gives  so  complete 
an  example  of  the  gap  which  exists  between  Eastern 
and  Western  ideas,  as  the  manner  in  which  the  tale  of 
these  uncircumcised  enemies  of  Israel  was  to  be  counted. 
Josephus  softens  it  by  substituting  beads  for  foreskins, 
but  it  is  obvious  that  heads  would  not  have  answered  the 
same  purpose.  The  LXX.,  who  often  alter  obnoxious  ex- 
pressions, adhere  to  the  Hebrew  text. 


352 


MICHAL 


It  was  not  long  before  the  btrength  of  lier  affec- 
tion was  put  to   the  proof.     They  seem  to  have 
been  living  at  Gibeah,  then  the  head-quarters  of 
tlie  king  and  the  army.    After  one  of  Saul's  attacks 
of  freuzy,    in    which    David    had    barely    escaped 
being  transfixed  by  the  king's  great  spear,  Michal 
learned  that  the  house  was  being  watched  by  the 
myrmidons  of  Saul,  and  that  it  was  intended  on 
the  next  moi-ning  to  attack  her  husband  as  he  lett 
his  door  (xix.   11).     That  the  intention  was  real 
was    evident    from    the    behaviour   of  the    king's 
soldiers,  who  paraded  round  and  round  the  town,  and 
"  returning  "  to  the  house  "  in  the  evening,"  witlx 
loud  cries,  more  like  the  yells  of  the  savage  dogs  of 
the  East  than    the  utterances  of  human  beings, 
"  belched  out "  curses  and  lies  against  the  young 
vvarrior  who  had  so  lately  shamed  them  all  (Ps.  lix.'' 
3,  *i,  7,  12).     Michal  seems  to  have  known  too 
well  the  vacillating  and  ferocious  disposition  of  her 
father   when    in    these    demoniacal    moods.      The 
attack  was  ordered  for  the  morning ;    but  before 
the  morning  arrives  the  king  will  probably  have 
changed   his  mind    and  hastened  his   stroke.     So 
like  a  true  soldier's  wife,  she  meets  stratagem  by 
stratagem.     She  first  provided  for  David's  safety  by 
lowering  him   out  of  the  window :    to  gain   time 
for  him  to  reach  the  residence  of  Samuel  she  next 
dressed  up  the  bed  as  if  still  occupied  by  him  :  the 
teraphim,  or  household  god,  was  laid  in  the  bed,  its 
head  enveloped,  like  that  of  a  sleeper,  in  the  usual 
net  "^  of  goat's  hair  for  protection  from  gnats,  the 
rest  of  the  figure  covered  with  the  wide  heged  or 
plaid.     It  happened  as  she  had  feared ;  Saul  could 
not  delay  his  vengeance  till  David  appeared  out  of 
doors,  but  sent  his  peoj)le  into  the  house.     The 
reply  of  Michal    is   that  her  husband    is   ill   and 
cannot  be  disturbed.     At  last  Saul  will  be  baulked 
no  longer:  his  messengers  force  their  way  into  the 
inmost  apartment  and  there  discover  the  deception 
which  has  been  played  off  upon  them  with  such 
success.     Saul's  rage  may  be  imagined  :  his  fury 
was  such  that   Michal  was  obliged  to  fabricate  a 
story  of  David's  having  attempted  to  kill  her. 

This  was  the  last  time  she  saw  her  husband 
for  many  years ;  and  when  the  rupture  between 
Saul  and  David  had  become  open  and  incurable, 
Michal  was  married  to  anothei-  man,  Phalti  or 
Phaltiel  of  Gallim  (1  Sam.  xxv.  44;  2  Sam.  iii. 
15),  a  village  prob.ibly  not  far  from  Gibeah. 
After  the  death  of  her  father  and  brothers  at 
Gilboa,  Michal  and  her  new  husband  appear  to 
have  betaken  themselves  with  the  rest  of  the 
family  of  Saul  to  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan. 
If  the  old  Jewish  tiadition  inserted  by  the  Targum 
in  2  Sam.  xxi.  may  be  followed,  she  was  occupied 
in  bringing  up  the  sons  of  her  sistei-  Merab  and 
Adriel  of  Meholah.  At  any  rate  it  is  on  the  road 
leading  up  from  the  Jordan  valley  to  the  Mount 
of  Olives  that  we  first  encounter  her  with  her 
husband — Michal  under  the  joint  escort  of  David's 
messengers  and  Abner's  twenty  men,  en  route  to 
David  at  Hebron,  the  submissive  Phaltiel  behind, 
bewailing  the  wife  thus  torn  from  hirti.     It  was  at 


b  This  Psalm  by  its  title  in  the  Hebrew,  LXX.,  Vul- 
gate, and  Targum,  is  referred  to  the  event  in  question,  a 
view  strenuously  supported  by  Hengstenberg. 

'  D^-ty  "1^33.  This  is  Ewald's  explanation  of 
a  term  which  has  puzzled  all  other  commentators 
(Gesch.  iii.  101).  For  'T'33,  the  LXX.  seem  to  have 
read  "T33,  a  liver;  since  they  state  that  Michal  "put 
the  liver  of  a  goat  at  David's  liead."  For  an  ingenious 
suggestion  founded  on  this,  see  Magu\  p.  179a.    « 


MICHAL 

least  fourteen  years  since  David  and  she  had  parted 
at  Gibeah,  since  she   had  watched  him  disa])pear 
down  the  cord  into  the  dai'kness  and  had  perilled 
her  own  life  for  his  against  the  rage  of  her  insane 
father.     That  David's  love  for  his  absent  wife  had 
undergone  no  change  in  the  interval  seems  cerfciin 
fjom    the   eagerness  with  which   he   reclamis   her 
as  soon  as  the  opportunity  is   afforded  him.     Im- 
portant  as   it  was   to    him    to   make   an  alliance 
with  Ishbosheth  and  the  great  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
and    much    as    he   lespected    Abner,    he    will   not 
listen  for  a  moment  to  any  overtures  till  his  wife 
is  restored.      Every  circumstance   is  fiesh   in  his 
memory.     "  I  will  not  see  thy  face  except  thou 
first  bring  Saul's  daughter  ....  my  wife  Michal 
whom   I   espoused  to  me  for  a  hundred  foreskins 
of  the    Philistines"   (2    Sam.   iii.    13,    14).     The 
meeting  took  place  at  Hebron.     How  Michal  com- 
ported herself  in  the  altered  circumstances  of  David's 
household;  how  she   received   or  was  received  by 
Abigail  and  Ahinoam  we  are  not  told ;  but  it  is 
plain  from  the  subsequent  occurrences  that  some- 
thing had  happened  to  alter  the  relations  of  herself 
and  David      They  were  no  longer  what  they  had 
been   to  each  other.     The  alienation  was  probably 
mutual.     On  her  side  must  have  been  the  recol- 
lection of  the  long  contests  which  had  taken  place 
in  the  interval  between  her  father  and  David  ;  the 
strong  anti-Saulite  and  anti-Benjamite  feeling  pre- 
valent in  the  camp  at  Hebron,  where  every  word 
she  heard  must   have   contained  some   distasteful 
allusion,  and  where  at  every  turn  she  must  have 
encountered    men    like    Abiathar    the    priest    or 
Ismaiah  the   Gibeonite  (1   Chr.  xii.  4;    comp.   2 
Sam.    xxi.    2),    who   had  lost   the  whole   or    the 
greater  part  of  their  relatives  in  some  sudden  burst 
of  her  father's  fury.     Add   to  this  the  connexion 
between  her  husband  and  the  Philistines  who  had 
killed  her  father  and  brothers  ;  and,  more  than  all 
perhaps,  the  iuevitiible  difference  between  the  boy- 
husband  of  her  recollections  and  the  matured  and 
occupied  warrior  who  now  received  her.    The  whole 
must  have  come  upon  her  as  a  strong  contrast  to 
the  affectionate  husband  whose  tears  had  followed 
her  along  the  road  over  Olivet,  and  to  the  home 
over  which  we  cannot  doubt  she  ruled  supreme. 
On  the  side  of  David  it  is    natural  to   put    her 
advanced    years,   in  a    climate  wheie  women    are 
old  at  thirty,  and  probably  a  petulant  and  jealous 
temper  inheiited  fiom  her  father,  one  outburst  of 
which    certainly    produced    the    rupture   between 
them  which  closes  our  knowledge  of  Michal. 

It  was  the  day  of  David's  greatest  triumph,  when 
he  brought  the  Ark  of  Jehovah  from  its  temporary 
resting-place  to  its  home  in  the  newly-acquired 
city.  It  was  a  triumph  in  every  respect  peculiarly 
his  own.  The  procession  consisted  of  priests,  Le- 
vites,  the  captains  of  the  host,  the  elders  of  the 
nation  ;  and  conspicuous  in  front,  "  in  the  midst  of 
the  damsels  playing  on  the  timbrels,"  ^  was  the  king 
dancing  and  leaping.  Michal  watched  this  procession 
approach  from  the  window  of  her  apartments  in  the 
royal  harem  ;  the  motions  of  her  husband  «  shockeil 


d  No  doubt  a  similar  procession  to  that  alluded  to  in 
Ps.  Isviii.  25,  where  U  will  be  observed  that  the  words 
interpolated  by  our  translators— "  among  them  were  the 
damsels"— alter  the  sense.  The  presence  of  the  women 
as  stated  above  is  implied  in  the  words  of  Michal  in  2  Sam. 
vi.  20,  when  compared  with  the  statement  of  Ps.  Ixviii 

e  It  seems  from  the  words  of  Michal  (vi.  20),  which 
must  be  taken  in  their  literal  sense,  coupled  with  the 
stiiteraent  of  1  Chr.  xv.  27,  that  David  was  clad  in  nothing 
but  the  ephod  Of  thin    linen.     So  it  is  understood  liy 


MICHAL 

her  as  undignified  and  indecent  —  "she  despised 
him  in  lier  licart."  It  would  have  been  well  if 
lier  contempt  had  rested  there ;  but  it  was  not  in 
her  nature  to  conceal  it,  and  when,  after  the 
exertions  of  the  long  da_v  were  over,  the  last  burnt- 
offering  and  the  last  peace-ofFering  offered,  the  last 
portion  distributed  to  the  crowd  of  worshippers, 
the  king  entered  his  house  to  bless  his  family,  he 
was  j-eceived  by  his  wife  not  with  the  congratula- 
tions which  he  had  a  Yight  to  expect  and  which 
would  have  been  so'  grateful  to  him,  but  with  a 
bitter  taunt  which  showed  how  incapable  she  was 
of  appreciating  either  her  husband's  temper  or  the 
service  in  which  he  had  been  engaged.  David's 
retort  was  a  tremendous  one,  conveyed  in  woi'ds 
which  once  spoken  could  never  be  recalled.  It 
gathered  up  all  the  differences  between  them  which 
made  .sympathy  no  longer  possible,  and  we  do 
not  need  the  assurance  of  the  sacred  writer  that 
"  Michal  had  no  child  unto  the  day  of  her  death," 
to  feel  quite  certain  that  all  intercourse  between 
her  and  David  must  have  ceased  from  that  date. 
Josephus  {^Ant.  vii.  4,  §o)  intimates  that  she 
leturned  to  Phaltiel,  but  of  this  there  is  no  men- 
tion in  the  records  of  the  Bible ;  and,  however 
much  we  may  hesitate  at  doubting  a  writer  so 
accurate  as  Joseplius  when  his  own  interests  are 
not  concerned,  yet  it  would  be  difficult  to  reconcile 
such  a  thing  with  the  known  ideas  of  the  Jews  as  to 
women  who  had  once  shared  the  king's  bed.'  [See 
KizPAii,  AisisiiAG,  Adonijah.] 

Her  name  appears  but  once  again  (2  Sara.  .\xi.  8) 
as  the  bringer-up,  or  more  accurately  the  mother, 
of  five  of  the  grandchildren  of  Saul  who  were 
sacrificed  to  Jehovah  by  the  Gibeonites  on  the 
hill  of  Gibeah.  But  it  is  probably  more  correct 
to  substitute  Merab  for  Michal  in  this  place,  for 
which  see  p.  327.  [G.] 

MICHE'AS  (Michaeas),  the  prophet  Micah 
the  Morasthite  [2  Esd.  i.  39). 

MICH'MAS  (DD"P  :    Maxi-MS  ;   Alex.  Xa/^- 

(Uas  :  Machmas),  a  variation,  probably  a  later*  form, 
of  the  iiameMiCHMASH  (Ezr.  ii.  27  ;  Neh.  vii.  31). 
In  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Esdras  it  is  given  as 
Macalon.     See  the  following  article.  [G.] 

MICH'MASH  (£i'D3p :  naxt'-i.s :  Machmas), 

a  town  which  is  known  to  us  almost  solely  by  its 
connexion  with  the  Philistine  war  of  Saul  and  Jo- 
nathan (1  Sam.  xiii.  xiv.).  It  has  been  identified 
with  great  pi'obability  in  a  village  which  still  bears 
the  name  of  Mukhmas,  and  stands  at  about  7  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  northern  edge  of  the 
great  Wady  Suweinit — in  some  Maps  W.  Fuwar — 

Procopius  of  Gaza  (in  1  Chr.  xv.).  The  ephod  seems  to 
have  been  a  kind  of  tippet  which  went  over  the 
shoulders,  (en-wjai't),  and  cannot  have  aiforded  much  pro- 
tection to  the  person,  especially  of  a  man  in  violent 
action. 

f  The  Jewish  tradition,  preserved  in  llie  'I'ui-gum  on 
Kuth  iii.  8,  states  thai  I'lialtiel  had  from  the  fli.st  acted  in 
accordance  with  the  idea  alluded  to  in  the  text.  He  is 
placed  in  the  same  rank  with  Joseph,  and  is  conniie- 
morated  as  "  Phaltiel,  son  of  Laish,  the  pious  (KT'DH, 
the  word  used  for.  the  Puritans  of  the  New  Testament 
times),  who  placed  a  sword  between  himself  and  Michal 
Saul's  daughter,  lest  he  should  go  in  unto  her."     [Assi- 

DAKANS.] 

»  The  change  of  ^>  into   Q  is  frequent   in   the  later 
Hebrew  (see  Gesen.  Thes.  fl.sK))- 
VOL.  II. 


MICHMASH 


353 


which  forms  the  main  pass  of  communication  be- 
tween the  central  highlands  on  which  the  villao-e 
stands,  and  the  Jordan  valley  at  Jericlio.  Imme- 
diately facing  3fukhmas,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
ravine,  is  the  modern  representative  of  (jeba  ;  and 
behind  this  again  are  Kamah  and  Gibeah — all  me- 
morable names  in  the  long  struggle  which  has  im- 
mortalised Michmash.  Bethel  is  abput  4  miles  to 
the  north  of  Michmash,  and  the  interval  is  filled  up 
by  the  heights  of  Barka,  Deir  Diwan,  Tell  el- 
Hajar,  &c.,  which  appear  to  have  constituted  the 
"  Mount  Bethel "  of  the  narrative  (xiii.  2).  So 
much  is  necessary  to  make  the  notices  of  Michmash 
contained  m  the  Bible  intelligible. 

The  place  was  thus  situated  in  tlie  very  middle 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  If  the  name  be,  as  some 
scholars  assert  (Fiirst,  Handwh.  6006,  7326),  com- 
pounded fiom  that  of  Chemosh,  the  Monbite  deity, 
it  is  not  improbably  a  relic  of  some  incursion  or  in- 
vasion of  the  Moabites,  justas  Chephar-haanunonai, 
in  this  very  neighbourhood,  is  of  the  Ammonites. 
But  though  in  the  heart  of  Benjamin,  it  is  not  named 
in  the  list  of  the  towns  of  that  tribe  (comp.  Josh, 
xviii.),  but  first  appears  as  one  of  the  chief  points  of 
Saul's  position  at  the  outbreak  of  the  war.  He  was 
occupying  the  range  of  heights  just  mentioned,  one 
end  of  his  line  resting  on  Bethel,  the  other  at 
Michmash  (1  Sam.  xiii.  2).  In  Geba,  close  to  him, 
but  separated  by  the  wide  and  intricate  valley,  the 
Philistines  had  a  garrison,  with  a  chief  'olficer. 
The  taking  of  the  garrison  or  the  killing  of  the 
officer  by  Saul's  son  Jonathan  was  the  first  move. 
The  next  was  for  the  Philistines  to  swarm  up 
from  their  sea-side  plain  in  such  numbers,  that  no 
alternative  was  left  for  Saul  but  to  retire  down 
the  Wady  to  Gilgal,  near  Jericho,  that  from  that 
ancient  sanctuaiy  he  might  collect  and  reassure 
the  Israelites.  Michmash  was  then  occupied  by 
the  Philistines,  and  was  their  furthest  post  to  the 
I'^ast.''  But  it  was  destined  to  witness  theii-  sudden 
overthrow.  While  he  was  in  Geba,  and  his  lather 
in  Michmash,  Jonathan  must  have  crossed  the 
intervening  valley  too  often  not  to  know  it  tho- 
roughly ;  and  the  intricate  paths  which  render  it 
impossible  for  a  stranger  to  find  his  way  through 
the  mounds  and  hummocks  which  crowd  the  bottom 
of  the  ravine^with  these  he  was  so  familiar — the 
"  passages"  here,  the  "  sharp  rocks"  there— as  to 
be  able  to  traverse  them  even  in  the  dark.  It  was 
just  as  the  day  dawned  (Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  6,  §2) 
that  the  watchers  in  the  garrison  at  Michmash 
descried  the  two  Hebrews  clambering  up  the  steeps 
Ijeneath.  We  learn  from  the  details  furnished  by 
Josephus,  who  must  have  had  an  opportimity  of 
examining  the  spot  when  he  passed  it  with  Titus 


»  The  Hebrew  word  2''y3,  or  2'''!i\  means  both  an 
officer  and  a  garrison  (Gesen."  rites.  9n3).  It  is  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  by  the  fornur  in  1  K.  iv.  19,  and  by  the  latter 
in  the  passage  in  question.  p:wald  (  G<'.<tcli.  iii.  41 )  affirms 
unhesitatingly  that  the  former  is  correct;  but  not  so 
Michaelis,  Zunz,  and  l)e  Wette,  in  their  translations,  or 
Gesonius  as  above.  The  English  word  "post"  embraces 
some  of  the  significations  of  Nctsib. 

^  See  xiv.  31,  where  Michmash  is  named  as  the  point 
on  the  east  at  which  the  slaughtei:  began,  and  Ajalon,  on 
the  west,  that  at  which  it  terminated.  Unlike  the  Ca- 
naanHes  (Josh,  x.),  who  probably  made  olT  in  the  direction 
of  Phoem'cia.  and  therefore  chose  the  upper  road  by  the 
two  Beth-horons,  the  Philistines  when  they  reached  Gibeon 
took  the  left  hand  and  lower  road,  by  the  Wady  Suleiman 
— where  Yalo  still  exists— the  most  direct  access  to  their 
own  maritime  plain. 

2   A 


354 


MICHMASH 


ou  their  way  to  the,  siege  of  Jerusalem  (see  B.  J. 
V.  2,  §1),  that  the  part  of  Michmash  in  which 
the  Philistines  had  establisherl  themselves,  consisted 
of  three  summits,  surrounded  by  a  line  of  rocks 
like  a  natural  entrenchment,  and  ending  in  a  long 
and  sharp  precipice  believed  to  be  impregnable. 
Finding  himself  observed  fiom  above,  and  taking 
the  invitation .  as  an  omen  in  his  favour,  Jonathan 
turned  from  the  course  which  he  was  at  first  pur- 
suing', and  crept  up  in  the  direction  of  the  point 
reputed  impregnable.  And  it  was  there,  according 
to  Josephus,  that  he  and  his  armour-bearer  made 
their  entrance  to  the  camp  (Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  6,  §2). 
[GiBEAH,  vol.  i.  6906  ;  Jonathan.] 

Unless  Makaz  be  Michmash — an  identification 
for  which  we  have  only  the  ^luthority  of  the  LXX. 
— we  hear  nothing  of  the  place  from  this  time 
till  the  invasion  of  Judah  by  Sennacherib  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah,  when  it  is  mentioned  by  Isaiah 
(x.  28).  He  is  advancing  by  the  northern  road, 
and  has  passed  Ai  and  Migron.  At  Michmash,  on 
the  further  side  of  the  almost  impassable  ravine, 
the  heavy  baggage  (A.V.  "carriages,"  see  vol.  i. 
281  rt)  is  deposited,  but  the  great  king  himself 
crosses  the  pass,  and  takes  up  his  quarters  for  the 
night  at  Geba.  All  this  is  in  exact  accordance  with 
the  indications  of  the  narrative  of  1  Samuel,  and 
with  the  present  localities. 

After  the  captivity  the  men  of  the  place  returned, 
122  in  number  (Ezr.  ii.  27;  Neh.  vii.  31;  in 
both  these  the  name  is  slightly  altered  to  MiCHMAS), 
and  re-occupied  their  former  home  (Neh.  xi.  31). 

At  a  later  date  it  became  the  residence  of  Jo- 
nathan Maccabaeus,  and  the  seat  of  his  government 
(1  Mace.  ix.  73,  "Machmas;"  Joseph.  Ant.  xin. 
1,  §6).  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Ono- 
masticon,  "Machmas")  it  was  "a  very  large 
village  retaining  its  ancient  name,  and  lying  near 
Puimah  in  the  district  of  Aelia  (Jerusalem)  at  9 
miles  distance  therefrom." 

Later  still  it  was  famed  for  the  excellence  of  its 
com.  See  the  quotation  from  the  Mishna  (Mena- 
choth)  in  Reland  {Pal.  897),  and  Schwarz  (131). 
Whether  this  excellence  is  still  maintained  we  do  not 
know.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  cultivation  in  and 
amongst  groves  of  old  olives  in  the  broad  shallow 
wady  which  slopes  down  to  the  north  and  east  of 
the  village ;  but  Mukhmas  itself  is  a  very  poor 
place,  and  the  country  close  to  it  has  truly  "a 
most  forbidding  aspect."  "  Huge  gray  rocks  raise 
up  their  bald  crowns,  completely  hiding  every  patch 
of  soil,  and  the  gray  huts  of  the  village,  and  the 
gi'ay  ruins  that  encompass  them  can  hardly  be  dis- 
tinguished from  the  rocks  themselves."  There  are 
considerable  remains  of  massive  foundations,  co- 
lumns, cisteiTis,  &c.,  testifying  to  former  prosperity, 
greater  than  that  of  either  Anathoth  or  Geba  (Porter, 
Handbk.  215,  216). 

Immediately  below  the  village  the  great  wady 
spreads  out  to  a  considerable  width — perhaps  half  a 
mile ;  and  its  bed  is  broken  up  into  an  intricate 
mass  of  hummocks  and  mounds,  some  two  of  which, 
before  the  torrents  of  3000  winters  had  reduced 
and  rounded  their  forms,  were  probably  the  two 
"  teeth  of  cliff" — the  Bozez  and  Seneh  of  Jo- 
nathan's adventure.  Right  opposite  is  Jeba,  on  a 
curiously  terraced  hill.  To  the  left  the  wady  con- 
tracts again,  and  shows  a  naiTOW  black  gorge  of 
almost  vertical  limestone  rocks  pierced  with  myste- 


»  For  the  situation  of  the  town  of  Asher  sec  note  to 
Manasseh,  p.  220. 


MICHTAM 

rious  caverns  and  fissures,  the  resort,  so  the  writer 
was  assured,  of  hyenas,  porcupines,  and  eagles.  In 
the  wet  season  the  stream  is  said  to  be  often  deeper 
than  a  man's  neck,  very  strong,  and  of  a  bright 
yellow  colour. 

In  the  middle  ages  cl-Bireh  was  believed  to  be 
Michmash  (see  Maundrell,  JIarch  25 ;  and  the  co- 
pious details  in  Quaresmius,  Elucidatio,  ii.  786, 
787).  But  el-Bireh  is  now  ascertained  on  good 
grounds  to  be  identical  with  Beeroth.  [G.] 

MICH'METHAH  cnripp?|iri,  i.  e.  the  Mic- 

methath  :  'iKacr/xiiv,  ArtXavdQ ;  Alex.  MaxOoid,  in 
both  cases :  Mcchmethath,  Machmathath),  a  place 
which  formed  one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  boundaiy 
of  the  territories  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  on  the 
western  side  of  Jordan.  (1.)  It  lay  "  facing 
C^D  ?y)  Shechem  ;"  it  also  was  the  next  place  on 
the  boundary  west  of  Asher*  (Josh.  xvii.  7),  if 
indeed  the  two  are  not  one  and  the  same  place — 
ham-Micmethath  a  distinguishing  affix  to  the  com- 
moner name  of  Asher.  The  latter  \-iew  is  taken 
by  Reland  {Pal.  596) — no  mean  authority — and 
also  by  Schwarz  (147),  but  it  is  not  supported  by 
the  Masoretic  accents  of  the  passage.  The  former 
is  that  of  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  as  well  as  our 
own  A.  V.  Whichever  may  ultimately  be  found 
coiTect,  the  position  of  the  place  must  be  somewhere 
on  the  east  of  and  not  far  distant  from  Shechem. 
But  then  (2.)  this  appears  quite  inconsistent  with 
the  mention  of  the  same  name  in  the  specification 
of  a  former  boundary  (Josh.  xvi.  6).  Here  the 
whole  description  seems  to  relate  to  the  boundary 
between  Benjamin  and  Ephraim  (i.  e.  Ephraim's 
southern  boundary),  and  Michmethath  follows  Beth- 
horon  the  upper,  and  is  stated  to  be  on  its  west 
or  seaward  side.  Now  Bethhoron  is  at  least  20 
miles,  as  the  crow  files,  from  Shechem,  and  more 
than  30  from  Asher.  The  only  escape  from  such 
hopeless  contradictions  is  the  belief  that  the  state- 
ments of  chap.  xvi.  have  suffered  very  great  muti- 
lation, and  that  a  gap  exists  between  verses  5  and  6, 
which  if  supplied  would  give  the  landmarks  which 
connected  the  two  remote  points  of  Bethhoron  and 
Michmethath.  The  place  has  not  been  met  with 
nor  the  name  discovered  by  travellers,  ancient  or 
modern.  [G.] 

MICH'RI  (n3»  :  yiaxlp  ;  Alex.  Moxope  : 
Mochori).  Ancestor  of  Elah,  one  of  the  heads  of  the 
fathers  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  ix.  8)  after  the  cap- 
tivity. 

MICH'TAM  (QnaO  :  ffTn\oypa<pia  :  tituli 
inscriptio).  This  word  occurs  in  the  titles  of  six 
Psalms  (xvi.,  Ivi.-lx.),  all  of  which  are  ascribed  to 
David.  The  marginal  reading  of  our  A.  V.  is  "  a 
golden  Psalm,"  while  in  the  Geneva  version  it  is 
described  as  "a  certain  tune."  From  the  position 
which  it  occupies  in  the  title,  compared  with  that 
of  Mizmor  (A.  V.  "Psalm,"  Ps.  iv.-vi.,  &c.), 
Maschil  (Ps.  xxxii.,  &c.),  and  Shiggaion  (Ps.  vii.), 
the  first  of  which  certainly  denotes  a  song  with  an 
instrumental  accompaniment  (as  distinguished  from 
shir,  a  song  for  the  voice  alone),  we  tnay  infer  that 
michtam  is  a  term  apphed  to  these  Psalms  to  denote 
their  musical  character,  but  beyond  this  eveiything 
is  obscure.  The  very  etymology  of  the  word  is 
uncertain.  1.  Kimchi  and  Aben  Ezra,  among 
Rabbinical  writers,  trace  it  to  the  root  DflS,  cd- 
tham,  as  it  appears  in  DHS,  cethem,  which  is  ren- 
dered in  the  A.  V.  "  gold"  (Job  xxviii.  16),  "pure 


MICHTAM 

gold"  (Job  xxviii.  19),  "fine  gold"  (Job  xxxi. 
24);  because  the  Psalm  was  to  David  precious  as 
fine  gold.  They  have  been  followed  by  the  trans- 
lators in  the  margin  of  our  version,  and  the  3Iic/Uam 
Psalms  have  been  compared  witli  the  "  Golden  Say- 
ings" of  Pythagoras  and  the  Proverbs  of  Ali. 
Others  have  thought  the  epithet  "golden"  was 
applied  to  these  Psalms,  because  they  were  written 
in  letters  of  gold  and  suspended  in  the  .Sanctuary  or 
elsewhere,  like  the  Moallakdt,  or  suspended  poems 
of  Mecca,  which  were  called  Modhahabdt,  or 
"  golden,"  because  they  were  written  in  gold  cha- 
racters upon  Egyptian  linen.  There  is,  however, 
no  trace  among  the  Hebrews  of  a  practice  analogous 
to  this.  Another  interpretation,  based  upon  the  same 
etymology  of  the  word,  is  given  to  Michtam  by  an 
unknown  writer  quoted  by  Jarchi  (Ps.  xvi.  1). 
According  to  this  it  signifies  "a  crown,"  because 
David  asked  God  for  His  protection,  and  He  was  as 
a  crown  to  him  (Ps.  v.  12).  ^ 

2.  InSyriactherootinconj.Pae/,  )f^h^^,cathem, 

signifies  "  to  stain,"  hence  "to  defile,"  the  primary 
meaning  in  Peal  being  probably  "  to  spot,  mark 
with  spots,"  whence  the  substantive  is  in  common 
use  in  Rabbinical  Hebrew  in  the  sense  of  "  spot " 
or  "  mark"  (comp.  Kimchi,  on  Am.  i.  1).  In  this 
sense  the  Niphal  participle  occurs  in  Jer.  ii.  22, 
"  thine  iniquity  is  spotted  before  me,"  which  makes 
the  parallelism  more  striking  than  the  "marked" 
of  our  A.  V.  From  this  etymology  the  meanings 
have  been  given  to  Michtam  of  "  a  noted  song " 
(Junius  and  Tremellius,  insignis),  or  a  song  which 
was  gi-aven  or  carved  upon  stone,  a  monumental 
inscription ;  the  latter  of  which  has  the  merit  of 
antiquity  in  its  favour,  being  suppoi-ted  by  the 
renderings  of  the  LXX.,  Theodotion,  the  Chaldee 
Targum,  and  the  Vulgate.  (See  ]\Iichaelis,  Siippl. 
ad  Lex.  Heb.  No.  1242.)  There  is  nothing  in 
the  character  of  the  Psalms  so  designated  to  render 
the  title  appropriate;  had  the  Hebrews  been  ac- 
quainted with  musical  notes,  it  would  be  as  reason- 
able to  compare  the  word  Michtam  with  the  old 
English  "  prick-song,"  »  a  song  pricked  or  noted. 
In  the  utter  darkness  which  envelopes  it,  any  con- 
jecture is  worthy  of  consideration ;  many  ai-e  va- 
lueless as  involving  the  transference  to  one  language 
of  the  metaphors  of  another.         ^  ^ 

3.  The  corresponding  Arab.  ^^jS i  katama,  "  to 

conceal,  repress,"  is  also  resorted  to  for  tlie  explana- 
tion oi'  Michtam,  which  was  a  title  given  to  certain 
Psalms  according  to  Hezel,  because  they  were 
written  while  David  was  in  concealment.  This, 
however,  could  not  be  appropriate  to  Ps.  Iviii.,  Ix. 
From  the  same  root  Hengstenberg  attributes  to 
them  a  hidden,  mystical  import,  and  renders  Mich- 
tam by  Geheimniss,  which  he  explains  as  "  ein  Lied 
tiefen  Sinnes."  Apparently  referring  the  word  to 
the  same  origin,  Ewald  (  Jahrh.  viii.  p.  68)  suggests 
that  it  may  designate  a  song  accompanieil  by  bass 
instruments,  like  "  the  cymbals  of  trumpet-sound" 
of  Ps.  cl.  5,  which  would  be  adapted  to  the  plaintive 
character  of  Ps.  xvi.  and  others  of  the  seiies  to 
which  it  is  applied.     The  same  mournful  tone  is 


a  Shakspeare,  Rom.  and  Jul.  ii.  4  :  "He  fights  as  you 
smg  pricksong,  Iceeps  time,  distance,  and  proportion." 

^  Tov  Ta7r€ti'6(/>poi'09  Kat  aTrAoO  ToO  Aavt5. 

^  ranetvo^povo^  Kal  ajLcoj/jioif- 

'I  "  Hiimilis  et  simplicis  David." 

"  The  notion  that  tljcre  were  two  peoples  called  Mi- 
ilian,  founded  on  tlie  supposed  shortness  of  the  interval 


MIDIAN  356 

also  believed  to  be  indicated  in  Michtam  as  derived 

from  a  root  analogous  to  the  Arab,  ^jj",  cathama, 

which  in  conj.  vii.  signifies  "to  be  sad,"  in  which 
case  it  would  denote  "  an  elegv." 

4.  But  the  explanation  which  is  most  approved 
by  Piosenmiiller  and  Gesenius,  is  that  which  finds 
in  Michtam  the  equivalent  of  3nD?0,  mictah ;  a 
word  which  occurs  in  Is.  xxxviii,  9  (A.  V.  "  writ- 
ing"), and  which  is  believed  by  Capellus  (Crit. 
Sacr.  iv.  2,  §11)  to  have  been  the  I'eading  followed 
by  the  LXX.  and  Targum.  Gesenius  supports  his 
decision  by  instances  of  similar  interchanges  of  3 
and  D  in  roots  of  cognate  meaning.  In  accordance 
witli  this  De  \\'ette  rendeis  "  Schrift." 

5.  For  the  sake  of  completeness  another  theory 
may  be  noticed,  which  is  quite  untenable  in  itself, 
but  is  curious  as  being  maintained  in  the  versions 
of  Aquila*"  and  Symmachus,*^  and  of  Jerome''  ac- 
coiding  to  the  Hebrew,  and  was  derived  from  the 
l\<ibbiiiical  interpreters.  According  to  these,,  DRDD 
is    an   enigmatic  word,  equivalent    to    Dm   TlO 

"  humble  and  perfect,"  epithets  applied  to  David 
himself. 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  said,  that  nothing 
has  been  really  done  to  throw  light  upon  the  mean- 
ing of  this  obscure  word,  and  theie  seems  little 
likelihood  that  the  ditliculty  will  be  cleared  away. 
Beyond  the  general  probability  that  it  is  a  musical 
term,  the  origin  of  which  is  uncertain  and  the  appli- 
cation lost,  nothing  is  known.  The  subject  will 
be  found  discussed  in  Rosenmiiller's  Scholia  {Psalm. 
vol.  i.  explic.  titid.  xlii.-xlvi.),  and  by  Hupfeld 
{Die  Psalmen  i.  308-311),  who  has  collected  all 
the  evidence  bearing  upon  it,  and  adheres  to  the 
rendering  kleinod  (jewel,  treasure),  which  Luther 
also  gives,  and  which  is  adojited  by  Hitzig  and  Men- 
delssohn. [W.  A.  W,] 

MID'DIN  (P'^O  :  KhSiv  ;  MaSo-j' :  Middin), 
a  city  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  61),  one  of  the  six  speci- 
fied as_  situated  in  the  district  of  "  the  midbar " 
(A.  V.  "wilderness").  This  midbar,  as -it  con- 
tained Beth  ha-Arabah,  the  city  of  Salt,'  and  En- 
gedi,  must  have  embraced  not  only  the  waste  lands 
on  the  upper  level,  but  also  the  clifls  themselves 
and  the  strip  of  shore  at  their  feet,  on  the  edge  of 
the  lake  itself.  Middin  is  not  mentioned  by  Euse- 
bius  or  Jerome,  nor  has  it  been  identified  or  per- 
haps sought  for  by  later  travellers.  By  Van  de 
Velde  {Memoir,  256,  and  map)  mention  is  made 
of  a  valley  on  the  south-western  side  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  below  Masada,  called  Un  el-Bcdun,  which  may 
contain  a  trace  of  the  ancient  name.  [G.] 

MID'IAN  (inO,  "  strife,  contention,"  Ges. : 
MaSidfji :  Madian),  a  son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah 
(Gen.  XXV.  2;  1  Chr.  i.  32)  ;  progenitor  of  the  Mi- 
dianites,  or  Arabians  dwelling  principally  in  the 
desert  north  ofthe  peninsula  of  Arabia.*  Southwards 
they  extended  along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Gulf 
of  Eyleh  {Sinus  Aelaniticus)  ;  and  northwards  they 
stretched  along  the  eastern  frontier  of  Palestine  ; 

for  any  considerable  multiplication  from  Abraham  to 
Mosps,  and  on  the  mention  of  IMoses'  Cushite  wife,  the 
writer  tliinlcs  to  be  untenalile.  Even  conceding  the  former 
oljjectlon,  wliich  is  unnecessary,  one  tribe  has  often  be- 
come merged  into  another,  and  older  one,  and  only  the 
name  of  the  Jater  retained.    See  below,  and  Mosbs, 

2  A  2 


356 


MIDIAN 


while  the  oases  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  seem  to 
have  art'orded  them  pastni'e  grounds  and  caused  it 
to  be  included  in  the  "  land  of  Midian  "  (but  see 
below  on  this  point).  The  people  is  always  spolien 
of,  in  the  Hebrew,  as  "  Midian,"  1^0,  except  in 
Gen.  xxxvii.  36  ;  Num.  xxv.  17,  xxxi.  2,  where  we 
find  the  pi.  CynQ.  In  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  the 
form  D^JnO  occurs,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  as  well 
a.s  in  the  Vulg.^  Midianites  ;  and  this  is  probabli/ 
the  correct  rendering,  since  it  occurs  in  ver.  36  of 
the  same  chap. ;  though  the  people  here  mentioned 
may  be  descendants  of  Medax  (which  see).  The 
gentilic  form  *jnD,  "  Midianite,"  occurs  once. 
Num.  X.  29. 

After  the  chronological  record  of  .Midian's  birth, 
with  the  names  of  his  sons,  in  the  xxvth  chapter  of 
Genesis,  the  name  di.sappears  from  the  Biblical 
history  until  the  time  of  Moses  ;  Midian  is  first 
mentioned,  as  a  people,  when  Moses  fled,  having 
killed  the  Egyptian,  to  the  "  land  of  Midian"  (Ex.  ii. 
1.5),  and  married  a  daughter  of  a  priest  of  Midian 
(21).  The  "  land  of  Midian,"  or  the  portion  of  it 
specially  referred  to,  was  probably  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai,  for  we  read  in  the  next  chapter  (ver.  1)  that 
Moses  led  the  flock  of  Jethro  his  father-in-law,  the 
priest  of  Midian  "  to  the  backside  of  the  desert,  and 
came  to  the  mountain  of  God,  even  Horeb,"  and 
this  agrees  with  a  natural  supposition  that  he  did 
not  flee  far  beyond  the  tVontier  of  Egypt  fcompare 
Ex.  xviii.  1-27,  where  it  is  recorded  that  Jethro 
came  to  Moses  to  the  mount  of  God  after  the  Exodus 
from  Egypt :  but  in  v.  27  "  he  went  his  way  into 
his  own  land:"  see  also  Num.  x.  29,  30j.  It 
should,  however,  be  remembered  that  the  name 
of  Midian  (and  hence  the  "land  of  Midian") 
was  perhaps  often  applied,  as  that  of  the  most 
powerful  of  the  northern  Arab  tribes,  to  the  northern 
Arabs  generally,  i.  c.  those  of  Abrahaniic  descent 
(eorap.  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  but  see  respecting  this 
passage  above ;  and  Judg.  viii.  24)  ;  just  as  Bene- 
Kedem  embraced  all  those  peoples,  and,  with  a 
wider  signification,  other  Eastern  tribes.  If  this 
reading  of  the  name  be  coiTect,  "Midian"  would 
correspond  very  nearly  with  our  modern  word 
"  Arab ;".  limiting,  however,  the  modern  word 
to  the  Arabs  of  the  northern  and  Egyptian  deserts : 
all  the  Ishmaelite  tribes  of  those  deserts  would  thus 
be  Midianites,  as  we  call  them  Arab'*,  the  desert 
being  their  "  land."  At  least,  it  cannot  be  doubted 
,  that  the  descendants  of  Hagar  and  Keturah  inter- 
married ;  and  thus  the  ^Midianites  are  apparently 
called  Ishmaelites,  in  Judg.  viii.  24,  being  connected, 
both  by  blood  and  national  customs,  with  the  father 
of  the  Arabs.  The  wandering  habits  of  nomadic  tribes 
must  also  preclude  our  arguing  fiom  the  fact  of 
Moses'  leading  his  father's  flock  to  Horeb,  that  Sinai 
was  necessarily  more  than  a  station  of  Midian  :  those 
tribes  annually  traverse  a  great  extent  of  country 
in  search  of  pasturage,  and  have  their  established 
summer  and  winter  pastures.  The  IMidianites  weie 
mostly  (not  always)  dwellers  in  tents,  not  towns; 
and  Sinai  has  not  sufficient  pasture  to  support  more 
than  a  small,  or  a  moving  people.  But  it  must 
be  remembered  that  perhaps  (or  we  may  say 
probabljj)  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  has  considerably 
chanced  in  its  physical  character  since  the  time  of 
Moses;  for  the  adjacent  isthmus  has,  since  that 
period,  risen  many  feet,  so  that  "  the  tongue  of  the 


f  The  LXX.  have  here  MaSiiji-aioi,  which  seems  to  be 
an  unusual  mode  of  writing  the  name  of  ihe  people 
descendert  from  MaSia/j      The  Samaiit.an  has  QiJ'inJO. 


MIDIAN 

Egyptian  Sea"  has  "dried  up:"  and  this  supposi- 
tion would  much  diminish  the  difhculty  of  account- 
ing for  the  means  of  subsistence  found  by  the 
Israelites  in  their  wanderings  in  the  wilderness, 
when  not  miraculously  supplied.  Apart  from 
this  consideration,  we  know  that  the  Egyptians 
afterwards  woi-ked  mines  at  Sarabet  el-Khddim, 
and  a  small  mining  population  may  have  found 
sufficient  sustenance,  at  least  in  some  seasons  of 
the  year,  in  the  few  watered  valleys,  and  wher- 
ever ground  could  be  reclaimed :  rock-inscriptions 
(though  of  later  date)  testify  to  the  number  of  at 
least  passers-by ;  and  the  remains  of  villages  of  a 
mining  population  have  been  recently  discovered. — 
\\'hatever  may  have  been  the  position  of  Midian  in 
the  Siuaitic  peninsula,  if  we  may  believe  the  Ara- 
bian historians  and  geographers,  backed  as  their 
testimony  is  by  the  Greek  geographers,  the  city  of 
Midian  was  situate  on  the  opposite,  or  Arabian, 
shore  of  the  Arabian  gulf,  and  thence  northwards  and 
spreading  east  and  west  we  have  the  true  country 
of  the  wandering  Midianites.  See  further  in  Sinai. 
The  next  occurrence  of  the  name  of  this  people 
in  the  sacred  history  marks  their  northein  settle- 
ments on  the  border  of  the  Promised  Land,  "  on 
this  side  Jordan  [by]  Jericho "  in  the  plains  of 
Moab  (Num.  xxii.  1-4),  when  Balak  said,  of  Israel, 
to  the  elders  (D^3pt,  or  "  old  men,"  the  same  as 

the  Arab  "  sheykhs  ")  of  Blidian,  "  Now  shall  this 
company  lick  up  all  [that  are]  roimd  about  us,  as 
the  ox  licketh  up  the  grass  of  the  field."  In  the 
subsequent  transaction  with  Balaam,  the  elders  of 
Midian  went  with  those  of  Moab,  "  with  the 
rewards  of  divination  in  their  hand"  (7);  but 
in  the  remarkable  words  of  Balaam,  the  Midian- 
ites are  not  mentioned.  This  might  be  explained 
by  the  supposition  that  Midian  was  a  wander- 
ing tribe,  whose  pasture-lands  reached  where\'er, 
in  the  Arabian  desert  and  frontier  of  Palestine, 
pasture  was  to  be  found,  and  who  would  not 
feel,  in  the  same  degree  as  Moab,  Amalek,  or  the 
other  more  settled  and  agiicultural  inhabitants  of  the 
land  allotted  to  the  tribes  of  Israel,  the  arrival  of 
the  latter.  But  the  spoil  taken  in  the  war  that 
soon  followed,  and  more  especially  the  mention  ot 
the  dvifellings  of  Midian,  render  tliis  suggestrcn  very 
doubtful,  and  point  rather  to  a  considerable  pas- 
toral settlement  of  Midian  in  the  trans-Jordanic 
country.  Such  settlements  of  Arabs  have,  how- 
ever,  been  very  common.  In  this  case  the  Midi- 
anites were  evidently  tributary  to  the  Amorites, 
being  "  dukes  of  Sihon,  dwelling  in  the  country  " 
(}*"lXn  ''Iti'^)  :  this  inferior  position  explains  their 
omission  from  Balaam's  prophecy.  It  was  here, 
"  on  this  side  Jordan,"  that  the  chief  doings  of  the 
Midianites  with  the  Israelites  took  place.  The  latter, 
while  they  abode  in  Shittim,  "  joined  themselves 
unto  Baal-Peor"  (Num.  xxv.  1,  &c. — apparently  a 
Midianite  as  well  as  a  Moabitish  deity — the  result 
of  the  sin  of  whoredom  with  the  Moabitish  women  ; 
and  when  "  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  against 
Israel  .  .  .  and  the  congiegation  ot"  the  children  of 
Israel  [were]  weejiiug  [before]  the  door  of  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation,"  an  Isi-aelite  brought 
a  Midianitish  woman  openly  into  the  camp.  The 
rank  of  this  woman  Cozisi,  that  of  a  daughter 
of  Zur,  who  was  "  head  over  a  people,  of  a 
chief  house  in   Midian,"  B  throws  a  strange  light 


8  3X"n''3  niSN  K'X"1,  ••  head  of  families  of  a  pa- 
triarHial  house;"  afterwards  in  ver.  18,  called  prince, 
X^CJ.     (See  next  note  ) 


MIDIAN 

over  the  obscure  page  of  that  people's  history.  The 
vices  of  the  Canmuiites,  idolatry  and  whoredom, 
had  infectetl  the  descendmits  of  Abraham,  doubtless 
connected  by  successive  intermarriages  with  those 
tribes  ;  and  the  prostitution  of  this  chief's  daughter, 
caught  as  it  was  from  tlie  customs  of  tlie  Ca- 
naanites,  is  evidence  of  the  ethnological  type  of 
the  latter  tribes.  Some  African  nations  have  a 
similar-  custom  :  they  offer  their  unmarried  daugh- 
ters to  show  hospitality  to  their  guests.  Zur  was 
one  of  the  five  "  kings"  (''D7J0),''  slain  in  the  war 
with  Midian,  recorded  in  ch.  xxxi. 

The  influence  of  the  Midianites  on  the  Israelites 
Wiis  clearly  most  evil,  and  directly  tended  to  lead 
them  from  the  injunctions  of  Moses.  Much  of  the 
dangei-ous  character  of  their  influence  may  probably 
be  ascribed  to  the  common  descent  from  Abraham. 
While  the  Canaanitish  tribes  were  abhoned,  Midian 
might  claim  cousanguinity,  and  more  readily  seduce 
Isiael  from  their  allegiarrce.  The  events  at  Shittim 
occasioned  the  injunction  to  vex  Midian  and  smite 
them — "  tor  they  vex  3'ou  with  their  wiles,  where- 
with they  have  beguiled  you  in  the  matter  of  I'eor 
and  in  the  matter  of  Cozbi,  the  daughter  of  a  piince 
of  Midian,  their  sister,  which  was  slaiu  in  the  day  of 
the  plague  for  Feor's  sake"  (Num.  xxv.  18);  and 
further  on,  Moses  is  enjoined,  "  Avenge  the  children 
of  Israel  of  the  Midianites :  afterwai'd  shalt  thou  be 
gathered  unto  thy  people  "  (xxxi.  2).  Twelve  thou- 
sand men,  a  thousand  from  each  tribe,  went  up  to 
this  war,  a  war  in  which  all  the  males  of  the  enemy 
weie  slain,  and  the  five  kings  of  Midian — Evi, 
Uekem,  Zur,  Hur,  and  lieba,  together  with  Balaam  ; 
and  afterwards,  by  the  express  command  of  Moses, 
only  the  vii'gins  and  fenrale  infants,  of  the  captives 
brought  into  the  camp,  were  spared  alive.  The 
cities  and  castles  of  the  vanquished,  and  the  spoil 
taken,  attbrd  tiicts  to  which  we  shall  recur.  Alter  a 
lapse  of  some  years  (the  number  is  -^ery  doubtful,  see 
OnRO^"OLOGY),  the  Midiwiites  appear  again  as  the 
enemies  of  the  Israelites,  They  had  recovered  trom 
the  devastation  of  the  former  war,  probably  by  the 
arrival  of  fresh  colonists  from  the  desert  tracts  over 
which  their  tribes  wandered  ;  and  they  now  were 
sutficiuntly  powerful  to  become  the  oppiessoi's  of 
the  children  of  Israel.  The  advocates  of  a  short 
chronology  must,  however  unwillingly,  concede  a 
considerable  time  for  Midian  thus  to  recover  from 
the  seveie  blow  inflicted  by  Moses.  Allied  with 
the  Amalekiles,  and  the  Bcne-Kedem,  they  drove 
them  to  make  dens  in  the  mouutauis  and  caves 
and  strongholds,  and  wasted  their  crops  even  to 
(Jaza,  on  the  Mediterranean  coast,  in  the  land  of 
Simeon.  The  judgeship  of  Gideon  was  the  imme- 
diate consequence  of  tliese  calamities  ;  and  with  the 
battle  he  fought  in  the  valley  of  .Jezreel,  and  his 
jiursuit  of  the  flying  enemy  over  Jordan  to  Karkor, 
the  jjower  of  Midian  seems  to  have  been  broken. 
It  is  written,  "Thus  was  Midian  subdued  before 
the  children  of  Israel,  so  that  they  lifted  up  their 
heads  no  more"  (viii.  28).  The  part  taken  by 
Clideon  in  this  memorable  event  hius  been  treated  of 
clsewheie,  but  the  Midianite  side  of  the  stoiy  is 
pregnant  with  interest.     [GlUIiON.] 

Midiiin  had  oppressed  Isiael  for  seven  years.    As 

h  These  are  afterwards  (Josh,  xlii  21)  called  "  princes" 
C'X^Ci'J),  which  may  also  be  lendered  i\w.  leader  or  cap- 
tain of  a  tribe,  or  even  of  a  family  (Ges.),  and  "dukes" 
'  ^3*p3,  not  tiv  worii  rciulered  dulcc  in  the  enumeration 
of  the  "  dukes  of  ICdom"),  "  one  anointed,  a  prince  coiisc- 


JUDIAN 


357 


a  numberless  eastern  horde  they  entered  the  land 
with  their  cattle  and  their  csimels.  The  imao-ina- 
tion  shows  us  the  green  plains  of  Palestine  spriukletl 
with  the  black  goats'  hair  tents  of  this  great  Arab 
tribe,  their  flocks  and  herds  and  camels  let  loose  in 
the  standing  corn,  and  tbraging  jiarties  of  horsemen 
driving  before  them  the  possessions  of  the  Israelites  • 
tor  "  they  came  like  locusts  (A.  V.  "  grasshoppers," 
n3"lN)  for  multitude  "  (Judg.  vi.  5),  and  when  the 
"  angel  of  the  Lord  "  came  to  Gideon,  so  severe  was 
the  oppression  that  he  was  threshing  wheat  by  the 
wine-press  to  hide  it  from  the  Midianites  (11). 
When  Gideon  had  received  the  Divine  command  to 
deliver  Israel,  and  had  thrown  down  the  altar  of 
Baal,  we  read,  "Then  all  the  Midianites  and  the 
Amalekites  and  the  Bene-Kedem  were  gathered  to- 
gether, and  went  over,"  descended  from  the  desert 
hills  and  crossed  Jordan,  "and  pitched  in  the  valley 
of  Jezreel"  (33)— part  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
the  battle-field  of  Palestine — and  there,  from  "  the 
grey,  bleak  crowns  of  Gilboa,"  where  Saul  and  Jo- 
nathan perished,  did  Gideon,  witli  the  host  that  he 
had  gathered  together  of  Israel,  look  down  on  the 
Midianites,  who  "  were  on  the  north  side  of  them, 
by  the  hill  of  Moreh,  in  the  valley"  (vii.  1).  The 
scene  over  that  fertile  plain,  dotted  with  the  enemies 
of  Israel,  "  the  Midianites  and  the  Amalekites  and 
all  the  Bene-Ivedera,  [who]  lay  along'  in  the  valley 
like  locusts  for  multitude,  and  their  camels  were 
without  number,  as  the  sand  by  the  sea-side  for 
multitude  "  (vii.  12),  has  been  picturesquely  painted 
by  Professor  Stanley  {S.  ^  P.). 

The  descent  of  Gideon  and  his  servant  into  the 
camp,  and  the  conversation  of  the  Midianite  watch 
forms  a  vivid  picture  of  Arab  life.  It  does  more; 
it  proves  that  as  Gideon,  or  Phurah,  his  servant, 
or  both,  understood  the  language  of  Midian,  the 
Semitic  languages  differed  much  less  in  the  14th 
or  13th  century  B.C.  than  they  did  in  after  times 
[see  Arabia,  vol.  i.  p.  9(5]  ;  and  we  besides  obtain 
a  remarkable  proof  of  the  consanguinity  of  the 
Jlidianites,  and  learn  that,  though  the  name  was 
probably  applied  to  all  or  most  of  the  northern 
Abiahamic  Arabs,  it  was  not  applied  to  the  Canaan- 
ites,  who  certainly  did  not  then  speak  a  Semitic 
language  that  Gideon  could  understand. 

'l"he  stratagem  of  Gideon  receives  an  illustration 
from  modern  Oriental  life.  Until  lately  the  police 
in  Cairo  were  accustomed  to  go  their  rounds  with  a 
lighted  torch  thrust  into  a  pitcher,  and  the  pitcher 
was  suddenly  withdrawn  when  light  was  required 
(Lane's  Mud.  Eg.  5th  ed.  p.  120)— a  custom  afford- 
ilig  an  exact  parallel  to  the  ancient  expedient  adopted 
by  Gideon.  The  consequent  panic  of  the  great  mul- 
titude in  the  valley,  if  it  has  no  parallels  in  modern 
European  histoiy,  is  consistent  with  Oriental  cha- 
racter. Of  all  peoples,  the  nations  of  the  East  are 
most  liable  to  sudden  and  violent  emotions;  and  a 
panic  in  one  of  their  heterogeneous,  undiscijjlined, 
and  excitable  hosts  has  always  proved  dis;istrous. 
In  the  case  of  Gideon,  however,  the  result  of  his 
attack  Wius  directed  by  God,  the  Divine  hand  being 
especially  shown  in  the  small  number  of  Israel, 
30i)  men,  against  13."),000  of  the  enemy.  At  the 
sight  of  the  300  torches,  suddenly  blazing  round 


crated  by  anointing"  (Ges.)  ofSihon  king  of  the  Amorites; 
appariiuly  lieutenants  of  the  Amorite,  or  princes  of  his 
appointing.    [Hun;  litAM.] 

'  Prof.  Stanley  reads  here  "  wrajit  in  sleep."  Though 
the  Utb.  will  bear  this  interpretation,  Gesenius  has 
"  cncampe<l." 


358 


MIDIAN 


about  the  camp  in  the  beginning  of  the  middle- watch 
(which  the  Midianites  had  newly  set),  with  the  con- 
fused din  of  the  trumpets,  "  for  the  three  companies 
blew  the  trumpets,  and  brake  the  pitchers,  and  held 
the  lamps  in  their  left  hands,  and  the  trumpets  in 
their  right  hands  to  blow  [withal],  and  they  cried, 
[The  sword]  of  the  Lord  and  of  Gideon"  (vii.  20), 
"  all  the  host  ran,  and  med,  and  f]ed"  (21).  The 
panic-stricken  multitude  knew  not  enemy  from 
friend,  for  "  the  Lord  set  every  man's  sword  against 
his  fellow  even  throughout  all  the  host"  (22).  The 
rout  was  complete,  the  first  places  made  for  being 
Beth-shittah  ("  the  house  of  the  acacia")  in  Zererath, 
and  the  "border"  [DSb*]  of  Abel-meholah,  "  the 
meadow  of  the  dance,"  both  being  probably  down 
the  Jordan  valley,  unto  Tabbath,  shaping  their  flight 
to  the  ford  of  Bethbarah,  where  probably  they  had 
crossed  the  river  as  invaders.  The  flight  of  so  gi'eat  a 
host,  encumbered  with  slow-moving  camels,  baggage, 
and  cattle,  was  calamitous.  All  the  men  of  Israel, 
out  of  Naphtali,  and  Asher,  and  Manasseh,  joined  in 
the  pursuit;  and  Gideon  roused  the  men  of  Mount 
Ephraim  to  "  t;dce  before"  the  Midianites  "the 
waters  imto  Beth-lwrah  and  Jordan"  (23,  24).  Thus 
cut  off,  two  princes,  Oreb  and  Zeeb  (the  "  raven,"  or, 
more  correctly  "  crow,"  and  the  "  wolf"),  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Ephraim,  and  Oreb  they  slew  at  the  rock 
Oreb,  and  Zeeb  they  slew  at  the  wiue-pressof  Zeeb(vii. 
25  ;  comp.  Is.  x.  26,  where  the  "  slaughter  of  Midian 
at  the  rock  Oreb"  is  refeired  to>''  But  though  we 
have  seen  that  many  joined  in  a  desultory  pursuit 
of  the  rabble  of  the  Midianites,  only  the  oUO  men 
who  had  blown  the  trumpets  in  the  valley  of  Jez- 
reel  crossed  Jordan  with  Gideon,  "  faint  yet  pur- 
suino-"  (viii.  4).  With  this  force  it  remained  for 
the  liberator  to  attack  the  enemy  on  his  own  giound, 
for  Midian  had  dwelt  on  the  other  side  Jordan 
since  the  days  of  Moses.  Fifteen  thousand  men, 
under  the  "  kings "  [''3?0]  of  Midian,  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna,  were  at  Karkor,  the  sole  remains  of 
135,000,  "for  there  fell  an  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand  men  that  drew  sword"  (viii.  10).  The 
assurance  of  God's  help  encouraged  the  we.ary 
three  hundred,  and  they  ascended  from  the  plain 
(or  ghdr)  to  the  higher  country  by  a  ravine  or 
torrent-bed  in  the  hills,  "  by  the  way  of  them  that 
dwelt  in  tents  [that  is,  the  pastoial  or  wandering 
people  as  distinguished  from  towns-people],  on  the 
east  of  Nobah  and  Jogbehah,  and  smote  the  host, 
for  the  host  was  secure"  (viii.  11) — secure  in  that 
wild  country,  on  their  own  ground,  and  away  from 
the  frequent  haunts  of  man.  A  sharp  pursuit  seems 
to  have  followed  this  fresh  victoiy,  euding  in  the 
capture  of  the  kings  and  the  final  discomfiture  of 
the  Midianites.  The  overthrow  of  Midian  in  its 
encampment,  when  it  was  "  secure,"  by  the  ex- 
hausted companies  of  Gideon  (they  were  "  faint," 
and  had  been  refused  bread  both  at  Succoth  and  at 
Penuel,  viii.  5-9),  sets  the  seal  to  God's  manifest 
hand  in  the  deliverance  of  His  people  from  the 
oppression  of  IMidian.  Zebah  and  Zalmunn;t  were 
slain,  and  with  them  the  name  itself  of  Midian 
almost  disappeivrs  from  sacred  history.  That  people 
never  afterwards  took  up  anus  against  Israel, 
though  they  may  have  been  allied  with  the  uame- 


k  It  is  added,  in  the  same  verse,  that  they  pursued 
Midian,  and  brought  the  heads  of  the  princes  to  Gideon 
"  on  the  other  side  Jordan."  This  anticipates  the  account 
of  his  crossing  Jordan  (viii.  4),  Ijut  such  transpusitions 
are  frerpient,  and  the  Hebrew  may  be  read  "  on  this  side 
Jordan." 


MIDIAN 

less  hordes  who  under  the  common  designation  of 
"  the  people  of  the  East,"  Bene-Kedem,  harassetl 
the  eastern  border  of  Palestine. 

Having  traced  the  history  of  Midian,  it  remains 
to  show  what  is  known  of  their  condition  and  customs 
&c.,  besides  what  has  already  been  incidentally  men- 
tioned. The  whole  account  of  their  doings  with 
Israel — and  it  is  only  thus  that  they  find  a  place  in 
the  sacred  writings,  plainly  marks  them  as  chai-ac- 
teristically  Arab.  We  have  already  stated  our 
opinion  that  they  had  intermaiTied  with  Ishmael's 
descendants,  and  become  nationally  one  people,  so 
that  they  are  apparently  called  Ishmaelites;  and 
that,  conversely,  it  is  most  probable  their  power 
and  numbers,  with  such  intermarriages,  had  caused 
the  name  of  Midian  to  be  applied  to  the  northern 
Abrahamic  Arabs  generally.  They  ai-e  described 
as  true  Arabs — now  Bedawees,  or  "  people  of  the 
desert ;"  anon  pastoral,  or  settled  Ai'abs — the  "flock  " 
of  Jethro ;  the  cattle  and  flocks  of  Midian,  in  the 
later  days  of  Moses  ;  their  camels  without  number, 
as  the  sand  of  the  sea-side  for  multitude  when  they 
oppressed  Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Judges — all 
agi'ee  with  such  a  description.  Like  Arabs,  who 
are  predominantly  a  nomadic  people,  they  seem  to 
have  partially  settled  in  the  land  of  iloab,  under 
the  rule  of  Sihon  the  Amorite,  and  to  have  adapted 
themselves  readily  to  the  "cities"  (Dn''"iy),  and 
forts?  (A.  V,"  goodly  castles,"  DriTD),  which  they 

did  not  build,  but  occupied,  r-etaining  even  then  their 
flocks  and  herds  (Num.  .xxxi.  9,  10),  but  not  their 
camels,  which  are  not  common  among  settled  Arabs, 
because  they  are  not  required,  and  are  never,  in  that 
state,  healthy.™  Israel  seems  to  have  devastated  that 
settlement,  and  when  next  Midian  appears  in  history 
it  is  as  a  desert-horde,  pouring  into  Palestine  with 
innumerable  camels  ;  and,  when  routed  and  broken 
by  Gideon,  fleeing  "  by  the  way  of  them  that  dwelt 
in  tents  "  to  the  east  of  Jordan.  The  character  of 
Midian  we  think  is  thus  unmistakeably  marked. 
The  only  glimpse  of  their  habits  is  found  in  the 
vigorous  picture  of  the  camp  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel, 
when  the  men  talked  together  in  the  camp,  and  one 
told  how  he  had  dreamt  that  "  a  cake  of  barley- 
bread  tumbled  into  the  host  of  Midian,  and  came 
into  a  tent,  and  smote  it  that  it  fell,  and  overturned 
it,  that  the  tent  lay  along"  Judg.  vii.  13). 

We  can  scarcely  doubt,  notwithstanding  the  dis- 
putes of  antiquaries,  that  the  more  ancient  of  the 
remarkable  stone  buildings  in  the  Lcjah,  and  stretch- 
ing far  away  over  the  land  of  Moab,  are  at  least  as 
old  as  the  days  of  Sihon  ;  and  reading  Mr.  Porter's 
descriptions  of  the  wild  old-world  character  of  the 
scenery,  the  "  cities,"  and  the  "  goodly  castles," 
one  may  almost  fancy  himself  in  presence  of  the  hosts 
of  Midi.an.    (See  Handbook,  501,  508,  523,  &c.) 

The  spoil  taken  in  both  the  war  of  Moses  and 
that  of  Gideon  is  remaikable.  On  the  foiTner  occa- 
sion, the  spoil  of  575,000  sheep,  72,000  beeves, 
and  61,000  asses,  seems  to  coufiiTn  the  other  indi- 
cations of  the  then  pastoral  character  of  the  Jli- 
dianites ;  the  omission  of  any  mention  of  camels  has 
been  already  explained.  But  the  gold,  silver,  brass, 
iron,  tin,  and  lead  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  the  "jewels 
of  gold,  chains,  and  biacelets,  rings,  earrings,  and 


^  Thus  an  Arab,  believing  in  contagious  diseases,  asked 
Mahoramad  why  camels  in  the  desert  .are  like  gazelle.";, 
and  become  mangy  as  soon  as  tliey  mix  with  camels  in 
tow  ns.  The  prophet  answered,  "  Who  made  the  first 
camel  mangy  ? " 


MIDIAN 

tablets"  (50) — tlie  offering  to  the  Lord  being  16,750 
shekels  (52), — taken  by  Moses,  is  especially  note- 
worthy; and  it  is  confirmed  by  the  booty  taken  by 
Gideon;  for  when  he  slew  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  he 
"  took  away  the  ornaments  that  [were]  on  their 
camels'  necks"  (Jndg.  viii.  21),  and  (24-26)  he 
asked  of  every  man  the  earrings  of  his  prey,  "  for 
they  had  golden  earrings,  because  they  [were]  Ish- 
maelites."  "  And  the  weight  of  the  golden  ear- 
rings that  he  requested  was  a  thousand  and  seven 
hundred  [shekels]  of  gold  ;  besides  ornaments  and 
collars,  and  purple  raiment  that  [was]  on  the  kings 
of  Midian,  and  beside  the  chains  that  [were]  about 
their  camels'  necks."  (The  rendering  of  A.  V.  is 
sufficiently  accurate  for  our  purpose  here,  and  any 
examination  into  the  form  or  character  of  these 
ornaments,  tempting  though  it  is,  belongs  more 
properly  to  other  articles.)  We  have  here  a  wealthy 
Arab  nation,  living  by  plunder,  delighting  in  finery 
(especially  their  women,  for  we  may  here  read  "  nose- 
ring") ;  and,  where  fora3's  were  impossible,  carrying 
on  the  traffic  southwards  into  Arabia,  the  land  of 
gold — if  not  naturally,  by  trade — and  across  to 
Chaldaea ;  or  into  the  rich  plains  of  Egypt. 

Midian  is  named  authentically  only  in  the  Bible. 
It  has  no  history  elsewhere.  The  names  of  places 
and  tribes  occasionally  throw  a  feeble  light  on  its 
past  dwellings;  but  the  stories  of  Arabian  writers, 
borrowed,  in  the  case  of  the  northern  Arabs,  too 
frequently  from  late  and  untrustworthy  Jewish 
writers,  cannot  be  seriously  treated.  For  reliable 
facts  we  must  rest  on  tlie  Biblical  narrative.  The 
city  of  "  Medj'en  [say  the  Arabs]  is  the  city  of  the 
people  of  Shu'eyb,  and  is  opposite  Tabook,  on  tlie 
shore  of  Bahr  el-Kulzum  [the  Red  Sea] :  between 
these  is  six  days'  journey.  It  [Medyen]  is  larger 
than  Tabook ;  and  in  it  is  the  well  fiom  which 
Moses  watered  the  flock  of  Sliu'eyb"  {Mardsid, 
s.  v.).  El-Makreezee  (in  his  Khitat)  enters  into 
considerable  detail  respecting  this  city  and  peo[>le. 
The  substance  of  his  account,  which  is  full  of  in- 
credible iables,  is  as  follows : — Medyen  are  the 
people  of  .Shu'eyb,  and  are  the  offspring  of  Mcdyan  " 
[Midian],  son  of  Abraham,  and  their  mother  was 
Kantoori,  the  daughter  of  Yuktan  [Joktan]  the 
('anaanite  :  she  bare  liim  eiglit  chil'dren,  fiom  whom 
descended  peoples.  He  here  quotes  the  passage  above 
cited  from  the  Mardsul  almost  verbatim,  and  adds, 
tliat  the  Arabs  dispute  whether  the  name  be  foreign 
or  Arabic,  and  whether  Medyen  spoke  Arabic,  so- 
called.  Some  say  that  they  had  a  number  of  kings, 
who  were  respectively  named  Abjad,  Hawwez, 
Huttee,  Kelemen,  Saafas,  and  Karashet.  This  absurd 


MIDWIFE 


359 


,L*x^. 


•   Jo^lXiLi, 


XLiaaaJV     s,*x».)!,     Xa/*1I, 


'Of 


s:^ 


'i^Ay 


u:^; 


.-Ji. 


enumeration  forms  a  sentence  common  in  Arabic 
grammars,  which  gives  the  order  of  the  Hebrew  and 
ancient  Arabic  alphabets,  and  the  numerical  order  of 
the  letters.  It  is  only  curious  as  possibly  containing 
some  vague  reference  to  the  language  of  Midian,  and 
it  is  therefore  inserted  here.  These  kings  are  said  to 
have  ruled  at  Mekkeh,  Western  Nejd,  the  Yemen, 
Medyen,  and  Egypt,  &c.,  contemporaneously.  That 
Midian  penetrated  into  the  Yemen  is,  it  must  be  ob- 
served, extremely  improbable,  as  the  writer  of  this 
article  has  remarked  in  Arabia,  notwithstanding 
the  hints  of  Arab  authors  to  the  contrary,  Ydkoot, 
in  the  Moajam  (cited  in  the  Journal  of  the  Deutsch. 
Morgcnl.  GeseUschaff),  saying  that  a  soutliern 
Arabian  dialect  is  of  Midian  ;  and  El-Mes'oodee  (ap. 
Schultens,  p.  158,  9)  inserting  a  Midianite  liing 
among  the  rulers  of  the  Yemen :  the  latter  being, 
however,  more  possible  than  the  tbrmer,  as  an  ac- 
cidental and  individual,  not  a  national  occurrence. 
The  story  of  Shu'eyb  is  found  in  the  Kur-dn.  He 
was  sent  as  a  prophet  to  warn  the  people  of  Midian, 
and  being  rejected  by  them,  they  were  destroyed 
by  a  storm  from  heaven  (Sale's  Kur-dn,  vii.  and 
xi.).  He  is  generally  supposed  to  be  the  same  as 
Jetliro,  the  father-in-law  of  Moses ;  but  some,  as 
Sale  informs  us,  deny  this ;  and  one  of  these  says 
"  that  he  was  first  called  Buyoon,  and  afterwards 
Shu'eyb,  that  he  was  a  comely  person,  but  spare 
and  lean,  very  thoughtful,  and  of  few  words." — 
The  whole  Arab  story  of  Medyen  and  Shu'eyb, 
even  if  it  contain  any  truth,  is  encumbered  by  a 
mass  of  late  Rabbinical  myths. 

El-Makreezee  tells  us  that  in  the  land  of  Midian 
were  many  cities, of  which  the  people  had  disappeared, 
and  the  cities  themselves  had  ftiUen  to  ruin  ;  that 
when  he  wrote  (in  the  year  825  of  the  Flight)  forty 
cities  remained,  the  names  of  some  being  known,  and 
of  others,  lost.  Of  the  former,  he  says,  there  were, 
between  the  Hijdz  and  Palestine  and  Egypt,  sixteen 
cities  ;  and  ten  of  these  in  the  direction  of  Palestine. 
They  were  El-Klialasali,  Es-Saneetah,  El-Medereh, 
El-Minyeh,  El-Aawaj,  El-Khuweyrak,  El-Beereyn, 
El-Md-eyn,  El-Seba,  and  El-Mu'allak.o  The  most 
important  of  these  cities  were  El-KhalasahP  and  El- 
Saneetah ;  the  stones  of  many  of  them  had  been 
removed  to  El-Ghazzah  (Gaza)  to  build  With  them. 
This  list,  liowever,  must  be  taken  with  caution. 

In  the  A.  V.  of  Apocr.  and  N.  T.  the  name  is 
given  as  Madian.  [E.  S.  P.] 

MIDWIFE.*  Parturition  in  the  East  is  usually 
easy.*"  The  otlice  of  a  midwife  is  thus,  in  many 
eastern  countries,  in  little  use,  but  is  performed, 
when  necessary,  by  relatives  (Chardin,  Voy.  vii. 


I'  lU-Klialasiili  (somi't.imos  written  KI-Khuliisali,  and 
I'U-KluilsiilO,  ur  l)lni-l-Klialasali,  imsscssed  an  iilol-teniplo, 
;li'str<iyc(l  l.y  order  oI'Muliaiuniad;  llio  idiil  heiiig  named 
Kl-Klialasali,  or  the  place,  or  "  growiiifj-plaoc  "  oIKI-Kha- 
lasali.  The  place  is  said  to  l)o  four  days'  Journey  from 
Melckeh,  in  the  'Ablil,  mid  called  "tlio  southern  Kiuibeh," 


Kl-Kaiibcli  el-Yemauecych  {Mardsid,  s.  v.,  and  EI-Bekree, 
and  tlie  Kdmoos  there  cited).  ICI-Medereh  seems  also  tu 
be  the  same  as  Dhu-l-Mcderoli  {Mardsid,  s.  v.),  and  tliere- 
fore  (Irom  the  name)  probably  the  sit*  of  an  idol-temple 
also. 

"  n^?^P,  part,  in  P.  of  "17\  '■  to  bring  forth  :"  jxala  : 
obstetrlx.  it  must  be  remarked  that  nVn,  A.  V.,  Ex.  i. 
19,  "lively,"  is  also  in  Rabbinical  Hebrew  "midwives," 
an  explanation  whicli  appears  to  have  bi en  had  in  view 
by  the  Vulg,,  which  interprets  chayoth  by  "  ipsae  obste- 
trlcandi  habent  scientlam."  It  is  also  rendered  "living 
creatures,"  implying  that  the  Hebrew  women  were,  like 
animals,  qiiiik  in  parturiton  Gesenius  renders  "  vividae, 
robustae,"  p.  -fes.  In  any  case  the  general  sense  of  the 
passage  Ex.  i.  19  Is  the  same,  viz.,  tlial  the  Hebrew  women 
stood  in  little  or  no  need  of  the  midwives'  assist.niu'e. 

'■  See  an  illustration  of  Cant.  viii.  5,  suggested  in 
Mislina,  I'csw.k,  x.  3. 


360 


MIGDAL-EL 


\Ot- 


23;  Harraer,  Obs.  iv.  425).  [Oiiildren  ]  It 
may  be  for  this  reason  that  the  number  of  persons 
employed  for  this  purpose  among  the  Hebi'ews 
was  so  small,  as  the  passage  Ex.  i.  19  seems  to 
show ;  unless,  as  Knobel  and  othoi's  suggest,  the 
two  named  were  the  principal  persons  of  their 
class. 

In  the  description  of  the  transaction  mentioned 
in  Ex.  i.  one  expression  "  upon  the  *■  stools "  re- 
ceives remarkable  illustration  from  modern  usage. 
Gesenius  doubts  the  existence  of  any  custom  such 
as  tlie  direct  meaning  of  the  passage  implies,  and 
suggests  a  wooden  or  stone  trough  for  washing  the 
new-born  child.  But  the  modern  Egyptian  prac- 
tice, as  described  by  Mr.  Lane,  exactly  answers  to 
that  indicated  in  the  book  of  Exodus.  "  Two  or 
three  days  before  the  expected  time  of  delivery,  the 
Layeh  (midwife)  conveys  to  the  house  the  kursee 
elwilddeh,  a  chair  of  a  peculiar  form,  upon  which 
the  patient  is  to  be  seated  during  the  birth  "  (Lane, 
-  Mod.  Eijiipt.  ill.  142). 

The  moral  question  arising  from  the  conduct  of 
the  midwives  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  the 
present  article.  The  reader,  however,  may  refer  to 
!St.  Augustine,  Contr.  mendacium,  c.  xv.  32,  and 
Qmest.  in  Hept.  ii.  1  ;  also  Corn,  a  Lap.  Com.  on 
Ex.  i. 

When  it  is  said,  "  God  dealt  well  with  the  mid- 
wives,  and  built  them  houses,"  we  are  probably  to 
understand  that  their  families  were  blfssed  either 
in  point  of  numbers  or  of  substance.  Other  expla- 
nations of  inferior  \alue  have  been  offered  by 
Kimchi,  Calvin,  and  others  (Calmet,  Com.  on  Ex. 
i.  ;  Patrick;  Corn,  a  Lap.;  Knobel;  Schleusner, 
Lex.  V.  T.  oIkio.  ;  Ges.  p.  193,  Grit.  Sacr.). 

It  is  worth  while  to  notice  only  to  refute  ou  its 
own  ground  the  Jewish  tradition  which  identified 
.Siphrah  and  Puah  with  Jochebed  and  Miriam, 
and  intei-preted  the  '•  houses "  built  for  them  as 
the  so-called  royal  and  sacerdotal  families  of  Caleb 
and  Moses  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  2,  §4;  Corn,  a  Lap. 
and  Crit.  Sacr.  I.  c, ;  Schottgen.  Hor.  Hehr. 
ii.  450  ;  De  Mess.  c.  iv.).  [H.  W.  P.] 

MIG'DAL-EL    ('pN'^'^jp  :     Me^aAaope/yu  ; 

Alex.  MaySaXirjaipa/U— both  including  the  succeed- 
ing name:  Mnijdal-El),  one  of  the  fortified  towns 
of  the  possession  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  six.  38  only), 
named  between  Iron  and  Horem,  possibly  de- 
riving its  name  from  some  ancient  tower — the 
"  tower  of  El,  or  God."  In  the  present  unexplored 
condition  of  the  part  of  Palestine  allotted  to  Naph- 
tali, it  is  dangerous  to  hazard  conjectures  as  to  the 
situations  of  the  towns:  but  if  it  be  possible  that 
Hurah  is  Horem  and  Yarun  Iron,  the  possibility 
is  strengthened  by  finding  a  Mrijeidel,  at  no  great 
distance  fj'om  them,  namely,  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
Wady  Kerkerah,  8  miles  due  east  of  the  Ras  en- 
Naknrah,  6  miles  west  of  Hurah  and  8  of  Fariin 
(tee  Van  de  Velde's  Map,  1858).  At  any  rate  the 
point  is  worth  investigation. 

By  Eusebius  {Otiomasticon,  Ma'YSir}A)  it  is 
spoken  of  as  a  large  village  lying  between  Dora 
'  Tantiira')  and  Ptolemais  (Akka)  at  9  miles  from 
the  former,  that  is  just  about  Athlit,  the  ancient 
"  Castellum  peregrinorum."  No  doubt  the  Cas- 
tellum  was  anciently  a  migdol*  or  tower:  but  it  is 


D''33Nn*7y.  rendered  in  the  LXX. 


lO*t    TTpoS 

0  T(KTeu' ;  Vulg.  quum  partus  tempus  advencrit. 
■>  May  this  not  be  the  Magdolus  named  by  Herodotus, 
.  159,  as  the  site  of  Tharaoh  Necho's  victory  over  Josiah? 


MIGDOL 

hard  to  locate  a  town  of  Naphtali  below  Carmel, 
and  at  least  25  miles  from  tlie  boundaries  of  the 
tribe.  For  a  similar  reason  Mejdel  by  Tiberias,  on 
the  shore  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth,  is  not  likely 
to  be  Migdal-el  (Kob.  B.  R.  ii.  397),  since  it  must 
be  outside  the  ancient  limits  of  NaphtaH  and  within 
those  of  Zebulun.  In  this  case,  however,  the  dis- 
tance is  not  so  great. 

Schwaiz  (184),  reading  Migdal-el  and  Horem  as 
one  word,  proiioses  to  identify  it  with  Mejdel  el- 
Kerwn,  a  place  about  12  miles  east  of  Akka. 

A  Mydcl  is  mentioned  by  Van  de  Velde  {Syr. 
and  Pal.  ii.  307)  in  the  cential  mounbiins  of 
Palestine,  near  the  edge  of  the  Ghor,  at  the  upper 
end  of  the  Wady  Fasail,  and  not  far  from  Dauineh, 
the  ancient  Edumia.  This  very  possibly  represents 
an  ancient  Migdal,  of  which  no  trace  has  yet  been 
found  in  the  Bible.  It  was  also  visited  by  Dr. 
Kobinson  (B.  R.  iii.  295),  who  gives  good  reasons 
for  accepting  it  as  the  Magdal-senna  mentioned  by 
Jerome  (Onomast.  "Senna")  as  seven  miles  north 
of  Jericho,  on  the  border  of  Judaea.  Another 
Migdid  probably  lay  about  two  miles  south  of 
Jerusalem,  near  the  Bethlehem  road,  where  the 
cluster  of  ruins  called  Kirbet  Um-Moghdala  is  now 
situated  (Tobler,  Dritte  Wanderuny,  81). 

The  Migdal-Eder,  at  which  Jacob  halted  on  his 
way  from  Bethlehem  to  Hebron,  was  a  short  distance 
south  of  the  former.    [Edar,  TOWER  OF.]     [G.] 

MIG'DAL-GAD   (nr'p-^JJD  :    MayaSaydS  ; 

Alex.  ^lay5a\yaS  :  Magdal-Gad),  a  city  of  Judah 
(Josh.  .\v.  37);  in  the  district  of  the  Shcfelah^  or 
maritime  lowland  ;  a  member  of  the  second  group 
of  cities,  which  contained  amongst  others  Lachish, 
Eglon,  and  Makicedah.  By  Eusebius  and  Je- 
tome  in  the  Onom^sticon,  it  appears  to  be  men- 
tioned as  "  iMagdala,"  but  without  any  sign  of  its 
being  actually  known  to  them.  A  village  called  el 
Medjdel  lies  in  the  nwiitime  plain,  a  couple  of 
miles  inland  from  Ascalou,  9  from  Um  Lakhis, 
and  11  from  Ajlan.  So  far  this  is  in  support  of 
Van  de  Velde's  identification  [Syr.  ^  P.  ii.  237,  238  ; 
Memoir,  334;  Rob.  1st  ed.  vol.  iii.  Appendix, 
118  6)  of  the  place  with  Migdal-gad,  and  it  would 
be  quite  satisfactory  if  we  were  not  uncertain  whe- 
ther the  other  two  places  are  Lachish  and  Eglon. 
Makkedah  at  any  rate  must  have  been  much  farther 
noi'th.  But  to  appreciate  these  conditions,  we  ought 
to  know  the  principles  on  wlu'ch  the  groups  of  towns 
in  these  catalogues  are  arranged,  which  as  yet  we 
do  not.  Migdal-gad  was  probably  dedicated  to  or 
associated  with  the  worship  of  the  ancient  deity  Gad, 
another  of  whose  sanctuai'ies  lay  at  the  opposite 
extremity  of  the  country  at  Baal-gad  under  JVIount 
Hermon.  [G.'] 

IMIG'DOL  (bhjp.  '?'"n:p:  Ua.y5oi\ov,  or 
May^<ii\6v :  Magdaluni),  proper  narrie  of  one  or 
two  places  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Egypt,  cognate 
to  biytD,  which  appears  properly  to  signify  a  mili- 
tary watch-tower,  as  of  a  town  (2  K.  ix.  17),  or 
isolated  (xvii.  9),  and  the  look-out  of  a  vineyard 
(Is.  V.  2:  comp.  Matt.^xxi.  33,  Mark  xii.  1),  or  a 
shepherd's  look-out,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  pro- 
per name,  Tl]}  ?'nJO,  "  the  tower  of  the  flock," 


(See  Rawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  246,  note.)  But  this  was  not 
the  only  Migdol  along  this  coast.  The  ^TpnTMi/os  jriJpyos, 
or  "  Strato's  tower,"  must  have  been  another,  and  a  third 
possibly  stood  near  Aslikelon.  [Megiddo  ;  Migdal-Gad.] 


MIGDOL 

in  which,  bowevei-,  it,  is  possible  that  the  second 
word  is  n  proper  name  (Gen.  xxxv.  21  ;  and  comp. 
Mic.  iv.  8,  where  the  mihtary  signification  seems  to 
be  implied,  though  perhaps  rhetorically  only).  This 
form  occurs  only  in  Egyptian  geography,  and  it  has 
therefore  been  supposed  by  ChampoUion  to  be  sub- 
stituted for  an  Egyptian  name  of  similar  sound,  the 
Coptic  equivalent  in  the  Bible,  JULeCtJXCOX, 
JULeXT'CoX  (Sah.),  being,  according  to  him, 
of  Egyptian  origin  {L'^gypte  sotis  les  Pharaons, 
ii.  79,  80;  comp.  69).  A  native  etymology  has 
been  suggested,  giving  the  signification  "multi- 
tude of  hills"*  (Thesl  s.  v.).  ^The  ancient  Egyp- 
tian form  of  Migdol  having,  however,  been  found, 
written  in  a  manner  rendering  it  not  impro- 
bable that  it  was  a  foreign  word,"^  MAKTUR 
or  MAKTeRU,  as  well  as  so  used  that  it  must 
be  of  similar  meaning  to  the  Hebrew  ?'1J!0' 
and  the  Coptic  equivalent  occurring  in  a  form, 
JULGG'ToX  (Sail.),  slightly  differing  from  that 
of  the  geographical  name,  with  the  significations 
"  a  circuit,  citadels,  towers,  bulwarks,"  a  point 
liitherto  strangely  overlooked,  the  idea  of  the 
Egyptian  origin  and  etymology  of  the  latter  must 
be  given  up. 

Another  name  on  the  frontier,  Baal-zephoU;  appears 
also  to  be  Hebrew  or  Semitic,  and  to  have  a  similar 
signiiication.  [Baal-zephon.]  The  ancient  Egyp- 
tian name  occurs  in  a  sculpture  on  the  outer  side 
of  the  north  wall  of  the  great  hypostyle  hail  of  the 
temple  of  p]l-Karuak  at  Thebes,  where  a  fort,  or 
possibly  fortified  town,  is  represented,  with  the  name 
PA-MAKTUR  EN  RA-MA-MEN,  "  the  tower  of 
Pharaoh,  establisher  of  Justice;"  the  last  four  words 
being  the  prenomen  of  Sethee  I.  (B.C.  cir.  1322). 
The  sculpture  represents  the  king's  triumjihal  return 
to  Egypt  from  an  eastern  expedition,  and  the  place 
is  represented  as  if  on  a  main  road,  to  the  east  of 
Leontopolis. 

1.  A  Migdol  is  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the 
Exodus.  Before  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  the 
Israelites  were  commanded  "  to  turn  and  enauiip 
before  Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the  sea, 
over  against  Baal-zephon  "  (Ex.  xiv.  2).  In  Num- 
bers we  read,  "  And  they  removed  from  Ethani, 
and  turned  again  unto  Pi-hahiroth,  which  [is]  be- 
fore Baal-zephon  :  and  they  pitched  before  Migdol. 
And  tliey  departed  from  before  Pi-hahii-oth,  and 
jiassed  thi-ougli  the  midst  of  the  sea  into  the  wilder- 
ness" (xxxiii.  7,  8).     We  suppose  thqt  the  position 


MIGDOL 


361 


»  The  derivation  is  from  JULHCU,  "  multitude,"  and 
O^Xi  T^X  (S-'''-).  "-1  liil'."  ■'^'l"'''  's  daring, 
notwlthsuxnding  the  instability  of  the  vowels  in  Coptic 
The  form  JULGCIJO^X  would  better  suit  this  ety- 
mology, were  there  not  other  reasons  than  its  rashness 
against  it.  Forster  (J.  K.)  gives  it,  on  what  authority  we 
know  not :  perhaps  it  is  a  n\\si>rmt  (_Kpist.  ad  Michaelis, 
p.  29). 

>>  Foreign  words  are  usually  written  witli  all  or  most 
of  the  vowels  in  ancient  Egj'plian  :  native  words,  rarely. 

<:  We  have  no  account  of  Jews  in  the  Kgyptian  military 
service  as  early  as  this  time;  but  it  is  not  impossible  that 
some  of  the  fugitives  who  took  Jeremiah  with  them  may 
have  become  mercenaries  in  I'haraoh  Hophra's  army. 

<'  Sleph.  IJyz.  s.  v.,  conip.  Fiai/iinnta  Ilisluiicurum 
Giaecorum,  t.  an.  If  the  latter  part  of  the  passar;e  he 
from  Hecataeus,  the  town  was  impurlant  in  his  time. 
MayfiwAo?,  ttoAis*  Ai-yvTrrou-  'EKaraios  TrtptTj-y^crft.  to 
iSviKOv  M(X75tt)AtT7;9,  k.t.\. 


of  the  encampment  was  before  or  at  Pi-hahiroth, 
behind  which  was  Migdol,  and  on  the  other  hand 
Baal-zephon  and  the  sea,  these  jilaces  being  near 
together.  The  place  of  the  encampment  and  of 
the  passage  of  the  sea  we  believe  to  have  been  not 
far  from  the  Persepolitan  monument,  which  is 
made  in  Linant's  map  the  site  of  the  Serapeum. 
[Exodus,  the.] 

2.  A  Migdol  is  spoken  of  by  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel. 
The  latter  prophet  mentions  it  as  a  boundary-town, 
evidently  on  the  eastern  border,  corresponding  to 
Seveneh,  or  Syene,  on  the  southern.  He  prophesies 
the  desolation  of  Egypt  "  from  Migdol  to  Seveneh 
even  unto  the  border  of  Gush,"  HpiD  V'HJ'SP 
£^'•13  ^-lirTyi  (xxix.  10),  and  predicts  slaughter 

"  from  Migdol  to  Seveneh  "  (xxx.  6).  That  the 
eastern  border  is  that  on  which  Migdol  was  situate 
is  shewn  not  only  by  this  being  the  border  towards 
Palestine,  and  that  which  a  conqueror  from  the 
east  would  pass,  but  also  by  the  notices  in  the  book 
of  Jeremiah,  where  this  town  is  spoken  of  with  places 
in  Lower  Egypt.  In  the  piophecy  to  the  Jews  in 
Egypt  they  are  spoken  of  as  dwelling  at  Migdol, 
Tahpanhes,  and  Noph,  and  in  the  country  of  Pathros 
(xliv.  1),  and  in  that  fbi'etelling,  apparently,  an 
invasion  of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  ]\Iigdol, 
Noph,  and  Tahpanhes  aie  again  mentioned  together 
(xlvi.  14).  It  seems  plain,  from  its  being  spoken 
of  with  Memphis,  and  from  Jews  dwelling  there, 
that  this  Migdol  was  an  important  town,  and 
not  a  mere  fort,  or  even  military  settlement.'^  After 
this  time  there  is  no  notice  of  any  place  of  this 
name  in  Egypt,  excepting  of  Magdolus,  by  Hecataeus 
of  Miletus,'^  and  in  the  Itineranj  of  Antoninus,  in 
which  Magdolo  is  placed  twelve  Roman  miles  to 
the  .southward  of  Pelusium,  in  the  route  from  the 
Serajieum  to  tlwttown.^  This  latter  place  most  pro- 
bably represents  the  Migdol  mentioned  by  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel.  Its  position  on  the  route  to  Palestine 
would  make  it  both  strategically  important  and 
populous,  neither  of  which  woidd  be  the  case  with 
a  town  in  the  position  of  the  Migdol  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. Gesenius,  however,  holds  that  theie  is  but 
one  Migdol  mentioned  in  the  Bible  {Lex.  s.  v.). 
Lepsius  distinguishes  two  Migdols,  and  considers 
Magdolo  to  be  the  same  as  the  Migdol  of  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel.  He  supposes  the  name  to  bo  only  the 
Semitic  rendering  of  "  the  Camp,"  STparoTreSa, 
the  settlement  made  by  Psammetichus  I.  of  Ionian 
and  Carian  mercenaries  on  the  Pelusiac  branch  of 
the  Nile.'      He  ingeniously  argues  that  Migdol   is 


'"  The  route  is  as  follows : — "  a  Serapiu  Pelusio  mpm 
Ix  Tliaubasio  viii  Sile  xxviii  Magdolo  xii  Pelusio 
xii"  (Kd.  Parthey  et  IMnder,  p.  76).  These  distances 
would  place  the  Serapeum  somewhat  further  southward 
than  the  site  assigned  to  it  in  Linant's  map  [see  ExoDtrs, 
the],  unless  the  route  were  verj'  Indirect,  which  in  the 
desert  might  well  be  the  case. 

f  Herodotus  describes  "  the  Camps  "  as  two  places,  one 
on  either  side  of  the  Nile,  and  puts  them  "  near  the  sea,  a 
little  below  the  city  Bubastis,  on  the  mouth  of  the  Nile 
called  the  Pelusiac."  ctcrl  &i  oStoi  oi  x^pot  ^P'">  ^o'- 
Aa<r(r>)5  oKiyov  evep6e  Bou^a(rTi09  7rdAi05,  eTi  T<p  IIi)- 
Aoutri'w  KOiAcv/iieVa)  (TTO/xaTL  toO  Nti'Aou  (ii.  151).  This 
Statement  is  contradictory,  as  Bubastis  is  far  Irom  the 
Pelusiac  mouth  or  the  sea.  Lepsius  (/..  c.)  merely  speaks 
of  this  settlement  as  near  Pelusium,  on  the  Pelusiac 
moull  below  Bubastis,  citing  the  last  clause  of  the  fol- 
lowing passage  of  Diodorus  Siculus,  who  gives  but  a  loose 
repetition  of  Herodotus,  and  is  not  to  be  taken,  here  at 
least,  as  an  independent  authority,  besides  that  he  may  fix 
the  position  of  a  territory  only,  and  not  of  "  the  Camp."' 


362 


MTGRON 


meutioneJ  iii  the  Bible  at  the  time  of  the  existence 
— he  rather  loosely  says  foundation — of  this  settle- 
ment, but  omitted  by  the  Greek  geographers — he 
should  have  said  after  Hecataeus  of  Miletus — the 
mercenaries  having  been  removed  by  Amasis  to  Mem- 
phis (ii.  154),  and  not  afterwards  noticed  excepting  in 
the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus  {Chronologic  der  Acgnp- 
ter,  i.  340,  and  note  5).  The  Greek  and  Hebrew  or 
Semitic  words  do  not  however  oHer  a  sufficient 
nearness  of  meaning,  nor  does  the  Egyptian  usage 
appear  to  sanction  any  deviation  in  this  case  ;  so 
that  we  cannot  accept  this  supposition,  which,  more- 
over, seems  repugnant  to  the  tact  that  Migdol  was 
a  town  where  Jews  dwelt.  ChampoUion  {L'Egijpto 
sous  les  Pharaons,  ii.  69-71)  and  others  (Ewakl, 
Geschichte,  2nd  ed.,  ii.  7  note ;  Schleideu,  Die 
Landenge  von  Sues,  pp.  140,  141)  have  noticed 
the  occurrence  of  Arabic  names  which  appear  to 
represent  the  ancient  name  Migdol,  and  to  be  de- 
rived from  its  Coptic  equivalent.  These  names,  of 
which  the  most  common  foim  appears  to  be  Mash- 
tool,8  are  found  in  the  Census  of  El-Melek  en-N;'sir 
(Mohammad  Ibn  Kalaoon),  given  by  De  Sacy  in  his 
translation  of  'Abd  el-Lateef's  History  of  Egypt. 
Their  frequency  favours  the  opinion  that  Migdol  was 
a  name  commonly  given  in  Egypt  to  forts,  especially 
on  or  near  the  eastern  frontier.  Dr.  Schleideu  (I.  c.) 
objects  that  Mashtool  has  an  Arabic  derivation  ; 
but  we  reply  that  the  modern  geography  of  Egypt 
offers  examples  that  render  this  by  no  means  a 
serious  difficulty. 

It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  ^ay^oXov  men- 
tioned by  Herodotus,  in  his  reference  to  an  expedition 
of  Necho's  (ii.  159),  supposed  to  be  that  in  which 
he  slew  Josiah,  is  the  Migdol  of  the  prophets 
(Mannert,  Afrika,  i.  489),  and  it  has  even  been  pro- 
posed to  read  in  the  Heb.  text  Migdol  for  Megiddo 
(Harenberg,  Bihl.  Brern.  vi.  281,  seqq. ;  Rosen- 
miiller,  Alterth.  ii.  99)  ;  but  the  latter  idea  is  un- 
worthy of  modern  scholarship.  [R.  S.  P.] 

MIG'RON  {iTsyq  :  Maytav  ;  in  Isai.  ^ayeliiiv, 
and  Alex.  MoyeSSa; :  Magron^),  a  town,  or  a  spot 
— for  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  which — in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Saul's  city,  Gibeah,  on  the  very 
edge  of  the  district  belonging  to  it  (1  Sam.  xiv.  2 ) ; 
distinguished  by  a  pomegi'anate-tree,  under  which 
ou  the  eve  of  a  memorable  event  we  discover  Saul 
and  Aliiah  surrounded  by  the  poor  remnants  of  their 
force.  Josephus  [Ant.  vi.  6,  §2)  presents  it  as  a 
high  hill  {fiovvhs  v\priX6s),  from  which  there  was  a 
wide  prospect  over  the  district  devastated  by  the 
Philistines.  But  this  gives  no  clue,  for  Palestine 
is  full  of  elevated  spots  commanding  wide  prospects. 

Migron  is  presented  to  our  view  only  once  again, 
viz.  in  the  invaluable  list  of  the  places  disturbed 
by  Sennacherib's  approach  to  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  28). 
But  here  its  position  seems  a  little  further  north 
than  that  indicated  in  the  fomier  passage — sup- 
posing, that  is,  that  Gibeah  was  at  TuL'il  el  Ful. 
'  It  here  occurs  between  Aiath — that  is  Ai — and 
Michmash,  in  other  words  was  on  the  north  of  the 
great  ravine  of  the  Wadg-Suux'init ,  while  Gibeah 
was  more  than  2  miles  to  the  south  thereof. 
[Gibeah,  vol.  i.  690  6,  691.]  In  Hebrew,  Migron 
may  mean  a  "  precipice,"  a  frequent  feature  of  the 


TOiy  5e  >Ai(r9oiJ>6pots  ....  Ta  KoXovfucfa  arpaTOTreSa  t6- 
TToi'  (uaj'.  TOi!  KaAovficVoit  crrpaTO?7-e'Soi5  Tt)7roi')  oIkclv 
cSuiKe,  Ka'i  x^P""  TToAAiji'  «  are  k  X»/p  o  u  x  ))  ere 
IJ-iKp'of  en-ai/o)  toC  llrjAouaiaKou  (TTonaros  (i.  67). 


MILCOM 

part  of  the  country  in  question,  and  it  is  not  im- 
possible therefore  that  two  places  of  the  same  name 
are  intended — a  common  occurrence  in  primitive 
countries  and  tongues  where  each  rock  or  ravine  has 
its  appellation,  and  where  no  reluctance  or  inconve- 
nience is  found  in  having  places  of  the  same  name 
in  close  proximity.  As  easily  two  Migrons,  as  two 
Gibeahs,  or  two  Shochos. 

The  LXX.  seem  to  have  had  Megiddo  in  their 
intentions,  but  this  is  quite  inadmissible.  (See  Jo- 
sephus, Ant.  vi.  0,  §2.)  [G.] 

MI'JAMTN  (}0*0  :  MeiV'"  ;  Alex.  MeiVeiV  : 
Maimmi).  1.  The  chief  of  the  sixth  of  the  24 
courses  of  priests  established  by  David  (1  Chi-, 
xxiv.  9). 

2.  {Miafxiv  ;  Alex.  Miafj.eiv ;  F.  A.  Mfia/xc^v : 
Miamin).  A  family  of  priests  who  signed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah ;  probably  the  descend- 
ants of  the  preceding,  and  the  same  as  MlAMiN  2 
(Neh.  X.  7),  and  Miniamin  2. 

MIK'LOTH  (ni^pD  :    Ma/ceAt^e  ;  Alex.  Ma- 

KiZdiQ  in  1  Chr.  ix. :  Macelloth).  1.  One  of  the 
sons  of  Jehiel,  the  father  or  prince  of  Gibeon,  by 
his  wife  Maachah  (1  Chr.  viii.  32,  ix.  37,  38). 
His  son  is  vai'iously  called  Shimeah  or  Shimeam. 

2.  {MaK€A\d>e).  The  leader  {Tii.  nagid)  of 
the  second  division  of  David's  army  (1  Chr.  sxvii. 
4),  of  which  Dodai  the  Ahohite  was  captain  ("IK', 

sar").  The  nag'id,  in  a  military  sense,  appears  to 
have  been  an  officer  superior  in  rank  to  the  cap- 
tains of  thousands  and  the  captains  of  hundreds 
(1  Chr.  xiii.  \)> 

MIKNEI'AH  (-in^pipO  :  Ma/ceAAia  ;  Alex.  Ma- 

K^vla ;  F.  A.  MuKeWd,  1  Chr.  xv.  18  ;  MaKfvia  ; 
Alex.  MaK€vias,  1  Chr.  xv.  21  :  Macenias).  One 
of  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank,  gatekeepers  of 
the  ark,  appointed  by  David  to  play  in  the  Temple 
band  "  with  harps  upon  Sheminith." 

MILALA'I  (^^^p :  om.  in  LXX. :  Malalai). 

Probably  a  Gershonite  Levite  of  the  sons  of  Asaph, 
who,  with  Ezra  at  their  head,  played  "  the  musical 
instruments  of  David  the  man  of  God  "  in  the  solemn 
procession  round  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  which 
accompanied  their  dedication  (Neh.  xii.  36). 
[Mattaniaii  2.] 

MIL'CAH  (nS^D:  MeAxd :  Melcha).  1. 
Daughter  of  Haran  and  wife  of  her  uncle  Nahor, 
Abraham's  brother,  to  whom  she  bare  eight  chil- 
dren :  the  youngest,  Bethuel,  was  the  father  of 
Rebekah  (Gen.  xi.  29,  xxii.  20,  23,  xxiv.  15,  24 
47).  She  was  the  sister  of  Lot,  and  her  soiv 
Bethuel  is  distinguished  as  "  Nahor's  sou,  whom 
Milcah  bare  unto  him,"  apparently  to  indicate 
that  he  was  of  the  purest  blood  of  Abraham's 
ancestry,  being  descended  both  from  Haran  and 
Nahor. 

2.  The  fourth  daughter  of  Zelophehad  (Num. 
xxvi.  33,  xxvii.  1,  xxxvi.  11 ;  Josh.  xvii.  3). 

MIL'COM  (D'aSp  :  6  ^aa-iXevs  avrHv  :  Mo- 
loch, 1  K.  xi.  5,  33  ;  6  Mo\6x  ;  Alex.  'A/U6Ax<5m  : 
Melchom,  2  K.  xxiii.  13).  The  "  abomination"  of 
the  children  of  Ammon,  elsewhere  called  MoLECH 


=*  Or  in  some  MSS.  in  affrum.  Gabaa. 

•>  This  verse  should  be  remtercd,  "  And  David  consulted 
with  the  captains  of  tliousands  and  hundreds,  bclongiu!; 
to  each  loader  "  (nagid). 


MILE 

(1  K.  xi.  7,  &c.)  ami  Malcham  fZeph.  i.  5,  marg. 
"  their  king"),  of  the  latter  of  which  it  is  probably 
a  dialectical  variation.  Movers  {Phonizier,  i.  358) 
calls  it  au  Aramaic  proiiuiiciatiou. 

MILE  (MiAtoi/,  the  Greek  form  of  the  Latin 
milliiiruun),  a  Koman  measure  of  length  equal  to 
1618  English  yards.  It  is  only  once  noticed  in 
the  Bible  (Matt.  v.  41);  the  usual  method  of 
reckoning  both  in  it  and  in  Josephus  being  by  the 
stadium.  The  Koman  system  of  measurement  was 
fully  introduced  into  Palestine,  though  probably 
at  a  later  date  ;  the  Talmudists  admitted. the  term 
"mile"  (?''0)  into  their  vocabulary:  both  Jei'ome 
(ip  his  Onomasticon)  and  the  Itineraries  compute 
the  distances  in  Palestine  by  miles;  and  to  this 
dav  the  old  milestones  may  be  seen,  here  and  there, 
in'that  country  (Robinson's  Bib.  Res.  ii.  161  note, 
iii.  306).  The  mile  of  the  Jews  is  said  to  have 
been  of  two  kinds,  long  or  short,  dependent  on 
the  length  of  the  pace,  which  varied  in  dillerent 
parts,  the  long  pace  being  double  the  length  of  the 
short  one  (Carpzov's  Apparat.  p.  679).    [VV.  L.  B.] 

MILETUS  (MiAtjtos:  Miletus)  Acts  xx.  15, 
17,  less  con-ectly  called  MlLETUM  in  '2  Tim.  iv. 
20.  The  first  of  these  passages  brings  before  us  the 
scene  of  the  most  pathetic  occasion  of  St.  Paul's 
lifQ  ;  the  second  is  interesting  and  important  in 
reference  to  the  question  of  the  Apostle's  second 
imprisonment. 

St.  Paul,  on  the  return  voyage  from  his  third 
missionary  journey,  having  left  Philippi  after  the 
passover  (Acts  xx.  6),  and  desirous,  if  possible,  to 
be  in  Jerusalem  at  Pentecost  (ib.  16),  determined 
to  pass  by  Ephesus.  Wishing,  however,  to  com- 
municate with  the  church  in  which  he  had  laboured 
so  long,  he  sent  for  the  presbyters  of  Ephesus  to 
meet  him  at  Miletus.  In  the  conte.xt  we  have  the 
geographical  relations  of  the  latter  city  brought  out 
as  distinctly,  as  if  it  were  St.  Luke's  purpose  to 
state  them.  In  the  first  place  it  lay  on  the  coast 
to  the  S.  of  Ephesus.  Next,  it  was  a  day's  sail  from 
Trogyllium   (ver.   15).     Moreover,   to  those  who 


MILETUS 


363 


are  sailing  from  the  north,  it  is  in  the<lirect  line  for 
Cos.  We  should  also  notice  that  it  was  near 
enough  to  Ephesus  by  land  communication,  for 
the  message  to  be  sent  and  the  presbyters  to  come 
within  a  very  narrow  space  of  time.  All  these 
details  correspond  with  the  geographical  facts  of  the 
case.  As  to  the  last  point,  Ephesus  was  by  land 
only  about  20  or  30  miles  distant  from  Miletus. 
There  is  a  further  and  more  minute  topographic;\l 
coincidence,  which  may  be  seen  in  the  phrase, 
"  They  accompanied  him  to  the  ship,"  implying  as 
it  does  that  the  vessel  lay  at  some  distance  from  the 
town.  The  site  of  Miletus  has  now  receded  ten 
miles  from  the  coast,  and  even  in  the  Apostle's 
time  it  must  have  lost  its  strictly  maritime  posi- 
tion. This  point  is  noticed  by  Prof.  Hackett  in 
his  Comm.  on  the  Acts  (2nd  ed.  p.  344)  ;  com- 
pare Acts  xxi.  5.  In  each  case  we  have  a  low 
flat  shore,  as  a  marked  and  deliiiite  feature  of  the 
scene. 

The  passage  in  the  second  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
where  Miletus  is  mentioned,  presents  a  very  serious 
difficulty  to  the  theory  that  there  was  only  one 
Roman  imprisonment.  When  St.  Paul  visited  the 
place  on  the  occasion  just  described,  Trophimus 
was  indeed  with  him  (Acts  xx.  4)  ;  but  he  cer- 
tainly did  not  "  leave  him  sick  at  Miletus;"  for  at 
the  conclusion  of  the  voyage  we  find  him  with  the 
Apostle  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxi.  29).  Nor  is  it 
possible  that  he  could  have  been  so  left  on  the 
voyage  from  Caesarea  to  Rome :  for  in  the  first 
place  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  Trophimus 
was  with  the  Apostle  then  at  all  ;  and  in  the  second 
place  the  ship  was  never  to  the  north  of  Cuidus 
(Acts  xxvii.  7).  But  on  the  hypothesis  that  St. 
Paul  was  liberated  from  Rome  and  revisited  the 
neighbourhood  of  Ephesus,  all  becomes  easy,  and 
consistent  with  the  other  notices  of  his  movements 
in  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Various  combinations  are 
possible.  See  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch. 
xxvii.,  and  Birks,  Horae  Apostolicae. 

As  to  the  history  of  Miletus  itself,  it  was  far  more 
famous  five  hundred  years  before  St.  Paul's  day, 


ill  of  Al.ullo  at  Mi; 


364 


MILK 


than  it  ever  became  afterwards.  In  early  times  it 
was  the  most  flourishing  city  of  the  Ionian  (j  reeks. 
The  ships  which  sailed  from  it  were  celebrated 
for  their  distant  voyages.  Jliletus  sutlered  in 
the  progress  of  the  Lydian  kingdom  and  became 
tributary  to  Croesus.  In  the  natural  order  of 
events,  it  was  absorbed  in  the  Persian  empire :  and, 
revolting,  it  was  stormed  and  sacked.  After  a 
brief  period  of  spirited  independence,  it  received  a 
blow  from  which  it  never  recovered,  in  the  siege 
conducted  by  Alexander,  when  on  his  Eastern  cam- 
paign. But  still  it  held,  even  through  the  Roman 
period,  the  rank  of  a  second-rate  trading  town,  and 
Strabo  mentions  its  four  harbours.  At  this  time  it 
was  politically  in  the  province  of  Asi.\,  though 
Carta  was  the  old  ethnolog:cal  naine  of  the  district 
in  which  it  was  situated.  Its  pre-eminence  on  this 
coast  had  now  long  been  yielded  up  to  Ephesus. 
These  changes  can  be  vividly  traced  by  comparing 
the  whole  series  of  coins  of  the  two  places.  In  the 
case  of  Miletus,  those  of  the  autonomous  period  are 
numerous  and  beautiful,  those  of  the  imperial  period 
very  scanty.  Still  Miletus  was  for  some  time  an 
episcopal  city  of  Westera  Asia.  Its  final  decay  was 
doubtless  promoted  by  that  silting  up  of  the  Mae- 
ander,  to  which  we  have  alluded.  No  remains 
worth  describing  are  now  found  in  the  swamps 
which  conceal  the  site  of  the  city  of  Thales  and 
Hecataeus.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MILK.  As  an  article  of  diet,  milk  holds  a  more 
important  position  in  Eastern  countries  than  with  us. 
It  is  not  a  mere  adjunct  in  cookery,  or  restricted  to 
the  use  of  the  young,  although  it  is  naturally  the 
characteristic  food  of  childhood,  both  from  its  simple 
and  nutritive  qualities  (1  Pet.  ii.  2),  and  particu- 
larly as  contrasted  with  meat  (1  Cor.  iii.  2  ;  Heb. 
V.  12) :  but  beyond  this  it  is  regarded  as  substantial 
food  adapted  alike  to  all  ages  and  classes.  Hence 
it  is  enumerated  among  "  the  principal  things  for 
the  whole  use  of  a  man's  life  "  (Ecclus.  sxxi.\.  26), 
and  it  appears  as  the  very  emblem  of  abundance^ 
and  wealth,  either  in  conjunction  with  honey  (Ex. 
iii.  8;  Deut.  vi.  3,  xi.  9)  or  wine  (Is.  Iv.  1),  or 
even  by  itself  (Job  xxi.  24'')  :  hence  also  to  "  suck 
the  milk"  of  an  enemy's  land  was  an  expression 
betokening  its  complete  subjection  (Is.  Ix.  16;  Ez. 
XXV.  4).  Not  only  the  milk  of  cows,  but  of  sheep 
(Deut.  xxxii.  14),  of  camels  (Gen.  xxxii.  15),  and 
of  goats  (Prov.  xxvii.  27)  was  used;  the  latter 
appears  to  have  been  most  highly  prized.  The  use 
of  camel's  milk  still  prevails  among  the  Arabs 
Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  44). 

Milk  was  used  sometimes  in  its  natural  state,  and 
sometimes  in  a  sour,  coagulated  state:  the  former 
was  named  khalab,'^  and  the  latter  khemahA  In  the 
A.  V.  the  latter  is  rendere;!  "  butter,"  but  there  can 
be  no  question  that  in  every  case  (except  perhaps 
Prov.  XXX.  .33)  the  term  refers  to  a  preparation  of 
milk  well  known  in  Eastern  countries  under  the 
name  of  lehen.     The  method  now  pursued  in  its 

"  This  is  expressed  in  the  Hebrew  term  for  milk, 
chalah,  the  etymological  force  of  which  is  "  fatness."  We 
may  compare  with  the  Scriptural  expression,  "  a  laud 
flowing  with  milk  and  honey,"  the  foilowinp;  passages 
from  the  classical  writers :  — 

'Pet  Se  7aAaicTt  TriSov, 

'Pet  5'  oti'(i>,  pet  5e  jUeArttrtraf 

Ne'icTapi.— KuRrr.  Bacch.  142. 

"  Flnminajam  lactis,  jam  fluniina  nectaris  ibant: 
Flavaque  de  viridi  stillabant  ilice  mella." 

Ov.  MH.  i.  111. 


MILL 

preparation  is  to  boil  the  milk  over  a  slow  fire,  adding 
to  it  a  small  piece  of  old  leben  or  some  other  acid  in 
order  to  make  it  coagulate  (Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  118, 
370  ;  Barckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  60).  The  refi-eshing 
draught  which  Jael  offered  "  in  a  lordly  dish  "  to 
Sisera  (Judg.  v.  25)  was  leben,  as  .losephus  parti- 
cularly notes  {ydXa  Siapdophs  ■^5tj,  Ant.  v.  5,  §4) ; 
it  was  produced  from  one  of  the  goatskin  bottles 
which  are  still  used  for  the  purpose  b3'  the  Bedouins 
(Judg.  iv.  19;  comp.  Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  45). 
As  it  would  keep  for  a  considerable  time  it  was 
particularly  adapted  to  the  use  of  travellers  (2  Sam. 
xvii.  29).  The  amount  of  milk  required  for  its 
production  was  of  coui-se  considei-able ;  and  hence 
in  Is.  vii.  22  the  use  of  lehen  is  predicted  as  a  con- 
sequence of  the  depopulation  of  the  land,  when  all 
agi-iculture  had  ceased,  and  the  fields  were  covered 
with  grass.  In  Job  xx.  17,  xxix.  6,  the  terra  is 
used  as  an  emblem  of  abundance  in  the  same  sense 
as  milk.  Leben  is  still  extensively  used  in  the 
East :  at  ceitain  seasons  of  the  year  the  poor  almost 
live  upon  it,  while  the  upper  classes  eat  it  with 
salad  or  meat  (Russell,  i.  118).  It  is  still  ofiered 
in  hospitality  to  the  passing  stianger,  exactly  as 
of  old  in  Abraham's  tent  (Gen.  xviii.  8 ;  comp. 
Robinson,  Bib.  Bes.  i.  571,  ii.  70,  211),  so  ft-eely 
indeed  that  in  some  parts  of  Arabia  it  would  be 
regarded  a  scandal  if  money  were  received  in  return 
(Burckhardt's  Arabia,  i.  120,  ii.  108).  Whether 
milk  was  used  instead  of  water  for  the  purpose  of 
boiling  meat,  as  is  at  present  not  unusual  among 
the  Bedouins,  is  imcertain.  [Cooking.]  The  pio- 
hibitiou  against  seething  a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk 
(occurring  as  it  does  amid  the  regulations  of  the 
harvest  festival,  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26;  Deut.  xiv. 
21)  was  probably  directed  against  some  heathen 
usage  practised  at  the  time  of  harvest.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MILL.      The   mills  (D''ni,  rechaim)  »  of  the 

ancient  Hebrews  piobably  differed  but  little  from 
those  at  present  in  use  in  the  East.  These  consist 
of  two  circular  stones,  about  18  in.  or  two  feet  in 
diameter,  the  lower  of  which  (Lat.  meta)  is  fixed, 
and  has  its  upfier  surface  slightly  convex,  fitting 
into  a  corresponding  concavity  in  the  upper  stone 
(Lat.  catillus).  The  latter,  called  by  the  Hebrews 
receh  (33^),  "  chariot,"  and  by  the  Arabs  rekkab, 

"  rider,"  has  a  hole  in  it  through  which  the  gi'ain 
passes,  immediately  above  a  pivot  or  shaft  which 
lises  from  the  centre  of  the  lower  stone,  and  about 
which  the  upper  stone  is  turned  by  means  of  an 
upright  handle  fixed  near  the  edge.  It  is  worked 
by  women,  sometimes  singly  and  sometimes  two 
together,  who  are  usually  seated  on  the  bare  ground 
(Is.  xlvii.  I,  2)  "  facing  each  other;  both  have  hold 
of  the  handle  by  which  the  upper  is  turned  round 
on  the  '  nether '  millstone.  The  one  whose  right 
hand  is  disengaged  throws  in  the  grain  as  occasion 
requires  through  the  hole  in  the  upper  stone.  It  is 
not  correct  to  say  that  one  pushes  it  half  round, 


i"  In  ttis  passage  the  marginal  reading,  "milk  pails," 
is  preferable  to  the  text,  "breasts."  The  Hebrew  word  does 
not  oci.nr  el.sewhere,  and  hence  its  meaning  is  doubtful. 
Perhaps  its  true  sense  is  "farm-yard"  or  "fold." 

•^  z?n.  "  nx?on. 


"  Compare   Arabic        1.-.^  ,   rahaydn,    the   dual   of 

->,,  ,  raJia,  a  mill.     The  dual  tbrm  of  coinse  refers  to 
the  pair  of  stones  composing  the  mill. 


MILL 

aud  then  the  otliei-  seizes  the  handle.  This  would 
be  slow  work,  and  would  give  a  spasmodic  motion 
to  the  stone.  Both  retain  their  hold,  and  pull  to, 
or  push  from,  as  men  do  with  the  whip  or  cross- 
cut saw.  The  proverb  of  our  Saviour  (Matt.  .xxiv. 
41)  is  true  to  lite,  tor  women  only  grind.  I  cannot 
recall  an  instance  iu  which  men  were  at  the  mill  " 
(Thomson,  Tlie  Land  and  the  Book,  c.  34).  The 
labour  is  very  hard,  and  the  task  of  grinding  in 
consequence  performed  only  by  the  lowest  servants 
(Ex,  xi.  5  ;  comp.  Flaut.  Merc.  ii.  o),  and  captives 
(Judg.  xvi.  21;  Job.  xxxi.  10;  Is.  xlvii.  1,  2  ; 
Lam.  V.  13;  comp.  Horn.  Od.  vii.  103  ;  Suet.  Tib. 
€.  51).'>  So  essential  were  mill-stones  for  daily 
domestic  use,  that  they  wei-e  forbidden  to  be  taken 
iu  pledge  (Dent.  xxiv.  6 ;  Jos.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §26), 
in  order  that  a  man's  family  might  not  be  deprived 
of  the  means  of  pi'eparing  their  food.  Among  the 
Fellahs  of  the  Hauran  one  of  the  chief  articles  of 
furniture  described  by  Burckhardt  {Syria,  p.  292) 
is  the  "  hand-inill  which  is  used  in  summer  when 
there  is  no  water  in  the  wadj's  to  drive  the  mills." 
The  sound  of  the  mill  is  the  indication  of  peaceful 
household  life,  and  the  absence  of  it  is  a  sign  of 
desolation  and  abandonment,  "  When  the  sound  of 
the  mill  is  low"  '  Keel.  xii.  4).  No  more  affecting 
picture  of  utter  destruction  could  be  imagined  than 
that  conveyed  in  the  threat  denounced  against 
Judah  by  the  mouth  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
(xxv.  10),  "I  will  take  from  them  the  voice  of 
mirth,  and  the  voice  of  gladness,  the  voice  of  the 
bridegroom  and  the  voice  of  the  bride,  t/io  sound  of 
the  millstones,  and  the  light  of  the  candle  "  (com]). 
Rev.  xviii.  22).  The  song  of  the  women  grinding 
IS  supposed  by  some  to  be  alluded  to  in  Eccl.  xii.  4, 
and  it  was  evidently  so  understood  by  the  LXX,* 
but  Dr.  Robinson  says  (i.  485)  "  we  heard  no  song 
as  an  accompaniment  to  the  work,"  and  Dr.  Hackett 
{Bibl.  lUust.  p.  49)  describes  it  rather  as  shrieking 
than  singing.  It  is  alluded  to  in  Homer  {Od.  xx. 
105-119)  :  and  Athenaeus  (xiv.  p.  G19a)  refers  to 
a  peculiar  chant  which  was  sung  by  women  win- 
nowing corn  aud  mentioned  by  Aristophanes  in  the 
Tiiesmophoriaziisae . 

The  hand-mills  of  the  ancient  Egyptians  appear 
to  have  been  of  the  same  character  as  those  of  their 
descendants,  and  like  them  were  worked  by  women 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  p.  118,  &c.).  "They 
had  also  a  large  mill  on  a  very  similar  nrinciple ; 
but  the  stones  were  of  far  greater  power  smd  dimen- 
sions ;  and  this  could  only  have  been  turned  by 
cattle  or  asses,  like  those  of  the  ancient  Romans, 
and  of  the  modern  Cairenes."  It  was  the  mill- 
stone of  a  mill  of  this  kind,  driven  by  an  ass,**  which 
is  alluded  to  in  Matt,  .xviii.  6  {fiv\os  6vik6s),  to 
distinguish  it,  says  Lightfoot  {Ilor.  Hcbr.  in  loc.) 
from  those  small  mills  which  were  used  to  grind 
spices  for  the  wound  of  ciicumcision,  or  for  the 
delights  of  the  sabbath,  aud  to  which  both  Kinchi 
and  Jarchi  find  a  reference  in  Jer.  xxv.  10.     Of  a 


MILLET 


3G5 


''  Grinding  is  reckoned  in  the  llisbna  {ShalibaiJi ,  vii.  2) 
among  tlie  cliief  household  duties,  to  be  performed  by  the 
wife  unless  she  brought  with  hor  one  servant  (CetUubolh, 
V.  5) ;  in  which  case  she  was  relieved  from  grindinjc, 
baking,  and  washinpc,  but  was  still  obliged  to  smkle  her 
child,  make  her  husband's  bod,  and  W(jrk  in  wool. 

<'  ey  aa-Bereiic  (/iioi-ij?  n)?  tiArjeoiIo-))?,  reading  1731110. 
iOchendh,  "  a  woman  grinding."  lor  njilO,  tachdndh, 
'■  a  mill." 

'I  H^omp.  Ovid,  Fast.  vi.  31 R,  "ct  quae  pumiceas  versat 
ascUa  mola>." 


married  man  with  slender  means  it  is  said  in  the 
Talmud  {Kiddnshin,  p.  296),  "  with  a  millstone 
on  his  neck  he  studies  the  law,"  aud  the  expres-.ioa 
is  still  proverbial  (Tendlau,  Sprichirortcr,  p.  181). 
It  was  the  moveable  upper  millstone  of  the  hand- 
mill  with  which  the  woman  of  Thebez  broke 
Abimclech's  skull  (Judg.  ix.  53).  It  is  now  gene- 
rally made,  according  to  Dr.  Thomson,  of  a  porous 
lava  brought  from  the  Hauran,  both  stones  beinu- 
of  the  same  material,  but,  says  the  same  tra- 
veller, "  I  have  seen  the  nether  made  of  a  com- 
pact sandstone,  and  quite  thick,  while  the  vpjier 
was  of  this  lava,  probably  because  from  its  light- 
ness it  is  the  more  easily  driven  round  withtho 
hand  "  ( The  Land  and  the  Booh,  ch.  34).  The 
porous  lava  to  which  he  i  efers  is  probably  the  same 
as  the  black  tufa  mentioned  by  Burckhaidt  (Syria, 
p.  57),  the  blocks  of  which  are  brought  fiom  the 
Lejah,  aud  are  fashioned  into  millstones  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Ezra,  a  village  in  the  Hauran.  "  Thev 
vary  in  price  according  to  their  size,  from  15  to  60 
piastres,  and  are  preferred  to  all  others  on  account 
of  the  hardness  of  the  stone." 

The  Israelites,  in  their  passage  through  the 
desert,  had  with  them  hand-mills,  as  well  as  mor- 
tars [Mortar]  in  which  they  ground  the  manna 
(Num.  xi.  8).  One  passage  (^Lam.  v.  13)  is 
deserving  of  notice,  which  Hoheisel  {de  Molis 
Manual.  Vet.  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxix)  explains  in  a 
manner  which  gives  it  a  point  which  is  lost  in  our 
A.  V.  It  may  be  rendered,  "  the  choice  (men)  bore 
the  mill  {\\V,'Q,tech6n),'  aud  the  youths  stumbled 
beneath  the  wood  ;"  the  wood  being  the  w^dwork 
or  shaft  of  the  mill,  which  the  captives  were  com- 
pelled to  carry.  There  are  besides  allusions  to  other 
apparatus  connected  with  the  operation  of  grinding, 
the  sieve,  or  bolter  (nCJ,  napluilt.  Is.  xxx.  28;  or 
m23.  cebdrdh,  Am.  ix.  9)  and  the  hopper,  though 
the  latter  is  only  found  in  the  Mishna  {Zabim, 
iv.  3),  and  was  a  late  invention.  We  also  tind 
in  the/Mishna  (Demai,  iii.  4)  that  mention  is  made 
of  a  miller  (|nit3.  tocheii),  indicating  that  grind- 
ing corn  was  recognized  as  a  distinct  occupation. 
Wind-mills  and  water-mills  are  of  more  recent 
date.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MILLET  (inM,"  dochan:  k^jx^ios  :  milium), 
in  all  probability  the  grains  of  Panicum  miliacexmi 
and  italiciim,  and  of  the  IIolcus  sorghum,  Linn. 
(the  Sor(fhum  vidgare  of  modern  writers),  may  all 
be  comprehended  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Mention 
of  millet  occurs  only  in  Ez.  iv.  9,  where  it  is  enu- 
merated together  with  wheat,  barley,  beans,  lentils, 
antl  fitches,  which  the  prophet  was  ordered  to  make 
into  bread.  Celsius  [Hicrob.  i.  454)  has  given  the 
names  of  numerous  old  writers  who  are  in  favour  of 
the  interpretation  adopted  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg. ; 
the  Chaldee,  Syriac,  and  Arabic  versions  have  a 
word  identical  with  the  Hebrew.  That  "millet" 
is  the  coi-rect  rendering  of  tiie  original  word  there 
can  be  no  doubt  ;  the  only  question  that  remains 
for  con-sideration  is,  what  is  the  particular  species  of 
millet  intended :  is  it  the  Panicum  miliaceum,  or  the 
Sorghum  vulgare,  or  may  both  kinds  be  denoted? 
The  Arabs    to    this   day  apply  the  term   diikhan 


^  Compare  the  Arabic     •'».s»lJs,  laliDim,  a  mill. 
"  From  root  jri'l,  "  lo  be  dusky,'    in  allusion  to  the 
colour  of  the  seeds 


566 


MILLET 


to  the  Panicuni  miliaceum,  but  Forslial  {Descr. 
Plant,  p.  174)  uses  tlie  name  of  the  Holcus 
dochna,  "  a  plant,"  says  Dr.  Royle  (Kitto's  Cyc. 
art.  "  Dokhan  "),  "  as  yet  luiknown  to  botanists." 
The  Holcus  durrha  of  Forskal,  which  he  says  the 
Arabs  call  tdam,  and  which  he  distinguishes  from 
the  H.  dochna,  appears  to  be  identical  with  the 
dourrha,  Sorghum  vidgare,  of  modei-n  botanists. 
It  is  impossible  in  the  case  of  these  and  many 
other  cereal  grains  to  say  to  what  countries  they 
are  indigenous.  Sir  G.Wilkinson  enumerates  wheat, 
beans,  lentiles,  and  dourrha,  as  being  preseixed  by 
seeds,  or  by  representation  on  the  ancient  tombs  of 
Egypt,  and  has  no  doubt  that  the  Holcus  sorghum 
was  known  to  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  that  country. 
Dr.  Iloyle  maintains  tliat  the  true  dukhun  of  Arab 
authors  is  the  Panicum  miliaceum,  which  is  univer- 
sally cultivated  in  the  East.  Celsius  {Hieroh.  1.  c.) 
and  Hiller  (Jlierophyt.  ii.  124)  give  Panicum  a.s  the 
rendering  of  Dochan ;  the  LXX.  word  K^yxpos,  in 
all  probability  is  the  Panicum  italicum,  a  grass  cul- 
tivated in  Europe  as  an  article  of  diet.  There  is, 
however,  some  difficulty  in  identifjing  the  precise 
plants  spoken  of  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans  under  the 
names  of  iftyxpos,  eKvfjLos,  panicum,  milium,  &c. 


The  Panicum  miliaceum  is  cultivated  in  Europe 
and  in  ti-q)ical  countries,  and  like  the  dourrha,  is 
often  used  as  an  ingredient  in  making  bread  ;  in 
India  it  is  cultivated  in  the  cold  weather  with 
wheat  and  barley.  Tournefort  (  Voyage,  ii.  95)  savs 
that  the  poor  people  of  Samos  make  bread  by  mixing 
iialf  wheat  and  half  barley  and  white  millet.  The 
seeds  of  millet  in  this  country  are,  as  is  well  known, 
extensively  used  as.  food  for  birds.  It  is  probable 
fhat  both  the  Sorghum  vulgarc,  and  the  Panicum 


MILLO 

miliaceum,  were  used  by  the  ancient  Hebrews  and 
Egyptians,  and  that  the  Heb.  Dochan  may  denote 
either  of  these  plants.  Two  cultivated  sfiecies  of 
Panicum  are  named  as  occurring  in  Palestine,  viz. 
P.  miliaceum  and  P.  italicum,  (Strand's  Flor. 
Palaest.  Nos.  35,  37).  The  genera  Sorghum  and 
Panicum  belong  to  the  natural  order  Gramineae, 
perhaps  the  most  important  order  in  the  vegetable 
kingdom.  [W.  H.] 


.# 


MIL'LO  (Ni^>Sn,  always  with  the  definite 
article :  tj  &Kpa,  once  rh  avaKrijjifia ;  Alex,  in  1  K. 
is.  only,  t)  /xeXai :  Hello),  a  place  in  ancient 
Jerusalem.  Both  name  and  thing  seem  to  have 
been  already  in  existence  when  the  city  was 
taken  from  the  Jebusites  by  David.  His  first  oc- 
cupation after  getting  possession  was  to  build  "  round 
about,  from  the  Millo  and  to  the  house"  (A.  V. 
"  inward  ;"  2  Sam.  v.  9) :  or  as  the  parallel  passage 
has  it,  "  he  built  the  city  round  about,  and  fron: 
the  Millo  round  about"  (1  Chr.  xi.  8).  Its  repair 
or  restoration  was  one  of  the  gi-eat  works  for  which 
Solomon  laised  his  "levy"  (1  K.  ix.  15,  24,  xi. 
27)  ;  and  it  formed  a  prominent  part  of  the  fortifi- 
cations by  which  Hezekiah  prepared  for  the  approach' 
of  the  Assyrians  (2  Chr.  x.xxii.  5).  The  last  pas- 
sage seems  to  show  that  "  the  Millo  "  was  part  of 
the  "  city  of  David,"  that  is  of  Zion,  a  conclusion 
which  is  certainly  supported  by  the  singular  passage, 
2  K.  xii.  20,  where,  whichever  view  we  take  of 
Silla,  the  "  house  of  Millo"  must  be  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Tyropoeon  valley  which  lay  at  the 
foot  of  Zion.  More  than  this  it  seems  impossible 
to  gather  from  the  notices  quoted  above — ^all  the 
passages  in  which  the  name  is  found  in  the  0.  T. 

If  "Millo"  be  taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  it 
would  be  derived  from  a  root  which  has  the  force 
of  "filling"  (see  Gesenius,  Thes.  787,  789).  This 
notion  has  been  applied  by  the  inteipreters  after 
their  custom  in  the  most  various  and  opposite 
ways : — a  rampart  [agger)  ;  a  mound  ;  an  open  space 
used  for  assemblies,  and  therefore  often  filled  with 
people ;  a  ditch  or  valley  ;  even  a  trench  filled  with 
water.  It  has  led  the  writers  of  the  Targums  to 
render  Millo  by  NIT'^D,  i.  e.  MilUtha,  the  term 


MILLO,  THE  HOUSE  OF 

by  which  in  other  passages  they  express  the  Hebi'ew 
ri??D,  sol'lah,  the  mound  which  in  ancient  warfare 
was  used  to  besiege  a  town.  But  unfortunately 
none  of  these  guesses  enable  us  to  ascertain  what 
Millo  really  was,  and  it  would  probably  be  nearer 
the  truth — it  is  certainly  safer — to  look  on  the 
name  as  an  ancient  or  archaic  tenn,  Jebusite,  or 
possibly  even  still  older,  adoptal  by  the  Israelites 
when  they  took  the  town,  and  incorporated  into 
their  own  nomenclature.*  That  it  was  an  ante- 
hebraic  term  is  supported  by  its  occurrence  in  con- 
nection with  Shechem,  so  eminently  a  Canaanite 
place.  (See  the  next  article.)  The  only  ray  of 
light  which  wo  can  obtain  is  from  the  LXX.  Their 
rendering  in  every  case  (excepting''  only  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  5)  is  ry  &Kpa,  a  word  which  they  employ  no- 
where else  in  the  0.  T.  Now  ^  S/cpo  :neans  "  the 
citadel,"  and  it  is  remarkable  that  it  is  the  word 
used  with  unvarying  persistence  throughout  the 
Books  of  Maccabees  for  the  fortress  on  Jlount  Zion, 
which  was  occupied  throughout  the  struggle  by  the 
adherents  of  Antiochus,  and  was  at  last  razed  and  the 
very  hill  levelled  by  Simon.  [Jerusalem,  vol.  i. 
p.  1000  6, 1 002  a,  &c.]  It  is  therefore  perhaps  not 
too  much  to  assume  that  the  word  millo  was  era- 
ployed  in  the  Hebrew  original  of  1  Maccabees.  The 
point  is  exceedingly  obscure,  and  the  above  is  at 
the  best  little  more  than  mere  conjecture,  though 
it  agrees  so  far  with  the  slight  indications  of  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  5,  as  noticed  already.  [G.] 

MiL'LO,  THE  HOUSE  OF.    1.  (rr-a 

N1?0  :  6  oTkos  BriOfxadKoiv  ;  Alex,  oikos  ^aaWccv : 
urbs  Mello;  oppiduin  Mello).  Apparently  a  family 
or  clan,  mentioned  in  Judg.  ix.  6,  2<)  only,  in  con- 
nexion with  the  men  or  lords  of  Shechem,  and  con- 
cerned with  them  in  the  affair  of  Abimelech.  Ko 
clue  is  given  by  the  original  or  any  of  the  versions 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  name. 

2.  (N?p  '3:  oTkos  MoaAw :  doraus Mello).  The 
"  house  of  Jlillo  that  goeth  down  to  Silla "  was 
the  spot  at  which  king  Joash  was  murdered  by  his 
slaves  (2  K.  xii.  20).  There  is  nothing  to  lead  us 
to  suppose  that  the  murder  was  not  committed  in 
.Jerusalem,  and  in  that  case  the  spot  must  be  con- 
nected with  the  ancient  Millo  (see  preceding  article). 
Two  explanations  have  been  suggested  of  the  name 
Silla.  These  will  be  discussed  more  fully  under 
that  head,  but  whichever  is  adopted  would  equally 
place  Beth  ]\Iillo  in  or  near  the  Tyropoeon,  taking 
that  to  be  where  it  is  shown  in  the  plan  of  .Jeru- 
salem, at  vol.  i.  p.  1018.  More  than  this  can 
haidly  be  said  on  the  subject  in  the  present  state 
of  our  knowledge.  [G.] 

MINES,  MINING.  "  Surely  there  is  a 
source  for  the  silver,  and  a  place  for  the  gold  which 
they  refine.  Iron  is  taken  out  of  the  soil,  and 
stone  man  melts  (for)  copper.  He  hath  put  an  end 
to  darkness,  and  to  all  peri'ection  (i.  <?.,  most 
thoroughly)  he  searcheth  the  stone  of  thick  dark- 
ness and  of  the  shadow  of  death.  He  hath  simk  a 
shaft  far  from  the  wanderer  ;  they  that  are  forgotten 
of  the  foot  are  suspended,  away  from  man  they 
waver  to  and  fro.     (As  for)   the  earth,  from  her 


MINES 


367 


"  Just  as  the  Knichtena-gniUl  Lane  of  Saxon  London 
became  Nightingale  Lane,  as  the  Saxon  name  grew 
unintelligible. 

•>  Here,  and  hero  only,  the  LXX.  have  to  avaKTi]ii.ixa, 
perhaps  the  "foundation"  or  "substruction";  though 
Schleusner  gives  also  the  meaning  altitiuio. 


Cometh  forth  bread,  yet  her  nethermost  parts  are 
upturned  as  (by)  fire.  The  place  of  sajiphire  (are) 
her  stones,  and  dust  of  gold  is  his.  A  track  which 
the  bird  of  prey  hath  not  known,  nor  the  eye  of 
the  falcon  glared  upon  ;  which  the  sons  of  pride 
(i.  e.  wild  beasts)  have  not  trodden,  nor  the  roai-ing 
lion  gone  over ;  in  the  flint  man  hath  thrust  his 
hand,  he  hath  overturned  mountains  from  the  root ; 
in  the  rocks  he  hath  cleft  channels,"  and  every  raie 
thing  hath  his  eye  seen :  the  streams  hath  he  bound 
that  they  weep  not,  and  that  which  is  hid  he 
bringeth  forth  to  light"  (Job  x.xviii.  1-11).  Such 
is  the  highly  poetical  description  given  by  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Job  of  the  operations  of 
mining  as  known  in  his  day,  the  only  record  of  the 
kind  which  we  inherit  from  the  ancient  Hebrews. 
The  question  of  the  date  of  the  book  cannot  be 
much  influenced  by  it ;  for  indications  of  a  very 
advanced  state  of  metallurgical  knowledge  are  found 
in  the  monuments  of  the  Egyptians  at  a  period  at 
least  as  early  as  any  which  would  be  claimed  for 
the  author.  Leaving  this  point  to  be  settled  inde- 
pendently, therefore,  it  remains  to  be  seen  what  is 
implied  in  the  words  of  the  poem. 

It  may  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  description 
that  a  distinction  is  made  between  gold  obtained  in 
the  manner  indicated,  and  that  which  is  found  in 
the  natural  state  in  the  alluvial  soil,  among  the 
debris  washed  down  by  the  torrents.  This  appears 
to  be  implied  in  the  expression  "  the  gold  they 
refine,"  which  presupposes  a  process  by  which  the 
pure  gold  is  extracted  from  the  ore,  and  separated 
from  the  silver  or  copper  with  which  it  may  have 
been  mixed.  What  is  said  of  gold  may  be  equally 
applied  to  silver,  for  in  almost  every  allusion  to  the 
process  of  refining  the  two  metals  are  associated. 
In  the  passage  of  Job  which  has  been  quoted,  so  far 
as  can  be  made  out  from  the  obscurities  with  which 
it  is  beset,  the  natural  order  of  mining  operations  is 
observed  in  the  description.  The  whole  point  is 
obviously  contained  in  the  contrast,  "  Surely  there 
is  a  source  for  the  silver,  and  a  place  for  the  gold 
which  men  refine, — but  where  shall  wisdom  be 
found,  and  where  is  the  place  of  understanding  ?  " 
No  labour  is  too  great  for  extorting  from  the  earth 
its  treasures.  The  shaft  is  sunk,  and  the  adven- 
turous miner,  far  from  the  haunts  of  men,  hangs 
in  mid-air  (v.  4) :  the  bowels  of  the  earth — which 
in  the  course  of  nature  grows  but  corn — are  over- 
thrown as  though  wasted  by  fire.  The  path 
which  the  miner  pursues  in  his  underground  course 
is  unseen  by  the  keen  eye  of  the  falcon,  nor  have 
the  boldest  beasts  of  prey  traversed  it,  but  man 
wins  his  way  through  every  obstacle,  hews  out 
tunnels  in  the  rock,  stops  the  water  from  flooding 
his  mine,  and  brings  to  light  the  precious  metals 
as  the  reward  of  his  adventure.  No  description 
could  be  more  complete.  The  poet  might  have 
had  before  him  the  copper  mines  of  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula.  In  the  Wady  MaghHrah,  "  the  valley 
of  the  Cave,"  are  still  traces  of  the  Egyptian  colony 
of  miners  who  settled  there  for  the  purpose  of 
extracting  copper  from  the  freestone  rocks,  and 
left  their  hieroglyphic  inscriptions  upon  the  face  of 
the  cliff.  That  these  inscriptions  are  of  great 
antiquity  there  can  bo  little  doubt,  though  Lepsius 
may  not  be  justified  in  placing  them  at  a  date 


"  It  is  curious  that  the  word  ItJS  ye6r,  here  used,  is 
apparently  Egyptian  in  origin,  and  if  so  may  have  been 
a  technical  term  among  the  Egyptian  miners  of  the 
Sinaitic  peninsula. 


3(38 


MNES 


B.C.  4000.  "Already,  uiider  the  fourth  dynasty 
ofManetho,"  he  says,  "the  same  which  erected 
the  great  pyramids  of  fiizeh,  4000  is.C,  copper 
mines  had  been  discovered  in  this  desert,  which 
were  worked  by  a  colony.  The  peninsula  was 
then  inhabited  by  Asiatic,  probably  Semitic  races; 
therefore  do  we  often  see  in  those  rock  sculptures, 
the  triumphs  of  Pharaoh  over  the  enemies  of 
Egyjit.  Almost  all  the  inscriptions  belong  to  the 
Old  Empire,  only  one  was  found  of  the  co-regency 
of  Tuthmosis  III.  and  his  sister"  (Letters  from 
Egypt,  p.  346,  Eng.  tr.).  In  the  Magharah 
tablets  I\Ir.  Di-ew  {Scripture  Lands,  p.  50  yiote) 
"saw  the  cartouche  of  Suphis,  the  builder  of  the 
<!reat  Pyramid,  and  on  the  stones  at  Silrabit  el 
Khadim  there  are  those  of  kings  of  the  eighteenth 
and  nineteenth  dynasties."  But  the  most  inter- 
esting description  of  this  mining  colony  is  to  be 
found  in  a  letter  to  the  Athenaeum  (June  4,  1859, 
No.  1649,  p.  747),  signed  M.  A.  and  dated  from 
"  Sarabut  el  Khadem,  in  the  Desert  of  Sinai,  May, 
1859."  The  writer  discovered  on  the  mountain 
exactly  opposite  the  caves  of  Magh3,rah,  traces  of 
an  ancient  fortress  intended,  as  he  conjectures,  for 
the  protection  of  the  miners.  The  hill  on  which  it 
stands  is  about  1000  feet  high,  nearly  insulated,  and 
formed  of  a  series  of  pi-ecipitous  terraces,  one  above 
the  other,  like  the  steps  of  the  pyramids.  The 
uppermost  of  these  was  entirely  surrounded  by  a 
strong  wall  within  which  were  found  remains  of 
140  houses,  each  about  ten  feet  square.  There 
were,  besides,  the  remains  of  ancient  hammers  of 
green  porphyry,  and  reservoirs  "  so  disposed  that 
when  one  was  full  the  surplus  ran  into  the  others, 
and  so  in  succession,  so  that  they  must  have  had 
water  enough  to  last  for  years.  The  ancient  fur- 
naces are  still  to  be  seen,  and  on  the  coast  of  the 
Red  Sea  are  found  the  piers  and  wharves  whence 
the  miners  shipped  their  metal  in  the  harbour  of 
Abu  Zelimeh.  Five  miles  fi'om  Sarabut  el  Khadem 
the  same  traveller  found  the  ruins  of  a  much 
greater  number  of  houses,  indicating  the  existence 
of  a  large  mining  population,  and,  besides,  five 
immense  reservoirs  formed  by  damming  up  various 
wadys.  Other  mines  appear  to  have  been  dis- 
covered by  Dr.  Wilson  in  the  granite  mountains 
east  of  the  Wady  Blokatteb.  In  the  Wady  Nasb 
the  German  tra\'eller  lliippell,  who  was  commis- 
sioned by  Moliammed  Ali,  the  Viceroy  of  Egypt, 
to  examine  the  state  of  the  mines  there,  met  with 
remains  of  several  large  smelting  furnaces,  sur- 
rounded by  heaps  of  slag.  The  ancient  inhabitants 
had  sunk  shafts  in  several  directions,  leaving  here 
and  there  columns  to  prevent  the  whole  from  falling 
in.  In  one  of  the  mines  he  saw  huge  masses  of 
stone  rich  in  copper  (Pitter,  Erdkunde,  xiii.  786). 
The  copper  mines  of  Phaeno  in  Idumaea,  according 
to  Jerome,  were  between  Zoar  and  Petra:  in  the 
persecution  of  Diocletian  the  Christians  were  con- 
demned to  work  them. 

The  gold  mines  of  Egypt  in  the  Bisharee  desert, 
the  principal  station  of  which  was  Eshuranib,  about 
three  days'  journey  beyond  Wady  Allaga,  have  been 
discovered  within  the  last  few  years  l)y  M.  Liuant 
and  Mr.  Bouomi,  tlie  latter  of  whom  supplied  Sir 
G.  Wilkinson  with  a  description  of  them,  which  he 
quotes  {Anc.  Eg.  iii.  229,  230).  Ruins  of  the 
miners'  huts  still  remain  as  at  Surabit  el-Khadim. 
"  In  those  nearest  the  mines  lived  the  workmen 
who  were  employed  to  break  the  quartz  into  small 
fragments,  the  size  of  a  beau,  from  whose  liands  the 
jiounded  stone  passed  to  the  persons  who  ground  it 


MINES 

in  hand-mills,  similar  to  those  now  used  lor  corn  in 
the  valley  of  the  Nile  made  of  granitic  stone;  one 
of  which  is  to  be  found  in  almost  every  house  at 
these  mines,  either  entire  or  broken.  The  quartz 
thus  reduced  to  powder  was  washed  on  inclined 
tables,  furnished  with  two  cisterns,  all  built  of 
fragments  of  stone  collected  there ;  and  near  these 
inclined  planes  are  generally  found  little  white 
mounds,  the  residue  of  the  operation."  Accorduig 
to  the  account  given  by  Diodorus  Siculus  (iii.  12- 
14),  the  mines  were  worked  by  gangs  of  convicts 
and  captives  in  fetters,  who  were  kept  day  and 
night  to  their  task  by  the  soldiers  set  to  guard 
them.  The  work  was  superintended  by  an  en- 
gineer, who  selected  the  stone  and  pointed  it  out  to 
the  miners.  The  harder  rock  was  split  by  the 
application  of  fire,  but  the  softer  was  broken  up 
with  picks  and  chisels.  The  miners  were  quite 
naked,  their  bodies  being  painted  according  to  the 
colour  of  the  rock  they  were  working,  and  in  order 
to  see  in  the  dark  passages  of  the  mine  they  carried 
lamps  upon  their  heads.  The  stone  as  it  fell  was 
can-ied  oft'  by  boys,  it  was  then  pounded  in  stone 
mortars  with  iron  pestles  by  those  who  were  over 
30  years  of  age  till  it  was  reduced  to  the  size  of  a 
lentil.  The  women  and  old  men  afterwaids  ground 
it  in  mills  to  a  fine  powder.  The  final  process  of 
separating  the  gold  from  the  pounded  stone  was 
entrusted  to  the  engineers  who  superintended  the 
work.  They  spread  this  powder  upon  a  broad 
slightly  inclined  table,  and  rubbed  it  gently  with 
the  hand,  pouring  water  upon  it  from  time  to  time 
so  as  to  carry  away  all  the  earthy  mattei-,  leaving 
the  heavier  particles  upon  the  board.  This  was  re- 
peated several  times;  at  first  with  the  hand  and 
afterwards  with  fine  sponges  gently  pressed  upon 
the  earthy  substance,  till  nothing  but  the  gold  was 
left.  It  was  then  collected  by  other  workmen,  and 
placed  in  earthen  crucibles  with  a  mixture  of  lead, 
and  salt  in  certain  pi-oportions,  together  with  a  little 
tin  and  some  bai'ley  bran.  The  crucibles  were 
covered  and  carefully  closed  with  clay,  and  in 
this  condition  baked  in  a  furnace  for  five  days 
and  nights  without  intermission.  Of  the  three 
methods  which  have  been  employed  for  refining 
gold  and  silver,  1.  by  exposing  the  fused  metal  to 
a  current  of  air ;  2.  by  keeping  the  alloy  in  a  state 
of  fusion  and  throwing  nitre  upon  it;  and  3.  by 
mixing  the  alloy  with  lead,  exposing  the  v?hole  to 
fusion  upon  a  vessel  of  bone-ashes  or  earth,  and 
blowing  upon  it  with  bellows  or  other  blast ;  the 
latter  appears  most  nearly  to  coincide  with  the 
description  of  Diodorus.  To  this  process,  known 
as  the  cupelling  process  [Lead],  there  seems  to 
be  a  reference  in  Ps.  xii.  6  ;  Jer.  vi.  28-30 ; 
Ez.  xxii.  18-22,  and  from  it  Mr.  Napier  {Met. 
of  the  Bible,  p.  24)  deduces  a  striking  illustra- 
tion of  Mai.  iii.  2,  3,  "  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner 
and  purifier  of  silver,"  &c.  "  When  the  alloy  is 
melted  .  .  .  upon  a  cupell,  and  the  air  blown  upon 
it,  the  surface  of  the  melted  metals  has  a  deep 
oi-ange-red  colour,  with  a.kind  of  flickering  wave 
constantly  passing  over  the  surface  ...  As  the 
process  proceeds  the  heat  is  increased  .  .  .  and  in  a 
little  the  colour  of  the  fused  metal  becomes  lighter. 
.  .  .  At  this  stage  the  refiner  watches  the  operation, 
either  standing  or  sitting,  with  the  greatest  earnest- 
ness, until  all  the  oi-ange  colour  and  shading  dis- 
appears, and  the  metal  has  the  appearance  of  a 
highly-polished  mirror,  reflecting  every  object 
around  it ;  even  the  refiner,  as  he  looks  upon  the 
mass  of  metal,  may  see  himself  as  in  a  looking- 


MINES 

glass,  and  thus  he  cnn  forni  a  very  correct  judg- 
ment respecting  tlie  purity  of  the  metal.  If  he  is 
satisfied,  the  fire  is  withdrawn,  and  the  metal  re- 
moved from  the  furnace  ;  but  if  not  considered  pure 
more  lead  is  added  and  the  process  repeated." 

Silver  mines  are  mentioned  by  Diodorus  (i.  33) 
with  those  of  gold,  iron,  and  copper,  in  the  island 
of  Meroe,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Nile.  But  the  chief 
supply  of  silver  in  the  ancient  woi-ld  appears  to 
have  been  brought  from  Spain.  The  mines  of  that 
country  were  celebrated  (1  Mace.  viii.  3).  Mt. 
Orospeda,  from  which  the  Guadalquivir,  the  ancient 
Baltes,  takes  its  rise,  was  formerly  called  "  the 
silver  mountain,"  from  the  silver-mines  which  were 
in  it  (Strabo,  iii.  p.  148).  Tartessus,  according  to 
Strabo,  was  an  ancient  name  of  the  river,  which 
gave  its  name  to  the  town  which  was  built  between 
its  two  mouths.  But  the  largest  silver-mines  in  Spajn 
were  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Carthago  Nova,  from 
which,  in  the  time  of  Polybius,  the  Homan  govern- 
ment received  25,000  drachmae  daily.  These,  when 
Strabo  wrote,  had  fallen  into  private  hands,  though 
most  of  the  gold-mines  were  public  property  (iii. 
p.  148).  Near  Castulo  there  were  lead-mines  con- 
taining silver,  but  in  quantities  so  small  as  not  to 
repay  the  cost  of  working.  The  process  of  separat- 
ing the  silver  from  the  lead  is  abridged  by  Strabo 
from  Polybius.  The  lumps  of  oi  e  were  fii'st  pounded, 
and  then  sitted  through  sieves  into  water.  The  se- 
diment was  again  pounded,  and  again  filtered,  and 
after  this  process  had  been  repeated  five  times  the 
water  was  drawn  off,  the  remainder  of  the  ore 
melted,  the  lead  poured  away  and  the  silver  left 
pure.  If  Tartessus  be  the  Tarshish  of  Scripture, 
the  metal  workers  of  Spain  in  those  days  must  have 
possessed  the  art  of  hammering  silver  into  slieets, 
for  we  find  in  Jer.  x.  9,  "  silver  spread  into  plates 
is  brought  from  Tarshish,  and  gold  from  Uphaz."     i 

We  have  no  means  of  knowing  whether  the  gold 
of  Ophir  was  obtained  from  mines  or  from  the 
washing  of  gold-streams.''  Pliny  (vi.  32),  from 
Juba,  describes  the  littus  Htmimacum  on  the  Per- 
sian Gulf  as  a  phvce  where  gold-mines  existed,  and 
in  the  same  chapter  alludes  to  the  gold-mines  of  the 
Sabaeans.  But  in  all  proljability  the  greater  part 
of  the  gold  which  came  into  the  hands  of  the  Phoe- 
nicians and  Hebrews  was  obtained  from  streams ; 
its  great  abundance  seems  to  indicate  this.  At  a 
very  eai'ly  period  Jei-icho  was  a  centre  of  commerce 
with  the  East,  and  in  the  naiTative  of  its  capture 
we  meet  with  gold  in  the  form  of  ingots  (Josh.  vii. 
21,  A.  V.  "wedge,"  lit.  "tongue"),"^  in  which  it 
was  probably  cast  for  the  convenience  of  traffic. 
That  which  Achan  took  weighed  25  oz. 

As  gold  is  seldom  if  ever  found  entirely  free 
from  silver,  the  quantity  of  the  latter  varying  from 
2  per  cent,  to  30  per  cent.,  it  has  been  supposed 
that  the  ancient  metallurgists  were  acquainted  with 
some  means  of_  parting  them,  an  oi)ei-ation  per- 
formed in  modern  times  by  boiling  the  metal  in 
nitric  or  sulphuric  acid.  To  some  process  ol'  this 
kind  it  has  been  imagined  that  reference  is  made  in 
Prov.  xvii.  3,  "  The  Jiniiig-pot  is  for  silver,  and  the 
furnace  for  gold;"  and  again  in  xxvii.  21.  "If, 
tor  example,"  says  Mr.  Napier,  "  the  term  fininij- 

b  The  Hebrew  "1^2.  bctser  (Job  xsii.  24,  25),  or  "IV3 
betsdr  (Job  xxxvi.  19),  which  is  rendered  "  gold"  in  the 
A.  v.,  and  is  mentioned  in  the  first-quoted  passage  in  con- 
nexion with  Ophir,  is  believed  to  signify  gold  anil  silver  ore. 

"^  Compare  tlie  Kr.  liinjot,  wliich  Is  from  lyi-.t.  lingua, 
ami  is  said  to  be  the  origin  oiiinjol. 

VOL.   II. 


MINES 


369 


pot  could  1-efer  to  the  vessel  or  pot  in  which  the 
silver  is  dissolved  from  the  gold  in  parting,  as  it 
may  be  called  with  propriety,  then  these  pissao-es 
have  a  meaning  in  our  modern  practice"  {Met.  of 
the  Bible,  p.  28)  ;  but  he  admits  this  is  at  best  but 
plausible,  and  considers  that  "  the  constant  reference 
to  certain  qualities  and  kinds  of  gold  in  Scripture 
is  a  kind  of  presumptive  proof  that  they  were  not 
in  the  habit  of  perfectly  purifying  or  separatino-  the 
gold  from  the  silver." 

A  strong  proof  of  the  acquaintance  possessed  by 
the  ancient  Hebrews  with  the  manipulation  of 
metals  is  found  by  some  in  the  destruction  of  the 
golden  calf  in  the  desert  by  Moses.  "  And  he  took 
the  calf  which  they  had  made,  and  burnt  it  in  fire, 
and  ground  it  to  powder,  and  strawed  it  upon  the 
watei-,  and  made  the  children  of  Isiael  drink"  (Ex. 
xxxii.  20).  As  the  highly  malleable  character  of 
gold  would  render  an  operation  like  that  which  is 
described  in  the  text  almost  impossible,  an  explana- 
tion has  been  sought  in  the  supposition  that  we 
have  hei-e  an  indication  that  Moses  was  a  proficient 
in  the  process  known  in  modern  times  as  calcination. 
The  object  of  calcination  being  to  oxidise  the  metal 
subjected  to  the  process,  and  gold  not  being  affected 
by  this  treatment,  the  explanation  can."-jt  be  ad- 
mitted. M.  Goguet  (quoted  in  Wilkinson's  Anc. 
Eg.  iii.  221)  confidently  asserts  that  the  problem 
has  been  solved  by  the  discovery  of  an  experienced 
chemist  that  "  in  the  place  of  tartaric  acid,  which 
we  employ,  the  Hebrew  legislator  used  natron, 
which  is  common  in  the  East."  The  gold  so  re- 
duced and  made  into  a  draught  is  further  said  to 
have  a  most  detestable  taste.  Goguet's  solution 
appears  to  have  been  adopted  without  examination 
by  more  modern  writers,  but  Mr.  Napier  ventured 
to  question  its  correctness,  and  endeavoured  to  trace 
it  to  its  source.  The  only  clue  which  he  found  was 
in  a  discovery  by  Stahll,  a  chemist  of  the  17th  cen- 
tury, "  that  if  1  part  gold,  3  parts  potash,  and  3 
parts  sulphur  ai'e  heated  together,  a  compound  is 
formed  which  is  partly  soluble  in  water.  If,"  he 
adds,  "  this  be  the  discovery  referred  to,  which  J 
think  very  probable,"!  it  certainly  has  been  made  the 
most  of  by  Bibliral  critics"  {Met.  of  the  Bible, 
p.  49).  The  whole  difficulty  appears  to  have  arisen 
from  a  desire  to  find  too  much  in  the  text.  The 
main  object  of  the  destruction  of  the  calf  was  to 
prove  its  worth lessness  and  to  throw  contempt  upon 
idolatry,  and  all  this  might  have  been  done  without 
any  refined  chemical  process  like  that  referred  to. 
Tlie  calf  was  first  heated  in  the  fire  to  destroy  its 
shape,  then  beaten  and  broken  up  by  hammering 
or  filing  into  small  pieces,  which  were  thrown  into 
the  water,  of  which  the  people  were  made  to  di'inlc 
as  a  symbolical  act.  "  Moses  threw  the  atoms  into 
the  water  as  an  emblem  of  the  peifect  annihilation 
of  the  calf,  and  he  gave  the  Israelites  that  water  to 
diink.  not  only  to  impress  upon  them  the  abomina- 
tion and  despicable  character  of  the  image  which 
they  had  mode,  but  as  a  symbol  of  purification,  to 
remove  the  object  of  the  transgression  by  those  very 
persons  who  had  committed  it"  (Dr.  Kaliseh, 
Comm.  on  Ex.  xxxii.  20). 

How  far  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted 
with  the  processes  at  present  in  use  tor  extracting 
copper  from  tlie  ore  it  is  impossible  to  assert,  as 


<*  This  uncertainty  might  have  been  at  once  removed 
by  a  reference  to  Goguet's  Origine  des  Lois,  &c.  (ii.  1.  2, 
c.  4),  where  Stahll  (  Vitulus  aureus  ■  opusc.  cliym.  pliys. 
iiK'd.  p.  .')K5)is  quoted  as  the  authority  for  the  statement. 

2  B 


370 


MINES 


there  are  no  references  in  Scripture  to  anything  of 
the  kind,  except  in  the  passage  of  Job  already  quoted. 
Copper  smelting,  however,  is  in  some  cases  attended 
with  comparatively  small  difficulties,  which  the 
ancients  had  e\adently  the  skill  to  overcome.  Ore 
composed  of  copper  and  oxygen  mi.xed  with  coal 
and  burnt  to  a  bright  red  heat,  leaves  the  copper 
in  the  metallic  state,  and  the  same  result  will 
follow  if  the  process  be  applied  to  the  carbonates 
and  sulphurets  of  copper.  Some  means  of  tough- 
ening the  metal  so  as  to  render  it  fit  for  manu- 
facture must  have  been  known  to  the  Hebrews  as 
to  other  ancient  nations.  The  Egyptians  evidently 
possessed  the  art  of  working  bronze  in  great  perfec- 
tion at  a  very  early  time,  and  much  of  the  know- 
ledge of  metals  which  the  Israelites  had  must  have 
been  acquired  during  their  residence  among  them. 

Of  tin  there  appears  to  have  been  no  trace  in 
Palestine.  That  the  Phoenicians  obtained  their 
supplies  from  the  mines  of  Spain  and  Cornwall 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  and  it  is  suggested  that 
even  the  Egyptians  may  have  procured  it  from  the 
same  source,  either  directly  or  through  the  medium 
of  the  former.  It  was  found  among  the  possessions 
of  the  Jlidianites,  to  whom  it  might  have  come  in 
the  course  of  traffic ;  but  in  other  instances  iu 
which  allusion  is  made  to  it,  tin  occurs  in  conjunc- 
tion with  other  metals  in  the  form  of  an  alloy. 
The  lead  mines  of  Gebel  e'  Rossass,  near  the  coast 
of  the  Red  Sea,  about  half  way  between  Berenice 
and  Kossayr  (Wilkinson,  Handh.  for  Egypt,  p. 
403),  may  have  supplied  the  Hebrews  with  that 
metal,  of  which  there  were  no  mines  in  their  own 
country,  or  it  may  have  been  obtained  from  the 
rocks  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sinai.  The  hills  of 
Palestine  are  rich  in  iron,  and  the  mines  are  still 
worked  there  [Metals]  though  in  a  very  simple 
rude  manner,  like  that  of  the  ancient  Samothra- 
cians :  of  the  method  employed  by  the  Egyptians 
and  Hebrews  we  have  no  certain  information.  It 
may  have  been  similar  to  that  in  use  throughout 
the  whole  of  India  from  very  early  times,  which  is 
thus  described  by  Dr.  Ure  {Diet,  of  Arts,  (f-c,  art. 
Steel).  "  The  furnace  or  bloomery  in  which  the 
ore  is  smelted  is  from  four  to  five  feet  high ;  it  is 
somewhat  pear-shaped,  being  about  five  feet  wide 
at  bottom  and  one  foot  at  top.  It  is  built  entirely 
of  clay  ....  There  is  an  opening  in  front  about 
a  foot  or  more-  in  height,  which  is  built  up  with 
clay  at  the  commencement  and  broken  down  at  the 
end  of  each  smelting  operation.  The  bellows  are 
usually  made  of  a  goat's  skin  ....  The  bamboo 
nozzles  of  the  bellows  are  inserted  into  tubes  of 
olay,  which  p.%ss  into  the  furnace  ....  The  fur- 
nace is  filled  with  charcoal,  and  a  lighted  coal  being 
introduced  before  the  nozzles,  the  mass  in  the  inte- 
rior is  soon  kindled.  As  soon  as  this  is  accom- 
plished, a  small  portion  of  the  ore,  previously 
moistened  with  water  to  prevent  it  from  running 
through  the  charcoal,  but  without  any  flux  what- 
ever, is  laid  on  the  top  of  the  coals  and  covered 
with  charcoal  to  fill  up  the  furnace.  In  this  manner 
ore  and  fuel  are  supplied,  and  the  bellows  are  urged 
for  three  or  four  hours.  When  the  pi-ocess  is 
stopped  and  the  temporary  wall  in  front  broken 
down,  the  bloom  is  removed  with  a  pair  of  tongs 
fiom  the  bottom  of  the  furnace." 

It  has  seemed  necessary  to  give  this  account  of  a 
very  ancient  method  of  iron  smelting,  because, 
from  the  difficulties  which  attend  it.  and  the  intense 
heat  whicli  is  required  to  .separate  the  metal  from 
the  ore,  it  has  been  asserted  that  tlic  allusions  to 


MINGLED  PEOPLE 

iron  and  iron  manufacture  in  the  Old  Testament 
are  anachronisms.  But  if  it  were  possible  among 
the  ancient  Indians  in  a  very  primitive  state  of 
civilization,  it  might  have  been  known  to  the 
Hebrews,  who  may  have  acquired  their  knowledge 
by  working  as  slaves  in  the  iron  fui-naces  of  Egypt 
(comp.  Dent.  iv.  20). 

The  question  of  the  early  use  of  iron  among  the 
Egyptians,  is  fully  disposed  of  in  the  following  re- 
marks of  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  {^Ancient  Egyp- 
tians, ii.  pp.  154-156):  — 

"  In  the  infancy  of  the  arts  and  sciences,  the 
difficulty  of  working  iron  might  long  withhold  the 
secret  of  its  superiority  over  copper  and  bronze ; 
but  it  cannot  reasonably  be  supposed  that  a  nation 
so  advanced,  and  so  eminently  skilled  in  the  art  of 
working  metals  as  the  Egyptians  and  Sidonians, 
should  have  remained  ignorant  of  its  use,  even  if  we 
had  no  evidence  of  its  having  been  known  to  the 
Greeks  and  other  people ;  and  the  constant  employ- 
ment of  bronze  arms  and  implements  is  not  a  sutK- 
cient  argument  against  their  knowledge  of  iron, 
since  we  find  the  Greeks  and  Romans  made  the 
same  things  of  bronze  long  after  the  period  when 

iron  was  universally  known To  conclude, 

from  the  want  of  iron  instruments,  or  arms,  beai'ing 
the  names  of  early  monarchs  of  a  Pharaouic  age, 
tliat  bronze  was  alone  used,  is  neither  just  nor 
satisfactory  ;  since  the  decomposition  of  that  metal, 
especially  when  buried  for  ages  in  the  nitrous  soil 
of  Egypt,  is  so  speedy  as  to  preclude  the  possibility 
of  its  preservation.  Until  we  know  in  what  manner 
the  Egyptians  employed  bronze  tools  for  cutting 
stone,  the  discovery  of  them  affords  no  additional 
light,  nor  even  argument ;  since  the  Greeks  and 
Romans  continued  to  make  bronze  instruments  of 
various  kinds  so  long  after  iron  was  known  to  them  ; 
and  Herodotus  mentions  the  iron  tools  used  by  the 
builders  of  the  Pyramids.  Iron  and  copper  mines 
are  found  in  the  Egyptian  desert,  which  were  woi'ked 
in  old  times  ;  and  the  monuments  of  Thebes,  and 
even  the  tombs  about  Memphis,  dating  more  than 
4000  years  ago,  represent  butchers  sharpening  their 
knives  on  a  round  bar  of  metal  attached  to  their 
apron,  which  from  its  blue  colour  can  only  be  steel ; 
and  the  distinction  between  the  bionze  and  iron 
weapons  in  the  tomb  of  Remeses  III.,  one  painted 
red,  the  other  blue,  leaves  no  doubt  of  both  having 
been  used  (as  iu  Rome)  at  the  same  periods.  In 
lithiopia  iron  was  much  more  abundant  than  in 
Egypt,  and  Herodotus  states  that  copper  was  a  i-are 
metal  there  ;  though  we  may  doubt  his  assertion  of 
prisoners  in  that  country  having  been  bound  with 
fetters  of  gold.  The  speedy  decomposition  of  iron 
would  be  sufficient  to  prevent  our  finding  imple- 
ments of  that  metal  of  an  early  period,  and  the 
greater  opportunities  of  obtaining  copper  ore,  added 
to  the  facility  of  working  it,  might  be  a  reason 
for  preferring  the  latter  whenever  it  answered  the 
purpose  instead  of  iron."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MINGLED  PEOPLE.  This  phrase  (inyn. 
M'ereb),  like  that  of  "  the  mi.xed  multitude,"  which 
the  Hebrew  closely  resembles,  is  applied  in  Jer. 
XXV.  20,  and  Ez.  xxx.  5,  to  denote  the  miscellaneous 
foreign  population  of  Egypt  and  its  frontier-tribes, 
including  every  one,  says  Jerome,  who  was  not  a 
native  Egyptian,  but  was  resident  thei-e.  The 
Targum  of  Jonathan  understands  it  in  this  passage 
as  well  as  in  Jer.  I.  37,  of  the  foreign  mercenaries, 
though  in  Jer.  xxv.  24,  where  the  word  again 
occurs,  it  is  rendered  "  Arabs."     It  is  difficult  to 


MINIAMIN 

attach  to  it  any  precise  meaning,  or  to  identify 
witli  the  mingled  people  any  race  of  which  we  have 
knowledge.  "  The  kings  of  the  mingled  people  that 
dwell  in  the  desert,"  "  are  the  same  apparently  as 
tlie  tributary  kings  (A.  V.  "kings  of  Arabia") 
who  brought  presents  to  Solomon  (1  K.  x.  IS);*" 
the  Hebrew  in  the  two  cases  is  identical.  These 
have  been  explained  (as  in  the  Targum  on  1  K. 
X.  15)  as  foreign  mercenary  chiefs  who  were  in 
the  pay  of  Solomon,  but  Thenius  understands  by 
them  the  sheykhs  of  the  border  tribes  of  Bedouins, 
living  in  Arabia  Deserta,  who  were  closely  con- 
nected with  the  Israelites.  The  "mingled  people" 
iu  the  midst  of  Babylon  (Jer.  1.  37),  were  pro- 
bably the  foreign  soldiers  or  mercenary  troops, 
who  lived  among  the  native  population,  as  the 
Targum  takes  it.  Kimchi  compares  Ex.  xii.  38, 
and  explains  haerch  of  the  foreign  population  of 
Babylon •=  generally,  "foreigners  who  were  in  Ba- 
bylon from  several  lands,"  or  it  may,  he  says,  be 
intended  to  denote  the  merchants,  'ereb  being  thus 
connected  with  the  TjS'iyO  ''3'iy,  'orehe  mdar&bec, 
of  Ez.  xxvii.  27,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  occu- 
piers of  thy  merchandize."  His  first  intei-pretation 
is  based  upon  what  appears  to  be  the  primary  signi- 
fication of  the  root  3"iy,  'drah,  to  mingle,  while 
Another  meaning,  "  to  pledge,  guarantee,"  suggested 
the  rendering  of  the  Targum  "  mercenaries,"^  which 
Jarchi  adopts  in  his  explanation  of  "  the  kings  of 
hd'ereh,"  in  1  K.  x.  15,  as  the  kings  who  were 
pledged  to  Solomon  and  dependent  upon  him.  The 
equivalent  which  he  gives  is  apparently  intended  to 
represent  the  Fr.  garantie. 

The  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is  supported  by 
the  LXX.  avixfxiKTos  in  Jer.,  and  iirifiLKros  iu 
Ezekiel.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MINIAMIN  (I^O^^JP :  Beria^iV;   Alex.  Ber- 

la/xeiv:  Benjamin).  1.  One  of  the  Levites  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah  appointed  to  the  charge  of  the 
freewill  offerings  of  the  people  in  the  cities  of  tlie 
priests,  and  to  distribute  them  to  their  brethren 
(2  Chr.  xxxi.  15).  The  reading  "  Benjamin "  of 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  is  followed  by  the  Peshito 
Syriac. 

2.  {MLa/XLv;  Miamin).  The  same  as  Miamin  2 
and  MiJAMiN  2  (Neh.  xii.  17). 

3.  (Bewa^iV;  Alex.  Beviaixeiv).  One  of  the 
priests  who  blew  the  trumpets  at  the  dedication  of 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  41). 

MIN'NI  CSO  :  Menni),  a  country  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  Ararat  and  Ashchcnaz  (Jer.  li.  27). 
The  LXX.  erroneously  renders  it  Trop'  eju*""-  ^^ 
has  been  already  noticed  as  a  portion  of  Armenia. 
[Armenia.]  The  name  may  be  connected  with 
the  Minyas  noticed  by  Nicolaus  of  Damascus 
(Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §G),  with  the  Minnni  of  the 
Assyiian  inscriptions,  whom  liawlinson  (^Herod.  i 
464)  places  about  lake   Urumiyeh,  and  with  the 


MINISTER 


371 


a  Kimchi  observes  that  these  are  distinguished  from 
tlie  mingled  people  mentii)ned  in  ver.  20  by  the  additiuii 
"  that  dwell  in  the  desert." 

0  In  the  parallel  passage  of  2  Chr.  ix.  14  the  reading  is 
my  'arab,  or  Arabia. 

c  The  same  commentator  refers  the  expression  in  Is. 
ix.  14,  "  they  shall  every  man  turn  to  his  own  people,' 
tbe  dispersion  of  the  mixed  populatiun  of  Habylun  at  its 
cai>ture. 


Minuas  who  appears  in  the  list  of  Armenian  kings 
in  the  inscription  at  Wan  (Layard's  Nin.  and  Bah. 
p.  401).  At  the  time  when  Jeremiah  propliesied, 
Armenia  had  been  subdued  by  the  Median  kino's 
{Herod,  i.  103,  177).  [W.  L.  B.] 

MINISTER.  This  term  is  used  in  the  A.  V. 
to  describe  various  officials  of  a  religious  and  civil 
character.  In  the  0.  T.  it  answers  to  the  Hebrew 
mes/iareiA,"  which  is  applied,  (1)  to  an  attendant 
upon  a  person  of  high  rank,  as  to  Joshua  in  rela- 
tion to  Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  13;  Josh.  i.  1)  and  to 
the  attendant  on  the  prophet  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  43) ; 
(2)  to  the  attaches  of  a  royal  court  (1  K.  x.  5, 
where,  it  may  be  observed,  they  are  distinguished 
from  the  "servants"  or  officials  of  higher  rank, 
answering  to  our  ministers,  by  the  different  titles 
of  the  chambers  assigned  to  their  use,  the  "sitting" 
of  the  servants  meaning  rather  their  abode,  and  the 
"attendance"  of  the  ministers  the  ante-room  in 
which  they  were  stationed)  ;  persons  of  high  rank 
held  this  post  m  the  Jewisli  kingdom  (2  Chron. 
xxii.  8)  ;  and  it  may  be  in  this  sense,  as  the  attend- 
ants of  the  King  of  Kings,  that  the  term  is  applied 
to  the  angels  (Ps.  civ.  4)  ;  (3)  to  the  Priests  and 
Levites,  who  are  thus  described  by  the  prophets 
and  later  historians  (Is.  Ixi.  6  ;  Ez.  xliv.  11  ;  Joel 
i.  9,  13;  Ezr.  viii.  17;  Neh.  x.  36),  though  the 
verb,  whence  meshdreth  is  derived,  is  not  uncom- 
monly used  in  reference  to  their  services  in  the 
earlier  books  (Ex.  xxviii.  43  ;  Num.  iii.  31  ;  Deut.  . 
xviii.  5,  al.).  In  the  N.  T.  we  have  three  terms, 
each  with  its  distinctive  meaning  —  XnTOvpyos, 
\n:r\piry]s,  and  Siafcocos.  The  first  answers  most 
nearly  to  the  Hebrew  meshdreth  and  is  usually 
employed  in  the  LXX.  as  its  equivalent.  It  be- 
tokens a  subordinate  public  administrator,  whether 
civil  or  sacerdotal,  and  is  applied  in  the  former 
.sense  to  the  magistrates  in  their  relation  to  the 
Divine  authority  (Rom.  xiii.  6),  and  in  the  latter 
sense  to  out*  Lord  in  relation  to  the  Father  (Heb. 
viii.  2),  and  to  St.  Paul  in  relation  to  Jesus  Christ 
(Rom.  XV.  16),  where  it  occurs  among  other  expres- 
sions of  a  sacerdotal  character,  "ministering" 
(Upovpyovvra),  "  oS&r'ms,  up"  {■Kpoa(popd,  &c.). 
In  all  these  instances  the  original  and  special  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  as  used  by  the  Athenians,''  is 
preserved,  though  this  comes,  perhaps,  yet  more 
distinctly  forward  in  the  cognate  terms  \eirovpyia, 
iuid  XiiTovpyitv,  applied  to  the  sacerdotal  office  of 
the  Jewish  priest  (Luke  i.  23  ;  Heb.  ix.  21,  x.  11),  to 
the  still  higher  priesthood  of  Christ  (Heb.  viii.  G), 
ami  in  a  secondary  sense  to  the  Christian  priest 
who  oilers  up  to  God  the  faith  of  his  converts 
(Phil.  ii.  17  ;  Xtnovpyia  Trjs  iriVTeois),  and  to  any 
act  of  public  self-devotion  on  the  part  of  a  Christian 
disciple  (Rom.  xv.  27  ;  2  Cor.  ix.  12  ;  Phil.  ii.  30). 
The  second  term,  vTrrjperris,  diflin's  from  the  two 
others  in  that  it  contains  the  idea  of  actual  ;ind 
personal  attendance  upon  a  superior.  Thus  it  is 
used  of  the  attendant  in  the  svnagogue,  the  hh'i- 


•>  The  term  is  derived  from  Aeixor  epyov,  "  public 
work,"  and  the  Uiloargia  was  the  name  uf  certain  per- 
sonal services  which  the  citizens  of  Athens  and  some 
litlicr  states  had  to  perform  gratuitously  for  the  public 
Rodd.  From  the  sacerdotal  use  of  Ihi;  word  in  tlu; 
N.  T.,  it  obtained  the.  special  souse  of  a  "  public  divine 
service, "  which  is  perpetuated  in  our  word  "  liturgy." 
The  verb  AeiTOupycii'  is  used  in  tills  sense  in  Acts 
xili.  2. 

2  B  2 


372 


MINNITH 


zan''  of  the  Talmudists  (Luke  iv.  20),  whose  duty 
it  was  to  open  and  close  the  building,  to  produce 
and  replace  the  books  employed  in  the  sendee,  and 
generally  to  wait  on  the  officiating  priest  or  teacher  ^ 
(Carpzov,  Apparat.  p.  314).  It  is  similarly  ap- 
plied to  Mark,  who,  as  the  attendant  on  Barnabas 
and  Saul  (Acts  xiii.  5),  was  probably  charged 
with  the  administration  of  baptism  and  other  as- 
sistant duties  (De  Wette,  in  he.)  ;  and  again  to  the 
subordinates  of  the  high-priests  (John  vii.  32,  45, 
xviii.  3,  al.),  or  of  a  jailor  (Matt.  v.  25  =  irpd- 
KTtap  in  Luke  xii.  58  ;  Acts  v.  22).  The  idea  of 
personal  attendance  comes  prominently  forward  in 
Luke  i.  2;  Acts  xxvi.  16,  in  both  of  which  places 
it  is  alleged  as  a  ground  of  trustworthy  testimony 
(ipsi  viderunt,  et,  quod  plus  est,  ministranmt, 
Bengal).  Lastly,  it  is  used  interchangeably  with 
^MKOvos  in  1  Cor.  iv.  1  compared  with  iii.  5,  but 
in  this  instance  the  term  is  designed  to  convey  the 
notion  of  subordination  and  humility.  In  all  these 
cases  the  etymological  sense  of  the  word  {^virh 
eptTTis,  literally,  a  "  suh-rower,"  one  who  rows 
under  command  of  the  steersman)  comes  out.  The 
term  that  most  adequately  represents  it  in  our 
language  is  "  attendant."  The  third  term,  Sia- 
Kovos,  is  the  one  usually  employed  in  relation  to 
the  ministry  oi,  the  Gospel  :  its  application  is 
twofold,  in  a  general  sense  to  indicate  ministers  of 
any  order,  wliether  superior  or  inferior,  and  in  a 
special  sense  to  indicate  an  order  of  inferior  minis- 
ters. In  the  former  sense  we  have  the  cognate 
term  StaKou'ta  applied  in  Acts  vi.  1,  4,  both  to 
the  ministration  of  tables  and  to  the  higher  minis- 
tration of  the  word,  and  the  term  Smkovos  itself 
applied,  without  defining  the  office,  to  Paul  and 
ApoUos  (1  Cor.  iii.  5),  to  Tychicus  (Eph.  vi.  21  ; 
Col.  iv.  7),  to  Epaphras  (Col.  i.  7),  to  Timothy 
(1  Thess.  iii.  2),  and  even  to  Christ  himself  (Rom. 
XV.  8;  Gal.  ii.  17).  In  the  latter  sense  it  is 
applied  in  the  passages  where  the  SiaKovos  is  con- 
tradistinguished from  the  Bishop,  as  in  Phil.  i.  1 ; 
1  Tim.  iii.  8-13.  It  is,  perhaps,  worthy  of  ob- 
servation that  the  word  is  of  very  rare  occuiTence 
in  the  LXX.  (Esth.  i.  10,  ii.  2,  vi.  3),  and  then 
only  in  a  general  sense :  its  sjiecial  sense,  as  known 
to  us  in  its  derivative  "  deacon,"  seems  to  be  of 
purely  Christian  growth.  [Deacon.]  [W.  L.  B.] 

MIN'NITH  (TT-arD  :  &xpis  'ApvUv ;  Alex,  eis 
Se/icoeiO;*  Joseph.  7r((\is  MaA.ia0r)s:  Pesch.Syriac, 
Machir:  Vulg.  Mcnniih),  a  place  on  the  east  of  the 
.lordan,  named  as  the  point  to  which  Jephthah's 
slaughter  of  the  Ammonites  extended  (Judg.  xi. 
33).  "  From  Aroer  to  the  approach  to  Minuith" 
{"0  '^N13  iy)  seems  to  have  been  a  district  con- 
taining twenty  cities.  Minnith  was  in  the  neighbour- 
nood  of  Abel-Ceramim,  the  "meadow  of  vineyards." 
Both  places  are  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon — 
■'  Mennith"  or  "  Maanith"  as  4  miles  from  Heshbon, 
on  the  road  to  Philadelphia  {Amman),  and  Abel  as 
6  or  7  miles  from  the  latter,  but  in  what  direction 
is  not  stated.  A  site  bearing  the  name  Menjah, 
is  marked  in  Van  de  Velde's  Map,  perhaps  on  the 
authority  of  Buckingham,  at  7  Roman  miles  east 
of  Heshbon  on  a  road  to  Amman,  though  not  on 


<*  The  vTnjpeTTjt  of  ecclesiastical  history  occupied 
precisely  the  same  position  in  the  Christian  Church 
that  the  khazan  did  in  the  synagogue :  in  Latin  he  was 
Rtyleil  siih-diacmms,  or  sub-dfaom  (Bingham,  Ant.  iii.  2). 

■^  ews  TOU   eAfttii'   ei5  <re(uniei8,    is   the   readins;  of   the 


MINSTREL 

the  fiequented  track.  But  we  must  await  further 
investigation  of  these  interesting  regions  before  we 
can  pronounce  for  or  against  its  identity  with 
Minnith. 

The  variations  of  the  ancient  versions  as  given 
above  are  remarkable,  but  they  have  not  suggested 
anything  to  the  writer.  Schwarz  proposes  to  find 
Minnith  in  Maged,  a  trans-Jordanic  town  named 
in  the  Maccabees,  by  the  change  of  J  to  J.  An  epis- 
copal city  of  "  Palestina  secunda,"  named  Mennith, 
is  quoted  by  Reland  {Fal.  211),  but  with  some 
question  as  to  its  being  located  in  this  direction 
(comp.  209). 

The  "  wheat  of  Minnith  "  is  mentioned  in  Ez. 
xxvii.  17,  as  being  supplied  by  Judah  and  Israel  to 
Tyre ;  but  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  the 
same  place  is  intended,  and  indeed  the  word  is 
thought  by  some  not  to  be  a  proper  name.  Philistia 
and  Sharon  were  the  great  corn-growing  districts  of 
Palestine — but  there  were  in  these  eastern  i-egions 
also  "  fat  of  kidneys  of  wheat,  and  wine  of  the  pure 
blood  of  the  gi-ape "  (Deut.  xxxii.  14).  Of  that 
cultivation  Minnith  and  Abel-Ceramim  may  have 
been  the  chief  seats. 

In  this  neighbourhood  were  possibly  situated  the 
vineyards  in  which  Balaam  encountered  the  angel 
on  his  road  from  Mesopotamia  to  Moab  (Num. 
xxii.  24).  [G.] 

MINSTREL.  The  Hebrew  word  in  2  K.  iii. 
15  (|]I3D,  menaggen)   properly  signifies  a  player 

upon  a  stringed  instrument  like  the  hai-p  or  kinnor 
[Harp],  whatever  its  precise  character  may  have 
been,  on  which  Da\'id  played  before  Saul  (1  Sam. 
xvi.  16,  xviii.  10,  xix.  9),  and  which  the  harlots  of 
the  great  cities  used  to  cany  with  them  as  they 
walked  to  attract  notice  (Is.  xxiii.  IG).  The  pas- 
sage in  which  it  occurs  has  given  lise  to  much  con- 
jecture ;  Elisha,  upon  being  consulted  by  Jehoram 
as  to  the  issue  of  the  war  with  Moab,  at  first  in- 
dignantly refuses  to  answer,  and  is  only  induced  to 
do  so  by  the  piesence  of  Jehoshaphat.  He  calls  for 
a  hai-per,  apparently  a  camp  follower  (one  of  the 
Levites  according  to  Procopius  of  Gaza),**  "  And 
now  bring  me  a  harper ;  and  it  came  to  pass  as 
the  harper  harped  that  the  hand  of  .Jehovah  was  on 
him.''  Other  instances  of  the  same  divine  influence 
or  impulse  connected  with  music,  are  seen  in  the 
case  of  Saul  and  the  young  prophets  in  1  Sam. 
X.  5,  6,  10,  11.  In  the  present  passage  the  reason 
of  Elisha's  appeal  is  variously  explained.  Jarchi 
says  that  "  on  account  of  anger  the  Shechinah  had 
departed  from  him ;"  Ephrem  Syrus,  that  the 
object  of  the  music  was  to  attiact  a  crowd  to  hear 
the  pro))hecy;  J.  H.  Michaelis,  that  the  prophet's 
mind,  disturbed  by  the  impiety  of  the  Israelites, 
might  be  soothed  and  prepared  for  divine  things  by 
a  spiritual  song.  According  to  Keil  {Comm.  on 
Kings,  i.  359,  Eng.  tr.),  "Elisha  calls  for  a  min- 
strel, in  order  to  gather  in  his  thoughts  by  the  soft 
tones  of  music  from  the  impression  of  the  outer 
world,  and  by  repressing  the  life  of  self  and  of  the 
world  to  be  transferred  into  the  state  of  internal 
vision,  by  which  his  spirit  would  be  prepared  to 
receive  the  Divine  revelation."     This  in  eflect  is  the 


Alex.  Codex,  ingeniously  corrected  by  Grabe  to  cus  tov 
e\9eiv  (T(  ets  Mweifl. 

''  The  Targiira  translates,  "  and  now  bring  me  a  man 
who  knows  how  to  play  upon  the  harp,  and  it  came  to 
pass  as  the  harper  haiped  there  rested  upon  him  the  spirit 
of  prophecy  from  before  Jehovah." 


MINT 

view  taken  by  Josephus  {Ard.  ix.  3,  §1),  and  the 
same  is  expressed  by  Maimonides  in  a  passage  which 
embodies  the  opinion  of  the  Jews  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  "  All  the  prophets  were  not  able  to  pro- 
phesy at  any  time  that  they  wished  ;  but  tliey  pre- 
pared their  minds,  and  sat  joyful  and  glad  of  heart, 
and  abstracted  ;  for  prophecy  dwelleth  not  in  the 
midst  of  melancholy  nor  in  the  midst  of  apathy, 
but  in  the  midst  of  joy.  Therefore  the  sons  of  tlie 
prophets  had  before  them  a  psaltery,  and  a  tabret, 
and  a  pipe,  and  a  harp,  and  (thus)  sought  after  pro- 
phecy" (or  prophetic  inspiration),  (F'K^ /wc/ci^a- 
kah,  vii.  5,  Beniard's  Creed  and  Ethics  of  the 
Jews,  p.  16;  see  also  note  to  p.  114).  Kimchi 
quotes  a  tradition  to  the  effect  that,  after  the  ascen- 
sion of  his  master  Elijah,  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
had  not  dwelt  upon  Elisha  because  he  was  mourn- 
ing, and  the  spirit  of  holiness  does  not  dwell  but  in 
the  midst  of  joy.  In  1  Sam.  xviii.  10,  on  the  con- 
trary, there  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  employ- 
ment of  music  to  still  the  excitement  consequent 
upon  an  attack  of  frenzy,  which  in  its  external 
manifestations  at  least  so  far  resembled  the  rapture 
with  which  the  old  prophets  were  aiiected  when 
delivering  their  prophecies,  as  to  be  described  Ijy 
the  same  term.  "  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
morrow,  that  the  evil  spirit  from  God  came  upon 
Saul,  and  he  prophesied  in  the  midst  of  the  house : 
and  David  played  with  his  hand  as  at  other  times." 
Wcemse  {Christ.  Sijnagoffue,  c.  vi.  §o,  par.  6, 
p.  143)  supposes  that  the  music  appropiiate  to 
such  occasions  was  "  that  which  the  Gi-eeks  called 
apfjLoviav,  which  was  the  greatest  and  the  saddest, 
and  settled  the  atlections." 

The  "  minstrels"  in  Matt.  ix.  23,  were  the  flute- 
players  who  were  employed  as  professional  mournei-s 
fo  whom  frequent  allusion  is  made  (Eccl.  xii.  5; 
2  Chr.  XXXV.  25 ;  Jer.  ix.  17-20),  and  whose  repre- 
tatives  exist  in.  great  numbers  to  this  day  in  the 
cities  of  the  East.     [Mourning.]       [W.  A.  W.] 

MINT  {riSvo(rfj,ov :  mentha)  occurs  only  in 
Matt,  xxiii.  23,  and  Luke  xi.  42,  as  one  of  those 
herbs,  the  tithe  of  which  the  Jews  were  most  scru- 
pulously exact  in  paying.  Some  commentators 
liave  supposed  that  such  herbs  as  mint,  anise  fdill), 
and  cummin,  were  not  titheable  by  law,  and  that 
the  Pharisees  solely  from  an  overstrained  zeal  paid 
tithes  for  them  ;  but  as  dill  was  subject  to  tithe 
{Massroth,  cap.  iv.  §5),  it  is  most  probable  that  the 
other  herbs  mentioned  with  it  were  also  titlied,  and 
this  is  fully  corroborated  by  our  Lord's  (uvu  words : 
"  these  ought  ye  to  have  done."  The  I'harisees 
therefore  are  not  censured  for  paying  tithes  of  things 
uiititheable  by  law,  but  foi-  paying  more  regard  to 
a  scrupulous  exactness  in  these  minor  duties  than 
to  important  moral  obligations. 

There  cannot  be  the  slightest  doubt  that  the 
A.  v.  is  correct  in  the  translation  of  the  Cireek 
word,  and  all  the  old  versions  are  agreed  in  under- 
stiinding  some  species  of  mint  {Mentha)  by  it. 
Dioscorides  (iii.  36,  ed.  Sprengel)  speaks  of  ijZvoa- 
jxov  7)fji.epov  (Mentha  sat iva) ;  the  (ireeks  used  the 
terms  jxivda,  or  fxivQr)  and  fxivdos  for  mint,  whence 
the  derivation  of  the  English  word  ;  the  L'omans 
have  mpitha,  menta,  mentastnun.  According  to 
riiny  (//.  N.  xix.  8)  the  old  Greek  word  for  mint 
Wiis  filvOa,  which  was  changed  to  riSvoff/xov  ("  the 
sweet  smelling"),  on  account  of  the  fragrant  pro- 
perties of  this  plant.  Mint  was  used  by  the  Greeks 
and  Ivomans  both  as  a  carminative  in  medicine  and 
a  condiment  in  cookery.     Apicius  mentions  the  use 


MIRACLES  373 

of  fresli  (viridis)  and  dried  {arida)  mint.  Compare 
also  riiny,  H.  N.  xix.  8,  xx.  14  ;  Dioscor.  iii.  30  ; 
the  Epityrum  of  the  Romans  had  mint  as  one  of  its 
ingredients  (Cato,  de  R.  Bus.  §  120).  Martial, 
Epig.  X.  47,  speaks  of  "  ructatrix  mentha,"  mint 
being  an  excellent  carminative.  "  So  amongst  the 
Jews,"  says  Celsius  {Hierob.  i.  547),  "  the  Tal- 
mudical  writers  manifestly  declare  that  mint  was 
used  with  their  foocL"  Tract,  Shem.  Ve  Jobel.  ch. 
vii.  §2,  and  Tr.  Oketzin,  ch.  i.  §2;  Sheb.  ch.  7,  1. 
Lady  Calcott  {Script.  Herb.  280)  makes  the  fol- 
lowing ingenious  remark :  "  I  know  not  whether 
mint  was  originally  one  of  the  bitter  herbs  with 
which  the  Israelites  eat  the  Paschal  lamb,  but  our 
use  of  it  with  roast  lamb,  particularly  about  Easter 
time,  inchnes  me  to  suppose  it  was."  The  same 
writer  also  observes  that  the  modern  Jews  eat 
horseradish  and  chervil  with  lamb.  The  woodcut 
represents  the  horse  mint  {M.  syhestris)  which  is 


Mentha  sylvestris, 

common  in  Syria,  and  according  to  Russell  {Hist,  of 
Aleppo,  p.  39)  found  in  the  gardens  at  Aleppo ; 
M.  sativa  is  generally  supposed  to  be  only  a  variety 
of  M.  arvensis,  another  species  of  mint ;  peihaps  all 
these  were  known  to  the  ancients.  The  mints  belong 
to  the  large  natural  order  Labiatae.  [W.  H.] 

MIPH'KAD,  THE  GATE  (nj^BJan  -\W  ■ 
irvArj  Tov  MacpiKciS  :  porta  judicialis),  one  of  the 
gates  of  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of 
the  wall  after  the  return  from  captivity  (Neh.  iii. 
31).  According  to  the  view  taken  in  this  work  of 
the  topograjihy  of  the  city  this  gate  was  probably 
not  in  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  proper,  but  in  that  of 
the  city  of  David,  or  Zion,  and  somewhere  near  to 
the  junction  of  the  two  on  the  north  side  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  1027).  The  name  may  refer  to  some  memorable 
census  of  the  people,  as  for  instance  that  of  David 
2  Sam.  xxiv.  0,  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  5  (in  each  of  which 
the  word  used  for  "  number "  is  miphhad),  or  to 
the  superintendents  of  some  portion  of  the  worship 
{Pekldim,  see  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13).  [G.J 

MIEACLES.  The  word  "miracle"  is  the 
oniinary  translation,  in  our  Authorized  Englisli  ver- 
sion, of  the  <ireek  ariixtiov.  Our  franslatoi-s  did 
not  borrow  it  fioni  the  Vulgate  (in  which  siijnuiti 
is  the  customary  rendering  of  crrifie'ioi'),  but,  appa- 


374 


MIRACLES 


rently,  from  their  English  predecflssors,  Tyndale, 
Coverdale,  &c.  ;  and  it.  had,  probably  before  their 
time,  acquired  a  fixed  technical  import  in  theological 
language,  which  is  not  directly  suggested  by  its 
etymology.  The  Latin  iniraculuin,  from  which  it 
is  merely  accommodated  to  an  English  termination, 
ooriesponds  best  with  the  Greek  Oav/xa,  and  denotes 
any  object  of  wonder,  wliether  supernatural  or  not, 
Thus  the  "  Seven  Wonders  of  the  VVorld  "  wei  e  called 
rairacula,  though  they  were  only  miracles  of  art. 
It  will  perhaps  be  found  that  the  habitual  use  of 
the  term  "  miracle"  has  tended  to  fix  attention  too 
much  on  the  physical  strangeness  of  the  facts  thus 
described,  and  to  divert  attention  from  what  may 
be  called  their  signality.  In  reality,  the  practical 
importance  of  the  strangeness  of  miraculous  facts 
consists  in  this,  that  it  is  one  of  the  circumstances 
which,  taken  together,  make  it  reasonable  to  under- 
stand the  phenomenon  as  a  mark,  seal,  or  attestation 
of  the  Divine  sanction  to  something  else.  And  if  we 
suppose  the  Divine  intention  established  that  a  given 
plienomenon  is  to  be  taken  as  a  mark  or  sign  of 
Divine  attestation,  theories  concerning  the  mode  in 
which  that  phenomenon  was  pi'oduced  become  of 
comparatively  little  practical  value,  and  are  only 
serviceable  as  helping  our  conceptions.  In  the  case 
of  such  signs,  when  they  vary  from  the  ordinary 
course  of  nature,  we  may  conceive  of  them  as  imme- 
diately wrought  by  the  authorized  intervention  of 
some  angelic  being  merely  exerting  invisibly  his 
natural  powers  .;  or  as  the  result  of  a  provision  made 
in  the  original  scheme  of  the  universe,  by  which  such 
an  occurrence  was  to  take  place  at  a  given  moment  ;* 
or  as  the  result  of  the  interference  of  some  higher 
law  with  subordinate  laws  ;  or  as  a  change  in  the 
ordinary  working  of  God  in  that  course  of  events 
which  we  call  nature ;  or  as  a  suspension  by  His 
immediate  power  of  the  action  of  certain  forces 
which  He  had  originally  given  to  what  we  aill 
natural  agents.  These  may  be  hypotheses  more  or 
less  probable  of  the  mode  in  which  a  given  pheno- 
menon is  to  be  conceived  to  have  been  produced ; 
but  if  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case  taken  together 
make  it  reasonable  to  understand  that  phenomenon 
as  a  Divine  sign,  it  will  be  of  comparatively  little 
practical  importance  which  of  them  we  adopt.  In- 
deed, in  many  cases,  the  phenomenon  which  con- 
stitutes a  Divine  sign  may  be  one  not,  in  itself, 
at  all  varying  from  the  known  course  of  nature. 
This  is  the  common  case  of  prophecy :  in  which  the 
fulfilment  of  the  propiiecy,  which  constitutes  the 
sign  of  the  prophet's  commission,  may  be  the  result 
of  ordinary  causes,  and  yet,  from  being  incapable  of 
having  been  anticipated  by  human  sagacity,  it  may 
be  an  adequate  mark  or  sign  of  the  Di\-ine"  sanction. 
In  such  cases,  the  miraculous  or  wonderful  element 
is  to  be  sought  not  in  the  fulfilment,  but  in  the 
prediction.  Thus,  although  we  should  suppose,  for 
example,  that  the  destruction  of  Sennacherib's  army 
was  accomplished  by  an  ordinary  simoom  of  the 
desert,  called  figui'atively  the  Angel  of  the  Lord, 
it  would  still  be  a  SIGN  of  Isaiah's  prophetic  mission, 
and  of  God's  care  lor  Jerusalem.  And  so,  in  the 
case  of  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  by  the  Israelites 
under  Moses,  and  many  other  instances.  Our  Lord's 
prediction  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  a  clear 
example  of  an  event  brought  about  in  the  ordinary 


MIEACLES 

course  of  things,  and  yet  being  a  sign  of  t'ae  Divine 
mission  of  Jesus,  and  of  the  just  displeasure  of  God 
against  the  Jews. 

It  would  appear,  indeed,  that  in  almost  all  cases 
of  signs  or  evidential  miracles  something  prophetic 
is  involved.  In  the  common  case,  for  example,  of 
healing  sickness  by  a  word  or  touch,  the  word  or 
gesture  may  be  regarded  as  a  prediction  of  the  cure  ; 
and  then,  if  the  whole  circumstances  be  such  as  to 
exclude  just  suspicion  of  (1)  a  natural  anticipation 
of  the  event,  and  (2)  a  casual  coincidence,  it  will  be 
indifferent  to  the  signality  of  the  cure  whether  we 
regard  it  as  effected  by  the  operation  of  ordinary 
causes,  or  by  au  immediate  interposition  of  the  Deity 
reversing  the  course  of  nature.  Hypotheses  by  which 
such  cures  are  attempted  to  be  accounted  for  by 
ordinary  causes  are  indeed  generally  wild,  impro- 
bable, and  arbitrary,  and  are  (on  that  ground)  justly 
open  to  objection  ;  but,  if  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  predictive  antecedent  be  admitted,  they  do 
not  tend  to  deprive  the  phenomenon  of  its  signality  : 
and  there  are  minds  who,  from  particular  associa- 
tions, find  it  easier  to  conceive  a  miraculous  agency 
operating  in  the  region  of  mind,  than  one  operating 
in  the  region  of  matter. 

It  may  be  further  obsei-ved,  in  passing,  that  the 
proof  of  the  actual  occurrence  of  a  sign,  when  in 
itself  an  ordinary  event,  and  invested  with  signality 
only  by  a  previous  prediction,  may  be,  in  some 
respects,  better  circumstanced  than  the  proof  of  the 
occurrence  of  a  miraculous  sign.  For  the  prediction 
and  the  fulfilment  may  have  occurred  at  a  long 
distance  of  time  the  one  from  the  other,  and  be 
attested  by  sepai'ate  sets  of  independent  witnesses, 
of  v/hom  the  one  was  ignorant  of  the  fulfilment, 
and  the  other  ignorant,  or  incredulous,  of  the  pre- 
diction. As  each  of  these  sets  of  witnesses  are  de- 
posing to  what  is  to  them  a  mere  ordinary  fact, 
there  is  no  room  for  suspecting,  in  the  case  of  those 
witnesses,  any  colouring  from  religious  prejudice, 
or  excited  feeling,  or  fraud,  or  that  craving  for  the 
marvellous  which  has  notoriously  produced  many 
legends.  But  it  must  be  admitted  that  it  is  only 
such  sources  of  suspicion  that  are  excluded  in  such 
a  case  ;  and  that  whatever  inherent  improbability 
there  may  be  in  a  fact  considered  as  miraculous — or 
varying  from  the  ordinary  course  of  nature — -remains 
still :  so  that  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  say  that  the 
two  facts  together — the  prediction  and  the  fulfil- 
ment— required  no  stronger  evidence  to  make  them 
credible  than  any  two  ordinary  facts.  This  will 
appear  at  once  fiom  a  parallel  case.  That  A  B 
was  seen  walking  in  Bond  Street,  London,  on  a 
certain  day,  and  at  a  certain  hour,  is  a  common 
ordinary  fact,  credible  on  very  slight  evidence.  That 
A  B  was  seen  walking  in  Broadway,  New  York,  on 
a  certain  day,  and  at  a  certain  hour,  is,  when  taken 
by  itself,  similaily  circumstanced.  But  if  the  day 
and  hour  assigned  in  both  reports  be  the  same,  the 
case  is  altered.  We  conclude,  at  once,  that  one  or 
other  of  our  infonnants  was  wrong,  or  both,  until 
convinced  of  the  correctness  of  their  statements  by 
evidence  much  stronger  than  would  suffice  to  esta- 
blish an  ordinary  fact.  This  brings  us  to  consider 
the  peculiar  improbahility  supposed  to  attach  to 
miraculous  signs,  as  such. 

The  peculiar  improbability  of  Miracles  is  resolved 


"  This  is  said  by  Mainionides  {Moreli  Nevochim,  part  ii. 
c.  29)  to  have  been  the  opinion  of  some  of  the  elder 
Rabbins  :  "  Nam  dicunt,  quando  Deus  0.  M.  hanc  cxisten- 
tiam  creavit,  ilium  tum  unicuique  enti  naturam  suam 


ordinasse  et  determinasse,  illisque  naturis  virtutem  indi- 
disse  miraciiln  ilia  producendi :  et  signum  prophetae  nihil 
aliud  esse,  (juani  iiuod  Deus  significarit  prophetis  tempus 
quo  dicere  hoc  vel  illud  debeant,"  &c. 


MIKACLES 

by  Hume,  in  his  famous  Essay,  into  the  circum- 
stance that  they  are  "  contrary  to  experience." 
This  expression  is,  as  has  often  been  pointed  out, 
strictly  speaking,  incorrect.  In  strictness,  that 
only  can  be  said  to  be  contrary  to  experience,  which 
is  contradicted  by  the  immediate  perceptions  of 
persons  present  at  tbe  time  when  the  fact  is  alleged 
to  have  occurred.  Thus,  if  it  be  alleged  that  all 
metals  are  ponderous,  this  is  an  assertion  contrary 
to  experience ;  because  daily  actual  obsei-vation 
shows  that  the  metal  potassium  is  not  ponderous. 
But  if  any  one  were  to  assert  that  a  particular 
piece  of  potassium,  which  we  had  never  seen,  was 
ponderous,  our  experiments  on  other  pieces  of  the 
same  metiil  would  not  prove  his  report  to  be,  in 
the  same  sense,  contrary  to  our  experience,  but  only 
contrary  to  the  analogy  of  our  experience.  In  a 
looser  sense,  however,  the  terms  "  contrary  to  ex- 
perience," are  extended  to  this  secondary  applica- 
tion ;  and  it  must  be  admitted  that,  in  this  latter, 
less  strict  sense,  miracles  are  contrary  to  general 
experience,  so  far  as  their  mere  physical  circum- 
stances, visible  to  us,  are  concerned.  This  should 
not  only  be  admitted,  but  strongly  insisted  upon, 
by  the  maintixiners  of  miracles,  because  it  is  an 
essential  element  of  their  signal  character.  It  is 
only  the  analogy  of  general  experience  (necessarily 
narrow  as  all  human  experience  is)  that  convinces 
us  that  a  word  or  a  touch  has  no  efficacy  to  cure 
diseases  or  still  a  tempest.  And,  if  it  be  held  that 
the  analogy  of  daily  experience  furnishes  us  with  no 
measure  of  probability,  then  the  so-called  miracles 
of  the  Bible  will  lose  the  character  of  marks  of  the 
Divine  Commission  of  the  workers  of  them.  They 
will  not  only  become  as  probable  as  ordinary  events, 
but  they  will  assume  the  character  of  ordinary 
events.  It  will  be  just  as  credible  that  they  were 
wrought  by  enthusiasts  or  impostors,  as  by  the 
true  Prophets  of  God,  and  we  shall  be  compelled  to 
own  that  the  Apostles  might  as  well  have  appealed 
to  any  ordinary  event  in  proof  of  Christ's  mission 
as  to  His  resurrection  from  the  dead.  It  is  so  far, 
therefore,  from  being  true,  that  (as  has  been  said 
with  something  of  a  sneer)  "  religion,  following  in 
the  wake  of  science,  has  been  compelled  to  acknow- 
ledge the  government  of  the  universe  as  being  on 
tiie  whole  carried  on  by  genei'al  laws,  and  not  by 
special  interpositions,"  that,  religion,  considered  as 
standing  on  miraculous  evidence,  necessarily  pre- 
supposes a  fixed  order  of  nature,  and  is  compelled 
to  assume  that,  not  by  the  discoveries  of  science, 
but  by  the  exigency  of  its  own  position  ;  and  there 
are  few  books  in  which  the  general  constancy  of 
the  order  of  nature  is  more  distinctly  recognized 
than  the  Bible.  The  witnesses  who  report  to  us 
miraculous  facts  ai'e  so  far  from  testifying  to  the 
absence  of  general  laws,  or  the  instability  of  the 
order  of  nature,  that,  on  the  contrary,  their  whole 
testimony  implies  that  the  miracles  whicli  tliey 
record  were  at  variance  with  their  own  general 
experience — with  the  general  experience  of  their 
contemporaries — with  what  they  believed  to  have 
been  the  general  experience  of  their  predecessors, 
and  with  what  they  anticipated  would  be  the 
general  experience  of  posterity.  It  is  upon  the  very 
ground  that  the  appaient  natural  causes,  in  the 
cases  to  which  they  testify,  are  known  by  uniform 
experience  to  be  incapable  of  producing  the  efTects 
said  to  have  taken  place,  that  therefore  these  wit- 
nesses refer  those  events  to  the  intervention  of  a 
supernatural  cause,  and  speidf  of  these  occuiTences 
as  Divine  Miracles. 


MIRACI.ES 


375 


And  this  leads  us  to  notice  one  grand  difference 
between  Divine  Miracles  and  other  alleged  facts 
that  seem  to  vary  from  tlie  ordinary  course  of 
nature.  It  is  manifest  that  theie  is  an  essential 
difterence  between  alleging  a  case  in  which,  all  the 
real  antecedents  or  causes  being  similar  to  those 
which  we  have  daily  oppoitunities  of  observing,  a 
consequence  is  said  to  have  ensued  quite  difierent 
from  that  which  general  ex])erience  finds  to  be 
uniformly  conjoined  with  them,  and  alleging  a  case 
in  which  there  is  supposed  and  indicated  by  all  the 
circumstances,  the  intervention  of  an  invisible 
antecedent,  or  carise,  which  we  know  to  exist,  and 
to  be  adequate  to  the  production  of  such  a  result ; 
for  the  special  operation  of  which,  in  this  case,  we 
can  assign  probable  reasons,  and  also  for  its  not 
generally  operating  in  a  similar  manner.  This 
latter  is  the  case  of  the  Scripture-miracles.  They 
are  wrought  under  a  solemn  appeal  to  (3od,  in  proof 
of  a  revelation  worthy  of  Him,  the  scheme  of  wiiich 
may  be  shewn  to  bear  a  striking  analogy  to  the 
constitution  and  order  of  nature;  and  it  is  manifest 
that,  in  order  to  make  them  fit  signs  for  attesting 
a  revelation,  they  ought  to  be  ]ihenomena  capable 
of  being  shewn  by  a  full  induction  to  vary  from 
what  is  known  to  us  as  the  ordinary  course  of 
nature. 

To  this  it  is  sometimes  replied  that,  as  we  collect 
the  existence  of  God  from  the  course  of  nature,  we 
have  no  right  to  assign  to  Him  powers  and  attri- 
butes in  any  higher  degree  than  we  find  them  in 
the  course  of  nature ;  and  consequently  neither  the 
po\ver  nor  the  will  to  alter  it.  But  such  persons 
must  be  understood  verbis  ponere  Deum,  re  tollere  ; 
because  it  is  impossible  really  to  assign  Power, 
Wisdom,  Goodness,  &c.  to  the  first  cause,  as  an 
inference  fiom  the  course  of  nature,  without  attri- 
buting to  Him  the  power  of  making  it  otherwise. 
There  can  be  no  design,  for  example,  or  anything 
analogous  to  design,  in  the  Author  of  the  Universe, 
unless  out  of  other  possible  collocations  of  things. 
He  selected  those  fit  for  a  ceitiiin  purpose.  And  it 
is,  in  truth,  a  violation  of  all  analogy,  and  an 
utterly  wild  and  arbitrary  chimera,  to  infer,  with- 
out the  fullest  evidence  of  such  a  limitation,  the 
existence  of  a  Being  possessed  of  such  power  and 
intelligence  as  we  see  manifested  in  the  course  of 
nature,  and  yet  unable  to  make  one  atom  of  matter 
move  an  inch  in  any  other  direction  than  that  in 
which  it  actually  does  move. 

And  even  if  we  do  not  regard  the  existence  of 
God  (in  the  proper  sense  of  that  term)  as  proved  by 
the  course  of  nature,  still  if  we  admit  His  existence 
to  be  in  any  degree  probable,  or  even  possible, 
the  occurrence  of  miracles  will  not  be  incredible. 
For  it  is  surely  going  too  fiir  to  say,  that,  because 
the  ordinaiy  course  of  nature  leaves  us  in  doubt 
whether  the  author  of  it  be  able  or  unable  to  alter 
it,  or  of  such  a  character  as  to  be  disposed  to  alter 
it  for  some  great  purpose,  it  is  therefore  incredible 
that  He  should  ever  have  actually  altered  it.  The 
true  philosopher,  when  he  considers  the  narrowness 
of  human  experience,  will  make  allowance  for  the 
jiossible  existence  of  many  causes  not  yet  observed 
by  man,  so  as  that  their  operation  am  be  reduced  to 
fixed  laws  understood  by  us ;  and  the  operation  of 
which,  therefore,  when  it  reveals  itself,  must  seem 
to  vary  from  the  ordinary  course  of  things.  Other- 
wise, there  could  be  no  new  discoveries  in  physical 
science  itself.  It  is  quite  true  that  such  forces  as 
magnetism  and  electricity  are  now  to  a  great  extent 
reduced  to  known  laws :  but  it  is  equally  true  that 


376 


MIRACLES 


no  one  would  have  taken  the  trouble  to  find  out  the 
laws,  if  he  had  not  first  believed  in  the  facts.  Oui- 
knowledge  of  the  law  was  not  the  ground  of  our 
belief  of  the  fact ;  but  our  belief  of  the  fact  was 
that  which  set  us  on  investigating  the  law.  And 
it  is  easy  to  conceive  that  there  may  be  forces  in 
nature,  unknown  to  us,  the  regular  periods  of  the 
recuiTence  of  whose  operations  within  the  sphere  of 
om-  knowledge  (if  they  ever  recur  at  all)  may  be 
immensely  distant  from  each  other  in  time — (as, 
e.  g.  the  causes  which  produce  the  appearance  or 
disappearance  of  stars) — so  as  that,  when  they 
occur,  they  may  seem  wholly  ditftrent  from  all  the 
rest  of  man's  present  or  past  experience.  Upon 
such  a  supposition,  the  rarity  of  the  phenomenon 
should  not  make  it  incredible,  because  such  a  rarity 
would  be  involved  in  the  conditions  of  its  existence. 
Now  this  is  analogous  to  the  case  of  miracles.  Upon 
the  supposition  that  there  is  a  God,  the  immediate 
volition  of  the  Deity,  determined  by  Wisdom,  Good- 
ness, &c.,  is  a  VERA  CAUSA  ;  because  all  the  phe- 
nomena of  nature  have,  on  that  supposition,  such 
volitions  as  at  least  their  ultimate  antecedents ;  and 
that  physical  effect,  whatever  it  may  be,  that  stands 
next  the  Divine  volition,  is  a  case  of  a  physical  effect 
having  such  a  volition,  so  determined,  for  its  imme- 
diate antecedent.  And  as  for  the  unusualness  of 
the  way  of  acting,  that  is  involved  in  the  very  con- 
ditions of  the  hypothesis,  because  this  very  unusual- 
tiess  would  be  necessary  to  fit  the  phenomenon  for  a 
miraculous  sign. 

In  the  foregoing  remarks,  we  have  endeavoured 
to  avoid  all  metaphysical  discussions  of  questions 
concerning  the  nature  of  causation — the  funda- 
mental principle  of  induction,  and  the  like  ;  not  be- 
cause they  ai'e  unimportant,  but  because  they  could 
not  be  treated  of  satisfactorily  within  the  limits 
which  the  plan  of  this  work  prescribes.  They  are, 
for  the  most  part,  matters  of  an  abstruse  kind,  and 
much  difficulty ;  but  (fortunately  for  mankind) 
questions  of  great  practical  moment  may  generally 
be  settled,  for  practical  purposes,  without  solving 
those  higher  problems — i.  e.  they  may  be  settled 
on  principles  which  will  hold  good,  whatever  solu- 
tion we  may  adopt  of  those  abstruse  questions.  It 
will  be  proper,  however,  to  say  a  few  words  here 
upon  some  popular  fonns  of  expression  which  tend 
greatly  to  increase,  in  many  minds,  the  natural 
prejudice  against  miracles.  One  of  these  is  the 
usual  description  of  a  miracle,  as,  "  a  violation  of 
the  laws  of  nature."  This  metaphorical  expi'es- 
sion  suggests  diiectly  the  idea  of  natural  agents 
breaking,  of  their  own  accord,  some  rule  which  has 
the  authority  and  sanctity  of  a  law  to  them.  Such 
a  figure  can  only  be  applicable  to  the  case  of  a  sup- 
posed causeless  and  arbitrary  variation  from  the 
uniform  order  of  sequence  in  natural  things,  and  is 
wholly  inapplicable  to  a  change  in  that  order  caused 
by  God  Himself.  The  word  "  law,"  when  applied  to 
material  things,  ought  only  to  be  understood  as  de- 
noting a  number  of  observed  and  anticipated  se- 
quences of  phenomena,  taking  place  with  such  a 
resemblance  or  analogy  to  each  other  as  if  a  rule 
had  been  laid  down,  which  those  phenomena  were 
constantly  observing.  But  the  rule,  in  this  case, 
is  nothing  different  from  the  actual  order  itself; 
and  there  is  no  cause  of  these  sequences  but  the  will 
of  God  choosing  to  produce  those  phenomena,  and 
choosing  to  produce  them  in  a  certain  order. 

Again,  the  term  "  nature"  suggests  to  many  per- 
sons the  idea  of  a  great  system  of  things  endowed 
with  powers  and  Ibrces  of  its  own — a  sort  of  ma- 


MIKACLES 

chine,  set  a-going  originally  by  a  first  cause,  but 
continuing  its  motions  of  itself.  Hence  we  are  apt 
to  imagine  that  a  change  in  the  motion  or  operation 
of  any  part  of  it  by  God,  would  produce  the  same 
distLirbance  of  the  other  parts,  as  such  a  change 
would  be  likely  to  produce  in  them,  if  made  by  us, 
or  any  other  natuial  agent.  But  if  the  motions 
and  operations  of  material  things  be  produced  really 
by  the  Divine  will,  then  His  choosing  to  change, 
for  a  special  pui-pose,  the  ordinary  motion  of  one 
part,  does  not  necessarily,  or  probably,  infer  his 
choosing  to  change  the  ordinary  motions  of  other 
parts  in  a  way  not  at  all  requisite  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  that  special  purpose.  It  is  as  easy  for 
Him  to  continue  the  ordinary  course  of  the  rest,  with 
the  change  of  one  part,  as  of  all  the  phenomena  with- 
out any  change  at  all.  Thus,  though  the  stoppage 
of  the  motion  of  the  earth  in  the  ordinary  course 
of  nature,  would  be  attended  with  terrible  con- 
vulsions, the  stoppage  of  the  earth  miraculoushj , 
for  a  special  purpose  to  be  served  by  that  onlg, 
would  not  of  itself,  be  followed  by  any  such  conse- 
quences. 

From  the  same  conception  of  nature,  as  a  ma- 
chine, we  are  apt  to  think  of  interferences  with  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature  as  implying  some  imper- 
fection in  it.  Because  machines  are  considered  more 
and  more  perfect  in  proportion  as  they  less  and  less 
need  the  interference  of  the  workman.  But  it  is 
manifest  that  this  is  a  false  analogy  ;  for,  the  reason 
why  machines  are  made  is,  to  save  us  trouble  ;  and, 
therefoie,  they  are  more  perfect  in  pi-oportion  as 
they  answer  this  purpose.  But  no  one  can  seri- 
ously imagine  that  the  universe  is  a  maclime  for 
the  purpose  of  saving  trouble  to  the"  Almighty. 

Again,  when  miracles  are  described  as  "  inter- 
ferences with  the  laws  of  nature,"  this  description 
makes  them  appear  improbable  to  many  minds, 
from  their  not  sufficiently  considering  that  the  laws 
of  nature  interfei-e  with  one  another' ;  and  that  we 
cannot  get  rid  of  "  interferences  "  upon  any  hypo- 
thesis consistent  with  experience.  When  organiza- 
tion is  superinduced  upon  inorganic  matter,  the 
laws  of  inorganic  matter  are  interfered  with  and 
controlled';  when  animal  life  conies  in,  there  are 
new  interfei'ences  ;  when  reason  and  conscience  are 
superadded  to  will,  we  have  a  new  class  of  con- 
trolling and  interfering  powers,  the  kars  of  which 
are  moral  in  their  character.  Intelligences  of  pure 
speculation,  who  could  do  nothing  but  observe  and 
i-eason,  surveying  a  portion  of  the  universe — such 
as  the  greater  part  of  the  material  universe  may 
be — wholly  destitute  of  living  inhabitants,  might 
have  I'easoned  that  such  powers  as  active  beings 
possess  were  incredible — that  it  was  incredible  that 
the  Great  Creator  would  suffer  the  majestic  uni- 
foiTnity  of  laws  which  He  was  constantly  main- 
taining through  boundless  space  and  innumerable 
worlds,  to  be  controlled  and  interfered  with  at  the 
caprice  of  such  a  creature  as  man.  Yet  we  know 
by  experience  that  God  has  enabled  us  to  control 
and  interfere  with  the  laws  of  external  nature  for  our 
own  purposes :  nor  does  this  seem  less  improbable 
beforehand  (but  rather  more),  than  that  He  should  ' 
Himself  interfere  with  those  laws  for  our  advantage. 
This,  at  least,  is  manifest — that  the  purposes  for 
which  man  was  made,  whatever  they  are,  involved 
the  necessity  of  producing  a  power  capable  of  con- 
trolling and  interfering  with  the  laws  of  external 
nature ;  and  consequently  that  those  pui-poses  in- 
volve in  some  sense  the  necessity  of  interferences 
with  the  laws  of  nature  external  to  roan :  and  how 


MIRACLES 

far  that  necessity  may  reach — whether  it  extend 
only  to  interferences  proceeding  from  man  Iiimself, 
or  extend  to  interferences  proceedina;  fiom  other 
creatures,  or  immediately  from  God  also,  it  is  im- 
possible for  reason  to  determine  beforehand. 

FurtheiTnore,  whatever  ends  may  be  contem- 
plated by  the  Deity  for  the  laws  of  nature  in 
reference  to  the  rest  of  the  universe — Hn  which 
question  we  have  as  little  information  as  interest)- — 
we  know  that,  in  respect  of  us,  they  answer  dis- 
lernible  moral  ends — that  they  place  us,  practi- 
cally, under  government,  conducted  in  the  way  of 
rewards  and  punishment — a  government  of  which 
the  tendency  is  to  encourage  virtue  and  repress 
vice — and  to  form  in  us  a  certain  character  by  dis- 
cipline ;  which  character  our  moral  nature  compels 
us  to  consider  as  the  highest  and  worthiest  object 
which  we  can  pursue.  Since,  therefore,  the  laws 
of  nature  have,  in  reference  to  us,  moral  purposes 
to  answer,  which  (as  far  as  we  can  judge)  they 
have  not  to  serve  in  other  respects,  it  seems  not 
y  incredible  that  these  peculiar  pui-poses  should  occa- 

sionally require  modifications  of  those  laws  in  rela- 
tion to  us,  which  are  not  necessary  in  relation  to 
other  parts  of  the  universe.  For  we  see — as  has 
been  just  observed — that  the  power  given  to  man 
of  modifying  the  laws  of  nature  by  which  He  is 
surrounded,  is  a  power  directed  by  moral  and  ra- 
tional influences,  such  as  we  do  not  find  directing 
the  power  of  any  other  creature  that  we  know  of. 
And  how  far,  in  the  nature  of  things,  it  would  be 
possible  or  eligible,  to  constract  a  system  of  ma- 
terial laws  which  should  at  the  same  time,  and  by 
the  same  kind  of  operations,  answer  the  other  pur- 
poses of  the  Creator,  and  also  all  His  moral  purposes 
with  respect  to  a  creature  endowed  witli  such  facul- 
ties as  free  will,  leason,  conscience,  and  the  other 
peculiar  attributes  of  man,  we  cannot  be  supposed 
capable  of  judging.  And  as  the  regularity  of  the 
laws  of  nature  in  themselves,  is  the  very  thing 
which  makes  them  capable  of  being  usefully  con- 
trolled and  interfeied  with  by  man — (since,  if  their 
.sequences  were  irregular  and  capricious  we  could 
not  know  how  or  when  to  interfere  with  them) — so 
that  same  regularity  is  the  very  thing  which  makes 
it  possible  to  use  Divine  interferences  with  them  as 
attestations  of  a  supernatural  revelation  from  God 
to  us  ;  so  that,  in  both  cases  alike,  the  usual  regu- 
larity of  the  laws,  in  themselves,  is  not  superfluous, 
but  necessary  in  order  to  make  the  interferences 
with  that  regularity  serviceable  for  their  proper  ends. 
In  this  point  of  view,  miracles  are  to  be  considered 
as  cases  in  which  a  higher  law  interferes  with  and 
controls  a  lower :  of  which  circumstance  we  see  in- 
stances around  us  at  every  turn. 

It  seems  further  that,  in  many  disquisitions  upon 
this  subject,  some  essentially  distinct  operations  of 
the  human  mind  have  been  confused  together  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  spread  unnecessary  obscurity 
over  the  discussion.  It  mny  be  useful,  therefore, 
briefly  to  indicate  the  mental  operations  which  are 
chiefly  concerned  in  this  matter. 

In  the  first  place  there  seems  to  be  a  law  "f  our 
mind,  in  virtue  of  which,  upon  the  experience  of  any 
new  external  event,  any  phenomenon  limited  by  the 
circumstances  of  time  and  place,  we  refer  it  to  a 
cause,  or  powerful  agent  producing  it  as  an  effect. 
The  relative  idea  involved  in  this  reference  appears 
to  be  a  simple  one,  incapable  of  definition,  and  is 
denoted  by  the  term  efficienci/. 

From  this  conception  it  has  been  supposed  by 
some  that  a  scientific  proof  of  the  stability  of  the 


MIRACLES 


377 


laws  of  Tiature  could  be  constructed  ;  but  the  attempt 
has  signally  miscarried.  Undoubtedly,  while  we 
abide  in  the  strict  metaphysical  conception  of  a  cause 
as  such,  the  axiom  that  "  similar  causes  produce 
similar,  effects  "  is  intuitively  evident ;  but  it  ij  so 
because,  in  that  point  of  view,  it  is  merely  a  barren 
truism.  For  my  whole  conception,  within  these 
narrow  limits,  of  the  cause  of  the  given  phenomenon 
B  is  that  it  is  the  cause  or  power  producing  B. 
I  conceive  of  that  cause  merely  as  the  term  of 
a  certam  relation  to  the  phenomenon  ;  and  therefoi-e 
my  conception  of  a  cause  similar  to  it,  precisely  as  a 
cause,  can  only  be  the  conception  of  a  cause  of  a 
phenomenon  similar  to  B. 

But  when  the  original  conception  is  enlarged 
into  affording  the  wider  maxim,  that  causes  similar 
as  thinqs,  considered  in  themselves,  and  not  barely 
in  i-elation  to  the  effect,  are  similar  in  their  effects 
also,  tlie  case  ceases  to  be  not  equally  clear. 

And,  in  applying  even  this  to  practice,  we  are 
met  with  insuperable  difficulties. 

For,  first,  it  may  reasonably  be  demanded,  on 
what  scientific  ground  we  are  justified  in  assuming 
that  any  one  material  phenomenon  or  substance  is, 
in  this  proper  sense,  the  cause  of  any  given  material 
phenomenon  ?  It  does  not  appear  at  all  self-evident, 
a  priori,  that  a  material  phenomenon  must  have  ii 
material  cause.  Many  have  supposed  the  contrary ; 
and  the  phenomena  of  the  apparent  results  of  our 
own  volitions  upon  matter  seem  to  indicate  that 
such  a  law  should  not  be  hastily  assumed.  Upon 
the  possible  supposition,  then,  that  the  material 
phenomena  by  which  we  are  surrounded  are  the 
effects  of  spiritual  causes — such  as  the  volitions  of 
the  Author  of  Nature — it  is  plain  that  these  are 
causes  of  which  we  have  no  direct  knowledge,  and 
the  similarities  of  which  to  each  other  we  can, 
without  the  help  of  something  more  than  the  funda- 
ment;\l  axiom  of  cause  and  effect,  discovei-  only  from 
the  effects,  and  only  so  far  as  the  effects  carry  us  in 
each  particular. 

But,  even  supposing  it  conceded  that  material 
effects  must  have  material  causes,  it  yet  remains  to 
be  settled  upon  what  ground  we  can  assume  that 
we  have  ever  yet  found  the  true  material  cause  of 
any  effect  whatever,  so  as  to  justify  us  in  predicting 
that,  wherever  it  recurs,  a  certain  effect  will  follow. 
All  that  our  abstract  axiom  tells  us  is,  that  if  we 
have  the  true  cause  we  have  that  which  is  always 
attended  with  the  effect :  and  all  that  experience  can 
tell  us  is  that  A  has,  so  fiir  as  we  can  oliserve,  been 
always  attended  by  B :  and  all  that  we  can  infer 
fiom  these  premises,  turn  them  how  we  will,  is 
merely  this  :  that  the  case  of  A  and  B  is,  so  far  as 
we  have  been  able  to  observe,  like  a  case  of  true 
cauf«l  connexion  ;  and  beyond  this  we  cannot  advance 
a  step  towards  proving  that  the  ease  of  A  and  B  is 
a  case  of  causal  connexion,  without  assuming  further 
another  principle  (which  would  have  saved  us  much 
trouble  if  we  had  assumed  it  in  the  b<'ginning), 
tliat  likeness  or  verisimilitude  is  a  ground  of  belief, 
gaining  strength  in  proportion  to  the  closeness  and 
constancy  of  the  resemblance. 

Indeed,  physical  analysis,  in  its  continual  advance, 
is  daily  teaching  us  that  those  things  which  we  once 
regarded  as  the  true  causes  of  certain  material  phe- 
nomena are  only  marks  of  the  presence  of  other 
things  which  we  now  regard  as  the  true  causes, 
and  which  we  may  hereafter  find  to  be  only  assem- 
blages of  adjacent  appearances,  more  or  less  closely 
connected  with  what  may  bettei-  claim  that  title. 
It  is  (luitc  possible,  for  exami)le,  that  gravitation 


578 


MIRACLES 


may  at  some  future  time  be  demonstrated  to  be  the 
result  of  a  complex  system  of  forces,  residing  (as 
some  philosophers  love  to  speak)  in  material  sub- 
sta,nces  hitherto  undiscovered,  and  as  little  suspected 
to  exist  as  the  gases  were  in  the  time  of  Aristotle. 

(2.)  Nor  can  we  derive  much  more  practical 
assistance  from  the  maxim,  that  similar  antecedents 
have  similar  consequents.  For  this  is  really  no  more 
than  the  former  rule.  It  difl'ers  therefrom  only  in 
dropping  the  idea  of  efficiency  or  causal  connexion  ; 
and,  however  certain  and  univei-sal  it  may  be  sup- 
posed in  the  abstract,  it  fails  in  the  concrete  just  at 
the  point  where  we  most  need  assistance.  For  it  is 
plainly  impossible  to  demonstrate  that  any  two 
actual  antecedents  are  precisely  similar  in  the  sense 
of  the  maxim  ;  or  that  any  one  given  apparent  ante- 
cedent is  the  true  unconditional  antecedent  of  any 
given  apparently  consequent  phenomenon.  Unless, 
tor  example,  we  know  the  vhole  nature  of  a  given 
antecedent  A,  and  also  the  u-hole  nature  of  another 
given  antecedent  B,  we  cannot,  by  comparing  them 
together,  ascertain  their  precise  similarity.  They 
may  be  similar  in  all  respects  that  we  have  hitherto 
observed,  and  yet  in  the  very  essential  quality  which 
may  make  A  the  unconditional  antecedent  of  a  given 
effect  C,  iu  this  respect  A  and  B  may  be  quite 
dissimilar. 

It  will  be  found,  upon  a  close  examination  of  all 
the  logical  canons  of  inductive  reasoning  that  have 
been  constructed  for  applying  this  principle,  that 
such  an  assumption — of  the  real  similarity  of  things 
apparently  similar — pervades  them  all.  Let  us  take, 
e.  g.,  what  is  called  the  first  canon  of  the  "  Method 
of  Agi-eement,"  which  is  this:  "  If  two  or  more 
instances  of  the  phenomenon  under  investigation 
have  only  one  circumstance  in  common,  the  circum- 
stance in  ivhich  alone  all  the  instanc&s  agi'ee,  is  the 
cause  (or  effect)  of  the  given  phenomenon."  Now, 
in  applying  this  to  any  practical  case,  how  can  we 
be  possibly  certain  that  any  two  instances  have 
only  one  circumstance  in  common  ?  We  can  remove, 
indeed,  by  nicely  varied  experiments,  all  the  different 
agents  known  to  us  from  contact  with  the  substances 
we  ai-e  examining,  except  those  which  we  choose  to 
employ;  but  how  is  it  possible  that  we  ciin  remove 
unknown  agents,  if  such  exist,  or  be  sure  that  no 
agents  do  exist,  the  laws  and  periods  of  whose  ac- 
tivity we  have  had  hitherto  no  means  of  estimating, 
but  which  may  reveal  themselves  at  any  moment, 
or  upon  any  unlooked-for  occasion  ?  It  is  plain 
that,  unless  we  can  know  the  whole  nature  of  all 
substances  present  at  every  moment  and  every  place 
that  we  are  concerned  with  in  the  universe,  we  cannot 
/mow  that  any  two  phenomena  have  but  one  circum- 
stance in  common.  All  we  can  say  is,  that  unknown 
agencies  count  for  nothing  in  practice ;  or  (in  other 
woixis )  we  must  assume  that  things  which  appear 
to  us  similar  are  similar. 

This  being  so,  it  becomes  a  serious  question 
whether  such  intuitive  principles  as  we  have  been 
discussing  are  of  any  re;il  practical  value  whatever 
in  mere  physical  inquiries.  Because  it  would  seem 
that  they  cannot  be  made  use  of  without  bringing 
in  another  principle,  which  seems  quite  sufficient 
without  them,  that  the  likeness  of  one  thing  to 
another  in  observable  respects,  is  a  ground  for  pre- 
suming likeness  in  other  respects — a  ground  strong 
in  proportion  to  the  apparent  closeness  of  the  re- 
semblances, and  the  number  of  times  in  which  we 
have  found  ourselves  right  in  acting  upon  such  a 
presumption.  Let  us  talk  as  we  will  of  theorems 
deduced  from  intuitive  axioms,  about  true  causes  or 


MIRACLES 

antecedents,  still  all  that  we  can  know  in  f;\ct  of  any 
particular  case  is,  that,  as  far  as  ice  can  uhsei-ce,  it 
resembles  what  reason  teaches  us  would  be  the  case 
of  a  true  cause  or  a  true  antecedent :  and  if  this 
justifies  us  in  di'awiug  the  inference  that  it  is  such  a 
case,  then  certainly  we  must  admit  that  resemblance 
is  a  just  ground  in  itself  of  inference  in  practical 
reasoning. 

And  "  therefore,  even  granting,"  it  will  be  said, 
"  the  power  of  the  Deity  to  work  miracles,  we  can 
have  no  better  grounds  of  detemiining  how  He  is 
likely  to  exert  that  power,  than  by  observing  how 
He  has  actually  exercised  it.  Now  we  find  Him, 
by  experience,  by  manifest  traces  and  records,  through 
countless  ages,  and  in  the  most  distant  regions  of 
space,  continually — (if  we  do  but  set  aside  these 
comparatively  few  stories  of  miraculous  intei-posi- 
tions) — working  according  to  what  we  call,  and 
rightly  call,  a  settled  order  of  nature,  and  we  ob- 
serve Him  constantly  preferring  an  adherence  to 
this  order  before  a  departure  from  it,  even  in  cir- 
cumstances in  which  (apart  from  experience)  we 
should  suppose  that  His  goodness  would  lead  Him 
to  vary  from  that  order.  In  particular,  we  find 
that  the  greatest  part  of  mankind  have  been  left 
wholly  in  past  ages,  and  even  at  present,  without 
the  benefit  of  that  revelation  which  you  suppose 
Him  to  have  made.  Yet  it  would  appear  that  the 
multitudes  who  are  ignorant  of  it  needed  it,  and 
deserved  it,  just  as  much  as  the  few  who  have  been 
made  acquainted  with  it.  And  thus  it  appears  that 
experience  relutes  the  inference  in  favour  of  the 
likelihood  of  a  revelation,  which  we  might  be  apt 
to  draw  from  the  mere  consideration  of  His  good- 
ness, taken  by  itself."  It  cannot  be  denied  that 
there  seems  to  be  much  real  weight  in  some  of 
these  considerations.  But  there  are  some  things 
which  diminish  that  weight: — 1.  With  respect  to 
remote  ages,  known  to  us  only  by  physical  traces, 
and  distant  regions  of  the  universe,  we  have  no 
record  or  evidence  of  the  moral  government  carried 
on  therein.  We  do  not  know  of  any.  And,  if  there 
be  or  was  any,  we  have  no  evidence  to  determine 
whether  it  was  or  was  not,  is  or  is  not,  connected 
with  a  system  of  miracles.  There  is  no  shadow  ot 
a  piesumption  that,  if  it  be  or  were,  we  should  have 
records  or  traces  of  such  a  system.  2.  With  respect 
to  the  non-interruption  of  the  course  of  nature,  in 
a  vast  number  of  cases,  where  goodness  would  seem 
to  require  such  interruptions,  it  must  be  considered 
that  the  very  vastness  of  the  number  of  such  occa- 
sions would  make  such  interruptions  so  frequent  as 
to  destroy  the  whole  scheme  of  governing  the  uni- 
verse by  general  laws  altogether,  and  consequently 
also  any  scheme  of  attesting  a  revelation  by  miracles 
— i.  e.  facts  varying  from  an  established  general 
law.  This,  therefore,  is  rather  a  presumption  against 
God's  interfering  so  often  as  to  destroy  the  scheme 
of  general  laws,  or  makes  the  sequences  of  things 
irregular  and  capricious,  than  against  His  interfering 
by  miracles  to  attest  a  revelation,  which,  after  that 
attestation,  should  be  left  to  be  propagated  and 
maintained  bv  ordinar}'  means  ;  and  the  very  man- 
ner of  the  attestation  of  which  (j.  e.  by  miracles) 
implies  that  there  is  a  regular  and  unitbi-m  course 
of  nature,  to  which  God  is  to  be  expected  to  adhere 
in  all  other  cases.  3.  It  should  be  considered  whe- 
ther the  just  conclusion  from  the  rest  of  the  pre- 
misses be  (not  so  much  this — that  it  is  unlikely  God 
would  make  a  revelation — as)  this — that  it  is  likely 
that,  if  God  made  a  revelation,  he  would  make  it 
subject  to  similar  conditions  io  those  imder  which 


MIRACLES 

He  bestows  His  other  special  favours  upon  man- 
kind— i.  e.  bestow  it  first  directly  upon  some  small 
part  of  the  rate,  and  impose  upon  them  the  respon- 
sibility of  communicatiug  its  benefits  to  the  rest. 
It  is  thus  that  He  acts  with  respect  to  superior 
sti-ength  and  intelligence,  and  in  regard  to  the  bless- 
ings of  civilization  and  scientific  knowledge,  of 
which  the  greater  part  of  mankind  have  always 
been  left  destitute. 

Indeed,  if  by  "the  course  of  nature"  we  mean 
the  whole  course  and  series  of  God's  government 
of  the  universe  carried  on  by  fi.\ed  laws,  we  cannot 
at  all  determine  beforehand  that  miiacles  (i.  e,  oc- 
casional deviations,  under  certain  moral  circum- 
stances, from  the  mere  physical  series  of  causes  and 
effects)  are  not  a  part  of  the  course  of  nature  in 
that  sense  ;  so  that,  for  aught  we  know,  beings  with 
a  larger  experience  than  ours  of  the  history  of  the 
universe,  might  be  able  confidently  to  predict,  from 
that  experience,  the  occurrence  of  such  miracles  in 
a  world  circumstanced  like  ours.  In  this  point  of 
view,  as  Bishop  Butler  has  truly  said,  nothing  less 
than  knowledge  of  another  world,  placed  in  circum- 
stances similar  to  our  own,  can  furnish  an  argument 
from  analogy  against  tlie  credibility  of  miracles. 

And,  again,  for  aught  we  know,  personal  inter- 
course, or  what  Scripture  seems  to  call  "  seeing 
God  face  to  face,"  may  be  to  myriads  of  beings  the 
normal  condition  of  God's  intercourse  with  His 
intelligent  and  moral  creatures ;  and  to  them  the 
state  of  things  in  which  we  are,  debarred  from  such 
direct  perceptible  intercourse,  may  be  most  contrary 
to  their  ordinary  experience  ;  so  that  what  is  to  us 
miraculous  in  the  history  of  our  race  may  seem 
most  accordant  with  the  course  of  nature,  or  their 
customary  experience,  and  what  is  to  us  most  na- 
tural may  appear  to  them  most  strange. 

After  all  deductions  and  abatements  have  been 
made,  however,  it  must  be  allowed  that  a  certain 
antecedent  improbability  must  always  attach  to 
mij'acles,  considered  as  events  varying  from  the 
ordinary  experience  of  mankmd  as  known  to  us: 
because  likelihood,  verisimilitude,  or  resemblance  to 
what  we  know  to  have  occurred,  is,  by  the  consti- 
tution of  our  minds,  the  very  gi-ound  of  proba- 
bility ;  and,  though  we  can  perceive  reasons,  from 
the  moral  character  of  God,  for  thinking  it  likely 
that  He  may  have  wrought  miracles,  yet  we  know 
too  little  of  His  ultimate  designs,  and  of  the  best 
mode  of  accomplishing  them,  to  argue  confidently 
from  His  character  to  His  acts,  except  where  the 
connexion  between  the  character  and  the  acts  is 
demonstrably  indissoluble — as  in  tlie  c;ise  of  acts 
rendered  necessary  by  the  attributes  of  veracity 
and  justice.  Miiacles  are,  indeed,  in  the  notion  of 
them,  no  breach  of  the  high  generalization  that 
"  similar  antecedents  have  similar  consequents  ;" 
nor,  necessarily,  of  the  maxim  that  "  God  works  by 
general  laws;"  because  we  can  see  some  laws  of 
miracles  (as  e.  g.  that  they  are  infrequent,  and 
that  they  are  used  as  attesting  signs  of,  or  in  con- 
junction with,  revelations),  and  may  suppose  more  ; 
but  they  do  vary,  when  taken  apart  from  their 
proper  evidence,  from  this  rule,  that  "  what  a 
general  experience  would  lead  us  to  regard  as 
similar  antecedents  are  similar  antecedents ;"  be- 
cause the  only  assignable  specific  difference  observ- 
able by  us  in  the  antecedents  in  the  case  of  miracles, 
and  in  the  case  of  the  experiments  from  the  analogy 
of  which  they  vary  in  their  physical  phenomena, 
consists  in  the  moral  antecedents  ;  and.  these,  in 
cases  of  physical  phenomena,  we  geneiaily  throw 


MIRACLES 


379 


out  of  the  account ;  nor  have  we  gi'ounds  a  prion 
for  concluding  inth  confidence  that  these  are  not  to 
be  thrown  out  of  the  account  here  also,  although 
we  can  see  that  the  moral  antecedents  here  (such  as 
the  fitness  for  attesting  a  i-evelatiou  like  the  Chris- 
tian) are,  in  many  important  respects,  different  from 
those  which  the  analogy  of  experience  teaches  us  to 
disregard  in  estimating  the  probability  of  physical 
events. 

But,  in  order  to  fomi  a  fair  judgment,  we  must 
take  in  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and, 
amongst  the  rest,  the  testimony  on  which  the 
miracle  is  reported  to  us. 

Our  belief,  indeed,  in  human  testimony  seems  to 
rest  upon  the  same  sort  of  instinct  on  which  our 
belief  in  the  testimony  (as  it  may  be  called)  of 
nature  is  built,  and  is  to  be  checked,  modified,  and 
confirmed  by  a  process  of  experience  similar  to  that 
which  is  applied  in  the  other  case.  As  we  learn, 
by  extended  observation  of  nature  and  the  com- 
parison of  analogies,  to  distinguish  the  real  laws  of 
physical  sequences  from  the  casual  conjunctions  of 
phenomena,  so  are  we  taught  in  the  same  manner 
to  distinguish  the  circumstances  under  which  himian 
testimony  is  certain  or  incredible,  probable  or  sus- 
picious. The  circumstances  of  our  condition  force 
us  daily  to  make  continual  observations  upon  the 
phenomena  of  human  testimony  ;  and  it  is  a  matter 
upon  which  we  can  make  such  experiments  with 
peculiar  advantage,  because  every  man  carries  v/ithin 
his  own  breast  the  whole  sum  of  the  ultimate 
motives  which  can  influence  human  testimony. 
Hence  arises  the  aptitude  of  human  testimony  for 
overcoming,  and  more  than  overcoming,  almost  any 
antecedent  improbability  in  the  thing  reported. 

"  The  conviction  produced  by  testimony,"  says 
Bishop  Young,  "  is  capable  of  being  carried  much 
higher  than  the  conviction  produced  by  experience : 
and  the  reason  is  this,  because  there  may  be  con- 
current testimonies  to  the  truth  of  one  individual 
fact;  whereas  there  can  be  no  concurrent  experi- 
ments wth  regard  to  an  individual  experiment. 
There  may,  indeed,  be  analogous  experiments,  in 
the  same  manner  as  there  may  be  analogous  testi- 
monies ;  but,  in  any  course  of  nature,  there  is  but 
one  continued  series  of  events :  whereas  in  testi- 
mony, since  the  same  event  may  be  observed  by 
difierent  witnesses,  their  concurrence  is  capable  of 
producing  a  conviction  more  cogent  than  any  that  is 
derived  from  any  other  species  of  events  in  the 
course  of  nature.  In  material  phenomena  the  pro- 
bability of  an  exjjected  event  arises  solely  from 
analogous  experiments  made  previous  to  the  event ; 
and  this  probability  admits  of  indefinite  increase 
from  the  unlimited  increase  of  the  number  of  these 
previous  experiments.  The  credibility  of  a  witness 
likewise  arises  from  our  experience  of  tlie  veracity 
of  previous  witnesses  in  similar  cases,  and  admits  of 
unlimited  increase  according  to  the  nuuAier  of  the 
previous  witnesses.  But  there  is  another  source  of 
the  increase  of  testimony,  likewise  unlimited,  derived 
from  tlie  number  of  concurrent  witnesses.  The 
evidence  of  testimony,  theiofbie,  admitting  of  mi- 
limited  increase  on  two  diHerent  accounts,  and  the 
physical  probability  admitting  only  of  one  of  them, 
the  former  is  capable  of  indefinitely  surpassing  the 
latter." 

It  is  to  be  observed  also  that,  in  the  aise  of  the 
Christian  miracles,  the  truth  of  the  facts,  varying 
as  they  do  from  our  ordinary  experience,  is  far  more 
credible  than  the  falsehood  of  a  testimony  so  cir- 
cumstjuiced  iis  that  by   which  they  are  attested  ; 


580 


MIRACLES 


because  of  the  former  stransje  phenomena — the 
miracles — a  reasonable  known  cause  may  be  assigned 
adequate  to  the  eflect — namel}',  the  will  of  God 
pi'oduciug  them  to  accredit  a  revelation  that  seems 
not  unworthy  of  Him  ;  whereas  of  the  latter — the 
falsehood  of  such  testimony — no  adequate  cause 
whatever  can  be  assigned,  or  reasonably  conjectured. 

So  manifest,  indeed,  is  this  inherent  power  of 
testimony  to  overcome  antecedent  improbabilities, 
that  Hume  is  obliged  to  allow  that  testimony  may 
be  so  circumstanced  as  to  require  us  to  believe,  in 
some  cases,  the  occurrence  of  things  quite  at  variance 
with  general  experience ;  but  he  pretends  to  shew 
that  testimony  to  such  facts  when  connected  with 
religion  can  never  beso  circumst;mced.  The  reasons 
for  this  paradoxical  exception  are  partly  general 
remarks  upon  the  proneness  of  men  to  believe  in 
portents  and  prodigies  ;  upon  the  temptations  to  the 
indulgence  of  pride,  vanity,  ambition,  and  such  like 
passions  which  the  human  mind  is  subject  to  in 
religious  matters,  and  the  strange  mixture  of  enthu- 
siasm and  knavery,  sincerity  and  craft,  that  is  to  be 
found  in  fanatics,  and  partly  particular  instances  oi' 
confessedly  false  miracles  that  seem  to  be  supported 
by  an  astonishing  weight  of  evidence — such  as 
those  alleged  to  have  been  wrought  at  the  tomb  of 
the  Abbe  Paris. 

But  (1)  little  weight  can  be  attached  to  such 
general  reflexions,  as  discrediting  any  particular 
body  of  evidence,  until  it  can  be  shewn  in  detail  that 
they  apply  to  the  special  circumstances  of  that 
jiarticular  body  of  evidence.  In  reality,  most  of 
his  general  objections  are,  at  bottom,  objections  to 
human  testimony  itself — i.  e.  objections  to  the  me- 
dium by  which  alone  we  can  know  what  is  called 
the  general  experience  of  mankind,  from  which 
general  experience  it  is  that  the  only  considerable 
objection  to  miracles  arises.  Thus,  by  general 
reflexions  upon  the  proverbial  fallaciousness  of 
"  travellers'  stories  "  we  might  discredit  all  ante- 
cedently improbable  relations  of  the  manners  or 
physical  peculiarities  of  foreign  lands.  By  general 
reflexions  upon  the  illusions,  and  even  temptations 
to  fraud,  under  which  scientific  observers  labour, 
we  might  discredit  all  scientific  observations.  By 
general  reflexions  upon  the  way  in  which  supine 
credulity,  and  passion,  and  party-interest  have  dis- 
coloured civil  history,  we  might  discredit  all  ante- 
cedently improbable  events  in  ci\^il  histor}' — such 
as  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  the  adventures  of  the 
Buonaparte  family,  or  the  story  of  the  late  mutiny 
in  India.  (2)  The  same  experience  which  infonnsus 
that  credulity,  enthusiasm,  craft,  and  a  mixture  of 
these,  have  produced  many  false  religions  and  false 
stories  of  miracles,  informs  us  also  what  sort  of 
religions,  and  v:hat  sort  of  legends,  these  causes  have 
produced,  and  are  likely  to  produce  ;  and,  if,  upon 
a  comparison  of  the  Christian  religion  and  miracles 
with  these  products  of  human  weakness  or  cimning, 
there  appear  specific  differences  between  the  two, 
luiaccountable  on  the  hypotliesis  of  a  common 
origin,  this  not  only  diminishes  the  presumption  of 
a  common  origin,  but  raises  a  distinct  presumption 
the  other  way — a  presumption  strong  in  proportion 
to  the  extent  and  accuracy  of  our  induction.  Re- 
markable specific  differences  of  this  kind  have  lieen 
pointed  out  by  Christian  apologists  in  respect  of  the 
nature  of  the  religion — the  nature  of  the  miracles — 
and  the  circumstances  of  the  evidence  by  which 
they  are  attested. 

Of  the  first  kind  are,  for  instance,  those  assigned 
by  Warburton,  in  his  Divine  Legation ;  and  by 


MIRACLES 

Archbp.  Whately,  in  his  Essays  on  the  Peculiari- 
ties of  the  Christian  Religion,  and  on  Romanism. 

Differences  of  the  second  and  third  kind  are 
largely  assigned  by  almost  every  writer  on  Christian 
evidences.  We  refer,  specially,  for  sample  sake,  to 
Leslie's  Shoi't  Method  with  the  Deists — to  Bishop 
Douglas's  Criterion,  in  which  he  fully  examines  the 
pretended  parallel  of  the  cures  at  the  tomb  of  Abbe 
Paris, — and  to  Paley's  Evidences,  which  may  l)e 
most  profitably  consulted  in  the  late  edition  by 
Archbp.  Whately. 

Over  and  above  the  direct  testimony  of  human 
witnesses  to  the  Bible-miracles,  we  have  also  what 
may  be  called  the  indirect  testimony  of  events  con- 
firming the  former,  and  raising  a  distinct  presump- 
tion that  some  such  miracles  must  have  been  wi'ought. 
Thus,  for  example,  we  know,  by  a  copious  induc- 
tion, that,  in  no  nation  of  the  antient  world,  and  in 
no  nation  of  the  modern  world  unacquainted  with 
the  Jewish  or  Christian  revelation,  has  the  know- 
ledge of  the  one  true  God  as  the  Creator  and 
Governor  of  the  world,  and  the  public  worship  of 
Him,  been  kept  up  by  the  mere  light  of  nature,  or 
formed  the  groundwork  of  such  religious  as  men 
have  devised  for  themselves.  Yet  we  do  find  that, 
in  the  Jewish  people,  though  no  way  distinguished 
above  others  by  mental  power  or  high  civilization, 
and  with  as  strong  natural  tendencies  to  idolatry  as 
others,  this  knowledge  and  worship  was  kept  up 
from  a  very  early  pei'iod  of  their  history,  and, 
according  to  their  uiufovm  historical  tradition,  kept 
up  by  revelation  attested  by  undeniable  miracles. 

Again,  the  existence  of  the  Christian  religion,  as 
the  belief  of  the  most  considerable  and  intelligent 
part  of  the  world,  is  an  undisputed  fact;  and  it  is 
also  certain  that  this  religion  originated  (as  far  as 
human  means  are  concerned)  with  a  handful  of 
Jewish  peasants,  who  went  about  j)reaching — on 
the  very  spot  where  Jesus  was  crucified — that  He 
had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  had  been  seen  by,  and 
had  conversetl  with  them,  and  afterwards  ascended 
into  heaven.  This  miracle,  attested  by  them  as 
eyewitnesses,  was  the  very  ground  and  foundation 
of  the  religion  which  they  preached,  and  it  was 
plainly  one  so  circumstanced  that,  if  it  had  been 
false,  it  could  easily  have  been  proved  to  be  false. 
Yet,  though  the  preachers  of  it  were  everywhere 
persecuted,  they  had  gathered,  before  they  died, 
large  churches  in  the  country  where  the  facts  were 
best  known,  and  through  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  Kgypt, 
and  Italy ;  and  these  churches,  notwithstanding  the 
severest  persecutions,  went  on  increasing  till,  in 
about  300  yeai-s  after,  this  religion — i.  e.  a  religion 
which  taught  the  worship  of  a  Jewish  peasant  who 
had  been  ignomiuiously  executed  as  a  malefactor- — 
became  the  established  religion  of  the  Roman  empire ; 
and  has  ever  since  continued  to  be  the  prevailing 
religion  of  the  civilized  world. 

It  would  plainly  be  impossible,  in  such  an  articla 
as  this,  to  enumerate  all  the  various  lines  of  con 
fii-niation — from  the  pro])hecies,  from  the  morality, 
from  the  sti'ucture  of  the  liible,  from  the  state  of 
the  world  before  and  after  Christ — &c.,  which  all 
converge  to  the  same  conclusion.  But  it  will  be 
manifest  that  almost  all  of  them  are  drawn  ulti- 
mately from  the  analogy  of  experience,  and  that  the 
conclusion  to  which  they  tend  cannot  be  rejected 
without  holding  something  conti'ary  to  the  analogies 
of  experience  from  which  they  are  drawn.  For,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  disbelieving  one  tiling 
necessarily  involves  believing  its  contradictory. 

It  IS  manifest  that,  if  the  miraculous  facts  of 


MIRACLES 

Christianity  did  not  really  occur,  the  stories  abont 
them  must  have  originated  either  in  fraud,  or  in 
fancy.  The  coarse  explanation  of  them  by  the 
hypothesis  of  unlimited  fraud,  has  been  generally 
abandoned  in  modern  times :  but,  in  Germany 
especially,  many  persons  of  great  acuteness  have 
long  laboured  to  accoimt  for  them  by  referring 
them  to  fancy.  Of  these  there  have  been  two  prin- 
cipal schools — the  Naturalistic,  and  the  Mijthic. 

1.  The  Naturalists  suppose  the  miracles  to  have 
been  natural  events,  more  or  less  unusual,  that  were 
mistaken  for  miracles,  through  ignorance  or  enthu- 
siastic excitement.  But  the  result  of  their  labours 
in  detail  has  been  (as  Strauss  has  shewn  in  his  Lchen 
Jesu)  to  turn  the  New  Testament,  as  interpreted  by 
them,  into  a  narrative  far  less  credible  than  any 
narrative  of  miracles  could  be:  just  as  a  novel,  made 
up  of  a  multitude  of  surprising  natural  events 
crowded  into  a  few  days,  is  less  consistent  with  its 
own  data  than  a  tale  of  genii  and  enchanters.  "  Some 
infidels,"  says  Archbishop  VVhately,  "  have  laboured 
to  prove,  concerning  so/Me  one  of  our  Lord's  miracles 
that  it  might  have  been  the  result  of  an  accidental 
conjunctuie  of  natural  circumstances ;  and  they 
endeavour  to  prove  the  same  concerning  another, 
and  so  on  ;  and  thence  ijifer  that  all  of  them,  occur- 
ring as  a  series,  might  have  been  so.  They  might 
argue,  in  like  manner,  that,  because  it  is  not  very 
improbable  one  may  throw  sixes  in  any  one  out  of 
an  hundred  throws,  therefore  it  is  no  more  impro- 
bable that  one  may  throw  sixes  a  hundred  times 
running."  The  truth  is,  that  everything  that  is 
improbable  in  the  mere  physical  strancjeness  of 
miracles  applies  to  such  a  series  of  odd  events  as 
these  explanations  assume  ;  while  the  hypothesis  of 
their  non-miraculous  character  deprives  us  of  the 
means  of  account inq  for  them  by  the  extraordinary 
intei-position  of  the  Deity.  These  and  other  objec- 
tions to  the  thorough-going  application  of  tlie  natu- 
ralistic method,  led  to  the  substitution  in  its  place  of 

2.  The  Mythic  theory — ^which  supposes  the 
N.  T.  Scripture-narratives  to  have  been  legends, 
not  stating  the  giounds  of  men's  belief  in  Chris- 
tianity, but  springing  out  of  that  belief,  and  em- 
bodying the  idea  of  what  Jesus,  if  he  were  the 
Messiah,  must  have  been  conceived  to  have  done  in 
order  to  fulfil  that  charactei',  and  was  therefore 
supposed  to  have  done.  But  it  is  obvious  that  this 
leaves  the  origin  of  the  belief,  that  a  man  who  did 
not  fulfil  the  idea  of  the  Messiah  in  any  one  re- 
markable particular,  was  the  Messiah — wholly  un- 
.accounted  for.  It  begins  with  assuming  that  a 
person  of  mean  condition,  who  was  publicly  executed 
as  a  malefactor,  and  who  wrought  no  miracles,  was 
so  earnestly  believed  to  be  theii-  Messiah  by  a  gr(>at 
multitude  of  .lews,  who  expected  a  Messiah  that 
was  to  work  miracles,  and  was  not  to  die,  but  to 
be  a  great  conquering  prince,  that  they  modifierl 
their  whole  religion,  in  which  they  had  been  brought 
up,  into  accordance  with  that  new  belief,  and  ima- 
gined n  whole  cycle  of  legends  to  embody  their  idea, 
and  brought  the  whole  civilized  world  ultimately 
to  accept  their  .system.  It  is  obvious,  also,  that  all 
the  arguments  for  the  genuineness  and  authenticity 
of  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.  bring  them  up  to  a 
date  when  the  memory  of  Christ's  real  history  was 
so  recent,  as  to  make  the  svibstitution  cf  a  set  of 
mere  legends  in  its  place  utteily  incredible  ;  and  it 
is  obvious,  also,  that  the  gravity,  simplicity,  histo- 
rical decorum,  and  consistency  with  what  we  know 
of  the  circumstances  of  the  times  in  whicji  the 
events  are  said  to  have  occurred,  observable  in  the 


MIRACLES 


381 


nan-atives  of  the  N.  T.,  make  it  impossible  reason- 
ably to  accept  them  as  mere  iwjths.  Tlie  same 
appears  from  a  comparison  of  them  with  the  style 
of  writings  really  mythic — as  the  Gospels  of  the  in- 
fancy, of  Nicodemus,  &c. — and  with  heathen  or  Mo- 
hamedan  legends  ;  and  from  the  omission  of  matters 
which  a  mythic  fancy  would  certainly  have  fas- 
tened on.  Thus,  though  John  Baptist  was  typified 
by  Elijah,  the  great  wonder-worker  of  the  Old 
Testament,  there  are  no  miracles  ascribed  to  John 
Baptist.  There  are  no  miracles  ascribed  to  Jesus 
during  His  infancy  and  youth.  There  is  no  de- 
scription of  His  personal  app<>arance ;  no  account  of 
His  adventures  in  the  world  of  spirits ;  no  miracles 
ascribed  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  very  little  said 
about  her  at  all ;  no  accoiuit  of  the  martyrdom  of 
any  apostle,  but  of  one,  and  that  given  in  the  driest 
manner,  &c. — and  so  in  a  hundred  other  parti- 
culars. 

It  is  observable  that,  in  the  early  ages,  the  fact 
that  extraordinaiy  miiacles  were  wrought  by  Jesus 
and  His  apostles,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  gene- 
rally denied  by  the  opponents  of  Christianity.  They 
seem  always  to  have  preferred  adopting  the  expe- 
dient of  ascribing  them  to  art  magic  and  the  power 
of  evil  spirits.  This  we  learn  from  the  N.  T. 
itself;  from  such  Jewish  writings  as  the  Sepher  ■ 
Toldoth  Jeshii ;  from  'the  Fragments  of  Celsus, 
Porphyry,  Hierocles,  Julian,  &c.,  which  have  come 
down  to  us,  and  from  the  popular  objections  which 
the  ancient  Christian  Apologists  felt  themselves 
concerned  to  grapple  with.  We  are  not  to  suppose, 
however,  that  this  would  have  been  a  solution 
which,  even  in  those  days,  would  have  been  natu- 
rally preferred  to  a  denial  of  the  fiicts,  if  the  facts 
could  have  been  plausibly  denied.  Ou  the  contrary, 
it  was  plainly,  even  then,  a  forced  and  improbable 
solution  of  stich  miracles.  For  man  did  not  com- 
monly ascribe  to  magic  or  evil  demons  an  unlimited 
power,  any  more  than  we  ascribe  an  unlimited 
power  to  mesmerism,  imagination,  and  the  occult 
and  irregular  forces  of  nature.  We  know  that  in 
two  instances,  in  the  Gospel  narrative, — the  cure  of 
the  man  born  blind  and  the  Resurrection — the 
Jewish  priests  were  unable  to  pretend  such  a  solu- 
tion, and  were  driven  to  maintain  unsuccessfully  a 
charge  of  fraud  ;  and  the  circumstances  of  the  Chris- 
tian miracles  were,  in  almost  all  respects,  so  utterly 
unlike  those  of  any  pretended  instances  of  magiral 
wonders,  that  the  apologists  have  little  difficulty  in 
refuting  this  plea.  This  they  do  generally  from  the 
following  considerations. 

(1.)  The  greatness,  number,  completeness,  and 
publicity  of  the  miracles.  (2.)  The  natural  bene- 
ficial tendency  of  the  doctrine  they  attested.  (3.) 
The  connexion  of  them  with  a  whole  scheme  of  re- 
velation extending  from  the  first  origin  of  the  hu- 
man race  to  the  time  of  Christ. 

It  is  also  to  be  considered  that  the  circumstance 
that  the  world  was,  in  the  times  of  the  apostles, 
full  of  Thaumaturgists,  in  the  shape  of  exorcists, 
magicians,  ghost-seers,  &c.,  is  a  strong  presumption 
tliat,  in  order  to  command  any  special  attention  and 
gain  any  large  and  permanent  success,  the  apostles 
and  their  followers  must  have  exhibited  works  quite 
different  from  any  wonders  which  ]ipople  had  been 
accustomed  to  see.  This  jiresumption  is  confirmed 
by  what  we  read,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  con- 
cerning the  effect  produced  ujion  the  Samaritans  by 
Philip  the  I'h-angelist  in  ojiposition  to  the  prestiges 
of  Simon  Magus. 

This  evasion  of  the  force  of  the  Christian  mira- 


382 


MIRACLES 


cles,  by  refen-ing  tliem  to  the  power  of  evil  spirits, 
has  seldom  been  seriously  recurred  to  in  modern 
times;  but  the  English  iniidels  of  the  last  century 
employed  it  as  a  kind  of  argumcntwn  ad  hominem, 
to  tease  and  embarrass  their  opponents — contending 
that,  as  the  Bible  speaks  of  "  lying  wonders  "  of 
Antichrist,  and  relates  a  long  contest  of  apparent 
miracles  between  Moses  and  the  Egyptian  magi- 
cians, Christians  could  not  on  their  own  principles, 
have  any  certainty  that  miracles  were  not  wrought 
by  evil  spirits. 

In  answer  to  this,  some  divines  (as  Bishop  Fleet- 
wood in  his  Dialogms  on  Miracles)  have  endea- 
voured to  establish  a  distinction  in  the  nature  of 
the  works  themselves,  between  the  seeming  miracles 
within  the  reach  of  intermediate  spirits, — and  the 
true  miracles,  which  can  only  be  wrought  by  God — 
and  others  (as  Bekker,  in  his  curious  work  Le 
Monde  Enchante,  and  Farmer,  in  his  Case  of  the 
Demoniacs)  have  entirely  denied  the  power  of  in- 
termediate spirits  to  interfere  with  the  course  of 
nature.  But,  without  entering  into  these  ques- 
tions, it  is  sufficient  to  observe — 

(1.)  That  the  light  of  nature  gives  us  no  reason  to 
believe  that  there  are  any  evil  spirits  having  power 
to  interfere  with  the  course  of  nature  at  all. 

(2.)  That  it  shows  us  that,  if  there  be,  they  are 
continually  controlled  from  exercising  any  such 
powor. 

(3.)  That  the  i-ecords  we  are  supposed  to  have 
of  such  an  exei-cise  in  the  Bible,  show  us  the  power 
there  spoken  of,  as  exerted  completely  under  tlie 
control  of  God,  and  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it 
evident  to  all  candid  observers  wheie  the  advantage 
lay,  and  to  secure  all  well-disposed  and  reasonable 
persons  from  any  mistake  in  the  matter. 

(4.)  That  the  circumstances  alleged  by  the  early 
Christian  apologists — the  number,  greatness,  bene- 
ficence, and  variety  of  the  Bil)le  miracles — their 
connexion  with  prophecy  and  a  long  scheme  of 
things  extending  from  the  creation  down — the  cha- 
racter of  Christ  and  His  apostles — and  the  manifest 
tendency  of  the  Christian  religion  to  serve  the  cause 
of  truth  and  virtue — make  it  as  incredible  that  the 
miracles  attesting  it  should  have  been  wrought  by 
evil  beings,  as  it  is  that  the  order  of  nature  should 
proceed  from  such  beings.  For,  as  we  gather  the 
character  of  the  Creator  from  His  works,  and  the 
moral  instincts  which  He  has  given  us  ;  so  we  gather 
the  character  of  the  author  of  revelation  from  His 
works,  and  from  the  drift  and  tendency  of  that 
revelation  itself.  This  last  point  is  sometimes 
shortly  and  unguardedly  expressed  by  saying,  that 
"  the  doctrine  proves  the  miracles:"  the  meaning  of 
which  is  not  that  the  particular  doctrines  which 
miracles  attest  must  first  be  proved  to  be  true 
aliunde,  before  we  can  believe  that  any  such  works 
were  wrought — (which  would,  manifestly,  be  making 
■  the  miracles  no  attestation  at  all) — but  the  mean- 
ing is,  that  the  whole  body  of  doctrine  in  connexion 
with  which  the  miracles  are  alleged,  and  its  ten- 
dency, if  it  were  divinely  revealed,  to  answer  visible 
good  ends,  makes  it  reasonable  to  think  that  the 
miracles  by  which  it  is  attested  were,  if  they  were 
wrought  at  all,  wrought  by  God. 

Particular  theories  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
miracles  have  been  wrought  are  matters  rather 
curious  than  practically  useful.  In  all  such  cases 
we  must  bear  in  mind  the  great  maxim  SubT'I- 
UTAS  Naturae  longe  superat  Subtilitatem 
Mentis  Humanae.  Malebranche  regarded  the 
Deity  as  the  sole  agent  in  nature,  acting  always  by 


MIEACLES 

general  laws ;  l)ut  He  conceived  those  general  laws 
to  contain  the  original  provision  tliat  the  manner  of 
the  Divine  acting  should  modify  itself,  under  certain 
conditions,  according  to  the  particular  volitions  of 
finite  intelligences.  Hence,  He  explained  man's 
apparent  power  over  external  nature ;  and  hence 
also  He  regarded  miracles  as  the  result  of  particular 
volitions  of  angels,  employed  by  the  Deity  in  the 
government  of  the  world.  This  was  called  the 
system  of  occasional  causes. 

The  system  of  Clarke  allowed  a  proper  real, 
though  limited,  efficiency  to  the  wills  of  inferior 
intelligences,  but  denied  any  true  powers  to  matter. 
Hence  he  referred  the  phenomena  of  the  course  of 
material  nature  immediately  to  the  will  of  God  as 
their  cause  ;  making  the  distinction  between  natural 
events  and  miracles  to  consist  in  this,  that  the 
former  happen  according  to  what  is,  relatively  to 
us,  Goil's  nsual  way  of  working,  and  the  latter  ac- 
cording to  His  unusual  way  of  working. 

Some  find  it  easier  to  conceive  of  miracles  as  not 
really  taking  place  in  the  external  order  of  nature, 
but  in  the  impressions  made  by  it  upon  our  minds. 
Others  deny  that  there  is,  in  any  miracle,  the  pro- 
duction of  anything  new  or  the  alteration  of  any 
natural  power  ;  and  maintain  that  miracles  are  pro- 
duced solely  by  the  intensifying  of  laiown  natural 
powers  already  in  existence. 

It  is  plain  that  these  various  hypotheses  are 
merelv  ways  in  which  different  minds  find  it  more 
or  less  easy  to  conceive  the  mode  in  which  miracles 
may  have  been  wrought. 

Another  question  more  curious  than  practical,  is 
that  respecting  the  precise  period  when  miracles 
ceased  in  the  Christian  Church.  It  is  plain,  that 
whenever  they  ceased  in  point  of  fact,  they  ceased 
relatively  to  us  wherever  a  sufficient  attestation  of 
them  to  our  faith  fails  to  be  supplied. 

It  is  quite  true,  indeed,  that  a  real  miracle,  and 
one  sufficiently  marked  out  to  the  spectators  as  a 
real  miracle,  may  be  so  imperfectly  reported  to  us, 
as  that,  if  we  have  only  that  imperfect  report,  there 
may  be  little  to  show  conclusively  its  miraculous 
character;  and  that,  therefore,  in  rejecting  ac- 
counts of  miracles  so  circumstanced,  we  may  pos- 
sibly be  rejecting  accounts  of  what  were  real  mi- 
racles. But  this  is  an  inconvenience  attending 
probable  evidence  from  its  very  nature.  In  reject- 
ing the  improbable  testimony  of  the  most  menda- 
cious of  witnesses,  we  may,  almost  always,  be 
rejecting  something  which  is  really  true.  But  this 
would  be  a  poor  reason  for  acting  on  the  testimony 
of  a  notorious  liar  to  a  story  antecedently  impro- 
bable. The  narrowness  and  imperfection  of  the 
human  mind  is  such  that  our  wisest  and  most  prudent 
calculations  are  continually  baffled  by  unexpected 
combinations  of  circumstances,  upon  which  we 
could  not  have  reasonably  reckoned.  But  this  is 
no  good  ground  for  not  acting  upon  the  calculations 
of  wisdom  and  prudence ;  because,  after  all,  such 
calculations  are  in  the  long  run  our  surest  guides. 

It  is  quite  true,  also,  that  several  of  the  Scripture 
miracles  are  so  circumstanced,  that  if  the  reports 
we  have  of  them  stood  alone,  and  came  down  to  us 
only  by  the  chaimel  of  ordinary  history,  we  should  , 
be  without  adequate  evidence  of  their  miraculous 
character;  and  therefore  those  particular  miracles 
are  not  to  us  (though  they  doubtless  were  to  the 
original  spectators,  who  could  mark  all  the  circum- 
stances),, by  themselves  and  taken  alone,  signal — or 
proper  evidences  of  revelation.  But,  then,  they 
may  be  very  proper  objects  of  faith,  though  not  tlie 


MIRACLES 

grounds  of  it.  For  (1.)  tliese  incidents  are  really 
reported  to  us  as  parts  of  a  course  of  things  which 
we  have  good  evidence  for  believing  to  have  been 
miraculous;  and,  as  Bishop  Butler  justly  observes, 
"  supposing  it  acknowledged,  that  our  Saviour  spent 
some  years  in  a  course  of  workijig  miracles,  there  is 
no  more  pe(;uliar  presumption  worth  mentioning, 
against  His  having  exerted  His  miraculous  powers 
in  a  certain  degree  greater,  than  in  a  certain  degree 
less ;  in  one  or  two  more  instances,  than  in  one  or 
two  fewer :  in  this,  than  in  another  manner."  And 
(2.)  these  incidents  are  reported  to  us  by  writers 
whom  we  have  good  reasons  for  believing  to  have 
been,  not  ordinary  historians,  but  persons  specially 
assisted  by  the  Divine  Spirit,  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  a  correct  account  of  the  ministry  of  our  Lord 
and  His  apostles. 

In  the  case  of  the  Scripture  miracles,  we  must 
be  careful  to  distinguish  the  particular  occasions 
upon  which  they  were  wrought,  from  their  general 
purpose  and  design  ;  yet  not  so  as  to  overlook  the 
connexion  between  these  two  things. 

There  are  but  few  miracles  recorded  in  Scripture 
of  which  the  whole  character  was  merely  evidential 
— few,  that  is,  that  were  merely  displays  of  a  super- 
natural power  made  for  the  sole  purpose  of  attesting 
a  Divine  Uevelation.  Of  this  character  were  the 
change  of  Moses'  rod  into  a  serpent  at  the  burning 
bush,  the  burning  bush  itself,  the  going  down 
of  the  shadow  upon  the  sun-dial  of  Ahaz,  and  some 
others. 

In  general,  however,  the  miracles  recorded  in 
Scripture  have,  besides  the  ultimate  purpose  of 
aflbrding  evidence  of  a  Divine  interposition,  some 
immediate  temporary  purposes  which  they  were 
apparently  wrought  to  serve, — such  as  the  curing 
of  diseases,  the  feeding  of  the  hungry,  the  relief  of 
innocent,  or  the  punishment  of  guilty  persons. 
These  immediate  temporary  ends  are  not  without 
value  in  reference  to  the  ultimate  and  general  design 
of  miracles,  as  providing  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
revelation  ;  because  they  give  a  moral  character  to 
the  works  wrought,  which  enables  them  to  display 
not  only  the  power,  but  the  other  attributes  of  the 
agent  performing  them.  And,  in  some  cases,  it 
would  appear  that  miraculous  works  of  a  particular 
kind  were  selected  as  emblematic  or  typical  of  some 
characteristic  of  the  revelation  which  they  were 
intended  to  attest.  Thus,  e.  g.,  the  cure  of  bodily 
disejises  not  only  indicated  the  generid  benevolence 
of  the  Divine  Agent,  but  seems  sometimes  to  be 
referred  to  as  an  eml)lem  of  Christ's  power  to  remove 
the  disorders  of  the  soul.  The  gift  of  tongues  appears 
to  have  been  intended  to  manifest  the  universality 
of  the  Christian  dispensation,  by  which  all  languages 
were  consecrated  to  the  worship  of  Ciod.  The  cast- 
ing out  of  demons  was  a  type  and  ])ledge  of  the 
presence  of  a  Power  that  was  ready  to  "  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil,"  in  every  sense. 

In  this  point  of  view,  Christian  miracles  may  be 
fitly  regarded  as  specimens  of  a  Divine  I'ower,  alleged 
to  be  present— specimens  so  circumstanced  as  to 
make  obvious,  and  bring  luider  the  notice  of  common 
understandings,  the  operations  of  a  I'ower — the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost — \vhich  w;w  really  supernatural, 
but  did  not,  in  its  moral  effects,  reveal  itself  exter- 
nally as  supernatural.  In  this  sense,  they  seem  to 
be  called  the  manifestation  or  exhibition  of  the  Spirit 
— outwaid  phenomena  which  manifcstod  sensibly 
His  presence  and  operation  in  the  Church  :  mid  the 
record  of  these  miracles  becomes  evidence  to  us  of 
the  invisible  presence  of  Christ  in  His  Church,  and 


MIRACLES 


383 


of  His  government  of  it  through  all  ages;  though 
that  presence  is  of  such  a  nature  as  not  to  be  imme- 
diately distinguishable  from  the  operation  of  known 
moral  motives,  and  that  government  is  canied  on  so 
as  not  to  interrupt  the  oi-dinary  course  of  thino-s. 

In  the  case  of  the  Old  Testament  miracles,  asjain, 
in  order  fully  to  understand  their  evidential  cha- 
racter, we  must  consider  the  general  nature  and 
design  of  the  dispensation  with  which  they  were 
connected.  The  generid  design  of  that  dispensation 
appears  to  have  been  to  keep  up  in  one  particular 
race  a  knowledge  of  the  one  true  God,  and  of  the 
promise  of  a  Messiah  in  whom  "  all  the  fiimilies  of 
the  earth  "  should  be  "  blessed."  And  in  order  to 
this  end,  it  appears  to  have  been  necessary  that,  for 
some  time,  God  should  have  assumed  the  character 
of  the  local  Tutelary  Deity  and  Prince  of  that  parti- 
cular people.  And  from  this  peculiar  relation  in 
which  He  stood  to  the  Jewish  people  (aptly  called 
by  Josephus  a  Theocracy)  resulted  the  necessitv 
of  frequent  miracles,  to  manifest  and  make  sensibly 
perceptible  His  actual  presence  among  and  govern- 
ment over  them.  The  miracles,  therefore,  of  the 
Old  Testament  are  to  be  regarded  as  evidential  of 
the  theocratic  government ;  and  this  again  is  to  be 
conceived  of  as  subordinate  to  the  further  purpose 
of  pi'eparing  the  way  for  Christianity,  by  keeping  up 
in  the  world  a  knowledge  of  the  true  God  and  of' 
His  promise  of  a  Redeemer.  In  this  view,  we  can 
readily  understand  why  the  miraculous  administra- 
tion of  the  theocracy  was  withdrawn,  as  soon  as  the 
purpose  of  it  had  been  answered  by  working  deeply 
and  permanently  into  the  mind  of  the  Jewish  people 
the  two  great  lessons  which  it  was  intended  to  teach 
them  ;  so  that  they  might  be  safely  left  to  the 
ordinary  means  of  instruction,  until  the  publication 
of  a  fresh  revelation  by  Christ  and  His  Apostles 
rendered  further  miiacles  necessary  to  attest  their 
mission.  Upon  this  view  also  we  can  perceive  that 
the  miracles  of  the  Old  Testament,  upon  whatever 
immediate  occasions  they  may  have  been  wrought, 
were  subordinate  (and,  in  general,  necessaiy)  to  the 
design  of  rendering  possible  the  estjiblishment  in 
due  time  of  such  a  religion  as  the  Christian ;  and 
we  can  perceive  further  that,  though  the  Jewish 
theocracy  implied  in  it  a  continual  series  of  miracles, 
yet — as  it  was  only  temporary  and  local — those 
miracles  did  not  violate  God's  general  purpose  of 
carrying  on  the  government  of  the  world  by  the 
ordinary  laws  of  nature ;  whereas  if  the  Christian 
dispensation — which  is  permanent  and  universal — 
necessarily  implied  in  it  a  series  of  constant  miracles, 
that  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  general  purpose 
of  carrying  on  the  government  of  the  world  by  those 
oidinary  kiws. 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment miracles,  we  must  also  remember  that  the 
whole  structure  of  the  Jewish  ceconomy  had  re- 
ference to  the  peculiar  exigency  of  the  circum- 
st;inces  of  a  people  imperfectly  civilized,  and  is  so 
distinctly  described  in  the  New  Testament,  ;is  deal- 
ing with  men  according  to  the  "  hardness  of  their 
hearts,"  and  being  a  system  of  "  weak  and  beg- 
garly elements,"  and  a  rudimentary  instruction  for 
"  children  "  who  were  in  the  condition  of"  slaves." 
We  are  not,  therefore,  to  judge  of  the  probability 
of  the  miracles  wrought  in  support  of  that  ceconomy 
(so  for  as  t\\e  forms  under  which  they  were  wrought 
are  concerned)  as  if  those  miracles  were  immediately 
intended  for  ourselves.  We  are  not  justified  in 
arguing  either  that  those  mii'acles  are  incredible 
because  wrought  in   such   a   mamier   as  that,  if 


383  a 


MIRACLES 


a/ldresseil  to  us,  tliey  would  lower  oicr  conceptions 
of  the  Divine  Being ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  tliat 
because  those  miracles — wrougiit  under  the  circum- 
stances of  the  Jewish  o?coiiomy — are  credible  and 
ought  to  be  believed,  there  is  therefore  no  reason 
for  objecting  against  stories  of  similar  miracles  al- 
leged to  have  been  wrought  vmdor  the  quite  different 
circumstances  of  the  Christian  dispensation, 

In  dealing  with  human  testimony,  it  may  be 
further  needful  to  notice  (though  very  briefly) 
some  refined  subtilties  that  have  been  occasionally 
introduced  into  this  discussion. 

It  has  been  sometimes  alleged  that  the  freedom 
of  the  human  will  is  a  circumstance  which  renders 
reliance  upon  the  stability  of  laws  in  the  case  of 
human  conduct  utterly  precarious.  "  In  arguing," 
it  is  said,  "  that  human  beings  cannot  be  supposed 
to  have  acted  in  a  particular  way,  because  that 
would  involve  a  violation  of  the  analogy  of  human 
conduct,  so  far  as  it  has  been  observed  in  all  ages, 
we  tacitly  assume  that  the  human  mind  is  unalter- 
ably detemiined  by  fixed  laws,  in  the  same  way  as 
material  substances.  But  this  is  not  the  case  on 
the  hypothesis  of  the  freedom  of  the  will.  The 
very  notion  of  a  free  will  is  that  of  a  faculty  which 
determines  itself  ;  and  which  is  capable  of  choosing 
a  line  of  conduct  quite  repugnant  to  the  influence 
of  any  motive  however  strong.  There  is  therefore 
no  reason  for  expecting  that  the  operations  of  human 
volition  will  be  confoi-mahle  throughout  to  any  fixed 
rule  or  analogy  whatever." 

In  rejjly  to  this  flir-sought  and  barren  refinement, 
we  may  observe — 1.  That,  if  it  be  worth  anything, 
it  is  an  objection  not  merely  against  the  force  of 
human  testimony  in  religious  matters,  but  against 
human  testimony  in  general,  and,  indeed,  against 
all  calculations  of  probability  in  respect  of  human 
conduct  whatsoever.  2.  That  we  have  already 
shown  that,  even  in  respect  of  material  phenomena, 
our  practical  measure  of  probability  is  not  derived 
from  any  scientific  axioms  about  cause  and  effect, 
or  antecedents  and  consequences,  but  simply  from 
the  likeness  or  unlikeness  of  one  thing  to  another ; 
and  therefore,  not  being  deduced  fi'om  premises 
which  assume  causality,  cannot  be  shaken  by  the 
denial  of  causality  in  a  particular  case.  3.  That 
the  thing  to  be  accounted  for,  on  the  supposition  of 
the  falsity  of  the  testimony  for  Christian  miracles, 
is  not  accounted  for  by  any  such  capiicious  principle 
as  the  arbitrary  freedom  of  the  human  will ;  be- 
cause the  thing  to  be  accounted  for  is  the  agreement 
of  a  number  of  witnesses  in  a  falsehood,  for  the 
propagation  of  which  they  could  have  no  intelligible 
inducement.  Now,  if  we  suppose  a  number  of  in- 
dependent witnesses  to  have  determined  themselves 
by  rational  motives,  then,  under  the  circumstances 
of  this  particular  instance,  their  agreement  in  a 
true  story  is  sufficiently  accounted  for.  But,  if  we 
suppose  them  to  have  each  determined  themselves 
by  mere  whim  and  caprice,  then  their  agreement 
in  the  s;ime  false  stoiy  is  not  accounted  for  at  all. 
The  concurrence  of  such  a  number  of  chances  is 
utterly  incredible.  4.  And  finally  we  remark  that 
no  sol)er  maintainers  of  the  freedom  of  the  human 
will  claim  for  it  any  such  unlimited  power  of  self- 
detei-mination  a.s  this  objection  supposes.  The  free- 
dom of  the  human  will  exhibits  itself  either  in 
cases  where  there  is  no  motive  for  selecting  one 
rather  than  another  among  many  possible  courses 
of  action  that  lie  before  us— in  which  cases  it  is  to 
be  observed  that  there  is  nothing  moral  in  its  elec- 
tions whatsoever; — or  in  cases  in  which  there  is  a 


MIRACLES 

conflict  of  motives,  and,  e.  g.,  pa.ssion  and  appetite, 
or  custom  or  temporal  interest,  draw  us  one  way, 
and  reason  or  conscience  another.  In  these  latter 
cases  the  maintainers  of  the  freedom  of  the  will 
contend  that,  under  certain  limits,  we  can  determine 
ourselves  (not  by  no  motive  at  all,  but)  by  either 
of  the  motives  actually  operating  upon  our  minds. 
Now  it  is  manifest  that  if,  in  the  case  of  the  wit- 
nesses to  Christianity,  we  can  show  that  theirs  was 
a  case  of  a  conflict  of  motives  (as  it  clearly  vxis), 
and  can  show,  further,  that  their  conduct  is  incon- 
sistent with  one  set  of  motives,  the  reasonable 
infei'ence  is  that  they  determined  themselves,  in 
point  of  fact,  by  the  other.  Thus,  though  in  the 
case  of  a  man  strongly  tried  by  a  conflict  of 
motives,  we  might  not,  even  with  the  fullest  know- 
ledge of  his  character  and  circumstances,  have  been 
able  to  predict  beforehand  how  he  would  act,  that 
would  be  no  reason  for  denying  that,  after  we  had 
come  to  know  how  he  did  act,  we  could  tell  by 
what  motives  he  had  deteimined  himself  in  choosing 
that  particular  line  of  conduct. 

It  has  been  often  made  a  topic  of  complaint 
against  Hume  that,  in  dealing  with  testimony  as  a 
medium  for  proving  miracles,  he  has  resolved  its 
force  entirely  into  our  experience  of  its  veracity, 
and  omitted  to  notice  that,  antecedently  to  all  ex- 
perience, we  are  predisposed  to  give  it  credit  by  a 
kind  of  natural  instinct.  But,  however  metaphy- 
sically erroneous  Hume's  analysis  of  our  belief  in 
testimony  may  have  been,  it  is  doubtful  whether, 
in  this  particular  question,  such  a  mistake  is  of  any 
great  practical  importance.  Our  original  predis- 
position is  doubtless  (whether  instinctive  or  not) 
a  predisposition  to  believe  all  testimony  indiscrimi- 
nately :  but  this  is  so  completely  checked,  modified, 
and  controlled,  in  after-life,  by  experience  of  the 
circumstances  under  which  testimony  can  be  safely 
relied  upon,  and  of  those  in  which  it  is  apt  to  mis- 
lead us,  that,  practically,  our  experience  in  these 
respects  may  be  taken  as  a  not  unfair  measure  of 
its  value  as  rational  evidence.  It  is  also  to  be 
observed  that,  while  Hume  has  omitted  this  original 
instinct  of  belief  in  testimony,  as  an  element  in  his 
calculations,  he  has  also  omitted  to  take  into  ac- 
count, on  the  other  side,  any  original  instinctive 
belief  in  the  constancy  of  the  laws  of  nature,  or 
expectation  that  our  future  experiences  will  resemble 
our  past  ones.  In  reality,  he  seems  to  have  resolved 
both  these  principles  into  the  mere  association  of 
ideas.  And,  however  theoretically  erroneous  he 
may  have  been  in  this,  still  it  seems  manifest  that, 
by  making  the  same  mistake  on  both  sides,  he  has 
made  one  error  compensate  another;  and  so — as  far 
as  this  branch  of  the  argument  is  concerned — 
brought  out  a  practically  correct  result.  As  we 
can  only  leai'n  by  various  and  repeated  experiences 
under  what  circumstances  we  can  safely  trust  our 
expectation  of  the  recurrence  of  apparently  similar 
phenomena,  that  exj)ectation,  being  thus  continually 
checked  and  controlled,  modifies  itself  into  accord- 
ance with  its  rule,  and  ce<xses  to  spring  at  all  where 
it  would  be  manifestly  at  variance  with  its  director. 
And  the  same  would  seem  to  be  the  case  with  our 
belief  in  testimony. 

The  argument,  indeed,  in  Hume's  celebrated 
Essay  on  Miracles,  was  very  far  from  being  a  new 
one.  It  had,  as  Mr.  Coleridge  has  pointed  out,  been 
distinctly  indicated  by  South  in  his  sermon  on  the 
incredulity  of  St.  Thomas  ;  and  theie  is  a  remark- 
able statement  of  much  the  same  argument  put 
into  the  mouth  of  VVoolston's  Advocate,  in  Sherlock's 


MIRACLES 

Trial  of  the  Witnesses.  The  restjitement  of  it, 
however,  by  a  person  of  Hume's  abilities,  was  of 
sei'vice  in  putting  men  upon  a  moi-e  accurate  ex- 
amination of  tlie  true  nature  and  measuie  of  pi'oba- 
bility  ;  and  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Hume's  bold 
statement  of  his  unbounded  scepticism  had,  as  he 
contended  it  would  have,  many  useful  results  in 
stimulating  inquiries  that  might  not  otherwise  have 
been  suggested  to  thoughtful  men,  or,  at  least,  not 
prosecuted  with  sufficient  zeal  and  patience. 

Bishop  Butler  seems  to  have  been  very  sensible 
of  the  imperfect  state,  in  his  own  time,  of  the  logic 
of  Probability;  and,  though  he  appears  to  have 
formed  a  moi-e  accurate  conception  of  it,  than  the 
.Scotch  school  of  Philosophers  who  succeeded  and 
undertook  to  refute  Hume ;  yet  there  is  one  passage 
in  which  we  may  perhaps  detect  a  misconception  of 
the  subject  in  the  pages  of  even  this  great  writer. 

"There  is,"  he  observes,  "a 'very  strong  pre- 
sumption against  common  speculative  truths,  and 
against  the  most  ordiiiary  facts,  before  the  proof 
of  them,  which  yet  is  overcome  by  almost  any 
proof.  There  is  a  presumption  of  millions  to  one 
against  the  story  of  Caesar  or  anxj  other  man.  For, 
suppose  a  number  of  common  facts  so  and  so  cir- 
cumstance(1,  of  which  one  had  no  kind  of  proof, 
should  happen  to  come  into  one's  thoughts  ;  every 
one  would,  without  any  possible  doubt,  conclude 
them  to  be  false.  And  the  like  may  be  said  of  a 
sinijle  common  fact.  And  from  hence  it  appears 
that  the  question  of  importance,  as  to  the  matter 
before  us,' is,  fconcerning  the  degree  of  the  peculiar 
presumption  against  miracles  :  not,  whether  there 
be  any  peculiar  presumption  at  all  against  them. 
For  if  there  he  a  presumption  of  millions  to  one 
against  the  most  common  facts,  what  can  a  small 
presumption,  additional  to  this,  amount  to,  though 
it  be  peculiar  ?  It  cannot  be  estimated,  and  is  as 
nothing."     {Analog;/,  part  2,  c.  ii.) 

It  is  plain  that,  in  this  passage,  Butler  lays  no 
stress  upon  the  peculiarities  of  the  story  of  Caesar, 
which  he  casually  mentions.  For  he  expressly  adds 
"  or  of  any  other  man ;"  and  repeatedly  explains 
tliat  what  he  says  applies  equally  to  any  ordinary 
facts,  or  to  a  single  tiict ;  so  that,  whatever  be  his 
drift  (and  it  must  be  acknowledged  to  be  somewhat 
obscure),  he  is  not  constructing  an  argument  similar 
to  that  which  has  been  pressed  by  Archbishop 
Whately,  in  his  Historic  L'onhts  respecting  Napo- 
leon Bonaparte.  And  this  becomes  still  more 
evident,  when  we  consider  the  extraordinaiy  medium 
by  which  he  endeavours  to  show  that  there  is  a 
presumption  of  millions  to  one  against  such  "  com- 
mon ordinary  facts  "  as  he  is  speaicing  of.  For  the 
way  in  which  he  proposes  to  estimate  the  presump- 
tion against  ordinary  facts  is,  by  considering  the 
likelihood  of  their  being  anticipated  beforehand  by 
a  person  guessing  at  random.  But,  surely,  this  is 
not  a  measure  of  the  likelihood  of  the  facts  con- 
sidered in  themselves,  but  of  the  likelihood  of  the 
coincidence  of  .the  facts  wWh  a  rash  and  arbitrary 
anticipation.  The  case  of  a  pei-son  guessing  before- 
hand, and  the  case  of  a  witness  reporting  what  has 
occurred,  are  essentially  ditferent.  In  the  common 
instance,  for  example,  of  an  ordinary  die,  before  the 
cast,  there  is  nothing  to  determine  my  mind,  with 
any  probability  of  a  correct  jr.dgment,  to  the  selec- 
tion of  any  one  of  the  six  faces  rather  than  another'; 
and,  therefore,  we  rightly  say  that  there  are  five 
chances  to  one  against  any  one  side,  considered  as 
thus  arbitrarily  selected.  But  when  a  person,  who 
has  had  opjiortunities  of  observing  the  cast,  re])orts 


MIRACLES 


.383 


to  me  the  presentation  of  a  particular  face,  there  is 
evidently,  no  such  presumption  against  the  coinci- 
dence of  his  statement  and  the  actual  fact ;  because 
he  hits,  by  the  supposition,  had  ample  means  of 
ascertaining  the  real  state  of  the  occurrence.  And 
it  seems  plain  that,  in  the  case  of  a  credible  witness, 
we  should  as  readily  believe  his  repoi-t  of  the  cast  of 
a  die  with  a  million  of  sides,  as  of  one  with  onlv 
six ;  though  in  respect  of  a  random  guess  before- 
hand, the  chances  against  the  correctness  of  the 
guess  would  be  vastly  greater  in  the  former  case, 
than  in  that  of  an  ordinary  cube. 

Furthermore,  if  any  common  by-stander  were  to 
report  a  series  of  successive  throws,  as  having  taken 
place  in  the  following  order — 1,  6,  3,  5,  6,  2 — no 
one  would  feel  any  difficulty  in  receiving  his  testiT 
mony  ;  but  if  we  further  become  aware  that  he,  or 
anybody  else,  had  beforehand  professed  to  guess  or 
predict  that  precise  series  of  throws  upon  that  par- 
ticular occasion,  we  should  certainly  no  longer  give 
his  report  the  same  ready  and  unhesitating  acquies- 
cence. We  should  at  once  suspect,  either  that  the 
witness  was  deceiving  us,  or  that  the  die  was 
loaded,  or  tampered  with  in  some  way,  to  produce 
a  conformity  with  the  anticipated  sequence.  This 
places  in  a  clear  light  the  difference  between  the  case 
of  the  coincidence  of  an  ordinary  event  with  a 
random  predetei'mination,  and  the  case  of  an  ordi- 
nary event  considered  in  itself. 

The  truth  is,  that  the  chances  to  which  Butler 
seems  to  refer  as  a  presumption  against  ordinary 
events,  are  not  in  ordinary  cases  overcome  by  testi- 
mony at  all.  The  testimony  has  nothing  to  do  with 
them ;  because  they  are  chances  against  the  event 
considered  as  the  subject  of  a  random  vaticination, 
not  as  the  subject  of  a  report  made  by  an  actual 
obsei-ver.  It  is  possible,  however,  that,  thi-oughout 
this  obscure  passage,  Butler  is  ai'guing  upon  the 
principles  of  some  objector  unknown  to  us ;  and, 
indeed,  it  is  certain  that  some  wiiters  upon  the 
doctrine  of  chances  (who  were  far  from  fi-iendly  to 
revealed  religion)  have  utterly  confounded  together 
the  questions  of  the  chances  against  the  coincidence 
of  an  ordinary  event  with  a  random  guess,  and  of 
the  probability  of  such  an  event  considered  by  itself. 

But  it  should  be  observed  that  what  we  com- 
monly call  the  chances  against  an  ordinary  event  are 
not  specific,  but  particular.  They  are  chances 
against  this  event,  not  against  this  hind  of  event. 
The  chances,  in  the  case  of  a  die,  are  the  chances 
against  a  particular  face  ;  not  against  the  coming 
up  of  some  face.  The  coming  up  of  some  face  is 
not  a  thing  subject  to  random  anticipation,  and, 
therefore,  we  say  that  there  arc  no  chances  against 
it  at  all.  But,  as  the  presumption  that  some  face 
will  come  up  is  a  specific  presumption,  quite  dif- 
ferent from  the  presumption  against  any  particidar 
face  ;  so  tlie  presumption  against  no  face  coming 
up  (which  is  leally  the  same  thing,  and  equivalent 
to  the  presumption  against  a  miracle,  considered 
merely  in  its  physiail  strangeness)  must  be  specific 
also,  and  different  fiom  the  presumption  against  any 
]iarticular  form  of  such  a  miracle  selected  before- 
hand by  an  .arbitrary  anticipation.  For  miraculous 
facts,  it  is  evident,  are  subject  to  the  doctrine  of 
chances,  each  in  particular,  in  the  same  way  as 
ordinary  iiicts.  Thus,  e.  g.  supposing  a  miracle  to 
be  wrought,  the  cube  might  be  changed  into  any 
geometrical  figure ;  and  we  can  see  no  reason  for 
selecting  one  rather  than  another,  or  the  substance 
might  he  changed  from  ivory  to  metal,  and  then  one 
metal  woidd  be  as  likelv  ns  nnothi^r.      But  no  one, 

o  p,  » 


383  c 


IVHEACLES 


probably,  would  say  that  he  would  believe  the 
specitic  fact  of  stcch  a  miracle  upon  the  same  proof, 
or  anything  like  the  same  proof,  as  that  on  which, 
such  a  miracle  being  supposed,  he  would  believe  the 
report  of  any  particular  form  of  it — such  form  being 
just  as  likely  beforehand  as  any  other. 

Indeed,  if  "almost  any  proof"  were  capable  of 
overcoming  presumptions  of  millions  to  one  against 
a  fact,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  we  could  reasonably 
reject  any  report  of  anything,  on  the  ground  of 
antecedent  presumptions  against  its  credibility. 

The  Ecclesiastical  Miracles  are  not  delivered  to 
us  by  inspired  historians  ;  nor  do  they  seem  to  form 
any  part  of  the  same  series  of  events  as  the  miracles 
of  the  New  Testament. 

The  miracles  of  the  New  Testament  (setting 
aside  those  wrought  by  Christ  Himself)  appear  to 
have  been  worked  by  a  power  conferred  upon  parti- 
cular persons  according  to  a  regular  law,  in  virtue 
of  which  that  power  was  ordinarily  transmitted 
from  one  person  to  another,  and  the  only  persons 
privileged  thus  to  transmit  that  power  were  the 
Apostles.  The  only  exceptions  to  this  rule  were, 
(1.)  the  Apostles  themselves,  and  (2.)  the  family^  of 
Cornelius,  who  were  the  first-fruits  of  the  Gentiles. 
In  all  other  cases,  miraculous  gifts  were  confen'ed 
only  by  the  laying  on  of  the  Apostles'  hands.  By 
this  arrangement,  it  is  evident  that  a  provision  was 
made  for  the  total  ceasing  of  that  miraculous  dis- 
pensation within  a  limited  period:  because,  on  the 
death  of  the  last  of  the  Apostles,  the  ordinary  chan- 
nels would  be  all  stopped  through  which  such  gitls 
were  transmitted  in  the  Church. 

Thus,  in  Acts  viii.,  though  Philip  is  described  as 
working  many  mii-acles  among  the  Samaritans,  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  ever  thought  of  imparting 
the  same  power  to  any  of  his  converts.  That  is 
reserve;]  for  the  Apostles  Peter  and  John,  who 
confer  the  miraculous  gifts  by  the  imposition  of 
their  hands :  and  this  power,  of  impaiting  mira- 
culous gifts  to  others,  is  clearly  recognized  by  Simon 
Magus  as  a  distinct  privilege  belonging  to  the  Apos- 
tles, and  quite  beyond  anything  that  He  had  seen 
exercised  before.  "  When  Simon  saw  that  through 
laying  on  of  the  Apostles'  hands  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
given,  he  offered  them  monev,  saying.  Give  me  also 
this  powei',  tliat,  on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands,  he  may 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost." 

This  separation  of  the  Rite  by  which  miraculous 
gifts  were  conferred  fiom  Baptism,  by  which  mem- 
bers were  admitted  into  the  Chuich,  seems  to  have 
been  wisely  ordained  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the 
two  ideas,  of  ordinary  and  extraordinary  gifts, 
distinct,  and  providing  for  the  approaching  cessation 
of  the  former  without  shaking  the  stability  of  an 
institution  which  was  designed  to  be  a  permanent 
Sacrament  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ. 

And  it  may  also  be  observed  in  passing,  that  this 
same  separation  of  the  etlects  of  these  two  Rites, 
affords  a  presumption  that  the  miraculous  gifts, 
bestowed,  as  far  as  we  can  see,  only  in  the  former, 
were  not  merely  the  result  of  highly  raised  enthu- 
siasm ;  because  experience  shows  that  violent  symp- 
toms of  enthusiastic  transport  would  have  been 
much  more  likely  to  have  shown  themselves  in  the 
first  ardour  of  conversion  than  at  a  later  period — in 
the  very  cjisis  of  a  change,  than  after  that  change 
had  been  confirmed  and  settled. 

One  passage  has,  indeed,  been  appealed  to  as 
seeming  to  indicate  the  permanent  residence  of  mi- 
raculous powers  in  the  Christian  Church  through 
all  ages,  Mark  xvi.  17,  18.     But— 


MIRACLES 

(1.)  That  passage  itself  is  of  doubtful  authority, 
since  we  know  that  it  was  omitted  in  most  of  the 
Greek  MSS.  which  Eusebius  was  able  to  e.xamine 
in  the  4th  century ;  aud  it  is  still  wanting  in  some 
of  the  most  important  that  remain  to  us. 

(2.)  It  does  not  necessarily  imply  more  than  a 
promise  that  such  miraculous  poweis  should  exhibit 
themselves  among  the  immediate  converts  of  the 
Apostles. 

And  (3.)  this  latter  interpretation  is  supported 
by  what  follows — "  And  they  went  forth,  and 
preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them, 
and  confirming  the  xcord  with  the  accompanying 
signs." 

It  is,  indeed,  confessed  by  the  latest  and  ablest 
defenders  of  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  that  the 
great  mass  of  them  were  essentially  a  new  dispen- 
sation ;  but  it  is  contended,  that  by  those  who  believe 
in  the  Scripture  miracles,  no  strong  antecedent  im- 
probability against  such  a  dispensation  can  be  rea- 
sonably entertained  ;  because,  for  them,  the  Scripture 
miracles  have  already  "  borne  the  brunt "  of  the 
infidel  objection,  and  "  broken  the  ice." 

But  this  is  wholly  to  mistake  the  matter. 

If  the  only  objection  antecedently  to  proof  against 
the  ecclesiastical  miracles  were  a  presumption  of 
their  impossibility  or  incredibility — simply  as  mi- 
racles, this  allegation  might  be  pertinent ;  because 
he  that  admits  that  a  miracle  has  taken  place,  can- 
not consistently  hold  that  a  miracle  as  such  is  im- 
possible or  incredible.  But  the  antecedent  pre- 
sumption against  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  rises 
upon  lour  distinct  grounds,  no  one  of  which  can  be 
properly  called  a  gi'ound  of  infidel  objection. 

(1.)  It  arises  from  the  very  nature  of  probabi- 
lity, and  the  constitution  of  the  human  mind,  which 
compels  us  to  take  the  analogy  of  general  expe- 
rience as  a  measure  of  likelihood.  And  this  pre- 
sumption it  is  manifest  is  neither  religiotLs  nor 
irreligious,  but  antecedent  to,  and  involved  in,  all 
probable  reasoning. 

A  miracle  may  be  said  to  take  place  when,  under 
certain  moral  circumstances,  a  physical  consequent 
follows  upon  an  antecedent  which  general  experience 
shows  to  have  no  natural  aptitude  for  producing 
such  a  consequent ;  or,  when  a  consequent  ftiils  to 
follow  upon  an  antecedent  which  is  always  attended 
by  that  consequent  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature. 
A  blind  man  recovering  sight  upon  his  touching 
the  bones  of  SS.  Gei-vasius  aud  Protasius,  is  an  in- 
stance of  the  foi-mer.  St.  Alban,  walking  after  his 
head  was  cut  off,  and  cai'iying  it  in  his  hand,  may 
be  given  as  an  example  of  the  latter  kind  of  miracle. 
Now,  though  such  occurrences  cannot  be  called  im- 
possible, because  they  involve  no  self-contradiction 
in  the  notion  of  them,  and  we  know  that  there  is  a 
power  in  existence  quite  adequate  to  produce  them, 
yet  they  must  alwavs  remain  antecedently  impro- 
bable, unless  we  can  see  reasons  for  expecting  that 
that  power  will  produce  them.  The  invincible 
original  instinct  of  our  nature — without  reliance  on 
which  we  could  not  set  one  foot  before  another — 
teaches  as  its  fii-st  lesson  to  expect  similar  conse- 
quents upon  what  seem  similar  physical  antecedents ; 
and  the  results  of  this  instinctive  belief,  checked, 
modified,  and  confirmed  by  the  experience  of  man- 
kind in  countless  times,  places,  and  circumstances, 
constitutes  what  is  called  our  knowledge  of  the 
laws  of  nature.  Destroy,  or  even  shake,  this  know- 
ledge, as  applied  to  practice  in  ordinary  life,  and 
all  the  uses  and  purposes  of  life  are  at  an  end.  If 
the  real  sequences  of  things  were  liable,  like  thosf- 


MIRACLES 

in  a  dream,  to  random  and  capricious  variations, 
on  which  no  one  could  calculate  beforehand,  there 
would  be  no  measures  of  probability  or  improba- 
bility. If  e.  g.  it  weie  a  measuring  case  whether, 
upon  immersing  a  lighted  candle  in  water,  the 
candle  should  be  extinguished,  or  the  water  ignited, 
— or,  whethei-  inhaling  the  common  air  should  sup- 
port life  or  produce  death — it  is  plain  that  the 
whole  course  of  the  world  would  be  brought  to  a 
stand-still.  There  would  be  no  order  of  nature  at 
all ;  and  all  the  rules  that  are  built  on  the  sta- 
bility of  that  order,  and  all  the  measures  of  judg- 
ment that  are  derived  from  it,  would  be  worth 
nothing.  We  should  be  living  in  fairy-land,  not  on 
earth. 

(2.)  This  general  antecedent  presumption  against 
miracle.s,  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of  general 
e.xperience,  is  (as  we  have  said)  neitlier  religious  nor 
irreligious — neither  rational  nor  irrational — but 
springs  from  the  very  nature  of  probability :  and  it 
cannot  be  denied  without  shaking  the  basis  of  all 
probable  evidence,  whether  for  or  against  religion. 

Nor  does  the  admission  of  the  existence  of  the 
Deity,  or  the  admission  of  the  actiial  occurrence  of 
the  Christian  miracles,  tend  to  remove  this  ante- 
cedent improbability  against  miracles  circumsUmced 
as  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  generally  are. 

If,  indeed,  the  onlij  presumption  against  miracles 
were  one  against  theii-  possihilitij — this  might  be 
truly  described  as  an  atheistic  presumption ;  and 
then  the  proof,  from  natural  reason,  of  the  existence 
of  a  God,  or  the  proof  of  the  actual  occurrence  of 
any  one  miracle  would  wholly  remove  that  pre- 
sumption ;  and,  upon  the  removal  of  that  presump- 
tion, there  would  i  euiaiu  none  at  all  against  miracles, 
however  frequent  or  however  strange ;  and  mira- 
culous occurrences  woidd  be  as  easily  proved,  and 
also  as  likely  hcforehmd,  as  the  most  ordinary 
events;  so  that  there  would  be  no  improbability  of 
a  miracle  being  wrought  at  any  moment,  or  upon 
any  conceivable  occasion  ;  and  the  slightest  testi- 
mony would  suffice  to  establish  the  truth  of  any 
story,  however  widely  at  variance  with  the  analogy 
of  ordinary  ex))erience. 

But  the  true  presumption  against  miracles  is  not 
against  their  possibility,  but  their  probability.  And 
this  presumption  cannot  be  wholly  removed  by 
showing  an  adequate  cause  ;  unless  we  hold  that 
all  presumptions  drawn  from  the  analogy  of  e.xpe- 
rience or  the  assumed  stability  of  the  order  of 
natuie  are  removed  by  showing  the  existence  of  a 
cause  capable  of  changing  the  order  of  nature — 
i.  e.  mdess  we  hold  tluit  the  admission  of  Cod's 
existence  involves  tlio  destruction  of  (dl  measures 
of  probability  drawn  fiom  the  analogy  of  expe- 
lience.  The  ordinary  sequences  of  nature  are, 
doubtless,  the  result  of  the  Divine  will.  But  to 
suppose  the  Divine  will  to  vary  its  mode  of  ojicra- 
tion  in  conjunctures,  upon  which  it  would  be  im- 
possible to  CJilculate,  and  under  circumstances  ajipa- 
rently  similar  to  those  which  are  perpetually 
recurring,  would  be  to  supjwse  that  the  course  of 
things  is  (to  all  intents  and  purposes  of  human  life) 
as  mutable  and  capricious  as  if  it  were  governed 
by  mere  chance. 

Nor  can  the  admission  that  Hod  has  actually 
wrought  such  miiacles  as  attest  the  Christian  re- 
ligion, remove  the  general  presumption  against 
miracles  as  improbable  occurrences.  The  evidence 
on  which  revelation  stands  has  proved  that  the 
Alniiglity  hiis,  under  special  circumstances  and  for 
special   ends,    exerted   his   power  of  chafiging  the 


MIRACLES 


383  rf 


ordinary  course  of  natui'e.  Tin's  may  be  fairly  i-elied 
on  as  mitigating  the  presumption  against  miracles 
under  the  same  circumstances  as  those  which  it  has 
established  :  but  miracles  which  cannot  avail  them- 
selves of  the  benefit  of  that  law  (as  it  may  be  called) 
of  miracles,  which  such  conditions  indicate,  are 
plainly  involved  in  all  the  antecedent  difficulties 
which  attach  to  miracles  in  general,  as  varying  tiom 
the  law  of  nature,  besides  the  special  difficulties 
which  belong  to  them  as  varying  from  the  law  of 
miracles,  so  far  as  we  know  anything  of  that  law. 
And  it  is  vain  to  allege  that  (lod  may  have  other 
ends  for  miracles  than  those  j)lain  ones  for  which 
the  Scripture  miracles  were  wrought.  Such  a  plea 
can  be  of  no  weight,  unle.ss  we  can  change  at  plea- 
sure the  "  may"  into  a  "  must  "  or  "  has."  Until 
the  design  appear,  we  cannot  use  it  as  an  element 
of  probability;  but  we  must,  in  the  meanwhile, 
determine  the  question  by  the  ordinary  rules  which 
regulate  the  proof  of  facts.  A  mere  "  may  "  is 
counterbalanced  by  a  "may  not."  It  cannot  surely 
be  meant  that  miracles  have,  by  the  proof  of  a 
revelation,  ceased  to  be  miracles  —  i.  e.  rare  and 
wonderful  occun-ences — so  as  to  make  the  chances 
equal  of  a  miracle  and  an  oi'dinary  event.  And  if 
this  be  not  held,  then  it  must  be  admitted  that  the 
laws  which  regulate  miracles  are,  in  some  way  or 
othei-,  laws  which  render  them  essentially  strange 
or  unusual  events,  and  insure  the  general  stability 
of  the  course  of  nature.  Whatever  other  elements 
enter  into  the  law  of  miracles,  a  necessary  infre- 
quency  is  one  of  them :  and  until  we  can  see  some 
of  the  positive  elements  of  the  law  of  miiacles  in 
operation  (i.  e.  some  of  the  elements  which  do  not 
check,  but  require  miracles)  this  negative  element, 
which  we  do  see,  must  act  strongly  against  the  pro- 
bability of  their  recuiTence. 

It  is  indeed  quite  true  that  Christianity  has 
revealed  to  us  the  permanent  operation  of  a  super- 
natural order  of  things  actually  going  on  around  us. 
But  there  is  nothing  in  the  notion  of  such  a  super- 
natural system  as  the  Christian  dispensation  is,  to 
lead  us  to  expect  continual  interferences  with  the  com- 
mon course  of  nature.  Not  the  necessity  oi  proving 
its  supernatural  character:  for  (1.)  that  has  been 
sufficiently  proved  once  for  all,  and  the  proof  suffi- 
ciently attested  to  us,  and  (2.)  it  is  not  pretended 
that  the  mass  of  legendary  miracles  are,  in  this 
sense,  evidential.  Nor  are  such  continual  miracles 
involved  in  it  by  express  promise,  or  by  tlie  very 
frame  of  its  constitution.  For  they  manifestly  are 
not.  "  So  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  if  a  man 
should  cast  seed  into  the  ground,  and  should  sleep 
and  rise,  night  and  day,  and  the  seed  should  spring 
and  grow  up  he  knoweth  cot  how,"  &c. — the  pa- 
rable manifestly  indicating  that  the  ordinary  visible 
course  of  things  is  only  intertered  with  by  the 
Divine  husbandman,  in  planting  and  reaping  the 
great  harvest.  Nor  do  the  answers  given  to  prayei-, 
or  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  our  minds, 
interfere  discoverably  with  any  one  law  of  outward 
nature,  or  of  the  inward  economy  of  our  mental 
frame.  The  system  of  grace  is,  indeed,  superna- 
tural, but,  in  no  sense  and  in  no  case,  pi-nternatural . 
It  disturbs  in  no  way  the  regular  sequences  which 
all  men's  experience  teaches  them  to  anticipate  as 
not  improbable. 

(3.)  It  is  acknowledged  by  the  ablest  defenders  of 
the  ecclesiastical  miracles  that,  for  the  most  part, 
they  belong  to  those  classes  of  miracles  which  are 
described  as  ambiguous  and  tentative — i.  e.  they  are 
cases  in  wliich  the  eflecfc   if  it  occurred  at  all)  may 


383  e 


MIEACLES 


have  been  tlie  result  of  natural  causes,  and  where, 
upon  the  application  of  the  same  means,  the  desired 
ettect  was  only  sometimes  produced.  These  cha- 
racters are  always  highly  suspicious  marks.  And 
though  it  is  quite  true— as  has  been  lemarked 
alreaiiy — that  real  miracles,  and  such  as  wei-e 
clearly  discernible  as  such  to  the  original  spectators, 
may  be  so  imperfectly  reported  to  us  as  to  wear 
an  ambiguous  appearance — it  still  remains  a  viola- 
tion of  aU  the  laws  of  evidence  to  admit  a  narrative 
■  which  leaves  a  miracle  ambiguous  as  the  ground  nf 
our  belief  that  a  miiacle  has  really  been  wrought. 
If  an  inspired  author  declare  a  particular  effect  to 
have  been  wrought  by  the  immediate  interposition 
of  God,  we  then  admit  the  miraculous  nature  of 
that  event  on  his  authority,  though  his  description 
of  its  outward  circumstances  may  not  be  full  enough 
to  enable  us  to  ibrm  such  a  judgment  of  it  from 
the  report  of  those  circumstances  alone :  or  if, 
amongst  a  series  of  indubitable  miracles,  some  are 
but  hastily  and  loosely  reported  to  us,  we  may 
safely  admit  them  as  a  part  of  that  series,  though 
if  we  met  them  in  any  other  connexion  we  should 
view  them  in  a  different  light.  Thus,  if  a  skilful 
and  experienced  physician  records  his  judgment  of 
the  nature  of  a  particular  disorder,  well  known  to 
him,  and  in  the  diagnosis  of  which  it  was  almost 
impossible  for  him  to  be  mistaken,  we  may  safely 
take  his  word  for  that,  even  though  he  may  have 
mentioned  only  a  few  of  the  symptoms  which 
marked  a  particular  case :  or,  if  we  knew  that  the 
plague  was  raging  at  a  particular  spot  and  time, 
it  would  require  much  less  evidence  to  convince  us 
that  a  particular  person  had  died  of  that  distemper 
there  and  then,  than  if  his  death  were  attributed  to 
that  disease  in  a  place  which  the  plague  had  never 
visited  for  centuries  before  and  after  the  alleged 
occurrence  of  his  case. 

(4.)  Though  it  is  not  true  that  the  Scripture- 
miracles  have  so  "  borne  the  brunt"  of  the  a  prion 
objection  to  miracles  as  to  remove  all  peculiar  pre- 
sumption against  them  as  improbable  events,  there 
is  a  sense  in  which  they  may  be  truly  said  to  have 
prepared  the  way  for  those  of  the  ecclesiastical 
legends.  But  it  is  one  which  aggravates,  instead 
of  extenuating,  their  improbability.  The  narratives 
of  the  Scripture-miracles  may  very  probably  have 
tended  to  raise  an  expectation  of  miracles  in  the 
minds  of  weak  and  credulous  persons,  and  to  en- 
courage designing  men  to  attempt  an  imitation  of 
them.  And  this  suspicion  is  confirmed  when  we 
observe  that  it  is  precisely  those  instances  of  Scrip- 
ture-miracles which  are  most  easily  imitable  by 
fraud,  or  those  which  are  most  apt  to  strike  a  wild 
and  mythical  fancy,  which  seem  to  be  the  types 
which — with  extravagant  exaggeration  and  distor- 
tion— are  principally  copied  in  the  ecclesiastical 
miracles.  In  this  sense  it  may  be  said  that  the 
Scripture  narratives  "  broke  the  ice,"  and  prepared 
the  way  for  a  whole  succession  of  legends  ;  just  as 
any  gi-eat  and  striking  character  is  followed  by  a 
host  of  imitators,  who  endeavour  to  reproduce  him, 
not  bv  copying  what  is  really  essential  to  his  great- 
ness, but  by  exaggerating  and  dist*irting  some  minor 
peculiarities  in  wliich  his  great  qualities  may  some- 
times have  been  exhibited. 

But — apart  from  any  leading  preparation  thus 
afforded — we  know  that  the  ignorance,  fraud,  and 
enthusiasm  of  mankind  have  in  almost  every  age 
and  country  produced  such  a  numerous  spawn  of 
spiu-ious  prodigies,  as  to  make  false  stories  of  mi- 
racles, under  certam  circumst<ances,  a  thing  to  be 


MIRACLES 

'naturally  expected.  Hence,  unless  it  can  be  dis- 
tinctly shown,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that 
narratives  of  mii'acles  are  not  attributable  to  such 
causes — that  they  are  not  the  offspring  of  such  a 
parentage — the  reasonable  rules  of  evidence  seem  to 
require  that  we  should  refer  them  to  their  usual 
and  best  known  causes. 

Nor  can  there  be,  as  some  weak  persons  are  apt 
to  imagine,  any  impiety  in  such  a  course.  On  the 
•contrary,  true  piety,  or  religious  reverence  of  God, 
requires  us  to  abstain  with  scrupulous  care  from 
attributing  to  Him  anj'  works  which  we  have  not 
good  reason  for  believing  Him  to  have  wrought. 
It  is  not  piety,  but  profane  audacity,  which  ven- 
tui'es  to  refer  to  God  that  which,  according  to  the 
best  rules  of  probability  which  He  has  Himself 
furnished  us  with,  is  most  likely  to  have  been  the 
product  of  human  ignorance,  or  fraud,  or  folly. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  we  may  conclude  that 
the  mass  of  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  do  not  ibrm 
any  part  of  the  same  series  as  those  related  in 
Scripture,  which  latter  are,  therefore,  unaffected  by 
any  decision  we  may  come  to  with  respect  to  the 
former ;  and  that  they  are  pressed  by  the  weight 
of  three  distinct  presumptions  against  them — being 
improbable  (1)  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of 
nature;  (2)  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of  the 
Scripture-miracles;  (3)  as  resembling  those  legend- 
ary stories  which  are  the  known  product  of  the 
credulity  or  imposture  ol'  niiinkind. 

The  controversy  respecting  the  possibility  of  mi- 
racles is  as  old  as  philosophic  literature.  There  is  a 
very  clear  view  of  it,  as  it  stood  in  the  Pagan  world, 
given  by  Cicero  in  his  books  de  Divinatione.  In  the 
works  of  Josephus  there  are,  occasionally,  suggestions 
of  naturalistic  explanations  of  0.  T.  miracles :  but 
these  seem  rather  thrown  out  for  the  purpose  of 
gratifying  sceptical  Pagan  readers  than  as  expressions 
of  his  own  belief.  The  other  chief  authorities  for 
Jewish  opinion  are,  Maimonides,  Moreh  Nebochim, 
lib.  2,  c.  o5,  and  the  Firke  Aboth,  in  Surenhusius' 
Mishna,  tom.  iv.  p.  469,  and  Abarbanel,  yiiplialoth 
Elohim,  p.  93.  It  is  hardly  worth  while  noticing 
the  extravagant  hypothesis  of  Cardan  I^De  contra- 
dictione  Medicomm,  1.  2,  tract.  2)  and  of  some 
Itidian  atheists,  who  referred  the  Christian  miracles 
to  the  influence  of  the  stai's.  But  a  new  era  in  the 
dispute  began  with  Spinoza's  Tractatvs  Theologico- 
politici,  which  contained  the  germs  of  almost  all  the 
infidel  theories  which  have  since  appeared.  A  list 
of  the  principal  replies  to  it  may  be  seen  in  Fabricius, 
Delectus  Argumcntorum,  &c.,  c.  43,  p.  697,  Ham- 
burg, 1725. 

A  full  account  of  the  controversy  in  England  with 
the  deists,  during  the  last  century,  will  be  found  in 
Iceland's  View  of  the  Deistical  Writers,  reprinted  at 
London,  1836. 

The  debate  was  renewed,  about  the  middle  of  that 
century,  by  the  publication  of  Hume's  celebrated 
essay  —  the  chief  replies  to  which  are:  Principal 
Campbell's  Dissertation  on  Miracles ;  Hey's  Nor- 
risian  Lectures,  vol.  i.  pp.  127-200  ;  Bp.  Elrington's 
Donnellan  Lectures,  Dublin,  1796 ;  Dr.  Thomas 
Brown,  On  Cause  and  Effect ;  Paley's  Evidences 
( Introduction) ;  Archbp.  Whately,  Logic  (Appendix;, 
and  his  Historic  Doubts  re^pectimj  Napoleon  Bona- 
parte [the  argument  of  which  the  writer  of  this 
article  has  attempted  to  apply  to  the  objections  of 
Strauss  in  Llistoric  Certainties,  or  the  Chronicles  of 
Ecnarf,  Parker,  London,  1862].  See  also  an  in- 
teresting work  by  the  late  Dean  Lyall,  Propoodia 
Prop/wiica,    reprinted    1854,    Rivington,    London. 


MIRIAM 

Compare  also  Bp.  Douglas,  Criterion,  or  Miracles  I 
Examined,  &c.,  London,  1754. 

Within  the  last  few  years  the  contioversy  has 
been  reopened  by  the  late  Professor  Baden  Powell  in 
The  Uiiitij  of  Worlds,  and  some  remarks  on  the 
study  of  evidences  published  in  the  now  celebrated 
\o\um&  o'l  Essays  and  Rcr.iev:s.  It  would  be  pre- 
mature, at  present,  to  give  a  list  of  the  I'eplies  to  so 
recent  a  work. 

The  question  of  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  was 
slightly  touched  by  Spencer  in  his  notes  on  Origen 
against  Celsus,  and  more  fully  by  Le  Rloine;  but 
did  not  attract  general  attention  till  Middleton  pub- 
lished his  famous  Free ' Enquirij ,  1748.  Several 
replies  were  written  by  Dodwell  (junior),  Chapman, 
Church,  &c.,  which  do  not  seem  to  have  attracted 
much  permanent  attention.  Some  good  remarks  on 
the  general  subject  occur  in  Jortin's  Remarks  on 
Ecclesiasiical  History,  and  in  Warburton's  Julian. 
This  controversy  also  has  of  late  years  been  re- 
opened by  Dr.  Newman,  in  an  essay  on  miracles 
originally  prefixed  to  a  translation  of  Fleury's 
Ecck'siadical  History,  and  since  republished  in  a 
separate  form.  Dr.  Newman  had  previously,  while 
a  Pi'otestant,  examined  the  whole  subject  of  miracles 
in  an  article  upon  Apollonius  Tyanaeus  iu  the 
Encyclopaedia  Metropolitana.  [W.  F.] 

MIR'IAM  {n'nO,    "their   rebellion:"    LXX. 

Mapioyit;  hence  Joseph.  MapidfivT] :  in  the  N.  T. 
Mapid/j.  or  Mopi'a ;  Mapidfi  being  the  form  always 
employed  for  the  nominative  case  of  the  name  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  though  it  is  declined  Hapias,  Mapia ; 
while  Mapla  is  employed  in  all  cases  for  the  thiee 
other  Maries).  The  name  in  the  O.  T.  is  given  to 
two  persons  only ;  the  sister  of  JMoses,  and  a  de- 
scendant of  Caleb.  At  the  time  of  the  Christian 
era  it  seems  to  have  been  common.  Amongst  others 
who  bore  it  was  Herod's  celebrated  wife  and  victim, 
Mai-iamne.  And  through  the  Virgin  Mary,  it  has 
become  the  most  frequent  female  name  in  Chris- 
tendom. 

1.  Miriam,  the  sister  of  Moses,  was  the  eldest  of 
that  sacred  family  ;  and  she  first  appears,  probably 
as  a  young  girl,  watching  her  inf;mt  brother's  cradle 
in  the  Nile  (Ex.  ii.  4),  and  suggesting  her  mother 
as  a  nurse  (ib.  7).  The  independent  and  high  posi- 
tion given  by  her  superiority  of  age  she  never  lost. 
''  The  sister  of  Aaron "  is  her  Biblical  distinction 
(Ex.  .XV.  '20).  In  Num.  sii.  1  she  is  placed  before 
Aaron  ;  and  in  Mic.  vi.  4  reckoned  as  amongst  the 
Three  Deliverers — "  I  sent  before  thee  Jloses  and 
Aaron  and  IMiriam."  She  is  the  first  personage  in 
that  household  to  whom  the  prophetic  gifts  are 
direcjly  ascribed — "  Miriam  the  Prophetess"  is  her 
acknowledged  title  (Ex.  xv.  20).  The  prophetic 
power  showed  itself  in  her  under  the  same  form  as 
that  which  it  assumed  in  the  ilays  of  Samuel  and 
David, — poetiy,  accompanied  with  music  and  pro- 
cessions. The  only  instance  of  this  prophetic  gift 
is  when,  after  the  passage  of  the  Ked  Sea,  she  takes 
a  cymbal  iu  her  hand,  and  goes  forth,  like  the 
Hebrew  maidens  in  later  times  after  a  victory 
(Judg.  V.  1,  xi.  34  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6  ;  Ps.  Ixviii. 
U,  25),  followe<l  by  the  whole  female  population 
of  Israel,  also  beating  their  cymbals  and  striking 

their  guitars  (nVnp,  mi-^trauslated  "  dances"). 
It  docs  not  appear  how  far  they  joined  in  the  whole 
of  the  song  (Ex.  xv.  1-lfl)  ;  but  the  opening  words 
are  repeated  again  by  Miriam  herself  at  the  close, 
in  the  form  of  a  command  to  the  Hebrew  women. 


MIRIAM 


383/ 


"  She  answered  them,  saying.  Sing  ye  to  Jehovah, 
for  He  hath  triumphed  gloriously:  the  hoise  and 
his  rider  hath  He  thrown  into  the  sea." 

She  took  the  lead,  with  Aaron,  iu  the  complaint 
against  Moses  for  his  marriage  with  a  Cushite. 
[Zii'poPvAh].  "  Hath  Jehovah  spoken  by  Moses? 
Hath  He  not  also  spoken  by  us?"  (iNum.  xii.  1,  2). 
The  question  implies  that  the  pi'ophetic  gift  was 
exercised  by  them ;  while  the  answer  implies  that  it 
was  communicated  in  a  less  direct  form  than  to  Moses. 
"  If  there  be  a  prophet  among  you,  I  Jehovah  will 
make  myself  known  unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will 
speak  unto  him  in  a  dream.     My  servant  Moses  is 

not  so With  him  will  I  spealv  mouth  to  mouth, 

even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark  speeches"  (Num. 
xii.  6-8).  A  stern  rebuke  was  administered  in 
front  of  the  sacred  Tent  to  both  Aaron  and  Miriam. 
But  the  punishment  fell  on  Miriam,  as  the  chief 
otlender.  The  hateful  Egyptian  leprosy,  of  which 
for  a  moment  the  sign  had  been  seen  on  the  haul 
of  her  vounger  brother,  broke  out  over  the  whole 
person  of  the  proud  prophetess.  How  grand  was 
her  position, and  how  hea^y  the  blow,  is  implied  in  the 
ciy  of  anguish  which  goes  up  from  both  her  brothers 
— "  Alas,  my  lord  !  .  .  .  Let  her  not  be  as  one  dead, 
of  whom  the  flesh  is  half  consumed  when  he  cometh 
out  of  his  mother's  womb.  . . .  Heal  her  now,  0  God  ! 
I  beseech  thee."  And  it  is  not  less  evident  in  the 
silent  grief  of  the  nation  :  "  The  jieople  journeyed 
not  till  Miriam  was  brought  in  again"  (Num.  xii. 
10-15).  The  same  feeling  is  reflected,  though  in  a 
strange  and  distorted  form,  in  the  ancient  tradition  of 
the  drying-up  and  re-flowing  of  the  marvellous  well 
of  the  Wanderings.     [Beer,  vol.  i.  p.  179  k.] 

This  stroke,  and  its  removal,  which  took  place  at 
Hazeroth,  form  the  last  public  event  of  Miriam's  life. 
She  died  towards  the  close  of  the  wanderings  at 
Kadesh,  and  was  buried  there  (Num.  xx.  1).  Her 
tomb  was  shown  near  Petra  in  the  days  of  Jerome 
{De  Loc.  Heh.  in  voce  "  Cades  Barnea  ").  Accord- 
ing to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  4,  §6), 
her  death  took  place  on  the  new  moon  of  the  month 
Xanthicus  {i.  e.  about  the  end  of  Februaiy)  ;  which 
seems  to  imply  that  the  anniversary  was  still  ob- 
served in  the  time  of  JosephuE.  The  burial,  he 
adds,  took  place  with  gi-eat  pomp  on  a  mountain 
called  Zin  («.  e.  the  wilderness  of  Zin)  ;  and  the 
mourning — which  lasted,  as  in  the  case  of  her 
brothers,  for  thirty  days — was  closed  by  the  insti- 
tution of  the  purification  through  the  sacrifice  of 
the  heifer  (Num.  xix.  1-10),  which  in  the  Pentateuch 
immediately  precedes  the  story  of  her  death. 

According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  2,  §4,  and  G,  §1), 
she  was  married  to  the  famous  HiiR,  and,  through 
him,  was  grandmother  of  the  architect  Bezaleel. 
In  the  Koran  (ch.iii.)  she  is  confounded  with  the 
Virgin  Maiy;  and  hence  the  Holy  Family  is  called 
the  Family  of  Amrara,or  Imran.  (See  also  D'Her- 
belot,  Bibl.  Orient.  "  Zahiria.")  In  other  Arabic 
trailitions  her  name  is  given  as  Kolthum  (see  Weil's 
Bihl.  Ley  ends,  101). 

2.  (Both  Vat.  and  Alex,  rhv  Maidiv:  Mariam). 
A  person — whether  man  or  woman  docs  not  appear 
— mentioned  in  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
and  hou.se  of  Caleb  (1  Chr.  iv.  17);  but  in  the 
present  state  of  the  Hebrew  text  it  is  impossible  to 
say  moie  than  that  IMiriam  was  sister  or  brother  to 
the  founder  of  the  town  of  Eshtemoa.  Out  of  the 
numerous  conjectures  of  critics  and  translatoi-s  the 
following  may  be  noticed  :  (a)  that  of  the  LX.X., 
"  and  Jether  begat  M. ;"  and  (6)  that  of  Berthean 
{i'hronik,  ad    loc),    that    Miriam,  Shammai,  and 


383  fir  MIRMA 

Ishbah  are  the  childieii  of  Mered  by  his  Egyptian 
wife  Bithiah,  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh :  the  last 
clause  of  ver.  18  having  beeu  erroneously  transposed 
tVom  its  proper  place  in  ver.  17.  [A.  P.  .S.] 

MIR'MA  (nOnO  :   Mapfid  :   Marma).  A  Ben- 

jamite,  ''chief  of  the  fathers,"  son  ofShaharaim  by 
his  wife  Hodesh  ;  born  in  the  land  of  Moab  (1  Chr. 
viii.  10). 

MIRROR.      The  two  words,   HNID,  77iarah 

(Ex.  xxxviii.  8  ;  Kdroirrpov,  speculum),  and  ^X"l, 

rSi  (Job  xxxvii.  18),  are  rendered  "  looking  glass" 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  fi-om  the  context  evidently  denote 


MIRROR 

a  mirror  of  polished  metal.  The  niiri'ors  of  the 
women  of  the  congi-egation,  according  to  the  foiTner 
passage,  furnislied  the  bronze  for  the  laver  of  the 
tabernacle,  and  in  the  latter  the  beauty  of  the  figure 
is  heightened  by  rendering  "  Wilt  thou  beat  out 
with  him  the  clouds,  strong  as  a  molten  miiTor  ?  "  ; 
the  word  translated  "spread  out"  in  the  A.  V. 
being  that  which  is  properly  applied  to  the  ham- 
mering of  metals  into  plates,  and  from  which  the 
Hebrew  term  for  "  firmament"  is  derived.  [Fir- 
mament.] The  metaphor  in  Deut.  xxviii.  23, 
"  Thy  heaven  that  is  over  thy  head  shall  be  brass," 
derived  its  force  fi-om  the  same  popular  belief  in  the 
solidity  of  the  sky. 


Egj-plian  Mirrors.     1,  3,  4.  from  Jh-.  Salt's  collection  ;  2,  from  a  iiainting  at  Thel 


1 11  inches  higli. 


The  Hebrew  women  on  coming  out  of  Egypt 
probably  brought  with  them  mirrors  like  those 
which  were  used  by  the  Egyptians,  and  were  made 
of  a  mixed  metal,  chiefly  copper,  wrought  with 
such  admirable  skill,  says  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  {Anc. 
Eg.  iii.  384),  that  they  were  "susceptible  of  a 
lustre,  which  has  even  been  partially  revived  at  the 
present  day,  in  some  of  those  discovered  at  Thebes, 
though  buried  in  the  earth  for  many  centuries.  The 
mirror  itself  was  nearly  round,  inserted  into  a  handle 
of  wood,  stone,  or  metal,  whose  form  varied  accord- 
ing to  tlie  taste  of  the  owner.  Some  presented  the 
figure  of  a  female,  a  flower,  a  column,  or  a  rod 
ornamented  with  the  head  of  Athor,  a  bird,  or  a 
fancy  device  ;  and  sometimes  the  face  of  a  Typho- 
nian  monster  was  introduced  to  support  the  mirror, 
serving  as  a  contrast  to  the  features  whose  beauty 
was  displayed  within  it."  With  regard  to  the 
metal  of  which  the  ancient  mirrors  were  composed 
there  is  not  much  diit'erence  of  opinion.  Pliny 
mentions  that  anciently  the  best  were  made  at 
Brundusium  of  a  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  (xxxiii. 
45),  or  of  tin  alone  (xxxiv.  48).  Praxiteles,  in  the 
time  of  Pompey  the  Great,  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  who  made  them  of  silver,  though  these  were 


"  Silver  mirrors  are  alluded  to  in  Plautus  {Mostdl.  i.  4, 
ver,  101)  and  Philostratus  {Icon.  i.  6)  ;  and  one  of  steel  is 
said  to  have  been  found.  They  were  even  made  of  gold 
(Eur.  Bee.  925  ;  Sen.  Nat.  Quaest.  i.  17). 

t"  Apparently  in  allusion  to  this  custom  Moore  {Epicu- 
rean, c.  5),  in  describing  the  maidens  who  danced  at  the 


afterwards  so  common  as,  in  the  time  of  Pliny,  to 
be  used  by  the  ladies'  maids.*  They  are  mentioned 
by  Chry.sostom  among  the  extravagances  of  fashion 
tor  which  he  rebuked  the  ladies  of  his  time,  and 
Seneca  long  before  was  loud  in  his  denunciation  of 
similar  follies  (Natur.  Quaest.  i.  17).  Mirrors  were 
used  by  the  Poman  women  in  the  worship  of  Jtmo 
(Seneca,  £p.  95;  Apiileius,  Metaiii.  xi.  c.  9,  p.  770). 
In  the  Egyjitian  temples,  says  Cyril  of  Alexandria 
{De  udor.  in  Spir.  ix. ;  Opera,  i.  p.  314,  ed.  Paris, 
1G38),  it  was  tlie  custom  for  the  women  to  worship 
in  linen  garments,  holding  a  mirror  in  their  left 
hands  and  a  sistrum  in  their  right,  and  the  Israelites, 
having  fallen  into  the  idolatri&s  of  the  country,  had 
brought  with  them  the  mirrors  which  they  used  in 
their  worship.'" 

According  to  Beckmann  [Hist,  of  Inv.  ii.  G4, 
Bohn),  a  mirror  which  was  discovered  near  Naples 
was  tested,  and  found  to  be  made  of  a  mixture  of 
copper  and  regulus  of  antimony,  with  a  little  lead. 
Beckmann's  editor  (Mr.  Francis)  gives  in  a  note  the 
result  of  an  analysis  of  an  Etruscan  mirror,  which 
he  e.xamined  and  found  to  consist  of  67"  12  copper, 
24-93  tin,  and  8*13  lead,  or  nearly  8  parts  of  copper 
to  3  of  tin  and  1  of  lead,  but  neither  in  this,  nor  in 


Island  Temple  of  the  Moon,  says,  "  As  they  passed  under 
the  lamp,  a  gleam  of  light  flashed  from  their  bosoms, 
which,  I  could  perceive,  was  the  reflection  of  a  small 
minor,  that  in  the  manner  of  the  women  of  the  Kast 
each  of  the  dancers  wore  beneath  her  left  shoulder." 


MIEEOR 

one  analysed  by  Klaproth,  was  there  any  trace  of 
antimony,  which  Becl<mann  asserts  was  unlcnown  to 
the  ancients.  Modern  experiments  have  shown  that 
the  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  produces  the  best 
metal  for  specnla  t  Phil.    Tmm.   vol.  67,  p.  296). 


MISGAB 


383/1 


Ej^yptian  Mirror. 


Much  curious  information  will  be  found  in  Beckmann 
upon  the  various  substances  employed  by  the  ancients 
for  mirrors,  but  which  has  no  bearing  upon  the 
tiubject  of  this  article.     In  his  opinion  it  was  not  till 


Egypliiin  Mirror.  2  antl  3  show  tlio  bottom  of  the  handle,  to 
wiiioh  -soinethiug  has  been  fastened.  (Was  in  the  possession 
of  tlr.  Hogg.) 

the  13th  century  that  gla.s.s,  covered  at  tiie  back  with 
tin  or  lead,  was  used  for  this  j)urpo.se,  the  doubtful 
allusion  in  Pliny  (x.x.\vi.  66)"^  to  the  mirrors  made 
in  the  glass-houses  of   Sidon,  having  reference  to 


experiments  which  vveie  unsuccessful.  Other  allu- 
sions to  bronze  mirrors  will  be  found  in  a  fragment 
of  Aeschylus  preserved  iu  ytobaeus  {Serm.  xviii. 
p.  164,  ed.  Gesner,  1608),  and  in  Callimachus 
\Hijm.  in  Lav.  Pall.  21).  Convex  miiTors  of  po- 
lished steel  are  mentioned  as  common  iu  the  East, 
in  a  manuscript  note  of  Chardiu's  upon  Ecclus.  xii. 
11,  quoted  by  Harmer  i^Observ.  vol.  iv.  c.  11, 
obs.  55). 

The  metal  of  which  the  mirrors  were  composed 
being  liable  to  rust  and  tarnish,  required  to  be  con- 
stantly kept  bright  (Wisd.  vii.  26  ;  Ecclus.  xii.  1 1). 
This  was  done  by  means  of  pouiided  pumice-stone, 
rubbed  on  with  a  sponge,  which  was  generally  sus- 
pended from  the  mirror.  The  Persians  used  emery- 
powder  for  the  same  purpose,  according  to  Chardin 
(quoted  by  Hartmann,  die  Ilebr.  am  Putztische,  ii. 
245).  The  obscure  image  produced  by  a  tarnished 
or  imperfect  mirror,  appears  to  be  alluded  to  in 
1  Cor.  xiii.  12.  On  the  other  hand  a  polished 
mirror  is  among  the  Arabs  the  emblem  of  a  pure 
reputation.  "  More  spotless  than  the  mirror  of  a 
foreign  woman,"  is  with  them  a  proverbial  expres- 
sion, wliich  Meidani  explains  of  a  woman  who  has 
married  out  of  her  country,  and  polishes  her  mirror 
incessantly  that  no  pait  of  her  face  may  escape  her 
observation  (De  Sacy,  Chrest.  Arab.  iii.  p.  236). 

The  obscure  word  D^JI  vil,  gilyonim  (Is.  iii.  23), 

rendered  "glasses"  in  the  A.  V.  after  the  Vulgate 
specula,  and  suj)ported  by  the  Targum,  and  the 
commentaries  of  Kimchi,  Abarbanel,  and  Jarchi,  is 
explained  by  Schroeder  {de  Vest,  Mul.  Hehr.  ch. 
18)  to  signify  "  transparent  dres.ses  "  of  Hne  linen, 
as  the  LXX.  {to,  Sia(pavri  AuKotiviKd),  and  even 
Kimchi  in  his  Lexicon  undersfcmd  it  (comp.  mul- 
ticia,  Juv.  Sat.  ii.  66,  76).  In  support  of  this 
view,  it  is  urged  that  the  terms  which  follow  denote 
articles  of  female  attire  ;  but  in  Is.  viii.  1,  a  word 
closely  resembling  it  is  used  for  a  smooth  writing 
tablet,  and  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is  approved 
by  Gesenius  {Jesaia  i.  215)  and  the  best  authorities. 

[VV.  A.  W.] 

MIS'AEL  (Mto-aTjA:  Misael).  1.  The  same  as 
MiSHAEL  2  (1  Esd.  ix.  44  ;  comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

2.  =MiSHAEL  3,  the  Hebrew  name  of  Meshach 
(Song  of  the  Three  Child,  66). 

MIS'GAB  (3-lb'Sn,   with   the   def.    article; 

'Afj.a.d  :  fortis,  sublimia),  a  place  in  Moab  named 
in  company  with  Neko  and  Kiriathaim  in  the 
lienunciation  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1).  It  appears 
to  be  mentioned  also  in  Is.  xxv.  12,'*  though  there 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  high  fort."  [MoAB,  p.  397.] 
In  neither  passage  is  there  any  clue  to  its  situation 
beyond  the  fact  of  its  mention  with  the  above  two 
places ;  and  even  that  is  of  little  avail,  as  neither 
of  them  have  been  satisfactorily  identified. 

The  name  may  be  derived  from  a  root  signi- 
fying elevation  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1320),  and  in 
that  case  was  probably  attached  to  a  town  situated 
on  a  height.  It  is  possibly  identical  with  MiZPiOH 
OF  Moab,  named  only  in  1  Sam.  xxiii.  3.  Fiirst 
{Handwb.  794a)  understands  "the  Mi.sgab"  to 
mean  the  highland  country  of  !Moab  generally,  but 
its  mention  in  company  with  other  places  which 


=  "  Sidime  quondam  iis  officinis  nobili :  siquidem  etiam 
specula  e.xcogitaverat." 

"  In  tliis  passage  it  is  without  the  article.  As  a  mere 
appellative,  the  word  Misgah  is  frequently  used  in  the 
poetical  parts  of  Siripturc,  in  the  sense  of  a  lofty  plac^ 


of  refuge.  Thus  2  Sam.  xxii.  3;  Pa.  ix.  9,  Ux.  9;  Is. 
xxxiii.  16;  in  which  and  other  places  it  is  variously 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "high  tower,"  "  refnge,"  "de- 
fence," &c.    .See  Stanley,  .s'.  A-  r.  App.  t^M. 


384 


MISHAEL 


we  know  to  ha\'e  horn  definite  spots,  even  though 
not  yet  identitiod  with  certainty,  seems  to  forbid 
this.  _  [G.] 

MISH'AEL  (hiiiy''D :  Miaa-fiX  iu  Ex.  ;  Ui- 
aaSdrj ;  Alex.  MtaaSdi  in  Lev. :  Misael,  Misaole). 
1.  One  of  the  sous  of  Uzziel,  the  uncle  of  Aaron 
and  Moses  (Ex.  vi.  22).  When  Nadab  and  Abihu 
were  struck  dead  for  offering  strange  fire,  Mishael 
and  his  brother  Elzaphan,  at  the  command  of  Moses, 
removed  their  bodies  from  the  sanctuary,  and  biiried 
them  without  the  camp,  their  loose  fitting  tunics'' 
{cuttonoth,  A.  V.  "  coats"),  the  simplest  of  eastern 
dresses,  serving  for  winding-sheets  (Lev.  x.  4,  5). 
The  late  Prof.  Blunt  ( Uiules.  Coincidences,  pt.  i. 
§xiv.)  conjectured  that  the  two  brothers  were  the 
"  men  who  were  defiled  by  the  dead  body  of  a  man  " 
(Num.  ix.  6),  and  thus  prevented  from  keeping  the 
second  passover. 

2.  (MitrarjA. ;  Alex.  M€iaaT]\  :  Misael).  One  of 
those  who  stood  at  Ezra's  left  hand,  on  the  tower  of 
wood  in  the  street  of  the  water  gate,  when  he  read 
the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4).  Called 
Misael  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  44. 

3.  One  of  Daniel's  three  companions  in  captivity, 
and  of  the  blood-royal  of  Judah  (Dan.  i.  6,  7,  11, 
19,  ii.  17).  He  received  the  Babylonian  title  of 
Meshach,  by  which  he  is  better  known.  In  the 
Song  of  the  Three  Children  he  is  called  Misael. 

MISH'AL,  and  mSH'EAL  (both  hii^'t^  ; 
tV  BocreWaj',  Alex.  MatraaA. ;  Madaa,  Alex. 
Maffdxl/ :  Messal,  Misal),  one  of  the  towns  in  the 
territory  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  26),  allotted  to  the 
Cershonite  Levites  (xxi.  30).  It  occurs  between 
Amad  and  Carrael,  but  the  former  remains  un- 
known, and  this  ratalogue  of  Asher  is  so  imperfect, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  conclude  with  certainty  that 
Mishal  was  near  Carmel.  True,  Eusebius  [Onom. 
"  Masan ")  says  that  it  was,  but  he  is  evidently 
merely  quoting  the  list  of  Josluia,  and  not  speaking 
from  actual  knowledge.  In  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr. 
vi.  it  is  given  as  Mashal,  a  form  which  suggests  its 
identity  w'ith  the  MaSALOTH  of  later  history;  but 
there  is  nothing  to  remark  tor  or  Pgainst  this  iden- 
tifiration.  [G.] 

MISH'AM  (Dyp'D:  MLcraiX:  Misaam).  A 
Benjamite,  son  of  Elp;uil,  and  descendant  of  Shaha- 
raim  (1  Chr.  viii,  12). 

MISH'MA  (yO^'n,  Maa-ixd:  Masma). 

1.  A  son  of  Isbmael  and  brother  of  Mibsam 
(Gen.  XXV.  14;  1  Chr.  i.  30).  The  JIasamaui  of 
Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  §21),  may  represent  the  tribe  of 
Mishma ;  their  modern  descendants  are  not  known 
to  the  writer,  but  the  name  (Misma')"^  exists  in 
Arabia,  and  a  tribe  is  called  the  I'>enee-]\Iisma'.  In 
the  Mir-at  ez-Zem:'n  (MS.),  Mishma  is  written 
Jlisma'- — probably  f'roni  Rabbinical  sources;  but  it 
is  added  "  and  he  is  Mesma'ah.^  The  Arabic  word 
has  the  same  signification  as  the  Hebrew. 

2.  A  son  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  25),  brother  of 
JIibsam.  These  brothers  weie  ]ieihaps  named  after 
the  older  brothers,  Mishma  and  Mibsam.    [E.  S.  P.] 

IMISHMAN'NAH  (nSDt^D :  Mafffiwd ;  Alex. 
Maa/xdu  ;    F.  A.   Maa-e/jiavvfi :    MasmancC).      The 


>>  'I'heir  priestly  froclcs,  or  cassocks  (Ex.  xl.  14),  which, 
as  Jardii  remarks,  were  not  burned. 

^  o 


MISREPHOTH 

fourth  of  the  twelve  lion-faced  Gadites,  men  of  the 
host  for  the  battle,  who  "  separated  themselves  unto 
David"  in  the  hold  of  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  10). 

MISH'RAITES,  THE  Cynti'Sn :  'Hixaixa- 
paei/i;  Alex.  7)^aaapaeiv:  Maserei),  the  fourth  of 
the  four  "  fiunilies  of  Kirjath-jearim,"  i.  e.  colonies 
proceeding  therefrom  and  founding  towns  (1  Chr. 
ii.  .53).  Like  the  other  three,  Mishra  is  not  else- 
where mentioned,  nor  does  any  trace  of  it  appear  to 
have  been  since  discovered.  But  in  its  turn  it 
founded — so  the  passage  is  doubtless  to  be  under- 
stood— the  towns  of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  the  former 
of  which  has  been  identified  iu  our  own  times, 
while  tlie  latter  is  possibly  to  be  found  iu  the  same, 
neighbourhood.     [Mahaneh-Dan.]  [G.] 

MISPER'ETH  (finapp  :   Maacpapde  ■,  F.  A. 

M.a(r<papd5  :  Mcspharath).  One  of  those  who  re- 
turned with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  from  Babylon 
(Neh.  vii.  7).  In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called  MiZPAR, 
and  in  1  Esdr.  v.  8  Asphauasus. 

MIS'EEPHOTH-MA'BI  (D^rD  n'lQnb'p, and 
in  xiii.  6,  'D  nb~!L'''D  :  MacrepHv,  and  Maaeped 
'M.efj.(pcofj.aifj. ;  Alex.  Marrpfcpuid  /.laeifj.,  and  Motre- 
pf(poi6  fj-ai/x  :  aquae  Miscrejjhoth),  a  place  in 
northern  Palestine,  in  close  connexion  with  Zidon- 
rabbah,  i.  e.  Sidon.  From  "  the  waters  of  Merom  " 
.loshua  chased  the  Canaanite  kings  to  Zidon  and 
Misrephoth-maim,  and  then  eastward  to  the  "plain 
of  Mizpeh,"  probably  the  great  plain  of  Baalbek — 
the  Bikah  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Buka'a  of  the  modern 
Syrians  (Josh.  xi.  8).  The  name  occurs  once  again 
in  the  enumeration  of  the  districts  remaining  to  be 
conquered  (xiii.  6) — "  ail  the  inhabitants  of  the 
mountain  from  Lebanon  unto  M.  Maim,  *  all  the 
Zidonians."  Taken  as  Hebrew,  the  literal  mean- 
ing of  the  name  is  "  burnings  of  waters,"  and  ac- 
coi-dingly  it  is  taken  by  the  old  interpreters  to  mean 
"  warm  waters,"  whether  natural,  i.  e.  hot  baths 
or  springs — as  by  Kimchi  and  the  interpolation  in 
the  Vulgate  ;  or  artificial,  i.  e.  salt,  glass,  or  smelt- 
ing-works — as  by  Jarchi,  and  the  others  mentioned 
by  Fiirst  (Hdwb.  8036),  Rodiger  (in  Gesen.  Thes. 
1341),  and  Keil  (Josua,  ad  loc). 

Lord  A.  Hervey  [Genealogies  &c.,  22Snote) 
considers  the  name  as  conferred  in  consequence  of 
the  "  burning"  of  Jabin's  chariots  there.  But  were 
they  burnt  at  that  spot  ?  and,  if  so,  why  is  the 
name  the  "burning  oi waters  f  The  probability 
here,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  is,  that  a  meaning 
has  been  foiced  on  a  name  originally  belonging  to 
another  language,  and  therefore  unintelligible  to  the 
later  occupiers  of  the  country. . 

Dr.  Thomson  (Land  and  Book,  cli.  xv.),  reviving 
the  conjecture  of  himself  and  Schultz  {Bibl.  Sacra, 
1855),  treats  Misrephoth-maim  as  identical  with  a 
collection  of  springs  called  Ai7i-Musheirifch,  on  the 
sea-shore,  close  undei-  the  lias  cn-Nalthura  ;  but 
this  has  the  disadvantage  of  being  veiy  far  from 
Sidon.  Jlay  it  not  rather  be  the  place  with  which 
we  are  familiar  in  the  later  history  as  Zarephath  ? 
In  Hebrew,  allowing  foi-  a  change  not  uiifrequent 
of  S  to  Z  (reversed  in  the  form  of  the  name  current 
still  later — Sarepta),  the  two  are  from  j-oots  almost 
identical,  not  only  in  sound,  but  also  iu  meaning; 
while  the  close  connexion  of  Zarephath  with  Zidon — 
"  Zarephath  which  belongeth  to  Zidon," — is  another 
point  of  strong  resemblance.  [G.] 


«  The   "and"  here  inserted  in  the  A.  V.  is  quite 

gratuitous. 


MITE 

MITE  (Keirrov),  a  coin  cuneiit  in  Palestine  in 
the  time  of  our  Lord.  It  toolv  its  name  from  a 
very  small  Greek  copper  coin,  of  wliich  witli  the 
Athenians  seven  went  to  the  xoAkoCs.  It  seems 
in  Palestine  to  have  heen  the  smallest  piece  ot 
money,  being  the  half  of  the  farthing,  which  was  a 
coin  of  very  low  value.  The  mite  is  famous  from 
its  being  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  poor 
widow's  piety  whom  Christ  saw  casting  two  mites 
into  the  treasury  (Mark  xii.  41-44  ;  Luke  xxi. 
1-4).  From  St.  Mark's  explanation,  "  two  mites, 
which  make  a  farthing "  (AeirTct  5'jo,  '6  icrri 
KoSpdvTT^s,  ver.  42),  it  may  perhaps  be  inferred 
that  tiie  KoSpdvr7]s  or  tarthing  was  tlie  commoner 
ooin,  for  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed  to  be  there 
spoken  of  as  a  money  of  account,  though  this  might 
be  the  case  in  another  passage  (JLitt.  v.  2G).  In 
the  Graeco-Komau  coinage  of  Palestine,  in  which 
we  include  the  money  of  the  Herodian  family,  the 
two  smallest  coins,  of  which  the  assariou  is  the  more 
common,  seem  to  correspond  to  the  farthing  and 
the  mite,  the  larger  weighing  about  twice  as  mucli 
as  the  smaller.  This  correspondence  is  made  more 
probable  by  the  circumsfcmce  that  the  larger  seems 
to  be  reduced  from  the  earlier  "quarter"  of  the 
Jewish  coinage.  It  is  noticeable,  that  although  the 
supposed  mites  struck  about  the  time  referred  to 
in  the  Gospels  are  rare,  those  of  Alex.  Jannaeus' 
coinage  are  numerous,  whose  abundant  money 
nmst  have  long  continued  in  use.  [Money  ; 
Farthing.]  [II.  S.  P.] 

MITH'CAH  (n|^n?3:    Mae^KKa:    Methca), 

the  name  of  an  unknown  desert  encampment  of  the 
Israelites,  meaning,  perhaps,  "place  of  sweetness  "  " 
(Num.  xxxiii.  28,  29).  [H.  H.] 

MITH'NITE,   THE  (Onsn  :    <5  Baieavd ; 

Alex,  o  'UladQavi:  Matlianites),  the  designation  of 
JOSHAPHAT,  one  of  David's  guard  in  the  catalogue 
of  1  Chr.  xi.  (ver.  43).  No  doubt  it  signifies  the 
native  of  a  place  or  a  tribe  bearing  the  name  of 
Methen ;  but  no  trace  exists  in  the  Bible  of  any 
such.  It  should  be  noticed  that  Joshaphat  is  both 
preceded  and  followed  by  a  man  from  beyond  Jor- 
dan, but  it  would  not  be  safe  to  infer  therefrom  that 
Metiien  was  also  in  that  region.  [G.] 

MITH'EEDATH  (nninp  :  ULepaUrtis  : 
Mithridates).  1.  The  treasurer  ("iSTil,  gizhdr)  of 
Cyrus  king  of  Persia,  to  whom  the  king  gave  the 
vessels  of  the  Temple,  to  be  by  him  transferred  to 
the  hands  of  Sheshbazzar  (Ezr.  i.  8).  The  LXX. 
take  gizhdr  as  a  gentilic  name,  Taa^ap-qvds,  the 
Vulgate  as  a  patronymic,  filhis  Gcuabar,  but  there 
is  little  doubt  as  to  its  meaning.  The  word  occurs 
in  a  slightly  different  form  in  Dan.  iii.  2,  3,  and  is 
there  rendered  "treasurer;"  and  in  the  parallel 
history  of  1  Esdr.  ii.  11,  Mithrednth  is  called  Mi- 
thridates the  treasurer  {ya^o(f>v\al}.  The  name 
Mithredath,  "  given  by  Blithra,"  is  one  of  a  class  of 
compounds  of  frequent  occurrence,  formed  from  the 
name  of  Mithra,  the  Iranian  sun-god. 

2.  A  Persian  officer  stationed  at  Samaria,  in  the 
reign  of  Artaxerxes,  or  Smerdis  the  Magian  (Ezr. 
iv.  7).  He  joineil  with  his  colleagues  in  pievailing 
upon  the  king  to  hinder  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple. 
In  1  Esdr.  ii.  16  he  is  called  Mithridatks. 

»  Derived  from  pf)^.  "  sweetness,"  with  the  suffix  H 
of  locality,  vvliicli  (or  its  plur.   jy\)  is  often  found  in 
names. 
VOL.  II. 


MIXED  MULTITUDE 


386 


MITHBIDA'TES  ( Mi0pa5aTr?s  ;  Alex.  Midpi- 
SdTTjs :  Ilithridatiis). 

1.  (1  Esdr.  ii.  11)  =  Mithkedath  1. 
3.  (1  Esdr.  ii.  16)  =  Mithredath  2. 

MITRE.     [Crown.] 

MITYLE'NE  lyyiirvA-l^vri,  in  chissical  authors 
and  on  inscriptions  frequently  MvriXrjUT)),  the  chief 
town  of  Lesbos,  and  situated  on  tlie  east  coast  of 
the  island.  Its  position  is  very  accurately,  though 
incidentally,  marked  (Acts  xx.  14,  15)  in  the  ac- 
count of  St.  Paul's  return-voyage  fi-om  his  thiid 
apostolical  journey.  JMitylene  is  the  intermediate 
place  where  he  stopped  for  the  night  between  Assos 
and  Chios.  It  may  be  gathered  from  the  circum- 
stances of  this  voyage  that  the  wind  was  blowing 
from  the  N.W. ;  and  it  is  worth  while  to  notice 
that  in  the  harbour  or  in  the  roadstead  of  Mityleue 
the  ship  would  be  sheltered  from  that  wind.  More- 
over it  appears  that  St.  Paul  was  there  at  the  time 
of  dark  moon :  and  this  was  a  sufficient  reason  for 
passing  the  night  there  before  going  through  the 
intricate  passages  to  the  southward.  See  Life  and 
Epistles  vf  St.  Paul,  ch.  xx.,  where  a  view  of  the 
place  is  given,  showhig  the  fine  forms  of  the  moun- 
tains behind.  The  tovra  itself  was  celebrated  in 
Roman  times  for  the  beauty  of  its  buildings  ("  Mi- 
tyleue pulchra,"  Hor.  Epist.  I.  xi.  17  ;  see  Cic. 
c.  Bull.  ii.  16).  In  St.  Paul's  day  it  had  the 
privileges  of  a  free  city  (Plin.  N.  H.  v.  39).  It 
is  one  of  the  few  cities  of  the  Aegean  which  have 
continued  without  intermission  to  flourish  till  the 
present  day.  It  has  given  its  name  to  the  whole 
island,  and  is  itself  now  called  sometimes  Castro, 
sometimes  Mitylen.  Tournefbrt  gives  a  rude  pic- 
ture of  the  place  as  it  appeared  in  1700  (  Voyage 
du  Levant,  i.  148,  149).  It  is  more  to  our  pur- 
pose to  refer  to  our  own  Admir;ilty  charts,  Nos. 
1665  and  1654.  Mitylene  concentrates  in  itself 
the  chief  interest  of  Lesbos,  an  island  peculiarly 
famous  in  the  history  of  poetry,  and  especially  of 
poetry  in  connexion  with  music.  But  for  these 
points  we  must  refer  to  the  articles  in  the  Diet,  of 
Geography.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MIXED  MULTITUDE.  With  the  Israelites 
who  journeyed  from  Rameses  to  Succoth,  the  first 
stage  of  the  Exodus  from  Egypt,  there  went  up  (Ex. 
xii.  38)  "  a  mixed  multitude  "  (2"iy  :  eirifiiKTos  ; 

vulgits  promiscuum),  who  have  not  hitherto  been 
identified.  In  the  Targnm  the  phrase  is  vaguely  ren- 
dered "  many  foreigners,"  and  Jarchi  explains  it  as 
"  a  medley  of  outkmdish  people."  Aben  Ezra  goes 
further  and  says  it  signifies  "  the  Egyptians  who 
were  mixed  with  them,  and  they  are  the  '  mixed 
multitude'  (PJ-IDSDN,  Num.  xi.  4),  who  were  ga- 
thered to  them."  Jarchi  on  the  latter  passage  also 
identifies  the  ''  mixed  multitude "  of  Num.  and 
Exodus.  During  their  residence  in  Egypt  marriages 
were  naturally  contracted  between  the  Israelites 
and  the  natives,  and  the  son  of  such  a  marriage  be- 
tween an  Isiaelitish  woman  and  an  Egyptian  is 
especially  mentioned  as  being  stoned  for  blasphemy 
(Lev.  xxiv.  11),  the  same  law  liolding  good  for  the 
resident  or  naturalized  foreigner  as  for  the  native 
Israelite  (Josh.  viii.  35).  This  hybrid  race  is  evi- 
dently alluded  to  by  Jarchi  and  Aben  Ezra,  and  is 
most  probably  that  to  which  reference  is  made  in 
E.xodus.  Kuobel  understands  by  the  "  mixed  mul- 
titude "  the  remains  of  the  Hyksos  who  left  Egypt 
with  the  Hebrews.  Di\  Kalisch  {Cotnin.  on  Ex. 
xii.  88)  inteiprets  it  of  the  native  Egyptians  who 

2  C 


386 


MIZAE,  THE  HILL 


MIZPAH 

1.   MizPAii  (nSVlSn  ;    Samar.    nilVDil,  i-  e. 

the  pillar :  7)  '6paffis  ;  Veneto-Gk.  6  aTevi(rfj.6s  : 
Vulg.  omits).  The  earliest  of  all,  in  order  of  the 
narrative,  is  the  heap  of  stones  piled  up  by  Jacob 
and  Laban  (Gen.  xxxi.  48)  on  Mount  Gilead  (ver. 
25),  to  serve  both  as  a  witness  to  the  covenant 
then  entered  into,  and  also  as  a  hindmark  of  the 
boundary  between  them  (ver.  52).  This  heap 
received  a  name  from  each  of  the  two  chief  actors 
in  the  transaction — Galeed  and  Jegar  Saha- 
DUTHA.  But  it  had  also  a  third,  viz.  Mizpah, 
which  it  seems  from  the  terms  of  the  narrative  to 
have  derived  from  neither  party,  but  to  have  pos- 
sessed already ;  which  third  name,  in  the  address 
of  Laban  to  Jacob,  is  seized  and  played  upon  after 
the  manner  of  these  ancient  people: — "Therefore 
he  called  the  name  of  it  Galeed,  and  the  Mizpah ; 
for  he  said,  Jehovah  watch  (itzeph,  f]V^)  between 

me  and  thee,"  &c.  It  is  remarkable  that  this 
Hebrew  paronomasia  is  put  into  the  mouth,  not  of 
Jacob  the  Hebrew,  but  of  Laban  the  Syrian,  the 
difference  in  whose  languaf^e  is  just  befoi-e  marked 
by  "Jegar-Sahadutha."  Various  attempts"^  have  been 
made  to  reconcile  this  ;  but,  whatever  may  be  the 
result,  we  may  rest  satisfied  that  in  Mizpah  we  pos- 
sess a  Hebraized  form  of  the  original  name,  whatever 
that  may  have  been,  bearing  somewhat  the  same 
relation  to  it  that  the  Arabic  Beit-ur  bears  to  the 
Hebrew  Beth-horon,  or — as  we  may  afterwards  see 
reason  to  suspect — as  Safeh  and  Shafat  bear  to 
ancient  Mizpehs  on  the  western  side  of  Jordan.  In 
its  Hebraized  Ibim  the  word  is  derived  fiom  the  root 
tsdphdh,  nS^,  "  to  look  out "  (Gesen.  Lexicon, 
ed.  Robinson,  s.  v.  IlS^f),  and  signifies  a  watch- 
tower.  The  root  has  also  the  signification  of  breadth 
— expansion.  But  that  the  original  name  had  the 
same  signification  as  it  possesses  in  its  Hebrew 
form  is,  to  say  the  least,  unlikely ;  because  in  such 
linguistic  changes  the  meaning  always  appears  to 
be  secondary  to  the  likeness  in  sound. 

Of  this  early  name,  whatever  it  may  have  been,  we 
find  other  ti-aces  on  both  sides  of  Jordan,  not  only  in 
the  various  Mizpahs,  but  in  such  names  as  Zophim, 
which  we  know  formed  part  of  the  lofty  Pisgah  ; 
Zaphon,  a  town  of  Moab  (Josh.  xiii.  27) ;  Zuph 
and  Ramathaim-Zophim,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
l\lizpeh  of  Benjamin  ;  Zephathah  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Mizph  of  Judah  ;  possibly  also  in  Safed, 
the  well-known  city  of  (Salilee. 

But,  however  this  may  be,  the  name  remained 
attached  to  the  ancient  meeting-place  of  Jacob  and 
Laban,  and  the  spot  where  their  conference  had 
been  held  became  a  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  and  a 
place  for  solemn  conclave  and  deliberation  in  times 
of  difficulty  long  after.  On  this  natural  "  watch- 
tower"  (LXX.  (TKOTTia),  when  the  last  touch  had 
been  put  to  their  "misery"  by  the  threatened 
attack  of  the  Bene-Ammon,  did  the  children  of 
Israel  assemble  for  the  choice  of  a  leader  ( Judg.  x. 
17,  comp.  ver.  16) ;  and  when  the  outlawed  Jeph- 
tliah  had  been  prevailed  on  to  leave  his  exile  and 
take  the  head  of  his  people,  his  first  act  was  to  go  to 
"  the  Mizpah,"  and  on  that  consecrated  ground  utter 

In  the  Peshito-Syriac  it  bears  tlic  title,  " 'I'lie  Psalm    3.  Mizpeh  with  the  article  in  Josh.  xv.  38  only ;  4.  In  every 
which  David  sang  when  he  was  in  exile,  and  longing  to    other  lase  the  Hebrew  text  presents  the  name  as  ham- 


were  inv(>lved  in  the  same  oppression  with  the 
Hebrews  by  the  new  dynasty,  which  invaded  and 
subdued  Lower  Egypt;  and  Kurtz  {Hist,  of  Old 
Coo.  ii.  312,  Eng.  tr.),  while  he  supposes  the 
"  mi.^ed  multitude  "  to  have  been  Egyptians  of  the 
lower  classes,  attributes  their  emigration  to  their 
having  "  endured  the  same  oppression  as  the 
Israelites  from  the  proud  spirit  of  caste  which  pre- 
vailed in  Egypt,"  in  consequence  of  which  they 
attached  themselves  to  the  Hebrews,  "  and  served 
henceforth  as  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water." 
That  the  "mixed  multitude"  is  a  general  term  in- 
cluding all  those  who  were  not  of  pure  Israelite 
blood  is  evident;  more  than  this  cannot  be  posi- 
tively asserted.  In  Exodus  and  Numbers  it  pro- 
bably denoted  the  miscellaneous  hangers-on  of  the 
Hebrew  camp,  whether  they  were  the  issue  of  spu- 
rious marriages  with  Egyptians,  or  were  themselves 
Egyptians  or  belonging  to  other  nations.  The  same 
happened  on  the  return  from  Babylon,  and  in  Neh. 
xiii.  3,  a  slight  clue  is  given  by  which  the  meaning 
of  the  "  mixed  multitude"  may  be  .more  definitely 
ascertained.  Upon  reading  in  the  law  "  that  the 
Ammonite  and  the  Jloabite  should  not  come  into 
the  congregation  of  God  for  ever,"  it  is  said,  "  they 
separated  from  Israel  all  the  mixed  multitude." 
The  remainder  of  the  chapter  relates  the  expulsion 
of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  from  the  Temple,  of  the 
merchants  and  men  of  Tyi-e  from  the  city,  and  of 
the  foreign  wives  of  Ashdod,  of  Ammon,  and  of 
Moab,  with  whom  the  Jews  had  intermarried.  All 
of  these  were  included  in  the  "mixed  multitude," 
and  Nehemiah  adds,  "  thus  cleansed  I  them  from  all 
foreigners."  The  Targ.  Jon.  on  Num.  xi.  4,  ex- 
plains the  "  mixed  multitude "  as  proselytes,  and 
this  view  is  apparently  adopted  by  Ewald,  but  there 
does  not  seem  any  foundation  for  it.     [\V.  A.  W.] 

MIZ'AR,  THE  HILL  (lyv^  ""O  •  '^pos 
HiiKfiSs:  mons  modicus),  a  momitain  —  for  the 
reader  will  observe  that  the  word  is  har  in  the  ori- 
ginal (see  vol.  i.  81 6a) — apparently  in  the  northern 
part  of  trans- Jordanic  Palestine,  from  which  the 
author  of  Psalm  xiii.  utters  his  pathetic  appeal 
(ver.  6).  The  name  appears  nowhere  else,  and  the 
only  clue  we  have  to  its  situation  is  the  mention 
of  the  "  land  of  Jordan  "  and  the  "  Hermons,"  com- 
bined with  the  general  impression  conveyed  by  the 
Psalm  that  it  is  the  cry  of  an  exile  "  from  Jeru- 
salem, possibly  on  his  road  to  Babylon  (Ewald, 
Dichter,  ii.  18.5).  If  taken  as  Hebrew,  the  word 
is  deiivable  from  a  root  signifying  smallness — the 
same  by  which  Zoar  is  explained  in  Gen.  xix.  20- 
22.  This  is  adopted  by  all  the  ancient  versions, 
and  in  the  Prayer-book  Psalms  of  the  Church  of 
England  appears  in  the  inaccurate  form  of  "  the 
little  hill  of  Hermou."  *  [G.] 

MIZTAH,  and  MIZTEH.  The  name  borne 
by  several  places  in  ancient  Palestine.  Although 
in  the  A.  V.  most  frequently  presented  as  Mizpeh, 
yet  in  the  original,  with  but  few  exceptions,  the 
name  is  Mizpah,  and  with  equally  few  *>  exceptions  is 
accompanied  with  the  definite  article—  nSVDH- 
liam-Mitxpah. 


return  to  Jerusalem." 

b  These  exceptions  may  be  collected  here  with  conve- 
nience: — 1.  Mizpeh,  without  the  article,  is  found  in  the 
Hebrew  in  Josh,  xi,  8,  Jtidg.  xi.  29,  and  1  Sam.  xxii.  3 


only  ;    2.  Mizpah  without  the  article  in  Hos.  v.  1  only  ;  '  is  given  to  the  verse. 


Mitzpab 

'^  See  Ewald,  Koniposition  der  Genesis.  Thus  in  the 
LXX.  aud  Vulg.  versions  of  ver.  49,  the  word  Mizpi^h  is 
not  treated  as  a  proper  name  at  all ;  and  a  different  turn 


MIZPAH 

all  his  words  "  before  Jehovali."  It  was  doubtless 
from  Mizp.ah  that  he  made  his  appeal  to  the  king  of  the 
Ammonites  (xi.  12),  and  invited,  though  fruitlessly, 
the  aid  of  his  kinsmen  of  Ephraim  on  the  other  side 
of  Jordan  (xii.  2).  At  Jlizpah  he  seems  to  have 
henceforward  resided  ;  there  the  fatal  meeting  took 
place  with  his  daughter  on  his  return  from  the 
war  (xi.  34),  and  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  on  the 
altar  of  that  sanctuary  the  father's  terrible  vow 
was  consummated.  The  topographical  notices  of 
Jephthah's  course  in  his  attack  and  piu'suit  '(ver. 
29)  are  extremely  difficult  to  unravel;  but  it  seems 
most  probable  that  the  "  Mizpeh-Gilead  "  which  is 
mentioned  here,  and  here  only,  is  the  same  as  the 
ham-Mizpah  of  the  other  parts  of  the  narrative  ; 
and  both,  as  we  shall  see  afterwards,  are  probably 
identical  with  the  liAMATii-MizPEH  and  Ramoth- 
GlLEAD,  so  famous  in  the  later  history. 

It  is  still  more  difficult  to  determine  whether 
this  was  not  also  the  place  at  which  the  great 
assembly  of  the  people  was  held  to  decide  on  the 
measures  to  be  taken  against  Gibeah  after  the 
outrage  on  the  Levite  and  his  concubine  (Judg.  sx. 
],  3,  xxi.  1,  5,  8).  No  doubt  there  seems  a  certain 
violence  in  removing  the  scene  of  any  part  of  so 
local  a  story  to  so  great  a  distance  as  the  other  side 
of  Jordan.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  are  the  limits 
of  the  story  so  circumscribed  ?  The  event  is  repre- 
sented as  one  affecting  not  a  part  only,  but  the 
whole  of  the  nation,  east  of  Jordan  as  well  as  west 
— "  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  and  the  land  of  (iilead  " 
(xx.  1).  The  only  part  of  the  nation  excluded  from 
the  assembly  was  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  that 
no  communication  on  the  subject  was  held  with 
them,  is  implied  in  the  statement  that  they  only 
"  heard  "  of  its  taking  place  (xx.  3)  ;  an  expression 
which  would  be  meaningless  if  the  place  of  assembly 
were — as  Mizpah  of  Benjamin  was — within  a  mile  or 
two  of  Gibeah,  in  theveiy  heart  of  their  own  territory, 
though  perfectly  natural  if  it  were  at  a  distance  from 
them.  And  had  there  not  been  some  reason  in  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case,  combined  possibly  with  some 
special  claim  in  Mizpah — and  that  claim  doubtless 
its  ancient  sanctity  and  the  reputation  which  Jeph- 
thah's success  had  conferred  upon  it — why  was  not 
either  Bethel,  where  the  ark  was  deposited  (xx. 
2G,  27),  or  Shiloh,  chosen  for  the  purpose  ?  Sup- 
pose a  Mizpah  near  Gibeah,  and  the  subject  is  full 
of  difficulty :  remove  it  to  the  place  of  Jacob  and 
Laban's  meeting,  and  the  difficulties  disappear ;  and 
the  allusions  to  Gilead  (xx.  I),  to  Jabesh-Gilead 
(xxi.  8,  &c.),  and  to  Shiloh,  as  "  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,"  all  fall  naturally  into  their  places  and 
acquire  a  proper  force. 

Mizpah  is  probably  the  same  as  IIamatk-Mizpeh 
(nSVJSn  ")),  mentioned  Josh.  xiii.  26  only.  The 
prefix  merely  signifies  that  the  spot  was  an  elevated 
one,  which  we  already  believe  it  to  have  been  ;  and 
if  the  two  are  not  identical,  then  we  have  the 
anomaly  of  an  enumeration  of  the  chief  places  of 
Gilead  with  the  omission  of  its  most  famous  sanc- 
tuary. Kamath  ham-Mizpeh  was  most  probably 
identical  also  with  Kamoth-Gilead ;  but  this  is  a 
point  which  will  be  most  advantageously  discussed 
under  the  latter  head. 

d  The  word  here  usid— Nn-llilD  ~IJ)X— exhibits 
the  transition  from  the  "  Jegar"  of  the  ancient  Aramaic 
of  Laban  to  the  llajar  of  tlie  niodcin  Arabs — the  word 
by  which  they  designate  the  heaps  wliich  it  is  their 
custom,  as  it  was  Laban's,  to  erect  as  landmarks  of  a 
boimdaiy. 


MIZPAH 


387 


Mizpah  still  retained  its  name  in  the  days  of  the 
Maccabees,  by  whom  it  was  besieged  and  taken  with 
the  other  cities  of  Gilead  (1  Mace.  v.  35).  From 
Eus'ebius  and  Jerome  (^Onomasticon,  "Maspha") 
it  receives  a  bare  mention.  It  i«  probable,  both 
from  their  notices  [Onom.  "  Kammoth")  and  from 
other  considerations,  that  Kamoth-Gilead  is  tlie 
modern  es-Salt ;  but  it  is  not  ascertained  whether 
Mizpah  is  not  rather  the  great  mountain  Jehel 
Osha,  a  short  distance  to  the  north-west.  The 
name  Safut  appears  in  Van  de  Velde's  map  a  few 
miles  east  of  cs-Salt. 

A  singular  reference  to  ]\]izpah  is  found  in  the 
title  of  Ps.  Ix.,  as  given  in  the  'fargum,  which  runs 
as  follows ; — "  For  the  ancient  testimony  of  the  sons 
of  Jacob  and  Laban  ....  when  David  assembled 
his  army  and  passed  over  the  heap  ^  of  witness." 

2.  A  second  j\lizpeh,  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  was  the 
MIZPEH-MOAB  (2?5'"ID  nS'^D:  Macro-TjAa  t^s 
Maja^ :  Maspha  quae  est  Moah),  where  the  king 
of  that  nation  was  living  when  David  committed 
his  parents  to  his  care  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3).  The  name 
does  not  occur  again,  nor  is  there  any  clue  to  the 
situation  of  the  place.  It  may  have  been,  as  is 
commonly  conjectured,  the  elevated  and  strong 
natural  fortress  afterwards  known  as  KiR-MoAB, 
the  modera  Kerak.  But  is  it  not  at  least  equally 
possible  that  it  was  the  great  Mount  Pisgah,  which 
was  the  most  commanding  eminence  in  the  whole 
of  Moab,  which  contained  the  sanctuary  of  Nebo, 
and  of  which  one  part  was  actually  called  Zophim 
(Num.  xxiii.  14),  a  name  derived  from  the  same 
root  with  Mizpeh  ? 

3.  A  third  was  Tiifc  Land  of  Mizpeh,  or 
more  accurately  "OF  MizPAii"  (HSytSn  V^X : 
Tiiv  Macrevfid :  *  terra  Mispha),  the  residence  of 
the  Hivites  who  joined  the  northern  confederacy 
against  Israel,  headed  by  Jabin  king  of  Hazoi- 
(Josh.  xi.  3).  No  other  mention  is  found  of  this 
district  in  the  Bible,  unless  it  be  identical  with 

4.  The  Valley  of  Mizpeh  (HS^'D  ni?ip3  : 
Tuv  TreSi'coi'  'M.affcrdix  '•  campus  Misphe),  to  which 
the  discomfited  hosts  of  the  same  confedeiacy 
were  chased  by  Joshua  (xi.  8).  It  lay  eastward 
from  MiSREPHOTH-MAiM ;  but  this  affords  us 
no  assistance,  as  the  situation  of  the  latter  place 
is  by  no  means  certain.  If  we  may  rely  on  the 
peculiar  term  here  rendered  "  valley  " — a  term  ap- 
plied elsewhere  in  the  records  of  Joshua  only  to  the 
"  valley  of  Lebanon,"  which  is  also  said  to  have 
been  "  under  Mount  Hermon,"  and  which  contained 
the  sanctuary  of  Baal-gad  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii.  7) — 
then  we  may  accept  the  "  land  of  Mizpah  "  or  "  the 
valley  of  Mizpeh  "  as  identical  with  that  enormous 
tract,  tlie  great  country  of  Coele-Syria,  tlie  Bukc'a 
alike  of  the  modern  Arabs  and  of  the  ancient  He- 
brews (comp.  Am.  i.  5),  which  contains  the  great 
sanctuary  of  Baal-bek,  and  may  be  truly  said  to  lie 
at  the  feet  of  Hermon  (see  Star.loy,  -S".  ^  P.  302 
note).  But  this  must  not  be  taken  lor  more  than 
a  probable  inference,  and  it  should  not  be  over- 
looked that  the  name  Mizpeh  is  here  connected  with 
a  "  valley  "  or  "  plain  " — not,  as  in  the  other  cases, 
with  an  eminence.     Still  the  valley  may  have  de- 


'  Here  the  LXX.  (ed.  Mai)  omit  "  Hivites,"  and  perhaps 
read  "Hovmon"  (|)D~in).  «s  "Arabah"  (ni"iy)— the 
two  words  are  more  alilie  to  the  car  tlian  the  eye— and 
thus  give  the  sentence,  "  they  under  the  desert  in  tlio 
Maseiima."  A  somewhat  similar  substitution  is  found  in 
the  LXX.  version  of  (Jen.  xxxv.  l!7. 

2  C  2 


38S 


MIZFAII 


rived  its  appellation  from  an  eminence  of  sanctity 
or  repute  situated  therein ;  and  it  may  be  re- 
marked that  a  name  not  impossibly  derived  from 
Mizpeh — Haush  Tell-Safiijeh — is  now  attached  to 
a  hill  a  short  distance  north  of  Baalbek. 

5.  Mizpeh  (HS^^n  :    Maff<pd:    Mespha),  a 

city  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  08)  ;  in  the  district  of  the 
Shefelah  or  maritime  lowland ;  a  member  of  the 
same  group  with  Dilean,  Lachish,  and  Eglon,  and 
apparently  in  their  neighbourhood.  Van  de  Velde 
{Memoir,  335)  suggests  its  identity  with  the 
present  Tell  es-Sdfii/eh — the  Blanchegarde  of  the 
Crusaders  ;  a  conjecture  which  appears  very  feasible 
on  the  ground  both  of  situation  and  of  the  likeness 
between  the  two  names,  which  ai-e  nearly  iden- 
tical— certainly  a  more  probable  identification  than 
those  proposed  with  Gatii  and  with  Lidnah.  Tina, 
which  is  not  improbably  Dilean,  is  about  3  miles 
N.W.,  and  Ajlun  and  nm  Lakis,  respectively  10  and 
12  to  the  S.W.  of  Tell  es-Safieh,  which  itself 
stands  on  the  slopes  of  the  mountains  of  Judah, 
completely  overlooking  the  maiitime  plain  (Porter, 
Handbk.  252).  It  is  remarkable  too  that,  just  as 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  other  Mizpahs  we  find 
Zophim,  Zuph,  or  Zaphon,  so  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Tell  es-Satieh  it  is  vei-y  prob.ible  that  the  valley 
of  Zephathah  was  situated.  (.See  Rob.  B.  K. 
ii.  31.) 

6.  MrzPEii,  in  Josh,  and  Samnel ;  elsewhere 
MizPAH  (ri2i*)3n  in  Joshua  ;  elsewhere  nSV?3n  : 

MaiTffri<pdO  ;  in  Josh.  Mdco-ij/ia  ;  Chron.  and  Xeh. 
T]  Ma<T<pa,  and  6  Ma<r(j>4 ;  Kings  and  Hos.  in  both 
j\IS.S.  71  (TKOTTLa ;  Alex.  K.a.(rT]<pa  :  Mesphe  ;  Mas- 
pha ;  MasphatJi),  a  "  city  "  of  Benjamin,  named  in 
the  list  of  the  allotment  between  Beei-oth  and  Che- 
phirah,  and  in  apparent  proximity  to  Ramah  and 
Gibeon  (Josh,  xviii.  26).  Its  connexion  with  the 
two  last-named  towns  is  also  implied  in  the  later  his- 
tory (1  K.  XV.  22 ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  6  ;  Neh.  iii.  7).  It 
was  one  of  the  places  fortified  by  Asa  against  the 
incursions  of  the  kings  of  the  northern  Israel  (1  K. 
XV.  22  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  6  ;  Jer.  xli.  9)  ;and  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  it  became  the  residence  of 
the  superintendent  appointed  by  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon (Jer.  xl.  7,  &c.),and  the  scene  of  his  murder  and 
of  the  romantic  incidents  connected  with  the  name  of 
Ishmael  the  son  of  Nethaniah. 

But  Mizpah  was  more  than  this.  In  the  earlier 
periods  of  the  history  of  Israel,  at  the  tiist  foun- 
dation of  the  monarchy,  it  was  the  great  sanc- 
tuary of  Jehovah,  the  special  resort  of  the  people 
in  times  of  difficulty  and  solemn  deliberation.  In 
the  Jewish  traditions  it  was  for  some  time  the 
residence  of  the  ark  (see  Jerome,  Qk.  Hehr.  on 
1  Sam.  vii.  2  ;  Reland,  Antiq.  i.  §vi.)  ;  f  but  this 
is  possibly  an  inference  from  the  expression  "  before 
Jehovah  "  in  Judg.  xx.  1 .  It  is  suddenly  brought 
before  us  in  the  history.  At  Mizpah,  when  suf- 
fering the  very  extremities  of  Philistine  bondage, 
the  nation  assembled  at  the  call  of  the  great  Pro- 
phet, and  with  stiange  and  significant  rites  con- 
fessed their  sins,  and  were  blessed  with  instant  and 
signal  deliverance  (1  Sam.  vii.  5-13).  At  Mizpah 
took  place  no  less  an  act  than  the  piblic  selection 
and  apyiointmcnt  of  Saul  as  the  first  king  of  the 
nation  (1  Sam.  x.  17-25).     It  was  one  of  the  three 


f  Rabbi  .Sclnrarz  {\'n  ■note)  very  ingeniously  iinds  a 
i-eferenee  to  Mizpeh  in  1  Sam.  iv.  13;  where  he  would 
ijoint  the  word  HSlVP  (A.  V.  "  watching")  as  HS^'D, 
and  thus  read  "by  the  road  to  Mizpeh." 


MIZPAH 

holy  cities  (LXX.  toIs  r]yiacriJ.4yois  tovtois)  which 
Samuel  visited  in  turn  as  judge  of  the  people  (vii. 
6,  16),  the  other  two  being  Bethel  andGilgal.  But, 
unlike  Bethel  and  Gilgal,  no  record  is  preserved  of 
the  cause  or  origin  of  a  sanctity  so  abruptly  an- 
nounced, and  yet  so  fully  asserted.  We  have  seen 
that  there  is  at  least  some  ground  for  believing  that 
the  Mizpah  spoken  of  in  the  transactions  of  the 
early  part  of  the  period  of  the  judges,  was  the 
ancient  sanctuary  in  the  mountains  of  Gilead.  Tliere 
is,  however,  no  reason  for,  or  tather  every  reason 
against,  such  a  supposition,  as  applied  to  the  events 
last  alluded  to.  In  the  inteiwal  between  the  de- 
struction of  Gibeah  and  the  rule  of  Samuel,  a  very 
long  period  had  elapsed,  during  which  the  ravages  of 
Ammonites,  Amalekites,  Moabites,  and  Midianites 
(Judg.  iii.  13,  14,  vi.  1,  4,  33,  x.  9)  in  the  districts 
beyond  Jordan,  in  the  Jordan  valley  itself  at  both 
its  northern  and  southern  ends — at  Jericho  no  less 
than  Jezreel — and  along  the  passes  of  communiaition 
between  the  Jordan  valley  and  the  western  table- 
land, luust  have  rendered  communication  between 
west  and  east  almost,  if  not  quite,  iiripossible.  Is 
it  possible  that  as  the  old  Mizpah  became  inacces- 
sible, an  eminence  nearer  at  hand  was  chosen  and 
invested  with  the  sanctity  of  the  original  spot  and 
used  for  the  same  purposes?  Even  if  the  name 
did  not  previously  exist  there  in  the  exact  shape  of 
Mizpah,  it  may  easily  have  existed  in  some  shape 
sufficiently  near  to  allow  of  its  formation  by  a 
process  both  natmal  and  fiequent  in  Oriental 
speech.  To  a  Hebrew  it  would  require  a  very  slight 
inflexion  to  change  Zophim  or  Zuph — both  of  which 
names  were  attached  to  places  in  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin-— to  Mizpah.  This,  however,  must  not  be 
taken  for  more  than  a  mere  hypothesis.  And  against 
it  there  is  the  serious  objection  that  if  it  had  been 
necessary  to  select  a  holy  place  in  the  territory  of 
Ephraim  or  Benjamin,  it  would  seetn  more  natural 
that  the  choice  should  have  fallen  on  Shiloh,  or 
Bethel,  than  on  one  which  had  no  previous  claim 
but  that  of  its  name. 

With  the  conquest  of  Jerasalem  and  tlie  establish- 
ment there  of  the  Ark,  the  sanctity  of  Mizpah,  or 
at  least  its  reputation,  seems  to  have  declined.  The 
"  men  of  Slizpah  "  (Neh.  iii.  7),  and  the  "  ruler  of 
Mizpah,"  and  also  of  "part  of  Mizpah"  (19  and 
15) — assisted  in  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  latter  expressions  perhaps  point  to  a 
distinction  between  the  sacred  and  the  secular  parts 
of  the  town.  The  allusion  in  ver.  7  to  the  "  throne 
of  the  governor  on  this  side  the  river"  in  connexion 
with  Jlizpah  is  curious,  and  recals  the  fact  that  Geda- 
liah,  who  was  left  in  charge  of  Palestine  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, had  his  abode  there.  But  we  hear  of  no 
religious  act  in  connexion  with  it  till  that  affecting 
assembly  called  together  thither,  as  to  the  ancient 
sanctuary  of  their  forefathers,  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus,  "  when  the  Israelites  assembled  themselves 
togethei'  and  came  to  Massepha  over  against  Jerusa- 
lem ;  for  in  Maspha  was  there  aforetime  a  place  of 
prayer  (T(Jiros  wpocrevxris)  for  Israel  "  ( 1  Mace.  iii. 
46).  The  expression  "  over  against"  (^KaTivavri),  no 
less  than  the  circumstances  of  the  story,  seems  to 
require  that  from  IMizpah  the  City  or  the  Temple 
was  visible :  an  indication  of  some  importance, 
since,  scanty  as  it  is,  it  is  the  only  information 
given  us  in  the  Bible  as  to  the  situation  of  the 
place.  Josephus  omits  all  mention  of  the  circum- 
stance, but  on  another  occasion  he  names  the  place 
so  as  fully  to  corroborate  the  inference.  It  is  in 
his  account  of  the  visit  of  Alexander  the  Great  to 


MIZPAH 

Jerusalem  {Ant.  xi.  8,  §5),  where  he  relates  that 
Jaddua  the  Irigh-priest  went  to  meet  the  king  "  to  a 
certain  place  called  Sapha  CSafpd) ;  which  name,  if 
interpreted  in  the  Greek  tongue,  signiiies  a  look-out 
place  {aKOTr-f]v),  for  from  thence  both  Jerusalem 
and  the  sanctuary  are  visible."  Sapha  is  doubtless 
a  corruption  of  the  old  name  Mizpali  through  its 
(ireek  form  Masplia ;  and  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  tliat  this  is  also  the  spot  wliich  Josephus 
on  other  occasions — adopting  as  he  often  does  the 
Greek  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  name  as  if  it  were 
the  original  (witness  the  dj/w  ayopd,  "AKpa,  t)  twv 
TvpOTTOiiov  <j>dpay^,  &c.  Sic.) — mentions  as  "  appro- 
priately named  Sco])Us"  {'S,Koir6i),  because  from  it 
a  clear  view  was  obtained  both  of  the  city  and  of 
the  great  size  of  the  Temple  {B.  J.  v.  2,  §3). 
The  position  of  this  he  gives  minutely,  at  least 
twice  (B.  J.  ii.  19,  §4-,  and  v.  2,  §3 ),  as  on  the  north 
quarter  of  the  city,  and  about  7  stadia  therefrom  ; 
that  is  to  say,  as  is  now  generally  agreed,  the 
broads  ridge  which  forms  the  continuation  of  the 
Jlount  of  Olives  to  the  north  and  east,  from  which 
the  traveller  gains,  like  Titus,  his  first  view,  and 
takes  his  last  larewell,  of  the  domes,  walls,  and 
towers  of  the  Holy  City. 

Any  one  who  will  look  at  one  of  the  numeious 
photographs  of  Jerusalem  taken  from  this  point, 
will  satisfy  himself  of  the  excellent  view  of  both 
city  and  temple  which  it  commands;  and  it  is  the 
only  spot  fi'om  which  such  a  view  is  possible,  which 
could  answer  the  condition  of  the  situation  of  Bliz- 
pah.  Nehii  Samwil,  for  which  Dr.  Robinson  argues 
\B.  E.i.  460),  is  at  least  live  miles,  as  the  crow  Hies, 
from  Jerusalem ;  and  although  from  that  lofty 
station  the  domes  of  the  "  Church  of  the  Sepulchre," 
and  even  that  of  the  Sakrah  can  be  discerned,  the 
distance  is  too  great  to  allow  ns  to  accept  it  as  a 
spot  "over  against  Jerusalem,"  or  from  which 
either  city  or  temple  could  with  satisfaction  be  in- 
spected. Nor  is  the  moderate  height  of  Scopus,  as 
compared  with  Neby  Samwil,  any  argument  against 
it,  for  we  do  not  know  how  far  the  height  of  a 
"high  place"  contributed  to  its  sanctity,  or  indeed 
what  that  sanctity  exactly  consisted  in.!*  On  the  other 
hand,  some  corroboration  is  atibrded  to  the  identifi- 
ciition  of  Scopus  with  Mizpah,  in  the  fact  that 
Mizpah  is  twice  rendered  by  the  LXX.  (TKoirid. 

Titus's  approach  through  the  villages  of  ancient 
Benjamin  was,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  a  close  parallel  to 
that  of  an  earlier  enemy  of  Jerusalem— Sennacherib. 
In  his  case,  indeed,  there  is  no  mention  of  Mizpah. 
It  was  at  Noi!  that  the  Assp-ian  king  remained  for 
a  day  feasting  his  eyes  ou  "  the  house  of  Zion  and  the 
hill  of  Jerusalem,"  and  menacing  with  "  his  hand  " 
tlie  fair  booty  before  him.  But  so  exact  is  the 
correspondence,  that  it  is  dithcult  not  to  susjject  that 
Nob  and  Mizpah  must  have  been  identical,  since 
that  part  of  llie  rising  ground  north  of  .Jerusalem 
which  is  crossed  by  the  northern  load  is  the  only 
spot  from  which  a  view  of  both  city  and  temple 
at  once  can  be  obtained,  without  malving  a  long 
detour  by  way  ol'  the  Mount  of  Olives.  This,  how-  1 
ever,  will  be  best  discusseti  under  NOB.  Assuming  i 
that  the  hill  in  question  is  the  Scopus  of  Josephus, 

g  The  word  used  by  Josephus  in  sjieakiiig  of  it  (/>'.  J. 
V.  2,  J3)  is  xeafiaAds  ;  and  it  will  be  observed  lliat  tlio  root 
(if  the  word  Mizpah  lias  the  force  of  breadth  as  well  as  of ; 
elevation.    See  above.  1 

''In  the  Eust,  at  the  present  time,  a  sanctity  is  at- 
tached to  the  spot  from  which  any  holy  place  is  visible.  I 
Such   spots  may  be  met  with  all  through  the  bills  a  | 
lew  miles  uorlh  of  Jerusuleiu,  distinguished  by  tlie  little 


MTZRAIM 


389 


and  that  that  again  was  tlie  Mizpah  of  tiie  He- 
brews, the  skopia  (cTKOTrtd)  and  lliissephath  of  the 
LXX.  translators,  it  is  certainly  startling  to  find  a 
■\'illage  named  S/idfdt^  lying  on  the  north  slope  or 
the  mountain  a  very  short  distance  below  the  sum- 
mit— if  summit  it  can  be  called — from  which  the 
view  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  Zion  (now  occupied  by 
the  Siikrah),  is  obtained.  Can  Shcifat,  or  Safat,  be, 
as  there  is  good  reason  to  believe  in  the  case  of 
Tell-es  Sdfieh,  the  remains  of  the  ancient  Semitic 
name  ?  Our  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the 
Holy  Land,  even  of  the  city  and  environs  of  Jeru- 
salem, is  so  very  imperfect,  that  the  above  can  only 
be  taken  as  suggestions  which  may  be  not  unworthy 
the  notice  of  future  explorers  in  their  investigations. 
Professor  Stanley  appears  to  have  been  the  first 
to  suggest  the  identity  of  Scopus  with  Mizpah 
(;S'.  ^  P.  1st  edit.  222).  But  since  writing  the 
above,  the  writer  has  become  aware  that  the  same 
view  is  taken  by  Dr.  Bonar  in  his  LumI  of  Promise 
(Appendix,  §viii.).  This  traveller  has  investigated 
the  subject  with  gi'eat  ability  and  clearness  ;  and 
he  points  out  one  circumstance  in  favour  of  Scopus 
being  I\lizpah,  and  against  Nehy  Samwil,  which 
had  escaped  the  writer,  viz.  that  the  former  lay 
directly  in  the  road  of  the  pilgrims  from  Samaria 
to  Jerusalem  who  were  murdered  by  Ishmael  (Jer. 
xli.  7),  while  the  latter  is  altogether  away  from  it. 
Possibly  the  statement  of  Josephus  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  8956)  that  it  was  at  Hebron,  not  Gibeon,  that 
Ishmael  was  overtaken,  coupled  with  Dr.  B.'s  own 
statement  as  to  the  prc-occupation  of  the  distncts 
east  of  Jerusalem — may  remove  the  only  scruple 
which  he  appears  to  enteit;iin  to  the  identification 
of  Scopus  with  Mizpah.  C^^-] 

MIZ'PAR  ("IBDJO  :  Mo.acpdp  :  Mesphar).  Pro- 
perly Misi'AR,  as  in  the  A.  V.  of  1611  andtheGeneva 
version ;  the  same  as  Mispereth  (Ezr.ii.  2). 

MIZPEH.     [Mizpah.] 

MIZ'RAIM  (Dn^O:  neffpcuv.  Mesraim), 
the  usual  name  of  Egypt  in  the  0.  T.,  the  dual  of 
Mazor,  IIVID,  which  is  less  frequently  "  employed : 
gent,  noun,  *1\*0. 

If  the  etymology  of  Mazor  be  sought  in  He- 
brew it  might  signify  a  "  mound,"  "  bulwark," 
or  "citadel,"  or  again  "distress;"  but  no  ( ne  of 
these  meanings  is  apposite.  We  prefer,  with  Ge- 
senius  {Thes.  s.  v.  11  >>D),  to  look  to  the  Arabic, 
and  we  extract  the  article  ou  the  corresponding  word 


from  the  Kdmoos. 


y/a./o 


,  a  partition  between  two 


things,  as  also  j.a£?Lo  •  ■''■  ^i'^'''*'  between  two  lands  : 

a  receptacle:  a  city  or  a  province  [the  exjijauation 
means  both]  :  and  red  earth  or  mud.  The  well- 
known  city  [Memphis]."  Gesenius  accepts  the 
meaning  "  limit "  or  the  like,  but  it  is  hard  to  see 
its  fitness  with  the  Shemites,  who  had  no  idea  that 
the  Nile  or  Egypt  was  ou  the  border  of  two  conti- 

heaps  of  stones  erected  by  thoughtful  or  pious  Mussul- 
mans.   (See  Miss  Beaufort's  f.'gnpt.  Scpidchies,  &c.  ii.  88.) 

'  This  is  the  spelling  given  by  Van  de  VeUle  In  his 
map.  Kobinson  gives  it  as  .'<hafat  (i.  e.  with  the  Ain), 
and  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  in  the  Arabic  lists  attached  to  Robin- 
son's 1st  edition  (iii.  App.  121),  Safdt. 

"  It  occurs  only  2  K.  xix.  24 ;  Is.  xi.\.  6,  xxivii.  25 ; 
Mic.  vii.  12. 


390 


MIZRAIM 


nents,  unless  it  be  supposed  to  denote  the  divided 
Land.  We  believe  tliat  the  last  menning  but  one, 
"  red  earth  or  mud  "  is  tlie  true  'one,  from  its  cor- 
respondence to  the  Egyptian  name  of  the  countiy, 
Ki'>M,  which  signifies  "  blaclj,"  and  was  given  to  it 
for  the  blackness  of  its  alluvial  soil.     It  must  be  re- 

collected  that  the  term  "  red  "  (j.».=»i)  »»  not  «sed 

in  the  Kamoos,  or  indeed  in  Semitic  phraseology,  in 
the  limited  sense  to  which  Indo-European  ideas  have 
accustomed  us ;  it  embraces  a  wide  range  of  tints, 
fi-om  what  we  call  red  to  a  reddish  brown.  So,  in 
like  manner,  in  Egyptian  the  word  "  black  "  signifies 
dark  in  an  equally  wide  sense.  We  have  already 
shown  tliat  the  Hebrew  word  Ham,  the  name  of  the 
ancestor  of  the  Egyptians,  is  evidently  the  same  as 
the  native  appellation  of  the  country,  the  former 
signifying  "  warm  "  or  "  hot,"  and  a  cognate  Arabic 

.re- 
word, Ljos.>  meaning  "  black  fetid  mud"  (Ka- 
woos),  or  "black  mud"  (Sihdh,  MS.),  and  sug- 
gested that  Ham  and  Mazor  may  be  identical  with 
the  Egyptian  KEM  (or  KHEJI),  which  is  virtually 
the  same  in  both  sound  and  sense  as  the  former, 
and  of  the  same  sense  as  the  latter.  [Egypt  ;  Ham]. 
How  then  are  we  to  explain  this  double  naming  of 
the  country?  A  recent  discovery  throws  light 
upon  the  question.  We  had  ahead}-  some  reason 
for  conjecturing  that  there  were  Semitic  equivalents, 
with  the  same  sense,  for  some  of  the  Egyptian  geo- 
graphical names  with  which  the  Shemites  were  well 
acquainted.  M.  de  Konge  has  ascertained  that 
Zoan  is  the  famous  Shepherd-stronghold  Avaris,  and 
that  the  Hebrew  name  ]]})i,  from  JVV,  "  he  moved 
tents,  went  forward,"  is  equivalent  to  the  Egyptian 
one  HA-WAR,  "  the  place  of  departure  "  i^Revue 
Archeologique,  1861,  p.  250).  This  discovery,  it 
should  be  noticed,  gives  remarkable  signiHcance  to 
the  passage,  "  Now  Hebron  was  built  seven  years 
before  Zoan  in  Egypt"  (Num.  xiii.  22).  Perhaps  a 
similar  case  may  be  found  in  Kush  and  Phut,  both 
of  which  occur  in  Egyptian  as  well  as  Hebrew.  In 
the  Bible,  African  Cush  is  Ethiopia  above  Egypt,  and 
Phut,  an  African  people  or  land  connected  with 
Egypt.  In  the  Egyptian  inscriptions,  the  same 
Ethiopia  IS  KEESH,  and  an  Ethiopian  people  is 
called  ANU-PET-JMEKU,  "the  Anu  of  the  island 
of  the  bow,"  probably  Meroe,  where  the  Nile  makes 
an  extraordinai-y  bend  in  its  course.  We  have  no 
Egyptian  or  Hebrew  etymology^for  KEESH,  or 
Cush.  unless  we  may  compare  \i^)p,  whicli  would 
give  the  same  connexion  with  bow  that  we  find  in 
Phut  or  PET,  for  which  our  only  derivation  is  from 
the  Egyjitian  PET,  "  a  bow."  There  need  be  no 
difficulty  in  thus  supposing  that  Mizraim  is  merely 
the  name  of  a  country,  and  that  Ham  and  Mazor 
'may  have  been  the  same  person,  for  the  very  form 
of  Mizraim  forbids  any  but  the  former  idea,  and  the 
tenth  chapter  of  Genesis  is  obviously  not  altogether 
a  genealogical  list.    Egyptian  etymologies  have  been 

sought  in  vain  for  Mizraim;  JULGTCYDOj 
"kingdom"  (Gcsen.  Thes.  s.  v.  TlVD),  is  not  an 
:incient  fonn,  and  the  old  name,  TO-JIAR  (Brugsch, 
Geog.  Inschr.  PI.  x.  nos.  367-370,  p.  74),  sug- 
gested as  the  source  of  Mizraim  Dy  Dr.  Hineks,  is 
too  different  to  be  accepted  as  a  derivation. 

Mizraim  first  occurs  in  the  account  of  the  Hamites 
in  Gen.  x.,  where  we  read,  "  And  the  sons  of  Ham  ; 
Cush,  ami  Mizraim.  and  Phut,  and  Canaan"  (ver.  6  ; 


MIZRAIM 

comp.  1  Chr.  i.  8).  Here  we  have  conjectured  that 
instead  of  the  dual,  the  original  text  had  the  gentile 
noun  in  the  plural  (suggesting  C'l^O  instead  of  the 
present  □"'TV'^);  since  it  seems  strange  that  a  dual 
form  should  occur  in  the  first  generation  after  Ham, 
and  since  the  plural  of  the  gentile  noun  would  be 
consistent  with  the  plural  forms  of  the  names  of 
the  Mizraite  nations  or  tribes  afterwards  enumerated, 
as  well  as  with  the  like  singular  forms  of  the  names 
of  the  Canaanites,  excepting  Sidon.    [Ham.] 

If  the  names  be  in  an  order  of  seniority,  whether 
as  indicating  children  of  Ham,  or  older  and  younger 
branches,  we  can  form  no  theory  as  to  their  settle- 
ments from  their  places ;  but  if  the  arrangement  be 
geographical,  which  is  probable  from  the  occurrence 
of  the  form  Mizraim,  which  in  no  case  can  be  a  man's 
name,  and  the  order  of  some  of  the  Mizraites,  the 
placing  may  afford  a  clue  to  the  positions  of  the 
Hamite  lands.  Cush  would  stand  first  as  the  most 
widely  spread  of  these  peoples,  extending  fi-om  Baby- 
lon to  the  upper  Nile,  the  territoiy  of  Mizraim  would 
be  the  next  to  the  north,  embracing  Egypt  and  its 
colonies  on  the  north-west  and  north-east,  Phut  as 
dependent  on  Egypt  might  follow  Slizraim,  and  Ca- 
naan as  the  northernmost  would  end  the  list.  Egypt, 
the  "  laud  of  Ham,"  may  have  been  the  jirimitive 
seat  of  these  four  stocks.  In  the  enumeration  of  the 
Mizraites,  though  we  have  tribes  extending  far  be- 
yond Egypt,  we  may  suppose  that  they  all  had 
their  first  seat  in  Jlizraim,  and  spread  thence, 
as  is  distinctly  said  of  the  Philistines.  Here 
the  order  seems  to  be  geographical,  though  the 
same  is  not  so  clear  of  the  Canaanites.  The 
list  of  the  Mizraites  is  thus  given  in  Gen.  x. : — 
"And  Jlizraim  begat  Ludim,  and  Anamim,  and 
Lehabim,  and  Naphtuhim,  and  Pathrusim,  and 
Casluhim  (whence  Gime  forth  the  Philistines),  and 
Caphtorim"  (13,  14;  comp.  1  Chr.  i.  11,  12). 
Heie  it  is  certain  that  we  have  the  names  of  nations 
or  tiibes,  and  it  is  probable  tliat  they  are  all  derived 
from  names  of  countries.  Wo  find  elsewhere  Pathros 
and  Caphtor,  probably  Lud  (for  the  Jlizraite  Ludim), 
and  perhaps,  Lub  for  the  Lubim,  which  are  almost 
certainly  the  same  as  the  Lehabim.  There  is  a  diffi- 
culty in  the  Philistines  being,  according  to  the 
present  test,'  traced  to  the  Casluhim,  whereas  in 
other  places  they  come  from  the  land  of  Caphtor, 
and  aie  even  called  Caphtorim.  It  seems  probable 
that  there  has  been  a  misplacement,  and  that  the 
parenthetic  clause  originally  followed  the  name  of 
the  Caphtoiim.  Of  these  names  we  have  not  yet 
identified  the  Anamim  and  the  Casluhim;  the  Leha- 
bim are,  as  already  said,  almost  certainly  the  same 
as  the  Lubim,  the  REBU  of  the  Egyptian  monu- 
ments, and  the  primitive  Libyans ;  the  Naphtuhim 
we  put  immediately  to  the  west  of  northern  Egypt ; 
and  the  Pathrusim  and  Caphtorim  in  that  country, 
where  the  Casluhim  may  also  be  placed.  There 
would  therefore  be  a  distinct  order  from  west  to 
east,  and  if  the  Philistines  be  transfeiTed,  this  order 
would  be  perfectly  preserved,  though  perhaps  these 
last  would  necessarily  be  placed  with  their  imme- 
diate parent  among  the  tribes. 

Mizraim  therefore,  like  Cush,  and  perhaps  Ham, 
geographically  represents  a  centre  whence  colonies 
went  forth  in  the  remotest  period  of  post-diluvian 
history.  The  Philistines  were  originally  settled  in  the 
land  of  Mizraim,  and  there  is  reason  to  suppose  the 
same  of  the  Lehabim,  if  they  be  those  Libyans  who 
revolted,  according  to  IManetho,  from  the  Egyptians 
in  a  very  early  age.    [Lubim.]     The  list,  however. 


MIZZAH 

probably  arranges  them  according  to  the  .settlements 
they  heiil  at  a  later  thne,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
notice  of  the  Philistines'  migration;  but  the  men- 
tion of  the  spread  of  the  Canaaiiites  must  be  con- 
sidered on  the  other  side.  We  regard  the  distri- 
bution of  the  Mizraites  as  shovving  that  their 
colonies  were  but  a  part  of  the  great  migration 
that  gave  the  Cushites  the  command  of  the  Indian 
Ocean,  and  which  e.xplains  the  affinity  the  Egyptian 
monuments  show  us  between  the  pre-Helleoic  (Jret;ms 
and  Caa-iaus  (the  latter  no  doubt  the  Leleges  of  the 
(jJreek  writers)  and  the  Philistines. 

The  history  and  ethnology  of  the  Mizraite  nations 
have  been  given  under  the  article  Ham,  so  that  here 
it  is  not  needful  to  do  more  than  draw  attention  to 
some  remarkable  particidars  which  did  not  fall  mider 
our  notice  in  treating  of  the  eaily  Egyptians.  We 
find  from  the  monuments  of  Egypt  that  the  white 
nations  of  western  Africa  were  of  what  we  call  the 
Semitic  type,  and  we  must  therefore  be  careful  not 
to  assume  that  they  formed  part  of  the  stream  of 
Arab  colonization  that  h;iii  lor  full  two  thousand 
years  steadily  flowed  into  northern  Africa.  The 
seatiiring  i-ace  that  first  passed  from  Egypt  to  the 
west,  though  physically  lilce,  was  mentally  dift'erent 
from,  the  true  pastoial  Arab,  and  to  this  day  the 
two  elements  have  kept  apart,  the  townspeople  of  the 
coast  being  unable  to  settle  amongst  the  tribes  of  the 
interior,  and  these  tribes  again  being  as  unable  to 
settle  on  the  coast. 

The  affinity  of  the  Egyptians  and  their  neighbours 
was  long  a  safeguard  of  the  empire  of  the  Pharaohs, 
and  from  the  latter,  whether  Cretans,  Lubim,  or 
people  of  Phut  and  Cush,  the  chief  mercenaries  of  the 
Egyptian  armies  were  drawn  ;  facts  which  we  mainly 
learn  frofn  the  Bible,  confirmed  by  the  monuments. 
In  the  days  of  the  Persian  dominion  Libyan  Inaros 
made  a  brave  stand  for  the  liberty  of  Egypt.  Pro- 
bably the  tie  wiis  more  one  of  religion  than  of  com- 
mon descent,  lor  the  Egyptian  belief  appears  to  have 
mainly  prevailed  in  Africa  as  far  as  it  was  civilised, 
though  of  course  changed  in  its  details.  The  Phi- 
listines had  a  diftijrent  religion,  and  seem  to  have 
been  identified  in  this  matter  with  the  Canaanitcs, 
and  thus  they  may  have  lost,  as  they  seem  to  have 
done,  their  attachment  to  their  mother  country. 

In  the  use  of  tlie  names  Mazor  and  Mizraim  for 
Egypt  there  am  be  no  doubt  that  the  dual  indicates 
the  two  regions  into  which  the  country  has  always 
been  divided  by  nature  as  well  as  by  its  inhabit- 
iuits.  Under  the  Greeks  iind  Romans  there  was 
indeed  a  third  division,  the  Heptanomis,  which  has 
been  calleil  Middle  Egypt,  as  between  Upper  and 
Lower  Egypt,  but  we  must  rather  regard  it  as 
forming,  with  the  Theba'is,  Upper  Egypt.  It  has 
IjNjen  suj)])0sed  that  Mazor,  as  distinct  from  Mizraim, 
signifies  Lower  Egypt ;  but  this  conjecture  cannot 
be  maintained.  For  fuller  details  on  the  subject 
of  this  article  the  reader  is  refeiTed  to  Ham,  Egypt, 
:md  the  articles  on  the  several  Mizraite  nations  or 
tribes.  [K.  S.  P.] 

MIZ'ZAH  (n-TD:  Mofe  ;  Alex.  Moxe  i" 
1  Chr. :  Ileza).  Son  of  Reuel  and  grandson  of  Esau  ; 
descended  likewise  thi-ough  Bashemath  from  Ish- 
mael.  He  WJis  one  of  the  "  dukes  "  or  chiefs  of 
tribes  in  the  land  of  Edom  (Gen.  x.xxvi.  lo,  17; 
1  Chr.  i.  37).  The  set^.lements  of  his  descendants 
are  believed  by  Mr.  Forster  {Hist.  Gco(/.  of  Arab. 
ii.  55)  to  be  indicated  in  the  /xecraviTTis  K6\iros, 
or  I'hmt-MisdU,  at  the  head  of  the  Persian  gulf. 

MNA'SON  (yivdtrwi>)  is  honomablv  mentioned 


MOAB 


391 


in  Scripture,  like  Gains,  Lydia,  and  others,  as  one 
of  the  hosts  of  the  Apostle  Paul  (Acts  x.\i.  16). 
One  or  two  questions  of  some  little  interest,  though 
of  no  great  importance,  are  raised  by  the  context. 
It  is  most  likely,  in  the  fiist  place,  that  his  resi- 
dence at  this  time  was  not  Caosarea,  but  Jerusalem. 
He  was  well  known  to  the  Christians  of  Caesarea, 
and  they  took  St.  Paul  to  his  house  at  Jerusalem. 
To  translate  the  words  ^yoyrfs  ■nap'  ^  ^e^ia-6a>fj.ev, 
as  in  the  A.  V.,  removes  no  grammatical  difficulty, 
and  introduces  a  slight  improbability  into  the  nar- 
rative. He  was,  howevei-,  a  Cyprian  by  birth,  mid 
may  have  been  a  friend  of  Barnabas  (Acts  iv.  ,'56), 
and  possibly  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  Chris- 
tianity by  him.  The  Cyprians  who  are  so  promi- 
nently mentioned  in  Acts  xi.  19,  20,  may  have 
included  Mnason.  It  is  hardly  likely  that  he  could 
have  been  converted  during  the  journey  of  Paul  and 
Barnabas  through  Cyprus  (Acts  xiii.  4-13),  other- 
wise the  Apostle  would  have  been  personally  ac- 
quainted with  him,  which  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  the  case.  And  the  phiase  apxcuoi  fiaOriTijs 
points  to  an  earlier  period,  possibly  to  the  day  of 
Pentecost  (compare  iu  dpxfj.  Acts  xi.  15),  or  to 
direct  intercourse  with  our  blessed  Lord  Himself. 
[Cyprus.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

MO'AB  (asitD:  McoajS;  Josephus,  MwajSos  : 
Monh),  the  name  of  the  son  of  Lot's  eldest  daughter, 
the  elder  brother  of  Ben-Ammi,  the  progenitor  of 
the  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix.  37)  ;  also  of  the  nation 
descended  from  him,  though  the  name  "  Moab- 
ites"  is  in  both  the  original  and  A.  V.  more 
frei|uently  used  for  them. 

No  explanation  of  the  name  is  given  us  in  the 
original  record,  and  it  is  not  possible  to  tlirow  an 
interpretation  into  it  unless  by  some  accommodation. 
Various  exijlauations  have  however  been  proposed. 
(a.)  The  LXX.  insert  the  words  Kiyovtra-  e'/f  tov 
irarp6s  fxov,  "  saying  '  from  my  father,' "  as  if 
3ND.  This  is  followed  by  the  old  interpreters  ;  as 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  11,  §5),  Jerome's  Quaest.  Hehr. 
in  Genesiin,  the  gloss  of  the  Pseudojon.  Targum  ; 
and  in  modern  times  by  De  Wette  {Bihcl ), Tuch  \Ge7i. 
370),  and  J.  D.  Michaelis  {B.  fiir  Ungelehrten) . 
(6.)  By  Hiller  (Cnom.  414),  Simonis  {Onom.  479), 
it  is  derived  from  3N  N3iD,  "  ingressus,  i.  e. 
coitus,  patris."  (c.)  Kosemniiller  (see  Schumann, 
Qenesis,  302)  proposes  to  treat  ID  as  equivalent 
for  D^D,  in  accordance  with  the  figure  employed  by 
Balaam  in  Num.  xxiv.  7.  This  is  countenanced  by 
Jerome — "  aqua  patenia  "  (  C'omm.  inMic.  vi.  8) — 
and  has  the  great  authority  of  Gesenius  in  its  favour 
{Thes.  IT^a);  also  of  Fiirst  {ILmdicb.  707)  and 
Bunsen  {Bihelwerk).  (d.)  A  derivation,  probably 
more  correct  etymologically  than  either  of  the  above, 
is  that  suggested  by  Maurer  from  the  root  3N*, 
"  to  desire" — "  the  desirable  land"— with  reference 
to  the  extreme  fertility  of  the  region  occupied  by 
Bloab.  (See  also  Furst,  'llwb.  707  L)  No  hint,  how- 
ever, has  yet  been  discovered  in  the  Bible  records  of 
such  an  origin  of  the  name. 

Zoar  was  the  cradle  of  the  race  of  Lot.  Although 
the  exact  position  of  this  town  h.is  not  been  deter- 
mined, there  is  no  doubt  that  it  was  situated  on  the 
south-eastern  border  of  the  Dead  Sea.  From  this 
centre  the  brother-tribes  spread  themselves.  Ammox, 
whose  disposition  seems  throughout  to  have  been 
more  roving  and  unsettled,  went  to  the  north-o;ist 
and  took  possession  of  the  pastures  and  waste  ti-acts 


392 


MOAB 


which  lay  outside  the  district  oC  the  mountains ; 
that  which  in  earlier  times  seems  to  have  been 
known  as  Ham,  and  inliabited  by  the  Zuzim  or 
Zamzummim  (Gen.  xiv.  5;  Deut.  ii.  20).  Moab, 
whose  habits  were  more  settled  and  peaceful,  re- 
mained neaier  their  original  seat.  The  rich  high- 
lands which  crown  the  eastern  side  of  the  chasm  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  extend  northwards  as  far  as  the 
foot  of  tlie  mountains  of  Gilead,  appear  at  that  early 
date  to  have  borne  a  name,  which  in  its  Hebrew 
form  is  presented  to  us  as  Sliaveh-Kiriathaim,  and  to 
have  been  inhabited  by  a  branch  of  the  great  race 
of  the  Kephaim.  Like  the  Horim  before  the  de- 
scendants of  Esau,  the  Avim  before  the  Philistines, 
or  the  indigenous  races  of  the  New  World  before  the 
settlers  from  the  West,  this  ancient  people,  the 
Emim,  gradually  became  extinct  before  the  Moabites, 
who  thus  obtained  possession  of  the  whole  of  the  rich 
elevated  tract  referred  to — a  district  forty  or  fifty 
miles  in  length  by  ten  or  twelve  in  width,  the  cele- 
brated Bclkii  and  Kerrak  of  the  modern  Arabs,  the 
most  fertile  on  that  side  of  Jordan,  no  less  eminently 
fitted  for  pastoral  pursuits  than  the  maritime  plains 
of  Philistia  and  Sliarou,  on  the  west  of  Palestine, 
are  for  agriculture.  With  the  highlands  they  occu- 
pied also  the  lowlands  at  their  feet,  the  plain  which 
intervenes  between  the  slopes  of  the  mountains  and 
the  one  perennial  stream  of  Palestine,  and  thi-oiigh 
whicli  tl'.e}'  were  enabled  to  gain  access  at  pleasure 
to  the  fords  of  the  river,  and  thus  to  the  country 
beyond  it.  Of  the  valuable  district  of  the  high- 
lands they  were  not  allowed  to  retain  entire  pos- 
.session.  The  warlike  Amorites — either  forced  frojn 
their  original  seats  on  the  west,  or  perhaps  lured 
over  by  the  increasing  prosperity  of  the  young 
nation — crossed  the  Jordan  and  overran  the  richer 
portion  of  the  territory  on  the  north,  driving  Moab 
back  to  his  original  position  behind  the  natural  bul- 
wark of  the  Arnon.  The  plain  of  the  Jordan- valley, 
the  hot  and  humi.l  atmosphere  of  which  had  per- 
liaps  no  attraction  for  tlie  Amorite  mountaineers, 
appears  to  have  remained  in  the  power  of  J.Ioab. 
Wlien  Israel  reached  the  boundaiy  of  the  country, 
this  contest  had  only  very  recently  occurred.  Sihon, 
the  Amorite  king  undoi-  whose  command  Heshbon 
had  been  taken,  was  still  reigning  there — the  ballads 
commemorating  tlie  event  "were  still  fresh  in  the 
popular  mouth  (Num.  xxi.  27 — .30).^ 

Of  these  events,  which  extended  over  a  period, 
according  to  the  received  Bible  chronology,  of  not  less 
than  500  years,  from  tlie  destruction  of  Sodom  to  the 
arrival  of  Israel  on  the  bordei-s  of  the  Promised 
Land,  we  obtain  the  above  outline  only  from  the 
fiiigments  of  ancient  documents,  which  are  found 
embedded  in  the  records  of  Numbers  and  Deutero- 
nomy (Num.  xxi.  26-30  ;  Deut.  ii.  10,  11). 

Tlie  position  into  which  the  Moabites  were  driven 
by  the  incursion  of  the  Amorites  was  a  veiy  circum- 
scribed one,  in  extent  not  so  much  as  half  that  which 
they  had  lost.  But  on  the  other  hand  its  position  was 
much  more  secure,  and  it  was  well  suited  for  the 
occupation  of  a  people  whose  disposition  was  not  so 
warlike  as  that  of  their  neighbours.  It  occupied  the 
southern  half  of  the  high  table-lands  which  rise  above 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea.  On  every  side  it 
was  strongly  fortified  by  nature.  On  the  north 
was  the  tremendous  chasm  of  the  Arnon.     On  ihe 

^  For  an  examination  of  this  remarkable  passage,  in 
some  respects  without  a  parallel  in  the  Old  Testament, 
see  Ni:mbf.ks. 

Ij  The  word   ''0X3  (A.V.  "corners')  is  twice  used 


MOAB 

west  it  was  limited  by  the  piecipices,  or  more  ac- 
curately the  clitis,  which  descend  almost  perpendi- 
cularly to  the  shore  of  the  lake,  and  are  intersected 
only  by  one  or  two  steep  and  narrow  passes.  Lastly, 
on  the  south  and  east,  it  was  protected  by  a  half 
circle  of  hills  which  open  only  to  allow  the  passage 
of  a  branch  of  the  Arnon  and  another  of  the  torrents 
which  descend  to  the  Dead  Sea. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  description 
that  the  territory  occupied  by  Moab  at  the  period 
of  its  gi-eatest  extent,  before  the  invasion  of  the 
Amorites,  divided  itself  naturally  into  three  distinct 
and  independent  portions.  Each  of  these  portions 
appears  to  have  had  its  name  by  which  it  is  almost 
invariably  designated.  (1)  The  enclosed  corner ^  or 
canton  south  of  the  Arnon  was  the  "  field  of  Moab  " 
(Ruth  i.  1,2,  6,  &c.).  (2)  The  more  open  rolling 
countiy  north  of  the  Arnon,  opposite  Jericiio,  and 
up  to  the  hills  of  Gilead,  was  the  "  land  of  Moab  " 
(Deut.  i.  5,  xxxii.  49,  &c.).  (3)  The  sunk  district 
in  the  tropical  depths  of  the  Jordan  valley,  taking 
its  name  fi-om  that  of  the  great  valley  itself — the 
Arabah — was  the  Arboth-Moab,  the  dry  regions- — 
in  the  A.  V.  very  incorrect!)'  rendered  the  "  plains 
of  Moab"  (Num.  xxii.  1,  &c.). 

Outside  of  the  hills,  which  enclosed  the  "  field 
of  Moab,"  or  Moab  proper,  on  the  south-east, 
and  which  are  at  present  called  the  Jehel  Uru- 
Karaiiieh  and  Jehel  el  Tarfwjeh,  lay  the  vast 
pasture  groimds  of  the  waste  uncultivated  coun- 
try or  "  Midbar,''  which  is  described  as  "  facing 
Moab"  on  the  east  (Num.  xxi.  11).  Through  this 
latter  district  Israel  appears  to  have  approached 
the  Promised  Land.  Some  communication  had 
evidently  taken  place,  though  of  what  nature  it  is 
impossible  clearly  to  ascertain.  For  while"  in  Deut. 
ii.  28,  29,  the  attitude  of  the  Moabites  is  men- 
tioned as  friendly,  this  seems  to  be  contradicted 
by  the  statement  of  xxiii.  4,  while  in  Judg.  xi.  17, 
again,  Israel  is  said  to  have  sent  fiom  Kadesh 
asking  permission  to  pass  through  Moab,  a  permis- 
sion which,  like  Edom,  Moab  refused.  At  any  rate 
the  attitude  perpetuated  by  the  provision  of  Deut. 
xxiii.  3 — a  provision  maintained  in  full  force  by 
the  latest  of  the  Old  Testament  reformere  (Neh. 
xiii.  1,  2,  23) — is  one  of  hostility. 

But  whatever  the  communication  may  have 
been,  the  result  was  that  Israel  did  not  traverse 
Moab,  but  turning  to  the  right  passed  outside  the 
mountains  through  the  "  wilderness,"  by  the  east 
side  of  the  territory  above  described  (Deut.  ii.  8  ; 
Judg.  xi.  18),  and  finally  took  up  their  position  in 
the  country  north  of  the  Anion,  fiom  which  Moab 
had  so  lately  been,  ejected.  Here  the  head-quarters 
of  the  nation  remained  for  a  considerable  time  while 
the  conquest  of  Bashan  was  being  effected.  It  was 
during  this  period  that  the  visit  of  Balaam  took  place 
The  whole  of  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan,  wnXh.  the 
exception  of  the  one  little  corner  occupied  by  Moab, 
was  in  possession  of  the  invaders,  and  although  at  the 
period  in  question  the  main  body  had  descended  from 
the  upper  level  to  the  plains  of  Shittim,  the  Ar- 
both-Moab, in  the  Jordan  valley,  yet  a  great 
number  must  have  remained  on  the  upper  level, 
and  the  towns  up  to  the  very  edge  of  the  tavine  of 
the  Arnon  were  still  occupied  by  their  settlements 
(Num.  xxi.  24  ;  Judg.  xi.  26).     It  was  a  situation 


with  respect  to  Moab  (Num.  xxiv.  17  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  45). 
No  one  appears  yet  to  have  discovered  its  force  in  this 
relation.  It  can  hardly  have  any  connexion  with  the 
shape  of  the  territory  as  noticed  in  the  text. 


MOAU 

full  of  aim  111  for  a  nation  which  liad  all eady  suffered 
so  severe!}'.  In  liis  extremity  the  Moabite  ki  ng,  Balak 
— whose  father  Zipper  was  doubtless  the  chieftairt 
who  had  lost  his  life  in  the  encounter  with  Sihon 
(Num.  xxi.  26) — appealed  to  the  Midianites  for  aid 
(Num.  xxii.  2-4-).  With  a  metaphor  highly  ap- 
propriate both  to  his  mouth  and  to  the  ear  of  the 
pastoral  tribe  he  was  addressing,  •=  he  exclaims  that 
"  this  people  will  lick  up  all  round  about  us  as  the 
ox  licketh  up  the  grass  of  the  field."  What  rela- 
tion existed  between  Jloab  and  Midian  we  do  not 
know,  but  there  are  various  indications  that  it  was 
a  closer  one  than  would  arise  merely  from  their  com- 
mon descent  IVom  Tei-ah.  The  tradition  of  the 
Jews''  is,  that  up  to  this  time  the  two  had  been  one 
nation,  with  kings  taken  alternately  from  each,  and 
that  Balak  was  a  Midianite.  This,  however,  is  in  con- 
tradiction to  the  .statements  of  Genesis  as  to  the  origin 
of  each  people.  The  whole  story  of  Balaam's  visit 
and  of  the  subsequent  events,  both  in  the  original 
nan-ative  of  Numbers  and  in  the  remarkable  state- 
ment of  Jephthah — whose  words  as  addressed  to 
Ammonites  must  be  accepted  as  literally  accurate — 
bears  out  the  inference  already  drawn  from  the 
earlier  history  as  fo  the  pacific  character  of  Jloab. 

The  account  of  the  whole  of  these  transactions  in 
the  Book  of  Numbers,  familiar  as  we  are  with  its 
phrases,  perhaps  hardly  convej's  an  adequate  idea 
of  the  extremity  in  which  Balak  found  himself  in 
his  unexpected  encounter  with  the  new  nation  and 
their  mighty  Divinity.  We  may  realise  it  better 
(and  certainly  with  gratitude  for  the  opportunity), 
if  we  consider  what  that  last  dreadful  agony  was  in 
which  a  successor  of  Balak  was  placed,  when,  all 
hope  of  esciipe  for  himself  and  his  people  being  cut 
oti',  the  unhappy  IMe.sha  immolated  his  own  son  on 
the  wall  of  Kir-haiaseth, — and  then  remember  that 
Balak  in  his  distress  actually  proposed  the  same 
awful  sacrifice — "  his  first-born  for  his  transgres- 
sion, the  fruit  of  his  body  for  the  sin  of  his  soul " 
(Mic.  VI.  7),  a  sacrifice  from  whitth  he  was  re- 
strained only  by  the  wise,  the  almost  Christian  * 
counsels,  of  Balaam.  This  catastrophe  will  be 
noticed  in  its  proper  place. 

The  connexion  of  Moab  with  Midian,  and  the 
comparatively  inofi'ensive  character  of  the  former,  are 
shown  in  the  narrative  of  the  events  which  followed 
the  departure  of  Balaam.  The  women  of  Moab  are 
indeed  said  (Num.  xxv.  1)  to  have  commenced  the 
idolatrous  fornication  which  proved  so  destructive  to 
Israel,  but  it  is  plain  that  their  share  in  it  was  insig- 
nificant compared  with  that  of  Midian.  It  was  a 
Midianitish  woman  whose  shameless  act  brought 
down  the  plague  on  the  camp,  the  Midianitish  women 
were  especially  devoted  to  destruction  by  Moses  (xxv. 
16-18,  xxxi.  16),  and  it  was  upon  Midian  that  the 
vengeance  was  t;d<en.  Except  in  the  passage  already 
mentioned,  Moab  is  not  once  named  in  the  whole 
transaction. 

The  latest  date  at  which  the  two  names  ajipear  in 
conjunction,  is  found  in  the  notice  of  the  defeat  of 
Midian  "in  the  field  of  Moab"  by  the  Edoniite 
king  Hadad-ben-Bedad,  which  occiured  five  genera- 
tions before  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy  of 


MOAB 


303 


"  Midian  was  eminently  a  pastoral  pioplc.  See  the 
account  of  the  spoil  taken  Irom  them  (Num.  xxxi.  32-47). 
Kor  the  pastoral  w  eaUli  ol  Moah,  even  at  this  early  period, 
see  the  expressions  in  Mic.  vi.  6,  7. 

•i  See  Targum  rseudojonatlian  on  Num.  xxii.  4. 

e  Balaam's  words  (Mic.  vi.  s)  arc  nearly  identical  with 
those  quoted  hy  oiu'  Lord  Himself  (Matt,  ix  13.  and 
xii.  lY 


Israel  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35;  1  Chr.  i.  -16).  Bv  the 
.Jewish  interpreters — -e.  g.  Solomon  Jarchi  in  his 
commentary  on  the  passage — this  is  treated  as  im- 
plying not  alliance,  but  war  between  Moab  and 
Midian  (comp.  1  Chr.  iv.  22). 

It  is  remarkable  that  Moses  should  have  taken  his 
view  of  the  Piomised  Land  from  a  Moabite  sanctuary, 
and  been  buried  in  the  land  of  Jloab.  It  is  singular  too 
that  his  resting-place  is  marked  intheHebrsw  l-tecords 
only  by  its  proximity  to  the  sanctuary  of  that  deity 
to  whom  in  his  lifetime  he  had  been  such  an  enemy. 
He  lies  in  a  ravine  in  the  land  of  Moab,  facing  Bet'h- 
Peor,  i.e.  the  abode  of  Baal-Peor  (Deut.  xxxiv.  6). 

After  the  (Muquest  of  Canaan  the  relations  of 
Sloab  with  Israel  were  af  a  mixed  character.  With 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  whose  possessions  at  their 
eastern  end  were  separated  from  those  of  Moab  only 
by  tlie  Jordan,  they  had  at  least  one  severe  struggle, 
in  union  with  their  kindred  the  Ammonites,  and 
also,  for  this  time  only,  the  wild  Amalekites  firom 
the  south  (Judg.  iii.  12-30).  The  Moabite  king, 
Eglon,  actually  ruled  and  received  tribute  in  Jericho 
for  eighteen  years,  but  at  the  end  of  that  time  he 
was  killed  by  the  Benjamite  hero  Ehud,  and  the 
return  of  the  Moabites  being  intercepted  at  the 
fords,  a  large  number  were  sLiughtered,  and  a 
stoj)  put  to  such  incursions  on  their  part  for  the 
future.f  A  trace  of  this  invasion  is  visible  in  the 
name  of  Chephar-ha-Ammonai,  the  "  hamlet  of  the 
Ammonites,"  one  of  the  Benjamite  towns ;  and 
another  is  possibly  preserved  even  to  the  present 
day  in  the  name  of  Mukhmas,  the  modern  repre- 
sentative of  Michmash,  which  is  by  some  scholars 
believed  to  have  received  its  name  from  Chemosh 
the  Moabite  deity. 

The  feud  continued  with  true  Oriental  perti- 
nacity to  the  time  of  Saul.  Of  his  slaughter  of  the 
Ammonites  we  have  full  details  in  1  Sam.  xi.,  and 
amongst  his  other  conquests  Moab  is  especially  men- 
tioned (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  Tliere  is  not,  however,  as 
we  should  expect,  any  record  of  it  during  Ishbosh- 
cth's  residence  at  Mahanaim  on  the  east  of  Jordan. 

But  while  such  were  their  relations  to  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin,  the  story  of  liuth,  on  the  other  hand, 
testifies  to  the  existence  of  a  friendly  intercourse 
between  Moab  and  Bethlehem,  one  of  the  towns  of 
Judah.  The  JewisliS  tradition  ascribes  the  death 
of  Mahlon  and  Chilion  to  punishment  for  having 
broken  the  commandment  of  Deut.  xxiii.  3,  but  no 
trace  of  any  feeling  of  the  kind  is  visible  in  the 
Book  of  Ruth  itself — which  not  only  seems  to  imply 
a  considei'able  intercourse  between  the  two  nations, 
but  also  a  complete  ignorance  or  disregard  of  the  pre- 
cept in  question,  which  was  broken  in  the  most  flag- 
rant manner  when  Kuth  became  the  wife  of  Boaz.  By 
his  descent  from  Uuth,  David  may  be  said  to  have 
had  Moabite  blood  in  his  veins.  The  relationship 
was  suHicient,  especially  when  combined  with  the 
blood-feud  between  Moab  and  Benjamin,  already 
alluded  to,  to  warrant  his  visiting  the  land  of  his 
ancestress,  and  committing  his  parents  to  tlie  protec- 
tion of  the  king  of  Moab,  when  hard  jiressed  by 
Saul  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3,  4).  But  here  all  friendly 
relation  stops  for  ever.     The  next  time  the  name  is 


f  The  account  of  Shaharaim,  a  man  of  Benjamin,  wlio 
"  begat  children  in  the  field  of  IHoab,"  in  1  Chr.  viii.  8, 
seems,  from  the  mention  of  Ehud  (ver.  6),  to  belong  to 
this  time ;  but  the  whole  passage  is  very  obscure. 

K  See  Targum  Jonathan  on  Ruth  i.  4.  'rh^  marriage 
of  Boaz  with  tlie  stranger  is  vindicati'd  by  making  Ruth  a 
pro.selytc  in  desire,  if  not  by  aitiuil  initiation 


3D4 


MOAB 


mentioned  is  in  the  account  of  David's  war,  at  least 
twenty  yeai-s  after  the  last  mentioned  event  (2  Sam. 
viii.  2 ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  2). 

'J'he  abrupt  manner  in  which  this  war  is  intro- 
duced into  the  history  is  no  less  remarkable  than 
tlie  brief  and  passing  terms  in  which  its  horrors  are 
recorded.  The  account  occupies  but  a  i'ew  words 
in  either  Samuel  or  Chronicles,  and  yet  it  must 
have  been  for  the  time  little  short  of  a  virtual  ex- 
tirpation of  the  nation.  Two-thirds  of  the  people 
were  put  to  death,  and  the  remainder  became  bond- 
men, and  were  subjected  to  a  regular  tribute.  An 
incident  of  this  war  is  probably  recorded  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  20,  and  1  Chr.  xi.  22.  The  spoils  taken  from 
the  Moabite  cities  and  sanctuaries  went  to  swell 
the  treasures  acquired  from  the  enemies  of  Jehovah, 
which  David  was  amassing  for  the  future  Temple 
(2  Sam.  viii.  11,  12;  1  Chr.  xviii.  11).  it  was 
the  first  time  that  the  prophecy  of  Balaam  had 
been  fulfilled, — •'  Out  of  Jacob  shall  come  he  that 
shall  have  dominion,  and  shall  destroy  him  that  re- 
maineth  of  Ar,"  that  is  of  Jloab. 

So  signal  a  vengeance  can  only  have  been  occa- 
sioned by  some  act  of  perfidy  or  insult,  like  that 
which  brought  down  a  similar  treatment  on  the 
Ammonites  (2  Sam.  x.).  But  as  to  any  such  act  the 
narrative  is  absolutely  silent.  It  has  been  conjec- 
tured that  the  king  of  Moab  betrayed  the  trust  which 
David  reposed  in  him,  and  eitlier  himself  killed  Jesse 
and  his  wife,  or  surrendered  them  to  Saul.  But 
this,  though  not  improbable,  is  nothing  more  than 
conjecture. 

It  must  have  been  a  considerable  time  before 
Moab  recovered  from  so  severe  a  blow.  Of  this 
we  have  evidence  in  the  fact  of  their  not  being 
mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  campaign  in  which 
the  Ammonites  were  subdued,  when  it  is  not  pro- 
bable they  would  have  refrained  from  assisting 
their  relatives  had  they  been  in  a  condition  to  do 
so.  Throughout  the  reign  of  Solomon,  they  no 
doubt  shared  in  the  universal  peace  which  sur- 
rounded Israel  ;  and  the  only  mention  of  the 
name  occurs  in  the  statement  that  there  were 
Moabites  amongst  the  foreign  women  in  the  royal 
harem,  and,  as  a  natural  consequence,  that  the 
Moabite  worship  was  tolerated,  or  perhaps  encou- 
raged (1  K.  xi.  1,  7,  33).  The  high  place  for 
Chemosh,  "the  abomination  of  Moab,"  was  conse- 
ciated  "  on  the  mount  facing  Jerusalem,"  where  it 
leniained  till  its  "defilement"  by  Josiah  (2  K. 
xxiii.  1 3),  nearly  four  centuries  afterwards. 

At  the  disruption  of  the  kingdom,  Moab  seems  to 
have  fallen  to  the  northern  realm,  probably  for 
the  same  i-eason  that  has  been  already  lemarked  in 
the  case  of  Eglou  and  Ehud — that  the  fords  of 
Jordan  lay  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  who 
for  some  time  after  the  separation  clung  to  its 
ancient  ally  the  house  of  Ephraim.  But  be  this  as 
it  may,  at  the  death  of  Ahab,  eighty  years  later,  we 
rind  Moab  paying  him  the  enoiinous  tribute,  appa- 
rently annual,  of  100,000  rams,  and  the  same 
number  of  wethers  with  their  fleeces;  an  amount 
which  testifies  at  once  to  the  severity  of  the  terms 
imposed  by  Israel,  and  to  the  remarkable  vigour  of 


t  This  affluence  is  shown  liy  the  treasures  which  they 
left  on  the  field  of  Berachah  (.2  Chr.  xx.  25),  no  less  than 
by  the  general  condition  of  the  country,  indicated  in  the 
narrative  of  .Joram's  invasion  ;  and'  in  the  passages  of 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  which  are  cited  further  on  iu  this 
article. 

'■  2  K.  iii.  21.  This  passage  exhibits  one  of  the  most 
-  ingular  variations  of  the  LXX.     The  Hebrew  text  is 


MOAB 

character,  and  wealth  of  natural  resources,  which, 
could  enable  a  little  country,  not  so  lai'ge  as  the 
county  of  Huntingdon,  to  raise  year  by  year  this 
enoi-mous  impost,  and  at  the  same  time  support 
its  own  i)eople  in  prosperity  and  alHueni'e.''  It 
is  not  surprising  that  the  Moabites  should  have 
seized  the  moment  of  Ahab's  death  to  throw  oft'  so 
burdensome  a  yoke ;  but  it  is  surprising,  that  not- 
withstanding such  a  drain  on  their  resources,  they 
were  ready  to  incur  the  risk  and  expense  of  a  war 
with  a  state  in  evei-y  respect  far  their  superior. 
Their  first  step,  after  asserting  their  independence, 
was  to  attack  the  kingdom  of  Judah  in  company 
with  their  kindred  the  Ammonites,  and, as  seems  pro- 
bable, the  ]\Iehunim,''a  roving  semi-Edomite  people 
from  the  mountains  in  the  south-east  of  Palestine 
(2  Chr.  XX.).  The  army  was  a  huge  heterogeneous 
horde  of  ill-assorted  elements.  The  route  chosen 
for  the  invasion  was  round  the  southern  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  thence  along  the  beach,  and  by  the  pass 
of  En-gedi  to  the  level  of  the  upper  country.  But 
the  expedition  coataiued  within  itself  the  elements 
of  its  own  destruction.  Before  they  reached  the 
enemy  dissensions  arose  between  the  heathen  strangers 
and  the  children  of  Lot ;  distrust  followed,  and  finally 
panic ;  and  when  the  army  of  Jehoshaphat  came  in 
sight  of  them  they  foiuid  that  they  had  nothing  to  do 
but  to  watch  the  extermination  of  one  half  the  huge 
host  by  the  other  half,  and  to  seize  the  prodigious 
booty  which  was  left  on  the  field. 

Disastrous  as  was  this  proceeding,  that  which 
followed  it  was  even  still  more  so.  As  a  natural  con- 
sequence of  the  late  events,  Israel,  Judah,  and 
Edom  united  in  an  attack  on  Moab.  Eor  reasons 
which  are  not  stated,  but  one  of  which  we  may 
reasonably  conjecture  was  to  avoid  the  passage  of 
the  savage  Edomites  through  Judah,  the  three 
confederate  armies  approached  not  as  usual  by  the 
north,  but  round  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
through  the  parched  valleys  of  upper  Edom.  As 
the  host  came  near,  the  king  of  Moab,  doubtless  the 
same  Mesha  who  threw  off  the  yoke  of  Ahab,  as- 
sembled the  whole  of  his  people,  from  the  youngest 
who  were  of  age  to  bear  the  sword-girdle,'  on  the 
boundary  of  his  territory,  probably  on  the  outer 
slopes  of  the  line  of  hills  which  encircles  the  lower 
portion  of  Moab,  overlooking  the  waste  which  ex- 
tended below  them  towards  the  east.''  Here  they 
remained  all  night  on  the  watch.  Withtlie  approach 
of  morning  the  sun  rose  suddenly  above  the  horizon 
of  the  rolling  plain,  and  as  his  level  beams  burst 
through  tlie  night-mists  they  revealed  no  masses  of 
the  enemy,  but  shone  with  a  blood-red  glare  on  a 
multitude  of  pools  in  the  bed  of  the  wady  at  their 
feet.  They  did  not  know  that  these  pools  had  been 
sunk  during  the  night  by  the  order  of  a  mighty 
Prophet  who  was  with  the  host  of  Israel,  and  that 
they  had  been  filled  by  the  sudden  flow  of  water 
rushing  from  the  distant  highlands  of  Edom.  To 
them  the  conclusion  was  inevitable.  The  army 
had,  like  their  own  on  the  late  occasion,  fallen  out 
in  the  night ;  these  red  pools  were  the  blood  of  the 
slain ;  those  who  were  not  killed  had  fled,  and  nothing 
stood  between  them  and  the  pillage  of  the  camp. 


literally,  "  and  all  gathered  themselves  together  that  were 
girt  with  a  girdle  and  upward."  This  the  LXX.  originally 
rendered  di/e/SoTjcra!/  ex  irarrbs  ircpte^'cutr/ieVoi  fuii'r)!'  Koi 
e-jToLvui-  which  the  Alexandrine  Codex  still  retains  ;  hut  ui 
the  Vatican  MS.  the  last  words  have  aciiially  been  cor- 
rupted into  (cat  eijToi',  ui' — "  and  they  said,  Oh  ! " 
^  Compare  Num.  xxi.  11 — "towards  tlie  sun-rising.  " 


MOAB 

The  cry  "  Moab  to  the  spoil!"  was  niiseii. 
Down  the  slopes  they  rushed  in  headlong  disorder. 
But  not,  as  they  expected,  to  empty  tents;  they 
found  an  enemy  ready  prepared  to  reap  the  result 
of  his  ingenious  stratagem."'  Then  occurred  cue  of 
those  scenes  of  carnage  which  can  happen  but  once 
or  twice  in  the  existence  of  a  nation.  The  Moabites 
fled  back  in  confusion,  followed  and  cut  down  at 
every  step  by  their  enemies.  Far  inwards  did  the 
pursuit  reach,  among  the  cities  and  firms  and 
orchards  of  that  rich  district :  nor  when  the  slaughter 
was  over  was  the  horrid  work  of  destruction  done. 
The  towns  both  fortified  and  unfortified  were  de- 
molished, and  the  stones  strewed  over  the  carefully 
tilled  fields.  The  fountains  of  water,  the  life"  of  an 
eastern  land,  were  choked,  and  all  timber  of  any 
size  or  goodness  felled.  Nowhere  else  do  we  hear 
of  such  sweeping  desolation  :  the  very  besom  of  de- 
struction passed  over  the  land.  At  last  the  struggle 
collected  itself  at  Kir-haraseth,  apparently  a 
newly  constructed  fortress,  which,  if  the  modern 
Kerak — and  there  is  every  probability  that  they 
are  identical — may  well  have  resisted  all  the  efforts 
of  the  allied  kings  in  its  native  impregnability. 
Here  Mesha  took  refuge  with  his  family  and  with 
the  remnants  of  his  army.  The  heights  around,  by 
which  the  town  is  entirely  commanded,  were  co- 
vered with  slingers,  who  armed  partly  with  the 
ancient  weapon  of  David  and  of  the  Benjamites, 
partly  perhaps  with  the  newly-invented  machines 
shortly  to  be  famous  in  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxvi. 
15),  discharged  their  volleys  of  stones  on  the  town. 
At  length  the  annoyance  could  be  borne  r.o  longer. 
Then  Mesha,  collecting  round  him  a  forlorn  hope 
of  700  of  his  best  warriors,  made  a  desperate 
sally,  with  the  intention  of  cutting  his  way  through 
to  his  special  foe  the  king  of  Edom.  But  the 
enemy  were  too  strong  for  him,  and  he  was  driven 
hack.  And  then  came  a  fitting  crown  to  a  tragedy 
already  so  terrible.  An  awful  spectacle  amazed  and 
horrified  the  besiegers.  The  king  and  his  eldest 
son,  the  heir  to  the  throne,  mounted  the  wall,  and, 
in  the  sight  of  the  thousands  who  covered  the  sides 
of  that  vast  amphitheatre,  the  father  killed  and 
burnt  his  child  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  to  the 
cruel  gods  of  his  country.  It  was  the  same 
dreadful  act  to  which,  as  we  have  seen,  Balak  had 
been  so  nearly  tempted  in  his  extremity."  But  the 
danger,  though  perhaps  not  really  greater  than  his, 
was  more  imminent ;  and  Mesha  had  no  one  like 
Balaam  at  hand,  to  counsel  patience  and  submis- 


MOAB 


395 


™  The  lesson  was  not  lost  on  king  Jorani,  who  proved 
himself  more  cautious  on  a  similar  occasion  (2  K.  vii. 
12,  13). 

"  I'rius  erat  luxurla  propter  iiTigiios  agros  (Jerom?, 
on  Is.  XV.  9). 

"  Jerome  alone  of  all  the  commentators  seems  to  have 
noticed  this.    See  his  Comm.  in  Mich.  vi. 

''  ^H-nil.  The  word  "  bunds,"  by  which  this  is 
commonly  rendered  with  A.V.  has  not  now  the  force 
of  the  original  term.  T-ITS  is  derived  from  TTH- 
to  nisli  together  and  fiercely,  and  signifies  a  troop  of 
irregular  marauders,  as  opposed  to  the  regular  soldiers  of 
an  army.  It  is  employed  to  denote  (1.)  the  bands  of  the 
Amalelcites  and  other  Bedouin  tribes  round  Talestine : 
as  1  S;mi.  XXX.  8,  15,  2\\  (A.V.  "  troop "  and  "com- 
pany"): 2  K.  vi.  23;  xiii.  20,  21;  xxiv.  2;  1  Chr.  xii. 
21;  2  Chr.  xxii.  1  (.\.V.  "band").  It  is  in  tliis  con- 
nexion tliat  it  occurs  in  tlje  elaborate  play  on  the  name 
of  Gad,  contained  in  Gen.  xlix.  19  [see  vol.  i.  647  a], 
a  passage  strilvingly  corroborated  by  I  Chr.  xii.  IS,  where 
the  Gadites  who  resorted  to  David  in  liis  difliculties — 
swift  as  roes  on  the  mountains,  witli  faces  like  the  faws 


sion  to  a  mightier  Power  than  Chemosh  or  Baal- 
Peor. 

Hitherto,  though  able  and  ready  to  fight  when  ne- 
cessary, the  Moabites  do  not  appear  to  have  been  a 
fighting  people  ;  perhaps,  as  suggested  elsewhere, 
the  Ammonites  were  the  warriors  of  the  nation  of 
Lot.  But  this  disaster  seems  to  have  altered  their 
disposition  at  any  rate  for  a  time.  Shortly  after 
these  events  we  hear  of  "  bands  " — that  is  pillaging 
marauding  parties ''—of  the  Moabites  making  their 
incursions  into  Israel  in  the  spring,  as  if  to  spoil 
the  early  corn  before  it  was  fit  to  cut  (2  K.  xiii. 
20).  With  Edom  theie  must  have  been  many  a 
contest.  One  of  these  marked  by  savage  vengeance — 
recalling  in  seme  degree  the  tragedy  of  Kir-haraseth, 
is  alluded  to  by  Amos  (ii.  1),  where  a  king  of 
Edom  seems  to  have  been  killed  and  burnt  by  Moab. 
This  may  have  been  one  of  the  incidents  of  the 
battle  of  Kir-haraseth  itself,  occurring  perhaps  after 
the  Edomites  had  parted  from  Israel,  and  were 
overtaken  on  their  road  home  by  the  furious  king 
oi"  Moab  (Gesenius,  Jesaia,  i.  .504) ;  or  according 
to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Jerome,  on  Amos  ii.  1),  it 
was  a  vengeance  still  more  savage  because  more 
protracted,  and  lasting  even  beyond  the  death  of 
the  king,  whose  remains  were  torn  from  his  tomb 
and  thus  consumed: — Non  dico  crudelitateni  sed 
rabiem  ;  ut  inceuderent  ossa  regis  Idumaeae,  et  non 
paterontur  mortem  esse  omnium  estremum  malo- 
rum  (lb.  ver.  4). 

In  the  "  Burden  of  Moab "  pronounced  by 
Isaiah  (chaps,  sv.  xvi.),  we  possess  a  document  full 
of  interesting  details  as  to  the  condition  of  the 
nation,  at  the  time  of  the  death  of  Ahaz  king  of 
Judah,  B.C.  726.  More  than  a  century  and  a  half 
had  elapsed  since  the  great  calamity  to  which  we 
have  just  referred.  In  that  interval,  Moab  has  re- 
gained all,  and  more  than  all  of  his  former  pro- 
sperity, and  has  besides  extended  himself  over  the 
distjict  which  he  originally  occupied  in  the  youth 
of  the  nation,  and  which  was  left  vacant  when  the 
removal  of  Reuben  to  Assyria,  which  had  been  begun 
by  Pul  in  770,  was  completed  by  Tiglath-pileser 
about  the  year  740  (1  Chr.  v.  25,  26). 

This  passage  of  Isaiah  cannot  be  considered  apart 
from  that  of  Jeremiah,  chap,  xlviii.  The  latter 
was  pronounced  more  than  a  century  later,  about 
the  year  600,  ten  or  twelve  years  before  the  inva- 
sion of  Nebuchadnezzar,  by  which  Jerusalem  was 
destroyed.  In  many  respects  it  is  identical  with 
that  of  Isaiah,  and  both  are  believed  by  the  best 


of  lions— were  formed  by  him  into  a  "  band."  In  1  K. 
xi.  24  it  denotes  the  roving  troop  collected  by  Hezon 
from  the  remnants  of  the  army  of  Zoliah.who  took  the  city 
of  Damascus  by  surprise,  and  by  their  forays  molested 
—literally  "played  the  Satan  to'' — Solomon  (ver.  25). 
How  formidable  these  bands  were,  may  be  gathered  from 
2  Sam.  xxii.  30,  where  in  a  moment  of  most  solemn 
exultation  David  speaks  of  breaking  through  one  of  them 
as  among  the  most  memorable  exploits  of  his  life. 

(2.)  The  word  is  used  in  the  general  sense  of  hired 
soldiers— mercenaries ;  as  of  the  host  of  luO.OOO  Kph- 
raimitcs  hired  by  Amaziah  in  2  Chr.  xxv.  9,  10,  13; 
where  the  point  is  missed  in  the  A.V.  by  the  use  of  the 
word  "  army."  No  Budouins  could  have  shown  a  keener 
appetite  for  plunder  than  did  these  Israelites  (ver.  13). 
In  this  sense  it  is  probably  used  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  11,  for  the 
iiTcgular  troops  kept  by  Uzziah  for  jnirposcs  of  jilunder, 
and  who  are  distinginshed  from  his  "army"  (ver.  13) 
maintained  for  regular  engagements. 

(3.)  In  2  Sam.  iii.  22  ("  troop  ')  and  2  K.  v.  2  ("  by 
companies")  it  refers  to  maramliug  raids  for  the  purpose 
of  pluiKlcr. 


396 


MOAB 


moileni  scholars,  on  account  of  the  archaisms  and 
other  peculiarities  of"  language  which  they  contain, 
to  be  a  lopted  from  a  common  source — the  work  of 
some  much  more  ancient  prophet.i 

Isaiah  ends  his  denunciation  by  a  prediction — in 
his  own  words — that  within  three  years  Moab 
should  be  greatly  reduced.  This  was  probably 
with  a  view  to  Shalmaneser  who  destroyed  Samaria, 
and  no  doubt  overran  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  ^ 
in  725,  and  again  in  723  (2  K.  xvii.  3,  xviii.  9). 
The  only  event  of  which  we  have  a  record  to  which 
it  would  seem  possible  that  the  passage,  as  oaigin- 
ally  uttered  by  the  older  prophet,  applied,  is  the 
invasion  of  Pul,  who  about  the  year  770  appeai-s  to 
have  commenced  the  deportation  of  Reuben  (1  Chr. 
V.  26),  and  who  very  probably  at  the  same  time 
molested  Moab.'  The  difficulty  of  so  many  of  the 
towns  of  Reuben  being  mentioned,  as  at  that  early 
date  already  in  the  possession  of  Moab,  may  perhaps 
be  explained  by  remembering  that  the  idolatry  of 
the  neighbouring  nations — and  therefore  of  Moab, 
had  been  adopted  by  the  trans-Jordanic  tiibes  lor 
some  time  previously  to  the  final  deportation  by 
Tiglath-pileser  (see  1  Chi-,  v.  25),  and  that  many 
of  the  sanctuaries  were  probably  even  at  the  date 
of  the  original  delivery  of  the  denunciation  in  the 
hands  of  the  piiests  of  Chemosh  and  Jlilcom.  If, 
as  Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  588)  with  much  probability 
infers,  the  Moabites,  no  less  than  the  Ammonites, 
were  under  the  protection  of  the  powerful  Uzziah  ' 
(2  Chr.  xxvi.  8),  then  the  obscure  expressions  of 
the  ancient  seer  as  given  in  Is.  xvi.  1-5,  referring 
to  a  tribute  of  lambs  (comp.  2  K.  iii.  4)  sent 
from  the  wild  pasture-grounds  south  of  Moab  to 
Zion,  and  to  protection  and  relief  from  oppression 
afforded  by  the  throne"  of  David  to  the  fugi- 
tives and  outcasts  of  Sloab — acquire  an  intelligible 
sense. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  calamities  which  Jere- 
miah describes,  may  have  been  inflicted  in  any  one 
of  the  numerous  visitations  from  the  Assyrian  army, 
under  which  these  unhappy  countries  sufiered  at 
the  period  of  his  prophecy  in  rapid  succession. 

But  the  micertainty  of  the  exact  dates  refei'red  to 
in  these  several  denunciations,  does  not  in  the  least 
affect  the  interest  or  the  value  of  the  allusions  they 
contain  to  the  condition  of  Moab.  They  bear  the 
evident  stamp  of  portraiture  by  artists  who  knew 
their  subject  thoroughly.  The  nation  appears  in  them 
as  high-spirited,*  wealthy,  populous,  and  even  to  a 
certain  extent,  civilised,  enjoying  a  wide  reputation 
and  popularity.  With  a  metaphor  which  well  ex- 
presses at  once  the  pastoral  wealth  of  the  country 


q  See  Ewald  (rropheten,  229-31).  He  seems  to 
believe  that  Jeremiah  has  preserved  the  old  prophecy 
more  nearly  in  its  original  condition  than  Isaiah. 

■■  Amos,  B.C.  cir.  7»0,  prophesied  that  a  nation  should 
afflict  Israel  from  the  entering  in  of  Hamath  unto  the 
"  torrent  of  the  desert "  (probably  one  of  the  wadys  on 
the  S.E.  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea);  that  is,  the  whole  of 
the  country  East  of  Jordan. 

s  Knobel  refers  the  original  of  Is.  xv.  xvi.  to  the  time 
of  Jeroboam  II.,  a  great  conqueror  beyond  Jordan. 

'  He  died  758,  i.  e.  12  years  after  the  invasion  of  Pul. 

"  The  word  used  in  this  passage  for  the  palace  of 
David  in  Zion,  viz.  "tent"  (A.  V.  "tabernacle"),  is 
remarkable  as  an  instance  of  the  persistence  with  which 
the  memory  of  the  original  military  foundation  of  Jeru- 
salem by  the  warrior-king  was  preserved  by  the  Prophets. 
Thus,  in  Ps.  Ixxvi.  2  and  Lam.  ii.  6  it  is  the  -'booth  or 
bivoiiacking-hut  of  Jehovah  ;  "  and  in  Is.  xxix.  1  the  city 
where  David  "  pitched,"  or  "  encamped  ''  (not  "  dwelt," 
as  in  A.  v.). 


MOAB 

and  its  commanding,  almost  regal,  position,  but 
which  cannot  be  conveyed  in  a  translation,  Moab  is 
depicted  as  the  strong  sceptre,y  the  beautiful  stall', 
whose  fracture  will  be  bewailed  by  all  about  him, 
and  by  all  who  know  him.  In  his  cities  we  discern 
a  "  great  multitude  "  of  people  living  in  "glory," 
and  in  the  enjoyment  of  great  "treasure,"  crowding 
the  public  squares,  the  housetops,  and  the  ascents 
and  descents  of  the  numerous  high  places  and  sanc- 
tuaries where  the  "  priests  and  princes  "  of  Chemosh 
or  Baal-Peor,  minister  to  the  anxious  devotees.  Out- 
side the  towns  lie  the  "  plentiful  fields,"  luxuriant 
as  the  I'enowned  Carmel^ — the  vineyards,  and  gar- 
dens of  "  summer  fruits  "  ; — the  harvest  is  being 
reaped,  and  the  "hay  stored  in  its  abundance,"  the 
vineyards  and  the  presses  are  crowded  with  peasants, 
gathering  and  treading  the  grapes,  the  land  resounds 
with  the  clamour  ^  of  the  vintagers.  These  charac- 
teristics contrast  very  favourably  with  any  traits 
recorded  of  Ammon,  Edom,  Midian,  Amalek,  the 
Philistines,  or  the  Canaanite  tribes.  And  suice  the 
descriptions  we  are  considering  are  adopted  by  cer- 
tainly two,  and  probably  three  prophets — Jeremiah, 
Isaiah,  and  the  older  seer — extending  over  a  period 
of  nearly  200  years,  we  may  safely  conclude  that 
they  are  not  merely  temporary  circumstances,  but 
were  the  endming  characteristics  of  the  people. 
In  this  case  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  amongst 
the  pastoral  people  of  Syria,  Moab  stood  next  to 
Israel  in  all  matters  of  material  wealth  and  civili- 
sation. 

It  is  very  interesting  to  remaik  the  feeling  which 
actuates  the  prophets  in  these  denunciations  of  a 
people  who,  though  the  enemies  of  Jehovah,  were 
the  blood-relations  of  Israel.  Half  the  allusions  of 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  in  the  passages  referred  to, 
must  for  ever  remain  obscure.  We  shall  never 
know  who  the  "  lords  of  the  heathen  "  were  who,  in 
that  terrible  '  night,  laid  waste  and  brought  to  silence 
the  prosperous  Ar-moab  and  Kir-moab.  Or  the 
occasion  of  that  flight  over  the  Arnon,  when  the 
Moabite  women  were  huddled  together  at  tlie  ford, 
like  a  flock  of  young  birds,  pressing  to  cross  to  the 
safe  side  of  the  stream, — when  the  dwellers  in 
Aroer  stood  by  the  side  of  the  high  road  which 
passed  their  town,  and  eagerly  questioning  the 
fugitives  as  they  hurried  up,  "  \Vhat  is  done  ?" — 
received  but  one  answer  from  all  alike — "  All  is 
lost !    Moab  is  confounded  and  broken  down  !  " 

Many  expressions,  also,  such  as  the  "  weeping 
of  Jazer,"  the  "heifer  of  three  years  old,"  the 
"  shadow  of  Heshbon,"  the  "  lions,"  must  remain 
obscure.     But  nothing  can  obscure  or  render  obso- 


»  Is.  xvi.  6;  Jer.  xlviii.  29.  The  word  gaSii  (pSH)- 
like  our  own  word  "pride,"  is  susceptible  of  a  good  as  well 
as  a  bad  sense.  It  is  the  term  used  for  the  "majesty"  and 
"  excellency"  of  Jehovah  (Is.  ii.  10,  &c.,  Ex.  xv.  7),  and  is 
frequently  in  the  A.  V.  rendered  by  "pomp." 

'  nt3D  ;  the  "  rod  "  of  Moses,  and  of  Aaron,  and  of 
the  heads  of  the  tiibes  (Xum.  xvii.  2,  &c.).  The  term  also 
means  a  "  tribe."  No  English  word  expresses  all  these 
meanings. 

^  ?J5D  ;  the  word  used  for  the  "  rods "  of  Jacob's 
stratagem  ;  also  for  the  "staves"  in  the  pastoral  parable 
ofZech:iriah(xi.  7-14). 

"  Carinel  is  the  word  rendered  "  plentiful  field  "  in 
Is.  xvi.  10  and  Jer.  xlviii.  33. 

i>  What  the  din  of  a  vintage  in  Palestine  was  may  be 
inferred  from  Jer.  xxv.  30  :  "  Jehovah  shall  roar  from  on 
high.  .  .  .  He  shall  mightily  roar.  .  ,  .  He  sliall  give  a 
shout  as  those  that  tread  the  grapes." 

<^  La  noche  triste. 


MOAB 

lete  the  tone'*  ot"  tenderness  and  afl'ection  which 
makes  itself  felt  in  a  hundred  expressions  through- 
out these  precious  documents.  Ardently  as  the 
Prophet  longs  for  the  destruction  of  the  enemy  of 
his  country  and  of  Jehovah,  and  earnestly  as  he 
curses  tlie  man  "  that  doeth  the  work  of  Jehovah 
deceitfully,  that  keepeth  back  his  sword  from 
blood,"  yet  he  is  constrained  to  bemoan  and  lament 
such  uieadfid  calamities  to  a  people  so  near  him 
both  in  blood  and  locality.  His  heart  mourns — it 
sounds  like  pipes — for  the  men  of  Kir-heres ;  his 
heart  cries  out,  it  sounds  like  a  harp  for  Moab. 

Isaiah  recurs  to  the  subject  in  another  pa.ssage  of 
extraordinary  force,  and  of  fiercer  character  than  be- 
fore, viz.,  XXV.  10-1_'.  Here  the  extermination,  the 
utter  annihilation,  of  Moab,  is  contemplated  by  the 
Prophet  with  triumph,  as  one  of  the  first  results 
of  the  re-establishment  of  Jehovah  on  Mount  Zion : 
"  In  this  mountain  shall  the  iiand  of  Jehovah  rest, 
and  Moab  shall  bo  trodden  down  under  Him,  even  as 
straw — the  straw  of  his  own  threshing-floors  at  Mad- 
meuah— is  trodden  down  for  the  dunghill.  .And  He 
shall  spread  forth  His  hands  in  the  midst  of  them — • 
namely,  of  the  Moabites — as  one  that  svvinimeth 
spreadfith  forth  his  hands  to  swim,  bulfet  following 
bullet,  right  and  left,  with  terrible  rapidity,  as  the 
strong  swiinmer  urges  his  way  forward  :  and  He 
shall  bring  down  their  pride  together  with  the 
spoils  of  their  hands.  And  the  fortress  of  Misgab"^ 
— thy  walls  shall  He  bring  down,  lay  low,  and  bring 
to  the  ground,  to  the  dust." 

If,  according  to  the  custom  of  interpreters,  this 
and  the  preceding  chapter  (xxiv.)  are  understood  iis 
referring  to  the  destruction  of  Babylon,  then  this 
sudden  burst  of  indignation  towards  Moab  is  ex- 
tremely puzzling.  But,  if  the  passage  is  exam- 
ined with  that  view,  it  will  perhaps  be  found  to 
contain  some  expressions  which  suggest  the  possi- 
bility of  Moab  having  been  at  least  within  the 
ken  of  the  Pi'ophet,  even  though  not  in  the  fore- 
grounil  of  his  vision,  during  a  great  part  of 
the  passage.  The  Hebrew  words  rendered  "  city  " 
in  XXV.  2 — two  entirely  distinct  terms — are  posi- 
tively, with  a  slight  variation,  the  names  of  the 
two  chief  Moabite  strongholds,  the  same  which  are 
mentioned  in  xv.  l,and  one  of  which ^  is  in  the 
Pentateuch  a  synonym  for  the  entire  nation  of 
Moab.  In  this  light,  verse  2  may  be  read  as 
follows:  "  For  Thou  hast  made  of  Ar  a  heap;  of 
Kir  the  defenced  a  ruin  ;  a  palace  s  of  strangers  no 
longer  is  Ar,  it  shall  never  be  rebuilt."  The  same 
words  are  found  in  verses  10  and  12  of  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  in  company  with  hutsoth  (A.  V. 
"streets")  which  we  know  from  Num.  xxii.  39  to 
have  been  the  name  of  a  Moabite  town.  [KiRJATii- 
HUZOXII.]  A  distinct  echo  of  them  is  again  heard  in 
XXV.  3,  4  ;  and  Hually  in  xxvi.  1,  5,  there  seems  to 
be  yet  another  reference  to  the  same  two  towns, 
acquiring  new  force  from  the  deuunciation  which 


MOAB 


397 


<•  It  IS  thus  characterized  by  KwaUl  (/'ropheten,  230). 
Kine  so  gair/,  von  Trauor  uud  Mitleid  hingerisscne,  von 
Weichlieit  zerflii'ssencle,  uiebr  elcgisch  als  prophetisch 
gesliramte  Eniiifimliing  sti'lit  unler  den  iillern  I'roplietcn 
clnzig  da;  sognr  bei  Husca  ist  nicbts  ganz  aelinliches. 

'•■  In  the  A.  V.  rondiTeii  "  the  bigb  fort.'  IJut  Ibcro  is 
good  reason  to  t;ike  it  as  llio  name  of  a  place  (Jer. 
xlviii.  1).   [Misgah.] 

f  Gesenius  believes  Ar,  "Ij?.  to  be  a  Moabite  form  of  Ir, 
'f'V'  one  of  the  two  words  spoken  of  above.  Num.  xxiv.  19 
acquires  a  new  force,  if  the  word  rcndrroii  "city"  is  inter- 
preted as  Ar,  that  is  Moab.     So  also  in  Mic.  vi.  9,  ai  the 


closes  the  preceding  ch.apter : — -"  RIoab  shall  be 
brought  down,  the  fortress  ami  the  walls  of  Misgab 
shall  be  hud  low  ;  but  in  the  land  of  Judah  this 
song  shall  be  sung,  '  Our   Ar,  oiir  city,  is  strong 

Trust  in  the  Lord  Jehovah  who  bringeth 

down  those  that  dwell  on  high:  the  lofty  Kir  He 
layeth  it  low,'  "  &c. 

It  is  perhaps  an  additional  corroboration  to  this 
view  to  notice  that  the  remarkable  expressions  in 
xxiv.  17,  "Fear,  and  the  pit,  and  the  snare," 
&c.,  actually  occur  in  Jeremi,ah  (xlviii.  43),  in  his 
denunciation  of  Moab,  embedded  in  the  old  pro- 
phecies out  of  which,  like  Is.  xv.  xvi.,  this  passage 
i.s  compiled,  and  the  lest  of  which  had  certainly,  as 
originally  uttered,  a  (tirect  and  even  exclusive  re- 
ference to  Moab. 

Between  the  time  of  Isaiah's  denunciation  and 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  we  have  hardly  a 
reference  to  Moab.  Zephaniah,  writing  in  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  reproaches  them  (ii.  8-10)  for 
their  taunts  against  the  people  of  Jehovah,  but  no 
acts  of  hostility  are  recorded  either  on  the  one  side 
or  the  other.  From  one  passage  in  Jeremiah  (xxv. 
9-21)  delivered  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
just  before  the  first  appearance  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
it  is  appai'ent  that  it  was  the  belief  of  the  Prophet 
that  the  nations  surrounding  Israel  —  and  Moab 
among  the  rest — were  on  the  eve  of  devastation  by 
the  Chaldaeans  and  of  a  captivity  for  seventy  years 
(see  ver.  1 1),  from  which  however,  they  should 
eventually  be  restored  to  their  own  country  (ver. 
12,  and  xlviii.  47).  From  another  record  of  the 
events  of  the  same  period  or  of  one  only  just 
subsequent  (2  K.  xxiv.  2),  it  would  appear,  how- 
ever, that  Moab  made  terms  with  the  Chaldaeans, 
and  for  the  time  acted  in  concert  with  them  in 
harassing  and  plundering  the  kingdom  of  Je- 
hoiakim. 

Four  or  five  years  later,  in  the  first  year  of  Zede- 
kiah  (Jer.  xxvii.  l),"*  these  hostilities  must  have 
ceased,  for  there  was  then  a  regular  intercourse  be- 
tween Moab  and  the  court  at  Jerusalem  (ver.  3),  pos- 
sibly, as  Bunsen  suggests  (^Bibelwerk,  Prophcten,  536) 
negotiating  a  combined  resistance  to  the  common 
enemy.  The  brunt  of  the  storm  must  have  thllen 
on  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  The  neighbouring  nations, 
including  Moab,  when  the  danger  actuall}''  arrived 
probably  adopted  the  advice  of  Jeremiah  (x.wii. 
11)  and  thus  escaped,  though  not  without  much 
dainage,  yet  without  being  carried  away  .as  the 
Jews  were.  That  these  nations  did  not  suffer  to 
the  same  extent  as  Judaea  is  evident  fiom  the  fact 
that  many  of  the  Jews  took  refuge  there  when 
their  own  land  was  laid  waste  (Jer.  xl.  11).  Jeie- 
miah  expressly  testifies  that  those  who  submitted 
tliemselves  to  the  King  of  Babylon,  though  thoy 
would  have  to  bear  a  severe  yoke — so  se\  ere  that 
their  very  wild  animals'  would  be  enslave<l — yet 
by  such  submission  should  purchase  the  privilege 


close  of  the  remarkable  conversation  be  twccn  Balak  and 
Balaam  there  preserved,  the  word  "T'^  oiciu's  again,  in 
such  a  maimer-  tliat  it  is  difllciilt  not  to  believe  that  the 
capital  city  of  Moab  Is  intendcii :  "  .fchovah's  voice  crleth 

unto  Ar hear  ye  tlie  rod,  and  who  hath  appointed 

it" 

K  ArntOn.  The  .s:imo  word  is  used  by  Amus  (ii.  2)  in 
his  denunciation  of  I\Ioab. 

h  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  ".Tehoiakiin  "  in  this  verse 
should  be  " Zi dikiah."  See  ver.  3  of  the  same  cliap,,  and 
xxviii.  1. 

'  Jer.  xxlii.  6. 


398 


MOAB 


of  remaining  in  tlieirowncoimlry.  Tlieremov.il  from 
home,  so  (liea<lful  to  the  Semitic  mind,''  was  to  be 
the  fate  only  of  those  who  resisted  (Jer.  xxvii.  10, 
11,  xxviii.  U).  This  is  also  supported  by  the 
allusion  of  Ezekiel,  a  few  years  later,  to  the  cities 
of  Moab,  cities  formerly  belonging  to  the  Israel- 
ites, which,  at  the  time  when  the  Prophet  is 
speaking,  were  still  flom-ishing,  "  the  glory  of  the 
country,"  destined  to  become  at  a  future  day^a  prey 
to  theBene-kedeni,  the  "men  of  the  East" — the 
Bedouins  of  the  great  desert  of  the  Euphrates " 
(Ezek.  sxv.  8-11). 

After  the  retuin  from  the  captivity  it  was 
a  Moabite,  Sauballat  of  Horonaim,  who  took 
the  chief  part  in  annoying  and  endeavouring  to 
hinder  the  operations  of  the  rebuilders  of  Jeru- 
salem (Neh.  ii.  19,  iv.  1,  vi.  1,  &c.).  He  confines 
himself,  however,  to  the  same  weapons  of  ridicule 
and  scurrility  which  we  have  already  noticed 
Zephaniah  "  resenting.  From  Sanballat's  words  (Neh. 
ii.  19)  we  should  Infer  that  he  and  his  country 
were  subject  to  "  the  king,"  that  is,  the  King  of  Ba- 
bylon. During  the  interval  since  the  return  of 
the  first  caravan  from  Babylon  the  illegal  practice 
of  marriages  between  the  Jews  and  the  other 
people  around,  Moab  amongst  the  rest,  had  become 
frequent.  So  far  had  this  gone,  that  the  son 
of  the  high  priest  was  married  to  an  Ammonite 
woman.  Even  among  the  fomilies  of  Israel  who 
returned  I'rom  the  captivity  was  one  bearing  the 
name  of  Pahath-Moab  (Ezr.  ii.  6,  viii.  4;  Neh. 
iii.  11,  &c.),  a  name  which  must  ceiiainly  denote 
a  Moabite  connexion,"  though  to  the  nature  of  the 
connexion  no  clue  seems  to  have  been  yet  discovered. 
By  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  the  practice  of  foreign  mar- 
riages was  strongly  repressed,  and  we  never  heai' 
of  it  again  becoming  prevalent. 

In  the  book  of  Judith,  the  date  of  which  is  laid 
shortly  after  the  return  from  captivity  (iv.  3), 
Moabites  and  Ammonites  are  represented  as  dwell- 
ing in  their  ancient  seats  and  as  obeying  the  call 
of  the  Assyrian  general.  Their  "princes"  (dp- 
yivras)  and  "  governors  "  {riyov/xevoL)  are  men- 
tioned (v.  2,  vii.  8).  The  Maccabees,  much  as  they 
ravaged  the  country  of  the  Ammonites,  do  not  appear 
to  have  molested  Moab  proper,  nor  is  the  name 
either  of  iloab  or  of  any  of  the  towns  south  of 
the  Anion  mentioned  throughout  those  books. 
Josephus  not  only  speaks  of  the  district  in  which 
Heshbon  was  situated  as  "  Moabitis  "  {Ant.  xiii.  15, 
§4;  also  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2),  but  expressly  says  that 
even  at  the  time  he  wi-ote  they  were  a  "  very  great 
nation"  {Ant.  i.  11,  §5.)    (See  5  Mace.  xxix.  19). 

In  the  time  of  Eusebius  {Onomast.  MwdP),  i.e. 
rir.  A.D.  380,  the  name  appears  to  have  been  attached 
to  the  disti'ict,  as  well  as  to  the  town  of  Rabhath — 
both  of  which  were  called  Moab.  It  also  lingered  for 
some  time  in  the  name  of  the  ancient  Kir-Moab, 
which,  as  Charakmoba,  is  mentioned  by  Ptolemy  p 
(  Reland,  Pul.  463),  and  as  late  as  the  Council  of 
Jerusalem,  A.D.  53(3,  foiTued  the  see  of  a  bishop  im- 
der  the  same  title  (j6.  533).    Since  that  time  the 


MOAB 

modem  name  Kerak  has  supeisoded  the  older  one, 
and  no  trace  of  Moab  has  been  found  either  in  re- 
cords or  in  the  country  itself. 

Like  the  other  countries  east  of  Jordan  Moab  has 
been  very  little  visited  by  Europeans,  and  beyond 
its  general  characteristics  hardly  anything  is  known 
of  it.  The  following  travellers  have  passed  through 
the  district  of  Moab  Proper,  from  Wady  Mojeh  on 
the  N.  to  Eerah  on  the  S. : — 

Seetzen,  March,  1806,  and  January,  1807.  (U.  I.  Seet- 
zen's  Reisen,  &c.,  von  Prof.  Kruse,  &c.,  vol.  i.  405- 
26  ;  ii.  320-"'7.  Also  the  editor's  notes  thereon,  in 
vol  iv.) 

Burckhardt,  1S12,  July  13,  to  Aug.  4.  (  TVa-uels,  Lon- 
don, 1822.  See  also  the  notes  of  Gesenius  to  the 
German  translation,  Weimar,  1824,  vol.  ii.,  1061- 
64.) 

Irby  and  Mangles,  1818,  June  5  to  8.  (  Travels  in  Egypt, 
&€.,  1822,  8vo. ;  1847,  12mo.    Chap,  viii.) 

De  Saulcy,  1851,  Januaiy.  {Voi/age  autour  de  la  Ma- 
Jlorte,  Paris,  1853.    Also  translated  into  English.) 

Of  the  character  of  the  face  of  the  country  these 
travellers  only  give  slight  reports,  and  among  these 
there  is  considerable  variation  even  when  the  same 
district  is  refeiTed  to.  Thus  between  Kerak  and 
Rabha,  Irby  (141  a)  found  "a  fine  country,"  of  gi-eat 
natural  fei  tility,  with  "  reapers  at  work  and  the 
corn  luxuriant  in  all  directions ;"  and  the  same  dis- 
trict is  described  by  Burckhardt  as  "  very  fertile, 
and  large  tracts  cultivated"  {Syr.  July  15)  ;  while 
De  Saulcy,  on  the  other  hand,  pronounces  that 
"  from  Shihaii  (6  miles  N.  oi  Rabhd)  to  the  Wady 
Keiak  the  country  is  perfectly  bare,  not  a  tree  or  a 
bush  to  be  seen  " — "  Toujours  aussi  nu  .  .  .  pas  un 
arbie,  pas  un  arbrisseau  "  (  Voyage,  i.  353)  ;  which 
again  is  contradicted  by  Seetzen,  who  not  only  found 
the  soil  very  good,  but  encumbered  with  wormwood 
and  other  shrubs  (Seetzen,  i.  410).  These  dis- 
ci-epancies  are  no  doubt  partly  due  to  diflerence  in 
the  time  of  year,  and  other  temporary  causes ;  but 
they  also  probably  proceed  i'rom  the  disagree- 
ment which  seems  to  be  inhei'ent  in  all  descrip- 
tions of  the  same  scene  or  spot  by  various  de- 
scribers,  and  which  is  enough  to  drive  to  despair 
those  wliose  ta.sk  it  is  to  endeavour  to  combine  them 
into  a  single  account. 

In  one  thing  all  agree,  the  extraordinary  num- 
ber of  ruins  which  are  scattered  over  the  country, 
and  which,  whatever  the  present  condition  of  the 
soil,  are  a  sure  token  of  its  wealth  in  former 
ages.  "  Wie  schrecklich,"  says  Seetzen,  "  ist  diese 
Kesidenz  alter  Konige  und  ihr  Laud  verwiistet!" 
(i.412). 

The  whole  country  is  undulating,  and,  after  the 
general  level  of  the  plateau  is  reached,  without  any 
serious  inequalities  ;  and  in  this  and  the  absence  of 
conspicuous  vegetation  has  a  certain  resemblance  to 
the  downs  of  our  own  southern  counties. 

Of  the  language  of  the  Jloabites  we  know  nothing 
or  next  to  nothing.  In  the  few  communications 
rec-orded  as  taking  place  between  them  and  Israelites 
no  interpreter  is  mentioned  (see  Ruth ;  1  Sam.  xxii. 


t  This  feeling  is  brought  out  very  strongly  in  Jer. 
xlviii.  11,  where  even  the  successive  devastations  from 
which  Moab  had  suffered  are  counted  as  nothing— as 
absolute  immunity— since  captivity  had  been  escaped. 

■n  To  the  incursions  of  these  people,  true  Arabs,  it  is 
possibly  due  that  theLXX.  in  is.  xv.  9  introduce  "Apapat 
— "  1  will  bring  Arabs  upon  Dimon." 

n  The  word  nS')n>  rendered  "  reproach"  in  Zeph.  ii.  s, 
occurs  sovcnil  limcs   in  Neherai.ih  in  reference  to  the 


taunts  of  Sanballat  and  his  companions.  (See  iv.  4, 
vi.  13,  &c.) 

o  It  will  be  observed  that  this  name  occurs  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Joab,  who,  if  the  well-known  son  of  Zeruiah, 
would  be  a  descendant  of  Ruth  the  Moabitess.  But 
this  is  uncertain.  [Vol.  i.  1084o.] 

P  From  the  order  of  the  lists  as  they  now  stand,  and 
the  latitude  afiixed  to  Charakmoba,  Ptolemy  appears  to 
reler  to  a  place  south  of  Petra. 


MOAB 

3,  4,  &c.).  And  from  the  origin  of  the  nation 
and  other  considerations  we  may  perhaps  conjectun' 
that  tlieir  language  was  more  a  dialect  of  Hebrew 
than  a  diffeient  tonuue.i  This  indeed  would  follow 
from  tlie  connexion  of  Lot,  their  founder,  with 
Abraham. 

The  narrative  of  Num.  xxii.-.xxiv.  must  be  founded 
on  a  Moabite  chronicle,  though  in  its  present  con- 
dition doubtless  much  altered  fioni  what  it  originallv 
Was  before  it  came  into  the  hands  of  the  author  of 
the  liook  of  ■■  Numbers.  No  attempt  seems  yet  to 
have  been  made  to  execute  the  difficult  but  interest- 
ing task  of  e.Kamiiiing  the  record,  with  the  view  of 
restoring  it  to  its  pristine  form. 

The  following  are  the  names  of  Moabite  persons 
preserved  in  tlie  Bible — probalily  Hebraized  in  their 
adoption  into  the  Bible  records.  Of  such  a  tran- 
sition we  seem  to  have  a  trace  in  Shoraor  and  Shim- 
rith  (see  below). 

Zippor. 
Balak. 
Egloii. 
Ruth. 

orpah  (nsiy). 

Mesha  (]}^'<D). 

Itlimah  (1  Cbr.  .\i.  46). 

Slioiner  (2  K.  xii.  21),  or  Shimritb  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  26). 

Sunballat. 

Add  to  these — 

Emim,  the  name  by  which  they  called  the  Uephaini 
who  originally  iiiliabited  their  cnuntry,  ami  whom 
tlic  .\rnmoiiites  called  Zanizumniim  or  Zuzim. 

CemOsh,  or  Ceniish  (Jer.  xlviii.  7),  the  deity  of  the 
nation. 

Of  names  of  places  the  following  may  be  men- 
tioned : — 

Moab,  with  its  compounds,  Scde-Moab,  the  fields  of 
M.  (A.  V.  "  the  country  of  M.") ;  Arbuth-Moah, 
the  deserts  (A.  V.  "the  plains")  of  jM.,  tliat  is, 
the  part  of  the  Arabah  occupied  by  the  Moabites. 

Ham-Mishor,  the  high  undulating  country  of  Moab 
Proper  (A.  V.  "  the  plain"). 

Ar,  or  Ar-Moab  (IJ?)-  'I'his  Gescnius  conjectures  to 
be  a  Moabite  form  of  tlie  word  which  in  Hebrew 
appears  as  Ir  ("l^J?)-  a  city. 

Anion,  the  river  (>J")5<)- 

IJamoth  Baal. 

ISeer  Elim. 

Belh-diblathaim. 

Dibon,  or  Dimon. 

Eglaim,  or  perhaps  P^glath-Shelishiya  (Is.  xv.  5). 

Horonaim. 

Kirialhaim. 

Kirjath-huzoth  (Num.  xxxii.  .'i9;  conip.  Is.  xxiv.  11). 

ICir-haraseth,  -haresh,  -heres. 

Ivir-Moab. 

l.uhith. 

Medeba. 

Nirarim,  or  Nimrah. 

Nobah,  or  Nopbah  (.\um.  xxi.  30). 

hap-Pisgah. 

hap-Peor. 

Shaveh-  Ivariathaira  (?) 

Zophim. 

Zoar. 


MODIN 


399 


n  Some  materials  for  an  investigation  of  this  subject 
luay  be  found  in  the  curious  variations  of  some  of  the 
Moabite  names -Chemosh,  Cliendsh  ;  Kir-haraseth,  Ivir- 
heres,  &c. ;  Shomer,  Shinniih  ;  and— reniemltering  the 
close  connexion  of  Aiiniiou  with  Moab-  the  namesof  the 
Ammonite  god,  Molech,  Milcom,  Malcham. 

■■  If  this  suggestion  is  iinnit— and  there  nnist  be  some 


It  should  bo  noticed  how  hirge  a  proportion  of 
these  names  end  in  im.^ 

For  the  religion  of  the  Moabites  see  CllEMOSH, 
Molech,  Peou. 

Of  their  liabits  and  customs  we  have  hardly  a 
trace.  The  gesture  employed  by  Balak  when  he 
found  that  Balaam's  interference  was  fruitless — 
"he  smote  his  hands  together" — is  not  mentioned 
again  in  the  Bible,  but  it  may  not  on  that  account 
have  been  peculiar  to  the  Moabites.  Their  mode 
of  moui-ning,  viz.  cutting  off  the  hair  at  the  back  ' 
of  the  head  and  cropping  the  beard  (Jer.  xlviii. 
37),  is  one  which  they  followed  in  common  with 
the  other  non-Israelite  nations,  and  which  was  for- 
bidden to  the  Israelites  (Lev.  xxi.  5),  who  indeed 
seem  to  have  been  accustomed  rather  to  leave  their 
hair  and  beard  disordered  and  untrimmed  when  in 
grief  (see  2  Sam.  xix.  24 ;  xiv.  2). 

For  a  singular  endeavour  to  identify  the  Moabites 
with  the  Druses,  see  Sir  G.  H.  Rose's  pamphlet. 
The  Affghans  the  Ten  Tribes,  &c.  (London,  1852), 
especially  the  statement  therein  of  Mr.  Wood,  late 
British  consul  at  Damascus,  (p.  154-157).      [G.] 

MOADrAH  (nnyiO :    UaaSai;    F.  A.,  3rd 

hand,  iv  Kaipols :  Moudia).  A  priest,  or  family  of 
priests,  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel.  The  chief 
of  the  house  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  son  of 
Jeshiia  was  Piltai  (Neh.  .xii.  17).  Elsewhere  (Neii. 
xii.  5-j  called  Maadiah. 

MOCHMUR,  THE  BROOK  (o  x^^t^^ph^ 
MoxfJ-ovp  ;  Alex,  omits  Mox-  '■  Vulg.  omits  :  Syr. 
Nachal  de  Peur),  a  torrent,  i.  e.  a  vcady — the  word 
"  brook "  conveys  an  entirely  false  impression — 
mentioned  only  in  Jud.  vii.  18  ;  and  there  as  speci- 
fying the  position  of  Ekrebel — "near  luito  Chiisi, 
and  upon  the  brook  Mochmur."  Ekrebel  has 
been  identified,  with  great  probability,  by  Mr. 
V;m  de  Velde  in  Akrabeh,  a  ruined  site  in  the 
mountains  of  Central  Palestine,  equidistant  from 
Nahulus  and  Seilun,  S.E.  of  the  former  and  N.E. 
of  the  latter;  and  the  toiTent  Mochmour  may  be 
either  the  Wudy  Makfuriijeh,  on  the  northern 
slopes  of  which  Ahraheh  stands,  or  the  Wadij 
AhiiMr,  which  is  the  continuation  of  the  former 
eastwards. 

The  reading  of  the  Syriac  possibly  points  to 
the  existence  of  a  sanctuary  of  Baal-Peor  in  this 
neighbourhood,  but  is  more  probably  a  corruption 
of  the  original  name,  which  was  apparently  "lIDHD 
(Simonis,  Onomasticon  N.  T.  &c.  p.  111).     [G.] 

MO'DIN  (MwSe'eii/ ;  Alex.  McoSeei/i,  McoSiei^, 
Ma)5a€ijU,  and  in  ch.  ii.  McoSsgii/;  Joseiih.  MoiSaifx, 
and  once  MaiSeeiu:  Mudiii:  the  Jewish  form  is, 
in  the  IMishna,  D''y''ni?On,  in  Joseph  ben-Gorion, 
ch.  XX.,  n^J?Ti?On  ;  the  Syriac  version  of  Macai- 
bees  agrees  with  the  Mishna,  except  in  the  absence  of 
the  article,  and  in  the  usual  substitution  of  r  for  d, 
Mora'im),  a  place  not  mentioned  in  cither  Old  or 
New  Testament,  though  rendeied  imnnntal  by  its 
connexion  with  the  history  of  the  Jews  in  the  in- 
terval between  the  two.  It  was  the  native  city 
of  the  Maccabaean  family  (1  Mace.  xiii.  25),  and  as 


truth  iu  it — thin  this  pas.sage  of  Numbers  I)ecomes no  less 
historically  important  than  Gen.  xiv.,  whii:h  Ewald  (fit- 
schichti;  i.  73,  KU,  &c.)  with  gnat  reason  maintains  to  be 
the  work  of  a  Canaauile  chronicler. 

'^  So  also  docs  Shaharaini,  a  person  who  had  a  special 
connexion  with  Moab  (1  Clir.  viii.  8). 

'    '^"!i?'  '**  distinguished  liuui  HBi. 


400 


MODIN 


a  necessary  consequence  contained  their  ancestral 
sepulchre  {rdcpos)  (ii.  70,  ix.  19).  Hither  Mat- 
tathias  removed  from  Jerusalem,  where  up  to  that 
time  he  seems  to  have  been  residing,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Antiochian  pereecution  (ii.  1). 
It  was  here  that  he  struck  the  first  blow  of  i-e- 
sistance,  by  slaying  on  the  heathen  altar  which 
had  been  erected  in  the  place,  both  the  commissioner 
of  Antioclins  and  a  recreant  Jew  whom  he  had 
induced  to  sacrifice,  and  tlien  demolishing  the  altar. 
Mattathias  himself,  and  subsequently  his  sons  Judas 
and  Jonathan,  were  buried  in  the  family  tomb,  and 
over  them  Simon  erected  a  structure  which  is  mi- 
nutely described  in  the  book  of  Maccabees  (xiii. 
25-30),  and,  with  less  detail,  by  Jisephus  (Ant. 
xiii.  6,  §6),  iKitthe  restoration  of  which  has  hitherto 
pioved  as  difficult  a  puzzle  as  that  of  the  mauso- 
leum of  Artemisia. 

At  Modin  the  Maccabaean  annies  encamped  on 
the  eves  of  two  of  their  most  memorable  victories — 
that  of  Judas  over  Antiochus  Eupator  (2  Wacc.  xiii. 
14),  and  that  of  Simon  over  Cendebeus  (1  Mace, 
xvi.  4) — the  last  battle  of  the  veteran  chief  before 
his  assassination.  The  only  indication  of  the  posi- 
tion of  the  place  to  be  gathered  from  the  above 
notices  is  contained  in  the  last,  from  which  we  may 
infer  that  it  was  near  "  the  plain  "  (tJ)  TreSiov),  i.  e. 
the  great  maritime  lowland  of  Philistia  (ver.  5).  By 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  [Onom.  MijSeeiV  and  "  Mo- 
dim  ")  it  is  specified  as  near  Diospolis,  i.e.  Lydda ; 
while  the  notice  in  the  Mishna  {Pesachim,  ix.  2), 
and  the  comments  of  Bartenora  and  Maimonides, 
state  that  it  was  15  (Konian)  miles  from  Jerusalem. 
At  the  same  time  the  description  of  the  monument 
seems  to  imply  (though  for  this  see  below)  that  the 
spot  was  so  lofty  ^  as  to  be  visible  from  the  sea,  and 
so  neai-  that  even  the  details  of  the  sculpture  were 
discernible  therefroin.  All  these  conditions,  except- 
ing the  last,  are  tolerably  fulfilled  in  either  of  the 
two  sites  called  Latruii  and  Kiibub.^  The  former 
of  these  is,  by  the  shortest  road — that  through 
Wadj  Ali — exactly  15  Roman  miles  from  Jeru- 
salem; it  is  about  8  English  miles  from  Lycld,  15 
from  the  Mediterranean,  and  9  or  10  from  the  liver 
Enbin,  on  which  it  is  piobable  that  Cedron — the 
position  of  Cendebeus  in  Simon's  battle — stood. 
Knbab  is  a  couple  of  miles  further  from  Jerusalem, 
and  therefore  nearer  to  Lydd  and  to  the  sea,  on 
the  most  westerly  spur  of  the  hills  of  Benjamin. 
Both  are  lofty,  and  both  apparently — Latrun  cer- 
tainly— connnand  a  view  of  the  Mediterranean. 
In  favour  of  Latrun  are  the  extensive  ancient 
lemains  with  which  the  top  of  the  hill  is  said  to  be 
covered  (Rob.  B.  R.m.  151 ;  Tobler,  Dritte  Wand. 
18(3),  though  of  their  age  and  particulai's  we  have 
at  present  no  accurate  information.  Kubab  appears 
to  possess  no  ruins,  but  on  the  other  hand  its  name 
may  retain  a  trace  of  the  monument. 

*  Thus  the  Vulg.  of  1  Mace.  ii.  1  has  Moin  Modin. 

h  Ewald  {Gesch.  iv.  350  vote)  suggests  that  the  name 
Modin  may  be  still  surviving  in  Deir  Ma'in.  But  is  not  this 
questionable  on  philological  grounds?  and  the  position  of 
Deir  Ma'in  is  less  in  accordance  with  the  facts  thim  that 
of  the  two  named  in  the  text. 

<:  See  the  copious  references  given  by  llobinson  (/?.  B. 
ii.  7,  note). 

d  The  lively  accovint  of  M.  Salzmann  {Jerusalem, 
Etude,  ic,  pp.  3T,  38)  would  be  more  satisfactory  if  it 
were  less  encumbered  with  mistakes.  To  name  but  two 
The  great  obstacle  which  interposes  itself  in  his  quest  of 
Modiii  is  that  lOusebius  and  Jerome  state  that  it  was 
■•  near  Diospoli::,  on  a  mountain  in  the  tribe  of  Judah," 


MODIN 

The  mediaeval  and  modern  tradition  <=  places 
Modin  at  Sob  i,  an  eminence  south  of  Kuriet  el- 
enab  ;  but  this  being  not  more  than  7  miles  from 
Jerusalem,  while  it  is  as  mtich  as  25  from  Lydd 
and  30  from  the  sea,  and  also  far  removed  from 
the  plain  of  Philistia,  is  at  variance  with  every  one 
of  the  conditions  implied  in  the  records.  It  has 
found  advocates  in  our  own  day  in  M.  de  Saulcy 
{FArt  Judaique,  &c.,  377,  8)  and  M.  Salzmann;  "^ 
the  latter  of  whom  explored  chambers  there  which 
may  have  been  tombs,  though  he  admits  that  there 
was  nothing  to  prove  it.  A  suggestive  fact,  which  Dr. 
Robinson  first  pointed  out,  is  the  want  of  unanimity 
in  the  accounts  of  the  mediaeval  travellers,  some  of 
whom,  as  William  of  Tyre  (viii.  1),  place  Modin  in 
a  position  near  Emmaus-Nicopolis,  Nob  (Anuabch), 
and  Lydda.  M.  Mislin  also — usually  so  vehement 
in  favour  of  the  traditional  sites — has  recoinmended 
further  investigation.  If  it  should  turn  out  that 
the  expression  of  the  book  of  Maccabees  as  to  the 
monument  being  visible  fioni  the  sea  has  been  mis- 
interpreted, then  one  impediment  to  the  reception  of 
Soba  will  be  removed ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  account 
for  the  origin  of  the  tradition  in  the  teeth  of  tliose 
ivhich  remain. 

The  descriptions  of  the  tomb  by  the  author  of 
the  book  of  JIaccabees  and  Josephus,  who  had  both 
appaieutly  seen  it,  will  be  most  conveniently  com- 
pared by  being  printed  together. 

1  Mace.  xiii.  27-30. 
"  And  Simon  made  a 
building  over  the  se- 
pulchre of  his  father  and 
his  brethi-cn,  and  raised 
it  aloft  to  view  with  po- 
lished' stone  behind  and 
before.  And  he  set  up 
upon  it  seven  pyramids, 
one  against  another,  for 
his  father  and  his  mother 
and  his  four  brethren. 
And  on  these  he  made 
engines  of  war,  and  set 
great  pillars  round  about, 
and  on  the  pillars  he 
made  suits  of  armour  for 
a  perpetual  memory  ;  and 
by  the  suits  of  armour 
ships  carved,  so  that  they 
might  be  seen  by  all  that 
sail  on  the  sea.  This 
sepulchre  he  made  at 
Modin,  and  it  stands  unto 
this  day." 

The  monuments  are  &iid  by  Eusebius  (Onom.) 
to  have  been  still  shown  when  he  wrote — A.  D. 
ciica  320. 

Any  restoration  of  the  structure  from  so  imperfect 
an  accoimt  as  the  above  can  never  be  anything  more 


Josephus.  Ant.  xiii.  6,  }6. 

"  And  Simon  built  a 
very  large  monument  to 
his  father  and  his  brethren 
of  white  and  polished 
stone.  And  he  raised  it 
up  to  a  great  and  con- 
spicuous height,  and 
threw  cloisters  around, 
and  set  up  pillars  of  a 
single  stone,  a  work 
wonderful  to  behold  :  and 
near  to  these  he  built 
seven  pyramids  to  his 
parents  and  his  brothers, 
one  for  each,  terrible  to 
behold  both  for  size  and 
beauty. 


And  these  things 
preserved  even  to 
day." 


are 
this 


This  difficulty  (which  however  is  entirely  imaginary,  for 
they  do  not  mention  the  name  of  Jndah  in  connexion 
with  Modin)  would  have  been  "  enough  to  deter  him 
entirely  from  the  task,"  if  he  had  not  "  found  in  the 
book  of  Joshua  that  M'dim  (from  which  Modim  is  derived) 
was  part  of  the  territory  allotted  to  the  tribe  of  Judah." 
Now  Middin  (not  M'dim)  was  certainly  in  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  but  not  within  many  miles  of  the  spot  in  question, 
since  it  was  one  of  the  sis  towns  which  lay  in  the  district 
immediately  bordering  on  the  Dead  Sea,  probably  in  the 
depths  of  the  Ghor  itself  (Josh.  xv.  61). 

«  Ai'6(f)  fecTTw.      This   Ewald   (iv.   3SS)  renders  "  in- 
scribed," or  'graven  " — bescliriebenen  Steinen. 


MOETH 

than  conjecture.  Something  has  been  already  at- 
tempted under  Maccabees  (p.  170).  But  iu  its 
absence  one  or  two  questions  present  themselves. 

(1.)  The  "ships"  (irKola,  naves).  The  sea  and 
its  pursuits  were  so  alien  to  the  ancient  Jews,  and 
the  lite  ot  the  IMaccabaean  heroes  who  preceded 
Simou  was — if  we  except  their  casual  relations  with 
Joppa  and  Jamnia  and  thg  battle-field  of  the  mari- 
time plain—  so  unconnected  therewith,  that  it  is 
diificult  not  to  suppose  that  the  word  is  corrupted 
from  what  it  originally  was.  This  was  the  view 
of  J.  D.  Michaelis,  but  he  does  not  propose  any 
satisfactory  word  in  substitution  for  irXola,  (see  his 
suggestion  iu  Grimm,  ad  foe).  True,  Simon  appears 
to  have  been  to  a  certain  extent  alive  to  the  im- 
portance of  commerce  to  liis  country,''  and  he  is 
especially  commemorated  <br  having  acquired  the 
liarbour  of  Joppa,  and  thus  opened  an  iulet  for  the 
isles  of  the  sea  (1  Mace.  xiv.  5).  But  it  is  ditiicult 
to  see  the  comiexion  between  this  and  the  placing 
of  ships  on  a  monument  to  his  father  and  brothers, 
whose  memorable  deeds  had  been  of  a'difl'erent  de- 
scription. It  is  perhaps  more  feasible  to  suppose 
that  the  sculptures  were  intended  to  be  symbolical 
of  the  departed  heroes.  In  this  aise  it  seems  not 
improbable  that  during  Simon's  intercoui-se  with 
tlie  liomans  he  had  seen  and  been  struck  with  their 
war-galleys,  no  inapt  symbols  of  the  fierce  and 
rapid  career  of  Judas.  How  far  such  symbolical 
representation  was  likely  to  occur  to  a  Jew  of  that 
peiiod  is  another  question. 

(2.)  The  distance  at  which  the  "ships"  were  to 
be  seen.  Here  again,  when  the  necessary  distance 
of  Modin  from  the  sea — Latrun  15  miles,  Kuhab 
13,  Lydda  itself  10 — and  the  limited  size  of  the 
sculptures  are  considered,  the  doubt  ine\  itably  arises 
whether  the  Gieek  text  of  the  book  of  Maccabees 
accurately  represents  the  original.  De  Saulcy  {^UArt 
Judaique,  377)  ingeniously  suggests  that  the  true 
meaning  is,  not  that  the  sculptures  could  be  dis- 
cerned from  the  vessels  in  the  Mediterranean,  but 
that  they  were  worthy  to  be  inspected  by  those  who 
were  sailors  by  profession.  The  consideration  of 
this  is  recommended  to  scholars.  [(}.] 

MO'ETH  (Mwed:  Medias).  In  1  Esd.  viii.  G3, 
"  NOADIAH  the  son  of  Binnui "  (Kzr.  viii.  33),  a 
Levite,  is  called  "  Moeth  the  son  of  Sabbau." 

MO'LAUAH  (rrh\)2  ;  but  in  Neh.  Trfp  ■■ 
McoAuSu,  Alex.  MccSaSa  ;  Kai\a\dfi,  Alex.  Mo)- 
KaSa;  MwdxSa,  Alex.  MdiXada:  Molada),  a  city 
of  .Judah.  one  of  those  which  lay  iu  the  district  of 
"  the  south,"  next  to  Edom.  It  is  named  in  tlie 
original  list  between  Shema  and  Ilazar-gaddah,  in 
the  same  group  with  Beer-sheba  ( .losh.  .xv.  'it! ) ; 
and  this  is  confirmed  by  another  list  in  which  it 
appears  as  one  of  the  towns  which,  though  in  the 
allotment  of  .ludah,  woie  given  to  Simeon  (xix.  2). 
In  the  latter  tribe  it  remained  jit  any  rate  till  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  iv.  '2S),  but  by  the  time  of 
the  captivity  it  seems  to  have  come  back  into  the 
hands  of  .ludah,  by  whom  it  was  reinhabited  after 
the  captivity  (N'eh.  xi.  20).  It  is,  however,  omitted 
fiom  the  catalogue  of  the  places  tVequcnte<l  by 
David  during  his  wandering  life  (1  Sam.  x.\.x.  27-31). 
In  the  Onomasticon  it  i-eceives  a  bare  mention 
under  the  h&vd  of  "  Molada,"  but  under  "  Ether" 
and  "  lether  "  a  place  named  JIalatha  is  spoken  of 


MOLE 


401 


as  in  the  interior  of  r>aronia  (a  district  which 
answered  to  the  Ncycb  or  "  South  "  of  the  He- 
brews);  and  further,  under  "Arath"  or  'Apafxd 
(i.  e.  Arad)  it  is  mentioned  as  4  miles  from  the 
latter  place  and  20  from  Hebron.  Ptolemy  also 
speaks  of  a  Maliattha  as  near  Elusa.  And  lastly, 
Josephus  states  that  Herod  Agiippa  retired  to  "a 
certain  tower  "  in  Malatha  of  Idumaea"  (iv  Ma\d- 
0019  rrjs  'IS.).  The  requirements  of  these  notices 
are  all  veiy  fairly  answered  by  the  position  of  the 
modern  el-JIilh,  a  site  of  ruins  of  some  extent,  ao-I 
two  large  wells,  one  of  the  regular  stations  on  tire 
road  from  Petra  and  Ain  el-Weibeh  to  Hebron. 
El-Milk  is  about  4  English  miles  from  71?/^  Arad. 
17  or  18  from  Hebron,  and  9  or  10  due  east  of 
Beersheba.  Five  miles  to  the  south  is  Ararah,  the 
Aroer  of  1  Sam.  XXX.  28.  It  is  between  20  and  30 
from  Elusa,  assuming  el-KJmlasah  to  be  that  place ; 
and  although  Dr.  Robinson  is  probably  correct  in 
saying  that  there  is  no  verbal  alfinity,  or  only  a  slight 
one,  between  Molada  or  Malatha  and  el-Milh,'-  yet, 
taking  that  slight  resemblance  into  account  with  the 
other  considerations  above  named,  it  is  very  probable 
that  this  identification  is  correct  (see  B.  R.  ii.  201). 
It  is  accepted  by  Wilson  (Lands,  i.  347),  Van  de 
Velde  (Memoir,  335),  Bonar,  and  others.         [G.] 

MOLE,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V^.  of  the 
Hebrew  words  Tinshemeth  and  ChSphor  peroth. 
1.   Tinshemeth  {T\iy^yF\ :  acnrdXai,,  Aid.    atrd- 

Aa|,  in  Lev.  xi.  30;  \apos,  Aid.  \dpos:  cygnus,' 
talpa,  ibis).  This  word  occurs  in  the  list  of  unclean 
birds  in  Lev.  xi.  18  ;  Deut.  xiv.  16,  where  it  is  trans- 
lated "  swan"  by  the  A.  V. ;  in  Lev.  xi.  30,  where 
the  same  word  is  found  amongst  the  unclean 
"  creeping  things  that  creep  upon  the  earth,"  it 
evidently  no  longer  stands  for  the  name  of  a 
bird,  and  is  rendered  "  mole "  by  the  A.  V. 
adopting  the  interpretation  of  the  LXX.,  Vulg., 
Onkelos,  and  some  of  the  Jewish  doctors.  Bochart 
has,  however,  showTi  that  tlie  Hebrew  C'holed,  the 
Arabic  Khuld  or  Khikl,  denotes  the  "  mole,"  and 
has  argued  with  much  force  in  behalf  of  the  "  cha- 
meleon "  being  the  tinshemeth.  The  Syriac  version 
and  some  Arabic  MSS.  understand  "a  centipede" 
by  the  original  word,  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  a 
"salamander,"  some  Arabic  versions  read  sam- 
mdbrcis,  which  Golius  renders  "a  kind  of  lizai-d." 
In  Lev.  xi.  30,  the  "  chameleon"  is  given  by  the 


r  For  the  niitice  of  this  fact  I  am  iiidebteJ  to  the  Rev. 
B.  F.  Wostcott. 
"  15y  Schvvarz  (100)   the   Araljlc   niuni'   is  qiiotnl  as 

VOt,.   II. 


The  Chamc'Ieou.     \^Cluimcteo  vultja 


A.  V.  as  the  tjanslation  of  the  Hebrew  chonch, 
which  in  all  piobability  denotes  some  larger  kijid  of 
lizard.  [Chameleon.]  Tiie  only  due  to  an  iden- 
tification of  tinshemek'i  is  to  be  found  in  its  etymo- 
logy, and  in  the  context  in  which  the  word  occui-S. 
Bochart  conjectures  that  the  root""  from  which  the 
Heb.  name  of  this  creature  is  derived,  has  reference 


Muladaii  ;    by  Stewart   (Ttnt  and   Khan,   217)    as  el- 
itdech. 
^  Dt^'3.  "  If  bTeathp,"  whence  nd^'3.  "  breath." 
"=20 


402 


MOLE 


to  a  vulgar  opinion  amongst  tlie  ancients  tliat  the 
chameleon  lived  on_air  (comp.  Ov.  Met.  xv.  411, 
"  Id  quoqiie  quod  ventis  animal  nutritui-  et  aura," 
and  see  numerous  quotations  from  classical  authors 
cited  by  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  505).  The  lung  of 
the  chameleon  is  very  large,  and  when  filled  with 
air  it  renders  the  body  semi-transpai'ent ;  from  the 
creature's  power  of  abstinence,  no  doubt  arose  the 
fable  that  it  lived  on  air.  It  is  probable  that  the 
animals  mentioned  with  the  tinshcmeth  (Lev.  xi. 
30)  denote  different  kinds  of  lizards  ;  perhaps  there- 
fore, since  the  etymology  of  the  word  is  favourable 
to  that  view,  the  chameleon  may  be  the  animal  in- 
tended by  tinshcmeth  in  Lev.  xi.  30.  As  to  the 
change  of  colour  in  the  skin  of  this  animal  numerous 
theories  have  been  proposed ;  but  as  this  subject  has 
no  Scriptural  bearing,  it  will  be  enough  to  refer  to 
the  explanation  given  by  Jiilne-Edwards,  whose 
paper  is  translated  in  vol.  xvii.  of  the  Edinburgh 
New  Philosophical  Journal.  The  chameleon  be- 
longs to  the  tribe  Dendrosaura,  order  Saura ;  the 
I'amily  inhabits  Asia  and  Africa,  and  the  south  of 
Europe ;  the  C.  vulgaris  is  the  species  mentioned 
iu  the  Bible.  As  to  the  bird  tinshcmeth,  see  SwAN. 
2.   Chephor peroth  {T\'\'^^  I'lSn  :=    to.  iidraia: 

talpae)  is  rendered  "  moles"  by  the  A.  V.  iu  Is.  ii. 
20  ;  three  ]\1SS.  read  these  two  Hebrew  words  as 
one,  and  so  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Aquila,  Symmachus, 
and  Theodotion,  with  the  Syriae  and  Arabic  ver- 
sions, though  they  adopt  different  interpretations  of 
the  word  (Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  449).  It  is  difficult 
to  see  what  Hebrew  word  the  LXX.  could  have 
read ;  but  compare  Schleusner,  Nov.  Thcs.  in  LXX. 
s.  V.  fxaraios.  Gesenius  follows  Bochart  in  consi- 
dering the  Hebrew  words  to  be  the  plural  feminine 
of  the  noun  chapharperdh/-  but  does  not  limit  the 
meaning  of  the  word  to  "moles."  Jlichaelis  also 
{Siippl.  ad  Lex.  Heh,  p.  876  and  2042)  believes 
the  words  should  be  read  as  one,  but  that  "  sepul- 
chres," or  "  vaults  "  dug  in  the  rocks  are  intended. 
The  explanation  of  Oedmann  (  Vermischt.  Samm.  iii. 
82,  83)  that  the  Hebrew  words  signify  "  (a  bird) 
that  follows  cows  for  the  sake  of  their  milk,"  and 
that  the  goat-sucker  (Caprimulgus  Europaeus)  is 
intended,  is  improbable.  Perhaps  no  reference  is 
made  by  the  Hebrew  words  (which,  as  so  few 
MSS.  join  them,  it  is  better  to  consider  distinct)  to 
any  particular  animal,  but  to  the  holes  and  burrows 
of  rats,  mice,  &c.,  which  we  know  frequent  ruins 
and  deserted  places.  (Hannei-'s  Ohserv.  ii.  456.) 
"  Remembering  the  extent  to  which  we  have  seen," 
says  Kitto  [Pict.  Bib.  on  Is.  xx.),  "  the  forsaken 
sites  of  the  East  perforated  with  the  lioles  of 
various  cave-digging  animals,  we  are  inclined  to 
suppose  that  the  words  might  generally  denote  any 
animals  of  this  description."  Kosenmiiller's  expla- 
nation, "  in  effossionem,  i.  e.  foramen  Murium," 
appears  to  be  decidedly  the  best  proposal ;  for  not 
only  is  it  the  literal  tianslntion  of  the  Helirew,  but 
it  is  more  m  accordance  with  the  natural  habits  of 
jats  and  mice  to  occr.py  with  bats  deserted  places 
than  it  is  with  the  habits  of  moles,  which  for  the 
most  part  certainly  frequent  cultivated  lands,  and 
this  no  doubt  is  time  of  the  particular  species, 
•'^pala.c  ti/phlus,  the  mole-rat  of  Syiia  and  ]\Iesopo- 
tamia,  which  by  some  has  been  supposed  to  repre- 
sent the  mole  of  the  Scriptures  ;  if,  moreover,  the 
prophet  intended  to  speak  exclusively  of  "  moles," 


<=  •' Holes  of  rats."  <>  niSISn.  as  if  the 

llf'b.  word  W.1S  ri'iim  HISS'  ''ac"«." 


MOLECH 

is  it   not  probable  that  he  would  have  used  the 
term  ('holed  (see  above)?     [Wkasei..]    [W.  H.] 

MO'LECH  C^^bn,  with  the  ai-ticle,  except  in 
1  K.  xi.  7  :  i-pxcv,  in  Lev. ;  6  ^affiXehs  avruiv, 
1  K.  xi.  7  ;  o  MoAo'Xj  2  K.  xxiii.  10 ;  and  o  MoA.bx 
fiaat\evs,  Jer.  xxxii.  35:  Moloch).  The  iire-god 
Molech  was  the  tutelary  deity  of  the  children  of 
Ammon,  and  essentially  identical  with  the  Jloabitish 
Chem.osh.  Fire-gods  appear  to  have  been  common' 
to  all  the  Canaanite,  Syrian,  and  Arab  tribes,  who 
worshipped  the  destructive  element  under  an  out- 
ward symbol,  with  the  most  inhuman  rites.  Among 
these  were  human  sacrifices,  purifications  and 
ordeals  by  lire,  devoting  of  the  first-born,  mutila- 
tion, and  vows  of  perpetual  celibacy  and  virginity. 
To  this  class  of  divinities  belonged  the  old  Canaan- 
itish  Molech,  against  whose  worship  the  Israelites 
were  wai'ned  by  threats  of  the  severest  punish- 
ment. The  offender  who  devoted  his  offspring  to 
Molech  was  to  be  put  to  death  by  stoning ;  and  in 
case  the  people  of  the  land  refused  to  inflict  upon  him 
thisjudgment,  Jehovah  would  Himself  execute  it,  and 
cut  him  off  from  among  His  people  (Lev.  xviii.  21, 
XX.  2-5).  The  root  of  the  word  Molech  is  the  same 
as  that  of  t]?tD,  melee,  or  "  king,"  and  hence  he  is 

identified  with  Malcham  ("their  king")  in  2  Sam. 
xii.  30,  Zeph.  i.  5,  the  title  by  which  he  was 
known  to  the  Israelites,  as  being  invested  with 
regal  honours  in  his  character  as  a  tutelary  deity, 
the  lord  and  master  of  his  people.  Our  translators 
have  recognized  this  identity  in  their  rendering  of 
Am.  v.  26  (where  "  your  Moloch  "  is  literally  "  your 
king,"  as  it  is  given  in  the  margin),  following 
the  Greek  in  the  speech  of  Stephen,  in  Acts  vii.  43. 
Dr.  Geiger,  in  accordance  with  his  theory  that  the 
worship  of  Molech  was  far  more  widely  spread 
among  the  Israelites  than  appears  at  first  sight 
from  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  many  traces  ai-c 
obscured  in  the  te.\t,  refers  "  the  king,"  in  Is.  x.xx. 
33,  to  that  deity  :  "  for  Tophet  is  ordained  of  old  ; 
yea  for  the  king  it  is  prepared."  Again,  of  the 
Israelite  nation,  personified  as  an  adulteress,  it  is 
said,  "  Thou  wentest  to  tlie  king  with  oil"  (Is.  Ivii. 
fl) ;  Amaziah  the  priest  of  Bethel  forbade  Amos  to 
prophesy  there,  "  foi-  it  is  the  king's  chapel"  (Am. 
vii.  13)  ;  and  iu  both  these  instances  Dr.  Geiger 
would  find  a  disguised  reference  to  the  worship  of 
Molech  (  Urschrift,  &c.,  pp.  299-308).  But  whe- 
ther his  theory  be  correct  or  not,  the  traces  of 
Molech-worship  in  the  Old  Testament  are  sufficiently 
distinct  to  enable  us  to  form  a  correct  estimate  of 
its  character.  The  first  direct  historical  allusion  to 
it  is  iu  the  description  of  Solomon's  idolatry  in  his 
old  age.  He  had  in  his  harem  many  women  of  the 
Ammonite  race,  wh'o  "  turned  away  his  heart  after 
other  gods,"  and,  as  a  consequence  of  their  influence, 
high  places  to  Molech,  "  the  abomination  of  the 
children  of  Ammon,"  were  built  on  "  the  mount 
that  is  facing  Jerusalem  " — one  of  the  summits  of 
Olivet  (1  K.  xi.  7).  Two  verses  before,  the  same 
deity  is  called  MiLCOM,  and  from  the  circumstance 
of  the  two  names  being  distinguished  in  2  K.  xxiii. 
10,  13,  it  has  been  inferred  by  Movers,  Ewald,  and 
others,  that  the  two  deities  were  essentially  distinct. 
Thei'c  does  not  appear  to  be  sufficient  ground  for 
this  conclusion.  It  is  true  that  in  the  later  history 
of  the  Israelites  the  worship  of  Molech  is  connected 
with  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  while  the  high  place  of 
Milcom  was  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and  that  no 
mention  is  made  of  human  sacrifices  to  the  latter. 


MOLECH 

But  it  seems  impossible  to  resist  tlie  couclusion 
that  in  1  K.  xi.  "  Milcom  the  abomination  of  the 
Ammonites,"  in  ver.  5,  is  the  same  as  "  Molech 
the  abomination  of  the  children  of  Amnion,"  in 
ver.  7.  To  avoid  this  Movers  contends,  not  very 
convincingly,  that  the  latter  verse  is  by  a  different 
hand.  Be  this  as  it  may,  in  the  reformation  carried 
out  by  .losiah,  the  high  place  of  Milcom,  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  mount  of  corruption,  and  Tophet 
in  the  valley  of  the  children  of  Himiom  were 
defiled,  that  "  no  man  might  make  his  son  or  his 
daughter  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech"  (2  K. 
xxiii.  10, 13).  In  the  narrative  of  Chronicles  these 
are  included  under  the  general  term  "  Baalim," 
and  the  apostasy  of  Solomon  is  not  once  alluded  to. 
Tophet  soon  appears  to  have  been  i-estored  to  its 
original  uses,  for  we  find  it  again  alluded  to,  in  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah,  as  the  scene  of  child-slaughter 
and  sacrifice  to  Molech  (Jer.  xxxii.  35). 

Most  of  the  Jewish  interpreters,  Jarchi  (on  Lev. 
xviii.  21),  Kinichi,  and  Maimonides  {Mor.  Neh.  iii. 
38)  among  the  number,  say  that  in  the  worship  of 
Molech  the  children  were  not  burnt  but  made  to 
pass  between  two  burning  pyres,  as  a  purificatory 
rite.  But  the  allusions  to  the  actual  slaughter  are 
too  plain  to  be  mistaken,  and  Aben  Ezi-a  in  his  note 
on  Lev.  xviii.  21,  says  that  "to  cause  to  pass 
through  "  is  the  same  as  "to  burn."  "  They  sa- 
crificed their  sons  and  their  daughters  unto  devils, 
and  shed  innocent  blood,  the  blood  of  their  sons  and 
of  their  daughters,  whom  they  sacrificed  unto  the 
idols  of  Canaan"  (Ps.  cvi.  37,  38).  In  Jer.  vii. 
31,  the  reference  to  the  worship  of  Molech  by  hu- 
man sacrifice  is  still  more  distinct :  "  they  have 
built  the  high  places  of  Tophet  .  .  .  to  burn  their 
sons  and  theii'  daughters  in  the  fire,"  as  "  burnt- 
offerings  unto  Baal,"  the  sun-god  of  Tyre,  with 
whom,  or  in  whose  character,  Molech  was  wor- 
shipped (Jer.  xix.  5).  Compare  also  Deut.  xii.  31 ; 
Ez.  xvi.  20,  21,  xxiii.  37.  But  the  most  remark- 
able passage  is  that  in  2  Chr.  xxviii.  3,  in  which 
the  wickedness  of  Ahaz  is  described :  "  Moreover, 
he  burnt  incense  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnoin, 
and  burnt  (*1J?Zl*1)  his  children  in  the  fire,  after  the 
abominations  of  the  nations  whom  .lehovah  had 
driven  out  before  the  children  of  Israel."  Now,  in 
the  parallel  narrative  of  2  K.  xvi.  3,  instead  of 
ny3*1 ,  "  and  he  burnt,"  the  reading  is  T'^Vn,  "  he 

made  to  pass  through,"  and  Dr.  Geiger  suggests 
that  the  former  may  be  the  true  reading,  of  which 
the  latter  is  an  easy  modification,  serving  as  a  euphe- 
mistic expression  to  disguise  the  horrible  nature  of 
the  sacrificial  rites.  But  it  is  more  natural  to 
suppose  that  it  is  an  exceptional  instance,  and  that 
the  true  reading  is  ~)3y''1,  than  to  assume  that  the 
other  passages  have  been  intentionally  altered." 
The  worship  of  Molech  is  evidently  alluded  to, 
though  not  expressly  mentioned,  in  connexion  with 
star-worship  and  the  worship  of  Baal  in  2  l\.  xvii. 
1(5,  17,  xxi.  5,  (5,  which  seems  to  shew  that  Molech, 
the  fianie-god,  and  Biud,  the  sun-god,  whatever 
their  distinctive  attributes,  and  whether  or  not 
the  latter  is  a  general  appellation  including  the 
former,  were  worshijipcd  with  the  same  rites.  The 
sacrifice  of  children  is  saiil  by  Movers  to  have  been 
not  so  much  an  expiatory,  as  a  purificatory  rite,  by 


MOLECH 


403 


which  the  victims  were  purged  from  the  dross  of 
the  body  and  attained  union  with  the  deilv.  In 
support  of  this  he  quotes  the  myth  of  Baaltis  or 
Isis,  whom  Malcauder,  king  of  Byblus,  employed  as 
nurse  for  his  child.  Isis  suckled  the  infant  with 
her  finger,  and  each  night  burnt  whatever  was 
mortal  in  its  body.  When  Astarte  the  mofher  saw 
this  she  uttered  a  cry  of  terror,  and  the  child  was 
thus  deprived  of  immortality  (I'lut.  Is.  ^  Os. 
ch.  16).  But  the  sacrifice  of  Jlesha  king  of  Moab, 
when,  in  despair  at  failing  to  cut  his  way  through  , 
the  overwhelming  forces  of  Judali,  Israel,  and  Edoni, 
he  offered  up  his  eldest  son  a  burnt-offering,  pro- 
bably to  Chemosh,  his  national  divinity,  has  more 
of  the  character  of  an  expiatory  rite  to  appease  an 
angry  deity,  than  of  a  ceremonial  purification.  Be- 
sides, the  passage  from  Plutarch  bears  evident  traces 
of  Egyptian,  if  not  of  Indian  influence. 

According  to  Jewish  tradition,  from  what  source 
we  know  not,  the  image  of  Molech  was  of  brass, 
hollow  within,  and  was  situated  without  Jeru- 
salem. Kimchi  (on  2  K.  xxiii.  10)  describes  it  as 
"  set  within  seven  chapels,  and  whoso  offered  fine 
flour  they  open  to  him  one  of  them,  (whoso  offered) 
turtle-doves  or  young  jiigeons  they  open  to  him 
two;  a  lamb,  they  open  to  him  three;  a  ram,  they 
open  to  him  four  ;  a  calf,  they  open  to  him  five  ;  an 
ox,  they  open  to  him  six,  and  so  whoever  otfered  his 
son  they  open  to  him  seven.  And  his  face  was 
(that)  of  a  calf,  and  his  hands  stretched  forth  like 
a  man  who  opens  his  hands  to  receive  (something) 
of  his  neighbour.  And  they  kindled  it  with  fire, 
and  the  jn-iests  took  the  babe  and  put  it  into  the 
hands  of  Molech,  and  the  babe  gave  uj)  the  ghost. 
And  why  was  it  called  Tophet  and  Ilinnom  ?  Be- 
cause they  used  to  make  a  noise  with  drums  (to- 
phiin),  that  the  fiither  might  not  hear  the  cry  of  his 
child  and  have  pity  upon  him,  and  refurn  to  him. 
Ilinnom,  because  the  babe  wailed  (DnjD,  mena- 
hcni),  and  the  noise  of  his  wailing  went  up.  An- 
other opinion  (is  that  it  was  called)  Hinnoin,  because 
the  priests  used  to  say — "May  it  profit  (njlT') 
thee  !  may  it  be  sweet  to  thee !  may  it  be  of  sweet 
savour  to  thee!"  All  this  detail  is  probably  as 
fictitious  as  the  etymologies  are  unsound,  but  wc 
have  nothing  to  supply  its  place.  Selden  con- 
jectures that  the  idea  of  the  seven  chapels  niav 
have  been  borrowed  from  the  worship  of  Mitlira, 
who  had  seven  gates  corresponding  to  the  seven 
planets,  and  to  whom  men  and  women  were  sacri- 
ficed {De  Dts  Syr.  Synt.  i.  c.  6).  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  describes  the  remains  of  an  ancient  Am- 
monite temple  which  he  saw  at  Gebal,  in  which 
was  a  stone  image  richly  gilt  seated  on  a  throne. 
On  either  side  sat  two  female  figures,  and  before  it 
was  an  .altar  on  which  the  Ammonites  anciently 
burned  incense  and  ollered  sacrifice  {Earli/  Traveh 
in  Palestine,  p.  79,  Bohn).  I'.y  these  chapels 
Lightfoot  explains  the  allusion  in  Am.  v.  26 ;  Acts 
vii. 43, to  "  the  tabernacle  of  Moloch  ;"  "these  seven 
chapels  (if  there  be  truth  in  the  tiling)  help  us  to 
understand  what  is  meant  by  IMolech's  tabernacle, 
and  seem  to  give  some  reason  why  in  the  Prophet 
he  is  called  Siccuth,  or  the  Covert  Cioit,  because  he 
was  retired  within  so  many  Cancelli  (for  that  word 
Kimchi  useth)  before  one  could  come  at  him" 
iComm.  on  Acts  vii.  43).  It  was  more  probably  a 
shrine  or.  ark  in  wliicli  the  figure  of  the  god  w.ts 


"  We  may  infer  from  the  expression,  "after  the  abo- 
minations of  tlie  nations  wliom  Jehovah  Iiad  driven  out 
■  hoforc  the  children  of  Israel,"  iliat  the  cliaractir  <if  \\w 


Molech-worship  of  the  time  of  Ahaz  \v;is  esseiiUally  the 
same  as  that  of  the  old  Ciiiiaanitcs,  although  Movers 
maintains  the  contrary. 

2  I)  2 


404 


MOLECH 


Ci'.rried  in  processions,  or  which  contained,  as  Movers 
conjectnres,  the  bones  of  children  who  had  been 
sacrificed  and  were  used  for  magical  purposes. 
[Ammon,  vol.  i.  p.  60  rt.] 

Many  instances  of  human  sacrifices  are  found  in 
ancient  writers,  which  may  be  compared  with  the 
descriptions  in  the  Old  Testament  of  the  manner  in 
which  Molech  was  worshipped.  The  Carthaginians, 
according  to  Augustine  {De  Civit.  Dei,  vii.  19), 
oti'ered  children  to  Saturn,  and  by  the  Gauls  even 
o-rown-up  persons  were  sacrificed,  under  the  idea 
that  of  all  seeds  the  best  is  the  human  kind.  Euse- 
bius  {Fraep.  Ev.  iv.  16)  collected  from  Porphyry 
numerous  examples  to  the  same  eftect,  from  which 
the  following  arc-  selected.  Among  the  Rhodians  a 
man  was  offered  to  Kronos  on  the  6th  July ;  after- 
wards a  criminal  condemned  to  death  was  substi- 
tuted. The  same  custom  prevailed  in  Salamis,  but 
was  abrogated  by  Diiphilus  king  of  Cyprus,  who 
substituted  an  ox.  According  to  Manetho,  Amosis 
abolished  the  same  practice  in  Egypt  at  Heliopolis 
sacred  to  Juno.  Sanchoniatho  relates  that  the 
Phoenicians,  on  the  occasion  of  any  great  calamity, 
sacrificed  to  Saturn  one  of  their  relatives.  Istrus 
says  the  same  of  the  Curetes,  but  the  custom  was 
abolished,  according  to  Pallas,  in  the  reign  of  Ha- 
drian. At  Laodii-ea  a  virgin  was  sacrificed  yearly 
to  Athene,  and  the  Dumatii,  a  people  of  Arabia, 
buried  a  boy  alive  beneath  the  altar  each  year. 
Diodorus  Sic'ulus  (xx.  14)  relates  that  the  Cartha- 
ginians when  besieged  by  Agathocles,  tyrant  of 
Sicily,  offered  in  public  sacrifice  to  Saturn  200  of 
their  noblest  children,  while  others  voluntarily  de- 
voted themselves  to  the  number  of  300.  His  de- 
scription of  the  statue  of  the  god  differs  but  slightly 
from  that  of  Molech,  which  has  been  quoted.  The 
image  was  of  brass,  with  its  hands  outstretched 
towards  the  ground  in  such  a  manner  that  the  child 
when  placed  upon  them  fell  into  a  pit  full  of  fire. 

Molech,  "  the  king,"  was  the  lord  and  master  of 
the  Ammonites ;  their  country  was  his  possession 
(Jer.  xlix.  1),  as  Moab  was  the  heritage  of  Che- 
mosh  ;  the  piinces  of  the  land  were  the  princes  of 
Malcham  (Jer.  xlix.  3;  Am.  i.  15).  His  priests 
were  men  of  rank  (Jer.  xlix.  3),  taking  precedence 
of  the  princes.  So  the  priest  of  Hercules  at  Tyre  was 
second  to  the  king  (Justin,  xviii.  4,  §5),  and  like 
Molech,  the  god  himself,  Baal  Chamman,  is  Melkart, 
"  the  Idnii  of  the  cit)'."  The  priests  of  Molech,  like 
those  of  other  idols,  were  called  Chemarim  (2  K. 
xxiii.  5 ;  Hos.  x.  5  ;  Zeph.  i.  4). 

Traces  of  the  root  ti-om  which  Molech  is  derived 
are  to  be  found  in  the  Milichus,  Malica,  and  Mal- 
cander  of  the  Phoenicians  ;  with  the  last  mentioned 
may  be  compared  Adrammelech,  the  fire-god  of 
Sepharvaim.  These,  as  well  as  Chemosh  the  fire- 
s>;od  of  Moab,  Urotal,  Dusaies,  Sair,  and  Thyan- 
drites,  of  the  Edomites  and  neighbouring  Arab 
tribes,  and  the  Greek  Dionysus,  were  worshipped 
under  the  symbol  of  a  rising  flame  of  fire,  wliich 
was  imitated  in  the  stone  pillars  erected  in  their 
honour  (Movers,  Phoen.  i.  c.  9).  Tradition  refers 
the  origin  of  the  fire-worshij)  to  Chaldea.  Abraham 
and  his  ancestoi-s  are  said  to  have  been  fire-wor- 
shippers, and  the  Assyrian  and  Chaldean  armies 
took  with  them  the  sacred  fire  accompanied  by  the 
Magi. 

'I'heie  remains  to  be  noticed  one  passage  (2  Sam. 


MONEY 

xu.  31)  in  which  the  Hebrew  written  text  has  \2i7'0 
malken,  while  the  marginal  reading  is  jS?©,  mal- 
ben,  which  is  adopted  by  our  translators  in  their 
rendering  "  brick-kiln."  Kimchi  explains  malken  as 
"  the  place  of  Slolech,"  where  sacrifices  were  ofi'ered 
to  him,  and  the  children  of  Ammon  made  their  sons 
to  pass  through  the  fire.  And  ]Milcom  and  Malken, 
he  says,  are  one.''  On  the  other  hand  Movers, 
rejecting  the  pomts,  reads  p?'^,  malcdn,  "  our 
king,"  which  he  explains  as  the  title  by  which  he  was 
known  to  the  Ammonites.  W  hatever  may  be  thought 
of  these  interpretations,  the  reading  followed  by  the 
A.  V.  is  scarcely  intelligible.  [VV.  A.  W.] 

MO'LI  (MooAi :    Moholi).    Maiili  the  son  of 

Merari  (1  Esdr.  viii.  47;  comp.  Ezr.  vin.  18). 

MO'LID  (T'VlD  :  McotjA  ;  Alex.  Ma)5<i5  : 
Molkl).  The  son  of  Abishur  by  his  wife  Abihail, 
and  descendant  of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  29). 

MO'LOCH.  The  Hebrew  corresponding  to 
"  your  Moloch"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Amos  v.  26  is 
□337J3,  malkekem,  "  your  king,"  as  in  the  margin. 
In  accordance  with  the  Greek  of  Acts'vii.  43  (6 
MoAox  '■  Moloch),  which  followed  the  LXX.  of 
Amos,  our  tianslators  have  adopted  a  form  of  the 
name  Molech  which  does  not  exist  in  Hebrew. 
Kimchi,  fijUowing  the  Targum,  takes  the  word  as 
an  appellative,  and  not  as  a  proper  name,  while 
with  regard  to  siccuth  (Jl-ISD,  A.  V.  "  tabernacle") 
he  holds  the  opposite  opinion.  His  note  is  as  fol- 
lows : — "  Siccuth  is  the  name  of  an  idol ;  and  (as 
for)  malkekem  he  spake  of  a  star  which  was  made 
an  idol  by  its  name,  and  he  calls  it  '  king,'  because 
they  thought  it  a  king  over  them,  or  because  it  ' 
was  a  great  star  in  the  host  of  heaven,  which  was 
as  a  king  over  his  host;  and  so  '  to  burn  incense  to 
the  queen  of  heaven,'  as  I  have  explained  in  the 
book  of  Jeremiah."  Gesenius  compares  with  the 
"  tabernacle  "  of  Moloch  the  sacred  tent  of  the  Car- 
thaginians mentioned  by  Diodorus  (xx.  65).  Rosen- 
miiller,  and  after  him  Ewald,  understood  by  siccuth 
a  pole  or  stake  on  which  the  figure  of  the  idol  was 
placed.  It  was  more  probably  a  kind  of  palanquin  in 
which  the  iniaoe  was  carried  in  processions,  a  custom 
which  is  alluded  to  in  Is.  xlvi.  1  ;.  Epist.  of  Jer.  4 
(Selden,  De  Bis  Syr.  synt.  i.  c.  6).        [W.  A.  W.] 

MOM'DIS  (Mo^Sios;  Alex.  MojuSetr:  Moa- 
dias).  The  same  as  Maadai,  of  the  sons  of  Bani 
(1  Esdr.  is.  34 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  34). 

MONEY.  This  ai-ticle  treats  of  two  princijjal 
matters,  the  uncoined  money  and  the  coined  money 
mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Before  entering  upon  the 
first  subject  of  inquiry,  it  will  be  necessary  to  speak 
of  uncoined  money  in  general,  and  of  the  antiquity 
of  coined  money.  An  account  of  the  principal  mo- 
netary systems  of  ancient  times  is  an  equally  needful 
introduction  to  the  second  subject,  which  requires  a 
special  knowledge  of  the  Greek  coinages.  A  notice 
of  the  Jewish  coins,  and  of  the  coins  current  in 
Judaea  as  late  as  the  time  of  Hadrian,  will  be 
interwoven  with  the  examination  of  the  passages  in 
the  Bible  and  Apocrypha  relating  to  them,  instead 
of  being  separately  given. 

I.  Uncoined  Money.  1.  Uncoined  Money  in 
general. — It  has  been  denied  by  some  that  there 


b  The  crown  of  Malcham.  taken  by  David  at  Eabbah,  is 
said  to  have  had  in  it  a  precious  stone  (a  magnet,  according 
to  Kimchi),  which  is  doscribed  by  Cyril  on  Amos  as 


transparent  and  lilce  the  daystar,  whence  Molech  has 
groundlessly  been  identified  with  the  planet  Venus 
(Vossius,  De.  Orig.  Idol.  ii.  c.  5,  p.  331). 


MONEY 

ever  has  been  any  moiipy  not  coined,  but  this  is 
merely  a  question  of  terms.  It  is  well  known  that 
ancient  nations  that  were  without  a  coinage  weighed 
the  precious  metals,  a  practice  represented  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  on  which  gold  and  silver  are 
shown  to  have  been  kept  in  the  form  of  rings  (see 
cut,  p.  406).  The  gold  rings  found  in  the  Celtic 
countries  have  been  held  to  have  had  the  same  use. 
It  has  indeed  been  argued  that  this  could  not  have 
been  the  c;ise  with  the  latter,  since  they  show  no 
monetary  system  ;  yet  it  is  evident  ftom  their 
weights  that  they  all  contain  complete  multiples  or 
parts  of  a  unit,  so  that  we  may  fairly  suppose  that 
the  Celts,  before  they  used  coins,  hail,  like  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  the  piactice  of  keeping  money 
in  rings,  which  they  weighed  when  it  was  necessary 
to  pay  a  fixed  amount.  We  have  no  certain  record 
of  the  use  of  ring-money  or  other  uncoined  money  in 
antiquity  exceptingamongthe  Egyptians.  With  them 
the  practice  mounts  up  to  a  remote  age,  and  was 
probably  as  constant,  and  perhaps  as  regulated  with, 
respect  to  the  weight  of  the  rings,  as  a  coinage.  It 
can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  highly  civilized 
rivals  of  the  Egyptians,  the  Assyrians  and  Baby- 
lonians, adopted  if  they  did  not  originate  this  custom, 
clay  tablets  having  been  found  specifying  grants  of 
money  by  weight  (ftawlinson,  Her.  vol.  i.  p.  684) ; 
and  there  is  therefore  every  probability  that  it  ob- 
tiiined  also  in  Palestine,  although  seemingly  unknown 
in  Greece  in  the  time  before  coinage  was  there  intro- 
duced. There  is  no  trace  in  Egypt,  however,  of  any 
diHeicnt  size  in  the  rings  represented,  so  tliat  there 
is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  this  further  step  was 
taken  towards  the  invention  of  coinage. 

2.  The  Antiquitij  of  Coined  Money. — Respecting 
the  origin  of  coinage,  there  are  two  accounts  seem- 
ingly at  variance :  some  saying  that  Phidon  king  of 
Argos  first  struck  money,  and  according  to  Epliorus, 
in  Aegina  ;  but  Herodotus  ascribing  its  invention  to 
the  Lydians.  The  former  statement  probably  refers 
to  the  origin  of  the  coinage  of  European  Gieece, 
the  latter  to  that  of  Asiatic  Greece;  for  it  seems, 
judging  from  the  coins  themselves,  that  the  electrum 
shAters  of  the  cities  of  the  coast  of  Asia  IMinor  were 
first  issued  as  early  as  the  silver  coins  of  Aegina,  both 
classes  appearing  to  comprise  the  most  ancient  pieces 
of  money  that  m'e  known  to  us.  When  Herodotus 
speaks  of  the  Lydians,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
he  refei's  not  to  tire  currency  of  Lydia  as  a  Iving- 
dom,  which  seems  to  commence  with  the  darics 
and  similar  silver  pieces  now  found  near  Sardis, 
and  probably  of  the  time  of  Croesus,  being  per- 
haps the  same  as  the  staters  of  Croesus  ( Kpoiailoi, 
Jull.  Poll.),  of  the  ancients ;  but  that  he  intends 
the  money  of  Greek  cities  at  the  time  when  the 
coins  were  issued  or  later  luider  the  autliority  of 
the  Lydians.  If  we  conclude  that  coinage  com- 
menced in  European  and  Asiatic  (Sreece  about  the 
same  time,  the  next  question  is  whether  we  c;ui 
approximately  determine  the  date.  This  is  ex- 
tremely diHicult,  since  there  are  no  coins  of  known 
period  before  the  time  of  the  expedition  of  Xerxes. 
The  pieces  of  that  age  are  of  so  archaic  a  style,  that 
it  is  hard,  at  first  sight,  to  believe  that  there  is  any 
length  of  time  between  them  and  tiie  rudest  and 
therefore  earliest  of  the  coins  of  Aegina  or  the  Asiatic 
coast.  It  must,  however,  be  recollected  that  in  somi^ 
condifions  of  ait  its  growth  or  change  is  extremely 
slow,  and  tliat  this  was  the  case  in  the  early  ])eriod 
of  Greek  art  seems  evident  from  the  results  of  tlie 
excavations  on  what  we  may  believe  to  be  the  oldest 
sites  in  Greece.    The  lower  limit  obtained  from  the 


MONEY 


405 


evidence  of  the  coins  of  known  date,  may  perhaps  be 
conjectured  to  be  two,  or  at  most  three,  centuries 
before  their  time;  the  higher  limit  is  as  vaguely 
determined  by  the  negative  evidence  of  the  Homeric 
writings,  of  which  we  cannot  guess  the  age,  excepting 
as  before  the  first  Olympiad.  On  the  whole  it  seems 
reasonable  to  carry  up  Greek  coinage  to  the  8th  cen- 
tuiy  B.C.  Purely  Asiatic  coinage  cannot  be  taken 
up  to  so  early  a  date.  The  more  arcliaic  Persian  coins 
seem  to  be  of  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  or  pos- 
sibly Cyrus,  and  certainly  not  much  older,  and  there 
is  no  Asiatic  money,  not  of  Greek  cities,  that  can  be 
reasonably  assigned  to  an  earlier  period.  Croesus 
and  Cyrus  probably  oi'iginated  this  branch  of  the 
coinage,  or  else  Darius  Hystaspis  followed  the 
example  of  the  Lydian  king.  Coined  money  may 
therefore  have  been  known  in  Palestine  as  early  as 
the  fall  of  Samaria,  but  only  through  commerce  with 
the  Greeks,  and  we  cannot  suppose  that  it  was  then 
current  there. 

3.  Notices  of  Uncoined  Mone]/  in  the  0.  T. — 
There  is  no  distinct  mention  of  coined  money  in  the 
books  of  the  0.  T.  written  before  the  return  from 
Babylon.  The  contrai'v  was  formerly  supposed  to 
be  the  case,  partly  because  the  word  shekel  has  a 
vague  sense  in  later  times,  being  used  for  a  coin  as 
well  as  a  weight.  Since  however  there  is  some 
seeming  ground  for  the  older  opinion,  we  may  here 
examine  the  principal  passages  relating  to  money, 
and  the  principal  terrns  employed,  in  the  books  of 
the  Bible  written  before  the  date  above  mentioned. 

In  the  history  of  Abraham  we  I'ead  that  Abime- 
lech  gave  the  patriarch  "  a  thousand  [pieces]  of 
silver,"  apparently  to  purchase  veils  for  Sarah  and 
her  attendants ;  but  the  passage  is  extremely  diffi- 
cult (Gen.  XX.  16).  The  LXX.  understood  shekels 
to  be  intended  (x'^'«  SiSpax/J-a,  I-  c.  also  ver.  14), 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  were  right, 
though  the  rendering  is  accidentally  an  unfortunate 
one,  their  equivalent  being  the  name  of  a  coin. 
The  narrative  of  the  purchase  of  the  burial  place 
from  Ephron  gives  us  further  insight  into  the  use 
of  money  at  that  time.  It  is  related  that  Abraham 
ofllireil  "  full  silver"  for  it,  and  tliat  Ephron  valued 
it  at  "  four  hundred  shekels  of  silver,"  which  accord- 
ingly the  patriarch  paid.  We  read,  "And  Abraham 
hearkened  unto  Ephron ;  and  Abraham  weighed 
(T'pE^'*1)  to  Ephron  the  silver,  which  lie  had  named 
in  the  audience  of  the  sons  of  Heth,  four  hundred 
shekels  of  silver,  current  with  the  merchant"  (l^'y 
ins?,  xxiii.  3  ad  fin.  esp.  9,  16).  Here  a  currency 
is  clearly  indicated  like  that  which  the  monuments 
of  Egypt  show  to  have  been  there  used  in  a  very 
remote  age;  for  the  weighing  proves  that  this 
currency,  like  the  Egyi)tian,  di<l  not  bear  the 
stamp  of  authority,  and  was  therefore  weighed 
when  eni])loyed  in  commerce.  A  similar  purchase 
is  lecorded  of  Jacob,  who  bought  a  parcel  of  a  field 
at  Shalem  for  a  hundred  kesitahs  (xxxiii.  18,  19). 
The  occurrence  of  a  name  diflerent  from  shekel  and 
unlike  it  not  distinctly  applied  in  any  other  passage 
to  a  weight  favours  the  idea  of  coined  money. 
But  what  is  the  keaitah  (HD^bp)  ?  The  old  in- 
terpreters supposed  it  to  mean  a  lamb,  and  it  has 
been  imagined  to  have  been  a  coin  bearing  the  figure 
of  a  lamb.  There  is  no  known  etymological  ground 
lor  this  meaning,  the  lost  root,  if  we  compare  the 

Arabic  Uy^W.  "he  or  it  divi.led  equally,"  being 
perhaps  conni>cted   witli   the  idea  of  division.     Yet 


406 


MONEY 


the  sanction  of  the  LXX.,  and  the  use  of  weights 
having  the  tbims  of  lions,  bulls,  and  geese,  by  the 
Egyptians,  Assyrians,  and  probably  Persians,  must 


1  Lepsius,  Denkmaler,  Abth.  iji.  Bl.  39.  Nn.  3.  Sieu  also  Wil- 
kinson's Aiir,  Et}.  ii.  10.  for  weiplits  in  the  fonii  of  a  crouchinff 
autelopu  :  and  conip.  Layard's  Nin.  and  Bab.  pp.  600-602. 

make  us  hesitate  before  we  abandon  a  rendering  so 
singularly  confirmed  by  the  relation  of  the  Latin 
pecunia  and  pecus.  Throughout  the  history  of  Jo- 
seph we  find  evidence  of  the  constant  use  of  money 
iu  preference  to  barter.  This  is  clearly  shown  in  the 
case  of  the  famine,  when  it  is  related  that  all  the 
money  of  Egypt  and  Canaan  was  paid  for  com,  and 
that  then  the  Egyptians  had  recourse  to  barter 
(xlvii.  13-2(>).  It  would  thence  appear  that  money 
was  not  very  plentiful.  In  the  narrative  of  the  visits 
of  Joseph's  brethren  to  Egypt,  we  find  that  they 
purchased  corn  with  money,  which  was,  as  in 
Abraham's  time,  weighed  silver,  for  it  is  spoken  of 
by  them  as  having  been  restored  to  their  sacks  in 
""its  [full]  weight"  (xliii.  21).  At  the  time  of 
the  exodus  money  seems  to  have  been  still  weighed, 
for  the  ransom  ordered  in  the  Law  is  stated  to  be 
half  a  shekel  for  each  man — "  half  a  shekel  after 
the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary  [of]  twenty  gerahs  the 
shekel"  (Ex.  xxx.  13).  Here  the  shekel  is  evi- 
dently a  weight,  and  of  a  special  system  of  which 
the  standard  examples  were  probably  kept  by  the 
priests.  Throughout  the  Law  money  is  .spoken  of 
as  in  ordinary  use ;  but  only  silver  money,  gold 
being  mentioned  as  valuable,  but  not  cleai'ly  as  used 
in  the  same  manner.  This  distinction  appears  at 
the  time  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  when  covetous 
Achan  found  in  Jericho  "  a  goodly  Babylonish  gar- 
ment, and  two  hundred  shekels  of  silver,  and  a 
tongue  of  gold  of  fifty  shekels  weight "  (Josh.  vii. 
21).  Throughout  the  period  before  the  return 
from  Babylon  this  distinction  seems  to  obtain : 
whenever  anything  of  the  character  of  money  is 
mentioned  the  usual  metal  is  silver,  and  gold  o-ene- 
nilly  occurs  as  the  material  of  ornaments  and  costly 
works.  A  passage  in  Isaiah  has  indeed  been  supposed 
to  show  the,  use  of  gold  coins  in  that  propliet's  time  : 
speaking  of  the  makers  of  idols,  he  says,  "  They  lavish 
gold  out  of  the  bag,  ;md  weigh  silver  in  the  balance  " 
(xlvi.  6).  The  mention  of  a  bag  is,  however,  a 
very  insufficient  reason  for  the  supposition  that  the 
gold  was  coined  money.  Rings  of  gold  may  have 
been  used  for  money  in  Palestine  as  early  as  this 
time,  since  they  had  been  long  previously  so  used  in 
Egypt ;  but  the  passage  probably  refers  to  the  people 
of  Babylon,  who  may  have  had  imcoined  money  in 


MONEY 

both  metals  like  the  Egyptians.  A  still  more  re- 
markable passage  would  be  that  in  Ezekiel,  which 
Gesenius  supposes  {Lex.  s.  v.  nt^'PIJ)  to  mention 
brass  as  money,  were  there  any  sound  reason  for 
following  the  Vulg.  in  the  literal  renderino-  of 
'^P\''^nZ  '^SEJ'n  ]V\  quia  effusum  est  aes  tuum, 
instead  of  reading  "  because  thy  filthiness  was 
poured  out"  with  the  A.  V.  (xvi.  36).  The  con- 
text does  indeed  admit  the  idea  of  money,  but  the 
sense  of  the  passage  does  not  seem  to  do  so,  whereas 
the  other  translation  is  quite  in  accoixlance  wth  it, 
as  well  as  philologically  admissible  (see  Gesen. 
Lex.  I.  c).  The  use  of  brass  money  at  this  period 
seems  unlikely,  as  it  was  of  later  introduction  iu 
Greece  than  money  of  other  metals,  at  least  silver 
and  electrum :  it  has,  however,  been  supposed  that 
there  was  an  independent  copper  coinage  in  further 
Asia  before  the  introduction  of  silver  money  by  the 
Seleucidae  and  the  Greek  kings  of  Bactriana. 

We  may  thus  sum  up  our  results  respecting  the 
money  mentioned  in  the  books  of  Scripture  written 
before  the  return  from  Babylon.  From  the  time  of 
Abraham  silvermoney  appears  to  have  been  iu  general 
use  in  Egypt  and  Canaan.  This  money  was  weighed 
when  its  value  had  to  be  determined,  and  we  may 
therefore  conclude  that  it  was  not  of  a  settled 
system  of  weights.  Since  the  money  of  Egypt  and 
that  of  Canaan  are  spoken  of  together  in  the  account 
of  Joseph's  administration  during  the  famine,  we 
may  reasonably  suppose  they  were  of  the  same  kind  ; 
a  supposition  which  is  confirmed  by  our  finding, 
from  the  monuments,  that  the  Egyptians  used 
uncoined  money  of  gold  and  of  silver.  It  is 
even  probable  that  the  form  in  both  cases  was 
similar  or  the  same,  since  the  ring-money  of  Egypt 
resembles  the  ordinary  ring-money  of  the  Celts, 
among  whom  it  was  probably  first  introduced  by 
the  Phoenician  traders,  so  that  it  is  likely  that  this 
form  generally  prevailed  before  the  introduction  of 
coinage.  We  find  no  evidence  in  the  Bible  of  the 
use  of  coined  money  by  the  Jews  before  the  time  of 
Ezra,  when  other  evidence  equally  -shews  that  it  was 
current  in  Palestine,  its  general  use  being  probably 
a  very  recent  change.  This  first  notice  of  coinage, 
exactly  when  we  should  e.xpect  it,  is  not  to  be  over- 
looked as  a  confirmation  of  the  usual  opinion  as  to  the 
dates  of  the  several  books  of  Scripture  founded  on 
their  internal  evidence  and  the  testimony  of  ancient 
writers ;  and  it  lends  no  support  to  those  theorists 
who  attempt  to  shew  that  there  have  been  great 
changes  in  the  text.  Minor  confinnations  of  this 
nature  will  be  found  iu  the  later  part  of  this  article. 

II.  Coined  Money.  1.  The  Principnl  Mone- 
tary Sjjstems  of  Antiquitij. — Some  notice  of  the 
principal  monetary  systems  of  antiquity,  as  deter- 
mined by  the  joint  evidence  of  the  coins  and  of 
ancient  writers,  is  necessary  to  render  the  nest 
section  comprehensible.  We  must  here  distinctly 
lay  down  what  we  mean  by  the  difierent  systems 
with  whicii  we  shall  compare  the  Hebrew  coin- 
age, as  current  works  are  generally  very  vague  and 
discordant  on  this  subject.  The  common  opinions 
respecting  the  standards  of  antiquity  have  been 
formed  fi-om  a  study  of  the  statements  of  writei-s 
of  different  age  and  authority,  and  without  a  due 
discrimination  between  weights  and  coins.  The 
coins,  instead  of  being  taken  as  the  basis  of  all 
hypotheses,  have  been  cited  to  confirm  or  refute 
previous  theories,  and  thus  no  legitimate  induction 
has  been  formed  from  their  study.  If  the  contrary 
method  is  adopted,  it  has  firstly  the  advantage  of 


MONEY 

resting  upon  the  indisputable  authority  of  monu- 
ments which  have  not  been  tampereii  with  ;  and,  in 
the  second  place,  it  is  ot"  an  essentially  inductive 
character.  The  result  simplifies  the  examination 
of  the  statements  of  ancient  writers,  by  shewing  that 
they  speak  of  the  same  thing  by  diflerent  naines  on 
account  of  a  change  which  the  coins  at  once  explain, 
and  by  indicating  that  probably  at  least  one  talent 
was  only  a  weight,  not  used  for  coined  money  unless 
weighed  in  a  mass. 

The  earliest  Greek  coins,  by  which  we  here 
intend  those  struck  in  the  age  before  the  Persian 
War,  are  of  three  talents  or  standards ;  the  Attic, 
the  Aeginetan,  and  the  Macedonian  or  earlier 
Ph:;enician.  The  oldest  coins  of  Athens,  of  Aegina, 
and  of  Macedon  and  Thrace,  we  should  select  as 
typical  respectively  of  these  standards  ;  obtaining  as 
the  weight  of  the  Attic  drachm  about  ti7'5  grains 
troy  ;  of  the  Aeginetan,  about  96  ;  and  of  the  Mace- 
donian, about  58 — or  116,  if  its  drachm  be  what  is 
now  generally  held  to  be  the  didrachm.  The  electrum 
coinage  of  Asia  Minor  probably  aflbrds  examples  of 
the  use  by  the  Greeks  of  a  fourth  talent,  which  may 
be  called  the  later  Phoenician,  if  we  hold  the  staters 
to  have  been  tetradrachms,  for  their  full  weight  is 
about  248  grs. ;  but  it  is  possible  that  the  pure  gold 
which  they  contain,  about  186  gi's.,  should  alone  be 
taken  into  account,  in  which  case  they  would  be 
didrachms  on  the  Aeginetan  standard.  Their  division 
into  sixths  (hectae)  may  be  urged  on  either  side. 
It  may  be  supposed  that  the  division  into  oboli  was 
retained  ;  but  then  the  half  hecta  has  its  proper  name, 
and  is  not  called  an  obolus.  However  this  may  be, 
the  gold  and  silver  coins  found  at  Sardis,  which  we 
may  reasonably  assign  to  Croesus,  are  of  this  weight, 
and  may  be  taken  as  its  earliest  examples,  without 
of  course  proving  it  was  a  Greek  system.  They  give 
a  tetradrachm,  or  equivalent,  of  about  246  grains, 
and  a  drachm  of  GTo  ;  but  neither  of  these  coins  is 
found  of  this  early  period.  Among  these  systems 
the  Attic  and  the  Aeginetan  are  easily  recognized  in 
the  classical  writers;  and  the  Macedonian  is  pi-o- 
bably  their  Alexandrian  talent  of  gold  and  silver, 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  Alexandrian  talent  of 
copper.  Respecting  the  two  Phoenician  talents  there 
is  some  didiculty.  The  Eubo'ic  talent  of  the  writers 
we  recognize  nowhere  in  the  coinage.  It  is  useless 
to  search  for  isolated  instances  of  Euboic  weight  in 
Euboea  and  elsewhere,  when  the  coinage  of  the  island 
and  ancient  coins  generally  afford  no  class  on  the 
stated  Euboic  weight.'  It  is  still  more  unsound  to 
force  an  agreement  between  the  Macedonian  talent 
of  the  coins  and  the  Euboic  of  the  writers.  It  mav 
be  sup])osed  that  the  Euboic  talent  was  never  used 
for  money;  and  the  statement  of  Herodotus,  that 
the  king  of  Persia  received  his  gold  tribute  by  this 
weight,  may  mean  no  more  than  that  it  was 
weighed  in  Eubo'ic  talents.  Or  jierhaps  the  near- 
ness of  the  Euboic  talent  to  the  Attic  caused  the 
coins  struck  on  the  two  standards  to  approximate 
in  their  weights  ;  as  the  Gretan  coins  on  the  Aeginetan 
stiuidaid  were  evidently  lowered  in  weight  by  the 
influence  of  the  Asiatic  ones  on  the  later  Phoenician 
st-indard. 

We  must  now  briefly  trace  the  history  of  these 
talents. 

(n.)  The  Attic  talent  was  from  a  very  early  peribd 


MONEY 


407 


"  IVIr.  Waddington  has  shewn  {ililanges  de  Nuniis- 
'iuati<iiie)  Unit  the  so-called  coins  of  ilie  satraps  were 
never  issued  e.\cri)tiiig  when  these  governors  wore  in 
command  of  expedilions,   and   were    therefore  invested 


the  standard  of  Athens.  If  Solon  really  reduced  the 
weight,  we  have  no  money  of  the  city  of  the  older 
currency.  Corinth  followed  the  same  system  ;  iuid 
its  use  was  diffused  by  the  great  influence  of  these 
two  leading  cities.  In  Sicily  and  Italy,  after,  in  the 
case  of  the  former,  a  limited  use  of  the  Aeginetan 
talent,  the  Attic  weight  became  universjil.  In 
Greece  Proper  the  Aeginetan  talent,  to  the  north  the 
Macedonian,  and  in  Asia  Minor  and  Africa  the  later 
Phoenician,  were  long  its  rivals,  until  Alexander 
made  the  Attic  standard  universal  throughout  his 
empire,  and  Carthage  alone  maintained  an  inde- 
pendent system.  After  Alexander's  time  the  other 
talents  were  partly  restored,  but  the  Attic  always 
remained  the  chief.  From  the  earliest  period  of 
which  we  have  specimens  of  money  on  this  standard 
to  the  time  of  the  Roman  dominion  it  suffered  a 
great  depreciation,  the  drachm  fiilling  from  67"5  grs. 
to  about  65-5  under  Alexander,  and  about  55  under 
the  early  Caesars.  Its  later  depreciation  was  rather 
by  adulteration  than  by  lessening  of  weight. 

(6.)  The  Aeginetan  talent  was  mainly  used  in 
Greece  Pioper  and  the  islands,  and  seems  to  have 
been  annihilated  by  Alexander,  unless  indeed  after- 
wards restored  in  one  or  two  remote  towns,  as 
Leucas  in  Acarnania,  or  by  the  general  issue  of  a 
coin  equally  assignable  to  it  or  the  Attic  stcindard 
as  a  hemidrachm  or  a  tetrobolon. 

(c.)  The  Macedonian  talent,  besides  being  used 
in  Macedon  and  in  some  Thracian  cities  before 
Alexander,  was  the  standard  of  the  great  Phoenician 
cities  mider  Persian  rule,  and  was  afterwards  re- 
stored in  most  of  them.  It  was  adopted  in  Egypt  by 
the  first  Ptolemy,  and  also  mainly  used  by  the  later 
Sicilian  tyrants,  whose  money  we  believe  imitates 
that  of  the  Egyptian  sovereigns.  It  might  have  been 
imagined  that  Ptolemy  did  not  borrow  the  talent 
of  Macedon,  but  struck  money  on  the  standard  of 
Egypt,  which  the  commerce  of  that  country  might 
have  spread  in  the  MediteiTanean  in  a  remote  age, 
had  not  a  recent  discovery  shown  that  the  Egyptian 
standard  of  weight  was  much  heavier,  and  even  in 
excess  of  the  Aeginetan  drachm,  the  unit  being  above 
140  grs.,  the  half  of  which,  again,  is  greater  than 
any  of  the  drachms  of  the  other  three  standards.  It 
ciumot  therefore  be  compared  with  any  of  them. 

(d.)  The  later  Phoenician  talent  was  always  used 
for  the  official  coinage  of  the  Persian  kings  and 
commanders,*  and  after  the  earliest  period  Wiis  very 
general  in  the  Persian  empire.  After  Alexander  it 
was  scarcely  used  excepting  in  coast-towns  of  Asia 
Minor,  at  Carthage,  and  in  the  Phoenician  town  of 
Aradus. 

Respecting  the  Roman  coinage  it  is  only  necessary 
here  to  state  that  the  origin  of  the  weights  of  its 
gold  and  silver  money  is  undoubtedly  Greek,  and 
that  the  denarius,  the  chief  coin  of  the  latter  metfll, 
was  under  the  early  emperors  equivalent  to  the 
Attic  drachm,  then  greatly  dei)rociated. 

2.  Coined  monetj  mentioned  in  the  Bihle. — The 
earliest  distinct  mention  of  coins  in  the  Bible  is  held 
to  refer  to  the  Persian  money.  In  Ezra  (ii.  69, 
viii.  27)  and  Nehemiah  (vii.  70,  71,  72)  current 
gold  coins  are  spoken  of  under  the  name  jIDS")^, 
|i3~l*1N,  which  only  occurs  in  tlie  plural,  and 
appciU's  to  correspond  to  the  (!reek  arariip  Aaptt 

with  special  powers.  This  discovery  explains  tlie  putting 
U)  doatli  of  Aryandcs,  satrap  of  K-ivjit,  for  striliiiig  a 
coinage  of  Ids  own. 


408 


MONEY 


MONEY 


k6s  or  AapuKds,  the  Daric  of  numismatists.  The 
reiideiings  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  xP"<^ovs,  soli- 
dus,  drachma,  especially  the  first  and  second,  lend 
weight  to  the  idea  that  this  was  the  standard  gold 
coin  at  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  this 
would  explain  the  vise  of  the  same  name  in  the 
First  Book  of  Chronicles  (xxix.  7),  in  the  account  of 
the  ofl'erings  of  David's  great  men  for  the  Temple, 
where  it  would  be  employed  instead  of  shekel,  as 
a  Greek  would  use  the  term  stater.  [See  Art. 
Daric] 


Daric     Obv. :  King  of  Persia  to  the  right,  kneeling,  bearing  bow 
and  javelin.   Kev. :  Irregular  incuse  square.    British  Museum. 

The  Apocrypha  contains  the  earliest  distinct  allu- 
sion to  the  coining  of  Jewish  money,  where  it  is 
narrated,  in  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees,  that  An- 
tiochus  VII.  granted  to  Simon  the  Maccabee  pei-mis- 
sion  to  coin  money  with  his  own  stamp,  as  well  as 
other  piivileges  (Kai  c-ireTpeif/a  ffoi  voirjcraL  nSixixa 
Idwv  vS/jLLff/xa  Trj  X'^Pf  """"•  ^^-  ^)-  I'h'^  was  in 
the  fourth  year  of  t^iniou's  pontificate,  B.C.  140.  It 
must  be  noted  that  Demetrius  II.  had  in  the  first 
year  of  Simon,  B.C.  143,  made  a  most  important 
decree  granting  freedom  to  the  Jewish  people,  which 
gave  occasion  to  the  dating  of  tlieir  contracts  and 
covenants, — "  In  the  first  year  of  Simon  the  great 
high-priest,  the  leader,  and  chief  of  the  Jews" 
(xiii.  34-42),  a  form  which  Josephus  gives  differ- 
ently, "  In  the  first  year  of  Simon,  benefactor  of  the 
Jews,  and  ethnarch  "  [Ant.  xiii.  6). 

The  eaiiiest  Jewish  coins  were  until  lately  con- 
sidered to  have  been  sti'uck  by  Simon  on  receiving 
the  permission  of  Antiochus  VII.  They  may  be 
thus  described,  following  M.  de  Saulcy's  arrange- 
ment : — • 

SILVER. 

1.  ^Nl^i''' '?p:^^"  Shekel  of  Israel."  Vase,  above 
which  N  [Year]  1. 

^  ntt'np  D^^i'lT,  "  Jerusalem  the  holy." 
Branch  bearing  three  llowoi's.     A\. 


2.  hp^n  '•Vn,  "  Half-shekel."     Same  type  and 
date. 

^  nCnp  o'pt^'nV    same  type.  Ai.   (Cut)  B.M. 

3.  '?X"ltJ'''  ^pK',  "Shekel  of  Israel."    Same  type, 
above  which  2^  (1  HJK^).  "  Year  2." 

i^  ncnpn  D^'?t^•n^     Same  type.     j:i. 

4.  VptiTI  ^:^n.     "  Ilulf-shekel."    Same  type  and 


date. 


^  ntJ'npn  Whuny.     Same  type.     Al. 


5.  ^NX"-  SpK>,  "Shekel  of  Israel.^ 
abova  which  JL*'  (;  n:^),  "  Year  3." 

^  nJi'inpn  D''^B'1T.  Same  type. 
B.M. 


Same  type, 
Al.   (Cut) 


COPPER. 

1.  ':^n  ymX  n3K>,"  Year  four:  Half."  A  fruit, 
between  two  s/icaves  ? 

^  JVTf  rbmh,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Zion." 
Palm-tree  between  two  baskets^     £. 


2.  ym  ymX  n3K',    "Year   four:    Quarter. 
Two  sheaves  i 

5  IW  n'pXj'p,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Zion.'^ 
A  fruit.     M.     (Cut)  Mr.  Wigan's  collection. 


3.  yniN  nit?',  "  Year  four."  A  sheaf  hetwctv. 
two  fruits? 

9  \Y)i  rhuih,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Zion." 
Vase.     Ai.     (Cut)  Wigan. 

The  average  weight  of  the  silver  coins  is  about 
220  grains  troy  for  the  shekel,  and  1 10  for  the  half- 
shekel.''  The  name,  from  7p^,  shews  that  the 
shekel  was  the  Jewish  stater.  The  determination  of 
the  standard  weight  of  1-he  shekel,  which,  be  it  re- 
membered, was  a  weight  as  well  as  a  coin,  and  of  its 
relation  to  the  other  weights  used  by  the  Hebiews, 
belongs  to  another  article  [Weights  and  Mea- 
sures] ;  here  we  have  only  to  consider  its  lelation 
to  the  different  talents  of  antiquity.  The  shekel  cor- 
responds almost  exactly  to  the  tetradrachm  or  di- 
drachm  of  the  eailier  Phoenician  talent  in  use  in  the 
cities  of  Phoenicia  under  Persian  rule,  and  after  Alex- 
ander's time  at  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Berytus,  as  well 
as  in  Egypt.  It  is  represented  in  the  LXX.  by 
didrachin,  a  rendering  which  has  occasioned  great 
difficulty  to  numismatists.  Col.  Leake  suggested, 
but  did  not  adopt,  what  we  have  no  doubt  is  the 
ti'ue  explanation.     After  speaking  of  the  shekel  as 


"j  Coins  are  not  always  exact  in  relative  weight:  in     heavier  than   they  would  be   if  exact  divisions  of  the 
some  modern  coinages  the  smaller  coins  are  intcutiorrally  |  larger. 


MONEY 

probably  the  Phoenician  and  Hebrew  unit  of 
weight,  he  adds:  "This  weight  appears  to  have 
been  the  same  as  the  Egyptian  unit  of  weight,  for 
we  learn  from  HorapoUo  that  the  M.ouhs,  or  unit, 
which  they  held  to  be  the  basis  of  all  numeration, 
was  equal  to  two  drachmae  ;  and  SiSpaxfji^ov  is  em- 
ployed synonymously  with  (TikAos  fur  the  Hebrew 
word  shekel  by  the  Greek  Septiiagint,  consequently, 
the  shekel  and  the  didrachmon  weie  of  the  same 
weight.  I  am  aware  that  some  learned  commen- 
tatore  are  of  opinion  that  the  translators  here  meant 
a  didrachmon  of  the  Graeco-Egyptian  scale,  which 
weighed  about  110  grains  ;  but  it  is  hardly  credible 
that  StSpax/J-ov  should  have  been  thus  employed 
without  any  distinguishing  epithet,  at  a  time  wlien 
the  Ptolemaic  scale  was  yet  of  recent  origin  [in 
Egypt],  the  word  didrachmon  on  the  other  hand, 
having  for  ages  been  applied  to  a  silver  money,  of 
about  130  grains,  in  the  currency  of  all  cities  wliich 
follow  the  Attic  or  Corinthi;m  standard,  as  well  as 
in  the  silver  money  of  Alexander  the  Great  and 
[most  of]  his  successors.  In  all  these  currencies, 
as  well  as  in  those  of  Lydia  and  Persia,  the  stater 
was  an  Attic  didrachmon,  or,  at  least,  with  no 
greater  diil'ereuce  of  standard  than  occurs  among 
modern  nations  using  a  denomination  of  weight  or 
measure  common  to  all ;  and  hence  the  word  5i'- 
5poX/"0j'  was  at  length  employed  as  a  measure  of 
weight,  without  any  reference  to  its  origin  in  the 
Attic  drachma.  Thus  we  find  the  drachma  of  gold 
described  as  equivalent  to  ten  didrachma,  and  the 
half-shekel  of  the  Pentateuch,  translated  by  the 
.Septuagint  rh  Tfiixtcrv  rov  SiSpdxf^ov.  There  can 
be  no  doubt,  therefore,  that  the  Attic,  and  not  the 
Graeco-Egyptian  didrachmon,  was  intended  by 
them."  He  goes  on  to  conjecture  that  Moses 
adopted  the  Egyptian  unit,  and  to  state  the  import- 
ance of  distinguishing  between  the  Mosaic  weight 
and  the  extant  Jewish  shekel.  "  It  appears,"  he 
continues,  "  that  the  half  shekel  of  ransom  had,  in 
the  time  of  our  Saviour,  been  converted  into  the 
payment  of  a  didrachmon  to  the  Temple  ;  and  two 
of  these  didrachma  formed  a  stater  of  the  Jewish 
currency.  This  stater  was  evidently  the  extant 
'  Shekel  Israel,'  which  was  a  tetradrachmon  of  the 
Ptolemaic  scale,  though  generally  below  the  standard 
weight,  like  most  of  the  extant  specimens  of  the 
Ptolemies ;  the  diihachmon  paid  to  the  Temple 
was,  therefore,  of  tlie  same  monetary  scale.  Tlius 
the  duty  to  the  Temple  was  converted  from  the  lialf 
of  an  Attic  to  the  whole  of  a  Ptolemaic  didrachmon, 
and  the  tax  was  nominally  raised  in  tlie  proportion 
of  about  105  to  65  ;  but  probably  the  value  of 
silver  had  fallen  as  much  in  the  two  preceding  cen- 
turies. It  w<is  ;iatural  that  the  .Jews,  wlien  they 
began  to  sti-ike  money,  should  have  revived  the  old 
name  shekel,  and  applied  it  to  their  stater,  or  prin- 
cipal coin  ;  and  equally  so,  that  they  should  liave 
adopted  the  scale  of  tlie  neighbouring  opulent  and 
powerful  kingdom,  the  money  of  which  they  must 
have  long  been  in  the  habit  of  employing.  The  in- 
scription on  the  coin  appears  to  have  been  expressly 
intended  to  distinguish  the  monetiuy  shekel  or  stater 
from  the  Shekel  lia-Kodesli,  or  Shekel  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary." A])pendix  to  Numisianta  liellcnica,  pp.  '1,  o. 
The  great  point  liere  gained  is  that  the  Egyptian 
unit  was  a  didrachm,  a  conclusion  confirmed  by  the 
•  discovery  of  an  Egyj)tian  weight  not  greatly  exceed- 
ing the  Attic  didrachm.  The  conjectuie,  howevei-, 
tliat  the  LXX.  intend  the  Attic  weight  is  forced, 
and  leads  to  this  double  dilemma,  the  supposition 
that  the  didrachm  of  the  L.\X.  is  a  shekel  and  that 
of  the  N.  T.  half  a  stater,  which  is  the  same  as  half 


MONEY 


409 


a  shekel,  and  that  the  tiibute  was  greatly  raised, 
whereas  there  is  no  evidence  that  in  the  N.  T.  the 
term  didrachm  is  not  used  in  exactly  the  same  sense 
as  in  the  LXX.  The  natural  explanation  seems  to 
us  to  be  that  the  Alexandrian  Jews  adopted  for  the 
shekel  the  term  didrachm  as  the  common  name  of 
the  coin  corresponding  in  weight  to  it,  and  that  it 
thus  became  in  Hebraistic  Greek  the  equivalent  of 
shekel.  There  is  no  ground  for  supposing  a  dif- 
ference in  use  in  the  LXX.  and  N.  T.,  more  especially 
as  there  happen  to  have  been  few,  if  any,  didrachms 
current  in  I'alestine  in  the  time  of  Our  Lord,  a 
fact  which  gives  great  significance  to  the  finding  of 
the  stater  in  the  fish  by  St.  Peter,  showing  the 
minute  accuracy  of  the  Evangelist.  The  Ptolemaic 
weight,  not  being  Egyptian  but  Phoenician,  chanced 
to  agree  with  the  Hebrew,  which  was  probably  de- 
rived from  the  same  source,  the  piimitive  system 
of  Palestine,  and  perhaps  of  Babylon  also. — Respect- 
ing the  weights  of  -the  copper  coins  we  cannot  as 
yet  speak  with  any  confidence. 

The  fabric  of  the  silver  coins  above  described  is 
so  different  from  that  of  any  other  ancient  money, 
that  it  is  extremely  hard  to  base  any  argument  on 
it  alone,  and  the  cases  of  other  special  classes,  as  the 
ancient  money  of  Cyprus,  show  the  danger  of  such 
reasoning.  Some  liave  been  disposed  to  consider 
that  it  proves  that  these  coins  cannot  be  later  than 
the  time  of  Nehemiah,  others  will  not  admit  it  to 
be  later  than  Alexander's  time,  while  some  still  hold 
that  it  is  not  too  archaic  for  the  Maccabean  period. 
Against  its  being  assigned  to  the  earlier  dates  we 
may  remark  that  the  forms  are  too  exact,  and  that 
apart  from  style,  which  we  do  not  exclude  in  con- 
sidering fabric,  the  mere  mechanical  work  is  like 
that  of  the  coins  of  Phoenician  towns  sti'uck  under 
the  Seleucidae.  The  decisive  evidence,  however,  is 
to  be  found  by  a  comparison  of  the  copper  coins 
which  cannot  be  doubted  to  complete  the  series. 
These,  though  in  some  cases  of  a  similar  style  to 
the  silver  coins,  are  genei-ally  flu-  more  like  the  un- 
doubted pieces  of  the  Maccabees. 

The  inscriptions  of  these  coins,  and  all  the  other 
Hebrew  inscriptions  of  Jewish  coins,  are  in  a  character 
of  which  there  are  few  other  examples.  As  Geseuius 
has  obsei-ved  i^Gram.  §5)  it  bears  a  strong  resem- 
blance to  the  Samaritan  and  Phoenician,  and  we 
may  add  to  the  Aramean  of  coins  which  must  be 
carefully  distinguished  from  the  Aramean  of  the 
jiapyri  found  in  Egypt.":  The  use  of  this  cliaractei- 
does  uot  atibrd  any  positive  evidence  as  to  age ;  but 
it  is  impoi-fant  to  notice  that,  although  it  is  found 
upon  the  Maccabean  coins,  there  is  no  palaeogra- 
jihic  re;ison  why  the  pieces  of  doubtful  time  bearing 
it  should  not  be  as  early  as  the  Persian  period. 

The  meaning  of  the  inscriptions  does  not  offer 
matter  for  controversy.  Tlieir  nature  would  in- 
dicate a  period  of  Jewish  freedom  from  Greek  in- 
fluence as  well  as  independence,  and  the  use  of  an 
era  dating  from  its  commencement.  The  form  used 
on  the  copper  coins  clearly  shows  the  second  and 
third  points.  It  cannot  be  supposed  that  thedating 
is  by  the  sabbatical  or  jubilee  year,  since  the  re- 
demption of  Zion  is  particularised.  These  are  sepa- 
rated from  the  known  Maccabean  and  later  coins 
by  the  absence  of  Hellenism,  and  connected  witli 
them  by  the  want  of  perfect  uniformity  in  their  in- 
scriptions, a  point  indicative  of  a  time,  of  national 
deciiy  like  that  which  followed  the  dominion  of  the 
eai-lier  Maccabees.    Here  it  may  be  remarked  that  the 

*:  See  Mr.  AVaildingtoti's  paper  on  the  so-called  satnip 
cciins  {Melange  de  Sumismaliiiue). 


410  MONEY 

idea  ofCavedoui,  that  the  form  D''T'lJ'1"lS  succeeding 
in  the  second  year  to  DX'IIS  is  to  1«  taken  as  a 
dual,  because  in  that  year  (;iccording  to  liis  view  of 
the  age  of  the  coins)  the  fortress  of  Sion  was  taken 
from''tlie  Syrians  {Num.  Bibl.  p.  23^,  notwith- 
^,tauding  its  ingenuity  must,  as  De  Saulcy  has  ah'eady 
said,  be  considered  untenable. 

The  old  explanation  of  the  meaning  of  the  types 
of  the  shekels  and  lialf-shekels,  that  they  j-epresent 
the  pot  of  manna  and  Aaron's  rod  that  budded, 
>;eems  to  us  remarkably  consistent  with  the  inscrip- 
tions and  with  what  we  should  expect.  Cavedoni 
has  suggested,  however,  that  the  one  type  is  simply 
a  vase'of  the  Temple,  and  the  other  a  lily,  arguing 
against  the  old  explanation  of  the  former  that  the 
pot  of  manna  had  a  cover,  which  this  vase  has 
not.  But  it  may  be  replied,  that  perhaps  this 
vase  had  a  flat  cover,  that  on  later  coins  a  vase  is 
represented  both  with  and  without  a  cover,  and 
that  the  different  forms  given  to  the  vase  which  is 
so  constant  on  the  Jewish  coins  seem  to  indicate 
that  it  is  a  representation  of  something  like  tlie  pot 
of  manna  lost  when  Nebuchadnezzar  took  Jeru- 
salem, and  of  which  there  was  therefore  only  a  tra- 
ditional recollection. 

Kespectiug  the  exact  meaning  of  the  types  of  the 
copper,  save  the  vase,  it  is  difficult  to  form  a  pro- 
bable conjecture.  They  may  reasonably  be  sup- 
posed to  have  a  reference  to  the  great  festivals  of 
the  Jewish  year,  which  were  connected  with  thanks- 
giving for.  the  fruits  of  the  earth.  But  it  may,  on 
the  other  hand,  be  suggested  that  they  merely  in- 
dicate the  products  of  the  Holy  Laud,  the  fertility 
of  which  is  so  prominently  brought  forward  in  the 
Scriptures.  With  this  idea  the  representation  of  the 
vine-leaf  and  bunch  of  grapes  upon  the  later  coins 
would  seem  to  tally  ;  but  it  must  be  i-ecollected  that 
the  lower  poition  of  a  series  generally  shows  a  depar- 
ture or  divergence  from  the  higher  in  the  intention  of 
its  types,  so  as  to  be  an  vmsafe  guide  in  interpretation. 

Upon  the  copper  coins  we  have  especially  to  ob- 
seiTe,  as  already  hinted,  that  they  form  an  import- 
ant guide  in  judging  of  the  age  of  the  silver.  That 
they  really  belong  to  the  same  time  is  not  to  be 
doubted.  Everything  but  the  style  proves  this. 
Their  issue,  in  the  4th  year,  after  the  silver  cease  in 
the  3rd  year,  their  types  and  inscriptions,  leave  no 
room  for  doubt.  The  style  is  remarkably  different, 
and  we  have  selected  two  specimens  for  engraving, 
which  aflbrd  examples  of  tlieir  divei'sity.  We  ven- 
ture to  think  that  the  ditlerence  between  the  silver 
coins  engraved,  and  the  small  copper  coin,  which 
most  nearly  resembles  them  in  the  form  of  the  letters, 
is  almost  as  great  as  that  between  the  large  copper 
one  and  the  coppin-  pieces  of  John  Hyrcanus.  The 
small  copper  coin,  be  it  i-emembered,  more  nearly 
resembles  the  silver  money  than  does  the  large  one. 

From  this  inquiry  we  may  lay  down  the  follow- 
ing particulars  as  a  b;isis  for  the  attribution  of  this 
class.  1 .  The  shekels,  halt-shekels,  and  correspond- 
uig  copper  coins,  may  be  on  the  evidence  of  fabric 
and  inscriptions  of  any  age  from  Alexander's  time 
until  the  eariier  period  of  the  Maccabees.  2.  They 
must  belong  to  a  time  of  independence,  and  one  at 
which  Greek  influence  was  excluded.  3.  They  date 
from  an  era  of  Jewish  independence. 

M.  de  Saulcy,  struck  by  the  ancient  appearance 
of  the  silver  coins,  and  disregai'ding  the  ditierence 
in  style  of  the  copper,  has  conJMtured  that  the 
whole  class  was  struck  at  some  early  period  of 
prosperity.  He  fixes  upon  the  pontificate  of  Jaddua, 
and  supposes  them  to  liave  been  first  issued  when 


MONEY 

Alexander  granted  great  privileges  to  the  Jews. 
If  it  be  admitted  that  this  was  an  occasion  from 
which  an  era  might  be  reckoned,  there  is  a  serious 
difficulty  in  the  style  of  the  copper  coins,  and  those 
who  have  practically  studied  the  subject  of  the 
fabric  of  coins  will  admit  that  though  archaic  style 
may  be  long  preserved,  there  can  be  no  mistake  as 
to  late  style,  the  earlier  limits  of  which  are  far  more 
rigorously  fixed  than  the  later  limits  of  ;uxhaic 
style.  But  there  is  another  difficulty  of  even  a 
graver  nature.  Alexander,  who  was  essentially  a 
practical  genius,  suppressed  all  the  varying  weights 
of  money  in  his  empire  excepting  the  Attic,  which 
he  made  the  lawful  standard.  Philip  had  struck 
his  gold  on  the  Attic  weight,  his  silver  on  the 
Macedonian.  Alexander  even  changed  his  native 
currency  in  canying  out  this  great  commercial  re- 
form, of  which  the  importance  has  never  been  recog- 
nized. Is  it  likely  that  he  would  have  allowed  a 
new  currency  to  have  been  issued  by  Jaddua  on  a 
system  difiierent  from  the  Attic?  If  it  be  urged 
that  this  was  a  sacred  coinage  for  the  tribute,  and 
that  therefore  an  exception  may  have  been  made, 
it  must  be  recollected  that  an  excess  of  weight 
would  have  not  been  so  serious  a  matter  as  a  defi- 
ciency, and  besides  that  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that 
the  shekels  follow  a  Jewish  weight.  On  these 
giounds,  therefore,  we  feel  bound  to  reject  M.  de 
Saulcy 's  theory. 

The  basis  we  have  laid  down  is  in  entire  accord- 
ance with  the  old  theory,  that  this  class  of  coins 
was  issued  by  Simon  the  Maccabee.  M.  de  Saulcy 
would,  however,  urge  against  our  conclusion  the  cir- 
cumstance that  he  has  attributed  small  copper  coins 
all  of  one  and  the  same  class  to  Judas  the  Maccabee, 
Jonathan,  and  John  Hyrcanus,  and  that  the  veiy 
dissimilar  coins  hitherto  attributed  to  Simon,  must 
therefore  be  of  another  period.  If  these  attribu- 
tions be  conect,  his  deduction  is  perfectly  sound, 
but  the  circumstance  that  Simon  alone  is  unrepre- 
sented in  the  series,  whereas  we  have  most  reason 
to  look  for  coins  of  him,  is  extremely  suspicious. 
We  shall,  however,  show  in  discussing  this  class, 
that  we  have  discovered  evidence  which  seems  to  us 
sufficient  to  induce  us  to  abandon  M.  de  Saulcy's 
classification  of  copper  coins  to  Judas  and  Jonathan, 
and  to  commence  the  series  with  those  of  John 
Hyrcanus.  For  the  present  therefore  we  adhere  to 
the  old  attribution  of  the  shekels,  half-shekels,  and 
similar  cojjper  coins,  to  Simon  the  Jlaccabee. 

We  now  give  a  list  of  all  the  principal  coppei 
coins  of  a  later  date  than  those  of  the  class  described 
above  and  anterior  to  Herod,  according  to  M.  de 
Saulcy's  arrangement. 

COPPER  COINS.     * 

1.  Judas  Maccahaeus. 


"  Judiih, 

the  illustrious  prii'sr, 

and  friend  of  the  Jews 


Witliin  a  wreath  o{ olive? 

H'.  Two  coruua  copiae  united,  within   which  a 
iiomeLrranate.     M.      W. 


iin" 

"  .Jiiiiatliaii 

nDnjn 

the  higb-priesi. 

nn'pnj 

Irienci  of  llie  Jew 

Within  ;i  wro.atii  of  olive'? 
5.  the  same.     .'E.     W. 


^.  The  same. 


.     M.     W. 
3.  Simon. 
(Wanting.) 

4.  John  Iliircanns. 


/;-^ 


y^> 


A 

Within  a  wreatli  of  olive  i 


"  John 

the  higb-priest, 

md  friend  of  the  Jews." 


^.  Two  comua  copiae,  witliin  which   a   jiome- 
orianute.     JE.     W. 


insnp 
on- 

l|.  The  same.     JK.     W. 

5.  Jiulas-Aristohulns  anil  Anlii/ouiis. 
lOVAA  .  . 
BA2IA  ? 
A? 

Within  a  crown. 

^.  Two  cornita  copiae,  witliin  wiiicii   a  ponu' 
grauate. 

Similar  coins. 


MONEY 

7.  Alexander  Jcmnaem. 


411 


(A).  BASIAEP OY    (BAi^ilAEnS 

AAEHANAPOY).    Anchor. 

9.  I^Dn  jn[31?,  "  Jonathan  the  king  ;"  within 
the  spolies  of  a  wheel.     ^.     W. 


(B).  AS AEHANAPO.    Anchor. 

R.  "I'pDn  }n3  •  •  •  ";  within  the  spokes  of  a  wheel. 
-E.     W. 

(C).  BA5IAEf!S  AAEHANAPOY.   Anchor. 

"17?3n  jn31n%  "  Jonathan  the  king."    Flower. 

The  types  of  this  last  coin  resemble  those  of  one 
of  Antiochus  VII. 

(D).  BA2IAEfi2  AAEHANA   .    .    .     Anchor. 

I?'.  Star. 

Alexandra. 

BASIAI2  AAE3ANA     Anchor. 

^'.  Star :  within  the  rays  nearly-eflaced  Hebrew 
inscription. 

Ifi/rcaniis  (no  coins). 
Aristobulus  (no  coins). 
Hyrcanus  restored  (no  coins). 
Oligarchy  (no  coins). 
Aristobulus  and  Alexander  (no  coins). 
Hyrcanus  again  restored  (no  coins). 
Antigomis. 


irONOY  (EASIAEnS  ANTirONOM 

around  a  crown. 

9 Tinn  oijn   in^n   n^nno  •'> 

"  ."\Iattathiah  the  high-priest"?     AL     \V. 

This  arrangement  is  certainly  the  most  satisfactory 
tliat  has  been  yet  proposed,  but  it  presents  serious 
difficulties.  The  most  obvious  of  these  is  the  absence 
of  coins  of  Simon,  for  whose  money  we  have  more 
reason  to  look  than  for  that  of  any  other  Jewish  ruler. 
M.  de  Saulcy's  suggestion  that  we  may  some  day  find 
his  coins  is  a  scarcely  satisfactory  answer,  for  this 
would  imply  that  he  struck  very  few  coins,  whereas 
all  the  other  princes  in  the  list,  .ludius  only  excepted, 
struck  many,  Judging  from  those  found.  That  Judas 
should  have  struck  but  few  coins  is  CNtremely  pro- 


412 


MONEY 


bable  ft-om  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country  during 
his  rule  ;  but  the  prosperous  government  of  Simon 
seems  to  require  a  large  issue  of  money.  A  second 
difficulty  is  that  the  series  of  small  copper  coins, 
having  the  same,  or  essentially  the  same,  reverse- 
type,  commences  with  Judas,  and  should  rather 
commence  with  Simon.  A  third  difficulty  is  that 
Judas  bears  the  title  of  priest,  and  probably  of  high- 
priest,  for  the  word  ?1  ?3  is  e.xtremely  doubtful,  and 
the  extraordinary  variations  and  blunders  in  the  in- 
sci'iptions  of  these  copper  coins  make  it  more  pro- 
bable that  ?"n!l  is  the  term,  whereas  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  that  he  took  the  office  of  high-priest. 
It  is,  however,  just  possible  that  he  may  have  taken 
an  infijrior  title,  while  acting  as  high-priest  during 
the  lifetime  of  Alcimus.  These  objections  are,  how- 
ever, all  trifling  in  comparison  with  one  that  seems 
never  to  have  struck  any  inquirer.  These  small 
copper  coins  have  for  the  main  part  of  their  reverse- 
type  a  Greek  symbol,  the  united  cornua  copiae,  and 
they  therefore  distinctly  belong  to  a  period  of  Greek 
influence.  Is  it  possible  that  Judas  the  Maccabee, 
the  restorer  of  the  Jewish  worship,  and  the  sworn 
enemy  of  all  heathen  customs,  could  have  struck 
money  with  a  type  derived  from  the  heathen,  and 
used  by  at  least  one  of  the  hated  family  that  then 
oppressed  Israel,  a  type  connected  with  idolatry, 
and  to  a  Jew  as  forbidden  as  any  other  of  the  repre- 
sentations on  the  coins  of  the  Gentiles?  It  seems 
to  us  that  this  is  an  impossibility,  and  that  the  use 
of  such  a  type  points  to  the  time  when  prosperity 
had  corrupted  the  ruling  family  and  Greek  usages 
once  Biore  were  powerful  in  their  influence.  This 
period  may  be  considei-ed  to  commence  in  the  rule  of 
John  Hyrcanus,  whose  adoption  of  foreign  customs 
is  evident  in  the  naming  of  his  sons  far  more  than 
in  the  policy  he  followed.  If  we  examine  the 
whole  series,  the  coins  bearing  the  name  of  "  John 
the  high-priest"  are  the  best  in  e.xecutiou,  and 
therefore  have  some  claim  to  be  considered  the 
earliest. 

It  is  important  to  endeavour  to  trace  the  origin 
of  the  type  which  we  are  discussing.  The  two 
cornua  copiae  first  occur  on  the  Egyptian  coins,  and 
indicate  two  sovereigns.  In  the  money  of  the  Se- 
leucidae  the  type  probably  originated  at  a  marriage 
with  an  Egyptian  princess.  The  cornua  copiae,  as 
represented  on  the  Jewish  coins,  are  first  found,  as 
fai-  as  we  are  aware,  on  a  coin  of  Alexander  II., 
Zebina  (B.C.  128-12'2),  who,  be  it  recollected,  was 
set  up  by  Ptolemy  Physcon.  The  type  occurs, 
however,  in  a  different  form  on  the  unique  tetra- 
drachm  of  Cleopatra,  ruling  alone,  in  the  British 
Museum,  but  it  may  have  been  adopted  on  her 
marriage  with  Alexander  I.,  Balas  (B.C.  150).  Yet 
even  this  earlier  date  is  after  the  rule  of  Judas 
(B.C.  167-161),  and  in  tlie  midst  of  that  of  Jona- 
than ;  and  Alexander  Zebina  was  contemporary 
with  John  Hyrcanus.  We  have  seen  that  Alex- 
ander Jannaeus  (B.C.  105-78)  seems  to  have  fol- 
lowed a  type  of  Antiochus  VII.,  Sidetes,  of  which 
there  are  coins  dated  B.C.  132-131. 

Thus  far  there  is  high  probability  that  M.  de 
Saulcy's  attributions  before  John  Hyrcanus  are  ex- 
tremely doulitful.  This  probability  has  been  almost 
changed  to  certainty  by  a  discovery  the  writer  has 
recently  had  the  good  fortune  to  make.  The  acute 
Earthelemy  mentions  a  coin  of  "  Jonathan  the 
high-priest,"  on  which  he  perceived  traces  of  the 
words  BASIAEflS  AAEHANAPOT,  and  he  accord- 
ingly conjectures  that  these  coins  are  of  tlie  same 


MONEY 

class  as  the  bilingual  ones  of  Alexander  Jannaeus, 
holding  them  both  to  be  of  Jonathan,  and  the  latter 
to  mark  the  close  alliance  between  that  ruler  and 
Alexander  I.  Balas.  An  examination  of  the  money  of 
Jonathan  the  high-priest  has  led  us  to  the  discovery 
that  many  of  his  coins  are  restruck,  that  some  of 
these  restruck  coins  exhibit  traces  of  Greek  inscrip- 
tions, showing  the  original  pieces  to  be  probably  of 
the  class  attributed  to  Alexander  Jannaeus  by  M.  de 
Saulcy,  and  that  one  of  the  latter  distinctly  bears 
the  letters  ANAI.  T  [AAEHANAPOT].  The  two 
impressions  of  restruck  coins  are  in  general  of  closely 
consecutive  dates,  the  objei^t  of  restriking  having 
usually  been  to  destroy  an  obnoxious  coinage.  That 
this  was  the  motive  in  the  present  instance  appears 
from  the  large  number  of  restruck  coins  among  those 
with  the  name  of  Jonathan  the  high-priest,  whereas 
we  know  of  no  other  restruck  Jewish  coins,  and 
from  the  change  in  the  style  from  Jonathan  the 
king  to  Jonathan  the  high-priest. 

Under  these  circumstances  but  two  attributions 
of  the  bilingual  coins,  upon  which  everything  de- 
pends, can  be  entertained,  either  that  they  are  of 
Jonathan  the  Maccabee  in  alliance  with  Alexander  I. 
Balas,  or  that  they  ai'e  of  Alexander  Jannaeus  , 
the  Jewish  prince  having,  in  either  case,  changed 
his  coinage.  We  learn  from  the  case  of  Anti- 
gonus  that  double  names  were  not  unknown  in  the 
family  of  the  Maccabees.  To  the  foi-mer  attribution 
there  are  the  ibllowing  objections.  1.  On  the  bilin- 
gual coins  the  title  Jonathan  the  king  corresponds 
to  Alexander  the  king,  implying  that  the  same 
prince  is  intended,  or  two  princes  of  equal  rank. 
2.  Although  Alexander  I.  Balas  sent  presents  of  a 
royal  character  to  Jonathan,  it  is  extremely  un- 
likely that  the  Jewish  prince  would  have  taken  the 
regal  title,  or  that  the  king  of  Syria  would  have 
actually  granted  it.  3.  The  Greek  coins  of  Jewish 
fabric  with  the  inscription  Alexander  the  king,  would 
have  to  be  assigned  to  the  Syrian  Alexander  I., 
instead  of  the  Jewish  king  of  the  same  name.  4.  It 
would  be  most  strange  if  Jonathan  should  have 
first  struck  coins  with  Alexander  I.,  and  then  can- 
celled that  coinage  and  issued  a  fi-esh  Hebrew  coin- 
age of  his  own  and  Greek  of  the  Syrian  king,  the 
whole  series  moreover,  excepting  those  with  only 
the  Hebrew  inscription  having  been  issued  within 
the  years  B.C.  1 53-146,  eight  out  of  the  nineteen 
of  Jonathan's  rule.  5.  The  reign  of  Alexander  Jan- 
naeus would  be  unrepresented  in  the  coinage.  To 
the  second  attribution  there  is  this  objection,  that 
it  is  unlikely  that  Alexander  Jannaeus  would  have 
changed  the  title  of  king  for  that  of  high-priest ; 
but  to  this  it  may  be  replied,  that  his  quarrel  with 
the  Pharisees  with  reference  to  his  performing  the 
duties  of  the  latter  office,  the  turning-point  of  his 
reio-n,  might  have  made  him  abandon  the  recent 
kingly  title  and  recur  to  the  sacerdotal,  already 
used  on  his  father's  coins,  for  the  Hebrew  currency, 
while  probably  still  issuing  a  Greek  coinage  with 
the  regal  title.  On  these  grounds,  therefore,  we 
maintain  Bayer's  opinion  that  the  Jewish  coinage 
begins  with  Simon,  we  transfer  the  coins  of  Jona- 
than the  high-priest  to  Alexander  Jannaeus,  and 
propose  the  following  arrangement  of  the  known 
money  of  the  princes  of  the  period  we  have  been 
just  considering 

JoJin  Hijrcanus,  B.C.  135-106. 
Copper  coins,  with  Hebrew  inscription,  "  John 
the  high-priest ;"  on  some  A,  marking  alliance  with 
Antiochus  VIL,  Sidetes. 


MONEY 

Aristohulus  and  Antigonus,  B.C.  10$-105. 
(Probable  Attribution.) 
Copper  coins,  with  Hebrew  iuscription,  "  Judah 
the  high  {?)  priest;"  copper  coins  with  Greek  in- 
scription, "  Judah  the  kiua;,"  and  A.  for  Antigonus? 
M.  de  Sau'cy  supposes  ttiat  Aristobuhis  bore  the 
Hebrew  name  Judah,  and  there  is  certainly  some 
probability  in  the  conjecture,  though  the  classifi- 
cation of  these  coins  cannot  be  regarded  as  more 
than  tentative. 

Alexander  Jannaeus,  B.C.  105-78. 

Fii-st  coinage:  copper  coins  with  bilingual  in- 
scriptions— Greek,  "  Alexander  the  king  ;"  Hebrew, 
"  Jonathan  the  king." 

Second  coinage:  copper  coins  with  Hebrew  in- 
scription, "  Jonathan  the  high-priest;"  and  copper 
.  coins  with  Greek  inscription,  "  Alexander  the  king." 
(The  assigning  of  these  latter  two  to  the  same  ruler 
is  confirmed  by  the  occurrence  of  Hebrew  coins  of 
"  Judah  the  high-priest,"  and  Greek  ones  of  "  Judas 
the  king,"  which  there  is  good  reason  to  attribute 
to  one  and  the  same  person.) 

Alexandra,  B.C.  78-69. 

The  coin  assigned  to  Alexandra  by  M.  de  ?aulcy 
may  be  of  this"  sovereign,  but  those  of  Alexander 
ai-e  so  frequently  blundered  that  we  are  not  certain 
that  it  was  not  struck  by  him. 

Hgrcamis,  B.C.  69-66  (no  coins). 

Aristohidus,  B.C.  66-63  (no  coins). 

ffyrcanus  restoied,  B.C.  63-57  (no  coins). 

Oligarchy,  B.C.  57-47  (no  coins). 

Aristohulus  and  Alexaiulcr,  B.C.  49  (no  coins). 

Hgrcanus  again,  B.C.  47-40  (no  coins). 

Antigonus,  B.C.  40-37.  Copper  coins,  with  bi- 
lingual inscriptions. 

It  must  be  observed  that  the  whole  period  unre- 
presented in  our  classification  is  no  more  than 
twenty-nine  years,  only  two  years  in  excess  of  the 
length  of  the  reign  of  Alexander  Jannaeus,  that  it 
was  a  very  troublous  time,  and  that  Hyrcanus, 
whose  rule  occupied  more  than  half  the  period,  was 
so  weak  a  man  that  it  is  extremely  likely  that  he 
would  have  neglected  to  issue  a  coinage.  It  is  pos- 
sible that  some  of  the  doubtful  small  pieces  are  of 
this  unrepresented  time,  but  at  pre.sent  we  cannot 
even  conjectuially  attiibute  any. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  describe  in  detail  the  money 
of  the  time  commencing  with  the  reign  of  Herod 
and  closing  under  Hadrian.  We  must,  however, 
speak  of  the  coinage  genei'ally,  of  the  references 
to  it  in  the  N.  T.,  and  of  two  iinportant  classes — 
the  money  attiibuted  to  the  revolt  preceding  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  of  the  lamous  Barko- 
kab. 

The  money  of  Herod  is  abundant,  but  of  inierior 
inteiest  to  the  earlier  coinage,  from  its  generally 
having  a  thoroughly  Greek  chaiacter.  It  is  of  copper 
onlv,  and  seems  to  be  of  three  denominations,  the 
smallest  being  apparently  a  jiiece  of  brass  i^x^'^'^ovs), 
the  next  lai-ger  its  double  (Si'xaAKOS),  and  the 
lai-gest  its  triple  {TplxO''^KOs),  as  M.  de  Saulcy  has 
ino'cniously  suggested.  The  smallest  is  the  com- 
monest, and  appeals  to  be  the  farthing  of  the  N.  T. 
The  coin  engraved  below  is  of  the  smallest  deno- 
mination ofthe.se:  it  may  be  thus  described: — 


MONEY 


4J3 


HPtBA  BACI.     Anchor. 

^  Two  cornua  copiae,  within  which  a  caduceus 
(degraded  fi-om  pomegranate).     M.  \V. 

We  have  chosen  this  specimen  from  its  remark- 
able relation  to  the  coinage  of  Alexander  Jannaeus, 
which  makes  it  probable  that  the  latter  was  still 
current  money  in  Herod's  time,  having  been  abund- 
antly issued, 'and  so  tends  to  explain  the  seeming 
neglect  to  coin  in  the  period  ti'om  Alexander  or 
Alexandra  to  Antigonus. 

The  money  of  Herod  Archclaus,  and  the  similar 
coinage  of  the  Greek  Imperial  class,  of  Roman  rulers 
with  Greek  inscriptions,  issued  by  the  procurators  of 
Judaea  under  the  emperors  from  Augustus  to  Nero, 
present  no  remarkable  peculiarities,  nor  do  the  coins 
attributed  by  II.  de  Saulcy  to  Agrippa  I.,  but  pos- 
sibly of  Agrippa  II.  We  engrave  a  specimen  of  the 
money  last  mentioned  to  illustrate  this  class. 


BASIAtooC  ArPIHA.    State  umbrella. 
R  Corn-stalk  bearing  three  ears  of  bearded  wheat. 
L  S    Year  6.     M. 

There  are  several  passages  in  the  Gospels  which 
throw  light  upon  the  coinage  of  the  time.  When 
the  twelve  were  sent  forth  Our  Lord  thus  com- 
manded them,  "  Provide  neither  gold,  nor  silver, 
nor  bi-ass  in  your  purses"  (lit.  "girdles"),  Matt. 
X.  9.  In  the  parallel  passages  in'St.  Mark  (vi.  8), 
copper  alone  is  mentioned  for  money,  the  Palesti- 
nian currency  being  mainly  of  this  metal,  although 
silver  was  coined  by  some  cities  of  Phoenicia  and 
Syria,  and  gold  and  silver  Roman  money  was  also 
in  use.  St.  Luke,  however,  uses  the  tei'm  "  money," 
apyvptou  (ix.  3),  which  may  be  accounted  for  by 
his  less  Hebraistic  style. 

The  coins  mentioned  by  the  Evangelists,  and  first 
those  of  silver,  are  the  following: — the  stater  is 
spoken  of  in  the  account  of  the  miracle  of  the  tribute 
money.  The  receivers  of  didrachms  demanded  the 
tribute,  but  St.  Peter  found  in  the  fish  a  stater, 
which  he  paid  for  our  Lord  and  himself  (Matt. 
1  xvii.  24-27).  This  stater  was  thercfoi-e  a  tetra- 
diachm,  and  it  is  very  noteworthy  that  at  this 
period  almost  the  only  Greek  Imperial  silver  coin 
in  the  East  was  a  tetradrachm.  the  didrachm  being 
probably  unknown,  or  very  little  coined. 

The  didrachm  is  mentioned  as  a  money  of  account 
in  the  passage  above  cited,  as  the  equivalent  of  the 
Hebrew  shekel.     [SuioKKL.] 

The  dcnarit(s,  or  Roman  penny,  as  well  -as  the 
Greek  drachm,  then  of  about  the  same  weight,  aie 
spoken  of  as  cun-ent  coins.  Theie  can  be  little 
doubt  that  the  latter  is  merely  employed  as  another 
name  for  the  fnmer.  In  the  famous  passages  re- 
specting the  tribute  to  Caesar,  the  Koman  denarius  of 


414 


MONEY 


the  time  is  con-ect.ly  described  (Matt.  xxii.  15-21  ; 
Luke  XX.  19-25).  It  bears  the  head  of  Tiberius, 
who  has  the  title  Caesar  iu  the  accompanying  in- 
scription, most  later  emperors  having,  after  their 
accession,  the  title  Augustus:  here  again  therefore 
we  have  an  evidence  of  the  date  of  the  Gospels. 
[Denarius  ;  Drachm.] 

Of  copper  coins  the  farthing  and  its  half,  the 
mite,  are  spoken  of,  and  these  probably  formed  the 
chief  native  currency.     [Farthing  ;  Mite.] 

To  the  revolt  of  the  .lews,  which  ended  in  the 
capture  and  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  M.  de  Saulcy 
assigns  some  remarkable  coins,  one  of  which  is  re- 
presented in  the  cut  bcnentli. 


MONEY-CHANGERS 

d'pL"'!"!''  nnnS.  "  of  the  deliverance  of. loru- 
salem."      Sunch  of  fruits? 

9'  JiyOK'.  "  Simeon."  Tetrastvlc  temple :  above 
which  star.     ^R.     B.  M.  (Shekel") 

The  half-shekel  is  not  known,  but  the  quarter, 
which  is  simply  a  restruck  denarius  is  common. 
The  specimen  represented  below  shows  traces  of  the 
old  types  of  a  denarius  of  Trajan  on  both  sides. 


IVVmn,  "The  liberty  of  Zion."  Vine-stalk, 
with  loaf  and  tendril. 

1^'  DTi::^  n'^llf.     "  Year  two."     Vase.     JE. 

There  are  other  pieces  of  the  year  following, 
which  slightly  vary  in  their  reverse-type,  if  indeed 
we  be  right  in  considering  the  side  with  the  date 
to  be  the  reverse. 

Same  obverse. 

^  liO^  n^^.  "  Year  three."     Vase  with  cover. 

M.  de  Saulcy  remarks  on  these  pieces: — ■"  De  ces 
deux  monuaies,  celle  de  I'an  III.  est  incomparable- 
ment  plus  rare  que  celle  de  I'an  II.  Cela  tieut 
probablement  a  ce  que  la  libeite  des  .Tuifs  etait  a 
son  apogee  dans  la  deuxi^me  annee  de  la  guerre  ju- 
daique,  et  deja  a  son  declin  dans  Tanne'e  troisi^me. 
Les  pifeces  analogues  des  anne'es  I.  et  I V^.  manquent,  et 
cela  doit  etre.  Dans  la  piemi^re  annee  de  la  guerre 
judaique,  1' autonomic  ne  fut  pas  re'tablie  a  Jerusa- 
lem ;  et  dans  la  quatri^me  annee  I'anarchie  et  les 
divisions  intestines  avaient  deja  prepare'  et  facilite 
k  Titus  la  conquete  qu'il  avait  entreprise  "  (p.  154). 

The  subjugation  of  Judaea  was  not  alone  signalised 
by  the  issue  of  the  famous  Roman  coins  with  the 
inscription  IVDAEA  CAPTA,  but  by  that  of  simi- 
lar Greek  Imperial  coins  in  Judae;i  of  Titus,  one  of 
which  may  be  thus  described: — 

ATVOKP  TITOS  KAI2.\P.  Head  of  Titus,  lau- 
reate, to  the  right. 

9  IdVAAIAS  EAAfiKYIAS.  Victory,  to  the  right, 
writing  upon  a  shield:  before  her  a  palm-tree.    JE. 

The  proper  Jewish  series  closes  with  the  money 
of  the  famous  Barkobab,  who  headed  the  revolt  in 
the  time  of  Hadrian.  His  most  import,ant  coins  are 
shekels,  of  which  wc  here  engiave  one. 


pyjDK'.     "  Simeon."     Bunch  of  grapes. 

^  D'?ti'n''ni-In^.  "  of  the  deliverance  of  Jeru- 
salem.''    Two  trumpets.     Al.     B.  il. 

The  denarius  of  this  time  was  so  neaidy  a  quarter 
of  a  shekel,  that  it  could  be  used  for  it  without  oc- 
casioning any  difficulty  in  the  coinage.  The  copper 
coins  of  Barkokab  are  numerous,  and  like  his 
silver  pieces,  have  a  clear  reference  to  the  money  of 
Simon  tlie  Maecabee.  It  is  indeed  possible  that  the 
name  Simon  is  not  that  of  Barkokab,  whom  we 
know  only  by  his  surnames,  but  that  of  the  earlier 
ruler,  employed  here  to  recall  the  foundation  of 
Jewish  autonomy.  What  high  importance  was 
attached  to  the  issue  of  money  by  the  Jews,  is  evi- 
dent from  the  whole  history  of  their  coinage. 

The  money  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  Roman  Colonia 
jElia  Capitolina,  has  no  interest  here,  and  we  con- 
clude this  article  with  the  last  coinage  of  an  inde- 
pendent Jewish  chief. 

The  chief  works  on  Jewish  coins  are  Bayer's 
treatise  De  Nutnis  Hchrceo-Samaritcmis ;  De  Saulcy's 
Numisinatiqne  Judcnque ;  CaveJoni's  Numismatica 
Biblica,  of  which  there  is  a  translation  under  the 
title  Bihlische  Numismatik,  by  A.  von  Werlhof,  with 
large  additions.  Since  wiiting  this  article  we  find 
that  the  translator  had  previously  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  coins  attributed  by  M.  de  Saulcy  to 
Judas  Maccaba3us  are  of  Aristobulus,  and  that  Jo- 
nathan the  high-priest  is  Alexander  Jannosus.  We 
have  to  express  our  sincere  obligations  to  Mr.  Wigan 
for  permission  to  examine  his  valuable  collection,  and 
have  specimens  drawn  for  this  ai'ticle.     [R.  S.  P.] 

MONEY-CHANGEES  {KoWvfiKrr^s,  Matt, 
xxi.  12  ;  Mark  xi.  15;  John  ii.  15).  According  to 
Ex.  XXX.  lo-15,  every  Israelite,  whether  rich  or 
poor,  who  had  reached  or  passed  the  age  of  twenty, 
must  pay  into  the  sacred  treasury,  whenever  the 
nation  was  numbered,  a  half-shekel  as  an  offering 
to  Jehovah.  Maimonides  {Shekal.  cap.  1)  says  that 
this  was  to  be  paid  annually,  and  that  even  paupers 
were  not  exempt.  The  Talmud  excmjits  priests  and 
women.  The  tribute  must  in  every  case  be  paid  in 
coin  of  the  e.xact  Hebrew  half-shekel,  about  \b\,d. 
sterling  of  English  money.  The  premium  for  obtain- 
ing by  exchange  of  other  money  the  half-shekel  ot 
Hebrew  coin,  according  to  the  Talmud,  was  a  k6\- 
\v0os  (coUybus),  and  hence  the  money-broker  who 
made  the  exchange  was  called  Ko\\vfiicrT7)s.  The 
collybus,  according  to  the  same  autliority,  was  equal 
in  value  to  a  silver  uholus,  which  has  a  weight  of  12 
gi^ains,  and  its  money  value  is  about  \^d.  sterling. 
The  money-changers  (/coAAu/SicTTai)  whom  Christ, 
fortheiv  impiety,  avarice,  and  fi audulent  dealing,  ex- 


MONTH 

pelled  from  the  Temple,  were  the  dealers  who  sup- 
plied hait'-shekols,  fur  such  a  ])remiuni  as  they  miijht 
be  able  to  exact,  to  the  Jews  from  all  parts  of  the 
■world,  who  assembled  at  Jerusalem  during  the  great 
festivals,  and  were  required  to  pay  their  tribute  or 
ransom  money  in  the  Hebrew  coin  ;  and  also  for  other 
pui^poses  of  exchange,  such  as  would  be  necessary  in 
so  great  a  resort  of  foreign  residents  to  the  ecclesi- 
astical metropolis.  The  word  TpaTrefiTrjs  [trape- 
zites),  which  we  iind  in  Matt.  xxv.  29,  is  a  general 
term  for  banker  or  broker.  Of  this  branch  of  bu- 
siness we  find  traces  very  early  both  in  the  Oriental 
and  classical  literature  (comp.  Matt.  xvii.  24-27  :  see 
Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt.  xxi.  12  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex. 
Rabbin.  2032).  [G.  E.  S.] 

MONTH  (K'nn  ;  mi).  The  terms  for  "  month  " 
and  "  moon  "  have  the  same  close  connexion  in  the 
Hebrew  language,  as  in  our  own  and  in  the  Indo- 
European  languages  generally ;  we  need  only  in- 
stance the  familiar  cases  of  the  Greek  ii.i]v  and 
fiilVTi,  and  the  Latin  mensis ;  the  German  mond  and 
monat ;  and  the  Smicrit  rausa,  which  answers  to 
both  month  and  moon.  The  Hebrew  chodesh,  is 
jierhaps  more  distinctive  than  the  corresponding 
teims  in  other  languages  ;  for  it  expresses  not  simply 
the  idea  of  a  lunation,  but  the  recurrence  of  a  period 
commencing  definitely  with  the  7iew  moon  ;  it  is  de- 
rived from  the  word  chdddsh,  "  new,"  which  was 
transferred  in  the  iiist  instance  to  the  "  new  moon," 
and  in  the  second  instance  to  the  "  month,"  or  as  it 
is  sometimes  more  fully  expressed,  D^D''  t/'Tn,  "  a 
month  of  days"  (Tien.  xxix.  14 ;  Num.  xi.  20,  21 ; 
comp.  Deut.  xxi.  13;  2  K.  xv.  13).  The  term 
yerach  is  derived  from  ydreach,  "  the  moon  ;"  it 
occurs  occasionally  in  the  historical  (Ex.  ii.  2  ;  1  K. 
vi.  37,  38,  viii.  2  ;  2  K.  xv.  13),  but  more  fre- 
quently in  the  poetical  portions  of  the  Bible. 

The  most  important  point  in  connexion  with  the 
month  of  the  Hebrews  is  its  length,  and  the  mode 
by  which  it  was  calculated.  The  difficulties  attend- 
ing this  enquiry  are  considerable  in  consequence  of 
the  scantiness  of  the  data.  Though  it  may  fairly 
be  presumed  fiom  the  terms  used  that  the  month 
originally  corresponded  to  a  lunation,  no  reliance 
can  be  placed  on  the  mere  verbal  argument  to  prove 
the  exact  length  of  the  month  in  historical  times. 
The  word  a]ipears  even  in  the  earliest  times  to  have 
jiassed  into  its  secondary  sense,  as  describing  a  period 
approaching  to  a  lunation;  for,  in  Gen.  vii.  11,  viii. 
4,  where  we  first  meet  with  it,  equal  periods  of 
30  days  are  described,  the  interval  between  the 
17th  days  of  the  second  and  the  seventh  montlis 
being  equal  to  150  days  ((len.  vii.  II,  viii.  3,  4). 
We  have  therefore  in  this  instance  an  approximation 
to  the  solar  month,  and  as,  in  addition  to  this,  an 
indication  of  a  double  calculation  by  a  solar  and  a 
lunar  year  has  been  detected  in  a  suljsequent  date 
(for  from  viii.  14  compared  with  vii.  11,  we  find 
that  the  total  duration  of  the  flood  exceeded  the 
year  by  eleven  days,  in  other  words  by  the  precise 
difference  between  the  lunar  year  of  354  days  and 
the  solar  one  of  3()5  days),  the  j)assage  ha.s  attracted 
considerable  attention  on  the  jjart  of  certain  critics, 
who  have  endcavoiued  to  deduce  from  it  arguments 
prejudicial  to  the  originality  of  the  Biblical  nar- 
rative. It  has  been  urged  that  the  Hebrews  them- 
selves knew  nothing  of  a  solar  month,  that  they 
must  have  derived  their  knowledge  of  it  from 
more  easterly  nations  (Kwald,  Jahrbiich.  1854,  p. 
8),  and  consecpiently  that  the  materials  for  the 
narrative,  and  the  date  of  its  composition  must  be 


MONTH 


416 


referred  to  the  period  when  close  intercourse  existed 
between  the  Hebrews  and  the  Babylonians  (Von 
Bohlen's  Introd.  to  Gen.  ii.  155  if.)  It  is  unne- 
cessary for  us  to  discuss  in  detail  the  arguments  on 
which  these  conclusions  are  founded  ;  ve  submit  in 
answer  to  them  that  the  data  are  insufficient  to 
form  any  decided  opinion  at  all  on  the  matter,  and 
that  a  more  obvious  explanation  of  the  matter  is 
to  be  found  in  the  Egyptian  system  of  months.  To 
prove  the  first  of  these  points,  it  will  be  only  neces- 
sary to  state  the  various  calculations  founded  on  this 
passage:  it  has  been  deduced  from  it  (1)  that  there 
were  12  months  of  30  days  each  [Chronology]  ; 
(2)  that  there  were  12  months  of  30  da3-s  with  5  in- 
tercalatal  days  at  the  end  to  make  up  the  solar  year 
(Ewald,  I.  c.) ;  (3)  that  there  were  7  months  of  3n 
days,  and  5  of  31  days  (Von  Bohlen)  ;  (4)  that 
there  were  5  months  of  30  days,  and  7  of  29  days 
(Knobel,  in  Gen.  viii.  1-3)  :  or,  lastly,  it  is  possible 
to  cut  away  the  foundation  of  any  calculation  what- 
ever by  assuming  that  a  period  might  have  elapsed 
between  the  termination  of  the  150  days  and  the 
17th  day  of  the  7th  month  (Ideler,  Chronol. 
i.  70).  But,  assuming  that  the  nan-ative  implies 
equal  months  of  30  days,  and  that  the  date  given  in 
viii.  14,  does  involve  the  fact  of  a  double  calcula- 
tion by  a  solar  and  a  lunar  year,  it  is  unnecessary 
to  refer  to  the  Babylonians  for  a  solution  of  the 
difficulty.  The  month  of  30  days  was  iii  use 
among  the  Egyptians  at  a  period  long  anterior 
to  the  period  of  the  exodns,  and  formed  the 
basis  of  their  computation  either  by  an  imiuter- 
calated  year  of  3(30  days  or  an  intercalated  one 
of  3G5  (Kawlinson's  Herodotus,  ii.  283-286). 
Indeed,  the  Bible  itself  furnishes  us  with  an  indica- 
tion of  a  double  year,  solar  and  lunar,  in  that  it 
assigns  the  regulation  of  its  length  indifferently  to 
both  sun  and  moon  (Gen.  i.  14).    [Year.] 

From  the  time  of  the  institution  of  the  Mosaic 
law  downwards  the  month  appears  to  have  been  a 
lunar  one.  The  cycle  of  religious  feasts,  com- 
mencing with  the  Passover,  depended  not  simply 
on  the  month,  but  on  the  moon  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii. 
10,  §5)  ;  the  14th  of  Abib  was  coincident  with  the 
full  nioon  (Fhilo,  Vit.  Mos.  iii.  p.  68(i);  and  the 
new  moons  themselves  wei'e  the  occasions  of  regular 
festivals  (Num.  x.  10,  xxviii.  11-14).  The  state- 
ments of  the  Talmudists  (Mishna,  Rosh  hash.  1-3) 
are  decisive  as  to  the  practice  in  their  time,  and 
the  lunar  month  is  observed  by  the  modern  Jews. 
The  commencement  of  the  month  was  generally 
decided  by  observation  of  the  new  moon,  which 
may  be  detected  about  forty  hours  after  the  period 
of  its  conjunction  with  the  sun  :  in  the  later  times 
of  Jewish  history  this  was  effected  according  to 
strict  rule,  the  appearance  of  the  new  moon  being 
reported  by  competent  witnesses  to  the  local  autho- 
rities, who  then  officially  announced  the  connnenco- 
ment  of  the  new  month  by  the  twice  repeated  word, 
"  Jlekddash,"  i.  e.  consecrated. 

According  to  the  Rabbinical  rule,  however,  there 
must  at  all  times  have  been  a  little  uncertainty 
beforehand  as  to  the  exact  day  on  which  the  month 
would  begin  ;  for  it  depended  not  only  on  the  ap- 
pearance, but  on  the  announcement :  if  the  important 
won!  Meliudaali  were  not  pronounced  mitil  alter 
dark,  the  following  day  was  the  first  of  the  month  : 
if  before  dark,  then  tiiat  day  {Rosh  hash.  3,  §1). 
But  we  can  hardly  sujjpose  that  such  a  strict  rule 
of  observation  jirevailed  in  early  times,  nor  was  it 
in  any  way  necessary  ;  the  rocuirence  of  the  new- 
moon  can  \k  pre(iicte<l  with  considerable  accuracy 


41G 


MONTH 


by  a  calculation  of  the  iuterva!  that  would  elapse 
either  from  the  last  new  moon,  from  the  full  moon 
(which  can  be  detected  by  a  practised  eye),  or  from 
the  disappearance  of  the  waning  moon.  Hence, 
David  announces  detinitely  "  To-moiTow  is  the  new 
moon,"  that  being  the  iirst  of  the  month  (1  Sam. 
XX.  5,  24,  27)  though  the  new  moon  could  not  have 
been  as  yet  observed,  and  still  less  announced.'' 
The  length  of  the  month  by  observation  would  be 
alternately  29  and  30  days,  nor  was  it  allowed  by 
the  Talmudists  that  a  month  should  fall  short  of 
the  former  or  exceed  the  latter  number,  whatever 
might  be  the  state  of  the  weather.  The  months 
containing  only  29  days  were  termed  in  Talmudical 
language  chasar,  or  "  deficient,"  and  those  with  30 
male,  or  "  full." 

The  usual  number  of  months  in  a  year  was  twelve, 
as  implied  in  1  K.  iv.  7;  1  Chr.  x.xvii.  1-15; 
but  inasmuch  as  the  Hebiew  months  coinciderl,  as 
we  shall  presently  show,  with  the  seasons,  it  follows 
as  a  matter  of  course  that  an  additional  month 
must  have  been  inserted  about  every  third  year, 
which  would  bring  the  number  up  to  thirteen. 
No  notice,  however,  is  taken  of  this  month  in  the 
Bible.  We  have  no  reason  to  think  that  the  inter- 
calary month  was  inserted  according  to  any  exact 
rule  ;  it  was  sufficient  for  practical  purposes  to  add 
it  whenever  it  was  discovered  that  the  barley  hai-vest 
did  not  coincide  with  the  ordinary  return  of  the 
month  of  Abib.  In  the  modern  Jewish  calendar 
the  intercalary  mouth  is  introduced  seven  times  in 
every  19  years,  according  to  the  Metonic  cycle, 
which  was  adopted  by  the  .lews  about  a.d.  36(j 
(Prideau.x's  Connection,  i.  209  note).  At  the  same 
time  the  length  of  the  synodical  month  was  fixed 
by  K.  Hillel  at  29  days,  12  hours,  44  min.,  3^  sec, 
which  accords  very  nearly  with  the  truth. 

The  usual  method  of  designating  the  months  was 
by  their  numerical  order,  e,  g.  "  the  second  month  " 
(Gen.  vii.  11),  "the  fourth  month"  (2  K.  x.\v. 
3) ;  and  this  was  generally  retained  even  when  the 
names  were  given,  e.  g.  "  in  the  month  Zif,  which 
is  the  second  month"  (1  K.  vi.  1),  "in  the  third 
month,  that  is,  the  month  Sivan"  (Esth.  viii.  9). 
An  exception  occurs,  however,  in  regard  to  Abib '' 
in  the  early  portion  of  the  Bible  (Ex.  xiii.  4,  xxiii. 
15;  Deut.  xvi.  1),  which  is  always  mentioned  by 
name  alone,  inasmuch  as  it  was  necessarily  coin- 
cident with  a  certain  season,  while  the  numerical 
order  might  have  changed  from  year  to  year.  The 
practice  of  the  writers  of  the  post-Babylonian  period 
in  this  respect  varied :  Ezra,  Esther,  and  Zechariah 
specify  both  the  names  and  the  numerical  order ; 

^  Jahn  {Ant.  lii.  3,  $352)  regards  ibe  discrepancy  of  tlie 
dates  in  2  K.  xxv.  27,  and  Jer.  lii.  31,  as  originating  in  the 
different  modes  of  computing,  by  astronomical  calculation 
and  by  observation.  It  is  more  probable  that  it  arises 
from  a  mistake  of  a  copyist,  substituting  ^  for  p|.  as  a 
similar  discrepancy  exists  in  2  K.  xxv.  19  and  Jer.  lii.  25, 
■without  admitting  of  a  similar  explanation. 

'•  We  doubt  indeed  whether  Abib  was  really  a  proper 
name.  In  the  first  place  it  is  always  accompanied  l>y  the 
article,  "  the  Abib ;"  in  the  second  place,  it  apprars  alnuist 
impossible  that  it  could  have  been  superseded  by  Nisan, 
if  it  had  been  regarded  as  a  proper  name,  considering  the 
important  associations  connected  with  it. 

"  The  name  of  the  intercalary  month  originated  in  its 
position  in  tlie  calendar  after  Adar  and  before  Nisan.  The 
opinion  of  Ideler  (Chronol.  i.  539),  that  the  first  Adar  was 
regarded  as  the  intercalary  month,  because  the  feast  of 
I'lirim  was  held  in  Veadar  in  the  intercalary  year,  has 
little  foundation. 

^  !1'3X.    [SceCniiOxoLOGY.] 


MONTH 

Nehemiah  only  the  foi-mer ;  Daniel  and  Haggai  only 
the  latter.  The  names  of  the  months  belong  to 
two  distinct  peiiods ;  in  the  first  place  we  have 
those  peculiar  to  the  period  of  Jewish  independence, 
of  which  four  only,  even  including  Abib,  which  we 
hardly  regard  as  a  ))roper  name,  are  mentioned, 
viz.:  Abib,  in  which  the  Passover  fell  (Ex.  xiii.  4, 
x.xiii.  15,  xxxiv.  18;  Deut.  xvi.  l),and  which  was 
established  as  the  first  month  in  commemoration  of 
the  e.xodus  (Ex.  xii.  2) ;  Zif,  the  second  month 
(1  K.  vi.  1,  37);  Bui,  the  eighth  (1  K.  vi.  38); 
and  Ethanim,  the  seventh  (1  K.  viii.  2) — the  three 
latter  being  noticed  only  in  connection  with  the 
building  and  dedication  of  the  Temple,  so  that  we 
might  almost  infer  that  their  use  was  i-estricted  to 
the  official  documents  of  the  day,  and  that  they 
never  attained  the  popular  use  which  the  later 
names  had.  Hence  it  is  not  difficult  to  account  for 
their  having  been  sujjerseded.  In  the  second  place 
we  have  the  names  which  prevailed  subsequently  to 
the  Babylonish  captivity;  of  these  the  following 
seven  appear  in  the  Bible : — Nisan,  the  first,  in 
which  the  passover  was  held  (Neh.  ii.  1 ;  Esth.  iii. 
7) ;  Sivan,  the  third  (Esth.  viii.  9  ;  Bar.  i.  8) ;  Elul, 
the  sixth  (Neh.  vi.  15;  1  Mace.  xiv.  27);  Chisleu, 
the  ninth  (Neh.  i.  1  ;  Zech.  vii.  1 ;  1  Mace.  i.  54); 
Tebeth,  the  tenth  (Esth.  ii.  16) ;  Sebat,  the  eleventh 
(Zech.  i.  7 ;  1  Macc.^j^.  14);  and  Adar,  the 
twelfth  (Esth.  iii.  7,  ffk  12;  2  Mace.  xv.  36). 
The  names  of  the  remaining  five  occiu'  in  the  Talmud 
and  other  woiks;  they  were  lyar,  the  second  (Tar- 
gum,  2  Chr.  XXX.  2)  ;  Tammuz,  the  fourth  (Mishn. 
Taa7i.  4,  §5)  ;  Ab,  the  fifth,  and  Tisri,  the  seventh 
{Bosh  hash.  1,  §3);  and  Marcheshvan,  the  eighth 
(Taan.  1,  §3;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §3).  The  name 
of  the  intei'calary  month  was  Veadar,'^  i.  e.  the  ad- 
ditional Adar. 

The  first  of  these  series  of  names  is  of  Hebrew 
origin,  and  has  reference  to  the  cliaracteristics  of 
the  seasons — a  circumsfcince  which  clearly  shows 
that  the  months  returned  at  the  same  period  of 
the  year,  in  other  words,  that  the  Jewish  year 
was  a  solar  one.  Thus  Abib"*  was  the  month  of 
"ears  of  corn,"  Zif^  the  month  of  "blossom," 
and  Bui  ^  tlie  month  of  •'  rain,"  With  regard  to 
Ethanim  s  there  may  be  some  doubt,  as  the  usual 
explanation,  "the  month  of  violent  or,  rather,  inces- 
sant rain  "  is  decidedly  inappropriate  to  the  seventh 
month.  With  regard  to  the  second  series,  both  the 
c>rigin  and  the  meaning  of  the  name  is  controverted. 
It  was  the  opinion  of  the  Talmudists  that  the 
names  were  introduced  by  the  Jews  who  returned 
from  the  Babylonish  captivity  (Jerusalem  Talmud, 


^  IT  or  VT>  or,  more  fully,  as  in  the  Targum,  Vt 
N*3V3.  "  the  bloom  of  flowers."  Another  explanation 
is  given  in  Rawlinaon's  Herodotus,  i.  B22 ;  viz.  that  Ziv 
is  the  same  as  the  Assyrian  Giv,  "  bull,"  and  answers  to 
the  zodiacal  sign  of  Taurus. 

f  7."|3.  The  name  occurs  in  a  recently  discovered 
Phoenician  inscription  (Ewald,  Jalirh.  1856,  p.  135).  A 
cognate  term,  ?-13)D>  is  used  for  the  "  deluge"  (Gen.  vi. 
17,  ^-c.)  ;  but  there  is  no  ground  for  the  inference  drawn 
by  Von  Boblen  (Inlrod.  to  Gen.  ii.  156),  that  there  is  any 
allusion  to  the  month  Bui. 

s  Thenius  on  1  K.  viii.  2,  suggests  that  the  true  name  was 
D''jnX.  as  in  the  LXX.  'ASai/i/x,  and  that  its  meaning 
was  the  "  month  of  gifts,"  i.  e.,  of  fruit,  from  H^ri- 
"  to  give."  There  is  the  same  pecuUarity  in  this  as  in 
Abib,  viz.,  the  addition  of  the  definite  article. 


MONTH 

Rosh  hash.  1,  §1),  and  they  are  certainly  used 
exclusively  by  writers  of  the  post-Babylonian 
period.  It  was,  therefore,  perhaps  natural  to  seek 
for  their  origin  in  the  Persian  language,  and  this 
was  done  some  years  since  by  Benfey  (^Monnts- 
namen)  in  a  manner  more  ingenious  than  satis- 
fiictory.  The  view,  though  accepted  to  a  certain 
extent  by  Gesenius  in  his  Thesaurus,  has  been  since 
abandoned,  both  on  philological  gi'ounds  and  be- 
cause it  meets  with  no  confirmation  from  the 
monumental  documents  of  ancient  Persia.''  The 
names  are  probably  borrowed  from  the  Syrians,'  in 
whose  regular  calendar  we  find  names  answering 
to  Tisri,  Sebat,  Adar,  Nisan,  lyar,  Tammuz,  Ab, 
and  Elul  (Ideler,  Chronol.  i.  430),  while  Chisleu 
and  Tebeth ''  appear  on  the  Palmp-ene  inscriptions 
(Gesen.  Thesaur.  pp.  702,  543).  Sivan  may  be 
borrowed  from  the  Assyrians,  who  appear  to  have 
had  a  month  .so  named,  sacred  to  Sin  or  the 
moon  (IJawlinson,  i.  615).  Marcheshvan,  coin- 
ciding as  it  did  with  the  rainy  season  in  Palestine, 
was  probably  a  purely  Hebrew  °>  term.  With 
regard  to  the  meaning  of  the  Syrian  names  we 
can  only  conjecture  from  the  case  of  Tammuz, 
which  undoubtedly  refers  to  the  festival  of  the 
deity  of  that  name  mentioned  in  Ez.  viii.  14,  that 
some  of  them  may  have  been  derived  from  the 
names  of  deities."  Hebrew  roots  are  suggested 
by  Gesenius  for  others,  but  without  much  con- 
fidence." 

Subsequently  to  the  establishment  of  the  Syro- 
Macedonian  empire,  the  use  of  the  IMacedonian 
calendar  was  gi-adually  adopted  for  purposes  of 
literature  or  intercommunication  with  other  coun- 
tries. Josephus,  for  instance,  constantly  uses  the 
Macedonian  months,  even  where  he  gives  the 
Hebrew  names  (e.  g.  in  Ant.  i,  3,  §3,  he  iden- 
tifies Marcheshvan  with  Dius,  and  Nisan  with 
Xanthicus,  and  in  xii.  7,  §0,  Chisleu  with  Appel- 
laeus).  The  only  instance  in  which  the  Mace- 
donian names  appear  in  the  Bible  is  in  2  Mace.  .\i. 
30,  33,  38,  where  we  have  notice  of  Xanthicus  in 
combination  with  another  named  Dioscorintliius 
(ver.  21),  which  does  not  appear  in  the  Macedonian 
calendar.  Various  explanations  have  been  offered 
in  respect  to  the  latter.  Any  attempt  to  connect 
it  with  the  Macedonian  Dius  fiiils  on  account  of 
the  interval  being  too  long  to  suit  the  narrative. 
Dins  being  the  first  and  Xanthicus  the  sixth  month. 
The  opinion  of  Scaliger  {Emend.  Temp.  ii.  94), 
that  it  was  the  Macedonian  intercalary  month, 
rests  on  no  foundation  whatever,  and  Idelcr's 
assumption  that  that  intercalary  month  preceded 
Xanthicus  must  be  rejected  along  with  it  {Chronol. 
i.  399).  It  is  most  probable  that  the  author  of 
2  Mace,  or  a  copyist  was  familiar  with  the  Cretan 


MOON 


417 


1'  The  names  of  the  months,  as  read  on  the  Behistun 
inscriptions,  tiantuDiada,  Haf/aijadish,  Atriyata,  &c.,  boar 
no  reseniblanip  to  the  Hebrew  names  (llawlinson's  Hero- 
dotus, il.  593-C). 

'  The  names  of  llic  months  appear  to  have  been  in 
many  instaiice.s  of  local  use  :  for  instance,  the  calendar  of 
Hellopolis  contains  the  names  of  Ag  and  (ielon  (Ide- 
ler, i.  440),  which  do  not  appear  in  the  rpRiilar  Syrian 
calendar,  while  that  of  Palmyra,  again,  contains  names 
unknown  to  cither. 

^  'I'he  rosomblanco  In  sound  between  Tebeth  and  tlie 
Egyptian  Tubi,  as  well  as  its  correspondonce  in  the  order 
of  the  months,  was  noticed  by  Jerome,  ad  ICz.  xxxix.  1. 

'"  Von  Hohlcn  connects  it  with  the  mot  rdchash  Ct^'m  ) 
'•  to  boil  over"  (Introtl.  to  Gen.  II.  1.56).  The  modern 
.Jews  consider  It  a  conipmnid  wnnl,  nuir,  ••  drop,"  and 
VOL.  II. 


calendar,  which  contained  a  month  named  Dios- 
curus,  liolding  the  same  place  in  the  calendar  as 
the  Macedonian  Dystrus  (Ideler,  i.  426),  i.  e.  im- 
mediately before  Xanthicus,  and  that  he  substituted 
one  for  the  other.  This  view  derives  some  con- 
firmation from  the  Vulgate  rendering,  Biosconis. 
We  have  further  to  notice  the  reference  to  the 
Egyptian  calendar  in  3  Mace.  vi.  38,  Pachon  and 
Epiphi  in  that  passage  answering  to  Pachons  and 
Epep,  the  ninth  and  eleventh  months  (Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Eij!ip.  i.  14,  2nd  ser.). 

The  identification  of  the  Jewish  months  with 
our  own  cannot  be  effected  with  precision  on  ac- 
count of  the  variations  that  must  inevitably  exist 
between  the  lunar  and  the  solar  month,  each  of  the 
former  ranging  over  portions  of  two  of  the  latter. 
It  must,  therefore,  be  understood  that  the  following 
remarks  apply  to  the  general  identity  on  an  average 
of  years.  As  the  Jews  still  retain  the  names  Xisan, 
&c.,  it  may  appear  at  first  sight  needless  to  do 
more  than  refer  the  reader  to  a  modern  almanack, 
and  this  would  have  been  the  case  if  it  were  not 
evident  that  the  modern  Nisan  does  not  correspond  to 
the  ancient  one.  At  present  Nisan  answers  to  March, 
but  in  early  times  it  coincided  with  April ;  for  the 
barley  harvest — the  first  fruits  of  which  were  to  be 
presented  on  the  15th  of  that  month  (Lev.  xxiii. 
]  0) — does  not  take  place  even  in  the  warm  district 
about  Jericho  until  the  middle  of  April,  and  in 
the  upland  districts  not  before  the  end  of  that 
month  (Robinson's  Researches,  i.  551,  iii.  102, 
145).  To  the  same  effect  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  14, 
§6)  synchronizes  Nisan  with  the  Egyptian  Phar- 
muth,  which  commenced  on  the  27th  of  March 
(Wilkinson,  I.  c),  and  with  the  Macedonian  Xan- 
thicus, which  answers  generally  to  the  early  part 
of  April,  though  considerable  variation  occurs  in 
the  local  calendars  as  to  its  place  (comp.  Ideler,  i. 
435,  442).  He  further  informs  us  (iii.  10,  §5) 
that  the  Passover  took  place  when  the  sun  was  in 
Aries,  which  it  does  not  enter  until  near  the  end 
of  March.  Assuming  from  these  data  that  Abib 
or  Nisan  answers  to  April,  then  Zif  or  lyar  would 
correspond  with  May,  Sivan  with  June,  Tammuz 
with  .luly,  Ab  with  August,  Elul  with  September. 
Ethanim  or  Tisri  with  Octobex,  Bui  or  Marcheshvan 
with  November,  Chisleu  with  December,  Tebeth 
with  January,  Sebat  with  February,  and  Adar 
with  March.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MOON  (nn^  ;  r\yih).  it  is  worthy  of  obser- 
vation that  neither  of  the  terms  by  which  tlie 
Hebrews  designated  the  moon,  contains  any  reference 
to  its  office  or  essential  character ;  they  simply 
describe  it  by  the  accidenttd  quality  of  colour, 
ydreach,  signifying  "  pale,"  or  "  yellow,"  lebdndh,' 


Cheshvan,  the  former  betokening  that  it  was  wet,  and 
the  latter  being  the  proper  name  of  the  month  (De  Sola's 
Mishim,  p.  16S  note). 

"  We  draw  notice  to  the  similarity  between  IClul  and 
the  Arabic  name  of  Venus  Urania,  AUl-at  (Herod,  ill.  8); 
and  again  between  Ad.ir,  the  Kgyptlan  Athor,  and  the 
Syrian  Atar-gatis. 

"  The  Hebrew  forms  of  the  names  .ire:  — jD^Ji  "1  Sl> 

nno,  D2L".  inx'.  and  insi. 

"  The  term  Ubandii  occurs  only  three  times  in  tlio 
Bible  (Cant.  vi.  10;  Is.xxiv.2:!,  xxx.2G).  Another  expla- 
nation of  the  term  is  proposed  in  Rawlinson's  Herodotus, 
i.  615,  to  the  effect  that  it  hiLS  reference  to  lebCiu'ih,  "a 
brick,"  and  embodies  the  Babylonian  notion  of  Sin.  the 

2   E 


418 


MOON 


"  white."  The  Indo-European  languages  recognized 
the  moon  as  the  measurer  of  time,  and  have  ex- 
pressed its  office  in  this  respect,  all  the  terms  applied 
to  it,  fxiji/,  moon,  &c.,  finding  a  common  element 
with  fxeTpuv,  to  measure,  in  the  Sanscrit  root  ma 
(Pott's  Eti/m.  Forsch.  i.  194).  The  nations  with 
whom  the  Hebrews  were  brought  into  more  imme- 
diate contact  worshipped  the  moon  under  various 
designations  expressive  of  its  influejice  in  the  king- 
dom of  nature.  The  exception  which  the  Hebrew 
language  thus  presents  would  appear  to  be  based  on 
the  repugnance  to  nature-worship,  which  runs 
through  their  whole  system,  and  which  induced  the 
precautionary  measure  of  giving  it  in  reality  no 
name  at  all,  substituting  the  circuitous  expressions 
"lesser  light"  (Gen.  i.  16),  the  "pale,"  or  the 
"  white."  The  same  tendency  to  avoid  the  notion 
of  personality  may  perhaps  be  observed  in  the 
indiffeience  to  gender,  ydreach  being  masculine, 
and  lehdndh  feminine. 

The  moon  held  an  important  place  in  the  kingdom 
of  nature,  as  known  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the  history 
of  the  creation  (Gen.  i.  14-16),  it  appears  simul- 
taneously with  the  sun,  and  is  described  in  terms 
which  imply  its  independence  of  that  body  as  far  as 
its  light  is  concerned.  Conjointly  with  the  sun,  it 
was  appointed  "  for  signs  and  for  seasons,  and  for 
days  and  years  ; "  though  in  this  respect  it  exercised 
a  more  important  influence,  if  by  the  "  seasons " 
we  understand  the  great  religious  festivals  of  the 
Jews,  as  is  particularly  stated  in  Ps.  civ.  19  ("  He 
appointed  the  moon  for  seasons "),  and  more  at 
length  in  Ecclus.  xliii.  6,  7.  Besides  this,  it  had  its 
special  office  in  the  distribution  of  light ;  it  was 
appointed  "  to  rule  over  the  night,"  as  the  sun  over 
the  day,  and  thus  the  appearance  of  the  two  founts 
of  light  served  "  to  divide  between  the  day  and 
between  the  night."  In  order  to  enter  fully  into 
this  idea,  we  must  remember  both  the  greater  bril- 
liancy'' of  the  moonlight  in  eastern  countries,  and 
the  larger  amount  of  work,  particularly  travelling, 
that  is  carried  on  by  its  aid.  The  appeals  to  sun 
and  moon  conjointly  are  hence  more  frequent  in  the 
literature  of  the  Hebrews  than  they  might  otherwise 
have  been  (Josh.  x.  12  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  5,  7,  17  ;  Keel, 
xii.  2  ;  Is.  xxiv.  2'd,  &c.) ;  in  some  instances,  indeed, 
the  moon  receives  a  larger  amount  of  attention  than 
the  sun  {e.g.  Ps.  viii.  3,  Lxxxix.  37').  The  in- 
feriority of  its  light  IS  occasionally  noticed,  as  in 
Gen.  i.  16  ;  in  Cant.  vi.  10,  where  the  epithets 
"  fair,"  and  "  clear"  (or  rather  spotless,  and  hence 
extremely  brilliant)  are  applied  respectively  to  moon 
and  sun ;  and  in  Is.  xxx.  26,  where  the  equalizing 
of  its  light  to  that  of  the  sun  conveys  an  image  of 
the  highest  glory.  Its  influence  on  vegetable  or 
animal  life  receives  but  little  notice  ;  the  expression 
in  Deut.  xxxiii.  14,  which  the  A.  V.  i-efers  to  the 
moon,  signifies  rather  months  as  the  period  of 
ripening  fruits.  The  coldness  of  the  night-dews  is 
prejudicial  to  the  health,  and  particularly  to  the 
eyes  of  those  who  are  exposed  to  it,  and  the  idea 

moon,  as  being  the  god  of  architecture.  The  strictly- 
parallel  use  of  ydreach  in  Joel  ii.  31  and  Ez.  xxxii.  7,  as 
well  as  the  analogy  in  the  sense  of  the  two  words,  seems 
a  strong  argument  against  the  view. 

l)  The  Greek  creA^rrj,  from  <Te\a^.  expresses  this  idea 
of  brilliancy  more  vividly  than  the  Hebrew  tenus. 

c  In  the  former  of  these  passages  the  sun  may  be  in- 
cluded in  the  general  expression  "  heavens  "  in  the  pre- 
ceding verse.  In  the  latter,  "  the  faithful  witness  in 
heaven  "  is  undoubtedly  the  moon,  atid  not  the  rainbow 
as  some  explain  it.   The  regularity  of  the  moon's  changes 


MOON 

expressed  in  Ps.  cxxi.6  ("  The  moon  shall  not  smite 
thee  by  night")  may  have  reference  to  the  general 
or  the  particular  evil  effect :  blindness  is  still  attri- 
buted to  the  influence  of  the  moon's  rays  on  those 
who  sleep  under  the  open  heaven,  both  by  the  Arabs 
(Carne's  Letters,  i.  88),  and  by  Europeans.  The 
connexion  between  the  moon's  phases  and  certain 
forms  of  disease,  whether  madness  or  epilepsy,  is 
expressed  in  the  Greek  cre\Tjvia(effdai  (Matt.  iv.  . 
24,  xvii.  15),  in  the  Latin  derivative  "lunatic," 
and  in  our  "  moon-struck." 

The  worship  of  the  moon  was  extensively  practised 
by  the  nations  of  the  East,  and  under  a  variety  of 
aspects.  In  Egypt  it  was  honoured  under  the  form 
of  Isis,  and  was  one  of  the  only  two  deities  which 
commanded  the  reverence  of  all  the  Egyptians 
{Herod,  ii.  42,  47).  In  Syria  it  was  represented 
by  that  one  of  the  Ashtaroth  (i.  e.  of  the  varieties 
which  the  goddess  Astarte,  or  Ashtoreth,  under- 
went), surnamed  "  Karnaim,"  from  the  horns  of 
the  crescent  moon  by  which  she  was  distinguished. 
[AsiiTORETH.]  In  Babylonia,  it  formed  one  of  a 
triad  in  conjunction  with  Aether,  ana  the  sun,  and, 
imder  the  name  of  Sin,  received  the  honoured  titles 
of  "  Lord  of  the  month,"  "  King  of  the  Gods,"  &c. 
(Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  614.)  There  are  indi- 
cations of  a  very  early  introduction  into  the  countries 
adjacent  to  Palestine  of  a  species  of  worship  distinct 
from  any  that  we  have  hitherto  noticed,  viz.  of 
the  direct  homage  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  which  is  the  characteristic  of 
Sabianism.  The  first  notice  we  have  of  this  is  in 
Job  (x.xxi.  26,  27),  and  it  is  observable  that  the 
warning  of  Moses  (Deut.  iv.  19)  is  directed  against 
this  nature-worship,  rather  than  against  the  form  of 
moon-worship,  which  the  Israelites  must  have  wit- 
nessed in  Egypt.  At  a  later  period,''  howe%'er,  the 
worship  of  the  moon  in  its  grosser  fomi  of  idol- 
worship  was  introduced  from  Syria:  we  have  no 
evidence  indeed  that  the  Ashtoreth  of  the  Zidonians, 
whom  Solomon  introduced  (1  K.  xi.  5)  was  identi- 
fied in  the  minds  of  the  Jews  with  the  moon,  but 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  moon  was  worshipped 
under  the  fonn  of  an  image  in  JTanasseh's  reign, 
although  Movers  {Phoenix,  i.  66,  164)  has  taken 
up  the  opposite  view  ;  for  we  are  distinctly  told 
that  the  king  "  made  an  asherah  (A.  V.  "  grove  ") 
i.e.  an  image  of  Ashtoreth,  and  worshipped  all  the 
host  of  heaven  "  (2  K.  xxi.  3),  which  asherah  was 
destroyed  by  Josiah,  and  the  priests  that  bui-ned 
incense  to  the  moon  were  put  down  fxxiii.  4,  5). 
At  a  soinewhat  later  period  the  worship  of  the 
"  queen  of  heaven  "  was  practised  in  Palestine  ( Jer. 
vii.  18,  xliv.  17) ;  the  title  has  been  generally  sup- 
posed to  belong  to  the  moon,  but  we  think  it  more 
probable  that  the  Oriental  Venus  is  intended,  for  the 
following  reasons:  (1)  the  title  of  Urania  "of 
heaven "  was  peculiarly  appropriated  to  Venus, 
whose  worship  was  boiTowed  by  the  Persians  from 
the  Arabians  and  Assyrians  {Herod,  i.  131,  199): 
(2)  the  votaries  of  this  goddess,  whose  chief  function 


impressed  the  mind  with  a  sense  of  durability  and  cer- 
tainty ;  and  hence  the  moon  was  specially  qualified  to  be 
a  witness  to  God's  promise. 

d  The  ambiguous  expression  of  Hosea  (v.  1),  "Now 
shall  a  month  devour  them  with  their  portions,"  is  imder- 
stood  by  Bnnsen  {Bibelaerk,  in  loo.)  as  referring  to  an 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  new  moon.  It  is  more  generally 
understood  of  "  a  month  "  as  a  short  space  of  time.  Hitzig 
{Comment,  in  loc.)  explains  it  in  a  novel  maimer  of  the 
crescent  moon,  as  a  symbol  of  destruction,  from  its 
'  resemblance  to  a  scimitar. 


MOON,  NEW 

it  was  to  preside  over  births,  were  women,  and  we 
find  that  in  Palestine  the  married  women  are  specially 
noticed  as  taking  a  prominent  part :  (3)  the  pecu- 
liarity of  the  title,  which  occurs  only  in  the  passages 
quoted,  looks  as  if  the  worship  was  a  novel  one  ; 
and  this  is  corroboi-ated  by  the  teiTn  cavvdn  *  applied 
to  the  "  cakes,"  which  is  again  so  peculiar  that  the 
LXX.  has  retained  it  (■x^avdv),  deeming  it  to  be, 
as  it  not  improbably  was,  a  foi'eign  word.  Whether 
the  Jews  derived  their  knowledge  of  the  "  queen  of 
heaven  "  from  the  Philistines,  who  possessed  a  very 
ancient  temple  of  Venus  Urania  at  Askalon  {Herod. 
i.  105),  or  from  the  Egyptians,  whose  god  Athor 
was  of  the  same  character,  is  uncertain. 

In  the  figurative  language  of  Scripture  the  moon 
is  frequently  noticed  as  presaging  events  of  the 
greatest  importance  through  the  temporary  or  per- 
manent withdrawal  of  its  light  (Is.  xiii.  10  ;  Joel 
ii.  31 ;  Matt.  xxiv.  29 ;  Mark  xiii.  24) ;  in  these 
and  similar  passages  we  have  an  evident  allusion  to 
the  mysterious  awe  with  which  eclipses  were  viewed 
by  the  Hebrews  in  common  with  other  nations  of 
antiquity.  With  regard  to  the  symbolic  meaning 
of  the  moon  in  Rev.  xii.  1,  we  have  only  to  observe 
that  the  ordinary  explanations,  \\z.  the  sublunary 
world,  or  the  changeableness  of  its  affairs,  seem  to 
derive  no  authority  from  the  language  of  the  0.  T., 
or  from  the  ideas  of  the  Hebrews.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MOON,  NEW.     [New  Moon.] 

MOOSI'AS  (Mooo-taj :  Moosiris).  Apparently 
the  same  as  Maaseiah  4  (1  Esdr.  ix.  31  ;  comp. 
Ezr.  X.  30). 

MORASTHITE,  THE  (^rip^-liBn  ;  in  Micah, 

^nE^'■^J^^  :   6  fiaipaBeirris,  6  rov  MaipaffOei  ;  Alex. 

in  Micah,  MaipaOei :  de  Morasthi,  Morasthites), 
that  is,  the  native  of  a  place  named  Moresheth, 
such  being  the  regular  formation  in  Hebrew. 

It  occurs  twice  (Jer.  xxvi.  18  ;  Mic.  i.  1),  each 
time  as  the  description  of  the  prophet  MiCAir. 

The  Targum,  on  each  occasion,  renders  the  word 
"  of  Maresliah  ;"  but  the  derivation  from  Mareshah 
would  be  Mareshathite,  and  not  Morasthite,  or  more 
accurately  Morashtite.  [G.] 

MOR'DECAI  C3"=1"10  :  MapSoxaTos  :  Mar- 
dnchaeus),  the  deliverer,  imder  Divine  Providence, 
of  the  Jews  from  the  destruction  plotted  against 
them  by  Haman  [Esther],  the  chief  minister  of 
Xerxes;  the  institutor  of  the  feast  of  Purim  [Pu- 
Rim],  and  probal)ly  the  author  as  well  as  the 
hero  of  the  book  of  Esther,  which  is  sometimes 
called  the  book  of  Mordecai."  The  Scripture  nar- 
rative tells  us  concerning  him  that  he  was  a  Ben- 
jamite,  and  one  of  the  captivity,  residing  in  Shushan, 
whether  or  not  in  the  king's  service  before  Esther 
was  queen,  does  not  appear  certainly.  From  the 
time,  however,  of  Esther  being  queen  he  was  one  of 
those  "  who  sat  in  the  king's  gate."  In  this  situa- 
tion he  saved  the  king's  life  by  discovering  the  con- 
spiracy of  two  of  the  eunuchs  to  kill  him.  When 
the  decree  fnr  the  massacre  of  all  the  .lews  in  the 
empire  was  known,  it  was  at  his  earnest  advice  and 
exhortation  that  Esther  undertook  the  perilous  task 
of  interceding  with  the  king  on  their  behalf.     He 

»  Vic  Wette  thinks  tliat  "  tlin  opinion  that  Jlordccai 
wrote  tlic  hootvdoes  not  dosorve  to  bo  confuted,"  altliongh 
thi^  autlinr  "dcsignrd  that  I  lie  I)ook  sliould  be  considered 
as  written  bj-  Mordecal."    His  translator  adds,  that  "  the 


MORDECAI 


419 


might  feel  the  more  impelled  to  exert  himself  to 
save  them,  as  he  was  himself  the  cause  of  the  medi- 
tated destruction  of  his  countrymen,  ^^^lether,  as 
some  think,  his  refusal  to  bow  before  Haman,  arose 
from  religious  scruples,  as  if  such  salutation  as  was 
practised  in  Persia  (irpotr/cvi'ijcns)  were  akin  to 
idolatry,  or  whether,  as  seems  far  more  probable, 
he  refused  from  a  stern  unwillingness  as  a  Jew  to 
bow  before  an  Amalekite,  in  either  case  the  affront 
put  by  him  upon  Haman  was  the  immediate  cause 
of  the  fatal  decree.  Any  how,  he  and  Esther  were 
the  instruments  in  the  hand  of  God  of  averting  the 
threatened  ruin.  The  concurrence  of  Esther's  fa- 
vourable reception  by  the  king  with  the  Providential 
circumstance  of  the  passage  in  the  Medo-Persian 
chronicles,  which  detailed  Mordecai's  fidelity  in  dis- 
closing the  conspiracy,  being  read  to  the  king  that 
very  night,  before  Haman  came  to  ask  leave  to  hang 
him  ;  the  striking  incident  of  Haman  being  made 
the  instrument  of  the  exaltation  and  honour  of  his 
most  hated  adversary,  which  he  rightly  interpreted 
as  the  presage  of  his  own  downfall,  and  finally  the 
hanging  of  Haman  and  his  sous  upon  the  very 
gallows  which  he  had  reared  for  Mordecai,  while 
Mordecai  occupied  Hainan's  post  as  vizier  of  the 
Persian  monarchy  ;  are  incidents  too  well  known  to 
need  to  be  further  dwelt  upon.  It  will  be  more 
useful,  probably,  to  add  such  remarks  as  may  tend 
to  point  out  Mordecai's  place  in  sacred,  profane,  and 
rabbinical  history  respectively.  The  first  thing  is 
to  fix  his  date.  This  is  pointed  out  with  great 
particularity  by  the  writer  himself,  not  only  by  the 
years  of  the  king's  reign,  but  by  his  own  genealogy 
in  ch.  ii.  5,  6.  Some,  however,  have  understood 
this  passage  as  stating  that  Mordecai  himself  was 
taken  captive  with  Jeconiah.  But  that  any  one 
who  had  been  taken  captive  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in 
the  8th  year  of  his  reign  should  be  vizier  after  the 
12th  year  of  any  Persian  king,  among  the  successors 
of  Cyrus,  is  obviously  impossible.  Besides  too,  the 
absurdity  of  supposing  the  ordinary  laws  of  human 
life  to  be  suspended  in  the  case  of  any  person  men- 
tioned in  Scripture,  when  the  sacred  history  gives 
no  such  intimation,  there  is  a  peculiar  defiance  of 
probability  in  the  supposition  that  the  cousin 
german  of  the  youthful  Esther,  her  father's  bro- 
ther's son,  should  be  of  an  age  ranging  from  90 
to  170  years,  at  the  time  that  she  was  chosen  to 
be  queen  on  account  of  her  vouth  and  beauty.  But 
not  only  is  this  interpretation  of  Esth.  ii.  5,  6,  ex- 
cluded by  chronology,  but  the  rules  of  grammatical 
propriety  equally  point  out,  not  Mordecai,  but 
K'ish,  as  being  the  person  who  was  taken  captive  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  at  the  time  when  Jeconiah  was 
carried  away.  Because,  if  it  had  been  intended  to 
speak  of  Mordecai  as  led  capti\'e,  the  ambiguity 
would  easily  have  been  avoided  by  either  placing 
the  clause  ri73n  "Iti'N,  &c.,  immediately  aftw 
nT'Sn  }d!i'3,  and  then  adding  his  name  and 
gene:ilogy,  "O  IDK'-I,  or  else  by  writing  N-IHI  in- 
stead of  "IK'X,  at  the  beginning  of  verse  fi.  Again, 
as  the  sentence  stands,  the  distiibution  of  the  copu- 
lative \  distinctly  connects  the    sentence  jO'K  *n*) 


greatest  part  of  tlie  Jewish  and  Christian  scholars"  refer 
it  to  him.  But  ho  adds,  "  nioro  modern  writers,  with 
better  judgment,  affirm  only  their  ignorance  of  the  author- 
ship" (/jj^rotZ.  ii.  345-347).  But  the  objections  to  Mor- 
decai's authorship  are  only  such  as,  if  valid,  would  impugn 
the  truth  and  authrnticitr  of  the  book  ils(>|f. 

2  ]•:  2 


420 


MORDECAI 


in  ver.  7,  with  riTl  in  ver.  5,  showing  that  three 

things  are  predicated  of  Mordecai :  (1)  that  he  lived 
in  Shufhau ;  (2)  that  his  name  was  Mordecai,  son 
of  Jair,  son  of  Shimei,  son  of  Kish  the  Benjamite 
who  was  taken  captive  with  Jehoiachin ;  (3)  that 
he  brought  up  Esther.  This  genealogy  does  then 
fix  with  great  certainty  the  age  of  Mordecai.  He 
was  great  grandson  of  a  contemporary  of  Jehoia- 
chin. Now  four  generations  cover  120  years — 
and  120  years  from  B.C.  599  bnng  us  to  B.C.  479, 
i.  e.  to  the  6th  year  of  the  I'eign  of  Xerxes ;  thus 
confirming  with  singular  force  the  arguments  which 
led  to  the  conclusion  that  Ahasuerus  is  Xerxes. 
[Ahasuerus.]  ^  The  carrying  back  the  genealogy 
of  a  captive  to  the  time  of  the  captivity  has  an 
obvious  propriety,  as  connecting  the  captives  with 
the  family  record  preserved  in  the  public  genealo- 
gies, before  the  captivity,  just  as  an  American  would 
be  likely  to  carry  up  his  pedigree  to  the  ancestor 
who  emigrated  from  England.  And  now  it  would 
seem  both  possible  and  probable  (though  it  cannot 
be  certainly  proved)  that  the  Mordecai  mentioned 
in  the  duplicate  passage,  Ezr.  ii.  2  ;  Neh.  vii.  7,  as 
one  of  the  leaders  of  the  captives  who  returned  from 
time  to  time  from  Babylon  to  Judaea  [Ezra],  was 
the  same  as  Mordecai  of  the  book  of  Esther.  It  is 
very  probable  that  on  the  death  of  Xerxes,  or  pos- 
sibly during  his  lifetime,  he  may  have  obtained 
leave  to  lead  back  such  Jews  as  were  willing  to  ac- 
company him,  and  that  he  did  so.  His  age  need 
not  have  exceeded  50  or  60  years,  and  his  character 
points  him  out  as  likely  to  lead  his  countrymen 
back  fi'om  exile,  if  he  had  the  opportunity.  The 
name  Mordecai  not  occurring  elsewhere,  makes  this 
supposition  the  more  probable. 

As  regards  his  place  in  profane  history,  the  do- 
mestic annals  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes  are  so  scanty, 
that  it  would  not  surprise  us  to  find  no  mention 
of  Mordecai.  But  there  is  a  pei'son  named  by 
Ctesias,  who  probably  saw  the  very  chronicles  of 
the  kings  of  Media  and  Persia  refened  to  in  Esth. 
X.  2,  whose  name  and  character  present  some 
points  of  resemblance  with  Mordecai,  viz.  Matacas, 
or  Natacas  (as  the  name  is  variously  written), 
whom  he  describes  as  Xerxes's  chief  favourite. 
and  the  most  powerful  of  them  all.  His  brief 
notice  of  him  in  these  words,  7)^iappevQ3V  Se  jx4- 
yiffTov  TjSvvaro  NaraKas,  is  in  exact  agreement 
with  the  description  of  Alordecai,  Esth.  ix.  4,  x. 
2,  3.  He  further  relates  of  him,  that  when  Xerxes 
after  his  return  from  Greece  had  commissioned  Me- 
gabyzus  to  go  and  plunder  tlie  temple  of  Apollo  at 
Delphi,'^  upon  his  refusal,  he  sent  Matacas  the 
eunuch,  to  insult  the  god,  and  to  plunder  his  pro- 
perty, which  Matacas  did,  and  returned  to  Xerxes. 
It  is  obvious  how  grateful  to  the  feelings  of  a  Jew, 
such  as  Mordecai  was,  would  be  a  commission  to 
desecrate  and  spoil  a  heathen  temple.  There  is  also 
much  probability  in  the  selection  of  a  Jew  to  be 
his  prime  minister  by  a  monarch  of  such  decided 
iconoclastic  propensities  as  Xerxes  is  known  to  have 
had  (Piidcaux,  Connect,  i.  231-233).  Xerxes 
would  doubtless  see  much  analogy  between  the 
Magian    tenets  of  which   he   was  such  a  zealous 


b  Justin  has  the  singular  statement,  "  Primum  Xerxes, 
rex  Persarum,  Judaeos  domuit "  (lib.  xxxvi.  cjip.  iii.). 
May  not  this  arise  from  a  confused  knowledge  of  Uie 
events  recorded  in  Esther  ? 

'  It  seems  probable  that  some  other  temple,  not  that 
at  Delplii,  was  at  this  time  ordered  by  Xerxes  to  be 
spoiled,  as  no  other  writer  mentions  it.     It  might  be  tlial 


MORDECAI 

patron,  and  those  of  the  Jews'  religion ;  just  as 
Pliny  actually  reckons  Moses  (whom  he  couples 
with  Jannes)  among  the  leaders  of  the  Magian  -sect, 
in  the  very  same  passage  in  which  he  relates  that 
Osthanes  the  Magian  author  and  heresiarch  accom- 
panied Xerxes  in  his  Greek  expedition,  and  widely 
diffused  the  Magian  doctrines  (lib.  xxx.  cap.  i.  §2) ; 
and  in  §4  seems  to  identify  Christianity  also  with 
Magic.  Fi'om  the  context  it  seems  highly  piobable 
that  this  notice  of  Moses  and  of  Jaunes  may  be  derivetl 
from  the  work  of  Osthanes,  and  if  so,  the  probable 
intercourse  of  Osthanes  witii  Mordecai  would  readily 
account  for  his  mention  of  them.  The  point,  how- 
ever, here  insisted  upon  is,  that  the  known  hatred 
of  Xerxes  to  idol-worship  makes  his  selection  of  a 
Jew  for  his  prime  minister  very  probable,  and  that 
there  are  strong  points  of  I'esemblance  in  what  is 
thus  related  of  Matacas,  and  what  we  know  from 
Scripture  of  Mordecai.  Again,  that  Mordecai  was, 
what  Matacas  is  related  to  have  been,  a  eunuch, 
seems  not  improbable  from  his  having  neither  wife 
nor  child,  from  his  bringing  up  his  cousin  Esther 
in  his  own  house,"*  from  his  situation  in  the  king's 
gate,  from  his  access  to  the  court  of  the  women, 
and  fi'om  his  being  raised  to  the  highest  post  of 
power  by  the  king,  which  we  know  from  Persian 
history  was  so  often  the  case  with  the  king's 
eunuchs.  With  these  points  of  agreement  between 
them,  there  is  sufficient  resemblance  in  their  names 
to  add  additional  probability  to  the  supposition  of 
their  identity.  The  most  plausible  etymology  usually 
given  for  the  name  Mordecai  is  that  favoured  by 
Gesenius,  who  connects  it  with  Merodach  the  Ba- 
bylonian idol  (called  Mardok  in  the  cuneiform  in- 
scriptions) and  which  appears  in  the  names  Mesessi- 
Mordacus,  Sisi-Mordachus,  in  nearly  the  same  form 
as  in  the  Greek,  MapSoxalos.  But  it  is  highly 
impi-obable  that  the  name  of  a  Babylonian  idol 
should  have  been  given  to  him  under  the  Persian 
dynasty,"^  and  it  is  equally  improbable  that  Mor- 
decai should  have  been  taken  into  the  king's  service 
before  the  commencement  of  the  Persian  dynasty. 
If  then  we  suppose  the  original  form  of  the  name 
to  have  been  Matacai,  it  would  easily  in  the  Chaldee 
orthography  become  Mordecai,  just  as  XD13  is  foj- 

ND3.  tD''31t^  for  tOnK',  pK>Onn  for  p^?3l,  &c. 
In  the  Targum  of  Esther  he  is  said  to  be  called 

Mordecai,  because  he  was  like  X*3T  N"T'0?,  "to 
pure  myirh." 

As  regards  his  place  in  Rabbinical  estimation, 
Mordecai,  as  is  natural,  stands  very  high.  The 
inteipolations  in  the  Greek  book  of  Esther  are  one 
indiattion  of  his  popularity  with  his  countrymen. 
The  Targum  (of  late  date)  shows  that  this  increased 
rather  than  diminished  with  the  lapse  of  centuries. 
There  Shimei  in  Mordecai's  genealogy  is  identified 
with  Shimei  the  son  of  Gera,  who  cursed  David, 
and  jt  is  said  that  the  I'eason  why  David  would  not 
permit  him  to  be  put  to  death  then  was,  that  it 
was  revealed  to  him  that  Mordecai  and  Esther 
should  descend  from  him ;  but  that  in  his  old  age, 
when  this  reason  no  longer  applied,  he  was  slain. 
It  is  also  said  of  Mordecai  that  he  knew  the  seventy 


of  Apollo  Didymaeus,  near  Miletus,  which  was  destroyed 
by  Xerxes  after  his  return  (Strab.  xiv.  cap.  i.  J5). 

d  To  account  for  this,  the  'I'argum  adds  that  he  was 
75  years  old. 

"  Mr.  liawlinsion  {Herod,  i.  270)  points  out  Mr.  Layard's 
conclusion  {Niii.  ii.  441),  that  the  Persians  adopted  gene- 
rally the  Assyrian  religion,  as  "  quite  a  mistake. ' 


MOREH 

langwxgcs,  i.  e.  the  languages  of  all  the  uations 
mentioned  in  Gen.  x.,  which  the  Jews  count  as 
seventy  nations,  and  that  his  age  exceeded  400 
years  (Juchasin  ap.  Wolf,  and  Stehelin,  Rahb. 
Lite)-,  i.  170).  He  is  continually  designated  by 
the  appellation  Np^TV,  "  the  Ju.st,"  and  the  ampli- 
fications of  Esth.  viii.  15  abound  in  the  most  glow- 
ing descriptions  of  the  splendid  robes,  and  Persian 
buskins,  and  Median  scimitars,  and  golden  crowns, 
and  the  profusion  of  precious  stones  and  Macedonian 
gold,  on  which  was  engraved  a  view  of  Jerusalem, 
and  of  the  phylactery  over  the  crown,  and  the 
streets  strewed  with  myrtle,  and  the  attendants, 
and  the  heralds  with  trumpets,  all  proclaiming  the 
glory  of  Mordecai  and  the  exaltation  of  the  Jewish 
people.  Benjamin  of  Tudela  mentions  the  ruins  of 
Shushan  and  the  remains  of  the  palace  of  Ahasuerus 
as  still  existing  in  his  day,  but  places  the  tomb  of 
Mordecai  and  Esther  at  Hamadan,  or  Ecbatana 
(p.  128).  Others,  however,  place  the  tomb  of  Mor- 
dectii  in  Susa,  and  that  of  Esther  in  or  near  Baram 
in  Galilee  (note  to  Asher's  Benj.  of  Tad.  p.  166). 
With  reference  to  the  above-named  palace  of  Aha- 
suerus at  Shushan,  it  may  be  added  that  consider- 
able remains  of  it  were  discovered  by  Mr.  Loftus's 
excavations  in  1852,  and  that  he  thinks  the  plan 
of  the  great  colonnade,  of  which  he  found  the  bases 
remaining,  cori'esponds  remarkably  to  the  desciip- 
tion  of  the  palace  of  Ahasuerus  in  Esth.  i.  (Loftus, 
C/taldaea,  ch.  xxviii.).  It  was  built  or  begun  by 
Darius  Hystaspis.  [A.  C.  H.] 

MO'REH.  A  local  name  of  central  Palestine, 
one  of  the  very  oldest  that  has  come  down  to  us. 
It  occurs  in  two  connexions. 

1.  The  plain,  qr  plains  (or,  as  it  should 
rather  be  rendered,  the  OAK  or  OAKs),  OF  Moreh 

(nniD  ]i'?X  and  n^b  \3i'?X  ;  Samar.  in  both  rases, 

NTID  |1?X:  rj  Spvs  r]  ti;|/7jA.7} :  coavallis  illustris, 
vallis  tendens),  the  fiist  of  that  long  succession  of 
sacred  and  venerable  trees  which  dignified  the  chief 
places  of  Palestine,  and  formed  not  the  least  interest- 
ing link  in  the  chain  which  so  indissolubly  united 
the  land  to  the  history  of  the  nation. 

The  Oak  of  Moreh  was  the  first  recorded  halting- 
place  of  Abram  after  his  entrance  into  the  land  of 
Canaan  (Gen.  xii.  6).  Here  Jehovah  "appeared" 
to  him,  and  here  he  built  the  first  of  the  series  of 
altars"  which  marked  the  vaiious  sjmts  of  his  resi- 
dence in  the  Piomised  Land,  and  dedicated  it  "  to 
Jehovah,  who  appeared''  unto  him"  (ver.  7).  It 
was  at  the  "  place  of  -  Shechem  "  (xii.  G),  close  to 

(7VK)  the  mountiiins  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim  (Deut. 
xi.  '60),  where  the  Samar.  Cod.  adds  "  over  against 
bhechem." 

There  is  reason  for  believing  that  this  place,  the 
.scene  of  so  important  an  occuri-ence  in  Abram 's 
early  residence  in  Canaan,  may  have  been  also  that 
of  one  even  more  important,  the  crisis  of  his  later 
life,  the  oHering  of  Isaac,  on  a  mountain  in  "  the 
land  of  Moriah."    [Mokiaii.] 

A  trace  of  this  ancient  name,  curiously  reappear- 
ing after  many  centuries,  is  probably  to  be  found  in 
Morthia,  which  is  given  ou  some  ancient  coins  as  one 


MORESHETH-GATH 


421 


»  It  may  be  rouglily  said  that  Abraham  built  altars ; 
Isaac  dug  wells;  Jacob  erected  stones. 

''  nSISn.    This  is  a  play  upon  tbe  same  word  which, 

as  we  shall  see  afterwards,  porlbrms  an  important  part  in 
the  name  of  Moiiiaii. 


of  the  titles  of  Neapolis,  i.e.  .Shechem,and  by  Pliny 
and  Josephus  as  Mamortha  <•  or  Mabortha  (Iceland, 
Diss.  III.  §8).  The  latter  states  {B.  J.  iv.  8,  §1), 
that  "it  was  the  name  by  which  the  jilace  was 
called  by  the  countr3'-peoj)le "  (emx^pioi),  who 
thus  kept  alive  the  ancient  appellation  just  as  the 
peasants  of  Hebron  did  that  of  Kirjath-arba  down 
to  the  date  of  Sir  John  Maundeville's  visit.  [See 
p.  41  rt.] 

Whether  the  oaks  of  Moreli  had  any  connexion 
with 

2.  The  Hill  of  Moreh  (inniSH  nyiil :  Ta- 
fiaadajxdpa  ;  Alex.  oTro  rov  ^wfiou  rov  a^cup  : 
cullis  cxcelsus),  at  the  foot  of  which  the  Midianites 
and  Amalekites  were  encamped  before  Gideon's 
attai;k  upon  them  (Judg.  vii.  1),  seems,  to  say  the 
least,  most  uncertain.  Copious  as  are  the  detiiils 
furnished  of  that  great  event  of  Jewish  history, 
those  which  enable  us  to  judge  of  its  precise  situation 
are  very  scanty.  But  a  comparison  of  Judg.  vi.  33 
with  vii.  1  makes  it  evident  that  it  lay  in  the  valley 
of  Jezreel,  rather  on  the  north  side  of  the  valley, 
and  north  also  of  the  ejninence  on  which  Gideon's 
little  band  of  heroes  was  clustered.  At  the  foot 
of  this  latter  eminence  was  the  spring  of  Ain- 
Charod  (A.  V.  "the  well  of  Harod"),  and  a 
sufficient  sweep  of  the  plain  intervened  between  it 
and  the  hill  Moreh  to  allow  of  the  encampment  of 
the  Amalekites.  No  doubt — although  the  fact  is 
not  mentioned — they  kept  near  the  foot  of  Mount 
Moreh,  for  the  sake  of  some  spring  or  springs  which 
i&sued  from  its  base,  as  the  Ain-Charod  did  fi-om 
that  on  which  Gideon  was  planted.  These  con- 
ditions are  most  accurately  fulfilled  if  we  assume 
Jcbel  ed-Duhy,  the  "  Little  Hermon  "  of  the  modern 
travellers,  to  be  Moreh,  the  Ain-Jalood  to  be  the 
spring  of  Harod,  and  Gideon's  position  to  have  been 
on  the  north-east  slope  of  Jebcl  Fiikua  (Mount 
Gilboa),  between  the  village  of  Nuris  and  the  last- 
mentioned  -spring.  Between  Ain  Jalood  and  the 
foot  of  the  "Little  Hermon,"  a  spac«  of  between 
2  and  3  miles  intervenes,  ample  in  extent  for  the 
encampment  even  of  the  enormous  horde  of  the 
Amalekites.  In  its  general  form  this  identification 
is  due  to  Professor  Stanley.  The  desire  to  find 
Moreh  nearer  to  Shechem,  where  the  "  oak  of 
Moreh"  was,  seems  to  have  induced  Mr.  Van  de  Velde 
to  place  the  scene  of  Gideon's  battle  many  miles  to 
the  south  of  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  "  possibly  on  the 
l)lain  of  T^jas  or  of  Yasir-"  in  which  case  the 
encampment  of  the  Israelites  may  have  been  ou  the 
ridge  between  Wadi  Ferra'  and  Wadi  Tubas,  near 
Bwj  el-Ferra'  {Si/r.  ^ Pal.  ii.  341-2).  But  this  in- 
volves the  supposition  of  a  movement  in  the  position 
of  the  Amalekites,  for  which  there  is  no  warrant 
either  in  the  narrative  or  in  the  circumstances  of 
the  <;;use ;  and  at  any  rate,  in  the  present  state  of 
our  knowledge,  we  may  rest  tolerably  certain  that 
Jcbci  cd-Dnhi/  is  the  iiiLL  oF  Mokeu.  [(L] 

MORESH'ETH-GATH  (D^  ni;niO:  /cAtj- 
povofxia  Te6:  hacreditas  Geth),  a  place  named  by 
the  piojihet  Micah  only  (Mic.  i.  1-i),  in  company 
with  Lachish,  Achzib,  Mareshah,  and  other  towns 
of  the  lowland  district  of  Judah.  His  words, 
"  theretbie  shalt  thou   give  presents  to  Moresheth- 

<!  Eccliis.  1.  26  perhnps  conUuiis  a  play  on  the  name 
Moreh — "  Ihatfoolish  peopU-  (6  Aabs  o  |ii  u  p  o  5)  who  dwell 
iu  Sichcm."  If  the  pun  existed  in  the  Hebrew  text  It 
may  have  been  between  Siohem  and  Sichor  (drunken). 

•1  This  form  is  possibly  due  to  a  confusiou  between 
Moreh  and  Mamrc.    (See  lleland  as  above.) 


422 


MORIAH 


gath  "  are  explained  by  Ewald  {PropJieten,  330,  1) 
as  referring  to  Jerusalem,  and  as  contaiuing  an 
allusion  to  the  signification  of  the  name  Moreslieth, 
which,  though  not  so  literal  as  the  play  on  those  of 
Achzib  and  Mareshah,  is  yet  tolerably  obvious  : — 
"  Therefore  shalt  thou,  0  Jerusalem,  give  com- 
pensation to  Moresheth-gath,  itself  only  the  posses- 
sion of  another  city." 

Micah  was  himself  the  native  of  a  place  called 
Moresheth,  since  he  is  designated,  in  the  only  two 
cases  in  which  his  name  is  mentioned,  "  Micah  the 
Moiashtite,"  which  latter  word  is  a  regular  deriva- 
tion from  Moresheth  ;  but  whether  ]Moresheth-gath 
was  that  place  cannot  be  ascertained  from  any  in- 
formation given  us  in  the  Bible. 

Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon,  and 
Jerome  in  his  Commentary  on  Micah  {Pivlogus), 
give  Morasthi  as  the  name,  not  of  the  person,  but 
of  the  place  ;  and  describe  it  as  "  a  moderate-sized 
village  (Jiaud  grandis  viculus)  near  Eleutheropolis, 
the  city  of  Philistia  (Palaestinae),  and  to  the  east 
thereof." 

Supposing  Beit-jibrin  to  be  Eleutheropolis,  no 
traces  of  the  name  of  Moresheth-gath  have  been  yet 
discovered  in  this  direction.  The  ruins  of  Jlaresha 
lie  a  mile  or  two  due  south  of  Beit-jihrin ;  but  it 
is  evident,  from  Mic.  i.  14,  15,  that  the  two  were 
distinct. 

The  affix  "gath"  may  denote  a  connexion  with  the 
famous  Philistine  city  of  that  name — the  site  of 
which  cannot,  however,  be  taken  as  yet  ascertained — 
or  it  may  point  to  the  existence  of  vineyards  and 
wine-presses,  "  gath  "  in  Hebrew  signifying  a  wine- 
press or  vat.  [G.] 

MORI' AH.  A  name  which  occurs  twice  in  the 
Bible  (Gen.  x'xii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  iii.  1). 

1.  The  Land  of  "Moriah  (n^n^H  )^nx ;  Samar. 
nj^lltOn  'N :  V  yv  V  vxprjXT]:  terra^  visionis). 
On  "one  of  the  mountains"  in  this  district  took 
place  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.  2).  What 
the  name  of  the  mountain  was  we  are  not  told  ;  but 
it  was  a  conspicuous  one  visible  from  "afar  off" 
(ver.  4).  Nor  does  the  narrative  afford  any  data 
for  ascertaining  its  position;  for  although  it  was 
more  than  two  days'  journey  from  the  "  land  of  the 
Philistines" — meaning  no  doubt  the  district  of 
Gerar  where  Beersheba  lay,  the  last  place  men- 
tioned before  and  the  first  after  the  occurrence  in 
question — yet  it  is  not  said  how  much  more  than 
two  days  it  was.  The  mountain — the  "place" — 
came  into  view  in  the  course  of  the  third  day  ;  but 
the  time  occupied  in  performing  the  remainder  of 
the  distance  is  not  stated.  After  the  deliverance  of 
Isaac,  Abraham,  with  a  play  on  the  name  of  Moriah 
impossible  to  convey  in  English,  called  the  spot 
Jehovah-jireh,  "  Jehovah  sees"  («.  e.  provides),  and 
thus  originated  a  proverb  referring  to  the  provi- 
dential and  opportune  interference  of  God.  "  In 
the  mount  of  Jehovah,  He  will  be  seen." 

It  is  most  natural  to  take  the  "  land  of  Moriah  " 
as  the  same  district  with  that  in  which  the  "  Oak 
(A.  V.  "plain")  of  Moreh  "  was  situated,  and  not 
as  that  which  contains  Jerusalem,  as  the  modern 

"  Mlchaelis  {Suppl.  No.  1458)  suggests  that  tbe  name 
may  be  njore  accurately  Hammoriah,  since  it  is  not  the 
practice  in  the  early  names  of  districts  to  add  the  article. 
Thus  the  land  of  Canaan  is  |y33  V'^'H,  not  iyj^n- 
[See  Lashakon.] 

b  Following  Aquila,  ■riji'  yr)V  rriu  KaTaijtavri ;  and  Sym- 
machus,  tiji'  yiji'  t^?  oTrratrta!.  The  same  rendering  is 
adopted  by  the  Samaritan  version. 


MORIAH 

tradition,  which  would  identify  the  Moriah  of  Gen. 
xxii.  and  that  of  2  Chr.  iii.  1  affirms.  The  former 
was  well-known  to  Abraham.  It  was  the  first 
spot  on  which  he  had  pitched  his  tent  in  the  Pro- 
mised Land,  and  it  was  hallowed  and  endeared  to 
him  by  the  first  manifestation  of  Jehovah  with 
wliich  he  had  been  favoured,'  and  by  the  erection  of 
his  first  altar.  With  Jerusalem  on  the  other  hand, 
except  as  possibly  the  residence  of  Melchizedek,  he 
had  not  any  connexion  whatever ;  it  lay  as  entirely 
out  of  his  path  as  it  did  out  of  that  of  Isaac  and 
Jacob.  The  LXX.  appear  to  have  thus  read  or  in- 
terpreted the  original,  since  they  render  both  Moreh 
and  Moriah  in  Gen.  by  y<|/7j\T},  while  in  2  Chr. 
iii.  they  have  'Afxcopeia.  The  one  name  is  but  the 
feminine  of  the  other'^  (Simonis,  Onom.  414),  and 
there  is  hardly  more  difference  between  them  than 
between  Maresha  and  Mai-eshah,  and  not  so  much 
as  between  Jerushalem  and  Jerushalaim.  The 
Jewish  tradition,  which  first  appears  in  Josephus — 
unless  2  Chr.  iii.  1  be  a  still  earlier  hint  of  its 
existence — is  fairly  balanced  by  the  rival  tradition 
of  the  Samaritans,  which  affirms  that  Moun't  Ge- 
rizim  was  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac,  and 
which  is  at  least  as  old  as  the  3rd  century  after 
Christ.     [Gerizim.] 

2.  Mount  Moriah  (n'^ifSn  "IH  :    upos  rod 

'Afxaipeia ;  Alex.  Afiopia  :  Mons  Moria).  The 
name  ascribed,  in  2  Chr.  iii.  1  only,  to  the  eminence 
on  which  Solomon  built  the  Temple.  "  And  Solo- 
mon began  to  build  the  house  of  Jehovah  in  Jeru- 
salem on  the  Mount  Moriah,  where  He  appeared  to 
David  his  father,  in  a  place  which  David  prepared 
in  the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah  the  Jebusite." 
From  the  mention  of  Araunah,  the  inference,  is 
natural  that  the  "  appearance  "  alluded  to  occurred 
at  the  time  of  the  purchase  of  the  threshing-floor 
by  David,  and  his  erection  thereon  of  the  altar 
(2  Sam.  sxiv. ;  1  Chr.  xxi.)  But  it  will  be  oti- 
served  that  nothing  is  said  in  the  naiTatives  of  that 
event  of  any  "  appearance  "  of  Jehovah.  The  earlier 
and  simpler  record  of  Samuel  is  absolutely  silent  on 
the  point.  And  in  the  later  and  more  elaborate 
account  of  1  Chr.  xxi.  the  only  occurrence  which 
can  be  construed  into  such  a  meaning  is  that 
"  Jehovah  answered  David  by  fire  on  the  altar  of 
burnt-ofTering." 

A  tradition  which  first  appears  in'a  definite  shape 
in  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  13,  §1,  2,  vii.  13,  §4),  and 
is  now  almost  universally  accepted,  asserts  that  the 
"Mount  Moriah"  of  the  Chronicles  is  identical 
with  the  "  mountain  "  in  "  the  land  of  Moriah  "  of 
Genesis,  and  that  the  spot  on  which  Jehovah  ap- 
peared to  David,  and  on  which  the  Temple  was  built, 
was  the  very  spot  of  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac.  In  the 
early  Targum  of  Onkelos  on  Gen.  xxii.,  this  belief 
is  exhibited  in  a  very  mild  form.  The  land  of 
Moriah  is  called  the  "  land  of  woiship, " ''  and  ver. 
14  is  given  as  follows:  "And  Abraham  sacrificed 
and  prayed  in  that  place ;  and  he  said  before  Je- 
hovah, In  this  place  shall  generations  worship,  be- 
cause it  shall  be  said  in  that  day.  In  this  mountain 
did  Abraham   worship  before  Jehovah."     But  in 


"  Others  take  Jloriah  as  Moreh-Jah  (i.e.  Jehovah), 
but  this  would  be  to  anticipate  the  existence  of  the  name 
of  Jehovah,  and,  as  Michaelis  has  pointed  out  (Suppl. 
No.  1458),  the  name  would  more  probably  be  Moriel, 
El  being  the  name  by  which  God  was  known  to  Abra- 
ham. 


MOEIAH 


MORTAR 


423 


the  Jerusalem  Targum  the  latter  passage  is  tlius  i  Abraham's  faith,  iustead  of  taking  place  in  the  lonely- 
given,  "  Because  in  generations  to  come  it  shall  be  |  ami  desolate  spot  implied  by  the  narrative,  where 
said,  In  the  mount  of  the  house  of  the  sanctuaiy  of  |  not  even  fire  was  to  be  obtained,  and  where  no  help 
Jehovah  did  Abraham  offer  up  Isaac  his  son,  and  |  but  that  of  the  Almighty  was  nigh,  actually  took 
in  this  mountain  which  is  the  house  of  the  sane-  |  place  under  the  very  walls  of  the  city  of  Melchi- 
tuary  was  the  glory  of  Jehovah  much  manifest."  |  zedek. 

And  those  who  wish  to  see  the  tradition  in  its  com-  But,  while  there  is  no  trace  except  in  the  sino-le 
plete  and  detailed  form,  may  consult  the  Targum  ,  passage  quoted  of  Moriah  being  attached  to  any 
of  R.  Joseph  on  1  Chr.  xxi.  15,  and  2  Chr.  iii.  1,  :  part  of  Jerusalem — on  the  other  hand  in  the  slightly 


and  the  passages  collected  by  Beer  {Leben  Abra- 
hams nach  judische  Sage,  57-71).^  But  the  single 
occuiTeuce  of  the  name  in  this  one  passage  of  Chio- 
nicles  is  surely  not  enough  to  establish  a  coinci- 
dence, which  if  we  consider  it  is  little  short  of 
miracidous.'  Had  the  fact  been  as  the  modern 
belief  assorts,   and  had  the  belief  existed   in    the 


rent  form  of  Moreh  it  did  exist  attached  to 
the  town  and  the  neighbourhood  of  Shechem,  the 
spot  of  Abram's  first  residence  in  Palestine.  The 
arguments  in  favour  of  the  identity  of  Mount  Ge- 
rizira  with  the  mountain  in  the  land  of  Moriah  of 
Gen.  xxii.,  are  stated  under  Gerizim  (vol.  i.  p. 
679,  680).     As  far  as  they  establish  that  identity, 


minds  of  the  people  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament,    they  of  course  destroy  the  claim  of  Jerusalem.  [G.] 
there  could  not  fail  to  be  frequent  references  to  it,  |      Txrn'RTA'R 


in  the  narrative — so  detailed — of  the  original  dedi- 
cation of  the  spot  by  David ;  in  the  account  of  So- 
lomon's building  in  the  book  of  Kings ;  of  Nehe- 
miah's  rebuilding  (compare  especially  the  reference 
to  Abraham  in  ix.  7);  or  of  the  restorations  and  puri- 
fications of  the  Maccabees.  It  was  a  fact  which  must 
have  found  its  way  into  the  paronomastic  addresses 
of  the  prophets,  into  the  sermon  of  St.  Stephen,  so 
full  of  allusion  to  the  Founders  of  the  i^ation,  or 
into  the  argument  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews.  But  not  so  ;  on  the  contrary,  except 
in  the  case  of  Salem,  and  that  is  by  no  means  ascer- 
tained— the  name  of  Abraham  does  not,  as  fai-  as 
the  writer  is  aware,  appear  once  in  connexion  with 
Jerusalem  or  the  later  royal  or  ecclesiastical  glories 
of  Israel.  Jerusalem  lies  out  of  the  path  of  the 
patriarchs,  and  has  no  part  in  the  history  of  Israel 
till  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy.  The  "  high 
places  of  Isaac,"  as  far  as  we  can  understand  the 
allusion  of  Amos  (vii.  9,  l(i)  were  in  the  northern 
kingdom.  To  connect  Jerusalem  in  so  vital  a  manner 
with  the  life  of  Abraham,  is  to  antedate  the  whole 
of  the  later  history  of  the  nation  and  to  commit  a 
serious  anachronism,  warranted  neither  by  the  direct 
nor  indirect  statements  of  the  sacred  records. 

But  in  addition  to  this,  Jerusalem  is  incompatible 
with  the  circumstances  of  the  narrative  of  Gen.  xxii. 
To  name  only  two  instances — (1.)  The  Temjile 
mount  cannot  be  spoken  of  as  a  conspicuous  emi- 
nence. "  The  towers  of  Jer\isalem,"  says  Professor 
Stanley  (5'.  ^  P.  251),  "are  indeed  seen  from  the 
ridge  of  Mar  Elias  at  the  distance  of  three  miles  to 
the  south,  but  there  is  no  elevation  ;  nothing  cor- 
responding to  the  '  place  afar  oil''  to  which  Abia- 
ham  '  lifted  up  his  eyes.'  And  the  special  locality 
which  Jewish  tradition  has  assigned  for  the  place, 
and  whose  name  is  the  chief  guaraJitee  for  the  tra- 
dition— Mount  Moriah,  the  hill  of  the  Temple — is 
not  visible  till  the  traveller  is  close  upon  it  at  the 
southern  edge  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  from  whence 
he  looks  down  upon  it  as  on  a  lower  B  eminence." 

(2.)  If  Salem  was  Jerusalem,  then  the  trial  of 

<•  The  modern  form  of  tho  belief  Is  well  expressed  by 
the  latest  Jewish  commentator  (Kaliscli,  Genesis,  Hi,  5)  : 
"  The  place  of  the  future  temple,  where  it  was  promised 
the  glory  of  God  should  dwell,  and  whence  atonement  and 
icace  were  to  bless  tho  hearts  of  the  Hohrews,  was  hal- 
lowed by  the  most  brilliant  act  of  piety,  and  the  deed  of 
their  ancestor  was  thus  more  prominently  presented  to  the 
imitation  of  liis  (lesa>ndr,nts."  The  spot  of  the  sacrifice  of 
Isaac  is  actually  .shewn  In  Jerusalem  (Barclay,  City,  l(i9). 

f  'I'here  is  in  the  ICast  a  natural  tendi-ncy  when  a  place 
is  established  as  a  sanctuary  to  make  it  the  scene  of  all 
the  notable  events,  possible  or  impossible,  whicli  can  liy 


The  simplest  and  probably  most 
ancient  method  of  preparing  corn  tor  food  was  by 
pounding  it  between  two  stones  (Virg.Aen.  i.  179). 
Convenience  suggested  that  the  lower  of  the  two 
stones  should  be  hollowed,  that  the  corn  might  not 
escape,  and  that  the  upper  should  be  shaped  so  as 
to  be  convenient  for  holding.     The  pestle  and  mor- 
tar must  have  existed  from  a  very  early  pei'iod. 
The  Israelites  in  the  desert  appear  to  have  possessed 
mortars  and  handmills  among  their  necessary  do- 
mestic utensils.    When  the  manna  fell  they  gathered 
it,  and  either  ground  it  in  the  mill  or  pounded  it 
in  the  mortar  (H^ID,  medocuh)  till  it  was  fit  for 
use  (Num.  xi.  8).     So  in  the   present  day  stone 
mortars  are  used  by  the  Arabs  to  pound  wheat  for 
their  national  dish  kibby  (Thomson,  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  ch.  viii.  p.  94).  Niebuhr  describes  one  of  a 
very  simple  kind  which  was  used  on  boai-d  the  vessel 
in  which  lie  went  from   Jidda  to  Loheia.     Every 
afternoon  one  of  the  sailors  had  to  take  the  durra, 
or  millet,  necessary  for  the  day's  consumption  and 
pound  it  "  upon  a  stone,  of  which  the  surface  was 
a  little  curved,  with  another  stone  which  was  long 
and  rounded"  {Descr.del'Arab.  p.  45).     Among 
the   inhabitants    of    Ezzehhoue,    a   Druse   tillage, 
Burckhardt   saw  cotfee-mortiirs   made  out  of  the 
trunks  of  oak-trees  (Syria,  p.  87, 8).  The  spices  for 
the  incense  are  said  to  have  been  prepared  by  the 
house  of  Abtines,  a  family  set  apart  for  the  pur- 
pose, and  the  mortar  which  they  used  was,  with 
other  spoils  of  the  Temple,  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  by  Titus,  carried  to  Kome,  where  it  re- 
mained till  the  time  of  Hadrian  (Keggio  in  ]\Iar- 
tinet's  Hebr.  Chrcst.  p.  35).     Buxtorf  mentions  a 
kind  of  mortar  (K'D-I!!,  cuttash)  in  which  olives 
were  slightly  bruised  before  they  were  taken  to  the 
olive- presses  {Lex.  Talm.  s.  v.  tlTlS).     From  the 
same  root  as  this  last  is  derived  mactesh  (Ci'DDO, 
Prov.  xxvii.  22),  which  probably  denotes  a  mortar  of 
a  larger  kind  in  which  corn  was  pounded.     "  Though 
thou  biay  the  fool  in  the  mortar  among  the  bruised 


any  jilay  of  words  or  other  pretext  be  connected  with  it. 
Of  this  kind  were  the  early  Christian  legends  that  Gol- 
gotha was  the  place  of  the  Inirial  of  the  first  Adam  as 
well  as  of  the  death  of  the  Second  (sec  Jlislin,  Saints 
hieiix,  il.  .304,  5).  Of  this  kind  also  arc  the  Wohammeduu 
legends  which  cluster  round  all  tlic  sliriiies  and  holy  pl.ices, 
both  of  Palestine  and  Arabia.  In  the  Targnm  of  Chronicles 
(2  Chr.  iii.  1)  alluded  to  above,  the  'rcinple  mount  is  made 
to  \k  also  the  scene  of  the  vision  of  Jacob. 

K  See  Jkuusai.km,  vol.  i.  9856,  and  the  plate  in  Harllett's 
Walks  there  referred  to. 


424 


MORTER 


corn  with  the  pestle,  yet  will  not  his  folly  depart 
from  him."  Corn  may  be  separated  from  its  husk 
and  all  its  good  properties  preserved  by  such  an 
operation,  but  the  fool's  folly  is  so  essential  a  part 
of  himself  that  no  analogous  process  can  remove  it 
from  him.  Such  seems  the  natural  intei-pretation 
of  this  remarkable  proverb.  The  language  is  in- 
tentionally exaggerated,  and  there  is  no  necessity 
for  supposing  an  allusion  to  a  mode  of  punishment 
by  which  criminals  were  put  to  death,  by  being 
pounded  in  a  mortar.  A  custom  of  this  kind  existed 
among  the  Turks,  but  there  is  no  distinct  trace  of 
it  among  the  Hebrews.  The  Ulemats,  or  body  of 
lawyers,  in  Turkey  had  the  distinguished  privilege, 
according  to  De  Tott  {Mem.  i.  p.  28,  Eng.  tr.),  of 
being  put  to  death  only  by  the  pestle  and  the  mortar. 
Such,  however,  is  supposed  to  be  the  reference  in 
the  proverb  by  Mr.  Roberts,  who  illustrates  it  from 
his  Indian  expeiience.  "  Large  mortars  are  used 
in  the  East  for  the  purpose  of  separating  the  rice 
from  the  husk.  When  a  considerable  quantity  has 
to  be  prepared,  the  mortar  is  placed  outside  the 
door,  and  two  women,  each  with  a  pestle  of  five 
feet  long,  begin  the  work.  They  strike  in  rotation, 
as  blacksmiths  do  on  the  anvil.  Cruel  as  it  is,  this 
is  a  punishment  of  the  state:  the  poor  victim  is 
thrust  into  the  mortar,  and  beaten  with  the  pestle. 
The  late  king  of  Kaudy  compelled  one  of  the  wives 
of  his  rebellious  chiefs  thus  to  beat  her  own  infant 
to  death.  Hence  the  saying,  '  Though  you  beat 
that  loose  woman  in  a  mortar,  she  will  not  leave 
her  ways :'  which  means.  Though  you  chastise  her 
ever  so  much,  she  will  never  improve"  {Orient. 
Illustr.  p.  368).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MORTER"  (Gen.  xi.  3;  Ex.  i.  14;  Lev.  xiv. 
42,  45;  Is.  xli.  25  ;  Ez.  xiii.  10,  11,  14,  15,  xxii. 
28  ;  Nah.  iii.  14).  Omitting  iron  cramps,  lead, 
[Handicraft],  and  the  instances  in  which  large 
stones  arc  fomid  in  close  apposition  without  cement, 
the  various  compacting  substances  used  in  Oriental 
buildings  appear  to  be — 1.  bitumen,  as  in  the  Ba- 
bylonian structm-es  ;  2.  common  mud  or  moistened 
clay;  3.  a  very  firm  cement  compounded  of  sand, 
ashes,  and  lime,  in  the  proportions  respectively  of 
1,  2,  3,  well  pounded,  sometimes  mixed  and  some- 
times coated  with  oil,  so  as  to  form  a  surface  almost 
impenetrable  to  wet  or  the  weather.  [Plaster.] 
In  Assyrian,  and  also  Egyptian  brick  buildings 
stubble  or  straw,  as  hair  or  wool  among  ourselves, 
was  added  to  increase  the  tenacity  (Shaw,  Trav. 
p.  206  ;  Volney,  Trav.  ii.  p.  436  ;  Chardin,  T  o^. 
iv.  116).  If  the  materials  were  bad  in  themselves, 
as  mere  mud  would  necessaiily  be,  or  insufficiently 
mixed,  or,  as  the  Vulgate  seems  to  understand  (Ez. 
xiii.  10),  if  straw  were  omitted,  the  mortar  or  cob- 
wall  would  be  liable  to  crumble  under  the  influence 
of  wet  weather.  (See  Shaw,  Trav.  136,  and  Ges.  p. 
1515,  s.  V.  7hT\ :  a  word  connected  with  the  Ai-abic 
Tafal^  a  substance  resembling  pipe-clay,  believed 
by  Burckhardt  to  be  the  detritus  of  the  felspar  of 


"  1.  "iDn  ;  in)A.o!,  caementum  a  word  from  the  same 
root  (IDn.  "  boil ")  as  T^H.  "  slime  "  or  "  bitumen," 
used  in  the  same  passage,  Gen.  xi.  3.  Ghomer  is  also 
rendered  "clay,"  evidently  plastic  clay,  Is.  xxix.  16,  and 
elsewhere.  2.  "ISI?-  x°"S>  '"*""'■.  "Iso  limus,  pulHs, 
A.V.  "dust,"  "powder,"  as  in  2  K.  xxiil  6,  and  Gen. 
ii.  7. 


aiosES 

granite,  and  used  for  taking  stains  out  of  cloth; 
Biu-clchardt,  Syria,  p.  488  ;  Mishn.  Pesach.  x.  3). 
Wheels  for  grinding  chalk  or  lune  for  morter, 
closely  resembling  our  own  machines  for  the  same 
purpose,  are  in  use  in  Egypt  (Niebuhr,  Voy.  i. 
122,  pi.  17  ;  Burckhardt,  Nubia,  p.  82,  97,  102, 
140  ;  Hasselquist,  Trav.  p.  90).   [House  ;  Clay.] 

[H.  W.  P.] 

MO'SERAH  CnnpID  :  Uaffovpoie  :  Mosera, 
Deut.  X.  6,  appai'ently  the  same  as  IMoseroth,  Num. 
xxxiii.  30,  its  plural  form),  the  name  of  a  place 
near  Mount  Hor.  Hengstenberg  {Aathent.  der 
Pentat.)  thinks  it  lay  in  the  Arabah,  where  that 
mountain  overhangs  it.  Burckliaidt  suggests  that 
possibly  Wady  Mousa,  near  Petra  and  Mount  Hor. 
may  contain  a  coiTuption  of  Mosera.  This  does 
not  seem  likely.  Used  as  a  common  notm,  the  word 
means  "  bonds,  fetters."  In  Deut.  it  is  said  that 
"there  Aaron  died."  Probably  the  people  en- 
camped in  this  spot  adjacent  to  the  motmt,  which 
Aaron  ascended,  and  where  he  died.  [H.  H.] 

MO'SES  (Heb.  Mdsheh,  HE^O  =  "  drawn"  : 
LXX.,  Josephus,  Philo,  the  most  ancient  MSS.  of 
N.  T.,  MoiOcTTjs,  declined  Moo'ixrews,  MoivaeT  or 
Ma)i)(7p,  Mct!v<r4a  or  Mcti'v(r7]v :  Vulg.  J/oyses,  de- 
clined Moysi,  gen.  and  dat.,  Moysen,  ace. :  Rec. 
Text  of  N.  T.  and  Protestant  versions,  Moses : 
Arabic,  Musa  :  Numenius  ap.  Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix. 
8,  27,  Moutroios:  Artapanus  ap.  Eus.  Ibid.  27, 
Mii>v(Tos:  Manetho  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  26,  28,  31, 
Osarsiph :  Chaeremon,  ap.  ib.  32,  Tisithen:  "the 
man  of  God,"  Ps.  xc,  title,  1  Chr.  xxiii.  14;  "the 
slave  of  Jehovah,"  Num.  xii.  7,  Deut.  xxxiv.  5,  Josh, 
i.  1,  Ps.  cv.  26  ;  "  the  chosen,"  Ps.  cvi.  23).  The 
legislator  of  the  Jewish  people,"  and  in  a  ceilaiu 
sense  the  founder  of  the  Jewish  religion.  No  one 
else  presented  so  imposing  a  figure  to  the  external 
Gentile  world  ;  and  although  in  the  Jewish  nation 
his  fame  is  eclipsed  by  the  larger  details  of  the  hfe 
of  David,  yet  he  was  probably  always  regarded  as 
their  greatest  hero. 

The  materials  for  his  life  are — 

I.  The  details  preserved  in  the  four  last  books  of 
the  Pentateuch. 

II.  The  allusions  in  the  Prophets  and  Psalms, 
which  in  a  few  instances  seem  independent  of  the 
Pentateuch. 

III.  The  Jewish  traditions  preserved  in  the  N.T. 
(Acts  vii.  20-38  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  8,  9  ;  Hcb.  .\i.  23- 
28:  Jude  9);  and  in  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.,  iii.,  iv.), 
Philo  (  Vita  Moysis'),  and  Clemens.  Alex.  {Strom). 

IV.  The  heathen  traditions  of  Manetho,  Lysi- 
machus,  and  Chaeremon,  preserved  in  Josephus 
(c.  Ap.  i.  26-32),  of  Ai-tapanus  and  others  in 
Eusebius  {Praep.  Ev.  ix.  8,  26,  27),  and  of 
Hecataeus  in  Diod.  Sic.  xl.,  Strabo  xvi.  2. 

V.  The  Mussulman  traditions  in  the  Koran  (ii, 
vii.  X.  xviii.  xx.  xxviii.  xl.),  and  the  Arabian 
legends,  as  given  in  Weil's  Biblical  Legends ; 
D'Herbelot  ("Moussa"),  and  Lane's  Selections, 
p.  182. 

VI.  Apocryphal  Books  of  Moses  (Fabricius,  Cod. 
Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  p.  825)  :— (1)  Prayers  of  Moses. 
(2)  Apocalypse  of  j\Ioses.  (3)  Ascension  of  Moses. 
(These  are  only  known  by  fragments.) 

VII.  In  modem  times  his  career  and  legislation 
has  been  treated  by  Warburton,  Michaelis,  Ewald, 
and  Bunsen. 


"  irpunos  (nravTutv  6  ^au^iacrrbs  SeoAo70S  re  Kal  yo/no- 
9c't))s,  Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  vii.  8.   Comp.  I'hilo,  V.  Mos.  i.  80. 


MOSES 

His  liie,  in  the  later  period  of  the  Jewish  history, 
was  divided  into  three  equal  portions  of  forty  years 
each  (Acts  vii.  23,  30,  30).  This  agrees  with  the 
natural  arrangement  of  his  history  into  the  three 
parts  of  his  Egyptian  education,  his  exile  in  Arabia, 
and  his  government  of  the  Israelite  nation  in  the 
Wilderness  and  on  the  confines  of  I'alestine. 

I.  His  birth  and  education.  The  immediate  pe- 
digree of  Moses  is  as  follows : — 

Levi 


MOSES 


425 


Amram  =  Jochebod 


Hiu-  =  Miriam  Aaron  =  Elisheba  Mobbs    =  Zipponih 


I  I  I 

Nadab    Abihu    Eleaz:u 

J 


Una 


I  I 

Gershom     Eliuzor 


Pbinehas.  Jonathan. 

In  the  Koran,  by  a  strange  confusion,  the  family 
<>f  Moses  is  confounded  with  the  Holy  Family  of 
Nazareth,  chiefly  through  the  identifiaition  of  Mary 
and  Miriam,  and  the  3rd  chapter,  which  describes  the 
evangelical  history,  bears  the  name  of  the  "  Family 
of  Amram."  Although  little  is  known  of  the  family 
except  through  its  connexion  with  this  its  most  illus- 
trious member,  yet  it  was  not  without  influence  on 
his  after-life. 

The  fact  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  no 
doubt  contributed  to  the  selection  of  that  tribe 
as  the  sacred  caste.  The  tie  that  bound  them  to 
Moses  was  one  of  kinship,  and  they  thus  naturally 
rallied  round  the  religion  which  he  had  been  the 
means  of  establishing  (Ex.  xxxii.  28)  with  an  ardour 
which  could  not  have  been  found  elsewhere.  His 
own  eager  devotion  is  also  a  quality,  for  good  or 
evil,  characteristic  of  the  whole  tiibo. 

The  Levitical  parentage  and  the  Egyptian  origin 
both  appear  in  the  family  names.  Gershom,  Eleazar, 
are  both  repeated  in  the  younger  generations.  Moses 
(vide  infra)  and  Pldnchas  (see  Brugsch,  Hist,  dc 
I'Egypte,  i.  173)  are  Egyptian.  The  name  of  his 
mother,  Jochebed,  implies  the  knowledge  of  the  name 
of  Jehovah  in  the  bosom  of  the  family.  It  is  its 
first  distinct  appearance  in  the  sacred  history. 

Mii'iam,  who  must  have  been  considerably  older 
than  himself,  and  Aaron,  who  was  three  years 
older  (Ex.  vii.  7),  afterwards  occupy  that  inde- 
pendence of  position  which  their  superior  age  would 
naturally  give  tliem. 

Moses  was  born  according  to  Manetho  (Jos.  c. 
Ap.  i.  26,  ii.  2)  at  Heliopolis,  at  the  time  of  the 
deepest  depression  of  his  nation  in  the  Egyp- 
tian servitude.  Hence  the  Jewish  proverb,  "  When 
the  tale  of  bricks  is  doubled  then  comes  Moses." 
His  birth  (according  to  Josejjhus,  Ant.  ii.  9,  §2,  3, 
4)  had  been  foretold  to  Pharaoh  by  the  Egyptian 
magicians,  and  to  his  fiither  Amram  by  a  dream — 
as  respectively  the  future  destroyer  and  deliverer. 
The  pangs  of  his  mother's  labour  were  alleviated 
so  as  to  enable  her  to  evade  the  Egyptian  midwives. 
The  story  of  his  birth  is  thoroughly  Egyptian  in 
its  scone.  The  beauty  of  the  new-born  babe — in 
the   later  versions  of  the   story  amplified  into  a 

•>  She  was  (according  to  Artapanus,  Eus.  I'raep.  Ev.  ix. 
27)  the  daughter  of  Palmauothcs,  who  was  reigning  at 
Heliopolis,  and  the  wife  of  Chcnepbres,  who  was  reigning 
at  Memphis.  In  this  tradition,  and  that  of  Phflo  (  V.  M. 
i.  4),  she  has  no  child,  and  hence  her  deliglit  at  finding  one. 

<^  Brugsch,  however  {V Hisljoue  d'Egyjite,  pp.  157,  173), 
renders  the  name  Mcs  or  jl/ts«on  =  child,  buiiie  by  one  uf 
the  princes  of  Etliiopia  under  Rameses  II.  In  the  Arabic 
traditions  the  name  is  derived  from  his  discovery  in  the 


bea\ity  and  size  (Jos.  Ibid.  §1,  5)  almost  divine 
(acrreios  tw  6€(^,  Acts  vii.  20  ;  the  word  affTeios 
is  taken  from  the  LXX.  version  of  Ex.  ii.  2,  and 
is  used  again  in  Heb.  xi.  23,  and  is  applied  to 
none  but  Moses  in  the  N.T.) — induced  the  mother 
to  make  extraordinary  efforts  for  its  preservation 
from  the  general  destruction  of  the  male  children 
of  Israel.  For  three  months  the  child  was  con- 
cealed in  the  house.  Then  his  mother  placed  him 
in  a  small  boat  or  basket  of  papyrus — perhaps  from 
a  cuiTent  Egyptian  belief  that  the  plant  is  a  protec- 
tion from  crocodiles  (Plut.  Is.  4'  Os.  3.58) — closed 
against  the  water  by  bitumen.  This  was  placed 
among  the  aquatic  vegetation  by  the  side  of  one  of 
the  canals  of  the  Nile.  [Nile.]  The  mother  de- 
parted as  if  unable  to  bear  the  sight.  The  sister 
lingered  to  watch  her  brother's  fate.  The  basket 
(Jos.  Ibid.  §4^  floated  down  the  stream. 

The  Egyptian  princess  (to  whom  the  Jewish  tra- 
ditions gave  the  name  of  Thermuthis,  Jos.  Ant.  ii. 
9,  §5;  Artapanus,  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  27,  the  name  of 
Mcrrhis,  and  the  Arabic  traditions  that  of  As'iat, 
Jalaladdin,  387)  came  down,  after  the  Homeric  sim- 
plicity of  the  age,  to  bathe  in  the  sacred  river,''  or 
(Jos.  Ant.  ii.  9,  §5)  to  play  by  its  side.  Her  at- 
tendant slaves  followed  her.  She  saw  the  basket  in 
the  flags,  or  (Jos.  Ibid.)  borne  down  the  stream, 
and  dispatched  divers  after  it.  The  divers,  or  one 
of  the  female  slaves,  brought  it.  It  was  opened, 
and  the  cry  of  the  child  moved  the  p)-incess  to 
compassion.  She  deteiinined  to  rear  it  as  her 
own.  The  child  (Jos.  Ibid.)  refused  the  milk  of 
Egyptian  nurses.  The  sister  was  then  at  hand  to 
recommend  a  Hebrew  nurse.  The  child  was  brought 
up  as  the  princess's  son,  and  the  memory  of  the 
incident  was  long  cherished  in  the  name  given  to 
the  foundling  of  the  water's  side — whether  accord- 
ing to  its  Hebrew  or  Egyptian  form.  Its  Hebrew 
form  is  HS^'O,  Mosheh,  from  riK'Ci,  i/os/ia/i,  "  to 

draw  out" — "because  I  have  draicn  him  out  of 
the  water."  But  this  (as  in  many  other  instances, 
Babel,  &c.)  is  probably  the  Hebrew  form  given  to 
a  foreign  word.  In  Coptic,  mo  =  water,  and  ushe 
=  saved.  This  is  the  explanation'  given  by  Jo- 
sephus  {Ant.  ii.  9,  §6 ;  c.  Apion,  i.  31  ^),  and  con- 
firmed by  the  Greek  foi-m  of  the  word  adopted  in 
the  LXX.,  and  thence  in  the  Vulgate,  MwiKrrjs, 
Moyses,  and  by  Artapanus  Mtliiiffos  (Eus.  Fraep. 
Ev.  \\.  '11).  His  former  Hebrew  name  is  said  to 
have  been  Joachim  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  p.  343). 
The  child  was  adopted  by  the  princess.  Tradition 
describes  its  beauty  as  so  great  that  p;\ssers-by 
stood  fixed  to  look  at  it,  and  labourers  left  their 
work  to  steal  a  glance  (Jos.  Ant.  ii.  9,  §(5). 

From  this  time  for  many  years  Moses  must  be 
considered  as  an  Egyptian.  In  the  Pentateuch  this 
period  is  a  blank,  but  in  the  N.  T.  he  is  re])resented 
as  "  educated  [iiraiSevdr])  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians,"  and  as  "mighty  in  words  and  deeds" 
(Acts  vii.  22).  The  following  is  a  brief  summary 
of  the  Jewish  and  Eg3'ptian  traditions  which  till  up 
the  silence  of  the  sacred  writer.  He  w;is  educated  at 
Heliopolis  (comp.  .Strabo,  xvii.  1),  and  grew  up  there 

water  and  among  the  trees ;  "  for  in  the  Egj-plian  lan- 
guage vu>  is  the  name  of  water,  and  se  is  that  of  a  tree '' 
(Jalaladdin,  3S7). 

d  I'hilo  (  V.  M.  t.  4),  mos  =  water;  Clem.  Alex.  (Strmn. 
i.  p.  343),  tiiuu  =  water.  Clement  (_ib.)  derives  Moses  from 
••drawing  breath."  In  an  ancient  Egyptian  treatise  on 
agriculture  citrd  by  Chwolson  (I'cbeiresle,  &c.,  12  liott) 
his  name  Is  given  as  Munion. 


426 


MOSES 


as  a  priest,  under  his  Egyptian  name  of  Osarsiph 
(Manetho,  apud  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  26,  28,  31)  or  Tisithen 
(Chaeremon,  apud  ib.  32).  "  Osarsiph"  is  derived 
by  Manetho  from  Osiris,  i.  e.  (Osiri-tsf  ?)  "  saved 
by  Osiris"  (Osbum,  Monumental  Eijyjd).  He  was 
taught  the  whole  range  of  Greel<,  Chaldee,  and 
Assyrian  literature.  From  the  Egyptians  espe- 
cially he  learned  mathemati&s,  to  train  his  mind 
for  the  unprejudiced  reception  of  truth  (Philo, 
V.  M.  i.  5).  "He  invented  boats  and  engines  for 
building — instruments  of  war  and  of  hydraulics — 
hieroglyphics — division  of  lands"  (Artapanus,  ap. 
Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  27).  He  taught  Oiijheus,  and 
was  hence  called  by  the  Greeks  Musaeus  (ib.),  and 
by  the  Egyptians  Henues  (ib.).  He  taught  grammar 
to  the  Jews,  whence  it  spread  to  Phoenicia  and  Greece 
(Eupolemus,ap.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  p.  343).  He 
was  sent  on  an  expedition  against  .the  Ethiopians. 
He  got  rid  of  the  serpents  of  the  country  to  be 
traversed  by  turning  baskets  full  of  ibises  upon  them 
(.los.  Ant.  ii.  10,  §2),  and  founded  the  city  of  Her- 
mopolis  to  commemorate  his  victory  (Artapanus,  ap. 
Eus.  ix.  27).  He  advanced  to  Saba,  the  capital 
of  Ethiopia,  and  gave  it  the  name  of  Meroe,  from 
his  adopted  mother  Men-his,  whom  he  buried  there 
(ib.).  Tharbis,  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  Ethiopia, 
fell  in  love  with  him,  and  he  returned  in  triumph 
to  Egypt  with  her  as  his  vnk  (Jos.  Ibid.'). 

n.  The  nurture  of  his  mother  is  probably  spoken 
of  as  the  link  which  bound  him  to  his  own  people, 
and  the  time  had  at  Irfst  arrived  when  he  was 
resolved  to  reclaim  his  nationality.  Here  again  the 
N.  T.  preserves  the  tradition  in  a  distincter  form 
than  the  account  in  the  Pentateuch.  "  Moses,  when 
he  was  come  to  years,  refused  to  be  called  the  son 
of  Pharaoh's  daughter ;  choosing  rather  to  suffer 
affliction  with  the  people  of  God  than  to  enjoy  the 
pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season ;  esteeming  the  re- 
proach of  Christ  greater  riches  than  the  treasures  " 
— the  ancient  accumulated  treasure  of  Rhampsinitus 
and  the  old  kings—"  of  Egypt  "  (Heb.  xi.  24-26). 
In  his  earliest  infancy  he  was  reported  to  have  re- 
fused the  milk  of  Egyptian  nurses  (Jos.  Ant.  ii.  9, 
§5),  and  when  three  years  old  to  have  trampled 
under  his  feet  the  crown  which  Pharaoh  had  play- 
fully placed  on  his  head  (ib.  7).  According  to 
the  Alexandi-ian  representation  of  Philo  ( V.  M. 
i.  6),  he  led  an  ascetic  life,  in  order  to  pursue 
his  high  philosophic  speculations.  According  to  the 
Egyptian  tradition,  although  a  priest  of  Heliopolis, 
he  always  perfbiTned  his  prayers,  according  to  the 
custom  of  his  fathers,  outside  the  walls  of  the  city, 
in  the  open  air,  tui-ning  towards  the  sun-rising  (Jos. 
c.  Apion.  ii.  2).  The  king  was  excited  to  hatred 
by  the  priests  of  Egypt,  who  foresaw  their  destroyer 
(ib.),  or  by  his  own  envy  (Artapanus,  ap.  Eus.  Pr. 
Ev.  ix.  27).  Vainous  plots  of  assassination  were 
contrived  against  him,  which  failed.  The  last  was 
after  he  had  already  escaped  across  the  Nile  from 
Memphis,  warned  by  his  brother  Aaron,  and  when 
pursued  by  the  assassin  he  killed  him  (ib.).  The 
same  general  account  of  conspiracies  against  his  life 
appears  in  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  10).  All  that  remains 
of  these  traditions  in  the  sacred  narrative  is  the 
simple  and  natural  incident,  that  seeing  an  Israelite 
suffering  the  bastinado  from  an  Egyptian,  and  think- 
ing that  they  \vere  alone,  he  slew  the  Egyptian  (the 
later  tradition,  preserved  by  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
said,  "  with  a  viovA  of  his  mouth"),  and  buried  the 
corpse  in  the  sand  (the  sand  of  the  desert  then,  as 
now,  running  close  up  to  the  cultivated  tract). 
The  fire  of  patriotism  which  thus  turned  him  into 


MOSES 

a  deliverer  from  the  oppressors,  turns  him  in  the 
same  story  into  the  peace-maker  of  the  oppressed. 
It  is  characteristic  of  the  faithfulness  of  the  Je\vish 
records  that  his  flight  is  there  occasioned  rather  by 
the  malignity  of  his  countiymen  than  by  the  enmity 
of  the  Egyptians.  And  in  St.  Stephen's  speech  it  is 
this  part  of  the  story  which  is  drawn  out  at  greater 
length  than  in  the  original,  e%ndently  with  the  view 
of  showing  the  identity  of  the  nan-ow  spirit  which 
had  thus  displayed  itself  equally  against  their  first 
and  their  last  Deliverer  (Acts  vii.  25-35). 

He  fled  into  Jlidian.  Beyond  the  fact  that  it  was 
in  or  near  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  its  precise  situation 
is  unknown.  Arabian  tradition  points  to  the  country 
cast  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  (see  Laborde).  Josephus 
(Ant.  ii.  11,  §1)  makes  it  "by  the  Red  Sea." 
There  was  a  famous  well  ("  the  well,"  Ex.  ii.  15) 
suiTounded  by  tanks  for  the  watering  of  the  flocks 
of  the  Bedouin  herdsmen.  By  this  well  the  fugi- 
tive seated  himself  "  at  noon "  (Jos.  Ibid.),  and 
watched  the  gathering  of  the  sheep.  There  were 
the  Arabian  shepherds,  and  there  were  also  seven 
maidens,  whom  the  shepherds  rudely  drove  away 
from  the  water.  The  chivalrous  spirit  (if  we  may 
so  apply  a  modern  phrase)  which  had  already  broken 
forth  in  behalf  of  his  oppressed  countrymen,  broke 
forth  again  in  behalf  of  the  distressed  maidens. 
They  returned  unusually  soon  to  their  father,  and 
told  him  of  their  adventure.  Their  father  was  a 
person  of  whom  we  know  little,  but  of  whom  that 
little  shows  how  great  an  influence  he  exercised 
over  the  future  career  of  Moses.  It  was  Jethro, 
or  Reuel,  or  Hobab,  chief  or  priest  ("  Sheykh" 
exactly  expresses  the  luiion  of  the  religious  and 
political  influence)  of  the  Midianite  tribes. 

Moses,  who  up  to  this  time  had  been  "  an  Egyp- 
tian" (Ex.  ii.  19),  now  became  for  an  unknown 
period,  extended  by  the  later  tradition  over  forty 
years  (Acts  vii.  30),  an  Arabian.  He  manied  Zip- 
porah,  daughter  of  his  host,  to  whom  he  also  became 
the  slave  and  shepherd  (Ex.  ii.  21,  iii.  1). 

The  blank  which  during  the  stay  in  Egypt  is  filled 
up  by  Egyptian  traditions,  can  here  only  be  supplied 
from  indirect  allusions  in  other  parts  of  the  0.  T. 
The  alliance  between  Israel  and  the  Kenite  branch  of 
the  Midianites,  now  first  forme;!,  was  never  broken. 
[Kenites.]  Jethro  became  their  guide  through 
the  desert.  If  from  Egypt,  as  we  have  seen,  was  ' 
derived  the  secular  and  religious  leaming  of  Moses, 
and  with  this  much  of  their  outward  ceremonial, 
so  from  Jethro  was  derived  the  organization  of  their 
judicial  and  social  arrangements  during  their  nomadic 
state  (Ex.  sviii.  21-23).  Nor  is  the  conjecture  of 
Ev/a]ii  (Gesch.  ii.  59,  60)  improbable,  that  in  this 
pastoral  and  simple  relation  there  is  an  indication  of 
a  wider  concert  than  is  directly  stated  between  the 
rising  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  and  the  Arabian 
tribes,  who,  under  the  name  of  "  the  Shepherds," 
had  been  recently  expelled.  According  to  Artapanus 
(Eus.  Pr.  Ev.  ix.  27)  Reuel  actually  urged  Moses  to 
make  war  upon  Egypt.  Something  of  a  jomt  action 
is  implied  in  the  visit  of  Aaron  to  the  desert  (Ex. 
iv.  27  ;  comp.  Artapanus,  ut  snpra)  ;  something  also 
in  the  sacredness  of  Smai,  already  recognised  both 
by  Israel  and  by  the  Arabs  (Ex.  viii.  27  ;  Jos.  Ant. 
ii.  12,  §1). 

But  the  chief  effect  of  this  stay  in  Arabia  is  on 
Moses  Himself.  It  was  in  the  seclusion  and  sim- 
plicity of  his  shepherd-life  that  he  received  his  call 
as  a  prophet.  The  trflditional  scene  of  this  great 
event  is  in  the  valley  of  Shoayb,  or  Hobab,  on  the 
N.side  of  Jcbcl  IMiisa.     Its  exact  spot  is  marked 


MOSES 

by  the  convent  of  S.  Catherine,  of  which  the  altar 
is  said  to  stand  on  the  site  of  the  Burning  Bush. 
The  original  indications  are  too  slight  to  enable  us 
to  fix  the  spot  with  any  certainty.  It  was  at  "  the 
back  "  of  "  the  wilderness  "  at  lloreb  (Ex.  iii.  1): 
to  which  the  Hebrew  adds,  whilst  the  LXX.  omits, 
"  the  mountain  of  God."  Josephus  further  pai- 
ticularises  that  it  was  the  loftiest  of  all  the  moun- 
tains in  that  region,  and  best  for  pasturage,  from 
its  good  grass ;  and  that,  owing  to  a  belief  that  it 
was  inhabited  by  the  Divinity,  the  shepherds  feared 
to  approach  it  {Ant.  ii.  12,  §1).  Philo  (  V.  M.  i. 
1 2)  adds  "  a  grove  "  or  "  glade." 

Upon  the  mountain  was  a  well-known  acacia 
[Shittim]  (the  definite  article  may  indicate  either 
"  the  particular  celebrated  tree,"  sacred  perhaps 
already,  or  "the  tree"  or  "vegetation  peculiar 
to  the  spot "),  the  thorn-tree  of  the  desert,  spread- 
ing out  its  tangled  branches,  thick  set  with  white 
thoms,  over  the  rocky  ground.  It  was  this  tree 
which  became  the  symbol  of  the  Divine  Presence : 
a  flame  of  fire  in  the  midst  of  it,  in  which  the  dry 
branches  would  naturally  have  crackled  and  burnt 
in  a  moment,  but  which  played  round  it  without 
consuming  it.  In  Philo  (  V.  M.  i.  12)  "  the  angel  " 
is  described  as  a  strange,  but  beautiful  creature. 
Artapanus  (Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  is.  27)  represents  it 
as  a  fire  suddenl)'^  bursting  fi'om  the  bare  ground, 
and  feeding  itself  without  fuel.  But  this  is  far  less 
expressive  than  the  Biblical  image.  Like  all  the 
visions  of  the  Di^^ne  Presence  recorded  in  the  0.  T., 
as  manifested  at  the  outset  of  a  prophetical  career, 
this  was  exactly  suited  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
tribe.  It  was  the  true  likeness  of  the  condition  of 
Israel,  in  the  furnace  of  affliction,  yet  not  destroyed 
(comp.  Philo,  V.  M.  i.  12).  The  place  too,  in  the 
desert  solitude,  was  equally  appropriate,  as  a  sign 
that  the  Divine  protection  was  not  confined  either 
to  the  sanctuaries  of  Egypt,  or  to  the  Holy  Land, 
but  was  to  be  found  with  any  faithful  worshipper, 
fugitive  and  solitary  though  he  might  be.  The  rocky 
ground  at  once  became  "holy,"  and  the  shepherd's 
sandal  was  to  be  taken  oft'  no  less  than  on  the 
threshold  of  a  palace  or  a  temple.  It  is  this  feature 
of  the  incident  on  which  St.  Stephen  dwells,  as  a 
proof  of  the  universality  of  the  true  religion  (Acts 
vii.  29-33). 

The  call  or  revelation  was  twofold — 

1.  The  declaration  of  the  Sacred  iS'ame  expresses 
the  etemal  self-existence  of  the  One  God.  The 
name  itself,  as  already  mentioned,  must  have  been 
known  in  the  family  of  Aaron.  But  its  grand 
significance  was  now  first  drawn  out.   [Jehovah.] 

2.  The  mission  was  given  to  Jloses  to  deliver 
his  people.  The  two  signs  are  characteristic — the 
one  of  his  past  Egyptian  life — the  other  of  his  active 
shepherd  life.  In  the  rush  of  leprosy  into  his 
hand  *  is  the  link  between  him  and  the  people 
whom  the  Egyptians  called  a  nation  of  lepers.  In 
the  transformation  of  his  shepherd's  staft'  is  the 
glorification  of  the  simple  pastoral  life,  of  which 
that  stall'  was  the  symbol,  into  the  great  career 
which  lay  before  it.  The  humble  yet  wonder- 
working crook  is,  in  the  history  of  Moses,  as  Ewald 
finely  observes,  what  the  despised  Cross  is  in  the 
first  history  of  Christianity. 

^  The  Mussulman  legends  speak  of  his  while  shining 
hand  as  the  instrument  of  his  miracles  (D'Hcrbelot). 
Hence  "  the  white  Iiand"  is  proverbial  for  the  healing  art. 

f  So  Ewald  (Ofsdiichte,  vol.  ii.  pt.  •>,  p.  l(i5),  talking  the 
sickness  to  have  visited  Moses.    Uosonmiillcr  makes  Ger- 


MOSES 


427 


In  this  call  of  Moses,  as  of  the  apostles  after- 
wards, the  man  is  swallowed  up  in  the  oause.  Yet 
this  is  the  passage  in  his  history  which,  more  than 
any  other,  brings  out  nis.  outward  and  domestic 
relations. 

He  returns  to  Egypt  from  his  exile.  His  Arabian 
wife  and  her  two  infant  sons  are  with  him.  She  is 
seated  with  them  on  the  ass — (the  ass  was  known  as 
the  animal  peculiar  to  the  Jewish  people  from  Jacob 
down  to  David).  He  apparently  walks  by  their  side 
with  his  shepherd's  staff'.  (The  LXX.  substitute  the 
general  term  ra  viro^vyia.) 

On  the  journey  back  to  Egypt  a  mysterious  in- 
cident occurred  in  the  family,  which  can  only  be 
explained  with  difficulty.  The  most  probable  ex- 
planation seems  to  be,  that  at  the  caravanserai 
either  Moses  or  Gershom  (the  context  of  the  pre- 
ceding verses,  iv.  22,  23,  rather  points  to  the  latter) 
was  struck  with  what  seemed  to  be  a  mortal  illness. 
In  some  way,  not  apparent  to  us,  this  illness  was 
connected  by  Zipporah  with  the  fact  that  her  son 
had  not  been  circumcised — whether  in  the  general 
neglect  of  that  rite  amongst  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, 
or  in  consequence  of  his  birth  in  Midian.  She 
instantly  performed  the  rite,  and  threw  the  sharp 
instrument,  stained  with  the  fresh  blood,  at  the 
feet  of  her  husband,  exclaiming  in  the  agony  of  a 
mother's  anxiety  for  the  life  of  her  child — "  A 
bloody  husband  thoti  art,  to  cause  the  death  of  my 
son."  Then,  when  the  recovery  from  the  illness 
took  place  (whether  of  Moses  or  Gershom),  she 
exclaims  again,  "A  bloody  husband  still  thou  art, 
but  not  so  as  to  cause  the  child's  death,  but  only  to 
bring  about  his  circumcision."  ' 

It  would  seem  to  have  been  in  consequence  of  this 
event,  whatever  it  was,  that  the  wife  and  her  children 
were  sent  back  to  Jethro,  and  remained  with  him 
till  Moses  joined  them  at  Kephidim  (Ex.  xviii.  2-6), 
which  is  the  last  time  that  she  is  distinctly  men- 
tioned. In  Num.  xii.  1  we  hear  of  a  Cushite  wife 
who  gave  umbrage  to  Miriam  and  Aai'on.  This 
may  be — (1)  an  Ethiopian  (Cushite)  wife,  taken 
after  Zipporah's  death  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  229). 
(2)  The  Ethiopian  princess  of  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  10, 
§2) :  (but  that  whole  story  is  probably  only  an 
inference  from  Num.  xii.  1).  (3)  Zipporah  herself, 
which  is  rendei-ed  probable  by  the  juxtaposition  of 
Cushan  with  Midian  in  Hab.  iii.  7. 

The  two  sons  also  sink  into  obscurity.  Their 
names,  though  of  Levitical  origin,  relate  to  their 
foreign  birth-place.  Gershom,  "  stranger,"  and 
Eli-ezer,  "  God  is  my  help,"  commemorated  their 
father's  exile  and  escape  (Ex.  xviii.  3,  4).  Gershom 
was  the  father  of  the  wandering  Levite  Jonatlum 
(Judg.  xviii.  30),  and  the  ancestor  of  Shebuel, 
David's  chief  treasurer  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  16,  xxiv.  20). 
Eliezer  had  an  only  son,  Rehabiah  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  17), 
who  was  the  ancestor  of  a  uumeious  but  obscure 
progeny,  whose  representative  in  David's  time — the 
last  descendant  of  Moses  known  to  us-^was  Shelo- 
mith,  guard  of  the  consecrated  treasures  in  the 
Temple  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  25-28). 

After  this  parting  he  advanced  into  the  desert, 
and  at  the  same  spot  where  he  iiad  had  his  vision 
encountered  Aaron  (Ex.  iv.  27).  From  that  nieet- 
ing  and  cooperation  we  have  the  fii-st  distinct  in- 

shom  the  victim,  and  makes  Zipporah  address  Jehovah, 
the  Arabic  word  for  "  marriage "  being  a  synonym  for 
"  circumcision."  It  is  possible  that  on  this  story  is 
toiuided  the  tradition  of  Artapanus  (Eus.  I'r.  A'r.  i.x.  27), 
that  the  Ethiopians  derived  circumcision  Irom  Moses. 


428 


MOSES 


dicntion  of  his  personal  appexirance  aud  character. 
The  traditional  representations  of  him  in  some 
respects  well  agree  with  that  which  we  derix-e 
from  Michael  Angelo's  famous  sbitue  in  the  church 
of  S.  Pietro  in  Vinculi  at  Rome.  Long  shaggy 
hair  and  beard  is  described  as  his  characteristic 
equally  by  Josephus,  Diodorus  (i.  p.  424),  and 
Artapanus  (kojUtjttjs,  apud  Ens.  Pr.  Ev.  ix.  27). 
To  this  Artapanus  adds  the  curious  touch  that  it 
was  of  a  reddish  hue,  tinged  with  gray  (Truppa/crjs, 
■troXiSi).  The  traditions  of  his  beauty  and  size  as 
a  child  have  been  already  mentioned.  They  are 
continued  to  his  manhood  in  the  Gentile  descrip- 
tions. "  Tall  and  dignified,"  says  Artapanus  {jxd- 
Kpos,  a^LwixariKhs) — "Wise  and  beautiful  as  his 
father  Joseph"  (with  a  curious  confusion  of  genea- 
logies), says  Justin  (xxxvi.  2). 

But  beyond  the  slight  glance  at  his  infantine 
beauty,  no  hint  of  this  gi-and  personality  is  given 
in  the  Bible.  What  is  described  is  rather  the 
reverse.  The  only  point  there  brought  out  is  a 
singular  and  unlocked  for  infirmity.  "  0  my  Lord, 
I  am  not  eloquent,  neither  heretofore  nor  since  Thou 
hast  spoken  to  Thy  servant ;  but  I  am  slow  of 

speech  aud  of  a  slow  tongue How  shall  Pharaoh 

hear  me,  which  am  of  uncircumcised  lips?"  {i.  e. 
slow,  without  words,  stammering,  hesitating:  iffxv6- 
(pavos  Kol  PapvyXuacros,  LXX.),  his  "speech 
contemptible,"  like  St.  Paul's — like  the  English 
Cromwell  (comp.  Carlyle's  Cromwell,  ii.  219) — like 
the  first  efforts  of  the  Greelc  Demosthenes.  In  the  so- 
lution of  this  difficulty  which  Moses  ofFere,  we  read 
both  the  disinterestedness,  which  is  the  most  distinct 
trait  of  his  personal  character,  and  the  future  rela- 
tion of  the  two  brothers.  "  Send,  I  pray  Thee,  by 
the  hand  of  him  whom  Thou  wilt  send  "  [i.  e. "  make 
any  one  Thy  apostle  rather  than  me").  In  outward 
appearance  this  prayer  was  granted  Aaron  spoke 
and  acted  for  Moses,  aud  was  the  permanent  in- 
heritor of  the  sacred  staff  of  power.  But  Moses 
was  the  inspiring  soul  behind ;  and  so  as  time  rolls 
on,  Aaron,  the  prince  and  priest,  has  almost  dis- 
appeared from  view,  and  Moses,  the  dumb,  back- 
ward, disinterested  prophet,  is  in  appearance,  what 
he  was  in  tnith,  the  foremost  leader  of  the  chosen 
people. 

III.  The  histoiy  of  Moses  henceforth  is  the  his- 
tory of  Israel  for  forty  years.  But  as  the  incidents 
of  this  history  are  related  in  other  articles,  under 
the  heads  of  Ehypt,  Exodus,  Plagues,  Sinai, 
Law,  Passover,  Wanderings,  Wilderness,  it 
will  be  best  to  confine  ourselves  here  to  such  indica- 
tions of  his  personal  character  as  transpire  through 
the  geneial  framework  of  the  narrative. 

It  is  important  to  trace  his  relation  to  his  im- 
mediate circle  of  followers.  In  the  Exodus,  he 
takes  the  decisive  lead  on  the  night  of  the  flight. 
Up  to  that  point  he  and  Aaron  appear  almost  on  an 
equality.  But  after  that,  ]\loses  is  usually  men- 
tioned alone.  Aaron  still  held  the  second  place, 
but  the  character  of  interpreter  to  Moses  which  he 
had  borne  in  speaking  to  Pharaoh  withdraws,  and 
it  would  seem  as  if  Moses  henceforth  became  alto- 
gether what  hitherto  he  had  only  been  in  pait,  the 
prophet  of  the  people.  Another  who  occupies  a 
place  nearly  equal  to  Aaron,  though  we  know  but 
little  of  him,  is  HUR,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  husband 
of  Miriam,  and  grandfather  of  the  artist  Bezaleel 
(Joseph.  A7it.  iii.  2,  §4).  He  and  Aaron  are  the 
chief  supporters  of  Moses  in  moments  of  weariness 
or  excitement.  His  adviser  in  regard  to  the  route 
through  the  wilderness  as  well  ;\s  in  the  judicial 


MOSES 

arrangements,  was,  as  we  have  seen,  Jethro.  His 
servant,  occupying  the  same  relation  to  him  as  Elisha 
to  Elijah,  or  Gehazi  to  Elisha,  was  the  youthful 
Hoshea  (afterwards  Joshua).  Miriam  always 
held  the  independent  position  to  which  her  age 
entitled  her.  Her  part  was  to  supply  the  voice 
and  song  to  her  brother's  prophetic  power. 

But  Moses  is  incoutestably  the  chief  personage  of 
the  histoiy,  in  a  sense  in  which  no  one  else  is  de- 
scribed before  or  since.  In  the  narrative,  the  phrase 
is  constantly  recurring,  "  The  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,"  "  Moses  spake  unto  the  children  of  Israel." 
In  the  traditions  of  the  desert,  whether  late  or 
early,  his  name  predominates  over  that  of  every 
one  else,  "  The  Wells  of  Moses  " — on  the  shores  of 
the  Red  Sea.  "  The  Jlountain  of  IMoses  "  (Jebel 
Jliisa) — near  the  convent  of  St.  Catherine.  The 
Ravine  of  Moses  (Shuk  Musa) — at  Mount  St.  Cathe- 
rine. The  Valley  of  Moses  (Wady  Miisa) — at 
Petra.  "  The  Books  of  Moses  "  are  so  called  (as 
afterwards  the  Books  of  Samuel),  in  all  probability 
from  his  being  the  chief  subject  of  them.  The  very 
word  "  Mosaic  "  has  been  in  later  times  applied  (as 
the  proper  name  of  no  other  saint  of  the  O.  T.)  to 
the  whole  rehgion.  Even  as  applied  to  tesselated 
pavement  ("  Mosaic,"  Musivum,  fiovcrelov,  fiov- 
(TaiK6v),  there  is  some  probabilitj'  that  the  expres- 
sion is  derived  from  the  variegated  pavement  of  the 
later  Temple,  which  had  then  become  the  represen- 
tative of  the  religion  of  Moses  (see  an  Essay  of 
Redslob,  Zeitschrift  dcr  Deutsch.  Morgeul.  Gesells. 
xiv.  603). 

It  has  sometimes  been  attempted  to  reduce  this 
great  character  into  a  mere  passive  instrument  of 
the  Divine  Will,  as  though  he  had  himself  borne 
no  conscious  part  in  the  actions  in  which  he  figures, 
or  the  messages  which  he  delivers.  This,  however, 
is  as  incompatible  with  the  general  tenor  of  the 
Scriptural  account,  as  it  is  with  the  common  lan- 
guage in  which  he  has  been  described  by  the  Church 
in  all  ages.  The  frequent  addresses  of  the  Divinity 
to  him  no  more  contravene  his  personal  activity 
and  intelligence,  than  in  the  case  of  Elijah,  Isaiah, 
or  St.  Paul.  In  the  N.  T.  the  Mosaic  legislation  is 
expressly  ascribed  to  him : — "  Moses  gave  you  cir- 
cumcision" (Johnvii.  22).  ^^  Moses,  because  of  the 
hardness  of  your  hearts,  suffered  you  "  (Matt.  xix.  8). 
"  Did  not  Moses  give  you  the  law?  "  (John  vii.  19). 
"Moses  accuseth  you  "  (John  v.  45).  St.  Paid  goes 
so  far  as  to  speak  of  him  as  the  founder  of  the 
Jewish  religion :  "  They  were  all  baptized  tinto 
Moses"  (1  Cor.  x.  2).  He  is  constantly  called  "a 
Prophet."  In  the  poetical  hmguage  of  the  0.  T. 
(Num.  xxi.  18  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  21),  and  in  the  popular 
language  both  of  Jews  aud  Christians,  he  is  known 
as  "  the  Lawgiver."  The  terms  in  which  his  legis- 
lation is  described  by  Philo  (  V.  M.  ii.  1-4)  is  deci- 
sive as  to  the  ancient  Jewish  view.  He  must  be 
considered,  like  all  the  saints  and  heroes  of  the  Bible, 
as  a  man,  of  mai-vellous  gifts,  raised  up  by  Divine 
Providence,  for  a  special  purpose;  but  as  led,  both 
by  his  own  disposition  and  by  the  peculiarity 
of'  the  Revelation  which  he  received,  into  a  closer 
communion  with  the  invisible  world  than  was  vouch- 
safed to  any  other  in  the  Old  Testament. 

There  aie  two  main  characters  in  which  he  ap- 
pears, as  a  Leader  and  as  a  Prophet.  The  two  are 
more  frequently  combined  in  the  East  than  in  the 
West.  Several  remarkable  instances  occur  in  the 
history  of  Mahometanism  :  —  JIahomet  himseltj 
Alxi-el-Kader  in  Algeria,  Scliamyl  in  Circassia. 
(a.)  As  a  Leader,  his  life  divides  itself  into  the  tin  be 


MOSES 

epochs — of  the  march  to  Sinai ;  the  march  from 
Sinai  to  Kadesh  ;  and  the  conquest  of  the  Trans- 
jordanic  kingdoms.  Of  his  natural  gifts  in  this 
capacity,  we  have  but  few  means  of  judging.  The 
two  main  dilKculties  which  he  encountered  were 
the  reluctance  of  the  people  to  submit  to  his  guid- 
ance, and  the  impracticable  nature  of  the  country 
which  they  had  to  traverse.  The  patience  with 
which  he  bore  their  murmurs  is  often  described — 
at  the  Red  Sea,  at  the  apostacy  of  the  golden  calf, 
at  the  rebellion  of  Korah,  at  the  complaints  of  Aaron 
and  Miriam.  The  incidents  with  which  his  name 
was  specially  connected  both  in  the  sacred  nan-ative, 
and  in  the  Jewish,  Arabian,  and  heathen  traditions, 
were  those  of  supplying  water,  v/hen  most  wanted. 
This  is  the  only  point  in  his  life  noted  by  Tacitus, 
who  describes  him  as  guided  to  a  spring  of  water 
by  a  herd  of  wild  asses  {Hist.  v.  3).  In  the  Penta- 
teuch these  supplies  of  water  take  place  at  Mar;di, 
at  Horeb,  at  Kadesh,  and  in  the  land  of  Moab.  That 
at  Marah  is  produced  by  the  sweetening  of  waters 
through  a  tree  in  the  desert,  those  at  Horeb  and 
at  Kadesh  by  the  opening  of  a  rift  in  the  "  rock  " 
and  in  the  "clitf;"  that  in  Moab,  by  the  united 
efforts,  under  his  direction,  of  the  chiefs  and  of  the 
people  (Num.  .\xi.  18).K  (See  Philo,  V.  M.  i.  40.) 
Of  tlie  three  first  of  these  incidents,  traditional 
sites,  bearing  his  name,  are  shown  in  the  desert 
at  the  present  day,  though  most  of  them  aie 
rejected  by  modern  travellers.  One  is  Ayun 
Musa,  "the  wells  of  Moses,"  immediately  south 
of  Suez,  which  the  tradition  (probably  from  a 
confusion  with  Marah)  ascribes  to  the  rod  of  Moses. 
Of  the  water  at  Horeb,  two  memorials  are  shown. 
One  is  the  Shuk  Musa,  or  "  cleft  of  Moses," 
in  tlie  side  of  Mount  St.  Catherine,  and  the  other 
is  the .  remarkable  stone,  first  mentioned  expressly 
in  the  Koran  fii.  57),  which  exhibits  the  12  marks 
or  mouths  out  of  which  the  water  is  supposed  to 
have  issued  for  the  12  tribes."*  The  fourth  is  the 
celebrated  "  Sik,"  or  ravine,  by  wliich  Petra  is 
approached  from  the  East,  and  which,  from  the 
story  of  its  being  torn  open  by  the  rod  of  Moses, 
has  given  his  name  (the  Wadij  Musa')  to  the 
whole  valley.  The  quails  and  the  manna  ai-e  less 
directly  ascrilied  to  the  inteieession  of  Moses.  Tlie 
brazen  serpent  that  was  lifted  up  as  a  sign  of  the 
Divine  protection  against  tlie  snakes  of  the  desert 
(Num.'xxi.  8,  9),  was  directly  connected  with  his 
name,  down  to  the  latest  times  of  the  nation  (2  K. 
-xviii.  4  ;  John  iii.  14).  Of  all  the  relics  of  his  time, 
with  the  exception  of  the  Ark,  it  was  the  one 
longest  preserved.     [Nehusutan.] 

Tlie  route  through  the  wilderness  is  described 
as  having  been  made  under  his  guidance.  The 
particular  spot  of  the  encampment  is  fixed  by  the 
cloudy  pillar.  But  the  direction  of  the  people  first 
to  the  Red  Sea,  and  then  to  Mount  Sinai  (where 
lie  had  been  before),  is  communicated  through 
Moses,  or  given  by  him.  According  to  the  tradition 
of  Memphis,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  was  effected 
through  Moses's  knowledge  of  the  movement  of 
the  tide  (Eus.  I'racp.  Ev.  ix.  27).  And  in  all  the 
wanderings  from  Mount  Sinai  he  is  said  to  have 
had  the  assistance  of  Jethro.  In  the  Mussulman 
legends,  as  if  to  avoid  this  appearance  of  human 
aid,  the  place  of  Jetliro  is  t;vken  by  El  Khudr,  the 

e  An  illustration  of  these  passages  is  to  be  found  In 
one  of  the  representations  of  Rameses  II.  (contemporary 
with  Moses),  in  lilce  manner  calling  ont  water  from  the 
desert-rocks  (see  Brugsch,  Hist,  di;  I'Kg.  i.  p.  153). 

^  See  S.  &  I'.,  ■16-7,  also  WoilTs  Tiavds,  'ind  Kd.  125. 


MOSES 


429 


mysterious  benefactor  of  mankind  (D'Herbelot, 
Moussa).  On  approaching  Palestine  the  office  of 
the  leader  becomes  blended  with  that  of  the  general 
or  the  conqueror.  By  Moses  the  spies  were  sent  to 
explore  the  country.  Against  his  advice  took  pla-e 
the  first  disastrous  battle  atHoimah.  To  his  guiumice 
is  ascribed  the  circuitous  route  by  which  the  nation 
approached  Palestine  ii-om  the  East,  and  to  his  gene- 
ralship the  two  successful  campaigns  in  which  SiU3x 
and  Og  were  defeated.  The  narrative  is  told  so 
shortly,  that  we  are  in  danger  of  forgetting  that  at 
this  last  stage  of  his  life  Jloses  must  have  been  as 
much  a  conqueror  and  victorious  soldier  as  Joshua. 

(6.)  His  chai'acter  as  a  Prophet  is,  from  the  nature 
of  the  case,  more  distinctly  brought  out.  He  is  the 
first  as  he  is  the  greatest  example  of  a  Prophet  in 
the  0.  T.  The  name  is  indeed  applied  to  Abraham 
before  (Gen.  xx.  7),  but  so  casually  as  not  to  enforce 
our  attention.  But,  in  the  case  of  Moses,  it  is  given 
with  peculiar  emphasis.  In  a  certain  sense,  he  ap- 
pears as  the  centre  of  a  prophetic  circle,  now  for  the 
first  time  named.  His  brother  and  sister  were  both 
endowed  with  prophetic  gifts.  Aaron's  fluent  speech 
enabled  him  to  act  the  part  of  Prophet  for  Moses 
in  the  first  instance,  and  Miriam  is  expressly  called 
"  the  Prophetess."  The  seventy  elders,  and  Eldad 
and  Medad  also,  all  "  prophesied  "  (Num.  xi.  25-27). 

But  Moses  (at  least  after  the  Exodus)  rose  high 
above  all  these.  The  others  are  spoken  of  as  more 
or  less  inferior.  Their  conimvuiications  were  made 
to  them  in  di'eams  and  figures  (Deut.  xiii.  1-4  ; 
Num.  xii.  6).  But  "  Moses  was  not  so."  With 
him  the  Divine  revelations  were  made,  "  mouth  to 
mouth,  even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark  speeches, 
and  the  similitude  of  Jehovah  shall  he  behold" 
(Num.  xii.  8).  In  the  Mussulman  legends  his  sur- 
name is  "  Kelim  Allah,"  "  the  spoken  to  by  God." 
Of  the  especial  modes  of  this  more  direct  communi- 
cation, four  great  examples  are  given,  corresponding 
to  four  critical  epochs  in  his  historical  career,  which 
help  us  in  some  degree  to  understand  what  is  meant 
by  these  expressions  in  the  sacred  text.  (1.)  The 
appearance  of  the  Divine  presence  in  the  flaming 
acacia-tree  has  been  ah'eady  noticed.  The  usual 
pictorial  representations  of  that  scene — of  a  wingal 
human  form  in  the  midst  of  the  bush,  belongs  to 
Philo  {V.M.  i.  12),  not  to  the  Bible.  No  form 
is  described.  *  The  Angel,"  or  "  Messenger,"  is 
spoken  of  as  being  "  in  the  flame."  On  this  it 
was  that  Moses  was  afi-aid  to  look,  and  hid  his 
face,  in  order  to  hear  the  Divine  voice  (Ex.  iii. 
2-G).  (2.)  In  the  giving  of  the  Law  from  Mount 
Sinai,  the  outward  form  of  the  revelation  was  a 
thick  darkness  as  of  a  thunder-cloud,  out  of  whii;h 
proceeded  a  voice  (Ex.  xix.  19,  xx.  21).  The  re- 
velation on  this  occasion  was  especially  of  the  Name 
of  Jehovah.  Outside  this  cloud  Moses  himself 
remained  on  the  mountain  (Ex.  xxiv.  1,  2,  15),  and 
received  the  voice,  as  from  the  cloud,  wliich  re- 
vealed the  Ten  Commandments,  and  a  short  code  of 
laws  in  addition  (Ex.  xx.-xxiii).  On  two  occasions 
he  is  described  as  having  penetrated  within  the 
darkness,  and  remained  tliere,  successively,  for  two 
periods  of  forty  days,  of  which  the  second  was  spent  in 
absolute  seclusion  and  fasting  (Ex.  xxiv.  18,  xxxiv. 
28).  On  tlie  first  occasion  he  received  instructions 
respecting  the  tabernacle,  from  "  a  pattern  showed  to 
him  "  (XXV.  9,  40  ;  xxvi.,  xxvii.),  and  respecting  the 
priesthood  (xxviii.-xxxi.).  Of  the  second  occiision 
hardly  anything  is  told  us.  But  each  of  these  periods 
was  concluded  by  the  production  of  the  two  slabs  or 
tables  of  granite,  containing  the  successive  editions 


430 


MOSES 


of  the  Teu  Commandments  (Ex.  xxxii.  15,  16).  On 
the  first  ot"  the  two  occiisions  the  ten  moral  com- 
mandments are  those  commonly  so  called  (comp. 
Ex.  XX.  1-17,  xxxii.  15;  Dent.  v.  6-22).  On  the 
second  occasion  (if  we  take  the  literal  sense  of  Ex. 
xxxiv.  27,  28),  they  are  the  ten  (chiefly)  ceremo- 
nial commandments  of  Ex.  xxxiv.  14-26.  The  first 
are  said  to  have  been  the  writing  of  God  (Ex.  xxxi. 
18,  xxxii.  16;  Deut.  v.  22);  the  second,  the 
writing  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxxiv.  28).  (3)  It  was  neai-ly 
at  the  close  of  those  communications  in  the  moun- 
tains of  Sinai  that  an  especial  revelation  was  made 
to  him  personally,  answering  in  some  degree  to  that 
which  first  called  him  to  his  mission.  In  the  de- 
spondency produced  by  the  apostacy  of  the  molten 
calf,  he  besought  Jehovah  to  show  him  "  His 
glory."  The  wish  was  thoroughly  Egyptian.  The 
same  is  recorded  of  Amenoph,  the  Pharaoh  pre- 
ceding the  Exodus.  But  the  Divine  answer  is  tho- 
roughly Biblical.  It  announced  that  an  actual  vision 
of  God  was  impossible.  "  Thou  canst  not  see  my 
face  ;  for  there  shall  no  man  see  my  face  and  live." 
He  was  commanded  to  hew  two  blocks  of  stone, 
like  those  which  he  had  destroyed.  He  was  to 
come  absolutely  alone.  Even  the  flocks  and  herds 
which  fed  in  the  neighbouring  valleys  were  to  be 
removed  out  of  the  sight  of  ihe  mountain  (Ex. 
xxxiii.  18,  20 ;  xxxiv.  1,  3).  He  took  his  place  on  a 
well-known  or  prominent  rock  ("  the  rock  ")  (sxxiii. 
21).  The  cloud  passed  by  (xxxiv.  5,  xxxiii.  22). 
A  voice  proclaimed  the  two  immutable  attributes 
of  God,  Justice  and  Love — in  words  which  became 
part  of  the  religious  creed  of  Israel  and  of  the  world 
(xxxiv.  6,  7).  The  importance  of  this  incident  in 
the  life  of  Moses  is  atte^ted  not  merely  by  the 
place  which  it  holds  in  the  sacred  record,  but  by 
the  deep  hold  that  it  has  t<iken  of  the  Mussulman 
traditions,  and  the  local  legends  of  Jlount  Sinai. 
It  is  told,  with  some  characteristic  variations,  in 
the  Koran  (vii.  139),  and  is  commemorated  in  the 
Mussulman  chapel  erected  on  the  summit  of  the 
mountain  which  from  this  incident  (rather  than 
from  any  other)  has  taken  the  name  of  the  Moun- 
tain of  Moses  (Jehel  Musa).  A  cavity  is  shown  in 
the  rock,  as  produced  by  the  pressure  of  the  back 
of  Moses,  when  he  shrank  from  the  Divine  glory' 
{S.  4-  P.  30). 

(4).  The  fourth  mode  of  Divine  manifestation 
was  that  which  is  described  as  commencing  at  this 
juncture,  and  which  continued  with  more  or  less  con- 
tinuity through  the  rest  of  his  career.  Immediately 
after  the  catastrophe  of  the  worship  of  the  ailf,  and 
apparently  in  consequence  of  it,  Moses  removed  the 
chief  tent  ^  outside  the  camp,  and  invested  it  with 
a  sacred  character  under  the  name  of  "  the  Tent  or 
Tabernacle  of  the  Congregation"  (xxxiii.  7).  This 
tent  became  henceforth  the  chief  scene  of  his  com- 
munications with  God.  He  left  the  camp,  and  it  is 
described  how,  as  in  the  expectation  of  some  great 
event,  all  the  people  rose  up  and  stood  every  man 
at  his  tent  door,  and  looked — gazing  after  Closes 
until  he  disappeared  within  the  tent.  As  he  disap- 
peared the  entrance  was  closed  behind  him  by  the 
cloudy  pillar,  at  the  sight  of  which  ™  the  people 
prostrated  themselves  (xxxiii.  10).  The  communi- 
cations within  the  tent  were  described  as  being 
still  more  intimate  than  those  on  the  mountain. 
"  Jehovah  spake  unto  Moses  face  to  face,  as  a 


'  It  is  this  moment  which  is  seized  in  the  recent  sculp- 
tm-e  by  Mr.  Woolner  in  Llandaff  Cathedral. 
It  According  to  the  LXX.  it  was  his  own  tent. 
"»  Kwuld,  Altei-tliiimey,  p.  329. 


MOSES 

man  speaketh  unto  his  friend  "  (xxxiii.  11).  He  was 
apparently  accompanied  on  these  mysterious  visits 
by  his  attendant  Hoshea  (or  Joshua),  who  remained 
in  the  tent  after  his  master  had  left  it  (xxxiii.  11). 
All  the  revelations  contained  in  the  books  of  Leviticus 
and  Numbers  seem  to  have  been  made  in  this  manner 
(Lev.  i.  1 ;  Num.  i.  1). 

It  was  during  these  communications  that  a  pecu- 
liarity is  mentioned  which  apparently  had  not  been 
seen  before.  It  was  on  his  final  descent  from 
]\Iount  Sinai,  after  his  second  long  seclusion,  that  a 
splendour  shone  on  his  face,  as  if  from  the  glory  of 
the  Divine  Presence.  It  is  fi'om  the  Vulgate  trans- 
lation of  "  ra}'  "  (pp);  "  comutam  habens  faciem," 
that  the  conventional  representation  of  the  horns  of 
Moses  has  arisen.  The  rest  of  the  stray  is  told  so 
dilFerently  in  the  different  versions  that  both  must 
be  given.  (1.)  In  the  A.  V.  and  most  Protestant 
versions,  Moses  is  said  to  wear  a  veil  in  order  to 
hide  the  splendour.  In  order  to  produce  this  sense, 
the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  xxxiv.  33  reads,  "  and  [till]  Moses 
had  done  speaking  with  them  " — and  other  versions, 
"he  had  put  on  the  veil."  (2.)  In  the  LXX.  and 
the  Vulgate,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  said  to  put  on 
the  veil,  not  during,  but  after,  the  conversation 
with  the  people — in  order  to  hide,  not  the  splendoui", 
but  the  vanishing  away  of  the  splendour ;  and  to 
have  worn  it  till  the  moment "  of  his  return  to  the 
Divine  Presence  in  order  to  rekindle  the  light  there. 
With  this  reading  agrees  the  obvious  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  words,  and  it  is  this  rendering,  of  the 
sense,  which  is  followed  by  St.  Paul  in  2  Cor.  iii.  13, 
14,  where  he  contrasts  the  fearlessness  of  the  Apos- 
tolic teaching  with  the  concealment  of  that  of  the 
0.  T.  "  We  have  no  fear,  as  Moses  had,  that  our 
glory  will  pass  away." 

There  is  another  form  of  the  prophetic  gift, 
in  which  Moses  more  neaily  resembles  the  later 
prophets.  We  need  not  heie  determine  (what  is 
best  considered  under  the  several  books  which  bear 
his  name,  Pentateuch,  &c.)  the  extent  of  his 
authorship,  or  the  period  at  which  these  books 
were  put  together  in  their  present  foi-m.  Eupole- 
mus  (Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  26)  makes  him  the 
author  of  letters.  But  of  this  the  Hebrew  naiTa- 
tive  gives  no  indication.  There  are  two  portions 
of  the  Pentateuch,  and  two  only,  of  which  the 
actual  loriting  is  ascribed  to  Moses :  (1 .)  The 
second  Edition  of  the  Ten  Commandments  (Ex. 
xxxiv.  28),  (2.)  The  jegister  of  the  Stations  in  the 
Wilderness  (Num.  xxxiii.  1).  But  it  is  clear 
that  the  prophetical  office,  as  represented  in  the 
history  of  Moses,  included  the  poetical  foi-m  of  com- 
position which  characterizes  the  Jewish  prophecy 
generally.  These  poetical  utterances,  whether  con- 
nected with  Moses  by  ascription  or  by  actual  au- 
thorship, enter  so  largely  into  the  ftdl  Biblical  con- 
ception of  his  character,  that  the)'  must  be  here 
mentioned. 

1 .  "  The'  song  which  Moses  and  the  children 
of  Israel  sung"  (after  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea, 
Ex.  XV.  1-19).  It  is,  unquestionably,  the  earliest 
written  account  of  that  event ;  and,  although  it  may 
have  been  in  part,  according  to  the  conjectm-es  of 
Ewald  and  Bunsen,  adapted  to  the  sanctuary  of 
Gerizim  or  Shiloh,  yet  its  framework  and  ideas  are 
essentially  Mosaic.  It  is  probably  this  song  to 
which  allusion  is  made  in  Rev.  xv.  2,3:  "  They  stand 


n  III  Ex.  xxxiv.  34,  35,  the  Vulgate,  apparently  by  fol- 
lowuig  a  different  reading,  DPlN.  "  with  them,"  for 
iriN.  "  with  him,"  differs  both  from  the  TA'X.  and  A.  V. 


MOSES 

on  the  sea  of  g'lass  mingled  with  five  .   .   .  and  sing 
the  song  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God." 

2.  A  fiagment  of  a  war -song  against  Amalek — 

"  As  the  hand  is  on  the  throne  of  Jehovah, 
So  will  Jehovah  war  with  Amalek 
From  generation  to  generation." 

(Ex.  xvii.  16). 

3.  A  fragnnent  of  a  lyrical  burst  of  indignation — 
"  Not  the  voice  of  them  that  shout  for  mastery, 

Nor  the  voice  of  tliem  that  cry  for  being  overcome. 
But  the  noise  of  them  that  sing  do  1  hear." 

(Ex.  xxxii.  18). 

4.  Probably,  either  from  him  or  his  immediate 
prophetic  followers,  the  fragments  of  war-songs  in 
Num.  xxi.  14, 15,  27-30,  preserved  in  the  "  book  of 
the  wars  of  Jehovah,"  Num.  xxi.  14 ;  and  the 
address  to  the  well,  xxi.  IG,  17,  18. 

5.  The  song  of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxii.  1-43),  setting 
forth  the  greatness  and  tire  failings  of  Israel.  It  is 
remarkable  as  bringing  out  with  much  force  the  idea 
of  God  as  the  Rock  (xxxii.  4,  15,  18,  30,  31,  37). 
The  special  allusions  to  the  pastoral  riches  of  Israel 
point  to  tlie  trans-Jordanic  territory  as  the  scene  of 
its  composition  (xxxii.  13,  14). 

6.  The  blessing  of  Moses  on  the  tribes  (Deut. 
xxxiii.  1-29).  If  there  are  some  allusions  in  this 
psalm  to  circumstances  only  belonging  to  a  later 
time  (stich  as  the  migration  of  Dan,  xxxiii.  22),  yet 
there  is  no  one,  in  whose  mouth  it  could  be  so  ap- 
propriately placed,  as  in  that  of  the  great  leader  on 
the  eve  of  the  final  conquest  of  Palestine.  This 
poem  combined  with  the  similar  blessing  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xlix.),  embraces  a  complete  collective  view  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  tribes. 

7.  The  90th  Psalm,  "  A  prayer  of  Moses,  the 
man  of  God."  The  title,  like  all  the  titles  of  the 
Psalms  is  of  doubtful  authority — and  the  Psalm 
has  often  been  referred  to  a  later  author.  But 
Ewald  {Psalmen,  p.  91)  thinks  that,  even  thougli 
this  be  the  case,  it  still  breathes  the  spirit  of  the 
venerable  lawgiver.  There  is  something  extremely 
characteristic  of  Moses,  in  the  view  taken,  as  from 
the  summit  or  base  of  Sinai,  of  the  eternity  of  God, 
greater  even  than  the  eternity  of  mountains,  in 
contrast  with  the  fleeting  generations  of  man.  One 
expression  in  the  Psalm,  as  to  the  limit  of  human 
life  (70,  or  at  most  80  years)  in  veise  10,  would, 
if  it  be  Mo.saic,  fix  its  date  to  the  stay  at  Sinai. 
Jerome  (^Ado.  Ruffin.  i.  §13),  on  tlie  authority  of 
Origen,  ascribes  the  next  eleven  Psalms  to  !Moses. 
Cosma.s  (Cosmogr.  v.  223)  supposes  that  it  is  by  a 
younger  Moses  of  the  time  of  David. 

How  far  the  gradual  development  of  these  re- 
velations or  prophetic  utterances  had  any  connexion 
with  his  own  character  and  history,  the  materials 
are  not  such  as  to  justify  any  decisive  judgment. 
His  Egyptian  education  must,  on  the  one  hand,  have 
supplied  him  with  mnch  of  tlic  ritual  of  the  Israelite 
worship.  The  coincidences  between  tlie  an-ange- 
ments  of  the  priesthood,  the  dress,  the  sacrifices, 
the  ark,  in  the  two  countries,  are  decisive.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  proclamation  of  the  Unity  of  God 
not  merely  as  a  doctrine  confined  to  tlie  priestly 
order,  but  communicited  to  the  whole  nation,  im- 
plies distinct  antagonism,  almost  a  conscious  recoil 
against  the  Egyptian  system.  And  the  absence  of 
tlie  doctrine  of  a  future  st;ite  (without  adopting  to 
its  full  extent  the  paradox  of  Warburton)  proves  at 
least  a  lomarkable  independence  of  the  Egyptian 
theology,  in  whicli  that  great  doctrine  held  so  pro- 
minent a  place.  Some  mcKlern  critics  have  supposed 
tiiat  the  Levitic;tl  ritual  was  an  aftor-growtli  of  the 


MOSES 


431 


Mosaic  system,  necessitated  or  suggested  by  the  in- 
capacity of  the  Israelites  to  retain  the  higher  and 
simpler  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Unity, — as  proved  by 
their  retui-n  to  the  worship  of  the  Heliopolitan  calf 
under  the  sanction  of  the  brother  of  Moses  himself. 
There  is  no  direct  statement  of  this  connexion  in 
the  sacred  narrative.  But  there  are  indirect  indi- 
cations of  it,  sufficient  to  give  some  colour  to  such 
an  explanation.  The  event  itself  is  described  as  a 
crisis  in  the  life  of  Moses,  almost  equal  to  that  in 
which  he  received  his  first  call.  In  an  agony  of 
rage  and  disappointment  he  destroyed  tlie  monu- 
ment of  his  first  revelation  (Ex.  xxxii.  19).  He 
threw  up  his  sacred  mission  (ib.  32).  He  craved 
and  he  received  a  new  and  special  revelation  of  the 
attributes  of  God  to  console  him  {ib.  xxxiii.  18). 
A  fresh  start  was  made  in  his  career  (Jb.  xxxiv.  29). 
His  relation  with  his  countrymen  henceforth  became 
more  awful  and  mysterious  (ib.  32-35).  In  point 
of  fiict,  the  greater  part  of  the  details  of  the  Levi- 
tical  system  were  subsequent  to  this  catastrophe. 
The  institution  of  the  Levitical  tribe  grew  directly 
out  of  it  (xxxii.  26).  And  the  inferiority  of  this 
part  of  the  system  to  the  rest  is  exjiressly  stated  in 
the  Prophets,  and  expressly  connected  with  the  idol- 
atrous tendencies  of  the  nation.  "  Wherefore  I  gave 
them  statutes  that  were  not  good,  and  judgments 
whereby  they  should  not  live"  (Ez.  xx.  25). 
"  I  spake  not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded 
them  in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  concerning  burnt-offerings  or  sacri- 
fices" (Jer.  vii.  22). 

Other  portions  of  the  Law,  such  as  the  regula- 
tions of  slavery,  of  blood-feud,  of  clean  and  unclean 
food,  were  probably  taken,  with  the  necessary  modi- 
fications, from  the  customs  of  the  desert-tribes. 

But  the  distinguishing  features  of  the  law  of 
Israel,  which  have  remained  to  a  considerable  extent 
in  Christendom,  are  peculiarly  Mosaic ; — the  Ten 
Commandments  ;  and  the  general  spirit  of  justice, 
humanity,  and  liberty,  that  pervades  even  the  more 
detailed  and  local  obsen'ances. 

The  prophetic  office  of  Moses,  however,  am  only 
be  fully  considered  in  connexion  with  his  whole 
character  and  appearance.  "  By  a  prophet  Jehovah 
brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  and  by  a  prophet 
was  he  preserved"  (Hos.  xii.  13).  He  was  in  a 
sense  peculiar  to  himself  the  founder  and  represen- 
tative of  his  people.  And,  in  accordance  with  this 
complete  identifiaition  of  himself  with  his  nation,  is 
the  only  strong  personal  trait  whicli  we  are  able  to 
gather  from  his  history.  "  The  man  Moses  was 
very  meek,  above  all  the  men  that  were  upon  the 
face  of  the  eaith  "  (Num.  xii.  3).  The  word  "  meek" 
is  hardly  an  adequate  reading  of  the  Hebrew  term 
Ijy,  which  shoidd  be  rather  "  much  enduring  ;"  and, 
in  fact,  his  onslaught  on  the  Egyptian,  and  his 
sudden  dashing  the  tables  on  the  ground,  indicate 
rather  the  reverse  of  what  we  sliouUl  call  "  meekness." 
I^  represents  what  we  .should  now  designate  by 
the  word  "  disinterested."  All  that  is  told  of  him 
indicates  a  withdrawal  of  himself,  a  preference  of 
the  ciiuse  of  his  nation  to  his  own  interests,  which 
makes  him  the  most  complete  example  of  Jewish 
patriotism.  He  joins  his  countrymen  in  their 
degrading  servitude  (Ex.  ii.  11,  v.  4).  He  forgets 
himself  to  avenge  their  wrongs  (ii.  14).  He  de- 
sires that  his  brother  may  take  the  lead  instead  of 
himself  (Ex.  iv.  13).  He  wishes  that  not  he  only, 
but  all  the  nation  were  gifted  alike  : — "  Enviest  thou 
for  my  sake?"  (Num.  \i.  29).     When  the  oiler  is 


432 


MOSES 


made  that  the  people  should  be  destroyed,  and  that 
he  should  be  made  "  a  gi-e;it  nation"  (lix.  xxxii.  10), 
he  prays  that  they  may  be  forgiven — "  if  not,  blot 
me,  I  pray  Thee,  out  of  Thy  book  which  Thou  hast 
written"  (xxxii.  32).  His  sons  were  not  raised  to 
honour.  The  leadership  of  the  people  passed,  after 
his  death,  to  another  tribe.  In  the  books  wliich  bear 
his  name,  Abraham,  and  not  himself,  appears  as  the 
real  fatiier  of  the  nation.  In  spite  of  his  great  pre- 
eminence, they  are  never  "  the  children  of  Moses." 

In  exact  conformity  with  his  life  is  the  account  of 
his  end.  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy  describes,  and 
is,  the  long  h^st  farewell  of  the  prophet  to  his 
people.  It  takes  place  on  the  first  day  of  the 
eleventh  month  of  the  fortieth  year  of  the  wander- 
ings, in  the  plains  of  Moab  (Deut.  i.  3,  5),  in  the 
palm-groves  of  Abila  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §1). 
[Abel-Shtttim.]  He  is  described  as  120  years  of 
age,  but  with  his  sight  and  his  freshness  of  strength 
unabated  (Deut.  xxxiv.  7).  The  address  from  ch.  i. 
to  ch.  XXX.  contains  the  recapitulation  of  the  Law. 
Joshua  is  then  appointed  his  successor.  The  Law  is 
written  out,  and  ordered  to  be  deposited  in  the  Ark 
(ch.  xxxi.).  The  song  and  the  blessing  of  the  tribes 
conclude  the  farewell  (ch.  xxxii.  xxxiii.). 

And  then  comes  the  mysterious  close.  As  if  to 
carry  out  to  the  last  the  idea  that  the  prophet  was 
to  live  not  for  himself^  but  tor  his  people,  he  is  told 
that  he  is  to  see  the  good  huid  beyond  the  Jordan, 
but  not  to  possess  it  himself.  The  sin  for  which 
this  penalty  was  imposed  on  the  prophet  is  ditiicult 
to  ascertain  clearly.  It  was  because  he  and  Aaron 
rebelled  against  Jehovah,  and  "  believed  Him  not  to 
sanctify  Him,"  in  the  murmurings  at  Kadesh  (Num. 
XX.  12,  xxvii.  14  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51),  or,  as  it  is  ex- 
pressed in  tlie  Psalms  (cvi.  33),  because  he  spoke 
unadvisedly  with  his  lips.  It  seems  to  have  been  a 
feeling  of  distrust.  "  Can  we  (not,  as  often  ren- 
dered, can  ive)  bring  water  out  of  the  cliff?"  (Num. 
XX.  10;  LXX.  fiT]  i^d^of^ei/,  "surely  we  cannot.") 
The  Talmudic  trailition,  characteristiavlly,  makes 
the  sin  to  be  that  he  adled  the  chosen  people  by  the 
opprobrious  name  of  "  rebels."  He  ascends  a  moun- 
tiiin  in  the  range  which  rises  above  the  Jordan  valley. 
Its  name  is  specified  so  particularly  that  it  must  have 
been  well  known  in  micient  times,  though,  owing  to 
the  difficulty  of  exploring  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Jordan,  it  is  unknown  at  present.  The  mountain 
tract  was  known  by  the  geneial  name  of  the  pisga}I. 
Its  summits  apparently  were  dedicated  to  different 
divinities  (Num.  xxiii.  14).  On  one  of  these, 
consecrated  to  Nebo,  Moses  took  his  stixnd,  and 
surveyed  the  four  great  masses  of  Palestine  west 
of  the  Jordan  —  so  far  as  it  could  be  discerned 
from  that  height.  The  view  has  passed  into  a 
proverb  for  all  nations.  In  two  remarkable  re- 
spects it  illustrates  the  office  and  character  of 
Moses.  Filst,  it  was  a  view,  in  its  full  extent, 
to  be  imagined  rather  than  actually  seen.  The  j 
foreground  alone  could  be  clearly  discernible :  its  I 
distance  had  to  be  suj>plied  by  what  was  beyond,  ' 
though  suggested  by  what  was  within,  the  actual  > 
prospect  of  the  seer.  I 

Secondly,  it  is  the  likeness  of  the  great  dis- 
coverer pointing  out  what  he  himself  will  never 
reach.  To  English  readers  this  has  been  made 
familiar  by  the  application  of  this  passage  to  Lord 
Bacon,  originally  in  the  noble  poem  of  Cowley,  and 
then  drawn  out  at  length  by  Lord  Macaulay, 


V  According  to  the  view  also  of  Philo  ( 1'.  M.  iii.  39), 

MoEcs  wrote  the  account  of  liis  death. 


MOSES 

"  So  Moses  the  servant  of  Jehovah  died  there  in 
the  land  of  Moab,  according  to  the  word  of  Jehovah, 
and  He  buried  him  in  a  '  ravine  '  in  the  land  of 
Moab,  '  before'  Beth-peor — but  no  man  knoweth  of 
his  sepulchre  unto  this  day  ....  And  the  children 
of  Israel  wept  for  Moses  in  the  plains  of  ]Moab  thirty 
days"  (Deut.  xxxiv.  5-8).  This  is  all  that  is  sjiid 
in  the  sacred  record.  Jewish,  Arabian,  and  Chris- 
tian traditions  have  laboured  to  fill  up  the  detail. 
"  Amidst  the  tears  of  the  people—  the  women 
beating  their  breasts,  and  the  children  giving  way 
to  uncontrolled  wailing — -he  withdrew.  At  a  cer- 
tain point  in  his  ascent  he  made  a  sign  to  the 
weeping  multitude  to  advance  no  farther,  taking 
with  him  only  the  elders,  the  high-priest  Eliezar, 
and  the  general  Joshua.  At  the  top  of  the  moiui- 
tain  he  dismissed  the  elders — and  then,  as  he  was 
embracing  Eliezar  and  Joshua,  and  still  speaking  to 
them,  a  cloud  suddenly  stood  over  him,  and  he 
vanished  in  a  deep  valley.  He  wrote  the  account 
of  his  own  death  P  in  the  sacred  books,  fearing 
lest  he  should  be  deified"  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  48). 
"  He  died  in  the  last  month  of  the  Jewish  year."l 
After  his  death  he  is  called  "  Melki "  (Clem.  Al. 
Strom,  i.  343). 

His  grave,  though  studiously  congealed  in  the 
sacred  narrative,  in  a  manner  which  seems  to  point 
a  warning  against  the  excessive  veneration  of  all 
sacred  tombs,  and  though  never  acknowledged  by 
the  Jews,  is  shown  by  the  Mussulmans  on  the  west 
(and  therefore  the  wrong)  side  of  the  Jordan,  between 
the  Dead  Sea  and  St.  Saba  (b.  ^  P.  p.  302). 

The  Mussulman  traditions  are  chiefly  exaggera- 
tions of  the  0.  T.  accounts.  But  there  are  some 
stories  independent  of  the  Bible.  One  is  the  striking 
story  (Koran,  xviii.  65-80)  on  which  is  founded 
Parnell's  Hermit.  Another  is  the  proof  given  by 
Moses  of  the  existence  of  God  to  the  atheist  king 
(Chardin,  x.  836,  and  in  Fabricius,  836). 

In  the  0.  T.  the  name  of  Moses  does  not  occur  so 
fi-equently,  alter  the  close  of  the  Pentateuch,  as 
might  be  expected.  In  the  Judges  it  occurs  only 
once — iuspeakingof  the  wandering  Levite  Jonathan, 
his  grandson.  In  the  Hebrew  copies,  followed  by 
the  A.  v.,  it  has  been  superseded  by  "  Manasseli," 
in  order  to  avoid  throwing  discredit  on  the  family 
of  so  great  a  man.  [Manasseh,  p.  225  6.]  In  the 
Psalms  and  the  Prophets,  however,  he  is  ti'equently 
named  as  the  chief  of  the  prophets. 

In  the  N.  T.  he  is  referred  to  partly  as  the 
representative  of  the  Law — as  in  the  numerous 
j)assages  cited  above — and  in  the  vision  of  the 
Transfiguration,  where  he  appears  side  by  side  with 
Elijah.  It  is  possible  that  the  peculiar  word  ren- 
dered "decease"  (f|o5os) — used  only  in  Luke  ix.  3J 
and  2  Pet.  i.  15,  where  it  may  have  been  drawn 
from  the  context  of  the  Transfiguration—  was  sug- 
gested by  the  Exodus  of  Moses. 

As  the  author  of  the  Law  he  is  contrasted  with 
Christ,  the  Author  of  the  Gospel:  "  The  law  was 
given  by  Moses  "  (John  i.  17).  The  ambiguity  and 
transitory  nature  of  his  glory  is  set  against  the 
permanence  and  clearness  of  Christianity  (2  Cor.  iii. 
13-18),  and  his  mediatorial  character  ("  the  law 
in  the  hand  of  a  mediator ")  against  the  unbroken 
communication  of  God  in  Christ  (Gal.  iii.  19). 
His  "  service  "  of  God  is  contrasted  with  Christ's 
sonship  (Heb.  iii.  5,  6).  But  he  is  also  spoken  of  as 
a  likeness  of  Christ ;  and,  as  this  is  a  point  of  view 


1  In  the  Arabic  traditions  the  7th  of  Adar  (Jalaladdin, 
388). 


MOSES 

which  lias  been  ahnost  lost  in  the  Church,  compared 
witli  the  more  familiar  comparisons  of  Christ  to 
Adam,  David,  Joshua,  and  yet  has  as  firm  a  basis 
in  fact  as  any  of  them,  it  may  be  well  to  draw  it 
out  in  detail. 

1 .  Moses  is,  as  it  wo\ild  seem,  the  only  character 
of  the  0.  T.  to  whom  Christ  expressly  likens  Himself, 
— "Moses  wrote  of  me"  (John  v.  46).  It  is 
uncertain  to  what  passage  our  Lord  alludes,  but 
the  general  opinion  seems  to  be  the  true  one — that 
it  is  the  remarkable  prediction  in  Deut.  xviii.  15, 
18,  19, — "The  Lord  thy  God  will  raise  up  unto 
thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee,  fiom  thy 
bi'etliren,  like  unto  me ;  unto  him  ye  shall  hearken 
....  I  will  raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among 
their  brethren,  like  unto  thee,  and  will  put  my 
words  in  his  mouth ;  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them 
all  that  I  shall  command  him.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that  whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  my 
words  which  he  shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will 
require  it  of  him."  This  passage  is  also  expressly 
quoted  by  Stephen  (Acts  vii.  o7),  and  it  is  probably 
in  allusion  to  it,  that  at  the  Transtigmvation,  in  the 
presence  of  Moses  and  Elijah,  the  words  were 
uttered,  "  Hear  ye  Him." 

It  suggests  three  main  points  of  likeness: — 
(a.)  Christ  was,  like  ]\loses,  the  great  Prophet  of 
the  people — the  last,  as  Closes  was  the  first.  In 
greatness  of  position,  none  came  between  them. 
Only  Samuel  and  Elijah  could  by  any  possibility  be 
thought  to  fill  the  place  of  Moses,  and  they  only  in 
a  very  secondary  degree.  Christ  alone  appears,  like 
Moses,  as  the  Kevealer  of  a  new  name  of  God — of  a 
new  I'eligious  society  on  earth.  The  Israelites  "  were 
baptized  unto  Moses"  (1  Cor.  x.  2).  The  Christians 
were  baptized  unto  Christ.  There  is  no  other  name 
in  the  Bible  that  could  be  used  in  like  manner. 

(6.)  Christ,  like  Moses,  is  a  Lawgiver:  "  Him 
shall  ye  hear."  His  whole  apjiearance  as  a  Teacher, 
differing  in  much  beside,  has  this  in  common  with 
Moses,  unlike  the  other  prophets,  that  He  lays  down 
a  code,  a  law,  for  His  followers.  The  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  almost  inevitably  suggests  the  parallel 
of  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai. 

(c.)  Christ,  like  Moses,  was  a  Prophet  out  of  the 
midst  of  the  nation — "  from  their  brethren."  As 
Moses  was  the  entire  representative  of  his  people, 
feeling  tor  them  more  than  for  himself,  absorbed 
in  their  interests,  hopes,  and  fears,  so,  with  re- 
verence be  it  said,  was  Chiist.  The  last  and 
greatest  of  the  Jewish  prophets.  He  was  not  only  a 
Jew  by  descent,  but  that  .Jewish  descent  is  insisted 
upon  as  an  integral  part  of  His  appearance.  Two 
of  the  Gospels  open  with  His  genealogy.  "  Of  the 
Israelites  came  Christ  alter  the  flesh"  (Kom.  ix.  5). 
He  wept  and  lamented  over  His  country.  He 
confined  himself  during  His  lite  to  their  needs. 
He  was  not  sent  "  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the 
liouse  of  Israel"  (Matt.  xv.  24).  It  is  true  that 
His  absorption  into  the  Jewish  nationality  was  but 
the  symbol  of  His  absorption  into  the  far  wider  and 
deeper  interests  of  all  humanity.  But  it  is  only  by 
undei-staiiding  the  one  that  we  are  able  to  under- 


MOTH 


433 


"■  In  laler  history,  the  name  of  Moses  lias  not  boon  for- 
gotten. In  the  early  Christiiin  Clnircli  \w  appears  in  the 
Romiui  Gilacombs  in  I  ho  likctuss  of  St.  I'ctor,  partly, 
(limbtlcss,  from  his  beinf?  the  leader  of  the  Jewish,  as 
Peter  of  ihe  Christian  Chin-ch,  partly  from  his  connexion 
'.vith  the  Rock.  It  is  ns  striking  the  Rock  that  he  appears 
mider  IVter's  name. 

In  the  Jewish,  as  in  the  Arabian  nation,  his  name 
lias  in  later  years  lie^n  more  oonniion  than  in  furmcr  ages, 
VOL.  II. 


stand  the  other  ;  and  the  life  ot  Closes  is  the  best 
means  of  enabling  us  to  understand  them  both. 

2.  In  Heb.  ii'i.  1-19,  xii.  24-29,  Acis  vii.  37, 
Christ  is  described,  though  more  obscurely,  as  the 
Moses  of  the  new  dispensation — as  the  Apostle,  or 
Jlessenger,  or  Mediator,  of  God  to  the  people — as  the 
Controller  ajid  Leader  of  the  flock  or  household  of 
God.  No  other  person  in  the  0.  T.  could  have  fui- 
nished  this  parallel.  In  both,  the  revelation  was  com- 
municated partly  through  the  life,  partly  throuo;h 
the  teaching  ;  but  in  both  the  Prophet  was  incessantly 
united  with  the  Guide,  the  IJuler,  the  Shepherd. 

,3.  The  details  of  their  lives  are  sometimes,  though 
not  often,  compared.  Stephen  (Acts  vii.  24-28, 
35)  dwells,  evidently  with  this  view,  on  the  likeness 
of  Moses  in  driving  to  act  as  a  peacemaker,  and  mis- 
understood and  rejected  on  that  very  account.  The 
death  of  Jloses,  especially  as  related  by  Josephus 
(?«<  supra),  immediately  suggests  the  Ascension  of 
Christ ;  and  the  retardation  of  the  rise  of  the 
Christian  Church,  till  after  its  Founder  was  with- 
drawn, gives  a  moral  as  well  as  a  material  resem- 
blance. But  this,  though  dwelt  upon  in  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church,  has  not  been  expressly  laid 
down  in  the  Bible. 

In  Jude  9  is  an  allusion  to  an  altercation  between 
Michael  and  Satan  over  the  body  of  Moses.  It  has 
been  endeavoured  (by  reading  'Irjcrov  for  Mci>'Oaea>s) 
to  refer  this  to  Zech.  iii.  2.  But  it  probably  refers  to 
a  lost  apocryphal  book,  mentioned  by  Origen,  called 
the  'Ascension,  or  Assumption,  of  Jloses.'  All 
thiit  is  known  of  this  book  is  given  in  Fabricius,  Cod. 
Pseudepigr.  V.  T.  i.  839-844.  The  "  dispute  of 
Michael  and  Satan  "  probably  had  reference  to  the 
concealment  of  the  body  to  prevent  idolatry.  Gal.  v. 
(5  is  by  several  later  writers  said  to  be  a  quotation 
from  the  '  Revelation  of  Moses'  (Fabricius,  Ibid. 
i.  838).'  [A.  P.  S.] 

MOSOL'LAM  ( Mocro'AAa^os  :  Bosorainus)  = 
Mkshullam  11  (1  Esdr.  ix.  14  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  15). 

MOSOL'LAMON  (Moo-o'AAa^os:  Mosolamns) 
=  Meshullam  10  (1  Esdr.  viii.  44;  comp.  Ezr. 
viii.  16). 

MOTH  (E^'y,*  "ash :  a-ris,  apaxvn,  fapaxhi 
Xpiivos;  Sym.  evpws;  Aq.  Ppaxris:  tinea,  aranea). 
By  the  Hebiew  word  we  are  certainly  to  under- 
stivnd  i^ome  species  of  clothe,s-moth  {tinea)  ;  for  the 
Greek  o-^s,  and  the  Latin  'tinea,  are  used  by  ancient 
authors  to  denote  either  the  larva  or  the  imago  of 
this  destructive  insect,  and  the  context  of  the  se- 
veral passages  where  the  word  occurs  is  sufficiently 
indicative  of  the  animal,  liet'erence  to  the  de- 
structive habits  of  the  clothes-moth  is  made  in  .Job 
iv.  19,  xiii.  28  ;  Ps.  xxxix.  11  ;  Is.  1.  9,  li.  8;  Hos. 
v.  12;  Matt.  vi.  19,  20;  Luke  .xii.  33,  and  in 
Ecclus.  xix.  3,  xhi.  13;  indeed,  in  every  in- 
stance but  one  where  mention  of  this  insect  is 
made,  it  is  in  reference  to  its  habit  of  destroying 
garments;  in  Job  xxvii.  18,  "He  buildeth  his 
house  as  a  moth,"  it  is  clear  that  allusion  is  made 
either  to  the  well-known  case  of  the  7V«t'a  pellio- 

thongh  never  occurring  again  (perhaps,  as  in  tile  aiso  of 
David,  and  of  Peter  in  the  Papacy,  from  motives  of  re- 
verence) in  the  earlier  annals,  as  recorded  in  the  Bibie. 
Moses  Maimonldes,  Moses  Mendelssohn,  Jliisa  the  con- 
queror of  Spain,  ai-e  obvious  instances.  Of  Ihe  first  of 
these  three  a  .lewish  proverb  tcstilies  that  "  From  Moses 
to  Moses  there  was  none  like  Moses." 
"  From  the  root  {^"tJ>y,  "to fall  aw.ny." 

2  K 


434 


MOTHER 


nella  (see  woodcut),  or  some  allied  species,  or  else 
to  the  leaf-building  larvae  of  some  other  member 
of  the  Lepidoptcra.  "  1  will  be  to  Kphraim  as  a 
moth,"  in  Hos.  v.  12,  cleaily  means  "I  will  con- 
sume him  as  a  moth  consumes  garments."  The 
expression  of  the  A.  V.  in  Job  iv.  19,  "  are  crushed 
before  the  moth,"  is  certainly  awkward  and  ambi- 
guous ;  for  the  different  interpretations  of  this  pas- 
sage see  Rosenmiiller's  Schol.  ad  loc,  where  it  is 
argued  that  the  words  rendered  "  before  the  moth  " 
signify,  "as  a  moth  (destroys  garments)."  .So  the 
Vulg.  "  consumentur  veluti  a  tinea"  (for  this  use 
of  the  Hebrew  phrase,  see  1  Sam.  i.  1 15.  Similar 
is  the  Latin  ad  faciein,  in  Plant.  CistcU.  i.  1,  73). 
Others  take  the  passage  thus — "  who  are  crushed 
even  as  the  frail  moth  is  crushed."  'tlither  sense 
will  suit  the  passage ;  but  see  the  different  e.xplana- 
tion  of- Lee  (Comment,  on  Job,  ad.  loc).  Some 
writers  understand  the  word  Ppwats  of  Matt.  vi. 
19,  20,  to  denote  some  species  of  moth  (tinea  gra- 
nella  ?)  ;  others  think  that  ctt/s  koI  ^pSicns  by  hen- 
diadj's  =  crjs  ^iPpwaKovcra  (see  Scultet.  Ux.  Evang. 
ii.  c.  35).  [Ulst.]  The  Orientals  were  fond  of 
forming  repositories  of  rich  apparel  (Hammond, 
Annot.  on  Matt.  vi.  19),  whence  the  frequent  allu- 
sion to  the  destructiveness  of  the  clothes-moth. 


Ol, 


''iT.ni 


The  Clotlies-Moth.     (Tine.,  pellinneUu.) 
a.  Larva  in  a  case  constructeii  out  of  the  substance  on  which  it 

is  feeding:. 
h.  Case  cut  at  the  ends. 

c.  Case  cut  open  by  tlie  iarva  for  eiilar^n;^  it. 
rf,  e.  The  perfect  insect. 

TheBriti.sh  tineae  which  are  injurious  to  clothes, 
fur,  &c.,  are  the  following:  tinea  tapetzella,  a  com- 
mon species  often  found  in  carriages,  the  larvn 
feeding  under  a  galleiy  constructed  from  the  lining  ; 
t.  pellionella,  the  larva  of  which  constructs  a  poii- 
able  case  out  of  the  substance  in  which  it  feeds, 
and  is  very  parti;d  to  feathers.  This  species,  writes 
Mr.  H.  T.  Stainton  to  the  author  of  this  article, 
"  certainly  occurs  in  Asia  Minor,  and  I  think  vou 
may  safely  conclude,  that  it  and  hiselUatn  (an 
abundant  species  often  found  in  horse-hair  linincjs 
of  chairs)  will  be  found  in  any  old  furniture  ware- 
house at  .Jerusalem."  For  an  intei-estiug  account 
of  the  habits  and  economy  of  the  clothes-moths, 
see  Rennie's  Insect  Architecture,  p.  190,  and  for 
a  systematic  enumeration  of  the  British  species  of 
the  genus  Tinea.,  see  Insecta  Britannica,  vol.  iii. 
The  clothes-moths  belong  to  the  group  Tineina, 
order  Lepidoptcra.  For  the  Hebrew  DD  (Sd.s)  see 
Worm.  ^  [W.  H.] 

MOTHER  (DX:   /x-hr-np:   mater).     The  supe- 


»  In  the  same  manner  "  The  Peak,"  originally  the  name 
of  the  highest  mountain  of  Derbyshire,  lias  now  been 
extended  to  the  whole  district. 


MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN 

riority  of  the  Hebrew  over  all  contempoianeous 
systems  of  legislation  and  of  morals  is  strongly 
shown  in  the  higher  estimation  of  the  mother  in 
the  Jewish  family,  as  contrasted  with  modern 
Oriental,  as  well  a.s  ancient  Oriental  and  classical 
usage.  The  king's  mother,  as  appears  in  the  case 
of  Bathsheba,  was  treated  with  especial  honour 
( 1  K.  ii.  19;  Ex.  xx.  12;  Lev.  xix.  3;  Dent.  v. 
16,  .xxi.  18,  21  ;  Prov.  x.  1,  xv.  20,  xvii.  25,  xxix. 
15,  xxxi.  1,30).  [Children;  Father;  Kin- 
dred ;  King,  vol.  ii.  19/> ;  Women.]    [H.  W.  P.] 

MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN.     In  the  0.  T.  our 

translators  have  employed  this  word  to  represent 
the  following  terms  only  of  the  original :  (1)  the 
Hebrew  "IH,  har,  with  its  derivative  or  kindred 
"l"in,  harar,  or,  Tin,  herer ;  and  (2)  the  Chaldee 

1-1D,  tiir:  this  last  occurs  only  in  Dan.  ii.  35,  45. 
In  the  New  Testament  it  is  confined  almost  exclu- 
sively to  representing  opos.  In  the  Apocryjiha  the 
same  usage  prevails  as  in  the  N.  T.,  the  only  excep- 
tion being  in  1  JIacc.  xii.  36,  where  "moinit"  is 
put  for  D'i(/os,  probably  a  mound,  as  we  should  now 
say,  or  embankment,  by  which  Simon  cut  off  the 
communication  between  the  citadel  on  the  Temple 
mount  and  the  town  of  Jerusalem.  For  this  Josephus 
{Ant.  xiii.  5,  §11)  has  relxos,  a  wall. 

But  while  they  have  employed  "  mount "  and 
"  mountain  "  for  the  above  Hebi  ew  and  Greek  terms 
only,  the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  have  al.so  occa- 
sionally rendered  the  same  terms  by  the  English 
word  "  hill,"  thereby  sometimes  causing  a  confusion 
and  disconnexion  between  the  different  parts  of  the 
narrative  which  it  would  be  desirable  to  avoid. 
Examples  of  this  ai-e  given  under  Hills  (vol.  i. 
p.  816  a).  Others  will  be  found  in  1  Mace.  xiii. 
52,  compared  with  xvi.  20;  Jud.  vi.  12,  13,  comp. 
with  X.  10,  .xiii.  10. 

The  Hebrew  word  hnr,  like  the  English  "  moun- 
tain," is  employed  both  for  single  eminences  more 
or  less  isolated,  such  as  Sinai,  Gerizim,  Ebal,  Zion, 
and  Olivet,  and  for  ranges,  such  as  Lebanon.  It  is 
also  applied  to  a  mountainous  country  or  district, 
as  in  Josh.  xi.  16,  where  "the  mountain  of  Israel  " 
is  the  highland  of  Palestine,  as  opposed  to  the 
"  valley  and  the  jilaiu  ;"  and  in  Josh.  xi.  21,  xx.  7, 
where  "  the  mountain  of  Judah"  (A.  V.  in  the 
former  case  "  mountains ")  is  the  same  as  "  the 
hill-country  "  in  x.xi.  1 1 .  Similarly  Mount  Ephraim 
(Har  Ephraim)  is  the  mountainous  district  occupied 
by  that  tribe,  which  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
the  Mount  Gaash,  Mount  Zemaraim,  the  hill  of 
Phinehas,  and  the  towns  of  Shechem,  Shamir, 
Timnath-Serach,  besides  other  cities  (2  Chr.  xv.  8), 
were  all  situated  upon  it."  So  also  the  "  mountain 
of  the  Amorites  "  is  apparently  the  elevated  country 
east  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  Jordan  (Deut.  i.  7,  19,  20), 
and  "  Mount  Naphtali "  the  verj'  elevated  and  hilly 
tract  allotted  to  that  tribe. 

The  various  eminences  or  mountain-districts  to 
which  the  word  liar  is  applied  in  the  0.  T.  are  as 
follow : — 

Abarim  ;  Amana  ;  of  the  Amalekites  ;  of 
the  Amorites  ;  Ararat  ;  Baalah  ;  Baal- 
Her.mon  ;  Bashan  ;  Bethel  ;  Bether  ;  Car- 
mel;  Ebal;  Ephraim;  Ephron;  Esau;  Gaash; 
Gerizim;  Gilboa  ;  Gilead;  Halak  ;  Heees; 
Hermon;  Hor1>  (2);  Horeb;  of  Israel;  Je- 


^  Mount  Hor  is  probably  the  "  great  mountain  " — the 
"  mountain  of  mountains,"  according  to  the  Oriental  cus- 
tom of  emphasizing  an  expression  by  doubling  the  word. 


MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN 

ARIM  ;  JUDAH  ;  OnVET,  or  OF  Olives  ;  MiZAK  ; 
MoRiAH;  Naphtali  ;  Nebo  ;  Paran  ;  Perazim; 
'Samaria  ;  Seir  ;  Sephar  ;  Sinai  ;  Sign,  Sirion, 
or  Shenir  (all  names  for  Heraion)  ;  Shapher  ; 
Tabor  ;  Zalmon  ;  Zejiaraim  ;  Ziox. 

The  Mount  of  the  Valley  (poyn  IT] :  6 
opos  'Eya9;  Alex.  ^'Evaic:  mons  convallis)  was  a 
district  on  the  East  of  Jordan,  within  the  territory 
allotted  to  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii.  19),  containing  a 
number  of  towns.  Its  name  rec;dls  a  similar  juxta- 
position of  "  mount "  and  "valley"  in  the  name 
of  "  Langdale  Pikes,"  a  well-known  mountain  in 
our  own  country. 

The  word  har  became,  at  least  in  one  instance, 
incorpoiated  with  the  name  which  accompanied  it, 
so  as  to  form  one  word.  Har  Oerizzim,  Mount  Ge- 
rizim,  .nppears  in  the  wi'iters  of  the  first  centuries  of 
the  Christian  era  as  ttSKls  'ApyapiQu  (Eupolemus), 
opos  ' Apyapi^os  (Marinus),  mons  Aijaznren  (^Itin. 
Hierosoli/m.  p.  587).  This  is  also,  as  has  already 
been  noticed  (see  vol.  i.  p.  108  a),  the  origin  of  the 
name  of  Armageddon  ;  and  it  may  possibly  be  that  of 
Atabyrion  or  Itabyrion,  the  form  under  which  the 
name  of  Mount  Tabor  is  given  by  the  LXX.,  Ste- 
phanus  of  Byzantium,  and  otliers,  and  which  may 
have  been  a  corruption,  for  tlie  sake  of  euphony, 
from  'Apra^vptov: — ^Ara/SvpLov,  'Ira^vpiov. 

The  frequent  occurrence  throughout  the  Scrip- 
tures of  personiticitiim  of  the  natural  features  of  the 
country  is  very  lemarkable.  The  following  aie,  it 
is  believed,  all  the  words=  used  with  this  object  in 
relation  to  mountains  or  hills  : — 

1.  Head,  t^'KI,  Hash,  Gen.  viii.  5  ;  Ex.  six.  20  ; 
Deut.  xxxiv.  1  ;    1  K.  xviii.  42;  (A.  V.  "top"). 

2.  Eap.S,  ni3TX,  Aznolk.  Aznoth-Tabor,  Josh. 
six.  34 :  possibly  in  allusion  to  some  projection  on 
the  to])  of  the  mountain.  The  same  word  is  perhaps 
found  in  Uzzen-Shekah. 

3.  Snovi,V)ER,f\r\2,  Cdtheph.  Deut.  xxxiii.  12  ; 
Josh.  XV.  8,  and  xviii.  10  ("side");  all  referring 
to  the  hills  on  or  among  which  Jerusalem  is  placed. 
Josh.  XV.  10,  "  the  side  of  Mount  Jearim." 

4.  Side,  ny,  Tsad.  (See  the  word  for  the 
"side"  of  a  man  in  2  Sam.  ii.  16,  Ez.  iv.  4,  &c.) 
Used  in  reference  to  a  mount^iia  in  1  Sam.  xxiii.  26, 
2  Sam.  xiii.  34. 

5.  Loins  or  Flanks,  n'^DS,  Ciddth.  Chisloth- 
Tabor,  Josh.  xix.  12.  It  occurs  also  in  the  name  of  a 
village,  probably  situated  on  this  part  of  the  moun- 


<:  1  K.  xvi.  24,  "the  hill  Samaria;"  accurately,  "the 
mountain  Shomeron." 

"•  The  same  reading  is  found  in  the  L.XX.  of  Jer.  xlvii. 
5,  xlL\.  4. 

»  With  perhaps  four  exceptions,  all  tlie  above  terms  are 
used  in  our  own  language ;  hut,  in  addition,  we  -speak  of 
the  "  crown,"  the  "  instep,"  the  "  foot,"  tlie  "  toe,"  and 
the  "  breast "  or  "  bosom  "  of  a  mountain  or  hill.  "  Top  " 
is  perhaps  only  a  corruption  of  Jcopf,  ••  head."  Similarly 
we  sppalc  of  the  "  moutli,"  and  the  "  gorw  "  (i.  e.  the 
"  throat ")  of  a  ravine ;  and  a  "  tongue  "  of  land.  Compare 
too  the  word  col,  "  nick,"  In  French. 

"  1.  To  mourn.     ?3N'  mveiui,  htgeo. 

2.  (a)  |3N.  Yov7i;(,"u),  and  (t>)  HiX.  ntveiiu,  moereo. 
From  (6)  H^JK  and  H^JXri.  aTemyfios,  gemitus.  In 
Lam.  il  5,  Tanen'ovtict'o^,  liumiliatus ;  A.  V.  "mourn- 
ing," "  l.imentation." 

3.  rr1D2>  ireveo';.fletus;  A.V.  Bachiith.  Also  n^D2. 
and  N33'  /laca,  IVoni  n33-  xAaiu,  Jleo. 


MOURNING  435 

tain,  Ha-CesuUoth,  m?p3n,  i.  e.  the  "  loins" 
(Josh.  xix.  18).     [Chesullotii.] 

6.  Rib,  y?V,  Tseld.  Only  used  once,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  ]\Iount  of  Olives,  2  Sam.  xvi.  13,  and 
there  translated  "side,"  e/c  irXevpas  tov  opovs. 

7.  Back,  Q'2^,  Shecem.  Po.ssibly  therootofthe 
name  of  the  town  Shechem,  whicli  may  be  derived 
fiom  its  situation,  as  it  were  on  the  back  of  Gerizim. 

8.  Thigh,  PI^T,  Jarcdh.  (See  the  word  for 
the  "thigh"  of  a  man  in  Judg.  iii.  16,  21.)  Ap- 
plied to  Moimt  Ephraim,  Judg.  xix.  1,  18  ;  and  to 
Lebanon,  2  K.  xix.  23  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  24.  Used  also 
for  the  "  sides  "  of  a  cave,  1  Sam.  xxiv.  3. 

9.  The  word  tran.slated  "  covert "  in  1  Sam.  xxv. 
20  is  IHD,  Sether,  from  "IflD,  "  to  hide,"  and  pro- 
bably refers  to  the  shrubbery  or  thicket  through 
which  Abigail's  path  lay.  In  this  passage  "  hill " 
should  be  "  mountain." 

The  Chaldee  1-10,  tur,  is  the  name  still  given  to 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  the  Jehel  et-  Tur. 

The  above  is  principally  taken  from  the  Appendix 
to  Professor  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine,  §23. 
See  also  249,  and  338  note,  of  that  work.       [G.] 

MOUNT  (Is.  xxix.  3 ;  Jer.  vi.  6,  &c.).   [Siege.] 

MOUNTAIN     OF     THE     AMORITES 

(^"iDXn  ^n  :  opos  TOV  ' Afj.oppaiov:  Alons  Anior- 
rhaci),  specifically  mentioned  Deut.  i.  19,  20  (comp. 
44),  in  reference  to  the  wandering  of  the  Israelites 
in  the  desert.  It  seems  to  be  the  range  which  rises 
abruptly  fi-om  the  plateau  of  ct-  Tih,  running  from  a 
little  S.  of  W.  to  the  N.  of  E.,  and  of  which  the  ex- 
tremities are  the  Jcbel  Araif  en-Nakah  west-ward, 
and  Jehel  el-Mukrah  eastward,  and  from  which  line 
the  country  continues  mountainous  all  the  wav  to  He- 
bron. [Wilderness  of  Wandering.]     [H.  H.] 

MOURNING."  The  numerous  list  of  words 
employed  in  Scripture  to  express  the  various  actions 
which  are  characteristic  of  mourning,  show  in 
a  great  degree  the  nature  of  the  Jewfsh  customs 
in  this  respect.  They  appear  to  have  consisted 
chiefly  in  the  following  particulars : — 

1 .  Beating  the  breast  or  others  parts  of  the  body. 

2.  Weeping  and  screaming  in  an  excessive  degree. 

3.  Wearing  sad-coloured  gamients. 

4.  Songs  of  lamentation. 

5.  Funeral  feasts. 

6.  Employment  of  persons,  especially  women,  to 
lament. 


''•  'Jr'  *P^»'o?,  cantus.  In  Ez.  ii.  10,  ^"1.  Spiji/os, 
lamentatio.  InEz.  xxvii.  32,  *3-  0prii'o^,  carmen  lugubre, 
from  nnj.  epTjce'w,  canlo. 

5-  ^■"I3,  6pi\viui,  lugeo. 

6.  lEpp>  KOTrcTos,  planctus,  fruni  TDD'  kotttuj, 
plango.    See  Eccl.  xii.  5. 

7.  I  lp>  tTKOTeo/xaL,  contristor,  i.  e..  to  wear  darlt- 
coloured  clothes.    Jer.  viii.  21. 

8.  |1N.  dulor.    [Bkn-ont.] 

9.  T\^J}_'  iiit'Aos,  carmen.     Ez.  ii.  10. 

10.  ntTO'  fli'acros,  conviHum;  A.  ^^  ni.irg.  "mourn- 
ing feast."     Jer.  xvi.  5. 

11-  |-1p,  or  Ti?'  "to  beat."  Hence  part.  HUyipp. 
Jer.  ix.  1 6 ;  eprjvovcai,  lamevtatricct;  "  mourning  women  " 

In  X.  T.  Spiji'e'u)  aAaAofio,  oAoAufo),  SopujSe'o^ai,  irt vflfcu, 
KKaiio,  Ko-rTTOfiai.  Kon-eTOS,  Trt'i'flos,  K\av0ii6<;,  oSup/itdg ; 
lugco,  jleo,  ploro,  plango,  moereo,  ejiilo,  luctus,  )letus, 
moeror,  plaitcius,  idulatu!!. 

2  F  2 


486  MOURNING  MOURNING 

silence ;  specially  In  the  case  of  the  leper,  Lev.  xiii. 
4.5  ;  '2  Sam.  xv.  30,  xix.  4  ;  Jer.  xiv.  4  ;  Ez.  xxiv. 
17;  Mic.  iii.  7. 

/.  Cluttiug  the  flesh,  Jer.  xvi.  6,  7  ;  xli.  5. 
[Cuttings  in  the  Flesh.]  Beating  the  body,  Ez. 
xxi.  12  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  19. 

m.  Employment  of  persons  hired  for  the  purpose 
of  mourning,  women  "  skilful  in  lamentation," 
Eccl.  xii.  5  ;  Jer.  ix.  17  ;  Am.  v.  16  ;  Matt.  ix.  23. 
Also  flute-players.  Matt.  ix.  23  [Minstrel]  ;  2  Chr. 
XXXV.  25. 

n.  Akin  to  this  usage  the  custom  for  friends  or 
passers-by  to  join  in  the  lamentations  of  bereaved  or 
afflicted  persons,  Gen.  1.  3;  Judg.  si.  40;  Job  ii. 
11,  XXX.  25,  xxvii.  15;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  64;  Jer.  ix.  1, 
xxii.  18  ;  1  K.  xiv.  13,  18 ;  1  Chr.  vii.  22  ;  2  Chr. 
xxx-v.  24,  25  ;  Zech.  xii.  11  ;  Luke  vii.  12  ;  John  xi. 
31  ;  Acts  viii.  2,  ix.  39;  Kom.  xii.  15.  So  also  in 
times  of  general  sori'ow  we  find  large  numbers  of 
persons  joining  in  passionate  expressions  of  grief, 
Judg.  ii.  4,  XX.  26  ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  3,  xxx.  4  ;  2  Sam. 
i.  12  ;  Ezr.  iii.  13  ;  Ez.  vii.  16,  and  the  like  is  men- 
tioned of  the  priests,  Joel  ii.  17  ;  Mai.  ii.  13  ;  see 
belovr. 

0.  The  sitting  or  lying  posture  in"  silence  indi- 
cative of  grief.  Gen.  xxiii.  3  ;  Judg.  xx.  26  ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  16,  xiii.  31  ;  Job  i.  20,  ii.  13;  Ezr.  ix.  3; 
Lam.  ii.  10  ;  Is.  iii.  26. 

p.  Mourning  feast  and  cup  of  consolation,  Jer. 
xvi.  7,  8. 

The  period  of  mourning  varied.  In  the  case  of 
Jacob  it  was  seventy  days.  Gen.  1.  3  ;  of  Aaron, 
Num.  xx.  29,  and  Moses,  Deut.  xxxiv.  8,  thirty. 
A  further  period  of  seven  days  in  Jacob's  case.  Gen. 
1.  10.  Seven  days  for  Saul,  which  may  have  been 
an  abridged  period  in  time  of  national  danger,  1  Sam. 
xxxi.  13. 

Excessive  grief  in  the  case  of  an  individual  may 
be  noticed  in  2  Sam.  iii.  16 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  and  the 
same  hypocritically,  .Ter.  xli.  6. 

(3.)  Similar  practices  are  noticed  in  the  Apocry- 
phal books, 

a.  Weeping,  fasting,  rending  clothes,  sackcloth, 
ashes,  or  earth  on  head,  1  Mace.  ii.  14,  iii.  47,  iv. 
39,  V.  14,  xi.  71,  xiii.  45;  2  Mace.  iii.  19,  x.  25, 
xiv.  15;  Jud.  iv.  10,  11  ;  viii.  6,  ix.  1,  xiv.  19 
(Assyi-ians),  x.  2,  3,  viii.  5 ;  3  Mace.  iv.  6  ;  2  Esdr. 
X.  4;  Esth.  xiv.  2. 

b.  Funeral  feast  with  wailing.  Bar.  vi.  32  :  also 
Tob.  iv.  17  ;  see  in  reproof  of  the  practice,  Aug. 
Civ.  D.  viii.  27. 

c.  Period  of  mourning,  Jud.  viii.  6 ;  Ecclus.  xxii. 
12,  seven  days,  so  also  perhaps  2  Esdr.  v.  20.  Bel 
and  Dragon  ver.  40. 

d.  Priests  ministering  in  sackcloth  and  ashes, 
the  altar  dressed  in  sackcloth,  Jud.  iv.  11,  14,  15. 

e.  Idol  priests  with  clothes  rent,  head  and  beard 
shorn,  and  head  bare,  Bar.  vi.  31. 

(4.)  In  Jewish  wi-itings  not  Scriptural,  these 
notices  are  in  the  main  confimied,  and  in  some  cases 
enlarged. 

a.  Tearing  hair  and  beating  breast,  Joseph.  ^4;;^. 
xvi.  7,  §5,  XV.  3,  §9. 

6.  Sackcloth  and  ashes,  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  6,  §1,  xix. 
8,  §2,  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  12,  §5  ;  clothes  rent,  ii.  15,  §4. 
c.  Sevendaysmourningfor  a  fother,  Joseph,  .^n)". 
In  the  same  direction  may  be  mentioned  dimi-  !  xvii.  8,  §4,   Bell.  Jud.  ii.  1,  §1  ;   for  thirty  days, 
nution  in  offerings  to  God,  and  prohibition  to  pai-  j  B.  J.  iii.  9,  §5. 

take  in   sacrificial   food,   Lev.  vii.  20;   Deut.  xxvi.  ]      d.  Those  who  met  a  funeral  required  to  join  it, 
14;  Hus.  ix.  4  ;  Joel  i.  9,  13,  16.  |  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  26;  see  Luke  vii.  12,  and  Rom. 

k.  Covering  the  "  upper  lip,"  i.  e.  the  lower  part  j  xii.  15. 
of  the  face,  and  sometimes  the  head,  in  token  of        e.  Flute-playersat  a  funeral,  .Be^/. /ad- iii.  9,  §5. 


And  we  may  remark  that  the  same  words,  and 
in  many  points  the  same  customs  prevailed,  not 
only  in  the  case  of  death,  but  in  cases  of  affliction 
or  calamity  in  general. 

(1.)  Although  in  some  respects  a  similarity 
exists  between  Ea.stern  and  Western  usage,  a  simi- 
larity which  in  remote  times  and  in  particular 
nations  was  stronger  than  is  now  the  case,  the 
difierence  between  each  is  on  the  whole  very  strik- 
ing. One  marked  feature  of  Oriental  mourning  is 
what  may  be  called  its  studied  publicity,  and  the 
careful  observance  of  the  pi-escribed  ceremonies. 
Thus  Abraham,  after  the  death  of  Sarah,  came,  as 
it  were  in  state,  to  mourn  and  weep  for  her,  Gen. 
xxiii.  2,  Job,  after  his  misfortunes,  "  arose  and 
rent  his  mantle  {meil.  Dress,  p.  4546)  and  shaved 
his  head,  and  fell  down  upon  the  ground,  on  the 
ashes,"  Job.  i.  20,  ii.  8,  and  in  like  manner  his 
friends,  "  rent  every  one  his  mantle,  and  sprinkled 
dust  upon  their  heads,  and  sat  down  with  him  on 
the  ground  seven  days  and  seven  nights  "  without 
speaking,  ii.  12,  13.  We  read  also  of  high  places, 
streets,  and  house-tops,  as  places  especially  chosen 
for  mourning,  not  only  by  Jews  but  by  other 
nations,  Is.  xv.  3;  Jer.  iii.  21,  xlviii.  38;  1  .Sam. 
xi.  4,  xxx.  4;  2  Sam.  xv.  30. 

(2.)  Among  the  particular  forms  obsei-ved  the 
following  may  be  mentioned ; 

a.  Rending  the  clothes.  Gen.  xxxvii.  29,  34, 
xliv.  13;  2' Chr.  xxxiv.  27;  Is.  xx.xvi.  22;  Jer. 
xxxvi.  24  (where  the  absence  of  the  form  is  to  be 
noted),  xli.  5  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  31,  xv.  32  ;  Josh.  vii. 
6;  Joel  ii.  13;  Ezr.  ix.  5;  2  K.  v.  7,  xi.  14; 
Matt.  xxvi.  65,  lixaTiov;  Mark  xiv.  63,  x'''"'^"- 

b.  Dressing  in  sackcloth  [Sackcloth],  Gen. 
xxxvii.  34  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  31,  xxi.  10;  Ps.  xxxv.  13  ; 
Is.  xxxvii.  1;  Joel  i.  8,  13;  Am.  viii.  10;  Jon. 
iii.  8,  man  and  beast;  Job  xvi.  15;  Esth.  iv.  3,  4  ; 
Jer.  vi.  26  ;  Lam.  ii.  10  ;  1  K.  xxi.  27. 

c.  Ashes,  dust,  or  earth  sprinkled  on  the  person, 

2  Sam.  xiii.  19,  xv.  32  ;  Josh.  vii.  6  ;  Esth.  iv.  1, 

3  ;  Jer.  v\.  26  ;  Job  ii.  12,  xvi.  15,  xiii.  6  ;  Is.  Lxi. 
3  ;  Fxev.  xviii.  19. 

d.  Black  or  sad-coloured  garments,  2  Sam.  xiv. 

2  ;  Jer.  viii.  21 ;   Ps.  xxxviii.  6,  xiii.  9,  xliii.  2  ; 
Mai.  iii.  14,  marg. ;  Ges.  p.  1195. 

e.  Removal  of  ornaments  or  neglect  of  person, 
Deut.  xxi.  12,  13;  Ex.  xxxiii.  4  ;^2  Sam.  xiv.  2, 
xix.  24;  Ez.  xxvi.  16  ;  Dan.  x.  3;  Matt.  vi.  16, 
17.    [Nail.] 

/,  Shaving  the  head,  plucking  out  the  hair  of  the 
head  or  beard.  Lev.  x.  6  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  24 ;  Ezr.  ix. 

3  ;  Job  i.  20  ;  Jer.  vii.  29,  xvi.  6. 

g.  Laying  bare  some  jjart  of  the  body.  Isaiah 
himself  naked  and  barefoot.  Is.  xx.  2.  The  Egyp- 
tian and  Ethiopian  captives,  ib.  ver.  4 ;  Is.  xlvii.  2, 
I.  6  ;  Jer.  xiii.  22,  26  ;  Nah.  iii.  5  ;  Mic.  i.  11  ; 
Am.  viii.  10. 

h.  Fasting  or  abstinence  in  meat  and  drink,  2 
Sam.  i.  12,  iii.  35,  xii.  16,  22;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  13; 
Ezr.  X.  6  ;  Neh.  i.  4 ;  Dan.  x.  3,  vi.  18 ;  Joel  i. 
14,  ii.  12  ;  Ez.  xxiv.  17;  Zech.  \-ii.  5,  a  periodical 
fast  during  captivity  ;  1  K.  xxi.  9,  12  ;  Is.  Iviii.  3, 
4,  5,  xxiv.  7,  9,  11 ;  Mai.  iii.  14;  .Ter.  xxxvi.  9; 
Jon.  iii.  5,  7  (of  Nineveh)  ;  Judg.  xx.  26  ;  2  Chr. 
XX.  3;  Ezr.  viii.  21;  Matt.  ix.  14,  15. 


MOURNING 

The  IMishna  presoribus  seven  days  mourning  for  a 
father,  a  mother,  son,  daughter,  brother,  sister,  or 
wife  (Bartenora,  on  Moed  Katon  iii.  7). 

Rending  garments  is  regularly  graduated  ac- 
cording to  the  degree  of  relationship.  For  a  father 
or  mother  the  garment  was  to  be  rent,  but  not  with 
an  instrum(!nt,  so  as  to  show  the  breast ;  to  be  sewn  | 
up  roughly  after  thirty  days,  but  never  closed.  The  I 
same  ter  one's  own  teacher  in  the  Law,  but  for 
other  relatives  a  palm  breadth  of  the  upjier  garment 
to  suffice,  to  be  sewn  up  i-oughly  after  seven  days 
and  fully  closed  after  thirty  days,  Moed  Kat.  iii. 
7 ;  Shahb.  xiii.  3 ;  Carpzov,  App.  Bib.  p.  G50. 
Friendly  mourners  were  to  sit  on  the  ground,  not 
on  the  bed.  On  certain  days  the  lamentation  was 
to  be  only  partial.  Moed  Kat.  1.  c.  For  a  wife 
there  was  to  be  at  least  one  hired  mom-ner  and  two 
pipers,  Cetuboth.  iv.  4. 

(5.)  lu  the  last  place  we  may  mention  a.  the 
idohitrous  "  mourning  for  Tanimuz,"  Ez.  viii.  14, 
as  indicating  identity  of  practice  in  certain  cases 
among  Jews  and  heathens ;  and  the  custom  iu  later 
days  of  offerings  of  food  at  graves,  Ecclus.  xxx.  18. 
6.  The  prohibition  both  to  the  high-priest  and  to 
Nazarites  against  going  into  moui-ning  even  for  a 
father  or  mother.  Lev.  xxi.  10,  11;  Num.  vi.  7  ; 
see  Nezir,  vii.  1.  The  inferior  priests  were  limited 
to  the  cases  of  their  near  relatives.  Lev.  xxi.  1,  2,  4. 
c.  The  food  eaten  during  the  time  of  mourning  was 
regarded  as  impure,  Dent.  xxvi.  14  ;  Jer.  xvi.  5,  7  ; 
Ez.  xxiv.  17  ;  Hos.  ix.  4. 

(6.)  When  we  tui'n  to  lieathen  writers  we  find 
similar  usages  prevailing  among  various  nations  of 
antiquity.  Herodotus,  speaking  of  the  Egyptians, 
saj's,  "  When  a  man  of  any  account  dies,  all  the 
womankind  among  his  relatives  proceed  to  smear 
their  heads  and  faces  with  mud.  They  then  leave 
the  corpse  iu  the  house,  and  parade  the  city  with 
their  breasts  exposed,  beating  themselves  as  they 
go,  and  in  this  they  are  joined  by  all  the  women 
belonging  to  tiie  family.  In  like  manner  the  men 
also  meet  them  from  opposite  quarters,  naked  to  the 
waist  and  beathig  themselves"  (Her.  ii.  85).  Healso 
mentions  seventy  days  as  the  period  of  embalming 
(ii.  86).  This  doubtless  includes  the  whole  mourn- 
ing period.  Diodorus,  speaking  of  a  king's  death, 
mentions  rending  of  garments,  suspension  of  sacri- 
fices, heads  smeared  with  clay,  and  breasts  bared, 
and  says  men  :uid  women  go  about  in  companies  of 
2lK)  or  3(,)0,  making  a  wailing  twice-a-day,  eiipvd- 
fjiws  /U6t'  (15rjs.  They  al)stain  from  flesh,  wiioat- 
bread,  wine,  the  bath,  dainties,  and  in  general  all 
pleasure ;  do  not  lie  on  beds,  but  lament  as  for  an 
only  child  during  seventy-two  days.  On  the  last  day 
a  sort  of  trial  was  held  of  the  merits  of  tlie  deceased, 
and  accordtng  to  the  verdict  pronounced  by  the  ac- 
clamations of  the  crowd,  he  was  treated  with  funeral 
honours,  or  the  contrary  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  72).  Similar 
usages  prevailed  iu  the  case  of  jjrivate  persons,  ib. 
91,  92. 

The  Egyptian  paintings  confirm  these  accounts 
as  t-o  the  exposure  of  the  person,  the  beating,  and 
the  throwing  clay  or  mud  upon  tlu!  head ;  and 
women  arc  ivpresented  who  ap]icar  to  be  hireil 
mourners  (Long,  E(j.  A7it.  ii.  154-151) ;  Wilkinson, 
3/.  Ant.  ii.  p.  ;i58,  387).  Heiodotus also  mentions 
the  Pereian  custom  of  rending  the  garments  with 
wailing,  and  also  cutting  off'  the  hair  on  occasions 
of  death  or  calamity.  The  last,  he  says,  was  also 
usual  among  the  Scythians  (Her.  ii.  OG,  viii.  99, 
ix.  24,  iv.  71). 

Lucian,  in  his  discourse  concerning  Greek  mourn- 


MOURNING 


437 


ing,  speaks  of  tearing  the  hair  and  flesh,  and 
wailing,  and  beating  the  breast  to  the  sound  of  a 
flute,  burial  of  slaves,  horses,  and  ornaments  as 
likely  to  be  useful  to  the  deceased,  and  the  practice 
for  relatives  to  endeavour  to  persuade  tiie  parents 
of  the  deceased  to  partake  of  the  funeral-feast  {-m- 
piSenrvof)  by  way  of  reci'uiting  themselves  after 
their  three  days'  fast  {De  Luctu,  vol.  ii.  p.  oOo,  305, 
307,  ed.  Amsterdam).  Plutarch  mentions  that  the 
Gieeks  regarded  all  mourners  as  unclean,  and  that 
women  in  mourning  cut  tlieir  hair,  but  the  men 
let  it  grow.  Of  the  Uomans,  in  carrying  corpses  of 
parents  to  the  grave,  the  sons,  he  says,  cover  their 
heads,  but  the  daughters  uncover  tliem,  contrary  to 
their  custom  in  each  case  {Quaest.  Horn.  vol.  vii.  p. 
74,  82,  ed.  Reiske.) 

Greeks  and  Romans  both  made  use  of  hired  mour- 
ners, praeficae,  who  accompanied  the  funeral  pro- 
cession with  chants  or  songs.  Flowers  and  per- 
fumes were  also  thrown  on  the  graves  (Ov.  Fast. 
vi.  ()60 ;  Trist.  v.  1,  47;  Plato,  legg.  vii.  9; 
Diet,  of  Aniiq.  art.  Funus).  The  prucficae  seem 
to  be  the  predecessoi-s  of  tlie  "mutes"  of  modern- 
funerals. 

(7.)  With  the  practices  above  mentioned.  Oriental 
and  other  customs,  ancient  and  modern,  in  great 
measure  agree.  D'Arvieux  says,  Arab  men  are 
silent  in  grief,  but  the  women  scream,  tear  their 
hair,  hands,  and  face,  and  throw  earth  or  sand  on 
their  heads.  The  older  women  wear  a  blue  veil 
and  an  old  abba  by  way  of  mourning  garments. 
They  also  sing  the  praises  of  the  deceased  (  Trail, 
p.  2tJ9,  270).  Niebuhr  says  both  JMahometans 
and  Christians  in  Egypt  hire  wailing  women,  and 
wail  at  stated  times  {Voy.  i.  150).  Burckhardt 
says  the  women  of  Atbara  in  Nubia  shave  their 
heads  on  the  death  of  their  nearest  relativ.es,  a 
custom  prevalent  also  among  several  of  the  peasant 
tribes  of  Upper  Egypt.  In  Berber  on  a  death  they 
usually  kill  a  sheep,  a  cow,  or  a  camel.  He  also 
mentions  walling  women,  and  a  man  in  distress 
besmearing  his  thee  with  dirt  and  dust  in  token  of 
grief  {Nubia,  pp.  176,  226,  374).  And,  speaking 
of  the  ancient  Arab  tribes  of  Upper  Egypt,  "  I  have 
seen  the  female  relations  of  a  deceased  man  dance 
before  his  house  with  sticks  and  lances  in  their 
hands  and  behaving  like  furious  soldiers "  {Notes 
on  Bed.  i.  280).  Shaw  says  of  the  Arabs  of 
Barbary,  after  a  funeral  the  female  relations  during 
the  space  of  two  or  three  months  go  once  a  week 
to  weep  o\'er  the  gi'ave  and  offer  eatables  (see 
Ecclus.  xxx.  18).  He  also  mentions  mourning 
women  ( Trav.  pp.  220,  242).  "  In  '■  >man," 
Wellsted  says,  "  there  are  no  hireil  mourning 
women,  but  the  females  from  the  neighbourhood 
assemble  after  a  funeral  and  continue  for  eight 
days,  from  sunrise  to  sunset,  to  utter  loud  lamenta- 
tions "  {Trav.  i.  216).  In  the  Arabian  Nights 
are  frequent  allusions  to  similar  practices,  as  rend- 
ing clothes,  throwing  dust  on  the  head,  cutting  off" 
the  hair,  loud  exclamation,  visits  to  the  tomb, 
plucking  the  hair  and  beard  (i.  65,  263,  297, 
358,  518,  ii.  354,  2:i7,  409).  'I'hey  also  mention 
ten  days  and  forty  days  as  periods  of  moiniiing 
(i.  427,  ii.  409).  Sir  J.  Chardin,  speaking  of 
Persia,  says,  the  tombs  are  visitfl  periodically  by 
women  (  Voy.  vi.  489).  He  speaks  also  of  the 
tumult  at  a  death  (ib.  482).  Mourning  lasts  forty 
days:  for  eight  days  a  fast  is  observed,  and  visits 
iue  paid  by  friends  to  the  bereavet.!  relatives;  on 
the  ninth  day  the  men  go  to  the  bath,  shave  the 
head    and    beard,    and    return  the  visit-;,    but   the 


438 


MOUSE 


lamentation  continues  two  or  three  times  a  week 
till  the  fortieth  day.  The  mourning  garments  are 
darl^-coloured,  but  never  black  (ib.  p.  481).  Rus- 
sell, speaking  of  the  Turks  at  Aleppo,  says,  "  the 
instant  the  death  takes  place,  the  women  who  are 
in  the  chamber  give  the  alarm  by  shrieking  as  if 
distracted,  and  are  joined  by  all  the  other  females 
in  the  harem.  This  conclamation  is  termed  the 
wulwaly:**  it  is  so  shrill  as  to  be  heard,  especially 
in  the  night,  at  a  prodigious  distance.  The  men 
disapprove  of  and  take  no  share  in  it ;  they  drop  a 
few  tears,  assume  a  resigned  silence,  and  retire  in 
private.  Some  of  the  near  female  relations,  when 
apprised  of  what  has  happened,  repair  to  the  house, 
and  the  wulwaly,  which  had  paused  for  some  time, 
is  renewed  upon  the  entrance  of  each  visitant  into 
the  harem"  (Aleppo,  i.  30(5).  He  also  mentions 
professional  mourners,  visits  to  the  grave  on  the 
third,  seventh,  and  fortieth  days,  piayers  at  the 
tomb,  flowers  strewn,  and  food  distributed  to  the 
poor.  At  these  visits  the  shriek  of  wailing  is 
renewed :  the  chief  mourner  appeals  to  the  de- 
ceased and  reproaches  him  fondly  for  his  departure. 
The  men  make  no  change  in  their  dress ;  the 
women  lay  aside  their  jewels,  dress  in  their  plainest 
garments,  and  wear  on  the  head  a  handkerchief  of  a 
dusky  colour.  They  usually  mourn  twelve  months 
for  a  husband  and  six  for  a  father  (ib.  311,312).  Of 
the  Jews  he  says,  the  conclamation  is  practised  by 
the  women,  but  hired  mourners  are  seldom  called 
in  to  assist  at  the  wulwaly.  Both  sexes  make  some 
alteration  in  dress  by  way  of  mourning.  The  women 
lay  aside  their  jewels,  the  men  make  a  small  rent  in 
their  outer  vestment  (ii.  86,  87). 

Lane,  speaking  of  the  modern  Egyptians,  says, 
"  After  death  the  women  of  the  family  raise  cries 
of  lamentation  called  welweleh  or  wilw^l,  uttering 
the  most  piercing  shrieks,  and  calling  upon  the 
name  of  the  deceased,  '  0,  my  master  !  O,  my 
resource !  0,  my  misfortune !  0,  my  glory '  (see 
Jer.  xxii.  18).  The  females  of  the  neighbourhood 
come  to  join  with  them  in  this  conclamation :  gene- 
rally, also,  the  family  send  for  two  or  more  neddd' 
behs,  or  public  wailing  women.  Each  brings  a 
tambourine,  and  beating  them  they  exclaim, '  Alas  for 
him.'     The  female  relatives,  domestics,  and  friends, 


MOUSE 

with  their  hair  dishevelled,  and  sometimes  with 
rent  clothes,  beating  their  faces,  cry  in  like  manner, 
'  Alas,  for  him !'  These  make  no  alteration  in 
dress,  but  women,  in  some  cases,  dye  their  shirts, 
head-veils,  and  handkerchiefs  of  a  dark-blije  colour. 
They  visit  the  tombs  at  stated  periods  "  {3fod.  Eg. 
iii.  152,  171,  195).  Wealthy  families  in  Cairo 
have  in  the  burial-grounds  regularly  furnished 
houses  of  mourning,  to  which  the  females  repair 
at  stated  periods  to  bewail  their  dead.  The  art  of 
mourning  is  only  to  be  acquired  by  long  practice, 
and  regular  professors  of  it  are  usually  hired  on  the 
occasion  of  a  death  by  the  wealthier  classes  (Mrs. 
Poole,  Englishw.  in  Egypt,  ii.  100).  Dr.  Wolfi 
mentions  the  wailing  over  the  dead  in  Abyssinia, 
Autobiog.  ii.  273.  Pietro  della  Valle  mentions 
a  practice  •  among  the  Jews  of  burning  perfumes 
at  the  site  of  Abraham's  tomb  at  Hebron,  for 
which  see  2  Chr.  xvi.  14,  xxi.  19  ;  Jer.  xxxiv. 
5;  P.  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  i.  306.  The  cus- 
toms of  the  N.  American  Indians  also  resemble 
those  which  have  been  described  in  many  par- 
ticulars, as  the  howling  and  wailing,  and  speeches 
to  the  dead :  among  some  tribes  the  practice  of 
piercing  the  flesh  with  arrows  or  sharp  stones, 
visits  to  the  place  of  the  dead  (Carver,  Travels, 
p.  401;  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  States,  ii.  912; 
Catlin,  N.  A.  Indians,  i.  90). 

The  former  and  present  customs  of  the  Welsh, 
Irish;  and  Highlanders  at  funerals  may  also  be 
cited  as  similar  in  several  respects,  e.  g.  wailing 
and  howling,  watching  with  the  corpse,  funeral 
entertainments  ("funeral  baked  meats"),  flowers 
on  the  gi'ave,  days  of  visiting  the  grave  (Brand, 
Pop.  Antiq.  ii.  128,  &c. ;  Harmer,  Obs.  iii. 
40). 

One  of  the  most  remarJvable  instances  of  tradi- 
tional customary  lamentation  is  found  in  the 
weekly  wailing  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  at  a  spot 
as  near  to  the  Temple  as  could  be  obtained.  This 
custom,  noticed  by  St.  Jerome,  is  alluded  to  by 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  and  exists  to  the  present  day. 
Jerome,  ad  Sophon.  i.  15  ;  ad  Faulam  Ep.  xxxix. ; 
Early  Trav.  in  Pal.  p.  83  ;  Raiimer,  Paldstina,  p. 
293  ;  Martineau,  Eastern  Life,  p.  471 ;  Robinson. 
i.  237.  [H.  W.  P.] 


Copper  Coins  of  Vespasinn,  representing  the  mourning  of  Judaea  for  her  captivity. 


MOUSE  C")3Dy,  'akbdr :  /xCj :  mus)  occurs  in    ^.j,  4^  5^  f^^.g  g^Ug^  n^j^g^  >■  j„^_.,ggs  of  the  mice  that 


Lev.  xi.  29  as  one  of  the  unclean  creeping  things 
which  weie  forbidden  to  be  used  as  food.    In  1  Sam 


h  Arab.    \,  \,,   Heb.    77V   Gk.  oAoAu^co,   i\aA<if<o, 
Lat.  ejiilo,   ulalo,   an  onomatopoetic  word  common   to 


mar  the  land,"  ai-e  mentioned  as  part  of  the  trespass 
offering  which  the  Philistines  were  to  send  to  the 

many   languages.      See    Ges.   p.   596 ;    Scboebel,    Anal- 
Constit.  p.  54  ;  and  Russell,  vol.  i.  note  83,  cbiefly  from 

Schultens. 


MOWING 

Israelites  when  thev  returned  tlie  ;irk.  In  Is.  Ixvi. 
17,  it  is  said,  "  Tliey  that  sanctify  themselves  .... 
eating  swine's  flesh,  and  the  abomination,  and  the 
mou.se,  shall  be  consumed  together."  The  Hebrew 
word  is  in  all  probability  generic,  and  is  not  in- 
tended to  denote  any  particular  .species  of  mouse  ; 
although  Bochart  {Hicroz.  ii.  427),  following  the 
Arabic  version  of  Is.  Ixvi.  17,  restricts  its  meaning 
to  the  jerboa  [JJipiis  jnculns).  The  original  word 
denotes  a  field-ravager,"  and  may  therefore  compre- 
hend any  destructive  rodent.  It  is  ])robable,  how- 
ever, that  in  1  Sam.  vi.  5,  "  the  mice  that  mar  the 
land"  may  include  and  more  particularly  refer  to 
tiie  short-tailed  field-mice  {Aroicola  at)  rest  is,  Flem.), 
which  Dr.  Kitto  .says  cause  great  destruction  to  the 
corn-lands  of  Syria.  "  Of  all  the  smaller  rodentia 
which  are  injiu-ions,  both  in  the  fields  and  in  the 
woods, there  is  not,"  says  Piof. Bell (.^isi.  Brit.  Qiutd. 
p.  325),  "  one  which  produces  such  extensive  de- 
struction as  this  little  animal,  when  its  increase,  as 
is  sometimes  the  case,  becomes  multitudinous." 
The  ancient  writers  frequently  speak  of  the  great 
ravages  committed  by  mice.  Herodotus  (ii.  141) 
ascribes  the  loss  of  Sennacherib's  army  to  mice, 
which  in  the  night  time  gnawed  through  the  bow- 
strings and  shield-straps. 

Col. Hamilton  Smith  (Kitto's CycL  art.  "Mouse") 
says  that  the  hamster  and  the  doi  mouse  are  still 
eaten  in  common  with  the  jerboa  by  tiie  Bedoueens  ; 
aud  Gesenius  {Thes.  s.  v.)  believes  some  esculent 
species  of  doraiouse  is  referred  to  in  Is.  Ixvi.  17. 

[W.  H.] 

MOWING  (I^_  ^tonsio,  Am.  vii.  1—LXX.  reads 

Tuiy  b  ^affiXivs,  either  from  a  various  reading  or 
a  confusion  of  the  letters  T  and  J — a  word  signify- 
ing also  a  shorn  fleece,  aud  rendered  in  I's.  Ixxii.  6 
"  mown  grass  ").  As  the  great  heat  of  the  climate 
in  Palestine  and  other  similarly  situated  countries 
soon  dries  up  the  herbage  itself,  hay-making  in  our 
sense  of  the  term  is  not  in  use.  The  term  "  hay," 
therefoie,  in  P.  B.  version  of  Ps.  cvi.  20,  for  3&y> 

is  incorrect.  A.  V.  "grass."  So  also  Prov.  xxvii. 
25,  and  Is.  xv.  6.  The  corn  destined  for  forage  is 
cut  with  a  sickle.    The  term  IV'p,  A.  V.  "mower," 

Ps.  cxxix.  7,  is  most  commonly  in  A.  V.  "  leaper  ;" 
.uid  once,  Jer.  ix.  22,  "  harvest-man." 

The  "king's  mowings,"  Am.  vii.  1,  i.  e.  mown 
grass,  Ps.  Ixxii.  6,  may  pei-haps  refer  to  some  royal 
right  of  early  pasturage  tor  the  use  of  the  cavalry. 
See  1  K.  xviii.  5.  "(Shaw,  Trav.  138;  Wilkin- 
son, Anc.  Eg.  abridgm.  ii.  43,  50;  Early  Trav. 
305.  Pietro  della  Valle,  ViiUjgi,  ii.  237  ;  Char- 
din,  Voy.  iii.  370  ;  La3-ard,  Nin.  4'  i^^b.  330  ; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  VAr.  139;  Harmer,  Obs. 
iv.  38G  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  210.) 

[H.  W.  P.] 

MO'ZA  (Syia  -.   Uwaa  ;   Alex.  'Icoira :   Mosa). 

1.  Son  of  Caleb  the  sou  of  llezron  by  his  concubine 
Ephah  n  Chr.  ii.  4(3 1. 

2.  (Moi(To,  1  Chr.  viii.  36,  37;  Matro-o,  Alex. 
Macro,  1  Chr.  ix.  42,  43j.  Son  of  Zimri,  and  de- 
.scendaut  of  Saul  tiuough  Mirah  the  son  of  Mephi- 
boshetli. 

MO'ZAH  ( nVbn,  witli  the  definite  article, 
ham-Wotsah  :  'A/ioiKr;  ;  .\le\.  A/liokto  :  Aminosa^, 
one   of  the   cities   in  the   allotment  of   Benjamin 


MULBEKKY-TKEES 


439 


(.losh.  xviii.  2B  only),  named  between  hac-Cephirah 
and  Rekem.    The  former  of  these  has  probably  been 
identified  with  Kcf'tr,  2  miles  ejist  of  Valo,  but  no 
trace  of  any  name  resembling  Motsah  has  hitherto 
been  discovered.     Interpreting  the  name  according 
to   its  Hebrew    derivation,  it   may    signify    "the 
spring-head" — the  place  at  which  the  water  of  a 
spring  gushes  out  (Stanley,  S.  cf-  P.  App.  §52). 
A  place  of  this  name  is  mentioned  in  the  Mishna 
(^Succah,  iv.  §5)  as  follows: — "There  was  a  place 
below  Jerusalem  named   Motsa  ;   thither  they  de- 
scended and  gathered  willow-branches,"  i.e.  for  the 
"Feast  of  Tabernacles"   so   called.      To   this  the 
Gemaraadds,  "  the  place  was  a  Colouia"  (X''3T'1p), 
that  is,  exempt  from  the  king's  tribute"  (Buxtoif, 
Lex.Tidin.  2043),  which  other  Talmudists  reconcile 
with  the  original  name  by  observing  that  Motsah 
signifies  an  outlet  or  liberation,  e.  g.  from  tribute. 
Bartenora,  who  lived  at  Jerusalem,  and  now  lies  in 
the  "valley  of  Jehoshaphat"  there,  says  (in  Su- 
renhusius'  Mishna,  ii.  274)  that  Motsah  was  but  a 
short  distance  from   the  city,  and  in  his  time  re- 
tained the  name  of  Colonia.       On    these  grounds 
Schwarz  (127)  would  identify  Blozah  with  the  pre- 
sent Kulonieh,  a  village  about  4  miles  west  of  Jeru- 
salem on  the  Jatl'a  road,  at  the  entrance  of  the  great 
Wady  Beit  Ilanimdi.      The  intei^pretations  of  the 
Rabbis,  just  quoted,  are  not  inconsistent  with  the 
name  being   really  derived  from    its  having  been 
the  seat  of  a  Roman  colonia,  as  suggested  by  Robin- 
son {B.R.  iii.  158).  The  only  difficulty  in  the  way 
of  the  identification  is  that  Kulonieh  can  hardly  be 
spoken  of  as  "  below  Jerusalem  " — an  expression 
which  is  most  naturally  interpreted  of  the  ravine 
beneath  the  city,  where  .the  Bir-Eyub  is,  and  the 
royal    gardens    formerly   were.       Still    there   are 
vestiges  of  much  vegetation  about  Kulonieh,  and 
when  the  country  was  more   generally  cultivated 
and  wooded,  and  the  climate  less  arid  than  at  pre- 
sent, the  dry  river-bed  which   the  traveller  now 
crosses   may  have   flowed    with   water,  aud  have 
formed  a  not  Unfavourable  spot  for  the  growth  of 
willows.  [G.] 

MULBERRY-TEEES      (D''N33,     bccMm : 

K\avdfi(av,  aiTLoi:  pyri)  occurs  only  in  2  Sam.  v. 
'S,'>  and  24,  and  in  the  parallel  pussage  of  1  Chr. 
xiv.  14.  The  Philisflnes  having  .spread  themselves 
in  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  David  was  ordered  to 
fetch  a  compass  behind  them  and  come  upon  thein 
over  against  the  mulberry-trees  ;  and  to  attack  them 
when  he  heard  the  "  sound  of  a  going  in  the  tops  of 
the  mulberry-trees." 

We  are  quite  unable  to  deteiiuine  what  kind 
of  tree  is  denoted    by  the   Hebiew  SOS  ;    many 

attempts  at  identification  have  been  made,  but  tliey 
are  mere  conjectures.  The  Jewish  Rabbis,  with  seve- 
ral modern  versions,  understand  the  mulberry-tree; 
others  retain  the  Hebrew  word.  Celsius  {Hicr<A.  i. 
.-.35)  believes  the  Hebrew  haea  is  iilentical  with  a 
tree  of  similar  name  mentioned  in  a  MS.  work  of  the 
Aiabic  botanical  writer  .\h\\\  Fadli,  namely,  some 
species  oi  Ainyris  or  Bidsionadi'mlron.  Most  lexico- 
graphers are  satisfied  with  this  exjilanation.  Some 
modern  English  authors  have  adopted  the  opinion 
of  Dr.  Royle,  who  (Kitto's  Cyc  art.  Baca)  iefei-s 


'^    Bocharl    tlerives    it    (ivm  7!3y.  "  to  devour,"  and 
12.  "  corn." 


"  Can  this  title  be  In  any  way  connected  with  the 
Koulou  (koOA,oi').  which  is  one  of  the  eleven  names 
inserted  by  the  LXX.  in  the  catalogue  of  the  cities  of 
JiiUah,  lietween  verses  59  and  UO  of  Josh.  .w.  i 


440 


MULE 


the  Hebrew  hacd  to  the  Arabic  Shajrat-al-hak,'^ 
"  the  gnat-tree,"  which  he  identities  with  some 
species  of  poplar,  several  kinds  of  which  are  tbund 
in  Palestine.  Roscnmiiller  follows  the  LXX.  of 
i  Chr.  xiv.  14,  and  believes  "pear-trees"  are  sig- 
nified. As  to  the  claim  of  the  mulberry-tree  to 
represent  the  becaim  of  iScriptuie,  it  is  difficult  to 
see  any  foundation  for  such  an  intei-pret;ition — for, 
as  Rosenmiiller  has  observed  {Bib.  Bot.  p.  256),  It 
is  neither  "  countenanced  by  the  ancient  versions 
nor  by  the  occurrence  of  any  similar  term  in  the 
cognate  languages" — unless  we  adopt  the  opinion 
of  Ursinus,  who  {Arhor.  Bib.  iii.  75),  having  in 
view  the  root  of  the  word  bacah^  "  to  weep,"  iden- 
tifies the  name  of  the  tree  in  question  with  the 
mulberry,  "  from  the  blood-like  tears  which  the 
'p)-essed  berries  pour  forth."  Equally  unsatisfactory 
is  the  claim  of  the  "pear-tree"  to  represent  the 
baca;  iar  the  uncertainty  of  the  LXX.,  in  the  ab- 
sence of  further  evidence,  is  enough  to  show  that 
little  reliance  is  to  be  placed  upon  this  rendering. 

As  to  the  tree  of  which  Abu'l  Fadli  speaks,  and 
which  Sprengel  {Hist.  Bei  herb.  p.  12)  identifies 
with  Amijris  gikadensis,  Lin.,  it  is  impossible  that 
it  can  denote  the  6acaof  the  Hebrew  Bible,  although 
there  is  an  exact  similarity  in  form  between  the  He- 
brew and  Arabic  terms :  for  the  Amyridaceae  are 
tropical  shrubs,  and  never  could  have  grown  in  the 
valley  of  liephaim,  the  Scriptural  locality  for  the 
bccdiin. 

The  e.\])lanntion  given  by  Royle,  that  some  poplar 
is  signified,  although  in  some  respects  it  is  well 
suited  to  the  context  of  the  .Scriptural  passages,  is 
untenable  ;  for  the  Hebrew  bdcd  and  the  Arabic  baka 
are  clearly  distinct  both  in  form  and  signification, 
as  is  evident  from  the  diHerence  of  the  second  radical 
letter  in  each  word.' 

As  to  the  N32  of  Ps.  l.xxxiv.  6,  which  the  A.  V. 
retains  as  a  proper  name,  we  entirely  agree  with 
Hengstenberg  [Coin,  on  Bs.  ad  loc.)  that  the  word 
denotes  "  weeping,"  and  that  the  whole  reference 
to  Baca  trees  must  be  given  up,  but  see  Baca. 

Though  there  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the 
mulberry-tree  occurs  in  the  Hebiew  Bible,  yet  the 
fruit  of  this  tree  is  mentioned  in  1  Mace.  vi.  34, 
as  having  been,  together  with  grape-juice,  shown 
to  the  elephants  of  Antiochus  Eupator  in  order  to 
initate  these  animals  and  make  them  more  foimid- 
able  opponents  to  the  army  of  the  Jews.  It  is  well 
known  that  many  animals  are  enraged  when  they 
.see  blood  or  anything  of  the  colour  of  blood.  For 
fuilher  remarks  on  the  mulberry-trees  of  Palestine 
see  SvcAMiNE.  [W.  H.] 

MULE,  the  i-eprcsentative  in  the  A.  V.  of 
the  following  Helnew  words, — Bcrcd  or  Pirdak, 
Rechesh,  and  Yeinhn. 

1.  Bered,  Birdah  (H^S,  HTlQ;"^  6  7jfj.lovos, 
^  V/J-iovos:  mnltts,  innla),  the  common  and  feminine 
Helarew  nouns  to  express  the  "  mule  ;"  the  first  of 
which  occurs  in  numerous  passages  of  the  Bible, 
the  latter  only  in  1  K.  i.  JiS,  38,  44.  It  is  an 
interesting  fact  that  we  do  not  read  of  mules  till 
the    time    of    David    (as    to  the  yeinhn,    A.  V. 


a  j_J(jJ|  y  ^g:v  A,  ol'  wluch,  bo»  ever,  Frey tag  says, 
'  ArBor  cuUcum,  ulnius,  quia  ex  sucoo  in  lolliculis  cxsic- 
;ato  culices  gignuntur." 

''  nDZl,  "  to  flow  by  drop^,"  "  to  weep." 

':  3  in  tlie  Hebrew,  J  in  the  Arabic ;  X33'  lJo  . 


MULE 

"  mules,"  of  Gen.  xxxvi.  24,  see  below),  just  at  the 
time  when  the  Israelites  were  becoming  well  ac- 
quainted with  horses.  After  this  time  horses  and 
mules  are  in  Scripture  often  mentioned  together. 
After  the  first  half  of  David's  reign,  as  ]\Iichaelis 
{Comment,  on  Lairs  of  Moses,  ii.  477)  observes, 
they  became  all  at  once  very  common.  In  Ezr.  ii. 
66,  Neh.  vii.  68,  we  read  of  two  hundred  and  forty- 
five  mules ;  in  2  Sam.  xiii.  29,  "  all  the  king's  sons 
ai'ose,  and  every  man  gat  him  uj)  upon  his  mule." 
Absalom  rode  on  a  mule  in  the  battle  of  the  wood 
of  Ephraim  at  the  time  when  the  animal  went 
away  from  under  him  and  so  caused  his  death. 
IMules  weie  amongst  the  presents  which  were 
brought  year  by  year  to  Solomon  (1  K.  x.  25). 
The  Levitical  law  forbade  the  coupling  together  of 
animals  of  different  .species  (Lev.  xix.  19),  conse- 
quently we  must  suppose  that  the  mules  were  im- 
ported, unless  the  Jews  became  subsequently  less 
strict  in  their  observance  of  the  ceremonial  injuuc- 
tioirs,  and  bred  their  mules.  We  learn  from  Ezekiel 
(xxvii.  14)  that  the  Tyrians,  after  the  time  of  Solo- 
mon, were  supplied  with  both  horses  and  mules 
from  Armenia  (Togarmah),  which  country  was  cele- 
brated for  its  good  horses  (see  Strabo,  xi.  13,  §7, 
ed.  Kramer;  comp.  also  Xenoph.  Anab.'iv.  5,  36; 
Herod,  vii.  40).  Michaelis  conjectmes  that  the 
Isiaelites  first  became  acquainted  with  mules  in  the 
war  which  David  carried  on  with  the  king  of  Nisibis 
(Zobah),  (2  Sam.  viii.  3,  4).  In  Solomon's  time  it 
is  possible  that  mules  from  Egypt  occasionally  ac- 
companied the  horses  which  we  know  the  king  of 
Israel  obtained  from  that  country ;  for  though  the 
mule  is  not  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  monu- 
ments of  Egypt  (Wilkinson's  Aria.  Egypt,  i.  38C, 
Lond.  1854),  yet  it  is  not  easy  to  believe  that  the 
Egyptians  were  not  well  .acquainted  with  this 
animal.  That  a  friendship  existed  between  Solo- 
mon and  Pharaoh  is  clear  from  1  K.  ix.  16,  as  well 
as  from  the  fact  of  Solomon  having  married  the 
daughter  of  the  king  of  Egypt ;  but  after  Shishak 
came  to  the  throne  a  very  different  spirit  prevailed 
between  the  two  kingdoms :  perhaps,  therefore, 
from  this  date  mules  were  obtained  from  Armenia. 
It  would  appear  that  kings  and  great  ir.en  ordy 
rode  on  mules.  We  do  not  read  of  mules  at  all  in 
the  N.  T.,  perhaps  therefore  they  had  ceased  to  be 
impoited. 

2.  Eechesh  ({J'31).  See  Dromedary,  in  Ap- 
pendix A. 

3.  Yemim  (DD**  :^  rhv  'la.ueiV,  Vat.  and  Alex. ; 
rhv  eajAv, •  CoViV^l.  ;  rovs  la/xelv,  Aq.  and  Sym. : 
aquae  calidiie)  is  found  only  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  24, 
where  the  A.  V.  has  "mules"  as  the  rendering  of 
the  word.  The  passage  where  the  Hebrew  name 
occurs  is  one  concerning  which  various  explanations 
have  been  attempted.  Whatever  may  be  the  proper 
translation  of  the  passage,  it  is  quite  certain  that 
the  A.  V.  is  incorrect  in  its  rendering: — "This  was 
that  Anah  that  found  the  inules  in  the  wilderness 
as  he  fed  the  asses  of  Zibeon  his  father."  Michaelis 
has  shown  that  at  this  time  horses  weie  unknown 
in    Canaan ;    consequently   mules   could    not  have 


d  A  word  of  doubtful  etymology.    Gesenius  refers  it  to 
V 
the  Syriac  ?*-^,  "  avolanL."     Comp.    German    I'jerd, 
Lat.  burdn,  and  see  Michaelis'  remarks. 

*■  From  unused  root   QV,  "  quae  calnih  puleslatem 
ludniissp  videtiu'"  ((iescn.  Thef.). 


MUPPIM 

been  bred  there.  The  Talmudical  writers  believe 
that  Anah  was  the  tirst  to  find  out  the  manner  of 
breeding  mules:  but,  besides  the  objection  ui'ged 
above,  it  may  be  stated  that  neither  the  Hebrew 
nor  its  cognates  have  any  such  a  word  to  signify 
"mules."  Bochart  [Hicroz.  i.  209,  10),  following 
the  reading  of  the  Samaritan  Version  and  Oakelos, 
renders  yem'tm  by  "emims"  or  "  giants"  (Gen. 
xiv.  5)  ;  but  this  e.'iplanation  has  been  generally 
abandoned  by  modern  critics  (see  Kosenmuller, 
Schol.  in  Gen. ;  Geddes,  Crit.  Rem.  xiv.  5).  The 
most  probable  explanation  is  that  which  inter- 
prets i/emim  to  mean  "  warm  springs,"  as  the  Vulg. 
has  it ;  and  this  is  the  interpretation  adopted  by 
Gesenius  and  modern  scholars  generally :  the  i)as- 
sage  will  then  read,  "  this  was  that  Anah  who 
while  he  was  feeding  his  father's  asses  in  the  desert 
discovered  some  hot  springs."  This  would  be  con- 
sidered au  important  discovery,  and  as  such  worthy 
of  record  by  the  historian  ;  but  if,  with  some  writers, 
we  are  to  understand  merely  that  Anah  discovered 
water,  there  is  nothing  very  remarkable  in  the 
fact,  for  his  tatlier's  asses  could  not  have  survived 
without  it.f  [W.  H.] 

MUP'PIM(D''Sp:  Mancpifx-eifi :  Mophim),  a 
Benjamite,  and  one  of  the  fourteen  descendants  of 
Hacliel  who  belonged  to  the  original  colony  of  the 
sons  of  Jacob  in  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvi.  21).  In  Num. 
xxvi.  39  the  name  is  written  Shupham,  and  the 
family  sprinig  from  him  are  called  Shuphamites. 
In  1  Chr.  vii.  12,  15,  it  is  Shuppim  (the  same  as 
xxvi.  16),  and  viii.  5  Shephuphan.  Hence  it  is 
probable  that  Muppim  is  a  corruption  of  the  text, 
and  that  .Shupham  is  the  true  form.  [Becher.] 
According  to  1  Chr.  vii.  12,  he  and  his  brother 
Huppiin  were  the  sons  of  Ir,  or  Iri  (ver.  7),  the  son 
of  Bela,  the  son  of  Benjamin,  and  their  sister  ]\laa- 
chah  appears  to  have  married  into  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  (ib.  15,  16).  But  ver.  15  seems  to  be 
in  a  most  corrupt  state.  1  Chr.  viii.  3,  5,  assigns 
in  like  manner  Shephuphan  to  the  family  of  Bela, 
as  do  the  LXX.  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21.  As  it  seems  to  be 
impossible  that  Benjamin  could  have  had  a  great- 
grandson  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  going  down  into 
Kgypt  (comp.  Gen.  1.  23),  and  as  Machir  the  hus- 
band of  Maacliah  was  Manasseh's  son,  perhaps  the 
explanation  of  the  matter  may  be  that  Shupham  was 
Benjamin's  son,  as  he  is  represented  Num.  xxvi.  39, 
but  that  liis  family  were  afterwards  reckoned  with 
that  of  which  Ir  the  son  of  Bela  was  chief  (comp. 
1  Chr.  XXV.  9-31,  xxvi.  8,  9,  11).         [A.  0.  H.] 

MURDER.'  The  principle  on  which  the  act 
of  taking  the  life  of  a  liuman  being  was  regarded 
by  the  Almighty  as  a  capital  offence  is  stated  on 
its  highest  ground,  as  an  outrage,  I'hilo  cjdls  it 
sacrilege,  on  the  likeness  of  God  in  man,  to  I'e 
punished  even  when  cjiused  by  an  animal  (Gen.  ix. 
5,  6,  with  Bortheau's  note;  see  also  John  viii.  44  ; 
1  John  iii.  12,  15;  I'hilo,  De  Spec.  Leg.  iii.  15, 
vol.  ii.  313).  Its  secondary  or  social  ground  ap- 
pears to  be  implied  in  the  direction  to  replenish  the 
earth  which  immediately  follows  (Gen.  ix.  7j.  The 
exemption  of  Cain  from  aipital  punislnnent  mav 
thus  be  regarded  by  anticipation  as  foundeil  on  the 

r  The  plural  form  of  a  noun  (D'3'iriCJ'nS).  «'lil<'h  is 
apparently  of  Persian  origin,  rend  nd  ••  camel"  by  the 
A.  v.,  occurs  In  Kslli.  viii.  10,  14,  an<l  sci'tns  U)  UiMioU' 
»onie  fuie  breed  of  nuilos.     See  IJocnart  {llienn.  i.  219). 

"  (Verb.)  1.  ^^^,  "  to  crusli,"  "  lu  l;iH,''  wliuncr  part. 


MURDER 


441 


social  ground  either  of  expediency  or  of  example 
(Gen.  iv.  12,  15).  The  postdiluvian  command, 
enlarged  and  infringed  by  the  practice  of  blood- 
revenge,  which  it  seems  to  some  extent  to  sanction, 
was  limited  by  the  Law  of  Jloses,  which,  while  it 
protected  the  accidental  homicide,  defined  with  ad- 
ditional strictness  the  crime  of  murder.  It  pro- 
hibited compensation  or  reprieve  of  the  murderer, 
or  his  protection  if  he  took  refuge  in  the  refuo-e- 
city,  or  even  at  the  altar  of  Jehovah,  a  principle 
which  finds  an  eminent  illustration  in  the  case  of 
Joab  (Ex.  x.xi.  12,  14;  Lev.  xxiv.  17,  21;  Num. 
xx.xv.  16,  18,  21,  31  ;  Deut.  .\ix.  11,  13;  2  Sam. 
xvii.  25,  XX.  10;  1  K.  ii.  5,  6,  31  ;  Philo,  I.  c. ; 
Jlichaelis,  On  Laws  of  Moses,  §132).  Bloodshed 
even  in  warfare  was  held  to  involve  pollution  (Num. 
.XXXV.  33,  34;  Deut.  x.xi.  1,  9;  1  Chr.  xxviii.  3). 
Philo  says  that  the  attempt  to  murder  deserves 
punishment  equally  with  actual  pei-peti-ation";  and 
the  Mishna,  that  a  mortal  blow  intended  for  an- 
other is  punishable  with  death ;  but  no  express 
legislation  on  this  subject  is  found  in  the  Law 
(Philo,  I.  c. ;  Mishn.  Sank.  ix.  2). 

No  special  mention  is  made  in  the  Law  (a)  of 
child-murder,  (6)  of  parricide,  nor  (c)  of  taking  life 
by  poison,  but  its  animus  is  sulliciently  obvious  in 
ail  these  cases  (Ex.  xxi.  15,  17  ;  1  Tim.  i.  9 ;  Matt. 
XV.  4),  and  the  3rd  may  perhaps  be  specially  in- 
tended under  the  prohibition  of  witchcraft  (Ex.'xxii. 
18  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §34;  Philo,  Dc  Spec.  Leg. 
iii.  17,  vol.  ii.  p.  315). 

It  is  not  certain  whether  a  master  who  killed  his 
slave  was  punished  with  death  ( Ex.  .x.xi.  20  ;  Knobel, 
ad  foe).  In  Egypt  the  mui'der  of  a  slave  was 
punishable  with  death  as  an  example  a  fortiori  in 
the  case  of  a  freeman  ;  and  parricide  was  punished 
with  burning ;  but  child-murder,  though  treated  as 
an  odious  crime,  was  not  punished  with  death  (Diod. 
Sic.  i.  77).  The  Greeks  also,  or  at  least  the  Athe- 
nians, protected  the  life  of  the  slave  {Vict,  of  Antiq. 
art.  Servus,  p.  1036  ;  Miiller,  Dorians,  iii.  3,  §4  ; 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  208,  209). 

No  punishment  is  mentioned  for  suicide  attempted, 
nor  does  any  special  restriction  appear  to  have  at- 
tached to  the  property  of  the  suicide  (2  Sam.  xvii.  23). 

Striking  a  pregnant  woman  so  as  to  cause  her 
death  was  punishable  with  death  (Ex.  xxi.  23; 
Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §33). 

If  an  animal  known  to  be  vicious  caused  the 
death  of  any  one,  not  only  was  the  animal  destroyed, 
but  the  owner  also,  if  he  had  taken  no  steps  to 
restrain  it,  was  held  guilty  of  murder  (Ex.  xxi.  29, 
31;  Michaelis,  §274^  vol.  iv.  234,  5)., 

The  duty  of  executing  punishment  on  the  mur- 
derer is  in  the  Law  expressly  laid  on  the  "revenger 
of  blood;"  but  the  question  of  guilt  was  to  be 
previously  dec'ided  by  the  Levitical  tribunal.  A 
strong  bar  against  the  licence  of  private  revenge 
was  filaced  by  the  provision  which  required  the 
concurrence  of  at  least  two  witnesses  in  any  capital 
question  (Num.  x.xxv.  19-30;  Dent.  .xvii.  6-12, 
xix.  12,  17).  In  regal  times  the  duty  of  execution 
of  justice  on  a  murderer  seems  to  have  been  as- 
sumed to  some  extent  by  the  sovereign,  as  well  as 
the  privilege  of  pardon  (2  Sam.  xiii.  39,  xiv.  7,  11 ; 


nVT )  o  "^ovevT^s ;  interfector,  reus  homiddCi,  Gts.  1307. 

2-  Jnri-  "kill;"  an-OKTfiVo),  (/lorciito ;  interficio,  ocdilo; 
whence  3")n  (subs),  "murder;''  (r<<)oyjj;  ocdsio,  Ges. 389, 

3-  ?Dp.  from  "ptDp,  "kill,"  (Jcs.  1212. 


442 


MUSHl 


1  K.  ii.  34).  During  this  period  also  the  practice 
of  assassination  became  frequent,  especially  in  the 
kingdom  of  Israel.  Amons;  modes  of  eft'ectiug  this 
object  may  be  mentioned  tlie  muider  of  Benhadad 
of  Damascus  by  Hazael  by  means  of  a  wet  cloth 
(1  K.  XV.  27,  xvi.  9  ;  2  K.  viii.  15;  Thenius,  ad 
he. ;  Jahn,  Hist.  i.  137  ;  2  K.  s.  7,  si.  1,  Iti,  .xii. 
20,  xiv.  5,  XV.  14,  25,  30). 

It  was  lawful  to  kill  a  burglar  taken  at  night  in 
the  act,  but  unlawful  to  do  so  after  sunrise  (Ex. 
xxii.  2,  3). 

The  Koran  forbids  child-murder,  and  allows  blood- 
revenge,  but  permits  money-compensation  for  blood- 
shed (ii.  21,  iv.  72,  xvii.  230,  ed.  Sale).  [Blood, 
Revenger  of  ;  Manslayeu.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

MU'SHI  ('P*-in  :  'Ojxovffi,  Ex.  vi.  19;  6  novffi, 
1  Chr.  vi.  19,  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  26,  30;  Movai, 
Num.  iii.  20;  1  Chr.  vi.  47,  xxiii.  23;  Alex. 
'Oj-iova-ei,  Ex.  vi.  19;  'Ofxovffi,  Num.  iii.  20; 
1  Chr.  vi.  47  ;  6  Moixri,  1  Chr.  vi.  19,  xxiv.  30 ; 
Mouo-i,  1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  26:  Musi).  The 
son  of  IVIerari  the  son  of  Kohath. 

MUSIC.     Of  music   as   a   science   among   the 
Hebrews  we  have  no  certain  knowledge,  and  the 
traces  of  it  are  so  slight  as  to  afi'ord  no  ground  for 
reasonable    conjecture.      But   with    regard   to    its 
practice  there  is  less  uncertainty.      The   inventor 
of  musical  instruments,  like  the  first  poet  and  the 
first  forger  of  metals,  was  a  Cainite.     According 
to  the   narrative   of  Gen.   iv.,  Jubal  the   son   of 
Lamech  was  "  the  father  of  all  such  as  handle  the 
harp    and   organ,"    that   is   of  all   players    upon 
stringed  and  wind  instruments.^     It  has  been  con- 
jectured that  Jubal's  discovery  may  have  been  per- 
petuated by  the  pillars  of  the  Sethites  mentioned 
by  Josephus  {^Ant.  i.  2),  and  that  in  this  way  it 
was  preserved  till  after  the  Flood ;  but  such  con- 
jectures are   worse   than   an   honest   confession    of  I 
ignorance.      The   first    mention   of  music    in   the 
times  after  the  Deluge  is  m  the  narrative  of  Laban's 
interview   wit^    Jacob,    when   he   reproached    his 
son-in-law    with    having    stolen   away    unawai-es, 
without    allowing    him    to    cheer    his    departure 
"  with  songs,  with  tabret,  and  with  harp  "  (Gen. 
xxxi.  27).     So  that,  in  whatever  way  it  was  pre- 
served, the  practice  of  music  existed  in  the  upland 
country  of  Syria,  and  of  the  three  possible  kinds 
of  musical  instruments,  two  were  known  and  em- 
ployed to  accompany  the  song.     The  three  kinds 
are  alluded  to  in  Job  xxi.  12.     On  the  banks  of  the 
Red  Sea  sang  Moses  and  the  children  of  Israel  their 
triumphal  song  of  deliverance  from  the   hosts  of 
Egypt ;    and  Jliriam,  in   celebration   of  the   same 
event,    exercised   one   of  her   functions   as   a  pro- 
phetess by  leading  a  procession  of  the  women  of 
the  camp,  chanting  in  chorus  the  burden  to  the 
song  of  Moses,  "  Sing  ye  to  Jehovah,  for  He  hath 
triumphed  gloriously ;  the  horse  and  his  rider  hath 
He  thrown  into  the  sea."     Their  song  was  accom- 
panied by  timbrels  and  dances,  or,  as  some  take 
the  latter  word,  by  a  musical  instrument  of  which 
the  shape  is  unknown   but  which  is  supposed   to 
have  resembled  the  modern  tambourine  (Dance, 
vol.  i.  p.  389),  and,  like  it,  to  have  been  used  as  an 


■MUSIC 

accompaniment  to  dancing.  The  expression  in  the 
A.  V.  of  Ex.  XV.  21,  "  and.Miriam  answered  them," 
seems  to  indicate  that  the  song  was  alternate, 
Miriam  leading  off  with  the  solo  while  the  women 
responded  in  full  chorus.  But  it  is  probable  that 
the  Hebrew  word,  like  the  corresponding  Arabic, 
has  merely  the  sense  of  singing,  which  is  retained 
in  the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  xxxii.  18  ;  Num.  xxi.  17  ;  1 
Sam.  xxix.  5;  Ps.  cxlvii.  7;  Hos.  ii.  15.  The 
same  word  is  used  for  the  shouting  of  soldiers  in 
battle  (Jer.  Ii.  14),  and  the  cry  of  wild  beasts 
(Is.  xiii.  22),  and  in  neither  of  these  cases  can  the 
notion  of  response  be  appropriate.  All  that  can 
be  inferred  is  that  Miriam  led  off  the  song,  and 
this  is  confirmed  by  the  rendering  of  the  Vulg. 
praecinebat.  The  triumphal  hymn  of  Moses  luid 
unquestionably  a  religions  character  about  it,  but 
the  employment  of  music  in  religious  service, 
though  idolatrous,  is  more  distinctly  marked  in  the 
festivities  which  attended  the  erection  of  the  golden 
cdf.''  The  wild  cries  and  shouts  which  reached 
the  ears  of  Moses  and  Joshua  as  they  came  down 
from  the  mount,  sounded  to  the  latter  as  the 
din  of  battle,  the  voices  of  victor  and  vanquished 
blending  in  one  harsh  chorus.  But  the  quicker 
sense  of  Moses  discerned  the  I'ough  music  with 
which  the  people  worshipped  the  visible  repi-e- 
sentation  ofthe  God  that  brought  them  out  of 
Egypt.  Nothing  could  show  more  clearly  than 
Joshua's  mistake  the  rude  character  of  the  He- 
brew music  at  this  period  (Ex.  xxxii.  17,  18),  as 
untrained  and  wild  as  the  notes  of  their  Syrian 
forefathers. •=  The  silver  trumpets  made  by  the 
metal  workers  of  the  tabernacle,  which  were  used 
to  direct  the  movements  of  the  camp,  point  to 
music  of  a  very  simple  kind  (Num.  x.  1-10),  and 
the  long  blast  of  the  jubilee  horns,  with  which 
the  priests  brought  down  the  walls  of  Jericho,  had 
probably  nothing  very  musical  about  it  (Josh,  vi.), 
any  more  than  the  rough  concert  with  v/hich  the 
ears  of  the  sleeping  Midianites  were  saluted  by 
Gideon's  three  hundred  warriors  (Judg.  vii.).  The 
song  of  Deborah  and  Barak  is  cast  in  a  distinctly 
metrical  form,  and  was  probaljly  intended  to  be 
sung  with  a  musical  accompaniment  as  one  of  the 
people's  songs,  like  that  with  which  Jephthah's 
daughter  and  her  companions  met  her  father  on 
his  victorious  return  (Judg.  xi.). 

The  simpler  impromptu  with  which  the  women 
from  the  cities  of  Israel  greeted  David  after  the 
slaughter  of  the  Philistine,  was  apparently  struck 
off  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  under  the  intlueuce 
of  the  wild  joy  with  which  they  welcomed  their 
national  champion,  "  the  darling  of  the  songs  of 
Israel."  The  accompaniment  of  timbrels  and  in- 
struments of  music  must  have  been  equally  simple, 
and  such  that  all  could  take  part  in  it  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  6,  7).  Up  to  this  time  we  meet  with  no- 
thing like  a  systematic  cultivation  of  music  among 
the  Hebrews,  but  the  establishment  of  the  scliools 
of  the  prophets  appears  to  have  supplied  this 
want.  Whatever  the  students  of  these  schools 
may  have  been  taught,  music  was  an  essential  part 
of  their  practice.  At  Bethel  (1  Sam.  x.  5)  was  a 
school  of  this  kind,  as  well  as  at  Naioth  in  Ramah 


"  From  the  occurrence  of  the  name  Mahalaleel,  third 
In  descent  from  Seth.  which  signifies  "  giving  praise  to 
God,"  Schneider  concludes  that  vocal  music  in  religious 
services  must  have  been  still  earlier  in  use  among  the 
Sctliites  (Bibl.-gesch.  Darstdlnng  der  Hebr.  Musik.  p.  xi.). 

b  With  this  may  be  compared  the  musical  service  which 
accompanied  the  dedication  of  the  golden  image  in  the 


plains  of  Dura  (Dan.  iii.),  the  commencement  of  which 
was  to  be  the  signal  for  the  multitude  to  prostrate  them- 
selves in  worship. 

"  Compare  Lam.  ii.  7,  where  the  war-cry  of  the  enemy 
in  the  Temple  is  likened  to  the  noise  of  the  multitude  on 
a  solemn  feast-day :  "  They  have  made  a  noise  in  the  house 
of  Jehovah  as  in  the  day  of  a  solemn  feast." 


MUSIC 

(1  Sam.  xix.  19,  20),  at  Jericho  (2  K.  ii.  5,  7, 
15),  Gilgal  (2  K.  iv.  .'(8),  and  perhaps  at  Jeru- 
salem (2  K.  xxii.  14).  I'rofessional  musicians  soon 
became  attached  to  the  court,  and  though  Saul,  a 
hardy  warrior,  had  only  at  intervals  recourse  to 
the  soothing  influence  of  Daviil's  harp,  yet  David 
seems  to  have  gathered  round  him  "  singing  men 
and  singing  women,"  who  could  celebrate  his  vic- 
tories and  lend  a  charm  to  his  hours  of  peace  (2 
Sam.  xix.  35").  Solomon  did  the  same  (Eccl.  ii.  8), 
adding  to  the  luxury  of  liis  court  by  his  patronage 
of  art,  and  obtaining  a  reputation  himself  as  no 
mean  composer  (1  K.  iv.  >>2j. 

But  the  Temple  was  the  great  school  of  music, 
and  it  was  consecrated  to  its  highest  service  in  the 
worship  of  .lehovah.  Before,  however,  the  elabo- 
rate arrangements  had  been  made  by  David  for  the 
temple  choir,  there  must  have  been  a  considerable 
body  of  musicians  throughout  the  country  (2  Sam. 
vi.  5),  and  in  the  procession  which  accompanied 
the  ark  from  the  house  of  Obededom,  the  Levites, 
with  Chenaniah  at  their  head,  who  had  acquired 
skill  from  previous  training,  played  on  psalteries, 
harps,  and  cymbals,  to  the  words  of  the  psalm  of 
thanksgiving  which  David  had  composed  for  the 
occasion  (1  Chr.  xv.  xvi.).  It  is  not  improbable 
that  the  Levites  all  along  had  practised  music  and 
that  some  musical  service  was  part  of  the  worship 
of  the  tabernacle ;  for  unless  this  supposition  be 
made,  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  body  of  trained 
singers  and  musicians  should  be  found  ready  for 
an  occasion  like  that  on  which  they  make  their 
first  appearance.  The  position  which  the  trfbe  of 
Levi  occupied  among  the  other  tribes  naturally 
tavoured  the  cultivation  of  an  art  which  is  essen- 
tially diaracteristic  of  a  leisurely  and  peaceful 
life.  They  were  free  from  the  hardships  attend- 
ing the  struggle  for  conquest  and  afterwards  for 
existence,  which  the  Hebrews  maintained  with  the 
nations  of  Canaan  and  the  surrounding  countries, 
and  their  subsistence  was  provided  for  by  a  national 
tax.  Consequently  they  had  ample  leisure  for 
the  various  ecclesiastical  duties  devolving  upon 
them,  and  among  others  for  the  service  of  song, 
for  which  some  of  their  families  appear  to  have 
possessed  a  remarkable  genius.  The  three  great 
divisions  of  the  tribe  had  each  a  representative 
family  in  the  choir:  Heman  and  his  sous  repre- 
sented the  Kohathites,  Asaph  the  Gershonites,  and 
Ethan  (or  Jeduthun)  the  Jlerarites  (1  Chr.  xv.  17, 
x.xiii.  6,  XXV.  1-6).  Of  the  ,".8,000  who  com- 
posed the  tribe  in  the  reign  of  David,  4000  are 
said  to  have  been  appointed  to  praise  Jehovah  with 
the  instruments  which  David  made  (1  Chr.  xxiii. 
5)  and  for  which  he  taught  them  a  special  chant. 
This  chant  for  ages  afterwards  Wiis  known  by  his 
name,  and  was  sung  by  the  Levites  before  the  army 
of  Jehoshaphat,  ami  on  laying  the  foundation  of  the 
second  temple  (comp.  1  Chr.  xvi.  34,  41 ;  2  Chr. 
vii.  6,  XX.  21  ;  Ezr.  iii.  10,  11)  ;  and  again  by  the 
Maccabi'.ean  army  after  their  great  victory  over 
Gorgias  (1  Mace.  iv.  24).  Over  this  great  body  of 
musicians  presided  the  sons  of  Asaph,  Heman,  and 
Jeduthun,  twenty-four  in  number,  as  heads  of  the 
twenty-four  courses  of  twelve  into  which  the  skilled 
minstrels  were  divided.  These  skilled  or  "  cunning" 
(PnO,  1  Chr.  XXV.  6,  7)  men  were  288  in  number, 

and  imder  them  appear  to  have  been  the  scholars 
(T*J37n  1  Chr.  XXV.  8)  whom,  perhaps,  they 
trained,  and  who  made  up  the  full  number  of 
4000.      Supposing  4000   to   be   merely  a   round 


MUSIC 


443 


number,  each  couise  would  consist  of  a  full  band 
of  166  musicians  presided  over  bv  a  body  of  twelve 
skilled  players,  with  one  of  the  sons  of  Asaph, 
Heman,  or  Jeduthun  as  conductor.  Asaph  him- 
self appears  to  have  played  on  the  cymbals  (1  Chr. 
xvi.  5),  and  this  was  the  case  with  the  other  leaders 
(1  Chr.  XV.  19"),  perhaps  to  mark  the  time  more 
distinctly,  while  the  rest  of  the  band  played  on 
psalteries  and  harps.  The  singers  were  distinct 
from  both,  as  is  evident  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  25,  "the 
singers  .vent  before,  the  players  on  instruments 
tiiUowM  after,  in  the  midst  of  the  damsels  playing 
with  timbrels;"  unless  the  sini/ers  in  this  case 
were  the  cymbal  players,  like  Heman,  Asaph,  and 
Ethan,  who,  in  1  Chr.  xv.  19,  are  called  "singers," 
and  perhaps  while  giving  the  time  with  their 
cymbals  led  the  choir  with  their  voices.  The 
"  players  on  instruments"  (0*3 J J,  nogenim),  as  the 
word  denotes,  were  the  jierformers  upon  stringed 
instruments,  like  the  psaltery  and  harp,  who  have 
been  alluded  to.  The  "players  on  instruments" 
(Dv?h,  cholelim),  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  were  different 
from  these  last,  and  were  properly  pipers  or  per- 
formers on  perforated  wind-instruments  (see  1  K. 
i.  40).  "The  damsels  playing  with  timbrels" 
(comp.  1  Chr.  xiii.  8)  seem  to  indicate  that  women 
took  part  in  the  temple  choir,  and  among  the 
family  of  Heman  are  specially  mentioned  three 
daughters,  wlio,  with  his  fourteen  sons,  were  all 
"  under  the  hands  of  their  fither  for  song  in  the 
house  of  Jehovah  "  (1  Chr.  xxv.  5,  G).  Besides, 
with  those  of  the  captivity  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  were  "  200  singing  men  and  singing 
women"  (Ezr.  ii.  65).  Barter^ora  adds  that  chil- 
dren also  were  included. 

The  trumpets,  which  ai-e  mentioned  among  the 
instruments  placed  before  the  ark  ( 1  Chr.  xiii.  8), 
appear  to  have  been  reserved  for  the  priests  alone 
(1  Chr.  XV.  24,  xvi.  6).  As  they  were  also  used 
in  royal  proclamations  (2  K.  xi.  14),  they  weie 
probably  intended  to  set  forth  by  way  of  symbol 
the  royalty  of  Jehovah,  the  theocratic  king  of  His 
people,  as  well  as  to  sound  the  alarm  against  His 
enemies  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12).  A  hundred  and  twenty 
priests  blew  the  trumpets  in  harmony  with  the 
choir  of  Levites  at  the  dedication  of  Solomon's 
temple  (2  Chr.  v.  12,  13,  vii.  6),  as  in  the  restoiation 
of  the  worship  under  Hezekiah,  in  the  description 
of  which  we  find  an  indication  of  one  of  the  uses 
of  the  temple  music.  "And  Hezekiah  commanded 
to  ofler  the  burnt-offering  upon  the  altar.  And 
when  the  burnt-offering  began,  the  song  of  Jehovah 
began  also,  with  the  trumi)ets  and  with  the  instru- 
ments of  David  king  of  Israel.  And  all  the  con- 
gregation worshipped,  and  the  singers  sang,  and 
the  trumpeters  sounded  ;  all  until  the  burnt-otfering 
was  finished  "  (2  Chr.  xxix.  27,  28).  The  altar 
was  the  table  of  Jehovah  (Mai.  i.  7),  and  the 
Siicrifices  were  His  feasts  (Ex.  xxiii.  18),  so  the 
solemn  music  of  the  Levites  corresponded  to  the 
melody  liy  which  the  banquets  of  earthly  monarchs 
were  accompanied.  The  Temple  was  His  palace, 
and  <T.s  the  Levite  sentries  watched  the  gates  by 
night  they  chanted  the  songs  of  Zion  ;  one  of  these 
it  has  been  conjectured  with  ])robability  is  Ps.  cxxxiv. 

The  relative  numbers  of  the  instruments  in  the 
temple  band  have  been  determined  in  the  tradi- 
tions of  .Jewish  writers.  Of  psalteries  there  were 
to  be  not  less  than  two  nor  more  tlian  six ;  of  flutes 
not  less  than  two  nor  more  tiian  twelve;  of  trum- 
pets not   less   than    two    but    as  many   as   were 


444 


MUSIC 


wished ;  of  harps  or  citherns  not  less  than  nine 
but  as  many  as  were  wished ;  while  of  cymbals 
there  was  only  one  pair  (Forkel,  All(j.  Gesch.  der 
Musik,  c.  iii.  §28).  The  enonnous  number  of 
instruments  and  dresses  for  the  Levites  provided 
during  the  magnificent  leign  of  Solomon  would 
seem,  if  Josephus  be  correct  {Ant.  viii.  3,  §8)  to 
have  been  intended  for  all  time.  A  thousand  dresses 
for  the  high-priest,  linen  garments  and  girdles  of 
pui-ple  for  the  priests  10,000;  trumpets  200,000; 
psaltei-ies  and  harps  of  electrum  40,000;  all  these 
were  stored  up  in  the  temple  tieasiuy.  The  cos- 
tume of  the  Levite  singers  at  the  dedication  of  the 
Temple  was  of  fine  linen  (2  Chr.  v.  12). 

In  the  private  as  well  as  in  the  religious  life  of 
the  Hebrews  music  held  a  prominent  place.  The 
kings  had  their  court  musicians  (Eccl.  ii.  8)  who 
bewailed  their  death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25),  and  in  the 
luxurious  times  of  the  later  monarchy  the'  eflemi- 
nate  gallants  of  Israel,  reeking  with  perfumes  and 
stretched  upon  their  couches  of  ivory,  were  wont 
at  their  banquets  to  accompany  the  song  with  the 
tinlding  of  the  psaltery  or  guitar  (Am.  vi.  4-6), 
and  amused  themselves  with  devising  musical  in- 
struments while  their  nation  was  jierishing,  as 
Neio  fiddled  when  Kome  was  in  flames.  Isaiah 
denounces  a  woe  against  those  who  sat  till  the 
morning  twilight  over  their  wine,  to  the  sound 
of  "the  harp  and  the  viol,  the  tabret  and  pipe" 
(Is.  V.  11,  12).  But  while  music  was  thus  made 
to  minister  to  debauchery  and  excess,  it  was  the 
legitimate  expression  of  mirth  and  gladness,  and  the 
indication  of  peace  and  prosperity.  It  was  only 
when  a  curse  was  upon  the  land  that  the  prophet 
could  say,  "  the  mirth  of  tabi'ets  ceaseth,  the  noise 
of  them  that  rejoice  endeth,  the  joy  of  the  harp 
ceaseth,  they  shall  not  drink  wine  with  a  song " 
(Is.  xxiv.  8,  9).  In  the  sadness  of  captivity  the 
harps  hung  upon  the  willows  of  Babylon  and  the 
voices  of  the  singers  refused  to  sing  the  songs  of 
Jehovah  at  their  foreign  captors'  bidding  (Ps. 
cxxxvii.).  The  bridal  processions  as  they  passed 
through  the  streets  were  accompanied  with  music 
and  song  (Jer.  vii.  34),  and  these  ceased  only  when 
the  land  was  desolate  (Ez.  xxvi.  13).  The  high 
value  attached  to  music  at  banquets  is  indicated  in 
the  description  given  in  Ecclus.  xxxii.  of  the  duties 
of  the  master  of  a  feast.  "  Pour  not  out  words 
where  there  is  a  musician,  and  show  not  forth 
wisdom  out  of  time.  A  concert  of  music  in  a 
banquet  of  wine  is  as  a  signet  of  carbuncle  set  in 
gold.  As  a  signet  of  an  emerald  set  in  a  work  of 
gold,  so  is  the  melody  of  music  with  pleasant 
wine."  And  again,  the  memory  of  the  good  king 
Josiah  was  "  as  music  at  a  banquet  of  wine " 
(Ecclus.  xlix.  1).  The  music  of  the  banquets  was 
accompanied  with  songs  and  dancing  (Luke  xv. 
25).''  The  triumplial  processions  which  celebrated 
a  victoiy  were  enlivened  Ijy  minstrels  and  singers 
(Ex.  x-v.  1,  20;  Judg.  v.  1,  xi.  34;  1  Sam.  xviii. 
6,  xxi.  11  ;  2  Chr.  xx.  28  ;  Jud.  xv.  12,  13),  and 
on  extraordinary  occasions  they  even  accompanied 


MUSIC 

armies  to  battle.  Thus  the  Levites  sang  the  chant 
of  David  before  the  army  of  Jehoshaphat  as  he 
went  forth  against  the  hosts  of  Ammon,  and  IMoab, 
and  Mt.  Seir  (2  Chr.  xx.  19,  21);  and  the  victory 
of  Abijah  over  Jeroboam  is  attributed  to  the  encou- 
ragement given  to  Judah  by  the  priests  sounding 
their  trumpets  before  the  ark  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12,  14;. 
It  is  clear  fi-om  the  narrative  of  Elisha  and  the 
minstrel  who  by  his  playing  calmed  the  prophet's 
spirit  till  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  upon  him,  that 
among  the  camp  followers  of  Jehoshaphat's  anny 
on  that  occasion  there  were  to  be  reckoned  musi- 
cians who  were  probably  Levites  (2  K.  iii.  15). 
Besides  songs  of  triumph  there  were  also  religious 
songs  (Is.  XXX.  29 ;  Am.  v.  23 ;  Jam.  v.  13), 
"songs  of  the  temple"  (Am.  viii.  3),  and  songs 
which  were  sung  in  idolatrous  worship  (Hlx.  xxxii. 
18).^  Love  songs  are  alluded  to  in  Ps.  xlv.  title, 
and  Is.  V.  1.  There  were  also  the  doleful  songs 
of  the  funeral  procession,  and  the  wailing  chant  of 
the  mourners  who  went  about  the  streets,  the  pro- 
fijssional  "  keening"  of  those  who  were  skilful  in 
lamentation  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25  ;  Eccl.  xii.  5  ;  Jer. 
ix.  17-20;  Am.  v.  16).  Lightfoot  {Hor.  Heb.  on 
Matt.  ix.  23)  quotes  from  the  Talmudists  (Chetuhh. 
cap.  4,  hal.  6)  to  the  etlect  that  every  Israelite  on 
the  death  of  his  wife,  "  will  afford  her  not  less  than 
two  pipers  and  one  woman  to  make  lamentation." 
The  gi-ape  gatherers  sang  as  they  gathered  in  the 
vintage,  and  the  wine-presses  were  trodden  with 
the  shout  of  a  song  (Is.  xvi.  10;  Jer.  xlviii.  33); 
the  women  sang  as  they  toiled  at  the  mill,  and  on 
every  occasion  the  land  of  the  Hebrews  during  their 
national  prosperity  was  a  land  of  music  and  melody. 
There  is  one  class  of  musicians  to  which  allusion  is 
casually  made  (Ecclus.  ix.  4),  and  who  were  pro- 
bably foreigners,  the  harlots  who  frequented  the 
streets  of  great  cities  and  attracted  notice  by  singing 
and  playing  the  guitar  (Is.  sxiii.  15,  16). 

There  are  two  aspects  in  which  music  appears, 
and  about  which  little  satisfactory  can  be  said : 
the  mysterious  influence  which  it  had  in  driving 
out  the  evil  spirit  from  Saul,  and  its  intimate  con- 
nexion with  prophecy  and  prophetical  inspiration. 
Miriam  "  the  prophetess  "  exercised  her  prophetical 
functions  as  the  leader  of  the  chorus  of  women 
who  sang  the  song  of  triumph  over  the  Egyptians 
(Ex.  XV.  20).  The  comjiany  of  prophets  whom 
Saul  met  coming  down  from  the  hill  of  God  had 
a  psalteiy,  a  tabret,  a  pii)e,  and  a  harp  before  them, 
and  smitten  with  the  same  enthusiasm  he  "pro- 
phesied among  them"  (1  Sam.  x.  5,  10).  The 
priests  of  Baal,  challens;ed  by  Elijah  at  Carmel, 
cried  aloud,  and  cut  themselves  with  knives,  and 
prophesied  till  sunset  (1  K.  xviii.  29).  The  sons 
of  Asaph,  Heman,  and  Jeduthun,  set  apart  by 
David  for  the  temple  choir,  were  to  " prophesi/ 
with  harps,  with  psalteries,  and  with  cymbals " 
(1  Chr.  XXV.  1) ;  Jeduthun  ^'prophesied  with  the 
hai-p  "  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3),  and  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  15 
is  allied  "  the  king's  seer,"  a  term  which  is  applied 
to    Heman  (1    Chr.   xxv.   5)  and  Asaph  (2   Chr. 


*  At  the  royal  banquets  of  Babylon  were  sung  hymns 
ol  praise  in  honour  of  the  gods  (Dan.  v.  4,  23),  and  per- 
haps on  some  such  occasion  as  the  feast  of  Belshazzar 
the  Hebrew  captives  might  have  been  brought  in  to  sing 
the  songs  of  their  native  land  (Ps.  cxxxvii.). 

=  rhe  use  of  music  in  the  religious  services  of  the 
Therapeutae  is  described  by  Philo  {Ve  Vita  contempl.  p. 
901,  ed.  Krankof.l.  At  a  certain  period  in  the  service  one 
of  the  worshippers  rose  and  sang  a  song  of  praise  to  (jod, 
either  of  his  own  composition,  or   one  from  the  older 


poets.    He  was  followed  by  others  in  a  regular  order,  the 

congregation  remaining  quiet  till  the  concluding  prayer, 
in  which  all  joined.  After  a  simple  meal,  the  whole  con- 
gregation arose  and  formed  two  choirs,  one  of  men  and 
one  of  women,  with  the  most  skilful  singer  of  each  for 
leader ;  and  in  this  way  sang  hymns  to  God,  sometimes 
with  the  full  chorus,  and  sometimes  with  each  choir  al- 
ternately. In  conclusion,  both  men  and  women  joined  in 
a  single  choir,  in  imitation  of  that  on  the  shores  of  the 
I'ed  Sea,  which  was  led  by  Moses  and  Miriam. 


MUSIC 

xxix.  30)  as  musicians,  as  well  as  to  Gad  the 
prophet  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  11;  1  Chr.  xxix.  29).  The 
spirit  of  Jehovah  came  upon  Jahaziel,  a  Levite  of 
the  sons  of  Asaph,  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  and 
he  foretold  the  sucmss  of  the  royal  army  (2  Chr. 
XX.  14).  From  all  these  instances  it  is  evident 
that  the  same  Hebrew  root  (N33)  is  used  'to 
denote  the  inspiration  under  which  the  prophets 
spoke  and  the  minstrels  sang:  Gesenius  ;issigns  the 
latter  as  a  secondary  meaning.  In  the  case  of 
Elisha,  the  minstrel  and  the  prophet  are  distinct 
personages,  but  it  is  not  till  the  minstrel  has 
played  tJiat  the  hand  of  Jehovah  comes  upon  the 
prophet  (2  K.  iii.  15).  This  influence  of  music 
has  been  explaiual  as  follows  by  a  learned  divine 
of  the  Platonist  school :  "  These  divine  enthusiasts 
were  commonly  wont  to  compose  their  songs  and 
hymns  at  the  sounding  of  some  one  musical  instru- 
ment oi'  other,  as  we  find  it  often  suggested  in  the 
Psalms.  So  Plutarch  ....  describes  the  dictate 
of  the  oracle  antiently  .  .  .  .  '  how  that  it  was 
uttered  in  verse,  in  pomp  of  words,  similitudes,  and 
metaphors,  at  the  sound  of  a  pipe.'  Thus  we  have 
Asaph,   Heman,  and    Jeduthun    set  forth   in    this 

prophetiftil   preparation,   1   Chr.   xxv.    1 

Thus  K.  Sal.  expoun.^is  the  place  .  .  .  .  '  when 
they  played  upon  their  musical  instruments  they 

prophesied  after  the   manner   of  Elisha ' 

And  this  sense  of  this  place,  I  think,  is  much  more 
genuine  than  that  which  a  late  author  of  our  own 
would  fasten  upon  it,  viz.,  that  this  prophesying 
was  nothing  but  the  singing  of  psalms.  For  it  is 
manifest  that  these  prophets  were  not  mere  singers 
but  composers,  and  such  as  were  truly  called  pro- 
phets or  enthusiasts "  (Smith,  Select  Discourses, 
vi.  c.  7,  pp.  238,  239,  ed.  1660).  All  that  can 
be  safely  concluded  is  that  in  their  external  mani- 
festations the  effect  of  music  in  exciting  the  emo- 
tions of  the  sensitive  Hebrews,  the  frenzy  of  Saul's 
madness  (1  Sam.  xviii.  10),  and  tlic  religious 
enthusiasm  of  the  prophets,  whether  of  Baal  or 
Jehovah,  were  so  nearly  alike  as  to  be  described  by 
the  same  word.  The  case  of  Saul  is  more  diffi- 
cidt  still.  We  cannot  be  admitted  to  the  secret 
of  his  dark  malady.  Two  turning  points  in  his 
history  are  the  two  intervievs's  with  Samuel,  the 
first  and  the  last,  if  we  except  that  dread  encounter 
which  the  desjiairing  monarch  challenged  before  the 
fatal  day  of  Gilboa.  On  the  first  of  these,  Samuel 
foretold  his  meeting  with  the  company  of  prophets 
with  their  minstrelsy,  the  external  means  by  which 
the  S])irit  of  Jehovah  should  come  upcm  him,  and  he 
should  be  changed  into  another  man  (1  Sam.  x.  ,5). 
The  last  occasion  of  their  meeting  was  the  disobedience 
of  Saul  in  sparing  the  .\malekites,  for  which  he  was 
rejected  from  being  king  (1  Sam.  xv.  26).  Imme- 
diately after  this  we  ai'e  told  the  Sjiirit  of  Jehovah 
departed  from  Saul,  and  an  "evil  spirit  from  Jehovah 
troubled  him"  (1  Sam.  xvi.  14) ;  and  his  attendants, 
who  had  perhaps  witnessed  the  strange  transforma- 
tion wrought  upon  him  by  the  music  of  the  pro- 
phets, suggested  that  the  same  means  should  be 
employed  for  his  restoration.  "  Let  our  lord  now 
command  thy  servants  betbre  thee,  to  seek  out  a  man, 
a  cunning  ])layer  on  an  harp :  and  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  when  tiie  evil  spirit  from  God  is  upon  thee, 
that  he  shall  play  with  his  hand,  and  thou  shalt  be 

well And  it  ciime  to  p;uss  when  the  spirit 

from  God  was  upon  Saul,  that  l)avid  took  an  harp 
and  playctl  with  his  iiand.  So  Saul  w:is  refi'eshed, 
and  was  well,  and  the  evil  spirit  departed  from  liim  " 
(1  Sam.  xvi.  16,  23).    But  on  two  occasions,  when 


MUSICAL  INSTRUMENTS       445 

anger  and  jealousy  supen-ened,  the  remedy  which 
had  soothed  the  frenzy  of  insanity  had  lost  its  charm 
(1  Sam.  xviii.  10, 1 1,  xix.  9,  10).  It  seems  therefore 
that  the  passage  of  Seneca,  which  has  often  been 
quoted  in  explanation  of  this  phenomenon,  "  Pytha- 
goras perturbationeslyra  componebat"  {De  Ira,  iii. 
9)  is  scarcely  appliaible,  and  we  must  be  content  to 
leave  the  narrative  as  it  stands.  [W.  A.  \V."| 

MUSICAL  INSTRUMENTS.  In  addition  to 
the  instruments  of  music  which  liave  been  represented 
in  our  version  by  some  modern  word,  and  are  treated 
under  their  respective  titles,  thei-e  are  other  terms 
which  are  vaguely  or  generally  rendered.   These  are — 

1.  \'\m,  dachacdn,  Chald.,  rendered  "  instru- 
ments of  musick"  in  Dan.  vi.  18.  The  margin  gives 
"  or  table,  perhaps  lit.  concuhiiies."  The  last-men- 
tioned rendering  is  that  approved  by  Gesenius,  and 
seems  most  probable.  The  tianslation,  "  instru- 
ments of  musick,"  seems  to  have  originated  with 
the  Jewish  commentators,  11.  Nathan,  K.  Levi,  and 
Aben  Ezra,  among  others,  who  lepresent  the  word 
by  the  Hebrew  neginoth,  that  is,  stringed  instru- 
ments which  were  played  by  being  struck  with  the 
hand  or  the  plectrum. 

2.  D*3J3,  minnvn,  rendered  with  great  proba- 
bility "  stringed-instruments"  in  Ps.  cl.  4.  It 
appears  to  be  a  general  term,  but  beyond  this 
nothing  is  known  of  it ;  and  the  word  is  chiefly 
interesting  from  its  occurrence  in  a  difficult  passage 
in  Ps.  xlv.  8,  which  stands  in  tlie  A.  V.  "  out  of  the 
ivory  palaces  whereby  ("•DO,  ininni)  they  have  made 
thee  glad,"  a  rendering  which  is  neither  intelligible 
nor  supported  by  the  Hebrew  idiom.  Gesenius 
and  most  of  the  moderns  follow  Sebastian  Schmid 
in  translating,  "  out  of  the  ivory  palaces  the  stringed- 
instruments  make  thee  glad." 

3.  "IIK'J/,  'dsor,  "  an  instrument  of  ten  strings," 
Ps.  xcii.  s!  The  full  phrase  is  "iVK^J?  ^"1},  nchel 
'cisor,  "  a  ten-stringed  psaltery,"  as  in  Ps.  xxxiii.  2, 
cxliv.  9 ;  and  the  true  rendering  of  the  first-men- 
tioned passage  would  be  "  upon  an  instrument  of 
ten  strings,  even  upon  the  psaltery."   [Psalterv.] 

4.  T\1^,  shidddh,  is  found  only  in  one  very 
obscure  passage,  Eccl.  ii.  8,  "  I  gat  me  men-singers 
and  women-singers,  and  the  deUghts  of  the  sons  of 
men,  musical  instruments,  and  that  of  all  sorts" 
(nnB'l  m^,  shidddh  veshiddoth).  The  words 
thus  rendered  have  I'eceived  a  gre^t  variety  of  mean- 
ings. They  are  translated  "  drinking-vessels  "  by 
Aquila  and  the  Vulgate;  "cup-bearers"  by  the 
LXX.,  Peshito-Syriac,  .Jerome,  and  the  Arabic  ver- 
sion ;  "baths"  by  the  Chaldee ;  and  "musical 
instruments"  by  Dav.  Kimchi,  followed  by  Luther 
and  the  A.  V.,  as  well  as  by  many  comnientatoi-s. 
By  others  they  are  supposed  to  refer  to  the  women  of 
the  royal  harem.  But  tlie  most  probable  interpre- 
tation to  be  put  upon  them  is  that  suggested  by  the 
usage  of  the  Talmud,  where  m^K',  shtddh,  denotes 
a  "palanquin"  or  "litter"  for  women.  The  whole 
question  is  discussed  in  Gesenius'  Thesaurrts,  j).  136.5. 

5.  D*tJ'?CJ',  shdlishhn,  rendered  "  instruments  of 
musick"  in  the  A.  V.  of  1  Sam.  xviii.  6,  and  in  the 
margin  "  three-stringed  instruments,"  from  the  root 
shdlosh,  "three."  Koediger  ((!osen.  Tlies.  p.  1429) 
translates  "  triangles,"  which  are  said  to  have  been 
invented  in  Syria,  from  the  same  root.  V\'e  have 
no  means  of  deciding  which  is  the  more  correct. 
The  LXX.  and  Syi-iac  give  "cymbals,"   and   tJie 


446 


MUSTARD 


Vulgate  "sistra;"  while  otheis  render  it.  "noble 
sonEcs"  (comp.  Prov.  xxii.  20).  [VV.  A.  W.] 

MUSTARD  {alvaiTi :  sinapis)  occurs  in  Matt, 
xiii.  HI  ;  l\Iark  iv.  31  ;  Luke  xiii.  19,  in  which 
passages  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  compared  to  a 
grain  of  mustard-seed  which  a  man  took  and  sowed 
in  his  garden ;  and  in  Matt.  xvii.  20,  Luke  xvii.  6. 
where  our  Lord  says  to  His  apostles,  "  if  ye  had 
faith  as  a  grain  of  mustard-seed,  ye  might  say  to 
this  mountain,  remove  hence  to  yonder  place." 

The  subject  of  the  mustard-tree  of  Scripture  has 
of  late  years  been  a  matter  of  considerable  contro- 
versy, the  common  mustard-plant  being  supposed 
unable  to  fulfil  the  demands  of  the  Biblical  allu- 
sion. In  a  paper  by  the  late  Dr.  Royle,  read 
before  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society,  and  published  in 
No.  XV.  of  their  Journal  (1844),  entitled,  "  On  the 
Identification  of  the  JIustard-tree  of  Scripture,"  the 
author  concludes  that  the  Salvadora  persica  is  the 
tree  in  question.  He  supposes  the  Salvadora  per- 
sica to  be  the  same  as  the  tree  called  Khardal  (the 
Arabic  for  mustard),  seeds  of  which  are  employed 
throughout  Syria  as  a  substitute  for  mustard,  of 
which  they  have  the  taste  and  properties.  This 
tree,  according  to  the  statement  of  Mr.  Ameuny,  a 
Syrian,  quoted  by  Or.  Royle,  is  found  all  along  the 
banks  of  the  Jordan,  near  the  lake  of  Tibeiias,  and 
near  Damascus,  and  is  said  to  be  generally  recog- 
nised in  Syria  as  the  mustard-tree  of  Scripture. 
It  appears  that  Captains  Irby  and  ]\Iangles,  who 
had  observed  this  tree  neai'  the  Dead  Sea,  were 
struck  with  the  idea  that  it  was  the  mustard-tree 
of  the  parable.  As  these  travellers  were  advancing 
towards  Kerek  from  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  after  leaving  its  borders  they  entered  a 
wooded  country  with  high  rushes  and  marshes. 
"  Occasionally,"  they  say,  "  we  met  with  specimens 
of  trees,  &c.,  such  as  none  of  our  party  had  seen 
before  .  .  .  Amongst  the  trees  which  we  knew,  were 
various  species  of  Acacia,  and  in  some  instances  we 
met  with  the  dwarf  Mimosa  .  .  .  There  was  one 
curious  tree  wliicli  we  observed  in  great  num- 
bers, and  which  bore  a  fruit  in  bunches,  resembling 
in  appearance  the  currant,  with  the  colour  of  the 
plum ;  it  has  a  pleasant,  though  strong  aromatic 
taste,  resembling  mustard,  and  if  taken  in  any 
quantity,  produces  a  similar  irritability  in  the  nose 
and  eyes.  The  leaves  of  this  tree  have  the  same 
pungent  flavour  as  the  fruit,  though  not  so  strong. 
We  think  it  probable  that  this  is  the  tree  our 
Saviour  alluded  to  in  the  parable  of  the  mustard- 
seed,  and  not  the  mustard-plant  which  is  to  be 
found  in  the  north"  (Trav.  May  8).  Dr.  Royle 
thus  sums  up  his  arguments  in  favour  of  the 
Salvadora  persica  representing  the  mustai-d-tree 
of  Scripture: — "The  S.  persica  appears  better 
calculated  than  any  other  tree  that  has  yet  been 
adduced  to  answer  to  every  thing  that  is  re- 
quired, especially  if  we  take  into  account  its 
name  and  the  opinions  held  respecting  it  in  Syria. 
We  have  in  it  a  small  seed,  which  sown  in  cul- 
tivated ground  grows  up  and  abounds  in  fo- 
liage. This  being  pungent,  may  like  the  seeds 
have  been  used  as  a  condiment,  as  mustard-and- 
cress  is  with  us.  The  nature  of  the  plant  is  to  be- 
come arboreous,  and  thus  it  will  form  a  large  shrub 
01-  a  tree,  twenty-five  feet  high,  under  which  a  horse- 
man may  stand  when  the  soil  and  climate  are  fa- 
vourable ;  it  produces  numerous  branchesand  leaves, 
under  which  birds  may  and  do  take  shelter,  as  well 
as  build  their  nests  ;  it  has  a  name  in  Syria  which 
may  be  considered  as  traditional  from  the  earliest 


MUSTARD 

times,  of  whicn  the  Greek  is  a  correct  translation  ; 
its  seeds  are  used  for  the  same  purposes  as  mustard  ; 
and  in  a  country  where  trees  are  not  plentiful, 
that  is,  the  shores  of  the  lake  of  Tiberias,  this  tree 
is  said  to  abound,  that  is  in  the  very  locality  where 
the  parable  was  spoken "  (  Treatise  on  the  Mus- 
tard-tree, &c.,  p.  24). 


Salvadora  Persica. 

Notwithstanding  all  that  has  been  adduced  by 
Dr.  Royle  in  support  of  his  argument,  we  confess 
ourselves  unable  to  believe  that  the  subject  of  the 
mustard-tree  of  Scripture  is  thus  finally  settled. 
But,  before  the  claims  of  the  Saleadora  persica  are 
discussed,  it  will  be  well  to  consider  whether  some 
mustard-plant  {Sinapis),  may  not  after  all  be  the 
mustard-tree  of  the  parable:  at  any  rate  this  opi- 
nion has  been  held  by  many  writers,  who  appear 
never  to  have  entertained  any  doubt  upon  the 
subject.  Hiller,  Celsius,  Rosenmiiller,  who  all 
studied  the  botany  of  the  Bible,  and  older  writers,  * 
such  as  Erasmus,  Zezerus,  Grotius,  are  content  to 
believe  that  some  common  mustard -plant  is  the 
plant  of  the  parable  ;  and  more  recently  Mr.  Lam- 
Isert  in  his  "  Note  on  the  Mustard-plant  of  Scrip- 
ture "  (see  Linnean  Trans,  vol.  xvii.  p.  449),  has 
argued  in  behalf  of  the  Sinapis  nigra. 

The  objection  commonly  made  against  any  Sina- 
pis being  the  plant  of  the  parable  is,  that  the 
seed  grew  into  "  a  tree"  {^ivtpov),  or  as  St.  Luke 
has  it,  "a  gi'eat  tree"  (SevSpov  neya),  in  the 
branches  of  which  the  fowls  of  the  air  are  said  (o 
come  and  lodge.  Now  iu  answer  to  the  above  ob- 
jection it  is  urged  with  great  truth,  that  the  ex- 
pression is  figurative  and  Oriental,  and  that  in  a 
proverbial  simile  no  literal  accuracy  is  to  be  ex- 
pected ;  it  is  an  error,  for  which  the  language  of 
Scripture  is  not  accountable,  to  assert,  as  Dr.  Royle 
and  some  others  have  done,  that  the  passage  implies 
that  birds  "  built  their  nests "  in  the  tree,  the 
Greek  word  KaraffK7)v6o}  has  no  such  meaning,  the 
word  merely  means  "to  settle  or  rest  upon"  any 
thing  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time;  the  birds  came, 
'^insidendi  et  rersandi  causa"  as  Hiller  [Hiero- 
phyt.  ii.  6.3)  explains  the  phrase:  nor  is  there  any 


•MUSTARD 

occasion  to  suppose  tliat  the  expression  "  fowls  of 
the  air  "  denotes  ;uiy  other  than  the  smaller  inses- 
swial  kinds,  liiuiets,  finches,  &c.,  and  not  the 
"  aquatic  fowls  by  the  lake  side,  or  partridges  and 
pigeons  hovering  over  the  rich  plain  of  Gennesa- 
reth,"  which  Prof.  Stanley  {S.  #  P.  427)  recog- 
nises as  "  the  birds  that  came  and  devoured  the  seed 
by  the  wav  side  " — for  the  larger  birds  are  wild  and 
avoid  the  way  side — or  as  those  "  which  to'ok  refuge 
in  the  spreading  brandies  of  the  mustard-tree." 
Killer's  explanation  is  probably  the  correct  one  ; 
that  the  birds  came  and  settled  on  the  mustard- 
plant  for  the  sake  of  the  seed,  of  which  they  are 
very  fond.  Again,  whatever  the  fflvairi  may  be, 
it  is  expressly  said  to  be  a  herb,  or  more  properly 
"a  gai'den  herb"  (Kaxavou,  olus).  As  to  the 
plant  being  called  a  "  tree"  or  a  "  great  tree,"  the 
expression  is  not  only  an  Oriental  one,  but  it  is 
clearly  spoken  with  reference  to  some  other  thing ; 
the  aiva-Ki  with  respect  to  the  other  herbs  of  the 
garden  may,  considering  the  size  to  wliich  it  grows, 
justly  be  called  "  a  great  tree,"  though  of  course, 
with  respect  to  trees  properly  so  named,  it  could 
not  be  called  one  at  all.  This,  or  a  somewhat 
similar  explanation  is  given  by  Celsius  and  Killer, 


MUSTAED 


447 


and  old  commcntatois  generally,  and  we  confess  we 
see  no  reason  whv  we  should  not  be  satisfied  v^ith 
it.  Irbyand  IMaiigles  mention  the  large  size  wliich 
the  mustard-plant  attains  in  Palestine.  In  their 
journey  from  Bysan  to  Adjeloun,  in  the  Jordan 
viilley,  they  crossed  a  small  plain  very  thickly 
coveial  with  herbage,  particularly  the  mustard- 
plant,  which  reached  as  high  as  their  horses'  heads. 
{Trav.  March  12.)     Dr.  Kitto  says  this  plant  wa-s 

»  Dr.  Hooker  bus  read  the  proot-slicet  of  this  article, 
and  returned  It  with  thi'  fdlluwin^  remarks :  "  I  quite 
agree  witli  all  you  say  about  MiiMard.  My  best  inform- 
ants lauglicd  at  the  Idea  of  the  Salrailnra  jMisica  either 
being  the  mustard,  or  as  being  sudlciontly  well  known  to 
be  made  use  of  In  a  purable  at  all.  I  am  satislied  that 
it  is  a  very  rare  plant  in  Syria,  and  is  probably  confined 
to  the  hot  low  sub-tropical  Engedl  valley,  where  various 


probably  the  Sinapis  orientalis  (nujri^,  wnich  attains 
under  a  favouring  climate  a  stature  which  it  will  not 
reach  in  our  country.     Dr.  Thomson  also  (  The  Land 
and  the  Book,  p.  414),  says  he  has  seen  the  Wild 
Mustard  on  the  rich  plain  of  Akkar  as  tall  as  the 
horse  and  the  rider.     Now,  it  is  clear  from  Scripture 
that  the  ffivairi  was  cultivated  in  our  Lord's  time, 
the  seed  a  "  man  took  and  sowed  in  his  field  ;"  St. 
Luke  says,   "  cast  into  his   garden :"   if  then,    the 
wild   plant  on  the  7'ich  plain  of  Akkar  grows  as 
high  as  a  man  on  horseback,  it  might  attiiin  to  the 
same   or  a   greater   height  when   in  a  cultivated 
garden ;  and  if,  as  Lady  Callcott  has  observed,  we 
take  into  account  the  very  low  plants  and  shrubs- 
upon  which  birds  often  roost,  it  will  readily  be  seen 
that  some  common  mustard-plant  is  able  to  fulfil  all 
the  Scriptural  demands.     As  to  the  story  of  the 
Rabbi  Simeon  Ben  Calaphtha  having  in  his  garden 
a  mustard-plant,  into  which  he  was  accustomed  to 
climb  as  men  climb  into  a  fig-tree,  it  can  only  be 
taken   for  what  Talmudical    statements   generally 
are  worth,  and  must  be  quite  insufficient  to  afford 
grounds  for  any  argument.     But  it  may  be  asked, 
Why  not  accept  the  explanation  that  the  Salvndora 
persica  is  the  tree  denoted  ? — a  tree  which  will  lite- 
rally meet  all  the  demands  of  the  parable.     Be- 
cause,  we  answer,   where  the  commonly  received 
opinion  can  be  shown  to  be  in  fidl  accordance  with 
the  Scriptural  allusions,  there  is  no  occasion  to  be 
dissatisfied  with  it;  and  again,  because  at  present 
we  know  nothing  certain  of  the  occurrence  of  the 
Salvadora  persica  in  Palestine,  except  that  it  occurs 
in  the  small  tropical  low  valley  of  Engedi,  near  the 
Dead  Sea,  from  whence  Dr.  Hooker  saw  specimens, 
but   it     is    evidently    of    rare   occurrence.       Mr. 
Ameuny  says  he  had  seen  it  all  along  the  banks 
of  the  Jordan,  near  the  lake  of  Tiberias  and  Da- 
mascus ;  but  this  statement  is  certainly  erroneous. 
We  know  from  Pliny,  Dioscorides,  and  other  Greek 
anil  liomau  writers,  that  mustard-seeds  were  much 
valued,  and  were  used  as  a  condiment ;  and  it  is 
more  probable  that  the   Jews  of  our  Lord's  time 
were  in  the  habit  of  making  a  similar  use  of  the 
seeds  of  some  common  mustafd  (Sinapis),  than  that 
they  used  to  plant  in  their  gardens  the  seed  of  a 
tree  which  certainly  cannot  fulfil  the  Scriptural  de- 
mand of  being  called  "  a  pot-herb." 

The  expression  "which  is  indeed  the  least  of  all 
seeds,"  is  in  all  probability  hyperbolical,  to  denote 
a  very  small  seed  indeed,  as  there  are  many  seeds 
which  are  smaller  tliair  mustard.  "  The  Lord 
in  his  popular  teaching,"  says  Trench  {Notes  on 
Parables,  108),  "adhered  to  the  popular  lan- 
guage;" and  tlie  mustard-seed  was  used  prover- 
bially to  denote  anything  very  minute  (see  the 
quotations  from  the  Talmud  in  Buxtorf,  Lex.  TaUn. 
p.  322  :  also  the  Koian,  Snr.  :M). 

The  parable  of  the  mustard-]ilant  inay  be  thus 
paraphrased: — "The  Gospel  dispensation  is  like  a 
grain  of  mustard-seed  which  a  man  sowed  in  his 
garden,  which  indeed  is  one  of  the  least  of  all  seals  ; 
but  which,  when  it  springs  up,  becomes  a  tall 
branched  plant,  on  the  branches  of  which  the  birds 
come  and  settle  seeking  their  food."'         [W.  H.] 

other  Indian  and  Arabian  typos  appear  at  the  I'ltima 
Thule  of  their  northern  waiidiTlngs.  Of  the  mustard- 
plants  which  1  saw  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  one  was 
10  feel  high,  drawn  up  amongst  bushes,  kc,  and  not 
thicker  than  whipc-ord.  I  was  told  it  was  a  well-known 
condiment,  and  cultivated  by  the  Arabs ;  It  Is  the 
common  wild  Sinapis  nigra." 


448 


MUTH-LABBEN 


MUTH-LAB'BEN.  "  To  the  chief  musician 
upon  Muth-hibben  "  (}3?  H-ID  7V :  virip  rZv 
Kpvtbloiv  Tuv  vlov:  pro  occult  is  fi  Hi),  is  the  title 
ot'  Ps.  ix.,  which  has  given  rise  to  infinite  con- 
jecture. Two  difficulties  in  connexion  with  it  have 
to  be  resolved ;  first,  to  determine  the  true  reading 
of  the  Hebrew,  and  then  to  ascertain  its  meaning. 
Neither  of  tliese  points  has  been  satisfactorily  ex- 
plained. It  is  evident  tliat  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate 
must  have  read  niO/J?  ?V,  "  concerning  the  mys- 
teries," and  so  the  Arabic  and  Ethiopic  versions. 
The  Targum,  Symmachus,"  and  Jerome,''  in  his 
translation  of  the  Hebrew,  adhered  to  the  received 
text,  while  Aquila,'^  retaining  the  consonants  as  they 
at  present  stand,  read  al-mvth  as  one  word,  n-1!DT'y> 
"youth,"  which  would  be  the  regular  form  of  the 
abstract  noun,  though  it  does  not  occur  in  Biblical 

Hebrew.  In  support  of  the  reading  T\'\'u>V  ''>*  oi^^ 
word,  we  have  the  authority  of  "JS  of  Kennicott's 
MSS.,  and  the  assertion  of  Jarchi  that  he  had  seen 
it  so  written,  as  in  Ps.  xhdii.  14,  in  the  Great  5Ia- 
sorah.  li  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate  and  LXX.  be 
correct  with  regard  to  the  consonants,  the  words 
might  be  pointed  thus,  h^ChV  /V,  'ul  'a/dmoth, 
"  upon  Alamoth,"  as  in  the  title  of  Ps.  xlvi.,  and 
J3?  is  possibly  a  fragment  of  m'p  ''32/',  libnS  Ko- 
rach,  "  for  the  sous  of  Korah,"  which,  appears  in 
the  same  title.  At  any  rate  such  a  reading  would 
have  the  merit  of  being  intelligible,  which  is  more 
than  can  be  said  of  most  explanations  which  have 
been  given.  But  if  the  5Iasoretic  reading  be  the 
true  one,  it  is  hard  to  attach  any  meaning  to  it. 
The  Targum  renders  the  title  of  the  psalm. — "  on 
the  ileath  of  the  man  who  came  forth  from  between 
(pS)  the  camps,"  alluding  to  Goliath,  the  Philis- 
tine champion  (D)3"'3n  K'''Nt,  1  Sam.  xvii.  4). 
That  David  composed  the  psalm  as  a  triumphal 
song  upon  the  slaughter  of  his  gigantic  adversary, 
was  a  tradition  which  is  mentioned  by  Kimchi 
merely  as  an  on  dit.  Others  render  it  "  on  the 
death  of  the  son,"  anifapply  it  to  Absalom;  but,  as 
Jarchi  remarks,  there  is  nothing  in  the  character  of 
the  psalm  to  warrant  such  an  application.  He 
mentions  another  interpretation,  which  appears  to 
have  commended  itself  to  Grotius  and  Hengsten- 
berg,  by  which  lahben  is  an  anagram  of  nahal,  and 
the  psalm  is  referred  to  the  death  of  Nabal,  but  the 
Itabbhiical  commentator  had  the  good  sense  to  reject 
it  as  untenable,  though  there  is  as  little  to  be  said 
in  fovour  of  his  own  view.  His  words  are — "  but 
I  say  that  this  song  is  of  the  future  to  come,  when 
the  chililhood  and  youth  of  Israel   shall  be  made 

white  (|27n*),  and  their  righteousness  be  revealed 
and  their  salvation  draw  nigh,  when  Esau  and  his 
seed  shall  be  blotted  out."     He  takes  TAtj^V  as  one 

word,  signifying  "youth,"  and  )37  =  J3??,  "to 
whiten."  Menahem,  a  commentator  quoted  by 
Jarchi,  interprets  the  title  as  addressed  "  to  the  mu- 
sician upon  the  stringed  instruments  called  Alamoth, 
to  instruct,"  taking  |37  as  if  it  were  pin?  or 
tjiS?.  Donesh  supposes  that  lahben  was  the  name 
of  a  man  who  wan-ed  with  David  in  those  days,  and 
to  whom  reference  is  made  as  "  the  wicked "  in 
verse  5.     Aram.a  (quoted  by  Di".  Gill  in  his  Expo- 


nepi  Oavdrov  tov  vlov.  *"  Super  morte  Jilii. 

E  reai'ionjTOs  TOU  vlov. 


MYKA 

sition)  identifies  him  with  Saul.  As  a  last  resource 
Kimchi  suggests  that  the  title  was  intended  to  con- 
vey instructions  to  the  Levite  minstrel  Ben,  wliose 
name  occurs  in  1  Chr.  xv.  18  among  the  temple 
choir,  and  whose  brethren  played  "  with  psalteries 
on  Alamoth."  There  is  reason,  however,  to  suspect 
that  the  reading  in  this  verse  is  corrupt,  as  the 
name  is  not  repeated  with  the  others  in  verse  20. 
There  still  remain  to  be  noticed  the  conjectures  of 
Delitzsch,  that  Muth-labben  denotes  the  tone  or 
melody  with  the  words  of  the  song  associated  with 
it,  of  others  that  it  was  a  musical  instrument,  and 
of  Hupfeld  that  it  was  the  commencement  of  an  old 
song,  either  signifying  "  die  for  the  son,"  or  "  death 
to  the  son."  Hitzig  and  others  regard  it  as  an 
abbreviation  containing  a  reference  to  Ps.  xlviii.  14. 
The  difficulty  of  the  question  is  sufficiently  indi- 
cated by  the  ex-]>lanation  which  Gesenius  himself 
{Thes.  p.  741a)  was  driven  to  adopt,  that  tlie 
title  of  the  psalm  signified  that  it  was  "  to  be 
chanted  by  hoys  with  virgins'  voices." 

The  renderings  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  induced 
the  early  Chiistian  commentators  to  refer  the 
psalm  to  the  Messiah.  Augustine  understands  "  the 
son"  a.s  "the  only  begotten  son  of  God."  The 
Syriac  version  is  quoted  in  support  of  this  interpre- 
tation, but  the  titles  of  the  Psalms  in  that  version 
are  generally  constructed  without  any  reference  to 
the  Hebrew,  and  therefore  it  cannot  be  appealed  to 
as  an  authority. 

On  all  accounts  it  seems  extremely  probable  that 
the  title  in  its  present  form  is  only  a  fragment  of 
the  original,  which  may  have  been  in  full  what  has 
been  suggested  above.  But,  in  the  words  of  the 
Assembly's  Annotations,  "  when  all  hath  been  said 
that  can  be  said  the  conclusion  must  be  the  same  as 
before  ;  that  these  titles  are  very  uncertain  things,  if 
not  altogether  unknown  in  these  days."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MYN'DUS  iUvvSos),  a  town  on  the  coast  of 
Caria,  between  Miletus  and  Halicarnassus. 
The  convenience  of  its  position  in  regaid  to  trade 
was  probably  the  reason  why  we  find  in  1  Mace. 
XV.  23  that  it  was  the  residence  of  a  Jewish  popu- 
lation. Its  ships  were  well  known  in  very  eaily 
times  (Herod,  v.  38),  and  its  harbour  is  specially 
mentioned  by  Strabo  (xiv.  658).  The  name  still 
lingers  in  the  modern  Mcntesche,  though  the  I'e- 
mains  of  the  city  are  probably  at  Gumis/ilit,  where 
Admiral  Beaufort  found  an  ancient  pier  and  other 
ruins.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MY'RA  (ra  yivpa),  an  important  town  in 
Lycia,  and  interesting  to  us  as  the  place  wheie 
St.  Paul,  on  his  vovage  to  Piome  (Acts  xxvii.  5), 
was  removed  from  the  Adramyttian  ship  which  had 
brought  him  from  Caesarea,  and  entered  the  Alex- 
andrian ship  in  which  he  was  wrecked  on  the  coast 
of  Malta.  [Adr.\MYTTIUM.]  The  travellei-s  had 
availed  themselves  of  the  first  of  these  vessels  be- 
cause their  course  to  Italv  necessarily  took  them 
past  the  coasts  of  the  province  of  Asia  (ver.  2), 
expecting  in  some  harbour  on  these  coasts  to  find 
another  vessel  bound  to  the  westward.  This  ex- 
pectation was  fulfilled  (ver.  6). 

It  might  be  asked  how  it  happened  that  an 
Alexandrian  ship  bound  for  Italy  was  so  far  out 
of  her  coui-se  as  to  be  at  ]\Iyra.  This  question  is 
easily  answered  by  those  who  have  some  ac- 
quaintance with  the  navigation  of  the  Levant, 
BIyra  is  nearly  due  north  of  Alexandria,  the 
harbours  in  the  neighbourhood  are  numerous 
and  good,    the  mountains    high    and    easily  seen. 


MYRRH 

and  the  current  sets  along  the  coast  to  the  west- 
ward (Smith's  Voyaije  and  Shipwreck  of  St. 
I'md).  Moreover,  to  say  nothing  of  the  possibilit_v 
of  la,nding  or  taking  in  passengers  or  goods,  the 
wind  was  blowing  about  this  time  continuously 
and  violently  from  the  N.W.,  and  the  same  weather 
which  impeded  the  Adramyttian  ship  (ver.  4)  would 
be  a  hindrance  to  the  Alexandrian  (see  ver.  7 ;  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  xxiii.). 

Some  unimportant  MSS.  having  Avcrpa  in  this 
passage,  Grotius  conjectui'ed  that  the  true  reading 
might  be  Al/xvpa  (Bentleii  Critioa  Sacra,  ed.  A.  A. 
Kllis).  This  supjiosition,  though  ingenious,  is  quite 
unnecessary.  Both  Limyia  and  Myra  were  well 
l<nowu  among  the  maritime  cities  of  Lycia.  The 
iiarbour  of  the  latter  was  stiictly  Andriace,  distant 
from  it  between  two  and  three  miles,  but  the 
river  was  navigable  to  the  city  (Appian,  B.  C- 
iv.  82). 

Myra  (called  Demhra  by  the  Greeks)  is  remark- 
able still  for  its  remains  of  various  periods  of  his- 
tory. The  tombs,  enriched  with  ornament,  and 
many  of  them  having  inscriptions  in  the  ancient 
l.ycian  character,  show  that  it  must  have  been 
wealthy  in  early  times.  Its  enormous  theatre 
attests  its  considerable  population  in  what  may  be 
called  its  Greek  age.  In  the  deep  gorge  which 
leads  into  the  mountains  is  a  large  Byzantine  church, 
a  relic  of  the  Christianity  which  may  have  begun 
with  St.  Paul's  visit.  It  is  reasonable  to  conjecture 
that  this  may  have  been  a  metropolitan  church, 
inasmucli  as  we  find  that  when  Lycia  was  a  pro- 
vince, in  the  later  Rom;m  empire,  Myra  was  its 
capital  {Hierocl.  p.  ti84).  In  later  times  it  was 
curiousl}'  called  the  port  of  the  Adriatic,  and  visited 
by  Anglo-Saxon  travellers  {Early  Travels  in  Pa- 
lestine, pp.  3.3,  138).  Legend  says  that  St.  Nicholas, 
the  patron  saint  of  the  modern  Greek  sailors,  was 
born  at  Patara,  and  buried  at  Myra,  and  his  sup- 
posed relics  were  taken  to  St.  Petersburgh  by  a 
Russian  fiigate  during  the  Greek  revolution. 

'I'he  remains  of  Myra  have  had  the  advantage  of 
very  full  descri])tion  by  the  following  travellers: 
Lealce,  Beaufort,  P'ellows,  Texier,  and  Spratt  and 
Forbes.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MYRRH,  the  represe-itative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Hebrew  woids  jl/y/-  and  Lot. 

1.  J/tJ/'OO":  crfjivpva,  iTTaKri\,  jj.vpvtvos,  Kp6- 
Kos :  myrrha,  inyrrhinus,  mijrrha)  is  mentioned  in 
Kx.  XXX.  23,  as  one  of  the  ingredients  of  the  "  oil 
of  holy  ointment;"  in  Esth.  ii.  12,  as  one  of  the 
substances  used  in  the  puritication  of  women  ;  in 
Ps.  xlv.  8,  Prov.  vii.  17,  and  in  several  passages 
in  Canticles,  as  a  perfume.  The  Greek  (Tfiipva 
occurs  in  Matt.  ii.  11  amongst  the  gifts  brought 
by  the  wise  men  to  the  infant  Jesus,  and  in  Mark 
XV.  23^  it  is  said  that  "  wine  mingled  with  myrrh  " 
(olvos  ifffJ.vpi(TfX(Vos)  was  offered  to,  but  refused 
by,  our  Ixird  on  the  cross.  Myrrh  was  also  used 
for  embalming  (see  .Fohn  xix.  39,  and  Ilerod.  ii.  86). 
Various  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to  the  leal 
nature  of  the  substance  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
mor  (see  Celsius,  Ilicrob.  i.  Ti2'l) ;  and  much  doubt 
has  existed  as  to  the  countries  in  which  it  is  pro- 
duced. According  to  the  testimony  of  Herodotus 
(iii.  107),  Dioscorides  (i.  77),  Theophrastus  (ix. 
4,  §1),  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  49),  Strabo,  Pliny, 
&c.,  the  tree  wiiich  produces  myrrh  grows  in 
Arabia.     Pliny  (xii.  16)  says,  in  diiForent  parts  of 


MYRRH 


449 


Arabia,  and  asserts  that  there  are  several  kinds  of 
myrrh  both  wild  and  cultivated :  it  is  probable 
that  under  the  name  of  myrrha  he  is  des;ribing 
different  resinous  productions.  Theophrastus,  who 
is  generally  pretty  accuia^e  in  his  observatijus,  re- 
marks (ix.  4.  §1),  that  myrrh  is  produced  in  the 
middle  of  Arabia,  around  Saba  and  Adramytta. 
Some  ancient  writers,  as  Propertius  (i.  2,  3)  and 
Oppian  {Halieut.  iii.  403),  speak  of  myrrh  as 
found  in  Syria  (see  also  Belon,  Observ.  ii.  ch.  8(1)  ; 
others  conjecture  India  and  Aethiopia ;  Plutarch 
(Is.  et  Osir.  p.  383)  asserts  that  it  is  produced  in 
Egypt,  and  is  there  called  Bal.  "  The  fact,"  ob- 
serves I)]-.  Koyle  (s.  v.  Mor,  Kitto's  CycL),  "  of 
myrrh  being  called  bal  among  the  Egyptians  is  ex- 
tremely curious,  for  bol  is  the  Sansorit  bola,  the 
name  for  myrrh  throughout  India."  *> 

It  would  appear  that  the  ancients  generally  are 
correct  in  what  they  state  of  the  localities  where 
myrrh  is  produced,  for  Ehrenberg  and  Hemprich 
have  proved  that  myrrh  is  found  in  Arabia  Eelix, 
thus  confirmiug  the  statements  of  Theophrastus  and 
Pliny;  and  Mr.  Johnson  (Travels  in  Abyssinia,  i. 
249)  found  myrrh  exuding  fi;om  cracks  in  the  back 
of  a  tree  in  Koran-hedulah  in  Adal,  and  Korskal  men- 
tions two  myrrh-producing  trees,  Amyris  Kaiafm\<\ 
Amyris  Kafal,  as  occurring  near  Haes  in  Arabia 
Felix.  The  myrrh-tree  which  Ehrenberg  and  Hemp- 
rich  found  in  the  borders  of  Arabia  Felix,  and  that 
which  Mr.  Johnson  saw  in  Abyssinia  are  believed 
to  be  identical ;  the  tree  is  the  Balsamodendron 
myrrha,  "  a  low  thorny  ragged-looking  tree,  with 
bright  trifoliate  leaves:"  it  is  probably  the  il/jwv 
of  Abu '1  Fadli,  of  which  he  says  "murr  is  the 
Arabic  name  of  a  thorny  tree  like  an  acacia,  from 
which  flows  a  wljite  liquid,  which  thickens  and 
becomes  a  trum." 


•»  Kroni  root  "IIDi  "  M  drop." 

•>  I'lutiircti,  however,  was  probably  in  irrur,  and  lins 

vol,.  II. 


That  myrrh  has  been  long  oxpoited  from  Africa 
wc  learn  from  Arrian,  who  mentions  (rfxvpva  as 
one  of  tlie  articles  of  export  from  the  ancient 
district  of  Barbaria:   the    Egyptians  perhaps  ob- 


confT)uti(l<>ci  the  Coptic  sal,  "  myrrh,"  willi  Ud,  "  an  oye.' 
See  .liiblonskl.  (Jpusc.  i.  49,  efl.  to  Water. 

•J  G 


450 


MYRRH 


taiaed  their  myrrh  from  the  country  of  the  Trog- 
lodytes (Nubia),  as  the  best  wild  myrrh-trees  are 
said  by  Pliuy  (xii.  15)  to  come  from  that  district. 
Pliny  states  also  that  "  the  Sabaei  even  cross  the 
sea  to  prociu-e  it  in  the  country  of  the  Troglodytae." 
From  what  Athenaeas  (xv.  689)  says,  it  woidd 
appear  that  myrrh  was  imported  into  Egypt,  and 
tliat  the  Greeks  received  it  froul  thence.  Dioscorides 
describes  many  kinds  ot  myrrh  under  various  names, 
for  which  See  Sprengel's  Annotations,  i.  7o,  &c. 

The  Balsainodendron  inyrrha,  which  produces 
the  myrrh  of  commerce,  has  a  wood  and  bark 
which  emit  a  strong  odour ;  the  gum  which  exudes 
from  the  bark  is  at  first  oily,  but  becomes  hard  by 
exposure  to  the  air :  it  belongs  to  the  natuial  order 
Ti'.rebinthaceae.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
this  tree  is  identical  with  the  ilurr  of  Abu'l  Fadli, 
the  (TjjLVpva  of  the  Greek  writers,  the  "  stillata 
cortice  myrrba  "  of  Ovid  and  the  Latin  writers,  and 
the  mor  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

The  "  wine  mingled  with  myrrh,"  which  the 
Roman  soldiers  presented  to  our  Lord  on  the  cross, 
was  given,  according  to  the  opinion  of  some  com- 
mentators, in  order  to  render  him  less  sensitive  to 
pain  ;  but  there  are  diflerences  of  opinion  on  this 
subject,  foi  which  see  (lALL,  Appendix   \. 


C'istus  Ci'trticus. 


2.    Lot  (b?^'  :     cTTaKTT)  :    stacte),    erroneously 
tianslated  "  myrrh"  in  the  A.  V.  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  25, 


MYRTLE 

xliii.  11,  the  only  two  passages  where  the  word  is 
found,  is  generally  considered  to  denote  the  odor- 
ous resin  which  exudes  from  the  branches  of  the 
Gistns  creticus,  known  by  the  name  of  ladawim  or 
labdanum.  It  is  clear  that  lot  cannot  signify 
"myrrh,"  which  is  not  produced  in  Palestine,  yet 
the  Scriptural  passages  in  Genesis  speak  of  this 
substance  as  beirg  exported  from  Gilead  into  Egypt. 
Ladanum  was  known  to  the  early  Greeks,  for  He- 
rodotus (iii.  107,  112)  mentions  Ki\^avov,  or  Ace- 
davov,  as  a  product  of  Arabia,  and  says  it  is  found 
"  sticking  like  gum  to  the  beards  of  he-goats,  which 
collect  it  from  the  wood ;"  similar  is  the  testimony 
of  Dioscorides  (i.  128),  who  says  that  the  best  kind 
is  "  odorous,  in  colour  inclining  to  green,  easy  to 
soften,  fat,  free  from  particles  of  sand  and  dirt ; 
such  is  that  kind  which  is  produced  in  Cyprus, 
but  that  of  Arabia  and  Libya  is  inferior  in  quality." 
Thei'e  are  several  species  of  C'istus,  all  of  which 
are  believed  to  yield  the  gum  ladanum  ;  but  the 
species  mentioned  by  Dioscorides  is  in  all  proba- 
bility identical  with  the  one  which  is  found  in  Pa- 
lestine, viz.,  the  C'istus  creticus  (Strand,  Flor.  Pa- 
laest.  No.  289).  The  C.  ladaniferns,  a  native  of 
Spain  and  Portugal,  produces  the  greatest  quantity 
of  the  ladanum  ;  it  has  a  white  ilower,  while  that 
of  the  C.  creticus  is  rose-coloured.  Tournefort 
(  Voyage,  i.  79)  has  given  an  interesting  account 
of  the  mode  in  which  the  gum  ladanum  is  gathered, 
and  has  figured  the  instrument  commonly  employed 
by  the  people  of  Candia  ibr  the  purpose  of  collect- 
ing it.  Tliere  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hebrew 
lot,  the  Arabic  ladnn,  the  Greek  Xifiavov,  the 
Latin  and  English  ladanum,  are  identical  (see  lio- 
senmiiller,  Bih.  Bot.  p.  158;  Celsius,  Hieroh.  i. 
288).  Ladanum  was  formerly  much  used  as  u 
stimulant  in  medicine,  and  is  now  of  repute  aniongst 
I  the  Turks  as  a  peifume. 

The  C'istus  belongs  to  the  Natural  order  Cista- 
ceac,  the  Piock-rose  family.  ^  [W.  H.] 

MYRTLE  (D"in,»  hadas:    /xvpirivn,    opos -j^ 

myrtus,  mijrtetum'].  Tliere  is  no  doubt  that  the 
A.  V.  is  correct  in  its  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
word,  for  all  the  old  versions  are  agreed  upon  the 
point,  and  the  identical  noun  occurs  in  Arabic — in 
the  dialect  of  Yemen,  S.  Arabia — as  the  name  of 
the  "  myrtle."  "> 

Mention  of  the  myrtle  is  made  in  Neh.  viii.  15; 
Is.  xli.  19,  Iv.  13  ;  Zech.  i.  8,  10,  11.  When  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  celebrated  by  the  Jews 
on  the  return  from  Babylon,  the  people  of  Jeru- 
salem were  ordered  to  "  go  forth  unto  the  mount 
and  fetch  olive-branches,  and  pine-branches,  and 
myrtle-branches,  and  to  make  booths."  The  prophet 
Isaiah  foretells  the  coming  golden  age  of  Isiael,  when 
the  Lord  shall  plant  in  the  wilderness  "  the  shittah- 
tiee  and  the  myrtle-tree  and  the  oil-tiee."  The 
modern  Jews  still  adorn  with  myrtle  the  booths 
and  sheds  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  Myrtles 
{Miijrtus  communis)  will  grow  either  on  hills  or  in 
valleys,  but  it  is  in  the  latter  locality  where  they 
attain  to  their  greatest  perfection.  Foimevly,  as 
we  learn  from  Nehemiah  (viii.  15),  myrtles  grew 
on  the  hills  about  Jerusalem.  "  On  Olivet,"  says 
Prof.  Stanley,  "  nothing  is  now  to  be  seen  but  the 
olive  and  the  fig  tree:"  on  some  of  the  hills,  how- 


■^  From  root  t2-lA  "  '°  cover ;"  the  gum  covering  the 
plant. 

«  The  derivation  of  this  wonl  is  uncertain  ;  but  see  the 
Hebrew  I.exicons. 


b  The  LXX.  reading  Qnnn.  instead  of  QlDiri- 

<^         j^  (Heb.    Din)      Myrlns    idiomatc   Arabiae 
f'elicis).     Kamus  (Frcytag,  ^l'"-  l-ex.  s.  v.). 


MYSIA 

ever,  near  Jerusalem,  Hasselquist  (  Trav.  127,  Lond. 
1766)  observed  the  myrtle.  Dr.  Hooker  says  it 
is  not  uncommon  in  Samaria  and  Galilee.  Irby  and 
Mana;les  (p.  222)  describe  the  rivers  from  Tripoli 
towards  Galilee  as  having  tiieir  banks  covered  with 
myrtles  (see  also  Kitto,  Ph'js.  lUst.  of  Palest. 
p.  268). 


NAAMAH 


451 


Wyitus 


Tlie  myrtle  {hadas)  gave,  her  name  to  Hadassah 
or  Esther  (Esth.  ii.  7):  the  Greek  names  Myrtilus, 
Myrtoessa,  &c.,  have  a  similar  origin.  Theie  are 
several  species  of  the  genus  Mijrtus,  but  the 
Mip-tiis  commnnis  is  the  only  kind  denoted  by 
the  Hebrew  Hadas :  it  belongs  to  the  natural  order 
Mi/rtaceae,  and  is  too  well  known  to  need  descrip- 
tion. [W.  H.] 

MY'SIA  (Mviria).  If  we  were  required  to  fix 
the  exact  limits  of  this  north-western  district  of 
Asia  Minor,  a  long  discussion  might  be  necessary. 
But  it  is  mentioned  only  once  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts 
xvi.  7,  8),  and  that  cursorily  and  in  reference  to  n 
passing  journey.  St.  Paul  and  his  companions,  on 
the  second  missionar}"  circuit,  were  divinely  pre- 
vented from  staying  to  ])reach  the  (!ospel  either  in 
Asia  or  Bithvnia.  They  had  then  come  Kara 
ri)v  Mvalav,  and  they  weie  directed  to  Troas, 
irapfXOSvTes  t^v  Vlvaiav ;  which  means  eitl'.fr 
that  they  skirted  its  border,  or  that  they  passed 
through  the  distiict  without  staying  there.  In 
lact  the  best  description  that  can  be  given  of  Mysia 
at  this  time  is  tliat  it  was  the  region  about  the 
frontier  of  tlie  provinces  of  Asia  and  Bithvnia.  The 
term  is  evidently  used  in  an  ethnological,  not  a 
political  sense.  Winer  compares  it,  in  this  point  of 
\iew,  to  such  German  terms  a.s  Suabia,  Breisgau, 
&c.  Illustrations  nearer  home  might  be  found  in 
such  districts  as  Craven  in  Yoikshiie  or  Appin  in 
Argyllshire.  Assos  and  AnuAMYTTiUM  were  both 
in  Mvsia.  Immodiatelv  op]«isite  was  the  island  of 
Lesbos.  [MiTVi.KNK.]  Tkoas,  though  within  the 
same  range  ol'  country,  had  a  small  district  of  its 
own,  which  was  viewed  ;is  politicallv  ^■ep:^l■ate. 

I.I.S.  H.] 


N 

NA'AM  fnW:  ^o6fi:  Naham).  One  of  the 
sons  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh  (1  Chr.  iv.  15). 
NA'AMAH  (nnyj).  \.  {-i^oeixd:  Noema.) 
One  of  the  four  women  whose  names  are  preser\-ed  in 
the  records  of  the  world  before  the  Flood  ;  all  except 
Eve  being  Cainites.  She  was  daughter  of  Lamech  by 
his  wife  Zillah,  and  sister,  as  is  expressly  mentioned, 
to  Tubaicain  ((ien.  iv.  22  only).  No  reason  is 
given  us  why  these  women  should  be  singled  out 
for  mention  in  the  genealogies ;  and  in  the  absence 
of  this  most  of  the  commentators  have  sought  a 
clue  in  the  signiticance  of  the  names  interpreted  as 
Hebrew  terms ;  endeavouring,  in  the  characteristic 
words  of  one  of  the  latest  .lewish  critics,  by  "  due 
energy  to  strike  the  living  water  of  thought  even 
out  "of  the  rocky  soil  of  dry  names"  (Kalisch, 
Genesis,  149).  Thus  Naamah,  from  Naam., 
"  sweet,  pleasant,"  signifies,  according  to  the  same 
interpreter,  "  the  lovely  beautiful  woman,"  and 
this  and  other  names  in  the  same  genealogy  of  the 
Cainites  are  interpreted  as  tokens  that  the  human 
race  at  this  period  was  advancing  in  civilization 
and  arts.  But  not  only  are  such  deductions  at  all 
times  hazardous  and  unsatisfactory,  but  in  this  par- 
ticular instance  it  is  surely  begging  the  question  to 
assume  that  these  early  names  are  Hebrew ;  at  any 
rate  the  onus  probandi  rests  on  those  who  make  im- 
poi'tant  deductions  from  such  slight  premises.  In 
the  Targum  Pseudojonathan,  Naamah  is  commemo- 
rated as  the  "  mistress  of  lamenters  and  singers  ;" 
and  in  the  Samaritim  N'ersion  her  name  is  given  as 
Zalkipha. 

2.  {MaaxafJ.,  T^aavdv,  Noo^jua  ;  Alex.  Nao//a, 
fiuo/JLixa;  Joseph.  Hoofxas :  Naamn.)  Mother  of 
king  Kelioboam  (1  K.  xiv.  21,  31";  2  Chr.  xii. 
13).  On  each  occasion  she  is  distinguished  by  the 
title  "  the  (not '  an,'  as  in  A.  V.)  Ammonite."  She 
was  therefore  one  of  the  foreign  women  whom 
Solomon  took  into  his  establishment  (1  K.  xi.  1). 
In  the  LXX.  (1  K.  xii.  24,  answering  to  xiv.  31 
of  the  Hebrew  text)  she  is  stated  to  have  been  the 
"  daughter  of  Ana  (i.  e.  Hanun)  the  son  of  Nahash." 
If  this  is  a  translation  of  a  statement  which  once 
formed  part  of  the  Hebrew  te.xt,  and  may  be  taken 
as  authentic  history,  it  follows  that  the  Ammonite 
war  into  which  Haiuin's  insults  had  provoked 
David  was  tenninated  by  a  re-alliance  ;  and,  since 
Solomon  reigned  forty  years,  and  Rehoboam  was 
forty-one  years  old  when  he  came  to  the  throne, 
we  can  fix  with  tolerable  certainty  the  date  of  the 
event.  It  took  place  before  David's  death,  during 
that  period  of  profound  quiet  which  settled  down 
on  the  nation,  after  the  lailure  of  Absalom's  re- 
bellion and  of  the  subsequent  attempt  of  Sheija  the 
son  of  Bichri  had  strengthened  more  than  ever  the 
afl'ection  of  the  nation  for  the  throne  of  David  ;  and 
which  was  not  destined  to  be  again  disturbed  till 
put  :ui  end  to  by  the  shortsighted  rasliness  of  the 
son  of  Naamah.  ["■J 

NA'AMAH  (nOy:  :  No.^o;'  :  Alex,  tiwy.a  : 
Xccmn^.,  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah  in  the  district 
of  the  lowland  or  Shcfelah,  belonging  to  the  same 
group  with  I.achish,  Eglon,  and  Makke<iah  (Josh. 
XV.  41).     Nothing  more   is  known  of  it,  nor  has 

»  The  LXX.  transpose  tliis  to  cli.  xii.  nfter  ver.  24. 
2   G   2 


452 


NAAMAN 


NAAMAN 

His  request  to  be  allowed  to  take  away  two 
mules'  bui'then  of  earth  is  not  easy  to  understand. 
The  natural  explanation  is  that,  with  a  feeling  akin 
to  that  which  prompted  the  Fisan  invaders  to  take 
away  the  earth  of  Aceldama  for  the  Campo  Santo 
at  Pisa,  and  in  obedience  to  which  the  pilgrims  to 
Mecca  are  said  to  bring  back  stones  from  that 
sacred  territory,  the  grateful  convert  to  Jehovah 
wished  to  take  away  some  of  the  earth  of  His 
country,  to  form  an  altar  for  the  burnt-olfering  and 
saciifice  which  henceforth  he  intended  to  dedicate 
to  Jehovah  only,  and  which  would  be  inappropriate 
if  offered  on  the  profane  earth  of  the  country  of 
Rimmou  or  Hadad.  But  it  should  be  remembered 
that  iu  the  narrative  thera  is  no  mention  of  an 
altar; "J  and  although  Jehovah  had  on  one  occasion 
ordeied  that  the  altars  put  up  for  offerings  to  Him 
should  be  of  earth  (Ex.  xx.  24),  3^et  Naaman  could 
hardly  have  been  aware  of  this  enactment,  unless 
indeed  it  was  a  custom  of  older  date  and  wider 
existence  than  the  Mosaic  law,  and  adopted  into 
that  law  as  a  significant  and  wise  precept  for  some 
reason  now  lost  to  us. 

How  long  Naaman  lived  to  continue  a  worshipper 
of  Jehovah  while  assisting  officially  at  that  of  Rim- 
mon,  we  are  not  told.  When  next  we  hear  of  Syria, 
another,  Hazael,  apparently  holds  the  position  which 
Naaman  formerly  filled.  But,  as  has  been  else- 
where noticed,  the  reception  which  Elisha  met  with 
on  this  later  occasion  in  Damascus  probably  implies 
that  the  fame  of  "  the  man  of  God,"  and  of  the 
mighty  Jehovah  in  whose  name  he  wrought,  had 
not  been  forgotten  in  the  city  of  Naaman. 

It  is  singular  that  the  narrative  of  Naaman's 
cure  is  not  found  in  the  present  text  of  Josephus. 
Its  absence  makes  the  reference  to  him  as  the  slayer 
of  Ahab,  already  mentioned,  still  more  remarkable. 

It  is  quoted  by  our  Lord  (Luke  iv.  27)  as  an 
instance  of  mercy  exercised  to  one  who  was  not  of 
Israel,  and  it  should  not  escape  notice  that  the 
reference  to  this  act  of  healing  is  recorded  by  none 
of  the  Evangelists  but  St.  Luke  the  physician.  [G.] 

NA'AMAN  ^jnyj  :    Noe^ua;/).      One   of    the 

family  of  Benjamin  who  came  down  to  Egypt  with 
Jacob,  as  we  read  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21.  According  to 
the  LXX.  version  of  that  passage  he  was  the  sou  of 
Bela,  which  is  the  parentage  assigned  to  him  in 
Num.  xxvi.  40,  where,  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
sons  of  Benjamin,  he  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  Bela, 
and  head  of  the  family  of  the  Naamites.  He  is  also 
reckoned  among  the  sons  of  Bela  in  1  Chr.  viii. 
3,  4.  Nothing  is  known  of  his  personal  history,  or 
of  that  of  the  Naamites.  For  the  account  of  the 
migrations,  apparently  compulsory,  of  some  of  the 
sons  of  Benjamin  from  Geba  to  Manahath,  in  1  Chr. 
viii.  6,  7,  is  so  confused,  probably  from  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  text,  that  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether 
the  family  of  Naaman  was  or  was  not  included  in 
it.  The  repetition  in  ver.  7  of  the  three  names 
Naaman,  Ahiah,  Gera,  in  a  conte.xt  to  which  they 
do  not  seem  to  belong,  looks  like  the  mere  eiTor 
of  a  copyist,  inadvertently  copying  over  again  the 
same  names  which  he  had  wiitten  in  the  same  order 
in  ver.  4,  5, — Naaman,  Ahoah,  Gera.  If,  however, 
the  names  are  in  their  place  in  ver.  7,  it  would 
j  seem  to  indicate  that  the  family  of  Naaman  did  mi- 

'^  LXX.  eucTTOxtos,  i-e.  "with  good  aim,'  possibly  a  I  went  in  and  told  his  master"  (i.e.  the  king).  The  word 
transcriber's  variation  from  euTvxws.  i  rendered  "  lord  "  is  the  same  as  is  rendered  "  master"  in 

*'  It  did  drive  a  liing  into  strict  seclusion  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  21).    ver.  1. 

■^  The  A.  V.  of  ver., 4  conveys  a  wrong  impression.  It  d  The  LXX.  (Vat.  MSS.)  omits  even  the  words  "of 
is  accurately  not  "  one  went  in,"  but  "he  (i.  c.  Naamani    eartli,"  ver.  17 


any  name  corresponding  with  it  been  yet  discovered 
in  the  proper  direction.  But  it  seems  probable  that 
Naamah  should  be  connected  with  the  Naamathites, 
who  again  were  perhaps  identical  with  the  Mohunim 
or  Minaeans,  traces  of  whom  are  found  on  the  south- 
western outskirts  of  Judah  ;  one  such  at  Minois  or 
el-Minyay,  a  few  miles  below  Gaza.  [G.] 

NA'AMAN  {\)2V}_  ■  Naifidv  ;  N.  T.  Rec.  Text, 

'Neefidu,  but  Lachm.  with  A  B  D,  Nai^iai';  Joseph. 
^Afiavos:  N laman) — or  to  give  him  the  title  con- 
ferred on  him  by  our  Lord,  "  Naaman  the  Syrian." 
An  Aramite  warrior,  a  remarkable  incident  in  whose 
life  is  preserved  to  us  through  his  connexion  with  the 
prophet  Elisha.    The  narrative  is  given  in  2  K.  v. 

The  name  is  a  Hebrew  one,  and  that  of  ancient 
date  (see  the  next  article),  but  it  is  not  im- 
]irobable  that  in  the  present  case  it  may  have  been 
slightly  altered  in  its  insertion  in  the  Israelite 
records.  Of  Naaman  the  Syrian  there  is  no  men- 
tion in  the  Bible  except  in  this  connexion.  But  a 
.Jewish  tradition,  at  least  as  old  as  the  time  of 
Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  15,  §5),  and  which  may  very 
well  be>  a  genuine  one,  identifies  him  with  the 
archer  whose  arrow,  whether  at  random  or  not," 
struck  Ahab  with  his  mortal  wound,  and  thus 
"  gave  deliverance  to  Syria."  The  expression  is 
remarkable — •'*  because  that  by  him  Jehovah  had 
given  deliverance  to  Syi-ia."  To  suppose  the  inten- 
tion to  be  that  Jehovah  was  the  universal  ruler, 
and  that  therefore  all  deliverance,  whether  aftbrded 
to  His  servants  or  to  those  who,  like  the  Syrians, 
acknowledged  Him  not,  was  wrought  by  Him,  would 
be  thrusting  a  too  modern  idea  into  the  expression 
of  the  writer.  Taking  the  ti-adition  above-mentioned 
into  account,  the  most  natui-al  explanation  perhaps 
is  that  Naaman,  iu  delivering  his  country,  had 
killed  one  who  was  the  enemy  of  Jehovah  not  less 
than  he  was  of  Syria.  Whatever  the  particular 
exploit  referred  to  was,  it  had  given  Naaman  a 
great  position  at  the  court  of  Benhadad.  In  the' 
first  rank  for  peisonal  prowess  and  achievements,  he 
was  commander-in-chief  of  the  army,  while  in  civil 
mattei's  he  was  nearest  to  the  person  of  the  king, 
whom  he  accompanied  officially,  and  supported, 
when  the  king  went  to  worship  in  the  temple  of 
Rimnion  (ver.  18).  He  was  afflicted  with  a  leprosy 
of  the  white  kind  (ver.  27),  which  had  hitherto 
defied  cure.  In  Israel,  according  to  the  enactments 
of  the  Mosaic  Law,  this  would  have  cut  off  even  •> 
Naaman  from  intercourse  with  every  one ;  he  would 
there  have  been  compelled  to  dwell  in  a  "  several 
house."  But  not  so  in  Syria;  he  maintained  his 
access  '  to  the  king,  and  his  contact  with  the  mem- 
bers of  his  own  household.  The  circumstances  of  his 
visit  to  Elisha  have  been  drawn  out  under  the  latter 
head  [vol.  i.  5886],  and  need  not  be  repeated  here. 
Naaman's  appearance  throughout  the  o('currence  is 
most  characteristic  and  consistent.  He  is  every  inch 
a  soldier,  ready  at  once  to  resent  what  he  considers 
as  a  slight  cast  either  on  himself  or  the  natural 
glories  of  his  country,  and  blazing  out  in  a  moment 
into  sudden  "  rage,"  but  calmed  as  speedily  by  a 
few  goodhumoured  and  sensible  woids  from  his 
dependants,  and,  after  the  cure  has  been  effected, 
evincing  a  thankful  and  simple  heart,  whose  grati- 
tude knows  no  bounds  and  will  listen  to  no  refusal. 


NAAMATHITE 

grate  with  the  sons  of  Khuil  (called  Ahiliud  in  vcr. 
3)  from  Geba  to  Manahath.  [A.  C.  II.] 

NAAM'ATHITE  ("TIDyj  :  mvaiuv  ^atxiK^is , 

6  Mivaius  :  Naamathitcs),  the  gentilic  name  of  one 
of  Job's  friends,  Zophar  the  Naamathite  (Job  ii. 
11,  xi.  1,  XX.  1,  xlii.  9),  There  is  no  other  trace 
of  this  name  in  the  Bible,  and  the  town,  HOyj, 
whence  it  is  derived,  is  unknown.  If  we  may  judge 
from  modern  usage,  several  places  so  called  jiro- 
bably  existed  on  the  Arabian  bordere  of  Syria. 
Thus  in  the  Geographical  Dictionary,  Alardsin-cl 
Ittdlia,  are  Noam,  a  castle  in  the  Yemen,  and  a 
place  on  the  Euphrates ;  Niameh  a  place  belonging 
to  the  Arabs;  and  Noamee,  a  valley  in  Tihameh. 
The  name  Naamd,n  (of  unlilcely  derivation  howeverj 
is  very  common.  Bochart  {Fhcdeg,  cap.  xxii.),  as 
might  be  expected,  seizes  the  LXX.  reading,  and  in 
the  "  king  of  the  Minaei "  sees  a  confirmation  to  his 
theory  respecting  a  Syrian,  or  northern  Arabian 
settlement  of  that  well-known  people  of  classical 
antiquity.  It  will  be  seen,  in  art.  Dikla,  that  the 
present  writer  identilies  the  Miiiaei  with  the  people 
of  Ma'een,  in  the  Yemen ;  and  there  is  nothing  im- 
probable in  a  northern  colony  of  the  tribe,  besides 
the  presence  of  a  place  so  named  in  the  Syro-Arabian 
desert.  But  we  regard  this  point  as  apart  from  the 
subject  of  this  article,  thinking  the  LXX.  reading, 
unsupported  as  it  is,  to  be  too  hypothetical  for  ac- 
ceptance. [E.  S.  P.] 
NA'AMITES,  THE  ("Oysn  :  Samar.  ''JJOyjn  : 

SrjiJLOs  6  Noe/xavel ;  Alex,  omits  :  fanilia  Naami- 
taruin,  and  Noemanitarum),  the  family  descended 
from  Maaman,  the  gi-audson  of  Benjamin  (Num.^ 
xxvi.  40  only).  [Naaman,  p.  4526.]  The  name  is 
a  contraction,  of  a  kind  which  does  not  often  occur 
in  Hebrew.  Accordingly  the  Samaritan  Codex,  as 
will  be  seen  above,  presents  it  at  length — "  the 
Naamanites."  [G.] 

NA'AEAH    (nnj?3:    0oa5a ;    Alex.   -Hoopa: 

Naara)  the  second  wife  of  Ashur,  a  descendant  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  5,  G).  Nothing  is  known  of  the 
persons  (or  places)  recorded  as  the  children  of  Naa- 
rah.  In  the  Vat.  LXX.  the  children  of  the  two 
wives  are  interchanged. 

NAARA'I(nV3:   Naapat:  Naardi).     One  of 

the  valiant  men  of  David's  armies  (1  Chr.  xi.  37). 
In  1  Chr.  he  is  called  the  son  of  Ezbai,  but  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  35  he  appears  as  "  Paarai  the  Arbite."  Ken- 
nicott  {Diss.  pp.  209-211)  decides  that  the  former 
is  correct. 

NA'AKAN  (|"1J?3:    Noap«/ay;   Alex.  Noopai/ : 

Noran),  a  city  of  Ephraim,  which  in  a  very  ancient 
record  (1  Chr.  vii.  28)  is  mentioned  as  the  eastern 
limit  of  the  tribe.  It  is  very  probably  identical  with 
Naaratu,  or  more  accurately  Naarah,  which  seems 
to  have  been  situated  in  one  of  the  great  valleys  or 
torrent-beds  which  lead  down  from  the  highlands  of 
Bethel  to  the  dejiths  of  the  Jordan  valley. 

In  1  Sam.  vi.  21  the  Peshito-Syriac  and  Arabic 
versions  have  respectively  Naarin  and  Naaran  Ibr 
the  Kirjath-jearim  of  the  Hebrew  and  A.  V.  If 
this  is  anything  more  than  an  error,  the  Naaran  to 
which  it  refers  can  hardly  be  that  above  spoken  of, 
but  must  have  been  situated  much  nearer  to  Beth- 
shemesh  and  the  Philistine  lowland.  [G.] 


NABAL 


453 


"  Perhaps  treating  niy3>  "  a  divrasel,"  as  equivalent 
to  n3>  "  a  daughter,"  the  term  cmuuiouly  used  to  ex- 
press the  hamlets  dependent  on  a  oily. 


NA'ARATH  (theHeb.is  nrini?3  =  to  Naarah, 

myj,  which  is  therefore  the  real  form  of  the  name : 

al  "  KSiixai  avTwy ;  Alex.  Naopoffo  (coi  at  /coijuat 
avTwy :  Naratha),  a  place  named  (Josh.  xvi.  7, 
only)  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  (southern) 
boundary  of  Ephiaim.  It  appears  to  have  lain 
between  Ataroth  and  Jericho.  If  Ataroth  be  the 
present  Atara,  a  mile  and  a  half  south  of  el-Bireh 
and  close  to  the  great  natural  boundary  of  the 
Wad;/  Suweinit,  then  Naarah  was  probably  some- 
where lower  down  the  wady.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(Onomast.)  speak  of  it  as  if  well  known  to  them — 
"  Naorath,''  a  small  village  of  the  Jews  five  miles 
from  Jericho."  Schwarz  (147)  fixes  it  at  "  Neama," 
also  "  five  miles  from  Jericho,"  meaning  perhaps 
Na'imeh,  the  name  of  the  lower  part  of  the  great 
Wady  Mutyah  or  el-Asas,  which  runs  trom  the 
foot  of  the  hill  of  Rwnmon  into  the  Jordan  valley 
above  Jericho,  and  in  a  direction  generally  parallel 
to  the  Wady  Suweinit  (Rob.  B.  R.  iii.  290).  A 
position  in  this  direction  is  in  agreement  with 
1  Chr.  vii.  28,  where  Naaran  is  probably  the  same 
name  as  that  we  are  now  considering.  [G.] 

NAASH'ON.    [Xaiisiiox.] 

NAASS'ON  {tiaava-dv  :  Naasson).  The 
Greek  form  of  the  name  Nahshon  (Matt.  i.  4  ; 
Luke  iii.  32  only). 

NA'ATHUS  (NcJaflos:  Haathus).  One  of  the 
family  of  Addi,  according  to  the  list  of  1  Esdr.  ix. 
3 1 .     There  is  no  name  corresponding  in  Ezr.  x.  30. 

NA'BAL  (^23  =  "  fool" :  Na^dx),  one  of  the 

characters  introduced  to  us  in  David's  wanderings, 
apparently  to  give  one  detailed  glimpse  of  his  whole 
state  of  life  at  that  time  (1  Sam.  xxv.).  Nabal 
himself  is  remarkable  as  one  of  the  few  examples 
given  to  us  of  the  private  life  of  a  Jewish  citi- 
zen. He  ranks  in  this  respect  with  BoAZ,  Bar- 
zii.lai,  Naboth.  He  was  a  sheepmaster  on  the 
confines  of  Judaea  and  the  desert,  in  that  part  of 
the  country  which  bore  from  its  great  conqueror 
the  name  of  Caleb  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14,  xxv.  3  ;  so 
Vulgate,  A.  V.,  and  Ewald).  He  was  himself,  ac- 
cording to  Josephus  {A?it.  vi.  13,  §6)  a  Ziphite, 
and  his  residence  Emmaus,  a  place  of  that  name  not 
otherwise  known,  on  the  southern  Carniel,  in  the 
pasture  lands  of  Maon.  (In  the  LXX.  of  xxv.  4  he 
is  ciilled  "  the  Carmelite,"  and  the  LXX.  read 
"  Maon"  for  "  Paran  "  in  xxv.  1).  With  a  usage 
of  the  word,  which  reminds  us  of  the  like  adapta- 
tion of  similar  words  in  modern  times,  he,  like 
Baizillai,  is  styled  "very  great,"  evidently  from 
his  wealth.  His  wealth,  as  might  be  expected  from 
his  abode,  consisted  chiefly  of  sheep  and  goats, 
which,  as  ui  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the  Christian 
era  (Matt,  xxv.),  and  at  the  present  day  (Stanley, 
S.  &  P.),  fed  together.  The  tradition  preserved 
in  this  case  the  exact  number  of  each — 3UO0  of  the 
former,  lOOO  of  the  latter.  It  was  the  custom  of 
the  shepherds  to  drive  them  into  the  wild  downs  on 
the  slopes  of  Carmel ;  and  it  was  whilst  they  were 
on  one  of  these  pastoral  excursions,  that  they  met 
a  band  of  outlaws,  who  showed  them  unexpected 
kindness,  protecting  them  by  day  and  night,  and  never 
themselves  committing  any  dipredations  (nxv.  7, 
15,  16).     Once  a  year  there  was  a  grand  banquet. 


*>  The  'OopdB  in  the  present  text  of  Eusebius  should 
obviously  have  prefixed  to  it  the  r  from  the  ecmr  which 
precfi'.es  it.    Compare  Nasou. 


454 


NABAL 


NABOTH 


on  Carmel,  when  they  brought  kick  their  sheej) 
from  the  wiMorness  for  shearing — with  eating  and 
drinking  "  like  the  feast  of  a  kino- "  (xxv  '^^  4 
36).  c      y       •     ,     , 

It  was  on  one  of  these  occasions  that  Nabal  came 
across  the  path  of  the  man  to  whom  he  owes  his 
place  in  history.     Ton  youths  were  seen  approach- 
ing the  hill ;   in  t!iem  the  shepherds  recognized  the 
slaves  or  attendants  of  the  chief  of  the  freebooters 
who  had  defended  them  in  the  wilderness.  To  Nabal 
they  were  unknown.     They  approached  him  with 
a  triple  salutation — enumerated  the  services  of  their 
master,  and  endeil  by  claiming,  with  a  mixture  of 
courtesy  and  defiance,  characteristic  of  the  East, 
"  whatsoever  cometh  into  thy  hand  for  thy  servants 
(LXX.  omit  this — and  have  only  the  next  words), 
and  for  thy  son  David."     The  great  sheepmaster 
was  not  disposed  to  recognise  this  unexpected  pa- 
rental relation.     He  was  a  man  notorious  for  his 
obstinacy    (such  seems  the  meaning  of  the  word 
translated  "churlish")  and  for  his  general  low  con- 
duct (xxv.  3,  "evil  in  his  doings;"  xxv.  17,  "a 
man  of  Belial").     Josephus  and  the  LXX.  taking 
the  word  Caleb  not  as  a  proper  name,  but  as  a  qua- 
lity (to  which  the  context  certainly  lends  itself) — 
add  "of  a  disposition  like  a  dog" — cynical — KvviKhs. 
On  hearing  the  demand  of  the  ten  petitioners,  he 
sprang  up  (LXX.  dveirriSrja'e),  and  broke  out  into 
I'ury,   "Who   is    David?    and  who  is  the   son  of 
Jesse?" — "What  runaway  slaves  are  these  to  in- 
tei-fere  with  my  own  domestic  an-angements  ?"  (xxv. 
10,11).  The  moment  that  the  messengers  were  gone, 
the  shepherds  that  stooil  by  perceived  the  danger 
that  their  master  and  themselves  would  incur.     To 
Nabal  himself,  they  durst  not  speak  (xxv.  17).    But 
the  sacred  writer,  with  a  tinge  of  the  sentiment 
which  such  a  contrast  always  suggests,  proceeds  to 
describe  that  this  brutal  ruffian  was  married  to  a 
wife  as  beautiful  and  as  wise,  as  he  was  the  reverse 
(xxv.  3).   [ABIGAI.L.]    To  her,  as  to  the  good  angel 
of  the  household,  one  of  the  shepherds  told  the  state 
of  affairs.     She,  with  the  offerings  usual  on  such 
occasions  (xxv.  18,  comp.  xxx.  11,  2  Sam.  xvi.  1, 
1  Chr.  xii.  40),  loaded  the  asses  of  Nabal's  large 
establishment — herself  mounted  one  of  them,  and, 
with  her  attendants  running  before  her,  rode  down 
the  hill  towards  David's  encampment.     David  had 
already  made    the    fatal    vow    of   extermination, 
couched    in    the    usual    terms     of  destroying   the 
household  of  Nabal,  so  as  not  even  to  leave  a  dog 
behind  (xxv.  22).     At  this  moment,  as  it  would 
seem,  Abigail  appeared,  throw  herself  on  her  face 
before  him,  and  poured  forth  hei-  petition  in  lan- 
guage which  botli  in  form  and  expression  almost 
assumes  the  tone  of  poetry : — "  Let  thine  handmaid, 
I  pray  thee,  speak  in  thine  audience,  and  hear  the 
words  of  thine  liandmaid."     Her  main  argument 
rests  on  the  description  of  her  husband's  charactei-, 
which  she  draws  with  that  mixture  of  playfulness 
and  seriousness  which  above  all  things  turns  away 
wrath.      His  name  here  came   in   to   his   rescue. 
"  As   his   name   is,  so  is  he  :  Nabal  [fool']  is  his 
name,  and  folly  is  with  him"  (xxv.  25;  see  also 
vor.  26).     She  returns  with   the  news  of  David's 
recantation  of  his  vow.     Nabal  is  then  in  at  tlie 
height  of  his  orgies.      Like  the  revellers  of  Pa- 
lestine   in   the   later   times  of  the  monarchv,   he 
had  drunk  to  excess,  and  his  wife  dared  not  com- 
municate to  him  either  his  danger  or  his  escape 
(xxv.  36).     At  break  of  day  she  told  him  both. 


*  Compare  the  cases  of  David  and  Araunah  (2  Sam. 
xxi.),  Omri  and  Shemcr  (1  K.  xvi.). 


'fhe  stupid  reveller  was  suddenly  roused  to  a  sense 
of  that  which  impended  over  him.  "  His  heart  died 
within  him,  and  he  became  as  a  stone."  It  w:is  as 
if  a  stroke  of  apoplexy  or  paralysis  had  fallen  upon 
him.  Ten  days  he  lingered,  "  and  the  Lord  smote 
Nabal,  and  he  died"  (xxv.  37,  38).  The  suspi- 
cions entertained  by  theologians  of  the  hist  century, 
that  there  was  a  conspiracy  between  David  and 
Abigail  to  make  away  with  Nabal  for  their  own 
alliance  (see  Winer  "  Nabal  "),  have  entirely  given 
place  to  the  better  spirit  of  modern  criticism,  and 
it  is  one  of  the  many  proofs  of  the  reverential,  as 
well  as  truthful  appreciation  of  the  Saci-ed  Narrative 
now  inaugurated  in  Germany,  that  Ewald  enters  fully 
into  the  feeling  of  the  narrator,  and  closes  his  sum- 
mary of  Nabal's  death,  with  the  reflection  that  "  it 
was  not  without  justice  rfgirded  as  a  Divine  judg- 
ment." According  to  tiie  (not  improbable)  i.XX. 
version  of  2  Sam.  iii.  33,  the  recollection  of  Nabal's 
death  lived  afterwards  in  David's  memory  to  point 
the  contrast  of  the  deatli  of  Abner :  "  Died  Abner 
as  Nabal  died  ?"  [A.  P.  S.] 

NABARI'AS  (NajQapias :  Nabarius).  Appa- 
rently a  corruption  of  Zechariah  (1  Esdr.  x.  44  ; 
comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

NA'BATHITES,  THE  (ol  NaUaTTaioi,  and 
'Na^araioi ;  Alex.  Na/Sareoi :  Nabatlutei),  1  Mace. 
V.25  5  ix.  35.     [Nebaioth.] 

NA'BOTH  (Db:  :  Jia^odai),  victim  of  Ahab 
and  Jezebel.     He  was  a  Jezreelite,  and  the  owner 
of  a  small  portion  of  ground  (2  K.   ix.  25,   26) 
that    lay   on    the    eastern    slope   of    the   hill    of 
Jezreel.      He  had  also  a  vineyard,  of  which  the 
situation  is  not  quite  certain.     According  to  the 
Hebrew  text  (1  K.  xxi.  1)  it  was  in  Jezieel,  but 
the    LXX.    render    the    whole   clause    differently, 
omitting  the  words  "  which  was  in  Jezreel,"  and 
reading  instead  of  "  the  palace,"  "  the  threshing- 
floor  of  Ahab  king  of  Samaria."     This  points  to 
the  view,  certainlj^  most  consistent  with  the  sub- 
sequent narrative,  that  Naboth's  vineyard  was  on 
the  hill  of  Samaria,  close  to  the  "  threshing-floor  " 
(the  word  translated  in  A.  V.  "void  place")  whicli 
undoubtedly  existed  there,  hard  by  the  gate  of  the 
city  (1  K.  xxiv.).     The  royal  palace  of  Ahab  was 
close  upon  the  city  wall  at  Jezreel.     According  to 
both  texts  it   immediately  adjoined  the   vinevard 
(1  K.  xxi.  1,2,  Heb. ;   1  K.  xxi.  2,  LXX. ;  2  K.  ix. 
30,  36),  and  it  thus  became  an  object  of  desire  to 
the  king,  who  offered  an  equivalent  in  money,  or 
another  vineyard  in  exchange  for  this.     Naboth,  in 
the  independent  spirit  of  a  Jewish  landholder,"  re- 
fused.    Perhaps  the  turn  of  his  expression  implies 
that  his    objection  was   mingled  with  a  religious 
scruple   at  forwarding  the  acquisitions  of  a  hall- 
heathi-u  king:    "Jehovah  forbid   it  to  me  that  1 
should  give  the  inheritance    of  my  fathers  unto 
thee."     Ahab  was  cowed  by  this  reply ;  but  the 
proud  spirit  of  Jezebel  was  roused.     She  and  her 
husband  were  apparently  in  the  city  of  Samaria 
(1    K.  xxi.   18).     She  took  the  matter  into   her 
own   hands,   and  sent  a  warrant  in  Ahab's  name 
and   sealed   with   Ahab's   seal,  to  the    elders   and 
nobles  of  Jezreel,  suggesting  the  mode  of  destroying 
the  man  who  had  insulted  the  royal  power.     A 
solemn  fast  was  proclaimed  as  on  the  announce- 
ment of  some  great  calamity.     Naboth  was  "set 
on  high  " ''  in  the  public  place  of  Samaria :    two 


''  The  Hebrew  word  which  is  rendered,  here  only, 
•'  on  high,"  is  more  accurately  "  at  the  licad  of"  or 


NABUCHODONOSOR 

men  of  woithless  charactei-  accused  him  ot  haviug 
"cursed'^  (Jod  and  the  king."  He  and  liis  cliikhen 
(2  K.  ix.  26),  who  else  might  have  succeeded  to 
his  father's  inheritance,  were  dragged  out  of  the 
city  and  despatched  the  same  night.-^  The  place 
of  execution  there,  as  at  Hebron  (2  Sam.  iii.), 
was  by  the  large  tank  or  reservoir,  which  still 
remains  on  the  slope  of  the  hill  of  Samaria,  imme- 
diately outside  the  walls.  The  usual  punishment 
for  blasphemy  was  enforced.  Naboth  and  his  sons 
were  stoned  ;  their  mangled  remains  were  de- 
voured by  the  dogs  (and  swine,  LXX.)  that  prowled 
under  the  walls ;  and  the  blood  from  their  wounds 
ran  down  into  the  waters  of  the  tank  below,  which 
was  the  common  bathing-place  of  the  prostitutes  of 
the  city  (comp.  1  K.  xxi.  19,  xxii.  38,  LXX). 
Josephus  {Ant.  15,  6)  makes  the  execution  to  have 
been  at  Jezreel,  where  he  also  places  the  washing 
of  Ahab's  chariot. 

For  the  signal  retribution  taken  on  tiiis  judicial 
murder — a  remarkable  proof  of  the  high  regard 
paid  in  the  old  dispensation  to  the  claims  of  justice 
and  independence— see  Ahab,  Jeiiu,  jEZtisEL, 
Jezreel.  [A.  F.  S.] 

NABUCHODONO'SOR  CNa^ovxodovdffop  ; 
Xabiichodonosor).  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon 
(1  Esdr.  i.  40,  41,  45,  48  ;  Tob.  xiv.  15;  Jud.  i.  1, 
5,  7,  11,  12,  ii.  1,  4,  19,  iii.  2,  8,  iv.  1,  vi.  2,  4, 
xi.  7,  23,  sii.  13,  xiii.  18). 

NA'CHON'S  THRESHING-FLOOR  (pi 
pD3  :  a\ws  'Ciddfi  ;  Alex.  aXwixcevos  Naxt^"  : 
Area  Nachon),  the  place  at  which  the  ark  had 
arrived  in  its  progress  fiom  Kirjath-jeaiim  to  Je- 
rusalem, when  LTzzah  lost  his  life  in  his  too  hasty 
zeal  for  its  safety  (2  Sam.  vi.  6).  In  the  parallel 
narrative  of  Chronicles  the  name  is  given  as  Ciu- 
DON,  which  is  also  foimd  in  Josephus.  After  the 
catastrophe  it  received  the  name  of  Perez-uzzah. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  narrative  to  guide  us 
to  a  conclusion  as  to  the  situation  of  this  threshing- 
floor, — whether  nearer  to  Jerusalem  or  to  Kirjath- 
jearim.  The  woids  of  Joseplius  {Ant.  vii.  4,  §2), 
however,  imply  that  it  was  close  to  the  former." 
Neither  is  it  certain  whether  the  name  is  that  of 
the  place  or  of  a  person  to  whom  the  place  be- 
longed. The  careful  Aquila  translates  the  words 
ectfs  aXwvos  ItoijUtj? — "to  the  prepared''  threshing- 
floor,"  which  is  also  the  rendering  of  the  Targum 
Jonathan.  [^O 

NA'CHOR.  The  tbrm  (slightly  the  more  accu- 
rate) in  which  on  two  occasions  the  name  elsewhere 
given  as  Naiiou  is  presented  in  the  A.  V. 

1.  (nin3:  liax^p-  Nachor).  The  brother  of 
Abraham  (Josh.  xxiv.  2).     [Naiiou  1.1 

Ch  is  commonly  used  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Old 
Testament  to  represent  the  Hebrew  3,  and  only 


NADAB 


455 


very  rarely  tor  H,  as  in  Nachor.  Charashim,  Itachel, 
Marcheshvan,  are  further  examjiles  of  the  latter 
usage. 

2.  (Nax<^p).  The  grandfather  of  Abraham  (Luke 
iii.  34j.     [Nahok  2.]  [G.] 

NA'DAB  (2n3).  1-  The  eldest  son  of  Aaron 
and  Elisheba,  Ex.  vi.  23  ;  Num.  iii.  2.  He,  his 
father  and  brother,  and  seventy  old  men  of  Israel 
were  led  out  from  the  midst  of  the  assembled  people 
(Ex.  xxiv.  1),  and  were  commanded  to  stay  and 
worship  God  "  afar  oft',"  below  the  lofty  summit  of 
Sinai,  where  Moses  alone  was  to  come  near  to  the 
Lord.  Subsequently  (Lev.  x.  1)  Nadab  and  his 
biother  [Abihu]  were  struck  dead  before  the  sanc- 
tuary by  fire  from  the  Lord.  Their  offence  was 
kindling  the  incense  in  their  censers  with  "  stiange" 
fire,  i.  c,  not  taken  from  tliat  which  burned  perpe- 
tually (Lev.  vi.  13)  on  the  altar.  From  the  in- 
junction given,  Lev.  x.  9,  10,  immediately  after 
their  death,  it  has  been  inferred  (Hosenmiiller,  in 
loco)  that  the  brothers  were  in  a  state  of  intoxica- 
tion when  they  committed  the  otlence.  The  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  injunction  is  drawn  out  at  great  length 
by  Origen,  Horn.  vii.  in  Levitic.  On  this  occasion, 
as  if  to  mark  more  decidedly  the  divine  displeasure 
with  the  oft'enders,  Aaron  and  his  surviving  son 
were  forbidden  to  go  through  the  oidiuary  outward 
ceremonial  of  mourning  for  the  dead. 

2.  King  Jeroboam's  son,  who  succeeded  to  the 
throne  of  Israel  B.C.  954,  and  leigned  two  years, 
1  K.  .\v.  25-31.  Gibbethon  in  the  territory  of  Dan 
(Josh.  xix.  44),  a  Levitical  town  (Josh.  xxi.  23), 
was  at  that  time  occupied  by  the  Philistines,  per- 
haps having  been  deserted  by  its  lawful  possessors 
in  the  general  self-exile  of  the  Levites  from  the 
polluted  territory  of  Jeroboam.  Nadab  and  all 
Israel  went  up  and  laid  siege  to  this  frontier-town. 
A  conspiracy  broke  out  in  the  midst  of  the  army, 
and  the  king  was  slain  by  Baasha,  a  man  of  Is- 
sachar.  Ahijah's  prophecy  (1  K.  xiv.  10)  was 
literally  fulfilled  by  the  murderer,  who  proceeded 
to  destroy  the  whole  house  of  Jeroboam.  So  pe- 
rished the  first  Israelitish  dyna.sty. 

We  are  not  told  what  events  led  to  the  siege  of 
Gibbethon,  or  how  it  ended,  or  any  other  incident 
In  Nadab's  short  reign.  It  does  not  appear  what 
ground  Ewald  and  Newman  have  for  describing  the 
war  with  the  Philistines  as  unsuccessful.  It  is 
remarkable  that  when  a  similar  destruction  fell 
upon  the  family  of  the  murderer  Baasha  twenty- 
four  years  afterwards,  the  Israelitish  army  was 
again  engaged  in  a  siege  of  Gibbethon,  1  K.  xvi. 
15. 

3.  A  son  of  Shammai,  1  Chr.  ii.  28,  of  the  trib<- 
of  Jiidah. 

4.  A  son  of  Gibeon,  1  Chr.  viii.  30,  ix.  36,  oi 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  [^^  .  '  ■  B.j 


"in  the  chicfest  place  among"  (1  Sam.  ix.  22).  The 
passage  is  obscured  by  our  ignorance  of  tlie  nature 
of  the  ceremonial  in  which  Naboth  was  made  to  take 
part ;  but,  in  default  of  this  knowledge,  we  may 
accept  the  explanation  of  Josephus,  that  an  assembly 
(e(cicAr)cri'a)  was  convened,  at  the  head  of  which  Na- 
both, in  virtue  of  his  position,  was  placed,  in  order 
that  the  charge  of  blasi)heniy  and  tlic  subsequent 
eatastrojihe  might  be  more  telling. 

*=  By  the  LXX.  this  is  given  ciiAdyTjorc,  "  blessed  ;" 
possibly  merely  for  the  sake  of  euiihemisui. 

''  ti*DS-  1'hc  word  rendered  "  yesterday"  in  2  K. 
ix.   26  has   really  the   meaning   of  \c»lvviii;/lit,   and 


thus  bears  testimony  to  the  precipitate  haste  both  of 
the  execution  and  of  Ahab's  entrance  on  his  new 
acquisition.     [See  Elijah,  vol.  i.  .')29«.] 

»  His  words  are,  "  Having  brouglit  the  ark  tvto  Jem- 
sakm-  (cis  •Upo<r6\v^ia).  In  some  of  the  Greek  vcreions. 
or  variations  of  the  LXX.,  of  which  fragments  are  pre- 
served by  Barhdt,  tlie  name  is  giveu  ^  iAw?  'Epva 
(Oman)  roi)  Ufiovaaioi,  identifying  it  with  the  floor  of 
Araunuh. 

b  As  if  from  V13,  to  make  ready.  A  aimiliir  rendering, 
lipn?;)  inX.  is  employed  in  the  l-arguui  Josopb,  of 
1  Chr.  xiii.  •),  for  the  floor  of  Cliidtm. 


466 


NADABATHA 


NADAB'ATHA    {Na0dd  ;    Alex.    NaSa,8a0  : 

Syriac,  .jJ>CiJ,    Nobot :    Aladabd),    a    place    from 

which  the  bride  was  being  conducted  by  the  children 
of  Jambii,  when  Jonathan  and  Simon  attacked  them 
1 1  Mace.  ix.  37).  Josephus  {Ant.  xiii.  1,  §4)  gives 
the  name  Ta^add.  Jerome's  conjecture  (in  the  Vul- 
tiate)  can  hardly  be  admitted,  because  Medeba  was 
the  city  of  the  Jambrites  (see  ver.  36)  to  which  the 
bride  was  bei:i2;  brought,  not  that  from  which  she 
came.  That  Nadabatlia  was  on  the  east  of  Jordan  is 
most  probable  ;  for  though,  even  to  the  time  of  the 
(iospel  narrative,  by  "  Chanaanites  " — to  which  the 
bride  in  this  case  belonged — is  signified  Phoenicians, 
\-et  we  have  the  authority  (such  as  it  is)  of  the  Book 
of  Judith  (v.  3)  for  attaching  that  name  especially 
to  the  people  of  Moab  and  Amnion  ;  and  it  is  not 
probable  that  when  the  whole  coimtry  was  in  such 
disorder  a  wedding  corte'tje  would  travel  for  so  great 
a  distance  as  from  Phoenicia  to  Medeba. 

On  the  east  of  Jordan  the  only  two  names  that 
occur  as  possible  are  Nebo — by  Eusebius  and  Je- 
rome written  Nabo  and  Nabau — and  Nabathaea. 
Compare  the  lists  of  places  round  es-Salt,  in  Robin- 
son, 1st  ed.  iii.  167-70.  [G.] 

NAG'GE  {'Hayyal,  or,  as  some  MSS.  read, 
^ayal),  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25). 
It  represents  the  Heb.  T[l^,  Nogah  (Nayai,  LXX.), 
which  was  the  name  of  one  of  David's  sons,  as  we 
read  in  1  Chr.  iii.  7.  Nagge  must  have  lived 
about  the  time  of  Onias  I.  and  the  commencement 
of  the  Macedonian  dynasty.  It  is  interesting  to 
notice  the  evidence  afforded  by  this  name,  both  as 
a  name  in  the  family  of  iJavid,  and  from  its 
meaning,  that,  amidst  the  revolutions  and  conquests 
which  overthrew  the  kingdoms  of  the  nations,  the 
house  of  David  still  cherished  the  hope,  founded  upon 
promise,  of  the  revival  of  the  splendour  (iiogah)  of 
their  kingdom.  [A.  C.  H.] 

NAH'ALAL  (^Snp  :  SeAAa;  Alex.  NaaAoiA. : 

Nalal),  one  of  the  cities  of  Zebulun,  given  with  its 
''  suburbs  "  to  the  iferarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  35). 
It  is  the  same  which  in  the  list  of  the  allotment  of 
Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  15)  is  inaccurately  given  in 
the  A.  V.  as  Nahallal,  the  Hebrew  being  in  both 
cases  identical.  Elsewhere  it  is  called  Nahalol. 
It  occurs  in  the  list  between  Kattath  and  Shimron, 
but  unfortunately  neither  of  these  places  has  yet 
been  recognised.  The  Jerusalem  Talmud,  however 
{Mojillih,  ch.  i. ;  Maaser  Sheni,  ch.  v.),  as  quoted 
by  Schwarz  (172),  and  Reland  {Pal.  Ill)  asserts 
that  Nahalal  (or  ]\Iahalal,  as  it  is  in  some  copies) 
w;is  in  post-biblical  times  called  Mahlul ;  and  this 
Schwarz  identifies  wi'th  the  modern  Malul,  a  village 
in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  under  the  mountains  which 
enclose  the  plain  on  the  north,  4  miles  west  of  Naza- 
reth, and  2  of  Japhia ;  an  identifiaition  concurred 
in  by  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir).     One  Hebrew  MS. 

(30  K.)  lends  countenance  to  it  by  reading  PTTlD, 
i.e.  Mahalal,  in  Josh.  xxi.  35.  If  the  town  was 
in  the  great  plain  we  can  uudei-stand  why  the 
Israelites  were  imable  to  drive  out  the  Canaanites 
from  it,  since  their  chariots  must  have  been  ex- 
tremely fonnidable  as  long  as  they  remained  on 
level  or  smooth  ground. 


NAHASH 

NAH'ALLAL  ('p'pnj  :  Na^adA  ;  Alex.  Naa- 
AojA  :  Nealid),  an  inaccurate  mode  of  spelling,  in 
.Josh.  xix.  15,  the  name  which  in  Josh.  xxi.  35,  is 
accurately  given  as  Nahalal.  The  original  is 
precisely  the  same  in  both.  [G.] 

NAHA'LIEL  (^X''^n3  =  "  torrent  of  God  ;" 
Samar.  7N7n3  :  Mara^A ;  Alex.  NaaAiijA  :  Naha- 
liel),  one  of  the  halting-places  of  Israel  in  the  latter 
part  of  their  progress  to  Canaan  (Num.  xxi.  19). 
It  lay  "  beyond,"  that  is,  north  of  the  Arnon  (ver. 
IH),  and  between  Mattanah  and  Bamoth,  the  next 
after  Bamoth  being  Pisgah.  It  does  not  occur  in 
the  catalogue  of  Num.  xxxiii.,  nor  anywhere  besides 
the  passage  quoted  above.  By  Eusebius  and  Je- 
rome {Onomast.  "Naaliel")  it  is  mentioned  as 
close  to  the  Arnon.  Its  name  seems  to  imply  that 
it  was  a  sti-eam  or  wady,  and  it  is  not  impossibly 
preserved  in  that  of  the  Wadij  Encheijle,  which 
runs  into  the  Mojeh,  the  'ancient  Arnon,  a  short 
distance  to  the  east  of  the  place  at  which  the  road 
between  Rabba  and  Aroer  crosses  the  ravine  of  the 
latter  river.  The  name  Encheyle,  when  written 
in  Hebrew  letters  (n^TlJN),  is  little  more  than 
7K''?n3  transposed.  Buickhardt  was  perhaps  the 
first  to  leport  this  name,  but  he  suggests  the  Wadij 
Wale  as  the  Nahaliel  {Syria,  July  14).  This, 
however,  seems  unnecessarily  far  to  the  north,  and, 
iu  addition,  it  retains  no  likeness  to  the  original 
name.  [G.] 

NAH'ALOL  (??n3  :    Aoi/xava  ;    Alex.   Emju- 

fiav  :  Naalol),  a  variation  in  the  mode  of  giving  the 
name  (both  in  Hebrew  and  A.V.)  of  the  place  else- 
where called  Nahalal.  It  occurs  only  in  Judg.  i.  30. 
The  variation  of  the  LXX.  is  remarkable.         [G.] 

NA'HAM  (an:  :  Naxtt'/u  :  ^'aham).  The 
brother  of  Hodiah,  or  Jehudijah,  wife  of  Ezra,  ;md 
tather  of  Keilah  and  Eshtemoa  (1  Chr.  iv.  19). 

NAHAMA'NI  (^30112  :  Natfiavi ;  FA.  Naa/i- 

fxavel:  Nahamani).  A  chief  man  among  those 
who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  and 
Jeshua  (Neh.  vii.  7).  His  name  is  omitted  in 
Ezr.  ii.  2,  and  in  the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  v.  8,  is 
written  Enexius. 

NAHARA'I  (nra  :  'i^ax^p  ;  Alex.  Noapai :' 
Naara'i).  The  armourbearer  of  Joab,  called  in  the 
A.V.  of2  Sam.  xxiii.  37,  Nahari.  He  wasanative 
of  Beeroth  (1  Chr.  xi.  39). 

NA'HARI  (nm  :  TeAcope  ;  Alex.  TeSape  : 
Naharai).  The  same  as  Naharai,  Joab's  ai-mour- 
bearer  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  37).  In  the  A.V.  of  1611 
the  name  is  printed  "  Naharai  the  Berothite." 

NA'HASH Cij'm,  "serpent").    1.  (Ndos,  but 

in  Chr.  'Avoy  ;  Alex,  in  both  Naas  :  Naas). 
•'  Nahash  the  Ammonite,"  king  of  the  Bene-Ammon 
at  the  foundation  of  the  monarchy  in  Israel,  who 
dictated  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh-Gilead  that 
cruel  alternative  of  the  loss  of  their  right  eyes  or 
slavery,  which  roused  the  swit't  wrath  of  Saul,  and 
caused  the  destruction  of  the  whole  of  the  Ammonite 
force  (1  Sam.  xi.  1,  2-11).  According  to  Josephus 
{Ant.  vi.  5,  §1)  the  siege  of  Jnbesh  was  but  the 
climax  of  a  long  career  of  similar"  ferocity  with 


^  The  statement  in  I  Sam.  xii.  12  appears  to  be  at     in  ascriljiiig  the  adoption  uf  umniucliy  by  Israel  to  the 
variance  with  that  of  viii.  4,  5  ;  but  it  bears  a  rcmarlcable     panic  caused  by  his  approach, 
testimony  to  the  dread  entertained  of  tliis  savage  chief, 


NAHASH 

which  Nahash  had  oppressed  the  whole  of  the 
Hebrews  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  his  success  in 
which  had  rendered  him  so  self-confident  that  he 
despised  the  chance  of  relief  which  the  men  of  Jabesh 
eagerly  caught  at.  If,  as  .losephus  {lb.  §3)  also 
states,  Nahash  himself  was  killed  in  the  rout  of  his 
army,  then  the  Nahash  who  was  the  father  of  the 
foolish  young  king  Hanun  (2  Sam.  x.  2  ;  1  Chr.  xix. 
1,2)  must  have  been  his  son.  In  this  case,  like 
Pharaoh  in  Egypt,  and  also  perhaps  like  Benhadad, 
Achish,  and  Agag,  in  the  kingdoms  of  Syria,  Phi- 
listia,  and  Amalek,  "  Naliash  "  would  seem  to  have 
been  the  title  of  the  king  of  the  Ammonites  than 
the  name  of  an  individual. 

However  this  was,  Nahash  the  father  of  Hanun 
had  rendered  David  some  special  and  valuable  service, 
which  David  was  anxious  for  an  opportunity  of  re- 
quiting (2  Sam.  X.  2).  No  doubt  this  had  been 
during  his  wanderings,  and  when,  as  the  victim  of 
Saul,  the  Ammonite  king  would  naturally  sympa- 
thise with  and  assist  him.  The  particulars  of  the 
service  are  not  related  in  the  Bible,  but  the  Jewish 
traditions  affirm  that  it  consisted  in  his  having 
artbrded  protection  to  one  of  David's  brothers,  who 
escaped  alone  when  his  family  were  massacred  by 
the  treacherous  king  of  Moab,  to  whose  care  they 
had  been  entrusted  by  David  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3,4), 
and  who  found  an  asylum  with  Nahash.  (See  the 
Midrash  of  11.  Tanclumi,  as  quoted  by  S.  Jarchi 
on  2  Sam.  x.  2.) 

The  retribution  exacted  by  David  for  the  annoying 
insults  of  Hanun  is  related  elsewhere.  [David, 
vol.  i.  4106;  JoAB,  vol.  i.  10826;  Uriah.]  One 
casual  notice  remains  which  seems  to  imply  that  the 
ancient  kindness  which  had  existed  between  David 
and  the  family  of  Nahash  had  not  been  extinguished 
even  by  the  horrors  of  the  Ammonite  war.  When 
David  was  driven  to  Mahanaim,  into  the  very 
neighbourhood  of  Jabesh-Gilead,  we  find  "  Shobi 
the  son  of  Nahash  of  Rabbah  of  the  Bene-Ammon" 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  27)  among  the  great  chiefs  who  were 
so  forward  to  pour  at  the  feet  of  the  fallen  monarch 
the  abundance  of  their  pastoral  wealth,  and  that 
not  with  the  grudging  spirit  of  tributaries,  but 
rather  with  the  sympathy  of  friends,  "  for  they 
sjiid,  the  people  is  himgry  and  weary  and  thirsty 
in  the  wilderness"  (ver.  29). 

2.  (Naas).  A  person  mentioned  once  only  (2  Sam. 
xvii.  2b)  in  stating  the  parentage  of  Amasa,  the 
commander-in-chief  of  Absalom's  army.  Amasa  is 
there  said  to  have  been  the  son''  of  a  certain  Ithra, 
by  Abigail,  "daughter  of  Nahash,  and  sister ■=  to 
Zeruiah."  By  the  genealogy  of  1  Chr.  ii.  IG  it 
appears  that  Zeruiah  and  Abigail  were  sisters  of 
David  and  the  other  children  of  Jesse.  The  question 
then  arises,  How  could  Abigml  have  been  at  the 
same  time  daughter  of  Nahash  and  sister  to  the 
children  of  Jesse?  To  this  three  answers  may  be 
given :  — 

I.  The  universal  tradition  of  the  Rabbis  that 
Nahash  and  Jesse  were  identical."*  "  Nahash,"-  says 
Solomon  Jarchi  (in  his  commentary  on  2  Sam.  xvii. 
25),  "was  Jesse  the  father  of  David,  because  he 
died  without  sin,  by  the  counsel  of  the  seipent" 
(nachash)  ;  i.  e.  by  the  infirmity  of  his  tiiUen  human 

''  The  whole  expression  seems  to  denote  that  he  was  an 
illegUiraate  son. 

■^  I'he  Alex.  IjXX.  regards  Xahash  as  ()io(/(6i' of  Zeruiah 
—  (^uyarepa   Naa?  aSiXfjiov  Sapovtas. 

''  .See  the  extract  from  Uic  rursinu  on  Ruth  iv.  22, 
Blvcn  in  Un'  nolo  toJi;s.siv.  vol.  i.  p.  I03H(i.     Also  the  cila- 


NAHOE 


45'; 


nature  only.  It  must  be  owned  that  it  is  easier  to 
allow  the  identity  of  the  two  than  to  accept  the 
reason  thus  assigned  for  it. 

2.  The  explanation  first  put  forth  by  Professoi 
Stanley  in  this  work  (vol.  i.  4016),  that  Nahash 
was  the  king  of  the  Ammonites,  and  that  the 
same  woman  had  first  been  his  wife  or  concu- 
hine — in  which  capacity  she  had  given  birth  to 
Abigail  and  Zeruiah — and  afterwards  wife  to  Jesse, 
and  the  mother  of  his  children.  In  this  manner 
Abigail  and  Zeruiah  would  be  sisters  to  David, 
without  being  at  the  same  time  daughters  of  Jesse. 
This  has  in  its  favour  the  guarded  statement  of 
1  Chr.  ii.  16,  that  the  two  women  were  not  them- 
selves Jesse's  children,  but  sisters  of  his  children  ; 
and  the  improbability  (otherwise  extreme)  of  so 
close  a  connexion  between  an  Israehte  and  an  Am- 
monite king  is  alleviated  by  Jesse's  known  descent 
from  a  Moabitess,  and  by  the  connexion  which  has 
been  shown  above  to  have  existed  between  Dawd 
and  Nahash  of  Ammon. 

3.  A  third  possible  explanation  is  that  Nahash 
was  the  name  not  of  Jesse,  nor  of  a  former 
husband  of  jiis  wife,  but  of  his  wife  herself. 
Theie  is  nothing  in  the  name  to  prevent  its  being 
borne  equally  by  either  sex,  and  other  instances 
may  be  quoted  of  women  who  are  given  in  the 
genealogies  as  the  daughters,  not  of  their  fathers, 
but  of  their  mothers  :  e.  g.  IMehetabel,  daughter  of 
Matied,  daughter  of  Mezahab.  Still  it  seems  verv 
improbable  that  Jesse's  wife  would  be  suddenly 
intruded  into  the  narrative,  as  she  is  if  this  hyjw- 
thesis  be  adopted.  [G.] 

NA'HATH  (nm:  Nax($e ;  Alex.  Nox*?/", 
Gen.  xxxvi.  13  ;  NaxciO  ;  Alex.  TSlaxid,  Gen.  xxxvi. 
17  ;  Nax«,  1  Chr.  i.  37  ;  Nah'ith).  1.  One  of  the 
"  dukes"  or  phylarchs  in  the  land  of  Edom,  eldest 
son  of  Reuel  the  son  of  Esau. 

2.  (Kaivaad;  klc^.Kvad).  A  Kohathite  Levite, 
son  of  Zophai  and  ancestor  of  Samuel  the  prophet 
(1  Chr.  vi.  26). 

3.  CNafd).  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
who  with  others  was  overseer  of  the  tithes  and  de- 
dicated things  under  Cononiah  and  Shimei  (2  Chr. 
xxxi.  13). 

NAH'BI  CZm  :  Na;8i' ;  Alex.  Jia^d :  Nahabi). 

The  son  of  Vophsi,  a  Naphtalite,  and  one  of  the 
twelve  spies  (Num.  xiii.  14). 

NA'HOR  ("lin3  :  Nax^jp  ;  Jose])h.  Naxa'p^JJ  : 
^Nahor,  and  Naclior),  the  name  of  two  persons  in 
the  family  of  Abraham. 

1.  His  grandfather:  the  sen  of  Serug  and  father 
of  Terah  (Gen.  xi.  22-25).  He  is  mentioned  in  the 
genealogy  of  our  Lord,  Luke  iii.  34,  though  there 
the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  in  the  Greek  form 
of  Naciiou. 

2.  Grandson  of  the  preceding,  son  of  Terah  and 
brother  of  Abraham  and  Haran  (Gen.  xi.  26,  27). 
The  members  of  the  family  are  bi-ought  together  in 
the  following  genealogy.    (See  the  next  page.) 

It  has  been  already  remarked,  under  LOT  (p.  143 
note),  that  the  order  of  the  ages  of  the  family  of 


tions  from  the  Talnuul  In  Meyer,  Seder  Olam,  569 ;  also 
Jerome,  Qimest.  hebr.  ad  loc. 

»  This  is  the  form  given  in  the  Brncdictine  Kditinn  of 
Jerome's  liihliotheca  Dieina.  Tlie  other  is  found  in  the 
ordinary  copies  of  tiic  Vulgate. 


458 


NAHOIl 


NAHSHON 


Terah 


Milcah  =  Nahoe = Eeumah 


Hai-an 


Huz      Buz 

(i.  e.  U/)      I 


Job      Elihu 


Aram ; 
(Ram, 
Jub  xxxii. 


I        r 

Chesed      Hazo 
(father  of 
Cliasdim  or 
Chaldeans) 


Pildash    Jidlaph    Bethuel 


Leah        Rachel 


Tebali 
Gaham 
Tbahash 
JIaacah 


Rebekah  =  Isaac 


Esau        Jacob 


Terah  is  not  impiobubly  inverted  in  the  narrative; 
in  which  case  Nahor,  instead  of  being  yovniger  than 
Abraham,  was  really  older.  He  manie  1  Jlilcah,  the 
daughter  of  his  brother  Haran  ;  and  when  Abraham 
and  Lot  migi-ated  to  Canaan,  Nalior  remained  behind 
in  the  land  of  his  birth,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
l'2uphrates — the  boundary  between  the  Old  and  the 
New  World  of  that  early  age — and  gathered  his 
family  around  him  at  the  sejiulchre  of  his  father.'' 
(Comp.  2  Sam.  xix.  .37). 

Like  Jacob,  and  also  like  Ishmael,  Nahor  was  the 
father  of  twelve  sons,  and  farther,  as  in  the  case  of 
Jacob,  eight  ot  them  were  the  children  of  his  wife, 
and  four  of  a  concubine  (Gen.  x.iii.  21-24).  Special 
care  is  taken  in  speaking  of  the  legitimate  branch  to 
specify  its  descent  from  Milcah — "  tiie  son  of  Milcah, 
which  she  bare  unto  Nahor."  It  was  to  this  inire 
and  unsullied  race  tliat  Abraham  and  IJebekah  in 
turn  had  recourse  for  wives  for  their  sons.  But  with 
.Jacob's  flight  from  Harau  the  intercourse  ceased. 
The  heap  of  stones  which  he  and  "  Labau  the 
Syrian"  erected  on  Mount  Gilead  (Gen.  .\xxi.  46) 
may  be  said  to  have  formed  at  once  the  tomb  of 
their  past  connexion  and  the  barrier  against  its 
continuance.  Even  at  that  time  a  wide  variation 
had  tiiken  place  in  their  language  (ver.  47),  and 
not  only  in  their  language,  but,  as  it  would  seem, 
in  the  Object  of  their  worship.  The  "God  of  Nahor  " 
appears  as  a  distinct  divinity  fiom  the  "  God  of 
Abraham  and  the  Fear  of  Isaac  "  (ver.  .53).  Doubt-  ■ 
less  this  Wiis  one  of  the  "  other  gods  "  which  before 
the  Call  of  Abraham  were  worshipped  by  the  family 
of  Terah ;  whose  images  weie  in  Kachel's  possession 
during  the  confeience  on  Gile.ad  ;  and  which  had  to 
be  discarded  before  Jacob  could  go  into  the  Presence 
of  the  "  God  of  Bethel  "  (Gen.  xxxv.  2  ;  comp.  xxxi. 
1  3).  Henceforward  the  line  of  distinction  between 
the  two  families  is  most  sharply  drawn  fas  in  the 
allusion  of  Josh,  x.xiv.  2),  and  the  descendants  of 
Nahor  confine  their  communications  to  their  own 
immediate  kindred,  or  to  the  members  of  other  non- 
Israelite  tribes,  as  in  the  case  of  Job  the  man  of  Uz, 
and  his  friends,  Elihu  the  Buzite  of  the  kindred  of 
Ram,  Eliphaz  the  Temanite,  and  B.ldad  the  Shuhite. 
Many  centuries  later  David  appears  to  have  come 
into  collision — sometimes  friendly,  sometimes  the 
reverse — with  one  or  two  of  tlie  more  remote 
Nahorite  tribes.  Tibhath,  pi-obably  identical  with 
Tebah  and  Maacah,  are  mentioned  in  the  relation 
of  his  wars  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Isiael  (1  Chr. 


•>  The  statements  of  Gen.  xi.  27-32  appear  to  imply 
that  Nahor  did  not  advance  from  Ur  to  Haran  at  the  same 
time  with  Terah,  Abraham,  and  Lot,  but  remained  there 
till  a  later  date.  Coupling  this  with  the  stalenient  of 
Judith  V.  8,  and  the  universal  tradition  of  the  E;i6t,  that 
Terah's  departure  from  Ur  was  a  relinr|uishmcnt  of  false 
worship,  an  additional  force  is  given   to  the  mention  of 


xviii.  8,  xi.\".  (3)  ;  and  the  mother  of  Absalom  either 
belonged  to  or  was  connected  with  the  latter  of  the 
the  above  nations. 

No  certain  traces  of  the  name  of  Nahor  have  been 
recognised  in  Mesopotamia.  Ewald  ( Geschichte,  i. 
359)  proposes  Haditha,  a  town  on  the  Euphrates 
just  above  Hit,  and  bearing  the  additional  name 
of  cl-Naura  ;  also  another  place,  likewise  called 
el-Na'ura,  mentioned  by  some  Arabian  geographers 
as  lying  further  north  ;  and  Nachrein,  which,  how- 
ever, seems  to  lie  out  of  IMesopotamia  to  the  east. 
Others  have  mentioned  Naarda,  or  Nehardea,  a  town 
or  district  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  above,  cele- 
brated as  the  site  of  a  college  of  the  Jews  {^Dict. 
of  Geogr.  "Naarda"). 

May  not  Aram-Naharaim  have  oiiginally  derived 
its  name  from  Nahor?  The  fact  that  in  its  jireseut 
form  it  has  another  signification  in  Hebrew  is  no 
argument  against  such  a  derivation. 

In  Josh.  xxiv.  2  the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V, 
in  the  form  (more  nearly  approaching  the  Hebrew 
than  the  other)  of  Nachor.  [G.] 

NAH'SHON,  orNAASH'ON  (jit^'n:  :  Naoo-- 

(j(tii/,  LXX.  and  N.  T. :  Nahasson,  0.  T.  ;  iViiasscni, 
N.  T.) ,  sou  of  Amminadab,  and  prince  of  the  children 
of  Judah  (as  he  is  styled  in  the  genealogy  of  Judah, 
1  Chr.  ii.  10)  at  the  time  of  the  first  numbering 
in  the  wilderness  (Exod.  vi.  23;  Num.  i.  7,  &c.). 
His  sister,  Elisheba,  was  wife  to  Aaron,  and  his 
son,  Salmon,  was  husband  to  Rahab  after  the 
taking  of  Jericho.  From  Elisheba  being  described 
as  "sister  of  Naashon"  we  may  infer  that  he  was 
a  person  of  considerable  note  and  dignity,  which 
his  being  appointed  as  one  of  the  twelve  princes 
who  assisted  Bloses  and  Aaron  in  taking  the  census, 
and  who  were  all  "  leuowned  of  the  congregation 

heads  of  thousands  in  Israel,"  shows  him 

to  have  been.  No  less  conspicuous  for  high  rank 
and  position  does  he  appear  in  Num.  ii.  3,  vii.  12, 
X.  14,  where,  in  the  encampment,  in  the  offerings 
of  the  princes,  and  in  the  order  of  march,  the  first 
place  is  assigned  to  Nahshon  the  son  of  Amminadab 
as  captain  of  the  host  of  Judah.  Indeed,  on  these 
three  last-named  occasions  he  appears  as  the  first 
man  in  the  state  next  to  Moses  and  Aaron,  wheieas 
at  the  census  he  comes  after  the  chiefs  of  the  tribes 
of  Reuben  and  Simeon.*  Nahshon  died  in  the 
wilderness  according  to  Num.  .xxvi.  64,  65,  but  no 
further  particulars  of  his  life  are  given.     In  the 


"  the  god  of  Nahor"  (Gen.  xxxi.  53)  as  distinct  from  the 
God  of  Abraham's  descendants.  Two  generations  later 
Nahor's  family  were  certainly  living  at  Haran  (Gen. 
xxviii.  10,  xxix.  4). 

"  It  is  curious  to  notice  that,  in  the  second  numbering 
(Num.  xxvi.),  Reuben  still  comes  first,  and  Judah  fourth. 
So  also  1  Chr.  ii.  1. 


NAHUM 

N,  T.  he  occurs  twice,  viz.  in  Matt.  i.  4  and  Luke 
iii.  32,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ,  where  his 
lineage  in  the  preceding  and  following  descents  are 
exactly  the  same  a.s  in  Itiith  iv.  18--0  ;  1  Ohr.  ii. 
10-12,  which  makes  it  quite  certain  that  he  was 
the  sixth  in  descent  from  Judah,  inclusive,  and  that 
David  was  the  fifth  generation  after  him.  [Ammin- 
ADAB.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

NA'HUjM  (Q-im:  i^aoi/j.:  Nahum).  "The 
booi<  of  the  vision  of  Nahum  the  Elkoshit«  "  stands 
seventh  in  order  among  the  wi-itings  of  the  minor 
prophets  in  the  present  an-angement  of  the  canon. 
Of  the  author  himself  we  have  no  more  knowledge 
than  is  afforded  us  by  the  scanty  title  of  his  book, 
which  gives  no  indication  whatever  of  his  date,  and 
leaves  his  origin  obscure.  The  site  of  Elkosh,  his 
native  place,  is  disputed,  some  placing  it  in  Galilee, 
with  Jerome,  who  was  shewn  the  ruins  by  his  guide  ; 
othei-s  in  Assyria,  where  the  tomb  of  the  prophet  is 
still  visited  as  a  sacred  spot  by  Jews  from  all  parts. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  (p.  53,  Heb.  text,  ed.  Asherj 
thus  briefly  alludes  to  it : — "  And  in  the  city  of 
Asshur  (Mosul)  is  the  synagogue  of  Obadiah,  and 
the  synagogue  of  Jonah  the  son  of  Amittiii,  and  the 
synagogue  of  Nahum  the  Elkoshite."  [Elkosh.] 
Those  who  maintain  the  latter  view  assume  that 
the  prophet's  parents  were  carried  into  captivity  by 
Tiglath-pileser,  and  planted,  with  other  exile  co- 
lonists, in  the  province  of  Ass3'-ria,  the  modern  Kur- 
distan, and  that  the  prophet  was  born  at  the  village 
of  Alkush,  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Tigris,  two  miles 
north  of  JIosul.  Evvald  is  of  opinion  that  the  pro- 
phecy was  written  there  at  a  time  when  Nineveh 
was  threatened  from  without.  Against  this  it  may 
be  urged  that  it  does  not  appear'  that  the  exiles 
were  carried  into  the  province  of  Assyria  Proper, 
but  into  the  newly-conquered  districts,  such  as 
Mesopotamia,  Babylonia,  or  Media.  The  arguments 
in  favour  of  an  Assyrian  locality  for  the  prophet  are 
supported  by  the  occurrence  of  what  are  presumed  to 
be  Assyrian  words  :  Q-'^fn,  ii.  8;  '?];^T3p,  "nl"]pDP- 

iii.  17;  and  the  strange  form  H^DNpD  in  ii.  14, 

which  is  supposed  to  indicate  a  foreign  influence. 
In  addition  to  this  is  the  internal  evidence  supplied 
by  the  vivid  description  of  Nineveh,  of  whose  splen- 
dours it  is  contended  Nahum  must  have  been  an 
eye-witness  ;  but  Hitzig  justly  observes  that  these 
descriptions  display  merely  a  lively  imagination,  and 
such  knowledge  of  a  renowned  city  as  might  be  pos- 
sessed by  any  one  in  Anterior  Asia.  The  Assyrian 
warrioi's  were  no  strangers  in  Palestine,  and  that 
there  was  sufllcient  intercourse  between  the  two 
countries  is  rendered  probable  by  the  history  of  the 
proi)het  Jonah.  There  is  nothing  in  the  prophecy 
of  Nahum  to  indicate  that  it  was  written  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Nineveh,  and  in  full 
view  of  the  scenes  which  are  depicted,  nor  is  the 
language  that  of  an  e.xile  in  an  enemy's  countrv. 
No  allusion  is  made  to  the  aiptivity  ;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  imagery  is  such  as  would  be  na- 
tural to  an  inhabitant  of  Palestine  (i.  4),  to  whom 
the  rich  pastures  of  Hashan,  the  vineyards  of  Carmel, 
and  the  blossom  of  Lebanon,  were  emblems  of  all 
that  was  luxuriant  and  fertile.  The  language  em- 
ployed in  i.  15,  ii.  2,  is  appropriate  to  one  who 
wrote  for  his  countrymen  in  their  native  land.*    In 

•  Capernaum,  literallj-  "  village  ofXahuni,'  is  supposed 
to  have  dcriveil  its  name  from  the  prophet.  Schwarz 
(Descr.  of  I'al.  p.  las)  mentions  a  Kefar  Tanchum  or 
Xachum,  close  on  Chinnercth,  and  2i  Knglish  miles  N. 


NAHUM 


450 


fact,  the  sole  origin  of  the  theory  that  Nahum 
flourished  in  Assyria  is  the  name  of  the  village 
Alkush,  which  contains  his  supposed  tomb,  and 
fiom  its  similarity  to  Elkosh  was  apparently  selected 
by  mediaeval  tradition  as  a  shrine  for  pilgrims, 
with  as  little  probability  to  recommend  it  as  exists 
in  the  case  of  Obadiah  and  Jephthah,  whose  burial- 
places  are  still  shown  in  the  same  neighbourhood. 
This  supposition  is  more  reasonable  than  another 
which  has  been  adopted  in  order  to  account  for  the 
existence  of  Nahum's  tomb  at  a  place,  the  name  of 
which  so  closelv  resembles  that  of  his  native  town. 
Alkush,  it  is  suggested,  was  founded  by  the  Israel- 
itish  exiles,  and  so  named  by  them  in  memory  of 
Elkosh  in  their  own  country.  Tradition,  as  usual, 
has  usurped  the  province  of  history.  According  to 
Pseudo-Epiphauius  {De  Vitis  Proph.  0pp.  ii.  p.  247), 
Nahum  was  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  "  from  Elcesei 
beyond  the  Jordan  at  Begabar  (Briya^ap  ;  Chrou. 
Pasch.  150  B.  BjjTajSapr)),"  or  Bethabara,  where 
he  died  in  peace  and  was  buried,  in  the  Roman 
Martyrology  the  1st  of  I)ecember  is  consecrated  to 
his  memory. 

The  date  of  Nahum's  prophecy  can  be  determined 
with  as  little  precision  as  his  birthplace.  In  the 
Seder  01am  Fiabba  (p.  55,  ed.  Jleyer)  he  is  made 
contemporaiy  with  Joel  and  Habakkuk  in  the  reign 
of  Manasseh.  Syncellus  I^Chron.  p.  201  d)  places 
him  with  Hosea,  Amos  and  Jonah  in  the  reign  of 
Joash  king  of  Israel,  more  than  a  century  earlier; 
while,  according  to  Eutychius  {Ann.  p.  252),  he 
was  contempoiary  with  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and 
Malachi,  and  prophesied  in  the  fifth  year  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  11, 
§3)  mentions  him  as  living  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Jotham  ;  "  about  this  time  was  a  certain 
prophet,  Nahum  by  name ;  who,  prophesying  con- 
cerning the  downfall  of  Assyiians  and  of  Nine- 
veh, said  thus,"  &c. ;  to  which  he  adds,  "  and  all 
that  was  foretold  concerning  Nineveh  came  to  pass 
after  115  years."  P^rom  this  Carpzor  concluded 
that  Nahum  prophesied  in  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Ahaz,  about  B.C.  742.  Modern  writers 
are  divided  in  their  sufliages.  Bertholdt  thinks  it 
probable  that  the  prophet  escaped  into  Judah  when 
the  ten  tribes  were  carried  captive,  ;md  wrote  in 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Keil  {Lehrh.  d.  Einl.  in  d. 
A.  T.)  places  him  in  the  latter  half  of  Hezekiali'.^ 
reign,  alter  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib.  Vitringa 
{Tt/p.  Doc tr.  proph.  p.  37)  w;is  of  the  like  opinion, 
anci  the  same  view  is  taken  by  De  Wette  (J-Jinl.  p. 
328j,  who  suggests  that  the  rebellion  of  the  ]\ledes 
against  the  Assyrians  (B.C.  710),  and  the  election 
of  their  own  king  in  the  person  of  Deioces,  may 
have  been  present  to  the  prophet's  mind.  But  the 
history  of  Deioces  and  his  very  existence  are  now 
generally  believed  to  be  mythical.  This  period  also 
is  adopted  by  Knobel  (Prophet,  ii.  207,  kc.)  ius  the 
date  of  the  prophecy.  He  was  guided  to  his  con- 
clusion by  the  same  supposed  tacts,  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  No  Ammon,  or  Thebes  of  Upjier  Egypt, 
which  he  believed  was  eHected  by  the  Assyrian 
monarch  Sargon  (B.C.  717-715),  and  is  referred 
to  by  Nahum  (iii.  8)  as  a  recent  event.  In  this 
case  the  prophet  would  be  a  younger  contemporary 
of  Isaiah  (comp.  Is.  xx.  f).  Ewald,  again,  con- 
ceives that  the  siege  of  Nineveh  by  the  Median 
king  Phraortes  (B.C.  630-625),  may  have  suggested 

of  Tiberias.   "  'I'liey  point  out  there  the  graves  of  Nahum 
the  prophet,  of  Rabbis  Taiichnm  and  Tancliiima,  who  all 

';  repoge  there,  and  through  these  the  ancient  position  of 

I  the  village  is  easily  known." 


460 


NAHUM 


Nahum's  prophecy  of  its  destruction.  The  exist- 
ence of  Phraortes,  at  the  period  to  which  he  is 
assigned,  is  now  believed  to  be  an  anachronism. 
[Medes.]  Junius  and  Tremelliiis  select  the  last 
years  of  Josiah  as  the  period  at  which  Nahum  pro- 
phesied, but  .at  this  time  not  Nineveh  but  Babylon 
was  the  object  of  alaim  to  the  Hebrews.  The  argu- 
ments by  which  Strauss  (Nahwni  de  Nino  Vatici- 
uiiim,  prol.  c.  1,  §3)  endeavours  to  prove  that  the 
prophecy  belongs  to  the  time  at  which  Manasseh 
was  in  captivity  at  Babylon,  that  is  between  the 
years  680  and  (567  B.C.,  are  not  convincing.  As- 
suming that  the  position  which  Nahum  occupies  in 
the  canon  between  Micah  and  Habakkuk  supplies, 
as  the  limits  of  his  prophetical  career,  the  reigns  of 
Hezekiah  and  Josiah,  he  endeavours  to  show  fi-om 
certain  apparent  resemblances  to  the  writings  of  the 
older  prophets,  Joel,  Jonah,  and  Isaiah,  that  Nahum 
must  have  been  familiar  with  their  writings,  and 
consequently  later  in  point  of  time  than  any  of 
them.  But  a  careful  examination  of  the  passages 
by  which  this  argument  is  maintained,  will  show 
that  the  phi-ases  and  tui-ns  of  expression  upon  which 
the  resemblance  is  supposed  to  rest,  are  in  no  way 
remarkable  or  characteristic,  and  might  have  been 
freely  used  by  any  one  familiar  with  Oriental  me- 
taphor and  imagery,  without  incurring  the  charge 
of  plagiarism.  Two  e.xceptions  are  Nah.  ii.  10, 
where  a  striking  expression  is  used  which  only 
occurs  besides  in  Joel  ii.  6,  and  Nah.  i.  15  (Heb. 
ii.  1),  the  first  clause  of  which  is  nearly  word  for 
word  the  same  as  that  of  Is.  lii.  7.  But  these  pas- 
sages, by  themselves,  would  equally  prove  that 
Nahum  was  anterior  both  to  Joel  and  Isaiah,  and 
that  his  diction  was  copied  by  them.  Other  refer- 
ences which  are  supposed  to  indicate  imitations  of 
older  writers,  or,  at  least,  familiarity  with  their 
writings,  are  Nah.  i.  3  compared  with  Jon.  iv.  2  ; 
Nah.  i.  13  with  Is.  x.  27  ;  Nah.  iii.  10  with  Is.  xiii. 
16;  Nah.  ii.  2  [1]  with  Is.  xxiv.  1  ;  Nah.  iii.  5 
with  Is.  xlvii.  2,  3  ;  and  Nah.  iii.  7  with  Is.  Ii.  19. 
For  the  purpose  of  showing  that  Nahum  preceded 
.Jeremiah,  Strauss  quotes  other  passages  in  which 
the  later  prophet  is  believed  to  have  had  in  his 
mmd  expressions  of  his  predecessor  with  which  he 
was  familiar.  The  most  striking  of  these  are  Jer. 
X.  19  compared  with  Nah.  iii.  19  ;  Jer.  xiii.  26  with 
Nah.  iii.  5;  Jer.  1.  37,  Ii.  30  with  Nah.  iii.  13. 
Words,  which  are  assumed  by  the  same  commen- 
tator to  be  peculiar  to  the  times  of  Isaiah,  are 
appealed  to  by  him  as  evidences  of  the  date  of  the 
prophecy.  But  the  only  examples  which  he  quotes 
prove  nothing;  P]t3ti',  sheteph  (Nah.  i.  8,  A.  V. 
"  flood "),  occurs  in  Job,  the  Psalms,  and  in  Pro- 
verbs, but  not  once  in  Isaiah  ;  and  n"l-"lVD,  metsu- 
rdh  (Nah.  ii.  1  [2],  A.  V.  "munition")  is  found 
only  once  in  Isaiah,  though  it  occurs  fi-equently  in 
the  Chronicles,  and  is  not  a  word  likely  to  be  un- 
common or  peculiar,  so  that  nothing  can  be  inferred 
from  it.  Besides,  all  this  would  be  as  appropriate 
to  the  times  of  Hezekiah  as  to  those  of  Manasseh. 
That  the  prophecy  was  written  before  the  final 
downfall  of  Nineveh,  and  its  rapture  by  the  Medes 
and  Chaldeans  (cir.  B.C.  625;,  will  be  admitted. 
The  allusions  to  the  Assyrian  power  imply  that  it 
was  still  unbroken  (i.  12,  ii.  13,  14,  iii.  15-17). 
The  glory  of  the  kingdom  was  at  its  brightest  in 
the  reign  of  Esarhaddon  (B.C.  680-660),  who  for 
1 3  years  made  Babylon  the  seat  of  the  empire,  and 
this  fact  would  incline  us  to  fix  the  date  of  Nahum 
rather  in  the  reign  of  his  father  Semiacherib,  for 


NAHUM 

Nineveh  alone  is  contemplated  in  the  destruction 
threatened  to  the  Assyrian  power,  and  no  hint  is 
given  that  its  importance  in  the  kingdom  was  dimi- 
nished, as  it  necessarily  would  be,  by  the  establish- 
ment of  another  capital.  That  Palestine  was  suffer- 
ing from  the  effects  of  Assyrian  invasion  at  the 
time  of  Nahum's  writing  seems  probable  from  the 
allu.sions  in  i.  11,  12,  13,  ii.  2  ;  and  the  vivid  de- 
scription of  the  Assyrian  armament  in  ii.  3,  4.  At 
such  a  time  the  prophecy  would  be  appropriate, 
and  if  i.  14  refers  to  the  death  of  Sennacherib  in  the 
house  of  Nisroch,  it  must  have  been  written  before 
that  event.  The  capture  of  No  Amnion,  or  Thebes, 
has  not  been  identified  with  anything  like  certainty. 
It  is  refen-ed  to  as  of  recent  occurrence,  and  it  has 
been  conjectured  with  probability  that  it  was  sacked 
by  Sargon  in  the  invasion  of  Egypt  alluded  to  in  Is. 
XX.  1 .  These  circumstances  seem  to  determine  the 
14th  year  of  Hezekiah  (b.c.  712)  as  the  period 
before  which  the  prophecy  of  Nahum  could  not  have 
been  written.  The  condition  of  A.ssyria  in  the  reign 
of  Sennacherib  would  correspond  with  the  state  of 
things  implied  in  the  prophecy,  and  it  is  on  all 
accounts  most  probable  that  Nahum  fiourished  in 
the  latter  half  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  wrote 
his  prophecy  soon  after  the  date  above  mentioned, 
either  in  Jerusalem  or  its  neighbourhood,  where  the 
echo  still  lingered  of  "  the  rattling  of  the  wheels, 
and  of  the  prancing  horses,  and  of  the  jumping 
chariots "  of  the  Assyrian  host,  and  "  the  flame  of 
the  sword  and  lightning  of  the  spear,"  still  flashed 
in  the  memory  of  the  beleaguered  citizens. 

The  subject  of  the  prophecy  is,  in  accordance 
with  the  superscription,  "  the  burden  of  Nineveh." 
The  three  chapters  into  which  it  is  divided  form  a 
consecutive  whole.  The  first  chapter  is  introduc- 
tory. It  commences  with  a  declaration  of  the  cha- 
racter of  Jehovah,  "  a  God  jealous  and  avenging," 
as  exhibited  in  His  dealings  with  His  enemies,  and 
the  swift  and  terrible  vengeance  with  which  He 
pursues  them  (i.  2-6),  while  to  those  that  trust  in 
Him  He  is  "  good,  a  stronghold  in  vhe  day  of 
trouble"  (i.  7),  in  contrast  with  the  overwhelming 
flood  which  shall  sweep  away  His  foes  (i.  8).  The 
language  of  the  prophet  now  becomes  more  special, 
and  points  to  the  destruction  which  awaited  the 
hosts  of  Assyria  who  had  just  gone  up  out  of  Judah 
(i.  9-11).  In  the  verses  that  follow  the  intention • 
of  Jehovah  is  still  more  fully  declared,  and  addressed 
first  to  Judah  (i.  12,  13),  and  then  to  the  monarch 
of  Assyria  (i.  14).  And  now  the  vision  grows 
more  distinct.  The  messenger  of  glad  tidings,  the 
news  of  Nineveh's  downfall,  trod  the  mountains 
that  were  round  about  Jerusalem  (i.  15),  and  pro- 
claimed to  Judah  the  accomplishment  of  her  vows. 
But  round  the  doomed  city  gathered  the  destroying 
armies;  "  the  breaker  in  pieces"  had  gone  up,  and 
Jehovah  mustered  His  hosts  to  the  battle  to  avenge 
His  people  (ii.  i.  2).  The  prophet's  mind  in  vision 
sees  the  burnished  bronze  shields  of  the  scarlet-clad 
warriors  of  the  besieging  army,  the  flashing  steel 
scvthes  of  their  war-chariots  as  they  are  drawn  up 
in  battle  array,  and  the  quivering  cypress-shafts  of 
their  spears  (ii.  3).  The  Assyrians  hasten  to  the 
defence:  their  chariots  rush  madly  through  the 
streets,  and  run  to  and  fi'o  like  the  lightning  in  the 
broad  ways,  which  glare  with  their  bright  armour 
like  torches.  But  a  panic  has  seized  their  mighty 
ones  ;  their  ranks  are  broken  as  they  march,  and 
they  hurry  to  the  wall  only  to  see  the  covered  bat- 
tering-rams of  the  besiegers  ready  i'or  the  .attack 
'ii.   4,    5).     The  crisis    hastens   on    with    terrible 


NAIDUS 

rapidity.  The  river-gates  are  Ijioken  in,  and  the 
royal  palace  is  in  the  hands  of  the  victors  (ii.  6). 
And  tlien  comes  the  end ;  the  city  is  tiiken  and 
carried  captive,  and  her  maidens  "  moan  as  with 
the  voice  of  doves,"  beating  their  brea-sts  with  sorrow 
(ii.  7).  The  flight  becomes  general,  and  the  leaders 
in  vaiu  endeavour  to  stem  the  torrent  of  fugitives 
(ii.  8).  The  wealth  of  the  city  and  its  accumu- 
lated treasures  become  tlie  spoil  of  the  captors,  and 
the  conquered  sutler  all  the  horrors  th;it  follow  the 
assault  and  storm  (ii.  9,  10).  Over  the  charred 
and  blackened  ruins  the  prophet,  as  the  mouth- 
piece of  .lehovah,  exclaims  in  triumph,  "  Where  is 
the  lair  of  the  lions,  the  feeding  place  of  the  young 
lions,  where  walked  lion,  lioness,  lion's  whelp,  and 
none  made  (them)  afraid?"  (ii.  11,  12).  But  for 
all  this  the  downfall  of  Nineveh  was  certain,  for 
"  behold  !  I  am  against  thee,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts  " 
(ii.  13).  The  vision  ends,  and  the  prophet  recalled 
from  the  scenes  of  the  future  to  the  realities  of  the 
present,  collects  himself  as  it  were,  for  one  final 
outburst  of  withering  denunciation  against  the  As- 
syrian city,  not  now  threatened  by  her  Median  and 
Chaldean  conquerors,  but  in  the  full  tide  of  pros- 
perity, the  oppressor  and  corrupter  of  nations. 
Mingled  with  this  woe  there  is  no  touch  of  sadness 
or  compassion  for  her  fiite  ;  she  will  fall  unpitied 
and  unlamented,  and  with  terrible  calmness  the 
prophet  pronounces  her  final  doom:  "all  that  hear 
the  bi'uit  of  thee  shall  clap  the  hands  over  thee :  for 
upon  whom  has  not  thy  wickedness  passed  conti- 
nually?" (iii.  19). 

As  a  poet,  Nahum  occupies  a  high  place  in  the 
first  rank  of  Hebrew  literature.  In  proof  of  this  it 
is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  the  openujg  verses  of 
his  prophecy  (i.  2-G),  and  to  the  magnificent  de- 
so'iptiou  of  the  siege  and  destruction  of  Nineveh  in 
ch.  ii.  His  style  is  clear  and  uninvolved,  though 
pregnant  and  forcible ;  his  diction  sonorous  and 
rhythmical,  the  words  re-echoing  to  the  sense 
(comp.  ii.  4,  iii.  3).  Some  words  and  forms  of 
words  are  almost  peculiar  to  himself;  as,  for  example, 
mytt'  for  mjJD,  in  i.  3,  occurs  only  besides  in  Job 
ix.  17  ;  X13p  for  XHp,  in  i.  2,  is  found  only  in 
Josh.  xxiv.  19  ;  nMDFI,  ii.  9  [10],  is  found  in  Job 
xxiii.  3,  and  tliere  not  in  the  same  sense  ;  "liTH,  in 
i.  2,   is  only  found  in  Judg.  v.  22  ;  DnPES  and 

n,  ii.  3  [4],  inj,  ii.  7  [8],  ni^-u  and  ni?'-n??. 
ii.  10  [11],  nntsib,  iii.  17,  and'nna,  iii.  I'o,  do 

not  occur  elsewhere.  The  unusual  form  of  the  pro- 
nominal suffix  in  nDDN^C,  ii.  13  [14],  ■IK'BJ  for 
■1^33,  iii.  18,  arc  peculiar  to  Nahum  ;  "I^D,  iii.  5, 
is  only  found  in  1  K.  vii.  36  ;  ^3iil,  iii.  17,  occurs 
besides  only  in  Am.  vii.  1  ;  and  the  foreign  word 
"IDSD,  iii.  17,  in  the  slightly  diHorent  form 
"1DDD,  is  found  only  in  Jcr.  Ii.  27. 

Kor  illustrations  of  Naiium's  projihecy,  see  the 
article  Niniovhm.  [W.  A.  W.] 

NA'IDUS  (NaiSos;  Alex.  JiadSos:  Baanns) 
=  Bknaiah  of  the  sons  of  I'ahath  Moab  (1  Esdr. 
ix.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30), 

NAIL.    I.  (of  finger).* — 1 .  A  nail  or  claw  of  man 


XAIL 


461 


hr 


or  animal.  2.  A  point  or  style,  c.tj.  for  writing: 
see  Jer.  xvii.  1.  Tzipporen  occurs  in  Deut.  xxi.  12, 
in  connexion  vifith  the  verb  HtJ'y,  'dsdh,  "  to  make," 
here  rendered  ■nepiovvxiC'^,  circumcido,  A.  V. 
"  pare,"  but  in  niarg.  "  dress,"  "  sutler  to  grow." 
Gesenius  explains  "  make  neat." 

Much  controversy  has  arisen  on  the  meaning  of 
this  passiige ;  one  set  of  interpreters,  including 
Josephus  and  Philo,  regarding  the  action  as  indi- 
cative of  mourning,  while  others  refer  it  to  the 
deposition  of  mourning.  Some,  who  would  thus 
belong  to  the  latter  class,  refer  it  to  the  pi'actice  of 
staining  the  nails  with  henneh. 

The  word  asah,  "  make,"  is  used  both  of 
"  dressing,"  i.  e.  making  clean  the  feet,  and  also  of 
"  trimming,"  {.  c.  coniliing  and  making  neat  the 
beaid,  in  the  case  of  Mephibosheth,  2  Sam.  xix. 
24.  It  seems,  therefoi  e,  on  the  whole  to  mean 
"make  suitable"  to  the  particular  purpose  in- 
tended, whatever  that  may  be:  unless,  as  Gese- 
nius thinks,  the  passage  refers  to  the  completion 
of  the  female  captive's  month  of  seclusion,  that 
purpose  is  evidently  one  of  mourning — a  month's 
mourning  interposed  for  the  purpose  of  preventing 
on  the  one  hand  too  hasty  an  approacli  on  the  part 
of  the  captor,  and  on  the  other  too  sudden  a  shock 
to  natural  feeling  in  the  captive.  Following  thi? 
line  of  interpretation,  the  command  will  stand 
thus:  The  captive  is  to  lay  aside  the  "raiment  of 
her  captivity,"  viz.  her  ordinary  dress  in  which 
she  had  been  taken  captive,  and  she  is  to  remain 
in  mourning  retirement  for  a  month  with  hair 
shortened  and  nails  made  suitable  to  the  same  pur- 
pose, thus  presenting  an  appearance  of  woe  to  which 
the  nails  untrimmed  and  sljortened  hair  would  seem 
each  in  their  way  most  suitable  (see  Job  i.  20). 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  we  suppose  that  the 
shaving  the  head,  &c.,  indicate  the  time  of  re- 
tirement completed,  we  must  suppose  also  a  sort 
of  Nazaritic  initiation  into  her  new  condition,  a 
supposition  for  which  there  is  elsewhere  no  warrant 
in  the  Law,  besides  the  fact  that  the  "  making," 
whether  paring  the  nails  or  letting  them  grow,  is 
nowhere  mentioned  as  a  Nazaritic  ceremony,  and 
also  that  the  shaving  the  heat!  at  the  end  of  the 
month  would  seem  an  altogether  unsuitable  intro- 
duction to  the  condition  of  a  bride. 

We  conclude,  theiefore,  that  the  captive's  head 
was  shaved  at  the  commencement  of  the  mouth, 
and  that  during  that  period  her  nails  were  to  be 
allowed  to  grow  in  token  of  natural  sorrow  and 
consequent  personal  neglect.  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8-23  ; 
Philo,  irepl  (ptXavOp.  c.  14,'  vol.  ii.  p.  394,  ed. 
Mangey;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  ii.  c.  18,  iii.  c.  11, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  475,  543,  ed.  Potter;  Calmet,  Patrick. 
Crit.  Sacr.  on  Deut.  xxi.  12  ;  Schleusner,  Lex. 
V.  T.  TrepiovvxiCc ;  Selden,  de  Jur.  Nat.  v.  xiii. 
p.  644;  Haimer,  Ohs.  iv.  104;  Wilkinson,  ^nc. 
JSg.  ii.  345;  Lane,  M.  E.  i.  64;  Gesenius,  p. 
1075;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Muses,  art.  88,  vol.  i. 
p.  464,  ed.  Smith;   Numb.  vi.  2,  18. 

II.— l.b  Anail  (Is.  xli.  7),  astake  (Is.  xxxiii.  20), 
also  a  tent-peg.  Tent-pegs  are  usually  of  wood  and  of 
large  size,  but  sometimes,  as  was  the  c;vse  with  those 
used  to  fiisten  the  cui  tains  of  the  Tabernacle,  of  metal 
(Ex.  xxvii.  19,  xx.\viii.  20  ;  see  Lightfoot,  Spicil.  in 
Ex.  §42  :  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  .'),  4).  '[Jakl,  'I'knt.] 


»  1DP>   t'phar,  a  ChaUlee  form  of  the  Ilcb.   p3V'        '"  "TI^j  jathcd;  TraaaaAos  ;  2>i-"'>iUus,  davu.^;  akin  to 
Izippoioi,  from  the  root  ^D^>  connected   with    "IDD' 


sapliar,  "  to  scrape,"  or  "  pare  ;"  oin/f ;  iiii'itiis, 


Arab.  J^'    .  nnfiiild.  '•  to  tix  a  peg 


462 


NAIN 


2.C  A  nail,  primarily  a  point.''  We  are  told  that 
1  )avid  prepared  Li-on  for  the  nails  to  be  used  in  the 
Temple  ;  and  as  the  holy  of  holies  was  plated  with 
gold,  the  nails  also  for  fastening  the  plates  were 
probably  of  gold.  Their  weight  is  said  to  have 
been  50  shekels,  =  25  ounces,  a  weight  obviously 
so  much  too  small,  unle>is  mere  gilding  be  sup- 
posed, for  the  total  weight  required,  that  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  render  it  as  expressing  that  of  each  nail, 
which  is  equally  excessive.  To  remedy  this  diffi- 
culty Thenius  suggests  reading  500  for  50  shekels 
(1  Chr.  xxii.  3;  2  Chr.  iii.  9;  Bertheau,  on  Chro- 
nicles, in  Kurzfief.  Handb.). 

"  Nail,"  Vulg.  palus,  is  the  rendering  of  irda- 
(TaKos  in  Ecclus.  xxvii.  2.  In  N.  T.  we  have 
^\os  and  irpoayiXScD  in  speaking  of  the  nails  of  the 
Cross  (John  xx.  25  ;  Col.  ii.  14).         [H.  W.  P.] 

NAIN  (Na'iV).  There  ai'e  no  materials  for  a 
long  history  or  a  detailed  descrijition  of  this  village 
of  Galilee,  the  gate  of  which  is  made  illustrious  by 
the  raising  of  the  widow's  son  (Luke  vii.  12).  But 
two  points  connected  with  it  are  of  extreme  interest 
to  the  Bibhcal  student.  The  site  of  the  village  is 
certainly  known ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to 
the  approach  by  which  our  Saviour  was  coming 
when  He  met  the  funeral.  The  modern  Nein  is  si- 
tuated on  the  north-western  edge  of  the  "  Little 
Hermou,"  or  Jebel  ed-Duhy,  where  the  ground  falls 
into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  Nor  has  the  name 
ever  been  forgotten.  The  crusaders  knew  it,  and 
Eusebius  and  Jeiqme  mention  it,  in  its  right  con- 
nexion with  the  neighbourhood  of  Endoi'.  Again, 
the  entrance  to  the  place  must  probably  always 
have  been  up  the  steep  ascent  fiom  the  plain ;  and 
here,  on  the  west  side  of  the  village,  the  rock  is 
full  of  sepulchral  caves.  It  appeal's  also  that  there 
are  similar  caves  on  the  east  side.  (Robinson,  Dib. 
Res.  ii.  361  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Si/ria  aiid  Palestine, 
ii.  382 ;  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  357 ; 
Thomson,  T/ie  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  445  ;  Porter, 
Handbook  to  Syria,  p.  358.)  [J.  S.  H.] 

NA'IOTHinVJ,  according  to  the  Keri  or  cor- 
rected text  of  the  Masorets,  which  is  ibllowed  by  the 
A.  v.,  but  in  the  Cethib  or  original  text  D^IJ,* 
i.e.  Nevaioth:  AuaS  ;  Alex.  Naui'oifl  :  Najoth),  or 
more  fully ,''  "  Naioth  in  Ramah  ;"  a  place  in 
which  Samuel  and  David  took  refuge  together,  after 
the  latter  had  made  his  escape  from  the  jealous  fury 
of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xix.  18,  19,  22,  23,  xx.  1).  It  is 
evideut  from  ver.  18,  that  Naioth  was  not  actually 
in  Ramah,  Samuel's  habitual  residence,  though  from 
the  affix  it  must  have  been  near  it  (Ewald,  iii.  66). 
In  its  corrected  form  {Keri)  the  name  sio-nities 
"  habitations,"  and  from  au  early  date  has  been 
interpreted  to  mean  the  huts  or  dwellings  of  a  school 
or  college  of  prophets  over  which  Samuel  presided, 
as  Elisha  did  over  those  at  Gilgal  and  Jericho. 

This  interpretation  was  unknown  to  Josephus, 
who  gives  the  name  TaK^daQ,  to  the  translators  of 


■=  ^OpO'  masmer,^  only  used  in  plur. ;  tjAos ;  clavus. 

<•  From  "IDD.  "  stand  on  end,"  as  hair  (Ges.  p.  961). 

"  The  plural  of  PlU  The  original  form  {Cethib) 
would  be  the  plural  of  n^lJ  (Slmonis,  Onom.  30),  a  word 
which  does  not  appear  to  have  existed. 


'  Closely  allied  to  Arab.  ,L»„g|,^^.  mismdr,  -'a  nail." 


NAOMI 

the  LXX.  and  the  Peshito-Syriac  (Jono,th),  and  to 
Jerome.=  It  appears  first  in  the  Targum-Jonathan, 
where  for  Naioth  we  find  throughout  NJQ>1N  IT'S- 
"  the  house  of  instruction,"  the  term''  which  appears 
in  later  times  to  have  been  regularly  applieil  to  the 
schools  of  the  Rabbis  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tatin.  106) — 
and  where  ver.  20  is  rendered,  "  and  they  saw  the 
company  of  scribes  singing  praises,  and  Samuel  teach- 
ing, standing  over  them,"  thus  introducing  the  idea 
of  Samuel  as  a  teacher.  This  interpretation  of 
Naioth  is  now  generally  accepted  by  the  lexicogra- 
phers and  commentators.  [G.] 

NANE'A  (Narai'a:  Nanca).  The  last  act  of 
Autiochus  Epiphanes  (vol.  i.  p.  756)  was  his  at- 
tempt to  plunder  the  temple  of  Nanea  at  Elymais, 
which  had  been  enriched  by  the  gifts  and  trophies 
of  Alexander  tlie  Great  (1  Mace.  vi.  1-4;  2  Mace, 
i.  1:3-16).  The  Persian  goddess  Nanea,  called  also 
'Aj'aiTts  by  Strabo  (xv.  p.  733),  is  apparently  the 
Moon  goddess,  of  whom  the  Greek  Artemis  was  the 
nearest  representative  in  Polybius  (quoted  by  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  9,  §1).  Beyer  calls  her  the  "  Elymaeim 
Venus"  {ad  Joh.  Seldeni,  &c.,  addit.  p.  345),  and 
Winer  {Realm.')  apparently  identifies  Nanea  with 
Meni,  and  both  with  the  planet  Venus,  the  star  of 

luck,  called  by  the  Syrians  caJJ,  Nani,  and  in 

Zend  Nahid  or  Anahid. 

Elphinstone  in  1811  found  coins  of  the  Sassanians 
with  the  inscription  NANAIA,  and  on  the  reverse 
a  figure  with  nimbus  and  lotus-flower  (Movers, 
Phoen.  i.  626).  It  is  probable  that  Nanea  is  iden- 
tical with  the  deity  named  by  Strabo  (xi.  p.  532)  as 
the  numcn  patrium  of  the  Persians,  who  was  also 
honoured  by  the  Medes,  Armenians,  and  in  many 
districts  of  Asia  Minor.  Other  forms  of  the  name 
are  'Kvala,  given  by  Strabo,  AIvt)  by  Polybius, 
'PLvelris  by  Plutarch,  and  Tavd'Cs  by  Clemens 
Alexandrinus.  with  which  last  the  variations  of 
some  MSS.  of  Strabo  corresjiond.  In  consequence 
of  a  confusion  between  the  Greek  and  Eastern  mytho- 
logies, Nanea  has  been  identified  with  Artemis  and 
Aphrodite,  the  probability  being  that  she  corre- 
sponds with  the  Tauric  or  Ephesian  Artemis,  who 
was  invested  with  the  attributes  of  Aphrodite,  and 
represented  the  productive  power  of  nature.  In  this 
case  some  weight  may  be  allowed  to  the  (»njecture, 
that  "the  desire  of  women"  mentioned  in  Dan.  xi.  37 
is  the  same  as  the  goddess  Nanea. 

In  2  Mace.  ix.  1,2,  appears  to  be  a  different  ac- 
count of  the  same  sacrilegious  attempt  of  Antiochus ; 
but  the  scene  of  the  event  is  there  placed  at  I'erse- 
polis,  "  the  city  of  the  Persians,"  where  there  might 
well  have  been  a  temple  to  the  national  deity.  But 
Grimm  considers  it  far  more  probable  that  it  was  au 
Elymaean  temple  which  excited  the  cupidity  of  the 
king.  See  Geseiiius,  Jesaia,  iii.  337,  aud  Grimm's 
Coinmentar  in  the  Kurzgef.  Handb.     [W.  A.  W.] 

NA'OMI  (^DW  :    NwefjLuv  ;    Alex.  Noo/ijueir, 


^  "  Naioth  "  occurs  both  in  Hch.  and  A.  V.  in  Sam.  xix. 
18,  only.  The  LXX.  supply  61/ 'Pafta  in  that  verse.  The 
Vulgate  adhpres  to  the  Hebrew. 

<:  In  his  nutice  of  this  name  in  the  Onomnaticon 
("  Namoth  "),  Jerome  refers  to  his  observations  thereon 
in  the  "  iibri  Hebraicanim  quaestionum.'  As,  however, 
we  at  present  possess  those  books,  tliey  contain  no  re- 
feronce  to  Naioth. 

<•  It  occurs  asain  in  the  Targum  for  the  residaiice  of 
Huldali  the  prophetess  (2  K.  .xxii.  H). 


NAPHISH 

iJoefiixeiv,  NoO|Uei,  &c. :  Noemi),  the  wii'e  of  l->li- 
melech,  and  mother-in-law  of  Kiith  (Ruth  i.  2,  &c., 
ii.  1,  Sic,  iii.  1,  iv.  3,  &c.).  The  name  is  derived 
from  a  root  signifying  sweetness,  or  pleasantness, 
and  this  significance  contributes  to  the  point  of  the 
paronomasia  in  i.  20,  21,  though  the  passage  con- 
tains also  a  play  on  the  mere  sound  of  the  name: — 
"  Call  me  not  Naomi  (pleasant),  call  me  Mara 
(bitter)  ....  why  call  ye  me  Naomi  when  Jehovah 
hath  testified  (annh,  T]^]})  against  me  ?  "         [G.] 

NATHISH  (:^'''33,  "according  to  the  Syriac 
usage,  '  refreshment,'  "  Ges. :  Na(J)es,  ^acpiaawi : 
Naphis),  the  last  but  one  of  the  sons  of  Ishmael 
(Gen.  XXV.  15;  1  Chr.  i.  31).  The  tribe  descended 
fiom  Nodab  was  subdued  by  the  Reubenites,  the 
Gadites,  and  the  half  of  the  tribe  of  Wanasseh, 
whea  "  they  made  war  with  the  Hagarites,  with 
Jetur,  and  Nephish  {Kaficraioov,  LXX.),  and 
Nodab"  (1  Chr.  v.  19).  The  tribe  is  ifot  again 
found  in  the  sacred  records,  nor  is  it  mentioned  by 
later  writers.  It  has  not  been  identified  with  any 
Arabian  tribe;  but  identifications  with  Ishmaelite 
tribes  are  often  difficult.  The  difficulty  in  question 
ai'ises  from  iutermarringes  with  Keturahites  and 
Joktanites,  from  the  influence  of  Jlohamm.adan  his- 
tory, and  from  our  ignorance  respecting  many  of 
the  tribes,  and  the  towns  and  districts,  of  Arabia. 
The  influence  of  Mohammadan  history  is  here  men- 
tioned as  the  strongest  instance  of  a  class  of  in- 
fluences very  common  among  the  Arabs,  by  which 
prominence  has  been  given  to  certain  tribes  remark-^ 
able  in  the  rise  of  the  religion,  or  in  the  history  of 
the  country,  its  language,  &c.  But  intermarriages 
exercise  even  a  stronger  influence  on  the  names  ot 
tribes,  causing  in  countless  instances  the  adoption 
of  an  older  name  to  the  exclusion  of  the  more 
recent,  without  altering  the  pedigree.  Thus  Mo- 
hammad claimed  descent  from  the  tribe  of  Mudad, 
although  he  gloried  in  being  an  Ishmaelite :  Mudad 
took  its  name  from  the  father  of  Ishmael's  wife, 
and  the  name  of  Ishmael  himself  is  merged  in  that 
of  the  older  race.     [Ishmael.] 

If  the  Hagarenes  went  southwards,  into  the  pro- 
vince of  Hejer,  after  their  defeat,  Naphish  may  have 
gone  with  them,  and  traces  of  his  name  should  in 
this  <;aso  be  looked  for  in  that  obscure  province  of 
Arabia.  He  is  described  in  Chronicles,  with  the 
confederate  tribes,  as  pastoral,  and  numerous  in  men 
and  cattle.     [Nddab.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

NAPH'ISI    (ytacpiia-d  ;    Alex.   Nac/xcn  :    Na- 
.   sissiiu},  1  Esdr.  V.  31.     [Nepiiusim.] 

NArH'TALT  C^ns:  :  Ne4)0aA€iV,  and  so  also 

.losephus:  Nephthnli).  The  fifth  son  of  .lacob ; 
the  second  child  borne  to  him  by  Biliiah,  I\;vchel's 
slave.  His  birth  and  the  bestowal  of  his  name  are 
recorded  in  Gen.  xxx.  8  : — "  and  Rachel  said  '  wrest- 
lings (or  contortions — naphtulc)  of  God*  have  1 


NAPHTAI.I 


463 


»  That  is,  according  to  the  Hebrew  idiom,  "  immense 
wrestlings."  a/iir)x<ifr)TO?  oloc,  "  as  if  irresistible,"  is  the 
explanation  of  the  name  given  by  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  19, 

b  An  attempt  has  been  made  by  Redslob,  in  his  singular 
treatise  Die  Altlest.  Xamni,  &c.  (Hamb.  l,s-)6,  pp.  hh,  9), 
to  show  that  "  Naphtali  "  is  nothing  but  a  synonynie  for 
"Galilee,"  and  that  aK':iin  for  "Cabul,"  all  three  luing 
opprolirious  appellations.  Hut  if  there  wore  no  other 
diflicnlticsin  the  way,  this  has  the  (lisa(lvant,ige  of  being 
in  direct  contradiction  (o  the  high  csiiinalion  in  which  tlic 
tribe  was  hold  at  llio  ilate  uf  the  composition  of  tlie  Songs 
of  Deborah  and  Jacob. 


wrestled  {niphtalti)  with  my  sister  anu  have  pre- 
v.ailed.'     .\nd  she  called  his  name  ''Naphtali." 

By  his  birth  Naphtali  was  thus  .allied  to  Dau 
(Gen.  xx.xv.  25)  ;  and  he  also  belonged  to  the  same 
portion  of  the  family  as  Ephraiin  and  Benjamin,  the 
sons  of  Rachel ;  but,  as  we  shall  see,  these  connexions 
ai)pear  to  have  been  only  imperfectly  maintained  by 
the  tribe  descended  from  him. 

At  the  migration  to  'Egypt  four  sous  are  attri- 
buted to  Naphtali  (Gen.  xlvi.  24;  Ex.  i.  4;  1  Chr. 
vii.  13).  Of  the  individual  patriarch  not  a  single 
trait  is  given  in  the  Bible  ;  but  in  the  .Jewish  tra- 
ditions he  is  celebrated  for  his  powers  as  a  swift 
runner,  and  he  is  named  as  one  of  the  five  who  were 
chosen  by  Joseph  to  represent  the  family  before  Pha- 
raoh (Targ.  Pseudojon.  on  Gen.  1.  13  and  xlvii.  2)." 
When  the  census  was  taken  at  Mount  Sinai  the 
tribe  numbered  no  less  than  53,400  fighting  men 
(Num.  i.  43,  ii.  30).  It  thus  held  exactly  the 
middle  position  in  the  nation,  having  five  above  it 
in  numbers,  and  six  below.  But  when  the  borders 
of  the  Promised  Land  were  reached,  its  numbers 
were  reduced  to  45,400,  with  four  only  below  it 
in  the  scale,  one  of  the  four  being  Ephraim  (Num. 
xxvi.  48-50  ;  oomp.  37).  The  leader  of  the  tribe 
at  .Sinai  wa:5  Ahira  ben-Enan  (Num.  ii.  29) ;  and  at 
Shiloh,  Pedahel  ben-Ammihud  (xxxiv.  28).  Amongst 
the  spies  its  representative  was  Nahbi  ben-Vophsi 
(xiii.  14). 

During  the  march  through  the  wilderness  Naph- 
tali occupied  a  position  on  the  north  of  the  Sacred 
Tent  with  Dan,  and  also  with  another  tribe,  which 
though  not  originally  so  intimately  connected  be- 
came afterwards  his  immediate  neighbour — Asher 
(Num.  ii.  25-31).  The  three  formed  the  "Camp 
of  Dan,"  and  their  common  standard,  according  to 
the  Jewish  traditions,  was  a  serpent  or  basilisk, 
with  the  motto,  "  Return,  0  Jehovah,  unto  the 
many  thousands  of  Israel  !"  {Tanj.  Pseudojon.  on 
Num.  ii.  25). 

In  the  apportionment  of  the  land,  the  lot  of 
Naphtali  was  not  drawn  till  the  last  but  one.  The 
two  portions  then  remaining  unappropriated  were 
the  noble  but  remote  district  which  lay  between  the 
strip  of  coast-land  already  allotted  to  Asher  and  the 
upper  part  of  the  Jordan,  and  the  little  canton  or 
corner,  moie  central,  but  in  every  other  respect  far 
inferior,  which  projected  from  the  territory  of  J  udah 
into  the  country  of  the  Philistines,  and  formed  the 
"  marches "  between  those  two  never-tiring  corn- 
batants.  Naphtali  chose  the  former  of  these,  leaving 
the  latter  to  the  Danites,  a  large  number  of  whom 
shortly  followed  their  relatives  to  their  home  in  the 
more  remote  but  more  undisturbed  north,  and  thus 
testified  to  the  wisdom  of  Naphtali's  selection. 

The  territory  thus  appropriated  was  enclosed  on 
three  sides  by  those  of  other  tribes.  On  the  west, 
as  already  remarked,  lay  Asher;  on  the  south  Zebu- 
lun,  and  on  the  east  the  trans-jordanic  JIanasseh. 

■=  In  the  '  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs.' 
Naphtali  dies  in  his  132nd  year,  in  the  7th  month,  on 
the  4th  day  of  tlie  mouth.  He  e.xplains  his  n.anie  as  given 
"  because  Rachel  had  dealt  doceittully"  (eV  n-aroupyiV 
eTToiVO-  He  also  gives  the  gcnoalcgy  of  his  mother  :— 
Balla  (Uilhah),  the  daughter  of  Routhaios,  the  brother  of 
Deborah,  Rebekah's  nurse,  was  born  the  sjuno  day  wiUi 
Kivchel.  Routhaios  was  a  Chaldaoan  of  the  kindred  of 
Abraham,  who,  being  talvon  captive,  was  bought  as  a  slave 
l)y  Latvin.  Laban  gave  him  his  maid  .\ina  or  ICva  to  wife, 
by  whom  he  had  Zolipha  (Zilpali) -so  called  Irom  the 
place  in  which  he  liad  been  o:ii>livo  -and  Balla  ^fabricius, 
Cod.  I'seudepigr.  i .  T.  6r.9,  *<•.). 


464 


NAPHTALl 


The  north  teiininated  with  the  ravine  of  the  Lit&nrj 
or  Leontes,  and  opened  into  the  splendid  valley  which 
separates  the  two  ranges  of  Lebanon.  According  to 
.Tosephus  (^Ant.  v.  1,  §22)  the  eastern  side  of  the 
tribe  reached  as  far  as  Damascus;  but  of  this — 
though  not  impossible  in  the  early  times  of  the  nation 
and  before  the  rise  of  the  Syrian  monai-chy — there 
is  no  indication  in  the  Bible.  The  south  boundary 
was  probably  \evy  much  th€  same  as  that  which  at 
a  later  time  separated  Upper  from  Lower  Galilee, 
and  which  ran  from  or  about  the  town  of  Ahka  to 
the  upper  part  of  the  Sea  of  Gennesaret.  Thus 
Naphtali  was  cut  off  from  the  great  plain  of 
Esdraelon — the  favourite  resort  of  the  hordes  of 
plunderers  from  beyond  the  Jordan,  and  the  great 
battlefield  of  the  country — by  the  mass  of  the  moun- 
tains of  Nazareth  ;  while  on  the  east  it  had  a  com- 
munication with  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  tlie  rich  district 
of  the  Ard  el-Hideh  and  the  Merj  Aijun,  and  all 
the  splendidly  watered  country  about  Banuis  and 
Hasheya,  the  springs  of  Jordan.  "  0  Naphtali," 
thus  accurately  does  the  Song  attributed  to  the 
dying  lawgiver  express  itself  with  regard  to  this 
part  of  the  teiTitory  of  the  tribe — "  0  Naphthali, 
satisfied  with  favoui'  and  full  of  Jehovah's  lilessing, 
the  sea**  and  the  south  possess  thou  !"  (Deut.  xxxiii. 
23).  But  the  capabilities  of  these  plains  and  of  the 
access  to  the  Lake,  which  at  a  later  period  raised 
Galilee  and  Gennesareth  to  so  high  a  pitch  of 
crowded  and  busy  prosperity,  were  not  destined  to 
be  developed  while  they  were  in  the  keeping  of  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali.  It  was  the  mountainous  country 
("  Mount  Naphtali,"  Josh.  xx.  7)  which  formed  the 
chief  pait  of  their  inheritance,  that  impressed  or 
brought  out  the  qualities  for  which  Naphtali  was 
remarkable  at  the  one  remarkable  period  of  its  his- 
tory. This  district,  the  modern  Belad-Besharah,  or 
"  land  of  good  tidings,"  comprises  some  of  the  most 
beautiful  scenery,  and  some  of  the  most  fertile  soil 
in  Palestine  (Porter,  363),  forests  surpassing  those 
of  the  renowned  Carmel  itself  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  293) ; 
as  rich  in  noble  and  ever-varying  prospects  as  any 
country  in  the  world  (ii.  407).  As  it  is  thus  de- 
sciibed  .by  one  of  the  few  travellers  who  have  crossed 
its  mountains  and  descended  into  its  ravines,  so  it 
was  at  the  time  of  the  Christian  era: — "The  soil," 
says  .Jcsephus  {B.  J.  iii.  3,  §2),  "  universally  rich 
and  productive  ;  full  of  plantations  of  trees  of  all 
sorts ;  so  fertile  as  to  invite  the  most  slothful  to  cul- 
tivate it."  But,  excei)t  in  the  pemiauence  of  these 
natural  advantages,  the  contrast  between  the  present 
and  that  earlier  time  is  complete  ;  for  whereas,  in 
the  time  of  Josephus,  Galilee  was  one  of  the  most 
popidous  and  busy  districts  of  Syria,  now  the  popu- 
lation is  in  an  mverse  proportion  to  the  luxuriance 
of  the  natural  vegetation  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  170). 

Three  of  the  towns  of  Naphtali  were  allotted  to 
the  Gershonite  Levites — Kedesh  (already  called 
Kedesh-in-Galilee),  Hammoth-dor,  and  Kartan.  Of 
these,  the  first  was  a  city  of  refuge  (Josh.  xx.  7, 
xxi.  32).  Naphtali  was  one  of  Solomon's  commis- 
sariat districts,  under  the  charge  of  his  son-in-law 
Ahimaaz  ;  who  with  his  wite  Basmath  resided  in 
his  presidency,  and  doubtless  enlivened  that  remote 
and  rural  locality  by  a  miniature  of  the  court  of  his 
august  father-in-law,  held  at  Safed  or  Kedesh,  or 
wherever  his  residence  may  have  been  (1  K.  iv.  15). 
Here  he  doubtless  watched  the  progress  of  the  un- 


d  Tarn,  rendered  "west"  in  the  A.  V.,  but  obviously 
the  "Sea"  of  Galilee. 
•^  So  Ewald,  wegwetfend  (Dichtet;  i.  l.'in). 


NAPHTALI 

promising  new  disti-ict  presented  to  Solomon  b}- 
Hiram — the  twenty  cities  of  Cabul,  which  seem  to 
have  been  within  the  teriitory  of  Naphtali ,  perhaps 
the  nucleus  of  the  Galilee  of  later  date.  The  i-uler 
of  the  tribe  (l^i^) — a  different  dignity  altogether 

from  that  of  Ahimaaz — was,  in  the  reign  of  David, 
Jerimoth  ben-Azriel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  19). 

Naphtali  had  its  share  in  those  incursions  and 
molestations  by  the  surrounding  heathen,  which 
were  the  common  lot  of  all  the  tribes  (Judah  per- 
haps alone  excepted)  during  the  first  centuries  after 
the  conquest.  One  of  these,  apparently  the  seveiest 
struggle  of  all,  fell  with  special  violence  on  the  north 
of  the  country,  and  the  leader  by  whom  the  invasion 
was  repelled — Barak  of  Kedesh-Naphtali — was  the 
one  great  hero  whom  Naphtali  is  i-ecorded  to  have  pro- 
duced. How  gigantic  were  the  efibi  ts  by  which  these 
heroic  mountaineers  saved  their  ilarling  highlands 
from  the  swarms  of  Canaanites  who  followed  Jabin 
and  Sisera,  and  how  gi-and  the  position  which  they 
achieved  in  the  eyes  of  the  whole  nation,  may  be 
gathered  from  the  nai  rative  of  the  war  in  Judg.  iv., 
and  still  more  from  the  expressions  of  the  triumphal 
song  in  which  Deborah,  the  prophetess  of  Ephraim, 
immortalised  the  victors,  and  branded  their  reluctant 
countrymen  with  everlasting  in&my.  Gilead  and 
lieuben  lingered  beyond  the  Jordan  amongst  their 
flocks  :  Dan  and  Asher  preferred  the  luxurious  calm 
of  their  hot  lowlands  to  the  fiee  air  ,and  fierce 
strife  of  the  mountains  ;  Issachar  with  characteiistic 
sluggishness  seems  to  have  moved  slowly  if  he 
moved  at  all ;  but  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  on  the 
summits  of  their  native  kighlands  devoted  them- 
selves to  death,  even  to  an  extravagant  pitch  of 
heroism  and  self-devotion  (Judg.  v.  18; : — 
"  Zebulun  are  a  people  that  threw  eaway  their  lives  even 
unto  death — 
And  Naphlali,  on  the  high  places  of  the  field." 

The  mention  of  Naphtali  contained  in  the  Song 
attributed  to  Jacob — whether  it  is  predictive,  or  as 
some  wiiters  believe,  retrospective — must  have  re- 
ference to  this  event:  unless  indeed,  which  is  hardly 
to  be  believed,  some  other  heroic  occasion  is  referred 
to,  which  has  passed  unrecorded  in  the  history.  The 
translation  of  this  difficult  passage  given  by  Ewald 
{Geschichte,  ii.  380),  has  the  merit  of  being  more 
intelligible  than  the  ordinary  version,  and  also  more 
in  harmony  with  the  expressions  of  Deborah's 
Song  : 

"  Naphtali  is  a  towering  Terebinth ; 
He  hath  a  goodly  crest." 
The  allusion,  at  once  to  the  situation  of  the  tribe  at 
the  very  apex  of  the  country,  to  the  heroes  who 
towered  at  the  head  of  the  tribe,  and  to  the  lofty 
mountains  on  whose  summits  their  castles,  then  as 
now,  were  perched — is  veiy  happy,  and  entirely  in 
the  vein  of  these  ancient  poems. 

After  this  burst  of  heroism,  the  Naphtalites 
appear  to  have  resigned  themselves  to  the  inter- 
course with  the  f  heathen,  which  was  the  bane  of  the 
northern  tribes  in  general,  and  of  which  there  are 
already  indications  in  Judg.  i.  33.  The  location  by 
Jeroboam  within  their  territory  of  the  gi-eat  sanc- 
tuary for  the  northern  i)art  of  his  kingdom  must 
have  given  an  impulse  to  their  nationality,  and  for  a 
time  have  revived  the  connexion  with  their  brethren 
nearer  the  centre.    But  there  was  one  circumstance 


f  This  is  implied  in  the  name  of  Galilee,  which,  at  an 
early  date,  is  styled  D'liin  7''7ii, gcUl  hag-goyim,Ga\ilee 
of  the  Gentiles. 


NAPHTALI,  MOUNT 


NAPHTUHIM 


465 


fatal  to  tlie  jirosiiprity  of  tlie  tribo,  nanifly,  that 
it  lay  in  the  very  path  of  the  northein  invaders. 
Syrian  and  Assyrian,  Benhadad  and  Tiglath-pileser, 
each  had  their  first  taste  of  the  plunder  of  the 
Israelites  from  tlie  goodly  land  of  Naphtali.  At 
length  in  the  reign  of  Fekali  king  of  Israel  (cir. 
B.C.  730),  Tiglath-pileser  overran  the  whole  of  the 
north  of  Israel,  swept  off  the  population,  and  bore 
them  away  to  Assyria. 

But  though  the  history  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali 
ends  here,  and  the  name  is  uot  again  mentioned 
except  in  the  well-known  citation  of  St.  Matthew 
(iv.  15),  and  the  mystical  references  of  Ezekiel 
(xlviii.  3,  4,  34)  and  of  the  writer  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse (Rev.  vii.  6),  yet  under  the  title  of  Galilkk 
— apparently  an  ancient  name,  though  not  brought 
prominently  forward  till  the  Christian  era— the  dis- 
trict which  they  had  formerly  occupied  was  destined 
to  become  in  eveiy  way  fiir  more  iaiportant  than  it 
had  ever  before  been.  For  it  was  the  cradle  of  the 
Christian  faith,  the  native  place  of  most  of  the 
Apostles,  and  the  "  home"  of  our  Lord.  [Galilek, 
vol,  i.  p.  G45';;  CAPiiRNAUM,  27:!rt.] 

It  also  became  populous  and  prosperous  to  a 
degree  far  beyond  anything  of  which  we  have  any 
indications  in  the  Old  Testament ;  but  this,  as  well 
a-s  the  account  of  its  sufferings  and  heroic  resist- 
ance during  the  campaign  of  Titus  and  Vespasian 
prior  to  the  destiuctiou  of  Jerusalem,  must  be  given 
elsewhere.     [Galilee  ;  Palestine.]  [G.] 

NAPH'TALI,  MOUNT  C^riD^  "IH  :  iv  t^ 
opei  rtf  'Nf(p9a\el:  Mons  Nephtali).  The  moun- 
tainous district  which  foiTued-  the  main  part  of  the 
inheritance  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xx.  7),  answering  to 
"Mount  Ephraim "  in  the  centre  and  "Mount 
Jiidah  "  in  the  south  of  Palestine. 

NAPH'THAR  {v^fpdap  :  Nephthar).  The 
name  given  by  Nehemiah  to  the  substance*  which 
after  the  Ileturn  from  Babylon  was  discovei'ed  in 
the  dry  pit  in  which  at  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  the  sacred  Fire  of  the  altar  had  been  hidden 
(2  Mace.  i.  36,  comp.  19).  The  legend  is  a  curious 
one ;  and  it  is  plain,  from  the  description  of  the 
substance — "  thick  water,"  '•  which,  being  poured 
over  the  sacrifice  and  the  wood,  was  kindled  by  the 
great  heat  of  tlie  sun,  and  then  burnt  with  an 
exceedingly  bright  and  clear  flame  (ver.  32) — that 
it  was  either  the  same  as  or  closely  allied  to  the 
naphtha  of  modern  commerce  {Petroleum).  The 
narrative  is  not  at  all  extravagant  in  its  terms, 
and  is  very  probably  grounde<.l  on  some  actual  '^  oc- 
currence. '1  he  only  difficulty  it  presents  is  the 
explanation  given  of  the  name:  "  Maphthar,  which 
is,  being  interpreted,  cleansing"  {KaQapifffji.6s),  and 
which  has  hitherto  puzzled  all  the  interpreters.  It 
is  perhaps  due  to  some  mistake  in  copying.  A  list 
of  conjectures  will  be  found  in  (irimin  ( h'wzfjef. 
Haiidb.  ad  loc),  and  another  in  Reland's  Diss,  de 
vet.  Linj.  .Pers.  Ixviii. 

The  place  from  which  this  combustible  water  was 
taken  was  enclosed  by  the  "  king  of  Persia  "  (Arta- 
xer.xes  Longimanus),  and  converted  into  a  sanctuary 
(such  seems  the  force  of  Uphv  troitlu,  ver.  34.V  In 
modern  times  it  lias  been  ideiititied  with  the  large 
well  called  by  the  Arabs  Bir-ei/ub,  situatml  beneath 


•lenisalem,  at  the  confluence  of  the  valleys  of  Kidron 
and  Hinnom  with  the  Wadi/  cn-Nai-  (or  "  valley 
of  the  fire"),  and  from  which  the  main  watei'  supply 
of  the  city  is  obtained. 

This  well,  the  Arab  name  of  which  may  be  the 
well  of  Joab  or  of  Job,  and  which  is  usually  iden- 
tified with  En-rogel,  is  also  known  to  the  Frank 
Christians  as  the  "  Well  of  Nehemiah."  According 
to  Dr.  Robinson  ( Bth.  lies.  i.  331,  2  note),  the  first 
trace  of  this  name  is  in  Quaresmius  [Elucidatio,  &c., 
ii.  270-4),  who  wrote  in  the  early  part  of  the  17tli 
cent.  (1616-25).  He  calls  it  "the  well  of  Nehe- 
miah and  of  fire,"  in  words  which  seem  to  imply 
that  such  was  at  that  time  its  recognized  name : 
"  Celebris  ille  et  nominatus  putens,  Nehemiae  et 
ignis  appellatus."  The  valley  which  runs  from  it 
to  the  Dead  Sea  is  called  Wddy  en- Nar,  ^^  YaWcy 
of  the  Fire  ;"  but  no  stress  can  be  laid  on  this,  as 
the  name  may  have  originated  the  tradition.  A 
description  of  the  Bir-eyub  is  given  by  Williams 
{Holi/  City,  ii.  489-95),  Barclay  (6'%,  &c.,  513-16 1, 
and  by  the  careful  Tobler  (  Umyebunjen,  &c.,  50). 
At  present  it  would  be  an  equally  unsuitable  spot 
either  to  store  fire  or  to  seek  for  naphtha.  One  thing 
is  plain,  that  it  cannot  have  been  En-rogel  (which 
was  a  living  spring  of  water  from  the  days  of  Joshua 
downwards),  and  a  naphtha  well  also.  [(!.] 

NAPH'TUHIM(D''nnQ::  ^((pdaAdfj.:  h'eph- 
tuim,  NephthHiin\  a  Mizraito  nation  or  tribe,  men- 
tioned only  in  the  account  of  the  dcs(;endants  of' 
Noah  (Gen.  x.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.  1 1).  If  we  may  judge 
from  their  position  in  the  list  of  the  Mizraites,  ac- 
cording to  the  Masoretic  text  (in  the  LXX.  in  Gen. 
X.  they  follow  the  Ludim  and  precede  the  Anamim, 
'Eve/xeTieifi),  immediately  after  the  Lehabim,  who 
doubtless  dwelt  to  the  west  of  Egypt,  and  he.i'oro 
the  Pathrusim,  who  inhabited  that  country,  the 
Naphtuhim  were  probably  settled  at  first,  or  at  the 
time  when  Gen.  x.  was  written,  either  in  Egypt 
or  immediately  to  the  west  of  it.  In  Coptic 
the  city  Marea  and  the  neighbouring  tenitory, 
which  probably  corresponded  to  the  oldei-  Mareotic 

nome,  is  called  HIC^^-IA-T"  or  ni4^i.I<^2>., 
a  name  composed  of  the  word  c{)^I<i.'T"  or 
C^^I^2s.,  of  unknown  meaning,  with  the  plural 
definite  article  ftl  prefixed.  In  hieroglyphics  men- 
tion is  made  of  a  nation  or  confetleracy  of  tribes  con- 
quered by  the  Egyptians  called  "the  Nine  Bows,"' 
a  name  which  ChampoUion  read  Naphit,  or,  as  we 
should  write  it,  NA-PETU,  "the  bows,"  though 
he  called  them  "  the  Nine  Bows."  ^  It  seems, 
however,  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  we  should 
read  (ix)  PETU  "  the  Nine  Bows  "  literally.  It  is 
also  doubtful  whether  the  Coptic  name  of  Marea 
contains  the  word  "  bow,"  which  is  only  finund  in  the 
forms  niTe  (S.  masc.)  and  C^I'f"  (M.  fem.  "a 
rainbow");  but  it  is  possible  that  the  second  part 
of  the  former  may  have  been  originally  the  same  as 
the  latter.  It  i.s  noteworthy  that  there  should  bo 
two  geographical  names  connected  with  the  bow  in 
hieroglyphics,  the  one  of  a  country,  MERU-1'ET, 
'•  the  island  of  the  bow,"  probably  JIEROE,  and  the 
other  of  a  nation  or  confederacy,  "  the  Nine  Bows," 


"  Not  to  the  place,  as  In  the  Vulgate,— Aunc  locum. 

•>  Tbe  word  "  water  "  is  liero  usi^d  merely  for  "  liquid," 
as  in  aqita  vitae.  Native  naplillm  U  somctiir.es  obtained 
without  colour,  and  in  appearance  not  unlike  water. 

<•■  Grimm  (p.  50)  notiuesa  passage  in  the  "  Adaniboolc" 
of  tbe  Ktliiopian  Christians,  in  whuli  Kzra  is  said  to 
VOL.  II. 


have  discovered  in  the  vaults  of  the  Temple  a  censer 
full  of  tbe  Sacred  Fire  whldi  had  formerly  burnt  in  the 
Sanctuary. 

"  Dr.  Brugsch  reads  tins  n:une  "  tlio  Niue  IVoples" 
(^iHengraphische  Inschriftim,  ii.  p.  20). 

!■  A  bow  In  hieroglyphics  is  I'ET,  PKKT,  or  PKTEE. 

2  H 


46(5 


NARCISSUS 


and  tliat  in  the  list  of  the  Hnmife.s  theie  shoiih!  be 
two  similar  names,  Phut  and  Naplituhim,  besides 
Gush,  probably  of  like  sense.  No  important  his- 
torical notice  of  the  Nine  Bows  has  been  found  in 
the  Egyptian  inscriptions :  tliey  ai'e  only  spoken  of 
in  a  general  manner  when  the  kings  are  said,  in 
laudatory  inscriptions,  to  have  subdued  great  na- 
tions, such  as  the  Negroes,  or  extensive  countries, 
such  as  KEliSH,  or  Cush.  Perhaps  therefore  this 
name  is  that  of  a  confederacy  or  of  a  widely-spread 
nation,  of  w  hich  the  members  or  tribes  are  spoken 
of  separately  in  records  of  a  more  particular  cha- 
racter, tieating  of  special  conquests  of  the  Pharaohs 
or  enumerating  their  tributaries.  [U.  S.  P.] 

NARCIS'SUS  (NapKio-cros).  A  dweller  at 
Rome  (liom.  ,\vi.  11),  some  members  of  whose 
household  were  known  as  Christians  to  St.  Paul. 
Some  persons  have  assumed  the  identity  of  this 
Narcissus  with  the  secretary  of  the  emperor  Clau- 
dius (Suetonius,  Claudius,  §28).  But  that  wealthy 
and  powerful  freedman  satisfied  the  revenge  of 
Agrippina  by  a  miserable  death  in  prison  (Tac. 
Ann.  xiii.  1),  in  the  first  year  of  Nero's  reign  (a.d. 
54-55),  about  three  years  before  this  Epistle  was 
written.  Dio  Cassius,  Ixiv.  3,  mentions  another 
Narcissus,  who  probably  was  living  in  Kome  at  that 
time;  he  attained  to  some  notoriety  as  an  associate 
of  Nero,  and  was  put  to  an  ignominious  death  with 
Helius,  Patrobius,  Loeusta,  and  othei's,  on  the  ac- 
cession of  (ialba,  A.D.  G8.  "His  name,  however 
(see  Reimar's  note,  in  loco),  was  at  that  time  too 
common  in  Rome  to  give  any  probability  to  the 
guess  that  he  was  the  Narcissus  mentioned  by  St. 
Paul.  A  late  and  improbable  tradition  (Pseudo- 
Hippolytus)  makes  Narcissus  one  of  the  seventy  dis- 
ciples, and  bishop  of  Athens.  [W.  T.  B.j 

NARD.     [Spikenard.] 

'NA^'BAS  {Naa0ds:  Nabath).  The  nephew  of 
Tobit  who  came  with  Achiacharus  to  the  wedding 
of  Tobias  (Tob.  xi.  18).  Grotius  considers  him  the 
same  witli  Achiacharus  the  son  of  Anael,  but  ac- 
cording to  the  Vulgate  they  were  brothers.  The 
margin  of  the  A.  V.  gives  "  Junius"  ;is  the  equi- 
valent of  Nasbas. 

NA'SITH  (Nao-r ;  Alex.  Nao-i'fl  :  Nasit)  = 
Neziaii  (1  Esdr.  v.  32  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  54-). 

NA'SOR,  THE  PLAIN  OF  {rh  TreSiov 
Nactip :  campus  Asor),  the  scene  of  an  action 
between  Jonathan  the  Jiaccabee  and  the  forces  of 
Demetrius  (1  Mace.  xi.  67,  comp.  63).  It  was 
near  Cades  (Kadesh-Naphfali)  on  the  one  side,  and 
the  water  of  Gennesar  (Lake  of  Gennesareth)  on  the 
other,  and  therefore  may  be  safely  identified  with 
the  Razor  which  became  so  renowned  in  the  history 
of  the  conquest  for  the  victories  of  Joshua  and  Barak 
(vol.  i.  765«).  In  fact  the  name  is  the  same,  except 
tliat  through  the  error  of  a  transcriber  the  N  from 
the  preceding  Greek  word  has  become  attached  to  it. 
Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  5,  §7 )  gives  it  corj-ectly,  'An-dp. 
[Comp.  Naakath,  p.  Ab'.inote.']  [G.] 

NATHAN  (jnj:  'Ha.Bav.  Aa^Acrn),  an  eminent 
Hebrew  jn'ojiliet  in  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solo- 
mon. If  tiie  expiession  "  fiist  and  last,"  in  2  Chr. 
ix.  29,  is  to  be  taken  literally,  he  must  have  lived 
late  into  the  life  of  Solomon,  in  which  case  lie  must 
have  been  considerably  younger  tlian  David.  At 
any  rate  he  seems  to  have  been  the  younger  of  the 
two  prophets  who  accompanied  him,  and  may  be 
considered  as  the  latest  diiect  representative  of  tlie 
schools  of  Samuel. 


NATHAN 

A  Jewish  tradition  mentioned  by  Jerome  {Qn. 
Ihh.  on  1  Sam.  xvii.  12)  identifies  him  with  the 
eiglith  son  of  Jesse.  [David,  vol.  i.  p.  402a.]  But 
of  this  (heie  is  no  proof. 

He  first  appears  in  the  consultation  with  David 
about  the  building  of  the  Temple.  He  begins  by 
advising  it,  and  then,  after  a  vision,  withdraws  liis 
advice,  on  the  ground  that  the  time  was  not  yet 
come  (2  Sam.  vii.  2,  3,  17).  He  next  comes  forward 
as  the  reprover  of  David  for  the  sin  with  BathsheLa  ; 
and  his  famous  apologue  on  the  rich  man  and  the 
ewe  lamb,  which  is  the  only  direct  example  of  his 
prophetic  power,  shows  it  to  have  been  of  a  very 
high  order  (2  Sam.  xii.  1-12). 

There  is  an  indistinct  trace  of  his  appearing  also 
at  the  time  of  the  plague  which  fell  on  Jerusalem 
in  accordance  with  the  warning  of  Gad.  "  An 
angel,"  says  Eupolemus  (Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  30), 
"  pointed  him  to  the  place  where  the  Temple  was 
to  be,  but  forbade  him  to  build  it,  as  being  stained 
with  blood,  and  having  fought  many  wars.  His 
name  was  Dianathan."  This  was  probably  occa- 
sioned by  some  confusion  of  the  Greek  version,  Sia 
tiddav,  with  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Chr.  xxii.  8, 
where  the  bloodstained  life  of  David  is  given  as  a 
reason  against  the  building,  but  where  Nathan  is 
not  named. 

On  the  birth  of  Solomon  he  was  either  specially 
charged  with  giving  him  his  name,  Jedidiah,  or 
else  with  his  education,  according  as  the  words  of 
2  Sam.  xii.  25,  "  He  sent  (or  '  sent  him ')  by  (or 
'  into  ')  the  hand  of  Nathan,"  are  understood.  At 
any  rate,  in  the  last  years  of  David,  it  is  Nathan 
who,  by  taking  the  side  of  Solomon,  turned  the  scale 
in  his  favour.  He  advised  Bathsheba ;  he  himself 
ventured  to  enter  the  royal  presence  with  a  i-emon- 
sti-auce  against  the  king's  apathy ;  and  at  David's 
request  he  assisted  in  the  inaugui'ation  of  Solomon 
(1  K.  i.  8,  10,  11,  22,  23,  24,  32,  34,  38,  45). 

This  is  the  last  time  that  we  hear  diiectly  of  his 
intervention  in  the  history.  His  son  Zabud  occu- 
pied the  post  of  "  King's  Friend,"  perhaps  suc- 
ceeding Nathan  (2  Sam.  xv.  37  ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  33). 
His  influence  may  be  traced  in  the  perpetuation  of  his 
manner  of  prophecy  in  the  writings  ascribed  to  Solo- 
mon (compare  Ecci.  ix.  14-16  with  2  Sam.  xii.  1-4). 

He  left  two  works  behind  him — a  Life  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  and  a  Life  of  Solomon  (2  Chr. 
ix.  29).  The  last  of  these  may  have  been  incom- 
plete, as  we  cannot  be  sure  that  he  outlived  Solo- 
mon. But  the  biography  of  David  by  Nathan  is, 
of  all  the  losses  which  antiquity,  sacred  or  profane, 
has  sustained,  the  most  deplorable. 

The  consideration  in  which  he  was  held  at  tjie 
time  is  indicated  by  the  solemn  announcement  of 
his  approach — "  Behold  Nathan  the  piophet"  (1  K. 
i.  23).  The  peculiar  affix  of  "  the  prophet,"  as  distin- 
guished from  "the  seer,"  given  to  Samuel  and  Gad 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  shows  his  identification  with  the 
later  view  of  the  prophetic  office  indicated  in  1  Sam. 
ix.  9.  His  grave  is  shown  at  Halhul  near  Hebron 
(see  Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  216  note).  [A.  P.  S.] 

2.  A  son  of  David  ;  one  of  the  four  who  were 
borne  to  him  by  Bathsheba  (1  Chr.  iii.  5;  comp. 
xiv.  4,  and  2  Sam.  v.  14).  He  was  thus  own  bio- 
ther  to  Solomon — if  the  order  of  the  lists  is  to  be 
accepted,  elder  brother ;  though  this  is  at  variance 
with  the  natural  inference  from  tlie  narrative  ot 
2  Sam.  xii.  24,  which  implies  that  Solomon  was 
Bathsheba's  second  son.  The  name  was  not  un- 
known in  David's  family  ;  Nethan-eel  was  one  of 
his  brothers,  and  Jo-nathan,  his  nephew. 


NATHAN AEL 

Nathan  appears  to  liave  taken  no  part  in  the 
events  of  his  lather's  or  his  brother's  reigns.  He  is 
interesting  to  us  fiom  his  appearing  as  one  of  the 
forefathers  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  St.  Luke 
(iii.  31) — "the  private  genealogy  of  Joseph,  exhi- 
biting his  line  as  David's  descendant,  and  thus  show- 
ing how  he  wiis  heir  to  Solomon's  crown"  (vol.  i. 
666a).  The  hypothesis  of  Lord  Arthur  Hervey  is 
that  on  the  failure  of  Solomon's  line  in  Jehoiachin 
or  Jeconiah,  who  died  without  issue,  Salathiel  of 
Nathan's  house  became  heir  to  David's  throne,  and 
then  was  entered  in  the  genealogical  tables  as  "  son 
of  Jeconiah"  (i.  6666).  That  the  family  of  Nathan 
was,  as  this  hypothesis  requires,  well  known  at  the 
time  of  Jehoiachin's  death,  is  implied  by  its  men- 
tion in  Zech.  xii.  12,  a  prophecy  the  date  of  which 
is  placed  by  Ewald  (Prophetcn,  i.  391)  as  fifteen 
years  after  Habbakuk,  and  shortly  before  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar — that  is, 
a  few  years  only  after  Jehoiachin's  death. 

3.  Son,  or  brother,  of  one  of  the  members  of 
David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  oQ  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  38). 
In  the  former  of  these  two  parallel  passages  he  is 
stated  to  be  "of  Zobah,"  i.e.  Aram-Zobah,  which 
Keiinicott  in  his  investigation  {Dissert.  215,  216) 
decides  to  have  been  the  original  reading,  though 
he  also  decides  for  "  brother"  against  "son." 

4.  One  of  the  liead  men  who  returned  from 
Babylon  with  Ezra  on  his  second  expedition,  and 
whom  he  despatched  from  his  encampment  at  the 
river  Ahava  to  the  colony  of  Jews  at  Casiphia,  to 
obtain  thence  some  Levites  and  Nethiuim  for  the 
Temple  service  (Ezr.  viii.  16;  1  Esdr.  viii.  44). 
That  Nathan  and  those  mentioned  with  him  were 
lavnien,  appears  evident  from  the  concluding  words 
of  the  preceding  verse,  and  therefore  it  is  not  im- 
))ossible  that  he  may  be  the  same  with  the  "  son  of 
Baui "  who  was  obliged  to  relinquish  his  foreign 
wife  (Ezr.  x.  39),  though  on  the  other  hand  these 
marriages  seem  rather  to  have  been  contracted  by 
those  who  had  been  longer  in  Jerusalem  than  he, 
who  had  so  lately  arrived  from  Babylon,  could  be. 

[G.] 
NATH'ANAEL  CNadavahK  "gift  of  God"), 
a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ  conceiuing  whom,  under 
that  name  at  least,  we  learn  from  Scripture  little 
more  tlian  his  birtli-place,  Caua  of  Galilee  (John 
xxi.  2),  and  his  simple  truthful  character  (John  i. 
47).  We  have  no  particulars  of  his  life.  Indeed 
the  name  does  not  occur  in  tlie  first  three  Gospels. 

We  learn,  however,  from  St.  John  that  Jesus  on 
the  third  or  tburth  day  after  His  return  from  the 
scene  of  His  temptation  to  that  of  His  bajitism, 
having  been  proclaimed  by  the  Baptist  as  the  Lamb 
of  God,  was  minded  to  go  into  Galilee.  He  first 
then  called  Philip  to  follow  Him,  but  l^hilip  could 
not  set  forth  on  his  journey  without  communicating 
to  Nathanael  the  wonderful  intelligence  which  he 
had  received  from  his  master  the  Baptist,  namelv, 
that  the  Messiah  so  long  foretold  by  Moses  and  the 
I'rophets  had  at  last  appeared.  Nathanael,  who 
.seems  to  have  heard  the  announcement  at  first  with 
some  distrust,  as  doubting  whether  anything  good 
could  come  out  of  so  small  and  inconsiderable  a 
place  as  Nazareth — a  place  nowhere  mentioned  in 
tiie  Old  Testament — yet  readily  acceptal  Philip's 
invitiition  to  go  and  satisfy  himself  by  his  own 
personal  oijservation  (John  i.  46).  What  follows  is 
a  testimony  to  the  humility,  simplicity,  and  sin- 
cerity of  ins  own  character  from  One  wlio  could 
read  liis  licart,  such  as  is  recorded  of  liardly  any 
other  person  in  the  Bible.     Nathanael,  on  his  aji- 


NATHANAEL 


467 


proacli  to  Jesus,  is  saluted  by  Him  as  "  an  Israelite 
indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile  "—a  true  child  of 
Abraham,  and  not  simply  according  to  the  flesh. 
So  little,  however,  did  he  expect  any  such  distinctive 
praise,  that  he  could  not  refiain  from  askino-  how  it 
was  that  he  had  become  known  to  Jesus.  The 
answer  "  before  that  Philip  called  thee,  when  thou 
wast  under  the  fig-tree  I  saw  thee,"  appears  to  have 
satislied  him  that  the  speaker  was  more  tlian  man — 
that  he  must  have  read  his  secret  thoughts,  and 
heard  his  miuttered  prayer  at  a  time  when  he  was 
studiously  screening  himself  from  public  observa- 
tion. The  conclusion  was  inevitable.  Nathanael  at 
once  confessed  "  Rabbi,  thou  art  the  Son  of  God  ; 
thou  art  the  King  of  Isiael"  (John  i.  49).  The 
name  of  Nathanael  occ.us  but  once  again  in  the 
Gospel  narrative,  and  then  simply  as  one  of  the  small 
company  of  disciples  to  whom  Jesus  showed  Himself 
at  the  sea  of  Tiberias  after  His  resurrection.  On 
that  occasion  we  may  fairly  sujipose  that  he  joined 
his  brethren  in  their  night's  venture  on  the  lake — 
that,  having  been  a  sharer  of  their  fruitless  toil,  he 
was  a  witness  with  them  of  the  miraculous  draught 
of  fishes  the  next  morning — anil  that  he  afterwards 
partook  of  the  meal,  to  which,  without  daring  to 
ask,  the  disciples  felt  assured  in  their  hearts,  that 
He  who  had  called  them  was  the  Lord  (John  xxi. 
12).  Once  therefore  at  the  beginning  of  our  Savi- 
our's ministry,  and  once  after  His  resurrection,  dues 
the  name  of  Nathanael  occur  in  the  Sacred  Record. 

This  scanty  notice  of  one  who  was  intimately 
associated  with  the  very  chiefest  apostles,  and  was 
himself  the  object  of  our  Lord's  most  emphatic 
commendation,  has  not  imnaturally  provoked  the 
enquiry  whether  he  may  not  be  identified  with 
another  of  the  well-known  disciples  of  Jesus.  It  is 
indeed  very  commonly  believed  that  Nathanael  and 
Bartholomew  are  the  same  person.  The  evidence 
for  that  belief  is  as  follows :  St.  John,  who  twice 
mentions  Nathanael,  never  introduces  the  name  of 
Bartholomew  at  all.  St.  Matt.  x.  3  ;  St.  Mark  iii. 
18  ;  and  St.  Luke  \-i.  14,  all  speak  of  Bartholomew, 
but  never  of  Nathanael.  It  may  be,  however,  that 
Nathanael  was  the  proper  name,  and  Bartholomew 
(son  of  Tholmai)  the  surname  of  the  same  disciple, 
just  as  Simon  was  called  Bar-Jona,  and  Joses,  Bar- 
nabas. 

It  was  Philip  who  first  brought  Nathanael  to 
Jesus,  just  as  Andrew  had  brought  his  brother 
Simon,  and  Bartholomew  is  named  by  each  of  the 
first  .three  Evangelists  immediately  after  Philip; 
while  by  St.  Luke  he  is  coupled  with  Philip 
]irecisely  in  the  same  way  as  Simon  with  his 
brother  Andrew,  and  James  with  his  brother  John. 
It  should  be  observed,  too,  that  as  all  the  other 
disciples  mentioned  in  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John 
became  Apostles  of  Christ,  it  is  dilh'cult  to  suppose 
that  one  who  had  been  so  singularly  conmiended  by 
Jesus,  and  who  in  his  turn  liad  so  promiitl}'  and  so 
fully  confessed  Him  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  should 
be  excluded  from  the  number.  Again,  that  Na- 
thanael was  one  of  the  original  twelve,  is  inferred 
with  much  probability  from  his  not  being  proposed 
as  one  of  the  candidates  to  fill  the  place  of  Jud;is. 
Still  we  must  be  aueful  to  distinguish  conjecture, 
however  well  founded,  fVom  proof. 

To  the  argument  based  upon  the  fact,  that  in  St. 
John's  enumeration  of  the  disciples  to  whom  our 
Lord  showed  Himself  at  the  Si-a  of  Tiberias  Na- 
thanael stands  before  thi;  sons  of  Zebcdee,  it  is  replied 
that  this  was  to  be  expecteil,  as  the  writer  was  him- 
self a  son  of  Zcbedce  ;  and  further  that  Nathanael 
2  H  2 


468 


NATHANIAS 


is  placed  after  Thomas  in  this  list,  while  Bavtlinlo- 
mew  comes  before  Thomas  in  St.  Matthew,  St. 
Mark,  and  St.  Luke.  But  as  in  the  Acts  St.  Luke 
reverses  the  order  of  the  two  names,  putting  Tliomas 
tirst,  and  Bartholomew  second,  we  cannot  attach 
much  weight  to  this  argument. 

St.  Augustine  not  only  denies  the  claim  of  N.a- 
thanael  to  be  one  of  the  Twelve,  but  assigns  as  a 
reason  for  his  opinion,  that  whereas  Nathanael  was 
most  likely  a  learned  man  in  the  law  of  looses,  it 
was,  as  St.  Paul  tells  us,  1  Cor.  i.  26,  the  wisdom 
of  Christ  to  make  choice  of  rude  and  unlettered 
men  to  confound  the  wise  (in  Johan.  Ev.  c.  i.  §17). 
St.  Gregory  adopts  the  same  view  (on  John  i.  33, 
c.  16.  B).  hi  a  dissertation  on  John  i.  46,  to  be 
found  in  Thcs.  Theo.  philokni.  ii.  370,  the  author, 
.T.  Kiudler,  maintains  that  Bartholomew  and  Na- 
thanael are  dili'erent  pei'sons. 

There  is  a  tradition  that  Nathanael  was  the 
bridegroom  at  the  marriage  of  Cana  (Calmet),  and 
Kpiphanius.  Adv.  Haer.  i.  §223,  implies  his  belief 
that  of  the  two  disciples  whom  Jesus  overtook  on  the 
road  to  Emmaus  Nathanael  was  one. 

2.  1  Esdr.  i.  9.     [Netiianeel.] 

3.  (NaSavaTjXos.)  lEsilr.  ix.  22.  [Netiian- 
eel.] 

4.  (Nathanias.)  Sou  of  Samael  ;  one  of  the  an- 
cestors of  Judith  (Jud.  viii.  1 ),  and  therefore  a 
Simeonite  (ix.  2).  [E.  H.   .  .  .  s.] 

NATHANI'AS  (NaSaj/fas  :  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
Nathan  of  the  sons  of  Bani  (1  Esdr.  i.x.  34  ;  comp. 
Ezi-.  X.  39). 

NATHAN -MEL'ECH  C^^Jrtnj  :  NaOav 
BacriXivs:  Nathan-melecit).  A  eunuch  (A.  V. 
"  chamberlain  ")  in  the  court  of  Josiah,  by  whose 
chamber  at  the  entrance  to  the  Temple  were  the 
horses  which  the  kings  of  Judah  had  dedicated  to 
the  sun  (2  K.  xxiii.  11).  The  LXX.  translate  the 
latter  part  of  the  name  as  an  appellative,  "  Nathan 
the  king." 

NA'UM  (Naov/i),  son  of  Esli,  and  father  of 
Amos,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25), 
about  contemporary  with  the  high-priesthood  of 
Jason  and  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The 
only  point  to  be  remarked  is  the  circumstance  of 
the  two  consecutive  names,  Naum  and  Amos,  being 
the  same  as  those  of  the  prophets  N.  and  A.  But 
whether  this  is  acciilental  or  has  any  peculiar  sig- 
nificance is  difficult  to  say.  Naum  is  also  a  Phoe- 
nician proper  name  (Gesen.  s.  v.  and  Mon.  Phoen. 
p.  134).  Nehemiah  is  formed  from  the  same  root, 
Dn3,  "  to  comfort."  [A.  C.  H.] 

NAVE.  The  heb.  33,  gav,  conveys  the  notion 
of  convexity  or  protuberance.  It  is  rendered  in 
A.  V.  boss  of  a  shield,  Job  xv.  26 ;  the  eyebrow. 
Lev.  xiv.  9;  an  eminent  place,  Ez.  sy\.  31  ;  once 
only  in  plur.  naves,  vSnoi,  radii,  1  K.  vii.  33-  but 
in  Ez.  i.  18  twice,  cwtoi,  "  rings,"  and  marf. 
"  strakes,"  an  old  word  apjiarently  used  both  for 
the  nave  of  a  wheel  from  which  the  spokes  pro- 
ceed, and  also  more  probably  the  felloe  or  the  tire, 
;\s  making  the  streak  or  stroke  upon  the  ground. 
Halliwell,  Phillips,  Bailey,  Ash,  Eng.  LicHoaaries, 
"strake."  Gesenius,  p.  256,  renders  curvatura 
rotarum.     [Chariot  ;  Layer  ;  Gabbatha.] 

[H.  W.  P.] 

NA'VE  (Nau^  :  N'ave).  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun 
is  always  called  in  the  LXX.  "the  son  of  Nave," 
and  this  form  is  retained  in  Ecclus.  xlvi.  1. 


NAZARENE 

NAZ'ARENE    (Na^ojpaTos,    Nafapij»'<{j),    an 

iuliabitant  of  Nazareth.  This  appellative  is  found 
in  the  N.  T.  applied  to  Jesus  by  the  demons  in  the 
synagogue  at  Capernaum  (Mark  i.  24  ;  Luke  iv. 
34)  ;  by  the  people,  who  so  describe  him  to  Barti- 
meus  (Mark  x.  47  ;  Luke  xviii.  37) ;  by  the  soldiers 
who  arrested  Jesus  (John  xviii.  5,  7)  ;  by  the 
servants  at  His  trial  (Matt.  xxvi.  71  ;  Mark  xiv. 
67) ;  by  Pilate  in  the  inscription  on  the  cross  (John 
xix.  19) ;  by  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus 
(Lukexxiv.  19^;  by  Peter  (Acts  ii.  22,  iii.  6,  iv. 
10);  by  Stephen,  as  reported  by  the  fidse  witness 
(Acts  vi.  14)  ;  by  the  ascended  Jesus  (Acts  xxii.  8) ; 
and  by  Paul  (Acts  xxvi.  9).  Tliis  name,  made 
striking  in  so  many  ways,  and  which,  if  first  given 
in  scorn,  was  adopted  and  gloiied  in  by  the  disciples, 
we  are  told,  in  JLatt.  ii.  23,  possesses  a  prophetic 
significance.  Its  application  to  Jesus,  in  consequence 
of  the  providential  arrangements  by  which  His 
parents  were  led  to  take  up  their  abode  in  Naznreth, 
was  the  filling  out  of  the  predictions  in  which  the 
promised  Messiah  is  described  as  a  Netser  (■1^*3\ 
i.  e.  a  shoot,  sprout,  of  Jesse,  a  humble  and  de- 
spised descendant  of  the  decayed  royal  family. 
Whenever  men  spoke  of  Jesus  as  the  Nazarene, 
they  either  consciously  or  unconsciously  pronounced 
one  of  the  names  of  the  predicted  Messiah,  a  name 
indicative  both  of  his  royal  descent  and  his  humble 
condition.  This  explanation,  which  Jerome  men- 
tions as  that  given  by  learned  (Christian)  Jews  in 
his  day,  has  been  adopted  by  Surenhusius,  Fritzsche, 
Gieseler,  Krabbe  (Lehcn  Jesn),  L^rechsler  (on  Is. 
xi.  1),  Schirlitz  (iV.  T.  Worterh.),  Robinson  {N .  T. 
Lex.'),  Hengstenberg  (Christol.),  De  Wette,  ami 
Meyer.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  following  considei- 
ations: — (1)  Netser,  as  Hengstenberg,  after  deDieu 
and  othei-s,  has  proved,  was  the  pioper  Hebrew 
name  of  Nazareth.  (2)  The  reference  to  the  etv- 
mological  signification  of  the  word  is  entirely  in 
keeping  with  Matt.  ii.  21-23.  (3)  The  Messiah  is 
expressly  called  a  Netser  in  Is.  xi.  1.  (4)  The 
same  thought,  and  under  the  same  image,  although 
expressed  by  a  different  word,  is  found  in  Jer.  xxiii. 
5,  xxxiii.  15  ;  Zech.  iii.  8,  vi.  12,  which  accounts 
for  the  statement  of  Matthew  that  this  prediction 
was  uttered  "by  the  prophets  "  in  the  plural. 

It  is  lumecessary  therefore  to  i-esort  to  the  hypo- 
thesis that  the  passage  in  Matt.  ii.  23  is  a  quotation 
from  some  prophetical  book  now  lost  (Chrysost., 
Thcophyl.,  Clericus),  or  from  some  apocryphal  book 
(Ewald),  or  was  a  traditional  prophecy  (Calovius; 
Alexander,  Connexion  and  Jfarmony  of  the  Old  anil 
N.  T.),  all  which  suppositions  are  refuted  by  the 
fact  that  the  phrase  "  by  the  prophets,"  in  the 
N.  T.,  refers  exclusively  to  the  canonical  books  of 
the  0.  T.  The  explanation  of  others  (Tert.,  Erasm., 
Calv.,  Bez.,  Grot.,  Wetstein),  according  to  whom 
the  declaration  is  that  Jesus  should  be  a  Nazarite 
(T'p),  i.  e.  one  specially  consecrated  or  devoted  to 
God  (Judg.  xiii.  5),  is  inconsistent,  to  say  nothing 
of  other  objections,  with  the  Sept.  mode  of  spellingr 
the  woi'd,  which  is  generally  "Ha^ipcuos,  and  never 
Nafa)pa?oy.  Within  the  last  century  the  inter- 
pretation which  finds  the  key  of  the  passage  in  the 
contempt  in  which  Nazareth  may  be  supposed  to 
have  been  held  has  been  widely  received.  So 
Paulus,  Rosenm.,  Kuin.,  Van  der  Palm.,  Gersdorf, 
A.  Barnes,  Olsh.,  Davidson,  Ebrard,  Lange.  Ac- 
cording to  this  view  the  reference  is  to  the  despised 
condition  of  the  Messiah,  as  predicted  in  Ps.  xxii., 
Is.  liii.     That  idea,   however,   is  moie  surely  e.x- 


NAZAKETH 

pressed  in  the  tirst  explanation  given,  which  has 
;il.so  the  iidvantage  of  lecoguising  the  apparent  im- 
portance attached  to  the  signification  of  the  7iamc' 
("  He  shall  be  called").  Recently  a  suggestion 
which  Witsius  borrowed  from  Socinus  has  been 
revived  by  Zuschlag  and  Riggenbach,  that  the  true 
word  is  l^b  or  "iivil,  my  Saviour,  with  reference 
to  Jesus  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  but  without 
much  success.  Once  (Acts  xxiv.  5)  the  term  Na- 
:.arenes  is  applied  to  the  followers  of  Jesus  by 
way  of  contempt.  The  name  still  exists  iu  Arabic 
as  the  ordinary  designation  of  Christians,  and  the 
recent  revolt  in  India  was  connected  with  a  pre- 
tended ancient  prophecy  that  the  Nazarcnes,  after 
holding  power  for  one  hundred  years,  would  be 
expelled.  (Spanheim,  Dubia  Evaiujelica,  ii.  583- 
•  048;  Wolf,  Cnrae  Philologicae,  i.  46-4-8;  Heng- 
stenberg,  Ckristologn  of  the  0.  T.  ii.  106-112; 
Zuschlag  in  the  Zeitsckrift  fur  die  Lutherische 
Thculogie,  1854,  417-446;  Riggenbach  iu  the  Stu- 
dien  tind  Kritiken,  1855,  588-612.)      [G.  E.  D.] 

NAZ'ARETH  (written  NaCapeV  andNaC«P6^) 
is  not  mentioned  iu  the  Old  Testament  or  iu  Jose- 
phus,  but  occurs  first  in  Matt.  ii.  23,  though  a 
town  could  hardly  fail  to  have  existed  on  so  eligible 
a  spot  from  much  earlier  times.  It  derives  its 
celebrity  almost  entirely  fi-om  its  connexion  with 
the  history  of  Christ,  and  iu  that  respect  has  a 
hold  on  the  imagination  and  feelings  of  men  which 
it  shares  only  with  Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem.  It 
is  situated  among  the  hills  which  constitute  the  south 
ridges  of  Lebanon,  just  before  they  sink  down  into 
the  Plain  of  Esdraelon.  Among  those  hills  is  a 
valley  which  runs  in  a  waving  line  nearly  east  and 
west,  about  a  mile  long  and,  on  the  average,  a 
quarter  of  a  mile  broad,  but  which  at  a  certain 
point  enlarges  itself  considerably  so  as  to  form  a 
sort  of  bcisin.  Iu  this  basin  or  enclosure,  along  the 
lower  edge  of  the  hill-side,  lies  the  quiet  secluded 
village  in  which  the  Saviour  of  men  spent  the 
greater  part  of  His  earthly  existence.  The  sur- 
rounding heights  vary  in  altitude,  some  of  them 
rise  to  400  or  500  feet.  They  have  rounded 
tops,  are  composed  of  the  glittering  limestone 
which  is  so  common  in  that  couutiy,  and,  though 
on  the  whole  sterile  and  unattractive  in  appear- 
ance, present  not  au  unpleasing  aspect  diversified  as 
they  are  with  the  foliage  of  tig-trees  and  wild 
shrubs  and  with  the  verdure  of  occasional  fields  of' 
grain.  Our  familiar  hollyhock  is  one  of  the  gay 
flowers  which  grow  wild  there.  The  enclosed 
valley  is  peculiarly  rich  and  well  cultivated :  it  is 
filled  with  coru-fields,  with  gardens,  hedges  of 
cactus,  and  clusters  of  fruit-bearing  trees.  Being 
so  sheltered  by  hills,  Nazareth  enjoys  a  mild  atmos- 
phere and  climate.  Hence  all  the  fruits  of  the 
country, — as,  pomegranates,  oranges,  figs,  olives, — 
ripen  e;vrly  and  attain  a  rare  perfection. 

Of  the  identification  of  the  ancient  site  there  Ciui 
bo  no  doubt.  The  name  of  the  present  village  is 
en-Ndzirah,  the  s;ime,  thereibre,  as  of  old ;  it  is 
formed  on  a  hill  or  mountain  (Luke  iv.  29)  ;  it  is 
within  the  limits  of  the  province  of  (ialilee  (I\lark 
i.  9);  it  is  ne;ir  Cana  (w'hether  we  assume  Kana 
on  the  eivst  or  Kuna  on  the  north-east  ;is  the  scene 
of  the  first  miracle),  according  to  the  implication  in 
John  ii.  1,  2,  1 1  ;  a  i)re('ipice  exists  in  the  ncighliour- 
hooil  (Luke  iv.  29)  ;  and,  finally,  n.  series  of  testi- 
monies (iveland,  I'al.,  905)  reacli  lack  to  Eusebius, 
tlio  father  of  Church  liistory,  which  represent  the 
place  as  having  occupied  an  invariable  position. 


NAZARETH 


469 


The  modern  Nazareth  belongs  to  tlie  better  class 
of  eastern  villages.  It  has  a  population  of  oOOi) 
or  4000,  a  few  are  Mohammedans,  the  rest  Latin 
and  Greek  Christians.  There  is  one  mosque,  a 
Franciscan  convent  of  huge  dimensions  but  dis- 
playing no  greiit  architectm-al  beauty,  a  small  Ma- 
ronite  church,  a  Greek  church,  and  perhaps  a 
church  or  chapel  of  some  of  the  other  confessions. 
Protestant  missions  have  been  attempted,  but  with 
no  very  marked  success.  Most  of  the  houses  are 
well  built  of  stone,  and  have  a  neat  and  comfortable 
appearance.  As  streams  in  the  rainy  season  are 
liable  to  pour  down  with  violence  from  the  hills, 
every  "  wise  man,"  instead  of  building  upon  the 
loose  soil  on  the  surface,  digs  deep  and  lays  his 
foundation  upon  the  rock  (eiri  rrjc  irerpav)  which 
is  found  so  generally  in  that  country  at  a  cer- 
tain depth  in  the  earth.  The  streets  or  lanes  are 
narrow  and  crooked,  and  al'ter  rain  are  so  full  of 
mud  and  mire  as  to  be  almost  impassable. 

A  description  of  Nazareth  would  be  incomplete 
without  mention  of  the  remarkable  view  from  the 
tomb  of  Neby  Ismail  on  one  of  the  hills  behind 
the  town.  It  must  suffice  to  indicate  merely  the 
objects  within  siglit.  In  the  north  are  seen  the 
ridges  of  Lebanon  and,  high  above  all,  the  white 
top  of  Hermon ;  in  the  west,  Carmel,  glimpses  of 
the  Mediterranean,  the  bay  and  the  town  of  Akka ; 
east  and  south-east  are  Gilead,  Tabor,  Gilboa  ;  and 
south,  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  and  the  mountains  of 
Samaria,  with  villages  on  every  side,  among  which 
are  Kana,  Nein,  Endor,  Zerin  (Jezieel),  and  Ta- 
annuk  (Taanach).  It  is  unquestionably  one  of  the 
most  beautiful  and  sublime  spectacles  (for  it  com- 
bines the  two  features)  which  earth  has  to  show. 
Dr.  Robinson's  elaborate  description  of  the  scene 
{Bib.  Res.,  ii.  336,  7)  conveys  no  exaggerated  idea 
of  its  magnificence  or  historical  interest.  It  is  easy 
to  believe  that  the  Saviour,  during  the  days  of  His 
seclusion  in  the  adjacent  valley,  came  often  to  this 
very  spot  and  looked  forth  thence  upon  those  glori- 
ous works  of  the  Creator  which  so  lift  the  soul  up- 
ward to  Him. 

The  passages  of  Scripture  which  refer  expressly 
to  Nazareth  though  not  numerous  are  suggestive 
and  deserve  to  be  recalled  here.  It  was  the  home 
of  Joseph  and  Jlary  (Luke  ii.  39).  The  angel  an 
nounced  to  the  Virgin  there  the  birth  of  the  Messiah 
(Luke  i.  26-28).  The  holy  family  returned  thither 
after  the  flight  into  Egypt  (Matt.  ii.  23).  Naza- 
reth is  called  the  native  country  (^  ■warpLS  avTov) 
of  Jesus:  He  grew  up  there  from  infiuicy  to 
manhood  (Luke  iv.  16),  and  was  known  through 
life  iis  "  The  Nazarene."  He  taught  in  the  syna- 
gogue there  (Matt.  xiii.  54 ;  Luke  iv.  16),  and  was 
dragged  by  His  fellow-townsmen  to  the  precipice 
in  order  to  be  cast  down  thence  and  be  killed  [ets 
t5  KaTaKp7]/j.vi<rai.  avTov).  "  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
king  of  tlie  Jews  "  was  written  over  His  Cross 
(John  xix.  19),  and  after  His  ascension  He  revealed 
Himself  under  that  appellation  to  the  persecuting 
Saul  (Acts  xxii.  8).  'I  he  ])hice  has  given  name  to 
His  followers  in  all  ages  and  all  lands,  a  name  which 
will  never  cease  to  be  one  of  honour  and  reproach. 

The  origin  of  the  disrepute  in  which  Nazareth 
stood  (John  i.  47)  is  not  cert.iinly  known.  All  the 
inhabitants  of  Galilee  were  looked  upon  with  con- 
tempt by  the  people  of  .ludaea  bec'ause  they  spoke 
a  ruder  dialect,  were  less  cultivated,  and  were 
more  exposed  by  their  position  to  cont^ict  with  the 
heathen.  But  Nazareth  lal)oured  uiuler  a  special 
opprobrium,  for  it  w;is  a  (ialilean  and  not  a  south- 


470 


NAZARETH 


ern  Jew  who  asked  the  reproachful  question,  whe- 
ther "  any  good  thing "  could  come  from  that 
source.  The  teiin  "  good  "  {aya66v),  having  more 
commonly  an  ethical  sense,  it  has  been  suggested 
that  tlie  inhabitants  of  Nazareth  may  have  had  a 
bad  name  among  their  neighbours  for  irreligion  or 
some  laxity  of  morals.  The  supposition  receives 
support  from  the  disposition  which  they  manifested 
towards  the  person  and  ministry  of  our  Loi-d. 
They  attempted  to  kill  Him ;  they  expelled  Him 
twice  (for  Luke  iv.  16-29,  and  Matt.  xiii.  54-58, 
relate  probably  to  dillerent  occurrences)  from  their 
borders;  they  were  so  wilful  and  unbelieving  that 
He  performed  not  many  miracles  among  them 
(Matt.  xiii.  58)  ;  and,  finally,  they  compelled  Him 
to  turn  his  bade  upon  them  and  reside  at  Caper- 
naum (Matt.  iv.  IH). 

It  is  impossible  to  speak  of  distances  with  much 
exactness.  Nazareth  is  a  moderate  journey  of 
three  days  from  Jerusalem,  seven  hours,  or  about 
twenty  miles,  from  Akka  or  Ptolemais  (Acts  xxi. 
7),  five  or  six  hours,  or  eighteen  miles,  from  the 
sea  of  Galilee,  six  miles  west  from  Mount  Tabor, 
two  hours  from  Cana,  and  two  or  three  trom  Endor 
and  Naiu.  The  origin  of  the  name  is  uncertain. 
For  the  conjectures  on  the  subject,  see  Nazarene. 

We  pass  over,  as  foreign  to  the  proper  object  of 
this  notice,  any  particular  account  of  the  "  holy 
places  "  which  the  legends  have  sought  to  connect 
with  events  in  the  life  of  Christ.  They  are  de- 
scribed in  nearly  all  the  books  of  modern  tourists ; 
but,  having  no  sure  connexion  with  biblical  geo- 
graphy or  exegesis,  do  not  require  attention  here. 
Two  localities,  however,  form  an  exception  to  this 
statement,  inasmuch  as  they  possess,  though  in  dif- 
ferent ways,  a  certain  interest  which  no  one  will 
fail  to  recognise.  One  of  these  is  the  "  Fountain 
of  the  Virgin,"  situated  at  the  north-eastern  extre- 
mity of  the  town,  where,  according  to  one  tradition, 
the  mother  of  Jesus  received  the  angel's  salutation 
(Luke  i.  28).  Though  we  may  attach  no  import- 
ance to  this  latter  belief,  we  must,  on  other 
accounts,  regard  the  spring  with  a  feeling  akin  to 
that  of  religious  veneiatiou.  It  derives  "its  name 
from  the  fact  that  Mary,  during  her  life  at  Naza- 
reth, no  doubt  accompanied  otten  by  •'  the  child 
Jesus,"  must  have  been  accustomed  to  repair  to 
this  fountain  for  water,  as  is  the  practice  of  the 
women  of  that  village  at  the  present  day.  Cer- 
tainly, as  Dr.  Clarke  observes  {Travels,  ii.  427), 
"  if  thei-e  be  a  spot  throughout  the  holy  land  that 
was  undoubtedly  honoured  by  her  presence,  we 
may  consider  this  to  have  been  the  place  ;  because 
the  situation  of  a  copious  spring  is  not  liable  to 
change,  and  because  the  custom  of  repairing  thither 
to  draw  water  has  been  continued  amono-  the  female 
inhabitants  of  Nazareth  from  the  eailiest  period  of 
its  history."  Tlie  well-worn  path  which  leads  thither 
from  the  town  has  been  trodden  by  the  feet  of  almost 
countless  generations.  It  presents  at  all  hom's  a 
busy  scene,  from  the  number  of  those,  hurrying  to 
and  fro,  engaged  in  the  labour  of  water-carryino-. 
.See  the  engraving,  i.  632  of  this  DictiorMry. 

The  other  place  is  that  of  the  attempted  Pre- 
cipitation. We  are  directed  to  the  true  scene  of 
this  occuirence,  not  so  much  by  any  tradition  as 
by  internal  indications  in  the  Gospel  history  itself. 
A  prevalent  opinion  of  the  country  has  tiaiisferred 
the  event  to  a  hill  about  two  miles  south-east  of 
the  town.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  Nazareth 
ever  occupied  a  different  site  fi'om  the  present  one  • 
and  that  a  mob  whose  determination  was  to  put  to 


NAZARETH 

death  the  object  of  their  rage,  should  repair  to  so 
distant  a  place  for  that  purpose,  is  entirely  incie- 
dible.  The  present  village,  as  already  stated,  lies 
along  the  hill-side,  but  much  nearer  the  base  than 
the  summit.  Above  the  bulk  of  the  town  are 
several  rocky  ledges  over  which  a  person  could  not 
be  thrown  without  almost  certain  destruction.  But 
there  is  one  very  remarkable  precipice,  almost  per- 
pendicular and  forty  or  fifty  feet  high,  near  the 
Maronite  church,  which  may  well  be  supposed  to 
be  the  identical  one  over  which  His  infuriated 
townsmen  attempted  to  hurl  Jesus. 

The  singular  piecision  with  which  the  narrative 
relates  the  transaction  desen'es  a  remark  or  two. 
Casual  readers  would  understand  from  the  account 
that  Nazareth  was  situated  on  the  summit,  and 
that  the  people  brought  Jesus  down  thence  to  the 
brow  of  the  hill  as  if  it  was  between  the  town  and 
the  valley.  If  these  inferences  were  correct,  the 
narrative  and  the  locality  would  then  be  at  vari- 
ance with  each  other.  The  writer  is  fiee  to  say 
that  he  himself  had  these  erroneous  impressions, 
and  was  led  to  correct  them  by  what  he  observed 
on  the  spot.  Even  Reland  {Pal.  905)  says:  "  Na- 
^aptQ — urbs  aedificata  super  nipem,  luide  Chris- 
tum precipitare  conati  sunt."  But  the  language 
of  the  Evangelist,  when  more  closely  examined,  is 
found  neither  to  require  the  inferences  in  question 
on  the  one  hand,  nor  to  exclude  them  on  the  other. 
What  he  asserts  is,  that  the  incensed  crowd  "  rose 
up  and  cast  Jesus  out  of  the  city,  and  brought  him 
to  the  brow  of  the  hill  on  which  the  city  was  built, 
that  they  might  cast  him  down  headlong."  It  will 
be  remarked  here,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  not 
said  that  the  people  either  went  up  or  descended  in 
order  to  ]-each  the  precipice,  but  simply  that  they 
brought  the  Saviour  to  it,  wherever  it  was ;  and  in 
the  second  place,  that  it  is  not  said  that  the  city 
was  built  "  on  the  brow  of  the  hill,"  but  equally 
as  well  that  the  precipice  was  "  on  the  brow," 
without  deciding  whether  the  cliff  overlooked  the 
town  (as  is  the  fact)  oi'  was  below  it.  It  will  be 
seen,  therefore,  how  very  nearly  the  terms  of  the 
history  approach  a  mistake  and  yet  avoid  it.  As 
Paley  remarks  in  another  case,  none  but  a  true 
account  could  advance  thus  to  the  very  brink  of 
contradiction  without  falling  into  it. 

The  fortunes  of  Nazareth  have  been  various. 
Epiphanius  states  that  no  Christians  dwelt  there 
until  the  time  of  Constantine.  Helena,  the  mother 
of  that  emperor,  is  related  to  have  built  the  first 
Church  of  the  Annunciation  here.  In  the  time  of 
the  Crusaders,  the  Episcopal  See  of  Bethsean  was 
translt;rred  there.  The  birthplace  of  Christianity 
was  lost  to  the  Christians  by  their  defeat  at  Hattin 
in  1183,  and  was  laid  utterly  in  ruins  by  Sultan 
Bibars  in  1263.  Ages  passed  away  before  it  rose 
again  from  this  prostration.  In  1620  the  Fran- 
ciscans rebuilt  the  Church  of  the  Annunciation  and 
connected  a  cloister  with  it.  In  1799  the  Turks 
assaulted  the  French  general  Junot  at  Naziireth  ; 
and  shortly  after,  21(.i0  French,  under  Kleber  and 
Napoleon,  defeated  a  Turkish  army  of  .25,000  at 
the  foot  of  Mount  Tabor.  Napoleon  himself,  after 
that  battle,  spent  a  few  hours  at  Nazareth,  and 
reached  thei-e  the  northern  limit  of  his  Eastern  ex- 
pedition. The  earthquake  which  destroyed  Safed, 
in  1837,  injured  also  Nazareth.  No  Jews  reside 
there  at  present,  which  may  be  ascribed  perhaps 
as  much  to  the  hostility  of"  the  Christian  sects  as 
to  their  own  hatred  of  the  prophet  who  was  sent 
"  to  redeem  Israel."  [H,  B.  H.j 


NAZARITE 

NAZ'AIIITE,  more  [.lopeily  NAZ'IKITE 
(T'P  and  D^rPN  "1"'T3  :  T]vyfxivos  and  ev^dfuevos. 
Num.  vi.  ;  i/a^tpaTos,  Judg.  xiii.  7,_Lam.  iv.  7  : 
Nazaraens),  one  of  either  sex  wlio  was  buund  by  a 
vow  of  a  peculiar  kind  to  be  set  apart  from  others 
for  the  service  of  God.  The  obh"gation  was  either 
for  life  or  for  a  detiued  time.  The  Rlishna  names 
the  two  classes  resulting  from  this  distinotion, 
D7iy  '"ftJ,  "perpetual  Kazarites "  {Xazaraci 
nativi),  and  D^C  ^TT3,  "  Nazarites  of  days" 
(^Nazaraei  votici). 

I.  Tliere  is  no  notice  in  the  Pentateuch  of  Na- 
zarites for  life;  but  the  regulations  for  the  vow  of 
a  Nazarite  of  days  are  given  Num.  vi.  1-21. 

The  Nazarite,  during  the  term  of  his  consecra- 
tion, was  bound  to  abstain  from  wine,  grapes,  with 
every  production  of  the  vine,  even  to  the  stones  and 
skin  of  the  grape,  and  from  every  kind  of  intoxi- 
cating drink.  He  was  forbidden  to  cut  the  hair  of 
liis  head,  or  to  approach  any  dead  body,  even  that  of 
his  nearest  relation.  When  the  period  of  his  vow 
was  fulfilled,  he  was  brought  to  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  and  was  required  to  ofl'er  a  he  lamb  for 
a  burnt-offehng,  a  ewe  lamb  for  a  sin-offering,  and 
a  ram  lor  a  peace-offering,  with  the  usual  accom- 
paniments of  pe:ice-otleriugs  (Lev.  vii.  12,  13)  and 
of  the  ottering  made  at  the  consecratiou  of  priests 
(Ex.  xxix.  2)  "  a  basket  of  unleavened  bread,  cakes 
of  tine  flour  mingled  with  oil,  and  wafers  of  un- 
leavened bread  anointed  with  oil"  (Num.  vi.  15). 
He  brought  also  a  meat-offering  and  a  drink-offering, 
which  appear  to  have  been  presented  by  themselves 
as  a  distinct  act  of  seiTice  (ver.  17).  He  was  to 
cut  off  the  hair  of  "  the  head  of  his  separation  " 
(that  is,  the  hair  which  had  grown  durmg  the 
pei'iod  of  his  consecration")  at  the  door  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, and  to  put  it  into  the  tire  under  the  sacrifice 
on  the  altar.  The  priest  then  placed  upon  his 
hands  the  sodden  left  shoulder  of  the  ram,  witR  one 
of  the  unleavened  cakes  and  one  of  the  wafers,  and 
then  took  them  again  and  waved  them  for  a  wave- 
otl'ering.  These,  as  well  as  the  breast  and  the 
heave,  or  right  shoulder  (to  which  he  was  entitled 
in  the  case  of  ordinary  ]ieace-offerings.  Lev.  vii. 
32-34),  were  the  perquisite  of  the  priest.  The 
Nazarite  also  gave  him  a  present  proponioned  to 
his  circumstances  (ver.  21)." 

If  a  Nazarite  incun-ed  defilement  by  accidentally 
touching  a  dead  body,  he  had  to.  undergo  certain 
rites  of  purification  and  to  recommence  the  full 
period  of  his  consecration.  On  the  seventh  day  of 
his  uncleanness  he  was  to  cut  off  his  hair,  and  on 
the  following  day  he  had  to  bring  two  turtle-doves 
or  two  young  pigeons  to  the  priest,  who  oflered  one 
for  a  sin-offering  and  the  other  for  a  burnt-offering. 
He  then  hallowed  liis  head,  ofi'ered  a  lamb  of  the  first 
year  as  a  trespass-offering,  and  renewed  his  vow  under 
the  -same  conditions  as  it  had  been  at  first  made. 

It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  Nazarite  vow 
was  at  first  taken  with  some  formality,  and  that 
it  was  accompanied  by  an  offeiing  similar  to  that 
prescribed  at  its  renewiU  in  the  case  of  pollu- 
tion.     But  if  any  inference  may  be  drawn  from 

"  It  Is  said  that  at  tlie  south-east  corner  of  tlic  court 
of  tlic  women,  in  Herod's  temple,  there  was  an  apart- 
ment appropriated  to  the  Nazarites,  In  which  they  used 
to  boil  their  peacc-ofTfrlngs  and  cut  olT  their  hair.  Light- 
fiiot,  I'rospecl  Of  the  TempU;  c.  xvii ;  Reland,  A.  S.  p.  i. 
c.  K.  ijll. 

l>  yazir.  cap.  ::,  >)G.  p.  151!. 


NAZARITE 


471 


the  early  sections  of  the  Jlishnical  treatise  Xazir, 
it  seems  probable  that  the  act  of  self-consecration 
was  a  private  matter,  not  accompanied  by  any  pre- 
scribed rite. 

There  is  nothing  whatever  said  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment of  the  duration  of  the  period  of  the  vow  oi 
the  Nazarite  of  days.  According  to  Nazir  (cap.  i. 
§3,  p.  148)  the  usual  time  was  thirty  days,  but 
double  vows  for  sixty  days,  and  treble  vows  for 
a  hundretl  days,  were  sometimes  made  (cap.  iii.  1-4). 
One  instance  is  related  of  Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene 
(of  whom  some  paiticulars  are  given  by  Josephus, 
Ant.  XX.  2),  who,  with  the  zeal  of  a  new  convert, 
took  a  vow  for  seven  years  in  order  to  obtain 
the  divine  favour  on  a  military  expedition  which 
her  son  was  about  to  undertake.  When  her  period 
of  consecration  had  expiied  she  visited  Jerusalem, 
and  was  there  informed  by  the  doctois  of  the  school 
of  Hillel  that  a  vow  taken  in  another  conutiy 
must  be  repeated  whenever  the  Nazarite  might 
visit  the  Holy  Land.  She  accordingly  continued 
a  Nazarite  for  a  second  seven  years,  and  happenino- 
to  touch  a  dead  body  just  as  the  time  was  about  to 
expire,  she  was  obliged  to  renew  her  vow  according 
to  the  law  in  Num.  vi.  9,  iS;c.  She  thus  continued 
a  Nazarite  for  twenty-one  years.'' 

There  are  some  other  particulars  given  in  the 
]\Iishna.  which  are  curious  as  showing  how  the  in- 
stitution was  regarded  in  later  times.  The  vow 
was  often  imdertaken  by  childless  parents  in  the 
hope  of  obtaining  children :  this  may,  of  course, 
have  been  easily  suggested  by  the  cases  of  Manoah's 
wife  and  Hannah. — A  female  Nazarite  whose  vow 
was  broken  might  be  punished  with  forty  stiipes. — 
The  Nazarite  was  permitted  to  smooth  his  hair 
with  a  brush,  but  not  to  comb  it,  lest  a  single  hair 
might  be  torn  out. 

II.  Of  the  Nazarites  for  life  three  are  mentioned 
in  the  b'criptures :  Samson,  Samuel,  and  St.  John  the 
Baptist.  The  only  one  of  these  actually  called  a 
Nazarite  is  Samson.  The  Rabbis  raised  tlje  question 
whether  Samuel  was  in  reality  a  Nazarite."^  In 
Hannah's  vow,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  no  razor 
should  come  upon  her  son's  head  (1  Sam.  i.  11)  ; 
but  no  mention  is  made  of  abstinence  from  wine. 
It  is,  however,  worthy  of  notice  that  Philo  makes 
a  particular  point  of  this,  and  seems  to  refer  the 
words  of  Hannah,  1  Sam.  i.  15,  to  Samuel  himself.'' 
In  reference  to  St.  John  the  Baptist,  the  Angel  makes 
mention  of  al:)stinence  fi'om  wine  and  stioug  drink, 
but  not  of  letting  the  hair  grow  (Luke  i.  15). 

We  are  but  imperfectly  in'formed  of  the  difference 
between  the  observances  of  tl>e  Nazarite  for  life  and 
those  of  the  Nazarite  for  days.  The  later  IJabbis 
slightly  notice  this  point.*  We  do  not  know  whether 
the  vow  for  life  was  ever  voluntarily  taken  by  the 
individual.  In  all  the  cases  mentioned  in  the  sacred 
histoiy,  it  was  made  by  the  parents  before  the  Ijirth 
of  the  Nazarite  himself.  Accoiding  to  the  general 
law  of  vows  (Num.  xxx.  8),  the  mother  could  not 
take  the  vow  without  the  father,  and  this  is  ex- 
pressly applied  to  the  Nazarite  vow  in  the  Mishna.' 
Hiumah  must  theiefore  either  have  presumed  ou  her 
husband's  concurrence,  or  secured  it  beforehand. 

«  Ifazir,  cap.  9,  ^S,  with  Hartenora's  note,  p.  17^. 

"  Ata  toCto  6  »Ja"i  Pam\eojv  xal  Trpoi/jTjTwr  fie'-yiorot 
^afj.ovr)\  oipov  Kol  /ncOi/Ujiia,  <i5  6  lepbs  Adyo?  <i>r]<riv, 
axpt  TeAfur^!  ov  ttutoi.— I'hil.  tie  Ebrielalt,  vol.  i.  p. 
379,  edit.  Maiigcy. 

*  S'cc  Pesikta,  quoted  by  Dnisius  on  Xum.  vt. 

f  Naxir,  cup.  t,  v'i.  P-  1^9- 


472 


NAZARITE 


The  MishnaS  makes  a  distinction  between  the  ov- 
dinaiy  Nazarite  for  life  and  the  Samson-Nazarite 
(PK'DEJ'  "1^13).  The  former  made  a  strong  point  of 
his  purity,  and,  if  he  was  polluted,  oft'eral  corban. 
But  as  regards  his  hair,  when  it  became  inconve- 
niently long,  he  was  allowed  to  trim  it,  if  he  was 
willing  to  ofler  the  appointed  victims  (Num.  vi.  14). 
The  Samson-Nazarite,  on  the  other  hand,  gave  no 
corban  if  he  touched  a  dead  body,  but  he  was  not 
sutlered  to  trim  his  liair  under  any  conditions.  This 
distinction,  it  is  pretty  evident,  was  suggested  by 
the  ti-eedom  with  which  Samson  must  have  come  in 
the  way  of  the  dead  (Judg.  xv.  16,  &c.),  ;md  the 
teirible  penalty  which  he  paid  for  allowing  his  hair 
to  be  cut. 

III.  The  consecration  of  the  Nazarite  bore  a  strik- 
ing resemblance  to  that  of  the  high-priest  (Lev.  xxi. 
10-12).  In  one  particular,  this  is  brought  out  more 
plainly  in  the  Hebrew  text  than  it  is  in  our  version, 
in  the  LXX.,  or  iu  the  Vulgate.-     One  word  ("IT3)>'' 

derived  from  the  same  root  as  Nazarite,  is  used  for 
the  long  hair  of  the  Nazarite,  Num.  vi.  19,  where 
the  A.  V.  has  "  hair  of  his  separation,"  and  for  the 
anointed  head  of  the  high-priest,  Lev.  xxi.  12,  where 
it  is  rendered  "  crown."  The  J\Iishna  points  out 
the  identity  of  the  law  tor  both  the  high-priest 
and  the  Nazarite  in  respect  to  pollution,  iu  that 
neither  was  permitted  to  approach  the  corpse  of  even 
the  nearest  relation,  while  for  an  ordinary  priest 
the  law  allowed  more  freedom  (Lev.  xxi.  2).  And 
Maimonides  {More  Nevochim,  iii.  48)  speaks  of 
the  dignity  of  the  Nazarite,  in  regard  to  his  sanctity, 
as  being  equal  to  that  of  the  high-priest.  The 
abstinence  from  wine  enjoined  upon  the  high-priest 
on  behalf  of  all  the  priests  when  they  were  about 
to  enter  upon  their  ministrations,  is  an  obvious, 
but  perhaps  not  such  an  important  point  in  the 
comparison.  There  is  a  passage  in  the  account 
given  by  Hegesippus  of  St.  James  the  Just 
(Eusebius,  Hist.  Ecc.  ii.  23),  which,  if  we  may 
<issume  it  to  represent  a  genuine  tradition,  is  worth 
H  notice,  and  seems  to  show  that  Nazarites  were 
permitted  even  to  enter  into  the  Holy  of  Holies. 
He  says  that  St.  James  w;ts  consecrated  fi-om  his 
birth  neither  to  eat  meat,  to  drink  wine,  to  cut 
his  hair,  nor  to  indulge  in  the  use  of  the  bath, 
and  that  to  him  alone  it  was  permitted  (tout^ 
fxovoi  i^rjv)  to  enter  the  sanctuary.  Perhaps  it 
would  not  be  imreasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
half  sacerdotal  character  of  Samuel  migiit  have  been 
connected  with  liis  prerogative  as  a  Nazarite.  Many 
of  the  Fathers  designate  him  as  a  priest,  although 
St.  Jerome,  on  the  obvious  ground  of  his  descent, 
denies  that  he  had  any  sacerdotal  rank.' 

IV.  Of  the  two  vows  recorded  of  St.  Paul,  that 
iu  Acts  -xviii.  18,''  certainly  camiot  be  regarded  as  a 
regular  Nazarite  vow.     All  that  weaie  told  of  it  is 


K  iVazir,  cap.  1,  }2,  p.  14". 

h  The  primary  meaning  of  tliis  wont  is  that  of  separa- 
tion with  a  holy  purpose.  Hence  it  is  used  to  e.xpress  the 
consecration  of  the  Nazarite  (Num.  vi.  4,  5,  9).  But  it 
appears  to  have  been  especially  applied  to  a  badge  of  con- 
secration and  distinction  worn  on  the  head,  such  as  the 
crown  of  a  king  (2  Sam.  i.  10;  2  K.  xi.  12),  the  diadem 
(p y)  of  the  high-priest  (Ex.  x.\ix.  6,  xxxix.  30),  as  well  as 
bis  anointed  hair,  the  long  hair  of  the  Nazarite,  and,  drop- 
ping the  idea  of  consecration  altogether,  to  long  hair  in  a 
general  sense  (Jer.  vii.  29).  This  may  throw  light  on  Gen. 
xlix.2Cand  Deut.  xxxiii.  16.  See  seclionVI.of  thisariicle. 

'  J.  C.  Ortlob,  in  an  essay   in   the  Tlusaiirui^  yvvus 


NAZARITE 

tliat,  ou  his  way  from  Corinth  to  Jerusalem,  he 
"  shaved  his  head  in  Cenchreae,  for  he  had  a  vow." 
It  would  seem  that  the  cutting  off  the  hair  was  at 
the  commencement  of  the  period  over  which  the 
vow  extended ;  at  all  events,  the  hair  was  not  cut 
off  at  the  door  of  the  Temple  when  the  sacrifices 
were  otlered,  as  was  required  by  the  law  of  the 
Nazarite.  It  is  most  likely  that  it  was  a  sort  of 
vow,  modified  from  the  proper  Nazarite  vow,  which 
had  come  into  use  at  this  time  amongst  the  re- 
ligious Jews  who  had  been  visited  by  sickness,  or 
any  other  calamity.  In  reference  to  a  vow  of  this 
kind  which  was  taken  by  Bernice,  Josephus  says 
that  "  they  were  accustomed  to  vow  that  they 
would  refi'ain  fiom  wine,  and  that  they  would  cut 
off  their  hair  thirty  days  before  the  presentation  of 
their  oflering." '  No  hint  is  given  us  of  the  pur- 
pose of  St.  Paul  in  this  act  of  devotion.  Spencer 
conjectures  that  it  might  have  been  pertbrmed  with 
a  view  to  obtain  a  good  voyage  ;  ■"  Neander,  with 
greater  probability,  that  it  was  an  expression  of 
thanksgiving  and  humiliation  on  account  of  some 
recent  illness  or  affliction  of  some  kind. 

The  other  reference  to  a  vow  taken  by  St.  Paul 
is  in  Acts  xxi.  24,  where  we  find  the  brethren  at 
Jerusalem  exhorting  him  to  take  part  with  tour 
Christians  who  had  a  vow  on  them,  to  sanctify 
(not  purifij,  as  iu  A.  V.)  himself  with  them,  and  to 
be  at  charges  with  them,  that  they  might  shave 
their  heads.  The  reason  alleged  tor  this  advice  is 
that  he  might  prove  to  those  who  misunderstood 
him,  that  he  walked  orderly  and  kept  the  law. 
Now  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  this  was  a  strictly 
legal  Nazarite  vow.  He  joined  the  four  men  for 
the  last  seven  days  of  their  consecration,  until  the 
offering  was  made  for  each  one  of  them,  and  their 
hair  was  cut  off  iu  the  usual  form  (ver.  26,  27).  It 
appears  to  have  been  no  uncommon  thing  for  those 
charitable  persons  who  could  aflbrd  it  to  assist  in 
paying  for  the  offerings  of  poor  Nazarites.  Josephus 
relates  that  Herod  Agrippa  I.,  when  he  desired  to 
show  his  zeal  for  the  religion  of  his  fathers,  gave 
direction  that  many  Nazarites  should  have  their 
heads  shorn:  "  and  the  Gemara  (quoted  by  Eeland, 
Ant.  Sac),  that  Alexander  Jannseus  contributed 
towards  supplying  nine  hundred  victims  for  three 
hundred  Nazarites. 

V.  That  the  institution  of  Nazaritism  existed 
and  had  become  a  matter  of  course  amongst  the 
Hebrews  before  the  time  of  Hoses  is  beyond  a 
doubt.  The  legislator  appears  to  have  done  no 
more  than  ordain  such  legulations  for  the  vow 
of  the  Nazarite  of  days  as  brought  it  under  the 
cognizance  of  the  priest  and  into  harmony  with 
the  general  S3'stem  of  religious  obsen'ance.  It  has 
been  assumed,  not  unreasonably,  that  the  conse- 
cration of  the  Nazaiite   for   life  was  of  at   least 


Theijlogico-Philologiciis,  vol.  i.  p.  587,  entitled  "  Samuel 
Judex  et  Propheta,  non  Pontifexautsacerdossacrificans," 
has  brought  forward  a  mass  of  testimony  ou  this  subject.   • 

k  Grotius,  Meyer,  Howson,  and  a  few  others,  refer  this 
vow  to  Aquila,  not  to  St.  Paul.  The  best  arguments  in 
favour  of  this  view  are  given  by  Mr.  Howson  (Life  of 
St.  Paul,  vol.  i.  p.  453).  Dean  Alford,  iu  his  note  on  Acts 
xviii.  18,  has  satisfactorily  replied  to  them. 

'  See  Neander's  I'lantivg  and  Training  the  Church,  i. 
208  (Ryland's  translation).  In  the  passage  translated 
fioni  Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  15.  ^l,  an  emendation  of  Neander's 
is  adopted.     See  also  Kuinoel  on  Acts  xviii.  I''. 

"'  />e  Leg.  Hcbr.  lib.  iii.  c.  vi.  §1. 

"  Antiq.  xix.  6.  $1. 


NAZARITE 

equal  antiquity."  It  may  not  have  neeclfd  any 
notice  or  nioditieation  in  the  law,  and  hence,  pro- 
bably, the  siJeni  e  respecting  it  in  the  Pentateuch. 
But  it  is  doubted  in  regard  to  Nazaritism  in 
general,  whether  it  was  of  native  or  foreign  origin. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  considered  that  the  letting  the 
hair  grow,  the  most  characteristic  feature  in  the 
vow,  was  taken  from  the  Egyptians.  This  notion 
has  been  substantially  adopted  by  Fagius,P  Spencer ,i 
Michaelis,''  Hengstenberg,^  and  some  other  critics. 
Hengstenberg  affirms  that  the  Egyptians  and  the 
Hebrews  were  distinguished  amongst  ancient  nations 
by  cutting  their  hair  as  a  matter  of  social  pro- 
priety ;  and  thus  the  marked  s'gnificance  of  long 
hair  must  have  been  common  to  them  both.  The 
arguments  of  Biihr,  however,  to  show  that  the 
wearing  long  hair  in  Egypt  and  all  other  heathen 
nations  had  a  meaning  opposed  to  the  idea  of  the 
Nazarite  vow,  seem  to  he  conclusive;'  and  Winer 
justly  observes  that  tlie  points  of  resemblance  be- 
tween the  Nazarite  vow  and  heathen  customs  are 
too  fragmentary  and  indefinite  to  furnish  a  safe 
foundation  fur  an  argument  in  favour  of  a  foreign 
origin  for  the  former. 

Ewald  supposes  that  Nazarites  for  life  were 
numerous  in  \ery  early  times,  and  that  they  mul- 
tiplied in  periods  of  great  politiad  and  religious 
excitement.  The  only  ones,  howe^'er,  expressly 
named  in  the  Old  Testament  are  Samson  and 
Samuel.  The  rabbinical  notion  that  Absalom  was 
a  Nazarite  seems  hardly  worthy  of  notice,  though 
Spencer  and  Liglittbot  have  adopted  it."  When 
Amos  wrote,  the  Nazarites,  as  well  as  the  prophets, 
suffered  from  the  persecution  and  contempt  of  the 
ungodly.  The  divine  word  respecting  them  was, 
"  1  raised  up  of  your  sons  tor  prophets  and  of 
your  young  men  Ibr  Nazarites.  liut  ye  gave  the 
Nazarites  wine  to  drink,  and  commanded  the  pro- 
phets, saying.  Prophesy  not"  (Am.  ii.  11,  12). 
in  the  time  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  we  tind  the  devout 
Jews,  when  they  were  bringing  their  gifts  to  the 
priests,  stirring  up  the  Nazarites  of  days  who  had 
completed  the  time  of  their  consecration,  to  make 
the  accustomed  otierings  ( I  Mace.  iii.  49).  From 
this  incident,  in  connexion  with  wliat  has  been  re- 
lated of  the  liberality  of  Alexander  Jannaeus  and 
Herod  Agrippa,  we  may  infer  that  the  number  of 
Nazarites  must  have  been  veiy  considerable  during 
tiie  two  centuries  and  a  half  which  preceded  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  insfcrnce  of  St. 
John  the  Baptist  and  that  of  St.  James  the  Just 
(if  we  acc-ept  the  traditional  account)  show  that 
tiie  Nazarite  for  life  retained  his  original  character 
till  later  times ;  and  the  act  of  St.  Paul  in  joining 
himself  with  the  !bur  Niuarites  at  Jerusalem  seems 
to  prove  that  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  of  days 
was  as  little  alteiej  in  its  important  teatures. 

VI.  The  word  ^^p  occurs  in   three  passages  of 

the  Old  Testament,  in  which  it  appears  to  mean 
one  separated  from  others  as  a  prince.  Two  of 
the  passages  refer  to  Joseph:    one   is   in   Jacob's 


NAZARITE 


473 


"  Ewald  spems  to  think  that  it  was  the  more  ancient 
ot  the  two  {AltcrUiiimtr,  p.  9G). 

I'  Critici  .vooi,  on  Num.  vi.  5. 

>i  De  Leg.  Ikbr.  lib.  iii.  c.  vi.  $1. 

'  Commentaries  on  the  Law  of  Moses,  bk.  iii.  ^145. 

"  £0'jpt  and  the  Bonks  of  Moses,  p.  190  (I'jiglish  vers.). 

t  Biilir,  Sifmbotik;  vol.  ii.  p.  439. 

"  Spencer,  IJe  Ley.  Hebr.  lib.  iii.  c.  vi.  ^M.  Lishtfoot, 
Kxercit.  in  1  Cor.  xl.  14.  Some  have  imagiticd  that 
Jephlha's  iluiiglitcr  was  consigned  to  a  NazariU'  vow  by 


benediction  of  his  sons  (Gen.  xlix.  26),  the  other 
in  iMoses'  benediction  of  tlie  tribes  (Deut.  xxxiii. 
ItJ).  As  these  texts  stand  in  our  version,  tlie 
blessing  is  spoken  of  as  falling  "  on  the  crown  of 
the  head  of  liim  who  was  separated  from  his  bre- 
thren." The  LXX.  render  the  words  in  one  place, 
eVl  Kopv(pris  wv  rjyriffaro  aSe\(pS>v,  and  in  the 
otiier  iirl  Kopv(pT)v  5o^aaQivTos  iv  a.Se\^o7s. 
The  Vidgate  translates  them  in  each  place  "  in 
vertice  Nazaraei  inter  fratres."  The  expression  is 
strikingly  like  that  used  of  the  high-priest  (Lev. 
xxi.  lU-12),  and  seems  to  derive  illustration  from 
the  use  of  the  word  "1T3.* 

The  third  passage  is  that  in  which  the  prophet 
is  mourning  over  the  departed  prosperity  and 
beauty  of  Sion  (Lam.  iv.  7,  8).  In  the  A.  V. 
the  words  are  "  Her  Nazarites  were  purer  than 
snow,  they  were  whiter  than  milk,  they  were 
more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies,  their  polishing 
was  of  sapphire,  their  visage  is  blacker  than  a 
coal,  they  are  not  known  in  the  streets,  their 
skin  cleaveth  to  their  bones,  it  is  withered,  it  is 
become  like  a  stick."  In  favour  of  the  application 
of  this  passage  to  the  Nazarites  are  the  renderings 
of  the  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  and  nearly  all  the  ver- 
sions. But  Gesenius,  de  Wette,  and  other  modern 
critics  think  that  it  refers  to  the  young  princes  of 
Israel,  and  that  the  word  1*T3  is  used  in  the  same 
sense  as  it  is  in  regard  to  Joseph,  Gen.  xlix,  26 
and  Deut.  xxxiii.  1(3. 

VII.  The  vow  of  the  Nazarite  of  days  must 
have  been  a  selt-imposed  discipline,  undertaken 
with  a  specific  purpose.  The  Jewish  writers 
mostly  regarded  it  as  a  kind  of  penance,  and  hence 
accounted  for  the  place  which  the  law  regulating 
it  holds  in  Leviticus  immediately  after  the  law 
relating  to  adultery.?  As  the  quantity  of  hair 
which  grew  within  the  ordinary  period  of  a  vow 
could  not  have  been  very  considerable,  and  as  a 
temporal  y  abstinence  from  wine  was  probably  not  a 
more  noticeable  thing  amongst  the  Hebrews  than 
it  is  in  modern  society,  the  Nazarite  of  days  might 
have  fulfilled  his  vow  without  attracting  much 
notice  until  the  day  came  for  him  to  make  his 
oll'ering  in  the  Temple. 

But  the  Nazarite  for  life,  on  the  other  hand, 
must  have  been,  with  his  flowing  hair  and  per- 
sistent refusal  of  strong  drink,  a  marked  man. 
Whether  in  any  other  particular  his  daily  life  was 
peculiar  is  uncertain.^  He  may  have  had  some 
privileges  (as  we  have  seen)  which  gave  him 
something  of  a  priestly  character,  and  {us  it  has 
been  conjectured)  he  may  have  given  up  much 
of  his  time  to  sacred  studies.*  Though  not  neces- 
sarily cut  off  fiom  social  life,  when  the  turn  of 
his  mind  was  devotional,  consciousness  of  his  pecu- 
liar dedication  must  have  influenced  his  habits  and 
manner,  anil  in  some  cases  probably  led  him  to 
retire  from  the  world. 

But  without  our  resting  on  anything  that  may 
be  called  in  question,  he  must  have  been  a  public 


her  father.    See  Carpzov,  p.  156. 

«  See  note''  p.  472, 

y  iVIaimoniiies,  Moi:  Xev.  ii.  48. 

'  Nicolas  Fuller  has  discussed  the  subject  of  the  dress 
of  the  Nazarites  (as  well  as  of  tlio  prcipliots)  in  his  Miscel- 
lanea Saau.  See  Critici  Sacri,  vol.  ix.  p.  1023.  Those 
who  have  imagined  that  the  Nazarites  wore  a  peculiar 
dress,  doubt  whelher  it  was  of  royal  purple,  of  rough 
hair-cloth  (like  St.  .John's),  or  of  some  white  material 

"  Vatablus  on  Num.  vi.  {Critici  Saa-i). 


474 


NAZAEITE 


witness  for  the  idea  of  legal  strictness  aiid  of  what- 
ever else  Nazaritism  was  intended  to  express :  and 
as  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  for  life  was  taken  by  his 
parents  before  he  was  conscious  of  it,  his  observance 
of  it  was  a  sign  of  filial  obedience,  like  the  peculi- 
arities of  the  Kechabites. 

The  meaning  of  the  Nazarite  vow  has  been  re- 
garded in  ditferent  lights.  Some  consider  it  as  a 
symbolical  expression  of  the  Divine  nature  working 
in  man,  and  deny  that  it  involved  anything  of  a 
strictly  ascetic  character  ;  others  see  in  it  the  prin- 
ciple of  stoicism,  and  imagine  that  it  was  intended 
to  cultivate,  and  bear  witness  for,  the  sovereignty 
of  the  will  over  the  lower  tendencies  of  human 
nature :  while  some  regard  it  wholly  in  the  light  of 
a  sacrifice  of  the  person  to  God. 

(a.)  Several  of  the  Jewish  writers  have  taken  the 
first  view  more  or  less  completely.  Abarbanel  ima- 
gined that  the  hair  represents  the  intellectual  power, 
the  power  belonging  to  the  head,  which  the  wise 
man  was  not  to  sutier  to  be  diminished  or  to  be 
interfered  with,  by  drinking  wine  or  by  any  other 
indulgence  ;  and  that  the  Nazarite  was  not  to  ap- 
proach the  dead  because  he  was  appointed  to  bear 
witness  to  the  eternity  of  the  divine  nature.''  Of 
modern  critics,  Biihr  appears  to  have  most  com- 
pletely troddeii  in  the  same  track. «  While  he  denies 
that  the  life  of  the  Nazarite  was,  in  the  proper 
sense,  ascetic,  he  contends  that  his  abstinence  from 
wine,"*  and  his  not  being  allowed  to  approach 
the  dead,  figured  the  separation  from  other  men 
which  characterises  the  consecrated  servant  of  the 
Lord  ;  and  that  his  long  hair  signified  his  holiness. 
The  hair,  according  to  his  theoi-y,  as  being  the 
bloom  of  manliood,  is  the  symbol  of  growth  in  the 
vegetable  as  well  as  the  animal  kingdom,  and  there- 
fore of  the  operation  of  the  Divine  power.^ 

(6.)  But  the  philosophical  .Jewish  doctors,  for  the 
most  part,  seem  to  have  preferred  the  second  view. 
Thus  Bechai  speaks  of  the  Nazarite  as  a  conqueror 
who  subdued  his  temptations,  and  who  wore  his 
long  hair  as  a  crown,  "  quod  ipse  rex  sit  cupidita- 
tibus  imperans  praeter  morem  reliquorum  homi- 
uum,  qui  cujiiditatum  sunt  servi."'  He  supposed 
that  the  hair  was  worn  rough,  as  a  protest  against 
foppery .K  But  others,  still  taking  it  as  a  regal 
emblem,  have  imagined  that  it  was  kept  elabo- 
rately dressed,  and  fancy  that  thev  see  a  proof  of 
the  existence  of  the  custom  in  the  seven  locks  of 
Samson  (Judg.  xvi.  13-19).'' 

(c.)  Philo  has  taken  the  deeper  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. In  his  work,  On  Animals  fit  for  sacrifice,' 
he  gives  an  account  of  the  Nazarite  vow,  and  calls 
it  7]  fvxh  fi-ijaJ^V-  According  to  him  the  Naza- 
rite did  not  sacrifice  merely  his  possessions  but 
his  person,  and  the  act  of  sacrifice  was  to  be 
performed  in  the  completest  manner.  The  out- 
ward observances  enjoined  upon  him  were  to  be 
the  genuine  expressions  of  his  spiritual  devotion. 


b  Quoted  by  De  Muis  on  Num.  vi.  {Critici  Saa-i). 

c  Si/mbolik,  vol.  ii.  p.  416-430. 

d  He  will  not  allow  that  this  abstinence  at  all  resembled 
in  its  meaning  that  of  the  priests,  when  engaged  in  their 
ministrations,  which  was  intended  only  to  secure  strict 
propriety  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties. 

•^  Bahr  defends  this  notion  by  several  philological  argu- 
ments, which  do  not  seem  to  be  much  to  the  point.  The 
nearest  to  the  purpose  is  that  derived  from  Lev.  xxv.  5, 
where  the  unpruncd  vines  o^'  the  sabbatical  year  are  called 
Nazarites.  But  this,  of  course,  can  be  well  explained  as  a 
metaphor  from  unshorn  hair. 

f  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  152.  Abenezra  uses  very  similar 
language  {Drusius,  on  Num.  vi.  7). 


NAZARITE 

To  represent  spotless  purity  within,  he  was  to  shun 
defilement  from  the  dead,  at  the  expense  even  of 
the  obligation  of  the  closest  fiimily  ties.  As  no 
spiritual  state  or  act  can  be  signified  by  any  single 
symbol,  he  was  to  identify  himself  with  each  one 
of  the  three  victims  which  he  had  to  offer  as  often 
as  he  broke  his  vow  by  accidental  pollution,  or 
when  the  period  of  his  vow  came  to  an  end.  He 
was  to  realise  in  himself  the  ideas  of  the  whole 
burnt-oft'ering,  the  sin-offering,  and  the  peace-offer- 
ing. That  no  mistake  might  be  made  in  regard  to 
the  three  sacrifices  being  shadows  of  one  and  the 
same  substance,  it  was  ordained  that  the  victims 
should  be  individuals  of  one  and  the  same  species  of 
animal.  The  shorn  hair  was  put  on  the  fire  of  the 
altar  in  order  that,  although  the  divine  law  did 
not  permit  the  offering  of  human  blood,  something 
might  be  offered  up  actually  a  portion  of  his  own 
person.  Ewald,  following  in  the  same  line  of 
thought,  has  treated  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  as  an 
act  of  self-sacrifice  ;  but  he  looks  on  the  preservation 
of  the  hair  as  signifying  that  the  Nazarite  is  so  set 
apart  for  God,  that  no  change  or  diminution  should 
be  made  in  any  part  of  his  person,  and  as  serving 
to  himsetf  and  the  world  for  a  visible  token  of  his 
peculiar  consecration  to  .Jehovah.'' 

That  the  Nazarite  vow  was  essentially  a  sacrifice 
of  the  person  to  the  Lord  is  obviously  in  accordance 
with  the  terms  of  the  Law  (Num.  vi.  2).  In  the 
oil]  dispensation  it  may  have  answered  to  that 
"  living  sacrifice,  holy,  acceptable  unto  God,"  which 
the  believer  is  now  called  upon  to  make.  As  the 
Nazarite  was  a  witness  for  the  straitness  of  tlie  law, 
as  distinguished  from  the  freedom  of  the  Gospel,  his 
sacrifice  of  himself  was  a  submission  to  the  letter  of 
a  rule.  Its  outward  manifestations  were  restraints 
and  eccentricities.  The  man  was  separated  fiom 
his  brethren  that  he  might  be  peculiarly  devoted  to 
the  Lord.  This  was  consistent  with  the  purpose  of 
divine  wisdom  for  the  time  for  which  it  was  or- 
dained. Wisdom,  we  are  told,  was  justified  of  her 
child  in  the  life  of  the  great  Nazarite  who  preached 
the  baptism  of  repentance  when  the  Law  was  about 
to  give  way  to  the  Gospel.  Amongst  those  born  of 
women,  no  greater  than  he  had  arisen,  "  but  he 
that  is  least  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  is  greater 
than  he."  The  sacrifice  which  the  believer  now 
makes  of  himself  is  not  to  cut  him  off  from  his 
brethren,  but  to  unit^  him  more  closely  with  them  ; 
not  to  subject  him  to  an  outward  bond,  but  to  con- 
firm him  in  the  liberty  with  which  Christ  has  made 
him  free.  It  is  not  without  significance  that  wine 
under  the  Law  was  strictly  forbidden  to  tiie  priest 
who  was  engaged  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuary, 
and  to  the  i'&w  whom  the  Nazarite  vow  bound  to 
the  special  service  of  the  Lord  ;  while  in  the  Church 
of  Christ  it  is  consecrated  for  the  use  of  every  be- 
liever to  v^'hom  the  command  has  come,  "  drink  ye 
all  of  this."'" 


g  This  was  also  the  opinion  of  Ligbtfoot,  Exeixit.  in 
1  Cur.  xi.  14,  and  Sermon  on  Judg.  xi.  39. 

ii  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Hebr.  iii.  vi.  §1. 

>  Opera,  vol.  ii.  p.  249  (ed.  Mangey.) 

It  Ligbtfoot  is  inclined  to  favour  certain  Jewish  writers 
who  identify  the  vine  with  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  and  to  connect  the  Nazarite  law  with  the  con- 
dition of  Adam  before  he  fell  (-ffxtrcii.  in  Luc.  i.  15). 
This  strange  notion  is  made  still  more  fanciful  by  Magee  ' 
{Atonement  and  Sacrifice,  Illustration  xxxviii.). 

■n  This  consideration  might  surely  have  furnished  St. 
Jerome  with  a  better  answer  to  the  Tatianists,  who  al- 
leged Amos  ii.  12  in  defence  of  their  abstinence  from 
wine,  than  his  bitter  taunt  that  they  were  bringing  "  Ju- 


NEAH 

Carpzov.  Apparat'ts  Crilicns,  p.  148 ;  Reland, 
Ant.  S'wrae,  p.  [I.  c.  10  ;  Meinhard,  Fmdi  Nazirac- 
atiis  (^Thesaurus  T/ieolor/ico-philologicus,  ii.  473). 
The  notes  of  De  Muis  aud  Drusius  on  Num.  vi. 
{Cntici  S(ia-i)  ;  the  notes  of  Grotius  on  Luke  i. 
15,  and  Kuinoel  on  Acts  xviii.  18;  Spencer,  De 
Legibus  Hebraconcm,  lib.  iii.  cap.  vi.  §1  ;  Mi- 
chaelis.  Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  Moses,  Book 
iii.  §145;  the  Mishnical  treatise  Nazir,  with  the 
notes  in  Surenhusius'  Mishna,  iii.  146,  &c. ;  Bahr, 
Sijmbolik,  ii.  416-430  ;  Ewald,  Altert/tiimer,  p.  96; 
also  Geschichte,  ii.  43.  Carpzov  mentions  with 
praise  Naziraeus,  seu  Comnientarius  literalis  et 
inysticus  in  Legem  Naziraeorum,  by  Cremer.  The 
essay  of  Jleinhard  contains  a  large  amount  of  infor- 
mation on  the  subject,  besides  what  bears  imme- 
diately on  St.  Paul's  vows.  Spencer  gives  a  full 
account  of  heathen  customs  in  dediaiting  the  hair. 
The  Notes  of  De  Jluis  contain  a  valuable  collection 
of  Jewish  testimonies  on  the  meaning  of  the  Nazarite 
vow  in  general.  Those  of  Grotius  relate  especially 
to  the  Nazarites'  abstinence  from  wine.  Hengsten- 
berg  (Egi/pt  and  the  Boohs  of  Moses,  p.  19(;),  Eng- 
lish translation)  confutes  Biihr's  theory.       [S.  C] 

NE'AH  ( nysn,  with  the  def.  article :  Vat.  omits ; 
Alex.  Avvova  : "  Anea\  a  place  which  was  one  of  the 
landmarks  on  the  boundary  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix. 
13  only).  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  [Onomast. 
"  Anna ")  it  is  mentioned  merely  with  a  caution 
that  there  is  a  place  of  the  same  name,  10  miles  S. 
of  Neapolis.  It  has  not  yet  been  identified  even  b}' 
Schwarz.  If  el  Meshhad,  about  2^  miles  E.  of 
Sejfnrieh,  be  Gath-hepiier,  and  Rummaneh  about 
4  miles  N.E.  of  the  same  place,  Ki.mmon,  then 
Neah  must  proljably  be  sought  somewhere  to  the 
north  of  the  last  named  town.  [G.] 

NEAP'OLIS  (NectTToAis)  is  the  place  in  northern 
Greece  where  Paul  and  his  associates  first  landed  in 
Europe  (Acts  xvi.  11)  ;  where,  no  doubt,  he  landed 
also  on  his  second  visit  to  Macedonia  (Acts  xx.  1), 
and  whence  certainly  he  embarked  on  his  last  journey 
through  that  province  to  Troas  and  Jerusalem  I'Acts 
XX.  6).  Philippi  being  an  inland  town,  Neapolis 
was  evidently  the  port ;  and  hence  it  is  accounted 
for,  that  Luke  leaves  tlie  verb  which  describes  the 
voyage  from  Troas  to  Neapolis  {fvdvSpo/j.ria-a/xei'), 
to  describe  the  continuance  of  the  journey  from 
Neapolis  to  Philippi.  ]t  has  been  made  a  question 
wiiethcr  this  harbour  occupied  the  site  of  the  present 
Kavalla,  a  Turkish  town  on  the  coast  of  Houmelia, 
or  should  be  sought  at  some  other  place.  Cousin^ry 
(  Voi/age  dans  la  Macedoine)  and  Tafel  {De  Via 
Militari  Romanornm  Egnafia,  Sec.)  maintain, 
against  the  common  opinion,  that  Luke's  Neapolis 
was  not  at  Kavalla,  the  inhabited  town  of  that 
name,  but  at  a  deserted  harbour  ten  or  twelve  miles 
furtlier  west,  known  as  Eski  or  Old  Kavalla.  Most 
of.  those  who  contend  for  the  other  identification 
assume  the  point  without  much  discussion,  and  the 
subject  demands  still  the  attention  of  the  biblical 


NEAPOLIS 


475 


daicas  fabulas "  into  the  church,  and  that  thny  were 
bound,  on  their  own  ground,  neither  to  tut  tlieir  liair,  to 
eat  grapes  or  raisins,  or  to  approach  tlie  corpse  of  a  dead 
parent  (in  Amos  il.  12). 

•  This  is  the  reading  of  the  text  of  the  Vulgale  given 
in  the  Benedictine  Edition  of  .Jerome.  'I'he  ordinary  copies 
have  Soa. 

b  Colonel  Leake  did  not  visit  either  tliis  K.ivalla  or  the 
otlier,  and  his  assertion  that  there  are  "  the  ruins  of  a 
Greek  city"  there  (which  he  supposes,  liowever,  to  have 
been  Galepsus,  and  not  Neapolis)  appears  to  rest  on 


geographer.  It  may  be  well,  therefore,  to  mention 
with  some  fulness  the  reasons  which  support  the 
claim  of  Kavalla  to  be  regarded  as  the  ancient  Nea- 
polis, in  opposition  to  those  which  are  urged  in 
with  Latin  inscriptions,  of  the  age  of  the  emperor 
favour  of  the  other  harbour. 

Kirst,  the  Koman  and  Greek  ruins  at  Kavalla 
prove  that  a  port  existed  there  in  ancient  times. 
Neapolis,  wherever  it  was,  formed  the  point  of  con- 
tact between  Northern  Greece  and  Asia  Minor,  at  a 
period  of  great  commercial  activity,  and  would  be 
expected  to  have  left  vestiges  of  its  former  import- 
ance. The  antiquities  found  still  at  Kavalla  fulfil 
entirely  that  pre.sumption.  One  of  these  is  a  massive 
aqueduct,  which  brings  water  into  the  town  from  a 
distance  of  ten  or  twelve  miles  north  of  Kavalla, 
along  the  slopes  of  ,Symbolum.  It  is  built  on  two 
tiers  of  arches,  a  liundred  feet  long  and  eighty  feet 
high,  and  is  carried  over  the  narrow  valley  between 
the  promontory  and  the  main  land.  The  upper  part 
of  the  work  is  modern,  but  the  sirbstructions  are 
evidently  Roman,  as  is  seen  from  the  composite 
cliaracter  of  the  material,  the  cement,  and  the  style 
of  the  masonry.  Just  out  of  the  western  gate  are 
two  marble  sarcophagi,  used  as  watering-troughs. 
Columns  with  chaplets  of  elegant  Ionic  workman- 
ship, blocks  of  marble,  fragments  of  hewn  stone, 
evidently  antique,  are  numerous  both  in  the  town 
and  the  suburbs.  On  some  of  these  are  inscrip- 
tions, mostly  in  Latin,  but  one  at  least  in  Greek. 
In  digging  for  the  foundation  of  new  houses  the 
walls  of  ancient  ones  are  often  brought  to  light,  and 
sometimes  tablets  with  sculptured  figures,  which 
would  be  deemed  curious  at  Athens  or  Corinth. 
For  fuller  details,  see  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  October, 
1860.  On  the  contrary,  no  ruins,  have  been  found 
at  Eski  Kavalla,  or  Paleopoli,  as  it  is  also  called, 
which  can  be  pronounced  unmistakeably  ancient. 
No  remains  of  walls,  no  inscriptions,  and  no  indica- 
tions of  any  thoroughfare  leading  thence  to  Philippi, 
are  reported  to  exist  there.  Cousiue'ry,  it  is  true, 
speaks  of  certain  ruins  at  the  place  which  he  deems 
worthy  of  notice;  but  according  to  the  testimony 
of  others  these  ruins  are  altogether  inconsiderable, 
and,  which  is  still  more  decisive,  are  modern  in  their 
character.''  Cousinery  himself,  in  fact,  coi'robor.afes 
this,  when  he  says  that  on  the  isthmus  which  binds 
the  peninsula  to  the  main  land,  "  on  trouve  les  ruines 
do  I'ancienne  A^eapolis  ou  celles  d'un  chateau  re- 
construit  dans  le  moycn  age.''  It  appears  that  a 
mediaeval  or  Venetian  fortress  existed  there ;  but 
as  far  as  is  yet  ascertained,  nothing  else  has  been 
discovered,  which  points  to  an  earlier  period. 

Secondly,  the  advantages  of  the  position  render 
Kavalla  the  probable  site  of  Neapolis.  It  is  the  first 
convenient  harbour  south  of  the  Hellespont,  on 
coming  from  the  east.  Thasos  serves  ;is  a  natural 
landmark.  Tafel  savs,  indeed,  that  Kavalla  has  no 
port,  or  one  next  to  none;  but  that  is  incorrect. 
The  fttct  that  the  place  is  now  the  seat  of  an  active 
conmierce  proves  the  contrary.     It  lies  open  some- 


Cousinery's  statement.  But  as  involving  this  claim  of 
ICski  Kavalla  in  still  greater  doubt,  it  may  be  added 
that  the  situation  of  Galepsus  itself  is  quite  uncertain. 
Dr.  Arnold  (note  on  Thucyd.  iv.  107)  places  it  near  the 
mouth  of  the  Stryinou,  and  Ikiico  much  further  west  than 
Leake  supposes.  According  to  Cousinery,  Galepsus  Is  to 
be  sought  at  Kavalla. 

•■  On  p.  119  he  says  again:  "  l>cs  ruines  do  Tancienne 
vlUc  de  Ne.ipolis  se  compospul  principalement  des  restes 
d'un  chateau  du  moycn  age  enticrement  abundoniie  et 
peu  accessible." 


476 


NEAPOLIS 


what  to  the  south  and  south-west,  bat  is  other- 
wise well  sheltered.  There  is  no  danger  in  i'oiiig 
into  the  harbour.  Even  a  rock  which  lies  oft'  the 
point  of  the  town  has  twelve  fathoms  alongside  of 
it.  The  bottom  aftbrds  good  anchorage  ;  and  although 
the  bay  may  not  be  so  large  as  that  of  Eski  Kavalla, 
it  is  ample  for  the  accommodation  of  any  number 
of  vessels  which  the  course  of  trade  or  travel  be- 
tween Asia  Minor  and  Northern  Greece  would  be 
likely  to  bring  together  there  at  any  one  time. 

Thirdly,  the  facility  of  intercourse  between  this 
port  and  Philippi  shows  that  Kavalla  and  Neapolis 
must  be  the  same.  The  distance  is  tai  miles,  and 
hence  not  greater  than  Corinth  was  from  Ceuchreae, 
and  Ostia  Irom  Rome.  Both  places  are  in  sight  at 
once  fiom  the  top  of  Symbolum.  The  distance 
between  Philippi  and  Eski  Kavalla  must  be  nearly 
twice  as  great.  Nature  itself  has  opened  a  passage 
from  the  one  place  to  the  other.  The  mountains 
which  guard  the  plain  of  Philippi  on  the  coast-side 
fall  apart  just  behind  Kavalla,  and  render  the  con- 
struction of  a  road  there  entirely  easy.  No  other 
such  defile  exists  at  any  other  point  in  this  line  of 
iormidable  hills.  It  is  impossible  to  view  the  con- 
figuration of  the  country  from  the  sea,  and  not  feel  at 
once  that  the  only  natural  place  for  crossing  into  the 
interior  is  this  break-down  in  the  vicinity  of  Kavalla. 
Fourthly,  the  notices  of  the  ancient  writers  lead 
us  to  adopt  the  same  view.  Thus  Dio  Cassius  says 
(Hist.  EoM.  xlvii.  35)  that  Neapolis  was  opposite 
Thasos  (icar'  avmripas  Qdcrov),  and  that  is  the 
situation  of  Kavalla.  It  would  be  much  less  cor- 
rect, if  correct  at  all,  to  say  that  the  other  Kavalla 
was  so  situated,  since  no  part  of  the  island  extends 
so  far  to  the  west.  Appian  says  [Bell.  Civ.  iv. 
106)  that  the  camp  of  the  Repubhcans  near  the 
Gangas,  the  river  (Trora/ibs)  at  Philippi,  was  nine 
Roman  miles  from  their  triremes  at  Neapolis  (it 
was  considerably  further  to  the  other  place),  and 
that  Thasos  was  twelve  Roman  miles  from  their 
naval  station  (so  we  should  understand  the  text) ; 
the  latter  distance  appropiiate  again  to  Kavalla,  but 
not  to  the  harbour  further  west. 

Finally,  the  ancient  Itineraries  support  entirely 
the  identification  in  question.  Both  the  Antonine 
ahd  the  Jerusalem  Itineraries  show  that  the  Egna- 
tian  Way  passed  through  Philippi.  They  mention 
Philippi  and  Neapolis  as  ne.xt  to  each  other  in  the 
order  of  succession ;  and  since  the  line  of  travel 
which  these  Itineraries  sketch  was  the  one  which 
led  from  the  west  to  Byzantium,  or  Constantinople, 
it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  tlie  road,  after 
leaving  Philippi,  would  pursue  the  most  convenient 
and  direct  course  to  the  east  which  the  nature  of 
the  country  allows.  If  the  road,  therefore,  was 
constructed  on  this  obvious  principle,  it  would 
follow  the  track  of  the  present  Turkish  road,  and 
the  next  station,  consequently,  would  be  Neapolis, 
or  Kav.alla,  on  the  coast,  at  the  termination  of  the 
only  natural  defile  across  the  iuteiveniug  mountains. 
The  distance,  as  has  been  said,  is  about  ten  miles. 
The  Jerusalem  Itinerary  gives  the  distance  between 
Philippi  and  Neapolis  as  ten  Roman  miles,  and  the 
Antonine  Itinerary  as  twelve  miles.  The  difference 
in  the  latter  case  is  unimpoitant,  and  not  greater 
than  in  some  other  instiuices  where  the  places  in 
the  two  Itineraries  are  unquestionably  the  same. 
It  must  be  several  miles  farther  than  this  from 
Philippi  to  Old  Kavalla,  and  hence  the  Neapolis  of 
the  Itineraries  could  not  be  at  that  point.  The 
theory  of  Tafel  is,  that  Akontisma  or  Herkontroma 
(the  same  place,  without  doubt),  which  the  Itine- 


NEBAIOTH 

raries  mention  next  to  Neapolis,  was  at  the  present 
Kavalla,  and  Neapolis  at  Leuter  or  Eski  Kavalla. 
This  theory,  it  is  true,  arranges  the  places  in  the 
order  of  the  Itineraries  ;  but,  as  Leake  objects,  there 
would  be  a  needless  detour  of  nearly  twenty  miles, 
and  that  through  a  region  much  more  difficult  than 
the  direct  way.  The  more  accredited  view  is  that 
Akontisma  was  beyond  Kavalla,  further  east. 

Neapolis,  therefore,  like  the  present  Kavalla,  was 
on  a  high  rocky  promontory  which  juts  out  into 
the  Aegean.  The  harbour,  a  mile  and  a  half  wide 
at  the  entrance,  and  half  a  mile  broad,  lies  on  the 
west  side.  The  indifferent  roadstead  on  the  east 
should  not  be  called  a  harbour.  Symbolum,  1670 
feet  high,  with  a  defile  which  leads  into  the  plain 
of  Philippi,  comes  down  near  to  the  coast  a  little  to 
the  west  of  the  town.  In  winter  the  sun  sinks 
behind  Mount  Athos  in  the  south-west  as  early  as 
4  o'clock  P.ii.  The  land  along  the  eastern  shore  is 
low,  and  otherwise  unmarked  by  'any  peculiarity. 
The  island  of  Thasos  bears  a  little  to  the  S.E.,  twelve 
or  fifteen  miles  distant.  Plane-trees  just  beyond  the 
walls,  not  less  than  four  or  five  hundred  years  old, 
cast  their  shadow  over  the  road  v/hich  Paul  followal 
on  his  way  to  Philippi.  Kavalla  has  a  population  of' 
five  or  sis  thousand,  nine-tenths  of  whom  are  Mussul- 
mans, and  the  rest  Greeks.  For  fuller  or  supple- 
mentary information,  see  Biblioth.  S^-icra,  as  above, 
and  also  Diet,  of  Geog.  ii.  p.  411. 

For  Neapolis  as  the  Greek  name  of  Shechem,  now 
Nabulus,  see  Shechem.  [H.  B.  H.] 

NEARI'AH(nny;:  NcoaS/a:  Naaria).  1. 
One  of  the  six  sons  of  Shemaiah  in  the  line  of  the 
royal  family  of  Judah  after  the  captivity  (1  Chr. 
iii".  22,  23). 

2.  A  son  of  Ishi,  and  one  of  the  captains  of  the 
500  Simeonites  who,  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah,  drove 
out  the  Amalekites  from  Mount  Seir  (1  Chr.  iv.  42). 

NEBA'I  0313;  Keri,  n-J  :  Nco^Saj:  Nehai). 
A  family  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  signed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  19).  The  LXX. 
followed  the  written  text,  while  the  Vulgate  adopted 
the  reading  of  the  margin. 


NEBAI'OTH,  NEBAJ'OTH  (nV33 :  Na- 
^a'idid :  Nabajoth),  the  "  first-bora  of  Ishmael " 
(Gen.  XXV.  13;  1  Chr.  1.  29),  and  father  of  a  pas- 
toral tribe  named  after  him,  the  "  rams  of  Ne- 
baioth"  being  mentioned  by  the  prophet  Isaiah 
(Ix.  7)  with  the  flocks  of  Kedar.  From  the  days 
of  Jerome  (Comment,  in  Gen.  xx.  13),  this  people 
had  been  identified  with  the  Nabathaeans,  until  M. 
Quatrem^re  first  investigated  the  origin  of  the  latter, 
their  language,  religion,  and  history ;  and  by  the 
light  he  threw  on  a  very  obscure  subject  enabled  us 
to  form  a  clearer  judgment  i  especting  this  assumed 
identification  than  was,  in  the  previous  state  .of 
knowledge,  possible.  It  will  be  convenient  to  reca- 
pitulate, biiefly,  the  results  of  M.  Qiiatrem^re's 
labours,  with  those  of  the  later  works  of  BI .  Chwolson 
and  others  on  the  same  subject,  before  wo  consider 
the  grounds  for  identifying  the  Nabathaeans  with 
Nebaioth. 

From  tiie  works  of  Arab  authors,  M.  Quatremfere 
(Meinoire  sur  les  Nahateens,  Paris,  1835,  reprinted 
from  the  Nouveau  Jonm.  Asiat.  Jan.-Mar.,  1835) 
proved    the   existence   of   a    nation    called    Nabat 
.-,  '  "^i 

(kxj'-   *^»'   Niilaeet   (k-^-AJi'   I'l-  Anbat  (ijLoV: 


NEBAIOTH 

[Sihdh  and  Kdiiioos),  rejmtc  1  to  lie  of  nnciont 
oiigin,  of  whom  scattered  remnants  existed  in  Arab 
times,  after  the  era  of  the  Flight.  The  Nahat,  in 
the  days  of  their  early  prosperity,  inhabited  the 
country  chiefly  between  the  Euphiates  and  the  Tigris, 
Beyn  en  Nahreyn  and  El-Irdk  (the  Mesopotamia 
and  Chaldaea  of  the  classics).  That  this  was  their 
chief  seat  and  that  they  were  Aramaeans,  or  more 
accurately  Syro-Chaldaeans,  seems,  in  the  present 
st;vte  of  the  mquiry  (for  it  will  presently  be  seen 
that,  by  the  publication  of  Oriental  texts,  our  know- 
ledge niav  be  very  greatly  enlarged)  to  he  a  safe 
conclusion.  The  Arabs  loosely  ajiply  the  name 
Nabat  to  the  Syrians,  or  especially  the  eastern 
Syrians,  to  the  Syro-Chaldaeans,  &c.  Thus  El- 
Mes'oodee  {ap.  Quatremere,  /.  c.)  says,  "The  Sy- 
I'ians  are  the  same  as  the  Nabathaeans  (Nabat). 
.  .  .  The  Nimrods  were  the  kings  of  the  Syrians 
whom  the  Arabs  call  Nabathaeans.  .  .  .  The  Chal- 
daeans  are  the  same  as  the  Syrians,  otherwise  called 
'N^hat  (Kitdh  et-Tenbceh).  The  Nabathaeans  .  .  . 
founded  the  city  of  Babylon.  .  .  .  The  inhabitants 
of  Nineveh  wei'e  part  of  tliose  whom  we  call  Nabeet 
or  Syrians,  wlio  form  one  nation  and  speak  one 
language ;  that  of  tlie  Nabeet  dift'ers  only  in  a 
small  number  of  letters;  but  the  foundation  of  the 
language  is  identical "  (^Kitdh  Mnrooj-edh-Dhnhah). 
These,  and  many  other  fragmentary  passages,  prove 
sufficiently  the  existence  of  a  great  Aramaean  people 
called  Nabat,  celebrated  among  the  Arabs  tor  their 
knowledge  of  agriculture,  and  of  magic,  astronomy, 
medicine,  and  science  (so  called)  generally.  But 
we  have  stronger  evidence  to  this  effect.  Quatre- 
mere introduced  to  the  notice  of  the  learned  world 
the  most  important  relic  of  that  people's  literature, 
a  treatise  on  Nabat  agriculture.  A  study  of  an 
imperfect  copy  of  that  work,  which  unfortunately 
was  all  he  could  gain  access  to,  induced  him  to  date 
it  about  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  cir.  B.C. 
600.  M.  Chwolsou,  professor  of  Oriental  lan- 
guages at  St.  Petersburg,  who  had  shown  himself 
lifted  for  the  inquiry  by  liis  treatise  on  the  Sabians 
and  their  religion  (Die  Ssahier  und  der  Ssabis- 
nms),  has  since  made  that  book  a  subject  of  special 
study  ;  and  in  his  Remains  of  Ancient  Babylonian 
Literature  in  Arabic  Translations  ( Ueber  die  Ueber- 
reste  dcr  Alt-Babylonischcn  Literatur  in  Ara- 
bischcn  Uebersctzungcn,  St.  Petersburg,  18.59),  he 
has  published  the«  results  of  his  impiiry.  Those 
results,  while  they  establish  all  M.  Quatremere 
liad  adv.anced  respecting  the  existence  of  the  Nabat, 
go  far  beyond  him  both  in  the  antiquity  and  the 
importahcc  M.  Chwolson  claims  for  tliat  people. 
Ewald,  however,  in  1857,  .stated  some  grave  causes 
for  doubting  this  antiquity,  and  again  in  18.59 
(both- piipei's  appeared  in  tiie  Goettingische  gekhrte 
Anzeigen)  repeated  moderately  but  decidedly  his 
misgivings.  M.  h'cnan  followed  on  the  same  side 
(Journ.  dc  I'lnstittU,  Ap.-May,  18G0);  and  more 
recently,  M.  de  (iutschmid  (Zeitschrift  d.Dcutsvh. 
Murgenland.  GescUschaft,  xv.  l-lOO)  has  attacked 
the  whole  theory  in  a  lengthy  essay.  The  limits 
of  this  Dictionary  forbid  us  to  do  more  than  leca- 
pitulato,  as  shortly  as  possible,  the  bearings  of  this 
remarkable  inquiry,  a.s  far  as  they  relate  to  the 
subject  of  the  article. 

The  remains  of  the  literattne  of  the  Nabat  consist 
of  four  woiks,  one  of  them  a  fragment :— the  '  Book 
of  Nabat  Agriculture'  (already  mentioned);  the 
'  Book  of  Poisons ;'  the  '  Book  of  Tenkelooshil 
the  Babylonian  ;'  and  the  '  Book  of  the  Secrets  of 
the  Sun  and  Moon'  (Chwolson,  Ucberreste,  p.  10, 


NEBAIOTH 


477 


II).  They  purport  to  have  been  translated,  in  the 
year  904,  by  Aboo-Bekr  Ahm.ad  Ibn-'Alee  the 
Chaldam  of  Kisseen,*  better  known  as  Ihn-Wah- 
sheeyeh.  The  '  Book  of  Nabat  Agriculture '  was, 
according  to  the  Arab  translator,  commenced  by 
Daghreeth,  continued  by  Yanbushildh,  and  com- 
pleted by  Kuth^mee.  Chwolson,  disregardi.ig  the 
dates  assigned  to  these  authors  by  the  translator, 
thinks  that  the  earliest  lived  some  2500  years  B.C., 
the  secouil  some  300  or  400  years  later,  and  Ku- 
thamee,  to  whom  he  ascribes  the  chief  authorship 
(Ibn-Wahshceyeh  says  he  was  little  more  than  edi- 
tor), at  the  earliest  under  the  6th  king  of  a  Canaanite 
dynasty  mentioned  in  the  book,  which  dynasty 
Chwolson — with  Bunsen — makes  the  same  as  the 
oth  (or  Arabian)  dynasty  of  Berosus  (Chwolson, 
Ucberreste,  68,  &c.;  Bunsen,  Egypt,  iii.  432,  &c. ; 
Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd  ed.  p.  60),  or  of 
the  13th  century  B.C.  It  will  thus  be  seen  that 
he  rejects  most  of  M.  Quatremere's  reasons  for 
placing  the  work  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
It  is  remarkable  that  that  great  king  is  not  men- 
tioned, and  the  author  or  authors  were,  it  is  argued 
by  Chwolson,  ignorant  not  only  of  the  existence  of 
Christianity,  but  of  the  kingdom  and  faith  of  Israel. 
While  these  and  other  reasons,  if  granted,  strengthen 
M.  Chwolson's  aise  for  the  antiquity  of  the  work, 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  urged  that  even  neglecting 
the  difficulties  attending  an  Arab's  translating  so 
ancient  a  writing  (and  we  reject  altogether  the  sup- 
position that  it  was  modernised  as  being  without  a 
parallel,  at  least  in  Arabic  literature),  and  conced- 
ing that  he  was  of  Chaldaean  or  Nabat  race — we 
encounter  formidable  intrinsic  difficulties.  The 
book  contains  mentions  of  personages  bearing  names 
closely  resembling  those  of  Adam,  Seth,  Enoch, 
Noah,  Shem,  Nimrod,  and  Abraham  ;  and  M.  Chwol- 
son himself  is  forced  to  confess  that  the  particulars 
related  of  them  are  in  some  respects  similar  to  those 
recorded  of  the  Biblical  patriarchs.  If  this  diffi- 
culty proves  insurmountable,  it  shows  that  the  author 
borrowed  from  the  Bible,  or  from  late  Jews,  and 
destroys  the  claim  of  an  extreme  antiquity.  Other 
apparent  evidences  of  the  same  kind  ai-e  not  want- 
ing. Such  are  the  mentions  of  Ermeesh  (Hermes), 
Agath.adeemoou  (Agathodaemon),  Tammuz  (Ado- 
nis), and  Yoonan  (lonians).  It  is  even  a  question 
whether  the  work  should  not  be  dated  sevei'al  cen- 
turies after  the  commencement  of  our  era.  Ana- 
chronisms, it  is  asserted,  abound ;  geographical, 
linguistic  (the  use  of  late  words  and  phrases),  his- 
torical, and  religious  (such  as  the  traces  of  Hel- 
lenism, as  shown  in  the  mention  of  Hermes,  &c., 
and  influences  to  be  ascribed  to  Neoplatonism). 
Tlie  whole  .style  is  said  to  be  modern,  wanting  the 
rugged  vigour  of  antiquity  (this,  however,  is  a 
delicate  issue,  to  be  tried  only  by  tlie  ripest  scho- 
larship). And  while  Chwolson  dates  the  oldest 
jjait  of  the  Book  of  Agriculture  n.c.  2;5O0,  and 
the  Book  of  Tenkolooslia  in  the  1st  century,  A. i>. 
at  the  latest  (p.  136),  Kenan  as.sort.s  that  the  two 
are  so  similar  as  to  preclude  the  notion  of  their 
being  separated  by  any  great  interval  of  time 
{Journal  do  I'lnstitut). 

Although  (Juatremere  recovered  the  broad  out- 
lines of  the  religion  and  language  of  the  Nabat,  a 
more  extended  knowledge  of  these  points  hiings 
mainly  on  the  genuineness  or  spiu'iousness  of  the 
work  of  Kuthdmee.     If  M.  Chwol-son's  tiieory  be 

"  Or  Keysce.  See  Ctiwolson,  reherrerte,  p.  8,  footnote. 
I'p  Lacy's  Alid-KI-Latccf,  p.  isl. 


478 


NEBAIOTH 


correct,  that  people  present  to  us  one  of  tlie  most 
ancient  ibrms  of  idolatry ;  and  by  tlieir  wiitings 
we  can  trace  the  origin  and  rise  of  successive 
phases  of  pantheism,  and  the  roots  of  tlie  compli- 
cated forms  of  idolatry,  heresy,  and  philosopliical 
infidelity,  which  abound  in  the  old  seats  of  the 
Aramaean   race.      At   present,   we   may   conclude 

that  they  were  Sabians  ((j.^^jL,^),'' at  least  in  late 

times,  as  Sabeism  succeeded  the  older  religions ;  and 
their  doctrines  seem  to  have  approached  (how 
nearly  a  further  knowledge  of  these  obscure  sub- 
jects will  show)  those  of  the  Menda'ees,  Mendaites, 
or  Gnostics.  Their  language  presents  similar  diffi- 
culties ;  according  to  M.  Chwolson,  it  is  the  ancient 
language  of  Babylonia.  A  cautious  criticism  would 
(till  we  know  more)  assign  it  a  place  as  a  compara- 
tively modern  dialect  of  Syro-Chaldee  (comp. 
Quatremere,  Mem.  100-3). 

Thus,  if  M.  Chwolson's  results  are  accepted, 
the  Book  of  Nabat  Agriculture  exhibits  to  us 
an  ancient  civilization,  before  that  of  the  Greeks, 
and  at  least  as  old  as  that  of  the  Egyptians,  of  a 
great  and  powerful  nation  of  remote  antiquity  ; 
making  us  acquainted  with  sages  hitherto  unknown, 
and  with  the  religions  and  sciences  they  either 
founded  or  advanced ;  and  throwing  a  flood  of 
light  on  what  has  till  now  been  one  of  the  darkest 
pages  of  the  world's  history.  But  until  the 
original  text  of  Kuthamee's  treatise  is  published, 
we  must  withhold  our  acceptance  of  facts  so  stait- 
ling,  and  i-egard  the  antiquity  ascribed  to  it  even 
by  Q-.iatremere  as  extremely  doubtful.  It  is  suffi- 
cient for  the  present  to  know  that  the  most  im- 
portant facts  advanced  by  the  latter — the  most 
important  when  regarded  by  sober  criticism — are 
snjiported  by  the  results  of  the  later  inquiries  of 
M.  Chwolson  and  others.  It  remains  for  us  to 
state  the  grounds  for  connecting  the  Nabat  with  the 
Nabathaeans. 

As  the  Arabs  speak  of  the  Kabat  as  Syrians,  so 
conversely  the  Greeks  and  Komans  knew  the  Na- 
bathaeans (ot  NajSoTTaioi  and  Na/Saraioi,  LXX.  ; 
Alex.  Na^areoi ;  Nabuthaei,  Vulg. ;  'ATraraToi,  or 
'Nairaraioi,  Pt.  vi.  7,  §-'1;  NajSarai,  >Suid.  s.  v.; 
Nabathae)  .is  Arabs.  While  the  inhabitants  of  the 
peninsula  were  comparative  strangers  to  the  classical 
wiiters,  and  very  little  was  known  of  the  further- 
removed  peoples  of  Chaldaea  and  Mesopotamia,  the 
Nabathaeans  bordered  tlie  well-known  Egyptian 
and  Syrian  provinces.  The  nation  was  famous  for 
its  wealth  and  commerce.  Even  when,  by  the  de- 
cline of  its  trade  (diverted  through  Egypt),  its 
prosperity  waned,  Petra  is  still  mentioned  as  a 
centre  of  the  trade  both  of  the  Sabaeans  of  South- 
ern Arabia  [Shi:ba]  and  the  Gerrhaeans  on  the 
Persian  gulf.  It  is  this  extension  across  the  desert 
that  most  clearly  connects  the  Nabathaean  colony 
with  the  birthplace  of  the  nation  in  Chaldaea. 
The  notorious  trade  of  Petra  across  the  well- 
trodden  desert-road  to  the  Persian  gulf  is  sufficient 
to  account  for  the  presence  of  this  colony  ;  just  as 
traces   of  Abrahamic   peoples    [Dedan,    &c.]  are 

*■  Sabi-oon  is  commonly  held  by  the  Arabs  to  signify 
originally  "  Apostates." 

1^  We  have  not  entered  into  the  subject  of  the  language 
of  the  NabaLhaeans.  The  little  that  is  known  of  it  tends 
to  strengthen  the  theory  of  the  Chaldaean  origin  of  that 
pe<jple.  The  Due  de  Luynes,  in  a  paper  on  the  coins  of 
the  latter  in  the  Jicvuc  A'umismatique  (nouv.  se'rie,  iii. 
1858).  adduces  facts  to  show  that  they  called  themselves 


NEBAIOTH 

found,  demonstrably,  on  the  shores  of  that  sea  on 
the  (>;ist,  and  on  the  borders  of  Palestine  on  the 
west,  while  along  the  northern  limits  of  the  Ara- 
bian peninsula  remains  of  the  caravan  stations  still 
exist.  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  the  existence  of 
this  great  stream  of  commerce,  from  remote  times, 
until  the  opening  of  tlie  Egyptian  route  gi-adually 
destroyed  it.  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  12,  §4)  speaks  of 
Nabataea  (Na^arofa,  Strab. ;  'Na^aTTivri,  Joseph.) 
as  embracing  the  countiy  from  the  Euphrates  to 
the  Red  Se.a — i.  e.  Petraea  and  all  the  desert  east 
of  it.  The  Nabat  of  the  Arabs,  however,  are  de- 
scribed as  famed  for  agriculture  and  science ;  in 
these  respects  oHering  a  contrast  to  the  Naba- 
thaeans of  Petra,  who  were  found  by  the  expedi- 
tion sent  by  Antigonus  (B.C.  312)  to  be  dwellers 
in  tents,  pastoral,  and  conducting  the  trade  of  the 
desert ;  but  in  the  Red  Sea  again  they  were  pi- 
ratical, and  by  sea-faring  qualities  showed  a  non- 
Semitic  cliaractei". 

We  agree  with  M.  Quatremere  {Mem.  p.  81), 
while  rejecting  other  of  his  reasons,  that  the  civili- 
zation of  the  Nabathaeans  of  Petra,  far  advanced 
on  that  of  the  surrounding  Arabs,  is  not  easily  ex- 
plained except  by  supposing  them  to  be  a  diflerent 
people  from  those  Aiabs.  A  remarkable  confir- 
mation of  this  supposition  is  ibund  in  the  character 
of  the  buildings  of  Petra,  which  are  unlike  anything 
constructed  b}-  a  purely  Semitic  race.  Architectuie 
is  a  characteristic  of  Arian  or  mixed  races.  In 
Southern  Arabia,  Nigritians  and  Semites  (Joktan- 
ites)  together  built  huge  edifices  ;  so  in  Babylonia 
and  Assyiia,  and  so  too  in  Egypt,  mixed  races  left 
this  unmistakeable  mark,  [Arabia.]  Petra, 
while  it  is  wanting  in  the  colossal  features  of  those 
moie  ancient  remains,  is  yet  unmistakeably  foreign 
to  an  unmixed  Semitic  race.  Further,  the  subjects  of 
the  literature  of  the  Nabat,  which  are  scientific  and 
industrial,  are  not  such  as  are  found  in  the  writings 
of  pure  Semites  or  Arians,  as  Renan  {Bist.  des 
Langues  Semitiques,  227)  has  well  observed ;  and 
he  points,  as  '  we  have  above,  to  a  foreign 
("  Couschite,"  or  partly  Nigritian)  settlement  in 
Babylonia.  It  is  noteworthy  that  'Abd-el-Lateef 
(at  the  end  of  the  fourth  section  of  his  first  book, 
or  treatise,  see  De  Lacy's  ed.)  likens  the  Copts  in 
Egypt  (a  mixed  race)  to  the  Nabat  in  El-'Ir£ik. 

From  most  of  these,  and  other  considerations,'  we 
think  there  is  no  reasonable  doulX  that  the  Nabath- 
aeans of  Arabia  Petraea  were  the  same  people  as  the 
Nabat  of  Chaldaea  ;  though  at  what  ancient  epoch 
the  western  settlement  was  fomie-d  remains  un- 
known."* That  it  was  not  of  any  imporfcitfce  until 
alter  the  captivity  appears  from  the  notices  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Edom  in  the  canonical  books,  and 
their  absolute  silence  respecting  the  Nabathaeans, 
except  (if  Nebaioth  be  identified  with  them)  the 
passage  in  Isaiah  (Ix.  7). 

The  Nabathaeans  were  allies  of  the  Jews  after  the 
Captivity,  and  Judas  the  Maccabee,  with  Jonathan, 
while  at  war  with  the  Edomites,  came  on  them 
three  days  south  of  Jordan  ( 1  Mace.  v.  3,  2-1,  &c. ; 
Joseph.  A7it.  xii.  8,  §3),  and  afterwards  "  Jona- 
than h.ad  sent  his  brother  John,  a  captain  of  the 


.\abat  1£233- 

d  It  is  remarkable  that  while  remnants  of  the  Nabat 
are  mentioned  by  trustwortbj-  Arab  writers  as  existing 
in  their  own  day,  no  Arab  record  ccnnecliug  that  people 
with  Petra  has  been  found.  Caussin  believes  this  to  have 
arisen  from  the  Chaldaean  speech  of  the  Nabathaeans, 
;\nd  their  corruption  of  Arabic  {Sssai  sur  I'Jiist.  dfS 
.■l)(//jtS  avaiU  I' fslainifvie,  i.  38). 


NEBAI;LAT 

people,  to  pray  his  t'ricnds  the  Nabathites  that 
they  might  leave  with  them  their  carriage,  which 
was  much"  (ix.  Ho,  06).  Died.  Sic.  gives  much 
information  regaiding  them,  and  so  too  Strabo, 
from  the  expedition  under  Aelius  Galhis,  the  object 
of  which  was  defeated  by  the  treachery  of  the 
Nabathaeans  (see  the  Diet,  of  Gcograp/ii/,  to  which 
the  history  of  Nabataea  in  classical  times  pi-operly 
belongs). 

Lastly,  did  the  Nabathaeans,  or  Nabnt,  derive 
their  name,  and  were  they  in  part  descended,  from 
Nebaioth,  son  of  Ishmael  ?  Joscphus  says  that 
Nabataea  was  inliabited  by  the  twelve  sons  of  Ish- 
raael;  and  Jerome,  "  Nebaioth  omnis  regio  ab  Eu- 
phrate  usque  ad  Mare  Kubrum  Nabathena  usque 
hodie  dicitur,  quae  pars  Arabiae  est"  {Comment,  in 
Gen.  XXV.  13).    Quatremere  rejects  the  identification 

for  an  etymological  reason — the  change  of  Tl  to  ^  j 

but  this  change  is  not  unusual ;  in  words  Arabicized 
from  the  Greek,  the  lilce  change  of  t  generally 
occurs.  Renan,  on  the  other  hand,  accepts  it ;  regard- 
ing Nebaioth,  after  his  manner,  merely  as  an  ancient 
name  unconnected  with  the  Biblical  history.     The 

Arabs  call  Nebaioth  Nabit  ((^XjL>)>   '''"'^   '^°   1^°'' 

connect  him  with  the  Nabat,  to  whom  they  give  a 
ditierent  descent;  but  all  their  Abrahamic  genealo- 
gies come  from  late  Jews,  and  are  utterly  untrust- 
worthy. When  we  remember  the  darkness  that 
enshrouds  the  early  liistory  of  the  "  sons  of  the 
concubines "  after  they  were  sent  into  the  east 
country,  we  hesitate  to  deny  a  relationship  between 
peoples  whose  names  are  strikingly  similar,  dwell- 
ing in  the  same  tract.  It  is  possible  that  Nebaioth 
went  to  the  far  east,  to  the  country  of  his  grand- 
father Abraham,  intermarried  with  the  Chaldaeans, 
and  gave  birth  to  a  mixed  race,  the  Nabat. 
Instances  of  ancient  tribes  adopting  the  name  of 
more  modern  ones,  with  which  they  have  become 
fused,  are  frequent  in  the  history  of  the  Arabs 
(see  WiDiAN,  foot-note);  but  we  think  it  is  also 
admissible  to  hold  that  Nebaioth  was  so  named  by 
the  sacred  lii^torian  because  he  intermarried  with 
the  Nabat.  It  is,  however,  safest  to  leave  unsettled 
the  identification  of  Nebaioth  and  Nabat  until  an- 
other link  be  added  to  the  chain  that  at  present 
seems  to  connect  them.  [E.  S.  P.] 

NEBAL'LAT  (^^Z)  :  Vat.  omits ;  Alex.  No- 
fiaWar :  Nebalhd),  a  town  of  Benjamin,  one  of 
those  which  the  Benjamites  i-eoccupied  after  the 
captivity  (Neh.  xi.  34),  but  not  mentioned  in  the 
original  catalogue  of  allotment  (comp.  Josh,  xviii. 
11-28).  It  is  here  named  with  Zeuotm,  Lod,  and 
0x0.  '  Lod  is  Lyd<la,  the  modern  LudJ,  and  Ouo 
not  impossil>ly  A'cfr  Aiduc,  four  miles  to  the  north 
of  it.  East  of  these,  and  forming  nearly  an 
equilateral  triangle  with  them,"  is  Beit  A'ebdla 
(Rob.  ii.  232),  which  is  possibly  the  locum  tencns 
of  the  ancient  village.  Another  place  of  very 
nearly  the  same  name,  Bir  Nebd/n,  lies  to  the  east 
of  el  Jib  ((iibeon),  and  within  half  a  mile  of  it. 
This  would  also  be  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin, 
and  although  further  removed  fioui  Lod  and  Ono, 
yet  if  Zkboim  should  on  investigation  prove  (as  is 
not  impossible)  to  be  in  one  of  the  wadys  which 
penetrate  the  eastern  side  of  this  district  and  lead 


NEBO 


479 


»  Schwan!  (p.  134),  with  loss  than  usual  accuracy,  places 
"  Betli-Naballa"  at  "  live  miles  south  of  Hamleli."  It  is 
really  about  tliat  distance  N.K.  of  li. 


down  to  the  Jordan  valley  (comp.  1  Sam.  xiii.  18), 
then,  in  that  c^ise,  this  situation  might  not  be  uu 
suitable  for  NebaUat.  [G.] 

NE'BAT  (Di:  :   Ne/Sar :   Nabat,  but  Nabath 

in  1  K.  xi.)  The  father  of  Jeroboam,  whose  name 
is  only  preserved  in  connexion  with  that  of  his  dis- 
tinguished son  (1  K.  xi.  26,  xii.  2,  15,  av.  1,  xvi. 
3,  26,  31,  xxi.  22,  xxii.  52  ;  2  K.  iii.  3,  ix.  9,  x. 
29,  xiii.  2,  11,  xiv.  24,  xv.  9,  18,  24,  28,  x\-u.  21, 
xxiii.  15  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  29,  x.  2,  1.5,  xiii.  6).  He  is 
described  as  an  Ephrathite,  or  p]phraimite,  of  Zereda 
in  the  Jordan  valley,  and  appears  to  have  died  while 
his  son  was  young.  The  Jewish  tradition  preserved 
in  Jerome  {Quaest.  Hcbr.  in  lib.  Reij.')  identifies 
him  with  Shimei  of  Gera,  who  was  a  Benjainite. 
[Jeeoboam.] 

NE'BO,  MOUNT  Qi1T-\T\ :  Tb  upos  Na^SaG: 

mans  Nebo').  The  mountain  from  which  Moses 
took  his  first  and  last  view  of  the  Promised  Land 
(Deut.- xxxii.  49,  xxxiv.  1).  It  is  so  minutely  de- 
scribed, that  it  would  seem  impossible  not  to  recog- 
nise it : — in  the  land  of  Jloab  ;  facing  Jericho  ;  the 
head  or  summit  of  a  mountain  called  the  Pisgah, 
which  again  seems  to  have  formed  a  portion  of  the  » 
general  range  of  the  "  mountains  of  Abarini."  Its 
position  is  further  denoted  by  the  mention  of  the 
valley  (or  perhaps  more  correctly  the  ravine)  in 
which  Moses  was  buried,  aud  which  was  apparently 
oire  of  the  clefts  of  the  mount  itself  (xxxii.  50) — 
"  the  ravine  in  the  land  of  Jloab  facing  Beth-Peor  " 
(xxxiv.  6).  And  yet,  notwithstanding  the  minute- 
ness of  this  description,  no  one  has  yet  succeeded  in 
pointing  out  any  spot  which  answers  to  Nebo. 
\''iewed  from  the  western  side  of  Jordan  (the  nearest 
point  at  which  most  travellers  are  able  to  view 
them)  the  mountiiin  of  Moab  piesent  the  appearance 
of  a  wall  or  cliff,  the  upper  line  of  which  is  almost 
straight  and  horizontal.  "  There  is  no  peak  or  point 
perceptibly  higher  than  the  rest;  but  all  is  one 
apparently  level  line  of  summit  without  peaks  or 
gaps"  (Hob.  B.  Ii.  i.  570).  "On  ue  distingue 
pas  un  sommet,  pas  la  moindi  e  cime ;  seulemeut  on 
aperfoit,  9a  et  la,  de  legeres  inflexions,  coinme  si 
la  main  du  peintre  qui  a  trace  cette  lignc  horizon- 
tale  sur  le  del  eut  tremble  dans  qnclqucs  endroits" 
(Chateaubriand,  Itineraire,  part  3).  "  Possibly," 
continues  Robinson,  "  on  travelling  among  these 
mountains,  some  isolated  point  or  summit  might 
be  found  answering  to  the  position  and  character 
of  Nebo."  Two  such  points  have  been  named. 
(1.)  Seetzen  (March  17,  1806;  Beise,  vol.  i.  408) 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  to  suggest  the  Dschib- 
bal  Attarus  (between  the  Wadi/  Zerka-main  and  the 
Arnon,  3  miles  below  the  former,  and  10  or  12 
south  of  Heshbon)  as  the  Nebo  of  Moses.  In  this 
he  is  followed  (though  probably  without  any 
communication)  by  Burckhardt  (July  14,  1812), 
who  mentions  it  as  the  highest  point  in  that  locality, 
and  therefore  probably  "  Mount  Nebo  of  the  Scrip- 
ture." This  is  adopted  by  Irby  and  Mangles,  though 
with  hesitation  (^Travels,  June  8,  1818). 

(2.)  The  other  elevation  above  the  general  sum- 
mit level  of  these  highlands  is  the  Jebel  'Osha,  or 
Aitsha',  or  Jebel  el-Jil'ud,  "  the  highest  point  in  all 
the  eastern  mountains,"  "  ovcrtoiii)ing  the  whole  of 
the  Belka,  and  rising  about  30OO  feet  above  the 
Ghor"  (Burckhardt,  Julv  2,  1.S12;  Robinson,  i. 
527  note,  570). 

But  these  eminences  are  alike  wanting  in  one 
main  essential  of  the  Nebo  of  tJie  Scripture,  which 


480 


NBBO 


is  stated  to  have  been  "facing  Jericho,"  words 
which  in  the  widest  interpretiition  must  imply  that 
it  was  "  some  elevation  imniediMtely  over  the  last 
stage  of  the  Jordan,"  while  'Osha  and  Jttan'is  are 
equally  remote  in  opposite  directions,  the  one  15 
miles  nortli,  the  other  1 5  miles  south  of  a  line  drawn 
eastward  from  Jericho.  Another  requisite  for  the 
identification  is,  that  a  view  should  be  obtainable 
from  the  summit,  corresponding  to  that  prospect 
over  the  whole  land  which  Moses  is  said  to  have 
had  from  Mount  Nebo :  even  though,  as  Professor 
Stanley  has  remarked  {S.  ^  P.  301),  that  was  a 
view  which  in  its  full  extent  must  have  been 
imagined  rather  than  actually  seen."  The  view  from 
JehelJiVad  has  been  briefly  described  by  Mr.  Porter 
( Handbh.  309),  though  without  reference  to  the 
possibility  of  its  being  Nebo.  Of  that  from  Jebel 
Attards,  no  description  is  extant,  for,  almost  incre- 
dible as  it  seems,  none  of  the  travellers  above  named, 
although  they  believed  it  to  be  Nebo,  appear  to  have 
made  any  attemjit  to  deviate  so  far  fiom  their  route 
as  to  ascend  an  eminence,  which  if  their  conjectures 
be  correct  must  be  tlie  most  interesting  spot  in  the  ! 
world.  [^O 

NEBO  (113).  1.  (Na/3o{;:  Nebo  and  Nabo). 
A  town  on  the  eastern  side  of  Jordan,  situated  in  the 
pastoral  country  (Num.  xxxii.  3),  one  of  those  which 
were  taken  possession  of  and  I'ebuilt  by  the  tribe  of 
Reuben  (ver.  38). ''  In  these  lists  it  is  associated 
with  Kii-jathaim  and  Baal-meon  or  Beon  ;  and  in 
another  record  (1  ('hr.  v.  8)  with  Aroer,  as  mark- 
ing one  extremity,  possibly  the  west,  of  a  principal 
part  of  the  tribe.  In  the  remarkable  prophecy 
adopted'  by  Isaiah  (xv.  2)  and  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1, 
2"2)  concerning  Moab,  Nebo  is  mentioned  in  the  same 
connexion  as  before,  though  no  longer  an  Israelite 
town,  but  in  the  hands  of  Moab.  It  does  not  occur 
in  the  catalogue  of  the  towns  of  Reuben  in  Joshua 
(,xiii.  15-23) ;  but  whether  this  is  an  accidental 
omission,  or  whether  it  appears  under  another  name, 
— according  to  the  .statement  of  Num.  xxxii.  38, 
that  the  Israelites  changed  the  names  of  the  heathen 
cities  they  retained  in  this  district — is  uncertain.  In 
the  case  of  Nebo,  wliich  was  doubtless  called  after 
the  deity  "*  of  that  name,  there  would  be  a  double 
reason  for  such  a  change  (see  Josh,  xxiii.  7). 

Neither  is  there  anything  to  shew  whether  there 
was  a  connexion  between  Nebo  the  town  and  Mount 
Nebo.  The  notices  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  ( Ono- 
masticoii)  are  confused,  but  they  at  least  denote 
that  the  two  were  distinct,  and  distant  from  each 
other.<=  The  town  (Na^wp  and  "  Nabo")  they  iden- 
tify with  Nobah  or  Keaath,  and  locate  it  8  miles 
south'  of  Heshbon,  wliere  the  ruins  of  cl-Habis 
appear  to  stand  at  present ;  while  the  mountain 
(NajSaC  and  "  Naban")  is  stated  to  be  6  miles  east 
(Jer.)  or  west  (Eus.)  from  the  same  spot. 


"  This  view  was  probably  identical  with  that  seen  by 
Balaam  (Num.  xxiii.  14).  It  is  beautifully  drawn  out  in 
detail  by  Prof.  Stanley  (^S.  <t-  P.  299). 

h  The  name  is  omitted  in  this  passage  in  the  Vatican 
LXX.    The  Alex.  MSS.  has  Trji' jSafitt. 

«  See  Moab,  p.  3956. 

d  Selden  (De  DU  Syr.  Synt.  ii.  cap.  12)  assumes  on  the 
authority  of  Hesychius'  interpretation  of  Is.  xv.  I,  that 
Dibon  contained  a  temple  or  sanctuary  of  Nebo.  liut  it 
would  appear  that  Nebo  the  place,  and  not  Nebo  the 
divinity,  is  referred  to  in  that  passage. 

e  In  another  passage  (ad  Esaiam  xv.  2),  .leromc  states 
that  the  "  consocratcxl  idol  of  Ohemosh— that  is,  Bel- 
phegor" — Baal  Poor,  resided  in  Nebo. 


NEBO 

In  the  list  of  places  south  of  es-Scdt  given  by 
Dr.  l\obinson  (/>'*.  Bes.  1st  ed.  vol.  iii.  App.  170) 
one  occurs  named  hcba,  which  may  possibly  be  iden- 
tical with  Nebo,  but  nothing  is  known  of  its  situation 
or  of  the  character  of  the  spot. 

2.  (NaySoS,  Alex.  "Na^co ;  in  Neh.  NajSiaS: 
Nebo).  The  children  of  Nebo  {Bene-Nebo)  to  the 
number  of  tifty-two,  are  mentioned  in  the  catalogue 
of  the  men  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  who  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  29  ;  Neh. 
vii.  33  s).  Seven  of  them  had  foreign  wives, 
whom  they  were  compelled  to  discard  (Ezr.  x.  43). 
The  name  occui's  between  Bethel  and  Ai,  and 
Lydda,  which,  if  wem.iy  trust  the  arrangement  of 
the  list,  implies  that  it  was  situated  in  the  territory 
of  Benjamin  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem.  This  is 
possibly  the  modern  Beit-Nubah,  about  12  miles 
N.W.  by  W.  of  Jerusalem,  8  from  Lydda,  and  close 
to  Yalo,  which  seems  to  be  the  place  mentioned  by 
Jerome  (  Onom.  "  Anab,"  and  "  Anob ;"  and  Epit. 
Pcndae,  §8)  as  Nob  the  city  of  the  priests  (thougli 
that  identification  is  hardly  admissible),  and  both 
in  his  and  later  times  known  as  Betliannaba  or 
Bettonuble.l» 

It  is  possible  that  this  Nebo  was  ;m  offshoot  of 
that  on  the  east  of  Jordan;  in  which  case  we  have 
another  town  added  to  those  already  noticed  in  the 
territory  of  Benjamin  which  retain  the  names  of 
foreign  and  heathen  settlers.  [Benjamin,  i.  188 
note;  MiCHMASii  ;   Ophni.]. 

A  town  named  Nomba,  is  mentioned  by  the  LXX. 
(not  in  Heb.)  amongst  the  places  in  the  south  of 
Judah  fiequented  by  David  (1  Sam.  xxx.  30),  but 
its  situation  forbids  auy  attempt  to  identify  this  with 
Nebo.  [G.] 

NE'BO  ('"133 :  Na^ci :  Nabo),  which  occurs 
both  in  Isaiah  (xlvi.  1)  and  Jeremiah  (.xlviii.  1) 
;is  the  name  of  a  Chaldaean  god,  is  a  well-known 
deity  of  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  The 
original  native  name  was,  in  Hamitic  Babylonian, 
Nabiu,  in  Senu'tic  Babylonian  and  Assyrian,  Nabu. 
It  is  reasonably  conjectured  to  be  connected  with 
the  Hebrew  X33,  "  to  prophesy,"  whence  the 
common  word  N^13,  "  prophet  "  (Arab.  Neby). 
Nebo  was  the  god  who  presided  over  learning  and 
letters.  He  is  called  "  the  far-hearing,"  "he  who 
])ossesses  intelligence,"  "  he  who  teaches  or  in- 
structs." The  wedge  or  ai'row-head — the  essential 
element  of  cuneiform  writing- — appears  to  have 
been  his  emblem  ;  and  hence  he  bore  the  name  of 
Tir,  which  signifies  "  a  shaft  or  arrow."  His  gene- 
ral character  corresponds  to  that  of  the  Egyptian 
Thofh,  the  Greek  Hermes,  and  the  Latin  Mercury. 
Astronomically  he  is  identified  with  the  planet 
nearest  the  sun,  called  Nebo  also  by  the  Mendaeans, 
and  Tir  by  the  ancient  Persians. 

f  Kenauat,  the  representative  of  Kenath,  is  100  Eomaii 
miles  N.E.  of  Heshbon. 

g  In  Neh.  the  name  is  given  as  the  "other  Nebo," 
"inX  133,  (comp.  Elasi),  as  if  two  places  of  that  name 
were  mentioned,  but  this  is  not  the  case. 

h  The  words  of  William  of  Tyre  (xiv.  8)  are  well  worth 
quoting.  They  are  evidently  those  of  an  eye-witness. 
"  Nobe  qui  hodie  vulgari  appellatione  dicitur  Bettenuble, 
in  descensum(mtium,in  p)i.rjres  auspiciis  (aspiciis.'')  cam- 

peslrium,  via  qua  itur  Liddam ibi  enim  in  faucibus 

montium  inter  angustias  incvitabiles  ....  Ascalonitis 
subitjis  imiptioncs  illic  faccre  consuetis."  Just  as  the 
Philistines  did  in  the  time  of  Saul.— Can  tins  be  Gob  or 
Nob,  where  tliey  were  so  frequently  encountered  ? 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

Nebo  was  of  Babylonian  rather  than  of  Assyrian 
origin.  In  the  early  Assyrian  Pantheon  he  occupies 
a  very  inferior  position,  behig  either  omitted  from 
the  lists  altogether,  or  occurring  as  the  last  of  the 
minor  gods.  The  king  supposed  to  be  Pul  first 
bi'ings  him  prominently  forward  in  Assyria,  and 
then  apparently  in  consequence  of  some  peculiar 
connexion  wliich  he  himself  had  with  Babylon. 
A  statue  of  Nebo  was  set  np  by  this  monarch  at 
C'alah  {Nirnnid),  which  is  now  in  the  British 
Museum.  It  has  a  long  inscription,  written  across 
the  body,  and  consisting  chietiy  of  the  god's  various 
epithets.  In  Babylonia  Nebo  held  a  prominent 
place  from  an  early  time.  The  ancient  town  of 
Borsippa  was  especially  under  his  protection,  and 
the  great  temple  there  (the  modarn  Birs-Nimrml) 
Wivs  dedicated  to  him  from  a  very  remote  age. 
[Babel,  Tower  of.]  He  was  the  tutelar  god  of 
the  most  important  Babylonian  kings,  in  whose 
names  the  word  Nabii,  or  Nebo,  appears  as  an 
element:  e.g.  Nabo-nassar,  Nabo-polassar,  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  Nabo-nadius  or  Labynetus  ;  and  ap- 
pears to  have  been  honoured  next  to  Bel-merodach 
by  the  later  kings.  Nebuchadnezzar  completely 
rebuilt  his  temple  at  Borsippa,  and  called  after  him 
liis  famous  seaport  upon  the  Persian  Gulf,  which 
became  known  to  the  Greeks  as  Teredon  or  Diridotis 
— "  given  to  Tir,"  i.  e.  to  Nebo.  The  worship  of 
Nebo  appears  to  have  continued  at  Borsippa  to  the 
3rd  or  4th  century  after  Christ,  and  the  .Sabaeaus 
of  Harran  may  have  preserved  it  even  to  a  later 
date.  (See  the  Essay  On  the  Relujion  of  the  Ba- 
hi/lonians  and  Assyrians,  by  Sir  H.  Kawlinson,  in 
the  1st  vol.  of  liawlinson's  Herodotus,  pp.  637- 
640  ;  and  compare  Norberg's  Ononiasticon,  s.  v. 
Nebo,  pp.  98,  9.)  [G.  R.] 

NEBUCHADNEZ'ZAE,  or  NEBUCHAD- 
REZ'ZAK  (l-VNJ-tD-nj,  or  l-'^'XinD-U:  :  Na- 
fiovxo^ov6(Top  :  Nahncliodonosor'),  was  the  greatest 
and  most  ])owerful  of  the  Babylonian  kings.  His 
name,  according  to  the  native  orthography,  is  read 
as  Nabn-hudwi-utsur,  and  is  explained  to  mean 
"  Nebo  is  the  protector  against  misfortune,"  kuduri 
being  connected  with  the  Hebrew  111^3,  "  trouble  " 
or  "  attack,"  and  utsur  being  a  participle  from  the 
root  "1^3,  "  to  protect."     The  rarer  Hebrew  form, 

used  by  .leremiah  and  Ezekiel, — Nebuchadrezzar,  is 
thus  very  close  indeed  to  the  original.  The  Persian 
form,  Nahukudrnchara  {Beh.  Inscr.  col.  i.  par.  16), 
is  less  correct;  while  the  Greek  equivalents  are 
sometimes  very  wide  of  the  mark.  Na^oi/KoSpd- 
ffopos,  which  was  used  by  Abydenus  and  Meoas- 
thenes,  is  the  best  of  them ;  NafioKoKaa-apos, 
which  appears  in  the  Canon  of  Ptuh'my,  the  worst. 
Stiaho's  Naj8o/io5po'cropoy  (xv.  1,  §6)  and  Berosus's 
'Na^ovxoSovviTopos  lie  between  these  extremes. 

Nebuchadnezzar  was  the  son  and  successor  of 
Nabopolassar,  the  founder  of  the  Baliylonian  Em- 
pire. He  appears  to  have  been  of  marriageable  age 
at  the  time  of  his  father's  rebellion  against  Assyria, 
B.C.  625 ;  for,  according  to  Abydenus  (ap.  Euseb. 
Chron.  C'ln.  i.  9),  tiie  alliance  between  this  prince 
and  the  Jledian  king  was  cemented  by  the  betrothal 
of  Amuhia,  the  daughter  of  the  latter,  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, Nabopoliussar's  son.  Little  fuither  is 
known  of  him  during  his  father's  lifetime.     It  is 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


481 


»  Herodotus  terms  this  leader  Ijibynetus  (i.  74) ;  a  word 
wliich  does  not  rightly  render  the   Unbylonian  Ifabu^ 
kudiifri-uzur,  but  dors  rpiulcr  another  Habylonian  name, 
VOL.  II. 


suspected,  rather  than  proved,  that  he  was  the 
leader  of  a  Babylonian  contingent  which  accom- 
panied Cyaxares  in  his  Lydian  war  [jMedes],  by 
whose  interposition,  on  the  occasion  of  an  eclipse, 
that  war  was  brought  to  a  close,*  B.C.  610.  At 
any  rate,  a  few  yeais  later,  he  was  placed  at  the 
head  of  a  Babylonian  army,  and  sent  by  his  fiither, 
who  was  now  old  and  infiini,  to  chastise  the  inso- 
lence of  Pharaoh-Necho,  king  of  Egypt.  This  prince 
had  recently  invaded  Syria,  defeated  Josiah,  king  of 
Judah,  at  Megiddo,  and  reduced  the  whole  tract, 
from  Egypt  to  Carchemish  on  tlie  upper  Euphrates 
[Carchemish],  which  in  the  partition  of  the  As- 
syrian territories  on  the  destruction  of  Nineveh  had 
been  assigned  to  Babylon  (2  K.  xxiii.  29,  30  ;  Beros. 
ap.  .loseph.  c.  Ap.  i.  19).  Necho  had  held  pos- 
session of  these  countries  for  about  three  years^ 
when  (B.C.  605)  Nebuchadnezzar  led  an  army 
against  him,  defeated  him  at  Carchemish  in  a 
great  battle  (Jer.  xlvi.  2-12),  recovered  Coele- 
syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine,  took  Jerusalem 
(Dan.  i.  1,  2),  pressed  forward  to  Egypt,  and  was 
engaged  in  that  country  or  upon  its  borders  when 
intelligence  arrived  which  recalled  him  hastily  to 
Babylon.  Nabopolassar,  after  i-eigning  21  years, 
had  died,  and  the  throne  was  vacant;  for  there  is 
no  reason  to  think  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  though  he 
a))peared  to  be  the  "  king  of  Babylon  "  to  the  Jews, 
had  really  been  associated  by  his  father.  In  some 
alarm  about  the  succession  he  hurried  back  to  the 
capital,  accompanied  only  by  his  light  ti'oops ;  and 
crossing  the  desert,  probably  by  way  of  Tadmor  or 
Palmyra,  leached  Babylon  befoi-e  any  disturbance 
had  arisen,  and  entered  peaceably  on  his  kingdom 
( B.C.  604).  The  bulk  of  the  army,  with  the  cap- 
tives— Phoenicians,  Syrians,  Egyptians,  and  Jews — 
returned  by  the  ordinary  route,  which  skirted  in- 
stead of  crossing  the  desert.  It  was  at  this  time  that 
Daniel  and  his  companions  were  brought  to  Baby- 
lon, where  they  presently  grew  into  favour  with 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  became  jjersons  of  very  consi- 
derable influence  (Dan.  i.  3-2o). 

Within  three  years  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  first  ex- 
pedition into  Syria  and  Palestine,  disaffection  again 
showed  itself  in  those  countries.  Jehoiakim — who, 
although  threatened  at  first  with  captivity  (2  Chr. 
xxxvi.  6)  had  been  finally  maintained  on  the  throne 
as  a  Babylonian  vassal — after  three  years  of  service 
"turned  and  rebelled"  against  his  suzerain,  pro- 
bably trusting  to  be  supported  by  Egypt  (2  K. 
xxiv.  1).  Not  long  afterwards  Phoenicia  seems  to 
have  broken  into  revolt ;  and  the  Chaldaean  monarch, 
who  had  previously  en<leavoured  to  subdue  the  dis- 
atiected  by  his  generals  (ib.  ver.  2),  once  more  took 
the  field  in  person,  and  marched  first  of  all  against 
Tyre.  Having  invested  that  city  in  tiie  seventh 
year  of  his  reign  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21),  and  left  a 
portion  of  his  army  there  to  continue  the  siege,  he 
proceeded  against  Jerusalem,  which  submitted  with- 
out a  struggle.  According  to  Jnsephus,  who  is 
here  our  chief  authority,  Nebuchadnezzar  punished 
Jehoiakim  with  death  (Ant.  x.  6,  §3 ;  cornp.  Jer. 
xxii.  18,  19,  and  xxxvi.  30),  but  placed  his  son 
Jehoiachin  upon  the  throne.  .lehoiachin  reigned 
only  three  months;  for,  on  his  showing  symptoms 
of  disafl'ection,  Nebuchadnezzar  came  up  against 
Jerusalem  for  the  third  time,  deposed  the  young 
prince  (whom  he  cjirried  to  Babylon,  together  with 


Xabu-nahit.  Nabopolassar  vta>/  have  had  a  son  of  this 
name;  or  the  Labynetus  of  Henxi.  1.  74  may  be  Nabo- 
polassar himself. 

2   I 


482 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


a  large  portion  of  the  population  of  the  city,  and 
the  chief  of  the  Temple  treasures),  and  maiie  his 
uncle,  Zedekiah,  kiuj;  in  his  room.  Tyre  still  held 
out  ;  and  it  was  not  till  the  thirteenth  year  from 
the  time  of  its  first  investment  that  the  city  of  mer- 
chants fell  (B.C.  585).  Ere  this  happened,  Jerusa- 
lem had  been  totally  destroyed .  This  consummation 
was  owing  to  the  folly  of  Zedekiah,  who,  despite  the 
warnings  of  Jeremiah,  made  a  treaty  with  Apries 
(Hophra),  kincj  of  Egypt  (Ez.  xvii.  15),  and  on 
the  strength  of  this  alliance  renounced  his  alle- 
giance to  tlie  king  of  Babylon.  Nebuchadnezzar 
commenced  the  final  siege  of  Jerusalem  in  the 
ninth  year  of  Zedekiah,  —  his  own  seventeenth 
year  (n.C.  588),  and  took  it  two  years  later 
(B.C.  586).  One  effort  to  carry  out  the  treaty 
seems  to  have  been  made  by  Apries.  An  Egyptian 
army  crossed  the  frontier,  and  began  its  march 
towards  Jerusalem  ;  upon  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
raised  the  siege,  and  set  off"  to  meet  the  new  foe. 
According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  7,  §3)  a  battle 
was  fought,  in  which  Apries  was  completely  de- 
feated ;  but  the  Scriptural  account  seems  rather  to 
imply  that  the  Egyptians  retired  on  the  advance  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  recrossed  the  frontier  without 
risking  an  engagement  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5-8).  At  any 
rate  the  attempt  failed,  and  was  not  repeated ;  the 
"  bi'oken  reed,  Egypt,"  proved  a  treacherous  sup- 
port, and  after  an  eighteen  months'  siege  Jerusalem 
fell.  Zedekiah  escaped  from  the  city,  but  was  cap- 
tured near  Jericho  (ib.  xxxix.  5)  and  brought  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  at  Riblah  in  the  territory  of  Ha- 
math,  where  his  eyes  were  put  out  by  the  king's 
order,  while  his  sons  and  his  chief  nobles  were  slain. 
Nebuchadnezzar  then  retnrned  to  Babylon  with 
Zedekiah,  whom  he  imprisoned  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life  ;  leaving  Nebuzar-adan,  the  captain  of  his 
guard,  to  complete  the  destruction  of  the  city  and 
the  pacification  of  Judaea.  Gedaliah,  a  Jew,  was 
appointed  governor,  but  he  was  shortly  muidered, 
and  the  rest  of  the  Jews  either  fled  to  Egypt,  or 
were  carried  by  Nebuzar-adan  to  Babylon. 

The  military  successes  of  Nebuchadnezzar  cannot 
be  traced  minutely  beyond  this  point.  His  own 
annals  have  not  come  down  to  us ;  and  the  historical 
allusions  which  we  find  in  his  extant  inscriptions 
are  of  the  most  vague  and  general  character.  It 
may  be  gathered  from  the  prophetical  Scriptures 
and  from  Josephus,  that  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem 
was  rapidly  followed  by  the  fall  of  Tyre  and  the 
complete  submission  of  Phoenicia  (Ez.  xxvi.^xxviii. ; 
Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21) ;  after  which  the  Babylonians 
carried  their  arms  into  Egypt,  and  inflicted  severe 
injuries  on  that  fertile  country  (,Ier.  xlvi.  13-26; 
Ez.  xxix.  2-20;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7).  But  we 
have  no  account,  on  which  we  can  depend,  of  these 
campaigns.  Our  remaining  notices  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar present  him  to  us  as  a  magnificent  prince  and 
beneficent  ruler,  rather  than  a  warrior ;  and  the 
great  fame  which  has  always  attached  to  his  name 
among  the  Eastern  nations  depends  rather  on  his 
buildings  and  other  grand  constructions  tiian  on  any 
victories  or  conquests  ascribed  to  him. 

We  are  told  by  Berosus  that  the  first  care  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  on  obtaining  quiet  possession  of 
his  kingdom  after  the  fir.st  Syrian  expedition,  was 
to  rebuild  the  temple  of  Bel  (Bel-Mcrodach)  at 
Babylon  out  of  the  spoils  of  the  Syri.an  war  (ap. 
Joseph.  A?it.  X.  11,  §1).  Ho  next  proceeded  to 
strengthen  and  beautify  the  city,  which  he  reno- 
vated throughout,  and  surrounded  with  several  lines 
of  fortification,   himself  adding    one  entirely  new 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

quarter.  Having  finished  the  walls  and  adorned  the 
gates  magnificently,  he  constructed  a  new  palace, 
adjoining  the  old  residence  of  his  father — a  superb 
edifice,  which  he  completed  in  fifteen  days  !  In  the 
grounds  of  this  palace  he  formed  the  celebrated 
"  hanging  gai-den,"  which  was  a  pleasaunce,  built 
up  with  huge  stones  to  imitate  the  varied  surface 
of  mountains,  and  planted  with  trees  and  shrubs  of 
every  kind.  Diodorus,  probably  following  Ctesias, 
describes  this  marvel  as  a  square,  four  plethra 
(400  feet)  each  way,  and  50  cubits  (75  feet) 
high,  approached  by  sloping  paths,  and  suppoi'ted 
on  a  series  of  arched  galleries  increasing  in  heio-ht 
from  the  base  to  the  summit.  In  these  2;alleries 
were  various  pleasant  chambers ;  and  one  of  them 
contained  the  engines  by  which  water  was  raised 
from  the  river  to  the  surface  of  the  mound. 
This  curious  construction,  which  the  Greek  writers 
reckoned  among  the  seven  wonders  of  the  world, 
was  said  to  have  been  built  by  Nebuchadnezzar  for 
the  gratification  of  his  wife,  Amuhia,  who,  having 
been  brought  up  among  the  Median  mountains, 
desired  something  to  remind  her  of  them.  Possibly, 
however,  one  object  was  to  obtain  a  pleasure-ground 
at  a  height  above  that  to  which  the  musquitoes  are 
accustomed  to  rise. 

This  complete  renovation  of  Babylon  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, which  Berosus  asserts,  is  confirmed  to 
us  in  every  possible  way.  The  Standard  Inscription 
of  the  king  relates  at  length  the  construction  of  the 
whole  series  of  works,  and  appears  to  have  been  the 
authority  from  which  Berosus  drew.  The  ruins  con- 
firm this  in  the  most  positive  way,  for  nine-tenths 
of  the  bricks  in  situ  are  stamped  with  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's name.  Scripture,  also,  adds  an  indirect  but 
important  testimony,  in  the  exclamation  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar recorded  by  Daniel,  "  Is  not  this  great 
Babylon  ichich  I  have  built'?"  (Dan.  iv.  30). 

But  Nebuchadnezzar  did  not  confine  his  efforts' 
to  the  ornamentation  and  improvement  of  his 
capital.  Throughout  the  empire,  at  Borsippa,  Sip- 
para,  Cutha,  Chilmad,  Duiaba,  Teredon,  and  a 
multitude  of  other  places,  he  built  or  rebuilt  cities, 
repaired  temples,  constructed  quays,  reservoirs, 
canals,  and  aqueducts,  on  a  scale  of  grandeur  and 
magnificence  surpassing  everything  of  the  kind 
recorded  in  history,  unless  it  be  the  constructions 
of  one  or  two  of  the  greatest  Egyptian  monarchs. 
"  I  have  examined,"  says  Sir  H.  Kawlinson,  "  the 
bricks  in  situ,  belonging  perhaps  to  a  hundred 
different  towns  and  cities  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Baghdad,  and  I  never  found  any  other  legend  than 
that  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  son  of  Nabopolassar,  king 
of  Babylon"  [Comtn.  on  the  Inscr.  of  Assyria  and 
Babylonia,  76,  77).  "  Nebuchadnezzar,"  says 
Abydenus,  "  on  succeeding  to  the  throne,  fortified 
Babylon  with  three  lines  of  walls.  He  dug  the 
Nahr  Malclm,  or  Royal  River,  which  was  a  branch 
stream  derived  fi'om  the  Euphrates,  and  ako  the 
Acracanus.  He  likewise  made  the  great  reserroir 
above  the  city  of  Sippara,  which  was  thirty  para- 
sangs  (90  miles)  in  circumference,  and  twenty 
fathoms  (120  feet)  deep.  Here  he  placed  sluices  or 
flood-gates,  which  enaliled  him  to  irrigate  the  low 
country.  He  also  built  a  quay  along  the  shore  of 
the  Red  Sea  (Persian  Gulf),  and  founded  the  city  of 
Teredon  on  the  boixlers  of  Arabia."  It  is  leasonably 
concluded  fiom  these  statements,  that  an  extensive 
system  of  irrigation  was  devised  by  this  monarch, 
to  whom  the  Babylonians  were  probably  indebted 
for  the  greater  portion  of  that  vast  net-work  of 
canals  which  covered  the  whole  alluvial  tr.act  be- 


NEBUCHADNP]ZZAR 

tweeii  the  two  rivers,  and  extendeil  on  the  right 
bank  of  the  Euphrates  to  the  extreme  verge  of  the 
stony  desert.  On  that  side  the  principal  work  was 
a  canal  of  the  largest  dimensions,  still  to  be  traced, 
which  left  the  Euphrates  at  Hit,  and  skirting  the 
desert  ran  south-east  a  distance  of  above  400  miles 
to  the  Persian  Gulf,  where  it  emptied  itself  into  the 
Bay  of  Grane. 

The  wealth,  greatness,  and  general  prosperity  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  are  strikingly  placed  before  us  in 
the  book  of  Daniel.  "  Tlie  God  of  Heaven  "  gave 
him,  not  a  kingdom  only,  but  "power,  strength, 
and  glory  "  (Dan.  ii.  37).  His  wealth  is  evidenced 
by  the  image  of  gold,  60  cubits  in  height,  which  he 
set  up  in  the  plaiu  of  Dura  (ib.  iii.  1).  The  gran- 
deur and  careful  organization  of  his  kingdom  appears 
from  the  long  list  of  his  officers,  "  princes,  governors, 
captains,  judges,  treasurers,  councillors,  sheriffs, 
and  rulers  of  provinces,"  of  whom  we  have  repeated 
mention  (ib.  verses  2,  3  and  27).  We  see  the 
existence  of  a  species  of  hierarchy  in  the  "  magi- 
cians, astrologers,  sorcerers,"  over  whom  Daniel 
was  set  (ib.  ii.  48).  The  "  tree,  whose  height  was 
great,  which  grew  and  was  strong,  and  the  height 
thei-eof  reached  unto  the  heavens,  and  the  sight 
thei-eof  to  the  end  of  all  the  earth  ;  the  leaves 
whereof  were  fair,  and  the  fruit  much,  and  in  which 
was  food  for  all  ;  under  which  the  beasts  of  the 
field  had  shadow,  and  the  fowls  of  heaven  dwelt  iu 
the  branches  thereof,  and  all  flesh  was  fed  of  it " 
{ib.  iv.  10-12),  is  the  titling  type  of  a  kingdom  at 
once  so  flourishing  and  so  extensive. 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  (De  Wette,  Th. 
Parker,  &c.),  that  the  book  of  Daniel  represents  the 
satrapial  system  of  government  {Satrapcn-Ein- 
richtung')  as  established  throughout  tlie  whole  em- 
pire ;  but  this  conclusion  is  not  justitied  by  a  close 
examination  of  that  document.  Nebuchadnezzar, 
like  his  Assyrian  predecessors  (Is.  x.  8),  is  repre- 
sented as  a  "king  of  kings"  (Dan.  ii.  37)  ;  and 
the  ofticers  enumerated  in  eh.  ii.  are  probably  the 
authorities  of  Babylonia  proper,  rather  than  the 
governors  of  remoter  regions,  who  could  not  be  all 
spared  at  once  from  their  employments.  The  in- 
stance of  Gedaliah  (Jer.  xl.  5  ;  2  K.  xxv.  22)  is  not 
that  of  a  satrap.  He  was  a  Jew  ;  and  it  may  be 
doubted  whether  he  stood  really  in  any  different 
relation  to  the  Babylonians  from  Zedekiah  or  Jehoi- 
achin  ;  although  as  he  was  not  of  the  seed  of  David, 
the  Jews  considered  him  to  be  "  governor  "  rather 
than  king. 

Towards  the  close  of  his  reign  the  glory  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar suffered  a  temporary  eclipse*  As  a 
punishment  for  his  pride  and  vanity,  that  strange 
form  of  madness  was  sent  upon  him  which  the 
Greeks  called  Lyainthropy  (KvKavdpanria) ;  wherein 
the  sufferer  imagines  himself  a  beast,  and  quitting 
the  haunts  of  men,  insists  on  leading  the  life  of  a 
beast  (Dan.  iv.  33).  Berosus,  with  the  pardonable 
tendei'ness  of  a  native,  anxious  for  the  good  fame  of 
his  country's  greatest  king,  suppi-essed  this  fact ; 
and  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Herodotus  in  his 
Babylonian  ti-avels,  which  fell  only  about  a  century 
after  the  time,  obtained  any  knowledge  of  it.  Ne- 
buchadnezzar himself,  however,  in  his  great  inscrip- 
tion appears  to  allude  to  it,  although  in  a  studied 
ambiguity  of  phrase  wiiicli  renders  the  passjige  very 
difficult  of  translation.  After  describing  the  con- 
struction of  the  most  important  of  his  great  works, 
lie  appears  to  say — "  For  four  years  (?)  .  .  .  the 
seat  of  my  kingdom  .  .  .  ilid  not  rejoice  my  heart. 
In  all  my  dominions  I  did  not  liuild  a  high  place  of 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


483 


power,  the  precious  ti'easures  of  my  kingdom  I  did 
not  lay  up.  In  Babylon,  buildings  for  myself  and 
for  the  honour  of  my  kingdom  I  did  not  la_y  out. 
In  the  worship  of  Merodacii,  my  lord,  the  joy  of 
my  heart,  in  Babylon  the  city  of  his  sovereignty, 
and  the  seat  of  my  empire,  I  did  not  sing  his 
praises,  I  did  not  furnish  his  altars  with  victims, 
nor  did  I  clear  out  the  canals"  (Rawlinson's  Herod. 
ii.  586).  Other  negative  clauses  follow.  It  is 
plain  that  we  have  here  narrated  a  suspension — 
apparently  for  four  years — of  all  those  works  and 
occupations  on  which  the  king  especially  prided 
himselt^ — his  temples,  palaces,  worship,  offerings, 
and  works  of  irrigation  ;  and  though  the  cause 
of  the  suspension  is  not  stated,  we  can  scarcely  ima- 
gine anything  that  would  account  for  it  but  some 
such  extraordinary  malady  as  that  recorded  in 
Daniel. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that  Herodotus 
ascribes  to  a  queen,  Nitocris,  several  of  the  im- 
portant works,  which  other  \vi'iters  (Berosus,  Aby- 
denus)  assign  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  conjecture 
naturally  arises  that  Nitocris  w;is  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's queen,  and  that,  as  she  carried  on  his  con- 
structions during  his  incapacity,  they  were  by  some 
considered  to  be  hers.  It  is  no  disproof  of  this 
to  ui-ge  that  Nebuchadnezzar's  wife  was  a  Median 
princess,  not  an  Egyptian  (as  Nitocris  must  have 
been  fiom  her  name),  and  that  she  was  called,  not 
Nitocris,  but  Amyitis  or  Amyhia ;  for  Nebuchad 
nezzar,  who  married  Amyitis  in  B.C.  625,  and 
who  lived  after  this  marriage  more  than  sixty  years, 
may  easily  have  married  again  after  tlie  decease 
of  his  first  wife,  and  his  second  queen  may  have 
been  an  Egyptian.  His  later  relations  with  Egypt 
appear  to  have  been  friendly  ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
that  the  name  Nitocris,  which  belonged  to  very 
primitive  Egyptian  history,  had  in  fact  been  resus- 
citated about  this  time,  and  is  found  in  the  Egyp- 
tian monuments  to  have  been  borne  by  a  princess 
belonging  to  the  family  of  the  Psammetiks. 

After  an  interval  of  four,  or  perhaps  ^  seven 
years  (Dan.  iv.  16),  Nebuchadnezzar's  malady  left 
him.  As  we  are  told  in  Scripture  that  "  his  reason 
returned,  and  for  the  glory  of  his  kingdom  his  ho- 
nour and  brightness  returned  ;"  and  he  "  was  esta- 
blished in  his  kingdom,  and  excellent  majesty  was 
added  to  him"  (Dan.  iv.  36),  so  we  find  in  the 
Standard  Inscription  that  he  resumed  his  great  works 
after  a  period  of  suspension,  and  added  fresh  "  won- 
ders" in  his  old  age  to  the  marvellous  construc- 
tions of  his  manhood.  He  died  in  the  year  B.C. 
561,  at  an  advanced  age  (83  or  84),  having  reigned 
43  years.  A  son,  Evil-Merodach,  succeeded  him. 
The  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar  must  be  gathered 
principally  from  Scripture.  There  is  a  conventional 
formality  in  the  cuneitbrm  inscriptions,  which  de- 
prives them  of  almost  all  value  for  the  illustration 
of  individual  mind  and  temper.  Ostentation  and 
vainglory  are  characteristics  of  the  entire  series, 
each  king  seeking  to  magnify  above  all  others  his 
own  exploits.  We  can  only  observe  as  peculiar  +o 
Nebuchadnezzar  a  disposition  to  rest  his  fame  on  his 
great  works  rather  than  on  his  military  achieve- 
ments, and  a  strong  religious  spirit,  manifesting 
itself  especially  in  a  devotion,  which  is  almost  e.\- 
clusive,  to  one  paiticilar  god.  Though  his  own 
tutelary  deity  and  that  of  his  father  wa.s  Nebo 
(Mercury),  yet  his  worship,  his  ascriptions  of  pitiise, 

i>  Danftl's  expression  is  "  seven  time.«."    We  cannot  be 
sure  that  by  a  "  lime  "  is  lueant  a  year. 

2   12 


484 


NEBUCILVDNEZZAR 


his  thanksivings,  have  in  almost  every  case  for  their 
object  the  god  Meroilach.  Under  his  protection 
he  placed  his  son,  Evil-Merodach.  Jlerodach  is 
"  his  lord,"  "  his  great  lord,"  "  the  joy  of  his  heart," 
"  the  gi-eat  lord  who  has  appointed  him  to  the  em- 
pire of  the  world,  and  Itas  confided  to  his  care  the 
iar-spread  people  of  the  earth,"  "  the  great  lord  who 
has  established  him  in  strength,"  &c.  One  of  the 
first  of  his  own  titles  is,  "  he  who  pays  homage  to 
Merodach."  Even  when  restoring  the  temples  of 
other  deities,  he  ascribes  the  work  to  the  sugges- 
tions of  Merodach,  and  places  it  under  his  pro- 
tection. We  may  hence  explain  the  appearance  of  a 
sort  of  monotheism  (Dan.  i.  2  ;  iv.  21,  32,  34,  37), 
mixed  with  polytheism  (ib.  ii.  47  ;  iii.  12,  18,  29  ; 
iv.  9),  in  the  Scriptural  notices  of  him.  While 
admitting  a  qualified  divinity  in  Nebo,  Nana,  and 
other  deities  of  his  country,  Nebuchadnezzar  main- 
tained the  real  monarchy  of  Bel-Merodach.  He 
was  to  him  "  the  supreme  chief  of  the  gods,"  "  the 
most  ancient,"  "  the  king  of  the  heavens  and  the 
earth."  <=  It  was  his  image,  or  symbol,  undoubt- 
edly, which  was  "  set  up  "  to  be  worshipped  in  the 
"  plain  of  Dura"  (ib.  iii.  1),  and  his  "  house"  in 
which  the  sacred  vessels  from  the  Temple  were 
treasured  (ib.  i.  2).  Nebuchadnezzar  seems  at  some 
times  to  have  identified  this,  his  supreme  god,  with 
the  God  of  the  Jews  (ib.  oh.  iv.)  ;  at  otliers,  to  have 
i-egarded  the  Jewish  God  as  one  of  the  local  mid  in- 
ferior deities  (ch.  iii.)  over  whom  Merodach  ruled. 

The  genius  and  grandeur  which  characterised 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  which  have  handed  down  his 
name  among  the  few  ancient  personages  known  ge- 
nerally throughout  the  East,  are  very  apparent  in 
Scripture,  and  indeed  in  all  the  accounts  of  his 
reign  and  actions.  Without  perhaps  any  strong  mili- 
tary turn,  he  must  have  possessed  a  fair  amount  of 
such  talent  to  have  held  his  own  in  the  east  against 
the  ambitious  Medes,  and  in  the  west  against  the 
Egyptians.  Necho  and  Apries  were  both  pi'iuces 
of  good  warlike  capacity,  whom  it  is  some  credit  to 
have  defeated.  The  prolonged  siege  of  Tyre  is  a 
proof  of  the  determination  with  which  he  prose- 
cuted his  military  enterprises.  But  his  greatness 
lay  especially  in  the  arts  of  peace.  He  saw  in  the 
natural  fertility  of  Babylonia,  and  its  ample  wealth 
of  waters,  the  foundation  of  national  prosperity, 
and  so  of  power.  Hence  his  vast  canals  and  elabo- 
rate system  of  irrigation,  which  made  the  whole 
country  a  garden  ;  and  must  have  been  a  main  cause 
of  the  full  treasury,  from  which  alone  his  palaces  and 
temples  can  have  received  their  magnificence.  The 
forced  labour  of  captives  may  have  raised  the  fabrics  ; 
but  the  statues,  the  enamelled  bricks,  the  fine  wood- 
work, the  gold  and  silver  plating,  the  hangings  and 
curtains,  had  to  be  bought ;  and  the  enormous  cx- 
penditme  of  this  monarch,  which  does  not  appear 
to  have  exliausted  the  country,  and  wliich  camiot 
have  been  very  largely  supported  by  tribute,  must 
have  been  really  supplied  in  the  main  from  that 
agricultural  wealth  which  he  look  so  much  pains  to 
develop.  We  may  gather  from  the  productiveness 
of  Babylonia  under  the  Persians  (Herod,  i.  192, 
193,  iii.  92),  after  a  conquest  and  two  (three?) 
revolts,  some  idea  of  its  flourishing  condition  in  the 
period  of  independence,  for  which  (accoi'ding  to  the 
consentient  testimony  of  the  monuments  and  the  best 
authors)  it  was  indebted  to  this  king. 

=  These  expressions  are  all  applied  to  Merodach  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  in  his  Inscriptions. 

"  In  the  usual  copies  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  this  final  n 
is  written  small,  and  noted  in  the  Masora  accordingly. 


NEBUSHASBAN 

The  moral  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  not 
such  as  entitles  him  to  our  approval.  Besides  the 
overweening  pride  which  brought  upon  him  so 
terrible  a  chastisement,  we  note  a  violence  and  fury 
(Dan.  ii.  12,  iii.  19)  common  enough  among  Oriental 
monarchs  of  the  weaker  kind,  but  from  which  the 
greatest  of  them  have  usually  been  free ;  while  at 
the  same  time  we  observe  a  cold  and  relentless 
cruelty  which  is  particularly  revolting.  The  blind- 
ing of  Zedekiah  may  perhaps  be  justified  as  an  ordi- 
nary eastern  practice,  though  it  is  the  earliest  case 
of  the  kind  on  record ;  but  the  refinement  of  cruelty 
by  which  he  was  made  to  witness  his  sons'  execu- 
tion before  his  eyes  were  put  out  (2  K.  xxv.  7)  is 
worthier  of  a  Dionysius  or  a  Domitian  than  of  a 
really  great  king.  Again,  the  detention  of  Jehoia- 
chin  in  prison  tor  36  years  for  an  offence  committed 
at  the  age  of  eighteen  (2  K.  xxiv.  8),  is  a  severity 
surpassing  Oriental  harshness.  Against  these  grave 
faults  we  have  nothing  to  set,  unless  it  be  a  feeble 
trait  of  magnanimity  in  the  pardon  accorded  to 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  when  he  found 
that  he  was  without  power  to  punish  them  (Dan. 
iii.  26). 

It  has  been  thought  remarkable  that  to  a  man  of 
this  character,  God  should  have  vouchsafed  a  reve- 
lation of  the  future  bj-  means  of  visions  (Dan.  ii.  29, 
iv.  2).  But  the  circumstance,  however  it  may 
disturb  our  preconceived  notions,  is  not  really  at 
variance  with  the  general  laws  of  God's  providence 
as  revealed  to  us  in  Scripture.  As  with  His  natural, 
so  with  His  supernatural  gifts,  they  are  not  confined 
to  the  worthy.  Even  under  Christianity,  miraculous 
powers  were  sometimes  possessed  by  those  who  made 
an  ill  use  of  them  (1  Cor.  xiv.  2-33).  And  God, 
it  is  plain,  did  not  leave  the  old  heathen  world 
without  some  supernatural  aid,  but  made  His  pre- 
sence felt  from  time  to  time  in  visions,  through 
prophets,  or  even  by  a  voice  from  Heaven.  It  is 
only  necessary  to  refer  to  the  histories  of  Pliaraoh 
(Gen.  xli.  1-7,  and  28),  Abimelech  (ib.  xx.  3),  Job 
(Job  iv.  13,  xxxviii.  1,  xl.  6;  comp.  Dan.  iv.  31), 
and  Balaam  (Num.  xxii.-xxiv.),  in  order  to  establish 
the  parity  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  visions  with  other 
facts  recorded  in  the  Bible.  He  was  warned,  and 
the  nations  over  which  he  ruled  were  warned 
through  him,  God  leaving  ijot  Himself  "  without 
witness  "  even  in  those  dark  times.  In  conclusion, 
we  may  notice  that  a  heathen  writer  (Abydenus), 
who  generally  draws  his  inspirations  from  Berosus, 
ascribes  to  Nebuchadnezzar  a  miraculous  speech 
just  before  his  death,  announcing  to  the  Babylonians 
the  speedy  coming  of  "  a  Persian  mule,"  who  with 
the  help  of  the  Medes  would  enslave  Babylon  (Abyd. 
ap.  Euseb.  I'raep.  Ev.  ix.  41).  [G.  R.] 

NEBUSHAS'BAN  CI^T^-U:,   i.  e.    Nebu- 

shazban  :  LXX.  omits:  Nahuscshan),  one  of  the 
officers  of  Nebuchadnezzar  at  the  time  of  the  cap- 
ture of  Jerusalem.  He  was  Eab-saris,  ».  e.  chief  of 
the  eunuchs  (Jer.  xxxix.  13),  as  Nebuzaradan  was 
Rab-tabbachim  (chief  of  the  body-guard,  and  Ner- 
gal-sharezer,  Kab-Mag  (chief  of  the  magicians),  the 
three  being  the  most  important  officers  then  present, 
probably  the  highest  dignitaries  of  the  Babylonian 
court.''  Nebu-shasban's  office  and  title  were  the 
same  as  those  of  Ashpenaz  (Dan.  i.  3),  whom  he 
probably  succeeded.     In  the  list  given  (ver.  3)  of 


In  several  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  z  (\)  is  found  instead  of 
n  (|),  making  the  name  Nebushazbaz,  with  perhaps  an 
intentional  play  of  sound,  bas  meaning  prey  or  spoil, 
b  So  at  the  Assyrian  invasion  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah, 


NEBUZARADAN 

those  who  took  possession  of  the  city  in  the  dead  of 
the  night  of  the  1 1th  'I'ammuz,  Nebu-shasban  is  not 
mentioned  hj  name,  but  merely  by  his  title  Kab- 
saris.  His  name,  like  that  of  Nebu-chadnezzar  and 
Nebu-zaradan,  is  a  compound  of  Nebo,  the  Babylo- 
nian deity,  with  some  word  which  though  not  quite 
ascertained,  probably  signified  adherence  or  attach- 
ment (see  Gesen.  Thes.  8406;  Fiirst,  Handu-h. 
ii.  76).  [G.] 

NEBUZAR'ADAN  (|nN-!T333  :  NaiSoufap- 
Sav  ;  in  Jer.  Jia^ov^apZav ;  Joseph.  l^a^ov(ap- 
Sdvvs:  Nehuzardan),  the  Kab-tabbachim,  i.e.  chief 
of  the  slaughterers  (A.  V.  "  captain  of  the  guard"), 
a  higli  officer  in  the  court  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
apparently  (like  the  Tartan  in  the  Assyrian  army) 
the  next  to  the  person  of  the  monarch.  He 
appears  not  to  have  been  present  during  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem;  probably  he  was  occupied  at  the 
more  important  operations  at  Tyre,  but  as  soon  as 
the  city  was  actually  in  the  hands  of  the  Babylo- 
nians he  arrived,  and  from  that  moment  everything 
was  completely  directed  by  him.  It  was  he  who 
decided,  even  to  the  minutest  details  of  fire-pans 
and  bowls  (2  K.  xxv.  15),  what  should  be  carried 
off  and  what  burnt,  which  persons  should  be  taken 
away  to  Babylon,  and  which  left  behind  in  the 
country.  One  act  only  is  referred  directly  to  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, the  appointment  of  the  governor  or 
superintendent  of  the  conquered  district.  All  this 
Nebuzaradan  seems  to  have  carried  out  with  wisdom 
and  moderation.  His  conduct  to  Jeremiah,  to  whom 
his  attention  had  been  directed  by  his  master  (Jer. 
xxxix.  11),  is  marked  by  even  higher  qualities  than 
these,  and  the  prophet  has  presented  (xl.  2-5)  a 
speech  of  Nebuzaradan's  to  him  on  libei'ating  him 
from  his  chains  at  Karaah,  which  contains  expres- 
sions truly  remarkable  in  a  heathen.  He  seems  to 
have  left  Judea  for  this  time  when  he  took  down 
the  chief  people  of  Jerusalem  to  his  master  at 
Riblah  (2  K.  xxv.  18-20).  In  four  years  he  again 
appeared  (Jer.  lii.  30).  Nebuchadnezzar  in  his 
twenty-third  year  made  a  descent  on  the  regions 
east  of  Jordan,  including  the  Ammonites  and  Moab- 
ites  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7),  who  escaped  when  Jeru- 
salem was  destroyed.  [Moab,  p.  397,  8].  Thence 
he  proceeded  to  Kgypt  (Joseph,  ibid.),  and,  either  on 
the  way  thither  or  on  the  return,  Nebuzaradan  again 
passed  through  the  country  and  carried  off  seven 
hundred  and  forty-five  more  captives  (Jer.  lii.  30). 

The  name,  like  Nebu-chadnezzar  and  Nebu- 
shasban,  contains  that  of  Nebo  the  Babylonian 
deity.  The  other  portion  of  the  word  is  less  certain. 
Gesenius  ( Tkes.  8396)  translates  it  by  "  Mercurii 
dux  dominus,"  taking  the  IT  as  =  "IC^,  "  prince," 
and  pN  as  =  jITN,  "  lord."  Furst,  on  the  other 
hand  {^Ilandirh.  ii.  6),  treats  it  as  equivalent  in 
meaning  to  the  Hebrew  rabAnhbachim,  which  usu- 
ally follows  it,  and  sometimes  occurs  by  itself 
(2  K.  xxv.  18;  Jer.  xl.  2,  5).  To  obtain  this 
meaning  he  compares  the  last  member  of  the  name 
to  the  8anscr.  ddiia,  from  do,  "  to  cut  off."  Ge- 
senius also  takes  zaradan  as  identical  with  the  fiist 
element  in  the  name  of  Sardan-apalus.  But  this 
latter  name  is  now  explained  by  Sir  H.  Hawlinson 
as  Assur-dan-i-pal  (Kawlinson's  Herod,  i.  4t)0). 

[G.] 


NEHELAMITE,  THE 


485 


Tart;in,  Eab-saris,  and  Rab-shakeli,  as  the  three  filghest 
dignitaries, addressed  tficJcus  Irom  the  hcadofthclrarmy 
(2  K.  xviii.  17).    Possibly  these  three  otlicers  in  the  As- 


NE'CHO  (133  :  Nexaci),  2  Chr.  xsxv.  20,  22  ; 
xxx\i.  4.     [Pharaoh-Necho.] 

NEC'ODAN  (NeKoiSai/ :  Ncchodaicus)  =  Ne- 
KODA  (1  Esdr.  V.  37  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  60). 

NEDABrAH(n^^n'13:  NajSaSi'os:  Nadabia). 

Apparently  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeconiah,  or  Jehoia- 
chin,  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  18).  Lord  A. 
Hen'ey,  however,  contends  that  this  list  contains 
the  order  of  succession  and  not  of  lineal  descent, 
and  that  Nedabiah  and  his  brothers  were  sons  of 
Neri. 

NEEMI'AS  (Nee/ii'as :  Nehemias)  =  Nehe- 
MIAH  the  son  of  Hachaliah  (Ecclus.  xlix.  13  ;  2  Mace, 
i.  18,  20,  21,  23,  31,  36,  ii.  13). 

NEG'INAH  (nyj:),  properly  Neginath,  as 
the  text  now  stands,  occurs  in  the  title  of  Ps.  Ixi., 
"  to  the  chief  musician  upon  Neginath."  If  the 
present  reading  be  correct,  the  foim  of  the  word 
may  be  compared  with  that  of  Mahalath  (Ps.  liii.). 
But  the  LXX.  {kv  vfivois),  and  Vulg.  (m  hjmnis), 
evidently  read  "Neginoth"  in  the  plural,  which 
occurs  in  the  titles  of  five  Psalms,  and  is  perhaps 
the  true  reading.  Whether  the  word  be  singular 
or  plural,  it  is  the  general  term  by  which  all 
stringed  instruments  are  described.  In  the  singular 
it  has  the  derived  sense  of  "  a  song  sung  to  the  accom- 
paniment of  a  stringed  instrument,"  and  generally 
of  a  taunting  character  (Job  xxx.  9  ;  Ps.  Ixix.  12  ; 
Lam.  iii.  14).     [Neginoth.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

NEG'INOTH  (nii''J3).  This  word  is  found  in 
the  titles  of  Ps.  iv.  vi.  liv.  Iv.  Isvii.  Ixxvi.,  and 
the  margin  of  Hab.  iii.  19,  and  there  seems  but 
little  doubt  that  it  is  the  general  term  denoting  all 
stringed  instruments  whatsoever,  whether  played 
with  the  hand,  like  the  harp  and  guitar,  or  with  a 
plectrum."  It  thus  includes  all  those  instruments 
which  in  the  A.  V.  are  denoted  by  the  special  terms 
"  harp,"  "  psaltery  "  or  "  viol,"  "  sackbut,"  as  well 
as  by  the  general  descriptions  "  stringed  instru- 
ments "  (Ps.  cl.  4),  "instruments  of  music  "  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  6),  or,  as  the  margin  gives  it,  "  three-stringed 
instruments,"  and  the  "  instrument  of  ten  strings" 
(Ps.  xxxiii.  2,  xcii.  3,  cxhv.  9).  "  The  chief  mu- 
sician on  Neginoth"  was  therefore  the  conductor  of 
that  portion  of  the  Temple-choir  who  played  upon 
the  stringed  instruments,  and  who  are  mentioned 
in  Ps.  Ixviii.  25  (D''3!lj,  nogenlm).  The  root 
(|ilJ  =  Kpoveiv)  from  which  the  word  is  derived 
occurs  in  1  Sam.  xvi.  16,  17,  18,  23,  xviii.  10,  xix. 
9,  Is.  xxxviii.  20,  and  a  comparison  of  these  passages 
confirms  what  has  been  said  with  regard  to  ib> 
meaning.  The  author  of  the  S/iilte  Haggibhorim, 
quoted  by  Kircher  {Afusurgia,  i.  4,  p.  48),  describes 
the  Neginoth  as  instruments  of  wood,  long  and 
I'ound,  pierced  with  several  apertures,  and  having 
three  strings  of  gut  stretched  across  them,  which 
were  played  with  a  bow  of  horsehair.  It  is  ex- 
tremely doubtful,  however,  whether  the  Hebrews 
were  acquainted  with  anything  so  closely  resembling 
the  modern  violin.  [^V.  A.  VV.] 

NEHELAMITE,  THE  (^P^niin  :  6  'Al\-a- 
Helr-qs:  Nelielamites).  The  designation  of  a  man 
named  Shemaiah,  a  false  prophet,  who  went  with 


Syrian  court  answered  to  the  three  named  above  in  the 
Babylonian. 
"  Hence  SjTimiachus  renders  Sio  i^aATTjpi'oii'. 


486 


NEHEMIAH 


the  captivity  to  Babylon  ( Jer.  xxix.  24,  ol,  32). 
The  name  is  no  doubt  formed  from  tliat  either  of 
Shemaiah's  native  place,  or  the  progenitor  of  his 
tiimily ;  which  of  the  two  is  uncertain.  No  place 
allied  Nehelam  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  or  known 
to  have  existed  in  Palestine,"  nor  does  it  occur  in 
any  of  the  genealogical  lists  of  families.  It  re- 
sembles the  name  which  the  LXX.  have  attached  to 
Ahijah  the  Prophet,  namely  the  Enlamite — o  Ev- 
Aojuet :  but  by  what  authority  they  substitute  that 
name  for  "  the  Shilonite "  of  the  Hebrew  text  is 
doubtful.  The  word  '■  Nehelamite  "  also  probably 
contains  a,  play  on  the  "dreams"  {halaiii)  and 
"  dreamers,"  whom  Jeremiah  is  never  wearied  of 
denouncing  (see  chaps,  xxiii.  xxvii.  xxix.).  This  is 
hinted  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V. — from  what  source 
the  writer  has  not  been  able  to  discover.         [G.] 

NEHEMI'AH  (n^JOn?:  N€e;uias).  1.  Son 
of  Hachaliah,  and  apparently  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
since  his  fathers  were  buried  at  Jerusalem,  and  Ha- 
nani  his  kinsman  seems  to  have  been  of  that  tribe 
(i.  2,  ii.  3,  vii.  2).  He  is  called  indeed  "  Nehe- 
miah  the  Priest"  (Neh.  sacerdos)  in  the  Vulgate  of 
2  Mace.  i.  21 ;  but  the  Greek  has  it,  that  "  Xehemiah 
ordered  the  priests  (Upels)  to  pour  the  water,"  &c. 
Nor  does  the  expression  in  ver.  18,  that  Nehemiah 
"  oflered  sacrifice,"  imply  any  more  than  that  he 
provided  the  sacrifices.  Others  again  have  iiiferi-ed 
that  he  was  a  priest  fi-om  Neh.  x.  1-8  ;  but  the 
words  "  these  were  the  priests,"  naturally  apply  to 
the  names  which  follow  Nehemiah's,  who  signed 
first  as  the  head  of  the  whole  nation.  The  opinion 
tliat  he  was  connected  with  the  house  of  David  is 
more  feasible,  though  it  cannot  be  proved.  The 
name  of  Hanani  his  kinsman,  as  well  as  his  own 
name,  are  found  slightly  varied  in  the  house  of 
David,  in  the  case  of  Hananiah  the  son  of  Zerub- 
babel  (1  Chr.  iii.  19),  and  Naum  (Luke  iii.  25).'' 
If  he  were  of  the  house  of  David,  there  would  be 
peculiar  point  in  his  allusion  to  his  "  fathers' 
sepulchres "  at  Jerusalem.  Malalas  of  Antioch 
(Chronogr.  vi.  p.  160),  as  cited  by  Grimm,  on 
2  Mace.  i.  21,  singularly  combines  the  two  views, 
and  calls  him  "  Nehemiah  the  priest,  of  the  seed  of 
David." 

All  that  we  know  certainly  concerning  this  emi- 
nent man  is  contained  in  the  book  which  bears  his 
name.  His  autobiography  first  finds  him  at  Shu- 
shan,  the  winter'  residence  of  the  kings  of  Persia, 
in  high  office  as  the  cupbearer  of  king  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus.  In  the  20th  year  of  the  king's  reign, 
i.  e.  B.C.  445,  certain  Jews,  one  of  whom  was  a 
near  kinsman  of  Nehemiah's,  arrived  from  Judea, 
and  gave  Nehemiah  a  deplorable  account  of  the 
state  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  residents  in  Judea. 
He  immediately  conceived  the  idea  of  going  to 
Jerusalem  to  endeavour  to  better  their  state. 
After  three  or  four  months  (from  Chisleu  to 
Nisan),  in  which  he  earnestly  sought  God's  bless- 
ing upon  his  undeiiaking  by  frequent  prayer  and 
fasting,  an  opportunity  piesented  itself  of  obtaining 

»  The  Targum  gives  the  name  as  fleJajn,  Qpri-  A  place 
of  this  name  lay  somewhere  butweeu  the  Jordan  and  the 
Euphrates.    See  vol.  i.  780  o. 

i>  See  Genealog.  of  our  Lord  J.  C,  p  145.  [Nehemiah, 
Son  of  Azbuk.] 

<^  Ecbatana  was  the  summer,  Babylon  the  spring,  and 
Persepolis  the  autuitm  residence  of  the  kings  of  Persia 
(Pilkinglon).  Susa  was  the  principal  palace  (Strab.  lib.  xv. 
iap.  iii.  ^3). 

''  nriD.  the  Itna  applied  to  himself  and  olhcr  .satraps 


NEHEMIAH 

the  king's  consent  to  his  mission.  Having  received 
his  appointment  as  governor  "*  of  Judea,  a  troop  of 
cavalry,  and  letters  from  the  king  to  the  difl'erent 
satraps  through  whose  provinces  he  was  to  pass,  as 
well  as  to  Asaph  the  keeper  of  the  king's  forests, 
to  supply  him  with  timber,  he  stalled  upon  his 
journey:  being  under  promise  to  return  to  I'ersia 
within  a  given  time.  Josephus  says  that  he  went 
in  the  first  instance  to  Babylon,  and  gathered 
round  him  a  band  of  exiled  Jews,  who  returned 
with  him.  This  is  important  as  possibly  indi- 
cating that  the  book  which  Josephus  followed, 
understood  the  Nehemiah  mentioned  in  Ezr,  ii.  2 ; 
Neh.  vii.  7,  to  be  the  son  of  Hachaliah. 

Nehemiah's  gi'eat  work  was  rebuilding,  for  the 
first  time  since  their  destruction  by  Nebuzar- 
adan,  the  walls  of  Jemsalem,  and  restoring  that 
city  to  its  former  state  and  dignity,  as  a  fortified 
town.  It  is  impossible  to  over  estimate  the  im- 
portance to  the  future  political  and  ecclesiastical 
prosperity  of  the  Jewish  nation  of  this  great 
achievement  of  their  patriotic  governor.  How  low 
the  community  of  the  Palestine  Jews  had  fallen, 
is  apparent  from  the  fact  that  from  the  6th  of 
Darius  to  the  7th  of  Artaxerxes,  there  is  no  history 
of  them  whatever  ;  and  that  even  after  Ezra's  com- 
mission, and  the  ample  grants  made  by  Artaxerxes  ' 
in  his  7th  year,  and  the  considerable  reinforce- 
ments, both  in  wealth  and  numbers,  which  Ezra's 
goverament  brought  to  them,  they  were  in  a  state 
of  abject  "  aflliction  and  reproach  "  in  the  20th  of 
Artaxerxes ;  their  conati-y  pillaged,  their  citizens 
kidnapped  and  made  slaves  of  by  their  heathen 
neighbours,  robbery  and  murder  rife  in  their  very 
capital,  .lerusalem  almost  deserted,  and  the  Temple 
falling  again  into  decay.  The  one  step  which  could 
resuscitate  the  nation,  preserve  the  Jlosaic  insti- 
liutions,  and  lay  the  foundation  of  future  inde- 
pendence, was  the  restoration  of  the  city  walls. 
Jerusalem  being  once  again  secure  from  the  attacks 
of  the  mai'auding  heathen,  civil  government  would 
become  possible,  the  spirit  of  the  people,  and  their 
attachment  to  the  ancient  capital  of  the  monarchy 
would  revive,  the  priests  and  Levites  would  be 
encouraged  to  come  into  residence,  the  tithes  and 
first-fruits  and  other  stores  would,  be  safe,  and 
Judah,  if  not  actually  independent,  would  preserve 
the  essentials  of  national  and  religious  life.  To  this 
great  object  therefore  Nehemiah  directed  his  whole 
energies  without  an  hour's  unnecessary  delay.* 
By  word  and  example  he  induced  the  whole  popu- 
lation, with  the  single  exception  of  the  Tekoite 
nobles,  to  commence  building  with  the  utmost 
vigour,  even  the  lukewarm  high-priest  Eliashib 
performing  his  part.  In  a  wonderfully  short  time 
the  walls  seemed  to  emerge  fi'om  the  heaps  of 
burnt  rubbish,  and  to  encircle  the  city  as  in  the 
days  of  old.  The  gateways  also  were  rebuilt,  and 
ready  for  the  doors  to  be  hung  upon  them.  But 
it  soon  became  apparent  how  wisely  Nehemiah  had 
acted  m  hastening  on  the  work.  On  his  very  first 
arrival,    as   governor,   Sanballat   and   Tobiah    had 


by  Nehemiah.  The  meaning  and  etymology  of  Tirshatha, 
which  is  applied  only  to  Nehemiah,  are  doubtful.  It  is  by 
most  modem  scholars  thought  to  mean  governor  (Gesen. 
s.v);  but  the  sense  cupbearer,  given  by  older  commen- 
tators, seems  more  probable. 

•^  The  three  days,  mentioned  Neh.  ii.  1 1,  and  Ezr.  viii.  32, 
seems  to  point  to  some  customary  interval,  perhaps  for 
purification  after  a  journey.  See  in  Cruden's  Concordanue 
"  Third  Day  "  and  "  Three  Days." 


NEHEMIAH 

given  unequivocal  proof  of  theii'  raortiticatioii  at 
his  appointment;  ;md,  before  the  work  was  even 
commenced,  had  scoi-nfully  asked  whether  he  in- 
tended to  rebel  against  the  king  of  Persia.  But 
when  the  restoration  was  seen  to  be  rapidly  pro- 
gressing, their  indignation  knew  no  bounds.  They 
not  only  poured  out  a  torrent  of  abuse  and  con- 
tempt upon  all  engaged  in  the  work,  but  actually 
made  a  great  conspiracy  to  fall  upon  the  builders 
with  an  armed  force  and  put  a  stop  to  tlie  under- 
taking. The  project  was  del'eated  by  the  vigilance 
and  prudence  of  Nehomiah,  who  armed  all  the 
people  after  their  families,  and  showed  such  a 
strong  front  that  their  enemies  daied  not  attack 
them.  This  armed  attitude  was  continued  from 
that  day  forward.  Various  stratagems  were  then 
resorted  to  to  get  Nehemiah  away  from  Jerusalem, 
and  if  possible  to  take  his  life.  But  that  which 
most  nearly  'succeeded  was  the  attempt  to  bring 
him  into  suspicion  with  the  king  of  Persia,  as  if  he 
intended  to  set  himself  up  for  an  independent  king, 
as  soon  as  the  walls  were  completed.  It  was 
thought  that  the  accusation  of  I'ebellion  would  also 
frighten  the  Jews  themselves,  and  make  them  cease 
irom  building.  Accordingly  a  double  line  of  action 
was  taken.  On  the  one  hand  Sanballat  wrote  a 
letter  to  Nehemiah,  in  an  apparently  friendly  tone, 
telling  him,  on  the  authority  ofGeshem,  that  it  was 
reported  among  the  heathen  (i.  e.  the  heathen  nations 
settled  in  Samaria,  and  Galilee  of  the  nations),  that 
he  was  about  to  head  a  rebellion  of  the  Jews,  and 
that  he  had  appointed  prophets  to  aid  in  the  design 
by  prophesying  of  him,  "  thou  art  the  king  of 
Judah ;"  and  that  he  was  building  the  walls  for 
this  purpose.  This  was  sure,  he  added,  to  come  to 
the  ears  of  the  king  of  Pei'sia,  and  he  invited  Nehe- 
miah to  confer  with  him  as  to  what  should  be  done. 
At  the  same  time  he  had  also  bribed  Noadiah  the 
prophetess,  and  other  prophets,  to  induce  Nehemiah 
by  representations  of  his  being  in  danger,  to  take 
refuge  in  the  fortress  of  the  Temple,  with  a  view 
to  cause  delay,  and  also  to  give  an  appeaiance  of 
conscious  guilt.  While  this  portion  of  the  plot  was 
conducted  by  Sanballat  and  Tobiah,  a  yet  more 
important  line  of  action  was  pursued  in  concert 
with  them  by  the  chief  officers  of  the  king  of  Persia 
in  Samaria.  In  a  letter  addressed  to  Artaxerxes 
they  represented  that  the  Jews  had  I'ebuilt  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  intent  of  rebelling 
against  the  king's  authoiity  and  recovering  their 
dominion  on  "this  side  the  river."  Referring  to 
ibrmer  instances  of  the  seditious  spirit  of  the 
Jewish  people,  they  urged  that  if  the  king  wished 
to  -maintiiin  his  power  in  the  province  he  must 
immediately  put  a  stop  to  the  fortification.  This 
artful  letter  so  far  wrought  upon  Artaxerxes,  that 
he  issued  a  decree  stopping  the  work  till  further 
orders.'  It  is  probable  that  at  the  same  time  he 
recalled  Nehemiah,  or  perhaps  Nehemiah's  leave  of 
absence  had  previously  expired  ;  in  either  case  had 
tiie  Tirshatha  been  less  upright  and  less  wise,  and 
had  he  fallen  into  the  trap  laid  for  him,  his  life 
might  have  been  in  great  danger.  The  sequel, 
however,  shows  that  his  perfect  integrity  was  ap- 
parent to  the  king.  For  after  a  delay,  perhaps  of 
several  years,  he  was  j)ermitted  to  leturu  to  Jeru- 
salem, and  to  crown  his  work  by  repairing  the 
Temple,  and  dedicating  the  walls.     What,  however, 

f  The  reader  must  remember  that  this  application  of 
Ezr.  iv.  T-23  to  this  time  is  novel,  and  must  exercise  his 
own  judgment  as  to  its  admissibility. 

8  Such  as  the  collcctiou  of  money  and  priests'  garments 


NEHEMIAH 


487 


we  have  here  to  notice  is,  that  owing  to  Nehemiah's 
wise  haste,  and  his  refusal  to  pause  for  a  day  in 
his  work,  in  spite  of  threats,  plots,  and  insiima- 
tions,  the  designs  of  his  enemies  were  fmstrated. 
The  wall  was  actually  finished  and  ready  to  receive 
the  gates,  before  the  king's  decree  for  suspendino- 
the  work  arrived.  A  little  delay  therefore  was  all 
they  were  able  to  elfect.  Nehemiah  does  not  in- 
deed mention  this  adverse  decree,  which  may  have 
arrived  during  his  absence,  nor  give  us  any  clue  to 
the  time  of  his  return  ;  nor  should  we  have  sus- 
pected his  absence  at  all  from  Jerusalem,  but  for 
the  incidental  allusion  in  ch.  ii.  6,  xiii.  6,  coupled 
with  the  long  interval  of  years  between  the  earlier 
and  later  chapters  of  the  book.  But  the  interval 
between  the  close  of  ch.  vi.  and  the  beginning  of 
ch.  vii.  is  the  only  place  where  we  can  suppose 
a  considerable  gap  in  time,  either  from  the  appear- 
ance of  the  text,  or  the  nature  of  the  events  nar- 
rated. It  seems  to  suit  both  well  to  suppose  that 
Nehemiah  returned  to  Persia,  and  the  work  stopped 
immediately  after  the  events  nan-ated  in  vi.  16-19, 
and  that  chapter  vii.  goes  on  to  relate  the  measures 
adopted  by  him  upon  his  return  with  fresh  powers. 
These  were,  the  setting  up  tlie  doors  in  the  various 
gates  of  the  city,  giving  a  special  chai'ge  to  Hanani 
and  Hananiah,  as  to  the  time  of  opening  and  shut- 
ting the  gates,  and  above  all  providing  tor  the  due 
peopling  of  the  city,  the  numbers  of  which  were 
miserably  small,  and  the  rebuilding  of  the  nume- 
i-ous  decayed  houses  within  the  walls.  Then  fol- 
lowed a  census  of  the  returned  captives,  a  large 
collection  of  funds  for  the  repau'  of  the  Temple, 
the  public  reading  of  the  law  to  the  people  by 
Ezra  (who  now  appears  again  on  the  scene,  perhaps 
having  returned  tiom  Persia  with  Nehemiah),  a 
celebration  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  such  as  had 
not  been  held  since  the  days  of  Joshua  ;  a  do  less 
solemn  keeping  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  when  the 
opportunity  was  taken  to  enter  into  solemn  cove- 
nant with  God,  to  walk  in  the  law  of  Moses  and  to 
keep  God's  commandments. 

It  may  have  been  after  another  considerable  in- 
terval of  time,  and  not  improbably  after  another 
absence  of  the  Tirshatha  from  his  government,  that 
the  next  event  of  interest  in  Nehemiah's  litis  oc- 
curred, viz.,  the  dedication  of  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem, including,  if  we  may  believe  tlie  author  of 
2  Mace,  supported  by  several  indications  in  the 
Book  of  Nehemiah,  that  of  the  Temple  after  its 
repair  by  means  of  the  funds  collected  from  the 
whole  population.  This  dedication  was  conducted 
with  great  solemnity,  and  appears  to  have  been  the 
model  of  the  dedication  by  Judas  Maccabeus,  when 
the  Temple  was  puritied  and  the  worship  restored 
at  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epi))hanes,  as  related 
1  Mace.  iv..  The  author  of  2  Mace,  says  that  on 
this  occasion  Nehemiah  obtained  the  sacred  fiie 
which  had  been  hid  in  a  pit  by  certain  priests  at 
the  time  of  the  captivity,  and  w;is  recovered  by 
their  descendants,  who  knew  were  it  was  concealed. 
When,  however,  these  priests  went  to  the  ])lace,  they 
found  only  muddy  water.  By  NuhemiaJi's  command 
they  drew  this  water,  a;id  sprinkled  it  upon  the 
wood  of  the  altai-  and  upon  the  victims,  and  when 
the  sun,  which  had  been  overclouded,  presently 
shone  out,  a  great  rtre  was  innnediately  kindled, 
which  consumed  the  sacrifices,  to  the  gre;it  wonder 


mentioned  in  Neh.  vii.,  70,  Kzr.  Ii.  68 ;  the  allusion  to  the 
pollution  of  the  Temple,  xiii.  7-9 ;  and  the  nature  of  the 
ceremonies  described  in  cl;.  xli.  27-13. 


48S 


NEHEMIAH 


of  all  present.  The  author  also  inserts  the  prayer, 
a  simple  and  beautiful  one,  said  to  have  been 
uttered  by  the  priests,  and  responded  to  by  Nehe- 
miah,  during  the  sacrifice ;  and  adds,  that  the  king 
of  Persia  enclosed  the  place  where  the  fire  was 
found,  and  that  Nehemiah  gave  it  the  nanae  of 
Naphthar,  or  cleansing.  [Naputhar.]  He  tells 
us  further  that  an  account  of  this  dedication  was 
contained  in  the  "  writings  and  commentaries  of 
Nehemiah"  (2  Mace.  ii.  13),  and  that  Nehemiah 
founded  "  a  library,  and  gathered  together  the  acts 
of  the  kings,  and  the  prophets,  and  of  David,  and 
the  epistles  of  the  kings  (of  Persia)  concerning  the 
holy  gifts."  How  much  of  this  has  any  historical 
foundation  is  difficult  to  determine.  It  should  be 
added,  however,  tliat  the  son  of  Sirach,  in  celebrat- 
ing Nehemiah's  good  deeds,  mentions  only  that  he 
"  raised  up  for  us  the  walls  that  were  fallen,  and 
set  up  the  gates  and  the  bars,  and  raised  up  our 
ruins  again,"  Ecclus.  xlix.  13.  Returning  to  the 
sure  ground  of  the  sacred  nan-ative,  the  other  prin- 
cipal achievements  of  this  great  and  good  governor 
may  be  thus  signalised.  He  tirmly  repressed  the 
exactions  of  the  nobles,  and  the  usury  of  the  rich, 
and  rescued  the  poor  Jews  from  spoliation  and 
slavery".  He  refused  to  receive  his  lawful  allow- 
ance as  governor  from  the  people,  in  consideration 
of  their  poverty,  during  the  whole  twelve  years 
that  he  was  in  office,  but  kept  at  his  own  charge 
a  table  for  150  Jews,  at  which  any  who  returned 
from  captivity  were  welcome.  He  made  most 
careful  provision  for  the  maintenance  of  the  minis- 
tering priests  and  Levites,  and  for  the  due  and  con- 
stant celebration  of  Divine  worship.  He  insisted 
upon  the  sanctity  of  the  precincts  of  the  Temple 
being  preserved  inviolable,  and  peremptorily  ejected 
the  powerful  Tobias  from  one  of  the  chambers 
which  Eliashib  had  assigned  to  him.  He  then  re- 
placed the  stores  and  vessels  which  had  been  re- 
moved to  make  room  for  him,  and  appointed  proper 
Levitical  officers  to  superintend  and  distribute  them. 
With  no  less  firmness  and  impartiality  he  expelled 
from  all  sacred  functions  those  of  the  high-priest's 
family  who  had  contracted  heathen  marriages,  and 
rebuked  and  punished  those  of  the  common  people, 
who  had  likewise  intermarried  with  foreigners ;  and 
lastly,  lie  provided  for  keeping  holy  the  Sabbath 
day,  which  was  shamefully  profaned  by  many,  both 
Jews  and  foreign  merchants,  and  by  his  resolute 
conduct  succeeded  in  repressing  the  lawless  tralHc 
on  the  day  of  rest. 

Beyond  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes,  to  which 
Nehemiah's  own  narrative  leads  us,  we  have  no 
account  of  him  whatever.  Neither  had  Josephus. 
For  when  he  tells  us  that  "  when  Nehemiah  had 
done  many  other  excellent  things  ...  he  came  to  a 
great  age  and  then  died,"  he  sufficiently  indicates 
that  he  knew  nothing  more  about  him.  The  most 
probable  inference  from  the  close  of  his  own  memoir, 
aral  the  absence  of  any  further  tradition  concerning 
him  is,  that  he  returned  to  Persia  and  died  there. 
On  reviewing  the  character  of  Nehemiah,  we  seem 
miable  to  find  a  single  fault  to  counterbalance  his 
many  and  great  virtues.  For  pine  and  disinterested 
patriotism  he  stands  unrivalled.  The  man  whom 
the  account  of  the  misery  and  ruin  of  his  native 
country,  and  the  perils  with  which  his  countrymen 
were  beset,  prompted  to  leave  his  splendid  banish- 
ment, and  a  post  of  wealth,  power,  and  influence, 
in  the  first  court  in  the  world,  that  he  might  share 
and  alleviate  the  sorrows  of  his  native  land,  must 
have  been  pre-eminently  a  patriijt.     Every  act  of 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

his  during  his  government  bespeaks  one  who  had 
no  selfishness  in  his  nature.  All  he  did  was  noble, 
generous,  high-minded,  courageous,  and  to  the 
highest  degree  upright.  But  to  stern  integrity  he 
united  great  humility  and  kindness,  and  a  princely 
hospitality.  As  a  statesman  he  combined  fore- 
thought, prudence,  and  sagacity  in  counsel,  with 
vigour,  promptitude,  and  decision  in  action.  In 
dealing  with  the  enemies  of  his  countiy  he  was 
wary,  peneti-ating  and  bold.  In  directing  the  internal 
economy  of  the  state,  he  took  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  real  welfare  of  the  people,  and  adopted  the 
measures  best  calculated  to  promote  it.  In  dealing 
whether  with  friend  or  foe,  he  was  iftterly  free 
from  favour  or  fear,  conspicuous  for  the  simplicity 
with  which  he  aimed  only  at  doing  what  was  right, 
without  respect  of  persons.  But  in  nothing  was 
he  more  remarkable  than  for  his  piety,  and  the 
singleness  of  eye  with  which  he  walked  before  God. 
He  seems  to  have  undertaken  everything  in  de- 
pendence upon  God,  with  prayer  for  His  blessing 
and  guidance,  and  to  have  sought  his  reward  only 
from  God. 

The  principal  authorities  for  the  events  of  Nehe- 
miah's life,  after  Josephus,  are  Carpzov's  Intro- 
duct,  ad  N.  T.\  Eichhorn,  £'m?e2Y?mi7 ;  Havernick's 
Einleit. ;  Kambaeh  in  Lib.  Nehoin. ;  Leclerc  in  Lib. 
histor.  N.  T.,  besides  those  refen-ed  to  in  the 
following  article.  Those  who  wish  to  see  the 
questions  discussed  of  the  20th  Artaxeixes,  as 
the  terminus  a  quo  Daniel's  seventy  weeks  com- 
mence, and  also  the  general  chronology  of  the 
times,  may  refer  to  Genealogy  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  ch.  xi.;  and  for  a  different  view  to  Pri- 
deaux,  Connect,  i.  251,  &c.  The  view  of  Sca- 
liger,  Hottiuger,  &c.,  adopteil  by  Dr.  Mill,  Vindic. 
of  our  Lord's  Genealogy,  p.  165  note ;  that  Ar- 
taxerxes Mnemon  was  Nehemiah's  patron,  is  almost 
universally  abandoned.  The  proof  from  the  parallel 
genealogies  of  the  kings  of  Persia  and  the  high- 
priests,  that  he  was  Longimanus,  is  stated  in  a 
paper  printed  for  the  Chronolog.  Institute  by  the 
wi'iter  of  this  article. 

2.  One  of  the  leaders  of  the  first  expedition  from 
Babylon  to  Jerusalem  under  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  2  ; 
Neh.  vii.  7). 

3.  t-'on  of  Azbuk,  and  ruler  of  the  half  part  of 
Beth-zur,  who  helped  to  repair  the  wall  of  Jeru- 
salem (Neh.  iii.  16).  Beth-zur  was  a  city  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  58;  1  Chr.  ii.  45),  belonging  to  a 
branch  of  Caleb's  descendants,  whence  it  follows 
that  this  Nehemiah  was  also  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 

[A.  a.  H.] 
NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF.  The  latest  of  all 
the  historical  books  of  Scripture,  both  as  to  the 
time  of  its  composition  and  the  scope  of  its  nan-a- 
tive in  general,  and  as  to  the  supplementary  matter 
of  ch.  xii.  in  particular,  which  reaches  down  to 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  This  book,  like 
the  preceding  one  of  Ezra  [Ezra,  Book  of],  is 
clearly  and  certainly  not  all  by  the  same  hand. 
By  far  the  principal  portion,  indeed,  is  the  work 
of  Nehemiah,  who  gives,  in  the  first  person,  a 
simple  narrative  of  the  events  in  which  he  himself 
was  concerned ;  but  other  portions  are  either  ex- 
tracts from  various  chronicles  and  registers,  or  svip- 
plementaiy  nai'ratives  and  i-eflections,  some  appa- 
rently by  Ezra,  others,  perhaps,  the  work  of  the 
same  pei-son  who  inserted  the  latest  genealogical 
extracts  from  the  public  chronicles. 

1.  The  main  his-tory  contained  in  the  book  of 
Kehemiah  covers  about   12   years,  viz.,  from  the 


NEHEMIAH.  BOOK  OF 


489 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

20th  to  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimaniis, 
i.  a.  fiom  li.C.  445  to  433.  For  so  we  seem  to 
learn  distinctly  from  v.  14  compared  with  xiii.  6  ; 
nor  does  thei'e  seem  to  be  an\j  historical  ground 
xohatevcr  for  asserting  with  Prideaux  and  many 
others  that  the  government  of  Nehemiah,  after  his 
return  in  the  32nd  of  Artaxerxes,  extended  to  the 
15th  year  of  Darius  Nothus,  and  that  the  events  of 
ch.  xiii.  belong  to  this  later  period  (Frid.  Connect. 
B.C.  409).  The  argument  attempted  to  be  derived 
from  Neh.  xiii.  28,  that  Eliashib  was  then  dead  and 
.loiada  his  son  high-priest,  is  utterly  without  weight. 
There  is  a  precisely  parallel  phrase  in  2  Chr.  xxxv. 
3,  where  we  read  "  the  house  which  Solomon  the 
son  of  David  king  of  Israel  did  build."  But  the 
doubt  whether  the  title  "  king  of  Israel  "  applies  to 
David  or  Solomon  is  removed  by  the  following 
verse,  where  we  read,  "  according  to  the  writing  of 
David  king  of  Israel,  and  according  to  the  writing 
of  Solomon  his  son."  The  LXX.  also  in  that  pas- 
sage have  jSacriAf'cos  agreeing  with  David.  There 
is,  therefore,  not  the  slightest  pi'etence  for  asserting 
that  Nehemiah  was  governor  after  the  32nd  of 
Artaxerxes  (see  below). 

The  whole  narrative  gives  us  a  graphic  and 
interesting  account  of  the  state  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  returned  captives  in  the  writer's  times,  and, 
incidentally,  of  the  nature  of  the  Persian  govern- 
ment and  the  condition  of  its  remote  provinces. 
The  documents  appended  to  it  also  give  some 
further  information  as  to  the  times  of  Zerubbabel 
on  the  one  hand,  and  as  to  the  continuation  of 
the  genealogical  registers  and  the  succession  of  the 
high-priesthood  to  the  close  of  the  Persian  empire 
on  the  other.  The  view  given  of  the  rise  of  two 
factions  among  the  Jews — the  one  the  strict  reli- 
gious party,  adhering  with  uncompromising  faith- 
fulness to  the  Mosaic  institutions,  headed  by  Nehe- 
miah ;  the  other,  the  gentilizing  party,  ever  imi- 
tating heathen  customs,  and  making  heathen  con- 
nexions,   headed,  or   at    least   eiicoui'aged   by    the 

high-piicst  Eliashib  and  his  family — sets  before  us 

the  germ  of  much  that  we  meet  with  in  a  more 

develdjied   state   in  later  Jewish  history  from  the 

commencement  of  the  Macedonian  dynasty  till  the 

final  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Again,  in  this  history  as  well  as  in  the  book  of 

Ezra,  we  see  the  bitter  enmity  between  the  Jews 

and  Saniaritiuis  acquiring    strength  and  definitive 

form  on  both  religious  and  political  grounds.     It 

would  seem  from  iv.  1,  2,  8  (A.  V.),  and  vi.  2, 

U,  &c.,  that  the   depi'ession  of  Jerusalem   was- a 

fixed  part  of  the  jiolicy  of  Sanballat,  and  that  he 

had  tile  design  of  raising  Samaria  as  the  head  of 

Palestine,  upon  J;he  ruin    of  Jerusalem,  a   design 

w  hich  seems  to  have  been  entertained  by  the  Sama- 
ritans in  later  times. 

The   book   also   throws    much    light   upon    the 

domestic  institutions  of  the  Jews.     We  learn  inci- 
dentally the  prevalence  of  usury  and  of  slavery  as  its 

consequence,  the  frequent  and  burdensome  oppres- 
sions of  the  governoi'S  (v.  15),  the  judicial  use  of 

corporal  punishment  (xiii.  25),  the  continuance  of 

false  prophet.s  as  an  engine  of  policy,  as  in  the  days  of 

the  kingsof  Judah  (vi.  7,12,  14),  the  restitution  of 

the  IMosaic  provision  for  the  maintenance    of  the 

Priests  and  Levites  and  the  duo  perfbrmmice  of  the 

"  This  lately  acquired  acqiiainti\ncc\vitli  the  Scriptures  I  vernacular  language  of  the  Jews,  which  some  tiiul  in 
appears  incldcnUnUy  ill  the  large  quotations  in  the  prayers  j  Neh.  vlil.  S,  is  very  doubtful,  ar.d  dependent  nu  Iho 
of  Nehemiah  and  the  Levites,  chaps,  i.,  ix.,  xiii.  26,  &c.        nieaning  of  ti'lbD. 

h  The  evidence  of  Hebrew  havitig  ceased  to  be  llic  ''-■■' 


Temple  service  (xiii.  10-3),  the  much  freer  promulga- 
tion of  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  the  public  reading  of 
them  (viii.  1,  ix.  3,  xiii.  1),  and  the  more  general 
acquaintance  ^  with  them  arising  from  theii-  collec- 
tion into  one  volume  and  the  multiplication  of 
copies  of  them  by  the  care  of  Ezra  the  scribe  and 
Nehemiah  himself  (2  Mace.  ii.  13),  as  well  as 
from  the  stimulus  given  to  the  ai-t  of  reading 
among  the  Jewish  people  daring  their  residence  in 
Babylon  [Hilkiah]  ;  the  mixed  form  of  political 
government  still  surviving  the  ruin  of  their  inde- 
pendence (v.  7, 13,  X.),  the  reviving  trade  with  Tyre 
(xiii.  16),  the  agricultural  pursuits  and  wealth  m 
the  Jews  (v.  11,  xiii.  15),  the  tendency  to  take 
heathen  wives,  indicating,  possibly,  a  disproportion 
in  the  number  of  Jewish  males  and  females  among 
the  returned  captives  (x.  30,  xiii.  3,  23),  the  danger 
the  Jewish  language  was  in  of  being  corrupted  >> 
(xiii.  24),  with  other  details  which  only  the  narrative  ■ 
of  an  eye-witness  would  have  preserved  to  us. 

Some  of  these  details  give  us  incidentally  infor- 
mation of  great  historical  importance. 

(a.)  The  account  of  the  building  and  dedication  of 
the  wall,  iii.,  xii.,  contains  the  most  valuable  mate- 
rials for  settling  the  topography  of  Jerusalem  to  be 
found  in  Scripture.  [Jerusalem,  vol.  i.  pp.  1026- 
27.]     (Thrupp's  Ancient  Jentsalem.) 

(b.)  The  list  of  returned  captives  who  came 
under  different  leaders  from  the  time  of  Zerubbabel 
to  that  of  Nehemiah  (amounting  in  all  to  only 
42,360  adult  males,  and  7337  servants),  which  is 
given  in  ch.  vii.,  convej^s  a  faithful  picture  of  the 
political  weakness  of  the  Jewish  nation  as  com- 
pared with  the  times  when  Judah  alone  numbei'ed 
470,000  fighting  men  (1  Chr.  xxi.  5).  It  justifies 
the  description  of  the  Palestine  Jews  as  "  the 
remnant  that  are  left  of  the  captivity  "  (Neh.  i.  3), 
and  as  "  these  feeble  Jews  "  (iv.  2),  and  explains 
the  great  difficulty  felt  by  Nehemiah  in  peopling 
Jerusalem  itself  with  a  sufficient  number  of  inha- 
bitants to  presen-e  it  from  assault  (vii.  3,  4,  xi. 
1,  2).  It  is  an  important  aid,  too,  in  under- 
standing the  subsequent  history,  and  in  appreciating 
the  patriotism  and  valour  by  which  they  attained 
their  independence  under  the  Maccabees. 

(c.)  The  lists  of  leaders,  priests,  Levites,  and  of 
those  who  signed  the  covenant,  reveal  incidenfciily 
much  of  the  national  spirit  as  well  as  of  the  social 
habits  of  the  captives,  derived  from  older  times. 
TJius  the  feet  that  bceke  leaders  are  named  in 
Neh.  vii.  7,  indicates  the  feeling  of  the  captives  that 
they  represented  the  twelve  tribes,  a  feeling  further 
evidenced  in  the  expression  "  the  men  of  the  people 
of  Israel."  The  enumeration  of  21  and  22,  or,  if 
Zidkijah  stands  for  the  head  of  the  house  of  ZacU^lc, 
23  chief  priests  in  x.  1-8,  xii.  1-7,  of  whom  9 
bear  the  names  of  those  who  were  heads  of  courses 
in  David's  name  (1  Chr.  xxiv.)  [jEiiotAUir.J, 
shows  how,  even  in  their  wasted  and  reduced  niim- 
bei-s,  they  struggled  to  preserve  these  ancient  in- 
stitutions, and  also  supplies  the  reason  of  the 
mention  of  these  particular  22  or  23  names.  But 
it  does  more  than  this.  Taken  in  conjunction  with 
the  list  of  those  who  sejiled  (x.  1-27),  it  proves 
the  existence  of  a  social  custom,  the  knowledge  of 
which  is  of  absolute  necessity  to  keep  us  from 
gross    chronologiail    error,    that,    viz.,   of  calling 


490         NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

chiefe  by  the  name  of  the  ckn  or  hovise  of  which 
they  were  chiefs.  One  of  the  causes  of  the  absurd 
confusion  which  has  prevailed,  as  to  the  times 
of  Zerubbabel  and  IMehemiah  respectively,  has 
been  the  mention,  e.  g.  of  Jeshua  and  Kadmiel 
(Ezr.  iii.  9)  as  taking;  part  with  Zerubbabel  in 
building  the  Temple,  while  the  very  same  Levites 
take  an  active  part  in  the  reformation  of  Xehemiali 
(Neh.  ix.  4,  5,  x.  9,  10) ;  and  the  statement  that 
some  21  or  22  priests  came  up  with  Zerubbabel 
(xii.  1-7),  coupled  with  the  fact  that  these  very 
same  names  were  the  names  of  those  who  sealed 
the  covenant  under  Nehemiah  (x.  1-8).  But 
immediately  we  perceive  that  these  were  the  names 
of  the  courses,  and  of  great  Levitical  houses  (as  a 
comparison  of  1  Ghr.  xxiv.  ;  Ezr.  ii.  40;  Neh.  vii. 
43  ;  and  of  Neh.  x.  14-27  with  vii.  8-38,  proves 
that  they  were),  the  difficulty  vanishes,  and  we 
have  a  useful  piece  of  knowledge  to  apply  to  many 
other  passages  of  Scripture.  It  would  be  very  de- 
sirable, if  possible,  to  ascertain  accurately  the  rules, 
if  any,  under  which  this  use  of  proper  names  was 
confined. 

(d.)  Other  miscellaneous  information  contained  in 
this  book,  embraces  the  hereditary  crafts  practised  by 
certain  priestly  families,  e.g.  the  apotheciiries,  or 
makers  of  the  sacred  ointments  and  incense  (iii.  8), 
and  the  goldsmiths,  whose  business  it  probably  was 
to  repair  the  sacred  vessels  (iii.  8),  and  who  may 
have  been  the  ancestors,  so  to  speak,  of  the  money- 
changers in  the  Temple  (John  ii.  14,  15);  the 
situation  of  the  garden  of  the  kings  of  Judah  by 
which  Zedekiah  escaped  (2  K.  xxv.  4),  as  seen 
iii.  15  ;  and  statistics,  reminding  one  of  Domesda}'- 
Book,  concerning  not  only  the  cities  and  families  of 
the  returned  captives,  but  the  number  of  their 
horses,  mules,  camels,  and  asses  (ch.  vii.):  to  which 
more  might  be  added. 

The  chief,  indeed  the  only  real  historical  diffi- 
culty in  the  narrative,  is  to  determine  the  time  of 
the  dedication  of  the  wall,  whether  in  the  32nd  year 
of  Artaxerxes  or  before.  The  expression  in  Neh. 
xiii.  1,  "  On  that  day,"  seems  to  fix  the  reading  of 
the  law  to  the  same  day  as  the  dedication  (see 
xii.  43).  But  if  so  the  dedication  must  have  been 
after  Nehemiah's  return  from  Babylon  (mentioned 
xiii.  7)  ;  for  Eliashib's  misconduct,  which  occurred 
"  before  "  the  reading  of  the  law,  happened  in  Nehe- 
miah's absence.  But  then,  if  the  wall  only  took 
52  days  to  complete  (Neh.  vi.  15),  and  was  begun 
immediately  Nehemiah  entered  upon  his  govern- 
ment, how  came  the  dedication  to  be  deferred 
till  12  years  afterwards?  The  answer  to  this  pro- 
bably is  that,  in  the  first  place,  the  52  days  are 
not  to  be  reckoned  from  the  commencement  of 
the  building,  seeing  that  it  is  incredible  that  it 
should  be  completed  in  so  short  a  time  by  so  feeble 
a  community  and  with  such  frequent  hindrances 
and  interruptions ;  seeing,  too,  that  the  narrative 
itself  indicates  a  much  longer  time.  Such  pas- 
sages as  Nehemiah  iv.  7,  8,  12,  v.,  and  v.  16  in 
particular,  vi.  4,  5,  coupled  with  the  indications 
of  temporary  cessation  from  the  work  which  ap- 
pear at  iv.  6,  10,  15,  seem  quite  iiTeconcileable 
with  the  notion  of  less  than  two  months  for  the 
whole.  The  52  days,  therefore,  if  the  text  is 
sound,  may  be  reckoned  fiom  the  resumption  of 
the  work  after  iv.  15,  and  a  time  exceeding  two 
years  may  have  elapsed  fi'oni  the  commencement 
of  the  building.  But  even  then  it  would  not  be 
ready  for  dedication.  There  were  the  gates  to  be 
hung,  perhaps  much  rubbish  to  be  removed,  and 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OP 

the  ruined  houses  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the 
vv'aUs  to  be  repaired.  Thi,^n,  too,  as  we  shall  see 
below,  there  were  repairs  to  be  done  to  the  Temple, 
and  it  is  likely  that  the  dedication  of  the  walls 
would  not  take  place  till  those  repairs  were  com- 
pleted. Still,  even  these  causes  would  not  be 
adequate  to  account  for  a  delay  of  12  years. 
Josephus,  who  is  seldom  in  harmony  with  the  book 
of  Nehemiah,  though  he  justifies  our  suspicion  that 
a  longer  time  must  have  elapsed,  by  assuming  two 
years  and  four  months  to  the  rebuilding,  and 
placing  the  completion  in  the  28th  year  of  the 
king's  reign  whom  he  calls  Xerxes  (thus  interposing 
an  interval  of  8  years  between  Nehemiah's  arri-s-al 
at  .Jerusalem  as  governor  and  the  completion),  yet 
gives  us  no  real  help.  He  does  not  attempt  to 
account  for  the  length  of  time,  he  makes  no  allu- 
sion to  the  dedication,  except  as  far  as  his  state- 
ment that  the  wall  was  completed  in  the  ninth 
month,  Chisleu  (instead  of  Elul,  the  sixth,  as  Neh. 
vi.  15),  may  seem  to  point  to  the  dedication 
(1  Mace.  iv.  59),  and  takes  not  the  slightest 
notice  of  Nehemiah's  return  to  the  king  of  Persia. 
We  are  left,  therefore,  to  inquire  for  ourselves 
whether  the  book  itself  suggests  any  further  causes 
of  delay.  One  cause  immediately  presents  itself, 
viz.,  that  Nehemiah's  leave  of  absence  from  the 
Persian  court,  mentioned  ii.  6,  may  have  drawn 
to  a  close  shortly  after  the  completion  of  the 
wall,  and  before  the  other  above-named  works 
were  complete.  And  this  is  j-endered  yet  more 
prol)able  by  the  circumstance,  incidentally  bi'ought 
to  light,  that,  in  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes,  we 
know  he  was  with  the  king  (xiii.  6). 

Other  circumstances,  too,  may  have  concurred 
to  make  it  imperative  for  him  to  return  to  Persia 
without  delay.  The  last  words  of  ch.  vi.  point  to 
some  new  effort  of  Tobiah  to  interrupt  his  vk'ork, 
and  the  expression  used  seems  to  indicate  that  it 
was  the  threat  of  being  considered  as  a  rebel  by  the 
king.  If  he  could  make  it  appear  that  Artaxerxes 
was  suspicious  of  his  fidelity,  then  Nehemiah  might 
feel  it  matter  of  necessity  to  go  to  the  Persian 
court  to  clear  himself  of  the  charge.  And  this 
view  both  receives  a  remarkable  confirmation  from, 
and  throws  quite  a  new  light  upon,  the  obscure 
passage  in  Ezr.  iv.  7-23.  We  have  there  a  de- 
tailed account  of  the  opposition  made  by  the  Sama- 
ritan nations  to  the  building  of  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem,  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  and  a 
copy  of  the  letter  they  wrote  to  the  king,  accusing 
tli£  Jews  of  an  intention  to  rebel  as  soon  as  the 
wall  should  be  finished;  by  which  means  they 
obtained  a  decree  stopping  the  building  till  the 
king's  further  orders  should  be  repeived.  Now,  if 
we  compare  Neh.  vi.  6,  7,  where  mention  is  made 
of  the  report  "  among  the  heathen "  as  to  the 
intended  rebellion  of  Nehemiah,  with  the  letter  of 
the  heathen  nations  mentioned  in  Ezr.  iv.,  and  also 
recollect  that  the  only  time  when,  as  far  as  we 
know,  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  were  attempted  to 
be  rebuilt,  was  when  Nehemiah  wa.s  governor,  it  is 
difficult  to  resist  the  conclusion  that  Ezra  iv.  7-23 
relates  to  the  time  of  Nehemiah's  government,  and 
explains  the  otherwise  unaccountable  circumstance 
that  12  years  elapsed  before  the  dedication  of  the 
walls  was  completed.  Nehemiah  may  have  started 
on  his  journey  on  receiving  the  letters  from 
Persia  (if  such  they  were)  sent  him  by  Tobiah, 
leaving  his  lieutenants  to  carry  on  the  works,  and 
after  his  departure  Kehum  and  Shimshai  and  their 
comj)anions  may  have  come  up  to  Jerusalem  with 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OP 

the  king's  decree  and  obliged  them  to  desist.  It 
slionid  seem,  however,  that  at  Nehemiah's  an-ival 
in  Persia,  he  was  able  to  satisfy  the  king  of  his  per- 
fect integi-ity,  and  that  he  was  permitted  to  return 
to  his  government  in  Judaea.  His  leave  of  abseuce 
may  again  liave  been  of  limited  duration,  and  the 
business  of  the  census,  of  repeopliug  Jerusalem,  set- 
ting up  the  city  gates,  rebuilding  the  ruined  houses, 
and  repairing  the  Temple,  may  have  occupied  his 
whole  time  till  his  second  return  to  the  king. 
During  this  second  absence  another  evil  arose  — 
the  gentili^ing  party  recovered  strengt-h,  and  the 
intrigues  with  Tobiali  (vi.  17),  which  had  already 
begun  before  his  first  departure,  were  more  actively 
carried  on,  and  led  so  tar  that  Eliashib  the  high- 
priest  actually  assigned  one  of  the  store-chambers 
in  the  Temple  to  Tobiah's  use.  This  we  are  not 
told  of  till  xiii.  4-7,  when  Nehemiah  relates  the 
steps  he  took  on  his  return.  But  this  very  cir- 
cumstance suggests  that  Nehemiah  does  not  relate 
the  events  which  happened  in  his  absence,  and 
would  account  for  his  silence  in  regard  to  Rehum 
and  Shimshai.  We  may  thus,  then,  account  for 
lU  or  11  years  having  elapsed  before  the  dedication 
of  the  walls  took  place.  In  tact  it  did  not  take 
place  till  the  last  year  of  his  government ;  and 
this  leads  to  the  right  interpretation  of  ch.  xiii.  6 
and  brings  it  into  perfect  harmony  with  v.  14,  a 
passage  wliich  obviously  imports  tliat  Nehemiah's 
government  of  Judaea  lasted  only  V2  years,  viz., 
from  the  20th  to  the  32nd  of  Arfaxerxes.  For 
the  literal  and  grammatical  rendering  of  xiii.  6 
is,  "  And  in  all  this  time  was  not  I  at  Jeru- 
salem: BUT  in  the  two-and-thirtieth  year  of  Ar- 
t;ixerxes  king  of  Babylon,'  came  I  unto  the  king, 
and  after  certain  days  obtained  I  leave  of  the 
king,  and  I  came  to  Jerusalem  "  —  the  force  of 
"•3  after  a  negative  being  but  rather  than  for 
(Gesen.  T/ies.  p.  680)  ;  the  meaning  of  the  passage 
being,  therefore,  not  that  he  left  Jerusalem  to  go 
to  Persia  in  the  32ud  of  Artaxerxes,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  that  in  that  year  he  returned  from  Persia 
to  Jerusalem.  The  dedication  of  the  walls  and  the 
other  retbi'ms  named  in  ch.  xiii.  were  the  closing 
acts  of  his  administration. 

It  lias  been  already  mentioned  that  Josephus  does 
not  follow  the  authority  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah. 
He  detaches  Nehem.  viii.  from  its  context,  and  ap- 
pends the  nanatives  contained  in  it  to  the  times  of 
Ezra.  He  makes  Ezra  die  beibre  Nehemiah  came  to 
Jerusalem  as  (Jovernor,  and  consequently  ignores  any 
part  taken  by  him  in  conjunction  with  Nehemiah. 
He  makes  no  mention  either  whatever  of  Sanballat  in 
the  events  of  Nehemiah's  government,  but  places 
him  in  the  time  of  Jaddua  and  Alexander  the  (Jreat. 
He  also  makes  the  daughter  of  Sanballat  marry  a 
son,  not  of  Joiada,  as  Neh.  xiii.  28,  but  of  Jona- 
than, viz.  Manasseh  the  brother  of  the  High  Priest 
.laddua,  thus  entirely  shifting  the  age  of  kanballat 
from  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  to  that 
of  Darius  Codomanus,  and  Alexander  the  Great. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe,  that  as  Arta- 
xerxes Longimanus  died  B.C.  424,  and  Alexander 
the  Great  was  not  master  of  Syria  and  Palestine 
till  B.C.  332,  all  attempts  to  reconcile  Josephus 
with  Nehemiah  must  be  lost  labour.  It  is  equally 
clear  that  on  every  ground  the  authority  of  Josej)iius 
must  yield  to  that  of  Nehemiah.     The  only  qucs- 

"^  It  is  worth  remarking,  that  the  apocrj'phal  book 
([Uotod  in  2  Mace.  i.  23  seems  to  liave  made  N'eheiiilali 
contemporary  with  Jonathan,  or  Johanaii,  the  high-prlcst 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF        491 

tion  therefore  is  what  was  the  cause  of  Joseph us's 
variations.  Now,  as  regards  the  appending  the 
history  in  Neh.  viii.  to  the  times  of  Ezra,  we  know 
that  he  was  guided  by  the  authority  of  the  Apocry- 
phal 1  Esdr.  as  he  had  been  in  the  whole  stoiy  of 
Zerubbabel  and  Darius.  From  the  florid  additions 
to  his  narrative  of  Nehemiah's  first  application  to 
Artaxerxes,  as  well  as  from  the  passage  below  re- 
ferred to  in  2  Mace.  i.  23,  we  may  be  sure  that  there 
were  apocryphal  versions  of  the  story  of  Nehemiah.* 
The  account  of  Jaddua's  interview  with  Alexander 
the  Great  savours  strongly  of  the  same  origin. 
There  can  be  little  doubt,  therefore,  tliat  in  all 
the  points  in  which  Josephus  diflers  from  Nehe- 
miah, he  followed  apocrj'phal  Jewish  writings, 
some  of  which  have  since  perished.  The  causes 
which  led  to  this  were  various.  One  doubtless 
was  the  mere  desire  for  matter  with  which  to  fill 
up  his  pages  where  the  narrative  of  the  canonical 
Scriptures  is  meagre.  In  making  Nehemiah  suc- 
ceed to  the  government  after  Ezra's  death,  he  was 
probably  influenced  partly  by  the  wish  to  give 
an  orderly,  dignified  appearance  to  the  succession 
of  Jewish  governors,  approximating  as  nearly  as 
possible  to  the  old  monarchy,  and  partly  by  the 
desire  to  spin  out  his  matter  into  a  continuous 
history.  Then  the  difficulties  of  the  books  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  which  the  compiler  of  1  Esdr.  had 
tried  to  get  over  by  his  arrangement  of  the  order 
of  events,  coupled  with  Josephus's  gross  ignorance 
of  the  real  order  of  the  Persiau  Kings,  and  his  utter 
misconception  as  to  what  monarchs  are  spoken  of 
in  the  books  of  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther,  had  also 
a  large  influence.  The  writer,  however,  who  makes 
Darius  Codomanus  succeed  Artaxerxes  Longimanus, 
and  confounds  this  last-named  king  with  Artaxerxes 
Mnemon ;  who  also  thinks  that  Xerxes  reigned 
above  32  years,  and  who  falsifies  his  best  authority, 
altering  the  names,  as  in  the  case  of  the  substitu- 
tion of  Xerxes  for  Artaxerxes  throughout  the  book 
of  Nehemiah,  and  suppi'essing  the  facts,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  omission  of  all  mention  of  Ezra,  Tobias, 
and  Sanballat  during  the  government  of  Nehemiah, 
is  not  entitled  to  much  deference  on  our  parts. 
What  has  been  said  shows  clearly  how  little  Jose- 
phus's unsupported  authority  is  worth ;  and  how 
entirely  the  authenticity  and  credibility  of  Nehe- 
miah remains  unshaken  by  his  blunders  and  confu- 
sions, and  that  there  is  no  occasion  to  resort  to  the 
improljablo  hypothesis  of  two  Sanballats,  m  to 
attribute  to  Nehemiah  a  patriarchal  longevity,  in 
order  to  bring  his  narrative  into  harmony  with  that 
of  the  Jewish  liistorian. 

2.  As  regards  the  authorship  of  the  book,  it  i>- 
admitted  by  all  critics  that  it  is,  as  to  its  main 
parts,  the  genuine  work  of  Nehemiah.  But  it  is 
no  less  certain  that  interpolations  and  additions 
have  been  made  in  it  since  his  time;''  and  theie  is 
considerable  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  what  are  the 
portions  which  have  been  so  added.  From  i.  1  to 
vii.  G,  no  doubt  or  ditliculty  occurs.  The  writer 
speaks  throughout  in  the  first  person  singular,  and 
in  his  character  of  governor,  nnS.  Again,  from 
xii.  31,  to  the  end  of  the  book  (except  .xii.  44-47), 
the  narrative  is  continuous,  and  the  use  of  the  first 
person  singular  constant  (xii.  30,  38,  40,  xiii.  6,  7, 
&c.).  It  is  therefore  only  in  the  iutennediate 
chapters,  vii.  6  to  xii.  26,  and  xii.  44-47),  that  we 


*  K.  F.  Kell,  in  his  Kiiileitung,  endeavours  indeed  to 
vindicate  Nehcniiali's  authorship  for  the  whole  book,  but 
without  success. 


492         NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

have  to  enquire  into  the  question  of  authorship 
and  this  we  will  do  by  sections  : — 

(a.)  The  first  section  begins  at  Neh.  vii.  6,  and 
ends  in  the  first  half  of  viii.  1,  at  the  words  "  one 
man."  It  has  already  been  asserted  [fCzRA,  BooiC 
OF,  vol.  i.  p.  607a]  that  this  section  is  identical  with 
the  paragraph  beginning  Ezr.  ii.  1,  and  ending  iii.  1  ; 
and  it  was  there  also  asserted  that  the  paragraph 
originally  belonged  to  the  book  of  Nehemiah,  and 
was  afterwards  inserted  in  the  place  it  occupies  in 
Ezra.e  Both  these  assertions  must  now  be  made 
good;  and  first  as  to  the  identity  of  the  two 
passages.  They  are  actually  identical  word  for 
word,  and  letter  for  letter,  except  iu  two  points. 
One  that  the  numbers  repeatedly  vary.  The  other 
that  there  is  a  difference  in  the  account  of  the 
offerings  made  by  the  governor,  the  nobles,  and  the 
people.  But  it  can  be  proved  that  these  are  merely 
variations  (whether  accidental  or  designed)  of  the 
same  text.  In  the  first  place  the  two  passages  are 
one  and  the  same.  The  heading,  the  contents,  the 
narrative  about  the  sons  of  Barzillai,  the  fiict  of  the 
offerings,  the  dwelling  in  their  cities,  the  coming  of 
the  seventh  month,  the  gathering  of  all  the  people  to 
Jerusalem  as  one  man,  are  in  words  and  in  sense  the 
very  self-same  passage.  The  idea  that  the  very 
same  words,  extending  to  70  verses,  describe  differ- 
ent events,  is  simply  absurd  and  irrational.  The 
numbers  therefore  must  originally  have  been  the 
same  in  both  books.  But  next,  when  we  examine 
the  varying  numbers,  we  see  the  following  particu- 
lar proofs  that  the  variations  are  corruptions  of  the 
original  text.  Though  the  items  vary,  the  sum 
total,  42,360,  is  the  same  (Ezr.  ii.  64 ;  Neh.  vii. 
66.)  In  like  manner  the  totals  of  the  servants, 
the  singing  men  and  women,  the  horses,  mules, 
and  asses  are  all  the  same,  except  that  Ezra  has  two 
hundred,  instead  of  two  hundred  and  forty-five, 
singing  men  and  women.  The  numbers  of  the 
Pi'iests  and  of  the  Levites  are  the  same  in  both, 
except  that  the  singers,  the  sons  of  Asaph,  are  128 
in  Ezra  against  148  in  Nehemiah,  and  the  porters 
139  against  138.  Then  in  each  particular  case 
when  the  numbers  differ,  we  see  plainly  how  the 
difference  might  arise.  In  the  statement  of  the' 
number  of  the  sons  of  Arah  (the  first  case  iu  which 
the  lists  differ),  Ezr.  ii.  5,  we  read,  flixn  yiL^ 
D''V3t^1  nt^'On,  "seven  hundred  five  and  seventy," 
whereas  m  Neh.  vii.  10,  we  read,  niXO  L^'t^ 
DI'iK'l  CK-'DH.  But  the  order  of  the  numerals  in 
Ezr.  ii.  .'5,  where  the  units  precede  the  tens,  is  the 
only  case  in  which  this  order  is  found.  Obviously, 
therefore,  we  ought  to  read  □''EJ'On,  instead  of 
riEJ'On,  fifty  instead  of  five.  No  less  obviously 
D'^ynti'  may  be  a  corruption  of  the  almost  identical 
D^JtJ',  and  probably  caused  the  preceding  change 
of  n^'pn  into  D"'t^'0^.f  Bat  the  tens  and  units 
being  identical,  it  is  evident  that  the  variation  in 
the  hundreds  is  an  error,  arising  from  both  six  and 
seven  beginning  with  the  same  letter  t^.  The 
very  same  interchange  of  six  and  seven  takes  place 
in  the  number  of  Adonikam,  and  Bigvai,  only  in 


e  So  also  Grotius  (notes  on  Ezr.  ii.  Neh.  vii.),  with  his 
usual  clear  sense  and  sound  judgment.  See  especially  his 
note  on  Ezr.  ii.  1,  where  he  says  that  many  Greek  copies 
of  Ezra  omit  cli.  ii. 

f  Or  if  ySK*  is  Uic  right  reading  in  lizr.  ii.  5  (instead  of 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

the  units  (Neh.  vii.  18,  19;  Ezr.  ii.  13,14).  In 
Pahath-Moab,  the  variation  from  2812,  Ezr.  ii.  6,  to 
2818  Neh.  vii.  11 ;  in  Zattu,  from  945  Ezr.  ii.  8, 
to  845  Neh.  vii.  13  ;  in  Binnui,  from  642  to  648  ; 
in  Bebai,  from  623  to  628  ;  in  Hashum,  from  223 
to  328  ;  in  .Senaah,  from  3630  to  3930  ;  the  same 
cause  has  oper.ated,  viz.  that  in  the  numbers  two 
and  eight,  three  and  eight,  nine  and  six,  the  same 
initial  C^  is  found  ;  and  the  resemblance  in  these 
numbers  may  probably  have  been  greatly  increased 
by  abbreviations.  In  Azgad  (1222  and  2322)  as 
in  Senaah,  the  mei'e  circumstance  of  the  tens  and 
units  being  the  same  in  both  passages,  while  the 
thousands  differ  by  the  mere  addition  or  omission  of 
a  final  D,  is  sufficient  proof  that  the  variation  is  a 
clerical  one  only.  In  Adin,  Neh.  vii.  20,  six  for 
four,  in  the  hundreds,  is  probably  caused  by  the 
six  hundred  of  the  just  preceding  Adonikans.  In 
the  four  remaining  cases  the  variations  are  equally 
easy  of  explanation,  and  the  lesult  is  to  leave  not 
the  slightest  doubt  that  the  enumeration  was 
identical  in  the  first  instance  in  both  passages.  It 
may,  however,  be  added  as  completing  the  proof 
that  these  variations  do  not  arise  from  Ezra  giving 
the  census  in  Zerubbabel's  time,  and  Nehemiah 
that  in  his  own  time  (as  Ceillier,  Prideaux,  and 
other  learned  men  have  thought),  that  in  the  cases 
of  Parosh,  Pahath-Moab,  Elam,  Shephatiah,  Bebai, 
Azgad,  and  Adonikam,  of  which  we  are  told 
in  Ezr.  viii.  3-14,  that  considerable  numbers 
came  up  to  Judaea  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes — 
long  subsequent  therefore  to  the  time  of  Zerub- 
babel — the  numbers  are  either  exactly  the  same  in 
Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.,  ov  exhibit  such  variations  as 
have  no  i-elation  whatever  to  the  numbers  of  those 
families  respectively  who  were  added  to  the  Jewish 
residents  in  Palestine  under  Artaxerxes. 

To  turn  next  to  the  offerings.  The  Book  of  Ezra 
(ii.  68,  69)  merely  gives  the  sum  total,  as  follows  : 
6 1,000  e  drachms  of  gold,  5,000  pounds  of  silver,  and 
100  priests'  garments.  The  Book  of  Nehemiah  gives 
no  sum  total,  but  gives  the  following  items  (vii.  72) : 

The  Tirshatha  gave  1000^  drachms  of  gold,  50 
basons,  630  priests'  garments. 

The  chief  of  the  fathers  gave  20,000  drachms  of 
gold,  and  2,200  pounds  of  silver. 

The  rest  of  the  people  gave20,000  drachms  of  gold, 
2000  pounds  of  silver,  and  67  priests'  garments. 

Here  then  we  learn  that  these  offei'iugs  were 
made  in  three  shai'es,  by  three  distinct  parties :  the 
governor,  the  chief  fathers,  the  people.  The  sum 
total  of  drachms  of  gold  we  learn  from  Ezra,  was 
61,000.  The  shares,  we  learn  from  Nehemiah, 
were  20,000  in  two  out  of  the  three  donors,  but 
1000  in  the  case  of  the  third  and  chief  donor  !  Is 
it  not  quite  evident  that  in  the  case  of  Nehemiah 
the  20  has  slipped  out  of  the  text  (as  in  1  Esdr. 
v.  45,  60,000  has),  and  that  his  real  contribution 
was  21,000  ?  his  generosity  prompting  him  to  give 
in  excess  of  his  fair  third.  Next,  as  reg.ards  the 
pounds  of  silver.  The  sum  total  was,  according  to 
Ezra,  5000.  The  shares  were,  according  to  Nehe- 
miah, 2200  pounds  fi'om  the  chiefs,  and  2000  from 
the  people.  But  the  LXX.  give  2300  for  the 
chiefs,  and  2200  for  the  people,  making  4500  in 
all.  and  so  leaving  a  deficiency  of  500  pounds  as 

D'lynK').  then  the  W'Z'^  of  Neh.  vii.  10  is  easily  ac- 
counted for  by  the  fact  that  the  two  preceding  numbers 
of  Parosh  and  Shephatiah  buth  end  with  the  same  number 
two. 
8  Observe  the  odd  thousand  in  both  cases. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

compared  with  Ezra's  tot;il  of  5000,  and  ascribing 
no  silver  offering  to  the  Tirshatha.  As  regards  the 
priests'  garments.  The  sum  total  as  given  in  both 
the  Hebrew  and  (Jreek  text  of  Ezra,  and  in  1  Esdr. 
is  100.  The  items  as  given  in  Neh.  vii.  70,  are 
.5:iO  +  67  =  597.  But  the  LXX.  give  30  +  67  = 
97,  and  that  this  is  nearly  correct  is  apparent  from 
the  numbers  themselves.  For  the  total  being  lUO, 
33  is  the  nearest  whole  number  to  '',*",  and  67  is  the 
nearest  whole  number  to  g  X  100.  So  that  we 
caunot  doubt  that  the  Tirshatha  gave  33  priests' 
garments,  and  the  rest  of  the  people  gave  67,  pro- 
bably in  two  gifts  of  34  and  33,  making  in  all  100. 
But  how  came  the  500  to  be  added  on  to  the 
Tirshatha's  tale  of  garments?  Clearly  it  is  a  frag- 
ment of  the  missing  500  pounds  of  silver,  which, 
with  the  50  bowls,  made  up  the  Tirshatha's  dona- 
tion of  silver.  So  that  Neh.  vii.  70  ought  to  be 
read  thus,  "  The  Tirshatha  gave  to  the  treasure 
21,000  drachms  of  gold,  50  basons,  500  pounds  of 
silver,  and  33  priests'  garments."  The  offerings 
then,  as  well  as  the  numbers  in  the  lists,  were  once 
identical  in  both  books,  and  we  learn  from  Ezr.  ii. 
68,  what  the  book  of  Nehemiah  does  not  expressly 
tell  us  (though  the  priests'  garments  strongly  in- 
dicate it),  what  was  the  purpose  of  this  liberal 
contribution,  viz.  "  to  set  up  the  House  of  God  in 
his  place"  (ijbp  bv  )T}2Vrh).   From  this  phrase 

occurring  in  Ezr.  ii.  just  before  the  account  of  the 
building  of  the  Temple  by  Zerubbabel,  it  has  usually 
been  undei'stood  as  referring  to  the  rebuilding. 
But  it  really  means  no  such  thing.  The  phrase 
pioperly  impUes  lestoration  and  preservation,  as 
may  be  seen  in  the  exactly  similar  case  of  the 
)  estoration  of  the  Temple  by  Jehoiada,  2  Chr.  xxiv. 
13,  after  the  injuries  and  neglect  under  Athaliah, 
where  we  read,  b^  DTl^Xri  n^lTlX  -n^Oy'l 
injSriD,  "  they  set  the  House  of  God  in  its  state" 
(comp.  also  1.  K.  xv.  4).  The  fact  then  was  that, 
when  all  the  rulers  and  nobles  and  people  were 
gathered  together  at  Jerusalem  to  be  registered  in 
the  seventh  month,  advantage  was  taken  of  the 
opportunity  to  collect  their  contributions  to  restore 
the  Temple  also  (2  Mace.  i.  18),  which  had  naturally 
jiartakeii  of  the  general  misery  and  affliction  of 
Jerusalem,  but  which  it  would  not  have  been  wise 
to  restore  till  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  placed  the 
city  in  a  state  of  safety.  At  the  s;ime  time,  and  in 
the  same  spirit,  they  formed  the  resolutions  recorded 
in  Neh.  x.  32-39,  to  keep  up  the  Temple  ritual. 

It  already  follows,  from  what  has  been  said,  that 
the  section  under  consideiation  is  in  its  right  place 
in  the  book  of  Nehemiah,  and  was  inserted  subse- 
quently in  the  book  of  Ezra  out  of  its  chronological 
order.  But  one  or  two  additional  proofs  of  tliis 
must  be  mentioned.  The  most  convincing  and 
l)alpable  of  these  is  perhaps  the  mention  of  the 
'I'irshatlia  in  Ezr.  ii.  63,  Neh.  vii.  65.  That  the 
'I'irshatha,  here  and  at  Neh.  vii.  70,  means  Nehe- 
miah, we  are  expressly  told  Neh.  viii.  9,  x.  l,*"  and 
therefore  it  is  perfectly  certain  that  what  is  related 
Ezr.  ii.  62,  Neh.  vii.  64,  happened  in  Nehemi^ih's 
time,  and  not  in  Zcrubbabel's.  Conse(|Ui'utly  the 
taking  of  the  census,  wliich  gave  rise  to  that  inci- 
dent, belongs  to  the  same  time.  In  other  words, 
the  section  we  are  considering  is  in  its  original  and 
liijht   place    in  the   book  of  Nehemiah.  and   was 

I"  It  Is  worth  noticing  that  Nchcmlah's  name  is  men- 
tioned as  the  Tii'shatba  in  1  Ksdr.  v.  40. 
I  Were  it  not  for  the  mention  of  Nehemiah  and  Mor- 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF        493 

transferred  from  thence  to  the  book  of  Ezra,  wheie 
it  stands  out  of  its  chronological  order.  And  this  is 
still  further  evident  from  the  circumstance  that 
the  closing  portion  of  this  section  is  an  abbreviation 
of  the  same  portion  as  it  stands  in  Nehemiah, 
proving  that  the  passage  existed  in  Nehemiah  before 
it  was  inserted  in  Ezra.  Another  proof  is  the  men- 
tion of  Ezra  as  taking  part  in  that  assembly  of  the 
people  at  Jerusalem  whicli  is  described  in  Ezr.  iii.  1, 
Neh.  viii.  1  ;  for  Ezra  did  not  come  to  Jerusalem 
till  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  (Ezr.  vii.).  Another  is 
the  mention  of  Nehemiah  as  one  of  the  leaders 
under  whom  the  captives  enumerated  in  the  census 
came  up,  Ezr.  ii.  2,  Neh.  vii.  7:  in  both  which 
passages  the  juxtaposition  of  Nehemiah  with  Seraiah, 
when  compared  with  Neh.  x.  1,  2,  greatly  strengthens 
the  conclusion  that  Nehemiah  the  Tir.shatha  is 
meant.  Then  again,  that  Nehemiah  should  sum- 
mon all  the  families  of  Isiael  to  Jerusalem  to  take 
their  census,  and  that,  having  done  so  at  great  cost 
of  time  and  trouble,  he,  or  whoever  was  employed 
by  him,  should  merely  transcribe  an  old  census 
taken  nearly  100  years  before,  instead  of  recording 
the  result  of  his  own  labours,  is  so  improbable  that 
nothing  but  the  plainest  necessity  could  make  one 
believe  it.  The  only  difficulty  in  the  way  is  that 
the  words  in  Neh.  vii.  5,  6,  seem  to  describe  the 
register  which  follows  as  "  the  register  of  the 
genealogy  of  them  which  came  up  at  the  first," 
and  that  the  expression  "  and  found  written  therein  " 
requires  that  the  words  which  follow  should  be  a 
quotation  from  that  )-egister  (comp.  vi.  6).  To 
this  difficulty  (and  it  is  a  difficulty  at  first  sight) 
it  is  a  sufficient  ;mswer  to  say  that  the  words 
quoted  are  only  those  (in  Neh.  vii.  6)  which  con- 
tiun  the  title  of  the  register  found  by  Nehemiah. 
His  own  new  register  begins  with  the  words  at 
ver.  7:  D"'X3ri,  &c.,  "The  men  who  came  with 

Zerubbabel,"  &c.,  which  form  the  descriptive  title 
of  the  following  catalogue.'  Nehemiah,  or  those 
employed  by  him  to  take  the  new  census,  doubtless 
made  use  of  the  old  register  (sanctioned  as  it  had 
been  by  Haggai  and  Zechariah)  as  an  authority  by 
which  to  decide  the  genealogies  of  the  present  gene- 
ration. And  hence  it  was  that  when  the  sons  of 
Barzillai  claimed  to  be  entered  into  the  register  of 
priestly  families,  but  could  not  produce  the  entry 
of  their  house  in  that  old  register,  Nehemiah  re- 
fused to  admit  them  to  the  priestly  office  (39-42), 
but  made  a  note  of  their  claim,  that  it  might  be 
decided  whenever  a  competent  authority  should 
arise.  From  all  which  it  is  abundantly  clear  that 
the  section  under  consideration  belongs  properly  to 
the  book  of  Nehemiah.  It  does  not  follow,  however, 
tliat  it  was  written  in  its  present  ibi'm  by  Nehemiah 
himself.  Indeed  the  sudden  change  to  the  third 
person,  in  speaking  of  the  Tirshatha,  in  ver.  65,  70 
(a  change  which  continues  regularly  till  the  section 
beginning  xii.  31),  is  a  strong  indication  of  a  change 
in  the  writer,  iis  is  also  the  use  of  the  term  Tirsliatha 
instead  of  Pechah,  which  last  is  the  official  designa- 
tion by  which  Nehemiah  speaks  of  himself  and 
other  governor.s  (v.  14,  18,  ii.  7,  9,  iii.  7).  It 
seems  probable,  therefore,  tiiat  ch.  vii.,  from  ver.  7, 
contains  the  substcmcc  of  what  was  found  in  this 
l)art  of  Nehemiah's  narrative,  but  abridged,  and  in 
the  form  of  an  abstract,  which  may  account  lor  tiie 
difficulty  of  separating   Nehemiah's   register  from 


decai  in  ver.  7,  one  might  liave  thought  Nehemiah's  re- 
gister began  with  the  words,  '•  The  number  of  the  men," 
in  ver.  7. 


494 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


Zerubbabel's,  and  also  for  the  very  abrupt  mention 
of  the  gifts  of  the  Tirshatha  and  the  people  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter.  This  abstract  formed  a  tran- 
sition from  Nehemiah's  narrative  in  the  preceding 
chapters  to  the  entirely  new  matter  inserted  in  the 
following  sections. 

(6.)  The  ne.Kt  section  commences  Neh.viii.,  latter 
part  of  ver.  1,  and  ends  Neh.  xi.  3.  Now  through- 
out this  section  several  things  are  observable. 
(1.)  Nehemiah  does  not  once  speak  in  the  first  per- 
son (viii.  9,  X.  1).  (2.)  Neherniah  is  no  longer  the 
principal  actor  in  what  is  done,  but  almost  dis- 
appears from  the  scene,  instead  of  being,  as  in  the 
first  six  chapters,  the  centre  of  the  whole  action. 
(3.)  Ezra  for  the  first  time  is  introduced,  and 
throughout  the  whole  section  the  most  prominent 
place  is  assigned  either  to  him  personally,  or  to 
strictly  ecclesiastical  aftairs.  (4.)  The  prayer  in 
ch.  ix.  is  very  ditl'erent  in  its  construction  from 
Nehemiah's  prayer  in  ch.  i.,  and  in  its  frequent 
references  to  the  various  books  of  the  0.  T.  singu- 
larly suited  to  the  character  and  acquii-ements  of 
Ezra,  "  the  read}'  scribe  in  the  law  of  Moses." 
(5.)  The  section  was  written  by  an  eye-witness  and 
actor  in  the  events  described.  This  appears  by  the 
minute  details,  e.  g.  viii.  4,  5,  6,  &c.,  and  the  use 
of  the  first  person  plural  (x.  30-39).  (6.)' There  is 
a  strong  resemblance  to  the  style  and  manner  of 
Ezra's  narrative,  and  also  an  identity  in  the  use  of 
particular  phrases  (comp.  Ezr.  iv.  18,  Neh.  viii.  8  ; 
Ezr.  vi.  22,  Neh.  viii.  17).  This  resemblance  is 
admitted  by  critics  of  the  most  opposite  opinions 
(see  Keil's  Ehileitunj,  p.  4G1).  Hence,  as  Ezra's 
manner  is  to  speak  of  himself  in  the  third  as  well 
as  in  the  first  person,  there  is  great  probability  in 
the  opinion  advocated  by  Havernick  and  Kleinert,'' 
that  this  section  is  the  work  of  Ezra.  The  fact  too 
that  1  Esdr.  ix.  38  sqq.  annexes  Neh.  viii.  1-13  to 
Ezr.  X.,  in  which  it  is  followed  by  Josephus  {^Ant.  xi. 
.5,  §5),  is  perhaps  an  indication  that  it  was  known 
to  be  the  work  of  Ezra.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
suppose  that  Ezra  himself  inserted  this  or  any  other 
fart  of  the  present  book  of  Nehemiah  in  the  midst 
of  the  Tirshatha's  history.  But  if  there  was  e.\tant 
an  account  of  these  transactions  by  Ezra,  it  may 
have  been  thus  incorporated  with  Nehemiah's  his- 
tory by  the  last  editor  of  Scripture.  Nor  is  it  im- 
possible that  the  union  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  as 
one  book  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  arrangement  (as 
Jerome  testifies),  under  the  title  of  the  Book  of 
Ezra,  may  have  had  its  origin  in  this  circumstimce. 

(c.)  The  third  section  consists  of  ch.  xi.  3-36.  It 
contains  a  list  of  the  iamilies  of  Judah,  Benjamin, 
and  Levi,  (priests  and  Levites),  who  took  up  their 
abode  at  .Jerusalem,  in  accordance  with  the  reso- 
lution of  the  volunteers,  and  the  decision  of  the  lot, 
mentioned  in  xi.  1,  2.  This  list  forms  a  kind  of 
supplement  to  that  in  vii.  8-GO,  as  appears  by  the 
allusion  in  .xi.  3  to  that  previous  document.  For 
ver.  3  distinguishes  the  following  list  of  the  "  dwellers 
at  Jerusalem  "  from  the  tbregoing  one  of  "  Israel, 
priests,  Levites,  Nethinim,  ai»d  children  of  Solo- 
mon's servants,"  who  dwelt  in  the  cities  of  Israel, 
as  set  forth  in  ch.  vii.  This  list  is  an  extract  from 
the  official  roll  preserved  in  the  national  archives, 
only  somewhat  abbreviated,  as  appears  l)y  a  com- 
parison with  1  Chr.  ix.,  where  an  abstract  of  the 
same  roll  is  also  preserved  in  a  fuller  form,  and  in 


Kleinert  ascribes  ch.  viii.  to  an  assistant,  ix.  and  x.  to 
Ezra  himself.     See  I)e  Wette,  l-'arker's  transl.  ii,  :!;i2. 
'"  Comp.  1  Chr.  i.\.  2  with  Neh  vii.  12. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

the  latter  pait  especially  with  considerable  varia- 
tions and  additions :  it  seems  also  to  be  quite  out 
of  its  place  in  Chronicles,  and  its  insertion  there 
probably  caused  the  repetition  of  1  Chr.  viii.  29-40, 
which  is  found  in  duplicate  ix.  35-44 :  in  the 
latter  place  wholly  uncomiected  with  ix.  1-34,  but 
connected  with  what  follows  (ch.  x.  sqq.),  as 
well  as  with  what  precedes  ch.  ix.  Whence  it  ap- 
pears clearly  that  1  Chr.  ix.  2-34  is  a  later  inser- 
tion made  after  Nehemiah's  census,""  but  proving 
by  its  very  incoherence  that  the  book  of  Chronicles 
existed  previous  to  its  insertion.  Bat  this  by  the 
way.  The  nature  of  the  information  in  this  section, 
and  the  parallel  passage  in  1  Chr.,  would  rather 
indicate  a  Levitical  hand.  It  might  or  might  not 
have  been  the  same  which  inserted  the  preceding 
section.  If  written  latsr,  it  is  perhaps  the  Work 
of  the  same  porson  who  inserted  xii.  1-30,  44-47. 
In  conjunction  with  1  Chr.  ix.  it  gives  us  minute 
and  interesting  information  concerning  the  families 
residing  at  Jerusalem,"  and  their  genealogies,  and 
especially  concerning  the  provision  for  the  Temple- 
sei^vice.  The  grant  made  by  Arta-xerxes  (ver.  23) 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  singers  is  exactly  parallel 
to  that  made  by  Darius  as  set  forth  in  Ezr.  vi.  8, 
9,  10.  The  statement  in  ver.  24  concerning  Petha- 
hiah  the  Zarlute,  as  "  at  the  king's  hand  in  all 
matters  concerning  the  people,"  is  somewhat  ob- 
scure, unless  perchance  it  alludes  to  the  time  of 
Nehemiah's  absence  in  Babylon,  when  Pethahiah 
may  have  been  a  kind  of  deputy-governor  ad  in- 
terim. 

(d.)  From  xii.  1  to  26  is  clearly  and  certainly  an 
abstract  from  the  official  lists  made  and  inserted 
here  long  after  Nehemiah's  time,  and  after  the 
destruction  of  the  Persian  dynasty  by  Alexander 
the  Great,  as  is  plainly  indicated  by  the  expression 
Darius  the  Persian,  as  well  as  by  the  mention  of 
Jaddua.  The  allusion  to  Jeshua,  and  to  Nehemiah 
and  Ezra,  in  ver.  26,  is  also  such  as  would  be  made 
long  posterior  to  their  lifetime,  and  contains  a  re- 
markable reference  to  the  two  censuses  taken  and 
written  down,  the  one  in  Jeshua  and  Zerubbabel's 
time,  the  other  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah ;  for  it  is 
evidently  from  these  two  censuses,  the  existence  of 
which  is  borne  witness  to  in  Neh.  vii.  5,  that  the 
writer  of  xii.  26  drew  his  information  concerning 
the  priestly  families  at  those  two  ej)Ochs  (compare 
also  xii.  47). 

The  juxtaposition  of  the  list  of  priests  in  Zerub- 
babel's time,  with  that  of  those  who  sealed  the 
covenant  in  Nehemiah's  time,  as  given  below,  both 
illustrates  the  use  of  proper  names  above  refen-ed 
to,  and  also  the  clerical  fluctuations  to  which  proper 
names  are  subject. 

Neh.  X.  l-S.  Neh.  xii.  1-7. 

Serai  ah    . .         . .         . .  Seraiah 

Azariah  . .         . .         . .  Ezra 

Jeremiali           . .         . .  Jeremiah 

Pashur 

Amariah Araariah 

Malchijah           . .         .  .  Malluch 

Hattush            . .         . .  Hattush 

Shebaniah          . .         . .  Shecaniah 

Malluch  . .         . .         . .  Malluch  (above) 

Harim Rehum 

Meremoth          . .         . .  Meremoth 

Obadiah Iddo 

Daniel     . .         . .         . .  

n  That  these  families  were  objects  of  especial  interest 
appears  from  Neh.  xi.  2. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


495 


Neh.  X.  1-s, 

Nfb.  xii.  1-t 

(iinnethon 

Ginnethu 

Baruch    . . 



MeshuUum 



Abijah    . . 

Abijah 

Mijamin . . 

M  iamin 

Maaziah  . . 

Maadiah 

Bilgai      . . 

Bilgah 

ShemaiaU 

Shemaiah 

Joiarib 

Jedaiah 

Sallu 

Amok 

Hilkiah 

Jedaiah. 

{e.)  xii,  44-47  is  an  explanatory  interpolation, 
made  in  later  times,  probably  by  the  last  re\-iser 
of  the  book,  whoever  he  was.  That  it  is  so  is  evi- 
dent not  only  I'roni  the  sudden  change  from  tlie 
first  person  to  tiie  third,  and  the  dropping  of  the 
personal  narrative  (though  the  matter  is  one  in 
which  Nehemiah  necessarily  took  the  lead),  but  from 
the  fact  that  it  de.'icribes  the  identical  transaction 
described  in  xiii.  10-13  by  Nehemiah  himself,  where 
he  speaks  as  we  should  expect  him  to  speak :  "  And 
1  made  treasurers  over  the  treasuries,"  &c.  The 
language  too  of  ver.  47  is  manifestly  that  of  one 
looking  back  upon  the  times  of  Zerubbabel  and 
those  of  Nehemiah  as  alike  past.  In  like  manner 
xii.  27-30  is  the  account  by  the  same  ainiotator  of 
what  Nehemiah  himself  relates,  xiii.  10-12. 

Though,  however,  it  is  not  difficult  thus  to  point 
out  those  passages  of  the  book  which  were  not  part 
of  Neliemiah's  own  work,  it  is  not  easy,  by  cutting 
them  out,  to  restore  that  work  to  its  integrity. 
For  Neh.  xii.  31  does  not  fit  on  well  to  any  part 
of  ch.  vii.,  or,  in  other  words,  the  latter  portion 
of  Nehemiah's  work  does  not  join  on  to  the  former. 
Had  the  former  part  been  merely  a  kind  of  diary 
entered  day  by  day,  one  might  have  supposed  that 
it  was  abruptly  interrupted  and  as  abruptly  re- 
sumed. But  as  Neh.  v.  14  distinctly  shows  that 
tlie  whole  history  was  either  written  or  revised  by 
tlie  autlior  after  lie  had  been  governor  twelve  years, 
such  a  supposition  cannot  stand.  It  .should  seem, 
therefore,  that  we  liave  only  the  first  and  last  parts 
of  Nehemiah's  work,  and  that  for  some  reason  the 
intermediate  portion  has  been  displaced  to  make 
room  foi-  the  narrative  and  documents  from  Neh. 
vii.  7  to  xii.  27. 

And  we  arc  greatly  confiiTned  in  this  supposition 
by  observing  that  in  the  very  chapter  where  we 
first  notice  tiiis  abrupt  change  of  person,  we  have 
another  evidence  that  we  have  not  the  whole  of 
what  Nehemiah  wrote.  For  at  the  close  of  chap.  vii. 
we  have  an  account  of  the  offerings  made  by  the 
governor,  the  chiefs,  and  the  people ;  but  we  are 
not  even  told  for  what  purpose  tliese  olVerings  were 
made.  Only  we  are  led  to  guess  that  it  must  have 
been  for  the  Temple,  as  tiie  parallel  passage  in 
Ezr.  ii.  tells  us  it  was,  by  the  mention  of  the  priests' 
garments  which  foi-med  a  part  of  the  ofierings. 
Obviously,  therefore,  the  original  work  must  have 
contained  an  account  of  some  transactions  connected 
with  repairing  or  beautifying  the  Temple,  which 
led  to  these  contributions  being  made.  Now,  it  so 
happens  that  there  is  a  passage  in  2  Mace.  ii.  13,  in 


o  It  is  not  necessary  to  believe  tliat  Nehemiah  wrote 
all  that  is  attribtiie:'.  to  him  in  2  Maci-.  It  is  very  pro- 
bal)le  that  there  was  an  apocryphal  version  of  his  book, 
with  additions  ami  embellishments.  Still  even  the  ori- 
ginal work  may  have  contained  matter  either  not  strictly 


which  "  the  writings  and  commentaries  of  Nehe- 
miah "  are  referred  to  in  a  way  which  shows  that 
they  contained  matter  relative  to  the  sacred  lii-e 
having  consumed  the  sacrifices  offered  by  Nehemiah 
on  some  solemn  occasion  when  he  repaiied  and 
dedicated  the  Temple,  which  is  not  found  in  the 
present  book  of  Nehemiah  ;  and  if  any  dependance 
can  be  placed  upon  the  account  there  given,  and  in 
i.  18-36,  we  seem  to  have  exactly  the  two  facts 
that  we  want  to  justify  our  hypothesis.  The  one, 
that  Nehemiah's  naiTative  at  this  part  contained 
some  things  which  were  not  suited  to  form  jjart  of 
the  Bible ; "  the  other,  that  it  formerly  contained 
some  account  which  would  be  the  natural  occasion 
for  mentioning  the  ofierings  which  come  in  so 
abruptly  at  piesent.  If  this  were  so,  and  the  ex- 
ceptional matter  was  consequently  omitted,  and  an 
abridged  notice  of  the  offerings  retained,  we  should 
have  exactly  the  appearance  which  we  actually  have 
in  chap.  vii. 

Nor  is  such  an  explanation  less  suited  to  connect 
the  latter  portion  of  Nehemiah's  narrative  with  the 
former.  Chap.  xii.  31,  goes  on  to  describe  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  wall  and  its  ceremonial.  How  naturally 
this  would  be  the  sequel  of  that  dedication  of  the  I'e- 
stoied  Temple  spoken  of  by  the  author  of  2  Mace, 
it  is  needless  to  observe.  So  that  if  we  suppose  the 
missing  portions  of  Nehemiah's  history  which  de- 
scribed the  dedication  service  of  the  Temple  to  have 
followed  his  description  of  the  census  in  ch.  vii., 
and  to  have  been  followed  by  the  account  of  the 
ofierings,  and  then  to  have  been  succeeded  by  the 
dedication  of  the  wall,  we  have  a  perfectly  natural 
and  consistent  narrative.  In  erasing  what  was  irre- 
levant, and  inserting  the  intervening  matter,  of 
couree  no  pains  were  taken,  because  no  desire  existed, 
to  disguise  the  operation,  or  to  make  the  joints 
smooth ;  the  object  being  simply  to  preserve  an 
authentic  record  without  reference  to  authorship  or 
literary  perfection. 

Another  circumstance  which  lends  much  proba- 
bility to  the  statement  in  2  Mace,  is  that  the  writer 
closely  connects  what  Nehemiah  did  with  what 
Solomon  had  done  before  him,  in  tliis,  one  may 
guess,  following  Nehemiah's  narrative.  But  in  the 
extant  portion  of  our  book,  Neh.  i.  6,  we  have  a 
distinct  allusion  to  Solomon's  prayer  (1  K.  viii. 
28,  29),  as  also  in  Neh.  xiii.  2G,  we  have  to  another 
part  of  Solomon's  life.  So  that  on  the  whole  the 
passage  in  2  Mace,  lends  considerable  support  to  the 
theory  that  the  middle  portion  of  Nehemiah's  worlc 
was  cut  out,  and  that  there  was  substituted  for  it 
partly  an  abridged  abstract,  and  partly  Ezra's  nar- 
rative and  other  appended  documents.? 

We  may  then  affirm  with  tolerable  certainty  that 
all  the  middle  part  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  has 
been  supplied  by  other  hands,  and  that  the  first  six 
chapters  and  part  of  the  seventh,  and  the  last  chapter 
and  half,  were  alone  written  by  him,  the  interme- 
mediate  portion  being  inserted  by  those  who  had 
authority  to  do  so,  in  order  to  complete  the  liistory 
of  the  transactions  of  those  times.  The  difl'erence 
of  authorship  being  marked  especially  by  this,  that, 
in  the  first  and  last  portions,  Nehemiah  imariahlij 
speaks  in  the  first  person  singular  (except  in  the 
inserted  verses  xii.  44-47),  but  in  the  middle  por- 
tion never.     It  is  in  this  middle  portion  alone  that 

authentic,  or  for  some  other  reason  not  suited  to  have  a 
place  in  tlie  canon. 

I'  Ceillior  also  supposes  that  pari  of  Nehemiah's  work 
may  be  now  lost. 


496 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


matter  unsuited  to  Nehemiah's  times  (as  e.g.  Neh. 
xii.  11,  2'2),  is  found,  that  obscurity  of  comicction 
exists,  and  that  the  variety  of  style  (as  almost  all 
critics  admit)  suggests  a  different  authorship.  But 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  book  of  Nehomiah 
is  in  fact  a  continuation  of  the  Chronicles,i  being 
reckoned  by  the  Hebrews,  as  Jerome  testifies,  as 
one  with  Ezra,  which  was  confessedly  so,  and 
that,  as  we  have  seen  binder  Ezra,  Chronicles, 
and  Kings,  the  customary  method  of  composing 
the  national  Chronicles  was  to  make  use  of  contem- 
porary wi'itings,  and  work  them  up  according  to 
the  requirements  of  the  case,  it  will  cease  to  surprise 
us  in  the  least  that  Nehemiah's  diary  should  have 
been  so  used:  nor  will  the  admixture  of  other  con- 
tempoiary  documents  with  it,  or  the  addition  of 
any  reliections  by  the  latest  editor  of  it,  in  any  way 
detract  from  its  authenticity  or  authority. 

As  regards  the  time  when  the  Book  of  Nehemiah 
was  put  into  its  present  form,  we  have  only  the 
■following  data  to  guide  us.  The  latest  high-priest 
mentioned,  Jaddua,  was  doubtless  still  alive  when 
his  name  was  added.  The  descriptive  addition  to 
the  name  of  Darius  (xii.  22)  "the  Persian,"  indi- 
cates that  the  Persian  rule  had  ceased,  and  the  Greek 
rule  had  begun.  Jaddua's  name,  therefore,  and 
the  clause  at  the  end  of  ver.  22,  were  inserted  early 
in  the  reign  of  Alexander  the  Great.  But  it  ap- 
pears that  the  registers  of  the  Levites,  entei-ed  into 
the  Chronicles,  did  not  come  down  lower  than  the 
time  of  Johanan  (ver.  23)  ;  and  it  even  seems  from 
the  distribution  of  the  conjunction  "and"  in 
ver.  21,  that  the  name  of  Jaddua  was  not  included 
when  the  sentence  was  first  written,  but  stopped 
at  Johanan,  and  that  Jaddua  and  the  clause  about 
the  priests  were  added  later.  So  that  the  close  of 
the  Persian  dominion,  and  the  beginning  of  the 
Greek,  is  the  time  clearly  indicated  when  the  latest 
additions  were  made,  But  whether  this  ad<lition 
was  anything  more  than  the  insertion  of  the  docu- 
ments contained  from  ch.  xi.  3  to  xii.  26,  or  even 
much  less ;  or  whether  at  the  same  time,  or  at  an 
earlier  one,  the  great  alteration  was  made  of  sub- 
stituting the  abridgment  in  ch.  vii.  in  the  contem- 
porary narratives  in  ch.  viii.  ix.  x.,  for  what 
Nehemiah  had  written,  there  seems  to  be  no  means 
of  deciding.'  Nor  is  the  decision  of  much  conse- 
quence, except  that  it  would  be  interesting  to  know 
exactly  when  the  volume  of  Holy  Scripture  defi- 
nitively assumed  its  present  shape,  and  who  were 
the  persons  who  put  the  finishing  hand  to  it. 

3.  In  respect  to  language  and  style,  this  book  is 
very  similar  to  the  Chronicles  and  Ezra.  Nehemiah 
has,  it  is  true,  quite  his  own  manner,  and,  as  De 
Wette  has  observed,  certain  phrases  and  modes  of 
expression  peculiar  to  himself.  He  has  also  some  few 
words  and  forms  not  found  elsewhere  in  Scripture ; 
but  the  genei-al  Hebrew  style  is  exactly  that  of  the 
books  pm-porling  to  be  of  the  same  age.  Some 
words,  as  0)0?^^,  "  cymbals,"  occur  in  Chron., 
Ezr.,  and  Neh.,  but  nowhere  else.  ^'^jrUl  occurs 
frequently  in  the  same  three  book's,  but  only  twice  (in 
Judg.  V.)  besides.  n^aN  or  Nn"}3X,  "  a  letter,"  is 
common  only  to  Neh.,  Esth.,  Ezr.,  and  Chron.  riT'B. 
and  its  Chaldee  equivalent,  N"T'3,  whether  spoken  of 

1  So  Ewalct  also. 

'■  If  we  knew  the  real  history  of  tlie  title  Tirshatba, 
it  might  assist  us  in  determining  the  date  of  the  passage 
«  here  it  appears. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

the  palace  at  Susa,  or  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  are 
common  only  to  Neh.,  Ezr.,  Esth.,  Dan.,  and  Chron. 
?JC  to  Neh.,  and  Dan.,  and  Ps.  ?lv.  The  phrase 
D^OCrn  ^nPN,  and  its  Chaldee  equivalent,  "  the 
God  of  Heavens,"  are  common  to  Ezr.,  Neh.,  and  Dan. 
Ji'TOO,  "  distinctly,"  is  common  to  Ezr.  and  Neh. 
Such  words  .as   PD,    nj'ltD,    DT^S,    and    such 

't  T  "•*,*-  *•    :  - 

Aramaisms  as  the  use  of  ?3n,  i.  7,  'Tp^'',  v.  7, 
n'ltO,  V.  4,  &c.,  are  also  evidences  of  the  age  when 
Nehemiah  wrote.  As  examples  of  peculiar  words 
or  meanings,  used  in  this  book  alone,  the  following 
may  be  mentioned:  —  3  ^3Ci',  "to  inspect,"  ii. 
13,  15;  nXD,  in  the  sense  of  "  interest,"  v,  11  ; 
fj-l-l  (in  Hiph.),  "  to  shut,"  vii.  3;  ^JJID,  «  a  lift- 
ing up,"  viii.  6  ;  nin*n,  "  praises,"  or  "  choirs," 
xii.  8;  n3-"l7nPl,  "  a  procession,"  xii.  32;  XIpJ?- 
in  sense  of  "  reading,"  viii.  8  ;  HIVX,  for 
nT'VKX,  xiii.  3,  where  both  form  and  sense  are 
alike  unusual. 

The  Aramean  form,   minS  Hiph.  of  m*  for 

V  :  ^  TT 

mV,    is    very   rare,    only  five'   other   analogous 

examples  occurring  in  the  Heb.  Scriptures,  though 
it  is  very  common  in  Biblical  Chaldee. 

The  phrase  DVSH  in^K'  C^'''N,  iv.  17  (which  is 
omitted  by  the  LXX.)  is  incapable  of  explanation. 
One  would  have  expected,  instead  of  D^Qn> 
n^l,  as  in  2  Chr.  xxiii.  10. 

N^E^'~lni^,  "  the  Tlrshatha,"  which  only  occurs 

in  Ezr.  ii.  63,  Neh.  vii.  65,  70,  viii.  9,  x.  1,  is  of 
uncertain  etymology  and  meaning.  It  is  a  terai 
a]iplied  only  to  Nehemiah,  and  seems  to  be  more 
likely  to  mean  "cupbearer"  than  "governor," 
though  the  latter  interpretation  is  adopted  by 
Gesenius  {T/ies.  s.  v.). 

The  text  of  Nehemiah  is  generally  pure  and  fiee 
from  corruption,  except  in  the  proper  names,  in 
which  there  is  considerable  fluctuation  in  the  ortho- 
graphy, both  as  compared  with  otner  parts  of  the 
same  book  and  with  the  same  names  in  other  parts 
of  Scripture ;  and  also  in  numerals.  Of  the  latter  we 
have  seen  several  examples  in  the  parallel  passages 
Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii. ;  and  the  same  lists  will  give 
variations  in  names  of  men.  So  will  xii.  1-7,  com- 
pared with  xii.  12,  and  with  x.  1-8. 

A  comparison  of  Neh.  xi.  3,  &c.,  with  1  Chr. 
ix.  2,  &c.,  e.xhibits  the  following  fluctuations : — 
Neh.  xi.  4,  Athaiah  of  the  children  of  Perez 
=  1  Chr.  ix.  4,  Uthai  of  the  children  of  Perez  ; 
V.  5,  Maaseiah  the  son  of  Shiloni  =  v.  5,  of  the 
Shilonites,  Asaiah  ;  v.  9,  Judah  the  son  of  Senuah 
(Heb.  Hasenuah)=v.  7,  Hodaviah  the  son  of  Ha- 
senuah  ;  v.  10,  Jedaiah  the  son  of  Joiarib,  Jachin 
=  v.  10,  Jedaiah,  Jehoiarib,  Jachin  ;  v.  13,  Amasai 
sou  of  Azareel  =  v.  12,  Maasai  son  of  Jahzerah  ; 
V.  17,  Micah  the  son  of  Zabdi  —  v.  15,  Mic.ah  the 
son  of  Zichri  fcomp.  Neh.  xii.  35).  To  which 
many  others  might  be  added. 

JIauy  various  readings  are  also  indicated  by  the 
LXX.  version.     For  example,  at  ii.  13,  for  Ciiri. 


s  Ps.  xlv.  18,  cxvi.  ti;   1  Sam.  xvii.  47  ;   Is.  lii.  5 ;   Ez. 
xlvi.  22  {Journ.  of  Sac.  Lit.  Jan.  1861,  p.  3S2). 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

"  dragon,"  tliey  rend  D''3Nn,  "  figs,"  ;"iJ  lender  it ' 
raiv  (TvKwv.     At  ii.  20*  I'or  Dlp^,^'  we  will  arise," 
they  read  D^'pJ,  "  pure,"  iind  render  it  KaOapoi.  j 
At  iii.  2,  for  -li^,   "  they  built,"   they  re;id  twice  j 
""JB,  vlHv;    and  so  at  vcr.   14.      At  iii.   15,  for 
•;]Vsn  \h  rh^r\  r\y^2,  "  the  pod  of  Slloah  by 
the  king's  garden,"  they  read  "H  ti?  "H  "2,  "  the 
king's    fleece,"    and    render   it   Ko\vfj.l3r)6pas   raiv 
KaiSiwv  T-fj  Kovpa  rod  fiaaiXeais-  Kovpa  being  the 
word  by  which  Til   is  rendered  in  Deut.  xviii.  4. 
rhl^n  is  rendered  by  KuSicov,  "  sheep-skins,"  in 
the   Chaldee   sense    of   vb^   or    Hn?^,   a   fleece  ; 
recently  stripped  fi-om  the  animal  (Castell.  Lex.).  [ 
At  iii.   16,   for   *1J3,   "  over  against,"   they  read  j 
\i,    "  the  garden  ;"  comp.  ver.  26  :  in  iii.  34,  35 
(iv.  2,3),  they  seem  to  liave  had  a  corrupt  and 
unintelligible  text.    At  v.  5,  for  D^'inX,  "  others,"  1 
they  read  Dnhn,  "the  nobles:"  v.  11,  for  DND. 
"  the  hundredth,"   they  read   Hi^D,   "  some  of," 
rendering  a-rrS:  vi,  1,  for  ^"IS  rl3,  there  was  lelt  no 
"  breach  in  it,"  viz.,  the  wall,  they  read  PI-")")  D3. 
"  spirit  in  them,"  viz.,  Sanballat,  &c.,  rendering  | 
eV  avToh  Trvorf    vi.  3,  for  HQ'IX,  "  I  leave  it," 
they  read   HNSIN,  "I  complete  it,"  re\eiwcTcii- 
which  gives  a  better  sense.      At  vii.  68,  sqq.,  the 
number  of  asses  is  2700  instead  of  6720  ;  of  priests' 
garments,  30  instead  of  530 ;   of  pounds  of  silver, 
2300  and  2200,  instead  of  2200  and  2000,  as  has 
been  noticed  above  ;   and  A'er.  70,  rep  'Neefj.ia,,  for 
"  the  Tirshatha."      At  xi.  11,  for  TiZ,  "ruler," 
they  read  *1J3,  "  over  against,"  direvavTi.     At  xii. 

8,  for  n'n*n,   "  thanksgiving,"   n'n*n,   iirl  rwv 

Xeipu"' :    xii.    25,    for   ^QDX,    "  the    treasuries," 

''DDK,   "  my  gathering  together,"    iv   t^    ffvva- 

yay(7v  fif :  and  at  xii.  44,  for  '^JJ',  "  the  fields," 

they  read  *"lCi',  "  the  princes,"  &pxovffi  twv  ttS- 

kfwv :  with  other  minor  variations.  The  prin- 
cipal additions  are  at  viii.  8,  15,  and  ix.  6,  where 
the  name  of  Ezra  is  intioduced,  and  in  the  tiist 
passage  also  the  words  iv  eiriirTTj^j)  Kvplov,  The 
omissions  of  words  and  whole  verses  are  numerous : 
as  at  iii.  37,  38j  iv.  17  (23,  A.  V.  and  LXX.) ; 
vi.  4,  5,  6,  10,  11 ;  vii.  68,  69 ;  viii.  4,  7,  9,  10  ; 
ix.  3,  5,  23  ;  -ti.  13,  16-21,  23-26,  28-35  ;  xii.  3-7, 

9,  25,  28,  29,  the  whole  of  38,40,  41,  and  half  42  ; 
xiii.  13,  14,  16,  20,  24,  25. 

The  following  discrepancies  seem  to  have  their 
origin  in  the  Greek  te.\t  itself: — viii.  I'i,  TrAareiais 
TTJs  ir6\(us,  instead  of  nvKr^s,  llfb.  DVSn  ~)])li'  ■ 
X.  2,  TI02  APAIA  for  KAI  2APAIA  :  xi.  4,  2a- 
fj.apia  for  'Afxapla,  tiie  final  2  of  the  picceding 
vi6s  having  stuck  to  the  beginning  of  the  name : 
xii.  31,  avriveyKav,  instead  of  — /co"  "  I  brought 
up:"  xii.  39,  IxOvpdv,  instead  of  IxOvripav,  as  in 
iii.  3.  It  is  also  worthy  of  remark  that  a  number 
of  Hebrew  words  are  left  untranslated  in  the  (ireek 
version  of  the  LXX.,  which  jiroliably  indicates  a 
want  of  learning  in  the  translator.  The  tbllowlng 
are  the  chief  Instances: — Chaps,  i.  1,  and  vii.  2, 
a/3ipa,  and  t^s  jSipa,  for  m^Bn  ;  ii.  13,  rov  yw- 

\r,\d  for  n^)^  xi-an ;  ib.  14,  rod  d'iv  for  ;)yn ; 

VOL.  n. 


NEHILOTH  497 

iii.  5,  01  QsKco'iij,  for  D''J/')pnn  ;  ib.  dScapl/j.  ibr 
Dn"'"l'''^N  ;  ib.  6,  laaavdl'  for  H^K'^ ;  ib.  8,  p£0K6i/t 

for  D^npin ;  ib.  11,  twv  Bavovpifj.  for  Dn-iunn » 

iii.  16,  PnOayyapiiJ.  for  DniniH  n?2  ;  ib.  20,21, 
^7)6iMa<To{>^  for  J.'^^'h^  TT'S,  cf.  24  ;  ib.  22, 
'E/cxex°P  *''''  "13311  ;  ib.  31,  rov  (rapecpl  for 
••ai'^'n,  and  ^Tjekv  Naetvi/x  for  DO'TlJn  JT'S  ; 
vii.  34,  'HAa,uaap  for  "iriN  Cy]}  ;  ib.  (15,  d0ep- 
aaadd,  and  x.  1,  dpraaaadd,  for  tinti'irin  ;  vll. 
70,  72,  x'oScoj'wfl  for  n'ljriS  ;   xii.  27,  0uda8d  for 

nniO;  xiii.  5, 9,  tV  fiavad  for  nnjQn. 

4.  The  Book  of  Nehemiah  has  always  had  an 
undisputed  place  in  the  Canon,  being  included  by 
the  Hebrews  under  the  general  head  of  the  Book 
of  Ezra,  and  as  Jerome  tells  us  in  the  Prolog.  Gal. 
by  the  Greeks  and  Latins  under  the  name  of  the 
second  Book  of  Ezra.  [Esdras,  First  Book  of.] 
There  is  no  quotation  from  it  in  the  N.  T.,  and  It 
has  been  comparatively  neglected  by  both  the  Greek 
and  Latin  fathers,  perhaps  on  account  of  its  simple 
character,  and  the  absence  of  anything  supernatural, 
prophetical,  or  mystical  in  its  contents.  St.  Jei'ome 
{ad  Faulinam)  does  indeed  suggest  that  the  account 
of  the  building  of  the  walls,  and  the  return  of  the 
people,  the  description  of  the  Priests,  Levites,  Israel- 
ites, and  proselytes,  mid  the  division  of  the  labour 
among  the  different  families,  have  a  hidden  mean- 
ing: and  also  hints  that  Nehemlah's  name,  which 
he  intei'prets  consolator  a  Domino,  points  to  a 
mystical  sense.  But  the  book  does  not  easily  lend 
itself  to  such  applications,  which  are  so  mani- 
festly forced  and  strained,  that  even  Augustine  says 
of  the  whole  Book  of  Ezra  that  it  is  simply  his- 
torical rather  than  prophetical  (De  Civit.  Dei,  xviii. 
36).  Those  however  who  wish  to  see  St.  Jerome's 
hint  elaborately  carried  out,  may  refer  to  the  Ven. 
Bede's  Ailegorica  Expositio  in  Librum  KchemicE, 
qui  et  Ezra;  Secmtdiis,  as  well  as  to  the  preface  to 
his  exposition  of  Ezra;  and,  in  another  sense,  to 
lip.  Pilkiugton's  Exposition  upon  Nehemiah,  and 
John  Fox's  Preface  {Park.  Soc).  It  may  be  added 
that  Bede  describes  both  Ezra  and  Kehemlah  as 
prophets,  which  is  the  head  under  which  Josephus 
Includes  them  in  his  description  of  the  sacred  books 
[C.  Ap.  i.  8). 

Keil's  Einleitung ;  Winer's  Realwort. ;  De  Wette's 
Einleitung,  hyTh.  Parker;  Prideaux's  Connection; 
Ceillier's  Auteitrs  Ecclesiast. ;  Wolf,  Bibl.  Hebraic. ; 
Ewald,  Geschichte,\.  225,  iv.  144;  Thrupp'sylH<i«j< 
./enisalem  ;  Bosanquet's  Times  of  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah. [A.  C.  H.] 

NEHEMI'AS  (Nee^ui'as:  Nehemias).  1.  Ne- 
hemiah, the  contemporary  of  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(1  Esdr.  V.  8). 

2.  Nehemiah  the  Tirshatha,  son  of  Ilachaliah 
(1  Esdr.  V.  40). 

NE'HII.OTH.    The  title  of  Ps.  v.  in  the  A.  V. 

is  rendered  "  to  the  chief  musician  upon  Nehiloth '' 

(ni'?''n3n"'?N) ;  LXX.,  Aqulla,  Symmachu.s,  and 

Thcodotion  translate  the  last  two  words  vvtp  ttjs 

I  KKr\povofjiov(Ti\s,  and  the  Vulgate,   "  pro  ea  quae 

h.aereditatcm  consequitur,"  by  which  Augustine  uu- 

I  deistands  the  Church.    The  origin  of  their  error  was 

a  mistaken  etymology,  by  which  Nehiloth  is  deriveil 

from  ?n3,  nachal,  to  inherit.     Other  etymologies 

I  have  been  proposed  which  are  equally  unsound.     In 

1  2  K 


498  NEHUM 

Chaldee  7*n3,  necliil,  signifies  "a  swaiin  of  bees," 
and  hence  Jarchi  attributes  to  Nehiloth  the  notion 
of  multitude,  the  Psalm  being  sung  by  the  whole 
people  of  Israel.  R.  Hai,  quoted  by  Kimchi,  adopt- 
ing the  same  ongin  for  the  word,  explains  it  as  an 
instrument,  the  sound  of  which  was  like  the  hum 
of  bees,  a  wind  instrument,  according  to  Sonntag 
{de  tit.  Psal.  p.  430),  which  had  a  rough  tone. 
Michaelis  [Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heh.  p.  1629)  suggests, 
with  not  unreasonable  timidity,  that  the  root  is  to 

be  found  in  the  Arab.  V^O'  nachala,  to  winnow, 
and  hence  to  separate  and  select  the  better  part,  indi- 
cating that  the  Psalm,  in  the  title  of  which  Nehiloth 
occurs,  was  "  an  ode  to  be  chanted  by  the  purified 
and  better  portion  of  the  people."  It  is  most  likely, 
as  Gesenius  and  others  explain,  that  it  is  derived 
from  the  root  77n,  chdlal,  to  bore,  perforate, 
whence  ?*7n,  chdlil,  a  flute  or  pipe  (1  Sam.  x.  5 ; 

1  K.  i.  40),  so  that  Nehiloth  is  the  general  terrri 
for  perforated  wind-insti'uments  of  all  kinds,  as  Ne- 
ginoth  denotes  all  manner  of  stringed  instruments. 
The  title  of  Ps.  v.  is  therefore  addressed  to  the  con- 
ductor of  that  portion  of  the  Temple-choir  who 
played  upon  flutes  and  the  like,  and  are  directly 
alluded  to  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  where  (Dvph,  chdlelim) 

"  the  players  upon  instruments"  who  are  associated 
with  the  singers,  are  proprly  "  pipers"  or  "  fiute- 
players."  fW.  A.  W.] 

NE'HUIM  (Din3  :  "Ivaovjx:  Nahum).     One  of 

those  who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zenibbabel 
(Neh.  vii.  7).  In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called  Rehum, 
and  in  1  Esdr.  v.  8  Roimus. 

NEHUSH'TA  ^^*nt^'m :  NeVea;  Alex.Nc^io-ea: 
Nohesta).  The  daughter  of  Elnathan  of  Jerusalem, 
wife  of  Jehoiakim,  and  mother  of  Jehoiachin,  kino-s 
of  Judah  (2  K.  xxiv.  8). 

NEHUSH'TAN  (jriEi'lli  :  ^eiaSdv,  but  Mai's 
ed.  Nf(rda\fl  ;  Alex.  VSea-edv :  Nohestan).  One  of 
the  first  acts  of  Hezekiah,  upon  coming  to  the  throne 
of  Judah,  was  to  destroy  all  traces  of  the  idolatrous 
rites  which  had  gained  such  a  fast  hold  upon  the 
people  during  the  reign  of  his  father  Ahaz.  Among 
other  objects  of  supei'stitious  reverence  and  worship 
was  the  brazen  serpent,  made  by  Moses  in  the  wil- 
derness (Num.  xxi.  9),  which  was  presented  through- 
out the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites,  probably  as  a 
memorial  of  their  deliverance,  and  according  to  a 
late  tradition  was  placed  in  the  Temple.  The  lapse 
of  nearly  a  thousand  yeais  had  invested  tliis  ancient 
relic  with  a  mysterious  sanctity  which  easily  dege- 
nerated into  idolatrous  reverence,  and  at  the  time 
of  Hezekiah's  accession  it  had  evidently  been  lono- 
an  object  of  worship,  "  tor  unto  those  days  the 
cliildren  of  Israel  did  burn  incense  to  it,"  or  as  the 
Hebrew  more  fully  implies,  "  had  been  in  the  habit 
of  burning  incense  to  it."  The  expression  points  to 
a  settled  practice.  The  name  by  which  the  brazen 
seipeut  was  known  at  this  time,  and  by  which  it 
had  been  worshipped,  was  Nehushtan  (2  K.  xviii.  4). 
It  is  evident  that  our  translators  by  their  rendering 
"  and  he  called  it  Nehushtan,"  understood  with 
many  commentators  that  the  subject  of  the  sentence 
is  Hezekiah,  and  that  when  he  destroyed  the  brazen 
serpent  he  ga^■e  it  the  uamo  Nehushtan,  "  a  brazen 
thing,"  in  token  of  his  utter  contempt,  and  to  im- 
pi'ess  upon  the  people  the  idea  of  its  worthlessness. 
This  rendeiing  has  the  support  of  the  LXX.  and 


NEPHEG 

Vulgate,  Junius  and  Tremellius,  Munster,  Clericus, 
and  others ;  but  it  is  better  to  understand  the  Hebrew 
as  referring  to  the  name  by  which  the  serpent  was 
generally  known,  the  subject  of  the  verb  being  in- 
definite— "  and  one  called  it  '  Nehushtan.'  "  Such  a 
construction  is  common,  and  instances  of  it  may  be 
found  in  Gen.  xxv.  26,  xxxvnii.  29,  30,  where  our 
translators  correctly  lender  "  his  name  was  called," 
and  in  Gen.  xlviii.  1,  2.  This  was  the  view  taken  in 
the  Targ.  Jon.  and  in  the  Peshito-Syriac,  "  and  they 
called  it  Nehushtan,"  which  Buxtoi-f  approves  [Hist. 
Serp.  Aen.  cap.  vi.).  It  has  the  support  of  Luther, 
PfeiH'er  (Dub.  Vex.  cent.  8,  loc.  5),  J.  D.  Michaelis 
(BibelfUr  Ungel.),  and  Bumei-JBibelwerk),  as  well 
asof  Ewald  ((?(?sc/i.  iii.  622),  Keil,  Thenius,  and  most 
modern  commentators.  [Skrpent.]     [\V.  A.  W.] 

NE'IEL  6x^y3  :  'lva-f,\  ;  Alex.  A«/irjA. :  Ne- 
hiel),  a  place  which  formed  one  of  the  landmarks 
of  the  boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix. 
27  only).  It  occurs  between  Jiphthah-el  and 
Cabul.  If  the  former  of  these  be  identified  with 
Jefdt,  and  the  latter  with  Kabul,  8  or  9  miles 
E.S.E.  of  Akka,  then  Neiel  may  possibly  be  repre- 
sented by  Miar,  a  village  conspicuously  placed  on 
a  lofty  mountain  brow,  just  half-way  between  the 
two  (Rob.  iii.  87,  103;  also  Van  de  Velde's  Map, 
1858).  The  change  of  N  into  M,  and  L  into  R,  is 
frequent,  and  Bliai-  retains  the  Ain  of  Neiel.    [G.] 

NEK'EB  (2i53n,  with  the  def.  article:  /col  No- 
^diK  ;  Alex.  Na/ce/3 :  quae  est  Neceb),  one  of  the 
towns  on  the  boundary  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  33 
only).     It  lay  between  Adami  and  Jabneel. 

A  great  number  of  commentators,  from  Jonathan 
the  Targumist  and  Jerome  (  Vuljate  as  above)  to 
Keil  (Josua,  ad  loc),  have  taken  this  name  as  being 
connected  with  the  preceding — Adami-han-Nekeb 
(Junius  and  Tremellius,  "  Adamaei  fossa");  and 
indeed  this  is  the  force  of  the  accentuation  of  the 
present  Hebrew  text.  But  on  the  other  hand  the 
LXX.  give  the  two  as  distinct,  and  in  the  Talmud  the 
post-biblical  names  of  each  are  given,  that  of  han- 
Nekeb  being  Tsiadathah  [Gemara  Hieros.  Cod. 
Megilla,  in  Reland,  Pal.  545,  717,  817;  also 
Schwarz,  181). 

Of  this  more  modem  name  Schwarz  suggests  that 
a  trace  is  to  be  found  in  "  Hazedki,"  3  English 
miles  N.  from  al  Cliatti.  [G.] 

NEK'ODA  (NlipJ :    N6/ca>5(£ ;    Alex,  in  Ezr. 

ii.  48,  NeKcoSat' :  Necoda).  1.  The  descendants  of 
Nekoda  returned  among  the  Nethinim  after  the 
captivity  (Ezr.  ii.  48  ;  Neh.  vii.  50). 

2.  The  sons  of  Nekoda  were  among  those  who 
went  up  after  the  capti\'it_v  from  Tel-melah,  Tel- 
harsa  and  other  places,  but  were  unable  to  prove 
their  descent  from  Israel  (Ezr.  ii.  60  ;  Neh.  vii.  62). 

NEM'UEL    ('?N-"I03  :    No/^oi/^A. :    Namuel). 

1.  A  Reubenite,  son  of  Eliab,  and  eldest  brother  of 
Dathan  and  Abu'am  (Num.  xxvi.  9). 

2.  The  eldest  son  of  Simeon  (Num.  xxvi.  12  ; 
1  Chr.  iv.  24),  from  whom  weie  descended  the 
family  of  the  Nemuelites.  In  Gen.  xlvi.  10  he  is 
called  Jehuel. 

NEMU'ELITES,  THE  cS^^-l^lin  :  5^^oy  6 

'Nafj.ovriXi ;  Alex.  NajuourjA.et,  and  so  Mai :  Na- 
inuelitae').  The  descendants  of  Nemuel  the  first- 
born of  Simeon  (Num.  .xxvi.  12). 

NE'PHEG  (3Sp  :   Nac^eV  :   Ncp]uig).      1.  One 


NEPHI 

of  the  sons  of  Izhav  the  son  of  Kohath,  and  thei'e- 
t'ore  brother  of  Korah  (Ex.  vi.  21). 

2.  {Nafpad  in  1  Chr.  xiv.  6  ;  Alex.  No<fs'7  in 
1  Chr.  iii.  7).  One  of  David's  sous  bo.n  to  him  in 
Jerusalem  after  he  was  come  from  Hebron  (2  Sam. 
V.  15;  1  Chr.  iii.  7,  xiv.  6). 

NE'PHI  (Ne<^0o€i  ;  Alex.  Ne^Oap  :  Nephi). 
The  name  by  which  the  Naphtha  ii  of  Nehemiah 
was  usually  {irapa  rots  ttoWois)  called  (2  Mace.  i. 
36).     The  A.  V.  lias  here  followed  the  Vulgate. 

NE'PHIS  {Ni(pls:  Liptis).  In  the  corrupt 
list  of  1  Esdr.  V.  21,  "  the  sons  of  Nephis,"  appa- 
rently correspond  with  "  the  children  of  Nebo  "  in 
l''zr.  ii.  29,  or  else  the  name  is  a  corruption  of 
Maghish. 

NE'PHISH  (K'-QJ  :  Nc(f)i<raSa(oi ;  Alex.  Na- 
(piaatot:  JVaphis).  An  inaccurate  variation  (found 
ill  1  Chr.  V.  19  only)  of  the  name  elsewhere  cor- 
rectly given  in  the  A.V.  Nai'Hish,  the  form  always 
preserved  iu  the  original. 

NEPHISH'ESIM(n"'pC'133;  Keri,  Dip^''Sl3: 
Ne<pci}(ra(ri ;  Alex.  'Necpucraelfi :  Nep/iussiin).  The 
children  of  Nephishesim  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  52).  The 
name  elsewhere  appears  as  Nephusim  iuid  Na- 
pinsi.  Gesenius  decides  that  it  is  a  corruption  of 
the  former  {Thes.  p.  899). 

NEPH'THALI  {■Ne<pda?.flf^  ;  Alex.  liecpBaM  : 
Ncphtludi).  The  Vulgate  form  of  the  name  Naph- 
TALI  (Tob.  i.  1,  2,  4,  5j. 

NEPH'THALIM  {JHe^QaXei ;  Alex.  Netffia- 
AeiyU,  and  so  N.  T. :  Ncpldhali,  Nephthalini). 
Another  tbrm  of  the  same  name  as  the  preceding 
(Tob.  vii.  3  ;  Matt.  iv.  13,  15  ;  liev.  vii.  6). 

NEPIITO'AH,    THE    WATER    OF    CO 

mnSJ :  liBwp  Ma(p8oj,  and  'Na(p0cl> :  aqua,  and 
aquae,  Nephtlioa).  The  spring  or  source  (PV,  A.  V. 
"  fountain"  and  "  well")  of  the  water  or  (inaccu- 
rately) waters  of  Nephtoah,  was  one  of  the  laud- 
marks  in  the  boundary-line  which  separated  Judah 
from  Benjamin  (Josh.  xv.  9,  xviii.  15).  It  was 
situated  between  the  "  head,"  or  the  "  end,"  of 
the  mountain  which  faced  the  valley  of  Hinnom  on 
the  west,  and  the  cities  of  Ephion,  the  next  point 
beyond  which  was  Kirjath-jearim.  It  lay  therefoie 
N.W.  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  direction  it  seems  to 
have  been  satisfactorily  identified  in  Am  Liftn,  a 
spring  situated  a  little  distance  above  the  village 
of  the  same  name,  in  a  short  valley  which  runs 
into  the  east  side  of  the  great  Wadii  Beit  Ilanmi, 
about  2^  miles  from  Jerusalem  and  G  from  Kurict 
el  L'liab  (  K.-jearim).  The  spring — of  which  a  view 
is  given  by  Dr.  Barclay  {City,  &c.,  54-1) — is  very 
abundant,  and  the  water  esKipes  in  a  considerable 
stream  into  the  valley  below. 

Nejihtoah  w;us  tbimerly  identified  with  various 
springs — the  spring  of  St.  Philip  (.4m  Hanir/eh)  in 
the  Wiulu  el  Went;  the  Ain  Vulo  in  the  same  val- 
ley, but  nearer  Jerusjjlem  ;  the  Ain  Karim,  or  Foun- 
tain of  the  Virgin  of  mediaeval  times  (Doubdan, 
Vuyago,  187  ;  see  also  the  cititions  of  Tobler,  T(j- 
poijraphie,  351  ;  and  Sandys,  lib.  iii.  p.  184);  and 
even  the  so-called  Well  of  Job  at  the  western  end 

"  This  must  arise  from  u  confusion  between  Yalo 
(A jalon),  near  which  the  "  well  of  Job  "  is  situuted,  and  the 
Ain  Yalt). 

b  Stewart,  while  accusing  Dr.  Robinson  of  inaccuracy 
(p.  349),  bos  himsL4f  fallen  into  u  curious  confusion  Ixaween 


NEE 


499 


of  the  Wadij  Alij^  {Mislin,  ii.  155);  but  these, 
especially  the  last,  are  unsuitable  in  their  situation 
as  respects  Jerusalem  and  Kirjath-jearim,  and  have 
the  additional  drawback  that  the  features  of  the 
country  there  are  not  such  as  to  permit  a  boundary- 
line  to  be  traced  along  it,  while  the  line  through 
Ain  Lifta  would,  in  Barclay's  words,  "  pursue  a 
course  indicated  by  nature." 

The  name  of  Lifta  is  not  less  suitable  to  this 
identific;ition  than  its  situation,  since  N  and  L  fre- 
quently take  the  place  of  each  other,  and  the  rest 
of  the  word  is  almost  entirely  unchanged.  The 
earliest  notice  of  it  appears  to  be  by  Stewart  *•  (  2'ent 
and  Khan,  349),  who  spealcs  of  it  as  at  that  time 
(Feb.  1854) '=  recognised."  [G.] 

NEPH'USIM  (n"'p»D3  ;    Keri,  n''p-lD3  :    Ns- 

(povff'iiJ. ;  Alex.  'Ne(pov(reifjL :  Ncp/msiin).  The  same 
as  Nephishesim,  of  which  name  according  to 
Gesenius  it  is  the  proper  tbrm  (Ezr.  ii.  50). 

NER  (")J  :  N-fip  :  Ner),  son  of  Jehiel,  according  to 

1  Chr.  viii.  33,  father  of  Kish  and  Abiier,  and  grand- 
father of  king  Saul.  Abner  was,  therefore,  uncle  to 
Saul,  as  is  expressly  statetl  1  Sam.  xiv.  50.  But 
some  confusion  has  arisen  from  the  statement  iu 
1  Chr.  ix.  3t5,  that  Kish  and  Ner  were  both  sons  of 
Jehiel,  whence  it  h;\s  been  concUuled  that  they 
were  brothers,  and  consequently  that  Abner  and  Saul 
were  first  cousins.  But,  unless  there  was  an  elder 
Kish,  uncle  of  Saul's  father,  which  is  not  at  all 
probable,  it  is  obvious  to  explain  the  insertion  of 
Kish's  name  (as  that  of  the  numerous  names  by  the 
side  of  it)  in  1  Chr.  ix.  36,  by  the  common  prac- 
tice in  the  Chronicles  of  calling  all  the  heads  of 
houses  of  fathers,  sojis  of  the  phy larch  or  demaich 
from  whom  they  sprung,  or  under  whom  they  were 
reckoned  iu  the  genealogies,  whether  they  were 
sons  or  grandsons,  or  later  descendants,  or  even 
descendants  of  collateral  branches.     [Becher.] 

The  name  Ner,  combined  with  that  of  his  son 
Abner,  may  be  compared  with  Nadab  in  ver.  36,  and 
Abinadab  ver.  39;  with  Jesse,  1  Chr.  ii.  13,  and 
Abishai,  ver.  16  ;  and  with  Juda,  Luke  iii.  26,  and 
Abiud,  Matt.  i.  13.  The  subjoined  table  shows 
Ner's  family  relations. 

Fpnjamiu 

BechcT,  or  Biclioralh  (\  Sum.  ix.  1 ;  1  Clir.  Tli.  6,  B) 

I 
Abiah,  or  ApUiah  (ib.) 

Zeror,  or  Zur  (1  Clir.  viii.  30) 

I 
Abicl,  or  Jtliiel  (1  Oir.  ix.  35) 


Nadiib       Gedor       Aliio 


Zi'chariali       Jliklotli 


Kish  Abiiur 

I     c 
Saul." 

The  family  seat  of  Ner  was  Gibeon,  where  his 
fiither  Jehii'l  w;is  probably  the  first  to  settle  (I 
Chr.  ix.  35).  From  the  pointed  mention  of  his 
mother,  Maachah,  ;ls  the  wife  of  Jehiel,  she  was 
fierhaps  the  heiress  of  the  estate  in  (libeon.  'I'his 
inference  receives  some  confirmation  from  the  fiic*: 
that  "  Maachah,  Caleb's  concubine,"  is  said,  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  49,  to  have  borne  "  Sheva  the  fiither  of 


Neplitoah  ami  Netopliah.    Dr.  llubinsoii  is  In  this  instance 
perfectly  rlglit. 

■^  There  are  doubtless  some  links  missing  in  this  senca- 
logy,  as  at  all  events  the  head  of  the  family  of  Matri. 

2  K  2 


600 


NEREUS 


JMachhenah  and  the  father  of  Oibea,"  where,  though 
the  text  is  in  ruins,  yet  a  connexion  of  some  sort 
between  Maachah  (whoever  she  was)  and  Gibeah, 
often  called  Gibeah  of  Saul,  and  the  same  as  Gibeon 
]  Chr.  xiv.  16,  is  apparent.  It  is  a  curious  cir- 
cumstance that,  while  the  name  (Jebiel)  of  the 
"father  of  Gibeon"  is  not  given  in  the  text  of 
1  Chr.  viii.  29,  the  same  is  the  case  with  "  the 
father  of  Gibea"  in  1  Chr.  ii.  49,  naturally  sug- 
gesting', therefore,  that  in  the  latter  passage  the 
same  name  Jchiel  ought  to  be  supplied  which  is 
supplied  for  the  ibrmer  by  the  duplicate  passage 
1  Chr.  Ix.  35.  If  this  inference  is  correct  it  would 
place  the  time  of  the  settlement  of  Jehiel  at  Gibeon 
— where  one  would  naturally  expect  to  find  it — 
near  the  .time  of  the  settlement  of  the  tribes  in 
their  respective  inheritances  under  Joshua.  Maa- 
chah, his  wife,  would  seem  to  be  a  daughter  or 
descendant  of  Caleb  by  Ephah  his  concubine.  That 
she  was  not  "  Caleb's  concubine "  seems  pretty 
certain,  both  because  Ephah  is.  so  described  in  ii.  46 
and  because  the  recurrence  of  the  name  Ephah  in 
ver.  47,  separated  from  the  words  1?3  ^''H?''?  °"^^' 
by  the  name  Shaaph,"*  creates  a  strong  presumption 
that  Ephah,  and  not  Maachah,  is  the  name  to  which 
this  description  belongs  in  ver.  47  as  in  ver.  46. 
Moreover,  Maachah  cannot  be  the  nom.  case  to 
the  masculine  verb  H^V  Supposing,  then,  Maa- 
chah, the  ancestress  of  Sai.l,  to  have  been  thus  a 
daughter  or  granddaughter  of  Caleb,  we  have  a 
curious  coincidence  in  the  occuiTence  of  the  name 
Saul,  as  one  of  the  Edomitish  kings,  1  Chr.  i.  48, 
and  as  the  name  of  a  descendant  of  the  Edomitish 
Caleb.  [Caleb.]  The  element  Baal  (1  Chr.  ix. 
36,  &c.)  in  ihe  names  Esh-haal,  3feribbaal,  the 
descendants  of  Saul  the  son  of  Kish,  may  also,  then, 
be  compared  with  Baal-hanan,  the  successor  of  Saul 
of  Rehoboth  (1  Chr.  i.  49),  as  also  the  name  Hatred, 
(ib.  50)  with  Matri  (1  Sam.  x.  21).     [A.  C.  H.] 

NE'EEUS.(N77p6i5s:  Nereus).  A  Christian  at 
Rome,  saluted  by  St.  Paul,  Rom.  xvi.  15.  Origen 
conjectures  that  he  belonged  to  the  household  of  Phi- 
lologus  and  Julia.  Estius  suggests  that  he  may  be 
identified  with  a  Xereus,  who  is  said  to  have  been 
baptized  at  Rome  by  St.  Peter.  A  legendary  account 
of  him  is  given  in  Bolland,  Acta  Sanctorum,  1 2th 
May ;  from  which,  in  the  opinion  of  Tillemont, 
H.  E.  ii.  139,  may  be  gatheied  the  fact  that  he 
was  beheaded  at  Ten-acina,  probably  in  the  I'eign  of 
Nerva.  His  ashes  are  said  to  be  deposited  in  the 
ancient  cliurch  of  SS.  Nereo  ed  Archilleo  at  Rome. 

There  is  a  reference  to  his  legendary  history 
in  Bp.  Jeremy  Taylor's  Semion,  The  Marriage- 
ring,  Part.  i.  [W.  T.  B.] 

NER'GAL  ('pnp  :  'EpyiX:  Nergel),  one  oUhe 
chief  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  deities,  seems  to 
have  corresponded  closely  to  the  classical  Mai's.  He 
was  of  Babylonian  origin,  and  his  name  signifies,  in 
the  early  Cushite  dialect  of  that  country,  "  the 
great  man,"  or  "  the  great  lioro."  His  monumental 
titles  are — "  the  storm-ruler,"  "  the  king  of  battle," 
"  the  champion  of  the  gods,"  "  the  male  principle  " 
(or  "the  strong  begetter"),  "the  tutelar  god  of 
Babylonia,"  and  "  the  god  of  the  chace."  Of  this 
last  he  is  the  god  pre-eminently;  another  deity, 
Nin,  disputing  with  him  the  presidency  over  war 
and  battles.  It  is  conjectured  that  he  may  repre- 
.sent  the  deified  Nimrod — "  the  mighty  hunter  before 

<!  S/iaaph  has  nearly  the  same  letters  as  Ephah. 


NERGAL-SH  A  REZER 

the  Lord" — from  whom  tlie  kings  both  of  Babylon 
and  Nineveh  were  likely  to  claim  descent.  The  city 
peculiarly  dedicated  to  his  worship  is  found  in  the 
inscriptions  to  be  Cutha  or  Tiggaba,  which  is  in 
Arabian  ti'adition  the  special  city  of  Niiniwl.  The 
only  express  mention  of  Xergal  contained  in  sacred 
Scripture  is  in  2  K.  xvii.  .30,  where  "  the  men  of 
Cutha,"  placed  in  the  cities  of  Samaria  by  a  king 
of  Assyria  (Esar-haddon?),  are  said  to  have  "made 
Nergal  their  god  "  when  transplanted  to  their  new 
country — a  fact  in  close  accordance  with  the  tVe- 
quent  notices  in  the  insciiptions,  which  mark  him 
as  the  tutelar  god  of  that  city.  Nergal 's  name  occurs 
as  the  initial  element  in  ^ez-^/aZ-shar-ezer  (Jer. 
xxxix.  3  and  13);  and  is  also  found,  under  a  con- 
tracted form,  in  the  name  of  a  comparatively  late 
king — the  khennerigus  of  Josephus  {Ant.  xx.  2,  §1). 

Nergal  appears  to  have  been  worshipped  under 
the  symbol  of  the  "  Man-Lion."  The  Semitic  name 
foi-  the  god  of  Cutha  was  Aria,  a  word  which  sig- 
nifies "  lion  "  both  in  Hebrew  and  Syriac.  Nir, 
the  first  element  of  the  god's  name,  is  capable  of 
the  same  significiition.  Perhaps  the  habits  of  the 
lion  as  a  hunter  of  beasts  were  known,  and  he  was 
thus  regarded  as  the  most  fitting  symbol  of  the  god 
who  presided  over  the  chace. 

It  is  in  connexion  with  their  hunting  excursions 
that  the  Assyrian  kings  make  most  frequent  men- 
tion of  this  deity.  As  eai'ly  as  B.C.  1150,  Tiglath- 
pileser  I.  speaks  of  him  as  furnishing  the  aiTows 
with  which  he  slaughtered  the  wild  animals. 
Assur-dani-pal  (Sai'danapalus),  the  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Esar-haddon,  never  fails  to  invoke  his  aid, 
and  ascribes  all  his  hunting  achievements  to  his 
intiuence.  Pul  sacrificed  to  him  in  Cutha,  and 
Sennacherib  built  him  a  temple  in  the  city  of 
Tarbisa  near  Nineveh  ;  but  in  general  he  was  not 
much  woi-shipped  either  by  the  earlier  or  the  later 
kings  (see  the  Essay  of  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  in  Raw- 
linson's  Herodotus,  i.  631-634).  [G.  R.] 

NER'GAL  -  SHAEE'ZER  ("1 VN"!^  "  ^n?.  ■ 
NTjpyiX-'Sapaadp  :  Nergel-Sereser)  occurs  only  in 
Jeremiali  xxxix.  3  and  13.  There  appear  to  have 
been  two  persons  of  the  name  among  the  "  princes 
of  the  king  of  Babylon,"  who  accompanied  Nebu- 
chadnezzar on  his  last  expedition  against  Jerusalem. 
One  of  these  is  not  marked  by  any  additional  title ; 
but  the  other  has  the  honourable  distinction  of 
Rab-mag  (!ID"3"I),  and  it  is  to  him  alone  that  any 
particular  interest  attaches.  In  sacred  Scripture  he 
appears  among  the  persons,  who,  by  command  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  released  Jeremiah  from  prison;  pro- 
fane history  gives  us  reason  to  believe  that  he  was  a 
personage  of  great  importance,  who  not  long  after- 
wards mounted  the  Babylonian  throne.  This  iden- 
tification depends  in  part  upon  the  exact  resemblance 
of  name,  which  is  found  on  Babylonian  bricks  in 
the  form  of  Nergal-shar-uaur  ;  but  mainhj  it  rests 
upon  the  title  of  Eubu-emga,  or  Rab-Mag,  which 
this  king  bears  in  his  inscriptions,  and  on  the  im- 
probability of  there  having  iDeen,  towards  the  close 
of  the  Babylonian  period — when  the  monumental 
monarch  must  have  lived — two  persons  of  e.xactl)' 
the  same  name  holding  this  ofiice.    [IIab-mag.] 

Assuming  on  these  grounds  the  identity  of  the 
Scriptural  "  Nergal-sharezer,  Rab-Mag,"  with  the 
monumental  "  Nergal-shar-uzur,  Rubu-emga,"  we 
may  leani  something  of  the  history  of  the  prince  in 
question  from  profane  authors.  Thei'e  cannot  be  a 
doubt  that  he  was  the  monarch  called  Neiiglissar 
or  Neiigiisiioor  by  Berosus  (Josej)h.  c.  Ap.  i.  20), 


NEW 

who  murdeied  Evil-MeroJaoh,  the  son  of  Nebu- 
chiuhiezzar,  and  succeeded  liim  upon  the  thione. 
'I'iiis  prince  was  married  to  a  daughter  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  was  thus  the  brother-in-law  of  his  pre- 
dece.ssor,  whom  lie  put  to  death.  His  reign  lasted 
between  thiee  and  tour  years.  He  appears  to  have 
died  a  natural  deatli,  and  certainly  left  his  crown 
to  a  young  son,  Laboiosnaichod,  who  was  murdered 
after  a  reign  of  nine  months.  In  the  canon  of  Pto- 
lemy he  appears,  under  the  designation  at'  Nerigas- 
solassar,  as  reigning  four  years  between  lUoaru- 
damus  (Evil-Merodacli)  and  Nabonadius,  his  son's 
reign  not  obtaining  any  mention,  because  it  fell 
short  of  a  ye;ir. 

A  palace,  built  by  Neriglissar,  has  been  disco- 
vered at  Babylon.  It  is  the  only  building  of  any 
extent  on  the  right  banic  of  the  Euphrates.  (See 
plan  of  Babylon.)  The  bricks  bear  the  name  of 
Nergal-shar-uzur,  the  title  of  Kab-mag,  and  also  a 
statement — which  is  somewhat  surpiising  —  that 
Nergal-shar-uzur  was  the  son  of  a  certain  "  Bel-zik- 
kariskun,  king  of  Buhylon."  'J"he  only  explanation 
which  has  been  oHered  of  this  statement,  is  a  con- 
jecture (Kawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i.  p.  518), 
that  Bel-zikkar-iskun  may  possibly  have  been  the 
"  chief  Chaldaean,"  who  (according  to  Beiosus) 
kept  the  royal  authority  for  Nebuchadnezzar  during 
the  interval  between  his  father's  death  and  his  own 
arrival  at  Babylon.  [Nebuchadnezzak.]  Neri- 
glissar could  scarcely  have  given  his  ijither  the  title 
(if  king  without  some  ground ;  and  this  is  at  any 
rate  a  ])ossible  ground,  and  one  compatible  with  the 
non-appearance  of  the  name  in  any  extant  list  of  the 
later  Babylonian  monarchs.  Neriglissar's  olHce  of 
Hab-Jlag  will  be  further  considered  under  that 
word.  It  is  evident  that  he  was  a  personage  of 
importance  before  he  mounted  the  throne.  Some 
(as  Larcher)  have  sought  to  identify  him  with  Da- 
rius the  Mede.  But  this  view  is  quite  untenable. 
Thei'e  is  abundant  reason  to  believe  from  his  name 
and  his  oliice  that  he  was  a  native  Babylonian — a 
grandee  of  high  rank  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  who 
regar<led  him  as  a  fitting  match  tor  one  of  his 
daughters.  He  did  not,  like  Darius  Medus,  gain 
Babylon  by  conquest,  but  acquired  his  dominion 
by  an  internal  levolution.  His  leign  preceded  that 
of  the  Median  Darius  by  17  years.  It  lasted  from 
li.C.  559  to  B.C.  556,  whereas  Darius  the  Mede 
cannot  have  ascended  the  throne  till  B.C.  538,  on 
the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus.  [G.  K.] 

NE'RI  (Ni7pi,  representing  the  Heb.  *"13,  which 
would  be  a  shoi  t  form  for  H^IJ,  Neriah,  "  Jeho- 
vah is  my.  lamp:"  Neri),^  .son  of  Melchi,  and 
liither  of  Salathiel,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ, 
i.uke  iii.  27.  Nothing  is  known  of  him,  but  his 
name  is  very  important  as  indicating  the  prin- 
ciple on  which  the  genealogies  of  our  Lord  are 
framed.  He  was  of  the  line  of  Nathan ;  but  his 
son  Salathiel  became  Solomon's  heir  on  the  failuie 
of  Solomon's  line  in  king  Jecouiah,  and  was  there- 
t'ure  reckoncvl  in  the  royal  genealogy  among  the 
sons  of  Jcconiah ;  to  whose  status  and  preroga- 
tives he  succeeded,  1- Chr.  iii.  17;  Matt.  i.  12. 
The  supposition  that  the  son  and  heir  of  David  and 
Solomon  would  be  called  the  son  of  Neii,  an  obscure 
individual,  becjuise  he  had  married  Neri's  daughter, 
as  many  pretend,  is  too  absurd  to  need  refutation. 
Tile  infoimation  given  us  by  St.  Luke — that  Neri, 
af  the  line  of  Nathan,  wa.s  Salathiel's  father — tloes, 

fl  See  Geneal.  of  Our  Lord  J.  C,  p.  159. 


NET 


501 


in  point  of  fact,  cleai-  up  and  settle  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  the  genealogies.  [Gi:nealogy  of  J^sus 
Christ.]  [a.  Q.  H.] 

NERI'AH  (n*"i:):  Nr/pms,  but  Nr/pei'as  in 
Jer.  li.  59  :  Ncrias,  but  Neri  in  xxxii.  12.  The 
son 'of  Maaseiah,  and  father  of  Baruch  (Jer.  \xxii. 
12,  xxxvi.  4,  xliii.  3),  and  Seraiah  (Jer.  li.  59). 

NERI'AS  (NTjpias:  Nerias).  The  father  of 
Baruch  and  Seraiah  (Bar.  i.  1). 

NET.  The  various  terms  applied  by  the  Hebrews 
to  nets  had  leterence  either  to  the  construction  of  the 
article,  or  to  its  use  and  objects.  To  the  first  of  these 
we  may  assign  the  following  teims: — Alacnior,^  and 
its  cognates,  niicmdr^  and  micinoreth,"  all  of  which 
are  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  weave ;"  and, 
again,  sebdcdh^  and  sebac,^  derived  fi-om  another 
root  of  similar  signification.  To  the  second  head 
we  may  assign  cherem,^  ti-om  a  root  signifying  "  to 
enclose;"  mdtzod-^  with  its  cognates,  inetzoddh^^ 
and  mitzudali}  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  lie  in 
wait;"  and  reslieth,^  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
catch."  Great  uncertainty  prevails  in  the  equiva- 
lent terms  in  the  A.  V. :  mdtzod  is  rendered  "  snai-e  " 
in  Keel.  vii.  26,  and  "net"  in  Jobxix.  6  and  Prov. 
xii.  12,  in  the  latter  of  which  passages  the  true 
sense  is  "prey;"  sebdcdh  is  rendered  "snaie"  in 
Job  xviii.  8;  metzdddh  "snare"  in  Ez.  xii.  13, 
xvii.  20,  and  "net"  in  Ps.  Ixvi.  11  ;  micmoreth, 
"drag"  or  "flue-net"  in  Hab.  i.  15,  16.  'What 
distinction  there  may  have  been  between  the  various 
nets  described  by  the  Hebrew  terms  we  are  unable 
to  decide.  The  etyniology  tells  us  nothing,  and 
the  equivalents  in  the  LXX.  vary.  In  the  New 
Testament  we  meet  with  three  terms, —  crayi]v'r) 
(fiom  adrrco,  "  to  load  "),  whence  our  word  seine, 
a  large  hauling  or  draw-net ;  it  is  the  term  used 
in  the  parable  of  the  draw-net  (Matt.  xiii.  47):  afi- 
(pi/SXriffTpov  (fiom  a.fi<pifid\\w,  "  to  cast  aroiuid  "] 
a  casting-net  (Matt.  iv.  18;  Mark  i.  16):  and 
S'lKTvov  (t\on\  SIko),  "to  throw"),  of  the  same 
description  as  the  one  just  mentioned  (Matt,  iv, 
20  ;  John  xxi.  6,  al.).  The  net  was  used  for  the 
purposes  of  fishing  and  hunting:  the  mode  in  which 
it  was  used  has  been  already  described  in  the 
articles  on  those  subjects.  [Fishing;  Hunting.] 
The  Egyptians  constructed  their  nets  of  llax-string : 
the  netting-needle  was  made  of  wood,  and  in  shape 
closely   lesembled    our   own    (Wilkinson,    ii.    95). 


Egyptian  landiiig-net     (Wilkinson.) 

The  neta  varied  in  foini  according  to  their  use;  the 
landing-net  has  been  already  represented  ;  we  here 
give  a  sketch  of  the  draw-net  fiom  the  same  som-ce. 


"  "ib::». 

'-  -lODO. 

<=  mb30 

•'  nDnb 

e   ^2C'. 

'  ^"l^- 

ff  nivo. 

"  nm^'D. 

'  mi>;o. 

"  n^-\. 

502 


NETHANEEL 


As  the  nets  of  Egypt  were  well  known  to  tlie 
early  Jews  (Is.  xix.  8),  it  is  not  improbable  that 
the  material  and  form  was  the  same  in  each 
country.  The  nets  used  for  birds  in  Egypt  were 
of  two  kinds,  clap-nets  and  traps.  The  latter  con- 
sisted of  network  strained  over  a  fi-ame  of  wood, 
wliich  was  so  constructed  that  the  sides  would 
collapse  by  pulling  a  string  and  catch  any  birds 
that  may  have  alighted  on  them  while  open.  The 
former  was  made  on  the  same  principle,  consisting 
of  a  double  frame  with  the  network  strained  over 
it,  which  might  be  caused  to  collapse  by  pulling  a 
string."* 


Eg>'ptian  druw-net  OVillduson). 


Tile  iuet:i])liorical  references  to  the  net  are  very 
numerous  :  it  was  selected  as  an  appropriate  image 
ol"  the  subtle  devices  of  the  enemies  of  God  on  the 
one  hand  {c.  g.  Ps.  ix.  15,  xxv.  15,  xxxi.  4),  and 
of  the  uuavei  table  vengeance  of  God  on  the  other 
hand  (Lam.  i.  13;  Ez.  xii.  13;  Hos.  vii.  12). 

We  must  still  notice  the  use  of  the  tenn  sehac, 
in  an  architectural  sense,  applied  to  the  open  orna- 
mental work  about  the  capital  of  a  pillar  (1  K. 
vii.  17),  and  described  in  similar  terms  by  Josephus, 
hiKTvov  iKarri  xi^'^e'?  irepi.TreTrXe'yfXfuou  {Ant. 
viii.  3,  §4).    '  [W.  L.  B.] 

NETH'ANEEL  ("PN^nj  :  NaOava-fiX  :  Nath- 
anael).  1.  The  son  of  Zuar,  and  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar  at  the  time  of  the  ExodiLs.  With  his 
54,400  men  his  post  in  the  camp  was  on  the  east, 
next  to  the  camp  of  Judah,  which  they  followed  in 

""  Prov.  i.  17,  is  accurately  as  follows: — "Surely  in  the 
eyes  of  any  bird  the  net  is  spread  for  nothing."  As  it 
stands  in  the  A.  Y.  it  is  simply  contrary  to  fact.  This  is 
one  of  the  admirable  emendations  of  the  late  Mr.  Bernard. 
(See  Mason  and  Bernard's  Hubrew  Grammar.) 

"  This  is  the  received  interpretation.  Bocluut  (Pluileg, 
ii.  1)  gives  a  more  active  meaning  to  the  words,  "  Those 


NETHINIM 

the  march.  The  same  oder  was  observed  in  the 
offerings  at  the  dedication  of  the  tabernacle,  when 
Nethaneel  followed  Nahshon  the  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Num.  i.  8,  ii.  5,  vii.  18,  23,  x.  15). 

2.  The  fourth  son  of  Jesse  and  brother  of  David 
(1  Chr.  ii.  14). 

3.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of  David  who  blew  the 
trumpet  before  the  ark,  when  it  was  brought  from 
the  house  of  Obed-edom  (I  Chr.  x-v.  24). 

4.  A  Levite,  father  of  Shemaiah  the  scribe  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  sxiv.  6). 

5.  The  fifth  son  of  Obed-edom  the  doorkeeper  of 
the  ark  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  4). 

6.  One  of  the  princes  of  Judah,  whom  Jehosha- 
phat  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign  sent  to  teach  in 
the  cities  of  his  kingdom  (2  Chr.  x^ii..?). 

7.  A  chief  of  the  Levites  in  the  reign  of  Josiah, 
who  took  part  in  the  solemn  passover  kept  by  that 
king  (2  Chr.  xxxx.  9). 

8.  A  priest  of  the  family  of  Pashur  in  the  tinle 
of  i^zra  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x. 
22).     He  is  called  Nathanael  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  22. 

9.  The  representative  of  the  priestly  family  of 
Jedaiah  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  21). 

10.  A  Levite,  of  the  sons  of  Asaph,  who  with 
his  brethren  played  upon  the  musical  instruments 
of  David,  in  the  solemn  procession  which  accom- 
panied the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  36).     [W.  A,  W.] 

NETHANI'AH(n^*in3,  and  in  the  lengthened 
form  -in^jni,  Jer.  xl.  8,  xii.  9  :   Nadavias,   exc. 

2  K.  xxv.  23,  where  the  Alex.  MS.  has  MaOeavias: 
Nathania).  1.  The  son  of  Elishama,  and  father 
of  Ishmael  who  murdered  Gedaliah  (2  K.  xxv.  23, 
25;  Jer.  xl.  8,  14,  15,  xh.  1,  2,  6,  7,  9,  10,  11, 
12,  15,  16,  18;.  He  was  of  the  royal  family  of 
Judah. 

2.  (•in''3n3,  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  12).  One  of  the  four 
sons  of  Asaph  the  minstrel,  and  chief  of  the  5th  of 
the  24  coui-ses  into  which  the  Temple  choir  was 
divided  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2,  12). 

3.  (■liT'jnj).  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  who  with  eight  others  of  his  tribe  and  two 
priests  accompanied  the  princes  of  Judah  who  were 
sent  by  the  king  through  the  country  to  teach  the 
law  of  Jehovah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  8). 

4.  The  father  of  Jehudi  (Jer.  xxxvi.  14). 

NBTH'INIM  (D"'rri:  :  Naen/aiot,  Neh.  xi.  21 ; 

NadLvl/j.,  Ezr.  ii.  43;  ol  StSojucVoi,  1  Chr.  ix.  2: 
Natliinaei).  As  applied  specifically  to  a  distinct 
body  of  men  connected  'with  the  services  of  the 
Temple,  this  name  first  meets  us  in  the  later  books 
of  the  0.  T.  ;  in  1  Chron.,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah. 
The  word,  and  the  ideas  embodied  in  it  may,  how- 
ever, be  traced  to  a  much  earlier  period.  As  derived 
fiom  the  verb  \T\l,  ndthan  (  =  give,  set  apart,  dedi- 
cate), it  Was  applied  to  those  who  were  specially 
appointed  to  the  litiugiail  offices  of  the  Tabernacle.* 
Like  m;uiy  other  official  titles  it  appears  to  have  had 
at  first  a  much  higher  value  than  that  afterwards 

]  wlio  have  devoted  themselves."  So  Theodoret  (Qu.  in 
J  1  I'aralip.),  who  explains  the  name  as=S6cris  'laiu,  tovt- 

e'oTi,  ToC  oi/TO?  ®eoO,  and  looljs  on  them  as  Israelites  of 
i  other  tribes  voluntarily  giving  themselves  to  the  service 
I  of  the  Sanctuary.  This  is,  however,  without  adequate 
j  grounds,   and  at  variance  with  facts.    Comp.  Pfeffinger 

De  Nathinaeis,  in  Ugoliui's  Thesaurus,  vol.  xiii. 


NETHINIM 

assigned  to  it.  We  must  uot  fui-get  that  the  Levites 
were  given  to  Aai'on  and  liis  sons,  i.e.  to  the  priests 
as  an  order,  and  were  accordingly  the  first  Nethinim 
(DJ-IDJ,  Num.  iii.  9,  viii.  19).  At  first  they  were 
the  only  attend.mts,  and  their  work  must  have  been 
laborious  enough.  The  first  conquests,  however, 
brought  them  their  share  of  the  captive  slaves  of  the 
Midianites,  and  320  were  given  to  them  as  having 
charge  of  the  Tabernacle  (Num.  xxxi.  47),  while  32 
only  were  assigned  specially  to  the  priests.  This 
disposition  to  devolve  the  more  laborious  offices  of 
their  ritual  upon  slaves  of  another  race  showed  itself 
again  in  the  treatment  of  the  Gibeonites.  They,  too, 
were  "  given  "  (A.  V.  "  made  ")  to  be  "  hewers  of 
wood  and  drawers  of  water  "  for  the  house  of  God 
(.Josh.  ix.  27),  and  the  addition  of  so  large  a  number 
(the  population  of  five  cities)  must  have  relieved  the 
Levites  from  much  that  had  before  been  burdensome. 
We  know  little  or  nothing  as  to  their  treatment. 
It  \v;is  a  matter  of  necessity  that  they  should  be 
circumcised  (Exod.  xii.  48),  and  conform  to  the 
religion  of  their  conquerors,  and  this  might  at  first 
seem  hard  enough.  On  the  other  hand  it  must  be 
remembered  that  they  presented  themselves  as  re- 
cognizing the  supremacy  of  Jehovah  (Josh.  ix.  9), 
and  that  for  many  generations  the  remembrance  of 
the  solemn  covenant  entered  into  with  them  made 
men  look  with  horror  on  the  shetlding  of  Gibeonite 
blood  (2  Sam.  xxi.  9),  and  protected  them  from 
much  outrage.  No  addition  to  the  number  thus 
employed  appears  to  have  been  made  during  the 
])eriod  of  the  Judges,  and  they  continued  to  be 
known  by  their  old  name  as  the  Gibeonites.  The 
want  of  a  further  supply  was  however  felt  when 
the  reorganization  of  worship  commenced  under 
David.  Either  the  massacre  at  Nob  had  involved 
the  Gibeonites  as  well  as  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii. 
19),  or  else  they  had  fallen  victims  to  some  other 
outburst  of  Saul's  fury,  and,  though  there  were 
survivors  (2  Sam.  x.xi.  2),  the  number  was  likely 
to  be  quite  inadequate  for  the  greater  stateliness 
of  the  new  worship  at  Jerusalem.  It  is  to  this 
period  accordingly  that  the  origin  of  the  class 
beiiring  this  name  may  be  traced.  The  Nethinim 
were  those  "  whom  David  and  the  princes  ap- 
pointed (Heb.  gave)  for  the  service  of  the  Levites" 
(Ezr.  viii.  20).  Analogy  would  lead  us  to  conclude 
that,  in  this  as  in  the  former  instances,  these  were 
either  prisoners  taken  in  war,  or  else  some  of  the 
remnant  of  the  Canaanites  ;  ^  but  the  new  name  in 
which  the  old  seems  to  have  been  merged  lehves  it 
uncertain.  The  foreign  character  of  the  names  in 
Ezr.  ii.  43-54  is  unmistakeable,  but  was  equally 
natural  on  either  hypothesis. 

From  this  time  the  Nethinim  probably  lived 
within  the  precini'ts  of  the  Temple,  doing  its  rougher 
work,  imd  so  enabling  the  Levites  to  take  a  higher 
position  as  the  religious  represenbitives  and  in- 
structors of  the  people.  [Lp:vitks,]  They  answered 
in  some  degree  to  the  male  Up65ov\oi,  who  were 
attjiched  to  Greek  and  Asiatic  temples  (Josephus, 
Ant.  xi.  5,  §1,  uses  this  word  of  them  in  his  para- 
phrase of  the  decree  of  Darius),  to  the  grave- 
diggers,  gate-keepers,  bell-ringers  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Ewald  (Altcrthiiin.^p.  299)  refere  to  the 
custom  of  the  moie  wenlthy  Arabs  dediaiting  slaves 
to  the  special  service  of  the  Kjuiba  at  Mecai,  or  the 
Sepulchre  of  the  Prophet  at  Medina. 

b  The  identity  of  the  Gibeonites  and  Nethinim,  ex- 
cluding the  idea  of  any  luldilion,  is,  however,  nialntaint'd 
by  I'l'i'IHngcr. 


NETHINIM 


503 


The  example  set  by  David  was  followed  by  his 
successor.  In  close  union  with  the  Nethinim  in 
the  st;itistics  of  the  return  from  the  captivity, 
attiiched  like  them  to  the  Priests  and  Levites,  we 
find  a  body  of  men  described  as  "  Solomon's  ser- 
vants" (Ezr.  ii.  55;  Nehem.  vii.  60,  xi.  3),  and 
these  we  may  identify,  without  much  risk  of  error, 
with  some  of  the  "  people  that  were  left "  of  the 
earlier  inhabitants  whom  he  made  "  to  pay  tribute 
of  bond-service  "  (1  K.  ix.  20  ;  2  Chron.  viii.  7). 
The  ordei-  in  which  they  are  placed  might  even  seem 
to  indicate  that  they  stood  to  the  Nethinim  in  the 
same  relation  that  the  Nethinim  did  to  the  Levites. 
Assuming,  as  is  probable,  that  the  later  liabbinic 
teaching  represents  the  traditions  of  an  earlier  period, 
the  Nethinim  appear  never  to  have  lost  the  stigma 
of  their  Canaanite  origin.  They  had  no  jus  connubii 
(Gemar.  Babyl.  Jeham.  ii.  4  ;  Kiddnsch.  iv.  1,  in 
Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  de  Neth.),  and  iUicit  intercourse 
with  a  woman  of  Israel  was  punished  with  scourging 
(Carpzov,  1.  c.) ;  but  their  quasi-sacred  position 
raised  them  in  some  measure  above  the  level  of  their 
race,  and  in  the  Jewish  order  of  precedence,  while 
they  stood  below  the  Mamzerim  (bastards,  or  children 
of  mixed  marriages),  they  were  one  step  above  the 
Proselytes  fi-esh  come  from  lieathenism  and  eman- 
cipated slaves  (Gemar.  Hieros.  Horajoth,  fol.  482 ; 
in  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heh.  ad  Matt,  xxiii.  14).  They 
were  thus  all  along  a  servile  and  subject  caste.  The 
only  period  at  which  they  rise  into  anything  like 
prominence  is  that  of  the  retuni  from  the  captivity. 
In  that  return  the  priests  were  conspicuous  and  nu- 
merous, but  the  Levites,  for  some  reason  unknown 
to  us,  hung  back.  [Levites.]  Under  Zerubbabel 
there  were  but  341  to  4289  priests  (Ezr.  ii.  3(5-42). 
Under  Ezra  none  came  up  at  all  till  after  a  special 
and  solemn  call  (Ezr.  viii.  15).  The  services  of 
the  Nethinim  were  consequently  of  more  im- 
porttmce  (Ezr.  viii.  17),  but  in  their  case  also, 
the  small  number  of  those  that  joined  (392  under 
Zerubbabel,  220  under  Ezra,  including  "  Solomon's 
servants")  indicates  that  many  preferred  remaining 
in  the  land  of  their  exile  to  returning  to  their  old 
service.  Those  that  did  come  were  consequently 
thought  worthy  of  special  mention.  The  names  of 
their  fimiilies  were  registered  with  as  much  care  as 
those  of  the  priests  (Ezr.  ii.  43-58).  They  were 
admitted,  in  strict  conformity  to  the  letter  of  the 
rule  of  Dent.  xxix.  11,  to  jom  in  the  great  covenant 
with  which  the  restored  people  inaugurated  its  new 
life  (Neh.  x.  28).  They,  like  the  Priests  and 
Levites,  were  exempted  from  taxation  by  the  Persian 
Satraps  (Ezr.  vii.  24).  They  were  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  chief  of  their  own  body  (Ezr.  ii.  43  ; 
Nehem.  vii.  46).  They  took  an  active  part  in  the 
work  of  rebuilding  the  city  (Nehem.  iii.  26),  and 
the  tower  of  Oishel,  convenient  from  its  proximity 
to  the  Temple,  was  assigned  to  some  of  them  as  a 
residence  (Neh.  xi.  21),  while  others  dwelt  with 
the  Levites  in  their  cities  (Ezr.  ii.  70).  They  took 
their  place  in  the  chronicles  of  the  time  as  next  in 
order  to  the  Levites  (1  Chr.  ix.  2). 

Neither  in  the  Apocrypha,  nor  in  the  N.  T.,  nor 
yet  in  the  works  of  the  Jewish  historian,  do  we  find 
any  additional  information  about  the  Nethinim. 
The  latter,  however,  mentions  incidentally  a  tl-stival,- 
that  of  the  Xylophoria,  or  wood  carrying,  of  which 
we  may  perhaps  recognize  the  beginning  in  Neh. 
X.  34,  and  in  which  it  was  tiic  custom  for  all  the 
people  to  bring  large  supplies  of  firewood  tor  the 
sacrifices  of  the  year.  This  may  ha\e  been  designed 
to  relieve  them.     They  were  at  any  rate  likely  to 


504 


NETOPHAH 


bear  a  couspicuous  part  in   it  (Joseph.   B.  J .    ii. 
17,  §G). 

Two  hypotheses  connected  with  the  Nethiniiii  are 
mentioned  by  Pfeifinger  in  the  exhaustive  mono- 
graph already  cited:  (1),  that  ol'  Forster  {Diet. 
ire&/-.,  Basil,  1564),  that  the  first  so  called  were 
sons  of  David,  i.  e.,  younger  branches  of  the  royal 
house  to  whom  waa  gkcii  the  defence  of  the  city 
and  the  sanctuary;  (2),  that  of  Boulduc  (referred 
to  also  by  Selden,  Be  Jure  Nat.  et  Gent.),  connected 
apparently  with  (1 ),  that  Joseph  the  husband  of  the 
Virgin  was  one  of  tJiis  class.''  [E.  H.  P.] 

NET'OPHAH  [TidO-i:  -N^ro^pd,  'Arwcpd; 
Alex.  Nec^tora :  Netnpha),  a  town  the  name  of  which 
occurs  only  in  the  catalogue  of  those  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  from  the  Captivity  (Ezr.  ii.  22 ; 
Neh.  vii.  26;  1  Esdr.  v.  18).  But,  though  not 
directly  mentioned  till  so  late  a  period,  Netophah 
was  really  a  much  older  place.  Two  of  David's 
guard,  Maiiarai  and  Helkb  or  Heldai,  leaders 
also  of  two  of  the  monthly  courses  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
13,  15),  were  Netophathites,  and  it  was  the  native 
place  of  at  least  one  »  of  the  captains  who  remained 
under  arms  near  Jenisalem  after  its  destruction  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.  The  "  villages  of  the  Netopha- 
thites"  were  the  residence  of  the  Levites  (1  Chr. 
ix.  16),  a  foct  which  shows  that  they  did  not  confine 
themselves  to  the  ])laces  named  in  "the  catalogues  of 
Josh.  xxi.  and  1  Chr.  vi.  From  another  notice  we 
learn  that  the  particular  Levites  who  inhabited 
these  villages  were  singers  (Neh.  sii.  28). 

'J'hat  Netophah  belonged  to  Judah  appears  from 
the  fact  that  the  two  heroes  above  mentioned  be- 
longed, the  one  to  the  Zarhites — that  is,  the  great 
family  of  Zerah,  one  of  the  chief  houses  of  the 
tribe — and  the  other  to  Othuiel,  the  son-in-law  of 
Caleb.  To  judge  from  Neh.  vii.  26  it  was  in  the 
Jieighbourliood  of,  or  closely  connected  with,  Beth- 
lehem, which  is  also  implied  by  1  Chr.  ii.  54, 
though  the  precise  force  of  the' latter  statement 
cannot  now  be  made  out.  The  number  of  Neto- 
jJiathites  who  returned  from  Captivity  is  not  exactly 
ascertainable,  but  it  seems  not  to  have  been  more 
than  sixty — so  that  it  was  piobably  only  a  small 
village,  which  indeed  may  account  for  its  having 
esciiped  mention  in  tlie  lists  of  Joshua. 

A  i-emarkable  tiadition,  of  which  there  is  no 
trace  in  the  Bible,  but  which  nevertheless  is  not 
improbably  authentic,  is  preserved  by  the  Jewish 
authors,  to  the  effect  that  the  Netophathites  slew 
tiie  guards  which  had  been  placed  by  Jeroboam  on 
the  roads  leading  to  Jerusalem  to  stop  the  passage 
of  the  firstfruits  from  the  country  villages  to  the 
Temple  (Targum  on  1  Chr.  ii.  54 ;  on  Ruth  iv.  20, 
and  Eccl.  iii.  11).  Jeroboam's  obstruction,  which 
.  is  said  to  have  remained  in  force  till  the  i-eign  of 
lloshea  (see  the  notes  of  Beck  to  Targum  on  1  Chr. 
ii.  54),  was  commemorated  by  a  fast  on  the  23rd 
Sivan,  which  is  still  retained  in  the  Jewish  calendar 
(see  the  calendar  given  by  Basnage,  Hist,  des  Juifs, 
vi.  ch.  29). 

It  is  not  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and 
although  in  the  Mishna  reference  is  made  to  the  ! 
"oil  of  Netophah"   {I'eah  7,  §1,  2),  and  to  the  ; 

"  The  only  trace  of  any  tradition  corresponding  to  this  j 
theory  is  the  description  in  the  Arabian  History  of  Joseph 
(c.  2),  according  to  which  he  is  of  the  city  of  David  and  ^ 
tlie  tribe  of  Judah,  and  yet,  on  account  of  his  wisdom  and  ' 
piety,  "  sacerdos  factus  est  in  'I'eniplo  Domini "  (Tischen- 
clorf,  Erany.  Apoc,  p.  116). 

»  Oimp.  2  K.  .\.\v.  23,  with  Jer.  \1.  8.  ! 


NETTLE 

"  valley  of  Beth  Netophah,"  in  which  artichokes 
flourished,  whose  growth  determined  the  date  of 
some  ceremonial  observance  [Sheviith  9,  §  7), 
nothing  is  said  as  to  the  situation  of  the  place. 
The  latter  may  well  be  the  present  village  of  Beit 
Nettif,  which  stands  on  the  edge  of  the  great  valley 
of  the  Wadij  es  Snrnt  (Rob.  Bib.  Res.  ii.  16,  17  ; 
Porter,  Handbk.  248)  ;  but  can  hardly  be  the  Ne- 
tophah of  the  Bible,  since  it  is  not  near  Bethlehem, 
but  in  quite  another  direction.  The  only  name  in 
the  neighbourliood  of  Bethlehem  suggestive  of  Ne- 
tophah is  that  which  appears  in  Van  de  Velde's  map 
(1858)  as  Antubch,  and  in  Tobler  (3«e  Wand.  80)  as 

Oin  Tuba  (L»»l3    -!),  attached  to  a  village  about 

2  miles  N.E.  of  Bethlehem  and  a  wady  which  falls 
therefrom  into  the  Wady  en-Nar,  or  Kidron.  [G.J 
NETO'PHATHI  (TlBbJ  :  Vat.  omits;  Alex. 
NerucpaOi :  Nethq^hati),  Neh.  xii.  28.  The  same 
word  wliich  in  other  passages  is  accurately  rendered 
"  the  Netophathite,"  except  that  here  it  is  not  ac- 
coiwpanied  by  the  article. 

NETO'PHATHITE,  THE  Cnsbjn,  in 
Chron.  TIQIDSn  :  6  i:.vTco(f>aTelTr]s,'Nepcpa6ieiT7is, 
Ne0&)(paTei,6  iK'Nerovcpdr:  Netophathites),  2 '^nm. 
xxiii.  28,  29;  2  K.  xxv.  23;  1  Chr.  xi.  30,  xxvii. 
13,  15;  Jer.  .\1.  8.  The  plural  Ibrm,  the  Neto- 
phathites (the  Hebrew  word  being  the  same  as 
the  above)  occurs  in  1  Chr.  ii.  54,  ix.  16.      [G.] 

NETTLE.     The  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of 

the  Hebrew  words  charul  and  kimmosh  or  kimosh. 

1.  Chdrill  {7Yyr\:  ^pvyava  &ypia  :^  sent  is,  vr- 
tica,  spina)  occurs  in  Job  xxx.  7 — the  patriarch 
complains  of  the  contempt  in  which  he  was  held  by 
the  lowest  of  the  people,  who,  from  poverty,  were 
obliged  to  live  on  the  wild  shrubs  of  the  desert: 
"  Among  the  bushes  they  brayed,  under  the  chaM 
they  were  gathered  together,"  and  in  Prov.  xxiv. 
31,  where  of"  the  field  of  the  slothful,"  it  is  said, 
"  it  was  all  grown  over  with  thorns  {kimmeshoniin), 
and  charulliin  had  covered  the  face  thereof;"  see  also 
Zeph.  ii.  9 :  the  curse  of  Moab  and  Ammon  is  that 
they  shall  be  "  the  breeding  o{  chdriil  and  salt-pits." 

There  is  very  great  uncertainty  as  to  the  meaning 
of  the  word  charul,  and  numerous  are  the  plants 
which  commentators  have  sought  to  identify  with 
it:  brambles,  sea-orache,  butchers'  broom,  thistles, 
have  all  been  proposed  (see  Celsius,  Hieroh.  ii.  165). 
The  generality  of  critics  and  some  modern  versions 
are  in  favour  of  the  nettle.  Some  have  objected  to 
the  nettle  as  not  being  of  a  sufficient  size  to  suit  the 
passage  in  Job  {I.  c.) ;  but  in  our  own  country  nettles 
gi  ow  to  the  height  of  six  or  even  seven  feet  when 
drawn  up  under  trees  or  hedges ;  and  it  is  worthy  of 
remark  that,  in  the  passage  of  Job  quoted  above, 
bushes  and  charul  are  associated.  Not  much  better 
founded  is  Dr.  Royle's  objection  (Kitto's  Cue.  art. 
Charul)  that  both  thorny  plants  and  nettles  must  be 
excluded,  "as  no  one  would  voluntarily  resort  to  such 
a  situation ;"  for  the  peo])le  of  whom  Job  is  speak- 
ing might  readily  be  supposed  to  resort  to  such  a 
shade,  as  in  a  sandy  desert  the  thorn-bushes  and 
tall  nettles  growing  by  tlieir  side  would  aflbrd  ;  or 
we  may  suppose  that  those  who  "  for  want  and 
famine "    were    driven    into   the    wilderness   were 


•>  4>pvyai/a  (from  (\>pvyui,  "  to  burn,"  "  to  roast,"  with 
reference  to  the  derivation  of  the  Hebrew  word)  properly 

signifies  "  dry  sticlcs,"  "  fagots." 


NEW  Mooisr 

gathered  together  under  the  nettles  for  the  purpose 
of  gathering  them  for  food,  together  with  the  sea- 
orache  and  juniper-roots  (ver.  4).  Celsius  believes 
the  charid  is  identical  with  the  Christ-thorn  (Zizij- 
phus  Faliwus) — the  Paliiims  aculentus  of  modern 
botanists — but  his  opinion  is  by  no  means  well 
founded.  The  passage  in  ProTerbs  (J.  c.)  ajipears 
to  forbid  us  identifying  the  chdrid  with  the  Faliit- 
)-us  aculeatiis;  for  the  context,  "I  went  by,  and 
lo  it  was  all  gi'own  over  with  kiinskon  and  charul- 
lim,"  seems  to  point  to  some  weed  of  quicker 
growth  than  the  plant  proposed  by  Celsius.  Dr. 
Koyle  hfis  argued  in  favour  of  some  species  of  wild 
mustard,  and  refers  the  Hebrew  word  to  one  of 
somewhat  similar  form  in  Arabic,  viz.  Khardul,  to 
which  he  ts-aces  the  English  charlock  or  hedlock,  the 
well-known  troublesome  weed.  The  Scriptural  pas- 
sages would  suit  this  inteipretation,  and  it  is  quite 
p(Ksible  that  wild  mustard  may  be  intended  by 
cliarul.  The  etymology  "=  too,  we  may  add,  is  as 
much  in  favour  of  the  wild  mustard  as  of  the  nettle, 
one  or  other  of  which  plants  appears  to  be  denoted 
by  the  Hebrew  word.  We  are  inclined  to  adopt 
i)r.  Royle's  opinion,  as  the  following  word  probably 
denotes  the  nettle. 

2.  Khninoah  or  htmosh  (^yQp,  tJ'1J3''p  :  aKavBi.va 
|uAo,  &Kav6a,  vXedpos :  urticae).  "  Very  many 
interpreters,"  says  Celsius  {Hierob.  ii.  207),  "  un- 
derstand the  nettle  hy  this  word.  Of  the  older 
Jewish  doctors,  K.  Ben  Melech,  on  Prov.  xxiv.  31, 
asserts  that  kimmosh  is  a  kind  of  thorn  (spinft) 
commonly  called  a  nettle."  The  Vulgate,  Arias 
JMontanus,  Luther,  Deodatius,"*  the  Spanish  and 
English  versions,  are  all  in  favour  of  the  nettle. 

The  word  occurs  in  Is.  xxxiv.  I'.i:  of  Edom  it  is 
said  that  "  there  shall  come  up  nettles  and  brambles 
in  the  fortresses  thereof:"  and  in  Hos.  ix.  6.  Another 
form  of  the  same  word,  kimmSshonim  ^  ("  thorns," 
A.  v.),  occurs  in  Prov.  sxiv.  31  :  the  "  field  of  the 
slothful  was  all  grown  over  with  kimmeshdnim." 
Modern  commentators  are  generally  agreed  upon 
the  signification  of  this  term,  which,  as  it  is  ad- 
mirably suited  to  all  the  Scriptural  p;issages,  may 
well  be  understood  to  denote  some  species  of  nettle 
(  Urtica).  [W.  H.] 

NEW  MOON  (B'nn,  B'nnn  ej^'xi  :  v^ofx-nvia, 

vovfirirla:  calendae,  neomenia).  The  fii-st  day  of 
tlie  lunar  month  was  observed  as  a  holy  day.  In 
addition  to  the  daily  sacrifice  there  were  olfered 
two  young  bullocks,  a  ram  and  seven  lambs  of  the 
first  year  as  a  burnt-ofiering,  with  tlie  proper  meat- 
oHerings  and  drink-oll'erings,  and  a  kid  as  a  sin- 
oJlering  (Num.  xxviii.  11-15)."  It  was  not  a  day 
of  holy  convocation  [Festivals],  and  was  not 
therefore  of  the  same  dignity  as  the  Sal.bath.  But, 
as  on  tiie  Sabbath,  trade  and  handicraft-work  were 
stopped  (Am.  viii.  5),  the  Temple  was  opened  for 
public  worship  (Ez.  xlvi.  3;  Is.  l.xvi.  23;,  and,  in 
the  kingdom  of  Israel  at  least,  the  people  seem  to 


NEW  MOON 


505 


^■1 


?-Tin,  from  ")n  ("l"in,  "  to  bum"),  "  addita  ter- 
niinatioMi'  bypochorlsLica  til."  See  t'iirst,  Ueb.  Cone. ;  of. 
urtica  ab  uro. 

<i  i.e.  the  Italian  version  of  Diodati.  We  have  often 
retained  the  T>ntin  forms  of  writers,  as  being  familiar  to 
the  readers  of  Celsius  iuul  Bochart. 

•^  D*;it:'J3i?,  plur.  from  Ilii'Op. 

"  The  day  of  the  new  moon  is  not  mentioned  in  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  or  Deuteronomy. 

••  2  K.  Iv.  23.  Wlieu  the  .Shiuiamniile  is  going  to  the 
luuphet,  her  husband  asks  her.  "  Whertforc  wilt  thou  go 


have  resorted  to  the  prophets  for  religious  instruc- 
tion.'' The  trumpets  were  blown  at  the  offering  ot 
the  special  sacrifices  for  the  day,  as  on  the  solemn 
festivals  (Num.  x.  10;  Ps.  Ixxxi.  3).  That  it 
was  an  occasion  for  state-bancjuets  may  be  inferred 
from  David's  i-egardiug  himself  lus  especially  bound 
to  sit  at  the  king's  table  at  the  new  moon  (1  Sam. 
XX.  5-24).  In  later,  if  not  in  earlier  times,  fasting 
was  intermitted  at  the  new  moons,  as  it  was  on  the 
Sabbaths  and  the  great  feasts  and  their  eves  (Jud. 
viii.  6).     [Fasts.] 

The  new  moons  are  generally  mentioned  so  as  to 
show  that  they  were  regarded  as  a  peculiar  class  of 
holy  days,  to  be  distinguished  from  the  soleiiin  feasts 
and  the  Sabbaths  (Ez.  xlv.  17;  1  Chr.  xxiii.  31; 
2  Chr.  ii.  4,  viii.  1 3,  xxxi.  3 ;  Ezr.  iii.  5 ;  Neh.  x.  33). 

The  seventh  new  moon  of  the  religious  year,  being 
that  of  Tisri,  commenced  the  civil  year,  and  had  a 
significance  and  rites  of  its  own.  It  was  a  day  of 
holy  convocation.     [Trumpets,  Feast  of.] 

By  what  method  the  commencement  of  the  month 
was  ascertained  in  the  time  of  Moses  is  uncertain. 
The  Misluia  "=  describes  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
determined  seven  times  in  the  year  by  observing 
the  first  appearance  of  the  moon,  which,  according 
to  Maimonides,  derived  its  origin,  by  tradition,  from 
Jloses,  and  continued  in  use  as  long  as  the  San- 
hedrim existed.  On'  the  30th  day  of  the  month 
watchmen  were  placed  on  commanding  heights 
round  Jerusalem  to  watch  the  sky.  As  soon  as 
each  of  them  detected  the  moon  he  hastened  to  a 
house  in  the  city,  which  was  kept  for  the  purpose, 
;uid  was  there  examined  by  the  president  of  the 
Sanhedrim.  When  the  evidence  of  the  appearance 
was  deemed  satisfactory,  the  president  rose  up  and 
formally  announced  it,  uttering  the  words,  "  It  is 
consecrated"  (K'TlpD).  The  information  was  im- 
mediately sent  throughout  the  land  from  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  by  beacon-fires  on  the  tops  of  the  hills. 
At  one  period  the  Samaritans  arc  said  to  have 
deceived  the  Jews  by  false  fires,  and  swift  mes- 
sengers were  afterwards  employed.  When  the  moon 
was  not  \isible  ou  account  of  clouds,  and  in  the  five 
months  when  the  watchmen  were  not  sent  out,  the 
month  was  considered  to  commence  on  the  morning 
of  the  day  which  followed  the  30th.  According  to 
Maimonides  the  liabbinists  altered  their  method 
when  the  Sanhedrim  ceased  to  exist,  and  have  ever 
since  determined  the  month  by  astronomical  calcu- 
lation, while  the  Caraites  have  retained  tha  old 
custom  of  depending  on  the  appearance  of  the  moou. 

The  I'eligious  observance  of  the  day  of  the  uew 
moon  may  plainly  be  regarded  as  the  consecration 
of  a  natural  division  of  time.  Such  a  usage  would 
so  readily  suggest  itself  to  the  human  mind  that  it 
is  not  wonderful  that  we  find  traces  of  it  amongst 
other  nations.  There  seems  to  be  but  little  ground 
for  founding  on  these  traces  the  notion  that  the 
Hebrews  derived  it  fi-om  the  (ientiles,  ;is  Spencer 
and  Jlichaelis  have  done ;''  and  still  less  for  attaching 


to  him  to-day?  It  is  neither  new  moon  nor  sabbtitb.' 
See  the  notes  of  Vatablus,  (irotius,  and  Keil. 

•^  Rosh  Ilashanah,  Surcnhusius,  ii.  338,  sq. 

d  The  three  passages  from  ancient  writers  which  seem 
most  to  the  point  of  those  which  are  quoted  are  in  Ma- 
crobius,  Horace,  and  Tacitus.  The  first  says,  "  Priscis 
tcmporibus  pontifici  niinorl  hacc  provincia  delegata  fnit, 
ut  novae  hmao  primum  observaret  aspcctum  visamque 
regi  sacrificulo  nuntiaret"  {Sat.  i.  15).  In  the  sccor.d  the 
day  is  rei'errcd  to  as  a  social  festival  {(jd.  iii.  23,  9)  ;  and 
in  'I'acitus  we  are  infoniud  that  the  ancient  Gcnuans 
assembled  on  the  days  of  new  and  full  moou,  considering 


506 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


to  it  any  of  thwie  symbolical  meanings  which  have 
been  imagined  by  some  other  writers  (see  Cai-pzov, 
App.  Grit.  p.  425).  Ewald  thinks  that  it  was  at 
first  a  simple  household  festival,  and  that  on  this 
account  the  law  does  not  take  much  notice  of  it.  He 
also  considers  that  there  is  some  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  day  of  the  full  moon  was  similarly  obsei-ved 
by  the  Hebiews  in  very  remote  times.  (Carpzov, 
Apparat.  Hist.  Crit.  p.  423  ;  Spencer,  De  Leij. 
Heb.  lib.  iii.  dissert,  iv. ;  Selden,  De  Ann.  Civ.  Heb. 
iv.  xi. ;  Mishna,  Eosh  Hashanah,  vol.  ii.  p.  338,  ed. 
Surenhus. ;  Bu.xtoif,  Sijnagoga  Judaica,  cap.  x.\ii.  ; 
Ewald,  Alterthiiiner,  p.  394;  Cudworth  on  the 
Lord's  Supper,  c.  iii. ;  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service, 
cap.  xi.)  \_^.  C] 

NEW  TESTAMENT.  The  origin,  history ,^ 
and  characteristics  of  the  constituent  books  and  of 
the  great  versions  of  the  N.  T.,  the  mutual  relations 
of  the  Gospels,  and  the  formation  of  the  Canon, 
are  discussed  in  other  articles.  It  is  proposed  now 
to  consider  the  Text  of  the  N.  T.  The  subject 
naturally  divides  itself  into  the  following  heads, 
which  will  be  examined  in  succession: — 

I.  The  History  of  the  Written  Text. 

§§1-11.  The  earliest  history  of  the  text. 
Autographs.  CoiTuptions.  The  text  of 
Clement  and  Origen. 

§§12-15.  Theories  of  recensions  of  the  text. 

§§16-25.  External  characteristics  of  MSS. 

§§26-29.  Enumeration  of  MSS.  §28.  Un- 
cial.    §29.  Cursive. 

§§30-40.  Classification  of  various  readings. 

n.  The  History  of  the  Printed  Text. 

§1.  The  great  periods. 

§§2-5.  §2.  The  Complutensian  Polyglott. 
§3.  The  editions  of  Erasmus.  §4.  The 
editions  of  Stephens.  §5.  Beza  and  El- 
zevir (English  version). 

§§6-10.  §6.  Walton;  Curcellaeus ;  Mill. 
§7.  Bentley.  §8.  G.  v.  Maestricht ;  Wet- 
stein.  §9.  Griesbach;  Matthaei.  §10. 
Scholz. 

§§11-13.  §11.  Lachmann.  §12.  Tischen- 
dorf.     §13.  Tregelles;   Alford. 

ni.  Principles  of  Textual  Criticism. 
§§1-9.  External  evidence. 
§§10-13.  Internal  evidence. 

IV.  The  Language  of  the  New  Testament. 


I.  The  History  of  the  Written  Text. 

1.  The  early  history  of  the  Apostolic  writings 
offers  no  points  of  distinguishing  literary  interest. 
Externally,  as  far  as  it  can  be  traced,  it  is  the  same 
as  that  of  other  contempoiary  books.  St.  Paul, 
like  Cicero  or  Pliny,  often  employed  the  services  of 
an  amanuensis,  to  whom  he  dictated  his  letters, 
affixing  the  salutation  "  with  his  own  hand " 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  21;  2  Thess.  iii.  17;  Col.  iv.  18). 
In  one  case  the  scribe  has  added  a  clause  in  his 
own  name  (Kora.  xvi.  22).  Once,  in  writing  to  the 
Galatians,  the  Apostle  appears  to  apologise  for  the 
rudeness  of  the  autograph  which  he  addressed  to 
them,  as  if  from  defective  sight  (Gal.  vi.  11).  If 
we  )jass  onwards  one  step,  it  does  not  appear  that 
any  special  care  was  taken  in  the  first  age  to  pre- 
seiTe  the  books  of  the   N.  T.   from   the   various 

them  to   be   auspicious  for  new  undertakings   (Ccn/i. 
c.  xl.). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

injuries  of  time,  or  to  insure  perfect  accuracy  of 
transcription.  They  were  given  as  a  heritage  to 
man,  and  it  was  some  time  before  men  felt  the  full 
value  of  the  gift.  The  original  copies  seem  to  have 
soon  perished ;  and  we  may  perhaps  see  in  this  a 
providential  provision  against  that  spirit  of  super- 
stition which  in  earlier  times  converted  the  symbols 
of  God's  redemption  into  objects  of  idolatry  (2  K. 
xviii.  4).  It  is  certainly  remarkable  that  in  the 
controversies  at  the  close  of  the  second  century, 
which  often  turned  upon  disputed  readings  of  Scrip- 
ture, no  appeal  was  made  to  the  Apostolic  originals. 
The  few  passages  in  which  it  has  been  supposed 
that  they  are  referred  to  will  not  bear  examination. 
Ignatius,  so  far  from  appealing  to  Christian  archives, 
distinctly  turns,  as  the  whole  context  shows,  to  the 
examples  of  the  Jewish  Church  (to,  apxaia — ad  Phi- 
lad.  8).  Tertullian  again,  when  he  speaks  of  "  the 
authentic  epistles"  of  the  Apostles  (De  Praescr. 
Haer.  xxxvi.,  "  apud  quas  ipsae  authenticae  litterae 
eorum  recitantur  "),  uses  the  term  of  the  pure  Greek 
text  as  contrasted  with  the  curient  Latin  version 
(comp.  De  Monog.  xi.,  "sciamus  plane  non  sic  esse 
in  Graeco  authcntico"  *).  The  silence  of  the  sub- 
Apostolic  age  is  made  more  striking  by  the  legends 
which  were  circulated  after.  It  was  said  that  when 
the  grave  of  Barnabas  in  Cyprus  was  opened,  in  the 
fifth  centuiy,  in  obedience  to  a  vision,  the  saint  was 
found  holding  a  (Greek)  copy  of  St.  Matthew  writ- 
ten with  his  own  hand.  The  copy  was  taken  to 
Constantinople,  and  used  as  the  standard  of  the 
sacred  text  (Credner,  Einl.  §39  ;  Assem.  Bibl.  Or. 
ii.  81).  The  autograph  copy  of  St.  John's  Gospel 
{^avrh  rh  iSit^xeipoj'  rov  evayyfXiffTOv)  was  said 
to  be  preserved  at  Ephesus  "  by  the  grace  of  God, 
and  worshipped  (irpocrKwuTai)  by  the  faithful 
there,"  in  the  fourth  century  (?),  ([Petr.  Alex.]  p. 
518,  ed.  Migne,  quoted  from  Chron.  Pasch.  p.  5)  ; 
though  according  to  another  account  it  was  found 
in  the  ruins  of  the  Temple  when  Julian  attempted 
to  rebuild  it  (Philostorg.  vii.  14).  A  similar  belief 
was  cunent  even  in  the  last  century.  It  was  said 
that  paiis  of  the  (Latin)  autograph  of  St.  Mark 
were  preserved  at  Venice  and  Prague ;  but  on 
examination  these  were  shown  to  be  fragments  of  a 
MS.  of  the  Vulgate  of  the  sixth  century  (Dobrowsky, 
Fragmentum  Pragense  Ev.  S.  Marci,    1778). 

2.  In  the  natural  course  of  things  the  Apostolic 
autographs  would  be  likely  to  perish  soon.  The 
material  which  was  commonly  used  for  letters,  the 
papyiTis-paper  to  which  St.  John  incidentally  alludes 
(2  John  12,  Sia  ^apTOu  Ka\  fiiXavos  ;  comp.  3 
John  13,  5ia  fie\avos  Koi  KaXd/xov),  was  singularly 
fragile,  and  even  the  stouter  kinds,  likely  to  be  used 
for  the  historical  books,  were  not  fitted  to  bear 
constant  use.  The  papyrus  fragments  which  have 
come  down  to  the  present  time  have  been  preserved 
under  peculiar  circumstances,  as  at  Herculaneum  or 
in  Egyptian  tombs ;  and  Jerome  notices  that  the 
library  of  Pamphilus  at  Caesarea  was  already  in 
part  destroyed  (ex  parte  coiTuptam)  when,  in  less 
than  a  century  after  its  formation,  two  presbyters 
of  the  Church  endeavoured  to  restore  the  papyiiis 
MSS.  (as  the  context  implies)  on  parchment  ("  in 
membranis,"  Hieron.  Ep.  xxxiv.  (141),  quoted  by 
Tischdf.  in  Herzog's  Encgcl.  Bibeltext  des  N.  T. 
p.  159).  Parchment  (2  Tim.  iv.  13,  fjufi^pava), 
which  was  more  durable,  was  proportionately  rarer 
and  more  costly.     And  yet  more  than  this.    In  the 


»  Giiesbaeli  (Opnscula,  ii.  69-76)  endeavours  to  show 
that  the  M'ord  simply  means  pure,  uncorrvpted. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

firet  age  the  written  word  of  the  Apostles  occupied 
no  autlioritative  position  above  their  spoken  woi-d, 
and  the  vivid  memory  of  their  personal  teaching. 
And  when  the  true  value  of  the  Apostolic  writings 
was  afterwards  revealed  by  the  progress  of  the 
Church,  then  collections  of  "  the  divine  oracles " 
would  be  chiefly  sought  for  among  Christians.  On 
all  accounts  it  seems  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
tiie  autographs  perished  daring  that  solemn  pause 
which  followed  the  Apostolic  age,  in  which  the 
idea  of  a  Christian  Canon,  parallel  and  supple- 
mentaiy  to  the  Jewish  Canon,  was  first  distinctly 
realized. 

3.  In  the  time  of  the  Diocletian  persecution  (a.d. 
303)  copies  of  the  Christian  Scriptures  were  suth- 
ciently  numerous  to  furnish  a  special  object  for  per- 
secutors, and  a  characteristic  name  to  renegades  who 
saved  themselves  by  surrendering  the  sacred  books 
{traditores,  August.  Ep.  Ixxvi.  2).  Partly,  perhaps, 
owing  to  the  destruction  thus  caused,  but  still  more 
from  the  natural  eflects  of  time,  no  MS.  of  the 
N.  T.  of  the  tii'st  three  centuries  remains.''  Some 
of  the  oldest  extant  were  cerUiinly  copied  from 
others  which  dated  from  within  this  period,  but  as 
yet  no  one  can  be  placed  further  back  than  the 
time  of  Constautine.  It  is  lecorded  of  this  monarch 
that  one  of  his  first  acts  after  the  foundation  of 
Constantinople  was  to  order  the  preparation  of  fifty 
AISS.  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  required  for  the  use 
of  the  Church,  "  on  fair  skins  (eV  Si(p04pais  ev- 
KarcuTKiiois)  by  skilful  caligraphists "  (Euseb. 
Vit.  Const,  iv.  36)  ;  and  to  the  general  use  of  this 
better  material  we  probably  owe  our  most  veneiahle 
copies,  which  are  written  on  vellum  of  singular 
excellence  and  fineness.  But  though  no  fragment 
of  the  N.  T.  of  the  first  century  still  remains,  the 
Italian  and  Egyptian  papyri,  which  are  of  that  date, 
give  a  clear  notion  of  the  c;iligraphy  of  the  period. 
In  these  the  text  is  written  in  columns,  rudely 
divided,  in  somewhat  awkward  capital  letters 
(iincials),  without  any  punctuation  or  division  of 
words.  The  iota,  which  was  afterwards  subscribed, 
is  commonly,  but  not  always,  adscribed ;  and  there 
is  no  trace  of  accents  or  breathings.  The  earliest 
MSS.  of  the  N.  T.  bear-  a  general  resemblance  to 
this  primitive  type,  and  we  may  reasonably  believe 
that  the  Apostolic  originals  were  thus  written. 
(Plate  i.  fig.  I.) 

4.  In  addition  to  the  later  MSS.,  the  earliest  ver- 
sions and  patristic  quotations  give  very  imjwrt^mt 
testimony  to  the  character  and  history  of  the  ante- 
Nicenc  text.  Express  statements  of  readings  which 
are  found  in  some  of  the  most  ancient  Christian 
writers  are,  indeed,  the  first  direct  evidence  which 
we  have,  and  are  consequently  of  the  highest  im- 
portiince.  But  till  the  last  quarter  of  the  second 
century  tliis  source  of  information  fiiils  us.  Not 
only  are  the  remains  of  Christian  literature  up  to 
that  time  extremely  scanty,  but  the  practice  of 
verbal  quotation  from  the  N.  T.  was  not  yet  pre- 
valent. The  evangelic  citations  in  the  Aj)ostolic 
Fathera  and  in  Justin  Martyr  show  that  the  oral 
tradition  was  still  as  widely  current  as  the  written 
Gospels  (Comp.  Westcott's  Canon  of  the  N.  T.  jip. 
125-195),  and  there  is  not  in  those  writers  one  ex- 
press verbal  citation  from  the  other  Apostolic  books.'^ 
This  latter  piienomenon  is  in  a  gre;\t  measure  to  be 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


507 


explained  by  the  nature  of  their  writings.  As  soon 
as  definite  controversies  arose  among  Christians,  the 
text  of  the  N.  T.  assumed  its  true  importiince.  The 
earliest  monuments  of  these  remain  in  tlie  works  of 
Irenaeus,  Hipjjolytus  (Pseudo-Origen),  and  Tertul- 
lian,  who  quote  many  of  the  arguments  of  the  lead- 
ing adversaries  of  the  Church.  Charges  of  corrupt- 
ing the  sacred  text  are  urged  on  both  sides  with 
great  acrimony.  Dionysius  of  Corinth  (j-  cir.  a.d. 
176,  ap.  Euseb.  //.  E.  iv.  23),  Irenaeus  (^cir.  a.d. 
177 ;  iv.  6, 1),  Tertullian  (cir.  A.D.  210 ;  Le  Came 
Christi,  19,  p.  385  ;  Adv.  Marc.  iv.  v.  passim), 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (cir.  a.d.  200  ;  Strom,  iv.  6, 
§41),  and  at  a  later  time  Ambrose  (cir.  a.d.  375  ; 
JJe  Spir.  S.  iii.  10),  accuse  their  opponents  of  this 
oHence ;  but  with  one  great  exception  the  instances 
which  are  brought  forward  in  support  of  the  accu- 
sation generally  resolve  themselves  into  various 
readings,  in  which  the  decision  cannot  always  be 
given  in  favour  of  the  catliolic  disputant ;  and  even 
where  the  unorthodox  reading  is  certainly  wrong 
it  can  be  shown  that  it  was  widely  spread  among 
writers  of  different  opinions  (e.  g.  Matt.  xi.  27, 
"  nee  Filium  nisi  Pater  et  cui  voluerit  Filius 
revelare  :"  John  i.  13,  ts  — iyewqdr]).  Wilful 
interpolations  or  changes  are  extremely  rare,  if  they 
exist  at  all  (comp.  Valent.  ap.  Iren.  i.  4,  5,  add. 
6e6Tr]Tes,  Col.  i.  16),  except  in  the  case  of  Marcion. 
His  mode  of  dealing  with  the  writings  of  the  N .  T., 
in  which  he  was  followed  by  his  school,  was,  as 
Tertullian  says,  to  use  the  knife  rather  than  subtlety 
of  intei-pretation.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  he  dealt  in  the  most  arbitrary  manner  with 
whole  books,  and  that  he  removed  from  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Luke  many  passages  which  were  opposed  to 
his  peculiar  views.  But  when  these  fundamental 
changes  were  once  made  he  seems  to  have  adhered 
scrupulously  to  the  text  which  he  found.  In  the 
isolated  readings  which  he  is  said  to  have  altered, 
it  happens  not  unfrequently  that  he  has  i-et;\ined 
the  right  reading,  and  that  his  opponents  are  in 
error  (Luke  v.  14  om.  rh  Swpov;  Gal.  ii.  5,  ois 
ov^e;  2  Cor.  iv.  5?).  In  very  many  cases  the 
alleged  corruption  is  a  ^'arious  reading,  more  or 
less  supported  by  other  authorities  (Luke  xii.  38, 
fairepivrj;  1  Cor.  x.  9,  XpicrTSv;  1  Thess.  ii.  15, 
add.  iSiovs).  And  where  the  changes  seem  most 
aibitiary  there  is  evidence  to  show  that  the  inter- 
polations were  not  wholly  due  to  his  school :  Luke 
xviii.  19,  d  iroT7?p ;  xxiii.  2;  1  Cor.  x.  19  (28), 
add.  lep66vTov.  (Comp.  Hahn,  Evangelium  Mar- 
cionis  ;  Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  403-486  ;  Kitschl, 
Das  Evang.  Marc.  1846  ;  Volckmar,  Das  Erang. 
Marc,  Leipsic,  1852:  but  no  examination  of  Mar- 
cion's  text  is  completely  satisfactory). 

5.  Several  very  important  conclusions  follow  from 
this  earliest  appearance  of  textual  criticism.  It  is 
in  the  first  place  evident  that  various  readings 
existed  in  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  at  a  time  prior  to_ 
all  extant  authorities.  History  atlbrds  no  tiace  of 
the  pure  Apostolic  originals.  Again,  from  the  pre- 
servation of  the  first  variations  noticed,  which  are 
otten  extremely  minute,  in  one  or  more  of  the  pi'i- 
mary  documents  still  left,  we  may  be  ceitain  that 
no  important  changes  have  been  made  in  the  sacred 
text  which  we  Ciinuot  now  detect.  The  materials 
for  ascertainino;  the  true  reading  are  found  to  be 


•>  Papyrus  fragments  of  part  of  St.  Matthew,  dating 
from  the  first  century  (??),  arc  announced  (1861)  for  pub- 
lication by  Dr.  Slmonides. 

<  111  the  ej)istle  of  I'olycarp  some  interesting  various 


readings  occur,  whicb  are  found  also  in  later  copies.  Acts 
Ii.  24,  Toi)  (JSou  for  toO  eavarvv;  1  'I'lni.  vi.  7,  aAA'  oiiSe 
for  &i)\ov  oTt  oiiSe  ;  1  John  Iv.  3,  iv  ffopKi  eA>)Au9eVai. 
Comp.  1  I'et.  i.  8  (Polyc.  ad  i'liil.  I.  4). 


508 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


complete  when  tested  by  the  earliest  witnesses. 
And  yet  further :  from  the  minuteness  of  some  of 
the  variations  which  are  urged  in  controversy,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  words  of  the  N.  T.  were  watched 
with  the  most  jealous  care,  and  that  the  least 
difterences  of  phrase  were  guarded  with  scrupulous 
and  faithful  piety,  to  be  used  in  after-time  by  that 
wide-ieaching  criticism  which  was  foreign  to  the 
spirit  of  the  first  ages.*^ 

6.  Passing  from  these  isolated  quotations  we  find 
the  first  great  witnesses  to  the  apostolic  text  in  the 
early  Syriac  and  Latin  versions,  and  in  the  rich 
quotations  of  Clement  of  AlexancWa  (t  cir.  A.D.  220 ) 
and  Origen  (a.d.  184-254).  The  versions  will  be 
treated  of  elsewhere,  and  with  them  the  Latin 
quotations  of  the  translator  of  Irenaeus  and  of 
Tertullian.  The  Greek  quotations  in  the  remains 
of  the  original  text  of  Irenaeus  and  in  Hippolytus 
are  of  great  value,  but  yield  in  extent  and  import- 
ance to  those  of  the  two  Alexandrine  lathers. 
From  the  extant  works  of  Origen  alone  no  incon- 
siderable portion  of  the  whole  N.  T.,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  St.  James,  2  Peter,  2  and  3  John,  and  the 
Apocalypse,  might  be  transcribed,  and  the  recur- 
rence of  small  variations  in  long  passages  proves 
that  the  quotations  were  accurately  made  and  not 
simply  from  memory. 

7.  The  evangelic  text  of  Clement  is  far  from 
pure.  Two  chief  causes  contributed  especially  to 
corrupt  the  text  of  the  Gospels,  the  attempts  to 
harmonize  pnrallel  narratives,  and  the  influence  of 
tradition.  The  former  assumed  a  special  import- 
ance from  the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian  (cir.  A.D.  170. 
Comp.  Hist,  of  N.T.  Canon,  358-362  ;Tischdf.  on 
Matt,  xxvii.  49) «  and  the  latter,  which  was,  as 
has  been  remarked,  very  great  in  the  time  of 
Justin  M.,  still  lingered.'  The  quotations  of 
Clement  suffer  from  both  these  disturbing  forces 
(Matt.  viii.  22,  x.  30,  xi.  27,  xix.  24,  xxiii.  27, 
XXV.  41,  X.  20,  omitted  by  Tischdf.  Luke  iii.  22), 
and  he  seems  to  have  derived  fi  om  his  copies  of  the 
Gospels  two  sayings  of  the  Lord  which  tbrm  no 
part  of  the  canonical  text.  (Comp.  Tischdf.  on  Matt. 
vi.  33;  Luke  xvi.  11).  Elsewhere  his  quotations 
are  free,  or  a  confused  mixture  of  two  naiTatives 
(Matt.  V.  45,  vi.  26,  32  f.,  xxii.  37  ;  Mark  xii.  43), 
but  in  innumerable  places  he  has  preserved  the  true 
reading  (Matt.  v.  4,  5,  42,  48,  viii.  22,  xi.  17, 
xiii.  25,  xxiii.  26  ;  Acts  ii.  41,  xvii.  26).  His  quo- 
tations from  the  Epistles  are  of  the  very  highest 
value.  In  these  tradition  had  no  prevailing  power, 
though  Tatian  is  said  to  have  altered  in  parts  the 
language  of  the  Epistles  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  29)  ; 
and  the  text  was  left  comparatively  free  from  cor- 
ruptions. Against  the  few  false  readings  which  he 
supports  {e.g.  1  Pet.  ii.  3,  Xpiirrt^s ;  Rom.  iii.  26, 
'XTlffovv;  viii.  11,  Sto  rod  ivoiK.  irj/.)  may  be 
brought  forward  a  long  list  of  passages  in  which 
he  combines  with  a  few  of  the  best  authorities  in 
upholding  the  true  text  {e.g.  1  Pet.  ii.  2;  Rom. 
ii.  17,  X.  3,  XV.  29  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  13,  vii.  3,  5,  35,  39, 
viii.  2,  X.  24). 

8.  But   Origen   stands  as   far   first   of  all  the 


d  Irenaeus  notices  two  various  readings  of  importance, 
in  which  he  maintains  tlie  true  test,  Matt.  i.  18,  toO  Se 
XpicTToC  (iii.  16,  2),  Apoc.  xiii.  18  (v.  30,  1). 

The  letter  of  Ptolemaeus  (cir.  a.d.  150)  to  Flora  (Epiph. 
i.  216)  contains  some  important  early  variations  in  the 
evangelic  text.  , 

"  Jerome  notices  the  result  of  this  in  his  time  in  strong 
terms,  I'raef.  in  Erang. 

f  To  what  extent  tradition  might  modify  the  tuirent 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

antc-Niceue  fathers  in  critical  authority  as  he  does 
in  commanding  genius,  and  his  writings  are  an 
almost  inexhaustible  storehouse  for  the  history  of 
the  text.  In  many  places  it  seems  that  the  printed 
text  of  his  works  has  been  modernized ;  and  till  a 
new  and  thorough  collation  of  the  JISS.  has  been 
made,  a  doubt  must  remain  whether  his  quotations 
have  not  suliered  by  the  hands  of  scribes,  as  the 
MSS.  of  the  N.  T.  have  surtCi'eJ,  though  in  a  less 
degree.  The  testimony  which  Origen  bears  as  to 
the  coiTuption  of  the  text  of  the  Gospels  in  his 
time  ditiers  from  the  general  statements  which 
have  been  already  noticed  as  being  the  deliberate 
judgment  of  a  scholar  and  not  the  plea  of  a  con- 
troversialist. "  As  the  case  stands,"  he  says,  "  it 
is  obvious  that  the  difference  between  the  copies  is 
considerable,  partly  from  the  carelessness  of  indi- 
vidual scribes,  partly  from  the  wicked  daring  of 
some  in  correcting  what  is  written,  partly  also 
from  [the  changes  made  by]  those  who  add  or 
remove  what  seems  good  to  them  in  the  process  of 
correction  "  b'  Orig.  In  Matt.  t.  xv.  §14).  In  the 
case  of  the  LXX.,  he  adds,  he  removed  or  at  least 
indicated  those  corruptions  by  a  comparison  of 
"editions"  (e/cSdcrets),  and  we  may  believe  that 
he  took  equal  care  to  ascertain,  at 'least  for  his 
own  use,  the  true  te.xt  of  the  N.  T.,  though  he 
did  not  venture  to  arouse  the  prejudice  of  his 
contemporaries  by  openly  revising  it,  as  the  old 
translation  adds  ( In  Matt.  xv.  vet.  int.  "  in  exem- 
plaribusautem  Novi  Testament!  hoc  ipsum  me  posse 
facere  sine  pei  iculo  non  putavi ").  Even  in  the  form 
in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us,  the  writings 
of  Origen,  as  a  whole,  contain  the  noblest  early 
memorial  of  the  apostolic  text.  And,  though  there 
is  no  evidence  that  he  published  any  recension  of 
the  text,  yet  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  wrote  out 
copies  of  the  N.  T.  with  his  own  hand  (Redepen- 
ning,  Origenes,  ii.  184),  which  were  spread  widely 
in  after  time.  Thus  Jerome  appeals  to  "  the 
copies  of  Adamantius,"  i.  e.  Origen  (/»  Mat.  xxiv. 
36;  Gal.  iii.  1),  and  the  copy  of  Pamphiius  can 
hardly  have  been  other  than  a  copy  of  Origeu's  text 
(Cod.  H3  Subscription,  Inf.  §26).  From  Pamphiius 
the  text  passed  to  Eusebius  and  Euthalius,  and  it  is 
scarcely  rash  to  believe  that  it  can  be  traced,  though 
inrperfectly,  in  existing  MSS.  as  C  L.  (Comp. 
Griesbach,  Sgmb.  Crit.  i.  Ixxvi.  ff. ;   cxxx.  ff.) 

9.  In  thirteen  cases  (Xorton,  Genuineness  of  the 
Gospels,  i.  234-236)  Origen  has  expressly  noticed 
varieties  of  reading  in  the  Gospels  (Matt.  viii.  28, 
.xvi.  20,  xviii.  1,  xxi.  5,  xxi.  9,  15,  xxvii.  17  ; 
Mark  iii.  18;  Luke  i.  46,  ix.  48,  .xiv.  19,  x.\iii.' 
45  ;  John  i.  3,  4 ;  28;.''  In  three  of  these  passages 
the  variations  which  he  notices  are  no  longer  found 
in  our  Greek  copies  (Matt.  xxi.  9  or  15,  o'[k(j>  for 
uiijJ ;  Tregelles,  ad  loc.\  Mark  iii.  18  (ii.  14), 
Ae/S^f  rhv  rov  'A\<p.  '?)  ;  Luke  i.  46,  'EAicra^eT 
for  Mapidix ;  so  in  some  Latin  copies)  ;  in  seven 
our  copies  are  still  divided  ;  in  two  (Matt.  viii.  28, 
raSaprivoov ;  John  i.  28,  Bridafiapa)  the  reading 
which  was  only  found  in  a  few  JISS.  is  now 
widely    spread  :    in   the    remaining   place    (INIatt. 


text  is  still  clearly  seen  from  the  CoJex  Bezae  and  some 
Latin  copies,  which  probably  give  a  text  dating  in  essence 
from  the  close  of  the  2nd  century. 

8, These  words  seem  to  refer  to  the  professional  cor- 
rector (StOpffojT^'!). 

!>  To  these  Mr.  Hort  (to  whom  the  writer  owes  many 
susgestions  and  corrections  in  this  article)  adds  Matt.  v. 
22,  from  Cramer,  Cat.  in  Eph.  iv.  31,  where  Origen 
blames  the  insertion  of  cik^. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


509 


xxvii.  17,  'Irjcrovv  Bapa^^av)  a  tew  copies  of  no 
great  age  retain  the  interpolation  which  was  found 
in  his  time  "  in.veiy  ancient  copies."  It  is  more 
remarkable  that  Origen  asserts,  in  answer  to  Celsus, 
that  our  Lord  is  nowhere  called  "  the  carpenter" 
in  the  Gospels  circulated  in  the  churches,  though 
this  is  undoubtedly  the  true  reading  in  Mark  vi.  3 
(Orig.  c.  Cels.  vi.  36). 

10.  The  evangelic  quotations  of  Origen  are  not 
wholly  free  from  the  admixture  of  traditional 
glosses  which  have  been  noticed  in  Clement,  and 
often  present  a  confusion  of  parallel  passages  (Matt. 
V.  44,  vi.  (33),  vii.  21  «'.,  xiii.  11,  xxvi.  27  f.  ; 
1  Tim.  iv.  1);  but  there  is  little  difficulty  in  se- 
parating his  genuine  text  from  these  natural  cor- 
ruptions, and  a  few  references  are  sufficient  to  indi- 
cate its  extreme  importance  (Matt.  iv.  10,  vi.  13, 
XV.  8,  35  ;  Mark  i.  2,  x.  29  ;  Luke  xxi.  19  ;  John 
vii.  39;  Acts  x.  10  ;  Rom.  viii.  28). 

11.  In  the  Epistles  Origen  once  notices  a  striking 
variation  in  Heb.  ii.  9,  x'^P^^  ^^^^  ^'^'"  X^P'-'^'-  ^^ov, 
which  is  still  attested ;  but,  apart  fiom  the  specific 
reference  to  variations,  it  is  evident  that  he  himself 
used  MSS.  at  different  times  which  varied  in  many 
details  (Mill,  Profc^/jr.  §687).  Griesbach,  who  h;is 
investigated  this  fact  with  the  gi-eatest  care  {Mele- 
tema  i.  appended  to  Coinm.  Crit.  ii.  ix.-xL),  seems 
to  have  exaggerated  the  extent  of  these  differences 
while  he  establishes  their  existence  satisfactorily. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  Origen's  time  the 
variations  in  the  N.  T.  MS8.,  which  we  have  seen 
to  have  existed  from  the  earliest  attainable  date, 
and  which  Origen  describes  as  considerable  and  wide- 
spread, were  beginning  to  lead  to  the  formation  of 
specific  groups  of  copies. 

Though  the  materials  for  the  history  of  the  text 
during  the  first  three  centuries  are  abundant, 
nothing  has  been  wi-itten  in  detail  on  the  subject 
since  the  time  of  Mill  i^Proleijg.  240  ff.)  and  R.  Simon 

{Histoire  Critique 1685-93).     What  is 

wanted  is  nothing  less  than  a  complete  collection  at 
full  length,  from  MS.  authority,  of  all  the  ante- 
Nicene  Greek  quotations.  These  would  form  a 
centre  round  which  the  variations  of  the  versions 
and  Latin  quotations  might  be  grouped.  A  fiist 
step  towards  this  has  been  made  by  Anger  in  his 

Si/nopsis  Em,  Matt.    Mure,   Luc 1851. 

The  Latin  quotations  are  well  given  by  Sabatier, 
Bihliorum  Sacrorum  Latinae  versiones  cmtiquae, 
1751. 

12.  The  most  ancient  MSS.  and  versions  now 
extant  exhibit  the  characteristic  differences  which 
have  been  found  to  exist  in  different  parts  of  the 
works  of  Origen.  These  cannot  have  had  their 
source  later  than  the  beginning  of  the  tliird  cen- 
tury, and  pi-obably  were  much  earlier.  In  chissical 
texts,  where  the  MSS.  are  sufficiently  numerous, 
it  is  generally  possible  to  determine  a  very  few 
primary  sources,  standing  in  definite  )elations  to 
one  another,  from  which  the  other  copies  can  be 
shown  to  flow ;  and  from  these  the  scholar  is  able 
to  discover  one  source  of  all.  In  the  case  of 
the  N.  T.  the  authorities  for  the  text  are  infi- 
nitely more  varied  and  extensive  than  elsewhere, 
and  the  question  has  been  laised  whether  it  may 
not  be  possible  to  distribute  them  in  like  manner 
and  divine  from  later  documents  the  earliest  his- 
tory of  the  text.  Various  answers  have  been  made 
which  are  quite  valueless  as  (i\r  as  they  profess  to 
rest  on  historical  evidence ;  and  yet  are  all  more 
or  less  interesting  as  cxjilaining  the  true  conditions 
of   the    problem.      The   chief   facts,    it    must    be 


noticed,  are  derived  from  later  documents,  but  the 
question  itself  belongs  to  the  last  half  of  the  second 
century. 

Bengel  was  the  first  (1734)  who  pointed  out  the 
affinity  of  certain  groups  of  MSS.,  which,  as  he  re- 
marks, must  have  arisen  before  the  first  versions  were 
made  {Apparatus  Criticus,  ed.  Burk,  p.  425). 
Originally  he  distinguished  three  families,  of  wliich 
the  Cod.  Alex.  (A),  the  Graeco-Latin  MSS.,  and 
the  mass  of  the  more  recent  MSS.  were  respec- 
tively the  types.  At  a  later  time  (1737)  he 
adopted  the  simpler  division  of  "  two  nations,"  the 
Asiatic  and  the  Ati-ican.  In  the  latter  he  included 
Cod.  Alex.,  the  Graeco-Latin  MSS.,  the  Aethiopic, 
Coptic  [Memphitic],  and  Latin  versions :  the  mass 
of  the  remaining  authorities  formed  the  Asiatic 
class.  So  far  no  attempt  was  made  to  trace  the 
history  of  the  groups,  but  the  genei'al  agreement  of 
the  most  ancient  witnesses  against  the  more  recent,' 
a  tact  which  Bentley  announced,  was  distinctly 
asserted,  though  Bengel  was  not  preparal  to  accept 
the  ancient  reading  as  necessarily  true.  Semler 
contributed  nothing  of  value  to  Bengel's  theory, 
but  made  it  more  widely  known  (Spicilef/iuin  Ob- 
servationum,  4'C.,  added  to  his  edition  of  Wetstein's 
Libelli  ad  Crisin  atqne  Int.  JV.  T.  1766  ;  Appa- 
ratus, ^c.  1767).  The  honour  of  carefully  deter- 
mining the  relations  of  critical  authorities  for  the 
N.  T.  text  belongs  to  Griesbach.  This  great 
scholar  gave  a  summary  of  his  theory  in  his 
Historia  Text.  Gr.  Epist.  Paul.  {Mil,  Opmc. 
ii.  1-135)  and  in  the  preface  to  his  first  edition  of 
the  Greek  Test.  His  earlier  essay.  Dissert.  Crit.  de 
Codd.  quat.  Evang.  Origenianis  (1771,  Opusc.  i.), 
is  incomplete.  According  to  Griesbach  (xVou.  Test. 
Praef.  pp.  Ixx.  tf.)  two  distinct  recensions  of  the 
Gospels  existed  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century :   the  Alexandrine,  represented  by  B  C  L, 

1,  13,  33,  69,  106,  the  Coptic,  Aethiop.,  Arm., 
and  later  Syrian  versions,  and  the  quotations  of 
Clem.  Alex.,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Cyril.  Alex.,  Isid. 
Pelus.  ;  and  the  Western,  represented  by  D,  and 
in  part  by  1,  13,  69,  the  ancient  Latin  version 
and  Fathers,  and  sometimes  by  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic  versions.  Cod.  Alex,  was  to  be  regarded 
as  giving  a  more  recent  (ConstantinopoHtan)  text 
in  the  (iospels.  As  to  the  origin  of  the  variations 
in  the  text,  Griesbach  supposed  that  copies  were 
at  first  derived  from  the  separate  autographs  or 
imperfect  collections  of  the  apostolic  books.  These 
were  gradually  interpolated,  especially  as  they 
were  intended  for  private  use,  by  glosses  of  various 
kinds,  till  at  length  authoritative  editions  of  the 
collection  of  the  Gospels  and  the  letters  (evayye- 
Xiov,  6  dir6(rro\os,  rb  aTroaroXiKdv)  were  made. 
These  gave  in  the  main  a  pure  text,  antl  thus  two 
classes  of  MSS.  were  afterwards  current,  those  de- 
rived from  the  interpolated  copies  (  Western),  and 
those  derived  from  the  evayye\ioy  and  airoffro- 
\ik6u  (Alexandrine,  Eastern;  Opusc.  ii.  77-99; 
Mcletcinuta,  xliv.).  At  a  later  time  (Jriesbach 
rejected  these  historical  conjectures  {Nov,  Test.  ed. 

2,  1790;  yet  comp.  Mcletcm.  I.e.),  and  n>peated 
with  greater  care  and  fulness,  from  his  enlarged 
knowledge  of  the  authorities,  the  threefold  division 
which  ho  had  originally  made  (.V.  T.  i.  Praef. 
Ixx.-lxxvii.  ed.  Schulz).  At  tha  same  time  he  recog- 
nized the  existence  of  mixed  and  transitional  texts  ; 
and  when  he  characterized  by  a  ha])iiy  epigram 
{grammaticum  cgit  Alexandrinvs  censor,  inter- 
pretcin  occident(di.i)  tiie  diflerence  of  (he  two 
ancient  families,  he  f^iankly  admitte<l  that  no  exist- 


510 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


ing  document  exhibited  either  "recension"  in  a 
pure  form.  His  great  merit  was  independent  of  the 
details  of  his  system :  he  established  the  existence 
of  a  group  of  ancient  MSS.  distinct  from  those  which 
could  be  accused  of  Latinizing  (Tregelles,  Hume, 
p.  105). 

13.  The  chief  object  of  Griesbach  in  propounding 
his  theory  of  recensions  was  to  destroy  the  weight 
of  mere  numbers.'  The  critical  lesul't  with  him 
had  far  more  interest  than  the  historical  process  ; 
and,  apart  from  all  consideration  as  t-o  the  origin 
of  the  variations,  the  facts  which  he  pointed  out 
are  of  permanent  value.  Others  carried  on  the 
investigation  from  the  point  where  he  left  it. 
Hug  endeavoured,  with  much  ingenuity,  to  place 
the  theory  on  a  historical  basis  {Einleitung  in  N.  T. 
1st  ed.  1808  ;  3rd,  1826).  According  to  him, 
the  text  of  the  N.  T.  fell  into  a  state  of  consider- 
able corruption  during  the  second  century.  To 
this  form  he  applied  the  term  koiv)]  eKSocris 
{common  edition),  which  had  been  applied  by 
Alexandrine  critics  to  the  unrevised  text  of  Homer, 
and  in  later  times  to  the  unrevised  text  of  the 
LXX.  (i.  144-).  In  the  course  of  the  thii-d  cen- 
tury tliis  text,  he  supposed,  undei-went  a  threefold 
revision,  by  Hesychius  in  Egypt,  by  Lucian  at 
Antioch,  and  by  Origen  in  Palestine.  So  that  our 
existing  documents  represent  four  classes:  (1)  The 
unrevised,  D.  1,  13,  69  in  the  Gospels;  D  E^  in 
the  Acts  ;  D2  Fg  Gg  in  the  Pauline  Epistles  :  the  old 
Latin  and  Thebaic,  and  in  part  the  Peshito  Syriac ; 
and  the  quotations  of  Clement  and  Origen.  (2) 
The  Egyptian  recension  of  Hesychius;  B  C  L  in 
Gospels  ;  A  B  C  17  in  the  Paidine  Epistles;  ABC 
Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles  ;  A  C  in  the  Apocalypse: 
the  Memphitic  version  ;  and  the  quotations  of 
Cyril.  Alex,  and  Athanasius.  (3)  The  Asiatic 
(Antioch-Constatitinople)  recension  of  Lucian  ;  E  F 
G  H  S  A^  and  the  recent  MSS.  generally  ;  the  Gothic 
and  Slavonic  versions  and  the  quotations  of  Theo- 
phylact.  (4)  The  Palestinian  recension  of  Origen 
(of  the  Gospels')  ;  A  K  M  ;  the  Fhiloxeni;m  Syriac  ; 
the  quotations  of  Theodoret  and  Chrysostom.  But 
the  slender  external  proof  which  Hug  adduced  in 
support  of  this  system  was,  in  the  main,  a  mere 
misconception  of  what  Jerome  said  of  the  labours 
of  Hesychius  and  Lucian  on  the  LXX.  {Praef.  in 
Paralip.;  c.  Ruff.  ii.  27;  and  Ep.  cvi.  (135)  §2. 
The  only  other  passages  are  De  Viris  illustr. 
cap.  Ixxvii.  Luciauus  ;  Praef.  in  quat,  Ev.)  ;  the 
assumed  recension  of  Origen  rests  on  no  historical 
evidence  whatever.  Yet  the  new  analysis  of  the 
internal  character  of  the  documents  was  not  with- 
out a  valuable  result.  Hug  showed  that  the  line 
of  demarcation  between  the  Alexandrine  and  West- 
ern families  of  Griesbach  was  practically  an  ima- 
ginary one.  Not  only  are  the  extreme  types  of 
the  two  classes  connected  by  a  series  of  inter- 
mediate links,  but  many  of  the  quotations'  of 
Clement  and  Origen  belong  to  the  so-called  Western 
text.  Griesbach  in  examining  Hug's  hypothesis, 
explained  this  phenomenon  by  showing  that  at 
vaiious  times  Origen  useil  MSS.  of  different  types, 
and   admitted    that   many    Western    readings   are 


>  This  he  states  distinctly  (^Syiub.  Crit.  i.  cxxii.) : — 
"  Praocipuus  vero  recensionum  in  criseos  sacrae  exercitio 
usus  hie  est,  ut  eorum  aucturitate  letliones  bonas,  sed  in 
paucis  libris  superstitesdefendamus  adversus  junioruni  et 
vulgarium  codicum  iniiumerabilem  poena  turbam."  Comp. 
id.  ii.  624,  n.  'J'lao  necessity  of  destroying  this  grand  source 
of  error  was  supreme,  as  may  be  seen  not  only  from  such 
canons  as  G.  v.  Maestricht  (ii.  fi.S,  n.),  but  also  from 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

found  in  Alexandrine  copies  {Meletem.  xlvlii.  comp. 
Laurence,  Remarks  on  the  Systematic  Classification 

of  MSS 1814). 

14.  Little  remains  to  be  said  of  later  theories. 
Eichhorn  accepted  the  classification  of  Hug  {Ein- 
leitung,  1818-27).  Matthaei,  the  bitter  adversary 
of  Griesbach,  contented  himself  with  asserting  the 
paramount  claims  of  the  later  copies  against  the  more 
ancient,  allowing  so  far  their  general  diti'erence 
(  Ueher  die  sotj.  Becensionen  ....  1804  ;  N.  T. 
1782-88).  Scholz  returning  to  a  simpler  arrange- 
ment divided  the  authorities  into  two  classes,  Alex- 
andrine and  Constantinopolitan  (N.  T.  i.  ppv  -xv.  ft'.), 
and  maintained  the  superior  purity  of  the  latter  on 
the  ground  of  their  assumed  unanimity.  In  prac- 
tice he  failed  to  cany  out  his  principles ;  and  the 
unanimity  of  the  later  copies  has  now  been  shown 
to  be  quite  imaginary.  Since  the  time  of  Scholz 
theories  of  recensions  have  found  little  favour. 
Lachmann,  who  accepted  only  ancient  authorities, 
simply  divided  them  into  Eastern  (Alexandrine)  ;md 
Western.  Tischendorf,  with  some  reserve,  proposes 
two  great  classes,  each  consisting  of  two  pairs,  the 
Alexandrine  and  Latin,  the  Asiatic  and  Byzantine. 
Tregelles,  discarding  all  theories  of  recension  as  his- 
toric facts,  insists  on  the  general  accordance  of  ancient 
authorities  as  giving  an  ancient  text  in  contrast  with 
the  recent  text  of  the  more  modern  copies.  At  the 
same  time  he  points  out  what  we  may  suppose  to 
be  the  "  genealogy  of  the  text."  This  he  exhibits 
in  the  followins:  form : 


D 


XBZ 

C  L  H  1  33 
P  Q  T  R 
X  (A)  69 


A 

K  M  H 

E  F  G  S  U,  &C.'' 


15.  The  fundamental  error  of  the  recension  theo- 
ries is  the  assumption  either  of  an  actual  recension 
or  of  a  pure  text  of  one  type,  which  was  variously 
modified  in  later  times,  while  the  fact  seems  to  be 
exactly  the  converse.  Groups  of  copies  spiing  not 
from  the  imperfect  reproduction  of  the  character  of 
one  typical  exemplar,  but  fi'om  the  multiplication 
of  characteristic  variations.  They  are  the  results 
of  a  tendency,  and  not  of  a  fact.  They  advance 
towards  and  do  not  lead  from  that  form  of  text 
which  we  regard  as  their  standard.  Individuals, 
as  Origen,  may  have  exercised  an  important  in- 
fluence at  a  particular  time  and  place,  but  the 
silent  and  continual  influence  of  circumstances  was 
greater.  A  pure  Alexandrine  or  Western  text  is 
simply  a  fiction.  The  tendency  at  Alexandria  or 
Carthage  was  in  a  certain  direction,  and  necessarily 
influenced  the  character  of  the  current  texts  with 
accumulative  force  as  far  as  it  was  unchecked  by 
other  influences.  This  is  a  general  law,  and  the 
history  of  the  apostolic  books  is  no  exception  to 
it.  The  history  of  their  text  diflers  from  that  of 
other  books  chiefly  in  this,  that,  owing  to  the  great 
multiplicity  of  testimony,  typical  copies  are  here 
represented  by  typical  groups  of  copies,  and  the 
intermediate  stages  ai'e  occupied  by  mixed  texts. 
But  if  we  look  beneath  this  complication  general 


Wetstein's  Ilule  xviil. :  "  Lectio  plurium  codicum  caeterls 
paribus  pracfcrenda  est." 

k  "  Those  codices  are  plaa'd  together  which  appear  to 
demand  such  an  arrangement ;  and  those  which  stand 
below  others  are  such  as  show  still  mure  and  more  of  Uie 
intermixture  of  modernized  readings"  (Tregelles,  Hcrrne, 
p.  106). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

lines  of  change  may  be  detected.  All  experience 
shows  that  certain  types  of  variation  propagate 
and  perpetuate  themselves,  and  existing  documents 
prove  that  it  was  so  with  the  copies  of  the  N.  T. 
Many  of  the  links  in  the  genealogical  table  of  our 
MSS.  may  be  wanting,  but  the  specific  relations 
between  the  groups,  and  their  comparative  anti- 
quity of  origin,  are  clear.  This  antiquity  is  deter- 
mined, not  by  the  demonstration  of  the  immediate 
dependence  of  particular  copies  upon  one  another, 
but  by  reference  to  a  common  standard.  The 
secondary  imcials  (E  S  U,  &c.)  are  not  derived 
from  the  earlier  (B  C  A)  by  direct  descent,  but 
rather  both  are  derived  by  ditferent  processes  from 
one  original.  And  here  various  considerations  will 
assist  the  judgment  of  the  critic.  The  accumu- 
lation of  variations  may  be  more  or  less  rapid  in 
certain  directions.  A  disturbing  force  may  act  for 
a  shorter  time  with  greater  intensity,  or  its  effects 
may  be  slow  and  protracted.  Corruptions  may  be 
obvious  or  subtle,  the  work  of  the  ignorant  copyist 
or  of  the  rash  scholar;  they  may  lie  upon  the 
surface  or  they  may  penetrate  into  the  fabric  of 
the  text.  But  on  such  points  no  general  i-ules  can 
be  laid  down.  Here  as  elsewhere,  there  is  an 
instinct  or  tact  which  discerns  likenesses  or  relation- 
ships and  refuses  to  be  measured  mechanically.  It 
is  enough  to  insist  on  the  truth  that  the  varieties 
in  our  documents  are  the  result  of  slow  and  natural 
growth  and  not  of  violent  change.  They  are  due  to 
the  action  of  intelligible  laws  and  rarely,  if  ever, 
to  the  caprice  or  imperfect  judgment  of  individuals. 
They  contain  in  themselves  their  history  and  their 
explanation. 

16.  From  the  consideration  of  the  earliest  history 
of  the  N.  T.  text  we  now  pass  to  the  aera  of  MS.S, 
The  quotations  of  Dioxysius  Alex.  (fA.D.  264), 
Fetrus  Alex.  (fc.  a.d.  312),  Methodius  (fA.D. 
311),  and  Eusebius  (tA.u.  340),  confirm  the 
prevalence  of  the  ancient  type  of  text ;  but  the 
public  establishment  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman 
empire  necessarilj'  led  to  important  changes.  Not 
only  were  more  copies  of  the  N.  T.  required  for 
public  use  (Comp.  §3),  but  the  nominal  or  real  ad- 
herence of  the  higher  ranks  to  the  Christian  faith 
must  have  lai-gely  increased  the  demand  for  costly 
MSS.  As  a  natural  consequence  the  ruiie  Hellenistic 
forms  gave  way  before  the  current  Greek,  and  at 
the  same  time  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  that 
smoother  and  fuller  constructions  were  substituted 
for  the  rougher  turns  of  the  apostolic  language. 
In  this  way  the  foundation  of  the  Byzantine  text 
was  laid,  and  the  same  influence  which  thus  began 
to  work,  continued  uninterruptedly  till  the  fall  of 
the  Eastern  empire.  Meanwhile  the  multiplication 
of  copies  in  Africa  and  Syria  was  checked  by  Mo- 
hammedan conquests.  The  (ireek  language ceaseil  to 
be  current  in  the  West.  The  progress  of  the  Alex- 
andrine and  Occidental  families  of  M.SS.  was  thus 
checked  ;  and  the  mass  of  recent  copies  necessarily 
represent  the  accumulated  results  of  one  tendency. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


511 


m  Jerome  describes  the  false  taste  of  many  In  his  time 
(c.  A.D.  400)  with  regard  to  MSS.  of  the  Bible :  "  Haboant 
qui  volunl  viteros  libros,  vel  in  membranis  purpureis 
iiuro  argcntoque  descriptos,  vel  uncialibus,  ut  vulgo 
aiuiit  litteris  onera  masis  cxarata,  quani  codices;  duui- 
niodo  mihi  meisquc  permittaiit  pauperos  babiTe  schedulas, 
et  non  tarn  pulcros  codices  quam  emendates"  (Fraef.  in 
Jobmn,  i.\.  1084,  ed.  Migne). 

»  The  Codex  Siiiaitlous  (Cod.  Frid.  AiiR.)  has  four 
columns ;  Cod.  Alox.  (.4.)  two.  Ct".  .Scrivener,  IiUroducUuii , 
p.  25,  n.,  for  otlier  exuinnlcs. 


1 7.  The  appearance  of  the  oldest  MSS.  has  been 
already  described  (§3).  The  MSS.  of  the  4th 
century,  of  which  Cod.  Vatican.  (B)  may  be  fallen 
as  a  type,  present  a  close  resemblance  to  these. 
The  writing  is  in  elegant  continuous  (capitals) 
uncials,""  in  three  columns,"  without  initial,  letters 
or  iota  subscript,  or  ascript.  A  small  interval 
serves  as  a  simple  punctuation ;  and  there  are  no 
accents  or  breathings  by  the  hand  of  the  first  writer, 
though  these  have  been  added  subsequently.  Uncial 
writing  continued  in  general  use  till  the  middle  of 
the  loth  century."  One  uncial  MS.  (S),  the  earliest 
dated  copy,  bears  the  date  949  ;  and  for  service 
books  the  same  style  was  retained  a  century  later. 
From  the  11th  centuiy  downwards  cursive  writing 
prevailed,  but  this  pa.ssed  through  several  forms 
sufficiently  distinct  to  fix  the  date  of  a  MS.  with 
tolerable  certainty.  The  earliest  cursive  Biblical 
MS.  is  dated  964  a.d.  (Gosp.  14,  Scrivener,  Intro- 
duction, p.  36  note),  though  cursive  writing  was  used 
a  century  before  (a.d.  888,  Scrivener,  I.  c).  The 
MSS.  of  the  14th  and  loth  centuries  abound  in 
the  contractions  which  afterwards  passed  into  the 
early  printed  books.  The  materi;il  as  well  as  the 
writing  of  MSS.  underwent  successive  changes.  The 
oldest  MSS.  are  written  on  the  thinnest  and  finest 
vellum  :  in  later  copies  the  parchment  is  thick  and 
coarse.  Sometimes,  as  in  Cod.  Cotton.  (N  =  J),  the 
vellum  is  stained.  Papyrus  was  very  rarely  used  after 
the  9th  century.  In  the  10th  century  cotton  paper 
(charta  bombi/ciiut,  or  Damascena)  was  generally 
employed  in  Europe;  and  one  example  at  least 
occurs  of  its  use  in  the  9th  century  (Tischdf.  Not. 
Cod.  Sin.  p.  54,  quoted  by  Scrivener,  Introduction, 
p.  21).  In  the  12th  century  the  common  linen  or 
lag  paper  came  into  use;  but  paper  was  "seldom 
used  for  Biblical  MSS.  earlier  than  the  13th  cen- 
tury, and  had  not  entirely  displaced  parchment  at 
the  aera  of  the  invention  of  printing,  c.  .\.D.  1450" 
(Scrivener,  Introduction,  p.  21).  One  other  kind 
of  material  requu-es  notice,  redressed  parchment 
(■7raAi/ii|/7/(rTOs,  charta  deleticia).  Even  at  a  very 
early  period  the  original  text  of  a  parchment  MS. 
was  often  erased,  that  the  material  might  be  used 
afresh  (Cic.  ad  Fam.  vii.  18  ;  CatuU.  xxii.).P  In 
lapse  of  time  the  original  writing  frequently  re- 
appears in  faint  lines  below  tlie  later  text,  and  in 
this  way  many  precious  fragments  of  Biblical  MSS. 
which  had  been  once  obliterated  for  the  transcrip- 
tion of  other  works  have  been  recovered.  Of  these 
palimpsest  MSS.  the  most  fiunous  are  those  noticed 
below  under  the  letters  C.  K.  Z.  E.  The  earliest 
Biblical  palimpsest  is  not  older  than  the  5th  century 
(Plate  i.  fig.  3). 

18.  In  uncial  MSS.  the  contractions  are  usu- 
ally limited  to  a  few  very  common  forms  (0C, 
IC,  nHP,  AAA,  &c.,  i.  e.  deSs,  'Irja-ovs,  -iraTvp, 
AaveiS :  comp.  Scrivener,  Introduction,  p.  43). 
.\  few  more  occur  in  later  uncial  copies,  in  which 
there  are  also  some  examples  of  the  luscript  iota. 


•>  A  full  and  Interesting;  account  of  the  various  changes 
in  the  uncial  alphabet  at  different  times  is  given  by  Scri- 
vener, Introduction,  pp.  27-36. 

V  This  practice  was  condemned  at  the  tjulnisextine 
Council  (a.d.  692),  Can.  63 ;  but  tlic  CommcnUiry  of  Ital- 
simion  shows  that  in  his  lime  (fA.D.  1204)  the  practice 
liad  not  ceased :  (njn-eiuo-at  raxna  Sii.  roiis  /Si^AioKa- 
TTTjAou?  ToO?  aTToAticfroi'Ta?  Ta9  neuPpdvat  Tiov  BtUov 
ypai}>C>v.  A  ISililical  fragment  in  the  Uritish  Museum  has 
been  era.sed,  and  used  tivia:  alt«'rwurds  for  Syrian  writing 
(.Vdil.  17.  !:»;.     Cod.  N'l'Ti.Mhilf). 


512 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


which  occm-s  rarely  in  the  Codex  Sinaiticus.i  Ac- 
cents are  not  found  in  MSS.  older  than  the  8th 
century.'  Breathings  and  the  apostrophus  (Tischdf. 
Proleg.  cxxxi.)  occar  somewhat  earlier.  The  oldest 
punctuation  after  the  simple  interval,  is  a  stop  like 
the  modern  Greek  colon  (in  A  C  I>),  which  is 
accompanied  by  an  interval,  proportioned  in  some 
cases  to  the  length  of  the  pause.»  In  E  (Gospp.) 
and  Bg  (Apoc),  which  are  MSS.  of  the  8th  century, 
this  point  marks  a  full  stop,  a  colon,  or  a  comma, 
according  as  it  is  placed  at  the  top,  the  middle,  or 
the  base  of  the  letter  (Scrivener,  p.  42).'  The 
present  note  of  interrogation  (;)  came  into  use  in 
the  9th  century. 

1 9.  A  very  ingenious  attempt  was  made  to  supply 
an  effectual  system  of  punctuation  for  public  read- 
ing, by  Euthalius,  who  published  an  aiTangement 
of  St.  Paul's  Kpistles  in  clauses  ((rrixoi)  in  458, 
and  another  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles  in 
490.  The  same  arrangement  was  applied  to  the 
Gospels  by  some  unknown  hand,  and  probably  at 
an  earlier  date.  The  method  of  subdivision  was 
doubtless  suggested  by  the  mode  in  which  the  poetic 
books  of  the  0.  T.  were  written  in  the  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.  The  great  examples  of  this  method  of 
writing  are  D  (Gospels),  H3  (Epp.),  Dg  (Epp.j.  The 
Cod.  Land.  (E^jActs)  is  not  strictly  sticliometric:il, 
but  the  parallel  texts  seem  to  be  arranged  to  esta- 
blish a  verbal  connexion  between  the  Latin  and 
Greek  (Tregelles,  Home,  187).  The  arixoi  vary 
considerably  in  length,  and  thus  the  amount  of 
vellum  consumed  was  far  more  than  in  an  ordinary 
MS.,  so  that  the  fashion  of  writing  in  "clauses" 
soon  passed  away ;  but  the  numeration  of  the 
(TTixot  in  the  several  books  was  still  preserved,  and 
many  MSS.  {e.  g.  A  Ep.,  K  Gosp.)  bear  traces  of 
having  been  copied  from  older  texts  thus  arranged." 

20.  The  earUest  extant  division  of  the  N.  T. 
into  sections  occurs  in  Cod.  B.  This  division  is 
elsewhere  found  only  in  the  palimpsest  fragment  of 
St.  Luke,  a.  In  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  there  is  a 
double  division  in  B,  one  of  which  is  by  a  later  hand. 
The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  treated  as  one  un- 
broken book  divided  into  93  sections,  in  which 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  originally  stood  between 
the  Ejiisties  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Ephesians. 
This  appears  from  the  numbering  of  the  sections, 
which  the  writer  of  the  MS.  preserved,  though  he 
transposed  the  book  to  the  place  before  the  pastoral 
epistles.' 

21.  Two  other  divisions  of  the  Gospels  must  be 

■1  As  to  the  use  of  cursive  MSS.  in  this  respect  of  iota 
ascript  or  subscript,  Mr.  Scrivener  found  that  "'  of  forty- 
three  MSS.  now  in  England,  twelve  have  no  vestige  of 
either  fashion,  fifteen  represent  the  ascript  use,  nine  the 
subscript  exclusively,  while  the  few  that  remain  have  both 
indifferently"  (Introduction,  p.  39).  The  earliest  use  of 
the  subscript  is  in  a  MS.  (7 1)  dated  1160  (Scrivener,  I.  c). 

■■  Mr.  Scrivener  makes  an  exception  in  the  a.\sA  of  "  the 
f  rst  four  lines  of  each  column  of  the  book  of  Genesis  "  in 
Cod.  A,  which,  he  says,  is  furnished  with  accents  and 
breathings  by  the  first  hand  {Jntraluctinv,  p.  40).  Dr. 
Tregellep,  to  whose  kindness  I  am  indebted  fur  several 
remarks  on  this  article,  expressed  to  me  his  strong  doubts 
as  to  the  correctnoss  of  this  assertion  ;  and  a  very  careful 
examination  of  the  MS.  leaves  no  question  but  that  the 
accents  and  breathings  were  the  work  of  the  later  scribe 
who  accentuated  the  whole  of  the  first  three  columns. 
There  is  a  perceptible  difference  in  the  shade  of  the  red 
pigment,  which  is  decisively  shown  in  the  initial  E. 

5  The  division  in  John  i.  3,  4,  o  yiyovev  en  avrw  fair;  Tjv 
ret.  Tregelles,  ad  lac),  Rom.  viii.  20  (Origen),  ix.  '5,  shows 
the  attention  given  to  tliis question  hi  the  earliest  times. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

noticed.  The  first  of  the.se  was  a  division  into 
''  chapters  "  {Ke^aXaia,  TirKoi,  breves),  which  cor- 
respond with  distinct  sections  of  the  narrative,  and 
are  on  an  avei'age  a  little  more  than  twice  as  long 
as  the  sections  in  B.  This  division  is  found  in  A, 
C,  R,  Z,  and  must  therefore  have  come  into  general 
use  some  time  before  the  5th  century."  The  other 
division  was  constructed  with  a  view  to  a  harmony 
of  the  Gospels.  It  owes  its  origin  to  Ammonius  of 
Alexandria,  a  scholar  of  the  3rd  century,  who  con- 
structed a  Harmony  of  the  Evangelists,  taking  St. 
Matthew  as  the  basis  round  which  he  grouped  the 
parallel  passages  from  the  other  Gospels.  Eusebius 
of  Caesarea  completed  his  labour  with  great  inge- 
nuity, and  constructed  a  notation  and  a  series  of 
tables,  which  indicate  at  a  glance  the  parallels  wliich 
exist  to  any  passage  in  one  or  more  of  the  other 
Gospels,  and  the  passages  which  are  peculiar  to 
each.  There  seems  every  reason  to  believe  that 
the  sections  as  they  stand  at  present,  as  well  as 
the  ten  "  Canons,"  which  give  a  summary  of  the 
Harmony,  are  due  to  Eusebius,  though  the  sections 
sometimes  occur  in  MSS.  without  the  corresponding 
Canons."  The  Cod.  Alex.  (A),  and  the  Cottonian 
fragments  (N),  are  the  oldest  MSS.  which  contain 
both  in  the  original  hand.  The  sections  occur  in 
the  palimpsests  C,  K,  Z,  P,  Q,  and  it  is  possible 
that  the  Canons  may  have  been  there  originally, 
for  the  vermilion  {Kiyvd^apis,  Euseb.  £p.  ad 
Carp.'),  or  paint  with  which  they  were  marked 
would  entirely  disappear  in  the  process  of  preparing 
the  parchment  afresh./ 

2-2.  The  division  of  the  Acts  and  Epistles  into 
chapters  came  into  use  at  a  later  time.  It  does 
not  occur  in  A  or  C,  which  give  the  Ammoniau 
sections,  and  is  commonly  referred  to  Euthalius 
(Comp.  §19),  who,  however,  says  that  he  borrowed 
the  divisions  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  from  an  earlier 
father ;  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  ijivi- 
sion  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles  which  he 
published  was  originally  the  work  of  Pamphilus 
the  Martyr  (Montfaucon,  Bibl.  Coislin.  p.  78). 
The  Apocalypse  was  divided  into  sections  by  An- 
di'ejis  of  Caesarea  about  a.d.  500.  This  division 
consisted  of  24  \6yoi,  each  of  which  was  sub- 
divided into  three  "chapters"  (/ceiJxxAaia).' 

23.  The  titles  of  the  sacred  books  are  from  their 
nature  additions  to  the  original  text.  The  distinct 
names  of  the  Gospels  implv  a  collection,  and  the 
titles  of  the  Epistles  are  notes  by  the  possessors 
and   not   addresses  by   the   writers  {'laidwov   a', 

t  Dr.  Tregelles,  whose  acquaintance  with  ancient  MSS. 
I  is  not  inferior  to  that  of  any  scholar,  expi'esses  a  doubt 
"  whether  this  is  at  all  unifonnly  the  case." 

■^  Comp.  Tischdf.  JV.  T.  ed.  1859,  under  the  subscriptions 
to  the  several  books.    Wetstein,  Frolegg.  pp.  ino-102. 

'  The  oldest  division  is  not  found  in  2  Pet.  (ed.  Vercell. 
p.  125.)    (Mr.  Hort).     It  is  found  in  Jude ;  2,  3  John. 

"  The  Ke(fiaAata  do  not  begin  with  the  beginning  of  the 
books  (Griesbach,  C'omin.  Crit.  ii.  4a).  This  is  important 
in  reference  to  the  objections  raised  against  Matt.  i. 

s  These  very  useful  canons  and  sections  are  printed  in 
the  Oxford  Text  (Lloyd)  in  'I'ischendorf  (1859),  and  the 
notation  is  very  casilj'  mastered.  A  more  complete  ar- 
rangement of  the  canons,  giving  the  order  of  the  sections 
in  each  Evangelist,  originally  drawn  up  by  Dr.  Tregelles, 
is  found  in  ])r.  Wordsworth's  Gk.  Test.  vel.  i. 

y  A  comparative  table  of  the  ancient  and  modern  divi- 
sions of  the  N.  T.  is  given  by  Scrivener  (^Introduction 
p.  5S). 

2  For  the  later  division  of  the  Bible  into  our  present 
chapters  and  verses,  see  Bibi-k,  i.  214. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

ff,  &c.).  In  their  earliest  form  tliey  are  quite 
simple,  According  to  Matthew,  &c.  (KaTo,  MaOdaTov 
K.T.\.) ;  To  the  Romans,  &c.  {irphs  'Vaifxaiovs 
K.T.A.)  ;  First  of  Peter,  &c.  (neVpou  a)  ;  Acts  of 
Apostles  (Trpd^eis  airoffrSAoov);  A/jocali/pse.  These 
headings  were  gradually  amplified  till  they  as- 
sume<l  such  forms  as  TJie  holi/  Gospel  according  to 
John ;  The  first  Catholic  Fpist.le  of  the  holg  and 
all-praiseworthy  Peter ;  The  Apocalypse  of  the 
holy  and  most  glorious  Apostle  and  Evangelist, 
the  beloved  virgin  who  rested  on  the  bosom  of 
Jesus,  John  the  Divine.  In  the  same  way  the 
original  subscriptions  {vTroypacpai),  which  were 
merely  repetitions  of  the  titles,  gave  way  to  vague 
ti-aditions  as  to  tlie  dates,  &c.,  of  the  books.  Those 
appended  to  the  Epistles,  which  have  been  trans- 
lated in  tlie  A.  V.,  are  attributed  to  I'^uthalius, 
and  their  singular  inaccuracy  (Paley,  Horae  Pau- 
linae,  eh.  xv.)  is  a  valuable  proof  of  the  utter  absence 
of  historical  criticism  at  the  time  when  they  could 
rind  currency. 

24.  Very  few  MSS.  contain  the  whole  N.  T., 
"  twenty-seven  in  all  out  of  the  vast  mass  of  extant 
documents"  (Scrivener,  Introduction,  61).  The 
MSS.  of  the  Apocalypse  are  rarest;  and  Chrysostom 
complained  that  in  his  time  the  Acts  was  very 
little  known.  Besides  the  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  or 
of  parts  of  it,  there  are  also  Lectionaries,  which 
contain  extracts  arranged  for  the  Church-services. 
These  were  taken  from  the  Gospels  (€110776X1- 
(rrapia),  or  from  the  Gospels  and  Acts  (TTpai,aTr6- 
cTToKoi),  or  rarely  from  the  Gospels  and  Epistles 
{aTTO(Tro\oevayy4\ia).  The  calendars  of  the  lessons 
{(Tvvaldpia),  aie  appended  to  very  many  MSS.  of 
the  N.  T.:  those  for  the  saints'-day  lessons,  which 
varied  very  considerably  in  ditTerent  times  and  places, 
were  called  Vlrivo\6yia  (Scholz,  N.  T.,  453-493 ; 
Scrivener,  68-75). 

25.  When  a  MS.  was  completed  it  was  com- 
monly submitted,  at  least  in  early  times,  to  a 
careful  revision.  Two  terms  occur  in  describing 
this  process,  6  avri^dWiov  and  SiopdcoTris.  It 
has  been  suggested  that  the  work  of  the  former  an- 
swered to  that  of  "  the  corrector  of  the  press," 
while  that  of  the  latter  was  more  critical  (Trogelles, 
Home,  85,  86).  Possibly,  however,  the  words 
only  describe  two  parts  of  the  same  work.  Several 
MSS.  still  preserve  a  subscription  which  attests  a 
revision  by  comparison  with  famous  copies,  though 
this  attestation  must  have  referred  to  the  earlier 
exemplar,  (Comp.  Tischdf.  Jude  subscript.)  ;  but 
the  Coislinian  fragment  (H3)  may  have  been  itself 
compared,  according  to  the  subscription,  "  with  the 
copy  in  the  library  at  Caesarea,  written  by  the 
hand  of  the  holy  Pamphilus."  (Comp.  Scrivener, 
Introduction,  p.  47).  Besides  this  official  correc- 
tion at  the  time  of  transcription,  MSS.  were  often 
corrected  by  different  hands  in  later  times.  Thus 
Tischendorf  distinguishes  the  work  of  two  cor- 
rectors in  C,  and  of  three  chief  correctors  in  1)^.  In 
later  MSS.  the  corrections  arc  often  mucli  more  va- 
luable than  the  original  text,  as  in  67  (Epp.);  and 
in  the  Cod.  Sinait.  the  readings  of  one  corrector 
''2  b)  are  frequently  as  valuable  as  those  of  the 
original  text." 

(The  work  of  Montfauqon  still  rem.ains  the  clas- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


513 


sical  authority  on  Greek  Palaeography  (Palaeo- 
graphia  Graecn,  Paris,  1708),  though  much  has 
been  discovered  since  his  time  wh.ich  modifies  some 
of  his  statements.  The  plates  in  the  magnificent 
work  of  Silvestre  and  Chanipollion  {Paleographie 
Urdvcrselle,  Paris,  1841,  Eng.  Trans,  by  Sir  F. 
Madden,  London,  1850)  give  a  splendid  and  fairly 
accurate  series  of  facsimiles  of  Greek  MSS.  (Plates, 
liv.-xciv.).  Tischendorf  announces  a  new  work  on 
Palaeography  (iV.  T.  Praef.  cxxxiii.),  and  this,  if 
published,  will  probably  leave  nothing  to  be  desired 
in  the  Biblical  branch  of  the  study. 

26.  The  number  of  uncial  MSS.  remaining, 
thoui'h  great  when  compared  with  the  ancient 
MSS.  extant  of  other  writings,  is  inconsiderable. i" 
Tischendorf  (iV.  T.  Praef.  cxxx.)  reckons  40  in  the 
Gospels,  of  which  5  are  entire,  B  K  M  S  U ;  3 
nearly  entire,  E  L  A;  10  contain  very  considerable 
portions,  A  C  D  F  G  H  V  X  T  A ;  of  the  remainder 
14  contain  very  small  fragments,  8  fragments  more 
(I  P  Q  U  Z)  or  less  considerable  (N  T  Y).  To 
these  must  be  added  X  (Cod.  Sinait.),  which  is 
entire;  2  (?)  a  new  MS.  of  Tischendorf  (iVbi.  Cod. 
Sin.  pp.  51-52),  which  is  nearly  entire;  and  E 
(Cod.  Zacynth.),  which  contains  considerable  frag- 
ments of  St.  Luke.  Tischendorf  has  likewise  ob- 
tained 6  additional  fragments  (1.  c).  In  the  Acts 
there  are  9  (10  with  X),  of  which  4  contain  the 
text  entire  (X  A  B),  or  nearly  (Eg)  so ;  4  have  large 
fragments,  (CDHjGg  =  Lg);  2  small  fragments. 
In  the  Catholic  Epistles  5,  of  which  4,  A  B  Kg  G^ 
=  Lj  are  entire  ;  1  (C)  nearly  entire.  In  the  Pau- 
line Epistles  there  are  14,  2  nearly  entire,  D^  Lo ; 
7  have  very  considerable  portions,  A  B  C  E3  Fj  G3 
K,  (but  Eg  should  not  be  reckoned) ;  the  remaining 
5  some  fragments.  In  the  Apocalypse  3,  two  entire 
(A  Bg),  one  nearly  entire  (C).  To  these  three  last 
classes  must  be  added   K,  which  is  entire. 

27.  According  to  date  these  MSS.  are  classed  as 
follows : — 

Fourth  century.   N  B. 

Fifth  century.  A  C,  and  some  fragments  in- 
cluding Q  T. 

Sixth  century.  D  P  R  Z,  Eg,  D^  H3,  and  4 
smaller  fragments. 

Seventh  century.   Some  fragments  including  0. 

Eii/hth  century.  E  L  A  H,  B^  and  some  frag- 
ments. 

Ninth  century.  F  K  M  X  T  A,  H^  0^  =  12, 
F^  Gg  Kg  M^  and  fragments. 

Tenth  century.     G  H  S  U,  (E^). 

28.  A  complete  description  of  these  JISS.  is 
given  in  the  great  critical  editions  of  the  N.  T. : 
here  those  only  can  be  briefly  noticed  which  are  of 
primary  importance,  the  first  place  being  given  to 
the  latest  discovered  and  most  complete  Codex 
Sinaiticits. 

A  (i).  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Gospels. 

N  (Codex Sinaiticus  =  Cod.  Frid.  Aug.  of  LXX.), 
at  St.  Petersburgh,  obtained  by  Tischendorf  from  the 
convent  of  St.  Catherine,  Mount  Sinai,  in  1859. 
The  fragments  of  LXX.  published  as  Cod.  Fri3. 
Aug.  (1846),  were  obtained  at  the  same  place  by 
Tischendorf  in  1844.  The  N.  T.  is  entire,  and  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas  and  parts  of  the  Shepherd  of 


"  Examples  of  the  attestation  and  signature  of  MSS., 
with  a  list  of  the  names  of  scribes,  are  given  by  Mont- 
fiiU(;on  (ralaeogvajihia.  pp.  39-108). 

•>  Since  the  timeof  Wetstcin  the  uncial  MSS.  have  been 
niarl<oil  by  capltid  letters,  tlie  cursives  by  numbers  (and  |  used)  to  mark  the  lirst,  &c.,  hands. 
VOL.  II. 


later  by  small  letters).  In  oonaequente  of  the  confusion 
which  arises  from  applying  the  .same  letter  to  different 
MSS.,  I  have  distinfaiishcd  the  diflferent  MSS.  by  ihe 
notation  M,  M..),  M,,,  retaining  the  asterisk  (as  originally 


514 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


Hevmas  are  added.  The  whole  M.S.  is  to  be  pub- 
lished in  1862  by  Tischendorf  at  the  expense  of  the 
Emperor  of  Russia.  It  is  probably  the  oldest  of 
the  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  and  of  the  4th  centuiy 
(Tischdf.  Not.  Cod.  Sin.  18(50). 

A  (Codex  Alexandrinus,  Brit.  Mus.),  a  MS.  of 
the  entire  Greek  Bible,  with  the  Epistles  of  Clement 
added.  It  was  given  by  Cyril  Lucar,  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  to  Charles  I.  in  1628,  and  is  now 
in  the  British  Museum.  It  contains  the  whole  of 
the  N.  T.  with  some  chasms :  JIatt.  i.-x.xv.  6, 
e^epxecfle ;  John  vi.  50,  IVa-viii.  52,  Xeyej ;  2 
Cor.  iv.  13,  eTTio-Teuo-a-xii.  6,  e|  e^oD.  It  was 
probably  ^vritten  in  the  first  half  of  the  5th  cen- 
tury. The  N.  T.  has  been  published  by  Woide 
(fol.  1786),  and  with  some  corrections  by  Cowper 
(Svo.  1860)."=  Comp.  Wetstein,  Prolegg.  pp.  13-30 
(ed.  Lotze).     (Plate  i.  tig.  2.) 

B  {Codex  Vaticanus,  1209),  a  MS.  of  the  entire 
Greek  Bible,  which  seems  to  have  been  in  the 
Vatican  Library  almost  from  its  commencement 
(c.  A.D.  1450).  It  contains  the  N.  T.  entire  to 
Heb.  ix.  14,  KaBa:  the  rest  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse 
were  added  in  the  15th  century.  Various  collations 
of  the  N.  T.  were  made  by  Bartolocci  (1669),  by 
Mico  for  Bentley  (c.  1720),  whose  collation  was 
in  part  revised  by  Rulotta  (1726),  and  by  Birch 
(1788).  An  edition  of  the  whole  MS.,  on  which 
Mai  had  been  engaged  for  many  years,  was  pub- 
lished three  years  after  his  death  in  1858  (V  voll. 
4to.  ed.  Vercellone ;  N.  T.  reprinted  Lond.  and 
Leipsic).  Mai  had  himself  kept  back  the  edition 
(printed  1828-1838),  being  fully  conscious  of  its 
imperfections,  and  had  prepared  another  edition  of 
the  N.  T.,  which  was  published  also  by  Vercellone 
in  1859  (8vo.).  The  errors  in  this  are  less  nu- 
merous than  in  the  former  collation  ;  but  the  literal 
text  of  B  is  still  required  by  scholars.  The  MS,  is 
assigned  to  the  4th  century  (Tischdf.  N.  T.  cxx.xvi.- 
cxlix.). 

C  (  Codex  Ephraemi  rescriptus.  Paris,  Bihl.  Imp. 
9),  a  palimpsest  MS.  which  contains  fragments  of  the 
LXX.  and  of  every  part  of  the  N.  T.  In  the  12th 
centuiy  the  original  writing  was  effaced  and  some 
Greek  writings  of  Ephraem  Syius  were  written 
over  it.  The  MS.  was  brought  to  Florence  from 
the  East  at  the  beginning  of  the  16th  century,  and 
came  thence  to  Paris  with  Catherine  de'  ]Medici. 
Wetstein  was  engaged  to  collate  it  for  Bentley 
(1716),  but  it  was  first  fully  examined  by  Tischen- 
dorf, who  published  the  N.  T.  in  1843  :  the  0.  T. 
fragments  in  1845.  The  only  entire  books  which 
have  perished  are  2  Thess.  and  2  John,  but  lacunae 
of  greater  or  less  extent  occur  constantly.  It  is  of 
about  the  siimc  date  as  Cod.  Alex. 

D  {Codex  Bezae.  Univ.  Libr.  Cambridge),  a 
Graeco-Latin  MS.  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  with  a 
small  fragment  of  3  John,  presented  to  the  University 
of  Cambridge  by  Beza  in  1581.  Some  readings  from 
it  were  obtained  in  Italy  for  Stephens'  edition ;  but 
afterwards  Beza  found  it  at  the  sack  of  Lyons  in 


"=  It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  the  editor  has  followed 
the  bad  example  of  Card.  Mai  in  introiluciiig  modem  punc- 
tuation, breathings,  and  accents,  wliich  are  by  no  means 
always  indifferent  (c.  g.  Luke  vii.  12,  av-n]  x'ip?  is  given 
without  note,  where  probably  the  MS.  represents  aiirq 
(or  avTTj)  xnpa)-  It  is  scarcely  less  unfortunate  that  he 
has  not  always  given  the  original  punctuation,  however 
absurd  it  may  appear,  and  the  few  contractions  which 
occur  in  the  MS.  Witli  these  drawbacks,  the  text  seems 
to  bo  given  on  tlie  whole  accurately. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

1562  in  the  monastery  of  St.  Ireuaeus.  The  text 
is  very  remarkable,  and,  especially  in  the  Acts, 
abounds  in  singular  interpolations.  The  MS.  has 
many  lacunae.  It  was  edited  in  a  splendid  form 
by  Kipling  (1793,  2  vols,  fol.),  and  no  com- 
plete collation  has  been  since  made ;  but  arrange- 
ments have  lately  been  (1861)  made  for  a  new 
edition  under  the  care  of  the  Rev.  F.  H.  Scrivener. 
The  MS.  is  referred  to  the  6th  century.  Cf.  Credner, 
Beitrage,  i.  452-518;  Bornemann,  Acta  Aposto- 
lomm,  1848  ;  Schulz,  De  Codice  D,  Cantab.  1827. '' 

L  {Paris.  Cod.  Imp.  62),  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant of  the  late  uncial  MSS.  It  contains  the 
four  Gospels,  with  the  exception  of  IMatt.  iv.  22- 
V.  14,  x.\viii.  17-20;  Mark  x.  16-20,  xv.  2-20; 
John  xxi.  15-25.  The  text  agrees  in  a  remarkable 
inanner  with  B  and  Origen.  It  has  been  published 
by  Tischendorf,  Moimnienta  Sacra  Inedita,  1846. 
Cf.  Griesbach,  Symh.  Crit.  i.  Ixvi.-cxli.  It  is  of 
the  8th  century. 

R  {Brit.  Mus.  Add.  17,211),  a  very  valuable 
palimpsest,  brought  to  England  in  1847  from  the 
convent  of  St.  Mary  Deipara  in  the  Nitrian  desert. 
The  original  text  is  covered  by  Syrian  writing  of 
the  9th  or  10th  century.  About  585  verses  of 
St.  Luke  were  deciphered  by  Tregelles  in  1854,  and 
by  Tischendoi-f  in  1855.  The  latter  has  published 
them  in  his  Mon.  Sacra  Inedita,  ii.  1855.  It  is 
assigned  to  the  6th  century.     (Plate  i.  fig.  3.) 

X  {Codex  Monacensis),  in  the  University  Library 
at  Munich.  Collated  by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles. 
Of  the  10th  century. 

Z  {Cod.  Duhlinensis  rescriptus,  in  the  Library 
of  Trin.  Coll.  Dublin), -a  palimpsest  containing  large 
portions  of  St.  Matthew.  It  was  edited  by  Barrett 
(1801)  ;  and  Tregelles  has  since  (1853)  re-examined 
the  MS.  and  deciphered  all  that  was  left  undeter- 
mined before  {History  of  Printed  Text,  pp.  166-9). 
It  is  assigned  to  the  6th  century. 

A  {Codex  Sangallensis),  a  MS.  of  the  Gospels, 
with  an  interlinear  Latin  translation,  in  the  Librar}' 
of  St.  Gall.  It  once  formed  part  of  the  same  vo- 
lume with  G3.  Published  in  lithographed  fac-simile 
by  Rettig  (Zurich,  1836). 

E  {Codex  Zacynthius),  a  palimpsest  in  possession 
of  the  Bible  Society,  London,  containing  important 
fragments  of  St.  Luke.  It  is  probably  of  the  8th 
century,  and  is  accompanied  by  a  Catena.  The 
later  writing  is  a  Greek  Lectionary  of  the  13th 
century.  It  has  been  transcribed  and  published  by 
Tregelles  (London,  1861). 

The  following  are  important  fi-agments : — 

I  (Tischendorf),  various  fragments  of  the  Gos- 
pels (Acts,  Pauline  Epistles),  some  of  great  value, 
published  by  Tischendorf,  Monnmenta  Sacra,  ii. 
1855. 

N  {Cod.  Cotton.'),  (formerly  J  N),  twelve  leaves 
of  purple  vellum,  the  writing  being  in  silver.    Four  ' 
leaves  are  in  Brit.  Mus.  (Cotton.  C.  xv).     Pub- 
lished   by  Tischendorf,    Mon.  Sacr.   ined.,    1846. 
Saec.  vi. 

ISF  l>  (Brit.  Mus.  Add.  17,  136),  a  palimpsest. 
Deciphered  by  Tregelles  and  Tischendorf,  and  pub- 
lished by  the  latter :  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.  ii.  Saec.  iv.,  v. 

d  An  edition  of  four  great  texts  of  the  Gospels  (A,  B, 
C,  D)  is  at  present  (1S61)  in  preparation  at  Oxford  by 
the  Kev.  K.  H.  Hansell.  The  Greek  text  of  D  has  been 
influenced  in  orthography  by  tlic  T^atin ;  e.  g.  Safxapi- 
TOLvoiv,  AeVpwo-o?,  <j)XayeK\Ma-os  (Wetstein,  Prnlegg.  40); 
but  the  charge  of  more  serious  altcraiions  from  this  sovirce 
cannot  be  maintained. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

P  Q  {Codd.  Guelpherhytani,  Wolfenbiittcl),  two 
palimpsests,  respeoti  \'ely  of  the  6th  and  5th  cen- 
turies. Published  b}'  Knittel,  1762  and  P  again, 
more  completely,  by  Tischendorf,  Mon.  Sao:  ined. 
iii.  1860,  who  has  Q  ready  for  publication. 

T  {Cod.  Borgianus:  Propaganda  at  Rome),  of 
the  5th  century.  The  fragments  of  St.  John,  edited 
by  Giorgi  (1789)  ;  those '"of  St.  Lulce,  collated  by 
B.  H.  Alford  (1859).  Other  fragments  were  pub- 
lished by  Woide.    (Tischdf.  N.  T.  Proleg.  cLxvii.).    j 

r  {Cod.  Barherini,  225,  Rome).  Saec.  viii. 
Edited  by  Tischendorf,  Mon.  Sacr.  incd.  1846. 

0  (Cod.  Tischendorf,  i.,  Leipsic).  Saec.  vii. 
Edited  by  Tischendorf,  in  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.  1846. 

(ii.)  The  Secondary  Uncials  are  in  the  Gospels: — 

E  (Basileensis,  K.  iv.  35,  Basle).  Collated  by 
Tischendorf,  Mueller,  'I'regelles.     Saec.  viii. 

F  (Kheno-trajectinus.  Utrecht,  formerly  Bor- 
reeli).     Coll.  by  Heringa.  Traj.  1843.    Saec.  ix. 

G  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5684).  Coll.  by  Tregelles 
and  Tis(;hendorf.     Saec.  i.x.  x. 

H  (Hamburgensis.  Seidelii).  Coll.  by  Tregelles, 
1850.     Saec.  ix. 

K  (Cod.  Cyprius.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  63).  Coll. 
by  Tregelles  and  Tischendorf.     Saec.  ix. 

M  (Cod.  Campianus.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  48).  Coll. 
by  Tregelles,  and  transcribed  by  Tischendorf.   Saec.  x. 

S  (Vaticanus,  354).     Coll.  by  Birch.     Saec.  x. 

U  (Cod.  Navianus.  Venice).  Coll.  by  Tregelles 
and  Tischendorf.     Saec.  x. 

V  (Mosquensis).     Coll.  by  Matthaei.     Saec.  ix. 

r  (Bodleianus).  Saec.  ix.  Cf.  Tischdf.,  jV.  T. 
p.  clxxiii.  Coll.  by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles. 
Fresh  portions  of  this  MS.  have  lately  been  taken 
by  Tischendorf  to  St.  Petersburgh. 

A  (Bodleianus).  Saec.  viii.  (?).  Cod.  Tischen- 
dorf iii.  (Bodleian).  Saec.  viii.  is.  Coll.  by  Tisch- 
endorf and  Tregelles. 

2  (St.  Petersburgh).  Saec.  viii.  ix.  (?).  A 
new  MS.  as  yet  uncollated. 

B  (i.).  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic 
Epistles. 

N,  A  B  C  D. 

Eg  {Codex  Laudianus,  35),  a  Graeco-Latin  MS. 
of  the  Acts,  probably  brought  to  England  by  Theo- 
dore of  Tarsus,  668,  and  used  by  Bede.  It  was 
given  to  the  University  of  O.\ford  by  Archbishop 
Laud  in  1636.  Published  by  Hearne,  1715;  but 
a  new  edition  has  been  lately  undertaken  (1861) 
by  Scrivener,  and  is  certainly  required.  Saec.  vi. 
vii. 

(ii.)  The  Secondary  Uncials  are — 

Go  :=  L,  (Cod.  Angelicus  (Passioiiei)  Rome). 
Coll.  by  Tischdf.  and  Treg.     Saec.  ix. 

Hj  (Cod.  Mutinensis,  Modcna),  of  the  Acts. 
Coll.  by  Tischdf.  and  Treg.     Saec.  ix. 

Kg  (Mosquensis),  of  the  Catholic  Epistles.  Coll. 
by  Matthaei.     Saec.  ix. 

C  (i.).  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Pauline  Epistles: 

N  A  B  C. 

Dj  (Codex  Claromontnnus,  i.  c.  from  Clermont, 
near  Beauvais,  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  107),  a  Graeco-Latin 
MS.  of  the  Pauline  Epistles,  once  (like  ]))  in  the 
possession  of  Beza .  It  passed  to  the  Royal  Library 
at  Paris  in  1707,  where  it  has  since  remained. 
Wetstein  collated  it  carefully,  and,  in  1852,  it  wa.s 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


615 


«  At  the  end  of  tlie  lacuna  after  Philoninn  20  Go  adds, 
ad      laudirciiscs      iticipU     tpiftola 

but  the  fnnn  ofthi' 'ivecU  name  shows  almost  crmcliisivoly 


published  by  Tischendorf,  who  had  been  engaged  on 
it  as  early  as  1840.  The  MS.  was  independently 
examined  by  Tregelles,  who  communicated  the 
results  of  his  collation  to  Tischendorf,  and  by  their 
combined  labours  the  original  text,  which  lias  been 
altered  by  numerous  correctors,  has  been  com- 
pletely ascertained.  The  MS.  is  entire  except  Rom. 
i.  1-7.  The  passages  Rom.  i.  27-30  (in  Latin,  i. 
24-27)  were  added  at  tlie  close  of  the  6th  century, 
and  1  Cor.  siv.  13-22  by  another  ancient  hand. 
The  MS.  is  of  the  middle  of  the  6th  century.  Cf. 
Griesbach,  Sijmb.  Crit.  ii.  31-77. 

Fg  {Codex  Augiensis.  Coll.  SS.  Trin.  Cant.  P., 
17,  1),  a  Graeco-Latin  MS.  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
bought  by  Bentley  from  the  Monnsterv  of  Reichenau 
(Augia  Major)  in  1718,  and  left  to  Trin.  Coll.  by 
his  nephew  in  1786.  This  and  the  Cod.  Boer- 
nerianus  (Gj)  were  certainly  derived  from  the 
same  Greek  original.  The  Greek  of  the  Ep.  to 
the  Hebrews  is  wanting  in  both,  and  they  have 
four  common  lacunae  in  the  Greek  text:  1  Cor.  iii. 
8-16,  vi.  7-14;  Col.  ii.  1-8;  Philem.  21-25. 
Both  likewise  have  a  vacant  space  between  2  Tim. 
ii.  4  and  5.  The  Latin  version  is  complete  from  the 
beginning  of  the  MS.  Rom.  iii.  19,  yu&i  \eyei,  dicit. 
Tlie  MS.  has  been  admirably  edited  by  F.  H. 
Scrivener,  Cambr.  1859.  It  is  assigned  to  the  9tli 
century.  The  Latin  version  is  of  singular  interest; 
it  is  closer  to  the  best  Hieronymian  text  than  that 
in  G3,  especially  when  the  Greek  text  is  wanting 
(Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  xxviii.),  but  has  many  pecu- 
liar readings  and  many  in  common  with  G3. 

G3  (Codex  Bocrnerianns.  Dresden),  a  Gra'^co- 
Latin  MS.,  which  originally  formed  a  part  of  the 
same  volume  with  A.  It  was  derived  from  the 
same  Greek  original  as  Fg,  which  was  written 
continuously,  but  the  Latin  version  in  the  two 
MSS.  is  widel}^  different.*  A  and  G^  seem  to  have 
been  written  by  an  Irish  scribe  in  Switzerland 
(St.  Gall)  in  the  9th  century.  The  Greek  with 
the  interlinear  Latin  version  was  carefully  edited 
by  Matthaei,  1791.  Scrivener  has  given  the  varia- 
tions from  Fg  in  his  edition  of  that  MS. 

The  following  fragments  are  of  great  value  : — 
H3  (Codex  Coislinianus.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  202), 
part  of  a  stichometrical  MS.  of  the  6th  century, 
consisting  of  twelve  leaves  :  two  more  are  at  St. 
Petersburgh.  Edited  by  Montfaucou,  Bibl.  Coislin. 
251-61  ;  and  again  transcribed  and  prepared  for  the 
press  by  Tischendorf.  It  was  compared,  according 
to  the  subscription  (Tischdf.  N.  T.  p.  clxxxix.), 
with  the  autograph  of  Pamphilus  at  Caesarea. 

Mg  (Hamburg;  London),  contiiinins;  Hob.  i.  1- 
iv.  3;  xii.  20-end,  and  1  Cor.  xv.  52-2  Cor.  i.  15; 
2  Cor.  X.  13 -xii.  5,  written  in  bright  red  ink  in  the 
10th  century.  The  Hamburg  fragments  were  col- 
lated by  Tregelles:  all  were  published  by  Tischen- 
dorf, Anecdot.  Sacr.  et  Prof.  1855. 

(ii.).  The  Secondary  Uncials  are  : — 

K,,  Lg. 

Eg  {Cod.  Sangermancnm,  St.  Petersburgh),  a 
Graeco-Latin  MS.,  of  whicli  tlie  Greek  text  was 
badly  copied  from  Dg  after  it  had  been  thrice  cor- 
rected, and  is  of  no  value.  The  Latin  text  is  of 
some  slight  value,  but  has  not  been  well  examined. 
Griesbach,  Symh.  Crit.  ii.  77-85. 


that  the  Greek  words  are  only  a  translation  of  the  lAtln 
title  which  the  scribe  found  in  his  Latin  MS.,  in  which, 
as  in  many  others,  llie  apocryphal  epistle  to  tlieT.aodiccans 
was  found. 

2  L  2 


516 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


D  (i.).   The  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Apocalypse. 

N  AC. 

(ii.).  The  Secondary  Uncial  is — 

B„  {Codex  Vaticanns  (Basilianus),  2066). 
Edited  (rather  imperfectly)  by  Tischendorf.  Mon. 
Sacr.  1846,  and  by  Mai  in  his  edition  of  B.  Tisch- 
endorf gives  a  collation  of  the  ditl'erences,  N.  T. 
Praef.  cxlii-iii. 

29.  The  number  of  the  cursive  MSS.  (minus- 
cules) in  existence  cannot  be  accurately  calculated. 
Tischendorf  catalogues  about  500  of  the  Gospels, 
200  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  P:pistles,  250  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  and  a  little  less  than  100  of 
the  Apocalypse  (exclusive  of  lectionaries) ;  but  this 
enumeration  can  only  be  accepted  as  a  rough 
approximation.  Many  of  the  JISS.  quoted  are 
only  known  by  old  references  ;  still  more  have  been 
"  inspected  "  most  cursorily;  few  only  have  been 
thoroughly  collated.  In  this  last  work  the  Rev. 
F.  H.  Scrivener  {Collation  of  about  20  Jf<S',S'.  of 
the  Hohj  Gospels,  Camb.  1853  ;  Cod.  Aug.,  ^x., 
Camb.  1859)  has  laboured  with  the  greatest  suc- 
cess, and  removed  many  common  errors  as  to  the 
character  of  the  later  text.'  Among  the  MSS.  which 
are  well  known  and  of  great  value  the  following 
are  the  most  important : — 

A.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Gospels. 

1  (Act.  i.;  Paul.  i. ;  Basileensis,  K.  iii.  3). 
Saec.  X.  Very  valuable  in  the  Gospels.  Coll.  by 
Roth  and  Tregelles. 

33  (Act.  13;  Paul.  17;  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  14). 
Saec.  xi.     Coll.  by  Tregelles. 

59  (Coll.  Gonv.  et  Cai.  Cambr.).  Saec.  xii.  Coll. 
by  Scrivener,  1860,  but  as  yet  unpublished. 

69  (Act.  31:  Paul.  37;  Apoc.  14;  Cod.  Lei- 
cestrensis).  Saec.  xiv.  The  text  of  the  Gospels 
is  especially  valuable.  Coll.  by  Treg.  1852,  and 
by  Scriv.  1855,  who  published  his  collation  in  Cod. 
Aug.  ^c,  1859. 

il8  (Bodleian.  Miscell.  13;  Marsh  24).  Saec. 
xiii.     Coll.  by  Griesbach,  Symh.  Crit.  i.  ccii.  ff. 

124  (Caesar.  Vindob.  Nessel.  188).  Saec.  xii. 
Coll.  by  Treschow,  Alter,  Birch. 

127  (Cod.  Vatic<anus,  349).  Saec.  xi  ColL  by 
Birch. 

131  (Act.  70;  Paul.  77;  Apoc.  G6  ;  Cod.  Vati- 
canns, 360).  Saec.  xi.  Formerly  belonged  to 
Aldus  Manutius,  and  was  probably  used  by  him 
in  his  edition.     Coll.  by  Birch. 

157  (Cod.  Urbino-Vat.  2).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Birch. 

218  (Act.  65;  Paul.  57;  Apoc.  33;  Caesar- 
Vindob.  23).     Saec.  xiii.     Coll.  by  Alter. 

238,  259  (Moscow,  S.  Synod.  42,  45).  Saec. 
xi.     Coll.  by  Matthaei. 


f  Mr.  Scrivener  has  kindly  furnished  me  with  the  fol- 
lowing summary  of  his  catalogue  of  N.  T.  MSS.,  which  is 
by  far  the  most  complete  and  trustworthy  enumeration 
yet  made  (_Flain  Introductimi,  p.  225)  : — 


Uncial. 

Cursive. 

Duplicntes 
already 
deducted. 

Gospels 

Act.  Cath.  Epp.     .   . 

Paul 

Apoc 

Kvangelistarla   .    .   . 
A postolos    

34 
10 
14 

4 
58 

7 

601 
229 
283 
102 
183 
65 

32 
12 
14 

Total    ....  1        12? 

1463 

61 

NEW  TESTAMENT 

26'2,  300  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  53,  186).  Saec. 
X.  xi.     Coll.  (?)  by  Scholz. 

346  (Milan,  Ambros.  23).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  (?) 
by  Scholz. 

2P«'  (St.  Petersburgh.  Petropol  vi.  470),  Saec. 
ix.     Coll.  by  Muralt.     (Transition  cursive.) 

c^",  gs""  (Lambeth,  1177,  528,  Wetstein,  71). 
Saec.  xii.     Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

p"' (Brit.  Mus."  Burney  20).  Saec.  xiii.  Coll. 
by  Scrivener. 

'  w«"  (Cambr.     Coll.  SS.  Trin.  B.  x.  16).     Saec. 
xiv.     Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

To  these  must  be  added  the  Evangelistarium 
(B.  M.  Burney,  22),  marked  y"',  collated  bv 
Scrivener.g     (Plate  ii.  fig.  4.) 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  need  careful 
collation:'' 

13  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp  .  50).  Coll.  1797.  S.aec. 
xii.     (Cf.  Griesbach,  Symh.  Crit.  i.  cliv.-clxvi.). 

22  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  72).     Saec.  xi. 

28  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  379).     Coll.  Scholz. 

72  (Brit.  Mns.  Harl.  5647).     Saec.  xi. 

106  (Cod.  Winchelsea).  Saec.  x.  Coll.  Jackson 
(used  by  Wetstein),  1748. 

113,  114  (B.  M.  Harl.  1810,  5540). 

126  (Cod.  Guelpherbytanus',  xvi.  16).     Saec.  xi. 

130  (Cod.  Vaticanus,  359).     Saec.  xiii. 

209  (Act.  95;  Paul.  138;  Apoc.  46;  Venice. 
Bibl.  S.  Marci  10).  Saec.  xv.  The  text  of  the 
Gospels  is  especially  valuable. 

225  (Vienna,  Bibl.  Imp.  Kollar.  9,  Forlos.  31). 
Saec.  xii. 

372,  382  (Rome,  Vatican.  1161,  2070).  Saec. 
XV.  xiii. 

405,  408,  409  (Venice,  S.  Marci,  i.  10,  14,  1.5). 
Saec.  xi.,  xii. 

B.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic 
Epistles. 

13  =  Gosp.  33,  Paul.  17. 

31  =  Gosp.  69  {Codex  Leicestrensis'). 

65  =  Gosp.  218. 

73  (Paul.  80.  Vatican.  367).  Saec.  xi.  Coll. 
by  Birch. 

95,  96  (Venet.  10,  11).  Saec.  xiv.  xi."  Coll. 
by  Rincli. 

180  (Ai-gentor.  Bibl.  Sem.  M.).  Coll.  by 
Arendt. 

loti  _  pEcr  61  (Tregelles),  (Brit.  Mus,  Add. 
20,003).     Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

a"'  (Lambeth,  1182).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

c"'  (Lambeth,  1184).  Coll.  Sanderson  aj). 
Scrivener. 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  require  more 
careful  collation. 

5  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  106). 

25,  27  (Paul.  31,  Apoc.  7  ;  Paul.  33.  Brit.  Mus. 


8  The  readings  marked  102  (Matt.  xxiv.-Mark  viii.  1) 
which  were  taken  by  AVetstein  from  the  margin  of  a 
printed  copy,  and  said  to  have  been  derived  from  a  Me- 
dicean  MS.,  cannot  have  been  derived  from  any  other 
source  than  an  imperfect  collation  of  B.  I  have  noticed 
85  places  in  which  it  is  quoted  in  St.  Mark,  and  in  every 
one,  except  ii.  22,  it  agrees  with  15.  In  St.  Matthew  it  is 
noticed  as  agreeing  with  B  70  times,  while  it  differs  from 
it  5  times.  These  few  variations  are  not  difficult  of 
explanation. 

i>  It  is  to  he  hoped  that  scholars  may  combine  to  accom- 
plish complete  collations  of  the  MSS.  given  in  these  lists. 
One  or  two  summer  vacations,  with  proper  co-operation, 
might  accomplish  the  work. 


PI.  I. 

1.  Brit.  Mu8.— Pap.  98. 


^^0  rKXH  ^  NO  ct^ev  jfifx 

nOTOYrHSUiKCYJUehiriHYUHKo 

2.  Brit.  Mus.— Cod.  Alex.— (St.  John  i.  1-5.) 

A       V_^  Kl  A  PVr-lM  MOAOrOCKAlOAorocH 

J^       •n|»oCTOMOis)<Aiec  MMOxoroc  • 

O  V^O  GHMeMAPXMn  f»0  CTO  1^  OH 

TTx  M  T-x^  I W  rove  re  M  G*ro  f  <x  I  ^w> 
pe  icxyTOyere  MGnroov^ee  n 
OrerO  M  eh-iBi^AVTCAj^CJUM  m  i-j 

KA  I  nrO  cb  cue  e  ^-•  TH  C  K  O-r »  xd)  Al 
Mei  KAlHCKOTlAAVTOOYICATTe 

3.  Brit.  Mus.— Add.  17,  211.-(St.  Luke  xx.  9, 10.> 


■§1!104  KA,.<)Yc 

SPECIMENS    OF    GREEK    WSS.    FROM    THE    1st    TO    THE    Vltli   CENTURY. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

Harl.  5537,  56'^U).     Cf.  Griesbach,  Symb.    Crit. 
ii.  184,  185. 

29  (Paul.  35,  Genev.  20).     Saec.  .\i.  xii 

36  {Coll.  Nov.  Oxon). 

40  (Paul.  46,  Apoc.  12.  Alex.  Vatican.  179). 
Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Zacagni. 

66  (Paul.  67). 

68  (Paul.  73,  Upsal).     Saec.  xii.  xi. 

69  (Paul.  74,  Apoc.  30,  Guelph.  .xvi.  7).  Saec. 
XIV.  xiii. 

81   (Bai'berini,  377).    Saec.  xi. 
137  (Milan,  Amhros.  97).      Saec.  xi.  Coll.   by 
Scholz. 

142  (Mut.inensis,  243).     Saec.  xii.» 

C.  P)-imary  Cursives  in  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

17  -  Gosp.  33. 

37  =  Gosp.  69  {Cod.  Lcicestrensis). 
57  =  Gosp.  218. 

108,  109  =  Act.  95,  96. 

115,  116  (Act.  100,  101,  Mosqu.  Matt.  d.  f.). 

137  (Gosp.  263,  Act.  1 17,  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  61). 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  require  more 
eireful  collation. 

5  =  Act.  5. 

23  (Paris,  Coislin.  28).  Saec.  xi.  Descr.  by 
Monttiiucon. 

31  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5537)  =  1»".  Apoc.  Saec. 
xiii. 

39  (Act.  33.  Oxford,  Coll.  Lincoln.  2). 

46  =  Act.  40. 

47  (Oxford,  Bodleian.  Roe  16).    Saec.  xi. 
55  (Act.  46.     Monacensis). 

67  (Act.  66.  Vindob.  Lambec.  34).  The  cor- 
rections are  especially  valuable. 

70  (Act.  67.    Vindob.    Lambec.  37). 

71  (Vindob.    Forlos.  19).     Saec.  xii. 

i  Three  other  MSS.,  containing  the  Catholic  Epistles, 
require  notice,  not  from  their  intrinsic  worth,  but  from 
their  connexion  with  the  controversy  on  1  John  v.  7,  «. 

34  (Gosp.  61,  Coll.  SS.  Trin.  Dublin,  Codex  Mont- 
furtioAius).  Saec.  xv.  xvi.  There  is  no  doubt  that  this 
was  the  Codex  Bntamricus,  un  the  authority  of  which 
Erasmus,  according  to  his  promise,  inserted  the  inter- 
polated words,  ev  tw  ovpafw,  irarrip,  KoyO';  Koi  jrreO/xa 
ayioi^  Kal  ovtol  ot  t.  €.  €.  Koi  r.  e.  ot  jw.  el'  t.  y. ;  but  (litl 
not  omit,  on  the  same  authority  (which  e.\actly  foUaws 
the  late  Latin  MSS.),  the  last  clause  of  ver.  8,  koi  ot  rp. 
— ela-Cv.  The  page  on  which  the  verse  stands  is  the  only 
glazed  page  in  the  volume.  A  collation  of  the  MS.  has 
been  publislied  by  Dr.  Dobbin,  London,  1854. 

162  (I'aul.  2U0.  Vat.  Ottob.  298.)  Saec.  xv.  AGraeco- 
I^atin  MS.  It  reads,  awb  toO  ouparoO,  TTan]p,  Aoyos  Koi 
TTi'eO/na  07101/  KoX  oi  Tpeis '  eU  to  eV  eitrt  (Tregelh'S, 
Home,  p.  217).  Scholz  says  that  the  MS.  contains  "  innu- 
merable transpositions,"  but  gives  no  clear  account  of  its 
character. 

173  (Paul.  211.  Naples,  Bibl.  Borbon.)  Saec.  xi.  The 
interpolated  words,  with  the  articles,  and  the  last  clause 
of  ver.  8,  are  given  by  a  second  hand  (Saec.  xvi.). 

CoiJUx  Ravianus  (110  (josp.)  is  a  mere  transcript  of  the 
X.  T.  of  the  ConipliUcnsian  Polj'glutt,  with  varialinns  from 
ErasniMS  and  Stephens.  Comp.  Griesbach,  Si/inb.  Crit.  i. 
clxxxi.-clxxx.\ii. 

Ii  The  accompanying  plates  will  give  a  good  idea  of  the 
different  forms  of  biblical  GU.  MSS.  For  permission  to 
lake  the  tracings,  trom  which  the  engravings  have  been 
admirably  made  by  Mr.  Netherclift,  my  sincere  thanl<s  arc 
due  to  Sir  1''.  M.iddcn,  K.II. ;  and  I  am  also  nuich  indebted 
to  the  other  officers  of  the  MSS.  department  of  the  Briti.sh 
Museum,  for  the  help  which  they  gave  me  In  making  them. 

I'l.  i.  fig.  1.  A  few  lines  from  the  Ao-yo?  €irtTa<|>tos  of 
Hyprrides  (col.  9,  1.  1,  of  the  edition  of  Rev.C.  Habinglon), 
a  papyrus  of  the  lirst  century,  or  not  much  later.  In 
Mr.    Babington's  fiKsimilc  {he  i  adscript  after  t'o/xoi  is 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


517 


73  (Act.  68). 

80  (Act.  73.    Vatican.  367). 

177-8-9  (Mutin.). 

D.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Apocalypse. 

7  =  1«"  (Act.  25.  Brit.  Mus.  Earl.  5537). 
Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

14  =  Gosp.  69  {Cod.  Leicestrensis). 

31  =  cs"  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5678).  Saec.  xv. 
Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

38  (Vatican.  579).  Saec.  xiii.  Coll.  by  B.  H. 
Alford. 

47  (Cod.  Dresdensis).  Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Mat- 
thaei. 

5)    (Paris,  Bibl.  I.mp.).     Coll.  by  Keichc. 

gs".  (Parham,  17).  Saec.  xi.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

m^".  (Middlehill)  =  87.  Saec.  xi.  .xii .  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

■  The  Ibllowing  are  valuable,  but  require  more 
careful  collation. 

2  (Act.  10.  Paul.  12.  Paris.  Bibl.  Imp.  237). 

6  (Act.  23.  Paul.  28.  Bodleian.  Barocc.  3). 
Saec.  xii.  xiii. 

11  (Act.  39.  Paul.  45). 

12  =  Act.  40. 

17,  19  (Ev.  35.    Act.  14.    Paul.  18;    Act.  17, 
Paul.  21.  Paris.  Coislin.  199,  205). 
28  (Bodleian.  Barocc.  48). 
36  (Vindob.  Forlos.  29).     Saec.  xiv. 
41   (Ale.x-Vaticau.  68).    Saec.  xiv. 
46  =  Gosp.  209. 
82  (Act.  179.    Paul.  128.    Monac.  211). 

30.  Having  surveyed  in  outline  the  history  of 
the  transmission  of  the  written  text,  and  the  chief 
characteristics  of  the  MSS.''  in  which  it  is  preserved, 


omitted  wrongly.  It  is  in  fact  partly  hidden  under  a  fibre 
of  the  papyrus,  but  easily  seen  from  the  side.  Two  cha- 
racteristic transcriptural  errors  occur  in  the  passage :  tu! 
TovTO)  TpoTTcu  for  TU  TouTou  TpoTTCf),  and  (by  itacism,  ij31) 
trvv^XoifTai,  for  (TvveKovTi.. 

Fig.  2.  The  opening  verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel  from  the 
Cod.  Alex.  The  two  first  lines  are  rubriaited.  The  spe- 
cimen exhibits  the  common  contractions,  0C,  ANfiN,  and 
an  example  of  itacism,  xwpei's.  The  stop  at  the  end  of  the 
fifth  line,  ouSe  ev,  is  only  visible  in  a  strong  light,  but 
certainly  exists  there,  as  in  C  1)  L,  &c. 

Fig.  3.  A  very  legible  specimen  of  the  Nilrian  pa- 
limpsest of  St.  Luke.  The  Greek  letters  in  the  original 
are  less  defined,  and  very  variable  in  tint :  the  Syriac 
somewhat  heavier  than  in  the  engraving,  which  is  on  the 
wliole  very  faithful.  The  dark  lines  shew  where  the 
vellum  was  folded  to  form  the  new  hook  for  the  writnigs 
of  Severus  of  Antloch.  The  same  MS.  contained  fragments 
of  the  Iliad,  i  dited  by  Dr.  Cureion,  and  a  piece  of  Euclid. 

PI.  ii.  fig.  1.  Part  of  the  first  cuhnnn  of  the  famous 
Harleian  KvmiyeUstariiim,  collated  by  Scrivener.  It  is 
dated  a.d.  995  (Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  p.  xlviii.).  The  Icttei-s 
on  this  p.ige  are  all  in  gold.  The  initial  letter  is  illu- 
minated with  red  and  blue.  The  MS.  is  a  magnificent 
example  of  a  service-book. 

Fig.  2.  From  Tischcndorf's  valuable  MS.  of  the  Acts 
(til  Tregelles).  It  was  written  a.d.  1044  (Scrivener,  Cwi. 
Aug.  l.xix.).  The  specimen  contains  the  itaclsms  xpoioiv 
(xpdfoi')  and  Trei'TtKOi'Ta. 

Fig  3.  The  beginning  of  St.  John,  from  Cod.  1 14  of  the 
Gospels  (Griesbach,  Sj/mb.  Crit.  i.  cxcili.),  a  MS.  of  the 
13th  cent. 

Fig.  4 .  Part  of  the  beginning  of  St.  John,  from  the 
very  valuable  Kmiiijelistarium  y»".  (Scrivener,  Collation, 
Sec,  pp.  Ixi.  ff.).  The  initial  letter  of  the  Gospel  is  a  rude 
illumination.  I'lie  MS.  bears  a  dale  1:110;  but  Mr.  Si-ri- 
vcner  justly  do\il't.s  wlielher  this  is  in  the  hand  of  the 
original  scrilir. 


518 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


we  are  in  a  position  to  consider  the  extent  and 
nature  of  the  variations  which  exist  in  dillerent 
copies.  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  number  of" 
these  exactly,  but  they  cannot  be  less  than  120,000 
in  all  (Scrivener,  Introduction,  3),  though  of  these 
a  very  large  proportion  consist  of  differences  of 
spelling  and  isolated  aberrations  of  scribes,'  and  of 
the  remainder  comparatively  few  alterations  are 
sufficiently  well  supported  to  create  reasonable 
doubt  as  to  the  final  judgment.  Probably  there 
are  not  more  than  1600-2000  places  in  which 
the  true  reading  is  a  matter  of  uncertainty,  even  if 
we  include  in  this  questions  of  order,  inflexion  and 
orthography :  the  doubtful  readings  by  which  the 
sense  is  in  any  way  affected  are  very  much  fewer, 
and  those  of  dogmatic  importance  can  be  easily 
numbered.  • 

31.  Various  readings  are  due  to  different  causes: 
some  arose  from  accidental,  others  from  intentional 
alterations  of  the  original  text,  (i)  Accidental  va- 
riations or  errata,  are  by  far  t.he  most  numerous 
class,  and  admit  of  being  referre<l  to  several  obvious 
sources,  (a)  Some  are  errors  of  sound.  The  most 
frequent  form  of  this  eiTor  is  called  Itacism,  a  con- 
fusion of  different  varieties  .of  the  I-sound,  by 
which  (oi,  v)  7],  I,  ei,  e,  &c.,  are  constantly  inter- 
changed. Other  vowel-changes,  as  of  a  and  w,  ov 
and  u,  &c.,  occur,  but  less  frequently.  Very  few 
MSS.  are  wholly  free  fiom  mistakes  of  this  kind, 
but  some  abound  in  them.  As  an  illustration  the 
following  variants  occur  in  F^  in  Rom.  vi.  1-16: 
1  ipev/xev.  2  OTives,  e'[T€i  (ert)*  3  ayvoflrat 
(-T€).  5  icrofiaida.  8  a-rroddvofiev.  9  airo- 
6vi]ffKL,€Tei.  II  vfxis,  XoylC^adai.  13  wapacrTr]- 
(Tarat.  14  ecrrat  (-re).  15  tixei.  16  oWaTUL, 
0T61,  TTapeiffTaverai  {irapiffrdi/eTe),  earai,  vira- 
KoveTai.  An  instance  of  fair  doubt  as  to  the  true 
nature  of  the  reading  occurs  in  ver.  2,  where  Qfjau- 
fiey  may  be  an  error  for  Qriffofieu,  or  a  real  va- 
riant.™ Other  examples  of  disputed  readings  of 
considerable  interest  which  involve  this  considera- 
tion of  Itacism  are  found,  Rom.  xii.  2,  crucrxTj^aTi- 
^iffOai  -de ;  .xvi.  20,  (TvvTpi\p€i  -ai.  James  iii.  3, 
el  Se  (i5e).  Rom.  v.  1,  exoo/xfv,  exo/ugi/  (cf.  vi. 
15).  Luke  iii.  12,  14;  .John  xiv.  23  ;  Hebr.  vi. 
3  ;  James  iv.  15  {Tron]ffwiJ.ev  -ojjiev).  Matt,  xxvii. 
60,  Kaivif,  K(v^.  John  xv.  4,  fxeivy,  jxivrj  (cf. 
]  John  ii.  27).  Jlatt.  .xi.  16,  irfpo'is,  eraipois. 
Matt.  XX.  15  17,  el.  2  Cor.  xii.  ],  Se7,  Srj.  1  Tim. 
V.  21,  TrpSaKK-nffiv,  irpoa-KAifftv.  1  Pet.  ii.  3, 
XpVO'T'hs  6  KVplOS,  xpiCT^s  0  Kvpto^. 

To  these  may  be  added  such  variations  as  Matt. 
xxvi.  29,  &c.  yeyrj/xa,  yeuvrjfjLa.  2  Pet.  ii.  12,  ye- 
yevvrjfjiiva,  yeyevrifxeva.  Matt.  i.  18  ;  LuJce  i.  14, 
yevv-qais,  yeveffts.  Matt,  xxvii.  35,  ^dWovres, 
^aX6vre%.     1  Pet.  ii.  1 ,  (p66i'os,  <p6vos. 

32.  (/3)  Other  variations  are  due  to  errors  of 
sight.  These  .arise  commonly  from  the  confusion 
of  similar  letters,  or  from  the  repetition  or  omission 
oi'  the  same  letters,  or  from  tlie  recurrence  of  a 
similar  ending  in  consecutive  clauses  which  often 
causes  one  to  be  passed  over  when  the  eye  mechanic- 
ally returns  to  the  copy  (ofioiOTeAevTov).  To  these 
may  be  added  the  fidse  division  of  words  in  tran- 
scribing the  text  from  the  continuous  uncial  writino-. 

I  The  whole  amount  is  considerably  less  in  number 
Ihan  is  found  in  the  copies  of  other  texts,  if  account  be 
taken  of  the  number  of  the  MSS.  existing.  Comp.  Norton, 
(Jenuineness  of  Ihe  Gosjxls,  i.  p.  191  ii. 

'"  Tlie  readings  are  taken  from  Mr.  Scrivener's  admir- 
able transcript.  In  the  siime  volume  Mr.  Sirivener  lias 
given  valuable  sununarics  of  the  freciuenci'  of  the  occur- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

The  uncial  letters  0,  O,  C,  £,  are  peculiaily  liable 
to  confusion,  and  examples  may  easily  be  quoted  to 
show  how  their  similarity  led  to  mistakes ;  1  Tim. 
iii.  18,  OC,  0C;  2  Cor.  ii.  3,  fcxn  CXil ;  Mark  iv. 
22,  CAN,  06AN,  OCAN. 

The  repetition  or  omission  of  similar  letters  may 
be  noticed  in  Matt.  xxi.  18,  EIlANArArXlN, 
EHANArnN.  Luke  x.  27  ;  Rom.  xiii.  9 ;  Tit.  ii.  7 ; 
James  i.  27,  C6ATT0N,  tATTON  (cf.  Tischdf. 
ad  Horn.  xiii.  9).  Luke  vii.  21,  EXAPI5ATO 
BAEnEIN,  EXAPI2ATO  TO  BAEnEIN.  Mark 
viii.  17,  STNIETE,  2TNIETE  ETI.  Luke  ii.  38, 
(ATTH)  ATTH  T.  HPA.  Matt.  xi.  23,  KA-fAP- 
NAOTM  IMH,  KA*APNAOYM  H.  1  Thess.  ii. 
7,  EFENHGHMEN  NHniOI,  EPENHeHMEN 
HniOI.  Luke  ix.  49,  EKBA;\AONTA  AAI- 
MONIA,  EKBAAAONTA  TA  AAIM.  Mark  xiv. 
35,  nPOCEAenN,  nPOEAeriN.  2Cor.  iii.  10, 
or  AEAOZA2TAI,  OTAE  AEAOZA2TAI. 
1  Pet.  iii.  20,  AnAH  EAEXETO,  AHEE- 
EAEXETO.  Acts  .x.  36,  TON  AOPON  AHE- 
2TEIAE,  TON  AOPON  ON  AHESTEIAE. 
Sometimes  this  cause  of  eiTor  leads  to  further 
change:  2  Cor.  iii.  15,  HNIKA  AN  ANAPI- 
Nn2KHTAI,  HNIKA  ANAriNn2KETAI. - 
Examples  of  omission  from  Homoioteleuton  occur 
John  vii.  7  (in  T)  ;  1  John  ii.  23,  iv.  3  ;  Apoc.  i.x. 
1,  2,  xiv.  1  ;  Matt.  v.  20  (D).  Cf.  I  Cor.  xv. 
25-27,  54  {¥,,  G^)  ;  xv.  15  (Origen).  And  some  have 
sought  to  explain  on  this  principle  the  absence 
from  the  best  authorities  of  the  disputed  clause  in 
Matt.  X.  23,  and  the  entire  verses,  Luke  xvii.  36, 
Matt,  xxiii.  14. 

Instances  of  false  division  are  found,  Mark  xv.  6, 
ovirep  -pTovvTO,  hv  TrapyTovi'TO.  Phil.  i.  1,  (Tvi/e~ 
TriaKowoLS,  avv  eTnaKdirois.  Matt.  xx.  23,  &Wois, 
aW'  oh.  Gal.  i.  9,  npoeip7iKafJ.fv,  TrpoeipTjKa 
fifu.  Acts  xvii.  25,  kuto,  irdpTa,  Kai  to.  irdvTa. 
In  a  more  complicated  example,  crpa  iv  {ffwrrjpa 
'1t](Tovi/)  is  changed  into  apiav  (aunripiav)  in 
Acts  xiii.  23  ;  and  the  remarkable  reading  of  Latin 
authorities  in  1  Cor.  vi.  20  ct  portate  arose  from 
confounding  dpa.  re  and  apare.  In  some  places 
the  true  division  of  the  words  is  still  doubtful. 
2  Cor.  xii.  19,  raSe  -Kavra,  ra  5e  TrdvTa.  Acts 
xvii.  26,  TTposrerayfievovs  Kaipovs,  irphs  reray- 
Ij-euovs  Kaipovs.  In  Cod.  Avij.  (F^)  the  fal.sg  divi- 
sions of  tlie  original  scribe  have  been  carefully  cor- 
T'ocfed  by  a  contemporary  hand,  and  the  frequency 
of  their  occurrence  is  an  instructive  illusti'ation  of 
the  corruption  to  which  the  text  was  expo.sed  from 
this  source  (<?.  g.  in  Gal.  i.  there  are  15  such  cor- 
rcictions,  and  four  mistakes,  vers.  13,  16,  18  are 
left  uncorrected).  Errors  of  breathing,  though  ne- 
cessarily more  rare,  are  closely  connected  with 
these:  Matt.  ix.  18,  us  fKddiv,  elveXdwv.  .lohn 
ix.  30,  iv  rovTO),  %v  tovto.  Luke  vii.  12  ;  Rom. 
vii.  10  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  12,aD'T7j,  avri).  Mark  xii.  31, 
avrrj,  out^. 

There  are  yet  some  other  various  readings  which 
are  eiTors  of  sight,  which  do  not  fall  under  any  of 
the  heads  already  noticed :  e.  g.  2  Pet.  i.  .'?,  ISla 
S6^r],  Sia  S6^7}s.     2  Cor.  v.  10,  to  Sick  rod  (rco/xa- 


rence  of  the  different  forms  of  itacism  in  other  MSS.  which 
he  has  collated. 

■>  I'lie  remarkable  reading  in  Matt,  xxvii.  11,  'IrjcroCi' 
Bapa^Pau,  seems  to  have  originated  in  this  way  :  VMIN- 
BAPABBAN  being  written  YMININ  BAPABBAN,  and 
hence  YMIN'IN,  ).  e.  vii.lt,  'IjjcroOi'  (Trcgellos,  ad  toe). 


■vbur. 


1  BHt.  MuK— Harl.  6698— (St   John.  i.   1,2.) 


HH. 


nNn|OJTOH;fri, 

2.  Brit.  Mu8.-AUil    20,003.— (Acts  xiii.  18-20.) 

•'^I^lA*brcri^  6Vi  r-to)  >^34*  c«^  cup  •  k^^-^t^ 


3  Brit    .Miis.  -  Harl.  5540. -{St   John  i.  1-3.) 
4)  Brit    Mu.-i— Burney  22.— (St.  John  i    1-3.)  ^\^ 

of^yoKj  •  ovnroaH  iJ€^ 


SPECIMENS   OF    GREEK    MSS.   FROM    THE    Xtli    TO    THE    XlVth    CENTURY. 

/■'.  G.  Ntthfrclift,  fac-sim.  lith. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

tos,  ra  tSia  rod  accfxaros."  IJnni.xii.  13,  ■)(^^>fiais, 
fxveiats.  Hebr.  ii.  9,  ;^(wpis,  X'^P'''"' (O-  ^^^'^  ''^^ 
remarkable  substitution  ot  Kutp^  tor  Kvpiw  in  Kom. 
xii.  11  seems  to  have  been  caused  by  a  t'alse  render- 
ing of  an  imusual  contraction.  The  same  expla- 
nation may  also  apply  to  the  variants  in  1  Cor.  ii.  1, 
fxapTvpLOV,  ixv(n7]pL0v.  1  Tim.  i.  4,  oiKovoixiav, 
olKoSofxiav,  otKoSofxrif. 

33.  Other  variations  may  be  described  as  errors 
of  impression  or  memory.  The  copyist  after  read- 
ing a  sentence  from  the  text  before  him  often  failed 
to  reproduce  it  exactly.  He  transposed  the  words, 
or  substituted  a  synonym  for  some  very  common 
term,  or  gave  a  direct  personal  turn  to  what  was 
objective  before.  Variations  of  order  are  the  most 
frequent,  and  very  commonly  the  most  puzzling 
questions  of  textual  criticism.  Examples  occur  in 
every  page,  almost  in  every  verse  of  the  N.  T.  The 
exchange  of  synonyms  is  chiefly  confined  to  a  few 
words  of  constant  use,  to  variations  between  simple 
and  compound  words,  or  to  changes  of  tense  or 
number:  Keyeiv,  ilireiv,  (^ai/ot,  A.aA.e?;' Matt.  xii. 
48,  XV.  12,  xix.  'Jl  ;  JIark  xiv.  31  ;  John  xiv.  lu, 
i&c.  iyeipw,  Sify^ipoi  Matt.  i.  24.  iyipdr^i/at, 
ava(nrivai  Matt.  xvii.  9  ;  Luke  ix.  22.  iKduv, 
aire\de7v,  e^eKd^v  Matt.  xiv.  .25 ;  Luke  xxiii. 
33 ;  Acts  xvi.  39.  'I.  X.,  'IrjcroSs,  XpiffrSs,  6 
Kvpios  Hebr.  iii.  1;  1  Pet.  v.  10;  Col.  iii.  17; 
Acts  xviii.  25,  x.\i.  13.  virS,  airo,  e'/c  Matt.  vii.  4; 
Mark  i.  26,  viii.  31 ;  Rom.  xiii.  1,  &c.  eSaiKa,  5e'- 
SwKa,  SiSoi/iii  Luke  x.  19;  .John  vii.  19,  xii.  49, 
&c.  sin;/,  anil  plnr.  Matt.  iii.  8  ;  1  Pet.  ii.  1 ;  Matt, 
xxiv.  18.  The  third  form  of  change  to  a  more  per- 
sonal exhortation  is  seen  constantly  in  the  Epistles 
in  the  substitution  of  the  pronoiui  of  the  first  person 
{rifie'is)  for  that  of  the  second  (yfj.f7s) :  1  Pet.  i.  4, 
10,  12,  &c.  To  these  changes  may  be  added  the  in- 
sertion of  pronouns  of  reference  (  avrSs,  &c.) :  Matt. 
vi.  4,  XXV.  17,  &c.  nadrtrai,  fxa6r]Tal  avrov  Matt. 
xxvi.  3G,  45,  56  ;  xxvii.  64,  lic.  Trarrjp,  irar^p 
fj-ov  .lohn  vi.  65,  viii.  28,  kc.  And  it  may  be 
doubtful  whether  the  constant  insertion  of  connect- 
ing particles  /cat,  Si,  yap,  ovv,  is  not  as  much  due 
to  an  unconscious  instinct  to  supply  natural  links 
in  the  narrative  or  ai'gument,  as  to  an  intentional 
eftbrt  to  give  greater  clearness  to  the  text.  Some- 
times the  impression  is  more  purely  mechanical,  as 
when  the  copyist  repeats  a  termination  incorrectly: 
Apoc.  xi.  9  (C)  ;  1  Thess.  v.  4  (?)  ;  2,  Pet.  iii.  7  (?)  P 

34.  (ii.)  Of  intentional  changes  some  affect  the 
expression,  others  the  substance  of  the  p:vssage. 
(a)  The  intentional  changes  in  language  are  partly 
changes  of  Hellenistic  forms  for  those  in  common 
use,  and  partly  modifications  of  harsh  constructions. 
These  may  in  many  cases  have  been  made  un- 
consciously, just  as  might  be  the  case  if  any  one 
now  were  to  transciibe  rapidly  one  of  the  original 
MS.  pages  of  Milton  ;  but  more  commonly  the  later 
scribe  would  correct  as  mere  blunders  dial('(-tic 
peculiarities  which  were  wholly  strange  to  him. 
Thus  the  forms  reffatpaKovra,  fpavvciv,  fKaOf- 
plcrOr],  Kiyioiv,  k(i.,  ^Afla,  tincTa,  i*Lc.,  and  the 
irregular  constructions  of  iav,  lirav,  ;uc  I'cmoved 
almost  without  exception  from  all  but  a  few  MSS. 
Imperfect  constructions  are  completed  in  ditl'erent 
ways:  Mark  vii.  2,  add.  ifxifjiy^avTO,  or  Kariyvw- 
aav ;  Horn.  i.  32,  add.  oxjk  ivSrjcray,  &c.  ;  2  Cor. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


519 


"  By  a  similar  change  Atlianasius  (i>e/nca)7i.  Vi:rhi,  5) 
and  others  give  in  Wisd.  ii.  2;!,  Kar'  e'lKoya  rri<;  iSt'as 
di'Stonjros  for  the  reading,  t^s  iSia';  iStoTTjro?. 

p  It   was   apparently   by  a  similar   trior  ( I'lcgcUes. 


viii.  4,  add.  Si^aadai  ;  1  Cor.  x.  24,  add.  eKacTTos. 
Apparent  solecisms  are  corrected :  Matt.  v.  28, 
avrfis  for  aiiT-fiv;  xv.  32,  ripiipas  tor  rt/j.epai;  Heb. 
iv.  2,  (TvyKiKipa(riJ.ivos  for  -fiivovs.  The  Apo- 
calypse lias  sutit-red  especially  from  this  grammatical 
revision,  owing  to  the  extreme  boldness  of  the  rude 
Hebraizing  dialect  in  which  it  is  written :  e.  a. 
Apoc.  iv.  1,  8,  vi.  11,  xi.  4,  xxi.  14,  &c.  Variations 
in  the  orthography  of  proper  names  ought  probably 
to  be  placed  under  this  head,  and  in  some  cases  it  is 
perhaps  impossible  to  determine  the  original  form 
{'laKaptwTris,  'laKapiuiO,  'ZKopttid  ;  Na^apd,  -td, 
-ad,  -OT,  -er). 

35.  (j8)  The  changes  introduced  into  the  sub- 
stance of  the  text  are  generally  additions,  borrowed 
either  from  pai'allel  passages  or  fi'om  marginal 
glosses.  The  first  kind  of  addition  is  particularly 
frequent  in  the  Gospels,  where,  however,  it  is  often 
very  difKcult  to  determine  how  far  the  parallelism 
of  two  passages  may  have  been  carried  in  the 
original  text.  Instances  of  unquestionable  inter- 
polation occur:  Luke  iv.  8,  xi.  4;  Matt.  i.  25,  v. 
44,  viii.  13,  xxvii.  35  (49)  ;  Mark  xv.  28;  Matt, 
xix.  17  (compare  Acts  ix.  5,  6,  xxli.  7,  xxvi.  14). 
Similar  interpolations  occur  also  in  other  books: 
Col.  i.  14;  1  Pet.  i.  17;  Jude  15  (Kom.  xvi.  27); 
Apoc.  XX.  2  ;  and  this  is  especially  the  case  in  quo- 
tations from  the  LXX.,  which  are  constantly  brought 
into  exact  harmony  with  the  original  text:  Luke  iv. 
18,  19,  xix.  46;  Matt.  xii.  44,  xv.  8  ;  Heb.  ii.  7, 
xii.  20. 

Glosses  are  of  more  partial  occurrence.  Of  all 
Greek  MSS.  Cod.  Bezae  (D)  is  the  most  remarkable 
for  the  variety  and  singularity  of  the  glosses  which 
it  contains.  Examples  of  these  may  be  seen  :  Matt. 
XX.  28  ;  Luke  v.  5,  xxii.  26-28 ;  Acts  i.  5,  xiv.  2. 
In  ten  verses  of  the  Acts,  taken  at  random,  the  fol- 
lowing glosses  occur:  Acts  xii.  1,  eV  t^ 'louSoi'a ; 
3,  7)  itrixe'i-pTOCis  e7r!  rovs  niffrovs  ;  5,  TtoAArj  8e 
TTpoaevx^  '/jv  tV  iKTiVfla  irepl  avrov  ;  7,  iTfearr] 
Ti^  Tlerptfi ;  10,  KaT4p7](Tav  tovs  ^'  ^aOfiovs.  Some 
simple  explanatory  glosses  have  passed  into  the 
common  text :  IMatt.  vi.  1,  iKi-r)ixotTvvr]v  for  ZiKaio- 
avvi)v;  Jlark  vii.  5,  avlinois  for  Koivais;  Jlatt. 
v.  11,  i^€i/8(^/xevoi :  conip.  John  v.  4  (Luke  xxii. 
43,  44). 

36.  (7)  Many  of  the  glosses  which  were  intro- 
duced into  the  text  s]iring  from  the  ecclesiastical 
use  of  the  N.  T.,  just  as  in  the  Gospels  of  our  own 
Prayer-Book  introductory  clauses  have  been  inserted 
here  and  there  (<?.  (/.  3rd  and  4th  Sundays  after 
Easter:  "  Jesus  said  to  His  disciples").  These  ad- 
ditions are  commonly  notes  of  person  or  place :  JIatt. 
iv.  12,  xii.  25,  &c.,  6  'IrjtroOs  inserted;  John  xiv. 
1,  Kai  eJirfv  Toh  /lad-fiTais  avrov  ;  Acts  iii.  11, 
xxviii.  1  (cf.  Mill,  J'rolegg.  1055-6).  Sometimes 
an  emphatic  clause  is  added:  Matt.  xiii.  23,  xxv. 
29;  Mark  vii.  16;  Luke  viii.  15,  xii.  21,  &  (Xfv 
Sna  K.r.\.  •  Luke  xiv.  24,  iroAAo)  yap  elffiv  kAtj- 
rol  K.r.K.  But  the  most  remarkable  liturgical  in- 
sertion is  the  doxology  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  Matt, 
vi.  13;  and  it  is  probable  that  the  inteipolated  verse 
Act-s  viii.  37  is  due  to  a  similar  cause.  An  in- 
structive example  of  the  growth  of  such  an  addition 
may  be  seen  in  the  readings  of  Luke  i.  55,  as  given 
in  the  text  of  the  Gospel  and  in  the  collections  of 
ecclesiastical  hymns. 


Hw~ne,  22J)  that,  in  the  A.  V.  of  Hobr.  x.  23,  "  the  pro- 
fession of  oxiv  faith"  stands  for  "the  profession  of  our 
hujif."     riii;  lunner  is  found  in  no  document  whatever 


520 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


37.  (S)  Sometimes,  though  rarely,  various  read- 
ings noted  on  the  margin  are  incoi-porateJ  in  the 
text,  though  this  may  be  reckoned  as  the  effect  of 
ignorance  rather  than  design.  Signal  examples  of 
this  confusion  occur:  Matt.  xvii.  -6,  xxvi.  59,  60 
(E)) ;  Rom.  vi.  12.  Other  ifistances  are  found,  Matt. 
V.  19  ;  Rom.  xiv.  9  ;  2  Cor.  i.  10  ;  1  Pet.  iii.  8. 

38.  (e)  The  number  of  readings  which  seem  to 
have  been  altered  for  distinctly  dogmatic  I'easons  is 
extremely  small.  In  spite  of  the  great  revolutions 
in  thought,  ti;eliug,  and  practice  through  which  the 
Christiau  Church  passed  in  fifteen  centuries,  the 
copyists  of  the  N.  T.  faithfully  preserved,  according 
to  their  ability,  the  sacred  trust  committed  to 
them.  There  is  not  any  trace  of  intentional  re- 
vision designed  to  give  support  to  cmieut  opinions 
(Matt.  xvii.  21  ;  Mark  ix.  29  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  5,  need 
scarcely  be  noticed).  The  utmost  that  can  be 
ui'ged  is  that  internal  considerations  may  have 
decided  the  choice  of  readings:  Acts  xvi.  7,  xx.  28  ; 
Rom.  V.  14 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  51 ;  2  Cor.  v.  7  ;  1  Tim. 
iii.  16  ;  1  John  v.  7,  in  Latin  copies;  (Rom.  viii. 
1 1).  And  in  some  cases  a  feeling  of  reverence  may 
have  led  to  a  change  in  expression,  or  to  the  intro- 
duction of  a  modifying  clause:  Luke  ii.  33,  'iccff'ficp 
for  0  irar^p  avTov  ;  ii.  43,  'Iwff^^  Kul  i}  fi^T7)p 
avrov  for  ol  yovtls  avrov  ;  John  vii.  39,  ovttw  yap 
■^v  TrveviJ.a  SeSofifuoi' ;  Acts  xix.  2  (D) ;  Gal.  ii.  5 ; 
Mark  xiii.  32,  o/n.  ouSe  6  vi6s  (cf.  Matt.  xxiv.  36)  ; 
Matt.  v.  22,  add.  elKrj ;  1  Cor.  xi.  29,  add.  ai/a^lus 
(Luke  xxii.  43,  44,  om.). 

But  the  general  effect  of  these  variations  is 
scarcely  appreciable ;  nor  are  the  corrections  of 
assumed  historical  and  geographical  errors  much 
more  numerous:  Matt.  i.  11,  viii.  28,  repyea-qvoii' ; 
x:^iii.  35,  om.  viov  Bapax'^ov ;  xxvii.  9,  oin.  'lepi- 
fj.lov,  or  Zax<^iov,  Mark  i.  2,  iy  toIs  Trpocp^Tais 
for  eV  'He.  Ty  irp. ;  ii.  28,  om.  iirl  'A^.  apx'f- 
peces  ;  John  i.  28,  BT]6al3apa  ;  v.  2,  -^v  Se  tor  ian 
Se  ;  vii.  8,  ouirco  for  ovk  (?j  ;  viii.  57,  T^crcrepd- 
KovTa  for  irevTTjKovra ;  xix.  14,  wpa  ijV  ois  TplrT] 
for  ejcTTj  ;  Acts  xiii.  33,  t^  devrepw  for  Tip  "KpaiTCf. 

39.  It  will  be  obvious  from  an  examination  of 
the  instances  quoted  that  the  great  mass  of  various 
i-eadings  are  simply  variations  in  form.  There  are, 
however,  one  or  two  greater  variations  of  a  diffei'ent 
character.  The  most  important  of  these  are  John 
vii.  53-viii.  12  ;  Mark  xvi.  9-end  ;  Rom.  xvi.  25-27. 
The  lirst  stands  quite  by  itself;  and  there  seems  to 
be  little  doubt  that  it  contains  an  authentic  narra- 
tive, but  not  Ijy  the  hand  of  St.  John.  The  two 
others,  taken  in  connexion  with  the  last  chapter  of 
St.  John's  Gospel,  suggest  the  possibility  that  the 
apostolic  writings  may  have  undergone  in  some 
cases  authoritative  revision :  a  supposition  which 
does  not  in  any  way  affect  tlieir  canonical  claims: 
but  it  would  be  impossible  to  enter  upon  the  details 
of  such  a  question  here. 

40.  Manuscripts,  it  must  be  remembered,  are  but 


4  The  history  and  characteristics  of  the  Versions  are 
iliscussed  elsewhere.  It  may  be  useful  to  add  a  short  Uible 
of  the  Fathers  whose  works  are  of  the  greatest  importance 
for  the  history  of  the  text.  Those  of  the  first  rank  are 
marked  by  capitals;  the  Latin  Fathers  by  italics. 

Justinus  M.,  c.  Iu;i-1GS.  Dionysius  Alex.,  f  2G5. 

iREN'AEns,  c.  120-190.         :     I'etriis  Alex.,  f  313. 

IrehOAsi  J'liierpriiS,  c.\SO.    I     Methodius,  fc.  31 1 


TEUTULLIAXUS 

Cion),  c.  llJO 
CI,£M^:^a  Alex.,  +  c 
Oi;ii;i;XLS,  1S6-253. 
Hippolytus. 

crrHiAycs,  1257. 


(Mar- 


KUSEBIUS  Caksau,  2G1- 
"     340. 

Athanasius,  296-373. 
Cyrillus  Hierosol.,  315- 

3Mti. 

I.VCIFEB,   r370. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

one  of  the  three  sotu-ces  of  textual  ciiticism.  The 
versions  and  patristic  quotations  are  scarcely  less 
important  in  doubtful  cases.")  But  the  texts  of  the 
versions  and  the  Fathers  were  themselves  liable  to 
corruption,  and  careful  revision  is  necessary  before 
they  can  be  used  with  confidence.  These  consider- 
ations will  sufficiently  .show  how  intricate  a  problem 
it  is  to  determine  the  text  of  the  X.  T.,  where 
"  there  is  a'  mystery  in  the  very  order  of  the  words," 
and  what  a  vast  amount  of  materials  the  critic 
must  have  at  his  command  before  he  can  ofler  a 
satisfactory  solution.  It  remains  to  inquire  next 
whether  the  first  editors  of  the  piinted  text  had 
such  materials,  or  were  competent  to  make  use  of 
them. 

II.  The  History  of  the  Printed  Text. 

1.  The  hi.story  of  the  printed  text  of  the  N.  T. 
may  be  divided  into  three  periods.  The  first  of 
these  extends  from  the  labours  of  the  Complutensiau 
editors  to  those  of  Mill :  the  second  from  Mill  to 
Scholz  :  the  third  from  Lachmann  to  the  present 
time.  The  criticism  of  the  first  period  was  neces- 
sarily tentative  and  partial :  the  materials  available 
for  the  construction  of  the  text  were  few,  and  im- 
perfectly known:,  the  relative  vtmte  of  various  wit- 
nesses was  as  yet  undetermined  ;  and  however  highly 
we  may  rate  the  scholarship  of  Erasmits  or  Beza, 
this  could  not  supersede  the  teaching  of  long  expe- 
rience in  the  sacred  writings  any  more  than  in  the 
writings  of  classical  authors.  The  second  period 
marks  a  great  progress:  the  evidence  of  MSS.,  of' 
versions,  of  Fathers,  was  collected  with  the  greatest 
diligence  and  success :  authorities  were  compared 
and  classified:  principles  of  observation  and  judgment 
woie  laid  down.  But  the  influence  of  the  fbimer 
period  still  lingered.  The  old  "received"  text  was 
supposed  to  have  some  prescriptive  right  in  viitue 
of'  its  prior  publication,  and  not  on  the  ground  of 
its  merits  :  this  was  asstimed  as  the  copy  which 
was  to  be  corrected  only  so  far  as  was  absolutely 
necessary.  The  third  period  was  introduced  by  the 
declaration  of  a  new  and  sounder  law.  It  was  laid 
down  that  no  right  of  possession  could  be  pleaded 
against  evidence.  The  "received"  text,  as  such,  was 
allowed  no  weight  whatever.  Its  authority,  on  this 
view,  must  depend  solely  on  its  critical  worth.  From 
first  to  last,  in  minute  details  of  order  and  ortho- 
graphy, as  well  as  in  graver  questions  of  substmitial 
alteration,  the  text  must  be  formed  by  a  free  and 
unfettered  judgment.  Variety  of  opinions  may  exist 
as  to  the  true  n>ethod  and  range  of  inquiry,  as  to 
the  relative  importance  of  different  forms  of  testi- 
mony :  all  that  is  claimed  is  to  rest  the  letter  of 
the  N.  T.  completely  and  avowedly  on  a  critical 
and  not  on  a  conventional  basis.  This  principle, 
which  seems,  indeed,  to  be  an  axiom,  can  only  be 
called  in  question  by  supposing  that  in  the  first 
instance  the  printed  text  of  the  >f.  T.  was  guarded 


Ephraem  Syrus,  +  378. 
Basiuus  Magnus,  329- 

379. 
HIERONYMUS,  340-420. 
Ambrosius,  340-397. 
AMBSOSIASTEIt,  C.360. 
Vict(/riitus,  c.  3G0. 
Chkysostomus,  347-407. 
DroYMUs,  1 396. 
Epiphanils,  t402. 
Jlu/iUKS,  c.  315-410. 
A  ua  CSTl.WS.  :i54-430. 
rhiodonis  Moi)S,  f  429. 
Cykillus  Alex.,  f  444. 


J/ilarius,  f  449. 
i'hcodoretns,  393-458. 
Eulhalius,  c.  450. 
{'assiodorus,  c.  46S-506. 
Victor  Antiochenus. 
Theuphylactus,  t  c.  628. 
AsiiiiEAS  (Apoc),  c.  635- 

7oO. 
Primasius  (Apoc). 
Johannes  Damascenus, 

fc.  756. 
Oecumenius,  c.  950. 
Euthyniius,  c.  1100. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

from  the  errors  and  imperfections  wliich  attended 
tlie  early  editions  of  every  classical  text ;  and  next 
tliat  the  laws  of  evidence  wliich  hold  good  every- 
where else  fail  in  the  very  case  where  they  might 
be  expected  to  find  tlieir  noblest  and  most  fruitful 
ap))licatiou — suppositions  which  are  refuted  by  the 
whole  history  of  tlie  Bible.     Each  of  these  periods 
will  now  requii-e  to  be  noticed  more  in  detail, 
(i)   From  the  Complutensian  t'ulytjlott  to  Mill. 
2.    The    Complutensian   Polijijlott. — The    Latin 
Vulgate  and  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  had  been 
published  some  time  before  any  part  of  the  original 
Greek  of  the  N.  T.     TJp  Hebrew  text  was  called 
for    by   numerous   and  wc.dthy   Jewish  congrega- 
tions   (Soncino,    1482-88),    the    Vulgate   satisfied 
ecclesiasti('al    wants;   and  the  few  Greek  scholars 
who  lived  at  the  close  of  the  15th  century  were 
hardly  likely  to  hasten  the  printing  of  the  Greek 
Testament.     Yet  the  critical  study  of  the  Greek  text 
had  not  been  wholly  neglected.    Laurcnti  us  Valla,  who 
was  second  to  none  of  the  scholars  of  iiis  age  (comp. 
Russell's  Life  of  Bp.  Andrewes,  pp.  282-310,  quoted 
by  Scrivener),  quotes  m  one  place  (Matt,  xxvii.  12) 
three,  and  in  another   (John  vii.  29),  seven  Gieek 
RISS.  in  his  commentaries  on  tlie  N.  T.,  which  were 
published  in  1505,  nearly  half  a  century  after  his 
death  (Michaelis,  Introd'.  ed.  Marsh,  ii.  339,  340). 
J.  Faber  (1512)  made  use  of  five  Greek  MSS.  of 
St.  Paul's  Ejjistles  (Michaelis,  p.  420).    Meanwhile 
tlie  Greek  Psalter  had  been  j)ublished  several  times 
(first  at  Milan,  1481  ?),and  the  H3^mnsof  Zachaiias 
and  the  Virgin  (Luke  i.  42-56,   U8-80)  were  ap- 
pended to  a  Venetian  edition  of  1486,  as  frequently 
happens  in  MS.  Psalters.     This  was  the  first  part 
of  the  N.  T.  which  wa.s  printed  in  Greek.    Eighteen 
years  afterwards   (1504),  the  first  six  chapters  of 
St.  John's  Gospel  were  added  to  an  edition  of  tlie 
poems  of  Giegory  of  Nazianzus,  published  by  Aldus 
(Guericke,  .Em?.  §41).     But  the  glory  of  printing 
the   first  Greek  Testament  is  due  to  the  princely 
Cardinal  Ximenes.     This  great  prelate  as  early  as 
1502  engaged  the  services  of  a  number  of  scholars 
to  superintend  an  edition  of  the  whole  Bible  in  the 
original  Hebrew  and  (ireek,  with  the  addition  of  the 
Chaldee  Targum  of  Onkelos,  the  LXX.  version,  and 
the  Vulgate.      The  work  was  executed  at  Alcala 
(Complutum),  wliere  he  had  founded  a  university. 
The  volume  containing  the  N.  T.  was  printed  first, 
and  was  completed  on  Jan.  10,  1514.     The  wliole 
work  was  not  iinished  till  July  10,  1517,  about 
t()ur  months  before  the  death  of  the  Cardinal.     Va- 
rious obstacles  still  delayed  its  publiciition,  and  it 
was   not   generally    circulated    till    1522,    though 
Leo  X.  (to  whom  it  was  dedicated)  authorized  the 
imblicatiou   March  22,    1520  (Tregelles,  Hid.   of 
Printed  Text  of  N.  T.  ;  Mill,  Prolegg.). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


521 


■■  "  Testarl  possuinus,  Pater  saiictissime  [i.e.  Leo  .\.], 
nia.\iniam  laborls  iiostri  partem  in  eo  praecipue  versatani 

luisse  uL castigatissima  omrii   ex  parte  vetus- 

tissimuque  excmplaria  pro  archelypis  habcieinus,  quotum 
quidem  tain  Hcbraionim  (iiiani  Oraccorum  ac  Latliioruiii 
nuiltipliceni  copiam  variis  <>x  locis  iiou  sine  siimino  labore 
icinquisiviiiuis.  Atque  ex  Ipsis  quideni  Gracca  Sanctitiiti 
tiiae  debenius :  qui  ex  ista  Apostolica  Bibliotheca  unti- 
quissimos  turn  Vetoris  turn  Novl  Tcsianienti  coillcos  per- 
quam  humane  ad  ims  niisicli ;  qui  nobis  In  hoc  iiegocio 
luuxime  fuerunt  aiijiunento"  {I'rol.  m.a).  And  again, 
tiiiu.  v.  rraef.:  "llliid  U'cturt'iii  non  lateat,  lum  quuevis 
excniphirla  impressioiii  luiic  archetypa  fiiisse,  sed  anti- 
qiiissima  cmiiKlatissiuiaqiic  ac  (aiitiie  praeterca  vetus- 
latis  lit  lidoin  eis  ulinisaie  iiufas  vldealur  (n-poc;  Sv<jk61\.ov 
Mvoi   Tojrapairai'   uai   /3t/3^Aoi',    .fie)   ([Uac    saiictissimus 


The  most  celebrated  men  who  were  engaged  on 
the  N.  T.,  which  forms  the  lifth  volume  of  the  entire 
work,    were    Lebrixa    (Nebrissensis)    and   Stuniai. 
Considerable  discussion  has  been  raised  as  to  the 
MSS.  which  they  used.     The  editors  describe  these 
generally  as  "  copies  of  the  greatest  accuracy  and 
antiquity,"  sent  from  tlie  Papal  Library  at  Rome ; 
and   in  the  dedication  to    Leo  acknowledgment  is 
made  of  his  generosity    iu   sending  MSS.  of  both 
"the  Old   and  N.  T." '     Very   little  time,   how- 
ever,  could,  have  been  given  to  the  examination  of 
the  Roman  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  as  somewhat  less 
than  eleven  months  elapsed  between  the  election  of 
Leo  and  the  completion  of  the  Complutensian  Tes- 
tament ;  and  it  is  remarkable  that  while  an  entry 
is  preserved  in  the  Vatican  of  the  loan  and  return 
of  two  MSS.  of  parts  of  the  LX.X.  there  is  no  trace 
of  the  transmission  of  any   N.  T.   MS.  to  Alcala 
(Tischdf.  N.   T.   1859,  p.  Ixxsii.  n.).     The  whole 
question,  liowever,  is  now  rather  of  bibliogi-aphieal, 
than  of  critical  interest.     There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  copies,  from  whatever  source  they  came, 
were  of  late  date,  and  of  the  common  type.'     The 
preference  which  the  editors  avow  for  the  Vulgate, 
placing   it    in   the   centre   column    in    the    (S.   T. 
"  between  the  Synagogue  and  the  Eastern  Church, 
tanquam  duos  hiuc  et  inde  latrones,"  to  quote  the 
well-known  and  startUug  words  of  the  Preface  "  me- 
dium autem  Jesum,  hoc  est,  Romanam  sive  Latinam 
ecclesiam"  (vol.  i.  p.  iii.  b.),  has  subjected  them  to 
the  charge  of  altering  the  Greek  text  to  suit  the 
Vulgate.     But  except  in  the  famous  interpolation 
and  omission  in  1  John  v.  7,  8,  and  some  points  of 
orthography    (BeeX^e^ovfi,    Be\ia\,    Tischdf.    p. 
Ixxxiii.)  the  cliarge  is  unfounded   (Marsh,  on  Mi- 
chaelis ii.  p.  851,  gives  the  literature  of  the  contro- 
versy).    The  impression  was  limited  to  six  hundred 
copies,  and  as,  owing  to  the  delays  which  occurred 
between  the  printing  and  publication  of  the  book, 
its  appearance  was  forestalled  by  that  of  the  edition 
of  Erasmus,   the   Complutensian    N.  T.    exercised 
comparatively  small  influence  on  later  texts,  except 
in  the  Apocalypse  (comp.  §3).     The  chief  editions 
which  follow  it  in  the  main,  are  those  of  (Plantin) 
Antwerp,  1564-1612;  Geneva,  1609-1632;  Mainz, 
1753  (Reuss,  Gesch.  d.  N.  T.  §401 ;  Le  Long,  Bi- 
hlioth.  Sacra,  ed.    Masch,  i.    191-195);   Mill  re- 
gretted that  it  was  not  accepted  as  the  standard 
text  {Prolcg.   1115);  and  has  given  a  long  list  of 
passages  in  which  it  offers,  in  his  opinion,   better 
readings   than    the   Stephanie  or  Elzevirian   texts 
{Prolog.  1098-1114). 

3.  The  editions  of  Erasmus. — The  history  of 
the  edition  of  Erasmus,  which  was  the  first 
published  edition  of  the  N.  T.,  is  happily  free 
from  all  obscurity.  Erasmus  had  paid  consider- 
In  Christo  pater  Leo  X.  pontifex  maximus  huic  institute 
favere  cupieiis  ex  Aposlolica  Bibliotheca  ediicla  ralsit." 

"  One  MS.  is  specially  appealed  to  by  Stmiica  in  his 
controversy  with  ICrasuius,  the  Cod.  JilKxiitnsis,  but 
nothing  Is  Icnown  of  It  which  can  lead  to  its  identification. 
The  famous  story  of  the  destruction  of  MS.S.  by  the  fire- 
work maker,  as  useless  parclimeiits,  has  been  fully  and 
clearly  refuted.  All  the  MSS  of  .Ximenes  wliich  were 
used  for  the  Polyglott  are  now  at  Madrid,  but  there  Is  no 
MS.  of  any  jiart  of  the  (Jk.  Test,  among  them  (Trogclles, 
JlUt.  of  Frintrd  Tert,  pp.  12-18).  'I'ho  edition  has  many 
readlnjjs  in  commun  with  tlie  Laudian  .MS.  numbereil 
51  Gosp.,  J2  Acts,  ;!.s  Paul  (Mill,  I  riAi'ij.  Ic9(l,  I436-3S). 
Many  of  the  peculiar  readings  are  collected  by  Mill 
(.I'rolng.  UI92-1095). 


522 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


able  attention  to   the  study  of  the  N.  T.    when 
he  received  an  application  from  Froben,  a  printer 
of  Bcisle  with  whom    he  was  acquainted,  to  pre- 
pare  a   Greek    text  tor    the   press.      Froben    was 
anxious  to  anticipate  the  publication  of  the  Com- 
plutensian  edition,  and  the  haste  with  which  the 
work  of  Erasmus  was  completed,  shows  that  little 
consideration  was  paid  to  the  exigences  of  textual 
criticism.     The  request   was   made  on    April   17, 
1515,  while  Erasmus  was  in  England.     The  details 
of  the   printing   were    not    settled   in   September 
in    the    same    year,    and    the    whole   work    was 
finished    in    February    1516    (Tregelles,    Hist,    of 
Printed  Text,  19,  'iO).      The  work,   as  Erasmus 
afterwards   confessed,   was   done   in    reckless  haste 
("  praecipij;atum    verius    quam    editum."    Comp. 
Epp.  V.  26  ;  xii.  19),  and  that  too  in  the  midst  of 
other  heavy  literary  labours  {Ep.  i.  7.    Comp.  Wet- 
stein,  Prolciiq.  p.  166-7).'     The  MSS.  which  formed 
the  basis  of  his  edition  are  still,  with  one  exception, 
preserved  at  Basle ;  and  two  which  he  used  for  the 
press  contain  the  corrections  of  Erasmus  and  the 
printer's  marks  (Michaelis,  ii.  220,  221).     The  one 
is  a  MS.  of  the  Gospels  of  the  1 6th  century  of  the 
ordinary  late  type   (marked  2  Gosp.   in  the  cata- 
logues of  MSS.  since  Wetstein) ;  the  other  a  MS.  of 
tiie  Acts  and  the  Epistles  (2  Acts.  Epp.),  somewhat 
older  but  of  the  same  general  character."     Erasmus 
also  made  some  use  of  two  other  Basle  MSS.  (1^ 
Gosp. ;  4  Acts.  Epp.) ;  the  former  of  these  is  of 
great  value,  but  the  important  variations  from  the 
common  text  which  it  oilers,  made  him  suspect  that 
it  had  been  altered  from  the  Latin.»     For  the  Apo- 
calypse he  had  only  an  imperfect  MS.  which  be- 
longed   to    Reuchliu.      The    last    six    verses   were 
wanting,  and  these  he  translated  from  the  Latin,'' 
a  process  which  he  adopted  in  other  places  where  it 
was  less  excusable.     The  received  text  contains  two 
memorable  instances  of  this  bold  interpolation.  _  The 
one  is  Acts  viii.  37,  which  Erasmus,  as  he  says,  found 
written  in  the  margin  of  a  Greek  MS.,  though  it 
was  wanting  in  that  which  he  used :  the  other  is 
Acts  ix.   5,  G,  aK\ripiv  croi  — avaffTridi  for  aWa 
avdffrr]6i,  which  has  been  found  as  yet  in  no  Greek 
MS.  whatsoever,  though  it  is  still   perpetuated  (-n 
the  ground  of  Erasmus'  conjecture.     But  he  did 

t  A  marvellous  proof  of  haste  occurs  on  the  title-page, 
in  which  he  quotes  "  Vulgarius  "  among  the  chief  fathers 
whose  authority  he  followed.  The  name  was  formed  from 
the  title  of  the  see  of  Theophylact  (Bulgaria),  and  Theo- 
phylact  was  converted  into  an  epithet.  This  "Vulgarius" 
is  quoted  on  Luke  xi.  35,  and  the  name  remained  un- 
changed in  subsequent  editions  (Wetstein,  I'rokg.  169). 

"  According  to  Mill  {ProUg.  1120),  Erasmus  altered  the 
text  in  a  little  more  than  fifty  places  in  the  Acts,  and  in 
about  two  hundred  places  in  the  Epistles,  of  whicTi  changes 
all  but  about  forty  were  improvements.  Specimens  of  the 
corrections  on  the  margin  of  the  MS.  are  given  by  Wet- 
stein {I'roleg.  p.  56,  ed.  Lotze).  Of  these  several  were 
simply  on  the  authority  of  the  Vulgate,  one  of  which 
(Matt.  ii.  11,  eupof  for  ctSoi')  has  retained  its  place  in  the 
received  text. 

V  The  reading  in  the  received  text,  Mark  vi.  15,  ij  (is 
eis  Tuiv  7rporjii)Taii',  in  place  of  lis  ets  Tail/  TTpo<j)riTioi',  is  a 
change  inti'oduccd  by  Erasmus  on  the  authority  of  this 
MS.,  which  has  been  supported  by  some  slight  additional 
evidence  since.  Mill  (Proleg.  l,^i^U17,  18)  states  that 
Erasmus  used  the  uncial  Basle  MS.  of  the  Gospels  (E), 
"  correcting  it  rightly  in  about  sixty-eight  places,  wrongly 
in  about  fifly-seveu."  This  opinion  has  been  refuted 
by  Wetstein  (I'rokg.  p.  5U).  The  MS.  was  not  then  at 
Basle  :  "  Hicce  codex  Basileensi  Academiae  dono  datus  est 
anno  1559  "  (Lotze  ad  Wetstein,  I.  c). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

not  insert  the  testimony  of  the  heavenly  witnesses 
(1  John  V.  7),  an  act  of  critical  faithfulness  which 
exposed  him  to  the  attacks  of  enemies.  Among 
these  was  Stunica^ — -his  rival  editor — and  when  ar- 
gument failed  to  silence  calumny,  he  promised  to 
insert  the  words  in  question  on  the  authority  of 
any  one  Greek  MS.  The  edition  of  Erasmus,  like 
the  Complutensian,  was  dediciited  to  Leo  X. ;  and  it 
is  a  nol)le  trait  of  the  generosity  of  Cardinal  Xi- 
menes,  that  when  Stimica  wished  to  disparage  the 
work  of  Erasmus  which  robbed  him  of  his  well- 
earned  honour,  he  checked  him  in  the  words  of 
Moses,  "  1  would  that  all  might  thus  prophecy," 
Num.  xi.  29  (Tregelles,  p.*19).  After  his  Hrst  edi- 
tion was  published  Erasmus  continued  his  labours 
on  the  N.  T.  Ep.  iii.  31 ;  and  in  March,  1519,  a 
second  edition  appeared  which  was  altered  in  about 
400  places,  of  whicli  Mill  reckons  that  330  were 
improvements  (^Prolegg.  §1134).  But  his  chief 
laboui-  seems  to  have  been  spent  upon  the  Latin 
version,  and  in  exposing  the  "solecisms"  of  the 
common  Vulgate,  the  value  of  which  he  completely 
misunderstood  (comp.  Mill,  Prolegg.  1124-1133).!' 
Tliese  two  editions  consisted  of  3300  copies,  and 
a  third  edition  was  required  in  1522,  when  the 
Complutensian  Polyglott  also  came  into  circulation. 
In  this  edition  1  John  v.  7  was  inserted  for  the 
first  time,  according  to  the  promise  of  Erasmus, 
on  the  authority  of  the  "Codex  Britannicus"  {i.  e. 
Cod.  Montfortianus),  in  a  form  which  obviously 
betrays  its  origin  as  a  clumsy  translation  from 
the  Vulgate  ("  ne  cui  foret  causa  calumniandi," 
Apol.  ad  Stnnicain,  ad  loc.).'  The  text  was 
altered  in  about  118  places  {Mill,  Prolegg.  1138). 
Of  these  corrections  36  wei-e  borrowed  fi'om  an 
edition  published  at  Venice  in  the  office  of  Aldus, 
1518,  which  was  taken  in  the  main  from  the  first 
edition  of  Erasmus,  even  so  as  to  preserve  errors  of 
the  press,  but  yet  differed  from  it  in  about  200 
jjlaces,  partlv  from  error  and  partly  on  MS.  au- 
thority (Mill,  §1122).  This  edition  is  further 
remarkable  as  giving  a  few  (19)  various  readings. 
Three  other  early  editions  give  a  text  formed  from 
the  second  edition  of  Erasmus  and  the  Aldine,  those 
ofHagenau,  1521,  of  Cephalaeus  at  Strasburg,  1524, 
of  Bebelius  at  Basle,   1531.     Erasmus  at  length 

»  Traces  of  this  unauthorized  retranslation  remain  in 
the  received  text :  Apoc.  xxii.  16,  opSpivo^.  17.  e\0e  (bis) ; 
(\9eTuj  ;  Kaix^av^Tio  to.  18.  crvixfxapTvpovixai  yap,  ctti- 
TiQrj  Trpo?  ravTa.  19.  atjiaipff  /3t)3Aou,  arro  ^t)3Aou  t.  ^. 
Some  of  these  are  obvious  bhmders  in  rendering  from  the 
Latin,  and  yet  they  are  consecrated  by  Uje. 

y  Luther's  German  version  was  made  from  this  text 
(Rcuss,  Gesch.  d.  H.  S.  ^400).  One  conjecture  of  Erasmus 
1 1'et.  iii.  20,  ttTra^  e^eSe^^TO,  supported  by  no  MS.,  passed 
from  this  edition  into  the  received  text. 

^  In  the  course  of  the  controversy  on  this  passage  the 
Cod.  Vatic.  B  was.  appealed  to  (1521).  Some  years  later 
(1534)  Sepulveda  describes  the  MS.  in  a  letter  to  Erasmus, 
giving  a  general  description  of  its  agreement  with  the 
Vulgate,  and  a  selection  of  various  readings.  In  reply  to 
this  Erasmus  appeals  to  a  supposed /ocdus  cum  Graecis, 
made  at  the  Council  of  Florence,  1439,  in  accordance  witli 
wlilch  Greek  copies  were  to  be  altered  to  agree  with  the 
Latin ;  and  argues  that  B  may  have  been  so  altered. 
When  Sepulveda  answers  that  no  such  compact  was  made, 
Erasmus  replies  that  he  had  heard  from  Culhbert  [Tonstall] 
of  Durham  that  it  was  agreed  that  the  Greek  MSS.  should 
be  corrected  to  harmonize  with  the  Latin,  and  took  the  state- 
ment for  granted.  Yet  on  this  simple  misunderstanding 
the  cre(iit  of  the  oldest  MSS.  has  been  impugned.  The  in- 
fluence of  the  idea  in  "-foedas  cum  Graecis"  has  survived 
all  belief  in  the  fact  (Tregelles,  Home,  iv.  pp.  xv.-xvii.). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

ol  tained  a  copy  of  the  Coniplutensiiin  text,  and  in 
his  fourth  edition  in  1527,  gave  some  various  read- 
ings from  it  in  addition  to  those  which  he  had 
already  noted,  and  used  it  to  correct  his  own  text 
in  the  Apocalypse  iu  90  places,  while  elsewhere  he 
introduced  only  IG  changes  (Mill,  §1141).  His 
fifth  and  last  edition  (i5.'>5)  dilfers  only  in  4 
places  fiom  the  fourth,  and  the  fourth  edition  after- 
wards became  the  basis  of  the  received  text.  This, 
it  will  be  seen,  rested  on  scanty  and  late  Greek  evi- 
dence, without  the  help  of  any  versions  except  the 
Latin,  which  was  itself  so  deformed  in  common 
copies,  as  not  to  show  its  true  character  and  weight. 
4.  The  editions  of  Stephc7is. — The  scene  of  our 
history  now  changes  from  Basle  to  Paris.  In  1543, 
Simon  de  Colines  (Colinaeus)  published  a  Greek 
text  of  the  N.  T.,  corrected  in  about  150  places  on 
fresh  MS.  authority.  He  was  charged  by  Beza 
with  making  changes  by  conjecture  ;  but  of  the  ten 
examples  quoted  by  Mill,  all  but  one  (Matt.  viii. 
;il),  oTToj'Ta  for  Trdura)  are  supportel  by  MSS., 
and  tour  by  the  Parisian  MS.  Heg.  85  (119  Gospp.;.» 
The  edition  of  Colinaeus  does  not  appear  to  have 
obtained  any  wide  nifluence.  Not  long  after  it  ap- 
peared, K.  Estienne  (Stephanos)  published  his 
first  edition  (1546),  which  was  based  on  a  collation 
of  MSS.  in  the  Royal  Library  with  the  Compluten- 
sian  text."*  He  gives  no  detailed  description  of  the 
MSS.  which  he  used,  and  their  character  can  only 
be  discovei'ed  by  the  quotation  of  their  readings, 
which  is  given  in  the  third  edition.  According  to 
Mill,  the  text  dilieis  fi'om  the  Complutensian  iu 
581  places,  and  in  198  of  these  it  follows  the  last 
edition  of  Erasmus.  The  former  printed  texts  are 
abandoned  in  only  37  places  in  favour  of  the  MSS., 
and  the  Erasmian  reading  is  often  preferred  to  that 
supported  by  all  the  other  Greek  authorities  with 
which  Stephens  is  known  to  have  been  acquainteil : 
c.  q.  Matt.  vi.  18,  viii.  5,  ix.  5.  &c.'=  A  second 
edition  very  closely  resembling  the  first  both  in 
form  and  text,  having  the  sime  preface  and  the 
same  number  of  pages  and  lines,  was  published  in 
1549;  but  the  great  edition  of  Stephens  is  that 
known  as  the  Regia,  published  in  1550.''  In  this 
a  systematic  collection  of  various  readings,  amount- 
ing, it  is  said,  to  2194  (Mill,  §1227),  is  given  for 
the  first  time;  but  still  no  consistent  critical  use 
was  made  of  them.  Of  the  authorities  which  he 
quoted  most  have  been  since  identified.  They  were 
the  Complutensian  text,  10  MSS.  of  the  Gospels, 
8  of  the  Acts,  7  of  the  Catholic  Epistles,  8  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  2  of  the  Apocalypse,  in  all  15 
distinct  MSS.     One  of  these  w;us  the  Codex  Bezae 

"  An  examination  of  the  readings  quoted  from  Colinaeus 
by  Mill  shows  conclusively  that  he  used  Cod.  119  of  the 
Gospels,  10  of  the  Paulino  Kpistles  (S  of  the  Acts,  the 
M.S.  marked  ta  by  Stephens),  and  probably  33  of  the 
tiospels  and  5  of  the  Catholic  Kpistles.  The  readings  in 
1  Cor.  xiv.  2,  1  I'lt.  V.  2,  2  I'et.  iii.  17,  seem  to  bo  mere 
errors,  and  are  apparently  supported  by  no  authority. 

•<  This  edition  and  its  counterpart  (1.519)  are  known  as 
the  "  O  niirificam"  edition,  from  the  opening  words  of 
the  preface :  " 0  mirificara  regis  nostil  optimi  et  pracstan- 
tissimi  principis  liboralilatem,"  in  allusion  to  the  new 
fount  of  small  Greek  type  which  the  king  had  ordered  to 
be  cut,  and  which  was  now  used  for  the  first  time. 

"The  Complutensian  influence  on  these  editions  has 
been  over-estimated.  In  the  last  verses  of  the  ApociiljTise 
(^3)  they  follow  what  Krasmus  supplied,  and  not  any 
Cjreek  authority"  ( I'regelles). 

c  Stephens'  own  description  of  his  edition  cannot  he 
received  literally.  "  Codices  nacti  aliquot  ipsa  vetustatis 
specie  pene  adoiandos,  iiuorum  copiam  nobis  bibliothcca 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


523 


(D).  Two  have  not  yet  been  recognised  (Comp. 
Griesbach,  N.  T.  ff.  xxiv.-xxxvi.).  The  collatior.s 
were  made  by  his  son  Henry  Stephens ;  but  they 
tail  entirely  to  satisfy  the  requii-ements  of  exact 
criticism.  The  various  readings  of  D  alone  in  the 
Gospels  and  Acts  are  more  than  the  whole  number 
given  by  Stephens ;  or,  to  take  another  example, 
while  only  598  variants  of  the  Complutensian  aie 
given.  Mill  calculates  that  700  are  omitted  (Protegg. 
§1226).  Nor  was  the  use  made  of  the  materi^s 
more  satisfactory  than  their  quality.  Less  than 
thirty  changes  were  made  on  MS.  authority  (Mill, 
1228) ;  and  except  in  the  Apocalypse,  which 
follows  the  Complutensian  text  most  closely,  "  it 
hardly  ever  deserts  the  last  edition  of  Erasmus" 
(Tregelles).  Numerous  instances  occur  in  which 
Stephens  deserts  his  former  text  and  all  his  AISS. 
to  restore  an  Erasmian  reading.  Mill  quotes  the 
following  examples  among  others,  which  are  the 
most  interesting,  because  tliey  have  passed  from  the 
Stephanie  text  into  our  A.  V.  Matt.  ii.  11,  evpov 
for  flSou  (without  the  authority  of  any  Greek 
MS.,  as  far  as  I  know,  though  Scholz  says  "  cum 
codd.  multis "),  iii.  8,  Kapnovs  a^iovs  for  Kapirhv 
&^iov.  Mark  vi.  33  add.  ol  bx^oi :  xvi.  8  add. 
raxv-  Luke  vii.  31  add.  elTve  Se  b  Kvpios.  .John 
xiv.  30  add.  rovrov.  Acts  v.  23  add.  6|ft).  Kom. 
ii.  5  om.  KaX  before  StKaioKpia-'ias.  James  v.  9, 
KaTaKpiQrJTe  for  KpiOrire.  Piescription  as  yet  oc- 
cupied the  place  of  evidence;  and  it  was  well  that 
the  work  of  the  textual  critic  was  reserved  for  a 
tiine  when  he  could  command  trustworthy  and 
complete  collations.  Stephens  published  a  fourth 
edition  in  1537  (Geneva),  which  is  only  remarkable 
as  giving  lor  the  first  time  the  present  division 
into  verses. 

5.  The  editions  of  Beza  and  Elzevir. — Notliing 
can  illustrate  more  clearly  the  deficiency  among 
scholars  of  the  first  elements  of  the  textual  criti- 
cism of  the  N.  T.  than  the  annotations  of  Beza 
(1556).  This  great  divine  obtained  from  H.  Ste- 
phens a  copy  of  the  N.  T.  in  which  he  had  noted 
down  various  readings  from  about  twenty-five  MSS. 
and  from  the  early  editions  (Cf.  Marsh,  on  Mi- 
chaelis,  ii.  858-60),  but  he  used  the  collection 
rather  for  exegetical  than  for  critical  purposes. 
Thus  he  pronounced  in  favour  of  the  obvious  inter- 
polations in  Matt.  i.  11  ;  John  xviii.  13,  which  have 
consequently  obtained  a  place  in  the  margin  of  the 
A.  v.,  ;md  elsewhere  maintained  readings  which, 
on  critical  grounds,  are  wholly  indefensible :  Matt, 
ii.  17;  Mark  iii.  1 6,  xvi.  2.  The  inter])olation  in 
Apoc.  xi.  11,  Kal  6  ayyekos  flar-fiKei  has  passed 


regia  facile  suppcditabit,  ex  lis  ita  hunc  nostrum  recen- 
suimus,  «i  nullam  omnino  litteram  secus  esse  pater emur, 
quam  plmrs  iique  meliores  libri,  tanquam  testes,  com- 
2>robarent.  Adjuti  praeterea  sumus  cum  aliis  (i.e.  Erasmi) 
tum  vero  Complutensi  editiorie,  quam  ad  vctustissimos 
bibliothecae  Leonis  X.  Pont,  codices  exoudi  jusserat  His- 
pan.  Card.  Fr.  Simcnius:  quos'cum  nostris  miro  consensu 
saepissime  convcnire  ex  ipsa  coUatione  deprehendlmus" 
(Pref.  edit.  15IG-9).  In  the  preface  to  the  third  edition, 
he  says  that  ho  used  the  same  16  copies  for  these  editions 
as  for  that. 

^  "Novum  Jksu  Chiisti  1).  N.  Teslamentum.  Kx  Bi- 
bliothecii  Kegia.  Luteliae.  Kx  (■iliciufi  Itolx'itl  Stephani 
typographi  regii,  regiis  typis.  MIM,."  In  this  edition 
Stephens  simply  says  of  his  "  16  cojiics,"  that  the  first  is 
the  Complutensian  edition,  the  second  {Cixitx  llezaf)  "  a 
most  ancient  copy,  collated  by  friends  in  Itjily  ;  3-8,  10, 
15,  copies  from  the  Royal  Library ;  "  caelera  sunt  ea  quae 
undique  corroftare  licuit  "  (I'ref ). 


524 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


into  tne  text  of  the  A.  V.  The  Greek  text  of  Beza 
(dedicated  to  Queen  Elizabeth)  was  printed  by 
H.  Stephens  in  1565,  and  again  in  1576;  but  his 
chief  edition  was  the  third,  printed  in  1582,  which 
contained  readings  from  the  Codices  Bezae  and 
Claromontanus.  The  reading  followed  by  the  text 
of  A.  V.  in  Rom.  vii.  6  (aTroQavovras  for  airo- 
Oav6vTis),  which  is  supported  by  no  Greek  MS.  or 
version  whatever,  is  due  to  this  edition.  Other 
editions  by  Beza  appeared  in  1588-9,  1598,  and 
his  (third)  text  found  a  wide  currency. «  Among 
other  editions  which  were  wholly  or  in  part  based 
upon  it,  those  of  the  Elzevirs  alone  require  to 
be  noticed.  The  first  of  these  editions,  famous  for 
the  beauty  of  their  execution,  was  published  at 
Leyden  in  1624.  It  is  not  known  who  acted  as 
editor,  but  the  text  is  mainly  that  of  the  third  edition 
of  Stephens.  Including  every  minute  variation  in 
orthography,  it  differs  from  this  in  278  places 
(Scrivener,  N.  T.  Cambr.  1860,  p.  vi.).  In  these 
cases  it  generally  agrees  with  Beza,  more  rarely  it 
differs  from  both,  either  by  typographical  enors 
(Matt.  vi.  34,  xv.  27;  Luke  x.  6  add.  b,  xi.  12, 
xiii.  19;  John  iii.  6)  or  perhaps  by  manuscript 
authority  (Matt.  xxiv.  9,  om.  twv.  Luke  vii.  12, 
viii.  29;  John  xii.  17,  Sri).  In  the  second  edition 
(Leyden,  1633)  it  was  announced  that  the  text 
was  that  which  was  universally  received  {textain 
ergo  habes  nunc  ah  omnibus  receptuin),  and  the 
declaration  thus  boldly  made  Wiis  practically  ful- 
filled. From  this  time  the  Elzevirian  text  was 
generally  reprinted  on  the  continent,  and  that  of  the 
third  edition  of  Stephens  in  England,  till  quite 
recent  times.  Yet  it  has  been  shown  that  these 
texts  were  substantially  formed  on  late  MS.  au- 
thority, without  the  help  of  any  complete  colla- 
tions or  of  any  readings  (except  of  D)  of  a  first 
class  MS.,  without  a  good  test  of  the  Vulgate,  and 
without  the  assistance  of  oriental  versions.  No- 
thing short  of  a  miracle  could  have  produced  a 
critically  pure  text  from  such  materials  and  those 
treated  without  any  definite  system.  Yet,  to  use' 
Bentley's  words,  which  are  not  too  strong,  "  the 

e  The  edition  of  Beza  of  1589  and  the  third  of  Stephens 
may  be  regarded  as  giving  the  fundamental  Greek  text 
of  the  A.  V.     In  the  fuUowing  passages  in  the  Gospels  the 
A.  V.  differs  frum  Stephens,  and  agrees  with  Beza: — 
Matt.  ix.  33,  om.  on.  Yet  this  particle  might  be  omitted 
in  translation. 
„      xxi.  7,  kiveKaBnTav  for  eTre/ca^to'er. 
„      xxiii.  13,  14,  transposed  in  Steph. 
Mark  vi.  29,  om.  tw. 

„      viii.  24,  (is  StvSpa  for  ort  ois  SevSpa. 
„     ix.  40,  riiJ.Civ  for  vfioiv,  "  against  most  MSS."  as 
Beza  remarks. 
Luke  i.  35,  add  U  (not  in  let  ed.). 
,,      ii.  22,  avTTis  for  avTwi'. 
„      X.  22,  oni.  xai.  o-rpaijcis  — eln-c.      Yet   given    in 

marg.,  and  noticed  by  Beza. 
„     XV.  26,  om.  avTov. 
„      xvii.  36,  add  verse.      The  omission   noticed   in 

marg.  and  by  Beza. 
„      XX.  31,  add  Koi.    So  Beza  H'  ed.,  but  not  S"!  (by 
eiTor?) 
John  xiii.  30,  ore  oiv  efijAee.     "  Against  all   the   old 
MSS."  (Beza). 
„     xviii.  24,  add  ovv. 
In  otliers  it  agrees  with  Stephens  agamst  Beza  : — 
Matt.  i.  23.  KaAt'uoutrt  for  KaAeVcts.    The  marg.  may  be 
intended  to  give  the  other  reading. 
,.      XX.  15,  tl  for  7). 
Mark  xvi.  20,  add  'Afj^riv  at  the  end.  " 

John  iv.  5,  Svxap  for  Six^P- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

text  stood  as  if  an  apostle  were  R.  StephePis'  com- 
positor." Habit  hallowed  what  was  commonly 
used,  and  the  course  of  textual  polemics  contri- 
buted not  a  little  to  preserve  without  change  the 
common  field  on  which  controversialists  were  pre- 
pared to  engage. 

ii.  From  Mill  to  Scholz. —  6.  The  second  period 
of  the  history  of  the  printed  text  may  be  treated 
with  less  detail.  It  was  influenced,  more  or  less, 
throughout  by  the  textus  receptus,  though  the 
authority  of  this  provisional  text  was  gradually 
shaken  by  the  increase  of  critical  materials  and  the 
bold  eniuiciation  of  principles  of  revision.  The 
first  important  collection  of  various  readings — for 
that  of  Stephens  was  too  imperfect  to  deserve  the 
name — was  given  by  Walton  in  the  6th  volume 
of  his  Polyglott.  The  Syriac,  Arabic,  Aethiopic, 
and  Persian  versions  of  the  N.  T.,  together  with 
the  readings  of  Cod.  Alex.,  were  printed  in  the 
5th  volume  together  with  the  text  of  Stephens. 
To  these  were  added  in  the  6th  the  readings  col- 
lected by  Stephens,  others  from  an  edition  by 
Wechel  at  Frankfort  (1597),  the  readings  of  the 
Codices  Bezae  and  Claromont.,  and  of  fourteen 
other  MSS.  which  had  been  collated  under  the  care 
of  Archbp.  Ussher.  Some  of  these  collations  were 
extremely  imperfect  (Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  p.  Ixvii. ; 
hitroduction,  p.  148),  as  appears  from  later  ex- 
amination, yet  it  is  not  easy  to  overrate  the  im- 
portance of  the  exhibition  of  the  testimony  of  the 
oriental  versions  side  by  side  with  the  cun-ent 
Greek  text.  A  few  more  MS.  readings  were  given 
by  CURCELLAEUS  (de  Courcelles)  in  an  edition  pub- 
lished at  Amsterdam,  1 658,  &c.,  but  the  great 
names  of  this  period  continue  to  be  those  of  Eng- 
lishmen. The  readings  of  the  Coptic  and  Gothic 
veisions  were  first  given  in  the  edition  of  (Bp.  Fell) 
Oxford,  1675;  ed.  Gregory,  1703  ;  but'the  greatest 
service  which  Fell  rendered  to  the  criticism  of  the 
N.T.  was  the  liberal  encouragement  which  lie  gave  to 
Mill.  The  work  of  Mill  (ct^.^Oxon.  17(17  ;  Amstelod. 
ed.  Kuster,  1710  ;  other  copies  have  on  the  title-page 
1723,  1746,  &c.)  maiks  an  epoch   in  the  history 


John  xviii.  20,  Traj/Tore  for  -navToBev.    "  So  in  the  old 
MSS."  (Beza). 

In  other  parts  of  the  N.  T.  I  have  noticed  the  following 
passages  In  which  the  A.  V.  agrees  with  the  text  of  Beza's 
edition  of  1589  against  Stephens  (.Vets  xvii.  25,  xxi.  8, 
xxii.  25,  xxiv.  13,  18;  Rom.  vii.  6  (note),  viii.  11  (note), 
xii.  11,  xvi.  20;  1  Cor.  v.  11,  xv.  31 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  1,  vi.  15, 
vii.  12,  16,  .\i.  10;  Col.  i.  1,  24,  ii.  10;  1  Thess.  ii.  15; 
2  Thess.  ii.  4  ;  Tit.  ii.  10 ;  Hibr.  ix.  2  (note) ;  Jumes  ii.  IS 
(note),  iv.  13.  15,  v.  12;  1  Pet.  i.  4  (note);  2  Pet.  iii.  T; 
1  John  i.  4,  ii.  23  (in  italics),  iii.  16 ;  2  John  3 ;  3  John  7  ; 
Jude  24  ;  Apoc.  Iii.  1,  v.  11,  vii.  2,  10,  14,  viii.  11,  xi.  1,  2, 
xiii.  3,  xiv.  18,  xvi.  14,  xvii.  4.  On  the  other  hand  the 
A.  V".  agrees  with  Stephens  against  Beza,  Acts  iv.  27, 
xvi.  17,  XXV.  6  (note),  xxvi.  8;  Kom.  v.  17;  1  Cor.  iii.  3, 
vii,  29,  xi.  22,  x.  3S  (error  of  press?);  2  Cor.  iii.  14  ;  Gal. 
iv.  1 7  (note) ;  PhiL  i.  23  ;  Tit.  ii.  7  ;  Hebr.  x.  2  ;  1  Pet. 
ii.  21,  iii.  21;  2  Pet.  ii.  12;  Apoc.  iv.  10,  ix.  5,  xii.  14, 
xiv.  2,  xviii.  6,  xix.  1.  The  enumeration  given  by  Scri- 
vener (.1  Supplement  tu  Vie  Authorized  Version,  pp.  7,  S) 
differs  slightly  from  this,  which  includes  a  few  more 
passages ;  other  passages  are  doubtful :  Acts  vii.  26,  xv. 
32,  xix.  27;  2  Cor.  xi.  1,  xiii.  4;  Apoc.  iv.  8,  xviii.  16. 
In  other  places,  Matt.  ii.  11,  x.  10 ;  John  xviii.  1 ;  Acts 
xxvii.  29  ;  2  Pet.  i.  1.  they  follow  neither.  In  James  iv. 
15,  ^-^(Toixiv  seems  to  be  a  conjectuue.  The  additional 
notes  on  readings.  Matt.  i.  11,  xxvi.  26;  M.ark  ix.  16; 
Luke  ii.  3S  ;  John  xviii.  13;  Acts  x.w.  6;  Eph.  vi.  9; 
James  ii.  in;  2  I'el.  ii.  2,  11,  18  ;  1  John  ii.  23;  2  John  8, 
all  come  from  Beza. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

of  the  N.  T.  text.  There  is  much  in  it,  which  will 
not  bear  the  test  of  historical  inquiry,  much  that 
is  imperfect  in  the  materials,  much  that  is  crude 
and  capricious  iu  criticism,  but  when  every  draw- 
back has  been  made,  the  edition  remains  a  splendid 
monument  of  the  labours  of  a  life.  The  work 
occupied  Mill  about  thirty  years,  and  was  finished 
only  a  fortnight  before  his  death.  One  great  merit 
of  Mill  was  that  he  recognized  the  importance  of 
each  element  of  ei'itical  evidence,  the  testimony  of 
MSS.  versions  and  citations,  as  well  as  internal 
evidence.  In  particular  he  asserted  the  claims  of 
the  Latin  version  and  maintained,  against  much 
opposition,  eten  from  his  patron  Bp.  Fell,  the  great 
value  of  patristic  quotations.  He  had  also  a  clear 
view  of  the  necessity  of  forming  a  general  estimate 
of  the  character  of  each  authonty,  and  described  in 
detail  those  of  which  he  made  use.  At  the  same 
time  he  gave  a  careful  analysis  of  the  origin  and 
liistory  of  previous  texts,  a  labour  which,  even 
now,  has  in  many  parts  not  been  superseded.  But 
while  he  pronounced  decided  judgments  on  various 
readings  both  in  the  notes  and,  without  any  refer- 
ence or  plan,  in  the  Prolegomena,  he  did  not 
venture  to  introduce  any  changes  into  the  printed 
text.  He  repeated  the  Stephanie  text  of  1550 
without  any  intentional  change,  anil  fiom  his 
edition  this  has  passed  (as  Mill's)  into  general  use 
in  England.  His  caution,  however,  could  not  save 
him  from  veheme^nt  attacks.  The  charge  which 
was  brought  against  Walton '  of  unsettling  the 
sacred  text,  was  renewed  against  Mill,  and,  un- 
happily, found  an  advocate  in  Whitby  {Ex- 
amen  variantiiim  lectionwn  J.  Millii  S.  T.  P.  an- 
nexed to  his  Annotations),  a  man  whose  genius 
was  worthy  of  better  things.  The  30,000  various 
readings  which  he  was  said  to  have  collected  formed 
a  common-place  with  the  assailants  of  the  Bible 
(Bentley,  L'einnrks,  iii.  348-358,  ed.  Dyce).  But 
the  work  of  Mill  silently  produced  fruit  both  in 
England  and  Germany.  Men  grew  familiar  with 
the  problems  of  textual  criticism  and  were  thus 
prepared  to  meet  them  fairly. 

7.  Among  those  who  had  known  and  valued 
Mill  was  R.  Bentlev,  the  greatest  of  English 
scholars.  In  his  earliest  work  (Epist.  ad  J.  Mil- 
linm.,  ii.  362,  ed.  Dyce),  iu  1691,  Bentley  had 
expressed  generous  admiration  of  the  labours  of 
Mill,  and  afterwards,  in  1713,  in  his  Bcmarks, 
triumphantly  refuted  the  charges  of  impiety  with 
which  they  were  assailed.  But  Mill  had  only 
"  accumulated  various  readings  as  a  promptuary  to 
the  judicious  and  critical  reader ;"  Bentley  would 

"m.akeuse  of  that  promptuary and  not 

leave  the  reader  in  doubt  and  suspense "  {Answer 
to  Bcmarks,  iii.  503).  With  this  view  he  an- 
nounced, in  1716,  his  intention  of  publishing  an 
edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  on  the  authority  of 
the  oldest  Greek  and  Latin  MS.,  "  exactly  as  it  was 
in  the  best  examples  at  the  time  of  the  Council  of 
Nice,  so  that  there  shall  not  be  twenty  words  nor 
even  particles'  difference"  (iii.  477  to  Archbp. 
Wake).  Collations  were  shortly  afterwards  under- 
taken both  at  Paris  (including  C)  and  Rome  (B), 
and  Bentley  himself  spared  neither  labour  nor 
money.     In  1720  he  published  his  Proposals  and 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


525 


f  Especially  by  the  groat  purilan  Owen  In  his  Consi- 
derations.  Wallon  replied  with  severity  in  The  Consi- 
derator  considereil. 

g  Gerhard  von  Maestriclifs  A'.  T.  fust  appeared  in 
1711,  with  a  selection  o'  various  roadinKS,  and  a  series 
of  canons  coniiiiisc'd  to  justify  the  rocolvod  text.     Some 


a  Specimen  (Apoc.  xxii.).  Iu  this  notice  he  an- 
nounces his  design  of  publishing  "  a  new  edition  of 
the  Greek  and  Latin  ....  as  represented  in  the 
most  ancient  and  venerable  MSS.  in  Greek  and 
Roman(?)  capital  letters."  In  this  way  "  he  be- 
lieves that  he  has  retrieved  (except  iu  a  very 
few  places)  the  true  exemplar  of  Origen  .... 
and  is  sure  that  the  Greek  and  Latin  RLSS.,  bv 
their  mutual  assistance,  do  so  settle  the  original 
text  to  the  smallest  nicety  as  cannot  be  per- 
formed now  in  any  classic  author  whatever."  He 
purposed  to  add  al^  the  various  readings  of  the 
first  five  centuries,  "  and  what  has  crept  into  any 
copies  since  is  of  no  value  or  authority."  The 
proposals  were  immediately  assailed  by  Middleton. 
A  violent  contro^'e^sy  followed,  but  Bentley  con- 
tinued his  labours  till  1729  (Dyce,  iii.  483). 
After  that  time  they  seemed  to  have  ceased.  The 
troubles  in  which  Bentley  was  involved  render  it 
unnecessary  to  seek  for  any  other  explanation  of 
the  suspension  of  his  work.  The  one  chapter 
which  he  published  shows  clearly  enough  that  he 
was  prepared  to  deal  with  variations  in  his  copies, 
and  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  concluding  that 
the  disagreement  of  his  ancient  codices  caused  him 
to  abandon  the  plan  which  he  had  proclaimed  with 
undoubting  confidence  (Scrivener,  Cad.  Aug.  p.  xix.). 
A  complete  account  of  Bentley's  labours  on  the 
N.  T.  is  prepared  for  publication  (1861)  bytheRev. 
A.  A.  Ellis,  under  the  title  Bcntleii  Critica  Sacra. 
8.  The  conception  of  Bentley  was  in  advance 
both  of  the  spirit  of  his  age  and  of  the  materials  at 
his  cominand.  Textual  criticism  was  forced  to 
undergo  a  long  discipline  before  it  was  prepared  to 
follow  out  his  principles.  During  this  time  German 
scholars  hold  the  first  place.  Foremost  among  these 
was  Bengel  (1687-1752),  who  was  led  to  study 
the  variations  of  the  N.  T.  from  a  devout  sense  of 
the  infinite  value  of  every  divine  word.  His  merit 
in  discerning  the  existence  of  families  of  documents 
has  been  already  noticed  (i.  §12) ;  but  the  evidence 
before  him  was  not  sufficient  to  show  the  paramount 
authority  of  the  most  ancient  witnesses.  His  most 
important  rule  was,  ProcUoi  scriptioni  praestat 
(trdua ;  but  except  in  the  Revelation  he  did  not 
venture  to  give  any  reading  which  had  not  been 
ali-eady  adopted  in  some  edition  {Prodromus  N.  T. 
Gr.  recte  cauteqne  adornandi,  1725  ;  Nov.  Testam. 
....  1 734  ;  Apparatus  criticus,  ed.  2''''  cura  P.  D. 
Burk,  1763).  But  even  the  partial  revision  which 
Bengel  had  made  exposed  him  to  the  bitterest 
attacks ;  and  Wetstein,  when  at  length  he  published 
his  great  edition,  reprinted  the  received  text.  The 
labours  of  Wetstein  (1693-1754)  formed  an  im- 
portant epoch  in  the  history  of  the  N.  T.  While 
still  very  young  (1716)  he  was  engaged  to  collate 
for  Bentley,  and  he  afterwards  continued  the  work 
for  himself.  In  1733  he  was  obliged  to  leave  Basle, 
his  native  town,  from  theological  differences,  and 
his  Greek  Testament  did  not  appear  till  1751-2  at 
Amsterdam.  A  first  edition  of  the  Prolojomma 
had  been  published  previously  in  1730;  but  the 
principles  which  he  then  maintainoil  were  after- 
wards much  modified  by  his  opposition  to  Bengel 
(Com p.  Preface  to  N.  T.  cura  Gerardi  de  Trajecto, 
ed.  2''«,  1735).?     The  great  service  which  Wetstein 


of  these  canons  deserve  to  he  quoted,  as  an  illustration 
of  the  bold  assertion  of  the  claims  of  Ihe  jtrinled  te.\t,  as 
such. 

Can.  ix.  "  Cnvs  codt'x  non  faclt  varlantcm  Icctionem  .... 
mcdo  recepta  lectio  sit  si-ciniditm  atwlnfllninjidei"  . . . 

Can.  X.  "  Neqiio  duo  codiirs   faciunt   variantem   loc- 


526 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


rendered  to  sacved  criticism  was  by  the  collection 
of  materials.  He  made  nearly  as  great  an  advance 
on  Mill  as  Mill  had  made  on  those  who  preceded 
him. .  But  in  the  use  of  his  materials  he  showed 
little  critical  tact ;  and  his  strange  theory  of  the 
Latinization  of  tlie  most  ancient  MSS.  proved  for 
a  long  time  a  serious  drawback  lo  the  sound  study 
of  the  Greek  text  (Prolegomena,  ed.  Semler,  1766, 
ed.  Lotze,  1831). 

^.  It  was  the  work  of  Griesbach  (174.5-1812) 
to  place  the  comparative  value  of  existing  docu- 
ments in  a  clearer  light.  The  .time  was  now  come 
when  the  i-esults  of  collected  evidence  might  be  set 
out ;  and  Griesbach,  with  singular  sagacity,  courtesy, 
and  zeal,  devt)ted  his  life  to  the  work.  His  first 
editions  {Synopsis,  1774;  Nov.  Test.  ed.  1,  1777- 
5)  wei-e  based  for  the  most  part  on  the  critical 
collections  of  Wetstein.  Not  long  afterwards  Mat- 
THAEI  published  an  edition  based  on  tlie  accurate 
collation  of  l\Ioscow  MSS.  (iV.  T.  ex  Codd.  Mos- 
quensibus  ....  Riga,  1782-88,  12  vols. ;  ed.  2^", 
1803-7,  3  vols.).  These  new  materials  were  fur- 
ther increased  by  the  collections  of  Alter  (1786-7), 
Birch,  Adler,  and  Moldenhawer  (1788-1801),  as 
well  as  by  the  labours  of  Griesbach  himself.  And 
when  Griesbach  published  his  second  edition  (179G- 
1806,  2nd  ed.  of  vol.  i.  by  D.  Schulz,  1827)  he 
made  a  noble  use  of  the  materials  thus  placed  in  his 
hands.  His  chief  eri'or  was  that  he  altered  the 
received  text  instead  of  constructing  the  text  afi'esh  ; 
but  in  acuteness,  vigour,  and  candour  he  stands 
below  no  editor  of  the  N.  T.,  and  his  judgment  will 
always  retain  a  peculiar  value.  In  1805  he  pub- 
lished a  manual  edition  with  a  selection  of  readings 
which  he  judged  to  be  more  or  less  worthy  of 
notice,  and  this  has  been  often  reprinted  (Comp. 
Symholae  Criticae,  1785-1793;  Opnscula,  ed. 
Gabler,  1824-5;  Commentarius  Criticus,  1798- 
1811;  White's  Criseos  Griesbacliinnae  . . .  Sunonsis, 
1811).  ^ 

10.  The  edition  of  ScHOLZ  contributed  more  in 
appearance  than  reality  to  the  furtherance  of  cri- 
ticism (N.  T.  adfidcm  test,  crit 1830-183G). 

This  laborious  scholar  collected  a  greater  mass  of 
vaiious  readings  than  had  been  brought  together 
before,  but  his  work  is  veiy  inaccui-ate,  and  his 
own  collations  singularly  superficial.  Yet  it  was 
of  service  to  call  attention  to  the  mass  of  unused 
M.SS. ;  and,  while  depreciating  tlie  value  of  the 
more  ancient  JISS.,  Scholz  himself  showed  the 
powerful  influence  of  Griesbach 's  principles  by 
accepting  frequently  the  Alexandrine  in  preference 
to  the  Constantiuopolitan  reading  (i.  §14.  Comp. 
Bihlisch-Kritische  Rcise  .  .  .  1823;  Curae  Criticae 
.  .  .  1820-1845). 

iii.  From  Lachmann  to  the  present  time. — 1 1 .  In 
the  year  after  the  publication  of  the  first  volume 
of  Scholz's  N.  T.  a  small  edition  appeared  in  a 
series  of  classical  texts  prepared  by  Lachmann 
(t  1851).  In  this  the  admitted  principles  of  sclio- 
larship  were  for  the  first  time  applied  through- 
out to  the  construction  of  the  text  of  the  N.  T. 
The  prftcriptive  right  of  the  textus  receptns  was 
wholly  set  aside,  and  the  text  in  every  part  was 

tionem  ....  contra  receptam  et  editam  et  sani  sensus 
lectionem  ....  maxime  in  omittendo"  .  .  . 

Can.  xiv.  "  Versiones  etiam  antiquissimae  ah  cditis  ct 
manuscriptls  di£Ferentes  . .  .  ostendunt  oscitantiam  inter- 
pretis. 

Can.  xvii.  "  Citatioves  I'atrum  textus  N.  T.  aon  faccrc 
debent  varianteni  versionem." 

Can.  xxix.  "  Klficacwr  lectio  textus  rccrpli." 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

regulated  by  ancient  authority.  Before  publishing 
his  small  edition  (N.  T.  Gr.  ex  recemione  C.  Lach- 
manni,  Berol.  1831)  Lachmann  had  given  a  short 
account  of  his  design  (Stud.  u.  Krit.  1830,  iv.).  to 
which  he  referred  his  readers  in  a  brief  postscript, 
but  tlie  book  itself  contained  no  Apparatus  or  Pro- 
legomena, and  was  the  subject  of  great  and  painful 
misrepresentations.  When,  however,  the  distinct 
assertion  of  the  primary  claims  of  evidence  through- 
out the  N.  T.  was  more  fairly  appreciated.  Lach- 
mann felt  himself  encouraged  to  undertalce  a  larger 
edition,  with  both  Latin  and  Greek  texts.  The 
Greek  authorities  for  this,  limited  to  the  primary 
uncial  MSS.  (A  B  C  D  P  Q  T  Z  E^  Gg  D^  H3), 
and  the  quotations  of  Irenaeus  and  Origen,  were 
an-anged  by  the  younger  Buttniann.  Lachmann 
himself  prepared  the  Latin  evidence  (Tregelles,  Hist, 
of  Gr.  Text,  p.  101).  and  revised  both  texts.  The 
first  volume  appearei!  in  1842,  the  second  was 
printed  in  1845,  but  not  published  till  1850,  owing 
in  a  great  measure  to  the  opposition  which  Lach- 
mann found  from  his  friend  Pe  Wette  {N.  T.  ii. 
Praef.  iv. ;  Tregelles,  p.  111).  The  text  of  the  new 
edition  did  not  differ  much  from  that  of  the  former ; 
but  while  in  tlie  former  he  had  used  Western 
{Lathi)  authority  only  to  decide  in  cases  where 
Eastern  (Greek)  authorities  were  divided;  in  the 
latter  he  used  the  two  great  sources  of  evidence 
together.  Lachmann  delighted  to  quote  Bentley  as 
his  great  precursor  (§7) ;  but  tliere  was  an  im- 
portant diff(!reuce  in  their  immedi.ite  aims.  Bentley 
believed  that  it  would  be  possible  to  obtain  the  true 
text  directly  by  a  compai'ison  of  the  oldest  Greek 
authorities  with  the  oldest  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate. 
Afterwards  very  important  i-emains  of  the  earlier 
Latin  versions  were  discovered,  and  the  whole  ques- 
tion was  complicated  by  the  collection  of  fresh  docu- 
ments. Lachmann  theielbre  wished  in  the  first 
instance  only  to  give  the  current  text  of  the  fourth 
century,  which  might  then  become  the  basis  of  fur- 
ther criticism.  This  at  least  was  a  gi-eat  step 
towards  the  truth,  though  it  must  not  be  accepted 
as  a  final  one.  Griesbach  had  changed  the  cuiTcnt 
text  of  the  15th  and  16tli  centuries  in  numberless 
isolated  passages,  but  yet  the  late  text  was  the 
foundation  of  his  own  :  Lachmann  admitted  the 
authority  of  antiquity  everywhere,  in  orthography, 
in  construction,  in  the  whole  complexion  and  ar- 
rangement of  his  text.  But  Lachmann's  edition, 
great  as  its  merits  are  as  a  first  appeal  to  ancient 
evidence,  is  not  without  serious  faults.  The  ma- 
terials on  which  it  was  based  were  imperfect.  The 
range  of  patristic  citations -was  limited  arbitrarily. 
The  exclusion  of  the  Oriental  versions,  however 
necessary  at  the  time,  left  a  wide  margin  for  later 
change  (t.  i.  Pracf.  p.  xxiv.).  The  neglect  of 
primary  cursives  often  necessitated  absolute  con- 
fidence on  slender  MS.  authority.  Lachmann  was 
able  to  use,  but  little  fitted  to  collect,  evidence  (t.  i. 
pp.  XXV.,  xxxviii.,  xxxix.).  It  was,  however,  enough 
for  him  to  have  consecrated  the  highest  scholarship 
by  devoting  it  to  the  service  of  the  N.  T.,  and  to 
have  claimed  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  a  field  for 
reverent  and  searching  criticism.    (The  best  account 


As  examples  of  Can.  :.\.  we  find,  Matt.  i.  16,  xptcTosfor 
'I.  6  Aey.  xp. ;  i.  2.5,  om.  tov  TrpojTOTOKoi' ;  Rom.  i.  31,  o)». 
do-TToVSovs.  On  1  John  v.  7,  8,  the  editor  refers  to  the 
Complutensian  cdllion,  and  adds  :  "  Ex  bac  editione,  quae 
ad  fidem  praestanlisoimorum  MSS.  edita  est,  indicium 
clarnm  habemus,  quod  in  pluriniis  niauuscriptis  locus  sic 
inventus  ot  lectus  sit"  (p.  35). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

of  Laclimann's  plan  and  edition  is  in  Tregelles, 
Hist,  of  I'rinted  Text,  97-115.  His  most  important 
critics  are  Fritzsche,  De  Conformatione  N.  T.  Cri- 
tica  .  .  .  1841  ;  Tischendort',  Prolegg.  cii.-cxii.) 

12.  The  cliief  defects  of  Lachmann's  edition  arise 
from  deficiency  of  autliorities.  Another  German 
scholar,  Tischendorf,  has  devoted  twenty  years 
to  enlarging  our  accvirate  knowledge  of  ancient  MSS. 
The  first  edition  of  Tischendorf  (1841)  has  now  no 
special  claims  for  notice.  In  his  second  (Leipsic) 
edition  (1849)  he  fully  accepted  the  great  principle 
of  Lachmann  (though  he  widened  the  range  of 
ancient  authorities),  that  the  text  "  must  be  sought 
solely  from  ancient  authorities,  and  not  from  the 
so-called  received  edition"  {Fraef.  p.  xii.),  and 
gave  many  of  the  results  of  his  own  laborious  and 
valuable  collations.  The  size  of  this  manual  edition 
necessarily  excluded  a  full  exhibition  of  evidence: 
the  editor's  own  judgment  was  often  arbitrary  and 
inconsistent;  but  the  general  influence  of  the  edition 
was  of  the  very  highest  value,  and  the  text,  as  a 
whole,  probably  better  than  any  which  had  preceded 
it.  During  the  next  few  years  Tischendorf  prose- 
cuted his  labours  on  MSS.  with  unwearied  diligence, 
and  in  18.55-9  he  published  his  third  (seventh'') 
critical  edition.  In  this  he  has  given  the  authorities 
for  and  against  each  reading  in  considerable  detail, 
and  included  the  chief  results  of  his  later  discoveries. 
The  whole  critical  apparatus  is  extremely  valuable, 
and  absolutely  indispensable  to  the  student.  The 
text,  except  in  details  of  orthogi'aphy,  exhibits  gene- 
rally a  retrograde  movement  from  the  most  ancient 
testimony.  The  Prolegomena  are  copious  and  full 
of  interest. 

13.  Meanwhile  the  sound  study  of  sacred  cri- 
ticism had  revived  in  England.  In  1 844  Tregelles 
published  an  edition  of  the  Apocalypse  in  Greek  and 
English,  and  announced  an  edition  of  the  N.  T.' 
From  this  time  he  engaged  in  a  systematic  examina- 
tion of  all  unpublished  uncial  MSS.,  going  over 
much  of  the  same  ground  as  Tischendorf,  and  com- 
paring results  with  him.  In  1854  he  gave  a  de- 
tailed account  of  his  labours  and  principles  (An 
Account  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the  Greek  Neio 
Testament  ....  London),  and  again  in  his  new 
edition  of  Home's  fntroduction  (1856).  The  first 
part  of  his  Greek  Testament,  containing  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Mark,  appeared  in  1857  ;  the  second,  com- 
pleting the  Gospels,  has  just  appeared  (18B1).  In 
this  he  gives  at  length  the  evidence  of  all  uncial 
MSS.,  and  of  some  peculiarly  valuable  cursives :  of 
all  versions  up  to  the  7th  century:  of  all  Fathers 
to  Eusebius  inclusive.  The  Latin  Vulgate  is  added, 
chiefly  fi-om  the  Cod.  Amiatimis  with  the  readings 
of  the  Clementine  edition.  This  edition  of  Tregelles 
differs  from  that  of  Lachmann  by  the  greater  width 
of  its  critical  foundation  ;  ami  from  that  of  Tischen- 
dorf by  a  moie  constant  adherence  to  ancient  evi- 
dence. Eveiy  possible  precaution  has  been  taken  to 
insure  perfect  accuracy  in  the  publication,  and  the 
work  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  important 
contributions,  as  it  is  perhajis  the  most  exact,  which 
has  been  yet  made  to  the  cause  of  textual  criticism. 
The  editions  of  Knapp  (1797,  &.;.),  Vater  (1824), 
Tittmann  (1820,  &c.),  and  Hahn  (1840,  &c.)  have 
no  peculiar  critical  value.  Meyer  (1829,  &c.)  paid 
greater  attention  to  the  revision  of  the  text  which 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


527 


•>  The  second  and  third  cdilions  were  Gracco-T>atin 
editions,  publislipci  iit  Paris  in  is  12,  of  no  critical  value 
(of.  rrolegf).  oxxiv.-v.).  'I'lie  fiftli  was  n  simple  text,  witli 
the  variations  of  lOlzevir,  cliiefly  a  rp])rint  of  the  (fourtli) 


accompanies  his  great  commentary  ;  Init  his  critical 
notes  are  often  arbitrary  and  unsatisfactory.  In 
the  Greek  Testament  of  Alford,  as  in  that  of  Meyer, 
the  text  is  subsidiary  to  the  commentary ;  but  it  is 
impossible  not  to  notice  the  importuit  advance 
which  has  been  made  by  the  editor  in  true  piinciples 
of  criticism  during  the  course  of  its  publication. 
The  fourth  edition  of  the  1st  vol.  (1859)  contains 
a  clear  enunciation  of  the  authority  of  ancient  evi- 
dence, as  supported  both  by  its  external  and  internal 
claims,  and  corrects  much  that  was  vague  and 
subjective  in  fonuer  editions.  Other  annotated 
editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  valuable  for  special 
merits,  may  be  passed  over  as  having  little  bearing 
on  the  history  of  the  text.  One  simple  text,  how- 
ever, deserves  notice  (Cambr.  18G0),  in  which,  by 
a  peculiar  arrangement  of  type.  Scrivener  has  re- 
presented at  a  glance  all  the  changes  which  have 
been  made  in  the  text  of  Stephens  (1550),  Elzevir 
(1024),  and  Beza  (1565),  by  Lachmann,  Tischen- 
dorf, and  Tregelles. 

1 4.  Besides  the  critical  editions  of  the  text  of  the 
N.  T.  various  collections  of  readings  have  been  pub- 
lished separately,  which  cannot  be  wholly  omitted. 
In  addition  to  those  ah'eady  mentioned  (§9),  the  most 
important  are  by  Rinck,  Lucnbratio  Critica,  1830; 
Keiche,  Codicum  MSS.  N.  T.  Gr.  aliquot  insignionmi 
in  Bibl.  Reg.  Paris  .  .  .  coUatio  1847  ;  Scrivener, 
A  Collation  of  about  Twenty  Greek  MSS.  oft/ce  ffoli/ 
Gospels  .  .  .  1853  ;  A  Transcript  of  the  God.  Aug., 
with  a  full  Collation  of  Fifty  MSS.  1859;  and 
E.  do  Muralt,  of  Russian  MSS.  (N.  T.  1848).  The 
chief  contents  of  the  splendid  series  of  Tischendorf 's 
works  (  Codex  Ephraemi  Rescriptus,  1 843  ;  Codex 
Claromontanus,  1 852  ;  Monwnenta  sacra  inedita, 
1846-1856;  Anecdota  sacra  et  prof  ana,  1855; 
Notitia  Cod.  Siiiaitici,  1860)  are  given  in  his  own 
and  other  editions  of  the  N.  T.  (The  chief  works 
on  the  history  of  the  printed  text  are  those  of 
Tregelles,  Hist,  of  Printed  Text,  1854;  Reuss, 
Geschichte  d.  11.  Schrift.  §§395  ff.,  where  are  very 
complet^e  bibliographical  references;  and  the  Prole- 
gomena of  Mill,  Wetstein,  Griesbach,  and  Tischen- 
dorf. To  these  must  be  added  the  promised  (1861) 
Introduction  of  Mr.  Scrivener.) 

III.  Principles  of  Textual  Criticism. 
The  work  of  the  critic  can  never  be  shaped  by 
definite  rulas.  The  formal  enunciation  of  prin- 
ciples is  but  the  first  step  in  the  process  of  revi- 
sion. Even  Lachmann,  who  proposed  to  fiillow  the 
most  directly  mechanical  method,  frequently  allowed 
play  to  his  own  judgment.  It  could  not,  indeed, 
be  otherwise  with  a  true  scholar;  and  if  there  is 
need  anywhere  for  the  most  free  and  devout  exer- 
cise of  every  faculty,  it  must  be  in  tracing  out  the 
very  words  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  Lord  Him- 
self. The  justification  of  a  method  of  re\'1sion  lies 
in  the  result.  Canons  of  criticism  are  more  fre- 
quently corollaries  than  lavv's  of  procedure.  ^et 
such  canons  are  not  without  use  in  marking  the 
course  to  be  followed,  but  they  are  intended  only 
to  guide  and  not  to  dispense  with  the  exercise  of 
tact  and  scholarsJiip.  The  student  will  judge  for 
himself  how  far  they  are  applicable  in  every  par- 
ticular case;  and  no  exhibition  of  gonenii  principles 
can  supersede  the  necessity  of  a  au-eful  examina- 


edllion  of  1849.     Tlio  sixth  was  a  Triglott  N.  T.  185-1- 
((Jroelc,  Latin,  German)  ;  1858  ((irpclc  and  Latin). 

'  lir.  'I'regelles'  first  sppcinicn  was  published  in  183 
(^UiU.  nf  Privtcd  Text,  p.  1&.!)- 


528 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


tion  of  the  characteristics  of  separate  witnesses  aud 
of  groups  of  witnesses.  The  text  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, like  the  text  of  all  other  books,  depends  on 
evidence.  Pailes  may  classify  the  evidence  and 
facilitate  the  decision,  but  the  final  appeal  must  be 
to  the  evidence  itself.  What  appears  to  be  the 
only  sound  system  of  criticism  will  be  seen  from 
the  rules  which  ibllow.  The  examples  which  are 
added  can  be  worked  out  in  any  critical  edition  of 
the  Greek  Testament,  and  will  explain  better  than 
any  lengthened  description  the  application  of  the 
rules. 

1.  The  text  must  throughout  he  determined  by 
evidence  v:ithout  allotoing  anij  prescriptive  right  to 
printed  editions.  In  the  infancy  of  criticism  it 
was  natural  that  early  printed  editions  should  pos- 
sess a  greater  value  than  individual  MSS.  The 
language  of  the  Complutensian  editors,  and  of 
Erasmus  and  Stephens,  was  such  as  to  command 
respect  foi'  their  texts  prior  to  examination.  Com- 
paratively few  MSS.  were  known,  and  none  tho- 
roughly ;  but  at  present  the  whole  state  of  the 
question  is  altered.  We  are  now  accurately  ac- 
quainted with  the  materials  possessed  by  the  two 
latter  editors  and  with  the  use  which  they  made 
of  them.  If  there  is  as  yet  no  such  certainty 
with  regard  to  the  basis  of  the  Complutensian 
text,  it  is  at  least  clear  that  no  high  value  can  be 
assigned  to  it.  On  tlie  other  hand  we  have,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  early  apparatus,  new  sources  of  evidence 
of  infinitely  greater  vai'iety  and  value.  To  claim  for 
the  printed  text  any  right  of  possession  is,  there- 
fore, to  be  faithless  to  the  principles  of  critical 
truth.  The  received  text  may  or  may  not  be 
correct  in  any  particular  case,  but  this  must  be 
determined  solely  by  an  appeal  to  the  original  autho- 
rities. Nor  is  it  right  even  to  assume  the  received 
text  as  our  basis.  The  question  before  us  is  not 
What  is  to  he  changed 'i  but,  What  is  to  be  r-eadi 
It  would  be  superfluous  to  insist  on  this  if  it  were 
not  that  a  natural  infirmity  makes  every  one 
unjustly  conservative  in  criticism.  It  seems  to  be 
irreverent  to  disturb  an  old  belief,  when  real  irre- 
verence lies  in  perpetuating  an  eiTor,  however 
slight  it  may  appear  to  be.  This  holds  good 
universally.  In  Holy  Scripture  nothing  can  be 
iudiflerent ;  and  it  is  the  supreme  duty  of  the  critic 
to  apply  to  details  of  order  and  orthography  the 
same  care  as  he  bestows  on  what  may  be  judged 
weightier  points.  If,  indeed,  there  were  anything 
in  the  circumstances  of  the  first  publication  of  the 
N.  T.  which  might  seem  to  remove  it  from  the 
ordinary  fortunes  of  books,  then  it  would  be  impos- 
sible not  to  respect  the  pious  sentiment  wliich 
accepts  the  early  text  as  an  immediate  work  of 
Providence.  But  the  history  shows  too  many 
marks  of  human  frailty  to  admit  of  such  a  sup- 
position. The  text  itself  contains  palpable  and 
admitted  eiTors  (Matt.  ii.  11,  ivpov\  Acts  viii. 
H7,  ix.  5.  fi  ;  Apoc.  v.  14,  xxii.  1 1  ;  not  to  men- 
tion 1  John  V.  7),  in  every  way  analogous  to  those 
which  occur  in  the  first  classical  texts.  The  con- 
clusion is  obvious,  and  it  is  superstition  rather 
than  reverence  which  refuses  to  apply  to  the  ser- 
vice of  Scripture  the  laws  which  ifiave  restored  so 
much  of  their  native  beauty  to  other  ancient 
writincrs.  It  may  not  be  possible  to  fix  tlie 
reading  in  every  case  finally,  but  it  is  no  less 
the  duty  of  the  scholar  to  advance  as  far  as  he 
can  and  mark  the  extreme  range  of  uncertainty. 

2.  Every  element  of  evidence  must  he  taken  into 
account  before  a  decision  is  made.     Some  uncer- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

tainty  must  necessarily  remain  ;  for,  when  it  ■  is 
said  that  the  text  must  rest  upon  evidence,  it  is 
implied  that  it  must  rest  on  an  examination  of  the 
whole  evidence.  But  it  can  never  be  said  that  the 
mines  of  criticism  are  exhausted.  Yet  even  here 
the  possible  limits  of  variation  are  narrow.  The 
available  evidence  is  so  full  and  manifold  that  it 
is  difficult  to  conceive  that  any  new  authorities 
could  do  more  than  turn  the  scale  in  cases  which 
are  at  present  doubtful.  But  to  exclude  remote 
chances  of  error  it  is  necessary  to  take  account  of 
every  testimony.  Xo  arbitral  y  line  can  be  drawn 
excluding  MSS.  versions  or  quotations  below  a 
certain  date.  The  true  text  must  (as  a  rule) 
explain  all  variations,  and  the  most  recent  forms 
may  illustrate  the  original  one.  In  practice  it  will 
be  found  tliat  certain  documents  may  be  neglected 
after  examination,  and  that  the  value  of  others  is 
variously  afi'ected  by  determinable  conditions  ;  but 
still,  as  no  variation  is  inherently  indifferent,  no 
testimony  can  be  absolutely  disiegarded. 

3.  I'he  relt'tive  weight  of  the  several  classes  of 
evidence  is  modified  by  their  generic  character. 
Manuscripts,  versions,  and  citations,  the  three  great 
classes  of  external  authorities  for  the  text,  are 
obviously  open  to  characteristic  errors.  The  first 
are  peculiarly  liable  to  errors  from  transcription 
(comp.  i.  §31  ff.).  The  two  last  are  liable  to  this 
cause  of  corruption  and  also  to  others.  The  genius 
of  the  language  into  which  the  translation  is  made 
may  require  the  introduction  of  connecting  par- 
ticles or  words  of  reference,  as  can  be  seen  from 
the  italicised  words  iu  the  A.  V.  Some  uses  of 
the  article  and  of  prepositions  cannot  be  expressed 
or  distinguished  with  certainty  in  translation. 
Glosses  or  marginal  additions  are  moie  likely  to 
pass  into  the  text  in  the  process  of  translation  than 
in  that  of  transcription.  Quotations,  on  the  other 
hand,  are  often  partial  or  from  memory,  and  long 
use  may  give  a  traditional  fixity  to  a  slight  confu- 
sion or  adaptation  of  passages  of  Scripture.  These 
grounds  of  inaccuracy  are,  however,  easily  deter- 
mined, aud  there  is  generally  little  difficulty  in  de- 
ciding whether  the  rendering  of  a  version  or  the  tes- 
timony of  a  Father  can  be  fairly  quoted.  Moreover, 
the  most  important  versions  are  so  close  to  the 
Greek  text  that  they  preserve  the  order  of  the 
original  with  scrupulous  accuracy,  and  even  in 
representing  minute  shades  of  expression,  obsen'e 
a  constant  uniformity  which  could  not  have  been 
anticipated  (Comp.  Lachmann,  iV.  T.  i.  p.  xlv.  ff.). 
It  is  a  tar  more  serious  obstacle  to  the  critical  use 
of  these  authorities  that  the  texts  of  the  versions 
and  Fathers  generally  are  in  a  very  imperfect 
state.  With  the  exception  of  the  Latin  Version 
there  is  not  one  in  which  a  thoroughly  satisfactoiy 
text  is  available ;  and  the  editions  of  Clement  and 
Origen  are  little  qualified  to  satisfy  strict  demands 
of  scholarship.  As  a  general  rule  the  evidence  of 
both  may  be  trusted  where  they  differ  fi-om  the 
late  text  of  the  N.  T.,  but  where  they  agree  with 
this  against  other  early  authorities,  there  is  reason 
to  entertain  a  suspicion  of  corruption.  This  is 
sufficiently  clear  on  comparing  the  old  printed  text 
of  Chrysostom  with  the  text  of  the  best  MSS. 
But  when  full  allowance  has  been  made  for  all 
these  drawbacks,  the  mutually  corrective  power  of 
the  three  kinds  of  testimony  is  of  the  highest 
value.  The  evidence  of  versions  may  show  at  once 
that  a  JIS.  reading  is  a  ti-anscriptural  error: 
John  i.  14,  d  flirdov  (B  C  ) ;  Jude  12,  aTrdrais  {A) ; 
IJohn  i.  2,  Koi  h  kopditajj-ev  (B),  ii.  8,  ffKia  for 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

CKoTia  {X),  iii.  21,  ex^'  C^)  5  2  Pet.  ii.  16,  iv 
avdpw-Kois  ;  and  the  absence  of  their  support  throws 
doubt  upon  readings  otherwise  of  the  highest  pro- 
bability: 2  Pet.  ii.  4,  aeipols,  ii.  6,  aarffiicriv. 
The  testimony  of  an  early  Father  is  again  sufficient 
to  give  preponderating  weiglit  to  slight  IIS.  au- 
thority :  Matt.  i.  18,  Tov  Se  xP"'''''ou  rj  yevetns; 
and  since  versions  and  Fathers  go  bnck  to  a  time 
anterior  to  any  existing  MSS.,  they  fui-nish  a 
standard  by  which  we  may  measure  the  conformity 
of  any  MS.  with  the  most  ancient  text.  On  ques- 
tions of  orthography  MSS.  alone  have  authority. 
The  earliest  Fathers,  like  our  own  writers,  seem 
(if  we  may  judge  from  printed  texts)  to  have 
adopted  the  current  spelling  of  their  time,  and 
not  to  have  aimed  at  preserving  in  this  respect 
the  dialectic  peculiarities  of  N.  T.  Greek.  But 
MSS.,  again,  are  not  free  from  special  idiosyn- 
crasies (if  the  phrase  may  be  allowed)  both  in  con- 
struction and  orthography,  and  unless  account  be 
taken  of  these  a  wrong  judgment  may  be  made  in 
isolated  passages. 

4-.  The  mere  preponderance  of  nnmbers  is  in 
itself  of  710  weight.  If  the  multiplication  of  copies 
of  the  N.  T.  had  been  unifoi-m,  it  is  evident  that 
the  uun^ber  of  later  copies  preserved  from  the 
a(  cidents  of  time  would  have  far  exceeded  that  of 
the  earlier,  yet  no  one  would  have  preferred  the 
fuller  testimony  of  the  loth  to  the  scantier  docu- 
ments of  the  4th  century.  Some  changes  are  ne- 
cessarily introduced  in  the  most  careful  copying, 
and  these  are  rapidly  multiplied.  A  recent  !\IS. 
may  have  been  copied  from  one  of  great  antiquity, 
but  this  must  be  a  rare  occurrence.  If  all  MSS. 
were  derived  by  successive  reproduction  from  one 
source,  the  most  ancient,  though  few,  would  claim 
supreme  authority  over  the  more  recent  mass.  As 
it  is,  the  case  is  still  stronger.  It  has  been  shown 
that  the  body  of  later  copies  was  made  xmder  one 
influence.  They  give  the  testimony  of  one  church 
only,  and  not  of  all.  For  many  generations  By- 
zantine scribes  must  gradually,  even  though  uncon- 
sciously, have  assimilated  the  text  to  their  current 
form  of  expression.  Meanwhile  the  propagation  of 
the  Syrian  and  Afriran  types  of  text  was  left  to 
the  casual  reproduction  of  an  ancient  exemplar. 
These  were  necessarily  far  rarer  than  later  and 
modified  copies,  and  at  the  same  time  likely 
to  be  far  less  used.  Representatives  of  one  ilass 
were  therefore  multiplied  rapidly,  wliile  those  of 
other  classes  barely  continued  to  exist.  From  this 
it  follows  that  MSS.  have  no  abstract  numerical 
value.  Variety  of  evidence,  and  not  a  crowd  of 
witnesses,  must  decide  on  each  doubtful  point ;  and 
it  happens  by  no  means  rarely  that  one  or  two 
MSS.  alone  support  a  reailing  which  is  unciues- 
tionabty  right  (M.att.  i.  25,  v.  4,  5  ;  Mark  ii. 
22,  &c.). 

5.  The  more  ancient  reading  is  gcneridig  pre- 
ferable. This  principle  seems  to  be  almost  a 
ti'uism.  It  can  only  be  assailed  by  assuming  that 
the  recent  reading  is  itself  the  representative  of  an 
authority  still  more  ancient.  But  tliis  carries  the 
decision  fiom  the  domain  of  evidence  to  that  of 
conjecture,  and  the  issue  must  be  tried  on  indi- 
vidual passages. 

6.  T/te  more  ancient  reading  is  gencrallg  the 
reading  of  the  more  ancient  JJSS.  This  proposi- 
tion is  fully  establisheil  by  a  comparison  of  explicit 
early  testimony  with  the  text  of  the  oldest  copies. 
It  would  be  strange,  indeed,  if  it  were  otherwise. 
Ill   this  respect   the  di«'overy  of  the   Ondex  Sinai- 

VOL.  ir. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


529 


ticus  cannot  but  have  a  powerful  influence  upon 
biblical  criticism.  Whatever  may  be  its  individual 
peculiarities,  it  preserves  the  ancient  readings  in 
characteristic  passages  (Luke  ii.  14  ;  John  i.  4,  18  ; 
1  Tim.  iii.  16).  If  the  secondary  uncials  (E  F  S 
U,  &c.)  are  really  the  direct  representatives  of  a  text 
more  ancient  than  that  in  N  B  C  Z,  it  is  at  least 
remarkable  that  no  unequivocal  early  anthoritv  pre- 
sents their  characteristic  readings.  This  dithculty 
is  greatly  increased  by  internal  considerations.  The 
characteristic  readings  of  the  most  ancient  MSS.  are 
those  which  preserve  in  their  greatest  integrity  those 
subtle  characteiistics  of  style  which  are  too  minute 
to  attract  the  attention  of  a  transcriber,  aad  yet  too 
marked  in  their  recurrence  to  be  due  to  anything 
less  than  an  miconscious  law  of  composition.  The 
laborious  investigations  of  Gersdorf  {Beitrdge  zur 
Sprach-Characteristik  d.  Schriftstcller  ■  d.  N.  T. 
Leipzig,  1816)  have  placed  many  of  these  pecu- 
liarities in  a  clear  light,  and  it  seems  impossible  to 
study  his  collections  without  gaining  the  assurance 
that  the  earliest  copies  have  preserved  the  truest 
image  of  the  Apostolic  texfe.  This  conclusion  from 
style  is  convincingly  confirmed  by  the  appearance  of 
the  genuine  dialectic  forms  of  Hellenistic  Greek  in 
those  MSS.,  and  those  only,  which  presen-e  charac- 
teristic traits  of  construction  and  order.  As  long  as 
it  was  supposed  that  these  forms  were  Alexandrine, 
their  occurrence  was  naturally  held  to  be  a  mark 
of  the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  MSS.,  but  now  that 
it  is  certain  that  they  were  characteristic  of  a  class 
and  not  of  a  locality,  it  is  impossible  to  resist  the 
inference  that  the  documents  which  have  preserved 
delicate  and  evanescent  tiaits  of  apostolic  language 
must  have  preserved  its  substance  also  with  the 
greatest  accuracy. 

7 .  The  ancient  text  is  often  preserved  substan- 
tially in  recent  copies.  But  while  the  most  ancient 
copies,  as  a  whole,  give  the  most  ancient  text,  yet  it 
is  by  no  means  confined  exclusively  to  them.  The 
te.xt  of  D  in  the  Gospels,  however  much  it  has  been 
interpolated,  preserves  in  several  cases  almost  alone 
the  true  reading.  Other  MSS.  exist  of  almost  every 
date  (8th  cent.  L  E,  9th  cent.  X  A  F„  Gg,  10th  cent. 
1,106,  11th  cent.  33,  22,  &c.),  which  contain  in 
the  main  the  oldest  text,  though  in  these  the  ortho- 
graphy is  modernised,  and  other  changes  appear 
which  indicate  a  greater  or  less  departure  from  the 
original  copy.  The  importance  of  the  best  cursives 
has  been  most  strangely  neglected,  and  it  is  but  re- 
cently that  their  true  claims  to  authority  have  been 
known.  In  many  cases  where  other  ancient  evi- 
dence is  defective  or  divided  they  are  of  the  highest 
value,  and  it  seldom  happens  that  any  true  reading 
is  wholly  unsupported  by  late  evidence. 

8.  The  agreement  of  ancient  MSS.,  or  of  MSS. 
containing  an  ancient  text,  with  all  the  earliest 
iH'rsions  and  citations  marks  a  certain  reading.  The 
final  argument  in  favour  of  the  text  of  the  most  an- 
cient copies  lies  in  the  combined  support  which  they 
recei  vein  characteristic  passa  ires  from  the  most  ancient 
versions  and  patristic  citations.  The  reading  ot  the 
oldest  MSS.  is,  as  a  general  rule,  upheld  by  the 
true  reading  of  Versions  and  the  certain  testimony 
of  the  Fatheis,  where  this  can  be  ascertained.  The 
later  reading,  and  this  is  not  less  worthy  of  notice,  is 
with  equal  constancy  repeatetl  in  the  corrupted  text 
of  the  \'ersions,  and  often  in  inferior  MS8.  of  Fathers. 
The  force  of  this  combination  of  testimony  can  only 
be  apprehended  after  a  continuous  examination  of 
j)assages.  A  mere  selection  of  texts  oonv<>ys  only  a 
partial  impression;  and  it  is  most  important  to  ob- 

2    M 


530 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


serve  the  errors  of  the  weightiest  autliorities  when 
isolated,  in  order  to  ippreciate  rightly  their  inde- 
peudeut  value  when  combined.  For  this  purpose 
the  student  is  urged  to  note  for  himself  the  leadings 
of  a  kw  selected  authorities  (A  B  C  D  L  X  1,  33,  G9, 
&c.,  the  MSS.  of  the  old  Latin  a  b  c  ff  k,  &ic.,  the 
best  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate,  am.  for.  liarL,  &c.,  the 
great  Oriental  versions)  through  a  tew  chapters ;  and 
it  may  certainly  be  predicted  that  the  lesnlt  will 
be  a  perfect  contideuce  in  the  text,  supported  by  the 
combined  authority  of  the  classes  of  witnesses, 
though  frequently  one  or  two  Greek  MSS.  are  to 
be  followed  against  all  the  remainder. 

9.  The  disaijreement  of  the  most  ancient  autlio- 
rities often  marks  the  existence  of  a  corruption  an- 
terior to  them.  But  it  happens  by  no  means  rarely 
that  the  most  aucieut  authorities  are  divided.  In 
this  case  it  is  necessary  to  recognise  an  alternative 
reading;  and  the  inconsistency  of  Tischendorf  in  his 
various  editions  would  have  been  less  glaring,  if  he 
had  followed  the  example  of  Griesbach  in  noticing 
prominently  those  readinffs  to  which  a  slight  change 
in  the  balance  of  evidence  would  give  the  prepon- 
derance. Absolute  certainty  is  not  in  every  case 
attainable,  and  the  peremptory  assertion  of  a  critic 
cannot  set  aside  the  doubt  which  lies  on  the  con- 
flicting testimony  of  trustworthy  witnesses.  The 
dili'erences  are  often  in  themselves  (as  may  appear) 
of  little  moment,  but  the  work  of  the  scholar  is  to 
present  clearly  in  its  minutest  details  the  whole  re- 
sidt  of  his  materials.  Examples  of  legitimate  doubt 
as  to  the  true  reading  occur  Matt.  vii.  14,  &c. ; 
Luke  X.  42,  &c. ;  John  i.  18,  ii.  8,  &c. ;  1  John  iii.  1, 
v.  10,  &c. ;  Rom.  iii.  26,  iv.  1,  &c.  In  rare  cases 
this  diversity  appears  to  indicate  a  corruption  which 
is  earlier  than  any  remaining  documents  :  Slatt.  xi. 
27  ;  Mark  i.  27  ;  2  Peter  i.  21 ;  James  iii.  6,  iv.  14 ; 
Rom.  i.  32,  V.  6  (17),  xiii.  5,  xvi.  25  ff.  One 
special  form  of  variation  in  the  most  valuable  au- 
thorities requLi'es  particular  mention.  An  early 
diti'erence  of  order  frequently  indicates  the  interpo- 
lation of  a  gloss ;  and  when  the  best  authorities  are 
thus  divided,  any  ancient  though  slight  evidence 
lor  the  omission  of  the  transferred  clause  deserves 
the  greatest  consideration:  Matt.  i.  18,  v.  32,  39, 
xii.  38,  &c. ;  Rom.  iv.  1,  &c. ;  Jam.  i.  22.  And 
generally  serious  variations  in  expression  between 
the  primary  authorities  jioint  to  an  early  corruption 
by  addition:  Jlatt.  x.  29;  Kom.  i.  27,  29,  iii. 
22,  26. 

10.  The  ari/iiiiient  from  internal  evidence  is 
alwaijs  precarious.  If  a  reading  is  in  accordance 
with  the  general  style  of  the  writei',  it  may  be  said 
on  the  one  side  that  this  fact  is  in  its  favour,  and 
on  the  other  that  an  acute  copyist  probably  changed 
the  exceptional  expression  tor  the  more  usual  one : 
e.  g.  Matt.  i.  24,  ii.  14,  vii.  21,  &c.  If  a  reading  is 
more  emphatic,  it  may  be  urged  that  the  sense  is 
improved  by  its  adoption:  if  less  emjihatic,  that 
scribes  were  habitually  inclined  to  prefer  stronger 
terms:  e.g.  Matt.  v.  13,  vi.  4,  &c.  Even  in  the 
case  of  the  supposed  influence  of  parallel  passages  in 
the  synoptic  Evangelists,  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to 
resist  the  weight  of  ancient  testimony  when  it  sup- 
ports the  parallel  phrase,  in  favour  of  the  natuial 
canon  which  recommends  the  choice  of  variety  in 
jireference  to  uniformity:  e.g.  Matt.  iii.  6,  iv.  9, 
viii.  32,  ix.  11,  &c.  But  though  internal  evidence  is 
commonly  only  of  subjective  value,  there  are  some 
general  rules  which  are  of  veiy  wide,  if  not  of  uni- 
versal application.  These  have  force  to  decide  or  to 
confirm   a  judgment ;  but  in   every  instance  they 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

must  be  used  only  in  combination  with  direct  tes- 
timony. 

1 1 .  The  more  difficult  reading  is  preferable  to 
the  simpler  (proclivi  lectioni  praestat  ardua,  Bengel). 
Except  in  cases  of  obvious  corruption  this  canon 
probably  holds  good  without  exception,  in  questions 
of  language,  construction,  and  sense.  Rare  or  pro- 
\incial  tbrms,  irregular  usages  of  words,  rough 
turns  of  expression,  are  universally  to  be  taken  in 
preference  to  tlie  ordinary  and  idiomatic  phrases. 
The  bold  and  emphatic  agglomeration  of  clauses, 
with  the  fewest  connecting  particles,  is  always 
likely  to  be  nearest  to  the  original  text.  The  usage 
of  the  diltereut  apostolic  writers  varies  in  this  re- 
spect, but  there  are  very  few,  if  any,  instances  where 
the  mass  of  copyists  have  left  out  a  genuine  con- 
nexion ;  and  on  the  other  hand  there  is  hardly  a 
chapter  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  where  they  have  not 
introduced  one.  The  same  rule'  is  true  in  questions 
of  interpretation.  The  hardest  reading  is  generally 
the  true  one:  Matt.  vi.  1,  xix.  17,xxi.31  (o  ycrrepos); 
Rom.  viii.  28  (6  Qs6s) ;  2  Cor.  v.  3  ;  unless,  indeed, 
the  dilticulty  lies  below  the  surface :  as  Rom.  xii. 
1 1  {Kaip^  tor  Kvplo}),  xii.  13  (jj-veiais  for  xpf'a's). 
The  rule  admits  yet  further  of  another  modified  ap- 
plication. The  less  definite  reading  is  geneially 
preferable  to  the  more  definite.  Thus  the  future  is 
constantly  substituted  for  the  pregnant  present, 
Matt.  vii.  8;  Rom.  xv.  18:  compound  for  simple 
words.  Matt.  vii.  28,  viii.  17,  xi.  25  ;  and  pro- 
nouns of  reference  are  frequently  introduced  to  em- 
phasize the  statement,  Matt.  vi.  4.  But  caution 
must  be  used  lest  our  own  imperfect  sense  of  the 
naturalness  of  an  idiom  may  lead  to  the  neglect  of 
ex-ternal  evidence  (Matt.  xxv.  16,  eTroirjcrej/ wrongly 
for  €KepSj]afy). 

12.  The  shorter  reading  is  generally  preferable 
to  the  longer.  This  canon  is  very  often  coincident 
with  the  former  one  ;  but  it  admits  also  of  a  wider 
application.  Except  in  very  rare  cases  copyists 
never  omitted  intentionally,  v^^hile  they  constantly 
intioduced  into  the  text  marginal  glosses  and  even 
various  readings  (comp.  §13),  either  from  igno- 
rance or  from  a  natural  desire  to  leave  out  nothing 
which  seemed  to  come  with  a  claim  to  authority. 
The  extent  to  which  this  instinct  influenced  the  cha- 
racter of  the  later  text  can  be  seen  from  an  exami- 
nation of  the  various  readings  in  a  few  chapters. 
Thus  in  Matt.  vi.  the  Ibllowiug  interpolations  occur: 
4  {avT6s),  eV  T(j)  cpauepai.  5  (&v)  ort  air.  6  ev 
T65  (pavfp^.  10  67ri  rrjs  y.  13  on  cov  .  .  afxi}v. 
15  (to,  irapaiTT.  avrHv).  16  oTiarr.  19  4v  r£ 
(pavep'f.  The  synoptic  Gospels  were  the  most  ex- 
posed to  this  kind  of  corruption,  but  it  occurs  in  all 
parts  of  the  N.  T.  Everywhere  the  fuller,  rounder, 
more  complete  form  of  expression  is  open  to  the 
suspicion  of  change ;  and  the  pre-eminence  of  the 
ancient  authorities  is  nowhere  seen  more  plainly 
than  in  the  constancy  with  which  they  combine  in 
preserving  the  plain,  vigoious,  and  abrupt  phra^se- 
ology  of  the  apostolic  writings.  A  few  examples 
taken  almost  at  random  will  illustrate  the  various 
cases  to  which  the  rule  applies :  ]\Iatt.  ii.  15,  iv.  6, 
xii.  25;  James  iii.  12;  Rom.  ii.  1,  viii.  23,  x.  15, 
i-v.  29  (comp.  §13). 

13.  That  reading  is  preferable  which  explains 
the  origin  of  the  others.  This  rule  is  chiefly  of  use 
in  cases  of  great  complication,  and  it  would  be  im- 
possible to  find  a  better  example  than  one  which  has 
been  brought  forward  by  Tischendorf  for  a  diffei'cnt 
purpose  (X.  T.  Praef.  pp.  xxxiii-iv.).  The  com- 
mon reading  in  Mark  ii.  22  is  6  olvos  eKX^^^o-i  Koii 


NEW  TESTAMEN'J" 

01  aaKol  airoAowTC.i,  which  is  perfectly  simple  iu 
itself,  ami  the  undoubted  reading  in  the  paiallel 
passage  of  t^t.  Matthew.  But  here  there  are  great 
variations.  One  important  MS.  (L)  reads  6  oluos 
iKX^i^Tai  leal  ol  aaKoi :  another  (D  with  it.)  6 
olvos  Kol  affKol  aTroXovvTai :  another  (Bj  6  olvos 
diriWvTat  koI  ol  dcTKoi.  Here,  if  we  bear  in 
iTiin<l  the  reading  in  St.  Matthew,  it  is  morally 
certain  that  the  ttxt  of  B  is  correct.  This  may 
have  been  changed  into  the  common  te.xt,  but  can- 
not have  arisen  out  of  it.  Compare  James  iv.  4, 
12  ;  Matt.  .xxiv.  38  ;  Jude  18  ;  Itom.  vii.  25  ;  Mark 
i.  16,  27. 

[For  the  principles  of  textual  criticism  compare 
Griesbach,  xY.  T.  Prolegg.  §3,  pp.  Iviii.  H. ;  Tischen- 
dorf,  N.  T.Prolcgg.  xxxii.-xliv.;  Tregelles, /ViHicc? 
Text,  pp.  132  tf. ;  (^Home's)  Introduction,  pp.  34-2  tf. 
The  Crisis  of  Wetstein  {Prolegg.  pp.  206-40,  Lotze) 
is  very  unsatisfactory.] 

IV.  The  L.4NGUAGE  of  the  New  Testament. 

1.  The  eastern  conquests  of  Alexander  opened  a 
new  field  for  the  development  of  the  Greek  language. 
It  may  be  reasonably  doubted  whether  a  specific 
Macedonian  dialect  is  not  a  mere  fiction  of  gram- 
marians ;  but  increased  freedom  both  in  form  and 
construction  was  a  necessaiy  consequence  of  the 
wide  diffusion  of  Greek.  Even  in  Aristotle  there 
is  a  great  declension  from  the  classical  standard  of 
purity,  though  the  Attic  foimed  the  basis  of  his 
language ;  and  the  rise  of  the  common  or  Grecian 
■  iialect  [SidXeKTOi-  kolvt],  or  5.  'EWriviKri)  is  dated 
from  his  time.  In  the  writings  of  educated  men 
who  were  familiar  with  ancient  models,  this  "  com- 
mon "  dialect  always  preserved  a  close  resemblance 
to  the  normal  .^ttic,  but  in  the  intercourse  of  ordi- 
nary life  the  corruption  must  have  been  both  great 
and  rapid. 

2.  At  no  place  could  the  corruption  have  been 
greater  or  more  nipid  than  at  Alexandiia,  where  a 
motley  population,  engaged  in  active  commerce, 
adopted  Greek  as  their  common  medium  of  com- 
muniaition.  [Alexandria,  i.  p.  48.]  And  it  is 
in  Alexandria  tiiat  we  must  look  for  the  origin  of 
the  language  of  tlie  New  Testament.  'I' wo  distinct 
elements  were  combined  in  this  marvellous  dialect 
which  was  destined  to  preserve  for  ever  the  fullest 
tidings  of  the  Gospel.  (Jn  the  one  side  there  was 
Hebrew  conception,  on  the  other  (ireek  expres- 
sion. The  thoughts  of  the  East  were  wedded  to 
the  words  of  the  West.  This  was  accomplished  by 
the  gradual  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures 
into  the  vernacular  Greek.  The  Greek  had  alieady 
lost  the  exquisite  symmetry  of  its  first  fbrnx,  so 
that  it  couhl  take  the  clear  impress  of  Il('I)rew 
ideas  ;  and  at  the  same  time  it  had  gained  rather  than 
lost  in  richness  and  capacity.  In  this  maimer  what 
may  be  c;illed  the  theocratic  aspect  of  Natui'e  and 
History  was  embodied  in  Greek  phrases,  and  the 
power  and  freedom  of  Greek  quickened  and  defined 
Eastern  speculation.  The  theories  of  the  "  purists  " 
(if  the  17th  century  (cnmp.  Winer,  Gruinmaiik,  §1  ; 
lieuss,  Gesch.  (1.  11.  S.  i}47)  were  basetl  on  a  com- 
plete misconception  of  what  we  may,  without  pre- 
sumption, feel  to  have  been  required  for  a  universal 
(iospel.  The  message  was  not  for  one  nation  only, 
Imt  for  all  ;  and  the  language  in  which  it  was 
promulgated — like  its  most  sviccessful  })rcaclier — 
united  in  one  complementai-y  attributes.  [Hi;i,- 
lENIST,  i.  p,  783.] 

3.  The  (ireek  of  the  LXX.-like  the  English  of 
the    A.    \'.   or    liie    (ieinian    ol    I.utiicr — naturallv 


NEW  TESTAMENT  531 

deteiniined  the  (ireek  diah'ct  of  the  mass  of  the 
Jews.  It  is  quite  possible  that  numerous  provin- 
cialisms existed  among  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  of 
Egypt,  Palestine,  and  Asia  Minor,  but  the  dialect 
of  their  common  Scriptures  must  have  given  a 
general  unity  to  their  language.  It  is,  therefore, 
more  correct^  to  call  the  N.  T.  dialect  Hellenistic 
than  Alexandrine,  though  the  form  by  winch  it 
is  characterised  may  have  been  peculiarly  Alexan- 
drine at  first.  Its  local  character  was  lost  when 
the  LXX.  was  spread  among  the  Greek  Dispersion ; 
and  that  which  was  originally  confined  to  one  city 
or  one  work  was  adopted  by  a  whole  nation.  At 
the  same  time  much  of  the  extreme  harshness  of 
the  LXX.  dialect  was  softened  down  by  intercourse 
with  Greeks  or  graecising  foreigners,  and  conversely 
the  wide  spread  of  pi-oselytism  familiarised  the 
Greeks  with  Hebrew  ideas. 

4.  The  position  of  Palestine  was  peculiar.  The 
Aramaic  (^Syro-Chaldaic),  which  was  the  national 
dialect  after  the  Keturn,  existed  .side  by  side  with 
tlie  Greek.  Both  languages  seem  to  have  been  gene- 
rally understood,  though,  if  we  may  judge  from  other 
instances  of  bilingual  countries,  the  Aramaic  would 
be  the  chosen  language  for  the  common  intercourse 
of  Jews  (2  Mace.  vii.  8,  21,  27).  It  was  in  this 
language,  we  may  believe,  that  our  Lord  was  accus- 
tomed to  teach  the  people ;  and  it  appears  that  He 
used  the  same  in  the  more  private  acts  of  His  life 
(Mark  iii.  17,  v.  41,  vii.  34  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  46  ;  John 
i.  43;  cf.  John  XX.  1(3).  But  the  habitual  use  of 
the  LXX.  is  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  familiarity  of 
the  Palestinian  Jews  with  the  (jlreek  dialect ;  and 
the  judicial  proceedings  before  Pilate  must  have  been 
conducted  in  Greek.  (Comp.  Grinfield,  Apology  for 
the  LXX.,  pp.  76  if.) 

5.  The  Roman  occupation  of  Syria  was  not  alto- 
gether without  influence  upon  the  language.  A 
considerable  number  of  Latin  words,  chiefly  refer- 
ring to  acts  of  government,  occur  in  the  N.  T.,  and 
they  are  probably  only  a  sample  of  larger  inno- 
vations (KrjvcTos,  Xiyidiv.  KovaruiSia,  aaadotov, 
woSpavTrj?,  drjvdpioy,  fx'iXiov,  -npaiTwpiov,  <poa- 
■y^Wovv,  St.  Matt.  &c. ;  KevTvpioov.  ffTTfKuu\aT(cp, 
rh  iKavhv  Troi/jtrai,  St.  Mark  ;  kivTiov,  aovSdpiov, 
t'itKos,  St.  .lohn,  &c.  ;  Ki^epr'ivos,  Ko\uvia,  (tiiml- 
KivBiov,  (TiKdpios,  St.  Luke  ;  fidKeWuv,  jxefx^pdva, 
St.  Paul).  Other  words  in  common  use  were  of 
Semitic  (appa^iiv,  ^i^dvtov,  Kop^avas,  paB^fi), 
Persian  (ayyapeva,  fxdyoi,  Tidpa,  -rrapaSucros),  or 
Egyptian  origin  (/Sai'ofy. 

6.  The  language  which  was  moulded  under  these 
various  influeuces  presents  many  peculiarities,  both 
philological  and  exegetical,  \vhich  have  not  yet 
been  placed  in  a  cleai-  light.  For  a  long  time  it 
has  been  most  strangely  assumed  that  the  linguistic 
fcu'ms  preserved  in  the  oldest  MSS.  are  Alcian- 
drine  and  not  in  the  widest  .sense  Hellenistic,  and 
on  the  other  hand  that  the  Aramaic  modifications 
of  the  N.  T.  phraseolog}'  remove  it  fi-om  the  sphere 
of  strict  grammatical  analysis.  Tiiese  errors  are 
necessarily  fatal  to  all  real  advance  in  the  accurate 
study  of  the  words  or  sense  of  the  apostolic  writ- 
ings. In  the  case  of  ^t.  Paul,  no  less  than  in  the 
case  of  Herodotus,  the  evidence  of  (he  earliest 
witnesses  must  be  deci.sivo  as  to  dialectic  fonns. 
Egyptia!)  scribes  preserved  the  characteristics  of 
other  books,  and  there, is  no  reason  to  suppii.se  that 
they  altered  those  of  the  N.  T.  Nor  is  it  rea.son- 
able  to  conclude  that  the  later  stages  of  a  language 
are  governed  by  no  law  or  that  the  introdncfion 
of  fresh  eleniiuts  destroys  thf  symmetry  whi.li   in 

2  M   2 


532 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


reality  it  only  changes.  But  if  old  misconceptions 
still  linger,  very  much  has  been  done  lately  to 
open  the  wa}'  to  a  sounder  understanding  both 
of  the  form  and  the  substance  ot  the  N.  T.  by 
Tischendorf  (as  to  the  dialect,  N.  T.  Prolegg. 
xlvi.-lxii.),  by  Winer  (as  to  the  grammatical  laws, 
Gramm.  d.  iV.  T.  Sprachid.  6th  ed.  18.55;  comp. 
Green's  Grammar  of  N.  T.  dialect,  1842),  and 
by  the  later  commentators  (Fritzsche,  Lucke, 
Bleek,  Meyer,  Alford),  In  detail  comparatively 
little  remains  to  be  done,  but  a  philosophical  view 
of  the  N.  T.  language  as  a  whole  is  yet  to  be 
desired.  For  this  it  would  be  necessary  to  take 
account  of  the  commanding  authority  of  the  LXX. 
over  the  religious  dialect,  of  the  constant  and  living 
power  of  the  spoken  Aramaic  and  Greek,  of  the 
mutual  influence  of  inflexion  and  syntax,'  of  the 
inherent  vitality  of  words  and  foims,  of  the  history 
of  technical  tei'nis,  and  of  the  creative  energy  of 
Christian  truth.  Some  of  these  points  may  be 
discussed  in  other  articles  ;  for  the  present  it  must 
be  enough  to  notice  a  few  of  the  most  salient 
characteristics  of  the  language  a.s  to  form  and  ex- 
pression. 

7.  The  formal  differences  of  the  Greek  of  the 
N.  T.  from  classical  Greek  are  partly  diflerences  of 
vocabulajy  and  partly  differences  of  construction. 
Old  words  are  changed  in  orthogiaphy  (1)  or  in 
inflection  (2),  new  words  (3)  and  rare  or  novel 
constructions  (4)  are  introduced.  One  or  two 
examples  of  each  of  these  classes  may  be  noticed. 
But  it  must  be  again  remarked  that  the  language 
of  the  N.  T.,  both  as  to  its  lexicography  and  as 
to  its  grammar,  is  based  on  the  language  of  the 
LXX.  The  two  stages  of  the  dialect  cannot  be 
examined  satisfactorily  apart.  The  usage  of  the 
earlier  books  often  confirms  and  illustrates  the 
usage  of  the  later ;  and  many  characteristics  of 
N.  T.  Greek  have  been  neglected  or  set  aside  from 
ignorance  of  the  tiict  that  they  are  undoubtedly 
found  in  the  LXX.  With  regai-d  to  the  forms  of 
words,  the  similarity  between  the  two  is  perfect  ; 
with  regard  to  construction,  it  must  always  be 
remembered  that  the  LXX.  is  a  translation,  exe- 
cuted under  the  immediate  influence  of  the  Hebrew, 
while  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  (with  a  partial  excep- 
tion in  the  case  of  St.  Matthew)  were  written  fr&ely 
in  the  current  Greek. 

(1)  Among  the  most  frequent  pectdiarities  of 
orthography  of  Hellenistic  Greek  which  are  sup- 
ported by  conclusive  authority,  are — the  preserva- 
tion of  the  fx  before  \f/  .and  (p  in  Ka^^Avw  and  its 
derivations,  \riix\peTai,  avTiX7)iJ.\l/eis  ;  and  of  r  in 
compounds  of  crvv  and  eV,  crvvCfiv,  <Tvvfj.adrjTT}s, 
ivyeypafi/xfur].  Other  variations  occ\ir  in  recrtre- 
paKovra,  ifiavvuv,  kc,  eKaOepicrBr]  &c.  It  is 
more  remarkable  that  the  a'^pirate  appears  to  have 
been  introduced  into  some  words,  as  eAiri's  (FJom. 
viii.  20;  Luke  vi.  ;i5).  The  v  e((>e\KV(TTiK6v  in 
verbs  (but  not  in  nouns)  and  the  s  of  ovtws  are 
always  preserved  before  consonants,  and  the  hiatus 
(with  aWa  especially)  is  constantly  (perhaps 
always)  disregarded.  The  forms  in  -ei-,  -t-,  are 
more  difficult  of  determination,  and  the  question  is 
not  limited  to  later  Greek. 

(2)  Peculiarities  of  inflection  are  found  in  ,ua- 
yaip-i],  -Tjy,  x^^P°'''{h'  (Tvyyfvr)v{'t),  ^adeoos,  kc. 
These  peculiarities  are  much  more  common  in 
verbs.  The  augment  is  sometimes  doubled  :  airtKa- 
Tearddri,  sometimes  omitted  :  oiKoS6f/.r](rei',  Karai- 
(Txwdi).  The  doubling  of  p  is  commonly  ne- 
glected:  ipdfTtffev.      Unusual  form's  of  tenses  are 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

used :  eirecra,  elira,  &c. ;  unusual  moods :  KavB'i]- 
(xcofj.ai  (1  Cor.  xiii.  4?);  and  unusual  conjuga- 
tions :  viKovvTi  for  vlkwvti,  eWoya  for  ^\K6yei, 
irapeiffeSirqffav  for  irapei(r4Sv(ra.v  (Jude  4\ 

foj  The  new  words  are  generally  formed  ac- 
cording to  old  analogy — oiKuSfa-n-6TTis,  eiiKaipelv, 
KaOrj/u.epivAs,  airoKapaSuKelv ;  and  in  this  respect 
the  frequency  of  compound  words  is  particularly 
worthy  of  notice.  Other  words  receive  new  senses  : 
XpTj/iaTiXeij',  oyf/dpiov,  irepiffTraaQai,  ffwiffrrifit ; 
and  some  are  slightly  changed  in  form  :  avdBffia 
(-Tjjua),  i^d-mpa  (-7?s),  fiaaiXicraa  (comp.  Winer, 
Gramm.  §2). 

(4)  The  most  remarkable  construction,  which  is 
well  attested  both  in  the  LXX.  and  in  the  N.  T., 
is  that  of  the  conjunctions  iVa,  Urav,  with  tiie 
present  indicative:  Gal.  vi.  12(?),  'iva  SiuKOvrai, 
Luke  xi.  2,  Urav  irpoffevx^cGe,  as  well  as  with 
the  future  indicative  (Comp.  Tischdf.  Maik  iii.  2). 
"Orav  is  even  found  with  the  imperfect  and  aor. 
indie,  Mark  iii.  11,  oTav  idecopovv;  Apoc.  viii.  1, 
orav  ^voi^ev.  Other  iiTegular  constructions  in 
the  combination  of  moods  (Apoc.  iii.  9)  and  in 
defective  concords  (Mark  ix.  26)  can  be  paralleled 
in  classical  Greek,  though  such  constructions  are 
more  frequent  and  anomalous  iu  the  Apocalypse 
than  elsewhere. 

8.  The  peculiarities  of  the  N.  T.  language  which 
have  been  hitherto  mentioned  have  only  a  rare 
and  remote  connexion  with  interpret<ition.  They 
illustrate  more  or  less  the  general  history  of  the 
decay  of  a  language,  and  offer  in  some  few  instances 
curious  problems  as  to  the  corresponding  changes 
of  modes  of  conception.  Other  peculiarities  have 
a  more  important  bearing  on  the  sense.  These  are 
in  part  Hebraisms  (Aramaisms)  in  (1)  expression 
or  (2)  construction,  and  in  part  (3)  modifications 
of  language  resulting  from  the  substance  of  the 
Christian  revelation. 

(1)  The  general  characteristic  of  Hebraic  expres- 
sion is  vividness,  as  simplicity  is  of  Hebraic  syntax. 
Hence  there  is  found  constantly  in  the  N.  T.  a  pei- 
sonality  of  language  (ifthephnise  maybe  used;  which 
is  foreign  to  classical  Greek.  At  one  time  this 
occurs  in  the  substitution  of  a  pregnant  metaphor 
for  a  simple  word  :  olKoSofj.f7i/  (St.  Paul),  (nr\ay- 
XVL^^Ofiai  (Gospels),  Trkarvveiv  t^v  KapSiav  (St. 
Paul),  ■KpSffcDTTOv  Kajx^dveiv,  ■Kpo<TwiroKrifJt.y\/ia, 
irpoffooTroKttfj.irTilv.  At  another  time  in  the  u.se 
of  prepositions  in  place  of  cases :  Kpd^nv  iv  f/.e- 
yd\ri  (paivfj,  iv  fxaxaipci,  drcoKeffdai,  dOwos  dirh 
Tov  alfiaros.  At  another  in  the  use  of  a  vivid 
phrase  for  a  proposition :  Std  x^'-P'^^  twos  yt- 
v4(70ai,  dirocTTfWetv  avv  X^'P^  dyyi\ov,  iv  X^'p' 
fxeffirov,  (j)€vyeiv  OTrb  irpoawTov  tivos.  And 
sometimes  the  one  personal  act  is  used  to  describe 
the  whole  spirit  and  temper :  -KopevfaOai    oiriffa 

TIVOS. 

(2)  The  chief  peculiarities  of  the  syntax  of  the 
N.  T.  lie  in  the  reproduction  of  Hebrew  forms. 
Two  great  features  by  which  it  is  distinguished 
from  classical  syntax  may  be  specially  singled  out. 
It  is  markedly  deficient  in  the  use  of  particles  and 
of  oblique  and  participial  constructions.  Sentences 
are  more  frequently  co-ordinated  than  subordinated. 
One  clause  follows  another  rather  in  the  way  of 
constructive  parallelism  than  by  distinct  lexical 
sequence.  Only  the  simplest  words  of  connexion 
are  used  in  place  of  the  subtle  varieties  of  expres- 
sion by  which  Attic  writers  exhibit ,  the  interde- 
pendence of  numerous  ideas.  The  repetition  of  a 
kev-word  (.John  i.   1,  v.  31,  32,  xi.  33)  or  of  a 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

Jfi^ding  thought  (John  x.  11  t'u,  xvii.  14-19)  often 
serves  in  place  of  ail  other  cunjunctions.  The 
words  quoted  from  another  are  given  in  a  direct 
objective  shape  (Jolin  vii.  40,  41).  Illustrative 
details  are  commonly  added  in  abrupt  parenthesis 
(Jolm  iv.  6).  Calm  emphasis,  solemn  repetition, 
grave  simplicity,  the  gradual  accumulation  of  truths, 
give  to  the  language  of  Holy  Sciipture  a  depth 
and  permanence  of  etfect  found  nowhere  else.  It 
is  difficult  to  single  out  isolated  phrases  in  illus- 
tration of  this  general  statement,  since  the  final 
impression  is  more  due  to  the  iteration  of  many 
small  points  than  to  the  striking  power  of  a  few. 
Apait  from  the  whole  context  the  influence  of 
details  is  almost  inappreciable.  Constructions  which 
are  mpst  distinctly  Hebraic  {irKrjdvvoiv  ir\ridvva>, 
Oavarci)  reKevrav,  evSoKf7v  ev  rivi,  crap^  a/jiap- 
Ti'as,  &c.)  are  not  those  which  give  the  deepest 
Hebrew  colouring  to  the  N.  T.  diction,  but  rather 
that  pervading  monotony  of  form  which,  though 
correct  in  individual  clauses,  is  wliolly  foreign  to  the 
vigour  and  elasticity  of  classical  Greek.  If  the  stu- 
dent will  carefully  analyse  a  few  chapters  of  St.  John, 
in  whom  tlie  Hebrew  spirit  is  most  constant  and 
marked,  inquiring  at  each  step  how  a  classical 
writer  would  have  avoided  repetition  by  the  use  of 
pronouns  and  particles,  how  he  would  have  indi- 
cated dependence  by  the  use  of  absolute  cases  and 
the  optative,  how  he  would  have  united  the  whole 
by  establishing  a  clear  relation  between  the  parts, 
he  will  gain  a  true  measure  of  the  Hebraic  style 
more  or  less  pervading  the  whole  N.  T.  whicli 
cannot  be  obtained  from  a  mere  catalogue  of 
phrases.  The  character  of  the  style  lies  in  its 
total  eflect  and  not  in  separable  elements :  it  is 
seen  in  the  spirit  which  informs  the  entire  text  fa- 
more  vividly  than  in  the  separate  members  (comp. 
Introduction  to  the  Gospels,  pp.  241-252). 

(3)  The  purely  Christian  element  in  the  N.  T. 
lequires  the  most  car*ful  handling.  Words  and 
phrases  already  partially  current  were  transfigured 
by  embodying  new  truths  and  for  ever  consecrated 
to  their  service.  To  trace  the  histoiy  of  these  is  a 
delicate  question  of  lexicography  which  has  not 
yet  been  thoroughly  examined.  There  is  a  danger 
of  confounding  the  apostolic  usage  on  the  one  side 
with  earlier  Jewish  usage,  and  on  the  other  with 
later  ecclesiastical  terminology.  The  steps  by  which 
the  one  served  as  a  preparation  for  the  ajtostolic 
sense  and  the  latter  uatiu'ally  grew  out  of  it  re- 
quire to  be  diligently  observed.  Even  within  the 
range  of  the  N.  T.  itself  it  is  possible  to  notice 
various  phases  of  fundamental  ideas  and  a  consequent 
modification  of  terms.  Language  and  thought  are 
both  living  powers,  mutually  dependent  and  illus- 
trative. Examples  of  words  which  show  this  pro- 
gressive history  are  abundant  and  full  of  instruc- 
tion. Among  others  may  be  quoted,  ttiVtij, 
■Kiffr6s,  TTHTTeveiv  eis  riva ;  S/»cotos,  SiKaiiiw ; 
ayio?,  ayid^oi;  KaXuv,  kAijctis,  /cAtjtJs,  e/cAe/c- 
T(is ;  dyaTrri,  i\wis.  x"*/"? ;  (vayyeAiov,  fiiay- 
yeXi^ea'dai,  Kr^pvTTetu,  Kripvy^a  ;  dirucnoKos, 
■n-pecT^vrepos,  iirluKOTros,  Siaxoros;  &prov  KKatrai, 
ISaiTTl^tiv,  Koivtiivia  ;  cdp^,  xl/vxv,  Trvtv/xa  ; 
KSffjxos,  cruiTTipia,  ffw^fiv  ■  Xv-rpovirdat,  /caraA- 
\d(T(Tfiv.  Nor  is  it  too  much  to  say  that  in  the 
history  of  these  and  such  like  words  lies  the  his- 
tory of  Christianity.  The  perfect  trutli  of  the 
apostolic  phr.aseology,  when  examined  by  this  most 
rigorous  criticism,  contains  the  fulfilment  of  earlier 
anticipations  and  the  germ  of  later  growth. 

9.   For  the  language  of  the    N.  T.   calls  lor  the 


NEW  TEST/s  MENT 


633 


exercise  of  the  most  rigorous  criticism.  The  com- 
plexity of  the  elements  which  it  involves  makes  the 
inquiry  wider  and  deeper,  but  does  not  set  it  aside. 
The  overwhelming  importance,  the  manifold  expres- 
sion, the  gradual  development  of  the  messaoe  which 
it  conveys,  call  for  more  intense  devotion  in  the  use 
of  every  faculty  trained  in  other  schools,  but  do 
not  suppress  inquiry.  The  gospel  is  for  the  whole 
nature  of  man,  and  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  reason 
as  well  as  the  spirit.  Wonls  and  idioms  admit  of 
investigation  in  all  stages  of  a  language.  Decay 
itself  is  subject  to  law.  A  mixed  and  degenerate 
dialect  is  not  less  the  living  exponent  of  definite 
thought,  than  the  most  pure  and  vigorous.  Kude 
and  unlettered  men  may  have  characteristic  modes 
of  thought  and  speech,  but  even  (naturally  speaking) 
there  is  no  reason  to  expect  that  they  will  be  less 
exact  than  others  in  using  their  own  idiom.  The 
literal  sense  of  the  apostolic  writings  must  be 
gained  in  the  same  way  as  the  literal  sense  of  any 
other  writings,  by  the  fullest  use  of  every  appliance 
of  scholarship,  and  the  most  complete  confidence  in 
the  necessaiy  and  absolute  connexion  of  words  and 
thoughts.  No  variation  of  phrase,  no  peculiarity 
of  idiom,  no  change  of  tense,  no  change  of  ordei-, 
can  be  neglected.  The  truth  lies  in  the  whole 
expression,  and  no  one  can  presume  to  set  aside  any 
part  as  trivial  or  indifferent. 

10.  The  importance  of  investigating  most  pa- 
tiently and  most  faithfully  the  literal  meaning  of 
the  sacred  text  must  be  felt  with  tenfold  force, 
when  it  is  lemembered  that  the  literal  sense  is  the 
outward  embodiment  of  a  spiritual  sense,  which  lies 
beneath  and  quickens  every  part  of  Holy  Scripture 
[0[,D  Testament].  Something  of  the  same  kind 
of  double  sense  is  found  in  the  greatest  works  of 
human  genius,  in  the  Orestea  for  example,  or 
Hamlet ;  and  the  obscurity  which  hangs  over  the 
deepest  utterances  ot  a  dramatist  may  teach  humility 
to  those  who  complain  of  the  darkness  of  a  prophet. 
The  special  circumstances  of  the  several  writei's, 
their  individual  characteristics  reflected  in  their 
books,  the  slightest  details  which  add  distinctness 
or  emphasis  to  a  statement,  are  thus  charged  with  a 
divine  force.  A  spiritual  harmony  rises  out  of  an 
accurate  intei-pretation.  And  exactly  in  proportion 
as  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the  Bible  is  felt  to  be 
truly  its  primary  meaning,  will  the  importance  of 
a  sound  criticism  of  the  text  be  recognized  as  the 
one  necessary  and  sufficient  foundation  of  the  noble 
superstructure  of  higher  truth  which  is  afterwards 
found  to  rest  upon  it.  Faith  in  words  is  the 
beginning,  faith  in  the  word  is  the  completion  of 
liiblical  inteipretation.  Impatience  may  destroy 
the  one  and  check  the  other  ;  but  the  true  student 
will  fiiul  the  simple  text  of  Holy  Sciipture  ever 
pregnant  with  lessons  for  the  present  and  promises 
for  ages  to  come.  The  literal  meaning  is  one  and 
fixed:  the  spiritual  meaning  is  infinite  and  multi- 
furm.  The  unity  of  the  hteral  meaning  is  not 
disturbed  by  the  variety  of  the  inherent  spiritual 
a])plications.  Truth  is  essentially  infinite.  There 
is  thus  one  sense  to  the  words,  but  countless  rela- 
tions. There  is  an  absolute  fitness  in  the  paialiles 
and  figures  of  Scripture,  and  hence  an  abiding 
pertinence.  The  spiritual  meaning  is,  so  to  speak, 
the  life  of  the  whole,  living  on  with  unchanging 
jiower  through  every  change  of  race  and  age.  To 
this  we  can  approach  only  (on  tlie  luiman  .-iide)  bj 
unwavering  trust  in  the  ordinary  laws  of  scholar- 
slii]i,  which  finds  in  Scripture  its  final  consecra- 
tion. 


634 


NEW  YEAR 


For  the  study  of  the  language  of  the  N.  T.,  Tisch- 
endorfs  7th  edition  (1859),  Grinfield's  Editio 
HeUenistica  (with  the  Scholia,  1843-8),  Bruder's 
Concordant iuB  (184-2),  and  Winer's  Griitmivitik 
(fjth  edition,  185/!,  translated  by  Masson,  Edinb. 
1859),  are  indispensable.  To  these  may  be  added 
Trommius'  Concordantks  .  .  .  LXX  interpretum, 
1718,  tor  the  usage  of  the  LXX,  and  Suicer's 
Thesaunis,  1682,  for  the  later  history  of  some 
words.  Tiie  lexicons  of  Schleusncr  to  the  LXX. 
(1820-1),  and  N.  T.  (1819)  contain  a  large  mass  of 
mateiials,  but  are  most  uncritical.  Those  of  Wahl 
(N.T.  1822;  Apocrypha,  1853)  are  much  better 
in  point  of  accuracy  and  scholarship.  On  questions 
of  dialect  and  grammar  there  are  impoitant  collec- 
tions in  Sturz,  De Dkdecto  Maced.  et  Alex.  (1786); 
Thiersch,  De  Pent.  vers.  Alex.  (1841)  ;  Lobeck's 
Fhrynichus  (\820),  Paralipomena  Gi\  Gr.  (1837), 
Pathol.  Serin.  Gr.  Prolegg.  (1843),  Pathol.  Serm. 
Gr.  Elein.  (1846).  The  Indices  of  Jacobsou  to 
the  Patres  Apostolici  (1840)  are  very  complete  and 
useful.  The  parallels  gathered  by  Ott  and  Krebs 
from  Josephus,  and  by  Loesner  and  Kiihn  fi-om 
Philo  have  been  fully  used  by  most  recent  commen- 
tators. Further  bibliographical  references  are  given 
bv  Winer,  Gramm.  pp.  1-38  ;  Reuss,  Gesch.  d. 
fleil.  Schrift,  pp.  28-37  ;  Grinfield's  N.  T.  Editio 
HeUenistica,  Praef .  xi.,  sii.  [B.  F.  W.] 

NEW  YEAR.     [Trujipets,  Feast  of.] 

NEZI'AH   (rC^J  :    Nao-Oie  ;    Alex.    Neflie    in 

Ezr. ;  Nicria  in  Neh.  :  Nasia\.  The  descendants  of 
Neziah  were  among  the  Nethinim  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  'Ezr.  ii.  54;  Neh.  vii.  56).  The 
name  appears  as  Nasith  in  1  Esdr.  v.  32. 

NE'ZIB  (2^V3  :  Nacrei'iS  ;  Alex.  NeiniS:  NesiV), 
a  city  of  Judah  (.Josh.  xv.  43  only),  in  the  district 
of  the  Shofelah  or  Lowland,  one  of  the  same  group 
with  Keilah  and  Mareshah.  To  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  it  was  evidently  known.  They  place  it  on 
the  road  between  Eleutheropolis  and  Hebron,  7,  or 
9  (Euseb.),  miles  from  the  former,  and  there  it 
still  stands  under  the  almost  identical  name  of  Beit 
Nusib,  or  Chirbeh  Nnsih,  1\  houis  from  BeitJihrin, 
on  a  rising  ground  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Wadij 
es-Sur,  and  with  Keilah  and  Mareshah  within  easy 
distance.  It  has  been  visited  by  Dr.  Robinson  (ii. 
220,  1)  and  Tobler  {3tte  Wanderung,  150).  The 
former  mentions  the  remains  of  ancient  buildings, 
especially  one  of  a|iparently  remote  age,  120  feet 
long  by  30  broad.  This,  however — with  the  curious 
discrepancy  which  is  so  remarkable  in  Eastern 
expioi  ers— ^is  denied  by  the  later  traveller,  who 
states  that  "  but  for  the  ancient  name  no  one  would 
suspect  this  of  being  an  ancient  site." 

Nezib*  adds  another  to  the  number  of  places 
which,  though  enumerated  as  in  the  Lowland,  have 
been  found  in  the  mountains.   [Jipiitah;  Keilah.] 

[G.] 

NIB'HAZ  (rnn;,  and  in  some  MSS.  jn33  and 

tnip :    Ni;3xay  or  Nai)3as ;    lor  which    there  is 

substituted  in  some  copies  an  entirely  different  , 
name,  'A/Saafe'p,  N«j3aaffp,  or  'E/SAofep,  the  latter  ; 
being  probably  the  more  correct,  answering  to  the  i 
Hebrew  "IVyb^N,   "  grief  of  the  ruler":    Neb- 

»  The  word  netsib,  identical  with  the  above  name,  is  Philistine  place.    But  the  application  of  the  term  to  the 

several  times  employed  for  a  garrison  or  an  officer  of  the  Philistim-s,  though  frequent,  is  not  exclusive. 

Philistines  (sec   1  Sam.  x.  5;  xiii.  3,  4  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  16).  I  "^  If  originally  a  Hehrew  name,  probably  from  the  s;iwp 

This  siiggesls   tlie  possibility  of  Nezib  having  been  a  root  as  B.Tshan— a  sandv  soil. 

I 


NICANOR 

ahaz),  a  deity  of  the  Avites,  introduced  by  them 
into  Samaria  in  the  time  of  Shalmaneser  (2  K. 
xvii.  31).  There  is  no  certain  information  as  to 
the  character  of  the  deity,  or  the  form  of  the  idol 
so  named.  The  Rabbins  derived  the  name  from  a 
Hebrew  root  n&hach  (1133),  "  to  bark,"  and  hence 
assigneil  to  it  the  h'guie  of  a  dog,  or  a  dog-headed 
man.  There  is  no  a  priori  improbability  in  this ;  the 
Egyptians  worshipped  the  dog  (Plut.  De  Ts.  44),  and 
according  to  the  opinion  cm-rent  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  they  represented  AnuVjis  as  a  dog- 
headed  man,  though  Wilkinson  {Anc.  Egypt,  i.  440, 
Second  Series)  asserts  that  this  was  a  mistake,  the 
head  being  in  reality  that  of  a  jackal.  Some  indi- 
cations of  the  worship  of  the  dog  have  been  found  in 
Sp-ia,  a  colossal  figure  of  a  dog  having  formerly 
existed  between  Berytus  and  Tripolis  (Winer,  Bealw. 
s.  v.).  It  is  still  more  to  the  point  to  observe  that 
on  one  of  the  slabs  found  at  Khorsabad  and  repre- 
sented by  Botta  (pi.  141),  we  have  the  front  of  a 
temple  depicted  with  an  animal  near  the  entrance, 
which  can  be  nothing  else  than  a  bitch  suckling  a 
puppy,  the  head  of  the  animal  having,  however, 
disappeared.  The  worship  of  idols  representing  the 
human  body  surmounted  by  the  head  of  an  animal 
(as  in  the  well-known  case  of  Nisroch)  was  com- 
mon among  the  Assp-ians.  According  to  another 
equally  unsatisfactoiy  theory,  Nibhaz  is  identified 
with  the  god  of  the  nether  world  of  the  Sabian 
worship  (Gesen.  nesaur.  p.  842).        [W.  L.  B.] 

NIB'SHAN  (with  the  definite  article,  "jK'nan  ■ 
'Ha<p\a^u)V  ;  Alex.  NeyScrar  :  Nebsan).  One  of  the 
six  cities  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  62)  which  were  in 
the  district  of  the  Midbar  (A.  V.  "  wilderness"), 
which  probably  in  this  one  case  only  designates  the 
depressed  region  on  the  immediate  shore  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  usually  in  the  Hebiew  Scriptures  called  the 
Arabdh.  [Vol.  i.  11566.]  Under  the  name  of 
Nempsan  or  Nebsan  it  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon,  but  with  no  at- 
tempt to  fix  its  position.  Nor  does  any  subsequent 
traveller  appear  to  have  either  sought  for  or  dis- 
covered any  traces  of  the  name.  [G.] 

NICA'NOR  (Ni/cai/co/):  JVicanor),  the  son  of 
Patroclus  (2  Mace.  viii.  9),  a  general  who  was  en- 
gaged in  the  Jewish  wars  under  Antiochns  Epiphanes 
and  Demetrius  I.  He  took  part  in  the  first  expedition 
of  Lysias,  B.C.  166  ( 1  Mace.  iii.  38),  and  was  defrated 
vvith  his  fellow-commander  at  Emmans  (1  Mace, 
iv.  ;  cf.  2  Mace.  viii.  9  If.).  After  the  death  of 
-Antiochus  Eupatoi'  and  Lysias,  he  stood  high  in 
the  favoiu-  of  Demetrius  (1  Mace.  vii.  26),  who 
appointed  him  governor  of  Judaea  (2  Mace.  xiv. 
12),  a  command  which  he  readily  undertook  as  one 
"who  bare  deadly  hate  unto  Israel"  (1  Maoc.  vii. 
26).  At  first  he  .seems  to  have  endeavoured  to  win 
the  confidence  of  Judas,  but  when  his  treacherous 
designs  were  discovered  he  had  recourse  to  violence. 
A  battle  took  place  at  Caphaisalama,  which  was 
indecisive  in  its  results ;  but  shortly  after  Judas 
met  him  at  Adasa  (B.C.  161),  and  he  fell  "  first  in 
the  battle."  A  geneial  rout  followed,  and  the  13th 
of  Adar,  on  which  the  engagement  took  place,  "  the 
day  before  Mardocheus'  day,"  was  ordained  to  be 
kept  for  ever  as  a  festival  { 1  ]Macc.  vii.  49  ;  2  Mace. 
.XV.  36). 


NICODEMUS 

There  are  suinc  discrepancies  brtween  the  iiai'ra- 
tives  in  the  two  booi<s  of  Maccabees  as  to  Nicaiior. 
In  1  Mace,  he  is  represented  as  acting  with  deli- 
berate treachery :  in  2  Mace,  he  is  said  to  liave  been 
won  over  to  a  sincere  friendship  witli  .Judas,  wliich 
was  only  interru})ted  by  the  intrigues  of  Alcimus, 
who  induced  Demetrius  to  rejieat  his  orders  for  the 
capture  of  tlie  Jewish  hero  (2  Alacc.  xiv.  2,3  ft'.). 
Internal  evidence  is  decidedly  in  favour  of  1  Mace. 
According  to  Josephus  (A7it.  xii.  10,  §4),  who  does 
not,  however,  appear  to  have  had  any  other  autho- 
lity  than  1  JIacc.  before  him,  Judas  was  defeated 
at  Capharsalama ;  and  though  his  account  is  obvi- 
ously inaccurate  (avajKa^ei  Toy  'lovSav  .  .  .  iirl 
T^i/  &Kpai>  (pivynv  \;  the  events  which  followed 
(I  Mace.  vii.  .TJ  If.;  conip.  2  Mace.  xiv.  33  tf.) 
seem  at  least  to  indicate  that  .Judas  gained  no  ad- 
vantage. In  2  Mace,  this  engagement  is  not  no- 
ticed, but  another  is  placed  (2  Mace.  xiv.  17)  befoie 
the  connexion  of  Nicanor  with  Judas,  while  this 
was  alter  it  (1  Mace.  vii.  27  ft'.),  in  which  "Simon 
.ludas'  brother"  is  said  to  have  been  "somewhat 
dit-comfited." 

2.  One  of  the  fii'st  seven  deacons  (Acts  vi.  5). 
According  to  the  Pseudo-Hippolytus  he  was  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples,  and  "  died  at  the  time  of  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  .Stephen"  (p.  953,  ed.  Migne).  [B.  F.  W.] 

NICODE'MUS  (NfKtJSTjyuos  T  Nicodemus),  a 
Pharisee,  a  ruler  of  the  Jev/ti,  and*  teacher  of  Israel 
(John  iii.  1 ,  10),  vi'hose  secret  visit  to  our  Lord  was 
the  occasion  of  the  discourse  recorded  by  St.  John. 
The  name  was  not  uncommon  among  the  Jews 
(.Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  3,  §2),  and  was  no  doubt  bor- 
rowed fi'om  the  Greeks.  In  the  Talmud  it  appears 
under  the  form  JID^pJ,  and  some  would  derive  it 
from  ^p3,  innocent,  DT,  blood  {i.  e.  "  Sceleris 
purus");  Wetsteiu,  N.  T.  i.  160.  In  the  case  of 
Nicodemus  Ben  Goriou,  the  name  is  derived  by 
II.  Nathan  ii'oni  a  miracle  which  he  is  supposed  to 
have  performed  (Otho,  Lex.  Uab.  s.  v.). 

Nicode.Tius  is  only  mentioned  by  St.  John,  who 
narrates  his  noctui-nal  visit  to  Jesus,  and  the  con- 
voi-sation  which  then  took  place,  at  which  the 
Evangelist  may  himself  have  been  present.  The 
high  station  of  Nicodemus  as  a  member  of  the 
Jewish  Sanhedrim,  and  the  avowed  scorn  under 
which  the  rulers  concealed  their  inward  conviction 
(John  iii.  2)  that  Jesus  was  a  teacher  sent  from 
God,  are  suiflcient  to  account  for  the  secrecy  of  the 
interview.  A  constitutional  timidity  is  discernible 
in  the  character  of  the  en(|uiring  Pharisee,  which 
could  not  be  overcome  by  his  vacillating  <lesire  to 
lietriend  and  acknowledge  One  whom  he  knew  to  be 
a  Prophet,  even  if  he  did  not  at  once  re<;ognise  in 
liim  the  promised  Me.ssiah.  Thus  the  few  words 
which  he  interposed  against  the  rash  injustice  of 
his  colleagues  are  cautiously  rested  on  a  general 
principle  (John  vii.  50),  and  betray  no  indication 
of  his  faith  in  the  (Jalilean  whom  his  sect  despised. 
And  even  when  the  power  of  Christ's  love,  mani- 
fested on  the  cross,  had  made  the  most  timid  disciples 
bold,  Nicodemus  does  not  come  forward  with  his 
splendid  gifts  of  alfection  until  the  example  had 
been  set  by  one  of  his  own  rank,  and  wealth,  and 
station  in  society  (xix.  39). 

In  these  three  notices  of  Nicodemus  a  noJ)le  can- 
dour, and  a  simple  love  of  truth  shine  out  in  the 
midst  of  hesitation  and  fear  of  man.     We  can  there- 

"  'J'he  article  in.lolMi  iii.  10  (o  Sifiaonc.)  is  probably  only 
generic,  althoii^li  Winer  uiul  Up.  Midilleloii  supiuisu  tlml 
it  implies  a  relnilci'. 


NICOLAITANS 


536 


fore  easily  believe  the  tradition  that  after  the 
resui'iection  (which  would  supply  the  last  outward 
impulse  necessary  to  coniirm  his  taith  and  increase 
his  courage)  he  beaime  a  piofessed  disciple  of  Christ, 
and  received  baptism  at  the  hands  of  Peter  and 
John.  All  the  rest  that  is  recorded  of  him  is  highly 
uncertain.  It  is  said,  however,  that  the  Jews,  in 
revenge  tor  his  conversion,  deprived  him  of  his  ottice, 
beat  him  cruelly,  and  drove  him  from  Jerusalem  ; 
that  Gamaliel,  who  was  his  kinsman,  hospitably 
sheltered  him  until  his  death  in  a  country  house, 
and  finally  gave  him  honourable  burial  near  the 
body  of  Stephen,  where  Gamaliel  himself  was  after- 
wards interred.  Finally,  the  three  bodies  are  said 
to  liave  been  discovered  on  Aug.  3,  a.d.  415,  which 
day  was  set  apart  by  the  Poniish  Church  in  honour 
of  the  event  (Phot.  Bibl'wtk.  Cod.  171;  Lucian, 
De  S.  Steph.  inventione). 

The  conversation  of  Christ  with  Nicodemus  is 
appointed  as  the  Gospel  for  Trinity  Sunday.  The 
choice  at  firet  sight  may  seem  strange.  'I'here  are 
in  that  discourse  no  mysterious  numbei's  which  might 
shadow  forth  truths  in  their  simplest  relations  ; 
no  distinct  and  yet  .simultaneous  actions  of  the  divine 
persons ;  no  separation  of  divine  attributes.  Yet 
the  instinct''  which  dictated  this  choice  was  a  right 
one.  For  it  is  in  this  conversation  alone  that  we 
see  how  our  Lord  himself  met  the  dilliculties  of  a 
thoughtful  man  ;  how  he  checked,  without  noticing, 
the  selt-assumption  of  a  teacher  ;  how  he  lifted  the 
half-believing  mind  to  the  light  of  nobler  truth. 

If  the  Nicodemus  of  St.  John's  Gospel  be  identical 
with  the  Nicodemus  Ben  Gorion  of  the  Talmud,  he 
must  have  lived  till  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  which  is 
not  impossible  since  the  term  yfpoiv,  in  John  iii.  4, 
may  not  be  intended  to  apply  to  Nicodemus  himself. 
The  arguments  for  their  identification  are  that  both 
are  mentioned  as  Pharisees,  wealthy,  pious,  and 
members  of  the  Sanhedrim  {2'aanith,  t'.  19,  &c. 
See  Otho,  Lex.  Eah.  s.  v.)  ;  and  that  in  Taanith 
the  original  name  (altered  on  the  occasion  of  a 
miracle  perfonned  by  Nicodemus  in  order  to  procure 
rain)  is  said  to  have  been  ''J13,  which  is  also  the 
name  of  one  of  five  Rabbinical  disciples  of  Christ 
mentioned  in  Sanhed.  f.  43,  1  (Otho,  s.  v.  Christus). 
Finally,  the  family  of  this  Nicodemus  are  .said  to 
have  been  reduced  from  great  wealth  to  the  most 
squalid  and  horrible  poverty,  which  however  may 
as  well  be  accounted  for  by  the  fiill  of  Jerusalem, 
as  by  the  change  of  fortune  resulting  from  an  accept- 
ance of  Christianity. 

On  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  see  Fabricius,  Cod. 
I'seuclepiijr.  i.  213;  Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  478. 
In  some  MSS.  it  is  also  called  '  The  Acts  of 
Pilate.'  It  is  undoubtedly  spurious  (as  the  con- 
clusion of  it  sufficiently  proves\  and  of  very  little 
value.  '  [F.  W.  F.] 

NICOLA'ITANS  (NiKoAaiVai :  Mcolaitac). 
The  question  how  far  the  sect  that  is  mentioned  by 
this  name  in  Rev.  ii.  (i,  15,  was  connected  witli  the 
Nicolas  of  Acts  vi.  5,  and  the  traditions  tli.at  have 
gathered  round  his  name,  will  be  discus.siHl  iielow. 
[Nicolas.]  it  will  here  be  considered  how  far  we 
can  get  at  any  distinct  notion  of  what  the  sect  it.self 
was,  and  in  what  relation  it  stood  to  the  life  t)f  the 
Apostolic  age. 

It  has  been  suggested  as  one  step  towards  this 
result  that  the  name  before  us  was  symbolic  rather 

b  The  wrltiT  is  indebted  for  lliis  nniiirk  to  a  MS.  seruioH 
by  Mr.  Wostcott. 


636 


NICOLAITANS 


than  historical.  The  Greek  NikoAoos  is,  it  has 
been  siiid,  an  approximate  equivalent  to  the  Hebrew 
Balaam,  the  lord  (Vitringa,  deriving  it  from  ?y3), 
or,  according  to  another  derivation,  the  devourer  of 
the  people  (so  Hengstenberg,  as  from  y^S).*  If 
we  accept  this  explanation  we  have  to  deal  with  one 
sect  instead  of  two — we  are  able  to  compare  with 
what  we  find  in  Rev.  ii.  the  incidental  notices  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  followers  of  Balaam  in 
.Jude  and  2  Peter,  and  our  fcisk  is  proportionately 
an  easier  one.  It  may  be  urged  indeed  that  this 
theory  rests  upon  a  false  or  at  least  a  doubtful 
etymology  (Gesenius,  s.  v.  DJ?p3,  makes  it  =  pere- 
griuus),  and  that  the  message  to  the  Church  of  Per- 
gamos  (Rev.  ii.  14,  15)  appears  to  recognise  "  those 
that  hold  the  doctrine  of  Balaam,"  and  "  those  that 
hold  the  doctrme  of  the  Nicolaitanes,"  as  two  dis- 
tinct bodies.  There  is,  however,  a  sufficient  answer 
to  both  these  objections.  (1)  The  whole  analogy 
of  the  mode  of  teaching  which  lays  stress  on  the 
significance  of  names  would  lead  us  to  look,  not  for 
philological  accuracy,  but  for  a  broad,  strongly- 
marked  paronorn'isia,  such  as  men  would  recognise 
and  accept.  It  would  be  enough  for  those  who 
were  to  hear  the  message  that  they  should  perceive 
the  meaning  of  the  two  words  to  be  identical.'' 
(2)  A  closer  inspection  of  Rev.  ii.  15  would  show 
that  the  outws  ex^'^;  '«•  "'■•  ^-  i™ply  the  )esem- 
blance  of  the  teaching  of  the  Nicolaitails  with  that 
of  the  historical  Balaam  mentioned  in  the  preceding 
verse,  rather  than  any  kind  of  contiast.  _ 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  form  a  clearer  judg- 
ment of  the  characteristics  of  the  sect.  It  comes 
before  us  as  presenting  the  ultimate  phase  of  a  great 
controversy,  which  threatenetl  at  one  time  to  destroy 
the  unity  of  the  Church,  and  afterwards  to  taint  its 
purity.  '  The  controversy  itself  was'  inevitable  as 
soon  as  the  Gentiles  were  admitted,  in  any  large 
numbers,  into  the  Church  of  Christ.  Were  the 
new  converts  to  be  brought  into  subjection  to  the 
whole  Mosaic  law?  Were  they  to  give  up  their 
old  habits  of  life  altogether — to  withdraw  entirely 
from  the  social  gatherings  of  their  friends  and  kins- 
men ?  Was  there  not  the  risk,  if  they  continued  to 
join  in  them,  of  their  eating,  consciously  or  un- 
consciously, of  that  which  had  been  slain  in  the 
sacrifices  of  a  false  worship,  and  of  thus  sharing  in 
the  idolatry  ?  The  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem 
met  the  question  calmly  and  wisely.  The  burden 
of  the  Law  was  not  to  be  imposed  on  the  Gentile 
disciples.  They  were  to  abstain,  among  other  things, 
from  "nieiits  offered  to  idols"  and  from  "fornica- 
tion" (Acts  XV.  20,  29),  and  this  decree  was  wel- 
comed as  the  great  charter  of  the  Church's  freedom. 
Strange  as  the  close  imion  of  the  moral  and  the 
positive  commands  may  seem  to  us,  it  did  not  seem 
so  to  the  synod  at  Jerusalem.  The  two  sins  were 
very  closely  allied,  often  even  in  the  closest  proximity 
of  time  and  place.    The  fathomless  imparity  which 


a  Cocce'ms  (Cogilat.  in  Ret:  ii.  6)  has  the  credit  of  being 
the  tirst  to  suggest  this  identifiaitiun  of  the  Nicolaituns 
with  the  followers  of  Balaam.  He  has  been  followed  hy 
the  elder  Vitringa  {Diisert.  de  Argum.  EpUt.  Felri poster. 
ill  Hase's  Thesaurus,  ii.  987),  Hengstenberg  (in  Inc.),  Stier 
(  Words  of  the  Risen  Lord,  p.  125  Eng.  transl.),  and  others. 
Lighlfoot  (flor.  Hcb.,  in  Act.  Apost.  vi.  5)  suggests  another 
and  more  startling  paronomasia.  The  word,  in  his  view, 
was  chosen,  as  identical  in  sound  with  N?13^3,  "  let  us 
cat,"  and  as  thus  marking  out  the  special  characteristic 
of  the  sect. 


NICOLAS 

oveispread  the  empire  made  the  one  almost  as  in- 
separable as  the  other  from  its  daily  social  life. 

The  messages  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  and  the 
later  Apostolic  Epistles  (2  Peter  and  .Jude)  indicate 
that  the  two  evils  appeared  at  that  period  also  in 
close  alliance.  The  teachers  of  the  Church  branded 
them  with  a  name  which  e.Npressed  their  true  cha- 
racter. The  men  who  did  and  taught  such  things 
were  followers  of  Balaam  (2  Pet.  ii.  15;  Jude  11). 
They,  like  the  false  prophet  of  Pethor,  united  brave 
words  with  evil  deeds.  They  made  their  "  liberty  " 
a  cloak  at  once  for  cowaidice  and  licentiousness. 
In  a  time  of  persecution,  when  the  eating  or  not 
eating  of  things  sacrificed  to  idols  was  more  than 
ever  a  crucial  test  of  faithfulness,  they  persuaded 
men  more  than  ever  that  it  was  a  thing  indifferent 
(Rev.  ii.  13,  14).  This  was  bad  enough,  but  there 
was  a  yet  worse  evil.  Jlingling  themselves  in  the 
orgies  of  idolatrous  feasts,  they  brought  the  im- 
purities of  those  feasts  into  the  meetings  of  the 
Christian  Church.  There  was  the  most  imminent 
risk  tliat  its  Agapae  might  become  as  full  of  abomi- 
nation* as  the  Bacchanalia  of  Italy  had  been  (2  Pet. 
ii.  12,  13,  18  ;  Jude  7,  8  ;  comp.  Liv.  xxxix.  8-19). 
Their  sins  had  already  brought  scandal  and  dis- 
ciedit  on  the  "  way  of  truth."  And  all  this  was 
done,  it  must  be  remembered,  not  simply  as  an 
indulgence  of  appetite,  but  as  part  of  a  system, 
supported  by  a  "  doctrine,"  accompanied  by  the 
boast  of  a  prophetic  illumination  (2  Pet.  ii.  1). 
The  trance  of  the  son  of  Beor  and  the  sensual  debase- 
ment into  which  he  led  the  Israelites  were  strangely 
reproduced. 

These  were  the  characteristics  of  the  followers  of 
Balaam,  and,  woithless  as  most  of  the  traditions 
about  Nicolas  may  be,  they  point  to  the  same  dis- 
tinctive evils.  Even  in  the  absence  of  any  teacher 
of  that  name,  it  would  be  natural  enough,  as  has 
been  shown  above,  that  the  Hebrew  name  of  igno- 
miny should  have  its  Gieek  equivalent.  If  there 
were  such  a  teacher,  whether  the  proselyte  of 
Antioch  or  another,*^  the  application  of  the  name 
to  his  followers  would  be  proportionately  more 
pointed.  It  confiims  the  view  which  has  been 
taken  of  their  character  to  find  that  stress  is  laid  in 
the  first  instance  on  the  "  deeds  "  of  the  Nicolaitans. 
To  hate  those  deeds  is  a  sign  of  life  in  a  Church 
that  otherwise  is  weak  and  faithless  (Rev.  ii.  6). 
To  tolerate  them  is  well  nigh  to  forfeit  the  glory 
of  having  been  faithful  under  persecution  (Rev.  ii. 
14,  15).  (Comp.  Neauder's  Apostelgesch.  p.  620; 
Gieseler's  Eccl.  Hist.  §29;  Hengstenberg  and 
Alford  on  Rev.  ii.  6  ;  Stier,  Words  of  the  Risen 
Saviour,  X.)  [E.  H.  P.] 

NICOLAS  l'NtK6\aos:  JSficohtns),  Acts  vi.  5. 
A  native  of  Antioch,  and  a  proselyte  to  the  Jewish 
faith.  When 'the  church  was  still  confined  to  Jeru- 
salem he  became  a  convert ;  and  being  a  man  of 
honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom, 
he  was  chosen  by  the  whole  multitude  of  the  dis- 


b  Vitringa  (I.  c.)  finds  another  instance  of  this  indirect 
expression  of  feeling  in  the  peculiar  form,  "  Balaam  the 
son  of  Bosor,"  in  2  Pet.  ii.  15.  The  substitution  of  the 
latter  name  for  the  Betup  of  the  LXX.  originated,  according 
to  his  conjecture,  in  the  wish  to  point  to  his  antitype  in 
the  Christian  Church  as  a  true  1Ei*2"|2,  a  filius  carnis. 

c  It  is  noticeable  (though  the  documents  themselves  are 
not  of  much  weight  as  evidence)  that  in  two  instances  the 
Nicolaitans  are  said  to  be  "  falsely  so  called  "  (i/(ci/£ion;>ioi, 
Ignat,  ad  Tiall.  xi..  Const.  Apost.yi.  8) 


NICOLAS 

ciples  to  be  one  of  the  first  seven  deacons,  and  lie 
w.os  ordained  by  tlie  apostles,  a.d.  33. 

A  sect  of  Nicolaitans  is  mentioned  in  Rev.  ii.  6, 
15;  am!  it  has  been  questioned  whether  this  Nicolas 
was  connected  with  them,  and  if  so,  how  closely. 

The  Nicolaitans  themselves,  at  least  as  early  as 
the  time  of  Ireuaeiis  (Contr.  Haer.  i.  26,  §3), 
claimed  him  as  their  founder.  Epiphanius,  an  in- 
accurate writer,  relates  {Adv.  Huer.  i.  2,  §25,  p. 
76)  some  details  of  the  life  of  Nicolas  the  deacon, 
and  describes  him  as  gradually  sinldng  into  the 
grossest  impurity,  and  becoming  the  originator  of 
the  Nicolaitans  and  other  immoral  sects.  Stephen 
Gobar  (Photii  BUj/iofh.  §232,  p.  291,  ed.  1824) 
states — and  the  statement  is  corroborated  by  the 
recently  discovered  I'liilosopliumena,  bk.  vii.  §36 — 
that  Hippolytus  agreed  with  Epiphanius  in  his  un- 
favourable view  of  Nicolas.  The  same  account  is 
believed,  at  least  to  some  extent  by  Jerome  (Ep. 
147,  t.  i.  p.  1082,  ed.  Vallars.  &c.)  and  other 
writers  in  the  4th  century.  But  it  is  irreconcile- 
able  with  the  traditionary  account  of  the  character 
of  Nicolas,  given  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom. 
iii.  4,  p.  187,  Sylb.  i\ud  apiid  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  29  ; 
see  also  Hammond,  Aniiot.  on  Rev.  ii.  4),  an  earlier 
and  more  discriminating  writer  than  Epiphanius. 
He  states  that  Nicohis  led  a  chaste  lite  and  brought 
lip  his  children  in  purity,  that  on  a  certain  occasion 
having  been  sharply  reproved  by  the  apostles  as  a 
jealous  husband,  he  repelled  the  charge  by  offering 
to  allow  his  wife  to  become  the  wife  of  any  other 
person,  and  that  he  was  in  the  habit  of  repeiiting  a 
saying  which  is  ascribed  to  the  apostle  Matthias 
also, — that  it  is  our  duty  to  tight  against  the  Hesh 
and  to  abuse  ( Trapaxprjcflai)  it.  His  words  were 
perversely  interpreted  by  the  Nicolaitans  as  an  au- 
thority for  their  immoral  practices.  Theodoret 
{Hucret.  Fah.  iii.  1),  in  his  account  of  the  sect 
repeats  the  foregoing  statement  of  Clement ;  and 
charges  the  Nicolaitans  with  false  dealing  in  bor- 
rowing the  name  of  the  de:icon.  Ignatius,*  who 
was  contemporary  with  Nicolas,  is  said  by  Stephen 
Gobar  to  have  given  the  same  account  as  Clement, 
Eusebius,  and  Theodoret,  touching  the  personal 
character  of  Nicolas.  Among  modern  critics,  Co- 
telerius  in  a  note  on  C'onstit.  Apost.  vi.  8,  after 
reciting  the  various  authorities,  seems  to  lean  to- 
wards the  favourable  view  of  the  character  of  Nico- 
las. Professor  Burton  {Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical 
JTisfori/,  Lect.  xii.  p.  364,  ed.  1833)  is  of  opinion 
that  the  origin  of  the  term  Nicolaitans  is  uncertain  ; 
and  that,  "  though  Nicolas  the  deacon  has  been 
mentioned  as  their  founder,  the  evidence  is  ex- 
tremely slight  which  would  convict  that  person 
himself  of  any  immoralities."  Tillcmont  (//.  E. 
ii.  47),  possibly  influenced  by  the  fact  that  no 
honour  is  paid  to  the  memory  of  Nicolas  by  any 
branch  of  the  Church,  allows  perhaps  too  much 
weight  to  the  testimony  against  him  ;  rejects  ]3e- 
remptorily  Cassian's  statement — to  which  Neander 
{Plantimj  of  the  Church,  hk.  v.  p.  390,  eii.  Bolin) 
gives  his  adhesion — that  some  other  Nicolas  was 
the  founder  of  the  sect ;  ami  concludes  that  if  not 
the  actual  founder,  he  was  so  unfortunate  as  to  give 
occasion  to  the  formation  of  the  sect,  by  his  indis- 
creet spe;ddng.  Grotius'  view  as  given  in  a  note 
en  Rev.  ii.  6,  is  substantially  the  same  as  that  of 
Tillemont. 

The  name  Balaam  is  perhaps   (but  see  Ge.sen. 

»  Usher  conjectures  that  this  reference  is  to  the  Inter- 
polated m\iy  of  the  Ki)i>tlc  to  the  'rrHlliims,  >li.  \\.  (De 


NICOPOLIS 


537 


Thes.  210)  capable  of  being  interpreted  as  a  Hebiew 
equivalent  of  the  Greek  Nicolas.  Some  commentators 
think  that  this  is  alluded  to  oy  St.  John  in  Rev.  ii. 
14;  and  C.  Vitringa  (06s.  Sacr.  iv.  9)  argue:- 
forcibly  in  support  of  this  opinion.         [VV.  T.  B.] 

NICOP'OLIS  ( NireoTroAis  :  Nicopolis)  is  men- 
tioned in  Tit.  iii.  12,  as  the  place  where,  at  the  time 
of  writing  the  Epistle,  St.  Paul  was  intending  to  pass 
the  coming  winter,  and  where  he  wished  Titus  to 
meet  him.  Whether  either  or  both  of  these  purposes 
were  accomplished  we  cannot  tell.  Titus  w;is  at 
this  time  in  Crete  (Tit.  i.  5).  The  subscription  to 
the  Epistle  assumes  that  the  Apostle  was  at  Nico- 
polis when  he  wrote ;  but  we  cannot  conclude  this 
fioni  the  form  of  expression.  We  should  rather 
infer  that  he  was  elsewhere,  possibly  at  Ephesus  or 
Corinth.  He  urges  that  no  time  should  be  lost 
{(nroiha(Tov  i\6f1i> j  ;  hence  we  conclude  that  winter 
was  near. 

Nothing  is  to  be  found  in  the  Epistle  itself  to  de- 
termine which  Nicopolis  is  here  intended.  There 
were  cities  of  this  name  in  Asia,  Africa,  and  Europe. 
If  we  were  to  include  all  the  theories  which  have 
been  respectably  supported,  we  should  be  obliged  to 
write  at  least  three  articles.  One  Nicopolis  was  in 
Thrace,  near  the  borders  of  Jlacedonia.  The  sub- 
scription (which,  however,  is  of  no  authority)  fixes 
on  this  place,  calling  it  the  Macedonian  Nicopolis : 
and  such  is  the  view  of  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret. 
De  Wette's  objection  to  this  opinion  {Pastoral 
Brief e,  p.  2 1 ),  that  the  place  did  not  exist  till  Trajan's 
reign,  appears  to  be  a  mistake.  Another  Nicopolis 
was  in  Cilicia ;  and  Schrader  {Der  Apostel  Faulus, 
i.  pp.  115-119)  pronounces  for  this;  but  this  opinion 
is  connected  with  a  peculiar  theory  regarding  the 
Apostle's  journeys.  We  have  little  doubt  that  Je- 
rome's view  is  correct,  and  that  the  Pauline  Nico- 
polis was  the  celebrated  city  of  Epirus  ("scribit 
Apostolus  de  Nicopoli,  quae  in  Actiaco  littore  sita," 
Hieion.  Prooem.  ix.  195).  For  arrangements  of  St. 
Paul's  journeys,  which  will  harmonise  with  this, 
and  with  the  other  facts  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
see  Birks,  Horae  Apostolicae,  pp.  296-304 ;  and 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Ejip.  of  St.  Paul 
(2nd  ed.),  ii.  564-573.  It  is  very  possible,  as 
is  observed  there,  that  St.  Paul  was  arrested 
at  Nicopolis  and  taken  thence  to  Rome  for  his  final 
trial. 

This  city  (the  "City  of  Victory  ")  was  built  by 
Augustus  in  memory  of  the  battle  of  Actium,  anil* 
on  the  ground  which  his  army  occupied  before  the 
engagement.  It  is  a  curious  and  interesting  cir- 
cumstance, when  we  look  at  the  matter  fioni  a 
Biblical  point  of  view,  that  many  of  the  handsomest 
parts  of  the  town  were  built  by  Herod  the  Great 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  5,  §3).  It  is  likely  enough 
that  many  Jews  lived  there.  Moreover,  it  was 
conveniently  situated  for  apostolic  journeys  in  the 
ejusteru  parts  of  Acliaia  and  Macedonia,  and  also  to 
the  northwards,  where  churches  perhaps  were 
(bunded.  St.  Paul  had  long  before  prcacheil  the 
riospel,  at  least  on  the  confines  of  lllyricum  (Rom. 
XV.  19),  and  soon  after  the  very  period  uiidei'  con- 
sideration 'I'itus  himself  w;us  sent  on  a  mission  to 
Dalmatia  (2  Tim.  iv.  10). 

Nicopolis  was  on  a  peninsula  to  the  west  of  the 
bay  of  Actium,  in  a  low  and  unhealthy  situation, 
and  it  is  now  a  very  desolate  place.  The  remains 
have  been  often  de.scribed.     VVe  mav  refer  to  Leake's 


Igtiatii  Kpislolis  ij6.  apiid  (Meier.  I'atr.  Apnst.  ii.  195, 

cd.  r.-ZAA 


538  NIGER 

Northern  Greece,  i.  178,  aud  iii.  491 ;  Bowen's 
Athos  and  Epirus,  211  ;  Wolfe  in  Journ.  of  R. 
Gcog.  Sac.  iii.  92  ;  Merivale's  Borne,  iii.  327,  328  ; 
VVordswoi-th's  Greece,  229-232.  In  the  la.^t  men- 
tioned work,  and  in  tlie  Diet,  of  Greek  and  Roman 
Gcoij.  maps  of  the  pl.-ice  will  be  found.   [J.  S.  H.] 

NI'GER  '  Ni'yep :  Nijer)  is  the  additional  or 
distinctive  name  given  to  tlie  Symeon  (SujUetoj'),  who 
was  one  of  the  teachers  and  prophets  in  the  Church 
at  Antioch  (Acts  xiii.  1).  He  is  not  known  except  in 
that  passage.  The  name  was  a  common  one  among 
the  Romans ;  and  the  conjecture  that  he  was  an 
African  proselyte,  and  was  called  Niger  on  account 
of  his  complexion,  is  unnecessary  as  well  as  destitute 
otherwise  of  any  support.  His  name,  Symeon,  shows 
that  he  was  a  Jew  by  birth ;  and  as  in  other  simi- 
lar cases  {e.g.  Saul,  Paul — Silas,  Silvanus)  he  may 
be  supposed  to  have  taken  the  other  name  as  more 
convenient  in  his  intercourse  with  foreigners.  He 
is  mentioned  second  among  the  five  who  officiated 
at  Antioch,  and  perhaps  we  may  infer  that  he  had 
some  pre-eminence  among  them  in  point  of  activity 
and  influence.  It  is  impossible  to  decide  (though 
Meyer  makes  the  attempt)  who  of  the  number 
were  prophets  (irpo^TJrai),  and  who  were  teachers 
iJ&iUffKaKoi).  [H.  B.  H.] 

NIGHT.  The  period  of  darkness,  from  sunset 
to  sunrise,  including  the  morning  mid  evening  twi- 
light, was  known  to  the  Hebrews  by  the  term 
7V,  layil,  or  n?'7,  layelah.  It  is  opposed  to 
'•  day,"  the  period  of  light  (Gen.  i.  5).  Following 
the  Oriental  sunset  is  the  brief  evening  twilight 
(FlK'3,  nesheph,  Job  xxiv.  15,  rendered  "night"  in 
Is.  V.  11,  xxi.  4,  lix.  10),  when  the  stars  appeared 
(Job  iii.  9).  This  is  also  called  "  evening"  (3~iy 
'ereh,  Prov.  vii.  9,  rendered  "  night"  in  Gen.  xlix. 
27,  Job  vii.  4),  but  the  term  which  especially  de- 
notes the  evening  twilight  is  T\u7Vt  aldtdh  (Gen. 

XV.  17,  A.  V.  "  dark;"  Ez.  xii.  6,  7,  12).  'Ereb 
also  denotes  the  time  just  before  sunset  (Deut.  xxiii. 
11  ;  Josh.  viii.  29),  when  the  women  went  to  draw 
water  (Gen.  xxiv.  11),  aud  the  decline  of  the  day 
is  called  "the  turning  of  evening"  (2~iy  m33, 
pSnoth  'ereb.  Gen.  xxiv.  63),  the  time  of  prayer. 
This  period  of  the  day  must  also  be  that  which  is 
described  as  "night"  when  Boaz  winnowed  his 
"barley  in  the  evening  breeze  (Ruth  iii.  2),  the  cool 
of  the  day  (Gen.  iii.  8),  when  the  shadows  begin 
to  fall  (Jer.  vi.  .4),  and  the  wolves  prow!  about 
(Hab.  i.  8 ;  Zeph.  iii.  3).  The  time  of  midnight 
(Hi'vn  '•Vn,  chdtd  hallayHldh,   Ruth  iii.  7,  and 

n?"*?!!  nivn,   clmtsoth  hallayeldh,  Ex.  xi.  4)  or 

greatest  darkness   i.s  called  in   Prov.   vii.  9  "  the 

pupil  of  night"  (n?V  |iti'''X,  ishon  laijeldh,  A.  V. 

"black  night").  The  period  between  midnight 
and  the  morning  twilight  was  generally  selected  for 
attacking  an  enemy  by  surprise  (Judg.  vii.  19). 
The  morning  twilight  is  denoted  by  the  same  term, 
nesheph,  as  the  evening  twilight,  and  is  iinmistake- 
ably  intended  in  1  Sam.  xxxi.  12;  Job  vii.  4;  Ps. 
cxix.  147  ;  possibly  also  in  Is.  v.  1 1.     With  sunrise 


njy^-na. 


I'reytag  s.  i: 


sc.ilp.-il,  unguibus  vulncravit  faciein.    See 


NIGHT-HAWK 

the  night  ended.  In  one  passage,  Job  xxvi.  10, 
■^ti'n,  choshec,  "dai'kness"  is  rendered  "  night"  in 

the  A.  v.,  hut  is  correctly  given  in  the  margin. 

For  tlie  artificial  divisions  of  the  night  see  the 
articles  Day  and  Watches.  [W.  A.  W.] 

NIGHT-HAWlv  (DDnn,  tachmds  :  yXav^  : 
noctua).  Bochart  {Hieroz.  ii.  830)  has  endeavoured 
to  prove  that  the  Hebrew  word,  which  occiiis 
only  (Lev.  xi.  16  ;  Deut.  xiv.  15)  amongst  the 
list  of  unclean  birds,  denotes  the  "  male  ostrich," 
the  preceding  term,  bath-yaandh "  {oxd,  A.  V.) 
signifying  the  female  bird.  The  etymology  of  the 
word  points  to  some  bird  of  prey,  though  there  is 
great  unoei-taiiity  as  to  the  particular  species  indi- 
cated. The  LXX.,  ^"ulg.,  and  perhaps  Onkelos, 
understand  some  kind  of  "  owl ;"  most  of  the  Jewish 
doctors  indefinitely  render  the  word  "  a  rapacious 
bird:"  Gesenius  {Thes.  s.  v.)  and  Koseumiiller 
[Schol.  ad  Lev.  xi.  16)  follow  Bochart.  Bochart's 
explanation  is  grounded  on  an  overstrained  intei'pre- 
tation  of  the  etymology  of  the  verb  chdmas,  the 
root  of  tachmds ;  he  restricts  the  meaning  of  the 
root  to  the  idea  of  acting  "  unjustly  "  or  "  deceit- 
fullv,"  aud  thus  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
"unjust  bird"  is  the  male  ostrich  [Ostrich]. 
Witliout  stopping  to  consider  the  etymology  of  the 
word  further  than  to  refer  the  reader  to  Gesenius, 
who  gives  as  the  first  meaning  of  chdmas  "  he 
acted  violently,"  and  to  the  Arabic  chamash,  "  to 
wound  with  claws,"  ^  it  is  not  at  all  probable  that 
Moses  should  have  specified  both  the  nmle  and 
female  ostrich  in  a  list  which  was  no  doubt  in- 
tended to  be  iis  comprehensive  as  possible.  The 
not  unfrequent  occurrence  of  the  expression  "  after 
their  kind  "  is  an  argument  in  favour  of  this  asser- 
tion. Michaelis  believes  some  kind  of  swallow 
(Iliinmdo)  is  intended :  the  word  used  by  the 
Targum  of  Jonathan  is  by  Kitto  {Pict.  Bib.  Lev. 
-xi.  16)  and  byOedmann  (  i'er/nisch.  Samm.  i.  p.  3, 
c.  iv.)  refeired  to  the  swallow,  though  the  last- 
named  authority  says,  "  it  is  uncertain,  however, 
what  Jonathan  really  meant."  Bu.xtorf  {Lex. 
Rabbin,  s.  v.  NIT'Spn.)  translates  the  word  used 

by  Jonathan,  "  a  name  of  a  rapacious  bird,  harpyja." 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  claim  the  swallow  can 
have  to  represent  the  tachmds,  neither  is  it  at  all 
probable  that  so  small  a  bii-d  should  have  been 
noticed  in  the  Levitical  law.  The  rendering  of  the 
A.  V.  rests  on  no  authority,  though  from  the  absurd 
properties  which,  from  the  time  of  Aristotle,  have 
been  ascribed  to  the  night-hawk  or  goat-sucker, 
and  the  superstitions  connected  with  this  liird,  its 
claim  is  not  so  entirely  destitute  of  every  kind  of 
evidence. 

As  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  are  'agreed  that  tachmds 
denotes  some  kind  of  owl,  we  believe  it  is  safer  to 
follow  these  versions  than  modern  commentators. 
The  (ireek  yKavi,  is  used  by  Aristotle  for  some 
common  species  of  owl,  in  all  probability  for  the 
Strix  flamiaca  (white  owl)  or  the  Syrnium  stridula 
(tawny  owl)  ;  •=  the  Veneto-Greek  reads  vvkti- 
Ko'paJ,  a  synonym  of  Sjtos,  Aristot.,  i.  e.  the  Otns 
vulyuris,  Flem.  (long-eared  owl):  this  is  the  species 
which  Oedmann  (see  above)  identifies  with  tachmds. 


=  Not    to    be    confounded    with'  the    Xycticorax   of 
modern    ornithology,    wliich    is   a    genus    of  Ardeidae 

(licrons). 


NILE 

"  The  name,"  he  says,  "  indicates  a  bird  which 
exercises  power,  but  the  force  of  the  power  is  in 
the  Arabic  root  chamash,  '  to  tear  a  face  with 
claws.'  Now,  it  is  well  known  in  the  East  that 
there  is  a  species  of  owl  of  which  people  believe 
that  it  glides  into  chambers  by  night  and  tears  the 
tiesh  off  the  faces  of  sleeping  children."  Hassel- 
quist  {Trav.  p.  19ij,  I.ond.  17G6)  alludes  to  this 
nightly  terror,  but  he  calls  it  the  "  Oriental  owl" 
(Strix  Orientalis)  and  clearly  distinguishes  it  from 
the  Striv  otus,  Lin.  The  Arabs  in  Egypt  call  this 
infant-killing  owl  massasa,  the  Syrians  hana. 
It  is  believed  to  be  identical  with  the  Syrnium 
strklula,  but  what  foundation  there  may  be  for 
the  belief  in  its  child-killing  jsropensities  we  know 
not.  It  is  probable  tlyit  .some  common  species  of  owl 
is  denoted  by  tachmas,  perhaps  the  Strix  flammea 
or  the  Athene  mcridionalis,  which  is  extremely  com- 
mon in  Palestine  and  Egypt.     [Owl.]     [W.  H.] 

NILE.  1.  Names  of  the  Nile.— The  Hebrew 
names  of  the  Nile,  excepting  one  that  is  of  ancient 
Eijyptian  origin,  all  distinguish  it  fioni  other  rivers. 
With  the  Hebrews  the  Euphrates,  as  the  great  stream 
of  their  primitive  home,  was  always  "  the  river," 
and  even  the  long  sojourn  in  Egypt  could  not  put 
the  Nile  in  its  place.  Most  of  their  geographical 
terms  and  ideas  are,  however,  evidently  traceable 
to  Canaan,  the  country  of  the  Hebrew  language. 
Thus  the  sea,  as  lying  on  the  west,  gave  its  name 
to  the  west  quarter.  It  was  only  in  such  an  excep- 
tional case  as  that  of  the  Euphrates,  which  had  no 
lival  in  Palestine,  that  the  Hebrews  seem  to  have 
retained  the  ideas  of  their  older  country.  These 
circumstances  lend  no  support  to  the  idea  that  the 
Shemites  and  their  language  came  originally  from 
Egypt.  The  Hebrew  names  of  the  Nile  are  S/dc/ior, 
"  the  black,"  a  name  perhaps  of  the  same  sense  as 
Nile ;  Teor,  "  the  river,"  a  word  originally  Egyptian ; 
"  the  river  of  Egypt ;"  "  the  Nachal  of  Egypt  "  f  if 
this  appellation  designate  the  Nile,  and  Nachal  lie 
a  proper  name)  ;  and  "  the  rivers  of  Cush,"  or 
"  Ethiopia."  It  must  be  observed  that  the  word 
Nile  nowhere  occurs  in  the  A.  V. 

(a.)  Shkhor, -\'\n''U},  lin^',  iht^,  "  the  biack," 
from  ^nC',  "  he  or  it  was  or  became  black."  The 
idea  of  blackness  conveyed  by  this  word  has,  as  we 
should  expect  in  Hebrew,  a  wide  sense,  applying  not 
only  to  the  colour  of  the  hair  (Lev.  xiii.  Ml,  87),  but 
also  to  that  of  a  face  tanned  by  the  sun  (Cant.  i.  .5, 
6),  and  that  of  a  skin  black  through  disea.=e  (.lob  xxx. 
30).  It  seems,  however,  to  be  indicative  of  a  very 
(lark  colour;  for  it  is  said  in  the  Lamentations,  as  to 
the  famished  Nazarites  in  the  besieged  city,  "  Their 
visage  is  darker  than  blackness"  (iv.  8).  That 
the  Nile  is  meant  by  Shihor  is  evident  from  its 
mention  as  equivalent  to  }'('(»-,  "the  river,"  and  as 
a  great  river,  where  Isaiah  says  of  Tyre,  "  And  by 
great  waters,  the  sowing  of  Shihor,  the  harvest  of 
the  river  (IN^)  [is]  her  revenue"  (xxiii.  o) ;  from 
its  being  put  as  the  western  boundary  of  the  Pro- 
mised Land  (.losh.  xiii.  "> ;  1  Chr.  xiii.  .5),  instead 
of  "  the  river  of  Egypt"  (Gen.  xv.  18)  ;  and  from 
its  being  spoken  of  as  the  great  stream  of  Egyi't, 
ju.st  as  the  Euphrates  was  of  As-;yria  (Jer.  ii.  13). 
If,  but  this  is  by  no  means  certain,  the  name  Nile, 
NeTAos,  be  really  indiciitive  of  the  colour  of  the 


NILK  539 

river,    it    must    be    compared    with    the    Sanskiit 

i^J^J,  Nilah,  "  hhie"  especially,  pmliabiy '-dark 

blue,"  also  even  "  black,"  as  ^(^^^t.  "  black 

mud,"  and  must  be  considered  to  be  the  Indo- 
European  equivalent  of  Shihor.  The  signiticatiou 
"blue"  is  noteworthy,  especially  as  a  great  con- 
fluent, which  most  nearly  corresponds  to  the  Nile 
in  Egypt,  is  called  the  Blue  Kiver,  or,  by  Europeans, 
the  Blue  Nile. 

(6.)  Ycor,  "nX*,  "l'S\  is  the  same  as  the  ancient 
Egyptian  ATUR,  AL'i;,' and  the  Coptic  eiGpO, 
I^LpO,  I^^pUO  (M),  lepO  (S).  Itisim- 
portmt  to  notice  that  the  second  form  of  the  ancient 
Eccvptian  name  alone  is  preserved  in  the  later  lan- 
guage, the  second  radical  of  the  first  having  been 
lost^  as  in  the  Hebrew  form  ;  so  that,  on  this 
double  evidence,  it  is  probable  that  this  commoner 
form  was  in  use  among  the  people  from  early 
times.  Year,  in  the  singular-,  is  used  of  the  Nile 
alone,  excepting  in  a  passage  in  Daniel  (xii.  5,  6,  7). 
where  another  river,  perhaps  the  Tigris  (comp. 
X.  4),  is  intended  by  it.  In  the  plural,  D''")t<\  this 
name  is  applied  to  the  branches  and  canals  of  the 
Nile  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  44  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  o,  seqq.,  xxx.  ]  2), 
and  perhaps  tributaries  also,  with,  in  some  places, 
the  addition  of  the  names  of  the  country,  Mitsraim, 
Matsor,  DnVD  "'^i^;'  (Is.  vii.  18,  A.  V.  "rivers  of 
Egypt"),  "liVO  niXI  (xix.  G,  "  brooks  of  defence;" 
xxxvii.  25,"  "  rivej-s  of  the  besieged  places"); 
but  it  is  also  used  of  streams  or  channels,  in  a 
general  sense,  when  no  particular  ones  are  uidi- 
cated  (see  Is.  xxxiii.  21  ;  Job  xxviii.  10).  It  is 
thus  evident  that  this  name  specially  designates 
the  Nile ;  and  although  properly  meaning  a  river, 
and  even  used  with  that  signification,  it  is  pro- 
bably to  be  regarded  as  a  proper  name  when 
applied  to  the  Egyptian  river.  The  latter  inference 
may  perhaps  be  drawn  fi'om  the  constant  mention 
of  the  Euphrates  as  "  the  river ; "  but  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  Shihor,  or  "  the  river  of  Egypt,"  is 
used  when  the  Nile  and  the  Euphrates  are  spoken 
of  together,  as  though  Veor  could  not  be  well 
employed  for  the  former,  with  the  ordinary  term 
for  river,  nahar,  for  the  latter.'' 

(c.)  "  The  river  of  Egypt,"  DnVP  inj,  is  men- 
tioned with  the  Euphrates  in  the  promise  of  the  ex- 
tent of  the  land  to  be  given  to  Abraham's  posterity, 
the  two  limits  of  which  were  to  be  "  the  river  of 
Egypt"  and  "  the  great  river,  the  river  Euphrates" 
(Gen.  XV.  18). 

{(1.)  "  TJie  Nachal  of  ICgypt,"  DnVP  ''0?'  '^"'^ 
generally  been  understood  to  mean  "  the  torrent  or 
"  brook'of  Egypt,"  and  to  <b'sigiiate  a  desert  stream 
at  Rhinocorura,  now  El-'Areesh.  on  the  eastern  bor- 
der. Certainly  ?n3  usually  signifies  a  stream  or  tor- 
rent, not  a  river;  and  when  a  river,  one  of  small  size, 
and  dependent  upon  mountain-rain  or  snow ;  but  as  it 
is  also  used  for  a  valley,  corresponding  to  the  Arabic 

wddee  {iSaS^^^  '''■'"'^'*  '*  '"  '''"•'  "'''"""'"  '■""1''"^*^'' 
in  both  senses,  it  may  apply  like  it,  in  the  case  of 


•  In  Ts.  xxxvii.  25  the  reference  seems  to  bo  to  an 
Assyrian  conquest  nf  l';gypt. 

b  The  Nile  was  probably  niendoiicil  liy  tlii>  imiiii-  in 


the  original  of  Ecclrsinsticiis  xxiv.  27,  where  the  Greek 
text  rt-ads  w!  i/)ttis,  "1S3  liavin;;  t)eeM  niisiuiilei-stooil 
((irsonius,  They.  s.  v.1 


540 


NILE 


tho  Gundalquivir,  &c.,  to  great  rivers.  This  name 
must  signify  tlie  Nile,  for  it  occurs  in  cases  parallel 
to  those  where  Shihor  is  employed  (Num.  xxxiv. 
5,  Josh.  XV.  4,  47,  1  K.  viii.  65,  2  K.  xxiv.  7, 
Is.  xxvii.  12),  both  designating  the  easternmost 
or  I'elusiac  branch  of  the  I'iver  as  the  border  of  tlie 
Philistine  territory,  where  the  Egyptians  equally 
put  the  border  of  their  country  towards  Kanaan 
or  Kanana  (Canaan).  It  remains  for  us  to  decide 
whether  the  name  signify  the  "  brook  of  Egypt,"  or 
whether  Nachal  be  a  Hebrew  form  of  Nile.  On  the 
one  side  may  be  urged  the  unlikelihood  that  the 
middle  radical  should  not  be  found  in  the  Indo- 
Europeiui  equivalents,  although  it  is  not  one  of  the 
most  permanent  letters;  on  the  other,  that  it  is 
impi-obable  that  wihar  "  river"  and  nachal  "  brook  " 
would  be  used  for  the  same  stream.  If  the  latter  be 
here  a  proper  name,  NeTAoy  must  be  supposed  to 
be  the  same  word  ;  and  the  meaning  of  the  (ireek 
as  well  as  the  Hebrew  name  would  remain  doubt- 
ful, for  we  could  not  then  positively  decide  on  an 
Indo-European  signification.  The  Hebrew  woi-d 
nachal  might  have  been  adopted  as  very  similar  in 
sound  to  an  original  proper  name  ;  and  this  idea  is 
supported  by  the  forms  of  various  Egyptian  words 
in  the  Bible,  which  are  susceptible "  of  Hebrew 
etymologies  in  consequence  of  a  slight  change. 
It  must,  however,  be  remembered  that  there  are 
traces  of  a  Semitic  language,  apparently  distinct 
from  Hebrew,  in  geographicjd  names  in  the  east  of 
Lower  Egypt,  probably  dating  from  the  Shepherd- 
period  ;  and  therefore  we  must  not,  if  we  take 
nachal  to  be  here  Semitic,  restrict  its  meaning  to 
that  which  it  bears  or  could  bear  in  Hebrew. 

(e.)  "  The  rivers  of  Cush,"  C^'•1^  nHJ,  are  alone 
mentioned  in  the  extremely  difficult  prophecy  con- 
tained in  Is.  xviii.  From  the  use  of  the  plural,  a 
single  stream  cannot  be  meant,  and  we  must  suppose 
'•  the  rivers  of  Ethiopia  "  to  be  the  confluents  or  tri- 
butaries of  the  Nile.  Geseniiis  (Lex.  s.  v.  "1113)  makes 
them  the  Nile  and  the  Astaboras.  Without  attempt- 
ing to  explain  this  prophecy,  it  is  interesting  to 
remark  that  the  expression,  "  Whose  laud  the 
rivers  have  spoiled  "  (vers.  2,  7),  if  it  apply  to  any 
Ethiopian  nation,  may  refer  to  the  ruin  of  great 
part  of  Ethiopia,  for  a  long  distance  above  the  First 
Cataract,  in  consequence  of  the  tall  of  the  level  of 
the  river.  This  change  has  been  effected  through 
the  breaking  down  of  a  barrier  at  that  cataract,  or 
at  Silsilis,  by  which  the  valley  has  been  placed  above 
the  reach  of  the  fertilizing  annual  deposit.  The  Nile 
IS  sometimes  poetically  called  a  sea,  D"'  (Is.  xviii.  2  • 
Nah.  iii.  8;  Job  xli.  31;  but  we  cannot  agree 
with  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v.,  that  it  is  intended  in 
Is.  xix.  .5):  this,  however,  can  scarcely  be  con- 
sidered to  be  one  of  its  names. 

It  will  be  instructive  to  mention  the  present  ap- 
pellations of  the  Nile  in  Arabic,  which  may  illus- 
trate the  Scripture  terms.  By  the  Arabs  it  is 
called  Bahr-eu-Neel,  "the  river  Nile,"  the  word 
"  bahr  "  being  applied  to  seas  and  the  greatest  rivers. 
The  Egyptians  call  it  Bahr,  or  "  the  river"  alone  ; 
and  call  the  inundation  En-Neel,  or  "  the  Nile."  This 
latter  use  of  what  is  properly  a  name  of  the  river 
resembles  the  use  of  the  plural  of  Year  in  the  Bible 
tor  the  various  channels  or  even  streams  of  Nile- 
water. 

With  the  ancient  Egyptians,  the  river  was  sacreil, 
and  had,  besides  its  ordinary  name  already  given, 
a  sacred  name,   under  which   it   was  woi-shippcd. 


NILE 

HAPEE,  or  HAPEE-MU,  "  the  abyss,"  or  "  the  abyss 
of  waters,"  or  "  the  hidden."  Corresponding  to 
the  two  regions  of  Egypt,  the  Upper  Country  and 
the  Lower,  the  Nile  was  called  hapee-RES,  "  the 
Southern  Nile,"  and  hapek-meheet,  "the  North- 
ern Nile,"  the  former  name  applying  to  the  river  in 
Nubia  as  well  as  in  Upper  Egypt.  The  god  Nilus 
was  one  of  the  lesser  divinities.  He  is  represented 
as  a  stout  man  having  woman's  breasts,  and  is 
sometimes  painted  red  to  denote  the  ri>'er  during 
its  rise  and  inundation,  or  High  Nile,  and  some- 
times blue,  to  denote  it  during  the  rest  of  the  year, 
or  Low  Nile.  Two  figures  of  hapee  are  frequently 
represented  on  each  side  of  the  throne  of  a  royal 
statue,  or  in  the  same  place  in  a  bas-relief,  binding 
it  with  water-plants,  as  though  the  prosperity  of 
the  kingdom  depended  upon  the  produce  of  the 
river.  The  name  hapee,  perhaps,  in  these  oises, 
hepee,  was  also  applied  to  one  of  the  four  children 
of  Osiris,  called  by  ICgyptologers  the  genii  of  amext 
or  Hades,  and  to  the  bull  Apis,  the  most  revered 
of  all  the  .sacred  animals.  The  s:enius  does  not 
seem  to  have  any  connection  with  the  river,  except- 
ing indeed  that  Apis  was  sacred  to  Osiris.  Apis 
was  worshipped  with  a  reference  to  the  inundation, 
perhaps  because  the  myth  of  Osiris,  the  conflict  of 
good  and  evil,  was  supposed  to  be  repi'esented  by 
the  struggle  of  the  fertilizing  river  or  inundation 
with  the  desert  and  the  sea,  the  first  threatening 
the  whole  valley,  and  the  second  wasting  it  along 
the  northern  coast. 

2.  Description  uf  the  Nile. — We  cannot  as  yet 
determine  the  length  of  the  Nile,  although  recent 
discoveries  jiave  narrowed  the  question.  There  is 
scarcely  a  doubt  that  its  largest  confluent  is  fed  by 
the  great  lakes  on  and  soutK  of  the  equator.  It  has 
been  traced  upwards  for  about  2700  miles,  measured 
by  its  course,  not  in  a  direct  line,  and  its  extent 
is  probably  upwards  of  1000  miles  more,  making 
it  longer  than  even  the  Mississippi,  and  the  longest 
of  rivers.  In  Egypt  and  Nubia  it  flows  through  a 
bed  of  silt  and  slime,  resting  upon  marine  or  num- 
mulitic  limestone,  covered  by  a  later  formation,  over 
which,  without  the  valley,  lie  the  sand  and  rocky 
debris  of  the  desert.  Beneath  the  limestone  is  a 
sandstone  formation,  which  rises  and  bounds  the 
valley  in  its  stead  in  the  higher  part  of  the  Thebais. 
Again  beneath  tlie  sandstone  is  the  breccia  verde, 
which  appears  above  it  in  the  desert  eastward  of 
Thebes,  and  yet  lower  a  group  of  azoic  rocks, 
gneisses,  quartzes,  mica  schists,  and  clay  slates, 
resting  upon  the  red  granite  and  syenite  that  rise 
through  all  the  upper  strata  at  the  First  Cataract.'^ 
The  river's  bed  is  cut  through  these  layei-s  of  rock, 
which  often  approach  it  on  either  side,  and  some- 
times confine  it  on  both  sides,  and  even  obstruct  its 
course,  forming  rapids  and  cataracts.  To  trace 
it  downwards  we  must  first  go  to  equatorial 
Africa,  the  mysterious  half-explored  home  of  the 
negroes,  where  animal  and  vegetable  life  flourishes 
around  and  in  the  Vtist  swamp-land  that  waters  the 
chief  part  of  the  continent.  Here  are  two  great 
shallow  lakes,  one  nearer  to  the  coast  than  the  other. 
From  the  more  eastern  (the  Ukerewe,  which  is  on 
the  equator),  a  chief  tributary  of  the  White  Nile 
probably  takes  its  rise,  and  the  more  western  (the 
Ujeejee),  may  feed  another  tributary.  The.se  lakes 
are  filled,  partly  by  the  heavy  rains  of  the  equatorial 
region,  partly  by  the  melting  of  the  snows  of  the 


<^   The  geolofcy  of  the  Nile-valley  Is  e.\cellently  given  by 
Hugh  jMillcr  (Testinimiy  nf  the,  Focl.-f,  p.  4(19,  soqq.). 


NILE 

lofty  mountaius  discovered  by  the  missionaries  Krapf 
and  Kebmanu.     Whether  the  lakes  supply  two  tri- 
butaries or  not,  it  is  certain  that  fi-om  the  great 
region  of  waters  where  they  lie,  several  streams  fall 
into  the  Bahr  el-Abyad,   or  White  Nile.     Great, 
however,  as  is  the  body  of  water  of  this  the  longer 
of  the  two  chief  conHueuts,  it  is  the  shorter,  the 
Bahr  el-Azrak,  or  Blue  River,  which  brings  down 
the  alluvial  soil  that  makes  the  Nile  the  great  fer- 
tilizer of  Egypt  and  Nubia.     The  Bahr  el-Azrak 
risf  s  in  the  mountains  of  Abyssinia,  and  carries  down 
from  them  a  great  quantity  of  decayed  vegetable 
matter  and  alluvium.      The  two  streams  tbrm  a 
junction  at  Khartoom,  now  the  seat  of  government 
of  Soodin,  or  the  Black  Country  under   Egyptian 
rule.     The  Bahr  el-Aziak  is  here  a  narrow  river, 
with  high  steep  mud-banks  like  those  of  the  Nile  in 
Egypt,  and  with  water  of  the  same  colour  ;  and  the 
Bahr  el-Abyad  is  broad  and  shallow,  with  low  banks 
jnd  clear  water.    Further  to  the  north  another  great 
river,  the  Atbara,  rising,  like  the  Bahr  el-Azrak,  in 
Abyssinia,  falls  into  the  main  stream,  which,  for  the 
remainder  of  its  course,  does  not  receive  one  triliutary 
more.     Throughout  the  rest  of  the  valley  the  Nile 
does  not  greatly  vary,  excepting  that  in  Lower  Nubia, 
through  the  fall  of  its  level  by  the  giving  way  of  a 
barrier  in  ancient  times,  it  does  not  inundate  the 
valley  on  either   hand.      From    time  to  time   its 
course  is  impeded  by  cataracts  or  rapids,  sometimes 
extending  many  miles,  until,  at  the  First  Cataract, 
the  boundary  of  Egypt,  it  surmounts  the  last  ob- 
stacle.    After  a  course  of  about   550  miles,  at  a 
short  distance  below  Cairo  and  the  Pyramids,  the 
river  parts  into  two  great  branches,  which  water  the 
Delta,  nearly  forming  its  boundaries  to  the  east  and 
west,  ivnd  tiowiug  into  the  shallow  Mediterranean. 
The  references  in  the  Bible  are  mainly  to  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  river  in  Egypt.     There,  above  the 
I)elta,  its  aveiage  breadth  may  be  put  at  from  half  a 
mile  to  three-quarters,  e.xcepting  wheie  huge  islands 
increase  the  distance.    In  the  Delt;i  its  branches  are 
usually  narrower.     The  water  is  e.\tiemely  sweet, 
especially  at  the  season  when  it  is  turbid.      It  is 


NILE 


541 


falling  more  slowly  than  it  had  risen,  sinks  to  its 
lowest  point  at  the  end  of  nine  months,  there  re- 
maining stationary  for  a  few  days  before  it  again  be- 
gins to  rise.  The  inundations  are  very  various,  and 
when  they  are  but  a  few  feet  deficient  or  excessive 
cause  great  damage  and  distress.  The  rise  during 
a  good  inundation  is  about  40  feet  at  the  First 
Cataract,  about  36  at  Thebes,  and  about  4  at  the 
Rosetta  and  Damietta  mouths.  If  the  river  at  Cairo 
attain  to  no  greater  height  than  18  or  20  feet,  the 
rise  is  scanty ;  if  only  to  2  or  4  more,  insufficient ; 
if  to  24  feet  or  more,  up  to  27,  good  ;  if  to  a  gi  eater 
height,  it  causes  a  Hood.  Sometimes  the  inundation 
has  failed  altogether,  as  for  seven  years  in  the  reign 
of  the  Fatimee  Khaleefeh  El-Mustansir  bi-llah, 
when  there  was  a  seven  years'  famine  ;  and  this 
must  have  been  the  case  witli  the  great  famine  of 
Joseph's  time,  to  which  this  later  one  is  a  remark- 
able parallel  [Famine].  Low  inundations  always 
cause  dearths ;  excessive  inundations  produce  or 
foster  the  plague  and  murrain,  besides  doing  great 
injury  to  the  crops.  In  ancient  times,  when  every 
square  foot  of  ground  must  have  been  cultivated, 
aud  a  minute  system  of  irrigation  maintained,  both 
for  the  natural  inundation  and  to  water  the  fields 
during  the  Low  Nile,  and  when  there  were  many 
fish-pools  as  well  as  canals  for  their  supply,  far 
greater  ruin  than  now  must  have  been  caused  by  ex- 
cessive inundations.  It  was  probaljly  to  them  that 
the  priest  referred,  who  told  Solon,  when  he  asked  if 
the  Egyptians  had  experienced  a  flood,  that  there  had 
been  many  floods,  instead  of  the  one  of  which  he 
had  spoken,  and  not  to  the  successive  past  destruc- 
tions of  the  world  by  water,  alternating  with  others 
by  fire,  in  which  some  nations  of  antiquity  believed 
(Plat.  Timaeits,  21  seqq.). 

The  Nile  in  Egypt  is  always  charged  with  allu- 
vium, especially  during  the  inundation ;  but  the 
annual  deposit,  excepting  under  extraordinary  cir- 
cumstances, is  very  small  in  comparison  with  what 
would  be  conjectured  by  any  one  unacquainted  with 
subjects  of  this  nature.  Inquirers  have  come  to 
ditlereut  results  as  to  the  rate,  but  the  discrepancy 


said  by  the  people  that  those  who  have  drunk  of  i  does  not  genei ally  exceed  an  inch  in  a  century.  The 
it  and  left  the  countiy  must  return  to  drink  of  it  ordinary  average  increase  of  the  soil  in  Egypt  is  about 
again.  four  inches  and  a  half  in  a  century.    The  cultivable 

The  great  annual  phenomenon  of  the  Nile  is  the    soil  of  Egypt  is  wholly  the  deposit  of  the  Nile,  but 
inundation,  the  failure  of  which  produces  a  lamine,    it  is  obviously  impossible  to  calculate,  from  its  pre- 


for  Egypt  is  virtually  without  rain  (see  Zech.  xiv 
17,  18).  The  country  is  therefore  devoid  of  the 
consUiut  changes  which  make  the  husbandmen  of 
other  lands  look  always  lor  the  providential  cave 
of  God.  "  For  the  land,  whither  thou  goest  in  to 
possess  it,  [is]  not  as  the  land  of  Egypt,  fiom  whence 
ye  came  out,  wheie  thou  sowedst  thy  seed,  and  wa- 
teredst  [it]  with  thy  foot,  as  a  garden  of  lierbs :  but 
the  land,  whither  ye  go  to  possess  it,  [is]  a  land  of 
hills  and  valleys,  [and]  drinketh  water  of  the  rain  of 
heaven :  a  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  careth  for  : 
the  eyes  of  the  Lord  thy  (!otl  [are]  always  upon  it, 
fiom  the  b<'ginning  of  the  yeai'  even  unto  the  end  of 
the  year"  (l)eut.  xi.  10-12).  At  Khartoom  the  in- 
crease of  the  river  is  observed  early  in  April,  but  in 
Egypt  the  first  signs  of  rising  occur  about  the 
summer  solstice,  and  generally  the  regular  increase 
does  not  begin  until  some  day>  after,  the  inundation 
commencing  about  two  months  after  the  solstice. 
The  river  then  [tours,  through  canals  aud  cuttings  in 
the  banks,  which  aie  a  little  higher  than  the  rest  of 
the  .soil,  over  the  valley,  which  it  covers  with  sheets 
of  water.  It  attains  to  its  gi'eatest  height  about, 
()|-  not  long  aftei',  the  autuuuial   equinox,  and  then, 


sent  depth,  when  the  river  first  began  to  flow  in  the 
rocky  bed  now  so  deeply  covered  with  the  rich  allu- 
vium. An  attemjit  has  however  been  made  to 
use  geology  as  an  aid  to  history,  by  first  endeavour- 
ing to  ascertain  the  rate  of  increase  of  the  soil,  then 
digging  for  indications  of  man's  existence  in  the 
country,  and  lastly  applying  to  the  depth  at  which 
any  such  remains  might  be  discovered  the  scale  pre- 
viously obtained.  In  this  manner  51  r.  Horner  {I'liil. 
Tnmsactions,  vol.  148),  when  his  labourers  had 
found,  or  pretended  to  find,  a  piece  of  pottery  at 
a  great  depth  on  the  site  of  Jlemphis,  argued  that 
man  must  have  lived  there,  awl  not  in  the  lowest 
state  of  barbarism,  about  13,000  years  ago.  He 
however  entirely  disregarded  various  causes  by 
which  an  object  could  have  been  deposited  at  such 
a  depth,  as  the  existence  of  canals  and  wells,  from 
the  latter  of  which  water  could  be  anciently  as 
now  drawn  up  in  earthen  pots  from  a  very  low 
level,  and  the  occiurence  of  fissuies  in  the  earth. 
He  formed  his  scale  on  the  supposition  that  the 
ancient  Egyptians  placed  a  great  statue  before  the 
principal  temple  of  Memphis  in  such  a  position  that 
tlio  inundation  e:ich  vear  ieache<I  its  base,  whereas 


542 


NILE 


we  know  that  they  were  very  cai-elul  to  put  all 
their  stone  works  where  they  thought  they  would 
be  out  of  the  reach  of  its  injurious  influence;  and, 
what  is  still  more  serious,  he  laitl  stress  upon  the 
discovery  of  burnt  brick  even  lower  than  the  piece 
of  pottery,  being  unaware  that  thei-e  is  no  evidence 
that  the  Egyprians  in  early  times  used  any  but 
crude  brick,  a  burnt  brick  being  as  sure  a  record  of 
the  Roman  dominion  as  an  imperial  coin.  It  is 
impoitant  to  mention  this  extraordinary  mistake,  as 
it  was  accepted  as  a  conect  result  by  the  late  Baron 
Bunsen,  and  urged  by  him  and  others  as  a  proof  of 
the  great  antiquity  of  man  in  Egypt  {Quarterly 
Beview,  Apr.  1859,  No.  oc.x.;  Modern  Egyptians, 
Sth  ed.,  note  by  Ed.,  p.  593  seqq.). 

In  Upper  Egypt  the  Nile  is  a  very  broad  stream, 
flowing  rapidly  between  high,  steep  mud-banks, 
which  are  scai'ped  by  the  constant  rush  of  the  water, 
which  fiom  time  to  time  washes  portions  away,  and 
stratified  by  the  regular  deposit.  On  either  side 
rise  the  bare  yellow  mountains,  usually  a  few  hun- 
dred feet  high,  I'arely  a  thousand,  looking  from  the 
ii\'er  like  cliti's,  and  often  honeycombed  with  the 
entrances  of  the  tombs  which  make  Egypt  one 
great  city  of  the  dead,  so  that  we  can  undei'stand 
the  meaning  of  that  murmur  of  the  Israelites  to 
Moses,  "  Because  [there  were]  no  graves  in  Egypt, 
hast  thou  taken  us  away  to  die  in  the  wilderness  ?' 
(Ex.  xiv.  11).  Frequently  the  mountain  on  either 
side  approaches  the  river  in  a  rounded  pi'omontory, 
against  whose  base  the  restless  stream  washes,  and 
then  retreats  and  leaves  a  broad  bay-like  valley, 
bounded  by  a  rocky  curve.  liarely  both  moun- 
tains confine  the  river  in  a  narrow  bed,  rising 
steeply  on  either  side  from  a  deep  rock-cut  channel 
througli  which  the  water  pours  with  a  rapid  cur- 
lent.  Perhaps  there  is  a  remote  allusion  to  the  rocky 
channels  of  the  Nile,  and  especially  to  its  primaeval 
bed  wholly  of  bare  rock,  in  that  passage  of  Job 
where  the  plural  of  Yeor  is  used.  "  He  cuttetli 
out  rivers  (D''"lb<^)  among  the  rocks,  and  his  eye 

seetli  every  precious  thing.  He  bindeth  the  floods 
from  overflowing"  (xx-viii.  10,  11).  It  must  be 
recollected  that  there  are  allusions  to  Egypt,  and 
especially  to  its  animals  ami  jiroducts,  in  this  book, 
so  that  the  Nile  may  well  be  here  referred  to,  if 
the  passage  do  not  distinctly  mention  it.  In  Lower 
l']gypt  the  chief  difierences  are  that  the  view  is  spread 
out  in  one  rich  plain,  only  bounded  on  the  east  and 
west  by  the  desert,  of  which  the  edge  is  low  and 
sandy,  unlike  the  mountains  above,  though  essentially 
the  same,  and  that  the  two  branches  of  the  river  are 
narrower  tlian  the  undivided  stream.  On  either 
bank,  during  Low  Nile,  extend  fields  of  corn  and 
barley,  and  near  the  river-side  stretch  long  groves 
of  pahnrtrees.  The  villages  rise  from  the  level  plain, 
standing  upon  mounds,  often  ancient  sites,  and 
surrounded  by  palm-groves,  and  yet  higher  dark- 
brown  mounds  mark  where  of  old  stood  towns,  with 
which  often  "their  memorial  is  perished"  (Ps.  ix.  6). 
The  villages  are  connected  by  dykes,  along  which  pass 
the  chief  roads.  During  the  inundation  the  whole 
valley  and  plain  is  covered  with  sheets  of  water, 
above  whicli  rise  the  villages  like  islands,  only  to  be 
reached  along  the  half-ruined  dylces.  The  aspect  of 
the  country  is  as  though  it  were  overflowed  by  a  de- 
structive flood,  while  between  its  banks,  here  and 
there  liroken  through  and  constantly  giving  way, 

<>  The  use  of  "  iiachal "  here  affords  a  strong  argument 
ill  favour  of  the  opinion  that  it  is  applied  to  the  Nile. 


NILE 

rushes  a  vast  turbid  stream,  against  .which  no  boat 
could  make  its  way,  excejiting  by  tacking,  weie  it 
not  for  the  north  wind  that  blows  ceaselessly  during 
the  sei^son  of  the  inundation,  making  the  river 
seem  more  powerful  as  it  beate  it  into  waves.  The 
prophets  more  than  once  allude  to  this  striking 
condition  of  the  Nile.  Jeremiah  says  of  I'haraoh- 
Necho's  army,  "  Who  [is]  this  [that]  cometh  up 
as  the  Nile  [Veor],  whose  waters  are  moved  as  the 
rivers?  Egypt  riseth  up  like  the  Nile,  and  [his] 
waters  are  moved  like  the  rivers;  and  he  saith, 
I  will  go  up,  [and]  will  cover  the  land ;  I  will 
destroy  the  city  and  tlie  inhabitants  thereof"  (xlvi. 
7,  8).  Again,  the  prophecy  "against  the  Philis- 
tines, befoi-e  that  Pharaoh  smote  (iaza,"  com- 
mences, "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ;  Behold,  waters 
rise  up  out  of  the  north,  and  shall  be  as  an  over- 
flowing stream  {nackul),^  and  shall  overflow  the  land, 
and  all  that  is  therein ;  the  city,  and  them  that 
dwell  therein"  (xlvii.  1,  2).  Amos,  also,  a  prophej 
who  especially  refers  to  Egypt,  uses  the  inundation 
of  the  Nile  as  a  type  of  the  utter  desolation  of  his 
couiitry.  "  The  Lord  hath  sworn  by  the  excellency 
of  Jacob,  Surely  I  will  never  forget  any  of  their 
works.  Shall  not  the  land  tremble  for  this,  and 
every  one  mourn  that  dwelleth  therein  ?  and  it 
shall  rise  up  wholly  as  the  Nile  ("1N3);  and  it 
shall  be  cast  out  and  drowned,  as  [by]  the  Nile 
(Onvp  liN''3)  of  Egypt"  (viii.  7,  8;  see  ix.  5). 

The  banks  of  the  river  are  enlivened  by  the 
women  who  come  down  to  draw  water,  and,  like 
Pharaoh's  daughter,  to  bathe,  and  the  herds  of 
kiue  and  butliiloes  wliich  are  driven  down  to  drink 
and  wash,  or  to  graze  on  the  grass  of  the  swairips, 
like  the  good  kine  that  Pharaoh  saw  in  his  dream 
as  "  he  stood  by  the  river,"  which  were  "  coming 
up  out  of  the  river,"  and  "  fed  in  the  marsh-grass  " 
(Gen.  sli.  1,  2). 

The  river  itself  abounds  in  fish,  whicli  anciently 
formed  a  chief  means  of  sustenance  to  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  country.  Perhaps,  as  has  been  acutely 
remarked  in  another  article,  Jacob,  when  blessing 
Ephraim  aaid  JIanasseh,  used  for  their  multiplying 
the  term  nJ*!  (Gen.  xlviii.  16),  which  is  connected 

with  y^,  a  fish,  though  it  does  not  seem  certain 

which  is  the  primitive ;  as  though  he  had  been 
struck  by  the  abundance  of  fish  in  the  Nile  or  the 
canals  and  pools  fed  by  it.  [Manassich,  p.  2186.] 
The  Israelites  in  the  desert  looked  back  with  regret 
to  the  fish  of  Egypt :  "  We  remember  the  fish,  which 
we  did  eat  in  Egypt  freely"  (Num.  xi.  5).  In  the 
Thebais  crocodiles  are  found,  and  during  Low  Nile 
they  may  be  seen  basking  in  the  sun  ujion  the  sand- 
banks. The  crocodile  is  constantly  spoken  of  in 
the  Bible  as  the  emblem  of  Pharaoh,  especially  in 
the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel.  [Egypt,  vol.  i.  p.  5006.] 
The  great  ditl'erence  between  the  Nile  of  Egypt  in 
the  present  day  and  in  ancient  times  is  caused  by 
the  tiiilure  of  some  of  its  branches,  and  the  ceasing  of 
some  of  its  chief  vegetable  products ;  and  the  chief 
change  in  the  aspect  of  the  cultivable  land,  as 
dependent  on  the  Nile,  is  the  result  of  the  ruin  of 
the  fish-pools  and  their  conduits,  and  the  consequent 
decline  of  the  fisheiies.  The  river  was  famous  for 
its  seven  branches,  and  under  the  Roman  dominion 
eleven  were  counted,  of  which,  however,  there 
were  but  seven  principal  ones.  Herodotus  notices 
that  there  were  seven,  of  which  he  says  that  two, 
the  piesent  Damietta  and  Rosetta  branches,  were 
originallv   artificial,    and    he    therefore    speaks    of 


NILE 

"the  five  mouths"  (ii.  10).  Now,  as  for  a  long 
period  past,  there  are  no  navigable  and  unob- 
structed branches  but  these  two  that  Herodotus  dis- 
tinguishes as  in  origin  works  of  man.  This  change 
was  prophesied  by  Isaiah :  "And  the  waters  shall 
tail  from  the  sea,  and  the  river  shall  be  waste<.l  and 
dried  up"  (xix.  .')  .  Perhaps  the  same  prophet,  in 
yet  more  precise  words,  predicts  this,  where  he  says, 
"  And  the  Lord  shall  utteily  destroy  the  tongue  of 
the  Egyi^tian  sea ;  and  with  his  mighty  wind  shall  he 
shake  his  hand  over  the  river,  and  shall  smite  it  in 
the  [or  '  into ']  seven  streams,  and  make  [men]  go 
overdryshod  ['  in  shoes']"  (xi.  15).  However,from  ' 
the  context,  and  a  parallel  passage  in  Zechariah  (x. 
10,  11),  it  seems  probable  that  the  Euphrates  is 
intended  in  this  passage  by  "  the  river."  Ezekiel 
also  prophesies  of  Egypt  that  the  Lord  would  "  make 
the  rivers  drought"  (xxx.  12),  here  evidently  le- 
ferring  to  either  the  branches  or  canals  of  the  Nile. 
In  exact  fulfilment  of  these  prophecies  the  bed  of  the 
highest  part  of  the  Gulf  of  Suez  has  dried,  and  all 
the  streams  of  the  Nile,  excepting  those  which  He- 
rodotus says  were  originally  artificial,  have  wasted, 
so  that  tiiey  can  be  crossed  without  fording. 

The  monuments  and  the  narratives  of  ancient 
writers  show  us  in  the  Nile  of  Egypt  in  old  times,  a 
stream  bordei'ed  by  flags  and  reeds,  the  covert  of 
abundant  wild-fowl,  and  bearing  on  its  waters  the 
fragrant  flowers  of  the  various-coloured  lotus.  Now, 
in  Egypt  scarcely  any  reeds  or  water-plants — the 
famous  papyrus  being  nearly  if  not  quite  extinct,  and 
the  lotus  almost  unknown — are  to  be  seen,  except- 
ing in  the  marshes  near  the  Mediterranean.  This 
also  was  prophesied  by  Isaiah  :  "  The  papyrus-reeds 
(?  nhy)  in  the  river  ("IIK;';,  on  the  edge  of  the 

river,  and  everything  growing  [lit.  "sown"]  in 
tiie  river  shall  be  dried  up,  driven  away  [by  the 
wind],  and  [shall]  not  be"  (.xix.  7).  Wlieu  it  is 
recollected  that  the  water-plants  of  Egyi)t  were  so 
abundant  as  to  be  a  great  source  of  leveuue  in  the 
prophet's  time,  and  much  later,  the  exact  I'ulfilment 
of  his  predictions  is  a  valuable  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  the  old  opinion  as  to  "  the  sure  word  of 
prophecy."  The  failure  of  the  fishei'ies  is  also 
foretold  by  Isaiah  (xix.  8,  10),  and  although  tliis 
was  no  doubt  a  natural  result  of  the  wasting  of  the 
river  and  streams,  its  cause  could  not  have  been 
anticipated  by  human  wisdom.  Having  once  been 
very  productive,  and  a  main  source  of  levenue  as 
well  as  of  sustenance,  the  fisheries  are  now  scarcely 
of  any  moment,  excepting  about  Lake  Jlenzeleh, 
and  in  some  lew  places  elsewhere,  cliictly  in  the 
noi'th  of  I'Igypt. 

Of  old  the  great  river  must  have  shewn  a  moie 
fair  and  busy  scene  than  now.  lioats  of  many  kinds 
were  ever  ])assing  along  it,  by  the  paint^jd  walls  of 
temples,  and  the  gardens  that  extendeil  around  the 
light  summer  pavilions,  from  the  pleasure-galley, 
with  one  great  square  sail,  white  or  with  variegated 
])attern,  and  many  oars,  to  the  little  papyrus  skill', 
dancing  on  the  water,  and  carrying  the  seekers  of 
])leasure  where  they  could  shoot  with  arrows,  or 
knock  down  with  the  throw-stick,  the  wild-fowl  that 
ahounded  among  the  reeds,  or  engage  in  the  dan- 
gerous cliacc  of  the  hippopotamus  or 'the  crocodile. 
In  the  Bible  the  papyrus-boats  are  mentioned  ;  and 
they  are  shewn  to  have  been  used  for  their  swiftness 
to  carry  tidings  to  Ethiopia  (Is.  xviii.  2). 

The  great  river  is  constantly  before  us  in  the 
histoiy  of  Israel  in  Kgypt.  Into  it  the  male  children 
wore  cast;  in  it.  or  rather  in  some  canal  or  pool. 


NILE 


543 


was  the  ark  of  Moses  put,  and  i'ound  by  Pharaoh's 
daughter  when  she  went  down  to  bathe.  When 
the  plagues  were  sent,  the  sacred  river — a  mam 
support  of  the  people — and  its  waters  everywhere, 
were  turned  into  blood.     [Plagues  of  Egypt.] 

The  prophets  not  only  tell  us  of  the  futuie  of  the 
Nile  ;  they  speak  of  it  as  it  was  in  their  days. 
Ezekiel  likens  Pharaoh  to  a  crocodile,  fearing  no 
one  in  the  midst  of  his  river,  yet  dragged  forth 
with  the  fish  of  his  rivers,  and  left  to  perish  in  the 
wilderness  (xxix.  1-5;  comp.  xxxii.  1-ii).  Nahum 
thus  speaks  of  the  Nile,  when  he  warns  Nineveh  by 
the  ruin  of  Thebes :  "  Art  thou  better  than  No-Amon, 
that  was  situate  among  the  rivers,  [that  had]  the 
waters  lound  about  it,  whose  rampart  [was]  the 
sea,  [and]  her  wall  [was]  from  the  sea?"  (iir.  8). 
Here  the  river  is  spoken  of  as  the  rampart,  and 
perhaps  as  the  support  of  the  capital,  and  the  situa- 
tion, most  remarkable  in  Egypt,  of  the  city  on  the 
two  banks  is  indicated  [No-Amon]  .  But  still  more 
stiiking  than  this  description  is  the  use  which  we 
have  already  noticed  of  the  inundation,  as  a  figure  of 
the  ICgyptian  armies,  and  also  of  the  coming  of  utter 
destruction,  probably  by  an  invading  force. 

In  the  New  Testament  there  is  no  mention  of  the 
Nile.  Tradition  says  that  when  Our  Lord  was 
brought  into 'Egypt,  His  mother  came  to  Heliopolis. 
[On.]  If  so,  He  may  have  dwelt  in  His  childhood 
by  the  side  of  the  ancient  river  which  witnessed  so 
many  events  of  sacred  history,  perhaps  the  coming 
of  Abraham,  certainly  the  rule  of  Joseph,  and 
the  long  oppression  and  deliverance  of  Israel  their 
posterity.  [R.  S.  P.] 

NIM'EAH  (mJ2J  :  Nd/j-Ppa  ;  Alex.  A/xBpa/x  : 
Neinra),  a  place  mentioned,  by  this  name,  in  Num. 
xxxii.  3  only,  among  those  which  formed  the  dis- 
tricts of  the  "  land  of  Jazer  and  the  land  of  (jilead," 
on  the  east  of  Jordan,  petitioned  lor  by  Reuben 
and  Gad.  It  would  a]ipear  from  this  passage  to 
have  been  near  Jazer  and  Heshbon,  and  therefore 
on  the  upper  level  of  tiie  country.  If  it  is -the 
same  as  Bi;th-ximrah  (ver.  o6)  it  belonged  to 
the  tribe  of  Gad.  By  Eusebius,  however  {Ononuist. 
Ne/3f>a),  it  is  cited  as  a  "  city  of  Keuben  in  Gilead," 
and  said  to  have  been  in  his  day  a  very  large  place 
( Koifir]  fieyiaTT])  in  ^Batanaea,  bearing  the  name 
of  Abara.  'I'his  account  is  full  of  difficulties,  for 
lieuben  never  possessed  the  countiy  of  Gilead,  and 
Batanaea  was  situated  several  days'  journey  to  the 
N.VV.  of  the  district  of  Heshbon,  beyond  not  only 
the  territory  of  Peuben,  but  even  that  of  (jad. 
A  wady  and  a  town,  both  called  Aimrch,  have, 
however,  been  met  with  in  Bct/ieniyeh,  east  of  the 
Lejah,  and  five  miles  N.W.  of  Kunavcat  (see  the 
maps  of  Porter,  Van  de  Velde,  and  Wetzstein). 
On  the  other  hand  the  name  of  Niinriu  is  said  to 
be  attached  to  a  wateicourse  and  a  site  of  i-uins  in 
the  Jordan  valley,  a  couple  of  miles  east  of  the 
river,  at  the  embouchure  of  the  Wadij  Shoaib. 
[Bktii-Nijirah.]  But  this  again  is  too  far  from 
Heshbon  in  the  other  direction. 

The  name  Nimr  ("  panther  ")  appears  to  be  a  com- 
mon one  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  it  must  be  lett 
to  future  explorers  (when  exploration  in  that  region 
becomes  possible)  to  ascertain  which  (if  either)  of  the 
places  so  named  is  the  Nimrah  in  question.       [G.] 

NIMTvIM,  THE  WATERS  OF  i  Dnr^3  ^JD : 
in  Is.  rh  KSai/)  tt\s  'Hiixripeifn,  Alex.  ttJs  Nffipeifi; 


»  The  present  Greek  text  has  Karavaia  ;  but  ilie  cor- 
rection is  obvious. 


544 


NIMKOD 


in  .Ter.  rh  vda^p  NejSpeiV,  Alex.  'Nf$pei/x  :  Aquae 
Nemrim),  a  stream  or  brook  (not  improbably  a 
stream  with  pools)  within  the  country  of  Tiloab, 
which  is  mentioned  in  the  denunciations  of  that 
nation  uttered,  or  quoted,  by  Isaiah  (xv.  6)  and 
Jeremiah  (xlviii.  34).  From  the  former  of  these 
passages  it  appears  to  have  been  famed  for  the 
abundance  of  its  grass. 

If  the  view  taken  of  these  denunciations  under 
the  head  of  Moab  (p.  392,  6)  be  con-ect,  we  should 
look  for  the  site  of  Ninirim  in  Moab  proper,  i.  c. 
on  the  south-eastern  shoulder  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
a  position  which  agrees  well  with  the  mention  of 
the  ''  brook  of  the  willows"  (perhaps  Wachj  Bcni 
Hammed)  and  the  "  borders  of  Moab,"  that  is,  the 
i-ange  of  liills  encircling  Jloab  at  the  lower  part  of 
the  territory. 

A  name  resembling  Nimrim  still  exists  at  the 
south- east ei-n  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  in  the  Wadij 
en-Nerneirah  and  Burj  en-Nemeirah,  which  are 
situated  on  the  beach,  about  half-way  between  the 
southern  extremity'and  the  promontory  of  e^Ztsscm 
(De  Saulcy,  Voyage,  i.  284,  &c. ;  Seetzen,  ii.  354). 
Eusebius  {Onom.  Ne/cTjpi'ju)  places  it  N.  of  Soora, 
i.  c.  Zoar.  How  far  the  situation  of  en-Nemeirah 
coiTesponds  with  the  statement  of  Eusebius  cannot 
be  known  until  that  of  Zoar  is  ascertained.  If  the 
Wady  en-Nemeirah  i-eally  occupies  the  place  of  the 
waters  of  Nimrim,  Zoar  must  have  been  consider- 
ably further  south  than  is  usually  supposed.  On 
the  other  hand  the  name  •>  is  a  common  one  in  the 
transjordanic  localities,  and  other  instances  of  its 
occurrence  may  yet  be  discovered  more  in  accordance 
with  the  anc:ient  statements.  [G.] 

NIM'1-vOD  (I'lp:  :  Ne^ptiS  :  Nemrod),  a  son 

of  Cush  and  grandson  of  Ham.  The  events  of  his 
life  are  recorded  in  a  passage  (Gen.  x.  8  tf.)  which, 
fi'om  the  conciseness  of  its  language,  is  involved  in 
considerable  uncertainty.  We  may  notice,  in  the 
first  place,  the  terms  in  ver.  8.  9,  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "mighty"  and  "mighty  hunter  before  the 
Lord."  The  idea  of  airy  moral  qualities  being 
conveyed  by  these  expressions  may  be  at  once 
rejected  ;  for,  on  the  one  hand,  the  words  "  before 
the  Lord"  are  a  mei-e  superlative  adjunct  (as  in 
the  parallel  expression  in  Jon.  iii.  3),  and  contain 
no  notion  of  Divine  approval ;  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  ideas  of  violence  and  insolence  with 
which  tradition  invested  the  character  of  the  hero, 
as  delineated  by  Josephus"^  {Ant.  i.  4,  §2),  are 
>jot  necessarily  involved  in  the  Hebrew  words, 
though  the  term  gibbor^  is  occasionally  taken  in 
a  bad  sease  (e.  g.    Ps.  Iii.  1).       The    term    may 

b  A  racy  and  characteristic  passage,  aimed  at  tbe  doc- 
trina  haereticoruni,  and  playing  on  the  name  as  sij^nify- 
ing  a  leopard,  will  be  found  in  Jtrome's  Gumnicnlary  on' 
Is.  XV.  6. 

<=  The  view  of  Nimrod's  character  taken  liy  this  writer 
originated  partly  perliaps  in  a  false  etymology  of  thu 
name,  as  though  it  were  connected  with  the  Hebrew  root 
mdrad  (H^D)-  "  to  rebel,"  and  partly  from  the  supposed 
connexion  of  the  hero's  history  with  the  building  of  the 
tower  of  Uabel.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  first  of  these 
assumptions:  the  name  is  either  Cushite  or  Assyrian. 
Nor,  again,  does  the  Bible  connect  Nimrod  with  the  build- 
ing of  the  tower  ;  for  it  only  states  that  Babel  formed  one 
of  his  capitals.  Indications  have,  indeed,  been  noticed  by 
Hunsen  {Bibehcerk,  v.  74)  of  a  connexion  between  the  two 
narratives ;  they  have  undoubtedly  a  common  Jehovistic 
character ;  but  the  point  on  which  he  lays  most  stress  (the 
expression  in  i.  2,  "  from  the  east, '  or  "  eastward  ")  is  in 


NIMROD 

be  regarded  as  betokening  personal  prowess  with 
the  accessory  notion  of  gigantic  stature  (as  in  the 
LXX.  ylyas).  It  is  somewhat  doubtful  whether 
the  prowess  of  Nimrod  rested  on  his  achievements 
as  a  hunter  or  as  a  conqueror.  The  literal  ren- 
dering of  the  Hebrew  words  would  undoubtedly 
apply  to  the  former,  but  they  may  be  regarded 
as  a  ti-anslatiou  of  a  proverbial  expression  ori- 
ginally cuiTent  in  the  land  of  Nimrod,  where  the 
terms  significant  of  "  hunter "  and  "  hunting " 
appear  to  have  been  applied  to  the  forays  of  the 
sovereigns  against  the  surrounding  nations.*  The 
two  phases  of  prowess,  hunting  and  conquering, 
may  indeed  well  have  been  combined  in  the  same 
person  in  a  rude  age,  and  the  Assyrian  monuments 
abound  with  scenes  which  exhibit  the  skill  of  the 
sovereigns  in  the  chase.  But  the  context  certiunly 
favours  the  special  application  of  the  term  to  the 
case  of  conquest,  for  otherwise  the  assertion  in 
ver.  8,  "  he  began  to  be  a  mighty  one  in  the 
earth,"  is  devoid  of  point — while,  taken  as  intro- 
ductory to  what  follows,  it  seems  to  indicate 
Nimrod  as  the  first  who,  after  the  flood,  established 
a  powerful  empire  on  the  earth  the  limits  of  which 
are  afterwards  defined.  The  next  point  to  be 
noticed  is  the  expression  in  ver.  10,  "  The  be- 
ginning of  his  kingdom,"  taken  in  connexion  with 
the  commencement  of  ver.  11,  which  admits  of 
the  double  sense:  "Out  of  that  land  went  forth 
Asshur,"  as  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.,  and  "  out 
of  that  land  he  went  forth  to  Assyria,"  as  in  the 
margin.  These  two  passages  mutually  react  on 
each  other ;  for  if  the  words  "  beginning  of  his 
kingdom "  mean,  as  we  believe  to  be  the  case, 
"  his  first  kingdom,"  or,  as  Gesenius  {Thes.  p. 
1252)  renders  it  "the  territory  of  which  it  was 
at  first  composed,"  then  the  expression  implies  a 
subsequent  extension  of  his  kingdom,  in  other 
words,  that  "  he  went  forth  to  Assyi-ia."  If, 
however,  the  sense  of  ver.  11  be,  "out  of  that 
land  went  forth  Asshur,"  then  no  other  sense 
can  be  given  to  ver.  10  than  that  "the  capital  of 
his  kingdom  was  I^abylon,"  though  the  expression 
must  be  equally  applied  to  the  towns  subsequently 
mentioned.  This  rendering  appears  untenable  in 
all  respectS;  and  the  expression  may  theiefoie  be 
cited  in  support  of  the  marginal  rendering  of  ver. 
11.  With  regard  to  the  latter  passage,  either 
sense  is  permissible  in  point  of  grammatical  con- 
struction, for  the  omission  of  the  local  affix  to  the 
word  Asshur,  which  fonns  the  chief  objection  to 
the  marginal  renderuig,  is  not  peculiar  to  this 
passage  (comp.  1  K.  xi.  17;  2  K.  xv.  14),  nor  is 
it   necessary    even    to   assume    a  prolepsis   in    the 


reality  worthless  for  the  purpose.  The  influence  of  the 
view  taken  by  .rosei)hus  is  curiously  developed  in  the 
identification  of  Nimrod  with  tbe  constellation  Orion,  the 
Hebrew  name  cesil  CP''p3)'  "foolish,"  being  reg.arded  as 
synonymous  with  Nimrod,  and  the  giant  form  of  Orion, 
together  with  its  Arabic  name,  "  the  giant.''  supplying 
another  connecting  link.  .Tosephus  follows  the  LXX.  in 
his  form  of  the  name,  Ne^pajfir)!.  The  variation  in  the 
LXX.  is  of  no  real  importance,  as  it  may  be  paralleled  by 
a  similar  exchange  of  /3  for  Q  in  the  case  of  2e(3Aa  (1  Chr. 
i.  47),  and,  in  a  measure,  by  the  insertion  of  the  /3  before 
the  liquids  in  other  cases,  such  as  Ma)i/3p>j  (Gen.  xiv.  I'A). 
The  variation  hardly  deserves  the  attention  it  has  received 
in  Rawlinsons  Berod.  i.  596. 

^  Tiglath-pileser  I.,  for  instance,  is  described  as  he 
that  "  pursues  after  "  or  "  hunts  the  people  of  Hilu-Nipru." 
So  also  of  other  kings  (Rawlinsons  Herod,  i.  .597.) 


NIMROD 

apjilication  of  the  term  Asshur  to  the  land  ol 
Assyria  at  the  time  of  Nimiod's  invasion,  inas- 
much as  the  historical  date  of  this  event  may  be 
considerably  later  than  the  genealogical  statement 
would  imply.  Authorities  both  ancient  and  mo- 
dern are  divided  on  tlie  subject,  but  the  most 
weighty  names  of  modern  times  support  the  mar- 
ginal rendering,  as  it  seems  best  to  accord  with 
historical  truth.  The  unity  of  the  passage  is 
moreover  supported  by  its  peculiarities  both  of 
style  and  matter.  It  does  not  seem  to  have 
formed  part  of  the  original  genealogical  statement 
but  to  be  an  interpolation  of  a  later  date ;'  it  is 
the  only  instance  in  which  personal  characteristics 
are  attributed  to  any  of  the  names  mentioned  ;  the 
proverbial  expression  which  it  embodies  bespeaks 
its  traditional  and  fragmentary  charactei-,  and  there 
is  nothing  to  connect  the  passage  either  with  what 
precedes  or  with  what  follows  it.  Such  a  frag- 
mentary record,  though  natural  in  reference  to  a 
single  mighty  hero,  would  hardly  admit  of  the 
introduction  of  references  to  others.  The  only 
subsequent  notice  of  the  name  Nimrod  occurs  in 
Jlic.  V.  6,  where  the  "land  of  Nimrod"  is  a 
synonym  either  for  Assyria,  just  before  mentioned, 
or  for  Batiylonia. 

The  chief  events  in  the  life  of  Nimrod,  then,  are 
( I)  that  he  was  a  Cushite  ;  (2)  that  he  estabhshed 
an  empire  in  Shinar  (the  classical  Babylonia),  the 
chief  towns  being  Babel,  Erech,  Accad,  and  Calneh  ; 
and  (3)  that  he  extended  this  empire  northwards 
along  the  course  of  the  Tigris  over  Assyria,  where 
he  founded  a  second  group  of  capitals,  Nineveh,' 
Rehoboth,  Calah,  and  Kesen.  These  events  cor- 
respond to  and  may  be  held  to  represent  the 
salient  historical  facts  connected  with  the  earliest 
stages  of  the  great  Babylonian  empire.  1.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  abundant  evidence  that  the  race 
that  first  held  sway  in  the  lower  Babylonian  plain 
was  of  Cushite  or  Hamitic  extraction.  Tradition 
assigned  to  Belus,  the  mythical  founder  of  Balsy- 
lon,  an  Egyptian  origin,  inasmuch  as  it  described 
him  as  the  son  of  Poseidon  and  Libya  (l)iod.  Sicul. 
i.  28;  Apollodor.  ii.  1,  §4;  Pausan.  iv.  23,  §5)  ; 
the  astrological  system  of  Babylon  (Diod.  Sicul.  i. 
81)  and  perhaps  its  religious  rites  (HestiaeusSf  ap. 
Joseph.  Ant.  i.  4,  §3)  were  referred  to  the  same 
quarter  ;  and  the  legend  of  Cannes,  the  great  teacher 
of  Babylon,  rising  out  of  the  Erythraean  sea,  pre- 
served by  Syncellus  [Chronogr.  p.  28),  points  in 
the  same  direction.  The  name  Cush  itself  was 
preserved  in  Babylonia  and  the  adjacent  countries 
under  the  forms  of  Cossaei,  Cissia,  Cuthah,  and 
Susiana  or  Chnzistan.  The  earliest  written  lan- 
guage of  Babylonia,  as  known  to  us  from  existing 
inscriptions,  bears  a  strong  resemblanc'C  to  that  of 
Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  and  the  s;tme  words  have 
been  found  in  each  country,  as  in  the  case  of 
Mirikh,  the  Jleroe  of  Ethiopia,  the  Mars  of 
Babylonia  (Hawlinson,  i.  442).  Even  the  name 
Nimrod  appears  in  the  list  of  the  Egyptian  kings 
of  the  22nd  dynasty,  but  there  are  reasons  for 
thinking  that  dyn;\sty  to   have   been  of  Assyrian 


NIMROD 


545 


'  The  expressions  1133,  TTin,  and  still  more  the  use 
of  the  term  mn),  are  ngardcd  as  indications  of  a  Jcho- 

vistic  original,  while  the  genealosy  itself  is  Elohistic.  Il 
should  be  further  noticed  that  there  is  nothing  to  mark 
the  connexinn  or  disUnclion  between  Nimrod  and  the 
iirher  sons  of  Cash. 
g  The  passage  quoted  by  Josephus  is  of  so  rragmeiitary  a 
\or,.  II. 


extraction.  Putting  the  above-mentioned  consi- 
derations together,  they  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
connexion  between  the  ancient  Babylonians  and  the 
Ethiopian  or  Egyptian  stock  (lespectively  the 
Nimrod  and  the  Cush  of  the  Jlosaic  table).  More 
than  this  cannot  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  data, 
and  we  must  therefore  withhold  ^ur  assent  from 
Bunsen's  view  {Bihehrerk,  v.  69)  that  the  Cushite 
origin  of  Nimrod  betokens  the  westward  progress 
of  the  Scythian  or  Turanian  I'aces  fi-om  the  coun- 
tries eastward  of  Babylonia ;  lor,  though  branches 
of  the  Cushite  family  (such  as  the  Cossaei)  had 
pressed  forward  to  the  east  of  the  Tigris,  and 
though  the  early  language  of  Babylonia  bears  in 
its  structure  a  Scythic  or  Turanian  character,  yet 
both  these  features  are  susceptible  of  explanation  in 
connexion  with  the  original  eastward  progress  of 
the  Cushite  race. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  the  earliest  seat  of  empire 
was  in  the  south  part  of  the  Babylonian  plain. 
The  large  mounds,  which  for  a  vast  number  of 
centuries  have  covered  the  ruins  of  ancient  cities, 
have  already  yielded  some  evidences  of  the  dates 
and  names  of  their  founders,  and  we  can  assign  the 
highest  antiquity  to  the  towns  represented  by  the 
mounds  of  Niffer  (perhaps  the  early  Babel,  though 
also  identified  with  Calneh),  Warka  (the  Biblical 
Erech),  Hugheir  (Ur),  and  Senkereh  (Ellasar), 
while  the  name  of  Accad  is  preserved  in  the  title 
Kimi-Akkad,  by  which  the  founder  or  embellisher 
of  those  towns  was  distinguished  (Rawlinson,  i. 
435).  The  date  of  their  foundation  may  be  placed 
at  about  B.C.  2200.  We  may  remark  the  coinci- 
dence between  the  quadruple  groups  of  capitals 
noticed  in  the  Bible,  and  the  title  Kiprat  or 
Kiprat-arha,  assumed  by  the  early  kings  of  Baby- 
lon and  supposed  to  mean  "  four  races  "  (Rawlin- 
son, i.  438,  447). 

3.  In  the  third  place,  the  Babylonian  empire 
extended  its  sway  northwards  along  the  course  of 
the  Tigris  at  a  period  long  anterior  to  the  rise  of 
the  Assyrian  empire  in  the  13th  century  B.C.  We 
have  indications  of  this  extension  as  early  as  about 
18(30  when  Shamas-lva,  the  son  of  Ismi-dagon 
king  of  Babylon  founded  a  temple  at  Kileh-shergat 
(sup])osed  to  be  the  ancient  Asshur).  The  exist- 
ence of  Nineveh  itself  can  be  traced  up  by  the  aid 
of  Egyptian  monuments  to  about  the  middle  of 
the  Kith  century  B.C.,  and  though  the  historical 
name  of  its  founder  is  lost  to  us,  yet  tradition 
mentions  a  Belus  as  king  of  Nineveh  at  a  period 
anterior  to  that  assigned  to  Ninus  (Layard's  Ni- 
neveh, ii.  231),  thus  rendering  it  probable  that  the 
dynasty  represented  by  the  latter  name  was  pre- 
ceded by  one  of  Babylonian  origin. 

Our  present  information  does  not  permit  us  to 
identify  Nimrod  with  any  personage  known  to  us 
I'ither  from  inscriptions  or  from  classical  writers. 
Xiiuis  and  Belus  are  representative  titles  rather 
than  personal  names,  and  are  but  equivalent  terms 
for  "  the  lord,"  who  was  regarded  ;is  the  tbiuider  of 
the  empires  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  We  have  no 
reason  on  this  account  to  doubt  the  personal  exist- 


character,  that  its  original  purport  can  hardly  be  guessed. 
He  adduces  it  apparently  to  iliiistrate  tlie  name  Sliinav, 
but  the  context  favours  the  suppusitinn  that  the  writer 
referred  to  the  period  subsequent  to  the  tlood,  in  which 
case  we  may  infer  the  belief  (1)  that  the  i)opiilation  of 
Habylonia  was  not  autochtlKinoiis.  but  immigrant ;  {2)  that 
the  point  from  wiiich  it  iniinigralcil  was  from  the  west, 
IJiMus  being  identihed  with  Zeus  Knyallus. 

2   N 


546 


NIMSHI 


ence'"  of  Ninirod,  for  the  events  with  which  he  is  con- 
nected fall  within  the  shadows  of  a  remote  antiquity. 
But  we  may,  nevertheless,  consistently  with  this 
belief,  assume  that  a  large  portion  of  the  interest 
with  which  he  was  invested  was  the  mere  reflection 
of  the  sentiments  with  which  the  nations  of  west- 
ern Asia  looked  %ack  on  the  overshadowing  great- 
ness of  the  ancient  Babylonian  empire,  the  very 
monuments  of  which  seemed  to  tell  of  days  when 
"  there  were  giants  in  the  earth."  The  feeling 
which  suggested  the  colouring  of  Nimrod  as  a 
i-epresentative  hero  still  finds  place  in  the  land  of 
his  achievements,  and  to  him  the  modern  Arabs' 
ascribe  all  the  great  works  of  ancient  times,  such  as 
the  Birs-Niinrud  near  Babylon,  Tel  Ninirud  near 
Baghdad,  the  dam  of  Suhr  el  Nimrud  across  the 
Tigris  below  Mosul,  and  the  well-known  mound  of 
Nimrud  in  the  same  neighbourhood.      [VV.  L.  B.] 

NIM'SHI  CK'J?;  :  Na^eo-o-f ;  in  2  Chr.  Na/ietr- 

aei:  Namsi).  The  grandfather  of  Jehu,  who  is 
generally  called  "  the  son  of  Nimshi "  (1  K.  xix.  16  • 
2  K.  ix.  2,  14,  20 ;  2  Chr.  xxii.  7). 

NIN'EVEH  (myj:    riivevi,  tJlvos:  Ninus, 

Ninos,  Ninive),  the  capital  of  the  ancient  kingdom 
and  empire  of  Assyria  ;  a  city  of  great  power,  size, 
and  renown,  usually  included  amongst  the  most 
ancient  cities  of  the  world  of  which  there  is  any 
historic  record.  The  name  appears  to  be  com- 
pounded fiym  that  of  an  Assyrian  deity,  "  Nin," 
corresponding,  it  is  conjectured,  with  the  Greek 
Hercules,  and  occun'ing  in  the  names  of  several  As- 
syrian kings,  as  in  "  Ninus,"  the  mythic  founder, 
according  to  Greek  tradition,  of  the  city.  In  the 
Assyrian  Inscriptions  Nineveh  is  also  supposed  to  be 
called  "  the  city  of  Bel." 

Nineveh  is  first  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  in  con- 
nexion with  the  primitive  dispersement  and  migra- 
tions of  the  human  race.  Asshur,  or,  according  to 
the  marginal  reading,  which  is  generally  preferred, 
Nimrod,  is  there  described  (Gen.  x.  11)  as  extending 
his  kingdom  from  tlie  land  of  Shinar,  or  Babylonia, 
in  the  south,  to  Assyria  in  the  north,  and  found- 
ing four  cities,  of  which  the  most  famous  was 
Nineveh.  Hence  Assyria  was  subsequently  known 
to  the  Jews  as  "  the  land  of  Nimrod  "  ( cf.  Mic.  v.  6), 
and  was  believed  to  have  been  first  peopled  by  a 
colony  from  Babylon.  The  kingdom  of  Assyria  and 
of  the  Assyrians  is  referred  to  in  the  0.  T.  as  con- 
nected with  the  Jews  at  a  very  early  period ;  as  in 
Num.  xxiv.  22,  24,  and  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  8  :  but  after  the 
notice  of  the  foundation  of  Nineveh  in  Genesis  no 
further  mention  is  made  of  the  city  until  the  time 
of  the  book  of  Jonah,  or  the  8th  century  B.C.,  sup- 
posing we  accept  the  earliest  date  for  Ihat  narrative 
[Jonah],  which,  however,  according  to  some  critics, 
must  be  brought  down  300  years  later,  or  to  the 

h  We  must  notice,  without  however  adopting,  the  views 
lately  propounded  by  M.  I).  Cliwulsun  in  liis  pamphlet, 
Ueber  die  I'eberreste  der  aUbahijIonlschen  Literatur.  He 
has  discovered  the  name  Nemrod  or  Nemroda  in  the 
manuscript  works  of  an  Arabian  writer  named  Ibn- 
Wa'hschijjah,  who  professes  to  give  a  translation  of  cer- 
tain original  literary  works  in  the  Nabathaean  language, 
one  of  which,  "on  Nabathaean  apriculture,"  is  in  part 
assigned  by  him  to  a  writer  named  Qut'ami.  This  Qut'ami 
incidentally  mentions  that  he  lived  in  Babylon  under  a 
dynasty  of  Canaanitcs,  which  had  been  founded  by  a  priest 
named  Nemrod.  M.  Chwolson  assigns  Ibn-Wa'lischijjah 
to  the  end  of  the  9th  century  of  our  new  era,  and  Qut'ami 
to  the  early  part  of  the  13th  century  B.C.    He  regards  the 


NINEVEH 

5th  century  B.C.  In  this  book  neither  Assyria  nor 
the  Assyrians  are  mentioned,  the  king  to  whom  the 
prophet  was  sent  being  termed  the  "  king  of  Nine- 
veh," and  his  subjects  "  the  people  of  Nineveh." 
Assyiia  is  first  called  a  kingdom  in  the  time  of 
Menahera,  about  B.C.  770.  Nahum  (?  B.C.  645) 
directs  his  prophecies  against  Nineveh ;  only  once 
against  the  king  of  Assyria,  ch.  iii.  18.  In  2  Kings 
(xix.  36)  and  Isaiah  (xxxvii.  37)  the  city  is  first  dis- 
tinctly mentioned  as  the  residence  of  the  monarch. 
Sennacherib  was  slain  there  when  worshipping  in  the 
temple  of  Nisroch  his  god.  In  2  Chronicles  (xxxii. 
21),  where  the  same  event  is  described,  the  name  of 
the  place  where  it  occurred  is  omitted.  Zephaniah, 
about  B.C.  630,  couples  the  capital  and  the  kingdom 
together  (ii.  13)  ;  and  this  is  the  last  mention  of 
Nineveh  as  an  existing  city.  He  probably  lived  to 
witness  its  destruction,  an  event  impending  at  the 
time  of  his  prophecies.  Although  Assyria  and  the 
Assyrians  are  alluded  to  by  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah, 
by  the  foi'mer  as  a  nation  in  whose  miserable  ruin 
piophecy  had  been  fulfilled  (xxxi.),  yet  they  do  not 
refer  by  name  to  the  capital.  Jeremiah,  when  enu- 
merating "  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  which  aic 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth''  (ch.  xxv.),  6mits  all 
mention  of  the  nation  and  the  city.  Habakkuk  only 
speaks  of  the  Chaldaeans,  which  may  lead  to  the 
inference  that  the  date  of  his  prophei'ies  is  somewhat 
later  than  that  usually  assigned  to  them.  [Habak- 
kuk.] From  a  comparison  of  these  data,  it  has  been 
generally  assumed  that  the  destruction  of  Nineveh 
and  the  extinction  of  the  empire  took  place  between 
the  time  of  Zephaniah  and  that  of  Ezekiel  and  Jere- 
miah. The  exact  period  of  these  events  has  conse- 
quently been  fixed,  with  a  certain  amount  of  con- 
current evidence  derived  from  classical  history,  at 
B.C.  606  (Clinton,  Fusti  Hellen.  i.  269).  It  has  been 
shewn  that  it  may  have  occurred  20  yeai"s  earlier. 
[Assyria.]  The  city  was  then  laid  waste,  its 
monuments  destroyed,  and  its  inhabitants  scattered 
or  carried  away  into  captivity.  It  never  ix)se  again 
from  its  ruins.  This  total  disappearance  of  Nineveh 
is  fully  confirmed  by  the  records  of  profane  history. 
There  is  no  mention  of  it  in  the  Persian  cuneifoim 
inscriptions  of  the  Achaemenid  dynasty.  Herodotus 
(i.  193)  speaks  of  the  Tigris  as  "  the  river  upon 
which  the  town  of  Nineveh  formerly  stood."  He 
must  have  passed,  in  his  journey  to  Babylon,  very 
near  the  site  of  the  city — perhaps  actually  over 
it.  So  accurate  a  recorder  of  what  he  saw  would 
scarcely  have  omitted  to  mention,  if  not  to  describe, 
any  ruins  of  importance  that  might  have  existed 
there.  Not  two  centuries  had  then  elapsed  since 
the  fiill  of  the  city.  Equally  conclusive  proof  of 
its  condition  is  afibrded  by  Xenophon,  who  with  the 
ten  thousand  Greeks  encampetl  during  his  retreat 
on,  or  very  near,  its  site  (B.C.  401).  The  very 
name  had  then  been  forgotten,  or  at  least  he  does 


term  Nabathaean  as  meaning  old  Babylonian,  and  the 
works  of  Qut'ami  as  the  remains  of  a  Babylonian  litera- 
ture. He  further  identifies  the  Ciinaanitc  dynasty  with 
the  fifth  or  Arabian  dynasty  of  Berosus,  and  adduces  the 
legend  of  Cepheus,  the  king  of  Joppa,  who  reigned  from 
the  Mediterranean  to  the  Erythraean  sea,  in  confirmation 
of  such  a  Canaanitish  invasion.  It  would  be  beyond  our 
province  to  discuss  the  various  questions  raised  by  this 
curious  discovery.  The  result,  if  established,  would  be 
to  bring  the  date  of  Nimrod  down  to  about  B.C.  1500. 

'  The  Arabs  retain  Josephus'  view  of  the  impiety  of 
Nimrod,  and  have  a  collection  of  legends  respecting  his 
idolatry,  his  enmity  against  Abraham,  &c.  (Layard's 
Nineveh,  i.  24,  note). 


NINEVEH 

not  appear  to  have  been  acquainted  with  it,  for  he 
eills  one  group  of  ruins  "  Larissa,"  and  merely  states 
that  a  second  group  was  near  the  deserted  town  of 
Mespila  {Anab.  b.  iii.  4,  §7).  The  ruins,  as  he 
describes  them,  correspond  in  many  respects  with 
those  which  exist  at  the  present  day,  except  that 
he  assigns  to  the  walls  near  Mespila  a  circuit  of 
six  parasangs,  or  nearly  three  times  their  actual 
dimensions.  Ctesias  placed  the  city  on  the  Eu- 
phi'ates  (^Frng.  i.  2),  a  proof  either  of  his  igno- 
rance or  of  the  entire  disappearance  of  the  place. 
He  appears  to  have  led  Diodorus  Siculus  into  the 
same  error  (ii.  27,  28).»  The  historians  of  Alex- 
ander, with  the  exception  of  Arrian  [Ftid.  42,  3),  do 
not  even  allude  to  the  city,  over  the  ruins  of  which 
the  conqueror  must  have  actually  marched.  His 
great  victory  of  Arbela  was  won  almost  in  sight  of 
them.  It  is  evident  that  tlie  later  Greek  and  Roman 
writers,  such  as  Strabo,  Ptolemy,  and  Pliny,  could 
only  have  derived  any  independent  knowledge  they 
possessed  of  Nineveh  from  traditions  of  no  authority. 
They  concur,  however,  in  placing  it  on  the  eastern 
bank  of  the  Tigris.  During  the  Roman  period,  a 
small  castle  or  fortified  town  appears  to  have  stood 
on  some  part  of  the  site  of  the  ancient  city.  It  was 
probably  built  by  the  Persians  (Amm.  Marcell. 
xxiii.  22)  ;  and  subsequently  occupied  by  the  Romahs, 
and  erected  by  the  Emperor  Claudius  into  a  colony. 
It  appears  to  have  borne  the  ancient  traditional 
name  of  Nineve,  as  well  as  its  corrupted  fomi  of 
Niuos  and  Kinus,  and  also  at  one  time  that  of 
Hierapolis.  Tacitus  (^Ann.  xii.  13),  mentioning  its 
capture  by  Meherdates,  calls  it  "  Ninos ;  "  on  coins 
of  Trajan  it  is  "  Minus,"  on  those  of  Maximinus 
"  Niniva,"  in  both  instances  the  epithet  Claudiopolis 
being  added.  Many  Roman  remains,  such  as  sepul- 
chral vases,  bronze  and  other  ornaments,  sculp- 
tured figures  in  marble,  tenacottas,  and  coins,  have 
been  discovered  in  the  rubbish  covering  the  Assyrian 
ruins ;  besides  wells  and  tombs,  constructed  Long 
after  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  edifices.  The 
Roman  settlement  appears  to  have  been  in  its  turn 
abandoned,  for  there  is  no  mention  of  it  when 
Heraclius  gained  the  great  victory  over  the  Per- 
sians in  the  battle  of  Nineveh,  fought  on  the  very 
site  of  the  ancient  city,  A.D.  027.  After  the  Arab 
conquest,  a  fort  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Tigris 
bore  the  name  of  "  Ninawi "  (Rawlinson,  As.  Soc. 
Journal,  vol.  xii.  418).  Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in 
the  12th  century,  mentions  the  site  of  Nineveh  as 
occupied  by  numerous  inhabited  villages  and  small 
townships  (ed.  Asher,  i.  91).  The  name  remained 
attached  to  the  ruins  during  the  Middle  Ages ;  and 
from  them  a  bisho]iof  the  Chaldaean  Church  derived 
his  title  (Assemani,  iv.  459) ;  but  it  is  doubtful 
whether  any  town  or  fort  was  so  called.  Early 
English  travellers  merely  allude  to  the  site  (Pur- 
chas,  ii.  1387).  Nicbuiir  is  the  first  modern  tra- 
veller who  speaks  of  "  Nuniyah  "  as  a  village  stand- 
ing on  one  of  the  ruins  which  he  describes  as  "  a 
considerable  hill "  (ii  353).  This  may  be  a  cor- 
ruption of  "  Nebbi  Yunus,"  the  Prophet  .lonah,  a 
name  still  given  to  a  village  containing  his  apo- 
cryphal tomb.  Mr.  Rich,  who  surveyed  the  site  in 
1820,  does  not  mention  Nuniyah,  and  no  such  place 
now  exists,  'i'ribes  of  Turcomans  and  sedentary 
Arabs,  and  Chaldaean  and  Syrian  Christians,  dwell  in 
small  mud-built  villages,  and  cultivate  the  soil  in  the 


NINEVEH 


547 


"  In  a  frapinpnt  from  Ctesias,  preserved  by  Nicolaus 
D.amaseeniis,  the  city  is  restored  to  its  true  site. 
(Muller,  Frag.  Hist.  Uraec.  iii.  358.) 


country  around  the  ruins  ;  and  occasionally  a  tribe  of 
wandering  Kurds,  or  of  Bedouins  driven  by  huno-er 
from  the  desert,  will  pitch  their  tents  amongst 
them.  After  the  Arab  conquest  of  the  west  of 
Asia,  Mosul,  at  one  time  the  fiourishing  capital  of 
an  independent  kingdom,  rose  on  the  opposite  or 
western  bank  of  the  Tigris.  Some  similarity  in 
the  names  has  suggested  its  identification  with  the 
Mespila  of  Xenophon  :  but  its  first  actual  mention 
only  occurs  after  the  Arab  conquest  (a.ii.  16,  and 
A.D.  637).  It  was  sometimes  known  as  Athur,  and 
was  imited  with  Nineveh  as  an  episcopal  see  of  the 
Chaldaean  Church  (Assemani,  iii.  269).  It  has  lost 
all  its  ancient  prosperity,  and  the  greater  part  of 
the  town  is  now  in  ruins. 

Traditions  of  the  unrivalled  size  and  magnificence 
of  Nineveh  were  equally  familiar  to  the  Greek  and 
Roman  writers,  and  to  the  Arab  geographers.  But 
the  city  had  fallen  so  completely  into  decay  before 
the  period  of  authentic  history,  that  no  description 
of  it,  or  even  of  any  of  its  monuments,  is  to  be 
found  in  any  ancient  author  of  trust.  Diodorus 
Siculus  asserts  (ii.  3)  that  the  city  foiTned  a  quad- 
rangle of  150  stadia  by  90,  or  altogether  of  480 
stadia  (no  less  than  60  miles),  and  was  surrounded  by 
walls  100  feet  high,  broad  enough  for  three  chariots 
to  drive  abreast  upon  them,  and  defended  by  1500 
towers,  each  200  feet  in  height.  According  to  Strabo 
(xvi.  737)  it  was  larger  than  Babylon,  which  was 
385  stadia  in  circuit.  In  the  O.T.  we  find  only  vague 
allusions  to  the  splendour  and  wealth  of  the  city, 
and  the  very  indefinite  statement  in  the  book  of 
Jonah  that  it  was  "  an  exceeding  great  city,"  or 
"  a  great  city  to  God,"  or  "  for  God"  («.  e.  in  the 
sight  of  God),  "  of  three  days'  journey  ;"  and  that 
it  contained  "  six  score  thousand  persons  who  could 
not  discern  between  their  I'ight  hand  and  their  left 
hand,  and  also  much  cattle"  (iv.  11).  It  is  ob- 
vious that  the  accounts  of  Diodorus  are  for  the 
most  part  absurd  exaggerations,  fomided  upon  fabu- 
lous traditions,  for  which  existing  i-emains  afford 
no  warrant.  It  may,  however,  be  remarked  that 
the  dimensions  he  assigns  to  the  area  of  the  city 
would  correspond  to  the  three  days'  jouiniey  of 
Jonah — the  Jewish  day's  journey  being  20  miles — 
if  that  expression  be  applied  to  the  circuit  of  the 
walls.  "  Persons  not  discerning  between  their 
right  hand  and  their  left"  may  either  allude  to 
children,  or  to  the  ignorance  of  the  whole  iiojiulation. 
If  the  first  be  intended,  the  number  of  inhabitants, 
according  to  the  usual  calculation,  would  have 
amounted  to  about  600,000.  But  such  expressions 
are  probably  mere  Eastern  figures  of  speech  to 
denote  vastness,  and  far  too  vague  to  admit  of  e.\act 
interpretation. 

The  political  history  of  Nineveh  is  that  of  As- 
syria, of  which  a  sketch  has  already  been  given. 
[Assyria.]  It  has  been  observed  that  the  territory 
included  within  the  boundaries  of  the  kingdom  of 
Assyria  proper  was  comparatively  limited  in  extent, 
and  that  almost  within  the  immediate  ncighboui-- 
hood  of  the  capital  petty  kings  appear  to  have  ruled 
over  semi-independent  st^ates,  owning  allegiance  and 
plying  tribute  to  the  great  Lord  of  the  Empire, 
"the  King  of  Kings,"  according  to  Ids  Oriental  title, 
who  dwelt  at  Nineveh.  (Cf.  Is.  x.  8  :  "  Are  not 
my  princes  altogether  kings?  ")  These  petty  kings 
were  in  a  constant  state  of  reljellion,  which  usually 
shewed  itself  by  their  lefusal  to  pay  the  apportioned 
tribute — the  principal  link  between  the  sovereign  and 
the  dependent  states — and  lepeated  expalitions  were 
undei-taken  against  tliem  to  enfoice  this  act  of  obe- 
2   N  2 


548 


NINEVEH 


dience.  (Cf.  2  K.  xvi.  7,  xvii.  4,  where  it  is  stated 
that  the  war  made  by  the  Assyrians  upon  the  Jews 
was  for  the  pui-pose  of  enforcing  the  payment  of 
tribute.)  There  was,  consequently,  no  bond  of 
sympathy  arising  out  of  common  interests  between 
the  various  populations  which  made  up  the  empire. 
Its  political  condition  was  essentially  weak.  When 
an  independent'  monarch  was  sufficiently  powerful 
to  carry  on  a  successful  war  against  the  great 
king,  or  a  dependent  prince  sufficiently  strong  to 
throw  off  his  allegiance,  the  empire  soon  came  to 
an  end.  The  M\  of  the  capital  was  the  signal  for 
universal  disruption.  Each  petty  state  asserted  its 
independence,  until  reconquered  by  some  wai'like 
chief  who  could  found  a  new  dynasty  and  a  new 
empire  to  replace  those  which  had  fallen.  Thus 
on  the  borders  of  the  great  rivers  of  Mesopotamia 
arose  in  turn  the  first  Babylonian,  the  Assyrian, 
the  Median,  the  second  Babylonian,  the  Persian, 
and  the  Seleucid  empires.  The  capital  was  how- 
ever invariably  changed,  and  generally  transferred 
to  the  principal  seat  of  the  conquering  race.  In 
the  East  men  have  rarely  rebuilt  great  cities 
which  have  once  fallen  into  decay — never  perhaps 
on  exactly  the  same  site.  If  the  position  of  the  old 
capital  was  deemed,  from  political  or  commercial 
reasons,  move  advantageous  than  any  other,  the 
population  was  settled  in  its  neighbourhood,  as  at 
Delhi,  and  not  amidst  its  ruins.  But  Nineveh, 
having  fallen  with  the  empire,  never  rose  again.  It 
was  abandoned  at  once,  and  suffered  to  perish 
utterly.  It  is  probable  that,  in  conformity  with 
an  Eastern  custom,  of  which  we  find  such  remark- 
able illustrations  in  the  history  of  the  Jews,  the 
entire  population  was  removed  by  the  conqueroi's, 
and  settled  as  colonists  in  some  distant  province. 

The  Bains. — Pi-evious  to  recent  excavations  and 
researches,  the  ruins  which  occupied  the  presumed 
site  of  Nineveh  seemed  to  consist  of  mere  shapeless 
heaps  or  mounds  of  earth  and  rubbish.  Unlike 
the  vast  masses  of  brick  masonry  which  mark  the 
site  of  Babylon,  they  showed  externally  no  signs  of 
artificial  construction,  except  perhaps  here  and  there 
the  traces  of  a  rude  wall  of  sun-dried  bricks.  Some 
of  these  mounds  were  of  enormous  dimensions — 
looking  in  the  distance  rather  like  natural  elevations 
than  the  work  of  men's  hands.  Upon  and  around 
them,  however,  were  scattered  innumerable  frag- 
ments of  pottery — the  unerring  evidence  of  former 
habit<ations.  Some  had  been  chosen  by  the  scat- 
tered population  of  the  land  as  sites  for  villages,  or 
for  small  mud-built  forts,  the  mound  itself  atl'ording 
means  of  refuge  and  defence  against  the  marauding 
parties  of  Bedouins  and  Kurds  which  for  generations 
have  swept  over  the  face  of  the  country.  The 
summits  of  others  were  sown  with  corn  or  barley. 
During  the  spring  months  they  were  covered  with 
grass  and  flowers,  bred  by  tlie  winter  rains.  The 
Arabs  call  these  mounds  "  Tel,"  the  Turcomans  and 
Turks  "  Teppeh,"  both  words  being  equally  applied 
to  natural  hills  and  elevations,  and  the  first  having 
been  used  in  the  same  double  sense  by  the  most 
ancient  Semitic  races  (cf.  Hebrew  ^D,  "  a  hill,"  "a 

mound,"  "a  heap  of  rubbish,"  Ez.  iii.  15,  Ezr.  ii.59; 
Neh.  vii.  61 ;  2  K.  xix.  12).  They  are  found  in 
vast  numbers  throughout  the  wliole  region  watered 
by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  and  their  confluents, 
from  the  Taurus  to  the  Persian  Gulf  They  are 
seen,  but  are  less  numerous,  in  Syria,  parts  of 
Asia  Minor,  and  in  the  plains  of  Armenia.  Where- 
ever  they  have  been  examined  they  appear  to  have 


NINEVEH 

furnished  remams  which  identify  the  period  of 
their  construction  with  that  of  the  alternate  supre- 
macy of  the  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  and  Persian  em- 
pires. They  ditler  greatly  in  form,  size  and  height. 
Some  are  mere  conical  heaps,  varying  from  50  to 
150  feet  high;  others  have  a  broad  fiat  summit, 
and  very  precipitous  clifit-like  sides,  furrowed  by 
deep  ravines  worn  by  the  winter  rains.  Such 
mounds  are  especially  numerous  in  the  region  to 
the  east  of  the  Tigris,  in  which  Nineveh  stood,  and 
some  of  them  must  mark  the  ruins  of  the  As- 
syi'ian  capital.  There  is  no  edifice  mentioned  by 
ancient  authors  as  forming  part  of  the  city,  which 
we  are  requiied,  as  in  the  case  of  Babylon,  to 
identify  with  any  existing  remains,  except  the  tomb, 
according  to  some,  of  Ninus,  according  to  others  of 
Sardanapalus,  which  is  recorded  to  have  stood  at 
the  entrance  of  Nineveh  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  7  ;  Amynt. 
Fraij.  ed.  Miiller,  p.  13ti).  The  only  difficulty  is 
to  determine  which  ruins  are  to  be  comprised 
within  the  actual  limits  of  the  ancient  city.  The 
northern  extremity  of  the  principal  collection  of 
mounds  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Tigris  may  be 
fixed  at  Shereef  Khan,  and  the  southern  at  Nim- 
roud,  about  6^  miles  from  the  junction  of  that 
river  with  the  gi'eat  Zab,  the  ancient  Lycus.  East- 
wdrd  they  extend  to  Khoi'sabad,  about  10  miles 
N.  by  E.  of  Shereef  Khan,  and  to  Karamless,  about 
15  miles  N.E.  of  Nimroud.  Within  the  area  of  this. 
iiTegular  quadrangle  are  to  be  found,  in  every 
direction,  traces  of  ancient  edifices  and  of  former 
population.  It  compiises  various  separate  and  dis- 
tinct groups  of  ruins,  four  of  which,  if  not  more, 
are  the  remains  of  tbitified  inclosures  or  strong- 
holds, defended  by  walls  and  ditches,  towers  and 
ramparts.  The  principal  are — 1,  the  group  imme- 
diately opposite  Mosul,  including  the  great  mounds 
of  Kouyunjik  (also  called  by  the  Arabs,  Armoushee- 
yah)  and  Nebbi  Yunus ;  2,  that  near  the  junction 
of  the  Tigris  and  Zab,  comprising  the  moimds  of 
Nimroud  and  Athur ;  3,  Khorsabad,  about  10  miles 
to  the  east  of  the  former  river ;  4,  Shereef  Khan, 
about  5J  miles  to  the  north  of  Kouyunjik  ;  and  5, 
Selamiyah,  3  miles  to  the  north  of  Nimroud. 
Other  large  mounds  are  Baaskeikhah,  and  Karam- 
less, where  the  remains  of  fortified  inclosures  may 
perhaps  be  traced,  Baazani,  Yarumjeh,  and  Bella wat. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe  that  all  these 
names  are  comparatively  modern,  dating  from  after 
the  Mohammedan  conquest.  The  respective  position 
of  these  ruins  will  be  seen  in  the  accompanying 
map  (p.  549).  We  will  describe  the  most  important. 
The  ruins  opposite  Mosul  consist  of  an  inclo- 
sure  formed  by  a  continuous  line  of  mounds,  le- 
sembling  a  vast  embankment  of  earth,  but  marking 
the  remains  of  a  wall,  the  western  face  of  which  is 
interrupted  by  the  two  great  mounds  of  Kouyunjik 
and  Nebbi  Yunus  (p.  550).  To  the  e-ast  of  this  inclo- 
sure  are  the  remains  of  an  extensive  line  of  defences, 
consisting  of  moats  and  ramparts.  The  inner  wall 
forms  an  irregular  quadrangle  with  very  unequal 
sides — the  northern  being  2333  yards,  the  western, 
or  the  river-face,  4533,  the  eastern  (where  the 
wall  is  almost  the  segment  of  a  circle)  5300  yards, 
and  the  southern  but  little  more  than  1000;  alto- 
gether 13,200  yards,  or  7  English  miles  4  fur- 
longs. The  present  height  of  this  earthen  wall  is 
between  4u  and  50  feet.  Here  and  theie  a  mound 
more  lofty  than  the  rest  covers  tlie  remains  of  a 
tower  or  a  gateway.  The  walls  appear  to  have 
been  originally  faced,  at  least  to  a  certain  height, 
witli  stone  masonry,  some  remains  of  which  have 


NINEVEH 

been  discovered.  'J'lie  mound  of  Kouyunjik  is  of 
irregular  form,  being  nearly  square  at  the  S.VV". 
corner,  and  ending  almost  in  a  point  at  the  N.E. 
It  is  about  1300  yards  in  length,  by  500  in  its 
greatest  width  ;  its  greatest  heiglit  is  96  feet,  and 
.  its  sides  are  precipitous,  with  occasional  deep  ravines 
or  watercourses.  The  summit  is  nearly  flat,  but  falls 
from  the  \V.  to  the  E.  A  small  village  formerly  stood 
upon  it,  but  has  of  late  years  been  abandoned.  The 
Khosr,  a  nairow  but  deep  and  sluggish  stream, 
sweeps  round  the  southern  side  of  the  mound  on  its 


NINEYEH 


549 


way  tojnnithe  Tigris.  Anciently  dividing  itself  into 
two  branches,  it  completely  suiTounded  Kouyunjik. 
Nebbi  Yunus  is  considerably  smaller  than  Kouyunjik, 
being  about  530  yards  by  430,  and  occupying  an 
area  of  about  40  acres.  In  height  it  is  about  the 
same.  It  is  divided  into  two  nearly  equal  parts  bv 
a  depression  in  the  surface.  Upon  it  is  a  Turcoman 
village  containing  the  apocryphal  tomb  of  .Jonah, 
and  a  burial-ground  held  in  great  sanctitv  bv  Mo- 
hanmiedans  from  its  vicinity  to  this  sacred  edifice. 
Kemains  of  entrances  or  gateways  have  been  dis- 


rian  of  ruiin  which  i 


650 


NINEVEH 


covered  in  the  N.  and  E.  walls  (6).  The  Tigi-is 
formerly  ran  beneath  the  W.  wall,  and  at  the  toot 
of  the  two  great  mounds.  It  is  now  about  a  mile 
distant  from  them,  but  during  very  high  spring 
floods  it  sometimes  reaches  its  ancient  bed.  The 
VV.  face  of  the  inclosure  (rt)  was  thus  protected  by 


Plan  of  Kouyunjik  and  Nebbi  Tunus. 

the  river.  The  N.  and  S.  faces  (6  and  d)  were 
strengthened  by  deep  and  broad  moats.  The  E.  (c) 
being  most  accessible  to  an  enemy,  was  most  strongly 
fortified,  and  presents  the  remains  of  a  very  elaborate 
system  of  defences.  The  Khosr,  before  entering  the 
inclosure,  which  it  divides  into  two  nearly  equal 
parts,  ran  for  some  distance  almost  parallel  to  it  (/), 
and  supplied  the  place  of  an  ai'tificial  ditch  for  about 
half  the  length  of  the  E.  wall.  The  remainder  of 
the  wall  was  protected  by  two  wide  moats  (A), 
fed  by  the  stream,  the  supply  of  water  being  regu- 
lated by  dams,  of  which  traces  still  exist.  In 
addition,  one  or  more  ramparts  of  earth  were 
thrown  up,  and  a  moat  e.\cavated  between  the 
inner  walls  and  the  Khosr,  the  eastern  bank  of 
which  was  very  considerably  raised  by  artificial 
means.     Below,  or  to  the  S.  of  the  stream,  a  third 


Moand  of  Nimmud 


NINEVEH 

ditch,  excavated  in  the  compact  conglomerate  rock, 
and  about  200  feet  broad,  extended  almost  the  whole 
length  of  the  E.  face,  joining  the  moat  on  the  S. 
An  enoi-mous  outer  rampart  of  earth,  still  in  some 
places  above  80  feet  in  height  (i),  completed  the 
defences  on  this  side.  A  few  mounds  outside  this 
rampart  probably  mark  the  sites 
of  detached  towers  or  fortified 
posts.  This  elaborate  system  of 
fortifications  was  singularly  well 
devised  to  resist  the  attacks  of 
an  enemy.  It  is  remarkable  that 
within  the  inclosure,  with  the 
exception  of  Kouyunjik  and  Nebbi 
yunus,  no  mounds  or  irregulari- 
ties in  the  surface  of  the  soil 
denote  ruins  of  any  size.  The 
ground  is,  however,  strewed  in 
every  direction  with  fragments 
of  brick,  pottery,  and  the  usual 
signs  of  ancient  population. 

Nimroud  consists  of  a  similar 
inclosure  of  consecutive  mounds 
— the  remains  of  ancient  walls. 
The  system  of  defences  is  how- 
ever very  inferior  in  importance 
and  completeness  to  that  of  Kou- 
yunjik. The  indications  of  towers 
occur  at  regular  inteifals ;  108 
may  still  be  traced  on  the  N. 
and  E.  sides.  The  area  forms 
an  irregular  square,  about  233  J 
yards  by  2095,  containing  about 
1000  acres.  The  N.  and  E.  sides 
were  defended  by  moats,  the  W. 
and  S.  walls  by  the  river,  which 
once  flowed  immediately  beneath 
them.  On  the  S.W.  face  is  a 
great  mound,  700  yards  by  400, 
and  covering  about  60  acres, 
with  a  cone  or  pyramid  of  earth  about  140  feet 
high  rising  in  the  N.W.  corner  of  it.  At  the  S.E. 
angle  of  the  inclosure  is  a  gi-oup  of  lofty  mounds 
called  by  the  Arabs,  after  Nimroud's  lieutenant, 
Athur  (cf.  Gen.  x.  11).  According  to  the  Arab 
geographers  this  name  at  one  time  applied  to  all 
the  ruins  of  Nimroud  (Layard,  Nin.  and  its  Hem. 
ii.  245,  note).  Within  the  inclosure  a  few  slight 
in-egularities  in  the  soil  mark  the  sites  of  ancient 
habitations,  but  there  are  no  indications  of  ruins  of 
buildings  of  any  size.  Fragments  of  brick  and 
pottery  abound.  The  Tigris  is  now  1^  mile  distant 
from  the  mound,  but  sometimes  reaches  them  during 
extraordinary  floods. 

The  inclosure-walls  of  Khorsabad  form  a  square 
of  about  2000  yards.  They  show  the  remains  of 
There  are  apparently  no 
traces  of  moats  oi' 
ditches.  The  mound 
which  gives  its  name 
to  this  group  of  ruins 
rises  on  the  N.W. 
face.  It  may  be  di- 
vided into  two  parts 
or  stages,  the  upper 
about  650  ft.  square, 
and  30  ft.  high,  and 
the  lower  adjoining 
it,  about  1350  by 
300.  Its  summit 
was  formeily  occu- 
pied by  an  Arab  vil- 


towers  and   gateways. 


NINEVEH  NINEVEH  55I 

lage.  In  one  corner  there  is  a  pyramid  or  cone, 
similar  to  that  at  Nimroud,  but  very  inferior  in 
height  and  size.  Within  tlie  interior  are  a  few 
mounds  marking  the  sites  of  propylaea  and  similar 
detached  monuments,  but  no  traces  of  considerable 
buildings.  These  ruins  were  known  to  the  early 
Arab  geographers  by  the  name  of  "  Saraouu,"  pro- 
bably a  traditional  corruption  of  the  name  of  Sar- 
gon,  the  king  who  founded  the  palaces  discovered 
there. 

Shereef  Khan,  so  called  from  a  small  village  in 
the  neighbourhood,  consists  of  a  group  of  mounds 
of  no  great,  size  when  compared  with  other  Assy- 
rian ruins,  and  without  traces  of  an  outer-wall. 
Selamiyah  is  an  inclosure  of  irregular  form,  situated 
upon  a  high  bank  overlooking  the  Tigris,  about 
5U0O  yards  in  circuit,  and  containing  an  area  of 
about  410  acres,  ajipm-ently  once  surrounded  by 
a  ditch  or  moat.  It  contains  no  mound  or  ruin, 
and  even  the  earthen  rampart  which  marks  the 
walls  has  in  many  places  nearly  disappeared.  The 
name  is  derived  from  an  Arab  town  once  of  some 
importance,  but  now  reduced  to  a  miserable  village 
inhabited  by  Turcomans. 

The  greater  part  of  the  discoveries  which,  of  late 
years,  have  thiown  so  much  light  upon  the  history 
and  condition  of  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  Nineveh 
were  made  m  the  ruins  of  Nimroud,  Kouyunjik, 
and  Khorsabad.  The  first  traveller  who  carefully 
e.xamined  the  supposed  site  of  the  city  was  Mr. 
Rich,  formerly  political  agent  for  the  lilast  India 
Company  at  Baghdad  ;  but  his  investigations  were 
almost  entirely  confined  to  Kouyunjik  and  the  sur- 
rounding mounds,  of  which  he  made  a  survey  in 
1820.  From  tiiem  he  obtained  a  few  relics,  such 
as  inscribed  pottery  and  bricks,  cylinders,  and  gems. 
Some  time  before  a  bas-relief  representing  men  and 
animals  had  been  discovered,  but  had  been  destroyed 
by  the  Mohammedans.  He  subsequently  visited  the 
mound  of  Nimroud,  of  which,  however,  he  was 
unable  to  make  more  than  a  hasty  e.\amination 
{Narrative  of  a  Residence  in  Kurdistan,  ii.  131). 
Several  travellers  described  the  ruins  after  Mr.  Rich, 
but  no  attempt  was  made  to  explore  them  S3'ste- 
matically  until  M.  Botta  was  appointed  French 
consul  at  Mosul  in  1843.  Whilst  excavating  in  the 
mound  of  Khorsabad,  to  which  he  had  been  directed 
by  a  peasant,  he  discovered  a  row  of  upright  ala- 
baster slabs,  forming  the  panelling  or  skirting  of 
•the  lower  part  of  the  walls  of  a  chamber.  This 
chamber  was  found  to  communicate  with  others  of 
similar  construction,  and  it  soon  became  evident 
that  the  remains  of  an  edifice  of  considerable  size 
were  buried  in  the  mound.  The  French  Govern- 
ment having  given  the  necessary  funds,  the  ruins 
were  fully  explored.  They  consisted  of  the  lower 
part  of  a  number  of  lialls,  rooms,  and  passages,  lor 
the  most  pai't  wainscoted  witli  slabs  of  coarse  gray 
alabaster,  sculj)tur('il  with  figures  in  relief,  the  prin- 
cipal entrances  being  formeil  Ijy  colossal  human- 
heailed  winged  bulls.  No  remains  of  exterior  archi- 
tecture of  any  groat  importance  were  discovered. 
The  calcined  limestone  and  the  great  accumulation 
of  charred  wood  and  charcoal  showed  that  the 
building  liad  been  destroyed  by  H)-e.  Jts  up])er  jwrt 
had  entirely  disa])])eared,  and  its  general  jilan  could 
only  be  restored  by  the  remains  of  the  lower  story. 
The  collection  of  Assyrian  sculptures  in  the  Louvre 
ciime  from  these  ruins. 

^  It  must  be  observed,  once  for  all,  that  whilst  the    to  the  latest  interpretations  of  the  cuneiform  inscrip- 

Assyrian  proper  niuncsare  given  in  tlic  text  according    tions,  they  are  very  itoubtl'ul. 


The  excavations  subsequently  cariied  ou  by  JIM. 
Place  and  Fresnel  at  Khoi-sabad  led  to  the  discoveiy, 
in  the  inclosure  below  the  platform,  of  propylaea, 
flanked  by  colossal  kuman-headed  bulls,  and  of  other 
detached  buildings  forming  the  approaches  to  the 
palace,  and  also  of  some  of  the  gateways  in  the 
inclosure-walls,  ornamented  with  similar  mythic 
figures. 

M.  Botta's  discoveries  at  Khorsabad  were  followed 
by  those  of  Mr.  Layard  at  Nimroud  and  Kouyunjik, 
made  between  the  years  1845  and  1850.  The 
momid  of  Nimroud  was  found  to  contain  the  ruins  of 
several  distinct  edifices,  erected  at  different  periods 
— materials  for  the  construction  of  the  latest  hav- 
ing been  taken  from  an  earlier  building.  The  most 
ancient  stood  at  the  N.W.  corner  of  the  platfoim, 
the  most  recent  at  the  S.E.  In  general  plan  and 
in  construction  they  resembled  the  ruins  at  IChoisa- 
bad — consisting  of  a  number  of  halls,  chambers, 
and  galleries,  panelled  with  sculptured  and  inscribed 
alaljaster  slabs,  and  opening  one  into  the  other  by 
doorways  generally  formed  by  pairs  of  colossal 
human-headed  winged  bulls  or  lions.  Tlie  exterior 
architecture  could  not  be  traced.  The  lofty  cone 
or  pyramid  of  earth  ailjoining  this  edifice  covered 
the  ruins  of  a  building  the  basement  of  which  was 
a  square  of  165  feet,  and  consisted,  to  the  height 
of  20  feet,  of  a  solid  mass  of  sun-dried  bricks,  faced 
on  the  four  sides  by  blocks  of  stone  carefully 
squared,  bevelled,  and  adjusted.  This  stone  facing 
singularly  enough  coincides  exactly  with  the  height 
assigned  by  Xeuophon  to  the  stone  plinth  of  the 
wails  {Anab.  iii.  4),  and  is  surmounted,  as  he 
describes  the  plinth  to  have  been,  by  a  super- 
structure of  bricks,  nearly  every  kiln-burnt  brick 
bearing  an  inscription.  Upon  this  solid  substructure 
there  probably  rose,  as  in  the  Babylonian  temples,  a 
succession  of  platforms  or  stages,  diminishing  in 
size,  the  highest  having  a  shrine  or  altar  upon  it 
(Babel;  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  ch.  v.).  A 
vaulted  chamber  or  gallery,  100  feet  long,  6  broad, 
and  12  high,  crossed  the  centre  of  the  mound  on  a 
level  with  the  summit  of  the  stone-masonry.  It 
had  evidently  been  broken  into  and  rifled  of  its  con- 
tents at  some  remote  period,  and  may  have  been  a 
royal  sepulchre — the  tomb  of  Ninus,  or  Sardana- 
palus,  which  stood  at  the  entrance  of  Nineveh.  It 
is  the  tower  described  by  Xenophon  at  Larissa  as 
being  1  plethron  (100  feet)  broad  and  2  plethra 
high.  It  appears  to  have  been  raised  by  the  son  ot' 
the  king  who  built  the  N.W.  palace,  and  whose 
name  in  the  cuneiform  insciiptions  is  supposed  to  be 
identified  with  that  of  Sardanapalus.  Shalmanubar 
or  Shalmaiieser,!'  the  builder  of  this  tomb  or  tower, 
also  erected  in  the  centre  of  the  great  mound  a 
second  palace,  which  appears  to  have  been  destroyed 
to  furnish  materials  for  later  buildings.  The  black 
obelisk  now  in  the  British  Museimi  was  found 
amongst  its  ruins.  On  the  W.  face  of  the  mound, 
and  adjoining  the  centre  palace,  are  the  remains 
of  a  third  edifice,  built  by  the  grandson  of  Shal- 
manubar, whose  name  is  road  Iva-Lush,  and  who 
is  believed  to  be  the  Pul  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures. It  contained  some  important  inscribed  slabs, 
but  no  sculptures.  Essarhadilon  raised  (about  u.C. 
()80)  at  the  iS.W.  corner  of  the  platlonn  another 
loyal  abode  of  considerable  extent,  but  constructed 
principally  with  materials  brought  I'rom  his  prede- 
cessor's palaces.      In  the  opposite  or  S.K.  corner 


552 


NINEVEH 


are  the  ruins  of  a  still  later  palace  built  by  his 
srandson  Ashur-emit-ili,  very  interior  in  size  and 
in  splendour  to  other  Assyrian  edifices.  Its  rooms 
were  small  ;  it  appears  to  have,  had  no  great  halls, 


and  the  cliambois  were  panelled  with  slabs  ot'  com- 
mon stone  without  sculpture  or  inscriptions.  Some 
impoitant  detached  figures,  believed  to  bear  the 
name  of  the  historical  Serairamis,  were,  however, 


NINEVEH 

found  in  its  ruins.  At  the  S.W.  corner  of  the 
mound  of  Kouyunjiiv  stood  a  palace  built  by  Sen- 
nacherib (about  B.C.  700),  exceeding  in  size  ;kud 
in  magnificence  of  decoration  all  others  hitherto 
explored.  It  occupied  nearly  100  acres.  Al- 
thousjh  much  of  the  building  yet  remains  to  be 
examined,  and  much  has  altogether  perished,  about 
Go  courts,  halls  (some  nearly  150  feet  square), 
rooms,  and  passages  (one  200  feet  long),  have  been 
discovered,  all  panelled  with  sculptured  slabs  of 
alabaster.  The  entrances  to  the  edifice  and  to  the 
principal  chambers  were  flanked  by  groups  of  winged 
human-headed  lions  and  bulls  of  colossal  propor- 
tions— some  nearly  20  feet  in  height;  27  portals 
thus  formed  were  excavated  bv  Mr.  Layard.  A 
second  palate  was  erected  on  the  same  plattonu 
by  the  son  of  Essarhaddon,  the  third  king  of  tlie 
name  of  Sardanapalus.  In  it  were  discovered 
sculptures  of  great  interest  and  beauty,  amongst 
them  the  series  representing  the  lion-hunt  now  in 
the  British  Museum.  Owing  to  the  sanctity  at- 
tiibuted  by  Mohammedans  ti)  the  supposed  tomb 
of  Jonah,  great  difficulties  were  experienced  in  ex- 
amining the  mound  upon  which  it  stands.  A 
shaft  sunk  within  the  walls  of  a  private  house  led 
to  the  discovery  of  sculptured  slabs ;  and  excava- 
tions subsequently  carried  on  by  agents  of  the 
Turkish  Government  proved  that  they  formed  part 
of  a  palace  erected  by  Essarhaddon.  Two  entrances 
or  gateways  in  the  great  inclosure-walls  have  been 
excavated — one  (at  b  on  plan)  flanked  by  colossal 
human-headed  bulls  and  human  figures.  They,  as 
well  as  the  walls,  appear,  according  to  the  inscrip- 
tions, to  have  been  constructed  by  Sennacherib. 
No  propylaea  or  detached  buildings  have  as  yet  been 
discovered  within  the  inclosure.  At  Shereeft"  Khan 
are  the  ruins  of  a  temple,  but  no  sculptured  slabs 
have  been  dug  up  there.  It  was  founded  by  Sen- 
naclierib,  and  added  to  by  his  grandson.  At  Sela- 
miyah  no  remains  of  buildings  nor  any  fi'agments  of 
sculpture  or  inscriptions  have  been  discovered. 

The  Assyrian  edifices  were  so  nearly  alike  in 
general  plan,  construction,  and  decoration,  that  one 
description  will  sutTice  for  all.  They  were  built 
upon  artificial  mounds  or  platforms,  varying  in 
height,  but  generally  from  30  to  50  feet  above  the 
level  of  the  sm-rounding  country,  and  solidly  con- 
stinacted  of  regular  layers  of  sun-dried  bricks,  as  at 
Nimroud,  or  consisting  merely  of  earth  and  rubbish 
heapeil  up,  as  at  Kouyunjik.  The  mode  of  raising* 
the  latter  kind  of  mound  is  represented  in  a  series 
of  bas-reliefs,  in  which  captives  and  prisoners  are 
seen  amongst  the  workmen  (Layard,  Mon.  of  Nin. 
2nd  series,  pi.  14, 15).  This  platform  was  probably 
faced  with  stone-masonry,  remains  of  which  were 
discovered  at  Nimroud,  and  broad  flights  of  steps 
(such  as  were  found  at  Khorsabad)  or  inclined 
ways  led  up  to  its  summit.  Although  only  the 
general  plan  of  the  giound-fioor  can  now  be  traced, 
it  is  evident  that  the  palaces  had  several  stories 
built  of  wood  and  sun-dried  bricks,  which,  when  the 
building  was  deserted  and  allowed  to  fall  to  decay, 
gradually  buiied  the  lower  chambers  with  their 
ruins,  and  protected  the  sculptured  slabs  from  the 
efiects  of  the  weather.  The  depth  of  soil  and 
rubbish  above  the  alabaster  slabs ,  varied  from  a 
few  inches  to  about  20  feet.  It  is  to  this  accumu- 
lation of  rubbish  above  tbem  that  the  bas-reliefs 
owe  their  extraordinary  preservation.  The  portions 
of  the  edifices  still  remaining  consist  of  halls,  cham- 
bers, and  galleries,  opening  for  the  most  part  into 
large  uncovered  courts.     The  partition  walls  vary 


NINEVEH 

from  6  to  15  feet  in  thickness,  and  are  solidly 
built  of  sun-dried  biicks,  against  whicli  are  placed 
the  panelling  or  skirting  ot'  alabaster  slabs.  No 
windows  have  hitherto  been  discovered,  and  it  is 
probable  that  in  most  of  the  smaller  chambers  light 
was  only  admitted  through  the  doors.  The  wall, 
above  the  wainscoting  of  alabaster,  was  plastered, 
and  painted  with  figures  and  ornaments.  The  pave- 
ment was  formed  either  of  inscribed  slabs  of  alabaster, 
or  large  flat  kiln-burnt  bricks.  It  rested  upon  layers 
of  bitumen  and  line  sand.  Of  nearly  similar  con- 
struction are  the  modern  houses  of  Mosul,  the  archi- 
tecture of  which  has  probably  been  preserved  from 
the  earliest  times  as  that  best  suited  to  the  climate 
and  to  the  maimers  and  wants  of  an  Oriental  people. 
The  rooms  are  grouped  in  the  same  manner  round 
ojien  courts  or  large  halls.  The  same  alabaster, 
usually  carved  with  ornaments,  is  used  for  wains- 
coting the  apartments,  and  the  walls  are  constructed 
of  sun-dried  bricks.  Tlie  upper  part  and  the  ex- 
ternal architecture  of  the  Assyrian  palaces,  both 
of  which  have  entirely  disappeared,  can  only  be 
restored  conjecturally,  from  a  comparison  of  monu- 
ments represented  in  the  bas-reliefs,  and  of  edilices 
built  by  nations,  such  as  the  Persians,  who  took 
their  arts  from  the  Assyrians.  By  such  means 
Rlr.  Fergusson  has,  with  much  ingenuity,  attempted 
to  reconstruct  a  palace  of  Nineveh  {The  Palaces  of 
Nineveh  and  Persepolis  restored).  He  presumes 
that  the  upper  stories  were  built  entirely  of  sun- 
dried  bricks  and  wood — a  supposition  warranted  by 
the  absence  of  stone  and  marble  columns,  and  of 
remains  of  stone  and  burnt-brick-masonry  in  the 
rubbish  and  soil  which  cover  and  surround  the 
ruins  ;  that  the  exterior  was  richly  sculptured  and 
painted  with  figures  and  ornaments,  or  decorated 
with  enamelled  bricks  of  bright  colours,  and  that 
light  was  admitted  to  the  principal  chambers  on 
tiie  ground-Hoor  through  a  kind  of  gallery  which 
ibrmed  tlie  upper  part  of  them,  and  upon  which 
rested  the  wooden  pillars  necessary  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  superstructure.  The  capitals  and 
various  details  of  these  pillars,  the  friezes  and 
architectural  ornaments,  he  restores  from  the  stone 
columns  and  other  remains  at  Persepolis.  He  con- 
jectures that  curtains,  suspended  between  the  pillars, 
kept  out  the  glaring  light  of  the  sun,  and  that  the 
ceilings  were  of  wood-work,  elaborately  painted  with 
patterns  similar  to  those  represented  in  the  sculp- 
tures, and  probably  ornamented  with  gold  and  ivory. 
The  discovery  at  Khorsabu<l  of  an  arched  entrance 
of  considerable  size  and  depth,  constructed  of  sun- 
dried  and  kiln-burnt  bricks,  the  latter  enamelled 
with  figures,  leads  to  the  inference  that  some  of  the 
smaller  chambers  may  have  been  vaulted. 

The  sculptures,  witii  the  exception  of  the  human- 
headed  lions  and  ))ulls,  were  for  the  most  part  in 
low  r^ef  The  colossal  figures  usually  represent 
the  king,  his  attendants,  and  the  gods ;  the  smaller 
sculptures,  which  either  cover  the  whole  face  of 
the  slab,  or  are  divided  into  two  compartments  by 
biUids  of  inscriptions,  represent  liattles,  sieges,  the 
chase,  single  combats  with  wild  lieasts,  religious 
ceremonies,  &c.  &c.  All  refer  to  public  or  national 
events ;  the  hunting-scenes  evidently  recording  the 
prowess  and  personal  valour  of  the  king  as  the 
head  of  the  people — "  the  mighty  luinter  before 
the  Lord."  The  sculptures  appear  to  have  been 
painted — remains  of  colour  having  been  found  on 
most  of  them.  Thus  decorated,  without  and  within, 
tlie  Assyrian  palaces  must  have  displayed  a  bar- 
baric magniticenco,  not   however   (U'void   of  a  cer- 


NINEVEH 


553 


tain  grandeur  and  beauty,  which  uo  ancient  or 
modern  edifice  has  probably  exceeded.  Amongst  the 
small  objects,  undoubtedly  of  the  Assyrian  period, 
found  in  the  ruins,  were  copper-vessels  (some  em- 
bossed and  incised  with  figures  of  men  and  animals 
and  graceful  ornaments),  bells,  various  instruments 
and  tools  of  copper  and  iron,  arms  (such  as  spear 
and  arrow  heads,  swords,  daggers,  shields,  helmets, 
and  fragments  of  chain  and  plate  armour),  ivory 
ornaments,  glass  bowls  and  vases,  alabaster  urns, 
figures  and  other  objects  in  terra-cotta,  pottery, 
parts  of  a  throne,  inscribed  cylinders  and  seals  of 
agate  and  other  precious  materials,  and  a  few  de- 
tached statues.  All  these  objects  show  great  me- 
chanical skill  and  a  correct  and  refined  taste,  in- 
dicating considerable  advance  in  civilization. 

These  great  edifices,  the  depositories  of  the  na- 
tional records,  appear  to  have  been  at  the  same  time 
the  abode  of  the  king  and  the  temple  of  the  gods — 
thus  corresponding,  as  in  Egypt,  with  the  character 
of  the  monarch,  who  was  both  the  political  and 
religious  chief  of  the  nation,  the  special  favoui'ite 
of  the  deities,  and  the  interpreter  of  their  decrees. 
No  building  has  yet  been  discovered  which  possesses 
any  distinguishing  features  to  mark  it  specially  as  a 
temple.  They  are  all  precisely  similar  in  general 
plan  and  construction.  Most  probably  a  part  of  the 
palace  was  set  apart  for  religious  worship  and  cere- 
monies. Altars  of  stone,  resembling  the  (jreek  tripod 
in  form,  have  been  found  in  some  of  the  chambei's 
— in  one  instance  before  a  figure  of  the  king  him- 
self (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  351).  According  to 
the  inscriptions,  it  would,  however,  appear  that  the 
Assyrian  monarchs  bidlt  temples  of  great  magnifi- 
cence at  Nineveh,  and  in  various  parts  of  the  empire, 
and  profusely  adorned  them  with  gold,  silver,  and 
other  precious  materials. 

Site  of  the  Citi/. — Much  diversity  of  opinion 
exists  as  to  the  identification  of  the  ruins  which 
may  be  properly  included  within  the  site  of  ancient 
Nineveh.  According  to  Sir  H.  Kawlinson  and  tliose 
who  concur  in  his  interpretation  of  the  cuneiform 
characters,  each  group  of  mounds  we  have  described 
re]n'esents  a  separate  and  distinct  city.  The  name 
applied  in  the  inscriptions  to  Nimroud  is  supposed 
to  read  "  Kalkhu,"  and  the  ruins  are  consequently 
identified  with  those  of  the  Calah  of  Genesis  {x.  11); 
Khorsabad  is  Sargiiia,  as  founded  by  Sargon,  the 
name  iiavingbeen  retained  in  that  of  Sarghun,  or  Sa- 
raoun,  by  which  the  ruins  were  known  to  the  Arab 
geographers;  Shereef  Khanis  Tarbisi.  Selamiyah  has 
not  yet  been  identified,  no  inscription  having  been 
found  in  the  ruins.  The  name  of  Nineveh  is  limited 
to  the  mounds  opposite  Mosul,  including  Kou- 
yunjik  and  Nebbi  Yunus.  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  was  at 
one  time  incMned  to  exclude  even  the  former  mound 
from  the  precincts  of  the  city  (Journ.  of  As.  Soc. 
xii.  418).  Furthermore,  Jhe  ancient  and  primitive 
capital  of  Assyria  is  supposed  to  have  been  not 
Nineveh,  but  a  city  named  Asshur,  whose  ruins 
have  been  discovered  at  Kalah  Slierghat,  a  mound 
on  the  right  or  W.  bank  of  the  Tigris,  about  00 
miles  S.  of  Mosul.  It  need  scarcely  be  observed 
that  this  theory  rests  entirely  upon  the  presumed 
accuracy  of  the  interpretation  of  the  cuneiform 
inscriptions,  and  that  it  is  totally  at  variance  with 
the  accounts  and  traditions  preserved  by  sacreti  and 
classic:d  history  of  the  antiquity,  size,  and  impor- 
tance of  Nineveh.  The  area  of  the  inclosure  of 
Kouyunjik,  about  1800  acres,  is  far  too  small  to 
represent  the  site  of  the  city,  built  as  it  must  have 
been  in  accordance  with  eastern  customs  and  man- 


554 


NINEVEH 


ners,  even  after  allowing  for  every  exaggeration  on 
the  part  of  ancient  writers.  Captain  Jones  ( To- 
pography  of  Nineveh,  Journ.  of  H.  Asiat.  Soc.  xv. 
p.  324-)  computes  that  it  would  confcvin  171:,000 
inhabitants,  50  square  yards  being  given  i.o  each 
person ;  but  the  basis  of  this  calculation  would 
scarcely  apply  to  any  modern  Eastern  city.  If 
Kouyunjik  represents  Nineveh,  and  Nimroud  Calah, 
where  are  we  to  place  Reseii,  "  a  great  city  "  be- 
tween the  two?  (Gen.  x.  12.)  Scarcely  at  Sela- 
miyah,  only  three  miles  from  Nimroud,  and  where 
no  ruins  of  any  importance  e.xist.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  these  groups 
of  mounds  are  not  ruins  of  separate  cities,  but  of 
fortified  royal  residences,  each  combining  palaces, 
temples,  propylaea,  gardens,  and  parks,  and  having 
its  peculiar  name ;  and  that  they  all  formed  part 
of  one  great  city  built  and  added  to  at  diH'eient 
periods,  and  consisting  of  distinct  quarters  scattered 
over  a  very  large  area,  and  frequently  very  distant 
one  from  the  other.  Nineveh  might  thus  be  com- 
pared with  Damascus,  Ispahan,  or  perhaps  more 
appropriately  with  Delhi,  a  city  rebuilt  at  various 
periods,  but  never  on  exactly  the  same  site,  and 
whose  ruins  consequently  'Cover  an  area  but  little 
inferior  to  that  assigned  to  the  capital  of  Assyria. 
The  primitive  site,  the  one  upon  which  Nineveh 
was  originally  founded,  may  possibly  have  been 
that  occupied  by  the  mound  of  Kouyunjik.  It  is 
thus  alone  that  the  ancient  descriptions  of  Nineveh, 
if  any  value  whatever  is  to  be  attached  to  them, 
can  be  reconciled  with  existing  remains.  The  ab- 
sence of  all  traces  of  buildings  of  any  size  within 
the  inclosures  of  Nimroud,  Kouyunjik,  and  Khor- 
sabad,  and  the  existence  of  propylaea  forming  part 
of  the  approaches  to  the  palace,  beneath  and  at  a 
considerable  distance  from  the  great  mound  at 
Khorsabad,  seem  to  add  weight  to  this  conjecture. 
Even  Sir  H.  Kawlinson  is  compelled  to  admit  that 
all  the  ruins  may  have  formed  part  of  "  that  group 
of  cities,  which  in  the  time  of  the  prophet  .Jonah, 
was  known  by  the  common  name  of  Nineveh  "  {On 
the  Inscriptions  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  Journ. 
As.  Soc).  But  the  existence  of  fortified  palaces  is 
consistent  with  Oriental  custom,  and  with  authentic 
descriptions  of  ancient  Eastern  cities.  Such  were 
the  residences  of  the  kings  of  Babylon,  the  walls  of 
the  largest  of  which  were  GO  stadia,  or  7  miles  in 
circuit,  or  little  less  than  those  of  Kouyunjik,  and 
considerably  greater  than  those  of  Nimroud  [Ba- 
bylon]. The  Persians,  who  appear  to  have  closelv 
imitated  the  Assyrians  in  most  things,  constructed 
similar  fortified  jiarks,  or  paradises — as  they  were 
called — w^hich  included  royal  dwelling  places  (Quint. 
Curt.  1.  7,  c.  8).  Indeed,  if  the  interpretation  of 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  is  to  be  trusted,  the 
Assyrian  palaces  were  of  precisely  the  same  cha- 
lacter;  for  that  built  Ijy  Essarhaddon  at  Nebbi 
.  Yunus,  is  stated  to  ha\'e  beeu  so  large  that  horses 
and  other  animals  were  not  only  kept,  but  even 
bred  within  its  walls  (Fox  Talbot,  Assyr.  Texts 
translated,  17,  18).  It  is  evident  that  this  de- 
scription cannot  apply  to  a  building  occupying  so 
confined  an  area  as  the  summit  of  this  mound,  but 
to  a  vast  inclosed  space.  This  aggregation  of 
strongholds  may  illustrate  the  allusion  in  Nahum 
(iii.  14),  "  Draw  thee  waters  for  the  siege,  fortify 

■^  To  support  the  theory  of  the  ancient  capital  of 
Assyi-ia  being  Asshur,  a  further  identification  is  re- 
quired of  two  kini?s  whose  names  are  read  Tiglath- 
piieser,  one  found  in  a  ruck-cut  inscription  at  Bavian 


NINEVEH 

thy  strong  holds,"  and  "  repair  thy  fortified  ])laces." 
They  were  probably  surrounded  by  the  dwellings 
of  the  mass  of  the  population,  either  collected  in 
groups,  or  scattered  singly  in  the  midst  of  fields, 
orchards,  and  gardens.  There  are  still  sufficient 
indications  in  the  country  around  of  the  sites  of 
such  habitations.  The  fortified  inclosures,  whilst 
including  the  residences  of  the  king,  his  family  or 
immediate  tribe,  his  principal  officers,  and  probably 
the  chief  priests,  may  also  have  served  as  places  of 
refuge  for  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  at  large  in 
times  of  danger  or  attack.  According  to  Diodorus 
(ii.  9)  and  Quintus  Curtius  (v.  1),  there  was  land 
enough  within  the  precincts  of  Babylon,  besides 
gaidens  and  orchards,  to  furnish  corn  for  the  wants 
of  the  whole  population  in  case  of  siege ;  and  in  the 
book  of  Jonah,  Nineveh  is  said  to  contain,  besides  its 
population,  "much  cattle"  (iv.  11).  As  at  Baby- 
lon, no  great  consecutive  wall  of  inclosure  comprising 
all  the  ruins,  such  as  that  described  by  Diodorus, 
has  been  discovered  at  Nineveh,  and  no  such  wall 
ever  existed,  otherwise  some  traces  of  so  vast  and 
massive  a  structure  must  have  remained  to  this 
day.  The  river  Gomel,  the  modern  Ghazir-Su, 
may  have  formed  the  eastern  boundary  or  defence 
of  the  city.  As  to  the  claims  of  the  mound  of 
Kalah  Sherghat  to  represent  the  site  of  the  pri- 
mitive capital  of  Assyria  called  Asshur,  they  must 
rest  entirely  on  the  interpretation  of  the  inscrip- 
tions. This  city  was  founded,  or  added  to,  they  are 
supposed  to  declare,  by  one  Shamas-Iva,  the  son 
and  viceroy,  or  satrap,  of  Ismi-Dagon,  king  of  Ba- 
bylon, who  reigned,  it  is  conjectured,  about  B.C. 
1840.  Assyria  and  its  capital  remained  subject  to 
Babylonia  until  B.C.  1273,  when  an  independent 
Assyrian  dynasty  was  founded,  of  which  fourteen 
kings,  or  more,  reigned  at  Kalah  Sherghat.  Aboat 
B.C.  930  the  seat  of  government,  it  is  asserted, 
was  transferred  by  Sardanapalus  (the  second  of" 
the  name,  and  the  Sardanapalus  of  the  Greeks) 
to  the  city  of  Kalkhu  or  Calah  (Nimroud),  whicii 
had  been  founded  by  an  earlier  monarch  named 
Shalmanubar.  There  it  continued  about  2.50 
years,  when  Sennacherib  made  Nineveh  the  cap- 
ital of  the  empire  [Assvria].  These  assumptions 
seem  to  i-est  upon  very  slender  grounds  ;  and 
Dr.  Hincks  altogether  rejects  the  theory  of  the 
Babylonian  character  of  these  early  kings,  believing 
them  to  be  Assyrian  {Report  to  Trustees  of  Brit. 
Mas.  on  Cylinders  and  Terra-Cottas).  It  is  believed 
that  on  an  inscribed  teiTa-cotta  cylinder  discovered 
at  Kalah  Sherghat,  the  foundation  of  a  temple  is 
attributed  to  this  Shamsis-Iva.  A  royal  name 
similar  to  that  of  his  father,  Ismi-Dagon,  is  read  on 
a  biick  from  some  ruins  in  southern  Babylonia,  and 
the  two  kings  are  presumed  to  be  identical,  although 
there  is  no  other  evidence  of  the  fact  (Rawl.  Herod. 
i.  p.  456,  note  5)  ;  indeed  the  only  son  of  this  Ba- 
bylonian king  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  is 
read  Ibil-anu-duina,  a  name  entirely  different  from 
that  of  the  presumed  viceroy  of  Asshur.  It  is 
by  no  means  an  uncommon  occurrence  tiiat  the 
same  names  should  be  found  in  royal  dynasties 
of  very  different  periods. •=  The  Assyrian  dynas- 
ties furnish  more  than  one  example.  It  may  be 
further  observed  that  no  remains  of  sufficient 
antiquity  and  importance  have  been  discovered  at 


in  the  mountains  to  the  E.  of  Mosul,  the  other  occur- 
ring on  tiie  Kalah  Sherghat  cylinder.  M.  Oppert  has 
questioned  the  identity  of  the  two  (Rawl.  Herod,  i. 
469,  and  note). 


NINEVEH 

Kalah  Sherghat  to  justify  the  opinion  tliat  it  was 
the  ancient  capital.  The  only  sculpture  found  in 
the  I'uins,  the  seated  figure  in  black  basalt  now 
in  the  British  Museum,  belongs  to  a  later  period 
than  the  monuments  from  the  N.VV.  palace  at 
Nimroud.  Upon  the  presumed  identification  above 
indicated,  and  upon  no  other  evidence,  as  fiir  as  we 
can  understand,  an  entirely  new  system  of  Assyrian 
history  and  chronology  has  been  constructed,  of 
which  a  sketch  has  been  given  luider  the  title  As- 
syria (see  also  Rawlinson's  Herod,  vol.  i.  p.  489). 
It  need  only  be  pointed  out  here  that  this  system 
is  at  variance  with  sacred,  classical,  and  monumental 
history,  and  can  scarcely  be  accepted  as  proven, 
until  the  Assyrian  ruins  have  been  examined  with 
more  completeness  tlian  has  hitherto  been  possible, 
and  until  the  decipherment  of  the  cuneifonn  in- 
scriptions ha.s  made  tar  greater  pi'ogress.  It  has 
been  shown  how  continuously  tiiidition  points  to 
Nineveh  as  the  ancient  capital  of  Assyria.  There  is 
no  allusion  to  any  other  city  whi('h  enjoyed  this 
rank.  Its  name  occurs  in  the  statistical  table  of 
Karnak,  in  conjunction  with  >iaharaina  or  Bleso- 
potamia,  and  on  a  fiagment  recently  discovered  by 
M.  Mariette,  of  the  time  of  Thotmas  III.,  or  about 
li.C.  1490  (Birch,  Trans.  R.  Soc.  of  Lit.  ii.  345, 
second  Series)  ;  and  no  mention  has  been  found  on 
any  Egyptian  monument  of  such  cities  as  Asshui- 
and  Calah.  Sir  H.  Kawlinson,  in  a  paper  read 
before  the  R.  S.  of  Lit.,  has,  however,  contended 
that  the  Naharayn,  Saenkar,  and  Assuri  of  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions  are  not  Mesojiotamia,  Singar, 
and  Assyria,  and  that  Nin-i-iu  is  not  Nineveh  at  all, 
but  refers  to  a  city  in  the  chain  of  Taurus.  But 
these  conclusions  are  altogethei'  rejected  by  Egyp- 
tian scholars.  Further  researches  may  show  that 
Sennacherib's  palace  at  Kouyunjik,  and  that  of  Sar- 
danapalus  at  Nimroud,  were  built  upon  the  site, 
and  above  the  remains  of  very  much  earlier  edifices. 
According  to  the  interpretation  of  the  inscriptions, 
Sardanapalus  himself  founded  a  temple  at "  Nineveh" 
(Rawl.  Herod,  i.  462),  yet  no  traces  of  this  building 
have  been  discovered  at  Kouyunjik.  Sargon  restored 
the  walls  of  Nineveh,  and  declares  that  he  erected 
his  palace  "near  to  Nineveh"  (/(/.  474),  whilst 
Sennacherib  only  claims  to  have  rebuilt  the  palaces, 
which  were  "rent  and  split  from  extreme  old  age" 
(Jd.  47.5),  employing  360,000  men,  captives  from 
Chaldaea,  Syria,  Armenia,  and  Cilicia,  in  the  under- 
taking, and  speaks  of  Nineveh  as  founded  of  old, 
and  governed  by  his  forefathers,  "  kings  of  the  old 
time"  (Fox  Talbot,  on  Bellino's  cylinder,  Journ. 
of  As.  Soc.  vol.  xviii.).  Old  palaces,  a  great  tower, 
and  ancient  temples  dedicated  to  Ishtar  and  Bar 
Muri,  also  stood  there.  Hitherto  the  remains  of  no 
other  edifices  than  those  attributed  to  Sennacherib 
and  his  successors  have  been  discovered  in  the  group 
of  ruins  opposite  IVIosul. 

Prophecies  rclatimj  to  Nineveh,  mut  Illustra- 
tions of  the  0.  T. — These  are  exclusively  contained 
in  the  Books  of  Nahum  and  Zephmiiah ;  for 
ulthough  Isaiah  foretells  tlie  downfall  of  the  Assy- 
rian empire  (ch.  x.  and  xiv.),  he  makes  no  mention 
of  its  capital.  Nahum  threatens  the  entire  de- 
struction of  the  city,  so  that  it  shall  not  rise  again 
from  its  ruins:  "With  an  overrunning  flood  he 
will  make  im  utter  end  of  the  place  thereof."  "  He 
will  make  an  uttai'  end;  allliction  sliall  not  rise  up 
the  second  time"  (i.  8,  0).  "Thy  people  is  sciit- 
tered  upon  the  mountains,  and  no  one  gathereth 
them.  There  is  no  healing  of  thy  bruise  "  (iii. 
18,  19).     The  manner  in  which  tiic  city  should  be 


NINEVEH 


555 


taken  seems  to  be  indicated.  "  The  defence  shall 
be  prepared"  (ii.  5)  is  rendered  in  the  marginal 
reading  "  the  covering  or  coverer  shall  be  prepared," 
and  by  Mr.  Vance  Smith  (^Prophecies  on  Assyria 
and  the  Assyrians,  242),  "the  covering  machine," 
the  covered  battering-ram  or  tower  supposed  to  be 
represented  in  the  bas-reliefs  as  being  used  in  sieges. 
Some  commentators  believe  that  "  the  overruiming 
flood  "  refers  to  the  agency  of  water  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  walls  by  an  extraordinary  overfiow  of 
the  Tigris,  and  the  consequent  exposure  of  the  city 
to  assault  through  a  breach  ;  others,  that  it  applies 
to  a  large  and  devastating  army.  An  allusion  to 
the  overflow  of  the  river  may  be  contained  in  ii.  6, 
■' The  gates  of  the  rivers  shall  be  opened,  and  the 
palace  shall  be  dissolved,"  a  prophecy  supposed  to 
have  been  fulfilled  when  the  i\Iedo-Babyloniau  army 
caj>tured  the  city.  Diodorus  (ii.  27)  relates  of  that 
event,  that  "there  was  an  old  prophecy  that  Ni- 
neveh should  not  be  taken  till  the  river  became  an 
enemy  to  the  city:  and  in  the  third  year  of  the 
siege  the  river  being  swolu  with  continued  rains, 
overflowed  part  of  the  city,  and  broke  down  the 
wall  for  twenty  stadia  ;  then  the  king  thinking 
that  the  oracle  was  fulfilled  and  the  ri,ver  become 
an  enemy  to  the  city,  built  a  large  funeral  pile  in 
the  palace,  and  collecting  together  all  his  wealth, 
and  his  concubines  and  eunuchs,  burnt  himself  and 
the  palace  with  them  all :  and  the  enemy  entered 
the  breach  that  the  waters  had  made,  and  took  the 
city."  Most  of  the  edifices  discovered  had  been 
destroyed  by  fire,  but  no  part  of  the  walls  of  either 
Nimroud  or  Kouyunjik  appears  to  have  been  washed 
away  by  the  river.  The  Tigris  is  still  subject 
to  very  high  and  dangerous  floods  during  the 
winter  and  spring  rains,  and  even  now  frequently 
reaches  the  ruins.  When  it  flowed  in  its  ancient 
bed  at  the  foot  of  the  walls  a  part  of  the  city 
miglit  have  been  overwhelmed  by  an  extraordinary 
inundation.  The  likening  of  Nineveh  to  "a  jiool 
of  water"  (ii.  8)  has  been  conjectured  to  refer  to 
the  moats  and  dams  by  which  a  portion  of  the 
country  around  Nineveh  could  be  flooded.  The 
city  was  to  be  partly  destroyed  by  fire,  "The  fire 
shall  devour  thy  bars,"  "  then  shall  the  fire  devour 
thee"  (iii.  13,  15).  The  gateway  in  the  northern 
wall  of  the  Kouyunjik  inclosure  had  been  destroyed 
by  fire  as  well  as  the  palaces.  The  population  was 
to  be  surprised  when  unprepared,  "  while  they  are 
drunk  as  drunkards  they  shall  be  devoured  as 
stubble  fully  dry  "  (i.  10).  Diodorus  strifes  that 
the  last  and  fatal  assault  was  made  when  they  were 
overcome  with  wine.  In  the  bas-reliefs  carousing 
scenes  are  represented,  in  which  the  king,  his  cour- 
tiers, and  even  the  queen,  reclining  on  couches  or 
seated  on  thrones,  and  attended  by  musicians,  appear 
to  be  jiledging  each  other  in  bowls  of  wine  (Botta, 
Mon.  de  Nin.  pi.  63-67,  112,  113,  and  one  very  in- 
teresting slab  in  the  Brit.  Mns.,  figured  on  j).  556). 
The  captivity  of  the  inhabitants,  and  their  removal  to 
distimt  provinces,  are  predicted  (iii.  18).  Their 
dispersion,  which  occurred  when  the  city  fell,  was 
in  accordance  with  the  barbarous  custom  of  the 
ago.  The  palace-temples  were  to  be  plundered  of 
their  idols,  "out  of  the  house  of  thy  gods  will 
I  cut  oft'  the  graven  image  and  the  molten  image  " 
(i.  14),  and  the  city  sacked  of  its  wealth :  "Take 
ye  the  spoil  of  silver,  t;ike  the  spoil  of  gold"  (ii.  9). 
For  ages  the  Assyrian  edifices  have  been  ilespoiled 
of  their  sacred  images  ;  and  enormous  amounts  of 
gold  and  silver  were,  according  to  tradition,  taken 
to  Kcbataiia   by  tiie  couqui'ring   Medes  (Diod.  Sic. 


556 


NINEVEH 


ii.).  Only  one  or  two  fragments  of  the  precious 
metals  were  found  in  the  ruins.  Nineveh,  after  its 
fall,  was  to  be  "empty,  and  void,  and  waste"  (ii. 
10) ;  "  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  all  they  that  look 
upon  thee  shall  flee  from  thee,  and  say,  Nineveh  is 
laid  waste"  (iii.  7).  These  epithets  describe  the 
present   state   of  the  site  of  the  city.     But   the 


NINEVEH 

fullest  and  the  most  vivid  and  poetical  picture  of 
its  ruined  and  deserted  condition  is  that  given  by 
Zephaniah,  who  probably  lived  to  see  its  fall.  "  He 
will  make  Nineveh  a  desolation,  and  dry  like  a 
wilderness.  And  flocks  shall  lie  down  in  the  midst 
of  her,  all  the  beasts  of  the  nations :  both  the  cor- 
morant and  the  bittern  shall  lodge  in  the  iipjier 


King  feasting.      From  Kouyunjik* 


lintels  of  it :  their  voice  shall  sing  in  the  windows  : 
desolation  shall  be  in  the  thresholds :  for  he  shall 
uncover  the  cedar  work  ....  how  is  she  become 
a  desolation,  a  place  for  beasts  to  lie  down  in  ! 
every  one  that  passeth  by  her  shall  hiss  and  wag 
his  hand"  (ii.  13,  14,  15).  The  canals  which 
once  fertilised  the  soil  are  now  dry.  Except  when 
the  earth  is  green  after  the  periodical  rains  the  site 
of  the  city,  as  well  as  the  suiTOunding  country, 
is  an  arid  yellow  waste.  Flocks  of  sheep  and  herds 
of  camels  may  be  seen  seeking  scanty  pasture 
amongst  the  mounds.  From  the  unwholesome 
swamp  within  the  ruins  of  Khorsabad,  and  from  the 
reedy  banks  of  the  little  streams  that  flow  by  Kou- 
yunjik and  Nimroud  may  be  heard  the  croak  of  the 
cni-morant  and  the  bittern.  The  cedar-wood  which 
adorned  the  ceilings  of  the  palaces  has  been  uncovered 
by  modern  explorers  (Layard,  Nin.  ^  Bab.  357),  and 
in  the  deserted  halls  the  hyena,  the  wolf,  the  fox,  and 
the  jackall,  now  lie  down.  Many  allusions  in  the 
0.  T.  to  the  dress,  arms,  modes  of  warfare,  and 
customs  of  the  people  of  Nineveh,  as  well  as  of  the 
Jews,  are  explained  by  the  Nineveh  monuments. 
Thus  (Nah.  ii.  3),  "the  shield  of  his  mighty  men 
is  made  red,  the  valiant  men  are  in  scarlet."  The 
shields  and  the  dresses  of  the  warriors  are  generally 
painted  red  in  the  sculptures.  The  magnificent 
description  of  the  assault  upon  the  city  (iii.  1,  2,  3) 
is  illustrated  in  almost  every  particular  (Layarl, 
Nin.  and  its  Rem.  ii.,  part  ii.,  ch.  v.).  The  mounds 
built  up  against  the  walls  of  a  besieged  town  (Is. 
xxxvii.  33 ;  2  K.  xix.  32  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  24,  &c.),  the 
battering-ram  (Ez.  iv.  2),  the  various  kinds 
of  armour,  helmets,  shields,  spears,  and  swords, 
used  in  battle  and  during  a  siege  ;  the  chariots 
and  horses  (Nah.  iii.  3;  Chariot),  are  all 
seen  in  various  bas-reliefs  (Layard,  Nin.  and 
its  Rem.  ii.,  part  ii.,  chaps,  iv.  and  v.). 
The  custom  of  cutting  off  the  heads  of  the 
slain  and  placing  them  in  heaps  (2  K.  x.  8) 
is  constantly  represented  (Layanl,  ii.  184). 
The  allusion  in  2  K.  xix.  28,  "  I  will  put  my 
hook  in  thv  nose  and  my  bridle  in  thy  lips," 
is  illustrated  in  a  bas-relief  fi-om  Khorsabad 
{id.  37(iV 


The  interior  decoration  of  the  Assyrian  palaces 
is  described  by  Ezekiel,  himself  a  captive  in  As- 
syria and  an  eye-witness  of  their  magnificence 
(xxiii.  14,  15).  "  She  saw  men  of  sculptured  work- 
manship upon  the  walls ;  likenesses  of  the  Chal- 
daeans  pictured  in  red,  girded  with  girdles  upon 
their  loins,  with  coloured  flowing  head-dresses  upon 
their  heads,  with  the  aspect  of  princes  all  of  them  " 
(Lay.  Nin.  and  its  Rem.  ii.  307)  ;  a  description 
strikingly  illustrated  by  the  sculptured  likenesses  of 
the  Assyrian  kings  and  warriors  (see  especially  Botta, 
Jilon.  de  Nin.  pi.  12).  The  mystic  figures  seen  by  the 
prophet  in  his  vision  (ch.  i.),  uniting  the  man,  the 
lion,  the  ox,  and  the  eagle,  may  have  been  suggested 
by  the  eagle-headed  idols,  and  man-headed  bulls  and 
lions  (by  some  identified  with  the  cherubim  of  the 
Jews  [Cherub]),  and  the  sacred  emblem  of  the 


winged  deity. 

"  wheel  within  wheel  "  by  the  winged  circle  or 
globe  frequently  represented  in  the  bas-reliefs  (Lay. 
Nin.  and  its  Rem.  ii.  p.  465). 


NINEVEH 

Arts. — The  origin  of  Assyrian  art  is  a  subject  at 
present  involved  in  mystery,  and  one  which  oft'ers  a 
wide  field  for  speculation  and  research.     Those  wlio 
derive  the  civilisatioa  and  political  system   of  the 
Assyrians  from  Babylonia  would  trace  their  arts  to 
the  same  source.     One  of  the  principal  features  ot 
their  ai'chitecture,  the  artificial  platform  serving  as 
a  substructure  for  their  national  edifices,  may  have 
been  taken  fi-om  a  people  inhabiting  plains  perfectly 
flat,  sucli  as  those  of  Shinar,  rather  than  an  undu- 
lating country  in  which  natural  elevations  are  not  un- 
common, such  as  Assyria  proper.  But  it  still  remains 
to  be  proved  that  there  are  artificial  mounds  in 
Babylonia  of  an  earlier  date  than  mounds    on  or 
near  the  site  of  Nineveh.  Whether  other  leading  fea- 
tures and  the  det;iils  of  Assyrian  architecture  came 
from  the  same  source,  is  much  mofe  open  to  doubt. 
Such  Babylonian  edifices  as  have  been  hitherto  ex- 
plored are  of  a  later  date  than  those  of  Nineveh, 
to   which   they  .ippear  to    bear   but  little  resem- 
blance.    The  only  features  in  common  seem  to  be 
the  ascending  stages  of  the  temples  or  tombs,  and 
the  use  of  enamelled  bricks.    The  custom  of  panelling 
walls  with  alabaster  or  stone  must  have  originated 
in  a  country  in  which  sucli  materials  abound,  as  in 
Assyria,  and  not  in  the  alluvial  plains  of  southern 
Mesopotamia,  where  they  cannot  be  obtained  e.xcept 
at  great  cost  or  by  great  labour.     The  use  of  sun- 
dried  and  kiln-burnt  bricks  and  of  wooden  columns 
would  be  common  to  both  countries,  as  also  such 
arrangements  for  the  admission  of  light  and  exclu- 
sion of  heat  as  the  climate  would  naturally  suggest. 
In  none  of  the  arts  of  the  Assyrians  have  any 
traces  hitherto  been  found  of  progressive  change. 
In  the  architecture   of  the   most   ancient    known 
edifice  all  the  characteristics  of  the  style  are  already 
fully  developed ;  no  new  features  of  any   import- 
ance seem  to  have  been  introduced  at  a  later  period. 
The   palace   of   Sennacherib  only  excels  those    of 
his  remote  predecessors  in  the  vastness  of  its  pro- 
portions,   and    in    the    elaborate    magnificence   of 
its   details.     In   sculpture,  as  probably  in    paint- 
ing also,  if  we  possessed  the  means  of  comparison, 
the  same    thing  is  observable   as    in   the  remains 
of   ancient    Egypt.     The  earliest  works    hitherto 
discovered  show  the  result  of  a  lengthened  period  of 
gradual  development,  which,  judging  from  the  slow 
progress  made  by  untutored  men  in  the  arts,  must 
have  extended  over  a  vast  number  of  years.     Tiiey 
exhibit  the  arts  of  the   Assyrians  at  the  highest 
stage   of  excellence    they  probably  ever   attained. 
The  only  change  we  can  ti-ace,  ao  in  Egypt,  is  one 
of  decline  or  "  decadence."     The  latest  monuments, 
such  as  those  from  the  palaces  of  Essarhaddon  and 
his  son,  show  perhaps  a  closer  imitation  of  nature, 
especially  in  the  representation  of  animals,  such  as 
the  lion,  dog,  wild  ass,  &c.,  and  a  moie  careful  and 
minute  execution  of  deUiils  than  those  from   the 
earlier  edifices ;   but  they  are  wanting  in  the  sim- 
plicity yet  g)-andeur  of  conception,  in  the  invention, 
and   in   the  variety  of  tieatment   displayed   in   the 
most   ancient    sculptures.       This   will    at    once   be 
perceived  by  a  comparison  of  the  ornamental  det;iils 
of  the  two  periods.     In  the  older  sculptures  there 
occur  the  most  graceful  and  varieil  combinations  of 
fiowers,   beasts,    birds,   an<l   other   natural    objects, 
treated  in  a  conventional  and  highly  aitistic  man- 
ner;  in  the  later  there  is  only  a  constant  and  mono- 
tonous repetition  of  rosettes  and  common])lace  terms, 
without  much  display  of  invention  or  imagination 
(compare    Layard,  Man.  of  Nineveh,    1st    series, 
especially  plates  ,'),  S,  4IJ-48,  oO,  with  2nd  series, 


NINEVEH 


r.57 


passim ;  and  with  Botta,  Monumens  de  Niiiice).  The 
same  remark  applies  to  animals.  The  lions  of  the 
eailier  period  are  a  grand,  ideal,  and,  to  a  certam 
extent,  conventional  representation  of  the  beast — not 
very  diflerent  from  that  of  the  Greek  sculptor  in 
the  noblest  period  of  Greek  art  (Layard,  3Ion.  of 
Nin.  '2nd  series,  pi.  2).  In  the  later  bas-reliefs,  such 
as  those  from  the  palace  of  Sardanapalus  III.,  now 
in  the  British  Museum,  the  lions  are  more  closely 
imitated  from  nature  without  any  conventional 
elevation ;  but  what  is  gained  in  truth  is  lost  in 
dignity. 

The  same  may  be  obsei^ved  in  the  treatment  of 
the  human  form,  though  in  its  representation  the  As- 
syrians, like  the  Egyptians,  would  seem  to  htive  been, 
at  all  times,  more  or  less  shackled  by  religious  pre- 
judices or  laws.  For  instance,  the  face  is  almost  in- 
variably in  profile,  not  because  the  sculptor  was 
unable  to  represent  the  full  face,  one  or  two  examples 
of  it  occuning  in  the  bas-reliefs,  but  probably  be- 
cause he  was  bound  by  a  generally  received  custom, 
through  which  he  would  not  break.  No  new  forms 
or  combinations  appear  to  have  been  introduced  into 
Assyrian  art  during  the  four  or  five  centuries,  if  not 
longer  period,  with  which  we  are  acquainted  with  it. 
We  trace  throughout  the  same  eagle-headed,  lion- 
headed,  and  fish-headed  figures,  the  same  winged 
divinities,  the  same  composite  forms  at  the  doorways. 
In  the  earliest  works,  an  attempt  at  composition, 
that  is  at  a  pleasing  and  picturesque  grouping  of 
the  figures,  is  perhaps  more  evident  than  in  the 
later, — as  may  be  illustrated  by  the  Lion-hunt 
from  the  N.  W.  Palace,  now  in  the  British  Museum 
(Layard,  Man.  of  Nin.  pi.  10).  A  parallel  may  in 
many  respects  be  drawn  between  the  arts  of  the 
Assyrians  from  theii'  earliest  known  period  to  their 
latest,  and  those  of  Greece  from  Phidias  to  the 
Roman  epoch,  and  of  Italy  from  the  15th  to  the 
18th  century. 

The  art  of  the  Nineveh  monuments  must  in  the 
present  st;ite  of  our  knowledge  be  accepted  as  an 
original  and  national  art,  peculiar,  if  not  to  the 
Assyrians  alone,  to  the  races  who  at  various  periods 
possessed  the  country  watered  by  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates.  As  it  was  undoubtedly  brought  to  its 
highest  perfection  by  the  Assyrians,  and  is  espe- 
cially characteristic  of  them,  it  may  well  and  con- 
veniently bear  their  name.  From  whence  it  was 
originally  derived  there  is  nothing  as  yet  to  show. 
If  from  Babylon,  as  some  have  conjectured,  there  are 
no  remains  to  prove  the  fact.  Analogies  may  per- 
haps be  found  between  it  and  that  of  Egypt,  but  they 
are  not  sufficient  to  convince  us  that  the  one  was 
the  olfspring  of  the  other.  These  analogies,  if  not 
accidental,  may  have  been  derived,  at  some  very 
remote  period,  from  a  common  source.  The  two 
may  have  been  offshoots  from  some  common  trunk 
which  perished  ages  before  either  Nineveh  or  Thebes 
wa:s  founded  ;  or  the  Phoenicians,  as  it  has  been 
suggested,  may  have  introduced  into  the  two  coun- 
tries, between  which  they  were  placed,  and  lietween 
which  they  may  have  formed  a  conimiMciai  link, 
the  arts  peculiar  to  each  of  them.  Whatever  the 
origin,  the  development  of  the  a)ts  of  the  two 
countries  appears  to  have  been  affec'ted  and  directed 
by  very  opposite  conditions  of  national  character, 
climate,  geographical  and  geological  position,  politics, 
and  religion.  Thus,  Egyptian  architecture  seems  to 
have  been  derived  from  a  stone  prototype,  Assyrian 
from  a  wooden  one — in  accordance  with  the  jihysical 
nature  of  the  two  countries.  Assyrian  art  is  the 
type  of  power,  vigour,  and  action  ;   Egyptian  tliat  of 


558 


NINEVEH 


calm  dignity  and  repose.  The  one  is  the  expression 
ot'an  ambitious,  conquering,  and  restless  nature  ;  the 
other  of  a  race  which  seems  to  have  worked  ibr  itself 
alone  and  for  eternity.  At  a  late  peiiod  of  Assyrian 
history,  at  the  time  of  the  building  of  the  Khorsabad 
palace  (about  the  8th  century  B.C.),  a  more  inti- 
mate intercourse  with  E^ypt  through  war  or  dynastic 
alliances  than  had  previously  existed,  appears  to 
have  led  to  the  introduction  of  objects  of  Egyptian 
manufacture  into  Assyria,  and  may  have  influenced 
to  a  limited  extent  its  arts.  A  precisely  similar 
influence  proceeding  from  Assyria  has  been  remarked 
at  the  same  period  in  Egj'pt,  probably  arising  from 
the  conquest  and  temporary  occupation  of  the 
latter  country  by  the  Assyrians,  under  a  king 
whose  name  is  read  Asshur-bani-pal,  mentioned  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  (Birch,  Trans,  of  R.  Soc. 
of  Lit.,  new  series).  To  this  age  belong  the  ivories, 
bronzes,  and  nearly  all  the  small  objects  of  an 
Egyptian  character,  though  not  apparently  of 
Egyptian  workmanship,  discovered  in  the  Assyrian 
ruins.  It  has  been  asserted,  on  the  authority  of  an 
inscription  believed  to  contain  the  names  of  certain 
Hellenic  artists  from  Idalium,  Citium,  Salamis, 
Paphos,  and  other  Greek  cities,  that  Greeks  were 
employed  by  Essarhaddon  and  his  son  in  executing 
the  sculptured  decorations  of  their  palaces  (Rawl. 
Herod,  i.  483).  But,  passing  over  the  extreme  un- 
certainty att<aching  to  the  deciphennent  of  proper 
names  in  the  cuneiform  character,  it  must  be  ob- 
served that  no  remains  whatever  of  Greek  art  of 
so  early  a  period  are  known,  which  can  be  com- 
pared in  knowledge  of  principles  and  in  beauty  of 
execution  and  of  design  with  the  sculptures  of 
Assyria.  Niebuhr  has  remarked  of  Hellenic  art, 
that  "anything  produced  before  the  Persian  war 
was  altogether  barbarous "  (.34th  Lecture  on  An- 
cient History).  If  Greek  artists  could  execute  such 
monuments  in  Assyria,  why,  it  may  be  asked,  did 
they  not  display  equal  skill  in  their  own  country  ? 
The  influence,  indeed,  seems  to  have  been  entirely 
iu  the  opposite  direction.  The  discoveries  at  Nine- 
veh show  almost  beyond  a  doubt  that  the  Ionic  ele- 
ment in  Greek  art  was  derived  from  Assyria,  as  the 
Doric  came  from  Egypt.  There  is  scarcely  a  lead- 
ing form  or  a  detail  in  the  Ionic  order  which  cannot 
be  traced  to  Assyria — the  volute  of  the  column,  the 
frieze  of  griffins,  the  honeysuckle-border,  the  guil- 
loche,  the  Caryatides,  and  many  other  ornaments 
peculiar  to  the  style. 

The  arts  of  the  Assyrians,  especially  their  archi- 
tecture, spread  to  surrounding  nations,  as  is  usually 
the  case  when  one  race  is  brought  into  contact  with 
another  in  a  lower  state  of  civilisation.  They  appear 
to  have  crossed  the  Euphrates,  and  to  have  had  more 
or  less  influence  on  the  countries  between  it  and 
the  Mediterranean.  Monuments  of  an  Assyrian 
character  have  been  discovered  in  various  parts 
of  Syria,  and  further  researches  would  probably 
disclose  many  more.  The  arts  of  the  Phoenicians, 
judging  from  the  few  specimens  preserved,  show 
the  same  influence.  In  the  absence  of  even  the 
most  insigniflcant  remains,  and  of  any  implements 
which  may  with  confidence  be  attributed  to  the 
.lews  [Arms],  there  are  no  materials  for  comparison 
between  .Jewish  and  Assyrian  art.  It  is  possible 
that  the  bronzes  and  ivories  discovered  at  Nineveh 
were  of  Phoenician  manufacture,  like  the  vessels  in 
L^olomon's  temple.  On  the  lion-weights,  now  in 
the  British  Museum,  are  inscriptions  both  in  the 
cuneiform  and  Phoenician  characters.  The  Assy- 
rian inscriptions  seem  to  indicate  a  direct  depend- 


NINEVEH 

ence  of  Judaea  upon  Assyria  from  a  very  exrly 
period.  From  the  desci-iptions  of  the  temple  and 
"houses"  of  Solomon  (cf.  1  K.  vi.,  vii. ;  2  Chr. 
iii.,  iv. ;  Joseph,  viii.  2  ;  Fergusson's  Palaces  of 
Nineveh ;  and  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  642),  it  would 
appear  that  there  was  much  similarity  between 
them  and  the  palaces  of  Nineveh,  if  not  in  the 
exterior  architecture,  certainly  in  the  interior  de- 
corations, such  as  the  walls  panelled  or  wains- 
coted with  sawn  stones,  the  sculptures  on  the 
slabs  representing  trees  and  plants,  the  remainder 
of  the  walls  above  the  skirting  painted  with  various 
colours  and  pictures,  the  figures  of  the  winged 
cherubim  carved  "  all  the  house  round,"  and  espe- 
cially on  the  doorways,  the  oniaments  of  open 
flowers,  pomegranates,  and  lilies  (apjjarently  corre- 
sponding exactly  with  the  rosettes,  pomegranates, 
and  honey-suckle  ornaments  of  the  Assyrian  bas- 
reliefs,  Botta,  Mon.  de  Nin.  and  Layard,  Mon.  of 
Nin.),  and  the  ceiling,  roof,  and  beams  of  cedar- 
wood.  The  Jewish  edifices  were  however  very  much 
inferior  in  size  to  the  Assyrian.  Of  objects  of  art  (if 
we  may  use  the  term)  contained  in  the  Temple  we 
have  the  description  of  the  pillars,  of  the  brazen 
sea,  and  of  various  bronze  or  cop))er  vessels.  They 
were  the  work  of  Hiram,  the  son  of  a  Phoenician 
artist  by  a  Jewish  woman  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali 
(1  K.  vii.  14),  a  fact  which  gives  us  some  insight 
into  Phoenician  art,  and  seems  to  show  that  the 
Jews  had  nok  art  of  their  own,  as  Hiram  was 
fetched  from  Tyre  by  Solomon.  The  Assyrian 
character  of  these  objects  is  very  remarkable. 
The  two  pillars  and  "  chapiters "  of  brass  had 
oniaments  of  lilies  and  pomegranates  ;  the  brazen 
sea  was  supported  on  oxen,  and  its  rim  was  orna- 
mented with  flowers  of  lihes,  whilst  the  bases  were 
graven  with  lions,  oxen,  and  cherubim  on  the  bor- 
ders, and  the  plates  of  the  ledges  with  cherubim, 
lions,  and  palm-trees.  The  vail  of  the  temple,  of 
different  colours,  had  also  cherubim  wi'ought  upon 
it.  (Cf.  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  woodcut,  p.  588,  in 
which  a  large  vessel,  probably  of  bronze  or  copper, 
is  represented  supported  upon  oxen,  and  Mo7i.  of 
Nin.  series  2,  pi.  60,  65,  68, — in  which  vessels 
with  embossed  rims  apparently  similar  to  those  in 
Solomon's  temple  are  figured.  Also  series  1,  pi.  8, 
44,  48,  in  which  embroideries  with  Cherubim 
occur.) 

The  influence  of  Assyria  to  the  eastward  was 
even  more  considerable,  extending  far  into  Asia. 
The  Persians  copied  their  architecture  (with  such 
modifications  as  the  climate  and  the  building- 
materials  at  hand  suggested\  their  scul]iture,  pro- 
bably their  painting  and  their  mode  of  writing, 
from  the  Assyrians.  The  ruined  palaces  of  Perse- 
polis  show  the  same  general  plan  of  construction 
as  those  of  Nineveh — fhe  entrances  formed  by 
human-headed  animals,  the  skiiting  of  sculptured 
stone,  and  the  inscribed  slabs.  The  various  religious 
emblems  and  the  ornamentation  have  the  same  As- 
syrian character.  In  Persia,  however,  a  stone  archi- 
teefure  prevailed,  and  the  columns  in  that  material 
have  resisted  to  this  day  the  i-avages  of  time. 

The  Persians  made  an  advance  in  one  respect 
upon  Assyrian  sculpture,  and  probably  painting 
likewise,  in  an  attempt  at  a  natural  representation  of 
drapery  by  the  introduction  of  folds,  of  which  there  is 
only  the  slightest  indication  on  Assyrian  monuments. 
It  may  have  been  partly  through  Persia  that  the  in- 
fluence of  Assyrian  art  passed  into  Asia  Minor  and 
thence  into  Greece ;  but  it  had  probably  penetrated 
far  into  the  former  countrv  long  Ijefore  the  Persian 


NINEVEH 

domiiialion.  We  find  it  strongly  shown  in  the 
earliest  monuments,  as  in  those  of  Lycia  and 
I'hrygia,  and  in  the  archaic  sculptures  of  Branchidae. 
Hut  the  early  art  of  Asia  Minor  still  offers  a  most 
interesting  field  for  investigation.  Amongst  the 
Assyrians,  the  arts  wei'e  principally  employed,  as 
amongst  all  nations  in  their  earlier  stages  of  civili- 
sation, for  religious  and  national  purposes.  The 
colossal  figures  at  the  doorways  of  the  palaces  were 
mythic  combinations  to  denote  the  attributes  of  a 
deity.  The  "  Man-Bull "  and  the  "  Man-Lion,"  are 
conjectured  to  be  the  gods  "  Nin  "  and  "  Nergal," 
presiding  over  war  and  the  chace  ;  the  eagle-headed 
■.nd  fish-headed  figures  so  constantly  repeated  in 
the  sculptures,  and  as  ornaments  on  vessels  of 
metal,  or  in  embroideries — Nisroch  and  Dagon.  The 
bas-reliefs  almost  invariably  record  some  deed  of  the 
king,  as  head  of  the  nation,  in  war,  and  in  combat 
with  wild  beasts,  or  his  i>iety  in  erecting  vast 
palace-temples  to  the  gods.  Hitherto  no  sculptures 
specially  illustrating  the  pri- 
vate life  of  the  Assyrians  have 
been  discovered,  except  one  or 
two  incidents,  such  as  men 
baking  bread  or  tending  horses, 
inti'oduced  as  mere  accessories 
into  the  historical  bas-reliefs. 
This  may  be  partly  owing  to 
the  fact  that  no  traces  what- 
ever have  yet  been  found  of 
their  burial  places,  or  even  of 
their  mode  of  dealing  with 
the  dead.  It  is  chiefly  upon  the  walls  of  tombs 
that,  the  domestic  life  of  the  Egyptians  has  been  so 
fully  depicted.  In  the  useful  aits,  as  in  the  fine 
arts,  the  Assyrians  had  made  a  proc^-ess  which 
denotes  a  very  high  stitte  of  civilisation  [Assyria]. 
When  the  inscriptions  have  been  fully  examined  and 
deciphered,  it  will  probably  be  found  that  they 
had  made  no  inconsiderable  advance  in  the  sciences, 
especially  in  astronomy,  mathematics,  numeration, 
and  hydraulics.  Although  the  site  of  ISineveh 
aflbrded  no  special  advantages  for  commerce,  and 
although  she  owed  her  greatness  rather  to  her  poli- 
tical position  as  the  capital  of  the  empii-e,  yet, 
situated  upon  a  navigable  river  communicating  with 
the  Euphrates  and  the  Pei'sian  Gulf,  she  must  have 
soon  formed  one  of  the  great  trading  stations  between 
that  important  inland  sea,  and  Syria,  and  the  Medi- 
terranean, and  must  have  become  a  depot  for  the 
merchandise  supplied  to  a  great  part  of  Asia  Minor, 
Armenia,  and  Persia.  Her  merchants  are  described 
in  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  24)  as  trading  in  blue  clothes 
and  bioidered  work  (such  as  is  probably  represented 
in  the  sculptures),  and  in  Jsahum  (iii.  16)  as 
"  multiplied  above  the  stars  of  heaven."  The  ani- 
mals represented  on  the  black  obelisk  in  the  British 
Museum  and  on  other  monuments,  the  rhinoceros, 
the  elephant,  the  double-humped  camel,  and  various 
kinds  of  apes  and  monkeys,  show  a  communication 
direct  or  indirect  with  the  remotest  parts  of  Asia. 
This  intercourse  with  foreign  nations,  and  the  prac- 
tice of  carrying  to  Assyria  as  captives  the  skilled 
.•ntists  and  workmen  of  con<iuered  countries,  must 
have  contiibuted  greatly  to  the  improvement  of 
AssyriiW  manufactures. 

Writituj  and  Lani/naijc. — The  ruins  of  Nineveh 
have  furnished  a  vast  collection  of  inscriptions  partly 
can'sd  on  marble  or  stone  slabs,  and  partly  im- 
piessed  upon  bricks,  and  upon  clay  cylindei's,  or 
six-sided  and  eight-sided  prisms,  barrels,  and  tablets, 
which,  used  for  the  purpose  when  .still  moist,  were 


NINEVEH 


569 


afterwards  baked  in  a  furnace  or  kiln.  (Cf.  Ezekiel, 
iv.  1,  "Take  thee  a  tile  .  .  .  aud  pourtray  upon 
it  the  city,  even  Jerusalem.")  The  cylinders  are 
hollow,  and  appear,  from  the  hole  pierced  through 
them,  to  have  been  mounted  so  as  to  turn  round, 
and  to  present  their  several  sides  to  the  reader.  The 
character  employed  was  the  aiTow-headed  or  cunei- 
form— so  called  from  each  letter  being  foimed  by 
marks  or  elements  resembling  an  arrow-head  or  a 
wedge.  This  mode  of  writing,  believed  by  some  to 
be  of  Turanian  or  .Scythic  origin,  prevailed  through- 
out the  provinces  comprised  in  the  Assyrian,  Babylo- 
nian, and  the  eastern  poition  of  the  ancient  Persian 
empires,  from  the  earliest  times  to  which  any  known 
record  belongs,  or  at  least  20  centuries  before  the 
Christian  era,  down  to  the  period  of  the  conquests 
of  Alexander  ;  after  which  epoch,  although  occa- 
sionally employed,  it  seems  to  have  gradually  fallen 
into  disuse.  It  never  extended  into  Syria,  Arabia, 
or  Asia  Minor,  although  it  was  adopted  in  Armenia. 


T-  -ET  PET  ^tll  -ET  <0  ^!I 
ET  }}<  <]-m]  ET  ^T?  --T<  -Tit 


Specimen  of  the  i 


-headed  or  cuueiform  ^vritiiig. 


A  cursive  writing  resembling  the  ancient  Syrian 
and  Phoenician,  and  by  some  believed  to  be  the 
original  form  of  all  other  cursive  writing  used  in 
Western  Asia,  including  the  Hebrew,  appears  to  have 
also  been  occasionally  employed  in  Assyria,  probably 
for  documents  written  on  parchment  or  papyrus,  or 
perhaps  leather  skins.  The  Assyrian  cuneitbrm  cha- 
racter was  of  the  same  class  as  the  Babylonian, 
only  differing  from  it  in  the  less  complicated  nature 
of  its  forms.  Although  the  primary  elements  in  the 
later  Peisian  and  so-called  Median  cuneiform  weie 
the  same,  yet  their  combination  and  the  value  of 
the  letters  were  quite  distinct.  The  latter,  indeed, 
is  but  a  form  of  the  Assyrian.  Herodotus  terms  all 
cuneiform  writing  the  "  Assyrian  writing  "  (Herod, 
iv.  87).  This  character  may  have 'been  derived 
from  some  more  ancient  form  of  hieroglyphic 
writing ;  but  if  so,  all  traces  of  such  origin  have 
di^appeaied.  The  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  alpha- 
bet (if  the  tei-m  may  be  ajijilied  to  above  200 
signs)  is  of  the  most  complicated,  imperfect,  and 
arbitrary  nature — some  charactei's  being  phonetic, 
others  syllabic,  others  ideographic — the  same  cha- 
racter being  frequently  used  indifferently.  This 
con.stitutes  one  of  the  principal  difficulties  in 
the  process  of  decipherment.  The  investigation 
first  commenced  by  Grotefend  (Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  vol.  ii.  App.  2)  has  since  been  carried 
on  with  much  .success  by  Sir  H.  Hawlinson,  Dr. 
Hincks,  Mr.  Norris,  and  Mr.  Kox  Talbot,  in  Eng- 
land, and  by  M.  Oppeit  in  France  (see  papers  by 
those  gentlemen  in  the  ,/oii.rnals  of  the  llo;/.  Ak. 
Soc,  in  Trcmsactions  of  Royal  Irish  Academi/,  in 
Journal  of  Sacred  Literature,  and  in  the  At/ic- 
nneum).  Although  considerable  doubt  may  still 
reasonably  pi  evail  as  to  the  interpretation  of  details, 
as  to  grammatical  construction,  and  es])ccially  as  to 
the  rendering  of  proper  names,  sufficient  progress 
has  been  made  to  enable  the  student  to  ascertain 
with  some  degiee  of  confidence  the  geneml  meaning 


560 


NINEVEH 


and  contents  of  an  inscription.  The  people  of  Ni- 
neveh spoke  a  Semitic  dialect,  connected  with  the 
Hebrew  and  with  the  so-called  Chaldee  of  the 
Books  of  Daniel  and  Ezra.  This  agrees  with  the 
testimony  of  the  0.  T.  But  it  is"  asserted  that 
there  existed  in  Assyria,  as  well  as  in  Babylonia, 
a  more  ancient  tongue  belonging  to  a  Turanian  or 
t5cythic  race,  which  is  supposed  to  have  inhabited 
the  plains  watered  by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates 
long  before  the  rise  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  and 
from  which  the  Assyrians  derived  their  civilisation 
and  the  gi-eater  part  of  their  mythology.  It  was 
retained  tor  sacred  purposes  bv  the  conquering  race, 
as  the  Latin  was  retained  after  the  tall  of  the. 
Roman  Empire  in  the  Catholic  church.  In  frag- 
ments of  vocabularies  discovered  in  the  record- 
chamber  at  Kouyuiijik  words  in  the  two  languages 
are  placed  in  parallel  columns,  whilst  a  centre  column 
contains  a  monographic  or  ideographic  sign  repre- 
senting both.  A  large  number  of  Turanian  woi'ds 
or  roots  are  further  supposed  to  liave  existed  in  tlie 
Assyrian  tongue,  and  tsiblets  apparently  in  that  lan- 
guage have  been  discovered  in  the  ruins.  The 
monumental  inscriptions  occur  on  detached  stelae 
and  obelisks,  of  which  there  are  several  specimens  in 
the  British  Museum  from  the  Assyrian  ruins,  and 
one  in  the  Berlin  Museum  discovered  in  the  island 
of  Cyprus  ;  on  the  colossal  human-headed  lions^  and 
buUs,  upon  parts  not  occupied  by  sculpture,  as  be- 
tween the  legs ;  on  the  sculptured  slabs,  generally 
in  bands  between  two  bas-reliefs,  to  which  they  seem 
to  refer ;  and,  as  in  Persia  and  Armenia,  carved  on 
the  face  of  rocks  in  the  hill-country.  At  Kiraroud 
the  same  inscription  is  carved  on  nearlv  every  slab  in 
the  N.  \V.  palace,  and  generally  repeated  on  the  back, 
and  even  carried  across  the  sculptured  colossal  tigures. 
The  Assyrian  inscriptions  usuidly  contain  the  chro- 
nicles of  the  king  who  built  or  restoi-ed  the  edifice 
in  which  they  are  found,  records  of  his  wars  and 
expeditious  into  distant  countries,  of  the  amount  of 
tribute  and  spoil  taken  from  conquered  tribes,  of 
the  building  of  temples  and  palaces,  and  invocations 
to  the  gods  of  Assyria.  Frequently  every  stone 
and  kiln-burnt  brick  used  in  a  building  bears  the 
name  and  titles  of  the  king,  and  generally  those 
of  his  father  and  grandfather  are  added.  These 
inscribed  bricks  are  of  the  greatest  value  in  restor- 
ing the  royal  dynasties.  The  longest  inscription  on 
stone,  that  from  the  N.  W.  jialace  of  Nineveh  con- 
taining  the   records  of  Sardanapalus  II.,  has   325 


NINEVEH 

lines,  that  on  the  black  obelisk  has  210.  The 
most  important  hitherto  discovered  in  connexion 
with  Biblical  historj',  is  that  upon  a  pair  of  colossal 
liumau-headed  bulls  from  Kouyunjik,  now  in  the 
British  Museum,  containing  the  records  of  Senna- 
cherib, and  describing,  amongst  other  events,  his 
wars  with  Hezekiah.  It  is  accompanied  by  a  seiies 
of  bas-reliefs  believed  to  represent  the  siege  and 
capture  of  Lachish  (Lachish  ;  Lavard,  Nin.  and 
Bab.  p.  148-153). 


I.ailiisli  (Knuyunjik) 


Sennacherib  on  his  Throne  betbre  Lachish. 

A  long  list  might  be  given  of  Biblical  names  oo- 
cvuTing  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  (iJ.  f32ti). 
Those  of  three  Jewish  kings  have  been  read,  Jehu 
son  of  Khumri  (Omri),  on  the  black  obelisk  (Jehu  ; 
Lavard,  Xin.  and  Bab.  613),  ]\lena- 
heni  on  a  slab  from  the  S.  W. 
palace,  Nimroud,  now  in  the  British 
Museum  (id.  617),  and  Hezekiah  in 
the  Kouyunjik  records.  The  most 
important  insc'ribed  tena-cotta  cy- 
linders are  —  those  from  Kalah 
Sherghat,  with  the  aniials  of  a 
king,  whose  name  is  believed  to 
read  Tiglath  Pileser,  not  the  same 
mentioned  in  the  2nd  Book  of 
Kings,  but  an  earlier  monarch,  who 
is  supposed  to  have  reigned  about 
B.C.  1110  (Rawl.  Herod,  i.  457): 
those  from  Khorsabad  containing  the 
annals  of  Sargon  ;  those  from  Kou- 
yunjik, especially  one  known  as 
Bellino's  cylinder,  with  the  chroni- 
cles of  Sennacherib ;  that  from  Nebbi 
Yunus  with  the  records  of  Essarhad- 
don,  and  the  fragments  of  three 
cvlinders  with  thn-e  of  his  son.    The 


NINEVEH 

longest  inscription  on  a  cylinder  is  of  820  lines.  Such 
cylinders  and  inscribed  slabs  were  generally  buried 
beneath  the  foundations  of  gi-eat  public  buildings. 
Many  fragments  of  cylinders  and  a  vast  collection 
of  inscribed  clay  tablets,  many  in  perfect  preser- 
vation, and  some  bearing  the  impressions  of  seals, 
were  discovered  in  a  chamber  at  Kouyunjik.  and  are 
now  deposited  in  the  British  Museum.  They  ap- 
pear to  include  historical  documents,  vocabularies, 
astronomical  and  other  calculations,  calendars,  direc- 
tions for  the  performance  of  religious  ceremonies, 
lists  of  the  gods,  their  attributes,  and  the  days  ap- 
pointed for  their  worship,  descriptions  of  countries, 
lists  of  animals,  grants  of  lands,  «Sjc.  &c.  In  this 
chamber  was  also  found  the  piece  of  clay  beaiing  the 
seal  of  the  Egyptian  king,  So  or  Sabaco,  and  that  of 
an  Assyrian  monarch,  either  Sennacherib  or  his  son, 
probably  atiixed  to  a  treaty  between  the  two,  which 
having  been  written  ou  parchment  or  papyrus,  had 
entirely  perished  (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  15ii). 


NISROCH 


561 


Impressions  of  the  Signets  of  the  Kings  of  Assyria  and  Egypt. 
(Original  si2c^) 


Tart  of  Cartouche  of  Sabaco,  enlarged  fro 
bis  i^iguct. 


1  the  impression  of 


The  most  important  results  may  be  expected 
when  inscriptions  so  numerous  and  so  varied  in  cha- 
racter are  deciphered.  A  list  of  nineteen  or  twenty 
kings  can  already  be  compiled,  and  the  annals  of  the 
greater  number  of  them  will  probably  be  restored  to 
the  lost  history  of  one  of  the  most  powerful  empires 
of  the  ancient  world,  and  of  one  which  appears  to 
have  exercised  perhaps  greater  influence  than  any 
other  upon  the  subsequent  condition  and  develop- 
ment of  civilised  man.      [.\SSVRIA.] 

The  only  race  now  ibuml  near  the  ruins  of  Nine- 
veli  or  in  Assyiia  which  may  have  any  claim  to  be 
considered  descendants  from  the  ancient  inhabitants 
of  the  country  are  the  so-c;illed  Chaldaean  or  Nos- 
toriaii  ti-ibes,  inhabiting  tlie  moiuitains  of  Kur- 
distan, the  plains  roun<i  the  lake  of  Ooroomiyah  in 
Persia,  and  a  few  villages  in  the  neighbonihood  of 
Mosul.  They  still  speak  a  Semitic  dialect,  almost 
identical  with  the  Chaldee  of  the  books  of  Daniel 
and   E/.r.\.      A  resemblance,  which  may  l)e  bnt  fan- 

V(»[,.  II. 


ciful,  ha.s  been  traced  between  them  and  the  repre- 
sentations of  the  Assyrians  in  the  bas-reliefs.  Their 
physical  characteristics  at  any  rate  seem  to  mark 
them  as  of  the  same  race.  The  inhabitants  of  this 
part  of  Asia  have  been  exposed  perhaps  more  than 
those  of  any  other  country  in  the  world  to  the  de- 
vastating inroads  of  stranger  hordes.  Conquerinof 
tribes  of  Arabs  and  of  Tartars  have  more  than  once 
well-nigh  e.xterminated  the  population  which  they 
found  there,  and  have  occupied  their  places.  The 
few  survivors  from  these  terrible  massacres  have 
taken  refuge  in  the  mountain  fastnesses,  where  they 
may  still  linger.  A  curse  seems  to  hang  over  a 
land  naturally  rich  and  fertile,  and  capable  of  sus- 
taining a  vast  number  of  human  beings.  Those 
who  now  inhabit  it  ai'e  yearly  diminishing,  and 
there  seems  no  prospect  that  for  generations  to  come 
this  once-favoured  country  should  remain  other  than 
a  wilderness. 

(Layard's  Nineveh  and  its  Remains ;  Nineoeh  and 
Babylon ;  and  Monuments  of  Nineveh,  1st  and  2nd 
Series  ;  Botta's  Monument  de  Ninive ;  Fergusson, 
Palaces  of  Nineveh  and  Persepolis  restored  ;  Vaux's 
Nineveh  and  Persepolis.)  [A.  H.  L.] 

NIN'EVITES  CNivevirai:  Ninevitae).  The 
inliabitants  of  Kineveh  (Luke  xi.  .30). 

XI'SAN.    [Months.] 

NIS'ROCPI  CTjnp?  :  yiiffepAx,  l^I'ii's  ed.  'E<r- 
5pax  ;  Alex.  'Etropdx  in  2  K.  ;  tiaaapdx  in  Is. : 
Nesroch).  The  proper  name  of  an  idol  of  Nineveh, 
in  whose  temple  Sennacherib  was  worshipping  when 
assassinated  by  his  sons,  Adi-ammeJech  and  Sharezer 
(2K.  xix.  37;  Is.  xxxvii.  38).  Selden  confesses  his 
ignoi-ance  of  the  deity  denoted  by  this  name  (de  Bis 
Syris,  synt.  ii.  c.  10) ;  but  Beyer,  in  his  Addita- 
menta  (pp.  323-325)  has  collected  several  conjec- 
tures. Jarchi,  in  his  note  on  Is.  xxxvii.  38,  explains 
Nisroch  as  "  a  beam,  or  plank,  of  Noah's  ark,"  fi-om 
the  analysis  which  is  given  of  the  word  by  l!ab- 
binical  expositors  (■]1Di  =  XniJ  N1D3).  What  the 
true  etymology  may  be  is  extremely  doubtful.  If 
the  origin  of  the  word  be  Shemitic,  it  may  be  de- 
rived, as  Gesenius  suggests,  from  the  Heb.  "lli^'3, 
which  is  in  Arab,  nisr,  "  an  eagle,"  with  the  ter- 
mination och  or  ach,  which  is  intensive  in  Persian," 
so  that  Nisroch  would  signify  "the  great  eagle" 
(comp.  Akioch).  But  it  must  be  confessed  \hat 
this  explanation  is  far  from  satisfactory.  It  is 
adopted,  however,  by  Mr.  Layard,  who  identifies 
with  Nisroch  the  eagie-headed  human  figure,  whicli 
is  one  of  the  most  prominent  on  the  earliest  Assyrian 
monuments,  and  is  always  represented  as  contending 
with  and  conquering  the  lion  or  the  bull  [Xinereh, 
II.  458,  459).  In  another  passage  he  endeavours 
to  reconcile  the  fact  that  Asshur  was  the  supreme 
god  of  the  Assyrians,  as  far  as  can  be  determined 
from  the  inscriptions,  with  the  appearance  of  the 
name  Nisroch  as  that  of  the  chief  god  of  Nineveh, 
by  supposing  that  Sennacherib  may  have  been  slain 
in  the  temple  of  A.sshur,  and  that  the  Hebrews, 
seeing  everywheie  the  eagle-headed  figure,  "  may 
have  believed  it  to  be  that  of  the  pccnliai-  g(Hl  of  the 
Assyrians,  to  whom  they  consequently  gave  a  name 
denoting  an  eagle"  {Nin.4-  Bab.  037,'  note).  Other 
explanations,  based  upon  the  sjmie  etymology,  have 
been  given  ;  such  as  that  suggested  by  IJeyer  '{Addit. 
p.  324),  that  Nisroch  denotes  "  Noah's  eagle," 
that  is  "  Noah's  bird,"  that  is  "  Noah's  dove,"  the 

"  So  he  says  in  his  Thes.,  but  in  his  Jemia  (I.  9T6)  he 

corrrctlj-  rails  it  a  (iinilnntive. 

2  0 


562 


NITRE 


dove  being  an  object  of  worship  among  the  Assyrians 
(Luciau,  de  Jov.  trag.  c.  42) ;  or  that  mentioned 
as  more  probable  by  Winer  (Realw.  s.  v.),  that  it 
was  the  constellation  Aquila,  the  eagle  being  in  the 
Persian  religion  a  symbol  of  Ormuzd.  Parkhurst, 
deriving  the  word  from  the  Chaldee  root  "^"ID,  serac 
(which  occui's  in  Dan.  vi.  in  the  foi-m  N^SiD,  sa- 
recaijya,  and  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "presidents"), 
conjectures  that  Nisroch  may  be  the  impersonation 
of  the  solar  fire,  and  substantially  identical  with 
Molech  and  Slilcom,  which  are  both  derived  fi'om  a 
root  similar  in  meaning  to  serac.  Nothing,  however, 
is  certain  with  regard  to  Nisroch,  except  that  these 
conjectures,  one  and  all,  are  veiy  little  to  be  de- 
pended on.  Sir  H.  RawJinson  says  that  Asshur  had 
no  temple  at  Nineveh  in  which  Sennacherib  could 
have  been  worshipping  (Piawlinson,  Herod.  I.  p. 
590).  He  conjectures  that  Nisroch  is  not  a  genuine 
reading.  Josephus  has  a  curious  variation.  He 
says  (Ant.  X.  1  §5)  that  Sennacherib  was  buried 
in  his  own  temple  called  Arasce  (eV  t^  i5iqj 
va^  'ApicTKri  Xeyo^aeVy).  [W.  A.  W.] 

NITRE  ("inj,  ne^Aer:  (\kos,  vlrpov  :  nitruni) 
occurs  in  Prov.  xxv.  20,  "  As  he  that  taketh  away  a 
gaiTneut  in  cold  weather,  and  as  vinegai-  upon  nether, 
so  is  he  that  singeth  songs  to  an  heavy  heart ;" 
and  in  Jer.  ii.  22,  where  it  is  said  of  sinful  Judah, 
"  though  thou  wash  thee  with  nether  and  take  thee 
much  borith  [Soap],  yet  thine  iniquity  is  marked 
before  me."  The  substance  denoted  is  not  that 
which  we  now  understand  by  the  term  nitre,  i.  e. 
nitrate  of  potassa — "saltpetre" — but  the  virpov 
or  Xirpov  of  the  Greeks,  the  nitrum  of  the  Latins, 
and  the  natron  or  native  carbonate  of  soda  of 
modern  chemistry.  Much  has  been  written  on 
the  subject  of  the  nitrum  of  the  ancients;  it  will 
be  enough  to  refer  the  reader  to  Beckmann,  who 
{History  of  Inventions,  ii.  482,  Bohn's  ed.)  has 
devoted  a  chapter  to  this  subject,  and  to  the  autho- 
rities mentioned  in  the  notes.  It  is  uncertain  at  what 
time  the  English  teiTn  nitre  first  ca'.ne  to  be  used 
for  saltpetre,  but  our  translators  no  doubt  under- 
stood thereby  the  carbonate  of  soda,  for  yiitre  is  so 
-used  by  Holland  in  his  translation  of  Pliny  (xxxi. 
10)  in  contradistinction  to  saltpetre,  which  he  gives 
as  the  marginal  explanation  of  aphronitrum. 

The  latter  part  of  the  passage  in  Proverbs  is  well 
explained  by  Shaw,  who  says  {Trav.  ii.  387),  "the 
unsuitableness  of  the  singing  of  songs  to  a  heavy 
heart  is  very  finely  compared  to  the  contrariety 
there  is  between  vinegar  and  natron."  This  is 
far  preferable  to  the  explanation  given  by  Jlichaelis 
{De  Nitro  Hehraeor.  in  Commcntat.  Societ.  Reg. 
praelect.  i.  166;  and  Sappl.  Lex.  Heh.  p.  1704), 
that  the  simile  alludes  to  the  unpleasant  smell 
arising  from  the  admixture  of  the  acid  and  alkali ; 
it  points  rather  to  the  extreme  mental  agitation 
produced  by  ill-timed  mirth,  tlie  grating  against 
the  feelings,  to  make  use  of  another  metaphor. 
Natrum  was  and  is  still  used  by  the  Egyptians  for 
washing  linen,  the  value  of  soda  in  this  respect  is 
well  known ;  this  explains  Jer.  I.  c,  "  though  thou 
wash  thee  with  soda,"  &c.  H:\sselquist  (Tnw. 
275)  says  that  natrum  is  dug  out  of  a  pit  or  mine 
near  Mantura  in  Egypt,  and  is  mixed  with  lime- 
stone and  is  of  a  whitish-brown  colour.  The 
Egyptians  use  it,  (1)  to  put  into  bread  instead  of 
yeast,  (2)  instead  of  soap,  (3)  as  a  cure  for  the 
toothache,  being  mixed  with  vinegar.  Compare 
also  ForskSl  {Flor.  Aegypt.  Arab.  p.  xlvi.),  who 
gives  its  Arabic  names,  atrun  or  natriin. 


NOAH 

Natron  is  found  abundantly  in  the  well-known 
soda  lakes  of  Egypt  described  by  Pliny  (xxxi.  10), 
and  referred  to  by  Strabo  (xvii.  A.  1155.  ed. 
Kramer),  which  are  situated  in  the  barren  valley  of 
Bahr-beh-ma  (the  Waterless  Sea), about  50  miles  W. 
of  Cairo  ;  the  natron  occurs  in  whitish  or  yellowish 
effloiescent  crusts,  or  in  beds  three  or  four  feet 
thick,  and  very  hard  (Volney,  Trav.  i.  15),  which 
in  the  winter  are  covered  with  water  about  two 
feet  deep ;  during  the  other  nine  months  of  the 
year  the  lakes  are  dry,  at  which  period  the  natron 
is  procured.  (See  Andreossi,  Memoire  sur  la  Vallee 
des  Lacs  de  Natron,  in  Mem.  sur  VSgypte,  ii. 
276,  &c.  ;  Berthollet,  Observat.  sur  le  Natron, 
ibid.  p.  310  ;  Descript.  de  I'Egyptc,  sxi.  205.) 

[W.  H.] 

NO.     [No-Amon.] 

NOADI'AH   (nnyi3:    NwaSfa:    Noadaia). 

1.  A  Levite,  son  of  Binnui,  Avho  with  Meremoth, 
Eleazar,  and  Jozabad,  weighed  the  vessels  of  gold  and 
silver  belonging  to  the  Temple  which  were  brought 
back  from  Babjdon  (Ezr.  viii.  33).  In  1  Esd.  viii. 
63,  he  is  called  "  Moeth  the  son  of  Sabban." 

2.  (Noadia).  The  prophetess  Noadiah  joined 
Sanballat  and  Tobiah  in  their  attempt  to  intimidate 
Nehemiah  while  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  vi.  14).  She  is  only  mentioned  in  Nehe- 
miah's  denunciation  of  his  enemies,  and  is  not  pro- 
minent in  the  narrative. 

NO'AH  (nh  :  N»€;  Joseph.  Ncosos:  Noe),  the 
tenth  in  descent  from  Adam,  in  the  line  of  Seth, 
was  the  son  of  Lamech,  and  grandson  of  Methu- 
selah. Of  his  father  Lamech  all  that  we  know  is 
comprised  in  the  words  that  he  uttered  on  the  birth 
of  his  son,  words  the  more  significant  when  we 
contrast  them  with  the  saying  of  the  other  Lamech 
of  the  race  of  Cain,  which  have  also  been  preserved. 
The  one  exults  in  the  discovery  of  weapons  by 
which  he  may  defend  himself  in  case  of  need.  The 
other,  a  tiller  of  the  soil,  mourns  over  the  curse 
which  rests  on  the  ground,  seeing  in  it  evidently 
the  consequence  of  sin.  It  is  impossible  to  mistake 
the  religious  feeling  which  speaks  of  "  the  ground 
which  Jehovah  hath  cursed."  Not  less  evident  is 
the  bitter  sense  of  weary  and  fruitless  labour,  min- 
gled with  better  hopes  for  the  future.  We  read 
that  on  the  birth  of  a  son  "  he  called  his  name 
Noah,  saying.  This  shall  comfort  us,  for  our  work 
and  labour  of  our  hands,  because  of  (or  from)  the 
ground  which  Jehovah  hath  cursed."  Nothing  can 
be  more  exquisitely  true  and  natural  than  the  way 
in  which  the  old  man's  saddened  heart  turns  fondly 
to  his  son.  His  own  lot  had  been  cast  in  evil  times  ; 
"  but  this,"  he  says,  "  shall  comfort  us."  One 
hardly  knows  whethei-  the  sorrow  or  the  hope  pi-e- 
dominates.  Clearly  there  is  an  almost  prophetic 
feeling  in  the  name  which  he  gives  his  son,  and 
hence  some  Christian  writers  have  seen  in  the  lan- 
guage a  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  and  have  sup- 
posed that  as  Eve  was  mistaken  on  the  birth  of 
Cain,  so  Lamech  in  like  manner  was  deceived  in  his 
hope  of  Noah.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  infer  from 
the  language  of  the  narrative  that  the  hopes  of 
either  were  of  so  definite  a  nature.  The  knowledge 
of  a  personal  Deliverer  was  not  vouchsafed  till  a 
much  later  period. 

In  the  reason  which  Lamech  gives  for  calling  his 
son  Noah,  there  is  a  play  upon  the  name  which  it 
is  impossible  to  pi'eserve  in  English.  He  called 
his  name  Noah  (113,  Noach,  rest),  saying,  "  this  same 


NOAH 
shall  co»i/o)-f  us"  (-laJOnj^,  yenachamenfl).  It  is 
quite  plain  that  the  name  "rest,"  and  the  verb 
"comfoit,"  are  of  difterent  roots  ;  and  we  must 
not  try  to  make  a  philologist  of  Lanicch,  ami  sup- 
pose that  he  was  giving  an  accurate  derivation  of 
the  name  Noah.  lie  merely  plays  upon  the  name, 
after  a  fashion  common  enough  in  all  ages  and 
countries. 

Of  Noah  himself  from  this  time  we  hear  no- 
thing more  till  he  is  500  years  old,  when  it  is  said 
he  begat  three  sons,  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet." 

Very  remarkable,  however,  is  the  glimpse  which 
we  get  of  the  state  of  society  in  the  ante-diluvian 
world.  The  narrative  it  is  true  is  brief,  and  on 
many  points  obscure :  a  mystery  hangs  over  it 
which  we  cannot  penetrate.  But  some  few  facts 
are  clear.  The  wickedness  of  the  world  is  described 
as  haAing  reached  a  desperate  pitch,  owing  it  would 
seem  in  a  great  measure  to  the  fusion  of  two  races 
which  had  hitherto  been  distinct.  And  further  the 
marked  features  of  the  wiclcedness  of  the  age  were 
lust  and  brutal  outrage.  "  They  took  them  wives 
of  all  which  they  chose  ;"  and,  "  the  earth  was  filled 
with  violence."  "  The  earth  was  corru[it ;  for  all 
flesh  had  corrupted  his  way  upon  the  eaith."  So 
far  the  picture  is  clear  and  vivid.  But  when  we 
come  to  examine  some  of  its  details,  we  are  left 
greatly  at  a  loss.     The  narrative  stands  thus: 

"  And  it  came  to  pass  when  men  (the  Adam) 
began  to  multiply  on  the  face  of  the  ground  and 
daughtei-s  were  born  unto  tiiem  ;  then  the  sons  of 
God  (the  Elohim )  saw  the  daughters  of  men  (the 
Adam)  that  they  weie  fair,  and  they  took  to  them 
wives  of  all  that  they  chose.  And  Jehovah  said. 
My  spirit  shall  not  for  ever  rule  (or  be  humbled) 
in  men,  seeing  that  they  are  [or,  in  their  error  they 
are]  but  flesh,  and  tlieir  days  shall  be  a  hundred 
and  twenty  years.  The  Nephilim  were  in  the  earth 
in  those  days  ;  and  also  afterwards  when  the  sons  of 
God  (the  Elohim)  came  in  unto  the  daughters  of 
men  (the  Adam),  and  children  were  born  to  them, 
these  were  the  heroes  which  were  of  old,  men  of 
renown." 

Here  a  number  of  perplexing  questions  present 
themselves:  Who  weie  the  sous  of  God  ?  Who  the 
daughters  of  men  ?  Who  the  Nephilim  ?  What  is 
the  meaning  of  "  My  spirit  shall  not  always  rule, 
or  dwell,  or  be  humbled  in  men  ;"  and  of  the  words 
which  follow,  "  But  their  days  shall  be  an  hundred 
and  twenty  years  ?" 

We  will  briefly  review  the  principal  solutions 
which  have  been  given  of  these  difficulties. 

a.  Sons  of  God  and  daughters  of  men. 

Three  different  intei-pretations  have  from  very  early 
times  been  given  of  this  most  singular  passage. 

1.  The  "sons  of  Elohim"  were  explained  to  mean 
sons  of  princes,  or  men  of  high  rank  (as  in  Ps. 
bcxxii.  6,  6'ne  'Ebjon,  sons  of  the  Most  High)  who 


NOAH 


563 


"  In  marked  contrast  witli  the  simplicity  and  sub'-rness 
of  the  Bibliciil  narrative,  is  tlio  wonderliil  stury  tuld  of 
Noah's  birlli  in  the  boolc  of  ICnocb.  Lamcch's  wile,  it 
is  said,  "  brouglit  forth  a  cliild,  the  flesh  of  which  was 
white  as  snow,  and  red  as  a  rose  ;  the  hair  of  whose  head 
was  white  like  wuol,  and  lon^;  and  whose  eyes  wore 
beautiful.  When  he  opened  them  he  illuminated  nil  tlm 
house  like  the  stui.  And  when  he  was  taken  from  the 
hand  of  the  iniihvil'c,  opening  also  his  mouth,  he  spoke  to 
the  Lord  of  righteousness."  Lamech  is  ti'iiilled  at  the 
prodigy,  and  goes  to  his  father  Mat,husala,  and  tells  him 
that  he  has  begotten  a  son  who  is  unlike  other  ehlldren. 
On  hiarinu  the  story,  Mcuhu.-alU  proceeds,  at  Jjanuch's 


degraded  themselves  by  contracting  marriages  with 
"  the  daughters  of  men,"  i.  e.  with  women  of  in- 
ferior position.  This  interpretation  was  defended 
by  Ps.  xlix.  3,  where  "sons  of  men,"  h'ne  dddin, 
means  "  men  of  low  degree,"  as  opposed  to  b'neish, 
"  men  of  high  degree."  Here,  however,  the  oppo- 
sition is  with  Une  ha- Elohim,  and  not  with  b'ne  ish, 
and  therefore  the  passages  are  not  parallel.  This 
is  the  interpretation  of  the  Targum  of  Onkelos, 
following  the  oldest  Palestinian  Kabbala,  of  the 
later  Targum,  and  of  the  Samaritan  Vers.  So  also 
Symmachus,  Saadia,  and  the  Arabic  of  Erpenius, 
Aben  Ezra,  and  K.  Sol.  Isaaki.  lu  recent  times 
this  view  has  been  elaborated  and  put  in  the  most 
favourable  light  by  Schiller  {Werke,  x.  401,  &c.)  ; 
but  it  has  been  entirely  abandoned  by  every  modei-n 
commentator  of  any  note. 

2.  A  second  interpretation,  perhaps  not  less  an- 
cient, understands  by  the  "  sons  of  Elohim,"  angels. 
So  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  which  according  to 
Procopius  and  Augustine  (Z)e  C'ioit.  Dei,  xv.  23), 
had  the  reading  &yye\oi  rov  @€ov,  whilst  others 
had  viol  Tov  Qeov,  the  last  having  been  generally 
preferred  since  Cyril  and  Augustine ;  so  Joseph. 
A7it.  i.  3;  Philo  Do  Gigantibus  [perhaps  Aquila, 
who  has  vioi  tov  Qeov,  of  which  liowever  Jerome 
says,  Deos  intelligens  angelos  sive  s  tnctos]  ;  the 
Book  of  Enoch  as  quoted  by  Georgius  Syncellus 
in  his  Chronographia,  where  they  are  termed  ol 
eyp'hyopoi,  "  the  watchers "  (as  in  Daniel)  ;  the 
Book  of  Jubilees  (translated  by  Dillniann  from 
the  Ethiopic)  ;  the  later  Jewish  Hagada,  whence 
we  have  the  story  of  the  fitll  of  Shamchazai  and 
Azazel,''  given  by  Jellinek  in  the  Midrash  Abchir ; 
ami  most  of  the  older  Fathers  of  the  Church,  find- 
ing probaV)ly  in  their  Greek  MSS.  &yye\oi  rev 
@eov,  as  Justin,  Tatian,  Atbenagoras,  Clemens 
Alex.,  Tertulliaii,  and  Lactantius.  Tiiis  view,  how- 
ever, seemed  in  later  times  to  be  too  monstrous 
to  be  entertained.  R.  Sim.  b.  Jochai  anathema- 
tized it.  Cyrill  calls  it  aroirdraTov.  Theodoret 
{Qnaest.  in  Gen.)  declares  the  maintainers  of  it 
to  have  lost  their  senses,  ifi^pSvrriTOi  koI  &yav 
ri\i6iOL  ;  Philastrius  numbers  it  among  heresies, 
Chrysostom  among  blasphemies.  Finally,  Calvin 
says  of  it,  "  Vetus  illud  commentum  de  angelorum 
concubitu  cum  mulieribus  sua  absurditate  abunde 
refellitur,  ac  mirum  est  doctos  viros  tam  civassis 
et  prodigiosis  deliriis  fuisse  olim  fascinates."  Not- 
withstanding all  which,  however,  many  modern 
German  commentators  very  strenuously  assert  this 
view.  They  rest  their  argument  in  favour  of  it 
maiidy  on  these  two  particulars ;  first,  that  "  sons 
of  God  "  is  everywhere  else  in  the  0.  T.  a  name  of 
the  angels;  and  next,  that  St.  Jude  seems  to  leml 
the  sanction  of  his  authority  to  this  interpretation. 
With  regard  to  the  first  of  tliese  rea,sons,  it  is  not  even 
certain  that  in  all  other  pa.s^ages  of  Scripture  where 
"  the  sons  of  God  "  are  mentioned  angels  are  meant. 


entreaty,  to  consult  Knoch,  "  whose  residence  is  with  the 
angels."  Knoch  explains  that,  in  the  days  of  his  father 
Jarod,  "  those  who  were  Irom  heaven  disregarded  the  word 
of  the  Lord  .  .  .  hud  aside  tlieir  cla.ss  and  intermingled  with 
%vonion  ;"  that  consequently  a  didugc  was  to  be  sent  upon 
the  earth,  whereby  It  should  he  "  wjushcd  from  all  cor- 
ruption;'  that  Noah  and  liis  cliildren  should  be  saved; 
and  tliat  his  ])osterity  should  beget  on  the  earth  giants, 
not  spiritual,  but  carnal  (IJook  of  Knoch,  ch.  cv.  p.  161-3). 

•>  in  licresli.  llab.  in  (Jen.  vi.  2,  this  Azazel  is  declared  to 
bo  the  tuleliiry  deity  of  women's  ornaments  and  paint, 
and  is  idontilled  wUh  the  Azanel  in  Lev.  xvi.  8. 

2  0  2 


5Gt 


NOAH 


It  is  not  absolutely  necessary  so  to  understand  the  de- 
signation either  in  Ps.  xxix.  1  or  Ixxxix.  6,  or  even 
in  Job  i.,  ii.  In  any  of  these  passages  it  might 
mean  holy  men.  Job  sxxviii.  7,  and  Dan.  iii.  25, 
are  the  only  places  in  which  it  certainly  means 
angels.  The  argument  from  St.  Jude  is  of  more 
force ;  for  he  does  compare  the  sin  of  the  angels  to 
that  of  Sodom  and  Gomon'ha  [tovtois  iu  ver.  7 
must  refer  to  the  angels  mentioned  in  ver.  6),  as  if 
it  were  of  a  like  unnatural  kind.  And  that  this 
was  the  meaning  of  St.  Jude  is  rendered  the  more 
probable  when  we  recollect  his  qiwtation  from  the 
Book  of  Enoch  where  the  same  view  is  taken.  Fur- 
ther, that  the  angels  had  the  power  of  assuming  a 
corporeiil  form  seems  clear  from  many  parts  of  the 
0.  T.  All  that  can  be  urged  in  support  of  this  view 
has  been  said  by  Delitzsch  in  his  Die  Genesis  ausgc- 
legt,  and  by  Kurtz,  Gesch.  des  Alien  Bundes,  and 
his  treatise,  Die  Ehen  der  Sohne  Gottes.  And  it 
must  be  confessed  that  their  arguments  are  not 
without  weight.  The  early  existence  of  such  an 
interpretation  seems  at  any  rate  to  indicate  a  start- 
ing-point for  the  heathen  mythologies.  The  tact, 
too,  that  from  such  an  intercourse  "  the  mighty 
men"  were  born,  points  in  the  same  direction.  The 
Greek  "  heroes"  were  sons  of  the  gods  ;  ovk  oiffOa 
says  Plato  in  the  Cratylus,  '6ti  rifiideoi  ol  ripSxs  ; 
iravTis  Srjvrou  yiySvainv  ipacrQei/Tes  ;}  Oehs  Qvq- 
TTjs  t)  dvriToi  Bias.  Even  Hesiod's  account  of  the 
birth  of  the  giants,  monstrous  and  fantastic  as  it  is, 
bears  tokens  of  having  originated  in  the  same  belief. 
In  like  manner  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  stories  of 
incuhi  and  succuhi,  so  commonly  believed  in  the 
middle  ages,  and  which  even  Heidegger  (^Hist.  Sacr. 
i.  289)  does  not  discredit,  had  reference  to  a  com- 
merce between  demons  and  mortals  of  the  same 
kind  as  that  narrated  in  Genesis."^ 

Two  modern  poets,  Byron  (in  his  drama  of  Cain) 
and  Moore  (in  his  Loves  of  the  Angels),  have  availed 
themselves  of  this  last  interpretation  for  the  pur- 
pose of  their  poems. 

3.  The  interpretation,  however,  which  is  now  most 
generally  received,  is  that  wliich  understands  by 
"  the  sons  of  the  Elohim"  the  family  and  descend- 
ants of  Seth,  and  by  "  the  daugliters  of  man 
(Adam),"  the  women  of  the  family  of  Cain.  So 
the  Clementine  Piecognitions  interpret  "  the  sons  of 
the  Elohim"  as  Homines  justi  qui  angelorum  vix- 
erant  vitam.  So  Ephrem,  and  the  Christian  Adam- 
Book  of  the  East:  so  also,  Theodoret,  Chrysostom, 
Cyril  of  Alexandi'ia,  Jerome,  Augustine,  and  others  ; 
and  in  later  times  Luther,  Melancthon,  Calvin,  and 
a  wliole  host  of  recent  commentators.  They  all 
suppose  that  whereas  the  two  lines  of  descent  from 
Adam — the  family  of  Seth  who  preserved  their  faith 
in  God,  and  the  family  of  Cain  who  lived  only  for 
this  world — had  hitherto  kept  distinct,  now  a  min- 
Ejling  of  the  two  races  took  place  which  resulted  in 
the  thorough  corruption  of  the  former,  who  falling 
away,  plunged  into  the  deepest  abyss  of  wickedness, 
and  that  it  was  this  universal  corraption  which  pro- 
voked the  judgment  of  the  Flood. 

4.  A  fourth  interpretation  has  recently  been  ad- 
vanced and  maintained  with  considerable  ingenuity, 
by  the  author  of  the  Genesis  of  the  Earth  and 
Man.  He  understands  by  "  the  sons  of  the  Elo- 
him "  the  "  servants  or  worshippers  oi  false  gods  " 
[taking  Elohim  to  mean  not  God  but  gods],  whom 
he  supposes  to  have  belonged   to  a  distinct  pre- 


<■■  Thomas  Aquin.  (pars  i.  qii.  51,  art.  3)  argues  that  it 
was  possible  for  angels  to  have  children  by  mortal  women. 


NOAH 

Adamite  race.  "  The  daughters  of  men,"  he  con- 
tends, should  be  rendered  "  the  daughters  of  Adam, 
or  the  Adamites,"  women,  that  is,  descended  from 
Adam.  These  last  had  hitherto  remained  true  in 
their  faith  and  worship,  but  were  now  perverted 
by  the  idolaters  who.  intermarried  with  them.  But 
this  hypothesis  is  opposed  to  the  direct  statements 
in  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis,  which  plainly 
teach  the  descent  of  all  mankind  from  one  common 
source. 

Whichever  of  these  interpretations  we  adopt  (the 
third  perhaps  is  the  most  probable),  one  thing  at 
least  is  clear,  tliat  the  writer  intends  to  describe  a 
fusion  of  races  hitherto  distinct,  and  to  connect 
with  this  two  other  facts ;  the  one  that  the  off- 
spring of  these  mixed  marriages  were  men  remark- 
able for  strength  and  prowess  (which  is  only  in  ac- 
cordance witii  what  has  often  been  observed  since, 
viz.,  the  superiority  of  the  mixed  race  as  compared 
with  either  of  the  parent  stocks) ;  the  other,  thdt 
the  result  of  this  intercourse  was  the  thorough  ana 
hopeless  corruption  of  both  families  alike. 

h.  But  who  were  tlie  Nephilim  ?  It  should  be 
observed  that  they  are  not  spoken  of  (as  has  some- 
times been  assumed),  as  the  oftspring  of  the  "sons 
of  the  Elohim  "  and  "  the  daughters  of  men."  The 
sacred-writer  says,  "  the  Nephilim  were  on  the  earth 
in  those  days,"  before  he  goes  on  to  speak  of  the 
children  of  the  mixed  marriages.  The  name,  which 
has  been  variously  explained,  only  occurs  once  again 
in  Num.  xiii.  33,  where  the  Nephilim  are  said  to 
have  been  one  of  the  Canaanitish  tribes.  They  are 
there  spoken  of  as  "  men  of  great  stature,"  and  hence 
probably  the  rendering  yiyavres  of  the  LXX.  and 
"the  giants"  ofourA.  V.  But  there  is  nothing 
in  the  word  itself  to  justify  this  interpretation.  If 
it  is  of  Hebrew  origin  (which  however  may  be 
doubted)  it  must  mean  either  "  fallen,"  i.  e.  apostate 
ones ;  or  those  who  "  fall  upon "  others,  violent 
men,  plunderers,  freebooters,  &c.  It  is  of  far  more 
importance  to  observe  that  if  the  Nephilim  of 
Canaan  were  descendants  of  the  Nephilim  in  Gen. 
vi.  4,  we  have  here  a  very  strong  argument  for  the 
non-universality  of  the  Deluge. 

c.  In  consequence  of  the  grievous  and  hopeless 
wickedness  of  the  world  at  this  time,  God  resolves  to 
destroy  it.  "  My  spirit,"  He  says,  "  shall  not  always 
"dwell"  (LXX.  Vnlg.  Saad.) — or  "  bear  sway  " 
in  man — inasmuch  as  he  is  but  flesh.  The  mean- 
ing of  which  seems  to  be  that  whilst  God  had  put 
His  Spirit  in  man,  «.  e.  not  only  the  breath  of  life, 
but  a  spiritual  part  capable  of  recognising,  loving, 
and  worshipping  Him,  man  had  so  much  sunk 
down  into  the  lowest  and  most  debasing  of  fleshly 
ple;isures,  as  to  have  almost  extinguished  the  higher 
light  within  him ;  as  one  of  the  Fathers  says :  anima 
victa  libidine  fit  caro :  the  soul  and  spirit  became 
transubstantiated  into  flesh.  Then  follows :  "  But 
his  days  shall  be  a  hundred  and  twenty  years,"  which 
has  been  interpreted  by  some  to  mean,  that  still  a 
time  of  grace  shall  be  given  for  repentance,  viz., 
120  years  before  the  Flood  shall  come;  and  by 
others,  that  the  duration  of  human  life  should  iu 
future  be  limited  to  this  term  of  years,  instead  of 
extending  over  centuries  as  before.  This  last  seems 
the  most  natural  interpretation  of  the  Hebrew 
words.  Of  Noali's  life  during  this  age  of  almost 
universal  apostasy  we  are  told  but  little.  It  is 
merely  said,  that  he  was  a  righteous  man  and  perfect 
in  his  generations  (i.e.  amongst  his  conterriporaries), 
and  that  he,  like  Enoch,  walked  with  God.  This 
last  e.\pressive  phrase  is  used  of  none  other  but 


NOAH 

these  two  only.  To  him  God  revealed  His  purpose 
to  destroy  the  world,  commanding  him  to  prepare 
an  ark  for  the  saving  of  his  house.  And  from  that 
time  till  the  day  came  for  him  to  enter  into  the 
Ark,  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  he  was  engaged  in 
active,  but  as  it  proved  unavailing  efforts  to  win 
those  about  him  from  their  wickedness  and  mi- 
belief.  Hence  St.  Peter  calls  liim  "  a  preacher  of 
righteousness."  Besides  (his  we  are  merely  told  that 
he  had  three  sons,  each  of  whom  had  married  a  wife  ; 
that  he  built  the  Ark  in  accordance  with  Divine 
direction  ;  and  that  he  was  GOO  years  old  when  the 
Flood  came. 

Both  about  the  Ark  and  the  Flood  so  many  ques- 
tions have  been  raised,  that  we  must  consider  each 
of  these  separately. 

The  Ark. — The  pi'ecise  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
word  (nnn,  tebdh)  is  uncertain.  The  word  only 
occurs  here  and  in  the  second  chapter  of  Exodus, 
where  it  is  used  of  the  little  papyrus  boat  in  which 
the  mother  of  Moses  entrusted  lier  child  to  the 
Nile.  In  all  probability  it  is  to  the  old  Egyptian  that 
we  are  to  look  for  its  original  form. 

Buusen,  in  his  vocabulary,''  gives  tba,  "a  chest," 
tpt,  "  a  boat,"  and  in  the  Copt.  Vers,  of  Exod.  ii. 
'■5>  5,  OHiil,  is  the  rendering  of  tebdh.  The 
LXX.  employ  two  different  words.  In  the  narrative 
of  the  flood  they  use  ki^wt6s,  and  in  that  of  Jloses 
6l0is,  or  according  to  some  MSS.  drtfir).  The  Book 
of  Wisdom  has  crxeSia ;  Berosus  and  Nicol. 
Damasc.  quoted  in  Josephus,  t\o7ov  and  \dpva^. 
The  last  is  also  found  in  Lucian,  Be  Bed  J^i/r.  c.  12. 
In  the  Sib3'lline  Verses  the  ark  is  Sovpareov  Sw/xa, 
oIkos  and  Kifiairos.  The  Targuni  and  the  Koran 
have  each  respectively  given  the  Chaldee  and  the 
Arabic  form  of  the  Hebrew  word. 

This  "  chest,"  or  "  boat,"  was  to  be  made  of 
gopher  {i.e.  cypress)  wood,  a  kind  of  timber  which 
both  for  its  lightness  and  its  durability  was  em- 
ployed by  the  Phoenicians  for  building  their  vessels. 
Alexander  the  Gi-eat,  Arrian  tells  us  (vii.  19),  made 
use  of  it  for  the  same  pui'pose.  The  planks  of  tlie 
ai'k,  after  being  put  together,  were  to  be  pi'otected 
by  a  coating  of  pitch,  or  rather  bitumen  (^133, 
LXX.  &(r<pa\ros),  which  was  to  be  laid  on  both  inside 
and  outside,  as  the  most  effectual  means  of  making  it 
water-tight,  and  perhaps  also  as  a  protection  against 
the  attacks  of  marine  animals.    Next  to  the  material. 


d  Egypt's  Mace,  &c.,  i.  482. 

«  Knobel's  explanation  is  different.  By  the  words,  "  to 
a  cubit  (or  within  a  cubit)  shall  thou  finish  it  above,"  he 
understands  that,  the  window  being  in  the  side  of  the  ark, 
a  spaxje  of  a  cubit  was  to  be  left  between  the  top  of  the 
window  and  the  overhanging  roof  of  the  ark  which  Noah 
removed  after  the  flood  had  abated  (viii.  13).  There  is 
however  no  reason  to  concluilc,  ;is  he  does,  that  tliere  was 
only  one  light.  The  great  objection  to  supposing  that  the 
window  was  in  the  side  of  the  ark,  is  that  then  a  great 
part  of  the  interior  must  have  boon  left  in  darkness. 
And  again  we  are  told  (viii.  13),  that  when  the  I-'lood 
abated  Noah  removed  the  covering  of  the  ark,  to  look 
about  him  to  see  if  the  earth  were  dry.  This  would  have 
been  unnecessary  if  the  window  had  been  in  tlie  side, 
"  Unto  a  cubit  shalt  tliou  finish  it  above "  can  hardly 
mean,  as  some  have  supposed,  that  the  roof  of  the  ark 
was  to  have  this  pitch  ;  for,  considering  that  the  ark  was 
to  be  50  cubits  in  breadth,  a  roof  of  a  cubit's  pitch  would 
have  been  almost  flat. 

t  Symm.  renders  the  word  Siaijiave^.  Theodoret  has 
merely  eupai- ;  Gr.  Venct.  4>ojTayuiy6i> ;  'Vn\g.  fenesiram. 
The  LXX.  translate,  strangely  enough,  eTvtcrvvdyuiv  Trouj- 
crtt!  TTjf  K^pioTov.    The  root  of  the  word  indicates  that 


NOAH  6fi5 

the  metliod  of  construction  is  described.  The  ark 
w;is  to  consist  of  a  number  of  "  nests"  (□"'Dp;,  or 
small  coinpartments,  with  a  view  no  doubt  to  the 
convenient  distribution  of  the  different  animals  and 
their  food.  These  were  to  be  arranged  in  three 
tiers,  one  above  another  ;  "  with  lower,  second,  and 
third  (stories)  shalt  thou  make  it."  Means  wei'e 
also  to  be  provided  for  letting  light  into  the  ark. 
In  the  A.  V.  we  read,  "A  v-indow  shalt  tliou 
make  to  the  ark,  and  in  a  cubit  shalt  thou  finish  it 
above  :" — words  which  it  must  be  confessed  convey 
no  very  intelligible  idea.  The  original,  however,  is 
obscure,  and  has  been  differently  interpreted.  What 
the  "  window,"  or  "  light-liole  "  (inVj  tsohar) 
was,  is  very  puzzling.  It  was  to  be  at  the  top  of 
the  ark  apparently.  If  the  words  "  unto  a  cubit 
(nt3N"7X)  shalt  thou  finish  it  above,"  refer  to  the 

window  and  not  to  the  ark  itself,  they  seem  to 
imply  that  this  aperture,  or  skylight,  extended  to 
the  breadth  of  a  cubit  the  whole  length  of  the  roof.* 
But  if  so,  it  could  not  have  been  merely  an  open  slit, 
for  that  would  have  admitted  the  rain.  Are  we  then 
to  suppose  that  some  transparent,  or  at  least  translu- 
cent, substance  was  employed  ?  It  would  almost  seem 
so.^  A  different  word  is  used  in  chap.  viii.  6,  where 
it  is  said  that  Noah  opened  the  window  of  the  ark. 

There  the  word  is  |i?n  {challon),  which  frequently 

occurs  elsewhere  in  the  same  sense.  Certainly  the 
story  as  there  given  does  imply  a  transparent 
window  as  Saalschiitz  {Archaeol.  i.  311)  has  re- 
marked.s  For  Noah  could  watch  the  motions  of  the 
birds  outside,  whilst  at  the  saine  time  he  had  to 
open  the  window  in  order  to  take  them  in.  Sujv 
posing  then  the  tsohar  to  be,  as  we  have  said,  a 
skylight,^  or  series  of  skylights  running  the  whole 
length  of  the  ark  (and  the  fem.  foi-m  of  the  noun 
inclines  one  to  regard  it  as  a  collective  noun),  the 
cha/ldii^  might  very  well  be  a  single  compartment 
of  the  larger  window,  which  could  be  opened  at  will. 
P.ut  besides  the  window  there  was  to  be  a  door. 
This  was  to  be  placed  in  the  side  of  the  ark.  "  The 
door  must  have  been  of  some  size  to  admit  the 
larger  aniiuals,  for  whose  ingress  it  was  mainly 
intended.  It  was  no  doubt  above  the  highest 
draught  mark  of  the  ark,  and  the  animals  ascendeil 
to  it  probably  by  a  sloping  embankment.     A  door 


the  ts6har  was  something  shirting.  Hence  probably  the 
Talmudic  explanation,  tliat  God  told  Noah  to  fix  precious 
stones  in  the  ark,  that  they  might  give  as  much  light  as 
midday  (Sanh.  108  6). 

S  The  only  serious  objection  to  this  explanation  is 
the  supposed  improb.ability  of  any  substance  like  gla.ss 
having  been  discovered  at  that  early  period  of  the 
world's  history.  But  we  must  not  forget  that  even 
according  to  the  Hebrew  chronology  the  world  had  been 
in  existence  1656  years  at  the  time  of  the  Flood,  and 
according  to  the  LXX.,  which  is  the  more  probable,  2262. 
Vast  strides  must  have  been  made  in  knowledge  and 
civilization  in  such  a  lapse  of  time.  Arts  and  sciences 
may  have  reached  a  ripeness,  of  which  the  record,  from 
its  scantiness,  conveys  no  adequate  conception.  The 
destruction  caused  by  the  Tlood  must  have  obliterated 
a  thousand  discoveries,  and  left  men  to  recover  again 
by  slow  and  patient  steps  the  gioinid  Ibcy  had  lost. 

•>  A  different  word  from  cither  of  these  is  used  in  vli.  ]  1 
of  the  windows  of  heaven,  DSIX'  'drubbuth  (from 
3")X.  "  to  interweave  "),  lit.  "  net-works "  or  "  gratings" 
(Ges.  Thes.  In  v.). 


666 


NOAil 


in  the  side  is  not  more  difficult  to  understind  tlian 
the  port-holes  in  the  sides  of  our  vessels."  ' 

Of  the  shape  of  the  ark  nothing  is  said  ;  but  its 
dimensions  are  given.  It  was  to  be  300  cubits  in 
length,  50  in  breadth,  and  30  in  height.  Sup- 
posing the  cubit  here  to  be  the  cubit  of  natural 
measuiemeut,  reckoning  from  the  elbow  to  the  top 
of  the  middle  linger,  we  may  get  a  rough  approxi- 
mation as  to  the  size  of  the  ark.  The  cubit,  so 
measured  (called  in  Deut.  iii.  11,  "the  cutit  of  a 
man  "),  must  of  course,  at  first,  like  all  natuial  mea- 
surements, have  been  inexact  and  tiuctuating.  In 
later  times  r.o  doubt  the  Jews  had  a  standard 
common  cubit,  as  well  as  the  royal  cubit  and  sacied 
cubit.  We  shall  probably,  however,  be  near  enough 
to  the  maik  if  we  take  the  cubit  here  to  be  the 
common  cubit,  which  was  reckoned  (according  to 
Mich.,  Jahn,  Ge^en.  and  others)  as  equal  to  six 
hand-bread ths,  the  hand-breailth  being  oj  inches. 
This  therefore  gives  21  inches  for  the  cubit.''  Ac- 
cordingly the  ark  would  be  525  feet  in  length, 
87  feet  6  inches  in  breadth,  and  52  feet  6  inches  in 
height.  This  is  very  considerably  larger  than  the 
largest  British  man-of-war.  The  Great  Eastern, 
however,  is  both  longer  and  deeper  than  the  ark, 
being  680  feet  in  length (691  on  deck),  83  in  breadth, 
and  58  in  depth.  Solomon's  Temple,  the  propor- 
tions of  which  are  given  1  K.  vi.  2,  was  the  same 
height  as  the  ark,  but  only  one-fifth  of  the  length, 
and  less  than  half  the  width. 

It  should  be  remembei  ed  that  this  huge  structure 
was  only  intendeil  to  float  on  the  water,  and  was 
not  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word  a  ship.  It 
had  neither  mast,  sail,  nor  rudder  ;  it  was  in  fact 
nothing  but  an  enormous  floating  house,  or  oblong 
box  ratlier,  "  as  it  is  very  likely,"  says  Sir  W. 
Raleigh,  "  that  the  ark  had  fundum  planum,  a  Jlat 
bottom,  and  not  raysed  in  form  of  a  sliip,  with  a 
sharpness  forwaid,  to  cut  the  waves  for  the  better 
speed."  The  figure  which  is  commonly  given  to  it 
by  paintei's,  there  can  be  no  doubt  is  wrong.  Two 
objects  only  were  aimed  at  in  its  construction : 
the  one  was  that  it  should  have  ample  stowage,  and 
the  other  that  it  should  be  able  to  keep  steady  upon 
the  water.  It  was  never  intended  to  be  carried  to 
any  groat  distance  from  the  place  where  it  was 
originally  built.  A  curious  proof  of  the  suitability 
of  the  ark  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  in- 
tended was  given  by  a  Dutch  merchant,  Peter 
Jansen,  the  Mennonite,  who  in  the  year  1604  had 
a   ship    built  at    Hoorn   of  the  same   proportions 


NOAH 

(though  of  course  not  of  the  same  size)  as  Noah's* 
aik.  It  was  120  feet  long,  20  broad,  and  12  deep. 
This  vessel,  unsuitable  as  it  was  for  quick  voyages, 
was  found  remarkably  well  adapted  for  freightage.' 
It  was  calculated  that  it  would  hold  a  thiixl  more 
lading  than  other  vessels  without  requiring  more 
hands  to  work  it.  A  similar  experiment  is  also  said 
to  have  been  made  in  Denmark,  where,  according 
to  Keyher,  several  vessels  called  "  fleuten  "  or  floats 
were  built  after  the  model  of  the  ark. 

After  having  given  Noah  the  necessary  instruc- 
tions for  the  building  of  the  ark,  God  tells  him  the 
purpose  for  which  it  was  designed.  Now  for  the 
first  time  we  hear  how  the  threatened  destruction 
w;is  to  be  accomplished,  as  well  as  the  provi- 
sion which  was  to  be  made  for  the  repeopling  of  the 
earth  with  its  various  tribes  of  animals.  The  earth 
is  to  be  destroye(J  by  water.  "And  I,  behold  I  do 
bring  the  flood  ("P-IBtSH) — waters  upon  the  earth — • 
to  destroy  all  flesh  wherein  is  the  breath  of  life  .  .  . 
but  1  will  establish  my  covenant  with  thee,  kc." 
(vi.  17,  18).  The  inmates  of  the  ark  are  then 
specified.  They  are  to  be  Noah  and  his  wife,  and 
his  three  sons  with  their  wives: — whence  it  is  plain 
that  he  and  his  family  had  not  yielded  to  the  prevail- 
ing custom  of  polvgam}'.  Noah  is  also  to  take  a  pair 
of  each  kind  of  animal  into  the  ark  with  him  that 
he  may  preserve  them  alive  ;  birds,  domestic  animals 
(ntDnS),""   and   creeping   things    are    particularly 

mentioned.  He  is  to  pro^^de  for  the  wants  of 
each  of  these  stores  "  of  every  kind  of  food  that  is 
eaten."  it  is  added,  "  Thus  did  Noah  ;  according 
to  all  that  God  (Klohim)  commanded  him,  so  did  he." 
A  remarkable  addition  to  these  directions  occurs 
in  the  following  chapter.  The  pairs  of  animals  are 
now  limited  to  one  of  unclean  animals,  whilst  of 
clean  animals  and  biids  (ver.  2),  Noah  is  to  take  to 
him  seven  pairs  (or  as  others  think,  seven  indi- 
viduals, that  is  three  pairs  and  one  supernumerary 
male  for  sacrifice)."  How  is  this  addition  to  be 
accounted  for?  May  we  not  suppose  that  we  have 
here  traces  of  a  separate  document  interwoven  by  a 
later  writer  with  the  former  history?  The  passage 
indeed  has  not,  to  all  appearance,  been  incorporated 
intact,  but  there  is  a  colouring  about  it  wliich  seems 
to  indicate  that  Moses,  or  whoever  put  the  Book  of 
Genesis  into  its  present  shape,  had  here  consulted  a 
different  narrative.  The  distinct  use  of  the  Divine 
names  in  the  same  phrase,  vi.  22,  and  vii.  5 — in 
the  former  Elohim,  in  the  latter  Jehovah — suggests 


i  Kilto,  Bible  Illustrations,  Antediluvians,  &c.,  p.  142. 
The  Jewish  notion  was  that  the  ark  was  entered  by  means 
of  a  ladiler.  On  the  steps  of  this  ladder,  the  story  goes, 
Og,  king  of  Bashan,  was  sitting  when  the  Flood  came ;  and 
on  his  pledging  himself  to  Noah  and  his  sons  to  be  their 
slave  for  ever,  he  was  suffered  to  remain  there,  and 
Noah  gave  him  his  food  each  day  out  of  a  hole  in  the  ark 
(Pirk.  R.  Kliczer). 

k  See  Winer,  Realw.  "  EUe."  Sir  Walter  IU\leigh,  in 
his  History  of  tlte  Woi-ld,  reckons  the  cubit  at  18  inches. 
Dr.  Kitto  calls  this  a  safe  way  of  estimating  the  cubit  in 
Scripture,  but  gives  it  himself  as  ^  21-883  inches.  For 
this  inconsistency  he  is  taken  to  Uisk  by  Hugh  Miller, 
who  adopts  the  measurement  of  Sir  W.  Raleigh. 

1  Augustine  (De  Civ.  D.  lib.  xv.)  long  ago  discovered 
another  excellence  in  the  proportions  of  the  ark ;  and  that 
is.  that  they  were  the  same  as  the  proportions  of  the 
perfect  human  fit^ure,  the  length  of  which  from  the  sole 
to  the  crown  is  six  times  the  width  across  the  chest,  and 
ten  times  the  depth  of  the  recumbent  figure  measured  in 
a  right  line  from  the  ground. 


"  Only  tame  animals  of  the  larger  kinds  are  expressly 
mentioned  (vi.  20) ;  and  if  we  could  be  sure  that  none 
others  were  taken,  the  difficulties  connected  with  the 
necessary  provision,  stowage,  &c.,  would  be  materially 
lessened.  It  may,  however,  be  urged  that  in  the  first 
instance  "  every  living  thing  of  all  flesh"  (vi.  19)  was  to 
come  into  the  ark,  and  that  afterwards  (vii.  14)  "  every 
living  thing"  is  spoken  of  not  as  including,  but  as  distinct 
from  the  tame  cattle,  and  that  consequently  the  inference 
is  that  wild  animals  were  meant. 

»  Calv.,  Ges.,  Tuch,  Baumg.,  and  Delltzsch,  understand 
seven  individuals  of  each  species.  Del.  argues  that  if 
we  take  HyZlK'  here  to  mean  seven  pairs,  we  must  also 
take  the  DJ'^kJ^  before  to  mean  two  pairs  (and  Origen 
does  so  take  it,  cwit.  Oels.  iv.  41).  But  without  arguing, 
with  Knobel,  that  the  repetition  of  the  numeral  in  this 
case,  and  not  in  the  other,  may  perhaps  be  designed  to 
denote  that  here  pairs  are  to  be  understood,  at  any  rate 

I  the  addition  "  male  and  his  female"  renders  this  the  more 

j  probable  interpretation. 


NOAH 


NOAH 


567 


that  this  may  have  been  the  case."      It  does  not  i  perhaps  the  tuitles),  the  six  hundred  and  forty -two 
follow,  however,   from   the  mention  of  clean  and    reptiles  of  Charles  Bonaparte. 


unclean  animals  that  this  section  )eflects  a  Levitical 
or  post-Mosaic  mind  and  handling.  There  were 
sacrifices  before  Moses,  and  why  may  there  not  have 
been  a  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  animals  ? 
It  may  be  true  of  many  other  things  besides  cir- 
cumcision; Moses  gave  it  you,  not  because  it  was 
of  Moses,  but  because  it  was  of  the  fathers. 

Are  we  then  to  undeistand  that  Noah  literally 


Take  the  case  of  the  clean  animals  alone,  of  which 
there  were  to  be  seven  introduced  into  the  ark. 
Admitting,  for  aigument  sake,  that  only  seven 
individuals,  and  not  seven  pairs,  were  introduced, 
the  number  of  these  alone,  as  now  known,  is  suffi- 
cient to  settle  the  question.  Mr.  Waterhouse,  in 
the  year  1856,  estimated  the  oxen  at  twenty  species  ; 
the  sheep  at  twenty-seven  species ;    the  goats   at 


conveyed  a  pair  of  all  the  animals  of  the  world  into  ;  twenty;  and  the  deer  at  fifty-one.  "  In  short,  if, 
the  ark  ?  This  question  virtually  contains  in  it  i  excluding  the  lamas  and  the  musks  as  doubtfully 
another,  viz.,  whether  the  deluge  was  universal,  or    clean,  tiied  by  the  Mosaic  test,  we  but  add  to  the 


only  partial  ?  If  it  was  only  partial,  then  of  course 
it  was  necessary  to  find  room  but  for  a  compara- 
tively small  number  of  animals  ;  and  the  dimensions 
of  the  ark  are  ample  enough  for  the  required  pur- 
pose. The  argument  on  this  point  has  ali'eady  been 
so  well  stated  by  Hugh  Jliller  in  his  Testimony  of 
the  Rocks,  that  we  need  do  little  more  than  give  an 
abst)act  of  it  here.  After  saying  that  it  had  for 
ages  been  a  sort  of  stock  problem  to  determine 
whether  all  the  animals  in  the  world  by  sevens, 
and  by  pairs,  with  food  sufficient  to  serve  them  for 
a  twelvemonth  could  have  been  accommodated  in 
the  given  space,  he  quotes  Sir  W.  Kaleigh's  calcu- 
lation on  the  subject.?  Sir  Walter  proposed  to  allow 
"  for  eighty-nine  distinct  species  of  beasts,  or  lest 
any  should  be  omitted,  for  a  hundred  several  kinds." 
He  then  by  a  curious  sort  of  estimate,  in  which 
he  considers  "  one  elephant  as  equal  to  four  beeves, 
one  lion  to  two  wolves,"  and  so  on,  reckons  that' the 
space  occupied  by  the  difl'erent  animals  would  be 
equivalent  to  the  spaces  required  for  91  (or  say  120) 
beeves,  four  score  sheep,  and  three  score  and  four 
wolves.  "  All  these  two  hundred  and  eighty  beastsi 
might  be  kept  in  one  storey,  or  room  of  the  ark,  in 
their  several  cabins  ;  their  meat  in  a  second  ;  the 
birds  and  their  provision  in  a  third,  with  space  to 
spare  for  Noah  and  his  family,  and  all  their  neces- 
saries." "  Such,"  says  Hugh  Miller,  "  was  the 
calculation  of  the  gieat  voyager  lialeigh,  a  man  who 
had  a  moie  practical  acquaintance  with  stowage 
than  perhaps  any  of  the  other  wiiters  who  have 
speculated  on  the  capabilities  of  the  ark,  and  his 
estimate  seems  sober  and  judicious."  He  then  goes 
on  to  show  how  enormously  these  limits  are  ex- 
ceeded by  our  piesent  knowledge  of  the  extent  of 
the  animal  kingdom.  Buffon  doubled  Kaleigh's 
number  of  distinct  species.  During  the  last  thirty 
yeai's  so  astonishing  has  been  the  progress  of  dis- 
covery, that  of  mammals  alone  theie  have  been 
ascertained  to  exist  more  than  eight  times  the  number 
which  BuHbn  gives.  In  the  first  edition  of  .John- 
ston's Physical  Atlas  (1848),  one  thous;md  six 
hundred  and  twenty-six  different  species  of  mammals 
are  enumerated ;  and  in  the  second  edition  (1856), 
one  thousand  six  hundred  and  lifty-eight  species. 
To  these  we  must  add  the  six  thousand  two  hundred 
and  sixty-six  biids  of  Lesson,  and  the  six  hundied 
and  fifty-seven  or  (subtracting  the  sea-snakes,  and 


sheep,  goats,  deer,  and  cattle  the  forty-eight  species 
of  unequivocally  clean  antelopes,  and  multiply  the 
whole  by  seven,  we  shall  have  as  the  lesiilt  a  sum 
total  of  one  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty-two 
individuals,  a  number  more  than  four  times  greatei 
than  that  for  which  Puileigh  made  provision  in  the 
ark."  It  would  be  curious  to  ascertiiin  what 
number  of  animals  could  possibly  be  stowed,  together 
with  sufhcient  food  to  last  for  a  twelvemonth,  on 
board  the  Gieat  Eastern. 

But  it  is  not  only  the  inadequate  size  of  the  ark 
to  contain  all,  or  anything  like  all,  the  progenitors 
of  our  existing  species  of  animals,  which  is  con- 
clusive against  a  universal  deluge.  Another  fact 
points  with  still  gi-eater  force,  if  possible,  in  the 
same  direction,  and  that  is  the  manner  in  which 
we  now  find  these  animals  distributed  over  the 
earth's  surface.  "  Linnaeus  held,  early  in  the  last 
century,  that  all  creatures  which  now  inhabit  the 
globe  had  proceeded  originally  from  some  such 
common  centre  as  the  ark  might  have  furnished ; 
but  no  zoologist  acquainted  with  the  distribution 
of  species  can  acquiesce  in  any  such  conclusion  now. 
We  now  know  that  every  great  continent  has  its 
own  peculiai-  fauna;  that  the  original  centres  of 
distribution  must  have  been  not  one,  but  many  ; 
further  that  the  areas  or  ciicles  around  these  centres 
must  have  been  occupied  by  their  pristine  animals 
in  ages  long  anterior  to  that  of  the  Noachian 
Deluge;  nay  that  in  even  the  latter  geologic  ages 
they  were  preceded  in  them  by  animals  of  the  same 
general  type."  Thus,  for  instance,  the  animals  of 
S.  America,  when  the  Spaniards  first  penetrated 
into  it,  were  found  to  be  totally  distinct  from  those 
of  Europe,  Asia,  or  Africa.  The  puma,  the  jagnar, 
the  tapir,  the  lama,  the  sloths,  the  ajmadilloes,  the 
opossums,  were  animals  which  had  never  been  seen 
elsewhere.  So  again  Australia  has  a  whole  class 
of  animals,  the  marsupials,  quite  unknown  to  other 
parts  of  the  world.  The  various  species  of  kan- 
garoo, phascolomys,  dasyurus,  and  perameles,  the 
fiying  jihalangers,  and  other  no  less  singular  crea- 
tures, were  the  astonishment  of  naturalists  when 
this  continent  was  first  discovered.  New  Zealand 
likewise,  "  though  singularly  devoid  of  indigenous 
mammals  and  reptiles  .  .  .  has  a  scarcely  less  re- 
markable fauna  than  either  of  these  great  conti- 
nents,    it  consists  almost  exclusively  of  birds,  some 


0  It  is  remarkable,  moreover,  that  whilst  In  ver.  2  It  is 
said,  "  Uf  every  cUan  heast  thou  shall  lake  to  Ihce  by 
sevens,"  in  vers.  8,  9,  it  is  said,  "  Of  dean  beasts,  and  of 
beasts  that  are  not  clean,"  &c.  "  there  went  in  Iko  and  tuo 
unto  Noah  into  the  ark."  I'his  again  looks  like  a  com- 
pilation from  (lifTcrent  sources. 

p  The  earliest  statement  on  the  subject  I  have  met  with 
is  in  the  I'irke  R.  Kliezer,  where  it  is  said  that  Noah  took 
32  kinds  of  birds,  and  365  species  of  beasts,  with  him  Into 
the  ark. 

1  Heidegger  in  like  manner  {JHst.  Sacr.  i.  p.  518)  thinks 


he  Is  very  liberal  in  allowint;  3(10  kinds  of  animals  to  have 
been  taken  into  the'  ark.  and  considers  that  this  would 
give  50  cubits  of  solid  contents  for  each  kind  of  animal. 
He  then  subjoins  the  far  more  elaborate'  and  really  veiy 
curious  computation  of  Joh.  Tenicrariiis  in  his  Chrmwl. 
Demmstr.,  who  reckons  after  Sir  W.  KalclRli's  fashion, 
but  enumerates  all  the  different  species  of  known  animals 
(amongst  which  ho  mentions  Pogasi,  Sphinxes,  and  Satyrs), 
thekiml  and  quantity  of  provision,  the  method  of  stowage, 
&C.    See  Heidegger,  as  above,  pp.  506,  7,  and  518-21. 


668 


NOAH 


of  them  so  ill  provided  with  wings,  that,  lilje  the 
luika  of  the  natives,  they  can  only  run  along  the 
ground."  And  what  is  very  remarkable,  this  law 
with  regard  to  the  distribution  of  animals  does  not 
date  merely  from  the  human  period.  We  find  the 
gigantic  forms  of  those  diflerent  species  which 
during  the  later  tertiary  epochs  preceded  or  accom- 
panied the  existing  forms,  occupying  precisely  the 
same  habitats.  In  S.  America,  for  instance,  there 
lived  then,  side  by  side,  the  gigantic  sloth  (mega- 
therium) to  be  seen  in  the  British  Museum,  and  the 
smaller  animal  of  the  same  species  which  has  sur- 
vived the  extinction  of  the  larger.  Australia  in 
like  manner  had  then  its  gigantic  marsupials,  the 
very  counterpart  in  everything  but  in  size  of  the 
existing  species.  And  not  only  are  the  same  mam- 
mals found  in  the  same  localities,  but  they  are  sur- 
rounded in  every  respect  by  the  same  circumstances, 
and  exist  in  company  with  the  same  birds,  the 
same  insects,  the  same  plants.  In  fact  so  stable  is 
this  law  that,  although  prior  to  the  pleistocene 
period  we  find  a  diflerent  distribution  of  animals, 
we  still  find  each  separate  locality  distinguished  by 
its  own  species  both  of  fauna  and  of  tiora,  and  we 
find  these  grouped  together  in  the  same  manner  as 
in  the  later  periods.  It  is  quite  plain,  then,  that 
if  all  the  animals  of  the  world  were  literally 
gathered  together  in  the  ark  and  so  saved  from  the 
waters  of  a  universal  deluge,  this  could  only  have 
been  effected  (even  supposing  there  was  space  for 
them  in  the  ark)  by  a  most  stupendous  miracle. 
The  sloth  and  the  armadillo  must  have  been  brought 
across  oceans  and  continents  from  their  South  Ame- 
rican'home,  the  kangaroo  fi'om  his  Australian  forests 
and  prairies,  and  the  polar  bear  from  his  icebergs, 
to  that  part  of  Armenia,  or  the  Euphiates  valley, 
where  the  ark  was  built.  These  and  all  the  other 
animals  must  have  been  brought  in  perfect  subjec- 
tion to  Noah,  and  many  of  them  must  have  been 
taught  to  forget  their  native  ferocity  in  order  to 
prevent  their  attacking  one  another.  The}'  must 
then  further,  having  been  brought  by  supernatural 
means  from  the  regions  which  they  occupied,  have 
likewise  been  carried  back  to  the  same  spots  b_v 
supernatural  means,  care  having  moreover  been 
taken  that  no  trace  of  their  passage  to  and  fro 
should  be  left. 

But  the  narrative  does  not  compel  us  to  adopt  so 
tremendous  an  hypothesis.  We  shall  see  more 
clearly  when  we  come  to  consider  the  language 
used  with  regard  to  the  Flood  itself,  that  even 
that  language,  sti-ong  as  it  undoubtedly  is,  does 
not  oblige  us  to  suppose  that  the  Deluge  was 
universal.  But  neither  does  the  langun2;e  em- 
ployed with  regard  to  the  animals  lead  to  this 
con<:lusion.  It  is  true  that  Noah  is  told  to  take 
two  "of  every  living  thing  of  all  flesh,"  but  that 
could  only  mean  two  of  every  animal  then  knomi 
to  him,  unless  we  suppose  him  to  have  had  sirper- 
natural  information  in  zoology  imparted— a  thing 
quite  incredible.  In  fact,  but  for  some  misconcep- 
tions as  to  the  meaning  of  certain  expressions,  no  one 
would  ever  have  suspected  that  Noah's  knowledge, 
or  the  knowledge  of  the  writer  of  the  narrative, 
could  have  extended  beyond  a  very  limited  portion 
of  the  globe. 

Again,  how  were  the  carnivorous  animals  sup- 
plied with  food  during  their  twelve  months'  abode 
in  the  ark?  This  would  have  been  ditticiilt  even 
for  the  very  limited  number  of  wild  animals  in 
Noah's  immediate  neighbourhood.  For  the  very 
large  nuinbei's  which    the   theorv  of  a    univeisal 


NOAH 

Deluge  suppose?,  it  would  have  been  quite  impos- 
sible, unless  again  we  have  recourse  to  miracle,  and 
either  maintain  that  they  were  miraculously  sup- 
plied with  food,  or  that  for  the  time  being  the 
nature  of  their  teeth  and  stomach  was  changed,  so 
that  they  were  able  to  live  on  vegetables.  But 
these  hypotheses  are  so  extravagant,  and  so  utterly 
unsupported  by  the  narrative  itself,  that  they  may 
be  safely  dismissed  without  further  comment. 

The  Flood. — The  ark  was  finished,  and  all  its 
living  freight  was  gathered  into  it  as  in  a  place  of 
safety.  Jehovah  shut  him  in,  says  the  chronicler, 
speaking  of  Noah.  And  then  there  ensued  a  solemn 
pause  of  seven  days  before  the  threatened  destruction 
was  let  loose.  At  last  the  Flood  came  ;  the  waters 
were  upon  the  earth.  The  narrative  is  vivid  and 
forcible,  though  entirely  wanting  in  that  sort  of 
description  which  in  a  modern  historian  or  poet 
would  have  occupied  the  largest  space.  We  see 
nothing  of  the  death-struggle  ;  we  hear  not  the  cry 
of  despair ;  we  are  not  called  upon  to  witness  the 
frantic  agony  of  husband  and  wife,  and  parent  and 
child,  as  they  fled  in  terror  before  the  rising  waters. 
Nor  is  a  word  said  of  the  sadness  of  the  one 
righteous  man  who,  safe  himself,  looked  upon  the 
destruction  which  he  could  not  avert.  But  one 
impression  is  left  upon  the  mind  with  peculiar 
vividness,  from  the  very  simplicity  of  the  uaiTative, 
and  it  is  that  of  utter  desolation.  This  is  heightened 
by  the  contrast  and  repetition  of  two  ideas.  On 
the  one  hand  we  are  reminded  no  less  than  six  times 
in  the  narrative  in  chaps,  vi.,  vii.,  viii.,  who  the 
tenants  of  the  ark  were  (\'i.  18-21,  vii.  1-3,  7-9, 
13-16,  viii.  16,  17,  18,  19),  the  favoured  and 
rescued  i^-w ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  total  and 
absolute  blotting  out  of  everything  else  is  not  less 
emphatically  dwelt  upon  (vi.  13,  17,  vii.  4,  21-23). 
This  evidently  designed  contrast  may  especially  be 
traced  in  chap.  vii.  First,  we  read  in  ver.  6,  "  And 
Noah  was  six  hundred  years  old  when  the  flood 
came, — watws  upon  the  earth."  Then  follows  an 
account  of  Noah  and  his  family  and  the  animals 
entering  into  the  ark.  Next  verses  10-12  resume 
the  subject  of  ver.  7 :  "  And  it  came  to  pass  after 
seven  days  that  the  waters  of  the  flood  were  upon 
the  earth.  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of  Noah's 
life,  in  the  second  month,  on  the  seventeenth  day 
of  the  month,  on  the  selfsame  day  were  all  the 
fountains  of  the  gi-eat  deep  broken  up,  and  the 
windows  (or  floodgates)  of  heaven  were  opened. 
And  the  rain  was  upon  the  earth  forty  days  and 
forty  nights."  Again  the  narrative  returns  to  Noah 
and  his  companions  and  their  safety  in  the  ark  (ver. 
13-16).  And  then  in  ver.  17  the  words  of  ver.  12 
are  resumed,  and  from  thence  to  the  end  of  the 
chapter  a  very  simple  but  very  powerful  and 
impressive  description  is  given  of  the  appalling 
catastrophe:  "And  the  flood  was  forty  cUiys  upon 
the  earth ;  and  the  waters  increased  and  bare  up 
the  ark,  and  it  was  lift  up  from  oft'  the  earth.  And 
the  waters  prevailed  and  increased  exceedingly  upon 
the  earth:  and  the  ark  went  on  the  face  of  the 
waters.  And  the  waters  prevailed  very  exceedingly 
upon  the  earth,  and  all  the  high  mountains  which 
[were]  under  the  whole  heaven  were  covered. 
Fifteen  cubits  upwards  did  the  waters  prevail,  and 
the  mountains  were  covered.  And  all  flesh  died 
which  moveth  upon  the  earth,  of  fowl,  and  of  cattle, 
and  of  wild  beasts,  and  of  every  creeping  thing 
which  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  and  every  man. 
All  in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breath  of  lite,  of  all 
that  was  in  the  dry  land,  died.     And  evoy  sub- 


NOAH 

stance  which  was  on  the  face  of  the  ^•ound  was 
blotted  out,  as  well  man  as  cattle  and  creeping 
thing  and  fowl  of  the  heaven :  they  were  blotted 
out  from  the  earth,  and  Noah  only  was  left,  and 
they  that  v/ere  with  him  in  the  ark.  And  the 
waters  prevailed  on  the  earth  a  hundred  and  fifty 
days." 

The  waters  of  the  Flood  increased  for  a  period  of 
190  days  (40  +  15t),  comparing  vii.  12  and  24). 
And  then  "  God  remembered  Noah,"  and  made  a 
wind  to  pass  over  the  earth,  so  that  the  waters 
were  assuaged.  The  ark  rested  on  the  seventeenth 
day  of  the  seventh  month'  on  the  mountains  of 
Ararat.  After  this  the  waters  gradually  decreased 
till  the  first  day  of  the  tenth  month,  when  the  tops 
of  the  mountains  were  seen.  It  was  then  that 
Noah  sent  forth,  first,  the  raven,"  which  flew  hither 
and  thither,  resting  probably  on  the  mountain-tops, 
but  not  returning  to  the  ark ;  and  next,  after  an 
interval  of  seven  days  (cf.  ver.  10),  the  dove,  "to 
see  if  the  waters  were  abated  from  the  ground " 
{i.  e.  the  lower  plain  country).  "  But  the  dove," 
it  is  beautifully  said,  "  found  no  rest  for  the  sole 
of  her  foot,  and  she  returned  unto  him  into  the 
ark."  After  waiting  for  another  seven  days  he 
again  sent  foi'th  the  dove,  which  returned  this  time 
with  a  fresh  (C]"lt2)  olive-leaf  in  her  mouth,  a  sign 
that  the  waters  were  still  lower.'  And  once  more, 
after  another  interval  of  seven  days,  he  sent  forth 
the  dove,  and  slie  "  returned  not  again  unto  him 
any  more,"  having  found  a  home  for  herself  upon 
the  earth.  No  picture  in  natural  history  was  ever 
drawn  with  more  exquisite  beauty  and  fidelity  than 
this :  it  is  admirable  alike  for  its  poetry  and  its 
truth. 

On  reading  this  narrative  it  is  difficult,  it  must 
be  confessed,  to  reconcile  the  language  employed 
with  the  hypothesis  of  a  paitial  deluge.  The 
difficulty  does  not  lie  in  the  largeness  of  most  of 
the  terms  used,  but  rather  in  the  precision  of  one 
single  expression.  It  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
the  writer,  when  he  speaks  of  "  all  flesh,"  "  all 
in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breath  of  life,"  refers 
only  to  his  own  locality.  This  sort  of  language 
is  common  enough  in  the  Bible  when  only  a  small 
part  of  the  globe  is  intended.  Thus,  for  instance, 
it  is  said  that  "  all  countries  came  into  Egypt  to 
Joseph  to  buy  corn;"  and  that  "a  decree  went 
out  from  Caesar  Augustus  that  all  the  icorld  should 
be  taxed."  In  these  and  many  similar  passages 
the  expressions  of  the  writer  are  obviously  not 
to  be  taken  in  an  exactly  literal  sense.  Even 
the  apparently  very  distinct  phrase  "  all  the  high 
hills  that  were  under  the  whole  heaven  were 
covered "  may  be  matched  by  another  precisely 
similar,  where  it  is  said  that  God  would  put  the 
fear  and  the  dread  of  Israel  upon  even/  nation  under 
heaven.  It  requires  no  eli'ort  to  see  that  such  lan- 
guage is  framed  with  a  kind  of  poetic  breadtli.  The 
real  difficulty  lies  in  the  connecting  of  this  state- 
ment with  the  district  hi  which  Noah  is  supposed 
to  have   livetl,  and   the  assertion  that  the  waters 


NOAH 


569 


"■  It  is  impossible  to  say  how  this  reckoning  of  time 
was  made,  ami  \\  lietlier  a  lunar  or  a  solar  year  is  meant. 
AIiicli  iugennity  lias  heen  expended  on  this  question  (see 
Delitzseh's  Comnunt.),  but  with  no  salisfactory  results. 

•  'I'he  raven  was  supposed  to  foretell  changes  in  the 
weather  both  bj'  its  flight  and  its  cry  (Aelian,  J7.  A.  vii. 
7;  Virg.  Geurg.  i.  3«2,  410).  According  to  .Jewish  tradi- 
tion, the  raven  was  preserved  in  the  ark  in  order  to  be 
tlie  progenitor  of  the  birds  which  afterwards  fed  Elijah  by 
the  brook  Cherith. 


prevailed  fifteen  cubits  upward.  If  the  Ararat  on 
which  the  ark  rested  be  the  present  mountam  of 
the  same  name,  the  highest  peak  of  which  is  more 
than  17,000  feet  above  the  sea  [Ararat],  it  would 
have  been  quite  impossible  for  this  to  have  been 
covered,  the  water  reaching  15  cubits,  i.  e.  26  feet 
above  it,  unless  the  whole  earth  were  submerged. 
Tlie  author  of  the  Genesis  of  the  Earth,  (Scc.,"has 
endeavoured  to  escape  this  difficulty  by  shifting  the 
scene  of  the  catastrophe  to  the  low  country  on  the 
banks  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  (a  miraculous 
overflow  of  these  rivers  being  sufficient  to  account 
for  the  Deluge),  and  supposing  that  the  "fifteen 
cubits  upward "  are  to  be  reckoned,  not  from  the 
top  of  the  mountains,  but  from  the  surface  of  the 
plain.  By  "  the  high  hills  "  he  thinks  may  be  meant 
only  slight  elevations,  called  "  high  "  because  they 
were  the  highest  parts  overflowed.  But  fifteen 
cubits  is  only  a  little  more  than  twenty-six  feet, 
and  it  seems  absurd  to  suppose  that  such  trifling 
elevations  are  described  as  "  all  the  high  hills  under 
the  whole  heaven."  At  this  rate  the  ark  itself  must 
have  been  twice  the  height  of  the  highest  mountain. 
The  plain  meaning  of  the  narrative  is,  that  far  as 
the  eye  could  sweep,  not  a  solitary  mountain  reared 
its  head  above  the  waste  of  waters.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  is  no  necessity  for  assuming  that  the 
ark  stranded  on  the  high  peaks  of  the  mountain 
now  called  Ararat,  or  even  that  that  mountain  was 
visible.  A  lower  moimtain-range,  such  as  the 
Zagros  range  for  instance,  may  be  intended.  And 
in  the  absence  of  all  geographical  certainty  in  the 
matter  it  is  better  to  adopt  some  such  explanation 
of  the  difficulty.  Indeed  it  is  out  of  the  question 
to  imagine  that  the  ai'k  rested  on  the  top  of  a 
mountain  which  is  covered  for  4000  feet  from  the 
summit  with  perpetual  snow,  and  the  descent  fi'om 
which  would  have  been  a  very  serious  matter  both 
to  men  and  other  animals.  The  local  tradition, 
according  to  which  fragments  of  the  ark  are  still 
believed  to  remain  on  the  summit,  can  weigh  no- 
thing when  balanced  against  so  extreme  an  impro- 
bability. Assuming,  then,  that  the  Ararat  here 
mentioned  is  not  the  mountain  of  that  name  in 
Armenia,  we  may  also  assume  the  inundation  to 
have  been  partial,  and  may  suppose  it  to  have  ex- 
tended over  the  whole  valley  of  the  Euphrates,  and 
eastward  as  far  as  the  range  of  mountains  running 
down  to  the  Persian  gulf,  or  further.  As  the 
inundation  is  said  to  have  been  caused  by  the 
breaking  up  of  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep,  as 
well  as  by  the  rain,  some  great  and  sudden  sub- 
sidence of  the  land  may  have  taken  place,  accom- 
panied by  an  inrush  of  the  waters  of  the  Persi;in 
gulf,  similar  to  what  occurred  in  the  Runn  of 
Cutch,  on  the  eastern  arm  of  the  Indus,  in  1819, 
when  the  sea  flowed  in,  and  in  a  few  hours  con- 
verted a  tract  of  land,  2000  square  miles  in  area, 
into  an  inland  sea  or  lagoon  (see  the  account  of 
this  subsidence  of  the  Delta  of  the  Indus  in  l.yell's 
Principles  of  Geologi/,  pp.  4G0-3). 

It  has  sometimes  been  asserted  that  the  facts  of 

'  The  olive-tree  is  an  evergreen,  and  seems  to  have 
the  power  of  living  under  water,  according  to  Theo- 
phrastus  (Hist,  plant.  Iv.  8)  and  I'llny  (If.  N.  xlii.  50), 
who  mention  olive-trees  in  the  Red  Sea.  The  olive 
grows  in  Armenia,  but  only  in  the  valleys  on  the  south 
side  of  Ararat,  not  on  the  slopes  of  the  mountain.  It 
will  not  flourish  at  an  elevation  whore  even  the  mul- 
berry, walnut,  and  apricot  are  foimd  (Ritter,  Jirdkunde, 
X.  9'20). 


570 


NOAH 


geology  are  conclusive  against  the  possibility  of  a 
universal  deluge.  Foraierly,  indeed,  the  existence 
of  shells  and  corals  at  the  top  of  high  mountains 
was  taken  to  be  no  less  conclusive  evidence  the 
other  way.  They  were  constantly  appealed  to  as 
a  proof  of  the  literal  truth  of  the  Scripture  narra- 
tive. And  so  troublesome  and  inconvenient  a  proof 
did  it  seem  to  Voltaire,  that  he  attempted  to  ac- 
count for  the  existence  of  fossil  shells  by  aiguing 
that  either  they  were  those  of  fresh-water  lakes  and 
rivers  evaporated  during  dry  seasons,  or  of  land- 
snails  developed  in  unusual  abundance  during  wet 
ones  ;  or  that  they  were  shells  that  had  been  dropped 
from  the  hats  of  pilgrims  on  their  way  from  the 
Holy  Land  to  their  own  homes ;  or  in  the  case  of 
the  ammonites,  that  they  were  petrified  reptiles. 
It  spe;iks  ill  for  the  state  of  science  that  such  argu- 
ments could  be  advanced,  on  the  one  side  for,  and 
on  the  other  against,  the  universality  of  the  Deluge. 
And  this  is  the  more  extraordinary — and  the  fact 
shows  how  very  slowly,  where  prejudices  stand  in 
the  way,  the  soundest  reasoning  will  be  listened  to 
— when  we  remember  that  so  early  as  the  year 
1517  an  Italian  named  Fracastoro  had  demonstrated 
the  untenableness  of  the  vulgar  belief  which  asso- 
ciated these  fossil  remains  with  the  Mosaic  Deluge. 
"  That  inundation,"  he  observed,  "  was  too  tran- 
sient; it  consisted  principally  of  fluviatile  waters; 
and  if  it  had  transported  shells  to  great  distances, 
must  have  strewed  them  over  the  surface,  not 
buried  them  at  vast  depths  in  the  interior  of  moun- 
tains. .  .  .  But  the  clear  and  philosophical  \aews 
of  Fracastoro  were  disregarded,  and  the  talent  and 
argumentative  powers  of  the  learned  were  doomed 
for  three  centuries  to  be  wasted  in  the  discussion 
of  these  two  simple  and  preliminary  questions: 
first,  whether  fossil  remains  had  ever  belonged  to 
"aving  creatures ;  and  secondly,  whether,  if  this  be 
idmitted,  all  the  phenomena  could  not  be  explained 
by  the  deluge  of  Noah"  (Lyell,  Fi-inciples  of  Geo- 
logy, p.  20,  9th  ed.).  Even  within  the  last  thirty 
years  geologists  like  Cuvier  and  Buckland  have 
thought  that  the  superficial  deposits  might  be 
referred  to  the  period  of  the  Noachian  Flood.  Sub- 
sequent investigation,  however,  showed  that  if  the 
received  chronology  were  even  approximately  cor- 
rect, this  was  out  of  the  question,  as  these  deposits 
must  have  taken  place  thousands  of  years  before 
the  time  of  Noah,  and  indeed  before  the  creation  of 
mau.  Hence  the  geologic  diluvium  is  to  be  care- 
fully distinguished  from  the  historic.  And  although, 
singularly  enough,  the  latest  discoveries  give  some 
support  to  the  opinion  that  man  may  have  been  in 
existence  during  the  formation  of  the  drift,"  yet 
even  then  that  foi-mation  could  not  have  resulted 
from  a  mere  temporary  submersion  like  that  of  the 
Mosaic  Deluge,  but  must  have  been  the  effect  of 
causes  in  operation  for  ages.  >So  far  then,  it  is  clear, 
there  is  no  evidence  now  on  the  earth's  surface  in 
favour  of  a  universal  deluge. 

But  is  there  any  positive  geological  evidence 
against  it?  Hugh  Miller  and  other  geologists  have 
maintained  that  there  is.  They  appeal  to  the  fact 
that  in  various  parts  of  the  world,  such  as  Auvergne 
in  France,  and  along  the  fianks  of  Aetna,  there  are 
cones  of  loose  scoriae  and  ashes  belonging  to  long 
extinct  volcanoes,  which  must  be  at  least  triple  the 


NOAH 

antiquity  of  the  Noacliian  Deluge,  and  which  yet 
exhibit  no  traces  of  abrasion  by  the  action  of  water. 
These  loose  cones,  they  aigue,  must  have  been  swept 
away  had  tlie  water  of  the  Deluge  ever  reached 
them.  But  this  argument  is  by  no  means  con- 
clusive. The  heaps  of  scoriae  are,  we  have  been 
assured  by  careful  scientific  observers,  not  of  that 
loose  incoherent  kind  which  they  suppose.  And  it 
would  have  been  quite  possible  for  a  gradually  ad- 
vancing inundation  to  have  submerged  these,  and 
then  gradually  to  have  retired  without  leaving  any 
mark  of  its  action.  Indeed,  although  there  is  no 
proof  that  the  whole  world  ever  was  submerged  at 
one  time,  and  although,  arguing  from  the  obsen'ed 
facts  of  the  geological  cataclysms,  we  should  be  dis- 
posed to  regard  such  an  event  as  in  the  highest 
degi'ee  improbable,  it  cannot,  on  geological  grounds 
alone,  be  pronounced  impossible.  The  water  of  the 
globe  is  to  the  land  in  the  proportion  of  three-fifths 
to  two-fifths.  There  already  existed  therefore,  in 
the  different  seas  and  lakes,  water  sufficient  to  cover 
the  whole  earth.  And  the  whole  earth  might  have 
been  submerged  for  a  twelvemonth,  as  stated  in 
Genesis,  or  even  for  a  much  longer  period,  without 
any  trace  of  such  submersion  being  now  discernible. 
There  is,  however,  other  evidence  conclusive 
against  the  hypothesis  of  a  universal  deluge,  miracle 
apart.  "  The  first  effect  of  the  covering  of  the 
whole  globe  with  water  would  be  a  complete  change 
in  its  climate,  the  general  tendency  being  to  lower 
and  equalize  the  temperature  of  all  parts  of  its  sur- 
face. Fari  passu  with  this  process  .  .  .  would 
ensue  the  destruction  of  the  great  majority  of  ma- 
rine animals.  And  this  would  take  place,  partly  by 
reason  of  the  entire  change  in  climatal  conditions, 
too  sudden  and  general  to  be  escaped  by  migration ; 
and,  in  still  greater  measure,  in  consequence  of  the 
sudden  change  in  the  depth  of  the  water.  Great 
multitudes  of  marine  animals  can  only  live  between 
tide-marks,  or  at  depths  less  than  fifty  fathoms ; 
and  as  by  the  hypothesis  the  land  had  to  be  de- 
pressed many  thousands  of  feet  in  a  few  months, 
and  to  be  raised  again  with  equal  celerity,  it  follows 
that  the  animals  could  not  possibly  have  accommo- 
dated themselves  to  such  vast  and  rapid  changes. 
All  the  littoral  animals,  tlierefore,  would  have  been 
killed.  The  race  of  acorn-shells  and  periwinkles 
would  have  been  exterminated,  and  all  the  coral- 
reefs  of  the  Pacific  would  at  once  have  been  con- 
verted into  dead  coral,  never  to  grow  again.  But 
so  far  is  this  from  being  the  case,  that  acorn-shells, 
periwinkles,  and  coral  still  survive,  and  there  is 
good  evidence  that  they  have  continued  to  exist  and 
flourish  for  many  thousands  of  years.  On  the  other 
hand  Noah  was  not  directed  to  take  marine  animals 
of  any  kind  into  the  ark,  nor  indeed  is  it  easy  to 
see  how  they  could  have  been  preserved. 

"  Again,  had  the  whole  globe  been  submerged, 
the  sea-water  covering  the  land  would  at  once  have 
destroyed  every  fresh-water  fish,  moUusk,  and 
worm  ;  and  as  none  of  these  were  taken  into  the 
ark,  the  several  species  would  have  become  extinct. 
Nothing  of  the  kind  has  occurred. 

"  Lastly,  such  expeiiments  as  have  been  made 
with  regard  to  the  action  of  sea-water  upon  ter- 
restrial plants  leave  very  little  doubt  that  sub- 
mergence  in  sea-water  for  ten  or  eleven  months 


"  In  a  valuable  paper  by  Mr.  Joseph  I'restwlcb  (recently 
published  in  the  Philosophical  Transections),  It  is  sug- 
gested that  in  all  probability  the  origin  of  man  will  have 
to  be  thrown  back  into  a  greatly  earlier  antiquity  than 


that  usually  assigned  to  it,  but  the  pleistocene  deposits 
to  be  brought  down  to  a  much  more  recen  t  period,  geolo- 
gically spealdng,  than  geologists  have  hitherto  allowed. 


NOAH 

would  liave  efFectually  destroyed  not  only  the  great 
majority  of  the  plants,  but  their  seeds  as  well. 
And  yet  it  is  not  said  that  Noah  took  any  stock  of 
plants  with  him  into  the  ark,  or  that  the  animals 
which  issued  from  it  had  the  slightest  difficulty  in 
obtaining  pasture. 

"  There  are,  then,  it  must  be  confessed,  very 
strong  grounds  for  believing  that  no  universal 
deluge  ever  occurred.  Suppose  the  Flood,  on  the 
other  hand,  to  have  been  local :  suppose,  for  in- 
stance, the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  to  have  been 


NOAH 


571 


national  grcwtn,  and  embody  merely  records  of 
catastrophes,  such  as  especially  in  mountainous 
countries  are  of  no  rare  occurrence.  In  some  in- 
stances no  doubt  the  resemblances  between  the  hea- 
then and  the  Jewish  stories  are  so  striking  as  to 
render  it  morally  certain  that  the  fonner  were  bor- 
rowed fi-om  the  latter.  We  find,  indeed,  a  mytho- 
logical element,  the  absence  of  all  moral  purpose, 
and  a  national  and  local  colouring,  but,  discernible 
amongst  these,  undoubted  featuies  of  the  primitive 
history.  -The  traditions  which  come  nearest  to  the 
submerged  ;  and'  then  the  necessity  for  presennng  i  Biblical  account  are  those  of  the  nations  of  Western 
all  the  species  of  animals  disappears.  For,  in  the  Asia.  Foremost  amongst  these  is  the  Chaldean.  It 
first  place,  there  was  nothing  to  prevent  the  birds  is  preserved  in  a  Fragment  of  Berosus,  and  is  as 
and   many    of  the   large   mammals   from    getting    follows:  "  After  the  death  of  Ardates,  his  son  Xisu^ 


away ;  and  in  the  next,  the  number  of  species 
peculiar  to  that  geographical  area,  and  which  would 
be  absolutely  destroyed  by  its  being  fiooded,  sup- 
posing they  could  not  escape,  is  insignificant." 

All  these  considerations  point  with  overwhelming 
force  in  the  siime  direction,  and  compel  us  to 
believe,  unless  we  suppose  that  a  stupendous  miracle 
was  wrought,  that  the  Flood  of  Noah  (like  other 
deluges  of  which  we  read)  extended  only  over  a 
limited  area  of  the  globe. 

It  now  only  remains  to  notice  the  later  allusions 
to  the  catastrophe  occuiTing  in  the  Bible,  and  the 
traditions  of  it  preserved  in  other  nations  besides  the 
Jewish. 

The  word  specially  used  to  designate  the  Flood 

of  Noah  (?-13l3n,  hammabbul)  occurs  in  only  one 

other  passage  of  Scripture,  Ps.  xxix.  10.  The  poet 
there  sings  of  the  IMajesty  of  God  as  seen  in  the 
stomi.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  heavy  rain 
accompanying  the  thunder  and  lightning  had  been 
such  as  to  swell  the  torrents,  and  perhaps  cause  a 
partial  inundation.  This  canned  back  his  thoughts 
to  the  Great  Flood  of  which  he  had  often  read, 
and  he  sang,  "  Jehovah  sat  as  king  at  the  Flood," 
and  looking  up  at  the  clear  face  of  the  sky,  and  on 
the  freshness  and  glory  of  nature  around  him,  he 
added,  "and  Jehovah  remaineth  a  king  for  ever." 
In  Is.  liv.  9,  the  Flood  is  spoken  of  as  "  the  waters 
of  Noah."  God  Himself  appeals  to  His  promise 
made  after  the  Flood  as  a  pledge  of  His  Ihithfuluess 
to  Israel :  "  For  this  is  as  the  watere  of  Noah  unto 
INIe :  for  as  I  have  sworn  that  the  waters  of  Noah 
should  no  moie  go  over  the  earth  ;  so  have  I  sworn 
that  I  would  not  be  wroth  with  thee  nor  relnike 
thee." 

In  the  N.  T.  our  Lord  gives  the  sanction  of  His 
own  authority  to  the  historical  truth  of  the 
narrative.  Matt.  xxiv.  37  (cf.  Luke  xvii.  2(]),  de- 
claring that  the  state  of  the  world  at  His  Second 
Coming  shall  be  such  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Noah. 
St.  Peter  speaks  of  the  "long  suffering  of  God," 
which  "waited  in  the  days  of  Noah  while  the  ark 
was  a  preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls 
were  saved  by  water,"  and  sees  in  the  waters  of  the 
Flood  liy  which  the  ark  was  borne  up  a  type  of 
Baptism,  by  which  the  Church  is  separated  from 
the  world.  And  again,  in  his  Second  Epistle  (ii.  ."i) 
he  cites  it  as  an  instance  of  the  lightcous  judgment 
of  God  who  spared  not  the  old  world,  cSjc. 

The  traditions  of  many  nations  have  preserved 
the  memory  of  a  great  and  destructive  Hood  from 
which  but  a  small  part  of  mankind  esaiped.  It 
is  not  always  very  clear  whether  they  point 
back  to  a  common  centre,  whence  they  were 
carried  by  the  different  families  of  men  ;is  they 


thrus  reigned  eighteen  sari.  In  his  time  happened 
a  great  Deluge :  the  history  of  which  is  thus  de- 
scribed. The  Deity  Kronos  appeared  to  him  in  a 
vision,  and  warned  him  that  on  the  15th  day  of  the 
month  Daesius  there  would  be  a  flood  by  which 
mankind  would  be  destroyed.  Ho  therefore  enjoined 
him  to  write  a  history  of  the  beginning,  course,  and 
end  of  all  things ;  and  to  bury  it  in  the  City  of  the 
Sun  at  Sippara;  and  to  build  a  vessel  {(XKd<pos), 
and  to  take  with  him  into  it  his  friends  and  rela- 
tions ;  and  to  put  on  board  food  and  drink,  together 
with  difiereut  animals,  birds,  and'  quadrupeds  ;  and 
as  soon  as  he  had  made  all  arrangements,  to  commit 
himself  to  the  deep.  Having  asked  the  Deity 
whither  he  was  to  sail  ?  he  was  answered,  '  To  the 
gods,  after  having  offered  a  prayer  for  the  good  of 
mankind.'  Whereupon,  not  being  disobedient  (to 
the  heavenly  vision),  he  built  a  vessel  five  stadia  in 
length,  and  two  in  breadth,  into  this  he  put  every- 
thing which  he  had  prepared,  and  embarked  in  it 
his  wife,  his  childi-en,  and  his  personal  friends. 
After  the  flood  had  been  upon  the  eartli  and  was  in 
time  abated,  Xisuthrus  sent  out  some  birds  from 
the  vessel,  which  not  finding  any  food,  nor  any 
place  where  they  could  rest,  returned  thither.  After 
an  interval  of  some  days  Xisuthrus  sent  out  the 
birds  a  second  time,  and  now  they  i-eturned  to  the 
ship  with  mud  on  their  feet.  A  third  time  he  re- 
peated the  experiment  and  then  they  returned  no 
more:  whence  Xisuthrus  judged  that  the  earth  was 
visible  above  the  waters  ;  and  accordingly  he  made 
an  opening  in  the  vessel  (?),  and  seeing  that  it  was 
stranded  upon  the  site  of  a  certain  mountain,  he 
quitted  it  v»ith  his  wife  and  daughter,  and  the 
pilot.  Having  then  paid  his  adoration  to  the  earth, 
and  having  built  an  altar  and  otiered  sacrifices  to 
the  gods,  he,  together  with  those  who  had  left  the 
vessel  with  him,  disappeared.  Those  who  had  re- 
mained behind,  when  they  found  that  Xisuthrus 
and  his  companions  did  not  return,  in  their  turn 
left  the  vessel  and  began  to  look  for  him,  calling 
him  by  his  name.  Him  they  saw  no  more,  but  a 
voice  came  to  them  from  heaven,  bidding  them  lead 
pious  lives,  and  so  join  him  wlio  was  gone  to  live 
with  the  gods  ;  and  further  informing  them  that  his 
wife,  his  daughter,  and  the  pilot  had  shared  the 
same  honour.  It  told  them,  moreover,  that  they 
should  return  to  Babylon,  and  how  it  was  ordained 
that  they  should  take  up  the  writings  that  had  been 
buried  in  Sippara  and  impart  them  to  mankind, 
and  that  the  country  where  they  then  were  was  the 
land  of  Armenia.  The  rest  having  heard  these 
words,  offered  sacrifices  to  the  gods,  and  taking  a 
circuit  journeyed  to  Babylon.  The  vessel  being 
thus  stranded  in  Armenia,  some  part  of  it  still  re- 
mains in  the  mountains  of  the  Corcyi-aeans  (or  Cor- 


wandei-ed  east  and  west,  or  whether  they  were  of  jdyaeans,  i.  e.  the  Kuixls  or  Kurdistan)  in  Aimeiiia; 


572 


NOAH 


and  the  people  scrape  oft'  the  bitumen  from  the 
vessel  and  make  use  of  it  by  way  of  charms.  Now, 
when  those  of  whom  we  have  spoken  returned  to 
Babylon,  they  dug  up  the  writings  which  had  been 
buried  at  Sippara ;  they  also  founded  many  cities 
and  built  temples,  and  thus  the  country  of  Babylon 
became  inhabited  again "  (Cory's  Ancient  Frag- 
ments,'^ pp.  26-29).  Another  version  abridged,  but 
substantially  the  same,  is  given  from  Abydenus 
{Ibid.  pp.  33,  34).  The  version  of  Eupolemus 
(quoted  by  Eusebius,  Praep.  Evang.  x.  9)  is  curious : 
"  The  city  of  Babylon,"  he  says,  "  owes  its  founda- 
tion to  those  who  were  saved  from  the  Deluge  ;  they 
were  giants,  and  they  built  the  tower  celebrated  in 
history."  Other  notices  of  a  Flood  may  bo  found  (a) 
in  the  Phoenician  mythology,  where  the  victory  of 
Pontus  (the  sea)  over  Demarous  (the  earth)  is 
mentioned  (see  the  quotation  from  Sanchoniathon 
in  Cory,  as  above,  p.  13):  (b)  in  the  Sibylline 
Oracles,  partly  borrowed  no  doubt  from  the  Biblical 
nan-ative,  and  partly  perhaps  from  some  Babylonian 
story.  In  these  mention  is  made  of  the  Deluge, 
after  which  Kronos,  Titan,  and  Japetus  ruled  the 
world,  each  taking  a  separate  portion  for  himself, 
and  remaining  at  peace  till  after  the  death  of  Noah, 
when  Kronos  and  Titan  engaged  in  war  with  one 
another  (76.  p.  o2).  To  these  must  be  added  (c) 
the  Phrygian  stoiy  of  king  Annakos  or  Nsmnakos 
(Enoch)  in  Iconium,  who  reached  an  age  of  more 
than  300  years,  foretold  the  Flood,  and  wept  and 
prayed  for  his  people,  seemg  the  destruction  that 
was  coming  upon  them.  Very  curious,  as  showing 
what  deep  root  this  tradition  must  have  taken  in 
the  country,  is  the  fact  fliat  so  late  as  the  time  of 
Septimius  Severus,  a  medal  was  struck  at  Apamea, 
on  which  the  Flood  is  commemorated.  "  The  city 
is  known  to  have  been  fonnerly  called  '  Kibotos ' 
or  '  the  Ark  ;'  and  it  is  also  known  that  the  coins  of 
cities  in  that  age  exhibited  some  leading  point  in 
their  mythological  history.  The  medal  in  question 
represents  a  kind  of  square  vessel  floating  in  the 
water.  Through  an  opening  in  it  are  seen  two 
persons,  a  man  and  a  woman.  Upon  the  top  of  this 
chest  or  ark  is  perched  a  bird,  whilst  another  Hies 
towards  it  carrying  a  branch  between  its  feet. 
Before  the  vessel  are  represented  the  same  pair  as 
having  just  quitted  it,  and  got  upon  the  dry  land. 
Singularly  enough,  too,  on  some  specimens  of  this 
medal  the  letters  NH,  or  NHE,  have  been  found  on 
the  vessel,  as  in  the  annexed  cut.  (S.ee  Eckhel  iii. 
pp.  132,  133  ;  Wiseman,  Lectures  on  Science  and 


Coin  of  Apamea  in  Phrj-gia,  representing  the  Deluge. 


»  We  have  here  and  there  made  an  alteration,  where 
the  translator  seemed  to  us  not  quite  to  have  caught  the 
meaning  of  the  original. 

J  Dr.  Gutzlaff,  in  a  paper  '  On  Buddhism  in  China,' 
communicated  to  the  Roj-al  Asiatic  Society  {Journal,  xvi. 
^9),  says  that  he  saw  in  one  of  the  Buddhist  t<'mpl<s,  "  in 
beautiful  stucco,  the  scene  where  Kwau-yin,  tlie  Goddess 


NOAH 

Revealed  Eelvjion,  ii.  pp.  128,  129.)  This  fact  is  no 
doubt  remarkable,  but  too  much  stress  must  not  be 
laid  upon  it ;  for,  making  full  allowance  for  the 
local  tradition  as  having  occasioned  it,  we  must  not 
forget  the  iufluence  which  the  Biblical  accovmt 
would  have  in  modifying  the  native  story. 

As  belonging  to  this  cycle  of  tradition,  must  be 
reckoned  also  (1)  the  Syrian,  related  by  Lucian 
{De  Dca  Siira,  c.  13),  and  connected  with  a  huge 
chasm  in  the  earth  near  Hieropolis  into  which  the 
waters  of  the  Flood  are  supposed  to  have  drained : 
and  (2)  the  Armenian  quoted  by  Josephus  {Ant. 
i.  3)  fi-om  Nicolaus  Damascenus,  who  flourished 
about  the  age  of  Augustus.  He  says:  "  There  is 
above  Minyas  in  the  land  of  Armenia,  a  great 
mountain,  which  is  called  Baris  [«'.  e.  a  ship],  to 
which  it  is  said  that  many  persons  fled  at  the  time 
of  the  Deluge,  and  so  were  saved  ;  and  that  one  in 
particular  was  carried  thither  upon  an  ark  (eVl 
XdpvaKos),  and  was  landed  upon  its  summit;  and 
that  the  remains  of  the  vessel's  planks  and  timbers 
were  long  preserved  upon  the  mountain.  Perhaps 
this  was  the  same  person  of  whom  Moses  the  Legis- 
lator of  the  Jews  wrote  an  account." 

A  second  cycle  of  traditions  is  that  of  Eastern 
Asia.  To  this  belong  the  Persian,  Indian,  and 
Chinese.  The  Pei'sian  is  mixed  up  with  its  cos- 
mogony, and  hence  loses  anything  like  an  historical 
aspect.  "  The  world  having  been  corrupted  by 
Ahriman,  it  was  necessary  to  bring  over  it  a  uni- 
versal flood  of  water  that  all  impurity  might  be 
washed  away.  The  rain  came  down  in  drops  as 
large  as  the  head  of  a  bull  ;  the  earth  was  under 
water  to  the  height  of  a  man,  and  the  creatures  of 
Ahriman  were  destroyed." 

The  Chinese  story  is,  in  many  respects,  singu- 
larly like  the  Biblical,  according  to  the  Jesuit 
M.  Martinius,  who- says  that  the  Chinese  computed 
it  to  have  taken  place  4000  years  before  the  Chris- 
tian era.  F^h-he,  the  reputed  author  of  Chinese 
civilization,  is  said  to  have  escaped  from  the  waters 
of  the  Deluge.  He  reappears  as  the  first  man  at 
tlie  production  of  a  renovated  world,  attended  by 
seven  companions — his  wife,  his  three  sons,  and 
three  daughters,  by  whose  intermarriage  the  whole 
circle  of  the  universe  is  finally  completed  (Hard- 
wick,  Christ  and  other  Masters,  iii.  1*3).'' 

The  Indian  tradition  appears  in  various  forms. 
Of  these,  the  one  which  most  remarkably  agrees 
with  the  Biblical  account  is  that  contained  in  the 
Mahabhdrate.  We  are  there  told  that  Biahma, 
having  taken  the  foim  of  a  fish,  appeared  to  the 
pious  Manu  (Satya,  i.  e.  the  righteous,  as  Noah 
is  also  called)  ou  the  banks  of  the  river  Wlrini. 
Thence,  at  his  request,  ]\Ianu  tranferred  him  when 
he  grew  bigger  to  the  Ganges,  and  finally,  when 
he  was  too  large  even  for  the  Ganges,  to  the  ocean. 
Brahma  now  announces  to  i\Ianu  the  approach  of 
the  Deluge,  and  bids  him  build  a  ship  and  put  in 
it  all  kinds  of  seeds  together  with  the  seven  Kishis, 
or  holy  beings.  The  Flood  begins  and  covers  the 
whole  earth.  Brahma  himself  appears  in  the  fonri  of 
a  horned  fish,  and  the  vessel  being  made  fast  to  him 
he  draws  it  for  many  years,  and  finally  lands  on 
the  loftiest  summit  of  Mount  Himarat  {i.  e.  the 

of  Mercy,  looks  down  from  heaven  upon  the  lonely  Noah 
in  his  ark,  amidst  the  raging  waves  of  the  deluge,  with 
the  dolphins  swimming  around  as  his  last  means  of  safety, 
and  the  dove  with  an  olive-brauch  in  its  beak  flying 
towards  the  vessel.  Nothing  could  have  exceeded  the 
beauty  of  the  execution." 


NOAH 

Himalaya).  'J'hen,  by  the  conmiaud  of  CJod,  the 
ship  is  made  fost,  and  in  meraoi-y  of  the  event  the 
mountain  called  Naubandhana  (i.  e.  ship-bindinij). 
By  the  favour  of  Biahnia,  Mann,  after  the  Flood, 
creates  the  new  race  of  mankind,  which  are  hence 
teimed  Manudsha,  i.  e.  born  of  Manu  (Bopp,  die 
Siindfluth).  The  Purdnic  or  popular  version  is  of 
much  later  date,  and  is,  "  according  to  its  own 
admission,  coloured  and  disguised  by  allcgoi'ical 
imagery."  Another  and  perhaps  the  most  ancient 
version  of  all  is  that  contained  in  the  Catapat'ha- 
Brdhmana.  The  peculiarity  of  this  is  that  its 
locality  is  manifestly  north  of  the  Himalaya  range, 
over  which  Manu  is  supposed  to  have  crossed  into 
India.  Both  versions  will  be  found  at  length  in 
Hardvvick's  Christ  caul  other  Masters,  ii.  145-152. 

The  account  of  the  Flood  in  the  Koran  is  drawn 
apparently,  partly  from  Biblical,  and  partly  from 
Persian  sources.  In  the  main,  no  doubt,  it  follows 
the  narrative  in  Genesis,  but  dwells  at  length  on 
the  testimony  of  Noah  to  the  unbelieving  (Sale's 
Koran,  ch.  xi.  p.  181).  He  is  said  to  have  tarried 
among  his  people  one  tiiousand,  save  titty  years 
(ch.  xxix.  p.  0-7).  The  people  scoffed  at  and 
deridal  him  ;  and  "  thus  were  they  employeil  until 
our  sentence  was  put  in  execution  and  the  oven 
pom'ed  fdi'th  watei-."  Different  explanations  have 
been  given  of  this  oven  which  may  be  seen  in  vSale's 
note.  He  suggests  (after  Hyde,  de  Bel.  Pers.) 
that  this  idea  was  borrowed  from  the  Persian 
Magi,  who  also  fancied  that  the  first  waters  of  the 
Deluge  gushed  out  of  the  oven  of  a  certain  old  woman 
named  Zala,  Ciifa.  But  the  word  Tannur  (oven), 
he  observes,  may  mean  only  a  receptacle  iu  which 
watei's  are  gathered,  or  the  fissure  from  which  they 
brake  forth.'  Another  peculiarity  of  this  version 
is,  that  Noah  calls  in  vain  to  one  of  his  sons  to 
enter  into  the  ark :  he  refuses,  in  the  hope  of 
escaping  to  a  mountain,  and  is  drowned  before  his 
father's  eyes.  Tlie  ark,  moreover,  is  said  to  have 
rested  on  the  mountain  Al  Judi,  which  Sale  sup- 
poses should  be  written  Jordi  or  Giordi,  and  con- 
nects with  the  Gordyaei.  Cardu,  &c.,  or  Kurd 
Mountains  on  the  borders  of  Armenia  and  Mesopo- 
tamia (ch.  xi.  p]i.  181-183,  an<l  notes). 

A  third  cycle  of  traditions  is  to  be  found  among 
the  Amei'iem  nations.  These,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected, show  occasionally  some  marks  of  resem- 
blance to  the  Asiatic  legends.  The  one  in  exist- 
ence among  the  Cherokees  reminds  us  of  the  story 
in  the  Mahjtbhdrata,  only  that  a  ilog  here  renders 
the  same  service  to  his  master  as  tlie  iish  does 
there  to  Manu.  "  This  dog  was  very  pertinacious 
in  visiting  the  banks  of  a  river  for  several  days, 
where  lie  stood  gazing  at  the  water  and  howling 
piteously.  Being  sharply  spoken  to  by  his  master 
and  ordered  home,  he  revealed  the  coming  evil.  He 
concluded  his  prediction  by  saying  that  the  escape 
of  his  master  and  family  from  drowning  depended 
upon  their  throwing  him  into  the  water;  that  to  es- 
cape drowning  himself  he  must  take  a  boat  and 
put  in  it  all  he  wished  to  save:  that  it  would  then 
rain  hard  a  long  time,  and  a  great  overilowing  of 
the  land  would  take  place,  liy  olieying  this  pre- 
diction the  man  and  his  family  were  saveil,  and  from 
them  the  earth  was  again  peopled."  (Schoolcraft, 
Notes  on  tlie  Iroquois,  pp.  o58,  .'559.) 

"Of  the  diiierent  nations  that  inhabit  Mexico," 
says  A.  von  Humboldt,  "  the  following  had  paiut- 


NOAH 


573 


«  The  road  from  Siil/.burc;  to  Bad-Gastein  passes  by 
some  very  siiignlar  fisMircs  nuulc  in  tin-  limestone  by  llic 


ings  resembling  the  deluge  ot  Coxcox,  viz.,  the 
Aztecs,  the  Mixtecs,  the  Zapotecs,  the  Tlascaltecs, 
and  the  Mechoacans.  The  Noah,  Xisuthrus,  or 
Manu  of  these  nations  is  termed  Coxcox,  Teo- 
Cipactli,  or  Tezpi.  He  saved  himself  with  his 
wife  Xochiquetzatl  in  a  bark,  or,  according  to  other 
traditions,  on  a  raft.  The  painting  1-epresents 
Coxcox  in  the  midst  of  the  water  waiting  for  a 
bark.  The  mountain,  the  summit  of  which  rises 
above  the  waters,  is  the  peak  of  Colhuacan,  the 
Ararat  of  the  Mexicans.  At  the  foot  of  the  moun- 
tain are  the  heads  of  Coxcox  and  his  wile.  The 
latter  is  known  by  two  tresses  in  the  form  of 
horns,  denoting  the  female  sex!  The  men  born 
after  the  Deluge  were  dumb:  the  dove  from  the 
top  of  a  tree  distributed  among  them  tongues, 
represented  under  the  form  of  small  commas." 
Of  the  Mechoacan  tradition  he  writes,  "  that  Co.\- 
cox,  whom  they  called  Tezpi,  embarked  in  a 
spacious  acalli  with  his  wife,  his  children,  several 
animals,  and  grain.  When  the  Great  Spirit  or- 
dered the  waters  to  withdraw,  Tezpi  sent  out  from 
his  bark  a  vulture,  the  zopilote  or  viiltur  aura. 
This  bird  did  not  return  on  account  of  the  car- 
cases with  which  the  earth  was  strewed.  Tezpi 
sent  out  other  birds,  one  of  which,  the  humming- 
bird, alone  returned,  holding  in  its  beak  a  branch 
clad  with  leaves.  Tezpi,  seeing  that  fresh  verdure 
covered  the  soil,  quitted  his  bark  near  the  moun- 
tain of  Colhuacan  "  ( Vnes  des  Cordillercs  et  Monu- 
tnens  de  I' Amerique,  pp.  226,  227).  A  pecu- 
liarity of  many  of  these  American  Indian  traditions 
must  be  noted,  and  that  is,  that  the  Flood,  accord- 
ing to  them,  irsually  took  place  in  the  time  of  the 
First  Man,  who,  together  with  his  family  escape. 
But  Miiller  {Americanischen  Urrelujionen)  goes 
too  far  when  he  draws  from  this  the  conclusion 
that  these  traditions  are  consequently  cosmogonic  and 
have  no  historical  value.  The  fact  seems  rather  to 
be  that  all  memory  of  the  age  between  the  Creation 
and  the  Flood  had  perished,  and  that  hence  these 
two  great  events  were  brought  into  close  juxtapo- 
sition. This  is  the  less  urdikely  when  we  see  how 
very  meagre  even  the  Biblical  history  of  that  age  is. 
It  may  not  be  amiss,  before  we  go  on  to  speak 
of  the  traditions  of  more  cultivated  races,  to  men- 
tion tlie  legend  still  preserved  among  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  Fiji  islands,  although  not  belonging  to 
our  last  grou]i.  They  say  that,  "  aftei-  the  islands 
had  been  ]>eopled  by  the  first  man  and  woman,  a 
groat  rain  took  place  by  which  they  were  finally 
submerged  ;  but  before  the  highest  places  were 
covered  by  the  waters,  two  large  double  canoes 
made  their  appearance.  In  one  of  these  was 
Kokora  the  god  of  carpenters,  iu  the  other  Kokola 
his  head  workman,  who  picked  up  some  of  the 
people  and  kept  them  on  board  until  tiie  waters 
liad  subsided,  after  which  they  were  .ngain  landed 
oil  the  island.  It  is  reported  that  in  former  times 
canoes  were  always  kept  in  readiness  against 
another  inundation.  The  pereons  thus  saved,  eight 
in  number,  were  lauded  at  Mbcuga,  where  the 
highest  of  their  gods  is  said  to  have  made  his 
tii-st  appearance.  Bj^  virtue  of  this  tradition,  the 
chiefs  of  Mbenga  take  rank  before  all  othere  and 
have  always  acted  a  conspicuous  part  among  the 
FIjls.  They  style  themselves  Nqali-duva-ki-langi 
—subject  to  Heaven  alone"  (Wilkes,  Exploring 
Expedition). 


course  of  the  stream,  which  an;  known  by  llic  iinmo  of 
"  Die  Ofen,"  (ir  "  the  Ovens." 


574 


NOAH 


One  more  cycle  of  trai^itions  we  shall  notice — 
that,  viz.,  of  the  Hellenic  races. 

Hellas  has  two  versions  of  a  tiooJ,  one  associated 
with  Ogyges  {Jul.  Afric.  as  quoted  by  Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  x.  10)  and  the  other,  in  a  far  more 
elaborate  form,  with  Deucalion.  Both,  however, 
are  of  late  origin, — they  were  unknown  to  Homer 
and  Hesiod.  Herodotus,  though  he  mentions  Deu- 
calion as  one  of  the  first  kings  of  the  Hellenes,  says 
not  a  word  about  the  Flood  (i.  56).  Pindar  is 
the  first  writer  who  mentions  it  (Olymp.  ix.  37fF.). 
In  Apollodorus  {Bihlio.  i.  7)  and  Ovid  {Mctani. 
i.  260)  the  story  appears  in  a  much  more  definite 
shape.  Finally,  Lucian  gives  a  narrative  {De  Dea 
Syr.  0.  12,  13),  not  very  different  fi-ora  that  of 
Ovid,  except  that  he  makes  provision  for  the 
safety  of  the  animals  which  Ovid  does  not.  He 
attributes  the  necessity  for  the  Deluge  to  the  ex- 
ceeding wickedness  of  the  existing  race  of  men,  and 
declares  that  the  earth  opened  and  sent  forth 
waters  to  swallow  them  up,  as  well  as  that  heavy 
rain  fell  upon  them.  Deucalion,  as  the  one  righteous 
man,  escaped  with  his  wives  and  children  and  the 
animals  he  had  put  into  t'he  chest  (AapvaKa),  and 
lauded,  after  nine  days  and  nine  nights,  on  the  top 
of  Parnassus,  whilst  the  chief  part  of  Hellas  was 
under  water,  and  nearly  all  men  perished,  except 
a  few  who  reached  the  tops  of  the  highest  moun- 
tains. Plutarch  {de  Sollert.  Anim.  §13)  mentions 
the  dove  which  Deucalion  made  use  of  to  ascertain 
whether  the  flood  was  abated. 

Most  of  these  accounts,  it  must  be  observed, 
localize  the  Flood,  and  confine  it  to  Greece  or  some 
part  of  Greece.  Aristotle  speaks  of  a  local  inunda- 
tion near  Dodona  only  {Meteorol.  i.  14). 

It  must  also  be  confessed,  that  the  later  the  nar- 
rative, the  more  definite  the  form  it  assumes,  and  the 
more  nearly  it  resembles  the  lilosaic  account. 

It  seems  tolerably  certain  that  the  Egyptians 
had  no  records  of  the  Deluge,  at  least  if  we  are  to 
credit  Manetho.  Kor  has  any  such  record  been 
detected  on  the  monuments,  or  preserved  in  the 
mythology  of  Egypt.  They  knew,  however,  of  the 
flood  of  Deucalion,  but  seem  to  have  been  in  doubt 
whether  it  was  to  be  regarded  as  partial  or  uni- 
versal, and  they  supposed  it  to  have  been  preceded 
by  several  others. 

Everybody  knows  Ovid's  story  of  Deucalion  and 
Pyn-ha.  It  may  be  mentioned,  however,  in  refer- 
ence to  this  as  a  very  singular  coincidence  that, 
just  as,  according  to  Ovid,  the  earth  was  repeopled 
by  Deucalion  and  Pyrrha  throwing  the  bones  of 
their  mother  («.  e.  stones)  behind  their  backs,  so 
among  the  Tamanaki,  a  Carib  tribe  on  the  Orinoko, 
the  story  goes  that  a  man  and  his  wife  escaping 
from  the  tiood  to  the  top  of  the  high  mountain 
Tapanacu,  threw  over  their  heads  the  fruit  of 
the  Mauritia-palm,  whence  sprvmg  a  new  race  of 
men  and  women.  This  curious  coincidence  be- 
tween Hellenic  and  American  traditions  seems  ex- 
plicable only  on  the  hypothesis  of  some  common 
centre  of  tradition. 

After  the  Flood. — Noah's  fii-st  act  after  he  left  the 
ark  was  to  build  an  altar,  and  to  offer  sacrifices. 
This  is  the  first  altar  of  which  we  read  in  Scripture, 
and  the  first  burnt  sacrifice.  Noah,  it  is  said,  took 
of  every  clean  beast,  and  of  every  clean  fowl,  and 
offei-eil  burnt  offerings  on  the  altar.  And  then  the 
narrative  adds  with  childlike  simplicity  :  "  And 
.Jehovah  smelled  a  smell  of  rest  (or  satisfaction), 
and  .Tehovah  said  in  His  heart,  I  will  not  again 
curse  the  ground  any  more  for  man's  sake  ;  for  tlie 


NOAH 

imagination  of  man's  heart  is  evil  from  his  youth  ; 
neither  will  I  again  smite  any  more  every  living 
thing  as  I  have  done."  Jehovah  accepts  the  sacri- 
fice of  Noah  as  the  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of 
man  that  he  desires  reconciliation  and  communion 
with  God ;  and  therefore  the  renewed  eai  th  shall 
no  more  be  wasted  with  a  plague  of  waters,  but  so 
long  as  the  earth  shall  last,  seed-time  and  harvest, 
cold  and  heat,  summer  and  winter,  day  and  night 
shall  not  cease. 

Then  follows  the  blessing  of  God  (Elohim)  upon 
Noah  and  his  sons.  They  are  to  be  fruitful  and 
multiply :  they  are  to  have  lordship  over  the  inferior 
animals  ;  not,  however,  as  at  the  first  by  native 
right,  but  by  terror  is  their  rule  to  be  established. 
All  living  creatures  are  now  given  to  man  for  food  ; 
but  express  provision  is  made  that  the  blood  (in 
which  is  the  lite)  should  not  be  eaten.  This  does 
not  seem  necessaiily  to  imply  that  animal  food  was 
not  eaten  before  tlie  flood,  but  only  that  now  the 
use  of  it  was  sanctioned  by  divine  permission.  The 
prohibition  with  regard  to  blood  reappears  with 
fresh  force  in  the  Jewish  ritual  (Lev.  iii.  17,  vii. 
26,27,  xvii.  10-14;  Deut.  xii.  16,  23,  24,  xa-.  23), 
and  seemed  to  the  Apostles  so  essentially  human  as 
well  as  Jewish  that  they  thought  it  ought  to  be 
enforced  upon  Gentile  converts.  In  later  times  the 
Greek  Church  urged  it  as  a  reproach  against  the 
Latin  that  they  did  not  hesitate  to  eat  things 
strangled  {snffocata  in  quihus  sanguis  tenetur). 

Next,  God  makes  provision  for  the  security  of 
human  life.  The  blood  of  man,  in  which  is  his 
life,  is  yet  moie  precious  than  the  blood  of  beasts. 
When  it  has  been  shed  God  will  require  it,  whether 
of  beast  or  of  man :  and  man  himself  is  to  be  the 
appointed  channel  of  Divine  justice  upon  the 
homicide :  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man 
shall  his  blood  be  shed;  for  in  the  image  of  God 
made  He  man."  Hence  is  laid  the  first  foundation 
of  the  civil  power.  And  just  as  the  priesthood  is 
declared  to  be  the  privilege  of  all  Israel  before  it  is 
made  representative  in  certain  individuals,  so  here 
the  civil  authority  is  declared  to  be  a  right  of  human 
nature  itself,  before  it  is  delivered  over  into  the 
hands  of  a  particular  executive. 

Thus  with  the  beginning  of  a  new  world  God 
gives,  on  the  one  hand,  a  promise  which  secures  the 
stability  of  the  natural  order  of  the  universe,  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  consecrates  human  life  with  a 
special  sanctity  as  resting  upon  these  two  pillars — 
the  brotherhood  of  men,  and  man's  likeness  to  God. 

Of  the  seven  precepts  of  Noah,  as  they  are  called, 
the  observance  of  which  was  required  of  all  Jewish 
proselytes,  three  only  are  here  expressly  mentioned : 
the  abstinence  from  blood ;  the  prohibition  of 
murder  ;  and  the  recognition  of  the  civil  authority. 
The  remaining  four :  the  prohibition  of  idolatry,  of 
blasphemy,  of  incest,  and  of  theft  rested  apparently 
on  the  general  sense  of  mankind. 

It  is  in  the  terms  of  the  blessing  and  the  covenant 
made  with  Noah  after  the  Flood  that  we  find  the 
strongest  evidence  that  in  the  sense  of  the  writer  it 
was  miiversal,  i.e.,  that  it  extended  to  all  the  then 
known  world.  The  literal  trath  of  the  nairative 
obliges  us  to  believe  that  the  whole  human  race, 
except  eight  persons,  perished  by  the  waters  of  the 
flood.  JS'oah  is  clearly  the  head  of  a  new  human 
family,  the  representative  of  the  whole  race.  It  is 
as  such  that  God  makes  His  covenant  with  him ; 
;uid  hence  selects  a  mdural  phenomenon  as  the  sign 
of  that  covenant,  just  ,as  later  in  making  a  national 
covenant  with  Abraham,  He  made  the  seal  of  it  to 


NOAH 

be  an  arbitrary  sign  in  the  flesh.  The  bow  in  the 
cloud,  seen  by  every  nation  under  heaven,  is  an 
unfailing  witness  to  the  truth  of  God.  Was  the 
rainbow,  then,  we  ask,  never  scon  before  the  flood  ? 
Was  this  "  sign  in  the  heavens"  beheld  for  the  flrst 
time  by  the  eight  dwellers  in  the  ark  when,  after 
their  long  imprisonment,  they  stood  again  upon  the 
green  earth,  and  saw  the  dark  himiid  clouds  spanned 
by  its  glorious  arch  ?  Such  seems  tlie  meaning  of 
the  narrator.  And  yet  this  implies  that  there  was 
no  rain  before  the  flood,  and  that  the  laws  of  nature 
were  changed,  at  least  in  that  part  of  the  globe,  by 
that  event.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  in 
the  world  at  large  there  has  been  such  change  in 
meteorological  phenomena  as  here  implied.  That  a 
certain  portion  of  the  earth  should  never  have  been 
visited  by  rain  is  quite  conceivable.  Egvpt,  though 
not  absolutely  without  rain,  very  rarely  sees  it. 
But  the  country  of  Noah  and  the  Ark  was  a  moun- 
tainous country ;  and  the  ordinary  atmospherical 
conditions  must  have  been  suspended,  or  a  new 
law  must  have  come  into  operation  after  the  flood, 
if  the  rain  then  first  fell,  and  if  the  rainbow  had 
consequently  never  before  been  painted  on  the  clouds. 
Hence,  many  writers  have  supjx);ed  that  the  meaning 
of  the  passage  is,  not  that  the  rainbow  now  appeared 
for  the  first  time,  but  that  it  was  now  for  tlie  first 
time  invested  with  the  sanctity  of  a  sign  ;  that  not  a 
nevi?  phenomenon  was  visible,  but  that  a  new  mean- 
ing was  given  to  a  phenomenon  already  existing. 
It  must  be  confessed,  however,  that  this  is  not  the 
natural  interpretation  of  the  words  :  "  This  is  the 
sign  of  the  covenant  which  I  do  set  between  me  and 
you,  and  every  living  thing  which  is  with  you  for 
everlasting  generations :  my  bow  have  I  set  in  the 
^loud,  and  it  shall  be  for  the  sign  of  a  covenant 
between  me  and  the  earth.  Arid  it  shall  come  to 
pass  that  when  I  bring  a  cloud  over  the  earth,  tiien 
the  bow  shall  be  seen  in  the  cloud,  and  I  will 
remember  my  covenant  which  is  between  me  and 
you  and  eveVy  living  thing  of  all  flesh,"  &c. 

Noah  now  for  the  rest  of  his  life  betook  himself 
to  agricultural  pursuits,  following  in  this  the  tra- 
dition of  his  family.  It  is  particularly  noticed  that 
he  planted  a  vineyard,  and  some  of  the  older  Jewish 
writers,  with  a  touch  of  poetic  beauty,  tell  us  that 
.he  took  the  shoots  of  a  vine  which  had  wandei'ed 
out  of  paradise  wherewith  to  plant  his  vineyard." 
Whether  in  ignorance  of  its  properties  or  otherwise, 
we  are  not  informed,  but  he  drank  of  the  juice  of 
the  gi-ape  till  he  became  intoxicated  and  shamefully 
exposed  himself  in  his  own  tent.  One  of  his  sons, 
Ham,  mocked  openly  at  his  father's  disgrace.  The 
others,  with  dutiful  care  and  reverence,  endeavoured 
to  hide  it.  Noah  was  not  so  drunk  as  to  be  un- 
conscious of  the  indignity  which  his  youngest  .son 
had  put  upon  him  ;  and  when  he  recovered  from 
the  ell'ects  of  his  intoxication,  ho  declared  that  in 
requiUil  for  this  act  of  brutal  unfeeling  mockery,  a 
curse  should  rest  upon  the  sons  of  Ham,  that  he 
who  knew  not  the  duty  of  a  child,  should  see  his 
own  son  degraded  to  the  condition  of  a  slave.  With 
the  curse  on  his  youngest  son  was  joined  a  blessing 
on  the  other  two.  It  lan  thus,  in  the  old  poetic 
or  rather   rhythmical   and  alliterative   fortn    into 


NOAH 


675 


which  tlie  more  solemn  utterances  of  antiquity 
commonly  fell.     And  he  said  : — 

Cursed  be  Canaan, 

A  slave  of  slaves  shall  he  be  to  his  brethren. 

And  he  .said  : — 

Blessed  be  Jehovah,  God  of  Shem, 

And  let  Canaan  be  their  slave  ! 

May  God  enlarge  Japhet,'' 

And  let  him  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem, 

And  let  Canaan  be  their  slave  ! 

Of  old  a  father's  solemn  curse  or  blessing  was  held 
to  have  a  mysterious  power  of  fulfilling  itself.  And 
in  this  case  the  words  of  the  righteous  man,  though 
strictly  the  expression  of  a  wish  (Dr.  Pye  Smith  is 
quite  wrong  in  translating  all  the  verbs  as  futures  ; 
they  are  optatives)  did  in  fact  amount  to  a  prophecy. 
It  has  been  asked  why  Noah  did  not  curse  Ham, 
instead  of  cursing  Canaan.  It  might  be  sufficient 
to  reply  that  at  such  times  men  are  not  left  to 
themselves,  and  that  a  divine  purpose  as  truly 
guided  Noah's  lips  then,  as  it  did  the  hands  of 
Jacob  afterwards.  But,  moreover,  it  was  surely  by 
a  righteous  retribution  that  he,  who  as  youngest 
son  had  dishonoured  his  father,  should  see  the  curse 
light  on  the  head  of  his  own  youngest  son.  The 
blow  was  probably  heavier  than  if  it  had  lighted 
directly  on  himself.  Thus  e.irly  in  the  world's 
history  was  the  lesson  taught  practicallj''  which  the 
law  afterwards  expressly  enunciated,  that  God  visits 
the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children.  The 
subsequent  history  of  Canaan  shows  in  the  clearest 
manner  possible  the  fulfilment  of  the  curse.  When 
Israel  took  possession  of  his  land,  he  became  the 
slave  of  Shem :  when  Tyre  fell  before  the  arms  of 
Alexander,  and  Carthage  succumbed  to  her  Roman 
conquerors,  he  became  the  slave  of  Japhet:  and  we 
almost  hear  the  echo  of  Noah's  curse  in  Hannibal's 
Agnosco  fortunam  Carthaglnis,  when  the  head  of 
Ha-sdrubal  his  brother  was  thrown  contemptuously 
into  the  Punic  lines. <= 

It  is  uncertain  whether  in  the  words  "And  let 
him  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem,"  "  God,"  or 
"  Japhet,"  is  the  subject  of  the  verb.  At  first  it 
seems  more  natural  to  suppose  that  Noah  prays  that 
God  would  dwell  there  (the  root  of  the  verb  is  the 
same  as  tiiat  of  the  noun  Shechinnh).  But  the 
blessing  of  Shem  has  been  spoken  already.  It  is 
better  therefore  to  take  Japhet  as  the  subject.  What 
then  is  meant  by  his  dwelling  in  the  tents  of  Shem  ? 
Not  of  course  that  he  should  so  occupy  them  as  to 
thrust  out  the  f)riginal  possessois ;  nor  even  that 
they  should  melt  into  one  people ;  but  as  it  would 
seem,  that  Japhet  may  enjoy  the  religious  privileges 
of  Shem.  So  Augustine  :  "  Latificet  Deus  Japheth 
et  habitet  in  tentoriis  Sem,  id  est,  in  Ecclesiis  quas 
filii  Prophetarum  Apostoli  construxerunt."  The 
Talmud  sees  this  blessing  fulfilled  in  the  use  of  the 
(ireek  language  in  sacred  things,  such  as  the  trans- 
lation of  the  Scriptures.  Thus  Shem  is  bless%:l  with 
the  knowledge  of  Jehovah :  and  .laphet  with  tem- 
poral increase  and  dominion  in  the  first  instance, 
with  the  further  hope  of  sharing  afterwards  in 
spiritual  advantiiges.  Aftei'  this  prophetic  lilessing 
we  hear  no  more  of  the  patriarch  but  the  sum  of  his 


»  Armenia,  it  has  been  observed,  is  still  favourable  to    to  one  version  brought  it  from  India  (jiiod.  Sic.  lii.  32), 
the  growth  of  the  vine.    Xenophon  (Anab.  iv.  4,  9)  speaks  i  according  to  another  from  I'hrygia  (Sirabo.  .\.  4B9).    Asia 
of  the  excellent  wines  of  the  country,  and  his  account ;  at  all  events  is  the  acknowledged  home  of  the  vine, 
has  been  confirmed  in  more  recent  times  (Hitter,  Krdk.  I      b  There  is  an  allitcrntlve  play  upon  words  hero  which 
X.  554,  .319,  Sec).    Tlie  Greek  myth  referred  the  discovery  1  Gmnot  be  preserved  in  a  translation, 
and  cuUivatiiin  of  the  vine  to  Dionysos,  wiin  accordiiii;  j      "^  See  Delil/.sch,  Comm.  in  Inc. 


576 


NO-AMOTSr 


years.  "  And  Noah  lived  after  the  flood  three  hun- 
dred and  fifty  years.  And  thus  all  the  days  of  Noah 
were  nine  hundred  and  fifty  years:  and  he  died." 

For  the  literature  of  this  article  the  various  com- 
mentaries on  Genesis,  especially  those  of  modern 
date,  may  be  consulted.  Such  are  those  of  Tuch, 
1838  ;  of  BaumH;arten,  1843  ;  Knobel,  1852  ;  Schrb- 
der,  1846  ;  Delitzsch,  3d  ed.  1860.  To  the  last  of 
these  especially  the  present  writer  is  much  indebted. 
Other  works  bearing  on  the  subject  more  or  less  di- 
rectly are  Lyell's  Principles  of  Geologij,  1853  ; 
Pfaff's  Schopfun'js  Geschichte,  1855 ;  Wiseman's 
Lectures  on  Science  and  Bevealed  Religion ; 
Hugh  Miller's  Testimony  of  the  Eochs.  Hardwick's 
Christ  and  other  Masters,  1857 ;  Miiller's  Die 
Americanischen  Urreligionen  ;  Bunsen's  Bihelwerk, 
and  Ewald's  Jahrbilcher ,  have  also  been  consulted. 
The  writer  has  further  to  express  his  obligations 
both  to  Professor  Owen  and  to  Professor  Hujley, 
and  especially  to  the  latter  gentleman,  for  much 
valuable  information  on  the  scientific  questions 
touched  upon  in  this  article.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

NO'AH(nyJ:  Noud:  Noa).  One  of  the  five 
daughters  of  Zelophehad  (Num.  xxvi.  33,  xxvii.  1, 
xxxvi.  11,  Josh.  xvii.  3). 

NO-A'MON,  NO  (pON  NJ  :  ix^ph  'A/xiJ-du : 
Alexandria  (populornm),  Nah.  iii.  8  :  XJ :  AiSff- 
iroKis:  Alexandria,  Jer.  xlvi.  25,  Ez.  xxx.  14,  15, 
16),  a  city  of  Egypt,  Thebae  (Thebes),  or  Dios- 
polis  Magna.  The  second  part  of  the  first  form  is 
the  name  of  AMEN,  the  chief  divinity  of  Thebes, 
mentioned  or  alluded  to  in  connexion  with  this 
place  in  Jeremiah,  "Behold,  I  will  punish  Amon  [or 
'the  multitude,'  with  reference  to  Amen"]  in  No, 
and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with  their  gods,  and  their 
kings"  {I.  c);  and  perhaps  also  alluded  to  in  Ezekiel 
(xxx.  15).  [Amon.]  The  second  part  of  the  Egyp- 
tian sacred  name  of  the  city,  HA-ABIEN,  "  the 
abode  of  Amen,"  is  the  same.  There  is  a  difficulty 
as  to  the  meaning  of  No.  It  has  been  supposeil,  in 
accordance  with  the  LXX.  rendering  of  No- Amon  by 

fxepls  'Anixdy,  that  the  Coj^tic  ItO^,  rtOT^j 
funis,  funiculus,  once  funis  mensorius  (Mic.  ii.  4), 
instead  of  ItO^  ItpCOCy,  might  indicate  that 
it  signified  "  portion,"  so  that  the  name  would 
mean  "  the  portion  of  Amon."  But  if  so,  how 
are  we  to  explain  the  use  of  No  alone  ?  It  thus 
occurs  not  only  in  Hebrew,  but  also  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  in  which  it  is 
written  Ni'a,  according  to  Sir  Henry  Rawliuson 
('  Illustrations  of  Egyptian  History  and  Chronology,' 
&c.,  Trans.  May.  Soc.  Lit.,  2nd'Ser.  vii.  p.  166).^ 

The  conjectures  that  Thebes  was  called  Tl  HI  It 
^JULOTIt)  "  the  abode  of  Amen,"  or,  still  nearer 
the  Hebrew,  ItA.  ^-JULOTHC,  "the  [city]  of 
AmenJ'  like  It<LHCI)  "  tlie  [city]  of  Isis,"  or, 
as  Gesenius  prefers,  JULA.  ^JULOTItj  "the 
place  of  Amen"  {Thes.  s.  v.),  are  all  liable  to  two 
serious  objections,  that  they  neither  represent  the 
Egyptian  name,  nor  afford  an  explanation  of  the  use 
of  No  alone.     It  seems  most  reasonable  to  suppose 


"  The  former  is  the  more  probable  reading,  as  the  gods 
of  Epypt  are  mentioned  almost  immediately  after. 

b  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson  identifies  Ni'a  with  No-Araon. 
The  whole  paper  (pp.  137,  seaq.)  is  of  great  importanec, 
as  Illustrating  llie  refei'ence  in  Nahimi  to  the  capture  of 
Thebes,  by  shewing  that  Egypt  was  conquered  by  both 
Kiiarhaddon   and  Asshur-buni-pal,  and    that   the  latter 


NOB 

that  No  is  a  Semitic  name,  and  that  Amon  is  added 
in  Nahum  (I.  c.)  to  distinguish  Thebes  from  some 
other  place  bearing  the  same  name,  or  on  account 
of  the  connection  of  Amen  with  that  city.  Thebes 
also  bears  in  ancient  Egyptian  the  common  name, 
of  doubtful  signification,  AP-T  or  T-AP,  which  the 
Greeks  represented  by  Thebae.  The  whole  metro- 
polis, on  both  banks  of  the  river,  was  called  TAM. 
(See  Brugsch,  Geogr.  Lnschr.  i.  pp.  175,  seqq.) 

Jerome  supposes  No  to  be  either  Alexandria  or 
Egypt  itself  {LnJesaiam,  lib.  v.  t.  iii.  col.  125,  ed. 
Pans,  1704).  Champollion  takes  it  to  be  Dios- 
polis  in  Lower  Egypt  (L'Egypte  sons  les  Pharaons, 
ii.  p.  131);  but  Gesenius  (/.  c.)  well  obsen-es  that 
it  would  not  then  be  compared  in  Nahum  to  Nineveh. 
This  and  the  evidence  of  the  Assyrian  record  leave 
no  doubt  that  it  is  Thebes.  The  description  of 
No-Amon,  as  "situate  among  the  rivers,  the  waters 
round  about  it"  (Nah.  I.  c),  remarkably  charac- 
terizes Thebes,  the  only  town  of  ancient  Egypt  which 
we  know  to  have  been  built  on  both  sides  of  the  Nile ; 
and  the  prophecy  that  it  should  "  be  rent  asunder  " 
(Ez.  xxx.  16)  cannot  fail  to  appear  remarkably 
significant  to  the  obsei-ver  who  stands  amidst  the 
vast  ruins  of  its  chief  edifice,  the  great  temple  of 
Amen,  which  is  rent  and  shattered  ;is  if  by  an 
earthquake,  although  it  must  be  held  to  refer  pri- 
marily, at  least,  rather  to  the  breaking  up  or  capture 
of  the  city  (comp.  2  K.  xxv.  4,  Jer.  Iii.  7),  than  to 
its  destruction.     See  Thebes.  [R.  S.  P.] 

NOB  (3b:  Nofil3d;  Alex.  NoPd,  exc.  Nofide 
1  Sam.  xxiii.  11,  NSji  Neh.  xi.  32:  Nobe,  Nob  in 
Neh.)  was  a  sacerdotal  city  in  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min, and  situated  on  some  eminence  near  Jerusalem. 
That  it  was  on  one  of  the  roads  which  led  from 
the  north  to  the  capital,  an<l  within  sight  of  it,  is 
certain  ii'om  the  illustrative  passage  in  which  Isaiah 
(x.  28-32)  describes  the  approach  of  the  Assyrian 
army : — 

"  He  comes  to  Ai,  passes  through  Migron, 

At  Michmash  deposits  his  baggage  ; 

They  cross  the  pass,  Geba  is  our  night-station; 

Terrified  is  Eamah,  Gibeah  of  Saul  flees. 

Shriek  with  thy  voice,  daughter  of  Gallim  ; 

Listen,  0  Laish  !    Ah,  poor  Anathoth  I 

Madmenah  escapes,  dwellers  in  Gebim  take  flight." 

Yet  this  day  he  halts  at  Nob : 

He  shakes  his  hand  against  the  mount,  daughter 
of  Zion, 

The  hill  of  Jerusalem." 
In  this  spirited  sketch  the  poet  sees  the  enemy 
pouring  down  from  the  north  ;  they  reach  at  length 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  devoted  city ;  they  take 
possession  of  one  village  after  another ;  while  the 
inhabitants  flee  at  their  approach,  and  fill  the 
country  with  cries  of  terror  and  distress.  It  is 
implied  here  clearly  that  Nob  was  the  last  station 
in  their  line  of  march,  whence  the  invaders  could 
see  Jerusalem,  and  whence  they  could  be  seen,  as 
they  "  shook  the  hand  "  in  proud  derision  of  their 
enemies.  Lightfoot  also  mentions  a  Jewish  tradition 
{0pp.  ii.  p.  203)  that  Jerusalem  and  Nob  stood 
within  sight  of  eacli  other. 

Nob  was  one  of  the  places  where  the  tabernacle, 
or  ark  of  Jehovali,  was  kept  for  a  time  during  the 
days  of  its  wanderings  before  a  home  was  provided 

twice  took  Thebes.  If  these  wars  were  after  the  prophet's 
time,  the  narrative  of  them  makes  it  more  probable  thati 
it  before  seemed  that  there  was  a  still  earlier  conquest  of 
Egypt  by  the  Assyrians. 

"  "  The  full  idea,"  says  Gesenius,  "  is  tliat  they  huriy 
off  to  conceal  their  treasures." 


NOB      ■ 

for  it  on  mount  Zion  (2  Sam.  vi.  I  &c.).  A  com- 
pany of  the  Bonjamitcs  settled  hero  after  the  return 
from  the  exile  (Neh.  xi.  32).  But  the  event  for 
which  Nob  was  most  noted  in  the  Scripture  annals, 
was  a  frightful  massacre  which  occurred  theie  in 
the  reign  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17-19).  David  had 
ried  thither  from  the  court  of  the  jealous  king ;  and 
the  circumstances  under  which  he  had  escaped  being 
unknown,  Ahimelech,  the  high  priest  at  Nob,  gave 
him  some  of  the  show-bread  from  the  golden  table, 
and  the  sword  of  Goliath  which  he  had  in  his  charge 
as  a  sacred  trophy.  Doeg,  an  Edomite,  the  king's 
shepherd,  who  was  present,  reported  the  affair  to 
his  master.  Saul  was  enraged  on  hearing  that  such 
favour  had  been  shown  to  a  man  whom  he  hated  as 
a  rival ;  and  nothing  would  appease  him  but  the 
indiscriminate  slaughter  of  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Nob.  'I'he  king's  executionei-s  having  refused  to 
perform  the  bloody  deed  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17),  he  said 
to  Doeg,  the  spy,  who  had  betrayed  the  un- 
suspecting Ahimelech,  "  Turn  thou,  and  flill  upon 
the  priests.  And  Doeg  the  Edomite  turned,  and 
he  fell  upon  the  pi'iests,  and  slew  on  that  day  four- 
score and  tive  persons  that  did  wear  a  linen  ephod. 
And  Nob,  the  city  of  the  priests,  smote  he  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  both  men  and  women,  children 
and  sucklings,  and  oxen,  and  asses,  and  sheep,  with 
the  edge  of  the  sword."  Abiathar,  a  son  of  Ahi- 
melech, was  the  only  person  who  survived  to  re- 
count the  sad  story. 

It  would  be  a  long  time  naturally  before  the 
doomed  city  could  recover  from  such  a  blow.  It 
appears  in  fact  never  to  have  regained  its  ancient 
importance.  The  references  in  Is.  x.  32,  and  Neh. 
xi.  32,  are  the  only  later  allusions  to  Nob  which 
we  find  in  the  0.  T.  All  trace  of  the  name  has 
disappeared  from  the  country  long  ago.  Jerome 
states  that  nothing  remained  in  his  time  to  indicate 
where  it  had  been.  Geographers  are  not  agreed  as 
to  the  precise  spot  with  which  we  are  to  identify 
the  ancient  locality.  Some  of  the  conjectures  on 
this  point  may  deserve  to  be  mentioned.  "  It  must 
have  been  situated,"  says  Dr.  Kobinson  {^Researches, 
vol.  i.  p.  464),  "  somewhere  upon  the  ridge  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  north-east  of  the  city.  We  sought 
all  along  this  ridge,  from  the  Damascus  road  to  the 
summit  opposite  the  city,  for  some  traces  of  an 
ancient  site  which  might  be  regarded  as  the  jilace 
of  Nob;  but  without  the  sliglitcst  success."  Kie- 
pert's  Map  places  Nob  at  El-kdwieh,  not  far  from 
Andtd,  about  a  mile  north-west  of  Jerusalem. 
Tobler  {Topographic  von  Jems.  ii.  §719)  describes 
this  village  as  beautifully  situated,  and  occupying 
unquestionably  an  ancient  site.  But  it  must  be 
regarded  as  fatal  to  this  identification  that  Jeru- 
salem is  not  to  be  seen  from  that  point.  El-lsawleh 
is  in  a  valley,  and  the  dramatic  representation  of 
the  prophet  would  be  unsuited  to  such  a  place. 
Mr.  Porter  {Handh.  ii.  324)  expresses  the  confi- 
dent belief  that  Nob  is  to  be  sought  on  a  low 
peaked  tell,  a  littli;  to  the  right  of  the  nortJiern 
road  and  opposite  to  Shdfdt.  He  found  there 
several  cisterns  hewn  in  the  rock,  largo  building 
stones,  and  various  other  indications  of  an  ancient 
town.  The  top  of  this  hill  affords  an  extensive 
view,  and  Movuit  Ziou  is  distinctly  >*oon,  though 
Moriah  and  Olivet  are  hid  by  an  intervening  ridge. 

The  Nob  spoken  of  above  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  another  which  Jerome  mentions  in  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  not  fu-  from  Lydda.  (See  Von  l!au- 
mer's  I'alacstina,  p.  19G.)  No  allu.sion  is  made  to 
this  latter  place  in  the  Bible.     The  Jews  alter  re- 

VOL.  II. 


NODAB 


577 


covering  the  ark  of  Jehovah  from  the  Philistines 
would  bo  likely  to  keep  it  beyond  the  leach  of  a 
similar  disaster ;  and  the  Nob  which  was  the  seat 
of  the  sanctuary  in  the  time  of  Saul,  must  have 
been  among  the  mountains.  This  Nob,  or  Niobo 
as  Jerome  writes,  now  Beit  Nuha,  could  not  be 
the  village  of  that  name  near  Jerusalem.  The 
towns  with  which  Isaiah  associates  the  place  put 
that  view  out  of  the  question.  [H.  B.  H.l 

NO'BAH(nni):  Na;8a;0,  Na/3ai ;  Alex.  Na/3w0, 

Na/3e9 :  Noha),  The  name  conferred  by  the  con- 
queror of  Kenath  and  the  villages  in  dependence  on 
it  on  his  new  acquisition  (Num.  xxxii.  42).  For  a 
certain  period  after  the  establishment  of  the  Israelite 
rule  the  new  name  remained,  and  is  used  to  mark 
the  course  taken  by  Gideon  in  his  chase  after  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  (Judg.  viii.  11).  But  it  is  not  aoain 
heard  of,  and  the  original  appellation,  as  is  usual  m 
such  cases,  appears  to  have  jecovered  its  hold,  which 
it  has  since  retained;  lor  in  the  slightly  modified 
form  of  Kimdioat  it  is  the  name  of  tlie  place  to  the 
present  day  (see  Onomasticon,  Nabo). 

Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  268,  note  2)  identifies  the 
Nobah  of  Gideon's  pursuit  with  Nophah  of  Num. 
xxi.  30,  and  distinguishes  them  both  from  Nobah  of 
Num.  xxxii.  42,  on  the  ground  of  their  being  men- 
tioned with  Dibon,  Blcdeba,  and  Jogbehah.  But  if 
Jogbehah  be,  as  he  elsewhere  (ii.  504,  note  4)  sug- 
gests, el-Jebeibeh,  between  Amman  and  es-Salt, 
there  is  no  necessity  for  the  distinction.  In  truth 
the  lists  of  Gad  and  Reuben  in  Num.  xxxii.  are  so 
confused  that  it  is  difficult  to  apportion  the  towns 
of  each  in  accordance  with  our  present  imperfect 
topographical  knowledge  of  those  regions.  Ewald 
also  (ii.  392noie)  identifies  Nobah  of  Num.  xxxii. 
42  with  Nawa  or  Neve,  a  place  15  or  16  miles  east 
of  the  north  end  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  (Ritter, 
Jordan,  356).  But  if  Kenath  and  Nobah  are  the 
same,  and  Kundwat  be  Kenath,  the  identification 
is  both  unnecessary  and  vmtenable. 

Eusebius  and  Jerome,  with  that  curious  disregai'd 
of  probability  which  is  so  puzzling  in  some  of  the 
articles  in  the  Onomasticon,  identify  Nobah  of 
Judg.  viii.  with  Nob,  "  the  city  of  the  Priests, 
afterwards  laid  waste  by  Saul"  {Onom.  'Nofi^d  and 
"  Nabbe  sive  Noba").  [G.] 

N0'BAH(ni3:  Na^oD:  Noba).    An  Israelite 

warrior  (Num.  xxxii.  42  only),  probably,  like  Jair, 
a  Manassito,  who  during  the  conquest  of  the  torri- 
toiy  ou  the  cast  of  Jordan  possessed  himself  of  the 
town  of  Kenath  and  the  villages  or  hamlets  de- 
pendent upon  it  (Heb.  "  daughters"),  and  gave  them 
his  own  name.  According  to  the  Jewish  tradition 
{Seder  Olam  Rabba,  ix.)  Nobah  was  born  in  Egyjtt, 
died  after  the  decease  of  Moses,  and  was  buried 
during  the  passage  of  the  Jordan. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  form  of  the  naipo  in 
the  LXX.  is  the  same  as  that  given  to  Nebo.  [G.] 

NOD.    [Cain.] 

NO'DAB  (mi3  :  Na5o^a?oi :  Noddi),  the  name 
of  an  Arab  tribe  mentioned  only  in  1  Chr.  v.  19, 
in  the  account  of  the  war  of  the  Roubeiiites,  the 
(iaditcs,  and  the  half  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh, 
against  the  Hagarites  (verses  9-22);  "and  they 
made  war  with  the  Hagarites,  with  Jetui',  and 
Nephish,  and  Nodab"  (ver.  19).  In  Gen.  xxv. 
15  and  1  Chr.  i.  31,  Jetur,  Naphish,  and  Kede- 
inah  are  the  last  three  sons  of  Ishmacl,  and  it 
has  been  thcrcfoie  supiiosod  that   Nodab  also  was 

2   I' 


578 


NOE 


onfi  of  his  sons.  But  we  have  no  other  mention 
of  Nodab,  and  it  is  probable,  in  tlie  abspnce  of 
additional  evidence,  thnt  he  \v:is  a  grandson  or  other 
descendant  of  the  patriarch,  and  that  the  name,  in 
the  time  of  the  record,  was  that  of  a  tribe  sprung 
from  such  descendant.  The  Hagarites,  and  Jetur, 
Nephish,  and  Nodab,  were  pastoral  people,  for  the 
Reubenites  dwelt  in  their  tents  throughout  all  the 
east  [land]  of  Gilead  (ver.  10),  and  in  the  war  a 
gi-eat  midtitude  of  cattle — camels,  sheep,  and  asses 
— were  taken.  A  hundred  thousand  men  wei  e  taken 
prisoners  or  slain,  so  that  the  tribes  must  have 
been  very  numerous ;  and  the  Israelites  "  dwelt  in 
their  steads  until  the  captivity."  If  the  Hagarites 
(or  Hagarenes)  were,  as  is  most  probable,  the  people 
who  afterwards  inhabited  Hejer  [Hagauenes], 
they  were  driven  southwards,  into  the  noi-th-eastern 
province  of  Arabia,  bordering  the  mouths  of  the 
Euphrates,  and  the  low  tracts  surrounduig  them. 
[Jetur;  Ituraea;  Naphish.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

NO'E  (yiwe  :  Noe).  The  patriarch  Noah  (Tob. 
iv.  12;  Matt.  xxiv.  37,  .38;  Luke  iii.  36,  Jani. 
26,  27). 

NO'EBA  (No6(8c£ :  Nachoba)  =  Nekoda  1 
(1  Esdr.  V.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  48). 

NO'GAHfHJi:  Nayai,  Nayefl:  Noge,  Noga). 
One  of  the  thirteen  sons  of  David  who  were  bom  to 
him  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  iii.  7,  xiv.  6).  His 
name  is  omitted  from  the  list  in  2  Sam.  v. 

NO'HAH  (nni:  :  ^wd  -.  Nohaa).  The  fourth 
.son  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  2). 

NON  (p3 :  Novj/ :  Nun).  Nun,  the  father  of 
.Joshua  (1  Chr.  vii.  27). 

NOPH,  MOPH  (5]i :  M€>(^is :  Memphis,  Is. 
xix.  13,  Jer.  ii.  16,  Ez.  xxx.  13,  16  ;  S]b:  MeiJ.(pi.s: 
Memphis,  Hos.  ix.  fi),  a  city  of  Egypt,  Jlemphis. 
These  fonns  are  contracted  from  the  ancient 
Egyptian  common  name,  MEN-NUFR,  or  MEN- 
NEFRU,  "  the  good  abode,"  or  perhaps  "  the  abode 
of  the  good  one :"    also  contracted  in  the  Coptic 

forms  juLertqi,  juLeJUtqi.  AJien^e. 
juLejULB.e  (M),  juLejULqe  'S) ;  in  the 

Greck  Mifxcpis  ;  and  in  the  Arabic  Jffw/,  ^.jLlLo. 

The  Hebrew  fonns  are  to  be  regai'ded  as  represent- 
ing colloquial  fonns  of  the  name,  current  with  the 
Shemites,  if  not  with  the  Egyptians  also.  As  to 
the  meaning  of  Memphis,  Plutarch  observes  that  it 
was  interpreted  to  signify  either  the  haven  of  good 
ones,  or  the  sepulchre  of  Osiris  (koI  rr]v  ^\v  ttSMv 
01  fiiv  opixov  ayaBwv  fpfj-rtvevovcriv,  ot  S'[i5i']a)S 
Td(pov  'OcipiSos,  De  Iside  et  Osiride,  20).  It  is 
probable  that  the  epithet  "  good  "  refers  to  Osiris, 
whose  sacred  animal  Apis  was  here  worshipped,  and 
here  had  its  burial-place,  the  Serapeum,  whence  the 
name  of  the  village  Busiris  (PA-HESAR  ?  "  the 


^  This  Arabic  name  affords  a  curious  instance  of  the 
use  of  Semitic  names  of  similar  sound  but  different  signi- 
fication in  the  place  of  names  of  other  languages. 

■>  J.  Ipn,  apifl^ids,  properly  enquiry,  investigation 
(Ges.  p.  515). 

2.  ilDSp,  apiSfio?,  nmnerus. 

3.  '3D,  'Vvxn,  Fm-tuna,  probably  a  deity  (Gcs.  p.  798) ; 
rendered  "  number,"  Is.  Ixv.  11. 

4.  ]'3?0,  Cliald.  from  same  root  as  (3). 


NUIVIBER 

[abode?]  of  Osiris"),  now  represented  in  name,  if 
not  in  exact  site,  by  Aboo-Seer,»  probably  originally 
a  quarter  of  Memphis.  As  the  great  upper  Egyptian 
city  is  characterized  in  Nahum  as  "  situat*  among 
the  rivers"  (iii.  8),  so  in  Hosea  the  lower  Egyptian 
one  is  distinguished  by  its  Necropolis,  in  this  passage 
as  to  the  fugitive  Israelites  :  "  Mizraim  shall  gather 
them  up,  Noph  shall  bury  them  ; "  for  its  burial- 
ground,  stretching  for  twenty  miles  along  the  edge 
of  the  Libyan  desert,  greatly  exceeds  that  of  any 
other  Egyptian  town,  (."^ee  Brugsch,  Geoqr.  Tnschr. 
i.  pp.  234,  seqq.,  and  Mejiphis.)  [R.  S.  P.] 

NO'PHAH  (HDJ,  Nophach  ;  the  Samar.  has  the 

article,  112311 :  ot  yvyalKes,  Alex,  at  y.  avrwu  : 
Nophe'),  a  place  mentioned  only  in  Num.  xxi.  30 
in  the  remarkable  song  apparently  composed  by 
the  Amorites  after  their  conquest  of  Heshbon  from 
the  Moabites,  and  therefore  of  an  earlier  date 
than  the  Israelite  invasion.  It  is  named  with 
Dibon  and  Medeba,  and  was  possibly  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Heshbon.  A  name  very  similar  to 
Nophah  is  Nobah,  which  is  tvi'ice  mentioned  ;  once 
as  bestowed  by  the  conqueror  of  the  same  name 
on  Kenath  (a  place  still  existing  more  than  70  miles 
distant  from  the  scene  of  the  Amorite  conflict),  and 
again  in  connexion  with  Jogbehah,  which  latter, 
fi-om  the  mode  of  its  occurrence  in  Num.  xxxii.  36, 
would  seem  to  have  been  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Heshbon.  Ewald  [Gesch.  ii.  268  »ofe)  decides 
(though  without  giving  his  grounds)  that  Nophah 
is  identical  with  the  latter  of  these.  In  this  case  tlie 
difference  would  be  a  dialectical  one,  Nophah  being 
the  Moabite  or  Amorite  form.    [Nobah.]       [G.] 

NOSE- JEWEL  (On,  pi.  constr.  "-OTJ :  eVt^- 

Tia:  inaiires:  A.  V.,  Gen.  xxiv.  22;  Ex.  xxxv.  22 
"  earring;"  Is.  iii.  21 ;  Ez.  xvi.  12,  "jewel  on  the 
forehead:"  rendered  byTheod.andSymm.  ^irippiviov, 
Ges.  870).  A  ring  of  metal,  sometimes  of  gold  or 
silver,  passed  usually  through  the  right  nostril,  and 
worn  by  way  of  ornament  by  women  in  the  East. 
Its  diameter  is  usually  1  in.  or  IJ  in.,  but  some- 
times as  much  as  Sg  in.  Upon  it  are  strung 
beails,  coral,  or  jewels.  In  Egypt  it  is  now  almost 
confined  to  the  lower  classes.  It  is  mentioned  in 
the  Mishna,  Shahh.  vi.  1  ;  Celim,  xi.  8.  Layard 
remarks  that  no  specimen  has  been  found  in  As- 
syrian remains.  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  51, 
232  ;  Niebuhr,  Dcscr.  de  I' Arab.  p.  57  ;  Voyages, 
i.  133,  ii.  56  ;  Chardin,  Fo//.  viii.  200  ;  Lane,  Jlod. 
Eg.  i.  78 ;  Ajyp.  iii.  p.  226 ;  Saalschiitz,  ffebr. 
Arch.  i.  3,  p.  25 ;  Lavard,  Nin.  4'  Bab.  p.  262, 
544.)  '  [H.  W.  P.] 

NUMBER.''  Like  most  Oriental  nations,  it  is 
probable  that  the  Hebiews  in  their  written  calcu- 
lations made  use  of  the  letters  of  the  alpliabet. 
That  they  did  so  in  pust-Babylonian  times  we  have 
conclusive  evidence  in  the  Maccabaean  coins ;  and 
it  is  highly  probable  that  this  was  the  case  also  m 
earlier  times,  both  from  internal  evidence,  of  which 


5.  ISpp. 

6.  miDD  in  jjlur.  Ps.  Ixxi.  15,  Trpay/aaTeioi,  littera- 
tura. 

7.  1[^3J?. 

To  number  is  (1)  1130,  ipie/ie'w,  nvmero.  (2)  3^'n. 
Aoyifofiai,  i.  c.  value,  account,  as  in  Is.  xiii.  17.  In  Picl, 
count,  or  number,  which  is  the  primary  n.ition  of  Ih"" 
word  (Ges.  p.  531 ). 


NUMBER 

we  shall  presently  speak,  and  also  from  the  practice 
of  the  Greeks,  who  borrowed  it  with  their  earliest 
ali)habet  from  the  Phoe'nicians,  whose  alphabet  again 
was,  with  some  slight  variations,  the  same  as  that 
of  the  Samaiitans  and  Jews  (Chardin,  Toy.  ii.  421, 
iv.  288  and  foil.,  Langle's;  Thiersch,  Gr.  Gr.  §.\ii., 
Ixxiii.  pp.  23,153;  Jelf,  Gr.  Gr.  i.  3;  Mtiller, 
Etrnsker,  ii.  31  7,  321  ;  Eng.  Ci/cL,  "  Coins,"  "  Nu- 
meral Characters ;"  Lane,  31od.  E(j.  i.  91 ;  Donald- 
son, New  Cratylns,  pp.  14G,  151  ;'  Winer,  Zahlen). 
But  though,  on  the  one  hand,  it  is  certain  that  in 
all  existing  M.SS.  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  the 
numerical  expressions  are  written  at  length  (Lee, 
Jfebr.  Grain.  §§19,  22),  yet,  on  the  other^  the  vari- 
ations in  the  several  versions  between  themselves 
and  from  the  Hebrew  text,  added  to  the  evident 
inconsistencies  in  numerical  statement  between  cer- 
tain passages  of  that  text  itself,  seem  to  prove  tliat 
some  shorter  mode  of  writing  was  originally  in 
vogue,  liable  to  be  misunderstood,  and  in  fact  mis- 
luiderstood  by  copyists  and  translators.  The  fol- 
lowing may  serve  as  specimens: — 

1.  In  2  K.  sxiv.  8  Jehoiaehin  is  said  to  have 
been  18  years  old,  but  in  2  Chr.  xxxti.  9  the  num- 
ber given  is  8. 

2.  In  Is.  vii.  8  Vitringa  shows  that  for  threescore 
and  five  one  reading  gives  sixteen  and  five,  the  letter 
jod  *  (10)  after  shesh  (6)  having  been  mistaken  for 
the  Rabbinical  abbreviation  b}'  omission  of  the  mem 
from  the  plural  shishim,  which  would  stand  for 
sixty.  Six  -}-  ten  was  thus  converted  into  sixty  -f 
ten. 

3.  In  1  Sam.  vi.  19  we  have  50,070,  but  the 
Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  have  5070. 

4.  In  1  K.  iv.  26  we  read  that  Solomon  had 
40,000  stalls  for  chariot-horses,  but  4000  only  in 
2  Chr.  ix.  25. 

5.  The  letters  vmi  (6)  and  zmjiii  (7)  appeal'  to 
have  been  inteichanged  in  sofne  readings  of  Gen. 
ii.  2. 

These  variations,  which  are  selected  from  a  copious 
list  given  by  Glass  (De  Ccmssis  Corruptionis,  i. 
§23,  vol.  ii.  p.  188,  ed.  Dathe),  appear  to  have  pro- 
ceeded fiom  the  alphabetic  method  of  writing  num- 
bers, in  which  it  is  easy  to  see  how,  e.  g.,  such 
letters  as  vau  (1)  M\Ajod.  {^),  nun  (3)  and  caph  (D), 
may  have  been  confounded  and  even  sometimes 
omitted.  The  final  letters  also,  which  woe  un- 
known to  the  early  Phoenician  or  Samaritan  aljiha- 
bet,  were  used  as  eaily  as  the  Alexandrian  period  to 
denote  hundreds  between  500  and  1000.*^ 

But  whatever  ground  these  variations  may  afford 
for  reasonable  conjecture,  it  is  certain,  from  the  fact 
mentioned  above,  that  no  positive  rectification  of 
them  can  at  jircscnt  be  established,  more  especially' 
as  there  is  so  little  variation  in  the  numbers  quoted 
from  the  0.  T.,  both  in  N.  T.  and  in  the  Apoci-ypha  ; 
e.g.  (1)  Num.  xxv.  9,  quoted  1  Cor.  x.  8.  (2)  Kx. 
xii.  40,  quoted  Gal.  iii.  17.  (3)  Ex.  xvi.  35  ami 
Ps.  xcv.  10,  quoted  Acts  xiii.  18.  (4)  Gen.  xtii.  1, 
quoted  Rom.  iv.  19.  (5)  Num.  i.  46,  quoted 
Ecelus.  xvi.  10. 

Josephus  also  in  the  main  agrees  in  his  state- 
ments of  numbers  with  our  existing  copies. 

There  can  be  little  doubt,  however,  as  was  re- 
marked by  St.  Augustine  {Cin.  J),  x.  13,  §1),  tjiat 
some  at  least  of  the  numbers  mentioned  in  Scripture 
are  intended  to  be  rejiresentative  I'ather  than  deter- 
minative. Certain  numbers,  as  7,  10,  40,  100, 
were  regai'ded  as  giving  the  idea  of  completeness. 

"  T  denotes  ."iOO,  Q  600,  j  700,  B  800,  V  900. 


NUMBER 


"9 


Without  entering  into  his  theory  of  this  usage,  we 
may  remark  that  the  notion  of  repiesentative  num- 
bers in  certain  cases  is  one  extremely  common  among 
Eastern  nations,  who  have  a  prejudice  against  count- 
ing their  possessions  accurately  ;  that  it  enters  largelv 
into  many  ancient  systems  of  chronology,  and  that 
it  is  found  in  the  philosophical  ami  metaphysical 
speculations  not  only  of  the  Pythagorean  and  other 
ancient  schools  of  philosophy,  both  (Jreek  and  Ro- 
man, but  also  in  those  of  the  later  Jewish  writers, 
of  the  Gnostics,  and  also  of  such  Christian  writci-s 
as  St.  Augustine  himself  (August.  De  Doctr.  Christ. 
ii.  16,  25  ;  Civ.  I),  xv.  30 ;  Philo,  DcMund.  Opif. 
i.  21 ;  De  Ahrah.  ii.  5  ;  De  Sept.  Num.  ii.  281,  ed. 
Mangey ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  5,  §5  ;  Mishna,  Pirke 
Ahotk,  V.  7,  8;  Irenaeus,  i.  3,  ii.  1,  v.  29,  30; 
Hieronym.  Com.  in  Is.  it.  1,  vol.  iv.  p.  72,  ed. 
]Migne;  Arist.  Metaphys.  i.5,6,  xii.  6,  8  ;  Aelian, 
V.  H.  it.  17  ;  Varro,  Hebdom.  fragm.  i.  p.  255,  ed. 
Bipont. ;  Niebuhr,  Histi  of  Rome,  ii.  72,  ed.  Hare; 
Buickhardt,  Trav.  in  Arabia,  i.  75  ;  Syria,  p.  560, 
comp.  with  Gen.  xiii.  16  and  xxii.  1 7  ;  also  see  papers 
on  Hindoo  Chronology  in  Sir  W.  Jones's  Works, 
Suppl.  vol.  ii.  pp.  968,  1017). 

We  proceed  to  give  some  instances  of  numbers 
used  a.  representatively,  and  thus  probably  by 
design  indefinitely,  or  b.  definitely,  but,  as  we  may 
say  preferentially,  i.e.,  because  some  meaning  (which 
we  do  not  in  all  cases  understand)  was  attached  to 
them. 

1.  Seven,  as  denoting  either  plurality  or  com- 
pleteness, is  so  frequent  as  to  make  a  selection  only 
of  instances  necessary,  e.  g.  seven-fold.  Gen.  iv. 
24 ;  seven  times,  i.  e.  completely,  Lev.  xxvi.  24  ; 
Ps.  xii.  6  ;  seven  {i.e.  many)  ivays,  Deut.  xxviii.  25. 
See  also  1  Sam.  ii.  5;  Job  v.  id,  where  six  also  is 
used  ;  Prot.  vi.  16,  ix.  1 ;  Eccl.  xi.  2,  where  eight 
also  is  named  ;  Is.  iv.  1  ;  Jer.  xv.  9  ;  Mic.  r.  5 ; 
also  Matt.  xii.  45,  seven  spirits  ;  Mark  xvi.  9,  seven 
devils;  Rev.  iv.  5,  seven  Spirits,  xv.  1,  seven 
phgues.  Otho,  Lex.  Piabh.  p.  411,  says  that 
Sciipture  uses  seven  to  denote  plurality.  "See  also 
Christian  authorities  quoted  by  Suicer,  Thes.  Eccl. 
s.  V.  6^5o/xt>y,  Hofniann,  Lex.  s.  v.  "  Septem,"  and 
the  passages  quoted  above  fiom  ^^arro,  Aristotle, 
and  Aelian,  in  reference  to  the  heathen  value  for 
the  number  7. 

2.  Ten  as  a  preferential  number  is  exemplified 
in  the  Ten  Commandments  and  the  law  of  Tithe. 
It  plays  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  later  Jewish 
ritual  code.     See  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  410. 

3.  Seventy,  as  compounded  of  7  X  10,  ajipears 
frequently,  e.g.,  seventy  fold  (Gen.  iv.  24;  Matt, 
xviii.  22).  Its  definite  use  apjiears  in  the  offerings 
of  70  shekels  (Num.  vii.  13,  19,  and  foil.);  the 
70  elders  (xi.  IG)  ;  70  years  of  eajitivity  (Jer. 
xxv.  11).  To  these  may  be  added  the  70  descendants 
of  Noah  (Gen.  x.),and  the  alleged  Rabbinical  quali- 
fication for  election  to  the  oilice  of  Judge  among 
tlip  71  members  of  the  Great  Sanliedrim,  of  the 
knowledge  of  70  languages  (iS'rtw/i.  ii.  6  ;  and  Cai-p- 
zov,  App.  Jlibl.  p.  576).  The  number  of  72  trans 
lators  may  peihaps  also  be  connected  with  the  same 
idea. 

4.  Five  apjiears  in  the  table  of  punishments,  of 
legal  requirements  (Ex.  xxii.  1  ;  Lev.  v.  IG,  xxii. 
14,   xxvii.    15;   Num.  v.  7,   xviii.  ]()),  and  in  the 

.five  empires  of  Daniel  (Dan.  ii.). 

5.  Four  is  used  in  reference  to  the  4  winds  (Dan. 
vii.  2) ;  and  the  so-called  4  corners  of  the  earth  ; 
the  4  creatures,  each  with  4  wings  and  4  faces,  of 
Ezekiel  (i.  5  and  full.)  ;  4  rivers  of  Paradise  (Gen. 

2   P  2 


580 


NUMBERING 


ii.  10);  4  be<asts  (Dan.  vii.,  and  Kev.  iv.  6);  the 
4  equal-sided  Temple-chamber  (  Kz.  xl.  47). 

(j.  Three  was  regarded,  both  by  the  Jews  and 
other  nations,  as  a  specially  complete  and  mystic 
nmnber  (Plato,  De  Leg.  iv.  p.  715  ;  Diouys.  Halic. 
iii.  c.  12).  It  appears  in  many  instances  in  Scrip- 
ture as  a  definite  number,  e.  g.  3  feasts  (Ex.  xxiii. 
14,  17;  Deut.  xvi.  16),  the  triple  offering  of  the 
Nazarite,  and  the  triple  blessing  (Num.  vi.  14,  24), 
the  triple  invocation  (Is.  vi.  P.;  Rev.  i.  4),  Daniel"? 
3  hours  of  prayer  (Dan.  vi.  10,  comp.  Ps.  Iv.  17), 
the  third  heaven,  (2  Cor.  xii.  2),  and  the  thrice- 
repeated  vision  (Acts  x.  16). 

7.  Twelve  (3  X  4)  appears  in  12  tribes,  12  stones 
in  the  high-priest's  breast-plate,  12  Apostles,  12 
foundation-stones,  and  12  gates  (Rev.  xxi.  19-21)  ; 
12,000  furlongs  of  the  heavenly  city  (Rev.  xxi.  16)  ; 
144,000  sealed  (Rev.  vii.  4). 

8.  Forty  appears  in  many  enumerations ;  40  days 
of  Moses  Ex.  (xxiv.  18)  ;  40  years  in  the  wilder- 
ness (Num.  xiv.  34)  ;  40  days  and  nights  of  Elijah 
(1  K.  xix.  8) ;  40  days  of  Jonah's  warning  to  Nineveh 
(Jon.  iii.  4);  40  days  of  temptation  (Matt.  iv.  2). 
Add  to  these  the  veiy  frequent  use  of  the  number 
40  in  regnal  years,  and  in  political  or  other  periods 
(Judg.  iii.  11,  xiii.  1  ;  1  Sam.  iv.  18  ;  2  Sam.  v.  4, 
XV.  7  ;  1  K.  xi.  42 ;  Ez.  sxix.  11,  12  ;  Acts 
xiii.  21). 

9.  One  hundred. — 100  cubits'  length  of  the  Taber- 
nacle-court (Ex.  xx:\-ii.  18) ;  100  men,  i.  e.  a  large 
number  (Lev.  xxvi.  8);  Gideon's  300  men  (Judg. 
vii.  6)  ;  the  selection  of  10  out  of  every  100,  (xx. 
10) ;  100  men  (2  K.  iv.  43)  ;  leader  of  100  men 
(1  Chr.  xii.  14)  ;  100  stripes  (Prov.  xvii.  10)  ; 
100  timas  (Eccl.  viii.  12);  100  children  (vi.  3); 
100  cubits'  measurements  in  Ezekiel's  Temple  (Ez. 
xl.,  xii.,  xiii.)  ;  100  sheep  (Matt,  xviii.  12)  ;  100 
pence  (Matt,  xviii.  28) ;  100  measures  of  oil  or 
wheat  (Luke  xvi.  6,  7). 

10.  Lastly,  the  mystic  number  666  (Rev.  xiii.  18), 
of  which  the  earliest  attempted  explanation  is  the 
conjecture  of  Irenaeus,  who  of  three  words,  Euauthas, 
Lateinos,  and  Teitan,  prefei-s  the  last  as  fulfilling  its 
conditions  best.  (For  various  other  interpretations 
see  Calmet,  Whitby,  and  Irenaeus,  De  Antichrist 
v.  c.  29,  30). 

It  is  evident,  on  the  one  hand,  that  whilst  the 
representative,  and  also  the  typiail  character  of 
certain  numbers  must  be  maintained  {e.  q..  Matt. 
xix.  28),  there  is,  on  the  other,  the  gi-eatest  danger 
of  over-straining  any  particular  theory  on  the 
subject,  and  of  thus  degenerating  into  that  subtle 
trifling,  from  which  neithei-  the  Gnostics,  nor  some 
also  of  their  orthodox  opponents  were  exempt  (see 
Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  c.  11,  p.  782,  ed.  Potter 
and  August.  I.  c),  and  of  which  the  Rabbinicid 
writings  present  such  striking  instances.  [Chro- 
nology, Census.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

NUMBERING.     [Census.] 

NmiBERS  (nan'l,  fi-om  the  first  word  ;  or 
^3'^?2l3,  from  the  words  '•^0  la'TDa,  in  i.  1  : 
'Api0juoi :  humeri :  called  also  by  the  later  Jews 
OnSpQn  "ISD,  or  Dn-1pSn),  the  Fourth  Book 
of  the  Law  or  Pentateuch.  It  takes  its  name  in 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  (whence  our  'NumWs') 
from  the  double  numbering  or  census  of  the  people ;, 
the  first  of  which  is  given  in  chaps,  i.-iv.,  and  the 
second  in  chap.  xxvi. 

A.  Confcnts. — The  Book  may  be  said  to  contain 
generally  the  history  of  the  Israelites  from  the  time 


NUjMBERS 

of  their  leaving  Sinai,  in  the  second  3'car  after  the 
Exodus,  till  their  anival  at  the  borders  of  the  Pro- 
mised Laud  in  the  fortieth  year  of  their  journeyings. 
It  consists  of  the  following  principal  divisions  : — 

I.  The  preparations  lor  the  departure  from  Sinai 
(i.  1-x.  10). 

II.  The  journey  from  Sinai  to  the  bordeis  of 
Canaan  (x.  11-xiv.  45). 

III.  A  brief  notice  of  laws  given,  and  events 
which  transpired,  during  the  thirty-seven  years' 
wandering  in  the  wilderness  (xv.  1-xix.  22). 

IV.  The  history  of  the  last  year,  from  the  second 
anival  of  the  Israelites  in  Kadesh  till  they  reach 
"  the  plains  of  Bloab  by  Jordan  near  Jericho  "  (xx. 
1-xxxvi.  13). 

I.  («.)  Tiie  object  of  the  encampment  at  Sinai  has 
been  accomplished.  The  Covenant  has  been  made, 
the  Law  given,  the  Sanctuary  set  up,  the  Priests 
consecrated,  the  service  of  God  appointed,  and  Je- 
hovah dwells  in  the  midst  of  His  chosen  people.  It 
is  now  time  to  depart  in  order  that  the  object  may 
be  achieved  for  which  Israel  has  been  sanctified. 
That  object  is  the  occupation  of  the  Promised  Land. 
But  this  is  not  to  be  accomplished  by  peaceable 
means,  but  by  the  forcible  expulsion  of  its  present  in- 
habitants ;  for  "  the  iniquity  of  the  Amorites  is  full," 
they  are  ripe  for  judgment,  and  this  judgment 
Israel  is  to  execute.  Therefore  Israel  must  be  or- 
ganized as  Jehovah's  army :  and  to  this  end  a  mus- 
tering of  all  who  are  capable  of  bearing  aims  is 
necessary.  Hence  the  book  opens  with  the  num- 
bering of  the  people,"  chapters  i.-iv.  These  con- 
tain, first,  the  census  of  all  the  tribes  or  clans, 
amounting  in  all  to  six  himdred  and  three  thousand, 
five  hundred  and  fifty,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Levites,  who  were  not  numbered  with  the  rest  (chap. 
i.)  ;  secondly,  the  arrangement  of  the  camp,  and  the 
order  of  march  (chap,  ii.) ;  thirdly,  the  special  and 
separate  census  of  the  Levites,  who  are  claimed  by 
God  instead  of  all  the  first-born,  the  three  families 
of  the  tribe  having  their  peculiar  offices  in  the  Taber- 
nacle appointed  tliem,  both  when  it  was  at  rest  and 
when  they  were  on  the  march  (chaps,  iii.,  iv.). 

(b.)  Chapters  v.,  vi.  Certain  laws  apparently 
supplementary  to  the  legislation  in  Leviticus ;  the 
removal  of  the  unclean  from  the  camp  (v.  1-4)  ; 
the  law  of  restitution  (v.  5-10);  the  trial  of  jea- 
lousy (v.  11-31),  the  law  of  the  Nazarites  (\n. 
1-21) ;  the  form  of  the  priestly  blessing  (vi.  22-27). 

(c)  Chapters  vii.  1-x.  10.  Events  occurring  at 
this  time,  and  regulations  connected  with  them. 
Chap.  \ni.  gives  an  account  of  the  offerings  of 
the  princes  of  the  different  tribes  at  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  Tabernacle;  chap.  viii.  of  the  con- 
secration of  the  Levites  (ver.  89  of  chap,  vii.,  and 
verses  1-4  of  chap.  viii.  seem  to  be  out  of  place); 
chap.  ix.  1-14,  of  the  second  observance  of  the 
Passover  (the  first  in  the  wilderness)  on  the  14th 
day  of  the  second  month,  and  of  certain  provisions 
made  to  meet  the  case  of  those  who  by  I'eason  of 
defilement  were  unable  to  keep  it.  Lastly,  chap, 
ix.  15-23,  tells  how  the  cloud  and  the  fire  regulated 
the  march  and  the  encampment  ;  and  x.  1-10,  how 
two  silver  trumpets  weie  employed  to  give  the 
signal  for  public  assemblies,  for  war,  and  for  festal 
occasions. 

H.  March  from  Sinai  to  the  borders  of  Canaan. 

(a.)  We  have  here,  first,  the  order  of  march  de- 
scribed (x.  14-28);  the  appeal  of  Moses  to  his 
father-in-law,  Hobab,  to  accompany  them  in  their 
journeys  ;  a  request  urged  probitbly  because,  from  his 


See  Kurtz,  Gesdi.  des  Alien  Bimda.  ii.  333. 


NUMBERS 

desert  life,  he  would  be  well  acquainted  with  the 
best  spots  to  enciimp  in,  and  also  would  have  in- 
fluence with  the  various  wandering  and  predatory 
tribes  who  inhabited  the  peninsula  (29-32);  and  the 
chant  wliich  accompanied  the  moving  and  the 
resting  of  the  ark  (vers.  35,  36). 

(6.)  An  account  of  several  of  the  stations  and  of 
the  events  which  happened  at  them.  The  tirst  was 
at  Taberah,  where,  because  of  their  impatient  mur- 
raurings,   several  of  the  peoi)le  were  destroyed  by 


NUMBEES 


581 


within  the  Edomite  territory,  whilst  it  mis;ht  have 
been  perilous  for  a  larger  number  to  attempt  to 
penetrate  it,  these  unai-med  wayfarers  would  not  be 
molested,  or  might  escape  detection.  Bunsen  suc^- 
gests  that  Aaron  was  taken  to  Mount  Hor,  in  the 
hope  that  the  fresh  air  of  the  mountain  might  be 
beneficial  to  his  recovery ;  but  the  nai-rative  docs 
not  justify  such  a  supposition. 

After  Aaron's  death,  the  march  is  continued 
southward  ;  but  when  the  Israelites  approach  the 
lightning  (these  belonged  chiefly,  it  would  seem,  i  head  of  the  Akabah  at  the  southernmost  point  of  the 
to  the  motley  multitude  which  came  out  of  Kgypt  j  Edomite  territory,  they  again  murmur  by  reason 
with  the  Isi-aelites)  ;  the  loathing  of  the  people  for  {  of  the  roughness  of  the  way,  and  many  perish  by 
the  manna  ;  the  complaint  of  Moses  that  he  cannot  I  the  bite  of  venomous  serpents  (xx.  22-xxi.  9).  The 
bear  the  burden  thus  laid  upon  him,  and  the  ap-  i  passage  (xxi.  1-3)  which  speaks  of  the  Canaanite 
pointmeut  in  consequence  of  seventy  elders  to  serve  j  king  of  Arad  as  coming  out  against  the  Israelites  is 
and  help  him  in  his  office  (xi.  10-29)  ;  the  quails  clearly  out  of  place,  standing  as  it  does  after  the 
sent,  and  the  judgment   following  tjjereon,  which  '  mention  of  Aaron's  de;ith  on  Mount  Hor.     Arad  is 

in  the  south  of  Palestine.  The  attack  therefore 
must  have  been  made  whilst  the  people  were  yet  in 


gave  its  name  to  the   next   stition,    Kibroth-hat- 

taavah   (the  graves  of  lust),    xi.    31-35    (cf.   Ps 

Ixxxviii.  30,  31,  cvi.  14,  15) ;  arrival  at  H;izeroth,  j  the   neighbourhood   of  Kadesh.     The   mention   of 

where  Aaron  and  Miriam  are  jealous  of  Moses,  and  I  Hormah  also  shows  that  this  must  have  been  the 


Miriam  is  in  consequence  smitten  with  leprosy  (xii 
1-15)  ;  the  sending  of  the  spies  from  the  wilderness 
of  Parau  {et  Tijli),  their  report,  the  refusal  of  the 
people  to  enter  Cana:m,  their  rejection  in  conse- 
quence, and  their  rash  attack  upon  the  Amalekites, 
which  resulted  in  a  defeat  (xii.  16-xiv.  45). 

III.  What  follows  must  be  referred  apparently 
to  the  thirty-seven  years  of  wanderings ;  but  we 
have  no  notices  of  time  or  place.  We  have  laws 
respecting  the  meat  and  drink  offerings,  and  other 
sacrifices  (xv.  1-31)  ;  an  account  of  the  punishment 
of  a  Sabbath-breaker,  perhaps  as  an  example  of  the 
presumptuous  sins  mentioned  in  vers.  30,  31  (xv. 
32-36) ;  the  direction  to  put  fringes  on  their  gar- 
ments as  mementos  (xv.  37-41)  ;  the  history  of  the 
rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  and  the 
murmuring  of  the  people  (xvi.)  ;  the  budding  of 
Aaron's  rod  as  a  witness  that  the  tribe  of  Levi  was 


ciwe  (comp.  xiv.  45).  It  is  on  this  second  ocaision 
that  the  name  of  Hormah  is  said  to  have  been  given. 
Either  therefore  it  is  used  proleptically  in  xiv.  45,  or 
there  is  some  confusion  in  the  nai-rative.  What 
"  the  way  of  Atharim  "  (A.  V.  "  the  way  of  the 
spies")  was,  we  have  no  means  now  of  ascertaining. 
(6.)  There  is  again  a  gap  in  the  narrative..  We 
are  told  nothing  of  the  march  along  the  eastera  edge 
of  Edom,  but  suddenly  find  ourselves  transported 
to  the  bordei's  of  Moab.  Here  the  Israelites  suc- 
cessively encounter  and  defeat  the  kings  of  the 
Amorites  and  of  Bashan,  wresting  ti-om  them  their 
territory  ;md  permanently  occupying  it  (xxi.  10-35). 
Their  successes  alarm  the  king  of  Moab,  who,  dis- 
trusting his  superiority  in  the  field,  sends  for  a  ma- 
gician to  curse  his  enemies ;  hence  the  episode  of 
Balaam  (xxii.  1-xxiv.  25).  Other  artifices  are  em- 
jiloyed   by  the  Moabites  to  weaken  the  Israelites, 


chosen  (xvii.)  ;  the  direction  that  Aaron  and  his  sons  especially  through  the  influence  of  the  Moabitish 
should  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  people,  and  the  duties  women  (xxv.  1),  with  whom  the  Midianites  (ver.  6) 
of  the  priests  and  Levites  (xviii.)  ;  the  law  of  the  I  are  also  joined  ;  this  evil  is  averted  by  the  zeal  of 


water  of  puriflcation  (xix.). 

IV.  (a.)  The  narrative  returns  abruptly  to  the 
second  encampment  of  the  Israelites  in  Kadesh. 
Here  Miriam  dies,  and  the  people  murmur  for 
water,  and  Moses  and  Aaron,  "  speaking  unad- 
visedly," are  not  allowed  to  enter  the  Promised 
Land  (xx.  1-13).  They  intendeJ  perhaps,  as  before, 
to  enter  Canami  from  the  south.  This,  however, 
was  not  to  be  permitted.  They  therefbi-e  desiied  a 
passage  through  the  country  of  Edom.  Moses  sent 
a  conciliatory  message  to  the  king,  iisking  permis- 
sion to  p;iss  through,  and  promising  carefully  to 
abstain  from  all  outrage,  and  to  pay  for  the  provi- 
sions which  they  might  hud  necessaiy.  The  jealousy, 
however,  of  this  fierce  and  warlike  people  was 
aroused.  They  refused  the  request,  and  turned  out 
in  arms  to  defend  their  border.  And  as  those  almost 
inaccessible  moiuitaiu-passes  could  have  been  held  by 
a  mere  handful  of  men  against  a  large  and  well- 
trained  army,  the  Israelites  abandoned  the  attempt 
as  ho])eless  and  turned  southwards,  keeping  along 
the  western  holders  of  Idumaea  till  they  reached 
Ezion-geber  (xx.  14-21). 

On  their  way  southwards  thoy  stop  at  Mount 
Hor,  or  rather  at  Moserah,  on  the  edge  of  the 
Edomite  teiiitory ;  and  from  this  spot  it  would 
seem  that  Aaron,  accompanied  by  his  brother  Moses 
and  his  son  Elea/.ar,  quitted  the  camp  iu  order  to 
ascend    the    mountain.      Mount    Hor    lying    itself 


Phinehas  (xxv.  7,  8)  ;  a  second  numbering  of  the  Is- 
raelites t;d<es  place  in  the  plains  of  Moab  preparatory 
to  their  crossing  the  Jordan  (xxvi.).  A  question  arises 
as  to  the  inheritance  of  daughters,  and  a  decision  is 
given  thereon  (x.xvii.  1-11)  ;  Moses  is  warned  ef  his 
death,  and  Joshua  appointed  to  succeed  him  (xxvii. 
1 2-23  ).  Certain  laws  are  given  concerning  the  daily 
sacrifice,  and  the  offerings  lor  sabbaths  and  festivals 
(xxviii.,  xxix.) ;  and  the  law  respecting  vows  (xxx.) ; 
the  conquest  of  the  Midianites  is  narrated  (xxxi.)  ; 
and  the  jiartition  of  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan 
among  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  and  the  half- 
ti'ibe  of  JIanasseh  (xxxii.).  Then  follows  a  rewipitu- 
latiou,  though  with  some  diflerence,  of  the  various 
encampments  of  the  Israelites  iu  the  desert  (xxxiii. 
1-49) ;  the  command  to  destroy  the  Canaanites, 
(xxxiii.  50-56);  the  boundaries  of  the  I'romised 
L;md,  and  the  men  appointed  to  divide  it  (xxxiv.)  ; 
the  appointment  of  the  cities  of  the  Levites  and  the 
cities  of  refuge  (xxxv.)  ;  further  directions  respect- 
ing heiresses,  with  special  reference  to  the  case 
mentioned  in  chap,  xxvii.,  and  conclusion  of  the 
book  (xxxvi.). 

B.  Intctji-itij. — This,  like  the  other  books  of  the 
Peutiiteuch,  is  supposed  by  many  critics  to  consist 
of  a  compilation  from  two  or  three,  or  more,  earlier 
documents.  According  to  De  Wette,  the  following 
portions  are  the  work  of  the  Elohist  [1'hnt.\- 
I'lucit]: — Chap.  i.  l-x.  28;  xiii.  2-16  (iu  its  ori- 


582 


NUMBERS 


ginal,  though  not  in  its  present  foimj  ;  xv. ;  xvi.  I, 
2-11,  16-23,  24  (?);  xvii.-xix. ;  xx.  1-13,  22-29  ; 
xxv.-xxxi.  (except  perhaps  xxvi.  8-11);  xxxii.  5, 
28-42  (vers.  1-4  uncertain) ;  xxxiii.-xxxvi.  The 
rest  of  the  book  is,  according  to  him,  by  the 
Jehovist  or  later  editor.  Von  Lengerke  [Kenaan, 
s.  Ixxxi.)  and  Stahelin  f§23)  make  a  similar  divi- 
sion, though  they  differ  as  to  some  verses,  and  even 
whole  chapters.  Vaihinger  (in  Herzog's  Encyclo- 
piidie,  art.  "  Pentateuch")  finds  traces  ot three  dis- 
tinct documents,  which  he  ascribes  severally  to  the 
pre-Elohist,  the  Elohist,  and  the  Jehovist.  To  the 
Hrst  he  assigns  chap.  x.  29-36;  xi.  1-12,  16  (in 
its  originid  form);  xx.  14-21;  xxi.  1-9,  13-35; 
xxxii.  33-42  ;  xxxiii.  55,  56.  To  the  Elohist  be- 
long chap.  i.  1-x.  28;  xi.  1-xii.  16;  xiii.  1-xx. 
13  ;  XX.  22-29 ;  xxi.  10-12  ;  xxii.  1  ;  xxv.  1-xxxi. 
54;  xxxii.  1-32;  xxxiii.  1-xxxvi.  19.  To  the 
Jehovist,  xi.  1-xii.  16  iu')er(irbeitet);  xxii.  2-xxiv. 
25;   xxxi.  8,  &c. 

But  the  grounds  on  which  this  distinction  of 
documents  rests  are  in  every  respect  most  unsatis- 
factory. The  use  of  the  divine  names,  which  was 
the  stiirting-point  of  this  criticism,  ceases  to  be  a 
criterion ;  and  certain  words  and  phrases,  a  par- 
ticular manner  or  colouring,  the  narrative  of 
miracles  or  prophecies,  are  supposed  to  decide  whe- 
ther a  passage  belongs  to  the  earlier  or  the  later 
docunient.  Thus,  for  instance,  Stiihelin  alleges  as 
reasons  for  assigning  chaps,  xi.  xii.  to  the  Jehovist, 
the  coming  down  of  Jehovah  to  speak  with  Moses, 
xi.  17,  25;  the  pillar  of  a  cloud,  xii.  5  ;  the  rela- 
tion between  Joshua  and  !Moses,  xi.  28,  as  in  Ex. 
xxxiii.  xxxiv. ;  the  seventy  elders,  xi.  16,  as  Ex. 
xxiv.  1,  and  so  on.  So  again  in  the  Jeho^astic 
section,  xiii.  xiv.,  he  finds  traces  of  "  the  author  of 
the  First  Legislation"  in  one  passage  (xiii.  2-17), 
because  of  the  use  of  the  word  HOD,  signifying 
"  a  tribe,"  and  ^''Ei'J,  as  in  Num.  i.  and  vii.  But 
N^tJ'J  is  used  also  by  the  supposed  snpplementist, 
as  in  Ex.  xxii.  27,  xxxiv.  31  ;  and  that  ntSO  is  not 
peculiar  to  the  older  documents  has  been  shown  by 
Keil  {Comm.  on  Joshica,  s.  x\x.).  Von  Lengerke  goes 
still  further,  and  cuts  off  xiii.  2-16  altogether  from 
what  follows.  He  thus  makes  the  story  of  the 
spies,  as  given  by  the  Elohist,  strangely  maimed. 
\Ve  only  hear  of  their  being  sent  to  Canaan,  but 
nothing  of  their  return  and  their  report.  The  chief 
reason  for  this  separation  is  that  in  xiii.  27  occui-s 
the  Jehovistic  phrase,  •'  flowing  with  milk  and 
honey,"  and  some  references  to  other  earlier  Jeho- 
vistic passages.  De  Wette  again  finds  a  repetition 
in  xiv.  26-38  of  xiv.  11-25,  and  accordingly  gives 
these  passages  to  the  Elohist  and  Jehovist  respec- 
tively. This  has  more  colour  of  probability  about 
it,  but  has  been  answered  by  Ranke  (  Untersuch.  ii. 
s.  197  ff.).  -Again,  chap.  xvi.  is  supposed  to  be  a 
combination  of  two  diHerent  accounts,  the  original 
or  Elohistic  document  having  contained  only  the 
story  of  the  rebellion  of  Korah  and  his  company, 
whilst  the  Jehovist  mixed  up  with  it  the  insurrec- 
tion of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  which  was  directed 
rather  against  the  temporal  dignity  than  against 
the  spiritual  authority  of  Moses.  But  it  is  against 
this  view,  that,  in  order  to  justify  it,  verses  12,  14, 
27,  and  32,  are  treated  as  interpolations.  Besides, 
the  discrepancies  which  it  is  alleged  have  arisen 
from  the  fusing  of  the  two  narratives  disappear 
when  fairly  looked  at.  There  is  no  contradiction, 
for  instance,  between  xvi.  19,  where  Korah  appears 
at  the  tabernacle  o(  the  congregation,  and  ver.  27, 
« here   Dathan   and   Abiram   .stand   at   the  door  of 


NUMBERS 

their  tents.  In  the  last  passage  Korah' is  not  men- 
tioned, and,  even  if  we  suppose  him  to  be  included, 
the  narrative  allows  time  for  his  having  left  the 
Tabernacle  and  returned  to  his  own  tent.  Nor, 
again,  does  the  statement,  ver.  35,  that  the  250 
men  who  offered  incense  were  destroyed  by  fire, 
and  who  had,  as  we  learn  from  ver.  2,  joined  the 
leaders  of  the  insurrection,  Korah,  Dathan,  and 
Abiram,  militate  against  the  narrative  in  ver.  32, 
according  to  which  Dathan  and  Abiiam  and  all  that 
appertained  unto  Korah  were  swallowed  up  alive 
by  the  opening  of  the  earth.  Further,  it  is  clear, 
as  Keil  remarks  [Einlcit.  94),  that  the  earlier 
document  [die  G rundschrift)  implies  that  persons 
belonging  to  the  other  tribes  were  mixed  up  in 
Korah's  rebellion,  because  they  say  to  Moses  and 
Aaron  (ver.  3),  "  All  the  congregation  is  holy," 
which  justifies  the  statement  in  vers.  1,  2,  that, 
besides  Koran  the  Levite,  the  Reubenites  Dathan, 
Abiram,  and  On,  were  leaders  of  the  insurrection. 

In  chap.  xii.  we  have  a  remarkable  instance  of 
the  jealousy  with  which  the  authority  of  Moses 
was  regarded  even  in  his  own  family.  Considering 
the  almost  absolute  nature  of  that  authority,  this 
is  perhaps  hardly  to  be  wondeied  at.  On  the  other 
hand,  as  we  are  expressly  reminded,  there  was 
eveiything  in  his  personal  character  to  disarm 
jealousy.  "  Now  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek 
above  all  the  men  which  were  upon  the  face  of  the 
earth, ".says  the  historian  (ver.  3).  The  pretext  for 
the  outburst  of  this  feeling  on  the  part  of  Miriam 
and  Aaron  was  that  Moses  had  married  an  Ethio- 
pian woman  (a  woman  of  Cush).  This  was  pro- 
bably, as  Ewald  suggests,  a  second  wife  married 
after  the  death  of  27ipporah.  But  there  is  no 
reason  for  supposing,  as  he  does  {Gesch.  ii.  229, 
note),  that  we  have  here  a  confusion  of  two  ac- 
counts. He  observes  that  the  words  of  the  bro- 
ther and  sister,  "  Hath  the  Lord  indeed  spoken  only 
by  Moses,  hath  He  not  also  spoken  by  us?"  show 
that  the  real  ground  of  their  jealousy  was  the  ap- 
parent superiority  of  Moses  in  the  prophetical  office ; 
whereas,  according  to  the  narrative,  their  dislike 
was  occasioned  by  his  marriage  with  a  foreigner  and 
a  person  of  inferior  rank.  But  nothing  surely  can 
be  more  natural  than  that  the  long  pent-up  feeling 
of  jealousy  should  have  fastened  upon  the  marriage 
as  a  pretext  to  begin  the  quarrel,  and  then  have 
shown  itself  in  its  true  character  in  the  words 
recorded  by  the  historian. 

It  is  not  perhaps  to  be  wondered  at  that  the 
ejjisode  of  Balaam  (xxii.  2-xxiv.  25)  should  have 
been  regarded  as  a  later  addition.  The  language  is 
peculiar,  as  well  as  tiie  general  cast  of  the  nan-a- 
tive.  The  prophecies  are  vivid  and  the  diction 
of  them  highly  finished:  very  different  from  the 
rugged,  vigorous  fragments  of  ancient  poetry  which 
meet  us  in  chap.  xxi.  On  these  grounds,  as  well 
as  on  the  score  of  the  distinctly  Messianic  character 
of  Balaam's  prophecies,  Ewald  gives  this  episode  to 
his  Fifth  Narrator,  or  the  latest  editor  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. This  wiiter  he  supposes  to  have  lived  in 
the  former  half  of  the  8th  century  B.C.,  and  hence 
he  accounts  for  the  reference  to  Assyria  and  the 
Cypriotes  (the  Kittim)  ;  the  latter  nation  about 
that  time  probably  infesting  as  pirates  the  coasts 
of  Syria,  whereas  Assyria  might  be  joined  with 
Eber,  because  as  yet  the  Assyrian  power,  though 
hostile  to  the  southern  nations,  was  rather  friendly 
than  otherwise  to  Judah.  The  allusions  to  Edora 
and  Moab  as  vanquished  enemies  have  reference, 
it   is  said,   to  the   time  of  David  I'Ewald,  Gesch. 


NUMBERS 

i.  143  ff.,  and  compare  ii.  277  ft".).  The  prophecies 
of  Balaam  therefore,  on  tliis  hypothesis,  are  vati- 
cinia  ex  eventu,  put  into  his  mouth  by  a  clever, 
but  not  very  acrnpulous,  writer  of  the  time  of 
Isaiah,  who,  finding  some  mention  of  Balaam  as  a 
prince  of  Midian  m  tlie  older  records,  put  the  story 
into  shape  as  we  have  it  now.  But  this  sort  of 
criticism  js  so  purely  arbitrary  that  it  scarcely 
me. its  a  serious  refutation,  not  to  mention  that  it 
rests  entirely  on  the  assumption  that  in  prophecy 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  piediction.  We  will  only 
observe  that,  considering  the  peculiarity  of  the  man 
and  of  the  circumstances  as  gi\en  in  the  history, 
we  niigjit  expect  to  find  the  narrative  itself,  and 
certainly  the  poetical  portions  of  it,  marked  by 
some  peculiarities  of  thought  and  diction.  Even 
granting  that  this  episode  is  not  by  the  same  writer 
as  the  rest  of  the  book  of  Numbers,  there  seems  no 
valid  reason  to  doubt  its  antiquity,  or  its  rightful 
claim  to  the  place  which  it  at  present  occupies. 
Nothing  can  be  more  improbable  than  that,  as  a 
later  invention,  it  should  have  tbund  its  wav  into 
the  Book  of  the  Law. 

At  any  rate,  the  picture  of  this  great  niaaicinn  is 
wonderfully  in  keeping  with  the  circumstances 
under  which  he  appears  and  with  the  prophecies 
which  he  utters.  This  is  not  the  place  to  enter 
into  all  the  questions  which  are  suggested  by  his 
appearance  on  the  scene.  How  it  was  that  a  heathen 
became  a  prophet  of  Jehovah  we  are  not  informed  ; 
but  sucii  a  fact  seems  to  point  to  some  remains  of 
a  primitive  revelation,  not  yet  extinct,  in  other  na- 
tions besides  that  of  Israel.  It  is  evident  that  his 
knowledge  of  (Jod  was  beyond  that  of  most  heathen, 
and  he  himself  could  utter  the  passionate  wish  to 
be  found  in  his  death  among  the  true  servants  of 
Jehovah ;  but,  because  the  soothsayer's  craft  pro- 
mised to  be  gainful,  and  the  profession  of  it  gave 
him  an  additional  importance  and  influence  in  the 
eyes  of  men  like  Balak,  he  sought  to  combine  it 
with  his  higher  vocation.  There  is  nothing  more 
j-emarkable  in  the  early  history  of  Israel  tiian 
Balaam's  appearance.  Summoneii  from  his  home 
by  the  Euphi-ates,  he  stands  by  his  red  altar-fires, 
weaving  his  dark  and  subtle  sorceries,  or  goes  to 
seek  for  enchantment,  hoping,  as  he  looked  down 
upon  the  tents  of  Israel  among  the  acacia-groves  of 
the  valley,  to  wither  them  with  his  word,  yet 
constrained  to  bless,  and  to  foretell  their  future 
greatness. 

The  Book  of  Numbers  is  rich  in  fiagments  of 
ancient  poetry,  some  of  them  of  great  beauty,  and 
all  throwing  an  interesting  light  on  the  character  of 
the  times  in  which  they  were  composed.  Such,  for 
instance,  is  the  blessing  of  the  high-priest  (vi. 
24-26)  :-- 

"  Jehovah  bless  thee  and  keep  thee : 
Jehovah  make  His  countenance^ shine  u[X)n  thee, 

And  be  gracious  unto  thee  : 
Jeho\ah  lift  up  His  countenance  upon  thee, 
And  give  thee  peace." 

Such  too  are  the  chants  which  were  the  signal 
for  the  Ark  to  move  when  the  people  journeyed, 
and  for  it  to  rest  when  they  were  about  to  en- 
camp:— 

"  Arise,  0  Jehovah  !  let  'I'hine  enemies  be  scattered : 
Let  them  also  that  hate  Tlice  flee  before  Thee." 
And, 

"  Return,  0  Jehovah, 
To  the  ten  thousands  of  the  latnilles  of  Israel  !'* 

In  chap.  xxi.  we  have  a  passiige  cited  from  a 
book   called   the  '  Bonk  of  the    Wars   of  .Irhovah.' 


NUjVIBEES 


683 


This  was  probably  a  collection  of  ballads  and  songs 
composed  on  different  occasions  by  the  watch-fires 
of  the  camp,  and  for  the  most  part,  though  not 
perhaps  exclusively,  in  commemoration  of  the  vic- 
tories of  the  Israelites  over  their  enemies.  The 
title  shows  us  that  these  were  written  by  men  im- 
bued with  a  deep  sense  of  religion,  and  who  were 
therefore  foremost  to  acknowledge  that  not  their 
own  prowess,  but  Jehovah's  Right  Hand,  had  given 
them  the  victory  when  they  went  forth  to  battle. 
Hence  it  was  called,  not  '  The  Book  of  tlie  Wars  of 
Israel,'  but  'The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah.' 
Possibly  this'  is  the  book  referred  to  in  Ex.  xvii. 
14,  especially  as  w'e  read  (ver.  16)  that  when 
Moses  built  the  altar  which  he  called  Jehovah- 
Nissi  (Jehovah  is  my  banner),  he  excUiimed,  "  Je- 
hovah will  have  war  with  Amalek  from  generation 
to  generation."  'i'his  expression  may  have  given 
the  name  to  the  book. 

The  fragment  quoted  from  this  collection  is  diffi- 
cult, because  the  allusions  in  it  are  obscure.  The 
Israelites  had  reached  the  Arnon,  "  which,"  says 
the  historian,  "  forms  the  border  of  Moab,  and 
separates  between  the  Sloabites  and  Amorites." 
"  Wherefore  it  is  said,"  he  continues,  "  in  the  Book 
of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah, 

'  Vaheb  in  Siiphah  and  the  torrent-beds  ; 
Arnon  and  the  slope  of  the  torrent-beds 
Which  turaeth  to  wliere  Ar  lieth, 
And  which  leaneth  upon  the  border  of  Woab.'  " 
The  next  is  a  song  which  was  sung  on  the  digging 
of  a  well  at  a  spot  where  they  encamped,  and  which 
from  this  circumstance  was  called  Beer,  or  '  The 
Well.'     It  runs  as  follows: — • 

"  Spring  up,  0  well !  sing  ye  to  It : 
AVell,  which  the  princes  dug, 
Which  the  nobles  of  the  people  bored 
With  the  sceptre-of-ofEce,  wiih  their  staves." 

This  song,  first  sung  at  the  digging  of  the  well, 
was  afterwards  no  doubt  commonly  used  by  those 
who  came  to  draw  water.  The  maidens  of  Isiael 
chanted  it  one  to  another,  verse  by  verse,  as  they 
toiled  at  the  bucket,  and  thus  beguiled  their  labour. 
"  Spring  up,  0  well !"  was  the  burden  or  refrain  of 
the  song,  which  would  pass  from  one  mouth  to  an- 
other at  each  fresh  coil  of  the  rope,  till  the  full 
bucket  reached  the  well's  mouth.  But  the  peculiar 
charm  of  the  song  lies  not  only  in  its  antiquity, 
but  in  tiie  characteristic  touch  which  so  manifestly 
connects  it  with  the  life  of  the  time  to  which  the 
narrative  assigns  it.  The  one  point  which  is 
dwelt  upon  is,  that  the  leaders  of  the  people  took 
their  part  in  the  work,  that  they  themselves  heljied 
to  dig  the  well.  In  the  new  generation,  who  were 
about  to  enter  the  Land  of  Promise,  a  strong  feel- 
ing of  sympathy  between  the  people  and  their  rulers 
had  sprung  up,  which  augured  well  for  the  future, 
and  which  left  its  stamp  even  on  the  liallads  and 
songs  of  the  time.  Tliis  little  carol  is  fresh  and 
lusty  with  young  life  ;  it  sparkles  like  the  water 
of  the  well  whose  springing  up  first  occasioned  it: 
it  is  the  expression,  on  the  part  of  those  who  sung 
it,  of  lively  confidence  in  the  sympathy  and  co- 
operation of  their  leaders,  which,  manifested  in  this 
one  instance,  might  be  relied  upon  in  all  emer- 
gencies (Ewald,  (Icsc/i.  ii.  264,  b). 

Immediately  following  this  '  Song  of  the  Well,' 
comes  a  song  of  victory,  tomposed  at'ter  a  defeat  of 
the  Moabites  and  the  occupation  of  their  territory. 
It  is  in  a  taunting,  mocking  strain  ;  and  is  commonly 
considered  to  have  been  written  by  some  fsraelitish 
hard  on   the   occupation   ot'  the   Amoiite  territory. 


584 


NUMENIUS 


Yet  the  mauner  in  which  it  is  introduced  would 
lather  lend  to  the  belief  that  we  have  here  the 
translation  of  an  old  Amorite  ballad.  The  history 
tells  us  that  when  Israel  approached  the  country  of 
t'ihoa  they  sent  messengers  to  him,  demanding  per- 
mission to  pass  through  his  territory.  The  request 
was  refused.  Sihon  came  out  against  them,  but 
was  defeated  in  battle.  "Israel,"  it  is  said,  "smote 
him  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  took  his  land 
in  possession,  from  the  Arnon  to  the  Jabbok  and  as 
tar  as  the  children  of  Ammon  ;  for  the  border  of  the 
children  of  Ammon  was  secure  (J.  e.  they  made  no 
encroaclnnents  upon  Amnionitish  territory).  Israel 
also  took  all  these  cities,  and  dwelt  in  all  the  cities 
of  the  Amorites  in  Heshbon,  and  all  her  daughters 
{i.  e.  lesser  towns  and  villages)."  Then  follows  a 
little  scrap  of  Amorite  history  :  "  For  Heshbon  is 
the  city  of  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  and  he  had 
waged  war  with  the  former  king  of  Woab,  and  had 
taken  fiom  hini  all  his  land  ^s  far  as  the  Arnon. 
therefore  the  ballad-singers  (□''PCfOn)  say, — 
'  Come  ye  to  Heshbon, 
Let  the  city  of  Sihon  be  buitt  and  established ! 
For  fire  went  forth  from  Heshbon, 

A  flame  out  of  the  stronghold  (H^lp)  of  Sihon, 
Which  devoured  Ar  of  Moab, 
The  lords  ^  of  the  high  places  of  Arnon. 
Woe  to  thee,  Moab  ! 
Thou  art  undone,  0  people  of  Chemosh  ! 
He  (f.  e.  Chemosh  thy  god)  hath  given  up  his  sons  as 
fugitives, 
And  his  daughters  into  captivity. 
To  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites. 
Then  we  cast  them  down*!  ;  Heshbon  perished  even 

unto  Dibon. 
And  we  laid  (it)  waste  unto  Nophah,  which  (reacheth) 
unto  Medeba.' " 

If  the  song  is  of  Hebrew  origin,  then  the  former 
part  of  it  is  a  biting  taunt,  "  Come,  ye  Amorites, 
into  your  city  of  Heshbon,  and  build  it  up  again. 
Ye  boasted  that  ye  had  burnt  it  with  Hre  and 
driven  out  its  Moabite  inhabitants ;  but  now  tre 
are  come  in  our  turn  and  have  burnt  Heshbon,  and 
driven  you  out  as  ye  once  burnt  it  and  drove  out 
its  Moabite  possessors." 

C.  The  alleged  discrepancies  between  many  state- 
ments in  this  and  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch, 
will  be  found  discu.ssed  in  other  articles,  Disutero- 
nomy;  Exodus;  1'entateucu.       [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

NUME'NIUS  {Novfj-rivios:  Numenius),  son  of 
Antiochus,  w;is  sent  by  Jonathan  on  an  embassy  to 
Home  (1  Mace.  .\ii.  16)  and  Sparta  (xii.  17),  to  le- 
iiew  the  friendly  conne.\ions  between  these  nations 
and  the  Jews,  c.  B.C.  144-.  It  appears  that  he  had 
not  returned  from  his  mission  at  the  death  of  Jona- 
than (1  Mace.  xiv.  22,  23).  He  was  again  des- 
patched to  Home  by  Simon,  c.  B.C.  141  (1  Mace.  xiv. 
24),  where  he  was  well  received  and  obtained  letters 
in  favour  of  his  countrymen,  addressed  to  the  various 
l.astern  powers  dependent  on  the  Republic,  B.C.  1 H9 
(1  Mace.  XV.  15  «■.).    [Lucius.]         [B.  F.  W.] 

NUN  (}-13,  or  ji:,  1  Chr.  vii,  27:  Nau^:  Nun). 
Tiie  father  of  the  Jewish  captain  Joshua  (  Ex.  xxxiii. 
11,  &c.).  His  genealogical  descent  from  Ephraim 
is  recorded  in  1  Chr.  vii.     Kothing  is  known  of  his 


NUTS 

life,  •which  was  doubtless  spent  in  Egypt.  The 
mode  of  spelling  his  name  in  the  LXX.  has  not  been 
satisflictorily  accounted  for.  Gesenius  asserts  that 
it  is  a  very  early  mistake  of  transcribers,  who  wrote 
NATH  for  NAYN.  But  Ewald  {Gesch.  ii.  298) 
gives  some  good  etymological  reasons  for  the  moi'e 
probable  opinion  that  the  final  N  is  omitted  inten- 
tionally. [W.  T.  B.] 

NUKSE."=  It  is  clear,  both  from  Scripture  and 
from  Greek  and  Roman  writeis,  that  in  ancient  times 
the  position  of  the  nurse,  wherever  one  was  main- 
tained, was  one  of  much  honour  and  importance. 
(See  Gen.  xxiv.  59,  x.xxv.  8  ;  2  Sam.  iv.  4 ;  2  K. 
xi.  2  ;  3  Mace.  i.  20  ;  Horn.  Od.  ii.  361,  xix.  15, 
251,  466  ;  Eurip.  Ion,  1357  ;  Hippol.  267  and  foil. ; 
Virg.  Aen.  vii.  1.)  The  same  term  is  applied  to  a 
foster-father  or  mother,  e.  g..  Num.  xi.  12  ;  Ruth 
iv.  16  ;  Is.  xlix.  23.  In  great  families  male  ser- 
vants, probably  eunuchs  in  later  times,  were  en- 
trusted with  the  charge  of  the  boys,  2  K.  x.  1,5. 
[Children.]  See  also  Kuran,  iv.  p.  63,  Tegg's  ed. ; 
Mi-s.  Poole,  Englw.  in  Eg.  iii.  p.  201.  [H.  W.  P.] 

NUTS.  The  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
words  botniin  and  C[idz. 

1.  Z)oiwi;ft  (Q''Jt32 :   TioiBivQos:    terehinthus). 

Among  the  good  things  of  the  land  which  the  sons 
of  Israel  were  to  take  as  a  present  to  Joseph  in 
Egypt,  mention  is  made  of  hotnim.  There  can 
scarcely  be  a  doubt  that  the  liotnirn  denote  the  fruit 
of  the  Pistachio  tree  (Pistacia  vera),  though  most 


»  Or  "  the  possessors  of,  the  men  of,  the  high  places,"  &c 
t"  So  in  Zunz's  Bible,  and  this  is  the  simplest  rendering. 

Ewald  and  Bmusen:  "  We  burned  them."    Others:  "  We 

shot  at  them." 

<:  1.  I^K,  m.,  rier)io9,  imtrix,  nutrilias ;   n3?DX,  /., 

n9)/ros,  niUrix,  from  |0X,  to  carry  (see  Is.  Ix.  4). 


modern  versions  are  content  with  the  general  teiui 
nuts.  (See  Bochart,  C'Acmartn,  i.  10.)  For  other  at- 
tempted explanations  of  the  Hebrew  term,  comp. 
Celsius,  Hieroh.  i.  24.     The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  read 


2.  nipp^p,  part.  f.  Hiph.,  from  pJ\  "  suck,"  with 
nCJ'N,  yvi/1)  Tpo0euou(ra  (Ex.  ii.  7).  Connected  with  this 
is  the  doubtful  verb  H-IJ,  e-qka-^ui,  nutiio  (<ic-s.  S6T). 

3.  In  N.  T.  Tfjoc^ds,  nidrix  (1  Thess.  ii.  7). 


NUTS 

terebinth,  the  Persian  version  h&spusteh,  from  wliich 
it  is  believed  the  Arabic  fostnk  is  derived,  whence 
the  Greek  iriffTiiKta,  and  the  Latin  pistacia ;  the 
Pistacia  vera  is  in  forin  not  unlike  the  P.  tere- 
bint/ms,  another  species  of  the  same  genus  of  plants  ; 
it  is  probable  tiierefore  that  the  terebinthus  of 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  is  used  generically,  and  is 
here  intended  to  denote  the  Fistacliio-tree,  lor  the 
terebinth  does  not  yield  edible  fruit.='  Syria  :md 
Palestine  have  been  long  famous  for  Pistachio-trees, 
see  Dioscorides  (i.  177)  and  Pliny  (xiii.  5),  who 
says  "  Syria  has  several  trees  that  are  peculiar  to 
itself;  among  the  nut-trees  there  is  the  well-known 
pistiicia ;"  in  another  place  (xv.  22)  he  states  that 
Vitellius  introduced  this  tree  into  Italy,  and  that 
Flaccus  Pompeius  brouglit  it  at  the  same  time  into 
Spain.  The  district  around  Aleppo  is  especially  cele- 
biated  for  the  excellence  of  the  Pistachio  nuts,  see 
Russell  {Hist,  of  Alep.  i.  p.  82,  2nd  ed.)  and  Galen 
{cle  Fac.  Alim.  2,  p.  612),  who  mentions  Beirhoea 
(Aleppo)  as  being  rich  in  the  production  of  tiiese 
trees  ;  the  town  of  Batna  in  the  same  district  is  be- 
lieved to  derive  its  name  from  this  circumstance : 
Betonim,  a  town  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh.  xiii.  26), 
has  in  all  probability  a  similar  etymology.  [Beto- 
nim.] Bochart  di'aws  attention  to  the  fact  that 
l)istachio  nuts  are  mentioned  together  with  almonds 
in  Gen.  xliii.  11,  and  observes  that  Dioscorides. 
Theophrastus,  and  others,  speak  of  the  pistachio-tree 
conjointly  with  the  almond-tree ;  as  there  is  no 
mention  in  early  writers  of  the  Pistacia  vera  grow- 
ing in  Kgypt  (see  Celsius,  Ilierub.  i.  27),  it  was 
doubtless  not  found  there  in  Patriarchal  times, 
wherefore  Jacob's  present  to  Joseph  would  have  been 
most  acceptable.  There  is  scarcely  any  allusion  to 
the  occurrence  of  the  Pistacia  vera  in  Palestine 
amongst  the  writings  of  modern  tiavellers  ;  Kitto 
{Phi/s.  Hist.  Pal.  p.  323)  says  "  it  is  not  much  cul- 
tivated in  Palestine,  although  found  there  growing 
wild  in  some  very  remarkable  positions,  as  on 
Mount  Tabor,  and  on  the  summit  of  Mount  Att-a- 
roiis"  (see  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  334).  Dr.  Thomson 
(  The  Land  and  the  Booh,  p.  2G7)  says  that  the 
terebinth-trees  near  Mais  el  Jebel  had  been  grafted 
with  the  pistachio  from  Aleppo  by  order  of  Ibrahim 
Pasha,  but  that  "  the  peasants  destroyed  the  grafts, 
lest  their  crop  of  oil  from  the  berries  of  these  trees 
siiould  be  diminished."  Dr.  Hooker  saw  only  two 
or  three  pistachio-trees  in  Palestine.  These  were 
outside  the  north  gate  of  Jerusalem.  But  he  says 
the  tree  is  cultivated  at  Beirut  and  elsewhere  in 
Syria.  The  Pistacia  vera  is  a  small  tree  varying 
from  15  to  30  ft.  in  height;  the  male  and  female 
flowers  grow  on  separate  trees ;  tiie  fruit,  which  is 
a  green-coloured  oily  kernel,  not  unlike  an  almond, 
is  enclosed  in  a  biittie  shell.  Pistac'hio-nuts  are 
much  esteemed  as  an  aiticle  of  diet  both  by  Orien- 
tals and  Europeans;  the  tree,  which  belongs  to 
the  Natural  Order  Anacardiaceao,  extends  from 
Syria  to  Bokhara,  and  is  naturalised  over  the  South 
of  Europe ;  the  nuts  are  too  well-known  to  neeil 
minute  descrijitioii. 

2.  Eijox  (tiJN  ■•  Kupva:  mix)  occurs  only  in 
Cant.  vi.  11,  "1  went  into  the  garden  of  nuts." 
The  Hebrew  woi'd  in  all  probability  is  here  to  be 


OAK 


585 


S  0  J 

"  The  Arabic       U  ,  (^Imim)  appears  to  be  ulso  usnl 

generically.  It  is  nmrc  gunorally  applied  to  the  terebinth, 
hut  may  comiirehend  the  pistacbiu-troc,  as  ticsenius  cmi- 
jrctures,  and   l)r.  Itoyle  (Killo's  Cyct.)  has  pruvca.     llu 


imderstood  to  refer  to  the  Walnut-tree  ;  the  Greek 
Kapva  is  supposed  to  denote  the  tree,  Kapvov  the 
nut  (see  Soph.  Fr.  892).  Although  Kapvov  and 
mix  may  signify  any  kind  of  nut,  yet  the  loalnut, 
as  the  nut  /car'  i^ox'fiv,  is  more  especi;llly  that 
which  is  denoted  by  the  Greek  and  Latin  terms 
(see  Casauboh  on  Athenaeus,  ii.  65  ;  Ovid,  Ntcx 
Flegin;  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  28).  The  Hebrew 
term  is  evidently  allied  to  the  Arabic  jawz,  which 
is  from  a  Persian  word  of  very  similar  form  ;  whence 
AbuT  Fadii  (in  Celsius)  siiys  "  the  Arabs  have  bor- 
rowed the  word  Gjaus  from  the  Persian,  in  Arabic 
the  term  is  Chiisf,  which  is  a  tall  tree."  The 
Chusf  or  C'hasf,  is  translated  by  Freytivg,  "  an 
esculent  nut,  the  walnut."  The  Jewish  Rabbis 
understand  the  walnut  by  Egoz. 

According  to  Josephus  {B.  J.  iii.  10,  §  8) 
the  walnut-tree  was  formerly  common,  and  grew 
most  luxuriantly  around  the  lake  of  Gennesareth  ; 
Schulz,  speaking  of  this  same  district,  says  he  often 
saw  walnut-trees  growing  there  large  enough  to 
shelter  four-aud-twenty  persons.  See  also  Xitto 
{Phys.  Hist.  Pal.  p.  250)  and  Burckhardt  {Syria, 
p.  265).  The  walnut-tree  [Jiiglans  rcgia)  belongs 
to  the  Natural  Order  Juglandaceue ;  it  is  too  well- 
known  to  require  any  description.  [W.  H.] 

NYM'PHAS  {'NvfKpas:  Nymphas),  a  wealthy 
and  zealous  Christian  in  Laodicea,  Col.  iv.  15.  His 
house  was  used  as  a  place  of  assembly  for  the 
Christians ;  and  hence  Grotius  making  an  extraor- 
dinarily high  estimate  of  the  probable  number  of 
Christians  in  Laodicea,  infers  that  he  must  have 
lived  in  a  rural  district. 

In  the  Vatican  MS.  (B)  this  name  is  taken  for 
that  of  a  woman ;  and  the  reading  appears  in  some 
Latin  writers,  as  pseudo-Ambrose,  }>seudo-Anselm, 
and  it  has  been  adopted  in  Lachmann's  N.  T.  The 
common  reading,  however,  is  tbund  in  the  Alexan- 
drian MS.  and  in  that  of  Ephrem  Syrus  (A  and  C), 
and  is  tlie  only  one  known  to  the  Greek  Fathers. 

[^.  T.  B.] 


OAK.  The  following  Hebrew  words,  whicii 
appear  to  be  merely  various  forms  of  the  same  root," 
occur  in  the  0.  T.  as  the  names  of  some  species  of 
of.k,  viz.  el,  eldh,  elon,  ildn,  alldh,  and  allon. 

1.    El   ("p^N:    LXX.  Vat.   repifiweos  ;    Alex 

TepffjLtiidos  ;  Aq.,  Sym.,  Theod.,  Spvs  :  campcstria) 
occurs  only  in  the  sing,  number  in  Gen.  xiv.  6 
("  El-paran").  It  is  uncertain  whether  el  should 
be  jt)ined  with  Paran  to  form  a  proper  name,  or 
whether  it  is  to  be  taken  separately,  as  the  "  tere- 
l>inth,"  or  the  "oak,"  or  the  "grove"  of  Paran. 
Onkelos  and  Saadias  follow  the  Vulg.,  whence  the 
"  plain"  tifthe  A.  V.  (margin);  (see  Stanley,  S.(.j-  P. 
519,  520,  App.).  Rosennuiller  {Schol.  ad  1.  c.) 
follows  Jarchi  (Comment,  in  Pent,  ad  Gen.  xiv. 
6),  and  is  for  retaining  the  j)roper  name.  Three 
jikual  forms  of  el  occur  :  elhn,  etoth,  anil  vlalh. 
Elim,  the   second  station  where  the  Israelites  halted 

says  the  word  is  applied  in  some  Arabic  works  to  a  tree 
which  has  green-coloured  kernels.  This  must  be  the 
I'islacia  vera. 

»  I'Voni  7'1N,   ?^X  or  ?/X,  '■  to  be  sliMiig." 


686 


OAK 


after  they  had  crossed  the  Red  Sea,  in  all  probability 
derived  its  name  fi-om  the  seventy  palm-trees  there ; 
the  name  el,  which  more  particularly  signifies  an 
"  oak,"  being  here  put  for  any  grove  or  plantation. 
Similarly  the  other  plural  form,  eloth  or  elath, 
may  refer,  as  Stanley  {S.  ^  P.  p.  20)  conjectures, 
to  the  palm-grove  at  Akaba.  The  plural  elm 
occurs  in  Is.  i.  29,  where  probably  "oaks"  ai-e 
intended  in  Is.  Ixi.  3,  and  Kz.  xxxi.  14,  any  strong 
flourishing  trees  may  be  denoted. 

2.  Elah  (n'PK  :  ripe^ivQos,  SpOs,  'HA.d,  5eV- 
Spov,  SevSpov  (TvaKia^ou  Symm.  ;  irXdravos  in 
Hos.  iv.  lo  ;  SevSpov  (tiktkiov  :  terehinthus,  qncrcus: 
"  oak,"  "  elah,"  "  teil-tree  "  in  Is.  vi.  13  ;  "  elms  " 
in  Hos.  iv.  13).  There  is  much  diiHculty  in  deter- 
mining the  exact  mecinings  of  the  several  varieties 
of  the  term  mentioned  above  ;  the  old  versions  are 
so  inconsistent  that  they  add  but  little  by  way  of 
elucidation.  Celsius  [Hieroh.  i.  34)  lias  endeavoured 
to  shew  that  el.  Slim,  elon,  elah,  and  allah,  all 
stand  for  the  terebinth-tree  {Pistacia  terehinthus), 
while  allon  alone  denotes  an  oak.  Koyle  (in  Kitto's 
Cyc.  art.  "  Ahih  ")  agrees  with  Celsius  iu  identi- 
fying the  elah  {TDVi)  with  the  terebinth,  and  the 
allon  (P?{<)  with  the  oak.  Hiller  {Hicrophjt.  i. 
348)  restricts  the  various  forms  of  this  word  to 
diti'erent  species  of  oak,  and  says  no  mention  is  made 
of  the  terebinth  in  the  Hebrew  Sciiptures.  Uosen- 
miiller  {Bib.  Not.  p.  237)  gives  the  terebinth  to 
el  and  elah,  and  the  oak  to  allah,  allon,  and 
elon   (|i'?iN). 

For  the  various  opinions  upon  the  meaning  of 
these  kindred  terms,  see  Gesen.  Thes.  pp.  47,  51, 
103,  and  Stanley,  S.  4'  P.  p.  619. 

That  various  species  of  oak  may  well  have  de- 
served the  appellation  of  mighty  trees  is  clear  from 
the  fact,  that  noble  oaks  are  to  this  day  occasionally 
seen  in  Palestine  and  Lebanon.  On  this  subject  we 
have  been  favoured  with  some  valuable  remarks  from 
Dr.  Hooker,  who  says,  "  The  forests  have  been  so 
completely  cleared  off  all  Palestine,  that  we  must 
not  look  for  existing  evidence  of  what  the  trees  weie 
in  biblical  times  and  antecedently.  In  Syria  proper 
there  are  only  three  common  oaks.  All  foim  lai'f;e 
trees  in  many  countries,  but  very  rarely  now  in 
Palestine  ;  though  that  they  do  so  occasionally  is 
proof  enough  that  they  once  did."  Abraham's  oak, 
near  Hebron,  is  a  familiar  example  of  a  noble  tree 
of  one  species.  Dr.  Robinson  [Bib.  Ees.ii.  81)  h.is 
given  a  minute  account  of  it ;  and  "  his  description," 
says  Dr.  Hooker,  "  is  good,  and  his  measurements 
tally  with  mine."  If  we  examine  the  claims  of  the 
terebinth  to  represent  the  elah,  as  Celsius  and 
others  assert,  we  shall  see  that  in  point  of 
size  it  cannot  compete  with  some  of  the  oaks  of 
Palestine ;  and  that  therefore,  if  elah  ever  denotes 
the  terebinth,  which  we  by  no  means  assert  it  does 
not,  the  term  etymologically  is  applicable  to  it  only 
in  a  second  degree  ;  for  the  Pistacia  terehinthus, 
although  it  also  occ;isionally  grows  to  a  great  size, 
"  spreading  its  boughs,"  as  Robinson  {Bib.  lies.  ii. 
222)  observes,  "  far  and  wide  like  a  noble  oak,"  vet 
it  does  not  form  so  conspicuously  a  good  tree  as 
either  the  Quercus  pseiido-coccifera  or  Q.  aegilops. 
Dr.  Thomson  (  The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  243)  re- 
marks on  this  point :  "  There  are  more  mighty  oaks 
here  in  this  immediate  vicinity  {Mejdel  es-ShcDis) 
than  there  are  terebmths  in  all  Syiia  and  Palestine 
together.  I  have  travelled  from  end  to  end  of  those 
countries,  and   across  them   in   all  directions,  and 


OAK 

speak  with  absolute  certainty."  At  p.  600,  the  same 
writer  lemarks,  "  We  have  oaks  in  Lebanon  twice 
the  size  of  this  (Abraham's  oak),  and  eveiy  way 
more  striking  and  majestic."  Dr.  Hooker  has  no 
doubt  that  Thomson  is  correct  in  saying  theie  are 
far  finer  oaks  in  Lebanon  ;  "  though,"  he  observes, 
"  I  did  not  see  any  largei-,  and  only  one  or  two 
at  all  near  it.  Cyril  Graham  told  me  there  were 
forests  of  noble  oaks  in  Lebanon  north  of  the  cedar 
valley."  It  is  evident  from  tliese  observations  that 
two  oaks  [Quercus  pseudo-coccifera  and  Q.  aegi- 
lops') are  well  worthy  of  the  name  of  mighty  trees  ; 
though  it  is  equally  true  that  over  a  greater  pai-f 
of  the  country  the  oaks  of  Palestine  are  at  present 
merelv  bushes. 


3.  Elon  (|1?''X  :  7)  Spvs  rj  v\pri\'{],  i]  ^dXavos, 
"RKdv  :  convullis  illustris,  quercus)  occurs  fie- 
quently  in  the  0.  T.,  and  denotes,  there  can  be  little 
doubt,  some  kind  of  oak.  The  A.  V.,  following  the 
Targum,  translates  elon  by  "  plain."  (See  Stanley, 
S.  #  P.  520,  App.) 

4.  Ildn  (p"'i<! :  ddvdpov :  arbor)  is  found  only 
in  Dan.  iv.  as  the  tree  which  Nebuchadnezzar  saw 
in  his  dream.  The  word  appears  to  be  used  for 
any  "  strong  tree,"  the  oak  having  the  best  claim 
to  the  title,  to  which  tree  probably  indirect  allusion 
may  be  made. 

5.  Allah  (Typii :  ^  rippuvdos  ;  Aq.  and  Symm. 
71  5pDs:  quercus)  occurs  only  in  Josh.  xxiv.  26, 
and  is  correctly  rendered  "  oak  "  by  the  A.  V. 

6.  Allon  (p?X  :  r]  fiaKavos,  BevSpoy  ^oKavov, 
Spvs :  quercus)  is  uniformly  remiered  "  oak "  by 
the  A.  v.,  and  has  always  been  so  understood  by 
commentators.  It  should  be  stated  that  allon  oc- 
curs in  Hos.  iv.  13,  as  distinguished  from  the  other 
form  elah ;  consequently  it  is  necessary  to  suf)pose 
that  two  different  trees  ai'e  signified  by  the  terms. 
We  believe,  for  reasons  given  above,  that  the  differ- 
ence is  specific,  and  not  generic — that  two  species  of 
oaks  are  denoted  by  the  Hebrevv-  terms :  allon  m;iy 
sUuid  for  an  evergreen  cak,  as  the  Quercus  pseudo- 
coccifera,  and  elah  for  one  of  the  deciduous  kinds. 
The  Pistacia  vera  could  never  be  mistaken  foran  oak. 
If,  therefore,  specific  allusion  was  ever  made  to  this 
ticc,  we  rannot  help  Ijelicving  that  it  would  have 


OATH 

been  under  anot]ier  name  than  any  one  of  the  nume- 
rous forms  which  are  used  to  designate  the  different 
species  of  the  genus  Quercus ;  perhaps  under  a 
Hebrew  form  allied  to  the  Arabic  butin,  "  the  tere- 
binth." The  oak-wooJs  of  Bashan  are  mentioned 
in  Is.  ii.  13,  Ez.  xxvii.  6,  Zech.  xi.  2.  The  oaks  of 
Bashan  belong  in  all  probability  to  the  species 
known  as  Quercus  aegihps,  the  Valonia  oak,  which 
is  said  to  be  common  in  Gilead  and  Bashan.  Sacri- 
fices were  offered  under  oaks  (Hos.  iv.  13  ;  Is.  i.  29) ; 
of  oak-timber  the  Tyrians  manufactured  oars  (Ez. 
xxvii.  6),  and  idolaters  their  images  (Is.  xliv.  14j  ; 
under  the  shade  of  oak-ti-ees  the  dead  were  sometimes 
interred  (Gen.  xxxv.  8  ;  see  also  I  Sam.  xxxi.  13). 


OATH 


587 


Querrut  ac^lops. 

Another  species  of  oak,  besides  tiiose  named  above, 
is  the  Quercus  infectorin,  which  is  common  in  Gal- 
ilee and  Samaria.  It  is  rather  a  small  tree  in 
Palestine,  and  seldom  grows  above  30  ft.  high, 
though  in  ancient  times  it  might  have  been  a  noble 
tree. 

For  a  description  of  the  oaks  of  Palestine,  see 
Dr.  Hooker's  paper  read  before  the  Linnean  Society, 
June,  18G1.  [W.  H.] 

OATH."  I.  The  principle  on  which  an  oath  is 
held  to  be  binding  is  incidentally  laid  dr^vn  in  Heb. 
vi.  16,  viz.  as  au  ultimate  appeal  to  divine  autho- 
rity to  ratify  an  assertion  (see  the  principle  stated 
and  defended  by  Philo,  De  Lci).  Allcj.  iii.  73, 
i.  128,  ed.  Mang.).  There  the  Almighty  is  lepre- 
sented  as  promising  or  denouncing  with  an  oath, 
i.  e.  doing  so  in  the  most  positive  and  solemn 
manner  (see  such  passages  as  Gen.  xxii.  Ui,  xii.  7, 
compared  with  xxiv.  7  ;  Ex.  xvii.  1(5  and  Lev.  xxvi. 
14  with  Dan.  ix.  11  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  12,  13,  with  Acts 
ii.  30;  Ps.  ex.  4  with  Heb.  vii.  21,  28;  Is.  xlv. 
23;  jer.  xxii.  5,  xxxii.  22).  With  this  Divine 
asseveration  we  may  comjiarc  the  Stygian  oath  of 
Greek  mythology  (Horn.  //.  xv.  37;  Hes.  'T/icotj. 
400,  80o;  see  also  the  Laws  of  Menu,  c.viii.  110; 
Sir  W.  Jones,  Works,  iii..291). 

IF.  On  the  same  principle,  that  oath  has  always 

«  I.  n?Ki  apa,  maledictio,  juramentum,  Viilh  afRnUy 
(<i   7X,   tlic  iiaiiicnfOo(l(l!i'S.  pp. -U,  !>»). 


been  held  most  binding  which  appealed  to  the 
highest  authority,  both  as  regards  individuals  and 
communities,  (a.)  Thus  believers  in  Jehovah  ap- 
pealed to  Him,  both  judicially  and  extra-judicially, 
with  such  phrases  as  "  The  God  of  Abraham  judge  ;" 
"  As  the  Lord  liveth  ;"  "  God  do  so  to  me  and 
more  also;"  "God  kuoweth,"  and  the  like  (see 
Gen.  xxi.  23,  xxxi.  53  ;  Num.  xiv.  2,  xxx.  2  ;  1 
Sam.  xiv.  39,  44;  1  K.  ii.  42 ;  Is.  .xlviii.  I,  Ixv. 
16;  Hos.  iv.  15).  So  also  our  Lord  himself  ac- 
cepted the  high-priest's  adjuration  (Matt.  xxvi. 
63),  and  St.  Paul  frequently  appeals  to  God  in  con- 
firmation of  his  statements  (Acts  xxvi.  29  ;  Rom. 
i.  9,  ix.  1 ;  2  Cor.  i.  23,  xi.  31  ;  Phil.  i.  8  ;  see 
also  Rev.  x.  6).  (6.)  Appeals  of  this  kind  to  autho- 
rities recognised  respectively  by  adjuring  parties 
were  regarded  as  bonds  of  international  security, 
and  their  infraction  as  being  not  only  grounds  of 
international  complaint,  but  also  offences  against 
divine  justice.  So  Zedekiah,  after  swearing  fidelity 
to  the  king  of  Babylon,  was  not  only  punished  by 
him,  but  denounced  by  the  prophet  as  a  breaker  of 
his  oath  (2  Chr.  xxxvi.  13  ;  Ez.  xvii.  13, 18).  Some, 
however,  have  supposed  that  the  Law  forbade  any 
intercourse  with  heathen  nations  which  involved  the 
necessity  of  appeal  by  them  to  their  own  deities 
(Ex.  xxiii.  32;  Selden,  Be  Jur.  Nat.  ii.  13;  see 
Liv.  i.  24  ;  Laws  of  Menu,  viii.  113 ;  Diet,  of  Antiq. 
"  Jii3  Jurandum"). 

III.  As  a  consequence  of  this  principle,  (a)  appeals 
to  God's  name  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  heathen 
deities  on  the  other,  are  treated  in  Scripture  as  tests 
of  allegiance  (Ex.  xxiii.  13,  .xxxiv.  6;  Deut.  xxix. 
12;  Josh.  x.xiii.  7,  .xxiv.  16;  2  Chr.  xv.  12,  14; 
Is.  xix.  18,  xlv.  23;  Jer.  xii.  16;  Am.  viii.  14; 
Zeph.  i.  5).  (6)  So  also  the  sovereign's  name  is 
sometimes  used  as  a  form  of  obligation,  as  was  the 
case  among  the  Romans  with  the  name  of  the  em- 
peror ;  and  Hofmann  quotes  a  custom  by  which  the 
kings  of  France  used  to  appeal  to  themselves  at 
their  coronation  (Gen.  xlii.  15  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  11,  xiv. 
19  ;  Martyr.  S.  Polyairp.  c.  ix. ;  Tertull.  Apol.  c. 
32  ;  Suet.  Caliq.  c.  27  ;  Hofmann,  Lex.  art.  "  Ju- 
ramentum  "  ;  L>ict.  of  Antiq.  u.  s. ;  Michaelis,  On 
Lairs  of  Moses,  art.  256,  vol.  iv.  102,  ed.  Smith). 

IV.  Other  forms  of  oath,  serious  or  frivolous,  are 
mentioned;  as,  by  the  "blood  of  Abel "  (Selden, 
De  Jnr.  Nat.  v.  8) ;  by  the  "  head  ;"  by  "  Heaven," 
the  "  Temple,"  kc,  some  of  which  ai'e  condemned 
by  our  Lord  (Matt.  v.  33,  xxiii.  16-22  ;  and  see 
Jam.  v.  12).  Yet  He  did  not  refuse  the  solemn 
adjuration  of  the  high-priest  (Matt.  xxvi.  63,  64 ; 
see  Juv.  Sat.  vi.  16  ;  Mart.  .xi.  94  ;  Mishna,  Sanh. 
iii.  2,  compared  with  Am.  viii.  7  ;  Spencer,  De  L^eg. 
Hebr.  ii.  1-4). 

As  to  the  subject-matter  of  oaths  the  following 
cases  may  be  mentioned-: — 

1.  Agreement  or  stipulation  for  performance  of 
certiiin  acts  (Gen.  xiv.  22,  xxiv.  2,  8,  9 ;  Ruth  i. 
17  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  24 ;  2  Sam.  v.  3  ;  Ezr.  x.  5  ;  Neh. 
V.  12,  .\.  29,  .xiii.  25 ;  Acts  xxiii.  21 ;  and  see  Joseph. 
Vit.  c.  53). 

2.  Allegiance  to  a  sovereign,  or  obedience  from 
an  inferior  to  a  superior  (E'.rl.  viii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  .xxxvi. 
13;  1  K.  xviii.  10).  Josephus  s;iys  the  Essenes 
consideretl  oaths  unnecessary  for  the  initiated,  though 
they  required  them  previously  to  initiation  {B.  J. 
ii.8,  §§6,  7;  Ant.}i.y.  10,  §4:  Piiilo,  Quod  omnis 
probus,  I.  12,  ii.  458,  ed.  Mangey.) 


2.  ny-UK'  and  nyiK'.     from    V2^,  "seven,"  the 

sacnd  niinilier  (iW^.  pp.  I;i5l.  i;!50).  opKo^.  jurainentum. 


588  OATH 

3.  Promissory  oath  of  a  ruler  (Josh.  vi.  2t5  ; 
1  Sam.  xiv.  24,  28;  2  K.  xxv.  24;  Matt.  xiv.  7). 
Priests  took  no  oath  of  office  (Heb.  vJi.  21). 

4.  Vow  made  in  the  form  of  an  oath  (Lev.  v.  4). 

5.  Judicial  oaths,  (a)  A  m;xn  receiving  a  pledge 
from  a  neighbour  was  required,  in  case  of  injury 
happening  to  the  pledge,  to  clear  himself  by  oath  of 
the  blame  of  damage  (  Ex.  xxii.  10,11;  1  K.  viii.  31 ; 
2^  Chr.  vi.  22).  A  wilful  breaker  of  trust,  especially 
it  he  added  perjury  to  his  fraud,  was  to  be  severely 
punished  (Lev.  vi.  2-5;  Deut.  xix.  16-18).  (6)  It 
appears  that  witnesses  were  examined  on  oath,  and 
that  a  talse  witness,  or  one  guilty  of  suppression  of 
the  truth,  was  to  be  severely  punished  (Lev.  y.  1  ; 
Prov.  xxix.  24;  Michaelis,  I.  c.  art.  256,  iv.  109; 
Deut.  xix.  16-19  ;  Grotius,  in  Grit.  Sacr.  on  Matt. 
xxvi.  63;  Kuobel  on  Lev.  v.  1,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg. 
Hdb.).  (c)  A  wife  suspected  of  incontinence  was 
required  to  clear  herself  by  oath  (Num.  v.  19-22). 

It  will  be  observed  that  a  leading  feature  of 
Jewish  criminal  procedure  was  that  the  accused 
person  was  put  upon  his  oath  to  clear  himself  (Ex. 
xxii.  11;  Num.  V.  19-22;  1  K.  viii.  31;  2  Chr. 
vi.  22  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  63). 

The  forms  of  adjuration  mentioned  in  Scripture 
are — 1.  Lifting  up  tlie  hand.  Witnesses  laid  their 
hands  on  the  head  of  the  accused  (Gen.  xiv.  22  ; 
Lev.  xxiv.  14;  Deut.  xxxii.  40  ;  Is.  iii.  7  ;  Ez.  xx. 
5,  6  ;  Sus.  V.  35 ;  Rev.  x.  5  ;  see  Horn.  Jl.  xix. 
254;  Virg.  Aa)i.  xii.  196;  Carpzov,  Apparatus, 
p.  652). 

2.  Putting  the  hand  undei-  the  thigh  of  the  per- 
son to  whom  the  promise  was  made.  As  Josephus 
describes  the  usage,  this  ceremony  was  performed 
by  each  of  the  contracting  parties  to  each  otiier.  It 
has  been  explained  (a)  as  liaving  reference  to  the  cove- 
nant of  circumcision  (Godwyn,  Moses  and  Aaron, 
vi.  6 ;  Carpzov,  I.  c.  p.  653)  ;  (6)  as  containing 
a  principle  similar  to  that  of  phalhc  symbolism 
(Her.  ii.  48  ;  Plut.  Is.  et  Osir.  vii.  412,  ed.  Keiske  ; 
Knobel  on  Gen.  xxiv.  2,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg.  Hdb.)  ; 
(c)  as  referring  to  the  promised  Messiah  (Aug.  Qu. 
in  Ilcpt.  62  ;  Civ.  Dei,  xvi.  33).  It  seems  likely 
that  the  two  first  at  least  of  these  exphmations  may 
be  considered  as  closely  connected,  if  not  ideutiail 
with  each  other  (Gen.  xxiv.  2,  xlvii.  29  ;  Nicolaus, 
De  Jur.  xi.  6  ;  Oes.  p.  631,  s.  v.  'JjT"  ;  Fagius  and 
others  in  Crit.  Sacr.  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  16,  §1). 

3.  Oaths  were  sometimes  taken  before  the  altar, 
or,  as  some  midei-stand  the  p;issage,  if  the  persons 
were  not  in  Jerusalem,  in  a  position  looking  towards 
the  Temple  (1  K.  viii.  31  ;  2  Chr.  vi.  22  ;  God- 
wyn, /.  c.  vi.  6;  Carpzov,  p..654;  see  also  Juv. 
Sat.  xiv.  219;  Horn.  II.  xiv.  272). 

4.  Dividing  a  victim  and  passing  between  or 
distributing  the  pieces  (Gen.  xv.  10,  17  ;  Jer.  xxxiv. 
18).  This  form  was  probably  used  to  intensify  the 
imprecation  already  ratified  by  sacriHee  according 
to  the  custom  described  by  classiciU  writers  under 
the  phrases  '6pKia  rijj.viiv,  faedus  ferire,  &c.  We 
may  perhaps  icgard  in  this  view  the  acts  recorded 
Judg.  xix.  29,  1  Sam.  xi.  7,  and  perhaps  Herod, 
vii.  39. 

As  the  sanctity  of  oaths  was  carefully  inculcated 
by  the  Law,  so  the  crime  of  perjury  was  strongly 
condemned ;  and  to  a  false  witness  the  same  j)iuiish- 
ment  was  ;\ssigned  which  was  due  for  tlie  crime  to 
which  he  testified  (Ex.  xx.  7;  Lev.  xix.  12  ;  Deut. 
xix.  16-19;  Ps.  XV.  4;  Jer.  v.  2,  vii.  9;  Ez.  xvi. 
59;  Hos.  X.  4;  Zech.  viii.  17).  Whether  the 
"swearing"  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  I(t)  ;uid 


OBADIAH 

by  Hosea  (iv.  2)  Was  false  swearing,  or  pi'ofane  abuse 
of  oaths,  is  not  certain.  If  the  latter,  the  crime  is 
one  which  had  been  condemned  by  the  Law  (Lev. 
xxiv.  11,  16;   Matt.  x.wi.  74). 

Prom  the  Law  the  Jews  deduced  many  special 
cases  of  perjury,  which  are  thus  classified: — 1.  Jus 
jurandum  promissorium,  a  rash  inconsiderate  pro- 
mise for  the  future,  or  false  assertion  respecting  the 
p;ist  (Lev.  v.  4).  2.  Vanmn,  an  absurd  self-con- 
tradictory assertion.  3.  Depositi,  breach  of  con- 
tract denied  (Lev.  xix.  11).  4.  les^i'moniV,  judicial 
perjury  (Lev.  v.  1 ;  Nicolaus  and  Selden,  De  Jura- 
mentis,  in  Ugolirii,  Thesaurus,  xxvi. ;  Lightfoot, 
Ilor.  Hcbr.  on  Matt.  v.  33,  vol,  ii.  292  ;  Mishna, 
Sheh.  iii.  7,  iv.  1,  v.  1,  2 ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.,  art. 
"  Jiu-amentum  "). 

Women  were  forbidden  to  bear  witness  on  oatli, 
as  was  inferred  from  Deut.  xix.  17  (Mishna,  Sheb. 
iv.  1). 

The  Christian  practice  in  the  matter  of  oaths 
was  founded  in  great  measure  on  the  Jewish.  Thus 
the  oath  on  the  Gospels  was  an  imitation  of  the 
Jewish  practice  of  placing  the  hands  on  the  book 
of  the  Law  (P.  Fagius,  on  Onkel.  ad  Ex.  xxiii.  1  ; 
Justinian,  Nov.  c.  viii.  Epil. ;  Matth.  Paris,  Hist. 
p.  916). 

Our  Lord's  prohibition  of  swearing  was  clearly 
always  understood  by  the  Christian  Church  as  di- 
rected against  profane  and  careless  swearing,  not 
against  the  serious  judicial  form  (Bingham,  Antiq. 
Eccl.  xvi.  7,  §4,  5;  Aug.  Ep.  157,  c.  v.  40)  ;  and 
thus  we  find  the  fourth  Council  of  Carthage  (c.  61) 
reproving  clerical  persons  for  swearing  by  created 

objects. 

The  most  solemn  Mohammedan  oath  is  made  on 
the  open  Koian.  Mohammed  himself  used  the 
form,  "  By  the  setting  of  the  stars"  (Chai'din,  Voy. 
vi.  87  ;  Sale's  Koran,  Ivi.  p.  437). 

Bedouin  Arabs  use  various  sorts  of  adjuration, 
one  of  which  somewhat  resembles  the  oath  "  by 
the  Temple."  The  person  fcikes  hold  of  the  middle 
tent-pole,  and  swears  by  the  life  of  the  tent  and  its 
owners  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  127,  foil.  ; 
.see  also  another  case  mentioned  by  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  p.  398). 

The  stringent  nature  of  the  Roman  military  oath, 
and  the  penalties  attached  to  infraction  of  it,  are 
alluded  to,  more  or  less  certainly,  in  sevei'al  places 
in  N.  T.,  e.  g.  Matt.  viii.  9,  Acts  xii.  19,  xvi.  27, 
xxvii.  42  ;  see  also  Dionys.  Hal.  xi.  43,  and  Aul. 
Cell.  xvi.  4.     [Perjury.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

OBADI,'AH(nnny:  'AjSSm:  Obdia).  The 
name  of  Obadiah  was  probably  iis  common  among 
the  Hebrews  as  Abdallah  among  the  Arabians,  both 
of  them  having  the  same  meaning  and  etymology. 

1.  The  sons  of  Obadiah  are  enumerated  in  a  coi'- 
rupt  passage  of  the  genealogy  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iii.  21).     The  reading  of  the  LXX.,  and 

Vulg.  was   133,  "  his  son,"  and   of    the   Peshito 

Syriac  "J3,  "  son  of,"  for  ""JS,  "  sons  of;"  so  that 

according  to  the  two  former  versions  Obadiah  was 
the  son  of  Arnan,  and  according  to  the  last  the  son 
of  Jesaiah. 

2.  ('A;85(ov:  Obadia.)  According  to  the  re- 
ceived text,  one  of  the  five  sous  of  Izrahiah,  a  de- 
scendant of  Issachar  and  a  chief  man  of  his  tiibe 
(1  Chr.  vii.  3).  Four  only,  however,  are  men- 
tioned, and  the  discrepancy  is  rectified  in  four  of 
Kennicott's  MSS.,  which  omit  the  words  "  and  the 
sons  of  Izrahiah,"  thus  making  Izrahiah  brother, 


OBADIAH 

aiid  not  father,  of  Obadiali,  and  both  sons  of  Uzzi. 
The  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  follow  the  received 
text,  but  read  "  four  "  instead  of  "  five." 

3*  ('A)3Sia:  OhJin.)  One  of  the  six  sons  of 
Azel,  a  descendant  of  Saul  (1  Clir.  viii.  08,  ix. 
44). 

4.  A  Levite,  son  of  Shemaiah,  and  descended 
fi-om  Jeduthun  (I  Chr.  ix.  16).  He  appears  to 
have  been  a  principal  musician  in  the  Temj^le  choir 
in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  25).  It  is  evi- 
dent, from  a  comparison  of  the  last-quoted  passage 
with  1  Chr.  ix.  15-17  and  Neh.  xi.  17-19,  that  the 
first  three  names  "  Mattaniah,  and  Bakbukiah,  Oba- 
diah,"  belong  to  ver.  24,  and  the  last  three,  "  Me- 
shullam,  Talmou,  Akkub,"  were  the  families  of 
porters.  The  name  is  omitted  in  the  Vat.  MS.  in 
Neh.  xii.  25,  where  the  Codex -Fred.  Aug.  has 
'0;85iof  and  the  Vulg.  Obedia.  In  Neh.  xi.  17, 
"Obadiah  the  son  of  Shemaiah,"  is  called  "  Abda 
the  son  of  Shammua." 

5.  (Obdias.)  The  second  in  order  of  the  lion- 
faced  Gadites,  captains  of  the  host,  who  joined 
David's  sbuidard  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  9). 

6.  One  of  the  princes  of  Judah  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat,  who  were  sent  by  the  king  to  teach  in 
the  cities  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7). 

7.  ('A/3a5ia:  Obedia.)  The  son  of  Jehiel,  of  the 
sons  of  Joab,  who  came  up  in  the  second  caravan 
with  Ezra,  accompanied  by  218  of  his  kinsmen 
(Ezr.  viii.  9). 

8.  ('AjSSi'a:  Obdias.)  A  priest,  or  family  of 
priests,  who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  X.  5).  [W.  A.  W.] 

9.  {'O^Slov:  Abdias.)     The  prophet  Obadiah. 

We  know  nothing  of  him  except,  what  we  can  ga- 
ther from  the  short  book  which  bears  his  name.  The 
Hebrew  tradition  adopted  by  St.  Jerome  (/»  Abd.), 
and  maintained  by  Abarbanel  and  Kimchi,  that  he  is 
the  same  person  as  the  Obadiah  of  Ahal/s  reign,  is 
as  destitute  of  foundation  as  another  account,  also 
suggested  by  Abarbanel,  which  makes  him  to  have 
been  a  convei-ted  Idumaean,  "  the  hatchet,"  accord- 
ing to  the  Hebrew  proverb,  "  returning  into  the 
wood  out  of  which  it  was  itself  taken  "  (Abarb.  In 
Obad  apud  Pfeifleri,  0/)r'm,p.  1092,  Ultra).  1704). 
The  question  of  his  date  must  depend  upon  the 
interpretation  of  the  11th  verse  of  his  prophecy. 
He  there  speaks  of  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  captivity  of  Jacob.  If  he  is  referring  to  the 
well-known  captivity  by  Nebuchadnezzar  he  must 
have  lived  at  the  time  of  the  Babylonish  captivity, 
and  have  prophesied  subsequently  to  the  year  B.C. 
588.  If,  further,  his  prophecy  against  Edom  found 
its  first  fulfilment  in  the  conquest  of  that  country 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  year  B.C.  583,  we  have 
its  date  fixed.  It  must  have  been  uttered  at  some 
time  in  the  five  years  which  intervened  between 
those  two  dates.  Jaeger  argues  at  length  for  an 
earlier  date.  He  admits  that  the  Uth  verse  refers 
to  a  capture  of  Jerusalem,  but  maintains  that  it  may 
apply  to  its  capture  by  Shishak  in  the  reign  of  Re- 
hoboam  (1  K.  xiv.  25  ;  2  Chr.  xii._  2)  ;  by  the  Phi- 
listines and  Arabians  in  the  reign  of  Jehorani  (2  Chr. 
xxi.  Ki)  ;  by  Joasli  in  the  reign  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr. 
XXV.  22)  ;  or  b.y  the  Chaldaeans  in  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiakim  and  of  Jehoiarhin  (2  K.  xxiv.  2  and  10). 
Tlie  Idumaeans  might,  he  argues,  have  joined  the 
enemies  of  Judah  on  any  of  these  occjisions,  a-s 
their  inveterate  hostility  from  an  early  date  is 
jiroved  by  several  passages  of  Scripture,  c.  </.  Joel 
iii.  19;  Am.  i.  11.  He  thinks  it  pn.liable  that  the 
occasion  referred  to  by  Obadiah  is  the  capttne  of 


OBADIAH 


589 


Jernsalem  by  the  Ephiaimites  in  the  reign  of  Ama- 
ziah (2  Chr.  XXV.  22).  The  utmost  force  of  these 
statements  is  to  prove  a  possibility.  The  only 
aigument  of  any  weight  for  the  early  date  of  Oba^ 
diali  is  his  position  in  the  list  of  the  books  of  the 
minor  prophets.  Why  should  he  have  been  inserted 
between  Amos  and  Jonah  if  his  date  is  about  B.C. 
585?  Schnurrer  seems  to  answer  this  question 
satisfactorily  when  he  says  that  the  prophecy  of 
Obadiah  is  an  amplification  of  the  last  five  verses  of 
Amos,  and  was  therefore  placed  next  after  the  book 
of  Amos.  Ou)-  conclusion  is  in  favour  of  the  later 
date  assigned  to  him,  agreeing  herein  with  that  of 
Pfeifler,  Schnurrer,  Rosemniiller,  De  Wette,  Hende- 
werk,  and  Maurer. 

The  book  of  Obadiah  is  a  sustained  denunciation 
of  the  Edomites,  melting,  as  is  the  wont  of  the 
Hebrew  prophets  (cf.  Joel  iii..  Am.  ix.),  into  a 
vision  of  the  future  glories  of  Zion,  when  the  arm 
of  the  Lord  should  have  wrought  her  deliverance 
and  have  repaid  double  upon  her  enemies.  Pre- 
vious to  the  captivity,  the  Edomites  were  in  a 
similar  relation  to  the  Jews  to  that  which  the 
Samaritans  afterwards  held.  They  were  near  neigh- 
bours, and  they  were  relatives.  The  result  was 
that  intensified  hatred  which  such  conditions  are 
likely  to  produce,  if  they  do  not  produce  cordiality 
and  good-will.  The  Edomites  are  the  types  of  those 
who  ought  to  be  friends  and  are  not — of  those  who 
ought  to  be  helpers,  but  in  the  day  of  calamity  are 
found  "  standing  on  the  other  side."  The  prophet 
first  touches  on  their  pride  and  self-confidence,  and 
then  denounces  their  "  violence  against  their  brother 
Jacob"  at  the  time  of  the  capture  of  Jerusalem. 
There  is  a  sad  tone  of  reproai,-h  in  the  form  into 
which  he  throws  his  denunciation,  whicii  contrasts 
with  the  parallel  denunciations  of  Ezekiel  (xxv.  and 
XXXV.),  Jeremiah  (Lam.  iv.  21),  and  the  author  of 
the  137th  Psalm,  which  seem  to  have  been  uttered 
on  the  same  occasion  and  for  the  same  cause.  The 
psalmist's  "  lEemember  the  children  of  Edom,  O 
Lord,  in  the  day  of  Jerusalem,  how  they  sai(i, 
Down  with  it,  down  with  it,  even  to  the  giound !"' 
coupled  with  the  immediately  succeeding  impreca- 
tion on  Babylon,  is  a  sterner  utterance,  by  the  side 
of  which  the  "  Thou  shouldest  not "  of  Obadijih 
appears  rather  as  the  sad  remonstrance  of  disap- 
pointment. He  comjilains  that  they  looked  on  and 
rejoiced  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  that  they 
ti'iumphed  over  her  and  plundered  her ;  and  that 
they  cut  off  the  fugitives  who  were  probably  making 
their  way  through  Idumaea  to  Egypt. 

The  last  six  verses  are  the  most  important  part 
of  Obadiah's  prophecy.  The  vision  presented  to  the 
prophet  is  that  of  Zion  triumphant  over  the  Idu- 
maeans and  all  her  enemies,  restored  to  her  ancient 
possessions,  and  extending  her  borders  northward 
and  southward  and  eastward  and  westward.  He 
sees  the  house  of  Jacob  and  the  house  of  .Joseph 
(here  probably  denoting  the  ten  tribes  and  the  two) 
consuming  the  house  of  Esau  as  fire  devours  stubble 
(ver.  18)."  The  inhabitants  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem, 
now  captive  at  Sepharad,  are  to  return  to  Jeru- 
salem, and  to  occupy  not  only  the  city  itself,  but 
the  southern  tract  of  Judaea  'ver.  20).  Those  who 
had  dwelt  in  the  southern  tract  aie  to  overrun  and 
settle  in  Idumaea  (ver.  19).  The  Ibrmer  inhabitiUits 
of  the  jjlain  country  are  also  to  estal)lish  themselves 
in  Philistia  (ib.^i.  To  the  north  the  tribe  of  Judali  is 
to  extend  itself  as  far  as  the  fields  of  Ejihraim  and 
Samaria,  while  Benjamin,  thus  displaced,  takes  pos- 
session of  (iilead  (ib.).      The  captives  of  the  ten 


590 


OBADIAH 


tribes  are  to  occupy  the  northern  region  from  tlie 
borders  of  the  enlarged  Judali  as  far  as  Sarepta  near 
Sidon  (ver.  20).  What  or  where  Sepharad  is  no 
one  knows.  The  1-XX.,  perhaps  by  an  error  of  a 
oopyist,  read  'E(ppada.  St.  Jerome's  Hebrew  tutor 
told  him  the  Jews  held  it  to  be  the  Bosporus.  St. 
Jerome  himself  thinks  it  is  deiived  from  an  As- 
syrian word  meaning  "bound"  or  "limit,"  and 
understands  it  as  signifying  "  .-icattered  abroad."  So 
Maurer,  who  compares  ol  iy  rfj  Siaairopa  of  Jam. 
i.  1.  Hardt,  who  has  devoted  a  volume  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  question,  is  in  favour  of  Sipphara  in 
Mesopotamia.  The  modern  Jews  pronounce  for 
Spain.  Schultz  is  probably  right  in  saying  that  it 
is  some  town  or  district  in  Babylon,  otherwise 
unknown. 

The  question  is  asked,  Have  the  prophet's  denun- 
ciations of  the  Edomites  been  fulrilleJ,  and  has  his 
vision  of  Zion's  glories  been  realised?  Typiailly, 
partially,  and  imperfectly  they  have  been  fulfilled, 
but,  as  Rosenmiiller  justly  says,  they  await  a  fuller 
accomplishment.  The  first  fulfilment  of  the  denun- 
ciation on  Edom  in  all  probability  took  place  a  few 
years  after  its  utterance.  For  we  read  in  Josephus 
{Aitt.  X.  9,  §7)  that  five  years  after  the  capture  of 
Jerusalem  Nebuchadnezzar  reduced  the  Ammonites 
and  Jloabites,  and  after  their  reduction  made  an 
expedition  into  Egypt.  This  he  could  hardly  have 
done  without  at  the  same  time  reducing  Idumaea. 
A  more  full,  but  still  only  partial  and  typical,  ful- 
filment would  have  taken  place  in  the  time  of  John 
Hyrcaiius,  who  utterly  reduced  the  Idumaeans, 
and  only  allowed  them  to  remain  in  their  coLmtrj- 
on  the  condition  of  their  beiiig  circumcised  and 
accepting  the  Jewish  rites,  after  which  their  na- 
tionality was  lost  for  ever  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §1 ). 
Similarly  the  return  from  the  Babylonish  captivity 
would  typically  and  imperfectly  fulfil  the  promise 
of  the  restoration  of  Zion  and  the  extension  of  hen 
borders.  But  "  magnificentior  sane  est  haec  pro- 
niissio  quam  ut  ad  Sorobabelica  aut  Blacabaica  tem- 
pora  i-eferri  possit,"  says  Rosenmiiller  on  ver.  21. 
And  "  necessitas  cogit  ut  omnia  ad  praedicationem 
evangelii  i-eferamus,"  says  Luther. 

The  full  completion  of  the  prophetical  descrip- 
tions of  the  glories  of  Jerusalem — the  future  golden 
age  towards  which  the  seers  stretched  their  hands 
with  fond  yearnings — is  to  be  looked  for  in  the 
Christian,  not  in  the  Jewish  Zion — in  the  antitype 
rather  than  in  the  type.  Just  as  the  fate  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  destruction  of  the  world  are  inter- 
woven and  iutoi-penetrate  each  other  in  the  prophecy 
uttered  by  our  Lord  on  the  mount,  and  His  words 
are  in  part  fulfilled  in  the  one  event,  but  only  fully 
accomplished  in  the  otlier ;  so  in  figure  and  in  type 
the  predictions  of  Oliadiah  may  have  been  accom- 
plished by  Nebuchadnezzar,  Zerubbabel,  and  Hyr- 
canus,  but  their  complete  fulfilment  is  resen-ed  for 
the  fortunes  of  the  Christian  Church  and  her  ad- 
vei-saries.  Whether  that  fulfilment  has  already 
occun-ed  in  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  through  the 
world,  or  whether  it  is  yet  to  come  (Rev.  xx.  4), 
or  whether,  being  conditional,  it  is  not  to  bo  ex- 
pected save  in  a  limi'ted  and  curtailed  degree,  is 
not  to  be  detennined  here. 

The  book  of  Olsadiah  is  a  favourite  study  of  the 
modern  Jews.  It  is  hei-e  especially  that  they  read 
the  future  fate  of  their  own  nation  and  of  the 
Christians.  Those  unversed  in  their  literature  may 
wonder  where  tlie  Christians  are  found  in  the  book 
of  Obadiah.  But  it  is  a  fixed  principle  of  Rabbinical 
interpretation   that   by    Edomites   is   prophetically 


OBADIAH 

meant  Christians,  and  that  by  iodoni  is  meant  Rome. 
Thus  Kimchi,  on  Obadiah,  lays  it  down  that  "  all 
that  the  prophets  have  said  about  the  destruction 
of  Edom  in  the  last  times  has  referencte  to  Rome." 
So  Rabbi  Bechai,  on  Is.  Ixvi.  17  ;  and  Abarbanel  has 
written  a  commentary  on  Obadiah  resting  on  this 
hypothesis  as  its  basis.  Other  examples  are  given 
by  Buxtorf  {Lex.  Talm.  in  voc.  DIIX,  and  Syna- 

goga  Judaioa).  The  i-easons  of  this  Rabbinical 
dictum  are  as  various  and  as  ridiculous  as  might  be 
imagined.  Nachmanides,  Bechai,  and  Abarbanel 
say  that  Janus,  the  first  king  of  Latium,  was  grand- 
son of  Esau.  Kimchi  (on  Joel  iii.  19)  says  that 
Julius  Caesjir  was  an  Idumaean.  Scaliger  (arf 
Chron.  Euseb.  n.  2152)  reports,  "  The  Jews,  both 
those  who  are  comparatively  ancient  and  those  who 
are  modern,  believe  that  Titus  was  an  Eilomite,  and  ■ 
when  the  prophets  denounce  Edom  they  frequently 
refer  it  to  Titus."  Aben  Ezra  says  that  there  were 
no  Christians  except  such  as  were  Idumaeans  until 
the  time  of  Constantine,  and  that  Constantine  hav- 
ing embraced  their  religion  the  whole  Roman  em- 
pire became  entitled  Idumaean.  St.  Jerome  savs 
that  some  of  the  Jews  read  niD-1"l,  Rome,  for  nOn, 

Dumah,  in  Is.  xxi.  11.  Finally,  some  of  the  Rabbis, 
and  with  them  Abarbanel,  maintain  that  it  was 
the  soul  of  Esau  which  lived  again  in  Christ. 

The  colour  given  to  the  prophecies  of  Obadiah, 
when  looked  at  from  this  point  of  view,  is  most 
curious.  The  following  is  a  specimen  fi-om  Abar- 
banel on  ver.  1 : — "  The  true  explanation,  as  I  have 
said,  is  to  be  found  in  this:  The  Idumaeans,  by 
which,  as  I  have  shown,  all  the  Christians  are  to  be 
understood  (for  they  took  their  origin  from  Rome), 
will  go  up  to  lay  waste  Jerusalem,  which  is  the 
seat  of  holiness,  and  where  the  tomb  of  their  God 
Jesus  is,  as  indeed  they  have  several  times  gone  up 
already."  Again,  on  ver.  2 :  "  I  have  seveial  times 
shown  that  from  Edom  proceeded  the  kings  who 
reigned  in  Italy,  and  who  built  up  Rome  to  "be 
great  among  the  nations  and  chief  among  the  pro- 
vinces; and  in  this  way  Italy  and  (Jreece  and  all 
the  western  provinces  became  filled  with  Idumaeans. 
Thus  it  is  that  the  pro])hets  call  the  whole  of  that 
nation  by  the  name  of  Edom."  On  ver.  8 :  "  There 
shall  not  be  found  counsel  or  wisdom  among  the 
Edomite  Christians  when  they  go  up  to  that  war." 
On  ver.  19  :  "  Those  who  have  gone  as  exiles  into 
the  Edomites',  that  is,  into  the  Christians'  land,  and 
have  there  suffered  affliction,  will  deserve  to  have 
the  best  part  of  their  country  and  their  metropolis  as 
Mount  Seir."  On  ver.  20  :  "  Sarepta"  is  "  France  ;" 
"  Sepharad  "  is  "  Spain."  The  "  Jlount  of  Esau," 
in  ver.  21,  is  "  the  city  of  Rome,"  which  is  to  be 
judged ;  and  the  Saviours  are  to  be  "  the  [Jewish] 
Messiah  and  his  chieftains, "  who  ai-e  to  be 
"  Judges." 

The  first  nine  verses  of  Obadiah  are  so  similar  to 
Jer.  xlix.  7,  &c.,  that  it  is  evident  that  one  of  the 
two  prophets  must  have  had  the  prophecy  of  the 
other  before  him.  Which  of  the  two  wrote  first  is 
doubtful.  Those  who  give  an  early  date  to  Obadiali 
thereby  settle  the  question.  Those  who  place  him 
later  leave  the  question  open,  as  he  would  in  that 
case  be  a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah.  Luther  holds 
that  Obadiah  followed  Jeremiah.  Schnurier  makes 
it  more  probable  that  Jeremiah's  prophecy  is  an 
altered  form  of  Obadiah's.  Eichhorn,  Schultz, 
Rosenmiiller,  and  JIaurer  agree  with  him. 

See  Ephrem  Syrus,  Expl.  in  AM.  v.  269,  Rome, 
1740;  St.  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Abd.  Op.  iii.  1455, 


OBAL 

Paris,  1704;  Luther,  Ewxrr.  in  Abel.  Op.  iii.  538, 
Jenae,  1612;  Pfeifter,  Tract.  Phil.  Antirrabin. 
Op.  p.  1081,  Ultraj.  1704;  '^chnmrer,  Dissertatio 
Pliilologicain  Obddiam,  Tubing.  1787  ;  Schultziiis, 
Scholia  in  Vet.  Test.  Norimb.  179:3;  KoseDmiiller, 
Scholia  in  Vet.  Test.  Lips.  1813  ;  Maurer,  Comm. 
in  Vet.  Test.  Lips.  183G;  Jacgor,  Ueler  das  Zeit- 
alter  Obadja's,  Tiibiug.  1837.  [F.  M.] 

10.  (-innay  -.  'APSioi-.  Abdias.)  An  officer  of 
high  rank  in  the  court  of  Ahab,  who  is  described  as 
"  over  the  house,"  that  is,  apparently,  lord  high 
chamberlain,  or  mayor  of  the  palace  (1  K.  xviii.  3). 
His  influence  with  the  king  must  have  been  gi-eat  to 
enable  him  to  retain  his  position,  though  a  devout 
worshipper  of  Jehovah,  during  the  tierce  persecu- 
tion of  the  prophets  by  Jezebel.  At  the  peril  of 
his  lite  he  concealed  a  hundred  of  them  in  eaves, 
and  fed  them  there  with  breal  and  water.  But  he 
himself  does  not  seem  to  have  been  suspected  (1  K. 
xviii.  4,  13).  The  occasion  upon  which  Obadiah 
appears  in  the  history  shows  the  confidential  nature 
of  his  office.  In  the  third  year  of  the  terrible  famine 
with  which  Samaria  was  \nsited,  when  the  fountains 
and  streams  were  dried  up  in  consequence  of  the 
long-continued  drought,  and  horses  and  mules  were 
perishing  for  lack  of  water,  Ahab  and  Obaliah  di- 
vided the  l.md  between  them  and  set  forth,  each 
unattended,  to  search  for  whatever  remnants  of 
herbage  might  still  be  left  around  the  springs  and 
in  the  fissures  of  the  river  beds.  'J'heir  mission  was 
of  such  importance  that  it  could  only  be  entrusted 
to  the  two  principal  persons  in  the  kingdom.  Oba- 
diah was  startled  on  his  solitary  journey  by  the 
abrupt  apparition  of  Elijah,  who  had  disappeared 
since  the  commencement  of  the  famine,  and  now 
commanded  him  to  announce  to  Ahab,  "  Behold 
Elijah  !"  He  hesitated,  ai)parently  afraid  tliat  his 
long-concealed  attachment  to  the  worship  of  Je- 
hovah should  thus  be  disclosed  and  liis  life  fall  a 
sacrifice.  At  the  same  time  he  was  anxious  that 
the  prophet  should  not  doubt  his  sincerity,  and 
appealed  to  what  he  had  done  in  the  persecution  by 
Jezebel.  But  Elijah  only  asserted  the  more  strongly 
liis  intention  of  encountering  Ahab,  and  Obadiah 
had  no  choice  but  to  obey  (1  K.  xviii.  7-16).  The 
interview  and  its  consequences  belong  to  the  history 
of  Elijah  [vol.  i.  p.  527].  According  to  the  Jewish 
tradition  preserved  in  Ephrem  Syrus  (Assemani, 
Bibl.  Or.  Clem.  p.  70),  Obadiah  the  chief  officer  of 
Ahab  was  the  same  with  Obadiah  the  prophet.  He 
was  of  Shechem  in  the  land  of  Ephraim,  and  a  dis- 
ciple of  Elijah,  and  was  the  third  captain  of  fifty 
who  was  sent  by  Ahaziah  (2  K.  i.  13).  After  this 
he  left  the  king's  service,  prophesied,  died,  and  was 
burie<i  with  his  father.  The  "certain  woman  of 
the  wives  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  "  who  came 
to  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  1 )  was,  according  to  the  tra- 
dition in  Rashi,  his  widow. 

11.  ('A;85i'as.)  The  father  of  Ishmaiah,  who 
was  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulon  in  David's  reign 
(1  Chr.  x.\vii.  19). 

12.  A  Merarite  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  and 
one  of  the  overseers  of  the  workmen  in  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12).  [W.  A.  W.] 

O'BALf^liy-.  Ei/oX:  Ebiil).  A  son  of.Ioktan, 
and,  like  the  re<t  of  his  family,  apparently  tlio 
founder  of  an  Arab  tribe  ((Jen.  x.  28),  which  has 
not  yet  been  identified.  In  1  Chr.  i.  22  tlie  name 
is  written   En.M.  (?3*y :     Alex.    Ttixlav:    Hehal). 


OBKD 


591 


which  Knoljel  {Genesis)  compares  with  the  Ge- 
banitae  of  Pliny,  a  tribe  of  Southern  Arabia.  The 
similarity  of  the  name  with  that  of  the  Avalitae, 
a  troglodyte  tribe  of  East  Africa,  induced  Bochart 
(Phaleg,  ii.  23)  to  conjecture  that  Obal  migrated 
thither  and  gave  his  name  to  the  Siwis  Abalites 
or  Avalites  ot" Pliny  (vi.  34).  [\V.  A.  W.] 

OBDI'A  ('O/SSia:  Ohia).  Probably  a  corrup- 
tion of  Obaia,  the  form  in  which  the  name  Ha- 
BAtAH  appears  (comp.  1  Esdr.  v.  38  with  Ezr.  ii. 
61). 

O'BED  ("inij?:  'n;8i75:  Obed).  1.  Son  of  Boaz 
and  liuth  the  Moabitess  ( Ruth  iv.  1 7).  The  circum- 
stances of  his  birth,  which  make  up  all  that  we  know 
about  him,  are  given  with  much  beauty  in  the  book 
of  Ruth,  and  form  a  most  interesting  specimen  of  the 
religious  and  social  life  of  the  Israelites  in  the  days  of 
Eli,  which  a  comparison  of  the  gene;dogies  of  David, 
Samuel,  and  Abiathar  shows  to  have  been  about 
the  time  of  his  birth.  The  famine  which  led  to 
Elimelech  and  his  sons  migrating  to  the  land  of 
Moab  may  naturally  be  assigned  to  the  time  of  the 
Philistine  inroads  in  Eli's  old  age.  Indeed  there  is  a 
considerable  resemblance  between  the  circumstances 
described  in  Hannah's  song  (1  Sam.  ii.  5),  "They 
that  were  hungry  ceased,  so  that  the  barren  hath 
born  seven,"  and  those  of  Obed's  birth  as  pointed 
at,  Ruth  i.  6,  and  in  the  speech  of  the  women  to 
Naomi:  "  He  shall  be  unto  thee  a  restorer  of  thy 
life,  and  a  nourisher  of  thine  old  age;  for  thy 
daughter-in-law  which  loveth  thee,  which  is  better 
to  thee  than  seven  sons,  hath  borne  him :"  .is  well 
as  between  the  prophetic  saying  (1  Sam.  ii.  7), 
"The  Lord  maketh  poor,  and  maketh  rich:  He 
bringeth  low,  and  lifteth  up.  He  rai-seth  up  the 
poor  out  of  the  dust,  and  lifteth  up  the  beggar 
from  the  dunghill,  to  set  them  among  princes,  and 
to  make  them  inherit  the  throne  of  glory :"  and 
the  actual  history  of  the  house  of  Elimelech,  whose 
glory  was  prayed  for  by  the  people,  who  said,  on 
the  marriage  of  Ruth  to  Boaz,  "  The  Lord  make 
the  woman  that  is  come  into  thine  house  lil*  Rachel 
and  like  Leah,  which  two  did  build  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  do  thou  worthily  in  Ephratah,  and  be 
famous  in  Bethlehem."  The  direct  mention  of  the 
Lord's  Christ  in  1  Sam.  ii.  10,  also  connects  the 
passage  remarkably  with  the  birth  of  that  child 
who  was  grandfather  to  King  David,  and  the  lineal 
ancestor  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  name  of  Obed  occurs  only  Ruth  iv.  17,  and 
in  the  four  genealogies,  Ruth  iv.  21,  22;  1  Chr. 
ii.  12 ;  Matt.  i.  5  ;  Luke  iii.  32.  In  all  these  five 
passages,  and  in  the  first  with  peculiar  emphasis, 
he  is  said  to  be  the  father  of  Jesse.  It  is  incredible 
that  in  David's  reign,  when  this  genealogy  was 
compiled,  his  own  grandfather's  name  should  have 
been  forgotten,  and  therefore  there  is  no  escape  from 
the  conclusion  that  Obed  was  literally  Jesse's  father, 
and  that  we  have  all  the  generations  recorded  from 
Nahshon to  David.  [Jesse";  Nahshox.]  [A.C.  H.] 

2.  (Alex.  'IcojStjS.)  A  descendant  of  Jarha,  the 
Egyptian  slave  of  Sheshan  in  the  line  of  Jeiahmeel. 
He  was  grandson  of  Zabad,  one  of  David's  mighties 
(1  Chr.  ii.  37,  38). 

3.  {'a$rie;  Alex.  'I«;8^S.)  One  of  David's 
mighty  men  (1  Chr.  xi.  47). 

4.  ('nj87)5  ;  Alex.  'la$riS.)  Ore  of  the  gate- 
keepers of  the  Temple:  son  of  Shemaiah  the  iii-st- 
born  of  Oiicd-edom  (  1  Ciir.  xxvi.  7). 


592 


OBED-EDOM 


5.  (Alex.  'Icoi8:^5.)  Father  of  Azaiiah,  one  of 
the  captains  of  hundreds  who  joined  with  Jehoiada 
in  the  revolution  by  which  Athaliah  fell  (2  Chr. 
ssiii.  1).  [W.  A.  W,] 

O'BED-E'DOM  (DHN  131?:  'A^iSSapd  in 
Sam.-,  'A/3Se5o'/u  in  Chr. ;  Alex.  'A0eSSaS6fx  in 
2  Sam.  vi.  1 1  :  Obcd-edum).  1.  A  Levite,  appa- 
rently of  the  family  of  Kohath.  He  is  described  as 
a  Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi.  10,  11),  that  is,  probably,  a 
native  of  the  Levitical  city  of  Gath-Kimmon  in 
Manasseh,  which  was  assigned  to  the  Kohathites  | 
(Josh.  xxi.  45),  and  is  thus  distinguished  from  j 
"  Obed-edom  the  son  of  Jeduthun,"  who  was  a 
Merarite.  After  the  death  of  Uzzah,  the  ark,  which 
was  being  conducted  from  the  house  of  Abinadab  in 
Gibeah  to  the  city  of  David,  was  carried  aside  into 
the  house  of  Obed-edom,  where  it  continued  three 
months,  and  brought  with  its  presence  a  blessing 
upon  Obed-edom  and  his  household.  Hearing  this, 
David,  at  the  head  of  a  large  choii*of  singers  and 
minstrels,  clothed  in  fine  linen,  and  attended  by  the 
elders  of  Israel  and  the  chief  captains,  "  went  to 
bring  up  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  out 
of  the  house  of  Obed-edom  with  joy"  (1  Chr.  xv. 
25;  2  Sam.  vi.  12). 

2.  "  Obed-edom  the  son  of  Jeduthun"  (1  Chr. 
xvi.  38),  a  Merarite  Levite,  ai)pears  to  be  a  different 
person  from  the  last-mentioned.  He  was  a  Levite 
of  the  second  degree  and  a  gatekeeper  for  the  ark 
(1  Chr.  XV.  18,  24),  appointed  to  sound  "with 
harps  ou  the  Sheminith  to  excel"  (1  Chr,  xv.  21, 
xvi.  5).  With  his  family  of  seven  sons  and  their 
children,  "mighty  men  of  valour"  (1  Chr.  xxvi. 
4-8),  he  kept  the  south  gate  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  15)  and 
the  house  of  Asuppim.  There  is  one  expression, 
however,  which  seems  to  imply  that  Obed-edom 
the  gatekeeper  and  Obed-edom  the  Gittite  may  have 
been  the  same.  After  enumerating  his  seven  sons 
the  chronicler  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  5)  adds,  "  for  God 
blessed  him,"  referring  apparently  to  2  Sam.  vi.  11, 
"  the  Lord  blessed  Obed-edom  and  all  his  house- 
hold." The  family  still  remained  at  a  much  later 
time  as  keepers  of  the  vessels  of  the  Temple  in  the 
reign  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr.  xxv.  24).    [W.  A.  W.] 

O'BETH  {'0.13^6:  cm.  in  Vulg.).  Ebed  the 
son  of  Jonathan  is  so  called  in  1  Esdr.  viii.  32. 

O'BIL  ('p'-niS:  'AjSi'as;  Alex.  Oi3/3(ay  :  Ubil). 
An  Ishmaelite  who  was  appropriately  ajipointed 
keeper  of  the  herds  of  camels  in  the  reign  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  30).  Bochart  {Hieroz.  pt.  i.,  ii.  2) 
conjectures  that  the  name  is  that  of  the  office, 
ahdl  in  Arabic  denoting  "  a  keeper  of  camels." 

OBLATION.    [Sacrifice.] 

O'BOTH  (nh'X:  'n)3c£0:  Oboth),  oae  of  the 
encampments  of  the  Israelites,  east  of  Moab  (Num. 
xxi.  10,  xxxiii.  43).  Its  exact  site  is  unknown. 
[Wilderness  of  the  Wanderimg.] 

OCHrELCOxi^Aoy,  Alex. 'GCitjAos  :  Ozicl). 
The  fbim  in  which  the  name  Jeiei,  appears  in 
1  Esdr.  i.  9  (comp.  2  Chr.  xxxv.  9).  The  Geneva 
version  has  Chielus. 

OCIDE'LUS  CnK/{57?Xos  ;  Alex.  ' aKeiSrjKos  : 
Jiissio,  Beddiis).     This  name  occupies,  in  1  Esdr.  ix. 


ODOLLAM 

22,  the  place  of  Jozabad  m  Ezr.  x.  22,  of  which  it 
IS  a  manifest  coiTuption.  The  original  name  is 
more  clearly  traced  in  the  Vulgate. 

OOI'NA  COKitva ;  and  so  Alex. :  Vulg.  omits'). 
"Sour  and  Ocina"  are  mentioned  (Jud.  ii.  28) 
among  the  places  on  the  sea-coast  of  Palestine, 
which  were  terrified  at  the  approach  of  Holofernes. 
The  names  seem  to  occur  in  a  regular  order  from 
noiih  to  south ;  and  as  Ocina  is  mentioned  between 
Sour  (Tyre)  and  Jemnaan  (Jabneh),  its  position 
aerees  with  that  of  the  ancient  ACCHO,  now  Akka, 
and  in  mediaeval  times  sometimes  called  Aeon  (Bro- 
cardus  ;  William  of  Tyre,  &c.).  [G.] 

OC'RAN(pDy:  "Expav:  Ochran).  The  father 
of  Pagiel,  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  after  the  Ex- 
odus (Num.  i.  13,  ii.  27,  vii.  72,  77,  x.  26). 

O'DED  (nniy :  'nS^S  ;  Alex.  'A5t{5 :  Oded). 
1.  The  father  of  Azariah  the  prophet  in  the  reigu 
of  Asa  (2  Chr.  xv.  1).  In  2  Chr.  xv.  8,  the  pro- 
phecy in  the  preceding  verses  is  attributed  to  him, 
and  not  to  his  son.  The  Alex.  MS.  and  the  Vul- 
gate retain  the  re;iding  which  is  probably  the  true 
one,  "  Azariah  the  son  of  Oded."  These  are  sup- 
ported by  the  Peshito-Syriac,  in  which  "  Azur"  is 
substituted  for  Oded. 

2.  A  prophet  of  Jehovah  in  Samaria,  at  the 
time  of  Pekah's  invasion  of  Judah.  Josephus  (^Ant. 
ix.  12,  §2)  calls  him  'nj37j5as.  On  the  return 
of  the  victorious  army  with  the  200,000  captives 
of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  Oded  met  them  and  pre- 
vailed upon  them  to  let  the  captives  go  free  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  9).  He  was  supported  by  the  chivalrous 
feelings  of  some  of  the  chieftains  of  Epliraim,  and 
the  narrative  of  the  restoration  of  the  prisoners,  fed, 
clothed,  and  anointed,  to  Jericho  the  city  of  palm- 
trees,  is  a  pleasant  episode  of  the  last  days  of  the 
northern  kingdom.  [W.  A.  W.] 

ODOL'LAM  ('05oA\a;u:  Odollam).  The  Greek 
form  of  the  name  Adullaji;  found  in  2  Mace, 
xii.  38  only.  Adullam  is  stated  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  {Onomast.  "  Adollam  ")  to  have  been  in 
their  day  a  large  village,  about  10  miles  east  of 
Eleutheropolis ;  and  here  (if  Beit-jihrin  be  Eleu- 
theropolis)  a  village  with  the  name  of  Bet  Dula 
(Tobler,  Bethlehem,  29  ;  Dritte  Wand.  151)  or 
Beit  Ula  (Robinson,  1st  ed.  App.  117)  now 
stands. 

The  obstacle  to  this  identification  is  not  that 
Adullam,  a  town  of  the  Shefelah,  should  be  found 
in  the  mountains,  for  that  puzzling  circumstance  is 
not  unfrequent  (comp.  Keilah,  &c.  vol.  ii.  p.  9), 
so  much  as  that  in  the  catalogue  of  Joshua  xv. 
it  is  mentioned  with  a  gioup  of  towns  (Zoreah, 
Socoh,  &c.)  which  lay  at  the  N.W.  corner  of  Judah, 
while  Bet  Dula  is  found  with  those  (Nezib,  Keilah, 
&c.)  of  a  separate  group,  farther  south. 

Further  investigation  is  requisite  before  we  can 
positively  say  if  there  is  any  cavern  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Bet  Dula  answering  to  the  "  cave  of 
Adullam."  The  cavern  at  Kkureitun,''  3  miles 
south  of  Bethlehem,  usually  shown  to  travellers 
as  Adullam,  is  so  far  distant  as  to  put  it  out  of 
the  question.     It  is  more  probable  that  this  latter 


^  Dr.  Bonar  has  suggested  to  us  that  the  name  Khu-  that  of  Chareiton,  or  Kreton,  a  famous  Essene  hermit  of 

reitun  represents  the  ancient  Hareth  {KUareth).    This  is  the  3rd  or  4tb  cent.,  who  founded  a  Laura  in  the  cavern 

ingenious,  and  may  be  correct ;  but  Tobler  (  Unujebungen,  in  riuestion.    (See  Acta  Saiict.  Sept.  28.) 
Ac,  522, 3)  has  made  out  a  strong  case  for  the  uiune  being 


ODONAKKES 

is  the  cavern  in  the  wilderness  of  Engedi,  in  which 
the  adventure  i>  of  Saul  and  David  (1  Sam.  xxiv.) 
occurred.  Everything  that  can  be  said  to  identify 
it  with  the  cave  of  Adullam  has  been  said  by  Dr. 
Bonar  {Land  of  Proiime,  248-50) ;  but  his  strongest 
argument — an  inference,  from  1  Sam.  s.xii.  1,  in 
favour  of  its  proximity  to  Bethlehem— comes  into 
direct  collision  with  the  statement  of  Jerome  quoted 
above,  which  it  should  be  observed  is  equally  op- 
posed to  Dr.  Robinson's  proposal  to  place  it  at  Dcir- 
Dubbdn. 

The  name  of  Adullam  appears  to  have  been  first 
applied  to  Khureitun  at  the  time  of  the  Crusades 
(Will,  of  Tyre,  XV.  6).  [0.] 

ODONAR'KES  (marg.  Odomarra:  'O50|U7jpa, 
'Oioappi]s  :  Vdnres),  the  chief  of  a  nomad  tribe  slain 
by  Jonathan  (1  Mace.  ix.  66).  The  form  in  the  A.  V. 
does  not  appear  to  be  supported  by  any  authority. 
The  Geneva  version  has  "  Odomeras."  [B.  F.  W.] 

OFFEEINGS.    [Sacrifice.] 

OFFICER."^  It  is  obvious  that  most,  if  not  all, 
of  the  Hebrew  words  rendered  "officer,"  are  either 
of  an  indefinite  character,  or  are  synonymous  teiTns 
for  functionaries  known  under  other  and  more  spe- 
cific names,  as  "  scribe,"  "  eunuch,"  &c. 

The  two  words  so  rendered  in  the  N.  T.  each  bear 
in  ordinary  Greek  a  special  sense.  In  the  case  of 
uTrrjpe'xTjs  this  is  of  no  very  definite  kind,  but  the 
word  is  used  to  denote  an  inferior  officer  of  a  court 
of  justice,  a  messenger  or  bailiff,  like  the  Koman 
viator  or  lictor.  IlpaKTopes  at  Athens  were  olli- 
cers  whose  duty  it  was  to  register  and  collect  fines 
imposed  by  courts  of  justice  ;  and  "deliver  to  the 
officer  "  ^  means,  give  in  the  name  of  the  debtor  to 
the  officer  of  the  court  (Demosthenes  (or  Dinarchus) 
c.  Theocr.  p.  1218,  Reiske;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  "  Prac- 
tores,"  "Hyperetes;"  Jul.  Poll.  viii.  114;  De- 
mosth.  c.  Arist.  p.  778  ;  Aesch.  c.  Tiinarch.  p.  5 ; 
Grotius,  ou  Luke  xii.  58).^ 

Josephus  says,  that  to  each  court  of  justice  among 
the  Jews,  two  Levites'  were  to  be  attached  as  clerks  or 
secretaries,  Ant.  iv.  8,  §14.  The  Mishua  also  men- 
tions the  crier  and  other  officials,  but  whether  these 
answered  to  the  officers  of  Josephus  and  the  N.  T. 
cannot  be  determined.  Selden,  from  Maimonides, 
mentions  the  high  estimation  in  which  such  ofiicials 
were  held.  Sanhedr.  iv.  3,  vi.  1  ;  Selden,  deSynedr. 
ii.  13,  11.    [Punishments  ;  Serjeants.] 

The  word  "  olficers  "  is  used  to  render  the  phrases 
ol  airh  (or  cttI)  rwv  xpf''<'''>  1  Mace.  x.  41,  xiii. 
37,  in  speaking  of  the  revenue-officers  of  Demetrius. 


OG 


593 


It  is  also  used  to  render  Xnrovpyoi,  Ecclus.  x. 
2,  where  the  meaning  is  clearly  the  subordinates  in 
a  general  sense  to  a  supreme  authority.  [H.  W.  P.] 

OG  (Jiy :  '^7 :  0(j),  an  Amoritish  king  of  Bashan, 
whose  rule  extended  over  sixty  cities,  of  which  the 
two  chief  were  Ashtaroth-Karnaim  and  Edrei  (Josh, 
xiii.  12).  He  was  one  of  the  last  representatives  of 
the  giant-race  of  Rephaim.  According  to  Eastern 
traditions,  he  escaped  the  deluge  by  wading  beside 
the  ark  (Sale's  Koran,  ch.  v.  p.  8G).  He  was  sup- 
posed to  be  the  largest  of  the  sons  of  Anak,  and  a 
descendant  of  Ad.  He  is  said  to  have  lived  no  less 
than  3000  years,  and  to  have  refused  the  warnings 
of  Jethro  (Shoaib),  who  was  sent  as  a  prophet  to 
him  and  his  people  (D'Herbelot,  s.  m.  ^'Falasthin," 
"Anak"  ).  Soiouthi  wrote  a  long  book  about  him 
and  his  race,  chiefly  taken  from  l\abbinic  traditions, 
and  called  Aug  fi  khaher  Aoug  (Id.  s.  v.  ''Aug"). 
See,  too,  the  Journal  Asiatkjue  for  1841 ,  and  Chro- 
nique  de  Tabari  trad,  du  persan,  par  Dubeux,  i. 
48,  f.  (Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  306). 

Passing  over  these  idle  fables,  we  find  from 
Scripture  that  he  was,  with  his  children  and  his 
people,  defeated  and  exterminated  by  the  Israelites 
at  Edrei,  immediately  after  the  conquest  of  Sihon, 
who  is  represented  by  Josephus  as  his  friend  and 
ally  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  5,  §3).  His  sixty  proud  fenced 
cities  were  taken,  and  his  kingdom  assigned  to  the 
Reubenites,  Gadites,  and  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh 
(Dent,  in.' 1-13;  Num.  xxxii.  33.  Also  Dent.  i.  4, 
iv.  47,  xxxi.  4;  Josh.  ii.  10,  ix.  10,  xiii.  12,  30). 
The  giant  stature  of  Og,  and  the  power  and  brai'ery 
of  his  people,  excited  a  dread  which  God  himself 
alleviated  by  his  encouragement  to  Moses  before  the 
battle  ;  and  the  memory  of  this  victory  lingered  long 
in  the  national  memory  (Ps.  cxxxv.  11,  cxxxvi.  20). 

The  belief  in  Og's  enormous  stature  is  corro- 
borated by  an  appeal  to  a  relic  still  existing  in  the 
time  of  the  author  of  Deut.  iii.  11.  This  was  an 
iron  bedstead,  or  bier,  preserved  in  "  Rabbath  of  the 
children  of  Ammon."  How  it  got  there  we  are  not 
told  ;  perhaps  the  Ammonites  had  taken  it  in  some 
victory  over  Og.  The  verse  itself  has  the  air  of  a 
later  addition  (Dathe),  although  it  is  of  course  pos- 
sible that  the  Hebrews  may  have  heard  of  so  curious 
a  i-elic  as  this  long  before  tliey  conquered  the  city 
where  it  Was  treasured.  Rabbath  was  first  subdued 
in  the  reign  of  David  (2  Sam.  xii.  26) ;  but  it  does 
not  therefore  follow  that  Deut.  iii.  11  was  not 
written  till  that  time  (Havernick  ad  foe).  Some 
have  supposed  that  this  was  one  of  the  common  flat 
beds  [Beds]  used  sometimes  on  the  housetops  of 


l"  Van  de  Velde  (.S'j/r.  <t-  I'al.  ii.  33)  illustrates  this 
charming  narrative  more  forcibly  than  is  his  wont.  The 
cave,  he  says,  has  still  "  the  same  narrow  natural  vault- 
ing at  the  entrance,  the  same  huge  chamber  in  the  rock, 
probably  the  place  where  Saul  lay  down  to  rest  in  the 
heat  of  the  day ;  the  same  side  vaults,  too,  where  David 
and  his  men  lay  concealed,  when,  accustomed  to  the  ob- 
scurity of  the  cavern,  they  saw  Saul  enter,  while  Saul, 
blinded  by  the  glare  of  light  outside,  saw  nothing  of- 
them." 

"  1.  H''^^,  Nacri'/3,  Vulg.  super  omnia,  from  SVJ- 
"  to  place." 

2.  From  same,  3'^3,  part.  plur.  In  Niph.  D^3'V3> 
Ka9e<TTaixii'0L,  praefecti,  1  K.  iv.  7. 

3.  D'^D,  Gen.  xl.  2,  eivovxoi.    [KuNUcn.] 

4.  "T'pS.  I'Sth.  Ii.  3,  Kwfiopxijs ;  Gen.  xii.  33,  rondpxrii ; 
Nch.  xi.  9,  eTTio-Kojro!  ;  prcKjmsitiis  ;  A.  V.  "  overseer." 

5.  rripQ,  TTpoo-TaTT)!,  concr.  for  abslr. ;  pmperly,  oflfire. 


like  "authority"  In  Eng.  Both  of  these  words  (4)  and 
(5)  from  ^i5Q,  "visit." 

6.  D1,  oIkovoixoi;,  princeps,  Esth.  i.  8,  joined  with 
D''"!D,  Dan.  i.  3. 

7.  "ID^,  part,  from  ItOti',  "  cut,"  or  "  inscribe,"  Ex. 
ii.  6,  ypaiMfxaTev^,  exaclcir  ;  Num.  xi.  16,  ypap.p.ariv<:, 
Deut.  xvi.  18,  Ypa/ufxaTocicravwyni;,  magistcr.  Josh.  i.  10 
pririceps. 

8.  The  word  "officer"  is  also  used,  Esth.  ix.  3,   to 

render  n3N?p.  which  is  Joined  with  ^b'J?.  marg. 
"  those  that  did  the  business,"  yponfiorcis,  procura- 
torcs. 

In  N.  T.  "officer"  is  used  to  render,  (I)  uTnjpeVij^. 
minister,  (2)  npaKTup,  Luke  xii.  5S,  exactor. 

*  TrapaSoiivai,  to!  Trpa/tT. 

«  npiKTwp  is  used  in  TAX.  lo  render  ti'33,  Is.  iii.  12; 
A.  V.  "  oppressoi,"  one  who  ]icrsocnlos  by  exaction. 

'  VTnjpeTai. 

2  Q 


594 


OHAD 


Eastern  cities,  but  made  of  iron  instead  of  palm- 
branches,  which  wouM  not  liave  supported  the 
giant's  weight.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  words 
?T"I3  'Ciy,  eres  harzel,  mean  a  "sarcophagus  of 
black  basalt,"  a  rendering  of  which  they  undoubtedly 
admit.  The  Arabs  still  regard  black  basalt  as  iron, 
because  it  is  a  stone  "  ferrei  coloris  atqne  duritiae" 
(Plin.  xxxvi.  11),  and  "  contains  a  large  percentage 
of  iron."  [Iron.]  It  is  most  abundant  in  the 
Hauran ;  and  indeed  is  probably  the  cause  of  the 
name  Argob  (the  stony)  given  to  a  part  of  Og's 
kingdom.  Tliis  sarcophagus  was  9  cubits  long,  and 
4  cubits  broad.  It  does  not  of  course  follow  that 
Og  was  1 5J  feet  high.  Maimonides  ( 1/ore  Nevochim, 
ii,  48)  sensibly  remarks  that  a  bed  (supposing  "  a 
bed "  to  be  intended)  is  usually  one-third  longer 
than  the  sleeper  ;  and  Sir  J.  Chardin,  as  well  as 
other  travellers,  have  observed  the  ancient  tendency 
to  make  mummies  and  tombs  far  larger  than  the 
natural  size  of  men,  in  order  to  leave  an  impression 
of  wonder. 

Other  legends  about  Og  may  be  found  in  Ben- 
Uzziel  on  Nimi.  xxi.  33,  Midrash  Jalqilt,  fol.  \?i 
^quoted  by  Ewald),  and  in  Mahometan  writers:  as 
that  one  of  his  bones  long  served  for  a  bridge  over 
a  river ;  that  he  roasted  at  the  sun  a  fish  freshly 
caught,  &c.  An  apocryphal  book  of  king  Og,  which 
pi-obably  contained  these  and  other  traditions,  was 
condemned  by  Pope  Gelasius  {Dccret.  vi.  13,  Sixt. 
Senensis,  Bibl.  Sanct.  p.  86).  The  origin  of  the 
name  is  doubtful :  some,  but  without  any  proba- 
bility, would  connect  it  with  the  Greek  Ogyges 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  306,  ii.  269).  [F.  W.  F.] 

O'HAD  ("tn'K  :  'hd^  ;  Alex.  'lacoaSi   in  Ex. : 

Ahod).  One  of  the  six  sons  of  Simeon  fGen.  xlvi. 
10;  Ex.  ^a.  15).  His  name  is  omitted  from  the 
lists  in  1  Chr.  iv  24  and  Num.  .xxvi.  14,  though 

in  the  former  passage  the  Syriac  has  >On),   Ohor, 

.as  in  Gen.  and  Ex. 

O'HEL  (bnl^  :  'OdA. :   Ohol).    As  the  text  now 

stands  Ohel  was  one  of  the  seven  sons  of  Zerub- 
babel.  though  placed  m  a  group  of  five  who  for 
some  cause  are  separated  from  the  rest  (1  Chr.  iii. 
20).  Whether  they  were  by  a  different  mother,  or 
were  born  after  the  return  from  Babylon,  can  only 
be  conjectured. 

OIL.»  i.  Of  the  numerous  substances,  animal 
and  ■\'egetable,  which  were  known  to  the  ancients  as 
yielding  oil,  the  olive-beny  is  the  one  of  which  most 
frequent  mention  is  made  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is 
well-known  that  both  the  quality  and  the  value  of 
olive-oil  differ  according  to  the  time  of  gathering 
ihe  fruit,  and  the  amount  of  pressure  used  in  the 
course  of  preparation.  These  processes,  which  do 
not  essentially  differ  from  the  modem,  are  described 
minutely  by  the  Roman  winters  on  agriculture,  and 
to  their  descriptions  the  few  notices  occurring  both 
in  Scriptm-e  and  tlie  Rabbinical  writings,  which 
throw  light  on  the  ancient  Oriental  metliod,  nearly 
correspond.  Of  these  descriptions  the  following  may 
be  taken  as  an  abstract.     The  best  oil  is  made  from 


OIL 

fruit  gathered  about  November  or  December,  when 
it  has  begun  to  change  colour,  but  before  it  has  be- 
come black.  The  beny  in  the  more  advanced  state 
yields  more  oil,  but  of  an  inferior  quality.  Oil  was 
also  made  from  unripe  fruit  by  a  special  process  as 
early  as  September  or  October,  while  the  harder 
sorts  of  fruit  were  sometimes  delayed  till  February 
or  JIarch,  Virg.  Georg.  ii.  519;  Palladius,  R.Ii. 
xii.  4;  Cohmiella,  R.  R.  xii.  47,  50  ;  Cato,  R.  R. 
65  ;  Phny,  N.  H.  xv.  1-8  ;  Varro,  R.  R.  i.  55  ; 
Hor.  2  Sat.  ii.  46. 

1 .  Gathering. — Great  care  is  necessary  in  ga- 
thering, not  to  injure  either  the  fruit  itself  or  the 
boughs  of  the  tree ;  and  with  this  view  it  was  either 
gathered  by  hand  or  shaken  off  carefully  with  a 
light  reed  or  stick.  The  "  houghing  "  of  Deut.  xxiv. 
20  (marg.),*"  probably  corresponds  to  the  "  shak- 
ing"-<=  of  Is.  xvii.  6,  xxiv.  13,  i.e.  a  subsequent 
beating  for  the  use  of  the  poor.  See  Mishna,  Shebiith, 
iv.  2  ;  Peah,  vii.  2,  viii.  3.  After  gathering  and 
careful  cleansing,  the  fruit  was  either  at  once  carried 
to  the  press,  which  is  recommended  as  the  best 
course ;  or,  if  necessary,  laid  on  tables  with  hollow 
trays  made  sloping,  so  as  to  allow  the  first  juice 
(Amiu'ca)  to  flow  into  other  receptacles  beneath, 
care  being  taken  not  to  heap  the  fruit  too  much, 
and  so  prevent  the  free  escape  of  the  juice,  which  is 
injurious  to  the  oil  though  itself  useful  in  other 
ways  '^Colum.  u.s.  xii.  50;  Aug.  Civ.  Dei,  i.  8,  2). 

2.  Pressing. — In  order  to  make  oil,  the  fruit 
was  either  bruised  in  a  mortar;  crushed  in  a  press, 
loaded  with  wood  or  stones ;  ground  in  a  mill ;  or 
trodden  with  the  feet.  Special  buildings  used  for 
grape-pressing  were  used  also  for  the  pui-pose  of 
olive-pressing,  and  contained  both  the  press  and  the 
receptacle  for  the  pressed  juice.  Of  these  processes, 
the  one  least  expedient  was  the  last  (treading), 
which  perhaps  answers  to  the  "  caualis  et  solea," 
mentioned  by  Columella,  and  was  probably  the  one 
usually  adopted  by  the  poor.  The  "  beaten  "  oil  of 
Ex.  xxvii.  20;  Lev.  xxiv.  2,  and  Ex.  xxix.  40; 
Num.  xxviii.  5,  was  probably  made  by  bruising  in 
a  mortar.  These  processes,  and  ako  the  place  and 
the  machine  for  pressing,  are  mentioned  in  the 
Mishna.  Oil-mills  are  often  made  of  stone,  and 
turned  by  hand.  Others  consist  of  cylinders  en- 
closing a  beam,  which  is  turned  by  a  camel  or  other 
animal.  An  Egyptian  olive-press  is  described  by 
Niebuhr,  in  which  the  pressure  exerted  on  the  fruit 
is  given  by  means  of  weights  of  wood  and  stone 
placed  in  a  sort  of  box  above.  Besides  the  above 
cited  Scripture  references,  the  following  passages 
mention  either  the  places,  the  processes,  or  the  ma- 
chines used  in  olive-pressing:  Mic.  vi.  15  ;  Joel  ii. 
24,  iii.  13  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  3;  Lam.  i.  15  ;  Hag.  ii.  16  ; 
Menach.  viii.  4  ;  Shebiith,  iv.  9,  vii.  6  (see  Ges.  p. 
179,  s.  V.  13)  ;  Terim.  x.  7;  Shabb.  i.  9  ;  Baba 
Bathra,  iv.  5  ;  Ges.  pp.  351,  725,  848,  1096  ;  Vi- 
truvius,  X.  1  ;  Cato,  R.  R.  'i  ;  Celsius,  Hierob.  ii. 
346,  350  ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  122,  pi.  xrii. ;  Arun- 
dell,  Asia  Jfmor,  ii.  196;   Wellsted,  Trav.  ii.  430. 

[GETHSEM.4NE.] 

3.  Keeping. — Both  olives  and  oil  were  kept  in 
jars  carefully  cleansed  ;  and  oil  was  drawn  out  for 
use  in  horns  or  other  small  vessels  (Cruse).    These 


"  1    "in^*\  from  "inV,  "shine"  (Ges.  1152-3),  Triorrjg,    JU'ce  from  oil  produced  from  other  sources.    Also  some- 

t    '■'  -T  _...._  I   tinipc  in    A     V    <' nintmpTit "  ('Pplfiine     TTifi.rnh.  li_  I'J^i^. 


eAator,  oleum,  clear  olive-oil,  as  distinguished  from 


times  in  A.  V.  "  ointment"  (Celsius,  Hierob.  ii.  279). 


2.  pK^  "  pressed  juice,"  eAaioy,  oleum,  from  |ttC',        3.  Plt^'P,  Chald.,  eXaiov,  oleum,  only  in   Ezr.  vi.  9, 

"become  fut"  (Ges.  1437);  sometimes  joined  with  JT'T-     ^"  """ 

eAaioi'  ej  eAaKOf,  oleum  de  olivctis,  distinguishing  olive-  i  IKS.  '   ^1^3,  KoAafiijeracrflai. 


OIL 

vessels  for  keeping  oil  were  stored  in  cellars  or 
storehouse.s ;  special  mention  of  such  repositories  is 
made  in  the  inventoi-ies  of  royal  property  and  re- 
venue (1  Sam.  X.  l,xvi.  1,13;  1  K.  i.  39,xvii.  10; 
2  K.  iv.  2,  6,  ix.  1,  3  ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  28  ;  2  Chr.  xi. 
11,  xxxii.  28  ;  Prov.  xxi.  20  ;  Shebiith,  v.  7  ;  Ce- 
lim,  ii.  5,  xvii.  12;  Colmnell.  /.  c). 

Oil  of  Tekoa  was  reckoned  the  best  {Menach. 
viii.  S).  Trade  in  oil  was  airried  on  with  the  Ty- 
rians,  by  whom  it  was  probably  often  re-ex-ported 
to  Egypt,  whose  oUves  do  not  for  the  most  part 
produce  good  oil.  Oil  to  the  amount  of  20,000 
baths  (2  Chr.  ii.  10;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  2,  §9),  or 
20  measures  (ccirs,  1  K.  v.  11)  was  among  the 
supplies  furnished  by  Solomon  to  Hiram.  Direct 
trade  in  oil  was  also  earned  on  between  Egypt  and 
Palestine  (1  K.  v.  11 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  10,  15  ;  Ezr.  iii. 
7;  Is.  XXX.  6,  Ivii.  9  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  17  ;  Hos.  xii.  1  ; 
S.  Hieronym.  Com.  in  Osee,  iii.  12;  Joseph.  Ant. 
viii.  2,  §9  ;  B.  J.  ii.  21,  §2  ;  Strabo,  xvii.  p.  809 ; 
Pliny,  XV.  4,  13;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  E(j.  ii.  28,  sm. 
ed, ;  Hasselquist,  2'rav.  pp.  53,  117j.  [Com- 
merce; Weights  and  Measures.] 

ii.  Besides  the  use  of  olives  themselves  as  food, 
common  to  all  olive-producing  countries  (Hoi-.  1  Od. 
x.\xi.  15;  Martial,  xiii.  36  ;  Arvieux,  Trav.  p.  209  ; 
Terumoth,  i.  9,  ii.  6),  the  principal  uses  of  olive-oil 
may  be  thus  stated. 

1.  As  food. — Dried  wheat,  boiled  with  either 
butter  or  oil,  but  more  commonly  the  former,  is  a 
common  dish  for  all  classes  in  Syria.  Hasselquist 
speaks  of  bread  baked  in  oil  as  being  particularly 
sustaining ;  and  Faber,  in  his  Pilgrimage,  mentions 
eggs  fried  in  oil  as  Saracen  and  Arabian  dishes.  It 
was  probably  on  account  of  the  common  use  of  oil 
in  food  that  the  "  nieat-ofl'erings  "  prescribed  by  the 
Law  were  so  frequently  mixed  with  oil  (Lev.  ii.  4, 
7,  15,  viii.  26,  31;  Num.  vii.  19,  and  foil.;  Deut. 
xii.  17,  xxxii.  13;  1  K.  xvii.  12,  15  ;  1  Chr.  xii. 
40;  Ez.  xvi.  13,  19;  S.  Hieronym.  Vit.  S.  Hi- 
larion.  c.  11,  vol.  ii.  32 ;  Ibn  Batuta,  Trav.  p.  60, 
ed.  Lee;  Volnev,  Trav.  i.  362,  406;  Russell, 
Aleppo,  i.  80,  il9;  Harmer,  Obs.  i.  471,  474; 
Shaw,  Trav.  p.  232  ;  Bertrandon  de  la  Brocquiere, 
Earlij  Trav.  p.  33J  ;  Burckhardt,  Trav^  in  Arab. 
i.  54  ;  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  59  ;  Arvieux,  I.  c. ;  Chardin, 

V'oy.  iv.  84  ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  ii.  302 ;  Hasselquist, 
Trav.  p.  132;  Faber,  Evagatorium,  vol.  i.  p.  197, 
ii.  152,  415).  [Food;  Offering.] 

2.  Cosmetic. — As  is  the  case  generally  in  hot 
climates,  oil  was  used  by  the  Jews  for  anointing 
the  body,  e.  g.  after  the  bath,  and  giving  to  the 
skin  and  hair  a  smooth  and  comely  appearance,  e.  g. 
before  an  entertainment.  To  be  deprived  of  the  use 
of  oil  was  thus  a  serious  privation,  assumed  voluutimly 
in  the  time  of  mourning  or  of  calamity.  At  Egyp- 
tian entertainments  it  was  usual  for  a  servant  to 
anoint  the  head  of  each  guest,  as  he  took  his  seat 
[Ointment],  (Deut.  .xxviii.  40;  2  Sam.  xiv.  2  ; 
Ruth  iii.  3;  2  Sam.  xii.  20  ;  Ps.  xxiii.  5,  xcii.  10, 
civ.  15;  Dan.  x.  3:  Is.  Ixi.  3;  Mic.  vi.  15;  Am. 
vi.  6;  Sus.  17;  Luke  vii.  46).  Straho  men- 
tions the  Egyptian  use  of  Civ-stoi-oil  for  this  purpose, 
xviii.  824.  The  Greek  and  Roman  usage  will  be 
found  mentioned  in  the  following  passages  :  Horn. 
//.  X.  577,  xviii.  596,  xxiii.  281;  Od.  vii.  107, 
vi.  96,  X.  364 ;  llor.  3  Od.  xiii.  6  ;  1  Sat.  vi.  123  ; 
2  Sat.  i.  8 ;  Pliny,  xiv.  22 ;  Aristoph.  Wasps, 
608,  CTwrfs,  816  ;  'Roberts,  pi.  164.  Butter,  as  is 
noticed  by  Pliny,  is  used  by  the  negroes  and  the 
lower  class  of  Arabs  for  the  like  purposes  (Pliny, 
xi.  41  ;  Burckhardt,  Trav.   i.  53;  iVH6w,  p.  215; 


OIL 


595 


Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  ii.  375  ;  see  Deut.  xxxiii.  24  ; 
Job  xxix.  6  ;   Ps.  cix.  18). 

The  use  of  oil  preparatoiy  to  athletic  exercises 
customary  among  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  can 
scarcely  have  had  place  to  any  extent  among  the 
Jews,  who  in  their  earlier  times  had  no  such  con- 
tests, thougli  some  are  mentioned  by  Josephus  with 
censure  ;\s  taking  place  at  Jerusalem  and  Caesaiea 
under  Herod  (Hor.  1  Od.  viii.  8;  Pliny,  xv.  4; 
Athenaeus,  xv.  34,  p.  686;  Horn.  Od.  vi.  79,  215  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  8,  §1,  xvi.  5,  §1  ;  Diet,  of  An- 
tiq.,  "  Aliptae  "). 

3.  Funereal. — The  bodies  of  the  dead  were  an- 
ointed with  oil  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  pio- 
bably  as  a  partial  antiseptic,  and  a  similar  custom 
appears  to  have  prevailed  among  the  Jews  {II.  xxiv. 
587;  Virg.  Aen.  vi.  219).   [Anoint;  Burial.] 

4.  Medicinal. — As  oil  is  in  use  in  many  cases  in 
modern  medicine,  so  it  is  not  surprising,  that  it 
should  have  been  much  used  among  the  Jews  and 
other  nations  of  antiquity  for  medicinal  purposes. 
(;elsus  repeatedly  speaks  of  the  use  of  oil,  especially 
old  oil,  applied  externally  with  friction  in  levers, 
and  in  many  other  cases.  Pliny  says  that  olive-oil 
is  good  to  warm  the  body  and  fortify  it  against 
cold,  and  also  to  cool  heat  in  the  head,  and  for 
various  other  purposes.  It  was  thus  used  pre- 
viously to  taking  cold-baths,  and  also  mixed  with 
water  for  bathing  the  body.  Josephus  mentions 
tiiat  among  the  remedies  employed  in  the  case 
of  Herod,  he  was  put  into  a  sort  of  oil-bath. 
Oil  mixed  with  wine  is  also  mentioned  as  a  re- 
medy used  both  inwardly  and  outwardly  in  the 
disease  with  which  the  soldiers  of  the  army  of 
Aelius  Gallus  were  affected,  a  circumstance  which 
recalls  the  use  of  a  similar  remedy  in  the  parable  ot' 
the  good  Samaritan.  The  prophet  Isaiali  alludes 
to  the  use  of  oil  as  ointment  in  medical  tieatment ; 
and  it  thus  furnished  a  fitting  symbol,  perhaps 
also  an  efficient  remedy,  when  used  by  our  Lord's 
disciples  in  the  miraculous  cures  which  they  were 
enabled  to  perform.  With  a  similar  intention,  no 
doubt,  its  use  was  enjoined  by  St.  James,  and,  as  it 
appears,  practised  by  the  early  Christian  Church  in 
general.  An  instance  of  cure  through  the  medium 
of  oil  is  mentioned  by  Tertullian.  The  medicinal 
use  of  oil  is  also  mentioned  in  the  Mishna,  which 
thus  exhibits  the  Jewish  piactice  of  that  day.  See, 
for  the  various  instances  above  named,  Is.  i.  6 ; 
Mark  vi.  13  ;  Luke  x.  34;  James  v.  14  ;  Josephus, 
Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5  ;  B.  J.  i.  33,  §5  ;  Skabb.  xiii.  4  ; 
Oiho,  Lex.  Mabb.  pp.  11,  526;  Mosheim,  Eccl. 
Hist.  iv.  9  ;  Corn,  a  Lap.  on  James  v. ;  Tertull.  ad 
Scap.  c.  4;   Celsus,  Be  Med.  iL  14,  17;    iii.  6,  9, 

19,  22,  iv.  2;  Hor.  2  Sat.  i.  7;  Pliny,  xv.  4, 
7,  xxiii.  3,  4;  Dio  Cass.  liii.  29;  Lightfoot,  //.  //. 
ii.  304,  444;  S.  Hieronym.  I.  c. 

5.  Oil  for  light.— The  oil  for  "the  light"  was 
expressly  ordered  to  be  olive-oil,  beaten,  i.  e.  made 
from  olives  bruised  in  a  mortar  (Ex.  xxv.  6,  xxvii. 

20,  21,  XXXV.  8;  Lev.  xxiv.  2;  2  Chr.  xiii.  11  ; 
1  Sam.  iii.  3  ;  Zech.  iv.  3,  12  ;  Mishna,  Dcmai,  i.  3  ; 
Menach.  viii.  4).  The  quantity  required  ibr  the 
longest  night  is  said  to  have  been  J  log  (13-79  cubic 
in.  =  "4166  of  a  pint),  Menach.  ix.  3;  Otho,  Lex. 
Jiabb.^.  159.  [Candlestick.]  In  the  same  manner 
the  great  lamps  used  at  the  Feast  of  Tabeinacles 
were  fed  {Succah,  v.  2).  Oil  was  used  in  general 
for  lamps ;  it  is  used  in  Egypt  with  cotton  wicks 
twisted  round  a  piece  of  straw  ;  the  receptacle  being 
a  glass  vessel,  into  which  water  is  first  poured  >  Matt. 
xxv.  1-8;  Luke  xii.  35;  Lane,  Mod.  £'./.  i.  201). 

2  (i  2 


596 


OIL 


6.  Ritual. — a.  Oil  was  poured  on,  or  mixed 
with  the  flour  or  meal  used  in  oflerings. 

i.  The  consecration  offering  of  priests,  Ex.  xxix. 
2,  23;  Lev.  vi.  15,  21. 

ii.  The  offering  of  "  beaten  oil  "  with  flour,  which 
accompanied  the  daily  sacrifice,  Ex.  xxix.  40. 

iii.  The  leper's  purification  offering,  Lev.  xiv. 
10-18,  21,  24,  28,  wliere  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  quantity  of  oil  (1  log,  = '83.3  of  a  pint,)  was  in- 
variable, whilst  the  other  objects  varied  in  quantity 
according  to  the  means  of  the  person  offering.  The 
cleansed  leper  was  also  to  be  touched  with  oil  on 
various  parts  of  his  body.  Lev.  .xiv.  15-18. 

iv.  The  Nazarite,  on  completion  of  his  vow,  was 
to  offer  unleavened  bread  anointed  with  oil,  and 
cakes  of  fine  bread  mingled  with  oil.  Num.  vi.  15. 

V.  After  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle,  the  offer- 
ings of  the  "princes"  included  flour  mingled  with 
oil,  Num.  vii. 

vi.  At  the  consecration  of  the  Levites,  fine  flour 
mingled  with  oil  was  offered,  Num.  viii.  8. 

vii.  Meat-offerings  in  general  were  mingled  or 
anointed  with  oil,  Lev.  vii.  10,  12. 

On  the  other  hand,  certain  offerings  were  to  be 
devoid  of  oil;  the  sin-offering.  Lev.  v.  11,  and  the 
ofiering  of  jealousy,  Num.  v.  15. 

The  principle  on  which  both  the  jiresence  and 
the  absence  of  oil  were  prescribed  is  clearly,  that  as 
oil  is  indicative  of  gladness,  so  its  absence  denoted 
sorrow  or  humiliation  (Is.  Ixi.  3  ;  Joel  ii.  19  ;  Rev. 
vi.  6).  It  is  on  this  principle  that  oil  is  so  often 
used  in  Scripture  as  symbolical  of  nourishment  and 
comfort  (Deut.  xxxii.  13,  xxxiii.  24  ;  Job  xxix.  6  ; 
Ps.  xiv.  7,  cix.  18;  Is.  Ixi.  3). 

6.  Kings,  priests,  and  prophets,  were  anointed 
with  oil  or  ointment.  [Ointment.] 

7.  a.  As  so  important  a  necessary  of  life,  the 
Jew  was  required  to  include  oil  among  his  firsi-fruit 
offerings  (Ex.  xxii.  29,  xxiii.  16;  Num.  xviii.  12  ; 
Dent,  xviii.  4;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  5  ;  Ternm.  xi.  3).  In 
the  Mishna  various  limitations  are  laid  down  ;  but 
they  are  of  little  importance  except  as  illustrating 
the  processes  to  which  the  oiive-beny  was  subjected 
in  the  production  of  oil,  and  the  degrees  of  esti- 
mation in  which  their  results  were  held. 

h.  Tithes  of  oil  were  also  required  (Deut.  xii. 
17  ;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  5  ;  Neh.  x.  37,  39,  xiii.  12  ;  Ez. 
xiv.  14). 

8.  Shields,  if  covered  with  hide,  were  anointed 
with  oil  or  grease  previous  to  use.  [Anoint.] 
Shields  of  metal  were  perhaps  rubbed  over  in  like 
manner  to  polish  them.  See  Thenius  on  2  Sam.  i. 
21  ;  Virg.  Aen.  vii.  025 ;  Plautus,  Mil,  i.  1,  2  ;  and 
Gesen.  p.  825. 

Oil  of  inferior  quality  was  used  in  the  composi- 
tion of  soap. 

Of  the  substances  which  yield  oil,  besides  the 
olive-tree,  myrrh  is  the  only  one  specially  men- 
tioned in  h'cripture.  Oil  of  myrrh  is  the  juice 
which  exudes  from  the  tree  Balsamodeudron  Myrrha, 
but  olive-oil  was  an  ingredient  in  many  compounds 
which  passed  under  the  general  name  of  oil  (Esth. 
li.  12 ;  Celsus,  u.  s.  iii.  10,  18,  19  ;  Pliny,  xii.  26, 
xiii.  1,  2,  XV.  7 ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  23  ; 
Balfour,  Plants  of  Bible,  p.  52  ;  Winer,  Bealic.  s.v. 
Myrrhe.  [Ointment,]  [H.  W.  P.] 


OINTMENT 
OIL-TREE  (JOtJ'  YV.'  ^^^  shemen :  Kvird- 
pKTffos,  |yA.a  Kvirapiffcnva. :  lignum  olivae,  frondes 
ligni  p}dcherrimi).  The  Hebrew  words  occur  in 
Neh.  viii.  15,  1  K.  vi.  23,  and  in  Is.  xii.  19.  In 
this  last  passage  the  A.  V.  has  "  oil -tree  ;"  but  in 
Kings  it  has  "  olive-tree,"  and  in  Nehemiah  "pine- 
branches."  From  the  passage  in  Nehemiah, 
where  the  its  shemen  is  mentioned  as  distinct  from 
the  zaith  or  "  olive-tree,"  wi'iters  have  sought  to 
identify  it  with  the  Elaeagnus  angustifolius,  Linn., 
sometimes  called  "  the  wild  olive-tree,"  or  "  nar- 
row-leaved oleaster,"  the  ^ac^Mfli-tree  of  the 
Arabs.  There  is,  however,  some  great  mistake  in 
tills  matter  ;  for  the  zackum-tree  cannot  be  referred 
to  the  elaeagnus,  the  properties  and  characteristics 
of  which  tree  do  not  accord  with  what  travellers 
have  related  of  the  famed  zackum-tree  of  Palestine. 
We  are  indebted  to  Dr.  Hooker  for  the  correction 
of  this  error.  The  zackum  is  the  Balanites 
Aegyptiaca,  a  well-known  and  abundant  shrub  or 
small    tree  in  the  plain  of  Jord;m.      It  is  found 


a  1.  Shemen.    See  On.  (2). 

2.  ilpli  jxvpov,  ungaentum,  from  Hp"!.  "  anoint." 

3.  JinpIO  or  nnp'10)  ixvpov.unguenlum^^n.^y.-R. 
25).  Gesenius  thinks  it  may  be  the  vessel  in  wliicb  the 
ointment  was  comiiouiided  (p.  l:iC9) 


Bahtnites  Aegyptiaca. 

all  the  way  from  the  penmsula  of  India  and  the 
Ganges  to  Syria,  Abyssinia,  and  the  Niger.  The 
zackum-oil  is  held  in  high  repute  by  the  Arabs  for 
its  medicinal  properties.  It  is  said  to  be  very 
valuable  against  wounds  and  contusions.  Comp. 
Maundrell  [Journ.  p.  86),  Robinson  {Bib.  lies.  i. 
560) :  see  also  Balm.  It  is  quite  probable  that 
the  zackum,  or  Balanites  Aegyptiaca,  is  the  ets 
shemen,  or  oil-tree  of  Scripture.  Celsius  {Hieroh. 
i.  309)  understood  by  the  Hebrew  words  any  "  fat 
or  resinous  tree;"  but  the  passage  in  Nehemiah 
clearly  points  to  some  specific  tree.  [W.  H.] 

OINTMENT."     Besides  the  fact  that  olive-oil 

4.  ^l^t^'D>  XP''<'''?>  XP^o't'-"-,  wyuentum,  sometimes 
ii]  A.  V.  "oil." 

.5.  D''p-1"iP:  in  A.  V.  "things  for  purifying"  (Esth. 
ii,  12);    LX.K.  <rjui7)y|u.aTa ;  by  Targum  rendered  "per- 


OINTMIIXT 


ODTTMENT 


597 


IS  hsdf  a  conuDoa  iBgr«dkat  in  ointments,  the  par- 1  oinfment  (Ex.  xxx.  2-3  .  It  vas  to  be  used  £ae 
poses  to  which  wntmoit,  as  mentioned  in  SaipUue,  j  anointing — 1.  the  taberoack  itself;  2.  the  table 
is  applied  ^ree  in  so  manr  respects  with  those  t  and  its  T«a>«ls ;  3.  the  camtliestick  and  its  iumitiire ; 
whidi  belong  to  oil,  that  we  need  not  be  smptised  t  4.  the  attar  of  incesse ;  5.  the  altar  of  bmnt- 
diat  the  same  words,  e^pedallj  1  and  4,  shodd  I  ofiering  and  its  resseis;  6.  the  larer  asd  its  foot ; 
be  applied  to  both  oil  and  ointment.  The  foUowii^  {  7.  Aaron  and  his  sons.  Strict  pndiibitiflo  was 
list  will  point  out  the  SdiptiiialiisK  of  (HDtment: — |  isoed  against  osing  this  m^ott  for  any  secnhr 
1.  Cosmetic. — ^The  Greek  and  Roman  ptactice  v£\  purpose,  or  tm  the  peison  oi  a  fbrdgner,  and  against 
anmnting  the  head  and  dotbes  on  festive  ocsaaons  \  'maiaitiag  it  in  anj  way  wfaatsoerer  ^Elx.  xxx. 
prevailed  also  amoi^  the  Egyptians,  and  af^wais  to  I  32,  33). 

bare  bad  place  amoae  the  Jews  (Roth  iiL  3 ;  EoeL  \  These  ingredients,  exdnsive  of  the  oil,  most  bare 
Tii.  1,  ix.  8 ;  Pror.  xxrii.  9, 16 :  Cant.  i.  3,  iv.  10 ;  amoonted  in  weig^  to  about  47  lbs.  8  oz.  Xow 
Am.  Ti.  6 ;  Ps.  sir.  7  ;  Is.  Irii.  9 ;  Ifatt.  xstL  7  ;  <^Te-aQ  wc^jiIk  at  the  rate  of  10  lbs.  to  the  gallon. 
Luke  \ii.  46 ;  Rer.  xviii.  13 :  Toma,  riiL  1 ;  Shalfo.  The  wea^t  ther^vire  of  the  oil  in  the  mixtnre 
is.  4 :  Plato,  Symp.  i.  6,  p.  123 ;  see  authorities  in  '  woold  be  12  lbs.  8  oz.  Engjidi.  A  qnestioD  arises, 
Ho&nann,Zer.art.  '^  Ungeiidi  ritas").  Oil  of  mynli,  \  in  what  £ana  were  the  other  ii^redients,  and  what 


ibr  like  porposes,  is  mestioned  Esth.  iL  12.  Stiabo 
says  that  the  inhabitants  of  Mesopotamia  use  oil  of 
."^aisun^  and  the  Egyptians  castor-oil  QkikiX  both 
•■ir  burning,  and  the  Iow«-  d^ses  tor  anontii^  the 
tiody.  Cbaidin  and  otho-  travellers  conjiimi  thb 
^tatonent  as  re^ids  the  Persians,  and  show  that 
'.bey  made  little  use  of  (dire-ail,  but  osed  ether 
;ils,  and  amoc^  them  ml  of  sesame'  and  castor-oiL 
Chardin  also  dsoribes  the  Indian  and  Peraan  cos- 
tom  of  presenting  perfumes  to  guests  at  banquets 
(Stiabo,  xri.  746,  iriL  824 ;  Chardin,  Vcy.  ir.  43, 
84,  86 ;  3Iarco  Polo,  Trxvc.  (Early  Tivc.%  p.  85; 


degree  cf  ailidity  did  the  whcJe  attain  ?  llynh, 
"  pore "  (deror),'  free-flowing  ^Ges.  355),  would 
seem  to  imply  the  juice  which  flows  from  the  tree 
at  the  fiist  inctaon,  perhaps  the  ~  odorato  sudantia 
l^;no  faakama"  (Geory.  iL  118),  which  Pliny  says 
is  called  "  stadte^'  and  is  the  b^  (xii.  15 ;  Dias- 
coride^  L  73,  74,  quoted  by  Cekos,  i.  159 ;  and 
Knobd  on  Exodus,  /.  c.;,. 

This  juice,  which  at  its  first  flow  is  soft  and  oily, 
becomes  harder  on  expoeore  to  the  air.  Accndii^ 
to  31aimoiude%  Mask  (not  Bezaled^,  havii^  reduced 
the  solid  ii^ie£aits  to  powder,  steeped  than  in 


Olearios,  Trac.  p.  3<)5).  Egyptian  paintings  repre-  f  wato*  till  all  the  aromatic  qualities  wexe  diavm 
sent  servants  anointing  guests  on  their  arriral  at  torth.  He  then  poured  in  the  oil,  and  baled  the 
their  oitertainer's  house,  and  alabaster  tssss  exist  I  wfade  till  the  water  was  eraporated.  The  residuum 
which  retain  the  traces  «f  the  tHutmeDt  which  they  I  thus  obtained  was  presared  in  a  vessd  for  use 
were  used  to  «'«ntain  Athenaeos  qieaks  of  the  (Otho,  Lez.  BdHb.  '•  Oleum ").  This  account  is 
extran^BKe  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  the  article '  perhaps  &ronred  by  the  expiessioD  "  powders  of 
of  otatmenfs  for  guests,  as  weU  as  of  ointmeats  of  the  msthant,"  in  reference  to  mynh  ((^t.  iiL  6 ; 
TarioGs  kinds  (\\'ilkinsoo,  Aiic.  Eg.  i.  78,  pL  89, :  Keil,  Arck.  Btbr.  p.  173).  Aiiother  theoay  aip- 
i.  157 ;  Athenaieas,  x.  53,  xr.  41>.  [Ai.ab;AST£B;  fosfs  aD  the  it^iedieots  to  have  been  in  the  ibiin 
AxoEST.J  t  of  oil  or  ointment,  azid  the  meKorement  by  we^t 

2.  Ftaterad. — Ointments  as  well  as  ml  woe  j|  of  all,  except  the  <^,  seems  to  im^y  that  they  were 
(Bed  to  anoint  dead  bodi«  and  the  dothe  in  which  :  in  some  solid  form,  but  whetho-  in  an  unctaoos 
they  weare  wrapped.  Our  Lord  thus  qnke  of  Kis  state  m-  in  that  of  powda-  cannot  be  ascertained, 
own  body  being  anmnted  by  anticipation  {JMatt.  I  A  process  of  making  ointment,  cmisistii^,  in  part  at 
xxvi.  12  ;  )Iaik  xir.  3,  8 ;  Luke  Triii  56;  Jdm  least,  in  boilii^,  is  alluded  to  in  Job  xJL  31.  The 
xii.  3,  7,  xix.  40 ;  see  also  Plutarch,  Conaol.  p.  611, '  ointment  widi  wliidi  Aaron  was  anmnted  is  said  to 
riii.  413,  ed.  Bdske).     [Bubial.]  '  have  flowed  down  over  his  garmeits  (Ex.  xxix.  21 ; 

3.  MeUcmaL — (Mntmait  formed  an  impmtant    Ps.  cxxxiii.  2:  **  i^irts,"  in  the  latter  passage,  is 
feature  in  ancient  medical  treatment  (Celsos,  De  i  litoally  "  month,"  i.  e.  the  <^)enii^  of  the  robe  at 
Med.  iiL  19,  t.  27 ;  Plin.  xxiv.  10,  ttjt    3,  8,    the  neck;  Ex.  nviii.  32). 
9).    The  prophet  Isaiah  alludes  to  this  in  a  figure  |      The  charge  «rf'  preerrii^  the  anotntii^  oil,  as 


of  speech;  and  our  Lord,  in  his  cure  of  a  Uind  man, 
adapted  as  the  outward  sign  one  which  rcpr^ented 
the  usual  method  <^  cure.  The  moitian  of  balm 
of  Gilead  and  of  eye-salve  {coUyrwm)  point  to  the 
same  method  (Is.  L  6 ;  John  ix.  6 ;  Jer.  viii.  22, 


well  as  the  o3  fiir  the  l^ht,  was  given  to  Eleazar 
(Num.  ir.  16).  The  quantity  of  mntmait  made 
in  the  fiist  instance  ;j«!tmb  to  imply  that  it  was 
intended  to  last  a  loi^  time.  The  lUbbinical  writets 
say  that  it  lasted  900  years,  ue.iSSl  the  captivity. 


xItL  11,  li.  8 ;  Rev.  iiL  18 ;  Tob.  ri.  8,  xi.  8, 13 ; ;  because  it  was  said,  "  ye  shall  not  make  any  like 
TertulL  De  IdoMatr.  11).  |  it "  (Ex.  xxx.  32; :  bat  it  seems  dear  from  1  Chr. 

4.  Ribfud. — ^Besides  the  oil  used  in  many  ceie-  [  ix.  30  that  the  ointment  was  leoewed  from  time  to 
mooial  observanoes,  a  qtedal  ointment  was  appointed    time  {Gteriitk,  i.  1). 


to  be  used  in  conseoation  (EIx.  ttt  23.  33,  •rriT  7, 
xxxviL  29,  xl.  9, 15  >.  It  was  first  compounded  by 
Bezaieel,  and  its  ii^redieats  and  proportions  are 
pfBcisdy  fipwififd ;  viz.  of  pure  myrrh  and  cassia 
500  shekels  (250  ounces)  eadi;  sweet  dnnamco 
and  sweet  calamas  250  shekels  r  125  ounces',  each ; 
and  of  olive-oil  1  bin  (about  5  quarts,  :>3'>'y6  cubic 
inches).  These  were  to  be  compounded  accordii^ 
to  the  ait  of  the  ^wtiiecary  ^  into  an  oil  of  holy 


p.  'il'f). 

In  X.  T.  iiri 
dering  for  ^v^. , 


•  rab,"  -  el««iise  "  (Ges> 
■  "  IS  the  A.  V.  ren- 


Kings,  and  also  in  some  cases  pn^ibets,  were, 
as  well  as  priests,  anointed  with  oil  or  ointment ; 
bat  Sai{Huie  otAj  mentimts  the  iat\  as  actnaUy 
taking  place  in  the  cases  of  Saul,  David.  SokMaoo, 
Jehu,  and  Joash.  The  Rabbins  say  that  ifaul,  Jehu, 
and  Joash  were  only  anmnted  with  common  oil, 
whilst  fix-  IXavid  and  Sidomon  the  holy  ml  was 
used  (1  Sam.  x.  1,  ivL  1,  13 ;  1  K.  L  39 ;  2  K. 
ix.  1,  3,  6,  xi.  12;  Godwyn,  Jfas«  amd  Aarxm, 


^  I^T^  papc^,  umgmeMbaimt,  pigmemtarimt. 


598 


OLAMUS 


i.  4 ;  Carpzov,  Apparatus,  p.  56,  57  ;  Hofmann, 
Lex.  ai't.  "  Ungeudi  ritus";  S.  Hieron.  Com.  in  Osee, 
iii.  134).  It  is  evident  that  the  sacred  oil  was  used 
in  the  case  of  .Solomon,  and  probably  in  the  cases 
of  Saul  and  David.  In  the  case  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  x. 
1)  the  article  is  used,  "  the  oil,"  iis  it  is  also  in  the 
case  of  Jehu  (2  K.  ix.  1 )  ;  and  it  seems  unlikely 
that  the  anointing  of  Joash,  performed  by  the  high- 
priest,  should  have  been  defective  in  this  respect. 

A  person  whose  business  it  was  to  compound 
ointments  in  general  was  called  an  "  apothecary  " 
(Neh.  iii.  8''";  Eccl.  x.  1;  Ecclus.  xlix.  1).  The 
work  was  sometimes  can'ied  on  by  women  "  confec- 
tionaries"  (1  Sam.  viii.  1:3). 

In  the  Christian  Church  the  ancient  usage  of 
anointing  the  bodies  of  the  dead  was  long  retained^ 
as  is  noticed  by  S.  Chrysostom  and  other  writei-s 
quoted  by  Suicer,  s.  v.  e\aiov.  The  ceremony  of 
Chrism  or  anointing  was  also  added  to  baptism. 
See  authorities  quoted  by  Suicer,  /.  c,  and  under 
BdirTifffxa  and  Xplfffia.  [H.  W.  P.] 

OLA'MUS  ('nAa/iJs:  Olamus).  Meshullam 
of  the  sons  of  Bani  (1  Esd.  ix.  30;  comp.  Ezr. 
X.  29). 

OLD  TESTAMENT.  This  article  will  treat 
(A)  of  the  Te.xt  and  (B)  of  the  Interpretation  of  the 
Old  Testament.  Some  observations  will  be  sub- 
joined respecting  (C)  the  Quotations  fiom  the  Old 
Testament  in  the  New. 

A. — Text  of  the  Old  Testament. 

1.  History  of  the  Text. — A  histoiy  of  the  text 
of  the  0.  T.  should  properly  commence  from  the 
date  of  the  completion  of  the  Canon ;  fiom  which 
time  we  must  assume  that  no  additions  to  any  part 
of  it  could  be  legitimately  made,  the  sole  object  of 
those  who  transmitted  and  watched  over  it  being 
thenceforth  to  preseiTe  that  which  was  already 
written.  Of  the  care,  however,  with  which  the  text 
was  transmitted  we  have  to  judge,  almost  entirely, 
by  the  phenomena  which  it  and  the  versions  derived 
from  it  now  present,  rather  than  by  any  recorded 
facts  respecting  it.  That  much  scrupulous  pains 
would  be  bestowed  by  Ezra,  the  "  leady  scribe  in  the 
law  of  Moses,"  and  by  his  companions,  on  the  correct 
transmission  of  those  Scriptures  which  passed  through 
their  hands  is  indeed  antecedently  probable.  The 
best  evidence  of  such  pains,  and  of  the  lespect  with 
which  the  text  of  the  sacred  books  was  consequently 
regarded,  is  to  be  found  in  the  jealous  accuiacy 
with  which  the  discrepancies  of  various  parallel  pas- 
sages have  been  preserved,  notwithstanding  the 
temptation  which  must  have  existed  to  assimilate 
them  to  each  other.  Sucii  is  the  case  with  Psalms 
xiv.  and  liii.,  two  recensions  of  tlie  same  hymn, 
both  proceeding  from  David,  where  the  reasons  of 
the  several  variations  may  on  examination  be  traced. 
Such  also  is  the  case  with  Psalm  xviii.  and  2  Sam. 
xxii.,  where  the  variations  between  the  two  copies 
are  more  than  sixty  in  number,  excluding  those 
which  merely  consist  in  the  use  or  ab^ence  of  the 
matres  lectionis ;  and  where  therefore,  even  though 
the  design  of  all  the  variations  be  not  perceived,  the 
hypothesis  of  their  having  originated  through  acci- 
dent would  imply  a  carelessness  in  transcribing  far 
beyond  what  even  the  rashest  critics  have  in  other 
passages  contemplated. 

As  regards  the  form  in  which  the  sacred  writings 
were  preserved,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 

d  np"!'  pigmevtarius. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

text  was  ordinariljr  written  on  skins,  rolled  up  into 
volumes,  like  the  modern  synagogue-rolls  (Ps.  xl. 
7  ;  Jer.  xxxvi.  14  ;  Zech.  v.  1 ;  Ez.  ii.  9).  Jo- 
sephus  relates  that  the  copy  sent  from  Jerusalem  as 
a  present  to  Ptolemy  in  Egypt,  was  written  with 
letters  of  gold  on  skins  of  admirable  thinness,  the 
joins  of  which  could  not  be  detected  (Ant.  xii. 
2,  §11). 

The  original  character  in  which  the  text  was  ex- 
pressed is  that  still  preserved  to  us,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  foui-  letters,  on  the  Maccabean  coins,  and 
having  a  strong  affinity  to  the  Samaritan  character, 
which  seems  to  have  been  treated  by  the  later  Jews 
as  identical  with  it,  being  styled  by  them  3nD 
*"l3y.  At  what  date  this  was  exchanged  for  the 
present  Aramaic  or  square  character,  nmti'X  303, 
or  y2"lD  3n3,  is  still  as  undetermined  as  it  is  at 
what  date  the  use  of  the  Aramaic  language  in  Pa- 
lestine superseded  that  of  the  Hebrew.  The  old 
Jewish  tradition,  repeated  by  Origen  and  Jerome, 
ascribed  the  change  to  Ezra.  But  the  Maccabean 
coins  supply  us  with  a  date  at  which  the  older  cha- 
racter was  still  in  use  ;  and  even  though  we  should 
allow  that  both  may  have  been  simultaneously  em- 
ployed, the  one  for  sacred,  the  other  for  more 
ordinary  purposes,  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  they 
existed  side  by  side  for  any  lengthened  period. 
Hassencamp  and  Gesenius  are  at  variance  as  to 
whether  such  eiTors  of  the  Septuagint  as  arose  from 
confusion  of  letters  in  the  original  text,  are  in  favour 
of  the  Greek  interpreters  having  had  the  older  or 
the  more  modern  character  before  them.  It  is 
sufficiently  clear  that  the  use  of  the  square  writing 
must  have  been  well  established  before  the  time  of 
those  authors  who  attributed  the  introduction  of  it 
to  Ezra.  Nor  could  the  allusion  in  Matt.  v.  18  to 
the  yod  as  the  smallest  letter  have  well  been  made, 
except  in  reference  to  the  more  modern  character. 
We  forbear  here  all  investigation  of  the  manner  in 
which  this  chaiacter  was  formed,  or  of  the  precise 
locality  whence  it  was  derived.  Whatever  modifi- 
cation it  may  have  undergone  in  the  hands  of  the 
Jewish  scribes,  it  was  in  the  fiist  instance  introduced 
from  abroad  ;  and  this  its  name  n^llK'K  DHD,  i.  e. 
Assyrian  writing,  implies,  though  it  may  geogra- 
phically require  to  be  interpreted  with  some  lati- 
tude. (The  suggestion  of  Hupfeld  that  nniK'K 
may  be  an  appellative,  denoting  not  Assyrian,  but 
Jinn,  writing,  is  improbable.)  On  the  whole  we 
may  best  suppose,  with  Ewald,  that  the  adoption 
of  the  new  character  was  coeval  with  the  rise  of  the 
earliest  Targums,  which  would  naturally  be  written 
in  the  Aramaic  style.  It  would  thus  be  shortly  an- 
terior to  the  Christian  era ;  and  with  this  date  all 
the  evidence  would  well  accord.  It  may  be  right, 
however,  to  mention,  that  while  of  late  years  Keil 
has  striven  anew  to  throw  back  the  introduction  of 
the  square  writing  towards  the  time  of  Ezra,  Bleek, 
also,  though  not  generally  imbued  with  the  con- 
servative views  of  Keil,  maintains  not  only  that  the 
use  of  the  square  writing  for  the  sacred  books  owed 
its  origin  to  Ezra,  but  also  that  the  later  books  of 
the  0.  T.  were  never  expressed  in  any  other  cha- 
racter. 

No  vowel  points  were  attached  to  the  text :  they 
were,  through  all  the  early  period  of  its  history, 
entirely  unknown.  Convenience  had  indeed,  at  the 
time  when  the  later  books  of  the  0.  T.  were 
written,  suggested  a  larger  use  of  the  matres  lec- 
tionis:  it  is  thus  that  in  those  books  we  find  them 
introduced  into  many  words  that  hail  been  pre- 
viously spelt  without  them;  K'^1p  takes  the  place 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  CJ'Tp,  n^lT  of  TIT.  An  elaborate  endeavour  has 
been  recently  made  by  Dr.  Wall  to  prove  that,  up 
to  the  early  pait  of  the  second  century  of  the  Chris- 
tian era,  the  Hebrew  text  was  tree  fioin  vowel 
letters  as  well  as  from  vowels.  His  theoiy  is  that 
they  were  then  intei  polatei]  by  the  Jews,  with  a 
view  of  altering  rather  than  of  perpetuating  the 
foimer  pi'onunciation  of  the  words:  their  objpct 
being,  according  to  him,  to  pervert  thereby  the 
sense  of  the  prophecies,  as  also  to  throw  discredit 
on  the  Septuagint,  and  thereby  weaken  or  evade  the 
force  of  aiguments  drawn  from  that  version  in  sup- 
port of  Christian  doctrines.  Improbable  as  such  a 
theory  is,  it  is  yet  more  astonishing  that  its  author 
should  never  have  been  deterred  from  piosecuting 
it  by  the  palpable  objections  to  it  which  he  himself 
discerned.  Who  can  believe,  with  him,  that  the 
Samaritans,  notwithstanding  the  mutual  hatred  ex- 
isting between  them  and  the  Jews,  borrowed  the 
interpolation  from  the  Jews,  and  conspired  with 
them  to  keep  it  a  secret  ?  Or  that  among  other 
words  to  which  by  this  interpolation  the  Jews  ven- 
tured to  impart  a  new  sound,  were  some  of  the  best 
known  proper  names ;  e.g.  Isaiah,  Jeremiah?  Or 
that  it  was  merely  through  a  blunder  that  in  Gen. 
i.  24,  the  substantive  n^H  in  its  construct  state 
acquired  its  final  1,  when  the  same  anomaly  occurs 
in  no  fewer  than  tlu'ee  passages  of  the  I'salms  ?  Such 
views  and  arguments  refute  themselves ;  and  while 
the  high  position  occupied  by  its  author  commends 
the  book  to  notice,  it  can  only  be  lamented  that  in- 
dustry, learning,  and  ingenuity  should  have  been  so 
misspent  in  the  vain  attempt  to  give  substance  to  a 
shadow. 

There  is  reason  to  think  that  in  the  text  of  the 
0.  T.,  as  originally  wiitten,  the  words  were  gene- 
rally, though  not  uniformly,  divided.  Of  the  Plioe- 
nician  inscriptions,  though  the  majority  proceed 
continuously,  some  have  a  point  after  every  word, 
except  when  the  words  are  closely  connected.  The 
same  point  is  used  in  the  Samaritan  manuscripts ; 
and  it  is  observed  by  Gesenius  (a  high  authority  in 
respect  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch)  that  the  Sa- 
maritan and  Jewish  divisions  of  the  words  generally 
coincide.  The  discrepancy  between  the  Hebrew 
text  and  the  Septuagint  in  this  respect  is  suffi- 
ciently explained  by  the  circumstance  that  the 
Jewish  scribes  did  not  separate  the  words  which 
were  closely  connected :  it  is  in  the  case  of  such  that 
the  discrepancy  is  almost  exclusively  found.  The 
practice  of  separating  words  by  spaces  instead  of 
points  probably  came  in  with  the  square  writing. 
In  the  synagogue-rolls,  which  are  written  in  con- 
formity with  the  ancient  rules,  the  words  are  regu- 
larly divided  from  each  other ;  and  indeed  the 
Talmud  minutely  prescribes  the  space  which  should 
be  left  (Gesenius,  Gesch.  der  Heb.  Sprache,  §45). 

Of  ancient  date,  probably,  are  also  the  separations 
between  the  lesser  Farshioth  or  sections  ;  whether 
made,  in  the  case  of  the  nioie  important  divisions. 
by  the  commencement  of  a  new  lino,  or,  in  the  case 
of  the  less  inipoit;mt,  by  a  blank  space  within  the 
line  [Bible].  The  use  of  the  letters  Q  and  D. 
however,  to  indicate  these  divisions  is  of  morn  icrcMit 
origin:  tiiey  are  not  emjjloyed  in  the  synagogue- 
rolls.  These  lesser  and  earlier  Paishioth,  ot'  which 
there  are  in  the  Pentateuch  669,  must  not  be  con- 
founded with  the  greater  and  later  Parshioth,  or 
Sabbath-lessons,  which  are  first  mentioned  in  the 
Masorah.  The  name  Parshioth  is  in  the  Misliiia 
(^Meqill.  iv.  4 )  applied  to  the  divisions  in  the  Pro- 
phets as  weil  as  to  those  in  the  Pentateuch  :  e.g.  to 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


599 


Isaiah  lii.  3-5  (to  the  gieater  Parshioth  here  corre- 
spond the  Ha]jlitaroth).  Even  the  separate  psalms 
are  in  the  ^Gemara  called  also  Paishioth  {Berach. 
Bah.  fol.  9,"  2;  10,  1).  Some  indication  of  the  an- 
tiquity of  the  divisions  between  the  Parshioth  may 
be  tbund  in  the  circumstance  that  the  Gemara  holds 
them  as  old  as  Jloses  {Beruch.  fol.  12,  2).  Of  their 
real  age  we  know  but  little.  Hupfeld  has  found 
that  they  do  not  always  coincide  with  the  capitula 
of  Jerome.  That  they  are  nevertheless  more  ancient 
than  his  time  is  shown  by  the  mention  of  them  in 
the  Mishna.  In  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  con- 
trary, their  disaccordance  with  the  Kazin  of  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  which  aie  966  in  number, 
seems  to  indicate  that  thev  had  a  historical  origin; 
and  it  is  possible  that  they  also  may  date  from  the 
period  when  the  0.  T.  was  first  transcribed  in  the 
square  character.  Our  present  chapters,  it  may  be 
remarked,  spring  from  a  Christian  source. 

Of  any  logical  division,  in  the  written  text,  ot 
the  prose  of  the  0.  T.  into  Pesukim,  or  verses,  we 
find  in  the  Talmud  no  mention  ;  and  even  in  the 
existing  synagogue-rolls  such  division  is  generally 
ignored.  While,  therefore,  we  may  admit  the  early 
currency  of  such  a  logical  division,  we  must  assume, 
with  Hupfeld,  that  it  was  merely  a  traditional  ob- 
servance. It  has  indeed,  on  the  other  hand,  been 
argued  that  such  numerations  of  the  verses  as  the 
Talmud  records  could  not  well  have  been  made  un- 
le.ss  the  written  text  distinguished  them.  But  to 
this  we  may  reply  by  observing  that  the  verses  of 
the  numbering  of  which  the  Talmud  speaks,  could 
not  have  thoroughly  accorded  with  those  of  modern 
times.  Of  the  former  there  were  in  the  Pentateuch 
5888  (or  as  some  read,  8888);  it  now  contains  but 
5845 :  the  middle  verse  was  computed  to  be  Lev. 
xiii.  33;  with  our  present  verses  it  is  Lev,  viii.  5. 
Had  the  verses  been  distinguished  in  the  written 
text  at  the  time  that  the  Talmudic  enumeration  was 
made,  it  is  not  easily  exphcable  how  they  should 
since  have  been  so  much  altered:  whereas,  were  the 
logical  division  merely  traditional,  tradition  would 
naturally  pieserve  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of 
the  places  of  the  various  logical  breaks  than  of  their 
relative  importance,  and  thus,  without  any  disturb- 
ance of  the  syntax,  the  number  of  computed  verses 
would  be  liable  to  continual  increase  or  diminution, 
by  separation  or  aggi-egation.  An  luicertaiuty  in 
the  versual  division  is  even  now  indicated  by  the 
double  accentuation  and  consecjuent  vocalization  ot 
the  decalogue.  In  the  poetical  books,  the  Pesukim 
mentioned  in  the  Talmud  correspond  to  the  poetical 
lines,  not  to  our  modern  verses ;  and  it  is  pi'obable 
both  from  some  expressions  of  .Jerome,  and  from  the 
analogous  practice  of  other  nations,  that  the  jioetical 
te.\t  w.as  written  stichometrically.  It  is  still  so 
written  in  our  manuscripts  in  the  poetical  pieces  in 
the  Pentateuch  and  historical  books;  and  even,  gene- 
rally, in  our  oldest  manuscripts.  Its  partial  discon- 
tinuwice  may  be  due,  first  to  the  desire  to  save  space, 
and  secondly  to  the  diminution  of  the  necessity  for 
it  by  the  introduction  of  the  accents. 

Of  the  documents  which  directly  bear  upon  the 
history  of  the  Hebi-ew  text,  the  two  earliest  are  the 
Samaiitan  copy  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  (Jreek 
translation  of  the  LXX.  For  the  latter  we  must 
refer  to  the  article  Septuagint  :  of  the  former 
some  account  will  here  be  necessary.  Mention  had 
been  made  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  inci- 
dentally, of  .some  of  its  peculiarities,  by  several  of 
the  Christian  Fathers.  Eusebius  had  taken  note  of 
its  primeval  chronology:  Jerome  had  recoi-ded  its 


600 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


insertions  in  Gen.  iv.  6  ;  Deut.  xx-vii.  26  :  Proco- 
pius  of  Gaza  had  referred  to  its  containing,  at  Num. 
X.  10  and  Ex.  xviii.  24,  the  words  afterwards  found 
in  Deut.  i.  6,  v.  9  :  it  had  also  been  spolcen  of  by 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Diodore,  and  others.  When 
in  the  17th  century  Samaritan  MSS.  were  im- 
ported into  Europe  by  P.  delia  Valle  and  Abp. 
Ussher,  according  with  the  representations  that  the 
Fathers  Iiad  given,  the  veiy  numerous  variations 
between  the  Samaritan  and  the  Jewish  Pentateuch 
could  not  but  excite  attention  ;  and  it  became  thence- 
tbrward  a  matter  of  controvei'sy  among  scholars 
which  copy  was  entitled  to  the  greater  respect. 
Tlie  co-ordinate  authority  of  both  was  advocated  by 
Kennicott,  who  however,  in  order  to  uphold  the 
credit  of  the  former,  defended,  in  the  celebrated 
passage  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  the  Samaritan  reading  Ge- 
rizim  against  the  Jewish  reading  Ebal,  charging 
corruption  of  the  text  upon  the  Jews  rather  than 
the  Samaritans.  A  full  examination  of  the  readings 
of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  at  length  made 
by  Gesenius  in  1815.  His  conclusions,  fatal  to  its 
credit,  have  obtained  general  acceptance ;  nor  have 
they  been  substantially  shaken  by  the  attack  of  a 
writer  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Lit.  for  July  1853  ; 
whose  leading  principle,  that  transcribers  are  more 
liable  to  omit  than  to  add,  is  fundamentally  un- 
sound. Gesenius  ranges  the  Samaritan  variations 
from  the  Jewish  Pentateuch  under  the  following 
heads  : — grammatical  coriections  ;  glosses  leceived 
into  the  text ;  conjectural  emendations  of  difficult 
passages ;  corrections  derived  from  parallel  pas- 
sages ;  larger  interpolations  derived  fi-om  parallel 
passages ;  alterations  made  to  remove  what  was 
offensive  to  Samaritan  feelings ;  alterations  to  suit 
the  Samaritan  idiom ;  and  alterations  to  suit  the 
Samaritan  theology,  interpretation,  and  worship. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  even  the  grains  of  gold 
which  he  thought  to  find  amongst  the  rubbish  really 
exist;  and  the  Samaritan  readings  which  he  was 
disposed  to  prefer  in  Gen.  iv.  18,  xiv.  14,  xxii.  13, 
xlix.  14,  will  hardly  approve  themselves  generally. 
The  really  remarkable  feature  respecting  the  Sama- 
ritan Pentateuch  is  its  accordance  with  the  Sep- 
tuagint  in  more  than  a  thousand  places  where  it 
differs  from  the  Jewish ;  being  mostly  those  where 
either  a  gloss  has  been  inti-oduced  into  the  text,  or 
a  difficult  reading  corrected  for  an  easier,  or  the 
prefix  1  added  or  removed.  On  the  other  hand 
there  are  about  as  many  places  where  the  Septuagint 
supports  the  Jewish  text  against  the  Samaritan  ; 
and  some  in  which  the  Septuagint  stands  alone,  the 
Samaritan  either  agreeing  or  disagi-eeing  with  the 
Jewish.  Gesenius  and  others  suppose  that  the  Sep- 
tuagint and  the  Samaritan  text  were  derived  from 
.Jewish  MSS.  of  a  different  recension  to  that  which 
afterwards  obtained  public  authority  in  Palestine, 
and  that  the  Samaritan  copy  was  itself  subsequently 
further  altered  and  inteipolated.  It  is  at  least 
equally  probable  that  both  the  Greek  translators 
and  the  Samaritan  copyists  made  use  of  MSS.  with 
a  large  number  of  traditional  marginal  glosses  and 
.  annotations,  which  they  embodied  in  their  own 
texts  at  discretion.  As  to  the  origin  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Pentateuch  among  the  Samaritans,  it 
was  probably  introduced  thither  when  Manasseh 
and  other  Jewish  priests  passed  over  into  Samaria, 
and  contemporarily  with  the  building  of  the  temple 
on  Blount  Gerizim.  Hengstenberg  contends  for  this 
on  the  ground  that  the  Samaritans  were  entirely  of 
heathen  origin,  and  that  their  subsequent  religion 
was  derived  from  Judea  [Genuineness  of  Pent.  vol. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

i.) :  the  same  conclusion  is  reached  also,  though  on 
veiy  different  grounds,  by  Gesenius,  De  Wette,  and 
Bleek.  To  the  hypothesis  that  the  Pentateuch  was 
perpetuated  to  the  Samaritans  from  the  Israelites  of 
the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes,  and  still  more  to 
another,  that  being  of  Israelitish  origin  they  tiret  be- 
came acquainted  with  it  under  Josiah,  there  is  the 
objection,  besides  what  has  been  urged  by  Heng- 
stenberg, that  no  trace  appears  of  the  reception 
among  them  of  the  writings  of  the  Israelitish  pro- 
phets Hosea,  Amos,  and  Jonah,  which  yet  Josiah 
would  so  naturally  circulate  with  the  Pentateuch, 
in  order  to  bring  the  remnant  of  his  northern  coun- 
trj'men  to  repentance. 

While  such  freedom  in  dealing  with  the  sacred 
text  was  exercised  at  Samaria  and  Alexandria,  there 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  in  Palestine  the  text 
was  both  carefully  preserved  and  scrupulously  re- 
spected. The  boast  of  Josephus  (c.  Apion.  i.  8), 
that  through  all  the  ages  that  had  passed  none  had 
ventured  to  add  to  or  to  take  away  from,  or  to  trans- 
pose aught  of  the  sacred  writings,  may  well  represent 
the  spirit  in  which  in  his  day  his  own  countrymen 
acted.  In  the  translations  of  Aquila  and  the  other 
Greek  interpreters,  the  fragments  of  whose  works 
remain  to  us  in  the  Hexapla,  we  have  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  a  text  differing  but  little  from  om- 
own :  so  also  in  the  Targimis  of  Onkelos  and 
Jonathan.  A  few  centuries  later  we  have,  in  the 
Hexapla,  additional  evidence  to  the  same  effect  in 
Origen's  transcriptions  of  the  Hebrew  text.  And 
yet  more  important  are  the  proofs  of  the  firm  es- 
tablishment of  the  text,  and  of  its  substantial  iden- 
tity with  our  own,  supplied  by  the  translation  of 
Jerome,  who  was  instructed  by  the  Palestinian 
Jews,  and  mainly  relied  upon  their  authority  for 
acquaintance  not  only  with  the  text  itself,  but  also 
with  the  traditional  unwritten  vocalization  of  it. 

This  brings  us  to  the  middle  of  the  Talmudic 
period.  The  learning  of  the  schools  which  had 
been  formed  in  Jerusalem  about  the  time  of  our 
Saviour  by  Hillel  and  Shammai  was  preserved,  after 
the  destruction  of  the  city,  in  the  academies  of 
Jabneh,  Sepphoris,  Cesarea,  and  Tiberias.  The 
great  pillar  of  the  Jewish  literature  of  this  period 
was  R.  Judah  the  Holy,  to  whom  is  ascribed  the 
compilation  of  the  Mishna,  the  text  of  the  Talmud, 
and  who  died  about  A.D.  220.  After  his  death 
there  grew  into  repute  the  Jewish  academies  of 
Sura,  Nahardea,  and  Pum-Beditha,  on  the  Euphrates. 
The  twofold  Gemara,  or  commentary,  was  now  ap- 
pended to  the  Mishna,  thus  completing  the  Talmud. 
The  Jerusalem  Gemara  pioceeded  from  the  Jews  of 
Tiberias,  piobably  towards  the  end  of  the  4th  cen- 
tury :  the  Babylonian  from  the  academies  on  the 
Euphi-ates,  perhaps  by  the  end  of  the  5th.  That 
along  with  the  task  of  collecting  and  commenting 
on  their  various  legal  traditions,  the  Jews  of  these 
several  academies  would  occupy  themselves  with 
the  text  of  the  sacred  writings  is  in  every  way  pro- 
bable ;  and  is  indeed  shown  by  various  Talmudic 
notices. 

In  these  the  fii'st  thing  to  be  remarked  is  the  entire 
absence  of  allusion  to  any  such  glosses  of  interpieta- 
tion  as  those  which,  from  having  been  previously  noted 
on  the  margins  of  MSS.,  had  probably  been  loosely 
incorporated  into  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  and  the 
Septuagint.  Interpretation,  pioperly  so  called,  had 
become  the  province  of  the  Targumist,  not  of  the 
transcriber  ;  and  the  result  of  the  entire  divoi'ce  of 
the  task  of  interpietetion  from  that  of  transcrip- 
tion had   been  to  obtain  greater  security  for  the 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

tiunsmission  of  the  text  in  its  purity.  In  place, 
however,  of  such  glosses  of  interpietatiou  had  crept 
in  the  more  childish  practice  of  reading  some  pas- 
sages dili'erently  to  the  way  iu  which  they  were 
written,  in  order  to  obtain  a  play  of  words,  or  to  tix 
them  aititicially  in  the  memory.     Hence  the  formula 

p  x'^N  p  Nipn  ba,  "  Head  not  so,  but  so."  In 
other  cases  it  was  sought  by  arbitraiy  modifications  of 
words  to  embody  in  them  some  casuistical  rule.  Hence 

the  formula  mO^'p  DX  t^V  XipO*?  DX  C'. 
"  There  is  ground  for  the  traditional,  there  is  ground 
for  the  textual  reading''  (Hupfeld,  in  Stud,  und 
Kritihen,  1830,  pp.  554  seqq.).  But  these  tradi- 
tional and  confessedly  apocryphal  readings  were  not 
allowed  to  atfect  the  written  text.  The  care  of  the 
Talmudic  doctors  for  the  text  is  shown  by  the'  pains 
with  which  they  counted  up  the  number  of  verses 
in  the  difl'erent  books,  and  computed  which  were 
the  middle  verses,  words,  and  letters  in  the  Penta- 
teuch and  in  the  Psalms.  These  last  they  distin- 
guished by  the  employment  of  a  larger  letter,  or 
by  raising  the  letter  above  the  rest  of  the  text :  see 
Lev.  xi.  42 ;  Ps.  l.xxx.  14  {Kiddushin,  tbl.  30,  1  ; 
Buxtorf's  Tiberias,  c.  viii.).  Such  was  the  origin 
of  these  unusual  letters :  mystical  meanings  were, 
however,  as  we  learn  from  the  Talmud  itself  (Baba 
Bathra,  fol.  109,  2),  afterwards  attached  to  them. 
These  may  have  given  rise  to  a  multiplication  of 
them,  and  we  cannot  therefore  be  certain  that  all 
had  in  the  first  instance  a  critical  significance. 

Another  Talmudic  notice  relating  to  the  sacred 
text  furnishes  the  four  following  remarks  (iVe- 
darim,  fol.  37,  2  ;  Buxt.  Tib.  c.  viii.) : — 

D^IQID  N"lpD,  "  Reading  of  the  scribes  ;"  re- 
ferring to  the  words  pX.  D'^Oti'.  OnVD. 

D''1S'1D  "lllD^y,  "  Rejection  of  the  scribes ;"  re- 
fer) ing  to  the  omission  of  a  1  prefix  before  the  word 
"inX  in  Gen.  xviii.  5,  xxiv.  55  ;  Num.  xxxi.  2,  and 
before  certain  other  words  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  26,  xxxvi. 
6.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  two  passages  of 
Genesis  are  among  those  in  which  the  Septuagint 
and  Samaritan  agree  in  supplying  1  against  the  au- 
thority of  the  present  Hebrew  text.  In  Num.  xxxi. 
2,  the  present  Helirew  text,  the  Septuagint,  and  the 
Samaiitan,  all  have  it. 

pTlS  Xbl  \''^'y\>,  "  Read  but  not  written ;"  re- 
ferring to  something  which  ought  to  be  read, 
although  not  in  the  text,  in  2  Sam.  viii.  3,  xvi.  23  ; 
Jer.  x.\xi.  38,  1.  29  ;  Ruth  ii.  11,  iii.  5,  17.  The 
omission  is  still  indicated  by  the  Masoretic  notes  in 
every  place  but  Ruth  ii.  11 ;  and  is  supplied  by  the 
Septuagint  in  every  place  but  2  Sam.  xvi.  23. 

|"'''"lp>  X'PI  pTID,  "  Written  but  not  read  ;"  re- 
ferring to  something  which  ought  in  reading  to  be 
omitted  from  the  text  in  2  K.  v.  18  ;  Dent.  vi.  1  ; 
Jer.'li.  3;  Ez.  xlviii.  16;  Ruth  iii.  12.  The  Ma- 
soretic notes  direct  the  omission  in  every  place  but 
Dent.  vi.  1 :  the  Septuagint  preserves  tlie  word 
there,  and  in  2  K.  v.  18,  but  omits  it  in  the  other 
three  passages.  In  these  last,  an  addition  Jiad  appa- 
rently crept  into  the  text  from  error  of  transcrip- 
tion. In  Jer.  Ii.  3,  the  word  "]"nV  in  Ez.  xlviii.  16, 
the  word  ti'Dn  had  been  accidentally  lepeated :  in 
Ruth  iii.  1'-',  DX  'D  had  been  repeated  from  the  pre- 
ceding DJOX  O. 

Of  these  four  remarks  tlien,  the  last  two,  there 
seems  scarcely  room  ibr  doubt,  point  to  errors  wliich 
the  Jews  liad  discovered,  or  believed  to  have  disco- 
vered, in  their  copies  of  the  text,  but  whii'h  they 
were  yet  generally  unwilling  to  corrwt  in  their 
future  copies,  and  wliich  accordingly,  although  stig- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


601 


matized,  have  descendel  to  us.  A  like  observation 
will  apply  to  the  'falmudic  notices  of  the  readings 
still  indicated  by  the  Masoretic  Keris  in  Job  xiii. 
15; 'Hag.  i.  8  \Sotah,  v.  5;  Foma,  fol.  21,2). 
The  scrupulousness  with  which  the  Talmudists  thus 
noted  what  they  deemed  the  truer  readings,  and  yet 
abstained  from  introducing  them  into  the  text,  indi- 
cates at  once  both  the  diligence  with  which  they 
scrutinized  the  text,  and  also  the  cai-e  with  which, 
even  while  acknowledging  its  occasional  imperfec- 
tions, they  guarded  it.  Critical  procedure  is  also 
evinced  in  a  mention  of  their  rejection  of  manuscripts 
which  were  found  not  to  agree  with  others  in  their 
readings  [Taanith  Hierosol.  fol.  68,  1);  and  the 
rules  given  with  reference  to  the  transcription  and 
adoption  of  manuscripts  attest  the  care  bestowed 
upon  them  {Shabbath,  fol.  103,  2 ;  Gittiri,  fol. 
45,  2).  The  "  Rejection  of  the  scribes  "  mentioned 
above,  may  perhaps  relate  to  certain  minute  rectifi- 
cations which  the  scribes  had  ventured,  not  neces- 
sarily without  ci'itical  authority,  to  make  in  the 
actual  written  text.  Wahner,  however,  who  is 
followed  by  Havernick  and  Keil,  maintains  that  it 
relates  to  rectifications  of  the  popular  manner  in 
which  the  text  was  read.  And  ibr  this  there  is 
some  ground  in  the  circumstance  that  the  "  Reading 
of  the  scribes "  bears  apparently  merely  upon  the 
vocalization,  probably  the  pausal  vocalization,  with 
which  the  words  |'")X,  &c.,  were  to  be  pronounced. 

The  Talmud  further  makes  mention  of  the  eu- 
phemistic Keris,  which  are  still  noted  in  our  Bibles, 
e.  g.  at  2  K.  vi.  25  {Megillah,  fol.  25,  2).  It  also 
reckons  six  instances  of  extraordinary  points  placed 
over  certain  words,  e.  g.  at  Gen.  xviii.  9  ( Ti: 
Supher.  vi.  3)  ;  and  of  some  of  them  it  furnishes 
mystical  explanations  (Buxtorf,  Tib.  c.  xvii.).  The 
Masorah  enumerates  fifteen.  They  are  noticed  by 
Jerome,  Quaest.  in  Gen.  xviii.  35  [six.  33].  They 
seem  to  have  been  originally  designed  as  marks  of 
the  supposed  spuriousness  of  certain  words  or  letters. 
But  in  many  cases  the  ancient  veisions  uphold  the 
genuineness  of  the  words  so  stig-matized. 

It  is  after  the  Talmudic  period  that  Hupfeld 
places  the  introduction  into  the  text  of  the  two 
lai-ge  points  (_in  Hebrew  pIDQ  P|1D,  Soph-pamik) 
to  mark  the  end  of  eai:h  verse.  Tliey  are  mani- 
festly of  older  date  than  tlie  aci:ents,  by  which  they 
are,  in  eflect,  supplemented  {Stud,  und  Krit.  1837, 
p.  857).  Coeval,  perhaps,  with  the  use  of  the 
Soph-pastc/i  is  that  of  the  Makkeph,  or  hyphen,  to 
unite  words  that  are  so  closely  conjoined  as  to  hr.ve 
but  one  accent  between  them.  It  must  be  older 
than  the  accentual  marks,  the  presence  or  absence 
of  which  is  determined  by  it.  It  doubtless  radicates 
the  way  in  which  the  text  was  traditionally  read, 
and  therefoie  embodies  traditional  authority  for  the 
conjunction  or  separation  of  words.  Internal  evi- 
dence shows  this  to  be  the  case  in  such  passages  as 
Ps.  xlv.  :>,  pnvm^yi.  But  the  use  of  it  cannot 
be  relied  on,  as  it  often  in  the  poetiail  books  con- 
flicts with  the  rhythm;  e.g.  in  Ps.  xh.  9,  10  (cf. 
Mason  and  Bernard's  Grammar,  ii.  p.  187). 

Such  modifications  of  the  text  ns  these  were  the 
piecursors  of  the  new  method  of  dealing  with  it 
which  constitutes  the  woik  of  the  JIas(u-etic  period. 
It  is  evident  from  the  notices  of  the  Talmud  that  a 
number  of  oral  traditions  had  l)een  gradually  accu- 
mulating respecting  both  the  integrily  of  particular 
pa.ssages  of  the  text  itself,  and  also  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  to  be  read.  The  time  at  length  arrived 
when  it  Iiecame  desirable  to  secure  the  permanence  of 
all  such  traditions  by  committing  them  to  writing. 


602 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


The  very  piocess  of  coUectins;  them  would  add 
greatly  to  their  number ;  the  tiaditious  of  various 
academies  would  be  superadded  the  one  upon  the 
other  ;  and  with  these  would  be  gradually  incor- 
porated the  various  critical  observations  of  the 
collectors  themselves,  and  the  results  of  their 
comparisons  of  different  manuscripts.  The  vast 
heterogeneous  mass  of  traditions  and  criticisms 
thus  compiled  and  embodied  in  writing,  forms  what 
is  known  as  the  ITIDO,  Masomk,  i.  e.  Tradition. 
A  similar  name  had  been  applied  in  the  jMishna  to 
the  oral  tradition  befoie  it  was  committed  to  writing, 
where  it  had  been  described  as  the  hedge  or  fence, 
Ji>D,  of  the  Law  {Pirke  Ahoth,  iii.  13). 

Buxtoif,  in  his  Tiberius,  which  is  devoted  to  an  j 
account  of  the  Masorah,  ranges  its  contents  under 
the  three  heads  of  observations  respecting  the  verses, 
words,  and  letters  of  the  sacred  text.  In  regard  of 
the  verses,  the  Masorets  i-ecorded  how  many  there 
were  in  each  book,  and  the  middle  verse  in  each  : 
also  how  many  verses  began  with  particular  letters, 
or  began  and  ended  with  the  same  word,  or  con- 
tained a  particular  number  of  words  and  letters,  or 
pai'ticular  words  a  certain  number  of  times,  &c.  In 
regard  of  the  words,  they  recorded  the  Keris  and 
Chethibs,  where  different  words  were  to  be  read 
from  those  contained  in  the  text,  or  where  words 
were  to  be  omitted  or  supplied.  They  noted  that 
ceitain  words  were  to  be  tbund  so  many  times  in 
the  beginning,  middle,  or  end  of  a  verse,  or  with  a 
particular  construction  or  meaning.  They  noted 
also  of  particular  words,  and  this  especially  in  cases 
where  mistakes  in  transcription  were  likely  to  arise, 
whether  they  were  to  be  written  plcne  or  defective, 
i.  e.  with  or  without  the  matres  lectionis  :  also  their 
vocalization  and  accentuation,  and  how  many  times 
they  occurred  so  vocalized  and  accented.  In  regard 
of  the  letters,  they  computed  how  often  each  letter 
of  the' alphabet  occurred  in  the  0.  T.:  they  noted 
fifteen  instances  of  letters  stigmatized  with  the  ex- 
traordinary points :  they  commented  also  on  all  the 
unusual  letters,  viz.  the  majiisculw,  which  they 
variously  computed ;  the  minusculw,  of  which  they 
reckoned  thirty-three  ;  the  snspensw,  four  in  num- 
ber ;  and  the  inverses,  of  which,  the  letter  being  in 
each  case  3,  there  are  eight  or  nine. 

The  compilation  of  the  Masorah  did  not  meet 
with  universal  approval  among  the  Jews,  of  whom 
some  regretted  the  consequent  cessation  of  oral  tra- 
ditions. Others  condemned  the  frivolous  character 
of  many  of  its  remarks.  The  formation  of  the 
written  Masorah  may  have  extended  fi-om  the  sixth 
or  seventh  to  the  tenth  or  eleventh  century.  It  is 
essentially  an  incomplete  work  ;  and  the  labours  of 
the  Jewish  doctors  upon  the  sacred  text  might  have 
unendingly  furnished  materials  for  the  enlargement 
of  the  older  traditions,  the  preservation  of  whicli 
had  been  the  primary  object  in  view.  Nor  must  it 
be  implicitly  relied'  on.  Its  computations  of  the 
number  of  letters  in  the  Bible  are  said  to  be  far 
from  correct;  and  its  observations,  as  is  remarked 
by  Jacob  ben  Chaim,  do  not  always  agree  with  those 
of  the  Talmud,  nor  yet  with  each  other  ;  though  we 
have  no  means  of  distinguishing  between  its  earlier 
and  its  later  portions. 

The  most  valuable  feature  of  the  Masorali  is  un- 
doubtedly its  collection  of  Keris.  The  first  rudi- 
ments of  this  collection  meet  us  in  the  Talmud.  Of 
those  subsequently  collectei^,  it  is  probable  that 
many  were  derived  from  the  collation  of  MSS., 
others  from  the  unsupported  judgment  of  the  Mas- 
orets themselves.     They  often  rested  ou  plausible 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  superficial  grounds,  originating  in  the  desire  to 
substitute  an  easier  for  a  more  difficult  reading  ; 
and  to  us  it  is  of  little  consequence  whether  it  wei-e 
a  transcriber  or  a  Masoretic  doctor  by  whom  the 
substitution  was  first  suggested.  It  seems  clear 
that  the  Keris  in  all  cases  represent  the  readings 
which  the  Masorets  themselves  approved  as  coiTect ; 
but  there  would  be  the  less  hesitation  in  sanctioning 
them  when  it  was  assumed  that  they  would  be 
always  preserved  in  documents  separate  from  the 
text,  and  that  the  written  text  itself  would  remain 
intact.  In  effect,  however,  our  MSS.  often  exhibit 
the  text  with  the  Keri  readings  incoiporated.  The 
number  of  Keris  is,  according  to  Elins  Levita,  who 
spent  twenty  years  in  the  study  of  the  Masorah, 
848;  but  the  Bomberg  Bible  contains  1171,  the 
Plantin  Bible  793.  Two  lists  of  the  Keris — the  one 
exhibiting  the  variations  of  the  printed  Bibles  with 
respect  to  them,  the  other  distributing  them  into 
classes — are  given  in  the  beginning  of  Walton's 
Polyglot,  vol.  vi. 

The  Masorah  furnishes  also  eighteen  instances  of 
what  it  calls  D^QID  ppH,  "Correction  of  the 
scribes."  The  real  import  of  this  is  doubtful ;  but 
the  recent  view  of  Bleek,  that  it  relates  to  altera- 
tions made  in  the  text  by  the  scribes,  because  of 
something  there  offensive  to  them,  and  that  there- 
fore the  rejected  reading  is  in  each  case  the  true 
reading,  is  not  borne  out  by  the  Septuagint,  which 
in  all  the  instances  save  one  (Job  vii.  20)  confirms 
the  i^resent  Masoretic  text. 

Furthermore  the  Masorah  contains  certain  pTSD, 
"  Conjectures,"  which  it  does  not  raise  to  the  dignity 
of  Keris,  respecting  the  true  reading  in  difficult 
passages.  Thus  at  Gen.  xix.  23,  for  N^"'  was  con- 
jectured riN^S  because  the  word  K'tDJJ'  is  usually 
feminine. 

The  Masorah  was  originally  preserved  in  distinct 
books  by  itself.  A  plan  then  arose  of  transfeiTing 
it  to  the  margins  of  the  MSS.  of  the  Bible.  For 
this  purpose  large  curtailments  were  necessary  ;  and 
various  transcribers  inserted  in  their  margins  only 
as  much  as  they  had  room  for,  or  strove  to  give  it 
an  ornamental  character  by  reducing  it  into  fanciful 
shapes.  R.  Jacob  ben  Chaim,  editor  of  the  Bomberg 
Bible,  complains  much  of  the  confusion  into  which 
it  had  fallen  ;  and  the  service  which  he  rendered  in 
bringing  it  into  order  is  honourably  acknowledged 
by  Buxtorf.  Kurthei'  improvements  in  the  aiTange- 
ment  of  it  were  made  by  Buxtorf  himself  in  his 
Rabbinical  Bible.  The  Masorah  is  now  distin- 
guished into  the  Maso)-n  magna  and  the  Masora 
pnrva,  the  latter  being  an  abridgment  of  the  foimer, 
and  including  all  the  Keris  and  other  compendious 
observations,  and  being  usually  printed  in  Hebrew 
Bibles  at  the  foot  of  the  page.  The  Masora  magna, 
when  accompanying  the  Bible,  is  disposed  partly  at 
the  side  of  the  text,  against  the  passages  to  which  its 
several  observations  refer,  partly  at  the  end,  where 
the  observations  are  ranged  in  alphabetical  older :  it 
is  thus  divided  into  the  Masora  textualis  and  the 
Masora  finalis. 

The  Masorah  itself  was  but  one  of  the  fruits  of 
the  labours  of  the  Jewish  doctors  in  the  Masoretic 
period.  A  far  more  important  work  was  the  fur- 
nishing of  the  text  with  vowel-marks,  by  which  the 
traditional  pronunciation  of  it  was  imperishably  re- 
corded. That  the  insertion  of  the  Hebrew  vowel- 
points  was  post-Talmudic  is  shown  by  the  absence 
from  the  Talmud  of  all  reference  to  them.  Jerome 
also,  in  recording  the  true  pronunciation  of  any 
word,  speaks  only  of  the  way  in  which  it  was  read  ; 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  occasionally  mentions  the  ambiguity  arising 
from  the  variety  of  words  represented  by  the  same 
letter  (Hupfeki,  Stud,  und  Krit.  1830,  pp.  549, 
seqq.).  The  system  was  gradually  elaborated,  having 
been  moulded  in  the  first  instance  in  imitation  of 
the  Arabian,  which  was  itself  the  daughter  of  the 
Syrian.  (So  Hupfeld.  Ewald  maintains  the  He- 
brew system  to  have  been  derived  immediately  from 
the  Syrian.)  The  history  of  the  Syrian  and  Arabian 
vocaliziition  lenders  it  probable  that  the  elaboration 
of  the  system  commenced  not  earlier  than  the 
seventh  or  eighth  centuiy.  The  vowel-marks  are 
referred  to  in  the  Masorah ;  and  as  they  are  all 
mentioned  by  R.  Judah  Chiug,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  eleventh  century,  they  must  have  been  per- 
fected before  that  date.  The  Spanish  ii'abbis«of  the 
eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  knew  nought  of  their 
recent  origin.  That  the  system  of  piuictuation 
with  which  we  ai-e  familiar  was  fashioned  in  Pales- 
tine is  shown  by  its  dili'erence  from  the  Assyrian  or 
Pei'sian  system  displayed  in  one  of  the  eastern  MSS. 
collated  by  Pinner  at  Odessa ;  of  which  more  here- 
after. 

Contemporaneous  with  the  written  vocalization 
was  the  accentuation  of  the  text.  The  import  of 
the  accents  was,  as  Hupfeld  has  shown,  essentially 
rhythmical  (Stud,  nnd  Krit.  1837):  hence  they 
had  fi-om  the  first  both  a  logical  and  a  musical  sig- 
nificance. In  respect  of  the  former  they  were  called 
□'DyD,  "  senses  ;"  in  respect  of  the  latter,  m3''J3, 
"  tones."  Like  the  vowel- marks,  they  are  mentioned 
in  the  Masorah,  but  not  in  the  Talmud. 

The  controversies  of  the  sixteenth  century  re- 
specting the  late  origin  of  the  vowel-marks  and 
accents  are  well  known.  Both  are  with  the  Jews 
the  authoritative  exponents  of  the  manner  in  which 
the  text  is  to  be  read :  "  Any  interpretation,"  says 
Aben  Ezra,  "  which  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
ai-rangement  of  the  accents,  thou  shalt  not  consent 
to  it,  nor  listen  to  it."  If  in  the  Books  of  Job, 
Psalms,  and  Proverbs,  the  accents  are  held  by  some 
Jewish  scholars  to  be  irregularly  placed,"*  the  expla- 
nation is  probably  that  in  those  books  the  rhythm  of 
the  poetry  has  aftbided  the  means  of  testing  the 
value  of  the  accentuation,  and  has  consequently  dis- 
closed its  occasional  imperfections.  Making  allow- 
ance for  these,  we  must  yet  on  the  whole  admiie 
the  marvellous  cori-ectness,  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  of 
both  the  vocalization  and  accentuation.  The  diffi- 
culties which  both  occasionally  present,  and  which  a 
superficial  criticism  would,  by  overriding  them,  so 
easily  remove,  furnish  the  best  eviiience  that  both 
faithfully  embody  not  the  private  judgments  of  the 
punctuators,  but  the  traditions  which  had  desceiuled 
to  them  from  previous  generations. 

Besides  the  evidences  of  various  readings  con- 
tained in  the  Keris  of  the  Masorah,  we  have  two 
lists  of  diifeient  readings  purporting  or  presumed  to 
be  those  adopted  by  the  Palestinian  and  Babylonian 
Jews  respectively.  Both  are  given  in  Walton's 
Polyglot,  vol.  vi. 

The  first  of  these  was  printed  by  R.  Jacob  ben 
Chaim  in  the  Bombeig  Bible  edited  by  him,  with- 
out any  mention  of  the  source  whence  he  had  de- 
rived it.  The  ditrerent  readings  are  21  (5  in  number  : 
all  relate  to  the  consonants,  except  two,  which  re- 
late to  the  Mai)pik  in  the  H.  They  are  generally 
of  but  little  importance :  many  of  the  dili'erences 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


f^03 


*  Mason  and  Bernard's  Grammar,  ii.  p.  235.  The 
system  of  accentuation  in  these  books  is  peculiar;  but  it 
will  doubtless  repay  study  no  less  than  that  in  the  other 


aie  orthogs'aphical,  many  identiad  with  those  indi- 
cated by  the  Keris  and  Chethibs.  The  list  does  not 
extend  to  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  supposed  to  be  an- 
cient, but  post-Talmudic. 

The  other  is  the  result  of  a  collation  of  MSS. 
made  in  the  eleventh  century  by  two  Jews,  R. 
Aaron  ben  Asher,  a  Palestinian,  and  R.  Jacob  ben 
Naphtali,  a  Babylonian.  The  diflerences,  864  in 
number,  relate  to  the  vowels,  the  accents,  the  Mak- 
keph,  and  in  one  instance  (Cant.  viii.  6)  to  the  divi- 
sion of  one  word  into  two.  The  list  helps  to  fur- 
nish evidence  of  the  date  by  which  the  punctuation 
and  accentuation  of  the  text  must  have  been  com- 
pleted. The  readings  of  our  MSS.  commonly  accord 
with  those  of  Ben  Asher. 

It  is  possible  that  even  the  separate  Jewish  aca- 
demies may  in  some  instances  have  had  their  own 
distinctive  standard  texts.  Traces  of  minor  varia- 
tions between  the  standards  of  the  two  Babylonian 
academies  of  Sura  and  Nahardea  are  mentioned  by 
De  f?ossi,  Proleg.  §35. 

From  the  end,  however,  of  the  Masoretic  period 
onward,  the  Masorah  became  the  great  authority 
by  which  the  text  given  in  all  the  Jewish  MSS. 
was  settled.  It  may  thus  be  said  that  all  our  MSS. 
are  Masoretic:  those  of  older  date  were  either  suf- 
fered to  perish,  or,  as  some  think,  were  intentionally 
consigned  to  destruction  as  incorrect.  Various 
standard  copies  are  mentioned  by  the  Jews,  by 
which,  in  the  subsequent  transcriptions,  their  MSS. 
were  tested  and  corrected,  but  of  which  none  aie 
now  known.  Such  were  the  Codex  Hillel  in  Spain  ; 
the  Codex  Aegyptius,  or  Hierosolymitanus,  of  Ben 
Asher ;  and  the  Codex  Babylonius  of  Ben  Naphtali. 
Of  the  Pentateuch  there  were  the  Codex  Sinaiticus, 
of  which  the  authority  stood  high  in  regard  of  its 
accentuation  ;  and  the  Codex  Hierichuntinus,  which 
was  valued  in  regard  of  its  use  of  the  inatres  lec- 
tioriis ;  also  the  Codex  Ezra,  or  Azarah,  at  Toledo, 
ransomed  from  the  Black  Prince  for  a  large  sum  at 
his  capture  of  the  city  in  1367,  but  destroyed  in  a 
subsequent  siege  (Scott  Porter,  Princ.  of  Text.  Crit. 
p.  74). 

2.  Manuscripts.  —We  must  now  give  an  account 
of  the  0.  T.  MSS.  known  to  us.  They  fall  into  two 
main  classes :  Synagogue-rolls  and  MSS.  for  private 
use.  Of  the  latter,  some  are  written  in  the  square, 
others  in  the  rabbinic  or  cursive  character. 

The  synagogue-rolls  contain,  separate  from  each 
other,  the  I'entateuch,  the  Haphtaroth,  or  appointed 
sections  of  the  Prophets,  and  the  so-called  Megilloth, 
viz.  Canticles,  Rutli,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
Esther.  The  text  of  the  synagogue-rolls  is  written 
without  vowels,  accents,  or  soph-pasuks:  the  greater 
par^hioth  are  not  distinguished,  nor  yet,  strictly, 
the  verses ;  these  last  are  indeed  often  slightly  sepa- 
rated, but  the  practice  is  against  the  ancient  tradi- 
tion. The  prescribed  rules  respecting  both  the  pre- 
paration of  the  skin  or  parchment  for  these  rolls, 
and  the  ceremonies  with  which  they  are  to  be  written, 
are  exceedingly  minute;  and,  though  superstitious, 
liave  probably  greatly  contributed  to  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  text  in  its  iutegritv.  They  are  given  in 
the  Tract  Sopherim,  a  later  ajipendage  to  the  Babv- 
lonian  Talmud.  The  two  mcidilicatious  of  the  square 
character  in  which  these  rolls  are  written  are  distin- 
guished by  the  Jews  as  the  Tarn  and  the  Welsh,  j.  e., 
probably,  the  Perfect  aiul  the  Foreign :  the  former  is 


books.  The  latest  expositions  of  it  are  by  Bar,  a  Jewish 
scholar,  appended  to  vol.  ii.  of  Delitzsch's  Comm.  on  tlie 
I'salter ;  and  by  A.  B.  Pavidson,  1861. 


604 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


the  older  angular  writing  of  the  German  and  Polish, 
the  latter  the  more  modern  j-ound  writing  of  the 
.Spanish  MSS.  These  rolls  are  not  sold ;  and  those 
in  Christian  possession  are  supposed  by  some  to 
be  mainly  those  rejected  from  synagogue  use  as 
vitiated. 

Private  MSS.  in  the  square  character  are  in  the 
book-form,  either  on  parchment  or  on  paper,  and  of 
various  sizes,  from  folio  to  12mo.  Some  contain 
the  Hebrew  text  alone  ;  others  add  the  Targum,  or 
an  Arabic  or  other  translation,  either  interspersed 
witli  the  text  or  in  a  separate  column,  occasionally 
in  the  margin.  The  upper  and  lower  margins  are 
generally  occupied  by  the  Masorah,  sometimes  by 
rabbinical  commentaries,  &c. ;  the  outer  margin, 
when  not  filled  with  a  commentary,  is  used  for  cor- 
rections, miscellaneous  observations,  &c. ;  the  inner 
margin  for  the  Masora  parva.  The  text  marks  all 
the  distinctions  of  sections  and  verses  which  are 
wanting  in  the  synagogue-rolls.  These  copies  ordi- 
narily passed  through  several  hands  in  their  prepa- 
ration :  one  wrote  the  consonants  ;  another  supplied 
the  vowels  and  accents,  which  ai-e  generally  in  a 
fainter  ink ;  another  revised  the  copy ;  another 
added  the  ilasorah,  &c.  Even  when  the  same  per- 
son performed  more  than  one  of  these  tasks,  the 
consonants  and  vowels  were  always  written  sepa- 
rately. 

The  date  of  a  5IS.  is  ordinarily  given  in  the  sub- 
scription ;  but  as  the  subscriptions  are  often  con- 
cealed in  the  Masorah  or  elsewhere,  it  is  occasionally 
difficult  to  find  them :  occasionally  also  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  decipher  them.  Even  when  found  and  de- 
ciphered, they  cannot  always  be  relied  on.  Sub- 
scriptions were  liable  to  be  altered  or  supplied  from 
the  desire  to  impart  to  the  MS.  the  value  either  of 
antiquity  or  of  newness.  For  example,  the  sub- 
scri])tion  of  the  MS.  Bible  in  the  University  Libraiy 
at  Cambridge  (Kenn.  No.  89;,  which  greatly  puz- 
zled Kennicott,  has  now  been  shown  by  Zunz  {Zm- 
Gesch.  und  Lit.  p.  214)  to  assign  the  MS.  to  the 
year  a.d.  856  ;  yet  both  Kennicott  and  Bruus  agree 
that  it  is  not  older  than  the  loth  century;  and 
De  Rossi  too  pronounces,  from  the  form  of  the  Ma- 
sorah, against  its  antiquity.  No  satisfactory  criteria 
have  been  yet  established  by  which  the  ages  of  MSS. 
are  to  be  deteraiined.  Those  that  have  been  relied 
on  by  some  are  by  others  deemed  of  little  value. 
Few  existing  MSS.  are  supposed  to  be  older  than 
the  12th  century.  Kennicott  and  Bruns  assigned 
one  of  their  collation  (No.  590)  to  the  10th  cen- 
tury ;  De  Rossi  dates  it  A.D.  1018;  on  the  other 
hand,  one  of  his  own  (No.  634-)  he  adjudges  to  the 
8th  century. 

It  is  usual  to  distinguish  in  these  MSS.  three 
modifications  ofthe  square  character:  viz.  a  Spanish 
writing,  upright  and  regularly  formed;  a  German, 
inclined  and  sharp-pointed  ;  and  a  French  and  Ita- 
lian, intermediate  to  the  two  preceding.  Yet  the 
character  of  the  writing  is  not  accounted  a  decisive 
criterion  of  the  country  to  which  a  MS.  belongs ; 
nor  indeed  are  the  criteria  of  comitry  much  more 
definitely  settled  than  those  of  age.  One  important 
distinction  between  the  Spanish  and  German  MSS. 
consists  in  the  difference  of  order  in  which  the  books 
are  generally  arranged.  The  former  follow  the 
Masoi-ah,  placing  the  Chronicles  before  the  rest  of 
the  Hagiographa :  the  latter  conform  to  the  Talmud, 
placing  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  before  Isaiah,  and 
Ruth,  separate  from  the  other  Mcgilloth,  before  the 
Psalms.  The  other  characteristics  of  Spanish  J\ISS., 
which  are  accounted  the  most  valuable,  are  thus 


OLD  TESTAIMENT 

given  by  Bruns : — They  are  written  with  paler  iuk  ; 
their  pages  are  seldom  divided  into  three  columns  ; 
the  Psalms  are  arranged  stichometrically  ;  the  Tar- 
gum is  not  interspersed  with  the  text,  but  assigned 
to  a  separate  column ;  words  are  not  divided  be- 
tween two  lines ;  initial  and  unusual  letters  ai'e 
eschewed,  so  also  figures,  ornaments,  and  flourishes ; 
the  parshioth  are  indicated  in  the  margin  rather 
than  in  the  text ;  books  are  separated  by  a  space  of 
four  lines,  but  do  not  end  with  a  pTH ;  the  letters 
are  dressed  to  the  upper  guiding-line  rather  than 
the  lower  ;  Rapheh  is  employed  iiequently,  Metheg 
and  JIappik  seldom. 

Private  MSS.  in  the  rabbinic  character  are 
mostly  on  paper,  and  are  of  comparatively  late  date. 
They. are  written  with  many  abbreviations,  and 
have  no  vowel-points  or  Masorah,  but  are  occa- 
sionally accompanied  by  an  Arabic  version. 

In  computing  the  number  of  known  MSS.,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  by  far  the  greater  part 
contain  only  portions  of  the  Bible.  Of  the  581 
Jewish  MSS.  collated  by  Kennicott,  not  more  than 
102  give  the  0.  T.  complete:  with  those  of  De 
Rossi  the  case  is  similar.  In  Kennicott's  volumes 
the  MSS.  used  for  each  book  are  distinctly  enume- 
rated at  the  end  of  the  book.  The  number  collated 
by  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  together  were,  tor  the 
book  of  Genesis,  490  ;  for  the  Megilloth,  collectively, 
549  ;  for  the  Psalms,  495  ;  for  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
172;  and  for  the  Chronicles,  211.  MS.  authority 
is  most  plenteous  for  the  book  of  Esther,  least  so  for 
those  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

Since  the  days  of  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  modern 
research  has  discovered  various  MSS.  beyond  the 
limits  of  Europe.  Of  many  of  these  there  seems  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  they  will  add  much  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  text.  Those  found  in 
China  are  not  essentially  different  in  character  to 
the  JMSS.  previously  known  in  Europe :  that  brought 
by  Buchanan  from  Malabar  is  now  supposed  to  be  a 
European  roll.  It  is  different  with  the  MSS.  exa- 
mined by  Pinner  at  Odessa,  described  by  him  iu 
the  Prospectus  der  Odessaer  Gesellschaft  fur 
Gesch.  imd  Alt.  gehorenden  dltesten  heb.  und 
rabb.  MSS.  One  of  these  MSS.  (A.  No.  1),  a 
Pentateuch  roll,  unpointed,  biought  from  Derbend 
in  Daghestan,  appears  by  the  subscription  to  have 
been  written  previously  to  the  year  A.D.  580  ;  and, 
if  so,  is  the  oldest  known  Biblical  Hebrew  MS.  in 
existence.  It  is  written  in  accordance  with  the 
rules  of  the  Masorah,  but  the  forms  of  the  letters 
ai-e  lemarkable.  Another  MS.  (B.  No.  3)  contain- 
ing the  Prophets,  on  parchment,  in  small  folio, 
although  only  dating,  according  to  the  inscription, 
from  A.D.  916,  and  furnished  with  a  Masorah,  is  a ' 
yet  greater  treasure.  Its  vowels  and  accents  are 
wholly  different  from  those  now  in  use,  both  in 
form  and  in  position,  being  all  above  the  letters: 
they  have  accordingly  been  the  theme  of  much  dis- 
cussion among  Hebrew  scholars.  The  foiTn  of  the 
letters  is  here  also  remarkable.  A  facsimile  has 
been  given  by  Pinner  ofthe  book  of  Habakkuk  from 
this  MS.  The  same  peculiarities  are  whollj'  or 
partially  repeated  in  some  of  the  other  Odessa  MSS. 
Various  readings  from  the  texts  of  these  MSS.  are 
instanced  by  Pinner :  those  of  B.  No.  3  he  has  sev 
forth  at  some  length,  and  speaks  of  as  of  great  im- 
portance, and  as  entitled  to  considerable  attention 
en  account  of  the  coirectness  of  the  MS. :  little  use 
has  however  been  made  of  them. 

The  Samaritan  MSS.  collated  by  Kennicott  are  all 
in  the  book-form,  though  the  Samaritans,  like  the 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Jews,  make  use  of  j'oUs  in  tlieir  synagogues.  They 
have  no  vowel-points  or  accents,  ami  their  diacritical 
signs  and  marks  of  di\nsion  ai'e  peculiar  to  them- 
selves. The  unusual  letters  of  the  Jewish  MSS. 
are  also  unknown  in  them.  They  are  written  on 
vellum  or  paper,  and  are  not  supposed  to  be  of  any 
great  antiquity.  This  is,  however,  of  little  im- 
portance, as  they  sufficiently  represent  the  Sama- 
ritan text. 

3.  Printed  Text. — The  history  of  the  printed 
text  of  tlie  Hebrew  Bible  commences  with  the  early 
Jewish  editions  of  the  separate  books.  First  ap- 
peared the  Psalter,  in  1477,  probably  at  Bologna, 
in  4to.,  with  Kinichi's  commentary  interspersed 
among  the  verses.  Only  the  first  four  .psalms  had 
the  vowel-points,  and  these  bat  clumsily  expressed. 
The  text  was  far  from'  correct,  and  tlje  mati-es  lec- 
tionis  were  inserted  or  omitted  at  pleasure.  At 
Bologna  there  subsequently  appeared,  in  1482,  the 
Pentateuch,  in  folio,  pointed,  with  the  Targum  and 
the  commentary  of  Jarchi ;  and  the  five  Megilloth 
(Ruth — Esther),  in  folio,  with  the  commentaries  of 
jfarchi  and  Aben  Ezra.  The  text  of  tlie  Pentateuch 
is  reputed  highly  correct.  From  Soncino,  near  Cre- 
mona, issued  in  1486  the  Prophetae  priores  (Joshua 
— Kings'),  folio,  unpointed,  with  Kimchi's  commen- 
tary; of  this  the  Prophetae  posteriores  (Isaiah — • 
Malachi),  also  with  Kimchi's  commentary,  was  pro- 
bably the  continuation.  The  Megilloth  were  also 
printed,  along  with  the  prayers  of  the  Italian  Jews, 
at  the  same  place  and  date,  in  4to.  Next  year, 
1487,  the  whole  Hagiographa,  pointed,  but  un- 
accentuated,  with  rabbinical  commentaries,  appeared 
at  Naples,  in  either  small  fol.  or  large  4to.,  2  vols. 
Thus  every  separate  portion  of  the  Bible  was  in 
print  before  any  complete  edition  of  the  whole 
appeared. 

The  honour  of  printing  the  first  entire  Hebrew 
Bible  belongs  to  the  above-mentioned  town  of  Sonci- 
no. The  edition  is  in  folio,  pointed  and  accentuated 
Nine  copies  only  of  it  are  now  known,  of  which  one 
belongs  to  Exeter  College,  Oxford.  The  earlier 
printed  portions  were  perliaps  the  basis  of  the  text. 
This  was  followed,  in  1494,  by  the  4to.  or  Svo. 
edition  printed  by  Gersom  at  Brescia,  remarkable 
as  being  the  edition  from  which  Luther's  Gemian 
translation  was  made.  It  has  many  peculiar  read- 
ings, and  instead  of  giving  the  Koris  in  the  margin, 
incorporates  them  generally  in  the  text,  which  is 
therefore  not  to  be  depended  upon.  The  unusual 
letters  also  are  not  distinguished.  This  edition, 
along  with  the  preceding,  formoi  the  basis  of  the 
first  edition,  with  the  Masorah,  Tai-gums,  and  rab- 
binical comments,  pi-inted  by  Bomb.-rg  at  ^'euice  in 
1518,  fol.,  under  the  editorship  of  the  converted 
Jew  Felix  del  Prato  ;  though  the  "  plurimis  collatis 
exemplaribus "  of  the  editor  seems  to  imply  that 
MSS.  were  also  used  in  aid.  This  edition  was  the 
first  to  contain  the  Masora  magna,  and  the  various 
readings  of  Ben  Asher  and  Ben  Naphtali.  On  the 
Brescian  text  depended  also,  in  greater  or  less  degree, 
Bomberg's  smaller  Bibles,  4to.,  of  1518,  1521. 
From  the  same  text,  or  from  the  equivalent  text 
of  Bomberg's  first  Rabbinical  Bible,  was,  at  a  sub- 
sequent period,  mainly  derived  that  of  Sel).  Miinstor, 
pi-inted  by  Froben  at  Basle,  4to.,  15:54-5:  which 
is  valued,  however,  as  containing  a  list  of  various 
readings  which  must  have  been  collected  by  a  Jewish 
editor,  and,  in  part,  from  JISS. 

After  the  Brescian,  the  next  primary  edition  was 
that  contained  in  the  Oiinjilutensian  Polyglot,  pub- 
lislied  at    Complutum  (Alcala)    in    Spain,  at   the 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


605 


expense  ot  Cardinal  Ximeues,  dated  1514-17,  but 
not  issued  till  1522.  The  whole  work,  6  vols,  fol., 
is  said  to  have  cost  50,000  ducats:  its  original 
price  was  65  ducats,  its  present  value  alx)ut  40/. 
The  Hebrew,  Vulgate,  and  Greek  texts  of  the  0.  T. 
(the  latter  with  a  Latin  translation)  appear  in  three 
parallel  columns:  the  Targum  of  Onkelos,  with  a 
Latin  translation,  is  in  two  columns  below.  The 
Hebrew  is  pointed,  but  unaccentuated :  it  was  taken 
from  seven  MSS.,  which  are  still  preserved  in  the 
University  Library  at  Madrid. 

To  this  succeeded  an  edition  which  has  had  more 
influence  than  any  on  the  test  of  later  times— the 
Second  Rabbinical  Bible,  printed  by  Bomberg  at 
Venice,  4  vols,  fol.,  1525-(S.  The  editor  was  the 
leai'ned  Tunisian  Jew,  R.  Jacob  ben  Chaim  :  a  Latin 
translation  of  his  prefoce  will  be  found  in  Kennicott's 
Second  Dissertation,  pp.  229  seqq.  The  great  feature 
of  his  work  lay  in  the  coiTCction  of  the  text  by  the 
precepts  of  the  Masorah,  in  which  he  was  pro- 
foundly skilled,  and  on  which,  as  well  as  on  the 
text  itself,  his  labours  were  employed.  Bomberg's 
Third  Rabbinical  Bible,  4  vols,  fol.,  1547-9,  edited 
by  Adelkiud,  was  in  the  main  a  reprint  of  the 
preceding.  Errors  were,  however,  corrected,  and 
some  of  the  rabbinical  commentaries  were  replaced 
by  others.  The  same  text  substantially  reappeared 
in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles  of  John  de  Gara,  Venice, 
4  vols,  fol.,  1568,  and  of  Bragadini,  Venice,  4  vols, 
fol.,  1617-18  ;  also  in  the  later  4to.  Bibles  of  Bom- 
berg himself,  1528,  1533,  1544;  and  in  those  of 
R.  Stephens,  Paris,  4to.,  1539-44  (so  Opitz  and 
Bleek :  others  represent  this  as  following  the  Brescian 
text);  R.  Stephens,  Paris,  16mo.,  1544-6;  Justini- 
ani,  Venice,  4to.  1551,  ISmo.  1552,  4to.  1563, 
4to.  1573  ;  De  la  Rouviere,  Geneva,  various  sizes, 
1618.;  De  Gara,  Venice,  various  sizes,  1566,  68, 
82  ;  Bragadini,  Venice,  various  sizes,  1614, 15, 19, 
28;  Plantin,  Antwerp,  various  sizes,  1566;  Hart- 
maiiu,  Frankfort-on-Oder,  various  sizes,  1595,8; 
and  Crato  (Kraft),  Wittemberg,  4to.  1586. 

The  Royal  or  Antwerp  Polyglot,  printed  by 
Plantin,  8  vols.  fol.  1569-72,  at  the  expense  of 
Philip  II.  of  Spain,  and  edited  by  Arias  Montanus 
and  others,  took  the  Com])lutensian  as  the  basis  of 
its  Hebrew  text,  but  compared  this  with  one  of 
Bomberg's,  so  as  to  produce  a  mixture  of  the  two. 
This  text  was  followed  both  in  the  Paris  Polyglot 
of  Le  Jay,  9  vols.  fol.  1645,  and  in  Walton's  Poly- 
glot, London,  6  vols.  fol.  1657.  The  printing  of 
the  text  in  the  Paris  Polyglot  is  said  to  be  very 
incorrect.  The  same  text  appeared  also  in  Plantin's 
later  Bibles,  with  Latin  translations,  fol.  1571, 
1584;  and  in  various  other  Hebrew-Latin  Bibles : 
Burgos,  fol.  1581  ;  Geneva,  fol.  1609,  1618  ;  Ley- 
den,  8vo.  1613;  Frankfort-on-Maine  (by  Knoch), 
fol.  1681 ;  Vienna,  Svo.  1743;  in  the  quadrilingual 
Polyglot  of  Reineccius,  Leipsic,  3  vols.  fol.  1750-1  ; 
and  also  in  the  same  editor's  earlier  Svo.  Bible, 
Leipsic,  1725,  for  which,  however,  he  professes  to 
have  compared  MSS. 

A  text  compounded  of  several  of  the  preceding 
was  issued  by  the  Leipsic  Professor,  Eiia.s  Hutter, 
at  Hamburg,  fol.  1587  :  it  was  intended  for  stu- 
dents, the  servile  letters  being  distinguished  from 
the  radicals  by  hollow  type.  Tins  was  leprinted 
in  his  uncompleted  Polyglot,  Nuremberg,  fol.  1591, 
and  by  Nisscl,  Svo.  1662.  A  special  mention  is 
also  due  to  the  labours  of  the  eliier  Bu.Ttorf,  who 
CiU-efully  revised  the  text  aiVer  tiie  Masorah,  pub- 
lishing it  in  Svo.  at  Basle,  1611,  and  again,  afler 
a  fresh  revision,  in  his  valuable  Rabbinical  Bible, 


606 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


Basle,  2  vols.  fol.  1618-19.  This  text  was  also 
reprinted  at  Amsterdam,  8vo.  1639,  by  R.  Manasseh 
ben  Israel,  who  had  previously  issued,  in  16ol, 
1635,  a  text  of  his  own  with  arbitrary  grammatical 
alterations. 

Neither  the  text  of  Hotter  nor  that  of  Buxtorf 
was  without  its  permanent  influence;  but  the  He- 
brew Bible  which  became  the  standard  to  subse- 
quent generations  was  that  of  Joseph  Athias,  a 
learned  rabbi  and  printer  at  Amsterdam.  His  text 
was  based  on  a  comparison  of  the  previous  editions 
with  two  MSS. ;  one  bearing  date  1299,  the  other 
a  Spanish  MS.,  boasting  an  antiquity  of  900  years. 
It  appeared  at  Amsterdam,  2  vols.  8vo.  1661,  with 
a  preface  by  Leusden,  professor  at  Utrecht ;  and 
again,  revised  afresh,  in  1667.  These  Bibles  were 
much  prized  for  their  beauty  and  correctness ;  and 
a  gold  chain  and  medal  were  conferred  on  Athias, 
in  token  of  their  appreciation  of  them,  by  the 
States  General  of  Holland.  The  progeny  of  the 
text  of  Athias  was  as  follows ; — a.  That  of  Clodius, 
Frankfort-on-Maine,  8vo.  1677 ;  reprinted,  with 
alterations,  8vo.  1692,  4to.  1716.  6.  That  of 
Jablonsky,  Berlin,  large  8vo.  or  4to.  1699  ;  re- 
printed, but  less  correctly,  12mo.  1712.  Jablonsky 
collated  all  the  cardinal  editions,  together  with 
several  MSS.,  and  bestowed  particular  cai'e  on  the 
vowel-points  and  accents.  c.  That  of  Van  der 
Hooght,  Amsterdam  and  Utiecht,  2  vols.  8vo. 
1705.  This  edition,  of  good  reputation  for  its 
accuiacy,  but  above  all  for  the  beauty  and  distinct- 
ness of  its  type,  deserves  special  attention,  as  con- 
stituting our  present  textus  recejjtus.  The  text 
was  chiefly  formed  on  that  of  Athias :  no  MSS. 
were  used  for  it,  but  it  has  a  collection  of  various 
readings  from  printed  editions  at  the  end.  The 
Masoretic  readings  are  in  the  margin,  d.  That  of 
Opitz,  Kiel,  4to.  1 709 ;  very  accurate :  the  text  of 
Athias  was  coirected  by  comparing  seventeen  printed 
editions  and  some  MSS.  e.  That  of  J.  H.  Michaelis, 
Halle,  8vo.  and  4to.  1720.  It  was  based  on  Jablon- 
sky :  twenty-four  editions  and  five  Erfurt  MSS.  were 
collated  for  it,  bnt,  as  has  been  found,  not  thoroughly. 
Still  the  edition  is  much  esteemed,  partly  for  its 
correctness,  partly  for  its  notes  and  parallel  re- 
ferences. Davidson  pronounces  it  superior  to  Van 
der  Hooght's  in  every  respect  except  legibility  and 
beauty  of  type. 

These  editions  show  that  on  the  whole  the  text 
was  by  this  time  firmly  and  permanently  established. 
We  may  well  regard  it  as  a  providential  circum- 
stance that,  having  been  early  conformed  by  Ben 
Chaim  to  tlie  Masorah,  the  printeil  text  should  in 
the  course  of  the  next  two  hundred  years  have  ac- 
quired, in  this  its  Masoretic  foiTn,  a  sacreduess  which 
the  subsequent  labours  of  a  more  extended  criticism 
could  not  venture  to  contemn.  Whatever  eriors, 
and  those  by  no  means  unimportant,  such  wider 
criticism  may  lead  us  to  detect  in  it,  the  grounds 
of  the  corrections  which  even  the  most  cautious 
critics  would  adopt  are  often  too  precarious  to 
enable  us,  in  departing  fiom  the  Masoretic,  to 
obtain  any  other  satisfactoiy  standard  ;  while  in 
practice  the  mischief  that  would  have  ensued  from 
the  introduction  into  the  text  of  tlie  emendations  of 
Houbigant  and  the  critics  of  his  school  would  have 
been  the  occasion  of  incalculable  and  irrepaiable 
harm.  From  all  such  it  has  been  happily  pre- 
served free ;  and  while  we  are  far  from  deeming  its 
authority  absolute,  we  yet  value  it,  because  ail  ex- 
perience has  taught  us  that,  in  seeking  to  remodel 
it,  we  should  be  introducing  into  it  woi-se  impei-- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

fections  than  those  which  we  desire  to  remove, 
while  we  should  lose  that  which  is,  after  all,  no 
light  advantage,  a  definite  textual  standiird  uni- 
versally accepted  by  Cliristians  and  Jews  alike.  So 
essentially  dili'erent  is  the  treatment  demanded  by 
the  text  of  the  Old  Testament  and  by  that  of  the 
New. 

The  modern  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  now  in 
use  are  all  based  on  Van  der  Hooght.  The  earliest 
of  these  was  that  of  Simonis,  Halle,  1752,  and  more 
correctly  1767  ;  reprinted  1822, 1828.  In  England 
the  most  jjopular  edition  is  the  steiling  one  by 
Judah  D'Allemand,  8vo.,of  high  repute  for  correct- 
ness :  there  is  also  the  pocket  edition  of  Bagster, 
on  which  the  same  editor  was  employed.  In  Ger- 
many there  are  the  8vo.  edition  of  Hahn  ;  the  12mo. 
edition,  based  on  the  last,  \^ith  preface  by  Rosen- 
miiller  (said  by  Keil  to  contain  some  conjectural 
alterations  of  the  text  by  Landschreiber)  ;  and  tlie 
8vo.  edition  of  Theile. 

4.  Critical  Labours  and  Apparatus. —  The  his- 
tory of  the  criticism  of  the  text  has  already  been 
brought  down  to  the  period  of  the  labours  of  the 
Masorets  and  their  immediate  successors.  It  must 
be  here  resumed.  In  the  early  part  of  the  13th 
century,  R.  Meir  Levite,  a  native  of  Burgos  and 
inhabitant  of  Toledo,  kno^vn  by  abbreviation  as 
Haramah,  by  patronymic  as  Todrosius,  wrote  a 
critical  work  on  the  Pentateuch  called  The  Book 
of  the  Masorah  the  Hedge  of  the  Law,  in  which  he 
endeavoured,  by  a  collation  of  MSS.,  to  ascertain  the 
true  reading  in  various  passages.  This  work  was 
of  high  i-epute  among  the  Jews,  though  it  long 
remained  in  manuscript:  it  was  eventually  printed 
at  Florence  in  1750  ;  again,  incorrectly,  at  Berlin, 
1761.  At  a  later  period  R.  Menahem  de  Lonzano 
collated  ten  MSS.,  chiefly  Spanish,  some  of  them 
five  or  six  centuries  old,  with  Bom  berg's  4to.  Bible 
of  1544.  The  results  were  given  in  the  work 
n"1in  "lIN,  "  Light  of  the  Law,"  printed  in  the 
niT*  "TlK^,  Venice,  1618  ;  afterwards  by  itself,  but 
less  accurately,  Amsterdam,  1659.  They  relate  only 
to  the  Pentateuch.  A  more  important  work  was 
that  of  R.  .'>olomon  Norzi  of  Mantua,  in  the  17th 
century,  T*~IS  "iTlJ,  "  Repairer  of  the  Breach:"  a 
copious  critical  commentary  on  the  whole  of  the 
0.  T.,  drawn  up  with  the  aid  of  MSS.  and  editions, 
of  the  Masorah,  Talmud,  and  all  other  Jewish 
resources  within  his  reach.  In  the  Pentateuch  he 
relied  much  on  Todrosius :  with  R.  Menahem  he 
had  had  personal  intercourse.  His  work  was  first 
printed,  116  years  after  its  completion,  by  a  rich 
Jewish  physician,  Raphael  Chaim,  Mantua,  4  vols. 
4to.  1742,  under  the  title  '<V  nnjtD  :  the  emenda- 
tions on  Proverbs  and  Job  alone  had  appeared  in 
tlie  margin  of  a  Mantuan  edition  of  those  books  in 
1725.  The  whole  was  reprinted  in  a  Vienna  0.  T., 
4to.  1813-16. 

Meanwhile  various  causes,  such  as  the  contro- 
versies awakened  by  the  Samaritan  text  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  the  advances  which  had  been  made 
in  N.  T.  criticism,  had  contributed  to  direct  the 
attention  of  Christian  scholars  to  the  importance  of 
a  more  extended  criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the 
0.  T.  In  1746  the  expectations  of  the  public  were 
raised  by  the  Prolegomena  of  Houbigant,  of  the 
Oratory  at  Paris;  and  in  1753  his  edition  appeared, 
splendidly  printed,  in  4  vols.  fol.  The  text  was 
that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  divested  of  points,  and  of 
every  vestige  of  the  Masorah,  which  Houbigant, 
though  he  used  it,  rated  at  a  very  low  value.  In 
the   notes    copious   emendations   were    introduced. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

They  were  derived — (a)  from  the  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch, which  Houbigant  preferred  in  many  respects 
to  the  Jewish ;  (6)  from  twelve  Hebrew  MSS., 
which,  however,  do  not  appear  to  have  been  regu- 
larly collated,  their  reiidings  being  chiefly  given  in 
those  passages  where  they  supported  the  editor's 
emendations ;  (c)  from  the  Septuagint  and  other 
ancient  versions;  and  (d)  from  an  extensive  ap- 
pliance of  critical  conjecture.  An  accompanying 
Latin  translation  embodied  all  the  emendations 
adopted.  The  notes  were  reprinted  at  Frankfbrt- 
on-Maine,  2  vols.  4to.  1777:  they  constitute  the 
cream  of  the  original  volumes,  the  splendour  of 
which  was  disproportionate  to  their  value,  as  they 
contained  no  materials  besides  those  on  which  the 
editor  directly  rested.  The  whole  work  was  indeed 
too  ambitious :  its  canons  of  criticism  were  thoroughly 
unsound,  and  its  ventures  rash.  Yet  its  merits  were 
also  considerable  ;  and  the  newness  of  the  path  which 
Houbigant  was  essaying  may  be  pleaded  in  extenua- 
tion of  its  faults.  It  effectually  broke  the  Masoretic 
coat  of  ice  wherewith  the  Hebrew  text  had  been 
encrusted  ;  but  it  aflbrded  also  a  severe  wai'ning  of 
the  difficulty  of  finding  any  sure  standing-gi-ound 
beneath. 

In  the  same  year,  1753,  appeared  at  Oxford 
Kennicott's  first  Dissertation  on  the  state  of  the 
Printed  Text:  the  second  followed  in  1759.  The 
result  of  these  and  of  the  author's  subsequent 
annual  reports  was  a  subscription  of  nearly  10,000^. 
to  defray  the  expenses  of  a  collation  of  Hebrew 
MSS.  throughout  Europe,  which  was  perfoimed 
from  1760  to  1769,  partly  by  Kennicott  himself, 
but  chiefly,  under  his  direction,  by  Professor  Eruns 
of  Hehnstadt  and  others.  The  collation  extended 
in  all  to  581  Jewish  and  16  Samaritan  MSS.,  and 
40  printed  editions,  Jewish  works,  &c. ;  of  which, 
however,  only  about  half  were  collated  throughout, 
the  rest  in  select  passages.  The  fruits  appeared  at 
Oxford  in  2  vols.  fol.  1776-80  :  the  text  is  Van  der 
Hooght's,  unpointed ;  the  various  readings  are  given 
below ;  comparisons  are  also  made  of  the  Jewish 
and  Samaritan  texts  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  of  the 
parallel  passages  in  Samuel  and  Chronicles,  &c. 
They  much  disappointed  the  expectations  tliat  hatl 
been  raised.  It  was  found  that  a  very  large  part 
of  the  various  readings  had  reference  simply  to  the 
omission  or  insertion  of  the  matres  lectionis ;  while 
of  the  rest  many  obviously  represented  no  more 
than  the  mistakes  of  sepai'ate  transcribers.  Happily 
for  the  permanent  interests  of  criticism  this  had  not 
been  anticipated.  Kennicott's  own  weakness  of  judg- 
ment may  also  have  made  him  less  aware  of  tlie 
smallness  of  the  immediate  results  to  follow  from 
his  persevering  toil ;  and  thus  a  Herculean  task, 
which  in  the  present -state  of  critical  knowledge 
could  scarcely  be  undertaken,  was  providentialU', 
once  for  all,  performed  with  a  thoroughness  for 
which,  to  the  end  of  time,  we  may  well  be  thankful. 

The  labours  of  Kennicott  were  su]ii)lcmt>iitt'd  by 
those  of  I)e  Rossi,  professor  at  Parma.  His  plan 
diffei-ed  materially  from  Kennicott's:  he  confined 
himself  to  a  specification  of  the  various  readings  in 
select  passages ;  but  for  these  he  supplied  also  the 
critical  evidence  to  be  obtained  from  tiie  ancient 
versions,  and  fi-om  all  the  various  Jewish  authorities. 
In  regard  of  manuscript  resources,  he  collected  in 
his  own  library  1031  MSS.,  more  than  Kennicott 
had  collated  in  all  Europe;  of  these  he  collated  617, 
some  being  those  which  Kennicott  had  collated 
befbi'e:  he  collateil  also  I-.">4  extraneous  MSS.  that 
had  escaped  Kennicott's  fellow-labourers ;    and  he 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


607 


recapitulated  Kennicott's  own  various  readings. 
1"he  readings  of  the  various  printed  editions  were 
also  well  examined.  Thus,  for  the  passages  on 
which  it  treats,  the  evidence  in  De  Rossi's  work  may 
be  regarded  as  almost  complete.  It  does  not  con- 
tain the  text.  It  was  published  at  Parma,  4  vols. 
4to.  1784-8  :  an  additional  volume  appeared  in 
1798. 

A  small  Bible,  with  the  text  of  Reineccius,  and  a 
selection  of  the  more  important  readings  of  Kenni- 
cott and  De  Rossi,  was  issued  by  Doderlein  and 
Meisner  at  Leipsic,  8vo.  1793.  It  is  prmted  (except 
some  copies)  on  bad  paper,  and  is  reputed  very  in- 
correct. A  better  critical  edition  is  that  of  Jahn, 
Vienna,  4  vols.  8vo.  1806.  The  text  is  Van  der 
Hooght's,  corrected  in  nine  or  ten  places  :  the  more 
important  various  readings  are  subjoined,  With  the 
authorities,  and  full  information  is  given.  But, 
with  injudicious  peculiarity,  the  books  are  arranged 
in  a  new  order;  those  of  Clironicles  are  split  up 
into  fragments,  for  the  purpose  of  comparison  with 
the  parallel  books ;  and  only  the  principal  accents 
are  retained. 

The  first  attempt  to  turn  the  new  critical  colla- 
tions to  public  account  was  made  by  Boothroyd, 
in  his  unpointed  Bible,  with  various  readings  and 
English  notes,  Pontefract,  4to.  1810-16,  at  a  time 
when  Houbigant's  principles  were  still  in  the 
ascendant.  This  was  followed  in  1821  by  Hamil- 
ton's Codex  Criticiis,  modelled  on  the  plan  of  the 
N.  T.  of  Griesbach,  which  is,  however,  hardly 
adapted  to  the  0.  T.,  in  the  criticism  of  the  text 
of  which  diplomatic  evidence  is  of  so  much  less 
weight  than  in  the  case  of  the  N.  T.  The  most 
important  contribution  towards  the  formation  of  a 
revised  text  that  has  yet  appeared  is  unquestionably 
Dr.  Davidson's  Hebrew  Text  of  the  0.  T.,  revised 
from  critical  Sources,  1855.  It  presents  a  con- 
venient epitome  of  the  more  important  various 
readings  of  the  MSS.  and  of  the  Masorah,  with  the 
authorities  for  them  ;  and  in  the  emendations  of  the 
text  which  he  sanctions,  when  there  is  any  Jewis-h 
authority  for  the  emendation,  he  shows  on  the 
whole  a  fair  judgment.  But  he  ventures  on  few 
emendations  for  which  there  is  no  direct  Jewish 
authority,  and  seems  to  have  pi-actically  fallen  into 
the  error  of  disparaging  the  critical  aid  to  be  derived 
from  the  ancient  versions,  as  much  as  it  had  by 
the  critics  of  the  last  centuiy  been  unduly  exalted. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  little  has  yet  been  done 
for  the  systematic  criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text 
from  the  ancient  versions,  in  comparison  of  what 
might  be  accomplished.  We  have  even  yet  to  learn 
what  critical  treasures  those  versions  really  contain. 
They  have,  of  course,  at  the  cost  of  much  private 
labour,  been  freely  used  bv  individual  scholars,  but 
the  texts  implied  in  tliem  have  never  yet  been  fairly 
exhibited  or  analysed,  so  as  to  enable  tlie  literary 
world  generally  to  form  any  just  estimate  of  their 
real  value.  The  readings  involved  in  tiieir  render- 
ings aie  in  Houbigant's  volumes  only  adduced  when 
they  support  the  emendations  which  he  desired  to 
advance.  By  De  K'ossi  they  are  treated  merely  as 
subsidiary  to  the  MSS.,  and  are  therefore  only  ad- 
duced for  the  passages  to  which  his  manuscript 
colhvtions  refer.  Nor  have  Boothroyd's  or  David- 
son's treatment  of  them  any  pretensions  whatever 
to  completeness.  Should  it  be  alleged  that  they 
have  given  all  the  important  version-reatlings,  it 
may  be  at  once  replied  that  such  is  not  the  case, 
nor  indeed  does  it  seem  possible  fo  decide  prima 
facie   of  any    version-reading    whether    it   be  im- 


608 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


portant  or  not:  many  have  doubtless  been  passed 
over  again  and  again  as  unimportant,  which  yet 
either  are  genuine  readings  or  contain  the  elements 
of  them.  Were  the  whole  of  the  Septuagint  variations 
from  the  Hebrew  text  lucidly  exhibited  in  Hebrew, 
they  would  in  all  probability  serve  to  suggest  the 
true  reading  in  many  passages  in  which  it  has  not 
yet  been  recovered ;  and  no  better  service  could  be 
rendered  to  the  cause  of  textual  criticism  by  any 
scholar  who  would  undertake  the  labour.  Skill, 
scholarship,  and  patience  would  be  required  in 
deciphering  many  of  the  Hebrew  readings  which 
the  Septuagint  represents,  and  in  cases  of  uncer- 
tainty that  uncertainty  should  be  noted.  For  the 
books  of  Samuel  the  task  has  been  grappled  with, 
apparently  with  care,  by  Thenius  in  the  Exegetisches 
Handbuch;  but  the  readings  are  not  conveniently 
exhibited,  being  given  partly  in  the  body  of  the 
commentary,  partly  at  the  eml  of  the  volume.  For 
the  Psalms  we  have  Reinke's  Kwze  Znsammen- 
stelhmg  aller  Ahweichungen  vom  heh.  Texte  in  der 
Fs.  iiberseUung  der  LXX.  und  Vulg.,  &c. ;  but  the 
criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text  was  not  the  author's 
direct  object." 

It  might  be  well,  too,  if  along  with,  the  version- 
readings  were  collected  together  all,  or  at  least  all 
the  more  important,  conjectural  emendations  of  the 
Hebrew  text  proposed  by  various  scholars  during 
the  last  hundred  years,  which  at  present  lie  buried 
in  their  several  commentaries  and  otlier  publica- 
tions. For  of  these,  also,  it  is  only  when  they  are 
so  exhibited  as  to  invite  an  extensive  and  simul- 
taneous criticism  that  any  true  general  estimate 
will  be  formed  of  their  worth,  or  that  the  pearls 
among  them,  whether  few  or  many,  will  become 
of  any  general  service.  That  by  fai  the  greater 
numberof  them  will  be  found  beside  the  mark  we 
may  at  once  admit ;  but  obscurity,  or  an  unpopular 
name,  or  other  cause,  has  probably  withheld  atten- 
tion from  many  suggestions  of  real  value. 

5.  Principles  of  Criticism. — The  method  of  pro- 
cedure required  in  the  criticism  of  the  0.  T.  is 
widely  difti?rent  from  that  prac:tised  in  the  criticism 
of  the  N.  T.  Our  0.  T.  textus  receptus  is  a  far 
more  faithful  representation  of  the  genuine  Scrip- 
ture, nor  could  we  on  any  account  affoid  to  part 
with  it ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  means  of  de- 
tecting and  con-ecting  the  errors  contained  in  it  are 
more  precarious,  the  results  are  more  uncertain,  and 
the  ratio  borne  by  the  value  of  the  diplomatic  evi- 
dence of  MSS.  to  that  of  a  good  critical  judgment 
and  sagacity  is  gi'eatly  diminished. 

It  is  indeed  to  the  direct  testimony  of  the  MSS. 
that,  in  endeavouring  to  establish  the  true  text,  we 
must  first  have  lecourse.  Against  the  general  con- 
sent of  the  MSS.  a  reading  of  the  textus  receptus, 
merely  as  such,  can  have  no  weight.  Where  the 
MSS.  disagree,  it  has  been  laid  down  as  a  canon 
that  we  ought  not  to  let  the  mere  numerical  ma- 
jority preponderate,  but  should  examine  what  is  the 
reading  of  the  earhest  and  best.  This  is  no  doubt 
theoretically  correct,  but  it  has  not  been  generally 
carried  out :  nor,  while  so  much  remains  to  be  done 
for  the  ancient  versions,  must  we  clamour  too  loudly 
for  the  expendit^-e,  in  the  sitting  of  MSS.,  of  the 
immense  labour  which  the  task  would  involve ;  for 
internal  evidence  can  alone  decide  which  MSS.  are 
entitled  to  greatest  authority,  and  the  researches  of 
any  single  critic  into  their  relative  value  could  not 
be  relied  on  till  checked  by  the  corresponding  re- 
searches of  others,  and  in  such  researches  few  com- 
petent persons  are  likely  to  engage.     While,  how- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

ever,  we  content  ourselves  with  judging  of  the  testi- 
mony of  the  MSS.  to  any  particular  reading  by  the 
number  sanctioning  that  reading,  we  must  remember 
to  estimate  not  the  absolute  number,  but  the  rela- 
tive number  to  the  whole  number  of  MSS.  collated 
for  that  passage.  The  circumstance  that  only  half 
of  Kennicotfs  MSS.,  and  none  of  De  Rossi's,  were 
collated  throughout,  as  also  that  the  number  of 
MSS.  greatly  varies  for  different  books  of  the  0.  T., 
makes  attention  to  this  important.  Davidson,  m 
his  Eevisio7i  of  the  Heh.  Text,  has  gone  by  the  ab- 
solute number,  which  he  should  only  have  done 
when  that  number  was  very  small. 

The  MSS.  lead  us  for  the  most  part  only  to  our 
first  sure  standing-ground,  the  Masoi  etic  text :  in 
other  words,  to  the  average  written  text  of  a  period 
later  by  a  thousand  or  fifteen  hundred  years  than 
the  latest  book  of  the  0.  T.  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, that  in  particular  MSS.  pre-Masoretic  readings 
may  be  incidentally  preserved.  Hence  isolated  MS. 
readings  may  serve  to  confirm  those  of  the  ancient 
versions. 

In  ascending  upvi^ards  from  the  Masoretic  text, 
our  first  critical  materials  are  the  Masoretic  Keris, 
valuable  as  witnesses  to  the  preservation  of  many 
authentic  readings,  but  on  which  it  is  impossible  to 
place  any  degree  of  reliance,  because  we  can  never 
be  certain,  in  particular  instances,  that  they  repre- 
sent more  than  mere  unauthorized  conjectures.  A 
Keri  therefore  is  not  to  be  I'eceived  in  preference  to 
a  Chethib  unless  confirmed  by  other  sufficient  evi- 
dence, external  or  internal ;  and  in  reference  to  the 
Keris  let  the  rule  be  borne  in  mind,  "  Proclivi 
scriptioni  praestat  ardua,"  many  of  them  being  but 
arbitrary  softenings  down  of  difficult  readings  in 
the  genuine  text.  It  is  fuiihermore  to  be  observed, 
that  when  the  reading  of  any  number  of  MSS. 
agrees,  as  is  frequently  the  case,  with  a  Masoretic 
Keri,  the  existence  of  such  a  Keri  may  be  a  damage 
rather  than  otherwise  to  the  weight  of  the  testi- 
mony of  those  MSS.,  for  it  may  itself  be  the  mi- 
trustworthy  source  whence  their  reading  originated. 
The  express  assertions  of  the  Masorah,  as  also  of 
the  Targum,  respecting  the  true  reading  in  par- 
ticular passages,  are  of  course  important:  they 
indicate  the  views  entertained  by  the  Jews  at  a 
period  prior  to  that  at  which  our  oldest  MSS.  were 
made. 

From  these  we  ascend  to  the  version  of  Jerome, 
the  most  thoroughly  trustworthy  authority  on  which 
we  have  to  i-ely  in  our  endeavours  to  amend  the 
Masoretic  text.  Dependent  as  Jerome  was,  for  his 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  text  and  everything  re- 
specting it,  on  the  Palestinian  Jews,  and  accui'ate 
as  are  his  renderings,  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that 
a  Hebrew  reading  which  can  be  shown  to  have  been 
received  by  Jerome,  should,  if  sanctioned  or  counte- 
nanced by  the  Targum,  be  so  far  prefeiTed  to  one 
upheld  by  the  united  testimony  of  all  MSS.  what- 
ever. And  in  general  we  may  definitely  make  out 
the  reading  which  Jerome  followed.  There  are, 
no  doubt,  exceptions.  Few  would  think  of  placing 
much  reliance  on  any  translation  as  to  the  presence 
or  absence  of  a  simple  1  copular  in  the  original  text. 
Again  in  Psalm  cxliv.  2,  where  the  authority  of 
Jerome  and  of  other  translators  is  alleged  for  the 
reading  COJ?,  "  peoples,"  while  the  great  majority 
of  MSS.  give  ''JDy,  "  my  people,"  we  Ciinnot  be 
certain  that  he  did  not  really  read  ""DV,  regarding 
it,  although  wrongly,  as  an  apocopated  plural. 
Hence  the  precaution  necessary  in  bringing  the  evi- 
dence of  a  version  to  bear  upon  the  text :  when  used 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

with  such  precaution,  tlie  version  of  Jevonie  will  be 
found  of  the  very  greatest  service. 

Of  the  otlier  versions,  although  more  ancient, 
none  can  on  the  whole  be  reckoned,  in  a  critical 
point  of  view,  so  valuable  as  his.  Of  the  Greek 
versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion,  we 
possess  but  mere  fragments.  The  Syriac  bears  the 
impress  of  having  been  made  too  much  under  the 
influence  of  the  Septuagint.  The  Targums  are  too 
often  paraphrastic.  For  a  detailed  account  of  them 
the  reader  is  referred  to  the  various  articles  [Ver- 
sions, &c.].  Still  they  all  furnish  most  important 
material  for  the  correction  cf  the  Masoretic  te-^t ; 
and  their  cumulative  evidence,  when  thov  all  concur 
in  a  reading  different  to  that  which  it  contains,  is 
very  strong. 

The  Septuagiut  itself,  venerable  for  its  antiquity, 
but  on  various  accounts  untrustworthy  in  the  re;id- 
ings  which  it  represents,  must  be  treated  for  critical 
])urposes  in  the  same  way  as  the  Jlasoretic  Kei'is. 
It  doubtless  contains  many  authentic  readings  of 
the  Hebrew  te.\t  not  otherwise  preserved  to  us  ;  but, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  presence  of  any  Hebrew 
reading  in  it  can  pass  for  little,  unless  it  can  be 
independently  shown  to  be  piobable  that  that  read- 
ing Is  the  true  one.  It  may,  however,  suggest  the 
ti'ue  reading,  and  it  may  confirm  it  where  sup- 
ported by  other  considerations.  Such,  for  example, 
is  the  case  with  the  almost  certain  correction  of 
*]3nn,  "  shall  keep  holyday  to  thee,"  for  ~)jnn, 
"  thou  sbalt  restrain,"  in  Psalm  Ixxvi.  10.  In  the 
opposite  direction  of  confirming, a  Masoretic  reading 
against  which  later  testimonies  militate,  the  autho- 
rity of  the  Septuagint,  on  account  of  its  age,  neces- 
sarily stands  high. 

Similar  remarks  would,  a  priori,  seem  to  apply 
to  the  critical  use  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch :  it 
is,  however,  doubtful  whether  that  document  be  of 
any  real  additional  value. 

In  the  case  of  the  O.T.,  unlike  that  of  the  N.T.. 
another  source  of  emendations  is  generally  allowed, 
viz.  critical  conjecture.  Had  we  any  reason  for 
Ijelieving  that,  at  the  <late  of  the  first  ti-aoslation  of 
the  O.  T.  into  Greek,  the  Heljrew  te.xt  had  been  pre- 
served immaculate,  we  might  well  abstain  from 
venturing  on  any  emendations  for  which  no  direct 
external  warrant  could  be  found  ;  but  the  Septua- 
gint version  is  nearly  two  centuries  younger  than 
the  latest  book  of  the  0.  T.  ;  and  as  the  history  of 
the  Hebiew  text  seems  to  show  that  the  care  with 
which  its  purity  has  been  guarded  has  been  conti- 
nually on  the  increase,  so  we  must  infer  that  it  is 
just  in  the  earliest  periods  that  the  few  corruptions 
which  it  has  sustained  would  be  most  likely  to 
accrue.  Few  enough  they  may  be  ;  but,  if  analogy 
may  be  trusted,  they  cannot  be  altogether  im.a- 
ginaiy.  And  thus  arises  the  necessity  of  admitting, 
besides  the  emendations  suggested  by  the  MSS.  and 
versions,  those  also  which  originate  in  the  simple 
skill  and  honest  ingenuity  of  the  critic  ;  of  whom, 
however,  while  according  him  this  licence,  we  de- 
mand in  return  that  he  shall  bear  in  mind  the  sole 
legitimate  object  of  his  investigations,  and  that  he 
shall  not  obtrude  upon  us  any  conjertund  reading, 
the  genuineness  of  which  he  caimot  fairly  e.stablish 
by  circumstantial  evidence.  What  that  circiuu- 
stantial  evidence  shall  be  it  is  impos.^lde  to  drline 
beforehand  :  it  is  enough  that  it  be  such  as  shall, 
when  produced,  bring  home  conviction  to  a  reason- 
ing mind. 

There  are  cases  in  which  the  Septuagint  will 
supply  an  indirect  wanant    for  the  reception   of  a 

VOL.   11 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


G09 


reading  which  it  nevertheless  does  not  directly  sanc- 
tion: thus  in  Ez.  xli.  11,  where  the  present  text 
has  the  meaningless  word  DIpD,  "  place,"  while  the 
Septuagint  inappropriately  reads  "IIXID,  "  lidit," 
there  arises  a  strong  presumption  that  both  readino-s 
are  equally  corruptions  of  "lIpJD,  ''  fountain,"  re- 
feiTing  to  a  water-gallery  running  along  the  walls 
of  the  Temple  exactly  in  the  position  described  in 
the  Talmud.  An  indirect  testimony  of  this  kind 
may  be  even  more  conclusive  than  a  direct  testi- 
mony, inasmuch  as  no  suspicion  of  design  can  attach 
to  it.  In  Is.  ix.  3,  where  the  text,  as  emended  by 
Pr^fessor    Selwyn    in   his  Horae  Hebraicae,  runs 

nnD^j'n  n'pijn  'p'-jn  n'^mn, "  Thou  hast  mul- 
tiplied the  gladness,  thou  hast  increased  the  joy," 
one  confiiTnation  of  the  correctness  of  the  proposed 
reading  is  well  traced  by  him  in  the  circumstance 
that  the  final  ?  of  the  second  and  the  initial  H  of 
the  third  word  furnish  the  TO,  "  to  it,"  implied  in 
the  &  of  the  Septuagint,  and  accoiding  with  the 
assumed  feminine  noun  n"'Il"in,  ri  irKuarov,  or 
with  n''!l"in  or  n''3"lD  which  was  substituted  for  it 
(see  this  fully  brought  out,  Hor.  Ileb.  pp.  22,  sqq.). 

It  is  frequently  held  that  much  may  be  drawn 
from  parallel  passages  towards  the  con-ection  of 
portions  of  the  Hebrew  text ;  and  it  may  well  be 
allowed  that  in  the  histoiical  books,  and  especiallv 
in  catalogues,  &c.,  the  texts  of  two  pai'allel  passages 
throw  considerable  light  the  one  upon  the  other. 
Kennicott  commenced  his  critical  dissertations  by 
a  detailed  comparison  of  the  text  of  1  Chr.  xi. 
with  that  of  2  Sam.  v.,  xxiii.  ;  and  the  comparison 
brought  to  light  some  corruptions  which  cannot  be 
gainsaid.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  poetical  and 
pi-ophetical  books,  and  to  a  certain  extent  in  the 
whole  of  the  0.  T.,  critical  reliance  on  the  texts  of 
parallel  passages  is  attended  with  much  danger.  It 
was  the  practice  of  the  Hebrew  writers,  in  revising 
former  productions,  or  in  borrowing  the  language 
to  which  other's  had  given  utterance,  to  make  com- 
paratively minute  alterations,  which  seem  at  first 
sight  to  be  due  to  mere  carelessness,  but  which 
nevertheless,  when  exhibited  together,  cannot  well 
be  attributed  to  aught  but  design.  We  have  a 
striking  instance  of  this  in  the  two  recensions  of 
the  .same  hymn  (both  probably  Davidic)  in  Ps. 
xviii.  and  2  Sam.  .xxii.  Again,  Ps.  Lx.xxvi.  14  is 
imitated  from  Ps.  liv.  3,  with  the  alteration  of 
D^T,  "  strangers,"  into  Wit,  "proud."  Ahead- 
long  critic  would  naturally  assimilate  the  two  pas- 
sages, yet  the  general  purport  of  the  two  psalms 
makes  it  probable  that  each  word  is  correct  in  its 
own  place.  Similarly  ,Jer.  xlviii.  45,  is  derived 
from  Num.  xxi.  28,  xxiv.  17:  the  alterations 
throughout  are  curious,  but  especially  at  the  eml, 
where  for  nr-'':3-!?3  "Iplpl,  "  an.l  destroy  nil 
the  children  of  Sheth,"  we  have  \\^\^  03  ^p^p1, 
"and  the  crown  of  the  head  of  the  children  of 
tumidt ;"  yet  no  suspicion  legitimately  attaches  to 
the  text  of  either  passage.  From  such  instances, 
the  caution  needful  in  making  use  of  pariUlels  will 
be  at  once  evident. 

The  comparative  purity  of  the  Hebrew  text  is 
probably  different  in  differeut  parts  of  the  ().  T.  In 
the  revision  of  Dr.  Davidson,  who  has  generally  re- 
stricted himself  to  the  admission  of  corrections 
warranted  by  MS.,  Masoretic,  or  Talmudic  autho- 
rity, those  in  the  book  of  Genesis  do  not  exceed  1 1  ; 
those  in  the  Psalms  are  proportionnti'Iy  three  times 
as  numcroas  ;  those  in  the  hi.sforical  hooks  and  the 
Prophets  .are  projiortionatoly  more  numerous  than 

2   li 


610 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


those  in  the  Psalms.  When  our  criticism  takes  a 
wider  range,  it  is  especially  in  the  less  fomiliar 
parts  of  Scripture  that  the  indications  of  corruption 
pre.-ent  themselves  before  us.  In  some  of  these 
the  Septuagint  version  hivs  been  made  to  render  im- 
portant sen'ice :  in  the  genealogies,  the  errors  which 
have  been  insisted  on  are  for  the  most  part  found  in 
the  Septuagint  as  well  as  in  tiie  Hebrew,  and  are 
therefore  of  older  date  than  the  execution  of  the 
Septuagint.  It  has  been  maintained  by  Keil,  and 
perhaps  witli  truth  {Apol.  Versuch.  iiher  die  Biicher 
der  Chronik,  pp.  185,  295),  that  many  of  these  are 
oldei  than  the  sacred  books  themselves,  and  had 
crept  into  the  documents  which  tlie  authors  incor- 
porated, as  they  found  them,  into  those  books.  This 
remark  will  not,  however,  apply  to  all ;  nor,  as  we 
have  already  observed,  is  there  any  ground  for  sup- 
posing that  the  period  immediately  succeeding  the 
production  of  the  last  of  the  canonical  writings  was 
one  during  which  those  wi'itings  would  be  preserved 
perfectly  immaculate.  If  Lord  A.  Ilervey  be  right 
in  his  rectification  of  the  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  iii. 
19.  seqq.  {On  the  Geneal.  pp.  98-110),  the  inter- 
polation at  the  beginning  of  ver.  22  must  be  due  to 
some  transcriber  of  the  book  of  Chronicles ;  and  a 
like  observation  will  apply  to  the  present  text  of 
1  Chr.  ii.  6,  respecting  which  see  Thrupp's  Introd. 
to  the  Psalms,  ii.  p.  98,  note. 

In  all  emendations  of  the  text,  whether  made 
with  the  aid  of  the  critical  materials  which  we 
possess,  or  by  critical  conjecture,  it  is  essential  that 
the  proposed  reading  be  one  fiom  which  the  existing 
reading  may  have  been  deriveil :  hence  the  neces- 
.<!ity  of  attenfion  to  the  means  by  which  corrup- 
tions were  introduced  into  the  text.  One  letter  was 
accidentally  exchanged  by  a  transcriber  for  another : 
thus  in  Is,  xxiv.  15,  D^"1X3  may  perhaps  be  a  cor- 
ruption for  D"'*N3  (so  Lowth).  In  the  square 
alphabet  the  letters  T  and  "1,  1  and  *,  were  espe- 
cially liable  to  be  confused :  there  were  also  simi- 
larities between  particular  lette:s  in  the  older  alpha- 
bet. Words,  or  parts  of  words,  were  repeated  (cf. 
the  Talmndic  detections  of  this,  supra:  similar  is 
the  mistake  of  "  so  no  now  "  for  "  so  now  "  in  a 
modem  English  Bible)  ;  or  they  were  dropped,  and 
this  especially  when  they  ended  like  those  that  pre- 
ceded, e.g.  SnV  after  "pNllOC^  (1  Chr.  vi.  13). 
A  whole  passage  seems  to  have  dropped  out  fi'om 
the  same  cause  in  1  Chr.  xi.  13  (cf.  Kennicott, 
Diss.  i.  pp.  128,  seqq.).  Occasionally  a  letter  may 
have  travelled  from  one  woixl,  or  a  word  fi-om  one 
verse,  to  another:  hence  in  Hos.  vi.  5,  "lIK  *T't2Qt^'ID1 
has  been  supposed  by  various  critics  (and  so  Selwyn, 
Hor.  Heh.  pp.  154-,  seqq.),  and  that  with  the  sanc- 
tion of  all  the  versions  except  Jerome's,  to  be  a  cor- 
ruj.tion  for  ")1N3  ''DDt^'01.  This  is  one  of  those 
cases  where  it  is  difficult  to  decide  on  the  true 
reading ;  the  emendation  is  highly  probable,  but  at 
the  same  time  too  obvious  not  to  excite  suspicion ; 
a  scrupulous  critic,  like  Maurer,  rejects  it.  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  we  ought  to  reject  the  pro- 
posed emendations  of  Ps.  xlii.  5,  6,  by  the  trans- 
ference of  TIT'K  into  ver.  5,  or  by  the  supply  of  it 
in  that  verse,  in  order  to  assimilate  it  to  ver.  1 1 
and  to  Ps.  xliii.  5.  Had  the  verses  in  so  familiar  a 
psalm  been  originally  alike,  it  is  almost  inciedible 
that  any  transcriber  should  have  rendered  them  dif- 
ferent. With  greater  probability  in  Gen.  xxvii.  33, 
Hitzig  {Begriff  der  Kritih,  p.  126)  takes  the  final 
i\^T['',  and,  altering  it  into  n^ni,  transfers  it  into 
ver.  34,  making  the  preceding  word  the  infinitive. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

That  glosses  have  occasionally  found  their  way  into 
the  text  we  may  well  believe.  The  words  NIH 
DT'3  in  Is.  3.  5  have  much  the  appearance  of  being 
a  gloss  explanatory  of  ilDJD  (Hitzig,  Begr.  pp.  157, 
158),  though  the  verse  can  be  well  construed  with- 
out their  removal ;  and  that  Deut.  x.  6,  7,  have 
crept  into  the  text  by  some  illegitimate  means, 
seems,  notwithstanding  Hengstenberg's  defence  of 
them  {Gen.  af  Pent,  ii.),  all  but  certain. 

Wilful  corruption  of  the  text  on  polemical  gromids 
has  also  been  occasionally  charged  upon  the  Jews ; 
but  the  allegation  has  not  been  proved,  and  their 
known  reverence  for  the  text  militates  against  it. 
Moi-e  trustworthy  is  the  negative  beai-ing  of  that 
hostility  of  the  Jews  against  the  Christians,  which, 
even  in  reference  to  the  Scriptures,  has  certainly 
existed;  and  it  may  be  fairly  argued  that  if  Aquila, 
who  was  employed  by  the  Jews  as  a  translator  on 
polemical  grounds,  had  ever  heard  of  the  modern 
reading  *nX3,  "  as  a  lion,"  in  Ps.  xxii.  17  (16),  he 
would  have  Ijeen  too  glad  to  follow  it,  instead  of 
translating  "|~IX3,   "  they  pierced,"  by  ■pffxvvav.  . 

To  the  criticism  of  the  vowel-marks  the  same 
general  principles  must  be  applied,  mutatis  mutan- 
dis, as  to  that  of  the  consonants.  Nothing  can  be 
more  remote  from  the  truth  than  the  notion  that 
we  are  at  liberty  to  supply  vowels  to  the  text  at 
our  unfettered  discretion.  Even  Hitzig,  who  does 
not  generally  err  on  tlie  side  of  caution,  holds  that 
the  vowel-marks  have  in  general  been  rightly  fixed 
by  tradition,  and  that  other  than  the  Masoretic 
vowels  are  seldom  requiied,  except  when  the  con- 
sonants have  been  first  changed  (Begr,  p.  119). 

In  conclusion,  let  the  reader  of  this  or  any  article 
on  the  method  of  dealing  with  errors  in  the  text 
beware  of  drawing  from  it  the  impression  of  a 
general  corruptness  of  the  text  which  does  not  really 
exist.  The  works  of  Biblical  scholars  have  been  on 
the  whole  more  disfigured  than  adorned  by  the 
emendations  of  the  Hebrew  text  which  they  have 
suggested  ;  and  the  cautions  by  which  the  more 
prudent  have  endeavoui-ed  to  guard  against  the 
abuse  of  the  licence  of  emending,  are,  even  when 
critically  unsound,  so  far  commendable,  that  they 
show  a  healthy  respect  for  the  Masoretic  text  which 
might  with  advantage  have  been  more  generally 
felt.  It  is  difficult  to  reduce  to  formal  rules  the 
treatment  which  the  text  of  the  0.  T.  should  receive, 
but  the  general  spirit  of  it  might  thus  be  given : — 
Deem  the  Masoretic  text  worthy  of  confidence,  but 
do  not  refuse  any  emendations  of  it  which  can  be 
fairly  established:  of  such  judge  by  the  evidence 
adduced  in  their  support,  when  advanced,  not  by 
any  supposed  previous  necessity  for  them,  respects 
ing  which  the  most  enoneous  views  have  been 
frequently  entertained  ;  and,  lastly,  remember  that 
the  judgment  of  the  many  will  correct  that  of  the 
few,  the  judgment  of  future  generations  that  of  the 
piesent,  and  that  permanent  neglect  generally  awaits 
emendations  which  approve  themselves  by  their 
biilliancy  rather  than  by  their  soundness.  (See 
generally  Walton's  Prolegomena  ;  Kenuicott's  Dis- 
sertatio  Generalis ;  De  Rossi's  Prolego)ncna ;  Bp. 
Marsh's  Lectures  ;  Davidson's  Bib.  Criticism,  vol, 
i. ;  and  the  Introductions  of  Home  and  Davidson, 
of  De  Wette,  Haveraick,  Keil,  and  Bleek.) 

B.  Interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament. 

1.  Historij  of  the  Interpretation.  —  We  shall 
here  endeavour  to  present  a  brief  but  comprehensive 
sketch  of  the  treatment  which  the  scriptures  of  the 
0.  T.  have  in  different  ages  received. 


OLD  TESTA]\IEN"T 

At  the  period  of  the  rise  of  Christianity  two  op- 
posite tendencies  had  manifested  themselves  in  the 
interpretation  of  them  among  tlio  Jews  ;  the  one  to 
an  extreme  literab'sm,  the  other  to  an  arbitrary 
allegorism.  The  former  of  these  was  mainly  deve- 
loped in  Palestine,  where  the  Law  of  Jloses  was, 
from  the  nature  of  things,  most  completely  obsei'ved. 
The  Jewish  teachers,  ackuowledgiug  the  obligation 
of  that  law  in  its  minutest  precepts,  but  overlook- 
ing the  moral  principles  on  which  those  precepts 
were  founded  and  which  they  should  have  unfolded 
from  them,  there  endeavoured  to  supply  by  other 
means  the  imperfections  inherent  in  every  law  in  its 
mere  literal  acceptation.  They  added  to  the  number 
of  the  existing  precepts,  they  defined  more  minutely 
the  method  of  their  obsen'ance ;  and  thus  practically 
further  obscured,  and  in  many  instances  overtlirew, 
the  inward  spirit  of  the  law  by  new  outward  tradi- 
tions of  their  own  (Matt,  xv.,  xxiii.).  On  the  other 
hand  at  Alexandria  the  allegorizing  tendency  pre- 
vailed. Germs  of  it  had  appeared  in  the  apocry- 
phal writings,  as  where  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
(xviii.  24)  the  priestly  vestments  of  Aaron  had  been 
treated  as  symbolical  of  the  universe.  It  liad  been 
fostered  by  Aristobulus,  the  author  of  the  'E^rjyfi- 
<r€is  TTjs  McoiJaeoos  ypa((>rjs,  quoted  by  Clement  and 
Eusebius;  and  at  length,  two  centuries  later,  it 
culminated  in  Philo,  from  whose  works  we  best 
gather  the  form  which  it  assumed.  P^or  in  the  ge- 
nei-al  principles  of  interpretation  which  Philo  adopted, 
he  w;is  but  following,  as  he  himself  assures  us,  in 
the  track  which  had  been  previously  marked  out  by 
those,  probably  the  Therapeutae,  under  whom  he 
had  studied.  His  expositions  have  chiefly  reference 
to  the  writings  of  Moses,  whom  he  regarded  as  the 
arch-prophet,  the  man  initiated  above  all  others 
into  divine  mysteries;  and  in  the  persons  and  things 
mentioned  in  these  writings  he  traces,  without  deny- 
ing the  outward  reality  of  the  narrative,  the  mys- 
tical designations  of  different  abstract  qualities  and 
aspects  of  the  invisible.  Thus  the  three  angels 
who  came  to  Abraham  represent  with  him  God  in 
his  essential  being,  in  his  beneficent  power,  and  in 
his  governing  power.  Abraham  himself,  in  his 
dealings  with  Sarali  and  Hagar,  represents  the  man 
who  has  an  admiration  for  contemplation  and  know- 
ledge: Sarah,  the  virtue  which  is  such  a  man's  legi- 
timate partner:  Hagar,  the  encyclical  accom])lish- 
ments  of  all  kinds  which  serve  as  the  handmaiden 
of  virtue,  the  pre-requisites  for  the  attainment  of 
the  highest  wisdom :  her  Egyptian  origin  sets  forth 
that  ibr  the  acquisition  of  this  varied  elementary 
knowledge  the  external  senses  of  the  body,  of  which 
Egypt  is  the  symbol,  are  necessary.  Such  are 
Philo's  interpretations.  They  are  marked  through- 
out by  two  fundamental  defects.  First,  beautiful 
as  are  the  moral  lessons  which  he  often  luifolds,  he 
yet  shows  no  more  appreciation  than  the  Palestinian 
opponents  of  our  Saviour  of  the  moral  teaching  in- 
volved in  the  simpler  acceptation  of  Scripture. 
And,  secondly,  his  exposition  is  not  the  result  of  a 
legitimate  drawing  forth  of  the  spiritual  import 
which  the  Scripture  contains,  but  of  an  endeavour 
to  engraft  the  Gentile  philosophy  upon  it.  Of  a 
Messiah,  to  whom  the  0.  T.  throughout  spiritually 
I>ointed,  Philo  recked  but  little:  the  wisdom  of 
Plato  he  contrives  to  find  in  every  page.  It  was  in 
fact  his  aim  so  to  find  it.  The  Alexandrian  inter- 
preters were  striving  to  vindiaite  lor  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  a  new  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  the  (ioutile 
world,  by  showing  that  Moses  had  anticipated  all 
the  doctrines  of  the  philosophers  of  Greece.     Hence, 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


611 


with  Aristobulus,  Moses  was  an  eailier  Aristotle: 
with  Philo,  an  earlier  Plato.  The  P.ible  was  with 
them  a  storehouse  of  all  tlie  jihilnsophy  which  they 
had  really  derived  from  other  sources ;  and,  in  so 
treating  it,  they  lost  sight  of  the  inspired  theology, 
the  revelation  of  God  to  man,  which  was  its  true 
aud  peculiar  glory. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  Palestinian 
literalism  and  the  Alexandrian  allegorism  ever  re- 
mained entirely  distinct.  On  the  one  hand  we  find 
the  Alexandrian  Philo,  in  his  treatise  on  the  special 
laws,  commending  just  such  ;m  observance  of  the 
letter  and  an  intraction  of  the  spirit  of  the  pro- 
hibition to  take  God's  name  in  vain,  as  our  Saviour 
exposes  and  condemns  in  Jlatt.  v.  33-37.  On  the 
other  hand,  among  the  Palestinians,  both  the  high- 
priest  Eleazar  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Fv.  viii.  9),  and  at 
a  later  period  the  historian  Joseplnis  (Ant.  prooeni. 
4),  speak  of  the  allegorical  significance  of  the  Mosaic 
writings  in  terms  which  lead  us  to  suspect  that 
their  expositions  of  them,  had  they  come  down  to 
us,  would  have  been  found  to  contain  much  that 
was  arbitrary.  And  it  is  probable  that  traditional 
allegorical  interpretations  of  the  sacred  writings 
were  current  among  the  Essenes.  In  fact  the  two 
extremes  of  literalism  and  arbitrary  allegorism,  in 
their  neglect  of  the  direct  moral  teaching  and  pro- 
phetical import  of  Scripture,  had  too  much  in  com- 
mon not  to  mingle  readily  the  one  with  the  other. 

Aud  thus  we  may  trace  the  development  of  the 
two  distinct  yet  co-existent  spheres  of  Halachah  and 
Hagadah,  in  which  the  Jewish  interpretation  of 
Scripture,  as  shown  by  the  later  Jewish  writings, 
ranged.  The  foraier  (n^/TI,  "  repetition," "  follow- 
ing") embraced  the  traditional  legal  determinations 
for  practical  obsen'ance:  the  latter  (mjil,  "dis- 
course") the  unrestrained  interpretation,  of  no  au- 
thentic force  or  immediate  practical  interest.  Hold- 
ing fost  to  the  position  for  which,  in  theory,  the 
Alexandrian  allegorists  had  so  strenuously  contended, 
that  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge,  in- 
cluding their  own  speculations,  were  virtually  con- 
tained in  the  Sacred  Law,  the  Jewish  doctors  pro- 
ceeded to  define  the  methods  by  which  they  were 
to  be  elicited  from  it.  The  meaning  of  Scripture 
was  according  to  them,  either  that  openly  expressed 
in  the  words  (ytSti'JO,  sensns  innntus),  or  else  that 
deduced  from  them  (CnO.  nK^ll,  sensus  Hiatus). 
The  former  was  itself  either  literal,  tOC'2,  or  figu- 
rative and  mystical,  *1"|D.  The  latter  was  partly 
obtained  by  simple  logical  inference;  but  i)artly 
also  liy  the  arbitrary  detection  of  recondite  mean- 
ings symbolically  indicated  in  the  places,  gramma- 
tical structure,  or  orthography  of  woixls  taken  a])ait 
from  their  logical  context.  This  last  was  the  cab- 
balistic interpretation  (vh^p,  "  reception,"  "  re- 
ceived tradition ").  Special  mention  is  made  of 
three  processes  by  wliich  it  was  pursued.  By  the 
process  Gematria  lii''~\\2^''i,  geomctrin)  a  symbo- 
lical import  was  attached  to  the  number  of  times 
that  a  word  or  letter  occun-ed,  or  to  the  number 
which  one  or  more  letters  of  any  word  lepresented. 
By  the  process  Notarjekon  (pp''~lt3J,  ludaiicnm) 
new  significant  words  were  formed  out  of  the  initi^ 
or  final  words  of  the  text,  or  else  the  letters  of  a 
word  were  constituted  the  initials  of  a  new  signi- 
iicant  series  of  words.  Aud  in  Temurah  (mibD. 
"change")  new  significant  wonls  were  olitained 
from  the  text  either  by  anagram  (e.  <j.  n^CD, 
"Messiah"  from  ^0C^'^  Ps.  xxi.  2),  or  by  the 
alphabet   Atbash,   wherein  the  letters  X,  3,  &c., 

2  i;  2 


612 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


were  roplnood  by  ri,  t^^  &o.  Of  such  nrtilic^es  tlie 
saciej  writers  hail  ))ossibly  for  special  purposes 
iDade  occasional  use ;  but  that  they  should  have  beeu 
ever  ai3plie(i  by  any  school  to  the  general  exegesis 
of  the  0.  T.  shows  oidy  into  what  trifling  even 
labours  on  Scripture  may  occasionally  degenerate. 

The  earliest  Christian  non-apostolic  treatment  of 
the  0.  T.  was  necessarily  much  dependent  on  that 
which  it  had  received  from  the  Jews.  The  Alex- 
andrian allegorism  reappears  the  most  fully  in  the 
fanciful  epistle  of  Barnabas  ;  but  it  influenced  also 
the  other  writings  of  the  sub-apostolic  Fathers.  Even 
the  Jewish  cabbalism  passed  to  some  extent  into  the 
Christian  Church,  and  is  said  to  liave  been  largely 
employed  by  the  Gnostics  (Iren.  i.  3,  8,  16,  ii.  -4). 
But  this  was  not  to  last.  Irenaeus,  himself  not  alto- 
gether free  fi'om  it,  raised  his  voice  against  it ;  and 
Tertullian  well  laid  it  down  as  a  canon  that  the 
words  (if  Scrijiture  were  to  be  interpreted  only  in 
their  logical  connexion,  and  with  reference  to  the 
occasion  on  which  they  were  uttered  {De  Praescr. 
Haer.  9).  In  another  respect  all  was  changed. 
The  Christian  interpreters  by  their  belief  in  Christ 
stood  on  a  vant<age-ground  for  the  comprehension  of 
the  whole  burden  of  the  O.  T.  to  which  the  Jews 
had  never  reached;  and  thus,  however  they  may 
have  eri'ed  in  the  details  of  their  interpretations, 
thev  were  generally  conducted  by  them  to  the  right 
conclusions  in  regard  of  Christian  doctrine.  It  was 
through  reading  the  0.  T.  prophecies  that  Justin 
liad  been  converted  to  Christianity  {Dial.  Trjiph. 
pp.  224,  225).  The  view  held  by  the  Christian 
Fathers  that  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  N.  T.  had  been 
virtually  rontained  and  foreshadowed  in  the  Old, gene- 
rally induced  the  search  in  the  0.  T.  for  such  Chris- 
tian doctrine  lather  than  for  the  old  philosoj^hical 
dogmas.  Thus  we  find  Justin  a.sserting  his  ability 
to  prove  by  a  careful  enumeration  that  all  the  ordi- 
nances of  Woses  were  types,  symbols,  and  disclosures 
of  those  things  which  were  to  be  realized  in  the 
Messiah  {Dpi I.  Tri/p.  p.  261).  Their  general  con- 
victions were  doubtless  here  more  correct  than  the 
details  which  they  advanced ;  and  it  would  be  easy 
to  multiply  from  the  writings  of  either  Justin,  Ter- 
tullian, or  Irenaeus,  typical  interpretations  that 
could  no  longer  be  defended.  Yet  even  these  were 
no  unrestrained  speculations:  they  were  all  designed 
to  illustrate  what  was  elsewhere  unequivocally  re- 
vealed, and  weie  limited  by  the  necessity  of  con- 
forming in  their  results  to  the  Catholic  rule  of  faith, 
the  tradition  handed  down  in  the  Church  from  the 
Apostles  (Tei't.  De  Praescr.  Haer.  13,  37  ;  Iren. 
iv.  26).  It  was  moreover  laid  down  by  Tertullian, 
that  the  language  of  the  Prophets,  although  gene- 
rally allegorical  and  figurative,  was  not  always  so 
(De  Res.  Carnis,  19)  ;  though  we  do  not  find  in  the 
early  Fatheis  any  canons  of  interpretation  in  this 
respect.  A  curious  combination,  as  it  must  seem 
to  us,  of  literal  and  spiritual  interpretation  meets 
us  in  Justin's  exposition,  in  which  he  is  not  alone, 
of  those  prophecies  which  he  explains  of  millen- 
nial blessings;  for  while  ho  believes  that  it  is 
the  litend  Jerusalem  which  will  be  i-estored  in  all 
her  splendou)-  for  God's  people  to  inhabit,  he  yet 
contends  that  it  is  the  spiritual  Israel,  not  the  Jews, 
that  will  eventually  dwell  there  {Dial.  Tr.  pp. 
306,  352).  Both  Justin  and  Irenaeus  upheld  the 
historical  reality  of  the  events  related  in  tlie  0.  T. 
narrative.  Both  also  fell  into  the  error  of  defend- 
ing the  less  commendable  proceedings  of  the  ]ia- 
triarchs — as  the  polygamy  of  Jacob,  and  the  incest 
ut'  Lot — on  the  strength    of  the  typical  cliaracter 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

assuraedly  attaching  to  them  (Just.  Dial.  Tr.  pp. . 
364  seqq.  ;  Iren.  v.  32  seqq.). 

It  was  at  Alexandria,  which  through  her  previous 
learning  had  already  exerted  the  deepest  influence 
on  the  interpretation  of  the  0.  T.,  that  definite 
principles  of  inteipretation  were  by  a  new  order  of 
men,  the  most  illustrious  and  influential  teachers  in 
the  Christian  Church,  first  laid  down.  Clement 
here  led  the  way.  He  lieM  that  in  the  Jewish  law 
a  fourfold  import  was  to  be  traced ;  literal,  symbo- 
lical, moral,  prophetical  {Strom,  i.  c.  28).  Of  these 
the  second,  by  which  the  persons  and  things  men- 
tioned in  the  law  were  treated  as  symbolical  of  the 
material  and  moral  universe,  was  manitestlv  derived 
from  no  Christian  source,  but  was  rather  the  relic 
of  the  philosophical  element  that  others  had  pre- 
viously engrafted  on  the  Hebrew  .Scriptures.  The 
new  gold  had  not  yet  shaken  off  the  old  alloy  ;  and 
in  practice  it  is  to  the  symbolical  class  that  the 
most  objectionable  of  Clement's  interpretations  will 
be  found  to  belong.  Such  are  those  which  he  re- 
peats from  the  Book  of  Wisdom  and  from  Fhilo  of 
thfe  high-priest's  garment,  and  of  the  relation  of 
Saiah  to  Hagar ;  or  that  of  the  branches  of  the 
sacred  ciuidlestick,  which  he  supposes  to  denote  the 
sun  and  planets.  Nor  can  we  commend  the  prone- 
uess  to  allegorism  which  Clement  everywhere  dis- 
plays, and  which  he  wouhl  have  defended  by  the 
mischievous  distinction  which  he  handed  down  to 
Origen  between  tt'kttis  and  yvuKTis,  and  by  the 
doctrine  that  the  literal  sense  leads  only  to  a  mere 
carnal  faith,  while  for  the  higher  Christian  life  the 
allegorical  is  necessary.  Yet  in  Clement's  recogni- 
tion of  a  literal,  a  moral,  and  a  prophetical  import 
in  the  Law,  we  have  the  germs  of  the  aspects  in 
which  the  0.  T.  has  been  regarded  by  all  subsequent 
ages ;  and  his  Christian  treatment  of  the  sacred 
oiacles  is  shown  by  his  acknowledging,  equally  with 
Tertullian  and  Irenaeus,  the  nde  of  the  tradition  of 
the  Lord  as  the  key  to  their  true  interpretation 
{Strom,  vii.  c.  17). 

Clement  was  succeeded  by  his  scholar  Origen. 
With  him  biblical  interpretation  showed  itself  more 
decidedly  Christian ;  and  while  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians,  moulded  anew,  became  the  permanent 
inheritance  of  the  Church,  tlie  distinctive  symbolical 
meaning  which  philosophy  had  placed  upon  the 
0.  T.  disappeared.  Origen's  principles  of  intei-pre- 
tation  are  fully  unfolded  by  him  in  the  De  Princip. 
iv.  1 1  seqq.  He  recognizes  in  Sciipture,  as  it  were, 
a  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  answering  to  the  hotly, 
soul,  and  spirit  of  man:  the  first  serves  for  the 
edification  of  the  simple,  the  second  tor  that  of  the 
moi'e  advanced,  the  third  for  that  of  the  perfect. 
The  reality  and  the  utility  of  the  first,  the  letter  of 
Sciipture,  he  proves  by  the  number  of  those  whose 
faith  is  nurtured  by  it.  The  second,  which  is  in 
fiict  the  moral  sense  of  Scripture,  he  illustrates  by  the 
interpretation  of  Deut.  xxv.  4  in  1  Cor.  ix.  9.  The 
third,  however,  is  that  on  which  he  principally 
dwells,  showing  how  the  Jewish  Law,  s))iritually 
understood,  contained  a  shadow  of  good  things  to 
come  ;  and  how  the  N.  T.  had  recognized  such  ."^ 
spiritual  meaning  not  only  in  the  narrative  of 
Moses,  and  in  his  account  of  the  tabernacle,  but 
also  in  the  historiad  narrative  of  the  other  books 
(1  Cor.  X.  11  ;  Gal.  iv.  21-31  ;  Heb.  v.iii.  5  ; 
Kom.  xi.  4,  5).  In  regard  of  what  he  calls  the  soul 
of  Scripture  his  views  are,  it  must  be  owned,  some- 
what uncertain.  His  practice  with  reference  to  it 
seems  to  have  been  less  commendable  than  his  prin 
ciples.     It  should  have  been  the  moral  teaching  of 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Scripture  aiising  out  of  the  literal  sense  applied  in 
accordance  with  the  rulps  of  analogy  ;  but  the  moral 
interpretations  actually  given  by  Oi'igen  are  ordi- 
narily little  else  than  a  series  of  allegorisms  of  moral 
tendency ;  and  thus  he  is,  unfortunately,  more  con- 
sistent with  bis  own  practice  when  lie  assigns  to  the 
moral  exposition  not  the  second  but  the  third  place, 
exalting  it  above  the  mystical  or  spiritual,  and  so 
removing  it  farther  from  the  literal  (  Horn,  in  Gen. 
ii.  6).  Both  the  spiritual  and  (to  use  his  own 
term)  the  psychical  meaning  he  held  to  be  always 
present  in  Scripture:  the  bodily  not  always.  Alike 
in  the  history  and  the  law,  he  found  things  inserted 
or  expressions  employed  which  could  not  be  lite- 
rally understood,  and  wiiich  were  intended  to  direct 
us  to  the  pursuit  of  a  higher  interpretation  than 
the  purely  literal.  Thus  the  immoial  actions 
of  the  patriarchs  were  to  him  stumbling-blocks 
which  he  could  only  avoid  by  passing  over  the 
literal  sense  of  the  nariative,  and  tracing  in  it  a 
spiritual  sense  distinct  fioin  the  literal ;  though 
even  here  he  seems  to  reject  the  latter  not  as  untrue, 
but  simply  as  profitless.  For  while  he  held  the 
body  of  vScripture  to  be  but  the  garment  of  its 
spirit,  he  yet  acknowledged  the  things  in  Scripture 
which  were  literally  true  to  be  far  more  numerous 
than  those  which  were  not ;  and  occasionally,  where 
he  found  the  latter  tend  to  edifying,  as  for  instance 
in  the  moral  commandments  of  the  Decalogue  as 
distinguished  from  the  ceremonial  and  therefore 
typical  law,  he  deemed  it  needless  to  seek  any  alle- 
gorical meaning  (Horn,  in  Num.  xi.  1).  Origen's 
own  expositions  of  Scripture  were,  no  doubt,  less 
successful  than  his  investigations  of  the  principles 
on  which  it  ought  to  be  expounded.  Yet  as  the 
appliances  which  he  brought  to  the  study  of  Scrip- 
ture made  him  the  father  of  biblical  criticism,  so  of 
all  detailed  Christian  scriptural  commentaries  his 
were  the  first ;  a  fact  not  to  be  forgotten  by  those 
who  would  estimate  aright  their  several  merits  and 
defects. 

The  labours  of  one  genuine  scholar  became  the 
inheritance  of  the  next ;  and  the  value  of  Origen's 
I'esearches  was  best  appreciated,  a  centur)'  later,  by 
Jerome.  He  adopted  and  repeited  most  of  Origen's 
principles;  biit  he  exhibited  more  judgment  in  the 
practical  application  of  them :  he  devoted  more 
attention  to  the  literal  interpretation,  the  basis  of 
the  rest,  and  he  brought  also  larger  stores  of  learn- 
ing to  bear  upon  it.  With  Origen  he  held  that 
Scripture  was  to  be  understood  in  a  threefold  man- 
ner, literally,  tropologically,"  mystically:  the  first 
meaning  was  the  lowest,  the  last  the  highest  (torn, 
v.  p.  172,  Vail.).  But  elsewhere  he  gave  a  new 
threefold  division  of  Scriptural  interpretation  ;  iden- 
tifying the  ethical  with  the  literal  or  lirst  mean- 
ing, making  the  allegorical  or  spiritiuvl  meaning 
the  second,  and  maintaining  tliat,  thirdly,  Scrip- 
ture was  to  be  understood  "  secundimi  fiiturorum 
beatitudinem "  (torn.  vi.  p.  270).  Interpretation  of 
this  last  kind,  vague  and  generally  untenable  as  it  is, 
was  that  denominated  by  succeeding  writers  the 
ayagogical  ;  a  term  which  had  been  used  by  Origen 
as  equivalent  to  spiiitual  (cf.  De  Princ.  iv.  9), 
though  the  contrary  has  been  maintained  by  writers 
familiar  with  the  later  distinction.  Combining 
these  two  classifications  given  by  .leiome  of  the 
various  meanings  of  Scripture,  we  obtain  the  four- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


613 


fold  division  which  was  current  through  the  middle 
ages,  and  which  has  Ijeen  perpetuated  in  the  Romish 
Church  down  to  recent  times: — 

"  Littera  gesta  docet ;  quid  credas,  Allegoria; 
Moralis  quid  agas;  quo  tendas,  Aiiagogia" — 
and  in  which,  it  will  be  observed,  in  conformity 
with  the  practice  rather  than  the  precept  of  Origen, 
the  moral  or  tropological  interpretation   is  raised 
above  the  allegorical  or  spiritual.        « 

The  principles  laid  down  by  master-minds,  not- 
withstiinding  the  manifold  lapses  made  in  the  appli- 
cation of  them,  necessarily  exerted  the  deepest  in- 
fluence on  all  who  were  actually  engaged  in  the 
work  of  interpretation.  The  influence  of  Origen's 
writings  was  supreme  in  the  Greek  Chui'ch  for  a 
hundred  years  after  his  death.  Towards  the  end  of 
the  4th  century  Diodore,  bishop  of  Tarsus,  pre- 
viously a  presbyter  at  Antioch,  wrote  an  exposition 
of  the  whole  of  the  0.  T.,  attending  only  to  the 
letter  of  Scripture,  and  rejecting  the  more  spiritual 
interpretation  known  as  Oecopia,  the  contemplation 
of  things  represented  under  an  outward  sign.  He 
also  wrote  a  work  on  the  distinction  between  this 
last  and  allegory.  Of  the  disciples  of  Diodore, 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  pursued  an  exclusively  gram- 
matical interpretation  into  a  decided  rationalism, 
rejecting  the  greater  part  of  the  prophetical  re- 
ference of  the  0.  T.,  and  maintaining  it  to  be  only 
applied  to  our  Saviour  by  way  of  accommodation. 
Chrysostom,  another  disciple  of  Diodore,  followed  a 
sounder  course,  rejecting  neither  the  literal  nor  the 
spiritual  interpretation,  but  bringing  out  with  much 
force  from  Scripture  its  moral  lessons.  He  was 
followed  by  Theodoret,  who  interpreted  both  lite- 
rally and  historically,  and  also  allegorically  and  pro- 
phetically. His  commentaries  dis))lay  both  dili- 
gence and  soberness,  and  are  uniformly  instructive 
and  pleasing:  in  some  respects  none  are  more  va- 
luable. Yet  his  mind  was  not  of  the  highest  order. 
He  kept  the  historical  and  prophetical  interpreta- 
tions too  widely  apart,  instead  of  making  the  one 
lean  upon  the  other.  Where  historical  iflustration 
was  abunilant,  he  was  content  to  rest  in  that,  in- 
stead of  finding  in  it  larger  help  for  pressing  onward 
to  the  development  of  the  spiritual  sense.  So  again 
wherever  prophecy  was  literally  fulfilled,  he  gene- 
rally rested  too  much  in  the  mere  outward  verifi- 
cation, not  caring  to  enquire  whether  the  literal 
fulfilment  was  not  itself  necessarily  a  type  of  some- 
thing beyond.  In  the  Canticles,  however,  where 
the  language  of  Scripture  is  directly  allegorical,  he 
severely  reprehends  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  for  im- 
posing a  liistorical  interpretation  upon  it :  even 
Diodore  the  literal  interpreter,  Theodore's  master, 
had  judged,  as  we  learn  from  Theodoret,  that  that 
book  was  to  be  spiritually  understood. 

In  the  Western  Church  the  influence  of  Origen, 
if  not  so  unqualified  at  the  first,  was  yet  penna- 
neiitly  greiitei-  than  in  the  Eastern.  Hilary  of 
Poitiers  is  said  by  Jerome  to  have  diawu  largely 
from  Origen  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Psalms. 
But  in  truth,  as  a  practical  inter})ieter,  he  greatly 
excelled  Origen  ;  caret'ully  seeking  out  not  what 
meaning  the  Scripture  might  bear,  but  What  it 
really  intended,  and  drawing  foith  the  evangelical 
sense  from  the  litei-al  with,  cogency,  terseness,  and 
elegance.  Here  too  Augustine  stood  somewhat  in 
advanceof  Origen ;  carefully  preserving  in  its  integrity 


"  That  Is,  morally.  The  term  xpoiroAoyta,  which  had 
in  Justin  and  Origen  denoted  the  doctrine  of  tropes,  was 
pel  baps  tirsl  applied  by  Jerome  to  the  doctrine  of  niaimerg ; 


in  which  sense  it  is  also  used  by  later  Greek  writws,  iis 

Andreas. 


614 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


the  litei'al  sense  of  the  historical  narrative  of  Scrip- 
ture as  the  substructure  of  the  mystical,  lest  other- 
wise the  latter  should  prove  to  be  but  a  building  in 
the  air  (Serm.  2,c.  6).  It  seems  tlierefore  to  have 
been  rather  as  a  traditional  maxim  than  as  the 
expression  of  his  own  conviction,  that  he  allowed 
that  whatever  in  Scripture  had  no  proper  or  literal 
reference  to  honestv  of  manners,  or  to  the  truth  of 
the  faith,  might  by  that  be  recognized  as  tlgurative 
{De  Doctt.  Chr.  iii.  10).  He  fully  acknowledges, 
however,  that  all,  or  nearly  all,  in  the  0.  T.  is  to 
be  taken  not  only  literally  but  also  figuratively 
(ib.  22)  ;  and  bids  us  earnestly  beware  of  taking 
literally  that  which  is  figuratively  spoken  (ib. 
5).  The  fourfold  classification  of  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  0.  T.  which  had  been  handed  down  to 
iiim,  literal,  aetiological,  analogical,  allegorical,  is 
neither  so  definite  nor  so  logical  as  Origen's  (De 
Util.  Cred.  2,  3  ;  De  Gm.  ad  Lit.  lib.  imp.  2) :  on 
the  other  hand  neither  are  the  rules  of  Tichonius, 
which  he  rejects,  of  much  value.  .Still  it  is  not  so 
much  by  the  accuracy  of  his  ])rinciples  of  exposition 
as  by  what  his  expositions  contain  that  he  is  had  in 
honour.  No  more  spiritually-minded  interpreter 
ever  lived.  The  main  source  of  the  blemishes  by 
which  his  interpretations  aie  disfigured,  is  his  lack 
of  acquaintance  with  Hebrew;  a  lack  indeed  far 
more  painfully  evident  in  the  writings  of  the  Latin 
Fathers  than  in  those  of  the  (ireek.  It  was  partly, 
no  doubt,  from  a  consciousness  of  his  own  short- 
comings in  this  respect  that  Augustine  urged  the 
importance  of  such  an  acquaintance  (De  Doctr. 
Chr.  v..  11  seqq.)  ;  rightly  judging  also  that  all  the 
external  scientific  equipments  of  the  intei-preter  of 
Scripture  were  not  more  important  for  the  disco- 
very of  the  literal  than  for  that  of  the  mystical 
meaning. 

But  whatever  advances  had  been  nuide  in  the 
treatment  of  0.  T.  scripture  by  the  Latins  since  tlie 
days  of  Origen  were  unhaj'pily  not  perpetuated. 
We  may  see  this  in  the  Blorals  of  Gregory  on  the 
Book  of  Job  ;  the  last  great  independent  work  of  a 
Latin  Father.  Three  senses  of  the  sacred  text  are 
iiere  recognized  and  j)ursued  in  separate  threads  ; 
the  historical  and  literal,  the  allegorical,  and  the 
moral.  But  the  three  have  hardly  any  mutual 
connexion :  the  very  idea  of  such  a  connexion  is 
ignored.  The  allegorical  interpretation  is  conse- 
quently entirely  arbitrary  ;  and  the  moral  interpre- 
tation is,  in  conformity  with  the  practice,  not  with 
tiie  principles,  of  Origen,  ])Iaced  after  the  allego- 
rical, so  called,  and  is  itself  every  whit  as  allegorical 
as  the  former.  They  differ  only  in  their  aims :  that 
of  ths  one  is  to  set  forth  the  history  of  Christ ;  that 
iif  the  other  to  promote  the  edification  of  the  Church 
by  a  reference  of  the  language  to  the  inward  work- 
ings of  the  soul.  No  effort  is  made  to  apprehend 
the  mutual  I'elation  of  the  diffei-ent  parts  of  the 
book,  or  the  moral  lessons  which  the  course  of  the 
argument  in  that  pre-eminently  moral  book  was 
intended  to  bring  out.  Such  was  the  general  cha- 
racter of  the  interpretation  which  yirevailed  through 
the  middle  ages,  during  which  Gregory's  work  stood 
in  high  repute.  The  mystical  sense  of  Scripture 
was  entirely  divorced  from  the  literal.  Some  guid- 
ance, however,  in  the  paths  of  even  the  most  arbi- 
trai-y  allegorism  was  found  practically  necessary  ; 
and  this  was  obtained  in  the  uniformity  of  the 
mystical  sense  attaiiied  to  the  seveial  .scriptural 
terms.  Hence  the  dictionary  of  the  allegorical 
meanings. — partly  genuine,  partly  conventional — of 
scriptural  terms  compiled  in  the  9th  century  by 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Rabanus  Maurus,  An  exceptional  value  may  attach 
to  some  of  the  mediaeval  comments  on  tiie  0.  T., 
as  those  of  Rupert  of  Deutz  (f  1135);  but  in  ge- 
neral even  those  which,  like  Gregory's  Morals,  are 
prized  for  their  treasures  of  religious  thought,  have 
little  worth  as  interpretations. 

The  first  impulse  to  the  new  investigation  of  the 
literal  meaning  of  the  text  of  the  0.  T.  came  from 
the  great  Jewish  commentators,  mostly  of  Spanish 
origin,  of  the  11th  and  following  centuries;  Jarchi 
(t  110.5),  Aben  Ezra  (f  1167),  Kimchi  (f  1240), 
and  others.  Following  in  the  wake  of  these,  the 
converted  Jew  Nicolaus  of  Lyre,  near  Evi-eux,  in 
Normandy  ff  1341),  produced  his  Postillae  I'er- 
petuae  on  the  Bible,  in  which,  without  denying  the 
deeper  meanings  of  Scripture,  he  justly  contended 
for  the  literal  as  that  on  which  they  all  must  rest. 
Exception  was  taken  to  these  a  century  later  by 
Paul  of  Burgos,  also  a  converted  Jew  (f  1435), 
wlio  upheld,  by  the  side  of  the  literal,  the  tradi- 
tional interpretations,  to  which  he  was  probably  at 
heart  exclusively  attached.  But  the  very  argu- 
ments by  which  he  sought  to  vindicate  them  showed 
that  the  recognition  of  the  value  of  the  literal  inter- 
pretation had  taken  firm  root.  The  Restoration  of 
Letters  helped  it  forward.  The  Reformation  con- 
tributed in  many  ways  to  unfold  its  importance ; 
and  the  position  of  Luther  with  regard  to  it  is 
embodied  in  his  saying  "  Optimum  grammaticum, 
eum  etiam  optimum  theologum  esse."  That  gi-am- 
matical  scholarship  is  not  indeed  the  only  qualifica- 
tion of  a  sound  theologian,  the  German  commen- 
taries of  the  last  hundred  years  have  abundantly 
shown :  yet  where  others  have  sown,  the  Church 
eventually  reaps ;  and  it  would  be  ungrateful  to 
close  any  liistorical  sketch  of  the  intei-pretation  of 
the  0.  T.  without  aclmowledging  the  immense  ser- 
vice rendered  to  it  by  modern  Germany,  through 
the  labours  ami  learning  alike  of  the  disciples  of  the 
ueologiau  school,  and  of  those  who  have  again  reared 
aloft  the  banner  of  the  faith. 

In  respect  of  the  0.  T.  tj-pes,  an  important 
difference  has  prevailed  among  ]*rotestaiit  inter- 
preters between  the  adherents  and  opponents  of  that 
school  which  is  usually,  from  one  of  the  most  emi- 
nent of  its  representatives,  denominated  the  Cocceian, 
and  which  practically,  though  perhaps  unconsci- 
ously, trod  much  in  the  steps  of  the  earlier  Fathers, 
Justin,  Irenaeus,  and  Tertullian.  Cocceius,  pro- 
fessor at  Leyden  (f  1669),  justly  maintained  that  a 
typical  meaning  ran  throughout  the  whole  of  the 
Jewish  scriptures  ;  but  his  principle  that  Scrij)ture 
signifies  whatever  it  can  signify  (quicquid  potest 
significare),  as  applied  by  him,  opened  the  door  for 
an  almost  boundless  licence  of  the  interpreter's  fancy. 
The  arbitrariness  of  the  Cocceian  interpretations 
provoked  eventually  a  no  less  arbitrary  reply  ;  and, 
while  the  authority  of  the  N.  T.  as  to  the  existence 
of  scriptural  types  could  not  well  be  set  aside,  it 
became  a  common  principle  with  the  English  theo- 
logians of  the  early  part  of  the  present  century,  that 
only  those  persons  or  things  were  to  be  admitted  as 
typittil  which  were  so  ex]iressly  interpreted  jn 
Scripture — or  in  the  N.  T. — itself.  With  sounder 
judgment,  •  and  not  without  considerable  succe.ss, 
Fairbairu  has  of  late  years,  in  his  Typology  of 
Scripture,  set  the  example  of  an  investigation  of  the 
fundamental  principles  which  govern  the  typical 
connexion  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  New. 
(See,  for  further  information,  .1.  G.  Kosenmiillcr's 
contemptuous  ffistoriu  Fnierprctationis  ab  Aposio- 
lorurn  Aetata  ad  Literurum  Instaurationem,  5  vols.. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

1795-1814;  Sleyer's  Gcich.  der  Schriftcr/ddning 
seit  der  WicderhersteUnng  der  Wissen&cluiften, 
5  vols.,  1802-9  ;  Conybeare's  Bampton  Lectures, 
1 824 ;  Olshauseu's  little  tract,  Ein  Wort  iiber 
tiefern  Schriftsinn,  1824;  and  Davidson's  Sacred 
Bermenentics,  184:^.) 

2.  Principles  of  Interpretation. — From  tlie  fore- 
going sketch  it  will  have  appeared  that  it  has  been 
very  generally  recognized  that  the  interpretation  of 
the  0.  T.  embraces  the  discovery  of  its  literal, 
moral,  and  spiritual  meiiniug.  It  has  given  occa- 
sion to  misrepresentation  to  speak  of  the  existence 
in  Scripture  of  more  than  a  single  sense :  rather, 
then,  let  it  be  said  that  there  are  in  it  three  ele- 
ments, coexisting  and  coalescing  with  each  other, 
and  generally  requiring  each  other's  presence  in 
order  that  they  may  be  severally  manifested.  Cor- 
respondingly too  there  ai-e  three  portions  of  the 
0.  T.  in  which  the  respective  elements,  each  in  its 
turn,  shine  out  with  peculiar  lustre.  The  literal 
(and  historical)  element  is  most  obviously  displayed 
in  the  historical  narrative :  the  moral  is  specially 
honoured  in  the  Law,  and  in  the  hortatory  addresses 
ol'  the  Projihets :  the  predictions  of  the  Prophets 
bear  emphatic  witness  to  the  prophetical  or  spi- 
ritual, titill,  generally,  in  every  portion  of  the 
0.  T.  the  presence  of  all  three  elements  may  by 
the  student  of  Scripture  be  traced.  In  perusing 
the  story  of  the  journey  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  wilderness,  he  has  the  historical  element  in  the 
actual  occurrence  of  the  facts  narrated ;  the  moral, 
in  the  warnings  which  God's  dealings  with  the 
people  and  their  own  several  disobediences  convey; 
and  the  spiritual  in  the  pretiguration  by  that  jour- 
ney, in  its  several  features,  of  the  Christian  pil- 
grimage through  the  wilderness  of  life.  In  investi- 
gating the  several  ordinances  of  the  Law  relating  to 
sacrifice,  he  has  the  historical  element  in  the  ob- 
servances actually  enjoined  upon  the  Israelites  ;  the 
moral  in  the  personal  unworthiness  and  self-sun-en- 
der  to  God  which  those  observances  were  designed 
to  express,  and  which  are  themselves  of  universal 
interest ;  and  the  spiritual  in  the  prefiguration  by 
those  sacrifices  of  the  one  true  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
In  bending  his  eyes  on  the  prophetical  picture  of 
the  conqueror  coming  from  Edom,  with  dyed  gar- 
ments from  Bozrah,  he  has  the  historical  element 
in  the  relations  subsisting  between  the  historical 
Edom  and  Israel,  supplying  the  language  through 
which  the  anticipations  of  triumph  are  expiessed ; 
the  moral  element  in  the  assurance  to  all  the  psr- 
spciited  of  the  condemnation  of  the  umiatural  ma- 
lignity wherewith  those  nearest  of  kin  to  themselves 
may  have  exulted  in  their  calamities  ;  and  the  spi- 
ritual, in  the  prophecy  of  the  loneliness  of  Christ's 
passion  and  of  the  gloriousness  of  his  resurrection, 
in  the  strength  of  which,  and  witii  the  signal  of 
victory  before  her,  the  Church  should  tiamjjle  down 
all  spiritual  foes  beneath  her  feet.  Yet  again,  in 
tiie  greater  number  of  the  Psalms  of  David  lie  lias 
the  historical  element  in  tho.se  events  of  David's  life 
which  the  language  of  the  psalm  retlects;  the  moral, 
in  the  moral  connexion  between  righteous  faith  and 
eventual  deliverance  by  which  it  is  pervaded  ;  and 
the  spiritual,  in  its  fore-embodiment  of  the  struggles 
of  Christ,  in  whom  it  finds  its  essential  and  perfect 
fulfilment,  and  liy  her  union  with  whom  the  Chris- 
tian Church  still  claims  and  appropriates  the  psalm 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


615 


b  Convenience  has  Introduced,  and  still  sanctions,  the 
use  of  tlrtB  somewhat  barbarous  word.  'I'lie  reader  will 
pardon  being  roniimlcd  that   tlie   term  i/rammalicul  is 


as  her  own.  In  all  these  cases  it  is  requisite  to  the 
fidl  interpretation  of  the  O.  T.  that  the  so-called 
gi-ammatico-historical,''  the  moial,  and  the  spiritual 
inteipretation  should  advance  hand  in  hand :  the 
moral  inteipretation  presupposes  the  giammatico- 
historical,  the  spiritual  rests  on  the  two  preceding. 
If  the  question  be  asked.  Are  the  three  several  ele- 
ments in  the  0.  T.  mutually  coextensive?  we  reply, 
They  are  certainly  coextensive  in  the  0.  T.,  taken 
as  a  whole,  and  in  the  several  portions  of  it,  largely 
viewed  ;  yet  not  so  as  that  they  are  all  to  be  traced 
in  each  several  section.  The  historical  element  may 
occasionally  exist  alone  ;  for,  however  full  a  history 
may  be  of  deeper  meanings,  there  must  also  needs 
be  found  in  it  connecting  links  to  hold  the  signifi- 
cant parts  of  it  together  :  otheiwise  it  sinks  from  a 
history  into  a  mere  succession  of  pictures.  Not  to 
cite  doubtfid  instances,  the  genealogies,  the  details 
of  the  I'oute  through  the  wilderness  and  of  the  sub- 
sequent partition  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  account 
of  the  war  which  was  to  furnish  the  occasion  for 
God's  providenti;d  dealings  with  Abraham  and  Lot 
(Gen.  xiv.  1-12),  are  obvious  and  simple  instimces 
of  such  links.  On  the  other  hand  there  are  passages 
of  direct  and  simple  moral  exhortation,  e.  g.  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  book  of  Proverbs,  into  which 
the  historical  element  hardly  enters :  the  same  is 
the  case  with  Psalm  i.,  which  is,  as  it  were,  the 
moral  preface  to  the  psalms  which  follow,  designed 
to  call  attention  to  the  moral  element  which  per- 
vades them  generally.  Occasionally  also,  as  in 
Psalm  ii.,  which  is  designed  to  bear  witness  of  the 
prophetical  import  running  through  the  Psalms,  tlje 
prophetical  element,  though  not  altogether  divorced 
from  the  historical  and  the  moral,  yet  completely 
overshadows  them.  It  is  moreover  a  maxim  which 
cainiot  be  too  strongly  enforced,  that  the  historical, 
moral,  or  prophetical  interest  of  a  section  of  Scrip- 
ture, or  even  of  an  entii-e  book,  may  lie  rather  in 
the  general  tenour  and  result  of  the  whole  than  in 
any  number  of  separate  passages :  e.  g.  the  moral 
teaching  of  the  book  of  Job  lies  pre-eminently  not 
in  the  truths  which  the  several  speeches  may  con- 
tain, but  in  the  great  moral  lesson  to  the  unfolding 
of  which  they  are  all  gradually  working. 

That  we  should  use  the  New  Testament  as  the 
key  to  the  true  meaning  of  the  Old,  and  should 
seek  to  interpret  the  latter  as  it  was  interpreted  by 
our  Lord  and  His  apostles,  is  in  accordance  both 
with  the  spirit  of  what  the  earlier  Fathers  asserted 
respecting  the  value  of  the  tradition  received  from 
tiiem,  and  with  the  appeals  to  the  N.  T.  by  which 
Origen  defended  and  fortified  the  threefold  method 
of  interpretation.  But  here  it  is  the  analogy  of  the 
N.  T.  interpietations  that  we  must  follow  ;  for  it 
were  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  whole  of  the 
Olil  Testament  would  be  found  completely  inter- 
preted in  the  New.  Nor,  provided  only  a  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  Old  Testament  be  in  the  New  sufli- 
cieatly  recognized,  does  it  seem  much  more  reason- 
able to  expect  every  separate  type  to  be  there  indi- 
aited  or  explained,  or  the  fulfilment  of  every 
l)ro[)hecy  noted,  than  it  would  be  to  expect  that  the 
N.  T.  should  unlblil  the  historical  importance  or 
the  moral  lesson  of  every  separate  portion  of  the 
0.  T.  history.  Why  indeed  should  we  assume  that 
a  full  interpretation  in  any  single  respect  of  the 
older  volume  would   be  given  in  another  of  less 

the  equivalent  of  literal;  being  derived  fl-om  ypiiiita, 

"  letter,"  not  from  -ypan/naTKo/.  "  prnmniur." 


616 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


than  a  quarter  of  its  bulk,  the  primaiy  design  of 
which  is  not  expository  at  all,  and  that  when  the 
use  actually  made  of  the  former  in  the  latter  is  in 
kind  so  manifold  ?  The  Apostles  nowhere  profess 
to  give  a  systematic  interprefcition  of  the  0.  T. 
The  nearest  approach  to  any  such  is  to  be  found  in 
the  explanation  of  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the 
Mosaic  ritual  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  and 
even  here  it  is  expressly  declaied  that  there  are 
many  things  "  of  which  we  cannot  now  speak  par- 
ticularly ""(ix.  5).  We  may  well  allow  that  the 
substance  of  all  the  0.  T.  shadows  is  in  the  N.  T. 
contained,  without  holding  that  the  several  relations 
between  the  substance  and  the  shadows  are  there  in 
each  case  authoritatively  traced. 

With  these  preliminary  observations  we  may 
glance  at  the  several  branches  of  the  interpreter's 
task. 

First,  then,  Scripture  h;is  its  outward  fomi  or 
body,  all  the  several  details  of  which  he  will  have 
to  explore  and  to  analyse.  He  must  ascertain  the 
thing  outwardly  asserted,  commanded,  foretold, 
prayed  for,  or  the  like  ;  ami  this  with  reference,  so 
far  as  is  possible,  to  the  historical  occasion  and  cir- 
cumstances, the  time,  the  place,  the  political  and 
social  position,  the  manner  of  life,  the  surrounding 
influences,  the  distinctive  character,  and  the  object 
in  view,  alike  of  the  writers,  the  persons  addressed, 
and  the  persons  who  appear  upon  the  scene.  Taken 
in  its  wide  sense,  the  outward  form  of  Scripture 
will  itself,  no  doubt,  include  much  that  is  figurative. 
How  should  it  indeed  be  otherwise,  when  all  lan- 
guage is  in  its  structure  essentially  figurative  ? 
Even,  however,  though  we  should  define  the  literal 
sense  of  words  to  be  that  which  they  signify  in 
their  usual  acceptation,  and  the  figurative  that 
which  they  intend  in  another  than  their  usual 
acceptation,  under  some  form  or  figure  of  speech, 
still  when  the  terms  literal  and  figurative  simply 
belong  (to  use  the  words  of  Van  Mildert)  "  to  the 
verbal  signification,  which  with  respect  to  the  sense 
may  be°virtually  the  same,  whether  or  not  ex- 
pressed by  trope  and  figure,"  and  when  therefore  it 
is  impossible  to  conceive  that  by  persons  of  mode- 
rate understanding  any  other  than  the  figurative 
sense  could  ever  have  been  deduced  from  the  words 
employed,  we  rightfully  account  the  investigation 
of  such  sense  a  necessary  part  of  tlie  most  ele- 
mentary interpretation.  To  the  outward  form  of 
Scripture  thus  belong  all  metonymies,  in  which  one 
name  is  substituted  for  another,  e.  g.  the  cause  for 
the  effect,  the  mouth  for  the  word  ;  and  metaphors, 
in  which  a  word  is  transformed  from  its  proper  to 
a  cognate  signification,  e.  g.  when  hardness  is  pre- 
dicated of  the  heart,  clothing  of  the  soul ;  so  also 
all  prosopopeias,  or  personifications ;  and  even  all 
anthropomorphic  and  anthropopathic  descriptions 
of  God,  which  could  never  have  been  understood  in 
a  purely  literd  sense,  at  least  by  any  of  the  right- 
minded  among  God's  people.  Kor  would  even  the 
exclusively  grammatico-historical  interpreter  deem 
it  no  part  of  his  task  to  explain  such  a  continued 
metaphor  as  that  in  Ps.  Ixxx.  8  seqq.,  or  such  a 
parable  as  that  in  Is.  v.  1-7,  or  such  a  fable  as  that 
in  Judo-,  ix.  8-15.  The  historical  element  in  such 
passages  only  comes  out  wlicn  their  allegorical  cha- 
racter is  perceived ;  nor  can  it  be  supposed  that  it 
was  ever  unpeiceived.  Still  the  primary  allegorical 
meaning  in  such  passages  may  itself  bo  an  allegory 
of  something  beyond,  with  which  latter  the  more 
rudimentar3Mnterpretfltiou  is  not  strictly  concerned. 
An  unexpectant  Jewish  reader  of  Is.  v.  1-7  might 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

have  traced  in  the  vineyard  an  image  of  the  land 
of  his  inheritance,  fenced  off  by  its  boundary 
heights,  deserts,  and  sea  from  the  surrounding 
territories — might  have  discerned  in  the  stones  the 
old  heathen  tribes  that  had  been  plucked  up  from 
off  it,  and  in  the  choice  vine  the  Israel  that  had 
been  planted  in  their  place — might  liave  identified 
the  tower  with  the  city  of  David,  as  the  symbol  of 
the  protecting  Davidic  sovereignty,  and  tlie  wine- 
press with  the  Temple,  where  the  blood  of  the 
sacrifices  was  poured  forth,  as  the  symbol  of  Israel's 
worship  ;  and  this  without  inquiring  into  or  recking 
of  the  higher  blessings  of  which  all  these  things 
were  but  the  shadows.  Yet  it  is  not  to  be  denied 
that  it  is  difficult,  perhaps  impossible,  to  draw  the 
exact  line  where  the  province  of  spiritual  inter- 
pretation begins  and  that  of  historical  ends.  On 
the  one  hand  the  spiritual  significance  of  a  passage 
may  occasionally,  perhaps  often,  throw  light  on  the 
historical  element  involved  in  it :  on  tlie  other  hand 
tlie  very  large  use  of  figurative  language  in  the 
0.  T.,  and  more  especially  in  the  prophecies,  pre- 
pares us  for  the  recognition  of  the  yet  more  deeply 
ficTirative  and  essentially  allegorical  import  which 
runs,  as  a  virSuoia,  through  the  whole. 

Yet  no  unhallowed  or  unworthy  task  can  it  ever 
be  to  study,  even  tor  its  own  sake,  the  historical 
form  in  which  the  0.  T.  comes  to  us  clothed.  It 
was  probably  to  most  of  us  one  of  the  earliest 
charms  of  our  childhood,  developing  in  us  our  sense 
of  brotherhood  with  all  that  had  gone  before  us, 
leading  us  to  feel  that  we  were  not  singular  in  that 
which  befell  us,  and  therefore,  correspondingly,  that 
we  could  not  live  for  ourselves  alone.  Even  by 
itself  it  proclaims  to  us  the  historical  workings  of 
God,  and  reveals  the  care  wherevi^ith  He  has  ever 
watched  over  the  interests  of  His  Church.  Above 
all  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  is  the  indispensable 
preface  to  the  historical  advent  of  the  Son  of  God 
in  the  flesh.  We  need  hardly  labour  to  prove  that 
the  N,  T.  recognizes  the  general  historical  character 
of  what  the  6.  T.  records.  It  is  everywhere  as- 
sumed. The  gospel-genealogies  testify  to  it :  so  too 
our  Lord  when  He  spoke  of  the  desires  of  the  pro- 
phets and  righteous  men  of  old,  or  of  all  the 
righteous  blood  shed  upon  the  earth  which  should 
be  visited  upon  His  own  generation  ;  so  too  Stephen 
and  Paul  in  their  speeches  in  the  council-chamber 
and  at  Antioch ;  so  too,  again,  the  latter,  when  he 
spoke  of  the  tilings  which  "  happened  "  unto  the 
Israelites  for  ensamples.  The  testimonies  borne  by 
our  Lord  and  His  apostles  to  the  outward  reality 
of  particular  circumstances  could  be  easily  drawn 
out  in  array,  were  it  needful.  Of  course  in  reference 
to  that  which  is  not  related  as  plain  matter  of  his- 
tory, there  will  always  remain  the  question  how 
far  the  descriptions  are  to  be  viewed  as  definitely 
historiciil,  how  far  as  drawn,  for  a  specific  purpose, 
from  the  imagination.  Such  a  question  presents 
itself,  for  example,  in  the  book  of  Job.  It  is  one 
which  must  plainly  be  in  each  case  decided  accord- 
ing to  the  particular  circumstances.  Scenes  which 
could  never  have  any  outward  reality  may,  as  in 
the  Canticles,  be  made  the  vehicle  of  spiritual  alle- 
gory ;  and  yet  even  here  the  historical  element 
meets  us  in  the  historical  person  of  the  typical 
bridegi-oom,  in  the  various  local  allusions  which  the 
allegorist  has  introduced  into  his  description,  and  in 
the  references  to  the  manners  and  customs  of  the 
age.  In  examining  the  extent  of  the  historiail  ele- 
ment in  the  prophecies,  both  of  the  projAets  and 
the  psalmists,  we  must  distinguish  between  those 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

which  we  either  definitely  know  or  may  reasonably 
assume  to  have  been  fultiUed  at  a  peiioJ  not  en- 
tirely distant  from  that  at  which  they  were  tittered, 
and  those  which  reached  far  beyond  in  their  pro- 
spective reference.    The  former,  once  fulfilled,  were 
thenceforth  annexed  to  the  domain  of  history  (Is. 
xvii.;    I's.  cvii.  33).     It  must  be  observed,  however, 
that  the  prophet  often  beheld  in  a  single  vision,  and 
therefore  delineated   as   accomplished  all  at  once, 
what  was  really,  as  in  the  case  of  the  desolation  of 
Babylon,  the  gradual  work  of  a  long  period  (Is. 
xiii.);  or,  as  in  Ezekiel's  prophecy  respecting  the 
humiliation  of  Egypt,  uttered    his  predictions  in 
such  ideal  language  as  scarcely  admitted  of  a  literal 
fulfilment  (Ez.  xxi.'c.  8-12;  see  Fairbairn  in  loco). 
With  the  prophecies  of  more  distant  scope  the  case 
stood  thus.     A  picture  was  presented  to  the  pro- 
phet's gaze,. embodying  an  outward  representation 
of  certain    future    spiritual    struggles,    judgments, 
triumphs,   or   blessings ;    a   picture    suggested    in 
general  by  the  historiciil  ciicumstances  of  the  pre- 
sent (Zech.  vi.  9-15  ;  Fs.  v.,  Ixxii.),  or  of  the  past 
(Ez.  XX.  35,  36  ;  Is.  xi.  15,  xlviii.  21 ;   Ps.  xcix.  6, 
seqq.),  or  of  the  near  future,  already  anticipated 
and  viewed   as  present   (Is.   xlix.  7-26;   Ps.  Ivii. 
6-11),  or  of  all  these,  variously  combined,  altejed, 
and  heightened  by  the  imagination.     But  it  does 
not  follow  that  that  picture  was  ever  outwardly 
brought  to  pass :  the  local  had  been  exchanged  for 
the  spiritual,  the  outward  type  had  merged  in  the 
inward  reality  before  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy 
took  eil'cct.     In  some  cases,  more  especially  those  in 
which  the  prophet  had  taken  his  stand  upon  the 
nearer  future,  there  was  a  preliminary  and  typical 
fulfilment,  or,  rather,  approach  to  it ;  for  it  seldom, 
if  ever,  coiTesponded  to  the  fidl  extent  of  the  pro- 
phecy:   the    far-reaching   import  of  the  prophecy 
would  have  been  obscured  if  it  had.    The  measuring- 
line  never  outwardly  went  forth  \ipon  Gareb  and 
compassed  about  to  Goath  (Jer.  xxxi.  39)  till  the 
days  of  Herod  Agrippa,  after  our  Saviour's  final 
doom  upon  the  literal  Jerusalem  had  been  actually 
pronounced;  and  neither  tlie  teuijile  of  Zerubbabel 
nor  that  of  Herod  corresponded  to  that  which  had 
been  beheld  in  vision  by  Ezekiel  (xl.  seqq.).    There 
are  moreover,  as  it  would   seem,  exceptional  cases 
in  which  even  the  outward  form  of  the  prophet's 
pi'edictions  was  divinely  drawn  from  the  unknown 
future  as  much  as  from  the  historical  circumstances 
with  which  he  was  familiar,  and  in  which,  conse- 
quently, the  details  of  the  imagery  by  means  of 
which  he  concentrated  all  his  conscious  conceptions 
of  the   future   were   literally,   or  almost  literally, 
verified  in  tlie  events  by  which  his  prediction  was 
fulfilled.     Such  is  the   case   in  Is.  liii.     The  Holy 
Spirit  presented  to  the  prophet  the  actual  death- 
scene  of  our  Saviour   as  the   form    in  which   his 
prophecy  of  that  event  was  to  be  embodied ;  and 
thus  we  tra(«  in  it  an  approacli  to  a  literal  history 
of  our  Saviour's  endurances  before  they  came  to 
pass. 

(Respecting  the  rudiments  of  interpretation,  let 
the  following  here  suHice  : — The  knowledge  of  the 
meanings  of  Hebrew  words  is  gathered  (a)  from  the 
context,  (6)  from  parallel  p:\ssages,  (c)  from  the 
traditional  interpretlifions  preserved  in  Jewish  com- 
mentaries and  dictionai  ies,  (cf)  from  the  ancient 
versions,  (c)  from  the  i:ognate  languages,  Ghaldee, 
Syriac,  and  Arabic.  The  syntax  must  be  almost 
wholly  gathered  from  the  O.  '1'.  itself;  and  for  the 
special  syntax  of  the  poetical  books,  while  the  im- 
portance of  a  study  of  the  Hebrew  jiarallolism  is 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


617 


now  generally  recognized,  more  attention  needs  to 
he  bestowed  than  has  been  bestowed  hitherto  on  the 
centralism  and  inversion  by  which  the  poetical 
structure  and  language  is  often  marked.  It  may 
here  too  be  in  place  to  mention,  that  of  the  various 
systematic  treatises  which  have  by  different  gene- 
rations been  put  forth  on  tlie  interpretation  of 
Scripture,  the  most  standard  work  is  the  Philologia 
Sacra  of  Sol.  Glassius  (Prof,  at  Jena,  tl656),  ori- 
ginally published  in  1623,  and  often  reprinted.  A 
new  edition  of  it,  "  accommodated  to  their  times," 
and  bearing  the  impress  of  the  theological  views  of 
the  new  editors,  was  brought  out  by  Dathe  and 
Bauer,  1776-97.  It  is  a  vast  storehouse  of  ma- 
terials ;  but  the  need  of  such  treatises  has  been  now 
much  superseded  by  the  special  labours  of  more  re- 
cent scholars  in  particular  departments.) 

From  the  outward  form  of  the  O.  T.  we  proceed 
to  its  moral  element  or  soul.    It  was  with  reference 
to  this  that  St.  Paul  declared  that  all  Scriptuie  was 
given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  was  profitable  for 
doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction 
in  righteousness  (2  Tim.  iii.  16);  and  it  is  in  the 
implicit  recognition  of  the  essentially  moral  cha- 
racter of  the  whole,  that  our  Lord  and  His  apostles 
not  only  appeal  to  its  direct  precepts  (e.  g.  Matt. 
XV.  4;  xix.   17-19),  and  set  forth  the  fulness  of 
their  bearing  (<?.  g.  Matt.  ix.  13),  but  also  lay  bare 
moral  lessons  in  0.  T.  passages  which  lie  rather  be- 
neath the  surface  than  upon  it  (Matt.  xix.  5,  6,  xxii. 
32  ;  John  x.  34,  35  ;  Acts  vii.  48,  49  ;  1  Cor.  ix.  9, 
10  ;  2  Cor.  viii.  13-15).    With  regard  more  particu- 
larly to  the  Law,  our  Lord  shows  in  His  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  how  deep  is  the  moral  teaching  implied 
in  its  letter  ;  and  in  His  denunciation  of  the  Pharisees, 
upbraids  them  for  their  omission  of  its  weightier 
matters— judgment,  mercy,  and  faith.    The  history 
too  of  the  0.  T.  finds  frequent  reference  made  iu 
the  N.  T.  to  its  moral  teaching  (Luke  vi.  3;   Rom. 
iv.,  ix.  17;  1  Cor.  x.  6-11;  Heb.  iii.  7-11,  xi.; 
2   Pet.  ii.  15-16;    1  John  iii.  12).    No  doubt  it 
was  with  reference  to  the  moral  instruction  to  be 
drawn  from  them  that  that  history  had  been  made 
to  dwell  at  greatest  length  on  the  events  of  greatest 
moral  importance.     The  same  reason  explains  also 
why  it  should  be  to  so  large  an  extent  biographical. 
The  interpreter  of  the  0.  T.  will  have,  among  his 
other  tasks,  to  analyse  in  the  lives  set  before  him 
the  various  yet  generally  mingled  workings  of  the 
spirit  of  holiness  and  of  the  spirit  of  sin.     He  must 
not  fall  into  the  eri'or  of  supposing  that  any  of  tiie 
lives  are  those  of  perfect  men  ;  Scripture  nowhere 
asserts  or  implies  it,  and  the  sins  of  even  the  best 
testify  against  it.     Nor  must  he  expect  to  be  ex- 
pressly informed  of  each  recorded  action,  any  more 
than  of  each    sentiment  delivered  by  the   several 
speakers  in  the  book  of  Job,  whether  it  were  com- 
mendable or  the  contraiy  ;  nor  must  we  assume,  as 
.some  have  done,  that  Scripture  identifies  itself  with 
every  action  of  a  saintly  man  which,  without  openly 
condemning,  it  records.    Tiie  moral  errors  by  which 
the  lives  of  even  the  greatest  O.  T.  saints  were  dis- 
figured are  related,  and  that  for  our  instruction, 
but  not  generally  criticized:  c.ij.  that  of  Abraham 
when,  already  once  warned  in   l'>gyi)t,  he  suffered 
the  king  of  Gerar  to  suppose  that  Sarali  was  merely 
his  sistei';    or  that  of  I'avid,  when,   by   feigning 
himself  mad,  he  practised  deceit  upon  Acliish.    'I'he 
interpreter  of  Scripture  has  no  warrant  lor  shutting 
his  eves  to  such  ejrors  ;   certainly  not  the  warrant 
of  David,  who  himself  virtually  conlkssed  them  in 
Ps.  xxxiv.  (see  especially  vcr.  13).     He  must  ac- 


618 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


knowledge  and  commend  the  holy  faith  which  lay 
at  the  root  of  the  earliest  recorded  deeds  of  Jacob,  a 
i'aith  rewarded  by  his  becoming  the  lieir  of  God's 
promises ;  but  he  must  no  less  acknowledge  and 
condemn  Jacob's  unbrotherly  deceit  and  filial  dis- 
obedience, oflences  punished  by  the  sorrows  that 
attended  hira  from  his  flight  into  Mesopotamia  to 
the  day  of  his  death.  And  should  he  be  tempted 
to  desire  that  in  such  cases  the  0.  T.  had  distin- 
guished more  directly  and  authoritatively  the  good 
from  the  evil,  he  will  ask,  Would  it  in  that  aise 
have  spoken  as  efi'ectually  ?  Are  not  our  thoughts 
more  drawn  out,  and  our  affections  more  engaged, 
by  studying  a  man's  character  in  the  records  of  his 
life  than  in  a  summary  of  it  ready  prepared  for  us? 
Is  it  in  a  dried  and  labelled  collection  of  specimens, 
or  in  a  living  garden  where  the  flowers  have  all  their 
several  imperfections,  that  we  best  learn  to  appre- 
ciate the  true  beauties  of  floral  nature  ?  The  true 
glory  of  the  0.  T.  is  here  the  choice  richness  of  the 
garden  into  which  it  conducts  us.  It  sets  before  us 
just  those  lives — the  lives  generally  of  religious 
men — which  will  best  repay  our  study,  and  will 
most  sti'ongly  suggest  the  moral  lessons  that  God 
would  have  us  learn  ;  and  herein  it  is  that,  in  regard 
of  the  moral  aspects  of  the  0.  T.  history,  we  may 
most  surely  trace  the  overruling  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  by  which  the  sacred  historians  wrote. 

But  the  0.  T.  has  further  its  spii'itual  and  there- 
foi'e  prophetical  element,  the  result  of  that  organic 
unity  of  sacred  history  by  means  of  which  the  same 
God  who  in  His  wisdom  delayed,  till  the  fulness  of 
time  should  be  come,  the  advent  of  His  Son  into  the 
world,  ordained  that  all  the  career  and  worship  of 
His  earlier  people  should  outwardly  anticipate  the 
glories  of  the  Redeemer  and  of  His  spiritually  ran- 
somal  Church.  Our  attention  is  here  first  attracted 
to  the  avowedly  predictive  parts  of  the  0.  T.,  of 
the  prospective  reference  of  which,  at  the  time  that 
they  were  uttered,  no  question  can  exist,  and  the 
majority  of  which  still  awaited  their  fulfilment 
when  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  was  born.  No 
new  covenant  had  up  to  that  time  been  inaugu- 
rated (Jer.  xxxi.  31-40);  no  temple  built  corre- 
sponding to  that  which  Ezekiel  had  described  (xl. 
seqq.)  ;  nor  had  the  new  David  ere  that  arisen  to 
be  a  prince  in  Israel  (ib.  xxxiv.).  With  Christ  then 
the  new  era  of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy  com- 
menced. In  Him  weie  to  be  fulfilled  all  things  that 
were  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  Pro- 
phets, and  in  the  Psalms,  concerning  Him  (Luke 
xxiv.  44 ;  of.  Matt.  xxvi.  54,  &c.).  A  marvellous 
amount  there  was  in  His  person  of  the  verification 
of  the  very  letter  of  pi'ophecy — partly  that  it  might 
be  seen  how  definitely  all  had  pointed  to  Him  ; 
partly  because  His  outward  mission,  up  to  the  time 
of  His  death,  was  but  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Israel,  and  the  letter  had  not  yet  been  finally 
superseded  by  the  spirit.  Yet  it  would  plainly  be 
impossible  to  suppose  that  the  significance  of  such 
prophecies  as  Zech.  ix.  9  was  exhausted  by  the 
mere  outward  verification;  and  with  the  delivery 
of  Christ  by  His  own  people  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
the  doom  on  the  city  of  Jerusalem  for  rejecting  Him, 
and  the  ratification  of  the  new  covenant  by  His 
death,  and  the  subsequent  mission  of  the  apostles 
to  all  nations,  all  consummated  by  the  final  blow 
which  fell  within  forty  years  on  the  once  chosen 
people  of  God,  the  outward  blessings  had  merged 
for  ever  in  the  spiritual,  and  the  typicid  Israelitish 
nation  in  the  Church  Universal. 

Hence  the  entire  absence  from  the  N.  T.  of  any 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

recognition,  by  either  Christ  or  His  apostles,  of  such 
prospective  outward  glories  as  the  prophecies,  lite- 
rally interpreted,  would  still  have  implied.  No  hope 
of  outward  restoration  mingled  with  the  sentence  of 
outward  doom  which  Christ  uttered  forth  on  tiie 
nation  from  which  He  Himself  had  sprung  (Matt.  xxi. 
43,  xxiii.  38,  xxiv.  2);  no  old  outward  deliverances 
with  the  spiritual  salvation  which  He  and  His 
apostles  declared  to  be  still  in  store  for  those  of  the 
race  of  Israel  who  should  believe  on  Him  (Jlatt. 
xxiii.  39;  Acts  iii.  19-21;  Rom.  xi. ;  2  Cor,  iii. 
16j.  The  language  of  the  ancient  prophecies  is 
everywhere  applied  to  the  gathering  together,  the 
privileges,  and  the  triumphs  of  the  universal  body 
of  Christ  (John  x.  16,  xi.  52  ;  Acts  ii.  39,  xv. 
15-17;  Rom.  ix.  25,  26,32,33,  x.  11,  13,  xi.  25, 
26,  27;  2  Cor.  vi.  16-18  ;  Gal.  iv.  27  ;  1  Pet.  ii. 
4-6,  10  ;  Rev.  iii.  7,  8,  xx.  8,  9,  xxi.  jxii.);  above 
all,  in  the  crowning  passage  of  the  apostolic  inter- 
pretation of  O.  T.  prophecy  (Heb.  xii.  22),  in  which 
the  Christian  Church  is  distinctly  marked  out  as 
the  Zion  of  whose  glory  all  the  prophets  had  spoken. 
Even  apart,  however,  from  the  authoritative  inter- 
pretation thus  placed  upon  them,  the  prophecies 
contain  within  themselves,  in  sufficient  measure, 
the  evidence  of  their  spiritual  import.  It  could  not 
be  that  the  literal  Zion  should  be  greatly  raised  in 
physical  height  (Is.  ii.  2),  or  all  the  Holy  Land 
levelled  to  a  plain  (Zech.  xiv.  10),  or  portioned  out 
by  straight  lines  and  in  rectangles,  without  regard 
to  its  physical  confoiTiiation  (Ez.  xlv.)  ;  or  that 
the  city  of  Jerusalem  should  lie  to  the  south  of  tlie 
Temple  (ib.  xl.  2),  and  at  a  distance  of  five  miles 
from  it  (ib.  xlv.  6),  and  yet  that  it  should  occupy 
its  old  place  (Jer.  xxxi.  38,  39 ;  Zech.  xii.  10) ;  or 
that  holy  waters  should  issue  from  Jerusalem,  in- 
creasing in  depth  as  they  roll  on,  not  through  the 
accession  of  any  tributary  streams,  but  simply  be- 
cause their  source  is  beneath  the  sanctuary  (Ez. 
xlvii.).  Nor  could  it  well  be  that,  after  a  long  loss 
of  genealogies  and  title-deeds,  the  Jews  should  be 
reorganized  in  their  tribes  and  families  (Zech.  xii. 
12-14;  Mai.  iii.  3;  Ez.  xliv.  15,  xlviii.),  and  set- 
tled after  their  old  estates  (Ez.  xxxvi.  11).  Nor 
again,  that  aU  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  should 
go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship,  not  only  to  the 
festivals  (Zech.  xiv.  16),  but  even  monthly  and 
weekly  (Is.  l,xvi.  23),  and  yet  that  while  Jerusalem 
were  thus  the  seat  of  worship  for  the  whole  world, 
there  should  also  be  altars  everywhere  (Is.  xix.  19  ; 
Zeph.  ii.  11;  Mai.  i.  11),  both  being  reallj  but 
different  expressions  of  the  same  sjjiritual  truth — 
the  extension  of  God's  pure  worship  to  all  nations. 
Nor  can  we  suppose  that  Jews  will  ever  again  out- 
wardly triumph  over  heathen  nations  that  have 
long  disappeared  from  the  stage  of  history  (Am.  ix. 
Il,''l2;  Is.  xi.  14;  Mic.  v.  5;  Ob.  17-21).-  Nor 
will  sacrifices  be  renewed  (Ez.  xliii.  &c.)  when 
Christ  has  by  one  offering  perfected  for  ever  them 
that  are  sanctified  ;  nor  will  a  special  sanctity  yet 
attach  to  Jerusalem,  when  the  hour  is  come  that 
"  neither  in  this  mountain  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem  " 
shall  men  worship  the  Father ;  nor  yet  to  the  na- 
tural Israel  (cf.  Joel  iii.  4),  when  in  Christ  there 
is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  all  believers  being  now 
alike  the  circumcision  (Phil.  iii.  3)  and  Abraham's 
seed  ((jial.  iii.  29),  and  the  name  Israel  being  fre- 
quently used  in  the  N.  T.  of  the  whole  Christian 
Church  (Matt.  xix.  28  ;  Luke  xxii.  30;  Rom.  xi. 
26  ;   Gal.  vi.  16;  cf.  Rev.  vii.  4,  xxi.  12). 

The  substance  therefore  of  these  prophecies  is  tlie 
gloi'y  of  the   Redeemer's  spiritual  kingdom :   it  is 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  the  form  that  is  derived  fiom  tlie  outward  cir- 
cumstances of  the  career  of  God's  ancient  people, 
which  had  passed,  or  all  but  passed,  away  before 
the  fulfilment  of  the  promised  blessuigs  commenced. 
The  one  Iviugdom  was  inileed  to  merge  into  rather 
than  to  be  violently  replaced  by  the  other;  the 
holy  seed  of  old  was  to  be  the  stock  of  the  new 
generation ;  men  of  all  nations  were  to  take  liold  of 
the  skirt  of  the  Jew,  and  Israelitish  apostles  were 
to  become  the  patriarchs  of  the  new  Christian  com- 
munity. Nor  was  even  the  form  in  which  the 
announcement  of  the  new  blessings  had  been  clothed 
to  be  rudely  cast  aside ;  the  imagery  of  the  prophets 
is  on  every  account  justly  dear  to  us,  and  from 
love,  no  less  than  from  habit,  we  still  speak  the 
language  of  Canaan.  But  then  arises  the  (luestion. 
Must  not  this  language  have  been  divinely  designed 
from  the  first  as  the  language  of  God's  Church  ? 
Is  it  easily  to  be  supposed  that  the  prophets,  whose 
writings  form  so  large  a  portion  of  the  Bible,  should 
have  so  extensively  used  the  history  of  the  old 
Israel  as  the  garment  wherein  to  enwrap  their  de- 
lineations of  the  blessings  of  the  new,  and  yet  that 
that  history  should  not  be  in  itself  essentially  an 
anticipation  of  what  the  promised  Redeemer  wa-s  to 
bring  with  him  ?  Besides,  the  typical  import  of 
the  Israelitish  tabernacle  and  ritual  worsliip  is  im- 
plied in  Heb.  ix.  ("  The  Holy  Ghost  this  signi- 
tying"),  and  is  almost  universally  allowed  ;  audit 
is  not  easy  to  tear  asunder  the  events  of  Israel's 
history  from  the  ceremonies  of  Israel's  worship ; 
nor  yet,  again,  the  events  of  the  preceding  history 
of  the  patriarchs  from  those  of  the  history  of  Isiael. 
The  N.  T.  itself  implies  the  typical  import  of  a 
large  part  of  the  0.  T.  narrative.  The  original 
dominion  conferred  upon  man  (1  Cor.  xv.  27  ;  Heb. 
ii.  8),  the  rest  of  God  on  the  seventh  day  (Heb.  iv. 
4),  the  institution  of  marriage  (Eph.  v.  31),  are  in 
it  all  invested  with  a  deeper  and  prospective  mean- 
ing. So  also  the  offering  and  martyrdom  of  Abel 
(Heb.  xi.  4,  xii.  24)  ;  the  preservation  of  Noah  and 
his  family  in  the  ark  (1  Pet.  iii.  21)  ;  the  priest- 
hood of  Melchizedek  (Heb.  vii.,  following  Ps.  ex. 
4)  ;  the  mutual  relation  of  Sarah  and  Hagar,  and  of 
their  children  (Gal.  iv.  22,  seqq.) ;  the  offering 
and  rescue  of  Isaac  (Rom.  viii.  32;  Heb.  xi.  19  j; 
the  favour  of  God  to  Jacob  rather  than  Ksau  (l!om. 
ix.  lO-l.'],  following  Mai.  i.  2,  3);  the  sojourn  of 
Israel  in  Egypt  (Matt.  ii.  15)  ;  the  passover  feast 
(1  Cor.  V.  7,  8);  the  shepherdship  of  Moses  (Heb. 
xiii.  20,  cf.  Is.  Lxiii.  11,  Sept.);  his  veiling  of  his 
face  at  Sinai  (2  Cor.  iii.  1.'!)  ;  the  ratification  of  the 
covenant  by  blood  (Heb.  ix.  18,  seqq.) ;  the  priestly 
character  of  the  chosen  people  (1  Pet.  ii.  9) ;  God's 
outward  piesence  with  them  (2  Cor.  vi.  Ifi);  the 
various  events  in  their  pilgrimage  through  the 
desert  (1  Cor.  x,),  and  specially  the  eating  of  manna 
from  heaven  (Matt.  iv.  4;  John  vi.  48-51);  the 
lifting  up  of  the  brasen  serpent  (John  iii.  14)  ;  the 
jiromise  of  the  divine  presence  with  Israel  after  tlie 
removal  of  Moses,  their  shepherd,  from  them  (llch. 
xiii.  5,  of.  Deut.  xxxi.  0)  ;  the  kingdom  of  David 
(Luke  i.  32,  33) ;  and  the  devouring  of  Jonah 
(Matt.  xii.  40).  If  some  of  these  instances  be 
deemed  doubtful,  let  at  least  the  rest  be  duly 
weighed,  and  this  not  without  regard  to  the  cumu- 
lative force  of  the  whole.  In  the  ().  T.  itself  we 
have,  and  this  even  in  the  latest  times,  events  and 
persons  expressly  treated  as  typical :  c.  ij.  the 
making  the  once-rejected  stone  the  headstone  of  the 
corner  (probabiy  a  historical  incident  in  the  laying 
of  the  foundation  of  the  second  Temple,  I's.  cxviii. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


619 


22)  ;  the  arraying  of  Joshua  the  high  priest  with 
fair  garments  (Zech.  iii.),  and  the  placing  of  crowns 
on  his  head  to  symbolize  the  union  of  royalty  and 
priesthood  (Zech.  vi.  9,  seqq.).  A  furtlier  testi- 
mony to  the  typical  character  of  the  history  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  furnished  by  the  typical  character 
of  the  events  related  even  in  the  New.  All  our 
Lord's  miracles  were  essentially  typical,  and  are 
almost  universally  so  acknowledged :  the  works  of 
mercy  which  He  wiought  outwardly  on  the  body 
betokening  His  corresponding  opoations  within 
man's  soul.  So  too  the  outward  fulfilments  of  pro- 
phecy in  the  Redeemer's  life  were  ty])es  of  the 
deeper  though  less  immediately  striking  fulfilment 
which  it  was  to  continue  to  receive  ideally  ;  and  if 
tliis  deeper  and  more  spiiitual  significance  underlie 
the  literal  narrative  of  the  New  Testament,  how 
much  more  that  of  the  Old,  which  was  so  essentially 
designed  as  a  preparation  for  the  good  things  to 
come  !  A  remarkable  and  honourable  testimony  on 
this  subject  was  borne  in  his  later  years  by  De  Wette. 
"  Long  before  Christ  appeared,"  he  says,  "  the  world 
was  prepared  for  His  appearance :  the  entire  0.  T.  is 
a  great  prophecy,  a  great  type  of  Him  who  was  to 
come,  and  did  come.  Who  can  deny  that  the  holy 
seers  of  the  0.  T.  saw,  in  spirit,  the  advent  of  Christ 
long  beforehand,  and  in  prophetic  anticipations  of 
greater  or  less  clearness  had  presages  of  the  new 
doctrine?  The  typological  comparison  too  of  the 
Old  Testament  with  the  New  was  no  mere  play  of 
fancy  ;  and  it  is  scarcely  altogether  accidental  that 
the  evangelic  histoiy,  in  the  most  important  par- 
ticulars, runs  parallel  with  the  Mosaic"  (cited  by 
Tholuck,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Nqw). 

It  is  not  unlikely  that  there  is  in  many  quarters 
an  unwillingness  to  recognize  the  spiritual  element 
in  the  historical  parts  of  the  0.  T.,  arising  from 
the  fear  that  the  recognition  of  it  may  endanger 
that  of  the  historical  truth  of  the  events  recorded. 
Nor  is  such  danger  altogether  visionary ;  for  one- 
sided and  prejudiced  contemplation  will  be  ever 
so  abusing  one  element  of  Scripture  as  thereby  to 
cast  a  slight  upon  the  rest.  But  this  docs  not  affect 
its  existence ;  and  on  the  other  hand  there  are  cer- 
tainly cases  in  which  the  spiritual  element  confirms 
the  outward  reality  of  tlie  historical  fact.  So  is  it 
with  the  devouring  of  Jonah ;  which  many  would 
consign  to  the  region  of  parable  or  myth,  not  appa- 
rently from  any  result  of  criticism,  which  is  indeed 
at  a  loss  to  find  an  origin  for  the  story  save  in  fact, 
but  simply  from  the  unwillingness  to  give  credit  to 
an  event  the  extraordinary  chai  afl(ter  of  which  must 
have  been  patent  from  the  first.  But  if  the  divine 
purjiose  were  to  prefigure  in  a  striking  and  ell'ective 
manner  the  passage  of  our  Saviour  through  the 
darkness  of  the  tomb,  how  coulil  any  ordinary 
event,  akin  to  ordinary  human  experience,  ade- 
quately represent  that  of  which  we  have  no  expe- 
rience? 'Fhe  utmost  perils  of  the  royal  jisalmist 
required,  in  Ps.  xviii.,  to  be  heightened  and  com- 
pacted together  by  the  aid  of  extraneous  imagery  in 
order  that  they  might  typify  the  horrors  of  death. 
Those  same  horrors  were  more  definitely  prefigured 
by  the  incarceration  of  Jonah :  it  was  a  marvellous 
type,  but  not  more  marvellous  than  the  antitype 
which  it  foreshadowed  :  it  testified  by  its  very  won- 
drousness  that  there  are  gloomy  terrors  beyond  any 
of  which  this  woild  supplies  the  experience,  but  over 
which  t'hrist  should  trium])!!,  as  .lonah  was  deli- 
vered from  the  belly  c?l'  the  fish. 

Of  another  danger  besetting  the  path  of  the  spi- 
ritual interpreter  ot  the  O.  T.,  we  have  a  wai'uing 


G20 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


in  the  unedit'yiug  puerilitios  into  which  some  have 
fallen.  Against  such  he  will  guard  by  Ibigoing 
too  curious  a  search  for  mere  external  resemblances 
between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Kew,  though 
withal  thankfully  recognizing  them  wherever  they 
present  themselves.  His  true  task  will  be  rather  to 
investigate  the  inwai'd  ideas  involved  in  the  0.  T. 
narratives,  institutions,  and  prophecies  themselves, 
by  the  aid  of  the  more  perfect  manifestation  of  those 
ideas  in  the  transactions  anil  events  of  gospel-times. 
The  spiritual  interpretation  must  rest  upon  both 
the  literal  and  the  moral ;  and  there  can  be  no  spi- 
ritual analogy  between  things  which  have  nought 
morally  in  common.  One  consequence  of  this  prin- 
ciple will  of  course  be,  that  we  must  never  be  con- 
tent to  rest  in  any, mere  outward  fulfilment  of 
prophecy.  It  can  never,  for  example,  be  admitted 
that  tlie  ordinance  respecting  tlie  enrireness  of  the 
passover-lamb  had  reference  mcrehj  to  the  preserva- 
tion of  our  Saviour's  legs  unbroken  on  the  cross,  or 
that  the  concluding  words  of  Zech.  ix.  9,  pointed 
merely  to  the  animal  on  which  our  Saviour  should 
outwardly  ride  into  Jerusalem,  or  that  the  sojourn 
of  Israel  in  Egypt,  in  its  evangelic  reterence,  had 
I'espect  merely  to  the  temporary  sojouin  of  our  Sa- 
viour in  the  same  countrv.  However  remarkable 
tiie  outward  fulrilment  be,  it  must-ahvays  guide  us 
to  some  deeper  analogy,  in  which  a  moral  element 
is  involved.  Another  consequence  of  the  foregoing 
principle  of  interpretation  will  be  that  that  which  was 
forbidden  or  sinful  can,  so  far  as  it  was  sinful,  not 
be  regarded  as  typical  of  that  which  is  free  from  sin. 
We  may,  for  example,  reject,  as  altogether  ground- 
less, the  view,  often  propounded,  but  never  proved, 
that  Solomon's  maniage  with  Pharaoh's  daughter 
was  a  figure  of  the  reception  of  the  Gentiles  into 
the  Church  of  the  Gospel.  On  the  other  hand  there 
is  no  more  difficulty  in  sujiposing  that  that  which 
was  sinful  may  have  originated  the  occ;isiou  for  the 
exhibition  of  some  striking  type,  than  there  is  in 
believing  that  disobedience  brought  about  the  need 
of  redemption.  The  Isiaelitos  sinned  in  demanding 
a  king ;  yet  the  earthly  kingdom  of  David  was  a 
type  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ :  and  it  was  in  con- 
sequence of  Jonah's  fleeing,  like  tlie  first  Adam, 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  that  he  became  so 
signal  a  type  of  the  second  Adam  in  his  three  days' 
removal  fiom  tlie  light  of  heaven.  So  again  that 
which  was  tolerated  rather  than  approved  may  con- 
tain within  itself  the  type  of  something  imperfect,  in 
contrast  to  that  which  is  more  perfect.  Thus  Hagar, 
as  the  concubine  of  Abraliam,  reiu'esented  the  cove- 
nant at  Sinai ;  but  it  is  only  the  bondage-aspect  of 
that  covenant  which  here  comes  directly  itnder  con- 
sideration, and  the  children  of  the  covenant,  sym- 
bolizeil  by  Ishniael,  are  those  only  who  cleave  to 
the  element  of  bondage  in  it. 

Yet  withal,  in  laying  down  rules  for  the  inter- 
inetation  of  the  0.  T.,  we  must  abstain  from 
attempting  to  define  the  limits,  or  to  measure  the 
extent  of  its  fulness.  That  fulness  has  certainly 
not  yet  been,  nor  will  by  us  be,  exhausted.  Search 
after  truth,  and  reverence  for  the  native  worth  of 
Ific  written  Word,  authorize  us  indeed  to  i  eject  past 
interpretations  of  it  which  cannot  be  shown  to  rest 
111  any  solid  foundation.  Still  all  interpretation  is 
essentially  progressive ;  and  in  no  part  of  the  O.  T. 
can  we  tell  the  number  of  meanings  and  bearings, 
beyond  those  with  which  we  are  ourselves  familiar, 
which  may  one  day  be  brougWt  out,  and  which  then 
not  only  may  approve  themselves  by  their  intrinsic 
reasonableness,  but  even  may  by  thiir  mutual  har- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

mony  and  practical  interest  furnish  additional  evi- 
dence of  the  divine  source  of  that  Scripture  whicli 
cannot  be  broken. 

C.  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  in 
THE  New  Testament. 

The  New  Testament  quotations  from  the  Old 
form  one  of  the  outward  bonds  of  connexion  between 
the  two  parts  of  the  Bible.  They  are  manifold  in 
kind.  Some  of  the  passages  quoted  contain  pro- 
phecies, or  involve  types  of  which  the  N.  T.  writers 
designed  to  indicate  the  fulfilnient.  Others  aie  in- 
troduced as  direct  logical  suppoits  to  the  doctrines 
which  they  were  enforcing.  In  all  cases  which  can 
be  cleaily  referred  to  either  of  these  categories,  we 
are  fairly  warranted  in  deeming  the  use  which  has 
been  made  of  the  older  te.xt  authoritative ;  and  from 
these,  and  especially  from  an  analysis  of  the  quota- 
tions which  at  first  sight  present  dithculties,  we 
may  study  the  principles  on  which  the  sacred  appre- 
ciation and  exegesis  of  the  older  scriptures  has  pro- 
ceeded. Let  it  only  be  borne  in  mind  that  however 
just  the  interpretations  virtually  placed  upon  the 
passaiges  quoted,  they  do  not  profess  to  be  ne<;essa- 
lily  complete.  The  contrary  is  indeed  manifest 
from  the  two  op])Osite  beai'iugs  of  the  same  p;issage, 
Ps.  xxiv.  1,  brought  out  by  St.  Paul  in  the  course 
of  a  few  verses,  1  Cor.  s.  26,  28.  But  in  many 
instances  also  the  N.  T.  writers  have  quoted  the 
0.  T.  rather  by  way  of  illustration,  than  with  the 
intention  of  leaning  upon  it;  variously  applying 
and  adapting  it,  and  making  its  language  the  vehicle 
of  their  own  independent  thoughts.  It  coLild  hardly 
well  be  otherwise.  The  thoughts  of  all  who  have 
been  deejjiy  educated  in  the  Scriptures  naturally 
move  in  sciiptural  diction :  it  would  have  been 
strange  had  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.  formeil  excep- 
tions to  the  general  rule. 

It  may  not  be  easy  to  distribute  all  the  quota- 
tions into  their  distinctive  classes.  But  among 
those  in  which  a  prophetical  or  typical  force  is 
ascribed  in  the  N.  T.  to  the  passage  quoted,  may 
fairly  be  reckoned  all  that  are  introduced  with  an 
intimation  that  the  Scripture  wtis  "fulfilled."  And 
it  may  be  obser\'ed  that  the  word  "  fulfil,"  as 
applied  to  the  accomplishment  of  what  had  been 
predicted  or  foreshadowed,  is  in  the  N.  T.  only  used 
by  ou)'  Lord  Himself  and  His  compauioii-apostles : 
not  by  St.  Mark  nor  St.  Luke,  except  in  their  reports 
of  our  Lord's  and  Peter's  sayings,  nor  yet  by  St. 
Paul  (Mark  xv.  28,  is  not  genuine).  It  had  grown 
familiar  to  the  original  apostles  from  the  continual 
verification  of  the  O.  T.  which  they  had  beheld  in 
the  events  of  their  Blaster's  career.  These  had  tes- 
tified to  the  deep  connexion  between  the  utterances 
of  the  O.  T.  and  the  realities  of  the  Gosjiel ;  and, 
through  the  general  connexion  in  turn  casting  down 
its  radiance  on  the  individual  points  of  contact,  the 
higher  term  was  occasionally  applied  to -express  a 
relation  for  which,  viewed'  meiely  in  itself,  weaker 
language  might  have  sufficed.  Three  "  fulfilments  " 
of  .Scripture  are  traced  by  St.  ]\Iatthew  in  the  inci- 
dents of  our  Saviour's  infancy  (ii.  15,  18,  2.i). 
He  beheld  Him  marked  out  as  the  true  Israel,  the 
beloved  of  God  with  high  destiny  before  Him,  by 
the  outward  correspondence  between  His  and  Israel's 
sojourn  in  Egypt.  The  sorrowing  of  the  mothers 
of  Bethlehem  for  their  children  w;is  to  him  a  re- 
newal of  the  grief  for  the  captives  at  Ramah,  which 
grief  Jeiemiah  had  described  in  language  suggested 
by  the  record  of  the  patriarchal  grief  for  the  loss  of 
Joseph  :  it  was  thus  a  present  token  (we  need  account 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

it  no  more)  of  the  spiritual  captivity  wliich  all  out- 
ward captivities  recalled,  and  from  which,  since  it 
had  been  declared  that  tiiere  was  hope  in  the  end, 
Christ  was  to  prove  the  deliverer.  And  again, 
Christ's  sojourn  in  despised  Nazareth,  was  an  out- 
ward token  of  the  lowliness  of  his  condition  ;  and  if 
the  propliets  had  rightly  spoken,  tliis  lowliness  was 
the  necessary  prelude,  and  therefoie,  in  part,  the 
pledge  of  his  future  glory.  In  the  tirst  and  last  of 
these  cases  the  evangelist,  in  his  wonted  phrase,  ex- 
pressly declares  that  the  events  came  to  pass  tliat 
that  which  was  spoken  "might  bo  fultilled  :"  lan- 
guage which  must  not  be  arhitiarily  softeu^l  down. 
In  the  other  case  the  phiase  is  less  detinitoly  strong : 
"  Then  was  fulfilled,"  &c.  The  substitution  of  this 
phrase  can,  howevei',  of  itself  decide  nothing,  for  it 
is  used  of  an  acknowledged  pi-o])hecy  in  xxvii.  9. 
And  should  any  be  disposed  on  other  giounds  to 
view  the  quotation  from  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  merely  as 
an  adornment  of  the  narrative,  let  them  first  con- 
sider whether  the  evangelist,  who  was  occupied 
with  the  history  of  Christ,  would  be  likely  formally 
to  introduce  a  passage  from  the  0.  T.  merely  as  an 
illustration  of  maternal  grief. 

In  the  quotations  of  all  kinds  fVom  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  the  New,  we  tind  a  continual  variation 
from  the  letter  of  the  older  Scriptures.  To  this 
variation  three  causes  may  be  specified  as  having 
contributeil. 

First,  all  the  N.  T.  wiiters  quoted  from  the 
Septuagint ;  correcting  it  indeed  more  or  less  by 
the  Hebrew,  especially  when  it  was  needful  for  their 
purpose ;  occasionally  deserting  it  altogether  ;  still 
abiding  by  it  to  so  large  an  extent  as  to  show  that 
it  was  the  primary  source  v^fhence  their  quotations 
were  drawn.  Their  use  of  it  may  be  best  illus- 
trated by  the  corresponding  use  of  our  liturgical 
version  of  the  Psalms ;  a  use  founded  on  love  as 
well  as  on  habit,  but  which  nevertheless  we  forgo 
when  it  becomes  important  that  we  should  follow 
the  more  accurate  rendering.  Consequently,  when 
the  errors  involved  in  the  Septuagint  version  do  not 
intertiire  with  the  purpose  which  the  N.  T.  writer 
had  in  view,  they  are  frequently  allowed  to  remam 
in  his  quotation:  see  Matt.  xv.  9  (a  record  of  our 
Lord's  words) ;  Luke  iv.  18  ;  Acts  xiii.  41,  xv.  17  ; 
Kom.  XV.  It) ;  2  Cor.  iv.  1 3 ;  Heb.  viii.  9,  x.  5,  xi.  21 . 
The  current  of  apostolic  thought  too  is  frequently 
dictated  by  words  of  the  Septuagint,  which  differ 
much  from  the  Hebrew:  see  Rom.  ii.  '24;  1  Cor. 
XV.  55;  2  Cor.  ix.  7;  Heb.  xiii.  15.  Or  even  an 
absolute  inteipolation  of  the  Septuagint  is  quoted, 
Heb.  i.  6  (Dent,  xxxii.  4.'j).  On  the  other  hand,  in 
Matt.  xxi.  5  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  19,  the  Septuagint  is  cor- 
rected by  the  Hebrew:  so  too  in  Matt.  ix.  13; 
Luke  xxii.  'M,  there  is  an  effort  to  preserve  an 
expressiveness  of  the  Hebrew  which  the  Septuagint 
had  lost;  and  in  Matt.  iv.  15,  16  ;  John  xix.  :!7  ;  1 
v.-or.  XV.  54,  the  Septuagint  disappears  altogether. 
In  Rom.  ix.  33,  we  have  a  quotation  from  the 
Septuagint  combined  witli  another  from  the  Hebrew. 
In  Mark  xil.  30;  Luke  x.  27;  Rom.  xii.  19,  the 
Septuagint  and  Hebrew  are  superadded  the  one 
uj)on  the  other.  In  the  Kpistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
which  in  this  respect  stands  alone,  the  Septuagint  is 
uniformly  followed;  except  in  the  one  remarkable 
quotation,  Heb.  x.  3o,  which,  according  neither  with 
the  Hebrew  nor  the  Septuagint,  w.as  probably  derived 
from  the  last-named  passage,  Rom.  xii.  lit,  where- 
with it  e\actlj'  coincides.  The  (luot.ation  in  1  Cor. 
ii.  9  seems  to  have  been  derived  not  directly  from 
the  0.   r.,   but  rathe;-  from   :i  ('In isti.ui  liturgv  or 


OLD  TESTAIVLENT 


621 

Ixiv. 


other  document  into  which  the  language  of  Is 
4,  had  been  transferred. 

Secondly,  the  N.  T.  writers  must  have  frequently 
quoted  from  memory.  The  0.  T.  had  been  deeply 
instilled  into  their  minds,  ready  for  service,  when- 
ever needed  ;  and  the  fulfilment  of  its  predictions 
which  they  witnessed,  made  its  utterances  lise  up 
in  life  before  them  :  cf.  John  ii.  17,  22.  It  was  of 
the  very  essence  of  such  a  living  use  of  0.  T.  scrip- 
ture that  their  quotations  of  it  should  not  of  neces- 
sity be  verbally  exact. 

Thirdly,  combined  with  this,  there  was  an  altera- 
tion of  conscious  or  unconscious  design.  Sometimes 
the  object  of  this  was  to  obtain  increased  force : 
hence  the  variation  from  the  oiigiual  in  the  form  of 
the  divine  oath,  Rom.  xiv.  11;  or  the  result  "I 
quake,"  substituted  for  the  cause,  Heb.  xii.  21  ;  or 
the  insertion  of  I'hetorical  words  to  bring  out  the 
emphasis,  Heb.  xii.  26 ;  or  the  change  of  person  to 
show  that  what  men  perpetrated  had  its  root  in 
God"s  determinate  counsel,  Matt.  xxvi.  31.  Some- 
times an  0.  T.  passage  is  abridged,  and  in  the 
abridgment  so  adjusted,  by  a  little  alteiation,  as  to 
present  an  aspect  of  completeness,  and  yet  omit  what 
is  foreign  to  the  immediate  purpose,  Acts  i.  20  ; 
1  Cor.  i.  31.  At  other  times  a  passage  is  enlarged 
by  the  incorporation  of  a  passage  from  another 
source  :  thus  iu  Luke  iv.  18,  19,  although  the  con- 
tents are  professedly  those  lead  by  our  Lord  from 
Is.  Ixi.,  we  have  the  words  "  to  set  at  liberty 
them  that  are  bruised,"  introduced  from  Is.  Iviii. 
6  (Sept.) :  similarly  in  Rom.  xi.  8,  Deut.  xxix.  4 
is  combined  with  Is.  xxix.  10.  In  some  cases  still 
greater  liberty  of  alteration  is  assumed.  In  Rom. 
X.  11,  the  word  Tras  is  introduced  iuto  Is.  xxviii.  16, 
to  show  that  that  is  uttered  of  Jew  and  Gentile 
alike.  In  Rom.  xi.  26,  27,  the  "  to  Ziou  "  of  Is. 
lix.  20  (Sept.  'iveK^u  '2,i.<iiv)  is  replaced  by  "  out  of 
Sion"  (suggested  by  Is.  ii.  3):  to  Zion  the  Re- 
deemer had  already  come ;  from  Zion,  the  Christian 
Church,  His  law  was  to  go  forth  ;  or  even  from  the 
literal  Jerusalem,  cf.  Luke  xxiv.  47  ;  Rom.  xv.  19, 
for,  till  she  was  destroyed,  the  type  was  still  in  a 
measure  kept  up.  In  Matt.  viii.  17,  the  words  of 
Is.  liii.  4  are  adapted  to  the  divine  removal  of  dis- 
ease, the  outward  token  and  witness  of  that  sin 
which  Christ  was  eventually  to  remove  by  His 
death,  thereby  fulfilling  the  prophecy  more  com- 
pletely. For  other,  though  less  striking,  instances 
of  variation,  see  1  Cor.  xiv.  21;  1  Pet.  iii.  15.  In 
some  places  again,  the  actual  words  of  the  original 
are  taken  up,  but  employed  with  a  new  meaning: 
thus  the  ipxSfisvo^,  which  in  Hab.  ii.  3  merely 
qualified  the  verb,  is  in  Heb.  x.  37  made  the  subject 
to  it. 

Almost  more  remarkable  than  any  alteration  in 
the  quotation  itself,  is  the  circumstance  that  in 
Matt,  xxvii.  9,  Jeremiah  should  be  named  as  the 
author  of  a  prophecy  really  delivered  by  Zechariah: 
the  reason  being,  as  has  been  well  shown  by  Heng- 
stenberg  in  his  Christology,  that  the  prophecy  is 
based  upon  that  in  Jer.  xviii.,  xix.,  and  that  with- 
out a  reference  to  this  original  source  the  most 
essential  features  of  the  fullilnient  of  Zechariah's 
prophecy  would  be  misunderstood.  The  case  is 
indeed  not  entirely  unique ;  for  in  the  (ireek  of 
Mark  i.  2,  3,  where  JIal.  iii.  1  is  condiinod  with 
Is.  xl.  3,  the  name  of  Isaiah  alone  is  mentioned : 
it  was  on  his  prophecy  that  that  of  Malachi  partly 
depejuled.  On  the  other  hand  in  Matt.  ii.  23  ; 
John  vi.  45,  the  comprehensive  mention  of  the  pro- 
phets indicates  a  reference  not  only  to  (he  j»ass,ages 


622 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


more  particularly  contemplated,  Is.  xi.  1,  liv.  13, 
but  also  to  the  geiieial  tenour  of  what  had  been 
elsewhere  prophetically  uttered. 

The  above  examples  will  sufficiently  illustrate 
the  freedom  with  which  the  apostles  and  evangelists 
interwove  the  older  Scriptures  into  their  writings. 
It  could  only  result  in  failure  were  we  to  attempt 
any  merely  meclianical  account  of  variations  from 
the  0.  T.  text  which  are  essentially  not  mechanical. 
That  which  is  still  replete  with  life  may  not  be 
dissected  by  the  anatomist.  There  is  a  spiritual 
meaning  in  their  employment  of  Scripture,  even  as 
there  is  a  spiritual  meaning  in  Sciipture  itself.  And 
though  it  would  be  as  idle  to  tre;it  of  their  quota- 
tions without  reference  to  the  Septuagint,  as  it 
would  be  to  treat  of  the  inner  meaning  of  the  Bible 
without  attending  first  to  the  literal  interpretation, 
still  it  is  only  when  we  pay  i-egard  to  the  inner 
purpose  for  which  each  separate  quotation  was 
made,  and  the  inner  significance  to  the  writer's 
mind  of  the  passage  quoted,  that  we  can  arrive  at 
any  true  solution  of  the  difficulties  which  the  phe- 
nomena of  these  quotations  frequently  present. 
(Convenient  tables  of  the  quotations,  ranged  in  the 
order  of  the  N.  T.  passages,  are  given  in  the  Intro- 
ductions of  Davidson  and  Home.  A  much  fuller 
table,  embracing  the  informal  verbal  allusions,  and 
ranged  in  the  contraiy  order,  but  with  a  reverse 
index,  has  been  compiled  by  Gough,  and  published 
separately,  1855.)  [J.  F.  T.] 

OLIVE  (n^T  :  e'Aaio).  No  tree  is  more  closely 
associated  with  the  history  and  civilization  of  man. 
Our  concern  with  it  Ijere  is  in  its  sacred  relations, 
and  in  its  connexion  with  Judaea  and  the  Jewish 
people. 

Many  of  the  Scriptural  associations  of  the  olive- 
tree  are  singularly  poetical.  It  has  this  remarkable 
interest,  in  the  first  place,  that  its  foliage  is  the 
earliest  that  is  mentioned  by  name,  when  the  waters 
of  the  flood  began  to  retire.  "  Lo !  in  the  dove's 
mouth  was  an  olive-leaf  pluckt  off:  so  Noah  knew 
that  the  waters  were  abated  from  off  the  earth  " 
(Gen.  viii.  11).  How  far  this  early  incident  may 
have  suggested  the  later  emblematical  meanings  of 
the  leaf,  it  is  impossible  to  say :  but  now  it  is  as 
difficult  for  us  to  disconnect  the  thought  of  peace 
from  this  scene  of  primitive  patriarchal  history,  as 
from  a  multitude  of  allusions  in  the  Greek  and 
Roman  poets.  Next,  we  find  it  the  most  prominent 
tree  in  the  earliest  allegory.  When  the  trees  invited 
it  to  reign  over  them,  its  sagacious  answer  sets  it 
before  us  in  its  characteristic  relations  to  Divine 
worship  and  domestic  life.  "  Should  I  leave  my 
fatness,  wherewith  by  me  they  honour  God  and  man, 
and  go  to  be  promoted  over  the  trees  ?"  (Judg.  ix. 
8,  9).  With  David  it  is  the  emblem  of  prosperity 
and  the  divine  blessing.  He  compares  himself  to 
"  a  green  olive-tree  in  the  house  of  God  "  ( Ps.  lii.  8) ; 
and  he  compares  the  children  of  a  righteous  man  to 
the  "olive-branches  round  about  his  table"  (Ps. 
cxxviii.  3).  So  with  the  later  prophets  it  is  the 
symbol  of  beauty,  luxuriance,  and  strength  ;  and 
hence  the  symbol  of  religious  privileges :  "  His 
blanches  shall  spread,  and  his  beauty  shall  be  as 
the  olive-tree,"  are  the  words  in  the  concluding 
promise  of  Hosea  (.xiv.  6).  "  The  Lord  called  thy 
name  a  green  olive-tree,  fair,  and  of  goodly  fruit," 
is  the  expostulation  of  Jeremiah  when  he  foictcljs 
retribution  for  advantages  abused  (xi.  IGJ.  Here 
we  may  compare  Ecclus.  1.  10.  We  must  bear 

in  mind,  in  reading  this  imagery,  that  the  olive 


OLIVE 

was  among  the  most  abundant  and  characteristic 
vegetation  of  Judaea.  Thus  after  the  captivity, 
when  the  Israelites  kept  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
we  find  them,  among  other  branches  for  the  booths, 
bringing  "  olive-branches  '  from  the  "  mount  " 
(Neh.  viii.  15).  "  The  mount"  is  doubtless  the 
famous  Olivet,  or  Mount  of  Olives,  the  "Olivetnm" 
of  the  Vulgate.  [Olives,  Mount  of.]  Here 
we  cannot  forget  that  the  trees  of  this  sacred  hill 
witnessed  not  only  the  humiliation  and  sorrow  of 
David  in  Absalom's  rebellion  (2  Sam.  xv.  30), 
but  also  some  of  the  most  solemn  scenes  in  the  life 
of  David's  Lord  and  Son  ;  the  prophecy  over  Jeru- 
salem, the  agony  in  the  garden  (Gkthsemane 
itself  means  "  a  press  for  olive-oil "),  and  the 
ascension  to  heaven.  Turning  now  to  the  mystic 
imagery  of  Zechariah  (iv.  3, 11-14),  and  of  St.  John 
in  the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  xi.  3,  4),  we  find  the  olive- 
tree  used,  in  both  cases,  in  a  very  remarkable  way. 
We  cannot  enter  into  any  explanation  of  "  the  two 
olive-trees  .  .  .  the  two  olive-branches  .  .  .  the  two 
anointed  ones  that  stand  by  the  Lord  of  the  whole 
earth"  (Zech.);  or  of  "the  two  witnesses  .  .  .  the 
two  olive-trees  standing  before  the  God  of  the  earth" 
(Rev.) :  but  we  may  remark  that  we  have  here  a 
verv  expressive  link  between  the  prophecies  of  the 
0.  T.  and  the  N.  T.  Finally,  in  the  argumentation 
of  St.  Paul  concerning  the  relative  positions  of  the 
Jews  and  Gentiles  in  the  counsels  of  God,  this  tree 
supplies  the  basis  of  one  of  his  most  forcible  alle- 
gories (Rom.  xi.  16-25).  The  Gentiles  are  the 
"wild  olive"  (aypUXaios),  grafted  in  upon  tlie 
"good  olive"  ( KaWisAaios),  to  which  once  the 
Jews  belonged,  and  with  which  they  may  again  be 
incorporated.  It  must  occur  to  any  one  that  tiie 
natural  process  of  grafting  is  here  inverted,  tlie 
custom  being  to  engraft  a  good  branch  upon  a  bad 
stock.  And  it  has  been  contended  that  in  the  case 
of  the  olive-tree  the  inveree  process  is  sometimes 
practised,  a  wild  twig  being  engrafted  to  strengthen 
the  cultivated  olive.  Thus  Mr.  Ewbank  {Comm. 
on  Romans,  ii.  112)  quotes  from  Palladius: 
"  Fecundat  sterilis  piiigues  oleaster  olivas, 
Et  quae  non  nuvit  munera  ferre  docet." 
But  whatever  the  fact  may  be,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
have  recourse  to  this  supposition :  and  indeed  it 
confuses  the  allegory.  Nor  is  it  likely  that  St.  Paul 
would  hold  himself  tied  by  horticultural  laws  in 
using  such  an  image  as  this.  Perhaps  the  very 
stress  of  the  allegory  is  in  tliis,  that  the  grafting  is 
contranj  to  nature  {irapa  (pvffiv  eveKevTpicrd7]S, 
V.  24). 

This  discussion  of  the  passage  in  the  Romans 
leads  us  naturally  to  speak  of  the  cultivation  of  the 
olive-tree,  its  industrial  applications,  and  general 
characteristics.  It  grows  freely  almost  everywhere 
on  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean ;  but,  as  has 
been  said  above,  it  was  peculiarly  abundant  in  Pa- 
lestine. See  Deut.  vi.  11,  viii.  8,  xxviii.  40.  Olive- 
yaids  are  a  matter  of  course  in  descriptions  of  the 
couufrv,  like  vineyards  and  corn-fields  (Judg.  xv. 
5  ;  1  Sam.  viii.  14).  The  kings  had  very  extensive 
ones  ( 1  Chr.  xxvii.  28).  Even  now  the  tree  is  very 
abundant  in  the  country.  Almost  every  \'i]lage  has 
its  olive-grove.  Certain  districts  may  be  specified 
wliere  at  various  times  this  tree  has  been  very 
luxuriant.  Of  Asher,  on  the  skirts  of  the  Lebanon, 
it  was  prophesied  that  he  should  "  dip  his  foot  in 
oil  "  (Ueut.  xxxiii.  24).  The  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood of  Jerusalem  has  already  been  mentioned. 
In  the  article  on  Gaza  we  have  alluded  to  its  large 
and  productive  olive-woods  in  the  present  day  :  and 


OLIVE 

v;e  may  refer  to  Vnn  cie  VelJe's  Sip-ia  (i.  386)  for 
their  exteut  mid  beauty  in  the  vale  of  Siiechem. 
Tiie  cultivatiiiii  of  tlie  olive-tree  had  the  closest 
connexion  with  the  domestic  life  of  the  Israelites, 
their  trade,  and  even  their  public  ceremonies  and 
religious  worship.  A  good  illustration  of  the  use 
of  olive-oil  for  food  is  fiu-nished  by  '2  Clir.  ii.  10, 
where  we  are  told  that  Solomon  provided  Hiram's 
men  with  "  twenty  thousand  baths  of  oil."  tloni- 
pare  Ezra  iii.  7.  Too  much  of  this  product  was 
supplied  for  home  consumption  :  hence  we  find  the 
country  sending  it  as  an  export  to  Tyre  (Ez.  xxvii. 
17),  and  to  Egypt  (Hos.  xii.  1).  This  oil  was  used 
in  coronations:  thus  it  was  an  emblem  of  sove- 
reignty (1  Sam.  X.  1,  xii.  3,  5).  It  was  also  mixed 
with  the  otlerings  in  sacrifice  (Lev.  ii.  1,  2,  6,  15). 
Even  in  tlie  wilderness  very  strict  directions  were 
given  that,  in  the  tabernacle,  the  Israelites  were 
to  have  "  pure  oil  olive  beaten  for  the  light,  to 
cause  the  lamp  to  burn  always"  (Ex.  xxvii.  20). 
For  the  burning  of  it  in  common  lamps  see  Matt. 
XXV.  3,  4,  8.  The  use  of  it  on  the  hair  and  skin 
was  customary,  and  indicative  of  cheerfulness  (Ps. 
xxiii.  5,  Matt.  vi.  17).  It  was  also  employed  medi- 
cinally in  surgical  cases  (Luke  x.  34).*  See  again 
Mark  vi.  13  ;  Jam.  v.  14,  for  its  use  in  combination 
with  prayer  on  behalf  of  the  sick.  [Oil  ;  Anoint.] 
Nor,  in  enumerating  the  useful  applications  of  the 
olive-tree,  must  we  forget  the  wood,  which  is  hard 
and  solid,  with  a  fine  grain,  and  a  pleasing  yellowish 
tint.  In  Solomon's  temple  the  cherubim  were  "  of 
olive-tree"  (1  K.  vi.  23),  as  also  the  doors  (vers.  31, 
32)  and  the  posts  (ver.  33).  As  to  the  berries 
(.Jam.  iii.  12,  2  Esd.  xvi.  29),  which  produce  the 
oil,  they  were  sometimes  gathered  by  shaking  the 
tree  (Is.  xxiv.  13),  sometimes  by  beating  it  (Dent. 
xxiv.  20).  Then  followed  the  treading  of  the  fruit 
(Deut.  xxxiii.  24;  Mic.  vi.  15).  Hence  the  mention 
of  "oil-tats"  (.Joel  ii.  24).  Nor  must  the  flower 
be  passed  over  without  notice ; 

"  Si  bene  floruerint  olcae,  nitidissimiis  annus." 

Ov.  Fast.  V.  265. 
The  wind  was  dreaded  by  the  cultivator  of  the 
olive ;  for  the  least  ruffling  of  a  breeze  is  ajit  to 
cause  the  flowers  to  fall : 

"  Florebant  oleae :  venti  nocuere  protcrvi." — IVid.  321. 
Thus  we  see  the  force  of  the  words  of  Eliphaz  the 
Temanite :  "  He  shall  cast  off  his  flower  like  the 
olive"  (Job  XV.  33).  It  is  needless  to  add  that  the 
locust  was  a  formidable  enemy  of  the  olive  (Amos 
iv.  9).  It  happened  not  unfrequently  that  ho])es 
were  disappointed,  and  that  "  the  labour  of  the 
olive  failed  "  (Hab.  iii.  17).  As  to  the  growth  of  the 
tree,  it  thrives  best  in  warm  and  .sunny  situations. 
It  is  of  a  moderate  height,  with  knotty  gnarled 
trunks,  and  a  smooth  ash-coloured  bark.  It  gi'ows 
slowly,  but  it  lives  to  an  immense  age.  Its  look  is 
.singularly  indicative  of  tenacious  vigour  ^  and  this 

*  All  these  subjects  admit  of  very  full  illustration  from 
Greek  and  Roman  writers.  And  if  this  were  not  a  Biblical 
article,  we  should  dwell  upon  other  classical  associations 
of  the  tree  which  supplied  tlie  victor's  wreath  at  tiic 
Olympic  Ramos,  and  a  twig  of  which  is  the  familiar  mark 
on  the  coins  of  AUicns.    See  Judith  xv.  13. 

''  DTI"';!?]  n7V^  -.  ivaflaa-i.';  nw  e\aiC>i'  :  dims 
olivarum.  The  natnes  applied  to  the  mount  in  the  Tar- 
gums  are  as  follows  :  — NJT'T  "l-"ltO  or  N*r)\T  (2  Sam. 
XV.  30,  2  Iv.  xxiii.  13,  Ez.  xi.  23,  Zcch.  xiv.  1),  ^^^^'D  't3 
(C.int.  vili.  3;  and  Gen.  vlii.  II,  rseudojun.  <iMly).  Tlie 
bitter  is  the  n;uiieeniployeii  in  the  Alishna  (/Vim/i.  c.  3). 
Its  mi'auiiiK  is  '•  oil  "  or  "  oiTitinenl."    The  miulern  Aral)ic 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


623 


is  the  force  of  what  is  said  in  Scripture  of  its  "  gi'een- 
ness,"  as  emblematic  of  strength  and  prosperity. 
The  leaves,  too,  are  not  deciduous.  Those  who  see 
olives  for  the  first  time  are  occasionally  disappointed 
by  the  dusty  colour  of  their  foliage  ;  but  those  who 
are  familiar  with  them  find  an  inexpressible  charm 
in  the  rippling  changes  of  these  slender  grey-gi-een 
leaves.  Mr.  Kuskin's  pages  in  the  Stones  of  Venice 
(iii.  175-177)  are  not  at  all  extravagant. 

The  literature  of  this  subject  is  very  extensive. 
All  who  have  written  on  the  trees  and  plants  of 
Scripture  have  de\oted  some  space  to  the  olive. 
One  especially  deserves  to  be  mentioned,  viz.,  Thom- 
son, The  Land  and  the  Book,  pp.  51-57.  But,  for 
Biblical  illustration,  no  later  work  is  so  useful  as 
the  Ilierohotanicon  of  Celsius,  the  friend  and  patron 
of  Linnaeus.  [J.  S.  H.] 

OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF  [Q^mT]  in  :  rh 
opos  Twv  eAaiivv  :  lions  Olivarnni).  The  exact 
expression  "  the  Mount  of  Olives"  occurs  in  the 
0.  T.  in  Zecli.  xiv.  4  only  ;  in  the  other  places  of  the 
0.  T.  in  which  it  is  referred  to  the  form  employed 
is  the  "ascent  of'  the  olives"  (2  Sam.  xv.  30  ; 
A.  V.  inaccurately  "  the  ascent  oi Mount  Olivet  "), 
or  simply  "  the  Mount "  (Neh.  viii.  15),  "  the  mount 
facing  Jerusalem"  (1  K.  xi.  7),  or  "  the  mountain 
which  is  on  the  cast  side  of  the  city  "  (Ez.  xi.  23). 

In  the  N.  T.  three  forms  of  the  word  occur:  1. 
The  usual  one,  "the  Mount  of  Olives"  (rb  Spos 
Twv  eXaiSiv).  2.  By  St.  Luke  twice  (xix.  29  ; 
xxi.  37);  "the  mount  called  Elaion  "  (rb  o.  t6 
KaX.  iAaidv ;  Rec.  Text,  'EAatco;/,  which  is  followed 
by  the  A.  V.).  3.  Also  by  St.  Luke  (Acts  i.  12), 
the  "  mount  called  Olivet"  (o.  rd  KaX.  iKaiwvos). 

It  is  the  well-known  eminence  on  the  east  of 
Jei'usalem,  intimately  and  characteristiciiUy  con- 
nected with  some  of  the  giavest  and  most  signi- 
•ficant  events  of  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament, 
the  New  Testament,  and  the  intervening  times,  and 
one  of  the  firmest  links  by  which  the  two  are 
united  ;  the  scene  of  the  flight  of  David  and  the  tri- 
umjihal  progress  of  the  Son  of  David,  of  the  idolatry 
of  Solomon,  and  the  agony  and  betrayal  of  Christ. 

If  any  thing  were  wanting  to  fix  the  position  of 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  it  would  be  amply  settled  by 
the  account  of  the  first  of  the  events  just  named,  as 
related  in  2  Sam.  xv.,  with  the  elucidations  of  the 
LXX.  and  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  9).  David's  object 
was  to  place  the  Jordan  between  himself  and 
Absalom.  He  therefore  flies  by  the  road  called 
"the  road  of  the  wilderness"  (xv.  23).  This  leails 
him  across  the  Kidron,  past  the  well-known  olive- 
tree''  which  marked  the  path,  up  the  toilsome  ascent 
of  the  mount — elsewhere  exactly  described  as  facing 
Jerusalem  on  the  east  (1  K.  xi.  7  ;  Ez.  xi.  23; 
Mk.  xiii.  3)  — to  the  summit,"^  where  was  a  conse- 
crated sjiot  at  which  he  was  accustomed  to  worship 
God.*     -At  this  spot  he  again  performed  his  devo- 


name  for  the  whole  ridge  seems  to  be  Jebel  es-ZeitOn,  i.  e. 
Mount  of  Olives,  or  Jcbel  Tar,  the  mount  of  the  mount, 
meaning,  the  importsmt  mount. 

"^  The  allusion  to  this  tree,  which  survives  in  the  LXX. 
of  vcr.  18,  1ms  vanished  from  the  jiresent  Hebrew  text. 

•i  The  mention  of  the  summit  marks  the  road  to  have 
been  that  over  the  present  Mount  of  the  Ascension.  The 
southern  road  keeps  below  the  summit  the  whole  way. 

«  The  expression  of  the  text  denotes  that  this  was  a 
known  and  frequented  spot  for  devotion.  The  Talmudlsts 
say  that  it  was  the  place  at  which  the  Ark  and'l'abernacle 
were  tirst  caught  sight  of  in  api>ionchinK  Jerusalem  over 
the  Mciuiit.  Spots  fnim  which  a  siincniary  is  visible  are 
sllll  niiinidiieil  ill  tlie  Kast  as  Ihrmselves  sacred.     (See 


624 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


tions — it  must  have  seemed  ibr  tiie  Inst  time — and 
took  his  farewell  of  the  city,  "  with  many  tears,  as 
one  who  had  lost  his  kingdom."  He  then  turned 
the  summit,  and  after  passing  Bahurini,  probably 
about  where  Bethany  now  stands,  continued  the 
descent  through  the  "dry  and  thirsty'  land"  until 
ho  arrived  "  weary  "  at  the  bank  of  the  river  (Joseph. 
Ant.  vii.  9,  §2-6  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  14,  xvii.  21,  22). 

This,  which  is  the  earliest  mentions  of  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  is  also  a  complete  introduction  to  it.  It 
stands  forth,  with  every  feature  complete,  almost  as 
if  in  a  picture.  Its  nearness  to  Jerusalem — the 
ravine  at  its  foot — the  olive-tree  at  its  base — the 
steep  road  through  the  trees'*  to  the  summit — the 
remarkable  view  from  thence  of  Zion  and  the  city, 
spread  opposite  and  almost  seeming  to  rise  towards 
the  spectator — the  very  "  stones  and  dust  "'  of  the 
rugged  and  sultry  descent — all  are  caught,  nothing 
essential  is  omitted. 

The  remaining  references  to  it  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment are  but  slight.  The  "  high  places  "  which 
Solomon  constructed  for  the  gods  of  his  numerous 
wives,  were  in  the  mount  "  facing  Jerusalem  " 
(1  K.  xi.  7) — an  expression  which  applies  to  the 
Mount  of  Olives  only,  as  indeed  all  commentators 
apply  it.  Modern  tradition  (see  below)  has,  after 
some  hesitation,  fixed  the  site  of  these  sanctuaries 
on  the  most  southern  of  the  four  summits  into 
which  the  whole  range  of  the  mount  is  divided, 
and  therefore  far  removed  from  that  principal 
summit  over  which  David  took  his  way.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  the  O.  T.  to  countenance  this, 
or  to  forbid  our  believing  that  Solomon  adhered  to 
the  spot  alieady  consecrated  in  the  time  of  his  father. 
The  reverence  which  in  oiu'  days  attaches  to  the 
spot  on  the  very  top  of  the  principal  summit,  is 
probably  only  changed  in  its"  object  from  what  it 
was  in  the  time  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

During  the  next  four  hundred  years  we  ha\-e  only 
the  brief  notice  of  Josiah's  iconoclasms  at  this  spot. 
Ahaz  and  Manasseh  had  no  doubt  maintained  and 
enlarged  the  original  erections  of  Solomon.  These 
Josiah  demolished.  He  "  defiled  "  the  high  places, 
broke  to  pieces  the  uncouth  and  obscene  symbols 
which  deformed  them,  cut  down  the  images,  or  pos- 
sibly the  actual  groves,  of  Ashtaroth,  and  effectually 
disqualified  them  for  woiship  by  filling  up  the 
cavities  with  human  bones  (2  K.  xxiii.  13,  14). 
Another  two  hundred  years  and  we  find  a  further 
mention  of  it — this  time  in  a  thoroughly  different 
connexion.  It  is  now  the  great  repository  for  the 
vegetation  of  the  district,  planted  thick  with  olive, 
and  the  bushy  myrtle,  and  the  featheiy  palm. 
"Go  out"  of  tlie  city  "into  the  mount"- — was 
the  command  of  Ezra  for  the  celebration  of  the 
first  anniversary  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  after 


the  citations  in  Lightfoot  on  Luke  xxiv.  50;  anil  compare 
MizpEH,  ii.  389,  note.)  It  is  worthy  of  remark  tliat  the 
expression  is  "  wliere  they  worsliippeil  God,"  not  Jpliovah  : 
as  if  it  were  one  of  the  old  sanctuaries  of  Elohini,  like 
Uethel  or  Moreh. 

f  Ps.  Ixiii. — by  its  title  and  by  constant  tradition— is 
referred  to  this  day.  The  word  rendered  •"thirsty"  in 
ver.  1  is  the  same  as  that  rendered  "  weary  "  in  2  Sam. 
xvi.  14  — P)''y. 

B  The  author  of  theTargumPsendojonalhan  introduces 
it  still  earlier.  According  to  him,  the  olive-leaf  which 
the  dove  brought  back  to  Noah  wa.s  plucl<ed  Ironi  it. 

•i  It  must  be  remembered  that  tlie  mount  had  not  yet 
acquired  its  now  familiar  name.  All  that  is  said  is  that 
David  "  ascended  by  the  ascent  of  the  idivi  s." 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

the  Return  from  Babylon — "  and  fetch  olive  branches, 
and  '  oil-tree '  branches,  and  myrtle-boughs,  and 
palm- leaves,  and  branches  of  thick  t)-ees  to  make 
booths,  as  it  is  written"  (Neh.  viii.  15). 

The  cultivated  and  umbrageous  character  which 
is  implied  in  this  description,  as  well  as  in  the  name 
of  the  mount,  it  retained  till  tlie  N.  T.  times. 
Caphnatha,  Bethphage,  Bethany,  all  names  of  pl.aces 
on  the  mount,  and  all  derived  from  some  fruit  or 
vegetation,  are  probably  of  late  origin,  certainly  of 
late  mention.  True,  the  "  palm-branches  "  borne 
by  tlie  crowd  who  flocked  out  of  Jerusalem  to 
welcome  the  "  Prophet  of  Nazareth,"  were  ob- 
tained from  the  city  (John  xii.  13) — not  impossibly 
from  the  gardens  of  the  Temple  (Ps.  xcii.  12,  13)  ; 
but  the  boughs  which  they  strewed  on  the  ground 
before  Him,  were  cut  or  toi'n  down  fiom  the  fig  or 
olive  trees  which  shadowed  the  road  round  the  hill. 

At  this  point  in  the  history  it  will  be  convenient 
to  describe  the  situation  and  appearance  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives.  It  is  not  so  much  a  "  mount " 
as  a  ridge,  of  rather  more  than  a  mile  in  length, 
I'unning  in  general  direction  north  and  south ;  cover- 
ing the  whole  eastern  side  of  the  cit}',  and  screening 
it  from  the  bare,  waste,  uncultivated  country — 
the  "  wilderness  " — which  lies  beyond  it,  and  fills 
up  the  space  between  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  the 
Dead  Sea.  At  its  north  end  the  ridge  bends  round 
to  the  west,  so  as  to  form  an  enclosure  to  the  city 
on  that  side  also.  But  there  is  this  difference,  that 
whereas  on  the, north  a  space  of  nearly  a  mile  of 
tolerably  level  surface  intervenes  between  the  walls 
of  the  city  and  the  rising  ground,  on  the  east  the 
mount  is  close  to  the  walls,  parted  only  by  that 
which  from  the  city  itself  seems  no  parting  at  all — ■ 
the  narrow  ranne  of  the  Kidron.  You  descend  from 
the  Golden  Gateway,  or  the  Gate  of  St.  Stephen, 
by  a  sudden  and  steep  declivity,  and  no  sooner  is 
the  bed  of  the  valley  reached  than  you  again  com- 
mence the  ascent  of  Olivet.  So  great  is  the  effect 
of  this  proximity,  that,  partly  from  that,  and  partly 
from  the  extreme  clcaiuess  of  the  air,  a  spectator 
from  the  western  part  of  Jerusalem  imagines  Olivet 
lo  rise  immediately  from  the  side  of  the  Haram  area 
(Porter,  JTimdb.  U)3a  ;  also  Stanley,  S.  4'  P.  186), 

It  is  this  portion  which  is  the  real  Mount  of 
Olives  of  the  history.  The  northern  part — in  all 
probability  Nob,''  Mizprh,  and  Scopus — is,  though 
geologically  continuous,  a  distinct  mountain  ;  and 
the  so-called  Mount  of  Evil  Coimsel,  directly  south 
of  the  Coenaculum,  is  too  distant  and  too  completely 
isolated  by  the  trench  of  the  Kidron  to  claim  the 
name.  We  will  therefore  confine  ourselves  to  this 
portion.  In  general  height  it  is  not  very  much 
above  the  city  :  300  feet  higher  than  the  Temple 
mount,™  hardly  more  than  100  above  the  so-called 


i  At  Bahurim,  while  David  and  his  men  kept  the  road, 
Shimei  scrtmbled  along  the  slope  of  the  overhanging  hill 
above,  even  with  him,  and  threw  stones  at  him,  and 
covered  Mm  icith  dust  (xvi.  13). 
k  See  MtZPEH,  vol.  ii.  389. 

■n  The  following  are  the  elevations  of  the  neiphhoiir- 
hood  (above  the  Mediterranean),  according  to  Van  de 
Velde  (Memoir,  179)  :— 

Mount  of  Olives  (Church  of  Ascension)    2724  ft. 

"  Zion  "  (the  Coenaculum)      2537  „ 

"  Moriah"  (//orani  area)        2429  „ 

N.W.  corner  of  city 2610  „ 

Valley  of  Kidron  (Gethsemanc)    ..     ..     22S1  „ 

Do.  (Bireyuh) 1996  „ 

Bethany     1803  ., 

Jordan       -1209., 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

Zion.  But  this  is  to  some  extent  made  up  for  by 
the  close  proximity  which  exaggerates  its  height, 
especially  on  the  side  nest  to  it. 

The  word  "  ridge  "  has  been  used  above  as  the 
only  one  available  for  an  eminence  of  some  length 
and  even  height,  but  that  woid  is  hardly  accurate. 
There  is  nothing  "  ridge-like  "  in  the  appearance  of 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  or  of  any  other  of  the  lime- 
stone hills  of  this  district  of  Palestine ;  all  is  rounded, 
swelling,  and  regular  in  form.  At  a  distance  its 
outline  is  almost  horizontal,  gradually  sloping  away 
at  its  southern  end:  but  wlien  approached,  and 
especially  when  seen  from  below  the  eastern  wall 
of  Jerusalem,  it  divides  itself  into  three,  or  rather 
perhaps  four,  independent  summits  or  eminences. 
Proceeding  ft'om  N.  to  S.  these  occur  in  the  follow- 
ing order : — Galilee,  or  Viri  Galilaei ;  Mount  of  the 
A'scension  ;  Prophets,  subordinate  to  the  last,  and 
almost  a  part  of  it ;   Mount  of  Offence. 

1.  Of  these  the  central  one,  distinguished  by  the 
minaret  and  domes  of  the  Church  of  the  Ascension, 
is  in  every  way  the  most  important.  The  church, 
and  the  tiny  hamlet  of  wi'etched  hovels  which  sur- 
round it, — the  Kefr  et-Tur — are  planted  slightly 
on  the  Jordan  side  of  the  actual  top,  but  not  so  iar 
as  to  hinder  their  being  seen  from  all  parts  of  the 
western  environs  of  the  mountain,  or,  in  their  turn, 
commanding  the  view  of  the  deepest  recesses  of  the 
Kidron  Valley  (Porter,  Handb.  103).  Three  paths 
lead  from  the  valley  to  the  summit.  The  first 
— a  continuation  of  the  path  which  descends  from 
the  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  tomb  of  the  Virgin — 
passes  under  the  north  wall  of  the  enclosure  of 
Gethsemane,  and  follows  the  line  of  the  depression 
between  the  centre  and  the  northern  hill.  The 
second  parts  from  the  first  about  50  yards  beyond 
Gethsemane,  and  striking  off  to  the  riglit  up  the 
very  breast  of  the  hill,  surmounts  the  projection  on 
which  is  the  traditional  spot  of  the  Lamentation  over 
Jerusalem,  and  thence  proceeds  directly  upwards  to 
the  village.  This  is  rather  shoiter  than  the  former  ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  much  steeper,  and  the 
ascent  extremely  toilsome  and  difficult.  The  third 
leaves  the  other  two  at  the  N.P2.  corner  of  Geth- 
semane, and  making  a  considerable  detour  to  the 
south,  visits  the  so-called  "  Tombs  of  the  Prophets," 
and,  following  a  very  slight  depression  which  occurs 
at  that  part  of  the  mount,  anives  in  its  turn  at 
the  village. 

Of  these  tliree  paths  the  first,  from  the  fact 
that  it  follows  the  natural  shape  of  the  ground,  is, 
unquestionably,  older  than  the  others,  which  deviate 
in  pursuit  of  certain  artificial  objects.  Every  con- 
sideration is  in  favour  of  its  being  the  road  taken 
by  David  in  his  flight.  It  is,  with  equal  probability, 
that  usually  taken  by  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  in 
their  morning  and  evening  transit  between  Jeru- 
salem and  Bethany,  and  that  also  by  which  the 
Apostles  returned  to  Jerusalem  after  the  Ascension. 
If  the  "  Tombs  of  the  Prophets"  existed  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  (and  if  they  are  the  Peri- 
stereon  of  Josephus  they  did],  then  the  third  road  is 
next  in  antiquity.  The  second — having  probably 
been  made  for  the  convenience  of  reaching  a  spot 
the  reputation  of  which  is  comparatively  modern — 
must  be  the  most  recent. 

The  central  hill,  which  we  are  now  considering, 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


625 


»  The  above  catalogue  has  been  compiled  from  (^ua- 
rcsmius,  Doubdan,  and  Mislin.  The  last  of  those  works, 
with  great  pretension  to  accuracy,  is  very  Inaccurate. 
Collateral  references  to  other  works  are  occasionally 
given. 

VOL.  II. 


pui-ports  to  contain  the  sites  of  some  of  the  most 
sacred  and  impressive  events  of  Christian  history. 
During  the  middle  ages  most  of  these  were  pro- 
tected by  an  edifice  of  some  sort ;  and  to  judge  from 
the  reports  of  the  early  travellers,  the  mount  must 
at  one  time  have  been  thickly  covered  with  churches 
and  convents.  The  following  is  a  complete  list  of 
these,  as  far  as  the  \vriter  has  been  able  to  ascertain 
them. 

1.  Commencing  at  the  Western  foot,  and  going 
gradually  up  the  Hill." 

"  *Tomb  of  the  Virgin  :    containing  also    those  of 
Joseph,  Joachim,  and  Anna. 
Gethsemane:  containing 
Olive  garden. 
*Cavern    of    Christ's    Prayer   and    Agony. 
f  A  Church  here  in  the  time  of  Jerome 
and  Willibald.) 
Rock  on  which  the  3  disciples  slept. 
*Place  of  the  capture  of  Christ.     (A  Church 
in  the  time  of  Bernard  the  Wise.) 
Spot  from  which  the  Virgin  witnessed  the  stoning 
of  St.  Stephen. 
Do.  at  which  her  girdle  dropped  during  her  As- 
sumption. 
Do.  of  our  Lord's  Lamentation  over  Jerusalem, 
Luke  xix.  41 .  (A  Church  here  formerly,  called 
Dominus  flevit]  Surius,  in  Mislin,  ii.  476.) 
Do.  on  which  He  first  said  the  Lord's  Prayer,  or 
wrote  it  on  the  stone  with  His  finger  (Sae- 
wulf,  E.  Tr.  42).     A  splendid  Church  here 
formerly.     Maundeville  seems  to  give  this  as 
the  spot  whei'e  the  Beatitudes  were  pronounced 
{E.  Tr.  177). 
Do.  at  which  the  woman  taken  in  adultery  was 
brought  to  Him  (Bernard  the  Wise,  E.  Tr.  28). 
*Tombs  of  the  Prophets  (Matt,  xxiii.  29):  contain- 
ing, according  to  the  Jews,  those  of  Haggai  and 
Zechariah. 
Cave  in  which  the  Apostles  composed  the  Cre&l : 
called  also  Church  of  St.  Maik  orof^the  12 
Apostles. 
Spot  at  which  Christ  discoursed  of  the  JudgTnent 

to  come  (Matt.  xxiv.  3). 
Cave  of  St.  Pelagia:  according  to  the  Jews,  sepid- 
chre  of  Huldah  the  Prophetess. 
*Place   of  the   Ascension.     (Church,    with   subse- 
quently a  large  Augustine  convent  attached.) 
Spot  at  which  the  Virgin  was  warned  of  her  death 
by  an  angel.     In  the  valley  between  the  As- 
cension and  Viri  Galilaei   (Maundeville,  177, 
and  so    Doubdan) :    but   IMaundrell    {E.    Tr. 
470)  places  it  close  to  the  cave  of  Pelagia. 
Viri  Galilaei.      Spot    from   whici)   the    Apostles 
watched  the  Ascension:   or  at  which  Christ 
first  appeared  to  the  3  Maries  after  His  Resur- 
rection (Tobler,  76  note). 

2.  On  the  East  side,  descending  from  the  Church 
of  th3  Ascension  to  Bethany. 

The  field  in  which  stood  the  fruitless  fig-tree. 
Bethphage. 

Bethany :  House  of  Lazarus.     (A  Church  there  in 
Jerome's  time  ;  Lib.  de  Situ,  &c.  "  Bethania.") 
*Tomb  of  Lazarus. 

♦stone  on  which  Christ  was  sitting  when  Martha 
and  Mary  came  to  Him. 


"  Plenary  Indulgence  is  accorded  by  the  t'hurch  of  Rome 
io  those  who  recite  the  T^ord's  I'rayer  and  the  Ave  Maria 
at  the  spots  marked  thus  (,*). 

2  S 


626  OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

The  majority  of  these  sacred  spots  now  command 
little  or  no  attention;  but  three  still  remain,  suffi- 
ciently sacred— if  authentic— to  consecrate  any  place. 
These  are :  1 .  Gethsemane,  at  the  foot  of  the  mount. 
2.  The  place  of  the  Lamentation  of  our  Saviour  over 
Jerusalem,  half-way  up:  and  3.  The  spot  from  which 
He  ascended,  on  the  summit. 

(1.)  Of  these,  Gethsemane  is  the  only  one  which 
has  any  claim  to  be  authentic.  Its  claims,  however, 
are  considerable  ;  they  are  spoken  of  elsewhere. 

(2.)  The  first  person  who  attached  the  Ascension 
of  Christ  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  seems  to  have  been 
the  Empress  Helena  (a.d.  325).  Eusebius  {Vit. 
Const,  iii.  §43)  states  that  she  erected  as  a  memo- 
rial of  that  event  a  sacred  house  i'  of  assembly  on 
the  highest  part  of  the  mount,  where  there  was  a 
cave  which  a  sure  tradition  {\6yos  a\ri6r]s)  testi- 
fied to  be  that  in  which  the  Saviour  had  imparted 
mysteries  to  His  disciples.  But  neither  this  account, 
nor  that  of  the  same  author  (Euseb.  Demonst. 
Evang.  vi.  18)  when  the  cave  is  again  mentioned,  do 
more  than  name  the  Mount  of  Olives,  generally,  as 
the  place  from  which  Christ  ascended :  they  fix  no 
definite  spot  thereon.  Nor  does  the  Bourdeaux  Pil- 
grim, who  arrived  shortly  after  the  building  of  the 
church  (a.d.  333),  know  anything  of  the  exact 
spot.  He  names  the  Mount  of  Olives  as  the  place 
where  our  Lord  used  to  teach  His  disciples ;  mentions 
that  a  basilica  of  Constantine  stood  there  ...  he 
carefully  points  out  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration 
in  the  neighbourhood  (!)  but  is  silent  on  the  As- 
rension.  From  this  time  to  that  of  Arculf  (a.d. 
700)  we  have  no  information,  except  the  casual  re- 
ference of  Jerome  (a.d.  39U),  cited  below.  In  that 
immense  interval  of  370  years,  the  basilica  of  Con- 
stantine or  Helena  had  given  way  to  the  round 
church  of  Modestus  (Tobler,  92  note),  and  the  tra- 
dition had  become  firmly  esUiblished.  The  church 
was  open  to  the  sky  "  because  of  the  passage  of  the 
Lord's  body,"  and  on  the  ground  in  the  centre  were 
the  prints  of  His  feet  in  the  dust  {pukcre).  The 
cave  or"  spot  hallowed  by  His  preaching  to  His  dis- 
ciples appears  to  have  been  moved  otf  to  the  north 
of  Bethany  {Early  Travels,  6). 

Since  that  day  many  changes  in  detail  have 
occurred:  the  "dust"  has  given  way  to  stone, 
in  which  the  print  of  first  one,  then  two  feet,  was 
recop-nized,i  one  of  which  by  a  strange  fate  is  said 
now  to  rest  in  the  Blosk  of  the  Aksa.^  The  buildings 
too  have  gone  thiough  alterations,  additions,  and 
finally  losses,  which  has  reduced  them  to  their 
present  condition: — a  mosk  with  a  paved  and  un- 
roofed court  of  irregular  shape  adjoining,  round 
which  are  ranged  the  altars  of  various  Christian 
churches.  In  the  centre  is  the  miraculous  stone  sur- 
mounted by  a  cupola  and  screened  by  a  Moslim 
Kibleh  or  praying-place,"  with  an  altar  attached,  on 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

which  the  Christians  are  pennitted  once  a  year  to 
say  mass  (Williams,  //.  C.  ii.  445).  But  through 
all  these  changes  the  locality  of  the  Ascension  has 
remained  constivntly  the  same. 

The  tradition  no  doubt  arose  from  the  fact  of  ' 
Helena's  having  erected  her  memorial  church  on 
the  summit  of  the  hill.  It  has  been  pointed  out 
that  she  does  not  appear  to  have  had  any  intention  of 
fixing  on  a  precise  spot ;  she  desired  to  erect  a  me- 
morial of  the  Ascension,  and  this  she  did  on  the 
summit  of  the  Momit  of  Olives,  partly  no  doubt 
because  of  its  conspicuous  situation,  but  mainly 
because  of  the  existence  there  of  the  sacred  cavern 
in  which  om*  Lord  had  taught.'  It  took  nearly  thiee 
centuries  to  harden  andnarrow  this  general  recognition 
of  the  connexion  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  with  Christ, 
into  a  lying  invention  in  contradiction  of  the  Gospel 
nanative  of  the  Ascension.  For  a  contradiction  it 
undoubtedly  is.  Two  accounts  of  the  Ascension 
exist,  both  by  the  same  author — the  one,  Luke  xxiv. 
50,  51,  the  other.  Acts  i.  6-1 1 .  The  foi-mer  only  of 
these  names  the  place  at  which  our  Lord  ascended. 
That  place  was  not  the  summit  of  the  Mount,  but 
Bethany — "  He  led  them  out  as  far  as  to  Bethany  " 
— on  the  eastern  slopes  of  the  Mount  nearly  a  mile 
beyond  the  traditional  spot."  The  narrative  of  the 
Acts  does  not  name  the  scene  of  the  occurrence,  but 
it  states  that  after  it  had  taken  place  the  Apostles 
"  returned  to  Jerusalem  from  the  mount  called 
Olivet,  which  is  from  Jerusalem  a  sabbath  day's 
journey."  It  was  their  natural,  their  only  route; 
but  St.  Luke  is  writing  for  Gentiles  ignorant  of  the 
localities,  and  therefore  he  not  only  names  Olivet, 
but  adds  the  general  information  that  it — tliat  is, 
the  summit  and  main  pai't  of  the  mount — was  a 
sabbath  dav's  journey  from  Jerusalem.  The  speci- 
fication of  the  distance  no  more  applies  to  Bethany 
on  the  further  side  of  the  mount  than  to  Gethse- 
mane on  the  nearer. 

And  if,  leaving  the  evidence,  we  consider  the  re- 
lative fitness  of  the  two  spots  for  such  an  event — 
and  compare  the  retired  and  wooded  slopes  around 
Bethany,  so  intimately  connected  with  the  last  period 
of  His  life  and  with  the  friends  who  relieved  the 
dreadful  pressure  of  that  period,  and  to  whom  He 
was  attached  by  such  biuding  ties,  with  an  open 
public  spot  visible  from  every  part  of  the  aij^  and 
indeed  tor  miles  in  every  direction — we  shall  have 
no  difficulty  in  deciding  which  is  the  more  appro- 
pi  iate  scene  for  the  last  act  in  the  earthly  sojourn  of 
One  who  always  shunned  publicity  even  before  His 
death,  and  wliose  communications  after  His  resur- 
rection were  confined  to  His  disciples,  and  marked 
by  a  singular  privacy  and  reseiTe. 

(3.)  The  third  of  the  three  traditionary  spots  men- 
tioned— that  of  the  Lamentation  over  Jerusalem 
(Luke  xix.  41-44) — is  not  more  happily  chosen  than 


P  Upov  oIkov  EKKArjo-t'os.  This  cliurch  was  surmounted 
by  a  conspicuous  gilt  cross,  tbe  glitter  of  which  was  visible 
far  and  wide.  Jerome  refers  to  it  several  times.  See 
especially  Epitaph.  I'aulae,  "  crux  rutilans,"  and  his  com- 
ment on  Zeph.  i.  15. 

1  Even  the  toes  were  made  out  by  some  (Tobler,  p.  ]08, 
note). 

'  The  •'  Chapel  of  the  foot  of  Isa  "  is  at  the  soutli  end 
of  the  main  aisle  of  the  Aksa,  almost  under  the  dome. 
Attaclied  to  its  northern  side  is  the  I'ulpit.  At  the  time 
of  All  Bey's  visit  (ii.  218,  and  plate  Ixxi.)  it  was  called 
Sklna  Aisa.  Lord  Jesus  ;  but  he  says  nothing  of  the  foot- 
mark. 

«  See  the  plan  of  the  edifice,  in  its  present  condition,  on 
the  margin  of  Sig.  Pierotti's  map,  1861.    Other  plans  arc 


given  in  Quaresmius,  ii.  31 S,  and  B.  Amico,  No.  34. 
Arculf  s  sketch  is  in  Tobler  {Siloahquelle,  &c.). 

t  Since  writing  this,  the  writer  has  observed  that  Mr. 
Stanley  has  taken  the  same  view,  almost  in  the  same 
words.     (See  S.  &  F.  ch.  xiv.  454.) 

1  The  Mount  of  Olives  seems  to  be  used  for  Bethany 
also  in  Luke  xxi.  37,  compared  with  Matt.  xxi.  IT,  xxvi.  6, 
Mark  xiv.  3.  The  morning  walk  from  Bethany  did  not 
at  any  rate  terminate  with  the  day  after  His  arrival  at 
Jerusalem.  (See  Mark  xi.  20.)  One  mode  of  reconciling 
the  two  narratives — which  do  not  need  reconciling — is  to 
say  that  the  district  of  Bethany  extended  to  the  summit 
of  the  mount.  But  "  Beth.any  "  in  the  N.  T.  is  not  a  dis- 
trict but  u  village  ;  and  it  was  "  as  far  as  "  that  well-known 
place  that  "  Ho  led  them  forth." 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

that  of  tlie  Ascension.  It  is  on  a  mamelon  or  pro- 
tuberance whicli  projects  from  the  slope  of  the  breast 
of  the  hill,  about  30<)  yards  above  Gethsemane.  The 
sacred  narrative  requii-es  a  spot  on  the  road  fi-om 
Bethany,  at  which  the  city  or  temple  should  sud- 
denly come  into  view :  but  this  is  o«e  which  can 
only  be  reached  by  a  walk  of  seveial  hundred 
yards  over  the  breast  of  the  hill,  vjith  the  temple 
and  city  full  in  sif/ht  the  ichole  time.  It  is  also 
pretty  evident  that  the  path  which  now  passes  the 
spot,  is  subsequent  in  date  to  the  fixing  of  the  spot. 
As  already  remarked,  the  natural  road  lies  up  the 
valley  between  this  hill  and  that  to  the  north,  and 
no  one,  unless  with  the  special  object  of  a  visit  to  this 
spot,  would  take  this  very  inconvenient  path.  The 
iuappropriateness  of  this  place  has  been  noticed  by 
many  ;  but  Mr.  Stanley  was  the  first  who  gave  it  its 
death-blow,  by  pointing  out  the  true  spot  to  take  its 
place.  In  a  well-known  passage  oi' Sinai  (tnd  Pales- 
tine (1 90-193),  he  shows  that  the  road  of  our  Lord's 
"Triumphal  entry"  must  have  been,  not  the  short 
and  steep  path  over  the  summit  used  by  small  parties 
of  pedestrians,  but  the  longer  and  easier  route  round 
the  southern  shoulder  of  the  southern  of  the  three 
divisions  ot'  the  mount,  which  has  the  peculiarity  of 
presenting  two  successive  views  of  Jerusalem  :  the 
first  its  south-west  portion — the  modern  Zion ;  the 
second,  after  an  interval,  the  buildings  on  the  Temple 
mount,  answering  to  the  two  points  in  the  narrative — 
the  Hosanna  of  the  multitude,  the  weeping  of  Christ. 
2.  We  have  spoken  of  the  central  and  principal 
portion  of  the  mount.  Next  to  it  on  the  southern 
side,  separated  from  it  by  a  slight  depression,  up 
which  the  path  mentioned  above  as  the  third  takes 
its  course,  is  a  hill  which  appears  neither  to  possess, 
nor  to  have  possessed,  any  independent  name.  It 
is  remarkable  only  for  the  fact  that  it  contains  the 
"  singular  catacomb  "  known  as  the  "  Tombs  of  the 
Prophets,"  probably  in  allusion  to  the  words  of 
Christ  (Matt,  xxiii.  29).  Of  the  origin,  and  even 
of  the  history,  of  this  cavern  hardly  anything  is 
known.  It  is  possible  that  it  is  the  "  rock  called 
Peristereon,"  named  by  Josephus  (^B.J.  v.  12,  §2) 
in  describing  the  course  of  Titus's  great  wall  *  of  cir- 
'  cumvallation,  though  there  is  not  much  to  be  said 
for  that  view  (see  Rob.  iii.  254- Jtoic).  To  the 
earlier  pilgrims  it  does  not  ajipear  to  have  been 
known;  at  least  their  descriptions  hardly  apply  to 
its  present  size  or  condition.  Mr.  Stanley  (H.  <J-  /'. 
453)  is  inclined  to  identify  it  with  the  cave  men- 
tioned by  luisebius  as  that  in  which  our  Lord 
taught  His  disciples,  and  also  with  that  which  is 
mentioned  by  Arculf  and  Bernard  as  cont;iining 
"  tlie  four  tables "  of  our  Lord  {Earli/  Travels, 
4  and  28).  The  first  is  not  improbable,  but  the 
cave  of  Arculf  and  Bernard  seems  to  have  been 
down  in  the  valley  not  far  from  the  tomb  of  the 
Virgin,  and  on  the  spot  of  the  betrayal  {J^.  T.  28), 
therefore  close  to  Gethsemane. 

»  The  wall  seems  to  have  crossed  the  Kidron  from 
abo\it  the  present  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  mount  on  the 
opposite  side.  It  tlien  "  turned  south  and  encompassed  the 
mount  as  far  as  the  rock  aiUed  the  dovecot  (dxP'  rq"; 
IleptcrTepetoro?  KaAou/xeV?;?  TreVpa?),  and  the  other  hill 
which  lies  iif'Xt  it,  and  is  over  the  valley  of  Siluam." 
I'eristereon  may  be  used  as  a  synonym  for  colinnbdri nin, 
a  late  Latin  word  for  an  excavated  cemetery  ;  ami  tliere  Is 
perhaps  some  analogy  between  it  and  the  W'tuiy  llammdm, 
or  Valley  of  Pigeons,  In  the  neighbourhood  of  Tiberias, 
the  rocky  sides  of  wlilch  abound  In  caves  and  perforations. 
Or  it  may  be  one  of  those  half-Hebrew,  lialf-Lireek  appel- 
Intions,  which  there  is  reason  to  believe  Josephus  bestows 
on  some  of  the  localities  of  Palestine,  and  whicli  have  yet 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


627 


3.  The  most  southern  portion  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives  is  that  usually  known  as  the  "  Mount  of 
OH'ence,"  Mons  Offensionis,  though  by  the  Arabs 
called  Baten  el  Hawa,  "  the  bag  of  the  wind."  It 
rises  next  to  that  last  mentioned  ;  and  in  the  hollow 
between  the  two,  more  marked  than  the  depressions 
between  the  more  northern  portions,  runs  the  road 
fiom  Bethany,  which  was  without  doubt  the  road 
of  Christ's  entiy  to  Jerusalem. 

The  title  IMount  of  Oftence,^  or  of  Scandal,  was  be- 
stowed on  the  sujiposition  that  it  is  the  "  Mount  of 
Corruption,"  ^  on  which  Solomon  erected  the  high 
places  for  the  gods  of  his  foreign  wives  (2  K. 
xxiii.  13;  1  K.  xi.  7).  This  tradition  appears  to 
be  of  a  recent  date.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Jewish  travellers,  Benjamin,  hap-Parchi,  or  Pe- 
tachia,  and  the  first  appearance  of  the  name  oi- 
the  tradition  as  attached  to  that  locality  among 
Christian  writers,  appears  to  be  in  John  of  Wirtz- 
burg  (Tobiei-,  80  note)  and  Brocardus  {Dcscriptio 
Ter.  S,  cap.  ix.)  both  of  the  13th  century.  At 
that  time  the  northern  summit  was  believed  to 
have  been  the  site  of  the  altar  of  Chemosh  (Bro- 
cardus), the  southern  one  that  of  Molech  only 
(Thietmar,  Peregr.  xi.  2). 

The  southern  summit  is  considerably  lower  than 
the  centre  one,  and,  as  already  remai'ked,  it  is  much 
more  definitely  separated  from  the  suiTounding  por- 
tions of  the  mountain  than  the  others  are.  It  is  also 
sterner  and  more  repulsive  in  its  form.  On  the  south 
it  is  bounded  by  the  Wady  en-Nar,  the  continua- 
tion of  the  Kidron,  curving  round  eastward  on  its 
dreary  course  to  S.  Saba  and  the  Dead  Sea.  From 
this  barren  ravine  the  Mount  of  Oti'ence  rears  its 
rugged  sides  by  acclivities  barer  and  steeper  than 
any  in  the  northern  portion  of  the  mount,  and  its 
top  presents  a  bald  and  desolate  surface,  contrasting 
greatly  with  the  cultivation  of  the  other  summits, 
and  which  not  improbably,  as  in  the  case  of  Mount 
Ebal,  suggested  the  name  which  it  now  bears.  On 
the  steep  ledges  of  its  western  face  clings  the  ill- 
favoured  village  of  Silwdn,  a  few  dilapidated  towers 
rather  than  houses,  their  gray  bleared  walls  hai'dly 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  ioc:k  to  which  they 
adhere,  and  inhabited  by  a  tribe  as  mean  and  re- 
pulsive as  their  habitations.  [Siloam.] 

Crossing  to  the  back  or  eastern  side  of  this  moun- 
tain, on  a  half-isolated  promontory  or  spur  which 
oxerlooks  the  road  of  our  Lord's  progress  from 
Bethany,  are  ibund  tanks  and  foundations  and  other 
remains,  which  are  maintained  by  Dr.  Barclay 
{City,  &c.  66)  to  be  those  of  Bethphage  (see  also 
Stewart,  Tent  and  Khan,  322). 

4.  The  only  one  of  the  four  summits  remaining 
to  be  considered  is  that  on  the  north  of  the  "  Mount 
of  Ascension  " — the  Karem  es-Seyad,  or  Vineyard 
of  the  Sportsman  ;  or,  as  it  is  called  by  the  movlern 
Latin  and  Greek  Christians,  the  Viri  Galilaei.  This 
is  a  hill  of  exactly  the  same  character  as  the  Mount 


to  be  investigated.  Tischendorf  (Travels  in  the.  f:ait,  \16) 
is  wrong  in  saying  that  Josephus  "  always  calls  it  the 
Dovecot."    He  mentions  It  only  this  once 

y  In  German,  Ilerg  des  Aergci-nisses. 

'  DTl'^DT}  "in.  This  seems  to  be  connected  etymo- 
logically  in  some  way  witli  the  name  liy  which  the  nioiuil 
Is  <)cc;isionally  rendered  in  the  Targums  — XPIii'JO  1-1D 
(Jonathan,  Cant.  viii.  9  ;  Pseudojon.  Gen.  vlli.  11).  One 
Is  probably  a  play  on  the  other. 

Mr.  Stanley  (,§.  it  I'.  1«H,  note)  argues  that  the  Mount 
of  Corruption  was  the  northern  hill  (Viri  Galilaoi),  because 
the  three  sanctuaries  were  soutli  of  it,  and  therefore  on  the 
other  three  summits. 

2  S  2 


628 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


of  the  Ascension,  and  so  nearly  its  equal  in  lieight 
that  few  travellers  agree  as  to  which  is  the  more 
lofty.  The  summits  of  the  two  are  about  400 
yards  apart.  It  stands  directly  opposite  the  N.E. 
corner  of  Jerusalem,  and  is  approached  by  the 
path  between  it  and  the  Mount  of  Ascension,  which 
strikes  at  the  top  into  a  cross  path  leading  to  el- 
Isawiyeh  and  Anata.  The  Arabic  name  well  reflects 
the  fruitful  character  of  the  hill,  on  which  there  are 
several  vineyards,  besides  much  cultivation  of  otlier 
kinds.  The  Christian  name  is  due  to  the  singular 
tradition,  that  here  the  two  angels  addressed  the 
Apostles  after  our  Lord's  ascension — "  Ye  men  of 
Galilee  ! "  This  idea,  which  is  so  incompatible,  on 
account  of  the  distance,  even  with  the  traditional 
spot  of  the  Ascension,  is  of  late  existence  and  inex- 
plicable origin.  The  first  name  by  which  we  en- 
counter this  hill  is  simply  "  Galilee,"  ^  TaXt\a'ta, 
(Perdiccas,  cir.  A.D.  12.^0,  in  Reland,  Pal.  cap. 
lii.).  Brocardus  (a.d.  1280)  describes  the  moun- 
tain as  the  site  of  Solomon's  altar  to  Chemosh 
(Descr.  cap.  ix.),  but  evidently  knows  of  no  name 
for  it,  and  connects  it  with  no  Christian  event. 
This  name  may,  as  is  conjectined  (Quaresmius  ii. 
319,  and  Reland,  341),  have  originated  in  its  being 
the  custom  of  the  Apostles,  or  of  the  Galilaeans 
generally,  when  they  came  up  to  Jerusalem,  to  take 
up  their  quarters  there;  or  it  may  be  the  echo  or 
distortion  of  an  ancient  name  of  the  spot,  possibly 
the  Geliloth  of  Josh,  xviii.  17 — one  of  the  land- 
marks of  the  south  boundary  of  Benjamin,  which 
has  often  puzzled  the  topograplier.  But,  whatever 
its  origin,  it  came  at  last  to  lie  considered  as  the 
actual  Galilee  of  northern  Palestine,  the  place  at 
which  our  Lord  appointed  to  meet  His  disciples 
after  His  resuirection  (Matt.  xx\'iii.  10),  the  scene 
of  the  miracle  of  Cana  (Reland,  338).  This  trans- 
ference, at  once  so  extraordinary  and  so  instructive, 
arose  from  the  same  desii-e,  combined  with  the  same 
astounding  want  of  the  critical  faculty,  which  en- 
abled the  pilgrims  of  the  middle  ages  to  see  without 
perplexity  the  scene  of  the  Transfiguration  (Bour- 
deaux  Pilgr.),  of  the  Beatitudes  (Maundeville,  E.  T. 
177),  and  of  the  Ascension,  all  crowded  together 
on  the  single  summit  of  the  central  hill  of  Olivet. 
It  testified  to  the  same  feeling  which  has  brought 
together  the  scene  of  Jacob's  vision  at  Bethel,  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac  on  Moriah,  and  of  David's  offering 
in  the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah,  on  one  hill ;  and 
which  to  this  day  has  crowded  within  the  walls  of 
one  church  of  moderate  size  all  the  events  connected 
with  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ. 

In  the  8th  century  the  place  of  the  angels  was 
represented  by  two  columns  *  in  the  Church  of  the 
Ascension  itself  (Willibald,  E.  Tr.  19).  So  it  re- 
mained with  some  trifling  difference,  at  the  time  of 
Saewulf's  visit  (a.u.  1 102),  but  there  was  then  also 
a  chapel  in  existence — apparently  on  the  noithern 
summit — purporting  to  stand  where  Christ  made  His 
first  ap))earance  after  the  Resurrection,  and  called 
"  Galilee."  So  it  continued  at  Maundeville's  visit 
(1322).  In  1580  the  two  pillars  were  still  shown 
in  the  Church  of  the  Ascension  (Piadzivil),  but  in 
the  16th  century  (Tobler,  75)  the  tradition  had  re- 
linquished its  ancient  and  more  appropriate  seat,  and 
thenceforth  became  attached  to  the  northern  summit, 
where  Maundrell  (a.d.  1697)  encountered  it  (A'.  T. 
471),  and  where  it  even  now  retains  some  hold,  the 

"  These  columns  appear  to  have  been  seen  as  late  as 
A.D.  1580  by  Radzivil  (Williams,  Ilohj  City.  ii.  127,  note). 

b  There  seems  to  be  some  doubt  whether  this  was  an 
aimual  ceremony.     Jerome  {Epitaph.  I'aulae,  ^12)  dis- 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

name  Kalilea  being  occasionally  applied  to  it  by  the 
Arabs.  (See  Pococke  and  Scholz,  in  Tobler,  72.) 
An  ancient  tower  connected  with  the  tradition  was  in 
course  of  demolition  during  Maundrell's  visit,  "  a 
Tuik  having  bought  the  field  in  which  it  stood." 

The  presence  of  the  crowd  of  churches  and  other 
edifices  implied  in  the  foregoing  description  must 
have  rendered  the  Mount  of  Olives,  duiing  the 
early  and  middle  ages  of  Christianity,  entirely  un- 
like what  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  Jewish  king- 
dom or  of  our  Lord.  Except  the  high  places  on  the 
summit  the  only  buildings  then  to  be  seen  were 
probably  the  walls  of  the  vineyards  and  gardens, 
and  the  towers  and  presses  which  were  their  inva- 
riable accompaniment.  But  though  the  churches 
are  nearly  all  demolished  there  must  be  a  consider- 
able difference  between  the  aspect  of  the  mountain 
now  and  in  those  days  when  it  received  its  name 
from  the  abundance  of  its  olive-groves.  It  does 
not  now  stand  so  preeminent  in  this  respect  among 
the  hills  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  "  It 
is  only  in  the  deeper  and  more  secluded  slope 
leading  up  to  the  northernmost  summit  that  these 
venerable  trees  spread  into  anything  like  a  forest." 
The  cedars  commemorated  by  the  Talmud  (Light- 
foot,  ii.  305),  and  the  date-palms  implied  in  the 
name  Bethany,  have  fared  still  worse  :  there  is  not 
one  of  either  to  be  found  within  many  miles.  This 
change  is  no  doubt  due  to  natural  causes,  variations 
of  climate,  &c. ;  but  the  check  was  not  improbably 
given  by  the  ravages  committed  by  the  army  of 
Titus,  who  are  stated  by  Josephus  to  have  stripped 
the  country  round  Jerusalem  for  miles  and  miles 
of  every  stick  or  shrub  for  the  banks  constnacted 
during  the  siege.  No  olive  or  cedar,  however  sacred 
to  .lew  or  Christian,  would  at  such  a  time  escape 
the  axes  of  the  Roman  sappers,  and,  remembering 
how  under  similar  circumstances  every  root  and 
fibre  of  the  smallest  shrubs  were  dug  up  for  fuel  by 
the  camp-followers  of  our  army  at  Sebastopol,  it 
would  be  wrong  to  deceive  ourselves  by  the  belief 
that  any  of  the  trees  now  existing  are  likely  to  be 
the  same  or  even  descendants  of  those  which  were 
standing  before  that  time. 

Except  at  such  rare  occasions  as  the  passage  of 
the  caravan  of  pilgrims  to  the  Jordan,  there  must 
also  be  a  great  contrast  between  the  silence  and 
loneliness  which  now  pervades  the  mount,  and  the 
busy  scene  which  it  presented  in  later  Jewish  times. 
Bethphagc  and  Bethany  are  constantly  referred  to 
in  the  Jewish  authors  as  places  of  much  resort  for 
business  and  pleasure.  The  two  large  cedars  already 
mentioned  had  below  them  shops  for  the  sale  of 
pigeons  and  other  necessaries  for  worshippers  in  the 
Temple,  and  appear  to  have  driven  an  enormous 
trade  (see  the  citations  in  Lightfoot,  ii.  39,  305). 
Two  religious  ceremonies  performed  there  must 
also  have  done  much  to  increase  the  numbers  who 
resorted  to  the  mount.  The  appearance  of  the  new 
moon  was  piobably  watched  for,  certainly  pro- 
claimed, from  the  summit — the  long  torches  waving 
to  and  fro  in  the  moonless  night  till  answered  from 
the  peak  of  Kurn  Sartabeh  ;  and  an  occasion  to 
which  the  Jews  attached  so  much  weight  would  be 
sure  to  attract  a  concourse.  The  second  ceremony 
referred  to  was  burning  of  the  Red  Heifer. •>  This 
solemn  ceremonial  was  enacted  on  the  central  mount, 
and  in  a  spot  so  carefully  specified  that  it  would 


tinctly  says  so  ;  but  the  R.abbis  assert  that  from  Moses  to 
the  Captivity  it  was  performed  but  once  ;  from  the  Cap- 
tivity to  the  Destruction  eight  times  (Lightfoot,  ii.  306). 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

seem  not  difficult  to  fix  it.  It  was  due  east  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  at  sucli  an  elevation  on  the  mount 
that  the  officiating  priest,  as  he  slew  the  animal 
and  sprinkled  her  blood,  could  see  the  facade  of  the 
sanctuai'y  through  the  east  gate  of  the  Temple. 
To  this  spot  a  viaduct  was  constructed  across  the 
valley  on  a  double  row  of  arches,  so  as  to  raise  it 
far  above  all  possible  proximit}-  with  graves  or 
other  defilements  (see  citations  in  Ligiitfoot,  ii.  39). 
The  depth  of  the  valley  is  such  at  this  place  (about 
350  feet  from  the  line  of  the  south  wall  of  the 
present  Ilarain  area)  that  this  viaduct  must  have 
ioeen  an  important  and  conspicuous  work.  It  was 
probably  demolished  by  the  Jews  themselves  on  the 
approach  of  Titus,  or  even  earlier,  when  Pompey 
led  his  army  by  Jericho  and  over  the  Mount  of 
Olives.  This  would  account  satisfactorily  for  its 
not  being  alluded  to  by  Josephus.  During  the  siege 
the  10th  legion  had  its  fortified  camp  and  batteries 
on  the  top  of  the  mount,  and  the  first,  and  some  of 
the  fiercest,  encounters  of  the  siege  took  place  here. 

"  The  lasting  glory  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,"  it 
has  been  well  said,  "  belongs  not  to  the  Old  Dis- 
pensation, but  to  the  New.  Its  very  barrenness 
of  interest  in  earlier  times  sets  forth  the  abundance 
of  those  associations  which  it  derives  from  the 
closing  scenes  of  the  sacred  history.  Nothing,  per- 
haps, brings  before  us  nioi'e  strikingly  the  contrast 
of  Jewish  and  Christian  feeling,  .the  abrupt  and 
inharmonious  termination  of  the  Jewish  dispen- 
sation— if  we  exclude  the  culminating  point  of  the 
Gospel  history — than  to  contiast  the  blank  which 
Olivet  presents  to  the  Jewish  pilgrims  of  the  middle 
ages,  only  dignified  by  the  sacrifice  of  '  the  red 
heifer ;'  and  the  vision  too  great  for  woids,  which 
it  offers  to  the  Christian  traveller  of  all  times,  as 
the  most  detailed  and  the  most  authentic  abiding- 
place  of  Jesus  Christ.  By  one  of  -those  strange 
coincidences,  whether  accidental  or  borrowed,  which 
occasionally  appear  in  th.e  Rabbinical  writings,  it  is 
said  in  the  Midrash,'=  that  the  tihechinah,  or  Pre- 
sence of  God,  after  having  finally  retired  from 
Jerusalem,  '  dwelt '  three  years  and  a  half  on  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  to  see  whether  the  Jewish  people 
would  or  would  not  repent,  calling,  '  Return  to  me, 
O  my  sons,  and  I  will  return  to  you ;'  '  Seek  ye 
the  Lord  while  He  may  be  found,  call  upon  Him 
while  He  is  near ;'  and  then,  when  all  was  in  vain, 
returned  to  its  own  place.  Whether  or  not  this 
story  has  a  direct  allusion  to  the  ministrations  of 
Christ,  it  is  a  true  expression  of  His  relation  respec- 
tively to  Jerusalem  and  to  Olivet.  It  is  nseless  to 
seek  for  traces  of  His  presence  in  the  streets  of  the 
.since  ten  times  captured  city.  It  is  impossible  not 
to  find  them  in  the  fiee  space  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives"  {Stanley,  S!ii.  and  Pal.  189). 

A  monograph  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  exhausting 
every  source  of  information,  and  giving  the  fullest 
references,  will  be  found  in  Tobler's  Siloahquelle 
und  der  Oelberg,  St.  Gallen,  1852.  The  ecclesias- 
tical traditions  are  in  Quaresmius,  Elncidntio  Tcrrac 
Sanctae,  ii.  277-340,  &c.  Doubdan's  account  {Le 
Voyage  do  la  Torre  Saiiito,  Paris,  1657)  is  excel- 
lent and  his  plates  very  correct.  Tiie  passages 
relating  to  the  mount  in  Mr.  Stanley's  Sinai  and 
Palestine  (p.  185-195,  452-454)  are  full  of  in- 
struction and  beauty,  and  in  fixing  tlie  spot  of  can- 
Lord's  lamentation  over  Jerusalem  he  has  certain! v 


OMEl 


029 


"  Rabbi  Janna,  In  the  Midi  ask  Tehillim,  quoted  by 
Lightfoot,  ii.  39.  Can  this  statement  have  originated  in 
the  mysterious  passage,  K/,.  xi.  23,  in  wliich  tlic  glory  of 


made  one  of  the  most  important  discoveries  ever 
made  in  relation  to  this  interesting  locality.     [G.] 

OLIVET  (2  Sam.  xv.  30 ;  Acts  i.  12),  pro- 
bably derived  from  the  Vulgate,  mons  qui  vocatur 
Oliveti  in  the  latter  of  these  two  passages.  [See 
Olives,  Mount  of.] 

OLYMTAS  {"OKvfj.-Kas:  Ohjmpias),  a  Chris- 
tian at  Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  15),  perhaps  of  the  house- 
hold of  Philologus.  It  is  stated  by  Pseudo-Hippo- 
lytus  that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples,  and 
underwent  martyrdom  at  Rome :  and  Baronius 
ventures  to  give  a.d.  (J9  as  the  date  of  his  death. 

[W.  T.  B.] 

OLYMTIUS  {'OXv^nrlos  :  Ohjmpius).  One  of 
the  chief  epithets  of  the  Greek  deity  Zeus,  so  called 
from  Mount  Olympus  in  Thessaly,  the  abode  of 
the  gods  (2  Mace.  vi.  2).  [See  Jupiter,  vol.  i. 
p.  1175.] 

OMAE'EUS  ('Itr^arjpos  :  Abramus).  Amram 
of  the  sons  of  Bani  (1  Esd.  ix.  34;  comp.  Ezr.  x. 
34).     'I'he  Syriac  seems  to  have  read  "  Ishmael." 

O'MAR  ("l?OiN  :  'n/xap  ;  Alex.  'Clfxav  in  Gen. 

xxxvi.  11  :  -Omar),  Son  of  Eliphaz  the  firstborn 
of  Esau,  and  "  duke"  or  phyjaich  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  11,  15;  1  Chr.  i.  36).  The  name  is  sup- 
posed to  survive  in  that  of  the  tribe  of  Amir  Arabs 
east  of  the  Jordan.  Bunsen  asserts  that  Omar  was 
the  ancestor  of  the  Bne  'Ifammer  in  northern 
Edom  {Bibelwerk,  Gen.  xxxvi.  11),  but  the  names 
are  essentially  different. 

O'MEGA  {&).  The  last  letter  of  the  Greek 
alphabet,  as  Alpha  is  the  first.  It  is  used  meta- 
phorically to  denote  the  end  of  anything:  "  I  am 
Alpha  and  Omega,  the  beginning  and  the  ending  .  .  . 
the  first  and  the  last"  (l!ev.  i.  8,  11).  The  symbol 
nX,  which  contains  the  fiist  and  last  letters  of  the 
Hebrew  alphabet,  is,  according  to  Bnxtorf  {Lex. 
Tidm.  p.  244),  "among  the  Cabalists  often  put 
mystically  for  the  beginning  and  end,  like  A  and  Xi 
in  the  Apocalypse."  Schoettgen  [Ilor.  Hob.  p.  1086) 
quotes  from  the  Jalkut  Eubeni  on  Gen.  i.  1,  to  the 
effect  that  in  JIN  are  comprehended  all  letters,  and 
that  it  is  the  name  of  the  Shechinah. 

OMER.    [Weights  and  Measures.] 

OM'EI  (njpy,  i.  e.  n»")Oy,  probably  "  servant 

of  Jehovah"  (Gesenius)  :  "A/x/Spi,  LXX. ;  A/aap'tvos, 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  12,5:  Amri],  1.  originally  "caj)- 
fainof  the  host"  to  Elah,  was  afterwards  himself 
king  of  Israel,  and  founder  of  the  third  dynasty. 
When  Elah  was  murdered  by  Zimri  at  Tirzah,  then 
capital  of  the  northern  kingdom,  Omri  was  eugageil 
in  the  siege  of  (Sibbethon,  situated  in  the  tribe  of  Dan, 
which  had  been  occupied  by  the  Piiilistines,  who  had 
retained  it,  in  spite  of  the  eftbrts  to  take  it  made 
by  Nadab,  Jeroboam's  son  and  successor.  As  soon  as 
the  army  heard  of  Elah's  death,  they  proclaimed 
Omri  king.  Thereupon  he  broke  uj)  the  siege  of 
Gibbethon,  and  attacked  Tirzah,  w'here  Zinu'i  w\as 
holding  his  court  as  king  of  Israel.  The  city  was 
taken,  and  Zimri  perished  in  the  flames  of  the  palace, 
after  a  i  eiga  of  seven  days.  [Zi  .mri.]  Omri, however, 
was  not  allowed  to  establish  his  dynasty  witliout  a 
struggle  against  Tibni,  whom  "  lialf  the  i)eople  " 
(1  k.  xvi.  21)  desired  to  raise  to  the  throne,  and 

Jehovah  is  said  to  have  left  Jerusalem  and  taken  its 
stand  on  the  Mount  ot  Olives— the  mountain  on  the  east 
side  of  the  city  ? 


630 


ON 


who  was  bravely  assisted  by  his  brother  Joram." 
The  civil  war  lasted  four  years  (cf.  1  K.  xvi.  15, 
with  23).  After  the  defeat  and  death  of  Tibni 
and  Joram,  Omri  reigned  for  six  years  in  Tirzah, 
although  the  palace  there  was  destroyed  ;  but  at 
the  end  of  that  time,  in  spite  of  the  proverbial 
beauty  of  the  site  (Cant.  vi.  4),  he  transferred  his 
residence,  probably  from  the  proved  inability  of 
Tirzah  to  stand  a  siege,  to  the  mountain  Shomron, 
better  known  by  its  Greek  name  Samaria,  which  he 
bought  for  two  talents  of  silver  from  a  rich  man, 
otherwise  unknown,  called  Shemer.  It  is  situated 
about  six  miles  from  Shecheni,  the  most  ancient 
of  Hebrew  capitals ;  and  its  position,  according  to 
Prof.  Stanley  (S.  ^  P.,  p.  240),  "  combined,  in  a 
union  not  elsewhere  found  in  Palestine,  strength, 
fertility,  and  beauty."  Bethel,  however,  remained 
the  religious  metroi)olis  of  the  kingdom,  and  the 
calf-worship  of  Jeroboam  was  maintiiined  with  in- 
creased detennination  and  disregard  of  God's  law 
(1  K.  xvi.  26).  At  Samaria  Omri  reigned  for  six 
years  move.  He  seems  to  have  been  a  vigorous  and 
unscrupulous  ruler,  anxious  to  strengthen  his 
dynasty  by  intercourse  and  alliances  with  foreign 
states.  Thus  he  made  a  treaty  with  Benhadad  I., 
king  of  Damascus,  though  on  very  unfavourable 
conditions,  surrendering  to  him  some  fi-ontier  cities 
(1  K.  XX.  34),  and  among  them  probably  Kamoth- 
Gilead  (1  K.  x.xii.  3),  and  admitting  into  Samaria  a 
resident  Syrian  embassy,  which  is  described  by  the 
expression  "he  made  streets  in  Samaria"  for  Ben- 
hadad. (See  the  phrase  moi'e  fully  explained  under 
Ahab;)  As  a  part  of  the  same  system,  he  united 
his  son  in  marriage  to  the  daughter  of  a  principal 
I-hoenician  prince,  which  led  to  the  introduction 
into  Israel  of  Baal-worship,  and  all  its  attendant 
calamities  and  crimes.  This  worldly  and  irreligious 
policy  is  denounced  by  Micah  (vi.  16)  under  the 
name  of  the  "  statutes  of  Omri ,"  which  appear  to 
be  contrasted  with  the  Lord's  precepts  to  His  people, 
'■  to  do  justly,  and  to  love  meicy,  and  to  walk 
humbly  with  thy  God."  It  achieved,  however,  a 
tempoiary  success,  for  Omri  left  his  kingdom  in 
peace  to  his  son  Ahab ;  and  his  family,  unlike  the 
ephemeral  dynasties  which  had  preceded  him,  gave 
four  kings  to  Israel,  and  occupied  the  throne  for 
about  half  a  century,  till  it  was  overthrown  by  the 
gre<at  reaction  against  B;uil-worship  vmder  Jehu. 
The  probable  date  of  Omri's  accession  («.  e.  of  the 
deaths  of  Elah  and  Zimri)  was  B.C.  935  ;  of  Tibni's 
defeat  and  the  beginning  of  Omri's  sole  reign  B.C. 
931,  and  of  his  death  B.C.  919.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

2.  ('Ajuapio.)  One  of  the  sons  of  Becher  the  sou 
of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  -vii.  8). 

3.  {'Afj.pl.)  A  descendant  of  Pharez  the  son  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  ix.  4). 

4.  ('A;U/3pi ;  Alex.  'A/xapL)  Son  of  Michael,  and 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar  in  the  reign  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  18). 

ON  (|iX  :  Avv  ;  Alex.  Avvdv  :  Hon).  The  son 
of  Peleth,  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tril)C  of  Reuben 
who  took  part  with  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abirara  in 
their  revolt  against  Moses  (Num.  xvi.  1).  His  name 
does  not  again  appear  in  the  nariative  of  the  con- 


"  The  LXX.  read  in  1  K.  xvi.  22,  Koi,  aTreflai/c  ©a^i'i 
KOi.  'luipafj.  6  aSeAi^bs  auToO  ev  Tw  (caipw  e/tet'i/w.  Ewald 
pronounces  this  an  "  ofFenbar  iichter  Ziisatz." 

•>  The  hitter  is  perhaps  more  probable,  as  the  letter  we 
represent  by  A  is  not  commonly  changed  into  the  Coptic 
WJl^,  unless  indeed  one  hieroglyphic  form  of  the  name 
should  be  read  ANU,  in  vvhicli  case  the  last  vowel  might 


ON 

spiracy,  nor  is  he  alluded  to  when  reference  is  made 
to  the  final  catasti-ophe.  Possibly  he  lepented  ;  and 
indeed  there  is  a  Rabbinical  tradition  to  the  effect 
that  he  was  prevailed  upon  by  his  wife  to  withdraw 
from  his  accomplices.  Abendana's  note  is,  "behold 
On  is  not  mentioned  again,  for  he  was  separated 
from  theii'  company  after  Sloses  spake  with  them. 
And  our  Rabbis  of  blessed  memory  said  that  his 
wifi'  saved  him."  Josephus  {A7it.  iv.  2,  §2)  omits 
the  name  of  On,  but  retains  that  of  his  father  in  the 
form  ^a\aovs,  thus  apparently  identifying  Peleth 
with  Phallu,  the  son  of  Reuben.  [W.  A.  W.] 

ON  (pN,  {a,  jIN:  "nv,  'HMovttoXls  :  Helio- 
polis),  a  town  of  Lower  Egypt,  which  is  mentioned 
in  the  Bible  under  at  least  two  names,  Beth- 
SiiEMESH,  Ei'DtJ*  n''3  (Jer.  xliii.  13),  correspond- 
ing to  the  ancient  Egyptian  sacred  name  HA-RA, 
"  the  abode  of  the  sun,"  and  that  above,  cor- 
responding to  the  common  name  AN,  and  perhaps 
also  spoken  of  ;is  L-ha-heres,  D'HilH  "l"'y,  or 
D'lnn — ,  the  second  part  being,  in  this  case,  either 
the  Egyptian  sacred  name,  or  else  the  Hebrew 
D"in,  but  we  prefer  to  read  "  a  city  of  destruc- 
tion." [Ir-ha-heres.]  The  two  names  were 
known  to  the  translator  or  translators  of  Exodus 
in  the  LXX.  where  On  is  explained  to  be  Helio- 
polis  (*Clv  ^  fffTiv  "iWioviroXis,  i.  11);  but  in 
Jeremiah  this  version  seems  to  treat  Beth-Shemesh 
as  the  name  of  a  temple  (rows  arvKovs  'HAtou- 
irdAeaiy,  rovs  iv''0,v,  xliii.  13,  LXX.  1.  13).  The 
Coptic  version  gives  L^Ift  as  the  equivalent  of  the 
names  in  the  LXX.,  but  whether  as  an  Egyptian 
word  or  such  a  word  Hebraicised  can  scarcely  be 
determined.** 

The  ancient  Egyptian  common  name  is  written 
AN,  or  AN-T,  and  perhaps  ANU  ;  but  the  essential 
part  of  the  word  is  AN,  and  probably  no  more  was 
pronounced.  There  were  two  towns  atlled  AN ;  Helio- 
polis,  distinguished  as  the  northern,  AN-MEHEET, 
and  Hemionthis,  in  Upper  Egypt,  as  the  southern, 
AN-RES  (Brugsch,  Gcojr.  Inschr.  i.  pp.  254,  255, 
Nos.  1217  fl,  b,  1218,  870,  1225).  As  to  the 
meaning,  we  can  say  nothing  certain.  Cyril,  who, 
as  bishop  of  Alexandria,  should  be  listened  to  on 
such  a  ipiestion,  says  that  On  signified  the  sun 
(^Civ  Se  iffTL  Kar'  aiirovs  6  rjXioi,   ad  Hos.  p. 

145),  and  the  Coptic  QTUOIItl  (M),  OTeilt, 

OTOein.  (S),  "light,"  has  therefore  been  com- 
pared (see  La  Croze,  Lex.  pp.  71,  189),  but  the 
hieroglyphic  form  is  UBEN,  "  shining,"  which  has 
no  connection  with  AN. 

Heliopolis  was  situate  on  the  east  side  of  the 
Pelusiac  branch  of  the  Nile,  just  below  the  point 
of  the  Delta,  and  about  twenty  miles  north-east  of 
Memphis.  It  was  before  the  Roman  time  the  capital 
of  the  Heliopolite  Nome,  which  was  included  in 
Lowei-  Egypt.  Now,  its  site  is  above  the  point  of 
the  Delta,  which  is  tlie  junction  of  the  Phatmetic, 
or  Damietta  branch  and  the  Bolbitine,  or  Rosetta, 
and  about  ten  miles  to  the  north-east  of  Cairo.  The 
oldest  monument  of  the  town  is  the  obelisk,  which 


have  been  transposed,  and  the  first  incorporated  with  it. 
Brugsch  (Geocjr.  Inschr.  i.  254)  supposes  AN  and  ON  to 
be  the  same,  "  as  the  Egyptian  A  often  had  a  sound  inter- 
mediate between  a  and  o."  B>it  this  does  not  admit  of  the 
change  of  the  a  vowel  to  the  long  vowel  o,  from  which 
it  was  as  distinct  as  from  the  other  long  vowel  KE, 
respectively  like  X  and  y,  ),  and  ». 


ON 

was  set  up  late  in  the  reign  of  Sesertesen  J.,  he:\d  of 
the  12th  dynasty,  dating  B.C.  cir.  2050.  According 
to  Jlanetho,  the  bull  Mnevis  was  first  worsliipped 
here  in  the  reign  of  Kaiechos,  .second  king  of  the  2nd 
dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  2400).  In  the  earliest  times  it 
must  have  been  subject  to  the  1st  dynasty  so  long  as 
their  sole  rule  lasted,  which  was  perhaps  for  no  more 
than  the  reigns  of  Menes  (b.O.  cir.  2717)  and  Atho- 
this :  it  doubtless  next  came  under  the  government 
of  the  Memphites,  of  the  3rd  (B.C.  cir.  2640),  4th 
and  6th  dynasties :  it  then  passed  into  the  hands 
of  the  Diospolites  of  the  12th  dynasty,  and  the 
Shepherds  of  the  15th;  but  whether  the  fomier  or 
the  latter  held  it  first,  or  it  was  contested  between 
them,  we  cannot  as  yet  determine.  During  the 
long  period  of  anarchy  that  followed  the  rule  of 
the  12th  dynasty,  when  Lower  Egypt  was  subject 
to  the  Shepherd  kings,  Heliopolis  must  have  been 
under  the  government  of  the  strangers.  With  the 
accession  of  the  18th  dynasty,  it  was  probably 
recovered  by  the  Egyptians,  during  the  war  which 
Aahmes,  or  Amosis,  head  of  that  line,  waged  with 
the  Shepherds,  and  thenceforward  held  by  them, 
though  perhaps  more  than  once  occupied  by  invaders 
(comp.  Chabas,  Fapyrus  Mcuiique  Harris),  before 
the  Assyrians  conquered  Egypt.  Its  position,  near 
the  eastern  frontier,  must  have  made  it  always  a 
post  of  especial  importance.     [No-Amon.] 

The  chief  object  of  worship  at  Heliopolis  was  the 
sun,  under  the  fonns  RA,  the  sun  simply,  whence 
the  sacred  name  of  the  place,  HA-RA,  "  the  abode 
of  the  sun,"  and  ATUM,  the  setting  sun,  or  sun 
of  the  nether  world.  Probably  its  chief  temple  was 
dedicated  to  both.  SHU,  the  son  of  Atum,  and 
TAFNET,  his  daughter,  were  also  here  worshipped, 
as  well  as  the  bull  Mnovis,  sacred  to  liA,  Osiris, 
Isis,  and  the  Phoenix,  BENN  U,  probably  represented 
by  a  living  bird  of  the  crane  kind.  (On  the  my- 
thology see  Brugsch,  pp.  254  seqq.)  The  temple 
of  the  sun,  described  by  Strabo  (xvii.  pp.  805,  8u6), 
is  now  only  represented  by  the  single  beautiful  obe- 
lisk, which  is  of  red  granite,  68  feet  2  inches  high 
above  the  pedestal,  and  bears  a  dedication,  showing 
that  it  was  sculptured  in  or  after  his  ISOth  year  (cir. 
2050)  by  Sesertesen  I.,  first  king  of  the  12th  dy- 
nasty (B.C.  cir.  2080-2045).  There  were  probably 
far  more  than  a  usual  number  of  obelisks  before  tlie 
gates  of  this  temple,  on  the  evidence  of  ancient 
writers,  and  the  inscriptions  of  some  yet  remaining 
elsewhere,  and  no  doubt  the  reason  was  that  these 
monuments  were  sacred  to  the  sun.  Heliopolis  was 
anciently  famous  for  its  learning,  and  Eudoxus  and 
Plato  studied  under  its  priests  ;  but,  from  the  extent 
of  the  mounds,  it  seems  to  have  been  always  a  small 
town. 

The  first  mention  of  this  place  in  the  Bible  is  in 
the  history  of  Joseph,  to  whom  we  read  Phaiaoh 
gave  "  to  wife  Asenath  the  daughter  of  Poti-pherah, 
priest  of  On  "  (Gen.  xli.  45,  comp.  ver.  50,  and  xlvi. 
20).  Joseph  was  probably  governor  of  Egypt  under 
a  king  of  the  15th  dynasty,  of  which  Memphis  was, 
at  least  for  a  time,  the  capital.  In  this  case  he  would 
doubtless  have  lived  for  part  of  the  year  at  ^Memphis, 
and  theiefoie  near  to  Heliopolis.  The  name  of  Asc- 
nath's  father  was  appropriate  to  a  lleliopoiite,  and 
especially  to  a  priest  ol'  that  place  (though  at'cording 
to  some  he  may  have  been  a  prince),  for  it  means 
"Belonging  to  Ra,"  or  "  the  sun."  The  name  of 
Joseph's  master  I'otijihar  is  the  same,  but  with  a 
slight  difference  in  the  Hebrew  orthography.  Ac- 
cording to  the  LXX.  version,  On  was  one  of  the  cities 
built  ibr  Pharaoh  by  the  oppressed  Israelites,  for  it 


ONAM 


631 


mentions  three  "strong  cities"  instead  of  the  two 
"  treasure  cities  "  of  the  Heb.,  adding  On  to  Pithom 
and  liajmises  (Kai  c^Ko56fn](Tau  7r({A.eis  oxvpas  rai 
^apaw,  Tr]v  re  IleiSw,  koI  'Pa^etrc?),  koL  *D,v,  tJ 
eVrir 'HAiouTToAis,  Ex.  i.  11).  If  it  be  intended 
that  these  cities  were  founded  by  the  labour  of  the 
jieople,  the  addition  is  probably  a  mistake,  although 
Heliopolis  may  have  been  ruined  and  rebuilt ;  but 
it  is  possible  that  they  were  merely  fortified,  pro- 
bably as  places  for  keeping  stores.  Heliopolis  lay 
at  no  great  distance  from  the  land  of  Goshen  and 
from  Raamses,  and  probably  Pithom  also. 

Isaiah  has  been  supposed  to  speak  of  On  when 
he  prophecies  that  one  of  the  five  cities  in  Egypt 
that  should  speak  the  language  of  Cnnaan,  should 
be  called  Ir-ha-heres,  which  may  mean  the  City  of 
the  Sun,  whether  we  take  "  heres  "  to  be  a  Hebrew 
or  an  Egyptian  word  ;  but  the  reading  "  a  city  of 
destruction  "  seems  preferable,  and  we  have  no  evi- 
dence that  there  was  any  large  Jewish  settlement  at 
Heliopolis,  although  there  may  have  been  at  one 
time  from  its  nearness  to  the  town  of  Onias.  [Ir-ha- 
IIERES  ;  Onias.]    Jeremiah  speaks  of  On  under  the 
name  Beth-shemesh,  "  the  house  of  the  sun,"  where 
he  predicts  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  "  He  shall  break  also 
the  pillars  [?  7112^0,  but,  perhaps,  statues,  comp. 
IDOL,  i.  850a]  of  Beth-sheraesh,  that  [is]  in  the  land 
of   Egypt ;   and   the    houses   of  the   gods   of  the 
Egyptians   shall  he  burn  with   fire"    (xliii.    13). 
By  the  word  we  have  rendered  "  pillars,"  obelisks 
are  reasonably  supposed  to  be  meant,  for  the  number 
of  which  before  the  temple  of  the  sun  Heliopolis 
must  have  been  famous,  and  perhaps  by  "  the  houses 
of  the  gods,"  the  temples  of  this  place  are  intended, 
as  their  being  burnt  would  be  a  proof  of  the  pov^er- 
lessness  of  Ra  and  Atum,  both  forms  of  the  sun, 
Shu  the  god  of  light,  and  Tafnet  a  fire-goddess,  to 
save  their  dwellings  from  the  very  element  over 
which  they  were  supposed  to  rule. — Perhaps  it  was 
on  account  of  the  many  false  gods  of  Heliopolis, 
that,  in  Ezekiel,  On  is  written  Aven,  by  a  change 
in  the  punctuation,  if  we  can  here  depend  on  the 
Masoretic  text,  and  so  made  to  signify  "  vanity," 
and  especially  the  vanity  of  idolatry.     The  prophet 
tbretells,  "  The  young  men  of  Aven  and  of  Pi-be-seth 
shall  fall  by  the  sword  :  and  these  [cities]  shall  go 
into  captivity"  (xxx.  17).     Pi-beseth  or  Bubastis  is 
doubtless  spoken  of  with  Heliopolis  as  in  the  same  part 
of  Egypt,  and  so  to  be  involved  in  a  common  calamity 
at  the  same  time  when  the  land  should  be  invaded. 
After  the  age  of  the  prophets  we  hear  no  more 
in  Scripture  of  Heliopolis.     Local  tradition,  how- 
ever, points  it  out  as  a  place  where  Our  Lord  and 
the  Virgin  came,  when  Joseph  brought  them  into 
Egyi)t,  and  a  very  ancient  sycamore  is  shown  as  a 
tree  beneath  which  they  rested.    The  Jewish  settle- 
ments in  this  part  of  Egypt,  and  especially  the  town 
of  Onias,  which  was  probably  only  twelve  miles  dis- 
tant from  Heliopolis  in  a  northerly  direction,  but 
a  little  to  the  eastwaid  (Mvdcrn  Eipjpt  and  Thebes, 
i.  297,  298),  then  fiourished,  and  were  nearer  to 
Palestine  than  the  heathen  towns  like  Alexandiia,  in 
which  there  w;rs  any  large  .Jewish  population,  so 
that  there  is   much  probability  in  this  tradition. 
And,  perhaps,  Heliopolis  it-self  may    have    had    a 
Jewish  quarter,  although  we  do  not  know  it  to 
have  been  the  Ir-ha-beres  of  Isaiah.       [R.  S.  1'.]. 
O'NAM  (D3iX  :    'Cl/jLap,  'Hcov  ;  Alex,  'ilfidv 

'Clvafi:  Onani).  1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Shobal  the 
son  of  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi.  23  ;  1  Chr.  i.  40).  Soem 
Hebrew  MSS.  read  "Oiian." 


632 


ONAN 


2.  {'0(6fjL;  Alex.  Of'j'o/ia.)  The  son  of  Jeiah- 
rneel  by  his  wife  Atarah  (1  Chr.  ii.  26,  28). 

O'NAN  (p'lN  :  Avvdv :  Onan).  The  second  son 
of  Judah  by  the  Canaanitess,  "  the  daughter  of 
Shua"  (Gen.  xsxviii.  4;  1  Chr.  ii.  3).  On  the 
death  of  Er  the  first-born,  it  was  the  duty  of  Onan, 
accoiding  to  the  custom  which  then  existed  and 
was  afterwards  established  by  a  definite  law  (Deut. 
XXV.  5-10),  continuing  to  the  latest  period  of  Jewish 
history  (Mark  xii.  19),  to  marry  his  brother's 
widow  and  perpetuate  his  race.  But  he  found 
means  to  prevent  the  consequences  of  marriage, 
"  and  what  he  did  was  evil  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah, 
and  He  slew  him  also,"  as  He  had  slain  his  elder 
brother  (Gen.  xxxviii.  9).  His  death  took  place 
before  the  family  of  Jacob  went  down  into  Egypt 
(Gen.  xlvi.  12  ;  Num.  xxvi.  19).         [W.  A.  W.] 

ONE'SIMUS  yOv7]<nfjLos:  Onesiinv.s)  is  the 
name  of  the  servant  or  slave  in  whose  behalf  Paul 
wrote  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  He  was  a  native, 
or  certainly  an  inhabitant  of  Colossae,  since  Paul 
in  writing  to  the  Church  there  speaks  of  him  (Col. 
iv.  9)  as  OS  icTTiv  e|  v/xiav,  "one  of  you."  This 
expression  confirms  the  presumption  which  his 
Greek  name  atTords,  that  he  was  a  Gentile,  and  not 
a  Jew,  as  some  have  argued  from  fxaKicrra  e/xoi 
in  Phil.  16.  Slaves  were  numerous  in  Phrygia, 
and  the  name  itself  of  Phrygian  was  almost  syno- 
nymous with  that  of  slave.  Hence  it  happened 
that  ill  writing  to  the  Colossians  (iii.  22-iv.  1) 
Paul  had  occasion  to  instruct  them  concerning  the 
duties  of  masters  and  servants  to  each  other.  Onesi- 
mus  was  one  of  this  unfortunate  class  of  persons,  as 
is  evident  both  from  the  manifest  implication  in 
ovKiTi  uii  5od\ou  in  Phil.  16,  and  from  the 
general  tenor  of  the  epistle.  There  appears  to  have 
been  no  difference  of  opinion  on  this  point  among 
the  ancient  commentators,  and  there  is  none  of  any 
critical  weight  among  the  modein.  The  man  escaped 
from  his  master  and  fled  to  Home,  where  in  the 
midst  of  its  vast  population  he  could  hope  to  be 
concealed,  and  to  battle  the  efforts  which  were  so 
often  made  in  such  cases  for  retaking  the  fugitive. 
(Walter,  Die  Gesohichte  des  Rom.  Rechts,  ii. 
63  sq.)  It  must  have  been  to  Rome  that  he  directed 
his  way,  and  not  to  Cesarea,  as  some  contend  ;  for 
the  latter  view  stands  connected  with  an  inde- 
fensible opinion  respecting  the  place  whence  the 
letter  was  written  (see  Neander's  Pflanzuwj,  ii.  s. 
506).  Whether  Onesimus  had  any  other  motive 
for  the  flight  than  the  natural  love  of  liberty,  we 
have  not  the  means  of  deciding.  It  has  been  very 
generally  supposed  that  he  had  committed  some 
offence,  as  theft  or  embezzlement,  and  feared  the 
punishment  of  his  guilt.  But  as  the  ground  of 
that  opinion  we  must  know  the  meaning  of  •^SiKTjtre 
in  Phil.  18,  which  is  uncertain,  not  to  say  incon- 
sistent with  any  such  imputation  (see  Notes  in 
the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  by  the  American  Bible 
Union,  p.  60).  Commentators  at  all  events  go 
entirely  beyond  the  evidence  when  they  assert  (as 
Conybeare,  Life  and  Ejnstks  of  Paid,  ii.  p.  467) 
that  he  belonged  to  the  dregs  of  society,  that  he 
robbed  his  master,  and  confessed  the  sin  to  Paul. 
Though  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Onesimus  heard 
the  gospel  for  the  first  time  at  Rome,  it  is  beyond 
question  that  he  was  led  to  embrace  the  gospel 
there  through  the  apostle's  instrumentality.  The 
language  in  ver.  10  of  the  letter  {hv  iyivvricra  eV 
rots  ^effixols  fiov)  is  explicit  on  this  point.  As 
tliere  were  believers  in  Phrygia  when  the  apostle 


ONESIPHORUS 

passed  through  that  region  on  his  third  missionary 
tour  (Acts  xviii.  23),  and  as  Onesimus  belonged 
to  a  Christian  household  (Phil.  2),  it  is  not  im- 
probable that  he  knew  something  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  before  he  went  to  Rome.  How  long  a 
time  elapsed  between  his  escape  and  conversion,  we 
cannot  decide;  for  irphs  S>pav  in  the  15th  verse,  to 
which  appeal  has  been  made,  is  purely  a  relative 
expression,  and  will  not  justify  any  inference  as  to 
the  intei-val  in  question. 

After  his  conversion,  the  most  happy  and  friendly 
relations  sprung  up  between  the  teacher  and  the 
disciple.  The  situation  of  the  apostle  as  a  captive 
and  an  indefatigable  labourer  for  the  promotion  of 
the  gospel  (Acts  xxviii.  30,  31)  must  have  made 
him  keenly  alive  to  the  sympathies  of  Christian 
friendship  and  dependent  upon  others  for  various 
services  of  a  personal  nature,  important  to  his  eth- 
ciency  as  a  minister  of  the  word.  Onesimus  appears 
to  have  supplied  this  twofold  want  in  an  eminent 
degree.  We  see  from  the  letter  that  he  won  en- 
tirely the  apostle's  heart,  and  made  himself  so 
useful  to  him  in  various  private  ways,  or  evinced 
such  a  capacity  to  be  so  (for  he  may  have  gone 
back  to  Colossae  soon  after  his  conversion),  that 
Paul  wished  to  have  him  lemain  constantly  with 
him.  Whether  he  desired  his  presence  as  a  per- 
sonal attendant  or  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  is 
not  certain  from  "va  SiaKOpfj  fioi  in  ver.  13  of  the 
Epistle.  Be  this  as  it  may,  Paul's  attachment  to 
him  as  a  disciple,  as  a  personal  friend,  and  as  a 
helper  to  him  in  his  bonds,  was  such  that  he  yielded 
him  up  only  in  obedience  to  that  spirit  of  self-denial, 
and  that  sensitive  regard  for  the  feelings  or  the 
rights  of  othei's,  of  which  his  conduct  on  this  occa- 
sion displayed  so  noble  an  example. 

There  is  but  little  to  add  to  this  account,  when 
we  pass  beyond  the  limits  of  the  New  Testament. 
The  traditionary  notices  which  have  come  down 
to  us,  are  too  few  and  too  late  to  amount  to  much 
as  historical  testimony.  Some  of  the  later  fathers 
assert  that  Onesimus  was  set  free,  and  was  subse- 
quently ordained  Bishop  of  Beroea  in  JIacedonia 
(Constit.  Apost.  7,  46).  The  person  of  the  same 
name  mentioned  as  Bishop  of  Ephesus  in  the  first 
epistle  of  Ignatius  to  the  Ephesians  (Hefele,.Pain<TO 
Apost.  0pp.,  p.  152)  was  a  different  person  (see 
Winer,  Realm,  ii.  175).  It  is  related  also  that 
Onesimus  finally  made  his  way  to  Rome  again,  and 
ended  his  days  there  as  a  martyr  during  the  perse- 
cution under  Nero.  [H.  B.  H.J 

ONESIPH'ORUS  COvncTi(popos)  is  named 
twice  only  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.,  2  'fim.  i.  16-18,  and 
iv.  19.  In  the  foimer  passage  Paul  mentions  him 
in  terms  of  grateful  love,  as  having  a  noble  courage 
and  generosity  in  his  behalf,  amid  his  trials  as  a 
prisoner  at  Rome,  when  others  from  whom  he  ex- 
pected better  things  had  deserted  him  (2  Tim.  iv. 
16) ;  and  in  the  latter  passage  he  singles  out  "the 
household  of  Onesiphorus"  as  worthy  of  a  special 
gi'eeting.  It  has  been  made  a  question  whether 
this  friend  of  the  apostle  was  still  living  when  the 
letter  to  Timothy  was  written,  because  in  both  in- 
stances Paul  speaks  of  "the  household"  (in  2  Tim. 
i.  16,  5(()ri  e\eos  6  Kvpios  tui  ^Ovriai<p6pov  oXko)), 
and  not  separately  of  Onesiphorus  himself.  If  we 
infer  that  he  was  not  living,  then  we  have  in 
2  Tim.  i.  18,  almost  an  instance  of  the  apostolic 
sanction  of  the  practice  of. praying  for  the  dead. 
But  the  probability  is  that  other  members  of 
the  family  were  also  active  Christians ;  and  as 
Paul  wished  to  remember  them  at  the  same  time. 


1 


ONIARES 

he  grouped  them  together  under  the  compre- 
hensive rhi/  'Ov.  oIkou  (2  Tim.  iv.  19),  and  thus 
delicately  lecogiiised  the  common  merit,  as  a  sort 
of  family  distinction.  The  mention  of  Stephanas 
in  1  Cor.  xvi.  17,  shows  that  we  need  not  exclude 
him  from  the  ^recpaua  oIkov  in  1  Cor.  i.  16.  It 
is  evident  from  2  Tim.  i.  18  {'6(Ta  iv  ''E.cpiff((i  Slyi- 
KSvricre),  that  Onesiphorus  had  his  home  at  Ephesus ; 
though  if  we  restrict  the  salutation  near  the  close 
of  the  Epistle  (iv.  19)  to  his  family,  he  himself 
may  possibly  have  been  with  Paul  at  Rome  when 
the  latter  wi-ote  to  Timothy.  Nothing  authentic 
is  known  of  him  beyond  these  notices.  According 
to  a  tradition  iu  F'abricius  {Lux  Evang.  p.  117), 
quoted  by  Winer  {Realw.  ii.  175),  he  became  bishop 
of  Corone  in  Messenia.  [H.  B.  H.] 

ONIA'RES  ('Ovid.pT]s),  a  name  introduced  into 
the  Greek  and  Syriac  texts  of  1  Mace.  xii.  20  by 
a  very  old  corruption.  The  true  reading  is  pre- 
served in  Josephus  [Ant.  xii.  4,  §10)  and  the  Vul- 
gate, {'Ofla  'Ape7os,  Oniae  Arm>;),  and  is  given  in 
the  margin  of  the  A.  V. 

ONI' AS  ('Ovlas  :  Onias),  the  name  of  five  high 
priests,  of  whom  only  two  (1  and  3 )  are  mentioned 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  an  account  of  all  is  here  given  to 
prevent  confusion.  1.  The  son  and  successor  of 
Jaddua,  who  entered  on  the  office  about  the  time  of 
the  death  of  Alexander  the  Great,  c.  B.C.  330-309, 
or,  according  to  Eusebius,  .300.  (Jos.  Ant.  xi.  7, 
§7).  According  to  Josephus  he  was  father  of  Simon 
the  .Just  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §4;  Ecclus.  1.  1).  [Ec- 
CLESiASTicus,  vol.  i.  p.  4796 ;  Simon.] 

2.  The  son  of  Simon  the  Just  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  4, 
1).  He  was  a  minor  at  the  time  of  his  father's 
death  (c.  B.C.  290),  and  the  high-priesthood  was 
occupied  in  succession  by  his  uncles  Eleazar  and 
Manasseh  to  his  exclusion.  He  entered  on  the 
office  at  last  c.  B.C.  240,  and  his  conduct  threatened 
to  precipitate  the  rupture  with  Egypt,  which  after- 
wards opened  the  way  for  Syrian  oppression.  Onias, 
from  avarice,  it  is  said — a  vice  which  was  likely  to 
be  increased  by  his  long  exclusion  from  powei- — 
neglected  for  several  years  to  remit  to  Ptol.  Euer- 
getes  the  customary  annual  tribute  of  20  talents. 
The  king  claimed  the  arreai's  with  threats  of  vio- 
lence in  case  his  demands  were  not  satisfied.  Onias 
still  refused  to  discharge  the  debt,  more,  as  it 
appears,  from  self-will  than  with  any  prospect  of 
successful  resistance.  The  evil  consequences  of  this 
obstinacy  were,  however,  averted  by  the  policy  of 
his  nephew  Joseph,  the  son  of  Tobias,  who  visited 
Ptolemy,  urged  the  imbecility  of  Onias,  won  tlie 
favour  of  the  king,  and  entered  into  a  contiact  tor 
fiviining  the  tribute,  which  he  carried  o>it  with  suc- 
cess. Onias  retaineil  the  high-priesthood  till  his 
death,  c.  B.C.  226,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  his 
son  Simon  II.  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  4). 

3.  The  son  of  Simon  II.,  who  succeeded  his 
father  in  the  high-priesthood,  c.  B.C.  198.  Iu  the 
interval  wliich  had  elapsed  since  the  government 
of  his  grandfather  the  Jews  had  transferred  their 
allegiance  to  the  Syrian  monarchy  (Dan.  xi.  14), 
and  for  a  time  enjoyed  tranquil  prosperity.  Internal 
dissensions  furnished  an  occ:ision  tor  tiie  first  act 
of  oppression.  Seleucus  I'hilojjator  was  informed 
by  Simon,  governor  of  the  Temple,  of  the  riciies 
contained  in  the  ijacred  treasury,  and  he  made  an 
attempt  to  seize  them  by  force.  At  the  prayer  of 
Onias,  according  to  the  tradition  (2  RIacc.  ill.*,  the 
sacrilege  was  averted  ;  but  the  high-priest  was 
obliged  to  appeal  to  the  king  himself  lor  siqiport 


ONIAS 


633 


against  the  machinations  of  Simon.  Not  long  after- 
wards Seleucus  died  (B.C.  175),  and  Onias  found 
himself  supplanted  in  the  favour  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  by  his  brother  Jason,  who  received  the  high- 
priesthood  from  the  king.  Jason,  in  turn,  was 
displaced  by  his  youngest  brother  Menelans,  who 
procured  the  murder  of  Onias  (c.  B.C.  171),  in  » 
anger  at  the  reproof  which  he  had  received  from 
him  for  his  sacrilege  (2  Mace.  iv.  32-38).  But 
though  his  righteous  zeal  was  thus  fervent,  the 
punishment  which  Antiochus  inflicted  on  his  mur- 
derer was  a  tribute  to  his  "  sober  and  modest  be- 
haviour" (2  Mace.  iv.  37)  after  his  deposition  from 
his  office.     [AsDRONicus,  vol.  1.  p.  67.] 

It  was  probably  during  the  government  of  Onias 
HI.  that  the  commmiication  between  the  Spartans 
and  Jews  took  place  (1  Mace.  xii.  19-23 ;  Jos.  Ant. 
xii.  4,  §10).  [Spartans.]  How  powerful  an  im- 
pression he  made  upon  his  contemporaries  is  seen 
from  the  remarkable  account  of  the  dream  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus  before  his  great  victory  (2  Mace.  xv. 
12-16). 

4.  The  youngest  brother  of  Onias  HI.,  who  bore 
the  same  name,  which  he  afterwards  exchanged  for 
Menelaus  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1).     [Menelaus.] 

5.  The  son  of  Onias  III.,  who  sought  a  refuge  in 
Egypt  from  the  sedition  and  sacrilege  which  dis- 
graced Jerusalem.  The  immediate  occasion  of  his 
fiight  was  the  triumph  of  "  the  sons  of  Tobias," 
gained  by  the  interference  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
Onias,  to  whom  the  high-priesthood  belonged  by 
right,  appears  to  have  supported  thioughout  the 
alliance  with  Egypt  (Jos.  B.  J.  i.  1,  §1),  and  re- 
ceiving the  protection  of  Ftol.  Philometor,  he  en- 
deavoured to  give  a  unity  to  the  Hellenistic  Jews, 
which  seemed  impossible  for  the  Jews  in  Palestine. 
With  this  object  he  founded  the  Temple  at  Leonto- 
polis  [On],  which  occupies  a  position  in  the  history 
of  the  development  of  Judaism  of  which  the  im- 
portance is  commonly  overlooked  :  but  the  discus- 
sion of  this  attempt  to  consolidate  Hellenism  belongs 
to  another  place,  though  the  connexion  of  the  at- 
tempt itself  with  Jewish  history  could  not  be  wholly 
overlooked  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  Z;  B.J.  i.  1,  §1,  vii. 
10,  §2 ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  iv.  405  If. ;  Herzfeld, 
Gcsch.  ii.  460  fi".,  557  ff.).  [B.  F.  VV.] 

The  City  of  Onias,  the  Region  of  Onias, 
the  city  in  which  stood  the  temple  built  by  Oni;is, 
and  the  region  of  the  Jewish  settlements  in  Egyjit. 
Ptolemy  mentions  the  city  as  the  capital  of  the 
Heliojjolite  nome :  'HAiottoAi'ttjs  vofi6%,  koX  furj- 
Tp6Tro\is  'Oviov  (iv.  5,  §53);  where  the  reading 
'HAi'ou  is  not  admissible,  since  Heliojiolis  is  after- 
wards mentioned,  and  its  ditierent  iwsition  distinctly 
laid  down  (§54).  Josephus  speaks  of  "  the  region 
of  Onias,"  'Oviov  X'^P"-  {-Ant.  xiv.  8,  §1  ;  B.  J.  i.  9, 
§4;  comp.  vii.  10,  §2),  and  mentions  a  place  there 
situate  called  "  the  Camp  of  the  Jews,"  'lou^aiwv 
ffTpaTS-jTiSov  (Ant.  xiv.  8,  §2,  B.  J.  1.  c.).  In  the 
spui'ious  letters  given  by  him  in  the  account  of  the 
foundation  of  the  temple  of  Onias,  it  is  made  to  have 
been  at  Leontopolis  in  the  Heliopolite  nome,  and 
called  a  strong  place  of  Biibastis  (Ant.  xiii.  3,  §§1, 
2)  ;  and  when  speaking  of  its  closing  by  the  Romans, 
he  says  that  it  was  in  a  region  IHO  stadia  from 
Memphis,  in  the  Heliopolite  nome,  where  Onias 
had  tbunded  a  castle  (lit.  watch-post,  <ppovptov, 
B.  J.  vii.  10,  §§2,  3,  4).  Leontopolis  was  not  in 
the  Heliopolite  nome,  but  in  Ptolemy's  time  was 
the  capital  of  the  I.eonlopolite  (iv.  5,  §51),  and 
the  mention  of  it  is  altogether  a  bhinder.  There  is 
probably  also  a  confusion  as  to  the  city  Buba.stis; 


G34 


ONIAS 


unless,  indeej,  the  temple  which  Onias  adopted 
and  restored  were  one  of  the  Egyptian  goddess  ol' 
that  name. 

The  site  of  the  city  of  Onias  is  to  be  looked  for 
in  some  one  of  those  to  the  northward  of  Heliopolis 
which  are  called  Tel-el- Yahood,  "  the  Mound  of  the 
Jews,"  or  Tel-el-Yahoodeeyeh,  "the  Jewish  Mound." 
Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  thinks  that  there  is  little 
doubt  that  it  is  one  which  stands  in  the  cultivated 
land  near  Shibbeen,  to  the  northward  of  Heliopolis, 
in  a  direction  a  little  to  the  east,  at  a  distance  of 
twelve  miles.  "  Its  mounds  are  of  very  great  height." 
He  remarks  that  the  distance  from  Memphis  (29 
miles)  is  greater  than  that  given  by  Josephus  ;  but 
the  inaccuracy  is  not  extreme.  Another  mound  of 
tlie  same  name,  standing  on  tlie  edge  of  the  desert, 
a  short  distance  to  the  south  of  Belbays,  and  24 
miles  from  Heliopolis,  would,  he  thinks, correspond  to 
the  Vicus  Judaeorum  of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus. 
(See  Modern  Eijypt  and  Thehes,  i.  pp.  297-300). 

During  the  writer's  residence  in  Egypt,  1842- 
1849,  excavations  were  made  in  the  mound  sup- 
posed Ijy  Sir  Gardner  Willdnson  to  mai'k  the  site  of 
the  city  of  Onias.  We  believe,  writing  only  from 
memory,  that  no  result  was  obtained  but  the  disco- 
very of  portions  of  pavement  very  much  resembling 
the  Assyrian  pavements  now  in  the  British  Museum. 
From  the  account  of  Josephus,  and  the  name 
given  to  one  of  them,  "  the  Camp  of  the  Jews," 
tliese  settlements  appear  to  have  been  of  a  half- 
militaiy  nature.  The  chief  of  them  seems  to  have 
been  a  strong  place ;  and  the  same  is  apparently  the 
case  with  another,  that  just  mentioned,  from  the 
circumstances  of  the  history  even  more  tlian  from 
its  name.  This  name,  though  recalling  the  "  Camp" 
where  Psammetichus  I.  established  his  Greek  mer- 
cenaries [Migdol],  does  not  prove  it  was  a  mili- 
tary settlement,  as  the  "  Camp  of  the  Tyrians  "  iu 
Memphis  (Her.  ii.  112)  was  perhaps  in  its  name  a 
reminiscence  of  the  Shepherd  occupation,  for  there 
stood  there  a  temple  of  "  the  Foreign  Venus,"  of 
which  the  age  seems  to  be  shewn  by  a  tablet  of 
Amenoph  II.  (B.C.  cir.  1400)  in  the  quarries  oppo- 
site the  city  in  which  Ashtoreth  is  worshipped,  or 
else  it  may  have  been  a  merchant-settlement.  We 
may  also  compare  the  Coptic  name  of  El-Geezeh, 
opposite  Cairo,  '^TiepCIOI,  which  has  been 
ingeniously  conjectured  to  lecord  the  position  of  a 
Persian  camp.  The  easternmost  part  of  Lower 
Egypt,  be  it  remembered,  was  always  chosen  for 
great  military  settlements,  in  order  to  protect  the 
country  fi'om  the  incursions  of  lier  enemies  beyond 
that  frontier.  Here  the  first  Shepherd  king  Salatis 
placed  an  enormous  g;uTison  in  the  stronghold  Avaris, 
the  Zoan  of  the  Bible  (Manetho,  ap.  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i. 
14).  Here  foreign  mercenaries  of  the  Sa'ite  kings 
of  the  26th  dynasty  were  settled  ;  where  also  the 
greatest  body  of  the  Egyptian  soldiers  had  tlie  lands 
allotted  to  them,  all  being  established  iu  the  Delta 
(Her.  ii.  164-166).  Probably  the  Jewish  settle- 
ments were  established  for  the  same  purpose,  more 
especially  as  the  hatred  of  their  inliabitants  towards 
the  kings  of  Syria  would  promise  their  opposmg  the 
strongest  resistance  in  case  of  an  invasion. 

The  history  of  the  Jewish  cities  of  Egypt  is  a 
veiy  obscure  portion  of  that  of  the  Heljrew  nation. 
We  know  little  more  than  the  story  of  the  founda- 


a  In  Neh.  vi.  2  the  Vat.  MS.,  according  to  Mai,  reads 
V  TreSc'oi  Iv  w  .  .  . 
^  The  tradition  of  tlie  Talmudists  is  tUat  it  was  left 


ONO 

tion  and  overthrow  of  one  of  them,  tliough  we  may 
infer  that  they  were  populous  and  politically  im- 
portant. It  seems  at  first  sight  remarkable  that 
we  have  no  trace  of  any  litei-ature  of  these  settle- 
ments ;  but  as  it  would  have  been  preserved  to  us 
by  either  the  Jews  of  Palestine  or  those  of  .Alexandria, 
both  of  whom  must  have  looked  upon  the  worsliip- 
l)ers  at  the  temple  of  Onias  as  schismatics,  it  could 
scarcely  have  been  expected  to  have  come  down 
to  us.  [K.  S.  P.] 

ONIONS  (DvVS,  hetsalim  :  ra.  KpSfxixva  : 
caepe).  There  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew  word,  which  occurs  only  in  Num  xi.  5,  as 
one  of  the  good  things  of  Egypt  of  which  the 
Israelites  regretted  the  loss.  Onions  have  been 
from  time  immemorial  a  favourite  article  of  food 
amongst  the  Egyptians.  (See  Her.  ii.  125  ;  Plin. 
xxxvi.  12.)  The  onions  of  Egypt  are  much 
milder  in  flavour  and  less  pungent  than  those  of 
this  country.  Hasselquist  ( Trav.  p.  290)  says, 
"  Whoever  has  tasted  onions  in  Egypt  must  allow 
that  none  can  be  had  better  in  any  other  part  iu 
the  universe  :  here  they  are  sweet ;  in  other  coun- 
tries they  are  nauseous  and  strong They 

eat  them  roasted,  cut  into  four  pieces,  with  some 
bits  of  roasted  meat  which  the  Turks  in  Egypt  call 
kebab ;  and  with  this  dish  they  are  so  delighted  that 
I  have  heard  them  wish  they  might  enjoy  it  in  Para- 
dise.   They  likewise  make  a  soup  of  them."  [W.  H.] 

ONO  i'lJIX,  and  once  i3X :  in  Chron.  AlXa/x, 
Alex.  A5aju  ;  elsewhere  'ClvSiv'^  and  'ClvSi,  Alex. 
n,vai :  (hw).  One  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin.  It 
does  not  appear  in  the  catalogues  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua,  but  is  first  found  in  1  Chr.  viii.  12,  where 
Shamed  or  Shamer  is  said  to  have  built  One  and 
Lod  with  their  "  daughter  villages."  It  was  there- 
fore probably  annexed  by  the  Benjamites  subse- 
quently to  their  original  settlement,*"  like  Aijalon, 
which  was  allotted  to  Dan,  but  is  found  afterwards 
in  the  hands  of  the  Benjamites  (1  Chr.  viii.  13). 
The  men  of  Lod,  Hadid,  and  Ono,  to  the  number  of 
725  (or  Neh.  721)  returned  from  the  captivity 
with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii.  37  ;  see 
also  1  Esdr.  v.  22).    [Oncs.] 

A  plain  was  attached  to  the  town,  and  bore  its 
name — Bikath-Ono,  "  the  plain  of  Ono"  (Neh.  vi. 
2),  perhaps  identical  with  the  "  valley  of  craftsmen  " 
(Neh.  xi.  36).  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  not 
named.  The  Rabbis  frequently  mention  it,  but  with- 
out any  indication  of  its  position  further  than  that  it 
was  three  miles  from  Lod.  (See  the  citations  from 
the  Talmud  in  Lightfoot,  Chor.  Decad  on  S.  Mark, 
ch.  ix.  §3.)  A  village  called  Kefr  'Ana  is  enu- 
merated by  Robinson  among  the  places  in  the 
districts  oi'  Eamleh  and  Lydd  {B.  R.  1st  ed.  App. 
120,  121).  This  village,  almost  due  N.  oi  Lydd, 
is  suggested  by  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  337)  as 
identical  with  Ono.  Against  the  identification  how- 
ever are,  the  difierence  in  the  names — the  modern 
one  containing  the  Ain; — and  the  distance  from 
Lydda,  which  instead  of  being  3  milliaria  is  fully 
5,  being  more  than  4  English  miles  according  to 
Van  de  Velde's  map.  Winer  remarks  that  Beit 
Unia  is  more  suit;ible  as  fai*  as  its  orthography  is 
concerned;  but  on  the  other  hand  Beit  Unia  is 
much  too  flir  distant  from  Ltidd  to  meet  the  re- 
quirements of  the  passages  quoted  above.         [^0 

intact  by  Joshua,  but  burnt  during  the  war  of  Gibeah 
(Judg.  XX.  48),  and  that  1  Clir.  viii.  12  describes  its  re- 
storation.   (See  Targuui  on  this  latter  p.Tssage.) 


ONUS 

O'NUS  ['Clvovs:  om.  in  Vulg.).  The  form  in 
which  the  name  Ono  appears  in  1  Esd.  v.  22. 

ONYCHA  (n'?nC',»  shecheleth:  Svv^:  onyx) 
according  to  many  of  the  old  versions  denotes  the 
opercuhim  of  some  species  of  Stroinbus,  a  genus  of 
gasteropodoLis  Moliiisca.  The  Hebrew  word,  which 
appears  to  be  derived  from  a  root  whicli  means  "  to 
shell  or  peel  off,''  occurs  only  in  Ex.  xxx.  34,  as 
one  of  the  ingredients  of  the  sacred  perfume  ;  in 
Ecclus.  .xxiv.  15,  Wisdom  is  compared  to  the  plea- 
sant odour  yielded  by  "  galbanum,  onyx,  and 
sweet  storax."  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
the  6vv^  of  Dioscorides  (ii.  10),  and  the  onijx 
of  Pliny  (xxxii.  10),  are  identical  with  the 
opei'culum  of  a  Strombus,  perhaps  S.  Icntiginosus 
There  is  frequent  mention  of  the  onyx  in  the 
writings  of  Arabian  authors,  ;uid  it  would  appear 
from  them  that  the  operculum  of  several  kinds  of 
Strombus  were  prized  as  perfumes.  The  following 
is  Dioscorides'  description  of  tiie  oj'u^  :  "  The  onyx 
is  the  operculum  of  a  shell-fish  resembling  i\\&  pur- 
pura, which  is  found  in  India  in  the  nard-producing 
lakes ;  it  is  odorous,  because  the  shell-fish  feed  on 
the  nard,  and  is  collected  after  the  heat  has 
dried  up  the  marshes:  that  is  the  best  kind  which 
comes  from  the  Red  Sea,  and  is  whitisli  and 
shining ;  the  Babylonian  kind  is  dark  and  smaller 
than  the  other;  both  have  a  sweet  odour  when 
burnt,  something  like  eastoreum."  It  is  not  easy 
to  see  what  Dioscorides  can  mean  by  "  nard-pro- 
ducing lakes."  The  ovv^,  "  nail,"  or  "  claw," 
seems  to  point  to  the  operculum  of  the  Strom- 
bidae,  which  is  of  a  cinw  shape  and  serrated,  whence 
the  Arabs  call   the   mollusc  "the  devil's    claw;" 


ONYX 


63^ 


A.  Stroinhits  Dii 


Ii.  The  ()i,enuluni. 


the  Unjuis  odoratus,  or  Blntta  byzantina, — 
for  under  both  these  terms  apparently  the  devil 
claw  {Teufelsklau    of   the    Germans,    see    Winer, 


?nK''  "i"  unused  root,  i.  q.    K^^^**)  >    whence  pro- 
bably our  word  "  shell,"  "  scale."    (See  Gesenius,  s.v.) 

b  Since  the  above  was  written,  we  liave  been  favoured 
with  a  conununicution  from  Mr.  Dayiil  Hanbury,  on  the 
subject  of  the  lilatta  /Jt/zantina  uf  old  I'harmacologlcal 
writers,  as  well  as  with  spcciuuns  of  the  substance 
itself,  which  it  appears  is  still  found  in  the  bazaars  uf 
the  East,  though  not  now  in  much  demand.  Mr.  Han- 
bury  procured  some  specimetis  in  Damascus  in  October 
(1««0),  and  a  friend  of  liis  bought  some  in  Alexandria  a 
few  months  previously.  The  article  appears  to  bo 
always  mixed  with  the  opercula  of  some  species  of 
Fusus.  As  regards  the  perfume  ascribed  to  this  sub- 
stance. It  does  nt)t  appear  to  us,  from  a  specimen  we 
bim\t,  to  deserve  the  character  of  the  excellent  odour 
which  has  been  i\scrlbed  t<j  it,  though  it  is  not  without  an 
aromatic  scent.    See  a  figure  of  the  true  H.  liyzant.  in 


Reahc.  s.  v.)  is  alluded  to  in  old  English 
writers  on  IMateria  Medica  —  has  by  some  been 
sujiposed  no  longer  to  exist.  Dr.  Lister  laments 
its  loss,  believing  it  to  have  been  a  good  medi- 
cine "  from  its  strong  aromatic  smell."  Dr. 
Gray  of  the  British  Museum,  who  has  favoured 
us  with  some  remarks  on  this  subject,  says  that 
the  opercula  of  the  different  kinds  of  Strombidue 
agree  with  the  figures  of  lilatta  byzantina  and 
Unguis  odoratus  in  the  old  books  ;  with  regard  to 
the  odour  he  writes — "The  horny  opercula  when 
burnt  all  emit  an  odour  which  some  may  call  sweet 
according  to  their  fancy."  Bochart  {Jficroz.  iii. 
797)  believes  some  kind  of  bdellium  is  intended; 
but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  ovv^  of  the 
LXX.  denotes  the  operculum  of  some  one  or  more 
species  of  Stiombus.  For  further  information  on 
this  subject  see  Rumph  (^Amboinische  Raritiiten- 
Kammer,  cap.  xvii.  p.  48,  the  German  ed.  Vienna, 
1766),  and  compare  also  Sprengel  {Comment,  ad 
Dioscor.  ii.  10)  ;  Forskal  {Desc.  Anim.  143,  21, 
"  Unguis  odoratus  "),  Philos.  Transac.  (xvii.  641) ; 
Johnston  {Introd.  to  Conchol.  p.  77) ;  and  Gesenius 
(  Thes.  s.  V.  n^n^).''  [W.  H.] 

ONYX  (Dnti',  shoham  :  6  \idos  6  Trpda-ivos, 
(TfxapaySos,  aapSios,  (TdTr(peipoi,  ^ripvWiov,  ijvxt^\ 
Aq.  crapSdcul ;  Symm.  and  Theod.  6Vu|  and  '6vv\  : 
onychinus  (^kipis),  sardonychus,  onyx).  The  A.  V. 
uniformly  renders  the  Hebrew  shoham  by  "  onyx  ;" 
the  Vulgate  too  is  consistent  with  itself,  the  sard- 
onyx (Job  xxviii.  16)  being  merely  a  variety  of  the 
onyx ;  but  the  testimonies  of  ancient  interpreters 
generally  are,  as  Gesenius  has  remarked,  diverse 
and  ambiguous.  The  shoham  stone  is  inentioned 
(Gen.  ii.  12)  as  a  product  of  the  land  of  Havjlah. 
Two  of  these  stones,  upon  which  were  engraven  the 
names  of  the  children  of  Israel,  six  on  either  stone, 
adorned  the  shoulders  of  the  high-priest's  ephod 
(Ex.  xxviii.  9-12),  and  were  to  be  worn  as  "  stones 
of  memorial  "  (see  Kalisch  on  Ex.  /.  c).  A  shoham 
was  also  the  second  stone  in  the  iburth  row  of  the 
sacerdotal  breastplate  (Ex.  xxviii.  20).  Shoham 
stones  were  collected  by  David  for  adorning  the 
Temple  (1  Chr.  xxix.  2).  In  Job  xxviii.  16,  it  is 
said  that  wisdom  "  cannot  be  valued  with  the  gold  of 
Ophir,  with  the  "precious  shoham  or  the  sapphire." 
The  shoham  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  treasures  of 
the  king  of  Tyre  (Ez.  x.wiii.  13).  There  is  nothing 
in  the  contexts  of  the  several  passages  where  the 
Hebrew  term  occurs  to  help  us  to  determine  its 
signification.  Braun  (Dc  Vest.  sac.  Hcb.  p.  727) 
h;is  endeavoured  to  shew  that  the  sardonyx  is  the 
stone  indicated,  and  his  remarks  are  well  worthy  of 
careful  perusal.      Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  7,  §5,  and 


Matthiolus'  Comment,  in  Dioscor.  (ii.  8),  where  there  is  a 
long  discussion  on  the  subject ;  also  a  ficc-  of  J!latta  By- 
zantina and  the  operculum  of  Fusus  in  Pomet's  Jlistoire 
(ks  Drogues,  1694,  part  2,  p.  97.  "  Mansfield  Tarkyns," 
writes  Mr.  Hanliury,  "in  his  Life  in  Abyssinia  (vol.1, 
p.  419),  mentions  among  the  exports  from  Massowah,  a 
certain  article  called  Dnofu,  which  he  states  is  the  oper- 
culum of  a  shell,  and  that  It  is  used  in  Nubia  as  a 
perfume,  being  burnt  with  sandal-wood.  This  bit  of 
information  is  quite  confirmatory  of  I'orskal's  statement 
concerning  the  Dofr  el  afrit — (Is  not  I'arkyus'a  "Doofu" 
meant  for  dofr,  ^^^  .>)— namely,  "  e  Mocbba  per  Sues. 

Arabes  etiam  afferunt.    Nigritis  fumigatoriura  est." 

"  The  Rev.  C.  W.  King  writes  to  us  that  "  a  large,  per- 
fect sardonyx  Is  still  jireclous.  A  dealer  tells  me  he  saw 
this  sununer  (1S61)  in  I'arls  one  valued  at  lOOOl.,  not 
engraved." 


636 


OPHEL 


B.  J.  V.  5,  §7)  expressly  states  that  the  shoulder- 
stones  of  the  high-priest  were  formed  of  two 
laige  sardonyxes,  an  onyx  being,  in  his  description, 
the  second  stone  in  the  fourth  row  of  the  breastplate. 
Some  writers  believe  that  the  "  beryl"  is  intended, 
and  the  authority  of  the  LXX.  and  other  versions 
has  been  adduced  in  proof  of  this  interpretation  ; 
but  a  glance  at  the  head  of  this  article  will  shew 
that  the  LXX.  is  most  inconsistent,  and  that  nothing 
can,  in  consequence,  be  learnt  from  it.  Of  those 
who  identify  the  sltoham  with  the  beryl  are  Beller- 
mann  {^Die  Urim  mid  Thuinmiin,  p.  64 ),  Winer  ( Bib. 
Realwort.  i.  333),  and  Rosenmiiller  {The  Minera- 
logy of  the  Bible,  p.  40,  Bib.  Cab.).  Other  inter- 
pretations of  shoham  have  been  proposed,  but  all 
are  mere  conjectures.  Braun  traces  shoham  to  the 
Arabic  sachma,  "  blackness"  :  "  Of  such  a  colour," 
says  he,  "  are  the  Arabian  sardonyxes,  which  have 
a  black  ground-colour."  This  agi-ees  essentially  with 
Mr.  King's  remarks  [Antique  Gems,  p.  9):  "The 
Arabian  species,"  he  say's,  "  were  formed  of  black 
or  blue  strata,  covered  by  one  of  opaque  white ;  over 
which  again  was  a  third  of  a  vermilion  colour." 
But Gesenius  and  Fiirst  refer  the  Hebiew  word  to  the 
Arabic  sahain,  "  to  be  pale."  The  difl'erent  kinds 
of  onyx  and  sardonyx,''  however,  are  so  variable 
in  colour,  that  either  of  these  definitions  is  suitable. 
They  all  form  excellent  materials  for  the  engraver's 
art.  'J'he  balance  of  authority  is,  we  think,  in 
favour  of  some  variety  of  the  onyx.  We  are  con- 
tent to  retain  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.,  supported 
as  it  is  by  the  Vulgate  and  the  express  statement  of 
so  high  an  authority  ;is  Josephus,'  till  better  proofs 
in  support  of  the  claims  of  some  other  stone  be 
forthcoming.  As  to  the  "onyx"  of  Ecclus.  xxiv. 
15,  see  OxYCHA.  [W.  H.] 

OPHEL  ('Psyn,  always  with  the  def.  article : 

'OTr(K,6'Cl<pdK;  Alex.  6  0<p\a:  Ophel).  A  part  of 
ancient  Jerusalem.  The  name  is  derived  by  the  lexi- 
cographers from  a  root  of  similar  sound,  which  has 
the  force  of  a  swelling  or  tumour  (Gesenius,  Thes. ; 
Fiirst,  Hdwb.  ii.  1696).  It  does  not  come  forwanl 
till  a  late  period  of  Old  Test,  history.  In  2  Chr. 
xxvii.  3,  Jotham  is  said  to  have  built  much  "  on 
the  wall  of  Ophel."  Manasseh,  amongst  his  other 
defensive  works,  "compassed  about  Ophel"  [Ibid. 
xxxiii.  14).  From  the  catalogue  ol'  Nehemiah's 
repairs  to  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  it  appears  to  have 
been  near  the  "water-gate"  (Neh.  iii.  26)  and  the 
"  great  tower  that  lieth  out "  (ver.  27).  Lastly, 
the  former  of  these  two  passages,  and  Neh.  xi.  21, 
shew  that  Ophel  was  the  residence  of  the  Levites. 
It  is  not  again  mentioned,  though  its  omission  in 
the  account  of  the  route  round  the  walls  at  the 
sanctiflcation  of  the  second  Temple,  Neh.  xii.  31- 
40,  is  singular. 

In  the  passages  of  his  history  parallel  to  those 
quoted  above,  Josephus  either  passes  it  over  alto- 
gether, or  else  refers  to  it  in  merely  general 
terms — "very  large  towers"  [Ant.  ix.  11,  §2), 
"  very  high  towers "  (x.  3,  §2).  But  in  his  ac- 
count of  the  last  days  of  Jerusalem  he  mentions  it 
four  times  as  Ophla  (5  ^0<pKa.,  accompanying  it  as 
in  the  Hebrew  with  the  article).  The  first  of  these 
{B.  J.  ii.  17,  §9)  tells  nothing  as  to  its  position; 


b  The  onyx  has  two  strata,  the  sardonyx  three. 

°  "  Who  speaks  from  actual  observation  :  he  expressly 
notices  the  fine  tiuality  of  these  two  pieces  of  sardonyx." 
— [C.  W.  King.] 

"  Fiirst  (Hdwl).  ii.  169)  states,  without  a  word  that 
could  lead  a  reader  to  suspect  that  there  was  any  doubt 


OPHEL 

but  from  the  other  thiee  we  can  gather  something. 
(1.)  The  old  wall  of  Jerusalem  ran  above  the  spring 
of  Siloam  and  the  pool  of  Solomon,  and  on  reaching 
the  place  called  Ophla,  joined  the  eastern  porch  of 
the  Temple  {B.  J.  v.  4,  §2).  (2.)  "  John  held 
the  Temple  and  the  places  round  it,  not  a  little  in 
extent, — both  the  Ophla  and  the  valley  called  Ke- 
dron"  {fb.  v.  6,  §1).  (3.)  After  the  capture'  of 
the  Temple,  and  before  Titus  had  taken  the  upper 
city  (the  modern  Zion)  from  the  Jews,  his  soldiers 
burnt  the  whole  of  the  lower  city,  lying  in  the 
valley  between  the  two,  "and  the  place  called  the 
Ophla"  (lb.  vi.  6,  §3). 

F'rom  this  it  appears  that  Ophel  was  outside  the 
south  wall  of  the  Temple,  and  that  it  lay  between 
the  central  valley  of  the  city,  which  debouches  above 
the  spring  of  Siloam,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  east 
portico  of  the  Temple  on  the  other.  The  east  por- 
tico, it  should  be  remembered,  was  not  on  the  line 
of  the  east  wall  of  the  present  haram,  but  330  feet 
further  west,  on  the  line  of  the  solid  wall  which 
forms  the  termination  of  the  vaults  in  the  eastern 
corner.  [See  Jerusalem,  vol.  i.  p.  1020  ;  and  the 
Plan,  1022.]  This  situation  agrees  with  the  mention 
of  the  "water-gate"  in  Neh.  iii.  26,  and  the  state- 
ment of  xi.  21,  that  it  was  the  residence  of  the  Le- 
vites. Possibly  the  "  great  tower  that  lieth  out," 
in  the  former  of  these  may  be  the  "  tower  of  Eder" — ■ 
mentioned  with  "  Ophel  of  the  daughter  of  Zion,"  by 
Micah  (iv.  8),  or  that  named  in  an  obscure  passage 
of  Isaiah — "Ophel  and  watch  tower"  (xxxii.  14; 
A.  V.  inaccurately  "  forts  and  towers"). 

Ophel,  then,  in  accordance  with  the  probable  root 
of  the  name,  was  the  swelling  declivity  by  which 
the  Mount  of  the  Temple  slopes  off'  on  its  southern 
side  into  the  N'alley  of  Hinnom — a  long  narrowish 
rounded  spur  or  promontory,  which  intervenes  be- 
tween the  mouth  of  the  central  valley  of  Jerusalem 
(the  Tyropoeon)  and  the  Kidron,  or 'Valley  of  Jeho- 
shaphat.  Halfway  down  it  on  its  eastern  face  is  the 
"  Fount  of  the  Virgin,"  so  called;  and  at  its  foot  the 
lower  outlet  of  the  same  spring — the  Pool  of  Siloam. 
How  much  of  this  declivity  was  covered  with  the 
houses  of  the  Levites,  or  with  the  suburb  which 
would  naturally  gather  round  them,  and  where  tlie 
"great  tower"  stood  we  have  not  at  present  the 
means  of  ascertaining." 

Professoi-  Stanley  ( Sermons  on  the  Apostolic  Age, 
329,  330)  has  ingeniously  conjectured  that  the 
name  Oblias  ('ilySAios) — which  was  one  of  the  titles 
by  which  St.  James  the  Less  was  distinguished 
from  other  Jacobs  of  the  time,  and  which  is  ex- 
phiined  by  Hegesippos  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  23)  as 
meaning   "  bulwark  {inpioxH)   of  the  people,"— 

was  in  its  original  form  Oj)hli-am  i"  (OyvSJ?).  In 
this  connexion  it  is  a  singular  coincidence  that 
St.  James  was  martyred  by  being  thrown  from 
the  coiner  of  the  Temple,  at,  or  close  to,  the 
very  spot  which  is  named  by  Josephus  as  the 
boundary  of  OphSl.  [James,  vol.  i.  924,  5 ; 
En-Rogel,  558a.]     Ewald,  however  (Geschichtc, 

vi.  204Ko^e),  restores  the  name  as  Dl?v3h,  as  if 
from  73n,  a  fence  or  boundary.  [Chebel.]  This 
has   in    its  favour  the  fact  that  it   more  closely 


on  the  point,  that  Ophel  is  identical  with  Millo.  It  may 
be  so,  only  there  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  for  or 
against  it. 

b  Some  of  the  MSS.  of  Eusebius  have  the  name  Ozleam 
('n^Atan),  preserving  the  termination,  though  they  cor- 
rupt the  former  part  of  the  word. 


OPHIR 

agrees   in  signification   with  Trepioxv   tl'-in   Ophel 
does. 

The  Ophel  which  appeal's  to  have  been  the  re- 
sidence of  Klisha  at  the  time  of  Naaman's  visit  to 
him  (2  K.  v.  24;  A.  V.  "the  tower")  was  of 
course  a  difl'erent  place  from  that  spoken  of  above. 
The  nai-rative  would  seem  to  imply  that  it  was  not 
far  from  Samaria ;  but  this  is  not  certain.  The 
LXX.  and  Vulg.  must  have  read  7Q'K,  "  darkness," 
for  they  give  rh  hkot^lvSv  and  vesperi  lespec- 
tively.  [G.] 

O'PHIR  OaiX,  "T'QiX :  Ou4)6i>:  Ophir).  1. 
The  eleventh  in  order  of  the  sons  of  Joktan,  coming 
immediately  after  Sheba  (Gen.  x.  29  ;  1  Chr.  i.  23). 
So  many  important  names  in  the  genealogical  table 
in  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis — such  as  Sidon, 
Canaan,  Asshur,  Aram  (Syria),  Mizraim  (the  two 
Egypts,  Upper  and  Lower),  Sheba,  Caphtorim,  and 
Philistim  (the  Philistines) — represent  the  name  of 
some  city,  country,  or  people,  that  it  is  reasonable 
to  infer  that  the  same  is  the  case  with  all  the 
names  in  the  table.  It  frequently  happens  that  a 
father  and  his  sons  in  the  genealogy  represent  dis- 
tricts geographically  contiguous  to  each  other ;  yet 
this  is  not  an  invariable  rule,  for  in  the  case  of 
Tarshish  the  son  of  Javan  (ver.  10),  and  of  Nimrod 
the  son  of  Gush,  whose  kingdom  was  Babel  or 
Babylon  (ver.  11),  a  son  was  conceived  as  a  dis- 
tant colony  or  ofi'shoot.  But  there  is  one  marked 
peculiarity  in  the  sons  of  Joktan,  which  is  com- 
mon to  them  with  the  Canaanites  alone,  that 
precise  geographical  limits  are  assigned  to  their 
settlements.  Thus  it  is  said  (ver.  19)  that  the 
border  of  the  Can:ianites  was  "  from  Sidon,  as  thou 
comest  to  Gerar,  unto  Gaza;  as  thou  goest,  unto 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  Admah,  and  Zeboim, 
even  unto  Lasha:"  and  in  like  manner  (ver.  29, 
30)  that  the  dwelling  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  was 
"  from  Mesha,  as  thou  goest  unto  Sephar  a  moun- 
tain of  the  east."  The  peculiar  wording  of  these 
geographical  limits,  and  the  fact  that  the  well-known 
towns  which  define  the  border  of  the  Canaanites  are 
mentioned  so  nearly  in  tlie  same  manner,  forbid  the 
supposition  that  Mesha  and  Sephar  belonged  to  very 
distant  countries,  or  were  comparatively  unknown: 
and  as  many  of  the  sons  of  Joktan — such  as  Sheba, 
Hazarmaveth,  Almodad,  and  others — are  by  com- 
mon consent  admitted  to  represent  settlements  in 
Arabia,  it  is  an  obvious  inference  that  all  the  set- 
tlements corresponding  to  the  names  of  the  other 
sons  are  to  be  souglit  for  in  the  same  peninsula 
alone.  Hence,  as  Ophir  is  one  of  those  sons,  it  may 
be  I'egarded  as  a  fixed  point  in  discussions  con- 
cerning the  place  Ophir  mentioned  in  the  book  of 
Kings,  that  the  author  of  the  10th  chapter  of 
Genesis  regarded  Ophir  the  son  of  .Joktan  as  cor- 
responding to  some  city,  region,  or  tribe  in  Arabia. 

Etyinolofjij. — There  is,  seemingly,  no  sutncient 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  word  Ojihir  is  Semitic, 
although,  as  is  the  case  with  numerous  proper 
names  knowu  to  be  of  Hebrew  origin,  the  precise 
word  does  not  occur  as  a  common  name  in  the 
Bible.  See  the  words  from  ")DX  and  "iQy  in 
(iesenius's  Thesaurus,  and  compare  'A(j)dp,  tlie  me- 
tropolis of  the  Sabaeans  in  the  Periplus,  attributed 

"  This  strange  Idea  of  one  of  the  most  learned  Spaniards 
of  his  time  (b.  1527,  a.p.,  d.  1598)  accounts  for  the  fol- 
lowing passage  in  Hen  Jonson's  Alchemist,  Act.  li.  So.  1 : 

"  Come  on,  sir ;  now  you  set  your  foot  on  shore 
In  Novo  Orbe. — Here's  llic  rich  IVni; 


OPHIR 


637 


to  Arrian.  Gesenius  suggests  that  it  means  a 
"  fi-uitful  region,"  if  it  is  Semitic.  Baron  von 
Wrede,  who  explored  Hadhi-amaut  in  Arabia  in 
1843  {Journal  of  the  H.  Geographical  Society, 
vol.  xiv.  p.  110),  made  a  small  vocabulary  of 
Himyaritic  words  in  the  vernacular  tongue,  and 
amongst  these  he  gives  ojir  as  signifying  red.  He 
says  that  the  Mahra  people  call  themselves  the 
tribes  of  the  red-  country  (ofr),  and  call  the  Red 
Sea,  bahr  ofir.  If  this  were  so,  it  might  have 
somewhat  of  the  same  relation  to  aphar,"An&i" 
or  "dry  gi-ound"  (N  and  J?  being  interchange- 
able), that  adorn,  "red,"  has  to  adamah,  "the 
ground."  Still  it  is  unsafe  to  accept  the  use  of 
a  word  of  this  kind  on  the  authority  of  any  one 
traveller,  however  accurate;  and  the  supposed  ex- 
istence and  meaning  of  a  word  ojir  is  recommended 
for  special  inquiry  to  any  future  traveller  in  the 
same  district. 

2.  ly'2,ov(pip  and  '2,0}<pip\  Ophira,  1  K.  ix.  28, 
X.  II  ;  2  Chr.  viii.  18,  ix.  10  :  in  1  K.  ix.  28  the 
translation  of  the  LXX.  is  ets  'Xaiipipa.,  though  the 
ending  in  the  original  merely  denotes  motion  towards 
Ophir,  and  is  no  part  of  tlie  name.)  A  seaport  or 
region  from  which  the  Hebrews  in  the  time  of 
Solomon  obtained  gold,  in  vessels  which  went  thither 
in  conjunction  with  Tyrian  ships  from  Ezion- 
geber,  near  Elath,  on  that  branch  of  the  Red  Sea 
which  is  now  called  the  Gulf  of  Akabah.  The  gold 
was  proverbial  for  its  fineness,  so  that  "  gold  of 
Ophir"  is  several  times  used  as  an  expression  for 
fine  gold  (Ps.  xlv.  10  ;  Job  xxviii.  16  ;  Is.  xiii.  12  ; 
1  Chr.  xxix.  4) ;  and  in  one  passage  (Job  xxii.  24) 
the  word  "Ophir"  by  itself  is  used  for  gold  of 
Ophir,  and  for  gold  generally.  In  Jer.  x.  9  and 
Dan.  X.  5  it  is  thought  by  Gesenius  and  others  that 
Ophir  is  intended  by  the  word  "  Uphaz  "-;-there 
being  a  very  trifling  difi'erence  between  the  words 
in  Hebrew  when  written  without  the  vowel-points. 
In  addition  to  gold,  the  vessels  brought  from  Ophir 
almug-wood  and  precious  stones. 

The  precise  geographical  situation  of  Ophir  has 
long  been  a  subject  of  doubt  and  discussion.  Calmet 
{Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  s.  v.  "  Ophir  ")  regarded  it 
as  in  Armenia;  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  {History  of  the 
World,  book  i.  ch.  8)  thought  it  was  one  of  the 
Molucca  Islands;  and  Arias  Montanus  (Bochart, 
Fhaleg,  Pref.  and  ch.  9),  led  by  the  similarity  of 
the  word  Parvaim,  supposed  to  be  identical  with 
Ophir  (2  Chr.  iii.  6),  found  it  in  Peru."  But  these 
countries,  as  well  as  Ibeiia  and  Phrygia,  amnot 
now  be  viewed  as  affording  matter  for  serious  dis- 
cussion on  this  point,  and  the  three  opinions  which 
have  found  supporters  in  our  own  time  were  for- 
merly represented,  amongst  other  writers,  by  Huet 
{Sur  le  Commerce  et  la  Naviyation  dcs  Anciens, 
p.  59),  by  Bruce  {Travels,  book  ii.  c.  4),  and  by 
the  historian  Robertson  (Disquisition  respecting 
Ancient  hidia,  sect.  1 ),  who  placed  0]ihir  in  Africa ; 
by  Vitringa  {Oeograph.  Sacra,  p.  114)  and  Reland 
{Dissertatio  de  Ophir),  who  placed  it  in  India  ;  and 
by  Michaelis  {Spicilegiurn,  ii.  184),  Niebuhr,  the 
traveller  {Description  de  l' Arable,  p.  2-53),  Gos- 
sellin  {Becherches  sur  la  Geographic  des  Anciens, 
ii.  99),  and  Vincent  {History  of  the  Commerce  and 
Navigation   of  the  Ancients,    ii.   265-270),   who 


And  there  within,  sir,  are  the  golden  mines, 

Great  Solomon's  Opbir." 
Arias  Montanus  fancied  that  Parvaim  meant.  In  the  dual 
number,  two  Perus ;  one  Peru  iVoper,  and  the  other  New 

spahi  (-iiB  Q^ns)- 


638 


OrHIR 


placed  it  in  Arabia.  Of  other  distinguished  geo- 
graphical writers,  Bochart  {Phaleg,  ii.  27)  admitted 
two  Opliirs,  one  in  Arabia  and  one  in  India,  i.  e.  at 
Ceylon  ;  while  D'Anville  {Dissertation  sur  le  Pays 
d'Ophir,  Meinoires  de  Litteraturc,  xxx.  83),  equally 
admitting  two,  placed  one  in  Arabia  and  one  in 
Africa.  In  our  own  days  the  discussion  has  been 
continued  by  Gesenius,  who  in  articles  on  Ophir  iu 
his  Thesaurus  (p.  141),  and  in  Ersch  and  Gruber's 
Encyklopaedie  (s.  v.)  stated  that  the  question  lay 
between  India  and  Arabia,  assigned  the  reasons  to 
be  urged  in  favour  of  each  of  these  countries,  but 
declared  the  arguments  for  each  to  be  so  equally 
balanced  that  he  refrained  from  expressing  any 
opinion  of  his  own  on  the  subject.  M.  Quatremere, 
however,  in  a  paper  on  Ophir  which  was  printed 
in  1842  iu  the  Mt'moires  de  I' Iiistitut,  again  in- 
sisted on  the  claims  of  Africa  (Acadeniie  des  In- 
scriptions et  Belles  Lettres,  t.  xv.  ii.  362);  and  in 
his  valuable  work  on  Ceylon  (part  vii.  chap.  1)  Sir 
J.  Emerson  Tennant  adopts  the  opinion,  sanctioned 
by  Josephus,  that  Malacca  was  Ophir.  Otherwise 
the  two  countries  which  have  divided  the  opinions 
of  the  learned  have  been  India  and  Arabia — Lassen, 
Ritter,  Bertheau  {Exeijet.  Handbuch,  2  Chr.  viii. 
18),  Thenius  (Exegct.  Handbuch,  1  K.  x.  22),  and 
Ewald  {Geschichte,  iii.  347,  2ad  ed.)  being  in 
favour  of  India,  while  Winer  {Realm,  s.  v.), 
Fiirst  {Hebr.  und  C'hald.  Handw.  s.  v.),  Knobel 
{Volkei'tafel  der  Genesis,  j).  190),  Forster  {Geogr. 
of  Arabia,  i.  161-167),  Crawfurd  {Descriptive  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Indian  Islands,  s.  v.),  and  Kalisch 
{Commentary  on  Genesis,  chap.  "  The  Genealogy 
of  Nations  ")  are  in  favour  of  Arabia.  The  fullest 
treatise  on  the  question  is  that  of  Ritter,  who  in 
his  Erdkunde,  vol.  xiv.,  published  in  1848,  devoted 
80  octavo  pages  to  the  discussion  (pp.  351-431), 
and  adopted  the  opinion  of  Lassen  ilnd.  Alt.  i. 
529)  that  Ophir  was  situated  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Indus. 

Some  general  idea  of  the  arguments  which  may 
be  advanced  iu  favour  of  each  of  the  three  countries 
may  be  derived  from  the  following  statement.  In 
favour  of  Aiabia,  there  are  these  considerations  : — 
1st.  The  10th  chapter  of  Genesis  ver.  29,  contains 
what  is  equivalent  to  an  intimation  of  the  author's 
opinion,  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia.  [Ophir  1.] 
2ndly.  Three  places  in  Arabia  may  be  pointed  out, 
the  names  of  which  agree  sufficiently  with  the  word 
Ophir :  viz.,  Aphar,  called  b)'  Ptolemy  Snpphara, 
now  Zafiir  or  Saphar,  which,  according  to  the  Pe- 
riplus  ascribed  to  An-ian,  was  the  metropolis  of  the 
Sabaeans,  and  was  distant  twelve  days'  journey  fiom 
the  emiiorium  Muza  on  the  Red  Sea ;  DofRr,  a 
city  mentioned  by  Niebuhr  the  ti-aveller  {Descrip- 
tion de  r Arabic,  p.  219),  as  a  considerable  town  of 
Yemen,  and  capital  of  Bellad  Hadsje,  situated  to 
the  north  of  Lolieia,  and  15  leagues  from  the  sea; 
and  Zafar  or  Zaftlri  [Arabia,  p.  92]  (Sepher, 
Dhafar)  now  Dofar,  a  city  on  the  southeni  coast  of 
Arabia,  visited  in  the  14th  century  by  Ibn  Batuta, 
the  Arabian  traveller,  and  stated  by  liim  to  be  a 
month's  journey  by  land  from  Aden,  and  a  month's 
voyage,  when  the  wind  was  fair,  from  the  Indian 
shores  (Lee's  Translation,  p.  57).  3rdly.  In  an- 
tiquity, Arabia  was  represented  as  a  country  pro- 
ducing gold  by  four  writers  at  least :  viz.,  by 
the  geographer  Agatharchides,  who  lived  in  the 
2nd  century  before  Christ  (iu  Photius  250,  and 
Hudson's  Gcograph.  Minorcs,  i.  60) ;  by  the 
geographer  Artemidorus,  who  lived  a  little  later, 
and  whose  account  has  been  pieserved,  and,  as  it 


OPHIR 

were,  adopted  by  the  geographer  Strabo  (xiv.'l8); 
by  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  50,  iii.  44)  ;  and  by  Pliny 
the  Elder  (vi.  32).  4thly.  Eupolemus,  a  Greek 
historian,  who  lived  befoie  the  Christian  aera,  and 
who,  besides  other  writings,  wrote  a  work  respect- 
ing the  kings  of  Judaea,  ex-pressly  states,  as  quoted 
by  Eusebius  {Praep.  Evang.  ix.  30),  that  Ophir 
was  an  island  with  gold  mines  in  the  Eiythracan 
Sea  {Ovp(l)rj,  comp.  Ou(peip,  the  LXX.  Translation 
in  Gen.  x.  29),  and  that  David  sent  miners  thither 
in  vessels  which  he  caused  to  be  built  at  Aelana 
=  Elath.  Kow  it  is  true  that  the  name  of  the  Ery- 
thraean Sea  was  deemed  to  include  the  Persian 
Gulf,  as  well  as  the  Red  Sea,  but  it  was  always 
regarded  as  closely  connected  with  the  shores  of 
Arabia,  and  cannot  be  shown  to  have  been  extended 
to  India.  5thly.  On  the  supposition  that,  notwith- 
standing all  the  ancient  authorities  on  the  subject, 
gold  really  never  existed  either  in  Arabia,  or  in  any 
island  along  its  coasts,  Ophir  was  an  Arabian  em- 
porium, into  which  gold  was  brought  as  an  article 
of  commerce,  and  was  exported  into  Judaea.  There 
is  not  a  single  passage  in  the  Bible  inconsistent 
with  this  supposition  ;  and  there  is  something  like 
a  direct  intimation  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia. 

While  such  is  a  general  view  of  the  arguments  for 
Arabia,  the  following  considerations  are  ui-ged  in 
behalf  of  India.  1  st.  Sofir  is  the  Coptic  word  for 
India ;  and  Sophir,  or  Sophira  is  the  word  used  for 
the  place  Ophir  by  the  Septuaglnt  translators,  and 
likewise  by  Josephus.  And  Josephus  positively 
states  that  it  was  a  part  of  India  {Ant.  viii.  6,  §4), 
though  he  places  it  iu  the  Golden  Chersonese,  which 
was  the  Malay  peuiiisula,  and  belonged,  geographic- 
ally, not  to  India  proper,  but  to  India  beyond  the 
Ganges.  Moreover,  in  three  passages  of  the  Bible, 
where  the  Septuagint  has  Soxjxpo  or  'Xovcpip,  1  K.  ix. 
28,  X.  11  ;  Is.  xiii.  12,  Arabian  translators  have  used 
the  word  India.  2ndly.  All  the  three  imports  from 
Ophir,  gold,  precious  stones,  and  almug  wood,  are 
essentially  Indian.  Gold  is  found  in  the  sources  ot 
the  Indus  and  the  Cabool  River  before  their  juncture 
at  Attock  ;  in  the  Himalaya  mountains,  and  in  a 
portion  of  the  Dcccan,  especially  at  Cochin.  India 
has  in  all  ages  been  celebrated  for  its  precious  stones 
of  all  kinds.  And  sandal-wood,  which  the  best 
modern  Hebrew  scholars  regard  as  the  almug-wood 
of  the  Bible,  is  almost  exclusively,  or  at  any  rate 
pre-eminently,  a  product  of  the  coast  of  Malabar. 
3rdly.  Assuming  tiiat  the  ivory,  peacocks,  and  apes, 
which  were  brought  to  Ezion-geber  once  in  three 
years  by  the  navy  of  Tharshish  in  conjunction  with 
the  navy  of  Hiram  (1  K.  x.  22),  were  brought 
from  Ophir,  they  also  collectively  point  to  India 
rather  than  Arabia.  Moreover,  etymologically,  not 
one  of  these  words  in  the  Hebrew  is  of  Hebrew  or 
Semitic  origin  ;  one  being  connected  with  Sanscrit, 
another  with  the  Tamil,  and  another  with  the 
Malay  language.  [Tarshisii.]  4thly.  Two  places 
in  India  may  be  specified,  agreeing  to  a  certain 
extent  in  name  with  Ophir ;  one  at  the  mouths 
of  the  Indus,  where  Indian  writers  placed  a  people 
named  the  Abhira,  agreeing  with  the  name  2a- 
ySei'pia  of  the  geographer  Ptolemj'  ;  and  the  other, 
the  SouTTopa  of  Ptolemy,  the  "Ovtrirapa  of  Arrian's 
Periplus,  where  the  to\vn  of  Goa  is  now  situated, 
on  the  western  coast  of  India. 

Lastly,  the  following  pleas  have  been  urged 
in  behalf  of  Africa.  1st.  Of  the  three  coun- 
tries, Africa,  Arabia,  and  India,  Africa  is  the 
only  one  which  can  be  seriously  regarded  as  con- 
taining distiicts  which  have  supplied  gold  in  auy 


OPHIR 

grrnt  quantity.  Although,  as  a  stiitistical  fact, 
gold  has  been  found  in  parts  of  India,  the  quan- 
tity is  so  small,  that  India  has  never  supplied 
gold  to  the  coiimierce  of  the  world ;  and  in 
Ynodern  times  no  gold  at  all,  nor  any  vestiges  of 
exhausted  mines  have  been  found  in  Arabia.  2ndly. 
On  the  western  coast  of  Africa,  near  Mozambique, 
there  is  a  port  called  by  the  Arabians  Sofala,  which, 
as  the  liquids  /  and  are  r  are  eiisily  interchanged,  was 
probably  the  Opliir  of  the  Ancients.  When  the  Por- 
tuguese, in  A.D.  1500,  first  reached  it  by  the  Cape 
of  (iood  Hope,  it  vv;is  the  emporium  of  the  gold 
ditftrict  in  the  interior ;  and  two  Arabian  vessels 
laden  with  gold  were  actually  off  Sofala''  at  the  time 
(see  Cadainusto,  cap.  58).  3rdly.  On  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  passage,  1  K.  x.  22,  applies  to  Ophir, 
JSofala  has  still  stronger  claims  in  preference  to 
India.  Peacocks,  indeed,  would  not  have  been 
brought  from  it ;  but  the  peacock  is  too  delicate  a 
bird  for  a  long  voyage  in  small  vessels,  and  the 
word  tuhkiijim,  prot)ably  signiKed  "  parrots."  At 
the  same  time,  ivory  and  apes  might  have  been 
supplied  in  abundance  from  the  district  of  which 
Sofida  was  the  emporium.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
Ophir  had  been  in  India,  other  Indian  productions 
might  have  been  expected  in  the  list  of  imports ; 
such  as  shawls,  silk,  rich  tissues  of  cotton,  per- 
fumes, pepper,  and  cinnamon.  4thly.  On  the  same 
supposition  respecting  1  K.  x.  22,  it  can,  according 
to  the  t)'aveller  Bruce,  be  proved  by  the  laws  of 
the  monsoons  in  the  Indian  Ocean,  that  Ophir  was 
at  Sofala ;  inasmuch  as  the  voyage  to  Sofala  from 
Ezion-geber  would  have  been  perfomied  exactly  in 
three  years ;  it  could  not  have  been  accomplished  in 
less  time,  and  it  would  not  have  required  more  (vol. 
i.  p.  440). 

From  the  above  statement  of  the  different  views 
which  have  been  held  respecting  the  situation  of 
Ophir,  the  suspicion  will  naturally  suggest  itself 
that  no  positive  conclusion  can  be  arrived  at  on  the 
subject.  And  this  seems  to  be  true,  in  this  sense, 
that  the  Bible  in  all  its  direct  notices  of  Ophir  as  a 
place  does  not  supply  sufficient  data  for  an  inde- 
pendent opinion  on  this  disputed  point.  At  the 
same  time,  it  is  an  inference  in  the  highest  degree 
probable,  that  the  author  of  the  10th  chapter  of 
Genesis  regarded  Ophir  as  in  Arabia ;  and,  in  the 
absence  of  conclusive  proof  that  he  was  mistaken,  it 
seems  most  reasonable  to  acquiesce  in  his  opinion. 

To  illustrate  this  view  of  the  question  it  is  de- 
sirable to  examine  closely  all  the  passages  in  the 
historical  books  which  mention  Ophir  by  name. 
These  are  only  five  in  number:  three  in  the  Books 
of  Kings,  and  two  in  tlie  Books  of  Chronicles.  The 
latter  were  probably  copied  from  the  former;  ami, 
at  any  rate,  do  not  contain  any  additional  informa- 
tion ;  so  that  it  is  sufficient  to  give  a  reference  to 
them,  2  Chron.  viii.  18,  ix.  10.  The  three  pas- 
sages in  the  Books  of  Kings,  however,  being  short, 
will  be  set  out  at  length.  The  first  passage  is  as 
follows  :  it  is  in  the  history  of  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
"  And  king  Solomon  made  a  navy  ships  at  Ezion- 
geber,  which  is  beside  Eloth,  on  the  shore  of  the 
Ked  Sea,  in  the  land  of  Kdom.  And  Hiram  sent  in 
the  navy  his  servants,  shipmen  that  had  knowledge 
of  the  sea,  with  the  servants  of  Solomon.  And  they 

b  Mr.  Grove  has  pointed  out  a  passage  in  Milton's 
Faradise  Lost,  xi.  399-101,  favouring  this  Sofala:— 
"  Mombiiza,  and  Quiloa,  and  Molind, 
And  Sofala,  thought  Ophir,  to  the  realm 
Of  Congo  and  Angola  farthest  soutb." 


OPHIR  639 

came  to  Ophir,  and  fetched  from  thence  gold,  foiu- 
hundred  and  twenty  talents,  and  brought  it  to  king 
Solomon,"  1  K.  ix.  26-29.  The  next  passage  is  in 
the  succeeding  chapter,  and  refers  to  the  same  reign. 
"  And  the  navy  also  of  Hiram  that  brought  gold 
from  Ophir,  brought  in  from  Ophir  great  plenty  of 
almug-trees  and  precious  stones,"  1  K.  x.  11.  The 
third  passage  relates  to  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat 
king  of  Judah,  and  is  as  follows :  "  Jehoshaphat 
made  ships  of  Tharshish  to  go  to  Ophir  for  gold  ;  but 
they  went  not :  for  the  ships  were  broken  at  Ezion- 
geber,"  1  K.  xxii.  48.  In  addition  to  these  three 
passages,  the  following  verse  on  the  Book  of  Kino-s 
has  very  frequently  been  referred  to  Ophir:  "  For- 
the  king  {i.  e.  Solomon)  had  at  sea  a  navy  of 
Tharshish  with  the  navy  of  Hiram :  once  in  three 
years  came  the  navy  of  Tharshish  bringing  gold  and 
silver,  ivory,  and  apes,  and  peacocks,"  1  K.  x.  22. 
But  there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  to  show  that 
the  fleet  mentioned  in  this  verse  was  identical  with 
the  fleet  mentioned  in  1  K.  ix.  26-29,  and  1  K.  x. 
11,  as  bringing  gold,  almug-trecs,  and  precious 
stones  from  Ophir ;  and  if,  notwithstanding,  the 
identity  of  the  two  is  admitted  as  a  probable  con- 
jecture, there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  the 
fleet  went  only  to  Ophir,  and  that  therefore  the 
silver,  ivory,  apes,  and  peacocks  must  have  come 
from  Ophir.  Indeed,  the  direct  contrary  might  be 
inferred,  even  on  the  hypothesis  of  the  identity  of 
the  two  fleets,  inasmuch  as  the  actual  mention  of 
Ophir  is  distinctly  confined  to  the  imports  of  gold, 
almug-trees,  and  precious  stones,  and  the  compiler 
might  seem  carefully  to  have  distinguished  between 
it  and  the  country  from  which  silver,  ivory,  apes, 
and  peacocks  were  imported.  Hence,  without  re- 
ferring farther  to  the  p;i&sage  in  1  K.  x.  22,  we  are 
thrown  back,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the 
situation  of  Ophir,  to  the  three  passages  from  the 
Book  of  Kings  which  were  first  set  forth.  And  if 
those  three  passages  are  carefully  examined,  it  will 
be  seen  that  all  the  information  given  respecting 
Ophir  is,  that  it  was  a  place  or  region,  accessible 
by  sea  from  Ezion-geber  on  the  Ked  Sea,  from  which 
imports  of  gold,  almug-trees,  and  precious  stones 
were  brought  back  by  the  Tyiian  and  Hebrew 
sailors.  No  data  whatever  are  given  as  to  the  dis- 
tance of  Ophir  from  Ezion-geber;  no  information 
direct  or  indirect,  or  even  the  slightest  hint,  is 
afforded  for  determining  whether  Ophir  was  the 
name  of  a  town,  or  the  name  of  a  district ;  whether 
it  was  an  emporium  only,  or  the  country  which 
actually  produced  the  three  articles  of  tratHc.  Bear- 
ing in  mind  the  possibility  of  its  being  an  empo- 
rium, there  is  no  reason  why  it  may  not  haxe  been 
either  in  Arabia,  or  on  the  Persian  coast,  or  in 
India,  or  in  Africa  ;  but  there  is  not  sufficient  evi- 
dence for  deciding  in  favour  of  one  of  these  sugges- 
tions rather  than  of  the  others. 

Under  these  circumstances  it  is  well  to  revert  to 
th*^  10th  chapter  of  Genesis.  It  has  been  shown 
[Oi'HiK  1]  to  be  reasonably  certain  that  the  author 
of  that  chaptei'  regarded  Ophir  as  the  name  of  some 
city,  region,  or  tribe  in  Arabia.  And  it  is  almost 
equally  certain  that  the  Ophir  of  Genesis  is  the 
Ophir  of  the  Book  of  Kings.  There  is  no  mention, 
either  in  the  Bible  or  elsewhere,  of  any  other  Ophir ; 


Milton  followed  a  passage  In  Purcbas's  /'tljri'nieft,  page 
1022  of  the  2nd  voluino,  published  in  1625;  and  all 
the  modern  geographical  names  in  vv.  387-411  are  iu 
rurclias. 


()40 


OPHIR 


and  the  idea  of  there  liaving  been  two  Ophirs,  evi- 
dently arose  tVom  a  perception  of  the  obvious  meaning 
of  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis,  on  the  one  hand,  cou- 
pled with  the  erroneous  opinion  on  the  other,  that 
the  Ophir  of  the  Book  of  K'ings  could  not  have  been 
in  Arabia.  Now,  whatever  uncertainty  may  exist 
as  to  the  time  when  the  1 0th  chapter  of  Genesis  was 
written  (Knobel,  Volkertafel  der  Genesis,  p.  4,  and 
Hartmann's  Forschun-_icn  iiber  die  5  Biicher  Moses, 
p.  584),  the  author  of  it  wrote  while  Hebrew  was  yet 
a  living  language ;  there  is  no  statement  in  any  part 
of  the  Bible  inconsistent  with  his  opinion  ;  and  the 
most  ancient  writer  who  can  be  opposed  to  him  as 
an  authority,  lived,  under  any  hypothesis,  many  cen- 
turies after  his  death.  Hence  the  burden  of  proof 
lies  on  any  one  who  denies  Ophir  to  have  been  in 
Arabia. 

But  all  that  can  be  advanced  against  Arabia  falls 
very  short  of  such  proof  In  weighing  the  evidence 
on  this  point,  the  assumption  that  ivory,  peacocks, 
and  apes  were  imported  fi-om  Ophir  must  be  dis- 
missed from  consideration.  In  one  view  of  the 
subject,  and  accepting  the  statement  in  2  Chr.  ix. 
21,  they  might  have  connexion  with  Tarshish 
[Taeshish]  ;  but  they  have  a  very  slight  bearing  on 
the  position  of  Ophir.  Hence  it  is  not  here  necessaiy 
to  discuss  the  law  of  monsoons  in  the  Indian  Ocean  ; 
though  it  may  be  said  in  passing  that  the  facts 
on  which  the  supposed  law  is  founded,  which 
seemed  so  cogent  that  they  induced  the  historian  Ro- 
bertson to  place  Ophir  in  Africa  (Disquisition  on 
India,  sect.  2),  have  been  pointedly  denied  by  Mr. 
Salt  in  his  Voyage  to  Abyssinia  (p.  103).  More- 
over, the  resemblance  of  names  of  places  in  India 
and  Africa  to  Ophir,  cannot  reasonably  be  insisted 
on  ;  for  there  is  an  equally  great  resemblance  in  the 
names  of  some  places  in  Arabia.  And  in  reference 
to  Africa,  especially,  the  place  there  imagined  to  be 
Ophir,  viz.,  Sofala,  has  been  shown  to  be  merely 
an  Arabic  word,  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
Shephglah,  which  signifies  a  plain  or  low  country 
(Jer.  xxxii.  44;  Josh.  xi.  16;  the  '2,ecj)T]Xa  of  the 
Maccabees,  I'Macc.  xii.  38;  see  (iesenius.  Lex. 
s.  v.).  Again,  the  use  of  Sofiv  as  the  Coptic  word 
for  Ophir  cannot  be  regai'ded  as  of  much  import- 
ance, it  having  been  pointed  out  by  Reland  that 
there  is  no  proof  of  its  use  except  in  late  Coptic, 
and  that  thus  its  adoption  may  have  been  the  mere 
consequence  of  the  erroneous  views  which  Josephus 
represented,  instead  of  being  a  confirmation  of  them. 
Similar  remarks  a]iply  to  the  Biblical  versions  by 
the  Arabic  translators.  The  opinion  of  Josephus 
himself  would  have  been  entitled  to  much  consi- 
deration in  the  absence  of  all  other  evidence  on  the 
subject ;  but  he  lived  about  a  thousand  years  after 
the  only  voyages  to  Ophir  of  which  any  record  has 
been  presented,  and  his  authority  cannot  be  com- 
pared to  that  of  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis.  Again, 
he  seems  inconsistent  with  himself;  for  in  Ant.  ix. 
1,  §4,  he  translates  the  Ophir  of  1  K.  xxii.  49,  and 
the  Tarshish  of  2  Chr.  xx.  o6,  as  Pontus  and  Thrace. 
It  is  likewise  some  deduction  from  the  weight  of  his 
opinion,  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  opinion  of  Eupo- 
lemus,  who  was  an  earlier  writer ;  though  he  too 
lived  at  so  great  a  distance  of  time  fiom  the  reign 
of  Solomon  that  he  is  by  no  means  a  decisive 
authority.     Moreover,  imagination  may  have  acted 


"^  The  general  meaning  of  iypD>  a  prop  or  support, 
is  certain,  tbough  its  special  meaning  in  1  K.  x.  12  seems 
Irrecoverably  lost.  It  is  translated  "  pillars  "  in  the  A.  V., 
and  wTocTTTipiyjaara  in  the  LXX.     In  the  corresponding 


OPHIR 

on  Josephus  to  place  Ophir  in  the  Golden  Cherso- 
nese, which  to  the  ancients  was,  as  it  were  the 
extreme  east ;  as  it  acted  on  Arias  Montanus  to 
place  it  in  Peru,  in  the  far  more  improbable  and 
distant  west.  All  the  foregoing  objections  having 
been  rejected  from  the  discussion,  it  remains  to 
notice  those  which  are  based  on  the  assertion  that 
sandal-wood  (assumed  to  be  the  same  as  almug- 
wood),  precious  stones,  and  gold,  are  not  productions 
of  Arabia.  And  the  following  observations  tend  to 
show  that  such  objections  are  not  conclusive. 

1st.  In  the  Periplus  attributed  to  Anian,  siindal- 
wood  (^v\a  ffavraXiva)  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
imports  into  Omana,  an  emporium  on  the  Persian 
Gulf;  and  it  is  thus  proved,  if  any  proof  is  requi- 
site, that  a  sea-port  would  not  necessarily  be  in 
India,  because  sandal-wood  was  obtained  from  it. 
But  independently  of  this  circumstance,  the  reasons 
advanced  in  favour  of  almug-wood  being  the  same 
as  sandal-wood,  though  admissible  as  a  conjecture, 
seem  too  weak  to  justify  the  founding  any  argu- 
ment on  them.  In  2  Chr.  ii.  8,  Solomon  is  re- 
presented as  writing  to  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  in 
these  words :  "  Send  me  also  cedar-trees,  iir- 
trees,  and  algum-trees  out  of  Lebanon ;  for  I 
know  that  thy  servants  can  skill  to  cut  timber  in 
Lebanon,"  a  passage  evidently  written  under  the 
belief  that  almug-trees  gi'ew  in  Lebanon.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  this  was  a  mistake —  but  this  is 
a  point  which  cannot  be  assumed  without  distinct 
evidence  to  render  it  probable.  The  LXX.  trans- 
lator of  the  Book  of  Kings,  1  K.  x.  12,  translates 
almug-wood  by  |yAa  irgA.eKTjra,  or  oTreAe/cijTa, 
which  gives  no  information  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
wood  ;  and  the  LXX.  translator  of  the  Chronicles 
readers  it  by  |yAa  irevKiva,  which  strictly  means 
fir-wood  (compare  Ennius's  translation  of  Medea, 
V.  4),  and  which,  at  the  utmost,  can  only  be  ex- , 
tended  to  any  wood  of  resinous  trees.  The  Vulgate 
translation  is  "  thyina,"  i.  e.  wood  made  of  thya 
{6vov,  6via),  a  tree  which  Theophrastus  mentions 
as  having  supplied  peculiarly  dmable  timber  for 
the  roofs  of  temples ;  which  he  says  is  like  the  wild 
cypress ;  and  which  is  classed  by  him  as  an  ever- 
green with  the  pine,  the  fir,  the  juniper,  the  yew- 
tree,  and  the  cedar  {Histor.  Plant,  v.  3,  §7,  i. 
9,  §3).  It  is  stated  both  by  Buxtorf  and  Gesenius 
(s.  V.)  that  the  Rabbins  understood  by  the  word, 
corals — which  is  certainly  a  most  improbable  mean- 
ing— and  that  in  the  3rd  century,  almug  in  the 
Mishnah  (Kelim  13,  6)  was  used  for  coral  in  the 
singular  number.  In  the  13th  century,  Kimchi,  it 
is  said,  proposed  the  meaning  of  Biazil  wood.  And 
it  was  not  till  last  century  that,  for  the  first  time, 
the  suggestion  was  made  that  almug-wood  was  the 
same  as  sandal-wood.  This  suggestion  came  from 
Celsius,  the  Swedish  botanist,  in  his  Hierobotanicon ; 
who  at  the  same  time  recounted  thirteen  meanings 
proposed  by  others.  Kow,  as  all  that  has  been 
handed  down  of  the  uses  of  almug-wood  is,  that  the 
king  made  of  it  a  prop  "^  or  support  for  the  House 
of  the  Lord  and  the  king's  house ;  and  harps  also 
and  psalteries  for  singers  (1  K.  x.  12),  it  is  hard 
to  conceive  how  the  greatest  botanical  genius  that 
ever  lived  can  now  do  moie  than  make  a  guess. 
more  or  less  probable,  at  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

Since  the  time  of  Celsius,  the  meaning  of  "  san- 


passage  of  2  Chr.  ix.  11,  the  word  ig  m?pt3>  the  usual 
meaning  of  which  is  highways ;  and  which  is  translated  in 
the  A.  V.  terraces,  and  in  the  LXX.  di^a^ao-et?,  ascents, 
or  stairs.    Sec  Her.  i.  181 


OPHIE 

dal  wood"  has  been  defended  by  Sanscrit  etymo- 
Ingies.  According  to  Gesenius  (^Lexicon,  s.  v.)> 
Bohlen  proposed,  as  a  derivation  for  almwj<iiin, 
tiie  Arabic  article  Al,  and  tnicatn,  from  simple 
intca,  a  name  for  red  sandal-wood.  Lassen,  in 
Indische  Altcrtkumskunde  (vol.  i.,  pt.  1,  p.  y.'58), 
adopting  the  form  ahininmim,  says  that  if  the 
plural  ending  is  taken  trijm  it,  there  remains  vahjn., 
as  oiie  of  the  Sanscrit  names  for  .sandal-wood, 
which  in  the  language  of  the  Deccan  is  valgum. 
Perhaps,  however,  these  etymologies  cannot  lay 
claim  to  much  value  until  it  is  made  probable, 
iiidcpendcnth/,  that  almug-wood  is  sandal-wood. 
It  is  to  be  observed  that  there  is  a  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  whether  "al"  in  alijummini  is  an 
article  or  part  of  the  noun,  and  it  is  not  denied  by 
any  one  that  chandana  is  the  ordinary  Sanscrit 
word  for  sandal-wood.  Moreover,  Mr.  Crawfurd, 
who  resided  officially  many  years  in  the  East  and 
is  familiar  with  sandal-wood,  says  that  it  is  never 
— now,  at  least — used  for  musical  instruments,  and 
that  it  is  unfit  for  pillars,  or  stairs,  balustrades, 
or  bannisters,  or  balconies.  (See  also  his  Descrip- 
tive Dictionary  of  the  Indian  Islands,  pp.  310- 
375.)  It  is  used  for  incense  or  perfume,  or  as 
fancy  wood. 

2.  As  to  precious  stones,  they  take  up  such 
little  room,  and  can  be  so  easily  concealed,  if 
necessary,  and  conveyed  from  place  to  place,  that 
tliere  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  they  came  from 
( )phir,  simply  as  from  an  emporium,  even  admit- 
ting that  tliere  were  no  precious  stones  in  Arabia. 
But  it  has  already  been  observed  [AiiABiA,  1.  p.  916] 
that  the  Arabian  peninsula  produces  the  emerald 
and  onyx  stone;  and  it  has  been  well  pointed  out 
by  Mr.  Crawfurd  that  it  is  impossible  to  identity 
jirecious  stones  under  so  general  a  name  with  any 
jiarticular  country.  Certainly  it  cannot  be  shown 
that  the  Jews  of  Solomon's  time  included  under 
that  name  the  diamond,  for  which  India  is  pecu- 
liarly renowned. 

3.  As  to  gold,  far  too  gi:eat  stress  seems  to 
have  been  laid  on  the  negative  fact  that  no  gold 
nor  trace  of  gold-mines  has  been  discovered  in 
Arabia.  Negative  evidence  of  this  kind,  in  which 
Ritter"*  has  placed  so  much  reliance  (vol.  xiv. 
p.  408),  is  by  no  means  conclusive.  Sirlvoderick 
Murchison  and  Sir  Chailes  Lyell  concur  in  stating 
that,  altliough  no  rock  is  known  to  exist  in  Arabia 
from  which  gold  is  obtained  at  the  present  day, 
yet  the  peninsula  has  not  undergone  a  sufficient 
geological  examination  to  warrant  the  conclusion 
that  gold  did  not  exist  there  formerly  or  that  it 
may  not  yet  be  discovered  tjieie.  Under  these 
circumst<ances  there  is  no  sulficient  reason  to  reject 
the  accounts  of  the  ancient  writers  who  iiave  been 
already  adduced  as  witnesses  for  the  former  exist- 
ence of  gold  in  Arabia.  It  is  true  that  Artemi- 
dorus  and  Diodorus  Siculus  may  merely  have 
relied  on  the  authority  of  Agatharciiidcs,  but  it  is 
important  to  remark  that  Agatharchides  lived  in 
Kgypt  and  was  guardian  to  one  of  the  young 
Ptolemies  during  his  minority,  so  that  ho  must 
have  been  familiar  with  the  general  nature  of  the 
commei-ce  between  l'>gypt  and  Arabia.  Althougii 
he  may  have  been  inaccurate  in  details,  it  is  not 


OPHIR 


641 


<i  Bearing  tills  in  mind,  it  is  remarkable  that  Kilter 
should  have  accepted  Lassen's  conjecture  rospoclinK  (he 
position  of  Ophlr  at  the  mouths  of  the  Imliis.  Atloclc  is 
distant  from  the  sea  942  miles  by  the  Indus,  and  CIM  in  a 
straight  line ;  and  the  upper  part  of  the  Indus  is  about 
vol,.  11. 


lightly  to  be  admitted  that  ho  was  altogether 
mistaken  in  supposing  that  Arabia  produced  any 
gold  at  all.  And  it  is  in  his  favour  that  two  of 
his  statements  have  unexpectedly  received  confirma- 
tion in  our  own  time:  1st,  resi^ecting  gold-mines 
in  Egypt,  the  position  of  which  in  the  Bisharee 
Desert  was  ascertained  by  Mr.  Linant  and  Jlr. 
Bonomi  (Wilkinson's  Ancient  EgijiAians,  ch.  ix.)  ; 
and  2nd,  as  to  the  existence  of  nuggets  of  pure 
gold,  some  of  the  size  of  an  olive-stone,  some  of  a 
medlar,  and  some  of  a  chestnut.  The  latter  state- 
ment was  discredited  by  Michaelis  {Spicilegium, 
p.  287,  "  Nee  credo  ullibi  massas  auri  non  experti 
castaneae  nucis  magnitudiue  reperiri "),  but  it  has 
been  shown  to  be  not  incredible  by  the  result  of  the 
gold  discoveries  in  California  and  Australia. 

If,  however,  negative  evidence  is  allowed  to 
outweigh  on  this  subject  the  authority  of  Agathar- 
chides, Artemidorus,  Diodorus  Siculus,  Pliny,  and, 
it  may  be  added,  Strabo,  all  of  whom  may  possibly 
have  been  mistaken,  there  is  still  nothing  to  pre- 
vent Ophir  having  been  an  Arabian  emporium  for 
gold  (VViner,  Ilealw.  s.  v.  "Ophir").  The  Peri- 
plus,  attributed  to  Arrian,  gives  an  account  of 
several  Arabian  emporia.  In  the  Red  Sea,  for  ex- 
ample, \\'as  the  Emporium  JIuza,  only  twelve 
days  distant  fioni  Aphar  the  metropolis  of  the 
Sabaeans  and  the  Homerites.  It  is  expressly  stated 
that  this  port  had  commercial  relations  with  Bary- 
gaza,  i.  e.  Beroach,  on  the  west  coast  of  India,  and 
that  it  was  always  full  of  Arabs,  either  shij)- 
owners  or  sailors.  Again,  where  tlie  British  town 
of  Aden  is  now  situated,  there  was  another  em- 
porium, with  an  excellent  harbour,  called  Arabia 
Felix  (to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  district 
so  called),  which  received  its  name  of  Felix, 
according  to  the  author  of  the  Periplus,  from  its 
being'  the  depot  for  the  merchandize  both  of  the 
Indians  and  Egyptians  at  a  time  when  vessels  did 
not  sail  direct  from  India  to  Egypt,  and  when 
merchants  from  Egypt  did  not  dare  to  venture 
farther  eastward  towards  India.  At  Zaiar  or  Za- 
fiiri,  likewise,  already  referred  to  as  a  town  in 
Iladramaiit,  there  was  an  emporium  in  the  middle 
ages,  and  there  may  have  been  one  in  the  time  of 
Solomon.  And  on  the  Arabian  side  of  the  I'ersian 
Gulf  was  the  emporium  of  Gerrlia,  mentioned  by 
Strabo  (x\'i.  p.  766),  which  seems  to  have  had 
commercial  intercourse  with  Babylon  both  liy 
caravans  and  by  barges.  Its  exports  and  im])orts 
arc  not  specified,  but  there  is  no  reason  why  the 
articles  of  commerce  to  be  obtained  tliere  should 
have  been  very  different  from  tliose  at  Omana  on 
Ihe  opposite  side  of  the  gulf,  the  exports  from 
which  were  purple  cloth,  wine,  dates,  slaves,  and 
gokl,  while  the  imports  were  brass,  .sandal-wood, 
honi,  and  ebony.  In  fact,  whatever  other  dilli- 
culties  may  exist  in  relation  to  Ojihir,  no  dilliculty 
arises  from  any  absence  of  emporia  along  the  Ara- 
bian coast,  suited  to  the  size  of  vessels  and  the  state 
of  navigation  in  early  times. 

There  do  not,  however,  appear  to  be  sufficient 
data  for  determining  in  favour  of  any  one  empo- 
rium or  of  any  one  locality  rather  than  another  in 
Arabia  as  having  been  the  Opliir  of  Solomon. 
Mr.  Forster  {^Geography  of  Arabia,  i.  167)  relies 


S60  miles  long  above  Attock  (Thornton's  Gazetteer  of 
Indiu).  Hence  gold  would  \>v  sii  distant  from  the  months 
of  the  Indus,  that  none  could  be  obtaUud  thence,  except 
tinui  an  einporiuin  situated  there. 


tU2 


OPHIR 


on  an  Otbv  or  Ofir,  in  Sale  and  D'Anville's  maps, 
as  the  name  of  a  city  and  district  in  the  moniitains 
of  Oman  ;  but  he  does  not  quote  any  ancient  writer 
ov  modern  traveller  as  an  authority  for  the  exist- 
ence of  such  an  Ofir,  though  this  may  perhaps  be 
reasonably  required  before  importance  is  attached, 
in  a  disputed  point  of  this  kind,  to  a  name  on 
a  map.  Niebuhr  the  traveller  {Description  de 
V Arabic,  p.  253)  savs  that  Ophir  was  probably 
the  principal  port  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Sabaeans, 
that  it  was  situaterl  between  Aden  and  Dafar  (or 
Zafar),  and  that  perhaps  even  it  was  Cane.  Gos- 
selin,  on  the  other  hand,  thinks  it  was  Doffir,  the 
city  of  Yemen  already  adverted  to ;  and  in  reference 
to  the  obvious  objection  (which  applies  equally  to 
the  metropolis  Aphar)  that  it  is  at  some  distiuice 
from  the  sea,  he  says  that  during  the  long  period 
which  has  elapsed  since  the  time  of  Solomon,  sands 
have  encroached  on  the  coast  of  Loheia,  and  that 
Ophir  may  have  been  regarded  as  a  port,  although 
vessels  did  not  actually  reach  it  {Eecherches  siir 
la  Geogrnphie  des  Anciens,  1.  c).  Dean  Vincent 
agi'ees  with  Gosselin  in  confining  Ophir  to  Sabaea, 
partly  because  in  Gen.  x.  Ophir  is  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  sons  of  Joktan  who  have  their 
residence  in  Arabia  Felix,  and  partly  because,  in 
1  K.  ix.,  the  voyage  to  Ophir  seems  related  as 
if  it  were  in  consequence  of  the  visit  of  the  Queen 
of  Sheba  to  Jerusalem  {History  of  the  Commerce 
and  Navigation  of  the  Ancients,  1.  c).  But  the 
opinion  that  Jobah  and  Havilah  represent  parts 
of  Arabia  Felix  would  by  no  means  command  uni- 
versal assent ;  and  although  the  Book  of  Kings 
cert.ainly  suggests  the  inference  that  there  was 
some  connexion  between  the  visit  of  the  Queen  of 
Sheba  and  the  voyage  to  Ophir,  this  would  be 
consistent  with  Ophir  being  either  contiguous  to 
Sabaea,  or  situated  on  any  point  of  the  southern  or 
eastern  coasts  of  Arabia  ;  as  in  either  of  these  cases 
it  would  have  been  politic  in  Solomon  to  conciliate 
the  good  will  of  the  Sabaeans,  who  occupied  a  long 
tract  of  the  eastern  coast  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  who 
might  possibly  have  commanded  the  Straits  of  Babel- 
mandel.  On  the  whole,  however,  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia,  there  does  not 
seem  to  be  adequate  information  to  enable  us  to 
point  out  the  precise  locality  which  once  bore  that 
name. 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  observed  that  objections 
against  Ophir  being  in  Arabia,  grounded  on  the 
fact  that  no  gold  has  been  discovered  in  Arabia  in 
the  present  day,  seem  decisively  answered  by  the 
parallel  case  of  Sheba.  In  the  72nd  Psalm,  v.  15, 
"  gold  of  Sheba,"  translated  in  the  English  Psalter 
"gold  of  Arabia,"  is  spoken  of  just  as  "gold  of 
Ophir  "  is  spoken  of  in  other  passages  of  the  0.  T.,. 
and  in  Ezekiel's  account  of  the  trade  with  Tyre 
(xxvii.  22),  it  is  stated  "the  merchants  of  Sheba 
and  Kaamah,  they  were  thy  merchants:  they  occu- 
pied in  thy  fairs  with  chief  of  all  spices  and  with 
all  precious  stones,  and  gold,"  just  as  in  1  K.  x., 
precious  stones  and  gold  are  said  to  have  been 
brought  from  Ophir  by  the  navy  of  Solomon  and 
of  Hiram.  (Compare  Plin.  vi.  28  ;  Horace,  Od. 
i.  29,  1,  ii.  12,  24,  iii.  24,  2;  Epist.  i.  7,  36  ; 
and  Judg.  viii.  24.)  Now,  of  two  things  one  is 
true.  Either  the  gold  of  Sheba  and  the  precious 
stones  sold  to  the  Tyrians  by  the  merchants  of 
Sheba  were  the  natural  productions  of  Sheba,  and 
in  this  case — as  the  Sheba  here  spoken  of  was 
confessedly  in  Arabia — the  assertion  that  Arabia 
did  not  produce  gold  falls  to  the  gi-ound  ;  or  the 


OPHRAH 

merchants  of  Sheba  obtained  precious  stones  and 
gold  in  such  quantities  by  trade,  that  they  became 
noted  for  supplying  them  to  the  Tyrians  and  Jews, 
without  curious  inquiry  by  the  Jews  as  to  the 
precise  locality  whence  these  commodities  were 
originally  derived.  And  exactly  similar  remarks 
may  apply  to  Ophir.  The  resemblance  seems  com- 
plete. In  answer  to  objections  against  the  obvious 
meaning  of  the  tenth  chapter  of  Genesis,  the  alter- 
natives may  be  stated  as  follows.  Either  Ophii-, 
although  in  Arabia,  produced  gold  and  precious 
stones  ;  or,  if  it  shall  be  hereafter  proved  in  the 
progress  of  geological  investigation  that  this  could 
not  have  been  the  case,  Ophir  furnished  gold  and 
precious  stones  as  an  emporium,  although  the 
Jews  were  not  careful  to  ascertain  and  record  the 
tact.  •  [E.  T.] 

OPH'NI  C'JSyn,  with  the  def.  article—"  the 

Ophnite:"  LXX.  both  ]MSS.  omit:  Ophni).  A  town 
of  Benjamin,  mentioned  in  Josh,  xviii.  24  only, 
apparently  in  the  north-eastei'u  portion  of  the  tribe. 
Its  name  may  perhaps  imply  that,  like  others  of  the 
towns  of  this  region,  it  was  originally  founded  by 
some  non-Israelite  tribe — the  Ophnites — who  in 
that  case  have  left  but  this  one  slight  trace  of  their 
existence.  [See  note  to  vol.  i.  p.  188.]  In  the 
biblical  history  of  Palestine  Ophni  plays  no  part, 
but  it  is  doubtless  the  Gophna  of  Josephus,  a  place 
which  at  the  time  of  Vespasian's  invasion  was  appa- 
rently so  important  as  to  be  second  only  to  Jeru- 
salem {B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5).  It  was  probably  the 
Gufnith,  Gufna,  or  Beth-gufnin  of  the  Talmud 
(Schwarz,  126),  which  still  survives  in  the  modern 
Jifna  or  Jnfna,  2A  miles  north-west  of  Bethel 
(Reland,  Pal.  816;'  Rob.  B.  R.  ii.  264).  The 
change  from  the  Ain,  with  which  Ophni  begins, 
to  G,  is  common  enough  in  the  LXX.  (Comp. 
Gomorrah,  Athaliah,  &c.)  [G.] 

OPH'RAH  (maV).  The  name  of  two  places  in 
the  central  part  of  Palestine. 

1.  (In  Judges,  ''E.<ppa.6(i.\  Alex.  Pi<ppa  ;  in  Sam. 
rocpepa  :  Ophra,  in  Sam.  Aphra.)  In  the  tribe  ot 
Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  23).  It  is  named  between 
hap-Parah  and  Chephar  ha-Ammonai,  but  as  the 
position  of  neither  of  these  places  is  known,  we  do 
not  thereby  obtain  any  clue  to  that  of  Ophrah.  It 
appears  to  be  mentioned  again  (1  Sam.  xiii.  17)  in 
describing  the  routes  taken  by  the  spoilers  who 
issued  from  the  Philistine  camp  at  Michmash.  One 
of  these  bands  of  ravagers  went  due  west,  on  the 
road  to  Betli-horon  ;  one  towards  the  "  ravine  of 
Zeboim,"  that  is  in  all  probability  one  of  the  clefts 
which  lead  down  to  the  Jordan  valley,  and  therefoie 
due  east ;  while  the  third  took  the  road  "  to  Ophrah 
and  the  land  of  Shual" — doubtless  north,  for  south 
they  could  not  go,  owing  to  the  position  held  by  Saul 
and  Jonathan.  "[Giueah,  vol.  i.  p.  6906.]  In  ac- 
cordance with  this  is  the  statement  of  Jerome  (  Ono- 
masticon,  "  Aphra"),  who  places  it  5  miles  cast  of 
Bethel.  Dr.  Robinson  {B.  R.  i.  447)  suggests  its 
identity  with  ct-Taiijibeh,  a  small  village  on  the 
crown  of  a  conical  and  very  conspicuous  hill,  4 
miles  E.N.E.  of  Beitin  (Bethel),  on  the  ground 
that  no  other  ancient  place  occurred  to  him  as  suit- 
able, and  that  the  situation  accords  with  the  notice  of 
Jerome.  In  the  absence  of  any  similarity  in  the 
name,  and  of  any  more  conclusive  evidence,  it  is 
impossible  absolutelv  to  adopt  this  identification. 

Ophrali  is  probably  the  same  place  with  that 
which  is  mentioned  under  the  slightly  diflerent  form 


OPHRAH 

of  Ephrain  (or  Ejjhron)  and  EniRAUi.  [See  vol. 
i.  p.  569a.)  It  may  also  have  given  its  name  to  the 
district  or  government  of  Apherema  (1  Mace. 
xi.  34). 

2.  {'E(j)pa6a ;  and  so  Alex.,  excepting  ix.  5, 
Ecppatfj,:  Ephni.)  More  fully  Opuraii  Of  the 
Abi-ezrites,  the  native  place  of  Gideon  (Judg. 
vi.  11)  ;  the  scene  of  his  exploits  against  Baal  (vei. 
24) ;  ■  his  residence  after  his  accession  to  power 
(ix.  5),  and  the  place  of  his  burial  in  the  family 
sepulchre  (viii.  32).  In  Ophrah  also  he  deposited 
the  ephod  which  he  made  or  enriched  with  the  orna- 
ments taken  from  the  Jshmaelite  followers  of  Zebah 
and  Zalmunnah  (viii.  27),  and  so  great  was  the 
attraction  of  that  object,  that  the  town  must  then 
have  been  a  place  of  great  pilgrimage  and  resort. 
The  indications  in  the  nariative  of  the  position 
of  Ophrah  are  but  slight.  It  was  probably  in  Ma- 
nasseh  (vi.  15),  and  not  far  distant  fi-om  Shechem 
(ix.  1,  5).  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir)  suggests  a 
site  called  Erfai,  a  mile  south  of  Akraheh,  about 
8  miles  from  Nnhlus,  and  Schwarz  (158  J  "  the  vil- 
lage Erafa,  north  of  Sanur,"  by  which  he  probably 
intends  Arabeh.  The  former  of  them  has  the  disad- 
vantage of  being  altogether  out  of  the  territory  of 
Manasseh.  Of  the  latter,  nothing  either  for  or 
against  can  be  said. 

Ophrah  possibly  derives  its  name  from  Epher,  who 
was  one  of  the  heads  of  the  families  of  Manasseh  in 
its  Gileadite  jwrtion  (1  Chr.  v.  24),  and  who  ap- 
pears to  have  migrated  to  the  west  of  Jordan  with 
Abi-ezer  and  Shechem  (Num.  xxvi.  30;  Josh. 
xvii.  2).  [Abi-ezer  ;  Epher,  vol.  i.  560a ;  Ma- 
^JASSEH,  p.  220a.]  [G.] 

OPH'EAH  (mey  :    To^ipa  ;   Alex.  Tocpopd  : 

Ophra).  The  son  of  Meonothai  (1  Chr.  iv.  14).  By 
the  phrase  "  Jleonothai  begat  Ophrah,"  it  is  uncer- 
tain whether  we  are  to  understand  that  they  were 
father  and  son,  or  that  Meonothai  was  the  founder 
of  Ophrah. 

OEATOE.  1 .  The  A.  V.  rendering  for  lachash, 
a  whisper,  or  incantation,  joined  with  nebon,  skilful,'' 
Is.  iii.  3,  A.  V.  "eloquent  orator,"  marg.  "skilful 
of  speech."  The  phrase  apjiears  to  refer  to  pretended 
skill  in  magic,  comp.  Ps.  Iviii.  5.     [Divination.] 

2.  The  title''  applied  to  Tertullus,  who  appeared 
as  the  advocate  or  patronus  of  the  Jewish  accusers 
of  St.  Paul  before  Felix,  Acts  xxiv.  1.  The  Latin 
language  was  used,  and  Ilonian  fomis  observed  in 
provincial  judicial  proceedings,  as,  to  cite  an  ob- 
viously parallel  case,  Norman-French  was  for  so 
many  ages  the  language  of  English  law  proceedings. 
The  trial  of  St.  Paul  at  Caesaiea  was  distinctly  one 
of  a  Roman  citizen  ;  and  thus  the  advocate  spoke  as 
a  Roman  lawyer,  and  probably  in  the  Latin  language 
(see  Acts  xxv.  9,  10;  Val.  Max.  ii.  2,  2  ;  Cic.  pro 
Coelio,  c.  30;  Jlrutns,  c.  37,  38,  41,  where  the 
qualifications  of  an  advocate  are  described :  Cony- 
beaie  and  Howson,  Life  and  Travels  of  St.  Paul, 
vol.  i.  3,  ii.  348;.  [II.  \V.  P.] 

OKCHARl).     [Garim-.n,  vol.  i.  p.  OSla.] 

O'REB  (3iy  ;  in  its  second  occurrence  only, 
nniy:  'Opvfi,  'ClpiiP;  Alex.  XlpTj/S:    Orel).    The 


OREB 


643 


»  CJT]?  p33  ;  oDvexos  dxpoar^s ;  Vulg.  and  Symm. 
prudens  cloijuii  myslici ;  Aquila,  (rvi/erbs  i^iflupio-jiiu! ; 
Tlipodot.  (TUffTos  eirtoSfj.    See  Ges.  pp.  202,  754. 

b  pjjTwp,  orator. 

<!  See  a  good  passage  on  this  by  Thomson  (The  Land 
and  the  Hook,  ch.   xxxvii.),   doscrlbing    the  flight  bc- 


"  raven"  or  "crow,"  the  companion  of  Zeeb,  the 
"wolf."  One  of  the  chieftains  of  the  Midianite 
host  which  invaded  Israel,  and  was  defeated  and 
driven  back  by  Gideon.  The  title  given  to  them 
C^C',  A.  V.  "princes")  distinguishes  them  from 
Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  the  other  two  chieftains, 
who  are  called  "  kings"  (^y?^),  and  were  evi- 
dently superior  in  rank  to  Oi'eb  and  Zeeb.  They 
were  killed,  not  by  Gideon  himself,  or  the  people 
under  his  immediate  conduct,  but  by  the  men  of 
Ephraim,  who  rose  at  his  entreaty  and  intercepted 
the  flying  horde  at  the  fords  of  the  Jordan.  This 
was  the  second  Act  of  this  great  Tragedy.  It  is  but 
slightly  touched  upon  in  the  narrative  of  Judges, 
but  the  terms  in  which  Isaiah  refers  to  it  (x.  26) 
are  such  as  to  imply  that  it  was  a  truly  awful 
slaughter.  He  places  it  in  the  same  rank  with  the 
two  most  tremendous  disasters  recorded  in  the 
whole  of  the  history  of  Israel — the  destruction  of 
the  Egyptians  in  the  Red  Sea,  and  of  the  army  of 
Sennacherib.  Nor  is  Isaiah  alone  among  the  poets 
of  Israel  in  his  reference  to  this  great  event.  While 
it  is  the  terrific  slaughter  of  the  Midianites  which 
points  his  allusion,  their  discomfiture  and  flight 
are  prominent  in  that  of  the  author  of  Ps.  Ixxxiii. 
In  imagery  both  obvious  and  vivid  to  every  native 
of  the  gusty  hills  and  plains  of  Palestine,  though 
to  us  comparatively  unintelligible,  the  Psalmist  de- 
scribes them  as  diiven  over  the  uplands  of  Gilead 
like  the  clouds  of  chaff  blown  from  the  threshing- 
floors  ;  chased  away  like  the  sjiherical  masses  of 
dry  weeds  "^  which  course  over  the  plains  of  Es- 
draelon  and  Philistia — flying  with  the  dreadful 
hurry  and  confusion  of  the  flames,  that  rush  and 
leap  fVom  tree  to  tree  and  hill  to  hill  when  the 
wooded  mountains  of  a  tropical  country  are  by 
chance  ignited  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  13,  14).  The  slaugh- 
ter was  concentrated  round  the  rock  at  wliich  Oreb 
fell,  and  which  was  long  known  by  his  name 
(Judg.  vii.  25;  Is.  x.  26).  This  spot  appears  to 
have  been  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  from  whence  the 
heads  of  the  two  chiefs  were  brought  to  (iideon  to 
encourage  him  to  further  pursuit  after  the  fugitive 
Zebah  and  Zalmunna. 

This  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  value  of  the 
incidental  notices  of  the  later  books  of  the  Bible  in 
confirming  or  filling  up  the  rapid  and  often  neces- 
sarily slight  outlines  of  the  formal  history.  No 
reader  of  the  relation  in  Judges  would  suppose  that 
the  death  of  Oreb  and  Zeeb  had  been  accompanied 
by  any  slaughter  of  their  followers.  In  the  subse- 
quent pursuit  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  the  "  host  " 
is  especially  mentioned,  but  in  this  case  the  chiefs 
alone  are  named.  This  the  notices  of  Isaiah  and  the 
Psalmist,  who  evidently  referred  to  facts  with  which 
their  hearers  were  familiar,  fortunately  enable  us  to 
su])ply.  Similarly  in  the  nariative  of  tlie  exodus  of 
Israel  from  Egypt,  as  given  in  the  Pentateuch,  there 
is  no  mention  whatever  of  the  femjiesf ,  the  thunder 
and  lightning,  and  the  earthquake,  which  from  the 
incidental  allusinns  of  Ps.  Ixxvii.  16-18  we  know 
accompanied  that  event,  and  which  arc  also  stated 
fully  by  Joscphus  {Atit.  ii.  16,  §3).  We  are  thus 
reminded  of  a  truth  perhaps  too  often  overlooked, 

fore  the  wind  of  tlie  dry  plants  of  the  wild  artichoke. 
He  gives  also  a  strililng  Arab  inijirccation  in  reference  to 
it,  which  recalls  in  a  rcmarkiihle  way  ilio  words  of  the 
Psalm  quoted  above  :— "  May  you  be  wliii led  like  the 
'akki'ib  before  llie  wind,  until  yi'ii  arc  caught  in  llie  thorns, 
or  plunged  into  the  sea  !" 

2   T   2 


644 


OREB,  THE  ROCK 


tliat  the  occun-ences  preserved  in  tlie  Scriptures  are 
not  tlie  only  ones  which  happened  in  connexion  with 
tlie  various  events  of  the  .Sacred  liistoiy:  a  consi- 
deration which  should  dispose  us  not  to  reject  too 
liastily  the  supplements  to  the  Bible  narrative  fur- 
nished by  Josephus,  or  by  the  additions  and  correc- 
tions of  the  Septuagint,  and  even  those  facts  which 
are  reflected,  in  a  distorted  form  it  is  true,  but  still 
often  with  considerable  remains  of  their  original 
shape  and  character,  in  the  legends  of  the  Jewish, 
Mahometan,  and  Christian  East.  [G.] 

O'REB  (Oreb),  i.  e.  Mount  Horeb  (2  Esd.  ii. 
3:;).     [Horeb.] 

O'REB,  THE  ROCK  (iniy  11 V :  in  Judges 
'Siovp,  Alex.  Soupeij' ;  in  Is.  riiiros  CAiifeois  in  both 
MSS. :  Petra  Oreb,  and  Horeb).  The  "raven's 
crag,"  the  spot  at  which  the  Jlidianite  chieftain 
Oreb,  with  thousands  of  his  countrymen,  fell  by  the 
hand  of  the  Ephraimites,  and  which  probably  ac- 
quired its  name  therefrom.  It  is  mentioned  in  Judg. 
vii.  25  ; ''  Is.  X.  20.  It  seems  plain  from  the  terms  of 
Judg.  vii.  25  and  viii.  1  that  the  rock  Oreb  and  the 
winepress  Zeeb  were  on  the  east  side*"  of  Jordan. 
Perhaps  the  place  called  'Orho  (mj?),  which  in  the 
Beresldth  liabha  (Reland,  Pal.  91o)  is  stated  to  have 
been  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethshean,  may  have 
some  connexion  with  it.  Pailjlji  Judah  {Ber.  Rabhn, 
ib.)  was  of  opinion  that  the  Orcbin  ("  ravens  ") 
who  ministered  to  Elijah  were  no  ravens,  but  the 
people  of  this  Orbo  or  of  the  rock  Oreb,<=  an  idea 
upon  which  even  St.  Jerome  himself  does  not  look 
with  entire  disfavour  (Comm.  in  Is.  sv.  7),  and 
which  has  met  in  later  times  with  some  supporters. 
The  present  defective  state  of  our  Imowledge  of  the 
regions  east  of  the  Jordan  renders  it  impossible  to 
pronoimce  whether  the  name  is  still  surviving.  [G.] 

O'RENCp'S:    'Apa/i;   Alex.  'Apai/ :    Ai-am). 

One  of  the  sons  of  Jerahmeel  the  firstborn  of  Hezron 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25). 

ORGAN  (33-11?,  Gen.  iv.  21,  Job  xxi.  12  ; 
nay,  job  xxx.  31,  Ps.  cl.  4).  The  Hebrew  word 
'ui/db  or  'uggdb,  thus  rendered  in  our  version,  pro- 
bably denotes  a  pipe  or  perforated  wind-instrument, 
as  the  root  of  the  word  indicates.'^  In  Gen.  iv.  21 
it  appears  to  be  a  general  term  for  all  wind-instru- 
ments, opposed  to  cinnor  (A.  V.  "harp"),  which 
denotes  all  stringed  instruments.  In  Job  xxi.  12 
are  enumerated  the  three  kinds  of  musical  instra- 
ments  which  are  possible,  under  the  general  tei-ms 
of  the  timbrel,  harp,  and  orijan.  The  'uijdb  is  here 
distinguished  from  the  timbrel  and  harp,  as  in  Job 
xxx.  31,  compared  with  Ps.  cl.  4.  Our  translators 
adopted  their  rendering,  "  organ,"  fi-om  the  Vulgate, 
which  has  uniformly  organum,  that  is,  the  double 
or  multiple  pipe.  The  renderings  of  the  LXX.  are 
vai-ious:  KiBdpa.  in  Gen.  iv.  21,  ypaXfiSs  in  Job, 
and  opyavov  in  Ps.  cl.  4.  The  Chaldee  in  every 
case  has  X3-13S,  abhubd,  which  signifies  "  a  pipe," 
and  is  the  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  word  so  trans- 
lated in  our  version  of  Is.  x.\x.  29,  Jer.  xlviii.  36. 
Joel  Bril,  in  his  2nd  preface  to  the  Psalms  in 
Meadelssohn's  Bible,  adopts  the  opinion  of  those 
who  identify  it  with  the  Pandean  pipes,  or  syrinx, 
an  instrument  of  unquestionalily  ancient  origm,  and 


^  The  word  "  upon  "  in  the  Auth.  version  of  this  passage 
is  not  correct.    The  preposition  is  3  ^  "in"  or  "at." 
•>  Such  is  the  conclusion  of  Rclanil  (PaJ.  915,  'Oreb'). 


ORION 

common  in  the  East.  It  was  a  favourite  with  the 
shejilierds  in  the  time  of  Homer  (/"/.  xviii.  526), 
anil  its  invention  was  attributed  to  various  deities : 
to  Pallas  Athene  by  Pindar  {Pyth.  xii.  12-14),  to 
Pan  by  Pliny  (vii.  57  ;  cf.  Virg.  Ed.  ii.  32 ;  TibuU. 
ii.  5,  30),  by  others  to  Marsyas  or  Siienus  (Atheu. 
iv.  184).  In  the  last-quoted  passage  it  is  said 
that  Hermes  first  made  the  syrinx  with  one  reed, 
while  Siienus,  or,  according  to  others,  two  Mede.s, 
Seuthes  and  Rhonakes,  invented  that  with  niaiiv 
reeds,  and  Marsyas  fa-stened  them  with  wax.  The 
reeds  were  of  unequal  length  but  equal  thickness, 
generally  seven  in  number  (Virg.  Ed.  ii.  36),  but 
sometimes  nine  (^Theocr.  Id.  viii.).  Those  in  use 
among  the  Turks  sometimes  numbered  fourteen  or 
fifteen  (Calmet,  Diss,  in  Mus.  Inst.  Haehr.,  in  Ugo- 
lini,  Tlies.  xxxii.  p.  790).  Russell  describes  those  he 
met  with  in  Aleppo.  "  The  S3'rinx,  or  Pan's  pipe, 
is  still  a  pastoral  instrument  in  Syria ;  it  is  known 
also  in  the  city,  but  very  few  of  the  performers 
can  sound  it  tolerably  well.  The  higher  notes  are 
clear  and  pleasing,  but  the  longer  reeds  are  apt, 
like  the  dervis's  flute,  to  make  a  hissing  sound, 
though  blown  by  a  good  player.  The  number  of 
reeds  of  which  the  syrinx  is  composed  varies  in 
difierent  instruments,  from  five  to  twenty-three" 
{Aleppo,  b.  ii.  c.  2,  vol.  i.  p.  155,  2nd  ed.). 

If  the  root  of  the  word  'ugdb  above  given  be 
correct,  a  stringed  instrument  is  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, and  it  is  therefore  only  necessary  to  mention 
the  opinion  of  tlie  author  of  Shilte  Ilaggibbortm 
(Ugol.  vol.  xxxii.),  that  it  is  the  same  as  the  Italian 
viola  da  gamba,  which  was  somewhat  similar  in 
form  to  the  modern  violin,  and  was  played  upon 
with  a  bow  of  horsehair,  the  chief  difference  being 
that  it  had  six  strings  of  gut  instead  of  four. 
Michaelis  {Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Hebr.,  No.  1184)  iden- 
tifies the  'uijdh  with  the  psaltery. 

Winer  {liealw.  art.  "  Musikalische  Instrumente  ") 
says  that  in  the  Hebrew  version  of  the  book  of 
Daniel  'ugdb  is  used  as  the  equivalent  of  PT'^SDID. 

stmponyah  (Gr.  crvp-^uivia),  rendered  "dulcimer" 
in  our  version.  [W.  A.  W.] 

ORI'ON  (^''03  :  "Eo-Trepos,  Job  ix.  9  ;  'apitav. 

Job  xxxviii.  31  :  Orion,  Ardurvs,  in  Job  xxxviii.  31). 
Tliat  the  constellation  known  to  the  Hebrews  by  the 
name  cesil  is  the  same  as  that  which  the  Greeks 
called  orion,  and  the  Arabs  "  the  giant,"  there 
seems  little  reason  to  doubt,  though  the  ancient 
versions  vaiy  in  their  renderings.  In  Job  ix.  9  the 
order  of  the  words  has  evidently  been  transposed. 
In  the  LXX.  it  appears  to  have  been  thus, — dmdli, 
cesil,  'ash :  the  Vulgate  retains  the  words  as  they 
stand  in  the  Hebrew  ;  while  the  Peshito  Syriac  read 
dmdh,  'ash,  cesil,  rendering  the  last-mentioned  word 
Ji«^_L^,  gaboro,  "  the  giant,"  as  in  Job  xxxviii. 


31.  In  Am.  v.  8  there  is  again  a  difficulty  in 
the  Syriac  version,  which  represents  cesil  by 
J^  f^  *■  V,    'lyutho,    by  which  'ash   in  Job  ix.  9, 

and  'aish  in  Job  xxxviii.  32  (A.  V.  "  Arcturus"), 
are  translated.  Again,  in  Job  xxxviii.  32,  'aish  is 
represented  by''E(nrepos  in  the  LXX.,  which  raises 
a  question  whether  the  order  of  the  words  which 
the  translators  had  before  them  in  Job  ix.  9  was 
not,  as  in  the  Syr.,  cimdh,  'ash,  cesil  •  in  which 

<=  Manasseh  ben-Israel,  Conciliator,  on  Lev.  xi.  15. 

33y,  to  blow,  or  breathe. 


OENAMENTS,  PEESONAL 

<;;ise  the  l;\st  would  be  represented  by  'ApKTovpos, 
which  was  tlie  rendering  adopted  by  Jerome  from 
}iis  Hebrew  teacher  [Comm.  in  Jes.  xiii.  10).  But 
no  known  manuscript  authority  supports  any  such 
variation  from  the  recei\-ed  Hebrew  text. 

The  "giant"  of  Oi'icntal  ;i.stronomy  was  Nimrod, 
the  iniglity  hunter,  who  was  iabled  to  have  been 
bound  in  the  sky  lor  his  im]iiety.  The  two  dogs 
and  tile  hare,  wliich  are  among  tlvj  constellations  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Orion,  made  his  train  com- 
plete. There  is  possibly  :ui  allusion  to  this  belief 
in  "the  bands  of  cesU"  (Job  xxxviii.  31),  with 
which  Gesenius  {Jes.  i.  458)  compares  Prov.  vii. 
22.  In  the  Chronicon  Faschalc  (p.  30)  Nimi'od 
is  said  to  have  been  "  a  giant,  the  founder  of  Baby- 
lon, who,  the  Persians  say,  was  deiiied  and  placed 
among  the  stars  of  heaven,  whom  they  call  Orion  " 
(comp.  Cedrenus,  p.  14).  The  name  cestl,  literally 
"  a  fool,"  and  then  "  an  impious,  godless  man,"  is 
supposed  to  be  approj)riate  to  Nimrod,  who,  accord- 
ing to  tradition,  w;is  a  rebel  against  (Jod  in  building 
the  tower  of  Babel,  and  is  called  by  the  Arab  his- 
torians "  the  mocker."  All  this,  however,  is  the 
invention  of  a  later  period,  and  is  based  upon  a 
false  etymology  of  Nimrod's  name,  and  an  attempt 
to  adaj)t  the  word  cesil  to  a  Hebrew  derivation. 
.Some  Jewisli  writers,  the  Rabbis  Isa;ic  Israel  and 
Jonali  among  them,  idi.'utified  the  Hebrew  ccsU 
with  the  Arabic  sohail,  by  which  was  imderstood 
either  Sirius  or  Canopus.  The  words  of  K.  Jonah 
(Abulwalid),  as  quoted  by  Kinichi  {Lex.  Heb.  s.  v.), 
are — "  CesU  is  the  large  star  called  in  Arabic  Sohail, 
and  the  stars  combined  with  it  are  called  after  its 
name,  ccsilim."  The  name  Sohail,  "  foolish,"  was 
deiived  from  the  supposed  influence  of  the  star  in 
causing  folly  in  men,  and  was  probably  an  addi- 
tional reason  for  identifying  it  with  cesil.  These 
conjectures  proceed,  lirst,  upon  the  supposition  that 
the  word  is  Hebrew  in  its  origin,  and,  secondly,  that, 
if  this  be  the  case,  it  is  connected  with  the  root  of 
cesil,  "  a  fool ;"  whereas  it  is  more  probably  derived 
from  a  root  signifymg  firmness  or  strength,  and 
so  would  denote  the  "  strong  one,"  the  giant  of  the 
Syrians  and  Arabs.  A  full  account  of  the  various 
theories  which  have  been  framed  on  the  subject 
will  be  found  in  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Hebr., 
No.  1192.  [VV.  A.  W.] 

OENAMENTS,  PEESONAL.  The  num- 
ber, variety,  mid  weight  of  the  ornaments  ordinarily 
worn  upon  the  jierson  forms  one  of  the  charac- 
teristic features  of  Oriental  costume,  both  in  ancient 
and  modern  times.  The  moiumients  of  ancient 
Egypt  exhibit  tiie  hands  of  ladies  loaded  with  rings, 
earrings  of  very  great  size,  anklets,  armlets,  brace- 
lets of  the  most  varied  character,  and  frequently 
inlaid  with  precious  stones  or  enamel,  handsome 
and  richly  ornamented  necklaces,  either  of  gold  or 
of  beads,  ami  chains  of  various  kinds  (Wilkinson, 
ii.  335-341).  The  modern  Egyptians  retain  to  the 
full  the  same  tiiste,  and  vie  with  their  progenitors  in 


»  Nezem  (DT3)  ;  A.  V.  "  ear-ring."  The  tei-m  is  used 
both  for  "  ear-ring  "  and  "  nose-ring."  That  it  was  the 
former  in  the  present  case  appears  from  ver.  4T :  "1  put 
the  nose-j-wfli  upon  her/acB"  (rl2X"?y)-  The  term  Is 
etymologically  more  appropriate  to  tlie  iiosc-ring  than  to 
the  ear-ring.    [Kak-uinc  ;  Nosk-uinc] 

b  Tsdmid  (T'DV)'  a  particular  kind  of  bracelet,  so 
named  from  a  mot  siKiiilj  ing  "  to  fasten."    [BitACHUr.T.] 

c  cdi'-'hyt;    A.  \.    "jcuels."      Ihc  word   slguiUes 


OENAMENTS,  PEESONAL        (346 

the  number  and  beauty  of  their  ornaments  (Lane, 
vol.  iii.  Appendix  A.).  Nor  is  the  display  confined, 
as  with  us,  to  the  upper  classes :  we  are  told  that 
even  "  most  of  the  women  of  the  lower  orders 
wear  a  variety  of  trumjjcry  oinaments,  such  ;is  ear- 
rings, necklaces,  bracelets,  &c.,  and  sometimes  a 
nose-ring"  (Lane,  i.  78).  There  is  sufficient  evi- 
dence in  the  Bible  that  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine 
were  equally  devoted  to  finery.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, Isaiah  (iii.  18-23)  supplies  us  with  a  detailed 
description  of  the  articles  with  which  the  luxurious 
women  of  his  day  were  decorated,  and  the  picture 
is  filled  up  by  incidental  notices  in  other  places :  in 
the  New  Testjanent  the  apostles  lead  us  to  infer 
the  prevalence  of  the  same  habit  when  they  I'ecom- 
meiid  the  women  to  adorn  themselves,  "  not  with 
broided  hair,  or  gold,  or  pearls,  or  costly  arrav, 
but  with  good  works  "  (1  Tim.  ii.  9,  10),  even  with 
"  the  ornament  of  a  meek  and  quiet  spirit,  which  is 
in  the  sight  of  God  of  great  price"  (1  Pet.  iii.  4). 
Ornaments  were  most  lavishly  displayed  at  festi- 
vities, whether  of  a  public  (Hos.  ii.  13)  or  a  private 
character,  particularly  on  the  occasion  of  a  wedding 
(Is.  Ixi.  10  ;  Jer.  ii.  32).  In  times  of  public  mourn- 
ing they  were,  on  the  other  hand,  laid  aside  (Ex. 
xxxiii.  4-6). 

With  regard  to  the  particular  articles  noticed  in 
the  Old  Testament,  it  is  sometimes  ditKcult  to  ex- 
plain their  form  or  use,  as  the  name  is  the  only 
source  of  information  open  to  us.  Much  illus- 
tration may,  however,  be  gleaned  both  from  the 
monuments  of  Egypt  and'  Assyria,  and  from  the 
statements  of  modern  travellers  ;  and  we  are  in  all 
respects  in  a  better  position  to  explain  the  meaning 
of  the  Hebrew  terms,  than  were  the  learned  men 
of  the  Heformation  era.  We  ];>ropose,  therefore,  to 
review  the  passages  in  which  the  personal  orna- 
ments ai'e  described,  substituting,  where  necessary, 
for  the  readings  of  the  A.  V.  the  more  correct  sense 
in  italics,  and  refen'ing  for  more  detailed  descrip- 
tions of  the  articles  to  the  various  heads  under 
which  they  may  be  found.  The  notices  whiuh 
occur  in  the  e;u'ly  books  of  the  Bible,  imply  the 
weight  imd  abundance  of  the  ornaments  worn  at 
that  period.  Eliezer  decorated  Rebekah  with  "  a 
golden  nose-ring  »  of  half  a  shekel  weight,  and  two  * 
bracelets  *»  for  her  hands  of  ten  shekels  weight  of 
gold  "  (Gen.  xxiv.  22)  ;  and  he  afterwards  added 
"  trinkets  "  of  silver  and  trinkets  '^  of  gold  "  (verse 
53).  Earrings'*  were  worn  by  Jacob's  wives,  ap- 
parentl)'  as  charms,  for  they  are  mentioned  in  con- 
nexion with  idols ; — "  they  gave  unto  Jacob  all  the 
strange  gods,  which  were  in  their  hand,  and  their 
earrings  which  were  in  their  ears"  ((Jen.  xxxv.  4). 
The  ornaments  worn  by  the  patriarch  Judah  were 
a  "  signet,"  «  whicli  was  suspended  by  a  strim] ' 
round  the  neck,  and  a  "staff"  (Gen.  xxxviii.  18): 
the  stair  itself  was  probably  ornamented,  and  thus 
the  practice  of  the  Israelites  would  be  exactly  simi- 
lar to  that  of  the  Babylonians,  who,  according  to 


generally  "  articles."  They  may  have  been  either  vessels 
or  personal  ornaments :  we  think  the  latter  souse  more 
adapted  to  this  passage. 

d  The  word  nezcm  is  again  used,  but  with  the  addilioii  of 
Dn^iTN?.  "  In  their  ears." 

•-■  Clwtham  (.UVi^W-    [Sbai..] 

t  I'Cakil  (PTIES);  A.V.  "bracelets."  ■iheslgnet  Is  still 
worn,  suspended  liy  ;i  slriiit;,  in  parts  of  Arabia.  (Uobin- 
son,  i.  3(>.) 


646      OKNAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

Herodotus  (i.  195),  "  each  carried  a  seal,  and  a 
walking-stick,  carved  at  the  top  into  the  tbim  of  an 
apple,  a  rose,  an  eagle,  or  something  similar."  The 
first  notice  of  the  ring  occurs  in  reference  to  Joseph : 
when  he  was  made  rider  of  Egypt,  Pharaoh  "  took 
off  his  si^ne^ring  s  from  his  hand  and  put  it  upon 
Joseph's  hand,  and  put  a  gold  chain''  about  his 
neck"  (Gen.  xli.  4'2j,  the  latter  being  probably  a 
"simple  gold  chain  in  imitation  of  string,  to  which 
a,  stone  scarabaeus,  set  in  the  same  precious  metal, 
was  appended  "  (Wilkinson,  ii.  339 j.  The  number 
of  personal  ornaments  worn  by  the  Egyptians,  par- 
ticularly by  the  females,  is  incidentally  noticed  in 
Ex.  iii.  22: — "Every  woman  shall  ask  (A.  V. 
"  borrow  ")  of  her  neighbour  trinkets  •  of  silver 
and  trinkets'^  of  gold  .  .  .  and  ye  shall  spoil  the 
Egvptians:"  in  E.v.  xi.  2  the  order  is  extended  to 
the'  males,  and  from  this  time  we  may  perhaps  date 
the  more  frequent  use  of  trinkets  among  men;  for, 
while  it  is  said  in  the  former  passage : — "  ye  shall 
put  them  upon  your  sons  and  upon  your  daugh- 
ters," we  find  subsequent  notices  of  eanings  being 
worn  at  all  events  by  young  men  (Ex.  xxxii.  2), 
and  again  of  otierings  both  from  men  and  women 
of  "  nose-rings,!  and  ear-rings,  and  rings,  and  neck- 
laces,'^ all  articles  of  gold"  (Ex.  xxxv.  22).  The 
profusion  of  those  ornaments  was  such  as  to  supply 
sufficient  gold  for  making  the  sacred  utensils  for 
the  tabernacle,  while  the  laver  of  brass  was  con- 
structed out  of  the  brazen  mirrors^  which  the 
women  canned  about  with  them  (Ex.  xxxviii.  8). 
The  Midianites  appear  tohave  been  as  prodigal  as  the 
Egyptians  in  the  use  of  ornaments :  for  the  Israelites 

e  Tabba'ath  (DySp)-  The  signet-ring  in  this,  as  in 
other  cases  (Esth.  iii.  10,  viii.  2;  1  Mace.  vi.  15),  was  not 
merely  an  omamenl,  but  the  symbol  of  authority. 

t  BdbU  (T*!!"))-  The  term  is  also  applied  to  a  chain 
worn  by  a  woman  (Ez.  xvi.  ll). 

i  Cdi.    See  note  =  above. 

j  Chach  (nn)  ;  A.  V.  "  bracelets."  The  meaning  of 
the  term  is  rather  doubtful,  some  authorities  preferring 
the  sense  "buckle."  In  other  passages  the  same  word 
signifies  the  ring  placed  through  the  nose  of  an  animal, 
such  as  a  bull,  to  lead  him  by. 

k  6'Mnidz  (T'O-IS)  ;  A.  V.  "tablets."  It  means  a  neck- 
lace formed  of  perforated  gold  drops  strung  together. 
[Necklace.]. 

1  Maroth  (niX")0)  ;  A.  V.  "  looking-glasses."  The 
use  of  polished  mirrors  is  alluded  to  m  Job  xxxvii.  18. 
[Mirror.] 

m  Ets  'dddh  (my  V^^  5  ^-  ^-  "  chains."  A  cognate 
term,  used  in  Is.  iii.  20,  means  "step-chain;"  but  the  word 
is  used  both  here  and  in  2  Sam.  i.  10  without  reference  to 
its  etymological  sense.    [Armi.et.] 

°  'Agil  O^jy)  ;  a  circular  ear-ring,  of  a  solid  character. 

0  Cumd2 ;  A.  V.  "  tablets."    See  note  ^  above. 

p  Nezem  ;  A.  V.  "  ear-rings."  See  note  a  above.  The 
term  is  here  undefined  ;  but,  as  ear-rings  are  subsequently 
noticed  in  the  verse,  we  think  it  probable  that  the  nose- 
ring is  intended. 

q  Saharotnn  (D''3"inK')  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments."  The 
ivord  specifies  moon-shaped  disks  of  metal,  strung  on  a 
cord,  and  placed  round  the  necks  either  of  men  or  of  camels. 
Compare  ver.  21.    [Chain.] 

■•  ,Ve(Ji)/i(5Wt  (n"IQ''L33) ;  A.  V.  "collars"  or  "sweet- 
jewels."  The  etymological  sense  of  the  word  is  pendants, 
which  were  no  doubt  attached  to  ear-rings. 

a  Tonm  (Dnin) ;  A.  V.  "  rows."  The  term  means, 
according  to  Gesenius  (Tlies.  p.  1499),  rows  of  pearls  or 


ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

are  described  as  having  captured  "  trinkets  of  gold, 
armlets,^  and  bracelets,  rings,  eanings,"  and  neck- 
laces," °  the  value  of  which  amounted  to  16,750 
shekels  (Num.  xxxi.  50,  52).  Equally  valuable 
were  the  ornaments  obtained  from  the  same  people 
after  their  defeat  by  Gideon :  "  the  weight  of  the 
golden  nose-rings  P  was  a  thousand  and  seven  hun- 
dred shekels  of  gold  ;  beside  collars  1  and  ear-pend- 
ants^ (Judg.  viii.  26). 

The  poetical  portions  of  the  0.  T.  contain  nu- 
merous references  to  the  ornaments  worn  by  the 
Israelites  in  the  time  of  their  highest  prosperity. 
The  appearance  of  the  bride  is  thus  described  in  the 
book  of  the  Canticles: — "Thy  cheeks  are  comely 
with  beach,^  thy  neck  with  perforated^  (pearls); 
we  will  make  thee  beads  of  gold  with  studs  of 
silver"  (i.  10,  11).  Her  neck  rising  tall  and 
stately  "  like  the  tower  of  David  builded  for  an 
armoury,"  was  decorated  with  various  ornaments 
hanging  like  the  "  thousand  bucklers,  all  shields  of 
mighty  men,  on  the  walls  of  the  armoury  "  (iv.  4)  : 
her  hair  falling  gracefully  over  her  neck  is  described 
figuratively  as  a  "chain""  (iv.  9):  and  "the 
roundinijs "  (not  as  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  joints  ") 
of  her  thighs  are  likened  to  the  pendant ''  of  an  ear- 
ring, which  tapers  gradually  downwards  (vii.  1). 
So  again  we  read  of  the  bridegroom  : — "his  eyes 
are  .  .  .  fitly  set,"  ■"  as  though  they  were  gems  fill- 
ing the  sockets  of  rings  (v.  12):  "his  hands  are 
as  gold  rings ^  set  with  the  beryl,"  i.  e.  (as  ex- 
plained by  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  p.  287)  the  fingers 
when  curved  are  like  gold  rings,  and  the  nails  dyed 
with  henna  resemble  gems.     Lastly,  the  yearning 


beads ;  but,  as  the  etymological  sense  is  connected  with 
circle,  it  may  rather  mean  the  Individual  beads,  which 
might  be  strung  together,  and  so  make  a  row,  encircling 
the  cheeks.  In  the  next  verse  the  same  word  is  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  "  borders."  The  sense  must,  however,  be  the 
same  in  both  verses,  and  the  point  of  contrast  may  per- 
chance consist  in  the  difference  of  the  material,  the  beads 
in  ver.  10  being  of  some  ordinary  metal,  while  those  in 
ver.  H  were  to  be  of  gold. 

t  Charuzim  (□''T-Tin)  ;  A.  V.  "  chains."  The  word 
would  apply  to  any  perforated  articles,  such  as  beads, 
pearls,  coral,  &c. 

"  'Andk  (pjy)-  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  supposed  to  be  lite- 
rally a  chain :  and  hence  some  critics  explain  the  word 
attached  to  it,  'J]''3"I-1V,  as  meaning  a  "collar,"  instead  of 
a  "  neck."  The  latter,  which  is  the  con-cct  sense,  may  be 
retained  by  treating  andk  as  metaphorically  applied  to  a 
pendant  lock  of  hair. 

»  CAaWiOT  (□''NT'n);  A.  V.  "jewels."  Gesenius  under- 
stands the  term  as  refen-ing  to  a  necklace,  and  renders  this 
passage,  "  the  roundings  of  thy  hips  are  like  the  knobs  or 
bosses  of  a  necklace."  The  two  notions  of  rounded  and 
p<jlished  may  be  combined  in  the  word  in  this  case.  A 
cognate  term  is  used  in  Hos.  ii.  13,  and  is  rendered  in  the 
A.  v.  "jewels." 

"  The  words  In  the  original  literally  mean  sittlvg  in 
fulness ;  and  the  previous  reference  to  "  rivers  of  waters  " 
would  rather  lead  us  to  adopt  a  rendering  in  harmony 
with  that  image,  as  is  done  in  the  LX.\.  and  the  Vulgate, 
Ka9ritJ.eva(.  eiri  -AnpMfxaTa  v&o.toji',  juxta  fluenta  ple- 
nissima.  i    i 

"  The  term  here  rendered  "  rings,"  gelilim  (D  ?  <-l^' 
is  nowhere  else  found  in  this  sense,  at  all  events  as  a  per- 
sonal ornament.  Its  etymological  sense  implies  something 
rounded,  and  therefore  the  word  admits  of  being  rendered 
"  staffs  ;"  in  which  case  a  comparison  would  be  instituted 
between  the  outstretched  fingers  and  the  handsomely  de- 
corated staff,  of  which  we  have  already  spoken  (Hitzig. 
in  toe). 


ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

after  close  afl'ectiou  is  exjuessed  tlms : — "Set  me  as 
a  seal  upon  thine  heart,  as  a  seal  upon  tliine  arm," 
whether  that  the  seal  itselt'was  the  most  valualile 
])ersonal  ornament  worn  hy  a  mnn,  as  in  Jei'.  x.xii. 
24:;  Hag.  ii.  2:!,  or  wiietiier  perchance  the  close 
contiguity  of  the  seal  to  the  wax  on  which  it  is  im- 
pressed may  not  rather  be  intended  (Cant.  viii.  6). 
We  may  further  notice  the  imagery  employed  in  the 
Proverbs  to  desci'ibe  the  effects  of  wisdom  in  beau- 
tifying the  character ;  in  I'eference  to  the  terms  used 
we  need  only  explain  that  the  "  ornament "  of  the 
A.  V.  in  i.  9,  iv.  9,  is  more  specifically  a  wreath^ 
or  fjitrland ;  the  "chains"  of  i.  9,  the  drops'^ 
of  which  tlie  necklace  was  formed  ;  the  "jewel  of 
gold  in  a  swine's  snout "  of  xi.  22,  a  nose-riiig  ;  '■ 
the  "  jewel  "  of  xx.  1 5,  a  trinket,  and  the  "  orna- 
ment "  of  XXV.  12,  an  ear-pendant?' 

The  passage  of  Isaiah  (iii.  18-231,  to  which  we 
have  already  referred,  may  be  rendered  as  follows : — 
(18)  "  In  that  day  the  Lord  will  take  away  the 
bi-avery  of  their  anklets,'^  and  their  lace  caps,^  and 
their  necklaces;^  (19;  the  ear-pendants,^  and  the 
bracelets,S  and  the  liiiht  veils  ;''  (20)  the  turhansj^  j 
and    the  step-chains, i   and  the  girdles,^   and   the 
scent-bottles,^  and  the    armdets;'"  (21)  the  rings  I 
and  nose-rings;^  (22)  the  state-dresses °  and  the! 
cloaks,  and  the  sAaw^s,  and  the /jio-ses ;  p  (23)  the 
mirrors,'^   and  the  fine  linen  shirts,  and  the  tur- 
bans," and  the  light  dresses."' 

The  following  extracts  from  the  Mishna  (Sabb. 
cap.  vi.)  illustrate  the  subject  of  this  article,  it 
being  premised  that  the  object  of  the  enquiry  was 


ORTHOSIAS 


047 


there  is  no  seal :  nor  with  a  needle  vdtliout  an  eye' 
(§  1 ) :  nor  with  a  needle  that  luis  an  eye :  nor  with 
a  finger-ring  that  has  a  seal  on  it :  nor  with  a  dia- 
dem :  nor  with  a  smelling-bottle  or  balm-Hask  (§  3). 
A  man  is  not  to  go  out  .  .  .  with  an  amulet,  unless 
it  be  by  a  distinguished  sage  (§  2)  :  knee-buckles 
are  cleim  and  a  man  may  go  out  with  them :  step- 
ci'ains  are  liable  to  become  unclean,  and  a  man 
mast  not  go  out  with  them  "  (§  4).      [W.  L.  B.] 

0R'NAN(|3"1N:  "Opm^:   Oman).    The  form 

in  which  the  name  of  the  .Jebusite  king,  who  in  the 
older  record  of  the  Book  of  Samuel  is  called  Aiau- 
nah,  Aranyah,  Ha-avarnah,  or  Haornah,  is  given  in 
Chronicles  (1  Chr.  xxi.  15,  18,  20-25,  28  ;"  2  Chr. 
iii.  1).  This  extraordinary  variety  of  foim  is  a 
strong  corroboration  to  the  statement  that  Oman 
was  a  non-Isiaelite.  [Araukah  ;  Jebusite,  vol. 
i.  9376.] 

In  some  of  the  Greek  versions  of  Origen's  Hexapla 
collected  by  Bahrdt,  the  threshing-fioor  of  Oman 
('Epi/o  Toi  'If^ovaaiov)  is  named  for  that  of  Nachou 
in  2  Sam.  vi.  6.  [G.] 

OR'PAH  (nQ"iy  :  'Opcjxx:  Orpha).  A Mo'dhita 

woman,  wife  of  Chilion  son  of  Naomi,  and  thereby 
sister-in-law  to  RuTH.  On  the  death  of  their  hus- 
bands Oi'pah  accompanied  her  sister-in-law  and  her 
mother-in-law  on  the  road  to  Bethlehem.  But  here 
her  resolution  failed  her.  The  ofler  which  Naomi 
made  to  tlie  two  youngei'  women  that  they  should 
return  "  each  to  their  own  mother's  house,"  after 
-   -     .        ,  ..     ,    ,  ,.  ,       J,  a  slight  hesitation,  she  embiaced.     "  Orpah  kissed 

to  ascertiun  what  constituted  a  proper  ait.cle  of ;  j^^,.  i,,other-in-law,"  and  went  back  "  to  her  people 


dress,  and  what  might  be  regarded  by  rabbinical 
refinement  as  a  burden : — "  A  woman  must  not  go 
out  (on  the  Sabbath)  with  linen  or  woollen  laces, 
nor  with  the  straps  on  her  head :  nor  with  a  fi-ont-  I 
let  and  pendants  thereto,  unless  sewn  to  her  cap : 
nor  with  a  golden  tower  (i.  e.  an  ornament  in  the 
shape  of  a  tower)  ;  nor  with  a  tight  gold  chain  :  nor 
with  nose-rings :  nor  with    finger-rings  on   which 


y  JAvyah    (iT'l?)- 

«  See  note  »  above. 

»  The  word  is  nczcm.    See  note  »  above. 

b  Cliali.     See  note  ^  above. 

<=  'Acikim  (D^D3J?)  ;  A.  V.  "  tinkling  ornaments  about 
their  feel."  Tlie  effect  of  the  anklet  is  described  in  ver.  16, 
"making  u  tinkling  with  their  feet."    [Anklet.] 

<•  SUms'im  (D''P''3t^')  ;  A.  V.  "  cauls  "  or  "  net- 
works." The  term  li:is  been  otherwise  explained  as  mean- 
ing ornaments  shaped  like  the  sun,  and  worn  as  a  necklace. 
[Haiu.] 

=  Sahardmm ;  A.  V.  "  round  tires  like  the  moon."  See 
note  1  above. 

I  A'etiphOlh;  A.  V.  "  chains"  or  "  sweet  balls."  See 
note  ■•  above. 

B  SherGlh  (nny)-  The  word  refers  to  the  construc- 
tion of  the  bracelet  by  inteitwininy  cords  or  metal  rods. 

l>  JieWdth  (ni?!?"))  ;  A.  V.  "  mufflers "  or  "  spangled 
ornnmcnts."  The  word  describes  the  tremulous  motion 
of  the  veil.     fV'i:n..] 

i  I'ec'i  tm  (O'lNQ)  ;  A.  V.  "  bonnets."  The  peer  may 
mean  more  specltically  the  decoration  in  front  of  the 
turban.    [Headduf.ss.] 

j  Tseddoth  (.T\T\]}'!i)  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments  of  the  legs." 
See  note  ""  above.  The  effect  of  the  stop-chain  Is  to  give 
a  "  mincing"  gait,  as  described  in  vcr.  16. 

V  Kishi^hurim  (D''"1E?^Jp)  ;  A.  V.  "  head-bunds."  It 
probably  means  a  handsomely  decorated  girdle.  [Gi  KW.i:.] 
It  formed  part  of  a  bride's  attire  (ler.  ii.  a2). 


and  to  her  gods,"  leaving  to  the  unconscious  Ruth 
the  glory,  which  she  miglit  have  rivalled,  of  being 
the  mother  of  the  most  illustrious  house  of  that  or 
any  nation.  [G.] 

ORTHO'SIAS  {'OpOwcrids;  Alex.  'Opewcria: 
Orthosias).  Tryphon,  when  besieged  by  Antiochus 
Sidetes  in  Dora,  fled  by  ship  to  Orthosias  (1  Mace, 


I  Botte  hannephesJi  (t'^SSH  ''^13)  ;  A.  V.  "tablets," 
or  "houses  of  the  soul,"  the  latter  being  the  literal  ren- 
dering of  the  words.  The  scent-bottle  was  either  attached 
to  the  girdle  or  suspended  from  the  neck. 

■n  Lechdshint,  (Q^^^rV)  ;  A.  V.  "  ear-rings."  The  mean- 
ing of  this  teim  is  extremely  doubtful :  it  is  derived  from 
a  root  signifying  "to  whisper;"  and  hence  is  applied  to 
the  mutterings  of  serpent  channers,  and  in  a  secondary 
sense  to  amulets.  They  may  have  been  in  the  form  of 
ear-rings,  as  already  stated.  The  etymological  meaning 
might  otherwise  make  it  applicable  to  describe  light, 
j-ualling  robes  (Saalcliiitz,  Archdul.  i.  30).  " 

n  A.  V.  "nose-jewels.' 

0  For  this  and  the  two  following  terms  see  Dress. 

V  Chariiim,  (D''P^"in) ;  A.  V.  "crisping-pins."  Com- 
pare 2  K.  v.  23.  According  to  Geseiiius  {'fltes.  p. 
519),  the  purse  is  so  named  from  its  round,  conical 
form. 

1  Gilyoiiim  (W^'hi)  ;  A.  V.  "  glasses."  The  term  is 
not  the  same  as  was  before  used ;  nor  is  its  sense  well 
ascertained.  It  has  been  otherwise  understood  as  do- 
scribing  a  transparent  material  like  gauze.    See  Dkess. 

■■  A.  V.  "  hoods."    [IIf,aum{E.ss.] 

•  A.  V.  "vails."    [DuKSS.] 

"  Declined 'Op..,:, 'Opiw,  in  the  Vat.  MS.  (Mai);  but 
in  the  Alex.  M.S.  constantly  "pi'a-  •"  '''e  Targum  on 
Chronicles  the  name  is  given  in  four  ililTereiil  forms:— 
usually  pnX,  but  also  fl^l^^.i  \PJ^/  n^")*^'  '""* 
|VnX-    S.e  llie  edition  of  lUek  (.!";/.  Mud.  16S0). 


648 


OSAIA« 


XV.  37).  Orthosia  is  desoribeil  by  Pliny  (v.  17)  as 
north  of  Tripolis,  and  south  of  the  livei-  Eleutheius, 
near  which  it  was  situated  (Stiabo,  xvi.  p.  753). 
It  was  the  northern  boundary  of  Phoenice,  and 
distant  1130  st<adia  from  the  Orontes  (id.  p.  760). 
.Shaw  (Trav.  p.  '270,  271,  2nd  ed.)  identities  the 
Eleutlierus  with  the  modern  Nahr  el-Barid,  on  the 
north  bank  of  which,  corresponding  to  the  descrip- 
tion of  Stiabo  (p.  753),  he  found  "  ruins  of  a  con- 
siderable city,  whose  adjacent  district  pays  yearly 
to  the  Bashaws  of  Tripoly  a  tax  of  fifty  dollars  by 
the  name  of  Or-tosa.  In  Peutinger's  Table,  also, 
Orthosia  is  placed  thirty  miles  to  the  south  of  Antar- 
adus,  and  twelve  miles  to  the  north  of  Tripoly.  The 
situation  of  it  likewise  is  further  illustrated  by  a 
medal  of  Antoninus  Pius,  struck  at  Orthosia ;  upon 
the  reverse  of  which  wo  have  the  goddess  Astarte 
treading  upon  a  river.  For  this  city  was  built  upon 
a  rising  ground  on  the  northern  banks  of  the  river, 
within  half  a  furlong  of  the  sea,  and,  as  the  rugged 
eminences  of  Mount  Libanus  lie  at  a  small  distance 
in  a  paiallel  with  the  shore,  Orthosia  must  have 
been  a  place  of  the  greatest  importance,  as  it  would 
have  hereby  the  entire  command  of  the  load  (the 
only  one  there  is)  betwixt  Phoenice  and  the  mari- 
time parts  of  Syria."  On  the  other  hand,  BIr. 
Porter,  who  identifies  the  Eleutherus  with  the 
modern  Nahr  el-Kebir,  describes  the  ruins  of  Or- 
thosia as  on  the  south  bank  of  the  Xahr  el-Barid, 
"  the  cold  river "  (^Handhk.  p.  593),  thus  agreeing 
with  the  accounts  of  Ptolemy  and  Pliny.  The  state- 
ment of  Strabo  is  not  sufficiently  precise  to  allow 
the  inference  that  he  considered  Orthosia  north  of 
the  Eleutherus.  But  if  the  ruins  on  the  south 
bank  of  the  Nahr  el-Barid  be  really  those  of  Or- 
thosia, it  teems  an  objection  to  the  identification  of 
the  Eleutherus  with  the  Nahr  el-Kebir  ;  for  Strabo 
at  one  time  makes  Orthosia  (xiv.  p.  670),  and  at 
another  the  neighbouring  river  Eleutherus  (6  ttAtj- 
a'lov  TTorafiSs),  the  boundary  of  Phoenice  on  the 
north.  This  could  liardly  have  been  the  case  if 
the  Eleutherus  were  3f  hours,  or  neai'ly  twelve 
miles,  from  Orthosia. 

Ac^virdiiig  to  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  7,  §2),  Tryphon 
fled  to  Apamea,  while  in  a  fragment  of  Charax, 
quoted  by  Grimm  (Kurzgef.  Handb.)  fi-om  Miiller's 
Frag.  Graec.  Hist.  iii.  p.  644,  fr.  14,  he  is  said  to 
have  taken  i-efuge  at  Ptolemais.  Grimm  recon- 
ciles these  statements  by  supposing  that  Tryi)hon 
fled  first  to  Orthosia,  then  to  Ptolemais,  and  lastly 
to  Apamea,  where  he  was  slain.  [W.  A.  W.] 

OSAI'AS  {'na-alas  :  cm.  in  Vulg.).  A  corrup- 
tion of  Jesuaiah  (1  Esd.  viii.  48;  comp.  Ezr. 
viii.  19). 

OSE'A  (Osec).  Hoshea  the  son  of  Elah,  king 
of  Israel  (2  Esd.  xiii.  40). 

OSE'AS  {Osee).  The  prophet  Hosea  (2  Esd. 
1.  39). 

OSHE'A  (y'^'in,  i.  c.  Hoshea;  Samar.  VK'in' : 
hhffi] :  Osce).  The  original  name  of  Joshua  the 
son  of  Nun  (Num.  xiii.  8),  which  on  some  occasion 
not  stated — but  which  we  may  with  reason  conjec- 
ture to  have  been  his  resistance  to  the  factious  con- 
duct of  the  spies — received  from  Moses  (ver.  16) 
the  addition  of  the  great  name  of  Jehovah,  so  lately 
revealed  to  the  nation  (Ex.  vi.  3),  and  thus  from 
"  Help  "  became  "  Help  of  Jehovah."  The  Samari-  I 
tan  Codex  has  Jehoshua  in  both  places,  and  therefore 
misses  the  point  of  the  chango. 

The  original  form  of  the  name  recurs  m  Dent. 


OSPRAY 

xxxii.  44,  though  there  the  A.  V.  (with  more  ac- 
curacy than  liere)  has  Hoshea. 

Probably  no  name  in  the  whole  Bible  appears  in 
so  many  fonus  as  that  of  this  great  personage,  in 
the  original  five,  and  in  the  A.  V.  no  less  than 
seven — Oshea,  Hoshea,  Jehoshua,  Jehoshuah,  Joshua, 
Jeshua,  Jesus  ;  and  if  we  add  Hosea  (also  identical 
with  Oshea)  and  Osea,  nine.  [G.] 

OSPKAY  (H^Jty,  ozniyyah  :  aXiaUros  :  lia- 
liaeetus).  The  Hebrew  word  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi. 
13,  and  Deut.  xiv.  12,  as  the  name  of  some  unclean 
bird  which  the  law  of  JMoses  disallowed  as  food  to  the 
Israelites.  The  old  versions  and  many  commentators 
are  in  favour  of  this  interpretation  ;  but  Bochart 
{Hieroz.  ii.  774)  has  endeavoured,  though  on  no 
reasonable  grounds,  to  pro\-e  that  the  bird  denoted 
by  the  Hebrew  term  is  identical  with  the  melan- 
aeetus  (fieXavaUros)  of  Aristotle,  the  Valeria 
aquila  of  Pliny.  There  is,  however,  some  difficulty 
in  identifying  the  haliaeeius  of  Aristotle  and  Pliny, 
on  account  of  some  statements  these  writei-s  make 
with  respect  to  the  habits  of  this  bird.  The  general 
description  they  give  would  suit  either  the  ospiay 
{Paridion   haliaeetus)    or    the    white-tailed    eap-le 


Pandion  haliaeetus. 


(^Haliaeetus  albicilla).  The  foUowmg  passage,  how- 
ever, of  Pliny  (x.  3),  points  to  the  ospray :  "  The 
haliaeetus  poises  itself  aloft,  and  the  moment  it 
catches  sight  of  a  fish  in  the  sea  below  pounces 
headlong  upon  it,  and  clea\ing  the  water  with  its 


CiTcaeltts  gaUicut, 


OSSIFRAGE 

tireast,  carries  off  its  booty."  Witli  this  may  be 
compared  the  descri|ition  of  a  modern  naturalist, 
Dr.  iiichardson  :  "  When  looking  out  for  its  prey 
it  sails  with  great  ease  and  elegance,  in  undulating 
lines  at  a  considerable  altitude  above  the  water, 
fi-om  whence  it  precipitates  itself  upon  its  quarry, 
and  bears  it  olf  in  its  claws."  Again,  both  Aristotle 
and  Pliny  speak  of  the  diving  habits  of  the /wtoee^»(s. 
The  ospray  often  plunges  entirely  under  the  water 
in  pursuit  of  Hsh.  The  ospray  belongs  to  the  family 
Fulconklae,  order  Raptatores.  It  has  a  wide  geo- 
graphiwil  range,  and  is  occasionally  seen  in  Egypt ; 
but  as  it  is  rather  a  northern  bird,  the  Heb.  word 
may  refer,  as  Jlr.  Tristram  suggests  to  us,  either  to 
the  Aquilu  mievia,  or  A.  naevioides,  or  more  pro- 
bably still  to  the  very  abundant  Circaetus  gaUicus 
which  feeds  upon  reptilia.  [W.  H.] 

OSSIFEAGE  (D'HB,  pcres  :    ypi^  :    gryps). 

There  is  much  to  be  said  in  favour  of  this  transla- 
tion of  the  A.  V.  The  word  occurs,  as  the  name 
of  an  unclean  bird,  in  Lev.  xi.  13,  and  in  the  parallel 
piissage  of  Dent.  xiv.  12.  (For  other  renderings  of 
peres  see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  770.)  The  Arabic 
version  has  okah,  which  Bochart  renders  fxeXav- 
aleros,  "  the  black  eagle."  [OsPRAY.]  This  word, 
however,  is  in  all  probability  generic,  and  is  used 
to  denote  any  bird  of  the  eagle  kind,  for  in  the 
vei-nacular  Arabic  of  Algeria  okab  is  "  the  generic 


Gt/tHirtut  barbatu 


name  used  by  the  Arabs  to  express  any  of  the  large 
kinds  of  the  Falconklae."  (See  Loche's  Catalogue 
lies  Oiseaux  obsei-ves  en  Algcrie,  ]>.  .'57.)  There 
is  nothing  conclusive  to  be  gathered  from  the 
ypvyfi  of  the  LXX.  and  the  gryps  of  the  Vulgate, 
which  is  the  name  of  a  fabulous  animal.  Etymo- 
logically  the  word  points  to  some  rapacious  bird 
with  an  eminently  "  hooked  beak  ;"  and  ceitiiinly 


"  D"12,  fioiii  D"]S,  ■•  to  bicak,"  "  to  crush.' 

•>  nay.  ■■  t.,  cy  out.-  ■•  lyv 


OSTRICH  649 

the  ossifrage  has  the  hooked  beak  characteristic  of 
the  order  Raptatores  in  a  very  marked  degree.  If 
much  weight  is  to  be  allowed  to  etymology,  the 
peres"  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  may  well  be  repre- 
sented by  the  ossifrage,  or  bone-breaker ;  for  peres 
in  Hebrew  means  "  the  breaker."  And  the  ossifra<;e 
{Gypaetus  barbatus)  is  well  deserving  of  his  name 
in  a  more  literal  manner,  it  will  appear,  than 
Colonel  H.  Smith  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  "  Feres")  is 
willing  to  allow ;  for  not  only  does  he  push  kids 
and  lambs,  and  even  men,  ofi'  the  roclvs,  but  he 
takes  the  bones  of  animals  which  other  birds  of 
prey  have  denuded  of  the  flesh  high  up  into  the  air, 
and  lets  them  fall  upon  a  stone  in  order  to  ci'ack 
them,  and  render  them  more  digestible  even  for  his 
enormous  powers  of  deglutition.  i^See  Mr.  Simpson's 
very  interesting  account  of  the  Lunimenjeyer  in 
Ibis,  ii.  282.)  The  Lammergeyer,  or  bearded  vul- 
ture, as  it  is  sometimes  called,  is  one  of  the  largest  of 
the  birds  of  prey.  It  is  not  uncommon  in  tlie  East ; 
and  Mr.  Tristram  several  times  observed  this  bird 
"  sailing  over  the  high  mountain- passes  west  of  the 
Jordan  "  {Ihis,  i.  23).  The  English  word  os.sifrage 
has  been  applied  to  some  of  the  Falconidae ;  but 
the  ussifraga  of  the  Latins  evidently  points  to  the 
Lammergeyer,  one  of  the  VtUturidae.        [W.  II.] 

OSTRICH.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Hebrew  words  bath  haya'anah,  yd'en,  xmd  rdiidn, 
denote  this  bird  of  the  desert. 

1.  Bath  haya'anah  (njy^nTIB  :  (xrpov66s, 
(TTpovdiou,  ffetpriv:  struthio)  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  16, 
Deut.  xiv.  15,  in  the  list  of  unclean  birds;  and  in 
other  passages  of  Scripture.  The  A.V.  erroneously 
renders  the  Hebrew  expression,  which  signifies  either 
"  daughter  of  greediness  "  or  "  daughter  of  shout- 
ing," by  "  owl,"  or,  as  in  the  margin,  by  "  daughter 
of  owl."  In  Job  XXX.  29,  Is.  xxxiv.  13,  and  xliii.  20, 
the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  correctly  reads  "  ostriches." 
Bochart  considers  that  bath  haya'anah  denotes  the 
female  ostrich  only,  and  that  tachnids,  the  follow- 
ing word  in  the  Hebrew  te.\t,  is  to  be  restricted  to 
the  male  bird.  In  all  probability,  however,  this 
latter  word  is  intended  to  signify  a  bird  of  another 
genus.  [Night-Hawic]  There  is  considerable 
dWiirence  of  opinion  with  regard  to  the  etjTiiology 
of  the  Hebrew  word  ya'andh.  Bochart  {Hieroz. 
ii.  811)  derives  it  from  a  root*"  meaning  to  "cry 
out"  (see  also  Maurer,  Comment,  in  V.  T.  ad  Thren. 
IV.  3) ;  and  this  is  the  interpretation  of  old  commen- 
tators generally.  Gesenius  (  TVies.  s.  v.  njy^)  refers 
the  word  to  a  root  which  signifies  "  to  be  greedy 
or  voracious ;" «  and  demurs  to  the  explanation 
given  hj  Michaelis  {Sujipl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  p.  1127), 
ami  by  liosenmiiller  {Not.  ad  Hieroz.  ii.  829, 
and  Schol.  ad  Lev.  xi.  1(3),  who  trace  the  Hebrew 
word  ya'andh  to  one  which  in  Arabic  denotes 
"  hard  and  .sterile  land:"<>  bath  haya'anah  accord- 
ingly would  mean  "  daughter  of  the  desert." 
Without  entering  into  the  merits  of  these  various 
explanations,  it  will  be  enough  to  mention  that  any 
one  of  them  is  well  suited  tn  the  li.ibit;,  of  the 
ostrich.  This  bird,  as  is  well  known,  will  swallow- 
almost  any  substance,  jieces  of  iron,  lai'ge  stones, 
&c.  &c.  ;  this  it  does  probably  in  order  to  assist 
the  triturating  action  of  the  gizzard :  so  that  the 
Oriental  expression  of  "  daughter  of  voracity  "   is 


terra,  dura  ct  UerilU. 


650 


OSTRICH 


eminently  characteristic  of  the  ostrich. «  With  regard 
to  the  two  other  derivations  of  the  Hebrew  word, 
we  may  add  that  the  cry  of  the  ostrich  is  said 
sometimes  to  resemble  the  lion,  so  that  the  Hot- 
tentots of  S.  Africa  are  deceived  by  it ;  and  that 
its  particular  haunts  are  the  parched  and  desolate 
tracts  of  sandy  deserts. 

The  loud  crying  of  the  ostrich  seems  to  be  le- 
ferred  to  in  Mic.  i.  8 :  "I  will  wail  and  howl  .... 
I  will  make  a  mourning  as  the  ostriches  "  (see  also 
Job  xx.\.  29).  The  other  passages  where  hath  haya- 
'and/i  occurs  point  to  the  desolate  places  which  are 
the  natural  habitat  of  these  birds. 

2.  Yd' en  (|y*)  occurs  only  in  the  plural  number 
D^jy'',  ye'entm  (LXX.  ffTpov6iov,  struthio),  in 
Lam.  iv.  3,  where  the  context  shews  that  the 
ostrich  is  intended  :  "  The  daughter  of  my  people 
is  become  cruel  like  the  ostriclies  in  the  wilderness." 
This  is  important,  as  shewing  that  the  other  woi'd 
(1),  which  is  merely  the  feminine  form  of  this  one, 
with  the  addition  of  bath,  "  daughter,"  clearly 
points  to  the  ostrich  as  its  coirect  translation,  even 
if  all  the  old  versions  were  not  agreed  upon  the 
matter.     For  remarks  on  Lam.  iv.  3,  see  below. 

3.  Edndn  (p"l).     The  plural  form  (□''JJI,  re- 

ndnim:  LXX.  Tepirdiuei/oi :  struthio)  alone  occurs 
m  Job  xxxix.  13  ;  where,  however,  it  is  clear  from 
the  whole  passage  (13-18)  that  ostriches  are  in- 
tended by  the  word.  The  A.  Y.  renders  rendniin 
by  "  peacocks,"  a  translation  wliich  has  not  found 
favour  with  commentators ;  as  "  peacocks,"  for 
which  there  is  a  diti'erent  Hebrew  name,'  were 
probably  not  known  to  the  people  of  Arabia  or 
Syria  before  the  time  of  Solomon. '  [Peacocks.] 
The  "ostrich"  of  the  A.  V.  in  Job  xxxix.  13  is 
the  representative  of  the  Hebrew  notseh,  "  feathers." 
The  Hebrew  rcndntm  appears  to  be  derived  from 
the  root  rdnan,e  "to  wail,"  or  to  "  utter  a  .stri- 
dulous  sound,"  in  allusion  to  this  bird's  nocturnal 
cries.  Gesenius  compares  the  Arabic  zimar,  "  a 
tijmale  ostrich,"  fi'om  the  root  zamar,  "to  sing." 

The  following  short  account  of  the  nidification  of 
the  ostrich  {Sti-uthio  camelus)  will  perhaps  elucidate 
those  passages  of  Scripture  which  ascribe  cruelty  to 
this  bird  in  neglecting  her  eggs  or  young.  Ostriclies 
ai'e  polygamous:  the  hens  lay  their  eggs  promis- 
cuously in  one  nest,  which  is  merely  a  hole  scratched 
in  the  sand  ;  the  eggs  are  then  covered  over  to  the 
depth  of  about  a  foot,  and  are,  in  the  case  of  those 
birds  which  are  found  within  the  tropics,  generally 
left  for  the  greater  part  of  the  day  to  the  heat  of 
the  sun,  the  parent-birds  taking  their  turns  at  incu- 
bation during  the  night.  But  in  those  countries 
which  have  not  a  tropiail  sun  ostriches  frequently 
incubate  dui'ing  the  day,  the  male  taking  his  turn 
at  night,  and  watching  over  the  eggs  with  great 
care  and  allection,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that 
jackals  and  other  of  the  smaller  carnivora  are 
occasionally  found  dead  near  the  nest,  having  been 
killed  by  the  ostrich  in  defence  of  the  eggs  or 
young.  "  As  a  further  proof  of  the  affection  of  the 
ostrich  for  its  young"  (we  quote  from  Shaw's 
Zoology,  xi.  426),  "it  is  related  by  Thunberg  that 
he  once  rode  past  a  place  where  a  female  was  sitting 


e  Mr.  Tristram,  who  has  paid  considerable  attention  to 
the  habits  of  the  ostrich,  has  kindly  read  over  this  article  ; 
he  says,  "the  necessity  for  swallowing  stones,  &c.,  may- 
be understood  from  the  favourite  food  of  the  tame  os- 
triches I  have  seen  l)eing  the  date-stone,  the  hardest  of 
vegetable  substances." 


OSTRICH 

on  her  nest,  when  the  bird  sprang  up  and  pursued 
him,  evidently  with  a  view  to  prevent  his  noticing 
her  eggs  or  young."  The  habit  of  the  ostiich 
leaving  its  eggs  to  b?  matured  by  the  sun's  lieat 
is  usually  appealed  to  in  order  to  confirm  the  Scrij> 
taral  account,  "  she  leaveth  hei-  eggs  to  the  earth  ;" 
but,  as  has  been  remai'ked  above,  this  is  probably 
the  case  only  with  the  tropical  birds  :  the  ostriches 
with  which  the  Jews  were  acquainted  were,  it  is 
likely,  birds  of  Syria,  Egypt,  and  North  Africa ; 
but,  even  if  they  were  acquainted  with  the  habits 
of  the  tropical  ostriches,  how  can  it  be  said  that 
"  she  forgetteth  that  the  foot  may  crush  "  the  eggs, 
when  they  are  covered  a  foot  deep  or  more  in 
sand  ?  '     We  believe  ihe  true   explanation  of  this 


passage  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  ostrich 
deposits  some  of  her  eggs  not  in  the  nest,  but 
around  it ;  these  lie  about  on  the  surface  of  the 
sand,  to  all  appearance  forsaken ;  they  are,  however, 
designed  for  the  nourishment  of  the  young  birds, 
according  to  Levaillant  and  Bonjainville  (Cuvier, 
An.  King,  by  Giiffiths  and  others,  viii.  432).  Are 
not  these  the  eggs  "  that  the  foot  may  crush,"  and 
may  not  hence  be  traced  the  cruelty  which  Scrip- 
ture attributes  to  the  ostrich  ?  We  have  had  occa- 
sion to  remark  in  a  former  artide  [Amt],  that  the 
language  of  Scripture  is  adapted  to  the  opinions 
commonly  held  by  the  people  of  the  East:  for  how- 
otherwise  can  we  explain,  for  instance,  the  passages 
which  ascribe  to  the  hare  or  to  the  coney  the  habit 
of  chewing  the  cud  ?  And  this  remark  will  hold 
good  in  the  passage  of  Job  which  speaks  of  the 
ostrich  being  without  luiderstanding.  It  is  a  genei-a) 
belief  amongst  tlie  Arabs  that  the  ostrich  is  a  very 
stupid  bird  :  indeed  they  have  a  proverb,  "  Stupid 
as  an  ostrich;"  and  Bochart  [Hieroz.  ii.  865)  has 
given  us  five  points  on  which  tliis  biid  is  supposed 
to  deserve  its  character.  They  may  be  briefly  stated 
thus: — (1)  Because  it  will  swallow  iron,  stones. 


•>  See  Tristram  (Ibis,  ii.  74) :  "  Two  Arabs  began  to 
dig  with  their  hands,  and  presently  brought  up  four  tine 
fresh  eggs  from  the  depth  of  about  a  foot  under  the  warm 
sund." 


OTHNI 


OTHNIEL 


651 


&c. ;  (2)  Because  when  it  is  hunted  it  thrusts  its 
head  into  a  bush  and  imagines  the  hunter  does  not 
see  it ;  •>  (3)  Beciuse  it  allows  itself  to  be  deceived 
and  captured  in  the  manner  described  by  Strabo 
(xvi.  772,  ed.  Kramer) ;  (4)  Because  it  neglects  its 
eggs ;  1  (5)  Because  it  has  a  small  head  and  few 
brains.  Such  is  the  opinion  the  Arabs  have  ex- 
pressed with  regard  to  the  ostrich  ;  a  bird,  however, 
which  liy  no  means  deserves  such  a  character,  as 
travellers  have  frequently  testified.  "  So  wai-y  is 
the  bird,"  says  Mr.  Tristram  {Ibis,  ii.  73),  "and  so 
open  are  the  vast  plains  over  which  it  roams,  that 
uo  ambuscades  or  artifices  can  be  employed,  and 
the  vulgar  resource  of  dogged  perseverance  is  the 
only  mode  of  pursuit." 

Dr.  Shaw  {Travels,  ii.  345)  relates  as  an  instance 
of  want  of  sagacity  iu  the  ostrich,  that  he  "  saw 
one  swallow  several  leaden  bullets,  scorching  hot 
from  the  mould."  We  may  add  that  not  unfre- 
quently  the  stones  and  other  substances  vvhich 
ostriches  swallow  prove  fatal  to  them.  In  this  one 
respect,  perhaps,  there  is  some  foundation  for  the 
character  of  stupidity  attributed  to  them. 

The  ostrich  was  forbidden  to  be  used  as  food  by 
the  Levitical  law,  but  the  African  Arabs,  says  Mr. 
Tristram,  eat  its  flesh,  which  is  good  and  sweet. 
Ostrich's  brains  were  among  the  dainties  that 
were  placed  on  the  supper-tables  of  the  ancient 
Romans.  The  fat  of  the  osti'ich  is  sometimes 
used  in  medicine  for  the  cure  oi"  palsy  and  rheu- 
matism (Pococke,  2Vav.  i.  209).  Burckhardt 
(Syria,  Append,  p.  664)  says  that  ostriches  breed 
in  the  Dhahy.  They  are  found,  and  seem  formerly 
to  have  been  more  abundant  than  now,  in  Arabia. 

The  ostrich  i3  the  largest  of  all  known  birds,  and 
perhaps  the  swiftest  of  all  cursorial  animals.  The 
capture  of  an  ostrich  is  often  made  at  the  sacrifice  of 
the  lives  of  two  horses  {Ibis,  ii.  73).  Its  strength  is 
enormous.  The  wings  are  useless  for  flight,  but 
when  the  bird  is  pursued  they  are  extended  and  act 
as  sails  before  the  wind.  The  ostrich's  feathers  so 
much  prized  are  the  long  white  plumes  of  the 
wings.  The  best  come  to  us  from  Barbary  and 
the'\vest  coast  of  Afiica.  The  ostrich  belongs  to 
the  tamily  Struthionidae,  order  Cursores.    [W.  H.] 

OTH'NI  C^ny  :  'OBvi ;  Alex.  Todvl :  Othni). 
Son  of  Shemaiah,  the  firstborn  of  Obed-edom,  one 
of  the  "  able  men  for  strength  for  the  service  "  of 
the  tabernacle  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvi.  7).  The  name  is  said  by  Gesenius  to  be  de- 
rived from  an  obsolete  word,  ' Othen,  "  a  lion." 

OTH'NIEL  (^X'':riy,  "lion  of  God,"  cf.  Othni, 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  7  :  VoQovLi\\  :  Othoniel),  son  of  Ke- 
naz  and  younger  brother  of  Caleb,  Josh.  xv.  17; 
Jud'o-.  i.  13,  iii.  9  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  13.  But  these  p<vs- 
safes  all  leave  it  doubtful  whether  Kenaz  was  his 
father,  or,  as  is  more  probable,  the  more  remote 
ancestor  and  head  of  the  tribe,  whose  descendants 
were  called  Kene/.ites,  Num.  xxxii.  12,  &c.,  or  sons 
of  Kenaz.  If  Jephunneh  was  Caleb's  father,  then 
probably  he  was  father  of  Othniel  also.  [Calkh.] 
The  first  mention  of  Othniel  is  on  ocaision  of  the 
taking  of  Kirjath-Sepher,  or  Debir,  ;ui  it  was  after- 
wards called.  Debir  was  included  in  the  moun- 
tainous territory  near  Hebron,  within  the  ijorder  of 
Judah,  assigned  to  Caleb  the  Kenezite  (Josh.  xiv. 


12-14);  and  in  order  to  stimulate  the  valour  of 
the  assailants,  Caleb  promised  to  give  his  daughter 
Achsah  to  whosoever  should  assault  and  take  the 
city.  Othniel  won  the  prize,  and  received  with  his 
wife  in  addition  to  her  previous  dowry  the  upper 
and  nether  springs  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood. 
These  springs  are  identified  by  Van  de  Velde,  after 
Stewart,  with  a  spring  which  lises  on  the  summit 
of  a  hill  on  the  north  of  Wady  Dilbeh  (2  hours 
S.W.  from  Hebron),  and  is  brought  down  by  an 
aqueduct  to  the  foot  of  the  hill.  (For  other  views 
see  Dehir).  The  next  mention  of  Othniel  is  in 
Judcr.  iii.  9,  where  he  appears  as  the  first  judge  of 
Israel  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  and  their  deliverer 
from  their  first  servitude.  In  consequence  of  their 
intermarriages  with  the  Canaanites,  and  their  fie- 
quent  idolatries,  the  Israelites  had  been  given  into  the 
liand  of  Chushan-Rishathaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia, 
for  eight  years.  From  this  oppressive  servitude 
they  were  delivered  by  Othniel.  "  The  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  came  upon  him,  and  he  judged  Israel,  and 
went  out  to  ^-ar :  and  the  Lord  delivered  Chushan- 
Rishathaim  king  of  Mesopotamia  into  his  hand  ;  and 
his  hand  prevailed  against  Chushan-Rishathaim. 
And  the  land  had  res"t  forty  years.  And  Othniel 
the  son  of  Kenaz  died." 

This  with  his  genealogy,  1  Chr.  iv.  13,  14, 
which  assigns  him  a  son,  Hathath,  whose  posterity, 
according  to  Judith  vi.  15,  continued  till  the  time 
of  Holofernes,  is  all  that  we  know  of  Othniel.  But 
two  questions  of  some  interest  arise  concerning  him, 
the  one  his  exact  relationship  to  Caleb ;  the  other 
the  time  and  duration  of  his  judgeship. 

(1)  As  regards  his  relationship   to  Caleb,    the 
doubt   arises  "from    the    uncertainty  whether   the 
words  iu  Judg.  iii.  9,  "  Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz, 
Caleb's  younger  brother,"  indicate  that  Othniel  him- 
self, or  that  kenaz,  was  the  brother  of  Caleb.     The 
most  natural  rendering,  according  to  the  canon  ot 
R.  Moses  ben  Nachman,  on  Num.  x.  29,  that  in 
constructions  of  this  kind  such  designations  belong 
to  the  principal  person  in  the  preceding  sentence, 
makes  Othniel  to  be  Caleb's  brother.     And  this  is 
favoured  by  the  probability  that  Kenaz,  was  not 
Othniel's  father,   but  the  father  and  head  of  the 
tribe,  as  we  learn  that  Kenaz  was,  from  the  desig- 
nation  of  Caleb  as  "the  Kenezite,"    or   "son  of 
Kenaz."     Jerome  also  so  translates  it,    "Othniel 
filius  Cenez,  f'rater  Caleb  junior ;"  and  so  did  the 
LXX.  originally,  because  even  iu  those  copies  which 
now  have  d5e\<^o0,  they  still  retain  vedirepov  in 
the  ace.  case.     Nor  is  the  objection,  which  influ- 
ences most  of  the  .lewish  commentators  to  under- 
stand that  Kenaz  was  Caleb's  brother,  and  Othniel^ 
his  nephew,  of  any  weight.     For  the  marriage  of 
an  uncle  with  his  niece  Is  not  expressly  prohibited 
by  the  Levitical  law  (Lev.  xviii.  12,  xx.  19);  an.l 
even  if  it  had  been,  Caleb  and  Othniel  as  men  ot 
foreign  extraction  would  have  been  less  amenable  to 
it,  and  more  likely  to  follow  the  custom  of  their 
own  tribe.     On  the  other  hand  it  must  be  acknow- 
ledgetl  that  the  canon  above  quoted  does  not  hold 
unh-ersally.     Even  in  the  very  pussage,  Num.  x. 
29,  on  which  the  canon  is  adduced,  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  whether  the  designation  "  the  Midianite, 
Moses'    father-in-law,"    iloes   not    apply    to    Reuel, 
rather  than   to   Ilobab.  seeing  that'  Reuel,  and  not 
Hobab,  was  father  to  Moses'  wife  (Kx.  ii.  18).     In 


1-  This  is  an  old  conceit:  see  Pliny  (x.  1).  and  the  re- 
mark of  niodorus  Siculus  (ii.  50)  thereon, 
i  Ostriclies  are  very  sby  birds,  and  will,  it  Ihclr  nest  is 


discovered,  frequently  forsake  the  eggs.    Surely  this  is  a 
mark  lalher  of  sanaciiy  than  siupidity. 


652 


OTHOXIAS 


Jer.  xxrii.  7,  in  the  phrase  "  Hanameel  the  son  of 
Shallmn  thine  uncle,"  the  words  "  thine  uncle " 
certainly  belong  to  Shallum,  not  to  Hanameel,  as 
ajipears  fiom  ver.  8,  y.  And  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  o,  4; 
Keh.  xiii.  28,  the  designations  "  King  of  Isniel," 
and  "  high-priest,"  belong  respectively  to  David, 
and  to  Eliashib.  The  chronological  difficulties  as 
to  Othniel's  judgeship  would  also  be  mitigated  con- 
siderably if  he  were  nephew  and  not  brother  to 
Caleb,  as  in  this  case  he  might  well  be  25,  whereas 
in  the  other  he  could  not  be  under  40  years  of 
age,  at  the  time  of  his  marriage  with  Achsah.  Still 
the  evidence,  candidly  weighed,  preponderates 
strongly  in  favour  of  the  opinion  that  Othniel  was 
Caleb's  brother. 

(2)  And  this  leads  to  the  second  question  sug- 
gested above,  viz.  the  time  of  Othniel's  judgeship. 
Supposing  Caleb  to  be  about  the  same  age  as  Joshua, 
as  Num.  xiii.  6,  8  ;  Josh.  xiv.  10,  suggest,  we  should 
have  to  reckon  about  25  years  from  Othniel's  mar- 
riage with  Achsah  till  the  death  of  Joshua  at  the 
age  of  110  years  (85+25  =  110;.  And  if  we  take 
Africanus's  allowance  of  30  years  for  the  elders 
after  Joshua,  in  whose  lifetime  "  the  people  sen-ed 
the  Lord"  (Judg.  ii.  7),  and  then  allow  8  yeai-s 
for  Chushan-Rishathaim's  dominion,  and  40  years  of 
rest  under  Othniel's  judgeship,  and  suppose  Othniel 
to  have  been  40  years  old  at  his  marriage,  we  obtain 
(40+254-30-{-8+40  =  )  143  years  as  Othniel's 
age  at  his  death.  This  we  are  quite  sure  cannot 
be  right.  Nor  does  any  escape  from  the  difficulty 
very  readily  offer  itself  It  is  in  feet  a  part  of  that 
lai-ger  chronological  diificulty  which  affects  the 
whole  interval  between  the  exodus  and  the  building 
of  Solomon's  temple,  where  the  dates  and  formal 
notes  of  time  indicate  a  period  more  than  twice  as 
long  as  that  derived  from  the  genealogies  and  other 
onlinai"v  calculations  from  the  length  of  human  life, 
and  general  historical  probability.  In  the  case 
before  us  one  would  guess  an  interval  of  not  more 
than  25  years  between  Othniel's  mariiage  and  his 
victory  over  Chushan-Kishathaim. 

In  endeavouring  to  bring  these  conflicting  state- 
ments into  harmony,  the  first  thing  that  occurs  to 
one  is,  that  if  Joshua  lived  to  the  age  of  110  yeai-s, 
t.  e.  full  30  years  after  the  enti-anee  into  Canaan, 
supposing  him  to  have  been  40  when  he  went  as  a  spy, 
he  must  have  outlived  all  the  elder  men  of  the  gene- 
]-ation  which  took  possession  of  Canaan,  and  that  10 
or  12  years  more  must  have  seen  the  last  of  the 
survivors.  Then  again,  it  is  not  necessaiy  to  sup- 
pose that  Othniel  lived  through  the  whole  Su  years 
of  rest,  nor  is  it  possible  to  avoid  suspecting  that 
these  long  periods  of  40  and  80  years  are  due  to 
some  influences  which  have  distm-bed  the  true  com- 
putation of  time.  If  these  dates  are  discarded,  and 
we  judge  onlv  by  ordinaiy  probabilities,  we  shall 
suppose  Othniel  to  have  survived  Joshua  not  more 
than  20,  or  at  the  outside,  30  yeai-s.  Nor,  how- 
ever unsatisfactory  this  may  be,  does  it  seem  pos- 
sible, with  only  our  present  materials,  to  arrive  at 
any  moie  definite  result.  It  must  suffice  to  know 
the  difficulties  and  wait  patiently  for  the  solution, 
should  it  ever  be  vouchsafed  to  us.        [A.  C.  H.] 

OTHOXIAS '^'Ofloyi'as:  Zochiis).  A  connip- 
tion of  the  name  Mattaniah  in  Ezr.  x.  27  (1  £sd. 
is.  28). 


•  It  is  importiint  to  observe,  in  reference  to  the  LXX. 
renderings  of  tbp  Hebrew  names  of  the  different  unclean 
birds,  &c.,  thai  ihe  verses  of  DeuU  .viv.  arc  some  of  llitm 


OWL 

OVEN  ("rtSh  :  KKiPavos).  The  Easteni  oven 
is  of  two  kinds — fixed  and  portable.  The  former  is 
found  only  in  towns,  where  regnLir  bakers  are  em- 
ployed (Hos.  vii.  4).  The  latter  is  adapted  to  the 
nomad  state,  and  is  the  article  generally  intended  by 
the  Hebrew  term  tannur.  It  consists  of  a  large  jar 
made  of  clay,  about  three  feet  high,  and  widening 
towards  the  bottom,  %\nth  a  hole  for  the  extrac- 
tion of  the  ashes  (Niebuhr,  Desc.  de  FArab.  p.  46';. 
Occasionally,  however,  it  is  not  an  actual  jar,  but 
an  erection  of  clay  in  the  form  of  a  jar,  built  on 
the  floor  of  the  house  i  Wellsted,  Tnirxls,  i.  350). 
Each  household  possessed  such  an  article  (Ex.  viii. 
3)  ;  and  it  was  only  in  times  of  extienie  dearth  that 
the  same  oven  sufficed  for  sevenil  families  (Lev. 
xx-vi.  26).  It  was  heated  with  d)-y  twigs  and  gi'ass 
(Matt.  vi.  30);  and  the  loaves  were  placed  botli 
inside  and  outside  of  it.  It  was  also  used  for  roast- 
ing me;it  (Mishna,  Tium.  3,  §8;.  The  heat  of  the 
oven  furnished  Hebrew  writers  with  an  image  of 
rapid  and  violent  destruction  (Fs.  xxi.  9 ;  Hos.  vii. 
7;  Mai.  iv.  1).  [W.  L.  B.] 


E^nT>tian  Oven. 

OWL,  the  representative ,  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Hebrew  words  hath  hayaanah,  yanshuph,  cod, 
kippoz,  and  lUUh.   . 

1.  Bathhaya'anah  (n3y|n-n3).     [Ostrich.] 

2.  TansMph,  or  yansh,6ph{r^^Vi}yi,  ^^Vy:  t^is, 
7Xou|:"  ibis),  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  17,  Deut.  siv.  16, 
as  the  name  of  some  unclean  bii-d,  and  in  Is.  xxxiv. 
11,  in  the  description  of  desolate  Edom,  "  the  )/«n- 
shoph  and  the  raven  shall  dwell  in  it."  The  A.  V. 
translates  yanshuph  by  "  owl,"  or  "  gieat  owl." 
The  Chaldee  and  Syriac  are  in  favour  of  some  kind 
of  owl ;  and  perhaps  the  etymology  of  the  word 
points  to  a  nocturnal  bird.  Bochart  is  satisfied 
that  an  "  owl "  is  meant,  and  supposes  the  bird  is 
so  called  from  the  Hebrew  for  "  twilight "  (Hieroz. 
iii.  29).  For  other  conjectures  see  Bochart  (Hieroz. 
iii.  24-29).  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  i-ead  ifiis  (ibis), 
i.  e.  the  Ibis  reliyiosa,  the  sacred  bird  of  Egyj>t. 
Col.  H.  Smith  suggests  that  the  night  heron  {Ardea 
nycticorax,  Lin.)  is  perhaps  intended,  and  objects 
to  the  Ibis  on  the  ground  that  so  rare  a  biixi,  and 
one  totally  unknown  in  Palestine  could  not  be  the 
yanshuph  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  there  is,  however,  no 
occasion  to  suppose  that  the  yanshuph  was  ever  seen 
in  Palestine  ;  the  Levitical  law  was  given  soon  after 
the  Israelites  left  Egypt,  and  it  is  only  natural  to 
suppose  that  several  of  the  unclean  animals  werc- 
Eigyptian,  some  might  never  have  been  seen  or  heai-d 


evidently  transposed  (see  Michaelis,  Sapp.  i.  p.  ]240,  and 
non-") :  the  order  as  given  in  Lev.  xi  is,  therefore,  to  In- 
taken  as  the  standard. 


OWL 

of  in  Palestine ;  the  yanskuph  is  mentioned  ;is  a 
bird  of  IvJom  (Is.  /.  c),  and  the  Ibis  might  have 
formerly  been  seen  there ;  the  old  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  are  in  error  when  they  state  that  this  bird 
never  leaves  Kgypt ;  Cuvier  says  it  is  found  through- 
out the  extent  of  Alrica,  and  latterly  Dr.  Heuglin 
met  with  it  on  the  co:ist  of  Abyssinia  {^List  of 
Birds  collected  in  the  Red  Sea  ;  Ibis,  i.  p.  347). 
The  Coptic  version  renders  yanskuph  by  "  Hippen," 
from  which  it  is  believed  the  Greek  and  Latin  word 
Ibis  is  derived  (see  Jftblonski's  Opusc.  i.  93,  ed. 
te  Water).  On  the  whole  the  evidence  is  incon- 
clusive, though  it  is  in  favour  of  the  Ibis  religiosa, 
and  probably  the  other  Egyptian  species  (/.  falci- 
nellus)  may  be  included  under  the  term.  See  on 
the  subject  of  the  Ibis  of  the  ancients  Savigny's 
Histoire  naturclle  et  mytholotjique  de  I' Ibis  (Paris, 
1805,  8vo.);  and  Cuvier's  Memoir e  sur  F Ibis  des 
Anciens  Egyptiens  {Ann.  Mas.  iv.  p.  IIG.) 


OWL 


653 


tended  by  it.  The  vvKTiK6pa^  of  the  LXX.  is  no 
doubt  a  general  teini  to  denote  the  different  species 
of  IA)i-ncd  oirl  known  in  Egypt  and  Palestine ;  for 
Aristotle  (//.  An.  viii.  14,  §(jj  tells  us  that  vvkti- 
(co'pal  is  identical  with  Sitos,  evidently,  from  his 
description,  one  of  the  horned  owls,  perhaps  either 
the  Otus  vulgaris,  or  the  0.  brachyotos.     The  owl 


Ibis  reli/^'osa. 

3.  Cos  (D13  :  vvKTiKopa^,  epa>5i6s  :  biibo, 
herodius,  nycticorax),  the  name  of  an  unclean 
bird  (Lev.  xi.  17;  Deut.  xiv.  16);  it  occurs 
again  in  Ps.  cii.  6.  There  is  good  reason  for  be- 
lieving that  the  A.  V.  is  correct  in  its  rendering  of 
"  owl  "  or  "  little  owl."  Most  of  the  old  versions 
and  yiaraphrases  are  in  favour  of  some  species  of 
"  owl  "  as  the  ])roper  translation  of  Cos  ;  Bochart 
is  inclined  to  think  that  we  should  understand  the 
pelican  (Ilicroz.  iii.  17),  the  Hebrew  Cos  meaning 
a  "  cup,"  or  "  pouch  ;"  the  pelican  being  so  called 
from  its  membranous  bill-pouch.  He  comjiares  tlie 
Latin  inw,  "  a  pelican,"  i'rom  trua,  "  a  scoop  "  or 
"  ladle."  But  the  ancient  versions  are  against  this 
tlieory,  and  there  does  not  seem  to  be  much  doubt 
that  Kaath  is  the  Hebrew  name  for  the  pelican. 
The  passage  in  Ps.  cii.  6,  "  I  am  like  a  pelican  of 
the  wilderness,  I  am  like  a  Cos  of  rained  places," 
points  decidedly  to  some  kind  of  owl.  Michaelis, 
who  has  devoted  great  attention  to  the  elucidation 
of  this  word,  has  aptly  compared  one  of  the  Arabic 
names  for  the  owl,  urn  clcharab  ("  mother  of 
ruins"),  in  reference  to  the  expression  in  the  jisalm 
just  quoted  (comp.  Siij>pl.  ad  Lex.  Hcb.  p.  I'Ji'iG, 
and  Kosonmiiller,  Not.  ad  Ilicroz.  1.  c).  Thus  tlie 
context  of  the  passage  in  the  I'salm  where  the  lie- 
brew  wonl  occurs,  as  well  a.s  the  authority  of  the 
old  versions,  goes  far  to  prove  that  .an  owl  is  in- 


we  figure  is  the  Otus  ascalaphus,  the  Egyptian  and 
Asiatic  representative  of  our  great  horned  owl  ( Btibo 
maximus).  Mr.  Tristram  says  it  swaiTns  among 
the  ruins  of  Thebes,  and  that  he  has  been  informed 
it  is  also  very  abundant  at  Petra  and  Baalbec ;  it  is 
the  great  owl  of  all  Eastern  ruins,  and  may  well 
therefore  be  the  "  Cos  of  ruined  places." 

4.  Kippoz  {^)Qp :  e'x'J'os:  ericius)  occurs  only 
in  Is.  xxxiv.  15 :  "  There  (i.  e.  in  Edom)  tlie 
kippoz  shall  make  her  nest,  and  lay  and  iiatch  and 
gather  under  her  shadow."  It  is  a  hopeless  aiiiiir 
to  attempt  to  identify  the  animal  denoted  by  this 
word ;  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  give  "  hedgehog," 
reading  no  doubt  kippod  instead  of  kippoz,  which 
variation  six  Hebrew  MSS.  exhibit  (Michaelis,  Stipp. 
p.  2199).  Various  conjectures  have  been  made 
with  respect  to  the  bird  which  ought  to  represent 
the  Hebrew  word,  most  of  which,  however,  may  be 
passed  over  as  unworthy  of  consideration.  We  can- 
not think  with  Bochart  {Hieroz.  iii.  194,  kc.)  that 
a  darting  serpent  is  intended  (the  aKovrias  of 
Nicander  and  Aelian,  and  the  jaculiis  of  Lucan), 
tor  the  whole  context  (Is.  xxxiv.  15)  seems  to  point 
to  some  bird,  and  it  is  certainly  stretching  the 
words  very  far  to  apply  them  to  any  kind  of  ser- 
pent. Bochart's  argument  rests  entirely  on  the  fact 
that  the  cognate  Arabic,  kippliaz,  is  used  by  Avi- 
ceana  to  denote  some  darting  tree-serpent ;  but  this 
theory,  although  supported  by  Gesenius,  Fiirst, 
Uosenmiiller,  and  other  high  authorities,  must  be 
rejected  as  entirely  at  variance  with  the  plain  and 
literal  meaning  of  the  prophet's  words ;  though 
incubation  by  reptiles  was  denied  hy  Cuvier,  and 
does  not  obtain  amongst  the  various  orders  and 
families  of  this  class  as  a  general  rule,  yet  some 
lew  excepted  instances  are  on  record,  but  "  the 
gathering  under  the  .shadow"  clearly  must  be  un- 
derstood of  the  act  of  a  bird  fostering  her  young 
under  her  wings  ;  the  kipjioz,  moreover,   is  men- 


654  OWL 

tioned  in  the  same  verse  with  "vultures"  (kites), 
so  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  some  bird  is 
intended.  * 


Deodati,  according  to  Bochart,  conjectures  the 
"  Scops  owl,"  being  le;i  apparently  to  this  inter- 
pretation on  somewhat  strained  etymological 
groimds.  See  on  this  subject  Bochart,  Hieroz.  iii. 
197  ;  and  for  the  supposed  connexion  of  (rKdiy^i  with 
ffK(i-n-Toi,  see  Aelian,  Nat.  Anim.  xv.  28  ;  Plinv, 
X.  49  ;  Eustathius,  on  Odi/s.  v.  66  :  and  Jacobs' 
annotations  to  Aelian,  I.  c.  We  are  content  to 
believe  that  kip'poz  may  denote  some  species  of 
owl,  and  to  retain  the  reading  of  the  A.  V.  till 
other  evidence  be  forthcoming.  The  woodcut  repre- 
sents the  Athene  mevidionalis,  the  commonest  owl 
in  Palestine.  Mount  Olivet  is  one  of  its  favourite 
resorts  {Ihis,  i.  26).  Another  common  species  of 
owl  is  the  Scops  zorca ;  it  is  often  to  be  seen  inha- 
biting the  mosque  of  Omar  at  Jerusalem  (see  Tris- 
tram, in  Ibis,  i.  26). 


.').  Lllith  (n''7V  :  ovoKevravpoi  ;  Aq.  AtAifl  ; 
Symm.  Ka/xla :  lamia).  The  A.  V.  renders  this 
word  by  "  screech  cwl "  in  the  text  of  Is.  xxx.  14, 
and  by  "night-monster"  in  the  margin.  The 
lil'dh  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  desolation 
that  was  to  mai'k  Edom.  According  to  the  Rabbins 
the  lllith  was  a  noctumal  spectre  in  the  form  of  a 
beautiful  woman  that   carried  off  children  at  ifiLdit 


OX 

and  destroyed  them  (see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  iii.  829  ; 
Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v.  D  vv  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Chald. 
et  Talm.  p.  1140).  With  the  lilith  may  be  com- 
pared the  ghnle  of  the  Arabian  fables.  The  old 
\-ersions  support  the  opinion  of  Bochai't  that  a 
spectre  is  intended.  As  to  the  ovoKevTavpoi  of  the 
LXX.,  and  the  lamia  of  the  Vulgate  translations 
of  Isaiah,  see  the  Hieroz.  iii.  832,  and  Gesenius 
(Jesaia,  i.  915-920).  Michaelis  (Suppl.  p.  1443; 
observes  on  this  word,  "  in  the  poetical  desoription 
of  desolation  we  borrow  images  even  from  fables." 
If,  however,  some  animal  be  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
term,  the  screech-owl  {strix  flammea)  may  well  be 
supposed  to  lepresent  it,  for  this  bird  is  found  in  the 
Bible  lands  (see  Ibis,  i.  26,  46),  and  is,  as  is  well 
known,  a  frequent  iuhabiter  of  ruined  places.  The 
statement  of  Irby  and  Jlangles  relative  to  Petra 
illustrates  the  passage  in  Isaiah  under  considera- 
tion : — "  The  screaming  of  eagles,  hawks,  and  owls, 
which  were  soaring  above  our  heads  in  consider- 
able numbers,  seemingly  annoyed  at  any  one  ap- 
proaching their  lonely  habitation,  added  much  to 
the  singularity  of  the  scene."  (See  also  Stephens, 
Incid.  of  Trav.  ii.  76).  [W.  H.] 

OX  ("Xil:  Idox),  an  ancestor  of  Judith  (Jud. 
viii.  1).  ,  [B.  F.  W.] 

OX,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  several 
Hebrew  words,  the  most  important  of  which  have 
been  already  noticed.     [Bull  ;  BuLLOCK.] 

We  propose  in  this  article  to  give  a  general  review 
of  what  relates  to  the  ox  tribe  {Bovidae),  so  far  as 
the  subject  has  a  Biblical  interest.  It  will  be  con- 
venient to  consider  (1)  the  ox  in  an  economic  point 
of  view,  and  (2)  its  natural  history. 

(1.)  There  was  no  animal  in  the  rural  economy 
of  the  Israelites,  or  indeed  in  that  of  the  ancient 
Orientals  generally,  that  was  held  in  higher  esteem 
than  the  ox ;  and  desen-edly  so,  for  the  ox  was  the 
animal  upon  whose  patient  labours  depended  all  the 
ordinary  operations  of  farming.  Ploughing  with 
horses  was  a  thing  never  thought  of  in  those  davs. 
Asses,  indeed,  were  used  for  this  purpose  [Ass]  ; 
but  it  was  the  ox  upon  whom  devolved  for  the  most 
part  this  important  sen'ice.  The  pre-eminent  value 
of  the  ox  to  "  a  nation  of  husbandmen  like  the 
Israelites,"  to  use  an  expression  of  Michaelis  in  his 
article  on  this  subject,  will  be  at  once  evident  from 
the  Scnptural  account  of  the  ^•arious  uses  to  which 
it  was  applied.  Oxen  were  used  for  ploughing 
(Deut.  xxii.  10;  i  Sam.  xiv.  14;  1  K.  xix.  19; 
Job  i.  14  ;  Am.  vi.  12,  &c.)  ;  for  treading  out  corn 
HJeut.  XXV.  4;  Hos.  x.  11 ;  Mic.  iv.  13  ;  I  Cor. 
ix.  9  ;  1  Tim.v.  18)  [Agriculture];  for  draught 
purposes,  when  they  were  generally  yoked  in  paiis 
(Num.  vii.  3  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  7 ;  2  Sam.  \i.  6)  ;  as 
ijoasts  of  burden  (1  Chr.  xii.  40)  ;  their  flesh  was 
.'aten  (Deut.  xiv.  4;  IK.  i.  9,  iv.  23,  xix.  21; 
I  Is.  xxii.  13;  Prov.  xv.  17;  Neh.  v.  18);  they 
were  used  in  the  sacrifices  [Sacrifices]  ;  they 
supplied  milk,  butter,  &c.  (Deut.  xxxii.  14  ;  Is. 
vii.  22  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  29)  [Butter,  Milk]. 

Connected  with  the  importance  of  oxen  in  the 
rural  economy  of  the  Jews  is  the  strict  code  of  laws 
which  was  mercifully  enacted  by  God  for  their  pro- 
tection and  preservation.  The  ox  that  threshed  the 
corn  was  by  no  means  to  be  muzzled  ;  he  was  to 
enjoy  rest  on  the  Sabbath  as  well  as  his  master 
I  Ex.  xxiii.  12 ;  Deut.  v.  14) ;  nor  was  this  only,  as 
Michaelis  has  observed,  on  the  people's  account, 
because  beasts  can  perform  no  work  without  man's 


ox 

assistance,  but  it  was  for  the  gooil  of  the  beasts 
"  that  thine  ox  and  thine  ass  may  rest." 

The  law  which  prohibited  the  slaughter  of  any 
cfea?i  animal,  ex(:e[)ting  as  "an  offering  unto  the 
Lord  before  the  tabernacle,"  during  tlie  time  that 
the  Israelites  abode  in  the  wilderness  (Lev.  xvii.  1-6), 
although  expressly  designed  to  keep  the  people  from 
idolatry,  no  doubt  contributed  to  the  preseiTation 
of  their  oxen  and  sheep,  which  they  were  not  allowed 
to  kill  excepting  in  public.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  during  the  forty  years'  wanderings  oxen  and 
sheep  were  rarely  used  as  food,  whence  it  was  flesh 
that  they  so  often  lusted  after.  (See  Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  art.  169.) 

It  is  not  easy  to  determine  whether  the  ancient 
Hebrews  were  in  the  habit  of  castrating  their  ani- 
mals or  not.  The  passage  in  Lev.  xxii.  24  may  be 
read  two  ways,  either  as  the  A.  V.  renders  it,  or 
thus,  "  Ye  shall  not  offer  to  the  Lord  that  which  is 
bruised,"  &c.,  "  neither  shall  ye  make  it  so  in  your 
land."  Le  Clerc  believed  that  it  would  have  been 
impossible  to  have  used  an  uncastrated  ox  (or 
agricultural  purposes  on  account  of  the  danger. 
Michaelis,  on  the  other  hand,  who  cites  the  exjiress 
testimony  of  Josephus  (^Ant.  iv.  8,  §40),  argues  that 
castration  was  wholly  forbidden,  and  refers  to  the 
authority  of  Niebuhr  {Descr.  de  I'Arah.,  p.  81), 
who  mentions  the  fact  that  Europeans  use  stallions 
for  cavalry  purposes.  In  the  East  it  is  well  known 
horses  are  as  a  ride  not  castrated.  Michaelis  ob- 
serves (art.  168),  with  truth,  that  where  peoi)le 
are  accustomed  to  the  management  of  uncastrated 
animals,  it  is  far  from  being  so  dangerous  as  we 
from  our  experience  are  apt  to  imagine. 

It  seems  clear  from  Prov.  xv.  17,  and  1  K.  iv.  2;!, 
that  cattle  were  sometimes  stall-fed  [Food],  though 
as  a  general  rule  it  is  probable  that  they  fed  in  the 
plains  or  on  the  hills  of  Palestine.  That  the  Egyp- 
tians stall-fed  oxen  is  evident  from  the  representations 
on  the  monuments  (see  Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  i. 
27,  ii.  49,  ed.  1854).  The  cattle  that  grazed  at 
large  in  the  open  country  would  no  doubt  often 
become  fierce  and  wild,  for  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  in  primitive  times  the  lion  and  other  wild 
beasts  of  prey  roamed  about  Palestine.  Hence,  no 
doubt,  the  laws  with  regard  to  "  goring,"  and  the 
expression  of  "  being  wont  to  push  with  his  horns" 
in  time  past  (Ex.  xxi.  28,  &c.)  ;  hence  the  force  of 
the  Psalmist's  complaint  of  his  enemies,  "  Many 
bulls  have  compassed  me,  the  mighty  ones  of  Bashan 
have  beset  me  round"  (Ps.  xxii.  L?).  The  habit 
of  surrounding  objects  which  excite  their  suspicion 
is  very  characteristic  of  half-wild  cattle.  See  Mr. 
Culley's  observations  on  the  Chillingham  wild  cattle, 
in  P>ell's  British  Quadrupeds  (p.  424). 

(2.)  The  monuments  of  Egypt  exhibit  repre- 
sentations of  a  long-horned  breed  of  oxen,  a  short- 
hoi'ued,  a  polled,  and  what  ai)pears  to  be  a  variety 
of  the  zebu  {Bos  hidicns,  Lin.).  Some  have  ideii- 
tirted  this  latter  with  the  Jios  Danta  (tiie  llos 
Elegans  et  parvus  Africamcs  of  Pielon).  Tiie  Abys- 
sinian breed  is  depicted  on  the  monuments  at  Thebes 
(see  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  38.")),  drawing  a  pkmstxuni  or 
car.  [Cai:t.]  These  cattle  are  "  white  and  bhick  in 
clouds,  low  in  tlie  legs,  with  the  horns  hanging  loose, 
forming  small  horny  hooks  nearly  of  equal  thickness 
to  the  point,  turning  freely  eitlier  way,  and  hanging 
against  the  cheeks"  (see  Hamilton  Smith  in  (iritlitlis' 
Anim.  King.  iv.  42.5).  The  drawings  on  Egyptian 
monuments  shew  that  the  cattle  of  ancient  Egypt 
were  fine  handsome  animals:  doubtless  these  may 
be  taicen  as  a  sample  of  the  cattle  of  Palestine  in 


OX 


655 


ancient  times.  "The  cattle  of  Egypt,"  says  Col. 
H.  Smith  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  '  Ox'),  a  high  authority 
on  the  Riaiiinantia,  "  continued  to  be  remarkable 
for  beauty  for  some  ages  after  the  Moslem  conquest, 
for  Abdollatiph  the  historian  extols  their  bulk  and 
proportions,  and  in  particular  mentions  the  Al- 
chisiah  breed  for  the  abundance  of  the  milk  it  fur- 
nished, and  for  the  beauty  of  its  curved  horns." 
(See  figures  of  Egyptian  cattle  under  Agricul- 
ture.) There  are  now  fine  cattle  in  Egypt ;  but  the 
Palestine  cattle  appear  to  have  deteriorated,  in  size 
at  least,  since  Biblical  times.  "  Herds  of  cattle," 
says  Schubert  (^Oriental  Christian  Spectator,  April, 
1853),  "  are  seldom  to  be  seen  ;  the  bullock  of  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  is  small  and  insigni- 
ficant ;  beef  and  veal  are  but  rare  dainties.  Yet  the 
bullock  thrives  better,  and  is  moie  frequently  seen, 
in  the  upper  valley  of  the  Jordan,  also  on  Mount 
Tabor  and  near  Nazareth,  but  particularly  east  of 
the  Jordan  on  the  road  from  Jacob' s-bridge  to 
Damascus."  See  also  Thomson  (  The  Land  and  the 
Book,  p.  322),  who  observes  (p.  335)  that  danger 
from  being  gored  has  not  ceased  "  among  the  hall- 
wild  droves  that  range  over  the  luxuriant  pastures 
in  certain  parts  of  the  country." 

The  burtiilo  {Bnbalus  Bvffalus')  is  not  uncommon 
in  Palestine  ;  the  Arabs  call  it  jdmus.  Robinson 
(Bib.  JRes.  iii.  306)  notices  bufialoes  "  around  the 
lake  el-Huleh  as  being  mingled  with  the  neat 
cattle,  and  applied  in  general  to  tlie  same  uses. 
They  are  a  shy,  ill-looking,  ill-tempered  animal." 
These  animals  love  to  wallow  and  lie  for  hours  in 
water  or  mud,  with  barely  the  nostrils  above  the 
surfac^e.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  domestic  buftalo 
was  known  to  the  ancient  people  of  Syria,  Egypt, 
&c. ;  the  animal  under  consideration  is  the  hhainsa- 
or  tame  buHalo  of  India;  and  although  now  com, 
mon  in  the  West,  Col.  H.  Smith  is  of  opinion  that 
it  was  not  known  in  the  Bible  lands  till  after  the 
Arabian  conquest  of  Persia  (a.p.  651).  Robinson's 
remark,  therefore,  that  the  buffalo  doubtless  existed 
anciently  in  Palestine  in  a  wild  state,  must  be  re- 
ceived with  caution.  [See  further  remarks  on  this 
subject  under  Unicorn.] 

The  A.  V.  gives  "  wild  ox  "  in  Deut.  xiv.  5,  and 
"  wild  bull"  in  Is.  li.  20,  as  the  representatives  of 
the  Hebrew  word  tco  or  to. 

Ted  or  to'  (IKW,  Xin  :   opul,  ffivrXiov"- ;  Aq., 

Symm.,  and  Theod.,  &pv^:  oryx).  Among  the 
beasts  that  were  to  be  eaten  mention  is  made  of 
the  tco  (I)out.  /.  c.)  ;  again,  in  Isaiah  "  they  lie  at 
the  head  of  all  the  streets  like  a  to  in  the  nets." 
The  most  important  ancient  versions  point  to  the 
oryx  ( Oryx  leitcoryx)  as  the  animal  denoted  by  the 
Hebrew  words.  Were  it  not  for  the  fact  that 
another  Heb.  name  {yachnur)  seems  to  stand  for 
this  animal,''  we  should  have  no  hesitation  in  re- 
ferring the  tco  to  the  antelope  above  named.  Col. 
H.  Smith  suggests  that  the  anteloj)e  he  cnlls  the 
Nubian  Oryx  {Oryx  Tao),  may  be  the  animal  in- 
tended; this,  however,  is  probably  only  a  variety  of 
the  other.  Oedmann  (  Verm.  Sainm.  p.  iv.  2.'!)  thinks 
the  Bubule  {Alcc}}haliis  Bubnlis)  maybe  the  tu; 
this  is  the  Bckl;cr-cl-tcash  of  N.  Africa  mentioned 
by  Shaw  (^Trav.  i:  310,  8vo  ed.").  The  point  must 
be  left  undetermined.  [See  F.M.I.OW  Dr.ini,  Ap- 
pend.] [W.  H.] 

"  As  to  this  word,  see  Schleusner,  I.ai.  in  LXX.  s.  v. 
l>  Tachmur,  in  tlio  vornaciil.ir  Arabic  of  ^f.  Africa,  is 
one  of  the  names  for  tin-  oryx. 


656  OX-GOAD 

OX-GOAD.    [OoAD.] 

O'ZEM  (D^V<,  i.  c.  Otsem).  The  name  of  two 
persons  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 

1.  ('h<T6ix:  Assom.^  The  sixth  son  of  Jesse,  the 
next  eldest  above  David  (1  Chr.  ii.  15).  His  name 
is  not  again  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  nor  do  the 
Jewish  traditions  appear  to  contain  anything  con- 
cerning him. 

2.  ('Ao-ar;"  Alex.  Atro/t :  Asom.)  Son  of  Je- 
rahmeel,  a  chief  man  in  the  great  family  of  Hezron 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25j.  [G.] 

OZrASCOCias:  Ozias).  1.  The  son  of  Micha 
of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  one  of  the  "governors" 
of  Bethulia,  in  the  history  of  Judith  (Jud.  vi.  15, 
vii.  23,  viii.  10,  28,  35).  [B.  F.  W.] 

2.  Uzzi,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Ezra  (2  Esd.  ii. 
2)  ;  also  called  Savias  (1  Esd.  viii.  2). 

3.  UzziAH,  King  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  8,  9). 

O'ZIEL  ('Ofc^A:  Ozias),  an  ancestor  of  Judith 
(Jud.  viii.  1).  The  name  occurs  frequently  in 
0.  T.  under  the  form  Uzziel.  [B.  F.  W.] 

OZ'NI  ('JTX:  'ACej/t;  Alex.  'ACaw':  Ozni). 
One  of  the  sons  of  Gad  (Num.  xxvi.  16),  called 
EzBON  in  Gen.  xlvi.  16,  and  founder  of  the  family 
of  the 

OZ'NITES  ('•3m  :  S^MOS  ^  'ACez/i ;  Alex.  5.  & 
A^aivi:  familia  Oznitarum),  Num.  xxvi.  16. 

OZO'RA  ('E^topci).  "ThesonsofMachnadebai," 
ill  Ezr.  X.  40,  is  corrupted  into  "  the  sons  of  Ozora" 
(1  Esd.  ix.  34). 


PA'AEAI  (nyS  :    ^apael :    Phamt).    In  the 

list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  35,  "  P;iarai  the  Arbite"  is  one 
of  David's  mighty  men.  In  1  Chr.  xi.  37,  he  is 
called  "  Naarai  the  son  of  Ezbai,"  and  this  in  Ken- 
nicott's  opinion  is  the  true  reading  {Diss.  p.  209- 
211).  The  Vat.  MS.  omits  the  fi'rst  letter  of  the 
name,  and  reads  the  other  three  with  the  following 
word,  thus,  ovpaioepxi.  The  Peshito-Syriac  has 
"  Cinri  of  Arub,"  which  makes  it  probable  that 
"  Naju'ai  "  is  the  true  reading,  and  that  the  Syriac 
translators  mistook  3  for  3. 

PA 'DAN  ^p3  :  MfffOTrorafila  rrjs  'S.upias  : 
Mcsopoiamia).    Padan-Aram  (Gen.  xlviii.  7). 

PA'DAN-A'RAM  (D-JN-flQ  :  rt  Meo-oTro- 
raixia'Zvpias,  Gen.  xxv.  20,  xxviii.  6,  7,  xxxiii.  18- 
7]  M.  Gen.  xxviii.  2,  5,  xxxi.  18;  M.  rf/s  2up. 
(Jen.  XXXV.  9,  26,  xlvi.  15  ;  Alex.  •^  M.  Gen.  xxv. 
20,  xxviii.  5,  7,  xxxi.  18  ;  ^  M.  Sup.  Gen.  xxviii.  2, 
sxxiii.  18:  Mesopotamia,  Gen.  xxv.  20,  xxxi.  18- 
M.  Syriae,  Gen.  xxviii.  2,  5,  6,  xxxiii.  18,  xxxv.  9, 
26,  xlvi.  15  ;  Sijria,  Gen.  xxvi.  15).  By  this  name, 
more  properly  Paddan-Aram,  which  signifies  "  the 
table-land  of  Aram  "  according  to  Fiirst  and  Ge- 
senius,  the  Hebrews  designated  the  tract  of  coun- 
tiy  which  they  otherwise    called  Aram-naharaim, 

•  The  word  following  this  —  n^HN  —  A.  V.  Ahijah, 
Vulg.  Achia,  is  in  the  LXX  rendered  aSeXc^bs  avjov. 


PAHATH-MOAB 

"  Aram  of  the  two  rivers,"  the  Greek  Mesopotamia 
(Gen.  xxiv.  10),  and  "the  field  (A.  V.  '  country') 
of  Aram"  (Hos.  xii.  12).  The  term  was  perhaps 
more  especially  applied  to  that  portion  which  bor- 
dered on  the  Euphrates,  to  distinguish  it  from  the 
mountainous  districts  in  the  N.  and  N.E.  of  Meso- 
potamia. Kashi's  note  on  Gen.  xxv.  20  is  curious  : 
"  Because  there  were  two  Arams,  Aram-naharaim 
and  Aram  Zobah,  he  (the  writer)  calls  it  Paddan- 
Aram  :  the  expression  '  yoke  of  oxen '  is  in  the 
Targums  p^lD  J"^S,  irnddan  torhi ;  and  some  in- 
terpret Paddan-Aram  as  '  field  of  Aram,'  because 
in  the  language  of  the  Ishmaelites  they  call  a  field 

paddan  "  (Ar.  ,  .!jo).  In  Srr.  JLl«-x23,  ptdono, 
is  used  for  a  "plain"  or  "field;"  and  both  this 
and  the  Arabic  woi'd  are  probably  from  the  root 

,Ss,fadda,  "  to  plough,"  which  seems  akin  to  fid- 

in  fidit,  from  findere.  If  this  etymology  be  true 
Paddan-Aram  is  the  arable  land  of  Syria  ;  "  either 
an  upland  vale  in  the  hills,  or  a  fertile  district 
immediately  at  their  feet "  (Stanley,  8.  ^  P.  p.  129, 
note).  Paddan,  the  ploughed  land,  would  thus 
correspond  with  the  Lat.  arvum,  and  is  analogous 
to  Yjng.  field,  the  /t'/fcc/land,  from  which  the  trees 
have  been  cleared. 

Padan-Aram  plays  an  important  part  in  the 
early  history  of  the  Hebrews.  The  family  of  their 
founder  had  settled  there,  and  were  long  looked 
upon  as  the  aristocracy  of  the  race,  with  whom 
alone  the  legitimate  descendants  of  Abraham  might 
intermarry,  and  thus  preserve  the  purity  of  their 
blood.  Thither  Abraham  sent  his  faithful  steward 
(Gen.  xxiv.  10),  after  the  news  had  reached  him  in 
his  southern  home  at  Beersheba  that  children  had 
been  born  to  his  brother  Nahor.  From  this  family 
alone,  the  offspring  of  Nahor  and  JMilcah,  Aljiva- 
ham's  brother  and  niece,  could  a  wife  be  sought  for 
Isaac,  the  heir  of  promise  (Gen.  xxv.  20),  and  Jacob 
the  inheritor  of  his  blessing  ((!en.  xx\'iii.). 

It  is  elsewhere  called  Padan  simply  (Gen. 
xlviii.  7).  [W.  A.  W.] 

PA'DON  (fnS :  ^aUv:  Phadon).  The  an- 
cestor of  a  family  of  Xethinim  who  retuin;ed  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  44 ;  Neh.  vii.  47).  He  is 
called  Phaleas  in  1  Esdr.  v.  29. 

PAG'lEL  ('PN''y33  :  ^ayii]K  ;  Alex.  cpayairiA  : 
Phegiel).  The  son  of  Ocran,  and  chief  of  the  tribe 
of  Asher  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (Num.  i.  13,  ii. 
27,  vii.  72,  77,  x.  26). 

PAHATH-MOAB (nxitt  nnS:  4>aa9 M«o;3: 

Pliahath-Moab,  "  governor  of'  Moab").  Head  of 
one  of  the  chief  houses  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  Of 
the  individual,  or  the  occasion  of  his  I'eceiving  so 
singular  a  name,  nothing  is  known  certainly,  either 
as  to  the  time  time  when  he  lived,  or  the  particular 
family  to  which  he  belonged.  But  as  we  read  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  22,  of  a  family  of  Shilonites,  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  who  in  very  early  times  "  had 
dominion  in  Moab,"  it  may  be  conjectured  that  this 
was  the  origin  of  the  name.  It  is  perhaps  a  slight 
corroboration  of  this  conjoctiu'e  that  as  we  find  in 
Ezr.  ii.  6,  that  the  sons  of  Pahath-JIoab  had  among 
their  number  "children  of  Joab,"  so  also  in  1  Chr.  iv. 
we  find  these  families  who  had  dominion  in  Moab 
very  much  mixed  with  the  sons  of  Caleb,  among 
wlinm,  in  1  Chr.  ii.  54,  iv.  14,  we  find  the  house 


PAHATH-MOAB 

of  Joab."  It  may  furtlier  be  conjectured  tliat  this 
dominion  of  the  sons  of  Shelah  in  Moab,  had  some 
connexion  with  tlie  migration  of  Klimelech  and  his 
sons  into  the  country  of  Moab,  as  mentioned  in  the 
book  of  Ruth  ;  nor  sliould  the  close  resemblance  of 
the  names  msy  (Oplirah),  1  Chr.  iv.  14,  and 
riBiy  (Oipah),  Huth  i.  4,  be  overlooked.  Jerome, 
indeed,  following  doubtless  his  Hebrew  master, 
gives  a  mystical  interpretation  to  the  names  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  22,  and  translates  the  strange  word 
Jaslmbi-lchem,  "  they  returned  to  Leem  "  (Beth- 
lehem). And  the  author  of  Quacst.  Heh.  in  Lib. 
Paraleip.  (printed  in  Jerome's  works)  follows  up 
this  opening,  and  makes  JoKiM  (qui  stare  fecit 
solem)  to  mean  Eliakim,  and  the  men  of  Ohozeba 
(viri  meudacii),  Joash  and  Saraph  (securas  et 
incendens),  to  mean  Mahlou  and  Chilion,  who  took 

wives  (-l^yS)  in  Moab,  and  I'eturned  («.  e.  Ruth 
and  Naomi  did)  to  the  plentiful  bread  of  Bethlehem 
{house  of  bread)  ;  interpretations  which  are  so  far 
worth  noticing,  as  they  point  to  ancient  traditions 
connecting  the  migration  of  Klimelech  and  his  sous 
with  the  Jewish  dominion  in  Moab  mentioned  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  21.''  However,  as  regards  tlie  name 
Pahath-Moab,  tliis  early  and  obscure  connexion 
of  the  families  of  Shelah  the  son  of  .ludah  with 
Moab  seems  to  supply  a  not  improbable  origin  for 
the  name  itself,  and  to  throw  some  glimmering 
upon  the  association  of  the  children  of  Joshua  and 
.Toab  with  the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab.  That  this 
family  was  of  high  rank  in  the  tribe  of  Jndali  we 
Jearn  from  their  appearing  fourth  in  order  in  the 
two  lists,  Ezr.  ii.  6  ;  Neh.  vii.  11,  and  from  their 
chief  having  signed  second,  among  the  lay  princes, 
in  Neh.  x.  14.  It  was  also  the  most  numerous 
(2818)  of  all  the  families  specified,  except  the 
Benjaniite  house  of  Seiiaah  (Xeh.  vii.  SS).  The 
name  of  the  chief  of  the  house  of  Pahath-Moab,  in 
Nehemiah's  time,  was  Hashub ;  and,  in  exact  ac- 
cordance with  the  numbers  of  his  family,  we  find 
him  repairing  two  portions  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  11,  23).  It  may  also  be  noticed  as 
slightly  confirming  the  view  of  Pahath-Moab  being 
a  Shilonite  family,  tliat  whereas  in  1  Chr.  ix.  5-7, 
Neh.  xi.  5-7,  we  find  the  Benjamite  families  in 
close  juxta-position  with  the  Shilonites,  so  in  the 
building  of  the  wall,  where  each  family  built  the 
portion  over  against  their  own  habitation,  we  find 
Benjamin  and  Hashub  the  Pahath-Moabite  coupled 
together  (Neh.  iii.  23).  The  only  other  notices  of 
the  family  are  found  in  Ezr.  viii.  4,  where  200  of 
its  males  are  said  to  have  accompanied  Elihocnai, 
the  son  of  Zerahiah,  when  he  came  up  with  Ezra 
from  Babylon;  and  in  Ezr.  x.  30,  where  eight  of 
the  sons  of  I'ahath-Moab  are  named  as  having 
taken  strange  wives  in  the  time  of  Ezia's  govern- 
ment. [A.C.  II.] 

PAINT  [as  a  cosmetic].  The  use  of  cosmetic 
dyes  lia.s  j)revailed  in  all  ages  in  Eastern  countries. 
We  iiave  abundant  evidence  of  the  practice  of  })aint- 
ing  the  eyes  both  in  ancient  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
342)  and  in  Assyria  (Layard's  Nineveh,  ii.  328)  ; 

"  The  resenibUuico  between  /.aadali  (iTny?,  ]  Chr. 
iv.  21),  one  of  the  soJis  of  Shelah,  and  Laadan  Cl"^]}^),  an 
ancestor  of  Joshua  (1  Chr.  vii.  26),  may  he  noted  in  con- 
nexion with  tlie  mention  of  Jcsliun,  Kzr.  ii,  6. 

•i  1  Sam.  xxil.  3,  may  also  be  noticed  in  this  contioxion. 

''  The  llebivw  verb  lus  even  been  intiodiu  i>il  iniu  lh<' 
VOL.  II. 


PAINT 


657 


and  in  modern  times  no  usnge  is  more  general.  It 
does  not  appear,  however,  to  have  been  by  anv 
means  universal  among  the  Hebrews.  The  notices 
of  it  are  few ;  and  in  each  instance  it  seems  to  have 
l»en  used  as  a  meretricious  art,  unworthy  of  a 
woman  of  high  character.  Thus  Jezebel  "  put  her 
eyes  in  painting"  (2  K.  ix.  30,  margin);  Jeremiah 
says  of  the  harlot  city,  "Though  thou  rentest  thy 
eyes  with  painting"  ( Jer.  iv.  30);  and  Ezekicl 
again  makes  it  a  characteristic  of  a  harlot  (Ez,  xxiii. 
40;  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  9,  §10).  The  ex- 
pressions used  in  these  passages  are  worthy  of  ob- 
servation, as  referring  to  the  mode  in  which  the 
process  was  effected.  It  is  thus  described  by 
Chandler  {Travels,  ii.  140):  "A  girl,  closing  one 
of  her  eyes,  took  the  two  lashes  between  the  fore- 
finger and  thumb  of  the  left  hand,  pulled  them 
forward,  and  then  thrusting  in  at  the  external  comer 
a  bodkin  which  had  been  immersed  in  the  soot,  and 
extracting  it  again,  the  particles  before  adhering  to 
it  remained  within,  and  were  presently  ranged  round 
the  organ."  The  eyes  were  thus  literally  "  put  in 
paint,"  and  were  "  rent  "  open  in  the  process.  A 
broad  line  was  also  drawn  round  the  eye,  as  repre- 
sented in  the  accompanying  cut.     The  effect  was 


"  Eye  ornamented  with  Kohl,  as  represented  in  ancient 
paintings."     (Lane,  p.  37,  new  cd.) 

an  apparent  enlargement  of  the  eye ;  and  the  ex- 
pression in  Jer.  iv.  30  has  been  by  some  understood 
in  this  sense  (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1239),  which  is 
without  doubt  admissible,  and  would  harmonize 
with  the  observations  of  other  writers  ( Juv.  ii.  94, 
"  obliqua  producit  acu  ;"  Plin.  Ep.  vi.  2).  The 
term  used  for  the  application  of  the  dye  was  kdkhal,'-' 
"  to  sinear ;"  and  Eabbinical  writers  described  the 
paint  itself  under  a  cognate  term  (Mishn.  Sabb.  8, 
§3).  These  words  still  survive  in  hohl,'^  the  mo- 
dern Oriental  name  for  the  powder  used.  The  Bible 
gives  no  indication  of  the  substance  out  of  which 
the  dye  was  formed.  If  any  conclusion  were  de- 
ducible  from  the  evident  affinity  between  the  Hebrew 
p&k,^  the  Greek  (pvKos,  and  the  Latin /!«c;;.s,  it  would 
be  to  the  effect  that  the  dye  was  of  a  vegetable  kind. 
Sucli  a  dye  is  at  the  present  day  produced  from  the 
henna  jilant  {Lawsonia  inermis),  and  is  extensively 
applied  to  the  hands  and  the  hair  (Russell's  Aleppo, 
i.  109,  110).  But  the  old  versions  (the  LXX., 
Ch^ldee,  Syriac,  &c.)  agree  in  pronouncing  the  dye 
to  have  been  produced  from  antimony,  the  very 
name  of  which  {ffrifii,  stibium)  probably  owed  its 
currency  in  the  ancient  world  to  this  circumstance, 
the  name  itself  and  the  application  of  the  substance 
having  both  emanated  from  Egypt.'  Antimony  is 
still  used  for  the  purpose  in  Arabia  (Burckhardt's 
Travels,  i.  376),  and  in  Persia  (I^Iorier's  Second 
Journey,  p.  61),  though  lead  is  also  used  in  the 
latter  country  (Russell,  i.  366) :  but  in  Egypt  tlie 
kohl  is  a  soot  produced  by  burning  either  a  kind  of 
frankincense  or  the  shells  of  almonds  (Lane,  i.  61). 
The  dye-stuff  was  moistened  with  oil,  and  kept  in 


Spanish  version :  "  Alcoholaste  tuos  ojos"  (Gesen.  Thes. 
p.  676). 

f  'I'his  mineral  was  imported  into  Egypt  for  the  pur- 
pose. One  of  the  pictures  at  ft'»i'  Ilasfan  represents  the 
arrival  of  a  i)arty  of  traders  in  stibium.  The  powder  made 
from  imtimony  has  been  always  supposed  to  have  a  bene- 
ficial effect  on  the  eye.sinht  (I'lin.  xxxili.  34  ;  Russell,  i. 
111  ;  Lane,  i.  61). 

2  U 


658 


PAINT 


a  smiiU  jar,  which  we  may  infer  to  have  been  made 
of  horu,  from  the  proper  name,  Keren-happuch, 
"  horn  for  paint"  (Job  xlii.  14).  The  probe  with 
which  it  was  applied  was  made 
either  of  wood,  silver,  or  ivory, 
and  had  a  blunted  point.  Both 
the  probe  and  the  jar  have 
frequently  been  discovered  in 
Egyptian  tombs  (Wilkinson, 
ii.  343).  In  addition  to  the 
])assages  referring  to  eye-paint 
already  quoted  from  the  Bible, 
we  may  notice  pi'obable  allu- 
sions to  the  practice  in  Prov.  vi. 

Ancient  Vessel  and  Probe  2,5,  Ecclus.  XXvi.  9,and  Is.  iii.  1  6, 
for  Kohl.  '  1        1    /f  J.       >> 

the  term  rendered  "  wanton 
in   the   last  passage  bearing   the   radical  sense  of 
paintel.     The  contrast  l)et\voen  the  black  paint  and 


SCALE    QF     cEET 


I  l'l;iji  ui  .Solomon's  I*nlaee. 


PALACE 

the  white  of  the  eye  led  to  the  transfer  of  the  tei-m 
puk  to  describe  the  variegated  stones  used  in  the 
string-courses  of  a  handsome  building  (1  Chr.  .txix. 
2  ;  A.  V.  "glistering  stones,"  lit.  stones  of  et/e- 
paint) ;  and  again  the  dark  cement  in  which  marble 
or  other  bright  stones  were  imbedded  (Is.  liv.  1 1 ; 
A.  V.  "  I  will  lay  thy  stones  with  fair  colours"). 
Whetlier  the  custom  of  staining  the  hands  and  feet, 
particularly  the  nails,  now  so  prevalent  in  the  East, 
was  known  to  the  Hebrews,  is  doubtful.  The  plant, 
henna,  which  is  used  for  that  purpose,  was  certainly 
known  (Cant.  i.  14  ;  A.  V.  "  camphire"),  and  the 
expressions  in  Cant.  v.  14  may  possibly  refer  to  the 
custom.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PAI.     [Pau.] 

PALACE.  There  are  few  tasks  more  difficult 
uzzling  than  the  attempt  to  restore  an  ancient 
building  of  which  we  pos- 
'sess  nothing  but  two  verbal 
descriptions,  and  these  dif- 
ficulties are  very  much  en- 
hanced when  one  account 
is  written  in  a  language 
like  Hebrew,  the  scientific 
terms  in  which  are,  from 
our  ignorance,  capable  of 
the  widest  latitude  of  in- 
terpretation ;  and  the  other, 
though  written  in  a  lan- 
guage of  which  we  have 
a  more  definite  knowledge, 
was  composed  by  a  person 
who  never  could  have  seen 
the  buildings  he  was  de- 
scribing. 

Notwithstanding  this, 
the  palace  which  Solomon 
occupied  himself  in  erect- 
ing during  the  thirteen 
vears  after  he  had  finished 
the  Temple  is  a  building 
of  such  world-wide  noto- 
rietv,  that  it  cannot  be 
without  interest  to  the 
Biblical  student  that  those 
who  have  made  a  special 
study  of  the  subject,  and 
who  are  familial*  with  the 
arrangements  of  Eastern 
palaces,  should  submit  their 
ideas  on  the  subject ;  and 
it  is  also  important  that 
our  knowledge  on  this,  as 
on  all  other  matters  con- 
nected with  the  Bible, 
should  be  brought  down 
to  the  latest  date.  Almost 
all  the  restorations  of  this 
celebrated  edifice  which  are 
found  in  earlier  editions  of 
the  Biljle  are  what  may  be 
called  Vitruvian,  viz.  based 
on  the  principles  of  Clas- 
sical architecture,  which 
were  the  only  ones  known 
to  their  authors.  During 
the  earlier  part  of  this  cen- 
tury attempts  were  made 
to  introduce  the  principles 
of  Egyptian  design  into 
these  restorations,  but  with 
even  less  success.  The  Jews 


PALACE 

hated  Egypt  and  all  that  it  contaihed,  and  every- 
thing they  did,  or  even  thought,  was  antagonistic 
to  the  arts  and  feelings  of  that  land  of  bondage. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  exhumation  of  the  palaces 
of  Nineveh,  and  the  more  careful  examination  of 
those  at  Persepolis,  have  thrown  a  flood  of  light  on 
the  subject.  Many  expressions  which  before  were 
entirely  unintelligible  are  now  clear  and  easily  un- 
derstood, and,  if  we  cannot  yet  explain  everything, 
we  know  at  least  where  to  look  ibr  analogies,  and 
what  was  the  character,  even  if  we  cannot  predicate 
tlie  exact  form,  of  the  buildings  in  question. 

The  site  of  the  Palace  of  .Solomon  was  almost 
certiiiuly  in  the  city  itself,  on  the  brow  opposite  to 
the  Temple,  and  overlooking  it  and  the  whole  city 
of  David.  It  is  impossible,  of  course,  to  be  at  all 
certain  what  was  eitlier  the  form  or  the  exact  dis- 
jiositiou  of  such  a  palace,  but,  as  we  have  the 
dimensions  of  the  three  principal  buildings  given  in 
the  book  of  Kings,  and  confirmed  by  Josephus,  we 
may,  by  taking  these  as  a  scale,  ascertain  pretty 
nearly  that  the  building  coveied  somewhere  about 
150,000  or  160,000  square  feet.  Less  would  not 
suffice  for  the  accommodation  specified,  and  more 
would  not  be  justified,  either  from  the  accounts  we 
have,  or  the  dimensions  of  the  city  in  which  it  was 
situated.  Whether  it  was  a  square  of  400  feet  each 
way,  or  an  oblong  of  about  55U   feet  by  300,  as 


PALACE 


659 


represented  in  the  annexed  diagram,  must  always 
be  more  or  less  a  matter  of  conjecture.  The  foi-ra 
here  adopted  seems  to  suit  better  not  only  the 
exigencies  of  the  site,  but  the  known  disposition  of 
the  parts. 

The  principal  building  situated  within  the  Palace 
was,  as  in  all  Eastern  palaces,  the  great  hall  of 
state  and  audience;  here  called  the  "  House  of  the 
Forest  of  Lebanon."  Its  dimensions  were  100 
cubits,  or  150  feet  long,  by  half  that,  or  75  feet  in 
width.  According  to  the  Bible  (1  K.  vii.  2)  it 
had  "-^  four  rows  of  cedar  pillars  with  cedar  beams 
upon  the  pillars;"  but  it  is  added  in  the  next  verse 
that  "  it  was  covered  with  cedar  above  the  beams 
that  lay  on  45  pillars,  15  in  a  row."  This  would 
be  etisily  explicable  if  the  description  stopped  theie, 
and  so  Josephus  took  it.  He  evidently  considered 
the  hall,  as  he  afterwards  described  the  Stoa  basi- 
lica of  the  Temple,  as  consisting  of  four  rows  of 
columns,  three  standing  free,  but  the  fourth  built 
into  the  outer  wall  (Ant.  xi.  5) ;  and  his  expression 
that  tlie  ceiling  of  the  palace  hall  was  in  the  Co- 
rinthian manner  {Ant.  vii.  5.  §2)  does  not  mean 
that  it  was  of  that  0)-der,  which  was  not  then  in- 
vented, but  after  the  fashion  of  what  was  called  in 
his  day  a  Corinthian  oecus,  viz.  a  hall  with  a 
clerestory.  If  we,  like  Josephus,  are  contented 
with  these  indications,  the  section  of  the  hall  was 


A.  B 

Fig.  2.    Diagram  Sections  cf  the  House  of  Cedars  oX  Lcbanoti. 


certainly  as  shown  in  fig.  A.  But  the  Bible  goes 
on  to  say  (ver.  4)  that  "there  were  windows  in 
three  rows,  and  light  was  against  light  in  three 
ranks,"  and  in  the  next  verse  it  repeats,  "and  light 
was  against  light  in  three  ranks."  Josephus  escapes 
the  difficulty  by  saying  it  was  lighted  by  "  Ovpdi- 
(laffi  Tpiy\v(pois,"  or  by  windows  in  three  divi- 
sions, which  might  be  taken  as  an  extremely  pro- 
bable description  if  the  Bible  were  not  so  very 
specific  regarding  it ;  and  we  must  therefore  adopt 
some  such  arrangement  as  that  shown  in  fig.  B. 
Though  other  arrangements  miglit  be  suggested, 
on  the  whole  it  appears  probable  that  this  is  the 
one  nearest  the  truth  ;  as  it  admits  of  a  clerestory, 
to  which  Josephus  evidently  refers,  and  shows  the 
three  rows  of  columns  which  the  Bible  description 
requires.  Besides  the  clerestory  th.ere  was  probably 
a  range  of  openings  under  the  cornice  of  the  walls, 
and  then  a  range  of  open  doorways,  which  would 
thus  make  the  three  openings  required  by  tlie 
Bible  description.  In  a  hotter  climate  the  first 
arrangement  (fig.  A)  would  be  the  more  probable; 
but  on  a  site  so  exposed  and  occasionally  so  cold 
as  Jerusalem,  it  is  scarcely  likely  that  the  great 
liall  of  the  Palace  was  permanently  open  even  on 
one  side. 

Another  dilTiculty  in  attempting  to  restore  this 
hall  arises  from  tlie  number  of  [)illars  being  un 


equal  ("  15  in  a  row"),  and  if  we  adopt  the  last, 
theory  (fig.  B),  we  have  a  row  of  columns  in  the 
centre  both  ways.  The  probability  is  that  it  was 
closed,  as  shown  in  the  plan,  by  a  wall  at  one  end, 
which  would  give  15  spaces  to  the  15  pillars,  and  so 
provide  a  central  sjsace  in  the  longer  dimension 
of  the  hall  in  which  the  throne  might  have  been 
placed.  If  the  first  theory  be  adopted,  the  throne 
may  have  stood  either  at  the  end,  or  in  the  centre 
of  the  longer  side,  but,  judging  from  what  we  know 
of  the  arrangement  of  Eastern  palaces,  we  may  be 
almost  certain  that  the  latter  is  the  correct  po- 
sition. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  building  just  described 
is  the  hall  or  porch  of  judgment  (ver.  7),  which 
Jos.^phus  distinctly  tells  us  (Ant.  vii.  5,  §1 )  was  si- 
tuated ojiposite  to  the  centre  of  the  longer  side  of 
the  great  hall:  an  indicafion  which  may  be  ad- 
mitted with  less  hesitation,  as  such  a  position  is 
identical  with  that  of  a  similar  liall  at  Persepolis, 
and  with  the  probable  position  of  one  at  Khor- 
sabad. 

Its  dimensions  were  50  cubits,  or  75  feet  square 
(Josephus  says  30  in  one  direction  at  least),  and  its 
disposition  can  easily  be  understood  by  comparing 
the  descriptions  we  have  with  tlio  remains  of  the 
Assyrian  and  Persian  examjiles.  It  must  liave  been 
supported  by   four  pillars  in   the  centre,  and  had 

2   U  2 


060 


PALACE 


fJiree  entrances ;  the  principal  opening  from  the 
street  and  facing  the  judgment-seat,  a  second  from 
the  court-yard  of  the  Palace,  by  which  the  coun- 
cillors and  officere  of  state  might  como  in,  and  a 
third  from  the  Palace,  reserved  for  the  king  and  his 
household  as  shown  in  the  plan  (fig.  1,  N). 

The  third  edifice  is  merely  called  "  the  Porch." 
Its  dimensions  were  50  by  30  cubits  or  75  feet  by 
45.  Josephus  does  not  describe  its  architecture  ; 
and  we  are  unable  to  understand  the  description 
contained  in  the  Bible,  owing  apparently  to  our 
ignorance  of  the  synonyms  of  the  Hebrew  archi- 
tectural temis.  Its  use,  however,  cannot  be  consi- 
dered as  doubtful,  as  it  was  an  indispensable  adjunct 
to  an  Eastern  palace.  It  was  the  ordinary  place  of 
business  of  the  palace,  and  the  reception-room — the 
Guesteu  Hall — where  the  king  I'eceived  ordinary 
visitors,  and  sat,  except  on  great  state  occasions,  to 
ti'ansact  the  business  of  the  kingdom. 

Behind  this,  we  are  told,  was  the  inner  court, 
adorned  with  gardens  and  fountains,  and  surrounded 
by  cloisters  for  shade ;  and  besides  this  were  other 
courts  for  the  residence  of  the  attendants  and  guards, 
and  in  Solomon's  case,  for  the  three  hundied  women 
of  his  hareem :  all  of  which  are  shown  in  the  plan 
with  more  clearness  than  can  be  conveyed  by  a 
verbal  description. 

Ajiart  from  this  palace,  but  attached,  as  Josephus 
tells  us,  to  the  Hall  of  Judgment,  was  the  palace  of 
Pharaoh's  daughter — too  proud  and  important  a  per- 
sonage to  be  grouped  with  the  ladies  of  the  hai-eem, 
and  requiring  a  residence  of  her  own. 

There  is  still  another  building  mentioned  by 
Josephus,  as  a  naos  or  temple,  supported  by  massive 
columns,  and  situated  opposite  the  Hall  of  Judgment. 
It  may  thus  have  been  outside,  in  front  of  the  palace 
in  the  city ;  but  more  probably  was,  as  shown  in 
the  plan,  in  the  centi-e  of  the  great  court.  It  could 
not  have  been  a  temple  in  the  ordinary  acceptation 
of  the  term,  as  the  Jews  had  only  one  temple,  and 
that  was  situated  on  the  other  side  of  the  valley  ;  but 
it  may  have  been  an  albir  covered  by  a  baldachino. 
This  would  equally  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  de- 
scription as  well  as  the  probabilities  of  the  case  ;  and 
so  it  has  been  represented  in  the  plan  (fig.  1). 

If  the  site  and  disposition  of  the  Palace  were  as 
above  indicated,  it  would  require  two  great  portals  ; 
one  leading  from  the  city  to  the  great  court,  shown 
at  M  ;  the  other  to  the  Temple  and  the  king's  gai'den, 
at  N.  This  last  was  probably  situated  where  the 
stairs  then  were  which  led  up  to  the  City  of  David, 
and  where  the  bridge  afterwards  joined  the  Temple 
to  the  city  and  palace. 

The  lecent  discoveries  at  Nineveh  have  enabled 
us  to  understand  many  of  the  architectural  details 
of  this  palace,  which  before  they  were  made  were 
nearly  wholly  inexplicable.  We  are  told,  for  instance, 
that  the  walls  of  the  halls  of  the  palace  were  wain- 
scotted  with  three  tiers  of  stone,  apparently  versi- 
coloured marbles,  hewn  and  polished,  and  surmounted 
by  a  fourth  course,  elaborately  carved  with  repre- 
sentations of  leafage  and  flowers.  Above  this  the 
walls  were  plastered  and  ornamented  with  coloured 
arabes(iues.  At  Nineveh  the  walls  were,  like  these, 
wainscotted  to  a  height  of  about  eight  feet,  but  with 
alabaster,  a  peculiar  product  of  the  countr}',  and 
these  were  sepai-ated  from  the  painted  space  above 
by  an  architectural  band ;  the  real  difference  being 
that  the  Assyrians  revelled  in  sculptural  repre- 
sentations of  men  and  finimals,  as  we  now  know 
from  the  sculptures  brought  home,  as  well  as  from 
the  passage  in  Ezekiel  ( xxiii.  14)  where  he  describes 


PALESTINE 

"  men  pourtrayed  on  the  wall,  the  images  of  the 
Chaldeans  pourtrayed  with  vermilion,"  &c.  These 
modes  of  decoration  were  forbidden  to  the  Jews  by 
the  second  commandment,  given  to  them  in  conse- 
quence of  their  residence  in  Kgypt  and  their  con- 
sequent tendency  to  that  multiform  idolatry.  Some 
difference  may  also  be  due  to  the  fact  that  the  soft 
alabaster,  though  admirably  suited  to  bassi-reUevi, 
was  not  suited  for  sharp  deeply-cut  foliage  sculpture, 
like  that  described  by  Josephus  ;  while,  at  the  same 
time,  the  hard  material  used  by  the  Jews  might 
induce  them  to  limit  their  ornamentation  to  one 
band  only.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  a  consi- 
derable amount  of  colour  was  used  in  the  decoration 
of  these  palaces,  not  only  from  the  constant  refer- 
ence to  gold  and  gilding  in  Solomon's  buildings,  and 
because  that  as  a  colour  could  hardly  be  used  alone, 
but  also  from  such  passages  as  the  following : — 
"  Build  me  a  wide  house  and  large" —  or  through- 
aired — "  chambers,  and  cutteth  out  windows ;  and 
it  is  cieled  'with  cedar,  and  painted  with  ver- 
milion" (Jer.  xxii.  14).  It  may  also  be  added, 
that  in  the  East  all  buildings,  with  scarcely  an 
exception,  are  adorned  with  colour  internally, 
generally  the  thiee  primitive  colours  used  in  all 
their  intensity,  but  so  balanced  as  to  produce  the 
most  harmonious  results. 

Although  incidental  mention  is  made  of  other 
palaces  at  Jerusalem  and  elsewhere,  they  are  all 
of  subsequent  ages,  and  built  under  the  influence 
of  Roman  art,  and  therefore  not  so  interesting  to 
the  Biblical  student  as  this.  Besides,  none  of  them 
are  anywhere  so  described  as  to  enable  their  dis- 
position or  details  to  be  made  out  with  the  same 
degree  of  clearness,  and  no  instruction  would  be 
conveyed  by  merely  reiterating  the  rhetorical  flou- 
rishes in  which  Josephus  indulges  when  describing 
them;  and  no  other  palace  is  described  in  the  Bible 
itself  so  as  to  render  its  elucidation  indispensable 
in  such  an  ailiele  as  the  present.  [J.  F.] 

PA'LAL  (^^3 :  <i>aAdx  ;  Alex.  *o\t£|:  Phalel). 
The  son  of  Uzai,  who  assisted  in  restoring  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii. 
25). 

PALESTI'NA  and  PALESTINE.  These  two 
forms  occur  in  the  A.  V.  but  four  times  in  all, 
always  in  poetical  passages :  the  first,  in  Ex.  xv.  14, 
and  Is.  xiv.  29,  31  ;  the  second,  Joel  iii.  4.  In  each 
case  the  Hebrew  is  nC^?S,  PelesJieth,  a  word  found, 
besides  the  above,  only  in  Ps.  Ix.  8,  hx.xiii.  7, 
Ixxxvii.  4,  and  cviii.  9,  in  all  which  our  translators 
have  rendered  it  by  "  Philistia  "  or  "Philistines." 
The  LXX.  has  in  Ex.  ^vXiarieifj.,  but  in  Is.  and 
Joel  aWScpvKoi. ;  the  Vulg.  in  Ex.  Philisthum,  in 
Is.  Philisthaea,  in  Joel  Palaesthini.  The  apparent 
ambiguity  in  the  different  renderings  of  the  A.  V. 
is  in  reality  no  ambiguity  at  all,  for  at  the  date  of 
that  translation  "  Palestine"  was  synonymous  with 
"  Philistia."  Thus  Milton,  with  his  usual  accuracy 
in  such  points,  mentions  Dagon  as 

"  dreaded  through  the  coast 
Of  Palestine,  in  Gath  and  Ascalon, 
And  Accaron  and  Gaza's  frontier  bounds  "  : — 

(Par.  Lost,  i.  464) 
and  again  as 

"  That  twice-battered  god  of  Palestine  ":— 

{Hymn  on  Nat.  199) 

— where  if  any  proof  be  wanted  that  his  meaning  is 
restricted  to  Philistia,  it  will  be  found  in  the  fact 


PALESTINE 

that  he  has  previously  connected  other  deities  with 
the  other  parts  of  the  Holy  Land.  See  also,  still 
more  decisively,  Samson  A(j.  14-4, 1098.*  But  even 
without  such  evidence,  the  passages  themselves  show 
how  our  translators  understood  the  word.  Thus  in 
Ex.  XV.  14,  "  Palestine,"  Edoni,  Moab,  and  Canaan 
are  mentioned  as  the  nations  alarmed  at  the  approach 
of  Israel.  In  Is.  xiv.  29,  31,  the  prophet  warns 
"  Palestine"  not  to  rejoice  at  the  death  ofkingAhaz, 
who  had  subdued  it.  In  Joel  iii.  4,  Phoenicia  and 
"  Palestine  "  are  upbraided  with  cruelties  practised 
on  Judah  and  Jerusalem. 

Palestine,  then,  in  the  Authorised  Version,  really 
means  nothing  but  Philistia.  The  original  Hebrew 
word  Peleshdh,  which,  as  shown  above,  is  else- 
where translated  Philistia,  to  the  Hebrews  signified 
merely  the  long  and  broad  strip  of  maritime  plain 
inhabited  by  their  encroaching  neighbours.  We  shall 
see  that  they  never  applied  the  name  to  the  whole 
country.  An  inscription  of  Iva-lush,  king  of  Assyria 
(probably  the  Pul  of  Scripture),  as  deciphered  by 
Sir  H.  Kawlinson,  names  "  Palaztu  on  the  Western 
Sea,"  and  distinguishes  it  from  Tyre,  Damascus, 
Samaria,  and  Edom  (EawMnson's  Herod,  i.  467). 
In  the  same  restricted  sense  it  was  probably  em- 
ployed— if  employed  at  all — by  the  ancient  Egyp- 
tians, in  whose  records  at  Karuak  the  name  Fulu- 
satu  has  been  deciphered  in  close  connexion  with 
that  of  the  Shaindana  or  Skaru,  possibly  the  Si- 
donians  or  Syrians  (Birch,  doubtfully,  in  Eayard, 
Nineveh,  ii.  407  nate).  Nor  does  it  appear  that  at 
first  it  signified  more  to  the  Greeks.  As  lying  next 
the  sea,  and  as  being  also  the  high  road  from  Egypt 
to  Phoenicia  and  the  richer  regions  north  of  it,  the 
Philistine  plain  became  sooner  known  to  the  western 
world  than  the  country  further  inland,  and  was  called 
by  them  Syria  Palaestina  —  Supi'r)  YlaXaiarluT]  — 
Philistine  Syria.  This  name  is  first  found  in  Hero- 
dotus (i.  105;  ii.l04;  iii.  5  ;  vii.  89)  ;  and  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  on  each  occasion  he  is  speaking  of 
the  coast,  and  the  coast  ^  only.  ( See  also  the  testimony 
of  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  G,  §'2.)  From  thence  it  wiis  gra- 
dually extended  to  the  country  further  inland,  till 
iu  the  Roman  and  later  Greek  authors,  both  lieaf  hen 
and  Christian,  it  becomes  the  usual  appellation  for 
the  whole  country  of  the  Jews,  both  west  and  east 
of  Jordan.  (See  the  citations  of  Keland,  J'al.  chaps, 
vii.  viii.)  Nor  was  its  use  confined  to  heathen 
writers :  it  even  obtained  among  the  Jews  them- 
selves.    Josephus  generally  uses  the  name  for  the 


PAIiESTINE 


661 


country  and  nation  of  the  Philistines  {Ant.  xiii.  5, 
§10;  vi.  1,  §1,  «S;c.),  but  on  one  or  two  occasions 
he  employs  it  in  the  wider  sense  (Ant.  i.  6,  §4  ;  viii. 
10,  §3  ;  c.  Ap.  i.  '22).  So  does  Philo,  I)e  Abrah. 
and  Be  Vita  Mosis,  It  is  even  found  in  such 
thoroughly  Jewish  works  as  the  Talmudic  treatises 
Bereshith  Rahha  and  Echa  Eahhathi  (Reland,  39)  ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  notice  how  much  the  feeling  of 
the  nation  must  have  degenerated  before  they  could 
apply  to  the  Promised  Land  the  name  of  its  bitterest 
enemies — the  "  uncircumcised  Philistines." 

Jerome  (cir.  a.d.  400)  adheres  to  the  ancient 
meaning  of  Palaestina,  which  he  restricts  to  Philistia 
(see  Ep.  ad  Dardaaum,  §4  :  Comm.  in  Esaiam  xiv. 
29  ;  in  Amos  i.  6).=  So  also  does  Procopius  of  Gaza 
(cir.  A.D.  510)  in  a  curious  passage  on  Gerar,  in  his 
comment  on  2  Chr.  xiv.  13. 

The  word  is  now  so  commonly  employed  in  our 
more  familiar  language  to  designate  the  whole  coun- 
try of  Israel,  that,  although  biblically  a  misnomer, 
it  has  been  chosen  here  as  the  most  convenient  head- 
ing under  which  to  give  a  general  description  of 
THK  Holy  Laxd,  embracing  those  points  which 
have  not  been  treated  under  the  sepaiate  headings 
of  cities  or  tribes. 

This  description  will  most  conveniently  divide 
itself  into  two  sections : — 

I.  The  Names  applied  to  the  country  of  Israel 

in  the  Bible  and  elsewhere. 
II.  The  Land :  its  situation,  aspect,  climate,  phy- 
sical characteristics,  in  coiurexiou  with  its 
history  ;  its  structure,  botany,  and  natural 
history."* 
The  histoiy  of  the   country    is   so    fully  given 
under  its  various  headings  throughout  the  work, 
that  it  is  unnecessary  to  recapitulate  it  here. 

I.  The  Names. 

Palestine,  then,  is  designated  in  the  Bible  by 
more  than  one  name  : — 

1.  During  the  Patriarchal  period,  the  Conquest, 
;md  the  age  of  the  Judges,  and  also  whore  those  early 
periods  are  referred  to  in  the  later  literature  (as 
Ps.  cv.  1 1 ;  imd  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  7  ;  8 ;  20  ;  v.  1 ,  &c.), 
it  is  spoken  of  as  "  Canaan,"  or  more  frequently 
"  the  Land  of  Canaan,"  meaning  thereby  the  coun- 
try west  of  the  Jordan,  as  ojiposed  to  "  the  Land 
of  Gilead "  on  the  east.  [Canaan,  Land  of, 
vol.  i.  24(3.]     Other  designations,  during  the  same 


»  Paradise  Lost  was  written  between  16G0  and  1670. 
Shakspere,  on  the  other  hand,  uses  the  word  in  its  modern 
sense  in  two  passages,  King  John,  Aotii.  .Sc.  1,  and  Othello, 
Act  iv.  Sc.  3 :  the  date  of  the  former  ot  these  plays  is 
1596,  that  of  the  hitter  1602.  But  Shakspert'  and  Milton 
wrote  for  different  audiences ;  and  tlie  language  of  the 
one  would  be  as  modi.Tn  (for  the  lime)  as  tliat  of  tlie  otiier 
was  classical  and  antique.  'I'hat  the  name  was  changing 
its  meaning  from  the  restriclcd  to  the  general  sense  just 
at  the  beginning  of  llie  nih  century,  Is  curiously  asccr- 
laiiiable  from  two  Indexes  "  of  the  Hardest  Wordes," 
appended  to  successive  editions  of  Sylvester's  Du  IJartas 
(1605  and  1608),  in  one  of  which  it  is  explained  .as  "  Judea, 
the  Iliily  Land,  first  culled  Canaiui,"  luid  In  the  otlier 
"  the  Land  of  the  rhillstines."  Fuller,  In  his  '  I'isgah- 
sightof  Palestine'  (1650),  of  course  uses  it  in  the  largest 
siMise  ;  but  it  is  somewhat  reniarkiiblc  that  he  si\ys  nothing 
whatever  of  the  signilicatidn  of  the  name.  Jn  Kraiice  the 
original  narrow  signilicalion  has  been  retained.  Thus 
chap.  xxxi.  of  Volney's  Travels  treats  of  "  Palestine,  i.  e. 
the  plain  which  terminates  the  country  of  Syria  on  the 
west,"  and  "  compichcnds  the  whole  eouiury  between  the 
Mediterranean  on  the  west,  the  mountains  on  the  east. 


and  two  lines,  one  drawn  by  Khan  Younes,  and  the  other 
between  Kaisaria  and  the  rivulet  of  Yafa."  1 1  is  thus  used 
repeatedly  by  Napoleon  I.  in  his  despatches  and  corre- 
spondence.   See  Coiresp.  tie  Nap.  Nos.  4020,  4035,  &c. 

>>  In  the  second  of  these  passages,  he  seems  to  extend 
it  as  far  north  as  Beirut— \i  the  sculptm-es  of  the  Nahr  el 
Kclh  are  the  stelae  of  Sesostris. 

c  In  his  F.pit.  Paulae  ({\s)  he  extends  the  region  of  the 
Philistines  as  far  north  as  Hor,  close  under  Jlount  Carmel. 
We  have  seen  above  that  Herodotus  extends  Palestine  to 
Beirut.  Caesarea  was  anciently  entitled  C.  Palacstinae,  to 
distinguish  it  from  other  towns  of  the  same  name,  and  It 
would  seem  to  be  even  still  called  Kaisnriijelt.  Felistin  by 
the  Arabs  (see  note  to  Hurckhardt,  Syria,  p.  :I87,  July  15 ; 
alsoSchuUens,/i!(te;.  aeogr.  'Caesarea').  Ujunleh,  10  miles 
east.of  JatTa,  retained  in  the  time  ofhap-Parehl  the  same 
affix  (see  Ashers  B.  of  Tudela,  11.  439).  He  lleutiBes  the 
latttT  with  Gath. 

d  The  reader  will  observe  that  the  botany  and  natural 
history  have  been  treated  by  Vr.  Hooker  and  the  Itev. 
AV.  Houghton  (pp.  BSl ;  68").  The  irnper  of  the  former 
diblinguishcd  botanist  derives  a  peculiar  value  fri.m  the 
fact  that  he  has  visited  Palestine.  ' 


662 


PAI.ESTIiSrE 


early  period,  are  "  the  land  of  the  Hebrews"  (Gen. 
xl.  15  only — a  natural  phrase  in  the  mouth  of 
Joseph);  the  "land  of  the  Hittites"  (Josh.  i.  4): 
a  remarkable  e.xpression,  occurring  here  only  in  the 
Bible,  though  frequently  used  in  the  Egyptian  re- 
cords of  Rameses  II.,  in  which  Chda  or  Chita  appp<ars 
to  denote  the  whole  country  of  Lower  and  Middle 
Syria.  (Brugsch.  Geogr.  Inschrift.  ii.  21,  &c.) 
The  name  Ta-netr  {i.  e.  Holy  Land),  which  is 
found  in  the  inscriptions  of  Rameses  II.  and  Thoth- 
mes  III.,  is  believed  by  M.  Brugsch  to  refer  to 
Palestine  {Ibid.  17).  But  this  is" contested  by  M. 
de  Roug^  {Eevue  Archeologique,  Sept.  1861,  p.  216). 
The  Phoenicians  appear  to  have  applied  the  title 
Holy  Land  to  their  own  country,  and  possibly  also 
to  Palestine  at  a  very  early  date  (Brugsch,  17).  If 
this  can  be  substantiated,  it  opens  a  new  view  to 
the  Biblical  student,  inasmuch  as  it  would  seem  to 
imply  that  the  country  had  a  reputation  for  sanctity 
before  its  connexion  with  the  Hebrews. 

2.  During  the  Monarchy  the  name  usually, 
though  not  frequently,  employed,  is  "  Land  of 
Israel"  ("•  pK  ;  1  Sam.  xiii.  19  ;  2  K.  v.  2,  4, 

vi.  23;  1  Chr.'xxii.  2;  2  Chr.  ii.  17).  Of  course 
this  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  same  appel- 
lation as  applied  to  the  northern  kingdom  only 
(2  Chr.  XXX.  25;  Ez.  xxvii.  17).  It  is  Ezekiel's 
favourite  expression,  though  he  commonly  alters  its 
form  slightly,  substituting  HOIX  for  pX.     The 

pious  and  loyal  aspirations  of  Hosea  find  vent  in  the 
expression  "  land  of  Jehovah "  (Hos.  ix.  3  ;  comp. 
Is.  Ixii.  4,  &c.,  and  indeed  Lev.  xxv.  23,  &c.).  In 
Zechariah  it  is  "the  Holy  land"  (Zech.  ii.  12); 
and  in  Daniel  "the  glorious  land"  (Dan.  xi.  41). 
In  Amos  (ii.  10)  alone  it  is  "  the  land  of  the 
Amorite ;"  perhaps  with  a  glance  at  Deut.  i.  7. 
Occasionally  it  appears  to  be  mentioned  simply  as 
"  The  Land;"  as  in  Ruth  i.  1 ;  Jer.  xxii.  27  ;  1  Mace, 
xiv.  4;  Luke  iv.  25,  and  perhaps  even  xxiii.  44. 
The  latei'  Jewish  writers  are  fond  of  this  title,  of 
which  several  examples  will  be  found  in  Reland, 
Fal.  chap.  v. 

3.  Between  the  Captivity  and  the  time  of  our 
Lord  the  name  "  Judaea"  had  extended  itself  from 
tlie  southern  portion  to  the  whole  of  the  cquntry,^ 
even  that  beyond  Joidan  (Matt.  xix.  1 ;  Mark  x.  1  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  14,  §1  ;  xii.  4,  §11).  In  the  book 
of  Judith  it  is  applied  to  the  portion  between  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon  and  Samaria  (xi.  19),  as  it  is  in 
Luke  xxiii.  5  ;  though  it  is  also  used  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  Judaea  proper  (John  iv.  3,  vii.  1),  that  is, 
the  most  southern  of  the  three  main  divisions  west 
of  Jordan.  In  this  narrower  sense  it  is  employed 
throughout  1  Mace,  (see  especially  ix.  50,  x.  30,  38, 
xi.  34). 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (xi.  9)  we  find 
Palestine  spoken  of  as  "  the  land  of  promise  ;" 
and  in  2  Esdr.  xiv.  31,  it  is  called  "  the  land 
of  Sion." 

4.  The  Roman  division  of  the  country  hardly 
coincided  witli  the  biblical  one,  and  it  does  not 
appear  that  the  Romans  had  any  distinct  name  for 
that  which  we  understand  by  Palestine.  The  pro- 
vince of  Syria,   established  by  Pompey,  of  which 

"  An  indication  of  this  is  discovered  by  Eeland  (/'aZ.32), 
as  early  as  the  time  of  Solomon,  in  the  terms  of  2  Chr.  ix.  1 1 ; 
but  there  is  nothing  to  imply  that "  Judah  "  in  that  passage 
means  more  than  the  actual  territory  of  the  tribe. 

f  This  very  ambiguity  Is  a  sign  (notwithstanding  all 
that  Josephus  says  of  the  population  and  importance  of 


PALESTINE 

Scaurus  was  the  first  governor  (quaestor  p:npraetor) 
in  62  B.C.,  seems  to  have  embraced  the  wliole  sea- 
board from  the  Bay  of  Issus  (IskanderUn)  to  Egypt, 
as  far  back  as  it  was  habitable,  that  is,  up  to  the 
desert  which  forms  the  background  to  the  whole 
district.  *'  Judaea"  in  their  phrase  appears  to  have 
signified  so  much  of  this  country  as  intervened  be- 
tween Idumaea  on  the  south,  and  the  territories  of 
the  numerous  fi'ee  cities,  on  the  north  and  west, 
which  were  established  with  the  establishment  of 
the  province — such  as  Scythopolis,  Sebaste,  Joppa, 
Azotus,  &c.  {Diet,  of  Geography,  ii.  1077).  The 
district  east  of  the  Jordan,  lying  between  it  and  the 
desert — at  least  so  much  of  it  as  was  not  covered  by 
the  lands  of  Bella,  Gadara,  Canatha,  Philadelpheia, 
and  other  free  towns — was  called  Peraea. 

5.  Soon  after  the  Christian  era,  we  find  the  name 
Palaestina  in  possession  of  the  country.  Ptolemy 
(a.d.  161)  thus  applies  it  {Geogr.  v.  16).  "  The 
arbitrary  divisions  of  Palaestina  Prima,  Secunda,  and 
Tertia,  settled  at  the  end  of  the  4th  or  beginning 
of  the  5th  cent,  (see  the  quotations  from  the  Cod. 
Theodos.  in  Reland,  p.  205),  are  still  observed  in  the 
documents  of  the  Eastern  Church  "  {Diet,  of  Geogr. 
ii.  533a).  Palaestina  Tertia,  of  which  Petra  was 
the  capital,  was  however  out  of  the  biblical  limits ; 
and  the  portions  of  Peraea  not  comprised  in  Pal. 
Secunda  were  counted  as  in  Arabia. 

6.  Josephus  usually  employs  the  ancient  name 
"  Cana;tn  "  in  reference  to  the  events  of  the  eailier 
history,  but  when  speaking  of  the  country  in  re- 
ference to  his  own  time  styles  it  Judaea  {Ant.  i.  6, 
§2,  &c.)  ;  though  as  that  was  the  Roman  name  for 
the  southern  province,  it  is  sometimes  {e.  g.  B.  J. 
i.  1,  §1 ;  iii.  3,  §56)  difficult  to  ascertain  whether 
he  is  using  it  in  its  wider  or  naiTower'  sense.  In 
the  narrower  sense  he  certainly  does  often  employ  it 
(e.g.  Ant.  v.  1,  §22  ;  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §4, 5a).  Kicolaus 
of  Damascus  applies  the  name  to  the  whole  country 
(Joseph.  Ant.  i.  7,  §2). 

The  Talmudists  and  other  Jewish  writers  use  the 
title  of  the  "  Land  of  Israel."  As  the  Greeks  styled 
all  other  nations  but  their  own  Barbarian,  so  the 
Rabbis  divide  the  whole  world  into  two  parts — the 
Land  of  Israel,  and  the  regions  outside  it.S 

7.  The  name  most  frequently  used  throughout 
the  middle  ages,  and  down  to  our  own  time,  is  Terra 
Sancta — the  Holy  Land.  In  the  long  list  of  Travels 
and  Treatises  given  by  Ritter  {Erdkxmde,  Jordan, 
31-55),  Robinson  {B.  R.  ii.  534-555),  and  Bonar 
{Land  of  Promise,  517-535),  it  predominates  far 
beyond  any  other  appellation.  Quaresmius,  in  his 
Elucidatio  Terrae  Sanctae  (i.  9,  10),  after  enu- 
merating the  various  names  above  mentioned, 
concludes  by  adducing  seven  reasons  why  that 
which  he  has  embodied  in  the  title  of  his  own  work, 
"  though  of  later  date  than  the  rest,  yet  in  excel- 
lency and  dignity  surpasses  them  all ;"  closing  with 
the  words  of  Pope  Urban  II.  addressed  to  the  Coun- 
cil of  Clermont : — Quam  terram  merito  Satictam 
diximus,  in  qua,  non  est  ctian passus pedis  quern  non 
illustraverit  et  sanctijicaverit  vel  corpus  vel  umbra 
Salvatoris,  vel  gloriosa  praesentia  Sanctae  Dei  gc- 
nitricis,  vel  amplectendtis  Apostolorum  commeatus, 
vel  martgrum  ebibendus  sanguis  effusus. 


Galilee)  that  the  southern  province  was  by  far  the  most 
important  part  of  the  country.  It  conferred  its  name  on 
the  wbole. 

e  See  the  citations  in  Otho,  Lex.  Rabh.  "  Israelitae  Re- 
gie " ;  and  the  Itineraries  of  Benjamin  ;  Parchi ;  Isaac  ben 
Chelo,  in  Carmoly ;  &c. 


PALESTINE 


II.  The  Land. 


PALESTINE 


663 


The  Holy  Land  is  not  in  size  or  physical  charac- 
teristics proportioned  to  its  moral  and  historical 
position,  as  the  theatre  of  the  most  momentous 
events  in  the  world's  history.  It  is  but  a  strip  of 
country,  about  the  size  of  Wales,  less  than  140 
miles'"  in  length,  and  barely  40 »  in  aveiage  breadth, 
on  the  very  frontier  of  the  East,  hemmed  in  between 
the  Mediterranean  Sea  on  the  one  hand,  mid  the 
enormous  trench  of  the  Jordan-valley  on  the  other, 
by  which  it  is  eliectually  cut  ofi' from  the  mainland 
of  Asia  behind  it.  On  the  north  it  is  shut  in  by 
the  high  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  anti-Lebanon,  and 
by  the  chasm  of  the  Litany ,J  which  runs  at  their 
feet  and  forms  the  main  drain  of  their  southern 
slopes.  On  the  south  it  is  no  less  enclosed  by  the 
arid  and  inhospitable  deserts  of  the  upper  part 
of  the  peninsula  of  iSinai,  whose  undulating  wastes 
melt  imperceptibly  into  the  southern  hills  of 
.ludaea. 

1.  Its  position  on  the  Map  of  the  World — as  the 
world  was  when  tlie  Holy  Land  tirst  made  its  ap- 
pearance in  history — is  a  remai'kable  one. 

(1.)  It  is  on  the  very  outpost — on  the  e.xtremest 
western  edge  of  the  East,  pushed  forward,  as  it 
were,  by  the  huge  continent  of  Asia,  which  almost 
seems  to  have  rejected  and  cut  off  from  commu- 
nication with  itself  this  tiny  stiip,  by  the  broad  and 
impassable  desert  interposed  between  it  and  the 
vast  tracts  of  Mesopotamia  and  Arabia  in  its  rear. 
On  the  shore  of  the  Mediterranean  it  stands,  as  if  it 
had  advanced  as  far  as  possible  towards  the  West — 
towards  that  New  World  which  in  the  fulness  of 
time  it  was  so  mightily  to  ati'ect ;  separated  there- 
from by  that  which,  when  the  time  arri\-ed,  proved 
to  be  uo  barrier,  but  the  readiest  medium  of  com- 
munication— the  wide  waters  of  the  "  Great  Sea." 
Thus  it  was  open  to  all  the  gradual  influences  of 
the  rising  communities  of  the  West,  while  it  was 
saved  fi'om  the  retrogression  and  decrepitude  which 
have  ultimately  been  the  doom  of  all  purely  Eastern 
States  whose  connexions  were  limited  to  the  East'' 
only.  And  when  at  last  its  ruin  was  eftected, 
an<l  the  nation  of  Israel  diiveu  from  its  home,  it 
transferred  without  obstacle  the  result  of  its  long 
training  to  those  regions  of  the  West  with  which 
by  virtue  of  its  position  it  was  in  ready  communi- 
cation. 

(2.)  There  was  however  one  channel,  and  but 
one,  by  which  it  could  reach  and  be  reai'hed  by  the 
great  Oriental  empires.  The  only  road  by  which 
the  two  great  rivals  of  the  ancient  world  could 
approach  one  another — by  which  alone  I'^gyjit  could 
get  to  Assyria,  and  Assyria  to  Egypt — lay  along 
the  broad  llat  strip  of  coast  which  tbrmed  tiie  ma- 


k  The  latitude  of  Banias,  the  ancient  Dan,  is  33°  16', 
and  that  of  Beersheba  31""  Iti' ;  thus  the  distance  between 
these  two  points- tlie  one  at  the  north,  tlie  oilier  at  the 
south— is  2  iJPKri'es,  120  gcogr.  or  139  ICnglish  miles. 

'  Tlie  breadth  of  the  country  at  Gaza,  from  the  shore 
of  the  Mediterranean  to  that  of  the  Dead  Sea,  is  18  geogr. 
miles,  wliile  at  the  latitude  of  the  Litany  from  tlii>  coast 
to  the  Jordan  it  Is  20.  The  average  of  tlie  breadths  be- 
tween these  two  parall'ds,  taken  at  each  half  degree, 
gives  34  geogr.  milos,  or  Just  10  English  miles. 

j  'I'he  latitude  of  the  Litiiiiy  (or  Kaaimii/ch)  differs  but 
slightly  from  that  of  JIanius.  Its  mouth  is  given  by 
Van  de  Vclde  {Memoir,  59)  at  33"  2(i'. 

k  The  contrast  between  lOast  and  Wi.'st,  and  the  position 
of  the  Holy  Land  as  on  the  confines  of  each,  Is  happily 
given  in  a  passage  in  Eolhen  (chap.  28) 


ritime  portion  of  the  Holy  Land,  and  thence  by  the 
Plain  of  the  Lebanon  to  the  Euphrates.  True,  this 
road  did  not,  as  we  shall  see,  lie  actually  through 
the  country,  but  at  tlie  foot  of  the  highlands  which 
virtually  composed  the  Holy  Land  ;  still  the  pro.xi- 
mity  was  too  close  not  to  be  full  of  danger  ;  and 
though  the  catastrophe  was  postponed  for  many 
centuries,  yet,  when  it  actually  arrived,  it  arrived 
through  this  channel. 

(3.)  After  this  the  Holy  Land  became  (like  the 
Netherlands  in  Europe)  the  convenient  arena  on 
which  in  successive  ages  the  hostile  powers  who 
contended  for  the  empire  of  the  East,  fought  their 
battles.  Here  the  Seleucidae  routed,  or  were  routed 
by,  the  Ptolemies ;  here  the  Romans  vanquished  the 
Parthians,  the  Persians,  and  the  Jews  themselves ; 
and  here  the  armies  of  France,  England,  and  Gei  many, 
fought  the  hosts  of  Saladin. 

2.  It  is  essentially  a  mountainous  country.  Not 
that  it  contains  independent  mountain  chains,  as  in 
Greece  for  example,  dividing  one  region  from  another, 
with  extensive  valleys  or  plains  between  and  among 
them — but  that  every  part  of  the  highland  is  in 
greater  or  less  undulation.  From  its  station  in  the 
north,  the  range  of  Lebanon  pushes  forth  before  it  a 
multitude  of  hills  and  eminences,  which  crowd  one 
another  more  or  less  thickly'  over  the  face  of  the 
country  to  its  extreme  south  limit.  But  it  is  not 
only  a  mountainous  country.  It  contains  in  com- 
bination with  its  mountains  a  remarkable  arrange- 
ment of  plains,  such  as  few  other  countries  can  show, 
which  indeed  form  its  chief  peculiarity,  and  have 
had  an  equal,  if  not  a  more  important,  bearing  on 
its  history  than  the  mountains  themselves.  The 
mass  of  hills  which  occupies  the  centre  of  the  country 
is  bordered  or  framed  on  both  sides,  east  and  west, 
by  a  broad  belt  of  lowland,  sunk  deep  below  its 
own  level.  The  slopes  or  clift's  which  form,  as  it 
were,  the  retaining  walls  of  this  depression,  are 
furrowed  and  cleft  by  the  torrent  beds  which  dis- 
charge the  waters  of  the  hills,  and  form  the  means 
of  communication  between  the  upper  and  lower 
level.  On  the  west  this  lowland  interposes  between 
the  mountains  and  the  sea,  and  is  the  Plain  of  Phi- 
listia  and  of  Sharon.  On  the  east  it  is  the  broad 
bottom  of  the  Jordan  valley,  deep  down  in  which 
rushes  the  one  river  of  Palestine  to  its  grave  iu  the 
Dead  Sea. 

3.  Such  is  the  first  general  impression  of  the 
physiognomy  of  the  Holy  Land.  It  is  a  phy- 
siognomy compounded  of  the  three  main  li?atures 
already  named — the  plains,  the  highland  hills,  and 
tiie  torrent  beds :  features  which  are  marked  in 
the  words  of  its  earliest  describers  (Num.  xiii.  29  ; 
Josh.  xi.  IG,  .\ii.  S),  and  which  must  be  com- 
prehended by  every  one  who  wishes  to  understand 


'  The  district  of  the  Surrey  hills  about  Caterham,  in  Its 
most  tegular  portions,  if  denuded  of  most  of  its  wood, 
turf,  and  soil,  would  be  not  unlilvO  many  parts  of  I'alesfine. 
So  are  (or  were)  the  hills  of  Ko.xburghshire  on  the  banks 
of  the  Tweed,  as  the  following  description  of  them  by 
Washington  Irving  will  shew: — "From  a  hill  which" 
like Gerizim  or  Olivet  "commanded  an  extensive  prospect 

1  gazed  about  me  for  a  time  with  surprise,  1  may 

almost  say  with  disappointment.  J  beheld  a  succession 
of  grey  waving  hills,  line  beyond  line,  as  far  as  my  eye 
could  reach,  monotonous  In   their  aspect,  and  eiiiiiely 

destitute  of  trees The  far-famed  Twefd  appeared 

a  naked  stream  flowing  between  bare  hills.  And  yet" 
(what  is  (!ven  more  applicable  to  the  Holy  Land)  "  such 
liad  been  the  magic  web  thrown  over  the  whole,  that  it 
had  a  greater  charm  than  the  richest  scenery  iu  Ktigland  " 


664 


PALESTINE. 


Map  of  Palestine  ,  with  section  of  tlic  country  from  Jalfa  to  tlie  mountains  of  Moab. 


PALESTINE 

the  country,  ami  the  intimate  connexion  existing 
between  its  structure  and  its  history.  In  the  ac- 
companying sketch-map  an  attempt  has  been  made 
to  exhibit  these  features  with  greater  distinctness 
than  is  usual,  or  perhaps  possible,  in  maps  con- 
taining more  detail. 

On  a  nearer  view  we  shall  discover  some  traits 
not  observed  at  first,  which  add  sensibly  to  the 
expression  of  this  interesting  countenance.  About 
halfway  up  the  coast  the  maritime  plain  is  suddenly 
interrupted  by  a  long  ridge  thrown  out  from  the 
central  mass,  rising  considerably""  above  the  general 
level,  and  terminating  in  a  bold  promontory  on  the 
very  edge  of  the  MediteiraneaQ.  This  ridge  is  Mount 
Carniel.  On  its  upper  side,  the  plain,  as  if  to 
compensate  for  its  temporary  displacement,  invades 
the  centre  of  the  country  and  forms  an  midulating 
hollow  right  across  it  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the 
Jordan  valley.  This  central  lowland,  wliich  divides 
with  its  broad  depression  the  mountains  of  Ephraim 
from  the  mountains  oF  Galilee,  is  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon  or  Jezreel,  the  great  battle-field  of  I'alestine. 
North  of  Carmel  the  lowland  resumes  its  position 
by  the  sea-side  till  it  is  again  interrupted  and  finally 
put  an  end  to  by  the  northern  mountains  which 
push  their  way  out  to  the  sea,  ending  in  the  white 
pi'omontory  of  the  Bas  Nakhura.  Above  this  is  the 
ancient  Phoenicia — a  succession  of  headlands  sweep- 
ing down  to  the  ocean,  and  leaving  but  few  intervals 
of  beach.  Behind  Phoenicia — north  of  Esdraelon, 
and  enclosed  between  it,  the  Litany,  and  the  upper 
\'alley  of  the  Jordan — is  a  continuation  of  the  moun- 
tain district,  not  differing  materially  in  structure  or 
character  from  that  to  the  south,  but  rising  gradually 
in  occasional  elevation  until  it  reaches  the  main 
ranges  of  Lebanon  and  auti- Lebanon  (or  Hermon), 
as  from  their  lofty  heights  they  overlook  the  whole 
laud  below  them,  of  which  they  are  indeed  the 
parents. 

4.  The  country  thus  roughly  portrayed,  and 
which,  as  before  stated,  is  less  than  140  miles  in 
length,  and  not  more  than  40  in  average  breadth, 
is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  the  whole  Land  of 
Israel.  The  northein  portion  is  Galilee  ;  the  centre, 
Samaria;  the  south,  Judaea.  This  is  the  Land  of 
Canaan  which  was  bestowed  on  Abraham  ;  the  co- 
venanted home  of  his  descendants.  The  two  tribes 
and  a  half  remained  on  the  uplands  beyond  Jordan, 
instead  of  advimcing  to  take  their  portion  with  the 
rest  within  Hs  circumvallation  of  defence  ;  but  that 
act  appears  to  have  formed  no  part  of  the  original 
plan.  It  arose  out  of  an  accidental  circumstance, — 
the  abundance  of  cattle  which  they  had  acquired 
during  their  stay  in  Egypt,  or  during  the  transit 
through  the  wilderness, — mid  its  result  was,  that 
the  tribes  in  question  soon  ceased  to  have  any  close 
connexion  with  the  others,  or  to  form  any  virtual 
part  of  the  nation.  But  even  this  delinition  might 
without  impropriety  lie  further  circumscribed  ;  for 
during  the  greater  part  of  the  ().  T.  times  the  chief 
events  of  the  history  weie  conlinod  to  the  distiict 
nouth  of  Esdraelon,  which  contained  the  cities  of 
Hebron,  Jerusalem,  Bethel,  Shiloh,  Shechem,  and 
Samaria,  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and  the  Mount  Carmel. 
The  battles  of  the  Coii((U('st  and  the  caily  struggles 


PALESTINE 


665 


■"  The  main  ridge  of  Carmel  Is  between  1700  and  ISOO 
feet  high.  The  hills  of  Samaria  immediiitely  to  the  S.K. 
of  it  are  only  about  UOO  feet  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
177,  8). 

n  The  same  word  Is  usvd  in  Hebrew  for  "sea"  mid  fur 
"  west." 


of  the  era  of  the  Judges  once  passed,  Galilee  subsided 
into  obscurity  and  unimportance  till  the  time  of 
Christ. 

5.  Small  as  the  Holy  Land  is  on  the  map,  and 
when  contrasted  either  with  modern  states  or  with 
the  two  enormous  ancient  empires  of  Egypt  and 
Assyria  between  which  it  lay,  it  seems  even 
smaller  to  the  traveller  as  he  pursues  his  way 
through  it.  The  long  solid  purple  wall  of  the 
Moab  and  Gilead  mountains,  which  is  always  iu 
sight,  and  forms  the  background  to  almost  every 
view  to  the  eastward,  is  perpetually  reminding  him 
that  the  confines  of  the  country  iu  that  direction 
are  close  at  hand.  There  are  numerous  eminences 
in  the  highlands  which  command  the  view  of  both 
fi'ontiers  at  the  same  time — the  eastern  mountains 
of  Gilead  with  the  Jordan  at  their  feet  on  the  one 
hand,  on  the  other  the  Western  Sea,"  with  its  line 
of  white  sand  and  its  blue  expanse.  Hermon,  the 
apex  of  the  country  on  the  north,  is  said  to  have 
been  seen  from  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea : 
it  is  certainly  plain  enough,  from  many  a  point 
nearer  the  centre.  It  is  startling  to  find  that  from 
the  top  of  the  hills  of  Neby  Samwil,  Bethel,  Tabor, 
Gerizim,  or  Safed,  the  eye  can  embrace  at  one 
glance,  and  almost  without  turning  the  head,  such 
opposite  points  as  the  Lake  of  Galilee  and  the  Bay 
of  Akka,  the  farthest  mountains  of  the  Hauran 
and  the  long  ridge  of  Carmel,  the  ravine  of  the 
Jabbok,  or  the  green  windings  of  Jordan,  and  the 
sand-hills  of  Jaffa.  The  impression  thus  produced 
is  materially  assisted  by  the  transparent  clearness  of 
the  air  and  the  exceeding  brightness  of  the  light, 
by  which  objects  that  in  our  duller  atmosphere 
would  he  invisible  from  each  other  or  thrown  into 
dim  distance  are  made  distinctly  visible,  and  thus  ap- 
pear to  be  much  nearer  together  than  ihej  really  are. 

6.  The  highland  district,  thus  surrounded  and 
intersected  by  its  broad  lowland  plains,  preserves 
from  north  to  south  a  remarkably  even  and  hori- 
zontal profile.  Its  average  height  may  be  taken  as 
1500  to  1800  feet  above  the  Mediterranean.  It  can 
hardly  be  denominated  a  plateau,  yet  so  evenly  is  the 
general  level  preserved,  and  so  thickly  do  the  hills 
stand  behind  and  between  one  another,  that,  when 
seen  from  the  coast  or  the  western  part  of  the  mari- 
time plain,  it  has  quite  the  appearance  of  a  wall, 
standing  in  the  background  of  the  rich  district  be- 
tween it  and  the  observer — a  district  which  from  its 
gentle  undulations,  and  its  being  so  nearly  on  a  level 
with  the  eye,  appears  almost  immeasurable  iu  extent. 
This  general  monotony  of  profile  is,  however,  accen- 
tuated at  intervals  by  certain  centres  of  ele\'ation. 
These  occur  in  a  line  almost  due  noith  and  south, 
but  lying  somewhat  east  of  the  axis  of  the  country. 
Beginning  from  the  south,  they  are  Hebron,"  3029 
feet  above  the  Mediterranean  ;  Jerusalem  2610,  and 
Mount  of  Olives  2724,  with  Neb;/  Samwil  on  the 
north  2650  ;  Bethel,  2400  ;  Sinjil,  2685  ;  Ebal  and 
Genzim  2700  ;  "  Little  Hermon"  and  Tabor  (on  the 
north  side  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon)  1900  ;  Satiid 
2775 ;  JcbelJurmuk  4000.  Between  these  elevated 
points  runs  the  watershed  P  of  the  country,  sending 
olf  on  either  hand — to  the  Jordan  valley  on  the  east 
and  the  Jlediterraiiean  on  the  west,  and  be  it  remem- 


°  The  altitudes  are  those  given  by  Van  de  Vclde,  after 
much  comparison  and  Investigation,  In  his  Memoir  (pp. 
170-183). 

P  For  the  watershed  see  Hitter,  Erdhunilc,  Jordan,  474- 
■isu.  His  heights  have  been  somewhat  modified  by  more 
recent  observations,  for  wliicb  sec  Van  de  Veldt's  Memoir 


666 


PALESTINE 


bered  east  and  westi  only — the  long  tortuous  aims 
of  its  many  torrent  beds.  But  though  keeping  north 
and  south  as  its  general  direction,  the  line  of  the 
watershed  is,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  pre- 
valent, equality  of  level  of  these  highlands,  and  the 
absence  of  anything  like  ridge  or  saddle,  very  irre- 
gular, the  heads  of  the  valleys  on  the  ona  side  often 
passing  and  "  overlapping "  those  of  the  other. 
Thus  in  the  territory  of  the  ancient  Benjamin,  the 
heads  of  the  gi-eat  Wadys  Fuwar  (or  Suweiiiit)  and 
Mutyah  (or  Kelt)  —  the  two  main  channels  by 
which  the  torrents  of  the  winter  rains  hurry  down 
from  the  bald  hills  of  this  district  into  the  valley  of 
the  .Jordan — are  at  Bireh  and  Beitin  respectively, 
while  the  great  Wady  Bcldt,  which  enters  the  Me- 
diterranean at  Nahr  Aujeh  a  few  miles  above  Jafia, 
stretches  its  long  arms  as  far  as,  and  even  farther 
th.an,  Taiyiheh,  nearly  four  miles  to  the  east  of 
either  Bireh  or  Beitin.  Thus  also  in  the  more 
northern  district  of  Jlount  Ephraim  around  Nablus, 
the  ramifications  of  that  extensive  system  of  valleys 
which  combine  to  form  the  Wady  Ferrah — one  of 
the  main  feeders  of  the  central  Jordan — interlace 
and  cross  by  many  miles  those  of  the  Wady  Shair, 
whose  principal  arm  is  the  Valley  o?  Nahlus,  and 
which  pours  its  waters  into  the  MediteiTanean  at 
Nahr  Falaik. 

7.  The  valleys  on  the  two  sides  of  the  watershed 
differ  considerably  in  character.  Those  on  the  east 
— owing  to  the  extraordinary  depth  of  the  Jordan 
valley  into  which  they  plunge,  and  also  to  the  fact 
already  mentioned,  that  the  watershed  lies  rather 
on  that  side  of  the  highlands,  thus  making  the  fall 
more  abrupt — are  extremely  steep  and  rugged.  This 
is  the  case  during  the  whole  length  of  the  southern 
and  middle  poiiions  of  the  country.  The  preci- 
pitous descent  between  Olivet  and  Jericho,  with 
which  all  travellers  in  the  Holy  Land  are  acquainted, 
is  a  type,  and  by  no  means  an  unfair  type,  of  the  eastern 
passes,  from  Zuiceirah  and  Ain-jidi  on  the  south  to 
Wady  Bidan  on  the  north.  It  is  only  when  the  junc- 
tion between  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  and  the  Jordan 
Valley  is  reached,  that  the  slopes  become  gi-adual 
and  the  ground  fit  for  the  manoeuvres  of  anything 
but  detached  bodies  of  foot  soldiers.  But,  rugged 
and  difficult  as  they  are,  they  form  the  only  access 
to  the  upper  country  from  this  side,  and  every  man 
or  body  of  men  who  reached  the  territory  of  Judah, 
Benjamin,  or  Ephraim  irom  the  Jordan  Valley, 
must  have  climbed  one  or  other  of  them.'  The 
Ammonites  and  Moabites,  who  at  some  remote 
date  left  such  lasting  traces  of  their  presence  in  the 
names  of  Chephar  ha-Ammonai  and  Michmash,  and 
the  Israelites  pressing  fo)'ward  to  the  relief  of  Gibeon 
and  the  slaughter  of  Beth-horon,  doubtless  entered 
alike  through  the  gi'eat  Wady  Fuwar  already 
spoken  of.  The  Moabites,  Edomites,  and  Mehunim 
swarmed  up  to  their  attack  on  Judah  through  the 
crevices  of  Ain-jidi  (2  Chr.  xx.  12,  16).      The  pass 


1  Except  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  Plain 
of  Esdraelon,  and  in  the  extreme  north  — where  the 
drainage,  instead  of  being  to  the  Mediterranean  or  the 
Jordan,  is  to  the  Litany  — the  statement  in  the  text  is 
strictly  accurate. 

r  Nothing  can  afford  so  strong  a  testimony  to  the  really 
unmilitary  genius  of  the  Canaanites,  and  subsequently, 
in  their  tum,  of  the  Jews  also,  as  the  way  in  which  they 
suffered  their  conquerors  again  and  again  to  advance 
through  these  defiles,  where  their  destruction  might  so 
easily  have  been  effected.  Thoy  always  retired  at  once, 
and,  shutting  tliemselves  up  in  their  strongholds,  awaited 
the  attack  there.     From  Jericho,  Hebron,  Jerusalem,  to 


PALESTINE 

of  Adummim  was  in  the  days  of  our  Lord — what  it 
still  is — -the  regular  route  between  Jericho  and  Je- 
rusalem. By  it  Pompey  advanced  with  his  army 
when  he  took  the  city. 

8.  The  western  valleys  are  move  gradual  in 
their  slope.  The  level  of  the  external  plain  on 
this  side  is  higher,  and  therefore  the  fall  less,  while 
at  the  same  time  the  distance  to  be  traversed  is 
much  greater.  Thus  the  length  of  the  Wady  Beldt 
already  mentioned,  from  its  remotest  head  at  Tai- 
yiheh to  the  point  at  which  it  emerges  on  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  may  be  taken  as  20  to  2.5  miles,  with 
a  total  difference  of  level  during  that  distance  of 
perhaps  1800  feet,  while  the  Wady  el-Aujeh,  which 
falls  from  the  other  side  of  Taiyibeh  into  the  Jor- 
dan, has  a  distance  of  barely  10  miles  to  reach  the 
Jordan-valley,  at  the  same  time  falling  not  less 
than  2800  feet. 

Heie  again  the  valleys  are  the  only  means  of 
communication  between  the  lowland  and  the  high- 
land. From  Jaffa  and  the  central  part  of  the  plain 
there  are  two  of  these  roads  "  going  up  to  Jeru- 
salem " :  the  one  to  the  right  by  Eamieh  and  the 
Wady  Aly ;  the  other  to  the  left  by  Lydda,  and 
thence  by  the  Bethhorons,  or  the  Wady  Suleiman, 
and  Gibeon.  The  former  of  these  is  modern,  but 
the  latter  is  the  scene  of  many  a  famous  incident 
in  the  ancient  history.  Over  its  long  acclivities  the 
Canaanites  were  driven  by  Joshua  to  their  native 
plains ;  the  Philistines  ascended  to  Michmash  and 
Geba,  and  fled  back  past  Ajalon;  the  Syrian  force 
was  stopped  and  hurled  back  by  Judas ;  the  Roman 
legions  of  Cestius  Gallus  were  chased  pell-mell  to 
their  strongholds  at  Antipatris. 

9.  Further  south,  the  communications  between 
the  mountains  of  Judah  and  the  lowland  of  Phi- 
listia  are  hitherto  comparatively  unexplored.  They 
were  doubtless  the  scene  of  many  a  foi'ay  and 
repulse  during  the  lifetime  of  Samson  and  the 
struggles  of  the  Danites,  but  there  is  no  record 
of  their  having  been  used  for  the  passage  of  any 
important  force  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times.^ 
North  of  Jaffa  the  passes  are  few.  One  of  them, 
by  the  Wady  Beldt,  led  from  Antipatris  to 
Gophna.  By  this  route  St.  Paul  was  probably  con- 
vej'ed  away  from  Jerusalem.  Another  leads  from 
the  ancient  sanctuary  of  Gilgal  near  Kefr  Saba,  to 
Nabhis. — These  western  valleys,  though  easier  than 
those  on  the  eastern  side,  are  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
present  great  difficulties  to  the  passage  "of  any  large 
force  encumbered  by  baggage.  In  fact  these  moun- 
tain passes  really  foimed  the  security  of  Israel,  and 
if  she  had  been  wise  enough  to  settle  her  own  in- 
testinal quarrels  without  reference  to  foreigners,  the 
nation  might,  humanly  speaking,  have  stood  to  the 
present  hour.  The  height,  and  consequent  strength, 
which  was  the  frequent  boast  of  the  Prophets  and 
Psalmists  in  regard  to  Jerusalem,  was  no  less  time 
of  the  whole  country,    rising   as   it  does   on   all 

Silistria,  the  story  is  one  and  the  same, — the  dislike  of 
Orientals  to  fight  in  the  open  field,  and  their  power  of 
determined  resistance  when  entrenched  behind  forti- 
fications. 

"  Richard  I.,  when  intending  to  attack  Jerusalem,  moved 
I  from  Ascalon  to  Blanche  Garde  (Safir,  or  Tell  es  Safieh), 
on  the  edge  of  the  mountains  of  Judaea :  and  then,  instead 
of  taking  a  direct  route  to  the  Holy  City  through  the  passes 
of  the  mountains,  turned  northwards  over  the  plain  and 
took  the  road  from  llamleh  to  Bettenuble  (jyuba),  that  is, 
the  ordinary  approach  from  Jaffa  to  Jerusalem  ;  a  circuit 
of  at  least  four  daj's.  (See  Vinisauf,  v.  48,  in  Chron.  of 
Crusades,  294.) 


PALESTINE 

sides  from  plains  so  much  below  it  iu  level.  Tlie 
armies  of  K;i:ypt  and  Assyria,  as  they  traced  and 
retraced  their  path  between  Pelusiiun  and  Carche- 
mish,  must  have  looked  at  the  long  waU  of  heights 
which  closed  in  the  broad  level  roadwa}'  they  were 
pursuing,  as  belonging  to  a  country  with  which 
they  had  no  concern.  It  was  to  them  a  natural 
mountain  fastness,  the  approach  to  which  wa.s  beset 
with  difficulties,  while  its  bare  and  soilless  hills  were 
hardly  worth  the  trouble  of  conquering,  in  compaiLson 
with  the  rich  green  plains  of  the  Euphrates  and  the 
Nile,  or  even  with  the  boundless  cornfield  through 
which  they  were  marching.  This  may  be  fairly 
inferred  from  various  notices  in  Scripture  and  in 
contemporary  history.  The  Egyptian  kings,  from 
Rameses  II.  and  Thothmes  III.  to  Pharaoh  Necho, 
were  in  the  constant  habit*  of  pursuing  this  route 
during  their  expeditious  against  the  Chatti,  or 
Hittites,  iu  the  north  of  Syria  ;  and  the  two  last- 
named  monarchs"*  fought  battles  at  Megiddo, 
without,  as  far  as  we*  know,  having  taken  the 
trouble  to  penetrate  into  the  interior  of  the  coimtiy. 
The  Pharaoh  who  was  Solomon's  contemporary 
came  up  the  Philistine  plain  as  far  as  Gezer  (pro- 
bably about  Eamleh),  and  besieged  and  destroyed 
it,  without  leaving  any  impression  of  uneasiness 
in  the  annals  of  Israel.  Later  iu  the  monarchy, 
Psammetichus  besieged  Ashdod  in  the  Philistine 
plain  for  the  extraordinary  period  of  twenty-nine 
years  (Herod,  ii.  157)  ;  during  a  portion  of  that 
time  an  Assyrian  army  probably  occupied  part  of 
the  same?  district,  endeavouring  to  relieve  the  town. 
The  battles  must  have  been  frequent ;  and  yet  the 
only  reference  to  these  events  in  the  Bible  is  the  men- 
tion of  the  Assyrian  general  by  Isaiah  (xx.  1),  in  so 
casual  a  manner  as  to  lead  irresistibly  to  the  con- 
clusion that  neither  Egyptians  nor  Assyrians  had 
come  up  into  the  highland.  This  is  illustrated  by 
Napoleon's  campaign  in  Palestine.  He  entered  it 
from  Egypt  by  El-Arish,  and  after  overrunning  the 
whole  of  the  lowland,  and  taking  Gaza,  Jafl'a,  Ramleh, 
and  the  other  places  on  the  plain,  he  writes  to  the 
sheikhs  of  Nablus  and  Jerusalem,  announcing  that 
he  has  no  intention  of  making  war  against  them 
(Corresp.  de  Nap.  No.  4020,  "  19  Ventose,  1799"). 
To  use  his  own  words,  the  highland  country  "  did 
not  lie  within  his  base  of  operations ;"  and  it  would 
have  been  a  waste  of  time,  or  worse,  to  ascend 
thither. 

In  the  later  days  of  the  .Jewish  nation,  and  during 
the  Crusades,  Jerusalem  became  the  great  object  of 
contest ;  and  then  the  battlefield  of  the  country, 
which  had  originally  been  Esdraelon,  wa.s  trans- 
ferred to  the  maritime  plain  at  tlic  foot  of  the 
passes  communicating  most  directly  with  the  capibil. 
Here  Judas  Maccabaeus  achieveil  some  of  his  greatest 
triumphs  ;  and  liere  some  of  Herod's  most  decisive 
actions  were  fought ;  and  Blanchegarde,  Ascalon, 
Jati'a,  and  Beitnuba  (the  Betteuuble  of  the  Cru- 

'  Rawlinson,  note  to  Herod,  ii.  ^U>T. 

"  For  Tliothiiies'  engagement  at  Megid  Jo,  see  De  Rouge's 
interpretation  of  liis  monuments  recently  discovered  at 
Thebes,  in  the  Revue  Arche'ologique,  1861,  p.  384,  &c.  For 
Pharaoh  Necho,  see  2  K.  xxiil.  28. 

«  The  identification  of  Megiddo,  coinciding  as  it  does 
with  tlie  statements  of  tlie  Uible,  is  tolerably  certain; 
but  at  present  as  mucli  can  hardly  be  said  of  the  other 
names  in  these  lists.  Not  only  does  the  agreement  of  the 
names  appear  doubtful,  but  the  lists,  as  now  deciphered, 
present  an  amount  of  confusion — places  in  the  north  being 
jumbled  up  with  those  in  the  south,  &c. — which  raises  a 
constant  suspicion. 


PALESTINE 


667 


sading  historian),  still  shine  with  the  brightest  ravs 
of  the  valour  of  Richard  the  First. 

10.  When  the  highlands  of  the  country  are  more 
closely  examined,  a  considerable  diflerence  will  be 
found  to  exist  in  the  natural  condition  and  appearance 
of  their  different  portions.  The  south,  as  being  nearer 
the  arid  desert,  and  farther  removed  from  the  arainage 
of  the  mountains,  is  drier  and  less  productive  than 
the  north.  The  tract  below  Hebron,  which  forms 
the  link  between  the  hills  of  Judah  and  the  desert, 
was  known  to  the  ancient  Hebrews  by  a  term  ori- 
ginally derived  from  its  dryness  (Negeb).  This  was 
THE  SOUTH  country.  It  contained  the  territory 
which  Caleb  bestowed  on  his  daughter,  and  which 
he  had  afterwards  to  endow  specially  with  the 
"upper  and  lower  springs"  of  a  less  parched 
locality  (Josh.  xv.  19).  Here  lived  Nabal,  so  chary 
of  his  "water"  (1  Sam.  xxv.  11);  and  here  may 
well  have  been  the  scene  of  the  composition  of  the 
63rd  Psalm  * — the  "  dry  and  thirsty  land  where  no 
water  is."  As  the  traveller  advances  north  of  this 
tract  there  is  an  improvement ;  but  perhaps  no  coun- 
try equally  cultivated  is  more  monotonous,  bare, 
or  uninviting  in  its  aspect,  than  a  great  part  of  the 
highlands  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  during  the  largest 
portion  of  the  year.  The  spring  covers  even  those 
bald  grey  rocks  with  verdure  and  colour,  and  fills 
the  ravines  with  ton-ents  of  rushing  water ;  but  in 
summer  and  autumn  the  look  of  the  country  from 
Hebron  up  to  Bethel  is  very  dreary  and  desolate. 
The  flowers,  which  for  a  few  weeks  give  so  brilliant  * 
and  varied  a  hue  to  whole  districts,  wither  and  vanish 
before  the  first  fierce  rays  of  the  sun  of  summer : 
they  are  "  to-day  in  the  field — to-morrow  cast  into 
the  oven."  Piounded**  hills  of  moderate  height 
fill  up  the  view  on  every  side,  their  coarse  grey'= 
stone  continitally  discovering  itself  through  the 
thin  coating  of  soil,  and  hardly  distinguishable 
from  the  remains  of  the  ancient  terraces  which  run 
round  them  with  the  regularity  of  contour  lines, 
or  from  the  confused  heaps  of  ruin  which  occupy 
the  site  of  former  village  or  fortress.  On  some  of 
the  hills  the  terraces  have  been  repaired  or  recon- 
structed, and  these  contain  plantations  of  olives  or 
figs,  sometimes  with  and  sometimes  without  vine- 
yards, suiTound^d  by  rough  stone  walls,  and  with 
the  watch-towers  at  the  corners,  so  familiar  to  us 
from  the  parables  of  the  Old  and  New  Test;uuents. 
Others  have  a  shaggy  covering  of  oak  bushes  in 
clumps.  Theie  are  traditions  that  in  former  times 
the  road  between  Bethlehem  and  Hebron  was  lined 
with  large  trees  ;  but  all  that  now  remains  of  them 
are  tlie  large  oak-roots  which  are  embedded  in  the 
rocky  soil,  and  are  dug  up  by  the  peasants  for  fuel 
(Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  12'i).  The  valleys  of  denudation 
which  divide  these  monotonous  hills  are  also 
planted  with  figs  or  olives,  but  oftener  cultivated 
with  corn  or  doiirra,  the  long  reedlike  stalks  of  which 
remain  on  the  stony  ground  till  the  next  seed  time. 


y  Is.  XX.  1,  as  explained  by  Geseulus,  and  by  Rawlinson 
(Ii.  242,  note). 

'  This  Psalm  is  also  referred  to  the  hot  and  waterless 
road  of  the  deep  descent  to  Jericho  and  the  Jordan.  See 
Olivks,  MouN-r  or,  p.  624  a. 

"  Stanley  (.V.  it  /'.  139)— not  prone  to  exaggerate  colour 
(comp.  k7,  "  IVtra") — speaks  of  it  us  "  a  blaze  of  scarlet." 

b  "  Kouiuled  swelling  masses  like  huge  bubbles,"  says 
M  r.  Seudon  the  painter  (p.  1 22).  "  I'Jvcli  one  uglier  than  Its 
neighbour"  (Miss  Beaufort,  II.  9").  See  also  the  descrip- 
tion of  Kussegger  the  geologist,  in  Hitter,  Jordan,  495. 

"  "  Often  looking  its  if  burnt  In  the  kiln  "  (Anderson, 
172). 


G68 


PALESTINE 


and  give  a  singularly  dry  and  slovenly  look  to  the 
fields.  The  general  absence  of  fences  in  the  valleys 
does  not  render  them  less  desolate  to  an  English  eye, 
and  wheie  a  fence  is  now  and  then  encountered,  it  is 
either  a  stone  wall  trodden  down  and  dilapidated,  or 
a  hedge  of  the  prickly-pear  cactus,  gaunt,  in-egular, 
and  ugly,  without  being  picturesque.  Often  the 
tiack  rises  and  falls  for  miles  together  over  the 
edges  of  the  white  strata  upturned  into  almost  a 
vertical  ^  position  ;  or  over  sheets  of  bare  rock 
spread  out  like  flagstones,^  and  marked  with  tissm-es 
which  have  all  the  regularity  of  artificial  joints ; 
or  along  narrow  channels,  through  which  the  feet 
of  centuries  of  travellers  Imxe  with  difficulty  re- 
tained their  hold  on  the  steep  declivities ;  or  down 
flights  of  irregular  steps  hewn  or  worn  in  the  solid 
rock  of  the  ravine,  and  strewed  thick  with  innu- 
merable loose  f  stones.  Even  the  grey  villages — 
always  on  the  top  or  near  the  top  of  the  hills — do 
but  add  to  the  dreariness  of  the  scene  by  the  forlorn 
look  which  their  flat  roofs  and  absence  of  windows 
present  to  a  pAiropean  eye,  and  by  the  poverty  and 
ruin  so  universal  among  them.  At  Jerusalem 
this  reaches  its  climax,  and  in  the  leaden  ashy  hue 
which  overspreads,  for  the  major  part  of  the  year, 
much  of  the  landscape  immediately  contiguous  to 
the  city,  and  which  may  well  be  owing  to  the  debris  B 
of  its  successive  demolitions,  there  is  something  un- 
speakably affecting.  'I'he  solitude  which  reigns 
throughout  most  of  these  hills  and  valleys  is  also 
very  striking.  "  For  miles  and  miles  there  is  often 
no  appearance  of  life  except  the  occasional  goat- 
herd on  the  hill-side,  or  gathering  of  women  at  the 
wells."  ^ 

To  the  west  and  north-west  of  the  highlands, 
where  the  sea  breezes  are  felt,  there  is  considerably 
more  vegetation.  The  Wady  es-Swnt  derives  its 
name  from  the  acacias  which  line  its  sides.  In  the 
same  neighbourhood  olives  abound,  and  give  the 
country  "almost  a  wooded  appearance"  (Rob.  ii. 
21,  22).  The  dark  grateful  foliage  of  the  butin,  or 
terebinth,  is  frequent ;  and  one  of  these  trees, 
perhaps  the  largest  in  Palestine,  stands  a  few 
minutes'  ride  from  the  ancient  Socho  (ib.  222). 
About  ten  miles  north  of  this,  near  the  site  of  the 
ancient  Kirjath-jearim,  the  "  city  of  forests,"  are 
some  thickets  of  pine  (snober)  and  laurel  (hebkab), 
which  Tobler  compares  with  Eu)'opean  woods  {otte 
Wcmderuiiij,  178). 

11.  Hitherto  we  have  spoken  of  the  central  and 
uorthei'n  portions  of  Judaea.  Its  eastern  portion — a 
tract  some  9  or  10  miles  in  width  by  about  35  in 
length — which  intei'venes  between  the  centre  and 
the  abrupt  descent  to  the  Dead  Sea,  is  far  more  wild 
and  desolate,  and  that  not  lor  a  portion  of  the  year 
only,  but  throughout  it.'  This  must  have  been 
always  what  it  is  now — an  uninhabited  desert, 
because  uninhabitable;  " a  bare  arid  wilderness  ;  an 
endless   succession   of  shapeless    yellow   and   ash- 


PALESTINE 

coloured  hills,  without  grass  or  shrubs,  without 
water,  and  almost''  without  life," — even  without 
ruins,  with  the  rare  exceptions  of  Masada,  and  a 
solitary  watch-tower  or  two. 

1 2.  No  descriptive  sketch  of  this  part  of  the  coun- 
try can  be  complete  which  does  not  allude  to  the 
caverns,  characteristic  of  all  limestone  districts,  but 
here  existing  in  astonishing  numbers.  Every  hill 
and  ravine  is  pierced  with  them,  some  very  large 
and  of  curious  formation — perhaps  partly  natural, 
pai'tly  artificial — others  niei'e  grottos.  Many  of 
them  are  connected  with  most  important  and  inte- 
resting events  of  the  ancient  histoiy  of  the  country. 
Especially  is  this  true  of  the  district  now  under 
consideration.  Machpelah,  Makkedah,  Adullam,  En- 
gedi,  names  inseparably  connected  with  the  lives, 
adventures,  and  deaths  of  Abraham,  Joshua,  David, 
and  other  Old  Testament  worthies,  are  all  within  the 
small  circle  of  the  territory  of  Judaea.  Moreover, 
there  is  perhaps  hardly  one  of  these  caverns,  however 
small,  which  has  not  at  some  time  or  other  furnished 
a  hiduig-place  to  some  ancient  Hebrew  from  the 
sweeping  incursions  of  Philistine  or  Amalekite.  For 
the  bearing  which  the  present  treatment  of  many  of 
the  caverns  has  on  the  modern  religious  aspect  of 
Palestine,  and  for  the  remarkable  symbol  which 
they  furnish  of  the  life  of  Israel,  the  reader  must  be 
referred  to  a  striking  passage  in  Sinai  and  Palestine 
(ch.  ii.  X.  3).    [Cave.] 

13.  The  bareness  and  dryness  which  prevails  more 
or  less  in  Judaea  is  owing  partly  to  the  absence  of 
wood  (see  below),  partly  to  its  proximity  to  the 
desert,  and  partly  to  a  scarcity  of  water,  arising 
fiom  its  distance  from  the  Lebanon.  The  abun- 
dant springs  which  form  so  delightful  a  feature  of 
the  country  further  north,  and  many  of  which 
continue  to  flow  even  after  the  hottest  summers, 
are  here  very  rarely  met  with  after  the  rainy 
season  is  over,  and  their  place  is  Ijut  poorly  supplied 
by  the  wells,  themselves  but  few  in  number,  bored 
down  into  the  white  rock  of  the  universal  sub- 
stratum, and  with  mouths'  so  narrow  and  so  care- 
fully closed  that  they  may  be  easily  passed  without 
notice  by  travellers  unaccustomed  to  the  country."' 
[Wells.] 

14.  But  to  this  discouraging  aspect  there  are 
liappily  some  imjiortant  exceptions.  The  valley  of 
Urtds,  south  of  Bethlehem,  contains  springs  which 
in  abundance  and  excellence  rival  even  those  of  Na- 
biits;  the  huge  "Pools  of  Solomon"  are  enough  to 
supjjly  a  district  for  many  miles  round  them  ;  and 
the  cultivation  now  going  on  in  that  neighbourhood 
shows  what  might  be  done  with  a  soil  which  re- 
quires ouly  irrigation  and  a  moderate  amount  of 
labour  to  evoke  a  boundless  produce.  At  Bethlehem 
and  Mar  Elyas,  too,  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
Convent  of  the  Cross,  and  especially  near  Hebron, 
there  are  excellent  examples  of  what  can  be  done 
with  vineyards,  and  plantations  of  olives  and  flg- 


d  As  at  BeiUur  (Beth-horon). 

«  As  south  of  Beitin  (Bethel),  and  many  other 
places. 

f  As  in  the  Wady  Aly,  1  miles  west  of  Jerusalem.  See 
Beamout's  description  of  this  route  in  bis  Diary  of  a 
Journey,  &c.  i.  192. 

s  See  Jerusalem,  vol.  i.  p.  9S8o.  The  same  remark 
will  he  found  in  Seddon's  Memoir,  198. 

h  Stanley,.?.  <fe  F.  117. 

>  Kven  on  the  8th  January,  De  Saulcy  found  no  water. 

k  Van  de  Voldc,  Syria  di  I'al.  ii.  99  ;  and  see  the  same 
.still  more  forcibly  slated  on  p.  101 ;  and  a  graphic  dcstrip- 
lioa  hy  Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  Ut2,  103;  127,  128.     The  cha- 


racter of  the  upper  part  of  the  district,  to  the  S.  E.  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  is  well  seized  by  Mr.  Seddon:  "A  wilder- 
iress  of  mountain-tops,  in  some  places  tossed  up  like  waves 
of  mud,  in  others  wrinkled  over  with  ravines,  like  models 
made  of  crumpled  lyroicn  paper,  the  nearer  ones  whitish, 
strewed  with  rocks  and  bushes  "  (Menioir,  204). 

■»  'lliere  is  no  adequate  provision  here  or  elsewhere  in 
Palestine  (except  perhaps  in  Jerusalem)  for  catching  and 
presei-viug  the  water  which  falls  in  the  heavy  rains  of 
winter  and  spring :  a  provision  easily  made,  &nd  found  to 
answer  admiral)ly  in  countries  similarly  circumstanced, 
such  as  Malta  and  Bermuda,  where  the  rains  furnish  almost 
the  whole  water  supply. 


PALESTINE 

trees.  And  it  must  not  be  fmsjotten  that  durino- 
tlie  limite<l  time  when  the  plains  and  bottoms  ;ire 
covered  with  waving  niops  of  green  or  golden  corn, 
and  when  the  naked  rocks  are  shrouded  in  that 
brilliant  covering  of  flowers  to  which  allusion  has 
already  been  made,  the  appearance  of  things  must 
be  far  more  inviting  than  it  is  during  that  greater 
portion  of  the  year  which  elapses  after  the  haiTest, 
and  which,  as  being  the  more  habitual  aspect  of  the 
scene,  has  been  dwelt  upon  above. 

1 5.  It  is  obvious  that  in  the  ancient  days  of  the  na- 
tion, when  Judah  and  Benjamin  possessed  the  teeming 
population  indicated  in  the  Bible,  the  condition  and 
aspect  of  the  country  must  have  been  very  different. 
Of  this  there  are  not  wanting  sure  evidences.  There 
is  no  country  in  which  the  ruined  towns  bear  so  large 
a  proportion  to  those  still  existing.  Hardly  a  hill- 
top of  the  many  within  sight  that  is  not  co^'ered 
witli  vestiges  of  some  fortress  oi?  city."  That  this 
numerous  population  knew  how  most  effectually  to 
cultivate  their  rocky  ten-itory,  is  shewn  by  the 
remains  of  their  ancient  terraces,  which  constantly 
meet  the  eye,  the  only  mode  of  husbanding  so 
scanty  a  coating  of  soil,  and  preventing  its  being 
washed  by  the  torrents  into  tlie  valleys.  These 
fi-equent  remains  enable  the  traveller  to  form  an 
idea  of  the  look  of  the  landscape  when  they  were 
kept  up.  But,  besides  this,  forests  appear  to  have 
stood  in  many  parts  of  Judaea °  until  the  repeated 
invasions  and  sieges  caused  their  fall,  and  the 
wretched  government  of  the  Turks  prevented  their 
reinstatement ;  and  all  this  vegetation  must  have 
reacted  on  the  moisture  of  the  climate,  and,  by  pre- 
serving the  water  in  many  a  ravine  and  natural 
reservoir  where  now  it  is  rapidly  dried  by  the  fierce 
sun  of  the  early  summer,  must  have  influenced  mate- 
rially the  look  and  the  resources  of  the  country. 

16.  Advancing  northwards  from  Judaea  the  coun- 
try becomes  gradually  more  open  and  pleasant.  Plains 
of  good  soil  occur  between  the  hills,  at  first  small,? 
but  afterwards  comparatively  large.  In  some  cases 
(such  as  the  Mukhna,  which  stretches  away  from  the 
feet  of  Gerizim  for  several  miles  to  the  south  and 
oast)  these  would  be  remarkable  anywhere.  The 
hills  assume  here  a  more  varied  aspect  than  in  the 
southern  districts,  springs  are  more  abundant  and 
moi'e  permanent,  until  at  last,  when  the  district  of 
the  Jcbcl  Nahlus  is  reached  —  the  ancient  Mount 
Ephraim — the  traveller  encounters  an  atmosphere 
and  an  amount  of  vegetation  and  water  which,  if 
not  so  transcendently  lovely  as  the  representations  of 
enthusiastic  travellers  would  make  it,  is  yet  greatly 
superior  to  anything  he  has  met  with  in  Judaea, 
and  even  sufficient  to  recall  mucii  of  the  scenerv  of 
the  West. 

17.  Perhaps  the  Springs  are  the  only  objects  which 
in  themselves,  anil  apart  from  their  a.ssociations,  really 
strike  an  English  traveller  with  astonishment  ami 
admiration.  Such  glorious  fountains  as  those  of 
Ain-jalud  or  the  Hits  cl-Mukdita,  where  a  great 
body  of  the  clearest  wat<^r  wells  silently  but  swiftly 
out  from  deep  blue  recesses  worn  in  the  foot  of  a 
low  cliff' of  limestone  rock,  and  at  once  forms  a  con- 
siderable stream — or  :us  that  of  Tdlcl-Kadij,  eildying 
forth  from  the  ba.-;e  of  a  lovely  wooded  mound  into 
a  wide,  deep,  and  limpid  pool — or  those  of  Banias 
and  Fijch,  where  a  large  river  leaps  headlong  foam- 

"  Stanley,  S.  &  P.  117,  where  the  lessons  to  be  gathered 
from  these  ruins  of  so  many  successive  nations  and  races 
arc  admirably  drawn  out. 

"  Tor  a  list  of  ihvso,  see  FoKkst. 

P  That  at  the  northcni  foot  of  Neby  Smiwil.  out  of 


PALESTINE 


669 


ing  and  i-oaring  from  its  cave — or  even  as  that  of 
Jrnhi,  bubbling  upwards  from  the  level  ground — are 
very  rarely  to  be  met  with  out  of  irregular,  rockv, 
mountainous  countries,  and  being  such  unusual 
sights  can  hardly  be  looked  on  by  the  traveller 
without  surprise  and  emotion.  But,  added  to  this 
their  natui'al  impressiveness,  there  is  the  consider- 
ation of  the  prominent  part  which  so  many  of  these 
springs  have  played  in  the  history.  Even  the  caverns 
are  not  more  characteristic  of  Palestine,  or  oftenor 
mentioned  in  the  accounts  both  of  the  great  national 
crises  and  of  more  ordinary  transactions.  It  is 
sufficient  here  to  name  En-hakkore,  En-gedi,  Gihon, 
and,  in  this  particular  district,  the  spring  of  Harod, 
the  fountain  of  Jezreel,  En-dor,  and  Kn-gannim, 
reserving  a  fuller  treatment  of  the  subject  for  the 
special  head  of  Springs. 

18.  The  valleys  which  lead  down  from  the  upper 
level  in  this  district  to  the  valley  of  the  Jordan, 
and  the  mountains  through  which  they  descend, 
are  also  a  great  improvement  on  those  which  form 
the  easte:-n  portion  of  Judah,  and  even  of  Ben- 
jamin. The  valleys  are  (as  already  remarked) 
less  precipitous,  because  the  level  from  which  they 
start  in  their  descent  is  lower,  while  that  of  the 
Jordan  valley  is  higher ;  and  they  have  lost  that 
savage  character  which  distinguishes  the  naked. 
clefts  of  the  Wad)'s  Suiceinit  and  Kelt,  of  the  Ain- 
jvhj  or  Zmreirak,  and  have  become  wider  and  shal- 
lower, swelling  out  heie  ami  there  into  basins,  and 
containing  much  land  under  cultivation  more  or 
less  regular.  Fine  streams  I'un  through  many  ot 
these  valleys,  in  which  a  considerable  body  of  water 
is  found  even  after  the  hottest  and  longest  summers, 
their  banks  hidden  by  a  thick  shrubbery  of  oleanders 
and  other  flowering  trees, — truly  a  delicious  sight, 
and  one  most  rarely  seen  to  the  south  of  Jerusalem, 
or  within  many  miles  to  the  north  of  it.  The 
mountains,  though  bare  of  wood  and  but  partially 
cultivated,  have  nonq  of  that  arid,  worn  look 
which  renders  those  east  of  Hebron,  and  esen  those 
between  Mukhmas  and  Jericho,  so  repulsive.  In 
foct  the  eastern  district  of  the  Jehel  Nahlus  con- 
tains some  of  the  most  fertile  and  valuable  spots  in 
Palestine."! 

19.  Hardly  less  rich  is  the  extensive  region  which 
lies  north-west  of  the  city  of  Nahlus,  between  it 
and  Carmel,  in  which  the  mountains  gradually 
break  down  into  the  Plain  of  Sharon.  This  has 
been  very  imperfectly  explored,  but  it  is  spoken  of 
as  extremely  fertile— huge  fields  of  corn,  with  occii- 
sional  tracts  of  wood,  recalling  the  county  of  Kenf — 
but  mostly  a  continued  expanse  of  sloping  downs. 

20.  But  with  all  its  richness,  and  all  its  advance  on 
the  southern  part  of  the  country,  there  is  a  strange 
dearth  of  natural  wood  about  this  central  district. 
Olive-trees  are  indeed  to  be  found  everywhere,  but 
they  are  artificially  cultivated  for  their  fruit,  and  the 
olive  is  not  a  tree  which  adds  to  the  look  of  a  landsc-ape. 
A  few  caroobs  are  .also  met  with  in  such  richer  spots 
as  the  valley  of  Nahlus.  But  of  all  natural  non- 
fruit-bearing  trees  there  is  a  singular  dearth.  It  is 
this  which  makes  the  wooded  sides  of  Carmel  and  the 
parklike  scenery  of  the  adjacent  slopes  and  plains  so 
remarkable.  True,  when  compared  with  Europem 
timber,  the  trees  are  but  small,  but  their  abundance 
is  in  strong  contrast  with  the  absolute  dearth  of 


which  rise  the  gentle  hills  which  bear  the  ruins  of  Gibeon, 
Ncballat,  &c.,  Is  pcihaps  the  first  of  these  in  the  advance 
from  south  to  nonh. 

1  Robinson,  li.  K.  lii.  304. 

"■  \jovii  Lindsay  (Bohn's  cd.),  !>■  ^-''fi. 


670 


PALESTINE 


wood  ill  the  neighbouring  mountains.  Carmel  is 
always  mentioned  by  the  ancient  prophets  and  poets 
as  remarkable  for  its  luxuriance  ;  and,  as  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  it  has  changed  its  character, 
we  have,  in  the  expressions  referred  to,  pretty  con- 
clusive evidence  that  the  look  of  the  adjoining  district 
of  Ephraim  was  not  very  different  then  from  what  it 
is  now. 

21.  No  sooner,  howe«-er,  is  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon 
passed,  than  a  considerable  improvement  is  pei'- 
ceptible.  The  low  hills  which  spread  down  from  the 
mountains  of  Galilee,  and  form  the  barrier  between 
the  plains  of  Akka  and  Esdraelon,  are  covered  with 
timber,  of  moderate  size,  it  is  true,  but  of  thick 
vigorous  growth,  and  pleasant  to  the  eye.  Eastvi^ard 
of  these  hills  rises  the  lound  mass  of  Tabor,  dark 
with  its  copses  of  oak,  and  set  off"  by  contrast  with  the 
bare  slopes  of  Jehel  ed-Duh;i  (the  so-called  "  Little 
Hermon  ")  and  the  white  hills  of  Nazareth.  North 
of  Tabor  and  Nazareth  is  the  plain  of  el-Buttauf, 
an  upland  tract  hitherto  very  imperfectly  described, 
but  apparently  of  a  similar  nature  to  Esdraelon, 
though  much  more  elevated.  It  runs  from  east 
to  west,  in  which  direction  it  is  perhaps  ten  miles 
long,  by  two  miles  wide  at  its  broadest  part. 
Jt  is  described  as  extremely  fertile,  and  abound- 
ing in  vegetation.  Beyond  this  the  amount  of 
'  natural  growth  increases  at  every  step,  until  to- 
wards the  north  the  country  becomes  what  even 
in  the  West  would  be  considered  as  well  timbered. 
The  centre  part — the  watershed  between  the  upper 
end  of  the  Jordan  valley  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
Mediterranean  on  the  other,  is  a  succession  of  swell- 
ing hills,  covered  with  oak  and  terebinth,  its  occa- 
sional ravines  thickly  clothed  in  addition  with  maple, 
arbutus,  sumach,  and  other  trees.  So  abundant  is 
the  timber  that  large  quantities  of  it  are  regularly 
carried  to  the  sea-coast  at  Tyre,  and  there  shipped 
as  fuel  to  the  towns  on  the  coast  (Rob.  ii.  430). 
The  general  level  of  the  country  is  not  quite  equal 
to  that  of  Judaea  and  Samaria,  but  on  the  other 
hand  there  are  points  which  reach  a  greater  eleva- 
tion than  anything  in  the  south,  such  as  the 
prominent  group  of  Jehel  Junnuk,  and  perhaps 
Tihnin — and  which  have  all  the  gi-eater  effect  from 
the  surrounding  country  being  lower.  Tibnin  lies 
about  the  centre  of  the  district,  and  as  far  north  as 
this  the  valleys  run  east  and  west  of  the  watershed, 
but  above  it  they  run  northwards  into  the  Litany, 
which  cleaves  the  country  from  east  to  west,  and 
forms  the  northern  border  of  the  district,  and 
indeed  of  the  Holy  Land  itself. 

22.  The  notices  of  this  romantic  district  in  the 
Bible  are  but  scanty ;  in  fact  till  the  date  of  the 
New  Testament,  when  it  had  acquired  the  name  of 
Galilee,  it  may  be  said,  for  all  purposes  of  history, 
to  be  hardly  mentioned.  And  even  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament times  the  interest  is  confined  to  a  very  small 
portion — the  south  and  south-vifest  corner  contain- 
ing Nazareth,  Cana,  and  Nain,  on  the  confines  of 
Esdraelon,  Capernaum,  Tiberias,  and  Gennesai'eth, 
on  the  margin  of  the  Lake.' 

In  the  great  Roman  conquest,  or  rather  destruc- 
tion, of  Galilee,  which  preceded  the  fall  of  Jerusalem, 
the  contest  penetrated  but  a  short  distance  into  the 
interior.  Jotapata  and  Giscala — neither  of  them 
more  than  12  miles  from  the  Lake — are  the  farthest 


»  The  associations  of  Mt.  Tabor,  dim  as  thej'  arc,  belong 
to  the  Old  Testament :  for  there  can  be  very  little  doubt 
that  it  was  no  more  the  scene  of  the  Transfiguration  than 
th(.'  Mount  of  Olives  was.    [See  vol.  ii.  62Ba.] 


PALESTINE 

points  to  which  we  know  of  the  struggle  extending 
in  that  wooded  and  impenetrable  district.  One  of 
the  earliest  accounts  we  possess  describes  it  as  a 
land  "quiet  and  secure"  (Judg.  xviii.  27).  There 
is  no  thoroughfare  through  it,  nor  any  inducement 
to  make  one.  May  there  not  be,  retired  in  the  re- 
cesses of  these  woody  hills  and  intricate  valleys, 
many  a  village  whose  inhabitants  have  lived  on 
from  age  to  age  undisturbed  by  the  invasions  and  de- 
populations with  which  Israelites,  Assyrians,  Romans, 
and  Moslems  have  successively  visited  the  more  open 
and  accessible  parts  of  the  country  ? 

23.  From  the  present  appearance  of  this  district 
we  may,  with  some  allowances,  perhaps  gain 
an  idea  of  what  the  more  southern  portions 
of  the  central  highlands  were  during  the  earlier 
periods  in  the  history.  There  is  little  material 
difference  in  the  natural  conditions  of  the  two 
regions.  Galilee  is  slightly  nearer  the  springs  and 
the  cool  breezes  of  the  snow-covered  Lebanon,  and 
further  distant  from  the  hot  siroccos  of  the  southern 
deserts,  and  the  volcanic  nature  of  a  portion  of  its 
soil  is  more  favourable  to  vegetation  than  the 
chalk  of  Judaea;  but  these  circumstances,  though 
they  would  tell  to  a  certain  degree,  would  not 
produce  any  very  marked  differences  in  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  country  provided  other  conditions 
were  alike.  It  therefore  seems  fair  to  believe 
that  the  hills  of  Shechem,  Bethel,  and  Hebron, 
when  Abram  first  wandered  over  them,  were  not 
very  inferior  to  those  of  the  Belad  Besharah  or 
the  Belad  cl-Buttauf.  The  timber  was  probably 
smaller,  but  the  oak-groves*  of  Moreh,  Mamre, 
Tabor,"  must  have  consisted  of  large  trees  ;  and 
the  narrative  implies  that  the  "  forests "  or 
"  woods  "  of  Hareth,  Ziph,  and  Bethel  were  more 
than  mere  scrub. 

24.  The  causes  of  the  present  bareness  of  the  face 
of  the  country  are  two,  which  indeed  can  hardly 
be  separated.  The  first  is  the  destruction  of  the 
timber  in  that  long  series  of  sieges  and  invasions 
which  began  with  the  invasion  of  tihishak  (B.C. 
circa  970)  and  has  not  yet  come  to  an  end.  This, 
by  depriving  the  soil  and  the  streams  of  shelter 
from  the  burning  sun,  at  once  made,  as  it  inva- 
riably does,  the  climate  more  arid  than  before,  and 
doubtless  diminished  the  rainfall.  The  second  is 
the  decay  of  the  terraces  necessary  to  retain  the 
soil  on  the  steep  slopes  of  the  round  hills.  This 
decay  is  owing  to  the  general  unsettlement  and 
insecurity  which  have  been  the  lot  of  this  poor 
little  country  almost  ever  since  the  Babylonian 
conquest.  The  terraces  once  gone,  there  was 
nothing  to  prevent  the  soil  which  they  supported 
being  washed  away  by  the  heavy  rains  of  winter; 
and  it  is  hopeless  to  look  for  a  renewal  of  the  wood, 
or  for  any  real  improvement  in  the  general  face 
of  the  country,  until  they  have  been  first  re- 
established. This  cannot  happen  to  any  extent 
until  a  just  and  firm  government  shall  give  con- 
fidence to  the  inhabitants. 

25.  Few  things  are  a  more  constant  source  of 
surprise  to  the  stranger  in  the  Holy  Land  than  the 
manner  in  which  the  hill  tops  are,  throughout, 
selected  for  habitation.  A  town  in  a  valley  is  a 
rare  exception.  On  the  other  hand  scarce  a  single 
eminence  of  the  multitude  always  in  sight  but  is 


*  In  the  Authorised  Version  rendered  inaccurately 
"  plain." 

"  Tabor  (1  Sam.  x.  3)  has  no  connexion  with  the  mount 
of  the  same  name. 


PALESTINE 

crowned  with  its  citj'  or  village,'  inliabited  or  in 
ruins,  often  so  placed  as  if  not  accessibility  bnt 
inaccessibility  had  been  the  object  of  its  builders.* 
And  indeed  such  was  their  object.  These  groups 
of  naked  forlorn  structures,  piled  irresnlarly  one 
over  the  other  on  the  curve  of  the  hill-top,  their 
rectangular  outline,  flat  roofs,  and  blank  walls,  sug- 
gestive to  the  Western  mind  rather  of  fastness  than 
of  peaceful  habitation,  surrounded  by  filthy  heaps 
of  the  rubbish  of  centuries,  approached  only  by  the 
narrow  windino;  path,  worn  white,  on  the  grey  or 
brown  breast  of  the  hill — are  the  lineal  descendants, 
if  indeed  they  do  not  sometimes  contain  the  actual 
remains,  of  the  "  fenced  cities,  great  and  walled  up 
to  heaven,"  which  are  so  frequently  mentioned  in 
the  records  of  the  Israelite  conijuest.  They  bear 
witness  now,  no  less  surely  than  they  did  even  in 
that  early  age,  and  as  they  have  done  through  all 
the  ravages  and  conquests  of  thirty  centuries,  to 
the  insecurity  of  the  country  —  to  the  continual 
risk  of  sudden  plunder  and  destruction  incurred 
by  those  rash  enough  to  take  up  their  dwelling 
in  the  plain.  Another  and  hardly  less  valid 
reason  for  the  practice  is  furnished  in  the  terms 
of  our  Lord's  well  known  apologue, — namely,  the 
treacherous  nature  of  the  loose  alluvial  "  sand " 
of  the  plain  under  the  sudden  rush  of  the  winter 
torrents  from  the  neighbouring  hills,  as  compared 
with  the  safety  and  Arm  foundation  attainable  by 
building  on  the  naked  "  rock  "  of  the  hills  them- 
selves (Matt.  vii.  24-27). 

26.  These  hill-towns  were  not  what  gave  the 
Israelites  their  main  dilficulty  in  the  occupation  of 
the  country.  Wherever  strength  of  arm  and  fleetness 
of  foot  availed,  there  those  hardy  warriors,  fierce  as 
lions,  sudden  and  swift  as  eagles,  sure-footed  and 
fleet  as  the  wild  deer  on  the  hills  (1  Chr.  xii.  8  ; 
2  Sam.  i.  23,  ii.  18),  easily  conquered.  It  was  in 
the  plains,  where  the  horses  and  chariots  of  the 
Canaanites  and  Philistines  had  space  to  manoeuvre, 
that  they  failed  in  dislodging  the  aborigines. 
"  Judah  drave  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountain, 
but  could  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  valley, 
because  they  had  chariots  of  iron  .  .  .  neither  could 
Mauasseh  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Bethshean  . .  . 
nor  Megiddo,"  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  ..."  nor 
could  Ephraim  drive  out  the  Cana<anites  that  dwelt 
in  Gezer,"  on  the  maritime  plain  near  Kamloh  .  .  . 
"  nor  could  Asher  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Ac- 
cho"  .  .  .  "and  the  Amorites  forced  the  children  of 
Dan  into  the  mountain,  for  they  would  not  sutfer 
them  to  come  down  into  the  valley"  (.Indg.  i.  \9- 
35).  Thus  in  this  case  the  ordinary  conditions  of 
conquest  were  reversed — the  conquerors  took  the 
hills,  the  conquered  kept  the  plains.  To  a  people 
so  exclusive  as  the  Jew*  there  must  have  been  a  con- 
stant satisfaction  in  the  elevation  and  inaccessibility 
of  their  highland  regions.  This  is  evident  in  every 
page  of  their  literature,  which  is  tinged  throughout 
with  a  highland  colouring.  The  "  mountains"  were 
to  "  bring  peace,"  the  "  little  hills,  justice  to  the 
people :"  when  plenty  came,  the  corn  was  to  flourish 
on  the  "top  of  the  mountains"  (Ps.  l.xxii.  3,  IB). 
lu  like  manner  the  mountains  were  to  be  joyful 
before  Jehovah  when  He  came  to  judge  His  people 


PALESTINE 


671 


"  The  same  thing  may  be  observed,  though  not  with 
the  same  exclusive  regularity,  in  IVovcncc,  a  country 
wlilch.  In  its  natural  and  artificial  features,  presents  many 
a  likeness  to  Palestine. 

I  Two  such  may  be  named  as  types  of  the  rest,— 
Kuril/el  Jilt  (perhaps  an  ancient  Gath  or  Gitta),  peiched 


fxcviii.  8).  What  gave  its  keenest  .sting  to  the 
Babylonian  conque.st,  was  the  consideration  that 
the  "  mountains  of  Israel,"  the  "  ancient  high 
places,"  were  become  a  "prey  and  a  derision  ;"  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  one  of  the  most  joyful  circum- 
stances of  the  restoration  is,  that  the  mountains 
"  shall  yield  their  fruit  as  before,  and  be  settled 
after  their  old  estates"  (Ezek.  xxxvi.  1,  8,  11). 
But  it  is  needless  to  multiply  instances  of  this, 
which  pervades  the  writings  of  the  psalmists  and 
prophets  in  a  truly  remarkable  manner,  and  must 
be  familiar  to  every  student  of  the  Bible.  (See 
the  citations  in  Sinai  ^  Pal.  ch.  ii.  viii.)  Nor 
was  it  unacknowledged  by  the  surrounding  heathen. 
We  have  their  own  testimony  that  in  their  estima- 
tion Jehovah  was  the  "  God  of  the  mountains  " 
(1  K.  XX.  28),  and  they  showed  their  appreciation 
of  the  fact  by  fighting  (as  already  noticed),  when 
possible,  in  the  lowlands.  The  contrast  is  strongly 
brought  out  in  the  repeated  expression  of  the  psalmists. 
"  Some,"  like  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines  of  the 
lowlands,  "  put  their  trust  in  chariots  and  some 
in  horses;  but  we" — we  mountaineers,  from  our 
"  sanctuary  "  on  the  heights  of  "  Zion  " — "  will 
remember  the  name  of  Jehovah  our  God,"  "  the 
God  of  Jacob  our  fether,"  the  shepherd-warrior, 
whose  only  weapons  were  sword  and  bow — the  God 
who  is  now  a  high  fortress  for  us — "  at  whose  com- 
mand both  chariot  and  horse  are  fallen,"  "  who 
burneth  the  chariots  in  the  fire"  (Ps.  xx.  1,  7, 
xlvi.  7-11,  kxvi.  2,  6). 

27.  But  the  hills  were  occupied  by  other  edifices 
besides  the  "  fenced  cities."  The  tiny  white  domes 
which  stand  perched  here  and  there  on  the  summits 
of  the  eminences,  and  mark  the  holy  ground  in 
which  some  j\lahometan  saint  is  resting- — sometimes 
standing  alone,  sometimes  near  the  village,  in 
either  case  surrounded  with  a  rude  inclosure,  and 
overshadowed  with  the  grateful  shade  and  pleasant 
colour  of  terebinth  or  caroob—  these  are  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  "  high  places "  or  sanctuaries  so 
constantly  denounced  by  the  prophets,  and  which 
were  set  up  "  on  every  high  hill  and  under  every 
green  tree"  (.ler.  ii.  20;  Ez.  vi.  13). 

28.  From  the  mountainous  structure  of  the  Holy 
Land  and  the  extraordinary  variations  in  the  level 
of  its  different  districts,  arises  a  further  peculiarity 
most  interesting  and  most  characteristic — namely, 
the  extensive  views  of  the  country  which  can  be 
obtained  from  various  commanding  points.  The 
number  of  panoramas  which  present  themselves  to 
the  traveller  in  Palestine  is  truly  remarkable.  To 
speak  of  the  west  of  Jordan  only,  for  east  of  it  all  is 
at  present  more  or  less  unknown — the  prospects  from 
the  height  of  Beni  naim,7  near  Hebron,  from  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  from  Neby  Samwil,  from  Bethel, 
from  Gerizim  or  Ebal,  from  Jenin,  Carmel,  Tabor, 
Safed,  the  Castle  of  Banias,  the  Kubbet  en  Nasr 
Jibove  Damascus — are  known  to  many  travellers. 
Their  peculiar  charm  resides  in  their  wide  extent, 
the  number  of  spots  historically  remarkable  which 
are  visible  at  once,  the  limpid  clearness  of  the  air, 
which  brings  the  most  distant  objects  comparatively 
dose,  and  the  consideration  that  in  many  ca-ses  the 
feet  must  be  standing  on  the  same  ground,  and  the 


on  one  of  the  western  spurs  of  the  Jelid-  Sfabltta,  and  de- 
scried high  up  beside  the  road  from  Jaffa  to  Ifaldiis ;  and 
\VezrovjWzi;on  the  ab,solute  tup  of  the  lofty  peaked  hill, 
at  the  foot  of  which  the  spring  of  Jaldd  wells  forOi. 
y  Uobinson,  Bib.  lies.  i.  490. 


(572 


PALESTINE 


eyes  vesting  on  the  same  spots  which  liave  l^een 
stood  upon  and  gazed  at  by  the  most  famous  pa- 
triarchs, prophets,  and  heroes,  of  all  the  successive 
ages  in  the  eventful  history  of  the  country.  We 
can  stand  where  Abram  and  Lot  stood  looking  down 
from  Bethel  into  the  Jordan  valley,  when  Lot  chose 
to  go  to  Sodom  and  the  great  destiny  of  the  Hebrew 
people  was  fixed  for  ever;^  or  with  Abraham  on 
the  height  near  Hebron  gazing  over  the  gulf  towards 
?odom  at  the  vast  column  of  smoke  as  it  towered 
aloft  tinged  with  the  rising  sun,  and  wondering 
whether  h  s  kinsman  had  escaped  ;  or  with  Gaal 
the  son  of  Ebed  on  Gerizim  when  he  watched  the 
armed  men  steal  along  like  the  shadow  of  the  moun- 
tains on  the  plain  of  the  Muklina  ;  or  with  Deborah 
and  Barak  on  MountTabor  when  they  saw  the  hosts 
of  the  Canaanites  marshalling  to  their  doom  on  the 
imdulations  of  Esdraelon;  or  with  Elisha  on  Carmel 
looking  across  the  same  wide  space  towards  Shunem, 
and  recognizing  the  bereaved  mother  as  she  urged  her 
course  over  the  flat  before  him  ;  or,  in  later  times, 
with  Mohammed  on  the  heights  above  Damascus, 
when  he  put  by  an  earthly  for  a  heavenly  paradise  ; 
or  with  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion  on  Neby  Samwil  when 
he  refused  to  look  at  the  towers  of  the  Holy  City, 
in  the  deliverance  of  which  he  could  take  no  part. 
These  we  can  see  ;  but  the  most  famous  and  the  most 
extensive  of  all  we  cannot  see.  The  view  of  Balaam 
from  Pisgah,  and  the  view  of  Moses  from  the  same 
spot,  we  cannot  realize,  because  the  locality  of 
Pis2;ah  is  not  yet  accessible. 

these  views  are  a  feature  in  which  Palestine  is 
perhaps  approached  by  no  other  country,  certainly 
by  no  country  whose  history  is  at  all  equal  in  im- 
portance to  the  world.  Great  as  is  their  charm 
when  viewed  as  mere  landscapes,  their  deep  and 
abiding  interest  lies  in  their  intimate  connexion  with 
the  history  and  the  remarkable  manner  in  which 
they  corroborate  its  statements.  By  its  constant  re- 
ference to  localities — mountain,  lock,  plain,  river, 
tree — the  Bible  seems  to  invite  examination  ;  and, 
indeed,  it  is  only  by  such  examination  that  we  can 
appreciate  its  minute  accuracy  and  realize  how  far 
its  plain  matter  of  fact  statements  of  actual  occur- 
rences, to  actual  persons,  in  actual  places — hovsr  far 
these  raise  its  records  above  the  unreal  and  un- 
connected rhapsodies,  and  the  vain  repetitions,  of 
the  sacred  books  of  other  religions.* 

29.  A  few  words  must  be  said  in  general  de- 
scription of  the  maritime  lowland,  which  it  will  be 
remembered  intervenes  between  the  sea  and  the 
hio-hlands,  and  of  which  detailed  accounts  will  be 
found  under  the  heads  of  its  great  divisions. 

This  region,  only  slightly  elevated  above  the  level 
of  the  Mediterranean,  extends  without  interruption 
from  el-Artsh,  south  of  Gaza,  to  Mount  Carmel.  ]t 
naturally  divides  itself  into  two  portions,  each  of 
about  half  its  length  :  — the  lower  one  the  wider  ; 
the  upper  one  the  narrower.  The  lower  half  is  the 
Plain  of  the  Philistines — PhiJistia,  or,  as  the  Hebrews 
called  it,  the  Shefelah  or  Lowland.  [Sephela.] 
The  upper  half  is  the  Sharon  or  Saron  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments,  the  "  Forest  country"  of  Jo- 
sephus  and  the  LXX.  (Josephus,  Ant.  xiv.  13,  §3  ; 


PALESTINE 

LXX.  Is.  Ixv.  10).  [Sharon.]  Viewed  from  the 
sea  this  maritime  region  appears  as  a  long  low  coast 
of  white  or  cream-coloured  sand,  its  slight  undula- 
tions rising  occasionally  into  mounds  or  cliffs,  which 
in  one  or  two  places,  such  as  Jaffa  and  Um-hhulid, 
almost  aspire  to  the  dignity  of  headlands.  Over 
these  white  undulations,  in  the  farthest  background, 
stretches  the  faint  blue  level  line  of  the  highlands 
of  Judaea  and  Samaria. 

30.  Such  is  its  appearance  from  without.  But 
from  within,  when  traversed,  or  overlooked  from 
some  point  on  those  blue  hills,  such  as  Deit-ur  or 
Beit-neWf,  the  prospect  is  very  different. 

The  Philistine  Plain  is  on  an  average  fifteen  or 
sixteen  miles  in  width  fi'om  the  coast  to  the  first 
beginning  of  the  belt  of  hills,  which  forms  the  gra- 
dual approach  to  the  highland  of  the  mountains  of 
Judah.  This  district  of  inferior  hills  contains  many 
places  which  have  been  identifietl  with  those  named 
in  the  lists  of  the  conquest  as  being  in  the  Plain, 
and  it  was  therefore  probably  attached  originally  to 
the  plain,  and  not  to  the  highland.  It  is  described 
by  modern  travellers  as  a  beautiful  open  country, 
consisting  of  low  ailcareous  hills  rising  from  the  allu- 
vial soil  of  broad  arable  valleys,  covered  with  inha- 
bited villages  and  deserted  ruins,  and  clothed  with 
much  natural  shrubbery  and  with  large  plantations 
of  olives  in  a  high  state  of  cultivation  ;  the  whole 
gradually  broadening  down  into  the  wide  expanse  of 
the  plain  **  itself.  The  Plain  is  in  many  parts  almost 
a  dead  level,  in  others  gently  undulating  in  long 
waves;  here  and  there  low  mounds  or  hillocks,  each 
crowned  with  its  village,  and  more  rarely  still  a 
hill  overtopping  the  rest,  like  Tell  es-Safieh  or 
Ajlun,  the  seat  of  some  fortress  of  Jewish  or  Cru- 
sading times.  The  larger  towns,  as  Gaza  and  Ash- 
dod,  which  stand  near  the  shore,  are  surrounded 
with  huge  groves  of  olive,  sycamore,  and  palm,  as 
in  the  days  of  King  David  (1  Chr.  sxvii.  28) — 
some  of  them  among  the  most  extensive  in  the 
country.  The  whole  plain  appears  to  consist  of  a 
brown  loamy  soil,  light,  but  rich,  and  almost  with- 
out a  stone.  This  is  noted  as  its  characteristic 
in  a  remarkable  expression  of  one  of  the  leaders  in 
the  Maccabean  wars,  a  great  part  of  which  were 
fought  in  this  locality  (1  Mace.  x.  73).  It  is  to  this 
absence  of  stone  that  the  disappearance  of  its  ancient 
towns  and  villages — so  much  more  complete  than 
in  other  parts  of  the  country — is  to  be  traced. 
The  common  material  is  brick,  made,  after  the 
Egyptian  fashion,  of  the  sandy  loam  of  the  plain 
mixed  with  stubble,  and  this  has  been  washed 
away  in  almost  all  cases  by  the  rains  of  successive 
centuries  (Thomson,  363).  It  is  now,  as  it  was 
when  the  Philistines  possessed  it,  one  enormous 
cornfield ;  an  ocean  of  wheat  covers  the  wide  ex- 
panse between  the  hills  and  the  sand  dunes  of  the 
sea-shore,  without  interruption  of  airy  kind  —  no 
break  or  hedge,  hardly  even  a  single  olive-tree 
(Thomson,  552  ;  Van  de  Velde,  ii.  175).  Its  fer- 
tility is  marvellous;  for  the  prodigious  crops  which 
it  raises  are  produced,  and  probably  have  been  pro- 
duced almost  year  by  year  for  the  last  40  cen- 
turies, without  any  of  tlie  appliances  which  we  find 


'  Stanley,  S.  <t-  /'.  218,  9. 

a  Nothing  can  be  more  instructive  than  to  compare  (in 
regard  to  tljis  one  only  of  the  many  points  in  which  they 
differ)  the  Bible  with  the  Koran.  So  little  ascertainable 
coniioxion  lias  the  Koran  with  the  life  or  career  of  Mo- 
hammed, that  it  seems  impossible  to  arrange  it  with  any 
certiiinty  in  the  order,  real  or  ostensible,  of  its  composition. 


With  the  Bible,  on  the  other  hand,  each  book  belongs  to 
a  certain  period.  It  describes  the  persons  of  that  period  ; 
the  places  under  the  names  which  they  then  bore,  and 
with  many  a  note  of  identity  by  which  they  can  often  be 
still  recognized;  so  that  it  may  be  said,  almost  without 
exaggeration,  to  be  the  best  Handbook  to  Palestine. 
"  Robinson,  Bib.  Bes.  ii.  15,  20, 29,  32,  228. 


PALESTINE 

necessary  for  success — with  no  mauuie  beyoud  that 
naturally  supplied  by  the  washing  down  of  the  hill- 
torrents — without  inigation,  without  succession  of 
crops,  and  with  only  the  rudest  method  of  husbandly. 
No  wonder  that  the  Jews  struggled  hard  to  get,  and 
the  Philistines  to  keep  such  a  prize :  no  wonder  that 
the  hosts  of  Egypt  and  Assyria  were  content  to  tra- 
verse and  re-traverse  a  region  whei'e  their  supplies 
of  corn  were  so  "=  abundant  and  so  easily  obtained. 

The  southern  part  of  tlie  Philistine  Plain,  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Beit  Jibrin,  appears  to  liave  been 
covered,  as  late  as  the  sixth  century,  with  a  forest, 
called  the  Forest  of  Gerar;  but  of  this  no  traces  are 
known  now  to  exist  (Procopius  of  Gaza,  Schulia  on 
2  Chr.  xiv.). 

31.  The  Plain  of  Sharon  is  much  narrower  than 
Phiiistia.  It  is  about  ten  miles  wide  from  the  sea 
to  the  foot  of  the  mountains,  which  are  here  of  a  more 
abrupt  character  than  those  of  Phiiistia,  and  with- 
out the  intermediate  hilly  region  there  occurring. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  more  undulating  and  irregular 
than  the  former,  and  crossed  by  streams  from  the 
central  hills,  some  of  them  of  considerable  size,  and 
containing  water  during  the  whole  year.  Owing 
to  the  general  level  of  the  surface  and  to  the  accu- 
mulation of  sand  on  the  shore,  several  of  these 
streams  spread  out  into  wide  marshes,  which  might 
without  difficulty  be  turned  to  purposes  of  irriga- 
tion, but  in  their  present  neglected  state  form  large 
boggy  places.  The  soil  is  eitremely  rich,  varying 
from  bright  red  to  deep  black,  and  producing  enor- 
mous crops  of  weeds  oi-  grain,  as  the  case  may  be. 
Here  and  there,  on  the  margins  of  the  streams  or 
the  borders  of  the  marshes,  are  large  tracts  of  rank 
meadow,  where  many  a  herd  of  camels  or  cattle 
may  be  seen  feeding,  as  tiie  royal  herds  did  in  the 
time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  29).  At  its  northern 
end  Sharon  is  narrowed  by  the  low  hills  which  gather 
round  the  western  flanks  of  Carmel,  and  gradually 
encroach  upon  it  until  it  terminates  entirely  against 
the  shoulder  of  the  mountain  itself,  leaving  only  a 
narrow  beach  at  the  foot  of  the  promontory  by  which 
to  communicate  with  the  plain  on  the  north. 

32.  The  tract  of  white  sand  ali'eiidy  mentioned  as 
fomiing  the  shore  line  of  the  whole  coast,  is  gra- 
dually encroaching  on  this  magnificent  region.  In 
the  south  it  has  buried  Askelon,  and  in  the  north 
between  Caesarea  and  Jaffa  the  dunes  are  said  to  be 
as  much  as  three  miles  wide  and  300  feet  high. 
'I'he  obstruction  which  is  thus  aiused  to  tlie  out- 
flow of  the  streams  has  been  already  noticed.  All 
along  file  edge  of  Sharon  there  are  pools  and  marshes 
due  to  it.  In  some  places  the  sand  is  covered  by  a 
stunted  growth  of  maritime  pines,  the  descendants  of 
the  forests  which  at  the  Christian  era  gave  its  name 
to  this  portion  of  the  Plain,  and  which  seem  to 
have  existed  as  late  as  the  second  crusade  (Vinisauf 
in  Chron.  ofCrus.).  It  is  probable,  for  tlie  reasons 
already  stated,  that  the  Jews  never  permanently 
occupied  more  than  a  small  portion  of  this  rich  and 
favoured  region.  Its  principal  towns  were,  it  is  true, 
allotted  to  the  dillisrent  tribes  (Josh.  xv.  45-47  ; 
xvi.  3,  Gezer;  xvii.  11,  Dor,  &c.) ;  but  this  was  in 
anticipation  of  the  intended  conquest  (xiii.  3-6). 
The  five  cities  of  the  Philistines  remained  in  their 


PALESTINE 


673 


'  Le  grenier  de  la  Syrie  (Due  de  Raguse,  Voyage). 

J  The  Bedouins  from  beyond  Jordan,  whom  Gideon 
repulsed,  destroyed  the  earth  "as  far  as  Gaza;"  i.  e.  tliey 
liiU'd  tlie  plain  of  Ksdraclon,  and  overflowed  into  Sharon, 
and  thence  southwards  to  the  richest  prize  of  the  day. 

e  This  district,  called  the  Sahel  Athlit,  between  the  sea 
VOL.   11. 


possession  (1  Sam.  v.,  xxi  10,  xxvii.);  and  the 
district  was  regarded  as  one  independent  of  and 
apart  from  Israel  (xxvii.  2  ;  IK.  ii.  39  ;  2  K.  viii. 
2,  3).  In  lite  niamier  Dor  remained  in  the  hands 
of  the  Canaauite.s  (Judg.  i.  27),  and  Gezer  in  the 
hands  of  the  Philistines  till  taken  from  thera  in 
Solomon's  time  by  his  father-in-law  (1  K.  ix.  IC). 
We  find  that  towards  the  end  of  the  monarchy  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  was  in  possession  of  Lydd,  Jimzu, 
Ono,  and  other  places  in  the  plain  (Neh.  xi.  34  ;  2 
Chr.  xxviii.  18;  ;  but  it  was  only  by  a  gradual  pro- 
cess of  extension  from  their  native  hills,  in  the  rough 
ground  of  which  they  were  safe  from  the  attack  of 
cavalry  and  chariots.  But,  though  the  Jews  never 
had  any  hold  on  the  region,  it  had  its  own  popu- 
lation, and  towns  probably  not  inferior  to  any  in 
Syria.  Both  Gaza  and  Askelon  had  regular  ports 
(jnajumas)  ;  and  there  is  evidence  to  show  that  they 
were  veiy  important  and  very  large  long  before  the 
fall  of  the  Jewish  monar<;hy  (Kenrick,  Fhoenicia, 
27-29).  Ashdod,  though  on  the  open  plain,  resisted 
for  29  years  the  attack  of  the  whole  Egyptian  force: 
a  similar  attack  to  that  which  reduced  Jerusalem 
vvithout  a  blow  (2  Chr.  xii.),  and  was  sufficient  on 
another  occasion  to  destroy  it  after  a  siege  of  a  year 
and  a  half,  even  when  fortified  by  the  works  of  a 
score  of  successive  monarchs  (2  K.  xxv.  1-3). 

33.  In  the  Pioman  times  this  region  was  considered 
the  pride  of  the  country  {B.  J,  i.  29,  §9),  and  some 
of  the  most  important  cities  of  the  province  stood  in 
it — Caesarea,  Antipatris,  Diospolis.  The  one  ancient 
port  of  the  Jews,  the  "  beautitul "  city  of  Joppa, 
occupied  a  position  central  between  the  Shefelah  and 
Sharon.  Poads  led  from  these  various  cities  to  each 
other,  to  .lerusalem,  Neapolis,  and  Sebaste  in  the  in- 
terior, and  to  Ptolemais  and  Gaza  on  the  north  and 
south.  The  commerce  of  Damascus,  and,  beyond  Da- 
mascus, of  Persia  and  India,  passed  this  way  to  Egypt, 
Rome,  and  the  infant  colonies  of  the  west ;  and  that 
traffic  and  the  constant  movement  of  troops  back- 
wards and  forwards  must  have  made  this  plain  one 
of  the  busiest  and  most  populous  regions  of  Syria 
at  the  time  of  Christ.  Now,  Caesarea  is  a  wave- 
washed  ruin  ;  Antipatris  has  vanished  both  in  name 
and  substance ;  Diospolis  has  shaken  off  the  appel- 
lation which  it  bore  in  the  days  of  its  pr*perity, 
and  is  a  mere  village,  remark-able  only  for  the  ruin 
of  its  fine  mediaeval  church,  and  for  the  palm-grove 
whiioh  shrouds  it  from  view.  Joppa  alone  main- 
tains a  dull  life,  surviving  solely  because  it  is  the 
nearest  point  at  which  the  sea-going  travellers  from 
the  West  can  approach  Jerusalem.  For  a  few  miles 
above  Jaffa  cultivation  is  still  carried  on,  but  the 
fear  of  the  Bedouins  who  roam  (as  they  always 
have  •'roamed)  over  parts  of  the  plain,  plundering 
all  passers-by,  and  extorting  black  mail  from  the 
wretched  peasants,  has  desolated  a  large  district, 
and  eU'ectually  prevents  it  being  used  any  longer 
as  the  route  for  travellers  from  south  to  north  ; 
while  in  the  portions  which  are  free  from  this 
scourge,  the  teeming  soil  it>elf  is  doomed  to  un- 
productiveness through  the  folly  and  iniquity  of  its 
Turkish  rulers,  whose  exactions  have  driven,  and 
are  driving,  its  industrious  and  patient  inhabitants 
to  remoter  parts  of  the  land." 


and  the  western  flanks  of  Carmel,  has  been  within  a  very 

few  years  reduced  fnjm  being  one  of  the  most  thriving 
and  productive  regions  of  the  conutrj',  as  well  as  one  of  the 
most  profitable  to  the  government,  to  desolation  and  de- 
sertion, by  these  wicked  exactions.  The  taxes  are  paid  in 
kind  ;  and  the  officers  who  galiier  lluni  demand  so  much 

2  X 


(374 


PALESTINE 


3-1-.  The  characteristics  already  described  are  hardly 
peculiar  to  Palestine.  Her  hilly  surface  and  general 
height,  her  rocky  ground  and  thin  soil,  her  torrent 
beds  wide  and  dry  for  the  greater  part  of  the  year, 
even  her  belt  of  maritime  lowland — these  she  shares 
with  other  lands,  though  it  would  perhaps  be  difficult 
to  find  them  united  elsewhere.  But  there  is  one 
fe;iture,  as  yet  only  alluded  to,  in  which  she  stands 
alone.  This  feature  is  the  Jordan — the  one  River 
of  the  country. 

35.  Properly  to  comprehend  this,  we  must  cast 
our  eyes  for  a  few^  moments  north  and  south,  outside 
the  narrow  limits  of  the  Holy  Land.  From  top  to 
bottom — -from  north  to  south  —  from  Antioch  to 
Aliaba  at  the  tip  of  the  eastern  horn  of  the  Red  Sea, 
Syria  is  cleft  by  a  deep  and  narrow  trench  running 
parallel  with  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  and 
dividing,  as  if  by  a  fosse  or  ditch,  the  central  range  of 
maritime  highlands  from  those  farther  east.^  At  two 
points  only  in  its  length  is  the  trench  interrupted : — 
by  the  range  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon,  and  by  the 
high  ground  south  of  the  Dead  Sea.  Of  the  three 
compartments  thus  formed,  the  northeni  is  the  valley 


PALESTINE 

of  the  Orontes ;  the  southern  is  the  Wady  el-Arabah ; 
while  the  central  one  is  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  the 
Arabah  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Anion  of  the  Greelcs,  and 
the  Ghor  of  the  Arabs.  Whether  this  remarkable 
fissure  in  the  surface  of  the  earth  originally  ran 
without  interruption  from  the  Alediterranean  to  the 
Red  Sea,  and  was  afterwards  (though  still  at  a 
time  long  anterior  to  the  historic  period)  broken  by 
the  protrusion  or  elevation  of  the  two  tracts  just 
named,  cannot  be  ascertained  in  the  present  state 
of  our  geological  knowledge  of  this  region.  The 
central  of  its  three  divisions  is  the  only  one  with 
which  we  have  at  present  to  do  ;  it  is  also  the  most 
remarkable  of  the  three.  The  river  is  elsewhere 
described  in  detail  [Jordan]  ;  but  it  and  the  valley 
through  which  it  rushes  down  its  extraordinary 
descent — and  which  seems  as  it  were  to  enclose  and 
conceal  it  during  the  whole  of  its  course — must  be 
here  briefly  characterized  as  essential  to  a  correct 
comprehension  of  the  country  of  which  they  form 
the  external  barrier,  dividing  Galilee,  Ephraim,  and 
Judah  from  Bashan,  Gilead,  and  j\Ioab,  respec- 
tivelv. 


3G.  To  speak  first  of  tlie  Valley.  It  begins  with 
the  river  at  its  remotest  springs  of  Hasbeiya  on  the 
N.W.  side  of  Hermon,  and  accompanies  it  to  the 
lower  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  a  length  of  about  150 
miles.  *  During  the  whole  of  tliis  distance  its 
course  is  straight,  and  its  direction  nearly  due  north 
and  south.  The  springs  of  Hasbeiya  are  1700 
ieet  above  the  level  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  the 
northern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  is  1317  feet  below  it, 
so  that  Detween  these  two  points  the  valley  falls 
with  more  or  less  regularity  through  a  height  of 
more  than  3000  feet.  But  though  the  river  dis- 
appears at  this  point,  the  valley  still  continues  its 
descent  below  tlie  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea  till  it 
reaches  a  fuj-ther  depth  of  1308  feet.  So  that  the 
bottom  of  this  extraorilinary  crevasse  is  actually 
more  thau  2600  feet  below  the  surface  of  the 
ocean. e  Even  that  portion  which  extends  down  to 
the  blink  of  the  lake  and  is  open  to  observation, 
is  without  a  parallel  in  any  other  part  of  the 
world.  It  is  obvious  that  the  load  by  which 
these  depths  are  reached  from  the  Jlount  of  Olives 
or  Hebron  must  be  very  steep  and  abrupt.  But 
this  is  not  its  real  peculiarity.  Equally  great  and 
sudden  descents  may  be  found  in  our  own  or  other 


gi'ain  for  their  own  perquisites  as  to  leave  the  peasant 
barely  enough  for  the  ne.xt  sowing.  Jn  artdilion  to  this, 
as  long  as  any  people  remain  in  a  district  they  are  liable 
for  the  whole  of  the  tax  at  which  the  district  is  rated. 
No  wonder  that  under  such  pressure  the  inhabitants  of 
ihe  Sahcl  Athlit  have  almost  all  emigrated  to  Kgypt, 
\\  here  the  system  is  better,  and  better  administered. 

f  So  remarkable  is  this  depression,  that  it  is  adopted  by 
the  gieat  geographer  Ritter  as  the  base  of  his  description 
of  Syria. 

g  Deep  as  it  now  is,  the  Dead  Sea  was  once  doubtless 
far  deeper,  for  the  sediment  brought  into  it  by  the  Jordan 


moD,  along  the  line  of  the  Jordan. 


mountainous  countries.  That  which  distinguishes 
this  from  all  others  is  the  fact  that  it  is  made  into 
the  very  bowels  of  tlie  earth.  The  traveller  who 
stands  on  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  has  reached  a 
point  nearly  as  far  below  the  surface  of  the  ocean  as 
the  miners  in  the  lowest  levels  of  the  deepest  mines 
ot  Cornwall. 

37.  In  width  the  valley  varies.  In  its  upper  and 
shallower  portion,  as  between  Banias  and  the  lake 
of  Hiileh,  it  is  about  five  miles  across ;  the  enclosing 
mountains  of  moderate  height,  though  tolei'ably 
vertical  in  character ;  the  floor  almost  an  absolute 
flat,  with  the  mysterious  river  hidden  from  sight 
in  an  impenetrable  jungle  of  reeds  and  marsh  vege- 
tation. 

Between  the  Huleh  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  as  far 
as  we  have  any  information,  it  contracts,  and  be- 
comes more  of  an  ordinary  ravine  or  glen. 

It  is  ill  its  third  and  lower  portion  that  the 
valley  assumes  its  more  definite  and  regular  cha- 
racter. During  the  greater  part  of  this  portion, 
it  is  about  seven  miles  wide  from  the  one  wall 
to  the  other.  The  eastern  mountains  preserve 
their  straight  line  of  direction,  and  their  massive 
horizontal  wall-like  aspect,  during  almost  the  whole  "^ 


must  be  gradually  accumulating.   No  data,  however,  exist 
by  which  to  judge  of  the  rate  of  this  accumulation. 

h  North  of  the  A\'ady  Zurka  their  character  alters. 
They  lose  the  vertical  wall-like  appearance,  so  striking 
at  Jericho,  and  become  more  broken  and  sloping.  The 
writer  had  an  excellent  view  of  the  mountains  behind 
Beisiur  from  the  Bug  at  Zerin  in  Oct.  1S61.  Zerin,  though 
distant,  is  sufficiently  high  to  command  a  prospect  into 
the  interior  of  the  mountains.  Thus  viewed,  their  wall- 
like character  had  entirely  vanished.  There  appeared, 
instead,  an  infinity  of  separate  summits,  fully  as  irregular 
and  multitudinous  as  any  district  west  of  Jordan,  rising 


PALESTINE 

distance.  Here  and  theie  they  aie  cloven  by  the 
vast  mysterious  rents,  through  which  the  Hiero- 
max,  the  Wady  Zurka,  and  other  streams  force 
their  way  down  to  the  Jordan.  The  western  moun- 
tains are  more  irregular  in  height,  their  slopes 
less  vertical,  and  their  general  line  is  interrupted 
by  projecting  outposts  such  as  Tell  Fasail,  and 
Kui-n  Surtabch.  North  of  Jericho  they  recede 
in  a  kind  of  wide  amphitheatre,  and  the  valley 
becomes  twelve  miles  broad,  a  breadth  which  it 
thenceforward  retiiins  to  the  southern  extremity 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  Wliat  the  real  bottom  of  this 
cavity  may  be,  or  at  what  depth  below  the  surface, 
is  not  yet  known,  but  that  which  meets  the  ej'e  is 
a  level  or  gently  luidulating  surface  of  light  sandy 
soil,  about  Jericho  brilliant  white,  about  Beisan 
dark  and  reddish,  crossed  at  intervals  by  the  torrents 
of  the  Western  highlands  which  have  ploughed 
their  ziqzag  couise  deep  down  into  its  soft  sub- 
stance, and  even  in  autumn  betray  the  presence  of 
moisture  by  the  bright  green  of  the  thorn-bushes 
which  flourish  in  and  around  their  channels,  and 
cluster  in  greater  profusion  round  the  springlieads 
at  the  foot  of  the  mountains.  Formerly  jialms 
abounded  on  both  sides'  of  the  Jordan  at  its 
lower  end,  but  none  now  exist  thei-e.  Passing 
through  this  vegetation,  such  as  it  is,  the  traveller 
emerges  on  a  jilain  of  bare  sand  furrowed  out  in 
innumerable  channels  by  the  rain-streams,  all  run- 
ning eastward  towards  the  river,  which  lies  there 
in  the  distance,  though  invisible.  Gradually  these 
channels  increase  in  number  and  depth  till  they  form 
steep  cones  or  mounds  of  sand  of  briUiant  white,  .50 
to  100  feet  high,  their  lower  part  lo'ose,  but  their 
upper  portion  indurated  by  the  action  of  the  rains 
and  the  tiemendous  heat  of  the  sun.J  Here  and 
there  these  cones  are  marshalled  in  a  tolerably  re- 
gular line,  like  gigantic  tents,  and  form  the  bank  of 
a  terrace  overlooking  a  flat  considerably  lower  in 
level  than  that  already  traversed.  After  crossing 
this  lower  flat  for  some  distance,  another  descent, 
of  a  few  feet  only,  is  made  into  a  thick  growth 
of  dwarf  shrubs  :  and  when  this  has  been  pursued 
until  the  traveller  has  well  nigh  lost  all  patience, 
lie  suddenly  arrives  on  the  edge  of  a  "  hole"  iilled 
with  thick  trees  and  shrubs,  whose  tops  rise  to  a 
level  with  his  feet.  Through  the  thicket  comes  the 
welcome  sound  of  rushing  waters.  This  is  the 
Jordan.'' 

38.  Buried  as  it  is  thus  between  such  lofty 
ranges,  and  shielded  from  every  breeze,  the  climate 

gradually  In  height  as  they  receded  eastward.  Is  this  the 
case  with  this  locality  only?  or  would  the  whole  region 
east  of  the  Jordan  prove  equally  broken,  if  viewed 
sufBciently  near?  Prof.  Stanley  hliit.-i  that  such  may  bu 
the  case  {S.  it  P.  32ii).  Certainly  the  hills  of  Judah  and 
Samaria  appear  as  much  a  "  wail "  as  those  east  of  Jordan, 
when  viewed  from  the  sea-coast. 

>  Jericho  was  the  city  of  palm-trees  (2  (Jhr.  xxviii.  15) ; 
and  Josephus  mentions  the  palms  of  Abila,  on  the  eastern 
side  of  the  river,  as  the  scene  of  Moses'  last  address. 
"  The  whole  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,"  says  Mr.  Poole,  "  is 
strewed  with  palms"  (.Geogr.  Socielii's  Jounxal,  It-SU). 
l)r.  Anderson  (192)  describes  a  large  grove  as  standing  on 
the  lower  margin  of  the  sea  between  Wady  Mojeb  (Arnon) 
and  Zurka  Main  (Callirhoe). 

j  The  writir  is  here  speaking  from  his  own  observation 
of  the  lower  part.  A  similar  description  is  given  by  1  ,ynch 
of  the  upper  pan  (  Officicl  liepurl,  April  1  i ;  Van  de  Velde, 
Memoir,  125). 

k  I'he  lines  which  have  given  many  a  young  mind  Us 
first  and  most  lasting  impression  of  the  Jordan  and  its 


PALESTINE 


675 


of  the  Jordan  valley  is  extremely  liot  and  relaxing. 
Its  enervating  influence  is  shown  by  the  inhabitants 
of  Jericho,  who  are  a  small  feeble  exhausted  race, 
dependent  for  the  cultivation  of  their  lands  on  the 
haidier  peasants  of  the  highland  villages  (Rob.  i. 
550),  and  to  this  day  prone  to  the  vices  which  are 
often  developed  by  tropical  climates,  and  which 
brought  destruction  on  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  But 
the  circumstances  which  are  unfavourable  to  morals 
are  most  favourable  to  fertility.  Whether  there 
was  anv  great  amount  of  cultivation  and  habitation 
in  this  region  in  the  times  of  the  Israelites  the  Bible 
does  not  'say;  but  in  post-biblical  times  there  is 
no  doubt  on  the  point.  The  palms  of  Jericho,  and 
of  Abila  (opposite  Jericho  on  the  other  side  of  the 
river),  and  the  extensive  balsam  and  rose  gardens 
of  the  former  place,  are  spoken  of  by  Josephus,  who 
calls  the  whole  district  a  "divine  spot"  {6e7ov 
X<^piov,  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §3;  see  vol.  i.  976).""  Beth- 
sliau  was  a  proverb  among  the  liabbis  for  its  fertility. 
Succoth  was  the  site  of  Jacob's  first  settlement  west 
of  the  Jordan ;  and  therefore  was  probably  then, 
as  it  still  is,  an  eligible  spot.  In  later  times 
indigo  and  sugar  appear  to  have  been  grown  near 
Jericho  and  elsewhere  ;°  aqueducts  ai'e  still  partially 
standing,  of  Christian  or  Saracenic  arches ;  and  there 
are  remains,  all  over  the  jilain  between  Jeiicho  and 
the  river,  of  former  residences  or  towns  and  of 
systems  of  irrigation  (Uitter,  Jordan,  503,  512). 
rhasaelis,  a  few  miles  further  north,  was  built  by 
Herod  the  Great;  and  there  were  other  towns  either 
in  or  closely  bordering  on  the  plain.  At  present  this 
part  is  almost  entirely  desert,  and  culti\'ation  is 
confined  to  the  u])per  portion,  between  Sakut  and 
Beisan.  There  indeed  it  is  conducted  on  a  grand 
scale  ;  and  the  traveller  as  he  journeys  along  the 
road  which  leads  over  the  foot  of  the  western 
mountains,  overlooks  an  immense  extent  of  1,he 
richest  land,  abundantly  wateral,  and  covered  with 
corn  and  other  grain."  Here,  too,  as  at  .lericho,  the 
cultivation  is  conducted  principally  by  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  villages  on  the  western  mountains. 

39.  All  the  irrigation  necessary  for  the  towns,  or 
for  the  cultivation  whicli  formerly  existed,  or  still 
exists,  in  the  Ghor,  is  obtained  from  the  torrents  and 
springs  of  the  western  mountains.  For  all  ])urposes 
to  which  a  river  is  ordinarily  applied,  the  Joidan  is 
useless.  So  rapid  that  its  course  is  one  continued 
aitaract ;  so  crooked,  that  in  the  whole  of  its  lower 
and  main  course,  it  has  hardly  half  ;i  mile  straiglit ; 
so  broken  with  rapids  and  other  impediments,  that 

surrounding  scenery,  are  not  more  accurate  than  many 
other  versions  of  Scripture  scenes  and  facts  : — 
"Sweet  fields  beyond  the  swelling  flood 
Stand  dressed  in  living  Kncn  .- 
So  to  the  Jews  old  Canaan  stood. 
While  Jordan  rolkd  between." 
1  Besides  Gilgal,  the  tribe  of  lienjamin  had  four  cities 
or  settlements  in   the  neighbourhood  of  Jericho  (.fosh. 
xvill.  21).     The  rebuilding  of  the  last-named  town  in 
Ahab's    reign   probably  indicates   an    increase    in    the 
prosperity  of  the  district. 

■"  This  seems  to  have  been  the  irtpCxiapot,  or  "  region 
round  about"  Jordan,  mentioned  in  the  Gospnls,  and 
possibly  answering  to  the  Viccar  tif  the  ancient  liebrews. 
(See  Stanley,  i'.  d-  /'.  2S4,  48H.) 

"  The  word  sukkar  (sugar)  is  found  in  the  names  of  places 
near  'J'iberias  below  Sebbeh  (Masada),  and  near  Gaza,  as 
well  as  at  Jeiicho.  All  these  are  In  the  depressed  regions. 
For  the  indigo,  see  Poole  {(limir.  Juurual,  xxvi.  67). 

"  Robinson,  ili.  314 ;  and  from  the  writer's  own  ob- 
servation. 

'.'  X  '2 


676 


PALESTINE 


no  boat  can  swim  for  more  than  the  same  distance 
continuously;  so  deep  bolow  the  surface  of  the  ad- 
jacent country  tliat  it  is  invisible,  and  can  only  with 
dilficulty  be  approached  ;  resolutely  refusing  all  com- 
munication with  the  ocean  and,  ending  in  a  lake, 
the  peculiar  conditions  of  which  render  navigation 
impossible — with  all  these  ehai-acteristics  the  Jordan, 
in  any  sense  which  we  attach  to  the  woid  "  river,"  is 
no  river  at  all : — alike  useless  for  irrigation  aud  na- 
vigation, it  is  in  fact,  what  its  Arabic  name  signifies, 
nothing  but  a  "  great  watering  place  "  {Sheriat  el- 
Khehir). 

40.  But  though  the  Jordan  is  so  unlike  a  river  in 
the  Western  sense  of  the  term,  it  is  tar  less  so 
than  the  other  streams  of  the  Holy  Land.  It  is 
at  least  perennial,  while,  with  iew  exceptions,  they 
are  mere  winter  torrents,  rushing  and  foaming 
during  the  continu'Uice  of  the  rain,  and  quickly 
drying  np  after  the  commencement  of  summer : 
"  What  time  they  wax  warm  they  vanish  ;  when 
it  is  hot  they  are  consumed  out  of  their  place  .... 
they  go  to  nothing  and  perish  "  (Job  vi.  15).  For 
fully  half  the  year,  these  "rivers"  or  "brooks," 
as  our  version  of  the  Bible  renders  the  special  term 
{nuchal)  which,  designates  them  in  the  original,  are 
often  mere  diy  lanes  of  hot  white  or  grey  stones  ;  or 
if  their  water  still  continues  to  run,  it  is  a  tiny  rill, 
working  its  way  through  heaps  of  parched  boulders 
in  the  centre  of  a  broad  flat  tract  of  loose  stones, 
often  only  traceable  by  the  thin  line  of  verdure 
which  springs  up  along  its  coarse.  Those  who  have 
travelled  in  Provence  or  Granada  in  the  summer  will 
have  no  difficulty  in  recognising  this  description,  and 
in  comprehending  how  the  use  of  such  terms  as 
"river"  or  "brook"  must  mislead  thpse  who  can 
only  read  the  exact  and  vivid  narrative  of  the  Bible 
through  the  medium  of  the  Authorised  Version. 

This  subject  will  be  more  fully  described,  and  a 
list  of  the  few  perennial  streams  of  the  Holy  Land 
given  under  River. 

41.  How  far  the  Valley  of  the  Jordan  was  em- 
ployed by  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  Holy  Land 
as  a  medium  of  communication  between  the  northern 
and  southern  parts  of  the  country  we  can  only  con- 
jecture. Though  not  the  shortest  route  between 
Galilee  and  Judaea,  it  would  yet,  as  far  as  the  levels 
and  form  of  the  ground  are  concerned,  be  the  most 
practicable  for  large  bodies  ;  though  these  advantages 
would  be  seriously  counterbalanced  by  the  sultry 
heat  of  its  climate,  as  compared  with  the  fresher  air 
of  the  more  difficult  road  over  the  highlands. 

The  ancient  notices  of  this  route  are  very  scanty. 

(1.)  From  2  Chr.  xxviii.  15,  we  find  that  the 
captives  taken  from  Judah  by  the  army  of  the 
northern  kingdom  were  sent  back  from  Samaria  to 
Jerusalem  by  way  of  Jericho.  The  route  pursued 
was  probably  by  Nahlus  across  the  Mukhna,  and 
by  Wady  Ferrak  or  Fasail  into  the  Jordan  valley. 
Why  this  road  was  taken  is  a  mystery,  since  it  is 
not  stated  or  implied  that  the  captives  were  accom- 
panied by  any  heavy  baggage  which  would  make  it 
dillicult  to  travel  over  the  central  route.  It  would 
seem,  however,  to  have  been  the  usual  road  from 
the  north  to  Jerusalem  (comp.  Luke  xvii.  11  with 
xix.  1),  as  if  there  were  some  impediment  to  passing 
through  the  region  immediately  north  of  the  city. 


p  WillibaUl  omits  his  route  between  Caesarea  (?  C.  Phi- 
lippi  =  Banias)  and  the  monastery  of  St.  John  the  Baptist 
near  Jericho.  He  is  always  assumed  to  have  come  down 
tlie  valley. 

'f  Num.  xxi.  5.  ■•  Num.  xi.  22. 

*  Neh.  ix.  35.  '   I  Sam.  xiv.  26. 


PALESTINE 

(2.)  Pompey  brought  his  army  and  siege-train 
from  Damascus  to  .Jerusalem  (B.C.  40),  past  Scy- 
thopolis  and  Pella,  and  thence  by  Koreae  (possibly 
the  present  Kerawa  at  the  foot  of  the  Wady  Ferrah) 
to  Jericho  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  3,  §4 ;  B.  J.  1.  6,  §5). 

(3.)  Vespasian  marched  from  Emmaus,  on  the 
edge  of  the  plain  of  Sharon,  not  far  east  of  Ramleh, 
past  Neapolis  {Nablus),  down  the  Wady  Ferrah  or 
Fas'iil  to  Koreae,  and  thence  to  Jericho  {B.  J,  iv. 
8,  §1);  the  same  route  as  that  of  the  captive  Ju- 
daeans  in  No.  1. 

(4.)  Antoninus  Martyr  (cir.  A.D.  600),  and 
possibly  WillibaldP  (a.d.  722)  followed  this  route 
to  Jerusalem. 

(5.)  Baldwin  I.  is  said  to  have  journeyed  fiom 
Jericho  to  Tiberias  with  a  caravan  of  pilgrims. 

(6.)  In  our  own  times  the  whole  length  of  the 
valley  h;is  been  traversed  by  De  Bertou,  and  by 
Dr.  Andeison,  who  accompanied  the  American  Expe- 
dition as  geologist,  but  apparently  by  few  if  any 
other  travellers. 

42.  Monotonous  and  uninviting  as  much  of  the 
Holy  Land  will  appear  from  the  above  description  to 
English  readers,  accustomed  to  the  constant  vei'dure, 
the  succession  of  flowers,  lasting  almost  throughout 
the  year,  the  ample  streams  and  the  varied  surface 
of  our  own  coimtry — we  must  remember  that  its 
aspect  to  the  Israelites  after  that  weary  march 
of  forty  years  through  the  desert,  and  even  by 
the  side  of  the  brightest  recollections  of  Egypt 
that  they  could  conjure  iip,  must  have  been  veiy 
difi'erent.  After  the  "great  and  terrible  wilder- 
ness" with  its  "fiery  serpents,"  its  "scorpions," 
"drought,"  and  "rocks  of  flint" — the  slow  and 
sultry  march  all  day  in  the  dust  of  that  enormous 
procession — the  eager  looking  forward  to  the  well 
at  which  the  encampment  was  to  be  pitched — the 
crowding,  the  fighting,  the  clamour,  the  bitter  dis- 
appointment round  the  modicum  of  water  when  at 
last  the  desired  spot  was  readied  —  the  "  light 
bread"?  so  long  "loathed" — the  rare  treat  of  animal 
food  when  the  quails  descended,  or  an  approach  to  the 
sea  permitted  the  "  fish"'  to  be  caught;  after  this 
daily  struggle  tor  a  painful  existence,  how  grateful 
must  have  been  the  rest  afforded  by  the  Land  of 
Promise ! — how  delicious  the  shade,  scanty  though 
it  were,  of  the  hills  and  ravines,  the  gushing  springs 
and  gi'een  plains,  even  the  mere  wells  and  cisterns, 
the  vineyards  and  olive-yaids  and  "  fruit  trees  '  in 
abundance,"  the  cattle,  sheep,  and  goats,  covering 
the  country  with  their  long  black  lines,  the  bees 
swarming  round  their  pendant  combs'  in  rock  or 
wood  !  Moreover  they  entered  the  country  at  the 
time  of  the  Passover,"  when  it  was  arrayed  in  the 
full  glory  and  freshness  of  its  brief  springtide, 
before  the  scorching  sun  of  summer  had  had  time 
to  wither  its  fiowers  and  embrown  its  verdure. 
Taking  all  these  circumstances  into  account,  and 
allowing  for  the  bold  metaphors"  of  oriental  speech 
— so  different  from  our  cold  depreciating  expres- 
sions— it  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  those  way- 
worn travellers  could  have  chosen  no  fitter  words 
to  ex-press  what  their  new  country  was  to  them 
than  those  which  they  so  often  employ  in  the 
accounts  of  the  conquest — "  a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey,  the  glory  of  all  lands." 


"  Josh.  v.  10, 11. 

»  See  some  useful  remarks  on  the  use  of  similar  language 
by  the  natives  of  the  East  at  the  present  day,  in  reference 
to  spots  inadequate  to  such  expressions  in  The  Jens  in 
the  East,  hy  Beaton  and  Franlil  (ii.  359). 


PALESTINE 

43.  Again,  the  variiitions  of  the  seasons  ma}'' appear 
to  us  slight,  and  the  atmosphere  dry  and  hot ;  but 
after  the  monotonous  climate  of  Egypt,  where  rain 
is  a  rare  phenomenon,  and  where  the  difi'erence 
between  summer  and  winter  is  hardly  perceptible, 
the  "  rain  of  heaven "  must  have  been  a  most 
grateful  novelty  in  its  two  seasons,  the  former  and 
the  lattei- — the  occasional  snow  and  ice  of  the  win- 
ters of  Palestine,  and  the  burst  of  retui'ning  spring, 
must  have  had  double  the  effect  which  they  would 
produce  on  those  accustomed  to  such  changes.  Nor 
is  the  change  only  a  i  elative  one ;  there  is  a  real 
difference — due  partly  to  the  higher  latitude  of 
Palestine,  partly  to  its  proximity  to  the  sea — be- 
tween the  sultry  atmosphere  of  the  Fjgyptian  valley 
and  the  invigorating  sea-breezes  which  blow  over 
the  hills  of  Ephraim  and  Judah. 

44.  The  contrast  with  Egypt  would  tell  also  in 
another  way.  In  place  of  the  huge  everflowing  river 
whose  only  variation  was  from  low  to  high,  and 
from  high  to  low  again,  and  which  lay  at  tiie 
lowest  level  of  that  level  country,  so  that  all  in-i- 
gation  had  to  be  done  by  arti  ticial  labour — "  a  land 
where  thou  sowedst  thy  seed  and  wateredst  it  with 
thy  foot  like  a  garden  of  herbs  " — in  place  of  this, 
they  were  to  find  themselves  in  a  land  of  constant 
and  considerable  undulation,  where  the  water,  either 
of  gushing  spring,  or  deep  well,  or  flowing  stream, 
could  be  procured  at  the  most  varied  elevations, 
requiring  only  to  be  judiciously  husbanded  and 
skilfully  conducted  to  iind  its  own  way  through 
field  or  garden,  whether  terraced  on  the  hill-sides 
or  extended  in  the  broad  bottoms.^  But  such  change 
was  not  compulsory.  Those  who  preferred  the 
climate  and  the  mode  of  cultivation  of  Egypt  could 
resort  to  the  lowland  plains  or  the  Jordan  valley, 
where  the  tempmature  is  more  constant  and  many 
degrees  higher  than  on  the  more  elevated  districts 
of  the  country,  where  the  breezes  never  penetrate, 
whei'e  the  light  fertile  soil  recalls,  as  it  did  in  the 
earliest  •  times,  that  of  Egypt,  and  where  the  Jordan 
in  its  lowness  of  level  presents  at  least  one  point  of 
resemblance  to  the  Nile. 

45.  In  truth,  on  closer  consideration,  it  will  be 
seen  that,  beneath  the  appai'ent  monotony,  there  is  a 
variety  in  the  Holy  Land  really  remarkable.  There 
is  the  variety  due  tc  the  diflerence  of  level  between 
the  ditlerent  parts  of  tlie  country.  There  is  the 
variety  of  climate  and  of  natural  appearances,  pro- 
ceeding, jiartly  from  those  \'eiy  dillereuces  of  level, 
and  partly  fmni  tlie  proximity  of  the  snow-capped 
Hernion  and  Lebanon  on  the  north  and  of  tiie 
torrid  desert  on  the  south  ;  an'd  which  appro-ximate 
the  climate,  in  many  respects,  to  that  of  regions 
much  further  north.  There  is  also  the  variety 
which    is   inevitably  produced  by   the  ])resence  of 


PALESTINE 


677 


y  The  view  taken  .above,  that  tlic  benuty  of  the  Pro- 
mised Land  v/as  greatly  enliancrd  to  the  Israelites  by 
its  contrast  with  the  scenes  they  had  previously  passed 
timiugh,  is  corroboiatcd  by  the  fact  that  such  laudatory 
expressions  as  "  the  land  ilowing  with  milk  and  honey," 
"  the  glory  of  all  lands,"  &c.,  occur,  with  rare  oxcoptlons, 
in  those  parts  of  tlic  Bible  only  which  purport  to  have 
been  composed  just  1  efore  their  entrance,  and  that  in  the 
few  cases  of  their  employment  by  the  Prophets  (Jcr.  xi.  5, 
xxxii.  22;  Ez.  xx.  U,  15)  there  is  always  an  allusion  to 
"  Kgj"pt,"  "  the  iron  furnace,"  the  piussing  of  the  Red  Sea, 
or  the  wilderness,  to  point  the  contrast. 

s  Gcu.  xiii.  10.  All  ISi'y  (il.  209)  says  that  the  mari- 
time plain,  from  Khan  Youuos  to  .TafTii,  Is  "  of  rich  soil, 
similar  to  the  slime  of  the  Nile."  ■X)ther  points  of  resem- 
blance are  mentioned  by  Robinson  {/I.  li.  ii.  22,  34,  35, 
226).  and  Thomson  (Land  and  Book,  ch.  36).    Tlie  plain 


the  sea — "  the   eternal  freshness   and   liveliness   of 
ocean." 

46.  Each  of  these  is  continually  reflected  in  the 
Hebrew  literature.  The  contrast  between  the  high- 
lands and  lowlands  is  more  than  implied  in  the 
habitual  foims  of  ^expression,  "going  up"  to  Judah, 
Jerusalem,  Hebron  ;  "  going  doun "  to  Jericho, 
(!a]iernaum,  Lydda,  Caesarea,  (jaza,  and  Egypt. 
More  than  this,  the  difference  is  marked  unmistake- 
ably  in  the  topographical  terms  which  so  abound 
in,  and  are  so  peculiar  to,  this  literature.  "  The 
mountain  of  Judah,"  "  the  mountain  of  Israel," 
"  the  mountain  of  Naphtali,"  are  the  names  by 
which  the  three  great  divisions  of  the  highlands  are 
designated.  The  predominant  names  for  the  towns 
of  the  same  district — Gibeah,  Geba,  Gaba,  Gibeon 
(meaning  ••hill'") ;  Ramah,  Uamathaim  (the  "brow" 
of  an  eminence)  ;  Mizpeh,  Zophim,  Zephathah  (all 
modifications  of  a  root  signifying  a  wide  prospect) 
— all  reflect  the  elevation  of  the  region  in  which 
they  were  situated.  On  the  other  hand,  the  great 
lowland  districts  have  each  their  peculiar  name. 
The  southern  part  of  the  maritime  plain  is  "  the 
Shefelah;"  the  northern,  ", Sharon;"  the  Valley  of 
the  Jordan,  "  ha-Arabah  ;"  names  which  are  never 
intei'changed,  and  never  confounded  with  the  terms 
(such  as  emck,  nachal,  gai)  employed  foi'  the  ravines, 
torrent-beds,  and  small  valleys  of  the  highlands.'' 

47.  The  differences  in  'jlimate  are  no  less  often 
mentioned.  The  Psalmists,  Prophets,  and  >•'  historical 
Books,  are  full  of  allusions  to  the  fierce  heat  of  the 
midday  sun  and  the  dryness  of  summer ;  no  less 
than  to  the  various  accompaniments  of  winter — 
the  rain,  snow,  frost,  ice,  and  fogs,  which  are 
experienced  at  Jerusalem  and  other  places  in  the 
upper  country  quite  sufficiently  to  make  every  one 
familiar  with  them.  Even  the  sharp  alternations 
between  the  heat  of  the  days  and  the  coldness  of  the 
n-ghts,  which  strike  every  traveller  in  Palestine,  afo 
mentioned."*  The  Israelites  practised  no  commerce 
by  .sea;  and,  with  the  single  exception  of  Joppa,  not 
only  possessed  no  harbour  along  the  whole  length  of 
their  coast,  but  had  no  word  by  which  to  denote  one. 
But  that  their  poets  knew  and  appreciated  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  sea  is  plain  from  such  expressions  as 
are  constantly  recurring  in  their  works — "  the  great 
and  wide  sea,"  its  "  ships,"  its  "  monsters,"  its 
roaring  and  dashing  "  waves,"  its  "  depths,"  its 
"  sand,"  its  mariners,  the  perils  of  its  navigation. 

It  is  unnecessary  here  to  show  how  materially  the 
Bible  has  gained  in  its  hold  on  Western  nations  by 
these  vi\id  reflections  of  a  country  .so  much  more 
like  tho.se  of  the  West  than  are  most  oriental  i-egions  : 
but  of  the  fact  there  can  be  no  doubt,  and  it  has  been 
a<imirably  brought  out  by  Professor  .Stanley  in  Sinai 
and  Falestine,  chap.  ii.  sect.  vii. 


of  Gennesareth  still  "recalls  the  Valley  of  the  Nile" 
(Stanley,  S.  &  P.  374).  'Phe  paiiyrus  is  said  to  grow 
there  (Buchanan,  Cler.  Furlough,  392). 

«  The  same  expressions  are  still  used  by  the  Arabs  of 
the  Nejd  with  reference  to  .Syria  and  their  own  country 
(WaUin,  Georp:  Soc.  Journal,  .vxiv.  174). 

''  It  is  impossible  to  trace  these  correspondences  and 
distinctions  in  the  English  Bible,  our  tr.iiislalors  not 
having  always  rendered  the  same  Hebrew  by  the  same 
ICnglish  word.  But  the  corrections  will  be  found  in  the 
Appendix  to  lYofessor  Stanley's  Sinai  amt  Palestine. 

<=  Vs.  -xlx.  6,  xxxil.  4 ;  Is.  Iv.  6,  xxv.  5;  Gen.  xvlii.  1  ; 
1  Sam.  xl.  9  ;  Neh.  vii.  ,"!. 

^  Jer.  xxxvl.  30.  Gen.  xxxl.  40  refers— unless  the  recent 
speculations  of  Mr.  Belce  should  prove  trne— to  Meso- 
potamia. 


678 


PALESTINE 


48.  lu  the  preceding  description  allusion  has 
been  made  to  many  of  the  characteristic  features  of 
the  Holy  Land.  But  it  is  impossible  to  close  this 
account  without  mentioning  a  defect  which  is  even 
more  characteristic— its  lack  of  monuments  and  per- 
sonal relics  of  the  nation  who  possessed  it  for  so 
many  centuries,  and  gave  it  its  claim  to  our  venera- 
tion and  affection.  When  compared  with  other  nations 
of  equal  antiquity — Egypt,  Greece,  Assyria — the 
contrast  is  truly  remarkable.  In  Egypt  and  Greece, 
and  also  in  Assyria,  as  far  as  our  knowledge  at 
present  extends,  we  Hnd  a  series  of  buildings,  reach- 
ing down  from  the  most  remote  and  mysterious 
antiquity,  a  chain,  of  which  hardly  a  link  is  want- 
ing, and  which  records  the  progress  of  the  people 
in  civilisation,  art,  and  religion,  as  certainly  as  the 
buildings  of  the  mediaeval  architects  do  that  of  the 
various  nations  of  modern  Europe.  We  possess  also 
a  multitude  of  objects  of  use  and  ornament,  belong- 
ing to  those  nations,  truly  astonishing  in  number, 
and  pertaining  to  every  station,  office,  and  act  in 
their  official,  religious,  and  domestic  life.  But  in 
Palestine  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  there  does 
not  exist  a  single  edifice,  or  part  of  an  edifice,  of 
which  we  can  be  sure  that  it  is  of  a  date  anterior 
to  the  Christian  era.  Excavated  tombs,  cisterns, 
flights  of  stairs,  which  are  encountered  everywhere, 
are  of  course  out  of  the  question.  They  may  be — 
some  of  them,  such  as  the  tombs  of  Hinnom  and 
Shiloh,  probably  are — of  very  great  age,  older  than 
anything  else  in  the  country.  But  there  is  no 
evidence  either  way,  and  as  far  as  the  history  of  art 
is  concerned  nothing  would  be  gained  if  their  age 
were  ascertained.  The  only  ancient  buildings  of 
which  we  can  spoak  with  certainty  are  those  which 
were  erected  by  the  Greeks  or  Romans  during  their 
occupation  of  the  country.  Not  that  these  buildings 
have  not  a  certain  individuality  which  separates 
them  from  any  mere  Greek  or  Roman  building  in 
Greece  or  Rome.  But  the  fact  is  certain,  that  not 
one  of  them  was  built  while  the  Israelites  were 
masters  of  the  country,  and  before  the  date  at 
which  Western  nations  began  to  get  a  footing  in 
Palestine.  And  as  with  the  buildings  so  with 
other  memorials.  With  one  exception,  the  museums 
of  Europe  do  not  possess  a  single  piece  of  pottery  or 
metal  work,  a  single  weapon  or  household  utensil, 
an  ornament  or  a  piece  of  armour,  of  Israelite  make, 
which  can  give  us  the  least  conception  of  the 
manners  or  outward  appliances  of  the  nation  before 
the  date  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus. 
The  coins  form  the  single  exception.  A  tew  rare 
specimens  still  exist,  the  oldest  of  them  attributed — 
though  even  that  is  matter  of  dispute — to  the  Mac- 
(;abees,  and  their  rudeness  and  insiguificanc*  furnish 
a  stronger  evidence  than  even  their  absence  could 
imply,  of  the  total  want  of  art  among  the  Israelites. 

it  may  be  said  that  Palestine  is  now  only  in  the 
same  condition  with  Assyria  before  the  recent  re- 
searches brought  so  much  to  light.  But  the  two 
cases  are  not  parallel.  The  soil  of  Babylonia  is  a 
loose  loam  or  sand,  of  the  desci'iption  best  fitted 
for  covering  up  and  preserving  the  relics  of  former 
ages.  On  the  other  hand,  the  greater  part  of  the 
Holy  Land  is  hard  and  rocky,  and  the  soil  hes  in 
the  valleys  and  lowlands,  where  the  cities  were  only 
veiy  rarely  built.  If  any  store  of  Jewish  relics 
were  remaining  embedded  or  hidden  in  suitable 
ground — as  for  example,  in  the  loose  mass  of  debris 
which  coats  the  slopes  around  Jei-usalem — we  should 
expect  occasionally  to  find  articles  which  might  be 
recognised  as  Jewish.    This  was  the  ca.-c  in  Assyria. 


PALESTINE 

Long  before  the  mounds  were  explored.  Rich  brought 
home  many  fragments  of  inscriptions,  bricks,  and  en- 
graved stones,  which  were  picked  up  on  the  surface, 
and  were  evidently  the  productions  of  some  nation 
whose  art  was  not  then  known.  But  in  Palestine  the 
only  objects  hitherto  discovered  have  all  belonged  to 
the  West — coins  or  arms  of  the  Greeks  or  Romans. 

The  buildings  already  mentioned  as  being  Jewish 
in  character,  though  can-ied  out  with  foreign  details, 
are  the  following: — 

The  tombs  of  the  Kings  and  of  the  Judges :  the 
buildings  known  as  the  tombs  of  Absalom,  Zecha- 
riah,  St.  James,  and  Jehoshaphat;  the  monolith  at 
Siloam  ; — all  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jeru.^alein  : 
the  ruined  synagogues  at  Meiron  and  Kefr  Birlm. 
But  there  are  two  edifices  which  seem  to  bear  a 
character  of  their  own,  and  do  not  so  clearly  betray 
the  style  of  the  West.  These  aie,  the  enclosure 
round  the  sacred  cave  at  Hebron  ;  and  portions  of 
the  western,  southern,  and  eastern  walls  of  the 
Haram  at  Jerusalem,  with  the  vaulted  passage 
below  the  Aksa.  Of  the  former  it  is  impossible  to 
speak  in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge.  The 
latter  will  be  more  fully  noticed  under  the  head  of 
Temple  ;  it  is  sufficient  here  to  name  one  or  two 
considerations  which  seem  to  bear  against  their  being 
of  older  date  than  Herod.  (1.)  Herod  is  distinctly 
said  by  Josephus  to  have  removed  the  old  founda- 
tions, and  laid  others  in  their  stead,  enclosing  double 
the  original  area  {Ant.  xv.  1 1 ,  §3  ;  i>.  /.  i.  2 1 ,  §1 ). 
(2.)  The  part  of  the  wall  which  all  acknowledge  to 
be  the  oldest  contains  the  springing  of  an  arch.  This 
and  the  vaulted  passage  can  hardly  be  assigned  to 
builders  earlier  than  the  time  of  the  Romans.  (3.) 
The  masonry  of  these  magnificent  stones  (absurdly 
called  the  "  bevel"),  on  which  so  much  stress  has 
been  laid,  is  not  exclusively  Jewish  or  even  Eastern. 
It  is  found  at  Persepolis ;  it  is  also  found  at  Cuidus 
and  throughout  Asia  Minor,  and  at  Athens ;  not  on 
stones  of  such  enormous  size  as  those  at  Jerusalem, 
but  similar  in  their  workmanship. 

M.  Renan,  in  his  recent  report  of  his  proceedings 
in  Phoenicia,  has  named  two  circumstances  which 
must  have  had  a  great  effect  in  suppressing  art  or 
architecture  amongst  the  ancient  Israelites,  while 
their  very  existence  proves  that  the  people  had  no 
genius  in  that  direction.  These  are  (1)  the  pro- 
hibition of  sculptured  representations  of  living  crea- 
tures, and  (2)  the  command  not  to  build  a  temple 
anywhei'e  but  at  Jerusalem.  The  hewing  or  polish- 
ing of  building-stones  was  even  forbidden.  "  What," 
he  asks,  "  would  Greece  have  been,  if  it  had  been 
illegal  to  build  any  temples  but  at  Delphi  or  Eleusis  ? 
In  ten  centuries  the  Jews  had  only  three  temples 
to  build,  and  of  these  certainly  two  were  erected 
under  the  guidance  of  foreigneis.  The  existence  of 
synagogues  dates  from  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
and  the  Jews  then  naturally  employed  the  Greek 
style  of  architecture,  which  at  that  time  reigned 
universally." 

In  fact  the  Israelites  never  lost  the  feeling  or  the 
traditions  of  their  early  pastoral  nomad  life.  Long 
after  the  nation  had  been  settled  in  the  countiy, 
the  cry  of  those  earlier  days,  "  To  your  tents, 
0  Israel !"  was  heard  in  periods  of  excitement.^ 
The  prophets,  sick  of  the  luxury  of  the  cities,  are 
constantly  recalling'  the  "tents"  of  that  simpler, 


=  2  Sam.  x.\.  1 ;  1  K.  xii.  16  (that  the  words  are  not  ii 
mere  formula  of  the  historian  is  proved  by  their  occurrence 
in  2  Chr.  x.  16);  2  K.  xiv.  !2. 

f  Jer.  .N.\x.  18;  Zcch.  xii.  7  ;  I's.  Ixxviii.  5.5,  &c. 


PA1.E6TINE 

less  artificial  life ;  and  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  nay 
even  perhaps  of  ZeniLbabel,  was  spoken  of  to  the 
last  as  the  "  teuts  of  the  Lord  of  hosts,"  the 
"place  where  David  had  pitrhed''  his  tent."  It  is 
a  remarkable  fact,  that  eminent  as  Jews  have  been 
in  other  departments  of  art,  science,'  and  affairs, 
no  Jewish  architect,  painter,  or  sculptor  has  ever 
achieved  any  signal  success. 

The  Geology. — Of  the  geological  structure  of 
Palestine  it  has  been  said  with  truth  that  our  in- 
formation is  but  impertect  and  indistinct,  and  that 
much  time  must  elapse,  and  many  a  cherished  hypo- 
thesis be  sacrificed,  before  a  satisfactory  explanation 
can  be  arri\-ed  at  of  its  more  remarkable  phenomena. 
It  is  not  intended  to  attempt  here  more  than  a  very 
cursory  sketch,  addressed  to  the  general  and  non- 
scientific  reader.  The  geologist  must  be  refei'i'ed  to 
the  original  works  from  which  these  remarks  have 
been  compiled. 

1.  The  main  sources  of  our  knowledge  are  (1)  the 
observations  contained  in  the  Travels  of  liussegger, 
an  Austrian  geologist  and  mining  engineer  who 
visited  this  amongst  other  countries  of  the  East  in 
1836-8  (Beiscn  in  Griechenland,  &c.,  4  vols.,  Stutt- 
gard,  1841-49,  with  Atlas) ;  (2)  the  Report  of  H. 
J.  .-Vnderson,  M.D.,  an  American  geologist,  formerly 
Professor  in  Columbia  Coll.,  New  York,  who  accom- 
panied Capbiin  Lynch  in  his  exploration  of  the 
Joidan  and  the  Dead  Sea  (  Geol.  Eeconnaissimce,  in 
Lynch's  Official  Report,  4to.,  185'2,  pp.  75-2u7j  ; 
and  (3)  the  Diary  of  Mr.  H.  Poole,  who  visited 
Palestine  on  a  mission  for  the  British  government 
in  1836  {Journal  of  Geogr.  Society,  vol.  xxvi.  pp. 
3.5-70).  Neither  of  these  contains  anything  ap- 
proachmg  a  complete  investigation,  either  as  to 
extent  or  to  detail  of  obsei'vations.  Russegger  tra- 
velled from  Sinai  to  Hebron  and  Jerusalem.  He 
explored  carefully  the  route  between  the  latter 
place  and  the  Dead  Sea.  He  then  proceeded  to 
•Jaffa  by  the  ordinary  road ;  and  from  thence  to 
Beyrut  and  the  Lebanon  by  Nazareth,  Tiberias, 
Cana,  Akka,  Tyre,  and  Sidon.  Thus  he  left  the 
Dead  Sea  in  its  most  interesting  portions,  the 
Jordan  Valley,  the  central  highlands,  and  the  im- 
portant district  of  the  Upper  Jordan,  untouched. 
His  woik  is  accorajianied  by  two  sections  :  from 
the  Mount  of  Olives  to  the  Joi-dan,  and  from  Tabor 
to  the  Lake  of  Tiberias.  His  observations,  though 
clearly  and  attractively  given,  and  evidently  those 
of  a  practised  observer,  are  too  short  and  cursory 
for  tiie  subject.  The  general  notice  of  his  journey 
is  in  vol.  iii.  76-157;  the  scientific  observations, 
tables,  &c.,  are  contained  between  161  and  291. 
Dr.  Anderson  visited  the  south-western  portion  of 
the  Lebanon  between  Beyrut  and  Banias,  O'alilee, 
the  Lake  of  Tiberias,  the  Jordan  ;  made  the  ciicuit 
of  the  Dead  Sea  ;  and  explored  the  distiict  lietwecn 
that  Lake  and  Jerusalem.  His  account  is  evidently 
drawn  up  with  great  pains,  and  is  far  more  elaborate 
than  that  of  Russegger.  He  gives  full  analyses  of 
the  different  rocks  which  he  examined,  and  very  good 
lithogra])hs  of  fossils;  but  unfbitunately  his  woik  is 
deformed  by  a  very  unreadable  .style.  Mr.  Poole's 
journey  was  confined  to  the  western  and  soutli- 
eastern  portions  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Jordan,  the 
country  between  the  latter  and  Jerusalem,  and  the 

g  Vs.  Ixxxiv.  1,  xliii.  3,  Ixxvl.  2;  Judith  Ix.  8. 
i>  Is.  xxix.  ],  xvi.  5. 

'  See  the  well-known  p.issage  in  Coninrishu,  bk.  iv.  cli.  15. 
I' The   surface  of  the  Dead  Sea  is  KtI7  It.  Ix'low  the 
Mediterranean,  and  its  depth  13ns  ft. 


PALESTINE 


679 


beaten  track  of  the  central  highlands  from  Hebron 
to  Nablus. 

2..  From  the  reports  of  these  observers  it  appears 
that  the  Holy  Land  is  a  much-disturbed  moun- 
tainous tract  of  limestone  of  the  secondary  period 
( Jurassic  and  cretaceous) ;  the  southern  offshoot  of 
the  chain  of  Lebanon  ;  elevated  considerably  above 
the  sea  level ;  with  partial  interruptions  from  ter- 
tiary and  basaltic  deposits.  It  is  part  of  a  v;ist 
mass  of  limestone,  stretching  in  every  direction  e.'c- 
cept  west,  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Holy  Laud. 
The  whole  of  Syria  is  cleft  fronr  north  to  south  by 
a  straight  crevasse  of  moderate  width,  but  extend- 
ing in  the  southern  portion  of  its  centie  division  to 
a  truly  remarkable  (lepth  (''2625  ft.)  below  the  sea 
level.  This  crevasse,  which  contains  the  principal 
watercourse  of  the  countiy,  is  also  the  most  excep- 
tional feature  of  its  geology.  Such  fissures  aie  not 
uncommon  in  limestone  foi  mations ;  but  no  other  is 
known  of  such  a  length  and  of  so  extiaordinary  a 
depth,  and  so  open  throughout  its  greatest  extent. 
It  may  have  been  volcanic  in  its  origin  ;  the  result  of 
an  upheaval  from  beneath,  which  has  tilted  the  lime- 
stone back  on  each  side,  leaving  this  huge  split  in  the 
strata;  the  volcanic  force  having  stopped  short  at 
that  point  in  the  operation,  without  intruding  any 
volcanic  rocks  into  the  fissure.  This  idea  is  supported 
by  the  ciater-like  form  of  the  basins  of  the  Lake  of 
Tiberias  and  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Russ.  206,  7),  and  by 
many  other  tokens  of  volcanic  action,  past  and  pre- 
sent, which  are  encountered  in  and  around  those 
Lakes,  and  along  the  whole  extent  of  the  Valley. 
Or  it  may  have  been  excavated  by  the  gradual  action 
of  the  ocean  duiiiig  the  immense  periods  of  geological 
operation.  The  latter  appears  to  be  tlie  o])inion  of 
Dr.  Anderson  (79,  140,  205)  ;  but  further  exami- 
nation is  necessary  befo.e  a  positive  ojiinion  can  be 
pronounced.  The  ranges  of  the  hills  of  the  surface 
take  the  direction  nearly  due  north  and  soulh, 
though  t'requently  thrown  fiom  their  main  bearing 
and  mitch  broken  up  into  detached  masses.  The 
lesser  watercourses  run  chiefiy  east  and  west  of  the 
central  highlands. 

3.  The  Limestone  consists  of  two  strata,  or  rather 
groups  of  strata.  Tlie  ujiper  one,  which  usually 
meets  the  eye,  over  the  whole  country  from  Hebron 
to  Hermon,  is  a  tolerably  solid  stone,  varying  in 
colour  from  white  to  reddish  bi'own,  with  very  few 
fossils,  inclining  to  ciystalline  structure,  jmd  abound- 
ing in  cavei'ns.  Its  general  surface  has  been  formed 
into  gently  rounded  hills,  crowded  more  or  less 
thickly  together,  separated  by  narrow  valleys  of 
denudation  occasionally  spreading  into  small  plains. 
The  strata  are  not  well  defined,  and  although  some- 
times level""  (in  which  case  they  lend  themselves  to 
the  formation  of  terraces),  are  more  often  violently 
disari-anged."  Remarkable  instances  of  such  con- 
tortions are  to  be  found  on  the  road  from  Jeru- 
salem to  Jeiicho,  where  the  beds  are  seen  pressed 
and  twisted  into  every  variety  of  form. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  these  contor- 
tions, ;is  well  as  the  general  form  of  the  surface, 
are  due  to  forces  not  now  in  action,  but  are  jiart  of 
the  general  configuration  of  the  country,  as  it  was 
left  after  the  last  of  that  succession  of  immersions 
below,  and  upheavals  from,  the  ocean,  by  which 


'■■  As  at  the  twin  hills  of  el-Jib,  the  ancient  G  llKOn,  below 
Acby  Samin!. 

"  As  on  the  road  between  the  upper  and  lovivr  Heit-ur, 
about  live  miles  from  d-Jib. 


680 


PALESTINE 


its  present  form  was  given  it,  long  prior  to  the  his- 
toiic  period.  There  is  no  ground  for  believing  that 
the  broad  geological  features  of  this  or  any  part  of 
tlie  country  are  appreciably  altered  from  what  they 
were  at  the  earliest  times  of  tlie  Bible  liistory. 
The  evidences  of  later  action  are,  however,  often 
visible,  as  for  instance  where  the  atmosphere  and 
the  rains  have  furrowed  the  face  of  the  limestone 
cliffs  with  long  and  deep  vertical  channels,  oiten 
causing  the  most  fantastic  forms  (And.  89,  111  ; 
I'oole,  56). 

4.  This  limestone  is  often  found  crowned  with 
chalk,  rich  in  flints,  the  remains  of  a  deposit  which 
probably  once  covered  a  great  portion  of  tlie  country, 
but  has  only  partially  survived  subsequent  immer- 
sions. In  many  districts  the  coarse  flint  or  chert 
which  originally  belonged  to  the  chalk  is  found  in 
great  profusion.  It  is  called  in  the  country  chalce- 
dony (Poole,  57). 

On  the  heights  which  border  the  western  side  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  this  chalk  is  found  in  greater  abun- 
dance and  more  undisturbed,  and  contains  numerous 
springs  of  salt  and  sulphurous  water. 

5.  Near  Jerusalem  the  mass  of  the  ordinary  lime- 
stone is  often  mingled  with  large  bodies  of  dolomite 
(magnesian  limestone),  a  hardish  semi-crystalline 
I'ock,  reddish  white  or  brown,  with  glistening  sur- 
face and  pearly  lustre,  often  containing  pores  and 
small  cellular  cavities  lined  with  oxide  of  iron  or 
minute  crystals  of  bitter  spar.  It  is  not  stratified  ; 
but  it  is  a  question  whether  it  has  not  been  pro- 
duced among  the  ordinary  limestone  by  some  subse- 
quent chemical  agency.  Most  of  the  caverns  near 
.lerusalem  occur  in  this  rock,  though  in  other  parts 
of  the  country  they  are  found  in  the  more  friable 
chalky  limestone.°    So  much  for  the  upper  stratum. 

6.  The  iower  stratum  is  in  two  divisions  or 
series  of  beds — the  upper,  dusky  in  colour,  contorted 
and  cavernous  like  that  just  described,  but  more 
ferruginous — the  lower  one  dark  grey,  compact  and 
solid,  and  characterised  by  abundant  fossils  of  cidaris, 
an  extinct  echinus,  the  spines  of  which  are  the  well- 
known  "  olives  "  of  the  convents.  This  last-named 
rock  appears  to  form  the  substratum  of  the  whole 
country,  east  as  well  as  west  of  the  Jordan. 

The  ravine  by  which  the  traveller  descends  from 
the  summit  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  (2700  ti^et 
above  the  Mediterraneanj  to  Jericho  (900  below  it) 
cuts  through  the  strata  already  mentioned,  and 
affords  an  unrivalled  opportunity  for  examining 
them.  The  lower  formation  differs  entirely  in  cha- 
racter from  the  upper.  Instead  of  smooth,  common- 
place, swelling,  outlines,  everything  here  is  rugged, 
pointed,  and  abrupt.  Huge  fissures,  the  work  of 
tlie  eai'thquakes  of  ages,  cleave  the  rock  in  all  direc- 
tions— they  are  to  be  found  as  much  as  1000  feet 
deep  by  not  more  than  30  or  40  feet  wide,  and 
with  almost  vertical  P  sides.  One  of  them,  near  the 
ruined  khan  at  which  travellers  usually  halt,  pre- 
sents a  most  interesting  and  characteristic  section 
of  the  strata  (Kussegger,  247-251,  &c.). 

7.  After  the  limestone  had  received  the  general 
fonn  which  its  surface  still  ret;iins,  but  at  a  time 
far  anterior  to  any  historic  period,  it  was  pierced 
and  broken  by  large  eruptions  of  lava  pushed  up 
from  beneath,  which  has  broken  up  and  overflowed 
the  stratified  beds,  and  now  appears  in  the  form  of 
basalt  or  trap. 


"  See  the  description  of  the  caverns  of  Beit  Jibrin  and 
Beir  Dubban  in  Rob.  ii.  23,  51-3 ;  and  Van  dc  Vclde, 
ii.  155. 


PALESTmE 

8.  On  the  vvest  of  Jordan  tliese  volcanic  rooks 
have  been  hitherto  found  only  north  of  the  moun- 
tains of  Samaria.  They  are  firet  encountered  on 
the  south-western  side  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon 
(Russ.  258):  then  they  are  lost  sight  of  till  the 
opposite  side  of  the  plain  is  reached,  being  probably 
hidden  below  the  deep  rich  soil,  except  a  i'&'Vf  pebbles 
here  and  there  on  the  surface.  Beyond  this  they 
abound  over  a  district  which  may  be  said  to  be  con- 
tained between  Delata  on  the  north,  Tiberias  on  the 
east.  Tabor  on  the  south,  and  Turan  on  the  west. 
There  seem  to  have  been  two  centres  of  eruption : 
one,  and  that  the  most  ancient  (And.  129,  134),  at 
or  about  the  Kurn  Hattin  (the  traditional  Mount 
of  Beatitudes),  whence  the  stream  flowed  over  the 
declivities  of  the  limestone  towards  the  lake  (Russ. 
259,  260).  This  mass  of  basalt  forms  the  cliffs  at 
the  back  of  Tiberias,  and  to  its  disintegration  is  due 
the  black  soil,  so  extremely  productive,  of  the  Ard 
el  Hamma  and  the  Plain  of  Genesareth,  which  lie, 
the  one  on  the  south,  the  other  on  the  north,  of  the 
ridge  of  Hattin.  The  other — the  more  recent — was 
more  to  the  north,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Safed, 
where  three  of  the  ancient  craters  still  exist,  con- 
verted into  the  reservoirs  or  lakes  of  el  Jish,  Taiteba, 
and  Delata  (And.  128,  9  ;  Caiman,  in  Kitto's  Phys. 
Geog.  119). 

The  basalt  of  Tiberias  is  fully  described  by  Dr. 
Anderson.  It  is  dark  iron-grey  in  tint,  cellular, 
but  firm  in  texture,  amygdaloidal,  the  cells  filled 
with  carbonate  of  lime,  olivine  and  augite,  with  a 
specific  gravity  of  2'6  to  2'9.  It  is  often  columnar 
in  its  more  developed  portions,  as,  for  instance,  on 
the  cliffs  behind  the  town.  Here  the  junctions  of 
the  two  formations  may  be  seen ;  the  base  of  the 
cliffs  being  limestone,  while  the  crown  and  brow 
are  massive  basalt  (124,  135,  136). 

The  lava  of  Delata  and  the  northera  centre  differs 
considerably  from  that  of  Tiberias,  and  is  pro- 
nounced by  Dr.  Anderson  to  be  of  later  date.  It 
is  found  of  various  colours,  from  black-brown  to 
reddish-gi-ey,  very  porous  in  texture,  and  contains 
much  pumice  and  scoriae ;  polygonal  columns  are 
seen  at  el  Jish,  where  the  neighbouring  cretaceous 
beds  are  contorted  in  an  unusual  manner  (And. 
128,  129,  130). 

A  third  variety  is  found  at  a  spur  of  the  hills  of 
Galilee,  projecting  into  the  Ard  el  Huleh  below 
Kedes,  and  referred  to  by  Dr.  Anderson  as  Tell  el 
Haiyeh  ;  but  of  this  rock  he  gives  no  description,  and 
declines  to  assign  it  any  chronological  position  (134). 
9.  The  volcanic  action  which  in  pre-historic  times 
projected  this  basalt,  has  left  its  later  traces  in  the 
ancient  records  of  the  country,  and  is  even  still  active 
in  the  form  of  earthquakes.  Not  to  speak  of  passages  1 
in  the  poetical  books  of  the  Bible,  which  can  hardly 
have  been  suggested  except  by  such  awful  cata- 
strophes, there  is  at  least  one  distinct  allusion  to 
them,  viz.  that  of  Zechariah  (xiv.  5)  to  an  earth- 
quake in  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  which  is  corroborated 
by  Josephus,  who  adds  that  it  injured  the  Temple, 
and  brought  down  a  large  mass  of  rock  from  the 
Mount  of'Olives  {Ant.  ix.  10,  §4). 

"  Syria  and  Palestine,"  says  Sir  Charles  Lyell 
{Principles,  8th  ed.  p.  340),  "  abound  in  volcanic 
appearances;  and  very  extensive  areas  have  been 
shaken  at  different  periods,  with  great  destruction  of 
cities  and  loss  of  lives.    Continued  mention  is  made 


p  Similar  rents  were  cleft  in  the  rock  of  el-Jish  by  the 
earthquake  of  1837  (Caiman,  in  Kitto,  Ph.  Geog.  158). 
9  Is.  xxiv.  17-20,  Amos  ix.  6,  he.  &c. 


PALESTINE 

in  history  ot"  the  ravnees  committed  by  earthquakes 
in  Sidon,  Tyre,  Beyrut,  Laodicea,  and  Antioch." 
The  same  author  (p  342)  mentions  the  remark- 
able fact  tliat  "  from  the  13th  to  the  17th  centuries 
there  was  an  almost  entire  cessation  of  earthquakes 
in  Syria  and  Judaea ;  and  that,  during  the  interval 
of  quiescence,  the  Archipelasjo,  together  with  part 
of  Asia  Minor,  Southern  Italy  and  Sicily  suffered 
greatly  fro*n  earthquakes  and  volcanic  eruptions." 
Since  they  have  again  be^un  to  be  active  in  Syria, 
the  most  remarkable  earthquakes  have  been  those 
which  destroyed  Aleppo  in  1616  and  1822  (for 
this  see  Wollf,  Travels,  ch.  9  ),  Antioch  in  1737,  and 
Tiberias  and  Safed  in  1837'  (Thomson,  ch.  19). 
A  list  of  those  which  are  known  to  have  affected 
the  Holy  Land  is  given  by  Dr.  Piisey  in  his  Coni- 
mentartj  on  Amos  iv.  11.  See  also  the  Index  to 
Kitter,  vol.  viii.  p.  1953. 

The  rocks  between  Jerusalem  and  Jericho  show 
many  an  evidence  of  these  convulsions,  as  we  have 
already  remarked.  Two  earthquakes  only  are  re- 
corded as  having  aftWted  Jerusalem  itself — that  in 
the  reign  of  [Jzziah  already  mentioned,  and  that  at 
the  time  of  the  crucifixion,  when  "the  rocks  were 
rent  and  the  rocky  tombs  torn  open  "  (Maft.  xxvii. 
51).  Slight'  shocks  are  still  occasionally  felt  there 
{e.  g.  Poole,  56),  but  the  general  exemption  of  that 
city  fi'om  any  injury  by  earthquakes,  except  in  these 
two  cases,  is  I'eally  remarkable.  The  ancient  Jewish 
writers  were  aware  of  it,  and  appealed  to  the  fact 
as  a  proof  of  the  favour  of  Jehovali  to  His  chosen 
city  (Ps.  xlvi.  1,  2). 

10.  But  in  addition  to  earthquakes,  the  hot  salt  and 
fetid  springs  which  are  found  at  Tiberias,  Caliirhoe, 
and  other  spots  along  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and 
round  the  basins  of  its  lakes,'  and  the  rock-salt, 
nitre,  and  sulphur  of  the  Dead  Sea  are  all  evidences 
of  volcanic  or  plutonic  action.  Von  Buch  in  his 
letter  to  Kobinson  (B.  R.  ii.  525),  goes  so  far  as  to 
cite  the  bitumen  of  the  Dead  Sea  as  a  further  token 
of  it.  The  hot  springs  of  Tiberias  were  observed  to 
flow  more  copiously,  and  to  increase  in  temperature, 
at  the  time  of  the  earthquake  of  1837  (Thomson, 
ch.  19,  26). 

1 1.  In  the  Jordan  Valley  the  basalt  is  frequently 
encountered.  Here,  as  before,  it  is  deposited  on  the 
limestone,  which  forms  the  substratum  of  the  whole 
country.  It  is  visible  iVom  tin;e  to  time  on  the 
banks  and  in  the  bed  of  the  river  ;  but  so  covered 
with  deposits  of  tufa,  conglomerate,  and  alluvium,  as 
not  to  be  traix'able  without  diificulty  (And.  136-1 52). 
On  the  westei'n  side  of  the  lower  Jordan  and  Dead 
Sea  no  volcanic  formations  have  been  found  (And. 
81,  133;  Kuss.  205,  251);  nor  do  they  appear  on 


PALESTINE 


681 


'  Four-fifths  of  the  population  of  Safed,  and  one-fourth 
of  that  of  Tiberias,  were  killed  on  this  occasion. 

«  I'iven  the  tremendous  earthqiiake  of  May  20,  1202, 
only  did  Jenisulem  a  very  slight  damage  (Abdul-latlff,  in 
Kitto,  Phys.  (ieogr.  148). 

«  It  may  be  convenient  to  give  a  list  of  the  hot  or 
brackish  springs  of  I'alestine,  as  far  as  they  can  be  col- 
lected. It  will  be  observed  that  they  arc  all  in  or  about 
the  Jordan  Valley.     Beginning  at  the  north  :- 

AinEyub.  and  Ain 'l'ttl)ighah,  N.K.  of  Lake  of  Tiberias: 
slightlywann,  too  brackish  to  be  drinkable.  (Rob.  ii. 405.) 

Aln  el-13aridoh,  on  shore  of  Lake,  S.  of  Mijdel:  SO  Fahr., 
slightly  brackish.     (Kob.il.  396.) 

Tiberias:  144''Fahr. ;  salt,  bitter,  sulphureous. 

Amati'h,  in  the  Waily  Mundhur  :  very  hot,  slightly  sul- 
phureous.   (Hurckhardt.  May  6.) 

Wady  Mallh  (Salt  Valley),  in  the  Ghor  near  Sakilt: 
9?.°  Fahr. ;  very  salt,  fetid.     (I{ob.  ili.  30«.) 


its  eastern  shore  till  the  Wady  Zurka  Main  is  ap- 
proached, and  then  only  in  erratic  fi-agments  (And. 
191).  At  Wady  Hemarah,  north  of  the  last-men- 
tioned stream,  the  igneous  rocks  first  make  their 
appearance  in  situ  near  the  level  of  the  v.'ater  (194). 

12.  It  is  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  that  the  most 
extensive  and  remarkable  developments  of  igneous 
rocks  are  found.  Over  a  large  portion  of  the  sur- 
face from  Damascus  to  the  latitude  of  the  south 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  even  beyond  that,  they  occur 
in  the  greatest  abundance  all  over  the  suiface. 
The  limestone,  however,  still  underlies  the  whole. 
These  extraordinary  formations  render  this  region 
geologioilly  the  most  remarkable  part  of  all  Syria. 
In  some  districts,  such  .as  the  Lejah  (the  ancient 
Argob  or  Trachouitis),  the  Sufa  and  the  Hurrah, 
it  presents  appearances  and  characteristics  which 
are  perhaps  unique  on  the  earth's  surface.  These 
regions  are  yet  but  veiy  imperfectly  known,  but 
travellers  are  beginning  to  visit  them,  and  We  shall 
possibly  be  in  possession  ere  long  of  the  results  of 
further  investigation.  A  portion  of  them,  has  been 
recently  described  in  great  detail"  by  Jlr.  Wetzsteiu, 
Prussian  consul  at  Damascus.  They  lie,  however, 
beyond  the  boundary  of  tlie  Holy  Land  proper,  and 
the  reader  must  therefore  be  referred  for  these  dis- 
coveries to  the  head  of  Trachonitis. 

13.  The  tertiary  and  alluvial  beds  remain  to  be 
noticed.  These  are  chiefly  remarkable  in  the  neigli- 
bourhood  of  the  Jordan,  as  forming  the  floor  of 
the  valley,  and  as  existing  along  the  course,  and 
accumulated  at  the  mouths,  of  the  torrents  which 
deliver  their  tributary  streams  into  the  river,  and 
into  the  still  deeper  caldron  of  the  Dead  Sea.  They 
appear  to  be  all  of  later  date  than  the  igneous  rocks 
described,  though  even  this  cannot  be  considered 
as  certain. 

14.  The  floor  of  the  Jordan  valley  is  described  by 
Dr.  Anderson  (140)  as  exhibiting  throughout  more 
or  less  distinctly  the  traces  of  two  independent"  ter- 
races. The  upper  one  is  much  the  broadei-  of  the 
two.  It  extends  back  to  the  face  of  the  limestone 
mountains  which  form  the  walls  of  the  valley  on 
east  and  west.  He  regards  this  as  older  than  the 
river,  though  of  course  formed  after  the  removal 
of  the  material  from  between  the  walls.  Its  upper 
and  accessible  portions  consist  of  a  mass  of  detritus 
brought  down  by  tlie  ravines  of  the  walls,  always 
chalky,  sometimes  "  an  actual  chalk  ;"  usually  bare 
of  vegetation  (And.  143),  though  not  uniformly  so 
(Rob.  iii.  315). 

Below  this,  varying  in  depth  from  50  to  150  feet, 
is  the  second  terrace,  wliich  reaches  to  the  channel 
of  the  Jordan,  and,  in  Dr.  Anderson's  opinion,  has 


Below  Ain-Feshkah :  fetid  and  brackish.  (Lynch, 
Apr.  IS.) 

One  day  N.  of  Ain-jidy  :  80°  F.abr.:  salt.     (Poole,  67.) 

Between  Wady  Mabras  and  W.  Ivhusheibeh,  S.  of  Ain- 
jidy  :  brackish.     (Ander.son,  177.) 

Wady  Muhar5yat,  45'  V,.  of  Usdum  :  salt,  containing 
small  fish.     (Ritter,  Jordan,  736 ;  I'oole,  61.) 

Wady  el-Ahsy,S.fc;.  end  of  Dead  Sea:  hot.  (Burckhardt, 
Aug.  7.) 

Wady  Beni-Hamed,  near  Rabba,  K.  side  of  Dead  Sea. 
(Ritter,  Syi-im,  1223.) 

Wady  Zerka  Ulain  (Caliirhoe),  K.  side  of  Dead  Sea : 
very  hot,  very  slightly  sulphureous.  (Seetzcn,  Jan.  IK ; 
Irby,  June  8.) 

"  Jieisebericht  iiher  llauran  und  die  Trachonen,  1860; 
with  map  and  woodcuts. 

»  Compare  Robinson's  diary  of  his  journey  across  llie 
Jordan  near  Sakftl  (iii.  313). 


682 


PALESTINE 


been  escavateJ  by  the  river  itself  before  it  had 
shrunk  to  its  present  limits,  wlieii  it  filled  the 
whole  space  between  the  eastern  and  western  faces 
of  the  upper  teiTace.  The  inner  side  of  both  upper 
and  lower  terraces  is  funowed  out  into  conical  knolls, 
by  the  torrents  of  the  rains  descending  to  the  lower 
level.  These  cones  often  attain  the  magnitude  of 
hills,  and  are  ranged  along  the  edge  of  the  terraces 
with  curious  regularity.  They  display  convenient 
sections,  which  show  sometimes  a  tertiary  limestone 
or  marl,  sometimes  quatenary  deposits  of  sands, 
gravels,  variegated  clays,  or  unstratified  det)-itus. 
The  lower  terrace  bears  a  good  deal  of  vegetation, 
oleander,  agnfls  castus,  &c.  The  alluvial  deposits 
have  in  some  places  been  swept  entirely  away,  for 
Dr.  Anderson  speaks  of  crossing  the  upturned  edges 
of  nearly  vertical  strata  of  limestone,  with  neigh- 
bouring beds  contorted  in  a  very  violent  manner 
(148).     This  was  a  few  miles  N.  of  Jericho. 

All  along  the  channel  of  the  river  are  found 
mounds  and  low  cliffs  of  conglomerates,  and  breccias 
of  various  ages,  and  more  various  composition. 
Rolled  boulders  and  pebbles  of  flinty  sandstone  or 
chert,  which  have  descended  from  the  upper  hills,  are 
found  in  the  cross  ravines ;  and  tufas,  both  calcareous 
and  siliceous,  abound  on  the  ten-aces  (And.  147). 

1 5.  Itound  the  margin  of  the  Dead  Sea  the  tertiary 
beds  assume  larger  and  more  important  proportions 
than  by  the  course  of  the  river.  The  marls,  gyp- 
sites,  and  conglomerates  continue  along  the  base  of 
the  western  cliff  as  far  as  the  Wady  Sebbeh,  where 
they  attain  thei  r  greatest  developm  ent .  South  of  this 
they  form  a  sterile  waste  of  brilliant  white  marl 
and  bitter  salt  flakes,  ploughed  by  the  rain-torrents 
from  the  heights  into  pinnacles  and  obelisks  (180). 

At  the  south-eastern  corner  of  the  sea,  sand- 
stones begin  to  display  themselves  in  great  pro- 
fusion, and  extend  northward  beyond  Wady  Zurka 
Main  (189).  Their  full  development  takes  place  at 
the  mouth  of  the  Wady  Mojeb,  whei'e  the  beds  are 
from  100  to  400  feet  in  height.  They  are  deposited 
on  the  limestone,  and  have  been  themselves  gra- 
dually worn  through  by  the  waters  of  the  ravine. 
There  are  many  varieties,  diflering  in  colour,  com- 
position, and  date.  Dr.  A.  enumerates  several  of 
these  (190,  196),  and  states  instances  of  the  red 
sandstone  having  been  filled  up,  after  excavation, 
by  nonconforming  beds  of  yellow  sandstone  of  a 
much  later  date,  which  in  its  turn  has  been  hol- 
lowed out,  the  hollows  being  now  occupied  by 
detritus  of  a  stream  long  since  extinct. 

Eussegger  mentions  having  found  a  teiiiaiy 
breccia  overlying  the  chalk  on  the  south  of  Carmel, 
composed  of  fragments  of  chalk  and  flint,  cemented 
by  lime  (257). 

16.  The  rich  alluvial  soil  of  the  wide  plains 
which  form  the  maritime  portion  of  the  Holy  Land, 
and  also  that  of  Esdraelon,  Oennesareth,  and  other 
similar  plains,  will  complete  our  sketch  of  the 
geology.  The  former  of  these  districts  is  a  region 
of  from  eight  to  twelve  miles  in  width,  intervening 
between  the  central  highlands  and  the  sea.  It  is 
formed  of  washings  from  those  highlands,  brought 
down  by  the  heavy  rains  which  fall  in  the  winter 
months,  and  which,  though  they  rarely  remain  as 
permanent  streams,  yet  last  long  enough  to  spread 
this  fertilising  manure  over  the  face  of  the  country. 
The  soil  is  a  light  loamy  sand,  red  in  some  places, 


y  The  statement  in  the  text  is  from  Thomson  (Land  and 
Booh-,  ch.  ;{3).  But  tlie  writer  has  learned  that  in  the 
opinion  of  Cujit.  ManstU,  K.  N.  (than  whom  no  one  has  had 


PALESTINE 

and  deep  black  in  others.  The  substratum  is  rarely 
seen,  but  it  appears  to  be  the  same  limestone  which 
composes  the  central  mountains.  The  actual  coast 
is  formed  of  a  very  recent  sandstone  full  of  marine 
shells,  often  those  of  existing  species  (Russ.  256,  7), 
which  is  disintegrated  by  the  waves  and  thrown  ou 
the  shore  as  sand,''  where  it  foiTns  a  tract  of  con- 
siderable width  and  height.  This  sand  in  many 
places  stops  the  outflow  of  the  streams;  and  sends 
them  back  on  to  the  plain,  where  they  overflow  and 
form  marshes,  which  with  proper  treatment  migiit 
afford  most  important  assistance  to  the  fertility  of 
this  already  fertile  district. 

17.  Tha  plain  of  Gennesareth  is  under  similar  con- 
ditions, except  that  its  outer  edge  is  bounded  by  the 
lake  instead  of  the  ocean.  Its  superiority  in  fertility 
to  the  maritime  land  is  probal)ly  due  to  the  abund- 
ance of  running  water  which  it  contains  all  the  year 
round,  and  to  the  rich  soil  produced  from  tlie  decay 
of  the  volcanic  rocRs  on  the  steep  heights  which 
immediately  enclose  it. 

]  8.  The  plain  of  Esdraelon  lies  between  two  ranges 
of  highland,  with  a  third  ithe  hills  separating  it 
from  the  plain  of  Akka),  at  its  north-west  end.  It  is 
watei-ed  by  some  of  the  finest  springs  of  Palestine, 
the  streams  from  which  traverse  it  both  east  and 
west  of  the  central  water-shed,  and  contain  water 
or  mud,  moisture  and  marsh,  even  during  the  hot- 
test months  of  the  year.  The  soil  of  this  plain  is 
also  volcanic,  though  not  so  purely  so  as  that  of 
Gennesareth. 

19.  Bitumen  or  asphallum,  called  by  the  Arabs  el 
hummar  (the  slime  of  Gen.  xi.  3),  is  only  met  with 
in  the  valley  of  Jordan.  At  Hasbeiya,  the  most 
remote  of  the  sources  of  the  river,  it  is  obtained 
fi'om  pits  or  wells  which  are  sunk  through  a  mass 
of  bituminous  eaith  to  a  depth  of  about  180  feet 
(And.  115,  116).  It  is  also  found  in  small  frag- 
ments on  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  occa- 
sionally, though  rarely,  very  large  masses  of  it 
are  discovered  floating  in  the  water  (Rob.  i.  518). 
This  appears  to  have  been  more  frequently  the 
ciise  in  ancient  times  (Joseph.  B.  J .  iv.  8,  §4 ; 
Diod.  Sic.  ii.  48).  [Slime.]  The  Arabs  report 
that  it  proceeds  from  a  source  in  one  of  the  preci- 
pices on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Rob. 
i.  517)  opposite  ^i«-jm/8  (Russ.  253);  but  this  is 
not  corroborated  by  the  observations  of  Lynch's 
party,  of  Mr.  Poole,  or  of  Di\  Robinson,  who  exa- 
mined the  eastern  shore  from  the  western  side  with 
special  reference  thereto.  It  is  more  probable  that 
the  bituminous  limestone  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Neby  Musa  exists  in  strata  of  great  thickness,  and 
that  the  bitumen  escapes  from  its  lower  beds  into 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  there  accumulates  until  by 
some  accident  it  is  detached,  and  rises  to  the 
surface. 

20.  Sulphur  is  found  on  the  W.  and  S.  and  S.E. 
portions  of  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Rob.  i.  512). 
in  many  spots  the  air  smells  strongly  of  sulphurous 
acid  and  sulphuretted  hydrogen  gas  (And.  176  ; 
Poole,  66  ;  Beaufort,  ii.  113),  a  sulphurous  crust  is 
spread  over  the  surface  of  the  beach,  and  lumps  of 
sulphur  are  found  in  the  sea  (Rob.  i.  512).  Poole 
(63)  speaks  of  "  sulphur  hills  "  on  the  peninsula  at 
the  S.E.  end  of  the  sea  (see  And.  187). 

Nitre  is  rare.  Mr.  Poole  did  not  discover  any, 
though  he  made  special  search   for  it.     Irby  and 


more  opportunity  of  judging),  the  sand  of  the  whole  coast 
of  Syria  has  been  brought  up  from  Egypt  by  the  S.S.W. 
wind.     'J'his  is  also  stated  I'y  Josfphus  {Ant.  xv.  9,  f  6). 


PALESTINE 

Mangles,  Seetzen  and  Ivobiiison,  however,  mention 
having  seen  it  (Rob.  i.  513). 

Rock-salt  abounds  in  large  masses.  The  salt 
mound  of  Kashm  Usduni  at  the  southern  end  of 
the  Dead  Sea  is  an  enormous  pile,  5  miles  long  by 
2^  broad,  and  some  hundred  feet  in  height  (And. 
181).  Its  inferior  portion  consists  entirely  of  rock- 
salt,  and  the  ujijier  j)art  of  sulphate  of  iinie  and 
salt,  often  with  a  large  admixture  of  alumina.  [G.] 

The  Botany. — The  Botany  of  Syria  and  Pa- 
lestine differs  but  little  from  that  of  Asia  Minor, 
which  is  one  of  the  most  rich  and  varied  on  the 
globe.  What  ditl'erences  it  presents  are  due  to  a 
slight  admixture  of  Persian  forms  on  the  eastern 
frontier,  of  Arabian  and  Egyptian  on  the  southern, 
and  of  Arabian  and  Indian  tropical  plants  in  the 
low  torrid  depiession  of  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea. 
These  latter,  which  number  perhaps  a  hundred 
different  kinds,  are  anomalous  features  in  the  other- 
wise Levantine  landscape  of  Syi'ia.  On  the  other 
hand,  Palestine  forms  the  southern  and  eastern  limit 
of  the  Asia-JIinor  flora,  and  contains  a  multitude 
of  trees,  shrubs,  and  herbs  that  advance  no  further 
south  and  east.  Of  these  the  pine,  oak,  elder, 
bramble,  dog-rose,  and  hawthorn  are  conspicuous 
examples ;  their  southern  migration  being  checked 
by  the  drought  and  heat  of  the  regions  beyond 
the  hilly  country  of  Judea.  Owing,  however,  to 
the  geographical  position  and  the  mountainous  cha- 
racter of  Asia  Minor  and  Syria,  the  main  features 
of  then-  flora  are  essentially  Mediterranean-European, 
and  not  Asiatic.  A  vast  proportion  of  the  com- 
moner arboreous  and  frutescent  plants  are  identical 
with  those  of  Spain,  Algeria,  Italy,  and  Greece ;  and 
as  they  belong  to  the  same  genera  as  do  British, 
Germanic,  and  Scandinavian  plants,  there  are  ample 
means  of  instituting  such  a  comparison  between  the 
Syrian  flora  and  that  familiar  to  us  as  any  intelligent 
non-botanical  observer  can  follow  and  understand. 

As  elsewhere  throughout  the  Mediterranean  re- 
gions, Syria  and  Palestine  were  evidently  once  tliickly 
covered  with  forests,  which  on  the  lower  hills  and 
plains  have  been  either  entirely  removed,  oi-  else 
reduced  to  the  condition  of  brushwood  and  copse; 
but  which  still  abound  on  the  mountains,  and  along 
certain  parts  of  the  sea-coast.  The  low  grounds, 
plains,  and  rocky  hills  are  carpeted  with  herbaceous 
plants,  that  appeal-  in  rapid  succession  from  before 
Christmas  till  .June,  when  they  disappear;  and  the 
brown  alluvial  or  white  calcareous  soil,  being  then 
exposed  to  the  scorching  rays  of  the  sun,  gives  an 
aspect  of  forbidding  sterility  to  the  most  productive 
regions.  Lastly,  the  lofty  regions  of  the  mountains 
are  stony,  dry,  swardless,  and  swampless,  with  i'ew 
alpine  or  arctic  plants,  mosses,  lichens,  or  ferns  ; 
thus  presenting  a  most  unfavourable  contrast  to  the 
Swiss,  Scandinavian,  and  British  mountain  floras  at 
analogous  elevations. 

To  a  traveller  from  England,  it  is  difficult  to  say 
whether  the  familiar  or  tlie  tbreign  forms  predo- 
minate. Of  trees  he  recognizes  the  oak,  pine,  walnut, 
maple,  juniper,  alder,  pojilar,  willow,  ash,  dwarf 
elder,  plane,  ivy,  arbutus,  rhamnus,  almond,  plum, 
pear,  and  hawthorn,  all  elements  of  his  own  forest 
scenery  and  ])lant;itions ;  but  misses  the  beech, 
chesnut,  lime,  holly,  birch,  larch,  ami  spruce ; 
while  he  sees  for  the  first  time  such  southern  forms 
as  Pride  of  India  {Melia),  carob,  sycamore,  tig, 
jujube,  pistachio,  styrax,  olive,  phyllyraca,  vitex, 
elaeagnus,  ccltis,  many  new  kinds  of  oak,  the  jm- 
pyrus,  ca.-'tor  oil,  and  various  tall  tropical  gi^asses. 


PALESTINE 


683 


Of  cultivated  English  fruits  he  sees  the  vine, 
apple,  pear,  apricot,  quince,  plum,  mulberry,  and 
fig ;  but  misses  the  gooseberry,  raspberry,  straw- 
berry, currant,  cherry,  and  other  northern  kinds, 
which  are  as  it  were  replaced  by  such  southern  and 
subtropical  fruits  as  the  date,  pomegranate,  cordia 
my>ia{sehastan  of  the  Arabs),  orange,  shaddock,  lime, 
banana,  almond,  prickly  pear,  and  pist;ichio-nut. 

Amongst  cereals  and  vegetables  the  English  tra- 
veller finds  wheat,  barley,  pens,  potatos,  many 
varieties  of  cabbage,  carrots,  lettuces,  endive,  and 
mustard ;  and  misses  oats,  rye,  and  the  extensive 
fields  of  turnip,  beet,  mangold-wurzel,  and  fodder 
grasses,  with  which  he  is  familiar  in  England.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  sees  for  the  first  time  the  cotton, 
millet,  rice,  sorghum,  sesamum,  sugar-cane,  maize, 
egg-apple,  ochra,  or  Ahebneosckm  esculentiis,  Cor- 
chorus  olitorius,  various  beans  and  lentils,  as  Lablah 
vulgaris,  Phaseolus  mnngos,  and  Cicer  arietmum  ; 
melons,  gourds,  pumpkins,  cumin,  coriander,  fennel, 
anise,  sweet  potato,  tobacco,  yam,  colocasia,  and 
other  subti'opic-al  and  tropical  field  and  garden  crops. 
The  flora  of  Syria,  so  far  as  it  is  known,  may 
be  roughly  classed  under  three  principal  Botanical 
regions,  corresponding  with  the  physical  characters 
of  the  country.  These  are  (1),  the  western  or  sea- 
board half  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  including  the 
lower  valleys  of  the  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon,  the 
plain  of  Coele-Syria,  Galilee,  Samaria,  and  Judea. 
(2)  The  desert  or  eastern  half,  which  includes  the 
east  flanks  of  the  Anti-Lebanon,  the  plain  of  Da- 
mascus, the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  valley,  (o)  The 
middle  and  upper  mountain  regions  of  Mount  Casius, 
and  of  Lebanon  above  3400  feet,  and  of  the  Anti-Le- 
banon above  4000  feet.  Nothing  whatever  is  known 
botanically  of  the  regions  to  the  eastward,  viz.  the 
Hauran,  Lejah,  Gilead,  Amnion,  and  Jloab ;  coun- 
tries extending  eastward  into  Mesopotamia,  the  flora 
of  which  is  Persian,  and  south  to  Iduniea,  whsre 
the  purely  Arabian  flora  begins. 

Tliese  Botanical  regions  present  no  definite  boun- 
dary line.  A  vast  number  of  plants,  and  especially 
of  herbs,  are  common  to  all  except  the  loftiest  parts 
of  Lebanon  and  the  driest  spots  of  tlie  eastern  district, 
and  in  uo  latitude  is  there  a  sharp  line  of  demarca- 
tion between  them.  But  though  the  change  is  gradual 
from  the  dry  and  semi-tropical  eastern  flora  to  the 
moister  and  coolei'  western,  or  from  the  latter  to  the 
cold  temperate  one  of  the  Lebanon,  there  is  a  great 
and  decided  difference  between  the  floras  of  three 
such  localities  as  the  Lebanon  at  5000  feet,  Jeru- 
salem, and  Jericho;  or  between  the  tops  of  Loljannn, 
of  Carnicl,  and  of  any  of  the  hills  bounding  tiie  .Jor- 
dan ;  for  in  the  first  locality  we  are  most  strongly 
reminded  of  nortiiern  Europe,  in  the  ;second  of  Spain, 
and  in  the  third  of  western  India  or  Persia. 

I.  Western  Syria  and  Palestine. — The  flora 
throughout  this  district  is  made  up  of  such  a  mul- 
titude of  different  families  and  genera  of  plants, 
that  it  is  not  easy  to  characteiise  it  by  the  mention 
of  a  few.  Amongst  trees,  oaks  are  by  far  the  most 
prevalent,  and  are  the  only  ones  that  form  conti- 
nuous woods,  except  the  Pinus  maritima  and  P.  Hit- 
lepensis  (Aleppo  Pine)  ;  the  former  of  which  extends 
in  forests  here  and  there  along  the  shore,  and  the 
latter  crests  the  .spurs  of  the  Lebanon,  Carmel,  and 
a  few  other  ranges  as  far  south  as  Hebron.  The 
most  prevalent  oak  is  the  Qitercns  pscudo-coccifcra, 
a  jilant  scarcely  different  from  the  common  Q.  coc- 
ci/era of  the  western  Mediterranean,  and  which  it 
I  strongly  vesenibles  in  f()rm.  habit,  and  evergreen 
j  foliage.     If  is  called  holly  by  many  travelloi-s,  and 


684 


PALESTINE 


Qiierciis  Hex  by  others,  both  very  different  trees. 
Q.  pseudo-coccifera  is  perhaps  the  commonest  plant 
in  all  Syria  and  Palestine,  covering  as  a  low  dense 
bush  many  square  miles  of  hilly  country  every- 
where, but  rarely  or  never  growing  in  the  plains. 
It  seldom  becomes  a  large  tree,  e.xcept  in  the  valleys 
of  the  Lebanon,  or  where,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
famous  oak  of  Mamre,  it  is  allowed  to  attain  its  full 
size.  It  ascends  about  5000  feet  on  the  mountains, 
but  does  not  descend  into  the  middle  and  lower  valley 
of  the  Jordan  ;  nor  is  it  seen  on  the  east  slopes  of 
the  Anti-Lebanon,  and  scarcely  to  the  eastward  of 
Jerusalem ;  it  may  indeed  have  been  removed  by  man 
from  these  regions,  when  the  effect  of  its  removal 
would  be  to  dry  the  soil  and  climate,  and  prevent 
its  re-establishment.  Even  around  Jerusalem  it  is 
rare,  though  its  roots  are  said  to  exist  in  abundance 
in  the  soil.  The  only  other  oaks  that  are  common 
are  the  Q.  infectoria  (a  gall  oak),  and  Q.  Aegilops. 
The  Q.  infectoria  is  a  small  deciduous-leaved  tree, 
found  here  and  there  in  Galilee,  Samaria,  and  on 
tlie  Lebanon ;  it  is  very  conspicuous  from  the 
numbers  of  bright  chesnut-coloured  shining  viscid 
galls  whch  it  bears,  and  which  are  sometimes  ex- 
ported to  England,  but  which  are  a  poor  substitute 
for  the  true  Aleppo  galls.  Q.  Aegilops  again  is  the 
Valonia  oak  ;  a  low,  very  stout-trunked  sturdy  tree, 
common  in  Galilee,  and  especiallv  on  Tabor  and 
C'armel,  where  it  grows  in  scattered  groups,  giving 
a  park-like  appearance  to  the  landscape.  It  bears 
acorns  of  a  very  large  size,  whose  cups,  which  are 
covered  with  long  recurved  spines,  are  exported  to 
Europe  as  Valonia,  and  are  used,  like  the  galls  of 
Q.  infectoria,  in  the  operation  of  dyeing.  This,  1 
am  inclined  to  believe,  is  the  oak  of  Bashan,  both 
ou  account  of  its  stuidy  habit  and  thick  trunk,  and 
also  because  a  fine  piece  of  the  wood  of  this  tree  was 
sent  from  Bashan  to  the  Kew  Museum  by  Mr.  Cyril 
Graham.  The  other  oaks  of  Syria  are  chiefly  con- 
fined to  the  mountains,  and  will  be  noticed  in  their 
pi'oper  place. 

The  trees  of  the  genus  Pistacia  rank  next  in 
abundance  to  the  Oak, — and  of  these  there  are  three 
species  in  Syria,  two  wild  and  most  abundant,  but 
the  third,  P.  vera,  which  yields  the  well-known 
pistachio  nut,  very  rare,  and  chiefly  seen  in  cultiva- 
tion about  Aleppo,  but  also  in  Beyrout  and  near 
Jerusalem.  The  wild  species  are  the  P.  Lentiscus 
and  P.  Terehinthus,  both  very  common  :  the  P.  Len- 
tiscus rarely  exceeds  the  size  of  a  low  bush,  which  is 
conspicuous  for  its  dark  evergreen  leaves  and  num- 
berless small  red  berries ;  the  other  gi-ows  larger, 
but  seldom  forms  a  fair-sized  tree. 

The  Cavob  or  Locust-tree,  Ceratonia  Siliqua, 
ranks  perhaps  next  in  abundance  to  the  foregoing 
trees.  It  never  grows  in  clumps  or  foims  woods, 
but  appears  as  an  isolated,  rounded  or  oblong,  very 
dense-foliaged  tree,  branching  from  near  the  base, 
of  a  bright  lucid  green  hue,  affording  the  best  shade. 
Its  singular  flowers  are  produced  from  its  thick 
Iji'anches  in  autumn,  and  are  succeeded  by  the  large 
pendulous  pods,  called  St.  John's  Bread,  and  exten- 
sively exported  from  the  Levant  to  England  for 
ie:;-i:ling  cattle. 

The  oriental  Plane  is  far  from  uiKommon,  and 
though  generally  cultivated,  it  is  to  all  appearance 
wild  in  the  valleys  of  the  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon. 
The  great  plane  of  Damascus  is  a  well-known  object 
to  travellers ;  the  gii  th  of  its  trunk  was  nearly  40 
feet,  biit  it  is  now  a  mere  wreck. 

The  Sycamore-fig  is  common  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  towns,  and  attains  a  large  size  ;  its  wood  is 


PALESTINE 

much  used,  especially  in  Egypt,  where  the  mummy- 
cases  were  foi-merlv  made   of  it.     Poplars,  espe- 
cially the  aspen  and  white  poplar,  are  extremelv 
common  by  streams  ;  the  latter  is  generally  trimmed 
for    firewood,    so   as   to   resemble   the    Lombardy 
poplar.     The   Walnut   is   more   common  in  Syria 
than  in  Palestine,  and  in  both  countiies  is  generally 
confined  to  gardens  and  orchards.     Of  large  native 
shrubs  or  small  trees  almost  universally  spread  over 
this   district    are,    Arbutus   Andrackne,    which   is 
common  in  the  hilly  country  from  Hebron  north- 
ward ;  Crataegus  Aronia,  which  grows  equally  in 
dry  rocky  exposures,  as  ou  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and 
in  cool  mountain  valleys  ;  it  yields  a  large  yellow 
or  red  haw  that  is  abundantly  sold  in  the  markets. 
Cypresses  are  common  about  villages,  and  especially 
near  all  religious  establishments,  often  attaining  a 
considerable  size,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  their  being 
indigenous  to  Syria .  Zizyphus  Spina-Christi,  Christ's 
Thorn — often  called  jujube — the  Nubk  of  the  Arabs, 
is  most  common  on  dry  open  plains,  as  that  of  Jeri- 
cho, where  it  is  either  a  scrambling  briar,  a  standard 
shrub,   or  rarely  even  a  middling-sized  tree  with 
pendulous  branches :  it  is  familiar  to  the  traveller 
from  its  sharp  hooks,  white  undersides  to  the  three- 
nerved  leaves,  and  globular  yellow  sweetish  fruit 
with  a  large  woody  stone.    The  Paliurus  aculeatus, 
also  called  Christ's  Thorn,  resembles  it  a  good  deal, 
but  is  much  less  common ;  it  abounds  in  the  Anti- 
Lebanon,  where  it  is  used  for  hedges,  and  may  be 
recognised  by  its  curved  prickles  and  curious  diy 
fruit,  with  a  broad  flat  wing  at  the  top.     Styrax 
officinalis,  which  used  to  yield  the  fiimous  Storax, 
abounds  in  all  parts  of  the  country  where  hilly  ; 
sometimes,  as  on  the  east  end  of  Carmel  and  on 
Tabor,  becoming  a  very  large  bush  branching  from 
the  ground,  but  never  assuming  the  form  of  a  tree : 
it  may  be  known  by  its  small  downy  leaves,  white 
flowers  like  orange  blossoms,  and  I'ound  yellow  fruit, 
pendulous  from  slender  stalks,  like  cherries.     The 
flesh  of  the  berry,  which  is  quite  uneatable,  is  of  a 
semi-ti-ansparent    hue,    and   contains   one   or  more 
large,   chesnut-coloured  seeds.      Tamarisk  is  com- 
mon, but  seldom  attains  a  large  size,  and  has  no- 
thing to  recommend  it  to  notice.      Oleander  claims 
a  separate  notice,  from  its  great  beauty  and  abun- 
dance ;  lining  the  banks  of  the  streams  and  lakes  in 
gravelly  places,  and  bearing  a  profusion  of  blossoms. 
Other  still  smaller  but  familiar  shrubs  are  Phylly- 
raea,  Rhamnits  alaternus,  and  others  of  that  genus. 
Rhus  Coriaria,  several  leguminous  shrubs,  as  Ana- 
gyris  foetida,  Calycotome  and  Genista ;  Cotoneas- 
ter,  the  common  bramble,  dog-rose,  and  hawthorn, 
Elaeagnus,  wild  olive,  Lycium  Europaeum,   Vitex 
agnus-castus,  sweet  bay  {Laurus  nobilis),  Ephedra, 
Clematis,  Gum-Cistus,  and  the  caper  plant:  these 
nearly  comj)lete  the  list  of  the  commoner  shrubs 
and  trees  of  the  western  district,  which  attain  a 
height  of  four  feet  or  more,  and  are  almost  uni- 
versally met  with,  especially  in  the  hilly  country. 

Of  planted  trees  and  large  shrubs,  the  first  in  im- 
portance is  the  Vine,  which  is  most  abundantly 
cultivated  all  over  the  country,  and  produces,  as  in 
the  time  of  the  Canaanites,  enormous  bunches  of 
grapes.  This  is  especially  the  case  in  the  southern 
districts ;  those  of  Eshcol  being  still  partwularly 
famous.  Stephen  Scliultz  states  that  at  a  village 
near  Ptolemais  (Acre)  he  supped  under  a  large 
vine,  the  stem  of  which  measured  a  foot  and  a  half 
in  diameter,  its  height  being  30  feet ;  and  that 
the  whole  plant,  supported  on  trellis,  covered  an 
area  50  feet  either  way.     The  bunches  of  grapes 


PALESTINE 

weighed  10-12  lbs.,  aud  the  berries  were  like 
small  plums.  Mariti  relates  that  no  vines  can  vie 
for  produce  with  those  of  Judea,  of  which  a  bunch 
cannot  be  carried  far  without  desti  eying  the  fruit : 
and  we  have  ourselves  heard  that  the  bunches  pro- 
duced near  Hebron  are  sometimes  so  long  that, 
when  attached  to  a  stick  which  is  supported  on  the 
shoulders  oi'  two  men,  the  tip  of  the  buucli  trails  on 
the  ground. 

isext  to  the  vine,  or  even  in  some  respects  its 
superior  in  importance,  ranks  the  Olive,  wliich  no- 
where grows  in  greater  luxuriance  and  abundance 
than  in  Palestine,  where  the  olive  orchards  form  a 
])romineut  feature  throughout  the  landscape,  and 
have  done  so  from  time  immemorial.  The  olive- 
tree  is  in  no  respects  a  handsome  or  picturesque 
object;  its  bark  is  grey  and  rugged;  its  foliage  is 
in  colour  an  ashy,  or  at  best  a  dusky  green,  aud 
alibrds  little  shade  ;  its  wood  is  useless  as  timber, 
its  Howers  are  inconspicuous,  and  its  fruit  uninvit- 
ing to  the  eye  or  palate :  so  that,  even  where  most 
abundant  and  productive,  the  olive  scarcely  relieves 
the  aspect  of  the  dry  soil,  and  deceives  the  super- 
ficial observer  as  to  the  fertility  of  Palestine,  in- 
deed it  is  mainly  owing  to  these  peculiarities  of 
the  olive-tree,  aud  to  tlie  deciduous  character  of 
the  foliage  of  the  rig  and  vine,  that  the  impression 
is  so  prevalent  amongst  northern  travellers,  that 
the  Holy  Land  is  in  point  of  productiveness  not 
what  it  was  in  former  times  ;  for  to  the  native 
of  northern  Europe  especially,  the  idea  of  fertility 
is  inseparable  from  that  of  verdure.  The  iirticle 
Olive  must  be  referred  to  for  details  of  this  tree, 
which  is  perhaps  most  skilfully  and  carefully  culti- 
vated in  the  neigiibourhood  of  Hebron,  where  for 
many  miles  the  roads  run  between  stone  walls  en- 
closing magnificent  olive  orchards,  apparently  tended 
with  as  much  neatness,  care,  and  skill  as  the  best 
truit  gardens  in  England.  The  terraced  olive-yaids 
around  Sebastieli  must  also  strike  the  most  casual 
observer,  as  admirable  specimens  of  careful  culti- 
vation. 

The  Fig  forms  another  most  impoi-t;\nt  crop  in 
Syria  and  Palestine,  and  one  which  is  apparently 
greatly  increasing  in  extent.  As  with  the  olive  and 
mulberry,  tlie  fig-trees,  where  best  cultivated,  are 
symmetrically  planted  in  fields,  whose  soil  is  freed 
from  stones,  and  kept  as  scrupulously  clean  of 
weeds  as  it  can  be  in  a  semi-tropical  climate.  As  is 
well  known,  the  fig  bears  two  or  three  crops  in  the 
yo:u-:  .losephus  says  that  it  bears  for  ten  months 
out  of  the  twelve.  The  eai-ly  figs,  which  ripen 
about  June,  are  reckoned  especially  good.  The 
summer  tigs  again  ripen  in  August,  and  a  third 
iTop  appears  still  later  when  the  leaves  are  shed; 
these  are  ocavsionally  gathered  as  late  ;is  January. 
The  figs  are  dried  by  the  natives,  and  are  chiefly 
purchased  by  the  .\rabs  of  tiie  eastern  deserts.  The 
Sycamore-fig,  pieviously  noticed,  has  nuuh  smaller 
and  very  inferior  fruit. 

The  quince,  ai)ple,  almond,  walnut,  peach,  and 
apricot,  are  all  most  abundant  field  or  orchard 
crops,  often  planted  in  lines,  rows,  or  quincunx 
oi-der,  with  the  olive,  mulberry,  or  fig;  but  they 
are  by  no  means  so  abundant  as  these  latter.  The 
pomegranate  grows  everywhere  as  a  bush ;  but,  like 
the  orange,  Elaefvpuis,  ;uul  other  less  common 
plauts,  is  more  often  seen  in  gardens  than  in  fields. 
The  fruit  ripens  in  August,  and  is  kept  throughout 
the  winter.  Three  kinds  are  cultivated — the  acid, 
sweet,  and  insii)id — and  all  are  used  in  preparing 
sherbets ;   while  the  bark  and  fruit  rind  of  all  are 


PALESTINE 


685 


used   for  dyeing  and  as  medicine,  owing  to  their 
astringent  properties. 

The  Banana  is  only  found  near  the  MediteiTa- 
nean  ;  it  ripens  its  fruit  as  far  north  as  Beyrout, 
and  occasionally  even  at  Tripoli,  but  more  constantl  v 
at  Sidou  aud  Jafla ;  only  one  kind  is  commonly  cul- 
tivated, but  it  is  excellent.  Dates  are  not  frequent: 
they  aie  most  common  at  Cailia  ami  JaHa,  whei-e 
the  fruit  ripens,  but  there  are  now  no  groves  of 
this  tree  anywhere  but  in  Southern  Palestine,  such 
as  once  existed  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  near  the 
assumed  site  of  Jericho.  Oi  that  well-known  grove 
no  tree  is  standing  ;  one  log  (jf  date-]ialm,  nowlying 
in  a  stream  near  the  locality,  is  perhaps  the  last 
remains  of  that  ancient  race,  though  that  they  were 
once  abundant  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of 
the  Dead  Sea  is  obvious  from  the  remark  of  Mr. 
Poole,  that  some  part  of  the  shore  of  that  sea  is 
strewn  with  their  trunks.  [See  p.  675  note.] 
Wild  dwarf  dates,  rarely  producing  fruit,  grow  by 
the  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Tiberias  and  near  Caiffa ; 
but  whether  they  are  truly  indigenous  date-palms,  or 
crab-dates  produced  from  seedlings  of  the  cultivated 
form,  is  not  known. 

The  Opuntia,  or  Prickly  Pear,  is  most  abundant 
throughout  Syria,  and  though  a  native  of  the  New 
World,  has  here,  as  elsewhere  throughout  the  dry, 
hot  regions  of  the  eastern  hemisphere,  established 
its  claim  to  be  regiu-ded  as  a  permanent  and  rapidly- 
increasing  denizen.  It  is  in  general  use  for  hedging, 
and  its  well-known  fruit  is  extensively  eaten  by  all 
classes.  I  am  not  awai'e  that  the  cochineal  insect 
has  ever  been  introduced  into  Syria,  where  there 
can,  however,  be  little  doubt  but  that  it  might  be 
successfully  cultivated. 

Of  dye-stuffs  the  Carthamus  (SafHower)  and 
Indigo  are  both  cultivated ;  and  of  Textiles,  Flax, 
Hemp,  and  Cotton. 

The  Carob,  or  St.  John's  Bread  {Ceratonia  Si- 
liqua),  has  already  been  mentioned  amongst  the 
conspicuous  trees:  the  sweetish  pulp  of  thepods  is 
used  for  sherbets,  and  abundantly  eaten  ;  the  pods 
are  used  for  cattle-feeding,  and  the  leaves  and  bark 
for  tanning. 

The  Cistus  or  Rock-rose,  two  or  three  species  of 
which  are  abundant  throughout  the  hilly  districts 
of  Palestine,  is  the  shrub  from  which  in  former 
times  Gum-Labdanum  was  collected  in  the  islands 
of  Candia  and  Cyprus. 

With  regard  to  the  rich  and  varied  herbaceous 
vegetation  of  West  Syria  and  Palestine,  it  is  difhcult 
to  aflbrd  any  idea  of  its  nature  to  the  English  nou- 
botiuiical  reader,  except  by  comparing  it  with  the 
British  ;  which  I  shall  first  do,  and  then  detail  its 
most  prominent  botanical  features. 

The  plants  contained  in  this  botanical  region  pro- 
bably number  not  less  than  2000  or  2000,  of  which 
peihaps  ,500  are  British  wild  flowers ;  amongst  the 
most  conspicuous  of  these  British  ones  are  the  Ka- 
nnncuUis  aquatilis,  arvensis,  and  Fiatria  ;  the  yellow 
water-lily,  Papaver  Rhoeas  and  hi/bridum,  and  se- 
veral Fumitories;  fully  20  cruciferous  plants, 
including  Draba  tenia,  water-cress,  Turrit  is  glabra, 
Sisymbrium  frio,  Capsella  Bursa-pasloris,  Cakile 
mantiina,  Lepidimn  Draba,  charlock,  mustard 
(often  growing  8  to  9  feet  high),  two  mignionettes 
(Reseda  alba  and  latea),  Silene  injlata,  various 
species  of  Cerastiuin,  Spergula,  Stellaria  and  Are- 
naria,  mallows.  Geranium  molle,  rotund  if oliuin, 
lucidum,  dissectum,  and  Bobcrtianum,  Erodium 
moschatum,  aud  cicutarium.  Also  many  species  of 
Leijuminosae,  especially  of  Medicaijo,    TrifoUum, 


686 


PALESTINE 


Melilotus,  Lotus,  Ononis,  Ervum,  Vicia  and  La- 
thyrus.  Of  liosaceae  the  common  bramble  and 
dog-rose.  Li/t/u-um  Salicaria,  Epilobiwn  hirsutum, 
Bryonia  dioica,  Saxifraga  tridactylites,  Galium 
verum,  Eubia  peregrina,  Aspcrula  arvensis.  Va- 
rious UinhcUiforae  and  Compositae,  including 
tlie  daisy,  wormwood,  groundsel,  dandelion,  chi- 
cory, sowthistle,  and  many  others.  Blue  and  white 
pimpernel,  Cyclamen  Europaeum,  Samolus  Vale- 
randi,  Erica  vagans.  Borage,  Veronica  Anagallis, 
Beccabunga,  agrestis,  triphyllos,  and  Chamaedrys, 
Lathraea  squamaria.  Vervain,  Lamit'.m  amplexi- 
caule,  mint,  horehound.  Prunella,  Statice  Limo- 
nium,  many  Chenopodiaceae,  Polygonum  and  Ru- 
mex,  Pellitory,  Mercurialis,  Euphorbias,  nettles, 
box,  elm,  several  willows  and  poplars,  common 
duck-weed  and  pond-weed,  Orchis  morio.  Crocus 
aureus,  butcher's-broom,  black  Bryony,  autumnal 
Squill,  and  many  rushes,  sedges,  and  grasses. 

The  most  abundant  natural  families  of  plants  in 
West  Syria  and  Palestine  are— (1)  Leguminosae, 
(2)  Compositae,  (3)  Lahiatac,  (4)  Cruciferae ; 
after  which  come  (5)  Umbelliferae,  (6)  Caryophyl- 
leae,  (7)  Boragineae,  (8)  Scrophularineae,  (9) 
Gramineae,  and  (10)  Liliaceae. 

{\.)  Leguminosae  abound  in  all  situations,  espe- 
cially the  genera  Trifolium,  Trigonella,  Medicago, 
Lotus,  Vicia,  and  Orobus,  in  the  richer  soils,  and 
Astragalus  in  enormous  profusion  in  the  drier  and 
more  barren  districts.  The  latter  genus  is  indeed 
the  largest  in  the  whole  country,  upwards  of  fifty 
species  belonging  to  it  being  enumerated,  either  as 
confined  to  Syria,  or  common  to  it  and  the  neigh- 
bouring countries.  Amongst  them  are  the  gum- 
bearing  Astragali,  which  are,  however,  almost  con- 
fined to  the  upper  mountain  regions.  Of  the  shrubby 
Leguminosae  there  are  a  few  species  of  Genista, 
Cytisus,  Ononis,  Retama,  Anagyris,  Calycotome, 
Coronilla,  and  Acacia.  One  species,  the  Ceratonia, 
is  arboreous. 

(2.)  Compositae. — No  family  of  plants  more 
strikes  the  obsen-er  than  the  Compositae,  from  the 
vast  abundance  of  thistles  and  centauries,  and  other 
spring-plants  of  the  same  tribe,  which  swarm  alike 
over  the  richest  plains  and  most  stony  hills,  often 
towering  high  above  all  other  herbaceous  vegetation. 
By  the  unobservant  traveller  these  are  often  sup- 
posed to  indicate  sterility  of  soil,  instead  of  the 
contrary,  which  they  for  the  most  part  really  do, 
for  they  are  nowhere  so  tall,  rank,  or  luxuriant  as 
on  the  most  productive  soils.  It  is  beyond  the  limits 
of  this  article  to  detail  the  botanical  peculiarities 
of  this  vegefcitiou,  and  we  can  only  mention  the 
genera  Centaureu,  Echinops,  Onopordum,  Cirsium, 
"Cynara,  and  Carduus,  as  being  eminently  conspi- 
cuous for  their  numbers  or  size.  The  tribe  Cichoreae 
are  scarcely  less  numerous,  whilst  those  of  Gnapha- 
liae,  Asteroideae,  and  Senecionideae,  so  common  in 
more  northern  latitudes,  are  here  comparatively  rare. 

(3.)  Labiatac  fomi  a  prominent  feature  every- 
where, and  one  all  the  more  obtrusive  from  the  fra- 
grance of  many  of  the  genera.  Thus  the  lovely  hills 
of  Galilee  and  Samaria  are  inseparably  linked  in  the 
memory  with  the  odoriferous  herbage  of  marjoram, 
thymes,  lavenders,  calaminths,  sages,  and  teucriums ; 
of  all  which  there  are  many  species,  as  also  there 
are  oi  Sideritis,  Phlomis,  Stachys,  Ballota,  Nepeta, 
and  Mentha. 

(4.)  Of  Cruciferae  there  is  little  to  remark  :  its 
species  are  generally  weed-like,  and  present  no 
marked  feature  in  the  landscape.  Among  the  most 
noticeable   are    the   gigantic   mustard,    pre\'iously 


PALESTINE 

mentioned,  whicli  does  not  differ  from  the  common 
mustard,  Sinapis  nigra,  save  in  size,  and  the  Anas- 
tatica  hierochuntica,  or  rose  of  Jericho,  an  Egyp- 
tian and  Arabian  plant,  which  is  said  to  grow  in 
the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  valleys. 

(5.)  Umbelliferae  present  little  to  remark  on 
save  the  abundance  of  fennels  and  Bupleurums :  the 
order  is  exceedingly  numerous  both  in  species  and 
individuals,  which  often  form  a  large  proportion  of 
the  tall  rank  herbage  at  the  edges  of  copse-wood  and 
in  damp  hollows.  The  grey  and  spiny  Eryngium,  so 
abundant  on  all  the  arid  hills,  belongs  to  this  order. 

(6.)  Caryophylleae  also  are  not  a  very  con- 
spicuous order,  though  so  numerous  that  the 
abundance  of  pinks,  Silene  and  Saponaria,  is  a 
marked  feature  to  the  eye  of  the  botanist. 

(7.)  The  Boragineae  are  for  the  most  part  annual 
weeds,  but  some  notable  exceptions  are  found  in 
the  EchiuriiS,  Anchusas,  and  Onosmas,  which  are 
among  the  most  beautiful  plants  of  the  countiy. 

(8.)  Oi  Scrophularineae  the  principal  genera  are 
Scrophidaria,  Veronica,  Linaria,  and  Verbascum 
(Mulleins) :  the  latter  is  by  far  the  most  abundant, 
and  many  of  the  species  are  quite  gigantic. 

(9.)  Grasses,  though  very  numerous  in  species, 
seldom  afford  a  sward  as  in  moister  and  colder 
regions ;  the  pasture  of  England  having  for  its 
Oriental  equivalent  the  herbs  and  herbaceous  tips 
of  the  low  shrubby  plants  which  cover  the  country, 
and  on  which  all  herbivorous  animals  love  to  browse. 
The  Arundo  Donax,  Saccharum  Aegyptiacum,  and 
Erianthus  Ravennae,  are  all  conspicuous  for  their 
gigantic  size  and  silky  plumes  of  flowers  of  singular 
grace  and  beauty. 

(10.)  Liliaceae. — The  variety  and  beauty  of  this 
order  in  Syria  is  perhaps  nowhere  exceeded,  and 
especially  of  the  bulb-bearing  genera,  as  tulips, 
fritillaries,  squills,  gageas,  &c.  The  Urginea  Scilla, 
(inedicinal  squill)  abounds  everywhere,  throwing  up 
a  tall  stalk  beset  with  white  flowers  at  its  upper 
half;  and  the  little  purple  autumnal  squill  is  one  of 
the  commonest  plants  in  the  country,  springing  up 
in  October  and  November  in  the  most  arid  situations 
imaginable. 

Of  other  natural  orders  worthy  of  notice,  for  one 
reason  or  another,  are  Violaceae,  for  the  paucity  of 
its  species  ;  Geraniaceae,  which  are  very  numerous 
and  beautifid  ;  Rutaceae,  which  are  common,  and 
very  strong-scented  when  bruised.  Rosaceae  are 
not  so  abundant  as  in  more  northei-n  climates,  but 
are  represented  by  one  remarkable  plant,  Poterium 
spinosum,  which  covers  whole  tracts  of  arid,  hilly 
country,  much  as  the  ling  does  in  Britain.  Cras- 
sulaceae  and  Saxifrageae  are  also  not  so  plentiful 
as  in  cooler  regions.  Dipsaceae  are  very  abundant, 
especially  the  genera  Knautia,  Scabiosa,  Cephalaria, 
and  Pterocephalus.  Campanidaceae  are  common, 
and  Lobeliaceae  rare.  Primulaceae  and  Ericeae 
are  both  rare,  though  one  or  two  species  are  not 
uncommon.  There  are  very  few  Gentiancae,  but 
many  Comohidi.  Of  Solnneae,  Mandragora,  So- 
lanum,  and  Hyoscyamus  are  very  common,  also 
Physalis,  Capsicum,  &nd  Lycopersicum,  all  probably 
escapes  from  cultivation.  Plumbagineae  contain  a 
good  many  Statices,  and  the  blue-flowered  Plum- 
bago Europaea  is  a  very  common  weed.  Cheno- 
podiaceae are  very  numerous,  especially  the  weedy 
Atriplices  and  Chenopodia  and  some  shrubby  Sal- 
solas.  Polygonae  are  veiy  common  indeed,  especially 
the  smaller  species  of  Polygonum  itself.  Aristo- 
lochieae  present  several  species.  Euphorhiaceae. 
The  herbaceous  genus  Euphorbia  is  va.stly  abundant, 


PALESTINE 

especially  in  fields:  upwards  of  fifty  Syrian  species 
are  known.  Crozophura,  Andrachne,  and  Ricinus, 
all  southern  types,  are  also  common.  Urticeae 
present  the  common  Eui-opean  nettles,  Mercurialis, 
and  Pellitory.  Moreac,  the  common  and  sycamore 
figs,  and  the  black  and  white  mulberi'ies.  Aroideae 
are  very  common,  and  many  of  them  are  handsome, 
having  deep-piuple  lurid  spathes,  which  rise  out 
of  the  ground  before  the  leaves. 

Of  Balanophorac,  the  curious  Cijnomonum  cocci- 
neitin,  or  "  Fungus  Melitensis,"  used  as  a  styptic 
during  the  Crusades  by  the  Knights  of  Malta,  is 
found  in  the  valleys  of  Lebanon  near  the  sea. 
Naiadeae,  as  in  other  dry  countries,  are  scarce. 
Orclndeae  contain  about  thirty  to  forty  kinds, 
chiefly  South  European  species  of  Orchis,  Ophrijs, 
Splranthes,  and  Serapias. 

Amaryllideae  present  Pancratium,  Sternhergia, 
Ixiolirion,  and  Narcissus.  Iridaac  has  many  species 
of  Iris  and  Crocus,  besides  Moraea,  Gladiolus, 
Trichoncma,  and  Romulea.  Dioscoreae,  Tamus 
communis.  Smilaceae,  several  Asparagi,  Smilax, 
and  Ruscus  aculeatus.  Melanthaccae  contain  many 
Colchicums,  besides  Mercndera  and  Enjtkrostictus. 
Junceac  contain  none  but  the  commoner  British 
rushes  and  luzulas.  Cyperaccae  are  remarkably  poor 
in  species  ;  the  genus  Carex,  so  abundant  in  Europe, 
is  especially  rare,  not  half  a  dozen  species  being 
enumerated. 

Eerns  are  extremely  scarce,  owing  to  the  dryness 
of  the  climate,  and  most  of  the  species  belong  to 
the  Lebanon  flora.  The  common  lowland  ones  are 
Adiantum  cupillus-veneris,  Ckeilantkes  fragrans, 
Gi/mnogramma  leptophijlla,  Ceterach  officinarmn, 
Pteris  lanceolata,  and  Asnleniam  Adiantum- 
nigrum.     Selaginella  dcnticulata  is  also  found. 

One  of  the  most  memorable  plants  of  this  region, 
and  indeed  in  the  whole  world,  is  the  celebrated 
Papyrus  of  the  ancients  {Papi/rtis  antiquoruni), 
which  is  said  once  to  have  grown  on  the  banks  of 
the  lower  Nile,  but  which  is  nowhere  found  now  in 
Africa  noi  th  of  the  tropics.  The  only  other  known 
habitat  beside  Syria  and  tropical  Africa  is  one  spot 
in  the  island  of  Sicil}'.  The  Papyrus  is  a  noble 
plant,  forming  tufts  of  tall  stout  3-angled  green 
smooth  stems,  6  to  10  feet  high,  each  surmounted 
by  a  mop  of  pendulous  threads:  it  abounds  in  some 
marshes  by  the  Lake  of  Tiberias,  and  is  also  said 
to  grow  near  Cailla  and  elsewhere  in  Syria.  It  is 
certainly  the  most  remarkable  plant  in  tlie  country. 

Of  other  Cryptogainic  plants  little  is  known. 
Mosses,  lichens,  and  Jlepaticae  are  not  generally 
common,  though  doflbtless  many  species  are  to  be 
found  in  the  winter  and  spring  months.  The  marine 
Algae  are  supposed  to  be  the  same  as  in  the  lost  of 
the  Mediterranean,  and  of  Faiigi  we  have  no  know- 
ledge at  all. 

Cucurbitaceae,  though  not  included  under  any  of 
the  above  heads,  are  a  very  tVecjuent  order  in  Syria. 
Besides  the  immense  crops  of  melons,  gourds,  and 
pumpkins,  the  colocynth  apple,  which  yields  the 
famous  drug,  is  common  in  some  parts,  while  even 
more  so  is  the  Squirting  Cucumber  {L'cbalium  cla- 
teriam). 

Of  plants  that  contribute  largelv  to  that  showy 
character  for  which  the  herbage  of  Palestine  is 
famous,  may  lie  mentioneil  Adunis,  Ranunculus 
Asiaticus,  ami  others ;  Anemone  coronaria,  poppies, 
Gkmcium,  MaWiiola,  ilalcolmia,  Algssmn,  Bi- 
saUclla,  Ilelianthcmwn,  Cistus,  the  caper  ])lant, 
many  pinks,  Silene.,  Saponaria,  and  Gijpsophila  ; 
various  Phloxes,  mallows,  Lavatcra,   H ijpericum  \ 


PALESTINE 


687 


many  geraniums,  Erodiums,  and  Leguminosae, 
and  Labiatae  far  too  numerous  to  individualize  ; 
Scabiosa,  Cephalaria,  chrysanthemums,  Pyrethrum, 
Inulas,  Achilleas,  Calendulas,  Centaureas,  Trago- 
pogons,  Scorzoneras,  and  Crepis  •  many  noble  Cam- 
panulas, cyclamens,  Convolvuli,  Anchusas,  Onos- 
mas,  and  Echiums,  Acanthus,  Verbascums  (most 
conspicuously),  Veronicas,  Celsius,  Hyoscyamus ; 
many  Arums  in  autumn,  oichis  and  Ophrys  in 
spring ;  Narcissus,  Tazetta,  irises,  Pancratiums, 
Sternbergia,  Gladiolus;  many  beautiful  crocuses 
and  colchicums,  squills,  Tulipa  oodus-solis,  Gageas, 
fritillaries,  Alliums,  Star  of  Bethlehem,  Muscaris, 
white  lily,  Hyacinthus  orientalis,  Bellevalias,  and 
Aspkodeli. 

With  such  gay  and  delicate  flowers  as  these,  in 
numberless  combinations,  the  ground  is  almost 
carpeted  during  spring  and  early  summer ;  and  as 
in  similar  hot  and  diy,  but  still  temperate  climates, 
as  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  Australia,  they  often 
colour  the  whole  landscape,  from  their  lavish 
abundance. 

II.  Botany  of  Eastern  Syria  and  Palestine. — 
Little  or  nothing  being  known  of  the  flora  of  the 
range  of  mounfciins  east  of  the  Jordan  and  Syrian 
desert,  we  must  confine  our  notice  to  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan,  that  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the  country 
about  Damascus. 

Nowhere  can  a  better  locality  be  found  for  show- 
ing the  contrast  between  the  vegetation  of  the 
eastei-n  and  western  disti'icts  of  Syria  than  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  'I"o  the  west  and 
south  of  that  city  the  valleys  are  full  of  the  dwarf 
oak,  two  kinds  oi' Pistacia,  besides  Smilax,  Arbutus, 
rose,  Aleppo  Pine,  Rhamnns,  Phyllyraea,  bramble, 
and  Crataegus  Aronia.  Of  these  the  last  alone  is 
found  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  beyond  which,  east- 
wai'd  to  the  Dead  Sea,  not  one  of  these  plants  appears, 
nor  are  they  replaced  by  any  analogous  ones.  For 
the  first  tew  miles  the  olive  groves  continue,  and 
here  and  there  a  carob  and  leutisk  or  sycamofe 
recurs,  but  beyond  Bethany  these  are  scarcely  seen. 
Naked  rocks,  or  white  chalky  rounded  hills,  with 
bare  open  valleys,  succeed,  wholly  destitute  of  copse, 
and  sprinkled  with  sterile-looking  shrubs  oi Salsolas, 
Capparideae,  Zygophyllum,  rues,  Fagonia,  Poly- 
gonum, Zizyphus,  tamarisks,  alhagi,  and  Artemisia. 
Herbaceous  plants  are  still  abundant,  but  do  not 
form  the  continuous  sward  that  they  do  in  Judea. 
Amongst  these,  Boragineae,  Alsineac,  Fagonia,  Poly- 
gonum, Crozophora,  Euphorbias,  and  Leguminosae 
are  the  most  fi-equent. 

On  descending  1000  feet  below  the  level  of  the 
sea  to  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  the  subtropical  and 
desert  vegetation  of  Arabia  and  West  Asia  is  en- 
countered in  full  force.  Many  plants  wholly  foreign  . 
to  the  western  district  suddenly  appear,  and  the 
floia  is  that  of  the  whole  dry  country  as  fai" 
east  iis  the  Panjab.  The  commonest  jilant  is  the 
Zizyphus  Spina-Christi,  or  nubk  of  the  Arabs, 
forming  bushes  or  small  trees.  Scarcely  less  abun- 
dant, and  as  large,  is  the  Balanites  Aegyptiaca, 
whose  fruit  yields  the  oil  called  ziik  by  tlie  .'\rabs, 
which  is  reputed  to  possess  healing  properties,  and 
which  may  possibly  be  alluded  to  as  Balm  of  (lilead. 
Tamarisks  are  most  abundant,  together  with  Rhus 
{Syriaca? I,  conspicuous  for  the  bright  green  of  its 
few  small  leaves,  and  its  exact  resemblance  in  foliage, 
bark,  and  habit  to  the  true  Balm  of  Cilead,  the 
Amyris  G ileadeusis  oi  \\AhvA.  Otliei'  most  abun- 
d;mt  shrubs  are  Ockradenus  baccat'ts,  a  tiill,  branch- 
ing, almost  leafless  plant,  with  small  wliite  berries, 


688 


PALESTINE 


and  the  twiggy,  leafless  broom  called  Retama. 
Acacia  Farnesiana  is  very  abundant,  and  cele- 
brated for  the  delicious  fragrance  of  its  yellow 
flowers.  It  is  chiefly  upon  it  that  the  superb  misletoe, 
Loranthus  Acaciae,  grows,  whose  scarlet  flowers 
are  brilliant  ornaments  to  the  desert  during  winter, 
giving  the  appearance  of  flame  to  the  bushes.  Cap- 
paris  spinosa,  the  common  caper-plant,  flourishes 
everywhere  in  the  Jordan  valley,  forming  clumps  in 
the  very  arid  rocky  bottoms,  which  are  conspicuous 
for  their  pale-blue  hue,  when  seen  from  a  distance. 
Alkagi  maurorum  is  extremely  common  ;  as  is  the 
prickly  Solanuin  Sodomaeum,  with  pui-ple  flowers 
and  globular  yellow  fruits,  commonly  known  as  the 
Dead  Sea  apple. 

On  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  itself  the  arboreous 
and  shrubby  vegetation  chiefly  consists  of  Populus 
Euphratica  (a  plant  found  all  over 'Central  Asia, 
but  not  known  west  of  the  Jordan),  tamarisk, 
Osyris  alba,  Periploca,  Acacia  vera,  Prosopis 
Stephaniana,  Arundo  Donax,  Lyciurn,  and  Cap- 
pans  spinosa.  As  the  gi'ound  becomes  sahne,  Atri- 
plex  Halimus  and  large  Statices  (sea-pinks)  appear 
in  vast  abundance,  with  very  many  succulent 
shrubby  Salsolas,  Salicornias,  Suaedas,  and  other 
allied  plants  to  the  number  of  at  least  a  dozen, 
many  of  which  are  typical  of  the  salt  depressions 
of  the  Caspian  and  Central  Asia. 

Other  very  tropical  plants  of  this  region  are 
Zygophyllum  coccineum,  Boerhavia,  Indigofera  ■ 
several  Astragali,  Cassias,  Gymnocarpiim,  and 
Nitraria.  At  the  same  time  thoroughly  European 
.  foims  are  common,  especially  in  wet  places  ;  as  dock, 
mint,  Veronica  Anagallis,  and  Siitm.  One  remote 
and  little-visited  spot  in  tiiis  region  is  particularly 
celebrated  for  the  tropical  character  of  its  vegetation. 
This  is  the  small  valley  of  Engedi  i^Ain-jidiJ,  which 
is  on  the  west  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  where 
alone,  it  is  said,  the  following  tropical  plants 
grow  : — Sida  mutica  and  Asintica,  Calotropis  pro- 
cera  (whose  bladdery  fruits,  full  of  the  silky  coma 
of  the  seeds,  have  even  been  assumed  to  be  the 
Apple  of  Sodom),  Amherhua,  Batatas  littoralis, 
Aerva  Javanica,  Plnckea  Dioscoridis. 

It  is  here  that  the  Salvadora  Persioa,  supposed 
by  some  to  be  the  mustard-tree  of  Scriptui-e,  grows  : 
it  is  a  small  tree,  found  as  far  south  as  Abyssinia  or 
Aden,  and  eastward  to  the  peninsula  of  India,  but 
is  unknown  west  or  north  of  the  Dead  Sea.  The 
late  Dr.  Koyle — unaware,  no  doubt,  how  scaice  and 
local  it  was,  and  arguing  from  the  pungent  taste  of 
its  bark,  which  is  used  as  horse-radish  in  India — 
supposed  that  this  tree  was  that  alluded  to  in  the 
parable  of  the  mustard-tree  ;  but  not  only  is  the 
pungent  natui-e  of  the  bark  not  generally  known  to 
the  natives  of  Syria,  but  the  plant  itself  is  so  scarce, 
local,  and  little  known,  that  Jesus  Christ  could 
never  have  made  it  the  subject  of  a  parable  that 
would  reach  the  understanding  of  His  hearers. 

The  shores  immediately  around  the  Dead  Sea  pi-e- 
seut  abundance  of  vegetation,  though  almost  wholly 
of  a  saline  character.  Juncus  maritimus  is  very 
common  in  large  clumps,  and  a  yellow-flowered 
groundsel-like  plant.  Inula  crithmoides  (also  com- 
mon on  the  rocky  shores  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  &c.), 
Spergularia  maritinia,  Atriplex  Halimus,  Bala- 
nites Aegyptiaca,  several  shrubby  Suaedas  and 
Salicornias,  Tamarix,  and  a  prickly-leaved  grass 
{Festiica),  all  grow  more  or  less  close  to  the  edge  of 


PALESTINE 

the  water  ;  while  of  non-saline  plants  the  Solamtm 
Sodomaeum,  Tamarix,  Centaurea,  and  immense 
brakes  of  Arundo  Donax  may  be  seen  all  around. 

The  most  singular  effect  is  however  experienced 
in  the  re-ascent  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  th-e  liiDs  on  its 
N.W.  shore,  which  presents  fiist  a  sudden  steep 
rise,  and  then  a  series  of  vast  water-worn  ten-aces 
at  the  same  level  as  the  Mediterranean.  Dui-ing 
this  ascent  such  familiar  plants  of  the  latter  region 
are  successively  met  with  as  Poterium  spinosum, 
Anchusa,  pink,  Hypericum,  Inula  viscosa,  &c. ; 
but  no  trees  are  seen  till  the  longitude  of  Jerusalem 
is  approached. 

111.  Flora  of  the  Middle  and  Upper  Mountain 
Regions  of  Syria. — The  oak  foi-ms  the  prevalent 
arboreous  vegetation  of  this  region  below  5000  feet. 
The  Quercus  pseudo-coccifera  and  infectoria  is  not 
seen  much  above  3000  feet,  nor  the  Valonia  oak 
at  so  great  au  elevation ;  but  above  these  heights 
some  magnificent  species  occur,  including  the  Quer- 
cus Cerris  of  the  South  of  Europe,  the  Q  Ehren- 
hergii,  or  castanaefolia,  Q.  Toza,  Q.  Libani,  and 
Q.  viannifera,  Lindl.,  which  is  perhaps  not  distinct 
fj-om  some  of  the  forms  of  Q.  Robur,  or  sessiliflora.^ 

At  the  same  elevations  junipers  become  common, 
but  the  species  have  not  been  satisfactorily  made 
out.  The  Juniperus  communis  is  fomid,  but  is 
not  so  common  as  the  tall,  straight,  black  kind 
(/.  excelsa,  or  foetidissima).  On  Mount  Casius  the 
J.  drupacea  grows,  remarkable  for  its  large  plum- 
like fruit ;  and  /.  Sabina,  phoenicia,  and  oxycedrus, 
are  all  said  to  inhabit  Syria.  But  the  most  remark- 
able plant  of  the  upper  region  is  certainly  the  cedar; 
for  which  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  the  article 
Cedar. » 

Lastly,  the  flora  of  the  upper  temperate  and 
alpine  Syrian  mountains  demands  some  notice. 
As  before  remarked,  no  part  of  the  Lebanon  pre- 
sents a  vesjetation  at  all  similar,  or  even  analogous, 
to  that  of  the  Alps  of  Europe,  India,  or  North 
America.  This  is  partly  owing  to  the  heat  and 
extreme  dryness  of  the  climate  during  a  considerable 
part  of  the  year,  to  the  sudden  desiccating  influence 
of  the  desert  winds,  and  to  the  sterile  nature  of  the 
dry  limestone  soil  on  the  highest  summits  of  Lebanon, 
Hermon,  and  the  Anti-Lebanon ;  but  perhaps  still 
more  to  a  warm  period  having  succeedeii  to  that 
cold  one  during  which  the  glaciers  were  formed 
(whose  former  presence  is  attested  by  the  moiaines 
in  the  cedar  valley  and  elsewhere),  and  which  may 
have  obliterated  almost  every  trace  of  the  glacial 
flora.  Hence  it  happens  that  far  more  boreal  plants 
may  be  gathered  on  the  Himal<-Tya  at  10-15,000  ft. 
elevation,  tiian  at  the  analogous  heights  on  Lebanon 
of  8-10,000  ft. ;  and  that  whilst  fully  300  plants 
belonging  to  the  Arctic  circle  inhabit  the  ranges  of 
North  India,  not  half  that  number  are  found  on  the 
Lebanon,  though  those  mountains  are  in  a  far  higher 
latitude. 

At  the  elevation  of  4000  feet  on  the  Lebanon 
many  plants  of  the  middle  and  northern  latitudes 
of  Europe  commence,  amongst  which  the  most  con- 
spicuous are  hawthorn,  dwarf  elder,  dog-rose,  ivy, 
butcher's  broom,  a  variety  of  the  berberiy,  honey- 
suckle, maple,  and  jasmine.  A  little  higher,  at 
O-7000  ft.,  occur  Cotoneaster,  Rhododendron  ponti- 
cum,  primrose.  Daphne  Oleoides,  several  other  roses, 
Poterium,  Juniperus  communis,  foetidissima  for 
excelsa),  and  cedar.     Still  higher,  at  7-10,000  ft.. 


»  For  some  notices  of  the  oaks  of  Syria,  see  Tramactlom 
of  the  Linn.  Society,  xxili.  3«1 ,  and  plates  36-38. 


"  See  also  Dr.  Hooker's  i)aper  '  On  the  Cedars  of  Leba- 
non,' &c.,  in  the  Xat.  Hist.  Reniem,  No.  5 ;  witli  3  plates. 


PALESTINE 

there  is  no  shrubby  vegetation,  properly  so  called. 
What  shrubs  there  are  form  small,  rounded,  harsh, 
prickly  bushes,  and  belono;  to  genera,  or  forms  of 
genera,  that  are  almost  peculiar  to  the  dry  moun- 
tain regions  of  the  Levant  and  Persia,  and  West 
Asia  generally.  Of  these  Astragali  are  by  far  the 
most  numerous,  including  the  A.  Tragacantha, 
which  yields  the  famous  gum  in  the  greatest  abun- 
dance ;  and  next  to  them  a  curious  tribe  of  Statlces 
called  Acantholiinon,  whose  rigid,  pungent  leaves 
spread  like  stars  over  the  whole  surface  of  the 
plant;  and,  lastly,  a  small  white  chenopodiaceous 
plant  called  Koaca.  These  are  the  ])rL'\'alent  forms 
up  to  the  very  siunniit  of  Lebanon,  growing  in 
globular  masses  on  the  rounded  Hank  of  l)iiar-el- 
khodib  itself,  10,200  ft.  above  the  sea. 

At  the  elevation  of  8-9000  ft.  the  beautiful 
silvery  Vicia  canescens  forms  large  tufts  of  jiale 
blue,  where  scarcely  anything  else  will  grow. 

The  herbaceous  plants  of  7-10,000  ft.  altitude 
are  still  chiefly  Levantine  forms  of  Campanula, 
Ranunculus,  Corydalis,  Lraha,  Silene,  Arcnni-ia, 
Saponaria,  Geranium,  Erodium,  several  Umbel- 
lifers,  Galium,  Eriija'on,  S'corzanera,  Taraxacum, 
Androsace,  Scroplmlaria,  Nepeta,  Sideritis,  Aspho- 
deline.  Crocus,  Omithogalum  ;  and  a  few  grasses 
and  sedges.  No  gentians,  heaths,  Primulas,  saxi- 
frages, anemones,  or  other  alpine  favourites,  are 
found. 

The  most  boreal  forms,  which  are  confined  to 
the  clefts  of  rocks,  or  the  vicinity  of  patches  of  snow 
above  9000  ft.,  are  Drabas,  Arenarin,  one  small 
Potentilla,  a  Festuca,  an  Arahis  like  alpina,  and 
the  Oxyria  reniformis,  the  only  decidedly  Arctic 
type  in  the  whole  country,  and  probably  the  only 
characteristic  plant  remaining  of  the  flora  which 
inhabited  the  Lebanon  during  tiie  glacial  period. 
It  is,  however,  extremely  rare,  and  only  found 
nestling  under  stones,  and  in  deep  clefts  of  rocks, 
on  the  very  summit,  and  near  the  patches  of  snow 
on  Dliar-el-Khodib. 

No  doubt  Cryptngamic  plants  are  sufficiently 
numerous  in  this  region,  but  none  have  beeu  col- 
lected, except  ferns,  amongst  which  are  Cystopteris 
fragilis,  J'ol'/podium  vulgare,  Nephrodium  pallidum, 
and  Poly'stichum  angidare.  [J.  D.  H.] 

ZOOLOGV. — Much  information  is  still  needed  on 
this  subject  before  we  can  possibly  determine  with 
any  degree  of  certainty  the  fauna  of  Palestine ; 
indeed,  the  complaint  of  Linneus  in  1747,  that 
"  we  are  less  acquainted  with  the  Natural  History 
of  Palestine  than  with  that  of  the  remotest  parts  of 
India,"  is  almost  as  just  now  as  it  was  when  the 
lemark  wa.s  made.  "There  is  perhaps,"  writes 
a  recent  visitor  to  the  Holy  I-and,  "  no  country 
frequented  by  travellers  whose  fauna  is  .so  little 
known  as  that  of  Palestine"  [Ibis,  i.  '-'2);  indeed, 
the  complaint  is  general  amongst  zoologists. 

It  will  be  sufficient  in  this  article  to  give  a 
general  survey  of  the  fauna  of  Palestine,  a.s  the 
render  will  find  more  particular  information  in  the 
several  articles  which  treat  of  the  various  animals 
under  their  respective  names. 

Mammalia. — The  Clieiroptcra  (bats)  are  pro- 
bably represented  in  Palestine  by  the  species  which 
are  known  to  occur  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  but  we 


PALESTINE 


689 


want  precise  information  on  this  jioint.  [Bat.!J 
Of  the  Insectivara  we  find  hedgehogs  {^Erinaccn 
Europeus)  and  moles  (  Talpa  vidgaris,  T.  coeca{?)), 
which  are  recorded  to  occur  in  great  numbers  and  to 
commit  much  damage  (Hasselquist,  Trav.  p.  120): 
doubtless  the  family  of  Soricidae  (Shrews)  is  also 
represented,  but  we  lack  information.  Of  the 
Carnivora  are  still  seen,  in  the  Lebanon,  the 
Syrian  bear  ( Ursus  Syriacus),^  and  the  panthei- 
{Leopardus  vanus),  which  occupies  the  cential 
mountains  of  the  land.  Jackals  and  foxes  aie 
common  ;  the  hyena  and  wolf  are  also  occasionally 
observed  ;  the  badger  {Meles  taxus)  is  also  said 
to  occur  in  P.alestine  ;•"  the  lion  is  no  longer 
a  resident  in  Palestine  or  Syria,  though  in  Bi- 
blical times  this  animal  must  have  been  by  no 
means  uncommon,  being  frequently  mentioned  in 
Scripture.  [LiON.]  The  late  Dr.  Iioth  informed 
Mr.  Tristram  that  bones  of  the  lion  had  recently 
been  found  among  the  gravel  on  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan  not  far  south  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  A 
species  of  squiirel  (Sciunis  S!j7-iacus),  which  the 
Arabs  term  Orkidaun,  "  the  leaper,"  has  beeu  no- 
ticed by  Hemprich  and  Elirenberg  on  the  lower  and 
middle  parts  of  Lebanon  ;  two  kinds  of  hare,  Lcpns 
Syriacus,  and  L.  Aegyptius;  rats  and  mice,  which 
are  said  to  abound,  but  to  be  partly  kept  down 
by  the  tame  Persian  cats ;  the  jerboa  {TJipus 
Aegyptius)  ;  the  porcupine  {Hystrix  cristata) ;  the 
short-tailed  field-mouse  {Arvicola  agrestis),  a.  most 
injurious  animal  to  the  husbandman,  and  doubtless 
othei-  species  of  Castoridae,  may  be  considered  as 
the  representatives-  of  the  Rodentia.  Of  the  Pachy- 
dermata,  the  wild  boar  {Sas  scrofa),  which  is 
fVequently  met  with  on  Tabor  and  little  Hermon, 
appears  to  be  the  only  living  wild  example.  The 
Syrian  hyrax  appears  to  be  now  but  rarely  seen. 
[Coney,  Appendix  A.] 

There  does  not  appear  to  be  at  present  any  wild 
ox  in  Palestine,  though  it  is  very  probable  that  in 
Biblical  times  some  kind  of  Urus  or  Bison  roamed 
about  the  hills  of  Bashan  and  Lebanon.  [Unicorn.] 
Dr.  Thomson  states  that  wild  goats  (Ibe.x  ?)  are  still 
(see  1  Sam.  xxiv.  2)  frequently  seen  in  the  I'ocks  ot 
Engerli.  Mr.  Tristram  possesses  a  specimen  of  Ca- 
pra  Aegagrus,  the  Persian  ibex,  obtained  by  him  a 
little  to  the  south  of  Hebron.  The  gazelle  ( Ga-.eUa 
dorcas)  occurs  not  unfrequently  in  the  Holy  Land, 
and  is  the  antelope  of  the  country.  We  want  in- 
iiirmation  as  to  other  species  of  antelopes  found  in 
Palestine:  probably  the  variety  named,  by  Hem- 
prich and  Elirenberg,  Antilope  Arahica,  and  perlin])s 
the  Gawlla  Tsahellina  belong  to  the  fauna.  The 
Arabs  hunt  the  gazelles  with  gieyhound  and  falcon  ; 
the  fiillow-deer  (Z*  ima  vidgaris')  is  said  to  be  not 
unfrequently  observed. 

Of  domestic  animals  we  need  only  mention  the 
Arabian  or  one-humped  camel,  asses,  and  mules,  ami 
hoi-ses,  all  which  are  in  general  use.  The  bufialo 
{Btthahis  buffalo)  is  common,  and  is  on  account  ol 
its  strength  much  used  for  ploughing  and  draught 
puiposes.  The  ox  of  the  country  is  small  and 
unsightly  in  the  neiglibouihood  of  .Jerusalem,  but  in 
the  richer  pastures  of  the  upper  part  of  the  country, 
the  cattle,  though  small,  are  not  unsightly,  the  hea<l 
being  very  like  that  of  an  Alderney  ;  the  common 


"  There  Is  some  little  doubt  wfiether  the  bruwn  bear 
(U.  Arctos)  may  not.  orcjusidimlly  be  found  in  Piilcstine. 
Sep  Schubert  (liche  in  das  Atoryenkind). 

b  Col.  H.  Smith,  In  Kitto's  Cyc,  iirt.  '  Badper,'  denies 
that  the  badger  occurs  in  Palestine,  and  says  it  has  not 
VOL.  n. 


yet  been  found  out,  of  Europe.  This  animal,  liowever,  Is 
certainly  an  inhabitant  of  certain  parts  of  Asia;  and  It  is 
mentioned,  together  with  wolves,  Jackals,  porcupines,  Sec, 
by  Mr.  H.  Poole  as  abounding  at  Hebron  (see  (Iroyraph, 
Journal  for  1856,  p.  58). 

2  T 


690 


PALESTINE 


sheep  of  Palestine  is  the  brond-tail  (Ocis  laticau- 
datiis),  with  its  varieties  [Shekp]  ;  goats  are 
extremely  common  evetywhere. 

Aves. — Palestine  abounds  in  numerous  kinds  of 
birds.  Vultures,  eagles,  falcons,  kites,  owls  of 
diti'erent  kinds,  represent  the  Buptoricd  order.  Of 
the  smaller  birds  may  be  mentioned,  amongst  others, 
the  3[erops  Persicus,  the  Upupa  Epops,  the  Sitta 
Syriaca  or  Dalmatian  nuthatch,  several  kinds  of 
Silviadae,  the  Cinnyris  osea,  or  Palestine  sunbird, 
the  Ijos  xanthopyijos,  Palestine  nightingale, — the 
finest  songster  in  the  country,  which  long  before 
sunrise  pours  foith  its  sweet  notes  fiom  the  thick 
jungle  which  fringes  the  Jordan  ;  the  Amydnis  Tris- 
tramii,  or  glossy  starling,  discovered  by  Mr.  Tristram 
in  the  gorge  of  the  Kedi'on  not  far  from  the  Dead 
Sea,  "  the  roll  of  whose  music,  something  like  that 
of  the  organ-bird  of  Australia,  makes  the  rocks 
resound"  —  this  is  a  bird  of  much  interest, 
inasmuch  as  it  belongs  to  a  purely  African  group 
not  before  met  with  in  Asia  ;  the  sly  and  wary 
Crateropns  chalyheus,  in  the  open  wooded  district 
near  Jericho;  the  jay  of  Palestine  [Oarrulus  mela- 
nocephalus) ;  kingfishers  {Ceryle  nidis,  and  perha])s 
Alcedo  ispida)  abound  about  the  Lake  of  Tiberias 
and  in  the  streams  above  the  Huleh  ;  the  raven, 
and  carrion  crow  ;  the  Pastor  roseus,  or  locust-bird 
[see  Locust]  ;  the  common  cuckoo ;  several  kinds 
of  doves  ;  sandgrouse  (Pterocles),  partridges,  fran- 
colins,  quails,  the  great  bustard,  storks,  both  the 
black  and  white  kinds,  seen  often  in  flocks  of  some 
hundreds  ;  herons,  curlews,  pjlicans,  sea-swallows 
(Sterna),  gulls,  &c.  &c.  For  tlie  ornithology  of 
the  Holy  Land  the  reader  is  referred  to  Hem- 
prich  and  Ehrenberg's  Symbolae  Physicae  (Berlin, 
1820-25),  and  to  Mr.  Tristram's  paper  in  the 
Ibis,  i.  22. 

ReptUia. — Sevei-al  kinds  of  lizards  (Saura)  occur. 
The  Lacerta  stellio,  Lin.,  which  the  Arabs  call 
Hardmi,  and  the  Turks  kill,  as  they  think  it 
mimics  them  saying  their  prayers,  is  very  common 
in  ruineil  walls.  The  War-an  el  htrd  [Psammo- 
saurus  scincus)  is  very  common  in  the  deserts. 
The  common  Gi'eek  tortoise  {Tcstudo  Graeca) 
Dr.  Wilson  observed  at  the  sources  of  the  Jordan  ; 
fresh-water  tortoises  (probably  Emus  Cuspica) 
are  found  abundantly  in  the  upjter  pi\rt  of  the 
country  in  the  streams  of  Esdraelon  and  of  the 
higher  Jordan  valley,  and  in  the  lakes.  The  cha- 
meleon (Chamc/eo  vulgaris)  is  common ;  the  crocodile 
does  not  occur  in  Palestine ;  the  Monitor  Niloticus 
has  doubtless  been  confounded  with  it.  In  the 
south  of  Palestine  especially  reptiles  of  various 
kinds  abound  ;  besides  those  alieady  mentioned,  a 
large  Acanthodactylus  frequents  old  buildings;  a 
large  species  of  Uromastix,  at  least  two  species  of 
Gecko (^Tarcntola:),  a  Gongylus  (ocellatus?),  several 
other  Acanthodactyli  and  Seps  tridactylns  have 
been  observed.  Of  Ophidians,  there  is  moie  than 
one  species  of  Echidna  ;  a  Naia,  several  Tropido- 
noti,  a  Coronella,  a  Coluber  (trivirgatns?)  occur- 
and  on  the  south.ern  frontier  of  the  land  the  desert 
form  Cerastes  Ilasselquistii  has  been  observed.  Of 
the  Batrachia  we  have  little  information  beyond 
that  supplied  by  ]\itto,  viz.  that  frogs  (Pana  escu- 
lenta)  abound  in  the  marshy  pools  of  Palestine  • 
that  they  are  of  a  large  size,  but  are  not  eaten  by 


■^^  This  statement  with  regard  to  the  totul  absence  of 
organic  life  in  the  Dead  Sea  is  confirmed  by  almost  every 
traveller,  and  there  can  lie  no  doubt  as  to  its  general 
iiccuracy.    It  is,  however,  but  risht  to  stale  that  Mr.  H. 


PALESTINE 

the  inhabitants.     The  tree-fjog  (Hyla)   and   to;ul 
{Bufo)  are  also  very  common. 

Pisces. — Fish  were  supplied  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  both  from  the  Mediterranean  and  from  the 
inland  lakes,  especially  from  the  Lake  of  Tiberias. 
The  men  of  Tyre  brought  fish  and  sold  on  the  Sab- 
bath to  the  people  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xiii.   16). 
The   principal    Icinds   which    are   caught   off    the 
shoi'es  of  the  MediteiTanean  are  supplied  by  the 
families  Sparidae,  Percidae,  Scomberidae,  Raiadae, 
and  Pleuronectidae.     The  Sea  of  Galilee  has  been 
always  celebrated  for  its  fish.     Burckhardt  [Syria, 
332)  says  the  most  common  species  are  the  binny 
{Cyprinus  lepidotus),  frequent  in  all  the  fresh  waters 
of  Palestine   and  Syria,   and  a  fish   called  Mesht, 
which  he  describes  as  being  a  foot  long  and  5  inches 
broad,  with  a  flat  body  like  the  sole.     The  Binny  is 
a  species  of  barbel ;  it  is  ihe  Barbus  Binni  oi  Cvx .  and 
Valenc,  and  is  said  by  Bruce  to  attain  sometimes  to 
a  weight  of  10  lbs. ;  it  is  common  in  the  Nile,  and 
is  said  to  occur  in  all  the  fresh  waters  of  Syria ;  the 
Mesht  is  undoubtedly  a  species  of  Chromius,  one  of 
the  Labridae,  and  is  perhaps  identical  with  the  C. 
Niloticus,  which  is  frequently  represented  on  Egyp- 
tian monuments.    The  tish  of  this  lake  are,  according 
to  old  tradition,  nearly  identical  with  the  fish  of  the 
Nile ;  but  we  sadly  want  accurate  information  on 
this  point.     As  to  the  fishes  of  Egypt  and  Syria, 
see  Kiippell,  E.,  Neue  Fischedes  Nils,  in  Verhandl. 
Senckenberg .  Gesellsch.  Frankf.,  and  Heckel,  J.,  Die 
Fische  Syriens,  in  Russegger,  Raise  nach  Egyptcn 
mid  Klein  Asicn.  There  does  not  appear  to  be  any 
separate  work  published  on  the  fishes  of  the  Holy  Land. 
Concerning  the  other  divisions  of  the  animal  king- 
dom   we   have    little   information.      Molluscs   are 
numerous  ;   indeed   in  few  areas  of  similar  extent 
could  so  large  a  number  of  land  molluscs  be  found  ; 
Mr.  Tristram  collected  rasually,  and  without  search, 
upwards  of  100  species  in  a  few  weeics.     The  lancl 
shells  may  be  classified  in  four  groups.     In  the 
north  of  the  country  the  prevailing  type  is  that  of 
the  Greek  and  Turkish  mountain  region,  numerous 
species  of  the  genus  Clausilia,  and  of  opaque  Bulind 
and  Pupae  predominating.    On  the  coast  and  in  the 
plains  the  common  shells  of  the  East  Mediterranean 
basin  abound,  e.  g.  Helix  Pisana,  H.  Syriaca,  &c. 
In  the  south,  in  the  hill  country  of  Judea,  occurs  a 
very  interesting  group,  chiefly  confined  to  the  genus 
Helix,  three  subdivisions  of  which  may  be  typified 
by  //.  Boissiori,  H.  Seetiena,  H.  tuhei-culosa,  re- 
calling by  their  thick,  calcareous,  lustreless  coating, 
the  prevalent  types  of  Egypt,  Arabia,  and  Sahara. 
In  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  the  prevailing  group  is 
a  subdivision  of  the  genus  Bulimus,  rounded,  serai- 
pellucid,  and  lustrous,  very  numerous  in  species, 
which  are  for  the  most  part  peculiar  to  this  district. 
The  reader  will  find  a  list  of  Mollusca  found  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  An.  and  Mag. 
of  Nat.  Hist.  vi.  No.  34,  p.  512.     The  following 
remark  of  a  resident  in  Jerusalem  may  be  mentioned. 
"  No  shells  are  found  in  the  Dead  Sea  or  on  its 
mai-gin  except  the  bleached  specimens  of  Melanopsis, 
Neritinae,  and  various  Unionidae,  which  have  been 
washed  down  by  the  Jordan,  and  afterwai'ds  drifted 
on  shore.     In  fact,  so  intense  is  the  bitter-saline 
quality  of  its  waters  that  no  mollusc  (nor,  so  far  as 
1  know,  any  other  living  creature)  can  exist  in  M." 


Poole  discovered  some  small  fish  in  a  brine-spring,  about 
100  yds.  distant  from,  and  30  ft.  above  tlie  level,  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  which  he  was  inclined  to  think  had  been  pro- 
duced from  fish  in  the  sea  (see  Heograph.Journalfor  1856). 


PALESTINE 

These  nay  be  typified  by  B.  Jordani  aud  B.  Alep- 
pensis.  Of  the  Crustacea  wo  know  scarc((ly  any- 
thing. Lord  Lindsay  observed  large  nunibei's  of  a 
small  crab  in  the  sands  near  Akaba.  Hasselquist 
{Trav.  238)  speaks  of  a  "running  crab"  seen  by 
him  oil  the  coasts  of  Syria  and  Kgypt.  Dr.  Baird  has 
recently  {An.  and  Mag.  N.  H,  viii.  No.  45,  p.  'J09) 
described  an  interesting  form  of  Entomostracous 
Crustacean,  which  he  terms  Branch/pics  Exiinius, 
reared  from  mud  sent  him  from  a  pool  nesu'  Jeru- 
s;ilem.  Five  other  species  of  this  group  are  described 
by  Dr.  Baird  in  the  An.  and  Mag.  N.  H.  for  Oct. 
1859.  With  regard  to  tlie  msecfc,  a  number  of  beetles 
may  be  seen  figured  in  the  Sijinholae  Fhysicae. 

The  Lepidoptcra  of  Palestine  are  as  numerous  and 
varied  as  might  have  been  expected  in  a  land  of 
flowers.  All  the  common  butterflies  of  southern 
Europe,  or  neai'ly  allied  congeners,  are  plentiful  in 
the  cultivated  plains  and  on  the  hill-sides.  Nu- 
merous species  of  Folyommatus  aud  Li/caena,  The- 
cla  iiicis  and  acaciae ;  many  kiuda  oi'  Pont ia,  the 
lovely  Anthocaris  Eupheno  abounds  on  the  lower 
hills  in  spring,  as  does  Parn-tssius  Apollinus;  more 
than  one  species  of  Thais  occurs ;  the  genera  Argyn- 
nis  and  Melitaea  are  abundantly  represented,  not 
so  Ilipparchia,  owing  probably  to  the  comparative 
dryness  of  the  soil.  Lihijthea  (Celtis?)  is  fovxnd, 
and  the  gorgeous  genus  Vanessa  is  very  common 
in  all  suitable  localities;  the  almost  cosmopolitan 
Cynthia  Cardui  and  Vanessa  Atalanta,  V.  L. 
album,  and  V.  Antiopa,  may  be  mentioned  ;  Pa- 
pilio  Alexanor  and  some  others  of  the  same  species 
flit  over  the  plains  of  Sharon,  and  the  caterpillar 
of  the  magniflcent  Sphinx  Nerii  feeds  in  swarms 
on  the  oleanders  by  the  banks  of  the  Jordan. 
Bees  are  common.  [Bee.]  At  least  three  species 
of  scorpions  have  been  distinguished.  Spiders  are 
common.  The  Abu  Hanakein,  noticed  as  occurring 
at  Sinai  by  Burckhardt,  which  appears  to  be  some 
species  of  Galeodes,  one  of  the  Solpugidae,  probably 
may  be  found  in  Palestine.  Locusts  occasionally 
visit  Palestine  and  do  infinite  damage.  Ants  are 
numerous  ;  some  species  are  described  in  the  Journal 
of  the  Linncan  Society,  vi.  No.  21,  which  were  col- 
lected by  Mr.  Hanbury  in  the  autumn  of  1 860.  Of 
the  Annelida  we  have  no  information  ;  while  of  the 
wliole  sub-kingdoms  of  Coelenterata  and  Protozoa 
we  are  completely  ignorant. 

It  has  been  remarked  that  in  its  physical  character 
Palestine  presents  on  a  small  scale  an  epitome  of  the 
natural  features  of  all  regions,  mountainous  and 
desert,  northern  and  tropical,  maritime  and  inland, 
pa.storal,  arable,  and  volcanic.  This  fact,  which  has 
rendered  the  allusions  in  the  Scriptures  so  varied  as 
to  alTord  familiar  illustrations  to  tiie  people  of  every 
climate,  h;is  liad  its  natural  eflect  on  the  zoology  of 
the  country.  In  no  other  district,  not  even  on  the 
southeiii  slopes  of  the  Himalayah,  are  the  typical 
fauna  of  so  many  distinct  regions  and  zones  brought 
into   such   close  ju.xtaposition.     The    bear  of  the 


PALESTINE 


691 


These  fish  liave  been  identified  by  Sir  J.  Ricliardson  with 
Cypriiwdon  I fammon is,  Cuv.  et  Val.  xvii.  169;  see  Pro- 
cced.  of  y.mihig.  Soc.  for  1 S56,  p.  37 1 .  M  r.  Tristram  observes 
tliat  he  found  in  the  Sahara  Cyjrfinixlim  dispar  in  hot 
salt-springs  wlicrc  Ihc  water  was  shallow,  Imt  that  these 
lisli  are  never  found  in  deep  pools  or  lakes.  Mr.  I'oolo 
observed  also  a  niunber  of  aquatic  birds  diving  fre- 
quently in  the  Dead  Sea,  and  fhenec  eimcludcd,  Justly, 
Sir  J.  lilehard.son  thinks,  "  that  they  must  have  found 
soniPthinK  edible  t.licrc."  It  would,  moreover,  be  an  in- 
leresilng  question  to  determine  whether  some  specie's  of 


snowy  heights  of  Lebanon  and  the  gazelle  of  the 
desert  may  be  hunted  within  two  days'  journey  of 
each  other ;  sometimes  even  the  ostrich  approaches 
the  southern  borders  of  the  land;  the  wolf  of  the 
north  and  the  leopard  of  the  tropics  howl  w'ithin 
hearing  of  the  same  bivouac  ;  while  the  falcons,  the 
hnnets,  and  buntings,  recall  the  familiar  inhabit-- 
ants  of  our  Engli.sh  fields,  the  sparkling  little  sun- 
bird  {Cinnyris  osea),  and  the  grackle  of  the  glen 
{Amydrus  Tristramii)  introduce  us  at  once  to  the 
most  brilliant  types  of  the  bird  life  of  Asia  and 
S.  Africa. 

Within  a  walk  of  Bethlehem,  the  common  frog 
of  fjngland,  the  chameleon,  and  the  gecko  of  Africa, 
may  be  found  almost  in  company;  and  descending  to 
the  lower  forms  of  animal  life,  while  the  northern 
valleys  are  prolific  in  Clausiliae  and  other  genera 
of  molluscs  common  to  Europe,  the  valley  of  the 
Jordan  presents  types  of  its  own,  and  the  hill 
country  of  Judaea  produces  the  same  type  of  Helices 
as  is  found  in  Egypt  and  the  African  Sahara.  So 
in  insects,  while  the  familiar  forms  of  the  butter- 
flies of  Southern  Europe  are  represented  on  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  the  Apollo  butterfly  of  the  Alps  is  recalled 
on  Mount  Olivet  by  the  exquisite  Parnassius  Apol- 
linus  hovering;  over  the  same  ])lant9  as  the  sparkling 
Thais  medicaste  and  ihe  Libythca  (  Celtis?), uovthenx 
representatives  of  sub-tropical  lepidoptera. 

If  the  many  travellers  who  year  by  year  visit 
the  Holy  Land  would  pay  some  attention  to  its 
zoology,  by  bringing  home  collections  and  by  in- 
vestigations in  the  country,  we  should  soon  hope 
to  have  a  fair  knowledge  of  the  fauna  of  a  land 
whidvinthis  respect  has  been  so  much  neglected, 
and  should  doubtless  gain  much  towards  the  eluci- 
dation of  many  passages  of  Holy  Scripture.  [W.  H. 
and  H.  B.  Tris'j*am.] 

The  Climate. — No  materials  exist  for  an  ac- 
curate account  of  the  Climate  of  the  very  dillerent 
regions  of  Palestine.  Besides  the  casual  n<itices  of 
travellers  (often  unscientific  persons),  the  following 
observations  are  all  that  we  possess  : — 

(1.)  Average  monthly  temperatures  at  Jerusa- 
lem, taken  between  June  1851,  aud  Jan.  1855, 
inclusive,  by  Dr.  R.  G.  Barclay,  of  Beyrout  and 
Jerusalem,  and  published  by  him  in  a  jiaper  '  On 
the  State  of  Medical  Science  in  Syria,'  in  the 
N.  American  Medico-Chirurgical  Bericw  (Phila- 
delphia), vol.  i.  705-718.^ 

(2.)  A  set  of  ob.servations  of  temperature,  200  in 
all,  extending  from  Nov.  19,  1838,  to  Jan.  16, 1839, 
taken  at  .lerusalem,  Jaffa,  Nazareth,  and  Beyrout, 
by  Kussegger,  and  given  in  his  work  {Reiscn,  iii. 
170-185). 

(3.)  The  writer  is  indebted  to  his  friend  Mr.  .lames 
Olaisher,  F.R.S.,  for  a  table  shewing  the  mean  tem- 
])erature  of  the  air  at  Jerusalem  for  each  month, 
froin  May,  1843,  to  May,  1844«;  and  at  Beyrout, 
from  April,  1842,  to  May,  1845. 

Artemia  (brine-shrimp)  may  not  exist  in  the  sliallow  pools 
at  the  extreme  south  end  of  the  Salt  Lake.  In  tlie  open 
tanks  at  Lyinington  myriads  of  thesi;  transparent  little 
brinp-shrimps  (ihey  are  about  half  an  ineb  in  length)  are 
seen  swimming  actively  about  in  water  every  pint  of  svhieh 
contains  as  much  as  a  quarter  of  a  pound  of  salt ! 

''  These  oliservations  are  inserted  In  Hr.  Barclay's  work 
{(Hl.y  of  the  flrrat  Kivg,  •12S),  and  are  accompanied  by  Ills 
comments,  the  result  of  a  residence  of  several  years  in 
•fenisalem  (see  also  pp.  4a-5G) 

"■  There  is  considerable  variation  in  tliealwve  three  sets 
2    Y    2 


692 


PALESTINE 


(4.)  Register  of  the  fall  of  rain  at  Jerusalem  from 
1846  to  1849,  and  1850  to  1854,  by  Dr.  R.  G. 
Barclay  (as  above). 

1.  Temperature. — The  results  of  these  observa- 
tions at  Jerusalem  may  be  stated  generally  as  fol- 
lows. January  is  the  coldest  month,  and  July  and 
August  the  hottest,  though  June  and  September 
are  nearly  as  warm.  In  the  first-named  month  the 
average  temperature  is  49^^-1  Fahr.,  and  greatest 
cold  28'^;  in  July  and  August  the  average  is  78°-4  ; 
with  greatest  heat  92°  in  the  shade  and  143-"  in 
the  sun.  The  extreme  range  in  a  single  year  was 
52- ;  the  mean  annual  temperature  65~"-6.  Though 
varying  so  much  during  the  dilTerent  seasons,  the 
climate  is  on  the  whole  pretty  unifoim  from  year 
to  year.  Thus  the  tHermometric  variation  in  the 
same  latitude  on  the  west  coast  of  North  America  is 
nearly  twice  as  great.  The  isothermal  line  of  mean 
annual  temperature  of  Jerusalem  passes  through 
California  and  Florida  (to  the  north  of  Mobile), 
and  Dr.  Barclay  remarks  that  in  temperature  and 
the  periodicity  of  the  seasons  there  is  a  close  analogy 
between  Palestine  and  the  former  state.  The  iso- 
thermal line  also  pa-sses  through  Gibraltar,  and  neai- 
Madeira  and  the  ?>ermudas.  The  heat,  though  ex- 
treme during  the  four  midsummer  months,  is  much 
alleviated  by  a  sea-breeze  from  the  N.W.,  which  blows 
with  great  i-egularity  from  10  A.M.  till  10  P.M.; 
and  from  this  and  other  unexplained  causes  the  heat 
IS  rarely  oppressive,  except  during  the  occasional 
presence  of  the  Khamsin  or  sirocco,  and  is  said  to  be 
much  more  bearable  than  even  in  many  parts  of  the 
western  world^  which  are  deemed  tropical.  The 
Khamsin  blows  during  February,  March,  and  April 
(Wildenbruch).  It  is  most  oppressive  when  it 
comes  from  the  east,  bearing  the  heat  and  sand 
of  the  desert  with  it,  and  during  its  continuance 
darkening  the  air  and  filling  eveiything  with  fine 
dust  (Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  22H). 

During  January  and  February  snow  often  falls 
to  the  depth  of  a  foot  or  more,  though  it  may  not 
make  its  appearance  for  several  years  together.  In 
1854-5  it  remained  on  the  ground  for  a  fortnight.s 


of  observations,  as  will  be  seen  trom  tbe  following  compa- 

rative table  of  the  mean  temperatures  of  Jerusalem  :— 

Month. 

(1.) 

(2.)                 (3.) 

Jan. 

49-4 

47-7 

Feb. 

54-4 

53-7 

March 

55-7 

60- 

April 

61-4 

54-7 

May- 

73-8 

66-8 

June 

75-2 

71-7 

July 

79-1 

77-3 

Aug. 

79-3 

72-6 

Sept. 

77- 

(Mean  of  67}       '2-2 

Oct. 

74-2 

obs.    from  1 

Nov.  19  to          0=  * 

Nov. 

63-8 

Dee.    5.)                                gg.g 

Dec. 

54-5 

«2-                  47-4 

Mean  for  i 
the  year/ 

66-5 

62-6 

It  is  understood  tbat  a  regular  series  of  observations, 
with  standard  Barometer,  Thermometer,  and  Rain-guage, 
was  made  for  10  years  by  the  late  Dr.  M'lilowan  of  the 
Hospital,  Jerusalem,  but  the  record  of  them  has  unfortu- 
nately been  mislaid. 

f  Barclay,  48 ;  Rob.  B.  R.  i.  430 ;  also  Schwarz,  327. 

S  Jewish  Intelligencer,  1856,  p.  137,  note. 


PALESTINE 

Nor  is  this  of  late  occurrence  only,  but  is  repoi-ted 
by  Shaw  in  1722.  In  1818  it  was  between  two 
and  three  feet  deep.*'  In  1754  a  heavy  fall  took 
place,  and  twenty-five  persons  are  sjiid  to  have  been 
frozen  to  death  at  Nazareth.'  ,Snow  is  repeatedly 
mentioned  in  the  poetical  books  of  the  Bible,  and 
must  therefore  have  been  known  at  that  time 
(Ps.  Lxviii.  14,  cxlvii.  16;  Is.  Iv.  10,  &c.).  But  in 
the  n.irrative  it  only  appears  twice  (1  Mace.  xiii.  22  ; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  20). 

Thin  ice  is  occasionally  found  on  pools  or  sheets 
of  water ;  and  pieces  of  ground  out  of  the  reach  of 
the  sun's  rays  remain  sometimes  slightly  frozen  for 
several  days.  Bat  this  is  a  rare  occurrence,  and  no 
iujury  is  done  to  the  ■vegetation  by  frost,  nor  do 
plants  require  shelter  daring  winter  (Barclay). 

Observations  made  at  Jerusalem  are  not  appli- 
cable to  the  whole  of  the  highland,  as  is  obvious 
from  Russegger's  at  Nazareth.  These  show  us  the 
result  of  fift3'-five  observations,  e.xtending  from  Dec. 
15  to  26:  highest  temp.  58-5°,  lowest  46°,  mean 
53^,  all  considerably  lower  than  those  taken  at 
Jerusalem  a  fortnight  before. 

2.  Rain. — The  result  of  Dr.  Barclay's  observa- 
tions is  to  show  that  the  greatest  fall  of  rain  at 
Jerusalem  in  a  single  year  was  85  inches,''  and 
the  smallest  44,  the  mean  being  61*6  inches.  The 
greatest  tall  in  any  one  mouth  (Dec.  1850)  was 
33'8,  and  the  greatest  in  three  months  (Dec.  1850, 
Jan.  and  Feb.  1851)  72-4.  These  figures  will  be 
best  appreciated  by  recollecting  that  the  average 
rain-fall  of  London  during  the  whole  year  is  on!}'' 
25  inches,  and  that  in  the  wettest  parts  of  the 
country,  such  as  Cumberland  and  Devon,  it  rarely 
exceeds  60  inches. 

As  in  the  time  of  our  Saviour  (Luke  xii.  54), 
the  rains  come  chiefly  from  the  S.  or  S.W.  They 
commence  at  the  end  of  October  or  beginning  of 
November,  and  continue  with  greater  or  less  con- 
stancy till  the  end  of  February  or  middle  of  March, 
and  occasionally,  though  rarely,  tilt  the  end  of 
April.  It  is  not  a  heavy  continuous  rain,  so 
much  as  a  succession  of  sevei-e  showers  or  storms 
with  intervening  periods  of  fine  bright  weather, 
permitting  the  grain  crops  to  grow  and  ripeu. 
And  although  the  season  is  not  divided  by  any 
entire  cessation  of  rain  for  a  lengthened  interval, 
as  some  represent,  yet  there  appears  to  be  a 
diminution  in  the  fall  for  a  few  weeks  in  De- 
cember and  January,  aftei-  which  it  begins  again, 
and  continues  during  February  and  till  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  season.  On  the  uplands  the  barley- 
harvest  (which  precedes  the  wheat)  should  begin 
about  the  last  week  of  ]\Tay,  so  that  it  is  preceded 
by  five  or  six  weeks  of  summer  weather.  Any 
falling-off  in  the  rain  during  the  winter  or  spring  is 
very  prejudicial  to  the  harvest;  and,  as  in  the  days 
of  the  prophet  Amos,  nothing  could  so  surely  occa- 
sion the  greatest  distress  or  be  so  fearful  a  threat 
as  a  drous^ht  three  months  before  harvest  (Amos 
iv.  7). 

There  is  much  ditference  of  opinion  as  to  whether 
the  former  and  the  latter  rain  of  Scripture  are  re- 
presented by  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  present 
rainy  season,  separated  by  the  slight  interval  men- 


>>  "  1  Elle  hoch,"  Scholz,  quoted  by  Von  Eaumer,  79. 

>  S.  Schulz,  quoted  by  Von  Rauiner.    Schwarz,  326. 

^  Here  again  there  is  a  considerable  discrepancy,  since 
Mr.  Poole  {Geogr.  Jnumal.  xxvi.  57)  states  that  Dr. 
M'Gowan  had  registered  the  greatest  quantity  in  one 
year  at  108  inches. 


PALESTINE 

tioued  above  [e.  g.  Kenrick,  Phoenicia,  'i',i).  or 
whether,  as  Dr.  Barclay  {Citi/,  &c.  54)  and  others, 
affirm,  the  latter  rain  took  place  after  the  harvest, 
about  midsummer,  and  has  been  withheld  as  a 
punishment  for  the  sins  of  the  nation.  This  will 
be  best  discussed  imder  Rain. 

Between  Ai)ril  and  November  there  is,  witli  the 
rarest  exceptions,  an  uninterrupted  succession  of 
fine  weather,  and  skies  without  a  cloud.  Thus  the 
year  divides  itself  into  two,  and  only  two,  seasons — 
as  indeed  we  see  it  const;uitly  divided  in  the  Bible 
— "  winter  and  summer,"  "  cold  and  heat,"  "  seed- 
time and  harvest." 

During  the  summer  the  dews  are  very  heavy, 
and  often  saturate  the  traveller's  tent  as  if  a  shower 
had  passed  over  it.  The  nights,  especially  towards 
sunrise,  are  very  cold,  and  thick  fogs  or  mists  are 
common  all  over  the  comitry.  Thunder-stoims 
of  gieat  violence  ai'e  frequent  during  the  winter 
months . 

.J.  So  much  for  the  climate  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
highland  generally,  in  the  lowland  districts,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  heat  is  much  greater  mid  more 
oppressive,"  owing  to  the  quantity  of  vapour  in  the 
atmosphere,  the  absence  of  any  bree/.e,  the  sandy 
nature  of  the  soil,  and  the  manner  in  which  the  lieat 
is  confined  and  reflected  by  the  enclosing  heights ; 
perhaps  also  to  the  internal  heat  of  the  earth, 
due  to  the  depth  below  the  sea  level  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  Jordan  valley,  and  the  remains  of 
volcanic  agency,  which  we  have  already  shown  to 
be  still  in  existence  in  this  very  depressed  region 
[p.  681a].  No  indiaition  of  these  conditions  is 
discoverable  in  the  Bible,  but  Josephus  was  aware 
of  them  (B.  J.  iv.  8,  §13),  and  states  that  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jericho  was  so  much  warmer 
than  the  upper  country  that  linen  clothing  was 
worn  there  even  when  Judaea  was  covered  with 
snow.  This  is  not  quite  confirmed  by  the  expe- 
rience of  modern  travellers,  but  it  appears  that 
when  the  winter  is  at  its  severest  on  tlie  highlands, 
and  both  eastern  and  western  mounfciins  are  white 
with  snow,  uo  frost  visits  the  depths  of  the  Jordan 
valley,  and  the  greatest  cold  experienced  is  produced 
by  the  driving  rain  of  tempests  (Seetzen,  Jan.  9, 
ii.  oOO).  The  vegetation  already  mentioned  as 
formerly  or  at  present  existing  in  the  district — 
palms,  indigo,  sugar — testifies  to  its  tropical  heat. 
The  harvest  in  the  Ghor  is  fully  a  month  in  advance 
of  that  on  the  highlands,  and  the  fields  of  wheat 
are  still  green  on  tlie  latter  when  the  grain  is  being 
threshed  in  the  former  (Rob.  B.  R.  i.  4:U,  551, 
iii.  .S14).  Thus  Burckhardt  on  May  5  found  the 
barley  of  the  district  between  Tibeii;is  and  Beisan 
nearly  all  harvested,  while  on  the  upland  plains  of 
the  Hauran,  from  which  he  had  just  descended,  the 
harvest  was  not  to  commence  tor  fifteen  days.  In 
this  fervid  and  moist  atmosphere  irrigation  alone  is 


PALESTINE 


093 


necessary  to  ensure  abundant  crops  of  the   finest 
grain  (Hob.  i.  550). 

4.  Tlie  climate  of  the  maritime  lowland  e.xhibits 
many  of  the  characteristics  of  that  of  the  Jordan 
valley,"  but,  being  much  more  elevated,  and  exposed 
on  its  western  side  to  the  sea-breezes,  is  not  so 
oppressively  hot.  Russegger's  observations  at  Jail'a 
(Dec.  7  to  12)  indicate  only  a  slight  advance  in  tem- 
perature on  that  of  Jerusalem.  But  Mr.  Glaisher's 
observations  at  Beyrout  (mentioned  above)  show 
on  the  other  hand  that  the  temperature  there  is 
considerably  higher,  the  Jan.  being  54°,  July  82°, 
and  the  mean  for  the  year  69-3.  The  situation  of 
Beyrout  (which  indeed  is  out  of  the  confines  of  the 
Holy  Land)  is  such  as  to  render  its  climate  very 
sultry.  This  district  retains  much  tropical  vegeta- 
tion ;  all  along  the  coast  from  Gaza  to  Beyrout,  and 
inland  as  flir  as  Ramleh  anil  Lydd,  the  <iate-palm 
flourishes  and  fruits  abundantly,  and  the  orange, 
sycamore  fig,  pomegranate,  and  banana  grow  lux- 
uriantly at  Jaffa  and  other  places.  Here  also  the 
harvest  is  in  advance  of  that  of  the  mountainous 
districts  (Tliorason,  Land  aiid  Book,  543).  In 
the  lower  portions  of  this  extensive  plain  fi'ost  and 
snow  are  as  little  known  as  they  are  in  the  Ghor. 
But  tlie  heights,  even  in  summer,  are  often  very 
chilly,"  and  the  sunrise  is  fi-e(iuently  obscured  by 
a  dense  low  fog  (Thomson,  490,  542 ;  Kob.  ii.  19). 
North  of  Carmel  slight  frosts  are  occasionally 
experienced. 

In  the  winter  months  however  the  climate  of 
these  regions  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the  south  of 
France  or  the  maritime  districts  of  the  north  of 
Italy.  Napoleon,  writing  from  Gaza  on  the  "  8^/t 
Ventose  (26  Feb.)  1799,"  says,  "Nous  sommes  ici 
dans  I'eau  et  la  boue  jusqu'aux  genoux.  II  fait  ici 
le  meme  froid  et  le  m^nie  temps  qu'a  Paris  dans 
cette  saison "  {Con:  de  Napoleon,  No.  399S). 
Bei  tliier  to  Marmont,  from  the  same  place  (29  Dec. 
1798\  says,  "  Nous  trouvons  ici  un  pays  qui  res- 
semble  i  la  Provence  et  le  climat  a  celui  d'Europe" 
{Mem.  dii  Due  de  Eagnse,  ii.  56). 

A  register  of  the  weather  and  vegetation  of  the 
twelve  months  in  Palestine,  referring  especially  to 
the  coast  region,  is  given  by  Colonel  von  Wilden- 
bruch  in  Geogr.  Society's  Journai,  xx.  232.  A 
good  deal  of  similar  inlbrmation  will  be  found  in  a 
tabular  form  on  Peiermann's  Physical  Map  of  Pales- 
tine in  the  Biblical  Atlas  of  the  Tract  Society. 

The  permanence  of  the  climate  of  Palestine,  on 
the  ground  that  the  same  vegetation  which  anciently 
flourished  there  still  exists,  is  ingeniously  maintained 
in  a  paper  on  The  Climate  of  Palestine  in  Modem 
compared  to  Ancient  Times  in  the  Edinburgh  New 
Philusdphical  Journal  for  April,  1862.  Refei-eiice 
is  therein  made  to  a  pajier  on  the  same  subject 
by  Schouw  in  vol.  viii.  of  the  same  periodical, 
p.  311.       ^ 


■>>  At  5  P.M.  on  the  25th  Nov.  Russegger's  thermometer 
at  Jerusalem  slievvcd  a  temp,  of  (j2»i ;  but  when  he  ar- 
rived at  Jericho  at  SMO  p.m.  on  the  27  th  it  had  risen  to 
72-5.  At  7'30  the  following  morning  it  was  6;!'5,  against 
58"  at  Jerusalem  on  the  25lh  ;  and  at  noon,  ut  the  Jordan, 
it  had  risen  to  81.  At  Mursaba,  ut  1 1  x.w.  of  the  29th,  It 
was  66  ;  and  on  returning  to  Jerusalem  on  the  1st  Dec.  it 
again  fell  to  an  average  of  61.  An  uUscrvatioii  recorded 
Viy  Dr.  Robinson  (ili.  311))  at  SalcM  (Succoth),  in  the  central 
liart  of  the  Jordan  valley,  on  May  14,  1852,  In  the  shade, 
and  close  to  u  spring,  gives  92",  which  Is  the  very  highest 
reading  recorded  ut  Jerusalem  in  July  :  later  on  the  same 
ilay  it  was  93",  in  a  strong  N.W.  wind  (314).  On  May 
13,  1838,  at  Jcriciio,  it  was  91°  in  the  shade  and  the  brecite. 


l)r.  Anderson  (184)  found  it  106°  Fahr.  "  through  the  first 
half  of  the  night"  at  the  S.E.  corner  of  the  Oead  Sea. 
In  a  paper  on  the  '  Climate  of  ralostine,'  itc,  in  the 
Edinburgh  Xew  Philos.  Journal  for  April,  1862,  published 
while  this  sheet  was  passing  through  the  press,  the  mean 
aniuial  tcmporattne  of  Jericho  is  stated  as  72"  Falir.,  but 
without  giving  any  authority. 

n  Itobinson  (il.  22.1),  on  June  8,  1838,  found  the  ther- 
mometer 83"  Fahr.  before  sunrise,  at  Ileit  Aetti/,  on  the 
lower  hills  overlooking  the  plain  of  I'hilistia. 

°  Chilly  nights,  succeeding  scorching  days,  have  formed 
a  characteristic  of  the  Kast  ever  since  the  days  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  .\.\xi.  40;  Jer.  x.\.xvl.  3i^). 


694 


PALESTINE 


LiTKRATURE.— The  list  of  works  on.  the  Holy 
Laud  is  of  prodigious  extent.  Dr.  Robinson,  in  the 
Appendix  to  his  Biblical  Researches,  enumerates  no 
less  than  183  ;  to  which  Bonar  {Land  of  Promise) 
adds  a  large  number ;  and  even  then  the  list  is 
far  from  complete.  Of  course  every  tiaveller  sees 
some  things  which  none  of  his  predecessors  saw,  and 
therefore  none  should  be  neglected  by  the  student 
au.xious  thoroughly  to  investigate  the  nature  and 
customs  of  the  Holy  Land  ;  but  the  following 
works  will  be  found  to  contain  nearly  all  necessary 
information  : — P 

1.  Josephus. —  Invaluable,  ijoth  for  its  own  sake, 
and  as  an  accompaniment  and  elucidation  of  the 
Bible  narrative.  Josephus  had  a  very  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  country.  He  possessed  both  the 
Hebrew  Bible  and  the  Septuagiut,  and  knew  them 
well ;  and  there  are  many  places  in  his  works  which 
sliow  that  he  knew  how  to  compare  the  various  books 
together,  and  combine  their  scattered  notices  in  one 
nu7-rative,  in  a  manner  more  like  the  processes  of 
modern  criticism  than  of  ancient  record.  He  pos- 
sessed also  the  works  of  several  ancient  historians, 
who  survive  only  through  the  fragments  he  has 
preserved.  And  it  is  evident  that  he  had  in  addi- 
tion other  nameless  sources  of  information,  now  lost 
to  us,  which  often  supplement  the  Scripture  history 
in  a  very  important  manner.  These  and  other  things 
in  the  writings  of  Josephus  have  yet  to  be  investi- 
gated. Two  tracts  by  Tuch  (Quaestiones  de  F. 
Josephi  libria,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1859),  on  geographical 
(joints,  are  worth  attention. 

2.  The  Onomasticon  (usually  so  called)  of  Euse- 
bius  and  Jerome.  A  tract  of  Eusebius  (f  340), 
"  concerning  the  names  of  places  in  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures ;"  translated,  freely  and  with  many  additions, 
by  .Jerome  (f  4-20),  and  included  in  his  works  as 
Liber  de  Situ  et  Nominibus  Locoruin  flebraiconim. 
The  oj'iginal  arrangement  is  according  to  the  Books 
of  Scripture,  but  it  was  thrown  into  one  general 
alphabetical  order  by  Bonfrere  (1631,  &c.);  and 
finally  edited  by  J.  Clericus,  Amst.  1707,  &c.  This 
tract  contains  notices  (often  very  valuable,  often 
absolutely  absurd)  of  the  situation  of  many  ancient 
places  of  Palestine,  as  f  \r  as  they  were  known  to 
the  two  men  who  in  their  day  were  probably  best 
acquainted  with  the  subject.  In  connexion  with  it, 
see  Jerome's  £)j.  ad  Eustochium  de  Virginitate — an 
itinerary  through  a  large  part  of  the  Holy  Land. 
Others  of  Jerome's  Epistles,  and  his  Commentaries, 
are  full  of  information  on  the  country. 

3.  The  most  impoitant  of  the  earlv  travellers 
—from  Arculf  (a.d.  700)  to  Maundrell  (1697)— 
are  contained  in  Earhj  Travels  in  Palestine,  a  vo- 
lume published  by  Bohn.  The  shape  is  convenient, 
but  the  translation  is  not  always  to  be  implicitly 
relied  on. 

4.  Reland. — H.  Relandi  Palaestina  ex  Morvw- 
mentis  Vcieribiis  ilhistrata,  1714.  A  treatise  on 
the  Holy  Land  in  three  books:  1.  The  country  ;  2. 
The  distances;  3.  The  places;  with  maps  (excellent 
tor  their  date),  prints  of  coins  and  inscriptions. 
Keland  exhausts  all  the  inf<n-mation  obtainable  on 
his  subject  down  to  his  own  date  (he  often  quotes 
IMaundrell,  1703).  His  learning  is  immense,  he  is 
extremely  accurate,  always  ingenious,  and  not  want- 
ing in  humour.  But  honesty  and  strong  sound 
sense  are  his  characteristics.  A  sentence  of  his 
own  might  be  his  motto :    "  Conjecturae,  quibus 


p  A  list  of  all  tbe  works  on  Palestine  which  have  any 
pretensions  to  importance,  with  full  critical  nniarks,  is 


PALESTINE 

non  delectamur"    (p.  139),  or  "Ego  nil   muto" 
(671). 

5.  Benjamin  of  Tudela. —  Travels  of  Pabbi  Ben- 
jamin (in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa)  from  1160-73. 
The  best  edition  is  that  of  A.  Asher,  2  vols.  1840-1. 
The  part  relating  to  Palestine  is  contained  in  pp. 
61-87.  The  editor's  notes  contain  some  carious 
information  ;  but  their  most  valuable  part  (ii.  397- 
445)  is  a  translation  of  extracts  fiom  the  work 
of  Esthori  B.  Mose  hap-Parchi  on  Palestine  (A.D. 
1314-22).  These  passages — notices  of  places  and 
identifications — are  very  valuable,  more  so  than 
those  of  Benjamin.  The  original  work,  Caftor  va- 
Pherach,  "  knop  and  flower,"  has  been  reprinted,  in 
Hebrew,  by  Edelmann,  Berlin,  1852.  Other  Itine- 
raries of  Jews  have  been  translated  and  published 
by  Carmoly  (Brux.  1847)  ,  but  they  are  of  less 
value  than  the  two  already  named. 

6.  Abulfeda. — The  chief  Moslem  accounts  of  the 
Holy  Land  are  those  of  Edrisi  (cir.  1150),  and 
Abulfeda  (cir.  1300),  translated  under  the  titles  of 
Tabula  Sijriae,  and  Descr.  Arabiae.  Extracts  from 
these  and  from  the  great  work  of  Yakoot  are  given 
by  Schultens  in  an  Index  Geographiciis  appended 
to  his  edition  of  Bohaeddin's  Life  of  Saladin,  folio, 
1755.  Yakoot  has  yet  to  be  explored,  and  no  doubt 
he  contains  a  mass  of  valuable  information. 

7.  Quaresmius. —  Terrae  Sanctae  LJluciiiatio,  kc. 
Ant.  1639,  2  vols,  folio.  The  work  of  a  Latin  monk 
who  lived  in  the  Holy  Land  for  more  than  twelve 
years,  and  rose  to  be  Principal  and  Commissary  Apos- 
tolic of  the  country.  It  is  divided  into  eight  books  : 
the  first  three,  general  dissertations  ;  the  remainder 
"  ]ieregrinations  "  through  the  Holy  Land,  with  his- 
torical accounts,  and  identifications  (often  incoiTect), 
and  elaborate  accounts  of  the  Latin  traditions  attach- 
ing to  each  spot,  and  of  the  ecclesiastical  establish- 
ments, military  orders,  &c.  of  the  time.  It  has  a 
copious  index. — Similar  infoi-mation  is  given  by  the 
Abb6  Mislin  {Les  Saints  Lieux,  Paris,  1858,  3  vols. 
8vo)  ;  but  with  less  elaboration  than  Quaresmius, 
and  in  too  hostile  a  vein  towards  Lamartine  and 
other  travellers. 

8.  The  great  burst  of  modem  travel  in  the  Holy 
Land  began  with  Seetzen  and  Burckhardt.  Seetzen 
resided  in  Palestine  from  1805  to  1807,  during 
which  time  he  travelled  on  both  E.  and  W.  of  Jordan. 
He  was  the  first  to  visit  the  Hauran,  tbe  Ghor,  and 
the  mountains  of  Ajlun  :  he  travelled  completely 
round  tlie  Dead  Sea,  besides  exploring  the  east  side 
a  second  time.  As  an  expei'ienced  man  of  science, 
Seetzen  was  charged  with  collecting  antiquities  and 
natui-al  objects  for  the  Oriental  Museum  at  Gotha ; 
and  his  diaries  contain  inscrijitions,  and  notices  of 
flora  and  faiuia,  &c.  They  have  been  published 
in  3  vols.,  with  a  4th  vol.  of  notes  (but  without  an 
index),  by  Kruse  (Berlin,  1854-9).  The  Palestine 
journeys  are  contained  in  vols.  1  and  2.  His  Letters, 
founded  on  these  diaries,  and  giving  their  results,  are 
in  Zach's  Monatl.  Corresp.  vols.  17,  18,  26,  27. 

9.  Burckhardt. —  Travels  in  Syria  and  the  Lfoli/ 
Land,  4to,  1822.  With  the  exception  of  an  ex- 
cursion of  twelve  days  to  Safed  and  Nazai'eth, 
Burckhardt's  join'neys  S.  of  Damascus  were  con- 
fined to  the  east  of  the  Jordan.  These  regions  he 
explored  and  described  more  completely  than  Seetzen, 
or  any  later  traveller  till  Wetstein  (1861),  and  even 
his  i-esearches  do  not  extend  over  so  wide  an  area. 
Burckhardt  made  two  tours  in  the  Hauran,  in  one 


given  by  Rittcr  at  Iho  coiunienccniunt  of  tbe  2nd  division 
of  his  viiith  volume  (Jordan). 


PALESTINE 

of  wliich  he  penetratel — first  of  Europeans — into 
the  mysterious  I.eja.  The  southern  portions  of  the 
Transjordanic  country  he  traversed  in  liis  journey 
fiom  Damascus  to  Petra  and  Sinai.  The  fulness  of 
the  notes  whicli  he  contrived  to  keep  under  the 
very  dilficult  tivcumstances  in  which  he  travelled  is 
astonishing.  Thoy  contain  a  multitude  of  inscrip- 
tions, long  catalogues  of  names,  plans  of  sites,  &c. 
The  strength  of  his  memory  is  shown  not  only  by 
these  notes  but  by  his  constant  references  to  books, 
from  which  he  was  completely  cut  olf.  His  diaries 
are  interspersed  with  lengthened  accounts  of  the 
various  districts,  and  the  manners  ami  customs, 
commerce,  &c.,  of  their  inhabitants.  Burckhardt's 
accuracy  is  universally  jiraised.  No  doubt  justly. 
But  it  should  be  remembered  that  on  the  E.  of 
Jordan  no  means  of  testing  him  as  yet  exist ;  while 
in  other  places  his  descriptions  have  been  found 
im]ierfect  or  at  variance i  with  tacts. — The  volume 
contains  an  excellent  preface  by  Col.  Leake,  but  is 
very  defective  from  the  want  of  an  index.  This  is 
jaitially  supplied  in  the  German  translation  (Wei- 
mar, 18i.'3-4,  2  vols.  8vo),  which  has  the  advantage 
of  having  been  edited  and  annotated  by  Gesenius. 

10.  Irby  and  Mangles. — Travels  in  Egi/jjt  and 
Nubia,  Syria  and  the  Holy  Land  (in  1817-18). 
Hardly  worth  special  notice  except  for  the  portions 
which  relate  their  route  on  the  east  of  Jordan, 
especially  about  Kerek  and  the  country  of  Woab  and 
Ammon,  which  are  veiy  well  told,  and  with  an  air 
of  simple  fiithfulness.  These  portions  are  contained 
in  chapters  vi.  and  viii.  The  work  is  published  in 
the  Home  and  Col.  Library,  1847. 

11.  Robinson. — (1.)  Biblical  Researches  in  Pa- 
lestine, 4'C.,  in  1838  :  1st  ed.  1841,  3  vols.  8vo; 
2nd  ed.  185G,  2  vols.  8vo.  (2.)  Later  Bib.  lies, 
in  1852,  8vo,  1856.  Dr.  liobinsou's  is  the  most 
important  work  on  the  Holy  Land  since  Reland. 
His  knowledge  of  the  subject  and  its  liteiature  is 
very  great,  his  common  sense  excellent,  his  qualifi- 
cations as  an  investigator  and  a  describer  remark- 
able. He  had  the  rare  advantage  of  being  accom- 
panied on  both  occasions  by  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  long 
resident  in  Syiia,  and  perfectly  versed  in  both 
classical  and'  vernacular  Arabic.  Thus  he  was 
enabled  to  identify  a  host  of  ancient  sites,  which  are 
mostly  discussed  at  great  length,  and  with  full 
references  to  the  authorities.  The  drawbacks  to  his 
work  are  a  want  of  knowledge  of  architectural  art, 
and  a  certain  dogmatism,  which  occasionally  passes 
into  contempt  for  those  who  differ  with  him.  He 
too  uniformly  disregards  tradition,  an  extreme  fully 
as  bad  as  its  oj^posite  in  a  countiy  like  the  Ivast. 

The  first  eilition  has  a  most  valuable  Apjiendix, 
containing  lists  of  the  Arabic  names  of  modern 
places  in  the  country,  which  in  the  second  edition 
are  omitted.  Both  series  are  furnished  with  in- 
dexes, but  those  of  Geography  and  Antiijuities  might 
be  extended  with  advantage. 

1 2.  Wilson. —  The  Lands  of  the  Bible  visited,  cf'C, 
1847,  2  vols.  8vo.  Dr.  Wilson  truver.sotl  the  Holy 
Land  twice,  but  without  going  out  of  the  usual 
routes.  He  paid  much  attention  to  the  topography, 
iind  keeps  a  constant  eye  on  the  reports  of  his  prede- 
cessor Dr.  Kobinson.  His  liook  cannot  be  neglected 
with  safety  by  any  student  of  the  country  ;  liut  it 
is  chietly  valuable  for  its  careful  and  dctiilod  ac- 
counts of  the  leligious  bodies  of  the  East,  especially 
the  Jews    and   Samaritans.      His   Jndiau   labours 

1  For  examples  of  this  sec  Uoblnson,  li.  R.  ill.  32S  ; 
408 ;  478  ;  194  :  Slanley.  Sinai  J-  I'al.  CI,  Vu. 


PALESTINE 


695 


liaving  accustomed  him  to  Arabic,  he  was  able  to 
converse  freely  with  all  the  peoi)le  he  met,  and  his 
inquiries  were  generally  made  in  the  direction  just 
named.  His  notice  of  the  Samaritans  is  unusually 
full  and  accurate,  and  illustrated  by  copies  and 
translations  of  documents,  and  information  •  not 
elsewhere  given. 

13.  Schwarz. — A  Descriptive  Geography,  ^c, 
of  Palestine,  Philad.  1850,  8vo.  A  translation  of 
a  work  originally  published  in  Hebrew  [Sepher  Te- 
buoth,  Jerusalem,  51)05,  A.D.  1845)  by  Kabbi  Joseph 
Schwarz.  Taking  as  his  basis  the  catalogues  of 
Joshua,  Chronicles,  &c.,  and  the  numerous  topogra- 
phical notices  of  the  Rabbinical  books,  he  proceeds 
systematically  through  the  country,  suggesting  iden- 
tifications, and  often  giving  curious  and  valuable 
information.  The  Ameiican  translation  is  almost 
useless  for  want  of  an  index.  This  is  in  some  mea- 
sure supplied  in  the  German  veision.  Das  heilige 
Land,  &c.,  Frankfurt  a.  M.  1852. 

14.  De  Saulcy. —  Voyage  autour  de  la  Mer  Morte, 
(Sec,  1853,  2  vols.  8vo.,  with  Atlas  of  Maps  and 
Plates,  Lists  of  Plants  and  Insects.  Interesting 
rather  fiom  the  unusual  route  taken  by  the  author, 
the  boldness  of  his  theories,  and  the  atlas  of  ad- 
mirably engraved  maps  and  plates  which  accom- 
panies the  text,  than  for  its  own  meiits.  Like 
many  French  works  it  has  no  index.  Translated  : — 
Narrative  of  a  Journey,  &c.,  2  vols.  8vo,  1 854. — See 
The  Dead  Sea,  by  Rev.  A.  A.  Isaacs,  1857.  Also  a 
valuable  Letter  by  "  A  Pilgrim,"  in  the  Athena:um, 
Sept.  9,  1854. 

15.  Lynch. —  Official  Report  of  the  Ignited  States 
Expedition  to  explore  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Jordan, 
4to.,  Baltimore,  1852.  Contains  the  daily  Record 
of  the  Expedition,  and  separate  Reports  on  the  Orni- 
thology, Botany,  and  Geology.  The  last  of  these 
Reports  is  more  particularly  described  at  p.  679. 

10.  Stanley. — Sinai  and  Palestine,  1853,  8vo. 
Professor  Stanley's  work  differs  from  those  of  his 
predecessors.  Like  them  he  made  a  lengthened 
journey  in  the  country,  is  intimately  acquainted 
with  all  the  authorities,  ancient  and  modern,  and 
has  himself  made  some  of  the  most  brilliant  identi- 
fications of  the  historical  sites.  But  his  great  object 
seems  to  have  been  not  so  much  to  make  fresh  dis- 
coveries, as  to  apply  those  already  made,  the  struc- 
ture of  the  country  and  the  peculiarities  of  the 
scenery,  to  the  elucidation  of  the  history.  This 
he  has  done  with  a  power  and  a  delicacy  truly 
remarkable.  To  the  sentiment  and  eloquence  of 
Lamartine,  the  genial  freshness  of  Miss  Slartineau, 
and  the  sound  judgment  of  Robinson,  he  adds  a 
reverent  appreciation  of  the  subject,  and  a  caie  for 
the  smallest  defciils  of  the  picture,  which  no  one 
else  has  yet  displayed,  and  which  render  his  de- 
scriptions a  most  valuable  commentary  on  the  Bible 
narrative.  The  work  cont;\ins  an  A])iicndix  on  the 
Topograj)hical  Terms  of  the  Bible,  of  imjiortance  to 
students  of  the  English  version  of  the  Scriptures. 

See  also  a  paper  on  '  Sacred  Geography  '  by  Pro- 
fessor Stanley  in  the  Quarterly  Review,  No.cl.xxxviii. 

17.  Tobler. — Bethlehem,  1849  :  'Topographic  von 
Jerusalem  u.  seine  Umgebnngcn,  1854.  These 
works  are  models  of  patient  industry  and  research. 
They  contain  everything  that  lias  been  said  by 
everybody  on  the  subject,  and  are  truly  valuable 
storehouses  for  those  who  aie  unable  to  refer  to  the 
originals.  His  Dritte  Wamlcriing,  8vo,  1859,  de- 
scribes a  district  but  little  known,  viz.  part  of  Phi- 
listia  and  the  country  between  Hebron  and  L'amleh, 
and  thus  po.sse.sses,  in  addition  to  the  merits  above 


696 


PALESTINE 


named,  that  of  novelty.  It  contains  a  sketch-map 
of  the  hitter  disti'ict,  which  corrects  former  maps  in 
some  important  points. 

18.  Van  de  Velde. — Sijria  and  Palestine,  2  vols. 
8vo.  1854.  Contains  the  naiTative  of  the  author's 
joui:neys  while  engaged  in  preparing  his  large  Map 
of  the  Huhj  Land  (1858'),  the  best  map  yet  pub- 
lished. A  condensed  edition  of  this  work,  omitting 
the  purely  pei-sonal  details  too  frequently  introduced, 
would  be  useful.  Van  de  Velde's  Memoir,  8vo, 
1858,  gives  elevations,  latitudes  and  longitudes, 
routes,  and  much  very  excellent  information.  His 
Pays d' Israel,  1 00  colourei  1  lithographs  fiom  oi iginal 
sketches,  are  accurate  and  admirably  executed,  and 
many  of  the  views  are  unique. 

19.  Ritter. — Die  Vergleicliende  Erdkunde,  &c. 
The  six  volumes  of  Hitter's  great  geographical  work 
which  relate  to  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  the  Holy 
Laud,  and  Syria,  and  form  together  Band  viii. 
They  may  be  conveniently  designated  by  the  follow- 
ing names,  which  the  writer  has  adopted  in  his  other 
articles: — I.Sinai.  2.  Jordan.  3.  Syria  (Index). 
4,  Palestine.    5.  Lebanon.     6.  Damascus  (Index). 

20.  Of  more  recent  works  the  following  may  be 
noticed  : — Porter  ;  Five  Years  in  Damascus,  the 
Hauran,  «&c.,  2  vols.  8vo.  1855:  Handbook  for 
Syria  and  I^alcstiiie,  1858.  — Bonar,  The  Land  of 
Promise,  1858.  —  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the 
Book,  1859.  The  fruit  of  twenty-five  years'  resi- 
dence in  the  Holy  Land,  by  a  shrewd  and  intelligent 
observer. — Wetstein,  Reiseborioht  iiber  Hauran 
uiid  die  beiden  Trachonen,  1860,  with  woodcuts, 
a  plate  of  inscriptions,  and  a  map  of  the  district 
by  Kiepert.  The  first  attempt  at  a  real  exploration 
of  those  extraordinary  regions  east  of  the  Jordan, 
which  were  partially  visited  by  Burckhardt,  and  re- 
cently by  Cyril  Graham  [Cambridije  Essays,  1858  ; 
Trans.  R.  S.  Lit.  18G0,  kc).  —  Drew,  Scripture 
Lands  in  Connexion  with  their  History,  1860. 

Two  works  by  ladies  claim  especial  notice. 
Egyptian  Sepulchres  and  Syrian  Shrines,  by  Miss 
li.  A.  Beaufort,  2  vols.  1861.  The  2nd  vol.  con- 
tains the  record  of  six  months'  travel  ami  residence 
in  the  Holy  Land,  and  is  full  of  keen  and  delicate 
observation,  caught  with  the  eye  of  an  artist,  and 
characteristically  lecorded, — Domestic  Life  in  Pa- 
lestine, by  Miss  Rogers  (1862),  is,  what  its  name 
purports,  an  account  of  a  visit  of  several  years  to 
the  Holy  Land,  during  which,  owing  to  her  brother's 
position,  the  author  had  opportunities  of  seeing 
at  leisure  the  interiors  of  many  unsophisticated 
Arab  and  Jewish  households,  in  places  out  of  the 
ordinary  track,  such  as  few  Englishwomen  ever 
before  enjoyed,  and  certainly  none  have  recorded. 
These  she  has  described  with  great  skill  and  fidelity, 
and  with  an  abstinence  from  descriptions  of  matters 
out  of  her  pioper  path  or  at  second-hand  which  is 
truly  admirable. 

It  still  remains,  however,  for  some  one  to  do  for 
Syria  what  Mr.  Lane  has  so  faultlessly  accomplished 
for  Egypt,  the  more  to  be  desired  because  the  time 
is  fast  passing,  and  Syria  is  becoming  every  day 
more  leavened  by  the  West. 

Views. — Two  extensive  collections  of  Views  of  the 
Holy  Land  exist—  those  of  Bartlett  and  of  RobCTts. 
Pictorially  beautifid  as  these  plates  are,  they  are  not 
so  useful  to  the  student  as  the  veiy  accurate  views 
rff  William  Tipping,  f^sq.,  published  in  Traill's 
,/osephus),  some  of  which  have  been  inserted  in  the 
article  Jerusalem.  There  are  some  instructive 
views  taken  from  photographs,  in  the  last  c<lition 
of  Keith'.s  Land  <f  fsrael.     I'hutographs  have  been 


PALMER-WORM 

puldished  by  Frith,  Robertson,  Rev.  G.  W.  Bridges, 
and  others. 

Maps. — Mr.  Van  de  Velde's  map,  already  men- 
tioned, has  superseded  all  its  predecessors;  but  much 
still  lemains  to  be  done  in  districts  out  of  the  track 
usually  pursued  by  travellers.  On  the  cast  of  Jor- 
dan, Kiepert's  map  (iu  Wetzstein's  Hauran)  is  as  yet 
the  only  trustworthy  document.  The  new  Admi- 
ralty surveys  of  the  coast  are  understood  to  be  rapidly 
approaching  completion,  and  will  leave  nothing  to 
be  desired. 

Of  works  on  Jerusalem  the  following  may  be 
named :  — 

Williams.— r/ie  Holy  City:  2nd  ed.  2  vols.  8vo. 
1849.  Contains  a  detailed  history  of  Jerusalem, 
an  account  of  the  modern  town,  and  an  essay  on 
tiie  architectural  history  of  the  Church  of  the 
Sepulchre  by  Professor  WiUis.  Mr.  Williams  in 
most  if  not  all  cases  supports  tradition. 

Barclay. —  The  City  of  the  Great  King:  Philad. 
1858.  An  accoiml  of  Jerusalem  as  it  was,  is,  and 
will  be.  Dr.  B.  had  some  peculiar  opportunities  of 
investigating  the  subterranean  passages ,of  the  city 
and  the  Haram  area,  and  his  book  contains  many 
valuable  notices.  His  large  Map  of  Jerusalem  and 
Environs,  though  badly  engraved,  is  accurate  and 
useful,  giving  the  form  of  the  ground  very  well. 

Fergusson. —  The  Ancient  Topography  of  Jeru- 
salem, &c.,  1847,  with  7  plates.  Treats  of  the 
Temple  and  the  walls  of  ancient  Jerusalem,  and 
the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  and  is  full  of  the 
most  original  and  ingenious  views,  expressed  in  the 
boldest  language.  From  architectural  arguments 
the  author  maintains  the  so-called  Mosk  of  Omar 
to  be  the  real  Holy  Sepulchre.  He  also  shows  that 
the  Temple,  instead  of  occupying  the  whole  of  the 
Haran  area,  vv;is  confined  to  its  south-western 
corner.  His  arguments  ha^e  never  been  answered 
or  even  fairly  discussed.  The  remarks  of  some  of 
his  critics  are,  however,  dealt  with  by  Mr.  F.  in  a 
pamphlet.  Motes  on  the  Site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre, 
1861.  See  also  vol.  i.  of  this  Dictionary,  pp. 
1017-1035. 

Thrujip. — Ancient  Jerusalem,  a  new  Investi- 
gation, &c.,  1855. 

A  good  resume  of  the  controversy  on  the  Holy 
Sepulclire  is  given  in  the  Museum  of  Classical 
Antiquities,  No.  viii.,  and  Suppl. 

Maps. — Besides  Dr.  Barclay's,  already  mentioned, 
Mr.  Van  de  Velde  has  published  a  very  clear  and 
correct  map  (1858).  So  also  has  Signor  Pierotti 
(1861).  The  latter  contains  a  great  deal  of  in- 
formation, and  shows  plans  of  the  churches,  &c., 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  city. 

Photographs  have  been  taken  by  Salzmann,  whose 
plates  are  accompanied  by  a  treatise,  Jerusalem, 
Etude,  &c.  (Paris,  1856)  :  also  by  Frith  (Virtue, 
1858),  Robertson,  and  others.  [G.] 

PAL'LU  (N-Ij'5  :  *a\A.ovs :  Phallu).  The 
second  son  of  Reuben,  father  of  Eiiab  and  founder 
of  the  family  of  the  Palluites  (Ex.  vi.  14  ;  Num. 
.xxvi.  5,  8;  1  Chr.  v.  3).  In  the  A.  V.  of  Gen. 
xlvi.  9,  he  is  called  Phallu,  and  Josephus  appea)s 
to  identify  him  with  Peleth  in  Num.  xvi.  1,  wiiom 
he  calls  *aAAoDs.     [See  On.] 

PAL'LUITES,  THE  CNl'pan :  b  ^aWovi ; 
Ale.x.  6  ^aWouii :  Phalluitae).  The  descendants 
of  Pallu  the  son  of  Reuben  (Num.  xxvi.  5;. 

PALMER -WORM  (DTH,  gazdm:  (ca/iirr;  : 
eruca)  occurs  Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25  ;  Am.  iv.  9.      Bochart 


PALM-TREE 

(^Hieroz.  iii.  253)  has  endeavoured  to  show  that 
gdzdtn  denotes  some  species  of  locust ;  it  has 
ah-eatly  been  shown  that  the  teu  Hebrew  names 
to  whicli  Bochart  assigns  the  meaning  of  different 
kinds  of  locusts  cannot  possibly  apply  to  so  many, 
iU5  not  more  than  two  or  tliree  destructive  species 
of  locust  are  known  in  the  Bible  lauds.  [Locust  ; 
Catehpillar.]  The  derivation  of  the  Hebrew 
word  from  a  root  which  means  "  to  cut  of}',"  is  as 
applicable  to  several  kinds  of  insects,  whether  in 
their  perfect  or  larva  condition,  as  it  is  to  a  locust ; 
accordingly  we  prefer  to  follow  the  LXX.  and 
Vulg.,  which  are  consistent  with  each  other  in  the 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew  word  iu  the  three  passages 
where  it  is  foLuid.  The  /ca^TTTj  of  Aristotle  {Anini. 
Hist.  ii.  17,  4,  5,  6)  evidently  denotes  a  cater- 
pillar, so  called  from  its  "bending  itself"  up 
(KcJ/tTTTO))  to  move,  as  the  caterpillars  called  geo- 
metric, or  else  from  the  habit  some  caterpillars 
have  of  "coiling"  themselves  up  when  handled. 
The  Eruca  of  the  Vulg.  is  the  /ca/UTTTj  of  the  Greeks, 
as  is  evident  from  the  express  assertion  of  Columella 
{Dc  Re  Rust.  xi.  3,  63,  Script.  R.  R.  ed.  Schneider). 
The  Ciialdee  and  Syriac  understand  some  locust 
larva  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Oedmann  (  Vena.  Sanvn. 
fasc.  ii.  c.  vi.  p.  116)  is  of  the  same  opinion. 
Tychsen  (^Comment,  de  locust  is,  &c.,  p.  88)  iden- 
tifies the  gdzdin  with  the  Gnjllus  cristatiis,  Liu.,  a 
South  African  species.  Micliaelis  {^Supp.  p.  220) 
follows  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  We  cannot  agree  with 
Mr.  Denham  (Kitto's  CycL,  art.  "  Locust")  that  the 
depredations  ascribed  to  the  gdzdm  in  Amos  better 
agree  with  the  characteristics  of  the  locust  than  of 
a  aiterpillar,  of  which  various  kinds  are  occasion- 
ally tiie  cause  of  much  damage  to  fruit-tiees,  the 
fig  and  the  olive,  &c.  [W.  H.] 

PALM-TREE  O^J^  =    (poivi^).     Under  this 

generic  term  many  species  are  botanically  iucludoii ; 
but  we  have  here  only  to  do  with  the  Date-palm, 
the  Phucnix  Dacti/lifera  of  Linnaeus.  It  grew 
very  abundantly  (more  abundantly  than  now)  in 
many  parts  of  the  Levant.  On  this  subject  gene- 
rally it  is  enough  to  refer  to  fitter's  monograph 
('  Ueber  die  geographische  Verbreitung  der  Dattel- 
palme ')  iu  his  Erdkundc,  and  also  published  sepa- 
rately. 

While  this  tree  was  abundant  generally  in  the 
Levant,  it  was  regarded  by  the  ancients  as  pecu- 
liarly characteristic  of  Palestine  and  the  neighbour- 
ing regions.  (2i'pfo,  ottov  poiuiKes  ol  Kapiro(f>6poi, 
Xeu.  C'l/rop.  vi.  2,  §22.  .Judaea  inclyta  est  paluiis, 
Plin.  iV.  II.  xiii.  4.  Palmetis  [Judaeis]  proceiitas 
et  decor,  Tac.  Ilist.  v.  6.  Compare  Strabo  xvii. 
800,  818;  Theophrast.  Hist.  Plant,  ii.  8;  Paus. 
ix.  19,  §5).  The  following  places  may  be  enu- 
merated from  the  Bible  as  having  some  connexion 
with  the  palm-tree,  either  in  tiie  derivation  of  tiie 
name,  or  iu  the  mention  of  tiie  tree  as  growing  on 
the  spot. 

( 1 .)  At  Elim,  one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israel- 
ites between  Egypt  and  Sinai,  it  is  expressly  stated 
that  there  were  "  twelve  wells  (fountains)  of  water, 
atid  threescore  and  ten  palm-trees"  (Ex.  xv.  27  ; 
Num.  xxxiii.  9).  The  word  "fountains"  of  the 
latter  passage  is  more  correct  than  the  "  wells  "  of 
the  former:  it  is  more  in  harmony  too  with  the 
habits  of  the  tree  ;  for,  as  Tiieophrastus  says  (/.  c), 
the  palm  iTri^Tjrii  fxaWov  to  vafxaTialof  vSwp. 
There  are  still  palm-trees  and  t'ouuhiins  in  Wndi/ 
GhUmndcl,  which  is  gencrallv  identilied  with  Elim 
(Hob.  Bib.  Res.  i.  69). 


PALM-TREE 


697 


(2.)  Next,  it  should  be  observed  that  Elatii  (Deut. 
ii.  8  ;  1  K.  ix.  26  ;  2  K.  xiv.  22,  xvi.  6 ;  2  Chr.  viii. 
17,  xxvi.  2)  is  another  plural  form  of  the  same  word, 
and  may  likewise  mean  "  the  palm-trees."  See 
Prof.  Stanley's  remarks  (5.  and  P.  pp.  20,  84, 
519),  and  compare  Keland  (Palaest.  p.  93a).  This 
place  was  in  Edom  (probably  Akaha ) ;  and  we  are 
reminded  here  of  the  "  Idumaeae  palmae  "  of  Virgil 
{Georg.  iii.  12)  and  Martial  (x.  50). 

(3.)  No  place  iu  Scripture  is  so  closely  associated 
with  the  subject  before  us  as  Jericho.  Its  rich 
palm-groves  are  connected  with  two  very  ditlerent 
peiiods, — with  that  of  Moses  and  Joshua  on  the 
one  hand,  and  that  of  the  Evangelists  on  the 
other.  As  to  the  former,  the  mention  of  "  Je- 
richo, the  city  of  palm-trees  "  (Deut.  xxxiv.  3), 
gives  a  peculiar  vividness  to  the  Lawgiver's  last 
view  from  Pisgah :  and  even  after  the  narrative  of 
the  conquest,  we  have  the  children  of  the  Keuite, 
Moses'  father-in-law,  again  associated  with  "  the 
city  of  palm-trees"  (Judg.  i.  16).  So  Jericho  is 
described  in  the  account  of  the  Moabite  invasion 
after  the  death  of  Othniel  (Judg.  iii.  13)  ;  and,  long 
after,  we  find  the  same  phrase  applied  to  it  in  the 
reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  15).  What  the  extent 
of  these  palm-groves  may  have  been  in  the  desolate 
period  of  Jericho  we  cannot  tell ;  but  they  were  re- 
nowned in  the  time  of  the  Gospels  and  Josephus. 
The  Jewish  historian  mentions  the  luxuriance  of 
these  trees  again  and  again ;  not  only  in  allusion  to 
tiie  time  of  Moses  {Ant.  iv.  6,  §1),  but  in  the 
account  of  the  Roman  campaign  under  Pompey 
{Ant.  xiv.  4,  §1  ;  B.  J.  i.  6,  §6),  the  proceedings 
of  Antony  and  Cleopatra  {Ant.  xv.  4,  §2),  and  the 
war  of  Vespasian  [B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2,  3).  Herod  the 
Cireat  did  much  for  Jericho,  and  took  great  interest 
iu  its  palm-groves.  Hence  Horace's  "  Herodis  pal- 
metapinguia"  {Ep.  ii.  2,  184),  which  seems  almost 
to  have  been  a  proverbial  expression.  Nor  is  this  the 
only  Heathen  testimony  to  the  same  fact.  Strabo 
describes  this  immediate  neighbourhood  as  TtXeova,- 
(,0V  Tcfi  (poiviKi,  ftrl  yUTj Kos  (XTaSiwv  cKarov  (xvi. 
763),  and  Pliuy  says  "  Hiericuntem  palmetis  con- 
sitam"  (//.  N.  V.  14),  and  adds  elsewhere  that, 
while  palm-trees  grow  well  in  other  parts  in  Judaea, 
"  Hiericunte  m.axime"  (xiii.  4).  See  also  Galen, 
De  Aliment,  facult.  ii.,  and  Justin,  xxxvi.  3. 
Shaw  {Trav.  p.  371,  folio)  speaks  of  several  of 
these  trees  still  remaining  at  Jericho  in  his  time. 

(4.)  TheuameofHAZiozoN-TAMAR,  "the  felling 
of  the  palm-tree,"  is  clear  iu  its  derivation.  This 
pL-ice  is  mentioned  iu  the  history  both  of  Abraham 
(Gen.  xiv.  7)  and  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xx.  2). 
In  the  second  of  these  passages  it  is  expressly  iden- 
tified with  Engedi,  which  wius  ou  the  western  edge 
of  the  Dead  Sea;  and  here  we  can  adduce,  as  a 
valuable  illustration  of  what  is  before  us,  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Apocrypha,  "  I  was  exalted  like  a 
palm-tree  in  Engaddi "  (Eccl.  xxiv.  14).  Here 
again,  too,  we  can  quote  alike  Josephus  {ytwarai 
iv  avTTJ  (poivi^  6  KaKKiiTTOS,  Ant.  ix.  1,  §2)  and 
Pliny  (Eugaddaopi)idum  secundum  ab  Hierosolymis, 
fertihtate  palmcturumque  neiuoribus,  ff.  N.  v.  17). 

(5.)  Another  place  having  tlie  s;ime  element  in 
its  name,  and  doubtless  the  same  characteristic  in 
its  scenery,  was  Baal-Tamar  i Judg.  xx.  33),  the 
B-qOda/xdp  of  Eusebius.  Its  position  was  near 
(iibeah  of  Benjamin:  and  it  could  not  be  far  from 
Deborah's  famous  palm-tree  (Judg.  iv.  5)  ;  if  indeed 
it  was  not  identical  with  it,  as  is  susrgostod  by 
Stiinley  {S.  ^  P.  p.  146). 

(6.)  We  must  next  mention  the  Tamak,  "  the 


698 


PALM-TREE 


palm,"  which  is  set  before  us  iu  the  vision  of  Ezekiel 
(xlvii.  19,  xlviii.  28)  !is  a  point  from  which  the 
southern  border  of  the  land  is  to  be  me;isured  east- 
wards and  westwards.  Kobinson  identifies  it  with 
the  Qafxapo)  of  Ptolemy  (v.  16),  and  thinks  its  site 
may  be  at  d-Milh,  between  Hebron  and  Wach;  Musa 
{Bib.  lies.  ii.  198,  202).  It  seems  from  Jerome  to 
have  been  in  his  day  a  Roman  fortress. 

( 7.)  There  is  little  donbt  that  Solomon's  Tadmor, 
afterwards  the  fiimous  Palmyra,  on  another  desert 
fiontiel-  far  to  the  IS'.E.  of  Tamar,  is  primarily  the 
same  word ;  and  that,  as  Gibbon  says  (^Decline  and 
Fall,  ii.  38),  "  the  name,  by  its  signification  in  the 
Syriac  as  well  as  in  the  Latin  language,  denoted  the 
multitude  of  palm-trees,  which  afforded  shade  and 
verdure  to  that  temperate  region."  In  fact,  while 
the  undoubted  reading  in  2  Chr.  viii.  4  is  "l1D"iri^ 
the  best  text  in  1  K.  ix.  18  is  1DP\.  See  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  6,  §  1 .  Thesprings  which  he  mentions  there 
make  the  palm-trees  almost  a  matter  of  course. 

(8.)  Nor  again  are  the  places  of  the  N.  T.  with- 
out their  associations  with  this  chai-acteristic  tree  of 
Palestine.  Bethany  means  "  the  house  of  dates ;" 
and  thus  we  are  reminded  that  the  palm  gi-ew  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  tlie  Mount  of  Olives.  This  helps 
our  realisation  of  Our  Saviour's  entry  into  Jerusalem, 
when  the  people  "  took  branches  oi palm-trees  and 
went  forth  to  meet  Him"  (John  xii.  13).  This 
aoain  carries  our  thoughts  backwards  to  the  time 
when  the  P'east  of  Tabernacles  was  first  kept  atler 
the  captivity,  when  the  proclamation  was  given  that 
they  should  "  go  forth  unto  the  mount  and  fetch 
palm-branches"  (Neh.  viii.  15) — the  only  branches, 
it  may  be  observed  (those  of  the  willow  excepted), 
.  which  are  specified  by  name  in  the  original  institu- 
tion of  the  festival  (Lev.  xxiii.  40).  From  this 
Gospel  incident  comes  Palm  Sunday  (Dominica  in 
Ilamis  Palmarum),  which  is  observed  with  much 
ceiemony  in  some  countries  where  true  palms  can  be 
had.  Even  in  northern  latitudes  (in  Yorkshire,  for 
instance)  the  countiy  people  use  a  substitute  which 
comes  into  flower  just  before  Easter : — 
"  And  willow  branches  hallow. 

That  they  palmes  do  use  to  call." 

(9.)  The  word  Phoenicia  (4>oiyi/c7j),  which  occurs 
twice  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts  xi.  19,  xv.  3)  is  in  all  pro- 
bability derived  from  the  Greek  word  ((^oiVi|)  tor  a 
palm.  Sidonius  mentions  palms  as  a  product  of 
Phoenicia  {Paneg.  Majorian.  44).  See  also  Plin. 
H.  N.  xiii.  4,  Athen.  i.  21.  Thus  we  may  imagine 
the  same  natural  objects  in  connexion  with  St.  Paul's 
journeys  along  the  coast  to  the  north  of  Palestine, 
as  with  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  desert  on  the  south. 

(10.)  Lastly,  Phoenix  in  the  island  of  Crete,  the 
harbour  which  St.  Paul  was  prevented  by  the  stonn 
from  reaching  (Acts  xxvii.  12),  has  -doubtless  the 
same  derivation.  Both  Theophrastus  and  Pliny  say 
that  palm-trees  are  indigenous  in  this  island.  See 
Hoeck's  Krcta,  i.  38,  388.     [Phenice.] 

From  the  passages  where  there  is  a  literal  refer- 
ence to  the  palm-tree,  we  may  pass  to  the  em- 
blematical uses  of  it  in  Scripture.  Under  this  head 
may  be  classed  the  following : — 

(1.)  The  striking  appearance  of  the  tree,  its  up- 
rightness and  beauty,  would  naturally  suggest  the 
giving  of  its  name  occasionally  to  women.  As  we 
find  in  the  Odyssey  (vi.  163)  Naasicaa,  the  daughter 
of  Alcinous,  compared  to  a  palm,  so  in  Cant.  vii.  7 
we  have  the  same  comparison  :  "Thy  stature  is 
like  to  a  palm-tree."     In  the  0.  T.  three  women 


PALM-TREE 

named  Tamar  are  mentioned:  Judah's  daughter-in- 
law  (Gen.  xxxviii.  6),  Absalom's  sister  (2  Sara, 
xiii.  1),  and  Absalom's  daughter  (2  Sam.  xiv.  27). 
'J'ho  Ijeauty  of  the  two  last  is  expressly  mentioned. 

(2.)  We  have  notices  of  the  employment  of  this 
form  in  decorative  art,  both  in  the  real  temple  of 
Solomon  and  in  the  visionary  temple  of  Ezekiel. 
In  the  former  case  we  are  told  (2  Chr.  iii.  5) 
of  this  decoration  in  general  terms,  and  else- 
where more  specifically  that  it  was  applied  to  the 
walls  (1  K.  vi.  29),  to  the  doors  (vi.  32,  35), 
and  to  the  "  bases "  (vii.  36).  So  in  the  pro- 
phet's vision  we  find  palm-trees  on  the  posts  of 
the  gates  (Ez.  xl.  16,  22,  26,  31,  34,  37),  and  also 
on  the  walls  and  the  doors  (xli.  18-20,  25,  26). 
This  work  seems  to  have  been  in  relief.  We  do 
not  stay  to  inquire  whether  it  had  any  symbolical 
meanings.  It  was  a  natural  and  doubtless  cus- 
tomary kind  of  ornamentation  in  Eastern  archi- 
tecture. Thus  we  are  told  by  Herodotus  (ii.  169) 
of  the  hall  of  a  temple  at  Sais  in  Egypt,  which  was 
i](rKrifxevrj  arvAoiai  (poiviKas  Tct  SeVSpeo  jUEjui^tj- 
fxivotffi :  and  we  are  familiar  now  with  the  same 
sort  of  decoration  iu  Assyrian  buildings  (Layard's 
Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  ii.  137,  396,  401).  The 
image  of  such  rigid  and  motionless  forms  may  pos- 
sibly have  been  before  the  mind  of  Jeremiah  w^hen 
he  said  of  the  idols  of  the  heathen  (x.  4,  5),  "  They 
fasten  it  with  nails  and  with  hammers,  that  it 
move  not :  they  are  upright  as  the  palm-tree,  but 
speak  not." 


(3.)  With  a  tree  so  abundant  in  Judaea,  and  so 
marked  in  its  growth  and  appearance,  as  the  palm, 
it  seems  rather  remarkable  that  it  does  not  appear 
more  frequently  in  the  imagery  of  the  0.  T.  There 
is,  however,  in  the  Psalms  (xcii.  12)  the  familiar 
comparison,  "  The  righteous  shall  fiourisli  like  the 
palm-tree,"  which  suggests  a  world  of  illustration, 
whether  respect  be  had  to  the  orderly  and  regular 
aspect  of  the  tree,  its  fruitfuluess,  the  perpetual 
greenness  of  its  foliage,  or  the  height  at  which  the 
foliage  gi'ows,  as  far  £is  possible  from  earth  and  as 


PALM-TREE 

near  as  possible  to  lipaven.  Peilinps  no  point  is 
move  worthy  of  mention,  it  we  wish  to  pureue  the 
cornpai'ison,  than  the  elasticity  of  the  fibre  of  the 
palm,  and  its  determined  growth  upwards,  even 
when  loaded  with  weights  ("  nititur  in  pondus 
palma").  Such  particulars  of  resemblance  to  the 
righteous  man  wei-e  variously  dwelt  on  by  the 
early  Christian  writei-s.  Some  instivnces  are  given 
by  Celsius  in  his  Hierohotanicon  (Upsal,  1747), 
ii.  522-547.  One,  which  he  does  not  give,  is  worthy 
of  quotation : — "  Well  is  the  life  of  the  righteous 
likened  to  a  palm,  in  that  the  palm  below  is  rough 
to  tiie  touch,  and  in  a  manner  enveloped  in  dry 
bark,  but  above  it  is  adorned  with  fruit,  lair  even 
to  the  eye ;  below,  it  is  compressed  by  the  entbld- 
ings  of  its  bark  ;  above,  it  is  spiead  out  in  ampli- 
tude of  beautiful  greenness.  For  so  is  the  life  of 
the  elect,  despised  below,  beautiful  above.  Down 
below  it  is,  as  it  were,  enfolded  in  many  barks,  in 
that  it  is  straitened  by  innumerable  atilictions  ;  but 
on  high  it  is  expanded  into  a  foliage,  as  it  were,  of 
beautiful  gi-eenness  by  tlie  amplitude  of  the  reward- 
ing" (St.  Gregory,  Mor.  on  Job  xix.  49). 

(4.)  The  passage  in  Rev.  vii.  9,  where  the  glori- 
fied of  all  nations  are  described  as  "  clothed  with 
white  robes  and  palms  in  their  hands,"  might  seem 
to  us  a  purely  classical  image,  drawn  (like  many 
of  St.  Paul's  images)  from  the  Greek  games,  the 
victore  in  which  carried  palms  in  their  hands.  But 
we  seem  to  trace  here  a  Jewish  element  also,  when 
we  consider  three  passages  in  the  Apocrypha.  In 
1  Mace.  xiii.  51  Simon  Maccabaeus,  after  the  sur- 
render of  the  tower  at  Jerusalem,  is  described  as 
entering  it  with  music  and  thanksgiving  "  and 
branches  of  palm-trees."  In  2  Mace.  x.  7  it  is  said 
that  when  Judas  Maccabaeus  had  recovered  the 
Temple  and  the  city  "  they  bare  branches  and  palms, 
raid  sang  psalms  also  unto  Him  that  had  given 
them  good  success."  In  2  Mace.  xiv.  4  Demetrius 
is  presented  "  with  a  crown  of  gold  and  a  palm." 
Here  we  see  the  palm-branches  used  by  Jews  in 
token  of  victory  and  peace.  (Such  indeed  is  the 
case  in  the  Gospel  narrative,  John  xii.  13.) 

There  is  a  fourth  passage  in  the  A])ocrypha,  as 
commonly  published  in  English,  which  appioximates 
closely  to  the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse.  "  I  asked 
the  angel.  What  are  these  ?  He  answered  and  said 
unto  me,  These  be  they  which  have  put  otf  the 
mortiil  clothing,  and  now  they  are  crowned  and 
receive  palms.  Then  said  I  unto  the  angel.  What 
young  person  is  it  that  crowneth  them  and  giveth 
them  palms  in  their  hands  V  So  he  answered  and 
said  unto  me,  It  is  the  Son  of  God,  whom  they  have 
confessed  in  the  world"  (2  Esd.  ii.  44-47).  This 
is  clearly  the  approximation  not  of  anticipation, 
but  of  an  imitator.  Whatever  may  be  determined 
concerning  the  date  of  the  rest  of  the  book,  this 
portion  of  it  is  clearly  subsequent  to  the  Chiistian 
era.  '  [Esdiias,  the  Second  Book  of.] 

As  to  the  industrial  and  domestic  uses 'of  the 
jKilm,  it  is  well  known  that  they  are  very  nu- 
merous: but  there  is  no  clear  allusion  to  them  in 
the  Bible.  That  the  ancient  Orientals,  however,  made 

"  riie  palm-tree  being  dioecious— ttiat  is  to  say,  the 
stamens  and  pistils  (malt  and  female  parts)  being  on  dif- 
f^Tent  trees— It  is  evident  that  no  edible  fruit  can  be  pro- 
duced unless  fertilisation  is  effected  either  by  insect.s  or 
by  some  arlificial  means.  That  the  mode  of  Impregnating 
the  female  plant  with  the  pollen  of  the  male  (oAiireu^tie 
Toi/  </)oii"Ktt)  was  known  to  the  ancients,  is  evident  from 
'I'heophrastus  (//.  I',  il.  9),  and  Herodotus,  who  statf^s  that 
the  Babylonians  adopted  a  similar  plan.     'I'lie  modern 


PALTIEL 


699 


use  of  wine  and  honey  obtained  fiom  the  Palm-tree 
is  evident  from  Herodotus  i\.  193,  ii.  8G),  Strabo 
(xvi.  ch.  14,  ed.  Kram.),  and  Pliny  (iV.  //.  xiii.  4). 
Jt  is  indeed  possible  that  the  honey  mentioned  in 
some  places  may  be  palm-sugar.  (In  2  Chr.  xxxi. 
5  the  mai'gin  has  "  dates.")  There  ma}'  also  in 
Cant.  vii.  8,  "  I  will  go  up  to  the  palm-tree,  I 
will  take  hold  of  the  boughs  thereof,"  be  a  reference 
to  climbing  ibr  the  fruit.  The  LXX.  have  ava^r) 
ffOfiai  iv  Tij5  (poivLKL,  KpaTTjcrw  tuv  u^ewv  avroii. 
So  in  ii.  3  and  elsewhere  (e.  g.  Ps.  i.  3)  the  fruit 
of  the  palm  may  be  intended  :  but  this  cannot  be 
proved."     [SUGAR ;  Wine.] 


It  is  curious  that  this  tree,  once  so  abundant  in 
Judaea,  is  now  comparatively  rare,  except  in  the 
Philistine  plain,  and  in  the  old  Phoenicia  about 
Beyt-out.  A  few  years  ago  there  was  just  one 
palm-tree  at  Jericho  ;  but  that  is  now  gone.  Old 
trunks  are  washed  up  in  the  Dead  Sea.  It  would 
almost  seem  as  though  we  might  take  the  history 
of  this  tree  in  Palestine  as  emblematical  of  that  of 
the  peo])le  whose  home  was  once  in  that  land.  The 
well-known  coin  of  Vespasian  representnig  tlie  palm- 
tree  with  the  legend  "  Judaea  c.apta,"  is  figured  in 
vol.  ii.  p.  438.  [J.  .S.  H.] 

PALSY.     [Medicine,  p.  304.] 

PAL'TI(^P^S:  ^a\Ti:  Fhalti).  The  son  of 
Raphu ;  a  Benjamite  who  was  one  of  the  twelve 
spies  (Num.  xiii.  9). 

.PAL'TIEL  (^X''P^S:  *a\Ti^A:  Phaltid). 
The  son  of  Azzan  and  piince  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar 

Arabs  of  Barbary,  Persia,  &c.,  take  care  to  baiiK  cinsters 
of  male  flowers  on  female  trees.  The  ancient  ICgyptlans 
probably  did  the  same.  A  cake  of  preserved  dates  was 
found  by  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  at  Thebes  (ii.  181,  ed.  IBS'!). 
It  is  certainly  curious  there  is  no  distinct  mention  of  dates 
in  the  liible,  though  we  cannot  dunbt  that  the  ancient 
Hebrews  used  the  fruit,  and  .verc  prob.ibly  acquainted 
with  Ihe  art  of  tertilising  the  flowers  of  iho  female  plant. 


700 


PALTITE,  THE 


(Num.  xxxiv.  2(3).  He  was  one  of  the  twelve  ap- 
pointed to  divide  the  laud  of  Caiuiaii  among  tfie 
tribes  west  of  Jordan. 

PAL'TITE,  THE  CP^SH  :  6  KiKcoOi ;  Alex. 

6<peK\(>)vel:  de  Phalti).  Helez  "the  Paltite" 
is  named  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  26  among  David's 
mighty  men.  In  1  Chr.  xi.  27,  he  is  called  ''  the 
Pelonite,"  and  such  seems  to  have  been  the  i-eading 
followed  by  the  Alex.  MS.  in  2  Sam.  The  Peshito- 
Syriac,  however,  supports  the  Hebrew,  "  Cholots  of 
Pelat."  But  in  1  Chr.  xxvii.  10,  "  Helez  the  Pe- 
lonite "  of  the  tribe  of  Ephiaim  is  again  mentioned 
as  captain  of  24,000  men  of  David's  army  for  the 
seventh  month,  and  the  balance  of  evidence  there- 
fore inclines  to  "Pelonite"  as  the  true  reading. 
The  variation  arose  from  a  confusion  between  the 
letters  31  and  t3.  In  the  Syriac  of  1  Chr.  both 
readings  are  combined,  and  Helez  is  described  as 
"  of  Palton." 

PAMPHYL'IA  {Uafi^vKia),  one  of  the  coast- 
regions  in  the  south  of  Asia  Minor,  having  CiLiCiA 
on  the  east,  and  LyCIA  on  the  west.  It  seems  in 
early  times  to  have  been  less  considerable  than  either 
of  tiiese  contiguous  districts  ;  for  in  the  Persian  war, 
while  Cilicia  contributed  a  hundred  ships  and  Lycia 
fifty,  Pamphylia  sent  only  thirty  (Herod,  vii.  91, 
92;.  The  name  probably  then  embraced  little  more 
than  the  crescent  of  comparatively  level  ground 
between  Taurus  and  the  sea.  To  the  north,  along  the 
heights  of  Taurus  itself,  was  the  region  of  Pjsidia. 
The  Roman  organization  of  the  country,  however, 
gave  a  wider  range  to  the  term  Pamphylia.  In 
St.  Paul's  time  it  was  not  only  a  regular  province, 
but  the  Emperor  Claudius  bad  united  Lycia  with  it 
(  Dio  Cass.  Ix.  17),  and  probably  also  a  good  part  of 
Pisidia.  However,  in  the  N.  T.,  the  three  terms  ai'e 
used  as  distinct.  It  was  in  Pamphylia  that  St.  Paul 
first  entered  Asia  Minor,  after  pre.iclung  the  Gospel 
in  Cyprus.  He  and  Barnabas  sailed  up  tiie  river 
Cestrus  to  Perga  (Acts  xiii.  13).  Here  they  were 
abandoned  by  their  subordinate  companion  John- 
Mark  ;  a  circumstance  which  is  alluded  to  again 
with  much  feeling,  and  with  a  pointed  mention  of 
the  place  wliere  the  separation  occurred  (Acts  xv. 
38).  It  might  be  the  pain  of  this  separation  which 
induced  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  le;i\'e  Perga  without 
delay.  Tiiey  did  however  preach  the  Gospel  there 
on  their  return  from  the  interior  (Acts  xiv.  24,  25). 
We  may  conclude,  from  Acts  ii.  10,  that  there  were 
many  Jews  in  the  province  ;  and  possibly  Pei'ga  had 
a  synagogue.  The  two  missionaries  Knaliy  left  Pam- 
phylia by  its  chief  seaport,  Attalia.  We  do  not 
know  that  St.  Paul  was  ever  in  this  district  again  : 
but  many  years  afterwards  he  sailed  near  its  coast, 
passing  through  "  the  sea  of  Cilicia  and  Pamphylia" 
on  his  way  to  a  town  of  Lycia  (Acts  xxvii.  5).  We 
notice  here  the  accurate  order  of  these  geographical 
terms,  as  in  the  above-mentioned  land-journey  we 
oliserve  how  Pisidia  and  Pamphylia  occur  in  their 
true  relations,  botli  in  going  and  returning  (e(s 
TlepyT]]/  rrjs  VlaficpvXias  .  .  .  and  ttjs  HepyT]S  els 

a  1.  IVIl,  or  "1*3  ;  Ae'/Srjs  6  neyas ;  Uhes  (1  Sam.  ii. 
14);  elsewhere  "laver"  and  "hearth,"  i.e.  a  brazier  or 
pan  for  fire  (Zech.  xii.  6). 

"  2.  niriD,  from  nin,  "bake"  (Ges.444),  •njvai'oi', 
sartago  (Lev.  ii.  5),  where  it  follows  riK^Pl'ID,  i<rx,a.pa, 
craticiila,  "fri'ing-paii,"  and  is  therefore  distinct  Irom  it. 

3.  mC'D  ;  rriyavov ;  "  a  baking-pan  "  (2  Sam.  xiit.  9), 
Ges.  1343'. 


PAPHOS 

'Avrioxeiav  ttjs  XltcTibias,  xiii.  13,  14;  SieAOdvTes 
r)}v  Xliffihiav  ■/]\6ov  els  Tla/xcpvAiau,  xiv.  24). 

[J.  S.  H.] 
PAN.  Of  the  »six  words  so  rendered  in  A.  V., 
two,  muchbath  ^  and  masreth,  seem  to  imply  a 
shallow  pan  or  plate,  such  as  is  used  by  Bedouins 
and  Syrians  for  baking  or  dj  essing  rapidly  their  cakes 
of  meal,  such  as  were  used  in  legal  oblations  :  the 
others,  especially  sir,  a  deeper  vessel  or  caldron  for 
boiling  meat,  placed  during  the  process  on  three 
stones  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  58  ;  Niebuhr, 
Descr.  de  I'Ar.  p.  46;  Lane,  Mod.  Eq.  i.  181). 
[Caldkon.]  [id.  W.  P.] 

PANNAG  (J3S),  an  article  of  commerce  ex- 
ported from  Palestine  to  Tyre  (Ez.  xxvii.  17),  the 
nature  of  which  is  a  pure  matter  of  conjecture,  as 
the  term  occurs  nowhere  else.  In  comparing  the 
passage  in  Ezekiel  with  Gen.  xliii.  1 1,  where  the  most 
valued  productions  of  Palestine  are  enumeiated,  the 
omission  of  tragaamth  and  ladanum  (A.  \' .  "spices 
and  myrrh  ")  in  the  former  is  very  observable,  and 
leads  to  the  supposition  that  paunag  represents  some 
of  the  spices  grown  in  that  country.  The  LXX., 
in  rendering  it  /cotri'o,  favours  this  opinion,  though 
it  is  evident  that  cassia  cannot  be  the  particular 
spice  intended  (see  ver.  19).  Hitzig  observes  that  a 
similar  term  occurs  in  Sanscrit  (pannaga)  for  an 
aromatic  plant.  The  Syriac  version,  on  the  other 
hand,  understands  by  it  "millet"  [panicuui  mi- 
liaceum) ;  and  this  view  is  favouied  by  the  ex- 
pression iu  the  book  of  Sohar,  quoted  by  Gesenius 
(s.  v.),  which  speaks  of  "  bread  of  paunag  :"  though 
this  again  is  not  decisive,  for  the  pannag  may  equally 
well  have  been  some  flavouring  substance,  as  seems 
to  be  implied  in  the  doubtful  equivalent  "•'  given  iu 
the  Targum.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PAPER.     [Writing.] 

PAPHOS  (Tldcpos),  a  town  at  the  west  end  of 
Cyprus,  connected  by  a  road  with  Sal.\mis  at  the 
east  end.  Paul  and  Barnabas  travelled,  on  their 
first  missionary  expedition,  "  through  the  isle,"  from 
the  latter  place  to  the  former  (Acts  xiii.  6). 

What  took  place  at  Paphos  was  briefly  as  follows. 
The  two  missionaries  found  Sergius  Padlus,  the 
proconsul  of  the  island,  residing  here,  and  were  en- 
abled to  produce  a  considerable  eh'ect  on  his  intel- 
ligent and  candid  mind.  This  influence  was  resisted 
by  Elymas  (or  J>ar-Jesus),  one  of  those  Oriental 
"  sorcerers,"  whose  mischievous  power  was  so  great 
at  this  period,  even  among  the  educated  classes. 
Miraculous  sanction  was  given  to  the  Apostles,  and 
Elymas  was  struck  with  blindness.  The  proconsul's 
faith  having  been  thus  confiimed,  and  doubtless  a 
Christian  Church  having  been  founded  in  Paphos, 
Barnabas  and  Saul  crossed  over  to  the  continent  and 
landed  in  Pamphylia  (ver.  13).  It  is  observable 
that  it  is  at  this  point  that  the  latter  becomes  the 
more  prominent  of  the  two,  and  that  his  name 
henceforward  is  P'aul,  and  not  Saul  (SoCAoy,  o  koI 
TlavXos,  ver.  9).  How  far  this  was  connected  with 
the  proconsul's  nflme,  must  be  discussed  elsewhere. 

4.  "1"'p  ;  Ae^rjs  ;  olJa ;  from  T'D,  "  boil,"  joined  (2  K. 
iv.  38)  with  gedoldh,  "  great,''  i.  e.  the  great  kettle  or 
caidror.. 

5-  l-IIB  ;  xuxpa  ;  olla. 

6.  nin?^,  plur. ;  Ae'jSrjTts  ;  ollae  (2  Chi-,  xxxv.  13). 
In  Prov.  xix.  24,  "  dish." 


PARABLE 

The  great  chaiaoteristic  of  l\iphos  was  tlie  worship 
of  Aphro<lite  or  Venus,  who  was  here  fabled  to 
have  risen  from  the  hca  (Horn.  Od.  viii.  362).  Her 
temp]e,  however,  was  at  "  Old  Pajihos,"  now  called 
Kuklia.  The  harbour  and  the  chief  town  were  at 
"  New  Paphos,"  at  some  little  distance.  Tlie  place 
is  still  called  Bajfa.  The  road  between  the  two 
was  often  Hlled  with  gay  and  profligate  processions 
(Strabo,  xiv.  p.  683) ;  strangers  came  constantly  to 
visit  the  shrine  (Athen.  xv.  18)  ;  and  the  hold  which 
these  local  superstitions  had  upon  the  higher  minds 
at  this  very  period  is  well  e.xemplilied  by  the  pil- 
grimage of  Titus  (Tac.  Hist.  ii.  2,  3)  shortly  before 
the  Jewish  war. 

For  notices  of  such  scanty  remains  as  are  found 
at  Paphos  we  must  refer  to  Pococke  {Disc,  of  the 
East,  ii.  325-328),  and  especially  lloss  {Beisen  nach 
Kos,  Halikarnassos,  Rhodos  u.  Ci/prus,  180-192). 
Extracts  also  are  given  in  Life  and  Ejop.  of  St.  Paid 
(2nded.  i.  190,  191)  from  the  MS.  notes  of  Captain 
Graves,  R.N.,  who  recently  surveyed  the  island  ol' 
Cyprus.  For  all  that  relates  to  the  harbour  the 
Admiralty  Chart  should  be  consulted.     [J.  S.  H.] 

PAPYRUS.     [Reed.] 

PARABLE  6k'0,  mash&l:  irapa^oXv :  pa- 
rabola). The  distinction  between  the  Parable  and 
one  cognate  form  of  teaching  has  been  discussed 
under  Fable.  Something  remains  to  be  said  (1) 
as  to  the  word,  (2)  as  to  the  Parables  of  the  Gospels, 
(3)  as  to  the  laws  of  their  interpretation. 

1.  The  word  Tropo/SoAr)  does  not  of  itself  imply 
a  naiTative.  The  juxta-position  of  two  things, 
differing  in  most  points,  but  agreeing  in  some,  is 
sufficient  to  bring  the  comparison  thus  produced 
within  the  etymology  of  the  word.  Tiie  irapa^o\i\ 
of  Greek  rhetoric  need  not  be  more  than  the  sim- 
plest argument  from  analogy.  "  You  would  not 
choose  pilots  or  athletes  by  lot ;  why  then  should 
you  choose  statesmen?"  (Arlstot.  Rhct.  ii.  20).  In 
Hellenistic  Greek,  however,  it  acquired  a  wider 
meaning,  co-extensive  with  that  of  the  Hebrew 
mashal,  for  which  the  LXX.  writers  with  hardly 
an  exception,  make  it  the  equivalent."  That  word 
(  =  similitude),  as  was  natural  in  the  language  of 
a  people  who  had  never  reduced  rhetoi'ic  to  an  art, 
had  a  large  range  of  application,  and  was  apjilied 
sometimes  to  the  shortest  proverbs  (1  Sam.  x.  12, 
xxiv.  13;  2  Chr.  vii.  20),  sometimes  to  dark  pro- 
phetic utterances  (Num.  xxiii.  7,  18,  xxiv.  3  ;  Ez.  xx. 
49),  sometimes  to  enigmatic  maxims  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  2  ; 
Prov.  i.  6),  or  metaphors  expanded  into  a  narrative 
(Ez.  xii.  22).  In  Ecclesiasticus  the  word  occurs 
with  a  striking  frequency,  and,  as  will  be  seen  here- 
after, its  use  by  the  son  of  Sirach  throws  light  on 
the  position  occupied  by  parables  in  Our  Lord's 
teaching.  In  the  N.  T.  itself  the  word  is  used  with 
a  like  latitude.  While  attached  most  fiequently  to 
the  illustrations  which  have  given  it  a  special  mean- 
ing, it  is  also  applied  to  a  short  saying  like,  "  Phy- 
sician, heal  thyself"  (Luke  iv.  23),  to  a  mere  com- 
parison without  a  narrative  (Matt.  xxiv.  32),  to  the 


PARABLE 


701 


"  The  word  -irapoiftia  is  used  by  the  LXX.  In  Prov.  1. 1, 
XXV.  1,  xxvi.  7  ;  Kcclus.  vl.  37,  &c.,  and  in  some  other 
passagos  by  Symmachus.  The  same  word,  it  will  Ik- 
renienibereii,  is  used  througliout  by  St.  John,  liislenrt  of 
■jrapa^oXri. 

b  It  should  be  mentioned  that  another  meaning  has 
been  given  by  some  interpreters  to  n-apafloA^  In  this 
passage,  l)ut,  it  is  believed,  on  insnfflck-nt  grounds. 

<^  Some  interesting  examples  of  these  nvay  be  spin  in 


figurative  character  of  the  Levitical  ordinances  (Heb. 
ix.  9),  or  of  single  facts  in  patriarchal  history  (Heb. 
xi.  19).'^  The  later  history  of  the  word  is  not 
without  interest.  Naturalized  in  Latin,  chiefly 
through  the  Vulgate  oi-  earlier  versions,  it  loses  gra- 
ducxlly  the  origind  idea  of  figurative  speech,  and  is 
used  tor  speech  of  any  kind.  Mediaeval  Latin  gives 
us  the  strange  form  oi  parabolare,  and  the  descend- 
ants of  the  technical  Greek  word  in  the  Romance 
languages  are  parler,  parole,  par ola,  palabras  (Diez, 
Roman.  Worterb.  s.  v.  parola). 

II.  As  a  form  of  teaching,  the  Parable,  as  has 
beefi  sho^vn,  diHers  from  the  Fable,  (1)  in  excluding 
brute  or  inanimate  creatures  passing  out  of  the 
laws  of  their  nature,  and  speaking  or  acting  like 
men,  (2)  in  its  higher  ethical  significance.  It  differs, 
it  may  be  added,  from  the  Mythus,  in  being  the 
result  of  a  conscious  deliberate  choice,  not  the  growth 
of  an  unconscious  realism,  pei'sonit'ying  attributes, 
appearing,  no  one  knows  how,  in  popular  belief  It 
difiers  fi'om  the  Allegory,  in  that  the  latter,  with 
its  direct  personification  of  ideas  or  attributes,  and 
the  names  which  designate  them,  involves  really  no 
comparison.  The  virtues  and  vices  of  mankind 
appear,  as  in  a  drama,  in  their  own  character  and 
costume.  The  allegory  is  self-interpreting.  The 
parable  demands  attention,  insight,  sometimes  an 
actual  explanation.  It  dillers  lastly  fr-om  the  Pro- 
verb, in  that  it  must  include  a  similitude  of  some 
kind,  while  the  proverb  may  assert,  without  a  simi- 
litude, some  wide  generalization  of  experience.  So 
far  as  proverbs  go  beyond  this,  and  state  what  they 
affirm  in  a  figurative  form,  they  ma.y  be  described 
as  condensed  parables,  and  parables  as  expanded  prb- 
verbs  (comp.  Trench  on  Parables,  ch.  i. ;  and  Gro- 
tiup  on  Matt.  xiii.). 

To  understand  the  relation  of  the  parables  of  the 
Gospels  to  our  Lord's  teaching,  we  must  go  back  to 
the  use  made  of  them  by  previous  or  contemporary 
teachers.  We  have  sufficient  evidence  that  they 
were  fiequently  employed  by  them.  They  appear 
fi'equently  in  the  Gemara  and  Midrash  (comp. 
Lightfoot,  Ilor.  ITeb.  in  Matt.  xiii.  3 ;  Jost,  .Tuden- 
thum,\\.  216),  and  are  ascribed  to  Hillel,  Shammai, 
and  other  great  Rabbis  of  the  two  preceding  cen- 
turies.*^ The  panegyric  passed  upon  the  gi-eat  Rabbi 
Meir,  that  after  his  death  men  ceased  to  speak  pa- 
rables, implies  that,  up  to  that  time,  there  had  been 
a  succession  of  teachers  more  or  less  distinguished 
for  them  (Snta,  fol.  49,  in  Jost,  Judenthtm,  ii. 
87  ;  Lightfoot,  /.  c).  Later  Jewish  writers  have 
seen  in  this  emjiloyment  of  parables  a  condescension 
to  the  ignor;mce^of  the  great  mass  of  mankind,  who 
cannot  be  taught  otherwise.  For  them,  as  for  wo- 
men or  children,  parables  are  the  natural  and  fit 
method  of  instruction  (Maimonides,  Porta  Mosis, 
p.  84,  in  Wetstein,  on  Matt,  xiii.),  and  the  same 
view  is  taken  by  .Jerome  as  accounting  for  the  com- 
mon use  of  parables  in  Syria  and  Palestine  (Hieron. 
in  Matt,  xviii.  23).  It  may  be  questioned,  how- 
ever, whether  this  represents  the  u.>=e  made  of  them 
by  the  Rabbis  of  Our  Lord's  time.     The  language 


Trench's  /'arables,  ch.  iv.  Others,  presenting  some  strik- 
ing superficial  resemblances  to  those  of  the  I'earl  of  Great 
Price,  tlie  Labourers,  the  Lost  Piece  of  Money,  the  Wise 
and  Foolish  Virgins,  may  be  seen  in  Wptslotn's  notes  lo 
those  parables.  The  conclusion  from  them  is,  tliat  there 
was  at  least  a  generic  resemblance  between  the  outward 
form  of  our  Lord's  teaching  and  that  of  the  Rabbis  of 
Jerusalem. 


702 


PARABLE 


of  the  Son  of  Sirach  confines  them  to  the  scribe  who 
devotes  himself  to  study.  They  are  at  once  his 
glory  and  his  reward  (Ecclus.  xxxix.  2,  3).  Of  all 
who  eat  bread  by  the  sweat  of  their  brow,  of  the 
great  mass  of  men  in  cities  and  country,  it  is  written 
that  "  they  shall  not  be  found  where  parables  are 
spoken "  (Ibid,  xxsviii.  33).  For  these  therefore 
it  is  probable  that  the  scribes  and  teachers  of  the 
law  had  simply  rules  and  precepts,  often  perhaps 
burdensome  and  oppressive  (Jlatt.  xxiii.  3,  4),  for- 
mulae of  prayer  (Luke  xi.  1),  appointed  times  of 
fasting  and  hours  of  devotion  (Mark  ii.  18).  They, 
with  whom  they  would  not  even  eat  (comp.  Wetstein 
and  Lampe  on  John  vii.  49),  cared  little  to  give  even 
as  much  as  this  to  the  "  people  of  the  earth,"  whom 
they  scorned  as  "  knowing  not  the  law,"  a  brute  herd 
for  whom  they  could  have  no  sympathy.  For  their 
own  scholars  they  had,  according  to  their  individual 
character  and  power  of  thought,  the  casuistiy  with 
which  the  Mishna  is  for  the  most  part  filled,  or  the 
parables  which  here  and  there  give  tokens  of  some 
deeper  insight.  The  parable  was  made  the  instru- 
ment for  teaching  the  young  disciple  to  discern  the 
treasures  of  wisdom  of  which  the  "  accursed  "  multi- 
tude were  ignorant.  The  teaching  of  Our  Lord 
at  the  commencement  of  His  ministry  was,  in  every 
way,  the  opposite  of  this.  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  may  be  taken  as  the  type  of  the  "  words  of 
Grace"  which  he  spake,  "not  as  the  scribes." 
Beatitudes,  laws,  pi-omises  were  uttered  distinctly, 
not  indeed  without  similitudes,  but  with  similitudes 
that  explained  themselves.  So  for  some  months  He 
taught  in  the  synagogues  and  on  the  sea-shore  of 
Galilee,  as  He  had  before  taught  in  Jerusalem,  and 
as  yet  without  a  parable.  But  then  there  comes 
a  change.  The  direct  teaching  was  met  with  scorn, 
nnbelief.  hardness,  and  He  seems  for  a  time  to 
abandon  it  for  that  which  took  the  form  of  parables. 
The  question  of  the  disciples  (Matt.  xiii.  lOj  implies 
that  they  were  astonished.  Their  Master  was  no 
longer  proclaiming  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  as 
before.  He  was  falling  back  into  one  at  least  of  the 
forms  of  Rabbinic  teaching  (comp.  Schoettgen's 
Hor.  Heb.  ii.,  Christus  Rahhinorum  Summus).  He 
was  speaking  to  the  multitude  in  the  parables  and 
dark  sayings  which  the  Rabbis  reserved  fbi'  their 
chosen  disciples.  Here  for  them  were  two  grounds 
of  wonder.  Here,  for  us,  is  the  key.  to  the  explana- 
tion which  He  gave,  that  He  had  chosen  this  form 
of  teaching  because  the  people  were  spiritually 
blind  and  deaf  (Matt.  xiii.  13),  and  in  order  that 
the.y  might  remain  so  (Mark  iv.  12).  Two  inter- 
pretations have  been  given  of  these  .words.  (1.)  Spi- 
ritu:d  truths,  it  has  been  said,  are  in  themselves 
hard  and  uninviting.  Men  needeil  to  be  won  to 
them  by  that  which  was  moi'e  attractive.  The  pa- 
rable was  an  instrument  of  education  for  those  who 
were  children  in  age  or  character.  For  this  reason 
it  was  chosen  by  the  Divine  Teacher  as  fables  and 
stories,  "  adminicula  imbecillitatis  "  (Seneca,  Epist. 
59),  have  been  chosen  by  human  teachers  (Chry- 
sost.  Horn,  in  Johann.  34).  (2.)  Others  again 
have  seen  in  this  use  of  parables  something  of  a 
penal  character.  Men  have  set  themselves  against 
the  truth,  and  therefore  it  is  hid  from  their  eyes, 
presented  to  them  in  forms  in  which  it  is  not  easy 
for  them  to  recognise  it.  To  the  inner  circle  of 
the  chosen  it  is  given  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the 
kingdom  of  God.     To  those  who  are  without,  all 


"I  The  number  of  parables  in  the  Gospels  will  of  roiirse 
"iepend  on  llie  rang'"  3ivon  to  the  application  of  tlir  nnme. 


PARABLE 

these  things  are  done  in  parables. — Neither  view  is 
wholly  satisfactory.  Each  contains  a  partial  truth. 
All  experiend^  shows  (1)  tliat  parables  do  attract, 
and,  when  once  understood,  are  sure  to  be  remem- 
bered, (2)  that  men  may  listen  to  them  and  see 
that  they  have  a  meaning,  and  yet  never  cai-e  to 
ask  what  that  meaning  is.  Their  worth,  as  instru- 
ments of  teaching,  lies  in  their  being  at  once  a  test 
of  character,  and  in  their  presenting  each  fbiin  of 
character  with  that  which,  as  a  penalty  or  blessing, 
is  adapted  to  it.  They  withdraw  the  light  from 
those  who  love  darkness.  They  protect  the  truth 
which  they  enshrine  fiom  the  mockeiy  of  the  scoffer. 
They  leave  something  even  with  the  careless  which 
may  be  interpreted  ayd  understood  afterwards. 
They  reveal,  on  the  other  hand,  the  seekers  after 
truth.  These  ask  the  meaning  of  the  parable,  will 
not  rest  till  the  teacher  has  explained  it,  are  led 
step  by  step  to  the  laws  of  interpretation,  so  that 
they  can  "  understand  all  parables,"  and  then  pass 
on  into  the  higher  region  in  which  parables  are  no 
longer  necessary,  but  all  things  are  spoken  plainly. 
In  this  way  the  parable  did  its  work,  found  out  the 
fit  hearers  and  led  them  on.  And  it  is  to  be  re- 
membered also  that  even  after  this  self-imposed  law 
of  reserve  and  reticence,  the  teaching  of  Christ  pre- 
sented a  marvellous  contrast  to  the  narrow  e.xclu- 
siveness  of  the  Scribes.  The  mode  of  education  was 
changed,  but  the  work  of  teaching  or  educating  was 
not  tor  a  moment  given  up,  and  the  aptest  scholars 
were  found  in  those  whom  the  received  system 
would  have  altogether  shut  out. 

From  the  time  indicated  by  Matt,  xiii.,  accord- 
ingly, parables  enter  largely  into  our  Lord's  recorded 
teaching.  Each  parable  of  those  which  we  read  in 
the  Gospels  may  have  been  repeated  more  th.'in  once 
with  greater  or  less  variation  (as  e.  g.  those  of  the 
Pounds  and  the  Talents,  Matt.  xrv.  14;  Luke  xix. 
12  ;  of  the  Supper,  in  Matt,  x.xii.  2,  and  Luke  xiv. 
16).  Everything  leads  us  to  believe  that  there 
were  many  others  of  which  we  have  no  record 
(Matt.  xiii.  34 ;  Mark  iv.  33).  In  those  which 
remain  it  is  possible  to  trace  something  like  an 
order.'' 

(A.)  There  is  the  group  with  which  the  new 
mode  of  teaching  is  ushered  in,  and  which  have  for 
their  subject  the  laws  of  the  Divine  Kingdom,  in  its 
growth,  its  nature,  its  consummation.  Under  this 
head  we  have — 

1.  The  Sower  (Matt.  xiii. ;  Markiv.;  Lukeviii.). 

2.  The  Wheat  and  the  Tares  (Matt.  xiii.). 

3.  The  Mustard-Seed  (Matt.  xiii.  ;  Mark  iv.). 

4.  The  Seed  cast  into  the  Ground  (Mark  iv.). 

5.  The  Leaven  (Matt.  xiii.). 

6.  The  Hid  Treasure  (Matt.  xiii.). 

7.  The  Pearl  of  Great  Price  (Matt.  xiii.). 

8.  The  Net  cast  into  the  Sea  (Matt.  xiii.). 

(B.)  After  this  there  is  an  interval  of  some 
months  of  which  we  know  comparatively  little. 
Either  there  was  a  retuni  to  the  more  direct  teach- 
ing, or  else  these  were  repeated,  or  others  like  them 
spoken.  When  the  next  parables  meet  us  they  are 
of  a  different  type  and  occupy  a  different  position. 
They  occur  chiefiy  in  the  interval  between  the  mis- 
sion of  the  seventy  and  the  last  approach  to  .lera- 
salem.  The}'  are  drawn  from  the  life  of  men  rather 
than  from  the  world  of  nature.  Often  they  occur, 
not,  as  in  Matt,  xiii.,  in  discourees  to  the  multitude, 


Thus  Mr.  Oreswell  reckons  twenty-seven  ;  Dean  Trench. 
tliirty.    I'.y  others,  the  niunher  h;is  been  extended  tofift^. 


PARABLE 

but  in  answers  to  the  questions  of  the  discij.les  or 
other  inquirers.     Tliey  are  such  as  these — 
9.  The  Two  Debtors  (Lulje  vii.). 

10.  The  Merciless  Servant  (Matt,  xviii.). 

11.  The  Oood  Samaritan  (Luke  x.). 

12.  The  Friend  at  Midnight  (Lul;e  xi.). 

13.  The  liich  Fool  (Luke  xii.). 

14.  The  Wedding  Feast  (Luke  xii.). 

15.  The  Fig-Tree  (Luke  xiii.). 
IG.  The  Great  Supper  (Luke  xiv.). 

17.  The  Lost  Sheep  (Matt,  xviii. ;  Luke  xv.). 

18.  The  Lost  Piece  of  Money  (Luke  xv.). 

19.  The  Prodigal  Son  (Luke  xv.). 

20.  The  Unjust  Steward  (Luke  xvi.). 

21.  The  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus  (Luke  xvi.). 

22.  The  Unjust  Judge  (Luke  xviii.). 

23.  The  Pharisee  and  the  Publican  (Luke  xviii.). 

24.  The  Labourers  in  tlie  Vineyard  (Matt.  xx.). 
(C.)  Towards  the  close  of  Oiu-  Lord's  ministry, 

immediately  before  and  after  the  entry  into  Jeru- 
salem, the  parables  assume  a  new  character.  They 
are  again  theocratic,  but  the  phase  of  the  Divine 
Kingdom,  on  which  they  chiefly  dwell,  is  that  of 
its  final  consummation.  They  are  prophetic,  in  part, 
nf  the  rejection  of  L^rael,  in  part  of  the  great  retri- 
bution of  the  coining  of  the  Lord.  They  are  to  the 
earlier  parables  what  the  prophecy  of  Matt.  xxiv. 
is  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  To  this  class  we 
may  refer — 

25.  The  Pounds  (Luke  xix.). 

26.  The  Two  Sons  (JLatt.  xxi.). 

27.  The  Vine3'ard  let  out  to  Husbandmen  (Matt. 

xxi. ;   Mark  xii. ;   Luke  xx.). 

28.  The  Marriage-Feast  (Matt.  xxii.). 

29.  'i'he  Wise  and  Foolish  Virgins  (Matt.  xxv.). 

30.  The  Talents  (Matt,  xxv.).' 

31.  The  Sheep  and  tlie  Goats  (Matt,  xxv.1. 

It  is  characteristic  of  the  several  Gospels  tliat  the 
greater  part  of  the  parables  of  the  first  and  third 
groups  belong  to  St.  Matthew,  emphatically  the 
Kvangelist  of  the  kingdom.  Those  of  the  second 
are  found  for  the  most  part  in  St.  Luke.  They  are 
such  as  we  might  expect  to  meet  with  in  the  (iospel 
which  dwells  most  on  the  sympathy  of  Christ  for 
all  men.  St.  Mark,  as  giving  vivid  recollections  of 
the  acts  rather  than  the  teaching  of  Christ  is  the 
scantiest  of  the  three  synoptic  (iospels.  It  is  not 
less  characteristic  that  there  are  no  paivables  pro- 
perly so  called  in  St.  .]o\m.  It  is  as  if  he,  sooner 
than  any  other,  had  passed  into  the  higher  .stage 
of  knowledge  in  whicli  parables  were  no  longer 
necessary,  and  thei-efbre  dwelt  less  on  them. 
That  which  his  spirit  appropriated  most  readily 
were  the  woi-ds  of  eternal  lift',  figurative  it  might 
be  in  foini,  abounding  in  bold  analogies,  but 
not  in  any  single  inst;inco  taking  the  form  of  a 
narrative.* 

Lastly  it  is  to  be  noticed,  partly  as  a  witness  to 
the  truth  of  the  four  Gospels,  partly  as  a  line  of 
demarcation  between  them  an(l  ail  countei  feits, 
that  the  apocryphal  Gospels  contain  no  paralilcs. 
Human  invention  could  imagine  miiacles  (though 
these  too  in  the  spurious  Gospels  are  stripped  of  all 


PARABLE 


703 


0  See  an  inpenlons  classiflcatinn  of  the  parables  of  each 
Gospel,  nccording  to  their  subject-matter,  in  Westoott, 
Jntrnduilion  to  the  Study  of  lite  d'ospth,  cli.  vii.,  and 
Appendix  K. 

1  Tlie  existence  of  Raliblnlc  parables,  presenting  a 
superficial  reseniblaiice  to  those  of  the  Gospel;  Is  no  real 
oxccplion  to  (his  slutemcnt.     Whether  we  believe  tliem 


that  gives  them  majesty  and  significance),  but  the 
parables  of  the  Gospels  were  inimitable  and  unap- 
proachable by  any  writers  of  that  or  the  succeeding 
age.  They  possess  a  life  and  power  which  stamp 
them  as  with  the  "  image  and  superscription  "  of 
the  Son  of  Man.  Even  the  total  absence  of  any 
allusion  to  them  in  the  written  or  spoken  teaching 
of  the  Apostles  shows  how  little  their  minds  set 
afterwards  in  that  direction,  how  little  likely  they 
were  to  do  more  than  testify  what  they  had  actually 
heard. f 

III.  Lastly,  there  is  the  law  of  interpretation. 
It  has  been  luged  by  some  wi iters,  by  none  with 
greater  fbice  or  clearness  than  by  Chrysostom 
[f/om.  in  Matt.  64),  that  there  is  a  scope  or  pur- 
pose for  each  parable,  and  that  our  aim  must  be 
to  discern  this,  not  to  find  a  special  significance 
in  each  circumstance  or  incident.  The  rest,  it  is 
said,  may  be  dealt  with  as  the  drapery  wliich  the 
parable  needs  for  its  grace  and  completeness,  but 
which  is  not  essential.  It  may  be  questioned, 
however,  whether  this  canon  of  interpretation  is 
likely  to  lead  us  to  the  full  meaning  of  this  portion 
of  Our  Lord's  teaching.  True  as  it  doubtless  is, 
tliat  there  was  in  each  parable  a  leading  thought 
to  be  learnt  partly  from  the  parable  itself,  partly 
from  the  occasion  of  its  utterance,  and  that  all  else 
gathers  round  that  thought  as  a  centre,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  in  the  great  patterns  of  interpre- 
tation which  He  himself  has  given  us,  there  is  more 
than  this.  Not  only  the  sower  and  the  seed  and  the 
several  soils  have  their  counterparts  in  the  spiritual 
life,  but  the  birds  of  the  air,  the  thorns,  the 
scorching  heat,  have  each  of  them  a  significance. 
The  explanation  of  the  wheat  aud  the  tares,  given 
with  less  fulness,  an  outline  as  it  were,  which  the 
advancing  scholars  would  be  able  to  fill  up,  is 
equally  specific.  It  may  be  inferred  from  these  two 
instances  that  we  are,  at  least,  justified  in  looking 
for  a  meaning  even  in  the  seeming  accessories  of  a 
parable.  If  the  opposite  mode  of  interpreting 
should  seem  likely  to  lead  us,  as  it  has  led  many,  to 
strange  and  forced  analogies,  and  aa  arbitrary  dog- 
matism, tlie  safeguard  may  be  found  in  our  recol- 
lecting that  in  assigning  such  meanings  we  are  but 
as  scholars  guessing  at  the  mind  of  a  teacher  whose 
words  are  higher  than  our  thoughts,  recognizing 
the  analogies  which  may  have  been,  but  which 
were  not  necessarily  those  which  he  recognized. 
No  such  interpretation  can  claim  anything  like  autho- 
rity. The  very  form  of  the  teaching  makes  it 
probalile  that  there  may  be,  in  any  case,  more  than 
one  legitimate  explanation.  The  outward  fact  in 
nature,  or  in  social  life,  may  correspond  to  spiritual 
facts  at  once  in  God's  government  of  the  world,  and 
in  the  history  of  the  individual  soul.  A  parable 
may  be  at  once  ethical,  and  in  the  highest  sense  of 
the  term  prophetic.  There  is  thus  a  wide  fii'ld  open 
to  the  discernment  of  the  interpicter.  There  are 
also  restraints  upon  the  mere  fertility  of  his  imagi- 
nation. (1.)  The  analogies  must  be  real,  not  arbi- 
trary. (2.)  The  parables  are  to  be  considered  as 
parts  of  a  wliole,  aud  the  interpretation  of  one  is 
not  to  over-ride  or  enci-oach  upon  the  lessons  taught 


to  have  had  an  indopondent  orisin,  and  so  to  be  fair 
specimens  of  X\\q  genus  of  this  form  of  teaching  among 
the  Jews,  or  to  have  been  (as  chronologically  they  mlRht 
have  been)  borrowed,  conscinusly  or  niicniiscioiislj',  from 
those  of  Christ,  there  is  stlU  in  llio  lulter  a  distinctive 
power,  and  purity,  which  place  iho  others  almost  beyond 
the  ranpc  ol  comparison,  oxci.pt  as  to  outward  fomi. 


704 


PARADISE 


by  others.  (3.)  Thfi  direct  tenching  of  Christ  pre- 
sents the  standard  to  which  all  our  interpretations 
are  to  be  referred,  and  by  which  they  are  to  be 
measured.  (Comp.  Dean  Ti-ench  on  the  Parables, 
Introductory  Remarks  ;  to  which  one  who  has  once 
read  it  cannot  but  be  more  indebted  than  any  mere 
references  can  indicate ;  .Stier,  Words  of  the  -Lord 
Jesus,  on  Matt.  xiii.  11).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PARADISE    (D^~)Q,    Pardes  :  TrapaSeitros  : 

Paradisus).  Questions  as  to  the  nature  and  locality 
of  Paradise  as  identical  with  the  garden  of  Gen.  ii. 
and  iii.  have  been  already  discussed  under  Edkx. 
It  remains  to  trace  the  history  of  the  word  and 
the  associations  connected  witli  it,  as  it  appeal's  in 
the  later  books  of  the  0.  T.  and  in  the  language  of 
Christ  and  His  Apostles. 

The  word  itself,  though  it  appears  in  tlie  above 
form  in  tSougof  Sol.  iv.  13,  Eccles.  ii.  5,  Neh.  ii.  8, 
may  be  classed,  with  hardly  a  doubt,  as  of  Aryan 
rather  than  of  Semitic  origin.  It  first  appears  in 
Greek  as  coming  straight  from  Persia  (Xen.  nt 
inf.).  Greek  lexicographers  classify  it  as  a  Persian 
word  (Julius  Pollux,  Onomast.  is.  3).  Modei-n 
philologists  accept  the  same  conclusion  with  hardly 
a  dissentient  voice  (Renan,  Lancjues  Semitiques,  ii. 
1,  p.  153).  Gesenius  (.s.  v.)  traces  it  a  step  further, 
and  connects  it  with  the  Sanscrit  joara-rfepa  =  high, 
well-tilled  land,  and  applied  to  an  ornamental  gar- 
den attached  to  a  house.  Other  Sanscrit  scholars, 
however,  assert  that  the  meaning  of  para-dega  in 
classical  Sanscrit  is  "  foreign  country,"  and  although 
they  admit  that  it  may  also  mean  "  the  best  or 
most  excellent  country,"  they  look  on  this  as  an 
instance  of  casual  coincidence  rather  than  derivation.' 
Other  etymologies,  more  fanciful  and  fai'-fetched, 
have  been  suggested — (1.)  from  irapd.  and  Seuoi, 
giving  as  a  meaning,  the  "  well -watered  ground" 
(Suidas,  s.  u.) ;  (2.)  from  Ttapd.  and  SeTcra,  a  bar- 
barous word,  supposed  to  signify  a  plant,  or  collec- 
tion of  plants  (Joann.  Damasc.  in  Suidas,  /.  c); 
(3)  from  NK'1  ma,  to  bring  forth  herbs;  (4) 
Din  mS,  to  bring  forth  myrrh  (Ludwig,  de 
rnptu  Pauli  in  Parad.  in  !Menthen's  Thesanr. 
Theolog.  1702.) 

On  the  assumption  that  the  Song  of  Solomon  and 
Ecclesiastes  were  written  in  the  time  of  Solomon, 
the  occuiTence  of  the  foreign  word  may  be  ac- 
counted for  either  (1.)  on  the  hypothesis  of  later 
forms  having  crept  into  the  text  in  the  process  of 
transcription,  or  (2.)  on  that  of  the  word  having 
found  its  way  into  the  language  of  Israel  at  the 
time  when  its  civilization  took  a  new  flight  under 
the  Son  of  David,  and  the  king  boirowed  from  the 
customs  of  central  Asia  that  which  made  the  royal 
park  or  garden  part  of  the  glory  of  the  kingdom. 
In  Neh.  ii.  8,  as  might  be  expected,  the  woi-d  is 
used  in  a  connexion  which  points  it  out  as  distinctlv 
Persian.  The  account  given  of  the  hanging  gar- 
dens of  Babylon,  in  like  manner,  indicates  Media  as 
the  original  seat  both  of  the  word  and  of  the  thinw. 
Nebuchadnezzar  constructed  them,  terrace  upm 
terrace,  that  he  might  repiwluce  in  the  plains  of 
Mesopotamia  the  scenery  with  which  the  Median 
princess  he  had  married  had  been  familiar  in  her 
native  country;  aiid  this  was  the  origin  of  the 
Kpffxaffrhs  TrapdSeiffos  (Berosus,  in  Joseph,  c.  Ap. 
i.  19).  In  Xenophon  the  word  occurs  fi-equently, 
and  we  get  vivid  pictures  of  the  scene  which  it  im- 


»  Professor  Monier  Williams  allows  the  writer  to  say 
that  he  is  of  tliis  opinion.    Comp.  also  Biisclimann,  in 


PARADISE 

plied.  A  wide  open  i)ark,  enclosed  against  injury, 
yet  with  its  natural  beauty  unspoiled,  with  statelv 
forest  trees,  many  of  them  bearing  fruit,  watered 
by  clear  streams,  on  whose  banks  roved  large  herds 
of  antelopes  or  sheep — this  was  the  scenerv  which 
connected  itself  in  the  mind  of  the  Greek  traveller 
with  the  word  TrapdSeiaos,  and  tor  which  his  own 
language  supplied  no  precise  equivalent.  (Comp. 
vlna6.  i.  2,  §7,  4,  §9  ;  ii.4,§14;  Hellen.W.  1,§15; 
C'ljrop.  i.  3,  §14  ;  Oeconom.  4,  §13.)  Through  the 
writings  of  Xenophon,  and  through  the  general  ad- 
mixture of  Orientalisms  in  the  later  Greek  after  the 
conquests  of  Alexander,  the  word  gained  a  recog- 
nized place,  and  the  LXX.  writers  chose  it  for  a 
new  use  which  gave  it  a  higher  worth  and  secured 
for  it  a  more  perennial  life.  The  garden  of  Eden 
became  6  irapdSei(ros  ttjs  Tpv<p7Js  (Gen.  ii.  15, 
iii.  23  ;  Joel  ii.  3).  They  used  the  same  woni 
whenever  there  was  any  allusion,  however  remote, 
to  the  fair  region  which  had  been  the  fiist  blissful 
home  of  man.  The  valley  of  the  Joi-dan,  in  their 
version,  is  the  paradise  of  God  (Gen.  xiii.  10). 
There  is  no  tree  in  the  paradise  of  ( jod  equal  to 
that  which  in  the  prophet's  vision  symbolises  the 
glory  of  Assyria  (Ez.  xxxi.  1-9).  The  imagery  of 
this  chapter  furnishes  a  more  vivid  picture  of  the 
scenery  of  a  TrapaSeitroy  than  we  find  elsewhere. 
The  prophet  to  whom  "  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  "  by  the  river  of  Chebar  may  well  have  seen 
what  he  describes  so  clearly.  Elsewhere,  howevei-, 
as  in  the  ti-anslation  of  the  three  passages  in  which 
pardes  occurs  in  the  Hebrew,  it  is  used  in  a  more 
general  sense.  (Comp.  Is.  i.  30  ;  Num.  x.xiv.  6  ; 
Jer.  xxix.  5  ;  Susann.  ver.  4.) 

It  was  natural,  however,  that  this  higher  mean- 
ing should  become  the  exclusive  one,  and  be  asso- 
ciated with  new  thoughts.  Paradise,  with  no 
other  word  to  qualify  it,  was  the  bright  region 
which  man  had  lost,  which  was  guarded  by  the 
flaming  sword.  Soon  a  new  hope  sprang  up. 
Over  and  above  all  questions  as  to  where  the  prime- 
val garden  had  been,  there  came  the  belief  that  it  did 
not  belong  entirely  to  the  past.  Tliere  was  a  para- 
dise still  into  which  man  might  hope  to  enter.  It 
is  a  matter  of  some  interest  to  ascertain  with 
what  associations  the  word  was  connected  in 
the  minds  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine  and  other 
countries  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  teaching, 
what  sense  therefore  we  may  attach  to  it  in  the 
writings  of  the  N.T. 

In  this  as  in  other  instances  we  may  distinguish 
three  modes  of  thought,  each  with  marked  charac- 
teristics, yet  often  blended  together  in  difleient 
proportions,  and  melting  one  into  the  other  by 
hardly  perceptible  degrees.  Each  has  its  counter- 
part in  the  teaching  of  Christian  theologians.  The 
language  of  the  N.T.  stands  apart  from  and  above 
all.  (I.)  To  the  Idealist  school  of  Alexandria,  of 
which  Philo  is  the  representative,  paradi.se  was  no- 
thing more  than  a  symbol  and  an  allegory.  Tiaces 
of  this  way  of  looking  at  it  had  appeared  previously 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Son  of  Sirach.  The  four 
rivers  of  Eden  are  figures  of  the  wide  streams  of 
Wisdom,  and  she  is  as  the  brook  which  becomes  a 
river  and  waters  the  paradise  of  God  (EccUis.  x.^iv. 
25-30).  This,  however,  was  compatible  with  the 
recognition  of  Gen.  ii.  as  speaking  of  a  fact.  To 
Philo  the  thought  of  the  fa(  t  was  unendurable. 
The  primeval  history  spoke  of  no   garden  such  as 


Humboldt's  Cosmos,  ii.  note  230,  and  Ersch  u.  Gnibej. 
KncycJop.  s.  v. 


PARADISE 

men  plant  and  water.  Spiritual  perfection  (kperi)) 
was  the  only  paradise.  The  trees  that  grew  in  it 
were  the  thoughts  of  the  spiritual  man.  The  fruits 
which  they  bore  were  life  and  knowledge  and  im- 
mortality. The  four  rivers  flowing  fioni  one 
source  are  the  four  virtues  of  the  later  Platonists, 
each  derived  from  the  same  source  of  goodness 
(Philo,  de  Alleg.  i.).  It  is  obvious  that  a  system  of 
interpretation  such  as  this  was  not  likely  to  become 
popular.  It  wiis  confined  to  a  single  school,  pos- 
sibly to  a  single  teacher.  It  has  little  or  nothing 
corresponding  to  it  in  the  N.T. 

(2.)  The  Rabbinic  schools  of  Palestine  presented 
a  phase  of  thought  the  very  opposite  of  that  of  the 
Alexandrian  writer.  They  had  their  descriptions, 
definite  and  detailed,  a  complete  topography  of  the 
unseen  world.  Paradise,  the  garden  of  Eden,  ex- 
isted still,  and  they  discussed  the  question  of  its 
locality.  The  answers  were  not  always  consistent 
with  each  other.  It  was  far  off  in  the  distant  East, 
fuither  tlian  the  foot  of  man  had  trod.  It  was  a 
region  of  the  woidd  of  the  dead,  of  Sheol,  in  the 
heart  of  the  earth.  Gehenna  w;is  on  one  side,  with 
its  flames  and  torments.  Paradise  on  the  other, 
the  intermediate  home  of  the  blessed.  (Comp. 
Wetstein,  Grotius,  and  Schoettgen  on  Luc.  xxiii.) 
The  patriarchs  were  there,  Abraham,  and  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  ready  to  receive  their  faithful  descend- 
ants into  their  bosoms  (Joseph,  dc  Mace.  c.  13). 
The  highest  place  of  honour  at  the  feast  of  the 
blessed  souls  w;is  Abraham's  bosom  (Luke  xvi.  23), 
on  which  the  new  heir  of  immortality  reclined  as 
the  favoured  and  honoured  guest.  Or,  again,  para- 
dise was  neither  on  the  earth,  nor  within  it,  but 
above  it,  in  the  third  heaven,  or  in  some  higher 
orb.  [Heaven.]  Or  there  were  two  paradises, 
the  upper  and  the  lower — one  in  heaven,  for  those 
who  had  attained  the  heights  of  holiness — one  in 
earth,  for  those  who  had  lived  but  decently  (Schoett- 
gen, Hor.  Heb.  in  Apoc.  ii.  7),  and  the  heavenly 
paiadise  was  sixty  times  as  large  as  the  whole 
lower  earth  (Eisenmenger,  Entdeckt.  Jiidenth.  ii. 
p.  297).  Each  had  seven  palaces,  and  in  each 
palace  were  its  appropriate  dwellers  {ih.  p.  302). 
As  the  righteous  dead  entered  paradise,  angels 
strip])ed  them  of  their  grave-clothes,  arrayed  them 
in  new  robes  of  glory,  and  placed  on  their  heads 
diadems  of  gold  and  pearls  (ib.  p.  310).  There 
was  no  night  there.  Its  jiavement  was  of  precious 
stones.  Plants  of  healing  power  and  wondrous 
fragrance  grew  on  the  banks  of  its  streams  {ib.  p. 
313).  F)om  this  lower  paradise  the  souls  of  the 
dead  rose  on  sabbaths  and  on  feast-days  to  the  higher 
{ib.  318),  where  every  day  there  was  the  presence 
of  Jehovah  holding  council  with  His  saints  (j6.  p. 
320).  (Comp.  also  Schoettgen,  Ilur.  Hcb.  in  Luc. 
xxiii.) 

(3.)  Out  of  the  discussions  and  theories  of  the 
Rabbis,  there  grew  a  broad  popular  belief,  fixed 
in  the  hearts  of  men,  accepted  without  discussion, 
blending  with  their  best  hopes.  Their  prayer  for 
the  dying  or  the  dead  was  that  his  soul  might  rest 
in  paradise,  in  the  garden  of  Eden  (Maimonides, 
Porta  Mosis,  quoted  by  Wetstein  in  Luc.  xxiii. ; 
Taylor,  Funeral  Sennon  on  Sir  G.  Dalston). 
Tiie  belief  of  the  Essenes,  as  reported  by  Jose- 
phus  {B.  J.   ii.    8,   §11),  may  be  accepted  as  a 


PARADISE 


705 


fair  representation  of  the  thoughts  of  those  who, 
like  them,  were  not  trained  in  the  Kabbinical 
schools,  living  in  a  simjile  and  more  child-like 
faith.  To  them  accordingly  paradise  was  a  far-ofl 
laud,  a  region  where  there  was  no  scorching  heat, 
no  consuming  cold,  where  the  soft  west-wind  from 
the  ocean  blew  for  evermore.  The  visions  of  the 
2nd  book  of  Esdras,  though  not  without  an  admix- 
ture of  Christian  thoughts  and  phrases,  may  be 
looked  upon  as  representing  this  phase  of  feeling. 
There  also  we  have  the  picture  of  a  fair  garden, 
streams  of  milk  and  honey,  twelve  trees  laden  with 
divers  fruits,  mighty  mountains  whereon  grow 
lilies  and  roses  (ii.  19) — a  place  into  which  the 
wicked  sliall  not  enter. 

It  is  with  this  popular  belief,  rather  than  with 
that  of  either  school  of  Jewish  thought,  that  the 
language  of  the  N.T.  connects  itself.  In  this,  as 
in  other  instances,  it  is  made  the  starting-point  ibr 
an  education  which  leads  men  to  rise  from  it  to 
higher  thoughts.  The  old  word  is  kept,  and  is 
raised  to  a  new  dignity  or  power.  It  is  significant, 
indeed,  that  the  word  "  paradise  "  nowhere  occurs 
in  the  public  teaching  of  our  Lord,  or  in  His  inter- 
course with  His  own  disciples.  Connected  as  it 
had  been  with  the  thoughts  of  a  sensuous  happi- 
ness, it  was  not  the  fittest  or  the  best  word  for 
those  whom  He  was  training  to  rise  out  of  sensuous 
thoughts  to  the  higher  regions  of  the  spiritual  life. 
For  them,  accordingly,  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  the 
kingdom  of  God,  are  the  words  most  dwelt  on.  The 
blessedness  of  the  pure  in  heart  is  that  they  shall 
see  God.  If  language  borrowed  from  their  com- 
mon speech  is  used  at  other  times,  if  they  hear  of 
the  marriage-supper  and  the  new  wine,  it  is  not 
till  they  have  been  taught  to  understand  parables 
and  to  separate  the  figure  from  the  reality.  With 
the  thief  dving  on  the  cross  the  case  was  different. 
We  can  assume  nothing  in  the  robber-outlaw  but 
the  most  rudimentary  forms  of  popular  belief.  We 
may  well  believe  that  the  word  used  here,  and  here 
only,  in  the  whole  course  of  the  Gospel  history, 
had  a  special  fitness  for  him.  His  reveience,  sym- 
pathy, repentance,  hope,  uttered  themselves  in  the 
prayer,  "  Lord,  remember  me  when  thou  comest  into 
thy  kingdom  !  "  What  were  the  thoughts  of  the 
suiferer  as  to  that  kingdom  we  do  not  know.  Un- 
less they  were  supernaturally  raised  above  the  level 
which  the  disciples  had  reached  by  slow  and  pain- 
ful steps,  they  must  have  been  mingled  with 
visions  of  an  earthly  glory,  of  jjomp,  and  victory, 
and  triumph.  The  answer  to  his  ])rayer  gave  him 
what  he  needed  most,  the  assurance  of  immediate 
rest  and  peace.  The  word  Paradise  spoke  to  him,  as 
to  other  Jews,  of  repose,  shelter,  joy — the  greatest 
contrast  possible  to  the  thirst,  and  agony,  and  shame 
of  the  hours  upon  the  cross.  Rudimentary  as  his 
previous  thoughts  of  it  might  be,  this  was  the  word 
fittest  for  the  education  of  his  spirit. 

There  is  a  like  significance  in  the  general  absence 
of  the  word  from  the  language  of  the  Epistles. 
Here  also  it  is  found  nowbeic  in  the  direct  teaching. 
It  occurs  only  in  passages  that  are  njiocalyptic.  and 
therefore  almost  of  necessity  symbolic.  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  one,  apparently  of  himself,  as  having  been 
"caught  up  into  paradise,"  as  having  there  heard 
things  that  might  not  be  uttered  (2  Cor.  xii.  3).t' 


b  For  the  questions  (1)  wlicthcr  the  raptus  of  St.  Paul 

was    coiTJoreal    or    incorporeal,    (2)   wlictlicr  tlio   tliird 

heaven   is   to  bo  identififd  with  or  distinguisheil  from 

paradise,  (."?)  whether  this  was  tlic  upper  or  the  lower 

VOL.  II- 


paradise  of  the  Jewish  schools,  comp.  Meyer,  Wordsworth, 
Alford,  in  loc;  August,  de  f.'tn.  ad  litt.  .\ii.;  Ludwig, 
IHss.  dc  raplii  /•auli,  in  Montlien's  Tliisauriis.  Inter- 
preted by  the  current  .le\\i>.li  belief  of  the  period,  we 

2  Z 


706 


PARADISE 


In  the  message  to  the  first  of  the  Seven  Churches 
of  Asia,  "  the  tree  of  life  which  is  in  the  midst  of 
the  paradise  of  God,"  appears  as  the  reward  of  him 
that  overcometh,  the  symbol  of  an  etei'nal  blessed- 
ness. (Comp.  Dean  Trench,  Comm.  on  the  Epistles 
to  the  Seven  Churches,  in  loc.)  The  thing,  though 
not  the  word,  appears  in  the  closing  visions  of 
Rev.  xxii. 

(4.)  The  eager  curiosity  which  prompts  men  to 
press  on  into  the  things  behind  the  veil,  has  led  them 
to  construct  hypotheses  mor^  or  less  definite  as  to 
the  intermediate  state,  and  these  have  affected  the 
thoughts  which  Christian  writei's  have  connected 
with  the  word  paradise.  Patristic  and  later  inter- 
preters follow,  as  has  been  noticed,  in  the  footsteps 
of  the  Jewish  schools.  To  Origen  and  others  of  a 
like  spiritual  insight,  paradise  is  but  a  synonym  for 
a  region  of  life  and  immortality — one  and  the 
same  with  the  third  heaven  (Jerome,  Ej).  ad  Joh. 
Hieros.  in  Wordsworth  on  2  Cor.  xii.).  So  far  as 
it  is  a  place,  it  is  as  a  school  in  which  the  souls  of 
men  are  trained  and  learn  to  judge  rightly  of  the 
things  they  have  done  and  seen  on  eartli  (Origen, 
de  I'rinc.  ii.  12).  The  sermon  of  Basil,  de  Para- 
diso,  gives  an  eloquent  representation  of  the  common 
belief  of  Christians  who  were  neither  mystical  nor 
speculative.  Minds  at  once  logical  and  sensuous  ask 
questions  as  to  the  locality,  and  tlie  answers  are 
wildly  conjectural.  It  is  not  in  Hades,  and  is  there- 
foi-e  difl'ei-ent  from  Abraham's  bosom  ('IVrtull.  de 
Idol.  c.  13).  It  is  above  and  beyond  the  world, 
separated  from  it  by  a  wall  of  fire  (Tertall.  Apol.  c. 
47).  It  is  the  "  refiigerium  "  for  all  faithful  souls, 
where  they  have  the  vision  of  saints,  and  angels,  and 
of  Christ  himself  (Just.  M.  Respons.  ad  Orthodox. 
75  and  85),  or  for  those  only  who  are  entitled,  as 
martyrs,  fresh  from  the  baptism  of  blood,  to  a  spe- 
cial reward  above  their  fellows  (Tertull.  de  Anim. 
c.  55).«  It  is  in  the  fourth  heaven  (Clem.  Alex. 
Fraijm.  §51).  It  is  in  some  unknown  region  of 
the  earth,  where  the  seas  and  skies  meet,  higher 
than  any  earthly  mountain  ( Joanu.  Damasc.  de  Or- 
thod.  Fid.  ii.  1 1),  and  had  thus  escaped  the  waters 
of  the  Flood  (P.  Lombard,  Sentent.  ii.  17,  E.).  It 
has  been  identified  with  the  (pvXaKr]  of  1  Pet.  iii. 
19,  and  the  spirits  in  it  are  those  of  the  antediluvian 
races  who  repented  befoi-e  the  gi-eat  destruction 
overtook  them  (Bishop  Horsley,  Sermons,  sx:.). 
(Comp.  an  elaborate  note  in  Thilo,  Codex  Apocrijph. 
N.  T.  p.  754.)  The  word  enters  largely,  as  might 
be  expected,  into  the  apocryphal  literature  of  "the 
early  Church.  Where  the  true  Gospels  are  most 
reticent,  the  mythical  are  most  exuberant.  The 
Gospel  of  Nicodemiis,  in  narrating  Christ's  victory 
over  Hades  (the  "  harrowing  of  hell  "  of  our  earlv 
English  mysteries),  tells  how,  till  then,  Enoch  and 
Elijah    had    been   its   sole    inhabitants'* — how   the 


may  refer  tbe  "  third  heaven  "  to  a  vision  of  the  Divine 
Glory ;  "paradise,"  to  a  vision  of  the  fellowship  of  the 
righteous  dead,  waiting  in  calmness  and  peace  for  their 
final  resurrection. 

'  A  special  treatise  by  Tertnllian,  de  I'aradiso,  ts 
unfortunately  lost. 

•^  One  trace  of  this  belief  is  found  in  tlie  Vulg.  of 
Ecclus.  xliv.  16,  "  translatus  est  in  jiaradisum,"  in  the 
absence  of  any  correspomiing  word  in  the  Greek  text. 

"=  Thus  it  occurs  in  the  Koran  in  the  ^orm  firdaus ;  and 
the  name  of  the  Persian  poet  Ferdusi  is  probably  derived 
from  it  (Humboldt's  Cosmos,  ii.  note  230). 

'  The  passage  quoted  by  Alt  is  from  Orat.  c.  Arian.  II. 
(vol.  i.  p.  307,  Colon.  1686) :  Kai  ^laferat  ttoXlv  eiireK- 
Oclv  eis  Toi/  napaSeicroi'  ti)?  tKicXr/crw.    Ingenious  as  his 


PARAH 

penitent  robber  was  there  with  his  cross  on  the  ni2;ht 
of  t/ie  crucifixion — how  the  souls  of  the  patriarchs 
were  led  thither  by  Christ,  and  were  received  by  the 
archangel  Michael,  as  he  kept  watch  with  the 
flaming  swords  at  the  gate.  In  the  apocryphal 
Acta  Philippi  (Tischendorf,  Act.  Apost.  p.  89), 
the  Apostle  is  sentenced  to  remain  tor  forty  davs 
outside  the  circle  of  paradise,  because  he  had  given 
way  to  anger  and  cursed  the  people  of  Hierapolis 
for  their  unbelief. 

(5.)  The  later  history  of  the  word  presents  some 
facts  of  interest.  Accepting  in  this,  as  in  other 
instances,  the  mythiciil  elements  of  Eastern  Christi- 
anity, the  creed  of  Islam  presented  to  its  followers 
the  hope  of  a  sensuous  paradise,  and  the  Persian  word 
was  transplanted  thiough  it  into  the  languages 
spoken  by  them.*  In  the  West  it  passes  through 
some  strange  transformations,  and  descends  to  baser 
uses.  The  thought  that  men  on  entering  the  Church 
of  Christ  returned  to  the  blessedness  which  Adam  had 
forfeited,  was  symbolized  in  the  church  architecture 
of  the  fourth  century.  The  narthex,  or  atrium,  in 
which  were  assembled  those  who,  not  being  fideks 
in  full  communion,  were  not  admitted  into  the  in- 
terior of  the  building,  was  known  as  the  "  Paradise" 
of  the  church  (Alt,  Cidtus,  p.  591).  Athanasius,  it 
has  been  said,  speaks  scornfully  of  Arianism  as 
creeping  into  this  paradise,'  implying  that  it  ad- 
dressed itself  to  the  ignorant  and  untaught.  In 
the  West  we  trace  a  change  of  form,  and  one  singu- 
lar change  of  application.  Paradiso  becomes  in 
some  Italian  dialects  Paraviso,  and  this  passes  into 
the  French  partis, s  denoting  the  western  porch  of 
a  churcli,  or  the  open  space  in  front  of  it  (Ducange, 
s.  V.  '  Parvisus ';  Diez,  Etymolog.  Wortei^h.  p.  703). 
In  the  church  this  space  was  occupied,  as  we  have 
seen,  by  the  lower  classes  of  the  people.  The  word 
was  transferred  from  the  place  of  worship  to  the 
place  of  amusement,  and,  though  the  position  was 
entirely  different,  was  applied  to  the  highest  and 
cheapest  gallery  of  a  French  theatre  (Alt,  Cultiis, 
1.  c).  By  some,  however,  this  use  of  the  word  is 
connected  only  with  the  extreme  height  of  the  gal- 
lery, just  as  "  chemiii  de  Paradis  "  is  a  proverbial 
phrase  for  any  specially  arduous  undertaking  (Be- 
scherelles,  Dictionnaire  Frangais).        [E.  H.  P.] 

PA'RAH  (man,  with  the  def.  article :  ^apd  ; 
Alex.  'A(j>ap:  Aphpihara^,  one  of  the  cities  in  the 
territory  allotted  to  Benjamin,  named  only  in  the 
lists  of  the  conquest  (Josh,  xviii.  23).  It  occurs  in 
the  first  of  the  two  groups  into  which  the  towns  of 
Benjamin  are  divided,  which  seems  to  contain  those 
of  the  northern  'and  eastern  portions  of  the  tribe, 
between  Jericho,  Bethel,  and  Geba ;  the  towns  ot 
the  south,  from  Gibeon  to  Jerusalem,  being  enu- 
merated in  the  second  group. 


conjecture  is,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  sarcasm 
which  be  finds  in  the  words  is  not  the  creation  of  his  own 
imagination.  There  seems  no  ground  for  referring  the 
word  paradise  to  any  section  of  the  Church,  but  rather  to 
the  Church  as  a  whole  (cuuip.  August,  de  Gen.  ad  litt.  xii.). 
The  Arians  were  to  it  what  the  serjient  had  been  to  the 
earlier  paradise. 

s  This  word  will  be  familiar  to  many  readers  from  the 
"  Responsiones  in  Parviso  "  of  the  Oxford  system  of  exa- 
mination, however  little  they  may  previously  have  con- 
nected that  place  with  their  thoughts  of  paradise.  By 
others,  however,  Parvisum  (or  -sus)  is  derived  "a  parvis 
pucris  ibi  cdoctis"  (.Menage,  Orig.de  la  Langue  Franf. 
s.  V, '  Parvis '). 


PARAN 

In  the  Onomnsticon  ("Aphra")  it  is  specified 
by  Jerome  only, —  the  text  of  Eusebius  being  waiit- 
mg — as  five  miles  east  of  Bethel.  No  traces  of  the 
name  have  yet  been  found  in  that  position  ;  but  the 
name  Fdrah  exists  further  to  the  S.E.  attached  to 
the  Wady  Fdrah,  one  of  the  southern  branches 
of  the  great  Wadi/  Smccin.it,  and  to  a  site  of  ruins 
at  the  junction  of  the  same  with  the  main  valley. 

This  identification,  first  suggested  by  Dr.  Robin- 
son (i.  439 ),  is  supported  by  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir, 
339)  and  Sohwarz  (126).  The  drawback  men- 
tioned by  Dr.  R.,  namely,  that  the  Arabic  word 
(  =  "mouse")  differs  in  signification  from  the 
Hebrew  ("  the  cow  ")  is  not  of  much  force,  since  it 
is  the  habit  of  modern  names  to  cling  to  similarity 
of  sound  with  the  ancient  names,  rather  than  of 
signification.     (Compare  Beit-ur  ;  el  Aal,  &c.) 

A  view  of  Wadij  Fdrah  is  given  by  Barclay 
{City,  &c.  558),  who  proposes  it  for  Aenon.    [G.] 

TA'EAN,  EL-PA'RAN  {]y.^,  pXS  '?"«  : 
^apdv,  LXX.  and  Joseph.). 

1.  It  is  shown  under  Kadesh  that  the  name 
Paran  corresponds  probably  in  general  outline  with 
the  desert  Et-Tih.  The  Sinaitic  desert,  including 
the  wedge  of  metamorphic  rocks,  granite,  syenite, 
and  porphyry,  set,  as  it  were,  in  a  superficial  margin 
of  old  red  sandstone,  forms  nearly  a  scalene  triangle, 
with  its  apex  southwards,  and  having  its  base  or 
upper  edge  not  a  straight,  but  concave  crescent  line 
— the  ridge,  in  short,  of  the  Et-Tih  range  of  moun- 
tains, extending  about  120  miles  from  east  to  west. 
with  a  slight  dip,  the  curve  of  the  aforesaid  crescent 
southwards.  Speaking  generally,  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai  (Num.  x.  12,  xii.  16),  in  which  the  march- 
stations  of  Taberah  and  Hazeroth,  if  the  latter 
[Hazeroth]  be  identiciil  with  Hudhcrd,  are  pro- 
bably included  towards  its  N.E.  limit,  may  be  said 
to  lie  S.  of  the  Et-Tih  range,  the  wilderness  of 
Paran  N.  of  it,  and  the  one  to  end  where  the  other 
begins.  That  of  Paran  is  a  stretch  of  chalky  forma- 
tion, the  chalk  being  covered  with  coarse  gravel, 
mixed  with  black  fiint  and  drifting  sand.  The  sur- 
t'lce  of  this  extensive  desert  tract  is  a  slope  ascending 
towards  the  north,  and  in  it  appear  to  rise  (by 
Uussegger's  map,  from  which  most  of  the  previous 
description  is  taken)  three  ('halky  ridges,  as  it  were, 
terraces  of  mountainous  formation,  all  to  the  W. 
of  a  line  drawn  from  Eai  Mohammed  to  Kulat-cl- 
Arish  on  the  Mediterranean.  The  caravan-route 
from  Cairo  to  Akaha  crosses  the  Et-TVi  desert  in 
a  line  from  W.  to  E.,  a  little  S.  In  this  wide  tract, 
which  extends  northwards  to  join  the  "  wilderness 
of  Beershoba  "  ((!en.  xxi.  21,  ef.  14),  and  eastward 
probably  to  the  wilderness  of  Zin  [Kauicsii]  on  the 
Eduniitish  border.  Ishmacl  dwelt,  and  there  ])ro- 
bably  his  ]josterity  originally  multiplied.  Ascending 
uortiiwards  from  it  on  a  meridian  to  the  E.  of  I'leer- 
sheba,  we  should  reach  Maon  and  Carmel,  or  that 
southern  portion  of  the  territory  of  Judah,  W.  of 
the  De;id  Se;i,  known  as  '•  the  Soutii,"  where  the 
waste  changes  gradually  into  an  unii.iiabiteil  piisture- 
land,  at  least  in  S])ring  and  autumn,  and  in  which, 
under  the  name  of  "  I'aran,"  Nalial  feil  his  (locks 
(1  Sam.  XXV.  1).  Between  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
and  that  of  Zin  no  strict  demarcation  exists  in  the 
narrative,  nor  do  the  natural  features  of  the  region, 

»  For  the  reasons  why  Serial  should  not  be  accepted. 
see  .Sinai. 

''  Gescn.  .'!.  ii.  pNS,  says  tlu!  wilderness  so  called, 
"  between  llidiaii  and  Egypt,  bears   this   name  at   the 


PARAN 


707 


so  far  as  yet  ascertained,  yield  a  well-defined 
boundary.  The  name  of  Paran  seems,  as  in  the 
story  of  Ishmael,  to  have  predominated  towards  the 
western  extremity  of  the  northern  desert  frontier  of 
Et-Tih,  and  in  Num.  xxxiv.  4  the  wilderness  of 
Zin,  not  Paran,  is  spoken  of  as  the  southern  border 
of  the  land  or  of  the  tiibe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  3). 
If  by  the  Paran  region  we  undeistand  "  that  great 
and  teriible  wilderness  "  so  emphatically  described 
as  the  haunt  of  noxious  creatures  and  the  terror  of 
the  waytarer  (Deut.  i.  19,  viii.  15),  then  we  might 
see  how  the  adjacent  tracts,  which  still  must  oe 
called  "  wilderness,"  might,  either  as  having  less 
repulsive  features,  or  because  they  lay  near  to  some 
settled  country,  have  a  special  nomenclature  of  their 
own.  For  the  latter  reason  the  wildernesses  of  Zin, 
eastward  towards  Edom  and  Mount  Seir,  and  of 
Shur,  westward  towards  Egypt,  might  be  thus  dis- 
tinguished ;  for  the  former  reason  that  of  Sin  and 
Sinai.  It  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the  rules 
of  Scriptural  nomenclature,  if  we  suppose  these 
accessory  wilds  to  be  sometimes  included  under  the 
general  name  of  "  wilderness  of  Paran  ;"  and  to  this 
extent  we  may  perhaps  modify  the  previous  general 
statement  that  S.  of  the  Et-Tih  range  is  the  wilder- 
ness of  Sinai,  and  N.  of  it  that  of  Paran.  Still, 
construed  strictly,  the  wildernesses  of  Paian  and  Zin 
would  seem  to  lie  as  already  approximately  laid 
down.  [Kadesii.]  If,  however,  as  jireviously 
hinted,  they  may  in  another  view  be  regarded  as 
overlapping,  we  can  'more  easily  understand  how 
Chedorlaomer,  when  he  "  smote  "  the  peoples  S.  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  returned  round  its  south-westeln 
mrve  to  the  lill-Paran,  or  "  terebinth-tree  of  Paran," 
viewed  as  indicating  a  locality  in  connexion  with 
the  wilderness  of  Paran,  and  yet  close,  apparentlv, 
to  that  Dead  Sea  border  (Gen.  xiv.  6  i. 

Was  there,  then,  a  Paran  proper,  or  definite  spot 
to  which  the  name  was  applied  ?  From  Deut.  i.  1 
it  should  seem  there  must  have  been.  This  is  con- 
firmed by  1  K.  xi.  18,  from  which  we  fui  ther  learn 
the  fact  of  its  being  an  inhabited  region ;  and  the 
position  required  by  the  context  here  is  one  between 
Midian  and  Egypt.  If  we  are  to  reconcile  these 
passages  by  the  aid  of  the  personal  history  of  Moses, 
it  seems  certain  that  the  local  Midian  of  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula  must  have  lain  near  the  Mount  Iloreb 
itself  (Ex.  iii.  1,  xviii.  1-5).  The  site  of  the 
"  Paran"  of  Hadad  the  Edomite  must  then  have 
lain  to  the  N.W.  or  Egyptian  side  of  Horeb.  This 
brings  us,  if  we  assume  any  principal  mountain, 
except  Serhdl,'^  of  the  whole  Sinaitic  group,  to  be 
"  the  ]\lount  of  God,"  so  close  to  the  Wady  Feiran 
that  the  similarity  of  name,''  supported  by  the 
recently  expressed  opinion  of  eminent  geographers, 
may  be  taken  as  establishing  substantial  identity. 
Hitter  (vol.  xiv.  p.  740-1)  and  Stanley  (p.  39-41) 
both  consider  that  Rephidim  is  to  be  foiuul  in  Wady 
Feiran,  and  no  other  place  in  the  whole  ])eninsula 
seems,  from  its  local  advant.nges,  to  have  been  so 
likely  to  form  an  entrepot  in  Solomon's  time  be- 
tweei-n  Edom  and  Egypt.  Burckhardt  {Syria,  4c- 
602)  describes  this  wady  as  narrowing  in  one  spot 
to  100  paces,  and  adds  that  the  high  mountains 
adjacent,  and  the  thick  woods  which  clothe  it,  con- 
tribute with  the  bad  .water  to  make  it  unhealthy, 
but  that  it  is,  for  productiveness,  the  finest  valley  = 

present  day."     No  Biaps  now  in   use  give  any  closer 
approximation  to  the  ancitnt  name  than  Feiran. 

■=  Compare,  however,  the  same  traveller's  stalement  of 
the  claims  uf  a  coast  wady  at  Tar.  on  tlie  Gulf  of  Suez 

2   Z   2 


ro8 


PARBAR 


in  the  whole  peninsula,  containing  four  jniles  of 
gardens  and  da'e-groves.  Yet  he  thinks  it  was  not 
the  Paian  of  Scripture.  Professor  Stanley,  on  the 
contrary,  seems  to  speak  on  this  point  with  greater 
confidence  in  the  affirmative  than  perhaps  on  any 
other  question  connected  with  the  Exolus.  See 
especially  his  remai'ks  (39-41)  regarding  the  local 
term  "  hill  "  of  K.\.  xvii.  9,  10,  which  he  considers 
to  be  satisfied  by  an  eminence  adjacent  to  the  Wachj 
Feiran.  The  vegetable  manna"*  of  the  tamarisk 
grows  wild  there  (Seetzen,  Reisen,  iii.  p.  75),  as  does 
the  colocijnth,  &c.  (Flobinson,  i.  l'21-4).  What  could 
have  led  Winer  (s.  v.  Paran)  to  place  El-Paran  near 
Elath,  it  is  not  easy  to  say,  especially  as  he  gives 
no  authority. 

2.  "Mount"  Paran  occurs  only  in  two  poetic 
passages  (Deut.  xxxiii.  2 ;  Hab.  iii.  3),  in  one  of 
which  Sinai  and  Seir  appear  as  local  accessories,  in 
the  other  Teman  and  (ver.  7)  Cushan  and  Midian. 
We  need  hardly  pause  to  inquire  in  what  sense 
Seir  can  be  brouglit  into  one  local  view  with  Sinai. 
It  is  clear  from  a  third  poetic  passage,  in  which 
Paran  does  not  appear  (Judg.  v.  4,  5),  but  which 
contains  "  Seir,"  more  literally  determined  by 
"  Edom,"  still  in  the  same  local  connexion  with 
"  Sinai,"  that  the  Hebrew  found  no  difficulty  in 
viewing  the  greater  scenes  of  God's  manifestation 
in  the  Exodus  as  historically  and  morally,'^  if  not 
locally  connected.  At  any  rate  Mount  I'aran  here 
may  with  as  good  a  right  he  claimed  for  the 
Sinaitic  as  for  the  Edomitish  side  of  the  difficulty. 
And  the  distance,  after  all,  from  Horeb  to  Mount 
Seir  was  probably  one  of  ten  days  or  less  (Deut.  i. 
2).  It  is  not  unlikely  that  if  the  Wady  Feiran  be 
the  Paran  proper,  the  name  "  Mount "  Paran  may 
have  been  either  assigned  to  the  special  member 
(the  north-western)  of  the  Sinaitic  mountain-group 
which  lies  adjacent  to  that  wady.'  or  to  the  whole 
Sinaitic  cluster.  That  special  member  is  the  five- 
peaked  ridge  of  Serhal.  If  this  view  for  the  site 
of  Paran  is  correct,  the  Israelites  must  have  pro- 
ceeded from  their  encampment  by  the  sea  (Num. 
xxxiii.  10),  probably  Tnyibeh  [Wilderness  of 
THE  Wandering],  by  the  "  middle"  route  of  the 
three  indicated  by  Stanley  (p.  38-9).  [H.  H.] 

PAR'BAR  CianSn,  with  the  definite  article : 

*5ia56xo/xeVous  :  cellidae).  A  word  occurring  in 
Hebrew  and  A.  V.  only  in  1  Chr.  xxvi.  18,  but 
there  found  twice:  "  At  the  Parbar  westward  four 
(Levites)  at  the  causeway  two  at  the  Parbar." 
From  this  passage,  and  also  from  the  context,  it 
would  seem  that  Parbar  was  some  place  on  the 
west  side  of  the  Temple  enclosure,  the  same  side 
with  the  causeway  and  the  gate  Shallecheth.     The 


(Burckhardt,  Jrob.  ii.  362;  comp.  Wcllsted,  ii.  9),  "re- 
ceiving all  the  waters  which  flow  down  from  the  higher 
range  of  Sinai  to  the  sea"  (Stanley,  p.  19). 

*  The  Tamarix  Gallica  mannifera  of  Ehrenberg,  the 
Tarfa  of  the  Arabs  (Robiuson,  i.  115). 

«  The  language  in  the  three  passages,  Deut,  xxxiii.  2, 
Hab.  iii.,  Judg.  v.  4,  5,  is  as  strikingly  similar  as  is  the 
purport  and  spirit  of  all  the  three.  All  describe  a  spiritual 
presence  manifested  by  natural  convulsions  attendant; 
and  all  are  confirmed  by  Ps.  Ixviii.  7,  S,  in  which  Sinai 
alone  is  named.  We  may  almost  regard  this  lofty  rhap- 
sody as  a  commonplace  of  the  inspired  song  of  triumph, 
in  which  the  seer  seems  to  leave  earth  so  far  beneath  him 
that  the  preciseness  of  geographic  dfifail  is  lost  to  his  view. 

f  Out  of  the  Wady  Feiran,  in  an  easterly  direction,  runs 
the  M'ady  Sheikh,  which  conducts  the  traveller  directly  to 
the  "modern  Horeb.'     See  Kif'pert's  map. 


PARMENAS 

latter  was  close  to  the  causeway — perhaps  on  it.  as 
the  Bah  Silsilis  now  is— and  we  know  from  its- 
lemains  that  the  c<auseway  was  at  the  extreme  north 
of  the  western  wall.  Parbar  therefore  must  have 
been  south  of  Shallecheth. 

As  to  the  meaning  of  the  name,  the  Rabbis  gene- 
rally agree *>  in  translating  it  "  the  outside  place  ;" 
while  modern  authorities  take  it  as  equivalent  to 
the pari'driin'^  m  2  K.  xxiii.  11  (A.  V.  "  suburbs"). 
a  word  almo-st  identical  with  parbar,  and  used  by 
the  early  Jewish  interpreters  as  the  equivalent  of 
irdijrasldm,  the  precincts  (A.  V.  "  suburbs")  of  the 
Levitical  cities.  Accepting  this  interpretation,  there 
is  no  difficulty  in  identifying  the  Parbar  with  the 
subuib  (rh  irpodffTetov)  mentioned  by  Josephus  in 
describing  Herod's  Temple  (Ant.  xv.  11,  §.5),  as 
lying  in  the  deep  valley  which  .separated  the  west 
wall  of  the  Temple  from  the  city  opposite  it ;  in 
other  words,  the  southern  end  of  the  Tyropoeon, 
which  intervenes  between  the  Wailing  Place  and 
the  (so-called)  Zion.  The  two  gates  in  the  original 
wall  were  in  Herod's  Temple  increased  to  four. 

It  does  not  follow  (as  some  have  as.sumed)  that 
Parbar  was  identical  with  the  "  suburbs"  of  2  K. 
xxiii.  11,  though  the  words  denoting  each  may  have 
the  same  signification.  For  it  seems  most  consonant 
with  probability  to  suppose  that  the  "  horses  of  the 
Sun "  would  be  kept  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Temple  mount,  in  full  view  of  the  risirig  rays  of 
the  god  as  they  shot  over  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  not  in  a  deep  valley  on  its  Avestern  side. 

Parbar  is  possibly  an  ancient  Jebusite  name, 
which  perpetuated  itself  after  the  Israelite  conqtiest 
of  the  city,  as  many  a  Danish  and  Saxon  name 
has  been  perpetuated,  and  still  exists,  only  slightly 
disguised,  in  the  city  of  London.  [G.] 

PARCHMENT.     [Writing.] 

PARLOUR.''  A  word  in  English  usage  mean- 
ing the  common  room  of  the  family,  and  hence 
probably  in  A.  V.  denoting  the  king's  audience- 
chamber,  so  used  in  reference  to  Eglon  (Judg.  iii. 
20-25  ;  Richardson,  Eng.  Diet.).  [HOOSE,  vol.  i. 
p.  838.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PARMASH'TA    (Nri^DIQ  •.     Mapfiacrifxi  ; 

Alex.  Mapna<Tifji.vd:  Fhermesta).  One  of  the  ten 
sons  of  Hainan  slain  by  the  Jews  in  Shushan  (Esth. 
ix.  9). 

PAR'MENAS  (Uapfievas).  One  of  the  seven 
deacons,  "  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  wisdom,"  selected  by  the  whole  body  of 
the  disciples  to  superintend  the  ministration  of  their 
alms  to  the  widows  and  necessitous  poor.  Parmenas 
is  placed  sixth  on  the  list  of  those  who  were  ordained 


»  Wi)at  Heb-ew  word  the  LXX.  read  here  is  not  clear. 

•>  See  the  Targum  of  the  passage ;  also  Buxtorf,  Lex. 
Talm.  s.  V.  2"13  ;  and  the  references  in  Lighifoot,  Prospect 
of  Temple,  chap.  v. 

"^  Gesenius,  Thes.  1 1 23  a  ;  Fiirst,  Havdich  ii.  235  6,  S;c. 
Gesenius  connects  pnrvarim  with  a  similar  Persian  word, 
meaning  a  building  open  on  all  sides  to  the  sun  and  air. 

<•  1.  "nn  ;  airo07JK:rj ;  ctiliicMiMm ;  once  only  "  parlour  " 
in  1  Chr.  xxviii.  11 ;  elsewhere  usually  "  chamber,"  a  with- 
drawing room  (Ges.  448). 

2.  nS^P  ;  uaraAuiua;  triclinium:,  usually  "  chamber." 

3.  n*7y,  with  art.  in  each  instance  where  A.  V  has 
"  parlour  ;"  to  i/nepwou ;  cocnaculum ;  usually  "  cham- 
ber." It  denotes  an  upper  chamber  in  2  Sam.  xviii.  33, 
2  K.  xxiii.  12. 


PARNACH 

by  the  laying  on  of  the  liaiuls  of  the  Apostlrs  to  this 
special  function  (Acts  vi.  5).  His  name  occurs  but 
this  once  in  Scriijture ;  and  ecclesiastical  history 
records  nothing  of  him  save  the  tradition  tliat  he 
suH'ered  martyrdom  at  Philippi  in  the  reig»i  of 
Trajan  (Barou.  ii.  55).  In  the  Calendar  of  the  By- 
zantine Church  he  and  Prochorus  are  commemorated 
on  July  L'Sth.  [E.  H— s.] 

PAR'NACH  ("rjnS  :  ^apvdx  :  Pharnack). 
Father  or  ancestor  of  Klizaphan  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Zebulun  (Num.  xxxiv.  25). 

PA'ROSH  (K'iZ-lS :    *af)e's ;    Alex.   </)op€S   m 

Ezr.  ii.  3,  elsewhere  ^6pos  :  Pharos).  The  de- 
scendants of  Parosh,  in  number  2172,  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  3  ;  Neh. 
vii.  8).  Another  detacliment  of  150  males,  with 
Zechariah  at  their  head,  accompanied  Ezra  (Ezr. 
viii.  3).  Seven  of  the  family  had  married  foreign 
wives  (Ezr.  x.  25).  They  assisted  m  the  building 
of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  25),  and  signed 
the  covenant  with  Neheniiah  (Neh.  x.  14).  In  the 
last-quoted  passage  the  name  Parosh  is  clearly  that 
of  a  family,  and  not  of  an  individual. 

PAKSHANDA'THA  (NTI^JCna :    iapffav- 

ves  ;  Alex,  ^apn-aveardv  :  Pharsandatha).  The 
eldest  of  Haman's  ten  sons  who  were  slain  by  the 
Jews  in  Shushan  (Esth.  ix.  7).  Fiirst  {Handwh.) 
renders  it  into  old  Persian //•as/mada?«,  "given  by 
prayer,"  and  compares  the  proper  name  Xlapaiiiv'Sris, 
whioh  occurs  in  Diod.  ii.  33. 

PARTHIANS  (UapeoL ;  Parthi)  occurs  only 
in  Acts  ii.  9,  where  it  designates  Jews  settled  in 
Parthia.  Parthia  Proper  was  the  region  stretching 
along  the  southern  flank  of  the  mountains  which 
separate  the  great  Persian  desert  from  the  desert  of 
Kharesm.  It  lay  south  of  Hyrcania,  east  of  Media, 
and  north  of  Sagartia.  The  country  was  pleasant, 
and  fairly  fertile,  watered  by  a  number  of  small 
streams  Howing  from  the  mountains,  and  absorbed 
after  a  longer  or  a  shorter  course  by  the  sands.  It 
is  now  known  as  the  Atak  or  "skirt,"  and  is  still 
a  valuable  j)art  of  Persia,  though  supporting  only 
a  scanty  population.  In  ancient  times  it  seems  to 
have  been  densely  peopled  ;  and  the  ruins  of  many 
large  and  apparently  handsome  cities  attest  its 
former  prosperity.  (See  Eraser's  Kliorassan,  p. 
245.) 

The  ancient  Parthians  are  called,  a  "  Scy thic " 
race  (Strab.  xi.  9,  §2;  Justin,  xli.  1-4;  Arriau, 
Fr.  1);  and  probably  belonged  to  the  great  Tiua- 
nian  family.  Various  stories  are  told  of  their 
origin.  Moses  of  Chorone  aills  them  the  descend- 
ants of  Abraham  by  Ketiuah  (  Hist.  Anncn.  ii.  (J5) ; 
while  John  of  Malala  relates  that  tiioy  were  Scy- 
thians whom  the  Egyptian  king  Sesostris  brought 
with  him  on  his  return  froni  Scythia,  and  settled  in 
a  region  of  Persia  (Hist.  Unw.  p.  2(3;  c<ini]>are 
.\rrian,  l.s.c).  Itcally,  nothing  is  known  of  tlieni 
till  about  the  time  of  Darius  llystaspis,  when  they 
are  found  in  the  district  which  so  long  retained 
their  name,  and  appear  as  faithful  subjects  of  the 
Persian  monarchs.  We  may  tiurly  presume  that 
they  were  added  to  the  empire  liy  Cyrus,  about 
D.C.  550;  ft)r  tiiat  monarch  seems  to  have  been  tiie 
conqueror  of  all  the  north-eastern  piovinces.  He- 
rodotus speaks  of  them  as  contained  in  the  KSth 
satrapy  of  Darius,  wliere  they  were  joined  with 
the  Chorasmians,  the  Spgdians,  and  the  Arians,  or 
people  of  Herat  (Herod,  iii.  'J3).     He  also  mentions 


PARTHIANIS 


ro'J 


that  they  served  in  the  army  winch  Xerxes  led  into 
(ireece,  under  the  same  leader  as  the  Chorasmians 
(vii.  (36).  They  carried  bows  and  anows,  and 
short  spears ,  but  were  not  at  this  time  held  in 
much  repute  as  soldiers.  In  the  final  struggle 
between  the  Gre.^ks  and  Persians  they  remained 
fiuthful  to  tiie  latter,  serving  at  Arbela  ( Arr.  Exj). 
Alex.  ill.  8),  but  otiering  only  a  weak  resistance 
to  Alexander  when,  on  his  way  to  Bactria,  he 
entered  their  country  (ib.  25).  In  the  division  of 
Alexander's  dominions  they  fell  to  the  share  of 
Eumenes,  and  Parthia  for  some  while  was  counted 
among  the  territories  of  the  Seleucidae.  About 
B.C.  256,  however,  they  ventured  upon  a  revolt, 
and  under  Arsaces  (whom  Strabo  calls  "a  king  of 
the  Dahae,"  but  who  was  more  probably  a  native 
leader)  they  succeeded  in  establishing  their  inde- 
pendence. This  was  the  beginning  of  the  great 
Parthian  empire,  which  may  be  regarded  as  rising 
out  of  the  ruins  of  the  Persian,  and  as  taking  its 
place  during  the  centuries  when  the  Eoman  power 
was  at  its  height. 

Parthia,  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  of  the  Acts, 
would  designate  this  empire,  which  extended  from 
India  to  the  Tigris,  and  from  the  Chorasmian  desert 
to  the  shores  of  the  Southern  Ocean.  Hence  the 
lirominent  position  of  the  name  Parthians  in  the 
list  of  those  present  at  Pentecost.  Parthia  was  a 
power  almost  rivalling  Kome — the  only  existing 
power  which  had  tried  its  strength  against  Rome 
and  not  been  worsted  in  the  encounter.  By  the 
defeat  and  destruction  of  Crassus  near  Carrhae  (the 
Scriptural  Harran)  the  Parthians  acquired  that  cha-i 
rac;ter  for  military  prowess  which  attaches  to  them 
in  the  best  writers  of  the  Roman  classical  period. 
(See  Hor.  Od.  ii.  13  ;  Sat.  ii.  1,  15;  Virg.  Geurg. 
iii.  31  ;  Ov.  Art.  Am.  i.  209,  &c.)  Their  armies 
were  composed  of  clouds  of  horsemen,  who  were 
all  riders  of  extraordinary  expeitness  ;  their  chief 
weapon  was  the  bow.  They  shot  their  aiTows 
with  wonderful  precision  while  their  horses  were 
in  full  career,  and  were  proverbially  remarkable 
lor  the  injury  they  inflicted  with  these  weapons  on 
an  enemy  who  attempted  to  follow  them  in  their 
flight.  From  the  time  of  Crassus  to  that  of  Trajan 
they  were  an  enemy  whom  l!omc  especially  dreaded, 
and  whose  ravages  she  was  content  to  repel  without 
revenging.  The  warlike  successor  of  Nerva  had 
the  boldness  to  attack  them ;  and  his  expedition, 
which  was  well  conceived  and  vigorously  conducted, 
deprived  them  of  a  considerable  portion  of  their  ter- 
ritories. In  the  next  reign,  that  of  Hadrian,  the 
Paitliians  recovered  these  losses  ;  but  their  military 
strength  was  now  upon  the  decline;  and  in  .\.D. 
2213,  the  last  of  the  Arsacidae  was  forced  to  yield 
his  kingdom  to  the  revolted  Persians,  who,  under 
Artaxerxes,  son  of  Sassan,  succeeded  in  re-establish- 
ing their  empire.  The  Parthian  dominion  thus 
lasted  for  nearly  live  centuries,  commencing  in  the 
tliird  century  before,  and  terminating  in  the  third 
century  after,  our  era. 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  the  Parthians 
were  a  Turanian  race.  Their  succe-s  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  subversion  of  a  tolerably  advanced 
civilisation  by  a  comparative  barbarism — the  sub- 
stitution of  Tatiu-  coarseness  for  Arian  polish  and 
refinement.  They  aimed  indeed  at  adopting  the  art 
and  civilisation  of  those  whom  they  conquered  ;  but 
their  imitation  was  a  poor  travestie,  and  there  is 
something  ludicrously  grotesque  in  most  of  their 
more  ambitious  etlorts.  At  the  same  time,  they 
iiccasionaliv  exhibit  a  certain  amount  of  skill  aii'l 


710 


PARTRIDGE 


taste,  more  especially  where  they  followed  Greek 
models.  Their  architecture  was  better  than  their 
sculpture.  The  famous  ruins  of  Ctesiphon  have  a 
gi-andeur  of  effect  which  stnke.s  eveiy  traveller  ; 


Figure  of  Fame,  surmounting  the  Arch  at  Tackt-i-Bostau. 
(Sir  R.  K.  Porter's  Truveh,  vol.  ii.  fol.  62.) 

and  the  Parthian  constructions  at  Akkerkuf,  P^l 
Hammam,  &c.,  are  among  the  most  remarkable  of 
Oriental  remains.  Nor  was  grandeur  of  general 
effect  the  onl}'  merit  of  their  buildings.  There  is 
sometimes  a  beauty  and  delicacy  in  their  ornamen- 
tation which  is  almost  worthy  the  Creeks.     (For 

Bffl3ni33rTr 


Oniamentatioii  of  Arch  at  T; 


specimens  of  Parthian  sculpture  and  architecture, 
see  the  Travels  of  Sir  R.  K.  Porter,  vol.  i.  plates 
19-24;  vol.  ii.  plates  62-66  and  82,  &c.  For  the 
general  history  of  the  nation,  see  Heeren's  Manual 
of  Ancient  History,  pp.  229-305,  Eng.  Tr. ;  and 
the  article  Parthia  in  Diet,  of  Gr^  and  Rom. 
Geography.)  [G.  i;.] 

PARTRIDGE  {iTp,  kdre:  HpSi^,  wkti- 
nSpa^ :  perdix)  occurs  only  1  Sam.  ,x.\vi.  20,  where 
David  compares  himself  to  a  hunted  A'ore  upon  the 
mountains,  and  in  Jer.  xvii.  11,  where  it  is  said, 
"  As  a  Kdre  sitteth  on  eggs,  and  hatcheth  them  not ; 
so  he  that  getteth  riches,  and  not  by  right,  shall 
leave  them  in  the  midst  of  his  dnys,  and  at  his  end 
sliall  be  a  fool."  The  translation  of  Kdre  by 
"  partridge  "  is  supported  by  many  of  the  old  ver- 
sions, the  Hebrew  name,  as  is  generally  supposed, 
having  reference  to  the  "  call  "  of  the  cock  bird  ; 
compare  the  German  Rehhuhn  from  rufen,  "  to 
call."  a  Bochart  [Hieroz.  ii.  632)  has  attempted  to 
show  that  Kore  denotes  some  species  of  "  snipe," 
or  "  woodcock  "  (rusticola  ?)  ;  he  refers  the  Hebrew 
word  to  the  Arabic  Karia,  which  he  believes,  but 

"  "  Perdix-  enim  nomen  suum  hebraicnm  J^Tp  habet 
a,  vocando,  quemadraofiuni  eadem  avis  Gemianis  dicitur 
nephiihn  a  ropen,  i.  e.  rufen,  vocare  "  (Roseiimiill.  Schol. 
in  Jer.  xvii.  11).  Mr.  Tinstram  says  that  Kore  would  be 
an  admirable  imitation  of  tlie  call-note  of  Caccabis  saxa- 

•>  "  The  partridge  of  tlie  mountains  I  suspect  to  be 
Jmmoperdix  Heyii,  familiar  as   it  must  have  been   to 


PARTRIDGE 

upon  very  insufficient  ground,  to  be  the  name  of 
some  one  of  these  birds.  Oedmann  (  Verm.  Samm. 
ii.  57)  identities  the  Aarw  of  Arabic  writers  with 
the  Merops  apiaster  (the  Bee-eater) ;  this  explana- 
tion has  deservedly  found  favour  with  no  commen- 
tators. What  the  Karia  of  the  Arabs  may  be  we 
have  been  unable  to  determine  ;  but  the  Kore  there 
can  be  no  doubt  denotes  a  partridge.  The  "hunting 
this  bird  upon  the  mountains  "  ''  ( 1  Sam.  .T.wi.  20) 
entirely  agrees  with  the  habits  of  two  well-known 
species  of  partiidge,  viz.,  Caccabis  saxatilis  (the 
Greek  partridge)  and  Ammoperdix  Heyii.  The 
specific  name  of  the  former  is  partly  indicative  of 
the  localities  it  frequents,  viz.,  rocky  and  hilly 
ground  covered  with  brushwood. 


>|x 


Ammoperdix  Htyii. 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  margmal  reading  that  the 
passage  in  Jeremiah  may  bear  the  following  inter- 
pretation: — As  the  Kore  "  gathereth  young  which 
she  hath  not  brouglit  forth."  This  rendei'ing  is 
supported  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  and  is  that 
which  JIaurer  (^Comment,  in  Jer.  1.  c),  Rosen- 
miilier  (Sell,  in  Jer.  I.e.),  Gesenius  {T/tes.  s.  v.), 
Winer  {Realwh.  "  Rebhuhn  "),  and  scholars  gene- 
rally, adopt.  In  order  to  meet  the  requirements 
of  this  latter  interpretation,  it  has  been  asserted 
that  the  partridge  is  in  tiie  habit  of  stealing  the 
eggs  from  the  nests  of  its  congeners  and  of  sitting 
upon  them,  and  that  when  the  young  are  hatched 
they  forsake  their  false  parent ;  hence,  it  is  said, 
the  meaning  of  the  simile :  the  man  who  has  be- 
come rich  bydlslionest  means  loses  his  riches,  as 
the  fictitious  partridge  Tier  stolen  brood  (see  Jerome 
in  Jerem.  1.  c).  It  is  perhaps  almost  needless  to 
remark  that  this  is  a  mere  table,  in  which,  how- 
ever, the  ancient  Orientals  may  have  believed. 
There  is  a  passage  in  the  Arabian  naturalist  Damir, 
quoted  by  Bochart  {Hieror.  ii.  638),  which  shows 
that  in  his  time  this  opinion  was  held  with  regard 
to  some  kind  of  partridge."^  The  explanation  of  the 
rendering  of  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  is  obviously  as 
follows.  Partridges  were  often  "  hunted  "  in  ancient 
times  as  they  are  at  present,  either  by  hawking 
or  by  being  driven  from  place  to  place  till  they  be- 


David  wlien  he  camped  by  the  cave  of  Adullam — a  bird 
more  difficult  by  far  to  be  induced  to  take  wing  than 
C.  saxatilis"  (H.  B.  Tristram). 

'  Partridges,  like  gallinaceo\is  birds  generally,  may 
occasionally  lay  their  eggs  in  the  nests  of  other  birds  of 
the  same  species :  it  is  hardly  likely,  however,  that  this 
fact  should  have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  ancients  ; 
neither  can  it  alone  be  sufficienl  to  e.\i)lain  the  simile. 


PAKUAH 

come  flitigued,  when  they  are  knocked  down  by  the 
clubs  or  zerwattijs  of  the  Arabs  (see  Shaw's  Trcw.  i. 
425,  8vo.).  Thus,  nests  were  no  doubt  constantly 
disturbed,  and  many  destroyed :  as,  therefore,  is  a 
partridge  which  is  driven  from  her  eggs,  so  is  he 
that  enriclieth  himstlf  by  unjust  means — "  he  shall 
leave  them  in  the  midst  of  his  days."  The  expres- 
sion m  Ecclus.  xi.  30,  "  like  as  a  partridge  taken 


PASHUI! 


711 


(and  kept)  in  a  cage,"  cleaily  refers,  as  Shaw  {Trav. 
1.  c.)  has  obsen'ed,  to  "  a  decoy  partridge,"  and  the 
Greek  ■KfpSi^  Q-qpevrris  should  liave  been  so  trans- 
lated, as  is  evident  both  from  the  context  and  the 
Cireek  words  ;  "*  compare  Aristot.  Hist.  Anim.  ix.  9, 
§  3  and  4.  Besides  the  two  species  of  partridge 
named  above,  the  Caccahis  chuk  ir  — the  red-leg  of 
India  and  Persia,  which  Mr.  TristVam  regards  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  Greek  partridge — is  found  about  the 
Jordan.  Our  common  partridge  {Perdix  cinerm), 
as  well  as  the  Barbary  (C.  pctrosa)  and  red-leg 
( C.  I'ufa),  do  not  occur  in  Palestine.  There  are 
three  or  four  species  of  the  genus  Ptcroclcs  (Sand- 
grouse)  and  Francolinus  found  in  the  Bible  lands, 
but  the}'  do  not  a])pear  to  be  noticed  by  any  distinct 
term.     [Quail.]  [\V.  H.] 

PARU'AH(n-"nQ:  *oua(TOu5;  k\*t\.<papp^ov: 
Fhunie).  The  father  of  Jehoshaphat,  Solomon's 
commissariat  officer  in  Issachar  (1  K.  iv.  17). 

PARVA'IM  (D^nS  :  ^apovlix),  the  name  of  a 
place  or  country  whence  the  gold  was  procured  for 
the  decoration  of  Solomon's  Temple  (2  Chr.  iii.  6). 
The  name  occurs  but  once  in  the  Bible,  and  there 
without  any  particulars  that  assist  to  its  identifi- 
cation. We  may  notice  the  conjectures  of  Hitzig 
(on  Dan.  x.  5),  that  the  name  is  derived  from  the 
Sanscrit /)«««,  "  hill,"  and  betokens  the  5i5ujuo  opi) 
in  Arabia,  mentioned  by  Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  §11);  of 
Knobel  (  Volkert.  p.  191),  that  it  is  an  abbreviated 
form  of  Sepharvaim,  which  stands  in  the  Syriac 
version  and  the  Targuni  of  Jonatiian  for  the  Sephar 
of  Gen.  X.  30  ;  and  of  Wilford  (quoted  by  Gesenius, 
Thcs.  ii.  1 125),  that  it  is  derived  fiom  the  Siuiscrit 
pw-va,  "eastern,"  and  is  a  general  term  for  the 
East.  Bochart's  identilication  of  it  with  Taprobane 
is  etymologically  incorrect.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

PA'SACPI  (^pS  :  ^affiK  ;  Alex.  *6o^7jx^ : 
Phosec/i).  Son  of  Jajihlet  of  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(1  Chr.  vii.  33),  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  his  tribe. 


■t  Mr.  Tristram  tells  us  the  Caccahis  saxatilu  makes 
an  admirable  decoy,  becoming  very  tamn  and  clever.  He 
brought  one  home  with  him  from  Cyprus. 


PAS-DAIM'MIM  (D''ST  D3n  :  ^aaoSofji^  ; 
A\ex.  ^acroSofiiv  :  Aphesdomini).  Tlie  form  under 
which  in  1  Chr.  xi.  13  the  name  appears,  which  in 
1  Sam.  xvii.  1  is  given  more  at  length  as  Ephes- 
DAMMIM.  The  lexicogi'aphers  do  not  decide  which 
is  the  earlier  or  correcter  of  the  two.  Gesenius 
[Thes.  139)  takes  them  to  be  identical  in  meaning. 
It  will  be  observed  that  in  the  original  of  Pas- 
dammim,  the  definite  article  has  taken  the  place  of 
the  first  letter  of  the  other  form.  lu  tiie  parallel 
narrative  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.,  the  name  appears  to  be 
corrupted*  to  chwplumi  (DQIH),  iu  the  A.  V. 
I'endered  "  there."  The  present  text  of  Josephus 
(^Ant.  vii.  12,  §4)  gives  it  as  Arasamos  ('Apa(ra/j.os). 

The  chief  mteiest  attaching  to  the  appeal  ance  of 
the  name  in  this  passage  of  Chronicles  is  the  evi- 
dence it  aflbrds  that  the  place  was  the  scene  of 
I'epeated  encounters  between  Israel  and  the  Philis- 
tines, unless  indeed  we  treat  1  Chr.  xi.  13  (and  the 
parallel  passage,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11)  as  an  independent 
account  of  the  occurrence  related  iu  1  Sam.  xvii.-^ 
which  hardly  seems  possible. 

A  ruined  site  bearing  the  name  of  Damun  or 
Chirhet  Damouii,  lies  near  the  road  from  Jerusalem 
to  Beit  Jihrin  (Van  de  VelJe,  aS.  ^  P.  ii.  193  ; 
Tobler,  3«e  Wand.  201),  about  three  miles  E.  of 
Shmceikeh  (Socho).  This  \'an  de  Velde  proposes  to 
identify  with  Fas-damniim.  [G.] 

PASE'AH  (npQ  :    Beacr-qi  ;    Alex,   ^itxa-i)  : 

Phesse).  1.  SonofEshton,  in  an  obscure  fragment 
of  the  genealogies  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  12).  He 
and  his  brethren  are  described  as  "  the  men  of 
Kechah,"  which  iu  the  Targum  of  R.  Joseph  is  I'-en- 
dered  "  the  men  of  the  great  Sanhediin." 

2.  i^affi]  Ezr.,  ^acTiK  Neh. :  Phased).  The 
"  sons  of  Paseah  "  were  among  the  Nethinim  who 
returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  49).  In  the 
A.  V.  of  Neh.  vii.  51,  the  name  is  written  Pha- 
SEAH.  Jehoiada,  a  member  of  the  family,  assisted 
in  rebuilding  the  old  gate  of  the  city  under  Nehe- 
miah  (Neh.  iii.  6). 

PA'SHUR  {y\m^  :  noffX'^P :  Phassur),  of 
uncertain  etymology,  although  Jer.  xx.  3  seems  to 
allude  to  the  meaning  of  it :  comp.  Ruth  i.  20  ;  and 
see  Ge.sen.  s.  v. 

1.  Name  of  one  of  the  families  of  priests  of  the 
chief  house  of  Malchijah  (Jer.  xxi.  1,  xxxviii.  1  ; 
1  Chr.  ix.  12,  xxiv.  9;  Neh.  xi.  12).  In  the  time 
of  Nehemiah  this  family  appears  to  have  become  a 
chief  house,  and  its  head  the  head  of  a  course 
(Ezr.  ii.  38  ;  Neh.  vii.  41,  x.  3)  ;  and,  if  the  text 
can  be  relied  upon,  a  comparison  of  Neh.  x.  3  with 
xii.  2  would  indicate  that  the  time  of  their  return 
from  Babylon  was  subsequent  to  the  days  of  Zerub- 
babel and  Jeshua.  The  individual  from  whom  the 
family  was  named  was  probably  Pnshur  the  son  of 
Malchiah,  who  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  was  one  of 
the  chief  princes  of  the  court  (Jer.  xxxviii.  1).  Ho 
Wius  sent,  with  others,  by  Zalekiah  to  Jeremiah  at 
the  time  when  Nebuchadnezzar  was  prepanng  his 
att;ick  upon  Jerusalem,  to  inquire  what  would  be 
the  issue,  and  received  a  reply  full  of  forebodings  of 
disaster  (Jer.  xxi.).  Again  somewhat  later,  when 
the  temporary  raising  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by 
the  advance  of  Pharaoh  Hophra's  ainiy  from  Egypt, 
had  inspired  hopes  in  king  and  people  that  Jei-e- 


■  This  is  carefully  examined  by  Keiniicott  {Oissertation, 
p.  137.  &c.). 


712 


PASSAGE 


miah's  predictions  would  be  falsified,  P.oshur  joined 
with  several  other  chief  men  in  petitioning  the  king 
that  Jeremiali  might  be  put  to  death  as  a  traitor, 
who  weal^eiied  the  hands  of  the  patriotic  party  by 
his  exhortations  to  surrender,  and  his  prophecies  of 
defeat,  and  he  proceeded,  with  the  other  princes, 
actually  to  cast  the  prophet  into  the  dry  well  wheie 
lie  nearly  perished  (Jer.  xxxviii.)-  Nothing  more  is 
luiown  of  Pashur.  His  descendant  Adaiah  seems  to 
have  returned  with  Zembbabel  (1  Chr.  ix.  12),  or 
whenever  the  census  there  quoted  was  taken. 

2.  Another  person  of  this  name,  also  a  priest, 
and  "  chief  governor  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,"  is 
mentioned  in  Jer.  xx.  1.  He  is  described  as  "the 
son  of  Immer,"  who  was  the  head  of  the  16th 
course  of  priests  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  14),  and  probably 
the  same  as  Amariah,  Neh.  x.  3,  xh.  2,  &c.  In  the 
reign  of  Jelioiakim  he  showed  himself  as  hostile  to 
Jeremiah  as  his  names:ike  the  son  of  Malchiah  did 
afterwards,  and  put  him  In  the  stocks  by  the  gate 
of  Benjamin,  for  prophesying  evil  against  Jerusalem, 
and  left  him  there  all  night.  For  this  indignity  to 
God's  prophet,  Pashur  was  told  by  Jeremiah  that 
his  name  was  changed  to  Magor-missabib  {Terror  on 
every  side),  and  that  he  and  all  his  house  should  be 
carried  captives  to  Babylon  and  there  die  (Jer.  xx. 
1-6).  From  the  expression  in  v.  6,  it  should  seem 
that  Pashur  the  son  of  Immer  acted  the  part  of  a 
prophet  as  well  as  that  of  priest. 

3.  FatherofGedaliah  (Jer.  xxxviii.  1).  [A.C.H.] 
PASSAGE."      Used  in  plur.   (Jer.  xxii.  20), 

probably  to  denote  the  mountain  region  of  Abarim, 
on  the  east  side  of  Jordan  [Abarim]  (Piaumer,  Fal. 
p.  62  ;  Ges.  p.  987  ;  Stanley,  ,S'.  ^-  P.  p.  204,  and 
App.  p.  503).  It  also  denotes  a  river-ford  or  a  moun- 
tain gorge  or  pass.     [JIiciimasii.]      [H.  W.  P.] 


PASSOVER 

PASSOVER  (HDS,  nOSH  JH  ■  rh  irdcrxa:^ 

phase,  id  est  transitus :  also,  nV'SJSn,  nV'SJSn  JPI, 

TO  &(vfia ;  in  N.  T.  tj  foprj]  tUv  a^vixwv,  rjfiepat 
Twv  a^vfjLoiv  :  azyma,  festum  azymoruni),  the  first 
of  the  three  great  annual  Festivals  of  the  Israelites, 
celebrated  in  the  month  Nisan,  from  the  14th  to 
the  21st. 

The  following  are  the  principal  passages  in  the 
Pentateuch  relating  to  the  Passover:  Ex.  xii.  1-51, 
in  which  there  is  a  full  account  of  its  original  insti- 
tution and  first  observance  in  Egypt,  Ex.  xiii. 
3-10,  in  which  the  unleavened  bread  is  spoken  of 
in  connexion  with  the  sanctification  of  the  first- 
born, but  there  is  no  mention  of  the  paschal  lamb  ;*' 
Ex.  xxiii.  14-19,  where,  under  the  name  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread,  it  is  first  connected  with 
the  other  two  great  annual  festivals,  and  also  with 
the  sabbath,  and  in  which  the  paschal  lamb  is  styled 
"  Jly  sacrifice";  Ex.  xxxiv.  18-26,  in  which  the 
festival  is  brought  into  the  same  connexion,  with 
immediate  reference  to  the  redemption  of  the  first- 
born, and  in  which  the  words  of  Ex.  xxiii.  18, 
regarding  the  paschal  lamb,  are  repeated ;  Lev. 
xxiii.  4-14,  where  it  is  mentioned  in  the  same  con- 
nexion, the  days  of  holy  convocation  are  esj)ecially 
noticed,  and  the  enactment  is  prospectively  given 
respecting  the  offering  of  the  first  sheaf  of  harvest, 
with  the  offerings  which  were  to  accompany  it, 
when  the  Israelites  possessed  the  promised  land; 
Num.  ix.  1-14,  in  wliich  the  Divine  word  repeats 
the  command  for  the  observance  of  the  Passover 
at  the  commencement  of  the  second  year  after  the 
Exodus,  and  in  which  the  observance  of  the  Pass- 
over in  the  second  month,  for  those  who  could  not 
participate  in  it  at  the  regular  time,  is  instituted ; 
Num.  xxviii.  16-25,  where  directions  are  given  for 


^   1.  13J?  ;  TO  rre'pac  -nis  6aA.a.(r(n)s. 

2.  "I2yj0  ;   SiaPaa-Ls  ;  vadum  (Gen.  xxxii.  22)  ;  also  a 
gorge  (1  Sam.  xiii.  23). 

3.  mSyO  ;   (fxxpayi ;   transcensus  (Is.  x.  29).     "  A 
ford  "  (Is.  xvi.  2). 

b  This  is  evidently  tlie  word  ^^^D^,  the  Aramaean 
form  of  HDS,  put  into  Greek  letters.  Some  have  taken 
the  meaning  of  HDQ,  the  root  of  nOS,  to  be  that  of 
"passing  through,"  and  have  referred  its  application  here 
to  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea.  Hence  the  Vulgate  has 
rendered  PIDQ  by  transitus,  Philo  {De  Tit.  Mosis,  lib.  iii. 
c.  29)  by  Sia^aT-qpia.,  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  by  Slo.- 
(3a<ri5.  Augustine  takes  the  same  view  of  the  word  ;  as  do 
also  Von  Bi)hlen  arid  a  few  other  modern  critics.  Jerome 
applies  transitus  both  to  the  passing  over  of  the  destroyer 
and  the  passing  through  the  Red  Sea  (in  Matt.  xxvi.).  But 
the  ti'ue  sense  of  the  Hebrew  substantive  is  plainly  indi- 
cated in  Ex.  xii.  27 ;  and  the  best  authorities  are  agreed 
that  riDS  never  expresses  "  passing  through,"  but  that 
its  primary  meaning  is  "  leaping  over."  Hence  the  verb 
is  regularly  used  with  the  preposition  7]}.  But  since, 
when  we  Jump  or  step  over  anything,  we  do  not  tread 
upon  it,  the  word  has  a  secondary  meaning,  "  to  spare," 
or  "  to  show  mercy  "  (comp.  Is.  xxxi.  5,  with  Ex.  xii.  27). 
The  LXX.  have  therefore  used  a-Ke-n-a^eiv  in  Ex.  xii.  13  ; 
and  Onkelos  has  rendered  nDETlllT,  "  the  sacrifice  of 
the  Passover,"  by  D^H  H^"!,  "the  sacrifice  of  mercy." 
Josephus  rightly  explains  ira<Txa.  by  virepPaa-Ca.  In  the 
same  purport,  agree  Aquila,  Theodotion,  Symmachus, 
several  of  the  Fathers,  and  the  best  modern  critics.  Our 
own  translators,  by  using  the  word  "  Passover,"  have 
made  clear  Ex.  xii.  12,  23,  and  other  passages,  which  are 


not  intelligible  in  the  LXX.  nor  in  several  other  versions. 
(See  Bahr,  Symbolik,  ii.  627  ;  Ewald,  Alter thUrner,  p.  39U ; 
Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v. ;  Suicer,  sub  Trocrxa ;  Drusius,  Notae 
Majores,  in  Ex.  xii.  27  ;  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  394.) 

The  explanation  of  ndcrxa  which  hinges  on  the  notion 
that  it  is  derived  from  Trdcrxco  needs  no  refutation,  but  is 
not  without  interest,  as  it  appears  to  have  given  rise  to 
the  very  common  use  of  the  word  passion,  as  denobing 
the  death  of  Our  Lord.  Itwas  held  by  Irenaeus,  Tertullian, 
and  a  few  others.  Chiysostom  appears  to  avail  himself 
of  it  for  a  paronomasia  {Bom.  V.  ml  1  Tim.),  as  in  another 
place  he  formally  states  the  true  meaning  ■  vnep^aai^ 
ccTTt  Kaff  epfurit'eCav  to  7r6.<Txa.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus 
seems  to  do  the  same  (Orat.  xiii.),  since  he  elsewhere 
(as  is  stated  above)  explains  naa-xo-  as  =  ^td/Saci?.  See 
Suicer,  sub  voce.  Augustine,  who  took  this  latter  view, 
has  a  passage  which  is  worth  quoting  :  "  Pascha,  fratres, 
non  sicut  quidam  existimant,  Graecum  nomen  est,  sed 
Hebracum  :  opportunissime  tamen  occurrit  in  hoc  nomine 
quaedam  congruentia  utrarumque  linguarum.  Quia  enim 
pati  Graece  Trduxti"'  dicitur,  idco  Pascha  passio  putata 
est,  velut  hoc  nomen  a  passione  sit  appellatum ;  in  sua 
vero  lingua,  hoc  est  in  Hebraea,  Pascha  transitus  dicitur : 
propterea  tunc  prinium  Pascha  celebravit  populus  Dei, 
quando  ex  Egypto  fugicntes,  rubrum  mare  transierunt. 
Nunc  ergo  figura  ilia  prophetica  in  veritate  conipleta  est, 
cum  sicut  ovis  ad  immolanduni  ducitur  Christus,  cujus 
sanguine  illitis  postibus  nostris,  id  est,  cujus  signo  crucis 
signatis  frontibus  nostris,  a  perditione  hiyus  seculi  tan- 
quam  a  captivitate  vel  interemptione  Aegyptia  liberamur ; 
et  agimus  saluberrimum  transitum,  cum  a  diabolo  trans- 
imus  ad  Christum,  et  ab  isto  instabili  seculo  ad  ejus  fim- 
datissimum  regnum.  Col.  i.  13"  {In  Joan.  Tract.  Iv.). 

<'  There  are  five  distinct  statutes  on  the  Passover  in  the 
12th  and  13th  chapters  of  Exodus  (xii.  2-4,  5-20,  21-28, 
42-51;  xiii.  1-10). 


PASSOVER 

the  offerings  winch  were  to  be  made  on  each  of  the 
seven  days  of  the  festival  ;  Deut.  xvi.  1-6,  where 
the  command  is  prospectively  given  that  the  Pass- 
over, and  the  other  great  festivals,  should  be  ob- 
served in  the  place  which  the  Lord  might  choose 
in  the  land  of  promise,  and  where  there  appears  to 
be  an  allusion  to  the  Chagigah,  or  voluntary  peace- 
offerings  (see  p.  7176). 

I.  Institution  and  first  Celebration  of 
THE  Passover. 

When  the  chosen  people  were  about  to  be  brought 
out  of  Egypt,  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  ]\lost's 
and  Aaron,  commanding  them  to  instruct  all  the  con- 
gregation of  Israel  to  prepare  for  their  departure 
by  a  solemn  religious  ordinance.  On  the  tenth  day 
of  the  month  Abib,  wliich  had  then  commenced, 
the  head  of  each  family  was  to  select  from  the  flock 
either  a  lamb  or  a  kid,  a  male  of  the  first  year, 
without  blemish.  If  his  family  was  too  small  to 
oat  the  whole  of  the  lamb,  he  was  permitted  to 
invite  his  nearest  neighbour  to  join  the  party.  On 
the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month,  he  "^  was  to  kill 
liis  lamb  while  the  sun  was  setting.*  He  was  then 
to  take  the  blood  in  a  basin,  and  with  a  sprig  of 
hyssop  to  sprinkle  it  on  the  two  side-posts  and  the 
lintel  of  the  door  of  the  house.  The  lamb  was 
tlien  thoroughly  roasted,  whole.  It  was  expressly 
tbrbidden  that  it  should  be  boiled,  or  that  a  bone  of 
it  should  be  broken.  Unleavened  bread  and  bitter 
herbs  were  to  be  eaten  with  the  flesh.  No  male 
who  was  uncircumcised  was  to  join  the  company. 
Each  one  was  to  have  his  loins  girt,  to  hold  a 
staff  in  his  hand,  and  to  have  shoes  on  his  feet. 
He  was  to  eat  in  haste,  and  it  would  seem  that 
he  was  to  stand  during  the  meal.  Tlie  number  of 
the  party  was  to  be  calculated  as  nearly  as  pos- 
sible, so  that  all  the  flesh  of  the  lamb  might  be 
eaten  ;  but  if  any  portion  of  it  happened  to  remain, 
it  was  to  be  burned  in  the  morning.  No  morsel  of 
it  was  to  be  carried  out  of  the  house. 

The  legislator  was  further  directed  to  inform 
the  people  of  God's  purpose  to  smite  the  first-born 
of  the  Egyptians,  to  decdare  that  the  Passover  was 
to  be  to  them  an  ordinance  for  ever,  to  give  them 
directions  respecting  the  order  and  duration  of  the 
festival  in  future  times,  and  to  enjoin  upon  them 
to  te;ich  their  children  its  meaning,  from  generation 
to  generation. 

When  the  message  was  delivered  to  the  people, 
they  bowed  their  heads  in  worship.  The  lambs 
were  selected,  on  the  fourteenth  they  were  slain  and 
the  blood  sprinkled,  and  in  the  following  evening, 
after  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  month  had  commenced, 
the  first  paschal  meal  was  eaten.  At  midnight  the 
first-born  of  the  Egyptians  were  smitten,  from  the 
first-born  of  Pharaoh  that  sat  on  his  throne  unto 
the  first-born  of  the  captive  that  was  in  the  dungeon, 
and  all  the  firstlings  of  the  cattle.'  The  king  and 
his  people  were  now  urgent  that  the  Isnielites  sliould 
start  immediately,  and  I'eadily  bestowed  on  them 


PASSOVER 


713 


<•  The  words  translated  in  A.  V.  "  the  wliolo  assembly 
o(  the  congregation"  (ICx.  xii.  6),  cviilently  mean  cverji 
vinn  (if  the  amijrcijation  'I'licy.  are  well  rendered  by 
\'itriiiga  {Observat.  Sac.  li.  3,  ^9),  "  univorsa  Israclitarum 

m\iltitudo  iiemine  e.xcepto."  The  word  /TXp,  though  it 
jiriinarily  denotes  an  assembly,  must  here  signify  no 
more  than  a  complete  number  of  persons,  not  necessarily 
assembled  lugetlicr. 

e  See  note  ^,  p.  711. 

'  iVIichaclis  and  Kurt/,  consider  that  Uiis  visitation  was 


supplies  for  the  journey.  In  such  haste  did  the 
Israelites  depart,  on  that  very  day  (Num.  xxxiii. 
3),  that  they  packed  up  their  kneading-troughs 
containing  the  dough  prepared  for  the  morrow's 
provision,  which  was  not  yet  leavened. 

Such  were  the  occurrences  connected  with  the 
institution  of  the  Passover,  as  they  are  related  in 
E-x.  xii.  It  would  seem  that  the  law  for  the  conse- 
cration of  the  first-born  was  passed  in  immediate 
connexion  with  them  (Ex.  xiii.  1,  13,  15,  16). 

11.  Observance  of  the  Passover  in  later 

times. 

1.  In  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  chapters  of  Exodus, 
there  are  not  only  distinct  references  to  the  observ- 
ance of  the  festival  in  future  ages  {e.  g.  xii.  2,  14, 
17,  24-'27,  42,  xiii.  2,  5,  8-10) ;  but  there  ai-e  se- 
veral injunctions  which  were  evidently  not  intended 
for  the  first  passover,  and  which  indeed  could  not 
possibly  have  been  observed.  The  Israelites,  for 
example,  could  not  have  kept  the  next  day,  the 
15th  of  Nisan,  on  which  they  commenced  their 
march  (Ex.  xii.  51;  Num.  xxxiii.  .3),  as  a  day  of 
holy  convocation  according  to  Ex.  xii.  16.  [Fes- 
tivals, vol.  i.  p.  G17.] 

In  the  later  notices  of  the  festival  in  the  books 
of  the  law,  there  are  particulars  added  which  appear 
as  modifications  of  the  original  institution.  Of  this 
kind  are  the  directions  for  offering  the  Omer,  or 
first  sheaf  of  harvest  (Lev.  xxiii.  10-14),  the  instruc- 
tions respecting  the  special  sacrifices  which  were  to 
be  offered  each  day  of  the  festival  week  (Num. 
xxviii.  16-25),  and  the  command  that  the  paschal 
lambs  should  be  slain  at  the  national  sanctuary,  and' 
that  the  blood  should  be  sprinkled  on  the  altar, 
instead  of  the  lintels  and  door-posts  of  the  houses 
(Deut.  xvi.  1-6). 

Hence  it  is  not  without  reason  that  the  Jewish 
writers  have  laid  great  stress  on  the  distinction 
between  "  the  Egyptian  Passover "  and  "  the  per- 
petual Passover."  The  distinction  is  noticed  in  the 
Mishna  {Pesachim,  ix.  5).  The  pecubarities  of  the 
Egyptian  passover  which  are  there  pointed  out  are, 
the  selection  of  the  lamb  on  the  1 0th  day  of  the 
month,  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  on  the  lintels 
and  door-posts,  the  use  of  hyssop  in  sprinkling,  the 
haste  in  which  the  meal  was  to  be  eaten,  and  the 
resti  iction  of  the  abstinence  from  unleavened  bread 
to  a  single  day.  Elias  of  Byzantium  «  adds,  that 
there  was  no  command  to  burn  the  fat  on  the  altar, 
that  the  pure  and  impure  all  partook  of  the  pjischal 
meal  contrary  to  the  law  afterwanls  given  (Num. 
xviu.  11),  that  both  men  and  women  were  then 
required  to  paifcvke,  but  subsequently  the  command 
was  given  only  to  men  (Ex.  xxiii.  17;  Deut.  xvi 
16),  that  neither  the  Hallel  nor  any  other  hymn 
was  sung,  as  was  required  in  later  times  in  accord- 
ance with  Is.  XXX.  29,  that  there  were  no  days  of 
holy  convocation,  and  that  the  lambs  were  not  slain 
in  the  consecrated  place."" 

2.  The  ibllowing  was  the  general  order  of  the  ob- 


dlrected  against  the  sncred  animals,  "  the  gods  of  Egypt," 
nionlioned  in  lO.v  xii  12. 

e  Quoted  by  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  406.  For  other 
Jewish  authorities,  see  Otlio's  Lexicm,  s.  v     I'a.sclia.' 

•>  Another  Jewish  authority  {Tosiphta  in  Pesadiim, 
quoted  by  Oilio)  adds  that  the  rule  that  no  one  who  par- 
took of  the  lamb  should  go  out  of  the  house  until  the 
morning  (Ex.  xii.  22)  was  observed  only  on  this  one 
occisidu  ;  a  point  of  Intorcst,  as  bearing  on  the  question 
relating  to  our  Ijord's  last  supi)i;r.    See  p.  7 i9a. 


714 


PASSOVER 


servances  of  the  Passover  in  later  times  according  to 
the  direct  evidence  of  Scripture : — On  the  14th  of 
Nisan,  every  trace  of  leaven  was  jiut  away  from 
the  houses,  and  on  the  same  day  every  male  Israelite 
not  labouring  under  any  bodily  infirmity  or  cere- 
monial impurity,  was  commanded  to  appear  before 
the  Lord  at  the  national  sanctuary  with  an  offering 
of  money  in  proportion  to  his  means  (Ex.  xxiii. 
15;  Deut.  xvi.  16,  17).'  Devout  women  some- 
•  times  attended,  as  is  proved  by  the  instances  of 
Hannah  and  Mary  (1  Sam.  i.  7;  Lul^e  ii.  il,  42). 
As  the  sun  was  setting,^  the  lambs  were  slain,  and 
the  fat  and  blood  given  to  the  priests  {2  Chr.  xxxv. 
5,  6  ;  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J.  vi.  9,  §o).  In  accordance 
with  the  original  institution  in  Egypt,  the  lamb 
was  then  roasted  whole,  and  eaten  with  unleavened 
bread  and  bitter  heibs ;  no  portion  of  it  was  to  be 
lefl  until  the  morning.  The  same  night,  after 
the  15th  of  Nisan  had  commenced,  the  fat  was 
burned  by  the  priest  and  the  blood  sprinkled  on  the 
altar  (2  Chr.  xxx.  16,  xxxv.  11).  On  the  15th, 
the  night  being  passed,  theje  was  a  holy  convoca- 
tion, and  during  that  day  no  work  might  be  done, 
except  the  preparation  of  necessary  food  (Ex.  xii. 
16).  On  this  and  the  six  following  days  an  offering 
in  addition  to  the  daily  sacrifice  was  made  of  two 
young  bullocks,  a  ram,  and  seven  lambs  of  the  first 
year,  with  meat-offerings,  for  a  burnt-offering,  and 
a  goat  for  a  s.in-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  19-23).  On 
the  16th  of  the  month,  "  the  morrow  after  the 
sabbath  "  (j.  e.  after  the  day  of  holy  convocation), 
the  first  sheaf  of  harvest  was  offered  and  waved  by 
the  priest  before  the  Lord,  and  a  male  lamb  was 
offered  as  a  burnt  sacrifice  with  a  meat  and  drink- 
offering.  Nothing  necessarily  distinguished  the  four 
following  days  of  the  festival,  except  the  additional 
burnt  and  sin-offerings,  and  the  rest)aint  from  some 
kinds  of  labour.   [Festivals.]  On  the  seventh  day, 


'  This  offering  was  common  to  ail  tlie  feasts.  According 
to  the  Misfma  (  Chagigah,  i.  2),  part  of  it  was  appropriated 
for  burnt-offerings,  and  the  rest  for  the  Ctiagigati. 

^  "Between  the  two  evenings,"  Q^3"iyn  |''3  (Ex.  xii. 
G;  Lev.  xxiii.  5  ;  Num.  ix.  3,  5).  Tfie  pbrase  also  occurs 
in  reference  to  the  time  of  offering  the  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  39,  41 ;  Num.  xxviii.  4),  and  in  other  con- 
nexions (Ex.  xvi.  12,  xxx.  8).  Its  precise  meaning  is 
doubtful.  The  Karaites  and  Samaritans,  witli  whom 
Aben  Ezra  (on  Ex.  xii.  6)  agrees,  consider  it  as  the  in- 
terval between  sunset  and  darli.  This  appears  to  be  in 
accordance  with  Deut.  xvi.  6,  where  the  paschal  lamb  is 
commanded  to  be  slain  "  at  the  going  down  of  the  sun." 
But  the  Pharisees  and  Rabbinists  held  that  the  first 
evening  conjmenced  when  the  sun  began  to  decline 
(&eC\rf  wpoita),  and  that  the  second  evening  began  with 
the  setting  sun  (Sei'Arj  oi//i'a).  Josppbus  suj-s  tliat  the 
lambs  were  slain  from  tlie  ninth  hour  till  the  eleventh, 
I.  e.  between  three  and  five  o'clocli  (B.  J.  vi.  9,  ^3) ; 
the  Mishna  seems  to  countenance  this  (f'esachim,  v.  3)  ; 
and  Maimonides,  who  saj-s  they  were  killed  immediately 
after  the  evening  sacrifice.  A  third  notion  has  been  held 
by  Jarchi  and  Kimchi,  that  the  two  evenings  are  the  time 
immediately  before  and  immediately  after  sunset,  so  that 
the  point  of  time  at  which  the  sun  sets  divides  them. 
Geseniiis,  Biilir,  Winer,  and  most  other  critics,  hold  the 
first  opinion,  and  regai'd  the  phrase  as  equivalent  with 
3^y3  (Deut.  xvi.  6).  SeeGesenius,  Thes.  p.  1065  ;  Bahr, 
Symbolik,  ii.  614  ;  Hupfeld,  De  Festis  Rebraeorum,  p.  15; 
Rosenmiiller  in  Exod.  xii.  6  ;  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  68. 

'  The  seventh  day  of  the  Passover,  and  the  eighth  day 
of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (see  John  vii.  37),  had  a  cha- 
racter of  their  own,  distinguishing  them  from  the  first  days 
of  the  feasts  and  from  all  other  days  of  holy  convocation, 
with  the  exception  of  the  day  of  Pentecost.   [Penteoosi.] 


PASSOVER 

the  21st  of  Nisan,  there  was  a  holy  convocation, 
and  the  day  appears  to  have  been  one  of  j)eculiar  so- 
lemnity.' As  at  all  the  festivals,  cheerfulness  was 
to  prevail  during  the  whole  week,  and  all  care  was 
to  be  laid  aside  (Deut.  xxvii.  7  ;  comp.  Joseph. 
Ant.  xi.  5;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  Art.  197). 
[Pentecost]. 

3.  (a.)  The  Paschal  Lamb. — After  the  first  Pass- 
over in  Egypt  there  is  no  trace  of  the  lainb  having 
been  selected  before  it  was  wanted.  In  later  times,  we 
are  certain  that  it  was  sometimes  not  provided  before 
the  14th  of  the  month  (Luke  xxii.  7-9  ;  Mark  xiv. 
12-16).  The  law  formally  allowed  the  alternative 
of  a  kid  (Ex.  xii.  b),  but  a  lamb  was  preferred,"" 
and  was  probably  nearly  always  chosen.  It  was 
to  be  faultless  and  a  male,  in  accordance  with  the 
established  estimate  of  animal  perfection  (see  Mai. 
i.  14).  Either  the  head  of  the  family,  or  any  other 
person  who  was  not  ceremonially  unclean  (2  Chr. 
xxx.  17),  took  it  into  the  court  of  the  Temple  on 
his  shoulders.  According  to  some  authorities,  the 
lamb  might,  if  circumstances  should  render  it  de- 
sirable, be  slain  at  any  time  in  the  afternoon,  even 
before  the  evening  sacrifice,  if  the  blood  was  kept 
stirred,  so  as  to  prevent  it  from  coagulating,  until  the 
time  came  for  sprinkling  it  [Pesachiin,  v.  3). 

The  Mishna  gives  a  particular  account  of  the 
aiTangement  which  was  made  in  the  court  of  the 
Temple  {Pesachiin,  v.  6-8).  Those  who  were  to 
kill  the  lamb  entered  successively  in  three  divisions. 
When  the  first  division  had  entered,  the  gates  were 
closed  and  the  trumpets  were  sounded  three  times. 
The  priests  stood  in  two  rows,  each  row  extending 
from  the  altar  to  the  place  where  the  people  were 
assembled.  The  priests  of  one  row  held  basins 
of  silver,  and  those  of  the  other  basins  of  gold. 
Each  Israelite  °  then  slew  his  lamb  in  order,  and 
the  priest  who  was  nearest  to  him  received  the  blood 


This  is  indicated  in  regard  to  the  Passover  in  Deut.  xvi.  8  . 
"  Six  days  thou  shaft  eat  unleavened  bread ;  and  on  the 
seventh  day  shall  be  a  solemn  assembly  (JTIVy)  to  the 
Lord."  See  also  Ex.  xiii.  6 :  "  Seven  days  thou  shalt  eat 
unleavened  bread,  and  in  the  seventh  day  shall  be  a  feast 
to  the  Lord."  The  word  mvy  is  used  in  like  manner 
for  the  last  day  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (I^ev.  xxiii.  36, 
where  it  is  associated  with  CTp'SlpIO,  "a  holy  con- 
vocation;" Num.  xxix.  35;  2  Chr.  vii.  9;  Neb.  viii.  18). 
Our  translators  have  in  each  case  rendered  it  "  solemn 
assembh',"  but  have  explaitied  it  in  tlie  margin  by 
"  restraint."  The  LXX.  have  i^oSiov.  Michaelis  and 
Iken  imagined  tlie  primary  idea  of  the  word  to  be  re- 
straint from  labour.  Gesenius  shows  that  this  is  a  mis- 
take, and  proves  the  word  to  mean  assembly  or  con- 
gregation.  Its  root  is  undoulitcdly  ^Vy,  to  shut  up, 
or  constrain.  Hence  Blihr  (Symbolik,  ii.  619)  reasonably 
argues,  from  the  occurrence  of  the  word  in  the  passages 
above  referred  to,  that  its  strict  meaning  is  that  of  the 
closing  assembly;  which  is  of  course  quite  consistent 
with  its  being  sometimes  used  for  a  solemn  assembly  in  a 
more  general  sense,  and  with  its  application  to  the  day  of 
Pentecost. 

m  The  Chaldee  interpreters  render  ilC\  which  means 
one  of  the  flock,  whether  sheep  or  goat,*  by  IJ^N- 
a  lamb ;  and  Thcodoret  no  doubt  represents  the  Jewish 
traditional  usage  when  he  says,  'iva.  6  fj.b'  irpo/Sarov  Ixcoi' 
dvarj  Toiiro'  6  5e  anavi^mv  Trpo/Sarov  Toi'  fpL<j>ov  (on  Ex. 
xii.). 

"  Undoubtedly  the  usual  practice  was  for  the  head  of 
the  family  to  slay  his  o%vn  lamb  ;  but  on  particular  occa- 
sions (as  in  tlie  great  observances  of  the  Passover  by 
Hczekiah,  .Josiah,  and  Ezra)  the  slaughter  of  the  lambs 
was  committed  to  the  Levites.    See  p.  7186. 


PASSOVER 

in  his  basin,  which  he  liaiuled  to  the  next  priest,  wiio 
gave  his  empty  basin  in  return.  A  succession  of 
full  basins  was  tints  passed  towards  the  altar,  and  a 
succession  of  empty  ones  towards  the  people.  The 
priest  who  stood  next  the  altar  threw  the  blood  out 
towards  the  base  in  a  sini;le  jet.  When  the  first 
division  had  pertbrniod  their  work,  the  second  came 
in,  and  then  the  third.  The  lambs  were  skinned, 
and  the  viscera  taken  out  with  the  internal  fat. 
The  fat  was  carefully  separated  and  collected  in  the 
large  dish,  and  the  visceia  were  washed  and  replaced 
m  the  body  of  the  lanili,  like  those  of  the  burnt 
sacritices  ( Lev.  i.  9,  iii.  3-5  ;  comp.  Pesnchiin,  vi.  1). 
Maimonides  says  that  the  tail  was  put  with  the  fat 
{Not.  in  Pes.  V.  10).  While  this  was  going  on 
the  Mallei  was  sung,  and  repeated  a  second,  or  even 
a  third  time,  if  the  process  was  not  finished.  As 
it  grew  dark,  the  people  went  home  to  roast  their 
lambs.  The  fat  was  burned  on  the  altar,  with  in- 
cense, that  same  evening."  When  the  14th  of  Nisan 
fell  on  the  sabbath,  all  these  things  were  done  in  the 
same  maimer  ;  but  the  court  of  the  Temple,  instead 
of  being  carefully  cleansed  as  on  other  occasions,  was 
merely  Hooded  by  opening  a  sluice. 

A  spit  made  of  the  wood  of  the  pomegranate 
was  thrust  lengthwise  through  the  \wmh  (^Pemchim, 
vii.  1).  According  to  Justin  Martyr,  a  second 
spit,  or  skewer,  was  put  transversely  through  the 
shoulders,  so  as  to  form  the  figure  of  a  cross.?  The 
oven  was  of  earthenware,  and  appears  to  have  been 
in  shape  something  like  a  bee-hive  with  an  opening 
in  the  side  to  admit  fuel.  The  lamb  was  carefully 
so  placed  a.s  not  to  touch  the  side  of  the  oven,  lest 

"  The  remarkable  passage  in  w  hicli  this  is  cummanded, 
which  occurs  V.x..  xxiii.  17,  18,  19,  and  is  repeated  Ex. 
xxxiv.  25,  26,  appears  to  be  a  sort  of  proverbial  caution 
respecting  the  three  great  feasts.  "  Three  times  in  the 
year  all  thy  males  shall  appear  before  the  Lord  God. 
Thou  shalt  not  offer  the  blood  of  my  sacrifice  with 
leavened  bread-  neither  shall  the  fat  of  my  sacrifice 
remain  until  the  morning.  The  first  of  the  first-fruits  of 
thy  land  thou  shalt  bring  into  the  house  of  the  Lord  thy 
Ocd.  Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk." 
The  references  to  the  Passover  and  Pentecost  are  plain 
enough.  That  which  is  supposed  to  refer  to  Tabernacles 
(which  is  also  found  Deut.  xiv.  21),  "Thou  shalt  not 
seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk,''  is  explained  by  Abar- 
banel,  and  in  a  Karaite  MS.  spoken  of  Ijy  Cudwortli,  as 
bearing  on  a  custom  of  boiling  a  kid  in  the  milk  of  its 
dam  as  a  chami,  and  sprinkling  fields  and  orchards  wiih 
the  milk  to  render  them  fertile  (Cudworth,  7'riie  Xotion 
of  (he  Lord's  Slipper,  pp.  3t),  3^  ;  Spencer,  Leg.  Ifeb.  ii.  8. 
For  other  interpretations  of  the  passage,  see  Itosenmliller, 
in  Exud.  xxlii.  19).     QIdolatuy  ;  vol.  i.  S59  b.] 

p  The  statement  is  in  the  Dialogue  with  Tryplio,  c.  10 : — 
Kai  TO  KcKivaOiu  npoBarov  e/ccii'o  otttou  oAor  yii'^aOaij 
Toil  na9ov<;  tou  <TT:iupoO,  6i'  oJ  ira.(T\ii.v  cfieWiv  o  Xpt- 
(JTo?,  <TviJ.^o\ov  rff.  TO  yap  OTTTwjuei'oi/  npo^aTOif  cr\i7jLta- 
Ti^6fj.€i'0v  OjLxoiujf  Ta>  <r)(rifj.aTL  tov  CTavpoi)  on-TaTat,  6*9 
yap  6p6io<;  o^tAicrKO?  StaTrcpoi'aTat  airb  ruti'  KaTuiTtxTU) 
fxrjpoji'  jut\-pi  Tqt;  Ke0aA>)?,  /cat  el?  ndXif  Kara  to  /xeTa- 
^ptfov,  u>  TTpocraprwi'Tat  Kat  at  x^lp^^  tov  npo^drov. 

As.rustin  was  a  native  of  Klavla  Xeapolis,  it  is  a  striking 
fact  that  the  modern  .Samaritans  roast  their  paschal  lambs 
in  nearly  the  same  manner  at  this  day.  Mr.  (icorgcGrove, 
who  visited  Nablous  iti  1861,  in  a  letter  to  the  writer  of 
this  article,  says,  "The  lambs  (they  reciulre  six  for  the 
community  now)  are  roasted  all  together  by  sttifling  them 
vertically,  head  downwards.  Into  an  oven  which  Is  like  a 
small  well,  about  three  feet  diameter,  and  four  or  five  feet 
deep,  roughly  steaned,  in  which  a  fire  has  been  kept  up 
for  several  liours.  .\fler  the  lambs  are  thrust  in,  the  top 
of  the  hole  is  coven  d  with  bushes  and  earth,  to  confine 
the  heat  till  tJiey  are  done.  Kach  lamb  has  a  stake  or 
spit  run  lUrough  him  to  draw  biin  up  by;  and,  to  pre- 


PASSOVER 


715 


tlie  cooking  should  be  effected  in  part  by  hot  earth- 
enware, and  not  entirely  by  tire,  according  to  Ex. 
xii.  9  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13.  If  any  one  concerned  in 
the  process  b;  oke  a  bone  of  the  lamb  so  as  to  infringe 
the  command  in  Ex.  xii.  46,  he  was  subject  to  the 
l)unishment  of  forty  stripes.  The  Hesh  was  to  be 
roasted  thoroughly  i  (Ex.  xii.  9).  No  portion  of  it 
was  allowed  to  be  airried  out  of  the  house,  and  if  any 
of  it  was  not  eaten  at  the  meal,  it  was  burned,  along 
with  the  bones  and  tendons,  in  the  morning  of  the 
16th  of  Nisan  ;  or,  if  that  day  happened  to  be  the 
sabbath,  on  the  17th. 

As  the  paschal  lamb  could  be  legally  slain,  and 
the  blood  and  fat  offered,  only  in  the  national  sanc- 
tuary (Deut.  xvi.  2),  it  of  course  ceased  to  be  ottered 
by  the  Jews  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
The  spring  festival  of  the  modern  Jews  strictly  con- 
sists only  of  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread.'' 

(6.)  T/ie  Unleavened  Bread. — There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  unleavened  bread  eaten  in  the 
Passover  and  that  used  on  other  religious  occasions 
were  of  the  same  nature.  It  might  be  made  of 
wheat,  spelt,  barley,  oats,  or  rye,  but  not  of  rice  or 
millet  (Pesachiin,  ii.  5).  It  appears  to  have  been 
usually  made  of  the  finest  wheat  flour '  (Buxt. 
Sijn.  Jud.  c.  .xviii.  p.  397).  The  greatest  care  was 
taken  that  it  should  be  made  in  perfectly  clean 
vessels  and  with  all  possible  expedition,  lest  the 
process  of  fermentation  should  be  allowed  to  com- 
mence in  the  slightest  degree  (Pesachiin,  iii.  2-5). 
It  was  probably  formed  into  dry,  thin  biscuits,  no* 
unlike  those  used  by  the  modern  Jews. 

The  command  to  eat  unleavened   bread  during 


vent  the  spit  from  tearing  away  through  the  roast  meat 
with  the  weight,  a  cross  piece  is  put  through  the  lower 
end  of  it."  A  similar  account  is  given  in  Miss  llogers' 
Domestic  Life  in  Pakstine.  Vitringa,  Bochart,  and  Hot- 
tinger  have  taken  the  statement  of  Justin  as  representing 
the  ancient  Jewish  usage ;  and.  with  him,  regard  the 
crossed  spits  as  a  prophetic  type  of  the  cross  of  our  Lord. 
But  it  would  seem  more  probable  that  the  transverse  spit 
was  a  mere  matter  of  convenience,  and  was  perhaps  never 
in  use  among  the  Jews.  The  Rabbinical  traditions  relate 
that  the  lamb  was  called  Gakatus,  "  qui  quiim  totus  assa- 
batur,  cum  capite,  cruribus,  et  intestinis,  pedes  autem  et 
intestina  ad  latera  ligabantur  inter  assandum,  agnus  ita 
quasi  armatum  repraesentaverit,  qui  galea  in  capite  et 
cnse  in  latere  est  nuinitus"  (Otho,  /.ex.  Kah  p.  503) 

1  The  word  N3,  in  A.  V.  "  raw,"  is  rendered  "  alive " 
by  Onkelos  and  Jonathan.  In  1  Sam.  ii.  15,  it  plainly  means 
raw.  But  Jarchi,  Abenezra,  and  other  Jewish  authorities, 
understand  it  as  half-dressed  (Rosenmiiller,  in  loc.). 

'  There  are  many  curious  particulars  in  the  mode  in 
which  the  modern  Jews  observe  this  festival  to  be  found 
in  Buxt.  .S'l/n.  Jud.  c.  xviii.  xix.;  Picart,  Ceremonies  Heli- 
gieuses,  vol.  i. ;  Mill,  The  British  Jews  (London,  11553)  ; 
Stauben,  Scenes  de  la  vie  Juive  en  Alsace  (Paris,  1S60). 
'I'he  following  appear  to  bo  the  most  interesting : — A 
shoulder  of  lamb,  thoroughly  niStsted,  is  ))laced  on  the 
table  to  take  the  place  of  the  paschal  lamb,  with  a  hard 
boiled  egg  as  a  symbol  of  wholeness.  Besides  the  sweet 
sauce,  to  remind  them  of  the  sort  of  work  carried  on  by 
their  fathers  in  Kgypt  (see  p.  716  a),  there  is  sometimes 
a  vessel  of  salt  and  water,  to  represent  the  Ked  Sea,  info 
which  they  dip  the  bitter  herbs.  But  the  most  remarkable 
usages  are  those  connected  with  the  expectation  of  the 
coming  of  Klijah.  A  cup  of  wine  is  poured  out  for  him, 
and  stands  all  night  upon  the  table.  Ju.-;t  before  the  fill- 
ing of  the  cups  of  the  guests  the  fourth  time,  there  Is  an 
interval  of  dead  silence,  and  the  door  of  the  room  is  opened 
for  some  minutes  to  .tdmit  the  prophet. 

"  Kwald  (^AUerthiimer,  p.  391)  and  Iliillman  (quoted  by 
Winer)  conjecture  the  original  unleavened  bread  of  the 
Passover  to  have  Iveii  of  barley,  in  connexion  with  the 
commencement  of  barhy  harvest. 


716 


PASSOVER 


the  seven  days  of  the  festival,  under  the  penalty  of 
being  cut  off'  from  the  people,  is  given  with  marked 
emphasis,  as  well  as  that  to  put  away  all  leaven  from 
the  house  during  the  festival  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19,  20, 
siii.  7).  But  the  rabbinists-say  that  the  house  was 
carefully  cleansed  and  every  corner  searched  for  any 
fragment  of  leavened  bread  in  the  evening  before 
the  14th  of  Nisan,  though  leavened  bread  might  be 
eaten  till  the  sixth  hour  of  that  day,  when  all  that 
remained  was  to  be  burned  {Fesachim,  i.  1,  4; ' 
and  citation  in  Lightfoot,  Temple  Serv.,  xii.  §1). 

(c.)  The  Bitter  Herbs  and  the  Anice.— According 
to  Pesachiin  (ii.  6)  the  bitter  herbs  (Q*"l1lD  ;  iriKpi- 
Ses  ;  lactucae  agrestes,  Ex.  xii.  S)  might  be  endive, 
chicory,  wild  lettuce,  or  nettles.  These  plants  were 
important  articles  of  food  to  the  ancient  Egyptians 
(as  is  noticed  by  Pliny),  and  they  are  said  to  con- 
stitute nearly  half  that  of  the  modern  Egyptians. 
According  to  Niebuhr  they  are  still  eaten  at  the 
Passover  by  the  Jews  in  the  East.  They  were  used 
in  former  times  either  fresh  or  dried,  and  a  portion 
of  them  is  said  to  have  been  eaten  before  the  un- 
leavened bread  {Pesach.  x.  3j. 

The  sauce  into  which  the  herbs,  the  bread,  and 
the  meat  were  dipped  ;is  they  were  eaten  (John 
siii.  26  ;  ]Matl.  xxvi.  23)  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Pentateuch.  It  is  called  in  the  Mishna  nDIIH. 
According  to  Bartenora  it  consisted  of  only  vinegar 
and  water ;  but  others  describe  it  as  a  mixture  of 
vinegar,  figs,  dates,  almonds,  and  spice.  The  same 
sauce  was  used  on  ordinary  occasions  thickened  with 
a  little  flour;  but  the  rabbinists  forbad  this  at  the 
Passover,  lest  the  flour  should  occasion  a  slight  degi'ee 
of  fermentation.  Some  say  tliat  it  was  beaten  up  to 
the  consistence  of  mortar  or  clay,  in  order  to  com- 
memorate the  toils  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  in  lay- 
ing bricks  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tal.  col.  831  ;  Fesacliim, 
ii.  8,  X.  3,  with  the  notes  of  Bartenora,  Waimouides, 
and  Surenhusius). 

{d.)  The  Four  Cups  of  Wine. — There  is  no  men- 
tion of  wine  in  connexion  with  the  Passover  in  the 
Pentateuch ;  but  the  Mishna  strictly  enjoins  that 
there  should  never  be  less  than  four  cup's  of  it  pro- 
vided at  the  paschal  meal  even  of  the  poorest 
Israelite  {Fes.  x.  1).  The  wine  was  usually  red, 
and  it  was  mixed  with  water  as  it  was  drunk  {Fes. 
vii.  13,  with  Barteuora's  note;  and  Otho's  Lex. 
p.  507).  'I'he  cups  were  handed  round  in  succes- 
sion at  specified  intervals  in  the  meal  (see  p.  717a). 
Two  of  them  appear  to  be  distinctly  mentioned 
Luke  xxii.  17,  20.  •'  The  cup  of  blessing"  (]  Cor. 
X.  IG)  was  probably  the  latter  one  of  these,  and 
is  generally  considered  to  have  been  the  third  of 
the  series,  after  which  a  grace  was  said  ;  though  a 
comparison  of  "Luke  xxii.  20  (where  it  is  called 
"the  cup  after  suppe*-")  with  Fes.  x.  7,  and  the 
designation  7?n  DiS,  "  cup  of  the  Hallel"  might 
rather  .suggest  that  it  was  the  fourth  and  last  cup. 
Schoettgen,  however,  is  inclined  to  doubt  whether 
there  is  any  refei  ence,  in  either  of  the  passages  of 
the  N.  T.,  to  the  formal  ordering  of  the  cups  of  the 
Passover,  and  pro\'es  tliat  the  name  "  cup  of  bless- 
ing" (11313  7\y  DiS)  was  applied  in  a  general 
way  to  any  cup  whicli  was  drunk  with  thanks- 
givmg,  and    that  the    expression    was    often    used 

'  Other  particulars  of  the  precautions  which  were  taken 
aie  given  in  Pesachim,  and  also  by  Malmonides,  in  bis 
treatise  /)!  Ftrmentato  et  Azymo,  a  compendium  of  \\  liich 
is  given  by  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  404. 

"  Cerlaiu  precautions  to  avoid  pollution  were   taken 


PASSOVER 

metaphorically,  e.  <j.  Ps.  cxvi.  13  (I/or.  Heb.  in 
1  Cor.  X.  16.    iSee  also  Caipzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  380). 

The  wine  drunk  at  the  meal  was  not  restricted 
to  the  four  cups,  but  none  could  be  taken  during 
the  interval  between  the  third  and  iburth  cups 
{Pes.  X.  7). 

(e.)  The  Hallel. — The  service  of  praise  sung  at 
the  Passover  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Law.  The  name 
is  contracted  from  n^"-"l7/'n  {Hallehijah).  It  con- 
sisted of  the  series  of  Psalms  from  cxiii.  to  cxviii. 
The  first  portion,  comprising  Ps.  cxiii.  and  cxiv., 
was  sung  in  the  early  part  of  the  meal,  and  the 
second  part  after  the  fourth  cup  of  wine.  This  is 
supposed  to  have  been  the  "  hymn  "  sung  by  our 
Lord  and  his  Apostles  (Matt.  xxvi.  30 ;  Mark  xiv. 
26  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tal.  s.  v.  7?n,  and  Syn.  Jud. 
p.  48;  Otho,  Lex.  p.  271;  Carpzov,  Ajjp.  Crit. 
p.  374). 

(/.)  Mode  and  Order  of  the  Paschal  Meal. — 
Adopting  as  much  from  Jewish  tradition  as  is  not 
inconsistent  or  improbable,  the  following  appears  to 
have  been  the  usual  custom.  All  work,  except  that 
belonging  to  a  few  trades  connected  with  daily  lite, 
was  suspended  for  some  hours  before  the  evening  of 
the  14th  of  Nisan.  There  was,  however,  a  difference 
in  this  respect.  The  Calilaeans  desisted  from  work 
the  whole  day  ;  the  Jews  of  the  south  only  after 
the  middle  of  the  tenth  hour,  that  is,  half-past 
three  o'clock.  It  was  not  lawful  to  eat  any  ordi- 
nary food  after  mid-day.  The  reason  assigned  for 
this  was,  that  the  paschal  supper  might  be  eaten 
with  the  enjoyment  furnished  by  a  good  appetite 
{Fes.  iv.  1-3,  X.  1,  with  Maimonides'  note).  Bnt 
it  is  also  stated  that  this  preliminary  fasting  was 
especially  incumbent  on  the  eldest  son,  and  that  it 
was  intended  to  commemorate  the  deliverance  of  the 
first-born  m  Egypt.  This  was  probably  only  a  fancy 
of  later  times  (Buxt.  Syn.  Jud.  xviii.  p.  401). 

No  male  was  admitted  to  the  table  unless  he  was 
circumcised,  even  if  he  was  of  the  seed  of  Israel 
(Ex.  xii.  48).  Neither,  according  to  the  letter  of 
the  law,  was  any  one  of  either  sex  admitteil  who 
was  ceremonially  unclean"  (Num.  ix.  6;  Joseph. 
£.  J.  vi.  9,  §3).  But  this  rule  w;is  on  special 
ocaisions  liberally  applied.  In  the  case  of  Heze- 
kiah's  Passover  (2  Chr.  xxx.)  we  find  that  a  greater 
degree  of  legal  purity  was  required  to  slaughter  the 
lambs  than  to  eat  them,  and  that  numbers  partook 
"  otherwise  than  it  w;is  written,"  who  were  not 
"  cleansed  according  to  the  purification  of  the  sanc- 
tuary." The  Kabbinists  expressly  state  that  women 
wei'e  penmtted,  though  not  commanded,  to  jiartake 
{Pes.  viii.  1 ;  Chagigah,  i.  1  ;  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J. 
vi.  9,  §3),  in  accordance  with  the  instances  in 
Scripture  which  have  been  mentioned  of  Hannah 
and  Jlary  (p.  714a).  But  the  Karaites,  in  more 
recent  times,  excluded  all  but  full-grown  men.  It 
wa-s  customary  for  the  number  of  a  jiarfy  to  be 
not  less  than  ten  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vi.  9,  §3).  It  was 
perhaps  generally  under  twenty,  but  it  might  be  as 
many  as  a  hundred,  if  each  one  could  have  a  piece 
of  the  lamb  as  large  as  an  olive  {Pes.  viii.  7). 

When  the  meal  w;is  prepared,  the  family  was 
placed  round  the  table,  the  paterfamilias  taking  a 
place  of  honour,  probably  somewhat  raised  above 
the  rest.     There   is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 


a  month  before  the  Passover.  Amongst  these  was  the 
annual  whitewashing  of  the  sepulchres  (cf.  JIatt.  xxiii.  27) 
(Roland,  Ant.  iv.  2,  6).  In  John  xi.  55,  we  lind  some  Jews 
coming  up  to  Jerusalem  to  purify  themselves  a  week 
bufure  the  feast. 


PASSOVER 

ancient  Hebrews  sat,  ;is  they  were  accustomed  to  do 
at  their  ordinary  meals  (see  Otho,  Lex.  p.  7).  But 
when  the  custom  of  reclining  at  table  liad  become 
general,  that  posture  appears  to  have  been  enjoined, 
on  the  ground  of  its  supposed  significance.  The 
Mishna  says  that  the  meanest  Israelite  should 
recline  at  the  Passover  "  like  a  king,  with  the  ease 
becoming  a  free  man"  {Pes.  x.  1,  with  Maimonides' 
note).  He  was  to  keep  m  mind  that  when  his 
ancestors  stood  at  the  feast  in  Egypt  they  took  the 
jiosture  of  slaves  (R.  Levi,  quoted  by  Otho,  p.  604-). 
Our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  confoimed  to  the  usual  cus- 
tom of  their  time, and  reclined  (Luke  xxii.  14,  &c.). 
When  the  party  was  arranged,  the  first  cup  of 
wine  was  filled,  and  a  blessing  was  asked  b}'  the 
head  of  the  tamily  on  the  feast,  as  well  as  a  special 
one  on  the  cup.  The  bitter  herbs  were  then  placed 
on  the  table,  and  a  portion  of  them  eaten,  either 
with  or  without  the  sauce.  The  unleavened  bread 
was  handed  round  next,  and  afterwards  the  lamb 
was  placed  on  the  table  m  liont  of  the  head  of  the 
family  {Pes.  x.  3).  Betbre  the  lamb  was  eaten, 
the  second  cup  of  wine  was  filled,  and  the  son,  in 
accordance  with  Ex.  xii.  26,  asked  his  lather  the 
meaning  of  the  feast.  In  reply,  an  account  was 
given  of  the  sutlerings  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, 
and  of  their  deliverance,  with  a  jiai'ticular  explana- 
tion of  Deut.  xxvi.  5,  and  the  first  part  of  the 
Hallel  (Ps.  cxiii.,  cxiv.)  was  sung.  This  being  gone 
through,  the  lamb  was  carved  and  eaten.  The  third 
cup  of  wine  was  poured  out  and  drunk,  and  soon 
afterwards  the  fourth.  The  second  part  of  the 
Hallel  (Ps.  cxv.  to  cxviii.)  was  then  sung  (Pes.  s. 
2-5).  A  fifth  wine-cup  appears  to  have  been  occa- 
sionally produced,  but  perhaps  only  in  later  times. 
What  w;vs  termed  the  greater  Hallel  (Ps.  cxx.  to 
cxxxviii.)  was  sung  on  such  occasions  (Buxt.  Si/71. 
Jud.  c.  xviii.).  The  meal  being  ended,  it  was  un- 
lawful for  anything  to  be  introduced  in  the  way 
of  dessert. 

The  Israelites  who  lived  in  the  country  appear 
to  have  been  accommodated  at  the  feast  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  in  their  houses,  so  far  as 
there  was  room  for  them  (Luke  xxii.  10-12  ;  llatt. 
xxvi.  18).  It  is  said  that  the  guests  left  in  return 
for  tlieir  entertainment  the  skin  of  the  lamb,  the 
oven,  and  other  vessels  which  they  had  used.  Those 
who  could  not  be  received  into  the  city  encamped 
without  the  walls  in  tents,  as  the  pilgrims  now  do 
at  Mecca.  The  number  of  these  must  have  been 
very  great,  if  we  may  trust  the  computation  of 
.Tosephus  that  they  who  partook  of  the  Passover 
amounted,  in  the  leign  of  Nero,  to  above  2,700,000 
{B.  J.  vi.  9,  §.")»).  It  is  not  wonderful  that 
seditions  wore  apt  to  break  out  in  such  a  vast  multi- 
tude so  brought  together  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  9,  §2; 
B.J.  I,  3,  &c. ;  comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  5;  Luke  xiii.  1). 

After  the  paschal  meal,  such  of  the  Israelites 
from  the  countiy  as  were  so  disposed  left  Jerusalem, 
and  observed  the  remainder  of  the  festival  at  their 
respective  homes  (I)eut.  xvi.  7).  But  see  Light- 
loot,  on  Luke  ii.  43. 

(r/.)  The  first  ^henf  of  Harvest.— The  otTering  of 
the  Omer,  or  sheaf  (^DJ/ ;  to.  Spdyi/.ara  ■  laanipulus 
spicarum)  is  mentioned  nowhere  in  the  law  except 
Lev.  xxiii.  10-14.  it  is  there  commanded  that 
when  the  Israelites  might  reach  the  land  of  promise, 
they  should  bring,  on  the  lOth  of  the  month,  "the 


PASSOVER 


717 


»  He  states  that  the  number  of  lamhs  slain  In  a  sinRle 
Passover  was  256,500.  It  is  difficult  to  imaRlne  how 
ttii'y  coulil  all  have  bein  slain,  and  their  hluud  sprinkled, 


morrow  after  the  sabbatli"  (;.  e.  the  day  of  holy 
convocation  [Pentecost,  §1  note])  the  first  sheaf 
of  the  harvest  to  the  priest,  to  be  waved  by  him 
before  the  Lord.  A  lamb,  with  a  meat-otiering 
and  a  drink-otfeiing,  was  to  be  ofi'ered  at  the  same 
time.  Until  this  ceremony  was  performed,  no 
bread,  parched  corn,  or  gieen  ears,  were  to  be  eaten 
of  the  new  crop  (see  Josh.  v.  II,  12).''  It  was 
from  the  day  of  this  ottering  that  the  fifty  days 
began  to  be  counted  to  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Lev. 
xxiii.  15).  The  sheaf  was  of  barley,  as  being  the 
grain  which  was  first  ripe  (2  Kings  iv.  42).  Jose- 
phus  relates  (A7it.  iii.  10,  §5)  that  the  barley 
was  gi-ound,  and  that  ten  haniifuls  of  the  meal 
v/ere  bi-ought  to  the  altar,  one  handful  being  cast 
into  the  fire  and  the  remainder  given  to  the  priests. 
The  Mishna  adds  several  particulars,  and,  amongst 
others,  that  men  were  formally  sent  by  the  San- 
hedrim to  cut  the  barley  in  some  field  near  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  that,  after  the  meal  liad  been  sifted 
thiiteen  times,  it  was  mingled  with  oil  and  incense' 
{Menachoth,  x.  2-G). 

(A.)  The  Chagiqah. — The  daily  saci'ifices  are  enu- 
merated in  the  Pentateuch  only  in  Num.  xxviii. 
19-23,  but  reference  is  made  to  them  Lev.  xxiii.  8. 
Besides  these  public  offerings  (which  are  mentioned, 
p.  714a),  there  was  another  sort  of  sacrifice  con- 
nected with  the  Passover,  as  well  as  with  the  other 
great  festivals,  called  in  the  Talmud  HJ^jn  {Cha- 
Ijigah,  i.  e.  "festivity").  It  was  a  voluntaiy  peace- 
offering  made  by  private  individuals.  The  victim 
might  be  taken  either  from  the  flock  or  the  herd. , 
It  might  be  either  male  or  female,  but  it  must  be 
without  blemish.  The  offerer  laid  his  hand  upon 
its  head  and  slew  it  at  the  door  of  the  sanctuary. 
The  blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  and  the  fat 
of  the  inside,  with  the  kidneys,  was  burned  by  the 
priest.  The  breast  was  given  to  the  priest  as  a 
wave-offering,  and  the  right  shoulder  as  a  heave- 
offering  (Lev.  lii.  1-5,  vii.  29-34).  What  remained 
of  the  victim  might  be  eaten  by  the  oft'erer  and  his 
guests  on  the  day  on  which  it  was  slain,  and  on 
the  day  following  ;  but  if  any  portion  was  left  till 
the  third  day,  it  was  burned  (Lev.  vii.  1(3-18; 
Pesach.  vi.  4).  The  connexion  of  these  free-will- 
l)eace-offerings  with  the  festivals,  appears  to  be 
indicated  Num.  x.  10 ;  Deut.  xiv.  2(5 ;  2  Chr. 
XXX.  22,  and  they  are  included  under  the  term 
Passover  in  Deut.  xvi.  2 — "  Thou  shalt  therefore 
sacrifice  the  passover  unto  the  Lord  thy  (iod,  of 
the  flock  and  of  the  herd."  Onkelos  here  under- 
stands the  command  to  sacrifice  from  the  flock,  to 
refer  to  the  paschal  lamb  ;  and  that  to  sacrifice 
from  the  herd,  to  the  Chagigah.  But  it  seems 
more  probable  that  both  the  tlock  and  the  herd 
refer  to  the  Chagigah,  as  there  is  a  specific  command 
respecting  the  paschal  lamb  in  vers.  5-7.  (See 
De  Muis'  note  in  the  Crit.  Sac;  and  Lightfoot, 
//or.  Jleb.  on  John  xviii.  28.)  There  are  evidently 
similar  references,  2  Chr.  xxx.  22-24,  and  2  Chr. 
XXXV.  7.  Hezekiah  and  his  princes  gave  away  at  the 
great  Passover  which  he  celebrated,  two  thousand 
bullocks  and  seventeen  thousand  sheep;  and  Josiah, 
on  a  similar  occasion,  is  said  to  have  supplied  the 
people  at  his  own  cost  with  lambs  "  for  the  Passover 
offerings,"  besides  thrw  thousand  oxen.  From  these 
passages  and  others,  it  may  be  seen  that  the  eating 
of  the  Chagigah  was  an  occasion  of  .social  festivity 

as  described  in  the  Mishna.    See  p.  7146. 
f  On  this  text,  see  Pknteco.st. 
•  Tlirre  is  no  nicnliou  of  the  ()nicr  in  I'fsachim. 


718 


PASSOVER 


coiinecttd  with  the  festivals,  and  especially  with  the 
Passover.  The  principal  day  for  sacrificing  the 
Passover  Chagigah,  was  the  15th  of  Nisan,  the 
first  day  of  holy  convocation,  unless  it  happened  to 
be  the  weekly  sabbath.  The  paschal  lamb  might 
be  slain  on  the  sabbath,  but  not  the  Chagigah. 
With  this  exception,  the  Chagigah  might  be  offered 
on  any  day  of  the  festival,  and  on  some  occasions  a 
Chagigah  victim  was  slain  on  the  14-th,  especially 
when  the  paschal  lamb  was  likely  to  prove  too 
small  to  serve  as  meat  for  the  party  (Pesach.  iv. 
4,  X.  3 ;  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  c.  xii. ;  Reland, 
Ant.  iv.  c.  ii.  §2). 

That  the  Chagigah  might  be  boiled,  as  well  as 
roasted,  is  proved  by  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13,  "  And  they 
roasted  the  passover  with  file  according  to  the  ordi- 
nance :  but  the  other  holy  offerings  sod  they  in  pots, 
and  in  caldrons,  and  in  pans,  and  divided  them 
speedily  among  the  people." 

(i.)  llelease  of  Prisoners. — It  is  a  question  whe- 
ther the  lelease  of  a  prisoner  at  the  Passover  (Matt. 
xr\-ii.  15;  Mark  xv.  6;  Luke  xxiii.  17;  John  xviii. 
39  j  was  a  custom  of  Roman  ortgin  resembling  what 
took  place  at  the  lectisternium  (Liv.  v.  13);  and, 
in  later  times,  on  the  birthday  of  an  emperor  ;  or 
whether  it  was  an  old  Hebrew  usage  belonging  to 
the  festival,  which  Pilate  allowed  the  Jews  to  retain. 
Grotius  argues  in  favour  of  the  former  notion  ( On 
Matt,  xxvii.  15).  But  others  (Hottinger,  Schoett- 
gen,  Winer)  consider  that  the  words  of  St.  John — ■ 
i(Tri  Se  (Tvv7\Qiia.  vixlv — render  it  most  probable 
that  the  custom  was  essentially  Hebrew.  Schoett- 
gen  thinks  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  it  in  Pe- 
sachim  (viii.  B),  where  it  is  permitted  that  a  lamb 
should  be  slain  on  the  14th  of  Nisan  for  the  special 
use  of  one  in  prison  to  whom  a  release  had  been 
promised.  The  subject  is  discussed  at  length  by 
Hottinger,  in  his  tract  De  Ritu  dimittendi  Reum  in 
Festo  Paschatis,  in  the  Thesaurus  Novus  Theologico- 
Philologicus. 

(k.)  The  Second,  or  Little  Passover. — When  the 
Piissover  was  celebrated  the  second  year,  in  the  wil- 
derness, certain  men  were  prevented  from  keeping  it, 
owing  to  their  being  defiled  by  contact  with  a  dead 
body.  Being  thus  prevented  from  obeying  the 
Divine  command,  they  came  anxiously  to  Moses  to 
inquire  what  they  should  do.  He  was  accordingly 
instructed  to  institute  a  second  Piissover,  to  be 
observed  on  the  14th  of  the  following  month,  for 
the  benefit  of  any  who  had  been  hindered  from 
keeping  the  i-egular  one  in  Nisan  (Num.  ix.  11). 
The  Talmudists  called  this  the  Little  Passover 
(Jt2p  riDSi.  It  was  distinguished,  according  to 
them,  from  the  G  reater  Passover  by  the  rites  lasting 
only  one  day,  instead  of  seven  days,  by  it  not  being 
required  that  the  Haliel  should  be  sung  during  the 
meal,  but  only  when  the  lamb  was  slaughtered, 
and  by  it  not  being  necessary  for  leaven  to  be  put 
out  of  the  houses  {Pesach.  ix.  3 ;  Buxt.  Lex.  Tal. 
col.  1766). 

(/.)  Observances  of  the  Passover  recorded  in 
Scripture. — Of  these  seven  are  of  chief  historical 
importance. 

1.  The  first  Passover  in  Egypt  (Ex.  xii.). 

2.  The  first  kept  in  the  desert  (Num.  ix.). 


PASSOVER 

Thei'e  is  no  notice  of  the  observance  of  any  other 
Passover  in  the  desert ;  and  Hupfeld,  Keil,  and"  othei-s 
have  concluded  that  none  took  place  between  this 
one  and  that  at  Gilgal.  The  neglect  of  circumcision 
may  render  this  probable.  But  Calvin  imagines 
that  a  special  penni.ssion  was  given  to  the  people 
to  continue  the  ordinance  of  the  Passover.  (See 
Keil  on  Joshua  v.  10.) 

3.  That  celebrated  by  Joshua  at  Gilgal  imme- 
diately after  the  circumcision  of  the  people,  when 
the  manna  ceased  (Josh.  v.). 

4.  That  which  Hezekiah  observed  on  the  occasion 
of  his  restoring  the  national  worship  (2  Chr.  xxx.). 
Owing  to  the  impurity  of  a  considerable  proportion 
of  the  priests  in  the  month  Nisan,  this  Passover 
was  not  held  till  the  second  month,  the  proper  time 
for  the  Little  Passover.  The  postponement  was  de- 
termined by  a  decree  of  the  congregation.  By  the 
same  authority,  the  festival  was  repeated  through 
a  second  seven  days  to  serve  the  need  of  the  vast 
multitude  who  wished  to  attend  it.  To  meet  the 
case  of  the  probable  impurity  of  a  great  number 
of  the  people,  the  Levites  were  commanded  to 
slaughter  the  lambs,  and  the  king  prayed  that  the 
Lord  would  pardon  every  one  who  was  penitent, 
though  his  legal  pollution  might  be  upon  him. 

5.  The  Passover  of  Josiali  in  the  eighteenth  year 
of  his  reign  (2  Chr.  xxxv.).  On  this  occasion,  as 
in  the  Passover  of  Hezekiah,  the  Levites  appear  to 
have  slain  the  lambs  (ver.  6),  and  it  is  expressly 
stated  that  they  flayed  them. 

6.  That  celebrated  by  Ezra  after  the  return  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  vi.).  On  this  occasion,  also,  the 
Levites  slevv  the  lambs,  and  for  the  same  reason  as 
they  did  in  Hezekiah's  Passover. 

7.  The  last  Passover  of  our  Lord's  life. 

ni.  The  Last  Supper. 

1  Whether  or  not  the  meal  at  which  our  Lord 
instituted  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  was  the 
paschal  supper  according  to  the  law,  is  a  question 
of  great  difficulty.  No  point  in  the  Gospel  histoiy 
has  been  more  disputed.  If  we  had  nothing  to 
guide  us  but  the  three  first  Gospels,  no  doubt  of  the 
kind  could  well  be  raised,  though  the  nariatives 
may  not  be  free  from  difficulties  in  themselves. 
We  find  them  speaking,  in  accordance  with  Jewish 
usage,  of  the  day  of  the  supper  as  that  on  which 
"  the  Passover  must  be  killed,"  and  as  "  the  first  day 
of  unleavened  bread  "  »  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark  xiv. 
12;  Luke  xxii.  7).  Each  relates  that  the  use  of 
the  guest-chamber  was  secured  in  the  manner  usual 
with  those  who  came  from  a  distance  to  keep  the 
festival.  Each  states  that  "  they  made  ready  the 
Passover,"  and  that,  when  the  evening  was  come, 
our  Lord,  taking  the  place  of  the  head  of  the  family, 
sat  down  with  the  twelve.  He  Himself  distinctly 
calls  the  meal  "  this  Passover"  (Luke  xxii.  15, 16). 
After  a  thanksgiving,  he  passes  round  the  first  cup 
of  wine  (Luke  xxii.  17),  and,  when  the  supper  is 
ended,  the  usual  "  cup  of  blessing"  (comp.  Luke  xxii. 
20  ;  1  Cor.  x.  16,  xi.  25).  A  hymn  is  then  sung 
(Matt.  xxvi.  30  ;  Mark  xiv.  26),  which  it  is  reason- 
able to  suppose  was  the  last  pait  of  the  Haliel. 

If  it  be  gi-anted  that  the  supper  was  eaten  on  the 


»  Josephus  in  like  manner  calls  tbe  14tb  of  Nisan  the 
first  daj'  of  unleavened  bread  (li.  J.  v.  3,  $1);  and  be 
speaks  of  the  festival  of  the  Passover  as  lasting  eight 
days  (Ant.  ii.  15,  }1).  But  he  elsewhere  calls  the  15th 
<if  Nisan  "  the  commencement  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread."   (.lii^.  iil.  10,^^5.)    Either  mode  of  speaking  was 


evidently  allowable :  in  one  case  regarding  it  as  a  matter 
of  Jact  that  the  eating  of  unleavened  bread  began  on  the 
14th ;  and  in  the  other,  distinguishing  the  feast  of  un- 
leavened bread,  lasting  from  the  first  day  of  holy  convo- 
cation to  the  concluding  one,  from  the  paschal  meal. 


PASSOVER 

evening  of  the  14th  of  Nisan,  the  apprehension, 
trial,  and  crucifixion  of  our  Lord,  must  have  oc- 
curred on  Friday  tlie  15th,  the  day  of  holy  convo- 
cation, which  was  the  first  of  the  seven  days  of  the 
Piissover  week.  The  weekly  sabbath  on  which  He 
lay  in  the  tomb  was  the  16th,  and  the  Sunday  of 
the  resurrection  was  the  17th. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  if  we  had  no  information 
but  that  which  is  to  be  gathered  from  St.  John's 
Ciospel,  we  could  not  hesitate  to  infer  that  the  even- 
ing of  the  supper  was  that  of  the  13th  of  Nisan, 
the  day  preceding  that  of  the  p:ischal  meal.  It 
appears  to  be  spoken  of  as  occurring  before  the  feast 
of  the  Passover  (xiii.  1,  2).  Some  of  the  disciples 
suppose,  that  Christ  told  Judas,  while  they  were  at 
supper,  to  buy  what  they  "  had  need  of  against  the 
least"  (xiii.  29).  tn  the  night  which  follows  the 
supper,  the  Jews  will  not  enter  the  praetorium  lest 
they  should  be  defiled  and  so  not  able  to  "  eat  the 
Passover"  (.wiii.  28).  When  our  Lord  is  before 
Pilate,  about  to  be  led  out  to  crucifixion,  we  are 
told  that  it  was  "  the  preparation  of  the  Passover  " 
(xix.  14-).  After  the  crucifixion,  the  Jews  are  soli- 
(•itous,  "  because  it  was  the  preparation,  that  the 
bodies  should  niit  remain  upon  the  cross  on  the 
Sabbath  dav,  for  that  Sabbath  day  was  a  high  day" 
(.xix.  31).  ' 

If  we  admit,  in  accordance  with  the  first  view  of 
these  passages,  that  the  last  supper  was  on  the  1 3th 
of  Nisan,  our  Lord  mitst  have  been  crucified  on  the 
14th,  the  day  on  which  the  paschal  lamb  was  slain 
and  eaten.  He  lay  in  the  grave  on  the  15th  (which 
was  a  "  high  day"  or  double  sabbath,  because  the 
weekly  sabbath  coincided  with  the  day  of  holy  con- 
vocation), and  the  Sunday  of  the  resurrection  was 
the  16  th. 

It  is  alleged  that  this  view  of  the  case  is  strength- 
ened by  certain  facts  in  the  narratives  of  the  synop- 
tical gospels,  as  well  as  that  of  St.  John,  compared 
with  the  law  and  with  what  we  know  of  Jewish 
customs  in  later  times.  If  the  meal  was  the  paschal 
supper,  the  law  of  Ex.  xii.  22,  that  none  "  shall  go 
out  of  the  door  of  his  house  until  the  morning," 
must  have  been  broken,  not  only  by  Judas  (John 
.xiii.  30),  but  by  our  Lord  ami  the  other  disciples 
(Luke -xxii.  39).''  In  like  maimer  it  is  said  that 
the  law  for  the  observance  of  the  15th,  the  day  of 
holy  convocation  with  which  the  paschal  week  com- 
menced (Kx.  xii.  16  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  35  &c.),  and  some 
express  enactments  in  the  Talmud  legarding  legal 
proceedings  and  particular  details,  such  as  the  carry- 
ing of  spices,  mast  have  been  infringed  by  the 
Jewish  rulers  in  the  apprehending  of  Christ,  in  His 
trials  before  the  High-|)riest  and  the  Sanhedrim,  and 
in  His  crucifixion  ;  and  also  by  Simon  of  Cyrene,  who 
was  coming  out  of  the  country  (  Mark  xv.  2 1  ;  Luke 
xxiii.  26),  by  Joseph  who  bought  fine  linen  (Mark 
XV.  46),  by  the  women  who  bought  spices  (Mark  xvi. 
1  ;  Luke  xxiii.  56),  and  by  Nicodemus  who  brought 
to  the  tomb  a  hundred  pounds  weight  of  a  mixture 
of  myrrh  and  aloes  (John  xix.  39).  The  same 
objection  is  considered  to  lie  against  the  supposition 
that  the  discii)l<'s  could  have  imagined,  on  the  even- 
ing of  the  Passover,  that  our  Lord  was  giving  direc- 
tions to  Judas  respecting  the  purchase  of  anything 

■»  It  has  been  stated  (p.  713  note'")  that,  according  to 
Jewish  (Wtlioiitios,  ttils  law  was  disused  In  later  times. 
But  even  if  this  worn  not  the  case,  it  docs  not  seem  that 
there  can  he  much  difTiculty  in  adoptinp;  thi'  arrangement 
of  Grcswell's  Ifarmomi,  that  tlie  parly  did  not  leave  the 
hmisp  tn  Ro  over  the  brook  till  aftrr  midnight. 

c  Lightfoot,  Uor.  llcb.  on  Matt,  xxvii,  1. 


PASSOVER 


71*3 


or  the  giving  of  alms  to  the  poor.  The  latter  act 
(except  under  very  special  conditions)  would  have 
been  as  much  opposed  to  rabbinical  maxims  as  the 
former.' 

It  is  further  urged  that  the  expressions  of  our  Lord, 
"  My  time  is  at  hand  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  18),  and  "  this 
passover"  (Luke  xxii.  15),  as  well  as  St.  Paul's 
designating  it  as  "  the  saine  night  that  He  was  be- 
trayed," instead  of  the  niijht  of  the  passover  (I  Cor. 
xi.  23),  and  his  identifying  Christ  as  our  slain 
paschal  lamb  (1  Cor.  v.  7),  seem  to  point  to  the 
time  of  the  supper  as  being  peculiar,  and  to  the 
time  of  the  crucifixion  as  being  the  same  as  that 
of  the  killing  of  the  lamb  (Neander  and  Liicke). 

It  is  not  surprising  that  some  modern  critics 
should  have  given  up  as  hopeless  the  task  of  recon- 
ciling this  difficulty.  Several  have  rejected  the 
narrative  of  St.  John  (Bretschneider,  Weisse),  but 
a  greater  number  (especially  De  Wette,  Usteri, 
Ewald,  Meyer,  and  Theile)  have  taken  an  opposite 
course,  and  have  been  content  with  the  notion  that 
the  three  first  Evangelists  made  a  iriistake  and  con- 
founded the  meal  with  the  Passover. 

2.  The  reconciliations  which  have  been  atteinpted 
fall  under  three  principal  heads : — 

1.  Those  which  regard  the  supper  at  which  our 
Lord  washed  the  teet  of  His  disciples  (John  xiii.), 
as  having  been  a  distinct  meal  eaten  one  or  more 
days  before  the  regular  Passover,  of  which  our  Lord 
partook  in  due  course  according  to  the  synoptical 
narratives. 

■  ii.  Those  in  which  it  is  endeavoured  to  estiiblisK 
that  the  meal  was  eaten  on  tlie  13th,  and  that  "our 
Lord  was  crucified  on  the  evening  of  the  true 
paschal  supper. 

iii.  Those  in  which  the  most  obvious  view  of  the 
first  three  narratives  is  defended,  and  in  which  it  is 
attempted  to  explain  the  apparent  contradictions  in 
St.  John,  and  the  difficulties  in  reference  to  the 
law. 

(i.)  The  first  method  has  the  advantage  of  fur- 
nishing the  most  ready  way  of  accounting  for  St. 
John's  silence  on  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion. It  has  been  adopted  by  Maldonat,''  Light- 
foot,  and  Bengel,  and  more  recently  by  Kaiser.* 
Lightfoot  identifies  the  supper  of  John  xiii.  with 
the  one  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper  at  Bethany 
two  days  before  the  P.xssover,  when  Mary  poured 
the  ointment  on  the  head  of  our  Saviour  (Matt. 
xxvi.  6,  Mark  xiv.  3) ;  and  quaintly  remarks, 
"  While  they  are  grumbling  at  tlie  anointing  of  His 
head.  He  does  not  scruple  to  wash  their  feet." ' 
Bengel  supposes  that  it  was  eaten  only  the  evening 
before  the  Passover.K 

But  any  explanation  fonnde<l  on  the  supposition 
of  two  meals  appears  to  be  rendered  untenable  by 
the  context.  The  fact  that  all  four  Evangelists 
introduce  in  the  same  connexion  tlie  Ibretelling  of 
the  treachery  of  Judas  with  the  dipping  of  the  sop, 
and  of  the  denials  of  St.  Peter  and  the  going  out  to 
the  Jlount  of  Olives,  can  hardly  leave  a  doubt  that 
they  are  speaking  of  the  same  meal.  Besides  this, 
the  explanation  does  not  touch  the  greatest  diffi- 
culties, which  are  those  connected  with  "  the  day  of 
preparation." 

<<  On  John  xiii.  1. 

'  Chronolngie  und  Harmonic  dcr  vier  Ev.  Mentioned 
by  Tlschendorf,  Si/imp.  Evang.  p.  xlv. 

f  Ex.  Ifeb.,  on  .John  xiii.  2,  and  Matt.  xxv).  6.  Also, 
'(ileanings  from  Kxodus.'  No.  XIX. 

*>'  On  Matt.  xxvi.  17,  and  John  xviii.  28. 


720 


PASSOVER 


(ii.)  The  current  of  o])iiiion  ''  in  modern  times  has 
set  in  favour  of  taking  the  more  obvious  interpreta- 
tion of  the  passages  in  St.  John,  that  the  supper 
was  eaten  on  the  13th,  and  that  Our  Lord  was  cru- 
cified on  the  14th.  It  must,  however,  be  admitted 
that  most  of  those  who  advocate  this  view  in  some 
degree  ignore  the  dilficulties  which  it  raises  in  any 
i-espectful  interpretation  of  tlie  synoptical  narratives. 
Tittmann  (Meletemata,  p.  476)  simply  remarks 
that  T]  TTpdiTT)  tS>v  a^vixuiv  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark 
xiv.  12)  should  be  explained  as  irpoTtpa  tuv  a^viJioov. 
Dean  Alford,  while  he  believes  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John  "absolutely  excludes  such  a  supposition  as 
that  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  ate  the  usual  Pass- 
over," acknowledges  the  difficulty  and  dismisses  it 
(on  Matt.  xxvi.  17). 

Those  who  thus  hold  that  the  supper  was  eaten 
on  the  loth  day  of  the  month  have  devised  vaiious 
ways  of  accounting  for  the  circumstance,  of  which 
the  following  are  the  most  important.  It  will  be 
obsei-ved  that  in  the  first  three  the  supper  is  re- 
garded as  a  true  paschal  supper,  eaten  a  day  before 
the  usual  time ;  and  in  the  other  two,  as  a  meal  of  a 
peculiar  kind. 

(a.)  It  is  assumed  that  a  party  of  the  Jews,  pro- 
bably the  Sadducees  and  those  who  inclined  towards 
them,  used  to  eat  the  Passover  one  day  befoie  the 
rest,  and  that  our  Lord  approved  of  their  practice. 
But  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  historical  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  any  party  which  might  have  held 
such  a  notion  until  the  controversy  between  the 
Rabbinists  and  the  Karaites  arose,  which  was  net 
miich  before  the  eighth  centui-y.' 

(6.)  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  great  boay 
of  the  Jews  had  gone  wrong  in  calculating  the  true 
Passover-day,  placing  it  a  day  too  late,  and  that 
our  Lord  ate  the  Passover  on  what  was  really  the 
14th,  but  what  commonly  passed  as  the  13th. 
This  was  the  opinion  of  Beza,  Bucer,  Calovius,  and 
Scaliger.  It  is  favoured  by  Stier.  But  it  is  utterly 
unsupported  by  historical  testimony. 

(c.)  Calvin  supposed  that  on  this  occasion,  though 
our  Lord  thought  it  right  to  adhere  to  the  true 
legal  time,  the  Jews  ate  the  Passover  on  the  15th 
instead  of  the  14th,  in  order  to  escape  from  the 
burden  of  two  days  of  sti-ict  observance  (the  day  of 
holy  convocation  and  the  weekly  sabbath)  coming 
together.''  But  that  no  practice  of  this  kind  could 
have  existed  so  early  as  our  Lord's  time  is  satis- 
factorily proved  in  Cocceius'  note  to  Sanhedrim, 
i.  §2.' 

{d.)  Grotius  ™  thought  that  the  meal  was  a  ■jrdax"'- 
fxvrjfxoviVTiKov  (like  the  paschnl  feast  of  the  modern 
Jews,  and  such  as  might  have  -been  observed  during 
the  Babylonian  captivity),  not  a  Tzaax^  Oinrifiov. 
Bat  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  such  a  mere 


•i  LUcke,  Ideler,  Tittmann,  Bleek,  De  Wettt,  Neander, 
Tiscbeniiorf,  Winer,  Ebrard,  Alford,  EUicolt ;  of  earlier 
critics,  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Suicer,  Carpzov. 

i  Iken  (^Dissertationes,  vol.  ii.  diss.  10  imd  12),  forget- 
ting the  late  date  of  tbe  Karaite  controversy,  supposed 
that  our  I^rd  might  have  followed  them  in  taking  the 
day  whidi,  according  to  their  custom,  was  calculated  from 
the  first  appearance  of  the  moon.  Carpzov  (App.  Crit. 
p.  43u)  advocates  the  same  notion,  wilhuut  naming  the 
Karaites.  Ebrard  conjectures  that  some  of  the  poorer 
Galilaeans  may  have  submitted  to  eat  the  Passover  a  day 
too  early  to  suit  the  convenience  of  the  priesis,  who  were 
overdone  with  ihe  labour  of  sprinkling  the  blood  and  (as 
he  strangely  imagines)  of  slaughtering  the  lambs. 

k  Harm,  in  JNIatt.  xxvi.  17,  ii.  305,  edit.  Tholuck. 

•  Surenhusius'  Mishna,  iv.  209. 


PASSOVER 

commemorative  rite  was  ever  observed  till  after  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple. 

((?.)  A  view  which  has  been  received  with  favour 
far  more  generally  than  either  of  the  preceding  is, 
that  the  Last  Supper  was  instituted  by  Christ  for 
the  occasion,  in  order  that  He  might  Himself  suffer 
on  the  proper  evening  on  which  the  pasclial  lamb 
was  slain.  Neander  says,  "  He  foresaw  that  He 
would  have  to  leave  His  disciples  before  the  Jewish 
Passover,  and  determined  to  give  a  peculiar  mean- 
ing to  His  last  meal  with  them,  and  to  place  it  in  a 
peculiar  relation  to  the  Passover  of  the  Old  Cove- 
nant, the  place  of  which  was  to  be  taken  by  the 
meal  of  the  New  Covenant "  {Zife  of  Christ,  §265)." 
This  view  is  substantially  the  same  as  that  held  by 
Clement,  Origen,  Erasmus,  Calmet,  Kuinoel,  Winer, 
Alford." 

Erasmus  (Paraphrase  on  John  xiii.  1,  xviii.  28, 
Luke  xxii.  7)  and  others  have  called  it  an  "  anticipa- 
tory Passover,"  with  the  intention,  no  doubt,  to  help 
on  a  reconciliation  between  St.  John  and  the  other 
Evangelists.  But  if  this  view  is  to  stand,  it  seems 
better,  in  a  formal  treatment  of  the  subject,  not  to 
call  it  a  Passover  at  all.  The  difference  between 
it  and  the  Hebrew  rite  must  have  been  essential. 
Even  if  a  lamb  was  eaten  in  the  supper,  it  can  hardly 
be  imagined  that  the  priests  would  have  perfoi-med 
the  essential  acts  of  sprinkling  the  blood  and  offering 
the  fat  on  any  day  besides  the  legal  one  (see  Mai- 
monides  quoted  by  Otho,  Lex.  p.  501).  It  could 
not  therelbre  have  been  a  true  paschal  sacrifice. 

(iii.)  They  who  take  the  facts  as  they  appear  to  lie 
on  the  surface  of  the  synoptical  nan-ativesP  start  from 
a  simpler  point.  They  have  nothing  unexpected  in 
the  occurrences  to  account  for,  but  they  have  to 
show  that  the  passages  in  St.  John  may  be  fairly 
interpreted  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  interfere 
with  their  own  conclusion,  and  to  meet  the  objec- 
tions suggested  by  the  laws  relating  to  the  observ- 
ance of  the  festival.  W^e  shall  give  in  succession, 
as  briefly  as  we  can,  what  appear  to  be  their  best 
explanations  of  the  passages  in  question. 

(a.)  John  xiii.  1,  2.  Does  wph  rrji  ioprris  limit 
the  time  only  of  the  proposition  in  the  first  verse,  or 
is  the  limitation  to  be  carried  on  to  verse  2,  so  as  to 
refer  to  the  supper?  In  the  latter  case,  for  which 
De  Wette  and  others  say  there  is  "  a  logical  neces- 
sity," els  TtXos  T]ydirri<r€v  avTOvs  must  refer 
more  directly  to  the  manifestation  of  -His  love 
which  He  was  about  to  give  to  His  disciples  in 
washing  their  feet ;  and  the  natural  conclusion  is, 
that  the  meal  was  one  eaten  before  the  paschal 
supper.  Bochart,  however,  contends  that  irph  t^s 
eopTrjs  is  equivalent  to  ec  rep  ■KpoeopTi(i},  '"  quod 
ita  praecedit  festum,  ut  tamen  sit  pars  festi."  Stier 
agrees  with  him.     Others  take  vd<rxa  to  mean  the 


>"  On  Matt.  xxvi.  19,  and  John  xiii.  1. 

n  Assuming  this  view  to  be  correct,  may  not  the  change 
in  the  day  made  by  Our  Lord  have  some  analogy  to  the 
change  of  the  weekly  day  of  rest  from  the  seventh  to  the 
first  day  ? 

o  Dean  Ellicott  regards  the  meal  as  "  a  paschal  supper  " 
eaten  twenty-four  hours  before  that  of  the  other  Jews, 
"  within  what  were  popularly  considered  the  limits  of  the 
festival."  and  would  understand  the  expression  in  Ex. 
xii.  6,  "  between  the  two  evenings,"  as  denoting  the  time 
between  the  evenings  of  the  13th  and  14th  of  the  month. 
But  see  note  ^  p.  7 1 4.  A  somewhat  similar  explanation  is 
given  in  the  Journal  nf  Sacred  Literature  for  Oct.  1861. 

p  I.ightfoot,  Bochart,  Reland,  Schoettgen,  Tholuck,  Ols- 
hausen,  Stier,  Lange,  itengstcnberg,  P.obinson,  Pavidson, 
Fairbairn. 


PASSOVER 

seven  days  of  unleavened  bre;id  as  not  including  the 
eating  of  the  lamb,  and  justify  this  liniitatiuii  by 
St.  Luke  xxii.  1  [rj  ioprr]  ran'  d^vf^oiv  ri  \tyofx4v7i 
Trocrxa).  See  note  ',  p.  723.  But  not  a  tew 
of  those  who  take  this  side  of  the  main  question 
(Olshausea,  Wieseler,  Tholuck,  and  others)  regard 
the  tiist  verse  as  complete  in  itself;  understanding 
its  puiport  to  be  that  "  Befoie  the  Passover,  in 
the  prospect  of  his  departure,  the  Saviour's  love 
Wiis  actively  called  forth  towards  liis  followers,  and 
He  gave  proof  of  his  love  to  the  last."  Tholuck 
remarks  that  the  expression  Seiirvou  yeuo/xivov 
(Tischendorf  reads  yiyofJ.evov),  "  while  supper  was 
going  on"  (not  as  in  the  A.  V.,  ''supper  being 
ended  ")  is  veiy  abrupt  if  we  refer  it  to  an3'thing 
except  the  passover.  The  Evangelist  would  then 
rather  have  used  some  such  expression  as,  koI 
eTToiTjcraj/  aur^  5i7iTvov ;  and  he  considers  that 
this  view  is  cuntirmed  by  xxi.  20,  where  this 
supper  is  spoken  of  as  if  it  was  something  tiuniliarly 
known  and  not  peculiar  in  its  character — hs  Kal 
dveTrefffv  ei/  rtf  SeiVi/o).  On  the  whole,  Ne;mder 
himself  admits  that  nothing  can  safely  be  inferred 
from  John  xiii.  1,  2,  in  favour  of  the  supper  having 
taken  place  on  the  13th. 

(6.)  Jolm  xiii.  29.  It  is  urged  that  the  things  of 
which  they  had  "  need  against  the  feast,"  might 
liave  been  the  provisions  for  the  Chagigah,  perhaps 
with  what  else  was  required  for  the  seven  days  of 
unleavened  bread.  The  usual  day  for  saciiticing 
the  Chagigah  was  the  15th,  which  was  then  com- 
mencing (see  p.  718,  a.).  But  there  is  another  diffi- 
culty, in  the  disciples  thinking  it  likely  either  that 
purchases  could  be  maiJe,  or  that  alms  could  be 
given  to  the  poor,  on  a  day  of  holy  convocation. 
This  is  of  course  a  difficulty  of  the  same  kind 
as  that  which  meets  us  in  the  purchases  actually 
made  by  the  women,  by  Joseph  and  Nicodemus. 
Now,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  we  have  no  proof 
that  the  strict  Rabbinical  maxims  which  have  been 
appealed  to  on  this  point  existed  in  the  time  of  our 
Saviour,  and  tiiAt  it  is  highly  probable  that  the 
letter  of  the  law  in  regard  to  trading  was  habitually 
relaxed  in  the  case  of  what  was  required  for  reli- 
gious rites,  or  for  burials.  There  was  plaiidy  a 
distinction  recognized  between  a  day  of  holy  convo- 
cation and  the  Sabbath  in  the  Mosaic  law  itself,  in 
respect  to  the  obtaining  and  ])reparation  of  food, 
under  whicli  head  the  Chagigah  might  come  (Ex.  xii. 
IG);  and  in  the  ]\Iishna  the  same  distinction  is 
clearly  maintained  (  Yoni  Tob,  v.  2,  and  3Ieijilla, 
i.  T)).  It  also  appears  that  the  School  of  HiUel 
allowed  more  liberty  in  certtiin  particulars  on  fes- 
tivals and  fasts  in  the  night  than  in  the  day  time.t 
And  it  is  ex])ressly  stated  in  the  IMishna,  that  on  the 
Sabbath  itself,  wine, oil, and  bread,  could  be  obtained 
by  leaving  a  cloak  (D^D),'  as  a  pledge,  and  when 
the  14th  of  Nisan  fell  on  a  Sabbath  the  paschal  lamb 

1  J'esachim,  iv.  5.  The  special  application  of  the  liceiico 
is  rather  obscure.  See  Barteuoru's  note.  Couip.  also 
J'&ach.  vi.  2. 

r  This  word  may  mean  an  oul-r  garment  of  any  form, 
lint  It  is  more  fre(iuently  used  to  denote  the  fringed  scarf 
worn  by  every  Jew  in  the  service  of  the  syiiaBogue  (Uuxt. 
/.ex.  Talm.  col.  877). 

'  St.  Augustine  says,  "  0  linpia  coecitas  !  Habitaculo 
videlicet  contanunarcntur  alieno,  et  non  coiitaiuhuirentur 
scelero  proprlo  ?  Alienigenae  judlcls  praelorio  contaniinari 
timebarit,  ot  fratris  liniocentis  sangiiliip  ifon  liiiicbant. 
Dies  enim  agere  coepcnint  azynionnu  :  qiiilMisdielniscon- 
tarainatio  lUls  rratjn  alienigenae  liabltaculuin  Inlrare  " 
(^Tt-act.  cxiv.  in  Jojm.  xviii.  2). 
VOL.  II. 


PASSOVER 


721 


could  be  obtained  in  like  manner  {S(t,hbath,\!il\\\.  1  ). 
Alms  also  could  be  given  to  the  poor  under  certain 
conditions  {Sabbath,  i.  1). 

(c.)  John  xviii.  28.  The  Jews  refused  to  enter  the 
praetorium,  lest  they  should  be  defiled  and  so  dis- 
qualified from  eating  the  Passover.  Neander  and 
others  deny  that  this  passage  can  possibly  refer  to 
anything  but  the  paschal  supper.  But  it  is  alleged 
that  the  words  'lya  (pdyaxri  to  iraffxa,  may  eitlier 
be  taken  in  a  general  sense  as  meaning  "  that  they 
might  go  on  keeping  the  passover,"  ••  or  that  rh 
TTctfTXa  may  be  understood  specifically  to  denote  the 
Chagigah.  That  it  might  be  so  used  is  lendered 
probable  by  Luke  xxii.  1  ;  and  the  Hebrew  word 
which  it  represents  (PIDS),  evidently  refers  equiiliy 
to  the  victims  for  the  Chagigah  and  the  paschal 
lamb  (Deut.  xvi.  2),  wheie  it  is  commanded 
that  the  Passover  should  be  sacrificed  "  of  the 
flock  and  the  heitl."'  In  the  plural  it  is  used 
in  the  same  manner  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  7,  9).  It  is 
moreover  to  be  kept  iu  view  that  the  Passover 
might  be  eaten  by  those  who  had  incurred  a  degree 
of  legal  impurity,  and  that  this  was  not  the  case  in 
respect  to  the  Chagigah."^  Joseph  apjiears  not  to 
have  pai  ticipated  in  the  scruple  of  the  other  rulers, 
as  he  entered  the  praetorium  to  beg  the  body  of 
Jesus  (Mark  xv.  43).  Lightfoot  {Re.  Heb.  in 
loc.)  goes  so  far  as  to  draw  an  argument  in  favour 
of  the  14th  being  the  day  of  the  supper  from  the 
very  text  in  question.  He  says  that  the  slight 
defilement  incuned  by  entering  a  Gentile  house, 
had  the  Jews  merely  intended  to  eat  the  supper  in 
the  evening,  might  have  been  done  away  in  good 
time  by  mere  ablution;  but  that  as  the  festival  had 
actually  commenced,  and  they  were  probably  just 
about  to  eat  the  Chagigah,  they  could  not  resort 
even  to  such  a  simple  mode  of  purification.^ 

{d.)  John  xix.  14.  "  The  preparation  of  the  Pass- 
over" at  first  sight  would  seem  as  if  it  must  be  the 
preparation  for  the  Passover  on  the  14th,  a  time  set 
apart  for  making  ready  for  the  p;ischal  week  and  for 
the  paschal  sujiper  iu  })articular.  It  is  naturally  so 
understood  by  those  who  advocate  the  notion  that  the 
last  supper  was  eaten  on  the  13th.  But  they  who 
take  the  opposite  view  affirm  that,  though  there 
was  a  regular  "  preparation  "  for  the  Sabbath,  there 
is  no  mention  of  any  "preparation"  for  the  fes- 
tivals (Bochart,  Keland,  Tholuck,  Hengsteuberg). 
The  word  Trapatr/ceuij  is  expressly  explained  by 
irpoad^^arov  (Mark  xv.  42 :  Lachmann  leads 
TTphs  crd^^arov.)  It  seems  to  be  essentially  con- 
nected with  the  Sabbath  itself  (John  xix.  31).y 
There  is  no  mention  whatever  of  the  preparation 
for  the  Sabbath  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  it  is 
mentioned  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xvi.  G,  §2),  ami  it 
would  f-eem  from  him  that  the  lime  of  preparation 
formally  commenced  at  the  ninth  hour  of  the 
sixth   day  of    the    week.     The    irpocrdfifiaroi/    is 

'  See  p.  717  6.,  and  Schoettgeu  on  John  xviii.  2s. 

»  See  2  Chr.  xxx.  17 ;  also  Pesadiim,  vii.  4,  wiih  Alal. 
nionldes'  note. 

»  Dr.  Falrbaim  takes  the  expression,  "  that  Uiey  might 
eat  the  Passover,"  in  ils  limiteil  sense,  and  supposes  that 
these  Jews,  in  tlieir  determined  hatred,  were  willing  to  put 
off  the  meal  to  the  verge  of,  or  even  beyond,  the  legal  time 
{llcrm.  Manual,  p.  341). 

y  It  cannot,  however,  be  denied  that  the  days  of  holy 
eonvdcation  are  sometimes  di'sisnated  in  the  0.  T.  simply 
as  sabbaths  (Lev.  xvi.  31,  xxiil.  II,  3'.;).  It  is  Ihcreforo 
not  quite  impossible  that  the  language  of  the  Gospels 
considered  by  itself,  might  refer  to  them.    [Pkstecost.1 

3  A 


722 


PASSOVER 


named  iu  Judith  viii.  6  as  one  of  the  tunes  on 
which  devout  Jews  suspended  their  fasts.  It  was 
called  by  the  liabbis  Nniny,  qaia  est  n3.'^  mi? 

•^  T  :       -:  T  -         vv 

(Buxt.  Lex.  Talm.  col.  1659).  The  phrase  in 
John  -xix.  14  may  thus  be  understood  as  the  pre- 
paration of  the  Sabbath  which  fell  in  the  Passover 
week.  This  mode  of  taking  the  expression  seems 
to  be  justified  by  Ignatius,  who  calls  the  Sabbath 
which  occurred  in  the  festival  ca/BjSaTov  tov 
Trdaxa  (Ep.  ad  Phil.  13),  and  by  Socrates,  who 
calls  it  crd^^arov  ttjs  eoprrjs  (Hist.  Eccl.  v.  22). 
If  these  arguments  are  admitted,  the  day  of  the  pre- 
paration mentioned  in  the  Gospels  might  have  fallen 
on  the  day  of  holy  convocation,  the  loth  of  Nisan. 
(e.)  John  xix.  31.  "  That  Sabbath  day  was  a  high 
day  " — r}ix4pa  /xeydXTj.  Any  Sabbath  occurring  in 
the  Passover  week  might  have  been  considered  "  a 
high  day,"  as  deriving  an  accession  of  dignity  fi'om 
the  festival.  But  it  is  assumed  by  those  who  fix 
the  supper  on  the  1 3th  that  the  term  was  applied, 
owing  to  the  15th  being  "a  double  sabbath,''  from 
the  coincidence  of  the  day  of  holy  convocation  with 
the  weekly  festival.  Those,  on  the  other  hand,  who 
identify  the  supper  with  the  paschal  meal,  contend 
that  the  special  dignity  of  the  day  resulted  from  its 
being  that  on  which  the  Omer  was  oliered,  and 
from  which  were  reckoned  the  fifty  days  to  Pen- 
tecost. One  explanation  of  the  term  seems  to  be  as 
good  as  the  other. 

(/.)  The  difficulty  of  supposing  that  our  Lord's 
apprehension,  trial,  and  crucifixion  took  place  on  the 
day  of  holy  convocation  has  been  strongly  urged.' 
If  many  of  the  rabbinical  maxims  for  the  observ- 
ance of  such  days  which  have  been  handed  down  to 
us  were  then  in  force,  these  occurrences  certainly 
could  not  have  taken  place.  But  the  statements 
which  refer  to  Jewish  usage  in  I'egard  to  legal  pro- 
ceedings on  sacred  days  are  very  inconsistent  with 
each  other.  Some  of  them  make  the  difficulty  equally 
great  whether  we  suppose  the  trial  to  have  taken 
place  on  the  14th  or  the  15th.  In  others,  there  are 
exceptions  permitted  which  seem  to  go  far  to  meet 
the  case  before  us.  For  example,  the  Mishna  forbids 
that  a  capital  offender  should  be  examined  in  the 
night,  or  on  the  day,  before  the  Sabbath  or  a  feast- 
day  {Sanhedrim,  iv.  1).  This  law  is  modified  by 
the  glosses  of  the  Gemara."  But  if  it  had  been 
recognised  in  its  obvious  meaning  by  the  Jewish 
rulers,  they  would  have  outraged  it  in  as  gi'eat  a 
degree  on  the  preceding  day  (i.  e.  the  14th)  as  on 
the  day  of  holy  convocation  before  the  Sabbath. 
It  was  also  forbidden  to  administer  justice  on  a 
high  feast-day,  or  to  carry  amis  {Yom  Tob,  v.  2). 
But  these  prohibitions  are  expressly  distinguished 
from  unconditional  precepts,  and  are  reckonetl 
amongst  those  which  may  be  set  aside  by  circum- 
stances. The  membei's  of  the  Sanhedrim  were  for- 
bidden to  eat  any  food  on  the  same  day  after  con- 
demning a  criminal.''  Yet  we  find  them  intending 
to  "  eat  the  Passover"  (John  xviii.  28)  after  pro- 
nouncing the  sentence  (Matt.  xxvi.  65,  66). 

It  was,  however,  expressly  permitted   that  the 


»  Especially  by  Greswell  (Dissert,  iii.  15G), 
"  See  the  notes  of  Coccelus  in  Surenhusius,  iv.  226. 
•>  Bab.  Gem.  Sanhedrim,  quoted  by  Lightloot  on  Matt, 
xxvii.  1.  The  application  of  this  to  the  point  in  hand  will, 
however,  hinge  on  the  way  in  which  we  understand  it  not 
to  have  been  lawful  for  the  Jews  to  put  any  man  to  death 
(John  xviii.  31),  and  therefore  to  pronounce  sentence  in 
the  legal  sense.  If  we  suppose  that  the  Roman  govern- 
ment had  not  deprived  them  of  the  power  of  life  and  death, 


PASSOVER 

Sanhediim  might  assemble  on  the  Sabliath  as  well 
as  on  feast-days,  not  indeed  iu  their  usual  chamber, 
but  in  a  place  near  the  court  of  the  women.'  And 
there  is  a  remarkable  passage  in  the  Mishna  in 
which  it  is  commanded  tiiat  an  elder  not  submitting 
to  the  voice  of  the  Sanhedrim  should  be  kept  at 
Jerusalem  till  one  of  the  three  great  festivals,  and 
then  executed,  in  accordance  with  Deut.  xvii.  12,  13 
(Sanhedrim,  x.  4).  Nothing  is  said  to  lead  us  to 
infer  that  the  execution  could  not  take  place  on  one 
of  the  days  of  holy  convocation.  It  is,  however, 
hardly  necessary  to  refer  to  this,  or  any  similar 
authority,  in  respect  to  the  ci'ucifi.xion,  which  was 
carried  out  in  conformity  with  the  sentence  of  the 
Roman  procurator,  not  that  of  the  Sanhedrim. 

But  we  have  better  proof  than  either  the  Mishna 
or  the  Gemara  can  afford  that  the  Jews  did  not 
hesitate,  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  domination,  to 
carry  arms  and  to  apprehend  a  prisoner  on  a  solemn 
feast-day.  We  find  them  at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles, 
on  the  "  great  day  of  the  feast,"  sending  out  officers 
to  take  our  Lord,  and  rebuking  them  for  not  bring- 
ing Him  (John  vii.  32-45).  St.  Peter  also  was 
seized  during  the  Passover  (Acts  xii.  3,  4).  And, 
again,  the  reason  alleged  by  the  rulers  for  not  ap- 
prehending Jesus  was,  not  the  sanctity  of  the  festi- 
val, but  the  fear  of  an  upi'oar  among  the  multitude 
which  was  assembled  (Matt.  xxvi.  5). 

On  the  whole,  notwithstanding  the  express  de- 
claration of  the  Law  and  of  the  Mishna  that  the 
days  of  holy  convocation  were  to  be  observed  pre- 
cisely as  the  Sabbath,  except  iu  the  preparation  of 
food,  it  is  highly  probable  that  considerable  licence 
was  allowed  in  regard  to  them,  as  we  have 
already  observed.  It  is  very  evident  that  the 
festival  times  were  characterised  by  a  fi-ee  and 
jubilant  character  which  did  not  belong,  in  the 
same  degree,  to  the  Sabbath,  and  which  was  plainly 
not  restricted  to  the  days  which  fell  between  the 
days  of  holy  convocation  (Lev.  xxiii.  40  ;  Deut.  xii. 
7,  xiv.  26 :  see  p.  714).  It  should  also  be  observed 
that  while  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  was  enforced 
on  strangers  dwelling  amongst  the  Israelites,  such 
was  not  the  case  with  the  law  of  the  Festivals.  A 
greater  freedom  of  action  in  cases  of  urgent  need 
would  naturally  follow,  and  it  is  not  difficult  to 
suppose  that  the  women  who  "  rested  on  the  Sab- 
bath-day according  to  the  commandment  "  had  pre- 
pared the  spices  aud  linen  for  the  intombment  on 
the  day  of  holy  convocation.  To  say  nothing  of 
the  way  in  which  the  question  might  be  affected  by 
the  much  greater  licence  permitted  by  the  school  of 
Hillel  than  by  the  school  of  Shammai,  in  all  matters 
of  this  kind,  it  is  remarkable  that  we  find,  on  the 
Sabbath-day  itself,  not  only  Joseph  (Mark  xv.  43), 
but  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  coming  to  Pilate, 
and,  as  it  would  seem,  entering  the  praetorium 
(Matt,  xxvii.  62). 

3.  There  is  a  strange  story  preserved  in  the  Ge- 
mara (Sanhedrim,  vi.  2 )  that  Our  Lord  having  vainly 
endeavoured  during  forty  days  to  find  an  advocate, 
was  sentenced,  and,  on  the  14th  of  Nisan,  stoned, 
and  afterwards   hansred.     As  we   know   that   the 


it  may  have  been  to  avoid  breaking  their  law,  as  expressed 
tn  Sanhedrim,  iv.  1,  that  theywished  to  throw  the  matter 
on  the  procurator.  See  Biscoe,  Lectures  on  the  Acts,  p.  166 ; 
Scaliger's  note  in  the  Critici  Sacri  on  John  xviii.  31 ; 
Lightfoot,  Ex.  Beb.,  Matt.  xxvi.  3,  and  John  xviii.  31, 
where  the  evidence  is  given  which  is  in  favour  of  the  Jews 
having  resigned  the  vigli  t  of  capital  punishmen  t  forty  years 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
'^  Gem.  Sanhedrim. 


PASSOVER 

difliculty  of  the  Gospel  uairatives  had  been  per- 
ceived long  before  this  statement  could  have  been 
wiitteu,  and  as  the  two  opposite  opinions  on  the 
chief  question  were  both  current,  the  writer  might 
easily  have  taken  up  one  or  the  other.  The  state- 
ment cannot  be  regarded  as  worth  anything  iu  the 
way  of  evidence."* 

Not  much  use  can  be  made  in  the  controversy 
of  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers.  But  few  of 
them  attempted  to  consider  the  question  critically. 
Eu.sebius  {Jlist.  Ecc.  v.  23,  24)  has  recorded  the 
traditions  which  were  in  favour  of  St.  John  having 
kept  Easter  on  the  14th  of  the  mouth.  It  has 
been  thought  that  those  traditions  rather  help  the 
conclusion  that  the  supper  was  on  the  14th.  But 
the  question  on  which  Eusebius  brings  them  to  bear 
is  simply  whether  the  Christian  festival  should  be 
observed  on  the  14th,  the  day  eV  fi  dvnv  rit  irp6- 
0a7ov  'lovSalois  ■irporiy6p€VTO,  on  whatever  day  of 
the  week  it  might  fall,  or  on  the  Sunday  of  the 
lesurrection.  It  seems  that  nothing  whatever  can 
be  safely  inferred  from  them  respecting  the  day  of 
the  month  of  the  supper  or  the  crucifixion.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  and  Origen  appeal  to  the  Gosjjel  of 
St.  John  as  deciding  iu  favour  of  the  13th.  Chry- 
sostom  expresseshimself  doubtfully  between  the  two. 
St.  Augustin  was  in  favour  of  the  14th.* 

4.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John,  as  far  as  the  mere  succession  of  events  is 
concerned,  bears  consistent  testimony  in  fiivour  of 
the  last  supper  having  been  eaten  on  the  evening 
befoi-e  the  Passover.  That  testimony,  however, 
does  not  appear  to  be  so  distinct,  and  so  incapable 
of  a  second  interpretation,  as  that  of  the  synoptical 
tiospels,  in  favour  of  the  meal  having  been  the 
pa.schal  supper  itself,  at  the  legal  time  (see  espe- 
cially Matt.  xxvi.  17  ;  Mark  .xiv.  1, 12  ;  Luke  xxii.  7). 
Whether  the  explanations  of  the  passages  in  St. 
John,  and  of  the  difficulties  resulting  from  the 
nature  of  the  occurrences  related,  compared  with 
the  enactments  of  the  Jewish  law,  be  considered 
satisfactory  or  not,  due  weight  should  be  given  to 
the  antecedent  probability  that  the  meal  was  no 
other  than  the  regular  Passover,  and  that  the  rai- 
sonableness  of  the  contrary  view  cannot  be  main- 
tained without  some  artificial  theory,  having  no 
jiroper  foundation  either  in  Scripture  or  ancient 
testimony  of  any  kind. 

IV.  Meaning  of  the  Passover. 
1.  Each  of  the  thi-ee  great  festivals  contained  a 


PASSOVER 


723 


d  Other  llabblnical  authorities  countenance  the  state- 
ment that  Clirist  was  executed  on  the  14th  of"  the  moiilh 
(see  Jost,  Judenth.  i.  104).  But  this  seems  to  lie  a  case 
in  which,  for  Uie  reason  stated  above  numbers  do  not  add 
to  the  weiglit  of  the  testimony. 

»  Numerous  Tatristlc  authorities  are  stated  by  Mal- 
(liiuat  on  Matt.  xxvi. 

f  Hupfeld  has  devised  an  nrranfcemont  of  the  passages 
in  tlie  Pentateuch  beariiiR  on  the  Passover  .so  &s  to  show, 
according  to  tliis  theory,  their  relative  antiquity.  Thi,' 
order  Is  as  follows:— (I)  Kx.  xxiii.  14-17 ;  (2)  Kx.  xxxiv. 
18-26;  (3)  Ex.  .\iil.  3-10;  (4)  Kx.  xii.  15-20;  (5)  Ex.  xli. 
1-14  ;  (G)  Ex.  xii.  43-50;  (7)  Num.  ix.  10-14. 

The  view  of  Haur,  that  the  Passover  \v;us  an  astrono- 
mical festival  and  the  lamb  a  symbol  of  the  si(;n  Aries, 
and  that  of  Von  liohlen,  that  it  resembled  tlie  sun-feast  ot 
the  Peruvians, are  well  exposed  by  Hilhr (.s'yni/wf lA.-).  Our 
own  Spencer  has  endeavoured  in  liis  usual  manner  to  show 
that  many  details  of  the  festival  were  derived  from  heatJicn 
sources,  though  he  admltjs  the  oripinality  of  the  whole. 

It  may  seem  at  first  sight  as  if  some  countenance  were 
given  to  the  notion  that  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread 


reference  to  the  annual  course  of  nature.  Two,  at 
least,  of  them — the  first  and  the  last — also  comme- 
morated events  in  the  history  of  the  chosen  people. 
The  coincidence  of  the  times  of  their  observance  with 
the  most  marked  periods  in  the  process  of  gatherino- 
in  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  h;is  not  unnaturally  sug- 
gested the  notion  that  their  agricultural  significance 
is  the  more  ancient ;  that  in  fiict  they  were  oii- 
ginally  harvest  feasts  observed  by  the  patriarchs, 
and  that  their  historical  meaning  was  superadded 
iu  later  times  (Ewald,  Hupfeld'). 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  relation  to  the 
natural  year  expressed  in  the  Passover  was  less 
marked  than  that  in  Pentecost  or  Tabernacles,  while 
its  historical  import  was  deeper  and  more  pointed. 
It  seems  hardly  possible  to  .study  the  history  of  the 
Passover  with  candour  and  attention,  as  it  stands  in 
the  Scriptures,  without  being  diiven  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  was,  at  the  very  first,  essentially  the 
commemoration  of  a  great  historical  fltct.  That  part 
of  its  ceremonies  which  has  a  direct  agricultural 
reference — the  offering  of  the  Omer — holds  a  very 
subordinate  place. 

But  as  regards  the  whole  of  the  feasts,  it  is  not 
very  easy  to  imagine  that  the  rites  which  belonged 
to  them  connected  with  the  harvest,  were  of  pa- 
triarchal origin.  Such  rites  were  adapted  for  the 
religion  of  an  agricultural  people,  not  for  that  of 
shepherds  like  the  patriarchs.  It  would  seem, 
therefore,  that  we  gain  but  little  by  speculating  on 
the  simple  impression  conveyed  in  the  Pentateuch, 
that  the  feasts  were  ordained  by  Moses  in  their 
integrity,  and  that  they  were  arranged  with  a  view 
to  the  religious  wants  of  the  people  when  they  were 
to  be  .settled  in  the  Land  of  Promise. 

2.  The  deliverance  from  Egypt  was  regarded  as 
the  starting-point  of  the  Hebrew  nation.  The 
Israelites  were  then  raised  from  the  condition  of 
bondmen  under  a  foreign  tyrant  to  that  of  a  fiee 
people  owing  allegiance  to  no  one  but  Jehovah. 
"  Ye  have  seen,"  said  the  Lord,  "what  I  did  unto 
the  Egyptians,  and  how  I  bare  you  on  eagles'  wings 
and  brought  you  unto  myself"  (Ex.  xix.  4). 
The  prophet  iu  a  later  age  spoke  of  the  event  as 
a  creation  and  a  redemption  of  the  nation,  (iod 
declares  Himself  to  be  "  the  creator  of  Israel,"  in 
immediate  connexion  with  evident  allusions  to  His 
having  brought  them  out  of  Egypt ;  such  as  His 
having  made  "  a  way  in  the  sea,  and  a  jiath  in  tlie 
mighty  waters,"  and  His  having  overthrown  "  tlie 
chariot  and  horse,  the  army  and  the  power"  (Is. 


was  originally  a  distinct  festival  from  tbe  I'assover,  by 
such  passages  as  Lev.  xxiii.  5,  6  :  "  In  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord's  Passover ;  and  on 
the  fifteenth  day  of  the  same  month  is  the  feast  of  iniloa- 
vened  bread  unto  the  Lord :  seven  days  ye  must  eat  uii- 
leavenod  bread  "  (see  also  Num.  xxviii.  16,  17).  Joseplius 
iu  like  manner  speaks  of  the  feast  of  unleavened  l)read  as 
"following  the  Passover"  (^Ant.  ill.  10,  ^5).  But  such 
language  may  mean  no  more  than  the  distinction  between 
the  pa.schal  supper  and  tlie  seven  days  of  imUavoned  bread, 
which  is  so  obviously  implied  in  the  fact  that  the  eating 
of  unleavened  bread  was  observed  by  the  country  .lews 
who  were  at  home,  though  tliey  could  not  partjike  of  the 
paschal  lamb  without  going  to  .lerusalcm.  Every  memlier 
of  tbe  household  had  to  abstain  from  loaven(d  bread,  but 
some  only  went  up  to  the  paschal  meal.  (S<>e  Wainion. 
l>e.  Femuntalo  ct  Azymn.  vi.  1.)  It  is  evident  that  the 
commrtn  usage,  in  later  times  at  least,  was  to  employ,  a.s 
equivalent  terras,  thefroH  of  the  Passover,  and  the  feast 
of  unleavened  bread  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark  xiv.  12; 
I;nke  xxii.  1;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  2,  }1;  B.  J.  li.  1,  ^3). 
Sec  note  ■,  p.  7 is. 

3  A   2 


724 


PASSOVER 


.\liii.  1,  15-17).  The  Exodus  was  tlius  looked  upon 
as  the  birth  of  the  nation  ;  the  Passover  was  its 
annual  birth-day  feast.  Nearly  all  the  rites  of  the 
festival,  if  e.xplained  ill  the  most  natural  manner, 
appear  to^point  to  this  as  its  primaiy  meaning.  It 
was  the  yearly  memorial  of  the  dedication  of  the 
people  to  Him  who  had  saved  their  first-born  from 
the  destroyer,  in  order  that  they  might  be  made 
holy  to  Himself.  This  was  the  lesson  which  they 
were  to  teach  to  their  children  throughout  all 
generations.  When  the  youug  Hebrew  asked  his 
lather  regarding  the  paschal  lamb,  "  What  is  this  ?  " 
the  answer  prescribed  w;\s,  "  By  strength  of  hand 
the  Loid  brought  us  out  fiom  Egypt,  from  the  house 
of  bondage :  and  it  came  to  pass  when  Pharaoh 
would  hardly  let  us  go,  that  the  Lord  slew  all  the 
first-born  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  both  the  fii'st-born 
of  man  and  the  first-born  of  beast;  theiefore  I 
sacrifice  to  the  Lord  all  that  openeth  the  womb, 
being  males ;  but  all  the  first-boin  of  my  children 
I  redeem"  (Ex.  xiii.  14,  15).  Hence,  in  the  periods 
of  great  national  restoration  in  the  times  of  Joshua, 
Hezekiah,  Josiah,  and  Ezra,  the  Passover  was  ob- 
sei"ved  in  a  special  manner,  to  remind  the  people 
of  their  true  position,  and  to  mark  their  renewal  of 
the  covenant  which  their  fathers  had  made. 

3.  (rt.)  The  ]iaschal  lamb  must  of  course  be  re- 
garded as  the  leading  featuie  in  the  ceremonial  of 
the  festival.  Some  Piotest-int  divines  during  the  last 
two  centuries  (Calov,  Cai'pzov),  laying  great  stress 
on  the  fact  that  nothing  is  said  in  the  law  respect- 
ing either  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  priest 
on  the  head  of  the  lamb,  or  the  bestowing  of  any 
poition  of  the  flesh  on  the  priest,  have  denied  that 
it  was  a  sacrifice  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word., 
They  appear  to  have  been  tempted  to  take  tliis  view, 
in  order  to  deprive  the  Romanists  of  an  analogical 
argument  beaiing  on  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  They  afliirmed  that  the  lamb  was 
sacramentipn,  not  sacrificium.  I->ut  most  of  their 
contemporaries  (Cudwoith,  Bochait,  Vitringa),  and 
neai'ly  all  modern  critics,  have  held  that  it  was  in 
the  stiictest  sense  a  sacrifice.  The  chief  charac- 
teristics of  a  saciifice  are  all  distinctly  ascribed  to  it. 
It  was  offered  in  the  holy  jdace  (Deut.  xvi.  5,  6) ;  the 
blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  and  the  fat  was 
burned  (2  Chr.  xxx.  16,  xxxv.  11).  Philo  and 
Josephus  commonly  call  it  6D/xa  or  Qv<xia.  The 
language  of  Ex.  xii.  27,  xxiii.  18,  Num.  ix.  7,  Deut. 
xvi.  2,  5,  together  with  1  Cor.  v.  7,  would  seem  to 
decide  the  question  beyond  the  reach  of  doubt. 

As  the  original  institution  of  the  Passover  in 
Egypt  preceded  the  establishment  of  the  piiesthood 
and  the  regulation  of  the  service  of  the  tabernacle, 
it  necessarily  fell  sliort  in  several  paiticulars  of 
the  observance  of  the  festival  accoiding  to  the 
fully  developed  ceremonial  law  (see  II.  1).  The 
head  of  the  family  slew  the  lamb  in  his  own  house, 
not  in  the  holy  place:  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on 
the  doorway,  not  on  the  altar.  But  when  the 
law  was  perfected,  certain  particulars  were  altered 


PASSOVER 

in  order  to  assimilate  the  Passover  to  tlie  accus- 
tomed order  of  religious  service.  It  has  been  con- 
jectured that  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the 
priest  was  one  of  these  particulars,  though  it  is  not 
recorded  (Kurtz).  But  whether  this  was  the  case  or 
not,  the  other  changes  which  have  been  stated  seem 
to  be  abundantly  sufficient  for  the  argument.  It  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  the  paschal  lamb  was-  le- 
garded  as  the  great  annual  peace-ofl'ering  of  the 
family,  a  thank-otJ'ering  for  the  existence  and  pre- 
servation of  the  nation  (Ex.  xiii.  14-16),  the  typical 
sacrifice  of  the  elected  and  reconciled  children  of  tlie 
promise.  It  was  peculiarly  the  Lord's  own  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxiii.  18,  xxxiv.  25).  It  was  more  ancient  than 
the  written  law,  and  called  to  mind  that  covenant 
on  which  the  law  was  based.  It  retained  in  a 
special  manner  the  expression  of  the  sacredness  of 
the  whole  people,  and  of  the  divine  mission  of  the 
head  of  every  family ,e  according  to  the  spirit  of  the 
old  patriarclial  priesthood.  No  part  of  the  victim 
was  given  to  the  priest  as  in  other  peace-ofi'erings, 
because  the  father  was  the  priest  himself.  The 
custom,  handed  on  from  age  to  age,  thus  guarded 
from  supeistition  the  idea  of  a  priesthood  placed  in 
the  members  of  a  single  tribe,  while  it  visibly  set 
forth  the  promise  which  was  connected  with  the 
deliverance  of  the  people  from  Egypt,  "  Ye  shall  be 
unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation  " 
(Ex.  xix.  6).''  In  this  way  it  became  a  testimony 
in  favour  of  domestic  worship.  In  the  historiail 
fact  that  the  blood  in  later  times  sprinkled  on  the 
altar,  had  at  first  had  its  divinely  appointed  place 
on  the  lintels  and  door-posts,'  it  was  declared  that 
the  national  altar  itself  represented  the  sanctity 
which  belonged  to  the  house  of  every  Israelite,  not 
that  only  which  belonged  to  the  nation  as  a  whole. 

A  question,  perhaps  not  a  wise  one,  has  been 
raised  regarding  the  purpose  of  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  on  the  lintels  and  door-posts.  Some  have 
considered  that  it  was  meant  as  a  mark  to  guide 
the  destroying  angel.  Otheis  suppose  that  it  was 
merely  a  sign  to  confirm  the  faith  of  the  Israelites 
in  their  safety  and  deliverance.''  Surely  neither  of 
these  views  can  stand  alone.  The  sprinkling  must 
have  been  an  act  of  faith  and  obedience  which  God 
accepted  with  favour.  "  Through  faith  (we  are 
told)  Moses  kept  the  Passover  and  the  sprinkling 
of  blood,  lest  he  that  destroyed  the  first-born  should 
touch  them  "  (Heb.  xi.  28).  Whatever  else  it  may 
have  been,  it  was  certainly  an  essential  part  of  a 
sacrament,  of  an  "  efiectual  sign  of  grace  and  of 
God's  good  will,"  expressing  the  mutual  relation 
into  which  the  covenant  had  brought  the  Creator 
and  the  creature.  That  it  also  denoted  the  purifi- 
cation of  the  children  of  Israel  from  the  abomina- 
tions of  the  Egyptians,  and  so  had  the  accustomed 
significance  of  the  sprinkling  of  blood  under  tlie  law 
(Heb.  ix.  22),  is  evidently  in  entire  consistency  with 
this  view. 

No  satisfactory  reason  has  been  assigned  for  the 
command  to  choose  the  lamb  four  days  before  the 


e  The  fact  which  has  been  noticed,  XL  3.  (/),  is  re- 
markable in  this  connexion,  that  those  who  had  not 
incurred  a  degree  of  impurity  sufficient  to  disqualify 
them  from  eating  the  paschal  lamb,  were  yet  not  pure 
enough  to  take  the  priestly  part  in  sliiyins  it. 

i"  Philo,  speaking  of  the  Passover,  says,  cruij.irav  to 
f9vo^  teparat,  tuiv  Kara  jne'po?  eKaCTOV  rd?  virkp*  avTOv 
Ovjias  i.vd.yovTO';  Tore  Km.  y^ti.povpyovvTO';.  'O  fi.kv  ovv 
aWoi  aTra;  A.6U9  ey(y^]9el.  xat  0ai5pbs  rjv,  iKacTTOv 
fom'foi/To;  Upoa-uvr)  TeTiju-^cflai. — Ue  Vit.  Mosis,  iii.  29, 
vol.  iv.  p.  250,  edit.  Tauch. 


»  As  regards  the  mere  place  of  sprinkling  in  the  first 
Passover,  on  the  reason  of  which  there  has  been  some 
speculation,  iJahr  reasonably  supposes  that  the  lintels 
and  door-posts  were  selected  as  the  parts  of  the  house 
most  obvious  to  passers-by,  and  to  which  inscrip- 
tions of  different  kinds  were  often  attached.  Comp. 
I;eut.  vi.  9. 

k  Especially  Bochart  and  Biihr.  The  former  says,  "  Hoc 
signum  Deo  non  datum  sed  Hebraeis  ut  eo  coufuiuati  de 
liberatione  certi  sint " 


PASSOVER 

paschal  supper.  Kurtz  (following  Hofmann)  fancies 
that  the  four  days  signified  the  four  centuries  of 
Egyptian  bondage.  As  in  later  times,  the  rule  ap- 
pears not  to  have  been  observed  (see  p.  714,6.),  the 
reason  of  it  was  probably  of  a  temporary  nature. 

That  the  lamb  was  to  be  roasted  and  not  boiled, 
has  been  supposed  to  commemorate  the  haste  of  the 
departure  of  the  Israelites.™  >^pencer  observes  on 
the  other  hand  that,  as  they  had  their  cooking 
vessels  with  them,  one  mode  would  have  been  as 
expeditious  as  tiie  other.  Some  think  that,  like 
the  dress  and  the  ))0sture  in  which  the  first  Passover 
was  to  be  eaten,  it  was  intended  to  remind  the  people 
tliat  they  were  now  no  longer  to  regard  themselves 
as  settled  down  in  a  home,  but  as  a  host  upon  the 
march,  roasting  being  the  proper  military  mode  of 
di'essnig  meat.  Kurtz  conjectures  that  the  lamb 
was  to  be  roasted  with  fire,  the  purifying  element, 
because  the  meat  was  thus  left  pure,  witiiout  the 
nuxture  even  ot  the  water,  which  would  have  en- 
tered into  it  in  boiling.  The  meat  in  its  purity 
would  thus  correspond  in  signification  with  the 
unleavened  bread  (see  II.  3  (6  )  ). 

It  is  not  ditlicult  to  determine  the  reason  of  the 
command,  "  not  a  bone  of  him  shall  be  broken." 
The  lamb  was  to  be  a  symbol  of  unity  ;  the  tuiity  of 
the  family,  the  unity  of  the  nation,  the  unity  of 
God  with  His  peojjle  whom  He  had  taken  into  cove- 
nant with  Himself.  While  the  flesh  was  divided 
into  portions,  so  that  each  member  of  the  family 
could  partake,  the  skeleton  was  left  one  and  entire 
to  lemind  them  of  the  bonds  which  united  tlunn. 
Thus  the  words  of  the  law  are  applied  to  the  body 
of  our  Saviour,  as  the  type  of  that  still  higher 
unity  of  which  He  was  Himself  to  be  the  author 
and  centre  (John  .\ix.  3G). 

The  same  significance  may  evidently  be  attached 
to  the  prohibition  that  no  part  of  the  meat  should 
be  kept  for  another  meal,  or  carried  to  another 
liouse.  Tlie  paschal  meal  in  each  house  was  to  be 
one,  whole  and  entire. 

■  (6.)  The  unleavened  bread  ranks  ne.xt  in  import- 
ance to  the  paschal  lamb.  The  notion  has  been 
very  generally  held,  or  taken  for  granted,  both  by 
Christian  and  Jewish  writers  of  all  ages,  tliat  it 
was  inteuiied  to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  un- 
leavened cakes  which  they  were  obliged  to  eat  in 
their  lutsty  flight  (Ex.  xii.  34,  39).  But  there  is 
not  the  least  intimation  to  this  efi'ect  in  the  sacred 
narrative.  On  the  contraiy,  the  command  was  given 
to  Moses  and  Aaron  that  unleavened  bread  should 
be  eaten  with  the  lamb  before  the  circumstiince 
occurred  u])oii  whii:h  tifis  explanation  is  based. 
Comp.  Ex.  xii.  8  with  xii.  39. 

It  hiis  been  considered  by  some  (Ewalil,  Winer, 
and  the  modern  Jews)  tliat  the  unleavened  bread 
and  the  bitter  herbs  alike  owe  their  meaning  to 
their  being   regarded    as    unpalatable    food.      The 

■"  So  Biilir  and  most  of  the  Jewish  authorities. 

n  Hupl'eld  imagines  that  bread  without  leaven,  being 
the  simplest  result  of  cooked  grain,  chaructcrised  the  old 
agricultural  festival  which  existed  before  the  sacrifice  of 
the  lamb  was  Instituted. 

o  'I'he  root  yHI^  signifies  "  to  make  drj-."  Kurtz  thinks 
that  dryness  ratlicr  than  sweetness  is  the  idea  in  HVifcJD- 
l!ut  sweet  In  this  connexion  has  the  sense  of  uncon-upled, 
or  incorruptible,  and  hence  is  easily  connected  with  dry- 
ness. Perhaps  our  auihori/A'd  version  has  lost  something 
in  expressiveness  by  substituting  the  term  "unleavened 
bread  "  for  the  "  sweet  bread  "  of  the  older  versions,  which 
siill  holds  its  place  in  1  Ksd.  i.  19. 


PASSOVER  725 

expression  "  bread  of  affliction,"  *j'y  QVO  (Deut. 
xvi.  3),  is  regarded  as  equivalent  to  fasiinij-hread, 
and  on  this  ground  Ewald  ascribes  something  of  the 
character  of  a  fast  to  the  Passover.  But  this  seems 
to  be  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  pervading  joyous 
nature  of  the  festival.  The  bread  of  affliction  may 
mean  bread  which,  in  present  gladness,  commemo- 
rated, either  in  itself,  or  in  common  with  the  other 
elements  of  the  feast,  the  past  aflliction  of  the 
people  (BJihr,  Kurtz,  Hofmann).  It  should  not  be 
forgotten  that  unleavened  bread  was  not  peculiar  to 
the  Passover.  The  ordinary  "  meat-offering  "  was 
unleavened  (Lev.  ii.  4,  5,  vii.  12,  x.  12  &c.),  and 
so  was  the  shewbread  (Lev.  xxiv.  5-9).  The  use 
of  unleavened  bread  in  the  consecration  of  the  priests 
(Ex.  xxix.  23),  and  in  the  offering  of  the  Nazarite 
(Num.  vi.  19),  is  interesting  in  relation  to  the  Pass- 
over, as  being  apparently  connected  with  the  con- 
secration of  the  person.  On  the  whole,  we  are 
warranted  in  concluding  that  unleavened  bread  had 
a  peculiar  sacrificial  character,  according  to  the  law, 
and  it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  a  particular  kind 
of  food  should  have  been  offered  to  the  Lord  because 
it  was  insipid  or  unpalatable." 

It  seems  more  reasonable  to  accept  St.  Paul's  re- 
ference to  the  subject  ( 1  Cor.  v.  6-8)  as  furnishing 
the  true  meaning  of  the  symbol.  Fermentation  is 
decomposition,  a  dissolution  of  unity.  This  must 
be  more  obvious  to  ordinary  eyes  where  the  leaven 
in  coinmon  use  is  a  piece  of  sour  dough,  instead  of 
the  expedients  at  present  employed  in  this  country 
to  make  bread  light.  The  pure  dry  biscuit,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  bread  thus  leavened,  would  be  an 
apt  emblem  of  unchanged  duration,  and,  in  its 
freedom  from  foreign  mixture,  of  purity  also."  If 
this  was  the  accepted  meaning  among  the  Jews, 
"  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincerity  and  truth " 
must  have  been  a  clear  and  familiar-  expression  to 
St.  Paul's  Jewish  readers.  Biihr  conceives  that  as 
the  blood  of  the  lamb  figured  the  act  of  purifying, 
tiie  getting  rid  of  the  corruptions  of  Egypt,  the 
unleavened  bread  signified  the  abiding  state  of  con- 
secrated holiness. 

(c.)  The  bitter  herbs  are  generally  understood  by 
the  Jewish  writers  to  signify  the  IJitter  sufferings 
which  the  Israelites  had  endured  p  (Ex.  i.  14).  But 
it  has  been  remarked  by  Abenezi-a  that  these  herbs 
are  a  good  and  wholesome  accompaniment  for  meat, 
and  are  now,  and  appear  to  have  been  in  ancient 
times,  commonly  so  eaten  (see  p.  716). 

(d.)  The  offering  of  the  Omer,  though  it  is  ob- 
viously that  part  of  the  festival  wliicli  is  imme- 
diately connected  with  the  course  of  the  seasons, 
bore  a  distinct  analogy  to  its  historical  significance. 
It  may  have  denoted  a  deliverance  from  winter,  as 
the  lamb  signified  deliverance  from  the  bondage  of 
Egypt,  which  might  well  be  considered  as  a  winter 
in  the  history  of  the  nation. i     Again,  the  consecra- 


P  I^^P  istud  comedimus  quia  amaritudine  affecenint 
Aepj'ptii  vitam  patnim  nostrorum  in  Aegypto.— Maimon. 
in  I'esachim,  viii.  4. 

f  This  application  of  the  rite  perhaps  derives  some 
support  from  the  form  in  which  the  ordinary  first-fruit 
olTering  was  presented  in  the  Temple.  [KiitsT  Fruits.] 
The  call  of  Jacob  ("a  Syrian  ready  to  perish"),  and  the 
deliverance  of  his  children  from  Kgypt,  with  their  settle- 
ment in  the  land  that  flowed  with  milk  and  honey,  were 
then  related  (I)cut.  xxvi.  5-10).  It  is  worthy  of  notice 
that,  according  to  J'esachim,  an  exposition  of  this  passage 
was  an  Important  part  of  the  reply  which  the  father  gave 
to  his  son's  inquiry  during  the  paschal  supper. 

The  account  of  the  procession  In  ofTeriii};  the  first-fruits 


726 


PASSOVER 


tion  of  the  first-fruits,  the  firet-horn  of  tlie  soil,  is 
an  easy  type  of  the  consecration  of  the  first-born  of 
the  Isiaelites.  This  seems  to  be  countenanced  by 
Ex.  xiii.  2-1-,  where  the  sanctification  of  the  first- 
born, and  the  unleavened  bread  which  figured  it, 
seem  to  be  emphatically  connected  with  the  time  of 
vear,  Abib,  the  month  of  green  ears.^ 

4.  No  other  shadow  of  good  things  to  come  con- 
tained in  the  Law  can  vie  with  the  festival  of  the 
Passover  in  expressiveness  and  completeness.  Hence 
we  are  so  often  reminded  of  it,  more  or  less  dis- 
tinctly, in  the  ritual  and  language  of  the  Church. 
Its  outline,  considered  in  reference  to  the  great 
deliverance  of  the  Israelites  which  it  commemorated, 
and  many  of  its  minute  details,  have  been  appro- 
priated as  current  expiessions  of  the  truths  which 
God  has  revealed  to  us  in  the  fulness  of  times  in 
sending  His  Son  upon  earth. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  ecclesiastical  writers 
should  have  pushed  the  comparison  too  far,  and 
exercised  their  fancy  in  the  application  of  trifling 
or  accidental  particulars  either  to  the  facts  of  Our 
Lord's  life  or  to  truths  connected  with  it.*  But, 
keeping  within  the  limits  of  sobei-  interpretation 
indicated  by  Scripture  itself,  the  application  is 
singularly  full  and  edifying.  The  deliverance  of 
Israel  according  to  the  tlesh  from  the  bondage  of 
Egypt  was  always  so  regarded  and  described  by  the 
prophets  as  to  render  it  a  most  apt  type  of  the 
deliverance  of  the  spiritual  Israel  from  the  bondage 
of  sin  into  the  glorious  liberty  with  which  Christ 
has  made  us  free  (see  IV.  2).  The  blood  of  the 
first  paschal  lambs  sprinkled  on  the  doorways  of 
the  houses  has  ever  been  regarded  as  the  best 
defined  foreshadowing  of  that  blood  which  has 
redeemed,  saved,  and  sanctified  us  (Heb.  xi.  28). 
The  lamb  itself,  sacrificed  by  the  worshipper  with- 
out the  inteiTention  of  a  priest,  and  its  flesh  being 
eaten  without  reserve  as  a  meal,  exhibits  the  most 
perfect  of  peace-ofterings,  the  closest  type  of  the 
atoning  Sacrifice  who  died  for  us  and  has  made  our 
peace  with  God  (Is.  liii.  7  ;  John  i.  29 ;  cf.  the 
expression  "  my  sacrifice,"  Ex.  xxxiv.  25,  also  Ex. 
xii.  27;  Acts  viii.  32  ;  1  Cor.  v.  7  ;  1  Pet.  i.  18, 
19).  The  ceremonial  law,  and  the  functions  of 
the  priest  in  later  times,  were  indeed  recognised  in 
the  sacrificial  rite  of  the  Passover ;  but  the  pre- 


in  the  Mishna  QBikurim),  with  the  probable  reference  to 
the  subject  in  Is.  xxx.  29,  can  hardly  have  anything  to  do 
with  the  Passover.  The  connexion  appears  to  have  been 
suggested  by  the  tradition  mentioned  by  Abcnezra,  that 
the  army  of  Sennacherib  was  smitten  on  the  night  of  the 
Passover.  Regarding  this  tradition,  Vitringa  says,  "  Non 
recipio,  nee  spemo"  (/n  Isaiam  xxx.  29). 

■■  See  Gesenius,  T/ies.  In  the  LXX  it  is  called  /ultji/ 
TUiv  viiav,  sc.  Kapwwv.  If  ^isan  is  a  Semitic  word, 
Gesenius  thinks  that  it  means  the  month  of  Jlov:ers,  in 
agreement  with  a  passage  in  Macarius  (Horn,  xvii.)  in 
which  it  is  called  /u.rji'  tmv  av9oiv.  But  he  seems  inclined 
to  favour  an  explanation  of  the  word  suggested  by  a  Zend 
root,  according  to  which  it  would  signify  the  month  of 
New  Tear's  day. 

«  The  crossed  spits  on  which  Justin  Martyr  laid  stress 
are  noticed,  II.  3.  (a).  The  subject  is  expanded  by  Vi- 
tringa. Observat.  Sac.  ii.  10.  The  time  of  the  new  moon,  at 
which  the  festival  was  held,  has  been  taken  as  a  type  of  the 
brightness  of  the  appearing  of  the  Messiah ;  the  lengthen- 
ing of  the  days  at  that  season  of  the  year  as  figuring  the 
ever-increa.'iiug  light  and  warmth  of  the  Itedcomer's 
kingdom;  the  advanced  hour  of  the  day  at  which  the 
supper  was  eaten,  as  a  representation  of  the  fulness  of 
times;  the  roasting  of  the  lamb,  as  the  effect  of  God's 
wrath  against  sin  ;  the  thoiough  cooking  of  the  iamb,  as 


PASSOVER 

vious  existence  of  the  rite  showed  that  they  were 
not  essential  for  the  personal  approach  of  the  w-or- 
shipper  to  God  (see  IV.  3  (a,)  ;  Is.  Ixi.  6  ;  1  Pet. 
ii.  5,  9).  The  unleavened  bread  .is  recognised  as  the 
figure  of  the  state  of  sanctification  which  is  the 
true  eleinent  of  the  believer  in  Christ'  (1  Cor.  v. 
8).  The  haste  with  which  the  meal  was  eaten, 
and  the  girt-up  loins,  the  staves  and  the  sandals, 
are  fit  emblems  of  the  life  of  the  Christian  pilgrim, 
ever  hastening  away  from  the  world  towai'ds  his 
heavenly  destination"  (Luke  xii.  35;  1  Pet.  i.  13, 
ii.  11;  Eph.  V.  15;  Heb.  xi.  13). 

It  has  been  well  observed  by  Kurtz  (on  Ex.  xii.  38), 
that  at  the  very  crisis  when  the  distinction  between 
Israel  and  the  nations  of  the  world  was  most  clearly 
brought  out  (Ex.  xi.  7),  a  "  mixed  multitude  "  went 
out  from  Egypt  with  them  (Ex.  xii.  38),  and  that 
provision  was  then  made  for  all  who  were  willing 
to  join  the  chosen  seed  and  participate  with  them 
in  their  spiritual  advantages  (Ex.  xii.  44).  Thus, 
at  the  very  starting-point  of  national  separation, 
was  foreshadowed  the  calling  in  of  the  Gentiles  to 
that  covenant  in  which  all  nations  of  the  earth 
were  to  be  blessed. 

The  offering  of  the  Omer,  in  its  higher  signifi- 
cation as  a  symbol  of  the  first-born,  has  been 
already  noticed  (IV.  3.  (d) ).  But  its  meaning 
found  full  expression  only  in  that  First-born  of  all- 
creation,  who,  having  died  and  risen  again,  became 
"  the  First-fruits  of  them  that  slept"  (1  Cor.xv.  20). 
As  the  first  of  the  fii'st-fruits,  no  other  otfering  of 
the  sort  seems  so  likely  as  the  Omer  to  have  imme- 
diately suggested  the  expressions  used,  Kom.  viii.  23, 
xi.  16  ;  Jam.  i.  18  ;   Kev.  xiv.  4. 

The  crowning  application  of  the  paschal  rites  to 
the  tiTiths  of  which  they  were  the  shadowy  pro- 
mises appears  to  be  that  which  is  afforded  by  the 
fact  that  our  Lord's  death  occuned  during  the 
festival.  According  to  the  Divine  purpose,  the  true 
Lamb  of  God  was  slain  at  nearly  the  same  time  as 
"  the  Lord's  Passover,"  in  obedience  to  the  letter  of 
the  law.  It  does  not  seem  needful  that,  in  order 
to  give  point  to  this  coincidence,  we  should  (as 
some  have  done)  draw  from  it  an  a  jtriori  argu- 
ment in  favour  of  our  Lord's  crucifixion  having 
taken  place  on  the  14th  of  Nisan  (see  HI.  2.  ii.).  It 
is  enough  to  know  that  our  own  Holy  Week  and 


a  lesson  that  Christian  doctrine  should  be  well  arranged 
and  digested ;  the  prohibition  that  any  part  of  the  flesh 
should  remain  till  the  moniing,  as  a  foreshowing  of  the 
haste  in  which  the  body  of  Christ  was  removed  from  the 
cross  ;  the  unfermented  bread,  as  the  emblem  of  a  humble 
spirit,  while  fermented  bread  was  the  figure  of  a  heart 
puffed  up  with  pride  and  vanity.  (See  Suicer,  sub  jrao-xa.) 
In  the  like  spirit,  Justin  Martyr  and  Lactantius  take  up 
the  charge  against  the  Jews  of  corruptiug  the  0.  T.,  with 
a  view  to  deprive  the  Passover  of  its  clearness  as  a  witness 
for  Christ.  They  specifically  allege  that  the  following 
passage  has  been  omitted  in  the  copies  of  the  book  of 
Ezra : — "  Kt  dixit  Esdras  ad  populum ;  Hoc  pascha  sal- 
vator  noster est,  et refugium  nostrum.  Cogitate  et  ascendat 
in  cor  vestrum,  quoniam  habemushumiliare  eum  in  signo  : 
et  post  haec  sperabimus  in  eum,  ne  deseratur  hie  locus  in 
aeternum  tempus."  (Just.  Mart.  Dialog,  cum  Ti-yp. ;  Lact. 
Ivst.  iv.  18.)  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  words 
may  have  been  inserted  between  vers.  20  and  21  in  Ezr.  vi. 
But  they  have  been  all  but  universally  regarded  as 
spurious. 

'  The  use  which  the  Fathere  made  of  this  may  be  seen 
in  Suicer,  s.  v.  a^v/ao5. 

"  See  Theodoret,  Interrog.  XXIV.  in  Exod.  There  is 
an  eloquent  passage  on  the  same  subject  in  Greg.  Naz. 
Orat  XLII. 


PASSOVER 

Easter  stand  as  the  anniversary  of  tlie  saine  great 
facts  as  were  foreshown  in  those  events  of  which 
the  yearly  Passover  was  a  commemoration. 

As  compared  with  the  other  festivals,  the  Pass- 
over was  remarkably  distinguished  by  a  single 
victim  essentially  its  own,  sacrificed  in  a  very 
peculiar  manner.^  In  this  respect,  as  well  as  in 
the  place  it  held  in  the  ecclesiastical  year,  it  Iwd  a 
formal  dignity  and  character  of  its  own.  It  was 
the  iepreseut;itive  festival  of  the  year,  and  in  this 
unique  position  it  stood  in  a  certain  relation  to 
circumcision  as  the  second  sacrament  of  the  Hebrew 
Church  (Ex.  .\ii.  44).  We  may  see  this  in  what 
occurred  at  Gilgal,  when  Joshua,  in  renewing  the 
Divine  covenant,  celebrated  the  Passover  imme- 
diately after  the  circumcision  of  the  people.  But 
the  nature  of  the  relation  in  which  these  two  rites 
stood  to  each  other  did  not  become  fully  developed 
until  its  types  were  fulfilled,  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
took  its  place  as  the  sacramental  feast  of  the  elect 
jieople  of  God.y  Hupfeld  well  observes:  "  En  pul- 
cherrima  mysteriorum  nostrorum  exempla:  circum- 
cisio  quiilem  baptismatis,  scilicet  signum  gratiae  di- 
viuae  et  foederis  cum  Deo  pacti,  quo  ad  sanctitatem 
popiili  sacri  vocamur  ;  Paschalis  vero  agnus  et  ritus, 
continuatae  quippe  gratiae  divinae  et  servati  foederis 
cum  Deo  signum  et  pignus,  quo  sacra  et  cum  Deo 
et  cum  coeteris  populi  sacri  membris  communio 
usque  renovatur  et  alitur,  coenae  Christi  sacrae 
typus  aptissimus !" 

Literature.  —  Mishna,  Pesachim,  with  the 
notes  in  Surenhusius;  Bahr,  SijmboUk,  b.  iv.  c.  3  ; 
Hupfeld,  De  Fest.  Hehr. ;  Bochart,  De  Agno  Fas- 
chali  (vol.  i.  of  the  Hierozoicoii) ;  Ugolini,  De 
Eitibus  in  Coen.  Dom.  ex  Pasch,  illustr.  (vol.  xvii. 
of  the  Thesaurus) ;  Maimonides,  De  Fennentato  et 
Azymo  ;  Rosenmiiller,  Scholia  in  Ex.  xii.,  &c. ; 
Otho,  Lex.  Eab.  s.  Fascha;  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.; 
Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  and  Hor.  Hehr.  on  Matt, 
xxvi.,  John  xiii.,  &c. ;  Vitringa,  Ohs.  Sac.  lib.  ii. 
o,  10  ;  Reland,  Antiq.  iv.  3 ;  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Ilehr. 
ii.  4  ;  Kurtz,  History  of  the  Old  Covenant,  ii.  288 
seqq.  (Clark's  edit.) ;  Hottinger,  De  Ritn  dimittcndi 
Feum  in  Fest.  Fasch.  (  Thes.  Nov.  Thcologico-Fhi- 
lolog.  vol.  ii.) ;  Buxtorf,  Synag.  Jud.  xviii. ;  Cud- 
worth,  True  NotiiM  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

More  especially  on  the  question  respecting  the 
Lord's  Supper,  Kobinson,  Harmony  of  the  Gospels, 
and  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  Aug.  1845  ;  Tholuck,  on 
John  xiii. ;  Stier,  on  John  xii.  ;  Kuinoel,  on  Matt. 
xxvi. ;  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  §265 ;  Greswell, 
Harm,  Evang.  and  Dissertations ;  Wieseler,  Chi-o- 
nol.  Synops.  der  vier  Evang. ;  Tischendorf,  Syn. 
Evang.  p.  xlv. ;  Bleek,  Dissert,  ueher  den  Mo- 
nathstag  des  Todes  Christi  (^Beitrdge  zur  Evan- 
gelien-Kritik,  184(5);  Frischmuth,  Dissertatio,  &c. 
(  Thes.  Theol.  Fhilolog.) ;  Harenberg,  Demonstratio, 
&c.'  {Thes.  Novus  Theol.  Fhil.  vol.  ii.).  Tholuck 
praises,  Eude,  Demonstratio  qiiod  Chr.  in  Coen. 
ffravpoiaifitf  agnum paschalem  non  comcderit.  Lips. 
1742.  EUicott,  Jjccturcs  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord, 
p.  320  ;  Fairbairn,  Hermcncuiical  Manual,  ii.  9  ; 
Davidson,  Introduction  to  N.  T.  i.  102.      [S.  C] 


PATHROS 


727 


»  The  only  parallel  case  to  this,  in  the  whole  range  of 
(lie  public  religious  observances  of  the  law,  seems  to  be 
tliiit  of  the  scappRoat  of  the  clay  of  atoiionicnt. 

y  It  Is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  modern  Jews  dis- 
tinguish tliese  two  rites  above  all  others,  as  being  imme- 
diately connected  with  the  Krand  fulfilment  of  (he  promises 
made  to  their  fathers.  TliouRh  they  refer  to  the  coming 
of  Elijah  in  their  ordinary  grace  at  meals,  It  is  only  on 


PAT'ARA  {Xldrapa:  the  noun  is  plui-al),  a 
Lj'cian  city  of  some  considerable  note.  One  of  its 
characteristics  in  the  heathen  world  was  that  it  was 
devoted  to  the  worship  of  Apollo,  and  was  the  seat 
of  a  famous  oracle  (Hor.  Od.  iii.  4,  64).  F"ellows 
says  that  the  coins  of  all  the  district  around  jhow 
the  ascendancy  of  this  divinity.  Patara  was  situated 
on  the  south-western  shore  of  Lycia,  not  far  from 
the  left  bank  of  the  river  Xanthus.  Tlie  coast  liere 
is  very  mountainous  and  bold.  Immediately  opposite 
is  the  island  of  Rhodes.  Patara  w;is  practically  the 
seaport  of  the  city  of  Xanthus,  wliich  was  ten  miles 
distant  (Appian,  B.  C.  iv.  81).  These  notices  of  its 
position  and  maritime  importance  introduce  us  to 
the  single  mention  of  the  place  in  the  Bible  (Acts 
xxi.  1,  2).  St.  Paul  was  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem 
at  the  close  of  his  third  missionary  journey.  He  had 
just  come  from  Rhodes  (v.  1);  and  at  Patara  he 
found  a  ship,  which  was  on  the  point  of  going  to 
Phoenicia  (v.  2),  and  in  which  he  completed  his 
voyage  (v.  3).  This  illustrates  the  mercantile  con- 
nexion of  Patara  with  both  tiie  eastern  and  western 
parts  of  the  Levant.  A  good  parallel  to  the  Apostle's 
voyage  is  to  be  found  in  Liv.  xxxvii.  16.  There 
was  no  time  for  him  to  preach  the  Gospel  here . 
but.  still  Patara  has  a  place  in  ecclesiastical  history, 
having  been  the  seat  of  a  bishop  {Hicrocl.  p.  684;. 
The  old  name  remains  on  the  spot,  and  there  are  still 
considerable  ruins,  especially  a  theatre,  some  baths, 
and  a  triple  arch  which  was  one  of  the  gates  of  the 
city.  But  sand-hills  are  gradually  concealing  these 
ruins,  and  have  blocked  up  the  harbour.  For  fuller 
details  we  must  refer  to  Beaufort's  Karamania, 
the  Ionian  Antiquities  published  by  the  Dilettanti 
Society,  Fellows'  Lycia  and  Asia  Minor,  and  the 
Travels  in  Asia  Minor  by  Spratt  and  Forbes. 
[Lycia;  Myra.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

PATHE'US  {XlaOalos  ;  Alex.  ^a0a7os :  Fac- 
tens).  The  same  as  Pethahiah  the  Levite  (1  Esdr. 
ix.  23 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  23). 

PATH'ROS  (Dhna  :  Uadovpvs,  *a0a.p^j : 
Fhctros,  Fhatures,  PKathurcs),  gent,  noun  Path- 
RUSIM  (Cp^nS  :   Uarpoa-cci'Lelfj. :   Fhetrusim),  a 

part  of  Egypt,  and  a  ]\Iizraite  tribe.  That  Pathros 
was  in  Eg)^pt  admits  of  no  question :  we  have  to 
attempt  to  decide  its  position  more  nearly.  In  the 
list  of  the  Mizraites,  the  Pathrusim  occur  after  the 
Naphtuhim,  and  before  the  Casluhim  ;  the  latter 
being  followed  by  the  notice  of  the  Philistines,  and 
by  the  Caphtorim  (Gen.  x.  13,  14;  1  Chr.  i.  12). 
Isaiah  prophesies  the  return  of  the  Jews  "  from 
Mizraim,  and  from  Pathros,  and  from  Cush '"  (xi. 
1 1 ).  Jeremiah  predicts  their  ruin  to  "  all  tlie  Jews 
which  dwell  in  the  land  of  Egyjit,  which  dwell  at 
Migdol,  and  at  Tahpanhes,  and  at  Noph,  and  in  the 
country  of  Pathros"  (xliv.  1),  and  tiioir  reply  is 
given,  after  this  introduct'on,  "  Then  all  the  men 
which  knew  that  their  wives  had  burned  incense 
unto  other  gods,  and  nil  tiie  women  that  stood  by, 
a  great  multitude,  even  all  the  peo])le  that  dwelt  in 
the  land  of  E^gyot,  in  Pathros,  answered  Jeremiah  " 


these  occasions  that  their  oxpectalion  of  the  harbinger  ot 
the  Messiah  is  expresse<l  by  formal  observances.  Wlien  a 
child  is  circumcised,  an  empty  chair  is  placed  at  hand  tor 
the  prophet  to  occupy.  At  the  jiaschal  meal,  a  cu])  of  wine 
is  poured  out  lor  him  ;  and  at  an  aiipolnted  moment  tlie 
door  of  the  room  is  solemnly  set  open  for  liim  to  enter. 
(See  note  >■,  p.  715.) 


728 


PATHEOS 


Mo).     Ezekiel  speaks  of  the  return  of  the  captive 
Egyptians  to  "  tlie  land  of  Pathros,  into  the  land  of 
their  birth"  (xxix.  14),  and  mentions  it  with  Egyp- 
tian cities,  Noph  preceding  it,  and  Zoan,  No,  Sin, 
Noph  again,  Aven   (On),   Pi-beseth,  and  Tehaph- 
nehes  following  it  (xxx.  13-18).     From  the  place  of 
the   Pathrusim  in  the  list  of  the  Mizraites,  they 
might  be  supposed  to  have  settled  in  Lower  Egypt, 
or  the  more  northern  part  of  Upper  Egypt,     lour 
only  of  the  Mizraite  tribes  or  peoples  can  be  pro- 
bably assigned  to  Egypt,  the  last  four,  the  Philis- 
tines being  considered  not  to  bo  one  of  these,  but 
merely  a  colony:  these  are  the  Naphtuhim,  Path- 
rusim, Casluhim,  and  Caphtorim.     The  first  were 
either  settled  in  Lower  Egypt,  or  just  beyond  its 
western  border  ;  and  the  last  in  Upper  Egypt,  about 
Coptos.     It  seems,  if  the  order  be  geographical,  as 
there  is  reason  to  suppose,  that  it  is  to  be  inferred 
that  the  Pathrusim  were  seated  in  Lower  Egypt,  or 
not  much  above  it,  unless  there  be  any  transposi- 
tion ;  but  that  some  change  has  been  made  is  pro- 
bable from  the  parenthetic  notice  of  the  Philistines 
following  the  Casluhim,  whereas  it  appears  from 
other   passages   that   it    should   rather  follow   the 
Caphtorim.     If  the  original  order  were  Pathrusim, 
Caphtorim,  Casluhim,   then  the  first  might  have 
settled  in  the  liigliest  part  of  Upper  Egypt,  and  the 
other  two   below   them.     The  mention    in    Isaiah 
would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  Pathros  was  Upper 
Egypt,  if  there  were  any  sound  reason  for  the  iilea 
that  Mizraim   or   Mazor   is   ever  used  for   Lower 
Egvpt,  which  we  think  there  is  not.      Rodiger's 
conjecture  that  Pathros  included  part  of  Nubia  is 
too  daring  to  be  followed  {Enci/clop.  Germ.  sect. 
iii.  torn.  xiii.  p.  312),  although  there  is  some  slender 
support  for  it.     The  occurrences  in  Jeremiah  seem 
to  favour  the  idea  that  Pathros  was  part  of  Lower 
Ecypt,  or  tlie  whole  of  that  region  ;  for  although  it 
is  mentioned  in  the  prophecy  against  the  Jews  ius  a 
region  where  they  dwelt  after  Aligdol,  Tahpanhes, 
and  Noph,  as  though  to  the  south,  yet  we  are  told 
that  the  prophet  was  answered  by  the  Jews  "  that 
dwelt  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  in  Pathros,"  as  though 
Pathros  were  the  region  in  which  these  cities  were. 
We  have,  moreover,  no  distinct  evidence  that  Jere- 
miah ever  went  into  Upper  Egypt.     On  the  other 
hand,  it  may  be  replied  that  the  cities  mentioned 
are  so  far  ajjart,  that  either  the  prophet  must  have 
preached  to  the  .lews  in  them  in  succession,  or  else 
have  addressed  letters  or  me;;sages  to  them  (comp. 
xxix.).     The  notice  by  Ezekiel  of  Pathros  as  the 
land  of  the  birtli  of  the  Egyptians  seems  to  favour 
the  idea  that  it  was  pait  of  or  all  Upper  Egypt,  as 
the  Thebais  was  probably  inhabite;!  before  the  rest 
of  the  country   (comp.   lldt.  ii.   15)  ;   an  opinion 
supported  by  the  tradition  that  the  people  of  Egvpt 
came  from  Ethiopia,  and  by  the  1st  dynasty's  being 
of  Thinite  kings. 

Pathros  has  bet  connected  with  the  Pathyrite 
nome,  the  Phaturite  of  Pliny  {II.  N.  v.  9,  §47), 
in  which  Thebes  was  situate.  The  first  form 
occurs  in  a  (ireek  papyrus  written  in  Egypt  (Ila- 
0upir7is  TTJs  Qrifia'iSos,  Papyr.  Anast.  vid.  Peu- 
vens,  Lcttres  a  M.  Lctronne,  3  let.  p.  4,  30,  ap. 
Paithey,  Vocah.  s.  v.).  This  identification  may  be 
as  old  as  tlie  LXX.  ;  and  the  Coptic  version,  winch 

reads  n^-Rioo'TpHcn^.TinroTpHc, 

does  not  contradict  it.  The  discovery  of  the  Egyp- 
tiiin  name  of  the  town  after  which  the  nome  was 
called  puts  tlie  inquiry  <>n  a  safer  basis.  It  is  writ- 
ten HA-HAT-HKi:,  '"■  The  Abode  of  Hat-her,"  the 


PATMOS 

Egyptian  Venus.  It  may  perhaps  have  sometimes 
been  written  P-HA-HAT-HER,  in  which  case  the 
P-H  and  T-H  would  have  coalesced  in  the  Hebrew 
form,  as  did  T-H  in  Caphtor.  [Caphtor.]  Such 
etymologies  for  the  word  Pathros  as  n"6T~pHCj 
"  that  whicli  is  southern,"  and  for  the  form  in  the 
LXX.,  n^-TOTpKC,  "the  southern  ()-egion)" 
(Gesen.  Tlies.  s.  v.),  must  be  abandoneil. 

On  the  evidence  here  brought  ibrward,  it  seems 
reasonable  to  consider  Pathros  to  be  part  of  TJpper 
Egypt,  and  to  trace  its  name  in  that  of  the  Pathyrite 
nome.  But  this  is  only  a  veiy  conjectural  identi- 
fication, which  future  discoveries  may  overthrow. 
It  is  spoken  of  with  cities  in  such  a  manner  that 
we  may  suppose  it  was  but  a  small  district,  and 
(if  we  have  rightly  identified  it),  that  when  it  occurs 
Thebes  is  especially  intended.  This  would  account 
for  its  distinctive  mention.  [K.  S.  P.] 

PATHEU'SIM.     [Pathros.] 

PAT'MOS  {Tli.Tij.os,  Rev.  i.  9).  Two  recent 
and  copious  accounts,  one  by  a  Gennan,  the  other 
by  a  French,  traveller,  furnish  us  with  very  full  in- 
formation regarding  this  island.  Ross  visited  it  in 
1841,  and  describes  it  at  length  {Reisen  aiif  den 
grlechischen  Inscln  des  dgiiischen  Meeres,  ii.  123- 
139).  Guerin,  some  years  later,  spent  a  month 
there,  and  enters  into  more  detail,  especially  as  re- 
gards ecclesiastical  antiquities  and  traditions  {De- 
scription de  rile  de  Fatmos  et  dc  V lie  de  Samos, 
Paris,  1856,  pp.  1-120).  Among  the  older  tra- 
vellers who  have  visited  Patmos  we  may  especially 
mention  Tournefort  and  Pococke.  See  also  Walpole's 
Turkey,  ii.  43. 

The  aspect  of  tne  island  is  peculiarly  rugged  and 
bare.  And  such  a  scene  of  banishment  for  St.  John 
in  the  reign  of  Domitian  is  quite  in  harmony  with 
what  we  read  of  the  custom  of  the  period.  It 
was  the  common  practice  to  send  exiles  to  the 
most  rocky  and  desolate  islands  ("  in  asperrimas 
insularum").  See  Suet.  Tit.  8;  Juv.  Sat.  i.  73. 
Such  a  scene  too  was  suitable  (if  we  may  presume 
to  say  so)  to  the  sublime  and  awful  lievelation 
which  the  Apostle  received  there.  It  is  possible 
indeed  that  there  was  more  greenness  in  Patmos 
formerly  than  now.  Its  name  in  the  Middle  Ages 
was  Pahnosa.  But  this  has  now  almost  entirely 
given  place  to  the  old  classical  name ;  and  theie  is 
just  one  palm-tree  in  the  island,  in  a  valley  which 
is  called  "  the  Saint's  Garden "  (6  ktittos  toD 
'Ocrtou).  Here  and  there  are  a  few  poor  olives, 
about  a  score  of  cypresses,  and  other  trees  in  the 
same  scanty  pioportion. 

Patmos  is  divided  into  two  nearly  equal  parts,  a 
northern  and  a  southern,  by  a  very  narrow  isthmus, 
where,  on  the  east  side,  are  the  harboui-  and  the 
town.  On  the  hill  to  the  south,  crowning  a  com- 
manding height,  is  the  celebrated  monastery,  which 
bears  the  name  of  "  John  the  Divine."  Hallway 
up  the  ascent  is  the  cave  or  gi-otto  where  tradition 
says  that  St.  John  received  the  Revelation,  and 
wliich  is  still  called  to  (jtri\XaLov  t^s  ^ hiroKoKv- 
■^eais.  A  view  of  it  (said  by  Ross  to  be  not  very  ac- 
curate) will  be  found  in  Choiseul-Goulfier,  i.  pi.  57. 
Both  Ross  and  Guerin  give  a  very  full,  and  a  very 
melancholy,  account  of  the  library  of  the  monastery. 
There  were  in  it  formerly  600  MSS.  There  are  now 
240,  of  which  Guerin  gives  a  catalogue.  Two 
ought  to  be  mentioned  here,  which  profess  to  furnish, 
under  the  title  of  oj  ireptoSot  tow  @eoK6yov,  an 
account  of  St.  John  after  tlic  ascension  of  our  Lord. 


PATRIARCHS 

One  of  them  is  attributed  to  I'lochorus,  an  alleged 
disciple  of  St.  John  ;  the  other  is  an  abridgment  of 
the  same  by  Nicetas,  archbishop  of  Thessalonica. 
Various  places  in  the  island  are  incorporated  in  the 
legend,  and  this  is  one  of  its  chief  points  of  interest. 
There  is  a  published  Latin  translation  in  the  Bihlio- 
theca  Maximi  I'atrum  (1(577,  tom.  ii.),  but  with 
curious  modifications,  one  great  object  of  which  is 
to  disengage  St.  John's  martyrdom  from  Ephesus 
(where  "the  legend  places  it),  and  to  tix  it  in 
Home. 

We  have  only  to  add  that  Patmos  is  one  of  the 
Sporades,  and  is  in  that  part  of  the  Aegean  which 
IS  called  the  Icarian  Sea.  It  must  have  been  con- 
spicuous on  the  right  when  St.  Paul  was  sailing 
(Acts  XX.  15,  xxi.  1 )  from  Samos  to  Cos.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PATRIARCHS.  The  name  iraTpiapxns  is 
applied  in  the  N.  T.  to  Abraham  (Heb.  vii.  4),  to 
the  sons  of  Jacob  (Acts  vii.  8,  9),  and  to  David 
(Acts  ii.  29) ;  and  is  apparently  intended  to  be  equi- 
valent to  the  phrase  n^^<  n^3  K'NI,  the  "head" 
or  "  prince  of  a  tribe,"  so  often  found  in  the  0.  T. 
It  is  used  in  this  sense  by  the  LXX.  in  1  Chr. 
xxiv.  31,  xxvii.  22  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  20,  xxvi.  12. 
lu  common  usage  the  title  of  patriarch  is  assigned 
especially  to  those  whose  lives  are  recorded  in 
Scripture  previous  to  tlie  time  of  Moses.  By  the 
"  patriarchal  system  "  is  meant  that  state  of  society 
which  developed  itself  naturally  out  of  family  rela- 
tions, before  tiie  formation  of  nations  properly  so 
called,  and  the  establishment  of  regular  govern- 
ment: and  by  the  "patriarchal  dispensation"  the 
communion  into  which  God  was  pleased  to  enter 
with  the  families  of  Seth,  Noah,  and  Abraham, 
before  the  Kill  of  the  chosen  peojile. 

The  patriarchal  times  are  naturally  ilivided  into 
the  ante-diluvian  and  post-diluvian  periods. 

1.  In  the  former  the  Scripture  record  contains 
little  except  the  list  of  the  line  from  Seth,  through 
lilnos,  Cainan,  Mahalaleel,  Jared,  Enoch,  Methu- 
selah, and  Lamech,  to  Noah  ;  with  the  ages  of  each 
at  their  periods  of  generation  and  at  tlieir  deaths. 
[Chronology.]  To  some  extent  parallel  to  this, 
is  given  the  line  of  Cain  ;  Enoch,  Irad,  Jlehujael, 
Methusael,  Lamech,  and  the  sons  of  Lamech,  Jabal, 
Jubal,  and  Tubal-Cain.  To  the  latter  line  are 
attributed  the  first  signs  of  material  civilization, 
the  building  of  cities,  the  division  of  classes,  and 
the  knowledge  of  mechanical  arts ;  while  the  only 
moral  record  of  their  history  obscurely  speaks  of 
Violence  and  bloodshed.  [Lamecii.]  In  the  former 
line  the  one  distinction  is  their  knowledge  of  the 
true  (iod  (with  the  constant  recollection  of  the  pro- 
mised "  seed  of  the  woman  " )  which  is  seen  in  its 
fullest  ])erit!ction  in  Enoch  and  Noah  ;  and  the  only 
allusion  to  their  occupation  ((^en.  v.  29)  seems  to 
show  that  they  continued  a  pastoral  and  agricul- 
tural race.  The  entire  corruption,  even  of  the 
chosen  finnily  of  Seth,  is  traced  (in  Gen.  vi.  1-4)  to 
the  union  between  "the  sons  ot  God"  and  "the 
daughters  of  men"  (Heb.  "of  Adam").  This 
union  is  general! v  explained  by  the  ancient  com- 
mentators of  a  contact  willi  snpernatnial  ]ioweis  of 
evil  in  the  persons  of  fallen  angels;  most  modern 


PATRIARCHS 


729 


»  The  Hebr.e\v  text  is  here  taken  throughout:  for  the 
variations  in  theljXX.and  theSivniaritunl'entateuch,  see 
Chkonoi.oci. 

"  It  is  likely  enough  that  the  year  (as  in  so  many 
ancient  calendars)  may  be  a  lunar  year  of  35 1  or  355  days, 


interpretation  refers  it  to  intermarriage  between  the 
lines  of  Seth  and  Cain.  The  latter  is  intended  to 
avoid  the  difficulties  attaching  to  the  comprehension 
of  the  former  view,  which  nevertheless  is  undoulit- 
edly  far  moi^  accordant  with  the  usage  of  the 
phrase  "sons  of  God "  in  the  0.  T.  (coinp.  Job 
i.  6,  x.xxviii.  7),  and  with  the  language  of  the 
passage  in  Genesis  itself.  (See  Maitland's  Eruvm, 
Essay  vi.) 

One  of  the  mam  questions  raised  as  to  the  ante- 
diluvian period  turns  on  the  longevity  assigned  to 
the  patriarchs.  With  the  single  exception  of  Enoch 
(whose  departure  from  the  earth  at  365  years  of 
age  is  exceptional  in  every  sense),  their  ages  vary 
fioni  777  (Lamech)  to  969  (Methuselah).  It  is 
to  be  observed  that  this  longevity  disappears  gra- 
dually after  the  Flood.  To  Sliem  are  assigned  6U0 
years ;  and  thence  the  ages  diminish  down  to  Terah 
(205  years),  Abraham  "(175),  Isaac  (180),  Jacob 
(147),  and  Joseph  (110).^ 

This  statement  of  ages  is  clear  and  definite.  To 
suppose,  with  some,  that  the  name  of  each  patriaixh 
denotes  a  clan  or  family,  and  his  age  its  duration, 
or,  with  others,  that  the  word  HJC  (because  it 
properly  signifies  "  iteration  "  )  may,  in  spite  of  its 
known  and  invariable  usage  for  "  year,"  denote  a 
lunar  revolution  instead  of  a  solar  one  (i.  e.  a  month 
instead  of  a  year)  in  this  passage,  appears  to  be  a 
mere  evasion  of  difficulty.''  It  must  either  be  ac- 
cepted, as  a  plain  statement  of  fact,  or  regarded  ;is 
purely  fabulous,  like  the  legendary  assignment  of 
immense  ages  to  the  early  Indian  or  Babylonian  or 
Egyptian  kings. 

The  latter  alternative  is  adopted  without  scruple 
by  many  of  the  German  commentators,  some  of 
whom  attempt  to  find  such  significance  in  the  pa- 
triarchal names  as  to  make  them  personify  natural 
j)owers  or  human  qualities,  like  the  gods  and  demi- 
gods of  mythology.  It  belongs  of  course  to  the 
mythical  view  of  Scripture,  destroying  its  claim,  in 
any  sense,  to  authority  and  special  inspiration. 

In  the  acceptance  of  the  literal  meaning,  it  is  not 
easy  to  say  how  much  dilliculty  is  involved.  With 
our  scanty  knowledge  of  what  is  really  meant  by 
"  dying  of  old  age,"  with  tiie  certainty  that  very 
great  etlects  are  produced  on  the  duration  of  life, 
both  of  men  and  animals,  by  even  slight  changes  of 
habits  and  circumstances,  it  is  impossible  to  say 
what  might  be  a  priori  probable  in  this  respect  in 
the  antediluvian  period,  or  to  determine  under  what 
conditions  the  process  of  continual  decay  and  recon- 
struction, which  sustains  animal  life,  miglit  be  in- 
definitely prolonged.  The  constant  attribution  in 
all  legends  of  great  age  to  primeval  men  is  at  least 
as  likely  to  be  a  distortion  of  fact,  as  a  mere  inven- 
tion of  fancy.  But  even  if  the  difficulty  wore 
greater  than  it  is,  it  seems  impossible  to  conceive 
that  a  book,  given  by  Iiis])iration  of  God  to  be  a 
treaswe  for  all  ages,  could  be  permitted  to  contain 
a  statement  of  plain  facts,  given  uiidoubtingly,  and 
with  an  elaborate  show  of  accuracy,  and  yet  purely 
ami  gratuitously  fabulous,  in  no  sense  bearing  on 
its  great  religious  sulijcct.  If  the  Divine  origin  of 
Scripture  be  believed,  its  authority  must  be  accejited 
in  this,  as  in  other  cases;  and  the  list  of  the  ages 

or  even  a  year  of  10  months .  but  this  makes  no  real 
diflbrcnce.  J I  is  possible  lliat  llicre  may  be  some  corrup- 
Hou  in  the  text,  wlilih  may  affect  the  niimt)ers  given;  hut 
the  longi'vKy  of  the  patriaiclis  Is  noticpil  and  (•ommented 
upon,  as  a  well-known  fart,  by  .losephus  (.Iji^.  I.  3,  ^9). 


i'60 


PATEIAECHS 


of   tlie  patriarchs  be  held  to  be  (what  it  certainly 
claims  to  bo)  a  statement  of  real  facts. 

2.  It  is  in  the  post-diluvian  periods  that  more 
is  sjathered  as  to  the  nature  of  the  patriarchal  his- 
toiy.  * 

It  is  at  first  general  in  its  scope.  The  "  Cove- 
nant" given  to  Noah  is  one,  free  from  all  condition, 
and  fraught  with  natural  blessings,  extending  to  all 
alike;  the  one  great  command  (against  bloodshed) 
which  marks  it,  is  based  on  a  deep  and  universal 
ground  ;  the  fulfilment  of  the  blessing,  "  Be  fruitful 
and  multiply,  and  replenish  the  earth,"  is  expressly 
connected,  first  with  an  attempt  to  set  up  an  uni- 
versal kingdom  i-ound  a  local  centre,  and  then 
(in  Gen.  x.)  with  the  formation  of  the  various 
nations  by  conquest  or  settlement,  and  with  the 
peopling  of  all  the  world.  But  the  history  soon 
narrows  itself  to  that  of  a  single  tribe  or  family,  and 
afterwards  touches  the  general  history  of  the  ancient 
world  and  its  empires,  only  so  far  as  it  bears  upon 
this. 

It  is  in  this  last  stage  that  the  principle  of  the 
patriarchal  dispensatiou  is  most  clearly  seen.  It  is 
based  on  the  sacredness  of  family  ties  and  patei-nal 
authority.  This  authority,  as  the  only  one  which 
is  natural  and  original,  is  inevitably  the  foundation 
of  the  earliest  form  of  society,  and  is  probably  seen 
most  perfectly  in  wandering  tribes,  where  it  is  not 
affected  by  local  attachments  and  by  the  acquisition 
of  wealth.  It  is  one,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
limited  in  its  scope,  depending  m^re  on  its  sacred- 
ness than  its  power,  and  giving  room  for  much  ex- 
ercise of  freedom  ;  and,  as  it  extends  from  the  family 
to  the  tribe,  it  must  become  less  stringent  and  less 
concentrated,  in  proportion  to  its  wider  diffusion. 
In  Scripture  this  authority  is  consecrated  by  an 
ultimate  reference  to  God,  as  the  God  of  the  pa- 
triarch, the  Father  (that  is)  both  of  him  and  his 
children.  Not,  of  course,  that  the  idea  of  God's 
Fatherhood  carried  with  it  the  knowledge  of  man's 
personal  communion  with  His  nature  (which  is  re- 
vealed by  the  Incarnation)  ;  it  rather  implied  faith 
in  His  protection,  and  a  free  and  loving  obedience 
to  His  authority,  with  the  hope  (more  or  less 
assured)  of  some  greater  blessing  from  Him  in  the 
coming  of  the  promised  seed.  At  the  same  time, 
this  faith  was  not  allowed  to  degenerate,  as  it  was 
prone  to  do,  into  an  appropriation  of  God,  as  the 
mere  tutelary  God  of  the  tribe.  The  Lord,  it  is 
true,  suffers  Himself  to  be  called  "  the  God  of  Shem, 
of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob  ;"  but  He  also 
reveals  Himself  (and  that  emphatically,  as  though 
it  were  His  peculiar  title)  as  the  "  God  Almighty  " 
(Gen.  ,\vii.  1,  xxviii.  3,  xx.w.  11);  He  is  addressed 
as  the  "  Judge  of  all  the  earth  "  (xviii.  25),  and  as 
such  is  known  to  have  intercourse  with  Pharaoh 
and  Abimelech  (xii.  17,  xx.  3-8),  to  hallow  the 
priesthood  of  IMelchizodek  (xiv.  18-20),  and  to  exe- 
cute wrath  on  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  All  this 
would  confirm  what  the  generality  of  the  cove- 
nant with  Noah,  and  of  the  promise  of  blessing  to 
"all  nations"  in  Abraham's  seed  must  have  dis- 
tinctly taught,  that  the  chosen  family  were,  not 
substitutes,  but  representatives,  of  all  mankind,  and 
that  God's  relation  to  them  was  only  a  clearer  and 
more  perfect  type  of  that  in  which  He  stood 
to  all. 

Still  the  distinction  and  preservation  of  the 
chosen  family,  and  the  maintenance  of  the  paternal 
authority,  are  the  special  puiposes,  which  give  a 
key  to  tiie  meaning  of  the  history,  and  of  the  insti- 


PATRIARCHS 

tutions  recorded.  For  this  the  birthright  (probably 
carrying  with  it  the  priesthood)  was  reserved  to 
the  rirst-born,  belonging  to  him  by  inheritance,  yet 
not  assured  to  him  till  he  received  his  father's 
blessing  ;  for  this  the  sanctity  of  marriage  was  jea- 
lously and  even  cruelly  guarded,  as  in  Gen.  xxxiv. 
7,  13,  31  (Dinah),  and  in  xxxviii.  24  (Tamar), 
from  the  licence  of  the  world  without ;  and  all  in- 
termarriage with  idolaters  was  considered  as  treason 
to  the  family  and  the  God  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xxvi. 
34,  35,  xxvii.  46,  xxviii.  1,  6-9).  Natiual  obe- 
dience and  affection  are  the  earthly  virtues  espe- 
cially brought  out  m  the  history,  and  the  sins 
dwelt  upon  (from  the  ineverence  of  Ham  to  the 
selling  of  Joseph),  are  all  such  as  offend  against 
these. 

The  type  of  character  formed  under  it,  is  one 
imperfect  in  intellectual  and  spiritual  growth,  be- 
cause not  yet  tried  by  the  subtler  temptations,  or 
forced  to  contemplate  the  deeper  questions  of  life  ; 
but  it  is  one  remarkably  simple,  afliectionale,  and 
free,  such  as  would  grow  up  under  a  natural  autho- 
rity, derived  from  God  and  centering  in  Him,  yet 
allowing,  under  its  unquestioned  sacredness,  a  fami- 
liarity and  freedom  of  intercourse  with  Him,  which  is 
strongly  contrasted  with  the  stern  and  awful  cha- 
racter of  the  ]\Iosaic  dispensation.  To  contemplate 
it  from  a  Christian  point  of  view  is  like  looking 
back  on  the  unconscious  freedom  and  innocence  of 
cliildhood,  with  that  deeper  insight  and  strength  of 
character  which  are  gained  by  the  experience  of  man- 
hood. We  see  in  it  the  germs  of  the  future,  of  the 
future  revelation  of  God,  and  the  future  trials  and 
development  of  man. 

It  is  on  this  fact  that  the  typical  interpretation  of 
its  history  depends,  an  interpretation  sanctioned 
directly  by  the  example  of  St.  Paul  (Gal.  iv. 
21-31  ;  Heb.  vii.  1-17),  indirectly  supported  by 
other  passages  of  Scripture  (Matt.  xxiv.  37-39 ; 
Luke  xvii.  28-32;  Rom.  ix.  10-13,  &c.),  and  in- 
stinctively adopted  by  all  who  have  studied  the 
history  itself. 

Even  in  the  brief  outline  of  the  ante-diluviaii 
period,  we  may  recognize  the  main  features  of  the 
history  of  the  world,  the  division  of  mankind  info 
the  two  great  classes,  the  struggle  between  the 
power  of  evil  and  good,  the  apparent  triumph  of 
the  evil,  and  its  destruction  in  the  final  judgment. 
In  the  post-diluvian  history  of  the  chosen  family, 
is  seen  the  distinction  of  the  true  believere,  pos- 
sessors of  a  special  covenant,  special  revelation,  and 
special  privileges,  from  the  world  without.  In  it 
is  therefore  shadowed  out  the  history  of  the  Jewish 
Nation  and  Christian  Church,  as  regards  the  freedom 
of  their  covenant,  the  gradual  unfolding  of  their 
revelation,  and  the  peculiar  blessings  and  tempta- 
tions which  belong  to  their  distinctive  position. 

It  is  but  natural  that  the  unfolding  of  the  cha- 
racters of  the  patriarchs  under  this  dispensation 
sliould  have  a  typical  interest.  Abraham,  as  the 
type  of  a  faith,  both  brave  and  patient,  gradually 
and  continuously  growing  under  the  eduaition  of 
various  trials,  stands  contrasted  with  the  lower  cha- 
racter of  Jacob,  in  whom  the  same  faith  is  seen, 
tainted  with  deceit  and  selfishness,  and  needing 
therefore  to  be  purged  by  disappointment  and  sufler- 
ing.  Isaac  in  the  passive  gentleness  .and  submis- 
siveness,  which  characterizes  his  whole  life,  and  is 
seen  especially  in  his  willingness  to  be  sacrificed  by 
the  hand  of  his  father,  and  Joseph,  in  the  more 
active  spirit  of  love,  in  which  he  rejoiced  to  save 


PATROBA,S 

his  family  aud  to  (bigive  those  who  hau  persecuted 
cind  sold  him,  set  forth  the  perfect  spirit  of  souship, 
and  are  seen  to  be  types  especially  of  Him,  in  whom 
alone  that  spirit  dwelt  in  all  tulness. 

This  typical  character  in  the  hands  of  the  myth- 
ical school  is,  of  course,  made  an  argument  against 
the  historical  reality  of  the  whole ;  those  who  recog- 
nise an  unity  of  principle  in  God's  dispensations  at  all 
times,  will  be  prepared  to  find,  even  in  their  earliest 
and  simplest  form,  the  same  features  which  are  more 
fully  developed  in  their  later  periods.         [A.  B.] 

PAT'ROBAS  {narpo^as:  Patrohas).  A 
Chiistian  at  Home  to  whom  St.  Paul  sends  his 
salutation  (Hom.  .\vi.  14).  According  to  late  and 
uncertain  tradition,  he  was  one  of  the  70  disciples, 
became  bishop  of  Puteoli  (Pseudo-Hippolytus,  Do 
LXX.  ApostoHs),  and  suffered  martyrdom  together 
with  Philologus  on  Nov.  4th  (Estius).  Like  many 
other  names  mentioned  in  Hom.  xvi.,  this  was  borne 
by  at  least  one  member  of  the  emperor's  household 
(Suet.  Galba,  20;  Martial,  Ep.  ii.  32,  3).  Pro- 
bably the  name  is  a  contraction,  like  others  of  the 
same  termination,  and  stands  for  llaTp6^ios  (see 
Wolf,  Cwr.  Fhilulog.).  [W.  T.  B.] 

PATKOCLUS  (ndrpoK\os:  Patroclus),  the 
father  of  Nicanor,  the  fmious  adversary  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus  (2  Mace.  viii.  9). 

PAU  (-lyS,  but  in  1  Chr.  i.  50,  Pai,  '•yQ,  though 
some  copies  agree  with  the  reading  in  Gen. :  4>oyu>p : 
Phau),  the  capital  of  Hadar,  king  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  39J.  Its  position  is  unknown.  The  only  name 
that  bears  any  resemblance  to  it  is  Phauara,  a  ruined 
jilace  in  Idumaea  mentioned  by  Seetzen.    [W.  L.  B.] 

PAUL  (IlaCAos:  Paulus),  the  Apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles. 

Original  Authorities. — Nearly  all  the  original 
materials  for  the  Life  of  St.  Paul  are  contained  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the  Pauline  Epis- 
tles. Out  of  a  comparison  of  these  authorities  the 
biographer  of  St.  Paul  has  to  construct  his  account 
of  the  really  important  period  of  the  Apostle's  life. 
The  early  traditions  of  the  Church  appear  to  have 
left  almost  untouched  the  space  of  time  for  which 
we  possess  those  sacred  and  abundant  sources  of 
knowledge  ;  and  they  aim  only  at  supplying  a  few 
particulars  in  the  biography  beyond  the  points  at 
which  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  begins  and  ter- 
minates. 

The  history  and  the  Epistles  lie  side  by  side,  and 
are  to  all  appearance  quite  independent  of  one  an- 
other. It  was  not  the  purpose  of  the  historian  to 
write  a  life  of  St.  Paul,  even  as  much  as  the  re- 
ceived name  of  his  book  would  seem  to  imply. 
The  book  called  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  an 
account  of  the  beginnings  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
on  the  earth.  The  huge  space  which  St.  Paul 
occupies  in  it  is  due  to  the  important  part  which 
he  bore  iu  Sjireading  that  kingdom.  As  to  the 
Epistles,  nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  they 
were  written  without  reference  to  the  history  ;  and 
there  is  no  attempt  in  the  Canon  to  combine  them 
with  it  so  as  to  form  what  we  should  call  in  modern 
phrase  the  Apostle's  "  Life  and  Letters."  Wiuit 
amount  of  agreement,  and  what  amount  of  discre- 


PAUL 


731 


a  In  his  Paulus  der  Apostel  Jesu  Christi,  Stuttgart, 
1845. 

b  The  story  mentioned  by  Jerome  (ScHp.  Keel.  Cat. 
'  J'aulus'),  ILiat  St.  Paul's  parents  lived  at  (Jischaki  in 


pancy,  may  be  observed  between  these  independent 
authorities,  is  a  question  of  the  greatest  interest 
and  importance,  and  one  upon  which  various  opi- 
nions are  entertained.  The  most  adverse  and  extreme 
criticism  is  ably  represented  by  Dr.  Baur  of  TUbin- 
gen,"  who  finds  so  much  opposition  between  what 
he  holds  to  be  the  few  authentic  Pauline  Epistles 
and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that  he  pronounces 
the  history  to  be  an  interested  fiction.  But  his 
criticism  is  the  very  caricature  of  captiousness. 
We  have  but  to  imagine  it  applied  to  any  history 
and  letters  of  acknowledged  authenticity,  and  we 
feel  irresistibly  how  arbitrai-y  and  unhistorical  it 
is.  Putting  aside  this  extreme  view,  it  is  not 
to  be  denied  that  difficulties  are  to  be  met  with 
in  reconciling  completely  the  Acts  and  the  received 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  What  the  solutions  of  such 
ditficulties  may  be,  whether  there  are  any  direct  con- 
tradictions, how  far  the  apparent  differences  may 
be  due  to  the  purpose  of  the  respective  writers,  by 
what  arrangement  all  the  facts  presented  to  us  may 
best  be  dove-tailed  together, — these  are  the  various 
questions  which  have  given  so  much  occupation  to 
the  critics  and  expositors  of  St.  Paul,  and  upon 
some  of  which  it  seems  to  be  yet  impossible  to 
arrive  at  a  decisive  conclusion. 

We  shall  assume  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  to  be  a 
genuine  and  authentic  work  of  St.  Luke,  the  com- 
panion of  St.  Paul,  and  shall  speak  of  the  Epistles 
at  the  places  which  we  believe  them  to  occupy  in 
the  history 

Prominent  points  in  the  Life. — It  may  be  well 
to  state  beforehand  a  few  of  the  principal  occur- 
rences upon  which  the  great  work  done  by  St.  Paul 
in  the  world  is  seen  to  depend,  and  which  therefore 
serve  as  landmarks  in  his  life.  Foremost  of  all  is 
his  Conversion.  This  was  the  main  root  of  his 
whole  life,  outward  and  inward.  Next  after  this, 
we  may  specify  his  Labours  at  Antioch.  From 
these  we  pass  to  the  First  Missionary  Journey,  in 
the  eastern  part  of  Asia  Minor,  in  which  St.  Paul 
first  assumed  the  character  of  the  Apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles.  The  Visit  to  Jerusalem, 
for  the  salie  of  settling  the  question  of  the  relation 
of  Gentile  converts  to  the  Jewish  law,  was  a  critical 
point,  both  in  the  history  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
Apostle.  The  introduction  of  the  Gospel  into 
Europe,  with  the  memorable  visits  to  Philippi, 
Athens,  and  Corinth,  was  the  boldest  step  in  the 
carrying  out  of  St.  Paul's  mission.  A  third  great 
missionary  journey,  chiefly  characterized  by  a  long 
stay  at  Ephesus,  is  further  interesting  from  its  con- 
nexion with  four  leading  Epistles.  Ihis  was  imme- 
diately followed  by  the  apprehension  of  St.  Paul 
at  Jerusalem,  and  his  imprisonment  at  Caesarea'. 
And  the  last  event  of  which  we  have  a  full  nar- 
rative is  the  Voyaj/e  to  Pome. 

The  relation  of  these  events  to  external  chrono- 
logy will  be  considered  at  the  end  of  the  article. 

Saul  of  Tarsus,  before  his  Conversion. — Up  to 
the  time  of  his  going  forth  as  an  avowed  preacher 
of  Clirist  to  the  Gentiles,  the  Ajiostle  was  known 
by  the  name  of  Saul.  This  was  the  Jewish  name 
which  he  receivoil  from  his  Jewish  parents.  But 
though  a  Hebrew  of  the  Hebiews,  he  was  born  iu 
a  Gentile  city.     Of  his  parents  we  know  nothing,'' 

Galilee,  and  that,  having  been  born  there,  the  infuiit  Saul 
emignittd  with  his  parents  to  Taisus  upon  the  taking  of 
that  city  by  the  Kumans,  is  inconsistent  with  the  fact 
that  Gischala  was  not  taken  until  a  much  later  time,  mid 


732 


PAUL 


except  that  his  father  was  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
(Phil.  iii.  5),  and  a  Pharisee  (Acts  xxiii.  6),  that 
he  had  acquired  by  some  means  the  Roman  fran- 
chise ("  I  was  free  born,"  Acts  xxii.  28),  and  that 
he  was  settled  in  Tarsus.  "  I  am  a  Jew  of  Tarsus, 
a  city  in  Cilicia,  a  citizen  of  no  mean  city"  (Acts 
xxi.  39).  Our  attention  seems  to  be  specially 
called  to  this  birthplace  and  early  home  of  Saul  by 
the  repeated  mention  of  it  in  connexion  with  his 
name.  Here  he  must  have  learnt  to  use  the 
Greek  language  with  freedom  and  mastery  in 
both  speaking  and  writing;  and  the  general  tone 
and  atmosphere  of  a  cultivated  community  cannot 
have  been  without  their  effect  upon  his  highly  sus- 
ceptible nature.  At  Tarsus  also  he  learnt  that 
trade  of  aK7\voTTOi6s  (Acts  xviii.  3),  at  which  he 
afterwards  occasionally  wrought  with  his  own 
hands.  There  was  a  goat's-hair  cloth  called  Cili- 
cluin,  manufactured  in  Cilicia,  and  largely  used 
for  tents.  Saul's  trade  was  probably  that  of  making 
tents  of  this  haircloth.  It  does  not  follow  that  the 
family  were  in  the  necessitous  condition  which 
such  manual  labour  commonly  implies;  for  it  was 
ji  wholesome  custom  amongst  the  Jews,  to  teach 
every  child  some  trade,  though  there  might  be 
little  prospect  of  his  depending  upon  it  tor  his 
living. 

When  St.  Paul  makes  his  defence  before  his 
countrymen  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxii.),  he  tells  them 
that  though  born  in  Tarsus,  he  had  been  "  brought 
up "  [avaTeBpanjxivos)  in  Jerusalem.  He  must, 
therefore,  have  been  yet  a  boy,  when  he  was  re- 
moved, in  all  probability  for  the  sake  of  his  edaca- 
tion,  to  the  Holy  City  of  his  fathers.  We  may 
imagine  him  arriving  there,  perhaps  at  some  age  "^ 
between  10  and  15,  alieady  a  Hellenist,  speaking 
Greek  and  familiar  with  the  Greek  version  of  the 
Scriptures,  possessing,  besides  the  knowledge  of  his 
trade,  the  elements  of  Gentile  learning,— to  be 
taught  at  Jerusalem  "according  to  the  perfect 
manner  of  the  law  of  the  fathers."  He  learnt,  he 
says,  "  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel."  He  who  was  to 
resist  so  stoutly  the  usurpations  of  the  law,  had  for 
his  teacher  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  all  the 
doctors  of  the  law.  [Gamaliel.]  It  is  singular, 
that  on  the  occasion  of  his  well-known  interven- 
tion in  the  Apostolical  history,  the  master's  coun- 
sels of  toleration  are  in  marked  contrast  to  the 
persecuting  zeal  so  soon  disjilayed  by  the  pupil. 
The  temper  of  Gamaliel  himself  was  moderate  and 
candid,  and  he  was  personally  free  from  bigotry; 
but  his  teaching  was  that  of  the  strictest  of  the 
Pharisees,  and  bore  its  natural  fi-uit  when  lodged  in 
the  ardent  and  thorough -going  nature  of  Saul. 
Other  fruits,  besides  that  of  a  zeal  which  persecuted 
the  Church,  may  no  doubt  be  referred  to  the  time 
when  Saul  sat  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel.  A  thorough 
training  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  the  traditions  of 
the  elders  under  an  acute  and  accom])Iished  master, 
must  have  done  much  to  exercise  the  mind  of  Saul, 
and  to  make  him  feel  at  home  in  the  subjects  in 
which  he  was  afterwards  to  be  so  intensely  inte- 
rested. And  we  are  not  at  all  bound  to  sujipose 
tliat,  because  his  zeal  for  the  law  was  strong  enough 
to  set  him  upon  persecuting  the  believers  in  Jesus, 


with  the  Apostle's  own  statement  that  he  was  bom  at 
Tarsus  (Acts  xxii.  3). 

'  His  words  in  the  speech  before  Agrippa  (Acts  xxvi. 
4,  5),  according  to  the  received  text,  refer  exclusively 
to  his  life  at  Jerusalem.     But  if  we  read,  with   tin- 


PAUL 

he  had  therefoie  experienced  none  of  the  doubts 
and  struggles  which,  according  to  his  subsequent 
testimony,  it  was  the  nature  of  the  law  to  produce. 
On  the  contrary,  we  can  scarcely  imagine  these  as 
absent  from  the  spiritual  life  of  Saul  as  he  passed 
from  boyhood  to  manhood.  Earnest  persecutors 
are,  oftener  than  not,  men  who  have  been  tormented 
by  inward  struggles  and  perplexities.  The  pupil 
of  Gamaliel  may  have  been  crushing  a  multitude  of 
conflicts  in  his  own  mind  when  he  threw  himself 
into  the  holy  work  of  extirpating  the  new  heresy. 

Saul  was  yet  "  a  young  man"  (vfavlas.  Acts 
vii.  58),  when  the  Church  experienced  that  sudden 
expansion  which  was  connected  with  the  ordaining 
of  the  Seven  appointed  to  serve  tables,  and  with 
the  special  power  and  inspiration  of  Stephen. 
Amongst  those  who  disputed  with  Stephen  were 
some  "  of  them  of  Cilicia."  We  naturally  think  of 
Saul  as  having  been  one  of  these,  when  we  find 
him  afterwards  keeping  the  clothes  of  those  suborned 
witnesses  who,  according  to  the  law  (Dent.  xvii. 
7),  were  the  first  to  cast  stones  at  Stephen.  "  Saul," 
says  the  sacred  writer,  significantly,  "  w^is  consent- 
ing unto  his  death."  The  angelic  glory  that  shone 
from  Stephen's  face,  and  the  Divine  truth  of  his 
words,  failing  to  subdue  the  spirit  of  religious 
hatred  now  burning  in  Saul's  breast,  must  have 
embittered  and  aggravated  its  rage;  Saul  was 
passing  through  a  terrible  crisis  for  a  man  of  his 
nature.  But  he  was  not  one  to  he  moved  from  his 
stern  purpose  by  the  native  refinement  and  tender- 
ness which  he  must  have  been  stifling  within  him. 
He  was  the  most  unwearied  and  unrelenting  of  per- 
secutors. "  As  for  Saul,  he  made  havoc  of  the 
Church,  entering  into  every  house,  and  haling  men 
and  women,  committed  them  to  prison "  (Acts 
viii.  3). 

Saul's  Conversion. — The  persecutor  was  to  be  con- 
verted. What  the  nature  of  that  conversion  was,  we 
are  now  to  observe. — Having  undertaken  to  follow  up 
the  believers  "  unto  strange  cities,"  Saul  naturally 
turned  his  thoughts  to  Damascus,  expecting  to  find, 
amongst  the  numerous  Jewish  residents  of  that  po- 
pulous city,  some  adherents  of  "the  way"  (ttjs 
oSov),  and  trusting,  we  must  presume,  to  be 
allowed  by  the  connivance  of  the  governor  to  appre- 
hend them.  What  befell  him  as  he  journeyed  thi- 
ther, is  related  in  detail  three  limes  in  the  Acts,  first 
by  the  historian  in  his  own  person,  then  in  the  two 
addresses  made  by  St.  Paul  at  Jerusalem  and  before 
Agrippa.  These  three  narratives  are  not  repetitions 
of  one  another:  there  are  differences  between  them 
which  some  critics  choose  to  consider  irreconcile- 
able.  Considering  that  the  same  author  is  respon- 
sible for  all  the  accounts,  we  gain  nothing,  of  course, 
for  the  authenticity  of  their  statements  by  bringing 
tjiem  into  agreement ;  but  it  seems  pretty  clear  that 
the  author  himself  could  not  have  been  conscious 
of  any  contradictions  in  the  narratives.  He  can 
scarcely  have  had  any  motive  for  placing  side  by 
side  inconsistent  reports  of  St.  Paul's  conversion  ; 
and  that  he  should  have  admitted  inconsistencies  on 
such  a  matter  through  mei'e  c<'lrelessness,  is  hardly 
credible.  Of  the  three  narratives,  that  of  the  his- 
toi'ian  himself  must  claim  to  be  the  most  purely 


better  authorities,  ei-  re  'lep.  for  ei>  'lip.  he  may  be 
speaking  of  the  life  he  led  "  amongst  his  own  people " 
at  Tarsus  or  elsewhere,  as  uell  as  of  his  residence  at 
Jerusalem. 


PAUL 

historical :  St.  Paul's  subsequent  accounts  were 
likely  to  be  affected  by  the  purpose  for  which  he 
introduced  them.  St.  Luke's  statement  is  to  be 
read  in  Acts  ix.  3-19,  where,  however,  the  words 
"  It  is  hard  tor.  thee  to  kick  against  the  pricks,"  in- 
cluded in  the  Vulgate  and  English  version,  ought 
to  be  omitted.  The  sudden  light  from  heaven  ;  the 
voice  of  Jesus  s])eaking  with  authoiity  to  His  perse- 
cutor; Saul  struck  to  the  ground,  bliuded,  over- 
come ;  the  three  days'  suspense ;  the  coming  of 
Ananias  as  a  messenger  of  the  Lord  ;  and  Saul's  bap- 
tism ; — these  were  the  leading  features,  in  the  eyes 
of  the  historian,  of  the  great  event,  and  in  these  we 
must  look  for  the  chief  signitiamce  of  the  con- 
version. 

Let  us  now  compare  the  historical  relation  with 
those  which  we  have  in  St.  Paul's  speeches  (Acts 
x.xii.  and  .xxvi.).  The  reader  will  do  well  to  con- 
sider each  in  its  place.  But  we  have  heie  to  deal 
with  the  bai'e  facts  of  agi'eement  or  difference. 
With  regard  to  the  liglit,  the  speeches  add  to  what 
St.  Luke  tells  us  that  the  phenomenon  occurred 
at  mid-day,  and  that  the  light  shone  round,  and  was 
visible  to,  Saul's  companions  as  well  as  himself. 
The  2nd  speech  says,  that  at  the  shining  of  this 
litrht,  the  whole  company  ('-we  all")  fell  to  the 
ground.  This  is  not  contradicted  by  what  is  said, 
ix.  7,  "  the  men  which  journeyed  with  him  stood 
speechless,"  for  tliere  is  no  emphasis  on  "  stood," 
nor  is  the  standing  antithetical  to  Saul's  falling 
down.  We  have  but  to  suppose  the  others  rising 
before  Saul,  or  standing  still  afterwards  in  greater 
perplexity,  through  not  seeing  or  hearing  what 
Saul  saw  and  heard,  to  reconcile  the  narratives 
without  forcing  either.  After  the  question,  "  Why 
persecutest  thou  me?"  the  2nd  speech  adds,  "It  is 
hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the  goads."  Then 
both  the  speeches  supply  a  question  and  answer — 
"  I  answered,  who  art  thou,  Lord?  And  he  said,  I 
am  .lesus  (of  Nazareth),  whom  thou  persecutest.'! 
In  the  direction  to  go  into  Damascus  and  await 
ordeis  there,  the  1st  speech  agrees  with  Acts  is. 
But  whereas  according  to  that  chapter  the  men 
with  Saul  "  heard  the  voice,"  in  the  1st  speech  it 
is  said  "  they  heard  not  the  voice  of  him  that  spake 
to  me."  It  seems  reasonable  to  conclude  from  the 
two  passages,  that  the  men  actually  heaid  sounds, 
but  not,  like  Saul,  an  articulate  voice.  ^Vith  I'egard 
to  the  visit  of  Ananias,  there  is  no  collision  between 
the  9th  chapter  and  the  1st  speech,  the  latter  only 
attributing  additional  words  to  Ananias.  The  2nd 
speech  ce;\ses  to  give  details  of  the  conversion  after 
the  words,  "  I  am  Jesus,  whom  thou  persecutest. 
But  rise  and  stand  ou  th}'  feet."  St.  Paid  adds, 
from  the  mouth  of  Jesus,  an  exposition  ot'  the  pur- 
pose for  which  He  had  appeared  to  him.  It  is  easy  to 
say  that  in  ascribing  these  words  to  Jesus,  St.  Paul 
or  his  professed  reporter  is  violating  the  onler  and 
sequence  of  the  earlier  accouuts.  But,  if  we  bear 
in  mind  the  nature  and  purpose  of  St.  Paul's  address 
before  Agrippa,  we  shall  suiely  not  suppose  that  he 
is  violating  the  strict  truth,  when  he  adds  to  the 
words  which  Jesus  spoke  to  him  at  tiie  moment  of 
the  light  and  the  sound,  without  interposing  any 
reference  to  a  later  occasion,  that  fuller  exposition 
of  the  meaning  of  the  crisis  through  which  he  was 
pa-sing,  which  lie  w;is  not  to  receive  till  afterwards. 
What  Saul  actually  heard  from  Jesus  on  the  way 
as  he  journeyed,  was  afterwards  interpreted,  to  the 
mind  of  Saul,  into  those  definite  expressions. 

For  we  must  not  forget  that,  whatever  we  hold 


PAUL 


733 


as  to  the  external  nature  of  the  phenomena  we  are 
considering,  the  whole  tnuisaction  was  essentiallv, 
in  any  case;  a  spiritual  communication.  That  the 
Lord  Jesus  manifested  Himself  as  a  Livinc;  Person 
to  the  man  Said,  and  spoke  to  him  so  that  His  very 
words  could  be  understood,  is  the  substantial  fact 
declared  to  us.  The  purport  of  the  three  narratives 
is  that  an  actual  conversation  took  place'  between 
Saul  and  the  Lord  Jesus.  It  is  remaikable  that  in 
none  of  them  is  Saul  said  to  have  seen  Jesus.  The 
grounds  for  believing  that  he  did  are  the  two  ex- 
pressions of  Ananias  (Acts  ix.  17),  "  The  Lord  Jesus, 
who  appeared  unto  thee  in  the  way,"  and  (Acts 
xxii.  14)  "  That  thou  shouldest  see  the  Just  One," 
and  the  statement  of  St.  Paul  ( 1  Cor.  xv.  8),  "  Last 
of  all  He  w;is  seen  of  me  also."  Comparing  these 
passages  with  the  narratives,  we  conclude,  either 
that  Saul  had  an  instantaneous  vision  of  Jesus  as 
the  flash  of  light  blinded  him,  or  that  the  "seeing" 
was  that  apprehension  of  His  presence  which  would 
go  with  a  real  couveisation.  How  it  was  that  Saul 
"  saw  "  and  "  heard  "  we  are  (piite  unable  to  de- 
termine. That  the  light,  and  the  sound  or  voice, 
were  both  different  from  any  ordinary  phenomena 
with  which  Saul  and  his  companions  were  familiar, 
is  unquestionably  implied  in  the  narrative.  It  is 
also  implied  that  they  were  specially  significant  to 
Saul,  and  not  to  tliose  with  him.  We  gather  there- 
fore that  there  were  real  outward  phenomena, 
through  which  Saul  was  made  inwardly  sensible  of 
a  Presence  revealed  to  him  alone. 

Externally  there  was  a  flash  of  light.  Spiritually 
"  the  light  of  the  gospel  of  tlie  gloiy  of  the  Christ, 
who  is  the  image  of  God,"  shoue  upon  Saul,  and 
convicted  the  darkness  of  the  heart  which  had  shut 
out  Love  and  knew  not  the  glory  of  the  Cross. 
Externally  Saul  fell  to  the  ground.  Spiritually  he 
was  prostrated  by  shame,  when  he  knew  whom  he 
had  been  persecuting.  Externally  sounds  issued  out 
of  heaven.  Spiritually  the  Crucified  said  to  Saul, 
with  tender  remonstrance,  "  I  am  Jesus,  why  per- 
secutest thou  me  ?"  Whether  audibly  to  his  com- 
panions, or  audibly  to  the  Lord  Jesus  onlv,  Saul 
confessed  himself  in  the  spirit  the  servant  of  Him 
whose  name  he  had  hated.  He  gave  himself  up, 
without  being  able  to  see  his  way,  to  the  disposal 
of  Him  whom  he  now  knew  to  have  vindicated  His 
claim  over  him  by  the  very  sacrifice  which  for- 
merly he  had  despised.  The  Pharisee  was  con- 
verted, once  for  all,  into  a  disciple  of  Jesus  the 
Crucified. 

The  only  mention  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  of 
tlie  outward  phenomena  attending  his  conversion 
is  that  in  1  Cor.  xv.  8,  "  Last  of  all  He  was  seen 
ot  me  also."  But  there  is  one  important  passage 
in  which  he  speaks  distinctly  of  iiis  conversion 
itself.  Dr.  Baur  (Paulus,  p.  (j4\  with  his  readi- 
ness to  find  out  discrepancies,  insists  that  this  pas- 
sage represents  quite  a  diiierent  process  from  that 
recorded  in  the  Acts.  It  is  manifestly  not  a  i-epe- 
tition  of  what  we  have  been  reading  and  considering, 
but  it  is  in  tlie  most  perfect  harmony  with  it.  In 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatimis  (i.  15,' IG)  St.  Paul 
has  these  words:  "When  it  pleased  God,  who  sepa- 
rated me  from  my  mother's  womb,  and  called  me 
by  His  grace,  to  reveal  His  &jn  m  me,  that  I 
might  ])reach  Him  among  the  heathen  .  .  ."  (ctiro- 
KaKvrpai  Thv  vlbf  aiJTOv  iv  (jJ-oi).  What  woids 
could  ex])ress  more  exactly  than  these  tlie  spiritual 
experience  which  occurred  to  Saul  on  the  way  to 
Damascus?    The  manifestation  of  Jesus  as  the  Son 


734 


PAUL 


of  God  is  clearly  the  main  point  in  the  narrative. 
This  manifestation  was  brought  about  through  a 
removal  of  the  veils  of  prejudice  and  ignorance 
which  blinded  the  eyes  of  Saul  to  a  Crucified 
Deliverer,  conquering  through  sacrifice.  And,  what- 
evei'  part  the  senses  may  have  played  in  the  trans- 
action, the  essence  of  it  in  any  case  must  have  been 
Saul's  inward  vision  of  a  spiritual  Lord  close  to  his 
spirit,  from  whom  he  could  not  escape,  whose  every 
command  he  was  henceforth  to  obey  in  the  Spirit. 

It  would  be  groundless  to  assume  that  the  new 
convictions  of  that  mid-day  immediately  cleared  and 
settled  themselves  in  Saul's  mind.  It  is  sufficient 
to  say  that  he  was  then  converted,  or  turned  round. 
For  a  while,  no  doubt,  his  inward  state  was  one  of 
awe  and  expectation.  He  was  being  "led  by  the 
hand"  spiritually  by  his  Master,  as  well  as  bodily 
by  his  companions.  Thus  entering  Damascus  as  a 
servant  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  he  sought  the  house  of 
one  whom  he  had,  perhaps,  intended  to  persecute. 
Judas  may  have  been  known  to  his  guest  as  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord.  Certainly  the  fame  of  Saul's 
coming  had  preceded  him  ;  and  Ananias,  "a  devout 
man  according  to  the  law,"  but  a  believer  in  Jesus, 
when  directed  by  the  Lord  to  visit  him,  wonders  at 
what  he  is  told  concerning  the  notorious  persecutor. 
He  obeys,  however ;  and  going  to  Saul  in  the  name 
of  "  the  Lord  Jesus,  who  had  appeared  to  him  in 
the  way,"  he  puts  his  hands  on  him  that  he  may 
receive  his  sight  and  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Thereupon  Saul's  eyes  are  immediately  purged,  and 
his  sight  is  restored.  "  The  same  hour,"  says  St. 
Paul  (Acts  xxii.  13),  "  I  looked  up  upon  him.  And 
he  said,  The  God  of  our  lathers  hath  chosen  thee, 
that  thou  shouldest  know  His  will,  and  see  the  Just 
One,  and  shouldest  hear  the  voice  of  His  mouth. 
For  thou  shalt  be  His  witness  unto  all  men  of  what 
thou  hast  seen  and  heard."  Every  word  in  this 
address  striKcs  some  chord  which  we  hear  sounded 
again  and  agiiin  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  The  new 
convert  is  not,  as  it  is  so  common  to  say,  converted 
from  Judaism  to  Christianity — the  God  of  the 
Jewish  fathers  chooses  him.  He  is  chosen  to  know 
God's  will.  That  will  is  manifested  in  the  Righteous 
One.  Him  Saul  sees  and  hears,  in  order  that  he 
may  be  a  witness  of  Him  to  all  men.  The  eternal 
will  of  the  God  of  Abraham  ;  that  will  revealed  in 
a  Righteous  Son  of  God;  the  testimony  concerning 
Him,  a  Gospel  to  mankind  : — these  are  the  essentially 
Pauline  principles  which  are  declai-ed  in  all  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Apostle,  and  illustrated  in  all  his  actions. 

After  the  recovery  of  his  sight,  Saul  received  the 
washing  away  of  his  sins  in  baptism.  He  then 
broke  his  three  days'  fast,  and  was  strengthened : 
an  image,  again,  of  the  strengthening  of  his  faint 
and  hungering  spirit  through  a  participation  in  the 
Divine  life  of  the  Church  at  Damascus.  He  was  at 
once  received  into  the  fellowship  of  the  disciples, 
and  began  without  delay  the  work  to  which  Ananias 
had  designated  him ;  and  to  the  a.stonishment  of  all 
his  hearers  he  proclaimed  .lesus  in  the  synagogues, 
declaring  him  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  This  was  the 
natural  sequel  to  his  conversion:  he  was  to  pro- 
claim Jesus  the  Crucified,  first  to  the  Jews  as  their 
own  Christ,  afterwards  to  the  world  as  the  Son  of 
the  Living  God. 

The  narrative  in  the  Acts  tells  us  sim])ly  that  he 
was  occupied  in  this  work,  with  increasing  vigour, 
loi  "  many  days,''  up  to  the  time  when  imminent 
dangei-  drove  him  from  Damascus.  From  the  Ejiistle 
to  the  Galatiaus  {i,  17,  IS)  we  learn  tliat  the  many 


PAUL 

days  were  at  least  a  good  part  of  "  three  years," 
and  that  Saul,  not  thinking  it  necessary  to  procure 
authority  to  preach  from  the  Apostles  that  were 
before  him,  went  after  his  conversion  into  Arabia, 
and  returned  from  thence  to  Damascus.  We  know 
nothing  whatever  of  this  visit  to  Arabia — to  what 
district  Saul  went,  how  long  he  stayed,  or  for  what 
purpose  he  went  there.  From  the  antithetical  way 
in  which  it  is  opposed  to  a  visit  to  the  Apostles  at 
Jerusalem,  we  infer  that  it  took  place  before  he 
deliberately  committed  himself  to  tiie  tisk  of  pro- 
claiming Jesus  as  the  Christ;  and  also,  with  some 
probability,  that  he  was  seeking  seclusion,  in  order 
that,  by  conferring  "  not  with  fiesh  and  blood,"  but 
with  the  Lord  in  the  Spirit,  he  might  receive  more 
deeply  into  his  mind  the  commission  given  him  at  his 
conversion.  That  Saul  did  not  spend  the  greater 
portion  of  the  "  three  years "  at  Damascus  seems 
probaljle,  for  these  two  reasons;  (1)  that  the  anger 
of  the  Jews  was  not  likely  to  have  borne  with  two 
or  three  years  of  such  a  life  as  Saul's  now  was 
without  growing  to  a  height ;  and  (2)  that  the 
disciples  at  Jerusalem  would  not  have  been  likely 
to  mistrust  Saul  as  they  did,  if  they  had  heard  of 
him  as  preaching  Jesus  at  Damascus  for  the  s<'ime 
considerable  period.  But  it  does  not  follow  that 
Saul  was  in  Arabia  all  the  time  he  was  not  disput- 
ing at  Damascus.  For  all  that  we  know  to  the 
contrary  he  may  have  gone  to  Antioch  or  Tarsus 
or  anywhere  else,  or  he  may  have  remained  silenV 
at  Damascus  for  some  time  after  returning  tiom 
Arabia. 

Now  that  we  have  arrived  at  Saul's  departure 
from  Damascus,  we  are  again  upon  historical  ground, 
and  have  the  double  evidence  of  St.  Luke  in  the 
Acts,  and  of  the  Apostle  in  his  2nd  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians.  According  to  the  former,  the  Jeivs 
lay  in  wait  for  Saul,  intending  to  kill  him,  and 
watched  the  gates  of  the  city  that  he  might  not 
escape  from  them.  Knowing  this,  the  disciples  took 
him  by  night  and  let  him  down  in  a  basket  from 
the  wall.  According  to  St.  Paul  (2  Cor.  xi.  32) 
it  was  the  ethnarch  under  Aretas  the  king  who 
watched  for  him,  desiring  to  apprehend  him.  There 
is  no  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  two  statements. 
We  might  similarly  say  that  our  Lord  was  put  to 
death  either  by  the  Jews  or  by  the  Roman  governor. 
There  is  more  difficulty  in  ascertaining  how  an 
officer  of  king  Aretas  should  be  governing  in  Da- 
mascus, and  why  he  should  lend  himself  to  the 
designs  of  the  Jevi^s.  But  we  learn  from  secular 
history  that  the  affairs  of  Damascus  were,  at  the 
time,  in  such  an  unsettled  state  as  to  make  the  nar- 
rative not  improbable.  [Aretas.]  Having  es- 
caped from  Damascus,  Saul  betook  himself  to  Je- 
rusalem, and  there  "  assayed  to  join  himself  to  the 
disciples;  but  they  weie  all  afraid  of  him,  and 
believed  not  that  he  was  a  disciple."  In  this 
natural  but  trying  difficulty  Saul  was  befriended 
by  one  whose  name  was  henceforth  closely  asso- 
ciated with  his.  Barnabas  became  his  sponsor  to 
the  Apostles  and  Church  at  Jerusalem,  a.ssuring 
them — from  some  personal  knowledge,  we  must 
presume — of  the  facts  of  Saul's  conversion  and  sub- 
sequent behaviour  at  Damascus,  It  is  noticeable 
that  the  seeing  and  hearing  are  still  the  leading 
features  in  the  conversion,  and  the  name  of  Jesus 
in  the  preaching.  Barnabas  declared  how  "  Saul 
had  seen  the  Lord  in  the  way,  and  tiiat  he  had 
spoken  to  him,  and  how  that  he  had  preached 
boldly  at  Damascus  iu  the  name  of  Jesus."     Bar- 


PAUL 

nabas's  introduction  removed  the  fears  of  the 
Apostles,  and  Paul  "  was  with  them  coming  in  and 
going  out  at  Jerusalem."  His  Hellenistical  educa- 
tion made  hmi,  lil<e  Stephen,  a  successful  disputant 
aganist  the  "  Grecians  ;"  and  it  is  not  strange  that 
the  former  persecutor  was  singled  out  from  the  other 
believers  as  the  object  of  a  murderous  hostility.  He 
was  theietbi e  again  urged  to  flee ;  and  by  way  of 
Caesarea  betook  himself  to  his  native  city  Tarsus. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  St.  Paul  adds 
certain  particular,  in  which  only  a  perverse  and 
captious  criticism  could  see  anything  conti-adictoiy 
to  the  facts  just  related.  He  tells  us  that  his  motive 
for  going  up  to  Jerusalem  rather  than  anywhere 
else  was  that  he  might  see  Peter ;  that  he  abode 
with  him  fifteen  days;  that  the  only  Apostles  he 
saw  were  Peter  and  James  the  Lord's  brother  ;  and 
that  afterwards  he  came  into  the  regions  of  Syiia 
and  Cilicia,  remaining  unknown  by  face,  though 
well-known  for  his  conversion,  to  the  churches  in 
Judaea  which  were  in  Christ.  St.  Paul's  object  in 
referring  to  this  connexion  of  his  with  those  who 
were  Apostles  before  him,  was  to  show  that  he 
had  never  accepted  his  apostleship  as  a  commission 
iVom  them.  On  this  point  the  narrative  in  the 
Acts  entirely  agrees  with  St.  Paul's  own  earnest 
asseverations  in  his  Epistles.  He  received  his  com- 
mission from  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  also  mediately 
through  Ananias.  This  commission  included  a 
special  designation  to  preach  Christ  to  the  Gentiles. 
Upon  the  latter  designation  he  did  not  act,  until 
circumstances  opened  the  way  for  it.  But  he  at 
once  began  to  proclaim  Jesus  as  tlie  Christ  to  his 
own  countrymen.  Barnabas  introduced  him  to  the 
Apostles,  not  as  seeking  their  sanction,  but  as  having 
seen  and  heard  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  as  having  boldly 
spoken  already  in  His  name.  Probably  at  first, 
Saul's  independence  as  an  Apostle  of  Christ  was  not 
distinctly  thought  of,  either  by  himself  or  by  the 
older  Apostles.  It  was  not  till  afterwards  that  it 
became  so  important ;  and  then  the  reality  of  it 
appeared  plainly  from  a  reference  to  the  beginning 
of  his  Apostolic  work. 

St.  Paid  at  Antioch. — While  Saul  was  at  Tarsus, 
a  movement  was  going  on  at  Antioch,  which  raised 
that  city  to  an  importance  second  only  to  that  of 
Jerusalem  itself  in  the  early  history  of  the  Church. 
In  the  life  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  Antioch 
ilaims  a  most  conspicuous  place.  It  was  there  that 
the  Preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles  fiist 
took  root,  and  from  thence  that  it  was  afterwards 
piopagated.  Its  geogi'ajihical  position,  its  political 
and  commercial  importance,  and  the  jiresence  of  a 
large  and  powerful  Jewish  element  in  its  popula- 
tion, were  the  more  obvious  chai'acteristics  which 
adapted  it  for  such  a  use.  There  came  to  Antioch, 
when  the  persecution  which  arose  about  Stephen 
scattered  upon  their  ditii'rciit  routes  the  disciples 
who  had  been  assembled  at  Jerusalem,  men  of 
Cyprus  and  Cyreiie,  eager  to  tell  all  who  would 
liear  them  the  good  news  concerning  the  Lord  Jesus. 
Until  Antioch  was  reached,  the  word  was  spoken 
"  to  none  but  unto  Jews  only"  (Acts  xi.  19).  But 
here  the  Gentiles  also  (oj  "EAATji/ey) — not,  as  in 
the  A.  v.,  "the  Grecians,"  —  were  amongst  the 
hearers  of  the  word.  A  great  number  believed  ; 
and  when  this  was  reported  at  Jerusalem,  Barnabiis 
was  sent  on  a  special  mission  to  Antioch. 

As  the  work  grew  under  his  hands,  and  "  much 
people  was  added  unto  the  Lord,"  Barnabiis  felt  the 
need  of  help,  and  went  himself  to  Tarsus  to  seek  Saul. 


PAUL 


735 


Possibly  ab  Damascus,  cerbuiily  at  Jerusalem,  he 
had  been  a  witness  of  Saul's  energy  ami  devoted- 
ness,  and  skill  in  disputation.  He  had  been  drawn 
to  him  by  the  bond  of  a  most  brotherly  affection. 
He  therefore  longed  for  him  as  a  helper,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  him  to  Antioch.  There  they 
laboured  together  unremittingly  for  "  a  whole 
year,"  mixing  with  the  constant  assemblies  of  the 
believers,  and  "  teaching  much  people."  All  this 
time,  as  St.  Luke  would  give  us  to  understand, 
Saul  was  subordinate  to  Barnabas.  Until  "  Saul  " 
became  "Paul,"  we  read  of  "Barnabas  and  Saul" 
(Acts  xi.  30,  xii.  2.5,  xiii.  2,  7).  Afterwards  the 
order  changes  to  '•  Paul  and  Barnabas."  It  seems 
reasonable  to  conclude  that  there  was  no  marked 
peculiarity  in  the  teaching  of  Saul  during  the  An- 
tioch period.  He  held  and  taught,  in  common 
with  the  other  Jewish  believers,  the  simple  faith  in 
Jesus  the  Christ,  crucified  and  raised  from  the 
dead.  Nor  did  he  ever  afterwards  depart  from  the 
simplicity  of  this  faith.  But  new  circumstances 
stirred  up  new  questions ;  and  then  it  was  to  Saul 
of  Tarsus  that  it  was  given  to  see,  more  clearly 
than  any  others  saw,  those  new  applications  of  the 
old  truth,  those  deep  and  world-wide  relations  of  it, 
with  which  his  work  was  to  be  permanently  asso- 
ciated. In  the  mean  time,  according  to  the  usual 
method  of  the  Divine  government,  facts  were  silently 
growing,  which  were  to  suggest  and  occasion  the 
future  developments  of  faith  and  piactice,  and  of 
these  facts  the  most  conspicuous  was  the  unprece- 
dented accession  of  Gentile  pi'oselytes  at  Antioch. 

An  opportunity  soon  occurred,  of  which  Bar- 
nabas and  Saul  joyfully  availed  themselves,  for 
proving  the  affection  of  these  new  disciples  towards 
their  brethren  at  Jerusalem,  and  for  knitting  the 
two  communities  together  in  the  bonds  of  practic:il 
fellowship.  A  manifest  impulse  from  the  Holy 
Spirit  began  this  work.  There  came  "prophets" 
from  Jerusalem  to  Antioch:  '"and  there  stooil  up 
one  of  them,  named  Agabus,  and  signified  by  the 
Spirit  that  there  should  be  great  dearth  throughout 
all  the  world."  The  "  prophets  "  who  now  arrived 
may  have  been  the  Simeon  and  Lucius  and  Manaen, 
mentioned  in  xiii.  1.,  besides  Agabus  and  others. 
The  prediction  of  the  dearth  need  not  have  been 
puiposeless ;  it  would  naturally  have  a  direct  re- 
ference to  the  needs  of  the  poorer  brethren  and  the 
duty  of  the  richer.  It  is  obvious  that  the  fulfil- 
ment followed  closely  upon  the  intimation  of  the 
cor.iing  famine.  For  the  disciples  at  Antioch  deter- 
mined to  send  contributions  immediately  to  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  the  gift  was  conveved  fo  the  elders  of 
that  Church  by  the  hands  of  IJarnabas  and  Saul. 
The  time  of  this  dearth  is  vaguely  designated  in  the 
Acts  as  the  reign  of  Claudius.  It  is  ascertained 
from  Josephus's  history,  that  a  severe  famine  did 
actually  prevail  in  .ludaea,  and  especially  at  Jeru- 
salem, at  the  very  time  fixed  by  the  event  recorded 
in  Acts  xii.,  the  death  of  Herod  Agripiw.  This 
wiis  in  A.D.  44.  [Agahus.] 

It  could  not  have  been  neccssiiry  for  the  mere 
safe  conduct  of  the  contribution  that  Barnalias  and 
Saul  should  go  in  ]i.>rson  to  Jerusalem.  We  are 
bound  to  see  in  the  relations  between  the  Mother- 
Church  and  that  of  Antioch,  of  which  this  visit  is 
illustrative,  examples  of  the  deep  libeling  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  union  which  dwelt  in  the  heart  of  the 
early  Church.  The  Apostles  did  not  go  forth  fo 
teach  a  sysfcm,  but  to  enlarge  a  body.  The  Spirit 
which   directed   and    furthered    their    labours    w;ts 


736 


PAUL 


essentially  the  Spirit  of  fellowship.  By  this  Spirit 
Saul  of  Tarsus  was  being  practically  trained  in 
strict  co-operation  with  his  elders  in  the  Church. 
The  haliits  which  he  learnt  now  were  to  aid  in 
guarding  him  at  a  later  time  from  supposing  that 
the  independence  which  he  \v;is  bound  to  claim, 
should  involve  the  sliglitest  breach  or  loosening  of 
tlie  bonds  of  the  universal  brotherhood. 

Having  discharged  their  errand,  Barnabas  and 
Saul  returned  to  Antioch,  bringing  with  them  an- 
other heljier,  John  surnamed  Jlark,  sister's  son  to 
Barnabas.  The  work  of  prophesying  and  teaching 
was  resumed.  Several  of  the  oldest  and  most  ho- 
noured of  the  believers  in  Jesus  were  expounding 
the  way  of  (jod  and  organizing  the  Church  in  that 
busy  metro]iolis.  Travellers  were  incessantly  pass- 
ing to  and  fro.  Antioch  was  in  constant  commu- 
nication with  Cilicia,  with  Cyprus,  with  all  the 
neighbouring  countries.  The  cjuestion  must  have 
forced  itself  upon  hundieds  of  the  "  Christians  "  at 
Antioch,  "  What  is  the  meaning  of  this  faith  of 
ours,  of  this  baptism,  of  this  incorporation,  of  this 
kingdom  of  the  Son  of  God,  for  the  world '1  The 
Gospel  is  not  for  Judaea  alone:  here  are  we  called 
by  it  at  Antioch.  Is  it  meant  to  stop  hei'e?"  The 
Church  was  pregnant  with  a  great  movement,  and 
the  time  of  her  delivery  was  at  hand.  We  forget 
the  whole  method  of  the  Divine  work  in  the  nurture 
of  the  Churcli,  if  we  ascribe  to  the  impulses  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  any  theatrical  suddenness,  and  discon- 
nect them  from  the  thoughts  which  were  brooding 
in  the  minds  of  the  disciples.  At  every  point  we  find 
both  circumstances  and  inward  reasonings  preparing 
the  crisis.  Something  of  direct  expectation  seems  to 
be  implied  in  what  is  said  of  the  leaders  of  the  Church 
at  Antioch,  that  they  were  "ministering  to  the 
J.ord,  and  fasting,"  when  the  Holy  Ghost  spoke  to 
them.  Without  doubt  they  knew  it  for  a  seal  set 
upon  previous  surmises,  when  the  voice  came  clearlv 
to  the  general  mind,  "  Separate  me  Barnabas  and 
Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called  them." 
That  "  work  "  was  partially  known  already  to  the 
Christians  of  Antioch :  who  could  be  so  tit  for  it 
as  the  two  brothers  in  the  faith  and  in  mutual 
affection,  the  sou  of  exliortation,  and  the  highly  ac- 
complished and  undaunted  convert  who  had  from 
the  first  been  called  "a  chosen  vessel,  to  bear  the 
name  of  the  Lord  before  the  Gentiles,  and  kings, 
and  the  people  of  Israel  ?  " 

When  we  look  back,  from  the  higher  ground  of 
St.  Paul's  apostolic  activity,  to  the  years  that  passed 
between  his  conversion  and  the  first  missionary 
journey,  we  cannot  observe  without  reverence  the 
patient  humility  with  which  Saul  waited  for  his 
Master's  time.  He  did  not  say  for  once  onlv, 
"Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do?"  Obe- 
dience to  Christ  was  thenceforth  his  ruling  prin- 
ciple. Submitting,  as  he  believed,  to  his  Lord's 
direction,  he  was  content  to  work  for  a  long  time  as 
the  subcfi'dinate  colleague  of  his  seniors  in  the  faith. 
He  was  thus  the  better  prepared,  when  the  call 
came,  to  act  with  the  authority  which  that  call 
conferred  upon  him.  He  left  Antioch,  however, 
still  the  second  to  Barnabas.  Everything  w;ls  done 
with  orderly  gravity  in  the  sending  forth  of  tlie 
two  missionaries.  Their  biethren,  after  fasting  and 
prayer,  laid  their  hands  on  them,  and  so  they  de- 
parted. 

The  first  Mlssionuru  Jounici/. — JIuch  must  have 
been  hid  fi'om  Barnabas  and  Saul  as  to  the  issues 
of  the  journey  on  which  they  embarked.     But  one 


PAUL 

thing  was  clear  to  them,  that  they  were  sent  forth 
to  speak  the  woi-d  of  God.  They  did  not  go  in 
their  own  name  or  for  tlieir  own  puqaoses :  they 
were  instruments  for  uttering  what  the  Etei-nal  God 
Himself  was  saying  to  men.  We  shall  lind  in  the 
history  a  perfectly  definite  representation  of  what 
St.  Paul  announced  and  taught  as  he  journeved 
from  city  to  city.  But  the  first  characteristic  t'ea- 
ture  of  his  teaching  was  the  absolute  conviction  that 
he  was  only  the  bearer  of  a  Heavenly  message.  It 
is  idle  to  discuss  St.  Paul's  character  or  views  with- 
out recognising  this  fact.  We  are  compelled  to 
think  of  him  as  of  a  man  who  was  capable  of  che- 
rishing such  a  conviction  with  perfect  assurance. 
We  are  bound  to  bear  in  mind  the  unspeakable 
influence  which  that  conviction  must  have  exerted 
upon  liis  nature.  The  writer  of  the  Acts  proceeds 
upon  tlie  same  assumption.  He  tells  us  that  as 
soon  as  Barnabas  and  Saul  reached  Cyprus,  they 
began  to  "  annoimce  the  word  of  God." 

The  second  fact  to  be  observed  is,  that  for  the 
present  they  delivered  their  message  in  the  syna- 
gogues of  the  Jews  only.  They  trod  the  old  path 
till  they  should  be  drawn  out  of  it.  But  when 
they  had  gone  through  the  island,  from  Salamis  to 
Paj)hos,  they  were  called  upon  to  explain  their  doc- 
trine to  an  eminent  Gentile,  Sergius  Paulus,  the 
proconsul.  This  Roman  otiicer,  like  so  many  of 
his  countrymen,  had  already  come  under  the  in- 
fluence of  Jewish  teaching ;  but  it  was  in  the 
corrupt  form  of  magical  pretensions,  which  throve 
so  luxuriantly  upon  the  godless  credulity  of  that 
age.  A  Jew,  named  Barjesus,  or  Elymas,  a  magus 
and  false  prophet,  had  attached  himself  to  the  go- 
vernoi',  and  had  no  doubt  interested  his  mind,  for  he 
was  an  intelligent  man,  with  what  he  had  told  him 
of  the  history  and  hopes  of  the  Jews.  [Elvmas.] 
Accordingly,  when  Sergius  Paulus  heard  of  the 
strange  teachers  who  were  announcing  to  the  Jews 
the  advent  of  their  true  Messiah,  he  wished  to  see 
them  and  sent  for  them.  The  impostor,  instinct- 
ively hating  the  Apostles,  and  seeing  his  influence 
over  the  proconsul  in  danger  of  jierishing,  did  what 
he  could  to  withstand  them.  Then  Saul,  "  who  is 
also  called  Paul,"  denouncing  Elymas  in  remarkable 
tenus,  declared  against  him  God's  sentence  of  tem- 
porary blindness.  The  blindness  immediatel)'  falls 
upon  him ;  and  the  proconsul,  moved  by  the  scene 
and  persuaded  by  the  teaching  of  the  Apostle,  be- 
comes a  believer. 

There  is  a  singular  parallelism  in  several  points 
between  the  history  of  St.  Paul  and  that  of  St. 
Peter  in  the  Acts.  Baur  presents  it  in  a  highly 
effective  foi-m  {Paulus,  p.  91  &c.),  to  support  his 
theory  of  the  comjiosition  of  this  book  ;  and  this  is 
one  of  the  services  which  he  has  incidentally  ren- 
dered to  the  full  understanding  of  the  early  history 
of  the  Church.  Thus  St.  Paul's  discomfiture  of 
Elymas  reminds  us  of  St.  Peter's  denunciation  of 
Simon  JIagus.  The  two  incidents  bring  strongly 
before  us  one  of  the  great  adverse  elements  with 
which  the  Gospel  had  to  contend  in  that  age. 
Everywhere  there  were  counterfeits  of  the  spiritual 
powers  which  the  Apostles  claimed  and  put  forth. 
It  was  necessary  for  the  preachers  of  Christ. — not 
so  much  to  prove  themselves  stronger  than  the  ma- 
gicians and  soothsayers,  as  to  guard  against  being 
confounded  with  them.  One  distinguishing  mark 
of  the  true  servants  of  the  Spirit  would  be  that  of 
not  trading  upon  their  spiritual  powers  (Acts  viii. 
20).     Another  would  be  that  of  shunning  every 


PAUL 

sort  of  concealmmit  ami  uvtifice,  and  courting  the 
ilaylight  of  open  truth.  St.  Paul's  language  to 
Klynias  is  stu<liou.sly  (lirex;ted  to  the  reproof  of  the 
tricks  of  tlie  religious  impostor.  The  Apostle,  full  of 
the  true  Holy  Ghost,  looiced  steadily  on  the  deceiver, 
spoke  in  the  name  of  a  God  of  light  and  rightwusness 
and  straigiitforward  ways,  and  put  forth  the  power 
of  that  God  for  the  vindication  of  truth  against 
delusion.  The  piinisliment  of  Elynias  was  itself 
symbolical,  and  conveyed  "  teaching  of  the  Lord." 
He  had  chosen  to  create  a  spiritual  ilarkness  around 
him  ;  and  now  there  fell  upon  him  a  mist  and  a  dark- 
ness, and  he  went  about,  seeking  some  one  to  lead 
him  by  the  hand.  If  on  reading  this  account  we 
refer  to  St.  Peter's  reproof  of  Simon  Magus,  we 
shall  lie  struck  by  the  ditfei'ences  as  well  as  the 
resemblance  which  we  shall  observe.  But  we  shall 
undoubtedly  gain  a  stronger  impression  of  this  part 
of  the  Apostolic  work,  viz.,  the  conflict  to  be  waged 
between  the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  of  the  Church,  and 
the  evil  spirits  of  a  dark  superstition  to  which  men 
were  surrendering  themselves  as  slaves.  We  sliall 
feel  the  worth  and  power  of  that  emdid  and  open 
temper  in  which  alone  St.  Paul  would  commend  his 
cause ;  and  in  the  conversion  of  Sergius  Paulus  we 
shall  see  an  exemplary  type  of  many  victories  to  be 
won  by  the  truth  over  falsehood. 

This  point  is  made  a  special  crisis  in  the  history 
of  the  Apostle  by  the  writer  of  the  Acts.  Saul  now 
becomes  Paul,  and  begins  to  take  precedence  of 
Barnabas.  Nothing  is  said  to  explain  the  change 
of  name.  No  reader  could  resist  the  temptation  of 
supposing  tliat  there  must  be  some  connexion  be- 
tween Saul's  new  name  and  that  of  his  distinguished 
Roman  convert.  But  on  reflection  it  does  not  seem 
probable  that  St.  Paul  would  either  have  wislied, 
or  have  consented,  to  change  his  own  name  for  that 
of  a  distinguished  convert.  If  we  put  Sergius 
Paulus  aside,  we  know  that  it  was  exceeilingly  com- 
mon for  Jews  to  bear,  besides  their  own  Jewish 
name,  another  borrowed  from  the  country  with 
which  they  had  become  connected.  (See  Cony- 
beare  and  Howson,  i.  p.  163,  for  full  illustrations.) 
Thus  we  have  Simeon  also  named  Niger,  Barsabas 
also  named  Justus,  John  also  named  Marcus.  Tliere 
is  no  reason  therefore  why  Saul  should  not  have 
borne  from  infancy  the  other  name  of  Paul.  In 
that  case  he  would  be  Saul  amongst  his  own  coun- 
trymen, Paulus  amongst  the  (Jentiles.  And  we  must 
understand  St.  Luke  as  wishing  to  mark  strongly 
the  transition  point  between  Saul's  activity  amongst 
his  own  countrymen,  and  his  new  labours  as  the 
Apostle  of  the  (ientiles,  by  calling  him  Saul  only, 
during  the  first,  and  Paul  only  afterwards. 

The  conversion  of  Sergius  Paulus  may  be  said, 
perhaps,  to  mark  the  beginning  of  the  work  amongst 
the  Gentiles  ;  otherwise,  it  was  not  in  Cyprus  that 
any  change  took  place  in  the  method  hitherto  fol- 
lowed by  P>arnabas  and  Saul  in  preaching  the  Gospel. 
Their  public  addresses  were  as  yet  contined  to  the 
synagogues  ;  but  it  was  soon  to  be  otherwise.  From 
Pa)ihos,  "  Paul  and  his  company  "  set  sail  for  tlie 
mainland,  and  arrived  at  Perga  in  Pampiiylia. 
Here  the  heart  of  their  companion  John  tiillod 
liim,  and  he  rcturneil  to  JerusiUem.  From  Perga 
they  travelled  on  to  a  place,  obscure  in  secular  his- 
tory, but  most  memorable  in  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ, — Antioch  iu  Pisidia.  [Antiocu 
IN  PiSIDlA.]  Here  '"they  went  into  the  syna- 
gogue on  the  sabbath-day,  and  sat  down."  Small 
as  the  place  was,  it  contained  its  colony  of  Jews, 
and  with  them  pioselytes  who  worshippwl  the  God 

VOL.  II. 


PAUI. 


737 


of  the  Jews.  Tlie  degree  to  which  the  Jews  had 
spread  and  settled  themselves  over  tlie  world,  and 
the  influence  they  had  gained  over  tlie  more  resi)e('t- 
ahle  of  their  Gentile  neighbours,  and  especially  over 
tlie  women  of  the  better  class,  are  facts  difficult  to 
appreciate  justly,  but  jiroved  by  undoubted  evi- 
dence, and  very  important  for  us  to  bear  in  mind. 
This  Pisidiau  Antioch  may  have  been  more  Jewish 
than  most  similar  towns,  but  it  was  not  more  so 
than  many  of  much  gre.iter  size  and  importance. 
What  took  plai?e  here  iu  the  synagogue  and  in  the 
city,  is  interesting  to  us  not  only  on  acc9unt  of  itvS 
bearing  on  the  history,  but  also  because  it  repre- 
sents more  or  less  exactly  what  afterwards  occurred 
in  many  other  places. 

It  cannot  he  without  design  that  we  have  single 
but  detailed  examples  given  us  in  the  Acts,  of  the 
various  kinds  of  addresses  which  St.  Paul  used  to 
deliver  in  appealing  to  his  different  audiences.  He 
had  to  address  himself,  in  the  course  of  his  mission- 
ary labours,  to  Jews,  knowing  and  I'eceiving  the 
Scriptures ;  to  ignorant  barbarians ;  to  cultivated 
Greeks;  to  mobs  enraged  against  himself  pei son- 
ally  ;  to  magistrates  and  kings.  It  is  an  inesti- 
mable help  in  studying  the  Apostle  and  his  work, 
that  we  have  specimens  of  the  tone  and  the  argu- 
ments he  was  accustomed  to  use  in  all  these  situa- 
tions. These  will  be  noticed  in  their  places.  In 
what  he  said  at  the  synagogue  in  Antioch,  we 
recognize  the  type  of  the  addi'esses  in  which  he 
would  introduce  his  message  to  his  Jewish  fellow- 
countrymen. 

The  Apostles  of  Christ  sat  still  with  t'ne  rest  of 
the  assembly,  whilst  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 
were  read.  They  and  their  audience  were  united 
in  reverence  for  the  sacred  books.  Then  the  rulers 
of  the  synagogue  sent  to  invite  them,  as  strangers 
but  brethren,  to  speak  any  word  of  exhortation 
which  might  be  in  them  to  the  people.  Paul  stood 
up,  and  beckoning  with  his  hand,  he  spoke.- — The 
speech  is  given  in  Acts  xiii.  lG-41.  The  charac- 
teristics we  observe  in  it  are  these.  The  speaker 
begins  by  acknowledging  "  the  God  of  this  people 
Israel."  He  ascribes  to  Him  the  railing  out  of  the 
nation  and  the  conduct  of  its  subsequent  history. 
He  touches  on  the  chief  points  of  that  history  up  to 
the  reign  of  David,  whom  he  brings  out  into  jiro- 
minence.  He  then  names  Jesus  as  the  promised 
Sim  of  David.  To  convey  some  knowledge  of  Jesus 
to  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  he  recounts  the  chief 
facts  of  the  Gospel  history ;  the  pieparatory  preach- 
ing and  baptism  of  John  (of  which  the  rumour  had 
spread  perhaps  to  Antioch),  the  condemnation  of 
Jesus  by  the  rulers  "  who  knew  neither  Him  nor 
the  prophets,*'  and  His  resurrection.  That  Kesur- 
rection  is  declared  to  be  the  fultilment  of  all  God's 
promises  of  Life,  given  to  the  fathers.  Througu 
Jesus,  therefore,  is  now  ]iroclaimed  by  (5od  Himself 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  full  justification.  The 
Apostle  concludes  by  diawii\g  from  the  pro]ih('ts  a 
warning  against  unbelief.  If  this  is  an  authentic 
example  of  Paul's  preaching,  it  was  iuijiossible  for 
Peter  or  John  to  start  more  exclusively  from  the 
Jewish  covenant  and  jiromises  than  did  the  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles.  How  entirely  this  discourse 
resembles  those  of  St.  Peter  and  of  Stephen  in 
the  eiuiier  chapters  of  the  Acts !  There  is  oiuy 
one  specially  I'auline  touch  in  the  whole, — the 
words  in  ver.  39,  "  By  Him  all  that  believe  are 
justilied  from  all  things,  from  wliich  ye  could  not 
"be  justified  by  the  Law  of  Moses."  '  Kvidently 
foisted  in,'  says  Baur  (p.  103),  who  tliinks  we  ai-e 
'  3  B 


738 


PAUL 


dealing  with  a  mere  fiction,  'to  prevent  the  speech 
from  appearing  too  Petrine,  ami  to  give  it  a  slightly 
Pauline  air.'  Certainly,  it  sounds  like  an  echo  of 
the  Epistles  to  the  liomans  and  Galatians.  But  is 
there  therefore  the  slightest  incongruity  between 
this  and  the  other  parts  of  the  address  ?  Does  not 
that  "  forgiveness  of  sins  "  which  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul  proclaimed  with  the  most  perfect  agreement, 
coimect  itself  naturally,  in  the  thoughts  of  one 
exercised  by  the  law  as  Saul  of  Tarsus  had  been, 
with  justification  not  by  the  law  but  by  grace? 
If  we  suppose  that  Saul  had  accepted  just  the  faith 
which  the  older  Apostles  held  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
the  Messiah  of  the  Jews,  crucified  and  raised  from 
the  dead  according  to  the  teaching  of  the  prophets, 
iind  in  the  remission  of  sins  through  Him  confiraied 
by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  that  he  had  also 
had  those  exjieriences,  not  known  to  the  older  Apos- 
t'es,  of  which  we  see  the  working  in  the  Epistles  to 
the  Romans  and  Galatians ;  this  speech,  in  all  its 
paits,  is  precisely  what  we  might  expect ;  this  is  the 
veiy  teaching  which  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles 
must  ha^'e  everywhere  and  always  set  forth,  when 
he  was  speaking  "  God's  woi-d  "  for  the  first  time  to 
an  assembly  of  his  fellow-countiymen. 

The  discourse  thus  epitomized  produced  a  strong 
impression  ;  and  the  hearers  (not  "the  Gentiles"), 
requested  the  Apostles  to  repeat  their  message  on 
the  next  sabbath.  During  the  week  so  much  in- 
terest was  excited  by  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles, 
that  on  the  sabbath  day  "  almost  the  whole  city 
came  together,  to  hear  the  Word  of  God."  It  was 
this  concern  of  the  Gentiles  which  appeal's  to  have 
first  alienated  the  minds  of  the  Jews  from  what 
they  bad  heard.  They  were  filled  with  envy.  They 
probably  felt  that  there  was  a  diffei'ence  between 
those  etlbrts  to  gain  Gentile  proselytes  in  which 
they  had  themselves  been  so  successful,  and  this 
new  preaching  of  a  Messiah  in  whom  a  justification 
which  the  Law  could  not  give  was  oH'ered  to  men. 
The  eagerness  of  the  Gentiles  to  hear  may  have  con- 
firmed their  instinctive  apprehensions.  The  Jewish 
en.vy  once  roused  became  a  power  of  deadly  hos- 
tility to  the  Gospel ;  and  these  Jews  at  Antioch  set 
themselves  to  oppose  bitterly  the  words  which 
Paul  spoke. — We  have  here,  therefore,  a  new  phase 
in  the  histoiy  of  the  Gospel.  In  these  foreign 
countries  it  is  not  the  Cross  or  Nazareth  which  is 
most  immediately  repulsive  to  the  Jews  in  the  pro- 
claiming of  Jesus.  It  is  the  wound  given  to  Jewish 
importance  in  the  association  of  Gentiles  with  Jews 
as  the  receivei-s  of  the  good  tidings.  If  the  Gentiles 
had  been  asked  to  become  Jews,  no  oflence  would 
have  been  taken.  But  the  proclamation  of  the 
Christ  could  not  be  thus  governed  and  restrained. 
It  overleapt,  by  its  own  force,  these  narrowing  me- 
thods. It  was  felt  to  be  addressed  not  to  one  nation 
only,  but  to  mankind. 

Tlie  new  opposition  brought  out  new  action  on 
i.he  part  of  the  Apostles,  liejected  by  the  Jews, 
diey  became  bold  and  outspoken,  and  turned  from 
them  to  the  Gentiles.  They  remembered  and  de- 
claied  what  the  prophets  had  foretold  of  the  enhVht- 
ening  and  deliverance  of  the  whole  world.  In 
speaking  to  the  Gentiles,  therefore,  they  were 
simply  fulfilling  the  promise  of  the  Covenant.  The 
gift,  we  observe,  of  which  the  Jews  were  depriving 
themselves,  and  which  the  Gentiles  who  believed 
were  accepting,  is  described  as  "  etemal  life  "  (^ 
alwyios  C'^Ti).  It  was  the  life  of  which  the  risen 
Jesus  was  the  tbuntain,  which  Peter  and  John  had 
declared    at  Jerusidem,   and  of  which  all  acts  of 


PAUL 

healing  wei-i'  set  forth  as  signs.  This  was  now 
poured  out  largely  upon  the  Gentiles.  The  word 
of  the  Lord  was  published  widely,  and  had  much 
fruit.  Henceforth,  Paul  and  Barnabas  knew  it  to 
be  their  commission, — not  the  less  to  present  their 
message  to  Jews  first;  but  in  the  absence  of  an 
adequate  Jewish  medium  to  deal  directly  with  the 
Gentiles.  But  this  expansion  of  the  Gospel  work 
brought  with  it  new  difiiculties  and  dangers.  At 
Antioch  now,  as  in  every  city  afterwards,  the  un- 
believing Jews  used  their  influence  with  their  own 
adherents  amongst  the  Gentiles,  and  especially  the 
women  of  the  higher  class,  to  persuade  the  autho- 
rities or  the  populace  to  persecute  the  Apostles,  and 
to  drive  them  from  the  place. 

With  their  own  spirits  raised,  and  amidst  much 
enthusiasm  of  their  disciples,  Paul  and  Barnabas 
now  travelled  on  to  Iconium,  where  the  occurrences 
at  Antioch  were  repeated,  and  from  thence  to  the 
Lycaonian  country  which  contained  the  cities  Lystra 
and  Derbe.  Here  they  had  to  de;d  with  uncivilized 
heathens.  At  Lystra  the  healing  of  a  cripple  took 
place,  the  naiTative  of  which  iTins  very  parallel  to 
the  account  of  the  similar  act  done  by  Peter  and 
John  at  the  gate  of  the  Temple.  The  agi'eement 
becomes  closer,  if  we  insert  here,  with  Lachmann, 
before  "  Stand^upright  on  thy  feet,"  the  words  "  1 
say  unto  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  The  parallel  leads  us  to  observe  more 
distinctly  that  every  messenger  of  Jesus  Christ  was  a 
herald  of  life.  The  spiritual  life — the  (a>^  alwvtos — 
which  was  of  faith,  is  illustrated  and  expounded  by 
the  iuvigoration  of  impotent  limbs.  The  same 
truth  was  to  be  conveyed  to  the  inhabitants  of  .Je- 
rusalem, and  to  the  heathens  of  Lycaonia.  The  act 
was  received  naturally  by  these  pagans.  They  took 
the  Apostles  for  gods,  calling  Barnabas,  who  was 
of  the  more  imposing  presence,  Zeus  (Jupiter),  and 
Paul,  who  was  the  chief  speaker,  Hermes  (Jlercu- 
rius).  This  mistake,  followed  up  by  the  attempt  to 
oti'er  sacrifices  to  them,  gives  occasion  to  the  record- 
ing of  an  address,  in  which  we  see  a  type  of  what 
the  Apostles  would  say  to  an  ignorant  pagan  audi- 
ence. Appeals  to  the  Scriptures,  references  to  the 
God  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob,  would  have 
been  out  of  place.  The  Apostles  name  the  Living 
God,  who  made  heaven  and  earth  and  the  sea  and 
all  things  therein,  the  God  of  tl.e  whole  world  and 
all  the  nations  in  it.  They  declare  themselves  to  lie 
His  messengers.  They  expatiate  upon  the  tokens 
of  Himself  which  the  Father  of  men  had  not  with- 
held, in  that  He  did  them  good,  sending  rain  fiom 
heaven  and  fruitful  seasons,  the  supportere  of  life 
and  joy.  They  protest  that  in  restoring  the  crijiplc 
they  had  only  acted  as  instrument*  of  the  Living  (jod. 
They  themselves  were  not  gods,  but  human  beings 
of  like  passions  with  the  Lycaonians.  The  Living 
God  was  now  manifesting  Himself  more  cleaily  to 
men,  desiring  that  henceforth  the  nations  should  not 
walk  in  their  own  ways,  but  His.  Tiny  therefore 
call  upon  the  people  to  give  up  the  vanities  of  idol 
worship,  and  to  turn  to  the  Living  God  (comp. 
1  Thess.  i.  9,  10).  In  this  address,  the  name  of 
Jesus  does  not  occur.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that 
the  Apostles  preached  Him  as  the  Son  of  that  Living 
God  to  whom  they  bore  witness,  telling  the  people 
of  His  death  and  lesurrection,  and  announcing  His 
coming  again. 

Although  the  people  of  Lystra  had  been  so  ready 
to  worship  Paul  and  Barnabas,  the  repulse  of  their 
idolatrous  instincts  appears  to  have  provoked  them, 
and  they  allowed  themselves  to  be  persuaded   into 


PAUL 

hostility  by  .lows  wlio  came  from  Antiodi  and  Ico- 
iiium,  so  that  they  attaclved  Paul  with  stones,  and 
thought  they  had  killed  him.  He  recovered,  how- 
ever, as  the  disciples  were  standing  round  him,  and 
went  again  into  the  city.  The  next  day  he  left  it 
witli  Barnabas,  and  went  to  Derbe,  and  thence  they 
returned  once  more  to  Lystra,  and  so  to  Iconium 
and  Antioch,  renewing  their  exhortations  to  the 
disciples,  bidding  them  not  to  think  their  trials 
strange,  but  to  recognize  them  as  the  appointed 
door  through  which  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  into 
which  they  were  called,  was  to  be  entered.  In  order 
to  establish  the  Churches  after  their  departure,  they 
solemnly  appointed  "elders"  in  every  city.  Then 
they  came  down  to  the  coast,  and  from  Attalia  they 
sailed  home  to  Antioch  in  Syria,  where  they  related  the 
successes  which  had  been  granted  to  them,  and  espe- 
cially the  "  opening  of  the  door  of  faith  to  the  Gen- 
tiles."   And  so  the  First  Missionary  Journey  ended. 

The  Council  at  Jerusalem.  (Acts  xv.  Gala- 
tians  ii.) — Upon  that  missionary  journey  follows 
most  naturally  the  next  important  scene  which  the 
liistorian  sets  before  us, — the  council  held  at  Jeru- 
salem to  determine  the  relations  of  Gentile  believers 
to  the  Law  of  Closes,  In  following  this  portion  of 
the  history,  Ave  encounter  two  of  the  greater  ques- 
tions which  the  biogra])her  of  St.  Paul  has  to  con- 
sider. One  of  these  is  historical.  What  were  the 
relations  between  the  Apostle  Paul  and  the  Twelve  ? 
The  other  is  critical.  How  is  Galatians  ii.  to  be 
connected  with  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  ? 

The  relations  of  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve  will 
best  be  set  forth  in  the  narrative.  But  we  must 
explain  here  why  we  accept  St.  Paul's  statements 
in  the  Galatian  Epistle  as  additional  to  the  history 
in  Acts  XV.  The  fi?-st  impression  of  any  reader 
would  be  a  supposition  that  the  two  writers  might 
lie  referring  to  the  same  event.  The  one  would  at 
least  bring  the  other  to  his  mind.  In  both  he  reads 
of  Paul  and  Barnabas  going  up  to  Jerusalem,  re- 
porting the  Gospel  preached  to  the  uncircumcised, 
and  discussing  with  the  older  Apostles  the  terms  to 
be  imposed  upon  Gentile  believers.  In  both  the 
conclusion  is  announced,  that  these  believers  should 
be  entirely  free  from  the  necessity  of  circumcision. 
These  are  main  jooints  which  the  narratives  have 
in  common.  On  looking  more  closely  into  both, 
the  second  impression  upon  the  reader's  mind  may 
possibly  be  that  of  a  certain  incompatibility  between 
the  two.  Many  joints  and  members  of  the  transac- 
tion as  given  by  St.  Luke,  do  not  appear  in  St. 
Paul.  Others  in  one  or  two  cases  are  substituted. 
Further,  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  is  the  3rd  men- 
tioned in  the  Acts,  after  Saul's  conversion  ;  in  Ga- 
latians, it  is  apjiarently  mentioned  as  the  2nd. 
Supposing  this  sense  of  incompatibility  to  remain, 
the  reader  will  go  on  to  inquire  whether  the  visit 
to  Jerusidem  mentioned  in  Galatians  coincides  better 
with  any  other  mentioned  in  the  Acts, — as  the  2nd 
(xi.  aO)  or  the  4th  (xviii.  22).  He  will,  in  all 
probability,  conclude  without  hesitation  that  it  does 
not.  Anutiior  view  will  remain,  that  St.  Paul 
refers  to  a  visit  not  recordeil  in  the  Acts  at  all. 
This  is  a  perfectly  legitimate  hypothesis ;  and  it  is 
recommended  by  the  vigorous  sense  of  Paley.  liut 
where  are  we  to  place  the  visit  ?  The  only  possible 
place  for  it  is  some  sliort  time  before  the  visit  of 
ch.  XV.  But  it  can  scarcely  be  denieil,  that  the  lan- 
guage of  ch.  XV.  decidedly  implies  that  the  visit 
thei'e  recorded  was  tlio  first  paid  by  Paid  and  Bar- 
nabas to  Jerusalem,  after  tlioir  great  success  in 
preaching  the  Gospel  amongst  the  (ienlilcs. 


PAUL 


r39 


We  suppose  the  reader,  therefoi-e,  to  recur  to  his 
first  impression.  He  will  then  have  to  ask  himself, 
"  Granting  the  considei-able  dilfeiences,  ai-e  there 
after  all  any  plain  contradictions  between  the  two 
narratives,  taken  to  refer  to  the  same  occunences ?" 
The  answer  must  be,  "  There  are  no  plain  contra- 
dictions." And  this,  he -will  perceive,  is  a  very 
weighty  fact.  When  it  is  recognized,  the  resem- 
blances first  obsei'ved  will  retuin  with  renewed 
force  to  the  mind. 

We  proceed  then  to  combine  the  two  narratives. — 
Whilst  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  staying  at  Antioch, 
"certain  men  from  Judaea"  came  there  and  tauoht 
the  brethren  that  it  w;v3  necessary  for  the  Gentile 
converts  to  be  circumcised.  This  doctrine  was 
vigorously  opposed  by  the  two  Apostles,  and  it  was 
determined  that  the  question  should  be  referied  to 
the  Apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem.  Paul  and 
Barnabas  themselves,  and  certain  others,  were  se- 
lected tor  this  mission.  In  Gal.  ii.  2,  St.  Paul 
says  that  he  went  up  "by  revelation"  (/car'  otto- 
Kd\vi\iiv\  so  that  we  are  to  understand  him  as 
receiving  a  private  intimation  from  the  Divine 
Spirit,  as  well  as  a  public  commission  from  the 
Church  at  Antioch.  On  their  way  to  Jerusalem, 
they  announced  to  the  brethren  in  Phoenicia  and 
Samaria  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles ;  and  the 
news  was  received  with  great  joy.  "When  they 
were  come  to  Jerusalem,  they  were  received  by  the 
Church,  and  by  the  Apostles  and  elders,  and  they 
declare<l  all  things  that  God  had  done  with  them  " 
(Acts  XV.  4).  St.  Paul  adds  that  he  communi- 
cated his  views  "  privately  to  them  which  were  of 
reputation,"  through  anxiety  as  to  the  success  of  his 
work  (Gal.  ii.  2).  The  Apostles  and  the  Church 
in  general,  it  appears,  would  have  raised  no  dilH- 
culties ;  but  certain  believers  who  had  been  Pha- 
risees thought  fit  to  maintain  the  same  doctrine 
which  had  caused  the  disturbance  at  Antioch.  In 
either  place,  St.  Paul  would  not  give  way  to  such 
teaching  for  a  single  hour  (Gal.  ii.  5).  It  became 
necessary,  therelbre,  that  a  formal  decision  should 
be  come  to  upon  the  question.  The  Apostles  and 
eldoi's  airae  together,  and  there  was  much  disputing. 
Arguments  would  be  used  on  both  sides;  but  when 
the  persons  of  highest  authority  spoke,  they  appealed 
to  what  was  stronger  than  arguments, — the  course 
of  facts,  through  which  the  will  of  God  had  been 
manifestly  shown.  St.  Peter,  reminding  his  hearers 
that  he  himself  had  ))een  first  employed  to  o]ien  the 
door  of  faith  to  Gentiles  points  out  that  Go.l  had 
Himself  bestowed  on  the  uncircumcised  that  which 
was  the  seal  of  the  highest  calling  and  fellowship  in 
Christ,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  Why  do  you 
not  acquiesce  in  this  token  of  God's  will?  Why 
impose  upon  Gentile  believers  ordinances  which  we 
ourselves  have  found  a  heavy  burden  ?  Have  not 
we  Jews  left  off  trusting  in  our  Law,  to  depend  only 
on  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ?" — Then, 
carrying  out  the  same  appeal  to  the  will  of  God  as 
shown  in  facts,  Barnabas  and  Paul  relate  to  the 
silent  multitude  the  wonders  with  which  (iod  had 
accompanied  their  preaching  amongst  the  (ientiles. 
After  they  had  done,  St.  James,  with  incomparable 
simplicity  and  wisdom,  binds  uj)  the  testimony  of 
recent  facts  with  the  testimony  of  ancient  prophecy, 
and  gives  a  practical  judgment  ui)un  the  (piestion. 

The  judgment  was  a  decisive  one.  The  injunc- 
tion that  the  Gentiles  should  abstain  from  pollu- 
tions of  idols  and  from  fornication  explained  itself. 
The  abstinence  from  things  stmngled  and  iVom 
blood  is  desired  a.s  a  concession  to  the  customs  of 

:5  P.  2 


740 


PAUL 


tlie  Jews  who  were  to  be  found  in  every  city,  and 
foi-  whom  it  was  still  right,  when  they  had  believed 
in  Jesns  Christ,  to  observe  the  Law.  St.  Paul  had 
completely  gained  his  point.  The  older  Apostles, 
.lames,  Cephas,  and  John,  perceiving  the  grace 
which  had  been  given  him  (his  etl'ectual  Apostle- 
ship),  gave  to  him  and  Barnabas  tlie  right  hand  of 
fellowship.  At  this  point  it  is  very  important  to 
obsei-ve  precisely  what  was  the  matter  at  stake  be- 
tween the  contending  parties  (compare  Prof.  Jowett 
on  "  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve,"  in  St.  Paul's 
Epistles,  i.  417).  St.  Peter  speaks  of  a  heavy 
yoke ;  St.  James  of  troubling  the  Gentile  converts. 
But  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  they  mean  merely 
the  outward  trouble  of  conforming  to  the  Law  of 
Moses.  That  was  not  what  St.  Paul  was  protesting 
against.  The  case  stood  thus :  Circumcision  and 
the  ordinances  of  the  Law  were  witnesses  of  a 
separation  of  the  chosen  race  from  other  nations. 
The  Jews  were  jiroud  of  that  separation.  But  the 
Gospel  of  the  Son  of  Man  proclaimed  that  the  time 
hatl  come  in  which  the  separation  was  to  be  done 
away,  and  God's  goodwill  manifested  to  all  nations 
alike.  It  spoke  of  a  union  with  Ciod,  through 
trust,  which  gave  hope  of  a  righteousness  tliat 
the  Law  had  been  powerless  to  produce.  Therefore 
to  insist  upon  Gentiles  being  circumcised  would 
have  been  to  deny  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  If  there 
was  to  be  simply  an  enlarging  of  the  separated 
nation  by  the  receiving  of  individuals  into  it,  then 
the  other  nations  of  the  world  remained  as  much 
on  the  outside  of  God's  covenant  as  ever.  Then 
there  was  no  Gospel  to  mankind;  no  justification 
given  to  men.  The  loss,  in  such  a  case',  would 
liave  been  as  much  to  the  Jew  as  to  the  Gentile. 
St.  Paul  felt  this  the  most  strongly;  but  St.  Peter 
also  saw  that  if  the  Jewish  believers  were  thrown 
back  on  the  Jewish  Law,  and  gave  up  the  fiee  and 
absolute  grace  of  God,  the  Law  became  a  mere 
burden,  just  as  heavy  to  the  Jew  as  it  would  be  to 
the  Gentile.  The  only  hope  for  the  Jew  was  in  a 
Saviour  who  nuist  he  the  Saviour  of  mankind. 

It  implied  therefore  no  dill'erence  pf  belief  when 
it  was  agreed  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  should  go  to 
the  heathen,  while  James  and  Cephas  and  John 
undertook  to  be  the  Apostles  of  the  Circumcision. 
St.  Paul,  wherever  he  went,  was  to  preach  "  to  the 
Jew  first ;"  St.  Peter  was  to  preach  to  the  Jews  as 
free  a  Gospel,  was  to  teach  the  admission  of  the 
Gentiles  without  circumcision  as  distinctly  as  St. 
Paul  himself.  The  unity  of  the  Church  was  to  be 
preserved  unbroken  ;  and  in  order  to  nourish  this 
unity  the  Gentiles  were .  requested  to  remember 
their  poorer  brethren  in  Palestine  (Gal.  ii.  10). 
How  zealously  St.  Paul  cherished  this  beautiful 
witness  of  the  common  brotherhood  we  have  seen 
in  part  already  (Acts  xi.  29,  30),  but  it  is  yet  to 
appear  more  strikingly. 

The  judgment  of  the  Church  was  immediately 
recorded  in  a  letter  addressed  to  the  Gentile  brethi-en 
in  Antioch  and  Syria  and  Cilicia.  That  this  letter 
might  carry  greater  authoiity  it  was  entrusted  to 
"  chosen  men  of  the  Jerusalem  Church,  Judas  sur- 
named  Barsabas,  and  Silas,  cliief  men  among  the 
brethren."  The  letter  speaks  afiectionately  of  Bar- 
nabas and  Paul  (with  the  elder  Church  Barnabas 
still  retained  the  precedence,  xv.  12,  2.5)  as  "  men 
"who  have  h;izarded  their  lives  for  the  name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  So  Judas  and  Silas  come  down 
with  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Antioch,  and  comfort  the 
Church  there  with  their  message,  and  when  Judas 
returned  "  it  pleased  Silas  to  abide  there  still." 


PAUL 

It  is  usual  to  connect  with  this  period  of  the 
history  that  rebuke  of.  St.  Peter  which  St.  Paul 
records  in  Gal.  ii.  11-14.  The  connexion  of  subject 
makes  it  convenient  to  record  the  incident  in  this 
place,  although  it  is  possible  that  it  took  place 
before  the  meeting  at  Jerusalem,  and  perhaps  most 
probable*  that  it  did  not  occur  till  later,  when 
St.  Paul  returned  from  his  long  tour  in  Greece  to 
Antioch  (Acts  xviii.  22,  23).  St.  Peter  was  at 
Antioch,  and  had  shown  no  scruple  about  "  eating 
with  the  Gentiles,"  until  "  certain  ciime  from 
James."  These  Jerusalem  Christiims  brought  their 
Jewish  exclusiveness  with  them,  and  St.  Peter's 
weaker  and  more  timid  mood  came  upon  him,  and 
through  fear  of  his  stricter  friends  he  too  began  to 
withdraw  himself  from  his  former  free  association 
with  the  Gentiles.  Such  an  example  had  a  dan- 
gerous weight,  and  Barnabas  and  the  other  Jews  at 
Antioch  were  being  seduced  by  it.  It  was  an  occa- 
sion for  the  intrepid  faithfulness  of  St.  Paul.  He 
did  not  conceal  his  anger  at  such  weak  dissembling, 
and  he  publicly  remonstrated  with  his  elder  fellow- 
Apostle.  "  If  thou,  being  a  Jew,  livest  after  the 
manner  of  Gentiles,  and  not  as  do  the  Jews,  why 
compellest  thou  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the 
Jews?"  (Gal.  ii.  14).  St.  Peter  had  abandoned  the 
Jewish  exclusiveness,  and  deliberately  clamied  com- 
mon ground  with  the  Gentile :  why  should  he,  l)y 
separating  himself  from  the  uncircumcised,  require 
the  Gentiles  to  qualify  themselves  for  full  com- 
munion by  accei)ting  circumcision?  This  "  with- 
standing "  of  St.  Peter  was  no  opposition  of  Pauline 
to  Petrine  views ;  it  was  a  tiiithful  rebuke  of 
blameable  moral  weakness. 

Second  Missionary  Journey. — The  most  resolute 
courage,  indeed,  was  required  for  the  work  to  which 
St.  Paul  was  now  publicly  pledged.  He  would 
not  associate  with  himself  in  that  work  one  who 
had  already  shown  a  want  of  constancy.  This  was 
the  occasion  of  what  must  have  been  a  most  painful 
difference  between  him  and  his  comrade  in  the  faith 
and  in  past  perils,  Barnabas.  After  remaining 
awhile  at  Antioch,  Paul  proposed  to  Barnabas  to 
revisit  the  brethren  in  the  countries  of  their  former 
journey.  Hereupon  Barnabas  desired  that  his  nephew 
John  Mark  should  go  with  them.  But  John  had 
deserted  them  in  Pamphylia,  and  St.  Paul  would 
not  try  him  again.  "  And  the  contention  was  so 
shai-p  between  them  that  they  departed  asunder  one 
from  the  other ;  and  so  Barnabas  took  Mark,  and 
sailed  unto  Cypi'us ;  and  Paul  chose  Silas,  and  de- 
parted." Silas,  or  Silvanus,  becomes  now  a  chief 
companion  of  the  Apostle.  The  two  went  together 
through  Syria  and  Cilicia,  visiting  the  churches, 
and  so  came  to  Derbe  and  Lystra.  Here  they  find 
Timotheus,  wht>  had  become  a  disciple  on  the 
former  visit  of  the  Apostle,  and  who  so  attracted 
the  esteem  and  love  of  St.  Paul  that  "  he  would 
have  him  go  forth  with  him."  Him  St.  Paul  took 
and  circumcised.  If  this  fact  had  been  omitted 
here  aiid  stated  in  another  narrative,  how  utterly 
irreconcilable  it  would  have  been,  in  the  eyes  of 
some  critics,  with  the  history  in  the  Acts  !  Paul 
and  Silas  were  actually  delivering  the  Jerusalem 
decree  to  all  the  churches  they  visited.  They  were 
no  doubt  triimiphing  in  the  freedom  secured  to  the 
Gentiles.  Yei  at  this  very  time  our  Apostle  had 
the  wisdom  mid  largeness  of  heart  to  consult  the 


'^  The  presence  of  St.  Peter,  and  tbe  growth  of  Jewish 
prpjiidice,  are  more  easily  accoiinted  for,  if  we  suppose 
St.  I'aul  to  have  left  Antioch  for  a  long  time. 


PAUL 

feelings  of  tlie  Jews  by  circumcising  Timothy. 
There  were  many  Jews  in  tliose  parts,  who  knew 
that  Timothy's  father  was  a  Cireek,  his  motlier  a 
Jewess.  That  St.  Paul  should  have  had,  as  a  chief 
companion,  one  who  was  uncircumcised,  would  of 
itselt  have  been  a  hindrance  to  hiin  in  preaching 
to  Jews;  but  it  would  have  been  a  still  greater 
stumbling-block  if  that  companion  were  half  a  Jew 
by  birth,  and  had  professed  the  Jewish  faith. 
Therefoi-e  in  this  case  St.  Paul  "  became  unto  the 
Jews  as  a  Jew  that  he  might  gain  the  Jews." 

St.  Luke  now  steps  rapidly  over  a  considerable 
space  of  the  Apostle's  life  and  labours.  "  They 
went  throughout  Phrygia  and  the  region  of  Galatia" 
(xvi.  (j).  At  this  time  St.  Paul  was  founding  "  the 
churches  of  Galatia"  (Gal.  i.  2).  He  himseff  gives 
us  hints  of  the  circumstances  of  his  preachino-  in 
that  region,  of  the  reception  he  met  with,  and  of 
the  ardent,  though  unstable,  character  of  the  people, 
in  the  following  words:  "  Ye  know  how  through 
infirmity  of  the  flesh  C6ri  Si'  affQ^vaav  ttjs  crap- 
Khs)  I  pleached  the  Gospel  unto  you  at  the  first 
{rh  vpoTepov),  and  my  temptation  which  was  in 
my  Hesli  ye  despised  not  nor  rejected,  but  received 
me  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as  Christ  Jesus.  Where 
is  tiien  the  blessedness  ye  spake  of  {6  f^aKapKT/xbs^ 
iifiwv)  ?  tor  I  bear  you  recoi-d  that,  if  it  had  been 
possible,  ye  would  have  plucked  out  your  own  eyes, 
and  have  given  them  to  me"  (iv.  13).  It  is  not 
easy^  to  decide  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  wonls  Si' 
atrBevfiav  rrjs  <xapK6s.  Undoubtedly  their  gram- 
matical sense  implies  that  "  weakness  of  the  tlesh" 
— an  illness — was  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's  preach- 
ing in  Galatia ;  and  De  Wette  and  Alford  adhere  to 
this  interpretation,  understanding  St.  Paul  to  have 
been  detained  by  illness,  when  otherwise  he  would 
have  gone  rapidly  through  the  country.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  tbrm  and  order  of  the  words  are 
not  what  we  should  have  expected  if  the  Apostle 
meant  to  say  this  ;  and  Professor  Jowett  prefijrs  to 
assume  an  inaccuracy  of  grammai-,  and  to  under- 
stand St.  Paul  as  saying  that  it  was  in  weakness  of 
the  flesh  that  he  preached  to  the  Galatians.  In 
either  case  St.  Paul  must  be  referring  to  a  move 
than  ordinary  pressure  of  that  bodily  inHrmity 
which  he  speaks  of  elsewhere  as  detracting  fi-om 
the  influence  of  his  personal  address.  It  is  hopeless 
to  attempt  to  determine  positively  what  this  infir- 
mity was.  But  we  may  observe  here — (1)  that  St. 
Paul's  sensitiveness  may  have  led  him  to  exaggerate 
this  personal  disadvantage;  and  (L!)  that,  whatever 
it  was,  it  allowed  him  to  go  through  suflbrings  and 
hardships  such  as  few  ordinary  men  could"  bear. 
And  it  certainly  did  not  repel  the  (Jalatians  ;  it  ap- 
l)ears  rather  to  have  excited  their  sympathy  and 
warmed  their  afl'ection  towards  the  Apostle. 

St.  Paul  at  this  time  had  not  indulged  the  am- 
bition of  preaching  his  Gospel  in  Europe.  His 
views  were  limited  to  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor. 
Having  gone  through  i'hrygia  .and  Galatia  he  in- 
tended to  visit  the  western  coast  [Asia]  ;  but 
"  tliey  were  forbidden  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  preach 
the  word  "  there.  Then,  being  on  the  Ijorders  of 
Mysia,  they  thought  of  going  back  to  the  north-east 
into  liithynia ;  but  again  "  the  Spirit  vf  Jcstis 
sufloi-od  them  not."  So  they  passed  by  Mysia,  and 
came  down  to  Troas.  Here  the  Spirit  of  .lesus, 
having  checked  them  on  other  sides,  levcaled  to 
them  in  what  direction  they  were  to  go.     St.  Paul 


PAUL 


741 


t  May  not    tills   mean   "your  calling  me  blessed"? 
making  me  as  one  of  the  fiaKape^  0toi. 


saw  in  a  vision  a  man  of  Macedonia,  who  besouo-ht 
hmi,  saying,  "  Come  over  into  Macedonia  and  hAu 
us.      The  vision  was  at  once  accepted  as  a  heavenly 
intimation  ;   the  help  wanted   by  the  Jlacedonians 
was  believed  to  be  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel       It 
IS  at^this  point  that  the  historian,  speaking  of  St. 
Paul's  company,    substitutes  "  we  "  for  •^'  they.'' 
He  says  nothing  of  himself;  we  can  only  infer  that 
St.  Luke,  to  whatever  country  he  belonged,  Ix'caine 
a  companion  of  St.  Paul  at  troas.     It  is   perhaps 
not  too  arbitrary  a  conjecture,  that  the    Apostle 
having  recently  suffered  in  health,  derived  benefit 
from  the  medical  skill  and  attendance  of  "  the  be- 
loved physician."     The  party,  thus  reinforced,  im- 
mediately set  sail  from  Troas,  touched  at  Samo- 
thrace,  then  landed  on  the  continent  at  Neapolis, 
and  from  thence  journeyed  to  Philippi.     They  has- 
tened to  carry  the  "help"  that  had  been  asked  to 
the  first  considerable  city  in  Macedonia.     Philippi 
was^no  inapt  representative  of  the  western  world. 
A  Greek  city,  it  had  received  a  body  of  Roman 
settlers,  and  was  politicallv  a  Colonia.     We  must 
not  assume  that  to   Saul  of  Tarsus,   the  Roman 
citizen,  there  was  anything  very  novel  or  strano-e 
in  the  world  to  which  he  had  now  come.     But  the 
name  of  Greece  must  have  represented  very  im- 
posing ideas  to  the  Oriental  and  the  Jew ;  and  we 
may  silently  imagine  what  it  must  have  been  to 
St.   Paul  to  know  that  he  was  called  to  be  the 
herald  of  his  Master,  the  Crucified  Jesus,  in  the 
centre  of  the  world's  highest  culture,  and  that  he 
was  now  to  begin  his  task.     He  began,  however, 
with   no  flourish  of  txumpets,   but  as  quietly  as 
ever,  and  in  the  old  way.     Thei-e  were  a  few  Jews, 
it  not  many,  at  Philippi ;  and  when  the  Sabbath 
came  round,  the  Apostolic   company  joined  their 
countrymen  at  the  place  by  the  river-side  where 
prayer  was  wont  to  be  made.     The  narrative  in 
this  part  is  very  graphic :  "  We  sat  down,"  says 
tiie  writer  (xvi.  13),  "and  spoke  to  the  women 
who  had  come  together."     Amongst  these  woijien 
was^   a   proselyte    from    Thvatira    ((TgySo/ieV?)   rdv 
Heov),  named  Lydia,  a  dealer  in  purple.     As  she 
listened  "  the  Lord  opened  her  heart "  to  attend  to 
what  Paul  was  saying.     The  first  convert  in  Mace- 
donia was  but  an  Asiatic  woman  who  already  wor- 
shipped the  God  of  the  Jews;  but  she  was  a  very 
earnest  believer,  and  besought  the  Apostle  and  his 
friends  to  honour  her  by  staying  in  her  house.    'I'hey 
could  not  resist  her  urgency,  and  during  their  stay 
at  Philippi  they  were  the  guests  of  Lydia  (ver.  40). 
But   a   proof  w<)s   given    before   long    that  the 
prejichers  of  Christ  were  come  to  grapple  with  the 
powers  in  the  spiritual  world  to  which  heathenism 
was  then   doing   homage.      A   female   slave,   who 
brought  gain  to  her  masters  by  her  powers  of  pre- 
d^iction  when  she  was  in  the  possessed  state,  beset 
Paul   and    his  company,   following  them  as   they 
went  to  the  place  of  praver,  and  crying  out,  "  'I'liese 
men  are  servants  of  the  Jlost  High  (iod,  who  pub- 
lish to  you  (or  to  us)  the  way  of  salvation."     Paul 
was  vexed  by  her  cries,  and  addressing  the  spirit  in 
the  girl,  he  said,  "  I  command  thee  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ  to  come  out  of  her."     Comparing  the 
confession  of  this  "spirit  of  divination"  with  the 
analogous  confessions  made  by  evil  spirits  to  onr 
Lord,  we  see  the  same  singular  character  of  a  true 
acknowledgment  extorted  as  if  by  forc-e,  and  ren- 
dered with  a  certain  insolence  which   implied  that 
the  spirits,  though  subject,  were  not  willingly  sub- 
ject.    The  cries  of  the  slave-girl  m.ay  have  "sounded 
like  sneers,  mimicking   what   she  had  heaid  from 


742 


PAUL 


the  Apostles  themselves,  until  St.  Paul's  exorcism, 
"  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,"  was  seen  to  be 
efl'ectual.  Then  he  might  be  recognized  as  in  truth 
a  servant  of  the  Most  High  God,  giving  an  example 
of  the  salvation  which  he  brought,  in  the  deliverance 
of  this  poor  girl  herself  from  the  spirit  which  de- 
graded her. 

But  the  girl's  mastere  saw  that  now  the  hope  of 
their  gains  was  gone.  Here  at  Philippi,  as  after- 
wards at  Ephesus,  the  locd  trade  in  religion  began 
to  sutler  from  the  manifesttition  of  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  and  an  interested  appeal  was  made  to  loail 
and  national  feelings  against  the  dangerous  innova- 
tions of  the  Jewish  strangers.  Paul  and  Silas  were 
dragged  before  the  magistrates,  the  multitude  cla- 
mouring loudly  against  them,  upon  the  vague  charge 
of  "  troubling  the  dtf,"  and  introducing  observances 
which  were  unlawful  for  Romans.  If  the  magis- 
trates had  desired  to  act  justly  they  might  have 
doubted  how  they  ought  to  deal  with  the  charge. 
On  the  one  hand  Paul  and  Silas  had  abstained  care- 
fully, as  the  preachers  of  Christ  always  did,  from 
disturbing  public  order,  and  had  as  yet  violated  no 
express  law  of  the  state.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  preaching  of  Jesus  as  King  and  Lord  was  un- 
questionably revolutionary,  and  aggressive  upon  the 
public  religion,  in  its  effects  ;  and  the  Roman  law 
was  decided,  in  general  terms,  against  such  innova- 
tions (see  retf.  in  Conyb.  and  Hows.  i.  324).  But 
the  praetors  or  duumviri  of  Philippi  were  very 
uuwortliy  representatives  of  the  Roman  magistracy. 
Tliey  yielded  without  inquiry  to  the  clamour  of  the 
inhabitants,  caused  the  clothes  of  Paul  and  Sil;«  to 
be  torn  from  them,  and  themselves  to  be  beaten, 
and  then  committed  them  to  prison.  The  jailer, 
having  received  their  commands,  "  thrust  them  into 
the  inner  ])risou,  and  made  their  feet  fast  in  the 
stocks."  This  cruel  wrong  was  to  be  the  occasion 
of  a  signal  appearance  of  the  God  of  righteousness 
and  deliverance.  It  was  to  be  seen  which  were  the 
true  servants  of  such  a  God,  the  magistrates  or 
tliese  strangers.  In  the  night  Paul  and  Silas,  sore 
and  sleepless,  but  putting  their  trust  in  God,  prayed 
and  Siuig  praises  so  loudly  that  the  other  prisoners 
could  hear  them.  Then  suddenly  the  ground  be- 
neath them  wa.s  shaken,  the  dooi's  were  opened,  and 
every  prisoner's  bands  were  struck  otl'  (compare  the 
smiilar  openings  of  prison-doors  in  xii.  6-10,  and 
V.  19).  The  jailer  awoke  and  sprang  up,  saw  with 
consternation  that  the  prison-doois  weie  open,  and, 
concluding  that  the  prisonei-s  were  all  tied,  diew  his 
sword  to  kill  himself.  But  Paul  called  to  him 
loudly,  "  Do  thyself  no  harm ;  we  are  all  here." 
The  jailer's  fears  were  then  changed  to  an  over- 
whelming awe.  What  could  this  be  ?  He  exiled 
for  lights,  sprang  in  and  fell  trembling  before  the 
feet  of  Paul  and  Silas.  Bringing  them  out  from 
the  inner  dungeon,  he  exclaimed,  "  Sirs,  what  must 
I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  (ri  fxe  Se?  -KoieTv  'lua  crcadiSi ;). 
They  answered,  "  Believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  thou  shalt  be  saved,  and  thy  house."  And  they 
went  on  to  speak  to  him  and  to  all  in  his  house 
"  the  word  of  the  Lord."  The  kindness  he  now 
showed  them  reminds  us  of  their  miseries.  He 
w;ished  their  wounds,  took  them  into  his  own  house, 
and  spread  a  table  before  them.  The  same  night 
he  received  oaptism,  "  he  and  all  his"  (including 
slaves),  and  rejoiced  in  his  new-found  faith  in  God. 
In  the  morning  the  magistrates,  either  having 
heard  of  what  had  happenecL  or  having  repented  of 
their  injustice,  or  having  done  all  they  meant  to  do 
by  way  of  pacifying  the  multitude,  sent  word  to 


PAUL 

the  prison  that  the  men  might  be  let  go.  But  legal 
justice  was  to  be  more  clearly  vindicated  in  the 
persons  of  these  men,  who  had  been  charged  with 
subverting  public  order.  St.  Paul  denounced  plainly 
the  unlawful  acts  of  the  magistrates,  infoi'ming 
them  moreover  that  those  whom  they  had  beaten 
and  imprisoned  without  trial  were  Roman  citizens. 
"  And  now  do  they  thrust  us  out  privily?  Nay, 
verily,  but  let  them  come  themselves  and  fetch  us 
out."  The  magistrates,  in  great  alarm,  saw  the 
necessity  of  humbling  themselves  ("  Facinus  est 
vinciri  civem  Romanum,  scelus  verberari,"  Cicero, 
in  Verrem,  v.  66).  They  came  and  begged  them 
to  leave  the  city.  Paul  and  Silas  consented  to  do 
so,  and,  after  paying  a  visit  to  "  the  brethren  "  in 
the  house  of  Lydia,  they  departed. 

The  Church  thus  founded  at  Philippi,  as  tlie 
first-fruits  of  the  Gospel  in  Europe,  was  called,  as 
we  have  seen,  in  the  name  of  a  spiritual  deliverer, 
of  a  God  of  justice,  and  of  an  equal  Lord  of  freemen 
and  slaves.  That  a  waim  and  generous  feeling  dis- 
tinguished *t  from  the  first,  we  le;u'n  from  a  testi- 
mony of  St.  Paid  in  the  Epistle  written  long  after 
to  this  Church.  "  In  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel," 
as  soon  as  he  left  them,  they  began  to  send  him 
gifts,  some  of  which  reached  him  at  Thessalonica, 
others  afterwards  (Phil.  Iv.  15,  16).  Their  part- 
nership in  the  Gospel  {KOivwvia  els  to  evayyeAioi') 
had  gladdened  the  Apostle  from  the  first  day  (Phil. 
L5). 

Leaving  St.  Luke,  and  perhaps  Timothy  for  a 
short  time,  at  Philippi,  Paul  and  Silas  travelled 
through  Amphipolis  and  ApoUonia,  and  stopped 
again  at  Thessalonica.  At  this  impoitant  city  there 
was  a  synagogue  of  the  Jews.  True  to  his  custom, 
St.  Paul  went  in  to  them,  and  for  three  Sabbath- 
days  proclaimed  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ,  as  he  would 
have  done  in  a  city  of  Judaea.  As  usual,  the  pro- 
selytes were  those  who  heard  him  most  gladly,  and 
among  them  were  many  women  of  station.  Again, 
as  in  Pisidian  Antioch,  the  envy  of  the  Jews  was 
excited.  They  contrived  to  stir  up  the  lower  class 
of  the  city  to  tumultuary  violence  by  representing 
the  preachers  of  Christ  as  revolutionary  disturbers, 
who  had  come  to  proclaim  one  Jesus  as  king  instead 
of  Caesar.  The  mob  assaulted  the  house  of  Jason, 
with  whom  Paul  and  Silas  were  staying  as  guests, 
and,  not  finding  them,  dragged  Jason  himself  and 
some  other  brethren  before  the  magistrates.  In  this 
case  the  magistrates,  we  are  told,  and  the  people 
generally,  were  "troubled"  by  the  rumours  and 
accusations  which  they  heard.  But  they  seem  to 
have  acted  wisely  and  justly,  in  taking  security  of 
Jason  and  the  rest,  and  letting  them  go.  After 
these  signs  of  danger  the  brethren  immediately  sent 
away  Paul  and  Silas  by  night. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  were  written 
very  soon  after  the  Apostle's  visit,  and  contain  moie 
particulars  of  his  work  in  founding  that  Church 
than  we  find  in  any  other  Epistle.  The  whole  of 
tliese  letters  ought  to  be  read  for  the  information 
they  thus  supply.  St.  Paul  speaks  to  the  Thessa- 
Ionian  Christians  as  being  mostly  Gentiles.  He 
reminds  them  that  they  had  turned  fiom  idols  to 
serve  the  living  and  true  God,  and  to  wait  for  His 
Son  from  heaven,  whom  He  raised  from  the  dead, 
"  Jesus  who  delivei's  us  from  the  coming  wrath  " 
(1  Thess.  i.  9, 10).  The  Apostle  had  evidently  spoken 
much  of  the  coming  and  presence  of  tiie  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  of  that  wrath  which  was  already  de- 
scending upon  the  Jews  (ii.  16,  19,  &c.).  His 
message  had  had  a  wonderful  power  amongst  them, 


PAUL 

because  tJiey  liad  known  it  to  be  really  the  word 
of  a  God  wlio  also  wrought  in  them,  having  had 
helps  towai-ds  this  coJiviction  in  the  zeal  and  dis- 
intei-estedness  and  atiection  with  which  St.  Paul 
(notwithstanding  his  recent  shameful  treatment  at 
Philippi)  proclaimed  his  Gospel  amongst  them  (ii. 
2,  8-13).  He  had  purposely  wrought  with  his  own 
hands,  even  night  and  day,  that  his  disinterestedness 
might  be  more  apparent  (1  Thess.  ii.  9  ;  2  Thess.  iii. 
8).  He  exhorted  them  not  to  be  drawn  away  fi'om 
patient  industiy  by  the  hopes  of  the  Ivingdom  into 
wliich  they  were  called,  but  to  work  quietly,  and  to 
cultivate  purity  and  brotherly  love  (1  Thess.  iv.  3, 
9,  11).  Connecting  these  allusions  with  the  preach- 
ing in  the  synagogue  (Acts  xvii.  3),  we  see  clearly 
how  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  turned  upon  the  person 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Son  of  the  Living  God,  pro- 
phesied of  in  the  Scriptures,  suffering  and  dying, 
raised  up  and  exalted  to  a  kiuiidom,  and  about  to 
appear  as  the  Giver  of  light  and  life,  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  enemies  and  the  saving  of  those  who 
trusted  in  him. 

When  Paul  and  Silas  left  Thessalonica  they  came 
to  Beroea.  Here  they  found  the  Jews  more  noble 
[fuyeveffTepoi) — more  disposed  to  receive  the  news 
ot'  a  rejected  and  crucified  Messiah,  and  to  examine 
the  Scriptures  with  candour — than  those  at  Thessa- 
lonica had  been.  Accordingly  they  gained  many 
converts,  both  Jews  and  Greeks;  but  the  Jews  of 
Thessalonica,  hearing  of  it,  sent  emissaries  to  stir 
up  the  peojjle,  and  it  was  thought  best  that  St.  Paul 
should  himself  leave  the  city,  whilst  Silas  and 
Timothy  remained  behind.  Some  of  "  the  brethren  " 
went  with  St.  Paul  as  far  as  Athens,  where  they 
left  him,  cairying  back  a  request  to  Silas  and 
Timothy  that  they  would  speedily  join  him.  He 
ajjparently  did  not  like  to  preach  alone,  and  in- 
tended to  rest  from  his  apostolic  labour  until  they 
should  come  up  to  him :  but  how  could  he  refrain 
himself,  with  all  that  was  going  on  at  Athens 
round  him  ?  There  he  witnessed  the  most  profuse 
idolatry  side  by  side  with  the  most  jiretentious 
philosophy.  Either  of  these  would  have  been 
enough  to  stimulate  his  spirit.  To  idolaters  and 
philosophers  he  felt  equally  urged  to  proclaim  his 
Miister  and  the  Living  God.  So  he  went  to  his 
own  countrymen  and  the  proselytes  in  the  synagogue 
and  declared  to  them  that  the  Messiah  hyd  come; 
but  he  also  spoke,  like  another  Socrates,  with  people 
in  the  market,  and  with  the  followers  of  the  two 
great  schools  of  philosophy.  Epicureans  and  Stoics, 
naming  to  all  Jesus  and  the  Resurrection.  The 
philosophers  encountered  him  with  a  mixture  of 
curiosity  and  contempt.  The  Epicurean,  teaching 
himself  to  seek  for  tranquil  enjoyment  as  the  chief 
object  of  lite,  heard  of  One  claiming  to  be  the  Lord 
of  men,  who  had  shown  them  the  glory  of  dying 
to  self,  and  had  promised  to  those  who  fought  the 
good  tight  bravely  a  nobler  bliss  than  the  comforts 
of  life  could  yield.  The  Stoic,  cultivating  a  stem 
and  isolateil  moral  independence,  heard  of  One 
whose  own  righteousness  was  proved  by  submission 
to  the  Father  in  heaven,  and  who  had  promised  to 
give  His  righteousness  to  those  who  trusted  not  in 
themselves,  but  in  Hnn.  To  all,  the  announcement 
of  a  Person  was  much  stranger  than  the  publishing 
of  any  theories  would  have  bei-n.  So  tar  as  they 
thought  the  pieacher  anything  but  a  silly  tritlei', 
he  seemed  to  them,  not  :\  pliilosopher,  Init  "a  setter 
forth  of  strange  gods"  (^ivoiv  Saifiofloiv  Karayyt- 
\evs).  But  any  one  with  a  novelty  was  welcome 
to  those  who  "  spent  their  time  in  nothing  else  but 


PAUL 


743 


either  to  hear  or  to  tell  soniu  new  thino."  Tiiey 
brought  him  therefore  to  the  Aieopagus,  that  he 
might  mr.ke  a  formal  exposition  of  his  doctrine  to 
an  assembled  audience. 

We  are  not  to  think  here  of  the  Council  or 
Court,  renowned  in  the  oldest  Athenian  history, 
which  took  its  name  from  Mars's  Hill,  but  only  of 
the  elevated  spot  where  the  council  met,  not  covered 
in,  but  arranged  with  benches  and  steps  of  stone, 
so  as  to  form  a  convenient  place  for  a  public  ad- 
dress. Here  the  Apostle  deliveied  that  wonderful 
discourse,  reported  in  Acts  xvii.  22-31,  which  seems 
as  fresh  and  instructive  tor  the  intellect  of  the  19th 
century  as  it  was  for  the  intellect  of  the  first.  In 
this  we  have  the  Pauline  (iospel  as  it  addressed 
itself  to  the  speculative  mind  of  the  cultivated 
Greeks.  How  the  "  report"  was  obtained  by  the 
writer  of  the  history  we  have  no  means  of  knowing. 
Possibly  we  have  in  it  notes  written  down  before  or 
after  the  delivery  of  this  address  by  St.  Paul  him- 
self. Short  as  it  is,  the  fonn  is  as  perfect  as  the 
matter  is  rich.  The  loftiness  and  breadth  of  the 
theology,  the  dignity  and  delicacy  of  the  argument, 
the  absence  of  self,  the  straighttijrward  and  reverent 
nature  of  the  testimony  delivered — all  the  charac- 
teristics so  strikingly  displayed  in  this  speech — help 
us  to  understand  what  kind  of  a  teacher  had  now 
ai)i)eared  in  the  Grecian  world.  St.  Paul,  it  is  well 
understood,  did  not  begin  with  calling  the  Athenians 
"  too  superstitious."  "  I  perceive  you,"  be  said, 
"to  be  eminently  religious."  s  He  had  observed' 
an  altar  inscribed  'hyvoiffrif  Qe^,  "  To  the  un- 
known God."  It  meant,  no  doubt,  "  To  some 
unknown  God."  "  I  come,"  he  said,  "  as  the 
messenger  of  that  unknown  God."  And  then  he 
proceeds  to  speak  of  God  in  terms  which  were  not 
altogether  new  to  Grecian  ears.  They  had  heard 
of  a  God  who  had  made  the  world  and  all  things 
therein,  and  even  of  One  who  gave  to  all  life,  and 
breath,  and  all  things.  But  they  had  never  learnt 
the  next  lesson  which  was  now  taught  them.  It 
was  a  special  truth  of  the  new  dispensation,  that 
"  God  had  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men,  for 
to  dwell  on  all  the  face  of  the  earth,  having  deter- 
mined the  times  assigned  to  them,  and  the  bounds 
of  their  habitation,  that  they  should  seek  the  Lord, 
if  haply  they  might  feel  after  him  and  find  him." 

Comparing  it  with  the  teaching  given  to  other 
audiences,  we  perceive  that  it  laid  hold  of  the 
deepftst  convictions  which  had  ever  been  givfu  to 
Greeks,  whilst  at  the  same  time  it  encountered  the 
strongest  prejudices  of  Greeks.  We  see,  as  at  Lys- 
tra,  that  an  Apostle  of  Christ  had  no  need  to  refer 
to  th(!  Jewish  Scriptures,  when  he  spoke  to  those 
who  had  not  received  them.  He  could  speak  to 
men  as  (!od's  children,  and  subjects  of  God's  edu- 
cating discipline,  and  was  only  bringing  them  fur- 
ther tidings  of  Him  whom  they  had  been  always 
feeling  after-  He  presented  to  thuni  the  Son  of 
Man  as  acting  in  the  jwwer  of  Him  who  had  made 
all  nations,  and  who  was  not  far  from  any  single 
man.  He  began  to  speak  of  Him  as  il--en  from  the 
ilead,  and  of  the  power  of  a  new  life  which  was  in 
Him  for  men  ;  but  his  auilience  wouM  not  hear  of 
Him  who  thus  claimed  their  personal  allegiance. 
Some  moi'ked,  others,  more  courteously,  talked  of 
heai-ing  him  again  another  time.  The  Apostle 
gained  but  few  converts  at  Athens,  and  he  soon 
took  his  departure  and  came  to  Coi  inth. 

K  Sec,  in  confirimuion,  iwissiiges  quoted  from  ancient 
aullmrs  in  Conjbeare  uiul  Iluwson,  i.  3a9,  &c. 


744 


PAUL 


Athens  still  retained  its  olil  intt-'llectunl  prodo- 
niinance ;  but  Corinth  was  the  political  aud  com- 
mercial capital  of  Greece.  It  was  iu  places  of  living 
activity  that  St.  Paul  laboured  longest  and  most 
successfully,  as  formerly  at  Antioch,  now  at  Corinth, 
and  afterwards  at  Kphesus.  The  rapid  spread  of 
the  Gospel  was  obviously  promoted  by  the  preach- 
ing of  it  in  cities  where  men  were  continually 
coming  and  going  ;  but  besides  this  consideration, 
we  may  be  sure  that  the  Apostle  escaped  gladly 
from  dull  ignorance  on  the  one  side,  and  from  phi- 
losophical dilettantism  on  the  other,  to  places  in 
which  the  real  business  of  the  world  was  being 
done.  The  Gospel,  though  unworldly,  was  yet  a 
message  to  practical  and  inquiring  men,  and  it  had 
more  affinity  to  ivorh  of  any  kind  than  to  torpor  or. 
to  intellectual  frivolity.  One  proof  of  the  whole- 
some agreement  between  the  following  of  Christ 
and  ordinaiy  labour  was  given  by  St.  Paul  himself 
during  his  stay  at  Corinth.  Here,  as  at  Thessa- 
lonica,  he  chose  to  earn  his  own  subsistence  by 
working  at  his  trade  of  tent-making.  This  trade 
brought  him  into  close  connexion  with  two  persons 
who  became  distinguished  as  Ijelievers  in  Christ, 
Aquila  and  Priscilla.  They  were  Jews,  and  had 
lately  left  Rome,  iu  consequence  of  an  edict  of  Clau- 
dius [see  Claudius];  and  as  they  also  were  tent- 
makeis,  St.  Paul  "  abode  with  them  and  wrought." 
Labouring  thus  on  the  six  days,  the  Apostle  went 
to  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath,  aud  there  by  ex- 
'  pounding  the  Scriptures  sought  to  win  both  Jews 
and  proselytes  to  the  belief  that  Jesus  was  the 
Christ. 

He  was  testifying  with  unusual  eflbrt  and  anxiety 
((TWiixiTo  TV  ^oycfi),  when  Silas  and  Timothy 
came  from  Maci-donia,  and  joined  him.  We  are 
left  in  some  uncei-tainty  as  to  what  the  movements 
of  Silas  and  Timothy  had  been,  since  they  were 
with  Paul  at  F.eroea.  From  the  statements  in  the 
Acts  (xvii.  15,  16)  that  Paul,  when  he  reached 
Athens,  desired  Silas  and  Timotheus  to  come  to  him 
v-ith  all  speed,  and  vaited  for  them  there,  com- 
pared with  those  in  1  Thess.  (iii.  1,  2),  "  When  we 
could  no  longer  forbear,  we  thought  it  good  to  be 
left  at  Athens  alone,  and  sent  Timotheus,  our  bro- 
ther, and  minister  of  (jod,  and  our  fellow-labourer 
in  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  to  establish  you  and  to 
comfort  you  concerning  your  faith," — Paley  { florae 
Paulinae.  1  Thess.  No.  iv.)  reasonably  argues  that 
Silas  and  Timothy  had  come  to  Athens,  but  had 
soon  been  despatched  thence,  Timothy  to  Thessa- 
lonica,  and  Silas  to  Philippi,  or  elsewhere.  From 
Macedonia  they  came  together,  or  about  the  same 
time,  to  Corinth  ;  and  their  arrival  was  the  occa- 
sion of  the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thes- 
salonii'ns. 

This  is  the  first''  extant  example  of  that  work 
by  which  the  Apostle  Paul  has  served  the  Church 
of  all  ages  in  as  eminent  a  degree  as  he  laboured  at 
the  founding  of  it  in  his  lifetime.  All  commen- 
tators upon  the  New  Testament  liave  been  accus- 
tomed to  notice  the  points  of  coincidence  between 
the  history  in  the  Acts,  and  these  Letters.  Paley's 
Horae  Paulinae  is  famous  as  a  special  work  upon 
this  subject.  But  more  recently,  important  attempts 
have  been  made  to  estimate  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
more  broadly,  by  considering  them  in  their  mutual 

h  Evvald  believes,  rather  capriciously,  that  the  Second 
lip.  to  the  'I'hess.  was  written  fir.H,  and  was  sent  from 
Beroea (Die Simlschrelben cifs  Ajmstdx  /'aiilux, pp.  17,1  s). 

>  Amonj;st  these,  the  works  of  I'rol'.  Jowett  (ytj^isffes  to 


PAUL 

order  and  relations,  and  in  their  bearing  upon  the 
question  of  the  development  of  the  writer's  teach- 
ing. Such  attempts'  must  lead  to  a  better  undei- 
standing  of  the  Epistles  themselves,  and  to  a  finer 
appreciation  of  the  Apostle's  nature  and  work.  It  is 
notorious  that  the  order  of  the  Epistles  in  the  book 
of  the  N.  T.  is  not  their  real,  or  chronological 
order.  The  mere  placing  of  them  in  their  true 
sequence  throws  considerable  light  upon  the  his- 
tory ;  and  happily  the  time  of  composition  of  the 
more  important  Epistles  can  be  stated  with  suffi- 
cient certainty.  The  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalo- 
nians  belong, — and  these  alone, — to  the  present 
Missionary  Journey.  The  Epistles  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  Romans,  and  Corinthians,  were  written  during 
the  next  journey.  Those  to  Phileinon,  the  Colos- 
sians,  the  Ephesians,  and  the  Philippians,  belong  to 
the  captivity  at  Rome.  With  regard  to  the  Pastoral 
Epistles,  there  are  considerable  difficulties,  which 
require  to  be  discussed  separately. 

Two  general  remarks  relating  to  St.  Paul's  Letters 
may  find  a  place  here.  (1.)  There  is  no  reason  to 
assume  that  the  extant  Letters  are  all  that  the 
Apostle  wrote.  On  the  contraiy,  there  is  a  strong 
presumption,  and  some  slight  positive  e\'idence, 
that  he  wrote  many  which  have  not  been  preserved 
(.Jowett,  i.  p.  19.5-201,  2nd  ed.).  (2.)  We  must 
be  on  our  guard  against  concluding  too  much  from 
the  contents  and  style  of  any  Epistle,  as  to  the 
fixed  bent  of  the  Apostle's  whole  mind  at  the  time 
when  it  was  written.  We  must  remember  that 
the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  were  written  whilst 
St.  Paul  was  deeply  absorbed  in  the  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances of  the  Corinthian  Church  ;  and  that  the 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  were  written  between 
those  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans.  These  facts 
are  sufficient  to  remind  us  of  the  versatiliti/  of  the 
Apostle's  mind ; — to  show  us  how  thoroughly  the 
feelings  and  ideas  suggested  to  him  by  the  circum- 
stances upon  which  he  was  dwelling  had  the  power 
to  mould  his  utterances. 

The  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  was  pro- 
bably written  soon  after  his  arrival  at  Corinth,  and 
before  he  turned  from  the  Jews  to  the  Gentiles.  It 
was  drawn  from  St.  Paul  by  the  arrival  of  Silas  and 
Tiinothy.  [Thessalonians,  Fikst  Epistle  to 
THE.]  The  largest  portion  of  it  consists  of  an  itn- 
passioned  recalling  of  the  facts  and  feelings  of  the 
time  when  the  Apostle  was  pei'sonally  with  them. 
But  we  perceive  gradually  that  those  expectations 
which  he  had  taught  them  to  entertain  of  the  ap- 
pearing and  presence  of  the  Lord  Jesas  Christ  had 
undergone  some  corruption.  There  were  symptoms 
in  the  Thessalonian  church  of  a  restlessness  which 
speculated  on  the  times  and  seasons  of  the  future, 
and  found  present  duties  fiat  and  unimportant.  This 
evil  tendency  St.  Paul  seeks  to  cori'ect,  by  reviving 
the  first  spirit  of  fiaith  and  hope  and  mutual  fellow- 
ship, and  by  setting  forth  the  a])peariiig  of  Jesus 
Christ — not  indeeil  as  distant,  but  as  the  lull  shining 
of  a  day  of  which  all  believers  in  Christ  were  already 
children.  The  ethical  characteristics  apparent  in 
this  letter,  the  degree  in  which  St.  Paul  identified 
himself  with  his  fiiends,  the  entire  surrender  of  his 
existence  to  his  calling  as  a  preacher  of  Christ,  his 
anxiety  for  the  good  fame  and  well-being  of  his  con- 
verts, are  the  same  which  will  reappear  continually. 


the  T/icss.,  Clal.,  and  liom.),  of  Ewald  (Die  SeruUchreiben, 
kc),  and  of  Ur.  Wordsworth  {Epistles  of  St.  Paul),  may 
be  namea. 


PAUL 

What  interval  of  time  separated  the  Second  Letter  to 
the  Thessaloiiians  fioni  the  First,  we  have  uo  means 
of  judging,  excejit  that  the  later  one  v^as  certxdnly 
written  before  St.  Paul's  departure  from  Corinth. 
[Thessalonians,  Second  Epistle  to  the.]  The 
Thessalonians  had  been  disturbed  by  announcements 
that  those  convulsions  of  the  world  which  all  Chris- 
tians were  taught  to  associate  with  the  coming  of 
Christ  were  immediately  impending.  To  meet  these 
Jissertions,  St.  Paul  delivers  express  predictions  in  a 
manner  not  usual  with  him  elsewhere  ;  and  whilst 
re-affirming  all  he  had  ever  taught  the  Thessalo- 
nians to  believe  respecting  the  early  coming  of  the 
Saviour  and  tlie  blessedness  of  waiting  patiently  for 
it,  he  informs  them  that  certain  events,  of  which  he 
had  spoken  to  them,  must  run  their  course  before  the 
full  manifestation  of  Jesus  Christ  could  come  to  pass. 
At  the  end  of  this  epistle  St.  Paul  guards  the  Thes- 
salonians against  pretended  letters  from  him,  by 
telling  them  that  every  genuine  letter,  even  if  not 
written  by  his  hand  throughout,  would  have  at 
least  an  autograph  salutation  at  the  close  of  it. 

We  return  now  to  the  Apostle's  preaching  at 
Corinth.  When  Silas  and  Timotheus  came,  he  was 
testifying  to  the  Jews  with  great  earnestness,  but 
with  little  success.  So  "  when  they  opposed  them- 
selves and  bla.sphemed,  he  shook  out  his  raiment," 
and  said  to  them,  in  words  of  warning  taken  from 
their  own  prophets  (Ezek.  xxxiii.  4) ;  "  Your  blood  be 
upon  your  own  heads ;  I  am  clean,  and  henceforth 
will  go  to  the  Gentiles."  The  experience  of  Pisi- 
dian  Antioch  was  repeating  itself.  The  Apostle 
went,  as  he  threatened,  to  the  Gentiles,  and  began 
to  preach  in  the  house  of  a  proselyte  named  Justus. 
Already  one  distinguished  Jew  had  become  a  be- 
liever, Crispus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  men- 
tioned (1  Cor.  i.  14)  as  baptized  by  the  Apostle 
himself:  and  many  of  the  Gentile  inhabitants  were 
receiving  the  Gospel  and  being  baptized.  The  envy 
and  rage  of  the  Jews,  therefore,  were  excited  in  an 
unusual  degree,  and  seem  to  have  pressed  upon  the 
spirit  of  St.  Paul.  He  was  therefore  encouraged 
by  a  vision  of  the  Lord,  who  appeared  to  him  by 
night,  and  said,  "  Be  not  afraid,  but  speak,  and 
hold  not  thy  peace:  for  I  am  with  thee,  and  no 
man  shall  set  on  thee,  to  hurt  thee;  for  I  have 
much  people  in  this  city."  Corinth  was  to  be  an 
important  seat  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  distin- 
guished, not  only  by  the  number  of  believers,  but 
also  by  the  variety  and  the  fi-uitfidness  of  the  teach- 
ing to  be  given  there.  At  this  time  St.  Paul 
himself  stayed  there  for  a  year  and  six  months, 
"  teaching  the  v^fonl  of  God  amongst  them." 

Corinth  was  the  chief  city  of  the  province  of 
Achaia,  and  the  residence  of  the  proconsul.  During 
St.  Paul's  stay,  we  find  the  proconsular  office  held 
by  (iallio,  a  brother  of  the  philosopher  Seneca. 
[(!ai.lio.]  Before  him  the  Apostle  was  summoned 
by  his  Jewish  enemies,  who  hoped  to  bring  the 
lionian  authority  to  bear  ujion  him  as  an  innovator 
in  religion.  But  Gallio  perceived  at  once,  before 
Paul  could  "open  his  mo\ith  "  to  defend  himself, 
that  the  movement  was  due  to  Jewish  prejudice, 
and  refused  to  go  into  the  question.  "  If  it  be  a 
(lucstion  of  words  and  names  and  of  your  law,"  he 
said  to  the  .Jews,  speaking  with  the  tolerance  of  a 
Ivoman  magistrate,  "look  ye  to  it;  for  I  will  be  no 
judge  of  such  matters."  Then  a  singidar  scene 
occurred.  The  Corinthian  spectators,  either  favour- 
ing St.  Paul,  oi-  actuated  only  liy  anger  against  the 
Jews,  s<'ized  on  the  princi])al  person  of  those  wIki 
had  brought   the  charge,   and    beat   him   lieliin-   the 


PAUL 


745 


judgment-seat.  (See  on  tlu;  other  hand"  Ewaid, 
Geschichte,  vi.  4G:i-4()6.)  Gallio  left  these  reli- 
gious (juarrels  to  settle  themselves.  The  Apostle 
therefore  was  not  allowcil  to  be  "  hurt,"  and 
remained  some  time  longer  at  Corinth  unmolested. 

We  do  not  gather  fi'om  the  subsequent  Epistles 
to  the  Corinthians  many  details  of  the  founding  of  the 
Church  at  Corinth.  The  main  body  of  the  believers 
consisted  of  Gentiles, — ("  Ye  know  tliat  ye  were  Gen- 
tiles," 1  Cor.  xii.  2).  But,  partly  from  the  number 
who  had  been  proselytes,  jxutly  fi-om  the  mixture  of 
Jews,  it  had  so  far  a  Jewish  character,  that  St.  Paul 
could  speak  of  "o(«r  fathers"  as  having  been  under 
the  cloud  (1  Cor.  x.  1).  The  tendency  to  intellectual 
display,  and  the  traffic  of  sophists  in  philosophical 
theories,  which  prevailed  at  Corinth,  made  the 
Apostle  more  than  usually  anxious  to  be  independent 
in  his  life  and  simple  in  bearing  his  witness.  He 
wrought  for  his  living  that  he  might  not  appear  to 
be  taking  fees  of  his  pupils  (1  Cor.  ix.  18)  ;  and  he 
put  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ,  crucified  and  risen, 
in  the  place  (if  all  doctrines  (1  Cor.  ii.  1-5,  xv.  3,  4). 
What  gave  infinite  significance  to  his  simple  state- 
ments, was  the  nature  of  the  Christ  who  had  been 
crucified,  and  His  relation  to  men.  Concerning  these 
mysteries  St.  Paul  had  uttered  a  wisdom,  not  of  the 
world,  but  of  God,  which  had  commended  itself 
chiefly  to  the  humble  and  simple.  Of  these  God  had 
chosen  and  called  not  a  few  "  into  the  fellowship 
of  His  Son  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord  of  men  "  (1  Cor. 
ii.  6,  7,  i.  27,  9). 

Having  been  the  instrument  of  accomplishing  this 
work,  St.  Paul  took  his  departure  for  Jerusalem, 
wishing  to  attend  a  festival  there.  Before  leaving 
Greece,  he  cut  ofl'his  hair''  at  Cenchreae,  in  fulfil- 
ment of  a  vow.  We  are  not  told  where  or  why  he 
had  made  the  vow  ;  and  there  is  considerable  diffi- 
culty in  reconciling  this  act  with  the  received  cus- 
toms of  the  Jews.  [Vows.]  A  passage  in  Josephus, 
if  rightly  understood  (B.  J.  ii.  15,  §1),  mentions  a 
vow  which  included,  besides  a  sacrifice,  the  cutting 
of  the  hair  and  the  beginning  of  an  abstinence  from 
wine  30  days  before  the  sacrifice.  If  St.  Paul's 
was  such  a  vow,  he  was  going  to  offer  up  a  sacrifice 
in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  "  sheai'ing  of 
his  head  "  was  a  preliminary  to  the  sacrifice.  The 
principle  of  the  vow,  whatever  it  was,  must  have 
been  the  same  as  that  of  the  Nazarite  vow,  whic-h 
St.  Paul  afterwards  countenanced  at  Jerusalem. 
[Nazarite,  p.  472.]  There  is  therefore  nd  diffi- 
culty in  supposing  him  to  have  followed  in  this 
instance,  for  some  reason  not  explained  to  us,  a 
custom  of  his  countrymen. — When  he  sailed  from 
the  Isthmus,  Aquila  and  Priscilla  went  with  him  as 
far  as  Ephesus.  Paul  paid  a  visit  to  the  synagogue 
at  Ephesus,  but  would  not  stay.  He  was  anxious 
to  he  at  Jerusalem  for  the  approaching  feast,  but 
he  promised,  God  willing,  to  return  to  them  again. 
Leaving  Ephesus,  he  sailed  to  Caesarea,  and  from 
thence  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  "  salutetl  the 
Church."  It  is  argued  (Wieseler,  pp.  48-50),  from 
considerations  founded  on  the  suspension  of  naviga- 
tion during  the  winter  months,  that  the  festival 
was  probably  the  Pentecost.  From  Jerusalem, 
almost  immediately,  the  Apostle  went  ilowu  to 
Antioch,  thus  returning  to  the  simie  place  from 
which  he  had  started  with  Silivs. 

Third  Missionary  Journeij,  including  the  stay  at 


I'  Acts.wiii.  18.    The  act  inay  be  tliat  of  Aquila,  hut 
the  historian  certainly  seems  lo  1)C  speaking  not  of  him, 

Iml  c.rSt.  I'.uil. 


740 


PAUL 


Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  2S-xxi.  17). — Without  in- 
veutiug  ihits  or  discussions  i'or  wliii-h  we  have  no 
authority,  we  may  connect  with  this  short  visit  of 
St.  Paul  to  Jerusalem  a  very  serious  raising  of  the 
whole  question,  What  was  to  be  the  relation  of  the 
now  kingdom  of  Christ  to  the  law  and  covenant  of  the 
Jews?  Such  a  Church  as  that  at  Corinth,  with  its 
affiliated  communities,  composed  chiefly  of  Gentile 
members,  appeared  likely  to  overshadow  by  its  im- 
portance the  Mother  Church  in  Judaea.  The  jealousy 
of  the  more  Judaical  believers,  not  extiugiiished  by 
the  decision  of  the  council  at  Jerusalem,  began  now  to 
show  itself  everywhere  in  the  form  of  an  active  and 
intriguing  party-spirit.  This  disastrous  movement 
could  not  indeed  alienate  the  heart  of  St.  Paul  from 
the  law  or  the  calling  or  the  people  of  his  fatiiers — 
his  antagonism  is  never  diiected  against  these  ;  but 
it  drew  him  into  the  great  conflict  of  the  next  period 
of  his  life,  and  must  have  been  a  sore  trial  to  the 
intense  loyalty  of  his  nature.  To  vindicate  the 
freedom,  as  regarded  the  Jewish  law,  of  believeis 
in  Christ ;  but  to  do  this,  for  the  very  sake  of  main- 
taining the  unity  of  the  Church  ; — was  to  be  the 
earnest  labour  of  the  Apostle  for  some  years.  .In 
thus  labouring  he  was  canying  out  completely  the 
principles  laid  down  by  the  elder  Apostles  at  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  may  we  not  believe  that,  in  deeji  sorrow 
at  appearing,  even,  to  disparage  the  law  and  the 
covenant,  he  was  the  more  anxious  to  prove  his 
tellowship  in  spirit  with  the  Church  in  Judaea,  by 
"  remembering  the  poor,"  as  "  James,  Cephas,  and 
John  "  had  desired  that  he  would  ?  (Gal.  ii.  10.)  The 
prominence  given,  during  the  journeys  upon  which 
we  are  now  entering,  to  the  collection  to  be  made 
amongst  his  Churches  for  the  benefit  of  the  j)Oor  at 
Jerusalem,  seems  to  indicate  such  an  anxiety.  The 
gi'eat  Epistles  which  belong  to  this  period,  tliose  to 
the  Galatians,  Corinthians,  and  flomans,  show  how 
the  "  Judaiziug"  question  exercised  at  this  time  the 
Apostle's  mind. 

St.  Paul  "  spent  some  time "  at  Antioch,  and 
during  this  stay,  as  we  are  inclined  to  believe,  his 
collision  with  St.  Peter  (Gal.  ii.  11-14),  of  which 
we  have  spoken  above,  took  place.  When  he  lett 
Antioch,  he  "  went  over  all  the  country  of  Galatia 
and  Phrygia  in  order,  strengthening  all  the  di-s- 
ciples,"  and  giving  orders  concerning  the  collection 
for  the  saints  (1  Cor.  .\vi.  1).  It  is  probable  that 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  written  soon  after 
this  visit.  [Galatians,  Epistle  TO  THE.]  When 
he  was  with  them  he  had  found  the  Christian  com- 
munities infested  Ijy  Judaizing  teachers.  He  had 
"  told  them  the  truth  "  (Gat.  iv.  16),  he  had  warned 
them  against  the  deadly  tendencies  of  Jewish  exclu- 
siveness,  and  had  re-affirmed  the  simple  Gospel, 
concerning  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  which  he 
had  prcaclied  to  them  on  his  first  visit  (rh  irpS- 
rtpov.  Gal.  iv.  13).  But  after  he  left  tliem  tlie 
Judaizing  doctrine  raised  its  head  again.  The  only 
course  lett  to  its  advocjites  was  to  assail. openly  the 
authority  of  St.  Paul ;  and  this  they  did.  They 
represented  him  as  having  derived  his  commission 
from  tlie  older  Apostles,  and  as  therefore  acting  dis- 
loyally if  he  opposed  the  views  ascribed  to  Peter  and 
James.  The  fickle  minds  of  the  Galatian  Christians 
were  influenced  by  these  hardy  assertions ;  and  the 
Apostle  heard,  when  he  had  come  down  to  Ephesus, 
that  his  work  in  Galatia  was  being  undone,  and  his 
converts  were  being  seduced  fiom  the  true  iaith  in 
Christ.  He  thcietbre  writes  tlie  Epistle  to  remou- 
strate  with  tlirm — an  Epistle  full  of  indignation,  of 
warning,  of  direct  and   impassioned  teacliing.     He 


PAUL 

recalls  to  theii  minds  the  Gospel  which  ho  had 
preached  amongst  them,  and  asserts  in  solemn  and 
even  awful  language  its  absolute  truth  (i.  8,  9). 
He  declares  that  he  had  received  it  directly  from 
Jesus  Christ  the  Lord,  and  that  his  position  towards 
the  other  Apostles  had  always  been  that,  not  of  a 
pupil,  but  of  an  independent  fellow-labourer.  He 
sets  before  them  Jesus  the  Crucified,  the  Son  of 
God,  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  made  to  the 
fathers,  and  as  the  pledge  and  giver  of  freedoni  to 
men.  He  declares  that  in  Him,  and  by  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  of  sonship  seat  down  through  Him, 
men  have  inherited  the  rights  of  adult  sons  of  God  ; 
that  the  condition  represented  by  the  Law  was  the 
inferior  and  preparatory  stage  of  boyhood.  He 
then,  most  earnestly  and  tenderly,  impresses  upon 
the  Galatians  the  responsibilities  of  their  fellowship 
with  Christ  the  Crucified,  urging  them  to  fruitful- 
nes!^  in  all  the  graces  of  their  spiritual  calling,  and 
especially  to  brotherly  consideration  and  unity. 

This  Letter  was,  in  all  probability,  sent  from 
Ephesus.  This  was  the  goal  of  the  Apostle's  journey- 
ings  through  Asia  Minor.  He  came  down  upon  Ephe- 
sus from  the  upper  districts  {to.  dvooTepiKo.  yue'/JTj)  of 
Phrygia.  What  Antioch  was  for  "  the  region  of 
Syria  and  Cilicia,"  what  Corinth  was  tor  Greece, 
what  Rome  was, — we  may  add, — for  Italy  and  the 
West,  that  Ephesus  was  for  the  important  province 
railed  Asia.  Indeetl,  with  reference  to  the  spread  of 
the  Church  Catholic,  Ephesus  occupied  the  central 
position  of  all.  This  was  tlie  meeting  place  of  Jew, 
of  Greek,  of  Roman,  and  of  Oriental.  Accordingly, 
the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  was  to  stay  a  long  time 
here,  that  he  might  found  a  strong  Church,  which 
should  be  a  kind  of  mother-church  to  Chi-istian 
communities  in  the  neigliboming  cities  of  Asia. 

A  new  element  in  the  preparation  of  the  world 
for  the  kingdom  of  Christ  piesents  itself  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Apostle's  work  at  Ephesus.  He  finds 
there  certain  disciples  [rivas  yuafiTjras), — about 
twelve  in  number — of  whom  he  is  led  to  inquire, 
"  Did  ye  receive  the  Holy  Ghost  when  ye  believed? 
They  answered.  No,  we  did  not  e\'en  hear  of  there 
being  a  Holy  Ghost.  Unto  what  then,  asked  Paul, 
were  ye  baptized?  And  they  said,  Unto  John's 
baptism.  Then  said  Paul,  John  baiitized  with  the 
baptism  of  repentance,  saying  to  the  people  that 
they  should  believe  on  him  who  was  coming  after 
him,  that  is,  on  Jesus.  Hearing  this,  they  were 
baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  ;uid 
when  Paul  had  laid  his  hands  ujion  them,  the  Holy 
Ghost  came  upon  them,  and  they  began  to  speak 
with  tongues  and  to  prophesy"  (Acts,  xix.  1-7). — 
It  is  obvious  to  compare  this  incident  with  the 
Apostolic  act  of  Peter  and  John  in  Samaria,  and  to 
see  in  it  an  assertion  of  the  full  Apostolic  dignity  of 
Paul.  But  besides  this  bearing  of  it,  we  see  in  it 
indications  which  suggest  more  than  they  distinctly 
express,  as  to  the  spiritual  movements  of  that  age. 
These  twelve  disciples  are  mentioned  immediately 
after  ApoUos,  who  also  had  been  at  Ephesus  just 
before  St.  Paul's  arrival,  and  who  had  fcuight  dili- 
gently concerning  Jesus  (to.  ivep\  rov  'Irjaov), 
knowing  only  the  baptism  of  John.  But  Apolios 
was  of  Alexandria,  trained  in  tlie  intelligent  and  in- 
quiring study  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  which  had 
been  fostered  by  the  Greek  culture  of  that  aipital. 
We  are  led  to  suppose  therefore  that  a  knowledge 
of  the  baptism  of  John  and  of  the  ministry  of  ,Iesus 
had  spread  widely,  and  had  been  received  with  fa- 
vour by  some  of  those  who  iiiiew  the  Scriptures  most 
thoroughly,  beibre  the  message  concerning  the  cz- 


PAUL 

altition  of  Jesus  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
had  been  received.  What  the  exact  belief  of  A  pol- 
ios and  these  twelve  "  disciples"  was  concerning  the 
character  and  work  of  Jesus,  we  have  no  means  of 
knowing.  But  we  gather  that  it  was  wanting  in  a 
recognition  of  the  full  lordship  of  Jesus  and  of  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Pentecostal  faith  was 
communieited  to  Apollos  by  Aquila  and  Priscilla, 
to  the  other  disciples  of  the  Baptist  by  St.  Paul. 

The  Apostle  now  entered  upon  his  usual  work. 
He  went  into  the  synagogue,  and  for  three  months 
he  spoke  openly,  disputing  and  persuading  concern- 
ing "  the  kingdom  of  God."  At  the  end  of  this 
time  the  obstinacy  and  opposition  of  some  of  the 
Jews  led  him  to  give  up  fretiuenting  the  synagogue, 
and  he  established  the  believers  as  a  separate 
society,  meeting  "  in  the  school  of  Tyraunus." 
This  continued  (though  we  may  probably  allow 
for  an  occasional  :ibsence  of  St.  Paul)  for  two 
years.  During  this  time  many  things  occurred,  of 
which  the  historian  of  the  Acts  chooses  two  e.K- 
aniples,  the  triumph  over  magical  arts,  and  the 
great  disturbance  raised  by  the  silversmiths  who 
made  shrines  tor  Artemis  ;  and  amongst  which  we 
are  to  note  further  the  wilting  of  the  First  Epistle 
to  the  Coi'inthians. 

"  God  wrought  special  miracles,"  we  are  told 
(Swdfieis  01)  ras  rvxoviras^,,  "  by  the  hands  of 
Taul."  "  It  is  evident  that  the  arts  of  sorcery  and 
magics — all  those  arts  which  betoken  the  belief  in 
the  presence  of  a  spirit,  but  not  of  a  Holy  Spirit — 
were  flourishing  here  in  great  luxuriance.  Every- 
thing in  the  history  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament 
would  suggest  the  thought  that  the  exhibitions  of 
Divine  power  took  a  more  startling  form  where 
superstitions  grounded  mainly  on  the  reverence  for 
diabolical  power  were  prevalent ;  that  they  were 
the  proclamations  of  a  beneticent  and  orderly  go- 
vernment, which  had  been  manifested  to  counteract 
an<l  overcome  one  that  was  irregular  and  malevo- 
lent "  (Maurice,  i7?jtY//  of  the  New  Testament, 
p.  515).  The  jwwers  of  the  new  kingdonj  took  a 
form  more  nearly  resembling  the  wonders  of  the 
kingdom  of  davkne.ss  than  was  usually  adoj)ted, 
when  handkerchiefs  and  aprons  from  the  body  of 
Paul  (like  the  shadow  of  I'eter,  v.  15)  were  allowed 
to  be  used  for  the  healing  of  the  sick  and  the 
casting  out  of  devils.  But  it  was  to  be  clearly 
Keen  that  all  was  done  by  the  healing  power  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Himself.  Certiiin  Jews,  and  among 
them  the  seven  sous  of  one  Sceva  (not  unlike  Simon 
Magus  in  Samaria),  fancied  that  the  eflect  was  due 
to  a  magic  fonnula,  an  tTr^S-^.  They  therefore 
attempted  to  exorcise,  by  saying,  "  We  adjure  you 
by  Jesus  whom  Paul  proacheth."  But  the  evil 
spirit,  having  a  voice  given  to  it,  cried  out,  "  Jesus 
I  know,  and  Paul  I  know,  but  who  are  ye?"  And 
.the  man  who  was  possesswl  fell  furiously  upon  the 
exorcists  and  drove  them  foith.  The  result  of  this 
testimony  was  that  fear  fell  upon  all  the  inhabitants 
of  Kphesus,  and  the  name  of  the  Lord  .Jesus  was 
magnifieil.  And  the  impression  produced  bore 
striking  practical  fruits.  The  city  was  well  known 
for  its  'E(^fma  ypdf^fiara,  forms  of  incantation, 
which  were  sold  al  a  higii  price.  Many  of  those 
who  had  these  books  brought  them  together  and 
biu'ued  them  before  all  men,  and  when  the  cost  of 
them  was  computed  it  was  found  to  be  50,(H)0 
drachmae  =  177<t/.  "  So  mightily  grew  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  and  jirevailed." 

Whilst  St.  Paul  was  at  Kphesus  his  communi- 
cations with  the  Church  in  Achaia  were  not  alto- 


PAUL 


747 


getlier  suspended.  There  is  strong  reason  to  believe 
that  a  personal  visit  to  Corinth  was  made  by  him, 
and  a  letter  sent,  neither  of  which  is  mentioned  in 
the  Acts.  The  visit  is  infen-ed  from  several  allu- 
sions iu  the  2nd  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  "  Be- 
hold, the  third  time  I  am  re;\dy  to  come  to  you" 
(2  Cor.  xii.  14).  "  This  is  the  third  time  I  am 
coming  to  you  "  (2  Cor.  xiii.  1).  The  visit  he  is  con- 
templating is  plainly  that  mentioned  in  Acts  xx.  2, 
which  took  place  when  he  finally  left  Ephesus.  If 
that  was  the  third,  he  must  have  paid  a  second 
during  the  time  of  his  residence  at  Ephesus.  It 
seems  far-fetched,  with  Paley  {^Horae  Faulinae, 
2  Cor.  No.  xi.),  to  conclude  that  St.  Paul  is  only 
atiirming  a  third  intention,  and  that  the  second 
intention  had  not  been  carried  out.  The  context, 
in  both  cases,  seems  to  refer  ]ilainly  to  insits,  and 
not  to  intentions.  Again,  "  I  determined  this  with 
mysel'f,  that  I  wouLl  not  come  again  to  you  in 
heaviness"  (irdXiv  ev  Xiittti):  2  Cor.  ii.  1.  Here 
St.  Paul  is  apparently  speaking  of  a  previous  visit 
which  he  had  paid  in  soitow  of  heart.  He  expresses 
an  apprehension  (2  Cor.  xii.  21)  lest  "again  when 
I  come,  my  God  should  humble  me  among  you  " 
(fx,ri  TzdXiv  e\86vTos  fiov  Taireiyuiaei  /te — the 
■naKiv  appearing  ceitainly  to  refer  to  raireivaxrei 
as  much  as  to  i\06vTos).  The  words  in  2  Cor. 
xiii.  2,  TTpofipTiKa  ical  TrpuXiym,  ws  irapchv  t^ 
5euT6pof  KoL  dtrwv  vvv,  may  be  translated,  either 
"  as  if  present  the  seconil  time,"  or  "  as  when  pre- 
sent the  second  time."  In  the  latter  case  we  have 
here  a  distinct  confirmation  of  the  supposed  visit. 
The  former  rendering  seems  at  first  sight  to  exclude 
it:  but  if  we  remember  that  the  thought  of  his 
special  admonition  is  occupying  the  Apostle's  mind, 
we  should  naturally  understand  it,  "  1  Ibrewarn 
you  now  in  my  absence,  as  if  I  were  present  a 
second  time  to  do  it  in  person ;"  so  that  he  would 
be  speaking  of  the  supposed  visit  as  a  fiist,  with 
reference  to  the  purpose  which  he  has  in  his  mind. 
The  prima  facie  sense  of  these  passages  implies  a 
short  visit,  which  we  should  plnce  in  the  first  halt 
of  the  stay  at  Ephesus.  And  there  are  no  strong 
I'easons  why  we  should  not  accept  that  prima  facie 
sense.  St.  Paul,  we  may  imagine,  heard  of  dis- 
orders which  prevailed  in  the  Corinthian  Church. 
Apollos  had  returned  to  Ephesus  some  time  before 
the  1st  Epistle  wa.s  written  (I  Cor.  xvi.  12),  and 
it  may  have  been  fiom  him  that  St.  Paul  leaint  tiie 
tidings  which  distressed  him.  He  was  moved  to  go 
himself  to  see  them.  He  stayed  but  a  short  time, 
but  wained  them  solemnly  again.'st  the  licentious- 
ness which  he  perceived  to  be  creeping  in  amongst 
them.  If  he  went  directly  by  sea  to  Corinth  and 
back,  this  journey  would  not  occupy  much  time. 
It  was  very  natural,  again,  that  this  visit  shouM 
be  followed  up  by  a  letter.  Either  the  Ajiostle's 
own  letlections  after  his  return,  or  some  subsecpient 
tidings  which  reached  him,  drew  from  him,  it  ap- 
pears, a  written  communication  in  which  he  gave 
them  some  practiwil  advice.  "  I  wrote  unto  you 
in  the  E])istle  not  to  keej)  company  with  fornicators  " 
(iypa^a  vfjiiv  tV  rf}  iirtaToXfj :  1  Cor.  v.  9).  Then, 
at  some  point  not  delined  in  the  course  of  the  stay 
at  Ephesus,  St.  Paul  aunounied  to  his  t'riends  a 
plan  of  going  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  and 
afterwards  visiting  jerussilem  ;  adding,  "  After  1 
have  been  there,  I  must  also  see  Rome."  But  he  put 
olffora  while  his  own  deiiarture,  and  sent  before  him 
Timothy  and  Erastus  to  the  churches  in  Maceilonia 
and  Achaia,  "  to  bring  them  into  remembrance  of 
his  ways  which  were  in  Christ"   (1  Cor.  iv.  17). 


748 


PAUL 


Whether  the  1st  Epistle  to  the  Coriuthians  wns 
written  before  or  after  the  tinnult  excited  by  De- 
metrius cannot  be  positively  asserted.  He  makes 
an  allusion,  in  that  Epistle,  to  a  "  battle  with  wild 
beasts"  fought  at  Ephesus  (e^T/pfo/xdx'Jo'a  ^f 
'E<^e'(r^:  1  Cor.  xv.  32),  which  it  is  usual  to  un- 
derstand figuratively,  and  which  is  by  many  con- 
nected with  that  tumult.  But  this  connexion  is 
arbitrary,  and  without  much  reason."  And  as  it 
would  seem  from  Acts  xx.  1  that  St.  Paul  departed 
immediately  after  the  tumult,  it  is  probable  that 
the  Epistle  was  written  before,  though  not  long 
before,  the  i-aising  of  this  disturbance.  Here  then, 
while  the  Apostle  is  so  earnestly  occupied  with  the 
teaching  of  believers  and  inquirers  at  Ephesus  and 
from  the  neighbouring  parts  of  "  Asia,"  we  find 
him  throwing  all  his  heart  and  soul  into  the  con- 
cerns of  the  Church  at  Corinth.  [Corinthians, 
First  Epistle  to  the.] 

There  were  two  external  inducements  for  writing 
this  Epistle.     (1.)  St.  Paul  had  received  informa- 
tion fiom  members  of  Chloe's  household  {eSr)\d)6i] 
fioi  iiirh  Twv  X\67)S,  i.    11)  concerning  the  state 
of  the  Church  at  Corinth.     (2.)  That  Church  liad 
wi-itten   him  a  letter,  of  which  the  bearers   were 
Stephanas  and  Fortunatus  and  Achaicus,  to  ask  his 
judgment   upon  various   points    which   were  sub- 
mitted to  him   (vii.  1,  xvi.  17).      He  had   learnt 
that  there    were   divisions    in    the   Church ;    that 
parties  had  been  formed  which  took  the  names  of 
Paul,  of  ApoUos,  of  Cephas,  and  of  Christ  (i.  11, 
12) ;  and  also  that  moral  and  social  irregularities 
had  begun  to  pi'evail,  of  which  the  most  conspicuous 
and  scandalous  example  was  that  a  believer  had 
taken  his  father's  wife,  without  being  publicly  con- 
demned by  the  Church  (v.  1,  vi.  7,  xi.  17-22,  xiv. 
33-40).     To  these  evils  we  must  add  one  doctrinal 
error,  of  those  who  said  "  that  there  was  no  resur- 
rection of  the  dead"  (xv.  12).     It  is  probable  that 
the  teaching  of  Apollos  the  Alexandrian,  which  had 
been  characteristic  and  highly  successful  (Acts  xviii. 
27,  28),  had  been  the  first  occasion  of  the  "divi- 
sions" in  the  Church.    We  may  take  it  for  granted 
that  his  adherents  did  not  form  themselves  into  a 
party  until  he  had  left  Corinth,  and  therefore  that 
he  had  been  some  time  with  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus. 
But  after  he  was  gone,  the  special   Alexaiidrian 
featui-es  of  his  teaching  were  remembered  by  those 
who  had  delighted  to  hear  him.      Their  Grecian 
intellect  was  captivated  by  his  liroader  and  more 
spiritual  interpretation  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures. 
The  connexion  which  he  taught  them  to  perceive 
between  the  revelation  made  to  Hebrew  rulei's  and 
prophets  and  the  wisdom  by  which  other  nations, 
and  especially  their  own,  had  been  enlightened,  dwelt 
in  their  minds.    That  which  especially  occupied  the 
Apollos  school  must  have  been  a  philosophy  of  the 
Scriptures.      It  was  the   tendency   of  this  party 
which  seemed  to  the  Apostle  particularly  dangerous 
amongst  the  Greeks.      He  hardly  seems  to  refer 
.specially  in  his  letter  to  the  other  parties,  but  we 
GUI  scarcely  doubt  that  in  what  he  says  about  "  the 
wisdom   which  the  Greeks  sought"  (i.  22),  he  is 
)-eferring  not  only  to  the  general  tendency  of  the 
Greek  mind,  but  to  that  tendency  as  it  had  been 
caught  and  influenced  by  the  teaching  of  Apollos. 
It  gives  him  an  occasion  of  delivering  his  most  cha- 
i-acteristic  testimony.     He  recognizes  wisdom,  but 
it  is  the  wisdom  of  God  ;  and  that  wisdom  w;is  not 


PAUL 

onli/  a  'Zofpia  or  a  A6yos  through  which  God  had 
always  s]ioken  to  all  men  ;  it  had  lieen  perfectly 
manifested  in  Jesus  the  Crucified.  Christ  crucified 
was  both  the  Power  of  God  and  the  Wisdom  of  God. 
To  receive  Him  required  a  spiritual  discernment 
unlike  the  wisdom  of  the  great  men  of  the  world  ; 
a  disceniment  given  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  and 
manifesting  itself  in  sympathy  with  humiliation  and 
in  love. 

For  a  detailed  description  of  the  Epistles  the 
reader  is  referred  to  the  special  articles  upon  each. 
But  it  belongs  to  the  history  of  St.  Paul  to  notice 
the  personal  characteristics  which  appear  in  them. 
We  must  not  omit  to  observe  therefore,  in  this 
Epistle,  how  loyally  the  Apostle  represents  -Jesus 
Christ  the  Crucified  as  the  Lord  of  men,  the  Head 
of  the  body  with  many  members,  the  Centre  of 
Unity,  tlie  Bond  of  men  to  tlie  Father.  We  should 
mark  at  the  same  time  how  invariably  he  connects 
the  Power  of  the  Spirit  with  the  Name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus.  He  meets  all  the  evils  of  the  Corinthian 
Church,  the  intellectual  pride,  the  party  spirit,  the 
loose  morality,  the  disregard  of  decency  and  order, 
the  false  belief  about  the  Resuri-ection,  by  recalling 
their  thoughts  to  the  Person  of  Christ  and  to  the 
Spirit  of  God  as  the  Breath  of  a  common  life  to  the 
whole  body. 

We  observe  also  here,  more  than  elsewhere,  the 
tact,  universally  recognized  and  admired,  with 
which  the  Apostle  discusses  the  practical  problems 
biouglit  before  him.  The  various  questions  relating 
to  marriage  (ch.  vii.),  the  difhculty  about  meats 
offered  to  idols  (ch.  viii.,  x.),  the  behaviour  proper 
for  women  (ch.  xi.,  xiv.),  the  use  of  the  gifts  of 
prophesying  and  speaking  with  tongues  (ch.  xiv.), 
are  made  examples  of  a  treatment  which  may  be 
applied  to  all  such  questions.  We  see  them  all 
discussed  with  reference  to  first  principles ;  the 
object,  in  every  practical  conclusion,  being  to  guard 
and  assert  some  permanent  principle.  We  see  St. 
Paul  no  less  a  lover  of  order  and  subordination 
than  of  freedom.  We  see  him  claiming  for  himself, 
and  prescribing  to  others,  gi-eat  variety  of  conduct 
in  varying  circumstances,  but  under  the  strict  obli- 
gation of  being  always  true  to  Christ,  and  always 
seeking  the  highest  good  of  men.  Such  a  character, 
so  stedfast  in  motive  and  aim,  so  versatile  in  action, 
it  would  be  difficult  indeed  to  find  elsewhere  in 
history. 

What  St.  Paul  here  tells  us  of  his  own  doings 
and  movements  refers  chiefly  to  the  nature  of  his 
preaching  at  Corinth  (i.  ii.) ;  to  the  hardships  and 
dangei-s  of  the  apostolic  life  (iv.  9-13)  ;  to  his  che- 
rished custom  of  working  for  his  own  living  (ix.)  ; 
to  the  direct  revelations  he  had  received  (xi.  23, 
XV.  8)  ;  and  to  his  present  plans  (xvi.).  He  bids 
the  Corinthians  raise  a  collection  for  the  Church  at 
Jerusalem  by  laying  by  something  on  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  as  he  had  directed  the  churches  in 
Galatia  to  do.  He  says  that  he  shall  tarry  at 
Ephesus  till  Pentecost,  and  then  set  out  on  a  jour- 
ney towards  Corinth  through  Macedonia,  so  as  per- 
haps to  spend  the  winter  with  them.  He  expresses 
his  joy  at  the  coming  of  Stephanas  and  his  com- 
panions, and  commends  them  to  the  respect  of  the 
Church. 

Having  despatched  this  Epistle  he  stayed  on  at 
Ephesus,  where  "  a  great  door  and  effectual  was 
opened  to  him,  and  there  were  many  adversaries." 


™  'I'hc   manner  of   tlie   allusion,   et   e0rjpiofi(ixr)o-a   c 
^4»iau>,  muy  iniijly,  as  ICwaUl  {Stiukvhreiben,  214)  su;; 


gosts,  that  he  had  mentioned  this  conflict  to  the  Co- 
riuthians in  the  previous  non-cxtaut  letter. 


PAUL 

The  aD'airs  of  the  Chnich  of  Coiiiitli  continued  to 
be  an  object  of  the  gravest  anxiety  to  him,  and  to 
give  him  occupation  at  Ephesus:  but  it  may  be 
most  convenient  to  put  off  the  further  notice  of 
tliese  till  we  come  to  the  time  when  the  '2nd 
Epistle  was  written.  We  have  now  no  information 
as  to  the  work  of  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus,  until  that 
tumult  occurred  which  is  described  in  Acts  xix. 
24-41.  The  whole  narrative  may  be  read  there. 
We  learn  that  "  this  Paul"  had  been  so  successful, 
not  only  in  Ephesus,  but  "  almost  throughout  all 
Asia,"  in  turning  people  from  the  worship  of  gods 
made  with  hands,  that  the  craft  of  silversmiths, 
who  made  little  shi'ines  for  Artemis,  were  alarmed 
for  their  manufacture.  They  raised  a  great  tumult, 
and  not  being  able,  apparently,  to  find  Paul,  laid 
hands  on  two  of  his  companions  and  dragged  them 
into  the  theatre.  Paul  himself,  not  willing  that 
his  friends  should  suffer  in  his  place,  wished  to  go 
in  amongst  the  people:  but  the  disciples,  supported 
by  the  urgent  request  of  certain  magistrates  called 
Asiarchs,  dissuaded  him  from  his  purpose.  The 
account  of  the  pi'oceedings  of  the  mob  is  highly 
graphic,  and  the  adtiress  witli  which  the  town-clerk 
finally  quiets  the  people  is  worthy  of  a  discreet 
and  experienced  magistrate.  His  statement  that 
"  these  men  are  neither  robbers  of  churches,  nor 
yet  blasphemers  of  your  goddess,"  is  an  incidental 
testimony  to  the  temperance  of  the  Apostle  and  his 
friends  in  their  attacks  on  the  popular  idolatry. 
But  St.  Paul  is  only  personally  concerned  in  this 
tumult  in  so  far  as  it  proves  the  deep  impression 
which  his  teaching  had  made  at  Ephesus,  and  the 
daily  danger  in  which  he  lived. 

He  had  been  anxious  to  depart  from  Ephesus, 
and  this  interruption  of  the  work  which  liad  kept 
him  there  determined  him  to  st;iy  no  longer.  He 
set  out  therefore  foi-  Macedonia,  and  proceeded  first 
to  Troas  (2  Cor.  ii.  12),  where  he  might  have 
preached  the  Gospel  with  good  hope  of  success. 
But  a  restless  ;mxiety  to  obtain  tidings  concerning 
the  Church  at  Coiinth  urged  him  on,  and  he  ad- 
vanced into  Macedonia,  where  he  met  Titus,  who 
brought  him  the  news  for  which  he  was  thirsting. 
The  receipt  of  tiiis  intelligence  drew  from  him  a 
letter  which  reveals  to  us  what  manner  of  man  St. 
Paul  was  when  the  fountains  of  his  heart  were  stiri'ed 
to  their  inmost  depths.  [Couinthians,  Skcoxd 
Ei'iSTLE  TO  THE.]  How  the  agitation  which  e.\- 
presses  itself  in  every  sentence  of  this  Letter  was 
excited,  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  questions  we 
have  to  consider.  Every  reader  may  perceive  that, 
on  passing  from  the  Eirst  Epistle  to  the  Second,  the 
scene  is  almost  entirely  changeii.  In  the  First,  the 
faults  and  diflicultics  of  the  Corinthian  Church  are 
before  us.  The  .Apostle  writes  of  these,  with  spirit 
indeed  and  emotion,  as  he  always  does,  but  without 
.passion  or  disturbance.  He  calmly  asserts  his  own 
authority  over  the  Church,  and  threatens  to  deal 
severely  with  otlenders.  In  the  Second,  lie  writes 
as  one  whose  personal  relations  with  those  wliom 
he  addresses  have  undergone  a  most  painful  shock. 
The  acute  pain  given  by  former  tidings,  the  com- 
fort yielded  by  the  account  wliich  Titus  brought, 
the  vexation  of  a  wnsitive  mind  at  the  necessity  of 
self-assertion,  contend  together  lor  utterance.  \Vhat 
had  occasioned  this  excitement? 

We  have  seen  that  'I'imothy  liad  been  sent  from 
Ephesus  to  Macedonia  and  (.'oriiith.  He  had  re- 
joined St.  Paul  when  he  wrote  this  Second  Epistle, 
for  he  is  a.ssociated  with  him  in  the  salutation  (2  Cor. 
i.  1).     We  have  no  account,  either  in  the  Acts  or 


PAUL 


749 


in  the  Epistles,  of  this  journey  of  Timothy,  and 
some  have  thought  it  probable  tliat  he  never  reached 
Corinth.  Let  us  suppose,  however,  that  he  arrived 
there  soon  after  the  First  Epistle,  conveyed  by  Ste- 
phanas and  others,  had  been  received  by  the  Corin- 
thian Church.  He  found  that  a  movement  had 
arisen  in  the  he;irt  of  that  Church  which  threw  (let 
us  suppose)  the  case  of  the  incestuous  person  (1  Cor. 
V.  1-5)  into  the  shade.  This  was  a  deliberate  and 
sustained  attack  upon  the  Apostolic  authority  and 
personal  integrity  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 
The  party-spirit  which,  before  the  writing  of  the 
First  Epistle,  had  been  content  with  underrating 
the  powers  of  Paul  compared  with  those  of  Apollos, 
and  with  protesting  agninst  the  laxity  of  his  doc- 
trine of  freedom,  had  been  fanned  into  a  fiame  bv 
the  arrival  of  some  person  or  persons  wlio  came 
trom  the  Judaean  Church,  armed  with  letters  of 
commendation,  and  who  openly  questioned  the  com- 
mission of  him  whom  they  proclaimed  to  be  a  self- 
constituted  Apostle  (2  Cor.  iii.  1,  xi.  4,  12-15). 
As  the  spirit  of  opposition  and  detraction  grew 
strong,  the  tongue  of  some  member  of  the  Church 
(more  probably  a  Corinthian  than  the  stranger  him- 
self) was  loosed.  He  scotfed  at  St.  Paul's  courage 
and  constancy,  pointing  to  his'  delay  in  coming  to 
Corinth,  and  making  light  of  his  threats  (i.  17,  23). 
He  demanded  proofs  of  his  Apostleship  (xii.  11, 12). 
He  derided  the  weakness  of  his  personal  presence, 
and  the  simplicity  of  his  speech  (x.  10).  He  even 
threw  out  insinuations  touching  the  personal  honesty 
and  self-devotion  of  St.  Paul  (i.  12,  xii.  17,  18). 
When  some  such  attack  was  made  openly  upon  the 
Apostle,  the  Church  had  not  immediately  called  the 
offender  to  account ;  the  better  spirit  of  the  be- 
lievers being  cowed,  apparently,  by  the  confidence 
and  assumed  authority  of  the  assailants  of  St.  Paul, 
A  report  of  this  melancholy  state  of  things  was 
brought  to  the  Apostle  by  Timothy  or  by  others ; 
and  we  can  imagine  how  it  must  have  wounded  his 
sensitive  and  most  affectionate  nature,  and  also  how 
critical  the  juncture  must  have  seemed  to  him  for 
the  whole  Western  Church.  He  immediately  sent 
off  Titus  1)0  Corinth,  with  a  letter  containing  the 
sharpest  rebukes,  using  the  authority  which  had 
been  denied,  and  threatening  to  enforce  it  speedily 
by  his  personal  presence  (ii.  2,3,  vii.  8).  As  soon 
as  the  letter  was  gone — how  natural  a  trait '; — he 
began  to  repent  of  having  written  it.  He  must 
have  hated  the  appearance  of  claiming  homage  to 
himself;  his  heart  must  have  been  sore  at  the  re- 
quital of  his  love ;  he  must  have  felt  the  deepest 
anxiety  as  to  the  issue  of  the  struggle.  We  can 
well  lielieve  him  therefore  wlien  he  speaks  of  what 
he  had  suffered  : — "  Out  of  much  affliction  and  an- 
guish of  heart  I  wrote  to  you  with  many  tears '" 
(ii.  4);  "1  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit"  (ii.  13); 
"  Our  flesh  had  no  rest,  bnt  we  were  troubled  on 
every  side;  without  were  fightings,  within  were 
fears"  (vii.  5).  It  appears  that  he  could  not  bring 
liimself  to  hasten  to  Corinth  so  nipidly  as  lie  had 
intended  (i.  15,  16);  he  would  wait  till  he  heard 
news  which  might  make  his  visit  a  hapjiy  instead 
of  a  painful  one  (ii.  1).  When  he  had  reached  Ma- 
cedonia, Titus,  as  we  have  seen,  met  him  with  such 
reassuring  tidings.  The  of^Mider  had  been  rebuked 
by  the  Church,  and  had  made  submission  (ii.  6,7)  ; 
the  old  spirit  of  love  and  reverence  towaixls  St.  Paul 
had  been  awakened,  and  had  poured  itself  forth  in 
warm  expressions  of  shame  and  grief  and  penitence. 
The  clouil  was  now  dispelled  ;  fear  and  pain  gave 
place  to  hope  and  tenderness  and  thankfulness.    But 


750 


PAUL 


even  now  tlio  A]xistle  would  not  stait  at  once  for 
Corinth.  He  may  have  had  iinportant  work  to  do 
in  Macedonia.  But  another  letter  would  smooth 
the  way  still  more  effectually  for  his  personal  visit ; 
and  he  accordingly  wrote  the  Second  Epistle,  and 
sent  it  by  the  hands  of  Titus  and  two  other  bre- 
thren to  Corinth. 

When  the  Epistle  is  read  in  the  light  of  the  cir- 
cumstances we  have  supposed,  the  symptoms  it  dis- 
plays of  a  highly  wiought  personal  sensitiveness, 
and  of  a  kind  of  ebb  and  flow  of  emotion,  arc  as 
intelligible  as  they  are  noble  and  beautiful.  Nothing 
but  a  temporary  inteiTuption  of  mutual  regard 
could  have  made  the  joy  of  sympathy  so  deep  and 
fresh.  If  he  had  been  the  object  of  a  personal  attack, 
how  natural  for  the  Apostle  to  write  as  he  does  in 
li.  5-10.  In  vii.  12,  "  he  that  suffered  wrong"  is 
Paul  himself.  All  his  protestations  relating  to  his 
Apostolic  work,  and  his  solemn  appeals  to  God  and 
Christ,  are  in  place ;  and  we  enter  into  his  feelings 
as  he  a'^serts  his  own  sincerity  and  the  openness  of 
the  truth  which  he  taught  in  the  Gospel  (iii.,  iv.). 
We  see  what  sustained  him  in  his  self-assertion ; 
he  knew  that  he  did  not  preach  himself,  but  Christ 
Jesus  the  Lord.  His  own  .  weakness  became  an 
argument  to  him,  wliich  he  can  use  to  others  also, 
of  the  power  of  God  working  in  him.  Knowing  his 
own  fellowship  with  Christ,  and  that  this  fellowship 
was  the  right  of  other  men  too,  he  would  be  per- 
suasive or  severe,  as  the  cause  of  Christ  and  the 
good  of  men  might  require  (iv.,  v.).  If  he  was 
appearing  to  set  himself  up  against  the  churches  in 
Judaea,  he  was  the  more  anxious  that  the  collection 
which  he  was  making  for  the  benefit  of  those 
churches  should  prove  his  sympathy  with  them  by 
its  largeness.  Again  he  would  recur  to  the  main- 
tenance of  his  own  authority  as  an  Apostle  of  Christ, 
against  those  who  impeached  it.  He  would  make 
it  understood  that  spiritual  views,  spiritual  powers, 
were  real ;  that  if  he  knew  no  man  after  the  fleJi, 
and  did  not  war  after  the  flesh,  he  was  not  the  less 
able  for  the  building  up  of  the  Church  (x.).  He 
would  ask  them  to  excuse  his  anxious  jealousy,  his 
folly  and  excitement,  whilst  he  gloried  in  the  prac- 
tical proofs  of  his  Apostolic  commission,  and  in  the 
infirmities  which  made  the  power  of  God  more 
manifest ;  and  he  would  plead  with  them  earnestly 
that  they  would  give  him  no  occasion  to  find  fault 
or  to  correct  them  (xi.,  xii.,  xiii.). 

The  hypothesis  \ipon  which  we  have  interpreted 
this  Epistle  is  not  that  which  is  most  commonly 
I'eceived.  According  to  the  more  common  view,  the 
offender  is  the  incestuous  person  of  1  Cor.  v.,  and 
the  letter  which  proved  so  sharp  but  wholesome  a 
medicine,  the  First  Epistle.  But  this  view  does 
not  account  so  satisfactorily  for  the  whole  tone  of 
the  Epistle,  and  for  the  particular  expressions  re- 
lating to  the  offender ;  nor  does  it  find  places  so 
consistently  for  the  missions  of  Timothy  and  Titus. 
It  does  not  seem  likely  that  St.  Paul  would  have 
treated  the  sin  of  the  man  who  took  his  father's 
wife  as  an  ofTence  against  himself,  nor  that  he 
would  have  sjioken  of  it  by  prefei-ence  as  a  urong 
(aSiKia)  done  to  another  (supposed  to  be  the 
father).  The  view  we  have  adopted  is  said,  in 
De  Wette's  Execjetisches  Handhuch,  to  have  been 
held,  in  whole  oi-  in  part,  by  Bleek,  Credner,  OIs- 
hausen,  and  Neander.  More  recently  it  has  been 
advocated  with  great  force  by  Ewald,  in  his  Scnd- 
schreihen  des  A.  P.  pp.  223-'232.  The  ordinary  ac- 
count is  retained  by  Stanley,  Alford,  and  Davidson, 
and  with  some  hesitation  by  Conybeare  and  Howson, 


PAUL 

The  particular  nature  of  this  Epistle,  as  an  appeal 
to  facts  in  favour  of  his  own  Apostolic  authority, 
leads  to  the  mention  of  many  interesting  features 
of  St.  Paul's  life.  His  summary,  in  xi.  23-28,  of 
the  hardships  and  dangers  through  which  he  had 
gone,  proves  to  us  how  little  the  history  in  the 
Acts  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  complete  account  of 
what  he  did  and  suflered.  Of  the  particular  facts 
stated  in  the  following  words,  "  Of  the  Jews  five 
times  received  I  forty  stripes  save  one;  thrice  was 
I  beaten  with  )'ods,  once  was  I  stoned,  thrice  I 
suflered  shipwreck,  a  night  and  a  day  I  have  been 
in  the  deep," — we  know  only  of  one,  the  beating 
by  the  magisti'ates  at  Philippi,  from  the  Acts.  The 
daily  burden  of  "the  care  of  all  the  churches" 
seems  to  imply  a  wide  and  constant  range  of  com- 
munication, by  visits,  messengers,  and  letters,  of 
which  we  have  found  it  reasonable  to  assume 
examples  in  his  intei-course  with  the  Church  of 
Corinth.  The  mention  of"  visions  and  revelations 
of  the  Lord,"  and  of  the  "  thorn  (or  rather  stake) 
in  the  flesh,"  side  by  side,  is  peculiarly  charac- 
teristic both  of  the  mind  and  of  the  experiences  of 
St.  Paul.  As  an  Instance  of  the  visions,  he  alludes 
to  a  trance  which  had  befallen  him  fourteen  years 
before,  in  which  he  had  been  I'aught  up  into  para- 
dise, and  had  heard  unspeakable  words.  Whether 
this  vision  may  he  identified  with  any  that  is  re- 
corded in  the  Acts  must  depend  on  chronological 
considei'ations :  but  the  very  expressions  of  St.  Paul 
in  this  place  would  rather  lead  us  not  to  think  of 
an  occasion  in  wliich  words  that  could  be  reported 
were  spoken.  We  observe  that  he  speaks  with  the 
deepest  reverence  of  the  privilege  thus  granted  to 
him ;  but  he  distinctly  declines  to  ground  anything 
upon  it  as  regards  other  men.  Let  them  judge 
him,  he  says,  not  by  any  such  pietensions,  but  by 
facts  which  were  cognizable  to  them  (xii.  1-G). 
And  he  would  not,  even  inwardly  with  himself, 
glory  in  visions  and  revelations  without  remem- 
beiing  how  the  Lord  had  guarded  him  from  being 
pufled  up  by  them.  A  stake  in  the  flesh  {crK6ko\f/ 
ry  aapKi)  was  given  him,  a  messenger  of  Satan  to 
bufliit  him,  lest  he  should  be  exalte  I  above  measure. 
The  difierent  interpretations  which  have  prevailed 
of  this  (TK^Xo^  have  a  certain  historical  significance. 
(1)  Roman  Catholic  divines  have  inclined  to  un- 
derstand by  it  stiong  sensual  temptation.  (2) 
Luther  and  his  followers  take  it  to  mean  tempta- 
tions to  unbelief.  But  neither  of  tiiese  would  be 
"  infirmities "  in  which  St.  Paul  could  "  glory." 
(3)  It  is  almost  the  unanimous  opinion  of  modern 
divines — and  the  authoiity  of  the  ancient  fathers 
on  the  whole  is  in  flivour  of  it— that  the  ctkoKo^ 
represents  some  vexatious  bodily  infirmity  (sec 
especially  Stanley  in  loco).  It  is  plainly  what  St. 
Paul  refers  to  in  Gal.  iv.  14 :  "  My  temptation  in 
my  flesh  ye  despised  not  nor  rejected."  This  in- 
firmity distressed  him  so  much  that  he  besought 
the  Lord  thrice  that  it  might  depart  from  him. 
But  the  Lord  answered,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for 
thee  ;  for  my  strength  is  made  perfect  in  weakness." 
We  are  to  understand  therefore  the  affliction  as 
lemaining ;  but  Paul  is  more  than  resigned  under 
it,  he  even  glories  in  it  as  a  means  of  displaying 
more  purely  the  power  of  Christ  in  him.  That  we 
aie  to  undei-stand  the  Apostle,  in  accordance  with 
this  passage,  as  labouring  under  some  degree  of  ill- 
health,  is  clear  enough.  But  we  must  remember 
that  his  constitution  was  at  least  strong  enough,  as 
a  matter  of  f!\ct,  to  carry  him  through  the  harfl- 
ships  and  anxieties  and  toils  which  lie  himself  da- 


PAUL 

SDribes  to  us,  ami  to  sustain  the  prpssui-o  of  the  long 
imprisonment  at  Caesarea  and  in  lIonK;. 

Aftei-  writing  this  Epistle,  St.  I'aul  travelleil 
through  Macedonia,  perhaps  to  the  borders  of  Illy- 
ricum  ([\oni.  xv.  19),  and  then  carried  out  the 
intention  of  which  he  had  spoken  so  often,  and 
arrived  himself  at  Corinth.  The  narrative  in  the 
Acts  tells  us  that  "  when  he  had  gone  over  those 
parts  (Macedonia),  and  had  given  them  much  ex- 
hoitiitiou,  he  came  into  Greece,  and  there  abode 
three  mouths  "  (xx.  2,  3).  There  is  only  one  inci- 
dent which  we  can  connect  with  this  visit  to  Greece, 
but  that  is  a  very  important  one — the  writing  of 
another  great  Epistle,  addressed  t<i  the  Church  at 
liome.  [Romans,  Epistle  to  the.]  That  this 
was  written  at  this  time  iVom  Corinth  appears  from 
passages  in  the  Epistle  itself,  ;uid  has  never  been 
doubted. 

It  would  be  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul 
was  insensible  to  the  mighty  associations  which 
connected  themselves  with  the  name  of  Homo.  The 
seat  of  the  imperial  government  to  which  Jerusalem 
itself,  with  the  rest  of  the  world,  was  then  subject, 
must  have  been  a  grand  object  to  the  thoughts  of 
the  Apostle  from  his  infancy  upwards.  He  was 
himself  a  citizen  of  Kome  ;  he  had  come  repeatedly 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  lioman  magistrates  ;  he 
had  enjoyed  the  benefits  of  the  equity  of  the  Ivoman 
law,  and  the  justice  of  Roman  administration.  And, 
besides  its  universal  supremacy,  Rome  was  the 
natural  head  of  the  Gentile  world,  as  Jerusalem 
was  the  head  of  the  Jewish  world.  In  this  august 
city  Paul  had  many  friends  and  brethren.  Romans 
who  had  travelled  into  Greece  and  Asia,  strangers 
from  Greece  and  Asia  who  had  gone  to  settle  at 
Rome,  had  heard  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  kingdom 
of  Heaven  fiom  Paul  himself  or  from  other  pieacheis 
of  Christ,  and  had  formed  themselves  into  a  com- 
munity, of  which  a  gooil  report  had  gone  forth 
throughout  the  Christian  workl.  We  are  not  sur- 
prised therefore  to  hear  that  the  Apostle  was  very 
anxious  to  visit  Rome.  It  was  his  fixed  intention 
to  go  to  Rome,  and  from  Rome  to  extend  his  jour- 
neys as  far  as  Spain  (Rom.  xv.  24,  28).  He  would 
thus  bear  his  witness,  both  in  the  capital  and  to 
the  extremities  of  the  Western  or  Gentile  world. 
For  the  present  he  could  not  go  on  from  Corinth  to 
Rome,  because  he  was  drawn  by  a  special  errand  to 
,)er\isalem — where  indeed  he  was  likely  enough  to 
meet  with  dangers  and  delays  (xv.  25-32).  But  from 
•Iciusalem  he  proposed  to  turn  Romewards.  In  the 
meanwhile  he  wou  Id  write  them  a  letter  from  Corinth. 
The  letter  is  a  substitute  for  the  personal  visit 
which  he  had  longed  "for  many  years"  to  pay; 
and,  as  he  would  have  made  the  visit,  so  now  he 
writes  the  letter,  because  he  is  the  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles.  Of  this  office,  to  speak  in  common  lan- 
guage, St.  Paul  was  proud.  All  the  laliours  and 
dangers  of  it  he  would  willingly  encounter  ;  and  he 
would  also  ji«lously  maintain  its  dignity  and  its 
powers.  He  held  it  of  Christ,  and  Christ's  com- 
mission should  not  be  dishonoured.  He  lepresents 
himself  grandly  as  a  priest,  appointed  to  otl'er  up 
the  faith  of  the  (jentile  world  as  a  sacrifice  to  God 
(xv.  16).  And  he  then  proceeds  to  speak  with 
pride  of  the  extent  and  independence  of  his  Apostolic 
labours.  It  is  in  harmony  with  this  language  that 
he  should  address  the  Roman  Church  as  consisting 
mainly  of  (ientiles:  but  we  find  that  he  sjicaks  to 
them  as  to  persons  deeply  interested  in  Jewish 
questions  (see  Prof.  Jowett's  and  lip.  Colenso's 
fiUivductioHs  to  the  Epistle). 


PAUL 


rsi 


To  the  Chnrch  thus  composed,  the  Apostle  of  the 
(ientiles  writes  to  declare  and  commend  the  Gospel 
which  he  everywhere  preaches.  That  Gospel  was 
invariably  the  announcement  of  Jesus  Christ  the 
Son  of  God,  the  Lord  of  men,  who  was  made  man, 
died,  and  was  raised  again,  and  whom  His  heralds 
present  to  the  faith  and  obedience  of  mankind. 
Such  a  K7ipvy/xa  might  be  variously  commended 
to  difl'eient  hearers.  In  speaking  to  the  Roman 
Church,  St.  Paul  represents  the  chief  value  of  it  as 
consisting  in  the  fact  that,  through  it,  the  i-ighteous- 
ness  of  God,  as  a  righteousness  not  for  God  only, 
but  also  for  men,  was  revealed.  It  is  natural  to 
ask  what  led  him  to  choose  and  dwell  upon  this 
aspect  of  his  proclamation  of  Jesus  Christ.  The 
following  answers  suggest  themselves; — (1.)  As  he 
looked  upon  the  condition  of  the  Gentile  world, 
with  that  coup  d'ccil  which  the  writing  of  a  letter 
to  the  Roman  Church  was  likely  to  suggest,  he  was 
struck  by  the  awful  wickedness,  the  utter  dissolu- 
tion of  moral  ties,  which  has  made  that  age  infa- 
mous. His  own  terrible  summary  (i.  21-32)  is 
well  known  to  be  confirmed  by  other  contemporarj' 
evidence.  The  profligacy  which  we  shudder  to  rend 
of  was  constantly  under  St.  Paul's  eye.  Along  with 
the  evil  he  saw  also  the  beginnings  of  God's  judg- 
ment upon  it.  He  saw  the  miseries  and  disastei-s, 
begun  and  impending,  which  proved  that  God  in 
heaven  would  not  tolerate  the  unrighteousness  of 
men.  (2.)  As  he  looked  upon  the  condition  of  the 
Jewish  people,  he  saw  them  claiming  an  exclusive 
righteousness,  which,  however,  had  manifestly  no 
power  to  preserve  them  from  being  I'eally  un- 
righteous. (3.)  Might  not  the  thought  also  occur 
to  him,  as  a  Roman  citizen,  that  the  empire  which 
was  now  falling  to  pieces  through  luirighteousness 
had  been  built  up  by  righteousness,  by  that  love 
of  order  and  that  acknowledgment  of  rights  which 
were  the  great  endowment  of  the  Roman  people? 
Whether  we  lay  any  stress  upon  this  or  not,  it 
seems  clear  that  to  one  contemplating  the  world 
from  St.  Paul's  point  of  view,  no  thought  would 
be  so  naturally  suggested  iis  that  of  the  neal  of  the 
true  Righteousness  for  the  two  divisions  of  man- 
kind. How  he  expounds  that  God's  own  righteous- 
ness was  shown,  in  Jesus  Christ,  to  be  a  righteous- 
ness which  men  might  trust  in — sinners  though 
they  were — and  by  trusting  in  it  submit  to  it,  and 
so  receive  it  as  to  show  forth  the  fruits  of  it  in 
their  own  lives  ;  how  he  declares  the  union  of  men 
with  Christ  as  subsisting  in  the  Divine  idea  and  as 
realized  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit, — may  be  seen 
in  the  Epistle  itself.  The  remarkable  exposition 
contained  in  ch.  ix.,  x.,  xi.,  illustrates  the  personal 
character  of  St.  Paul,  by  showing  the  intense  love 
for  his  nation  which  he  ret;\ined  through  all  his 
struggles  with  unbelieving  Jews  aii<l  .ludaizing 
Christians,  and  liy  what  hopes  he  reconciled  him- 
self to  the  thought  of  their  unbelief  and  their 
punishment.  Having  spoken  of  this  subject,  he 
goes  on  to  exhibit  in  practical  counsels  the  same 
love  of  Christian  unity,  moderation,  and  gentleness, 
the  same  respect  fiir  social  order,  the  same  tender- 
ness for  weak  consciences,  and  the  same  expectation 
of  the  Lord's  coming  and  confidence  in  the  future, 
which  appear  more  or  less  strongly  in  all  his 
letters. 

Before  his  dejiarture  from  Corinth,  St.  Paul  was 
joined  agjiin  by  St.  Luke,  as  we  infer  from  the  change 
in  the  narrative  froni  the  third  to  the  first  person. 
We  have  seen  already  that  he  was  bent  on  making  a 
journey  to  Jerusalem,  fbra  special  purpose  and  with- 


762 


PAUL 


in  a  limited  time.  ArVith  this  view  he  was  intendino; 
to  go  by  sea  to  Syria.  But  he  was  made  aware  of 
some  plot  of  the  Jews  for  his  destruction,  to  be 
can-ied  out  through  this  voyage  ;  and  he  deter- 
mined to  evade  their  malice  by  changing  his  route. 
Several  brethren  were  associated  with  him  in  this 
expedition,  the  bearers,  no  doubt,  of  the  collections 
made  in  all  the  Churches  for  the  poor  at  Jerusalem. 
These  were  sent  on  by  sea,  and  probably  the  money 
with  them,  to  Troas,  where  they  were  to  await 
St.  Paul.  He,  accompanied  by  St.  Luke,  went 
northwards  through  Macedonia.  The  style  of  an 
eye-witness  again  becomes  manifest.  "  From  Phi- 
lippi,"  says  the  writer,  "  we  sailed  away  after  the 
days  of  unleavened  bread,  and  came  unto  them  to 
Troas  in  five  days,  where  we  abode  seven  days." 
The  marks  of  time  throughout  this  journey  have 
given  occasion  to  much  chronological  and  geogra- 
phical discussion,  which  brings  before  the  reader's 
mind  the  difficulties  and  uncertainties  of  travel  in 
that  age,  and  leaves  the  precise  determination  of 
the  dates  of  this  history  a  matter  for  reasonable 
conjecture  rather  than  ior  positive  statement.  But 
no  question  is  raised  by  the  times  mentioned  which 
need  detain  us  in  the  course  of  the  naiTative. 
During  the  sfciy  at  Troas  there  was  a  meeting  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week  "  to  break  bread,"  and 
Paul  was  discoursing  earnestly  and  at  length  with 
the  bi'ethren.  He  w.is  to  depart  the  next  morning, 
and  midnight  found  them  listening  to  his  earnest 
speech,  with  many  lights  burning  in  the  upper 
chamber  in  which  they  had  met,  and  making  the 
atmosphere  oppressive.  A  youth  named  Eutychus 
was  sitting  in  the  window,  and  was  gradually  over- 
powered by  sleep,  so  that  at  last  he  fell  into  the 
street  or  court  from  the  third  story,  and  was  taken 
up  dead.  The  meeting  was  interrupted  by  tliis 
accident,  and  Paul  went  down  and  fell  upon  him 
and  embraced  him,  saying,  "  Be  not  disturbed,  his 
life  is  in  him.".  His  friends  then  appear  to  have 
taken  charge  of  him,  whilst  Paul  went  up  again, 
first  presided  at  the  breaking  of  bread,  afterwards 
took  a  meal,  and  continued  conversing  until  day- 
break, and  so  departed. 

Whilst  the  vessel  which  conveyed  the  rest  of  the 
party  sailed  from  Troas  to  Assos,  Paul  gained  some 
time  by  vnaking  the  journey  by  land.  At  Assos  he 
went  on  board  again.  Coasting  along  by  Mitylene, 
Chios,  Samos,  and  Trogyllium,  they  arrived  at 
Miletus.  The  Apostle  was  thus  passing  by  the 
chief  Church  in  Asia ;  but  if  he  had  gone  to  Ephesus 
he  might  have  arrived  at  Jerusalem  too  late  for  the 
Pentecost,  at  which  festival  he  had  set  his  heart 
upon  being  present.  At  Miletus,  however,  there 
was  time  to  send  to  Ephesus  ;  and  the  elders  of  the 
Church  were  invited  to  come  down  to  him  there. 
This  meeting  is  made  the  occasion  for  recording 
another  characteristic  and  representative  address  of 
St.  Paul  (Acts  XX.  18-35).  This  spoken  address  to 
the  elders  of  the  Ephesian  Church  may  be  ranked 
with  the  Epistles,  and  throws  the  same  kind  of 
light  upon  St.  Paul's  Apostolical  relations  to  the 
Churches.  Like  several  of  the  Epistles,  it  is  in 
great  part  an  appeal  to  their  memories  of  him  and 
of  his  work.  He  refers  to  his  labours  in  "  serving 
the  Lord"  amongst  them,  and  to  the  dangers  he 
incurred  from  the  plots  of  the  Jews,  and  asserts 
emphatically  the  unreserve  with  which  he  had 
taught  them.  He  then  mentions  a  fact  which  will 
come  betbre  us  again  i)iesently,  that  he  was  re- 
ceiving inspired  warnings,  as  he  advanced  from  city 
to  city,  of  the  bonds  and  afflii-tions  awaiting  him  at 


PAUL 

Jerusalem.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  the 
Apostle  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  press  on  in  spite 
of  tiiese  warnings.  Having  fonned  his  plan  on  good 
gi-ounds  and  in  the  sight  of  God,  he  did  not  see,  in 
dangers  which  might  even  touch  his  life,  however 
clearly  set  before  him,  reasons  for  changing  it. 
Other  arguments  might  move  him  from  a  fixed 
purpose — not  dangers.  His  one  guiding  principle 
was,  to  discharge  the  ministry  which  he  had  re- 
ceived of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  testify  the  Gospel  of 
the  grace  of  God.  Speaking  to  his  present  audience 
as  to  those  whom  he  was  seeing  for  the  last  time, 
he  proceeds  to  exhort  them  with  unusual  earnest- 
ness and  tenderness,  and  expresses  in  conclusion 
that  anxiety  as  to  practical  industiy  and  liberality 
which  has  been  increasingly  occupying  his  mind. 
In  terms  strongly  resembling  the  language  of  the 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  and  Corinthians,  he 
pleads  his  own  example,  and  entreats  them  to  follow 
it,  in  "  labouring  for  the  support  of  the  weak." 
"And  when  he  had  thus  spoken  he  kneeled  down 
and  prayed  with  tliem  all :  and  they  all  wept  sore, 
and  tell  on  Paul's  neck,  and  kissed  him,  sorrowing 
most  of  all  for  the  words  which  he  s]i;ike,  that  they 
should  see  his  face  no  more.  And  they  accom- 
panied him  to  the  ship."  ....  This  is  the  kind  of 
narrative  in  which  some  learned  men  think  they 
can  detect  the  signs  of  a  moderately  clever  fiction. 

The  course  of  the  voyage  from  Miletus  was  by 
Coos  and  Rhodes  to  Patara,  and  from  Patara  in 
another  vessel  past  Cyprus  to  Tyre.  Here  Paul 
and  his  company  spent  se\'en  days  ;  and  there  were 
disciples  "  who  said  to  Paul  through  the  Spirit, 
that  he  should  not  go  up  to  Jerusalem."  Again 
there  was  a  sorrowful  parting  :  "  They  all  brought 
us  on  our  way,  with  wives  and  childien,  till  we 
were  out  of  the  city ;  and  we  kneeled  down  on  the 
shore  and  prayed."  From  Tyre  they  sailed  to 
Ptolemais,  where  they  spent  one  day,  and  from 
Ptolemais  proceeded,  apparently  by  land,  to  Cae- 
sarea.  In  this  place  was  settled  Philip  the  Evan- 
gelist, one  of  the  seven,  and  he  became  the  host 
of  Paul  and  his  friends.  Philip  had  four  unmarried 
daughters,  who  "  prophesied,"  and  who  repeated, 
no  doubt,  the  warnings  already  heaid.  Caesarea 
was  within  an  easy  journey  of  Jerusalem,  and  Paul 
may  have  thought  it  pi'udent  not  to  be  too  long  in 
Jerusalem  before  the  festival ;  otherwise  it  might 
seem  strange  that,  after  the  foiTner  haste,  they  now 
"tarried  many  days"  at  Caesarea.  During  this 
intei'val  the  prophet  Agabus  (Acts  xi.  28)  aime 
down  from  Jerusalem,  and  crowned  the  previous 
intimations  of  danger  with  a  prediction  expiessively 
delivered.  It  would  seem  as  if  the  approaching  im- 
prisonment were  intended  to  be  conspicuous  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Church,  as  an  agency  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  God's  designs.  At  this  stage  a  final  effoil 
was  made  to  dissuade  Paul  from  going  up  to  Jerusa- 
lem, by  the  Christians  of  Caesarea,  and  by  his  tra- 
velling companions.  But  "  Paul  answered,  What 
mean  ye  to  weep  and  to  break  mine  heart  ?  for  I 
am  ready  not  to  be  bound  only,  but  also  to  die  at 
Jerusalem  for  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  And 
when  he  would  not  be  persuaded,  we  ceased,  saying, 
The  will  of  the  Lord  be  done."  So,  after  a  while, 
they  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  wei-e  gladly  received 
by  the  brethren.  This  is  St.  Paul's  fifth  and  last 
visit  to  Jerusalem. 

St.  Paul's  Imprisonment :  Jei-usalem  and  Cae- 
sarea.— He  who  was  thus  conducted  into  Jerusalem 
by  a  company  of  anxious  friends  had  become  by 
this  time  a  man  of  considerable  fame  amongst  his 


PAUL 

countrymen.  He  was  widely  known  as  one  who 
had  taught  witli  pie-eminent  boldness  tliafc  a  way 
into  God's  fiivour  was  opened  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
that  this  way  did  not  lie  through  the  door  of  the 
Jewish  Law.  He  had  moreover  actually  founded 
lumierous  and  important  communities,  composed  of 
Jews  ;md  Gentiles  together,  which  stood  simply  on 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  apart  from  circumcision 
and  the  observance  of  the  Law.  He  had  thus 
.roused  against  himself  the  bitter  enmity  of  that 
unfathomable  Jewish  jiride  which  was  almost  as 
strong  in  some  of  those  who  had  jirofessed  the  faith 
of  Jesus,  as  in  their  unconverted  brethren.  This 
enmity  had  for  years  been  vexing  both  the  body 
and  the  spirit  of  the  Ajiostle.  He  had  no  rest  fiom 
its  persecutions ;  and  his  joy  in  proclaiming  the  free 
grace  of  God  to  the  world  was  mixed  with  a  con- 
stant sorrow  that  in  so  doing  he  was  held  to  be 
disloyal  to  the  calling  of  his  fathers.  He  was  now 
approaching  a  crisis  in  the  long  struggle,  and  the 
shadow  of  it  had  been  made  to  rest  upon  his  mind 
throughout  his  journey  to  Jerusalem.  He  came 
"  ready  to  die  for  tlie  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus," 
but  he  csime  expressly  to  prove  himself  a  faithful 
Jew,  and  this  purpose  emerges  at  every  point  of 
the  history. 

St.  Luke  does  not  mention  the  contributions 
brought  by  Paul  and  his  companions  for  the  poor 
at  Jerusalem.  But  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  tlieir 
first  act  was  to  deliver  these  funds  into  the  proper 
hands.  This  might  be  done  at  the  interview  which 
took  place  on  the  following  day  with  "  James  and 
all  the  elders."  As  on  former  occasions,  the  be- 
lievers at  Jerusalem  could  not  but  glorify  God  for 
what  they  heard ;  but  they  had  been  alarnwd  by 
the  prevalent  feeling  concerning  St.  Paul.  They 
said  to  him,  "  Thou  seest,  brother,  how  many 
tliousands  of  Jews  there  are  which  believe ;  and 
they  are  all  zealous  of  the  law  ;  and  they  are  in- 
fprmed  of  thee  that  thou  teachest  all  the  Jews 
which  are  among  the  Gentiles  to  forsake  Moses, 
saying  that  they  ought  not  to  circumcise  their  chil- 
dren, neither  to  walk  after  the  customs."  This 
report,  as  James  and  the  elders  assume,  was  not  a 
true  one  ;  it  was  a  perversion  of  Paul's  real  teach- 
ing, which  did  not,  in  fact,  differ  from  theirs.  In 
order  to  dispel  such  rumours  they  ask  him  to  do 
publicly  an  act  of  homage  to  the  Law  and  its 
observances.  They  had  four  men  who  were  under 
the  Nazarite  vow.  The  completion  of  this  vow 
involved  (Num.  vi.  13-21)  a  considerable  expense 
for  the  offerings  to  be  presented  in  the  Temple; 
and  it  was  a  meritorious  act  to  provide  these 
offerings  for  the  poorer  Nazarites.  St.  Paul  was 
requested  to  put  himself  under  the  vow  with  those 
other  four,  and  to  supply  the  cost  of  their  offerings. 
He  at  once  accepted  the  proposal,  and  on  the  next 
day,  having  perfonned  some  ceremony  which  im- 
plied the  adoption  of  the  vow,  he  went  into  the 
Temple,  announcing  that  the  due  offerings  for  each 
Nazarite  were  about  to  be  presented  ancl  the  period 
of  the  vow  terminated.  It  appears  that  the  whole 
process  undertaken  by  St.  Paul  required  seven  days 
to  complete  it.  Towards  the  end  of  this  time  cer- 
tain Jews  from  "  Asia,"  who  had  come  u])  for  the 
Pentecostal  feast,  and  who  had  a  personal  know- 
ledge both  of  Paul  himself  and  of  his  companion 
Trophimns,  a  Gentile  from  Kphesus,  saw  I'aul  in 
the  Temple.  They  immediately  set  upon  him,  and 
stirred  up  tiu^  people  against  him,  crying  out, 
''  Men  of  iKiael,  help:  tliis  is  the  man  that  teacheth 
all  men  everywhere   against   the  people,  and   the 

VOL.  II. 


PAUL 


753 


law,  and  this  place  ;  and  furtlier  brought  Greeks 
also  into  (he  Temple,  and  hath  polluted  this  holy 
]ilace."  The  latter  charge  had  no  more  truth  in  it 
than  the  first :  it  was  only  suggested  by  their 
having  seen  Trophimns  with  him,  not  in  the  Tem- 
))le,  but  in  the  city.  They  raised,  however,  a  great 
commotion:  Paul  was  dragged  out  of  the  Temple, 
of  which  the  doors  were  immediately  shut,  and  the 
people,  having  him  in  their  hands,  were  proposino- 
to  kill  him.  But  tidings  were  soon  can-ied  to  the 
commander  of  the  force  which  was  serving  as  a 
garrison  in  Jerusalem,  that  "  all  Jerusalem  was  in 
an  uproar ;"  and  he,  taking  with  him  soldiers  and 
centurions,  hastened  to  the  scene  of  the  tumult. 
Paul  was  rescued  from  the  violence  of  the  multi- 
tude by  the  Roman  officer,  who  made  him  his  own 
prisoner,  causing  him  to  be  chained  to  two  soldiers, 
anil  then  proceeded  to  inquire  who  he  was  and 
what  he  had  done.  The  inquiry  only  elicited  con- 
fused outcries,  and  the  '■  chief  captain  "  seems  to 
have  imagined  that  the  Apostle  might  perhaps  be 
a  cei'tain  Egyptian  pretender  who  had  recently 
stirred  up  a  considerable  rising  of  the  people.  The 
account  in  the  Acts  (xxi.  34-40)  tells  us  with 
graphic  touches  how  St.  Paul  obtained  leave  and 
opportunity  to  address  the  people  in  a  discourse 
which  is  related  at  length. 

This  discourse  was  spoken  in  Hebrew ;  that  is, 
ill  the  native  dialect  of  the  country,  and  was  on  that 
account  listened  to  with  the  more  attention.  It  is 
described  by  St.  Paul  himself,  in  his  opening  words, 
as  his  "  defence,"  addressed  to  his  brethren  and 
fathers.  It  is  in  this  light  that  it  ought  to  be  re- 
garded. As  we  have  seen,  the  desire  which  occu- 
pied the  Apostle's  mind  at  this  time,  was  that  of 
vindicating  his  message  and  work  as  those  of  a  faith- 
ful Jew.  The  discourse  spoken  to  the  angry  people 
at  Jerusalem  is  his  own  justification  of  himself. 
He  adopts  the  historical  method,  after  which  all  the 
recorded  appeals  to  Jewish  audiences  are  framed. 
He  is  a  servant  of  facts.  He  had  been  from  the 
first  a  zealous  Israelite  like  his  hearers.  He  had 
changed  his  course  because  the  God  of  his  fathers 
had  turned  him  from  one  path  into  another.  It 
is  thus  that  he  is  led  into  a  narrative  of  his  Conver- 
sion. We  have  already  noticed  the  differences,  in 
the  statement  of  bare  facts,  between  this  naiTative^ 
and  that  of  the  9th  chapter.  The  business  of  the 
student,  in  tiiis  place,  is  to  see  how  far  the  purpose 
of  the  Apostle  will  account  for  whatever  is  special 
to  this  address.  That  purpose  explains  the  detailed 
reference  to  his  rigorously  Jewish  education,  ami  to 
his  history  before  his  Conversion,  it  gives  point 
to  the  announcement  that  it  was  by  a  direct  opera- 
tion from  without  upon  his  spirit,  and  not  by  the 
gradual  inffuence  of  other  minds  upon  his,  that  his 
course  was  changed.  Incidentally,  we  may  see  a 
reason  i'ov  the  admission  that  his  companions  "  heard 
not  the  voice  of  him  that  spake  to  mo  "  in  the  fact 
that  some  ot'  them,  not  believing  in  Jesus  with  their 
former  leader,  may  have  been  living  at  Jerusalem, 
and  possibly  present  amongst  the  audience.  In  this 
speech,  the  Apostle  is  glad  to  mention,  what  we 
were  not  told  before,  that  the  Ananias  who  inter- 
preted the  will  of  the  Lord  to  him  more  fully  at 
Damascus,  was  "  a  devout  man  aciording  to  the 
law,  having  a  good  report  oi'  all  the  Jews  which 
dwelt  there,"  and  that  lie  made  his  communication 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  saying, 
"The  (!od  of  our  fathers  hath  chosen  thee,  that 
thou  slioiildest  know  his  will,  and  see  the  l{ighteous 
One,  and  hear  a  voice  out  of  his  moutii  ;   for  thou 

3  C 


754 


PAUL 


shalt  be  a  wituoss  for  liiin  iiiito  all  men  of  what 
thou  hast  seen  and  heard."  Having  thus  claimed, 
according  to  his  wont,  the  character  of  a  sini]>le  in- 
strument and  witness,  St.  Paul  goes  on  to  describe  an- 
other revelation  of  which  we  read  nothing  elsewhere. 
He  had  been  accused  of  being  an  enemy  to  the 
Temple.  He  relates  that  after  the  visit  to  Da- 
mascus he  went  up  again  to  Jerusalem,  and  was 
prayiug  once  in  the  Temple  itself,  till  he  fell  into  a 
trance.  Then  he  saw  the  Lord,  and  was  bidden  to 
leave  Jerusalem  quickly,  because  the  people  there 
would  not  receive  his  testimony  concerning  Jesus. 
His  own  impulse  was  to  stay  at  Jerusalem,  and  h.e 
pleaded  with  the  Lord  that  there  it  was  well  known 
how  he  had  persecutetl  those  of  whom  he  was  now 
one, — implying,  it  would  appear,  that  at  Jerusalem 
his  testimony  was  likely  to  be  more  impressive  and 
irresistible  than  elsewhere  ;  but  the  Lord  answered 
with  a  simple  command,  "  Depart:  for  I  will  send 
thee  far  hence  unto  the  Gentiles." 

Until  this  hated  word,  of  a  mission  to  the  Gen- 
tiles, had  been  spoken,  the  Jews  had  listened  to  the 
speaker.  They  could  bear  the  name  of  the  Na- 
zareue,  though  they  despised  it ;  but  the  thought  of 
that  free  declaration  of  God's  grace  to  the  Gentiles, 
of  which  Paul  was  knov/n  to  be  the  herald,  stung 
them  to  fury.  Jewish  pride  was  in  that  generation 
becoming  hardened  and  embittered  to  the  utmost ; 
and  tills  was  the  enemy  which  St.  Paul  had  come 
to  encounter  in  its  stronghold.  "  Away  with  such 
a  I'ellow  from  the  earth,"  the  multitude  now 
shouted:  "  it  is  not  fit  that  he  should  live."  The 
Itonian  commander,  seeing  the  tumult  tliat  arose, 
might  well  conclude  that  St.  Paul  had  committed 
some  heinous  ofleuce ;  and  carrying  him  oft^  he  gave 
orders  that  he  should  be  foiced  by'  scourging  to 
confess  his  crime.  Again  the  Apostle  took  advan- 
tage of  his  Roman  citizenship  to  protect  himself 
from  such  an  outrage.  To  the  rights  of  that  citi- 
zenshij),  he,  a  free-born  Roman,  ha<l  a  better  title 
than  the  chief  captain  himself;  and  if  he  had  chosen 
to  assert  it  before,  he  might  have  saved  himself 
from  the  indignity  of  being  manacled. 

The  Roman  officer  was  bound  to  protect  a  citizen, 
and  to  suppress  tumult ;  but  it  was  also  a  part  of 
his  policy  to  treat  with  deference  the  religion  and 
the  customs  of  the  country.  St.  Paul's  present 
history  is  the  resultant  of  these  two  principles. 
The  chief  captain  set  him  free  from  bonds,  but  on 
the  next  day  called  together  the  chief  priests  and  the 
Sanhedrim,  and  brought  Paul  as  a  prisoner  before 
them.  We  need  not  suppose  that  this  was  a  regular 
legal  proceeding:  it  was  probably  an  experiment  of 
policy  and  courtesy.  If,  on  the  one  hand,  the  com- 
mandant of  the  garrison  had  no  power  to  convoke 
the  Sanhedrim ;  on  the  other  hand  he  would  not 
give  up  a  Roman  citizen  to  their  judgment.  As  it 
was,  the  affair  ended  in  confusion,  and  with  no 
semblance  of  a  judicial  termination.  The  incidents 
selected  by  St.  Luke  from  the  history  of  this  meet- 
ing fonn  striking  points  in  the  biography  of  St. 
Paul,  but  they  are  not  easy  to  understand.  The 
difficulties  arising  here,  not  out  of  a  comparison  of 
two  independent  narratives,  but  out  of  a  single  nar- 
rative which  must  at  least  have  appeared  consistent 
and  intelligible  to  the  writer  himself,  are  a  warning 
to  the  student  not  to  draw  unfavourable  inferences 
from  all  apparent  discrepancies. — St.  Paul  appears 
to  have  been  put  upon  his  defence,  and  with  the 
peculiar  habit,  mentioned  elsewhere  also  (Acts  xiii. 
9),  of  looking  steadily  when  about  to  speak  (dre- 
vicrai),  he  began  to  say  "  Men  and  brethren,  I  have 


PAUL 

lived  in  all  good  conscience  (or,  to  give  the  force  of 
ireTToKiTiVfjiaL,  I  have  lived  a  conscientiously  loyal 
lile)  unto  God,  until  this  day."  Here  the  High- 
Priest  Ananias  commanded  them  that  stood  by  him 
to  smite  him  on  the  mouth.  With  a  fearless  indig- 
nation, Paul  exclaimed:  "God  shall  smite  thee, 
thou  whited  wall:  for  sittest  thou  to  judge  me  after 
the  law,  and  commandest  me  to  be  smitten  coutraiy 
to  the  law?"  The  Ijystanders  said,  "  llevilest  thou 
God's  High-Priest?"  Paul  answered,  "I  knew 
not,  brethren,  that  he  was  the  High-Priest ;  for  it  is 
written.  Thou  shalt  not  speak  evil  of  the  ruler 
of  thy  people."  The  evidence  furnished  by  this 
apology,  of  St.  Paul's  resjiect  both  for  the  Law  and 
for  the  high  priesthood,  was  probably  the  reason  for 
relating  the  outburst  which  it  followed.  Whether 
the  writer. thought  that  outburst  culpable  or  not, 
does  not  appear.  St.  Jerome  (contra  Pelag.  iii., 
quoted  by  Baur)  draws  an  unfavoui'able  contrast 
between  the  vehemence  of  the  Apostle  and  the 
meekness  of  his  Master  ;  and  he  is  followed  by  many 
critics,  as  amongst  others  De  Wette  and  Alford. 
But  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  He  who  was  led 
as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,  was  the  same  who  spoke 
of  "  whited  sepulchres,"  and  exclaimed,  "  Ye  ser- 
pents, ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  shall  ye  escape 
the  damnation  of  hell?"  It  is'  by  no  means  certain, 
therefore,  that  St.  Paul  would  have  been  a  truer 
follower  of  Jesus  if  he  had  held  his  tongue  under 
Ananias's  lawless  outrage.  But  what  does  his  :in- 
swer  mean  ?  How  was  it  possible  for  him  not  to 
know  that  he  who  spoke  was  the  High  Priest? 
Why  should  he  have  been  less  willing  to  rebuke  an 
iniquitous  High  Priest  than  any  other  member  of 
the  Sanhedrim,  "sitting  to  judge  him  after  the 
Law?"  These  are  difficult  questions  to  answer. 
It  is  not  likely  that  Ananias  was  personally  un- 
known to  St.  Paul ;  still  less  so,  that  the  High 
Priest  was  not  distinguislied  by  dress  or  place  fiom 
the  other  members  of  the  Sanhedrim.  The  least 
objectionable  solutions  seem  to  be  that  for  some 
reason  or  other, — either  because  his  sight  was  not 
good,  or  because  he  was  looking  another  way, — he 
did  not  know  whose  voice  it  was  that  ordered  him 
to  be  smitten ;  and  that  he  wished  to  coirect  the 
impression  which  he  saw  was  made  upon  some  of 
the  audience  by  his  threatening  protest,  and  there- 
fore took  advantage  of  the  fact  that  he  really  did 
not  know  the  speaker  to  be  the  High-Priest,  to  ex- 
plain tlie  deference  he  felt  to  be  due  to  the  person 
holding  that  office.  The  next  incident  which  St. 
Luke  records  seems  to  some,  who  cannot  think  of 
the  Apostle  as  remaining  still  a  Jew,  to  cast  a  sha- 
dow upon  his  lectitude.  He  pei'ceived,  we  are  told, 
that  the  council  was  divided  into  two  parties,  the 
Sadducees  and  Pharisees,  and  therefore  he  cried  out, 
"  Men  and  brethren,  1  am  a  Pliarisee,  the  son  of  a 
Pharisee  ;  concerning  the  hope  and  resurrection  of 
the  dead  I  am  called  in  question."  This  declaration, 
whether  so  intended  or  not,  had  the  effect  of  stiiring 
up  the  party  spii'it  of  the  assembly  to  such  a  degree, 
that  a  fierce  dissension  arose,  and  some  of  the  Pha- 
risees actually  took  Paul's  side,  saying, -"We  find 
no  evil  in  this  man  ;  suppose  a  spirit  or  an  angel 
has  spoken  to  him  ?" — Those  who  impugn  the  au- 
thenticity of  the  Acts  point  triumphantly  to  this 
scene  as  an  utterly  impossible  one:  others  consider 
that  the  Apostle  is  to  be  blamed  for  using  a  disin- 
genuous artifice.  But  it  is  not  so  clear  that  St. 
Paul  was  using  an  artifice  at  all,  at  least  for  his 
own  interest,  in  identifying  himself  as  he  did  with 
the  j)rofessions  of  the  Pharisees.     He  had  not  come 


PAUL 

to  Jerusalem  to  pscn]5e  out  of  the  way  of  danger, 
nor  was  the  course  lie  took  on  this  occasion  the 
safest  he  could  liavo  chosen.  Two  objects,  we  must 
remember,  were  dearer  to  him  than  his  life:  (1)  to 
testify  of  Him  wliom  God  had  raised  from  the  dead, 
and  (li)  to  prove  that  in  so  doing  he  was  a  faithful 
Israelite.  He  may  well  have  thought  that  both 
these  objects  might  be  promoted  by  an  appeal  to 
the  nobler  professions  of  the  Pharisees.  The  creed 
of  the  Pharisee  as  distinguished  from  that  of  the 
Sadducee,  was  unquestionably  the  creed  of  St.  Paul. 
His  belief  in  Jesus  seemed  to  him  to  supply  the 
ground  and  fulfilment  of  that  creed.  He  wished  to 
lead  his  brother  Pharisees  into  a  deeper  and  more 
living  apprehension  of  their  own  faith. 

Whether  such  a  result  was  in  any  degree  attained, 
we  do  not  know  :  the  immediate  consequence  of  the 
dissension  which  occurred  in  the  assembly  was  that 
Paul  was  like  to  be  torn  in  pieces,  and  was  carried 
off  by  the  Roman  soldiers.  In  the  night  he  had  a 
vision,  as  at  Corinth  (xviii.  9,  10)  and  on  the 
Voyage  to  Rome  (xxvii.  '23,  24),  of  the  Lord  stand- 
ing by  him,  and  encouraging  him.  "  Be  of  good 
cheer,  Paul,"  said  his  Master;  "for  as  thou  hast 
testified  of  me  in  Jerusalem,  so  must  thou  bear 
witness  also  at  Rome."  It  was  not  safety  that  the 
Apostle  longed  for,  but  oppoitunity  to  bear  witness 
of  Christ. 

Probably  the  factious  support  which  Paul  had 
gained  by  his  manner  of  bearing  witness  in  the 
council  died  away  as  soon  as  the  meeting  was  dis- 
solved. On  the  next  day  a  conspiracy  was  formed, 
which  the  historian  relates  with  a  singular  fulness  of 
details.  More  than  forty  of  the  Jews  bound  them- 
selves under  a  curse  neither  to  eat  nor  to  drink 
until  they  had  killed  Paul.  Their  plan  was,  to 
persuade  the  Roman  commandant  to  send  down 
Paul  once  more  to  the  council,  and  then  to  set  upon 
liim  by  the  way  and  kill  him.  This  conspiracy 
became  known  in  some  way  to  a  nephew  of  St. 
Paul's,  his  sister's  son,  who  was  allowed  to  see  his 
uncle,  and  inform  him  of  it,  and  by  his  desire  was 
taken  to  the  captain,  who  was  thus  put  on  his 
guard  against  the  plot.  This  discovery  baflled  the 
conspirators ;  and  it  is  to  be  feared  that  they  ob- 
tained some  dispensation  from  their  vow.  The  con- 
sequence to  St.  Paul  was  that  he  was  huiried  away 
from  Jerusalem.  The  chief  captain,  Claudius  Ly- 
sias,  determined  to  .send  him  to  Caesai'ea,  to  Felix 
the  governor,  or  procurator,  of  Judaea.  He  there- 
fore put  him  in  charge  of  a  strong  guard  of  soldiers, 
who  took  him  by  night  as  far  as  Antipatris.  From 
thence  a  smaller  detachment  conveyed  him  to  Cae- 
sarea,  where  they  delivered  up  their  prisoner  into 
the  hands  of  the  governor,  together  with  a  letter, 
in  which  Claudius  Lysias  had  explained  to  Felix  his 
reason  for  sending  Paul,  and  had  announced  that 
his  accusers  would  follow.  Felix,  St.  Luke  tells  us 
with' that  particularity  which  marks  this  portion  of 
his  narrative,  ask-ed  of  what  province  the  prisoner 
was:  and  being  told  that  he  was  of  Cilicia,  he  pro- 
mised to  give  him  a  hearing  when  his  accusers 
should  come.  In  the  meantime  he  ordered  him  to 
be  guarded. — chained  piobably,  to  a  soldier, — in 
the  government-house,  which  had  been  the  palace 
of  Herod  the  Great. 

Imprisonment  at  Caesnrea. — St.  Paul  was  hence- 
forth, to  the  end  of  the  period  embraced  in  the 
Acts,  if  not  to  the  end  of  his  life,  in  Roman  cus- 
tody. This  custody  was  in  fact  a  j)rotection  to 
him,  without  which  he  would  have  fallen  a  victim 
to  the  animosity  of  the  .Jews.     He  seems  to  have 


PAUL 


755 


been  treated  throughout  with  humanity  and  consi- 
deration. His  own  attitude  towards  Roman  magis- 
trates was  invariably  that  of  a  respectful  but  inde- 
pendent citizen  ;  and  whilst  his  franchise  secured 
him  from  open  injustice,  his  character  and  conduct 
could  not  fail  to  win  him  the  goodwill  of  those  into 
whose  hands  he  came.  The  governor  before  whom 
he  was  now  to  be  tried,  according  to  Tacitus  and  Jo- 
sephus,  was  a  mean  and  dissolute  tyrant.  [Felix.] 
"  Per  omnem  saevitiam  nc  libidinem  jus  regium 
servili  ingenio  exercuit "  (Tacitus,  Hist.  v.  9). 
But  these  characteiistics,  except  perhaps  the  servile 
ingenium,  do  not  appear  in  our  history.  The 
orator  or  counsel  retained  by  the  Jews  and  brought 
down  by  Ananias  and  the  elders,  when  they  arrived 
in  the  course  of  five  days  at  Caesarea,  begins  the 
proceedings  of  the  trial  professionally  by  compli- 
menting the  governor.  The  charge  he  goes  on  to 
set  forth  against  Paul  shows  precisely  the  light  in 
which  he  was  I'egarded  by  the  fanatical  Jews.  He 
is  a  pestilent  fellow  {AoifxSs) ;  he  stirs  up  divisions 
amongst  the  .Jews  throughout  the  world ;  he  is  a 
ringleader  of  the  sect  (aipeVecos)  of  the  Nazarencs, 
His  last  offence  had  been  an  attempt  to  profane  the 
Temple.  St.  Paiil  met  the  chai-ge  in  his  usual  man- 
ner. He  was  giaa  that  his  judge  had  been  for  some 
years  governor  of  a  Jewish  province;  "  because  it  is 
in  thy  power  to  ascertain  that,  not  more  than  twelve 
days  since,  I  came  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship." 
The  emphasis  is  upon  his  coming  up  to  worship. 
He  denied  positively  tiie  charges  of  stirring  up  strife 
and  of  ]5rofaning  the  Temple.  But  he  admitted 
that  "  after  the  way  {r^v  dh6v)  which  they  call  a 
sect,  or  a  heresy," — so  he  worshipped  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  believing  all  things  written  in  the  law 
and  in  the  prophets.  Again  he  gave  prominence  to 
the  hope  of  a  resurrection,  which  he  held,  as  he 
said,  in  common  with  his  accusers.  His  loyalty  to 
the  faith  of  his  fathers  he  had  shown  by  coming  up 
to  Jerusalem  expressly  to  bring  alms  for  his  nation 
and  oft'oings,  and  by  undertaking  the  ceremonies  of 
purification  in  the  Temple.  What  fault  then  could 
any  Jew  possibly  find  in  him? — The  Apostle's  an- 
swer was  straightforward  and  complete.  He  had 
itot  violated  the  law  of  his  fathers  ;  he  was  still  a 
true  and  loyal  Israelite.  Felix,  it  appears,  knew  a 
good  deal  about  "  the  way"  (ttjs  oSou),  as  well  as 
about  the  customs  of  the  Jews,  and  was  probably 
satisfied  that  St.  Paul's  account  was  a  true  one. 
He  made  an  excuse  for  putting  oft'  the  matter,  and 
gave  orders  that  the  prisoner  should  be  treated  ■with 
indulgence,  and  that  his  friends  should  bo  allo\^•ed 
free  access  to  him.  After  a  while,  Felix  heard  him 
again.  His  wife  Drusilla  was  a  .Jewess,  and  they 
were  both  curious  to  hear  the  eminent  preacher  of 
the  new  faith  in  Christ.  But  St.  Paul  was  not  a 
man  to  entertain  an  idle  curiosity.  Ho  began  to 
reason  concerning  righteousness,  temperance,  and 
the  coming  judgment,  in  a  manner  which  alarmed 
Felix  and  caused  him  to  put  an  eml  to  the  con- 
ierence.  He  frecjuently  saw  him  afterwards,  how- 
ever, and  allowed  him  to  underst;in<l  that  a  bribe 
would  procure  his  release.  But  St.  Paul  woidd  not 
resoit  to  this  method  of  escape,  ami  he  remained  in 
custody  until  Felix  left  the  province.  The  unprin- 
ciplerl  governor  had  good  reason  to  seek  to  ingra- 
tiate himself  with  the  Jews  ;  and  to  please  them,  he 
handed  over  Paul,  as  an  untried  prisoner,  to  his 
successor  Festus. 

At  this  point,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  the  liis- 
tory  of  St.  Paul  comes  into  its  closest  contact  with 
external  chronologv.     Festus,  like  Felix,  has  a  place 

3  0  2 


7.56 


PAUL 


in  secular  history,  and  he  bears  a  much  better  cha- 
racter. Upon  his  arrival  in  the  province,  lie  went 
up  without  delay  from  Caesarea  to  Jerusalem,  and 
the  landing  Jews  seized  the  opportunity  of  asking 
that  Paul  might  be  brouglit  up  there  for  trial,  in- 
tending to  assassinate  him  by  the  way.  But  Festus 
would  not  comply  with  their  i-equest.  He  invited 
them  to  follow  him  on  his  speedy  return  to  Cae- 
sarea, and  a  trial  took  place  there,  closely  resem- 
bling that  before  Feli.x.  Festus  saw  clearly  enough 
that  Paul  had  committed  no  ofl'ence  against  the  law, 
but  he  was  anxious  at  the  same  time,  if  lie  could, 
to  please  tlie  Jews.  "  They  had  certain  questions 
against  him  "  Festus  says  to  Agiippa,  "  of  their 
own  superstition  (or  religion),  and  of  one  Jesus, 
who  was  dead,  whom  Paul  affirmed  to  be  alive. 
And  being  puzzled  for  my  part  as  to  such  inquiries, 
I  asked  him  wliether  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem  to 
be  tried  there."  This  proposal,  not  a  very  likely 
one  to  be  accepted,  w;is  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's 
appeal  to  Caesar.  In  dignified  and  independent 
language  he  claimed  his  rights  as  a  Roman  citizen. 
We  can  scarcely  doubt  that  the  prospect  of  being 
forwarded  by  this  means  to  Rome,  the  goal  of  all 
his  desires,  presented  itself  to  him  and  drew  him 
onwards,  as  he  virtually  protested  against  the  inde- 
cision and  impotence  of  the  provincial  governor,  and 
exclaimed,  1  appeal  unto  Caesar.  Having  heard 
this  appeal,  Festus  consulted  with  his  assessors, 
found  tliat  there  was  no  impediment  in  the  way  of  its 
prosecution,  and  then  replied,  "  Hast  thou  appealed 
to  Caesar  ?     To  Caesar  thou  slialt  go." 

Properly  speaking,  an  appeal  was  made//'o?/i  the 
sentence  of  an  inferior  court  to  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
higher.  But  in  St.  Paul':?  case  no  sentence  had 
been  pronounced.  We  must  understand,  therefore, 
by  his  appeal,  a  demand  to  be  tried  by  the  imperial 
court,  and  we  must  suppose  that  a  Roman  citizen 
liad  the  right  of  electing  whether  he  would  be  tried 
in  the  province  or  at  Rome.  [Appeal.] 

The  appeal  having  been  allowed,  Festus  reflected 
that  he  must  send  with  the  prisoner  a  report  of 
"  the  crimes  laid  against  him."  And  he  found  that 
it  was  no  easy  matter  to  put  the  complaints  of  the 
Jews  in  a  form  which  would  be  intelligible  at  Rome. 
He  therefore  took  advantage  of  an  opportunity 
which  offeied  itself  in  a  few  days  to  seek  some  help 
in  the  matter.  The  .Jewish  prince  Agi'ippa  arrivsd 
with  his  sister  Bei-enice  on  a  visit  to  the  new 
governor.  To  him  Festus  communicated  his  per- 
plexity, together  with  an  account  of  what  had  oc- 
curred before  him  in  the  rase.  Agrippa,  who  must 
have  known  something  of  the  sect  of  the  Nazarenes, 
and  had  probably  heard  of  Paul  himself,  expressed  a 
desire  to  hear  liim  speak.  The  Apostle  therefoi-e 
was  now  called  upon  to  bear  tlie  name  of  liis  Master 
'•  before  Gentiles,  and  kings."  The  audience  which 
assembled  to  hear  him  was  the  most  dignified  which 
lie  had  yet  addressed,  and  the  state  and  ceremony 
of  the  scene  proved  that  he  was  regarded  as  no  vulvar 
criminal.  Festus,  when  Paul  had  been  brought 
into  the  council-chambei ,  exjjlained  to  Agrippa  and 
the  rest  of  the  company  the  dilKcadty  in  which  he 
tb\md  himself,  and  tlien  expressly  referred  the  matter 
to  the  better  knowledge  of  the  Jewish  king.  Paul 
tiierefore  was  to  give  an  account  of  himself  to 
Agrippa ;  and  when  he  had  received  from  him  a 
courteous  peniiission  to  begin,  he  stretched  forth 
his  hand  and  made  his  defence. 

In  this  discourse  (Acts  xxvi.),  we  have  the  second 
explanation  from  St.  Paul  himself  of  the  manner  in 
which  he  had  been  led,  tlirough  his  Conversion,  to 


PAUL 

serve  the  Lord  Jesus  instead  of  persecuting  His  dis- 
ciples ;  and  the  third  narrative  of  the  Conversion 
itself.  Speaking  to  Agrippa  as  to  one  thoroughly 
versed  in  the  customs  and  questions  prevailing 
amongst  the  Jews,  Paul  appeals  to  the  well-known 
Jewish  and  even  Pharisaical  strictness  of  his  youth 
and  early  manhood.  He  reminds  the  king  of  the 
great  hope  which  sustained  continually  the  worship 
of  the  Jewish  nation, — the  hope  of  a  deliverer,  pro- 
mised by  God  Himself,  who  should  be  a  conqueror 
of  death.  He  had  been  led  to  see  that  this  promise 
was  fulfilled  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth ;  he  proclaimed 
His  resurrection  to  be  the  pledge  of  a  new  and  im- 
mortal lite.  What  was  there  in  this  of  disloyalty 
to  the  traditions  of  his  fathers? — Did  his  countiy- 
men  disbelieve  in  this  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  ?  So 
had  he  once  disbelieved  in  Him  ;  and  had  thought  it 
his  duty  to  be  earnest  in  hostility  against  His  name. 
But  his  eyes  had  been  opened :  he  would  tell  how 
and  when.  The  stoiy  of  the  Convereion  is  modified 
in  this  address  as  we  might  fairly  expect  it  to  be. 
We  have  seen  that  there  is  no  absolute  contradiction 
between  the  statements  of  this  and  the  other  narra- 
tives. The  main  points, — the  light,  the  prostra- 
tion, the  voice  from  heaven,  the  instructions  from 
Jesus, — are  found  in  all  three.  But  in  this  account, 
the  words,  "  I  am  Jesus  whom  thou  persecutest," 
are  followed  by  a  fuller  explanation,  as  if  then 
spoken  by  the  Lord,  of  what  the  work  of  the 
Apostle  was  to  be.  The  other  accounts  defer  this 
explanation  to  a  subsequent  occasion.  But  when 
we  consider  how  fully  the  mysterious  communica- 
tion made  at  the  moment  of  the  Conversion  included 
what  was  afterwards  conveyed,  through  Ananias 
and  in  other  ways,  to  the  mind  of  Paul ;  and  how 
needless  it  was  lor  Paul,  in  his  present  address 
before  Agi-ippa,  to  mark  the  stages  by  which  the 
whole  lesson  was  taught,  it  seems  merely  captious 
to  base  upon  the  method  of  this  account  a  charge  of 
disagreement  between  the  difl'erent  parts  of  this  his- 
tory. They  bear,  on  the  contraiy,  a  striking  mark 
of  genuineness  in  the  degree  in  which  they  approach 
contradiction  without  reaching  it.  It  is  most  na- 
tural that  a  story  told  on  different  occasions  should 
be  told  differently  ;  and  if  in  such  a  case  we  find  no 
contradiction  as  to  the  facts,  we  gain  all  the  firmer 
impression  of  the  substantial  truth  of  the  story. 
The  particulars  added  to  the  foiTner  accounts  by  the 
present  narrative  are,  that  the  words  of  Jesus  were 
spoken  in  Hebrew,  and  that  the  first  question  to 
Saul  was  followed  by  the  saying,  "  It  is  hard  for 
thee  to  kick  against  the  goads."  (This  saying  is 
omitted  by  the  best  authorities  in  the  ixth  chapter.) 
The  language  of  the  commission  which  St.  Paul  says 
he  received  from  Jesus  deserves  close  study,  and  will 
be  found  to  bear  a  striking  resemblance  to  a  passage 
in  Colossians  (i.  12-14).  Theideasof  light,  redemp- 
tion, forgiveness,  inheritance  and  faith  in  Christ, 
belong  characteristically  to  the  Gospel  which  Paul 
preached  amongst  the  Gentiles.  Not  less  striking 
is  it  to  observe  the  older  terms  in  which  he  describes 
to  Agrippa  his  obedience  to  the  heavenly  vision. 
He  had  made  it  his  business,  he  says,  to  proclaim  to 
all  men  "  that  they  should  repent  and  turn  to  God, 
and  do  works  meet  for  repentance."  Words  such 
as  John  the  Baptist  uttered,  but  not  less  truly 
Pauline.  And  he  finally  reiterates  that  the  testi- 
mony on  account  of  which  the  Jews  sought  to  kill 
him  was  in  exact  agreement  with  Moses  and  the 
prophets.  They  had  taught  men  to  expect  that  the 
Christ  should  sufier,  and  that  He  should  be  the  first 
that  shoukl  rise  fiom  the  de;id,  and  should  show 


PAUL 

light  uuto  the  peojile  and  to  the  (jeiitiles.     Of  sucli 
a  Messiah  Saul  was  the  servant  and  preacher." 

At  this  point  Festus  began  to  apprehend  what 
seemed  to  him  a  m;uiitest  absurdity.  He  inter- 
rupted tlie  Apostle  discourteously,  but  with  a  com- 
pliment contained  in  his  loud  remonstrance.  "Thou 
art  mad,  Paul;  thy  much  learning  is  turning  thee 
mad."  The  phrase  to.  ■rroA.Ait  -ypdixfiara,  may  pos- 
sibly have  been  suggested  by  the  allusion  to  Moses 
and  the  prophets ;  but  it  probably  refers  to  the 
books  with  which  St.  Paul  had  been  supplied,  and 
which  he  was  known  to  study,  during  his  imprison- 
ment. As  a  biographical  hint,  this  phrase  is  not  to 
be  overlooked.  "  1  am  not  mad,"  replied  Paul, 
"  most  noble  Festus :  they  are  words  of  truth  and 
soberness  which  I  am  uttering."  Then,  with  an 
appeal  of  mingled  dignity  and  solicitude,  he  turns 
to  the  king.  He  was  sure  the  king  understood  him. 
"  King  Agrippa,  believest  thou  the  prophets  ? — 1 
know  that  thou  believest."  The  answer  of  Agrippa 
can  hardly  have  been  the  serious  and  encouraging 
remark  of  our  English  version.  Literally  rendered, 
it  appeal's  to  be.  You  are  brieHy  persuading  me  to 
Ijecome  a  Christian ;  and  it  is  generally  sup])osed  to 
have  been  spoken  ironically.  "  I  would  to  God," 
is  Paul's  earnest  answer,  "  that  whether  by  a  brief 
process  or  by  a  long  one,  not  only  thou  but  all  who 
heiir  me  to-day  might  become  such  as  I  am,  with 
the  exception  of  these  bonds."  He  was  wearing  a 
chain  upon  the  hand  he  heU  up  in  addressing  them. 
With  this  prayer,  it  appears,  the  conliirence  ended. 
Festus  and  the  king,  and  their  companions,  con- 
sulted together,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  accused  was  guilty  of  nothing  that  desen'ed 
death  or  imprisonment.  And  Agrippa's  final  an- 
swer to  the  inquiry  of  Festus  was,  "  Tliis  man  might 
have  been  set  at  liberty,  if  he  had  not  appealed  unto 
Caesar." 

The  Voyage  to  Rome. — No  formal  trial  of  St. 
Paul  had  yet  taken  place.  It  appears  from  Acts 
-xxviii.  18,  that  he  knew  how  favourable  the  judg- 
ment of  the  provincial  governor  was  likely  to  be. 
But  the  vehement  ojiposition  of  the  Jews,  together 
with  his  desire  to  be  conveyed  to  Rome,  might  well 
induce  him  to  claim  a  trial  before  the  imperial 
court.  After  a  while  arrangements  were  made  to 
carry  "  Paul  and  certain  other  prisoners,"  in  the 
custody  of  a  centurion  named  Julius,  into  Italy; 
and  amongst  the  company,  whether  by  favour  or 
from  any  other  reason,  we  find  the  historian  of  the 
Acts.  The  narrative  of  this  voyage  is  accordingly 
minute  and  circumstantial  in  a  degree  which  has 
excited  much  attention.  The  nautical  and  geo- 
graphiccil  details  of  St.  Luke's  account  have  been 
submitted  to  an  apparently  thorough  investigation 
by  several  competent  critics,  especially  by  Mr.  Smith 
of  Jordanhill,  in  an  important  treatise  devoted  to 
this  subject,  and  by  Mr.  Howson.  The  result  of 
this  investigation  has  been,  that  several  errors  in 
the  received  version  have  been  corrected,  that  the 
course  of  the  voyage  has  been  laid  down  to  a  very 
minute  degree  with  great  certainty,  and  that  tlie 
account  in  the  Acts  is  shown  to  be  written  by  an 
accurate  eye-witness,  not  himself  a  professional  sea- 
man, but  well  acquainted  with  nautical  matteis. 
We  shall  hasten  lightly  over  this  voyage,  referring 
the  reader  to  the  works  above  mentioned,  and  to 


PAUL 


757 


»  "  There  never  was  any  lliat  understood  the  Old  tes- 
tament so  well  us  St.  Paul,  except  John  the  Baplist,  and 

John  the  Divine Oh,  he  dearly  loved  Moses  and  Isuiali, 

lor  they,  together  wilh  king  David,  weiu  the  chief  projihets. 
The  words  and  things  of  St.  Tuul  arc  taken  out  of  Moses 


the  articles  in  this  Dictionary  on  the  names  of 
places  and  the  nautical  terms  which  occur  in  the 
narrative. 

The  centurion  and  his  prisoners,  amongst  whom 
Arist;u-chus  (Col.  iv.  lo)  is  named,  embarke<l  at 
Caesarea  on  board  a  ship  of  Adramyttium,  and  set 
sail  for  the  coast  of  Asia.  On  the  next  day  they 
touched  at  Sidon,  and  Julius  began  a  course  of 
kindly  and  respectful  treatment  by  allowing  Paul 
to  go  on  shore  to  visit  his  friends.  The  westerly 
winds  still  usual  at  the  time  of  year  (late  in  the 
summer)  compelled  the  vessel  to  riin  northwards 
under  tlie  lee  of  Cyjirus.  Off  the  coast  of  Cilicia 
;uid  Pamphylia  they  would  find  northerly  winds, 
which  enabled  them  to  reach  Wyra  in  Lycia.  Heie 
the  voyagers  were  put  on  board  another  ship,  which 
was  come  from  Alexandria  and  was  bound  for  Italy. 
In  this  vessel  they  worked  slowly  to  windward, 
keeping  near  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  till  they  came 
over  against  Cnidus.  The  wind  being  still  con- 
trary, the  only  course  was  now  to  run  southwards, 
under  the  lee  of  Crete,  passing  the  headland  of 
Salmone.  They  then  gained  the  advantage  of  a 
weather  shore,  and  worked  along  the  coast  of  Crete 
as  far  as  Cape  ]\latala,  near  which  they  took  refuge 
in  a  harbour  calhid  Fair  Havens,  identified  with 
one  bearing  the  same  name  to  this  day. 

It  became  now  a  serious  question  what  course 
should  be  taken.  It  was  late  in  the  year  for  the 
navigation  of  those  days.  The  tiist  of  the  day  of 
expiation  (Lev.  xxiii.  27-29),  answering  to  the  au- 
tumnal equinox,  was  past,  and  St.  Paul  gave  it  as 
his  advice  that  they  should  winter  where  they  were. 
But  the  master  and  the  owner  of  the  ship  were 
willing  to  run  the  risk  of  seeking  a  more  com- 
modious harbour,  and  the  centurion  followed  their 
judgment.  It  was  resolved,  with  the  concurrence 
of  the  majority,  to  make  for  a  harbour  called 
Phoenix,  sheltered  from  the  S.W.  winds,  as  well  as 
from  the  N.W.  (The  phrase  /SAeVovTu  Kara 
\il3a  is  rendered  either  "  looking  down  the  S.W." 
[Smith  and  Alford],  or  "  looking  towards  the 
S.W."  when  observed  from  the  sea  and  towards 
the  land  enclosing  it  [Howson].)  A  change  of 
wind  occurred  which  favoured  the  plan,  and  by 
the  aid  of  a  light  breeze  from  the  south  they  were 
sailing  towards  Phoenix  (now  Lutro),  when  a  vio-  , 
lent  N.E.  wind  [Eluioci^ydon]  came  down  from 
the  land  {Kar  avTrjs,  scil.  Kpr)T7is),  caught  the 
vessel,  and  compelled  them  to  let  her  drive  before 
the  wind.  In  this  course  they  arrived  under  the 
lee  of  a  small  island  called  Clauda,  about  20  miles 
from  Crete,  where  they  took  advantage  of  com- 
paratively smooth  water  to  get  the  boat  on  board, 
and  to  undergird,  or  flap,  the  ship.  There  was  a 
fear  lest  they  should  be  driven  upon  the  Syrtis  on 
the  coast  of  Africa,  and  they  therefore  "  lowered 
the  gear,"  or  sent  down  upon  deck  the  gear  con- 
nected with  the  fair-weather  sails,  and  stood  out  to 
sea  '*  with  storm-sails  set  and  on  the  starboiU'd 
tack"  (Smith).  The  bad  weather  continued,  and 
the  ship  was  lightened  on  the  next  day  of  her 
cargo,  on  the  third  of  her  loose  furniture  and 
tackling.  For  many  days  neither  sun  nor  stare 
were  visible  to  steer  by,  the  storm  was  violent,  and 
uU  begiui  to  despair  of  safety.  The  general  dis- 
couragement   was   aggravated    by   the    abstinence 

and  the  prophets  "  (Lutlier's  Table  Talk,  cccc.wviii.,  Engl. 
I'rans.).  Another  striking  remark  of  Luther's  may  be 
added  here:  "  Whoso  reads  I'uul  may,  with  a  safe  con- 
science, build  upon  his  words"  (Tabic  Talk,  xxiU.). 


758 


PAUL 


caused  by  the  difficulty  of  pvcpaiing  food,  and  the 
spoiling  of  it;  and  in  order  to  niise  the  spiiits  of 
the  wliole  company  Paul  stood  forth  one  morning 
to  relate  a  vision  which  had  occurred  to  him  in  the 
night.  An  angel  of  the  God  "  whose  he  was  and- 
whom  he  served  "  had  appeared  to  him  and  said, 
"  Fear  not,  Paul :  thou  must  be  brought  before 
Caesar;  and  bohold,  God  hath  given  thee  all  them 
that  sail  with  thee."  At  the  same  time  he  pre- 
dicted that  the  vessel  would  be  cast  upon  an  island 
and  be  lost. 

This  shipwreck  was  to  happen  speedily.  On  the 
fourteenth  night,  as  they  were  drilling  through  the 
sea  [Adria],  about  midnight,  the  sailors  perceived 
indications,  probably  the  roar  of  breakers,  that  land 
was  near.  Their  suspicion  was  confirmed  by  sound- 
ings. They  therefore  cast  four  anchors  out  of  the 
stern,  and  waited  anxiously  for  daylight.  After  a 
while  the  sailors  lowered  the  boat  with  the  pro- 
fesseil  purpose  of  laying  out  anchors  from  the  bow, 
but  intending  to  desert  the  ship,  which  was  in 
imminent  danger  of  being  dashed  to  pieces.  St. 
Paul,  aware  of  their  intention,  infoiTned  the  cen- 
turion and  the  soldiers  of  it,  who  took  aire,  by 
cutting  the  ropes  of  the  boat,  to  prevent  its  being 
can  ied  out.  He  then  addressed  himself  to  the  task 
of  encouraging  the  whole  company,  assuring  them 
that  their  lives  would  l)e  preserved,  and  exhorting 
them  to  refresh  themselves  quietly  after  their  long 
abstinence  with  a  good  meal.  He  set  the  example 
himself,  taking  bread,  giving  thanks  to  God,  and 
beginning  to  eat  in  presence  of  them  all.  After  a 
general  meal,  in  which  there  were  27(5  persons  to 
partake,  they  further  lightened  the  ship  by  casting 
out  what  remained  of  the  provisions  on  board  [rdv 
(TLTOv  is  commonly  understood  to  be  the  "  wheat" 
which  formed  the  cargo,  but  the  other  interpreta- 
tion seems  more  probable).  When  the  light  of  the 
dawn  revealed  the  land,  they  did  not  recognize  it, 
but  they  discovered  a  creek  with  a  smooth  beach, 
and  determined  to  run  the  ship  aground  in  it.  So 
they  cut  away  the  anchors,  unloosed  the  rudder- 
paddles,  raised  the  foresail  to  the  wind,  and  made 
for  the  beach.  When  they  came  close  to  it  they 
found  a  narrow  channel  between  the  land  on  one 
side,  which  proved  to  be  an  islet,  and  the  shore  ; 
and  at  this  point,  where  the  "  two  seas  met,"  they 
succeeded  in  driving  the  fore  part  of  the  vessel  fast 
into  the  clayey  beach.  The  stern  began  at  once  to 
go  to  pieces  under  the -action  of  the  breakers  ;  but 
escape  was  now  within  reach.  The  soldiers  sug- 
gested to  their  commander  that  the  prisoners  should 
be  effectually  prevented  from  gaining  their  liberty 
by  being  killed  ;  but  the  centurion,  desiring  to  save 
Paul,  stopped  this  ])roposition,  and  gave  orders  that 
those  who  could  swim  should  cast  themselves  first 
into  the  sea  and  get  to  land,  and  that  the  rest 
should  follow  with  the  aid  of  such  spars  as  might 
be  available.  By  this  creditable  combination  of 
humanity  and  discipline  the  deliverance  was  made  as 
complete  as  St.  Paul's  assurances  had  predicted  it 
would  be. 

The  land  on  which  they  had  been  cast  was  found 
to  belong  to  Malta.  [Melita.]  The  very  point 
of  the  stranding  is  made  out  witli  great  probability 
by  Mr.  Smith.  The  inhabitants  of  the  island  re- 
ceived the  wet  and  exhausted  voyagers  with  no 
ordinary  kindness,  and  immediately  lighted  a  fire 
to  warm  them.  This  particular  kindness  is  re- 
corded on  account  of  a  curious  incident  connected 
with  it.  The  Apostle  was  helping  to  make  the 
fire,  and  had  gathered  a  bundle  of  stioks  and  laid 


PAUL 

them  on  the  fire,  when  a  viper  came  out  of  the 
heat,  and  fastened  on  his  hand.  When  the  natives 
saw  the  creature  hanging  from  his  hand  they  be- 
lieved him  to  be  poisoned  by  the  bite,  and  said 
amongst  themselves,  "  No  doubt  this  man  is  a  mur- 
derer, whom,  though  he  has  escaped  from  the  sea, 
yet  Vengeance  suffers  not  to  live."  But  when  they 
saw  that  no  harm  came  of  it  they  changed  their 
minds  and  said  that  he  was  a  god.  This  circum- 
stance, as  well  as  the  honour  in  which  he  was  held 
by  Julius,  would  account  for  St.  Paul  being  invited 
with  some  others  to  stay  at  the  house  of  the  chief 
man  of  the  island,  whose  name  was  Publius.  By 
him  they  were  courteously  entertained  for  three 
days.  The  father  of  Publius  happened  to  be  ill  of 
fever  and  dysentery,  and  was  healed  by  St.  Paul ; 
and  when  this  was  known  many  other  sick  persons 
were  brought  to  him  and  were  healed.  So  there 
was  a  pleasant  interchange  of  kindness  and  benefits. 
The  people  of  the  island  showed  the  Apostle  and 
his  company  much  honour,  and  when  they  were 
about  to  leave  loaded  them  with  such  things  as 
they  would  want.  The  Roman  soldiers  would  carry 
with  them  to  Rome  a  deepened  impression  of  the 
character  and  the  powers  of  the  kingdom  of  which 
Paul  was  the  herald. 

After  a  three  months'  stay  in  Malta  the  soldiers 
and  their  prisoners  left  in  an  Alexandrian  ship  for 
Italy.  They  touched  at  Syracuse,  where  they 
stayed  th)-ee  days,  and  at  Rhegium,  from  which 
place  they  were  carried  with  a  fair  wind  to  Puteoli, 
where  they  left  their  ship  and  the  sea.  At  Puteoli 
they  foun<l  "  brethren,"  for  it  was  an  important 
place,  and  especially  a  chief  port  for  the  traffic 
between  Alexandria  and  Rome  ;  and  by  these  brethren 
they  were  exhorted  to  stay  awhile  with  them.  Per- 
mission seems  to  have  been  granted  by  the  cen- 
turion ;  and  whilst  they  were  spending  seven  days 
at  Puteoli  news  of  the  Apostle's  arrival  was  sent 
on  to  Rome.  The  Christians  at  Rome,  on  their 
part,  sent  forth  some  of  their  number,  who  met 
St.  Paul  at  Appii  Forum  and  Tres  Tabernae ;  and 
on  this  first  introduction  to  the  Church  at  Rome 
the  Apostle  felt  that  his  long  desire  was  fulfilled  at 
last — "  He  thanked  God  and  took  courage." 

St.  Paul  at  Rome. — On  their  arrival  at  Rome 
the  centurion  delivered  up  his  prisoners  into  the 
proper  custody,  that  of  the  praetorian  prefect.  Paul 
was  at  once  treated  with  special  consideration,  and 
was  allowed  to  dwell  by  himself  with  the  soldier 
who  guarded  him.  He  was  not  released  from  this 
galling  annoyance  of  being  constantly  chained  to  a 
keeper ;  but  every  indulgence  compatible  with  this 
necessary  restraint  was  readily  allowed  him.  He 
was  now  therefore  free  "  to  preach  the  Gospel  to 
them  that  were  at  Rome  also ;"  and  proceeded 
without  delay  to  act  upon  his  rule — "  to  the  Jew 
first."  He  invited  the  chief  persons  amongst  the 
Jews  to  come  to  him,  and  explained  to  them  that 
though  he  was  brought  to  Rome  to  answer  charges 
made  against  him  by  the  Jews  in  Palestine,  he  had 
really  done  nothing  disloyal  to  his  nation  or  the 
Law,  nor  desired  to  be  considered  as  hostile  to  his 
fellow-countrymen.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  in 
custody  for  maintaining  that  "the  hope  of  Israel" 
had  been  fulfilled.  The  Roman  Jews  replied  that 
they  had  received  no  tidings  to  his  prejudice.  The 
sect  of  which  he  had  implied  he  was  a  member 
they  knew  to  be  everywhere  spoken  against ;  but 
they  were  willing  to  hear  what  he  had  to  say.  It 
has  been  thought  strange  that  such  an  attitude 
shoukl  be  taken  towiuds  the  faith  of  Christ  by  the 


PAUL 

Jews  at  Rome,  whei'e  a  flourishing  braiiuh  of  tliu 
Church  had  existed  for  some  years;  and  an  aigii- 
ment  has  been  drawn  from  this  represeutation 
agaiust  the  authenticity  of  the  Acts.  But  it  may 
be  accounted  for  without  violence  from  what  we 
know  and  may  probably  conjecture.  (1.)  The 
Church  at  Rome  consisted  mainly  of  Gentiles, 
though  it  must  be  supposed  that  they  had  been 
previously  for  the  most  part  Jewish  proselytes. 
(2.)  The  real  Jews  at  Rome  had  been  persecute<l 
and  sometimes  entirely  banished,  and  their  unsettled 
state  may  have  checked  the  contact  and  collision 
which  would  have  been  otherwise  likely.  (3.)  St. 
Paul  was  possibly  known  by  name  to  the  Roman 
Jews,  and  curiosity  may  have  persuaded  them  to 
listen  to  him.  Even  if  he  were  not  known  to  them, 
here,  as  in  other  places,  his  courteous  bearing  and 
strong  expi'essions  of  adhesion  to  the  taith  of  his 
fathers  would  win  a  hearing  from  them.  A  day 
was  therefore  appointed,  on  which  a  large  number 
came  expressly  to  hear  him  expound  his  belief;  and 
from  morning  till  evening  he  bore  witness  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  persuading  them  concerning  Jesus, 
both  out  of  the  Law  of  Mo.^es  and  out  of  the  pro- 
phets. So  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  had  not  yet 
unlearnt  the  original  Apostolic  method.  The  hope 
of  Israel  was  still  his  subject.  But,  as  of  old,  the 
reception  of  his  message  by  the  Jews  was  not 
favourable.  They  were  slow  of  heart  to  believe, 
at  Ivome  as  at  Pisidian  Antioeh.  The  judgment 
pronounced  by  Isaiah  was  come,  Paul  testified,  upon 
the  people.  They  had  made  themselves  blind  and 
deaf  and  gross  of  heart.  Tlie  Gospel  must  be  pro- 
claimed to  the  Gentiles,  amongst  whom  it  would 
find  a  better  welcome.  He  turned  therefore  again 
to  the  Gentiles,  <and  for  two  years  he  dwelt  in  his 
own  hired  house,  and  received  all  who  came  to 
him,  proclaiming  the  kingdom  of  God  and  teaching 
concerning  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  with  all  confi- 
dence, no  man  forbidding  him. 

These  are  the  last  words  of  the  Acts.  This  his- 
tory of  the  planting  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  in 
the  world  brings  us  down  to  the  time  when  the 
Gospel  was  openly  proclaimed  by  the  great  Apostle 
in  the  Gentile  capit^al,  and  stops  short  of  the  mighty 
convulsion  which  was  shortly  to  pronounce  that  kii»ij- 
dom  established  as  the  Divine  commonwealth  for  all 
men.  The  work  of  St.  Paul  belonged  to  the  prepara- 
tory period.  He  was  not  to  live  through  the  time 
when  the  Son  of  Man  came  in  the  destruction  of  the 
Holy  City  and  Temple,  and  in  the  throes  of  the  New 
Age.  The  most  significant  part  of  his  work  was 
accomplished  when  in  the  Imperial  City  he  had 
declared  his  Gospel  "  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to 
the  Gentile."  But  his  career  is  not  abruptly  closed. 
Before  he  himself  fades  out  of  our  sight  in  the 
twilight  of  ecclesiastical  tradition,  we  have  letters 
written  by  himself,  which  contribute  some  parti- 
culars to  his  external  biography,  and  give  us  a 
far  more  precious  insight  into  his  convictions  and 
sympathies. 

Period  of  the  Later  Epistles. — Wo  might  natu- 
rally expect  that  St.  Paul,  tieil  down  to  one  spot  at 
Rome,  and  yet  free  to  speak  and  write  to  whom  he 
pleased,  would  pour  out  in  Letteis  his  love  and 
anxiety  for  distant  Churches.  It  seems  entirely 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  author  of  the  extant 
Epistles  wrote  veiy  many  which  are  not  extant. 
To  suppose  this,  aids  us  perhaps  a  little  in  the  dif- 
ficult endeavour  to  coiitemijlate  St.  Paid's  Epistles 
as  living  Letters.  It  is  dillicult  enough  to  connect 
in  our  minds  the  writiw/  of  these  E|)istlcs  with  the 


PAUL 


r5'j 


external  conditions  of  a  luunan  lifii  ;  to  think  of 
Paul,  with  his  incessant  chain  and  scddicr,  sitting 
down  to  write  or  dictate,  and  producing  for  the 
world  an  inspired  Ep'stle.  But  it  is  almost  more 
difficult,  to  imagine  the  Christian  communities  of 
those  days,  samples  of  the  population  of  i\Iacedonia 
or  Asia  Minor,  receiving  and  i-eadiug  such  Letters. 
But  the  Letters  were  actually  written ;  and  they 
must  of  necessity  be  a(x-epted  as  representing  the 
kind  of  communications  which  marked  the  inter- 
course of  the  Apostle  and  his  fellow-Christians. 
When  he  wrote,  he  wrote  out  of  the  fullness  of  his 
heart ;  and  the  ideas  on  which  he  dwelt  were  those 
of  his  daily  and  hourly  thoughts.  To  that  impri- 
sonment to  which  St.  Luke  has  introduced  us, — the 
imprisonment  which  lasted  for  such  a  tedious  time, 
though  tempered  by  much  indulgence, — belongs  the 
noble  group  of  Letters  to  Philemon,  to  the  Colos- 
sians,  to  the  Ephesians,  and  to  the  Philippians. 
The  thi-ee  former  of  these  were  written  at  one  time 
and  sent  by  the  same  messengers.  Whether  that 
to  the  Philippians  was  written  before  or  after  these, 
we  cannot  detennine ;  but  the  tone  of  it  seems  to 
imply  that  a  crisis  was  approaching,  and  therefore 
it  is  commonly  regarded  as  the  latest  of  the  four. 

St.  Paul  had  not  himself  founded  the  Church  at 
Colossae.  But  during  his  iinprisonment  at  Some 
he  had  for  an  associate — he  calls  him  a  "  fellow-pri- 
soner "  (Philemon  23) — a  chief  teacher  of  the  Colos- 
sian  Church  named  Epaphras.  He  had  thus  become 
deeply  interested  in  the  condition  of  that  Church. 
It  happened  that  at  the  same  time  a  slave  named 
Onesimus  came  within  the  reach  of  St.  Paul's  teach- 
ing, and  was  converted  into  a  zealous  and  useful 
Christian.  This  Onesimus  had  run  away  from  his 
master ;  and  his  master  was  a  Christian  of  Colossae. 
St.  Paul  determined  to  send  back  Onesimus  to  his 
master ;  and  with  him  he  determined  also  to  send 
his  old  companion  Tychicus  (Acts  xx.  4),  as  a  mes- 
senger to  the  Church  at  Colossae  and  to  neighbour- 
ing Churches.  This  was  the  occasion  of  the  letter 
to  Philemon,  which  commended  Onesimus,  in  lan- 
guage of  singular  tenderness  and  delicacy,  as  a 
fiiithfid  and  beloved  brother,  to  his  injured  master  ; 
and  also  of  the  two  letters  to  the  Colossians  and 
Ephesians.  That  to  the  Colossians,  being  drawn 
forth  by  the  most  special  circumstances,  may  be 
reasonably  supposed  to  have  been  written  first.  It 
was  intended  to  guard  the  Church  at  Colossae  from 
t'idse  teaching,  which  the  Apostle  knew  to  be  infest- 
ing it.  For  the  characteristics  of  this  P^pistle,  we 
must  refer  to  the  special  article.  [Colossians, 
EiMSTLic  TO  THK.]  The  end  of  it  (iv.  7-18)  names 
several  friends  who  were  with  St.  Paid  at  Rome,  as 
Aristarchus,  Marcus  (St.  Mark),  Epaphras,  Luke, 
and  Demas.  For  the  writing  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  there  seems  to  have  been  no  more  special 
occasion,  than  that  Tychicus  was  passing  through 
Ephosus.  [Ephesians,  Epistle  to  the.]  The 
highest  characteristic  which  these  two  Epistles,  loi 
the  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  have  in  common,  is 
that  of  a  presentation  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
fuller  and  clearer  than  we  find  in  previous  writings, 
as  the  Head  of  creation  and  of  mankind.  -Ml  things 
created  through  Christ,  all  things  coherent  in  Him, 
all  things  reconciled  to  the  Father  by  Him,  the  eter- 
nal purpose  to  restore  and  complete  all  things  in 
Him, — such  are  the  ideas  which  grew  richer  and 
more  distinct  in  the  mind  of  the  Apostle  as  he  medi- 
tated on  the(iospel  wliich  ho  had  been  preaching, 
and  the  truths  imphed  in  It.  In  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians  this  Divine  Headship  of  Christ  is  main- 


760 


PAUL 


taiiied  as  the  safeguard  agaiust  the  fancies  which 
filled  the  heavens  with  secondaiy  divinities,  and 
which  laid  down  rules  for  an  artificial  sanctity  of 
men  upon  the  earth.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  the  eternity  and  universality  of  God's  redeem- 
ing purpose  in  Christ,  and  the  gathering  of  men 
unto  Him  as  His  members,  are  set  forth  as  gloriously 
revealed  in  th^  Gospel.  In  both,  the  application  of 
the  truth  concerning  Christ  as  the  Image  of  God 
and  the  Head  of  men  to  the  common  relations  of 
human  life  is  dwelt  upon  in  detail. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  resembles  the 
Second  to  the  Corinthians  in  tlie  effusion  of  personal 
feeling,  but  differs  from  it  in  the  absence  of  all  sore- 
ness. The  Christians  at  Philijipi  had  regarded  the 
Apostle  with  love  and  reverence  from  the  beginning, 
and  had  given  him  many  proofs  of  their  affection. 
They  had  now  sent  him  a  contribution  towards  his 
maintenance  at  Rome,  such  as  we  must  suppose  him 
to  have  received  from  time  to  time  for  the  expenses 
of  "  his  own  liired  house."  The  bearer  of  this  con- 
tribution was  Epaphroditus,  an  ardent  friend  and 
fellow-labourer  of  >St.  Paul,  who  had  fallen  sick  on 
the  journey  or  at  Rome  (Phil.  ii.  27).  The  Epistle 
was  written  to  be  conveyed  by  Epaphroditus  on  his 
retiu-n,  and  to  express  the  joy  with  which  St.  Paul 
had  .I'eceived  the  kindness  of  the  Philippians.  He 
dwells  therefore  upon  their  fellowship  in  the  work 
of  spreading  the  Gospel,  a  work  in  which  he  was 
even  now  labouring,  and  scarcely  with  the  less  effect 
on  account  of  his  bonds.  His  imprisonment  had 
made  him  known,  and  had  given  him  fruitful  oppor- 
tunities of  declaring  his  Gospel  amongst  the  Imjie- 
rial  guard  (i.  13),  and  even  in  the  household  of  the 
Caesar  (iv.  22).  He  professes  his  undiminished 
sense  of  the  glory  of  following  Christ,  and  his  expec- 
tation of  au  approaching  time  in  which  the  Lord 
Jesus  should  be  revealed  from  heaven  as  a  deliverer. 
There  is  a  gracious  tone  running  through  this 
Epistle,  expressive  of  humility,  devotion,  kindness, 
delight  in  all  things  fair  and  good,  to  which  the 
favourable  circumstances  undei'  which  it  was  written 
gave  a  natural  occasion,  and  which  helps  us  to 
imderstivnd  the  kind  of  ripening  which  had  taken 
place  in  the  spirit  of  the  writer.  [Philippians, 
Epistle  to  the.] 

In  this  Epistle  St.  Paul  twice  expresses  a  con- 
fident hoj)e  that  before  long  he  may  be  able  to  visit 
the  Philippians  in  person  (i.  25,  oJSa  k.t.A.  ii.  24, 
Tteiroida  k.t.\.').  Whether  this  hope  was  fulfilled 
or  not,  belongs  to  a  question  which  now  presents 
itself  to  us,  and  which  has  been  the  occasion  of 
much  controversy.  According  to  the  general  opi- 
nion, the  ."Apostle  was  liberated  from  his  imprison- 
ment and  left  Rome,  soon  alter  the  writing  of  the 
letter  to  the  Pliilippians,  spent  some  time  in  visits 
to  Greece,  Asia  Minor,  and  Spain,  returned  again  as 
a  prisoner  to  Rome,  and  was  put  to  death  there. 
In  opposition  to  this  view  it  is  maintained  by  some, 
tliat  he  was  never  liberated,  but  was  put  to  death 
at  Rome  at  au  earlier  period  than  is  commonly  suj)- 
posed.  The  arguments  adduced  in  favour  of  the 
common  view  are,  (1.)  the  hopes  expressed  by  St. 
Paul  of  \-isiting  Philippi  (already  named)  and  Colossae 
(Philemon  22)  ;  (2.)  a  number  of  allusions  in  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  their  general  character  ;  and 
(3.)  the  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  tradition.  The 
argimients  in  tavour  of  the  single  impi-isonment 
appear  to  be  wholly  negative,  and  to  aim  simjily  at 
showing  that  there  is  no  proof  of  a  liberation,  or 
departure  from  Rome.  It  is  contended  that  St. 
Paul's  cxi)ectations  were  not  iilways  realized,  and 


PAUL 

that  the  passages  from  Philemon  and  Philippians 
are  effectually  neutralized  by  Acts  xx.  25,  "  1  know 
that  ye  all  (at  Ephesus),  shall  see  my  face  no 
more ;"  inasmuch  as  the  supporters  of  the  ordinaiy 
view  hold  that  St.  Paul  went  again  to  Ephesus. 
This  is  a  fair  answer.  The  argument  from  the 
Pastoral  P^pistles  is  met  most  simply  by  a  denial  of 
their  genuineness.  The  tradition  of  ecclesiastical 
antiquity  is  affirmed  to  have  no  real  weight. 

The  decision  must  turn  mainly  upon  the  view 
taWen  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  It  is  true  that  there 
are  many  critics,  including  Wieseler  and  Dr.  David- 
son, who  admit  the  genuineness  of  these  Epistles, 
and  yet,  by  referring  1  Timothy  and  Titus  to  an 
earlier  period,  and  by  strained  explanations  of  the 
allusions  in  2  Timothy,  get  rid  of  the  evidence  they 
are  generally  understood  to  give  in  favour  of  a 
second  imprisonment.  The  voyages  required  by  the 
two  foiTuer  Epistles,  and  the  writing  cf  them,  are 
placed  within  the  three  years  spent  chiefiy  at  Ephe- 
sus (Acts  XX.  31).  But  the  hypothesis  of  voyages 
during  that  period  not  recorded  by  St.  Luke  is  just 
as  arbitrary  as  that  of  a  release  from  Rome,  which 
is  oljjected  to  expressly  because  it  is  arbitrary ;  and 
such  a  distriljutiou  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  is  shown 
by  overwhelming  evidence  to  be  untenable.  The 
whole  question  is  discussed  in  a  m;isterly  and  de- 
cisive manner  by  Alford  in  his  Piolegomena  to  the 
Pastoral  Epistles.  If,  however,  these  Epistles  are 
not  accepted  as  genuine,  the  main  ground  for  the 
belief  in  a  second  imprisonment  is  cut  away.  For 
a  special  consideration  of  the  Epistles,  let  the  reader 
refer  to  the  articles  on  TiMOTilv  and  TiTUS. 

The  difficulties  which  have  induced  such  critics 
as  De  Wette  and  Ewald  to  reject  these  Epistles,  are 
not  inconsiderable,  and  will  force  themselves  upon 
the  attention  of  the  careful  student  of  St.  Paid. 
But  they  are  overpowered  by  the  much  greater  ditfi- 
culties  attending  any  hypothesis  which  assumes 
these  Epistles  to  be  spurious.  We  are  obliged  there- 
fore to  recognize  the  modifications  of  St.  Paul's 
style,  the  developments  in  the  histoiy  of  the  Church, 
and  the  movements  of  various  persons,  which  have 
appeared  suspicious  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and 
Titus,  as  nevertheless  historically  true.  And  then 
without  encroaching  on  the  domain  of  conjecture, 
we  draw  the  Ibllowing  conclusions.  (1.)  St.  Paul 
must  have  left  Rome,  and  visited  Asia  Minor  and 
Greece;  for  he  says  to  Timothy  (1  Tim.  i.  3),  "I 
besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus,  when  1  was 
setting  out  for  Macedonia."  After  being  once  at 
Ephesus,  he  was  pui'posiug  to  go  there  again  (1  Tim. 
iv.  13),  and  he  spent  a  considerable  time  at  Ephesus 
(2  Tim.  i.  18).  (2.)  He  paid  a  visit  to  Crete,  and 
left  Titus  to  organize  Churches  there  (Titus  i.  .5). 
He  was  intending  to  spend  a  winter  at  one  of  the 
places  named  Nicopolis  (Tit.  iii.  12).  (3.)  He  tra- 
velled by  Miletus  (2  Tim.  iv.  20),  Troas  (2  Tim. 
iv.  13),  where  he  left  a  cloak  or  case,  and  some 
books,  and  Corinth  (2  Tim.  iv.  20).  (4.)  He  is  a 
pi'isoner  at  Rome,  "  sufi'ering  unto  bonds  as  an  evil- 
doer "  (2  Tim.  ii.  9),  and  expecting  to  be  soon  con- 
demned to  death  (2  Tim.  iv.  6).  At  this  time  he 
felt  deserted  and  solitary,  having  only  Luke  of  his 
old  associates,  to  keep  him  company  ;  and  he  was 
very  anxious  that  Timothy  should  come  to  him 
without  delav  fiom  Ephesus,  and  bring  Mark  with 
him  (2  Tim."i.  15,  iv.  IG,  9-12). 

These  facts  may  be  amplified  by  probable  addi- 
tions from  conjecture  and  trailition.  There  ai-e 
strong  reasons  for  placing  the  three  Epistles  at  as 
advanced  a  date  as  possible,  and  not  tar  from  one 


PAUL 

another.     The  peculiarities  of  style  and  diction  by 
which  these  are  distinguished  from  all  his  former 
Epistles,  the  affectionate  anxieties  of  an  old  man  and 
the  glances  frequently  thrown  back  on  earlier  times 
and  scenes,  the  disposition  to  be  hortatoiy  rather  than 
speculative,  the  references  to  a  more  com])lete  and 
settled  organization  of  the  Church,  the  signs  of  a 
condition  tending  to  mor;d  corruption,  and  resem- 
bling that  described  in  the  apocalyptic  letters  to  the 
Seven   Churches — would   incline    us  to  ^idopt  the 
latest  date  which  has  been  suggested  for  the  deiith 
of  St.  Paul,  so  as  to  interpose  as  much  time  as  pos- 
sible between  the  Pastoral  Epistles  and  the  former 
group.     Now  the  earliest  authorities  for  the  ilate  of 
St.  Paul's  death  are  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  wlio  place 
it,  the  one  {Chronic.  Ann.  2083)  in  the  loth,  the 
other  {Cat.  Script.  Eccl.  "  Paulus")  iu  the  14th 
year  of  Nero.     These  dates  would  allow  some  four 
or  five  years  between  the  First  Imprisoiniient  and 
tiie  Second.     E)uring  these  years,  according  to  the 
general  belief  of  the  early  Church,  St.  Paul  accom- 
plished his  old  design  (Rom.  .\v.  28)  and  visited 
Spain.     Ewald,  who  denies  tlie  genuineness  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  with  it  the  journeyings  in 
Greece  and  Asia  Minor,  believes  that  St.  Paul  was 
liberated  and  paid  this  visit  to  Spain  (Gcschichto, 
vi.  pp.  G21,  631,  632);  yielding  upon  this  point 
to   the   testimony  of  tradition.      The    first  writer 
quoted   in   support    of   the  journey   to    Spain    is 
one  whose   evidence  would  indeed   be   irresistible, 
if  the   language   in   which     it   is  expressed    were 
less  obscure.      Clement  of  Rome,  in  a   hortatory 
and  ratlier  rhetorical  passage  {Ep.  1  ad  Cor.  c.  5) 
refers  to  St.  Paul  as  an  example  of  jiatieuce,  and 
mentions  that  he  preached  €v  re  tj;  aroToAj?  koI 
iv  T-p   Sv(Tei,  and  that  before  his   martyrdom   he 
went  (irl   rd  repfxa  ttjs  Svffecas.     It  is  probable, 
but  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  certain,  that  by  this 
expression,  "  tlie  goal  of  the  west,"  Clement  w;us  de- 
scribing Spain,   or  some  country  yet  more  to  the 
west.     The  next  testimony  labours  under  a  some- 
what similar  difiiculty  from  the  imperfection  of  the 
text,  but  it  at  least  names  unambiguously  a  "  pro- 
fi'ctionem  Paidi  ab  urbe  ad  Spaniam  proHciscentis." 
This  is  from  Muratori's   Fragment  on  the  Canon 
(llouth,  Bel.  Sac.  iv.  p.  1-12).     (See  the   passage 
quoted  and  discussed  in  Wieseler,   Chron.  Apost. 
Zcit.  p.  530,  iSic,  or  AU'ord,  iii.  p.  93.)    Afterwards 
Chrysostom  says  simj)ly,   Mera  t5    yevecrOai   iy 
'PoDlxfj,  iraKiv  fls  t^v  ^iraviav  airrjABfy  (on  2  Tim. 
iv.  20);   and  Jerome  speaks  of  St.  I'aul  as  set  free 
by  Nero,  that  ho  might  preach  the  (Jospel  of  Christ 
"  in   Occidentis  quoque    partibus "    {Cat.    Script. 
Eccl.  "Paulus").  Against  these  assertions  nothing 
is  produced,  except  the  absence  of  allusions  to  a 
journey  to  Spain  iu  passages  from  some  of  the  lathers 
where  such  allusions  might  more  or  less  be  expected. 
Dr.  Davidson  {Intrvd.  New  Test.  iii.  15,  84) -gives 
a  long  list  of  critics  who  believe  in  St.  Paul's  re- 
lease from  the  first  imprisonment.     Wieseler  (p. 
521)  mentions  some  of  these,  with  references,  and 
adils  some  of  the  more  eminent  (lei'man  critics  who 
believe  with  him  in  but  one  imprisonment.     These 
include  Schrader,  Hemscn,  Winer,  ;uid  liaur.     The 
only  English  name  of  any  weight  to  be  added  to 
this  list  is  that  of  Dr.  Davidson. 

We  conclude  then,  that  after  a  wearing  impri- 
sonment of  two  years  or  more  at  Rome,  St.  Paul 

1'  Kor  'I'nu  Ki'isir-K  to  the  Hkbbkws,  see  llio  arlicU' 
imiler  that  Iiead.  'I'lie  cluse  ol)servalum  of  Iho  life  of 
St   Paul  Aould  lead,  we  Uiiiik,  lo  tlie  couthisiuii,  that  llie 


PAUL 


761 


was  set  free,  and  spent  some  years  iu  various  jour- 
neyings eastwards  and  westwards.  Towards  the 
close  of  this  time  he  pours  out  the  warnings  of  his 
less  vigorous  but  still  brave  and  faithful  spirit  in 
the  Letters  to  Timothy  and  Titus.  The  first  to 
Timothy  and  that  to  Titus  were  evidently  written  at 
very  nearly  the  same  time.  After  these  were 
written,  he  was  apprehended  again  and  sent  to 
Rome.  As  an  eminent  Christian  teacher  St.  Paul 
was  now  in  a  tar  more  dangerous  position  than  when 
he  was  first  brought  to  Rome.  The  Christians  had 
been  exposed  to  popular  odium  by  the  talse  charge 
of  being  concerned  in  the  great  Neronian  confiagra- 
tion  of  the  city,  and  had  been  subjected  to  a  most 
cruel  persecution.  The  Apostle  appears  now  to 
have  been  treated,  not  as  an  honourable  state- pri- 
soner, but  as  a  felon  (2  Tim.  ii.  9).  But  he  was 
at  least  allowed  to  write  this  Second  Letter  to  his 
"  dearly  beloved  son  "  Timothy ;  and  though  he  ex- 
presses a  confident  expectation  of  his  speedy  death, 
he  yet  thought  it  sutKciently  probable  that  it  might 
be  delayed  for  some  time,  to  warrant  him  in  urging 
Timothy  to  come  to  him  from  Ephesus.  Mean- 
while, though  he  felt  his  isolation,  he  was  not  in 
the  least  daunted  by  his  danger.  He  was  more 
than  ready  to  die  (iv.  6),  and  had  a  sustaining 
experience  of  not  being  deserted  by  his  Lord.  Once 
already,  in  this  second  imprisonment,  he  had  ap- 
peared before  the  authorities ;  and  "  the  Lord  then 
stood  by  him  and  strengthened  him,"  and  gave  him 
a  favourable  opportunity  for  the  one  thing  always 
nearest  to  his  heart,  the  public  <leclaration  of  his 
Gospel. 

This  Epistle.P  surely  no  unworthy  utterance  at 
such  an  age  and  in  such  an  hour  even  of  a  St.  Paul, 
brings  us,  it  may  well  be  presumed,  close  to  the 
end  of  his  life.  For  what  remains,  we  have  the 
concui-rent  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  that 
he  was  beheaded  at  Rome,  about  the  same  time 
that  St.  Peter  was  crucified  there.  The  earliest 
allusion  to  the  death  of  St.  Paul  is  in  that  sentence 
from  Clemens  Romanus,  already  quoted,  iir\  rb 
Tepjxa  rrjs  Svffeais  i\diiiv  Koi  fxaprvprjcras  iirl  tocv 
rjyov/xfvaiv,  ovtcos  airyiWdyr]  rov  Kdcfiov,  which 
just  fails  of  giving  us  any  particulars  upon  which 
we  can  conclusively  rely.  The  next  authorities  are 
those  quoted  by  Eusebius  in  his  If.  E.  ii.  25.  Dio- 
nysius,  bishop  of  Corinth  (A. I).  170),  says  that  Peter 
and  Paul  went  to  Italy  and  taught  there  together, 
and  suH'ered  martyrdom  about  the  same  time.  This, 
like  most  of  the  statements  relating  to  the  death  of 
St.  Paul,  is  mixed  up  with  the  tradition,  with  which 
we  are  not  here  immediately  concerned,  of  the  work 
of  St.  Peter  at  Rome.  Cains  of  Rome,  supposed  to 
be  writing  within  the  2nd  century,  names  the  grave 
of  St.  Peter  on  the  Vatican,  and  that  of  St.  Paul 
on  the  Ostian  way.  Eusebius  himself  entirely 
adopts  the  tradition  that  St.  Paul  was  beheaded 
under  Nero  at  Rome.  Amongst  other  early  testi- 
monies, we  have  that  of  Tertulliau,  who  s;iys  {Do 
Pracscr.  Ilueret.  'M)  that  at  Rome  "  Petrus  pas- 
sioni  Dominicae  adequatur,  Paulus  Johannis  [the 
Baptist]  cxitu  corouatur  ;"  and  that  of  Jerome  {Cat. 
Sc.  Paulus),  "  Hie  ergo  14»»  Xeronis  anno  (eodem 
die  quo  Petrus)  Romae  pro  Christo  capite  truncatus 
sepultiisque  est,  in  via  Ostiensi."  It  would  be 
useless  to  enumerate  further  testimonies  of  what  is 
undisputed. 

thoughts  and  beliefs  of  thiit  Kpisllc,  to  whomsuovor  the 
(■omposiliiiii  of  It  he  atlrihiiled,  are  by  no  nieiuui  alien  to 

the  ApusUc's  lialiils  of  mind. 


762 


PAUL 


It  would  also  bo  beyond  the  scope  of  this  article 
to  attempt  to  exhibit  the  traces  of  St.  Paul's  Apo- 
stolic work  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  But  there 
is  one  indication,  so  exceptional  as  io  deserve  special 
mention,  which  shows  that  the  difficulty  of  under- 
standing the  Gospel  of  St.  Paul  and  of  reconciling 
it  with  a  true  Judaisjn  w.is  very  early  felt.  This 
is  in  the  Apocryphal  work  called  the  Clementines 
{to,  KATj/ieVria),  supposed  to  be  written  before  the 
end  of  the  2nd  century.  These  curious  composi- 
tions contain  direct  assaults  (for  though  the  name 
is  not  given,  the  references  are  plain  and  undis- 
guised), upon  the  authority  and  the  character  of  St. 
Paul.  St.  Peter  is  represented  as  the  true  Apostle, 
of  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  of  the  Jews,  and  St.  Paul 
as  6  ex^pbs  &vdp<i>Tros,  who  opposes  St.  Peter  and 
St.  James.  The  portions  of  the  Clementines  which 
illustrate  the  writer's  view  of  St.  Paul  will  be 
found  in  Stanley's  Corinthians  (Introd.  to  2  Cor.)  ; 
and  an  account  of  the  whole  work,  with  references 
to  the  treatises  of  Schliemann  and  Baur,  in  Gieseler, 
Eccl.  Hist.  i.  §58. 

Chronolo'jij  of  St.  PauVs  Life. — It  is  usual  to 
distinguish  between  the  internal  or  absolute,  and 
the  external  or  relative,  chronology  of  St.  Paul's 
life.     The  former  is  that  which  we  have  hitherto 
followed.     It  remains   to   mention   the   points   at 
•  which  the  N.  T.  history  of  the  Apostle  comes  into 
contact  with  the  outer  history  of  the  world.    There 
are  two  principal  events  which  serve  as  fixed  dates 
for  determining  the  Pauline  chronology — the  death 
of  Herod  Agrippa,  and  the  accession  of  Festus  ;  and 
of  these  the  latter  is  by  far  the  more  important. 
The  time  of  this  being  ascertained,  the  particulars 
given  in  the  Acts  enable  us  to  date  a  considerable 
portion  of  St.  Paul's  life.     Now  it  has  been  proved 
almost  to  certainty  that  Felix  was  recalled  from 
Judaea  and  succeeded  by  F'estus  in  the  year  60 
(Wieseler,  pp.  66,  &c. ;  Conybeare  and  Howson,  ii. 
note  C  ).     In  the  autumn,  then,  of  a.d.  60  St.  Paul 
left  Caesarea.     In  the  spring  of  61  he  arrived  at 
Rome.     There  he  lived  two  year's,  that  is,  till  the 
spring  of  63,  with  much  freedom  in  his  own  hired 
house.     After  this  we  depend  upon  conjecture;  but 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  give  us  reasons,  as  we  have 
seen,  for  deferring  the  Apostle's  death  until  67,  with 
Eusebi\is,  or  68,  with  Jerome.     Similarly  we  can 
go  backwards  from  a.d.   60.      St.  Paul  was  two 
years  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.   27)  ;    therefore  he 
arrived  at  Jerusalem  on  his  last  visit  by  the  Pente- 
cost of  58.     Before  this  he  had  wintered  at  Coiinth 
(Acts  XX.   2,  3),    having   gone   from    Ephesus   to 
Greece.     He  left  I^phesus,  then,  in  the  latter  part 
of  57,   and   as    he    stayed    3    years    at    Ephesus 
(Acts  XX.  31),  he  must  have  come  thither  in  54. 
Previously  to  this  journey  he  had  spent  "  some 
time"  at  Antioch  (Acts  xviii.  23),  and  our  chro- 
nology becomes  indeterminate.     We  can  only  add 
together  the  time  of  a  hasty  visit  to  Jerusalem, 
the  travels  of  the  gi-eat  second  missionary  journey, 
which  included  1^  year  at  Corinth,  another  inde- 
terminate stay  at  Antioch,  the  important  third  visit 
to  Jerusalem,  another  "  long"  lesidence  at  Antioch 
(Acts  xiv.  28),  the  first  missionary  journey,  again 
an  indeterminate  stay  at  Antioch  (Acts  xii.  25, — 
until  we  come  to  the  second  visit  to  Jerusalem, 
which  nearly  synchronised  with  the  death  of  Herod 
Agrippa,  in  A.D.  44  (Wieseler,  p.  130).     Within 
this  interval  of  some  10  years  the  most  important 
date  to  fix  is  that  of  the  third  visit  to  Jerusalem ; 
and  there  is  a  great  concurrence  of  the  bast  autho- 
rities   in    placing    this   visit   in   either  50  or  51. 


PAUIi 

St.  Paul  himself  (Gal.  ii.  1)  places  this  visit  "  14 
years  after"  either  his  conversion  or  the  first  visit. 
In  the  former  case  we  have  37  or  38  for  tlie  date 
of  the  conversion.  The  conversion  was  followed 
by  3  years  (Gal.  i.  18)  spent  in  Arabia  and  Da- 
mascus, and  ending  with  the  first  visit  to  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  the  space  between  the  first  visit  (40 
or  4 1 )  and  the  second  (44  or  45)  is  filled  up  by  an 
indeterminate  time,  presumably  2  or  3  years,  at 
Tarsus  (Acts  ix.  30),  and  lyear  at  Antioch  (Acts 
xi.  26).  The  date  of  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen 
can  onlv  be  conjectured,  and  is  very  variously 
placed  between  a.d.  30  and  the  year  of  St.  Paul's 
eon  version.  In  the  account  of  the  death  of  Stephen 
St.  Paul  is  called  "a  young  man"  (Acts  vii.  58). 
It  is  not  improbable  therefore  that  he  was  born 
between  A.D.  0  and  a.d.  5,  so  that  he  might  be 
past  60  years  of  age  when  he  calls  himself  "  Paul 
the  aged  "  in  Philemon  9.  Jlore  detailed  conjec- 
tures will  be  found  in  almost  every  writer  on  St. 
Paul.  Comparative  chronological  tables  (showing 
the  opinions  of  30  and  34  critics)  are  given  by 
Wieseler  and  Davidson ;  tables  of  events  only  by 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  Alford,  Jowett,  and  many 
others. 

Personal  Appearance  and  Character  of  St.  Paul. 
— We  have  no  very  trustworthy  sources  of  inform- 
ation as  to  the  personal  appearance  of  St.  Paul. 
Those  which  we  have  are  refen-ed  to  and  quoted 
in  Conybeare  and  Hoivson  (i.  ch.  7,  end).     They  are 
the  early  pictures  and  mosaics  described   by  Mrs, 
Jameson,  and  passages  fi'om  Malalas,  Nicephorus, 
and  the  apocryphal  Acta  Pauli  ct  Theclae  (con- 
cerning which  see  also  Conybeare  and  Howson,  i. 
197).     They  all  agree  in  ascribing  to  the  Apostle 
a  short  stature,  a  long  face  with  high  forehead,  an 
aquiline  nose,  close  and  prominent  eyebrows.    Other 
characteristics  mentioned  are  baldness,  gray  eyes, 
a  clear  complexion,  and  a  winning  expression.     Of 
his  temperament  and  character  St.  Paul  is  himself 
the  best  painter.     His  speeches  and  letters  convey 
to  us,  as  we  read  them,  the  truest  impressions  of 
those  qualities  which  helped  to  make  him  The  great 
Apostle.     We  perceive  the  warmth  and  ardour  of 
his  nature,   his  deeply  aftectionate  disposition,  the 
tenderness  of  his  sense  of  honour,  the  courtesy  and 
personal  dignity  of  his  bearing,  his  perfect  fearless- 
ness, his  heroic  endurance ;   we  perceive  the  rare 
combination  of  subtlety,  tenacity,  and  versatility  in 
his  intellect ;  we  perceive  also  a  practical  wisdom 
which  we  should  have  associated  with  a  cooler  tem- 
perament, and  a  tolerance  which  is  seldom  united 
with  such  impetuous  convictions.    And  tlie  principle 
which  harmonised  all  these  endowments  and  directed 
them  to  a  practical   end    was,   beyond  dispute,  a 
knowledge  of  Jesus  Christ   in   the  Divine  Spirit. 
Personal  allegiance  to  Christ  as  to  a  living  Jlaster, 
with  a  growing  insight  into  the  relation  of  Christ 
to  each  man  and  to  the  world,  carried  the  .•Apostle 
forwards  on  a  straight  course  through  every  vicissi- 
tude of  personal   foituues  and  amidst  the  various 
habits  of  thought  which  he  had  to  encounter.     The 
conviction  that  he  had  been  entrusted  with  a  Gospel 
concerning  a  Lord  and  Deliverer  of  men  was  what 
sustained  and  purified  his  love  for  his  own  people, 
whilst  it  created  in  him  such  a  love  for  mankind 
that  he  only  knew  himself  as  the  servant  of  others 
for  Christ's  sake. 

A  remarkable  attempt  has  recently  been  made  by 
Professor  Jowett,  in  his  Commentary  on  some  of 
the  Epistles,  to  qualify  what  he  considers  to  be  the 
blind  and  undiscriminating  admiration  of  St.  Paul, 


PAUL 

by  representing  him  as  having  been,  with  all  his 
excellences,  a  man  "  whose  appearance  and  dis- 
course made  an  impression  of  feebleness,"  "  out  of 
harmony  with  life  and  nature,"  a  confused  thinker, 
uttering  himself  "in  broken  words  and  hesitating 
forms  of  speech,  witir  no  beauty  or  comeliness  of 
style,"  and  so  undecided  in  his  Christian  belief  that 
he  was  preaching,  iu  the  14th  year  after  his  con- 
version, a  Gospel  concerning  Christ  which  he  him- 
self, in  four  years  more,  confessed  to  have  been 
carnal.  In  these  paradoxical  views,  however.  Pro- 
fessor Jowett  stands  almost  alone :  the  result  of  the 
freest,  as  of  the  most  reverent,  of  the  numerous  recent 
studies  of  St.  Paul  and  his  works  (amongst  which 
Professor  Jowett's  own  Commentary  is  one  of  the 
most  interesting)  having  been  only  to  add  an  inde- 
pendent tribute  to  the  ancient  admiration  of  Chris- 
tendom. Those  who  judge  St.  Paul  as  they  would 
judge  any  other  remarkable  man  confess  him  unani- 
mously to  have  been  "  one  of  the  greatest  spirits  of 
all  time  ;"  whilst  those  who  believe  him  to  have  been 
appointed  bv  the  Lord  of  mankind,  and  inspired  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  to  do  a  work  in  the  world  of  almost 
unequalled  importance,  are  lost  iu  wonder  as  they 
study  the  gifts  with  which  he  was  endowed  for 
that  work,  and  the  sustained  devotion  with  which 
he  gave  himself  to  it. 

Modern  Authorities. — It  has  not  been  thought 
necessaiy  to  load  the  pages  of  this  article  with 
references  to  the  authors  about  to  be  mentioned, 
because  in  each  of  them  it  is  easy  for  the  student 
to  turn  at  once  to  any  part  of  St.  Paul's  life  or 
writings  with  regard  to  which  he  may  desire  to 
consult  them.  A  very  long  catalogue  might  be 
made  of  authors  who  have  written  on  St.  Paul ; 
amongst  whom  the  following  may  be  recommended 
as  of  some  independent  value.  In  English,  the 
work  of  Messrs.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  on  the 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paid,  is  at  once  the  most 
comprehensive  and  the  most  popular.  Amongst 
Commentaries,  those  of  Professor  Jowett  on  the 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  and  l!o- 
mans,  and  of  Professor  Stanley  on  the  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians,  aie  expressly  designed  to  throw 
light  on  the  Apostle's  character  and  work.  The 
general  Commentaries  of  Dean  Alfbrd  and  Dr. 
Wordsworth  include  abundant  matter  upon  every- 
thing relating  to  rJt.  Paul.  So  does  Dr.  Davidson's 
Litrodaction  to  the  New  Testament,  which  gives 
also  in  great  profusion  the  opinions  of  all  former 
critics,  English  and  foreign.  Paley's  well-known 
florae  I'aulinae ;  Mr.  Smith's  work  on  the  Voijage 
and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul ;  Mr.  Tate's  Continuous 
Ilistorji  of  St.  Paul ;  and  Mr.  Lewin's  St.  Paid, 
are  exclusively  devoted  to  Pauline  subjects.  Of 
the '  older  works  by  commentators  and  others, 
which  are  thoroughly  sif'ted  by  more  recent 
writere,  it  may  be  sulllcient  to  mention  a  book 
which  had  a  great  reputation  in  the  last  century, 
that  of  Lord  Lyttelton  ou  the  Conversion  of  St. 
Paul.  Amongst  German  critics  and  historians  the 
following  may  be  named : — Ewald,  in  his  Geschichte 
des  Volhes  Israel,  vol.  vi.,  and  his  Sendschreiben 
des  Apostcls  Paulus ;    Wieseler,    Chronologic  des 


PEACOCKS 


76i 


"  "nb-  '^■"""^  "=]2D,  "enclose"  (Qes.  952);  o-ictji^ ;  to- 
bernaculniii. 

^  nSP,  from  same  root;  o-kijitj  ;  tabemaculuni;  also 
2  Sam.  xxll.  VI,  huibtdum.  In  1  K.  xx.  16,  "ZokxwO, 
umlyracidiim. 

'  -\)lZlV.  ;md  Keri  T'^SK'  (Gcs.  110l>)- 


Apostolischen  Zeitalters,  which  is  uni\-ersally  ac- 
cepted as  the  best  work  on  the  chronology  of  St. 
Paul's  life  and  times ;  De  W'ette,  in  his  Einleitung 
and  his  Exegetisches  Handhuch ;  Neander,  Pflan- 
zung  und  Leitung  der  Christl.  Kirche ;  works  on 
Paulus,  by  Baur,  Hemsen,  Schrader,  Schnecken- 
burger  ;  and  the  Comment;u-ies  of  Olshausen,  Meyer, 
&c.  In  French,  the  work  of  Salvador  on  Jesus 
Christ  et  sa  Doctrine,  in  the  chapter  St.  Paul  et 
I'Eglise,  gives  the  view  of  a  modei  n  Jew  ;  and  the 
Discourses  on  St.  Paul,  by  M.  de  Pressense',  are 
able  and  eloquent.  [J.  LI.  D."] 

PAVEMENT.     [Gabbatha.] 

PAVILION.  1.  Soc,'^  properly  an  enclosed 
place,  also  rendered  "  tabernacle,"  "  covert,"  and 
"  den,"  once  only  "  pavilion"  (Ps.  sxvii.  5). 

2.  Succdh,^  usually  "  tabernacle  "  and  "  booth." 

[SUCCOTII.] 

3.  Shaphrur,'^  and  Shaphrir,  a  word  used  once 
only  in  Jer.  xliii.  10,  to  signify  glory  or  splendour, 
and  hence  probably  to  be  understood  of  the  splendid 
covering  of  the  royal  throne.  It  is  explained  by 
Jarchi  and  others  "  a  tent."  [Tent.]    [H.  W.  P.] 

PEACOCKS  (D''»3ri  and  D''»3W,  tuccvjiiim  : 
Ta&ves:  pavi).  Amongst  the  natural  products  of 
the  land  of  Tarshish  which  Solomon's  fleet  brought 
home  to  Jerusalem  mention  is  made  of  "  peacocks :" 
for  there  can,  we  think,  be  no  doubt  at  all  that  the 
A.  V.  is  correct  in  thus  rendering  tuccv/ijim,  which 
word  occurs  only  in  1  K.  x.  22,  and  2  Chr.  ix.  21 ; 
most  of  the  old  versions,  with  several  of  the  Jewish 
Kabbis  being  in  favour  of  this  translation.  Some 
writei's  have,  however,  been  dissatisfied  with  the 
rendering  of  "  peacocks,"  and  have  proposed  "  par- 
rots," as  Huet  {Diss,  de  Nav.  Sal.  7,  §6)  and  one 
or  two  others.  Keil  {Diss,  de  Ophir.  p.  104,  and 
Comment,  on  1  K.  x.  22),  with  a  view  to  support 
his  theory  that  Tarshish  is  the  old  Phoenician  Tar- 
tessus  in  Spain,  derives  the  Hebrew  name  from 
Tucca,  a  town  of  Mauretania  and  Numidia,  and 
concludes  that  the  "  Aves  Numidicae"  (Guinea 
Fowls)  are  meant:  which  birds,  however,  in  spite 
of  their  name,  never  existed  in  Numidia,  nor  within 
a  thousand  miles  of  that  country  ! 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hebrew  word 
is  of  foreign  origin.  Gesenius  {Thes.  p.  1502) 
cites  many  authorities  to  prove  that  the  tucci 
is  to  be  traced  to  the  Tamul  or  Malabaric  togei, 
"  pe;icock :"  which  opinion  has  been  recently  con- 
firmed by  Sir  E.  Tennent  {Ceylon,  ii,  p.  102,  and  i. 
p.  XX.  3rd  ed.),  who  says,  "  It  is  very  remarkable 
tliatthe  teiins  by  which  these  articles  (ivory,  apes, 
and  peacocks)  are  designated  in  the  Hebrew  Sculp- 
tures, are  identical  wltii  the  Tamil  names,  by  which 
some  of  them  are  called  in  Ceylon  to  the  present 
day, — tukeijiin  may  be  recogiu7,e<l  in  trikei,  the 
modern  name  for  these  birds."  Thus  Keil's  objec- 
tion "that  this  supposed  togei  is  not  yet  itself 
sulHciently ascertained"  {Comment,  on  1  K.  x.  22) 
is  satisfactorily  met."* 

Peacocks  are  called  "Persian  birds"  by  Aristo- 
phanes, Aves,  484;  see  also  Acharn.  63;  Died.  Sic. 
ii.  53. 


d  The  Hebrew  names  for  apes  and  ivory  are  clearly 
traceable  to  the  Sanscrit;  but  though  Unjiii  does  not  ap- 
pear in  Sanscrit,  it  has  Ix'iii  lUTiveil  from  the&inscrit 
word  s'ih-hin,  meaning  furnished  with  a  crest.  (Max. 
Miilkr,  Scieme  of  Language,  p.  19iO- 


764 


PEARL 


Peacocks  were  doubtless  introduced  into  Persia 
from  India  or  Ceylon  ;  perhaps  their  first  intro- 
duction dates  from  the  time  of  Solomon ;  and 
they  gradually  extended  into  Greece,  Kome,  and 
Europe  generally.  The  a'^ription  of  the  quality  of 
vanity  to  the  peacock  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Aris- 
totle, who  says  {Hist.  An.  i.  1,  §15),  "Some 
animals  are  jealous  and  vain  like  the  peacock." 
The  A.V.  in  Job  xxxix.  Vd,  speaks  of"  the  goodly 
wings  of  the  peacocks ; "  but  this  is  a  ditt'erent 
Hebrew  word,  and  has  undoubted  reference  to  the 
"  ostrich."  [W.  H.] 

PEARL  (^'''15,  ijdbish:    ya^is:    eminentia). 

The  Heb.  word  occurs,  in  this  form,  only  in  Job 
xxviii.  18,  where  the  price  of  wisdom  is  contrasted 
with  that  of  rdnioth  ("  coral ")  and  gdhish  ;  and 
the  same  word,  witii  the  addition  of  the  syllable 

cl  (7N),  is  found  in  Ez.  xiii.  11,  13,  sxxviii.  22, 

with  dime,  "  stones,"  i.  e.  "  stones  of  ice."  The 
ancient  versions  contribute  nothing  by  way  of 
explanation.  Schultens  [Comment,  in  Job,  1.  c.) 
leaves  the  word  untranslated :  he  gives  the  signi- 
fication of  "paxrls"  to  the  Heb.  term  perdnhn 
(A.V.  "  rubies  "j  which  occurs  in  the  same  verse. 
Gesenius,  Fiirst,  RosenmiiUer,  Maurer,  and  com- 
mentators generally,  understand  "  crystal "  by  the 
term,  on  account  of  its  resemblance  to  ice.  Lee 
{Comment,  on  Job,  1.  c.)  translates  rdmoth  veijdbish 
"  tilings  high  and  massive."  Carey  I'enders  gdbish 
by  "  niother-of-pe;irl,"  though  he  is  by  no  means 
content  with  this  explanation.  On  the  whole  the 
balance  of  probability  is  in  favour  of  "  crystal," 
since  </a6w/t  denotes  "ice"  (not  "hailstones,"  as 
Carey  supposes,  without  the  addition  of  abne, 
'•  stones ")  in  the  passages  of  Ezekiel  where  the 
word  occurs.  There  is  nothing  to  which  ice  can  be 
so  well  compared  as  to  cryst;il.  The  objection  to 
this  interpretation  is  that  c:  ystal  is  not  an  article 
of  much  value  ;  but  perhaps  reference  may  here  be 
made  to  the  beauty  and  pure  lustre  of  rock  crystal, 
or  this  substance  may  by  the  ancient  Orientals  have 
been  held  in  higli  esteem. 

Pearls  (fxapyaplTat),  however,  are  frequently 
mentioned  in  the  N.  T. :  conip.  Matt.  xiii.  45,  46, 
where  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened  unto  "  a 
merchant-man  seeking  goodly  pearls."  Pearls  formed 
part  of  women's  attire  (1  Tim.  ii.  9  ;  Rev.  xvii.  4). 
"  The  twelve  gates "  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem 
were  twelve  pearls  (Rev.  xxi.  21);  perhaps  "  mother- 
of-pearl"  is  here  more  especially  intended. 

Pearls  are  found  inside  the  shells  of  various  species 
ofMoilusca.  They  are  formed  by  the  deposit  of  the 
nacreous  substance  around  some  foreign  body  as  a 
nucleus.  The  Unio  margaritiferus,  Mi/tilus  edulis, 
Ostrea  edulis,  of  our  own  country,  occasionally  fur- 
nish pearls ;  but  "  the  pearl  of  great  price "  is 
<loubtle.ss  a  fine  specimen  yielded  by  the  pearl  oyster 
[Avicula  mdrgaritifera)  still  found  in  abundance 
in  the  Persian  Gulf,  which  lias  long  been  celebrated 
for  its  pearl  fisheries.  In  Matt.  vii.  6  pe;irls  are 
used  uietaplioricaUy  for  any  thing  of  value ;  or 
perhaps  more  especially  for  "  wHse  sayings,"  which 
in  Arabic,  according  to  Schultens  {Hariri  Consess. 
i.  12,  ii.  102),  are  called  peiirls.  (See  Parkhurst, 
Gr.  Lex.  s.  v.  WlapyapiTris.  As  to  D''3'3Q,  see 
Rubies.)  [W.  H.] 

PED'AHEL  v'?n"I2  :  ^a5av\ :  J'hcdael).  The 
sen  of  Amniiliud,  aii<l  piince  of  the  tribe  of  Naph- 
tali  (Num.  xxxiv.  2b)  :  vini  of  the  twelve  appointed 


PEKAH 

to  divide  the  land  west  of  Jordan  among  the  nine 
and  a  half  tribes. 

PEDAH'ZUR  ("l-IVnnB  :   4>a5aaffovp  :   Fhad- 

assur).  Father  of  Gamaliel,  the  chief  of  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (Num.  i. 
10,  ii.  20,  vii.  54,  59,  x.  23). 

PEDAI'AH  (nna  :  *a5aiA;  Alex.  EUSSiXd: 

Phadaia).  1.  The  tiither  of  Zebudah,  mother  of 
king  Jehoiakim  (2  K.  xxiii.  36).  He  is  described 
as  "  of  Rurnah,"  which  has  not  with  certainty  been 
identilied. 

2.  (*a5atos).  The  brother  of  Salathiel,  or  Sheal- 
tiel,  and  father  of  Zerubbabel,  who  is  usually  called 
the  "  son  of  Shealtiel,"  being,  as  Lord  A.  Hervey 
{Genealogies,  p.  100)  conjectures,  in  reality,  his 
uncle's  successor  and  heir,  in  consequence  of  the 
failure  of  issue  in  the  direct  line  (1  Chr.  iii.  17-19). 

3.  (*a5aia).  Son  of  Parosh,  that  is,  one  of  the 
family  of  that  name,  who  assisted  Nehemiah  m  re- 
pairing the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  25). 

4.  (*aSo(as).  Apparently  a  priest;  one  of  those 
who  stood  on  the  left  hand  of  Ezra,  when  he  read 
the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4).  In  1  Esdr.  ix. 
44,  he  is  called  Phaldaius. 

5.  (4>a5oia;  F.A.  4>aA.a'i'a).  A  Benjamite,  an- 
cestor of  Sallu  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

6.  (4>a5aia).  A  Levite  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah, 
appointed  by  him  one  of  the  "  treasurers  over  the 
treasury,"  whose  ofHce  it  was  "  to  distribute  unto 
their  brethren"  (Neh.  xiii.  13). 

7.  (■liT'nSl :  ^aSaCa  ;  Alex.  *aA5tt.)  The  father 
of  Joel,  prince  of  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  20). 

PEKAH  (HpS:  *a«:ee  :  *a»ceos,  Joseph.: 
Phaceac),  son  of  Remaliah,  originally  a  captain  of 
Pekahiah  king  of  Israel,  murdered  his  master,  seized 
the  throne,  and  became  the  18th  sovereign  (and  last 
but  one)  of  the  northern  kingdom.  His  native  coun- 
try was  probably  Gilead,  as  fifty  Gileadites  joined  him 
in  the  conspiracy  against  Pekahiah  ;  and  if  so,  he  fur- 
nishes an  instance  of  the  same  undaunted  energy 
which  distinguished,  for  good  or  evil,  so  many  of  the 
Israelites  who  sprang  from  that  country,  of  which 
Jephthah  and  Elijah  were  the  most  famous  exam- 
ples (Stanley,  S.  4'  P.  327).  [Elijah.]  Under  his 
predecessors  Israel  had  been  much  weakened  through 
the  payment  of  enormous  tribute  to  the  Assyrians 
(see  especially  2  K.  xv.  20),  and  by  internal  wars 
and  conspiracies.  Pekah  seems  steadily  to  have  ap- 
plied himself  to  the  restoration  of  its  power.  For 
this  purpose  he  sought  for  the  support  of  a  foreign 
alliance,  and  fixed  his  mind  on  the  plunder  of  the 
sister  kingdom  of  Judah.  He  must  have  made  the 
treaty  by  which  he  proposed  to  share  its  spoil  with 
Rezin  king  of  Damascus,  when  Jotham  was  still  on 
the  throne  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  sv.  37) ;  but  its  exe- 
cution was  long  delayed,  probably  in  consequence 
of  that  prince's  righteous  and  vigorous  administra- 
tion (2  Chr.  xxvii.).  When,  however,  his  weak  son 
Ahaz  succeeded  to  the  crown  of  David,  the  allies 
no  longer  hesitated,  and  formed  the  siege  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  history  of  the  war,  which  is  sketched 
under  Ahaz,  is  found  in  2  K.  xvi.  and  2  Chr. 
xxviii.  ;.  and  in  the  latter  (ver.  6)  we  read  that 
Pekah  "  slew  in  Judah  one  hundred  and  tw-enty 
thousand  in  one  day,  which  were  all  valiant  men," 
a  statement  which,  even  if  we  should  lie  obliged  to 
diminish  the  number  now  read  in  the  text,  from  the 
uncertainty  as  to  nuniijers  attaching  to  our  present 


PEKAHIAH 

MSS.  of  the  books  of  Chronicles  (Abijaii  ;  CiiRO- 
NICLKS ;  Kennicott,  Hehreio  Text  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Considered,  p.  53'J),  proves  that  the  charac- 
ter of  his  warfare  was  in  full  accordance  with  Gi- 
leadite  precedents  (Jndg.  xi.  3o,  xii.  6).  The  war 
is  famous  as  the  ocaision  of  the  great  prophecies  in 
Isaiah  vii.-ix.  Its  chief  result  was  the  capture  of 
the  Jewish  port  of  Elath  on  the  Red  Sea;  but  the 
luinatural  alliance  of  Damascus  and  Samaria  was 
punished  through  the  final  overthrow  of  the  fero- 
cious confederates  by  Tiglath-pileser,  king  of  Assy- 
ria, whom  Ahaz  called  to  his  assistance,  and  who 
seized  the  opportunity  of  ad<ling  to  his  own  domi- 
nions and  crushing  a  union  which  might  have  been 
dangerous.  The  kingdom  of  Damascus  was  linally 
suppressed,  and  Rezin  put  to  death,  while  Feknh  was 
deprived  of  at  least  half  of  his  kingdom,  including  all 
the  northern  portion,  and  the  whole  district  to  the 
east  of  Jordan.  For  though  the  v/riter  m  2  K.  xv.  29 
tells  us  that  Tiglath-pileser  "  took  1  jon,  and  Abel- 
beth-maachah,  and  Janoah,  and  Kedesh,  and  Hazor, 
and  Gilead,  and  Galilee,  all  the  land  of  Naphtali," 
yet  from  comparing  1  Chr.  v.  26,  we  find  that 
Gilead  must  include  "the  lieubeniter.  and  the  Gad- 
ites  and  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh."  The  inha- 
bitants were  carried  off,  according  to  the  usual 
practice,  and  settled  in  remote  districts  of  Assyria. 
I'ekah  himself,  now  fallen  into  the  position  of  an 
Assyrian  vassal,  was  of  coui-se  compelled  to  abstain 
from  further  attacks  on  Judah.  Whether  his  con- 
tinued tyranny  exhausted  the  patience  of  his  sub- 
jects, or  whether  his  weakness  emboldened  them  to 
attack  him,  we  do  not  know ;  but,  from  one  or  the 
other  cause,  Hoshea  the  son  of  Elah  conspired 
against  him,  and  pat  him  to  death.  Josephus 
says  that  Hoshea  was  his  friend  {(plXov  Tivhs  im- 
fiovXevffavros  avrc^,  Ant.  ix.  13,  §1).  Comp.  Is. 
vii.  16,  which  prophecy  Hoshea  was  instrumental  in 
fulfilling.  [Hoshea.]  I'ekah  ascended  the  throne 
B.C.  757.  He  must  have  begun  to  war  against 
Judah  B.C.  740,  and  was  killed  B.C.  737.  Theor- 
dei-  of  events  above  given  is  according  to  the  scheme 
of  Ewald's  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  iii. 
p.  602.  Mr.  Rawlinson  {Bampton  Lectures  for 
1859,  Lect.  iv.)  seems  wrong  in  assuming  two  in- 
vasions of  Israel  by  the  Assyrians  in  Pekah's  time, 
the  one  corresponding  to  2  K.  xv.  29,  the  other  to 
2  K.  xvi.  7-9.  Both  these  narratives  refer  to  the 
same  event,  which  in  the  first  place  is  mentioned 
briefly  in  the  short  sketch  of  Pekah's  reign,  while, 
in  the  second  passage,  .idditional  details  are  given  in 
the  longer  biography  of  Ahaz.  It  would  have  been 
scarcely  possible  for  Pekah,  when  deprived  of  half 
Ills  kingdom,  to  make  an  alliance  with  Rezin,  and 
to  attack  Ahaz.  We  learn  further  tVom  ]\Ir.  Raw- 
linson that  the  conquests  of  Tiglath-])ileser  are 
mentioned  in  an  Assyrian  fragment,  though  there 
is  a  difhculty,  from  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
Mehahem  in  the  inscription,  which  may  have  pro- 
ceeded from  a  mistake  of  the  engraver.  Comp. 
the  title,  son  of  Khumri  (Omri),  assigned  to  Jehu 
in  another  inscription  ;  and  see  Rawlinson,  note  35 
on  Lect.  iv.  As  may  bo  inferre<l  from  Pekah's 
alliance  with  Rezin,  his  government  was  no  im- 
provement, morally  and  religiously,  on  that  of  his 
predecessors.  [tl.  E.  L.  C] 

PEKAHI'AH  (n^^nipB.  *aK((rlas;  Alex.: 
^aKeias  :  Phaccja),  son  and  successor  of  Menahem, 
viras  the  1 7th  king  of  the  separate  kingdom  of  Israel. 
After  a  brief  reign  of  scai-ccly  two  years,  a  con- 
spiracy  was  organized  against  him  by  "  one  of  his 


PELEG 


765 


captains'  (probably  of  his  body  guard),  Pekah, 
son  of  Remaliah,  and  who,  at  the  head  of  fifty 
Gileaditos,  attacked  him  in  his  palace,  murdered 
him  and  his  fiiends  Argob  and  Arieh,  and  seized 
the  throne.  The  date  of  his  accession  is  B.C.  759, 
of  his  death  757.  This  reign  w;is  no  better  than 
those  which  had  gone  before ;  and  the  calt-worship 
was  retained  (2  K.  xv.  22-26).  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

PEKO'D  nipS),  an  appellative  applied  to  the 
Chaldaeans.  It  occurs  only  twice,  viz.  in  Jer.  I. 
21,  and  Ez.  xxiii.  23,  in  the  latter  of  which  it  is 
connected  with  Shoa  and  Koa,  as  though  these  three 
were  in  some  way  subdivisions  of  "  the  Babylonians 
and  all  the  Chaldaeans."  Authorities  are  undecided 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  term.  It  is  apparently 
connected  with  the  root  pdkad,  "to  visit,"  and  in 
its  secondary  senses  "  to  punish,"  and  "  to  appoint 
a  ruler:"  hence  Fekod  may  be  applied  to  Babylon 
in  Jer.  1.  as  significant  of  its  impending  punishment, 
as  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  "  visitation."  But 
this  sense  will  not  suit  the  other  passage,  and  hence 
Gesenius  here  assigns  to  it  the  meaning  of  "  prefect " 
(Thes.  p.  1 121),  as  though  it  were  but  another  form 
of  pahid.  It  certainly  is  unlikely  that  the  same 
word  would  be  applied  to  the  same  object  in  two 
totally  diflferent  senses.  Hitzig  seeks  for  the  origin 
of  the  word  in  the  Sanscrit  hliavan,  "noble" — 
Shoa  and  Koa  being  respectively  "prince"  and 
"  lord;"  and  he  explains  its  use  in  Jer.  1.  as  a  part 
for  the  whole.  The  LXX.  treats  it  as  the  name  of 
a  district  (^anovK  ;  Alex.  *ou5)  in  Ezekiel,  and  as 
a  verb  (e/cSi/crjo'oj')  in  Jeremiah.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PELAI'AH  (H^X^a  :  LXX.  om.  in  Neh.  viii., 

•{•eAia  ;  Alex.  ^eAei'a  :  I'hnldia).  1.  A  son  of  Eli- 
seaai,  one  of  the  last  members  of  the  royal  line  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  24). 

2.  One  of  the  Levites  who  assisted  Ezra  in  ex- 
pounding the  law  (Neh.  viii.  7).  He  atterwards 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  10). 
He  is  called  Biatas  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  48. 

PELALI'AH  (n^'pbS) :  ^aXaXla:  Phelelia). 
The  son  of  Amzi,  and  ancestor  of  Adaiah  a  priest  at 
Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh. 
xi.  12). 

PELATI'AH  (njP^Q :  *aA.€TTi'a:  Thaltias). 
1.  Son  of  Hananiah  the  son  of  Zerubbabel  ( 1  Chr. 
iii.  21).  In  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  he  is  further 
described  as  the  tiither  of  Jesaiah. 

2.  (*aAaeTT(a;  Alex.  4>a\fTTio).  One  of  thy 
captains  of  the  marauding  band  of  five  hundred 
Simeonites,  who  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  made  .an 
expnditinn  to  Mount  Seir  and  smote  the  fugitive 
Amalokites  ( 1  Chr.  iv.  42). 

3.  {iaXTia:  Pheltia).  One  of  the  heads  of  the 
people,  and  probably  the  name  of  a  family,  who 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  22). 

4.  (in^p^Q:  *a\Tt'as:  Pheltias).    The  son  of 

Benaiah,  and  one  of  the  princes  of  the  people  against 
whom  Ezekiel  was  directed  to  utter  the  words  of 
doom  recorded  in  Ez.  xi.  5-12.  The  prophet  iu 
spirit  saw  him  stand  at  the  east  gate  of  the  Temple, 
and,  as  he  spoke,  the  same  vision  showed  Inni  IVla- 
tiah's  sudden  death  {V.7..  xi.  1,  13). 

PELEG  (3^3  :  *aA€'7,  *o\e'K:  Thaleg),  a 
son  of  Filler,  and  brother  of  .loktan  (Gen.  x.  25, 
xi.  16).  The  only  incident  connected  with  his  history 
is  tiie  statement  that  "  in  his  days  was  the  eartli  di- 
vided " — an  event  which  was  embodied  in  his  ii.ame, 


76G 


PELET 


I'eleg  meanins;  "  division."  This  notice  ref'ei's,  not  to 
tlie  general  dispersion  of  the  human  family  subse- 
quently to  the  Deluge,  but  to  a  division  of  the  family 
of  Eber  himself,  the  younger  branch  of  whom  (the 
Joktanids)  migrated  into  southern  Arabia,  while 
the  elder  remained  in  Mesopotamia.  The  occurrence 
of  the  name  Phaliga  for  a  town  at  the  junction  of 
tiie  Chaboras  witli  the  Euphrates  is  obseivable  in 
consequence  of  the  remark  of  Winer  {Bealwb.)  that 
there  is  no  geographical  name  cori'esponding  to 
Peleg.  At  the  same  time  the  late  date  of  the 
author  who  mentions  the  name  (Isidorus  of  Charax) 
prevents  any  great  stress  being  laid  upon  it.  'J'he 
separation  of  the  Joktanids  from  the  stock  whence 
the  Hebrews  sprang,  finds  a  place  in  the  Mosaic 
table,  as  marking  an  epoch  in  the  age  immediately 
succeeding  the  Deluge.  [W.  L.  B.J 

PEL'ETio'pS:  *aA.€K;  Alex.  iaAer:  Fhalet). 
1.  A  son  of  Jahdai  in  an  obscure  genealogy  (1  Chr. 
ii.  47). 

2.  {^la>(pa\T]T  \  Alex.  ^aXXi\T.  Phallet).  The 
son  of  Azmaveth,  that  is,  either  a  native  of  the 
place  of  that  name,  or  the  son  of  one  of  David's 
heroes.  He  was  among  the  Benjamites  who  joined 
David  in  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  3). 

PEL'ETH  (n^S  :  ^a\ie  :  Fheleth).      1.  The 

father  of  On  the  Reubenite,  who  joined  Dathan  and 
Abiram  in  their  rebellion  (Num.  xvi.  1).  Josephus 
{Ant.  iv.  2.  §2),  omitting  all  mention  of  On,  calls 
Peleth  ^aXaovs,  appaiently  identifying  him  with 
Phallu  the  son  of  Reuben.  In  the  LXX.  Peleth  is 
made  the  son  of  Reuben,  as  in  the  8am.  text  and 
version,  and  one  Heb.  MS.  supports  this  rendering. 
2.  (Fhaleth).  Sou  of  Jonathan  and  a  descendant 
of  Jerahmeel  through  Onam,  his  son  by  Atarah 
(1  Chr.  ii.  33). 

PEL'ETHITES  Cn^S  :  ^lAeOi :   Phclethi), 

mentioned   only   in    the   phrase   "iri^Sni   ^Xl'lSn, 

rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  Cherethites  and  the 
Pelethites."  These  two  collectives  designate  a  force 
that  was  evidently  David's  body-guard.  Their  names 
have  been  supposed  either  to  indicate  their  duties, 
or  to  be  gentile  nouns.  Gesenius  renders  them 
"  executioners  and  runners,"  comparing  the  ^^^^ 
D''V"ini,  "  executioners  and  runners"  of  a  later 
time  (2  K.  xi.  4,  19) ;  and  the  unused  roots  m3 
and  n?B,  as  to  both  of  which  we  shall  speak 
later,  admit  this  sense.  In  favour  of  this  view,  the 
supposed  parallel  phrase,  and  the  duties  in  which 
these  guards  wei-e  employed,  may  be  cited.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  retain  tlieir 
names  untranslated  ;  and  the  Syriac  and  Targ.  Jon. 
translat>e  them  differently  from  the  rendering  above 
and  from  each  other.  In  one  place,  moreover,  the 
Gittites  are  mentioned  with  the  C^herethites  and 
Pelethites  among  David's  troops  (2  Sam.  xv.  18); 
and  elsewhere  we  read  of  the  Cherethim,  who  be;\r 
the  same  name  in  the  plural,  either  as  a  Philistine 
tribe  or  as  Philistines  themselves  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14  ; 
Ez.  XXV.  16;  Zeph.  ii.  5).  Gesenius  objects  that 
David's  body-guard  would  scarcely  have  been  chosen 
ti-om  a  nation  so  hateful  to  the  Israelites  as  the 
Philistines.  But  it  must  be  remembei-eJ  that  David 
in  his  later  years  may  have  mistrusted  his  Israelite 
soldiers,  and"  relied  on  the  Philistine  troops,  some  of 
whom,  with  Ittai  the  Gittite,  who  was  evidently  a 
Philistine,  and  not  an  Israelite  from  Gath  [Ittai], 


PELETHITES 

wei'e  faithful  to  him  at  the  time  of  Absalom's  I'e- 
bellion.  He  also  argues  that  it  is  improbable  that 
two  synonymous  appellations  should  lae  thus  used 
together ;  but  this  is  on  the  assumption  that  both 
names  signify  Philistines,  whereas  they  may  de- 
signate Philistine  tribes.  (See  r/(es.  pp.  719, 1107). 
The  Egyptian  monuments  throw  a  fresh  light 
upon  this  subject.  From  them  we  find  that  kings 
of  the  xixth  and  xxth  dynasties  had  in  their  sen-ice 
mercenaries  of  a  nation  adled  SHAYRETANA, 
which  Rameses  III.  conquered,  under  the  name 
"  SHAYRETANA  of  the  Sea."  This  king  fought 
a  naval  battle  with  the  SHAYRETANA  of  the 
Sea,  in  alliance  with  tlie  TOKKAREE,  who  were 
evidently,  from  their  physical  characteristics,  a  kin- 
dred people  to  them,  and  to  the  PELESATU,  or 
Philistines,  also  conquered  by  him.  The  TOKKA- 
REE and  the  PELESATU  both  wear  a  peculiar 
dress.  We  thus  learn  that  there  were  two  peoples 
of  the  Mediterranean  kindred  to  the  Philistines, 
one  of  which  supplied  mercenaries  to  the  Egyptian 
kings  of  the  xixth  and  xxth  dvnasties.  The  name 
SHAYRETANA,  of  which  the  first  letter  was 
also  pi-onounced  KH,  is  almost  letter  for  letter  the 
same  as  the  Hebrew  Cherethim ;  and  since  the 
SHAYRETANA  were  evidently  cognate  to  the  Phi- 
listines, their  identity  with  the  Cherethim  cannot 
be  doubted.  But  if  the  Cherethim  supplied  mer- 
cenaries to  the  Egyptian  kings  in  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury B.C.,  according  to  our  reckoning,  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  the  same  name  in  the  designation  of 
David's  body-guard  denotes  the  .same  people  or  tribe. 
The  Egyptian" SHAYRETANA  of  the  Sea  are  pro- 
bably the  Cretans.  The  Pelethites,  who,  as  already 
remarked,  are  not  mentioned  e.\'cept  with  the  Che- 
rethites, have  not  yet  been  similarly  traced  in 
Egyptian  geography,  and  it  is  rash  to  sup]iose 
their  name  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  Philistines, 
*ri73,  for  "'RK'?S  ;  for,  as  Gesenius  remarks,  this 

contraction  is  not  possible  in  the  Semitic  languages. 
The  similarity,  however,  of  the  two  names  would 
favour  the  idea  which  is  suggested  by  the  mention 
together  of  the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites,  that  the 
latter  were  of  the  Philistine  stock  as  well  as  the 
former.  As  to  the  etymology  of  the  names,  both 
may  be  connected  with  the  migration  of  the  Phi- 
listines. As  already  noticed,  the  fornier  has  been 
derived  from  the  root  mS,  "  he  cut,  cut  off, 
destroyed,"  in  Niphal  "  he  was  cut  off  from  his 
countiy,  driven  into  exile,  or  expelled,"  so  that  we 
might  as  well  read  "exiles"*  as  "executioners." 
The  latter,  from  n?S,  an  unused  root,  the  Arab. 

C1aj3,  "  he  escaped,  fled,"  both  being  cognate  to 
D?S,  "  he  was  smooth,"  thence,  "he  slipped  away, 

escaped,  and  caused  to  escape,"  where  the  rendering 
"  the  fugitives "  is  at  least  as  admissible  as  "  the 
runners."  If  we  compare  these  two  names  so 
rendered  with  the  gentile  name  of  the  Philistine 
nation  itself,  ^DJi'^Q  "  a  wanderer,  sti-anger," 
from    the   unused    root   t^v3,   "  he   wandered   or 

emigrated,"  these  previous  inferences  seem  to  be- 
come iiTesistible.  l"he  appropriateness  of  the  names 
of   these   tribes    to   the   duties   of  David's   body- 


»  Michaelis  Philistaeos  Tl^B  dictos  esse  censet,  ut- 
pote  exsules  (v.  rad.  Niph.  no.  3)  ut  idem  valeat  quod 
'AAA60uAoi  {Tlies.  p.  719). 


PELIAS 

guard  would  then  be  accidental,  though  it  does 
not  seem  unliliely  tiiat  they  should  have  given 
rise  to  the  adoption  in  later  times  of  other  appel- 
lations for  the  royal  body-guard,  definitely  signi- 
fying   '•  executioners  and   runners."     If,   however, 

^ri?2ni    'ri^Sn   meant  nothing  but  executioners 

and  runners,  it  is  difficult  to  explain  the  change 

to  D^vn^"?  '''}^\!-  [K-  s.  P.] 

PELT' AS  (neSias  ;  Alex.  UaiSeias  :  Pelias). 
A  corruption  of  Bedeiah  (1  Esd.  ix.  34;  comp. 
Ezr.  X.  35).     Our  translators  followed  the  Vulgate. 

PELICAN  (riNp,  kdath:    ireAe/cav,   opv(ov, 

vafjLai\ecijv,  KarappaK-r-rii :  onocrotalus,  pelican). 
Amongst  the  uncle;in  birds  mention  is  made  of  the 
kdath  (Lev.  xi.  18;  Deut.  xiv.  17j.  The  suppliant 
psalmist  compares  his  condition  to  "  a  iMidh  in  the 
wilderness"  (Ps.  cii.  6).  As  a  mark  of  the  deso- 
lation that  was  to  come  upon  Edom,  it  is  said  that 
"  the  kaath  and  the  bittern  should  possess  it"  (Is. 
xxxiv.  11).  The  same  words  are  spoken  of  Nineveh 
(Zeph.  ii.  14).  In  these  two  last  places  the' A.  V 
has  "  cormorant"  in  the  text,  and  "pelican"  in  the 
margin.  The  best  authorities  are  in  favour  of  the 
pelican  being  the  bird  denoted  by  kciidk.  The  ety- 
mology of  the  name,  from  a  word  meaning  "  to 
vomit,"  leads  also  to  the  same  conclusion,  for  it 
doubtless  has  reference  to  the  habit  which  this  bird 
has  of  pressing  its  under  mandible  against  its  breast, 
in  order  to  assist  it  to  disgorge  the  contents  of  its 
capacious  pouch  for  its  young.  This  is,  with  good 
rea.son,  suj^posed  to  be  the  origin  of  the  fable  about 
the  pelioin  feeding  its  young  with  its  own  blood,  tlie 
red  nail  on  the  upper  mandible  serving  to  complete 
the  delusion." 

The  expression  "  pelican  of  the  wilderness  "  has, 
with  no  good  reason,  been  supposed  by  some  to 
prove  that  the  kaath  cannot  be  denoted  by  this  bird. 
Shaw  (Trrtu.  ii.  303,  8vo.  ed.)  says  "  the  pelican  must 
of  necessity  starve  in  the  desert,"  as  it  is  essentially 
a  water  bird.  In  answer  to  this  objection,  it  will  be 
enough  to  observe  that  the  term  midhnr  ("  wilder- 
ness ")  is  by  no  means  restricted  to  bari'en  sandy 
spots  destitute  of  water.  "  The  idea,"  says  Prof. 
Stanley,  "  is  that  of  a  wide  open  space,  with  or 
without  actual  pasture  ;  the  connti  y  of  the  nomads, 
as  distinguished  from  that  of  the  agricultuial 
and  settled  people"  {S.  c)^  P.  p.  486,  bi\\  ed.V' 
Pelicans  (rdecanns  onocrotalus)  are  often  seen 
associated  in  large  flocks ;  at  other  times  single 
individuals  may  be  observed  sitting  in  lonely  and 
pensive  silence  on  the  ledge  of  some  rod:  a  few  feet 
above  the  surface  of  the  water.  (See  Kitto,  J'ici. 
Jlih.  on  Ps.  cii.  6.)  It  is  not  quite  clear  what  is 
the  particular  point  in  the  nature  or  character  of 
tlie  pelican  with  which  the  ])salmist  compares  his 
pitialje  condition.  Some  have  supposed  that  it  con- 
sists in  the  loud  cry  of  the  bird  :  compare  "  the  voice 
of  my  sighing"  (ver.  5).  W'c  are  inclined  to  believe 
that  reference  is  made  to  its  general  aspect  as  it  sits 
in  apparent  melancholy  mood,  with  its  bill  re.-^ting  on 
its  breast.    There  is,  we  think,  little  doubt  but  that 


PELONITE 


■67 


the  pelii^an  is  the  kdath  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 
Oedraaun's  ojiinion  that  the  Pclccanus  graculiis,  the 
shag  cormorant  (  Ver7n.  Samm.  iii.  57),  and  liochart's, 
that  the  "  bittern  "  is  intended,  are  unsupported  by 
any  good  evidence.     The  J',  onocrotalus  (common 


"  The  reader  is  referred  to  a  curious  work  by  a  Scotch 
divine,  Archibald Slmson  byname,  entitled '  llieroglyphica 
Animaliuin,  Vegctabiliiim  ct  Mctallorum,  fjuiu  in  Scrip- 
turis  sacris  reperluntur,'  Kdinb.  16'22, -Ito.  In  this  work 
are  some  wild  fancies  about  the  pelican,  which  serve  to 
show  the  state  of  zoology,  kc,  ut  the  period  in  whicli  the 
autbor  lived. 

^  Asa  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  pelican,  after  havioj; 


t"^"' 


Pelecanus  onocrotaiti 


pelican)  and  the  P.  crispus  are  often  observed  in 
Palestine,  Egypt,  &c.  Of  the  latter  Mr.  Tristram  ob- 
served an  immense  flock  swimming  out  to  sea  within 
sight  of  Mount  Carmel  {IbL-;,  i.  37).<^       [W.  H.] 

PEL'ONITE,    THE   {'>yh^n  :    b  ^eKuivi  ; 

Alex,  b  <^a\Koivi,  1  Chr.  xi.  27 ;  b  ^eWwvl,  1  Chr. 
xi.  36;  b  iK  ^aWovs,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  10  :  Phalonites, 
Phclonites,  Phallonites).  Two  of  David's  mighty 
men,  Helez  and  Ahijah,  are  called  Pclonites  (1  Chr. 
xi.  27,  30).  From  1  Chr.  xxvii.  10,  it  appears 
that  the  former  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  and 
"  Pelonite  "  would  therefore  be  an  appellation  de- 
rived from  his  place  of  birth  or  residence.  But  in 
the  Targum  of  R.  Joseph  it  is  evidently  regarded 
as  a  patronymic,  and  is  rendered  in  the  last  men- 
tioned passage  "  of  the  seed  of  Pelan."  In  the  list  of 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  Helez  is  called  (ver.  26)  "  the  Paltite," 
that  is,  as  Bertheau  (on  1  Chr.  xi.)  conjectures,  of 
Beth-Palet,  or  Beth-Phelet,  in  the  south  of  .ludah. 
But  it  seems  pi-obable  that  "  Pelonite  "  is  the  correct 
reading.  [See  Paltite.]  "  Ahijah  the  Pelonite  " 
appears  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  34  as  "  Eliam  the  son  of 
Ahithophel  the  Gilonite,"  of  which  the  former  is  a 
con-uption ;  "  Ahijah "  forming  the  first  part  of 
"  Ahithophel,"  and  "Pelonite"  and  "  Gilonite"  dif- 
fering only  by  D  and  J.  If  we  follow  the  l.XX.  of 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  the  place  from  which  Helez  took  his 
name  would  be  of  the  form  PJiallu,  but  there  is  no 
trace  of  it  elsewhere,  and  the  LXX.  must  have  had 
a  diflerently  pointed  text.  In  Hcb.  pcloni  corre- 
sponds to  the  tiVeek  6  Se7i'a,  ''  such  a  one:"  it  still 

filled  its  pouch  with  fls^h  and  mollusks,  often  does  retire 
miles  Inland  away  from  water,  to  some  spot  where  it 
consumes  the  contents  of  its  ixnich. 

""  J',  crispus  breeds  in  vast  numbers  In  the  flat  plain 
of  the  nobrudscha  (in  European  Turkey) ;  Its  habits  there 
bear  out  your  remark  of  the  pelican  retiring  Inland  to 
digest  its  food."— H.  IS.  risisTUAM. 


768 


PEN 


exists  111  Arabic  and  in  the  Spanish  Don  Fnhino, 
"Mr.  So-anil-so."  [W.  A.  W.] 

PEN.    [Writing.] 

PEN'IEL  (^N''JQ  ;  Samar.  !?N  13D  :  elSos 
Oeov  :  Phamwl,  and  so  also  I'eshito).  Tlie  name 
which  Jacob  gave  to  the  place  in  whicli  he  had 
wrestled  with  God  :  "  He  called  the  name  of  tlie 
jilace  '  Face  of  El,'  for  I  have  seen  Elohim  face  to 
face  "  (Gen.  -xxxii.  30).  With  that  singular  corre- 
spondence between  the  two  paiis  of  this  narrative 
which  has  been  already  noticed  under  Maiianaim, 
there  is  apparently  an  allusion  to  the  bestowal  of  the 
name  in  xxxiii.  10,  where  Jacob  says  to  Esau,  "  I 
have  seen  thy  flice  as  one  sees  the  face  of  Elohim." 
In  xxxii.  31,  and  the  other  passages  in  which 
the  name  occurs,  its  form  is  changed  to  Penuicl. 
On  this  change  the  lexicographers  throw  no  light. 
It  is  perhaps" not  impossible  that  Penuel  was  the 
original  form  of  the  name,  and  that  the  slight 
change  to  Peniel  was  made  by  Jacob  or  by  the 
historian  to  suit  his  allusion  to  the  circumstance 
under  which  the  patriarch  first  saw  it.  The  Sama- 
ritan Pentateuch  has  Penu-el  in  all.  The  pro- 
montory of  the  Ras-es-Shukah,  on  the  coast  of 
Syria  above  Bein'it,  was  formerly  called  Theou- 
prosdpon,  probably  a  translation  of  Peniel,  or  its 
Phoenician  equivalent.  [G.] 

PENIN'NAH  (n!)3Q  :  ^ewdva:  Phenenna), 
one  of  the  two  wives ^of'Elkanah,  the  other  being 
Hannah,  the  mother  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  i.  2). 

PENNY,  PENNYWORTH.  In  the  A.  V., 
in  several  passages  of  the  N.  T.,  "  penny,"  either 
alone  or  in  the  compound  "  pennyworth,"  occurs  as 
the  rendering  of  the  Greek  Srivapiof,  the  name  of 
the  Roman  denufius  (IMatt.  xx.  2,  xxii.  19  ;  Mark  vi. 
I)?,  xii.  15  ;  Luke  xx.  24;  John  vi.  7  ;  Rev.  vi.  6). 
The  denarius  was  the  chief  Roman  silver  coin,  from 
the  beginning  of  the  coinage  of  the  city  to  the  early 
part  of  the  third  century.  Its  name  continued  to 
be  applied  to  a  silver  piece  .is  late  as  the  time  of  the 
earlier  Byzantines.  The  states  that  arose  from  the 
ruins  of  the  Roman  empire  imitated  the  coinage 
of  the  imperial  mints,  and  in  general  called  their 
principal  silver  coin  the  denarius,  whence  the 
French  name  denier  and  the  Italian  denaro.  The 
chief  x\nglo-Saxon  coin,  and  for  a  long  period  the 
only  one,  corresponded  to  the  denarius  of  the  Con- 
tinent. It  continued  to  be  current  mider  the  Nor- 
mans, Plantagenets,  and  Tudors,  though  latterly 
little  used.  It  is  called  penny,  denarius,  or  denier, 
which  explains  the  employment  of  the  first  word  in 
the  A.  V.  [R.  S.  P.] 

PENTATEUCH,  THE.  The  Greek  name 
given  to  the  five  books  commonly  called  the  Five 
Books  of  Moses  {ri  irevTareuxos  sc.  /3i/3Aos  ;  Pen- 
tateuchus  sc.  liber;  the  fivefold  book;  from  revxos, 
wliich  meaning  originally  "  vessel,  instrument,"  &c., 
came  in  Alexandrine  Greek  to  mean  "  book  ").  In 
the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  it  was  called  "  the 
Law  of  Moses"  (Ezr.  vii.  G)  ;  or  "  the  book  of  the 
Law  of  Moses"  (Neh.  viii.  1);  or  simply  "the 
book  of  Moses"  (Ezr.  vi.  18;  Neh.  xiii.  1  ;  2  Chr. 
XXV.  4,  XXXV.  12).  This  was  beyond  all  reason- 
able doubt  our  existing  Peutateuch.  The  book 
which  was  discovered  in  the  temple  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  and  which  is  entitled  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  14), 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah  by  the  hand  of 
Moses,"  was  substantially  it  would  seem  the  same 
volume,  though  it  may  have  undergone  some  revi- 
sion by   Ezra.     In   2  Chr.  xxxiv.   130,   it  is  styled 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

"  the  book  of  the  Covenant,"  and  so  also  in  2  K. 
xxiii.  2,  21,  whilst  in  2  K.  xxii.  8  Hilkiah  says,  I 
have  found  "the  book  of  the  Law."  Still  earlier  in 
the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  we  find  a  "  book  of  the  Law 
of  Jehovah  "  in  use  (2  Chr.  xvii.  9).  And  this  was 
probably  the  earliest  designation,  for  a  "  book  (>f  the 
Law "  is  mentioned  in  Deuteronomy  (xxxi.  26), 
thougli  it  is  questionable  whether  the  name  as  there 
used  refers  to  the  whole  Pentateuch,  or  only  to  Deuter- 
onomy ;  probably,  as  we  shall  see,  it  applies  only  to 
the  latter.  The  present  Jews  usually  call  the  whole 
by  the  name  of  Torah,  i.  e.  "  the  Law,"  or  Torath 
Mosheh,  "  the  Law  of  Moses."  The  Rabbinical 
title  is  minn  ''£r»-"in  ntJ'Dri,  "  the  five-fifths  of 

the  Law."  In  the  preface  to  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus 
the  son  of  Sirach,  it  is  called  "  the  Law,"  which  is 
also  a  usual  name  for  it  in  the  New  Testament 
(Matt.  xii.  5,  .xxii.  36,  40;  Luke  x.  26;  John  viii. 
5,  17).  Sometimes  the  name  of  Jloses  stands  briefly 
for  the  whole  work  ascribed  to  him  (Luke  xxiv.  27  i. 
Finally,  the  whole  Old  Testament  is  sometimes 
called  a  potiori  parte,  "  the  Law  "  (Matt.  v.  18  ; 
Luke  x\'ii  17;  John  vii.  49,  x.  34,  xii.  34).  In 
John  XV.  25  ;  Rom.  iii.  19,  words  from  the  Psalms, 
and  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  21  from  Isaiah,  are  quoted  as 
words  of  the  Law. 

The  division  of  the  whole  work  into  five  parts 
has  by  some  va'itcrs  been  supposed  to  be  original. 
Others  (as  Leusden,  Hjiveruick  and  v.  Lengerke), 
with  more  probability  think  that  the  division  was 
made  by  the  Greek  translators.  For  the  titles  of 
the  several  books  are  not  of  Hebrew  but  of  Greek 
origin.  The  Hebrew  names  are  merely  taken  from 
the  first  words  of  each  book,  and  in  the  first  in- 
stance only  designated  particular  sections  and  not 
whole  books.  The  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch  form  a 
single  roll  or  volume,  and  are  divided  not  into 
books,  but  into  the  larger  and  smaller  sections  called 
Parshitjoth  and  Sedarim.  Besides  this,  the  Jews 
distribute  all  the  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  under  the 
two  heads  of  affirmative  and  negative  precepts.  Of 
the  former  they  reckon  248  ;  because,  according  to 
the  anatomy  of  the  Rabbins,  so  many  are  the  parts 
of  the  human  body :  of  the  latter  they  make  365, 
which  is  the  number  of  days  in  the  year,  and  also 
the  number  of  veins  in  the  human  body.  Accord- 
ingly the  Jews  are  bound  to  the  observance  of  613 
precepts  :  and  in  order  that  these  precepts  may  be 
pei'petually  kept  in  mind,  they  are  wont  to  carry  a 
piece  of  cloth  foursquare,  at  the  four  corners  of 
wliich  they  have  fringes  consisting  of  8  threads 
a-piece,  fastened  in  5  knots.  These  fi'inges  are 
called  n''^''^,  a  word  which  in  numbers  denotes 
600 :  add  to  this  the  8  threads  and  the  5  knots, 
and  we  get  the  613  precepts.  The  five  knots  de- 
note the  five  books  of  Moses.  (See  Bah.  Talmud. 
Maccoth,  sect.  3  ;  Maimon.  Pref.  to  Jad  Ha- 
chazakah  ;  Leusden,  Philol.  p.  33.)  Both  Philo  {de 
Abraham.,  ad  init.)  and  Josephus  (c.  Apion.  i.  8) 
recognise  the  division  now  current.  As  no  rea.«on 
for  this  division  can  satisfactorily  be  found  in  the 
structure  of  the  work  itself,  Vaihinger  supposes 
that  the  symbolical  meaning  of  the  number  five  led 
to  its  adoption.  For  ten  is  the  symbol  of  com- 
pletion or  perfection,  as  we  sec  in  the  ten  command- 
ments [and  so  inGenesis  we  have  ten  "generations"], 
and  therefore  five  is  a  number  which  as  it  were 
confesses  imperfection  and  piophesies  completion. 
The  Law  is  not  perfect  without  the  Prophets,  for 
the  Prophets  are  in  a  special  sense  the  bearers  of 
the  Promise  ;  and  it  is  the  Promise  which  completes 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

(he  Law.  This  is  questionable.  There  can  be  no 
iloiibt,  however,  that  this  division  of  the  Pentateucli 
influenced  the  arrangement  of  the  Psalter  in  five 
books.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  live  Megil- 
loth  of  the  Hagiograplia  (Canticles,  Ruth,  Lamenta- 
tions, Ecclesiastes,  and  Esther),  which  in  many 
Hebrew  Bibles  are  placed  immediately  alter  the 
Penfciteuch. 

For  the  several  names  and  contents  of  the  Five 
Books  we  refer  to  the  articles  on  each  Book,  where 
questions  affecting  their  integrity  and  genuineness 
are  also  discussed.  In  the  article  on  Genesis  the 
scope  and  design  of  the  whole  work  is  pointed  out. 
We  need  only  briefly  observe  here  that  this  work 
beginning  with  the  record  of  Creation  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  primitive  world,  passes  on  to  deal  more 
especially  with  the  early  history  of  the  Jewish 
fiimily.  It  gives  at  length  the  personal  history 
of  the  three  great  Fathers  of  the  family:  it  then 
describes  how  the  family  grew  into  a  nation  in 
Egypt,  tells  us  of  its  oppression  and  deliverance, 
of  its  forty  years'  wandering  in  the  wilderness,  of 
the  giving  of  the  Law,  with  all  its  enactments  both 
civil  and  religious,  of  the  construction  of  the  taber- 
nacle, of  the  numbering  of  the  people,  of  the  rights 
and  duties  of  the  priesthood,  as  well  as  of  many 
important  events  which  befell  them  before  their 
entrance  into  the  Laud  of  Canaan,  and  finally  con- 
cludes with  Moses'  last  discourses  and  his  death. 
The  unity  of  the  work  in  its  existing  form  is  now 
generally  recognized.  It  is  not  a  mere  collection  of 
loose  fragments  carelessly  put  together  at  ditferent 
times,  but  bears  evident  traces  of  design  and  pur- 
pose in  its  composition.  Even  those  who  discover 
different  authors  in  the  earlier  books,  and  who  deny 
that  Deuteronomy  was  written  by  Moses,  are  still 
of  opinion  that  the  work  in  its  present  form  is  a 
connected  whole,  and  was  at  least  reduced  to  its 
present  shape  by  a  single  reviser  or  editor.'* 

The  question  has  also  been  raised,  whether  the 
Book  of  Joshua  does  not,  properly  speaking,  consti- 
tute an  integral  portion  of  this  work.  To  this 
question  Ewald  {Gesch.  i.  175),  Knobel  {Genesis, 
Vorbem.  §1,  2),  Lengerke  {Kenaan,  Ix.xxiii.),  and 
Stiiheliu  (Krit.  Untcrs.  p.  91)  give  a  reply  in  the 
allimiative.  Tliey  seem  to  have  been  led  to  do  so, 
partly  because  they  imagine  that  the  two  documents, 
the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic,  which  characterize  the 
earlier  books  of  the  Penfciteuch,  may  still  be  traced, 
like  two  streams,  the  waters  of  which  uevei-  wholly 
mingle  though  they  flow  in  the  same  channel, 
running  on  through  the  book  of  Joshua;  and  partly 
because  the  same  work  which  contains  the  promise 
of  the  land  (Gen.  xv.)  m\ist  contain  also — so  they 
argue — the  fulfilment  of  the  promise.  But  such 
grounds  are  fai-  too  arbitrary  and  uncertain  to  sup- 
port the  hypothesis  which  rests  upon  them.  All 
that  seems  i)robable  is,  that  the  book  of  .Joshua 
received  a  final  revision  at  the  hands  of  Ezra,  or 
some  earlier  pro[)het,  at  the  siuiie  time  with  the 
books  of  the  I  .aw. 

The  fact  that  the  Samarituis,    who  it  is   well 

»  See  Ewald,  GeschiclUe,  i.  1T5 ;  and  Stiihelin,  Kritisch. 
Unters.  p.  1. 

b  It  is  strange  to  see  how  widely  the  misconception 
which  we  are  anxious  to  obviate  extends.  A  learned 
writer,  in  a  recent  publication,  says,  In  rctcrence  to  the 
alleged  existence  of  different  documents  in  tlie  I'cnta- 
teuch.  "I'his  exclusive  use  of  the  one  Divine  Name  in 
some  portions,  and  of  the  otlicr  in  otlior  portions,  it  is 
said,  characterizes  twodinVreiit  authors  living  at  dilTiTent 
times;  and  conscquputly  (ienesis  is  cmnposcd  of  two  dif- 
VOL.  II. 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


769 


known  did  not  possess  the  other  books  ot  Scripture, 
have  besides  the  Pentateuch  a  liook  of  .loshua  (see 
Chronicon  Saraaritanum,  &c.,  ed.  Juynboll,  Lugd. 
Bat.  1848 ),  indiftiles  uo  doubt  an  early  association  of 
the  one  with  the  other;  but  is  no  proof  that  they 
originally  constituted  one  work,  but  rather  the  con- 
trary. Otherwise  the  Samaritans  would  naturally 
have  adopted  the  canonical  recension  of  .loshua. 
We  may  therefore  legard  the  Five  Books  of  Moses 
as  one  separate  and  complete  work.  For  a  detailed 
view  of  the  several  books  we  must  refer,  as  we  have 
said,  to  the  Articles  where  they  are  severally  dis- 
cussed. The  questions  which  we  have  left  for  this 
article  are  those  connected  with  the  authorship  and 
date  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole. 

It  is  necessary  here  at  the  outset  to  stsite  the 
exact  nature  of  the  investigation  which  lies  before 
us.  Many  English  readers  are  alarmed  when  they 
are  told,  for  the  first  time,  that  critical  investigation 
renders  it  doubtful  whether  the  whole  Pentateuch  in 
its  present  form  was  the  work  of  Moses.  On  this 
subject  there  is  a  strange  confusion  in  many  minds.  ' 
They  suppose  that  to  sur)'ender  the  recognized  au- 
thorship of  a  sacred  book  is  to  surrender  the  truth 
of  the  book  itself.  Yet  a  little  reflection  should  suffice 
to  correct  such  an  error.  For  who  can  say  now  who 
wrote  the  books  of  Samuel,  or  Ruth,  or  Job,  or  to 
what  authorship  many  of  the  Psalms  are  to  be 
ascribed  ?  We  are  quite  sure  that  these  books 
were  not  written  by  the  persons  whose  names  they 
bear.  We  are  scarcely  less  sure  that  many  of  the 
Psalms  ascribed  to  David  were  not  written  Ijy  him, 
and  our  own  translators  have  signified  the  doubtful- 
ness of  the  inscriptions  by  separating  them  from 
the  Psalms,  of  which  in  the  Hebrew  text  they  were 
made  to  form  a  constituent  part.  These  books  of 
Scripture,  however,  and  these  divine  poems,  lose 
not  a  whit  of  their  value  or  of  their  authority  be- 
cause the  names  of  their  authors  have  perisheil. 
Truth  is  not  a  thing  dependent  on  names.  So  like- 
wise, if  it  should  turn  out  that  portions  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch were  not  written  by  Moses,  neither  their 
inspiration  nor  their  trustworthiness  is  thereby  di- 
minished. All  will  admit  that  one  portion  at  least 
of  the  Pentateuch — the  o4th  chaiiter  of  Deutero- 
nomy, which  gives  the  account  of  Moses'  death — 
was  not  written  by  him.  But  in  making  this 
admission  the  principle  for  which  we  contend  is 
conceded.  Common  sense  comjiels  us  to  regard  this 
chapter  as  a  later  addition.  Why  then  may  not 
other  later  additions  have  been  made  to  the  work  ? 
If  common  sense  leads  us  to  such  a  conclusion  in 
one  insfcmce,  critical  examination  may  do  so  on 
sulHcient  grounds  in  another.'' 

At  different  times  suspicions  have  been  entertained 
that  the  I'entiiteuch  as  we  now  have  it  is  not  the 
Pentateuch  of  the  earliest  age,  and  that  the  work 
must  have  undergone  various  mod'iiicatious  and  .addi- 
tions before  it  assumed  its  present  shape. 

So  early  as  the  second  century  we  find  the  author 
of  the  Clementine  Homilies  calling  in  question  the 
authenticity  of  the  Mosaic  writings.     According  to 


ferent  documents,  the  one  Klobistlc,  the  otbcr  Jehovistic, 
which  moreover  differ  in  statement;  and  CL-nscquently 
this  book  was  not  written  hy  Moses,  and  Is  neither  in- 
spircil  nor  trustworthy  "  {Aids  to  Failh,  p.  190).  How  it 
follows  that  a  book  is  neither  inspired  nor  trustworthy 
because  its  authorship  is  unknown  we  are  at  a  loss  to 
conceive.  A  large  part  of  the  canon  must  he  sacrificed, 
if  we  are  oidy  U)  reciive  Iwoks  whose  authorship  is  satis- 
factorily ascertiiined. 

3  I) 


770 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


him  the  J^aw  wns  only  given  orally  by  Jloses  to 
the  seventy  elders,  and  not  consigned  to  writing  till 
after  his  death ;  it  subsequently  underwent  many 
changes,  was  corrupted  more  and  more  by  means  of 
the  false  prophets,  and  was  especially  filled  with  eri'o- 
neous  anthropomorphic  conceptions  of  God,  and  un- 
worthy representations  of  the  characters  of  the 
Patriarchs  (Hem.  ii.  38,  43,  iii.  4,  47  ;  Neander, 
Gnost.  Systemc,  380).  A  statement  of  this  kind, 
unsupported,  and  coming  from  an  heretical,  and 
therelbre  suspicious  source,  may  seem  of  little  mo- 
ment :  it  is  however  I'emarkabie,  so  far  as  it  indicates 
an  early  tendency  to  cast  ofi'the  received  traditions 
respecting  the  books  of  Scripture  ;  v/hilst  at  the 
same  time  it  is  evident  that  this  was  done  cau- 
tiously, because  such  an  opinion  respecting  the  Pen- 
t;iteuch  was  said  to  be  for  the  advanced  Christian 
only,  and  not  for  the  simple  and  unlearned. 

Jerome,  there  can  be  little  doubt,  had  seen  the 
difficulty  of  supposing  the  Pentateuch  to  be  alto- 
gether, in  its  present  form,  the  work  of  Moses  ;  for 
he  observes  {contra  Helcid.) :  "  Sive  IMosen  dicere 
volueris  auctorem  Pentateuchi  sive  Esram  ejusdem 
instauratorem  operis,"  with  reference  apparently  to 
the  Jewish  tradition  on  the  subject.  Aben  Ezra 
(tll67),  in  his  Comm.  on  Deut.  i.  ],  threw  out 
some  doubts  as  to  the  Jlosaic  authorship  of  certain 
passages,  such  as  Gen.  xii.  6,  Deut.  iii.  10,  11, 
xxxi.  9,  which  he  either  explained  as  later  inteipola- 
tious,  or  left  as  mysteries  which  it  was  beyond  his 
power  to  unravel.  For  centuries,  however,  the 
Pentateuch  was  generally  received  in  the  Church 
without  question  as  written  by  Moses.  The  age 
of  criticism  had  not  yet  come.  The  first  signs  of 
its  approach  were  seen  in  the  17th  century.  In 
the  year  1651  we  find  Hobbes  writing:  "  Videtur 
Pentateuchus  potius  de  Mose  quam  «  Mose  scriptus" 
{Leviathan,  c.  33).  Spinoza  (  J/y<c^.  Theol.-PoUt. 
c.  8,  9,  published  in  1679),  set  himself  boldly  to 
controvert  the  received  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. He  alleged  against  it  (1)  later  names  of 
places,  as  Gen.  xiv.  14  comp.  with  Judg.  xviii.  29 ; 

(2)  the  continuation  of  the  history  beyond  the  days 
of  Moses,  Exod.  xvi.  35  comp.  with  Josh.  v.  12; 

(3)  the  statement  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  31,  "before  there 
reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel." 
Spinoza  mamtained  that  Moses  issued  his  commands 
to  the  elders,  that  by  them  they  were  wi-itten  down 
and  communicated  to  the  people,  and  that  later 
they  were  collected  and  assigned  to  suitable  passages 
in  Moses'  life.  He  considered  that  the  Pentateuch 
was  indebted  to  Ezra  for  the  form  in  which  it  now 
appears.  Other  writers  began  to  suspect  that  the 
book  of  Genesis  was  composed  of  written  documents 
earlier  than  the  time  of  Moses.  So  Vitiinga  ( Observ. 
Sacr.  i.  3)  ;  LeClerc  {de  Script.  Pentateuchi,  §11), 
and  R.  Simon  {Hist.  Critique  du  V.  T.  lib.  i.  c.  7, 
Rotterdam,  1685).  According  to  the  last  of  these 
writers,  Genesis  was  composed  of  earlier  documents, 
the  Laws  of  the  Pentateuch  were  the  work  of  Moses, 
iind  the  greater  portion  of  the  history  was  written 
by  the  public  scribe  who  is  mentioned  in  the  book. 
Le  Clerc  supposed  that  the  piiest  who,  according  to 
2  K.  xvii.  27,  was  sent  to  instruct  the  Samaritan 
colonists,  was  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch. 

But  it  was  not  till  the  middle  of  the  last  century 
that  the  question  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch was  handled  with  anything  like  a  discerning  |  of  the  Deuteronomist  and  the  Jehovist;  and  sup- 
criticism.  The  first  attempt  was  made  by  a  lay-  poses  the  last  to  have  written  in  the  reign  of  Saul, 
man,  whose  studies  we  might  have  supposed  would  i  and  the  Elohist  in  the  time  of  the  Judges.  Hupfeld 
sKircely  have  led  him  to  such  an  investigation.  In  ,  {die  Qucllen  der  Genesis)  finds,  in  Genesis  at  least, 
the  ye;u-  1753,  there  appeared  at  Brussels  a  work,  j  traces  of  three  authors,  an  eai'lier  and  a  later  Elohist, 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

entitled  :  "  Conjectures  sur  les  Me'moires  originaux. 
dont  il  ])aroit  que  Moyse  s'est  servi  pour  composer 
le  Livie  de  Gen^se."  It  was  written  in  his  69th 
year  by  Astruc,  Doctor  and  Professor  of  Medicine  in 
the  lioyal  College  at  Paris,  and  Court  Physician  to 
Louis  XIV.  His  critical  eye  had  observed  that 
thioughout  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  as  far  as  the 
6th  chapter  of  Exodus,  traces  were  to  be  found  of 
two  original  documents,  each  characterised  by  a 
distinct  use  of  the  names  of  God  ;  the  one  by  the 
name  Elohim,  and  the  other  by  the  name  Jehovah. 
Besides  these  two  principal  documents,  he  supposed 
Jloses  to  have  made  use  of  ten  others  in  the  compo- 
sition of  the  earlier  part  of  bis  work.  Astruc  was 
followed  by  several  Gemian  wi-iters  on  the  path  which 
he  had  traced  ;  by  Jerusalem  in  his  Letters  on  the 
Mosaic  Writings  and  Philosophy  ;  by  Schultens,  in 
his  Dissertatio  qua  disquiritur,  unde  Moses  res  in 
libro  Geneseos  descriptas  didicerit ;  and  with  con- 
siderable learning  and  critical  acumen  by  Ilgen 
( Urkunden  der  Jenisalemischen  Tempelarchivs, 
l*"-  Theil,  Halle,  1798),  and  Eichhorn  {Einleitmg 
in  d.  A.  T.). 

But  this  "documentary  hypothesis,"  as  it  is 
called,  was  too  conservative  and  too  rational  foi- 
some  critics.  Vater,  in  his  Comnieniar  iib.  den 
Pentateuch,  1815,  and  A.  T.  Hartmann,  in  his 
Linguist.  Einl.  in  d.  Stud,  der  Biicher  des  A.  Test. 
1818,  maintained  that  the  Pentateuch  consisted 
merely  of  a  number  of  fragments  loosely  strung 
together  without  order  or  design.  The  former  sup- 
posed a  collection  of  laws,  made  in  the  times  of  David 
and  Solomon,  to  have  been  the  foundation  of  the 
whole :  that  this  was  the  book  discovered  in  the  reign 
of  Josiah,  and  that  its  fragments  were  afterwards  in- 
corporated in  Deuteronomy.  All  the  rest,  consisting 
of  fragments  of  history  and  of  laws  written  at  dilferent 
periods  up  to  this  time,  were,  according  to  him,  col- 
lected and  shaped  into  their  present  form  between  the 
times  of  Josiah  and  the  Babylonish  Exile.  Hartmann 
also  brings  down  the  date  of  the  existing  Pentateuch 
as  late  as  the  Exile.  This  has  been  called  the  "  Frag- 
ment;a-y  hypothesis."  Both  of  these  have  now  been 
superseded  by  the  "  Supplementary  hypothesis," 
which  has  been  adopted  with  various  modifiaitions 
by  DeWette,  Bleek,  Stiihelin,  Tuch,  Lengerke,  Hup- 
feld, Knobel.  Bunsen,  Kurtz,  Delitzsch,  Schultz, 
Vaihinger,  and  othei's.  They  all  alike  recognize  two 
Documents  in  the  Pentateuch.  They  suppose  the 
narrative  of  the  Elohist,  the  more  ancient  writer,  to 
have  been  the  foundation  of  the  work,  and  that  the 
Jehovist  or  later  writer  making  use  of  this  docu- 
ment, added  to  and  commented  upon  it,  sometimes 
transcribing  portions  of  it  intact,  and  sometimes 
incorporating  the  substance  of  it  into  his  own  work. 
But  though  thus  agreeing  in  the  main,  they  difier 
widely  in  the  application  of  the  theory.  Thus,  tor 
instance,  De  Wette  distinguishes  between  the  Elohist 
and  the  Jehovist  in  the  first  four  Books,  and  attri- 
butes Deuteronomy  to  a  different  wi  iter  altogether 
{Einl.  ins  A.  T.  §150  tf.).  So  also  Lengerke,  though 
with  some  differences  of  detail  in  the  portions  he 
assigns  to  the  two  editors.  The  last  places  the 
Elohist  in  the  time  of  Solomon,  and  the  Jehovistic 
editor  in  that  of  Hezekiah  ;  whereas  Tuch  puts  the 
fii'st  under  Saul,  and  the  second  under  Solomon. 
Stahelin,  on  the  other  hand,  declares  for  the  identity 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

as  well  as  the  Jehovist.  Ho  is  jjeculiar  in  regarding 
the  Jehovistic  portion  as  an  altogether  original  docu- 
ment, written  in  entire  independence,  and  without 
the  knowledge  even  ot  the  Elohistic  record.  A  later 
editor  or  compiler,  he  thinks,  found  the  two  books, 
and  threw  them  into  one.  Vaihiuger  (in  Herzog's 
EncyclopUdie)  is  also  of  opinion  that  poi'tions  of 
three  original  documents  are  to  be  found  in  the  first 
four  books,  to  wliich  he  ailds  some  fragments  of  the 
32ud  and  o4th  chajiti-rs  of  Deuteronomy.  The 
Fifth  Book,  accoiding  to  liim,  is  by  a  diflerent  and 
much  later  writer.  The  I're-elohist  he  supposes  to 
have  flourished  about  1200  B.C.,  the  Elohist  some 
200  yeiirs  later,  the  Jehovist  in  the  first  half  of  the 
8th  century  B.C.,  and  the  Deuteronomist  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah. 

Delitzsch  agrees  with  the  writers  above  men- 
tioned in  recognizing  two  distinct  documents  as  the 
basis  of  the  Pentateuch,  especially  in  its  earlier  por- 
tions; but  he  entirely  severs  himself  from  them  in 
maintaining  that  Deuteronomy  is  the  work  of  Moses. 
His  theory  is  this  :  the  kernel  or  first  foundation  of 
the  Pentateuch  is  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant  (E.\.  .xix.-.xxiv,),  which  was  written  by 
Moses  himself,  and  afterwai'ds  incorporated  into  the 
body  of  the  Pentateuch,  where  it  at  present  .stands. 
The  rest  of  the  Laws  given  in  the  wilderness,  till 
the  people  reached  the  plains  of  Moab,  were  commu- 
niaited  orally  by  Moses  and  taken  down  by  the 
priests,  whose  business  it  was  thus  to  provide  for 
their  preservation  (Deut.  xvii.  11,  comp.  xxiv.  8, 
-xxxiii.  10;  Lev.  x.  11,  comp.  xv.  31).  Inasmuch 
as  Deuteronomy  does  not  pre-suppose  the  existence 
in  writing  of  the  entire  e;irlier  legislation,  but  on 
the  contraiy  recapitulates  it  with  the  greatest 
freedom,  we  are  not  obliged  to  assume  that  the 
proper  codification  of  the  Law  took  place  during  the 
forty  years'  wandering  in  the  Desert.  This  was 
done,  however,  shortly  after  the  occupation  of  the 
land  of  Camwn.  On  that  sacred  soil  was  the  firet 
definite  portion  of  the  history  of  Israel  written  ;  and 
the  writing  of  the  history  itself  necessifcited  a  full 
and  complete  account  of  the  Mosaic  legislation.  A 
man,  such  as  Eleazar  the  son  of  Aaron,  the  priest 
(see  Num.  xxvi.  1,  xxxi.  21),  wrote  the  gi'cat  work 
begiiining  with  the  first  wortls  of  Genesis,  mcluding 
in  it  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  and  perhaps  gave 
only  a  short  notice  of  tlie  last  discourses  of  Moses, 
because  Moses  had  written  them  down  with  his  own 
hiind.  A  second — who  may  have  been  .Joshua  (see 
especially  Dent,  xxxii.  44  ;  Josh.  xxiv.  26,  and  comp. 
on  the  other  hand  1  Sam.  x.  25),  who  wa-s  a  prophet, 
and  spake  as  a  pro])het,  or  one  of  the  elders  on  whom 
Moses'  spirit  rested  (Xum.  xi.  25),  and  many  of 
whom  survived  Joshua  (Josh.  xxiv.  ol  ) — completed 
the  work,  taking  Deuteronomy,  which  Moses  had 
written,  for  his  model,  and  incorporating  it  into  his 
own  book.  Somewhat  in  this  manner  arose  the 
Torah  (or  I'entateuch),  eiich  narrator  further  avail- 
ing himself  when  he  thought  proper  of  other  written 
documents. 

Such  is  the  theory  of  Delitzsch,  which  is  in  many 
respects  wortliy  of  consideration,  and  which  has 
been  adopte:!  in  the  main  by  Kurtz  {Ocsc/i.  d.  A.  B. 
i.  §20,  and  ii.  §09,  i>),  who  formerly  was  opjxised 
to  the  theory  of  difi'erent  documents,  and  sided 
rather  witii  llengstenberg  and  the  critics  of  the 
extreme  tx)nservative  school.  There  is  tliis  dill'erence, 
however,  tliat  Kurtz  olijects  to  the  view  that 
Deuteronomy  existeil  before  the  other  books,  and 
believes  that  the  rest  of  the  Pentateucli  was  com- 
mitted to  writing  before,  not  after,  the  occupation  of 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


771 


the  Holy  Land.  Finally,  .Schultz,  in  his  lecent  work 
on  Deuteronomy,  recognizes  two  original  documents 
in  tlie  Pentateuch,  the  Elohistic  being  the  base  and 
groundwork  of  the  whole,  but  contends  that  the 
Jehovistic  portions  of  the  first  four  books,  as  well 
as  Deuteronomy,  except  the  concluding  portion,  were 
written  by  iMoses.  Thus  he  agrees  with  Delitzsch 
and  Kurtz  m  admitting  two  documents  and  the 
Slosaic  authorship  of  Deuteronomy,  and  with 
Stiihelin  in  identifying  the  Deuteronomist  with  the 
Jehovist.  That  these  three  writers  more  nearly 
approach  the  truth  than  any  others  who  have 
attempted  to  account  for  the  phenomena  of  the 
existing  Pentateuch,  we  are  convinced.  Which  of 
the  three  hypotheses  is  best  supported  by  facts  and 
by  a  careful  examination  of  the  record  we  shall  see 
hereafter. 

One  other  theory  has,  however,  to  be  stated  before 
we  pass  on. 

The  author  of  it  stands  quite  alone,  and  it  is  not 
likely  that  he  will  ever  find  any  disciple  bold 
enough  to  adopt  his  theory  :  even  las  great  admirer 
Bunseu  forsakes  him  here.  But  it  is  due  to  Ewald's 
great  and  deservetl  reputation  as  a  scholar,  and  to 
his  uncommon  critical  sagacity,  briefly  to  state 
what  that  theory  is.  He  distinguishes,  then,  seven 
difi'erent  authors  in  the  great  Book  of  Origines  or 
Primitive  History  (comjirising  the  Pentateuch  and 
Joshua).  The  oldest  historical  work,  of  which  but 
a  very  kvi  fragments  remain,  is  the  Book  of  the 
Wars  of  Jehovah.  Then  follows  a  biography  ot 
Moses,  of  which  also  but  small  portions  have  been 
preserved.  The  third  and  fourth  documents  are 
much  more  perfect :  these  consist  of  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant,  which  was  written  in  the  time  of  Samson, 
and  the  Book  of  Origines,  which  was  written  by  a 
priest  in  the  time  of  Solomon.  Then  comes,  in  the 
fifth  place,  the  third  historian  of  the  primitive 
times,  or  the  first  prophetic  narrator,  a  subject  of 
the  northern  kingdom  in  the  days  of  Elijah  or  Joel. 
The  sixth  document  is  the  work  of  the  fourth  his- 
torian of  primitive  times,  or  the  second  prophetic 
narrator,  who  lived  between  800  and  750.  Lastly 
comes  the  fifth  historian,  or  third  prophetic  nar- 
rator, who  flourished  not  long  after  Joel,  and  who 
collected  and  reduced  into  one  corpus'  the  various 
works  of  his  predecessors.  The  real  purposes  of  th? 
history,  both  in  its  prophetical  and  its  legal  aspects, 
began  now  to  be  discerned.  Some  steps  were  taken 
in  this  direction  by  an  unknown  writer  at  the 
beginning  of  the  7th  century  B.C. ;  and  then  in  a 
far  more  comprehensive  manner  by  the  L)euterono- 
mist,  who  flourished  in  the  time  of  Manasseh,  and 
lived  in  Egypt.  In  the  time  of  Jeremiah  appeai-ed 
the  poet  who  wrote  the  Blessing  of  Moses,  as  it  is 
given  in  Deuteronomy.  A  somewhat  later  editor 
iucorpoiated  the  originally  independent  work  of  the 
Deuteronomist,  and  the  les?er  additions  of  his  two 
colleagues,  with  the  history  as  left  by  the  fifth 
narrator,  and  thus  the  whole  was  finally  completed. 
"  Such,"  says  Ewald  (and  his  words,  seriously  meant, 
read  like  deliciite  irony),  "  were  the  strange  fortunes 
which  this  great  work  underwent  before  it  reached 
its  present  form." 

Such  is  a  brief  summary  of  the  views  which  have 
been  entertained  by  a  large  number  of  critics,  many 
of  them  men  of  uniloubtetl  piety  as  well  as  lejirning, 
who  have  found  themselves  compelled,  after  cai-eful 
investigation,  to  abandon  the  older  doctrine  of  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  IVnfciteuch.  and  to  adopt, 
in  some  form  or  otlier,  the  theory  of  a  compilation 
from  earlier  documents. 

3  D  2 


772  PENTATEUCH,  THE 

(In  the  other  side,  however,  stands  an  array  of 
names  scarcely  less  distinguished  for  learning,  who 
maintain  not  only  that  there  is  a  unity  of  design 
in  the  Fentateuch^which  is  granted  by  many  of 
those  before  mentioneii — but  who  contend  that  this 
imity  of  design  can  only  be  explained  on  the  sup- 
position of  a  single  author,  and  that  this  author 
could  have  been  none  other  than  Jloses.     This  is 
the   ground    taken    by    Hengstenberg,    Havernick, 
Drechsler,  Ranke,  Wolte,  and  Keil.     'J'he  first  men- 
tioned of  these  writers  has  no  doulit  done  admirable 
service  in  reconciling  and  removing  very  many  ot 
the  alleged  discrepancies  and  contradictions  in  the 
Pentateuch:    but   his    zeal    carries   him   in   some 
instances  to  attempt  a  defence  the  very  ingenuity 
of  which  betrays  how  unsatisfactory  it  is;  and  his 
attempt  to  explain  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names,  by 
showing  that  the  writer  had  a  special  design  in  the 
use  of  the  one  or  the  other,  is  often  in  the  last 
degree  arbitrary.     Drechsler,  in  his  woi-k  on  the 
Unity  and  Gewmieness  of  Goncsis  (1838),  feres  no 
better,  though  his  remarks  are  the  more  valuable 
because  in  many  cases  they  coincide,  quite  inde- 
pendently, with  those  of  Hengstenberg.    Later,  how- 
ever, Drechsler  modified  his  view,  and  supposed  that 
the  several  uses  of  the  Di\-ine  Names  were  owing  to 
a  didactic  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  writer,  ac- 
cording as  his  object  was  to  show  a  particular  rela- 
tion of  God  to  the  world,  whether  as  Elohim  or  as 
Jehovah.     Hence  he  argued  that,  whilst  different 
streams  floweil  through  the  Pentateuch,  they  were 
not  from  two  different   fountain-heads,  but  varied 
according  to  the  motive  which  influenced  the  writer, 
and  according  to  the  fundamental  thought  in  par- 
ticular   sections ;    and    on    this    ground,    too,    he 
explained  the  charactei-istic  phraseology  which  dis- 
tinguishes such  sections.      Kanke's  work   (  Unter- 
suc/uingcn  iiber  den  Pentateuch)  is  a  valuable  con- 
tribution to  the  exegesis  of  the  Pentateuch.     He  is 
especially  successful  in  establishing  the  inward  unity 
of  the  work,  and  in  showing  how  inseparably  the 
several  portions,  legal,  genealogical,  and  historical, 
are  interwoven  together.      Kurtz  (in  his  Einheit 
der  Genesis,  184G,  and  in  the  first  edition  of  his 
first  volume  of  the  Geschichte  des  Alien  Bundes) 
followed  on  the  same  side ;  but  he  has  since  aban- 
doneil  the  attempt  to  explain  the  use  of  the  Divine 
Names  on  the  principle  of  the  difierent  meanings 
which  they  bear,  and  has  espoused  the  theory  of 
two  distinct  documents.     Keil.  also,  though  he  does 
not  despair  of  the  solution  of  the  problem,  confesses 
{Luther.  Zeitsc/u:  lS.:)l-2,  p.  '235)  that  "  all  attempts 
as  yet  made,  notwithstanding  the  acumen  which  has 
been  brought  to  bear  to  explain  the  interchange  of 
the  Divine  Names  in  fienesis  on  the  ground  of  the 
different  meanings  which  they  possess,  must  be  pro- 
nounced a  failure."    Kbrard  {Das  Alter  des  Jchom- 
Namcns)  and  Tiele  {Stud,  und  Krit.  1852-1)  make 
nearly  the  same  admission.     This  manifest  doubt- 
fulness in  some  cases,  and  desertion  in  others  from 
the  ranks  of  the  more  conservative  school,  is  signi- 
ficant.    And  it  is  certainly  unfair  to  claim  con- 
sistency and  unanimity  of  opinion  for  one  side  to 
the   prejudice    of  the   other.      The  tnith  is  that 
diversities  of  opinion  are  to  be  found  among  those 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

who  are  opposed  to  the  theory  of  different  docu- 
ments, as  well  as  amongst  those  who  advocate  it. 
Nor  can  a  theory  which  has  been  adopted  by 
Delitzsch,  and  to  which  Kurtz  has  become  a  con- 
vert, be  considered  as  either  irrational  or  irreligious. 
It  may  not  be  established  beyond  doubt,  but  the 
presumptions  in  its  favour  are  strong;  nor,  when 
properly  stated,  will  it  be  found  open  to  any  serious 
ol:)jection. 

II.  We  a^k  in  the  next  place  what  is  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Pentateuch  itself  with  regard  to  its 
authorship  ? 

1.  We  find  on  reference  to  Ex.  xxiv.  3,  4,  that 
"  Moses  came  and  told  the  people  all  the  words  of 
.lehovah  and  all  the  judgments,"  and  that  he  subse- 
quently  "  wrote  down  all  the  words  of  Jehovah." 
These  were  vs^ritten  on  a  roll  called  "  the  book  of 
the  covenant"  (ver.  7),  and  "  rend  in  the  audience 
of  the  people."     These  "  words  "  and  "judgments" 
were  no  doubt  the  Sinaitic  legislation  so  far  as  it 
had  as  yet  been  given,  and  which  constituted  in  fact 
the  covenant  between  Jehovah  and  the  people.  Upon 
the  renewal  of  this  covenant  after  the  idolatry  of 
the  Israelites,  Moses  was  again  commanded  by  Je- 
hovah to  "  write  these  words"  (xxxiv.  27).  "  And," 
it  is  added,  "  he  wrote  upon  the  tables  the  words  of 
the  covenant,   the  ten  commandments."     Leaving 
Deuteronomy  aside  for  the  present,  there  are  only 
two  other  passages  in  which  mention  is  made  of  the 
writing  of  any  part  of  the  Law,  and  those  are  Ex. 
xvii.  14,  where  Moses  is  commanded  to  write  the 
defeat  of  Amalek'in  a  book  (or  rather  in  the  book, 
one  ah'eady  in  use  for  the  purpose"^);   and  Num. 
xxxiii.  2,  where  we  are  informed  that  Moses  wrote 
the  journeyings   of  the  children   of  Israel  in  the 
desert  and  the  various  stations  at  whi<;h   they  en- 
camped.    It  obviously  does  not  follow  from  these 
statements  that  Moses  wrote  all  the  rest  of  the  first 
four  books  which  bear  his  name.     Nor  on  the  other 
hand  does  this  specific  testimony  with   regard  to 
certain  portions  justify  us  in  coming  to  an  opposite 
conclusion.     So  far  nothing  can  l)e  determined  posi- 
tively one  way  or  the  other.     But  it  may  be  said 
that  we  have  an  express  testimony  to  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Law  in  Deut.  xxxi.  9-12,  where 
we  are  told  that  "  Moses  wrote  this  Law  '"  (miPlH 
nx'-Tn),  and  delivered  it  to  the  custody  of  the  priests 
with  a  command  that  it  should  be  read  before  all 
the  people  at  the  end  of  e^■ery  seven  years,  on  the 
Fenst  of  Tabernacles.     In  ver.  24  it  is  further  said, 
that  when  he  "  had  made  an  end  of  writing  the 
words  of  this  Law  in  a  book  till  they  were  finished," 
he  delivered  it  to  the  Levites  to  be  placed  in  the 
side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah,  that  it 
might  be  preserved  as  a  witness  against  the  people. 
.Such  a  statement  is  no  doubt  decisive,  but  the  ques- 
tion is,  how  far  does  it  extend.    Do  the  words  "  this 
Law"  compri.se  all  the  Mosaic  legislation  as  con- 
tained in   the   last  four  books  of  the   Pentateuch, 
or  must  they  be  confined  only  to  Deuteronomy? 
The  last  is  apparently  the  only  tenable  view.     In 
Deut.  xvii.  18,  the  direction  is  given  that  the  king 
on  his  accession  "  shall  wi'ite  him  a  copy  of  this 
Law  in  a  book  out  of  that   which  is  before  the 


c  Delitzsch,  however,  will  not  allow  tbat  "IQDil  means 
in  the  already  existing  book,  but  in  one  whidi  was  to 
be  taken  for  the  occasion ;  and  he  refers  to  Num.  v.  23. 
1  S,ini.  X.  25,  2  Sam.  xi.  15,  for  a  similar  use  of  the  article. 
"IDD  he  takes  here,  as  in  Is.  xxx.  8,  to  mean  a  separate 
li^-ir  or  plate  on  wliidi  the  record  was  to  lie  ma<ie.   But  tlie 


three  passages  to  wliich  he  refers  do  not  help  him.  In  the 
first  two  a  particular  book  kept  for  the  purpose  is  pro- 
l>ably  intended;  and  in  2  Sam.  xi.  15,  the  book  or  leaf  is 
meant  which  had  already  been  mentioned  in  the  previous 
verse.    Hence  the  article  is  indispensable. 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

priests  the  Levites."  The  words  "  copy  of  this 
Law,"  are  literally  "  repetition  of  this  Law  " 
C'?n  'nn  nJK'O;,  which  is  another  name  for  the 

book  of  L)euterouoniy,  and  hence  the  LXX.  render 
here  rh  Sevrepovifxiov  rovio,  and  Philo  t\]v  iiri- 
yofiiSa,  and  although  it  is  true  that  Oukelos  uses 
npt^D  (Jlishneh)  in  tlie  sense  of  "  copy,"  and  the 

Talmud  in  the  sense  of  "duplicate"  (Cai-pzov  on 
Schickard's  Jus  reg.  Hebraeor.  pp.  82-84),  yet  as 
regai-ds  the  passage  already  referred  to  in  xxxi. 
9,  &c.,  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  second  Temple 
received  as  an  unquestionable  tradition  that  Deute- 
ronomy only,  and  not  the  whole  Law  was  read  at 
the  end  of  every  seven  years,  in  the  year  of  release. 

The  words  are  nnniH  h'px  c^'^^'l^  n'pnno, 

"from  the  beginning  of  Deuteronomy "  {Soia,  c. 
7  ;  Maimon.  J<id  hn-chazakah  in  Hi l  both  Chagiga, 
c.  3  ,•  Keland,  Antiq.  Sac.  p.  iv.  §11).'' 

Besides,  it  is  on  the  face  of  it  veiy  improbable 
that  the  whole  Pentateuch  should  have  been  lead  at 
a  national  feast,  whereas  that  Deuteronomy,  summing 
up,  spiritualizing,  and  at  the  same  time  enforcing 
the  Law  should  so  have  been  read,  is  in  the  highest 
degree  probable  and  natural.     It  is  in  confirmation 
of  this  view  that  all  the  later  literature,  and  espe- 
cially the  writings  of  the   Prophets,  are  full  of  re- 
ferences to  Deuteronomy  as  the  book  with  which 
they  might  expect  the  most  intimate  acquaintance 
on  the  part  ot  their  hearers.     So  in  other  passages 
in  which  a  written  law  is  spoken  of  we  are  driven 
to  conclude  that  only  some  part  and  not  the  whole 
of  the  Pentateuch  is  meant.     Thus  in  chap,  xxvii. 
3,  8,  Jloses  commands  the  jieople  to  write  "  all  the 
words  of  this  Law  very  plainly  "  on  the  stones  set 
up  on  Mount  Ebal.     Some  have  supposed  that  only 
the  Decalogue,  others,  that  the  blessings  and  curses 
which  immediately  follow,  were  so  to  bo  inscribed. 
Others  again  (as  Schulz,  Deutcron.  p.  87)  thmk 
that  some  summary  of  tlie  Law  may  have  been  in- 
tended ;  but  it  is  at  any  rate  quite  clear  that  the 
expression  "  all  the  words  of  this  Law  "  does  not 
refer  to  the  whole  Pentateuch.     This  is  confirmed 
by  Josh.  viii.  32.     There  the  history  tells  us  that 
Joshua  wrote  upon  the  stones  of  the  altar  whidi 
he  had  built  on  Jlount  Ebal  "  a  copy  of  the  Law  of 
Moses  {mishneh  toratli  Mosheh — tlie  same  expression 
which  we  have  in  Deut.  xvii.  18),  which  he  wrote 
in  the  presence  of  the  children  of  IsraeL  .  .  .  And 
afterward  he  read  all  the  words  of  the  Law,  the 
blessings   and   cursings,   according   to   all    that   is 
written  in  the  book  of  the  Law."     On  this  we  ob- 
serve, first,  that  "  the  blessings  and  the  cuisings  " 
here  specified  as  having  been  engraven  on  the  plaster 
with  which  the  stones  were  coveral,  are  those  re- 
corded in  Deut.  xxvii.,  xxviii.,  and  next  that  the 
language  of  the  writer  renders  it  probable  that  other 
portions  of  the  Law  were  added.     If  any  reliance  is 
to  be  placed  on  what  is  apparently  the  oldest  Jewish 
tradition  isee  below  note  ••),  and  if  the  words  ren- 
dered in  our  version  "copy  of  the  Law,"  mean 
"  repetition  of  the  La^v,"  i.  e.  the  book  of  Deute- 
ronomy, then  it  was  this  which  was  engraven  upon 
the  stones  aud  read  in   the  liearing  of  Israel.     It 
seems  clear  th  it  the  whole  of  the  existing  Pentateuch 


PENTATEUCH,  THE  773 

camiot  be  meant,  but  either  the  book  of  Deutero- 
nomy only,  or  some  summary  of  the  Jlosaic  legis- 
lation.    In  any   case  notliing  can  be  argued  from 


any  of  the  passages  to  which  we  have  referred  as  to 
the  authorship  of  the   first  four  books.     Schultz, 
indeed,  contends  that  with  chap.  xxx.  the  discourses 
of  Moses  end,  and  that  therefore  whilst  the  phrase 
"  this  law,"  whenever  it  occurs  in  chaps,  i.-xxx., 
means  only  Deuteronomy,  yet  in  chap.  xxxi.  where 
the  narrative  is  resumed  and  the  history  of  Moses 
brought  to  a  conclusion,    "  this  law "  would  na- 
turally  refer    to    the   whole   previous   legislation. 
Chapter  xxxi.  brings  as  he  says,  to  a  termination, 
not  L)euteronomy  only,  but  the  previous  books  as 
well ;  lor  without  it  they  would  be  incomplete.     In 
a  section  therefore  which  concludes  the  whole,  it  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  words  "  this  law " 
designate  the  whole.     He  appeals,  moreover  (against 
Dclitzsch),  to  the  Jewish  tradition,  and  to  the  words 
of   Josephus,   6    apx'^P^^^    ^'''"'    jSr^/xaTos    6v|/7jA.oi} 
ffradels  ....  avayivcoffKeTu    rohs    vojxovs   iracri, 
and  also  to  the  absence  of  the  article  in  xxxi.  24, 
where    JMoses   is  said   to    have    made    an   end    of 
writing  the  Law  in   a   Book  (1DD  7y),  whereas 
when  different  poitions  are  spoken  of,  they  are  said 
to  have  been  written  in  the  Book  already  existing 
(Ex.  xvii.  14;   1  Sam.  x.  25;  Josh.  xxiv.  26).     U 
is  scarcely  conceivable,  he  says,  that  Moses  should 
have  provided  so  carefully  for  the~saf(j  ('ustody  and 
transmission  of  his  own  sermons  on  the  Law,  and 
have  made  no  like  provision   for  the  Law  itsell", 
though  given   by  the  mouth    of  Jehovah.      Even 
therefore  if  "this  Law"  in  xxxi.  9,  24,  applies  in 
the  fii'st  instance  to  Deuteronomy,  it  must  indirectly 
include,  if  not  the  whole  Pentateuch,  at  any  rate  the 
whole  Mosaic  legislation.     Deuteronomy  evei-ywhere 
supposes  the  existence  of  the  earlier  books,  and  it  is 
not  credible  that  at  the  end  of  his  life  the  great 
Legislator  should  have  been  utterly  regardless  of  the 
Law  which  was  the  text,  and  solicitous  only  about 
the  discourses  which  were  the  comment.     The  one 
would  have  been  unintelligible  apart  fiom  the  other. 
There  is  no  doubt  some  tbrce  in  these  arguments  ; 
but  as  yet  they  only  render  it  probable  tliat  if  Moses 
were  the  author  of  Deuteronomy,  he  was  the  author 
of  a  great  part  at  least  of  the  three  pievious  books. 

So  far  then  the  direct  evidence  from  the  Penta- 
teuch itself  is  not  sufficient  to  establish  the  Mosaic 
autliorship  of  every  portion  of  the  Five  Books. 
Ceitain  parts  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers, 
and  the  whole  of  Deuteronomy  to  the  end  of  chap. 
XXX.,  is  all  that  is  expressly  said  to  Jiave  been 
written  by  Jloses. 

Two  questions  are  yet  to  be  answered.  Is  there 
evidence  that  parts  of  the  work  were  not  written  by 
Moses  ?  Is  there  e\idence  that  parts  of  the  work 
are  later  than  his  time  ? 

2.  The  next  question  we  ask  is  this:  Is  there 
any  evidence  to  show  that  he  did  nut  write  portions 
of  the  work  which  goes  by  his  name?  We  have 
ali'eady  rcteiied  to  the  last  chaj)ter  of  Deuteronomy 
which  gives  an  account  of  his  death.  Is  it  jirobable 
that  Moses  wrote  the  words  in  Ex:  xi.  3,  "  More- 
over the  man  Jloses  was  very  great  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh's  servants,  and  in 


d  "  The  imssage  of  the  SIfri,"  says  Delitzsch  on  Genesis, 
p.  63,  "  one  of  the  oldest  Midrashim  of  the  school  of  Rubs 
(  +  247),  on  Deut.  xvii.  18,  to  which  Hiuschi  refers  on  Sotn 
■11",  is  as  clear  as  it  Is  important:  '  Let  him  (the  king) 

i^opy  'tn  'nn  n^i^'D  nx  >"  '^  ''■'"'^  '"*'  himscif  in 

particular,  luid  let  him  not.  be  sulislied  with  one  that  he 


has  inherited  from  his  ancestors.  HJtJ'D  nieans  nothing 
else  but  niin  llX'D  (neuleronoiuy).  Not  this  e.xclu- 
slvcly,  however,  because  in  ver.  1!)  Is  said,  to  ob.serve  all 
the  words  of  this  Law.  If  so,  then  why  is  Deuteronomy 
only  mentioned  ?  Heciuise  on  the  day  of  assembly  Deuter- 
oiioiny  only  was  read.'  " 


774 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


the  sight  of  the  people;" — or  those  in  Num.  xii.  3, 
"Now  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek,  above  all 
the  men  which  were  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  ?" 
On  the  other  hand,  are  not  such  words  of  praise 
just  what  we  might  expect  from  the  friend  and  dis- 
ciple— for  such  perhaps  he  was — -who  pronounced 
his  eulogium  after  his  death — "  And  tliei-e  arose 
not  a  prophet  since  in  Israel  like  unto  Moses,  whom 
Jehovah  knew  face  to  face"  (Dent,  xxxiv.  10)? 

3.  But  there  is  other  evidence,  to  a  critical  eye 
not  a  whit  less  convindng,  which  points  in  the 
same  direction.  If,  without  any  theory  casting  its 
shadow  upon  us,  and  without  any  fear  of  conse- 
quences before  our  eyes,  we  read  thoughtfully  only 
the  Book  of  Genesis,  we  can  hardly  escape  the  con- 
viction that  it  partakes  of  the  nature  of  a  com- 
pilation. It  has  indeed  a  unity  of  plan,  a  coherence 
of  parts,  a  shapeliness  and  an  order,  which  satisfy 
us  that  as  it  stands  it  is  the  creation  of  a  single 
mind.  But  it  bears  also  manifest  traces  of  having 
been  based  upon  an  earlier  work ;  and  that  earlier 
work  itself  seems  to  have  had  embedded  in  it  frag- 
ments of  still  more  ancient  documents.  Befoie  pro- 
ceeding to  prove  this,  it  m;iy  not  be  imneeessary  to 
state,  in  order  to  avoid  misconstruction,  that  such  a 
theory  does  not  in  the  least  militate  against  the 
divine  authority  of  the  book.  The  history  contained 
in  Genesis  could  not  have  been  narrated  by  Moses 
from  personal  knowledge ;  but  whether  he  was 
taught  it  by  immediate  divine  suggestion,  or  was 
directed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  use  of  earlier 
documents,  is  immaterial  in  reference  to  the  inspii'a- 
tion  of  the  work.  The  question  may  therefore  be 
safely  discussed  on  ci'itical  grounds  alone. 

We  begin,  then,  by  pointing  out  some  of  the 
phenomena  which  the  Book  of  Genesis  presents.  At 
the  very  opening  of  the  book,  peculiarities  of  style 
and  manner  are  discernible,  which  can  scarcely 
escape  the  notice  of  a  careful  reader  even  of  a 
translation,  which  certainly  are  no  sooner  pointed 
out  than  we  are  compelled  to  admit  their  existence. 

The  language  of  cliapter  i.  1-ii.  3  (where  the 
first  chapter  ought  to  have  been  made  to  end)  is 
totiilly  unlike  that  of  the  section  which  follows, 
ii.  4— iii.  23.  This  last  is  not  only  distinguished  by 
a  peculiar  use  of  tlie  Divine  Names — t'oi-  here  and 
nowhere  else  in  the  whole  Pentateuch,  except  Ex. 
ix.  30,  have  we  the  combination  of  the  two, 
Jehovah  Elohim — but  also  by  a  mode  of  expression 
peculiar  to  itself.  It  is  also  remarkable  for  pre- 
serving an  a(>count  of  the  Creation  distinct  from 
that  contained  in  the  first  chapter.  It  may  be  said, 
indeed,  that  this  account  does  not  contradict  the 
former,  and  might  therefore  have  proceeded  from  the 
same  pen.  But,  fully  admitting  that  there  is  uo  con- 
tradiction, the  representation  is  so  dilferent  that  it 
is  far  more  natural  to  conclude  tli;it  it  was  derived 
from  some  other,  though  not  antagonistic  source. 
It  may  be  argued  that  here  we  have,  not  as  in  the 
first  instance  the  Divine  idea  and  method  of  Cre- 
ation, but  the  actual  relation  of  man  to  the  world 
around  him,  and  especially  to  the  vegetable  and 
animal  kingdoms ;  that  this  is  therefore  only  a 
resumption  and  explanation  of  some  things  which 
had  been  mentioned  more  broadly  and  generally 
before.  Still  in  any  case  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
this  second  account  has  the  character  of  a  supjile- 
meut ;  that  it  is  designed,  if  not  to  correct,  at  least 
to  explain  the  other.  And  this  fact,  taken  in  con- 
nexion with  tlie  peculiarities  of  the  phraseology  and 
the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  in  the  same  section,  is 
quite  sufficient  to  justify  the  supposition  that  we 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

have  here  an  instance,  not  of  independent  narrative, 
but  of  compilation  from  diHerent  sources. 

To  take  another  instance.  Cliapter  xiv.  is  beyond 
all  doubt  an  ancient  monument — papyrus-roll  it 
may  have  been,  or  inscription  on  stone,  which  has 
been  copied  and  transplanted  in  its  original  form 
into  our  present  Book  of  (jlenesis.  Archaic  it  is  in 
its  whole  character:  distinct  too,  again,  from  the 
rest  of  the  book  in  its  use  of  the  name  of  God. 
Here  we  have  El  'Ellyon,  "  the  Most  High  God,",- 
used  by  Melchizedec  first,  and  then  by  Abraham, 
who  adojjts  it  and  applies  it  to  Jehovah,  as  if  to 
show  that  it  was  one  (iod  whom  he  worshi[)ped  and 
whom  Melchizedec  acknowledged,  though  they  knew 
Him  under  diHerent  appellations. 

We  believe,  then,  that  at  least  these  two  portions 
of  Genesis — chap.  ii.  4— iii.  24,  and  chap.  xiv. — are 
original  docimients,  preserved,  it  may  have  been, 
like  the  genealogies,  which  are  also  a  very  promi- 
nent feature  of  the  book,  in  the  tents  of  the  patri- 
archs, and  made  use  of  either  by  the  Elohist  or  the 
Jehovist  for  his  history.  Indeed  Eichhorn  seems 
to  be  not  far  from  the  truth  when  he  observes, 
"  The  early  portion  of  the  histor}'  was  composed 
merely  of  separate  small  notices  ;  whilst  the  family 
history  of  the  Hebrews,  on  the  contrary,  runs  on 
in  two  continuous  narratives :  these,  however,  again 
have  not  only  here  and  there  some  passages  inserted 
from  other  sources,  as  chap,  xiv.,  xxxiii.  18-xxxiv. 
31,  xxxvi.  1-43,  xlix.  1-27,  but  even  where  the 
authors  wrote  more  independently  they  often  bring 
together  traditions  which  in  the  course  of  time  had 
taiien  a  different  form,  and  merely  give  them  as 
they  had  received  them,  without  intimating  which 
is  to  be  preferred"  {FAnl.  in  A.  T.  iii.  91,  §412). 

We  come  now  to  a  more  ample  examination  of 
the  question  as  to  the  distinctive  use  of  the  Divine 
Names.  Is  it  the  fact,  as  Astruc  was  the  first  to 
surmise,  that  this  early  portion  of  the  Pentateuch, 
extending  from  Gen.  i.  to  Ex.  vi.,  does  contain  two 
original  documents  characterised  by  their  separate 
use  of  the  Divine  Names  and  by  other  peculiarities 
of  style?  Of  this  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt. 
We  do  find,  not  only  scattered  verses,  but  whole 
sections  thus  characterised.  Throughout  this  por- 
tion of  the  Pentateuch  the  name  niiT*  (Jehovah) 
prevails  in  some  sections,  and  DTIPN  (Elohim)  in 
others.  There  are  a  few  sections  where  both  are 
employed  indifferently ;  and  there  are,  finally,  sec- 
tions of  some  length  in  which  neither  the  one  nor 
the  other  occurs.  A  list  of  these  has  been  given 
in  another  article.  [Genesis.]  And  we  find  more- 
over that  in  connexion  with  this  use  of  the  Divine 
Names  there  is  also  a  distinctive  and  characteristic 
phraseology.  The  style  and  idiom  of  the  Jehovah 
sections  is  not  the  same  as  the  style  and  idiom  of 
the  Elohim  sections.  After  Ex.  vi.  2-vii.  7,  the 
name  Elohim  almost  ceases  to  be  characteristic  of 
whole  sections ;  the  only  exceptions  to  this  rule 
being  Ex.  xiii.  17-19  and  chap,  xviii.  Such  a  phe- 
nomenon as  this  cannot  be  without  significance.  If, 
as  Hengstenberg  and  those  who  agree  with  him 
would  pei-suade  us,  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  is 
to  be  accounted  for  throughout  by  a  reference  to 
their  etj'mology — if  the  author  uses  the  one  when 
his  design  is  to  speak  of  God  as  the  Creator  and  the 
Judge,  and  the  other  when  his  object  is  to  set  forth 
God  as  the  Redeemer — then  it  still  cannot  but 
appear  remarkable  that  only  up  to  a  particular 
point  do  these  names  stamp  separate  sections  of  the 
narrative,  whereas  afterwards  all  such  distinctive 
criterion  fails.     How  is  this  fact  to  be  accounted 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

for?  Why  is  it  Ihat  up  to  Ks.  vi.  each  name  has 
its  own  province  in  the  nanative,  broad  and  clearly 
defined,  whereas  in  the  subsequent  portions  the 
name  Jehovah  prevails,  and  Elohim  is  only  inter- 
changed with  it  here  and  there  ?  But  the  alleged 
design  in  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  will  not  bear 
a  close  examination.  It  is  no  doubt  true  that 
throughout  the  story  of  Creation  in  i.  1-ii.  3  we 
have  Elohim — and  this  squares  with  the  hypothesis. 
There  is  some  plausibility  also  in  the  attempt  to 
explain  the  compound  use  of  the  Divine  Names  in 
the  next  section,  by  the  fact  that  here  we  have  the 
transition  from  the  History  of  Creation  to  the  His- 
tory of  Iledemjjtion  ;  that  here  consequently  we 
should  expect  to  find  God  exhibited  in  both  cha- 
racters, as  the  God  who  made  and  the  God  who 
redeems  the  world.  That  after  the  Fall  it  should 
be  Jehovah  who  speaks  in  the  history  of  Cain  and 
Abel  is  on  the  s;ime  principle  intelligible,  viz.  that 
this  name  harmonises  best  with  the  features  of  the 
narrative.  But  when  we  come  to  the  history  of 
Noah  the  criterion  fails  us.  Why,  for  instance, 
should  it  be  said  that  "  Noah  foiuid  grace  in  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah"  (vi.  8),  and  that  "  Noah  walked 
with  Elohim"  (vi.  9)?  Surely  on  the  hypothesis 
it  should  have  been,  "  Noah  walked  with  Jehovah," 
for  Jehovah,  not  Elohim,  is  His  Name  as  the  God 
of  covenant  and  grace  and  self-revelation.  Heng- 
stenberg's  attempt  to  explain  this  phrase  by  an 
opposition  between  "  walking  with  God  "  and 
"  walking  with  the  world  "  is  remarkable  only  for 
its  ingenuity.  Why  should  it  be  more  natural  or 
more  forcible  even  then  to  imply  an  opposition 
between  the  world  and  its  Creator,  than  between 
the  world  and  its  lledeemer  ?  The  reverse  is  what 
we  sliould  expect.  To  walk  with  the  world  does 
not  mean  with  the  created  things  of  the  world,  but 
with  the  spirit  of  the  world ;  and  the  emphatic 
opposition  to  that  spirit  is  to  be  found  in  the  spii'it 
which  confesses  its  need  and  lays  hold  of  the  promise 
of  Redemption.  Hence  to  walk  with  Jehovah  (not 
Elohim)  would  be  the  natural  antithesis  to  walking 
with  the  world.  So,  again,  how  on  the  hypothesis 
of  Hengstenberg,  can  we  satisfactorily  account  for  its 
being  said  in  vi.  22,  "  Thus  did  Noah  ;  a(;cording  to 
all  that  God  (^Elohiio)  commanded  him,  so  did  he  :" 
and  in  vii.  5,  "  And  Noah  did  according  unto  all 
that  ye/ioi)a/i  commanded  him  :"  while  again  in  vii.  9 
Elohim  occurs  in  the  same  phrase  ?  The  elaborate 
ingenuity  by  means  of  which  Hengstenberg,  Drech- 
sler,  and  others,  attempt  to  account  for  the  specific 
use  of  the  several  names  in  these  instances  is  in  fact 
its  own  refutation.  The  stern  constraint  of  a  theory 
could  alone  have  suggested  it. 

The  fact  to  which  we  have  referrotl  thai  there  is 
this  distinct  use  of  the  names  Jehovah  and  Elohim 
in  the  Ciirlier  portion  of  the  l'ent;iteuch,  is  no 
doubt  to  be  ex])lained  by  what  we  are  told  in  Ex. 
vi.  2,  "  And  Elohim  spake  unto  Sloses,  and  said 
unto  him,  I  am  Jehovah :  and  1  appeared  unto 
Abraham,  unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob  as  El-Shaddai, 
but  by  iny  name  Jehovah  was  I  not  known  to 
them."  Does  this  mean  that  the  name  Jehovah 
was  literally  unknown  to  the  Patriarchs  ?  that  the 
first  revelation  of  it  was  tiiat  made  to  Moses  in 
chap.  iii.  1'),  1-1^?  where  we  read:  "  .\nd  Moses 
.said  unto  God,  Behold,  when  I  come  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  and  shall  say  unto  them.  The  God  of 
vour  fathei-s  hath  sent  me  unto  you  ;  and  they  shall 
say  to  me.  What  is  His  Name?  wiiat  shall  I  .say 
unto  them?  And  (iod  said  imto  Moses,  I  AM 
THAT  1  AM:  and  He  said.  Thus  shall  thou  say 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


775 


unto  the  children  of  Israel,  I  AM  hath  sent  me 
unto  you." 

This  is  undoubtedly  t\w  thst  explanation  oi' the 
name.  It  is  now,  and  now  first,  that  Jsrael  is  to 
be  made  to  understand  the  full  import  of  that 
Name.  This  they  are  to  learn  by  the  redemption 
oat  of  Egypt.  By  means  of  tlie  deliverance  they 
are  to  recognize  the  character  of  their  deliverer. 
The  God  of  their  fathers  is  not  a  God  of  power 
only,  but  a  God  of  faithfulness  and  of  love,  the  God 
who  has  made  a  covenant  with  His  chosen,  and  who 
therefore  will  not  forsake  them.  This  seems  to  be 
the  meaning  of  the  "  I  A  JI  THAT  I  AM  "  (nVHX 
ri_"[nN  lEJ'X),  or  as  it  may  perhaps  be  better  ren- 
dered, "  I  am  He  whom  I  prove  myself  to  be." 
The  abstract  idea  of  self-existence  can  hardly  be 
conveyed  by  this  name  ;  but  rather  the  idea  that 
God  is  what  He  is  in  relation  to  His  people.  Now, 
in  this  sense  it  is  clear  God  had  not  fully  made 
Himself  known  befose. 

The  name  Jehovah  may  have  existed,  though  we 
have  only  two  instances  of  this  in  the  history, — the 
one  in  the  name  Moriah  (Gen.  xxii.  2),  and  the 
other  in  the  name  of  the  mother  of  Moses  (E.x.  vi. 
20),  who  was  called  Jochebed  ;  both  names  formed 
by  composition  from  the  Divine  name  Jehovah.  It 
is  certainly  remarkable  that  during  the  patriarchal 
times  we  find  no  other  instance  of  a  proper  name  so 
compounde<l.  Names  of  persons  compounded  with 
El  and  Shaddai  we  do  find,  but  not  with  Jehovah. 
This  fact  abundantly  shows  that  the  name  Jehovah 
was,  if  not  altogether  unknown,  at  any  rate  not 
understood.  And  thus  we  have  "  an  undesigned 
coinci<ience"  in  support  of  the  accuracy  of  the  nar- 
rative, (iod  says  in  Exodus,  He  was  not  known 
by  that  name  to  the  patriarchs.  The  Jehovistic 
writer  of  the  patriarchal  history,  whether  Moses  or 
one  of  his  friends,  uses  the  name  freely  as  one  with 
which  he  himself  was  familiar,  but  it  never  appears 
in  the  history  and  life  of  the  Patriarchs  as  one 
which  was  familiar  to  them.  On  the  other  hand, 
passages  like  Gen.  iv.  26,  and  ix.  26,  seem  to  show 
that  the  name  was  not  altogether  unknown.  Hence 
Astruc  remarks :  "  Le  passage  de  I'Exode  bien  en- 
tendu  ne  prouve  point  que  le  nom  de  Jehova  fut 
un  nom  de  Dieu  inconnu  aux  Patriarches  et  revele 
h,  Moyse  le  premier,  mais  prouve  seulement  que 
Dieu  n'  avoit  pas  fait  connoitre  aux  Patriarches 
toute  I'e'tendue  de  la  signification  de  ce  nom,  au 
lieu  qu'il  I'a  manifestee  a  Moyse."  The  expression 
in  hbi.  vi.  3,  "  I  was  not  known,  or  did  not  make 
myself  known,"  is  in  fact  to  be  understood  with  the 
same  limitation  as  when  (John  i.  17)  it  is  said,  that 
"  Grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ "  as  in 
opposition  to  the  Law  of  Moses,  which  does  not 
mean  that  there  was  no  Gi-ace  or  Trutli  in  the  Old 
Covenant;  or  as  when  (John  vii.  39)  it  is  said, 
"  The  Holy  (Jhost  was  not  yet,  because  Jesus  was 
not  yet  glorified,"  which  does  not  of  course  exclade 
all  operation  of  the  Spirit  betbre. 

Still  this  phenomenon  of  the  distinct  use  of  the 
Divine  names  would  scarcely  of  itself  prove  the 
point,  that  there  are  two  documents  which  form  the 
groundwork  of  the  existing  Pentateuch.  But  there 
is  otlier  evidence  pointing  the  same  way.  We  find, 
for  instance,  the  sami;  story  told  by  the  two  writers, 
and  their  two  accounts  manifestly  interwoven  ;  and 
we  find  also  certain  favourite  words  and  phra.ses 
which  distinguish  the  one  writer  from  the  other. 

(1.)  In  proof  of  the  (irst,  it  is  suiricient  to  read 
the  history  of  Noah. 


776 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


in  order  to  make  this  more  clear,  we  will  separate 
the  two  documents,  and  an-auge  them  in  parallel 
columns : — 


Jehovah. 

Gen.  vi.  5.  And  Je- 
hovah saw  that  the  wick- 
edness of  man  was  great 
in  the  earth,  and  that 
every  imagination  of  tlie 
thoughts  of  bis  heart  was 
only  evil  continually. 
And  it  repented  Jehovah, 
&c. 

7.  And  Jehovah  said, 
I  will  blot  out  man  whom 
I  have  created  from  off 
the  face  of  the  ground. 


Elohim. 
Gen.  vi.  12.  And  Elo- 
him  saw  the  earth,  and 
heboid  it  was  corrupt ; 
for  all  flesh  had  corrupted 
his  way  upon  the  earth. 


vii.  1.  And  Jehovali 
said  to  Noah  ....  Thee 
have  I  seen  righteous  be- 
fore me  in  this  genera- 
tion. 

vii.  2.  Of  all  cattle 
which  is  clean  thou  sbalt 
take  to  thee  by  sevens, 
male  and  his  female,  and 
of  all  cattle  which  is  not 
clean,  two,  male  and  his 
female. 

3.  Also  of  fowl  of  the 
air  by  sevens,  male  and 
female,  to  preserve  seed 
alive  on  the  face  of  all 
the  earth. 


vii.  4.  For  in  yet 
seven  days  1  will  send 
tain  upon  the  earth  forty 
days  and  forty  nights, 
and  I  will  blot  out  all  the 
substance  which  I  have 
made  from  off  the  face  of 
the  ground. 

vii.  5.  And  Noah  did 
according  to  all  that  Je- 
hovah commanded  him. 


1 3.  And  Elohim  said  to 
Noah,  The  end  of  all  flesh 
is  come  before  me,  for  the 
earth  is  filled  with  vio- 
lence because  of  them, 
and  behold  I  will  destroy 
them  with  the  earth. 

vi.  9.  Noah  a  righteous 
man  was  perfect  in  his 
generation.  With  Elohim 
did  Noah  walk. 

vi.  19.  And  of  every 
living  thing  of  all  flesh, 
two  of  all  sbalt  thou  bring 
into  the  ark  to  preserve 
alive  with  thee  :  male  and 
female  shall  they  be. 

20.  Of  fowl  after  their 
kind,  and  of  cattle  after 
their  kind,  of  every  thing 
that  creepeth  on  the 
ground  after  his  kind, 
two  of  all  shall  come  unto 
thee  that  thou  mayest 
preserve  (them)  alive. 

vi.  17.  And  I,  behold  I 
do  bring  the  flood,  waters 
>ipon  the  earth,  to  destroy 
all  flesh  wherein  is  the 
breath  of  life,  from  under 
heaven,  all  that  is  in  the 
earth  shall  perish. 

vi.  22.  And  Noah  did 
according  to  all  that  Elo- 
him commanded  him  ;  so 
did  he. 

Without  carrying  this  parallelism  further  at 
leno-th,  we  will  merely  indicate  by  references  the 
traces  of  the  two  documents  in  the  rest  of  the  nar- 
rative of  the  Flood  : — -vii.  1,  6,  on  the  Jehovah  side, 
answer  to  vi.  18,  vii.  11,  on  the  Elohim  side  ;  vii. 
7,  8,  9,  17,  23,  to  vii.  13,  14,  15,  16,  18,  21,  22; 
viii.  21,  22,  toix.  8,  9,  10,  11. 

It  is  quite  true  that  we  find  both  in  earlier  and 
later  writers  repetitions,  which  may  arise  either 
from  accident  or  from  want  of  sk]ll  on  the  part  of 
the  author  or  compiler ;  but  neither  the  one  uor  the 
other  would  account  for  the  constant  repetition 
which  here  runs  through  all  parts  of  the  narrative. 

(2.)  But  again  we  find  that  these  duplicate 
narratives  are  characterized  by  peculiar  modes  of 
ei})ression  ;  and  that,  generally,  the  Elohistic  and 
Jehovistic  sections  have  their  own  distinct  and  indi- 
vidual colouring. 

We  find  certain  favourite  phrases  peculiar  to  the 
Elohistic  passages.  Such,  for  instance,  are  il-TilN, 
"  possession  ;"  D''>13D  f}^,  "  land  of  sojouni- 
ings ;"   DjTinh/,  or  Dnnh^,  "  after  your,  or 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

their,  generations  ;"  i3"'JD7,  or  n3"'lp7,  "  after  his, 
or  her,  kind  ;"  r\-\T]  OVn  DVyS,  "  on  the  self- 
snmeday;"  D"IX  pS.  "  Pndan  Aiam" — for  which 
in  the  Jehovistic  portions  we  always  find  D"IK 
D''"in3,  "  Aram  Naharaim,"  or  simply  DIK, 
"  Aram  ;"  mil  iTiS,  "  be  fruitful  and  multiply  ;" 
nnS  D^pn,  "establish  a  covenant"  —  the  Jeho- 
vistic phrase  being  n''"13  mS,  "  to  make  (lit. 
'  cut')  a  covenant."  So  again  we  find  n''"13  niN. 
"  sign  of  the  covenant ;"  U^\V  ri''"l3,  "  everlasting 
covenant;"  n3pM  "IDT,  "male  and  female"  (in- 
stead of  the'  Jehovistic  mm)  l^''ii)  ;  'y^*, 
"  swarming  or  creeping  thing;"  and  I'ntJ' :  and 
the  common  supei'scription  of  the  genealogical  por- 
tions, n'nbin  n?N,    "  these  are  the  generations 

of,"  &c.,  are,  if  not  e.xclusively,  yet  almost  exclu- 
sively, characteristic  of  those  sections  in  which  the 
name  Elohim  occurs. 

There  is  therefore,  it  seems,  good  ground  for 
concluding  that,  besides  some  smaller  independent 
documents,  traces  may  be  discovered  of  two  ori- 
ginal historical  works,  which  form  the  basis  of  the 
present  book  of  Genesis  and  of  the  earlier  chapters 
of  Exodus. 

Of  these  there  can  be  uo  doubt  that  the  Elohistic 
is  the  earlier.  The  passage  in  Ex.  vi.  establishes 
this,  as  well  as  the  matter  and  style  of  the  document 
itself.  Whether  Moses  himself  was  the  author  of 
either  of  these  works  is  a  different  question.  Both 
are  probably  in  the  main  as  old  as  his  time ;  the 
Elohistic  certainly  is,  and  perhaps  older.  But  other 
questions  must  be  considered  before  we  can  pro- 
nounce with  certainty  on  this  head. 

4.  But  we  may  now  advance  a  step  further. 
There  are  certain  references  of  time  and  place  which 
prove  cleai'ly  that  the  work,  in  its  present  form,  is 
later  than  the  time  of  Moses.  Kotices  there  are 
scattered  here  and  there  which  can  only  be  ac- 
counted for  fairly  on  one  of  two  suppositious — viz., 
either  a  later  composition  of  the  whole,  or  the 
revision  of  an  editor  who  found  it  necessary  to 
introduce  occasionally  a  few  words  by  way  of  ex- 
planation or  correction.  When,  for  instance,  it  is 
said  (Gen.  xii.  6,  comp.  xiii.  7),  "  And  the  Canaanite 
was  then  (T^?)  in  the  land,"  the  obvious  meaning 
of  such  a  remark  seems  to  be  that  the  state  of 
things  was  different  in  the  time  of  the  writer ;  that 
now  the  Canaanite  was  there  no  longer ;  and  the 
conclusion  is  that  the  words  must  have  been  written 
after  the  occupation  of  the  land  by  the  Israelites. 
lu  any  other  book,  as  Vaihinger  justly  remarks, 
we  should  certainly  draw  this  inference. 

The  principal  notices  of  time  and  place  which 
have  been  alleged  as  bespeaking  for  the  Pentateuch 
a  later  date  are  the  following: — 

(rt.)  Keferences  of  time.  Ex.  vi.  26,  27,  need 
not  be  regarded  as  a  later  addition,  for  it  obviously 
sums  up  the  genealogical  register  given  just  before, 
and  refers  back  to  ver.  13.  But  it  is  more  naturally 
reconcilable  with  some  other  authorship  than  that 
of  Moses.  Again,  P]x.  xvi.  33-36,  though  it  must 
have  been  introduced  after  the  rest  of  the  book  was 
written,  may  have  been  added  by  Moses  himself, 
supposing  him  to  have  composed  the  rest  of  the 
book.  Moses  there  directs  Aaron  to  lay  up  the 
manna  before   .Jehovah,  and   then   we  read:   "As 


PENI'ATEUCH,  THE 

Jehovah  comniaii(.U'd  Moses,  so  Aaioii  laid  it  u|) 
before  the  'I'estimony  (i.  e.  the  Ark)  to  be  kept. 
And  the  children  of  Israel  did  eat  mauna  ibrty 
years,  until  they  came  to  a  land  inhabited;  they 
did  eat  manna  until  they  came  unto  the  borders  of 
the  land"  of  Canaan."  Then  follows  the  remark, 
"  Now  an  onier  is  the  tenth  part  of  an  ephah."  It 
is  clear  then  that  this  p;issage  was  written  not  only 
after  the  Ark  was  made,  but  after  the  Israelites 
had  entered  the  Promised  Land.  The  plain  and 
obvious  intention  of  the  writer  is  to  tell  us  when 
the  manna  ceased,  not,  as  Hengstenberg  contends, 
merely  how  long  it  continued.  !So  it  is  said  (Josh. 
V.  12),  "And  the  manna  ceased  on  the  morrow 
after  they  had  eaten  of  the  old  corn  of  the  land,"  &c. 
The  observation,  too,  about  the  omer  could  only 
have  been  made  when  the  omer  as  a  measure  had 
fallen  into  disuse,  which  it  is  hardly  supposable 
could  have  taken  place  in  the  lifetime  of  Moses. 
Still  these  passages  are  not  absolutely  in-econcilable 
with  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  book.  Verse  35 
may  be  a  later  gloss  only,  as  Le  Clerc  and  Rosen- 
miiller  believed. 

The  difficulty  is  greater  with  a  passage  in  the 
book  of  Genesis.  The  genealogical  table  of  Esau's 
family  (chap,  xxxvi.)  can  scarcely  be  regarded  as  a 
later  interpolation.  It  does  not  interrujit  the  order 
and  connexion  of  the  book ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is 
a  most  essential  part  of  its  structure ;  it  is  one  of 
the  ten  "  generations "  or  genealogical  registers 
which  form,  so  to  speak,  the  backbone  of  the  whole. 
Herfe  we  find  the  remark  (ver.  'M),  "And  these 
are  the  kings  that  ]-eigned  in  the  land  of  Edom, 
before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of 
Israel."  Le  Clerc  supposed  this  to  be  a  later  ad- 
dition, and  Hengstenberg  confesses  the  difficulty  of 
the  passage  (Aut/i.  d.  Fentat.  ii.  202).  But  the 
dilficLilty  is  not  set  aside  by  Heugstenberg's  remai-k 
that  the  reference  is  to  the  prophecy  already  deli- 
vered in  XXXV.  11,  "  Kings  shall  come  out  of  thy 
loins."  No  unprejudiced  person  can  read  the  words, 
"  before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children 
of  Israel,"  without  feeling  that  when  they  were 
written,  kings  had  already  begun  to  reign  over 
Israel.  It  is  a  simple  historical  fact  that  for  cen- 
turies after  the  death  of  Moses  no  attempt  was 
made  to  establish  a  monarchy  amongst  the  Jews. 
Gideon  indeed  (Judg.  viii.  22,  23)  might  have 
become  king,  or  perhaps  rather  military  dictator, 
but  was  wise  enough  to  decline  with  firmness  the 
dangerous  honour.  His  son  Abimelech,  less  scru- 
pulous and  more  ambitious,  prevailed  upon  the 
Shcchemites  to  make  him  king,  and  was  acknow- 
ledged, it  would  seem,  by  other  cities,  but  ho 
perished  after  a  turbulent  reign  of  three  years, 
without  being  able  to  perpetuate  his  dynasty.  Such 
facts  are  not  indicative  of  any  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
Israelites  at  that  time  to  be  ruled  by  kings.  There 
was  no  deeji-rooted  national  tendency  to  monarchy 
which  could  account  lor  theol)servation  in  Gen.  xxxvi. 
on  the  jiart  of  a  writer  who  lived  centuries  before 
a  monarchy  was  established.  It  is  impossible  not 
to  feel  in  the  wor<ls,  as  Ewald  observes,  that  the 
narrator  almost  envies  lulom  because  she  had  en- 
joyed the  blessings  of  a  regular  well-ordered  king- 
dom so  long  before  Israel.  An  historical  remark 
of  this  kind,  it  must  be  reniembere<l,  is  widely 
ditii-rent  from  the  provision  made  in   Deuteronomy 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


777 


e  I'salm  .\iv.  furnishes  a  curious  Instunco  of  the  way  in 
wliicli  a  passage  may  be  introducrd  inti>  ;wi  earlier  Ixmk. 
Si. Paul,  (luoling  tbis  psalm  in  ll^m.  ili.  lo.  Kiilynins  oiIht 


tor  the  possible  case  that  at  some  later  time  a 
monarchy  would  be  established.  It  is  one  thing 
tor  a  writer  framing  laws,  which  are  to  be  the 
heritage  of  his  jieople  and  the  basis  of  their  consti- 
tution for  all  time,  to  prescribe  what  shall  be  done 
when  they  shall  elect  a  king  to  reign  over  them. 
It  is  another  thing  for  a  writer  comparing  the  con- 
dition of  another  country  with  his  own  to  say  that 
the  one  had  a  monarchical  form  of  government  long 
before  the  other.  The  one  might  be  the  dictate  of 
a  wise  sagacity  forecasting  the  future  ;  the  other 
could  only  be  said  at  a  time  when  both  nations 
alike  were  governed  by  kings.  In  the  former  case 
we  might  even  recognise  a  spirit  of  prophecy :  in 
the  latter  this  is  out  of  the  question.  Either  then 
we  must  admit  that  the  book  of  Genesis  did  not 
exist  as  a  whole  till  the  times  of  David  and  Solomon, 
or  we  must  regard  this  particular  verse  as  the  inter- 
polation of  a  later  editor.  And  this  last  is  not  so 
improbable  a  supposition  as  Vaihinger  would  repie- 
sent  it.  Perfectly  true  it  is  th?t  the  whole  genea- 
logical table  could  have  been  no  later  addition :  it 
is  manifestly  an  integral  part  of  the  book.  But  the 
words  in  question,  ver.  31,  may  have  been  inserted 
later  i'rom  the  genealogical  table  in  1  Chr.  i.  43 ; 
and  if  so,  it  may  have  been  introduced  by  Ezra  in 
his  revision  of  the  Law.* 

Similar  remarks  may  perhaps  apply  to  Lev.  xviii. 
28  :  "  That  the  land  spue  not  you  out  also  when 
ye  defile  it,  as  it  spued  out  the  nation  Hint  was 
before  you,"  This  undoubtedly  assumes  the  occu- 
pation of  the  Land  of  Cana;\n  by  the  Israelites. 
The  great  difficulty  connected  with  this  passage, 
however,  is  that  it  is  not  a  supplementary  remark 
of  the  writer's,  but  that  the  words  are  the  words 
of  God  directing  Moses  what  he  is  to  say  to  the 
children  of  Israel  (ver.  1).  And  this  is  not  set 
aside  even  if  we  suppose  the  book  to  have  been 
written,  not  by  Moses,  but  by  one  of  the  elders 
after  the  entrance  into  Canaan. 

(b.)  In  several  instances  older  names  of  places 
give  place  to  those  which  came  later  into  use  in 
Canaan.  In  Gen.  xiv.  14,  and  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  1, 
occurs  the  name  of  the  well-known  city  of  Dan. 
But  in  Josh.  xix.  47  we  are  distinctly  told  that 
this  name  was  given  to  what  was  originally  called 
Leshom  (or  Laish)  by  the  children  of  Dan  after 
they  had  wrested  it  from  the  Canaanites.  The 
same  account  is  repeated  still  more  circumstantially 
in  Judg.  xviii.  27-29,  where  it  is  positively  asserted, 
that  "  the  name  of  the  city  was  Laish  at  the  first." 
It  is  natural  that  the  city  should  be  called  Dan  in 
Deut.  xxxiv.,  as  that  is  a  passage  written  beyond 
all  doubt  after  the  occupation  of  the  Land  of 
Canaim  by  the  Israelites.  But  in  Genesis  we  can 
only  fairly  account  for  its  appearance  by  supposing 
that  the  old  name  Laish  originally  stood  in  the 
MS.,  and  that  Dan  was  substituted  for  it  on  some 
later  revision.     [Dan.] 

In  Josh.  xiv.  ]5(comp.  xv.  13,  54)  and  Judg. 
i.  10  we  are  told  that  the  original  name  of  Hebron 
before  the  conquest  of  Canaan  was  Kirjath-Arba. 
In  Gen.  xxiii.  2  the  older  name  occui-s,  and  the 
explanation  is  added  (evidently  by  some  one  wlio 
wrote  later  than  the  occupation  of  Canaan),  "  the 
same  is  Hebron."  In  (ien.  xiii.  18  we  find  the  name 
of  Hebron  standing  alone  and  without  any  ex- 
planation.    Hence  Keil  supposes  that  this  was  the 


passages  of  Scripture  to  his  quotation.  Hence  the  LXX 
have  traiisrerred  these  passages  from  the  K|iistlt:  into  the 
Psalm,  luid  have  been  follnwed  l>y  the  N'lilg.  and  Arab. 


778 


PENTATEUCPI,  THE 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


original  name,  th.at  the  place  came   to  be  called    of  the  people,  and  on  the  basis  of  the  Law  was  to 


Kiijath-Arba  in  the  interval  between  Abraham  and 
Moses,  and  that  in  the  time  of  Joshua  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  speak  of  it  by  its  ancient  instead  of  its 
more  modern  name.  This  is  not  an  impossible 
supposition ;  but  it  is  more  obvious  to  explain  the 
apparent  anachronism  as  the  correction  of  a  later 
editor,  especially  as  the  correction  is  actually  given 
in  so  many  words  in  the  other  passage  (xxiii.  2). 

Another  instance  of  a  similar  kind  is  the  occur- 
rence of  Hormah  in  Num.  xiv.  45,  xxi.  1-3,  com- 
pared with  Judg.  i.  17.  It  may  be  accounted  for, 
however,  thus : — In  Num.  xxi.  3  we  have  the  origin 
of  the  name  explained.  The  book  of  Numbers  was 
written  later  than  this,  and  consequently,  even  in 
speaking  of  an  earlier  event  which  took  place  at 
the  same  spot,  the  writer  might  apply  the  name, 
though  at  that  point  of  the  history  it  had  not  been 
given.  Then  in  Judg.  i.  17  we  have  the  Canaanite 
name  Zephath  (for  the  Canaanites  naturally  woidj 
not  have  adopted  the  Hebrew  name  given  in  token 
of  their  victory),  and  are  reminded  at  the  same 
time  of  the  oiiginal  Hebrew  designation  given  in 
the  Wilderness. 

So  far,  then,  judging  the  work  simply  by  what 
we  find  in  it,  there  is  abundant  evidence  to  show 
that,  though  the  main  bulk  of  it  is  IMosaic,  certain 
detached  portions  of  it  are  of  later  growth.  We 
are  not  obliged,  because  of  the  late  date  of  these 
portions,  to  bring  down  the  rest  of  the  book  to 
later  times.  Tiiis  is  contrary  to  the  express 
claim  advanced  by  laige  portions  at  least  to  be 
from  Closes,  and  to  other  evidence,  both  literary 
and  liistorical,  in  favour  of  a  Jlosaic  origin.  On 
the  other  hand,  when  we  remember  how  entirely 
during  some  periods  of  Jewish  history  the  Law 
seems  to  have  been  forgotten,  and  again  how  neces- 
sary it  would  be  after  the  seventy  years  of  exile  to 
explain  some  of  its  archaisms  and  to  add  here  and 
there  short  notes  to  make  it  more  intelligible  to 
the  people,  nothing  can  be  more  natural  than  to 
suppose  that  such  later  additions  were  made  by 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

III.  We  are  now  to  consider  the  evidence  lying 
outside  of  the  Pentateuch  itself,  which  bears  upon 
its  authorship  and  the  probable  date  of  its  compo- 
sition. This  evidence  is  of  three  kinds:  first,  direct 
mention  of  the  work  as  already  existing  in  the  later 
books  of  the  Bible ;  secondly,  the  existence  of  a  book 
substantially  the  same  as  the  present  Pentateuch 
amongst  the  Samaritans;  and,  lastly,  allusions  less 
direct,  such  as  historiail  references,  quotations,  and 
the  like,  which  presuppose  its  existence. 

1.  We  have  direct  evidence  for  the  authorship 
of  the  Law  in  Josh.  i.  7,  8,  "  according  to  all  the 
Law  which  Moses  my  servant  commanded  thee," — 


"  this  book  of  the  Law  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth," — and  viii.  31,  34,  xxiii.  6  (in  xxiv.  26, 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  God "),  in  all  which 
places  Moses  is  said  to  have  written  it.  This  agrees 
with  what  we  have  already  seen  respectino-  Deu- 
teronomy and  ceitain  other  portions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch which  are  ;iscribed  in  the  Pentateuch  itself 
to  Moses.  They  cannot,  however,  be  cited  as  prov- 
ing that  the  I'entateuch  in  its  present  foi-m  and  in 
all  its  parts  is  Mosaic. 

The  book  of  Judges  does  not  speak  of  the  book 
of  the  Law.  A  reason  may  be  alleged  lor  this 
ditlerence  between  the  books  of  Joshua  and  Judges. 
In  the  eyes  of  Joshua,  the  friend  and  immediate 
snccassor  of  Moses,  the  Law  would  po.ssess  unspeak- 
able value.     It  was  to  be  his  guide  as  the  Captain 


rest  all  the  life  of  the  people  both  civil  and  reli- 
gious, in  the  land  of  Canaan.  He  had  leceived, 
moreover,  from  God  Himself,  an  express  charge  to 
observe  and  do  according  to  all  that  was  written  in 
the  Law.  Hence  we  are  not  sui-prised  at  .the  pro- 
minent position  which  it  occupies  in  the  book  which 
tells  us  of  the  exploits  of  Joshua.  In  the  book  of 
Judges  on  the  other  hand,  whei-e  we  see  the  nation 
departing  widely  from  the  Mosaic  institutions,  lapsing 
into  idolatry  and  falling  under  the  power  of  foreign 
oppressors,  the  absence  of  all  mention  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law  is  easily  to  be  accounted  for. 

It  is  a  little  remarkable,  however,  that  no  direct 
mention  of  it  occurs  in  the  books  of  Samuel.  Con- 
sidering the  expiess  provision  made  for  a  monarchy 
in  Deuteronomy,  we  should  have  expected  that  on 
the  first  appointment  of  a  king  some  reference 
would  have  been  made  to  the  requirements  of  the 
Law.  A  prophet  like  Samuel,  we  might  have 
thought,  could  not  fi'il  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
newly  made  king  to  the  Book  in  accordance  with 
which  he  was  to  govern.  But  if  he  did  this,  the 
history  does  not  tell. .us  so;  though  there  are,  it 
is  true,  allusions  whicl^  can  only  be  interpieted  on 
the  supposition  that  the  Law  was  known.  The 
first  mention  of  the  Law  of  Moses  after  the  esta- 
blishment of  the  monarchy  is  in  David's  charge  to 
his  son  Solomon,  on  his  death-bed  (1  K.  ii.  3). 
From  that  passage  theie  can  be  no  doubt  that  David 
had  himself  fi-amed  his  rule  in  accordance  W'ith  it, 
and  was  desirous  that  his  son  should  do  the  same. 
The  words  "  as  it  is  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses," 
show  that  some  portion,  at  any  rate,  of  our  present 
Pentateuch  is  retijrred  to,  and  that  the  Law  was  re- 
ceived as  the  Law  of  Moses.  The  allusion,  too, 
seems  to  be  to  parts  of  Deuteronomy,  and  therefore 
favours  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  that  book.  In 
viii.  9,  we  are  told  that  "  there  was  nothing  in  the 
ark  save  the  two  tables  of  stone  which  Moses  put 
there  at  Horeb."  In  viii.  53,  Solomon  uses  the 
words,  "  As  Thou  spakest  by  the  hand  of  Moses 
Thy  servant;"  but  the  reference  is  too  general  to 
prove  anything  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. The  reference  may  be  either  to  Ex.  xix.  5, 
6,  or  to  Deut.  xiv.  2. 

In  2  K.  xi.  12,  "the  testimony"  is  put  into 
the  hands  of  Joash  at  his  coronation.  This  must 
have  been  a  book  containing  either  the  whole  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  or  at  least  the  Book  of  Deuteronomv, 
a  copy  of  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  king  was  ex- 
pected to  make  with  his  own  hand  at  the  time  of 
his  accession. 

In  the  Books  of  Chronicles  far  more  frequent  men- 
tion is  made  of  "  the  Law  of  Jehovah,"  or  "  the 
book  of  the  Law  of  Moses :" — a  fact  which  may 
be  accounted  for  partly  by  the  priestly  character  of 
those  books.  Thus  we  find  David's  prepai'ation  for 
the  worship  of  God  is  "  according  to  the  Law  of 
Jehovah  "  (1  Chr.  xvi.  40).  In  his  charge  to  Solo- 
mon occur  the  words  "  the  Law  of  Jehovah  thy 
God,  the  statutes  and  the  judgments  which  Jehovah 
charged  Moses  with  concerning  Israel"  (xxii.  12, 
13).  In  2  Chr.  xii.  it  is  said  that  Rehoboam 
"  forsook  the  Law  of  Jehovah  ;"  in  xiv.  4,  that  Asa 
commanded  Judah  "to  seek  Jeliovah  the  God  of 
their  fathers,  and  to  do  the  law  and  the  command- 
ment." In  XV.  3,  the  prophet  Azariali  reminds 
Asa  that  "  now  for  a  long  season  Israel  hath  been 
without  the  true  God,  and  without  a  teaching 
priest,  and  without  Law  ;"  and  in  xvii.  9, 
we    find   Jehoshaphat    ajipointing    certain    princes, 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

together  with  priests  and  Levites,  to  teach  :  "  they 
taught  in  Jiulah,  ami  had  the  book  of  the  Law  ot 
Jehovah  with  them."  In  xxv.  4,  Amaziah  is  said 
to  have  acted  in  a  particular  instance  "  as  it  is 
written  in  the  Law  of  the  book  of  Moses."  In 
.\x.Ni.  3,  4,  21,  He;iekiah's  regulations  are  expressly 
said  to  have  been  in  accordance  with  "  the  Law  of 
Jehovah."  In  xxxiii.  8,  the  writer  is  quoting  the 
word  of  God  in  reference  to  the  Temple : — "  so  that 
they  will  take  heed  to  do  all  that  I  have  commanded 
them,  according  to  the  whole  Law  and  the  statutes, 
and  the  ordinances  by  the  hand  of  Moses."  Jn 
xxxiv.  14,  occurs  the  memorable  passage  in  which 
HilkiaH  the  priest  is  said  to  have  "  found  a  book  of 
the  Law  of  Jehovah  (given)  by  Moses."  This  hap- 
pened in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
And  accordingly  we  aie  told  in  xxxv.  26,  that 
Josiah's  life  had  been  regulated  in  accordance  with 
that  which  was  "  written  in  the  Law  of  Jehovah." 

In  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  we  have  mention  several 
times  made  of  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  here  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  our  present  Pentateuch  is  meant ; 
for  we  have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  later 
revision  of  it  took  place.  At  this  time,  then,  the 
existing  Pentateuch  was  regarded  as  the  woik  of 
Moses.  Ezra  iii.  2,  "  as  it  is  written  in  the  Law  of 
Moses  the  man  of  God  ;"  vi.  18,  "  as  it  is  written  in 
the  book  of  Moses  ;"  vii.  6,  Ezra  it  is  said  "  was 
a  ready  scribe  in  the  Law  of  Moses."  In  Keh. 
i.  7,  &.C.,  "  the  commandments,  judgments,&c.,  which 
Thou  conimandedst  Thy  servant  Moses,"  viii.  1,  &c., 
we  have  the  remarkable  account  of  the  reading  of 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Moses."  See  also  ix.  3, 
14,  xiii.  1-3. 

The  Books  of  Chronicles,  though  undoubtedly 
based  upon  ancient  records,  are  probably  in  their 
present  form  as  late  as  the  time  of  Ezra.  Hence  it 
might  be  supposed  that  if  the  retei'ence  is  to  the 
present  Pentateuch  in  Ez;a,  the  present  Pentateuch 
must  also  be  referred  to  in  Chronicles.  But  this 
does  not  follow.  The  Book  of  Ezra  speaks  of 
the  Law  as  it  existed  in  the  time  of  the  writer ; 
the  books  of  Chronicles  speak  of  it  as  it  existed 
long  before.  Hence  the  author  of  the  latter  (who 
may  have  been  Ezra)  in  making  mention  of  the  Law 
of  Moses  refers  of  course  to  that  recension  of  it  which 
existed  at  the  particular  periods  over  which  his  his- 
tory travels.  Substimtially,  no  doubt,  it  was  the 
same  book ;  and  there  was  no  sj)ecial  reason  why 
the  Chronicler  should  tell  us  of  any  coi'rections  and 
additions  which  in  the  course  of  time  had  been  in- 
troduced into  it. 

In  Dan.  ix.  11,  13,  the  Law  of  Moses  is  men- 
tioned, and  here  again,  a  book  dillering  in  nothing 
from  our  present  Pentateuch  is  probably  meant. 

'L'hese  are  all  tiie  passages  of  the  Old  Testament 
Canon  in  which  •'  the  Law  of  Moses,"  "  the  book 
of  the  Law,"  or  such  like  expressions  occur,  de- 
noting the  existence  of  a  particular  book,  the  autlior- 
ship  of  which  was  ascribed  to  Moses,  in  the 
Prophets  and  in  tlie  Psalms,  though  there  are  many 
allusions  to  the  Law,  evidently  as  a  written  docu- 
ment, there  are  none  as  to  its  authorship.  But 
the  evidence  hitherto  adduced  from  tlie  liistorical 
books  is  iinq\K'stional)ly  strong;  first,  in  favour  of 
an  early  existence  of  the  main  body  of  the  Penta- 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


779 


teuch — more  particularly  of  Genesis  and  the  legal 
portions  of  the  remaining  books ;  and  next,  as  show- 
ing a  universal  'belief  amongst  the  Jews  that  the 
work  was  written  by  Moses. 

2.  Conclusive  proof  of  the  early  composition  of 
the  Pentateuch,  it  has  been  argued,  exists  in  the 
fact  that  the  Samaritans  hail  their  own  copies  of  it, 
not  dillering  very  materially  from  those  possessed 
by  the  Jews,  excejit  in  a  few  passages  which  had 
probably  been  purposely  tampered  with  and  altered ; 
such  for  instance  as  Ex.  xii.  40  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  4. 
The  Samaritans,  it  is  said,  must  have  derived  their 
Book  of  tlie  Law  from  the  Ten  Tribes,  whose  land 
they  occupied  ;  on  the  other  hand  it  is  out  of  tiie 
question  to  suppose  that  the  Ten  Tribes  would  be 
willing  to  accept  religious  books  from  the  Two. 
Hence  the  conclusion  seems  to  be  irresistible  that 
the  Pent;iteuch  must  have  existed  in  its  present  form 
before  the  separation  of  Israel  from  Judah ;  the  only 
part  of  the  0.  T.  which  was  the  common  heritage 
of  both. 

If  this  point  could  be  satisfactorily  established, 
we  should  have  a  limit  of  time  in  one  direction  for 
the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch.  It  could  not 
have  been  later  than  the  times  of  the  earliest  kings. 
It  must  have  been  earlier  than  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
and  indeed  than  that  of  Saul.  The  history  becomes 
at  this  point  so  full,  that  it  is  scarcely  credible  that 
a  measure  so  important  as  the  codirication  of  the 
Law,  if  it  had  taken  place,  could  have  been  passed 
over  in  silence.  Let  us,  then,  examine  the  evidence. 
What  proof  is  there  that  the  Samariums  received 
the  Pentateuch  from  the  Ten  Tribes  ?  According  to 
2  K.  xvii.  24-4i,  the  !^amaritans  were  originally 
heathen  colonists  belonging  to  difli^rent  Assyrian  and 
Arabian  f  tribes,  who  were  transplanted  by  Shalma- 
neser  to  occupy  the  room  of  the  Israelites  whom  he 
had  carried  away  captive.  It  is  evident,  however, 
that  a  considerable  portion  of  the  original  Israelitish 
population  must  still  have  remained  in  the  cities  of 
Samaria.  For  we  tind  (2  Chr.  xxx.  1-20)  that 
Hezekiah  invited  the  remnant  of  the  Ten  Tribes 
who  were  in  the  land  of  Israel  to  come  to  the  great 
Passover  which  he  celebrated,  and  the  different  ■ 
tribes  are  mentioned  (vers.  10,  11)  who  did,  or  did 
not  respond  to  the  invitation.  Later,  Esarhaddon 
adopted  the  policy  of  Shalmaneser  and  a  still  further 
deportation  took  place  (Ezr.  iv.  2).  But  even  after 
this,  though  the  heathen  element  in  all  probability 
jireponderated,  the  land  was  not  swept  clean  of  its 
original  inhabitants.  Josiah,  it  is  true,  did  not 
like  Hezekiah  invite  the  Samaritans  to  take  part  in 
the  worship  at  Jerusalem,  But  finding  himself 
strong  enough  to  disregard  the  power  of  Assyria, 
now  on  the  decline,  he  virtually  claimed  the  land  of 
Israel  as  the  rightful  apanage  of  David's  throne, 
adopted  energetic  measures  for  the  suppression  of 
idolatry,  and  even  exterminated  the  Samarit;in 
priests.  But  what  is  of  more  importance  as  show- 
ing that  .some  jxirtion  of  the  Ten  Tribes  was  still 
left  in  the  land,  is  the  fact,  that  when  the  collection 
was  made  for  the  repaiis  of  the  Temple,  we  are 
told  that  the  Levites  gathered  the  money  "  of  the 
hand  of  Manaxseh  and  Ephraim,  ami  of  all  the  rem- 
nant of  Israel,"  as  well  as  "of  Judah  and  Benjamin" 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9).     And  so  also,  after   the  disco- 


780 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


very  of  the  Book  of  Ihe  Law,  Jusiali  Lomul  not  only 
"all  who  were  present  in  Judnh  and  Benjamin"  to 
stand  to  the  covenant  contained  in  it,  but  he  "  toolj 
away  all  the  abominations  out  of  all  the  countries 
that  pei  taiued  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and  made 
all  tliat  were  present  in  Israel  to  serve,  even  to 
serve  Jehovah  their  God.  And  all  his  days  they 
departed  not  from  seiving  Jehovah  the  God  of  their 
fathers"  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  32,  33). 

Later  yet,  during  the  vice-royalty  of  Gedaliah, 
we  find  still  the  same  feeling  manifested  on  the  part 
of  the  Ten  Tribes  which  had  shown  itself  under  He- 
zekiah  and  Josiah.  Eighty  devotees  from  .Shechem, 
from  Shiloh,  and  from  Samaria,  came  with  all  the 
signs  of  mourning,  and  bearing  offerings  in  their 
hand,  to  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.  They  thus  tes- 
tified both  their  sorrow  for  the  desolation  that  had 
come  upon  it,  and  their  readiness  to  take  a  part  in 
the  worship  there,  now  tiiat  order  was  restored. 
And  this,  it  may  be  reasonably  presumed,  was  only 
one  partv  out  of  many  who  came  on  a  like  errand. 
All  these  facts  prove  that,  so  far  was  the  intercourse 
between  Judah  and  the  remnant  of  Israel  from  being 
embittered  by  religious  animosities,  that  it  was  the 
religious  bond  that  bound  them  together.  Hence 
it  Would  have  been  quite  possible  during  any  por- 
tion of  this  period  for  the  mixed  Samaritan  popu- 
lation to  have  received  the  Law  fiom  the  Jews. 

This  is  far  more  probable  than  that  copies  of  the 
Pentateuch  should  have  been  preserved  amongst 
those  families  of  the  Ten  Tribes  who  had  either 
escaped  when  the  land  was  shaven  by  the  razor 
of  the  king  of  Assyria,  or  who  had  straggled  back 
thither  from  their  exile.  If  even  in  Jeiusalem 
itself  the  Book  of  the  Law  was  so  scarce,  and  had 
been  so  forgotten,  that  the  pious  king  Josiah  knew 
nothing  of  its  contents  till  it  was  accidentally  dis- 
covered ;  still  less  probable  is  it  that  in  Israel, 
given  up  to  idolatry  and  wasted  by  invasions,  any 
copies  of  it  should  have  survived. 

On  the  whole  we  should  be  led  to  infer  that 
there  had  been  a  gradual  fusion  of  the  heathen 
settleis  with  the  original  inhabitants.  At  first  the 
former,  who  regarded  Jehovah  as  only  a  local  and 
national  deity  like  one  of  their  own  false  gods, 
endeavoured  to  appease  Him  by  adopting  in  part 
the  religious  worship  of  the  nation  whose  land  tliey 
occupied.  They  did  this  in  the  first  instance,  not 
by  mixing  with  the  resident  population,  but  by 
sending  to  the  king  of  Assyria  for  one  of  the 
Israelitish  priests  who  had  been  carried  captive. 
But,  in  process  of  time,  the  amalgamation  of  races 
became  complete  and  the  worsliip  of  Jehovah  super- 
seded the  worsliip  of  idols,  as  is  evident  both  from 
the  wish  of  the  Samaritans  to  join  in  the  Temple- 
worship  after  the  Captivity,  and  from  the  ab:-*nce 
of  all  idolatrous  symbols  onGerizim.  So  far,  then, 
the  history  leaves  us  altogether  in  doubt  as  to  the 
time  at  which  the  Pentateuch  was  received  by  the 
Samaritans.  Copies  of  it  mii/ht  have  been  lett  in 
the  northern  kingdom  after  Shalmaneser's  invasion, 
though  this  is  hardly  probable  ;  or  they  might  have 
been  introduced  thither  during  the  religious  reforms 
of  Hezekiah  or  Josiah. 

But  the  actual  condition  of  the  Pamai'itan  Pen- 
tiiteuch  is  against  any  such  supposition.  It  agrees 
so  remarkably  with  the  existing  Hebrew  Pentateuch, 
and  that,  too,  in  those  passages  which  are  niani- 
testiy  interpolations  and  corrections  as  late  as  the 
time  of  Ezra,  that  we  must  look  for  some  other 
period  to  which  to  refoi  the  adoption  of  the  Books 
of  Jloses  by  the  Samaritans.     This  we   find  after 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

the  Babyloni.sh  exile,  at  the  time  of  the  institution 
of  the  rival  worship  on  Gerizim.  Till  the  i-eturn 
from  Babylon  there  is  no  evidene-e  that  the  Sama- 
ritans regarded  the  Jews  with  any  extraordinaiy 
dislike  or  hostility.  But  the  manifest  distrust  and 
suspicion  with  which  Nehemiah  met  their  advances 
when  he  was  rebuilding  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  pro- 
voked their  wrath.  From  tliis  time  forward,  tiiey 
were  declared  and  open  enemies.  The  quarrel  be- 
tween the  two  nations  was  further  aggravated  by 
the  determination  of  Nehemiah  to  break  ofl' all  mar- 
riages which  had  been  contracted  between  Jews  and 
Samaritans.  Manasseh  the  brother  of  the  high- 
priest  (so  Josephus  calls  him.  Ant.  xi.  7,  §5),  and- 
himself  acting  high-priest,  was  one  of  the  otleuders. 
He  refused  to  divorce  his  wife,  and  took  refuge  with 
his  father-in-law  Sanballat,  who  consoled  him  for  the 
loss  of  his  priestly  privilege  in  Jerusalem  by  making 
him  liigh-priest  of  the  new  Samaritan  temple  on 
(ierizim.  With  Manasseh  many  other  apostate  Jews 
wlio  refused  to  divorce  their  wives,  fled  to  Samaiia. 
It  seems  highly  probable  that  these  men  took  the 
Pentateuch  with  them,  and  adopted  it  as  the  basis 
of  the  new  religious  system  which  they  inaugurated. 
A  full  discussion  of  this  question  would  be  out  of 
place  here.  It  is  sufficient  merely  to  show  how  fjir 
the  existence  of  a  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  not  mate- 
rially differing  from  the  Hebrew  Pentateuch,  bears 
upon  the  question  of  the  antiquity  of  the  latter. 
And  we  incline  to  the  view  of  Prideaux  {Connect. 
I'ook  vi.  chap,  iii.)  that  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
was  in  fact  a  transcript  of  Ezra's  revised  copy.  The 
same  view  is  virtually  adopted  by  Gesenius  {De 
Pent.  Sam.  pp.  8,  9). 

3.  We  are  now  to  consider  evidence  of  a  more 
indirect  kind,  which  bears  not  so  much  on  the 
Mosaic  authorship  as  on  the  early  existence  of  tjie 
work  as  a  whole.  This  last  circumstance,  how- 
ever, if  satisfactorily  made  out  is,  indirectly  at 
least,  an  argument  that  Moses  wrote  the  Pentateuch. 
Heiigstenberg  has  tried  to  show  that  all  the  later 
books,  by  their  allusions  and  quotations,  presuppose 
the  existence  of  the  Books  of  the  Law.  He  traces 
moreover  the  influence  of  the  Law  upon  the  whole 
life  civil  and  religious  of  tiie  nation  after  their 
settlement  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  He  sees  its 
spirit  transfused  into  all  the  national  literature, 
historical,  poetic  and  prophetical:  he  argues  that 
except  on  the  basis  of  the  Pentateuch  as  already 
existing  before  the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  into 
Canaan,  the  whole  of  their  history  after  the  occu- 
pation of  the  land  becomes  an  inexplicable  enigma. 
It  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  this  line  of  proof 
is,  if  established,  peculiarly  convincing,  just  in  pro- 
portion as  it  is  indirect  and  informal,  and  beyond 
the  reach  of  the  ordinary  weajxjus  of  criticism. 

Now,  beyond  all  doubt,  there  are  numerous  most 
striking  j-eferences  both  in  the  Prophets  and  in  the 
Books  of  Kings  to  passages  which  are  found  in  our 
present  Pentateuch.  One  thing  at  lesist  is  certain, 
tliat  the  theory  of  men  like  Von  Bohlen,  Vatke,  and 
others,  wlio  suppose  the  Pentateuch  to  have  been 
written  in  the  times  of  the  latest  kings,  is  utteily 
absurd.  It  is  established  in  the  most  convincing 
manner  that  tlie  legal  portions,  of  the  Pentateuch 
already  existed  in  writing  before  the  separation  of 
the  two  kingdoms.  Even  as  regards  the  historiavl 
portions,  there  are  often  in  the  later  books  almost 
verbal  coincidences  of  expression,  which  render  it 
more  than  probable  that  these  also  existed  in  writing. 
All  this  has  Ix'eu  argued  with  much  learning,  tha 
most   indefatigable   research,   and  in  somi-  instmices 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

with  groat  success  by  HengstenbiTs;  in  his  AutJientie 
das  I'entateuchs.  We  will  satisfy  ourselves  with 
poiutiug  out  some  oF  the  most  striking  passages  in 
which  tlie  coincidences  between  the  later  books  and 
the  Pentateuch  (omitting  Deuteronomy  for  the 
present)  appear. 

In  Joel,  who  prophesied  only  in  the  kingdom  of 
.ludah  ;  in  Amos,  who  prophesied  in  both  kingdoms  ; 
and  in  Hosea,  whose  ministry  was  confined  to  Israel, 
we  find  references  which  imply  the  existence  of  a 
written  code  of  laws.  The  following  comparison  of 
passages  may  siitisfy  us  on  this  point: — Joel  ii.  2 
with  Kx.  X.  14 ;  ii.  o  with  Gen.  ii.  8,  9  ''comp.  xiii. 
10);  ii.  17  with  Num.  siv.  13;  ii.  20  with  Ex.  x.  19; 
iii.  1  [ii.  28,  E.  V.]  with  Gen.  vi.  12  ;  ii.  13  with  Ex. 
xxxiv.  6  ;  iv.  [iii.]  18  with  Num.  x.w.  1. — Again, 
Amos  ii.  2  with  Num.  xxi.  28  ;  ii.  7  with  Ex.  xxiii.  6., 
Lev.  XX.  3  ;  ii.  8  with  Ex.  xxii.  25  &c. ;  ii.  9  with 
Num.  xiii.  32  &c. ;  iii.  7  with  Gen.  xviii.  17  ;  iv.  4 
with  Lev.  xxiv.  3,  and  Deut.  .xiv.  28,  .xxvi.  12  ;  v.  12 
with  Num.  xxxv.  31  (comp.  Ex.  xxiii.  6  and  Am. 
ii.  7)  ;  V.  17  with  Ex.  xii.  12;  v.  21  &c.  with 
Num.  xxix.  35,  Lev.  xxiii.  36;  vi.  1  with  Num.  i. 
17  ;  vi.  0  with  Gen.  xxxvii.  25  (this  is  probably  the 
reference :  Hengstenberg's  is  wrong);  vi.  8  with 
Lev.  xxvi.  19  ;  vi.  14  with  Num.  xxxiv.  8  ;  viii. 
6  with  Ex.  xxi.  2,  Lev.  xxv.  39  ;  ix.  13  with  Lev. 
xxvi.  3-5  (comp.  Ex.  iii.  8). — Again,  Hosea  i.  2 
with  Lev.  xx.  5-7  ;  ii.  1  [i.  10]  with  Gen.  xxii.  17, 
xxxii.  12  ;  ii.  2  [i.  11]  with  Ex.  i.  10  ;  iii.  2  with  Ex. 
xxi.  32 ;  iv.  8  with  Lev.  vi.  17  &c.,  and  vii.  1  &c. ; 
iv.  10  with  Lev.  xxvi.  26;  iv.  17  with  Ex.  xxxii.  9, 
10 ;  v.  6  lyith  Ex.  x.  9 ;  vi.  2  with  Gen.  xvii.  18  ; 
vii.  8  with  Ex.  xx.xiv.  12-16;  xii.  6  [A.  V.  5]  with 
Ex.  iii.  15  ;  xii.  10  [9]  with  Lev.  xxiii.  43  ;  xii.  15 
[14]  with  Gen.  ix.  5. 

In  the  Books  of  Kings  we  have  also  references  as 
follows: — 1  K.  XX.  42  to  Lev.  xxvii.  29  ;  xxi.  3  to 
Lev.  xxv.  23,  Num.  xxxvi.  8;  xxi.  10  to  Num. 
xxxv.  30,  comp.  Deut.  xvii.  6,  7,  xix.  15;  xxii.  17 
to  Num.  xxvii.  16,  17.— 2  K.  iii.  20  to  Ex.  xxix. 
38  &c.  ;  iv.  1  to  Lev.  xxv.  39  kc. ;  v.  27  to  Ex. 
iv.  6,  Num.  xii.  10  ;  vi.  18  to  Gen.  xix.  11 ;  vi.  28 
to  Lev.  .xxvi.  29  ;  vii.  2,  19  to  Gen.  vii.  11  ;  vii.  3 
to  Lev.  xiii.  46  (comp.  Num.  v.  3). 

But  now  if,  as  appears  from  the  examination  of 
all  the  extant  Jewish  literature,  the  Pent«iteuch 
existed  as  a  canonical  book  ;  if,  moreover,  it  was  a 
book  so  well  known  that  its  words  had  become 
household  words  among  the  people  ;  and  if  the 
prophets  could  appeal  to  it  as  a  recognized  and  well- 
known  document, — how  comes  it  to  pass  that  in 
the  reign  of  Josiah,  one  of  the  latest  kings,  its 
existence  as  a  canonical  book  seems  to  have  been 
almost  forgotten  ?  Yet  such  was  evidently  the 
tact.  The  circumstiinces,  as  narrated  in  2  Chi-. 
xxxiv.  14,  &c.,  were  these: — In  the  eighteenth  year 
of  his  reign,  the  king,  who  had  already  t;iken  active 
meivsui'cs  for  the  suppression  of  idolatry,  determined 
to  execute  the  necessary  repairs  of  the  Temjile, 
which  had  become  seriously  dilapidated,  and  to 
restore  the  worship  of  Jehovah  in  its  ])urity.  He 
accordingly  directed  Hilkiah  the  high-priest  to  take 
charge  of  the  monies  that  were  contributed  for  the 
purpose.  During  the  progress  of  the  work,  Hilkiah, 
who  was  busy  in  the  Temple,  emie  upon  a  cojiy 
of  tlie  Book  of  the  Law — which  must  have  Ions;  lain 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


781 


neglecteil  and  foi-gotten — and  told  Sha]ihan  the  scribe 
of  his  discovery.  The  et)ect  produced  by  this  was 
very  remarkable.  The  king,  to  whom  Shaphan  read 
the  words  of  tlie  book,  was  filled  with  consternation 
when  he  learnt  for  the  first  time  how  fiir  the  nation 
had  departed  from  the  Law  of  Jehovah.  He  sent 
Hilkiah  and  others  to  consult  the  prophetess  Huldah, 
who  only  confirmed  his  fears.  The  consequence 
was  that  he  held  a  solemn  assembly  in  the  house 
of  the  Lord,  and  "  read  in  their  ears  all  the  words 
of  the  book  of  the  covenant  that  was  ibuiid  in  the 
house  of  the  Lord." 

How  are  we  to  explain  this  surprise  and  alarm  in 
the  mind  of  Josiah,  betraying  as  it  does  such  utter 
ignorance  of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  and  of  the 
severity  of  its  threatenings — except  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  as  a  written  document  it  had  well  nigh 
perished  ?  This  must  have  been  the  case,  and  it  is 
not  so  extraordinary  a  fact  perhaps  as  it  appears  at 
first  sight.  It  is  quite  true  that  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat  pains  had  been  talcen  to  make  the 
nation  at  large  acquainted  with  the  Law.  That 
monarch  not  only  instituted  "  teaching  priests,"  but 
we  are  told  that  as  they  went  about  the  country  they 
had  the  Book  of  the  Law  with  them.  But  that  was 
300  years  before,  a  period  equal  to  that  between 
the  days  of  Luther  and  our  own ;  and  in  such  an 
interval  great  changes  must  have  taken  place.  It 
is  true  that  in  the  reign  of  iVhaz  the  prophet  Isaiali 
directed  the  people,  who  in  their  hopeless  infatuation 
were  seeking  counsel  of  ventriloquists  and  necro- 
mancers, to  turn  '*  to  the  Law  and  to  the  Testi- 
mony;"  and  Hezekiah,  who  succeeded  Ahaz,  had 
no  doubt  reigned  in  the  spirit  of  the  prophet's 
advice.  But  the  next  monarch  was  guilty  of  out- 
rageous wickedness,  and  filled  Jei'usalem  with  idols. 
How  great  a  desolation  might  one  wicked  prince 
effect,  especially  during  a  lengthened  reign  !  To 
this  we  must  add,  that  at  no  time,  in  all  probability, 
were  there  many  copies  of  the  Law  existing  in 
writing.  It  was  probably  then  the  custom,  as  it 
still  is  in  the  Ea.st,  to  trust  largely  to  the-memoiy 
for  its  transmission.  Just  as  at  this  day  in  Egypt, 
persons  are  to  be  found,  even  illiterate  in  otiier 
respects,  who  am  repeat  the  whole  Kurau  by  heart, 
and  as  some  modern  Jews  are  able  to  recite  the 
whole  of  the  Five  Books  of  Moses,K  so  it  probably 
was  then :  the  Law,  for  the  great  bulk  of  the 
nation,  was  orally  preserved  and  inculcated.  The 
ritual  would  easily  be  perpetuated  by  the  mere 
force  of  observance,  though  much  of  it  doubtless 
became  perverted,  and  some  part  of  it  perhajw 
obsolete,  through  the  neglect  of  the  priests.  Still 
it  is  against  the  perfunctory  and  liteless  manner  of 
their  worship,  not  against  their  total  neglect,  that 
the  burning  words  of  the  jirophets  are  directed. 
The  command  of  Moses,  which  laid  upon  the  king 
the  obligation  of  making  a  copy  of  the  Law  for 
himself,  had  of  course  long  been  disregarded.  Here 
and  there  perhaps  onlv  some  prophet  or  righteous 
man  possessed  a  copv  of  the  sacred  book.  The  bulk 
of  the  nation  were  without  it.  Nor  was  there  any 
reason  why  copies  should  be  brought  under  the 
notice  of  the  king.  We  mav  understivnd  this  by  a 
)iaiallol  case.  How  easy  it  would  have  been  in  our 
own  country,  before  tiie  invention  of  iiriuting,  for  a 
similar  circumstance  to  have  hap])ened.    How  many 

er  See 

and  the  Saniarita -_ ,  -.,......     _..„.,„...„  .,,  .,„..^  ^„  ^„>.  .,„.j  .,„„..„.     ...„  ,.. ....>„ 

lug  of  the  service  of  the  yam  kippoor  In  the  Sanmrltun    and  a  few  of  the  people  know  the  whole  of  the  Torah  by 
synaBogue , he  says  that  the  rcxilalion  of  tlu'  rentatoucb    heart"  (p.  .110). 
was  continued   throuRh   the   uinlil,  "  wiMinu    even  the' 


Mr.  Grove's  very  interesting  paper  on  Nabloos    feeble  lamp  which  on  every  otluT  night  of  the  year  but 
Samaritans  in   Vcuation  Towrists,  1861.    Speak-    tliis  burns  In  IVunt  of  the  huly  liooks.     The  two  priests 


782 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


copies,  do  we  suppose,  of  the  Scriptures  were  made? 
Such  as  did  exist  would  be  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
learned  men,  or  more  probably  in  the  libraries  of 
monasteries.''  Even  after  a  translation,  like  Wiclif's, 
had  been  made,  the  people  as  a  whole  would  know 
nothing  whatever  of  the  Bible  ;  and  yet  they  were  a 
Christian  people,  and  weie  in  some  measure  at  least 
instructed  out  of  the  Scriptures,  though  the  volume 
itself  could  scarcely  ever  have  been  seen.  Even  the 
monarch,  unless  he  happened  to  be  a  man  of  learn- 
ing or  piety,  would  remain  in  the  same  ignorance 
as  his  subjects.  Whatever  knowledge  there  was  of 
the  Bible  and  of  religion  would  be  kept  alive  chiefly 
by  means  of  the  Liturgies  used  in  public  worship. 
So  it  was  in  Judah.  The  oral  transmission  of  the 
Law  and  the  living  witness  of  the  prophets  had 
superseded  the  written  document,  till  at  last  it  had 
become  so  scarce  as  to  be  almost  unknown.  But 
the  hand  of  God  so  ordeied  it  thafWhen  king  and 
people  were  both  zealous  for  reformation,  and  ripest 
for  the  reception  of  the  truth,  the  written  document 
itself  was  brought  to  light. 

On  carefully  weighing  all  the  evidence  hitherto 
adduced,  we  can  hai'dly  question,  without  a  literary 
scepticism  which  would  he  most  unreasonable,  that 
the  Pentateuch  is  to  a  very  considerable  extent  as 
early  as  the  time  of  Closes,  though  it  may  have 
undergone  many  later  revisions  and  corrections,  the 
last  of  these  being  certainly  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Ezra.  But  as  regards  any  direct  and  unimpeach- 
able testimony  to  the  composition  of  the  whole 
work  by  Moses  we  have  it  not.  Only  one  book  out 
of  the  five — that  of  Deuteronomy — claims  in  express 
terms  to  be  from  his  hand.  And  yet,  strange  to 
say,  this  is  the  very  book  in  which  modern  criticism 
refuses  most  peremptorily  to  admit  the  claim.  It 
is  of  importance  therefore  to  consider  this  question 
separately. 

All  allow  that  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  in 
Exodus,  perhaps  a  great  part  of  Leviticus  and  some 
part  of  Numbers,  were  written  by  Israel's  greatest 
leader  and  prophet.  But  Deuteronomy,  it  is  alleged, 
is  in  style  and  purpose  so  utteily  unlike  the  genuine 
writings  of  Moses  that  it  is  quite  impossible  to 
believe  that  he  is  the  author.  But  how  then  set 
aside  the  express  testimony  of  the  book  itself? 
How  explain  the  tact  that  Moses  is  there  said  to 
have  written  all  the  words  of  this  Law,  to  have 
consigned  it  to  the  custody  of  the  priests,  and  to 
have  charged  the  Levites  sedulously  to  preserve  it 
by  the  side  of  the  ark  ?  Only  by  the  bold  assertion 
that  the  fiction  was  invented  by  a  later  writer, 
who  chose  to  personate  the  great  Lawgiver  in  order 
to  give  the  more  colour  of  consistency  to  his  work ! 
'I'he  author  first  feigns  the  name  of  Mose.s  that  he 
may  gain  the  greater  consideration  under  the  shadow 
of  his  name,  and  then  proceeds  to  re-enact,  but  in  a 
broader  and  more  spiritual  manner,  and  with  true 
prophetic  inspiration,  the  chief  portions  of  the  earlier 
legislation. 

But  such  an  hypothesis  is  devoid  of  all  proba- 
bility. For  what  writer  in  later  times  would  ever 
have  presumed,  unless  he  were  equal  to  Moses,  to 
correct  or  supplement  the  Law  of  Mo.^es?  And  if 
he  were  equal  to  Moses  why  bori'ow  his  name  (as 
Ewald  supposes  the  Deuteronomist  to  have  donej  in 
Older  to  lend  greater  weight  and  sanction  to  his 


•>  That  even  in  monasteries  the  Bible  was  a  neglected 
und  almost  unknown  book,  is  clear  from  the  story  of 
Luther's  conversion. 

'  It  is  a  sifaiificant  fact   that  Kwald.  who  will  have  it 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

book?  The  truth  is,  those  who  make  such  a  sup- 
position import  modern  ide;is  into  ancient  writing's. 
They  forget  that  what  might  be  allowable  in  a  mo- 
dern writer  of  fiction  would  not  have  been  tolerated 
in  one  who  claimed  to  have  a  Divine  commission, 
who  came  forward  as  a  prophet  to  rebulte  and  to 
reform  the  people.  Which  would  be  more  weighty 
to  win  their  obedience,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah,"  or 
"  Moses  wrote  all  these  words"? 

It  has  been  argued  indeed  that  in  thus  assuming 
a  feigned  character  the  writer  does  no  more  than 
is  done  by  the  author  of  Ecclesiastes.  He  in  like 
manner  takes  the  name  of  Solomon  that  he  may 
gain  a  better  hearing  for  his  words  of  wisdom.  But 
the  cases  are  not  parallel .  The  Preacher  only  pre- 
tends to  give  an  old  man's  view  of  life,  as  seen  by 
one  who  had  had  a  large  experience  and  no  common 
reputation  for  wisdom.  Deuteronomy  claims  to  be 
a  Law  imposed  on  the  highest  authority,  and  de- 
manding implicit  obedience.  The  first  is  a  record 
of  the  struggles,  disappointments,  and  victory  of  a 
human  heart.  The  last  is  an  absolute  rule  of  life, 
to  which  nothing  may  be  added,  and  from  which 
nothing  may  be  taken  (iv.  2,  xxxi.  1). 

But,  besides  the  fact  that  Deuteronomy  claims  to 
have  been  written  by  Moses,  there  is  other  evidence 
which  establishes  the  great  antiquity  of  the  book. 

1.  It  is  remarkable  for  its  allusions  to  Egypt,' 
which  are  just  what  would  be  expected  supposing 
Moses  to  have  been  the  author.  Without  insisting 
upon  it  that  in  such  passages  as  iv.  1.5-18,  or  vi.  8, 
xi.  18-20  (comp.  Ex.  xiii.  16),  wheie  tlie  command 
is  given  to  wear  the  Law  after  the  fiijjhion  of  an 
amulet,  or  xxvii.  1-8,  where  writing  on  stones 
covered  with  plaster  is  mentioned,  are  probable 
references  to  Egyptian  customs,  we  may  point  to 
more  certain  examples.  In  xx.  5  there  is  an  allu- 
sion to  Egyptian  regulations  in  time  of  war ;  in 
XXV.  2  to  the  Egyptian  bastinado;  in  xi.  10  to  the 
Egyptian  mode  of  irrigation.  The  references  which 
Delitzsch  sees  in  xxii.  5  to  the  custom  of  the 
Egyptian  priests  to  hold  solemn  processions  iu  the 
masks  of  different  deities,  and  iu  viii.  9  to  Egyptian 
mining  operations,  are  by  no  means  so  certain. 
Again,  among  the  curses  threatened  are  the  sick- 
nesses of  Egypt,  xxviii.  6U  (comp.  vii.  15).  Ac- 
cording to  xxviii.  68,  Egypt  is  the  type  of  all  the 
oppressors  of  Israel:  "Remember  that  thou  wast 
a  slave  in  the  land  of  Egypt,"  is  an  expression 
which  is  several  times  made  use  of  as  a  motive  in 
enforcing  the  obligations  of  the  book  (v.  15,  xxiv. 
18,  22  ;  see  the  same  appeal  in  Lev.  xix.  34,  a 
passage  occurring  in  the  remarkable  section  Lev. 
xvii.-xx.,  which  has  so  much  affinity  with  Deutero- 
nomy). Lastly,  references  to  the  sojourning  in 
Egypt  are  numerous:  "  We  were  Pharaoh's  bond- 
men in  Egypt,"  &c.  (vi.  21-23  ;  see  also  vii.  8,  18, 
xi.  3) ;  and  these  occur  even  in  the  laws,  as  in  the 
law  of  the  king  (xvii.  16),  which  would  be  very 
extraordinai-y  if  the  book  had  only  been  written  in 
the  time  of  Manasseh. 

The  phraseology  of  the  book,  and  the  archaisms 
found  in' it,  stamp  it  as  of  the  same  age  with  the 
rest  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  form  NIH,  instead 
of  N^n,  for  the  feminine  of  the  pronoun  (which 
occurs  in  all  195  times  in  the  Pentateuch),  is  found 
36  times  in  Deuteronomy.     Kowheie  do  we  meet 

that  Deuteronomy  was  written  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh, 
is  obliged  to  make  his  supposed  author  live  in  Egj^Jt, 
in  order  to  account  plausibly  for  the  acquaintance  with 
Egyptian  customs  which  is  discernible  in  the  hook. 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

with  NVT  ill  tills  boolv,  tlioiigii  iu  the  rest  of  thn 
Pentateuch  it  occurs  1 1  times.  In  the  same  way, 
like  the  other  books,  Deuteronomy  has  "lyj  of  a 
maiden,  instead  of  the  feminine  mj?3,  which  is  only 
used  once  (xxii.  19).  It  has  also  the  third  pers.  pvet. 
*n,  which  iu  prose  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch 
(Ewald,  Lehrhuch,  §1426).  The  demonstrative 
pronoun  7Xn,  which  (according  to  Ewald,  §18oa, 
is  characteristic  of  the  Pentateuch)  occure  in  Deut. 
iv.  42,  vii.  22,  xix.  11,  and  nowhere  else  out  of  the 
books  of  Moses,  except  in  the  late  book,  1  Chr.  xx.  8, 
and  the  Aramaic  Ezra,  v.  15.  The  use  of  the  n 
locale,  which  is  comparatively  rare  in  later  writings, 
is  common  to  Deuteronomy  with  the  other  books  of 
the  Pentateuch  ;  and  so  is  the  old  and  rare  form  of 
writing  T|KVDJn,  and  the  termination  of  the  future 
in  ]-1-.  The  last,  according  to  Konig  {A.  T.  Stud. 
2  Heft)  is  more  common  in  the  Pentateuch  than  in 
any  other  book  :  it  occurs  58  times  in  Deuteronomy. 
Twice  even  in  the  preterite,  viii.  3,  IG,  a  like  ter- 
mination presents  itself;  on  the  peculiarity  of  which 
Ewald  (§190  6,  note)  remarks,  as  being  the  ori- 
ginal and  fuller  form.  Other  archaisms  which  aie 
common  to  the  whole  five  books  are  :  the  shortening 
of  the  Hiphil,  HX"}^,  i.  33  ;  ~\^'!h,  xxvi.  1 2,  &c. ; 
the  use  of  K"lp=n"lp,  "  to  meet ;"  the  construction 
of  the  passive  with  nX  of  the  object  (for  instance, 
XX.  8);  the  interchange  of  the  older  ^ti'B  (xiv.  4) 
with  the  more  usual  ^13  ;  the  use  of  "I-13T  (instead 
of  IDT),  xvi.  16,  XX.13,  a  form  which  disappears  al- 
together after  the  Pentateuch  ;  many  ancient  words, 
such  as  n''nN,  U^\>\  IJK'  ("IJC',  Ex.  xiii.  12). 
Amongst  these  are  some  which  occur  besides  only 
in  the  book  of  Joshua,  or  else  in  very  late  -writers, 
like  Ezekiel,  who,  as  is  always  the  case  in  the  deaiy 
of  a  language,  studiously  imitated  the  oldest  Ibrms  ; 
some  which  are  found  afterwards  only  iu  poetry, 
as  D^D?N  (vii.  13,  xxviii.  4,  &c.),  and  DTlD,  so 
common  in  Deuteronomy.  Again,  this  book  has  a 
number  of  words  whicli  have  an  archaic  character. 
Such  are,  K'Dnn  (for  the  later  hl^),  X3L3  (instead 
of  ^D) ;  the  old  Caivianite  fX-'ifn  nVSl^^'V,  "  off- 
spring of  the  flocks;"  }'1")E^''',  which  as  a  name  of 
Israel  is  bon-owed.  Is.  xliv.  2  ;  PHH,  i.  41,  "  to 
act  rashly;"  JT'SpH,  "to  be  silent;"  p^jyn  (xv. 
14),  "to  give,"  lit.  "toput  like  a  collar  on  the  neck;" 
*1?31?nn,  "  to  play  the  lord  ;"  HinD,  "  sickness." 

2.  A  fondness  for  the  use  of  figures  is  another 
peculiarity  of  Deuteronomy,  ."^ee  xxix.  17,  18; 
xxviii:  13,  44;  i.  31,44;  viii.  5  ;  xxviii.  29,  49.  Of 
similar  comparisons  tliere  are  but  few  (Delitzsch  says 
but  three)  in  the  other  books.  The  results  are  most 
surprising  when  we  compare  Deuteronomy  witli  the 
Book  of  tiie  Covenant  (Ex.  xix.-xxiv.)  on  tlic  one 
hand,  and  with  Ps.  xc.  (which  is  said  to  be  Mosaic) 
on  the  other.  To  cite  but  one  example:  the  images 
of  devouring  fire  and  of  the  bearing  on  eagles'  wings 
occur  only  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  and  in 
Deuteronomy.  Comp.  i'^x.  xxiv.  17,  with  Deut.  iv. 
24,  ix.  3;  and  Ex.  xix.  4,  with  Deut.  xxxii.  11. 
So  again,  not  to  mention  numlierless  undesigneil 
coincidences  between  Ps.  xc.  and  the  book  of  I  )cutero- 
nomy,  especially  chap,  xxxii.,  we  need  only  here  cite 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


783 


the  phrase  Wy  nb'l?^  (Ps.  xc.  17),  "  work  of  the 

hands,"  as  descriptive  of  human  action  generally, 
which  runs  through  the  whole  of  Deut.  ii.  7,  xiv. 
29,  xvi.  15,  xxiv.  19,  xxviii.  12,  xxx.  9.  The  same 
close  affinity,  both  as  to  matter  and  style,  exists  be- 
tween the  section  to  which  we  have  already  referred 
in  Leviticus  (ch.  xvii.-xx.,  so  manifestly  different 
from  the  rest  of  that  book),  the  Book  of  the  Covenant 
(Ex.  xix.-xxiv.)  and  Deuteronomy. 

In  addition  to  all  this,  and  very  much  more 
might  be  said — for  a  whole  harvest  has  been  gleaned 
on  this  field  by  Schultz  in  the  Introduction  to  his 
work  on  Deuteronomy — in  addition  to  all  these 
peculiarities  which  are  arguments  for  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Book,  we  have  here,  too,  the  evi- 
dence strong  and  clear  of  post-Mosaic  times  nnd 
writings.  The  attempt  by  a  wrong  interpretation 
of  2  k.  x.xii.  and  2  Chr.  .xxxiv.  to  bring  down 
Deuteronomy  as  low  as  the  time  of  Manasseh  fails 
utterly.  A  century  earlier  the  Jewish  prophets 
borrow  their  words  and  their  thoughts  from  Deu- 
teronomy. Amos  shows  how  intimate  his  acquaint- 
ance was  with  Deuteronomy  by  such  passages  as 
ii.  9,  iv.  11,  ix.  7,  whose  matter  and  form  are  both 
coloured  by  those  of  that  book.  Hosea,  who  is 
richer  than  Amos  in  these  references  to  the  past, 
whilst,  as  we  have  seen,  full  of  allusions  to  the 
whole  Law  (vi.  7,  xii.  4  &c.,  xiii.  9,  10),  in  one 
passage,  viii.  12,  using  the  remarkable  expression  "  1 
have  written  to  him  the  ten  thousand  things  of  my 
Law,"  manifestly  includes  Deuteronomy  (comp.  xi. 
8  with  Deut.  xxix.  22),  and  in  many  places  shows 
that  that  book  was  in  his  mind.  Comp.  iv.  13  with 
Deut.  xj;.  2;  viii.  13  with  Deut.  xxviii.  68;  xi.  3 
with  Deut.  i.  31  ;  xiii.  6  with  Deut.  viii.  11-14. 
Isaiah  begins  his  propheciy  with  the  words,  "  Hear, 
0  heavens,  and  give  ear,  0  earth,"  taken  from  the 
mouth  of  Moses  in  Deut.  xxxii.  1.  In  fact,  echoes 
of  tlie  tones  of  Deuteronomy  are  heard  throughout 
the  solemn  and  majestic  discourse  with  which  his 
prophecy  opens.  (See  Caspari,  Beitrchje  zur  Einl. 
in  d.  Buck  lesaia,  p.  203-210.)  The  same  may 
be  said  of  Micah.  In  his  protest  against  the 
apostasy  of  the  nation  from  the  Covenant  with 
Jehovah,  he  appeals  to  the  mountains  as  the  sure 
foundations  of  the  earth,  in  like  manner  as  Moses, 
Deut.  xxxii.  1,  to  the  heavens  and  the  earth.  The 
controversy  of  Jehovah  with  His  people  (Mic.  vi. 
3-5)  is  a  compendium  as  it  were  of  the  history  of 
the  Pentateuch  from  Exodus  onwards,  whilst  the 
expression  CT^V  0^3,  "Slave-house"  of  Egypt  is 

taken  from  Deut.  vii.  8,  xiii.  5.  In  vi.  8,  there  is 
no  doubt  au  allusion  to  Deut.  x.  12,  and  the  threat- 
enings  of  vi.  13-16  remind  us  of  Deut.  xxviii.  as 
well  as  of  Lev.  xxvi. 

Since,  then,  not  only  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  but 
Amos  and  Hosea,  Isaiah  and  Micah,  speak  in  tiie 
words  of  Deuteronomy,  as  well  as  in  words  bor- 
rowed from  other  portions  of  the  Pentateuch,  we 
see  at  once  how  untenable  is  the  theory  of  tiiose 
who,  like  Ewald,  maintain  that  Deuteronomy  was 
composed  during  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  or,  as  Vai- 
hinger  does,  during  that  of  Hezekiah. 

But,  in  truth,  the  Book  speaks  for  itself.  No 
imitator  could  have  written  iu  such  a  strain.  We 
scarcely  need  the  express  testimony  of  the  work  to 
its  own  authorship.  But,  having  it,  wo  find  all  the 
internal  evidence  conspiring  to  show  that  it  came 
from  Moses.  Those  magnilifciit  discourses,  the  grand 
roll  of  which  can  be  heard  and  felt  even  in  a  trans- 
lation, came  warm   from   the  heart  anil  fresh  from 


784 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


the  lips  of  Isi-ael's  Lawgiver.  They  are  the  outpour- 
ings of  a  solicitude  which  is  nothing  less  than 
parental.  It  is  the  father  uttering  his  ilying  advice 
to  his  children,  no  less  than  the  Prophet  counselling 
and  admonishing  his  people.  What  book  can  vie 
with  it  either  in  majesty  or  in  tenderne.^s?  What 
words  ever  bore  more  surely  the  stamp  of  genuine- 
ness ?  If  Deuteronomy  be  only  the  production  of 
some  timorous  reformer,  who,  conscious  of  hii5  own 
weakness,  tried  to  borrow  dignity  and  weight  fiom 
the  name  of  I\Ioses,  then  assuredly  all  arguments 
drawn  from  internal  evidence  for  the  composition 
of  any  work  are  utterly  useless.  We  can  never  tell 
whether  an  author  is  wearing  the  mask  of  another, 
or  whether  it  is  he  himself  who  speaks  to  us. 

In  spite  therefore  of  the  dogmatism  of  modern 
critics,  we  declare  unhesitatingly  for  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  Deuteronomy. 

Briefly,  then,  to  sum  up  the  results  of  our  inquiry. 

1.  The  Book  of  Genesis  rests  chiefly  on  docu- 
ments much  earlier  than  the  time  of  Moses,  though 
it  was  probably  brought  to  very  nearly  its  present 
shape  either  by  Moses  himself,  or  by  one  of  the 
elders  who  acted  under  him. 

2.  The  Books  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers, 
are  to  a  great  extent  Mosaic.  Besides  those  por- 
tions which  are  expressly  declared  to  have  been 
written  by  him  (see  above),  other  portions,  and 
especially  the  legal  sections,  were,  if  not  actually 
written,  in  all  probability  dictated  by  him. 

3.  Deuteronomy,  excepting  the  concluding  part, 
is  entirely  the  work  of  Moses,  as  it  professes  to  be. 

4.  It  is  not  probable  that  this  was  written  before 
the  thi-ee  preceding  books,  because  the  legislation 
iu  Exodus  and  Leviticus  as  being  the  more  formal 
is  manifestly  the  earlier,  whilst  Deuteronomy  is 
the  spiritual  interpretation  and  appliaition  of  the 
Law.  But  the  letter  is  always  before  the  spirit ; 
the  thing  before  its  interpretation. 

5.  The  first  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a 
whole  could  not  liave  taken  place  till  after  the 
Israelites  entered  Canaan.  It  is  probable  that 
.loshua,  and  the  elders  who  were  associated  with 
him,  would  provide  for  its  formal  arrangement, 
custody,  and  transmission. 

6.  The  whole  work  did  not  finally  assume  its 
present  shape  till  its  revision  was  undertaken  by 
Ezra  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonish  captivity. 

IV.  Literature : 

1.  Amongst  the  earlier  Patristic  expositors  may 
be  raentioned-r- 

Augustine,  ■  De  Gcnesi  contra  Manich. ;  De 
Genesiad  Uttcram  ;  Locutiones  {Gen. — Jiid.)  ;  and 
Quaestiones  in  Heptateuchum. 

Jerome,  Liber  Quaestiunum  Hebraicarum  in 
Geiiesivi. 

Chrysostom,  In  Genesim,  Ilomiliae  ct  Sermones. 
(0pp.  Montfaucon,  vol.  vi.  With  these  will  also  be 
found  those  of  Severiau  of  Gabala.) 

Theodoret,  Quaestiones  in  Gen.,  Ex.,  Lev., 
Numcr.,  Dent.,  &c. 

Ephraem  Syrus,  Explanat.  in  Genesin. 

Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Glaphyra  in  libros  Mosis. 

2.  In  the  middle  ages  we  have  the  Jewish  com- 
mentatois — Isaaki  or  Kashi  (an  abbreviation  of  his 
name  Ikibbi  Solomon  Isaaki,  sometimes  wrongly 
called  Jarchi)  of  Troyes,  in  the  11th  centurv ; 
Aben-Ezra  of  Toledo  in  the  12th;  David  Kimchi 
of  Narbonne  in  the  13th. 

3.  Of  the  Reformation  period : — 

Tiie  Commentary  of  Calvin  on  the  Eive  Books  is 
a  masterpiece  of  exposition. 


PENTECOST 

Luther  wrote,  both  in  German  i.nd  in  Latin, 
Commentaries  on  (Jenesis,  the  last  being  finished 
but  a  short  time  before  his  death. 

4.  Later  we  have  the  Commentaries  of  Calovius, 
in  his  Biblia  Itlustrata,  and  Mercerus,  in  Genesin  ; 
Rivetus,  Exercitationes  in  Genesin,  and  Commen- 
tarii  in  Exodum,  in  his  0pp.  Theolog.  vol.  i.  Roter. 
1651 ;  Grotius,  Annot.  ad  Vet.  Test,  in  0pp.  vol.  i.; 
Le  Clerc  (Clericus),  Mosis  Prophetae,  TJb.  V.  ;  in 
the  1st  vol.  of  his  work  on  the  Old  Testament, 
Amst.  1710,  with  a  special  dissertation,  De  Scrip- 
tore  Pentatcuchi  Mose ;  Spencei-,  De  Legibus  He- 
braeorum. 

5.  The  number  of  books  written  on  this  subject 
in  Germany  alone,  during  the  last  century,  is  very 
considerable.  Reference  may  be  made  to  the  General 
lntr«ductions  of  Michaelis,  Eichhorn  (5  vols.  1823), 
Jahn  (1814),  De  Wette  (7th  ed.  1852),  Keil  (1st 
ed.  1853),  Havernick  (1856),  Bleek  (1861),  Sta- 
heliu  (1862).  Further,  on  the  one  hand,  to  Heng- 
stenberg's  Authentic  des  Pentateuchs  (1836,  1839)  ; 
Ranke's  Untersuchungen  (1834);  Di-echsler,  Ei7i- 
heit  4'C.,  der  Genesis  (1838);  Konig,  Alt.  Stud. 
(2  Heft,  1839);  Kurtz,  Gesch.  des  Alien  Bundes 
(2nd  ed.  1853) :  and  on  the  other  to  Ewald, 
Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israels  ;  Von  Lengerke,  Ke- 
naan  (1844)  ;  Stahelin,  Krit.  Untersuchungen 
(1843)  ;  Bertheau,  Die  Sieben  Gruppen,  &c. 

As  Commentaries  on  the  whole  or  parts  of  the 
Pentateuch  may  be  consulted — 

(1)  Critical: — Roseiimiiller,  Scholia,  vol.  i.  3rd 
ed.  (1821) ;  Knobel  (on  all  the  books),  in  the 
Kurzgef.  Exeget.  Haiulbuch ;  Tuch,  Die  Genesis 
(1838)  ;  Schumann,  Genesis  (1829)  ;  Bunsen, 
Bibelwerk. 

(2)  Exegetical: — Baumgarten,  Theol.  Comment. 
(1843);  Schroder,  Das  Erste  Buck  Mose  (1846); 
Delitzsch,  Genesis  (3rd  ed.  1861) ;  Schultz,  Deu- 
tcronomium  (1859).  Much  will  be  found  bearing 
on  the  general  question  of  the  authorship  and  date 
of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Introductions  to  the  last 
two  of  these  woiks. 

In  England  may  be  mentioned  Graves'  Lectures 
on  the  last  four.  Books  of  the  Pentateitch,  who 
argues  strenuously  for  the  Mosaic  authorship.  So 
also  do  Rawlinson  on  The  Pentateuch,  in  Aids  to 
Faith,  1862  ;  and  M'Caul  on  the  Mosaic  Cosmogony, 
in  the  same  volume;  though  the  former  admits  that 
Moses  made  fiee  use  of  ancient  documents  iu  com- 
piling Genesis. 

Davidson,  on  the  other  hand,  in  Home's  Intro- 
duction, vol.  ii.  (10th  ed.  1856),  argues  for  two 
documents,  and  supposes  the  Jehovist  to  have  writ- 
ten in  the  time  of  the  Judges,  and  the  Elohist  in 
that  of  Joshua,  and  the  two  to  have  been  incor- 
porated in  one  work  in  the  reign  of.  Saul  or  David. 
He  maintains,  however,  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
Deuteronomy. 

The  chief  American  writers  who  have  treated  of 
the  Pentateuch  are  Stuart,  Introduction  to  the  Old 
Testament ;  and  Bush,  Commentaries  on  the  Fire 
Books.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

PENTECOST  ('?i''b'.j;o  "-^isa  n^vi^n  ^^ 

(Ex.  xxiii.  16)  ;  eoprri  Qipiafxov  irpoiToyevi'r]- 
fj.dTwv  ;  solemnitas  messis  jvimitivonan  ;  "  the 
feast  of  harvest,  the  first  fruits  of  thy  labours :" 
n'yn^  in  (Ex.  xxxlv.  22  ;  Deut.  xvi.  10)  ;  eoprri 
e;85oyuo5<wi' ;  solemnitas  hebdomadarum  ;  "  the  fea-st 
of  weeks:"  D'''l-133n  UV  (Num.  xxviii.  26,cf.  Lev. 
xxiii.  17);   7i/ji.4pa  rHv  vitnv;  dies  primitivorum  ; 


PENTECOST 

"  the  day  of  first  fruits."  In  later  times  it  .appears 
to  have  been  called  D''E^Dn  QV  (see  Joseph.  B.  J. 
ii.  3.  §1)  ;  and  hence,  rj/xtpa  ttjs  nei/TTj/ccKrTiJs 
(Tob.  ii.  1  ;  2  Mace.  xii.  32  ;  Acts  ii.  1,  xx.  16  ; 
1  Cor.  xvi.  8).  But  tlie  more  common  Jewish  name 
was  ni^iy"  (in  Chalilee,  KDnVJ?  ;  'Aa-apOa,  in 
Joseph.  Aid.  iii.  10.  §6).  The  second  of  the  great 
festivals  of  the  Hebrews.  It  fell  in  due  course  on 
the  sixth  da}-  of  Sivan,  and  its  rites,  according  to 
the  Law,  were  restricted  to  a  single  day.  The  most 
important  passages  relating  to  it  are,  Ex.  xxiii.  16, 
Lev.  xxiii.  15-22,  Num.  xxviii.  26-31,  Deut.  ,xvi. 
9-12. 

I.  The  time  of  the  festival  was  calculated  from 
the  second  day  of  the  Passover,  the  I6th  of  Nisan. 
The  Law  prescribes  that  a  reckoning  should  be  kept 
from  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbatli  "  ^  (Lev.  xxiii. 
11,  15)  [Passover,  II.  3]  to  the  morrow  after 
the  completion  of  the  seventh  week,  which  would 
of  course  be  the  fiftieth  day  (Lev.  xxiii.  15,  16  ; 
Deut.  xvi.  9).  The  fifty  days  formally  included 
the  period  of  grain-harvest,  commencing  with  the 
offering  of  the  first  sheaf  of  the  barley-harvest  in 
the  Passover,  and  ending  with  that  of  the  two  first 
loaves  whicli  were  made  from  the  wheat-harvest,  at 
tliis  festival. 

It  was  the  offering  of  these  two  loaves  which 
was  the  distinguishing  rite  of  the  day  of  Pentecost. 


•  This  word  in  the  0.  T.  is  apphed  to  the  seventh  day 
of'the  Passover  and  the  eighth  day  of  Tabernacles,  but  not 
to  the  day  of  Pentecost.  [Passovek,  note  i,  p.  71-1,]  On 
its  ajiplication  to  Pentecost,  which  is  found  in  the  Mishna 
(Hash  hash.  i.  2,  and  Chagic/ah,  ii.  4,  &c.),  In  the  Targum 
(Num.  xxviii.  26),  in  Josephus,  and  elsewhere  (see  }  v.). 

b  There  has  been  from  early  times  some  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words  DBCJ^TI  mPI?^- 
it  has  however  been  generally  held,  by  both  .Jewish  and 
Christian  vvriters  of  all  ages,  that  the  sabbath  here  spoken 
of  is  the  first  day  of  holy  con\cjcation  of  the  Passover,  the 
15th  of  Nisan,  mentioned  Lev.  xxiii.  7.  In  like  manner 
the  word  OBti'  is  evidently  used  as  a  designation  of  the 
day  of  atonement  (Lev.  x.\iii.  32)  ;  and  jinSti'  (sabbati 
obsei-vatio)  is  applied  to  the  first  and  eighth  days  of  Ta- 
bernacles and  to  the  Feast  of  Trumpets.  That  the  LXX. 
so  understood  the  passage  in  question  am  hardly  be 
doubled  from  their  aiUing  it,  "  the  morrow  alter  t}ie  first 
day  "  (i.  e.  of  the  festival)  :  ^  eTravpiou  tt);  7rpwn/s.  The 
word  in  vers.  15  and  16  has  also  been  undcrstoud  as 
"  week,"  used  in  the  same  manner  as  adp^aTa  in  the  N.T. 
(Matt,  xxviii.  1  ;  Luke  xviii.  12;  Juhnxx.  ],  Vc).  But  some 
have  insisted  on  taking  the  Sabbath  to  mean  nothing  but 
the  seventh  day  of  the  week,  or  "  the  sabbath  of  creation," 
as  the  Jewish  writers  have  called  it ;  and  they  see  a  difll- 
culty  in  understanding  the  same  word  in  the  gene'al  sense 
of  wee'i;  as  a  period  of  seven  days,  contending  that  It  can 
only  mean  a  regular  week,  beginning  with  the  first  day, 
and  ending  with  the  Sabbath.  Hence  the  Baithusian  (or 
SaddMcean)  party,  and  in  later  limes  the  Karaites,  sup- 
posed that  the  omer  was  olTereil  on  the  day  tbllowiiig  IIk' 
weekly  Sabbath  which  might  happen  to  full  within  the 
seven  days  of  the  Passover.  The  day  of  PeiUecost  would 
thus  always  fall  on  the  first  day  of  the  week.  Hltzig 
(^Ostein  mid  I'Jingsten,  Heidelberg,  1H37)  has  put  forth  the 
notion  that  the  Hebrews  regularly  began  a  new  week  at 
the  commencement  of  the  year,  so  that  the  7tl),  14th,  ami 
21st  of  Nisan  were  always  Sabbath  days.  He  imagines 
that  "the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath"  Irom  whicli  Pente- 
cost was  reckoned,  was  the  22nd  day  of  the  mouth,  the  day 
alter  the  proper  tt^rmiualion  ol'  the  Passover.  He  is  well 
answered  by  Biihr  {Sifinbolik,  ii.  620),  who  refers  espe- 
cially to  Josh.  V.  11,  i\s  proving,  in  connexion  with  the  law 
in  Ix'V.  xxiii.  11,  that  the  ouier  was  offered  on  the  lOlh 
VOL.  II. 


PENTECOST  785 

They  wore  to  be  leavened.  Each  loaf  was  to  con- 
tain the  tenth  of  an  ephah'  (».  e.  about  3 J  quarts) 
of  the  finest  wheat-tlour  of  the  new  crop  (Lev. 
xxiii.  17).  The  flour  was  to  he  the  produce  of  the 
land.d  The  loaves,  along  with  a  pace-olIe)-ing  of 
two  lambs  of  the  first  year,  were  to  be  waved  before 
the  Lord  and  given  to  the  priests.  At  the  same 
time  a  special  sacrifice  was  to  be  made  of  seven 
lambs  of  the  first  year,  one  young  bullock  and  two 
rams,  as  a  burnt-offering  (accompanied  by  the  proper 
meat  and  drink  offerings),  and  a  kid  for  a  sin-otterino' 
(Lev.  .x.\iii.  18,  19).  Besides  these  offerings,  if  we 
adopt  the  interpretation  of  the  Rabbinical  writers, 
it  appears  that  an  addition  was  made  to  the  daily 
sacrifice  of  two  bullocks,  one  ram,  and  seven  lambs, 
as  a  burnt-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  27).«  At  this,  os 
well  as  the  other  festivals,  a  free-will  ofterino-  was 
to  be  made  by  eacli  person  who  came  to  the  sanc- 
tuary, according  to  his  circumstances  (Deut.  xvi. 
10).  [Passover,  p.  714,  note  '.]  It  would  seem 
that  its  festive  character  partook  of  a  nitore  free  and 
hospitable  liberality  than  that  of  the  Passover,  which 
was  rather  of  the  kind  which  belongs  to  the  mere 
family  gathering.  In  this  respect  it  resembled  the 
Feast  of  Tabeinacles.  The  Levite,  the  stranger,  the 
fatherless,  and  the  widow,  were  to  be  brought  within 
its  influence  (Deut.  xvi.  11,  14).  The  mention  of 
tlie  gleanings  to  be  left  in  the  fields  tit  harvest  for 
"  the  poor  and  the  stranger,"  in  connexion  with 

of  the  month.  It  should  be  observed  that  the  words  in 
that  passage,  f^N^  "llHy,  mean  merely  com  of  the 
land,  not  as  in  A.  V.  "  the  old  corn  of  the  land."  "  The 
morrow  after  the  Passover"  (110311  JTIIID)  might  at 
first  sight  seem  to  express  the  15th  of  Nisan;  but  the 
expression  may,  on  the  whole,  with  more  probability, 
be  taken  as  equivalent  with  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sab- 
bath," that  is,  the  16th  day.  See  Keil  on  Josh.  v.  II ; 
Masius  and  Drusius,  on  the  same  text,  in  the  Crit.  Sac; 
Biibr,  Symb.  ii.  621 ;  Selden,  Be  Anno  CiviU,  ch.  7  ;  Bar- 
tenora,  in  Chagigah,  ii.  4;  Buxt.  Syn.  Jiid.  xx. ;  Fagius, 
in  Lev.  xxiii.  15  ;  Drusius,  Notae  Majores  in  Lev.  xxiii.  16. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  L.XX.  omit  rrj  inavpiov 
ToO  irao-xa,  according  to  the  texts  of  Tischendorf  and 
Theile. 

«  The  I'n^y.  or  teitth  (in  A.  V.  "  tenth  deal"),  is  ex- 
plained  in  Num.  v.  15,  HS^Sn  JT'T^y,  *  the  tenth 
part  of  an  ephah."  It  is  sometimes  called  "IDJ?,  omer, 
literally,  a  handftd(^Ex.  xvi.  30),  the  same  word  which 
is  applied  to  the  first  sheaf  of  the  Passover.  (See  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  2,  $9.)    [Weights  and  Mkasurks.] 

''  This  is  wliat  is  meant  by  the  words  in  Lev.  xxiii.  17, 
which  stand  in  the  A.  V.  "out  of  your  habitations,"  and 
in  the  Vulgate,  "  ex  onmibus  habltaculis  vestris."  The 
Hebrew  word  is  not  D^S,  a  house,  as  the  home  of  a 
family,  but  3t^lO,  o  place  of  abode,  as  tin:  temtoiy 
of  a  nation.  The  L.XX.  has,  ano  t^?  /carotKia!  viidv; 
Jonathan,  "  e  loco  habitationum  vestrum."  See  Drusius, 
in  C'ril.  Sac. 

■^  i'lic  differing  statements  respecting  the  proper  sacri- 
fices for  the  day  in  Lev.  xxiii.  18,  and  Num.  xxviii.  27,  are 
thus  reconciled  by  the  Jewish  writers  (Mishna,  .Menachotii, 
iv.  2,  with  the  notes  of  Barlenora  and  Mainionides). 
Josephus  appears  to  aiki  the  two  statements  together, 
not  quite  accurately,  and  does  not  treat  them  as  relating 
to  two  distinct  sacrifices  (Ant.  iii.  10.  }6).  He  enumerates, 
as  the  whole  of  tlie  offerings  for  the  day,  a  single  loaf,  two 
lambs  for  a  jieace-otTering,  three  bulloeUs.  two  rams  and 
lonneen  lambs  for  a  burntofferiug,  and  two  kMs  for  a  sln- 
offeiing.  BUhr,  Winer,  and  other  modern  critics,  regard 
the  statements  as  dl.scordant,  and  prefer  that  of  Num. 
xxviii.  as  being  most  in  hai  niony  with  the  sacrifices  which 
belong  to  the  other  festivals. 

3  E 


786 


PENTECOST 


Pentecost,  may  perhaps  liavp  a  bearint;  on  the  libe- 
rality which  belonged  to  the  festival  (Lev.  xxiii. 
22).  At  Pentecost  (as  at  the  Passover)  the  people 
were  to  be  reminded  of  tlieir  bondage  in  Egypt,  and 
they  weie  especially  admonished  of  their  obligation 
to  keep  the  divine  law  (Deut.  xvi.  12). 

II.  Of  the  information  to  be  gatheied  from 
•Jewish  writers  resjiecting  the  observance  of  Pente- 
cost, the  following  particulars  apjiear  to  be  the  best 
worthy  of  notice.  The  flour  for  the  loaves  was 
sifted  with  peculiar  cjwe  twelve  times  over.  They 
were  made  either  the  day  before,  or,  in  the  event 
of  a  Sabbath  preceding  the  day  of  Pentecost,  two 
days  before  the  occasion  {Mennchoth,  vi.  7,  xi.  9). 
Tiiey  are  said  to  have  been  made  in  a  particular  foi-m. 
They  were  seven  palms  in  length  and  four  in  breadth 
(Menachoth,  xi.  4,  with  Maimonides' note*.  The  two 
lambs  for  a  peace-offering  wei'o  to  be  waved  by  the 
priest,  before  they  were  slaughtered,  along  with  the 
loaves,  ami  afterwards  the  loaves  were  waved  a 
second  time  along  with  the  shoulders  of  the  lambs. 
One  loaf  was  given  to  the  high-priest  and  the  other 
to  the  ordinary  priests  who  officiated'  (Maimon.  in 
Tamid,  c.  8,  quoted  by  Otho).  The  bread  was  eaten 
that  same  night  in  the  Tem])le,  and  no  fragment  of 
it  was  suffered  to  remain  till  the  morning  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  vi.  5,  §3;  A7it.  iii.  10,  §6). 

Although,  according  to  the  Law,  the  observance  of 
i'eatecost  lasted  but  a  single  day,  the  Jews  in  foreign 
countries,  since  the  Captivity,  have  prolonged  it  to 
two  days.  They  have  treated  the  Feast  of  Trum- 
pets in  the  same  way.  The  alteration  appears  to 
have  been  made  to  meet  the  possibility  of  an  ei-ror 
in  calculating  the  true  day.K  It  is  said  by  Barte- 
iiora  and  Maimonides  that,  while  the  Temple  was 
standing,  though  the  religious  rites  were  confined 
to  the  day,  the  festivities,  and  the  bringing  in  of 
gifts,  continued  through  seven  days  (Notes  to  Cha- 
giijnh,  ii.  4).  The  Hallel  is  said  to  have  been  sung 
at  Pentecost  as  well  as  at  the  Pa.ssover  ( Lightfoot, 
Temple  Service,  §o).  The  concourse  of  Jews  who 
attended  Pentecost  in  later  times  appears  to  have 
been  very  great  (Acts  ii. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  13, 
§14,  xviL  10,  §2;  B.  J.  ii.  3,  §1). 

No  occasional  offering  of  first-fruits  could  be 
made  in  the  Temple  before  Pentecost  (^Bicc'irim, 
i.  3,  6).  Hence  probably  the  two  loaves  were  desig- 
nated "  the  first  of  the  first-fruits"  (l<]x.  xxiii.  19) 
[Passover,  p.  715,  note  "],  although  the  offering 
of  the  omer  had  preceded  them.  The  proper  time 
for  offering  first-fruits  was  the  interval  between 
Pentecost  and  Tabernacles  {Bice.  i.  6,  10 ;  comp. 
Ex.  xxiii.  16).     [First  Fruits.] 

The  conne.vion  between  the  omer  and  the  two 


PENTECOST 

loaves  of  Penteccst  apjwars  nevei-  to  have  been  lost 
si^ht  of.  The  former  was  called  by  Philo,  irpoe- 
6prios  erepos  eoprfjs  /xei^ovos  "^  (De  Sej^f.  §21, 
V.  25  ;  comp.  I>c  Dcccm  Orac.  iv.  302,  ed.  Tauch). 
The  inte\val  between  the  Passover  and  Pentecost 
was  evidently  regarded  as  a  religious  season.'  The 
custom  has  probably  been  handed  down  from  ancient 
times,  which  is  observed  by  the  modern  Jews,  of 
keeping  a  regular  computation  of  the  fifty  days  by 
a  foi'inal  observance,  beginning  with  a  short  prayer 
on  the  evening  of  the  day  of  the  omer,  and  con- 
tinued on  each  succeeding  day  by  a  solemn  declara- 
tion of  its  number  in  the  succession,  at  evening 
prayer,  while  the  members  of  the  family  are  stand- 
ing with  respectful  attention  "^  (Bust.  Syn.  Jud. 
XX.  p.  440). 

III.  Doubts  have  been  cast  on  the  common  inter- 
pretation of  Acts  ii.  1,  according  to  which  the  Holy 
Gliost  was  given  to  the  Apostles  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost.  Lighttbot  contends  that  the  passage,  eV 
T^  (TvfnrXrjpovaOai  r^v  r^/xepav  rris  nefTrjKOtrTf/s, 
means,  v:hen  the  daij  of  Pentecost  had  passed, 
and  considers  that  this  rendering  is  countenanced 
by  the  words  of  the  Vulgate,  "  cum  complerentur 
dies  Pentecostes."  He  supposes  that  Pentecost  fell 
that  year  on  the  Sabbath,  and  that  it  was  on  tlie 
ensuing  Lord's  day  that  -^(rav  a-jravTes  ofxodviJ.aShi' 
iirl  rb  avrS  {Exercit.  in  Act.  ii.  1).  Hitzig,  on 
the  other  hand  (  Ostem  und  Pfngsten,  Heidelberg, 
1837),  would  render  the  words,  "As  the  day  of 
Pentecost  was  approaching  its  fulfilment."  Neander 
has  replied  to  the  latter,  and  has  maintained  the 
common  interpretation  [Planting  of  the  Christian 
Church,  i.  5,  Bohn's  ed.). 

The  question  on  what  day  of  the  week  this 
Pentecost  fell,  must  of  course  be  determined  by  tlie 
mode  in  which  the  doubt  is  solved  regarding  the 
day  on  which  the  Last  Supper  was  eaten.  [Pass- 
over, III.]  If  it  was  the  legal  paschal  supper,  on 
the  14th  of  Nisan,  and  the  Sabbath  during  which 
our  Lord  lay  in  the  grave  was  the  day  of  the  omer, 
Pentecost  must  have  followed  on  the  Sabbath.  But 
if  the  supper  was  eaten  on  the  13th,  and  He  was 
crucified  on  the  14th,  the  Sunday  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion must  have  been  the  day  of  the  omer,  and 
Pentecost  must  have  occurred  on  the  first  day  of 
the  week. 

IV.  There  is  no  clear  notice  in  the  Scriptures  of 
any  historical  significance  belonging  to  Pentecost. 
But  most  of  the  Jews  of  later  times  have  regarded 
the  day  as  the  commemoration  of  the  giving  of  the 
Law  on  Jlount  Sinai.  It  is  made  out  from  Ex.  xix. 
that  the  Law  was  delivered  on  the  iittieth  day  after 
the  deliverance  from  Egypt  (SeLien,  De  Jnr.  Nat. 


'  In  like  manner,  the  leavened  bread  which  was  offered 
with  the  ordinary  peace-offering  was  waved  and  given  to 
the  priest  who  sprinkled  the  blood  (Lev.  vii.  13,  14). 

g  Ijightfoot,  Exercit.  Ifeb.  Acts  ii.  1 ;  Reland,  Ant.  iv. 
4,5;  Selden,  De  Ann.  Civ.  c.  vii. 

h  He  elsewhere  mentions  the  festival  of  Pentecost  with 
the  same  marked  respect.  Ho  speaks  of  a  peculiar  feast 
kept  by  the  Thcrapeutae  as  Trpoeopnos  fifyicrrr)?  eopr^s 
SC.  lIei'TT;(coo-T^5  (De  Vit.  CoTitemp.  V.  334). 

■  According  to  the  most  generally  received  intei-pretation 
of  the  word  SeiirepoTrpioTo?  (Luke  vi.  1),  the  piTiod  was 
marlved  by  a  regularly  designated  succession  of  Sabbaths, 
similar  to  the  several  succcssioas  of  Sundays  in  our  own 
calendar,  it  is  assmned  that  the  day  of  the  omer  was 
called  Seurepa  (in  the  LXX.,  Lev.  xxiii.  11,  rj  eTTa.vpi.ov 
TfjS  -n-puiTqi).  The  Sabbath  which  Gime  next  after  it  was 
tennod  SeurepoTrpajTOj' ;  the  second,  fievrepofieuTepor  ;  the 
third,  SeuTepoxpiToi' ;  and  so  onwards,  till  Pentecost.    This 


explanation  was  first  proposed  by  Scaliger  (De  Emend.  Temp. 
lib.  vi.  p.  557),  and  has  been  adopted  by  Frischmuth,  Pe- 
tavius,  Casaubon,  Lightfoot,  Godwyn,  Carpzov,  and  many 
othere. 

k  The  less  educated  of  the  modem  Jews  regard  the  fifty 
days  with  strange  superstition,  and,  it  would  seem,  are 
always  impatient  for  tliem  to  come  to  an  end.  During 
their  continuance,  they  have  a  dread  of  sudden  death,  of  the 
effect  of  malaria,  and  of  the  influence  of  e\il  spirits  over 
children.  They  relate  with  gross  exaggeration  the  case  of  a 
great  mortality  which,  during  the  first  twenty-three  days 
of  the  period,  befel  the  pupils  of  Aliiba,  the  great  Mishnical 
doctor  of  the  second  century,  at  Jaffa.  They  do  not  ride, 
or  drive,  or  go  on  the  water,  unless  they  are  impelled  by 
absolute  necessity.  They  are  aireful  not  to  whistle  in  the 
evening,  lest  it  should  bring  111  luck.  They  scrupulously 
put  off  marriages  till  Pentecost.  (Stauben,  La  VieJuive  en 
Alsace  (Paris,  1860),  p.  124  ;  Mills,  British  Jeics,  p.  207.) 


PENTECOST 

et  Gent.  iii.  11).  It  has  been  conjectuved  that  a, 
connexion  between  the  event  and  the  festival  may 
possibly  be  hintevl  at  in  the  reference  to  the  ob- 
seivauce  of  the  Law  in  Dent.  xvi.  12.  But  neither 
Philo""  nor  Josephus  has  a  word  on  the  subject. 
There  is,  however,  a  tradition  of  a  custom  which 
Schottgen  supposes  to  l)o  at  least  as  ancient  as  the 
Apostolic  times,  that  the  night  before  Pentecost  was 
a  time  especially  appropriate!  for  thanking  God  for 
the  gift  of  the  Law."  Several  of  the  Fathers  noticed 
the  coincidence  of  the  day  of  the  giving  of  the  Law 
with  tliat  of  the  festival,  and  made  use  of  it.  Thus 
Jerome  says,  "  Supputemus  nunierum,  et  inve- 
niemus  quinquagesimo  die  egressionis  Israel  ex 
Aesypto  in  vertic  e  montis  Sinai  legem  datam. 
Unde  ct  Pentecostes  celebratur  solemuitas,  et  postea 
Evangelii  sacramentum  Spiritus  Sancti  descensinne 
completur  "  {Epist.  ad  Fabiolam,  Mansio  XtF.). 
St.  Augiistin  speaks  in  a  similar  manner :  "  Pente- 
costen  etiam,  id  .est,  a  passione  et  resurrectione 
Domini,  quinquagesimum  diem  celebramus,  quo 
nobis  Sanctum  Spiritnm  Paracletum  quern  pro- 
miserat  misit:  quod  futurum  etiam  per  Judaeorum 
pascha  significatum  est,  cum  quinquagesimo  die 
post  celebrationem  ovis  occisae,  Moyses  digito  Dei 
scriptam  legem  accepit  in  monte  "  [Contra  Faustuin, 
lib.  xxxii.  c.  12).  The  later  Kabbis  spoke  with 
confidence  of  the  commemoration  of  the  Law  as  a 
prime  object  in  the  institution  of  the  feast.  Mai- 
monidcs  says,  "  Festum  septimanarum  est  dies  ille, 
quo  lex  data  fuit.  Ad  hujus  diei  honorem  pertinet 
quod  dies  a  praecedenti  solenni  festo  (Pascha)  ad 
ilium  usque  diem  numerautur  "  [More  Nevochiin, 
iii.  41).  Abaibanel  recognises  the  fact,  but  denies 
that  it  had  anything  to  do  with  the  institution  of 
the  fe.'ist,  observing,  "  lex  divina  non  opus  habet 
sancti licjitione  diei,  quo  ejus  memoria  recolatur." 
He  adds,  "  causa  festi  septimanarum  est  initium 
messis  tritici "  (in  Leg.  262).  But  in  general  the 
Jewish  writers  of  modern  times  have  expressed 
themseh'es  on  the  subject  without  hesitation,  and, 
in  the  rites  of  the  day,  as  it  is  now  observal,  the 
gift  of  the  Law  is  kept  prominently  in  view." 

V.  If  the  feast  of  Pentecost  stood  without  an 
organic  connexion  with  any  other  rites,  we  should 
have  no  certain  warrant  in  the  Old  Testament  for 
regarding  it  as  more  than  the  divinely  appointed 
solemn  thanksgiving  for  the  yearly  supply  of  the 
most  useful  sort  of  food.  Every  reference  to  its 
meaning  seems  to  bear  immediately  upon  the  com- 
pletion of  the  grain-harvest.  It  might  have  been  a 
Gentile  festival,  having  no  proper  reference  to  the 
election  of  the  chosen  race.  It  might  have  taken  a 
place  in  the  religion  of  any  people  who  merely  felt 
that  it  is  (jod  who  gives  rain  from  heaven  and 
fruitful  seasons,  and  who  (ills  our  hearts  with  food 
and  gladness  (Acts  xiv.  17).  But  it  was,  as  we 
ha\'e  seen,  essentially  linked  on  to  the  Passover,  that 
festival  which,  above  all  others,  expi-essed  the  fact 
of  a  race  chosen  and  separated  from  other  nations. 

'"  Philo  expressly  states  tbat  it  was  at  the  Feast  of 
Trunip'jLs  tliat  the  giving  of  the  Law  was  commemorated 
{l)e  Sept.  c.  22).    [Trumpets,  Fkast  ok.] 

"  Jior.  IJeb.  in  Act.  il.  1.  ScUullgen  conjectures  that  the 
Apostles  on  t  he  occasion  there  spoken  of  were  asscnibloil  to- 
gether for  this  purpose.  In  accordance  with. lewlsh  custom. 

»  Some  of  tlie  Jews  adorn  their  liouses  with  flowers,  and 
wear  wreaths  on  their  Iieads,  witli  the  declarcnl  purpose  of 
testifying  their  joy  in  tlje  possession  of  the  Ijiiw.  'I'liey  also 
eat  such  food  as  is  pi'epared  with  niUk,  l)cc;iuse  the  parity 
of  the  divine  law  is  likciipd  to  mil!;  ((.'oiiiparc  tlie  ex- 
pression, "  the  sinccie  milk  of  the  word,"  1  I'd.  ii.  2.) 


PENTECOST 


787 


It  was  not  an  insulated  day.  It  stood  as  the  cul- 
minating point  of  the  Pentecostal  se;tson.  If  the 
ofteriug  of  the  omer  was  a  supplication  for  the 
Divine  blessing  on  the  harvest  which  was  just  com- 
mencing, and  the  otfeiing  of  the  two  loaves  was  a 
thanksgiving  for  its  completion,  each  rite  was 
brought  into  a  higher  significance  in  con^equence 
of  the  omer  forming  an  integral  part  of  the  Pass- 
over. It  was  thus  set  forth  that  He  who  had 
delivered  His  people  from  Egyjit,  who  had  raised 
them  froin  the  condition  of  slaves  to  that  of  free 
men  in  immediate  covenant  with  Himself,  was  the 
same  that  was  sustaiuitig  them  with  bread  from  year 
to  year.  The  inspired  teacher  declaied  to  God's 
chosen  one,  "  He  maketh  j^eace  in  thy  borders,  He 
filleth  thee  with  the  finest  of  the  wheat "  (i's. 
cclvii.  14).  If  we  thus  legard  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost as  the  solemn  termination  of  the  consecrated 
period,  intended,  as  the  seasons  came  round,  to 
teach  this  lesson  to  the  people,  we  may  see  the 
fitness  of  the  name  by  which  the  Jews  have  mostly 
called  it,  n"li*J?,  the  concludimj  assembli/.f  [Pass- 
over, p.  7 14,  note  i.] 

As  the  two  loaves  were  leavened,  they  could  not 
be  offered  on  the  altar,  like  the  unleavened  sacrificial 
bread.  [Passovek,  IV.  3  (6).]  Abarbanel  (m 
Lev.  xxiii.)  Las  proposed  a  reiison  for  their  not 
being  leavened  which  seems  hardly  to  admit  of  a 
doubt.  He  thinks  that  they  were  intended  to  re- 
present the  best  pi'oduce  of  the  earth  in  the  actual 
condition  in  which  it  ministers  to  the  support  of 
human  life.  Thus  they  express,  in  the  most  signi- 
ficant manner,  what  is  evidently  the  idea  of  the 
festival. 

We  need  not  suppose  that  the  grain-harvest  in 
the  Holy  Land  was  in  all  years  precisely  cqtupleted 
between  the  Passover  and  Pentecost.  The  period  of 
seven  weeks  was  evidently  appointed  in  conformity 
with  the  Sabbatical  number,  which  so  frequently 
recurs  in  the  arrangements  of  the  Mosaic  Law. 
[Feasts  ;  Jubilee.]  Hence,  probably,  the  prevail- 
ing use  of  the  name,  "  The  Feast  of  VVeeks,"  which 
might  always  have  suggested  the  close  religious  con- 
nexion in  which  the  festival  stood  to  the  Passover. 

It  is  not  surprismg that,  without  any  direct  autho- 
rity in  the  0.  T.,  the  coincidence  of  the  day  on  which 
the  festival  was  observed  with  that  on  which  the  Law 
appears  to  have  been  given  to  Moses,  should  have 
strongly  impressed  the  minds  of  Christians  in  the 
early  ages  of  the  Church.  The  Divine  Providence 
had  ordained  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  come 
down  ill  a  special  manner,  to  give  spiritual  life  and 
unity  to  the  Church,  on  that  very  same  day  in  the 
year  on  which  the  Law  had  been  bestowed  on  the 
children  of  Israel  which  gave  to  them  national  life 
and  unity.  They  must  have  seen  that,  ;us  the  pos- 
session of  the  Law  had  completed  the  deliverance  of 
the  Hebrew  race  wrought  by  the  hand  of  Moses,  so 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit  perfected  the  work  of  Christ 
in  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  upon  e;irth. 


It  is  a  fact  of  some  interest,  though  in  no  wise  con- 
nected with  the  present  argument,  that.  In  the  service 
of  the  synagogue,  tlie  took  of  Kuth  is  read  llirougb 
at  Pentecost,  from  the  connexion  of  its  subject  wiili  hor- 
vest.  (Buxt.  Hi/n.  Jud.  xx. ;  I.a  Vie  Juiix  en  Ahace 
pp.  129.  112.) 

p  So  Godwyn,  Ligbtl'oot,  IMaiid,  liiilir.  The  full  name 
appears  to  liave  been  HDS  7^'  n^VV,  the  concluding 
assembly  of  Vie  I'assovo:  'I'lie  designation  of  the  offer- 
ing of  the  omer  used  by  I'liilo,  irpocopTiot  tTcpa?  toprqt 
lifiiovoi,  strikingly  tends  to  the  same  iiurpose. 

;i  E  2 


788 


PENUEL 


It  may  have  been  on  this  account  that  Pentecost 
was  the  last  Jewish  festival  (as  far  as  we  know) 
which  St.  Paul  was  anxious  to  observe  (Acts^xx.  16, 
1  Cor.  xvi.  8),  and  that  Whitsuntide  came  to  be 
the  first  annual  festival  instituted  in  the  Christian 
Church  (Hessey's  Bampton  Lectures,  pp.  88,  96). 
It  was  I'iglitly  regarded  as  the  Church's  birthday, 
and  the  Pentecostal  season,  the  period  between  it 
and  Easter,  bearing  as  it  does  such  a  clear  analogy 
to  the  fifty  days  of  the  old  Law,  thus  became  the 
ordinary  time  for  the  baptism  of  converts  (Tcrtullian, 
De  Bapt.  c.  19 ;  Jei'ome,  in  Zech.  xiv.  8). 

(Cai-pzov,  App.  Crit.  iii.  5;  Keland,  Ant.  iv.  4; 
Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  §3;  Exercit.  in  Act. 
ii.  1  ;  Bahr,  Symbolik,  iv.  3 ;  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Heb. 
I.  ix.  2,  III.  viii.  2 ;  Meyer,  De  Fest.  Heb.  ii.  13  ; 
Hupfeld,  De  Fest.  Heb.  ii.;  Iken.  De Duobus  Pani- 
bus  Pentecost.  Brem.  1729  ;  Mishna,  Menachoth 
and  Biccurim,  with  the  Notes  in  Surcnhusius ; 
Di'usius,  Notae  Majores  in  Lev.  xxiii.  15,  21  {Crit. 
Sac);  Otho,  Lex.  Rab.  s.  Festa ;  Buxtorf,  Si/n. 
Jud.  c.  XX.)  [S.  C] 

PEN'UEL  (^N-IJS  :  in  Gen.  J5os  deov,  else- 
where ^avovr\\ :  Phanuel).  The  usual,  and  pos- 
sibly the  original,  form  of  the  name  of  a  place  which 
first  appears  under  the  slightly  different  fonn  of 
Peniel  (Gen.  xxxii.  30,  31).  From  this  narrative 
it  is  evident  that  it  lay  somewhere  between  the 
torrent  Jabbok  and  Succoth  (comp.  xxxii.  22  with 
xxxiii.  17).  This  is  in  exact  agreement  with  the 
terms  of  its  next  occurrence,  when  Gideon,  pursuing 
the  hosts  of  the  Slidianites  across  the  Jordan  into  the 
uplands  of  Gilead,  arrives  first  at  Succoth,  and  from 
thence  mounts  to  Penuel  (Judg.  viii.  5,  8).  It  had 
then  a  tower,  which  Gideon  destroyed  on  his  return, 
at  the  same  time  slaying  tlie  men  of  the  place 
because  they  had  refused  him  help  before  (ver.  17). 
Penuel  was  rebuilt  or  fortified  by  Jeroboam  at  the 
commencement  of  his  reign  (1  K.  xii.  25),  no  doubt 
on  account  of  its  commanding  the  fords  of  Succoth 
and  the  road  from  the  east  of  Jordan  to  his  capital 
city  of  Shechem,  and  also  perhaps  as  being  an  ancient 
sanctuary.  Succoth  has  been  identified  with  toler- 
able certainty  at  Sakut,  but  no  trace  has  yet  been 
found  of  Penuel.  [G.] 

PE'OR  (~)iySn,  "  the  Peor,"  with  the  def. 
article:  tov  '^ioywp:  mons  ]'/u)hor),  A  mountain 
in  Woab,  from  whence,  after  having  without  efiisct 
ascended  the  lower  or  less  sacred  summits  of  Bamoth- 
Baal  and  Pisgah,  the  prophet  Balaam  was  conducted 
by  Balak  for  his  final  conjurations  (Num.  xxiii.  28 
only). 

Peor — or  more  accurately,  "the  Peor" — was 
"  facing  Jeshimon."  The  same  thing  is  said  of  Pisgah. 
But  unfortunately  we  are  as  yet  ignorant  of  the 
position  of  all  three,  so  that  nothing  can  be  inferred 
from  this  specification. 

In  the  Ononiasticon  ("  Fogor  ;"  "  Bethphoo-or ;" 
"  Danaba")  it  is  stated  to  be  above  the  town  of 
Libias  ( the  ancient  Beth-aram),  and  opposite  Jericho. 
The  towns  of  Bethpeor  and  Dinhaba  were  on  the 
mountain,  six  miles  from  Libias,  and  seven  from 
Heshbon,  respectively.  A  jtlace  named  Fukharah  is 
mentioned  in  the  list  of  towns  south  of  Es-Salt  in 
the  appendix  to  the  1st  edit,  of  Dr.  Ilobinson's 
Bib.  Res.  (iii.  App.  169),  and  this  is  placed  by 
Van  de  Velde  at  tJie  head  of  the   Wady  Eshteh, 

"  The  LXX.  have  here  represented  the  Hebrew  letter 
Airi  by  g,  as  they  have  also  in  Raguel,  Gomorrah, 
Athaliah,  &c. 


PERAZIM,  MOUNT 

8  miles  N.  E.  of  ffesbdn.  But  in  our  present  igno- 
rance of  tliese  regioas  all  this  must  be  mere  conjecture. 

Gesenius  (  TAes.  1119  a)  gives  it  as  his  opinion 
that  B;Kil- Peor  derived  his  name  from  the  mountain, 
not  tlie  mountain  from  him. 

A  Peor,  under  its  Greek  gaib  of  Phagor,  appears 
among  the  eleven  names  added  by  the  LXX.  to  the 
list  of  the  allotment  of  Judali.  between  Bethlehem 
and  Aitui  ( Etham  i.  It  was  known  to  Eusebius 
and  Jerome,  and  is  mentioned  by  the  latter  in  his 
translation  of  the  Ononiasticon  as  Phaora.  It 
probably  still  exists  luider  the  name  of  Beit  Fdghur 
or  Kirbet  Fdghur,  5  miles  S.W.  of  Bethlehem, 
barely  a  mile  to  the  left  of  the  road  from  Hebron 
(Tobler,  Ztte  Wanderung).  It  is  somewhat  singular 
that  both  Peor  and  Pisgah,  names  so  prominently 
connected  with  the  East  of  Jordan,  should  be  found 
also  on  the  West. 

The  LXX.  also  read  the  name,  which  in  the  He- 
brew text  is  Pan  and  Pai,  as  Peor;  since  in  both 
cases  they  have  Phogor. 

2.  ("nj?3,  without  the  article  :  ^oydop  :  idolum 
Phehor;  Phohor;  Beel  Phegor).  In  four  passages 
(Num.  XXV.  18,  twice;  xxxi.  16;  Josh.  xxii.  17) 
Peor  occurs  as  a  contraction  for  Baal-peor ;  always 
in  reference  to  the  licentious  rites  of  Shittim  which 
brought  such  destruction  on  Israel.  In  the  three 
first  cases  the  expression  is,  the  "  matter,"  or  "  for 
the  sake"  (literally  "word"  in  each)  "of  Peor;" 
in  the  fourth,  "  iniquity,  or  crime,  of  Peor."     [G.] 

PERA'ZIM,  MOUNT  (D'-V^S^in  :  ipos  hffe- 
$wv^:  mons  divisiorum).  A  name  which  occurs  in 
Is.xxviii.  21  only, — unless  the  place  which  it  desig- 
nates be  identiciil  witli  the  Baal-Perazim  men- 
tioned as  the  scene  of  one  of  David's  victories  over 
the  Philistines.  Isaiah,  as  his  manner  was  (comp. 
x.  26),  is  referring  to  some  ancient  triumphs  of  the 
arms  of  Israel  as  symbolical  of  an  event  shortly  to 
happen — • 

Jehovah  shall  rise  up  as  at  Mount  Perazim, 
He  shall  be  wroth  as  in  the  valley  of  Gibeon. 
The  commentators  almost  unanimously  take  his 
reference  to  be  to  David's  victories,  above  alluded  to, 
at  Baal  Perazim,  and  Gibeon  (Gesenius;  Strachey), 
or  to  the  former  of  these  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Joshua's  slaughter  of  the  CaniTanites  at  Gibeon  and 
Beth-horon  on  the  other  (Eichhorn;  Rosenmiiller  ; 
Michaelis).  Ewald  alone — perhaps  with  greater 
critical  sagacity  than  the  rest^-doubts  that  David's 
victory  is  intended ,  "  because  the  prophets  of  this 
period  are  not  in  the  habit  of  choosing  such  examples 
from  his  history  "  (Propheten,  i.  261). 

If  David's  victory  is  alluded  to  in  this  passage  of 
the  prophet,  it  furnishes  an  example,  similar  to  that 
noticed  under  Oreb,  of  the  slight  and  casual  mannei- 
in  which  events  of  the  gravest  importance  are  some- 
times passed  over  in  the  Bible  narrative.  But  for 
this  later  reference  no  one  would  infer  that  the 
events  reported  in  2  Sam.  v.  18-25,  and  1  Chr.  xiv. 
8-17,  had  been  impoi-tant  enough  to  serve  as  a 
parallel  to  one  of  Jehovah's  most  tremendous  judg- 
ments. In  the  account  of  Josephus  {Ant.  vii. 
4,  §1),  David's  victory  assumes  much  larger  pro- 
portions than  in  Samuel  and  Chronicles.  The  attack 
is  made  not  by  the  Philistines  only,  but  by  "  all  Syria 
and  Phoenicia,  with  many  other  warlike  nations  be- 
sides."    This  is  a  good  instance  of  the  manner  in 

a  Perhaps  considering  the  word  as  derived  from  yEi*"!' 
which  the  LXX.  usually  render  by  do-e/Sijs. 


PERESH 

wliicli  Joso)iliu,s,  apjiaieiitly  from  recoids  now  lost 
to  us,  sui)plements  and  completes  the  scanty  narra- 
tives of  the  Bible,  iu  agreement  with  the  casual 
i-eferences  of  the  Prophets  or  Psalmists.  He  places 
the  scene  of  the  encounter  iu  the  "  groves  of  weep- 
ing" as  if  alluding  to  the  Baca  of  Ps.  Ixxxiv. 

The  title  Mount  Perazim,  when  taken  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Bual  Perazim  of  2  .Sam,  y.  seems 
to  imply  that  it  was  an  eminence  with  a  heathen 
sanctuary  of  Baal  upon  it.  [Baal,  vol.  i. 
p.  148.]  [G.] 

PE'KESH  (C^nS  :  ^apis  :  Phares).  The  son 
of  Macliir  hy  his  wile  Maaehah  (1  Clir.  vii.  IG). 

PE'REZ  (^nS  :  *apes  :  J'harcs).  The  "  chil- 
dren of  Perez,"  or  Phai-ez,  the  son  of  Judah,  appear 
to  have  been  a  family  of  inijmi  tanc.e  for  many  cen- 
turies. In  the  reign  of  David  one  of  them  was 
chief  of  all  the  capUiins  of  the  host  lor  the  first 
mouth  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  3) ;  and  of  those  who  leturned 
from  Babylon,  to  the  number  of  4G8,  some  occu- 
pied a  prominent  position  in  the  trite  of  Judah, 
and  are  mentioned  by  name  as  living  iu  Jeiusalem 
(Neh.  xi.  4,  6).     [Pii  Am:z.] 

PE'KEZ-UZ'ZA  (N;Ty  }nQ  :  AtaKOTri,  'OCd  : 
divisio  O^a),  I  Chr.  xiii.  i  1  ;  and 

PE'REZ-UZ'ZAH  (n-Ji?  'Q  :  pcrcussio  O-ui), 
2  Sam.  vi.  8.  The  title  which  David  conferred  on 
the  threshing-floor  of  Nachon,  or  Cidon,  in  comme- 
moration of  the  sudden  death  of  Uzzah :  "  And 
David  was  wroth  because  Jehovah  had  broken  this 
breach  on  Uzzah  and  he*  called  the  place  '  Uzzah's 
breaking'  unto  this  day."  The  word /3ere^  was  a 
favourite  with  David  on  such  occasions.  He  em- 
jiloys  it  to  commemorate  hi*  having  "  broken  up  " 
the  Philistine  force  in  the  valley  of  Itephaim  (2  .Sam. 
v.  20).  [Baal  Perazim.]  He  also  uses  it  in  a 
subsequent    refei'ence    to    Uzzah's    destruction    in 

1  Chr.  XV.  13. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  statement  of  the  con- 
tinued existence  of  the  name  should  be  found  not  only 
in  Samuel  and  Chronicles,  but  also  in  Josephus.  who 
says  {Ant.  vii.  4,  §2),  as  if  from  his  own  observation, 
"  the  place  where  he  died  is  even  now  (ert  vvv) 
called  '  the  cleaving  of  Oza.'  " 

The  situation  of  tiie  spot  is  not  known.  [Nachon.] 
If  this  statement  of  Josephus  may  I^e  taken  literally, 
it  would  however  be  wortli  while  to  make  some 
search  for  traces  of  the  name  between  Jerusalem  and 
Kirjath-jearim.  [G.] 

PERFUMES  (nnbp).  The  free  use  of  per- 
fumes was  peculiarly  grateful  to  the  Orientals 
(Prov.  xxvii.  9),  whose  olfactory  nerves  are  more 
thai)  usually  sensitive  to  the  ollensive  smells  en- 
gendered b}'  the  hiKit  of  their  climate  {Binikhardt's 
Travels,  ii.  85).  The  Hebrews  manuliictuied  their 
perfumes  chiefly  from  sj)ices  imported  from  Arabia, 
though  to  a  certain  extent  also  fiom  aromatic  plants 
growing  in  their  own  countiy.  [Spices.]  The 
modes  in  which  they  apjilied  them  were  various  : 
occasionally  a  bunch  of  the  plant  itself  vv;is  worn 
about  the  person  as  a  nosegay,  or  enclosed  in  a  bag 
(Cant.  i.  13)  ;  or  the  plant  w.is  reduced  to  a  powder 
and  used  in  the  way  of  fumigation  (Cant.  iii.  6)  ; 
or,  again,  the  aromatic  qudities  were  extracted  by 

"  Or,  witli  equal  accurucy,  and  perliajis  more  conve- 
nience, "one  called  it,"  that  Is,  "It  vvus  oiUed"— as  In 

2  K.  xviii.  4.    [Nkuusutan.] 

b  K'BJn  ^n3  ;  lit,  "bouses  of  the  soul." 

"  A  similar  usage  is  recorded  of  the  Judiuu  piinccs  :— 


PERGAMOS 


789 


some  proLX'ss  of  boiling,  and  weie  then  mixed  with 
oil,  so  as  to  be  applied  to  the  person  in  the  way  of 
ointment  (John  xii.  3) ;  or,  lastly,  the  scent  was 
car)-ied  about  in  smelling-bottles ''  suspended  from 
the  girdle  (Is.  iii.  20).  Perfumes  entered  largely 
into  the  Temple  service,  in  the  two  forms  of  incense 
and  ointment  (Ex.  xxx.  22-,'58).  Nor  were  they 
less  used  in  private  life:  not  only  were  thev  aj'plied 
to  the  person,  but  to  garments  (Ps.  xlv.  8;  C;uit. 
iv.  11),  and  to  articles  of  furniture,  such  .is  beds 
(Prov.  vii.  17).  On  the  arrival  of  a  guest  the 
same  compliments  were  probably  paid  in  ancient  as 
in  modern  times;  the  rooms  were  fumigated;  tlie 
person  of  the  guesf  was  sprinkled  with  rose-water; 
and  then  the  incense  was  ai)i)lied  to  his  face  and 
beard  (Dan.  ii.  4G  ;  Lane's  Mud.  Eg.  ii.  14).  When 
a  royal  personage  went  abroad  in  his  litter,  attend- 
ants threw  up  "  pillars  of  smoke"  "  about  his  jiath 
(Cant.  iii.  Gj.  Nor  is  it  improbable  that  other 
practices,  such  as  scenting  the  breath  Ijy  chewing 
frankincense  (Lane,  i.  24G),  and  the  .skin  by  wasiiing 
in  rose-water  (Burckhardt's  Arab.  i.  (58),  and  fumi- 
gating drinkables  (Lane,  i.  185;  Burckhardt,  i.  52), 
were  also  adopted  in  eaily  times.  The  use  of  per- 
fumes was  omitted  in  times  of  mourning,  whence 
the  allusion  in  Is.  iii.  24,  "  instead  of  sweet  smell 
there  shall  be  stink."  The  preparation  of  perfumes 
in  the  fonn  either  of  ointment  or  incense  was  a 
recognised  proliission  ■*  among  the  Jews  (Ex.  xxx. 
25,35;   Eccl.  X.  1).  [W.  L.  B.] 

PER'GA  [n^pyn),  an  ancient  and  important 
city  of  Pamphylia,  situated  on  the  river  Cestius, 
at  a  distance  of  60  stadia  from  its  mouth,  and  cele- 
brated in  antiquity  for  the  worship  of  Artemis 
(DianaJ,  whose  temple  stood  on  a  hill  outside  the 
town  (Strab.  xiv.  6G7;  Cic.  Verr.  i.  20;  Plin.  v. 
2G ;  Mela,  i.  14 ;  Ptol.  v.  5,  §7).  The  goddess  and 
the  temple  are  represented  in  the  coins  of  Perga. 
The  Cestius  was  navigable  to  Perga;  and  St.  Paul 
landed  here  on  his  voyage  from  Pajihos  (Acts  xiii. 
13).  He  visited  the  city  a  second  time  on  his  return 
from  the  interior  of  Pamphylia,  and  preached  the 
Gosi>el  there  (Acts  xiv.  25).  For  further  details  see 
Pami'IIYLIA.  There  are  still  extensive  remains  of 
Pei-ga  at  a  spot  called  by  the  Turks  Eshi-Kdlesi, 
(Leake,  Asia  Minor,  p.  132  ;  Fellows,  Asia  Minor, 
p.  190). 

PER'GAMOS  (^  Xlepyafxos,  or  r'b  Udpya- 
fiov).  A  city  of  Mysia,  about  three  miles  to  the  N. 
of  the  river  Bab/r-tchai,  the  Caicus  of  antiquity,  and 
twenty  miles  from  its  present  mouth.  The'name 
was  originally  given  to  a  rcmai-kable  hill,  presenting 
a  conical  apj)earance  when  viewed  from  the  plain. 
The  local  legends  att<ached  a  sacred  character  to  this 
place.  Upon  it  the  Cabiri  were  said  to  have  been 
witnesses  of  the  birth  of  Zeus,  and  the  whole  of  the 
land  belonging  to  the  city  of  the  same  name  which 
afterwards  giew  up  around  the  original  Pergamos, 
to  have  belonged  to  these.  The  sacred  character  of 
the  locsility,  combined  with  its  natural  strength, 
seems  to  iiave  made  it,  like  some  others  of  the 
ancient  temjjles,  a  bank  for  chiefs  who  desired  to 
accumulate  a  large  amount  of  sjiecie;  and  Lysi- 
machus,  one  of  Alexander's  successors,  depositeil 
there  an  enormous  sum  —  no  less  tiian  iHM)i) 
talents — in  the  care  of  an  Asiatic  eunuch  named 

"  Quum  rex  semet  in  pulilico  conspici  patitur,  tuiibula 
aigenloa  ministri  f'ennit,  tudiuique  Iter  per  quud  ferri 
dcstliinvit  odorlbiis  cuniiilcnf'  (Cui  lius  viii.  9,  ^23). 
■'  np"l;  A.  V.  "jiputliecary." 


790 


PERGAMOS 


Philetaerus.  In  the  troublous  times  which  fol- 
lowe  I  the  break  up  of  the  Macedonian  conquests, 
this  officer  betrayed  his  trust,  and  by  successful 
temporizing,  and  perhaps  judicious  employment  of 
the  funds  at  his  command,  succeeded  in  retaniing 
the  treasure  and  transmitting  it  at  the  end  of  twenty 
years  to  his  nephew  Eunieues,  a  petty  dynast  in  the 
neighbourhood.  Eumenes  was  succeeded  by  his 
cousin  Attalus,  the  founder  of  the  Attalic  dynasty 
of  Pergamene  kings,  who  by  allying  himself  with 
the  rising  Roman  power  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
future  greatness  of  his  house.  His  successor,  Eu- 
menes II.,  was  j-ewarded  for  his  fidelity  to  the 
Romans  in  their  wars  with  Antiochus  and  Perseus 
by  a  gift  of  all  the  teiritory  which  the  former  had 
possessed  to  the  north  of  the  Taurus  range.  The 
g:eat  wealth  which  accrued  to  him  from  this  source 
he  employed  in  laying  out  a  magnificent  residential 
cit}'',  and  adorning  it  with  temples  and  other  public 
buildings.  His  passion,  and  that  of  his"  successor, 
for  literature  and  the  fine  arts,  led  them  to  form  a 
library  which  rivalled  that  of  Alexandria ;  and  the 
impulse  given  to  the  art  of  preparing  sheepskins 
for  the  purpose  of  transcription,  to  gratify  the  taste 
of  the  royal  dilettanti,  has  left  its  I'ecord  in  the 
name  parchment  (charta  pergamenaj.  Eumenes's 
successor,  Attalus  II.,  is  said  to  have  bid  600,000 
sesterces  for  a  picture  by  the  painter  Aristides,  at 
the  sale  of  the  plunder  of  Corinth  ;  and  by  so  doing 
to  have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Roman  general 
Mummius  to  it,  who  sent  it  off  at  once  to  Rome, 
where  uo  foreign  artist's  work  had  then  been  seen. 
For  another  picture  by  the  same  artist  lie  paid  100 
talents.  But  the  great  glory  of  the  city  was  the 
so-called  Nicephorium,  a  grove  of  e.xtreme  beauty, 
laid  out  as  a  thank-offering  for  a  victory  over 
Antiochus,  in  which  was  an  assemblage  of  temples, 
probably  of  all  the  deities,  Zeus,  Athenfe,  Apollo, 
Aesculapius,  Dionysus,  and  Aphrodite.  The  temple 
of  the  last  was  of  a  most  elaborate  character.  Its 
fa9ade  was  perhaps  inlaid  after  the  manner  of 
pietra  dura  work  ;  for  Philip  V.  of  Macedonia,  who 
was  repulsed  in  an  attempt  to  surprise  Pergamos 
during  the  reign  of  Attalus  II.,  vented  his  spite  in 
cutting  down  the  trees  of  the  grove,  and  not  only 
destroying  the  Aphrodisium,  but  injuring  the 
stones  in  such  a  way  as  to  prevent  their  being  used 
again.  At  the  conclusion  of  peace  it  was  made 
a  special  stipulation  that  this  damage  should  be  made 
good. 

The  Attalic  dynasty  terminated  u.c.  133,  when 
Attalus  III.,  dying  at  an  early  age,  made  the  Ro- 
mans his  heirs.  His  dominioas  formed  the  province 
of  Asia  propria,  and  tlie  immense  wealth  which 
was  directly  or  indirectly  derived  from  this  legacy, 
contributed  perhaps  even  more  than  the  spoils  of 
Carthage  and  Corinth  to  the  demoralization  of  Ro- 
man statesmen. 

The  sumptuousness  of  the  Attalic  princes  had 
raised  Pergamos  to  the  rank  of  the  first  city  in  Asia 
■IS  regai-ds  splendour,  and  Pliny  speaks  of  it  as  with- 
out a  rival  in  the  province.  Its  prominence,  how- 
ever, was  not  that  of  a  commercial  town,  like 
Ephesus  or  Corinth,  but  arose  fiom  its  peculiar 
features.  It  was  a  sort  of  union  of  a  pagan  cathedral 
city,  an  university  town,  and  a  royal  residence, 
embellished  during  a  succession  of  years  by  kings 
who  all  had  a  passion  for  ex-penditure  and  ample 
means  of  gi-atifying  it.  Two  smallei-  streams,  which 
fiowed  fiom  the  north,  embracing  the  town  between 
them,  and  then  fell  into  the  Caicus,  all'orded  ample 
nicaus  ol'  storing  water,  without  which,   in  those 


PERGAMOS 

latitudes,  ornamental  cultivation  (or  indeed  culti- 
vation of  any  kind)  is  out  of  the  question.  The 
larger  of  those  streams — the  Bergama-tchai,  or 
Cetius  of  antiquity — has  a  fall  of  more  than  i.50 
feet  between  the  hills  to  the  north  of  Pergamos 
and  its  junction  with  the  Caicus,  and  it  brings 
down  a  very  consideiable  body  of  water.  Both  the 
Nicephorium,  which  has  been  spoken  of  above,  and 
the  Grove  of  Aesculapius,  which  became  yet  more 
celebrated  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  empire,  doubt- 
less owed  their  existence  to  the  means  of  irrigation 
thus  available ;  and  furnished  the  appliances  foi- 
those  licentious  rituals  of  pagan  antiquity  whit-h 
fiourished  wherever  there  were  groves  and  hill- 
altars.  Under  the  Attalic  kings,  Pergamos  became  a 
city  of  temples,  devoted  to  a  sensuous  worship  ;  and 
being  in  its  origin,  according  to  pagan  notions,  a  sacred 
place,  might  not  uimaturally  be  viewed  by  .lews  and 
Jewish  Christians,  as  one  "  where  was  the  throne  of 
Satan"  (ottou  6  6p6vos  rov^aTava,  Rev.  ii.  13). 

After  the  extinction  of  its  independence,  the  sacred 
character  of  Pergamos  seems  to  have  been  put  even 
more  prominently  forward.  Coins  and  inscriptions 
constiuitly  descTibe  the  Pergamenes  as  veaiKopot  or 
vecoK6poi  TrpcDToi  ttjs  'Afflas.  This  title  always 
indicates  the  duty  of  maintaining  a  religious  worship 
of  some  kind  (which  indeed  naturally  goes  together 
with  the  usufruct  of  religious  property).  What  the 
deities  were  to  which  this  title  has  reference  espe- 
cially, it  is  difficult  to  say.  In  the  time  of  Martial, 
however,  Aesculapius  had  acquired  so  much  promi- 
nence that  he  is  called  Pergameus  deus.  His  grove 
was  recognised  by  the  Roman  senate  in  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  as  possessing  the  rights  of  sanctuary.  Pau- 
sanias,  too,  in  the  course  of  his  work,  refers  more 
than  once  to  the  Aesculapian  ritual  at  Pergamus  :is 
a  sort  of  standard.  From  the  circumsbmce  of  this 
notoriety  of  the  Pergamene  Aesculapius,  from  the 
title  ScoT^p  being  given  to  him,  from  the  serpent 
(which  Judaical  Christians- would  regard  as  a  symbol 
of  evil)  being  his  characteristic  emblem,  and  from 
the  feet  that  the  medical  practice  of  antiquity  in- 
cluded charms  and  incantations  among  its  agencies, 
it  has  been  supposed  that  the  expressions  6  dpovos 
Tov  Sarow  and  '6irov  6  'Saravas  KaroiKel  have 
an  especial  reference  to  this  one  pagan  deity,  and  not 
to  the  whole  city  as  a  sort  of  focus  of  idolatrous 
worship.  But  .although  undoubtedly  the  Aescu- 
lapius worship  of  Pergamos  was  the  most  famous, 
and  in  later  times  became  continually  more  pre- 
dominant from  the  fact  of  its  being  combined  with 
an  excellent  mediciil  school  (which  among  others 
produced  the  celebrated  Galen),  yet  an  inscription  of 
the  time  of  Marcus  Antoninus  distinctly  puts  Zeus, 
Athene,  Dionysus,  and  Asclepius  in  a  co-ordinate 
rank,  as  all  being  s])ecial  tutelary  deities  of  Per- 
gamos. It  seems  unlikely,  therefore,  that  the  ex- 
pressions above  quoted  should  be  so  iuter})reted  as  to 
isolate  one  of  them  from  the  I'est. 

It  may  be  added,  that  the  charge  against  a  portion 
of  the  Pergamene  Church  that  some  among  them 
were  of  the  school  of  Balaam,  whose  jiolicy  was  "  to 
put  a  stumbling-block  before  the  children  of  Israel, 
by  inducing  them  payuv  eiSceKvdvra  Kol  irop- 
vivaai"  (Rev.  ii.  14j,  is  in  both  its  particulars  very 
inappropriate  to  the  Aesculapian  ritual,  it  points 
rather  to  the  Dionysus  and  Aphroditfe  worship ;  and 
the  sin  of  the  Nicolaitans,  which  is  condemned,  seems 
to  have  consisted  in  a  participation  in  this,  arising 
out  of  a  social  amalgamation  of  themselves  with  the 
native  population.  Now,  from  the  time  of  the  war 
with  Antiochus  at  least,  it  is  cert.un  that  there  was 


PEKIDA 

a  considerable  Jewish  population  in  Pergamene  ter- 
ritoiy.  The  decree  of  the  I'ergamenes  quoted  by 
Josephus  {Ant.  xiv.  10,  §-'i),  seems  to  indicate 
tliat  the  Jews  had  farmed  the  tolls  in  some  of  the 
hui'bours  of  their  territory,  and  likewise  were  holders 
of  land.  They  are — in  accordance  with  the  expressed 
desire  of  the  1  Ionian  senate — allowed  to  levy  jiort- 
dues  upon  all  vessels  except  those  belonging  to  king 
Ptolemy.  The  growtli  of  a  large  and  wealthy  class 
naturally  leads  to  its  obtaining  a  share  in  political 
rights,  and  the  only  bar  to  the  admission  of  Jews  to 
privileges  of  citizenship  iu  Perganios  would  be  their 
unwillingness  to  take  any  part  in  the  religious  cere- 
monies, which  were  an  essential  part  of  every  rela- 
tion of  life  in  pagan  times.  The  more  lax,  however, 
might  regard  such  a  proceeding  as  a  purely  formal 
act  of  civil  obedience,  and  reconcile  themselves  to  it 
as  Naaman  did  to  "  bowing  himself  in  the  house  of 
Himmon "  when  in  attendance  upon  his  sovereign. 
It  is  perhaps  worth  noticing,  with  reference  to  tliis 
l)oint,  that  a  Pergamene  inscription  published  by 
Boeckh,  mentions  by  two  names  {Nicostratus,  who 
is  also  called  Trypho)  an  individual  who  served  the 
olTice  of  gymnasiarch.  Of  these  two  names  the 
latter,  a  foreign  one,  is  likely  to  have  been  borne  by 
him  among  some  special  body  to  which  he  belonged, 
and  the  former  to  have  been  adopted  when,  by  ac- 
cepting the  position  of  an  oificial,  he  merged  himself 
iu  the  general  Greek  population. 

(Strab.  xiii.  4 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv. ;  Martial,  ix.  17  ; 
Plin.  H.  N.  XXXV.  4,  10 ;  Liv.  xxxii.  33,  4 ;  Polyb. 
xvi,  1,  xx.xii,  23 ;  Boeckh,  Inscript.  Nos.  3538, 
3550,  3553 ;  Philostratus,  De  1  'it.  Soph.  p.  45, 106  ; 
Tchihatcheff,  Asie  Mineure,  p.  230 ;  Arundell,  Disco- 
veries in  Asia  Minor,  ii.  p.  304.)  [J.  W.  B.] 

PEK'IDA  (XnnS  :  *6pi5o  ;  Alex.  ^apeiSd  : 
Pharida).  The  children  of  Pei'ida  returned  from 
Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  57).  In  Ezr. 
ii.  55  the  name  appears  as  Pekuda,  and  in  1  Esd. 
V.  33  as  Pharira.  One  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  has 
"  Peruda"  in  Neh. 

PEKIZZITE,   THE,    and    PEEIZ'ZITES 

C-PEin,  in  all  cases  in  the  Heb.  singular:  oi  *epe- 

Couoi;  in  Ezr.  only  6  ^epe<r9ei:  I'herczaens).  One 
of  the  nations  inliabiting  tlie  Land  of  Promise  before 
and  at  the  time  of  its  conquest  by  Israel.  They  are 
not  named  in  the  catalogue  of  Gen.  x. ;  so  that  their 
origin,  like  that  of  other  small  tribes,  such  as  the 
Avites,  and  the  similarly  named  Gerizzites,  is  left  in 
obscurity.  They  are  continually  mentioned  in  the 
tbrmula  so  fi-equently  occuning  to  e.\press  the  Pro- 
mised Land  (Gen.  xv.  20;  Kx.  iii.  8,  17,  xxiii.  23, 
xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  1 1 ;  Deut.  vii.  1,  xx.  17  ;  Josh.  iii. 
10,  ix.  1,  .\xiv.  11 ;  Judg.  iii.  5;  Ezr.  ix.  1  ;  Neh. 
ix.  8).  They  apjjear,  however,  with  somewhat  greater 
distinctness  on  several  occ;isions.  On  Abram's  first 
entrance  into  the  land  it  is  said  to  have  been  occu- 
pied by  "  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite  "  (Gen. 
xiii.  7).  Jacob  also,  after  the  massacre  of  the  She- 
chemites,  uses  the  same  expression,  complaining  that 
his  sons  had  "  made  him  to  .stink  among  the  inha- 
bitants of  the  land,  among  the  Canaanite  and  the 
Perizzite"  fxxxiv.  30).  So  also  in  the  detaihxl  records 
of  the  conquest  given  in  the  opening  of  the  book  of 
Judges  (evidently  from  a  distinct  .source  to  those  in 
.loshua),  Judah  and  Simeon  are  s<iid  to  have  found 
their  teriitory  occupied  by  "  tlie  Canaanite  and  the 

"  See  Manasseh,  vol.  ii.  220a. 

I"  ('ojiher  hap-jierazi,  A.  V.  "  coiniti-y  vlUaRos  "  (1  Sam. 
vi.  18)  :  Arei  Aa;i-jpcraz(,  "  unwallcil  lowtis  "  (Deut.  IU.  5). 
In  both  these  passages  the  L.W.  undcrstaml  llic  I'crlzzltcs 


PERSEPOLIS 


791 


Perizzite"  (Judg.  i.  4,  5),  with  Bezek  (a  place  not 
yet  discovered)  as  their  stronghold,  and  Adoni-bezek 
their  most  noted  chief.  And  thus  too  a  late  tradi- 
tion, preserved  in  2  Esdr.  i.  21,  mentions  only 
"  the  Caniuinites,  the  Pheresites,  and  the  Philistines,'"' 
as  the  original  tenants  of  the  country.  The  notice 
just  cited  from  the  book  of  Judges  locates  tiiem  iu 
the  southern  part  of  the  Holy  Laud.  Another  inde- 
pendent and  equally  remarkable  fragment  of  the 
history  of  the  conquest  seems  to  speak  of  them  a.s 
occupying,  with  the  Uephaim,  or  giants,  the  "  foiest 
country"  on  the  western  flanks  of  11  ount  »Carmel 
(Josh.  xvii.  15-18).  Here  again  the  Cauaanites 
only  are  named  with  them.  As  a  tribe  of  moun- 
taineers, they  are  enumerated  in  company  with 
Amorite,  Hittite,  and  Jebusite  in  Josh.  xi.  3,  xii.  S  ; 
and  they  are  catalogued  among  the  remnants  of 'iln' 
old  population  whom  Solomon  reduced  to  bondage, 
both  in  1  K.  ix.  20,  and  2  Chi.  viii.  7.  By  Josephus 
the  I'erizzites  do  not  appear  to  be  mentioned. 

The  signification  of  the  name  is  not  bv  any  means 
clear.  It  possibly  meant  rustics,  dwellers  iu  open, 
unwalled  villages,  which  are  denoted  by  a  similar 
word.''  Ewald  {Gcschichte,  i.  317 )  incluies  to  believe 
that  they  were  the  same  peojile  with  the  Hittites, 
But  against  this  there  is  the  fact  that  both  they  and 
the  Hittites  appear  in  the  same  lists  ;  and  that  not 
only  in  mere  general  formulas,  but  in  the  records  of 
the  conquest,  as  above.  Kedslob  has  examined  the 
whole  of  these  names  with  some  care  (in  his  Alt- 
testam.  Namender  Israelitenstnats,  1846),  and  his 
conclusion  (p.  103)  is  that,  wliile  the  Chavroth -were 
villages  of  tribes  engaged  in  the  care  of  cattle,  the 
I'erdioth  were  inhabited  by  peasants  engaged  in 
agi-iculture,  like  the  Fellahs  of  the  Arabs.      "[G.] 

PERSEP'OLIS  {HepareTroMs  ;  Persepolis)  is 
mentioned  only  in  2  Mace  ix.  2,  where  we  hear  of 
Autiochus  Epiphiuies  atf^empting  to  burn  its  temples, 
but  provoking  a  resistance  which  forced  him  to  fly 
ignominiously  from  the  place.  It  was  the  capital 
of  Persia  Proper,  and  the  occasional  residence  of  the 
Persian  court  from  the  time  of  Darius  Hyslaspis, 
who  seems  to  have  been  its  founder,  to  the  invasion 
of  Aleximder.  Its  wanton  destruction  by  that 
coii()ueror  is  well  known.  According  to  Q.  Curtius 
the  destruction  was  complete,  as  the  chief  building 
material  employed  was  cedar-wood,  which  caused 
the  conflagration  to  be  rapid  and  general  {De  Eehm 
Alex.  Magn.  v.  7).  Perhaps  the  temples,  which 
were  of  stone,  escaped.  At  any  rate,  if  ruined, 
they  must  have  been  shortly  afterwards  restored, 
since  they  were  still  the  depositories  of  treasure  in 
the  time  of  Epiphanes. 

Persepolis  has  been  regarded  by  many  as  identical 
with  Pasargadae,  the  famous  capital  of  Cyrus  (see 
^.'iebuhr's  Lectures  on  Ancient  History,  i.  115; 
Ouseley,  Travels,  ii.  316-318).  But  the  positions 
are  carefully  distinguished  by  a  number  of  ancient 
writers.  (Strab.  xv.  3,  §6,  7";  Plin.  //.  N.  vi.  2C  ; 
Arrian,  Ejcp.  Alex.  vii.  1  ;  Ptolem.  vi.  4) ;  and  the 
ruins,  which  are  identified  beyond  any  leasonable 
d(nibt,  show  that  the  two  places  were  more  than 
40  miles  ajiait.  Pasarg-adae  was  at  Murgaub,  wheie 
the  tomb  of  Cyrus  may  still  be  seen  ;,Pei-sepolis 
was  42  miles  to  the  south  of  this,  near  Istakher, 
on  the  site  now  called  the  Chchl-Minar,  or  Forty 
Pillars.  Here,  on  a  platform  hewn  out  of  the  solid 
rock,  tbe  sides  of  which  fiice  the  four  cardinal  points, 

to  be  alluded  to,  and  translate  accordingly.  In  Josh.  xvi. 
10  they  add  the  I'erizzites  to  the  Cimaaiiitcs  as  inliubitaiits 
of  Gczer. 


792 


PERSEUS 


are  the  remains  of  two  great  palaces,  built  respec- 
tively by  Darius  Hystaspis  and  his  son  Xerxes, 
besides  a  number  of  other  edifices,  chiefly  temples. 
These  ruins  have  been  so  frequently  described  that 
it  is  unnecessary  to  do  more  than  refer  the  reader 
to  the  best  accounts  which  have  been  given  of  them 
(Niebuhr,  Reise,  ii.  121  ;  Chardin,  Voyages,  ii. 
245  ;  Ker  Porter,  Travels,  i.  576  ;  Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  i.  143-190  ;  Rich,  Residence  in  Kurdistan, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  218-222  ;  Fergusson,  Palaces  of  Nineveh 
and  Persepolis  Restored,  pp.  89-124,  &c.).  They 
are  of  great  extent  and  magnificence,  covering  an  area 
of  many  acres.  At  the  foot  of  the  rock  on  which 
they  are  placed,  in  the  plain  now  called  Merdasht, 
stood  probably  the  ancient  town,  built  chiefly  of 
wood,  and  now  altogether  efl'aced. 

Pereepolis  may  be  regarded  as  having  taken  the 
place  of  Pasargadae,  the  more  ancient  capital  of 


PERSIA 

Persia  Proper,  fi'om  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis 
Nb  exact  reason  can  be  given  for  this  change,  which 
perhaps  arose  from  mere  royal  caprice,  Darius  having 
taken  a  fancy  to  the  locality,  near  which  he  erected 
his  tomb.  According  to  Athenaeus  the  court  re- 
sided at  Persepolis  during  three  months  of  each 
year  (Deipnosoph.  xii.  p.  513,  F.),  but  the  conflicting 
stivtements  of  other  writers  (Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6, 
§22,  Plut.  de  Exil.  ii.  p.  604;  Zonar.  iii.  26,  &c.) 
make  this  uncertain.  We  cannot  doubt,  however, 
that  it  was  one  of  the  royal  residences ;  and  we 
may  well  believe  the  statement  of  Strabo,  that, 
in  the  later  times  of  the  empire,  it  was,  next  to 
Susa,  the  richest  of  all  the  Persian  cities  {Geograph. 
XV.  3,  §6).  It  does  not  seem  to  have  long  survived 
the  blow  inflicted  upon  it  by  Alexaniler;  for  after 
the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  it  disappears  alto- 
gether from  history  as  an  inhabited  place.     [G.  R.J 


Persepolis. 


PERSEUS  \Jl€p<T€vs:  Ferses),  the  eldest  (ille- 
gitimate or  supposititious?)  son  of  Philip  V.  and 
hist  king  of  ]\Iacedonia.  After  his  father's  death 
(B.C.  179)  he  continued  the  preparations  for  the  re- 
newnl  of  the  war  with  Rome,  which  was  seen  to  be 
inevitable.  The  war,  which  broke  out  in  B.C.  171, 
was  at  first  ably  sustained  by  Perseus;  but  in  168 
he  was  defeated  by  L.  Aemilius  Paullus  at  Pydua, 
and  shortly  attenvards  surrendered  with  his  family  to 
his  conquerors.  He  graced  the  triumph  of  Paullus, 
and  died  in  honourable  retirement  at  Alba.  The 
defeat  of  Perseus  put  an  end  to  the  independence  of 
Macedonia,  and  extended  even  to  Syria  the  terror  of 


the  Roman  name  (1  Slacc.  viii 


[B.F.W.] 


Perseus,  Kik^  of  Maccdunia, 
Totradrachm  of  Ptrseus  (Attic  talent).     Obv.  Head  of  Kjiip:.  r.  bound 
flUet.     Rev.    BASIAEliS    IJErSEnS,  Ein;lb  on  thunderbult 
within  wreatti. 


PER'SIA  (DnS,  I.e.  Paras:  nepa-is:  Persis) 
was  strictly  the  name  of  a  tract  of  no  very  large 
dimensions  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  which  is  still  known 
as  Pars,  or  Farsistan,  a  corruption  of  the  ancient 
appellation.  This  tract  was  bounded,  on  the  west,  by 
Susiana  or  Elam,  on  the  north  by  Media,  on  the  south 
by  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  on  the  east  by  Carmania,  the 
modern  Kerman.  It  was,  speaking  generally,  an  arid 
and  unproductive  region  (Herod,  ix.  122;  Arr.  Ej:p. 
Alex.  V.  4  ;  Plat.  Leg.  iii.  p.  695,  A.)  ;  but  contained 
some  districts  of  considerable  fertility.  The  worst 
part  of  the  country  was  that  towards  the  south,  on 
the  borders  of  the  Gulf,  which  has  a  climate  and  soil 
like  Arabia,  being  sandy  and  almost  without  streams, 
sulyect  to  pestilential  winds,  and  in  many 
places  covered  with  particles  of  salt.  Above 
this  miserable  region  is  a  tract  very  far 
superior  to  it,  consisting  of  rocky  moim- 
t;uns — the  continuation  of  Zagros,  among 
which  are  found  a  good  many  fertile  valleys 
and  plains,  especially  towards  the  north, 
in  the  vicinity  of  Shiraz.  Here  is  an  im- 
portant stream,  the  Bcndamir,  which  flow- 
ing through  the  beautiful  valley  of  Ifer- 
dasht,  and  by  the  ruins  of  Persepolis,  is  then 
separated  into  nmnerous  channels  lor  the 
purpose  of  irrigation,  and,  after  fertilizing  a 
large  tract  of  country  (the  district  of  Kur- 
jan),  ends  its  coui'se  in  the  salt  lake  of  £a/c- 


PERSIANS 

tigan.  Vines,  oranges,  and  lemons,  are  produced 
abundantly  in  this  region ;  and  the  wine  of  Shiraz  is 
celebrated  throughout  Asia.  Fuither  north  an  arid 
country  again  succeeds,  the  outskirts  of  the  Great 
Desert,  which  extends  fiom  Kerinan  to  Mazenderan, 
and  from  Kaslian  to  Lake  Zerrah. 

Ptolemy  {Geograph.  vi.  4)  divides  Pereia  into  a 
number  of  provinces,  among  which  the  most  im- 
portant are  Paraetacen^  on  the  north,  which  was 
sometimes  reckoned  to  Media  (Herod,  i.  101  ;  Steph. 
Byz.  ad  voc.  napaiVa/ca),  and  Mardyen^  on  the 
south  coast,  the  country  of  the  Mardi.  The  chief 
towns  were  Fasargadae,  the  ancient,  and  Persepolis, 
the  later  capital.  Pasargadae  was  situated  near  the 
modern  village  of  Munjaub,  42  miles  nearly  due 
north  of  Persepolis,  and  appears  to  have  been  the 
capital  till  the  time  of  Darius,  who  chose  the  far 
more  beautiful  site  in  the  valley  of  the  Beiuiamir, 
where  the  Chehl  Minar  or  "Forty  Pillars"  still 
stand.  [See  Persepolis.]  Among  other  cities  of 
less  import^mce  were  Paraetaca  ;ind  Gabae  in  the 
mountain  country,  and  Taocd  upon  the  roast. 
(See  Strab.  .w.  3,  §1-8  ;  Fliu.  H.  N.  vi.  25, 
26 ;  Ptolem.  Geoij.  vi.  4  ;  Kinueir's  Persian 
Empire,  ))p.  54-80;  Malcolm,  History  of 
Persia,  i.  2;  Ker  Port«r,  Travels,  i.  458, 
&c. ;  Rich,  Jowney  from  Bushire  to  Per- 
sepolis, &c.) 

While  the  district  of  Furs  .is  the  true 
original  Persia,  the  name  is  more  commonly 
applied,  both  in  Sciipture  and  by  profane 
authors,  to  the  entire  tract  which  came  by 
degrees  to  be  included  within  the  limits  of 
the  Persian  Empire.  This  empire  extended 
at  one  time  fi'om  India  on  the  east  to  Egypt 
and  Thrace  upon  the  west,  and  included, 
besides  portions  of  Europe  and  Africa,  the 
whole  of  Western  Asia  between  the  Black 
Sea,  the  Caucasus,  the  Caspian,  and  the 
Jaxartes  upon  the  north,  the  Arabian  desert, 
the  Persian  Gulf,  and  the  Indian  Ocean  upon 
the  south.  According  to  Herodotus  (iii.  89), 
it  was  divided  into  twenty  governments, 
or  satrapies ;  but  from  the  inscriptions  it 
would  rather  appear  that  the  number  varied 
at  different  times,  and,  when  the  empire 
was  most  flourishing,  considerably  exceeded 
twenty.  In  the  inscription  upon  his  tomb 
at  Nakhsh-i-Eustam  Darius  mentions  no 
fewer  than  thirty  countries  as  subject  to 
him  besides  Persia  Proper.  These  are — 
Media,  Susiana,  Parthia,  Aria,  Bactria,  Sog- 
diana,  Chorasmia,  Zarangia,  Arachosia,  Sattagydia, 
Gaudaria,  India,  Scythia,  Babylonia,  Assyria,  Arabia, 
Egypt,  Armenia,  Cappadociu,  Saparda,  Ionia,  (Euro- 
pean) Scythia,  the  islands  (of  the  Egean),  the  country 
of  the  Scodrae,  (European)  Ionia,  the  lands  of  the 
Tacabri,  the  Budians,  the  Cushites  or  Ethiopians, 
the  Aiardians,  and  the  Colchians. 

The  only  passage  in  Scripture  where  Peisia  de- 
signates the  tract  whi(;h  has  been  called  above 
'•  Persia  Proper  "  is  Ez.  .\.Kxviii.  5.  Elsewhere  the 
ICmpiie  is  intended.  [G.  U.] 

PEK'SIANS  Cp")^  :  Uepcral:  Persae).  The 
name  of  the  people  who  inhabited  the  country  called 
above  "  Persia  Proper,"  and  who  thence  conquered 
.1  mighty  empire.  Thei'e  is  reason  to  believe  that 
the  Persians  were  of  the  same  race  as  the  Modes, 
both  being  branches  of  the  gre;it  Arian  sttick,  which 
under  various  names  estiiblishe<I  their  sway  omt  Ihc 
whole  tract  between  Mesopotamia  and  Buiniah.    'I'hc 


PERSIANS 


793 


native  form  of  the  name  is  Parsa,  which  the  Hebrew 
*D~I3  fairly  represents,  and  which  remains  but  little 
changed  in  the  modern  "  Parsee."  It  is  conjectured 
to  signify  "  the  Tigers." 

1 .  Character  of  the  nation. — The  Persians  were 
a  people  of  lively  and  impressible  minds,  brave  and 
impetuous  in  war,  witty,  passionate,  for  Orientals 
truthful,  not  without  some  spirit  of  generosity,  and 
of  irftjre  intellectual  capacity  than  the  generality  of 
Asiatics.  Their  faults  were  vanity,  impulsiveness, 
a  want  of  perseverance  and  solidity,  and  an  almost 
slavish  spirit  of  sycophancy  and  servility  towards 
their  lords.  In  the  times  anterior  to  Cyrus  they 
were  noted  for  the  simplicity  of  their  habits,  whicli 
offered  a  strong  contr;ujt  to  the  luxuriousiiess  of  the 
Medes  ;  but  from  the  date  of  the  Median  overthro'v, 
this  simplicity  began  to  decline  ;  and  it  was  not  veiy 
long  before  their  manners  became  as  soft  and  effemi- 
nate as  those  of  any  of  the  conquered  peoples.  They 
adopted  the  flowing  Median  robe  (Fig.  1)  which  was 
probably  of  silk,  in  lieu  of  the  old  national  costume 


Vig.  2.  01(1  Persian  dress. 


(Fig.  2) — a  close-fitting  tunic  and  trousers  of  leathei- 
(Herod.  i.*71 ;  compare  i.  135) ;  beginning  at  the  same 
time  the  practice  of  wearing  on  their  persons  chains, 
bracelets,  and  collars  of  gold,  with  which  precious 
metal  they  also  adorned  their  horses.  Polygamy 
was  commonly  practised  among  them  ;  and  besides 
legitimate  wives  a  Persian  was  allowed  any  number 
of  concubines.  They  were  fond  of  the  pleasures  of 
the  table,  indulging  in  a  great  variety  of  food,  and 
spending  a  long  time  over  their  meals,  at  which 
tliey  were  accustomed  to  swallow  large  (juantities 
of  wine.  In  war  they  fought  bravely,  but  without 
discipline,  generally  gaining  their  victories  by  the 
vigour  of  thei)-  fii-st  atfack  ;  if  they  were  streiui- 
ously  resisted,  they  soon  flagged  ;  ami  it' they  suffered 
a  icpulse,  all  order  was  at  once  lost,  and  the  retreat 
speedily  became  a  rout. 

2.  Peliyion. — The  religion  whicli  the  Persians 
brought  with  tiiem  into  Persia  l'roi)er  seems  to 
have  bet'u  of  a  veiy  simple  ch.iracter,  differing  from 


794 


PERSONS 


natural  religion  in  little,  except  that  it  was  deeply 
tainted  with  Dualism.     Like  tlie  other  Aryans,  tlie 
Persians  worshipped  one  Supreme  God,  whom  they 
called  Aiira-mazda  (Oromasdes) — a  term  signifying 
(as  is  believed)  "  tlie  Great  Giver  of  Life."     From 
Oromasdes  came  all  blessings — "  he  gave  the  earth, 
he  gave  tlie  heavens,  he  gave  mankind,  he  gave  life 
to  mankind  "  (Inscriptions,  passim) — he  settled  the 
Persian  kings  upon  their  thrones,  strengthened  them, 
established  them,  and  granted  them  victory  over  all 
their  enemies.     The  royal  inscriptions  rarely  men- 
tion any  other  god.     Occasionally,  however,  they 
indicate  a  slight  and  modified  polytheism.     Oro- 
masdes is  "  the  chief  of  the  gods,"  so  that  there  are 
other  gods  besides  him  ;  and  the  highest  of  these  is 
evidently  Mithra,  who  is  sometimes  invoked  to  pro- 
tect the  monarch,  and  is  beyond  a  doubt  identical 
with  "  the  sun."     To  the  worship  of  the  sim  as 
iVIithra  Wiis  probably  attached,   as  in  India,    the 
worship  of  the  moon,  under  the  name  of  Homa,  as 
the   third  greatest   god.      Entirely  separate   from 
tliese — their   active   resister   and    antagonist — was 
Ahrinan   (Arimanius)    "the  Death-dealing" — the 
powerful,  and  (probably)  self-existing  Evil  Spirit, 
from  whom  war,  disease,  frost,  hail,  poverty,  sin, 
death,  and  all  other -evils,  had  their  origin.    Mriman 
was  Satan,  can-ied  to  an  extreme — believed  to  have 
an  existence  of  his  own,  and  a  real  power  of  resisting 
and  defying  God.    Ahriman  could  create  spirits,  and 
as  the  beneficent  Auramazda  had  surrounded  himself 
with  good  angels,  who  were  the  ministers  of  his  mer- 
cies towards  mankind,  so  Ahriman  had  surrounded 
liimself  with  evil  spirits,  to  carry  out  his  malevolent 
puiposes.   Worship  was  confined  to  Auramazda,  and 
his  good  spirits ;  Ahriman  and  his  demons  were  not 
worshipped,  but  only  hated  and  feared. 

The  character  of  the  original  Persian  worship  was 
simple.  They  were  not  destitute  of  temples,  as 
Herodotus  asserts  (Herod,  i.  131  ;  compare  Beh. 
Inscr.  col.  i.  par.  14,  §5)  ;  but  they  had  probably 
no  altars,  and  certainly  no  images.  Neither  do  they 
appear  to  have  had  any  priests.  Processions  were 
formed,  and  religious  chants  were  sung  in  the 
temples,  consisting  of  piayer  and  praise  intermixed, 
whereby  the  favour  of  Auramazda  and  his  good 
spirits. was  supposed  to  be  secured  to  the  worship- 
pers. Beyond  this  it  does  not  appear  that  they  had 
luiy  religious  ceremonies.  Sacrifices,  appai-ently, 
were  unknown  ;  though  thank-offerings  may  have 
been  made  in  the  temples. 

From  the  first  entrance  of  the  Pei-sians,  as  immi- 
grants, into  their  new  territory,  they  were  probably 
brought  into  contact  with  a  form  of  religion  veiy 
diflerent  from  their  own.  Magianism,  the  religion 
of  the  Scythic  or  Turanian  population  of  Western 
Asia,  had  long  been  dominant  over  the  greater  por- 
tion of  the  region  lying  between  Jlesopotamia  and 
India.  The  essence  of  this  religion  was  worship  of 
the  elements — more  esj)ecially,  of  the  subtlest  of 
all,  fire.  It  was  an  ancient  and  imposing  system, 
guarded  by  the  venerable  hierarcliy  of  the  Magi, 
boasting  its  fire-altars  where  from  time  immemorial 
the  sacred  flame  had  burnt  without  intermission, 
and  claiming  to  some  extent  mysterious  and  mira- 
culous powers.  The  simplicity  of  the  Aryan  reli- 
gion was  speedily  corrupted  by  its  contact  with 
this  powerful  ri\'al,  which  presented  special  attrac- 
tions to  a  rude  and  credulous  people.  There  was 
a  short  struggle  for  pre-eminence,  ai'ter  which  the 
rival  systems  came  to  terms.  Dualism  was  re- 
tained, togetlier  with  tlic  names  of  Auramazda  and 
Ahriman,  and  the  .special  worship  of  the  sua  and 


PERSIANS 

moon  under  the  appellations  of  Mithra  and  Homa  ; 
but  to  this  was  superadded  the  worship  of  the  ele- 
ments and  the  whole  ceremonial  of  Magianism,  in- 
cluding the  divination  to  which  the  Magiafl  priesthood 
made  pretence.  The  worship  of  other  deities  as 
Tanata  or  Anaitis,  was  a  still  later  addition  to  the 
religion,  which  grew  more  complicated  as  time 
went  on,  but  which  always  maintained  as  its  lead- 
ing and  most  essential  element  that  Dualistic  prin- 
ciple whereon  it  was  originally  based. 

3.  Language. — The  language  of  the  anciint  Per- 
sians w;is  closely  akin  to  the  Sanskrit,  or  ancient 
language  of  India.  We  find  it  in  its  earliest  stege 
in  the  Zendavesta — the  sacred  book  of  the  whole 
Aryan  race,  where,  however,  it  is  corrupted  by  a 
large  admixture  of  later  forms.  The  inscriptions 
of  the  Achaemenian  kings  give  us  the  language  in 
its  second  stage,  and,  being  free  fi'om  these  later  ad- 
ditions, are  of  the  greatest  importance  towards  deter- 
mining what  was  primitive,  and  what  more  recent 
in  this  type  of  speech.  Modern  Persian  is  its  dege- 
nerate representative,  being,  as  it  is,  a  motley  idiom, 
largely  impregnated  with  Arabic ;  still,  however, 
both  in  its  grammar  and  its  vocabulary,  it  is  mainly 
Aryan  ;  and  historically,  it  must  be  regarded  as  the 
continuation  of  the  ancient  tnngue,  just  as  Italian  is 
of  Latin,  and  modern  of  ancient  Greek. 

4.  Division  into  tribes,  4'C- — Herodotus  tells  us 
that  the  Persians  were  divided  into  ten  tribes,  of 
which  three  were  noble,  three  agricultural, and  four 
nomadic.  The  noble  tribes  were  the  Pasargadae, 
who  dwelt,  probably,  in  the  capital  and  its  imme- 
diate neighbourhood  ;  the  Maraphians,  who  are  per- 
haps lepresented  by  the  modem  Mdfee,  a  Persian 
tribe  which  prides  itself  on  its  antiquity ;  and  the 
Maspians,  of  whom  nothing  more  is  known.  The 
three  tribes  engaged  in  agi'iculture  were  called  the 
PcUithialaeans,  the  Derusiaeans,  and  the  Germanians, 
or  (according  to  the  true  orthography;  the  Carma- 
nians.  These  last  were  either  the  actual  inhabitants 
oi  Kerman,  or  settlers  of  the  same  race,  who  re- 
mained in  Persia  while  their  fellow-tribesmen  occu- 
pied the  adjoining  region.  The  nomadic  tribes  are 
said  to  have  been  the  Dahi,  who  appear  in  Scripture 
as  the  "  Dehavites"  (Ezr.  iv.  9),  the  Mardi,  moun- 
taineers famous  for  their  thievish  habits  (Steph. 
Byz.),  together  with  the  Sagartians  and  the  Der- 
bices  or  Dropici,  colonists  from  the  regions  east  of 
the  Caspian.  The  royal  race  of  the  Achaemenidae 
was  a  phratry  or  clan  of  the  Pasargadae  (Herod,  i. 
126) ;  to  which  it  is  probable  that  most  of  the  noUe 
houses  likewise  belonged.  Little  is  heard  of  the 
Maraphians,  and  nothing  of  the  Maspians,  in  his- 
tory ;  it  is  therefore  evident  that  their  nobility  was 
very  inferior  to  that  of  the  leading  tribe. 

5.  History. — In  remote  antiquity  it  would  appear 
that  the  Persians  dwelt  in  the  region  east  of  the 
Caspian,  or  possibly  in  a  tract  still  nearer  India. 
The  first  Fargard  of  the  Vendidad  seems  to  describe 
their  wanderings  in  these  countries,  and  shows  the 
general  line  of  their  progress  to  have  been  fi'om  east  to 
west,  down  the  course  of  the  Oxiis,  and  then,  along 
the  southern  shores  of  the  Caspian  Sea,  to  Rhages, 
and  Media.  It  is  impossible  to  determine  the  period 
of  these  movements;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
they  were  anterior  to  B.C.  880,  at  which  time  the 
Assyrian  kings  seem  for  the  first  time  to  have  come 
in  contact  with  Aryan  tribes  east  of  Mount  Zagros. 
Probably  the  Persians  accompanied  the  Medes  in 
their  migration  from  Khorassan,  and,  after  the  latter 
people  took  possession  of  the  tract  extending  from 
the  river  Kur  to   Ispahan,    proceeded  still  further 


PERSIANS 

south,  and  occupied  the  reu;ioii  between  Media  and 
the  Persian  Gult'.  It  is  uncertain  whether  they  are 
to  be  identified  witli  tlie  Bartsic  or  Partsu  of  the 
Assyrian  monuments.  It'  so,  we  may  Bay  that  from 
the  middle  of  the  9th  to  the  middle  of  the  8tli 
century  li.C.  they  occupied  south-eastern  Armenia, 
but  by  tlie  end  of  the  8th  century  had  removed  into 
th.e  country,  which  thencefovth  went  by  their  name. 
The  leader  of  this  last  migration  would  seem  to 
have  been  a  certain  Achaeuienes,  wjio  was  recog- 
nized as  king  of  the  newly-occupied  territory,  and 
founded  tlie  famous  dynasty  of  the  Achaemenidae, 
about  B.C.  700.  Very  little  is  known  of  the  his- 
tory of  Persia  between  this  date  and  the  accession 
of  Cyrus  the  Great,  near  a  century  and  a  half  later. 
The  crown  appears  to  liave  descended  in  a  right  line 
through  four  princes — Te'ispes,  Cambyses  I., Cyrus  I., 
and  Cambyses  II.,  who  was  the  lather  of  Cyrus 
the  Conqueror.  Te'ispes  must  have  been  a  prince 
of  some  repute,  for  his  daughter,  Atossa,  married 
Pharnaces,  king  of  the  distant  Cappadocians  (Diod. 
Sic.  ap.  Phot.  Bibliothcc.  p.  1158).  Later,  however, 
the  Persians  found  themselves  unable  to  resist  the 
grovviug  sti'ength  of  Media,  and  became  tributary  to 
that  power  about  B.C.  630,  or  a  little  earlier.  The 
line  of  native  kings  was  continued  on  the  throne,  and 
the  internal  administiation  was  probably  untouched; 
but  e.xternal  independence  was  altogether  lost 
until  the  revolt  under  Cyrus. 

Of  the  circumstances  under  which  this 
revolt  took  place  we  have  no  certain  know- 
ledge. The  stories  told  by  Herodotus  (i. 
108-129)  and  Nicolas  of  Damascus  {Fr.  66) 
are  internally  improbable  ;  and  they  are  also 
at  variance  with  the  monuments,  which 
prove  Cyrus  to  have  been  the  son  of  a  Per- 
sian kiiiij.  [See  Gyrus.]  We  must  therefore 
discard  them,  and  be  content  to  know  that 
after  about  seventy  or  eighty  years  of  sub- 
jection, the  Persians  revolted  tiom  the  Medes, 
engaged  in  a  bloody  struggle  with  them,  and 
tinally  succeeded,  not  only  in  establishing 
their  independence,  but  in  changing  places 
with  their  masters,  and  becoming  the  ruling 
people.  The  probable  date  of  the  revolt  is  B.C.  558. 
its  success,-  by  transferring  to  Persia  the  dominion 
jireviously  in  tlie  possession  of  the  Medes,  placed 
her  at  the  head  of  an  empire,  the  bounds  of  whicli 
were  the  Halys  upon  the  west,  the  Euxine  upon 
the  north,  Babylonia  upon  the  south,  and  upon  the 
east  the  salt  desert  of  Iran.  As  usual  in  the  East, 
this  success  led  on  to  others.  Croesus  the  Lydian 
monarch,  who  had  united  most  of  Asia  Jlinor  under 
his  sway,  ventiu'ing  to  attack  the  newly- risen  power, 
in  the  hope  that  it  was  not  yet  firmly  established, 
was  iirst  repulsed,  and  afterwards  defeated  and 
made  prisoner  by  Cyrus,  who  took  his  capital,  and 
added  the  Lydian  empire  to  his  dominions.  This 
conquest  was  followed  closely  by  the  submission  of 
the  (ireek  settlements  on  the  .'\siatic  coast,  and  by 
the  reduction  of  Caria,  Caunus,  and  Lycia.  The 
empire  was  soon  afterwards  extended  greatly  ta- 
waids  the  north-east  and  east.  Cyrus  rapidly  over- 
ran the  tlat  countries  beyond  the  Caspian,  jilauting 
a  city,  which  he  called  alter  himself  (Arr.  Exp. 
Alex.  iv.  3),  on  the  Jitxartes  (Ji/hnn) ;  atter  which 
he  seems  to  have  pushed  his  conquests  still  further 
to  the  east,  adiling  to  his  dominions  the  districts  of 
Hei-at,  Cabul,  Cmidahar,  Scistan,  and  Beloochistan, 
which  were  thenceforth  included  in  the  empire. 
(See  Ctes.  Fers.  Kxc.  §  5,  et  soqq. ;  and  compare 
Plin.  H.  N.  vi.  23.)     In  B.C.  539  or  iViS,  Babylon 


PERSIANS 


795 


was  attacked,  and  after  a  stout  defence  fell  before 
his  irresistible  bands.  [Babylon.]  This  victory 
Iirst  brought  the  Persians  into  contact  with  the 
Jews.  The  conquerors  found  in  Babylon  an  op- 
pressed race — like  themselves,  abhori'ers  of  idols — 
and  professors  of  a  religion  in  which  to  a  great 
extent  they  could  sympathize.  This  race,  which 
the  Babylonian  monarchs  had  torn  violently  from 
their  native  land  and  settled  in  the  vicinity  of  Ba- 
bylon, Cyrus  determined  to  restore  to  their  own 
country ;  which  he  did  by  the  remarkable  edict  re- 
corded in  the  first  chapter  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  i.  2-4). 
Thus  commenced  that  friendly  connexion  between 
the  Jews  and  Persians,  which  prophecy  had  already 
foreshadowed  (Is.  xliv.  28,  .\lv.  1-4),  and  which 
fonns  so  remarkable  a  feature  in  the  Jewish  history. 
After  the  conquest  of  Babylon,  and  the  consequent 
extension  of  his  empire  to  the  borders  of  Egypt, 
Cyrus  might  have  been  expected  to  carry  out  the 
design,  which  he  is  said  to  have  entertained  (Herod. 
i.  153),  of  an  expedition  against  Egypt.  Some 
danger,  however,  seems  to  have  threatened  the 
north-eastern  provinces,  in  consequence  of  which 
his  purpose  was  changed  ;  and  he  proceeded  against 
the  Massagetae  or  the  Derbices,  engaged  them,  but 
was  defeated  and  slain.  He  reigned,  according  to 
Herodotus,  twenty-nine  years. 


Persian  'Warriors.    (From  Persepolis.) 

Under  his  son  and  successor,  Cambyses  III.,  the 
conquest  of  Egypt  took  place  (B.C.  525),  and  the 
Persian  dominions  were  extended  -southward  to 
Elephantine  and  westward  to  Euesperidae  on  the 
North-African  coiist.  This  prince  appears  to  be  the 
Ahasuerus  of  Ezra  (iv.  6),  who  was  asked  to  alter 
Cyrus's  policy  towards  the  Jews,  but  (apparently) 
declined  all  interference.  We  have  in  Herodotus 
(book  iii;)  a  very  complete  account  of  his  warlike 
expeditions,  which  at  first  resulted  in  the  successes 
above  mentioned,  but  were  afterwards  unsuccessfiil, 
and  even  disastrous.  One  army  perished  in  an 
attempt  to  reach  the  temple  of  Amnion,  while 
another  was  reduced  to  the  last  straits  in  an  expe- 
dition against  Ethiopia.  Perhaps  it  was  in  con- 
se(iuence  of  these  misfortunes  that,  in  the  absence 
of  Cambyses  with  the  army,  a  conspiracy  was 
formed  against  him  at  court,  and  a  Magian  priest, 
Comates  [Gaumata)  by  name,  professing  to  be 
Smerdis  {Bardii/a),  the  son  of  Cyrus,  wliom  his 
brother,  Cambyses,  had  put  to  death  secretly, 
obtained  quiet  possession  of  the  throne.  Cani- 
by.scs  was  .in  Syria  when  news  reached  him  of 
this  bold  attempt ;  and  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that,  seized  with  a  sudden  disgust,  and  desjwir- 
ing  of  the  recovery  of  his  crown,  lie  fled  to  the 
la.st  resort  of  the  unfortunate,  mid  ended  his  life 
by  suiddc.  {Bchidun    /nscnptioti,  col.   i.   jiar.    11, 


796 


PERSIANS 


§10).  His  reign  had  lasted  seven  years  and  five 
months. 

Gomates  the  Magian  found  himself  thus,  with- 
out a  struggle,  master  of  Persia  (B.C.  5'22).  His 
situation,  however,  was  one  of  great  danger  and 
delicacy.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  he  owed 
his  elevation  to  his  fellow-religionists,  whose  object 
in  placing  him  upon  the  throne  was  to  secure  the 
triumph  of  Magianisni  over  the  Dualism  of  the 
Persians.  It  was  necessarv  lor  him  therefore  to 
accomplish  a  religious  revolution,  which  was  sure 
to  be  distiisteful  to  the  Persians,  while  at  the  same 
time  he  had  to  keep  up  the  deception  on  which  his 
claim  to  the  crown  was  professedly  based,  and  to 
prevent  any  suspicion  arising  that  he  was  not 
Smerdis,  the  son  of  Cyrus.  To  combine  these  two 
aims  was  difficult;  and  it  would  seem  that  Gomates 
soon  discarded  the  hitter,  and  entered  on  a  course 
which  must  have  soon  caused  his  subjects  to  feel 
that  their  ruler  was  not  only  no  Achaemenian,  but 
no  Persian.  He  destroyed  the  national  temples, 
substituting  for  them  the  fire-altars,  and  abolished 
the  religious  chants  and  other  sacred  ceremonies  of 
the  Oromasdians.  He  reversed  the  policy  of  Cyrus 
with  respect  to  the  Jews,  and  forbad  by  an  edict 
the  further  building  of  the  Temple  (Ezr.  iv.  17- 
22).  [Artaxerxes.]  He  courted  the  favour 
of  the  subject-nations  generally  by  a  remission  of 
tribute  for  three  yeais,  and  an  exemption  during 
the  same  space  from  forced  military  service  (Heiod. 
iii.  67).  Towards  the  Persians  he  was  haughty 
and  distant,  keeping  them  as  much  as  possible  aloof 
IVom  his  person,  and  seldom  showing  himself  beyond 
the  walls  of  his  palace.  Such  conduct  made  him 
very  unpopular  with  the  proud  people  which  held 
the  first  place  among  his  subjects,  and,  the  suspicion 
that  he  was  a  mere  pretender  having  after  some 
months  ripened  into  certainty,  a  revolt  broke  out, 
headed  by  Darius,  the  son  of  Hystaspes,  a  prince 
of  the  blood-royal,  which  in  a  short  time  was  crowned 
with  complete  success.  Gomates  quitted  his  capital, 
and,  having  thrown  himself  into  a  fort  in  Media, 
was  pursued,  attacked,  wid  slain.  Darius,  then,  as 
the  chief  of  the  conspiracy,  and  after  his  father  the 
next  heir  to  the  throne,  was  at  once  acknowledged 
king.     The  reign  of  Gomates  lasted  seven  months. 

The  first  ell'orts  of  Darius  were  directed  to  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Oiomasdian  religion  in  all 
its  purity.  He  "  rebuilt  the  temples  which  Gomates 
the  Magian  had  destroyed,  anil  restui-ed  to  the  people 
the  religious  chants  and  the  worship  of  which 
Gomates  the  Magian  had  depiived  them  "  (^Beh. 
Inscr.  col.  i.  par.  14).  Appealed  to,  in  his  second 
year,  by  the  Jews,  who  wished  to  resume  the  con- 
struction of  their  Temple,  he  not  only  allowed 
them,  confirming  tlie  decree  of  Cyrus,  but  assisted 
the  work  by  grants  from  his  own  revenues,  whereby 
the  Jews  were  able  to  complete  the  Temple  as  early 
as  his  sixth  year  (Ezr.  vi.  1-15).  During  the  first 
part  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  tranquillity  of  the 
empire  was  disturbed  by  numerous  revolts.  The 
provinces  )-egretted  the  loss  of  those  exemptions 
which  they  had  obtained  from  the  weakness  of  the 
Pseudo-Smerdis,  and  hoped  to  shake  off  the  yoke 
of  the  new  prince  before  he  could  grasp  firmly  the 
reins  of  government.  The  fii-st  revolt  was  that 
of  Babylon,  where  a  native,  claiming  to  be  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, the  son  of  Nabonadius,  was  made  king; 
but  Darius  speedily  crushed  this  revolt  and  executed 
the  pretender.  Shortly  afteiwards  a  far  more  ex- 
tensive rebellion  broke  out.  A  Mede,  named  Phra- 
oiies,  came  forward  and,  annouiiciug  himself  to  he 


PERSIANS 

"  Xathrites,  of  the  race  of  Cyaxares,"  assumed  the 
royal  title.  Media,  AiTnenia,  and  Assyria  imme- 
diately acknowledged  him — the  Median  soldiers  at 
the  Persian  court  revolted  to  him — Parthia  and 
Hyrcania  after  a  little  while  declared  in  his  favour 
— while  in  Sagartia  another  pretender,  making  a 
similar  claim  of  descent  from  Cyaxares,  induced  the 
Sagartians  to  revolt ;  and  in  Margiana,  Arachotia,  and 
even  Persia  Proper,  there  were  insuiTections  against 
the  authority  of  the  new  king.  His  courage  and 
activity,  however,  seconded  by  the  valour  of  his 
Persian  troops  and  the  fidelity  of  some  satraps, 
carried  him  successfully  through  these  and  other 
similar  difficulties;  and  the  result  was,  that,  after 
five  or  six  years  of  struggle,  he  became  as  firmly 
seated  on  his  throne  as  any  previous  monarch.  His 
talents  as  an  administrator  were,  upon  this,  brought 
into  play.  He  divided  the  whole  empire  into 
satrapies,  and  organised  that  somewhat  compli- 
cated system  of  government  on  which  they  were 
henceforth  administered  (Rawlinson's  IJerodutus,  ii. 
555-568).  He  built  himself  a  magnificent  palace 
at  Persepolis,  and  another  at  Susa  [P1';rsepolis, 
Siiushan].  He  also  applied  himself,  like  his 
predecessors,  to  the  extension  of  the  empire ;  con- 
ducted an  expedition  into  European  Scythia,  from 
which  he  returned  without  disgrace ;  conquered 
Thrace,  Paeonia,  and  Macedonia  towards  the  west, 
and  a  large  portion  of  India  on  the  east,  besides 
(apparently)  bringing  into  subjection  a  number  of 
petty  nations  (see  the  Nakhsh-i-Rnstam  Inscrip- 
tion). On  the  whole  he  must  be  pronounced,  next 
to  Cyrus,  the  greatest  of  the  Persian  monarchs. 
'f  he  latter  part  of  his  reign  was,  however,  clouded 
by  reverses.  The  disaster  of  Mardonius  at  Mount 
Athos  was  followed  shortly  by  the  defeat  of  Datis 
at  Marathon  ;  and,  before  any  attempt  could  be 
made  to  avenge  that  blow,  Egypt  rose  in  revolt 
(B.C.  486),  massacred  its  Persian  garrison,  and 
declared  itself  independent.  In  the  palace  at  the 
same  time  there  was  dissension ;  and  when,  after  a 
reign  of  thirty-six  years,  the  fourth  Persian  monarch 
died  (B.C.  485),  leaving  his  throne  to  a  young  prince 
of  strong  and  ungoverned  passions,  it  was  evident  that 
the  empire  had -reached  its  highest  point  of  gi-eat- 
uess,  and  was  alre;xdy  verging  towards  its  decline. 

Xerxes,  the  eldest  son  of  Darius  by  Atossa,  daugh- 
ter of  Cyrus,  and  the  first  son  born  to  Darius  after 
he  mounted  the  throne,  seems  to  have  obtained  the 
crown,  in  part  by  the  favour  of  his  father,  over 
whom  Atossa  exercised  a  strong  influence,  in  part 
by  right,  as  the  eldest  male  descendant  of  Cyrus, 
the  founder  of  the  empire.  His  first  act  was  to 
reduce  Egypt  to  subjection  (B.C.  484),  after  which 
he  began  at  once  to  make  preparations  for  his  inva- 
sion of  Greece.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  the 
Ahasuerus  of  Esther.  [Ahasuerus.]  The  gi-eat 
feast  held  in  Shushan  the  palace  in  the  third  year 
of  his  reign,  and  the  repudiation  of  Vashti,  Ikll  into 
the  period  preceding  the  Grecian  expedition,  while 
it  is  probable  that  he  kept  open  house  tor  the 
"  princes  of  the  pi'ovinces,"  who  would  from  time 
to  time  visit  the  court,  in  order  to  report  the  state 
of  their  preparations  for  the  war.  The  marriage 
with  Esther,  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,  falls 
into  the  year  immediately  following  his  flight  from 
Greece,  when  he  undoubtedly  returned  to  Susa, 
relinquishing  warlike  enterprises,  and  henceforth 
devoting  himself  to  the  pleasures  of  the  seraglio. 
It  is  unnecessary  to  give  an  account  of  the  well- 
known  expedition  against  (ireecf,  which  eiide<l  so 
disastrously  for   the  invaders.     Persia   was   taught 


PERSIANS 

by  the  defeats  of  Salaniis  and  Plataea  the  danger  of 
encountering  the  (iioeks  on  their  side  of  the  Aegean, 
while  she  learned  at  Mycal6  the  retaliation  which 
she  had  to  expect  on  her  own  shores  at  the  hands 
of  her  infuriated  enemies.  For  a  while  some  vague 
idea  of  another  inv;ision  seems  to  have  been  enter- 
tained by  the  court ;  »  but  discrecter  counsels  pi-e- 
vailed,  and,  relinquishing  all  aggi-essive  designs, 
Persia  from  this  poijit  in  her  history  stood  upon 
the  defensive,  and  only  sought  to  maintain  her  own 
territories  intact,  without  anywhere  ti'enching  npon 
her  neighbours.  During  the  rest  of  the  reign  of 
Xei'xes,  and  during  part  of  that  of  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor, Aitaxerxes,  she  continued  at  war  with  the 
Greeks,  who "  destroyed  her  fleets,  plundered  her 
co;\sts,  and  stirred  up  levolt  in  her  provinces ;  but 
at  last,  in  B.C.  449,  a  jjeace  was  concluded  between 
the  two  powers,  who  then  continued  on  terms  of 
amity  for  half  a  century. 

A  conspiracy  in  the  seraglio  having  carried  of^' 
Xerxes  (B.C.  465),  Artaxerxes  his  son,  called  by  the 
Greeks  MaKpSxetpj  or  "  the  Long-Handed,"  suc- 
ceeded him,  after  an  intei'val  of  seven  months, 
dunng  which  the  conspirator  Artabanus  occupied 
the  throne.  This  Artaxerxes,  who  reigned  forty 
years,  is  beyond  a  doubt  the  king  of  that  name 
who  stood  in  such  a  friendly  relation  towards  Ezra 
(Ezr.  vii.  11-28)  and  Nehemiah  (Neh.  ii.  1-9,  &c.). 
[Artaxerxes.]  His  character,  as  drawn  by 
Ctesias,  is  mild  but  weak  ;  and  under  his  rule  the 
disorders  of  the  empire  seem  to  have  increased 
rapidly.  An  insurrection  in  Bactria,  headed  by  his 
brother  Hystaspes,  was  witli  dilhculty  put  down  in 
the  first  year  of  his  reign  (B.C.  4(34),  afler  which  a 
revolt  broke  out  in  Egypt,  headed  by  Inarus  the 
Libyan  and  Amyrtaeus  the  Egyptian,  who,  receiving 
the  support  of  an  Athenian  fleet,  maintained  them- 
selves for  six  years  (b.c.  460-455)  against  tlie 
whole  power  of  Pereia,  but  were  at  last  overcome 
by  Megabyzus,  satrap  of  Syria.  This  powerful 
and  haughty  noble  soon  afterwards  (B.C.  447),  on 
occasion  of  a  difference  with  the  court,  himself 
became  a  rebel,  and  entered  into  a  contest  with  his 
sovereign,  which  at  once  betrayed  and  increased  the 
weakness  of  the  empire.  Artaxerxes  is  tlie  last  of 
the  Persian  kings  who  had  any  special  connexion 
with  the  Jews,  and  the  last  but  one  mentioned  in 
Scripture.  His  successors  were  Xerxes  IL,  Sog- 
dianus,  Darius  Nothus,  Artaxerxes  Mnenion,  Ar- 
taxerxes Ochus,  and  Darius  Codomannus,  who  is 
probably  the  "  Darius  the  Persian"  of  Nehemiah 
(xii.  22).  These  monarchs  reigned  from  B.C.  424 
to  B.C.  'MO.  None  were  of  much  capacity  ;  and 
during  their  reigns  the  decline  of  the  empire  was 
scarcely  arrested  for  a  day,  unless  it  were  by 
Ochus,  who  reconquered  Egypt,  and  gave  some 
other  signs  of  vigour.  Had  the  younger  Cyrus 
succeeded  in  his  attempt,  the  regeneration  of  Persia 
was,  perhaps,  possible.  After  his  failure  the  seraglio 
grew  at  once  moi'e  powerful  and  more  cruel. 
Eunuchs  and  women  governed  the  kings,  and  dis- 
pensed the  favours  of  the  crown,  or  wielded  its 
terrors,  as  their  interests  or  passions  moved  them. 
Patriotism  and  loyalty  were  alike  dead,  and  the 
empire  must  have  fallen  many  years  before  it  did, 
had  not  the  Persians  early  learnt  to  turn  the  swords 
ef  the  Greeks  against  one  another,  and  at  the  same 
time  raised  the  character  of  their  own  armies  by 


PETER 


797 


the  employment,  on  a  large  scale,  of  Greek  mer- 
cenaries. The  collapse  of  the  empire  under  the 
attack  of  Alexander  is  well  known,  and  requires  no 
description  here.  On  the  division  of  Alexander's 
dominions  among  his  generals  Persia  fell  to  the 
Seleucidae,  under  whom  it  continued  till  after  the 
death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  when  the  conquering 
Pai'thians  advanced  their  frontier  to  the  Euphrates, 
and  tlie  Persians  came  to  be  iitcluded  among  their 
subject-tribes  (B.C.  164).  Still  their  nationality 
was  not  obliterated.  In  A.D.  226,  three  hundred 
and  ninety  years  after  their  subjection  to  the  Par- 
thians,  and  five  hundred  and  fifty-six  years  after 
the  loss  of  their  independence,  the  Persians  shook 
off  the  yoke  of  their  oppressors,  and  once  more 
became  a  nation.  The  kingdom  of  the  Sassanicjae, 
though  not  so  brilliant  as  that  of  Cyrus,  still  had 
its  glories ;  but  its  history  belongs  to  a  time  which 
scarcely  comes  within  the  scope  of  the  pi-esent  work. 

(See,  for  the  history  of  Persia,  besides  Herodotus, 
Ctesias,  Excerpta  Persica ;  Plutarch,  Vit.  Ar- 
taxerx.  ;  Xenophon,  Anabasis  ;  Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  vol.  i. ;  Malcolm,  History  of  Persia  from 
the  Earliest  Ages  to  the  Present  Times,  2  vols.  4to., 
London,  1816  ;  and  Sir  H.  Rawlinson's  Memoir  on 
the  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Ancient  Persia,  pub- 
lished in  the  Journal  of  the  Asiatic  Society,  vols.  x. 
and  xi.  For  the  religion  see  Hyde,  Be  Religione 
Veterum  Persarum  ;  Brockhaus,  T  'endidad-Sade  ; 
Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal  History,  iii. 
472-506;  and  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  1.426-431. 
For  the  system  of  government,  see  Riiwlinson's 
Herodotus,  ii.  555-568.)  [G.  R.] 

PERSIS  (ITepo-is).  A  Christian  woman  at 
Rome  (^Rom.  xvi.  12)  whom  St.  Paul  salutes,  and 
ciimmends  with  special  affection  on  account  of  some 
work  which  she  had  performed  with  singular  dili- 
gence (see  Origen  in  loco).  [\V.  T.  B.] 

PER'UDA  (N'1-nB  :  *a5ot;pa:  Pharuda).  The 
same  as  Perida  (Ezr.  ii.  55).  The  LXX.  reading 
is  supported  by  one  of  Keunicott's  MSS. 

PESTILENCE.    [Plague.] 

PETER  (neVpos,  the(^reek  for  XD^3,  Kt)^as, 
Cephas, i.e.  "a stone"  or  "rock,"  on  which  name  see 
Note  at  the  end  of  this  article).  His  original  name 
was  Simon,  liypK*,  i.  e.  "  hearer."  The  two  names 
are  commonly  combined,  Simon  Peter,  but  in  the 
early  part  of  his  history,  and  in  the  interval  be- 
tween our  Lord's  death  and  resurrection,  he  is  more 
frequently  named  Simon  ;  after  that  event  he  bears 
almost  exclusively  the  more  honourable  designation 
Peter,  or,  as  St.  Paul  sometimes  writes,  Cephas. 
The  notices  of  this  Apostle's  early  life  are  few,  but 
not  unimportant,  and  enable  us  to  form  some  esti- 
mate of  the  circumstances  under  which,  his  cha- 
racter was  formed,  and  prepared  for  his  great  work. 
He  was  the  son  of  a  man  named  Jonas  (Matt.  xvi. 
17  ;  John  i.  43,  xxi.  16),  and  was  brought  up  in 
his  father's  occupation,  a  fisherman  on  the  sea  of 
Tiberias.*  The  occupation  Wiis  of  course  a  humble 
one,  but  not,  as  is  often  assumeil,  mean  or  servile, 
or  incompatiUo  with  some  degree  of  mental  culture. 
His  family  were  probably  in  easy  circumstances. 
He  and  his  brother  Andrew  were  partners  of  John 
and  James,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  who  had  hired 
servants ;  and  from  various  indications  in  the  sacred 


»  The  force  collectod  in  ramphylia,  which  Cimon  de- 
feated and  dispersed  (n.c.  •ICU),  seems  to  have  been  In- 
tended for  aggressivi"  purposes. 


»  There  is  a  traditli>i\   that  his  mother's  name  was 
Johanna  (Coteler,  Valt.  Apost.  il.  63). 


798 


PETEE 


nai-iative  we  are  led  {o  tlie  conclusion  that  their 
soi'ial  position  brouglit  them  into  (ujntact  with  men 
of  education.  In  fact  the  trade  of  fishenneii,  sup- 
l)lying  some  of  the  important  cities  on  the  coasts 
of  that  inland  lake,  may  have  been  tolerably  remu- 
nerative, while  all  the  necessaries  of  life  were  clieap 
.and  abundant  in  the  singularly  rich  and  fertile  dis- 
trict where  the  Apostle  resided.  He  did  not  live, 
as  a  mere  labourinp;'  man,  in  a  liut  by  the  sea-side, 
but  first  at  Bethsaida,  and  afterwards  in  a  house  at 
Capeinaum,  belonging  to  himself  or  his  mother-in- 
law,  which  must  have  been  rathei-  a  large  one,  since 
he  ]-eceived  in  it  not  only  our  Lord  and  his  fellow- 
disciples,  but  multitudes  who  were  attracted  by  the 
mii-acles  and  jii-eaching  of  Jesus.  It  is  certain  that 
when  he  left  ail  to  follow  Christ,  he  made  what  he 
regai-ded,  and  what  seems  to  have  been  admitted  by 
his  Waster,  to  have  been  a  considerable  sacrifice. 
The  habits  of  such  a  life  were  by  no  means  un- 
favourable to  the  development  of  a  vigorous,  earnest, 
and  practiixvl  character,  such  as  he  displayed  in 
after  years.  The  labours,  the  privations,  and  the 
perils  of  an  existence  passed  in  great  part  upon  the 
waters  of  that  beautiful  but  stoimy  lake,  the  long 
and  anxious  watching  through  the  nights,  were  cal- 
culated to  test  and  increase  his  natural  powers,  his 
fortitude,  energy,  and  perseverance.  In  the  city  he 
must  have  been  brought  into  contact  with  men  en- 
gaged in  trafhc,  with  soldiers,  and  foreigners,  and 
may  have  tlius  acquired  somewhat  of  the  flexibility 
and  geniality  of  temperament  all  but  indispensable 
to  the  attainment  of  such  personal  influence  as  he 
exei-cised  in  after-life.  It  is  not  probable  that  he 
and  his  brother  were  wholly  uneducated.  The  Jews 
regarded  instruction  as  a  necessity,  and  legal  enact- 
ments enforced  the  attendance  of  youths  in  schools 
maintained  by  the  community.''  The  statement  in 
Acts  iv.  13,  that  "  the  council  perceived  they  (i.  e. 
Peter  and  John)  wei'e  unlearned  and  ignorant  men," 
is  not  incompatible  with  this  assumption.  The 
translation  of  the  passage  in  the  A,  V.  is  rather 
exaggerated,  the  word  rendered  "  unlearned  "  (tSioj- 
Tat)  being  nearly  equivalent  to  "  laymen,"  i.  e.  men 
of  ordinary  education,  as  contrasted  with  those  who 
weie  specially  trained  in  the  schools  of  the  liabbis. 
A  man  might  be  thoroughly  conversant  with  the 
Scriptures,  and  yet  be  considered  ignorant  and  un- 
leai-ned  by  the  liabbis,  among  whom  the  opinion 
was  ali'eady  prevalent  that  "  the  letter  of  Scripture 
was  the  mere  shell,  an  earthen  vessel  containing 
heavenly  treasuies,  which  could  only  be  discovered 
by  those  who  had  been  taught  to  search  for  the 
hidden  cabalistic  meaning."  Peter  and  his  kinsmen 
were  probably  taught  to  read  the  Scriptures  in 
childhood.  The  history  of  their  country,  especially 
of  the  great  events  of  early  days,  must  have  been 
familiar  to  them  as  attendants  at  the  synagogue, 
and  tlieir  attention  was  there  directed  to  those  por- 
tions of  Holy  Writ  from  which  the  Jews  derived 
their  anticipations  of  the  Messiah. 

The  language  of  the  Apostles  was  of  course  the 
form  of  Aramaic  sjioken  in  northern  Palestine,  a 
sort  of  patois,  partly  Hebrew,  but  more   nearly 

•>  A  law  to  this  effect  was  enacted  by  Simon  ben-Shelacli, 
one  of  the  great  leaders  of  the  Pharisaic  party  under  the 
A snionean  princes.  SceJost,  Geschkhte  des  Jiuientliums, 
i.  246. 

<:  See  E.  Renan,  Hktoire  des  iMngiies  S&nitiqites,  p.  224. 
The  only  extant  specimen  of  that  patois  is  the  Book  of 
Adam  or  'Codex  Nasiraeus,'  edited  by  Norbtrg,  Lond. 
Gi>th.  1815,  6. 

d  See  ISuxtorf,  s.  v.  XPV^ 


PETER 

allied  to  the  Sp-iac.'=  Hebrew,  even  in  its  debased 
form,  was  then  spoken  only  by  men  of  learning,  the 
leaders  of  the  pharisees  and  scribes.^  The  men  of 
Galilee  were,  however,  noted  for  rough  and  inaccu- 
rate language,  and  especially  for  vulgarities  of  pro- 
nunciation.^ It  is  doubtftd  whether  our  Apostle 
was  acquainted  with  Greek  in  early  life.  It  is  cer- 
tain tliat  there  was  more  intercourse  with  foreigners 
in  Galilee  than  in  any  district  of  Palestine,  and 
Greek  appears  to  have  been  a  common,  if  not  the 
principal,  medium  of  communication.  Within  a  few 
years  after  his  caU  St.  Peter  seems  to  have  con- 
versed fluently  in  Greek  with  Cornelius,  at  least 
there  is  no  intimation  that  an  interpreter  was  em- 
ployed, while  it  is  highly  improbable  that  Cornelius, 
a  Koman  soldier,  should  have  used  the  language  of 
Palestine.  The  style  of  both  of  St.  Peter's  Epistles 
indicates  a  considerable  knowledge  of  Greek — it  is 
pure  and  accurate,  and  in  grammatical  structure 
equal  to  that  of  St.  Paul.  That  may,  however,  be 
accounted  for  by  the  fact,  for  wliich  there  is  very 
ancient  authority,  that  St.  Peter  employed  an  inter- 
preter in  the  composition  of  his  Epistles,  if  not  in 
his  oi'dinary  intercourse  with  foreigners.'  There 
are  no  traces  of  acquaintance  with  Greek  authors, 
or  of  the  influence  of  Greek  literature  upon  his 
mind,  such  as  we  find  in  St.  Paul,  nor  could  we 
exjject  it  in  a  person  of  his  station  even  had  G]-eek 
been  his  mother-tongue.  It  is  on  the  whole  pro- 
bable that  he  had  some  rudimental  knowledge  of 
Greek  in  early  life,S  which  may  have  been  after- 
wards extended  when  the  need  was  felt,  but  not 
more  than  would  enable  him  to  discourse  intelligibly 
en  practical  and  devotional  subjects.  That  he  was 
an  aflectionate  husband,  married  in  early  life  to  a 
wife  who  accompanied  him  in  his  Apostolic  journeys, 
are  facts  interred  from  Sci'ipture,  while  very  ancient 
traditions,  recorded  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (^whose 
connexion  with  the  church  founded  by  St.  jNlark 
gives  a  ]3eculiar  value  to  his  testimony)  and  by 
othei'  early  but  less  trustworthy  writers,  inform  us 
that  her  name  was  Perpetua,  that  she  bore  a  daugh- 
ter, or  peihaps  otlier  children,  and  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom. It  is  uncertain  at  what  age  he  was  called 
by  our  Lord.  The  general  impression  of  the  Fathers 
is  that  he  was  an  old  man  at  the  date  of  his  deatii, 
A.D.  64,  but  this  need  not  imply  that  he  was  much 
older  tlian  our  Lord.  He  was  probably  between 
thirty  and  forty  years  of  age  at  the  date  of  his  call. 
That  call  was  preceded  by  a  special  preparation. 
He  and  his  brotlier  Andrew,  together  with  their 
partners  James  and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  were 
disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  (^John  i.  35).  They 
were  in  attendance  upon  him  when  they  were  first 
called  to  the  service  of  Christ.  From  the  circum- 
stances of  that  call,  which  are  recorded  with  graphic 
minuteness  by  St.  John,  we  learn  some  important 
facts  touching  their  state  of  mind  and  the  personal 
character  of  our  Apostle.  Two  disciples,  one  named 
by  the  Evangelist  St.  Andrew,  the  other  in  all  pro- 
bability St.  John  himself,  were  standing  with  the 
Bajjtist  at  Bethany  on  the  Jordan,  when  he  pointed 
out  Jesus    as   He   walked,   and    said.  Behold  the 


e  See  Reuss,  Geschkhte  der  If.  S.  §41. 

f  Rcuss  (1:  c.  }49)  rgects  this  as  a  mere  hypothesis,  Imt 
gives  no  reason.  The  tradition  .rests  on  the  authority  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Irenaeus,  and  Tertulliau.  .See  the 
notes  on  Kuseb.  //.  E.  iii.  39,  v.  8,  and  vi.  25. 

B  Kven  highly  educated  Jews,  like  Josephus,  spoke 
Greek  imperfectly  (see^nf.  xx.  11,^^2).  On  the  antagonism 
to  Gre-('k  influence,  see  Josi,  I.  c.  i.  ISs,  and  M.  Niculas, 
IjCS  Doctrines  7-eligCctises  des  Jtu/'s,  i.  c  2. 


PETER 

Lamb  of  God  !    That  is,  the  antitype  of  the  victims 
whose  blood  (as  all  true  Israelites,  and  tliey  more 
distinctly  under  the  teaching  of  John,''  believed) 
prefigured  the  atonement  for  sin.     The  two  at  once 
followed  Jesus,  and  upon  His  invitation  abode  with 
Him  that  day.     Andrew  then  went  to  bis  brother 
Simon,  and  saith   unto  him,  We  have  found  the 
Messias,  the  anointed  One,  of  wliom  they  h;id  read 
in  the  prophets.     Simon  went  at  once,  and  when 
Jesus  looked  on  him  He  said.  Thou  art  Simon  the 
son  of  Joua;    thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas.     The 
change  of  name  is  of  course  deeply  significant.     As 
son  of  Jona  (a  name  of  doubtful  meaning,  according 
to  Lampe  equivalent  to  Johanan  or  .John,  i.  e.  grace 
of  the   Lord;  according  to  Lange,  who  has  some 
striking  but  fanciful  observations,  signifying  dove) 
he  bore  as  a  disciple  the  name  Simon,  i.  e.  hearer,  but 
as  an  Apostle,  one  of  the  twelve  on  whom  the  Church 
was  to  be  erected,  he  was  hereafter  (kAtjA^ctt?)  to 
be  called  Rock  or  Stone.     It  seems  a  natural  im- 
pression that  the  words  refer  primarily  to  the  ori- 
ginal cliaracter  of  Simon :   that  our  Lord  saw  in 
him  a  man  firm,  stedfast,  not  to  be  overthrown, 
though  severely  tried;  and  such  was  generally  the 
view  taken   by  the  Fathei-s:   but  it  is  perhaps  a 
deeper  and  truer  inference  that  Jesus  thus  describes 
Simon,  not  as  what  he  was,  but  as  what  he  would 
become  under  His  influence — a  man  with  predis- 
positions and  capabilities  not  unfitted  for  the  otfice 
he  was  to  hold,  but  one   whose   permanence  and 
stability  would  depend  upon  union  with  the  living 
Kock.     Thus  we  may  expect  to  find  Simon,  as  the 
natural  man,  at  once  rough,  stubborn,  and  mutable, 
whereas  Peter,  identified  with  the  Rock,  will  remain 
firm  and  unmoveable  unto  the  end.' 

This  first  call  led  to  no  immediate  change  in  St. 
Peter's  external  position.  He  and  his  fellow  dis- 
ciples looked  henceforth  upon  our  Lord  as  their 
teacher,  but  were  not  commanded  to  follow  him  as 
regular  disciples.  There  were  several  grades  of 
disciples  among  the  Jews,  from  the  occasional  hearer, 
to  the  follower  who  gave  up  all  other  pursuits  in 
order  to  serve  a  master.  At  the  time  a  recognition 
of  His  Person  and  office  sufficed.  They  returned  to 
Capernaum,  where  they  pursued  their  usual  business, 
waiting  for  a  further  intimation  of  His  will. 

The  second  call  is  recorded  by  the  other  three 
Evangelists  ;  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke  being  appa- 
rently supplementary''  to  the  brief,  and  so  to  speak, 
official  accounts  given  by  Matthew  and  Mark.  It 
took  place  on  the  sea  of  Galilee  near  Capernaum — 
where  the  four  disciples,  Peter  and  Andrew,  James 
and  John,  were  fishing.  Peter  and  Andrew  were 
first  called.  Our  Lord  then  entered  Simon  Peter's 
boat,  and  addressed  the  multitude  on  the  shore ; 
after  the  conclusion  of  the  discourse  He  wrought 
the  miracle  by  which  He  foreshadowed  the  success 
of  the  Apostles  in  the  new,  but  analogous,  occupa- 
tion which  was  to  be  theirs,  that  of  fishers  of  men. 
The  call  of  James  and  John  followed.  From  that 
time  the  four  were  certainly  enrolled  formally 
among  His  disciples,  and  although  .as  yet  invested 
with    no   official    character,   accompanied    Him    in 

>>  See  Liicke,  Tholuck,  and  Lange,  on  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John. 

'  Ijiicke  describes  this  character  well,  as  that  fiminpss, 
or  rather  hardness  of  power,  which,  if  not  piirifieil,  ''asily 
becomes  violence.  The  deepest  and  most  beautiful  ob- 
servations are  those  of  Origen  (in  .Fohn,  torn.  ii.  c.  30. 

k  This  is  a  point  of  great  difficulty,  and  hotly  contested. 
Many  writiTS  of  groat  weight  hold  the  occurrences  to  be 
altogether  distinct ;  but  the  generality  of  commentators, 


PETER 


799 


His   journeys,   those    especially   in    the    north    of 
Palestine. 

Immediately  after  that  call  our  Lord  went  to 
the  house  of  Peter,  where  He  wrought  the  miiacle 
of  healing  on  Peter's  wife's  mother,  a  mir.acle  suc- 
ceeded by  other  manifestations  of  divine  power 
which  produced  a  deep  impression  upon  the  people. 
Some  time  was  passed  afterwards  in  attendance 
upon  our  Lord's  public  ministrations  in  Galilee,  De- 
capolis,  Peraca,  and  Judaea;  though  at  intervals 
the  disciples  returned  to  their  own  city,  and  were 
witnesses  of  many  miracles,  of  the  call  of  Levi,  and 
of  their  Master's  reception  of  outcasts,  whom  they 
in  common  with  their  zealous  but  prejudiced  coun- 
trymen had  despised  and  shunned.  It  was  a  period 
of  training,  of  ineutal  and  spiritual  discipline  prepa- 
ratory to  their  admission  to  the  higher  office  to 
which  they  were  destined.  Even  then  Peter  re- 
ceived some  marks  of  distinction.  He  was  selected, 
together  with  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  to  witness 
the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter. 

The  special  designation  of  Peter,  and  his  eleven 
fellow  disciples  took  place  some  time  afterwards, 
when  they  were  set  apart  as  our  Loril's  immediate 
attendants,  and  as  His  delegates  to  go  forth  wher- 
ever He  might  send  them,  as  apostles,  announcers 
of  His  kingdom,  gifted  with  supernatural  powers  as 
credentials  of  their  supernatural  mission  (see  Matt.  x. 
2-4  ;  Mark  iii.  13-19,  the  most  detailed  account — 
Luke  vi.  13).  They  appear  then  first  to  have 
received  formally  the  name  of  Apostles,  and  from 
that  time  Simon  bore  publicl}',  and  as  it  would 
seem  all  but  exclusively,  the  name  Peter,  which 
had  hitherto  been  used  rather  as  a  characteristic 
appellation  than  as  a  proper  name. 

From  tins  time  there  can  bo  no  doubt  that  St. 
Peter  held  the  first  place  among  the  Apostles,  to 
whatever  cause  his  precedence  is  to  be  attributed. 
There  was  certainly  much-  in  his  character  which 
marked  him  as  a  representative  man  ;  both  in  his 
strength  and  in  his  weakness,  in  his  excellences  and 
his  defects  he  exemplifies  the  changes  which  the 
natural  man  undergoes  in  the  gradual  transforma- 
tion into  the  spiritual  man  under  the  personal  in- 
fluence of  the  Saviour.  The  precedence  did  not 
depend  upon  priority  of  call,  or  it  would  have 
devolved  upon  his  brother  Andiew,  or  that  other 
disciple  who  first  followed  Jesus.  It  seems  scarcely 
probable  that  it  depended  upon  seniority,  even  sup- 
posing, which  is  a  mere  conjecture,  that  he  was 
older  than  his  fellow  disciples.  The  special  desig- 
nation by  Christ,  alone  accounts  in  a  satisfactory 
way  for  the  facts  that  he  is  naiued  first  in  every 
list  of  the  Apostles,  is  generally  addressed  by  our 
Loid  as  their  representative,  and  on  the  most  solemn 
occasions  speaks  in  their  name.  Thus  when  the 
first  great  secession  took  place  in  consequence  of  the 
offence  given  by  our  Lord's  mystic  discourse  at 
Capernaum  (see  John  vi.  G()-69),  "  Jestis  said  unto 
the  twelve.  Will  ye  also  go  away  ?  Then  Simon 
Peter  answered  Hirn,  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go? 
Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life  :  and  we  believe 
and  are  sure  that  Thou  art  that  Christ,  the  Son  of 


including  some  of  the  most  earnest  and  devout  in  Germany 
and  Kngland,  appear  now  to  concur,  in  the  view  which  I 
have  here  taken.  Thus  Trench  On  the  rarabhs,  Ni-ander, 
Liicke,  I^ngo,  and  V'-bnud.  The  object  of  Strauss,  who 
denies  the  identity,  is  to  make  out  that  St.  Luke's  account 
is  a  mere  myth.  The  most  satisfactory  attempt  to  account 
for  the  variations  is  that  of  Spanheim,  Dubia  Jivangdica, 
U.  341. 


800 


PETER 


the  living  God."  Thus  again  at  Caesavea  Philippi, 
soon  after  the  return  of  tlie  twelve  from  their  first 
missionary  tour,  St.  Peter  (spealving  as  before  in 
the  name  of  the  twelve,  though,  as  appears  from 
our  Lord's  words,  with  a  peculiar  distinctness  of 
personal  conviction)  repeated  that,  declaration,  "  Thou 
art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  The 
confirmation  of  oui-  Apostle  in  his  special  position 
in  the  Church,  his  identification  with  the  rock  on 
which  that  Church  is  founded,  the  ratification  of 
the  powers  and  duties  attached  to  the  apostolic 
ofilce,"'  and  the  promise  of  permanence  to  the  Church, 
followed  as  a  reward  of  that  confession.  The  early 
Church  regarded  St.  Peter  generally,  and  most 
especially  on  this  occasion,  as  the  representative  of 
the  apostolic  body,  a  very  distinct  theory  from  that 
which  makes  him  their  head,  or  governor  in  Christ's 
stead.  Even  in  the  time  of  Cyprian,  when  com- 
munion with  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  St.  Peter's 
successor  for  the  first  time  was  held  to  be  indis- 
pensable, no  powers  of  juiisdiotion,  or  supremacy, 
were  supposed  to  be  attached  to  the  admitted  pre- 
cedency of  rank."  Primus  inter  pares  Peter  held  no 
distinct  office,  and  certainly  never  claimed  any 
powers  which  did  not  belong  equally  to  all  his 
fellow  Apostles, 

This  great  triumph  of  Peter,  however,  brought 
other  points  of  his  character  into  sti'ong  relief.  The 
distinction  which  he  then  received,  and  it  may  be 
his  consciousness  of  ability,  energy,  zeal,  and  abso- 
lute devotion  to  Christ's  person,  seem  to  have 
developed  a  natural  tendency  to  rashness  and  for- 
wardness bordering  upon  presumption.  On  this 
occasion  the  exhibition  of  such  feelings  brought 
upon  him  the  strongest  I'eproof  ever  addressed  to  a 
disciple  by  our  Lord.  In  his  affection  and  self-con- 
fidence Peter  ventured  to  reject  as  impossible  the 
announcement  of  the  sufferings  and  humiliation 
which  Jesus  predicted,  and  heard  the  sharp  words — 
"  Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan,  thou  art  an  offence 


■n  The  accounts  whiih  have  been  given  of  the  precise 
import  of  this  declaration  may  be  summed  up  under  these 
heads : — 1.  That  our  Lord  spoke  of  Himself,  and  not  of 
St.  Peter,  as  the  rock  on  which  the  Church  was  to  be 
founded.  This  interpretation  expresses  a  great  truth,  but 
it  is  irreconcileable  with  the  context,  and  could  scarcely 
have  occurred  to  an  unbiassed  reader,  and  ceilainly  does 
not  give  the  primary  and  literal  meaning  of  our  Lord's 
words.  It  has  been  defended,  however,  by  candid  and 
learned  critics,  as  Glass  and  Dathe.  2.  That  our  Lord 
addresses  Peter  as  the  type  or  representative  of  the  Church, 
in  his  capacity  of  chief  disciple.  This  is  Augustine's  view, 
and  it  was  widely  adopted  in  the  early  Church.  It  is 
hardly  borne  out  by  the  context,  and  seems  to  involve  a 
false  metaphor.  The  Church  would  in  tlmt  case  be  founded 
on  itself  in  its  type.  3.  That  the  rock  was  not  the  person 
of  Peter,  but  his  confession  of  faith.  This  rests  on  much 
better  authority,  and  is  supported  by  stronger  arguments. 
The  authorities  for  it  are  given  by  Suicer,  v.  Ile'rpo^,  ^1, 
n.  3.  Yet  it  seems  to  have  been  originally  suggested  as 
an  explanation,  rather  than  an  interpretation,  which  it 
certainly  is  not  in  a  literal  sense.  4.  That  St.  Peter  him- 
self was  the  rock  on  which  the  Church  would  be  built,  as 
the  representative  of  the  Apostles,  as  professing  in  their 
name  the  true  faith,  and  as  entrusted  specially  with  the 
duty  of  preaching  it,  and  thereby  laying  the  foundation 
of  the  Church.  Many  learned  and  candid  Protestant 
divines  have  acquiesced  in  this  view  (e.  g.  Pearson, 
Hammond,  Bengel,  Rosenmiiller,  Schleusner,  Kuinoel, 
Bloomficld,  &c.).  It  is  borne  out  by  the  facts  that  St. 
I'eter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  during  the  whole 
period  of  the  establishment  of  the  Church,  was  the  chief 
agent  in  all  the  work  of  the  ministry,  in  preaching,  in 
admitting  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  laying  down  the 


PETER 

unto  me — for  thou  savourest  not  the  things  that  be 
of  God,  but  those  that  be  of  men."  That  was 
Peter's  first  fall ;  a  very  ominous  one;  not  a  rock, 
but  a  stumbling  stone,°  not  a  defender,  but  an  anta- 
gonist and  deadly  enemy  of  the  faith,  when  the 
spiritual  should  give  place  to  the  lower  natuie  in 
dealing  with  the  things  of  God.  It  is  remarkable 
that  on  other  occasions  when  St.  Peter  signalized 
his  faith  and  devotion,  he  displayed  at  the  time,  or 
immediately  afterwards,  a  more  than  usual  defi- 
ciency in  spiritual  discernment  and  consistency. 
Thus  a  few  days  after  that  fall  he  was  selected 
together  with  .John  and  James  to  witness  the 
transfiguration  of  Christ,  but  the  words  which 
he  then  uttered  prove  that  he  was  completely  bewil- 
dered, and  rmable  at  the  time  to  comprehend  the 
meaning  of  the  transaction. p  Thus  again,  when 
his  zeal  and  courage  prompted  him  to  leave  the 
ship  and  walk  on  the  water  to  go  to  Jesus  (Matt. 
xiv.  29),  a  sudden  failure  of  faith  withdrew  the 
sustaining  power ;  he  was  about  to  sink  when  he 
was  at  once  reproved  and  saved  by  his  master. 
Such  traits,  which  occur  not  unfrequently,  prepare 
us  for  his  last  great  fall,  as  well  as  for  his  conduct 
after  the  Resun-ection,  when  his  natural  gifts  were 
perfected  and  his  deficiencies  supplied  by  "  the 
power  fi'om  on  High."  We  find  a  mixture  of  zeal 
and  weakness  in  his  conduct  when  called  upon  to 
pay  tribute-money  for  himself  and  his  Lord,  but 
faith  had  the  upper  hand,  and  was  rewarded  by  a 
significant  miracle  (Matt.  xvii.  24-27).  The  ques- 
tion which  about  the  same  time  Peter  asked  our 
Lord  as  to  the  extent  to  which  forgiveness  of  sins 
should  be  carried,  indicated  a  gi-eat  advance  in  spi- 
rituality fi'om  the  Jewish  standing  point,  while  it 
showed  how  far  as  yet  he  and  his  fellow  disciples 
were  from  imderstanding  the  true  principle  of  Chris- 
tian love  (Matt,  xviii.  21).  We  find  a  similar 
blending  of  opposite  qualities  in  the  declaration 
recorded  by  the  synoptical  evangelists  (Matt.  xix. 

terms  of  communion.  This  view  is  wholly  incompatible 
with  the  Roman  theory,  which  makes  him  the  repre- 
sentative of  Christ,  not  personally,  but  in  virtue  of  an 
office  essential  to  the  permanent  existence  and  authority 
of  the  Church.  Passaglia,  the  latest  and  ablest  contro- 
veisialist,  lakes  more  pains  to  refute  this  than  any  other 
view ;  but  wholly  without  success :  it  being  clear  that 
St.  Peter  did  not  retain,  even  admitting  that  he  did  at 
first  hold,  any  primacy  of  rank  after  completing  his  own 
special  work  ;  that  he  never  exercised  any  authority  over 
or  independently  of  the  other  Apostles ;  that  he  certainly 
did  not  transmit  whatever  position  he  ever  held  to  any 
of  his  colleagues  after  his  decease.  At  Jerusalem,  even 
during  his  residence  there,  the  chief  authority  rested  with 
St.  James;  nor  is  there  any  trace  of  a  central  power  or 
jurisdiction  for  centuries  after  the  foundation  of  the 
Church.  The  same  arguments,  mutatis  mutandis,  apply 
to  the  keys.  The  promise  was  literally  fulfilled  when 
St.  Peter  preached  at  Pentecost,  admitted  the  first  con- 
verts to  baptism,  confirmed  the  Samaritans,  and  received 
Cornelius,  the  representative  of  the  Gentiles,  into  the 
Church.  Whatever  privileges  may  have  belonged  to  him 
personally  died  with  him.  The  authority  required  for  the 
permanent  government  of  the  Church  was  believed  by  the 
Fathers  to  be  deposited  in  the  episcopate,  as  representing 
the  apostolic  body,  and  succeeding  to  its  clairns. 

n  See  an  admirable  discussion  of  this  question  in  Rothe's 
Avfange  dcr  Christlichen  Kirche. 

°  Lightfoot  suggests  that  such  may  have  been  the  real 
meaning  of  the  term  "  rock."  An  amusing  instance  of 
the  blindness  of  party  feeling.  See  Horae  Ueb.  on  John, 
vol.  xii.  p.  237. 

i>  As  usual,  the  least  favourable  view  of  St.  Peter's 
conduct  and  feelings  is  given  by  St.  Mark,  i.  e.,  by  himself. 


PETER 

27 ;  Mark  x.  '28  ;  Luke  xviii.  28),  Lo,  we  have 
left  all  and  followed  Thee.  It  certainly  bespeaks  a 
consciousness  of  sincerity,  a  spirit  of  self-devotion 
and  self-sacrifice,  though  it  conveys  an  impression 
of  somethino;  like  ambition  ;  but  in  that  instance 
the  good  undoubtedly  predominated,  as  is  shown  by 
our  Lord's  answer.  He  does  not  reprove  Peter, 
who  spoke,  as  usual,  in  the  name  of  the  twelve, 
but  takes  that  oppoitunity  of  uttering  the  strongest 
prediction  touching  the  future  dignity  and  piu'a- 
mount  autiiority  of  the  Apostles,  a  prediction  re- 
corded by  St.  Matthew  only. 

Towards  the  close  of  our  Lord's  ministry  St, 
Peter's  characteristics  become  especially  prominent. 
Together  witli  liis  brother,  and  the  two  sons  of 
Zebedee,  he  listened  to  the  last  awful  predictions 
and  warnings  delivered  to  the  disciples  in  reference 
to  the  second  advent  (Matt.  xxiv.  .'5 ;  Mark  xiii.  3, 
who  alone  mentions  these  names  ;  Luke  xxi.  7).  At 
the  last  supper  Peter  seems  to  have  been  particu- 
larly earnest  in  the  request  that  the  tiaitor  might 
be  pointed  out,  expressing  of  c-ourse  a  general  feeling, 
to  which  some  inward  consciousness  of  infirmity 
may  have  added  force.  After  the  supper  his  words 
drew  out  the  meaning  of  the  significant,  almost 
sacramental  act  of  our  Lord  in  washing  His  disciples' 
feet,  an  occasion  on  which  we  find  the  same  mixture 
of  goodness  and  frailty,  humility  and  deep  afiection, 
with  a  certain  taint  of  self-will,  which  was  at  once 
hushed  into  submissive  reverence  by  the  voice  of 
Jesus.  Then  too  it  was  that  he  made  those  re- 
peated protestittions  of  unalterable  fidelity,  so  soon 
to  be  falsified  by  his  miserable  fall.  That  event  is, 
however,  of  such  critical  import  in  its  bearings 
upon  the  character  and  position  of  the  Apostle,  that 
it  cannot  be  dismissed  without  a  careful,  if  not  an 
exhaustive  discussion. 

Judas  had  left  the  guest-chamber  when  St.  Peter 
put  the  question,  Lord,  whither  goestThou?  words 
which  modern  theologians  generally  represent  as 
savouring  of  idle  curiosity,  or  presumption,  but  in 
which  the  early  Fathers  (as  Chrysostom  and  Augus- 
tine) recognized  the  utterance  of  love  and  devotion. 
The  answer  was  a  promise  that  Peter  should  follow 
his  Master,  but  accompanied  with  an  intimation  of 
present  unfitness  in  the  disciple.  Then  came  the 
first  protestation,  which  elicited  the  sharp  and  stern 
rebuke,  and  distinct  prediction  of  Peter's  denial 
(John  xiii.  36-1^8).  From  comparing  this  account 
with  those  of  the  other  evangelists  (Matt.  xxvi.  33- 
35 ;  Mark  xiv.  29-31  ;  Luke  xxii.  33,  34),  it  seems 
evident  that  with  some  diversity  of  circumstances 
both  the  protestation  and  warning  were  thrice  re- 
])eated.  'i'he  tempter  was  to  sift  all  the  disciples, 
our  Apostle's  faith  was  to  be  presented  from  failing 
by  the  special  intercession  of  Christ,  lie  being  thus 
singled  out  either  lus  the  representative  of  the  whole 
body,  .or  as  seems  more  probable,  because  his  cha- 
racter was  one  which  had  special  need  of  super- 
natural aid.  St.  Mark,  as  usual,  records  two  points 
which  enhance  the  force  of  the  warning  and  the 
guilt  of  Peter,  viz.,  that  the  cock  would  crow  twice, 
and  tliat  after  such  warning  he  repeated  his  pro- 
testation with  greater  vehemence.  Chrysostom,  who 
judges  the  A])ostie  with  frirness  and  candour,  attri- 
butes this  vehemence  to  his  gieat  love,  and  more 
particularly  to  the  deliglit  wliich  lie  leit  when 
iissured  that  he  was  not  the  traitor,  yet  not  without 
a  certain  admixture  of  tbrwaiduess  and  ambition 
such  as  had  previously  bw-ii  shown  in  the  dispute 
fo)-  pre-eminence.  The  (iei-y  trial  soon  ainie.  After 
the  agonv  of  Gethsemane,  when  the  tliree,  Peter, 


PETER 


801 


James,  and  John  were,  as  on  former  occasions,  se- 
lected to  be  with  our  Lord,  the  only  witnesses  of 
His  passion,  where  also  all  three  had  ahke  failed  to 
prepare  themselves  by  prayer  and  watching,  the 
arrest  of  Jesus  took  place.  Peter  did  not  shrink 
from  the  danger.  In  the  same  spirit  which  had 
dictated  his  promise  he  drew  his  sword,  alone  against 
the  armed  thi'ong,  and  wounded  the  servant  (rhv 
SovKov,  not  a  servant)  of  the  high-priest,  probably 
the  leader  of  the  band.  When  this  bold  but  unau- 
thorized attempt  at  rescue  was  reproved,  he  did  not 
yet  forsake  his  Master,  but  followed  Him  with  St. 
John  into  the  focus  of  danger,  the  house  of  the 
high-jniest.  There  he  sat  in  the  outer  hall.  He 
must  have  been  in  a  state  of  utter  confusion :  his 
faith,  which  from  first  to  last  was  bound  up  with 
hope,  his  special  characteristic,  was  for  tlie  time 
powerless  against  temptation.  The  danger  found 
him  unanned.  Thrice,  each  time  with  greater 
vehemence,  the  last  time  with  blasphemous  asse- 
veration, he  denied  his  Master.  The  triumph  of 
Satan  seemed  complete.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  it 
was  an  obscuration  of  faith,  not  an  extinction.  It 
needed  but  a  glance  of  his  Lord's  eye  to  bring 
him  to  himself.  His  repentance  was  instantaneous, 
and  effectual.  The  hght  in  which  he  himself  re- 
garded his  conduct,  is  clearly  shown  by  the  terms 
in  which  it  is  related  by  St.  Mark.  The  inferences 
are  weighty  as  regards  his  personal  character,  which 
represents  more  completely  perhaps  than  any  in  the 
New  Testament,  the  weakness  of  the  natural  and  the 
.strength  of  the  spiritual  man :  still  moie  weighty 
as  bearing  upon  his  relations  to  the  apostolic  body, 
and  the  claims  resting  upon  the  assumption  that  he 
stood  to  them  in  the  place  of  Christ. 

On  the  morning  of  the  resurrection  we  have 
proof  that  St.  Peter,  though  humbled,  was  not 
crushed  by  his  fall.  He  and  St.  John  were  the  first 
to  visit  the  sepulchre;  he  was  the  first  who  entered 
it.  We  are  told  by  Luke  (in  words  still  used  by 
the  Eastern  Church  as  the  first  salutation  on  Easter 
Sunday)  and  by  St.  Paul,^  that  Christ  appeared  to 
him  first  among  the  Apostles — he  who  most  needed 
the  comfort  was  the  first  who  received  it,  and  with 
it,  as  may  be  assumed,  an  assurance  of  forgiveness. 
It  is  observable,  however,  that  on  that  oce.usion  he 
is  called  by  his  original  name,  Simon,  not  Peter  ; 
the  higher  designation  was  not  restoi-ed  until  he  had 
been  jniblicly  reinstituted,  so  to  speak,  by  his 
Master.  That  reinstitution  took  place  at  the  sea 
of  Galilee  (John  x.xi.),  an  event  of  the  very  highest 
import.  We  have  there  indications  of  his  best  na- 
tural ([ualities,  practical  good  sense,  promptness 
and  energy ;  slower  than  St.  John  to  recognize  their 
Lord,  Peter  was  the  first  to  reach  Him  :  he  brought 
the  net  to  land.  The  thrice  repeated  question  of 
Christ,  referring  doubtless  to  the  three  protestations 
and  denials,  were  thrice  met  by  answers  full  of  love 
and  faith,  and  utterly  devoid  of  his  hitherto  charac- 
teristic failing,  ))resumption,  of  which  not  a  trace  is 
to  be  discerned  in  his  later  history.  He  then  re- 
ceived the  formal  commission  to  feed  Christ's  sheep ; 
not  certainly  as  one  endued  with  exclusive  or  para- 
mount authority,  or  !vs  distinguished  from  his 
t'ellow-disciples,  whose  fall  had  been  marked  by  fjir 
less  aggravating  circiuustances;  rather  as  one  who 
had  Iflrfeited  his  jilace.  ami  could  not  resume  it 
without  such  au  authorization.     Then  followed  the 


.1  A  fact  very  perplexing  to  the  TUbingen  school,  being 
utt<>rlj'  irreconciloablc  wlili  llieir  theory  of  antagonism 
botweon  tlie  Apostles. 

3   F 


802 


PETER 


prediction  of  his  martyrdom,  in  which  he  was  to 
tiiid  the  fulfilment  of  his  request  to  be  pemiitted  to 
follow  the  Lord. 

With  this  event  closes  the  first  part  of  St.  Peter's 
history.  It  has  been  a  period  of  transition,  during 
which  the  fisherman  of  Galilee  had  been  trained 
first  by  the  Baptist,  then  by  oui'  Lord,  for  the  great 
work  of  his  life.  He  had  learned  to  know  the 
Person  and  appreciate  the  offices  of  Chi-ist:  while 
his  own  character  had  been  chastened  and  elevated 
by  special  privileges  and  humiliations,  both  reach- 
ing their  climax  in  the  last  recorded  transactions. 
Henceforth,  he  with  his  colleagues  were  to  establish 
and  govern  the  Church  founded  by  their  Lord,  with- 
out the  support  of  His  presence. 

The  first  part  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  occu- 
pied by  the  record  of  transactions,  in  nearly  all  of 
which  Peler  stands  forth  as  the  recognized  leader  of  the 
Apostles ;  it  being,  however,  equally  clear  that  he 
neither  exercises  nor  claims  any  authority  apart  from 
them,  much  less  over  them.  In  the  first  chapter  it 
is  Peter  who  points  out  to  the  disciples  (as  in  all  his 
discourses  and  writings  drawing  his  arguments  from 
prophecy)  the  necessity  of  supplying  the  place  of 
Judas.  He  states  the  qualifications  of  an  Apostle, 
but  takes  no  special  part  in  the  election.  The  can- 
didates are  selected  by  the  disciples,  while  the  deci- 
sion is  left  to  the  searcher  of  hearts.  The  extent 
and  limits  of  Peter's  primacy  might  bo  inferred 
with  tolerable  accuracy  from  this  transaction  alone. 
To  have  one  spokesman,  or  foreman,  seems  to  accord 
with  the  spirit  of  order  and  humility  which  ruled 
the  Church,  while  the  assumption  of  power  or  su- 
premacy would  be  incompatible  with  the  express 
command  of  Christ  (see  Matt,  xxiii.  10).  In  the 
2nd  chapter  again,  St.  Peter  is  the  most  prominent 
person  in  the  greatest  event  after  the  resurrection, 
when  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  the  Church  was  first 
invested  with  the  plenitude  of  gifts  and  powers. 
Then  Peter,  not  speaking  in  his  own  name,  but  with 
the  eleven  (see  ver.  14),  explained  the  meaning  of 
the  miraculous  gifts,  and  shewed  the  fulfilment  of 
prophecies  (accepted  at  that  time  by  all  Hebrews  as 
Messianic),  both  in  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  in  the  resurrection  and  death  of  our 
Lord.  This  discourse,  which  bears  all  the  marks  of 
Peter's  individuality,  both  of  character  and  doctrinal 
views,''  ends  with  an  appeal  of  remarkable  boldness. 

It  is  the  model  upon  which  the  apologetic  dis- 
courses of  the  primitive  Christians  were  generally 
constructed.  The  conversion  and  baptism  of  three 
thousand  persons,  who  continued  steadfastly  in  the 
Apostle's  doctrine  and  fellowship,  attested  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  which  spake  by  Peter  on  that  occasion. 

The  first  miracle  after  Pentecost  was  wrought 
by  St.  Peter  (Acts  iii.) ;  and  St.  John  was  joined 
with  him  in  that,  as  in  most  important  acts  of  his 
ministry ;  but  it  was  Peter  who  took  the  cripple 
by  the  hand,  and  bade  him  "  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  rise  up  and  walk,"  and  when  the 
people  ran  together  to  Solomon's  porch,  where  the 
Apostles,  following  their  Master's  example  were 
wont  to  teach,  Peter  was  the  speaker:  he  convinces 
the  people  of  their  sin,  warns  them  of  their  danger, 
points  out  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  and  the  spe- 


'  See  Schmid,  Biblische  Theologk,  li.  153 ;  and  Weiss, 
Der  Petrinische  Lehrbeyriff,  p.  19. 

s  This  speech  is  at  once  strikingly  characteristic  of 
St.  Peter,  and  a  proof  of  the  fundamental  harmony  between 
his  teaching  and  tlie  more  developed  and  systematic  doc- 
trines of  St.  Paul ;  differing  in  form,  to  an  extent  utterly- 
incompatible   with   the   theory  of  Baur  and   Schwcgler 


PETER 

cial  objects  for  which  God  sent  His  Son  first  to  the 
children  of  the  old  covenant." 

The  boldness  of  the  two  Apostles,  of  Peter  riiore 
especially  as  the  spokesman,  when  "  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost "  he  coufi-onted  the  full  assembly,  headed 
by  Annas  and  Caiaphas,  produced  a  deep  impression 
upon  those  cruel  and  luiscrupulous  hypocrites ;  an 
impression  enhanced  by  the  fact  that  the  woi-ds 
came  from  ignorant  and  unlearned  men.  The  words 
spoken  by  both  Apostles,  when  commanded  not  to 
speak  at  all  nor  teach  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  have  ever 
since  been  the  watchwords  of  martyrs  (iv.  19,  20). 

This  first  miracle  of  healing  was  soon  followed 
by  the  first  miracle  of  judgment.  The  first  open 
and  deliberate  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  a  sin 
combining  ambition,  fraud,  hypoci'isy,  and  bla.s- 
pheiny.  was  visited  by  death,  sudden  and  awful  as 
under  the  old  dispensation.  St.  Peter  was  the  mi- 
nister in  that  transaction.  As  he  had  first  opened 
the  gate  to  penitents  (Acts  ii.  37,  38),  he  now 
closed  it  to  hypocrites.  The  act  stands  alone,  with- 
out a  precedent  or  parallel  in  the  Gospel ;  but  Peter 
acted  simply  as  an  instrument,  not  pronouncing  the 
sentence,  but  denouncing  the  sin,  and  that  in  the 
name  of  his  fellow  Apostles  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Penalties  similar  in  kind,  though  far  ditlerent  in 
degree,  were  inflicted,  or  commanded  on  various 
occasions  by  St.  Paul.  St.  Peter  appears,  perhaps 
in  consequence  of  that  act,  to  have  become  the 
object  of  a  reverence  bordering,  as  it  would  seem, 
on  superstition  (Acts  v.  15),  while  the  numerous 
miracles  of  healing  wrought  about  the  same  time, 
showing  the  true  character  of  the  power  dwelling 
in  the  Apostles,  gave  occasion  to  the  second  perse- 
cution. Peter  then  came  into  contact  with  the 
noblest  and  most  interesting  character  among  the 
Jews,  the  learned  and  liberal  tutor  of  St.  Paul, 
(Jamaliel,  whose  caution,  gentleness,  and  disjias- 
sionate  candour,  stand  out  in  strong  relief  contrasted 
with  his  colleagues,  but  make  a  faint  impression 
compared  with  the  steadfast  and  uncompromising 
principles  of  the  Apostles,  who  after  undergoing  an 
illegal  scourging,  went  forth  rejoicing  that  they 
were  counted  worthy  to  suffer  shame  for  the  name 
of  Jesus.  Peter  is  not  specially  named  in  connexion 
with  the  appointment  of  deacons,  an  important  step 
in  the  organization  of  the  Church ;  but  when  the 
Gospel  was  first  preached  beyond  the  precincts  of 
Judea,  he  and  St.  John  were  at  once  sent  by  the 
Apostles  to  confirm  the  converts  at  Samaria,  a 
very-  important  statement  at  this  critical  point, 
proving  clearly  his  subordination  to  the  whole  body, 
of  which  he  was  the  most  active  and  able  member. 

Up  to  that  time  it  may  be  said  that  the  Apostles 
had  one  great  work,  viz.,  to  convince  the  Jews  that 
Jesus  was  the  Messiah;  in  that  work  St.  Peter  was 
the  master  buildei-,  the  whole  structure  rested  upon 
the  doctrines  of  which  he  was  the  principal  teacher : 
hitherto  no  words  but  his  are  specially  recorded  by 
the  writer  of  the  Acts.  Henceforth  he  remains 
prominent,  but  not  exclusively  prominent,  among 
the  propagators  of  the  Gospel.  At  Samaria  he  and 
John  established  the  precedent  for  the  most  im- 
portant rite  not  expressly  enjoined  in  Holy  Writ, 
viz.,  confirmation,  which  the  Western  Church'  has 


touching  the  object  of  the  writer  of  the  Acts ;  identical  in 
spirit,  as  issuing  from  the  same  source. 

'  Not  so  the  Eastern,  which  combines  the  act  with 
baptism,  and  leaves  it  to  the  officiating  priest.  It  is  one 
of  the  points  upon  whicti  Photius  and  other  Eastern  con- 
ti'oversialists  lay  special  stress. 


PETER 

always  held  to  belong  exclusively  to  the  functions 
of  bishops  as  successoi's  to  the  ordinary  powers  of 
the  Apostolate.  Then  also  St.  Peter  was  confronted 
with  Simon  JIagus,  the  first  teacher  of  heresy. 
[Simon  JIagus.]  As  in  the  case  of  Ananias  he  had 
denounced  the  first  sin  against  holiness,  so  in  this 
case  he  first  declared  the  penalty  due  to  the  sin 
called  after  Simon's  name.  About  three  years  later 
(compare  Acts  ix.  26,  and  Gal.  i.  17,  18)  we  have 
two  accounts  of  the  first  meeting  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Paul.  In  the  Acts  it  is  stated  generally  that 
Saul  WAS  at  first  distrusted  by  the  disciples,  and 
received  by  the  Apostles  upon  the  recommendation 
of  Barnabas.  From  the  Galatians  we  learn  that 
St  Paul  went  to  Jerusalem  specially  to  see  Peter ; 
that  he  abode  with  iiim  fifteen  days,  and  that  James 
was  the  only  other  Apostle  present  at  the  time.  It 
is  important  to  note  that  this  account,  which  while 
it  establishes  the  independence  of  St.  Paul,  marks 
the  position  of  St.  Peter  as  the  most  eminent  of  the 
Apostles,  rests  not  on  the  authority  of  the  writer 
of  the  Acts,  but  on  that  of  St.  Paul — as  though  it 
were  intended  to  obviate  all  possible  misconceptions 
touching  the  mutual  relations  of  the  Apostles  of  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Gentiles.  This  interview  was 
followed  by  other  events  marking  Peter's  posi- 
tion— a  general  apostolical  tour  of  visitation  to  the 
Churches  hitherto  established  (Siepx^l^fvov  Sia 
■KOiVTwv,  Acts  ix.  32),  in  the  course  of  whicli  two 
gi-eat  miracles  were  wrought  on  Aeneas  and  Tabitha, 
mid  in  connexion  with  whicli  the  most  signal  trans- 
action after  the  day  of  Pentecost  is  recorded,  the 
baptism  of  Cornelius.  That  was  the  crown  and 
consummation  of  Peter's  ministry.  Peter  who  had 
first  preached  the  resurrection  to  the  Jews,  baptized 
the  first  convei'ts,  confirmed  the  first  Samaritans, 
now,  without  the  advice  or  co-operation  of  any  of 
his  colleagues,  under  direct  communication  from 
heaven,  first  threw  down  the  barrier  which  sepa- 
rated proselytes  of  the  gate"  from  Israelites,  first 
establishing  principles  whicli  in  their  gradual  appli- 
cation and  full  development  issued  in  the  complete 
fusion  of  the  Gentile  and  Hebrew  elements  in  the 
Church.  Tlie  narrative  of  this  event,  which  stands 
alone  in  minute  circumstantiality  of  incidents,  and 
accumulation  of  supernatural  agency,  is  twice  re- 
corded by  St.  Luke.  The  chief  points  to  be  noted 
are,  first  the  peculiar  fitness  of  Cornelius,  both  as  a 
representative  of  Iteman  force  and  nationality,  and 
as  a  devout  and  liberal  worshipper,  to  be  a  recipient 
of  such  privileges;  and  secondly,  the  state  of  the 
Apostle's  own  mind.  Whatever  may  have  been  his 
hopes  or  fears  toucliing  tlie  lieathen,  the  idea  had 
cert^iinly  not  yet  crossed  him  that  they  could  be- 
come Christians  without  first  becoming  Jews.  As 
a  loyal  and  l)elieving  Hebrew  he  could  not  contem- 
plate the  removal  of  Gentile  disqualifications,  with- 
out a  distinct  assurance  that  the  enactments  of  the 
law  which  concerneil  them  were  abrogated  by  the 
divine  legislator.  The  vision  could  not  thciclbre 
have  been  the  jnoduct  of  a  subjective  impression. 
It  was,  strictly  speaking,  objective,  presented  to  liis 
mind  by  an  external  intiuence.  Yet  the  will  of  the 
Apostle  was  not  controlled,  it  was  simply  enlight- 
ened. The  intimation  in  the  state  of  trance  did  not 
at  once  overcome  his  reluctance.  It  was  not  until 
his  consciousness  was  fully  restored,  and  lie  had 
well  considered  the  me:ining  of  the  vision,  tiiat  he 
learned  that  the  distinction  of  cleiinness  and  unclean- 


PETEE 


803 


ncss  in  outwara  things  belonged  to  a  temporary 
dispensation.  It  was  no  mere  acquiescence  in  a 
positive  command,  but  the  development  of  a  spirit 
full  of  generous  impulses,  which  found  utterance 
in  the  words  spoken  by  Peter  on  that  occasion — 
both  in  the  presence  of  Cornelius,  and  afterwards 
at  Jerusalem.  His  conduct  gave  great  oHence  to 
all  his  countrymen  (Acts  xi.  2),  and  it  needed  all 
his  authority,  corroborated  by  a  special  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  induce  his  fellow-Apostles 
to  recognize  the  propriety  of  this  gieat  act,  in 
which  both  he  and  they  saw  an  earnest  of  the  ad- 
mission of  Gentiles  into  the  Church  on  the  single 
condition  of  spiritual  repentance.  The  establish- 
ment of  a  Church  in  great  part  of  Gentile  origin  at 
Antioch,  and  the  mission  of  Barnabas,  between  whose 
family  and  Peter  there  were  the  bonds  of  near  inti- 
macy, set  the  seal  upon  the  work  thus  inaugurated 
by  St.  Peter. 

This  transaction  was  soon  followed  by  the  im- 
prisonment of  our  Apostle.  Herod  Agrippa  having 
first  tested  the  state  of  feeling  at  Jerusalem  by 
the  execution  of  James,  one  of  the  most  eminent 
Apostles,  arrested  Peter.  The  hatred,  which  at 
that  time  first  showed  itself  as  a  popular  feeling, 
may  most  pi'obably  be  attributed  chiefiy  to  the 
offence  given  by  Peter's  conduct  towards  Cornelius. 
His  miraculous  deliverance  marks  the  close  of  this 
second  great  period  of  his  ministiy.  The  special 
work  assigned  to  him  was  completed.  He  had 
founded  the  Church,  opened  its  gates  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  and  distinctly  laid  down  the  conditions  of 
admission.  From  that  time  we  have  no  continuous 
history  of  Peter.  It  is  quite  clear  that  he  retained 
his  rank  as  the  chief  Apostle,  equally  so,  that  he 
neither  exercised  nor  claimed  any  right  to  control 
their  proceedings.  At  Jerusalem  the  government 
of  the  Church  devolved  ujion  James  the  brother  of 
our  Lord.  In  other  jilaces  Peter  seems  to  have 
confined  his  ministrations  to  his  countrymen — as 
Apostle  of  the  circumcision.  He  left  Jerusalem, 
but  it  is  not  said  where  he  went.  Certainly  not  to 
Rome,  where  there  are  no  traces  of  his  presence 
before  the  la.st  years  of  his  life ;  he  probably  re- 
mained in  Judea,  visiting  and  confirming  the 
Churches ;  some  old  but  not  trustworthy  traditions 
represent  him  as  preaching  in  Caesarea  and  other 
cities  on  the  western  coast  of  Palestine  ;  six  years 
later  we  find  hmi  once  more  at  Jerusalem,  when 
the  Apostles  and  elders  came  together  to  considei' 
the  question  whether  converts  should  be  circum- 
ciseil.  Peter  took  the  lead  in  that  discussion,  and 
urged  with  remarkable  cogency  tlie  principles  settled 
in  the  case  of  Cornelius.  Purifying  faith  and  saving 
grace  (xv.  9  and  11)  remove  all  distinctions  be- 
tween believers.  His  arguments,  adopted  mid  en- 
forced by  James,  decided  that  question  at  once  and 
for  ever.  It  is,  however,  to  be  remarked,  that  on 
that  occasion  he  exercised  no  one  power  which  Ro- 
manists hold  to  be  inalienably  attached  to  the  chair 
of  Peter.  He  did  not  preside  at  the  meeting;  he 
neither  summoned  nor  dismissed  it;  he  neither  col- 
lected the  suflVages,  nor  ])ronouiiced  the  decision.* 

It  is  a  disputed  point  whether  the  meeting  I>e- 
tween  St.  Paul  and  St.  Petei-,  of  whicli  we  have  .in 
account  in  the  Galatians  (ii.  1-lU)  took  place  at 
this  time.  The  great  majority  of  critics  believe 
that  it  did,  and  this  hypothesis,  though  not  with- 
out difficulties,  seems  moi-e  probable  than  any  other 


"  A  term  to  which  objection  has  hern  made,  but  shewn 
by  .Jost  to  be  strictly  correct. 


»  In  accordance  with  this  representation.  St.  I'aul  ni'.mcs 
James  Iwl'ore  Cephas  ami  John  (Gal.  ii.  9). 

3  F  2 


804 


PETER 


which  has  been  suggested.y  The  only  point  of  real  im- 
portance was  cei-tainly  determined  before  the  Apostles 
separated,  the  work  of  converting  the  Gentiles  being 
henceforth  specially  entrusted  to  Paul  and  Barnabas, 
while  the  charge  of  preaching  to  the  circumcision 
was  assigned  to  the  elder  Apostles,  and  more  parti- 
cularly to  Peter  (Gal.  ii.  7-9).  This  arrangement 
cannot,  however,  have  been  an  exclusive  one.  St. 
Paul  always  addressed  himself  first  to  the  Jews  in 
every  city  :  Peter  and  his  old  colleagues  undoubt- 
edly admitted  and  sought  to  make  converts  among 
the  Gentiles.  It  may  have  been  in  full  force  only 
wlien  the  old  and  new  Apostles  resided  in  the  same 
city.  Such  at  least  was  the  case  at  Antioch,  where 
St.  Peter  went  soon  afterwards.  There  the  painful 
collision  took  place  between  the  two  Apostles ;  the 
most  remarkable,  and,  in  its  bearings  upon  contro- 
versies at  ci'itical  periods,  one  of  the  most  important 
events  in  the  history  of  the  Cluii-ch.  St.  Peter  at 
first  applied  the  principles  which  he  had  lately 
defended,  carrying  with  him  the  whole  Apostolic 
body,  and  on  his  anival  at  Antioch  ate  with  the 
Gentiles,  thus  showing  that  he  believed  all  cere- 
monial distinctions  to  be  abolished  by  the  Gospel : 
in  that  he  went  far  beyond  the  strict  letter  of  the 
injunctions  issuer!  by  the  Council.^  That  step  was 
marked  and  condemned  by  certain  members  of  the 
Cliui'ch  of  Jerusalem  sent  by  James.  It  appeared 
to  them  one  thing  to  recognize  Gentiles  as  fellow 
Christians,  another  to  admit  them  to  social  inter- 
course, whereby  ceremonial  defilement  would  be 
contracted  luider  the  law  to  which  all  the  Apostles, 
Barnabas  and  Paul  included,  acknowledged  alle- 
giance.^ Peter,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  circumcision, 
fearing  to  give  offence  to  those  who  were  his  special 
charge,  at  once  gave  up  the  point,  suppressed  or 
disguised  his  feelings,*"  and  separated  himself  not 
fi-om  communion,  but  from  social  intercourse  with 
the  Gentiles.  St.  Paul,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, saw  clearly  the  consequences  likely  to  ensue, 
and  could  ill  brook  the  misapplication  of  a  rule 
often  laid  down  in  his  own  writings  concerning 
compliance  with  the  prejudices  of  weak  brethren. 
He  held  that  Peter  was  infringing  a  great  principle, 
withstood  him  to  the  face,  and  using  the  same  ar- 
guments which  Peter  had  urged  at  the  Council, 
pronounced  his  conduct  to  be  indefensible.  The 
statement  that  Peter  compelled  the  Gentiles  to 
Judaize,  probably  means,  not  that  he  enjoined  cir- 
cumcision, but  that  his  conduct,  if  persevered  in, 
would  have  that  effect,  since  they  would  naturally 
take  any  steps  which  might  remove  the  barriers  to 
familiar  intercourse  with  the  first  Apostles  of  Christ. 
Peter  was  wrong,  but  it  was  an  error  of  judgment ; 
an  act  contrary  to  his  own  feelings  and  wishes,  in 


PETER 

deference  to  those  whom  he  lookea  upon  as  repre- 
senting the  mind  of  the  Church  ;  that  he  was 
actuated  by  selfishness,  national  pi'ide,  or  any  re- 
mains of  superstition,  is  neither  asseiled  nor  implied 
in  the  strong  censure  of  St.  Paul :  nor,  much  as  we 
must  admire  the  earnestness  and  wisdom  of  St. 
Paul,  whose  clear  and  vigorous  intellect  was  in  this 
case  stimulated  by  anxiety  for  his  own  special 
charge,  the  Gentile  Church,  should  we  overlook 
Peter's  singular  humility  in  submitting  to  public 
reproof  from  one  so  much  his  junior,  or  his  mag- 
nanimity both  in  adopting  St.  Paul's  conclusions 
(as  we  must  infer  that  he  did  from  the  absence  of 
all  trace  of  continued  resistance),  and  in  remaining 
on  terms  of  brotherly  communion  (as  is  testified  by 
his  own  written  words),  to  the  end  of  his  life  (1  Pet. 
V.  10  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  15,  16). 

From  this  time  until  the  date  of  his  Epistles, 
we  have  no  distinct  notices  in  Scripture  of  Peter's 
abode  or  work.  The  silence  may  be  accounted  for 
by  the  fact  that  from  that  time  the  great  work 
of  propagating  the  Gospel  was  committed  to  the 
mai'vellous  energies  of  St.  Paul.  Peter  was  pro- 
bably employed  for  the  most  part  in  building  up, 
and  completing  the  organization  of  Christian  com- 
munities in  Palestine  and  the  adjoining  districts. 
There  is,  however,  strong  reason  to  believe  that 
he  visited  Corinth  at  an  early  period ;  this  seems 
to  be  implied  in  several  passages  of  St.  Paul's 
first  epistle  to  that  Church,<=  and  it  is  a  natural 
inference  from  the  statements  of  Clement  of  Rome 
(1  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  c.  4).  The  fact 
is  positively  asserted  by  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Co- 
rinth (a.d.  180  at  the  latest),  a  man  of  excellent 
judgment,  who  was  not  likely  to  be  misinformed, 
nor  to  make  such  an  assertion  lightly  in  an 
epistle  addressed  to  the  Bishop  and  Church  of 
Rome.^  The  reference  to  collision  between  paities 
who  claimed  Peter,  Apollos,  Paul,  and  even  Christ 
for  their  chiefs,  involves  no  opposition  between  the 
Apostles  themselves,  such  as  the  fabulous  Cle- 
mentines and  modem  infidelity  assume.  The  name 
of  Peter  as  founder,  or  joint  founder,  is  not  asso- 
ciated with  any  local  Church  save  those  of  Corinth, 
Antioch,'^  or  llome,  b}'  early  ecclesiastical  tradition. 
That  of  Alexandria  may  have  been  established  by 
St.  Mark  alter  Peter's  death.  Ti]at  Peter  preached 
the  Gospel  in  the  counti'ies  of  Asia,  mentioned  in 
his  first  Epistle,  appears  from  Origen's  own  words ' 
{KiKripvKivai  toi.Kiv)  to  be  a  mere  conjecture,  not 
in  itself  improbable,  but  of  little  weight  in  the 
absence  of  all  positive  evidence,  and  of  all  personal 
reminiscences  in  the  Epistle  itself.  From  that 
Epistle,  however,  it  is  to  be  infen-ed  that  towards 
the  end  of  his  life,  St.  Peter  either  visited,  or  resided 


y  Liinge  (^Das  apostoUscke.  Zeitalter,  ii.  378)  fixes  the 
date  iil)out  three  years  after  the  Council.  Wieseler  has  a 
long  excursus  to  shew  that  it  must  have  occurred  after 
St.  Paul's  second  apostolic  journey.  Ho  Rives  some  weighty 
reasons,  but  wholly  fails  in  the  attempt  to  account  for  tlie 
presence  of  Barnabas,  a  fatal  objecticm  to  his  theory.  See 
Der  Brkfan  die  Galater,  Excursu.<:,  p.  579.  On  the  other 
side  are  Theodoret,  Pearson,  Eichhom,  Olshausen,  Meyer, 
Neand"r,  Howson,  Schaff,  &c. 

I  This  decisively  overthrows  the  whole  system  of  Baur, 
which  rests  upon  an  assumed  antagonism  between  St.  Paul 
and  tlie  elder  Apostles,  especially  St.  Peter.  St.  Paul 
grounds  his  reproof  upon  the  inconsistency  of  Peter,  not 
upon  his  judaizing  tendencies. 

»  See  Acts  xviii.  ls-21,  xx.  16,  xxi.  18-24,  passages 
borne  out  by  numerous  statements  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles. 

b  VTrdcrreXXev,    crvrvT^expiOriaav,    iiTroKptcrts,    must    be 


understood  in  this  sense.  It  was  not  hypocrisy  in  the 
sense  of  an  affectation  of  lioliness,  but  in  that  of  an  outr 
ward  deference  to  prejudices  which  certainly  neither  Peter 
nor  Barnabas  any  longer  shared. 

=  See  Rxjuith,  Bell.  Sacrae,  i.  179. 

d  The  attempt  to  set  aside  the  evidence  of  Dionysius, 
on  the  ground  that  he  makes  an  evident  mistake  in  attri- 
buting the  foundation  of  the  Corinthian  Church  to  Peter 
and  Paul,  is  futile.  If  Peter  took  any  pait  in  organizing 
the  Church,  he  would  be  spoken  of  as  a  joint  founder. 
Schaff  supposes  that  Peter  may  have  first  visited  Corinth 
on  his  way  to  Rome  towards  the  end  of  his  life. 

<!  It  is  to  be  observed  that  even  St.  Leo  represents  the 
relation  of  St.  Peter  to  Antioch  as  precisely  the  same  with 
that  in  which  he  stands  to  Rome  (Kp.  92). 

f  Origen.ap.  Euseb.  iii.  1.  adopted  by  Epiphanius  (Haer. 
xxvii )  and  Jerome  (^Calal.  c.  1). 


PETER 

for  some  time  at  Babylon,  which  at  that  time,  and 
for  some  hundreds  of  yeai-s  afterwards  was  a  chief 
seat  of  Jewish  culture.  This  of  course  depends 
upon  tlie  assumption,  which  on  the  whole  seems  s 
most  probable,  that  the  word  Babylon  is  not  used 
as  a  mystic  designation  of  Rome,  but  as  a  proper 
name,  and  that  not  of  an  obscure  city  in  Kgypt,  but 
of  the  ancient  capitcil  of  the  East.  There  were 
many  inducements  for  such  a  choice  of  abode.  The 
Jewish  families  formed  there  a  separate  community,'' 
they  were  rich,  prosperous,  and  had  established  set- 
tlements in  many  districts  of  Asia  Jlinor.  Their 
language,  probably  a  mi.\ture  of  Hebrew  and  Naba- 
tean,  musf  have  borne  a  near  aflinity  to  the  Galilean 
dialect.  They  were  on  far  more  familiar  terms 
than  in  other  countries  with  their  heathen  neigh- 
bours, while  their  intercourse  with  Judea  was 
carried  on  without  intermission.  Christianity  cer- 
tainly made  considerable  progress  at  an  early  time 
in  that  and  the  adjoining  districts,  the  great  Chris- 
tian schools  at  Edessa  and  Nisibis  probably  owed 
their  origin  to  the  influence  ol'  Peter,  the  general 
tone  of  the  wntei's  of  that  school  is  what  is  now 
commonly  designated  as  Petiine.  It  is  no  unrea- 
sonable supposition  that  the  establishment  of  Chris- 
tianity in  those  districts  may  have  been  specially 
connected  with  the  residence  of  Peter  at  Babylon. 
At  that  time  there  must  have  been  some  communi- 
cations between  the  two  great  Apostles,  Peter  and 
Paul,  thus  stationed  at  the  two  extremities  of  the 
Christian  world.  St.  JIark,  who  was  certainly 
employed  about  that  time  by  St.  Paul,  was  with  St. 
Peter  when  he  wrote  the  Epistle.  Silvanus,  St. 
Paul's  chosen  companion,  was  the  bearer,  probably 
the  amanuensis  of  St.  Peter's  Epistle  :  not  impro- 
bably sent  to  Peter  from  Rome,  and  charged  by 
him  to  deliver  that  epistle,  written  to  support  Paul's 
authority,  to  the  Churches  founded  by  that  Apostle 
on  his  return. 

More  important  in  its  bearings  upon  later  con- 
troversies is  the  question  of  St.  Peter's  connexion 
with  Rome. 

It  may  be  considered  as  a  settled  point  that  he 
did  not  visit  Rome  before  the  last  year  of  his  life, 
Too  muc'n  stress  may  perhaps  be  laid  on  the  tiict 
that  there  is  no  notice  of  St.  Peter's  labours  or 
piesence  in  that  city  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Rom;ms  ; 
but  that  negative  evidence  is  not  counterbalanced 
by  any  statement  of  undoubted  anticjuity.  The 
date  given  by  Eusebius'  rests  upon  a  misuilcula- 
tion,  and  is  irrecoucileable  with  the  notices  of  St. 


PETER 


805 


g  On  the  other  band,  the  all  but  unanimous  opinion  of 
ancient  commentators  that  Rome  is  designated  has  been 
adopted,  and  maintained  with  great  ingenuity  and  some 
very  strong  arguments,  by  SchalT  ((kscliichle  iIkt  Christ- 
lichen  Kiicke,  p.  30(1),  Noander,  Stclger,  De  Wette,  and 
Wiesclrr.  Among  ourselves,  I'carson  taUes  the  name 
Biibyton  literally,  though  with  some  difference  as  to  the 
place  so  named. 

I"  For  many  interesting  and  valuable  notices  see  Jost, 
GcschichU  des  JudetHhums,  I.  3;i7,  li.  127. 

'  He  gives  A.i>.  '12  In  the  Chronicon  (i.  e.  in  the  Arme- 
nian text),  and  says  that  Peter  remained  at  Home  twenty 
years,  in  this  he  is  followed  by  Jerome,  Calal.  c.  1  (who 
gives  twenty-five  years),  and  by  most  Roman  Catholic 
writers. 

k  Thiersch  is  the  only  exception.  He  belongs  to  the 
Irvingite  sect,  which  can  scarcely  be  calle<l  IVotestant. 
See  V'er.sucA,  p.  104.  His  ingenious  arguments  are  answered 
by  Lange,  JJas  aposlolisdie  Zeitaiter,  p.  381,  and  by  Schaif, 
Kirdwtigcscliiclite,  p.  3Uij. 

"I  The  most  ingenious  attempt  Is  that  of  Windischmann, 
Vindiciae  I'etnnae,  p.  112  f.    lie  assumes  that  I'etir  went  | 


Peter  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Protestant 
critics,  with  scarcely  one  exception,''  are  unanimous 
upon  this  point,  and  Roman  controversialists  are  far 
fiom  being  agreed  in  their  attempts™  to  remove 
the  difficulty. 

The  fact,  however,  of  St.  Peter's  martvrdom  at 
Rome  rests  upon  very  different  grounds.  The  evi- 
dence for  it  is  complete,  while  there  is  a  total 
absence  of  any  conti-ary  statement  in  the  wiitings 
of  the  early  Fathers.  We  have  in  the  fii'st  place 
the  cei-tainty  of  his  martyrdom,  in  our  Lord's  own 
prediction  (John  xxi.  18,  19).  Clement  of  Rome, 
writing  before  the  end  of  the  first  century,  speaks 
of  it,"  but  does  not  mention  the  place,  that  being 
of  course  well-knovi'n  to  his  readers.  Ignatius,  in 
the  undoubtedly  genuine  Epistle  to  the  Romsns 
(ch.  iv.),  speaks  of  St.  Peter  in  terms  which  imply 
a  special  connexion  with  theii  Church.  Other 
early  notices  of  less  weight  coincide  with  this,  as 
that  of  Papias  (Euseb.  ii.  15),  and  the  apocryphal 
Praedicatio  Petri,  quoted  by  Cyprian.  In  the 
second  century,  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  in  the  Epistle 
to  Soter,  bishop  of  Rome  (ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  25), 
states,  as  a  fact  universally  known  and  accounting 
for  the  intimate  relations  between  Corinth  and 
Rome,  that  Peter  and  Paul  both  taught  in  Italy, 
and  suffered  martyrdom  about  the  same  time." 
Irenaeus,  who  was  connected  with  St.  John,  being 
a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  a  hearer  of  that  Apostle, 
and  thoroughly  conversant  with  Roman  matters, 
bears  distinct  witness  to  St.  Peter's  presence  at 
Rome  [Ado.  Haer.  iii.  1  and  3).  It  is  incredible 
that  he  should  have  been  misinformed.  In  the 
next  century  there  is  the  testimony  of  Caius,  the 
liberal  and  learned  Roman  pi-esbyter  (who  speaks 
of  St.  Peter's  tomb  in  the  Vatican),  that  of  Origen, 
TertuUian,  and  of  the  ante-  and  post-  Nicene  Fathers, 
without  a  single  exception.  In  short,  the  Churches 
most  nearly  connected  with  Rome,  and  those  least 
atiecteJ  by  its  influence,  which  was  as  yet  but  in- 
considerable in  the  East,  concur  in  the  statement 
that  Peter  was  a  joint  founder  of  that  Church,  and 
sufiered  death  in  that  city.  What  the  early  Fathers 
do  not  assert,  and  indeed  implicitly  deny,  is  that 
Peter  was  the  sole  Founder  or  resident  head  of  that 
Church,  or  that  the  See  of  Rome  derived  from  him 
any  claim  to  supremacy :  at  the  utmost  they  place 
him  on  a  footing  of  equality  with  St.  Paul.P  That 
fact  is  sufficient  for«ill  purposes  of  fair  controversy. 
The  denial  of  the  statements  resting  on  such  evi- 
dence seems  almost  to  indicate  an  uneasy  conscious- 


to  Rome  immediately  after  his  deliverance  from  prison 
(Acts  xii.),  i.  e.  \j>.  44,  and  left  in  consequence  of  the 
Claudian  persecution  betv.-ecn  a.d.  4  9  and  51. 

"  /tiapTvp>j(70S  eTTOpevSr)  els  t'ov  6(|)«iAdnei'0i'  TOTTOr  tip 
oofijs  (1  Cor.  v.).  The  first  word  might  sinqily  mean  "  bore 
public  witness;"  but  the  last  arc  conclusive. 

o  One  of  the  most  striking  instances  of  the  hypercritical 
scepticism  of  the  Tiibingen  school  is  Baur's  attempt  to 
prove  that  this  distinct  and  positive  statemfnt  was  a 
mere  inference  from  the  epistle  of  Clement.  Ths  inter- 
course between  the  two  churches  was  unbroken  from  the 
Apostles'  times. 

p  Cloteler  has  collected  a  large  niunber  of  passages  from 
the  early  Fathers,  in  which  the  name  of  I'aul  precedes 
that  of  i'eter  (I'at.  Apost.  i.  414  ;  see  also  Valcsius,  Eus. 
//.  K.  iil.  -21).  Fabricius  observes  that  this  is  the  general 
usage  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  It  is  also  to  be  remarked 
that  when  the  Fathers  of  the  4lh-and  Tith  centuries- for 
instimce.  Chrysostom  and  Augusline— use  the  words 
6  'AtrdcTToAo?,  or  j\postolus,  they  mean  I'aul,  not  Peter. 
A  very  weighty  fact. 


806 


PETER 


ness,  ti'uly  remarkable  in  those  who  believe  that 
they  have,  and  who  in  fact  really  have,  irrefragable 
grounds  for  rejecting  the  pretensions  of  the  Papacy. 

The  time  and  manner  of  the  Apostle's  martyrdom 
are  less  certain.  The  early  writers  imply,  or  dis- 
tinctly state,  that  he  suffered  at,  or  about  the  same 
time  (Dionysius,  koto  rhv  avrhv  KatpSv)  with  St. 
Paul,  and  in  the  Neronian  persecution.  All  agree 
that  he  was  crucified,  a  point  sufficiently  determined 
by  our  Lord's  prophecy.  Origen  (ap.  Eus.  iii.  1), 
who  could  easily  ascertain  the  fact,  and  though 
fanciful  in  speculation,  is  not  inaccurate  in  histo- 
rical matters,  says  that  at  his  own  request  he  was 
crucified  with  his  head  downwards.  This  statement 
was  generally  received  by  Christian  antiquity:  nor 
does  it  seem  inconsistent  with  the  fervent  tempera- 
ment and  deep  humility  of  the  Apostle  to  have  chosen 
such  a  death  :  one,  moreover,  not  unlikely  to  have 
been  inflicted  in  mockery  by  the  instruments  of 
Nero's  wanton  and  ingenious  cruelty. 

The  legend  found  iu  St.  Ambrose  is  interesting, 
and  may  have  some  foundation  in  fact.  When  the 
persecution  began,  the  Christians  at  Rome,  anxious 
to  preserve  their  great  teacher,  persuaded  him  to 
flee,  a  course  which  tliey  had  Scriptural  warrant 
to  recommend,  and  he  to  follow  ;  but  at  the  gate 
he  met  our  Lord.  Lord,  whither  goest  thou  ? 
asked  the  Apostle,  I  go  to  Rome,  was  the  answer, 
there  once  more  to  be  crucified.  St.  Peter  well 
understood  the  meaning  of  those  words,  returned  at 
once  and  was  crucified.i 

Thus  closes  the  Apostle's  life.  Some  additional 
facts,  not  perhaps  unimportant,  may  be  accepted  on 
early  testimony.  From  St.  Paul's  words  it  may 
be  inferred  with  certainty  that  he  did  not  give 
up  the  ties  of  family  life  when  he  forsook  his  tem- 
poral calling.  His  wife  accompanied  him  in  his 
wanderings.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  a  writer  well 
informed  in  matters  of  ecclesiastical  interest,  and 
thoroughly  trustworthy,  says  (Strom,  iii.  p.  448) 
that  "  Peter  and  Philip  had  children,  and  that  both 
took  about  their  wives,  who  acted  as  their  coad- 
jutors in  ministering  to  women  at  their  own  homes; 
by  their  means  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord  penetrated 
without  scandal  into  the  privacy  of  women's  apart- 
ments." Peter's  wife  is  believed,  on  the  same  au- 
thority, to  have  sufi'ered  martyrdom,  and  to  have 
been  supported  in  the  hour  of  trial  by  her  husband's 
exhortation.  Some  critics  believe  that  she  is  referred 
to  iu  the  salutation  at  the  end  of  the  first  Epistle 
of  St.  Peter.  The  Apostle  is  said  to  have  employed 
interpreters.  Basilides,  an  early  Gnostic,  professed 
to  derive  his  system  from  Glaucias,  one  of  these 
interpreters.  This  shows  at  least  the  impression, 
that  the  Apostle  did  not  understand  Greek,  or  did 
not  speak  it  with  fluency.  Of  far  more  importance 
is  the  statement  that  St.  Mark  wrote  his  gospel 
under  the  teaching  of  Peter,  or  that  he  embodied  in 


1  See  Tillemont,  Mem.  i.  p.  187,  and  555.  He  shows 
that  tlje  account  of  Ambrose  (which  is  not  to  be  found  in 
the  Bcned.  edit.)  is  contrary  to  the  apocrvphal  legend. 
Later  writers  rather  value  it  as  reflecting  upon  St.  Peter's 
want  of  courage  or  constancy.  That  St.  Peter,  like  all 
good  men,  valued  his  life,  and  suffered  reluctantly,  may 
be  inferred  from  our  Lord's  words  (John  xxi.) ;  but  his 
flight  is  more  in  harmony  with  the  principles  of  a  Christian 
than  %vilful  exposure  to  persecution.  Origen  refers  to  the 
words  then  said  to  Imve  been  spoken  by  our  I^ord,  but 
quotes  an  apocryphal  work  (On  St.  Joint,  torn.  ii.). 

■^  Papias  and  Clem.  Alex.,  referred  to  by  Eusebius, 
IT.  E.  li.  15;  TertuUian,  c.  Marc.  iv.  c.  5;  Irenaeus,  iii.  1, 
and  iv.  9.    Petavius  (on  Epiphanius,  p.  428)  observes  that 


PETER 

that  gospel  the  substance  of  our  Apostle's  oral 
instructions.  This  statement  rests  upon  such  an 
amount  of  external  evidence,'  and  is  corroliorated 
by  so  many  internal  indications,  that  they  would 
scarcely  be  questioned  in  the  absence  of  a  strong 
theological  bias.  The  fact  is  doubly  important  in 
its  bearings  upon  the  Gospel,  and  upon  the  cha- 
racter of  our  Apostle.  Chrysostom,  who  is  fol- 
lowed by  the  most  judicious  commentators,  seems 
first  to  have  drawn  attention  to  the  fact,  that  in 
St.  Mark's  gospel  every  defect  in  Peter's  character 
and  conduct  is  brought  out  clearly,  without  the 
slightest  extenuation,  while  many  noble  acts  and 
peculiar  marks  of  favour  are  either  omitted,  or 
stated  with  far  le?s  force  than  by  any  other  Evan- 
gelist. Indications  of  St.  Peter's  influence,  even  in 
St.  Mark's  style,  much  less  pure  than  that  of  St. 
Luke,  are  traced  by  modern  criticism.' 

The  only  written  documents  which  St.  Peter  has 
left,  are  the  First  Epistle,  about  which  no  doubt  has 
ever  been  entertained  in  the  Church  ;  and  the  Second, 
which  has  both  in  early  times,  and  in  our  own,  been 
a  subject  of  earnest  controversy. 

FiKST  Epistle. — The  external  evidence  of  authen- 
ticity is  of  the  strongest  kind.  Referred  to  in  the 
Second  Epistle  (iii.  1 )  ;  known  to  Polycarp,  and  fi-e- 
quently  alluded  to  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippiaus  ; 
recognized  by  Papias  fap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39) ; 
repeatedly  quoted  by  Irenaeus,  Clemens  of  Alex- 
andria, TertuUian,  and  Origen  ;  it  was  accepted 
without  hesitation  by  the  universal  Church.'  The 
internal  evidence  is  equally  strong.  Schwegler  the 
most  reckless,  and  De  Wette  the  most  vacillating 
of  modern  critics,  stand  almost  alone  in  their  denial 
of  its  authenticity. 

It  was  addressed  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  Slinor, 
which  had  for  the  most  part  been  founded  by  St. 
Paul  and  his  companions.  Supposing  it  to  have 
been  written  at  Babylon  (see  above),  it  is  a  pro- 
bable conjecture  tliat  Silvanus,  by  whom  it  was 
transmitted  to  those  Churches,  had  joined  St.  Peter 
after  a  tour  of  visitation,  either  in  pursuance 
of  instructions  frorfl  St.  Paul,  then  a  prisoner  at 
Rome,  or  iu  the  capacity  of  a  minister  of  high 
authority  in  the  Church,  and  that  his  account  of 
the  condition  of  the  Christians  in  those  districts  de- 
termined the  Apostle  to  write  the  Epistle.  From 
the  absence  of  personal  salutations,  and  other  indi- 
cations, it  may  perhaps  be  inferred  that  St.  Peter 
had  not  hitherto  visited  the  Churches  ;  but  it  is 
certain  that  he  was  thoroughly  acquainted  both 
with  their  external  circumstances  and  spiritual  state. 
It  is  clear  that  Silvanus  is  not  regarded  by  St. 
Peter  as  one  of  his  own  coadjutors,  but  as  one 
whose  personal  character  he  had  sufficient  oppor- 
tunity of  appreciating  (v.  12).  Such  a  testimonial 
as  the  Apostle  gives  to  the  soundness  of  his  faith, 
would  of  course  have  the  greatest  weight  with  the 


Papias  derived  his  information  from  John  the  Presbyter. 
For  other  passages  see  Fabricius  (Bibl.  Gr.  torn.  lit.  132). 
The  siight  discrepancy  between  Eusebius  and  Papias  indi- 
cates independent  sources  of  information. 

*  Gieseler,  quoted  by  Davidson. 

«  No  importance  can  be  attached  to  the  omission  in  the 
mutilated  fragment  on  the  Canon,  published  by  Muratori. 
See  Routli,  Eell.  Sac.  i.  396,  and  the  note  of  Freindaller, 
which  Routh  quotes,  p.  424.  Theodorus  of  Mopsnestia, 
.a  shrewd  but  rash  critic,  Is  said  to  have  rejected  all,  or 
some,  of  the  Catholic  epistles;  but  the  statement  is  ambi- 
guous. See  Davidson  {hit.  iii.  391),  whor.e  translation  is 
incorrect. 


PETER 

Hebrew  Christians,  to  wliom  the  Epistle  appears  to 
have  been  specially,  tliouwli  iiotesclusively  addressed." 
The  assumption  that  Silvanus  was  employed  in  the 
composition  of  the  I'^pistle  is  not  borne  out  by  the 
expression,  "  by  Silvanus,  I  have  written  unto  you," 
such  words  accoi-ding  to  ancient  usage  applying  rather 
to  the  bearer  than  to  the  writer  or  amanuensis. 
Still  it  is  highly  jirobable  that  Silvanus,  considering 
his  rank,  character,  and  special  connexion  with  those 
Churches,  and  with  their  great  Apostle  and  founder, 
would  be  cousulteil  by  St.  Peter  throughout,  and 
that  they  would  together  read  the  Epistles  of  St. 
I'aul,  especially  those  aildressed  to  the  Ciiurches  in 
those  districts:  thus,  partly  with  direct  intention, 
partly  it  may  be  unconsciously,  a  Pauline  colouring, 
amounting  in  jiassages  to  something  like  a  studied 
imitation  of  St.  I'aul's  representations  of  Christian 
truth,  may  have  been  introduced  into  the  Epistle. 
It  has  been  observed  above  that  there  is  good  reason 
to  suppose  that  St.  Peter  was  in  the  habit  of  em- 
ploying an  interpreter  ;  nor  is  there  anything  incon- 
sistent with  his  position  or  character  in  the  suppo- 
sition that  Silvanus,  perhaps  also  St.  Mark,  may 
have  assisted  him  in  giving  expression  to  the  thoughts 
suggested  to  him  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  We  have  thus 
at  any  rate,  a  not  unsatisfactory  solution  of  the 
difficulty  arising  from  correspondences  both  of  style 
and  modes  of  thought  in  the  writings  of  two 
Apostles  who  differed  so  widely  in  gifts  and  acquire- 
ments." 

The  objects  of  the  Epistle,  as  deduced  from  its 
contents,  coincide  with  these  ;issumptions.  They 
were  : — 1.  To  comfort  and  strengthen  the  Christians 
in  a  season  of  severe  trial.  2.  To  enforce  the  prac- 
tical and  spiritual  duties  involved  in  their  calling. 
3.  To  warn  them  against  special  temptations  attached 
to  their  position.  4.  To  remove  all  doubt  as  to  the 
soundness  and  completeness  of  the  religious  system 
which  they  had  already  received.  Such  an  attesta- 
tion was  especially  needed  by  the  Hebrew  Christians, 
who  were  wont  to  appeal  from  St.  Paul's  authority 
to  that  of  the  elder  Apostles,  and  above  all  to  that 
of  Peter.  The  last,  which  is  })erhaps  the  very  pi-in- 
cipal  object,  is  kept  in  view  throughout  the  Epistle, 
and  is  distinctly  stated,  ch.  v.  ver.  12. 

These  objects  may  come  out  more  clearly  in  a 
brief  analysis. 

The  Epistle  begins  with  salutations  and  general 
description  of  Christians  (i.  ],  2),  followed  by  a 
statement  of  theii-  present  privileges  and  future  in- 
heritance {'-i-o)  ;  the  bearings  of  that  statement 
upon  their  conduct  under  persecution  (6-9);  re- 
ference, according  to  the  Aj)0stle's  wont,  to  pro- 
phecies concei'ning  both  the  suHljrings  of  C^hrist  and 
the  salvation  of  His  people  (10-12)  ;  exhortations 
based  upon  tiiose  promises  to  earnestness,  sobriety, 
hope,  obedience,  and  holiness,  as  results  of  know- 
ledge- of  redemption,  of  atonement  by  tlie  blood  of 
.lesus,  and  of  the  resurrection,  and  as  proofs  of  s])i- 
ritual  regeneration  by  the  wonl  of  (iod.  Peculiar 
stress  is  laid  upon  the  cardinal  graces  of  faith,  hope, 
and  brotherly  love,  each  connected  with  and  rest- 
ing upon  the  fiuidamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel 
(13-25).     Abstinence  from  the  spiritual  sins  most 

"  This  Is  tbe  general  opinion  of  the  ablest  commentators. 
Ttie  ancienta  were  nearly  unanimous  in  hoUliiiR  tliat  it 
was  written  lor  Hebrew  converts.  Hut  several  ]iassagcs 
are  eviileritly  meant  for  Gentiles:  e.  g.  i.  M,  IK  ;  li.  0,  lu  ; 
iii.  6  ;  iv.  ;t.  lliuss,  an  original  and  able  writer,  Is  almost 
alone  in  the  ojilnion  that  it  wius  adihesscii  cliielly  to 
Gentile  converts  (|i.  13."!).  He  takes  ndpoiKoi  and  Trap- 
en-i5T);u.oi  as  =  Q^lJi  Israelites  by  lalth,  not  by  ceremonial 


PETER 


807 


directly  opposed  to  those  graces  is  then  enforced 
(ii.  ])  ;  spiritual  growth  is  represented  as  dependent 
upon  the  nourishment  supplied  by  the  same  Word 
which  was  the  iustrument  of  regeneration  (2  3)  • 
and  then,  by  a  change  of  metaphor.  Christians  are 
represented  as  a  spiiitual  house,  collectively  and 
individually  as  living  stones,  and  royal  priests, 
elect,  and  brought  out  of  darkness  into  li«;ht  (4-10). 
This  portion  of  the  Epistle  is  singularTv  rich  in 
thought  and  expression,  and  bears  the  peculiar 
impress  of  the  Apostle's  mind,  in  which  Judaism  is 
spiritualized,  and  finds  its  full  development  in  Christ. 
From  this  condition  of  Christians,  and  more  directly 
from  the  iiict  that  they  are  thus  separated  from  the 
woi'ld,  pilgrims  and  sojourners,  St.  Peter  deduces 
an  entire  system  of  practical  and  relative  dutias, 
self-control,  care  of  leputation,  especially  for  the 
sake  of  Gentiles ;  submission  to  all  constituted 
authorities;  obligations  of  slaves,  ui-ged  with  re- 
markable earnestness,  and  founded  upon  the  example 
of  Christ  and  His  atoning  death  (11-25)  ;  and  duties 
of  wives  and  husbands  (iii.  1-7).  Then  generally 
all  Christian  graces  are  commended,  those  which 
pertain  to  Christian  brotherhood,  and  those  which 
are  especially  needed  in  tiines  of  persecution,  gentle- 
ness, forbearance,  and  submission  to  injmy  (8-17): 
all  the  precepts  being  based  on  imitation  of  Christ, 
with  warnings  from  the  history  of  the  deluge,  and 
with  special  reference  to  the  baptismal  covenant. 

lu  the  following  chapter  (iv.  1,  2)  the  analogy 
between  the  death  of  Christ  and  spiritual  mortifi- 
cation, a  topic  much  dwelt  on  by  St.  Paul,  is  uiged 
with  special  reference  to  the  sins  committed  "by 
Christians  before  conversion,  and  habitual  to  the 
(ientiles.  The  doctrine  of  a  future  judgment  is 
inculcated,  both  with  i-efereuce  to  their  heathen 
persecutors  as  a  motive  tor  endmance,  and  to  theii- 
own  conduct  as  an  incentive  to  sobriety,  watchful- 
ness, fervent  charity,  liberality  in  all  exteinal  acts 
of  kindness,  and  diligent  discharge  of  all  spiritual 
duties,  with  a  view  to  the  gloi-y  of  God  through 
Jesus  Christ  (3-11).  ^ 

This  Epistle  appears  at  the  first  draught  to  have 
terminated  here  with  the  doxology,  but  the  thought 
of  the  fiery  trial  to  which  the  Christians  were 
exposed  stirs  the  Apostle's  heart,  and  suggests  addi- 
tional exhortations.  Christians  are  taught  to  rejoice 
in  partaking  of  Christ's  sufferings,  lieing  thereby 
assured  of  sharing  His  glory,  which  even  in  this 
hfe  rests  upon  them,  and  is  especially  manil'ested 
in  their  innocence  and  endurance  of  persecution: 
judgment  must  come  first  to  cleanse  the  house  of 
(iod,  then  to  reach  the  disobedient :  suffering  accord- 
ing to  the  will  of  God,  they  may  commit  their  soids  to 
Him  in  well  doing  as  unto  a  faithful  Creator.  Faith 
and  hope  are  equally  conspicuous  in  these  exhorta- 
tions. The  Apostle  then  (v.  1-4)  addresses  the 
presbyters  of  the  Churches,  warning  them  as  one  of 
their  own  body,  as  a  witness  (/xaprvs)  of  Christ's 
suHerings,  and  partaker  of  future  glory,  against 
negligence,  covetousness,  and  love  of  ]iower:  the 
younger  members  he  exhorts  to  submission  and 
huinility,  and  concludes  this  part  with  a  warning 
against  their  spiritual  enemy,  and   a  solemn  and 

observance  (_mvht  nuch  dem  Cultus).  See  also  Weiss, 
Der  I'etrinisclie  Wirbeffriff,  p.  2S,  n.  2. 

'  ITiC  question  has  been  thoroiiglily  discussed  by  Hug, 
Kwald,  Bortholdt,  Weiss,  and  other  critics.  The  most 
striking  resemblances  are  iKiihups  1  I'et.  i.  3,  with  Kph.  i.  3- 
il.  IS.wilhKph.vl.  5;  iii.  I,  with  Kph.  v.  22;  and  v.  5,  wllh 
V.  21 :  but  allusions  nearly  us  distinct  an;  found  to  the  Ro- 
mans, Corinlhians,Colossians,rhc.ss;ilonian3,  and  Philemon. 


808 


PETER 


most  beautiful  prayer  to  the  God  of  all  grace. 
Lastly,  he  mentions  Silvanus  with  special  com- 
mendation, and  states  very  distinctly  what  we  have 
seen  reason  to  believe  was  a  principal  object  of  the 
Epistle,  viz.,  that  the  principles  inculcated  by  their 
former  teachers  were  sound,  the  ti-ue  grace  of  God, 
to  which  they  are  exhorted  to  adhere.y  A  salutation 
from  the  Church  in  Babylon  and  from  St.  Mark, 
with  a  parting  benediction,  closes  the  Epistle. 

The  harmony  of  such  teaching  with  that  of  St. 
Paul  is  sufficiently  obvious,  nor  is  the  general  ar- 
rangement or  mode  of  discussing  the  topics  unlike 
that  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles;  still  the  indi- 
cations of  originality  and  mdependence  of  thought 
are  at  least  equally  conspicuous,  and  the  Epistle  is 
full  of  what  the  Gospel  narrative  and  the  discourses 
in  the  Acts  prove  to  have  been  characteristic  pecu- 
liarities of  St.  Peter.  He  dwells  more  frequently 
than  St.  Paul  upon  the  future  manifestation  of 
Christ,  upon  which  he  bases  nearly  all  his  exhoita- 
tions  to  patience,  self-control,  and  the  discharge  of 
all  Christian  duties.  There  is  not  a  shadow  of 
opposition  here,  the  topic  is  not  neglected  by  St. 
Paul,  nor  does  St.  Peter  omit  the  Pauline  argument 
from  Christ's  sufferings ;  still  what  the  Germans 
call  the  eschatological  element  predominates  over  all 
others.  The  Apostle's  mind  is  full  of  one  thought, 
the  realization  of  Messianic  hopes.  While  St.  Paul 
dwells  with  most  earnestness  upon  justification  by 
our  Lord's  death  and  merits,  and  concentrates  liis 
enei-gies  upon  the  Christian's  present  struggles,  St. 
Peter  fi.\es  his  eye  constantly  upon  the  future  coming 
of  Christ,  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  the  mani- 
festation of  the  promised  kingdom.  In  this  he  is 
the  true  representative  of  Israel,  mo\-ed  by  those 
feelings  which  were  best  calculated  to  enable  him 
to  do  his  work  as  the  Apostle  of  the  circumcision. 
Of  the  three  Christian  graces  hope  is  his  special 
theme.  He  dwells  much  on  good  works,  but  not 
so  much  because  he  sees  in  them  necessary  results 
of  faith,  or  the  complement  of  faith,  or  outward 
manifestations  of  the  spirit  of  love,  aspects  most 
prominent  in  St,  Paul,  St.  James,  and  St.  John,  as 
beciiuse  he  holds  them  to  be  tests  of  the  soundness 
and  stability  of  a  faith  which  rests  on  the  fact  of 
the  resurrection,  and  is  directed  to  the  future  in 
the  developed  form  of  liope. 

But  while  St.  Peter  thus  shows  himself  a  genuine 
Israelite,  his  teaching  is  directly  opposed  to  Judaizing 
tendencies.  He  belongs  to  the  school,  or,  to  speak 
more  correctly,  is  the  leader  of  the  school,  which  at 
once  vindicates  the  unity  of  the  Law  and  the  Gosjiel, 
and  puts  the  superiority  of  the  latter  on  its  true 
basis,  that  of  spiritual  development.  All  his  prac- 
tical injunctions  are  drawn  from  Christian,  not 
Jewish  pi'inciples,  from  the  precepts,  example,  fife, 
death,  resurrection,  and  future  coming  of  Christ. 
The  Apostle  of  the  circumcision  says  not  a  word  in 
this  Epistle  of  the  perpetual  obligation,  the  dignity, 
or  even  the  bearings  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  He  is  full 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  his  style  and  thoughts  are 
charged  with  its  imagery,  but  he  contemplates  and 
applies  its  teaching  in  the  light  of  the  Gospel ;  he 
regards  the  privileges  and  glory  of  the  ancient 
people  of  God  entirely  in  their  spiritual  develop- 
ment in  the  Church  of  Christ.  Only  one  who  had 
been  brought  up  as  a  Jew  could  have  had  his  spirit 
BO  impregnated  with  these  thoughts;  only  one  who 
had  been  thoroughly  emancipated  by  the  Spirit  of 


y  The  reading  (rrriTf  is  in  all  points  preferable  to  that 
of  the  textus  veceptus,  io-TrJKare. 


PETER 

Christ  could  have  risen  so  completely  above  the  preju- 
dices of  his  age  and  countiy.  This  is  a  point  of  great 
importance,  showing  how  utterly  opposed  the  teach- 
ing of  the  original  Apostles,  whom  St.  Peter  certainly 
represents,  was  to  that  Judaistic  narrowness  which 
speculative  rationalism  has  imputed  to  all  the  early 
followers  of  Christ,  with  the  exception  of  St.  Paul. 
There  are  in  fact  more  traces  of  what  are  called 
Judaizing  views,  more  of  sympathy  with  national 
hopes,  not  to  say  prejudices,  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  Galatians,  than  in  this  work.  In  this 
we  see  the  Jew  who  has  been  born  again,  and  ex- 
changed what  St.  Peter  himself  calls  the  unbear- 
able yoke  of  the  law  for  the  liberty  which  is  in 
Christ.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  admitted  that 
our  Apostle  is  f;u-  from  tracing  his  principles  to 
their  origin,  and  fi'om  drawing  out  their  conse- 
quences with  the  vigour,  spiritual  discernment, 
internal  sequence  of  reasoning,  and  systematic  com- 
pleteness winch  are  characteristic  of  St.  Paul.^  A 
few  gi-eat  facts,  broad  solid  principles  on  which 
faith  and  hope  may  rest  securely,  with  a  spirit  of 
patience,  confidence,  and  love,  suffice  for  his  un- 
speculative  mind.  To  him  objective  truth  was  the 
main  thing ;  subjective  struggles  between  the  in- 
tellect and  spiritual  consciousness,  such  as  we  find 
in  St.  Paul,  and  the  intuitions  of  a  spirit  absorbed 
in  contemplation  like  that  of  St.  John,  though  not 
by  any  means  alien  to  St.  Peter,  were  in  him  wholly 
subordinated  to  the  practical  tendencies  of  a  simple 
and  energetic  character.  It  has  been  observed  with 
truth,  that  both  in  tone  and  in  form  the  teaching  of 
St.  Peter  bears  a  peculiarly  strong  resemblance  to 
that  of  our  Lord,  in  discourses  bearing  directly  upon 
practical  duties.  The  gi-eat  value  of  the  Epistle 
to  believers  consists  in  this  resemblance ;  they  feel 
themselves  in  the  hands  of  a  safe  guide,  of  one  who 
will  help  them  to  trace  the  hand  of  their  Master  in 
both  disjjensations,  and  to  confirm  and  expand  their 
faith. 

Second  Epistle. — The  Second  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter  presents  questions  of  fai-  greater  difficulty 
than  the  former.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
whether  we  consider  the  external  or  the  internal 
evidence,  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  demonstrate  its 
genuineness.  We  have  few  references,  ;md  none  of 
a  very  positive  character,  in  the  writings  of  the 
eaidy  Fathers  ;  the  style  difleis  materially  from  that 
of  the  First  Epistle,  and  the  resemblance,  amount- 
ing to  a  studied  imitation,  between  this  Epistle 
and  that  of  St.  Jude,  seems  scarcely  reconcileable 
with  the  position  of  St.  Peter.  Doubts  as  to  its 
genuineness  were  entertained  by  the  greatest  critics 
of  the  early  Church ;  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  it 
was  reckoned  among  the  disputed  books,  and  was 
not  formally  admitted  into  the  Canon  until  the 
year  393,  at  the  Council  of  Hippo.  The  opinion  of 
critics  of  what  is  called  the  liberal  school,  including 
all  shades  from  Liicke  to  Baur,  has  been  decidedly 
unfavourable,  and  that  opinion  has  been  adopted  by 
some  able  writers  in  England.  There  are,  however, 
very  strong  reasons  why  this  verdict  should  be  recon- 
sidered. No  one  ground  on  which  it  rests  is  unassail- 
able. The  rejection  of  this  book  a,fiects  the  authority 
of  the  whole  Canon,  which,  in  the  opinion  of  one  of 
the  keenest  and  least  scrupulous  critics  (Keuss)  of 
modern  Germany,  is  free  from  any  other  error.  It 
is  not  a  question  as  to  the  possible  authorship  of  a 
work  like  that  of  the  Hebrews,  which  does  not  bear 


2  Thus  Reuss,  Pierre  7i'a  pas  de  systeme. 
Bruckner  and  Weiss,  pp.  14,  17. 


See  also 


PETER 

the  writer's  name :  this  Epistle  must  either  be  dis- 
missed as  a  deliberate  forgery,  or  accepted  as  the 
last  production  of  the  first  among  the  Apostles  of 
Christ.  The  Church,  which  for  more  than  fourteen 
centuries  has  receiveil  it,  has  either  been  imposed 
upon  ])j  what  must  in  that  case  be  regarded  as  a 
Satanic  device,  or  derived  from  it  spiritual  instruc- 
tion of  the  highest  importance,  if  received,  it  bears 
attestation  to  some  of  the  most  import;iut  facts  in 
our  Lord's  histor}',  casts  light  upon  the  fyelings  of 
the  Apostolic  body  in  relation  to  the  elder  Church 
and  to  each  other,  and,  while  it  confirms  many 
doctrines  generally  inculcated,  is  the  cliief,  if  not  the 
only,  voucher  for  eschatological  views  touching  the 
destruction  of  the  framework  of  creation,  which  from 
an  early  peiiod  have  been  prevalent  in  the  Chuich. 
The  contents  of  the  Epistle  seem  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  its  asserted  origin. 

The  customary  opening  salutation  is  followed  by 
an  enumeration  of  Christian  blessings  and  exhortation 
to  Christian  duties,  with  special  reference  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  truth  which  had  been  already 
communicated  to  the  Church  (i.  1-13).  Referring 
then  to  his  approaching  death,  the  Apostle  assigns 
as  grounds  of  assurance  for  believers  his  own  per- 
sonal testimony  as  eye-witness  of  the  transfiguration, 
and  the  sure  word  of  piophecy,  that  is  the  testimony 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  (14-21  J.  The  danger  of  being 
misled  by  false  prophets  is  dwelt  upon  with  great 
earnestness  throughout  the  second  chapter,  their  co  ve- 
tausness  and  grols  sensuality  combined  with  jiretences 
to  spiritualism,  in  short  all  the  permanent  and 
fundamental  characteristics  of  Autinomianism,  are 
described,  while  the  overthrow  of  all  opponents  of 
Christian  truth  is  predicted  (ii.  1-29)  in  connexion 
with  prophecies  touching  the  second  advent  of  Christ, 
the  destruction  of  the  world  by  fire,  and  the  })iomise 
of  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth  wherein  dwelleth 
lighteonsness.  After  an  exhortation  to  attend  to 
St.  Paid's  teaching,  in  accordance  with  the  less 
explicit  admonition  in  the  previous  Epistle,  and  an 
emphatic  warning,  the  Epistle  closes  with  the  cus- 
tomary ascription  of  glory  to  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ. 

We  may  now  sfcitc  briefly  the  answers  to  the 
objections  above  stated. 

1.  With  regard  to  its  recognition  by  the  early 
Church,  we  observe  that  it  was  not  likely  to  be 
quoted  frequently  ;  it  was  addressed  to  a  portion 
of  the  Churcli  not  at  that  time  much  in  intercourse 
with  the  rest  of  Christendom : "  the  documents  of 
the  primitive  Church  are  far  too  samty  to  give  weight 
to  the  argument  (gener;dly  a  questionable  one)  from 
omission.  Although  it  cannot  be  j)roved  to  have 
been  referred  to  by  any  autlior  earlier  than  Origen, 
yet  passages  from  Clement  of  lionie,  Hermas,  Justin 
Martyr,  Theoj)hilus  of  Antioch,  and  Irenaeiis,  suggest 
an  acquaint<ince  with  this  l-^jistle :  ^  to  these  may  be 
added  a  probable  reference  in  the  Martyrdom  of 
Ignatius,  quoted  by  Wcstcott,  Oil  the  C<(non,  j).  87, 
and  another  in  the  Apology  of  iMclito,  pul(lishe<l  in 
Syriac  by  Dr.  Cureton.  Jt  is  also  distinctly  stated 
by  Eusebius,  //.  £.  vi.  14,  and  by  I'hotius,  cod. 


PETER 


809 


109,  that  Clement  of  Alexandria  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  all  the  disputetl  Epistles,  in  which  this 
was  certainly  included.  It  is  quoted  twice  by 
Origen,  but  unforttmately  in  the  translation  of 
KulHnus,  which  cannot  be  relieil  upon.  Didymus 
refers  to  it  very  fiequently  in  his  great  work  on  the 
Trinit}'.  It  was  certainly  included  in  the  collection 
of  Catholic  Epistles  known  to  Eusebius  and  Origen, 
a  very  important  point  made  out  by  Olshausen, 
Opiiscula  TIteol.  p.  29.  It  was  probably  known 
in  the  third  century  in  ditl'erent  parts  of  the  Chris- 
tian world:  in  Cappadocia  to  Fiimihan,  in  Africa 
to  Cyprian,  in  Italy  to  Hippolytus,  in  Phoenicia  to 
Methodius.  A  large  numbfr  of  passages  has  been 
collected  by  Dteblein,  which,  though  quite  insuffi- 
cient to  prove  its  reception,  add  somewhat  to  the 
probability  that  it  was  read  by  most  of  the  early 
Fathers.  The  historical  evidence  is  certainly  incon- 
clusive, but  not  such  as  to  require  or  to  warrant  the 
rejection  of  the  Epistle.  The  silence  of  the  Fatheiii 
is  accounted  for  more  easily  than  its  admission  into 
the  Canon  after  the  question  as  to  its  genuineness 
had  been  raised.  It  is  not  conceivable  that  it 
should  have  been  received  without  positive  attesta- 
tion from  the  Churches  to  which  it  was  first  ad- 
dressed. We  know  that  the  autographs  of  Apostolic 
writings  were  preserved  with  care.  It  must  also  be 
observed  that  all  motive  for  forgery  is  absent.  This 
Epistle  does  not  support  any  hierarchical  preten- 
sions, nor  does  it  bear  upon  any  controversies  of  a 
later  age. 

2.  The  difference  of  style  may  be  admitted.  The 
only  question  is,  whether  it  is  greater  than  can  be 
satisfactorily  accounted  for,  supposing  that  the 
Apostle  employed  a  diti'erent  person  as  his  amanu- 
ensis. That  the  two  Ejiistles  could  not  have 
been  composed  and  written  by  the  same  person  is 
a  point  scarctdy  open  to  doubt.  Olshausen,  one  of 
the  fairest  and  least  prejudiced  of  critics,  points 
out  eight  discrepancies  of  style,  some  ]>erhaps  un- 
important, but  others  almost  concdusive,  the  most 
important  being  the  appellations  given  to  om- 
Saviour,  and  the  comparative  absence  of  references 
to  the  Old  Testament  in  this  Epistle.  If,  however, 
we  admit  that  some  time  intervened  between  the 
composition  of  the  two  works,  that  in  writing  the 
first  the  Apostle  was  aided  by  Silvanus,  and  in 
the  second  by  another,  perhaps  St.  Mark,  that  the 
circumstances  of  the  Churches  addiessed  by  him 
were  considerably  changed,  and  that  the  second  was 
written  in  greater  haste,  not  to  speak  of  a  possible 
decay  of  faculties,  the  diil'ereuces  may  be  regardetl 
as  insuilicient  to  justify  more  than  hesitation  iu 
admitting  its  genuineness.  The  resembhiuce  to 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  may  be  admitted  without 
afiecting  our  judgment  unfavourably.  Sujtposiug, 
as  some  eminent  critics  have  lielieved,  that  this 
Epistle  was  copied  by  St.  Jude,  we  should  have  the 
strongest  possible  testimony  to  its  authenticity  ;  »■ 
but  if,  on  the  other  hand,  we  accept  the  more 
general  opinion  of  modern  critics,  that  the  writer 
of  this  Epistle  copied  St.  Jude,  the  following  con- 
sideiatious    have   great   weight.      It   seems    quite 


*  Ritschl's  observations  on  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  are 
at  least  equally  appliciible  to  this.  It  would  bo,  conipa- 
rativi'ly  spcaklnp,  liltU-  known  to  (.ientilc  converts,  while 
the  Jewish  party  piaiUially  iliiil  out,  and  was  not  at  any 
time  mixed  up  with  the  general  movement  of  the  Church. 
The  only  litciiiry  docimioiits  of  the  Hebrew  Christians 
were  written  by  Ebidiiites,  to  whom  tliis  Kpistle  would  lie 
most  disliisteftil.     Had  the  book  not  been  siippuitcd  by 


strong  external,  credentials,  its  general  reception  or  drcn- 
latlon  seem  unaccountable. 

>■  'I'he  passages  are  quofA'd  by  Guerike,  Einleitung, 
p.  162. 

'  See  Dr.  Wordswortli's  Commentary  on  2  Peter.  His 
chief  ground  is  tliat  St.  IVter  predicts  a  state  of  afluirs 
which  8t.  Judo  desiribes  as  actually  existing.  A  very 
strong  grouMil,  admitting  the  authenticity  of  both  Epistles. 


810 


PETER 


incredible  that  a  forger,  personating  the  chief  among 
the  Apostles,  should  select  the  least  important  of 
all  the  Apostolicnl  writings  for  imitation  ;  whereas 
it  is  probable  that  St.  Peter  might  choose  to  give 
the  stamp  of  his  personal  authority  to  a  document 
bearing  so  powerfully  upon  practical  and  doctrinal 
errors  "in  the  Churches  which  he  addressed.  Con- 
sidering, too,  the  characteristics  of  our  Apostle, 
his  humility,  his  impressionable  mind,  so  open  to 
personal  influences,  and  his  utter  forgetfulness  of 
self  when  doing  his  Master's  work,  we  should  hardly 
be  surprised  to  find  that  pai't  of  the  Epistle  which 
treats  of  the  same  subjects  coloured  by  St.  Jude's 
style.  Thus  in  the  First  Epistle  we  find  everywhere, 
especially  in  dealing  with  kindred  topics,  distinct 
traces  of  St.  Paul's  influence.  This  hypothesis  has 
moreover  the  advantage  of  accounting  for  the  most 
striking,  if  not  all  the  discrepancies  of  style  between 
the  two  Epistles. 

3.  The  doubts  as  to  its  genuineness  appear  to 
have  originated  with  the  critics  of  Alexandria, 
where,  however,  the  Epistle  itself  was  formally 
recognised  at  a  very  early  period.  Those  doubts, 
however,  were  not  quite  so  strong  as  they  are  now 
generally  represental.  The  three  gi-eatest  names 
of  that  school  may  be  quoted  on  either  side.  On 
the  one  hand  there  were  evidently  external  cre- 
dentials, without  which  it  could  never  have  ob- 
tained circulation ;  on  the  other,  strong  subjective 
impressions,  to  which  these  critics  attached  scarcely 
less  weight  than  some  modern  inquirers.  They  rested 
entirely,  so  fiir  as  can  be  ascertained,  on  the  difference 
of  style.  The  opinions  of  modern  commentators  may 
be  summed  up  under  three  heads.  Many,  as  we  have 
seen,  reject  the  Epistle  altogether  as  spurious,  sup- 
posing it  to  have  been  directed  against  forms  of 
Gnosticism  prevalent  in  the  early  part  of  the  second 
century.  A  few  ^  consider  that  the  first  and  last 
chapters  were  written  by  St.  Peter  oi*  under  his  dic- 
tation, but  that  the  second  chapter  was  interpolated. 
So  far,  however,  is  either  of  these  views  from  repre- 
senting the  general  results  of  the  latest  investigations, 
that  a  majority  of  names,*^  including  nearly  all  the 
writers  of  Geniiany  opposed  to  Ilationalism,  who  in 
point  of  teaming  and  ability  are  at  least  upon  a  par 
with  their  opponents,  may  be  quoted  in  support  of 
tlie  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  this  Epistle. 
The  statement  that  all  critics  of  eminence  and  im- 
partiality concur  in  rejecting  it  is  simply  untrue, 
unless  it  be  admitted  that  a  belief  in  the  reality  of 
objective  revelation  is  incompatible  with  critical 
impartiality,  that  belief  being  the  only  common 
point  between  the  numerous  defenders  of  the 
canonicity  of  this  document.  If  it  were  a  question 
now  to  be  decided  for  the  first  time  upon  the 
external  or  internal  evidences  still  accessible,  it  may 
be  admitted  that  it  would  be  far  more  difficult 
to  maintain  this  than  any  other  document  in  the 
New  Testament ;  but  the  judgment  of  the  early 
Church  is  not  to  be  reversed  without  fai-  stronger 
arguments  than  have  been  adduced,  more  especially 
as  the  Epistle  is  entirely  free  from  objections  which 
might  be  brought,  with  more  show  of  reason,  against 
others  now  all  but  universally  received  :  inculcating 
no  new  doctrine,  bearing  on  no  controversies  of  post- 


PETER 

Apostolical  origin,  supporting  no  hieiarchical  inno- 
vations, but  simple,  earnest,  devout,  and  eminently 
jiractical,  full  of  the  characteristic  graces  of  the 
Apostle,  who,  as  we  believe,  bequeathed  this  last 
proof  of  faith  and  hope  to  the  Church. 


Some  Apocryphal  wi-itings  of  very  early  date 
obtained  currency  in  the  Church  as  containing  the 
substance  of  the  Apostle's  teaching.  The  fragments 
which  femain  are  not  of  much  importance,  nor 
could  they  be  conveniently  discussed  in  this  notice. 
The  Preaching  {KTipvy/xa)  or  Doctrine  {SiSaxh)  of 
Petei-,'  probably  identical  with  a  work  called  the 
Preaching  of  Paul,  or  of  Paul  and  Peter,  quotetl  by 
Lactantius,  may  have  contained  some  tiaces  of  the 
Apostle's  teaching,  if,  as  Grabe,  Ziegler,  and  others 
supposed,  it  was  published  soon  after  his  death. 
The  passages,  however,  quoted  by  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria ai'e  for  the  most  part  wholly  unlike  St. 
Peter's  mode  of  treating  doctrinal  oi-  practical  sub- 
jects.s  Another  work,  called  the  Revelation  of  Peter 
(aTroKoAuif/ts  Tlerpov),  was  held  in  much  esteem 
for  centuries.  It  was  commented  on  by  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  quoted  by  Theodotus  in  the  Eclogae, 
named  together  with  the  Kevelation  of  St.  John  in 
the  Fragment  on  the  Canon  published  by  I\Iuratori 
(but  with  the  remark,  "  quam  quidam  ex  nostris 
legi  in  Ecclesia  nolunt "),  and  according  to  Sozo- 
men  {E.  H.  vii.  19)  was  read  once  a  year  in  some 
Churches  of  Palestine.  It  is  said, .but  not  on  good 
authority,  to  have  been  preserved  among  the  Coptic 
Christians.  Eusebius  looked  on  it  as  spurious,  but 
not  of  heretic  origin.  From  the  fragments  and 
notices  it  appears  to  have  consisted  chiefly  of  denun- 
.  ciations  against  the  Jews,  and  predictions  of  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem,  and  to  have  been  of  a  wild  fanatical 
character.  The  most  complete  account  of  this 
curious  work  is  given  by  Liicke  in  his  general 
introduction  to  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  p.  47. 

The  legends  of  the  Clementines  are  wholly  devoid 
of  historical  worth;  but  from  those  fictions,  ori- 
ginating with  an  obscure  and  heretical  sect,  have 
been  derived  some  of.the  most  mischievous  specula- 
tions of  modern  rationalists,  especially  as  regards 
the  assumed  antagonism  between  St.  Paul  and  the 
earlier  Apostles.  It  is  important  to  observe,  how 
ever,  that  in  none  of  these  spurious  documents,  which 
belong  undoubtedly  to  the  two  first  centuries,  are 
there  any  indications  that  our  Apostle  was  regaided 
as  in  any  peculiar  sense  connected  with  the  Church 
or  see  of  Rome,  or  that  he  exercised  or  claimed  any 
authority  over  the  Apostolic  body,  of  which  he  was 
the  recognised  leader  or  representative.     [F.  C.  C] 


d  E.  g.  liunsen,  Ullmann,  and  Lange. 

^  Nitzsche,  Flatt,  Dablman,  AVindischmann,  Heyden- 
reich,  Guerike,  Pott,  August!,  Olshausen,  Thiersch,  Stier, 
and  Dietlein. 

f  The  two  names  are  believed  by  critics  —  i.  e.  Cave, 
Grabe,  Ittig,  Jlill,  &c.  —  to  belong  to  the  same  worlc.    See 


[Cephas  (Krt\^as)  occm-s  in  the  following  p;is- 
sages :  John  i.  42  ;  1  Cor.  i.  12  ;  iii.  22,  ix.  5,  xv.  5  ; 
Gal.  ii.  9,  i.  18,  ii.  10,  14  (the  last  three  according 
to  the  text  of  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf").  Cephas 
is  the  Chaldee  word  Cepha,  XS^3,  itself  a  corrup- 
tion of,  or  derivation  from,  the  Hebrew  C^ph, 
f|3,  "  a  rock,"  a  rare  word,  found  only  in  Job  xxx.  6, 
and  Jer.  iv.  29.  It  must  have  been  the  word  actually 
pronounced  by  our  Lord  in  Matt.  xvi.  18,  and  on 
subsequent  occasions  when  the  Apostle  was  addressed 

Scl)liemann,  Die  Ckmentiiien,  p.  253. 

s  Ruffinus  and  Jerome  allude  to  a  work  which  they  call 
"judicium  Petri;"  for  which  Cave  accounts  by  a  happy 
conjecture,  adopted  by  Nitzsche,  Mayerhof^  Ileuss,  and 
Schliemann,  that  Ruflinus  found  Kp/j-a  lor  Kijpvyfj.a,  and 
read  fcpcjua. 


PETHAfflAH 

by  Him  or  other  Hebrews  liy  his  new  name.  By  it 
he  was  known  to  the  Corinthian  Christians.  In  the 
ancient  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Test.  (Peshito), 
it  is  uniformly  found  where  the  C!reek  has  Pvtros. 
When  we  consider  tliat  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles 
spoke  Chaklee,  and  that  therefore  (as  already  re- 
marked) the  Apostle  must  have  been  always  ;uldressed 
as  Cephas,  it  is  certainly  remarkable  that  through- 
out the  Gospels,  no  less  than  97  times,  with  one 
exception  only,  the  name  should  be  given  in  the 
Greek  form,  whicli  was  of  later  introduction,  and 
unintelligible  to  Hebrews,  though  intelligible  to  the 
far  wider  Gentile  woild  among  which  the  Gospel 
was  about  to  begin  its  course.  Even  in  St.  Mark, 
where  more  Chaklee  woi'ds  and  phrases  are  retained 
than  in  all  the  other  Gospels  put  together,  this  is 
the  case.  It  is  as  if  in  our  English  Bibles  the  name 
were  uniformly  given,  not  Peter,  but  Kock  ;  and  it 
suggests  that  the  meaning  contained  in  the  appel- 
lation is  of  more  vital  importance,  and  intended  to 
be  more  carefully  seized  at  each  recurrence,  than 
we  are  apt  to  recollect.  The  commencement  of 
the  change  from  the  Chaldee  name  to  its  Greek 
synonym  is  well  marked  in  the  interchange  of  the  two 
in  Gal.  ii.  7,  8, 9  (Stiinley,  Apostolic  Age,  1 1<<,  7).] 

PETHAHI'AH  (n^nnS  :  ^eTofo  ;  Alex.  *€- 
Beia:  Phetuia).  1.  A  priest,  over  the  19th  course 
in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  16). 

2.  (*e6€'/o:  Phatdia,  Phathahia.)  A  Levite  in 
the  time  of  Ezra,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  X.  2.3).  He  is  probably  the  same  who,  with 
others  of  his  tribe,  conducted  the  solemn  service  on 
the  occasion  of  the  fast,  when  "  the  seed  of  Israel 
separated  themselves  from  all  strangers"  (Neh.  ix. 
5),  though  his  name  does  not  appear  among  those 
who  sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.). 

3.  {^aBu'ia:  Phdthathia.)  The  son  of  Jlesheza- 
beel  and  descendant  of  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah 
(Neh.  xi.  24),  who  was  "  at  the  king's  hand  in  all 
matters  concerning  the  people."  The  "king"  here 
is  explained  by  Rashi  to  be  Darius:  "he  was  an 
iissociate  in  the  counsel  of  the  king  Darius  for  all 
matters  affecting  the  people,  to  speak  to  the  king 
concerning  them." 

PETHO'R  (llnSl :  ^aeovpd),  a  town  of  Meso- 
poliunia  wliere  Balaimi  resided  (Num.  xxii.  5  ;  Deut. 
xxiii.  4).  Its  position  is  wholly  unknown.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PETH'UEL  (Sx-inS:  BadovfiK:  Phatuel). 
The  father  of  the  prophet  Joel  (Joel  i.  1). 

PEULTHA'I  Cn^iyQ  :  ^eXadi ;  Alex.  *oA- 
XaQ'i:  Plwll(dlii).  Prupei-ly  "  Peullethai  ;"  the 
eighth  son  of  Obed-edom  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  5). 

PHA'ATH  MO'AB  (*flaAf(  Ma)a/3e?j  ;  Alex. 
^aaQ  Mwa/S  :  P/tocmo),  1  Esd.  v.  ll=PAiiArii 
Mo.vi!.  In  this  passage  the  number  (2812)  agrees 
with  that  in  Ezra,  and  dis,igrees  with  Nchemiah. 

PHACAK'P:TH  {4>axap(e;  Alex.  *aKaped  : 
Savliaretli)  —  Pocueiiktu  of  Zcl)aim  (1  Esd.  v.  :J4). 

PHAI'SUR  {^aiffovp  ;  Alex,  ^aiffov  :  Fosere). 
Pasiiui!,  the  priestly  family  (1  Esdr.  ix.  22). 

PHALUAI'US  (*oASaro$  :  Faldcus)  =  Pii- 
DAiAH  4  (1  Esdr.  ix.  44). 

PHALE'AS  {^oKaios:  I/clln)  =  VAUo-i  (I 
Esdr.  v.  29). 

PHA'LEC  (*oAe»c:  Phakg).  Pelkg  the  son 
of  Eber  (Luke  iii.  .'irj). 

PHAL'LU  (N-1?a-.    ^oAAo's;   \V\.  <pa\Kuvo  : 


PHARAOH 


811 


Phn/lit).  Pallu  the  son  of  Keuben  is  so  called  in  the 
A.  V.  of  Gen.  xlvi.  9. 

PHAL'TI  CP^Q:  4>aATi':  Phalti).  The  son 
of  Laish  of  GalHm,  to  whom  Saul  gave  llichal  in 
marriage  after  his  mad  jealousy  had  driven  David 
forth  as  an  outlaw  (1  Sam.  xxv.  44).  lu  2  Sam. 
iii.  15  he  is  called  Phaltiel.  Ewald  {Gesch.  iii. 
129)  suggests  that  this  forced  marriage  was  a  piece 
of  policy  on  the  part  of  Saul  to  attach  Phalti  to  his 
house.  With  the  exception  of  this  brief  mention 
of  his  name,  and  the  touching  little  episode  in 
2  Sam.  iii.  16,  nothing  more  is  heard  of  Phiilti. 
Michal  is  there  restored  to  David.  "  Her  husband 
went  with  her  along  weeping  behind  her  to  Bahu- 
rim,"  and  there,  in  obedience  to  Abner's  abrv.pt 
command,  "  Go,  return,"  he  turns  and  disappears 
from  the  scene. 

PHAL'TIEL  ('?i<*pSQ  :  *a\Ti^X:  Phaltiel). 
The  same  as  Phalti  (2  Sam.  iii.  15). 

PHAN'UEL  {i-avovliK:  Phanuel).  The  father 
of  Anna,  the  prophetess  of  the  tribe  of  Aser  (Luke 
ii.  36). 

PHAR'ACIM  {^apaKin  ;  Alex.  ^apaKeifi : 
Faiion).  The  "  sons  of  Pharacim  "  were  among  the 
servants  of  the  Temple  who  returned  with  Zeru'b- 
babel,  according  to  the  list  in  1  Esdr.  v.  SI.  No 
corresponding  name  is  found  in  the  parallel  narra- 
tives of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

PHA'RAOH  (riyiE:  ^apad>:  Pharao),  the 
common  title  of  the  native  kings  of  Egypt  in  the 
Bible,  conesponding  to  P-KA  or  PH-RA,  "  the 
Sun,"  of  the  hieroglyphics.  This  identification, 
respecting  which  there  can  be  no  doubt,  is  due  to  the 
Duke  of  Northumberland  and  General  Felix  (Rawlin- 
sou's  Herod,  ii.  p.  293).    It  has  been  supposed  that 

the  original  was  the  same  as  the  Coptic  Of  DO? 
"the  king,"  with  the  article,  niO'^pOj 
CpO'CpO  ;  but  this  word  appears  not  to  have 
been  written,  judging  from  tlie  evidence  of  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions  and  writings,  in  the  times  to 
which  the  Sciiptures  refer.  The  conjecture  arose 
from  the  idea  that  Pharaoh  must  signify,  instead 
of  merely  implying,  "  king,"  a  mistake  occasioned 
by  a  too  implicit  confidence  in  the  exactness  of 
ancient  writers  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  6,  §2  ;  Euseb. 
ed.  Seal.  p.  20,  v.  1). 

By  the  ancient  Egyptians  the  king  was  called  "the 
Sun,"  as  the  representative  on  earth  of  the  god  RA, 
or  "  the  Sun."  It  was  probably  on  this  account 
that  more  than  one  of  the  Pharaohs  bear  in  the 
nomen,  in  the  second  royal  ring,  the  title  "  ruler  of 
Heliopolis,"  the  city  of  I-ta,  HAK-AN,  as  in  the  case 
of  Rameses  HI.,  a  distinction  shared,  though  in  an 
inferior  degree,  if  we  mav  judge  from  the  frequency 
of  the  corresponding  title,  liy  Thebes,  but  by  scarcely 
any  other  city.*  One  of  the  most  cmunion  regal  titles, 
that  which  almost  always  precedes  the  nomen,  is 
"  Son  of  the  Sun,"  SA-HA.  The  prenomen,  in  the 
first  royal  ring,  regularly  commences  with  a  disk, 
tlie  character  which  ie})rescnts  the  sun,  and  this 
name,  which  the  king  took  on  his  accession,  tlius 
comprises  the  title  Pharaoh  :  for  instance,  the  {)i'e- 
nomen  of  Psiunmitichus  II.,  the  successor  of  Nccho, 
is  1;A-N  UKR-H  at,  "  Pharaoii  "  or  "  Ha  of  the  good 
heart."    In  the  period  before  the  Villi  dynasty,  when 

"  Tlie  kings  who  bear  the  former  title  ure  chiefly  of  the 
nuine  Itoineses,  "  Born  of  Ha,"  tlie  god  of  Heliopolis,  whicli 
renders  the  title  especially  appropriate. 


812 


PHARAOH 


there  was  but  a  single  ring,  the  use  of  the  word  RA 
was  not  invai'iable,  many  names  not  commencing 
with  it,  as  SHUFU  or  KHUFU,  the  king  of  the  ivth 
tlyuasty  who  built  the  Great  Pyramid.  It  is  diffi- 
cult to  determine,  in  rendering  these  names,  whether 
the  king  or  the  divinity  be  meant :  perhaps  in  royal 
names  no  distinction  is  intended,  both  Pharaoh 
and  lia  being  meant. 

Tlie  word  Pharaoh  occurs  generally  in  the  Bible, 
and  always  in  the  Pentateuch,  with  no  addition,  for 
the  king  of  Egypt.  Sometinies  the  title  "  king  of 
I'^gyjit "  follows  it,  and  in  the  cases  of  the  last  two 
native  kings  mentioned,  the  proper  name  is  added, 
Pharaoh-Necho,  Pharaoh-Hophia,  with  sometimes 
the  further  addition  "  king,  '  or  the  king,  of 
Kgypt."  It  is  remarkable  that  Shishak  and  Zerah 
(if,  as  we  believe,  the  second  were  a  king  of  Egypt), 
and  the  Ethiopians  So  and  Tirhakah,  are  never  dis- 
tinctly called  Pharaoh  (the  mention  of  a  Pharaoh 
during  the  time  of  the  Ethiopians  probably  referring 
to  the  Egyptian  Sethos),  and  that  the  latter  were 
foreigners  and  the  former  of  foreign  extraction. 

As  several  kings  are  only  mentioned  by  the  title 
"  Pharaoh  "  in  the  Bible,  it  is  important  to  endea- 
vour to  cliscriminate  them.  We  shall  therefore  here 
state  what  is  known  respecting  them  in  order, 
adding  an  account  of  the  two  Pharaohs  whose  proper 
names  follow  the  title. 

1.  The  Pharaoh  of  Abraham. — The  Scripture 
narrative  does  not  afi'ord  us  any  clear  indications 
for  the  identification  of  the  Pharaoh  of  Abraham. 
At  the  time  at  which  the  patriarch  went  into 
Egypt,  according  to  Hales's  as  well  as  Ussher's 
chronology,  it  is  generally  held  that  the  country, 
or  at  least  Lower  Egypt,  was  ruled  by  the  Shepherd 
kings,  of  whom  the  first  and  most  powerful  line  was 
the  xvth  dynasty,  the  undoubted  tenitories  of  which 
would  be  first  entered  by  one  coming  from  the  east. 
Manetho  relates  that  Salatis,  the  head  of  this  line, 
established  at  Avaris,  the  Zoan  of  the  Bible,  on  the 
eastern  frontier,  what  appears  to  have  been  a  great 
permanent  camp,  at  which  he  resided  for  part  of 
each  year.  [Zoan.]  It  is  noticeable  that  Sarah 
seems  to  have  been  taken  to  Pharaoh's  house  imme- 
diately after  the  coming  of  Abraham  ;  and  if  this 
were -not  so,  yet,  on  account  of  his  flocks  and  herds, 
the  patriarch  could  scarcely  have  gone  beyond  the 
part  of  the  country  which  was  alvvays  more  or 
less  occupied  by  nomad  tribes.  It  is  also  probable 
that  Pharaoh  gave  Abraham  camels,  for  we  read, 
that  Pharaoh  "  enti'eated  Abram  well  for  Sarah's 
sake :  and  he  had  sheep,  and  oxen,  and  he  asses, 
and  menservants,  and  maidservants,  and  she  asses, 
and  camels"  (Gen.  xii.  16),  where  it  appears  that 
this  property  was  the  gift  of  Pharaoh,  and  the  cir- 
cumstance that  the  patriarch  afterwards  held  an 
Egyptian  bondwoman,  Plagar,  confirms  the  infer- 
ence. If  so,  the  present  of  camels  would  argue 
that  this  Pharaoh  was  a  Shepherd  king,  for  no  e\'i- 
dence  has  been  found  in  the  sculptures,  paintings, 
and  inscriptions  of  Egypt,  that  in  the  Pharaonic 
ages  the  camel  was  used,  or  even  known  tliere,*" 
and  this  ornission  can  be  best  explained  by  the  sup- 
position that  the  animal  was  hateful  to  the  Egyptians 
as  of  great  value  to  their  enemies  the  Shepherds. 

The  date  at  which  Abi'aham  visited  Egypt  (ac- 
cording to  the  chronology  we  hold  most  probable), 
was  about  B.C.  2081,  which  would  accord  with  the 


•>  It  has  been  erroneously  asoertcd  that  a  hieroglyphic 
representing  the  head  and  neck  of  the  camel  is  found  on 
the  Kgyptian  monuments. 


PHARAOH 

time  of  Salatis,  the  head  of  tlie  xvth  dynasty,  accord- 
ing to  our  reckoning. 

2.  The  Pharaoh  of  Joseph. — The  history  of  Joseph 
contains  many  particulars  as  to  the  Pharaoh  whose 
minister  he  became.  We  first  hear  of  him  as  the 
arbitrary  master  who  imprisoned  his  two  servants, 
and  then,  on  his  birthday-feast,  reinstated  the  one  and 
lianged  the  other.  We  next  read  of  his  dreams,  how 
he  consulted  the  magicians  and  wise  men  of  Egypt, 
and  on  their  failing  to  interpret  them,  by  the  advice 
of  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers,  sent  for  Joseph  from 
the  prison,  and  after  he  had  heard  his  inteipretation 
and  counsel,  chose  liim  as  governor  of  the  country, 
taking,  as  it  seems,  the  advice  of  his  servants.  The 
sudden  advancement  of  a  despised  stranger  to  the 
highest  place  under  the  king  is  important  as  show- 
ing his  absolute  power  and  manner  of  governing. 
From  this  time  we  read  more  of  Joseph  than  of 
Pharaoh.  We  are  told,  however,  that  Pharaoh  libe- 
rally received  Joseph's  kimlred,  allowing  them  to 
dwell  in  the  land  of  Goshen,  where  he  liad  cattle. 
The  last  mention  of  a  Pharaoh  in  Joseph's  history 
is  in  the  account  of  the  death  and  burial  of  Jacob. 
It  has  been  supposed  from  the  following  passage 
that  the  position  of  Joseph  had  then  become  changed. 
"  Joseph  spake  unto  the  house  of  Pharaoh,  saying, 
If  now  I  have  found  grace  in  your  eyes,  speak, 
I  pray  you,  in  the  ears  of  Pharaoh,  saying.  My 
father  made  me  swear,  saying,  Lo,  I  die:  in  my 
grave  which  I  have  digged  for  me  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  there  shalt  thou  bury  me.  Now  therefore 
let  me  go  up,  I  pray  thee,  and  bury  my  father, 
and  I  will  come  again.  And  Pharaoh  said.  Go  up 
and  bury  thy  father,  according  as  he  made  thee 
swear "  (Gen.  1.  4-6).  The  account  of  the  em- 
balming of  Jacob,  in  which  we  are  told  that 
"  Josepli  commanded  his  servants  the  pliysicians  to 
embalm  his  father"  (ver.  2),  shows  the  position  of 
Joseph,  which  is  more  distinctly  proved  by  the  nar- 
rative of  the  subsequent  journey  into  Palestine. 
"  And  Joseph  went  up  to  bury  his  father  :  and 
with  him  went  up  all  the  sei-vants  of  Pharaoh,  the 
elders  of  his  house,  and  all  the  elders  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  all  the  house  of  Joseph,  and  his  brethren, 
and  his  father's  house:  only  their  little  ones,  and 
their  flocks,  and  their  herds,  they  left  in  the  land 
of  Goshen.  And  there  went  up  with  him  both 
chariots  and  horsemen :  and  it  was  a  very  great 
company"  (,7-9).  To  make  such  an  expedition  as 
this,  with  perhaps  risk  of  a  hostile  encounter, 
would  no  doubt  require  special  permission,  and  from 
Joseph's  whole  history  we  can  understand  that  he 
would  have  hesitated  to  ask  a  favour  for  himself, 
while  it  is  most  natural  that  he  should  have  ex- 
plained that  he  had  no  further  motive  in  the  journey. 
The  fear  of  his  brethren  that  after  their  fatlier'a 
death  he  would  take  vengeance  on  thera  for  their 
former  cruelty,  and  his  declaration  that  he  would 
nourish  them  and  their  little  ones,  prove  he  still 
held  a  Ingh  position.  His  dying  charge  does  not  indi- 
cate that  the  persecution  had  then  commenced,  and 
that  it  had  not  seems  quite  clear  from  the  narrative 
at  the  beginning  of  Exodus.  It  thus  appeare  that 
Joseph  retained  his  position  until  Jacob's  death ; 
and  it  is  therefoi-e  probable,  nothing  being  stated 
to  the  contrary,  that  the  Pharaoh  who  made  Joseph 
governor  was  on  the  throne  during  the  time  that  he 
seems  to  have  held  office,  twenty-six  years.  We 
may  suppose  that  the  "  new  king  "  "  which  knew 
not  Joseph"  (Ex.  i.  8")  was  head  of  a  new  dynasty. 
It  is  very  unlikely  that  he  was  the  immediate  suc- 
cessor of  this  Pharaoh,  as  the  interval   from  the 


PHARAOH 

appointment  of  the  governor  to  the  l>eginning  of 
the  oppression  was  not  less  than  eighty  years,  and 
probably  much  inore. 

The  chief  points  for  the  identification  of  the  line 
to  which  this  Pharaoh  belonged,  are  that  he  was  a 
despotic  monarch,  ruling  all  Egypt,  who  followed 
Egyptian  customs,  but  did  not  hesitate  to  set  them 
aside  when  he  thought  fit ;  that  he  seems  to  have 
desired  to  gain  complete  power  over  the  Egyptians ; 
and  that  he  favoured  strangers.     These  particulars 
certainly  appear  to  lend  support  to  the  idea  that  he 
was    an    Egyptianized    foreigner    rather    than    an 
Egyptian  ;  and  M.  Mariette's  recent  discoveries  at 
Zoan,  or  Avaris,  have  positively  settled  what  was 
the  gieat  difficulty  to  most  scholars  in  the  way  of 
this    view,    for    it   has  been  ascertained   that   the 
Shepherds,    of    at    least    one    dvnasty,    were    so 
thoroughly    Egyptianized  that  they  executed   mo- 
numents of  an  Egyptian  character,  differing  alone 
in  a  peculiarity  of  style.    Before,  however,  we  state 
the  main  heads  of  argument  in  favour  of  the  idea 
that  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  a  Shepherd,  it  will 
be  well  to  mention  the  grounds  of  the  theories  that 
make  him  an  Egyptian.     Baron  Bunsen  supposed 
that  he  was  Sesertesen  I.,  the  head  of  the  xiith 
dynasty,  on  account  of  the  mention  in  a  hieroglyphic 
inscription  of  a  famine  in  that  king's  reign.     This 
identification,  although  receiving  some  support  from 
the  statement  of  Herodotus,  that  Sesostris,  a  name 
I'easonably  traceable  to  Sesertesen,  divided  the  land 
and  raised  his  chief  revenue  from  the  rent  paid  by 
the  holders,  must  be  abandoned,  since  the  calamity 
recorded   does    not    approach    Joseph's    famine   in 
character,  and  as  the  age  is  almost  certainly  too 
remote.     According  to  our  reckoning  this  king  began 
to  reign  about  B.C.  2080,  and  Baron  Bunsen  places 
him  much  earlier,  so  that  this  idea  is  not  tenable, 
unless  we  take  the  long  chronology  of  the  Judges,  and 
hold  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  to  have  lasted  4.^0  years. 
If  we  take  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the  Exodus,  Jo- 
seph's Phaiaoh   would    have   been  a  king  of  the 
xviiith  dynasty,  unless,  with  Bunsen,  we  lengthen 
the  Hebrew  chronology  belbre  the  Exodus  as  arbi- 
trarily as,  in  adopting  that  date,  we  shorten  it  after 
the  Exodus.     To  the  idea  that  this  king  was  of  the 
xviiith  dynasty  there  is  this  objection,  which  we  hold 
to  be  fatal,  that  the  monuments  of  that  line,  often 
recording  the  events  of  almost  every  year,  present 
no  trace  of  the  remarkable  circumstances  of  .Joseph's 
rule.      Whether  we  take  Ussher's  or  Hales's  date 
of  the    E.\odus,   Josejih's   government   would   fall 
before  the  xviiith  dynasty,  and  during  the  Shepherd 
period.     (By  the  Sliephenl  period  is  generally  under- 
stood the  period  after  the  xiith  ilynasty  and  before 
the  xviiith,  during  which  the  ibrcigners  were  domi- 
nant over  Egypt,  although  it  is  possible  that  they 
already  held  part  of  the  country  at  an  earlier  time.) 
If,  discai'ding  the  idea  that  Jose|)h's   Pharaoh  was 
an  Egyptian,  we  turn  to  the  old  view  that  he  was 
one  of  the  Shepherd  kings,  a  view  almost  inevitable 
if  we    infer  that  he  ruled  during  the  Shephenl- 
period,  we  are  struck  with  the  fitness  of  all  the 
circumstances   of   the    Biblical    narrative.      These 
foreign  rulers,  or  at  least  some  of  tliem  wei'e  Egvj)- 
tianized,  yet  the  account  of  Mauetho,  if  we  some- 
what  lessen  the  colouring  that  we  may  supjiose 
national  hati'ed  gave  it,  is  now  shown  to  be  correct  in 
making  them  disregard  the  laws  and  religion  of  the 
country  they  had  subdued.     They  were  evidently 
]>owerful   militaiy  despots.      As   foreigners   ruling 
what  was  treated   as  a  conquered  country,   if  not 
actually  won   by  force  of  arms,  they  would  have 


PHARAOH 


813 


encouraged  foreign  settlers,  particularly  in  their 
own  especial  region  in  the  east  of  Lower  Egypt, 
where  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  seems  to  have  had 
cattle  (Gen.  xlvii.  5,  6).  It  is  very  unlikely,  un- 
less we  suppose  a  special  interposition  of  Provi- 
dence, that  aJi  Egyptian  Pharaoh,  with  the  acquies- 
cence of  his  counsellors,  should  have  chosen  a  Hebrew 
slave  as  his  chief  officer  of  state.  It  is  statal  by 
Eusebius  that  the  Pharaoh  to  whom  Jacob  came 
was  the  Shepherd  Apophis;  and  although  it  may 
be  replied  that  this  identification  was  simply  a 
result  of  the  adjustment  of  the  dynasties  to  his  view 
of  Hebrew  chronology,  it  should  be  observed  that 
he  seems  to  have  altered  the  very  dynasty  of 
Apophis,  both  m  its  number  (making  it  the  xviith 
instead  of  the  xvth),  and  in  its  duration;  as  though 
he  were  convinced  that  this  king  was  really  the 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph,  and  must  therefore  be  brought 
to  his  time.  Apophis  belonged  to  the  xvth  dynasty, 
which  was  certainly  of  Shepherds,  and  the  most 
powerful  foreign  line,  for  it  seems  clear  that  there 
was  at  least  one  if  not  two  more.  This  dynasty, 
according  to  our  view  of  Egyptian  chronology,  ruled 
for  either  284  years  (Africanus),  or  259  yeai's  10 
months  (Josephus),  from  about  B.C.  2080.  If 
Hales's  chronology,  which  we  would  slightly  modify, 
be  correct,  the  government  of  Joseph  fell  under  this 
dynasty,  commencing  about  B.C.  1876,  wliich  would 
be  during  the  reign  of  the  last  but  one  or  perhaps 
the  last  king  of  the  dynasty,  was  possibly  in  the  time 
of  Apophis,  who  ended  the  line  according  to  Africanus. 
It  is  to  be  remarked  that  this  dynasty  is  said  to  have 
been  of  Phoenicians,  and  if  so  was  probably  of  a 
stock  predominantly  Shemite,  a  circumstance  in 
perfect  accordance  with  what  we  know  of  the  go- 
vernment and  character  of  Joseph's  Pharaoh,  whose 
act  in  making  Joseph  his  chief  minister  finds  its 
parallels  in  Shemite  history,  and  in  that  of  nations 
which  derived  their  customs  from  Shemites.  An 
Egyptian  king  would  scarcely  give  so  high  a  place 
to  any  but  a  native,  and  that  of  the  military  or 
priestly  class;  but,  as  already  remaiked,  this  may 
have  been  due  to  Divine  interposition. 

This  king  appears,  as  has  been  already  shewn, 
to  have  reigned  from  Joseph's  appointment  for, 
perhaps,  somewhat  earlier,  since  he  was  already 
on  the  throne  when  he  imprisoned  his  servants), 
until  Jacob's  death,  a  period  of  at  least  twenty-six 
yeais,  from  B.C.  cir.  187G  to  1850,  and  to  have 
been  the  fifth  or  sixth  king  of  the  xvth  dynasty. 

3.  The  Pharaoh  of  the  Oppression. — The  first 
persecutor  of  the  Isi'aelites  may  be  distinguished  as 
the  Pharaoh  of  the  Oppression,  from  the  second,  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  especially  as  he  commenced, 
and  probably  long  carried  on,  the  persecution.  Here, 
as  in  the  case  of  Joseph's  Pharaoh,  there  has  been 
difl'erence  of  opinion  as  to  the  line  to  which  the 
oppressor  belonged.  The  general  view  is  that  he 
was  an  Egyptian,  and  this  at  first  sight  is  a  pro- 
bable inference  from  the  narrative,  if  the  line  under 
which  the  Israelites  were  protected  be  supposed  to 
have  been  one  of  Shejiherds.  The  Biblical  history 
here  seems  to  justify  clearer  deductions  than  before. 
We  re.ad  that  Joseph  and  his  brethren  and  that  ge- 
neration died,  and  that  the  Isracliti's  mulliplied  and 
became  very  mighty  and  filled  the  land.  Of  the 
events  of  the  interval  between  Jacob's  death  and  the 
oppression  we  know  almost  nothing ;  but  the  cala- 
mity to  E])hraim's  house,  in  the  slaughter  of  his  sons 
by  the  men  of  Gatli,  born  :is  it  seems  in  Egypt 
[Bkiuaii],  renders  it  jirobable  that  the  Israelites  had 
become  a  tributary  tribe,  settli?d  in  (iwlieri,  and  be- 


814 


PHAEAOH 


ginning  to  sho.w  that  warlike  vigour  that  is  so  strong 
a  feature  in  the  character  of  Abraham,  that  is  not 
wanting  in  Jacob's,  and  that  litted  their  posterity 
for  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  The  beginning  of  the 
oppression  is  thus  naiTated: — "  Now  there  arose  a 
new  king  over  Egypt,  which  knew  not  Joseph  "  (Ex. 
i.  8).  The  expression  "a  new  king"  (comp.  "an- 
other king,"  Acts  vii.  18)  does  not  necessitate  the 
idea  of  a  change  of  dynasty,  but  favours  it.  The 
next  two  verses  are  extremely  important : — "  And 
he  said  unto  his  people,  Behold,  the  people  of  the 
children  of  Israel  [are]  more  and  mightier  than 
we :  come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely  with  them  ;  lest 
they  multiply,  and  it  come  to  pass  that,  when 
there  falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also  unto  our 
enemies,  and  tight  against  us,  and  [so]  get  them  up 
out  of  the  land"  (9,  10).  Here  it  is  stated  that 
Pharaoh  ruled  a  people  of  smaller  numbers  and  less 
strength  than  the  Israelites,  whom  he  feared  lest 
they  should  join  with  some  enemies  in  a  possible 
war  in  Egypt,  and  so  leave  the  country.  In  order 
to  weaken  the  Israelites  he  adopted  a  subtle  policy 
which  is  next  related.  "  Therefore  they  did  set 
over  them  taskmasters  to  afflict  them  with  their 
bui-dens.  And  they  built  for  Pharaoh  treasure 
cities,  Pithom  and  Kaamses  "  (1 1).  The  name  of 
the  second  of  these  cities  has  been  considered  a 
most  impoi-tant  point  of  evidence.  They  multiplied 
notwithstanding,  and  the  persecution  apparently  in- 
creased. They  were  employed  in  brickmaking  and 
other  labour  connected  with  building,  and  perhaps 
also  in  making  pottery  f  Ps.  Ixxxi.  6).  This  bondage 
producing  no  eflect,  Pharaoh  commanded  the  two 
Hebrew  midwives  to  kill  every  male  child  as  it 
was  born  ;  but  they  deceived  him,  and  the  people 
continued  to  increase.  He  then  made  a  fresh  attempt 
to  enfeeble  them.  "  And  Pharaoh  charged  all  his 
people,  saying,  Every  son  that  is  born  ye  shall 
cast  into  the  river,  and  every  daughter  ye  shall 
save  alive  "  (22).  How  long  this  last  infamous 
command  was  in  force  we  do  not  know,  probably 
but  for  a  short  time,  unless  it  was  constantly 
evaded,  otherwise  the  number  of  the  Israelites 
would  have  been  checked.  It  may  be  remarked  that 
Aaron  was  three  years  older  than  Moses,  so  that  we 
might  suppose  that  the  command  was  issued  after 
his  birth  ;  but  it  must  also  be  observed  that  the 
fear  of  the  mother  of  Moses,  at  his  birth,  may  have 
been  because  she  lived  near  a  royal  residence,  as 
appears  from  the  finding  of  the  child  by  Pharaoh's 
daughter.  The  story  of  his  exposure  and  rescue 
shows  that  even  the  oppressor's  daughter  could  feel 
pity,  and  disobey  her  father's  command ;  while  in 
her  saving  Moses,  who  was  to  ruin  her  house,  is 
seen  the  retributive  justice  that  so  often  makes  the 
tyrant  pass  by  and  even  protect,  as  Pharaoh  must 
have  done,  the  instrument  of  his  future  punish- 
ment. The  etymology  of  the  name  of  Moses  does 
not  aid  us :  if  Egyptian,  it  may  have  been  given 
by  a  foreigner  ;  if  foreign,  it  may  have  been  given 
by  an  Egyptian  to  a  foreign  child.  It  is  important 
that  Pharaoh's  daughter  adopted  Moses  as  her  son, 
and  that  he  was  taught  iu  all  the  wisdom  of  Egypt. 
The  persecution  continued,  "  And  it  tame  to  pass 
in  those  days,  when  Moses  was  grown,  that  he 
went  out  unto  his  brethren,  and  looked  on  their 
burdens :  and  he  spied  an  Egyptian  smiting  an  He- 
brew, one  of  his  brethren.  And  he  looked  this  way 
and  that  way,  and  when  he  saw  that  [there  was] 


=  When  Moses  went  to  see  his  people  and  slew  the 
Egyptian,  lie  does  not  seem  to  have  made  any  journey, 


PHARAOH 

no  man,  he  slew  the  Egyptian,  and  hid  him  in  the 
sand"  (ii.  11,  12).      When  Pharaoh  attempted  to 
slay  Moses  he  fled  into  the  land  of  Midian.     From 
the  statement  in  Hebrews  that  he  "  refused  to  be 
called   the   son    of  Pharaoh's   daughter ;   choosing 
rather  to  suffer  affliction  with  the  people  of  God, 
than  to  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season  ; 
esteeming  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches  than 
the  treasures  in  Egypt "  (xi.  24-26;,  it  is  evident  that 
the  adoption  was  no  mere  form,  and  this  is  a  point  of 
evidence  not  to  be  shghted.    While  Moses  was  in  Mi- 
dian Pharaoh  died,  and  the  narrative  implies  that  this 
was  shortly  before  the  events  preceding  the  Exodus. 
This   Pharaoh  has  been   generally    supposed    to 
have  been  a  king  of  the  yv'iiith  or  xixth  dynasty : 
we  believe  that  he  was  of  a  line  earlier  than  either. 
The  chief  points  in  the  evidence  in  favour  of  the 
former  opinion  are  the  name  of  the  city  Kaamses, 
v^hence  it  has  been  argued  that  One  of  the  oppressors 
was  a  king  Rameses,  and  the  probable  change  of 
line.     The  first  king  of  this  name  known  was  head 
of  the  xi.xth  dynasty,  or  last  king  of  the  xviiith. 
According  to  Manetho's  story  of  the  Exodus,  a 
story  so  contradictory  to  historical  truth  as  scarcely 
to  be  worthy  of  mention,  the  Israelites  left  Egypt 
iu  the  reign  of  Menptah,  who  was  great  grandson 
of  the  first  Kameses,  and  son  and  successor  of  the 
second.    This  king  is  held  by  some  Egyptologists  to 
have  reigned  about  the  time  of  the  Rabbinical  date 
of  the  Exodus,  which  is  virtually  the  same  as  that 
which  has  been  supposed  to  be  obtainable  from  the 
genealogies.     There  is  however  good  reason  to  place 
these  kings  much  later;  in  which  case  Kameses  I. 
would  be  the  oppressor ;  but  then  the  building  of 
Raamses  could  not  be  placed  in  his  reign  without 
a  disregard  of  Hebrew  chronology.     But  the  argu- 
ment that  there  is  no  earlier  known  king  Rameses 
loses  much  of  its  weight  when  we  bear  in  mind  that 
one  of  the  sons  of  Aahmes,  head  of  the  xviiith  dy- 
nasty, who  reigned  about  two  hundred  years  before 
Rameses  I.,  bore  the  same  name,  besides  that  very 
many  names  of  kings  of  the  Shepherd-period,  per- 
haps of  two  whole  dynasties,  are  unknown.    Against 
this  one  fact,  which  is  certainly   not  to  be  disre- 
garded, we  must  weigh  the  general  evidence  of  the 
history,  which  shows  us  a  king  apparently  governing 
a  part  of  Egypt,  with  subjects  inferior  to  the  Ls- 
raelites,  and  fearing  a  war  in  the  countiy.     Like 
the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  he  seems  to  have  dwelt 
in  Lower  Egypt,  probably  at  Avaris."=    Compare  this 
condition  witli  the  power  of  the  kings  of  tiie  later 
part  of  the  x^'iiith  and  of  the  xixth  dynasties  ; 
rulers  of  an  empire,  governing  a  united  country 
from  which  the  head  of  their  line  had  driven  the 
Shepherds.     The  view  that  this  Pharaoh  was  of 
the   beginning  or  middle   of  the  xviiith  dynasty 
seems  at  first  sight  extremely  probable,  especially 
if  it  be  supposed  that  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was 
a  Shepherd  king.     The  expulsion  of  the  Shepherds 
at  the  commencement  of  this  dynasty  would  have 
naturally  caused  an  immediate  or  gradual  oppres- 
sion of  the  Israelites.     But  it  must  be  remembered 
tliat  what  we  have  just  said  of  the  power  of  some 
kings  of  this  dynasty  is  almost  as  true  of  their 
predecessors.     The  silence  of  the  historical  monu- 
ments is  also    to   be   weighed,  when   we  bear  in 
mind  how  numerous  they  are,  and  that  we  might 
expect  many  of  the  events  of  the  oppression  to  be 
recorded  if  the  Exodus  were  not  noticed.     If  we 

and  the  burying  in  sand  shews  that  the  place  was  in  a 
part  of  Kptypt  like  Goshen,  encompassed  by  sandy  desert';. 


PHARAOH 

assign  this  Pharaoh  to  the  age  before  the  xviiith 
dynasty,  which  our  view  of  Hebiew  chronology 
would  probably  oblige  us  to  do,  we  have  still  to 
detennine  whether  he  were  a  Shepherd  or  an  Egyp- 
ti;xn.  If  a  Sliepherd,  he  must  have  been  of  the 
xvith  or  the  sviith  dynasty ;  and  that  he  was  Egyp- 
tianized  does  not  afford  any  argument  against  this 
supposition,  since  it  appears  that  foreign  kings,  who 
can  only  be  assigned  to  one  of  these  two  lines,  had 
Egyptian  names.  In  corroboration  of  this  view  we 
quote  a  remarkable  passage  that  does  not  seem 
otherwise  explicable :  "  My  people  went  down  afore- 
time into  Egypt  to  sfijourn  there  ;  and  the  Assyrian 
oppressed  them  without  cause  "  (Is.  lit.  4)  :  which 
may  be  compared  with  the  allusions  to  the  Exodus 
in  a  prediction  of  the  same  prophet  respecting  As- 
syria (x.  24,  26).  Our  inference  is  strengthened  by 
the  discovery  that  kings  bearing  a  name  almost  cer- 
tainly an  Egyptian  translation  of  an  Assyrian  or 
Babylonian  regal  title  are  among  those  apparently  of 
the  Shepherd  age  in  the  Turin  Papyi-us  (Lepsius, 
Koiiigsbuch,  taf.  xviii.  xix.  275,  285). 

The  reign  of  this  king  ])robably  commenced  a 
little  before  the  birth  of  Moses,  which  we  place 
B.C.  1732,  and  seems  to  have  lasted  upwards  of 
forty  years,  perhaps  much  more. 

4.  The  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus. — What  is  known 
of  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus  is  rather  biographical 
than  historical.  It  does  not  add  much  to  om' 
means  of  identifying  the  line  of  the  oppressors  ex- 
cepting by  the  indications  of  race  his  character 
affords.  His  life  is  spoken  of  in  other  articles. 
[PLAGUriS,  &c.]  His  acts  show  us  a  man  at  once 
impious  and  superstitious,  alternately  rebelling  and 
submitting.  At  first  he  seems  to  have  thought 
that  his  magicians  could  work  the  same  wonders 
as  Moses  and  Aaron,  yet  even  then  he  begged  that 
the  frogs  might  be  taken  away,  and  to  the  end  he 
prayed  that  a  plague  might  be  removed,  promising 
a  concession  to  the  Israelites,  and  as  soon  as  he  was 
respited  failed  to  keep  his  word.  This  is  not  strange 
in  a  character  piincipally  influenced  by  fear,  and 
history  abounds  in  pai'allels  to  Pharaoh.  His  vacil- 
lation only  ended  when  he  lost  his  army  in  the  Red 
Sea,  and  the  Israelites  were  finally  delivered  out  of 
his  hand.  Whether  he  himself  was  drowned  has  been 
considered  matter  of  unceifciinty,  as  it  is  not  so 
stated  in  the  account  of  the  lOxodus.  Another  pas- 
sage, however,  appears  to  affirm  it  (Ps.  cxxxvi.  15). 
It  seems  to  be  too  great  a  latitude  of  criticism  either 
to  argue  that  the  expression  in  this  passage  indi- 
cates the  overthrow  but  not  the  death  of  the  king, 
especially  as  the  Hebrew  expression  "shaked  olf"  or 
"  threw  in  "  is  very  literal,  or  that  it  is  only  a 
strong  Semitic  expression.  Besides,  throughout  the 
preceding  history  his  end  is  foreshadowed,  and  is, 
perhaps,  positively  foretold  in  Ex.  ix.  15  ;  though 
this  passage  may  be  rendered  "  For  now  I  might  have 
stretched  out  my  hand,  and  might  have  smitten  thee 
and  thy  people  with  pestilence;  and  thou  wouldest 
have  been  cut  olf  from  the  earth,"  as  by  Kalisch 
(^Commentary  in  loc),  instead  of  as  in  the  A.  V. 

Although  we  have  already  stated  our  reasons  for 
abandoning  the  theory  that  places  the  Exodus  under 
the  xixth  dynasty,  it  may  be  well  to  notice  an  addi- 
tional and  conclusive  argument  for  rejecting  as  unhis- 
torical  the  tale  preserved  by  Manetho,  which  makes 
Menptah,  the  son  of  l-!anieses  II.,  thi!  Piiaraoh  in 
whose  reign  the  Israelites  left  Egypt.  This  tale  was 
commonly  current  in  Egyjjf ,  but  it  must  be  remarked 
that  the  historian  gives  it  only  on  the  authority  of 
tradition.      M.   Maiiette's    recent  discoveries  have 


PHARAOH 


815 


added  to  the  evidence  we  already  had  on  tne  subject. 
In  this  story  the  secret  of  the  success  of  the  rebels 
was  that  they  had  allotted  to  them  by  Amenophis, 
or  Menptah,  the  city  of  Avaris  formerly  held  by 
the  Shepherds,  but  then  in  ruins.  That  the  people 
to  whom  this  place  was  given  were  working  in  the 
quan-ies  east  of  the  Nile  is  enough  of  itself  to  throw  a 
doubt  on  the  narrative,  for  there  appear  to  have  been 
no  quarries  north  of  those  opposite  Memphis,  from 
which  Avaris  was  distant  nearly  the  whole  length 
of  the  Delta  ;  but  when  it  is  found  that  this  very 
king,  as  well  as  his  father,  adorned  the  great  temple 
of  Avaris,  the  story  is  seen  to  be  essentially  false. 
Yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  some  calamity  oc- 
curred about  this  time,  with  which  the  Egyptians 
wilfully  or  ignorantly  confounded  the  Exodus :  if 
they  did  so  ignorantly,  there  would  be  an  argument 
that  this  event  took  place  during  the  Shepherd 
period,  which  was  probably  in  after  times  an 
obscure  part  of  the  annals  of  Egypt. 

The  character  of  this  Pharaoh  finds  its  parallel 
among  the  Assyrians  rather  than  the  Egyptians. 
The  impiety  of  the  oppressor  and  that  of  Senna- 
cherib are  remarkably  similar,  though  Sennacherib 
seems  to  have  been  more  resolute  in  his  resistance 
than  Pharaoh.  This  resemblance  is  not  to  be  over- 
looked, especially  as  it  seems  to  indicate  an  idio- 
syncracy  of  the  Assyrians  and  kindred  nations,  for 
national  character  was  more  marked  in  antiquity 
than  it  is  now  in  most  peoples,  doubtless  beciiuse 
isolation  was  then  general  and  is  now  special.  Thus, 
the  Egyptian  monuments  show  us  a  people  highly 
reverencing  their  gods  and  even  those  of  other 
nations,  the  most  powerful  kings  appearing  as  sup- 
pliants in  the  representations  of  the  temples  and 
tombs ;  in  the  Assyrian  sculptures,  on  the  con- 
trary, the  kings  are  seen  rather  as  protected  by 
the  gods  than  as  worshipping  them,  so  that  we 
understand  how  in  such  a  country  the  famous 
decree  of  Darius,  which  Daniel  disobeyed,  could  be 
enacted.  Again  the  Egyptians  do  not  seem  to 
have  supposed  that  their  enemies  were  supported 
by  gods  hostile  to  those  of  Egypt,  whereas  the  Assy- 
rians considered  their  gods  as  more  powerful  than 
those  of  the  nations  they  subdued.  This  is  im- 
portant in  connection  with  the  idea  that  at  least  one 
of  the  Pharaohs  of  the  oppression  was  an  Assyrian. 
Respecting  the  time  of  this  king  we  can  only  say 
that  he  was  reigning  for  about  a  year  or  more  before 
the  Exodus,  which  we  place  B.C.  1652. 

Before  speaking  of  the  later  Pharaohs  we  may 
mention  a  pomt  of  weight  in  reference  to  the  iden- 
tification of  these  earlier  ones.  The  accounts  of  the 
campaigns  of  the  Pharaohs  of  the  xviiith,  xixth  and 
xxth  dynasties  have  not  been  found  to  contain  any 
reference  to  the  Israelites.  Hence  it  might  be  sup- 
posed that  in  their  days,  or  at  least  during  the 
greater  part  of  their  time,  the  Israelites  were  not 
yet  in  the  Promised  Land.  There  is,  however, 
an  almost  equal  silence  as  to  the  Canaanite  nations. 
The  land  itself,  KANANA  or  KANAAN,  is  indeed 
mentioned  as  invaded,  as  wel  1  .as  those  of  KIl  I^TA  and 
AMAR,  referring  to  the  Ilittitas  and  Amorites;  but 
the  latter  two  must  have  been  ))r;uiches  of  those  na- 
tions seated  in  the  valley  of  the  drontes.  A  recently- 
discovered  record  of  Thothmes  III.  published  by 
M.  de  Rouge,  in  the  Jicviw  Archeola/iqKC  (Nov, 
18()1,  pp.  ;i44,  seqq.),  contains  many  names  of 
Caiuumite  towns  conquered  by  that  king,  but  not 
cue  recognized  as  Israelite.  These  Canaanit".  names 
ai'e,  moreover,  on  the  Israelite  borders,  not  in  the 
heart  of  the  country.     It  is  interesting  that  a  great 


816 


PHARAOH 


battle  is  shown  to  have  been  won  by  this  king 
at  Megiddo.  It  seems  probable  that  the  Egyp- 
tians either  abstained  li'om  att,icking  the  Israelites 
from  a  recollection  of  the  calamities  of  the  Exodus, 
or  that  they  were  on  friendly  temis.  It  is  veiy 
remarkable  that  the  Egyptians  were  granted  privi- 
leges in  the  Law  (Deut.  xxiii.  7),  and  that  Shishak, 
the  first  king  of  Egypt  after  the  Exodus  whom 
we  know  to  have  invaded  the  Hebrew  territories, 
was  of  foreign  extraction,  if  not  actually  a  foreigner. 

5.  Pharctoh,  father-in-law  of  Mered. — In  the 
genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  mention  is  made  of 
the  daughter  of  a  Pharaoh,  married  to  an  Israelite ; 
*'  Bithiah  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  which  Mered 
took"  (1  Chr.  iv.  18).  That  the  name  Pharaoh 
here  probably  designates  an  Egyptian  king  we  have 
already  shown,  and  obsen'ed  that  the  date  of  Mered 
is  doubtful,  although  it  is  likely  that  he  lived  before, 
or  not  much  after',  the  Exodus.  [Bithiah.]  It 
may  be  added  that  the  name  Miriam,  of  one  of  the 
family  of  ]\Iered  (17),  apparently  his  sister,  or  per- 
haps a  daughter  by  Bithiah,  suggests  that  this  part 
of  the  genealogies  may  refer  to  about  the  time  of 
the  Exodus.  Tiiis  marriage  may  tend  to  aid  us 
in  determining  the  age  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.  It 
is  perhaps  less  pixibable  that  an  Egyptian  I'haraoli 
would  have  given  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  an 
Israelite,  than  that  a  Shepherd  king  would  have 
done  so,  before  the  oppression.  But  Bithiah  may 
have  been  taken  in  war  after  the  Exodus,  by  the 
surprise  of  a  caiavan,  or  in  a  foray. 

G.  Pharaoh,  fathcr-in-laio  of  Hadad  the  Edom- 
ite. — Among  the  enemies  who  were  raised  up 
against  Solomon  was  Ifadad,  an  Edomite  of  the 
blood  royal,  wlio  had  escaped  as  a  child  from  the 
slaughter  of  his  nation  by  Joab.  We  read  of  him 
and  his  servants,  "  And  they  arose  out  of  Midian, 
and  came  to  Paran :  and  they  took  men  with  them 
out  of  Pai'an,  and  they  came  to  Egyjit,  unto  Pharaoh 
king  of  Egypt ;  who  gave  him  an  house,  and  ap- 
pointed him  victuals,  and  gave  him  land.  And 
Hadad  found  great  tavour  in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh, 
.so  that  he  gave  him  to  wife  the  sister  of  his  own 
wite,  the  sister  of  Tahpenes  the  queen.  And  the 
sister  of  Tahpenes  bare  him  Genubath  his  son, 
whom  Tahpenes  weaned  in  Pharaoh's  liouse :  and 
Genubath  was  in  Pharaoh's  houshold  among  the 
sons  of  Pharaoh  "  (1  K.  xi.  18-20).  When,  how- 
€vei',  Hadad  heard  that  David  and  Joab  were  both 
dead,  he  asked  Pharaoh  to  let  him  return  to  liis 
country,  and  was  unwillingly  allowed  to  go  (21, 
22).  Probably  the  fugitives  took  refuge  in  an 
Egyptian  mining-station  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai, 
and  so  obtained  guides  to  conduct  them  into  Egypt. 
There  they  were  received  in  accordance  with  the 
Egyptian  policy,  but  with  the  especial  favour  that 
seems  to  have  been  shown  about  this  time  towai'ds 
the  eastei-n  neighbours  of  the  Pharaohs,  which  ma}' 
reasonably  be  supposed  to  have  led  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  xxiind  dynasty  of  foreign  extraction. 
For  the  identification  of  this  Pharaoh  we  have  chro- 
nological indications,  and  the  name  of  his  wife. 
Unfortunately,  however,  the  history  of  Egypt  at 
this  time  is  extremely  obscure,  neither  the  monu- 
ments nor  Manetho  giving  us  clear  information  as 
to  the  kincjs.  It  appears  that  towards  the  latter 
part  of  the  xxth  dynasty  the  high-priests  of  Amen, 
the  god  of  Thebes,  gained  great  power,  and  at  last 
supplanted  the  Kameses  family,  at  least  in  Ujnier 
Egypt.  At  the  same  time  a  line  of  Tanite  kings, 
Manetho's  xxist  dynasty,  seems  to  have  ruled  in 
Lower  Egypt.     From  the  latest  part  of  tlii!  xxth 


PHARAOH 

dynasty  three  houses  appear  to  have  reigned  at  the 
same  time.  The  feeble  xxth  dynasty  was  probably 
soon  extinguished,  but  the  priest-rulers  and  the 
Tanites  appear  to  have  reigned  contemporaneously, 
until  they  were  both  succeeded  by  the  Bubastites  of 
the  xxiind  dynasty,  of  whom  Sheshonk  I.,  the  Shishak 
of  the  Bible,  was  the  first.  The  monuments  have 
preserved  the  names  of  several  of  the  high-priests, 
perhaps  all,  and  probably  of  some  of  the  Tanites ; 
but  it  is  a  question  whether  Manetho's  Tanite 
line  does  not  include  some  of  the  former,  and  we 
have  no  means  of  testing  the  accuracy  of  its  num- 
bers. It  may  be  reasonably  supposed  that  the 
Pharaoh  or  Pharaohs  spoken  of  in  the  Bible  as 
ruling  in  the  time  of  David  and  Solomon  were 
Tanites,  as  Tanis  was  nearest  to  the  Israelite  terri- 
tory. We  have  therefore  to  compare  the  chrono- 
logical indications  of  Scripture  with  the  list  of 
this  dynasty.  Shishak,  as  we  have  shown  else- 
where, must  have  begun  to  reign  in  about  the  24tli 
or  25th  year  of  Solomon  (is.c.  cir.  990-989). 
[Chronology.]  The  conquest  of  Edom  probably 
took  place  some  50  years  earlier.  It  may  there- 
fore be  infen-ed  that  Hadad  fled  to  a  king  of  Egypt 
who  may  have  ruled  at  least  25  years,  probably 
ceasing  to  govern  before  Solomon  married  the 
daughter  of  a  Phai-aoh  early  in  his  reign  ;  for  it 
seems  unlikely  that  the  protector  of  David's  enemy 
would  have  given  his  daughter  to  Solomon,  unless 
he  wej-e  a  ]iowerless  king,  which  appears  was  not 
the  case  with  Solomon's  tather-in-law.  This  would 
give  a  reign  of  25  years,  or  25  -f  x  separated 
from  the  close  of  the  dynasty  by  a  period  of  24  or 
25  years.  According  to  Africauus,  the  list  of  the 
xxist  dynasty  is  as  follows :  Smendes,  26  years  ; 
Psusennes,  46 ;  Nephelcheres,  4  ;  Ameuothis,  9 ; 
Osochor,  6 ;  Psinaches,  9  ;  Psusennes,  14 ;  but 
Eusebius  gives  the  second  king  41,  and  the  last, 
35  years,  and  his  numbers  make  up  the  sum  of 
130  years,  which  Africanus  and  he  agree  in  assign- 
ing to  the  dynasty.  If  we  take  the  numbers  of 
Eusebius,  Osochor  would  probably  be  the  Pharaoh 
to  whom  Hadad  fled,  and  Psusennes  II.  the  father- 
in-law  of  Solomon ;  but  the  numbers  of  Afi'icanus 
would  substitute  Psusennes  I.,  and  probably  Psina- 
ches. We  cannot,  however,  be  sure  that  the  reigns 
did  not  overlap,  or  were  not  separated  by  intervals, 
and  the  numbers  are  not  to  be  considered  reliable 
until  tested  by  the  monuments.  The  royal  names 
of  the  period  have  been  searched  in  vain  for  any  one 
resembling  Tahpenes.  If  the  Egyptian  equivalent 
to  the  similar  geographical  name  Tahpanhes,  &c., 
were  known,  we  miglit  have  some  clue  to  that  of 
this  queen.     [Tahpenes  ;  Tahpanhes.] 

7.  Pharaoh,  father-in-law  of  Solomon. — In  the 
narrative  of  the  beginning  of  Solomon's  reign,. after 
the'  account  of  tlie  deaths  of  Adonijah,  Joab,  and 
Shimei,  and  the  deprivation  of  Abiatliar,  we  read: 
"  And  the  kingdom  was  established  in  the  hand  of 
Solomon.  And  Solomon  made  affinity  with  Pharaoh 
king  of  Egypt,  and  took  Pharaoh's  daughter,  and 
brought  her  into  the  city  of  David,  luitil  he  had 
made  an  end  of  building  his  own  house,  and  the 
house  of  the  Lord,  and  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  round 
about"  (]  K.  ii.  46,  iii.  1).  The  events  mentioned 
before  the  marriage  belong  altogether  to  the  very 
commencement  of  Solomon's  reign,  excepting  the 
matter  of  Shimei,  which  extending  through  three 
years  is  carried  on  to  its  completion.  The  mention 
that  the  queen  was  brought  into  the  city  of  David, 
while  Solomon's  house,  and  the  Temple,  and  the 
city- wall,  were  building,   shows  that  the  mairiage 


PHARAOH 

took  place  not  later  than  the  eleventh  year  of  the 
king,  when  the  Temple  was  finished,  having  been 
commenced  in  tlie  fourth  year  (vi.  1,  37,  38).  It 
is  also  evident  th;it  this  alliance  was  before  Solomon's 
tailing  away  into  idolatry  (iii.  3),  of  which  the 
Egyptian  queen  does  not  seem  to  have  been  one  of 
the  causes.  From  this  chronological  indication  it 
appears  that  the  man-iage  must  have  taken  place  be- 
tween about  24  and  11  jea,rs  befoi-e  Shishak's  acces- 
sion. It  must  be  recollected  that  it  seems  certain 
that  Solomon's  tather-in-law  was  not  the  Pharaoh 
who  was  reigning  when  Hadad  left  Egypt.  -Both 
Pharaohs,  as  already  shown,  cannot  yet  be  identified 
in  Manetho's  list.     [Pharaoh's  Daughter.] 

This  Pharaoh  led  an  expedition  into  Palestine, 
which  is  thus  incidentally  mentioned,  where  the 
building  of  Gezer  by  Solomon  is  i-ecorded  :  "  Pha- 
raoh king  of  Egypt  had  gone  up,  and  taken  Gezer, 
and  burnt  it  with  tire,  and  slain  the  Canaanites 
that  dwelt  in  the  city,  and  given  it  [for]  a  present 
unto  his  daughter,  Solomon's  wife"  (ix.  16).  This 
is  a  very  curious  historical  circumstance,  for  it 
shows  that  in  the  reign  of  David  or  Solomon,  more 
probably  the  latter,  an  Egyptian  king  apparently  on 
tenns  of  friendship  with  the  Israelite  monarch, 
conducted  an  expedition  into  Palestine,  and  besieged 
and  captured  a  Canaanite  city.  This  occurrence  warns 
us  against  the  supposition  that  similar  expeditions 
could  not  have  occurred  in  earlier  times  without  a  war 
with  the  Israelites.  Its  incidental  mention  also  shows 
the  danger  of  inferring,  from  the  silence  of  Scripture 
as  to  any  such  earlier  expedition,  that  nothing  of  the 
kind  took  place.     [Palestine,  p.  6(37,  «.] 

This  Egyptian  alliance  is  the  first  indication, 
after  the  days  of  Moses,  of  that  leaning  to  Egypt 
which  was  distinctly  forbidden  in  the  Law,  and 
produced  the  most  disastrous  consequences  in  later 
times.  The  native  kings  of  Egypt  and  the  Ethio- 
pians readily  supported  the  Hebrews,  and  were 
unwilling  to  malie  war  upon  them,  but  they  ren- 
dered them  mere  tributaries,  and  exposed  them  to 
the  enmity  of  the  kings  of  Assyria.  If  the  Hebrews 
did  not  incur  a  direct  punishment  for  their  leaning 
to  Egypt,  it  must  have  weakened  their  trust  in  the 
Divine  favour,  and  paralysed  their  ertbrts  to  defend 
the  country  against  the  Assyrians  and  their  party. 

The  next  kings  of  Egypt  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
are  Shishak,  probably  Zerah,  and  So.  The  first 
and  second  of  these  were  of  the  xxiiud  dynasty,  if 
the  identification  of  Zerah  with  Userken  be  accepted, 
and  the  third  was  doubtless  one  of  the  two  Shehelis 
of  the  xxvth  dynasty,  which  was  of  Ethiopians. 
The  xxiind  dynasty  w;is  a  line  of  kings  of  foreign 
origin,  who  retained  foreign  names,  and  it  is  notice- 
able that  Zerah  is  called  a  Cushite  in  the  Bible 
(2  Chr.  xiv.  9  ;  comp.  xvi.  8).  Shebek  was  pro- 
bably also  a  foreign  name.  The  title  "  Pharaoh  " 
is  probably  not  once  given  to  these  kings  in  the 
Bible,  because  they  were  not  Egyptians,  and  did 
not  bear  Egyptian  names.  The  Shepherd  kings,  it 
must  be  remarked,  adopted  Egyptian  names,  and 
therefore  some  of  the  earlier  sovereigns  called  Pha- 
raohs in  the  Bible  may  be  conjectured  to  have  l)een 
Shepherds  notwithstanding  that  they  bear  this  title. 
[Shishak  ;  Zerah  ;  So.] 

8.  I'harauli,  the  opiMnent  of  Sennacherib. — In 


PHARAOH 


817 


"J  According  to  t>iis  historian,  he  was  the  son  of  Psam- 
metlclius  1. :  this  tlie  monnnients  do  not  corroborate. 
Dr.  Hrugscli  says  that  he  married  NI'Iiyr-AKIClll',  Nito- 
cris,  (laughter  of  I'sammcticlms  1.  and  queen  .SIII';rUN- 
TEl'Er,  wtio  appears,  lilco  her  niotlKr,  io  liavn  been 
VOL.  II. 


the  narrative  of  Sennacherib's  war  with  Hezekiah, 
mention  is  made  not  only  of  "  Tirliakidi  king  of 
Gush,"  but  also  of"  Pharaoh  king  of  Mizraim."  kib- 
shakeh  thus  taunted  the  king  of  Judah  for  having 
sought  the  aid  of  Pharaoh :  "  Lo,  thou  trustest  in 
the  staff  of  this  broken  reed,  on  Egypt;  whereon  if 
a  man  lean,  it  will  go  into  his  hand,  and  pierce  it : 
so  [is]  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt  to  all  that  trust  in 
him"  (Is.  .xxxvi.  6).  The  comparison  of  Pharaoh 
to  a  broken  reed  is  remaikable,  as  the  common  hiero- 
glyphics for  "  king,"  restricted  to  Egyptian  sove- 
reigns, SU-TEN,  strictly  a  title  of  the  ruler  of  Upper 
Egypt,  commence  with  a  bent  reed,  which  is  an 
ideographic  symbolical  sign  proper  to  this  word, 
and  is  sometimes  used  alone  without  any  phonetic 
complement.  This  Pharaoh  can  only  be  the  Sethos 
whom  Herodotus  mentions  as  the  o)>ponent  of  Sen- 
nacherib, and  who  may  be  reasonably  supposed  to 
be  the  Zet  of  Manetho,  the  last  king  of  his  xxiiird 
dynasty.  Tirhakah,  as  an  Ethiopian,  whether  then 
ruling  in  Egypt  or  not,  is,  like  So,  apparently  not 
called  Pharaoh.  [Tirhakah.] 

9.  Pharaoh  Necho. — The  first  mention  in  the 
Bible  of  a  proper  name  with  the  title  Pharaoh  is 
in  the  case  of  Pharaoh  Necho,  who  is  also  called 
Necho  simj)ly.  His  name  is  written  Necho,  133 
and  Nechoh,  11*33,  and  in  hieroglyphics  NEKU. 
This  king  was  of  the  Saite  xxvith  dynasty,  of 
which  Wanetho  makes  him  either  the  fifth  ruler 
(Africanus)  or  the  sixth  (Eusebius).  Herodotus 
calls  him  Nekos,  and  assigns  to  him  a  reign  of  sixteen 
years,  which  is  confirmed  by  the  monuments.'^ 
He  seems  to  have  been  an  enterprising  king,  as  he 
is  related  to  have  attempted  to  complete  the  canal 
connecting  the  Red  Sea  with  the  Nile,  and  to  have 
sent  an  expedition  of  Phoenicians  to  circumnavi- 
gate Afi'ica,  which  was  successfully  accomplished. 
At  the  commencement  of  his  reign  (n.c.  610) 
he  made  war  against  the  king  of  Assyria,  and, 
being  encountered  on  his  way  by  Josiah,  de- 
feated and  slew  the  king  of  Judah  at  Wegiddo. 
The  empire  of  Assyria  was  then  drawing  to  a 
close,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Nceho's  expe- 
dition tended  to  hasten  its  fall.  He  was  marching 
against  Garchemish  on  the  Euphrates,  a  place  already 
of  importance  in  the  annals  of  the  Egyptian  wars  of 
the  xixth  dynasty  {Sel.  Pap.  Sallier,  2).  As  he 
passed  along  the  coast  of  Palestine,  Josiah  disputed 
his  passage,  probably  in  consequence  of  a  treaty  with 
Assyria.  The  king  of  Egypt  remonstrated,  setiding 
ambassadors  to  assure  him  that  he  did  not  make 
war  upon  him,  and  that  God  was  on  his  side.  "  Ne- 
vertheless Josiah  would  not  turn  his  fiice  from  him, 
but  disguised  himself,  that  he  might  fight  with 
him,  and  hearkened  not  unto  the  words  of  Necho 
from  the  mouth  of  God,  and  came  to  fight  in  the 
valley  of  Megiddo."  Here  he  was  wounded  by  the 
archers  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  and  died  (comp.  2  Chr. 
XXXV.  20-24;  2  K.  xxii'i.  20,  30).  Necho's  asser- 
tion that  he  was  obeying  God's  command  in  warring 
with  the  Assyrians  seems  here  to  be  confirme*.!. 
Yet  it  c;m  scarcely  be  understood  as  moie  than  a 
conviction  that  the  war  was  predestined,  for  it 
ended  in  the  destruction  of  Necho's  army  and  the 
curUiilmeut  of  his  empire.     Josiah  seems  from  the 


tlie  heiress  of  an  Kgyptian  royal  line,  and  supposes  that 
he  was  the  son  of  Psammelichus  by  anothfi-  wife  (see 
Ilistoire  d'tTgypte,  p.  '2ri2;  cinip,  2'I8).  If  he  married 
Nitocris,  he  may  liavo  bcin  called  by  Herodotus  by  mistake 
the  son  of  Psammelichus. 

3  G 


818 


PHARAOH 


iiiirrative  to  have  known  he  was  wrong  in  opposing 
the  king  of  Kgypt ;  otherwise  an  act  so  contrary 
to  the  Egyptianizing  policy  of  his  house  would 
scarcely  have  led  to  his  destruction  and  be  con- 
demned in  the  history.  Herodotus  mentions  this 
battle,  relating  that  ISlecho  made  war  against  the 
Syrians,  and  defeated  them  at  Magdolus,  after  which 
he  took  Cadytis,  "a  large  city  of  Syria"  (ii.  159). 
There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Magdolus  is 
Megiddo,  and  not  the  Egyptian  town  of  that  name 
[Migdol],  but  the  identification  of  Cadytis  is  diffi- 
cult. It  has  been  conjectured  to  be  Jei'usalem,  and 
its  name  has  been  supposed  to  correspond  to  the 
ancient  title  "  the  Holy,"  HK^npn,  hut  it  is 
elsewhere  mentioned  by  Herodotus  as  a  great  coast- 
town  of  Palestine  near  Egypt  (iii.  5),  and  it  has 
therefore  been  supposed  to  be  Gaza.  The  difficulty 
that  Gaza  is  not  beyond  Megiddo  would  perhaps  be 
removed  if  Herodotus  be  thought  to  have  confounded 
Megiddo  with  the  Egyptian  Magdolus,  but  this  is 
not  certain.  (See  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson's  note  to 
Her.  ii.  159,  ed.  Uawlinson.)  It  seems  possible 
that  Kadytis  is  the  Hitlite  city  KETESH,  on  the 
Orontes,  which  was  the  chief  stronghold  in  Syria 
of  those  captured  by  tlie  kings  of  the  xviiith  and 
xixth  dynasties.  The  Greek  historian  adds  that 
Necho  dedicated  the  dress  he  wore  on  these  oc- 
casions to  Apollo  at  the  temple  of  Branchidae 
(1.  c).  On  Josiah's  death  his  son  Jehoahaz  was 
set  up  by  the  people,  but  dethroned  three  months 
afterwards  by  Pharaoh,  who  imposed  on  the  land 
the  moderate  tribute  of  a  hundred  talents  of  silver 
and  a  talent  of  gold,  and  put  in  his  place  another 
son  of  Josiah,  Eliakim,  whose  name  he  changed  to 
Jehoiakim,  conveying  Jehoahaz  to  Egypt,  where 
he  died  (2  K.  xxiii.  30-34  ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  1-4). 
Jehoiakim  appears  to  liave  been  the  elder  son,  so 
that  the  deposing  of  his  brother  may  not  have  been 
merely  because  he  was  made  king  without  the  per-- 
mission  of  the  conqueror.  Necho  seems  to  have 
soon  returned  to  Egypt:  perhaps  he  was  on  his 
way  thither  when  he  deposed  Jehoahaz.  The  army 
was  probably  posted  at  Caichemish,  and  was 
there  defeated  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Necho  (B.C.  007),  that  king  not  being,  as 
it  seems,  then  at  its  head  (Jer.  xlvi.  1,  2,  6,  10). 
This  battle  led  to  the  loss  of  all  the  Asiatic  domi- 
nions of  Egypt;  and  it  is  related,  after  the  mention 
of  the  death  of  Jehoiakim,  that  "  the  king  of  Egypt 
came  not  again  any  more  out  of  his  land :  for  the 
king  of  Babylon  had  taken  from  the  river  of  Egypt 
unto  the  'iver  Euphrates  all  that  pertained  to  the 
kincr  of  Egypt"  (2K.xxiv.  7).  Jeremiah's  pi  ophecy 
of  this  great  defeat  by  Euphrates  is  followed  by 
another,  of  its  consequence,  the  invasion  of  Egypt 
itself;  but  the  latter  calamity  did  not  occur  in  the 
reign  of  Necho,  nor  in  that  of  his  immediate  suc- 
cessor, Psammetichus  [I.,  but  in  that  of  Hophra, 
and  it  was  yet  future  in  the  last  king's  reign  when 
Jeremiah  had  been  carried  into  Egypt  after  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem. 

10.  Fharaoh  Hophra. — The  next  king  of  Egypt 
mentioned  in  the  Bible  is  Pharaoh  Hophra,  the  se- 
cond successor  of  Necho,  from  whom  he  was  sepa- 
rrted  by  the  six  years'  reign  of  Psammetichus  II. 
The  name  Hophra  is  in  hieroglyphics  WAH-(P)RA- 
HaT,  and  the  last  syllable  is  equally  omitted  by  He- 
rodotus, who  writes  Apries,  and  by  I\Ianetho,  who 
writes  Uaphris.  He  came  to  the  throne  about  B.C. 
589,  and  ruled  nineteen  years.  Herodotus  makes  him 
son  of  Psammetichus  11.,  whom  he  calls  Psammis, 
and  great-grandson  of  Esammetichus  I.     The  his- 


PHARAOH 

torian  relates  his  great  prosperity,  how  he  attacked 
Sidou,  and  fought  a  battle  at  sea  with  the  king 
of  Tyre,  until  at  length  an  array  which  he  had 
dispatched  to  conquer  Cyrene  was  routed,  and  the 
Egvptians,  thinking  he  had  purposely  caused  its 
overthrow  to  gain  entire  power,  no  doubt  by  sub- 
stituting mercenaries  for  native  troops,  revolted,  and 
set  up  Amasis  as  king.  Apries,  only  supported  by 
the  Carian  and  Ionian  mercenaries,  was  routed  in  a 
pitched  battle.  Herodotus  remarks  in  narrating 
this,  "  It  is  said  that  Apries  believed  that  there  was 
not  a  god  who  could  cast  him  down  from  his  emi- 
nence, so  firmly  did  he  think  that  he  had  established 
himself  in  his  kingdom."  He  was  taken  prisoner, 
and  Amasis  for  a  while  treated  him  with  kindness, 
but  when  the  Egyptians  blamed  him,  "  he  gave  Apries 
over  into  the  hands  of  his  former  subjects,  to  deal 
with  as  they  chose.  Then  the  Egyptians  took  him 
and  strangled  him"  (ii.  161-169).  In  the  Bible  it 
is  related  that  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah,  was 
aided  by  a  Pharaoh  against  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  ful- 
filment of  a  treaty,  and  that  an  army  came  out  of 
Egypt,  so  that  the  Chaldeans  were  obliged  to  raise  the 
siege  of  Jerusalem.  The  cit}'  was  first  besieged  in  the 
ninth  year  of  Zedekiah,  B  c.  590,  and  was  captured 
in  his  eleventh  year,  B.C.  588.  It  was  evidently 
continuously  invested  for  a  length  of  time  before  it 
was  taken,  so  that  it  is  most  probable  that  Pharaoh's 
expedition  took  place  during  590  or  589.  There 
may,  therefore,  be  some  doubt  whether  Psamme- 
tichus II.  be  not  the  king  here  spoken  of;  but  it 
must  be  remembered  that  the  siege  may  be  sup- 
posed to  have  lasted  some  time  before  the  Egyptians 
could  have  heard  of  it  and  marched  to  relieve  the 
city,  and  also  that  Hophra  may  have  come  to  the 
throne  as  early  as  B.C.  590.  The  Egyptian  army 
returned  without  effecting  its  purpose  (Jer.  x.xvii. 
5-8;  Ez.  xvii.  11-18;  comp.  2  K.  x.xv.  1-4). 
Afterwards  a  remnant  of  the  Jews  fled  to  Egypt, 
and  seem  to  have  been  kindly  received.  From  the 
prophecies  against  Egypt  and  against  these  fugitives 
we  learn  more  of  the  history  of  Hophra ;  and  here 
the  narrative  of  Herodotus,  of  which  we  have  given 
the  chief  heads,  is  a  valuable  commentary.  Ezekiel 
speaks  of  the  arrogance  of  this  king  in  words  which 
strikingly  recall  those  of  the  Greek  historian.  The 
prophet  describes  him  as  a  great  crocodile  lying  in 
his  rivers,  and  saying  "  My  river  [is]  mine  own, 
and  I  have  made  [it]  for  myself"  (xxix.  3). 
Pharaoh  was  to  be  overthrown  and  his  country  in- 
vaded by  Nebuchadnezzar  (xxix.,  XXX.,  x.xxi.,  xxxii.). 
This  prophecy  was  yet  unfulfilled  in  B.C.  572  (xxix. 
17-20).  Jeremiah,  in  Egypt,  yet  more  distinctly 
prophesied  the  end  of  Pharaoh,  warning  the  Jews, 
— "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ;  Behold,  I  will  give 
Pharaoh-hophra  king  of  Egypt  into  the  hand  of  his 
enemies,  and  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  his  life  ; 
as  I  gave  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah  into  the  hand  of 
Nebuchadrezzar  king  of  Babylon,  his  enemy,  and  that 
sought  his  life  "  (xliv.  30).  In  another  place,  when 
foretelliug.the  defeat  of  Necho's  army,  the  same  pro- 
phet says, — "  Behold,  I  will  punish  Amon  in  No, 
and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with  their  gods,  and  their 
kings;  even  Pharaoh,  and  [all]  them  that  trust  in 
him :  and  I  will  deliver  them  into  the  hand  of 
those  that  seek  their  lives,  and  into  the  hand  of 
Nebuchadrezzar  king  of  Babylon,  and  into  the  hand 
of  his  servants"  (xlvi.  25,  26).  These  passages, 
which  entirely  agree  with  the  account  Herodotus 
gives  of  the  death  of  Apries,  make  it  not  impro- 
bable that  the  invasion  of  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
the  cause  of  that  disatlection  of  Ins  subjects  which 


PHARAOH'S  DAUGHTER 

ended  in  the  overthrow  and  death  of  this  Pharaoh. 
The  invasion  is  not  spoken  of  by  any  reliable  pro- 
fane historian,  excepting  Beiosus  (Cory,  Anc.  Frag. 
2nd  ed.  pp.  37,  38),  but  the  silence  of  Herodotus  and 
others  can  no  longer  be  u  matter  of  surprise,  as  we  now 
know  from  the  Assyrian  records  in  cuueitbrm  of  con- 
quests of  Egypt  either  unrecorded  elsewhere  or  only 
mentioned  by  second-rate  annalists.  No  subsequent 
Pharaoli  is  mentioned  in  Scripture,  but  there  are  pre- 
dictions doubtless  referring  to  the  misfortunes  of  later 
princes  until  the  second  Persian  conquest,  when  the 
prophecy  "  there  shall  be  no  more  a  prince  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  "  (Ez.  x\x.  13)  was  fulfilled.      [R.  S.  P.] 

PHARAOH'S  DAUGHTER ;  PHARAOH, 
THE  DAUGHTER  OF.  Tliree  Egyptian  prin- 
cesses, daughters  of  Pharaohs,  are  mentioned  in  the 
Bible. 

1.  The  preserver  of  Moses,  daughter  of  the  Pha- 
raoh who  irrst  oppressed  the  Israelites.  She  appears 
from  her  conduct  towards  Moses  to  have  been 
heiress  to  the  throne,  something  more  than  ordinary 
adoption  seeming  to  be  indicated  in  the  passage  in 
Hebrews  respecting  the  taith  of  Moses  (xi.  23-26), 
and  the  designation  "  Pharaoh's  daughter,"  perhaps 
here  indicating  that  she  was  the  only  daughter.  She 
probably  lived  for  at  least  Ibrty  years  after  she  saved 
Moses,  tor  it  seems  to  be  implied  in  Hebrews  (/.  c.) 
that  she  was  living  when  he  tied  to  Midian.  Arta- 
panus,  or  Artabanus,  a  historian  of  uncertain  date, 
who  appears  to  have  preserved  traditions  current 
among  the  Egyptian  Jews,  calls  this  princess  Merrhis, 
and  her  lather,  the  oppressoi',  Palmauothes,-  and 
relates  that  she  was  married  to  Chenephres,  who 
ruled  in  the  country  above  Memphis,  for  that  at  tiiat 
time  there  were  many  kings  of  Egypt,  but  that 
this  one,  as  it  seems,  became  sovereign  of  the  whole 
country  {Frag.  Hist.  Graec.  iii.  pp.  220  seqq.). 
Palmauothes  may  be  supposed  to  be  a  corruption  of 
Amenophis,  the  equivalent  of  Amen-hept,  the  Egyp- 
tian name  of  four  kings  of  the  xviiith  dynasty,  and 
also,  but  incorrectly,  applied  to  one  of  the  xixth, 
whose  Egyptian  name,  Menptah,  is  wholly  difl'ereut 
from  that  of  the  others.  No  one  of  those  however 
had,  as  far  as  we  know,  a  daughter  with  a  name 
resembling  Jlerrhis,  nor  is  there  any  king  with  a 
name  like  Chenephres  of  this  time.  These  kings 
Amenophis,  moreover,  do  not  belong  to  the  j)eriod 
of  contemporary  dynasties.  The  tradition  is  appa- 
rently of  little  value  excepting  as  showing  that  one 
quite  ditferent  from  that  given  by  Manetho  and  others 
was  anciently  current.     [See  PiiAKAoii,  3.] 

2.  Bithiah,  wife  of  Jlered  an  Israelite,  daughter 
of  a  Pharaoh  of  an  uncertain  age,  probably  of  about 
the  time  of  the  Exodus.  [See  Bithiah  ;  Piia- 
RAOII,  5.] 

3.  A  wife  of  Solomon,  most  probably  daughter  of 
a  king  of  the  xxist  dynasty.  She  was  married  to  Solo- 
mon early  in  his  reign,  and  apparently  treated  with 
distinction.  It  has  been  supposed  that  the  Song  of 
Solomon  was  written  on  the  occasion  of  this  marriage ; 
but  the  idea  is,  we  think,  repugnant  to  sound  criti- 
cism. She  was  at  iirst  brought  into  the  city  of  David 
(1  K.  iii.  1),  and  afterwaids  a  house  was  built  for 
her  (vii.  8,  ix.  24),  because  Solomon  would  not  have 
her  dwell  in  the  house  of  I>avid,  which  hatl  been 
rendered  holy  by  the  ark  having  been  there  (2  Chr. 
viii.  11).     [See  Pharaoh,  7.]  [H.  S.  P.] 

PHARAOH,  THE  WIFE  OF.  The  wife  of 
one  Pharaoh,  the  king  who  received  lladad  the 
Edomito,  is  mentioned  in  Scripture.     She  is  Gilled 


PHAREZ 


819 


"  queen,"  and  her  name,  Tahpenes,  is  given.  Her 
husband  was  most  probably  of  the  xxist  dynasty. 
[Tahpenks;  Pharaoh,  tj.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

PHAR'ATHONI"  {i-apadwv,  Joseph,  ^apaeo.: 
Peshito,  Phcratli;  Vulg.  I'hara).  One  of  the  cities 
of  Judaea  fortified  by  Ba(X'hides  during  his  ^-(intests 
with  Jonathan  Maccabaeus  (I  Mace.  ix.  50).  In 
both  MSS.  of  the  LXX.  the  name  is  joined  to  the 
preceding — Thamnatha-Pharathon;  but  in  Jusephus, 
the  Svriac,  and  Vulgate,  the  two  are  separated. 
Ewald  ( (?esc/«Wi^e,  iv.  373)  adheres  to  the  former. 
Pharathon  doubtless  represents  an  ancient  Piiathon, 
thougti  hardly  that  of  the  Judges,  since  that  was  in 
Mt.  Ejjhraim,  probably  at  Ferata,  a  few  miles  west 
of  Nablus,  too  far  north  to  be  included  in  Judaea 
properly  so  Ciilled.  [G.] 

PHA'RES  ;*ape's:  Phares),  ViiWll-.Z  or  Perez, 
the  son  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  3  ;  Luke  iii.  33). 

PHA'REZ.  1.  (Perez,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  3; 
Phares,  Matt.  i.  3,  Luke  iii.  33, 1  Esd.  v.  5),  (pS: 
tape's  :  Phares,  "  a  breach."  Gen.  xxxviii.  29),  twin 
son,  with  Zarah,  or  Zerah,  of  Judah  and  Tamar  his 
daughter-in-law.  The  circumstivnces  of  his  birth 
are  detailed  in  Gen.  xxxviii.  Pharez  seems  to  have 
kept  the  right  of  primogeniture  over  his  brother, 
as,  in  the  genealogical  lists,  liis  name  comes  first. 
The  house  also  which  he  founded  was  far  more 
numerous  and  illustrious  than  that  of  the  Zarhites. 
Its  remarkable  fertility  is  alluded  to  in  Ruth  iv.  12, 
"  Let  thy  house  be  like  the  house  of  Pharez,  whom 
Tamar  bare  unto  Judah."  Of  Pharez's  personal 
history  or  character  nothing  is  known.  We  can 
only  speak  of  him  therefore  as  a  demarch,  and 
exhibit  his  genealogical  relations.  At  the  time  of 
the  sojourn  in  the  wilderness  the  families  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  were:  of  Shelah,  the  family  of  the 
Shelanites,  or  Shilonites ;  of  Pharez,  the  family  of 
the  Pharzites  ;  of  Zerah,  the  tamily  of  the  Zarhites. 
And  the  sons  of  Pharez  were,  of  Hezron  the  family 
of  the  Hezronites,  of  Hamul  the  family  of  the 
Hamulites  (Num.  xxvi.  20,  21).  After  the  death, 
therefore,  of  Er  and  Onan  without  children,  Pharez 
occupied  the  rank  of  Judah's  second  son,  and  more- 
over, from  two  of  his  sons  sprang  two  new  chief 
houses,  those  of  the  Hezronites  and  Hamulites. 
From  Hezron's  second  son  Ram,  or  Aram,  sprang 
David  and  the  kings  of  Judah,  and  eventually  Jesus 
Christ.  [Genealogy  op  Jesus  Christ.]  The 
house  of  Caleb  was  also  incorporated  into  the  house 
of  Hezron  [Caleb],  and  so  were  reckoned  among 
the  descendants  of  Pharez.  Another  line  of  Pharez's 
descendants  were  reckoned  as  sons  of  JIanasseh  by 
the  second  marriage  of  Hezron  with  the  daughter 
of  Machir  (I  Chr.  ii.  21-23).  In  the  census  of  the 
house  of  Judah  contained  in  1  Chr.  iv.,  drawn  up 
apjxirently  in  the  reign  of  Hezokiah  (iv.  41),  the 
liouses  enumerated  in  vei-.  1  are  Pharez,  Hezron, 
Carmi,  Hur,  and  Shobal.  Of  these  all  but  Carnii 
(who  was  a  Zai'hite,  Josh.  vii.  1)  were  descendants 
of  Pharez.  Hence  it  is  not  unlikely  that,  as  is 
suggested  in  the  margin  of  A.  V.,  Carmi  is  im  error 
for  C'/ieltthai.  Some  of  the  sons  of  Shelah  are  men- 
tioned separately  at  ver.  21,  22.  [Pahath-Moak.] 
In  the  reign  of  David  the  house  of  Pharez  seems 
to  have  been  eminently  distinguished.  The  chief  of 
all  the  captains  of  the  host  for  the  first  month, 


»  Whence  our  translators  borrowed  the  final  1  of  this 
name  does  not  appear ;  lliore  is  notlilng  in  cither  of  the 
originals  to  bUt;gost  II.     'I'lic  Geneva  Vers,  bas  It  too. 

3  G   2 


820 


PHAREZ 


PHAEEZ 

Jashobeam,  the  son  of  Zabdiel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  2,  3), 
so  famous   for  his  prowess    (1  Chr.   xi.   11),  and 
called   "the   chief  among   the   captains"    (ib.  and 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  8),  was   of  the   sons   of  Perez,   or 
Pharcz.    A  considerable  number  of  the  other  mighty 
men  seem  also,  from  their  patronymic  or  gentile 
names,  to  have  been  of  the  same  house,  those  namely 
who  are  called  Bethlehemites,  Paltites  (I  Chr.  ii. 
o3,   47)     Tekoites,    Netophathites,*    and    Ithrites 
(1  Chr.  ii.  5o,  iv.  7).     Zabad  the  son  of  Ahlai,  and 
.Joab,  and  his  brothers,  Abishai  and  Asahel,  we  know 
were  Pharzites  (1  Chr.  ii.  31,  36,  54,  xi.  41).    And 
the  royal  house  itself  was  the  head  of  the  family. 
We  have  no  means  of  assigning  to  their  respective 
I'arailies  those  members  of  the  tribe  of  J  udah  who 
are  incidentiilly  mentioned  alter  David's  reign,  as 
Adnah,  the  chief  captain  of  Judah  in  Jehoshaphat's 
reign,  and  Jehohanan  and  Amasiah,  his  companions 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  14-16) ;  but  that  the  family  of  Pharez 
continued  to  thrive  and  multiply,  we  may  conclude 
fiom   the   numbers    who   returned   from   captivity. 
At  Jerusalem  alone  468  of  the  sons  of  Perez,  with 
Athaiah,  or  Uthai,  at  their  head,  were  dwelling  in 
the  days  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  ix.  4  ;  Neh.  xi.  4-6), 
Zerubbabel  himself  of  course  being  of  the  family 
(1  Esdr.  V.  5).     Of  the  lists  of  returned  captives 
in  Ezr.  ii.,  Neh.  vii.,  in  Nehemiah's  time,  the  fol- 
lowing seem  to  have  been  of  the  sons  of  Phaiez, 
judging  as  before  from  the  names  of  tiieir  ancestors, 
or  the  towns  to  which  they  belonged:  the  children 
of  Baui  (Ezr.  ii.  10;  comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  4);  of  Big- 
vai  (ii.  14;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  14);  of  Ater  (ii.  16; 
comp.   1  Chr.  ii.   26,  54)  ;  of  Joiah,  or  Hariph 
(ii.    18;    Neh.    vii.    24;    comp.   1    Chr.   ii.   51); 
of  Beth-lehem  and  Netophah  (ii.  21,  22;  comp. 
1  Chr.  ii.  54)  ;  of  Kirjathraiim  (ii.  25 ;  comp.  1 
Chr.  ii.  50,  53)  ;  of  Harim  (ii.  32  ;  comp.  1  Chr. 
iv.  8)  ;  and,  judging  from  their  position,  many  of 
the  intermediate  ones  also  (comp.  also  the  lists  in 
Ezr.  X.  25-43  ;  Neh.  x.  14-27).     Of  the  builders 
of  the  wall  named  in  Neh.  iii.  the  following  were 
of  the  house  of  Phaiez:   Zaccur  the  son  of  Imri 
(ver.  2,  by  comparison  with  1  Chr.  ix.  4,  and  Ezr. 
viii.  14,  where  we  ought,  with  many  MSS.,  to  read 
Zaccur  for  Zahbud)  ;  Zadok  the  son  of  Baaua  (ver. 
4,  by  comparison  with  2  Sam.  xxiii.  29,  where  we 
find  that  Baanah  was  a  Netophathite,  which  agrees 
with  Zadok 's  place  here  next  to  the  Tekoites,  since 
Beth-lehem,  Netophah,  and  Tekoa,  are  often  in  close 
juxtaposition,  comp.  1  Chr.  ii.  54,  iv.  4,  5,  Ezr.  ii. 
21,  22,  Neh.  vii.  26,  and  the  situation  of  the  Neto- 
phathites  close  to  Jerusalem,  among  the  Benjamites, 
Neh.  xii.  28,  29,  compared   with  the  mixture  of 
Benjamites  with  Pharzites  and  Zarhites  in  Neh.  iii. 
2-7);  the  Tekoites  (ver.  5  and  27,  compared  with 
1  Chr.  ii.  24,  iv.  5) ;  Jehoiada,  the  son  of  Paseah 
(ver.  6,  compared  with  1  Clir.  iv.  12,  where  Paseah, 
a  Clielubite,  is  apparently  descended  from  Ashur, 
tlie  father  of  'I'ekoa) ;  Kephaiah,  the  son  of  Hur 
(ver.  9,  compared  with  1  Chr.  ii.  20,  50,  iv.  4, 
12,  P.eth-Raphah)  ;  Hanun  (ver.  13  and  30),  with 
tlic  inhabitants  of  Zanoah  (compared  with   1  Cin-. 
iv.    18) ;    perhaps    MalchiiJi    the   son   of  Rechab 
(ver.   14,  compared  with   1   Chr.  ii.  65) ;    Nehe- 
miah,  son  of  Azbuk,  ruler  of  Beth-zur  (ver.   16, 
compared  with  1  Chr.  ii.  45);  and  perhaps  Baruch, 
son  of  Zabba,  or  Zaccai  (ver.  20),  if  for  Zaccai  we 
read  Zaccur  as  the  meutioa  of  "  the   other,   or 

"  Maharai  the  Netophathite  was  however  a  Zarhite 
(1  Chr.  Nxvii.  13),  wlille  Heldal,  or  Helod,  the  descendant 
of  Olhniel,  was  a  I'harzite  (1  CUr.  x.wii.  15). 


PHAKISEES 


821 


second,  piece "  makes  probable,  as  well  as  his 
proximity  to  Jleremoth  in  this  second  piece,  as 
Zaccur  was  to  Jlerenioth  in  their  first  pieces  (ver. 
2,4). 

The  table  on  the  opposite  page  displays  the  chief 
descents  of  the  house  of  Pharez,  and  shows  its  lela- 
five  greatness,  as  compared  with  the  other  houses  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah.  It  will  be  observed  that  many  of 
the  details  are  more  topographical  than  genealogical, 
and  that  several  towns  in  Dan,  Simeon,  and  Ben- 
jamin, as  Eshtaol,  Zorah,  Efam,  and  Gibea,  seem 
to  have  been  peoj)led  with  Pharez's  descendants. 
The  confusion  between  the  elder  and  younger  Caleb 
is  inextricable,  and  suggests  the  suspicion  that  tKe 
elder  Caleb  or  Chelubai  may  have  had  no  real,  but 
only  a  genealogical  existence,  intended  to  embrace 
all  those  families  who  on  the  settlement  in  Canaan 
were  reckoned  to  the  house  of  Caleb,  the  son  of 
Jephunneh,  the  Kenezite. 

2.  {'^6pos:  P/irtrcs)  =  Parosii  (1  Esdr.  viii.  30; 
comp.  Ezr.  viii.  3).  [A.  C.  H.] 

PHAK'IRA  (*apipa;  Alex.  ^aptSct:  Phasida) 
nPERiDA  or  Pekuda  (1  Esdr.  v.  33). 

PHARISEES  {*api(ra7oi :  Pharisaei),  a  reli- 
gious pirty  or  school  amongst  the  Jews  at  the  time 
of  Christ,  so  called  from  Pcrisldii,  the  Aramaic  form 
of  the  Hebrew  word  Perusldm,  "  separated."  The 
name  does  not  occur  either  in  the  Old  Testament 
or  in  the  Apocrypha ;  but  it  is  usually  coni-idered 
that  the  Pharisees  were  essentially  the  same  with 
the  Assideans  (i.  e.  chastdhn  =  godly  men,  saints) 
mentioned  in  the  1st  Book  of  Jlaccabees  ii.  42,  vii. 
13-17,  and  in  the  2nd  Book  xiv.  6.  And  those  who 
admit  the  existence  of  Maccabean  I'salms  find  allu- 
sions to  the  Assideans  in  Psalms  Ixxix.  2,  xcvii.  10, 
cxxxii.  9,  16,  cxlix.  9,  where  chaaUhii  is  translated 
"  saints  "  in  the  A.  V.  (See  Fiirst's  Handwortcrbnch, 
i.  420,  h.)  In  the  2nd  Book  of  Maccabees,  supposed 
by  Geiger  to  have  been  written  by  a  Pllari^ee  (  Ur- 
schrift  und  Uebersetzimgen  dcr  Libel,  p.  226),  there 
are  two  passages  which  tend  to  illustrate  the  meaning 
of  the  word  "  sejiarated  ;"  one  in  xiv.  3,  where  Ak-i- 
mus,  who  had  been  liigh-piiest,  is  described  as  hav- 
ing deliled  himself  wilfully  "  in  the  times  of  the 
mingling  " — iu  rols  t^s  eir  i /j.  L^ias  xp6voiS, — 
and  another  in  xiv.  38,  wheie  the  zealous  llazis  is 
said  to  have  been  accused  of  Judaism,  "  in  the 
former  times  when  there  was  no  mingling,"  iv 
rols  ifXTTpocQiv  xp^vois  rris  a fii^las.  In  both 
cases  the  exjiression  "  mingling"  I'et'eis  to  the  time 
when  Antiochus  Epiphanes  had  jiaitially  succeeded 
in  breaking  down  the  barrier  which  divided  the 
.lews  from  his  other  subjects ;  and  it  was  in  the 
resolute  determination  to  resist  the  adoption  of 
Grecian  customs,  and  the  slightest  departure  from 
the  requirements  of  tlieir  own  law,  tliat  the  '*  Sepa- 
lated  "  took  their  rise  as  a  party.  Comjiaie  1  Slacc. 
i.  13-15,  41-49,  62,  63.  Subsequently,  however 
(and  perhaps  not  wholly  at  tii-st),  this  by  no 
means  exhausted  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  Pha- 
risees." 

A  knowledge  of  the  opinions  and  ]iracti(-es  of  this 
party  at  the  time  of  Christ  is  of  great  imiiortance 
for  entering  deejily  into  the  gmius  of  the  Christian 
religion.  A  cursory  perusal  of  tlie  Gospels  is  suffi- 
cient to  show  tliat  Cluisf's  teaching  was  in  some 
respects  thoroughly  antagonistic  to  theirs.  He  de- 
nounced them  in  the  bitterest  language  ;  and  in  the 
sweeping  charges  of  hypocrisy  which  Hemadeagaiust 
them  ;is  a  class.  He  might  even,  at  fii-st  sight,  seem 


822 


PHARISEES 


to  have  departed  fiom  that  spirit  of  meekness,*  of 
gentleness  in  judging  others,  and  of  abstinence  from 
the  imputation  of  improper  motives,  which  is  one  of 
the  most  characteristic  and  original  charms  of  His 
own  precepts.  See  Matt.  xv.  7,  8,  xxiii.  5,  13,  14, 
15,  23;  Mark  vii.  6;  Luke  xi.  42-44,  and  com- 
pare Matt.  vii.  1-.5,  xi.  29,  xii.  19,  20  ;  Luke  vi. 
28,  37-42.  Indeed  it  is  difficult  to  avoid  the  con- 
clusion that  His  repeated  denunciations  of  the  Pha- 
risees mainly  exasperated  them  into  taking  measures 
for  causing  his  death  ;  so  that  in  one  sense  He  may- 
be said  to  have  shed  His  blood,  and  to  have  laid 
down  His  life  in  protesting  against  their  practice  and 
spirit.  (See  especially  verses  53,  54  in  the  xith 
chapter  of  Luke,  which  follow  immediately  upon 
the  naiTation  of  what  he  said  while  dining  with  a 
Pharisee.)  Hence  to  imderstand  the  Pharisees  is, 
by  contrast,  an  aid  towards  understanding  the  spirit 
of  uncorrupted  Chi'istianity. 

Authorities. — The  sources  of  infoTOiation  respect- 
ing the  Pharisees  are  mainly  threefold.  1st.  The 
writings  of  Josephus,  who  was  himself  a  Pharisee 
(Vit.  2),  and  who  in  each  of  his  great  woiks  pro- 
fesses to  give  a  direct  account  of  their  opinions 
(B.  J.  ii.  8,  §2-14;  Ant.  xviii.  1,  §2,  and  com- 
pare xiii.  10,  §5-6,  xvii.  2,  §4,  xiii.  16,  §2,  and 
Vit.  38).  The  value  of  Josephus's  accounts  would 
be  much  greater,  if  he  had  not  accommodated  them, 
more  or  less,  to  Greek  ideas,  so  that  in  order  to 
arrive  at  the  exact  truth,  not  only  much  must  be 
added,  but  likewise  much  of  what  he  has  written, 
must  be  re-translated,  as  it  were,  into  Hebrew  Qon- 
ceptions.  2ndly.  The  New  Testament,  including 
St.  Paul's  Epistles,  in  addition  to  the  Gospels  and 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  St.  Paul  had  been  in- 
structed by  an  lUustiious  Rabbi  (Acts  xxii.  3)  ;  he 
had  been  a  rigid  Pharisee  (xxiii.  6,  xxvi.  5),  and  the 
remembrance  of  tlie  galling  bondage  from  which  he 
had  escaped  ((lal.  iv.  9,  10,  v.  1)  was  probabl}-  a 
human  element  in  that  deep  spirituality,  and  that 
uncompromising  opposition  to  Jewish  ceremonial 
observances,  by  which  he  pre-eminently  contributed 
to  make  Christianity  the  religion  of  the  civilized 
world.  3rdly.  The  first  portion  of  the  Talmud, 
called  the  Mishna,  or  "second  law."  This  is  by 
far  the  most  important  source  of  information  re- 
specting the  Pharisees  ;  and  it  may  safely  be  asserted 
that  it  is  nearly  impossible  to  have  adequate  con- 
ceptions respecting  them,  without  consulting  that 
work.  It  is  a  digest  of  the  Jewish  traditions,  and 
a  compendium  of  the  whole  ritual  law,  reduced  to 
writing  in  its  present  form  bj'  Rabbi  Jehudah  the 
Holy,  a  Jew  of  great  wealth  and  influence,  who 
flourished  in  the  2nd  century.  He  succeeded  his 
father  Simeon  as  patriarch  of  Tiberias,  and  held 
that  office  at  least  thirty  years.  The  precise 
date  of  his  death  is  disputed  ;  some  placing  it  in 
a  year  somewhat  antecedent  to  194,  a.d'.  (see 
Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Jnclcn,  iv.  p.  251),  while 
others  place  it  as  late  as  220  A.D.,  when  he  would 


^  This  is  thus  noticed  by  Milton,  from  the  point  of  view 
of  his  own  peculiar  ecclesiastical  opinions  : — "  The  invin- 
cible warrior  Zeal,  shaking  loosely  the  slack  reins,  drives 
over  the  heads  of  scarlet  prelates,  and  such  as  are  insolent 
to  maintain  traditions,  bruising  their  stiff  necks  under  his 
flaming  wheels.  Thus  did  the  true  prophets  of  old  combat 
with  the  false.  Thus  Christ  Himself,  the  fountain  of  meek- 
ness, found  acrimony  enough  to  be  still  rialling  and  vexing 
the  prelatieal  /'ftari'secs."— Apology  for  Smectynmuus. 

b  There  are  two  Gemaras:  one  of  Jerusalem,  in  which 
there  is  said  to  be  no  passage  which  can  be  proved  to  be 
later  than  the  first  half  of  the  4th  century;  and  the  other 


PHAEISEES 

have  been  about  81  years  old  (Jost's  Geschichte 
des  Jiidenthums  und  seiner  Sekten,  ii.  p.  118). 
The  Mishna  is  very  concisely  written,  and  requires 
notes.  This  circumstance  led  to  the  Commen- 
taries called  Gemara ''  (i.  e.  Supplement,  Com- 
pletion, according  to  Buxtorf),  which  form  the 
second  part  of  the  Talmud,  and  which  are  veiy 
commonly  meant  when  the  word  "Talmud"  is 
used  by  itself.  The  language  of  the  Mishna  is  that 
of  the  later  Hebrew,  purely  written  on  the  whole, 
though  with  a  few  grammatical  Aramaisms,  and 
interspersed  with  Greek,  Latin,  and  Aramaic  words 
which  had  become  naturalized.  The  woik  is  dis- 
tributed uito  six  great  divisions  or  orders.  The  first 
(^Zeraiin)  relates  to  "seeds,"  or  productions  of  the 
land,  and  it  embraces  all  matters  connected  with 
the  cultivation  of  the  soil,  and  the  disposal  of  its  pro- 
duce in  offerings  or  tithes.  It  is  preceded  by  a  trea- 
tise on  "Blessings"  [Bcracoth).  The  2nd  (Moed) 
relates  to  festivals  and  their  observances.  The  3rd 
[Nashim)  to  women,  and  includes  regulations  re- 
specting betiothals,-  marriages,  and  divorces.  The 
4th  {Nezihin)  relates  to  damages  sustained  by  means 
of  man,  be<ists,  or  things ;  with  decisions  on  points  at 
issue  between  man  and  man  in  commercial  dealings 
and  compacts.  The  5th  {Kodashiin)  treats  of  holy 
things,  of  ofierings,  and  of  the  Temple-seiwice.  The 
6th  {Tohardth)  treats  of  what  is  clean  and  unclean. 
These  6  Orders  are  subdivided  into  61  Treatises,  as 
reckoned  by  Maimonides ;  but  want  of  space  precludes 
describing  their  contents  ;  and  the  mention  of  the 
titles  would  give  little  information  without  such 
description.  For  obtaining  accurate  knowledge  on 
these  points,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Surenhusius's 
admirable  edition  of  the  Mishna  in  6  vols,  folio, 
Amsterdam,  1698,  1703,  which  contains  not  only 
a  Latin  translation  of  the  text,  but  likewise  ample 
prefaces  and  explanatory  notes,  including  those  of 
the  celebrated  Maimonides.  Others  may  prefer  the 
German  translation  of  Jost,  in  an  edition  of  the 
Jlishna  wherein  the  Hebrew  text  is  pointed ;  but 
the  German  is  in  Hebrew  letters,  3  vols.  4to., 
Berlin.  And  an  English  leader  may  obtain  an  ex- 
cellent idea  of  the  whole  work  from  an  English 
translation  of  18  of  its  Treatises  by  De  Sola  and 
Raphall,  London,  1843.  There  is  no  reasonable 
doubt,  that  although  it  may  include  a  few  passages 
of  a  later  date,  the  Mishna  was  composed,  as  a 
whole,  in  the  2nd  century,  and  represents  the  tra- 
ditions which  wore  current  amongst  the  Pharisees 
at  the  time  of  Christ.  This  may  be  shown  in  the 
following  way.  1st.  Josephus,  whose  Autobio- 
graphy was  apparently  not  written  later  than  A.D. 
100,  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Trajan,  is  an 
authority  to  show  that  up  to  that  period  no  ini' 
portimt  change  had  been  introduced  since  Christ's 
death  ;  and  the  general  facts  of  Jewish  history  render 
it  morally  imposs/ble  that  theie  should  have  been 
any  essential  alteration  either  in  the  reign  of  Trajan, 
the  epoch  of  the  great  Jewish  revolts  in  Egypt, 

of  Babylon,  completed  about  500  a.d.  The  latter  is  the 
most  important,  and  by  far  the  longest.  It  was  estimated 
by  Chiarini  to  be  fifteen  limes  as  long  as  the  Mishna 
The  uOiole  of  the  Gemaras  has  never  been  translated ; 
though  a  proposal  to  make  such  a  translation  was  brought 
before  the  public  hy  Chiarini  (^The'orie  du  Judaisme  ap- 
pliquec  a  la  Reforme  des  Israelites,  a.d.  IS.'iO).  But  Chia- 
rini died  in  1832.  Fifteen  treatises  of  the  Jerusalem  Ge- 
mara, and  two  of  the  Babylonian,  are  given,  accompanied 
by  a  Latin  translation,  in  Ugolino's  Thes,aurus,  volh.  .wii.- 
XX.  Some  interpret  Gemara  to  be  idiiilical  in  meaning 
with  Talmud,  signifying  "  doctrine." 


PHARISEES 

Cyrene,  and  Cyprus;  or  iu  the  reign  of  Hadrian, 
dming  which  there  was  the  disastrous  second  rebel- 
lion in  Judaea.  And  it  was  at  the  time  of  the 
suppression  of  this  rebellion  tiiat  Ribbi  Jehudah 
was  born  ;  the  tradition  being  that  his  birth  was  on 
tlie  very  same  day  that  iUibbi  Akiba  was  Hayed  alive 
and  put  to  death,  a.d.  136-137.  2ndly.  There  is 
frequent  reference  in  the  Mishua  to  the  sayings  and 
decisions  of  Hillel  and  Shamniai,  the  celebrated 
leaders  of  two  schools  among  the  Pharisees,  diH'ering 
from  each  other  on  what  would  seem  to  Christians 
to  be  comparatively  unimportant  points.  But  Hillel 
and  Shammai  flourished  somewhat  before  the  birth 
of  Christ;  and,  except  on  the  incredible  Rupposition 
of  forgeries  or  mistalies  on  a  very  large  scale,  their 
decisions  conclusively  furnish  p;uticuiars  of  tlie  ge- 
neral system  in  force  among  the  Pharisees  during 
the  period  of  Christ's  teaching.  There  is  likewise 
occasional  reference  to  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  Gama- 
liel, the  grandson  of  Hillel,  and  the  teacher  of  St. 
Paul.  3rdly.  The  Mishna  contains  numerous  cere- 
monial regulations,  especially  in  the  5th  Order, 
which  pre-suppose  that  the  Temple-service  is  still 
subsisting,  and  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  these 
wei'e  invented  after  tlie  destiuction  of  the  Temple 
by  Titus.  But  these  breathe  the  same  general  spirit 
as  the  other  traditions,  and  there  is  no  sufficient 
roiisou  for  assuming  any  difference  of  date  between 
the  one  kind  and  the  other.  Hence  for  facts  con- 
cerning the  system  of  the  Pharisees,  as  distinguished 
fioni  an  appreciation  of  its  merits  or  defects,  the 
value  of  the  Mishna  as  an  authority  is  greater 
than  that  of  all  other  sources  of  information  put  to- 
gether. 

Referring  to  the  Jlishna  for  details,  it  is  proposed 
in  this  article  to  give  a  general  view  of  the  pecu- 
liarities of  the  Pharisees ;  afterwards  to  notice  their 
opinions  on  a  future  life  and  on  fiee-will ;  and 
finally,  to  make  some  remarks  on  the  proselytizing 
spirit  attributed  to  them  at  the  time  of  Christ. 
Points  noticed  elsewhere  in  this  Dictionary  will  be 
•IS  far  as  possible  avoided.  Hence  information  re- 
specting Coiban  and  Phylacteries,  which  in  the  New 
Testament  are  peculiarly  associated  with  the  Pha- 
risees, must  be  sought  for  under  the  appropriate 
titles.     See  Corban  and  Frontlets. 

I.  The  fundamental  principle  of  the  Pharisees 
common  to  them  with  all  orthodox  modern  Jews  is, 
tiiat  by  the  side  of  the  written  law  regarded  as  a 
summary  of  the  jirinciples  and  general  laws  of  tlie 
Hebrew  people,  there  was  an  oral  law  to  comj)lete 
and  to  explain  the  written  law.  It  was  an  article 
of  faith  that  in  the  Pentateuch  there  wasjio  ])recept, 
and  no  rcgidation,  ceremonial,  doctrinal,  or  legal, 
of  which  God  had  not  given  fo  Jloses  all  explana- 
tions necessary  for  their  a])plication,  with  the  order 
to  transmit  them  by  word  of  mouth  (Klein's  Verile 
S'lr  le  Tiilnind,  p.  9).  The  classical  pa.ssage  in  the 
Mishna  on  this  subject  is  the  following: — "Moses 
received  the  (oi'al)  law  from  Sinai,  and  delivered  it  to 
Joshua,  and  Joshua  to  the  elders,  and  the  elders  to  the 
prophets,  and  the  prophets  to  the  men  of  the  Great 

•  A  passage  in  Deuteronomy  (xvfi.  s-ll)  lias  been  inter- 
preted so  as  to  serve  as  a  basis  for  an  oral  law.  Hut  that 
passage  seems  merely  to  prescribe  olwdience  to  the  priests, 
the  Levites,  and  to  the  judges  in  civil  and  criminal  matters 
of  controversy  bftweou  man  and  man.     A  funcif'nl  appb- 

cation  of  the  words  ^S*?y  in  ver.  11  has  favoured  the 

rabbinical  interpretation.    In  the  '  Krstivnl  Prayers'  of  llie 
Knglish  Jews,  p.  69,  for  Pentecost,  it  is  stated,  of  God,  in  a 


PHAEISEES  823 

'  Synagogue"  {Pirke  Aboth,  i.).  This  remarkable  state- 
i  ment  is  sodestitute  of  what  would  at  the  present  day 
:  be  deemed  historical  evidence,  and  would,  it  might 
\  be  supposed,  have  been  rendered  so  incredible  to  a 
!  Jew  by  the  absence  of  any  distinct  allusion  <=  to  the 
fact  in  the  Old  'i'estanieut,  that  it  is  interesting  to 
consider  by  what  process  of  argument  the  principle 
could  ever  have  won  acceptance.  It  may  be  con- 
ceived in  the  following  way.  Tlie  Pentateuch  ac- 
cording to  the  Rabbins,  contains  613  laws;  in- 
,  eluding  248  commands,  and  365  prohibitions  ;  but 
j  whatever  may  be  the  number  of  the  laws,  how- 
ever minutely  they  may  be  anatomized,  or  into 
whatever  form  they  may  be  thrown,  there  is  no- 
where an  allusion  to  the  duty  of  piayer,  or  to  the 
doctrine  of  a  future  life.  The  absence  of  the  doc- 
trine of  a  future  life  has  been  made  familiar  to 
English  theologians  by  the  author  of  "  The  divint 
Legation  of  Moses ;"  and  the  liict  is  so  undeniable, 
that  it  is  needless  to  dwell  upon  it  farther.  The 
absence  of  any  injunction  to  piay  has  not  attracted 
equal  attention,  but  seems  to  be  almost  equallv 
certain.  The  only  passage  which  by  any  ingenuity 
has  ever  been  inteipreted  to  enjoin  prayer  isin  Ex. 
xxiii.  25,  where  the  words  are  used,  "  And  ye  shall 
sene  Jehovah  your  God."  But  as  the  Pentateuch 
abounds  with  specific  injunctions  as  to  the  mode  of 
serving  Jehovah  ;  by  sacrifices,  by  meat-oHerings, 
by  drink-offerings,  by  the  rite  of  circumcision,  by 
observing  festivals,  such  as  the  Sabbath,  the  Pass- 
over, the  feast  of  weeks,  and  the  feast  of  taber- 
nacles, by  obeying  all  His  ceiemonial  and  moral 
commands,  and  by  loving  Him,  it  is  contrary  to 
sound  j-ules  of  construction  to  import  into  the 
general  word  "serve"  Jehovah  the  specific  mean- 
ing "pray  to"  Jehovah,  when  that  jiarticular 
mode  of  service  is  nowhere  distinctly  commanded 
in  the  law.  There  being  then  thus  no  mention  ' 
either  of  a  future  life,  or  of  prayer  as  a  duty,*! 
it  would  be  easy  for  the  Pharisees  at  a  time  when 
prayer  was  universally  practised,  and  a  future  life 
was  generally  believed  in  or  desired,  to  argue  from 
tlie  supposed  inconceivability  of  a  true  revelation 
not  commanding  prayer,  or  not  asserting  a  future 
life,  to  the  necessity  of  Jloses  having  "treated  of 
both  orally.  And  when  the  principle  of  an  oral 
tradition  in  two  such  important  points  was  once 
admitted,  it  was  easy  for  a  skilful  controversialist  to 
carry  the  appliciition  of  the  principle  much  farther 
by  insisting  that  there  was  precisely  the  same  evi- 
dence for  numerous  other  traditions  having  come 
from  ]\loses  as  for  those  two;  and  that  it  was  illo- 
gical, as  well  as  presmnptuous  to  admit  the  two 
only,  and  to  exercise  the  right  of  selection  and  pri- 
vate judgment  I'especting  the  rest. 

It  is  not  fo  be  supposed  that  all  the  traditions 
which  bound  the  Pharisees  were  believed  to  be 
direct  revelations  to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai.  In 
addition  to  such  revelations,  which  were  not  dis- 
puted, although  there  w;us  no  pi-oof  from  the  written 
law  to  support  them,  and  in  addition  to  interpreta- 
tions received  fi-om  Moses,  which  were  either  implied 

]  prayer,  "  He  explained  it  (the  law)  to  His  people/ace  to 
face,  .and  on  every  point  are  ninety-eight  explanations." 

J  Mahomet  was  preceded  both  by  Christianity  and  by 
the  latest  development  of  Judaism  :  from  both  of  which  he 
borrowed  much.  See,  as  to  Judaism,  Geiger's  essay,  Was 
liat  Mohammed  aiis  dcm  JitdiMthitm  avfgaiommtn  f  Still, 
one  of  the  most  marked  characteristics  of  the  Koran  is  the 
vmweiiried  reiteration  of  the  duty  of  prayer,  and  of  the 
certainty  of  a  future  slal«  of  retribution. 


824 


PHARISEES 


in  the  vviitten  law  or  to  be  elicited  from  them  by 
reasoning,  there  were  three  other  classes  of  tradi- 
tions. 1st.  Opinions  on  disputed  points,  which 
were  the  result  of  a  majority  of  votes.  To  this 
class  belonged  the  secondary  questions  on  which 
there  was  a  ditference  between  the  schools  of  Hillel 
and  Shammai.  2ndly.  Decrees  made  by  prophets 
and  wise  men  in  difierent  ages,  in  conformity  with 
a  saying  attributed  to  the  men  of  the  ('Ireat  Syna- 
gogue, "  Be  deliberate  in  judgment ;  train  up  many 
disciples ;  and  make  a  fence  for  the  law."  These 
carried  prohibitions  farther  than  the  written  law  or 
oral  law  of  Moses,  in  order  to  protect  the  Jewish 
people  from  temptations  to  sin  or  pollution.  For 
example,  the  injunction  "  Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a 
kid  in  his  mother's  milk,"  «  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26  ; 
Deut.  xiv.  21  ;  was  intei-preted  by  the  oral  law  to 
mean  that  the  flesh  of  quadrupeds  might  not  be 
cooked,  or  in  any  way  mixed  with  milk  for  food  ; 
so  that  even  now  amongst  the  orthodox  Jews  milk 
may  not  be  eaten  for  some  hours  after  meat.  But 
this  was  extended  by  the  wise  men  to  the  flesh  of 
birds ;  and  now,  owing  to  this  "  fence  to  the  law," 
the  admixture  oi poultry  with  any  milk,  or  its  pre- 
parations, is  rigorously  forbidden.  When  once  a 
decree  of  this  kind  had  been  passed,  it  could  not  be 
reversed ;  and  it  was  subsequently  said  that  not 
even  Elijah  himself  could  fake  away  anything  from 
the  18  points  which  had  been  detennined  on  by 
the  school  of  Shammai  and  the  school  of  Hillel. 
3rdly.  Legal  decisions  of  proper  ecclesiastical  autho- 
rities on  disputed  questions.  Some  of  these  were 
attributed  to  Closes,  some  to  Joshua,  and  some  to 
Ezra.  Some  likewise  to  Rabbis  of  later  date,  such 
as  Hillel  and  Gamaliel.  However,  although  in  these 
several  ways,  all  the  traditions  of  the  Pharisees 
were  not  deemed  direct  revelations  from  Jehovah, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  all  became  invested,  more  or 
less,  with  a  peculiar  sanctity;  so  that,  regarded 
collectively,  the  study  of  them  and  the  obsei-vance 
of  them  became  as  imperati\'e  as  the  study  and  ob- 
servance of  the  precepts  in  the  Bible. 

Viewed  as  a  whole,  they  treated  men  like  chil- 
dren, formalizing  and  defining  the  minutest  par- 
ticulars of  ritual  obi^ervances.  The  expressions  of 
"  bondage,"  of  "weak  and  beggarly  elements,"  and 
of  "  burdens  too  heavy  for  men  to  bear,"  faithfully 
i-epresent  the  impression  produced  by  their  multi- 
plicity. An  elaborate  argument  might  be  advanced 
for  many  of  them  individually,  but  the  sting  of 
them  consisted  in  fheir  aggregate  number,  which 
would  have  a  tendency  to  quench  the  fervour  and 
the  freshness  of  a  spiritual  religion.  They  varied 
in  character,  and  the  following  instances  may  be 
given  of  three  different  classes : — 1st,  of  those  which, 
admitting  certain  principles,  were  points  reasonable 
to  define ;  2ndly,  of  points  defined  which  were 
superfluously  particularized  ;  JVnd  Srdly,  of  points 
defined  where  the  discussion  of  them  at  all  was 
superstitious  and  pueiile.  Of  the  first  class  the 
very  first  decision  in  the  Mishna  is  a  specimen. 
It  defines  the  penod  up  to  which  a  Jew  is  bound, 
as  his  evening  service,  to  repeat  the  Shenia.  The 
Shema  is  the  celebrated  passage  in  Deut.  vi.  4-9, 
commencing,  "Hear,  0  Israel :  the  Loid  our  God 
is  one  Lord,  and  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  ail  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and 
with  all  thy  might."     It  is  a  tradition  that  every 


o  Although  this  pioliibition  occurs  tln-ee  tunes,  no  light 
is  thrown  upon  its  meaning  by  the  context.  The  most  pro- 
bable conjecture  is  that  given  under  the  head  of  Idolatri- 


PHARISEES 

Israelite  is  bound  to  recite  this  passage  twice  in  tlie 
twenf  y-four  hours,  morning  and  evening — for  which 
authority  is  supposed  to  be  found  in  verse  7,  where 
it  is  said  of  these  words,  "Thou  shalt  talk  of  them 
.  .  .  .  when  thou  liest  down  and  when  thou  visest 
up."  The  compulsory  recitation  of  even  these  words 
twice  a  day  might  be  objected  to  as  leading  to 
fomialism  ;  but,  accepting  the  recitation  as  a  reli- 
gious duty,  it  might  not  be  unreasonable  that  the 
range  of  time  permitted  for  the  recitation  should  be 
defined.  The  following  is  the  decision  on  this  point 
in  the  Mishna,  Beracoth  1.  "  From  what  time  do 
they  recite  the  Shema  in  the  evening  ?  From  the 
time  that  the  priests  are  admitted  to  eat  their  obla- 
tions fill  the  end  of  the  first  watch.  The  words  of 
Kabbi  Eliezer :  but  the  wise  men  say,  up  to  mid- 
night. Rabban  Gamaliel  says,  until  the  column  of 
dawn  has  arisen.  Case :  His  sons  returning  from 
a  house  of  entertainment  said,  We  have  not  yet 
recited  the  Shema;  to  whom  he  said,  If  the  column 
of  dawn  has  not  yet  arisen,  you  are  bound  to  recite 
it.  But  not  this  alone ;  but  wherever  the  wise  men 
have  said  '  to  midnight,'  their  injunction  is  in  force 

until  the  column  of  dawn  has  arisen If  so, 

why  did  the  wise  men  say  till  midnight?  In  order 
to  keep  men  far  fi'om  transgression."  'I'he  following 
is  an  instance  of  the  second  class.  It  relates  to  the 
lighting  candles  on  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath,  which 
is  the  duty  of  every  Jew :  it  is  found  in  the 
Jlishna,  in  the  treatise  Shahhath,  c.  ii.,  and  is 
printed  in  the  Hebrew  and  English  Prayer-Book, 
according  to  the  form  of  the  German  and  Polish 
Jews,  p.  66,  from  which,  to  avoid  objections,  this 
translation,  and  others,  where  if  is  possible,  are  taken. 
"  With  what  sort  of  wick  and  oil  are  the  candles 
of  the  Sabbath  to  be  lighted,  and  with  what  are 
they  not  to  be  lighted  ?  They  are  not  to  be  lighted 
with  the  woolly  substance  that  gi'ows  upon  cedars, 
nor  with  undressed  flax,  nor  with  silk,  nor  with 
rushes,  nor  with  leaves  out  of  the  wilderness,  nor 
with  moss  that  grows  on  the  surface  of  wafer,  nor 
with  pitch,  nor  with  wax,  nor  with  oil  made  of 
cotton-seed,  nor  with  the  fat  of  the  tail  or  the 
entrails  of  beasts.  Nathan  Hamody  saith  it  may 
be  lighted  with  boiled  suet;  but  the  wise  men  say, 
be  it  boiled  or  not  boiled,  it  may  not  be  lighted 
with  it.  It  may  not  be  lighted  with  burnt  oil  on 
festival-days.  Kabbi  Ishmael  says  it  may  not  be 
lighted  with  train-oil  because  of  honour  to  the  Sab- 
bath ;  but  the  wise  men  allow  of  all  sorts  of  oil : 
with  mixed  oil,  with  oil  of  nuts,  oil  of  radish-seed, 
oil  of  fish,  oil  of  gourd-seed,  of  rosin  and  gum. 
Rabbi  Tar])hun  saith  they  are  not  to  be  lighted  but 
with  oil  of  olives.  Nothing  that  grows  out  of  the 
woods  is  used  for  lighting  but  flax,  and  nothing 
that  grows  out  of  woods  doth  not  pollute  by  the 
pollution  of  a  tent  but  flax  :  the  wick  of  cloth  that 
is  doubled,  and  has  not  been  singed.  Rabbi  Eleazar 
saith  it  is  tinclean,  and  may  not  be  lighted  withal ; 
Rabbi  Akibah  saith  it  is  clean,  and  may  be  lighted 
withal.  A  man  may  not  split  a  shell  of  an  egg 
and  fill  it  with  oil  and  put  it  in  the  socket  of  a 
candlestick,  because  it  shall  blaze,  though  the  candle- 
stick be  of  earthenware ;  but  Puibbi  Jehudah  per- 
mits it :  if  the  potter  made  it  with  a  hole  through 
at  first,  it  is  allowed,  because  it  is  the  same  vessel. 
No  man  shall  fill  a  platter  with  oil,  and  give  it 
place  next  to  the  lamp,  and  put  the  head  of  the 


(i.  Sd9  !;),  that  it  was  aimed  against  some  practice  of  ido- 
hiters.  Mr.  Laing  gives  a  simi  lar  explanation  of  the  Chris- 
tian proliibiiion  in  Scandinavia  against  eating  horse-flesh. 


PHAEISEES 

wick  in  a  platter  to  make  it  drop  the  oil ;  but 
liabbi  Jehudah  permits  it."  Now  in  regard  to 
details  of  this  kind,  udmitting  it  was  not  unreason- 
able to  make  some  regulations  concerning  lighting 
candles,  it  certainlv  seems  that  the  above  particulars 
are  too  minute,  and  that  all  which  w;is  really  essen- 
tial could  have  been  brought  within  a  much  smaller 
compass.  3rdly.  A  specimen  of  the  3rd  class  may 
be  pointed  out  in  the  beginning  of  the  treatise 
on  festivals  {Moed),  entitled  Beitzah,  an  Egg, 
from  the  following  case  of  the  egg  being  the  first 
point  discussed  in  it.  We  are  gravely  informed 
that  "  an  egg  laid  on  a  festival  may  be  eaten,  ac- 
cording to  the  school  of  Shammai ;  but  the  school 
ofHiilel  says  it  must  not  be  eaten."  In  order  to 
understand  tliis  important  controversy,  which  re- 
minds us  of  the  two  parties  in  a  well-known  work, 
who  took  their  names  from  the  end  on  which  each 
held  that  an  egg  ought  to  be  broken,  it  must  be 
observed  that,  tor  a  )-eason  into  which  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  enter  at  present,  it  was  admitted  on  all 
hands,  both  by  the  school  of  Hillel  and  the  school 
of  Shammai,  that  if  a  bird  which  was  neither  to 
be  eaten  nor  killed  laid  an  egg  on  a  festival,  the  egg 
was  not  to  be  eaten.  The  only  point  of  controversy 
was  respecting  an  egg  laid  by  a  lien  that  would  be 
afterwards  eaten.  Now  the  school  of  Hillel  inter- 
dicted the  eating  of  such  an  egg,  on  account  of  a 
passage  in  the  5th  verse  of  the  16th  chapter  of 
E.xodus,  wherein  Jehovah  said  to  Moses  respecting 
the  people  who  gathered  manna,  "  on  the  sixth  day 
they  shall  prepare  tliat  which  they  bring  in."  For 
it  was  inferred  from  these  words  that  on  a  common 
day  of  the  week  a  man  might  "  prepare  "  for  the 
Sabbath,  or  prepare  for  a  feast-day,  but  that  he 
might  not  prepare  for  the  Sabbath  on  a  feast-day, 
nor  tor  a  feast-day  on  the  Sabbath.  Now,  as  an 
egg  laid  on  any  particular  day  was  deemed  to  have 
been  "  prepai'ed"  the  day  before,  an  egg  laid  on  a 
feast-day  following  a  Sabbath  might  not  be  eaten, 
because  it  w;us  prepared  on  the  Sabbath,  and  the 
eating  of  it  would  involve  a  breach  of  the  Sabbath. 
And  although  all  feast-days  did  not  fall  on  a  day 
following  the  Sabbath,  yet  as  many  did,  it  was 
deemed  better,  ex  majori  cauteld,  "  as  a  fence  to 
the  law,"  to  interdict  the  eating  of  an  egg  which 
had  been  laid  on  any  feast-day,  whether  such  day 
was  or  was  not  the  day  after  the  Sabbath  (see 
Surenhusius's  Mishna,  ii.  28'2).  In  a  world  wherein 
the  objects  of  human  interest  and  wonder  are  nearly 
endless,  it  certainly  does  seem  a  degradation  of  hu- 
man intelligence  to  exercise  it  on  matters  so  trifling 
and  petty. 

In  order,  however,  to  observe  regulations  on 
jioints  of  this  kind,  mixed  with  others  less  objec- 
tionable, and  with  some  which,  regarded  from  a 
certain  point  of  view,  were  in  themselves  indivi- 
diially  not  um-easonable,  the  Pharisees  formed  a 
kind  of  society.  A  member  was  called  a  chaber 
(1311),  and  those  among  the  middle   and    lower 

classes  who  were  not  members  were  called  "  the 
people  of  the  land,"  or  the  vulgar.  Kacli  member 
undertook,  in  the  presence  of  three  othei'  members, 
that  he  would  remain  true  to  the  laws  of  the  asso- 
ciation. The  conditions  were  various.  One  of  tran- 
scendant  importance  was  that  a  member  should 
refrain  fiom  everything  that  was  not  tithed  (conip. 
Matt,  xxiii.  2.'!,  and  Luke  xviii.  12).  The  Mishna  says, 
"  He  who  undertakes  to  be  triistwort/n/  (a  word  with 
a  technical  Pharisaical  meiuiing)  tithes  whatever  he 
eats,  and  whatever  he  sells,  and  whatever  he  buys,  and 


PHARISEES 


825 


does  not  eat  aiul  drink  with  the  people  of  the  land." 
This  was  a  point  of  peculiar  delicacy,  for  the  por- 
tion of  produce  resen'cd  as  tithes  for  the  priests  and 
Levites  was  holy,  and  the  enjoyment  of  what  was 
holy  was  a  deadly  sin.  Hence  a  Pharisee  was 
bound,  not  only  to  ascertain  as  a  buyer  whether 
the  articles  which  he  purch;ised  had  been  duly 
tithed,  but  to  have  the  same  certainty  in  regaixl  to 
what  he  eat  in  his  own  house  and  when  taking  his 
meals  with  others.  And  thus  Christ,  in  eating  with 
publicans  and  sinners,  ran  counter  to  the  first  prin- 
ciples, and  shocked  the  most  deeply-rooted  preju- 
dices, of  Pharisaism ;  lor,  independently  of  other 
obvious  considerations.  He  ate  and  drank  with  "  the 
people  of  the  land,"  and  it  would  have  been  assumed 
as  Luidoubted  that  He  partook  cm  such  occasions  of 
food  which  had  not  been  duly  tithed. 

Perhaps  some  of  the  most  characteristic  laws  of 
the  Pharisees  related  to  what  was  clean  (tdhor) 
and  miclean  {tame).  Among  all  Oriental  nations 
there  has  been  a  certain  tendency  to  symbolism  in 
religion  ;  and  if  any  symbolism  is  admitted  on  sucli 
a  subject,  nothing  is  more  natural  than  to  symbolize 
purity  and  cleanliness  of  thought  by  cleanliness  of 
person,  dress,  and  actions.  Again,  in  all  climates, 
but  especially  in  wann  climates,  the  sanitary  ad- 
vantages of  such  cleanliness  would  tend  to  coufinn 
and  perpetuate  this  kind  of  symbolism  ;  and  when 
once  the  principle  was  conceded,  superstition  would 
be  certain  to  attach  an  intrinsic  moral  value  to  the 
rigid  obsei-vance  of  the  symbol.  In  addition  to  what 
might  be  explained  in  this  manner,  there  arose 
among  the  Jews — partly  from  opposition  to  idola- 
trous practices,  or  to  wliat  savoured  of  idolatry, 
partly  from  causes  which  it  is  difficult  at  the  pre- 
sent day  even  to  conjecture,  possibly  from  mere  pre- 
judice, individual  antipathy,  or  strained  fanciful 
analogies — peculiar  ideas  concerning  what  was  clean 
and  unclean,  which  at  first  sight  might  appear 
pur?ly  conventional.  But,  whether  their  origin  was 
symbolical,  sanitary,  religious,  fanciful,  or  conven- 
tional, it  was  a  matter  of  vital  importance  to  a 
Pharisee  that  he  should  be  well  acquainted  with 
the  Pharisaical  regulations  concerning  what  was 
clean  and  what  was  unclean ;  for,  as  among  the 
modern  Hindoos  (some  of  whose  customs  are  very 
similar  to  those  of  the  Pharisees),  every  one  tech- 
nictdly  unclean  is  cut  oft'  from  almost  every  reli- 
gious ceremony,  so,  according  to  the  Levitical  law, 
every  unclean  person  was  cut  oft"  from  all  religious 
privileges,  and  was  regarded  as  defiling  the  sanc- 
tuary of  Jehovah  (Num.  six.  20  ;  compare  Ward's 
Hindoo  History,  Literature,  and  Religion,  ii.  14-7). 
On  principles  precisely  similar  to  those  of  the 
Levitical  laws  (Lev.  xx.  25,  xxii.  4-7),  it  was 
possi"ble  to  incur  these  awful  religious  penalties 
either  by  eating  or  by  touching  what  was  unclean 
in  the  Pharisaical  sense.  In  ret'erence  to  eating, 
indoi)endently  of  the  slaughtering  of  holy  sacrifices, 
which  is  the  subject  of  two  other  treatises,  the 
Jlishua  contains  one  treatise  called  Cholin,  which 
is  specially  devoted  to  the  slaughtering  of  fowls 
and  cattle  for  domestic  use  (see  Surenhusius,  v. 
114;  and  De  Sola  and  Raphall,  p.  325).  One 
point  in  its  very  first  section  is  by  itself  vitivlly  dis- 
tinctive ;  and  if  the  treatise  had  contained  no  other 
regulation,  it  would  still  have  raised  an  insuperable 
barrier  between  the  free  social  intoicourse  of  Jews 
and  other  nations.  This  point  is,  "  that  any  thimj 
slaughtered  by  a  hoathen  should  be  deemed  unfit  to 
be  eaten,  like  the  carcase  of  an  animal  that  liad  died 
of  itself,  and  like  such  eai-case  should  pollute  the 


826 


PHARISEES 


person  who  carried  it."'  On  the  reasonable  assump- 
tion that  under  such  circumstances  animals  used 
for  food  would  be  killed  by  Jewish  slaug;hterers, 
regulations  the  most  minute  are  laid  down  for  their 
guidance.  In  reference  likewise  to  touching  what  is 
unclean,  the  Mishna  abounds  with  prohibitions  and 
distinctions  no  less  minute  ;  and  by  far  the  greatest 
portion  of  the  6th  and  last  "  Order  "  relates  to  im- 
purities contracted  in  this  manner.  Referring  to 
that  "Order"  for  details,  it  may  be  observed  that 
to  any  one  fVesh  from  the  perusal  of  them,  and  of 
otheis  already  adverted  to,  the  words  "Touch  not, 
taste  not,  handle  not,"  seem  a  correct  but  almost 
a  pale  summary  of  their  drift  and  purpose  (Gol.  ii. 
21);  and  the  stern  antagonism  becomes  vividly 
visible  between  them  and  Him  who  proclaimed 
boldly  that  a  man  was  defiled  not  by  any  thing  he 
ate,  but  by  the  bad  thoughts  of  the  heart  alone 
(Matt.  XV.  1 1) ;  and  who,  even  when  the  guest  of 
?i  Pharisee,  pointedly  abstained  fi-om  washing  his 
hands  before  a  meal,  in  order  to  rebuke  the  super- 
stition which  attached  a  moral  value  to  such  a 
ceremonial  act.  (See  Luke  xi.  37-40  ;  and  compare 
the  Mishna  vi.  480,  where  there  is  a  distinct  treatise, 
Yadaim,  on  the  washing  of  hands. )s 

It  is  proper  to  add  that  it  would  be  a  great  mis- 
take to  suppose  that  the  Pliarisees  were  wealthy 
and  luxurious,  much  more  that  they  had  degene- 
rated into  the  vices  which  were  imputed  to  some  of 
the  Roman  popes  and  cardinals  during  the  200  years 
preceding  the  Reformation.  Josephus  compared  the 
Pharisees  to  the  sect  of  the  Stoics.  He  says  that 
they  lived  frugally,  in  no  respect  giving  in  to 
luxury,  but  that  they  followed  the  leadership  of 
I'easou  in  what  it  had  selected  and  transmitted  as  a 
good  lyAnt.  xviii.  1,  §  3).  With  this  agrees  what 
he  states  in  another  passage,  that  the  Pharisees 
had  so  much  weight  with  the  multitude,  that  if 
they  said  anything  against  a  king  or  a  high  priest 
they  were  at  once  believed  (xiii.  10,  §  5)  ;  for  this 
kind  of  influence  is  more  likely  to  be  obtained  by  a 
.religious  body  over  the  people,  through  austerity 
and  self-denial,  than  through  wealth,  luxury,  and 
self-indulgence.  Although  there  would  be  hypo- 
crites among  them,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to 
charge  all  the  Pharisees  as  a  body  with  hypocrisy, 
in  the  sense  wherein  we  at  the  piesent  day  use  the 
word.  A  learned  Jew,  now  living,  charges  against 
them  rather  the  holiness  of  works  than  hypocritical 
holiness  —  WerkheUigkeit,  nichl  Scheinheiligkeit 
(Herzfeld,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  iii.  359). 
At  any  rate  they  must  be  regarded  as  having  been 
some  of  the  most  mtenae  formalists  whom  the  world 
has  ever  seen ;  and,  looking  nt  the  average  standard 
of  excellence  among  mankind,  it  is  nearly  certain 
that  men  whose  lives  were  spent  in  the  ceremonial 
observances  of  the  Mishna,  would  cherish  feelings 
of  self-complacency  and  spiritual  pride  not  justified 

f  At  the  present  day  a  strict  orthodox  Jew  may  not  eat 
meat  of  any  animal,  unless  it  has  been  killed  by  a  Jewish 
butcher.  According  to  Mr.  I.  Disraeli  (Tlie  Genius  of 
Judaism,  p.  154),  the  butcher  searches  the  animal  for  any 
blemish,  and,  on  his  approval,  causes  a  leaden  seal, 
stamped  with  the  Hebrew  word  cdshdr  (lawful),  to  be 
attached  to  the  meat,  attesting  its  "  cleanness."  Mr.  Dis- 
raeli likewise  points  out  that  in  Herodotus  (ii.  38)  a  seal 
is  recorded  to  have  been  used  for  a  similar  purpose  by 
Egyptian  priests,  to  attest  that  a  bull  about  to  be  sacri- 
ficed was  "  clean,"  KaSapos.  The  Greek  and  Hebrew  words 
are  perhaps  akin  in  origin,  s  and  th  being  frequently  inter- 
changed in  language. 

s  The  Egyptians  appear  to  have  had  ideas  of  "  uiiclcan- 


PHARISEES 

by  intrinsic  moral  excellence.  The  supercilious  con- 
tempt towards  the  poor  publican,  and  towards  the 
tender  penitent  love  that  bathed  Christ's  feet  with 
tears,  would  be  the  natural  result  of  such  a  system 
of  life. 

It  was  alleged  against  thein,  on  the  highest  spi- 
ritual authority,  that  they  "  made  the  word  of  God 
of  no  eflect  by  their  traditions."  This  would  be 
true  in  the  largest  sense,  from  the  purest  form  of 
religion  in  the  Old  Testament  being  almost  incom- 
patible with  such  endless  forms  (Mic.  vi.  8j  ;  but 
it  was  true  in  another  sense,  from  some  of  the  tra- 
ditions being  decidedly  at  variance  with  genuine  i-e- 
ligion.  The  evasions  connected  with  Corban  are 
well  known.  To  this  may  be  addal  the  following 
instances : — It  is  a  plain  precept  of  morality  and 
religion  that  a  man  shall  pay  his  debts  (Ps.  xxxvii. 
21);  but,  according  to  the  treatise  of  the  ]\lishna 
called  Avodah  zarah,  i.  1 ,  a  Jew  was  prohibited  from 
paying  money  to  a  heathen  three  days  before  any 
heathen  festival,  just  as  if  a  delator  had  any  business 
to  meddle  with  the  question  of  liow  his  creditor 
inight  spend  his  own  money.  In  this  way,  Cato  or 
Cicero  might  have  been  kept  for  a  while  out  of  his 
legal  rights  by  an  ignoble  Jewish  money-dealer  in 
the  Transtiberine  district.  In  some  instances,  such 
a  delay  in  the  payment  of  debts  might  have  ruined 
a  heathen  merchant.  Again,  it  was  an  injunction 
of  the  Pentateuch  that  an  Israelite  should  "  love  his 
neighbour  as  hiitiself "  (Lev.  xix.  18) ;  and  althougli 
in  this  particular  passage  it  might  be  aigued  that 
by  "neighbour"  was  meant  a  brother  Israelite,  it 
is  evident  that  the  spirit  of  the  precept  went  much 
farther  (Luke  x:  27-29,  &c.).  ]n  plain  violation  of 
it,  however,  a  Jewish  midwife  is  forbidden,  in  the 
Avodah  zarah,  ii.  1,  to  assist  a  heathen  mother  in 
the  labours  of  childbirth,  so  that  through  this  pro- 
hibition a  heathen  mother  and  child  might  have  been 
left  to  perish  for  want  of  a  Pharisee's  professional 
assistance.  A  great  Roman  satirist,  in  holding  up 
to  view  the  unsocial  customs  of  the  Roman  Jews, 
specifies  as  two  of  their  traditions  that  they  were 
not  to  show  the  way,  or  point  out  springs  of  water 
to  any  but  the  circumcised. 

"  Tradidit  arcano  quodcunque  volumine  Moses, 
Non  nioustrare  vias  eadem  nisi  sacra  colenti, 
Quaesitum  ad  fontera  solos  deducere  veiT)os." 

Juvenal,  xiv.  102-4. 

Now  the  ti'uth  of  this  statement  has  in  our  times  beai 
formally  denied,  and  it  seems  certain  that  neither  of 
these  particular  prohibitions  is  found  in  the  Mishna  ; 
but  the  regulation  respecting  the  Jewish  midvvives 
was  more  unsocial  and  cruel  than  the  two  practices 
refeired  to  in  the  satirist's  lines;  and  individual 
Pharisees,  while  the  spirit  of  antagonism  to  the 
Romans  was  at  its  height,  may  have  supplied  in- 
stances of  the  imputed  churlishness,  although  not 
justified  by  the  letter  of  their  traditions.     In  fact. 


ness "  through  tasting,  touching,  and  handling,  precisely 
analogous  to  those  of  the  Levilical  law  and  of  the  I'harisees. 
The  priests  would  not  endure  even  to  look  at  beans, 
deeming  them  not  clean,  voiXL^ovTf;  ov  KaSapov  ij.lv 
sti'ai  oairpiov  (xaOapov  is  the  Greek  word  in  the  LXX.  for 
tdlidr").  "  No  Kgyptian."  says  Herodotus,  "  would  salute 
a  Greek  with  a  kiss,  nor  use  a  Greek  knife,  or  spits,  or 
cauldron;  or  taste  the  meat  of  an  ox  which  had  been  cut 
by  a  Greek  knife.  They  drank  out  of  bronze  vessels, 
rinsing  them  ■pe.rpeluaUy.  And  if  any  one  accidentally 
touched  a  pig,  be  would  plunge  into  the  Nile,  without 
stopping  to  undress''  {Ilerodot.  ii.  37,  41,  47).  Just  as  the 
Jews  regarded  all  other  nations,  the  Egyptians  regarded 
all  other  nations,  including  the  Jews  :  viz.,  as  unclean. 


PHARISEES 

Juvenal  did  really  soniewhiit  n7iderstate  what  was 
tiue  in  principle,  not  of  the  Jews  universally,  but 
of  the  most  im|)ort;mt  religious  paiiy  among  the 
Jews,  at  the  time  when  he  wrote. 

An  analogy  has  been  pointed  out  by  Geiger  (p. 
104)  between  tlk  Pharisees  and  our  own  Puritans; 
and  in  some  points  there  are  undoubted  features  of 
similarity,  beginning  even  witli  their  names.  Both 
were  innovators :  the  one  against  the  legal  ortho- 
doxy of  the  Sadducees,  the  others  against  Episco- 
pacy. Both  of  them  had  republican  tendencies  : 
the  Pharisees  glorifying  the  office  of  rabbi,  which 
depended  on  learning  and  personal  merit,  rather 
than  that  of  priest,  which,  being  hereditary,  de- 
pended on  the  accident  of  birth  ;  while  the  Puritans 
in  England  abolished  monarchy  and  the  right  of 
liereditary  legislation.  Even  in  their  zeal  ibr  reli- 
gious education  there  was  some  resemblance;  the 
Pharisees  exerting  themselves  to  instruct  disciples  in 
their  schools  with  an  earnestness  -never  equalled  in 
Rome  or  Greece;  while  in  Scotland  the  Purit:ms 
.set  the  most  brilliant  example  to  modern  Europe  of 
parochial  schools  for  the  common  people.  But  here 
comparison  ceases.  In  the  most  essential  points  of 
I'eligion  they  were  not  only  not  alike,  but  they  were 
directly  antagonistic.  The  Pharisees  were  under 
the  bondage  of  forms  in  the  manner  already  de- 
scribed ;  while,  except  in  the  strict  observance  of 
the  Sabbath,  the  religion  of  the  Puritans  was  in 
theory  purely  spiritual,  and  they  assailed  even  the 
ordinary  forms  of  Popery  and  Prelacy  with  a  bitter- 
ness of  language  copied  from  the  denunciations  of 
Christ  against  the  Pharisees. 

II.  In  regard  to  a  future  state,  Josephus  presents 
the  ideas  of  the  Pharisees  in  such  a  light  to  his 
(ireek  readers,' that  whatever  interpretation  his  am- 
biguous language  might  possibly  admit,  he  obvi- 
ously would  have  produced  the  impression  on  Greeks 
that  the  Pharisees  believed  in  the  ti'ansmigration 
of  souls.  Thus  his  statement  respecting  them  is, 
"  They  say  that  every  soul  is  imperishable,  but  that 
the  soul  of  good  men  only  jiasses  over  (or  transmi- 
grates) into  another  body — fi^ra^aiveiv  eh  erepov 
(TWjua — while  the  soul  of  bad  meu  is  chastised  by 
eternal  punishment"  {B.J.  11.  8,  §14;  compare 
iii.  8,  §5,  and  Ant.  xviil.  1,  §3,  and  Boettcher, 
De  Inferis,  pp.  519,  552).  And  there  are  two 
passages  in  the  Gospels  wliicli  might  countenance 
this  Idea:  one  in  Matt.  xiv.  2,  where  Herod  the 
t(!trarch  is  )-epresented  as  thinking  that  Jesus  was 
.lohn  the  Baptist  risen  from  the  dead  (though  a  dif- 
ferent colour  is  given  to  Herod's  thoughts  in  the 
corre.sponding  passage,  Luke  ix.  7-9) ;  and  another 
in  Jolni  ix.  2,  where  the  question  is  put  to  Jesus 
whether  the  lilind  man  hini.^clf  "^  had  sinned,  or  his 
parents,  that  he  was  born  blind  ?  Notwithstanding 
these  passages,  however,  there  does  not  appear  to  be 
sufficient  reason  for  doubting  that  the  Pharisees  be- 
lieved in  a  resurrection  of  the  dead  very  much  in 
the  same  sense  as  the  early  Christians.  This  is 
m<ist  in  accordance  with  St.    Paul's  statement  to 


PHARISEES 


827 


i"  At  leust  five  dittircnt  cxplanalioiis  have  been  sug- 
gested of  the  passage  Jiilin  ix.  2.  Kirst,  I'hat  It  alludes 
to  a  Jewish  duclrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls. 
2ndly.  That  it  refers  to  an  Alexandrine  doctrine  of  tlie 
pre-exislence  of  souls,  but  not  to  their  trunsmigratidii. 
3rdly.  That  the  words  mean,  "  Did  this  man  sin,  as  the 
Greeli-s  sat/,  or  did  his  jiarents  sin.  as  i/e  say,  that  he  was 
born  blind?"  4thly.  I'hat  it  involves  the  llalibinlcal  idea 
of  the  possibility  of  an  infant's  sinning  in  his  mother's 
womb.  5thly.  That  it  is  founded  on  the  predoslinuriun 
notion  that  the  blindness  from  birth  was  a  prtctdnig 


the  chief  priests  and  council  (Acts  xxiii.  6),  that  he 
was  a  Pharisee,  the  son  of  a  Pharisee,  and  that  he 
was  called  in  question  for  the  hope  and  resurrection 
of  the  dead — a  statement  which  would  have  been 
peculiarly  disingenuous,  if  the  Pharisees  had  merely 
believed  in  the  transmigration  of  souls ;  and  it  is 
likewise  almost  implied  in  Christ's  teaching,  which 
does  not  insist  on  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life  as 
anything  new,  but  assumes  it  as  already  adopted  by 
his  hearers,  except  by  the  Sadducees,  although  ho 
condemns  some  unspiritual  conceptions  of  its  natnie 
as  erroneous  (Matt.  xxii.  30;  Mark  xii.  25;  Luke 
XX.  34-36).  On  this  head  the  Jlishna  is  an  illus- 
tration of  the  ideas  iu  the  Gospels,  as  distiu2:ul!hcd 
from  any  mere  transmigi-ation  of  souls ;  and  the 
peculiar  phrase,  "  the  world  to  come,"  of  which 
6  altev  6  ipx^fMevos  was  undoubtedly  only  the  trans- 
lation, frequently  occurs  in  it  (N3n  DPiyn,  Avoth, 

li.  7,  Iv.  16  ;  comp.  Mark  x.  30  ;  Luke  xviii.  30). 
This  phrase  of  Christians,  which  Is  anterior  to 
Christianity,  but  which  does  not  occur  in  the  0.  T., 
though  fully  justified  by  cei  tain  passages  to  be  found 
in  some  of  its  latest  books,'  is  essentially  diflerent 
from  Greek  conceptions  on  the  same  subject ;  and 
generally.  In  contradistinction  to  the  purely  tem- 
poral blessings  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  the  Chris- 
tian ideas  that  this  world  is  a  state  of  probation,  and 
that  every  one  after  death  will  have  to  render  a 
strict  account  of  his  actions,  were  expressed  by  Phari- 
sees In  language  which  it  is  impossible  to  misunder- 
stand : — "  This  world  may  be  likened  to  a  court- 
yard in  comparison  of  the  world  to  come  ;  therefore 
prepare  thyself  in  the  antechamber  that  thou  mayest 
enter  into  the  dining-room"  (^Avoth,  iv.  16). 
"  Everything  is  given  to  man  on  security,  and  a 
net  is  spread  over  every  living  creature ;  the  shop 
is  open,  and  the  merchant  credits  ;  the  book  is  open, 
and  the  hand  records ;  and  whosoever  chooses  to 
borrow  may  come  .and  borrow:  for  the  collectors 
are  continually  going  round  daily,  and  obtain  pay- 
ment of  man,  whether  with  his  consent  or  without 
it ;  and  the  judgment  is  true  justice ;  and  all  are 
prepared  for  the  feast"  (Avoili,  iii.  16).  "Those 
who  are  born  are  doomed  to  die,  the  dead  to  live, 
and  the  quick  to  be  judged ;  to  make  us  know, 
understand,  and  be  informed  that  He  is  God  ;  He 
is  the  Former,  Creator,  Intelligent  Being,  Judge, 
Witness,  and  suing  Party,  and  will  judge  thee 
hereafter.  Blessed  be  He  ;  for  in  His  presence  there 
is  no  unrighteousness,  forgetfulness,  respect  of  per- 
sons, nor  acceptance  of  a  bribe ;  for  everything  is 
His.  Know  also  that  everything  is  done  according 
to  the  account,  and  let  not  thine  evil  imagination 
persuade  thee  that  the  grave  is  a  place  of  refuge  tor 
thee:  ibr  against  thy  will  wast  thou  formed,  and 
against  thy  will  wast  thou  born  ;  and  against  thy 
will  dost  thou  live,  and  against  thy  will  wilt  thou 
die ;  and  against  thy  will  must  thou  hereafter  ren- 
der an  account,  and  receive  judgment  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  Supreme  King  of  kings,  the  Holy  G'od, 

punishment  for  sins  which  the  blind  man  afterwards  com- 
mitted :  just  as  it  has  been  sufrgested.  in  n  remarkable, 
passage,  that  the  death  before  less  of  the  Princess  .June's 
infant  children  (three  in  number)  was  a  preceding  punish- 
ment for  her  subsequent  abandonment  of  her  lather, 
James  II.  See  Stewarts  /'hihfvjihi/,  vol.  il.  App.  vi.,  and 
the  Commentaries  of  De  Wette  and  Liicke,  ojl  locum. 

'  The  earliest  text  in  support  of  the  expression  is  jicr- 
haps  "  the  new  hea\  ens  and  the  new  earth  "  promised  by 
Ksaiah  (Is.  Ixv.  11-22).  Cunipare  Duu.  vli.  21,  ii.  44  ;  Is. 
xxvi.  19. 


828 


PHARISEES 


blessed  is  He"  (Avoth,  iv.  22).  Still  it  must  he 
borne  in  mind  that  the  actions  of  which  such  a 
strict  account  was  to  be  rendered  were  not  merely 
those  referred  to  by  the  spiritual  prophets  Isaiali 
and  Micah  (Is.  i.  16,  17  ;  Mic.  vi.  8),  nor  even  those 
enjoined  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  included  those 
fabulously  supposed  to  have  been  orally  transmitted 
bv  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai,  and  the  whole  body  of 
the  traditions  of  the  elders.  They  included,  in  fact, 
all  those  ceremonial  "  works,"  against  the  efficacy 
of  which,  in  the  deliverance  of  the  human  soul,  St. 
Paul  so  emphatically  protested. 

III.  In  reference  to  the  opinions  of  the  Pharisees 
concerning  the  freedom  of  the  will,  a  difficulty 
arises  from  the  very  prominent  position  which 
they  occupy  in  the  accounts  of  Josephus,  whereas 
nothing  vitally  essential  to  the  peculiar  doctrines  of 
the  Pharisees  seems  to  depend  on  those  opinions, 
and  some  of  his  expressions  are  Greek,  rather  than 
Hebrew.  "  There  were  three  sects  of  the  Jews,"  he 
says,  "which  had  different  conceptions  respecting 
human  affairs,  of  which  one  was  called  Pharisees, 
the  second  Sadducees,  and  the  third  Essenes.  The 
Pharisees  say  that  some  things,  and  not  all  things, 
are  the  work  of  fate;  but  that  some  things  are  in 
our  own  power  to  be  and  not  to  be.  But  the 
Essenes  declare  that  Fate  rules  all  things,  and  tliat 
nothing  happens  to  man  except  by  its  decree.  The 
Sadducees,  on  the  other  hand,  take  away  Fate, 
holding  that  it  is  a  thing  of  nought,  and  that  human 
affairs  do  not  depend  upon  it ;  but  in  their  estimate 
ail  things  are  in  the  power  of  ourselves,  as  being 
ourselves  the  causes  of  our  good  things,  and  meet- 
ing with  evils  through  oui-  own  incousiderateness  " 
(comp.  xviii.  1,  §3,  and  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §14).  On 
reading  this  passage,  and  the  others  which  bear  on 
the  same  subject  in  Josephus's  works,  the  suspicion 
natui'ally  arises  that  he  was'  biassed  by  a  desire  to 
make  the  Greeks  believe  that,  like  the  Greeks,  the 
.Tews  had  philosophical  sects  amongst  themselves. 
At  any  rate  his  words  do  not  represent  the  opinions 
as  they  were  really  held  by  the  three  religious 
parties.  We  may  feel  certain,  that  the  influence  of 
fate  was  not  the  point  on  which  discussions  respect- 
ing free-will  turned,  though  there  may  have  been 
differences  as  to  the  way  in  which  the  interposition 
of  God  in  human  ailairs  was  to  be  regarded.  Thus 
the  ideas  of  the  Essenes  are  likely  to  have  been  ex- 
pressed in  language  approaching  to  the  words  of 
Christ  (Matt.  x.  29,  30,  vi.  25-34),  and  it  is  vuy 
ditficult  to  believe  that  the  Sadducees,  who  accepted 
the  authority  of  the  Pentateuch  and  other  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  excluded  (jod,  in  their  concep- 
tions, fiom  all  influence  on  human  actions.  On 
the  whole,  iu  reference  to  this  point,  the  opinion  of 
Graetz  {Oeschichte  der  Jndcn,  iii.  509)  seems  not 
improbable,  that  the  real  dilference  betvfeen  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees  was  at  first  practical  and 
political.  He  conjectures  that  the  wealthy  and 
aristocratical  Sadducees  in  their  wars  and  negocia- 
tions  with  the  Syiians  entered  mto  matters  of  policy 
and  calculations  of  prudence,  while  the  zealous  Pha- 
risees, disdaining  worldly  wisdom,  laid  stress  on 
doing  what  seemed  right,  and  on  leaving  the  event 
to  God:  and  that  this  led  to  differences  in  formal 
theories  and  metaphysical  statements.  The  precise 
nature  of  those  ditfeiences  we  do  not  certainly 
know,  as  no  writing  of  a  Sadducee  on  the  subject 
has  been  preserved  by  the  Jews,  and  on  matters  of 
this  kind,  it  is  unsafe  to  trust  unreservedly  the 
statements  of  an  adversary.     [Saddccicks.] 

IV.  In    reference   to  the   spirit   of  proselytism 


PHARISEES 

among  the  Pharisees,  there  is  indisputable  authority 
for  the  statement  that  it  prevailed  to  a  very  great 
extent  at  the  time  of  Christ  (j\latt.  sxiii.  15) ;  and 
attention  is  now  called  to  it  on  account  of  its  pro- 
bable impoiiance  in  having  paved  the  way  for  the 
early  diffusion  of  Christianity.  The  district  of 
Palestine,  which  was  long  in  proportion  to  its 
breadth,  and  which  yet,  from  Dan  to  Beersheba, 
was  only  160  Roman  milesi  or  not  quite  148 
English  miles  long,  and  which  is  represented  as 
having  been  civilized,  wealthy,  and  populous  1000 
years  before  Christ,  would  under  any  ciicumstances 
have  been  too  small  to  continue  maintaining  the 
whole  gi-owing  population  of  its  children.  But, 
through  kidnapping  (Joel  iii.  6),  through  leading 
into  captivity  by  military  incursions  and  victorious 
enemies  (2  K.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  11,  xxiv.  15;  Am.  i. 
G,  9),  through  flight  (Jer.  xliii.  4-7),  through 
commerce  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2,  §3),  and  probably 
through  ordinary  emigration,  Jews  at  the  time  of 
Christ  had  become  scattered  over  the  fairest  portions 
of  the  civilized  world.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
that  gieat  festival  on  which  the  Jews  suppose 
Moses  to  have  brought  the  perfect  law  down  from 
heaven  {Festival  Prayers  for  Pentecost,  p.  6),  Jews 
are  said  to  have  been  assembled  with  one  accord  in 
one  place  at  Jerusalem,  "  from  every  region  under 
heaven."  Admitting  that  this  was  an  Oriental 
hyperbole  (comp.  John  xxi.  25),  there  must  have 
been  some  foundation  for  it  in  fact ;  and  the  enu- 
meration of  the  various  countries  from  which  Jews 
are  said  to  have  been  present  gives  a  vivid  idea 
of  the  widely-spread  existence  of  Jewish  commu- 
irities.  Now  it  is  not  unlikely,  though  it  cannot 
be  proved  from  Josephus  {Ant.  xx.  2,  §3),  that 
missions  and  organized  attempts  to  produce  conver- 
sions, although  unknown  to  Greek  philosophers, 
existed  among  the  Pharisees  (De  Wette,  Exegetisches 
Handbuch,  Matt,  xxiii.  15).  But,  at  any  rate,  the 
then  existing  regulations  or  customs  of  synagogues 
afi'orded  facilities  which  do  not  exist  now  either  in 
synagogues  or  Christian  churches  for  presenting 
new  views  to  a  congregation  (Acts  xvii.  2 ;  Luke 
iv.  16).  Under  such  auspices  the  proselytizing 
spirit  of  the  Pharisees  inevitably  stimulated  a  thirst 
for  inquiry,  and  accustomed  the  Jews  to  theological 
controversies.  Thus  there  existed  precedents  and 
favouring  circumstances  for  efforts  to  make  prose- 
lytes, when  the  greatest  of  all  missionaries,  a  Jew  by 
race,  a  Pharisee  by  education,  a  Greek  by  language, 
and  a  Roman  citizen  by  birth,  preaching  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  to  those  who  for  the  most  part 
already  believed  in  the  resunection  of  the  dead, 
confronted  the  elaborate  ritual-system  of  the  written 
and  oral  law  by  a  pure  spiritual  religion :  and  thus 
obtained  the  co-operatiou  of  many  Jews  themselves 
in  breaking  down  eveiy  barrier  between  Jew,  Pha- 
risee, Greek,  and  Roman,  and  in  endeavouring  to 
unite  all  mankind  by  the  brotherhood  of  a  common 
Christianity. 

Literature. — In  addition  to  the  New  Testament, 
Josephus,  and  the  Jlishna,  it  is  proper  to  read 
Epiphanius  Adversns  Haereses,  lib.  I.  xvi. ;  and 
the  Notes  of  Jerome  to  Matth.  xxii.  23,  xxiii. 
6,  &c.,  though  the  information  given  by  both  these 
writers  is  very  imperfect. 

In  modern  literature,  see  several  treatises  in  Ugo- 
lino's  Thesaurus,  vol.  xxii. ;  and  Lightfoot's  Horae 
Hehraicae  on  Matth.  iii.  7,  where  a  curious  Rab- 
binical description  is  given  of  seven  sects  of  Pha- 
risees, which,  from  its  being  destitute  of  any  intrinsic 
value,  is  not  inserted  in  this  article.     See  likewise 


PHAKOSH 

Brucker's  Historia  Critica  PUlosdphiae,  ii.  744- 
759  ;  Milman's  Historij  of  the  Jews,  ii.  71 ;  Ewald's 
Geschichte  des   Vulkes   Israel,  iv.  415-419  ;  and 
the  Jahrknndert  des  Heils,  p.  5  &c.   of  Gfrorer,  ^ 
who  has  insisted  strongly  on  the  importance  of  the  ^ 
Mishna,  and  has  made  great  use  of  tlie  Talmud  ge-  I 
nerally.     See  also  the  following  works  by  modern  | 
learned  Jews :    Jost,   Geschichte   des  Judenthums  i 
tmd  seiner  Sekten,  i.  196  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
Jiiden,   iii.    508-518;    Herzfeld,    Geschichte  des\ 
Volkes  Israel,  iii.  ;-558-362  ;  and  Geiger,  Urschrift 
tmd  Uebersetzmgan  der  Bibel,  p.  103  &c.    [E.  T.]  } 

PHA'ROSH  (ti'yiS  :  *6pos  :  Pharos).  Else- 
where Parosh.  Tlie  same  variation  is  found  in  the 
Geneva  Version  (Ezr.  viii.  3). 

PHAR'PAR  ("iSnS,  i.  e.  Parpar:  '''A<|)pa^a  ; 
Alex.  ^ap(papa:  Pharphar).  The  second  of  the 
two  "  rivers  of  Damascus" — Abana  and  Pharpar — 
alluded  to  by  Naamau  (2  K.  v.  12). 

The  two  principal  streams  in  the  district  of  Da- 
mascus are  tlie  Barada  and  the  Awaj : — in  fact, 
there  are  no  otliers  worthy  of  the  name  of  "  river." 
There  are  good  grounds  for  identifying  the  Barada 
with  the  Abana,  and  there  seems  therefore  to  be  no 
alternative  but  to  consider  the  Awaj  as  being  the 
Pharpar.     But  though  in  the  region  of  Damascus, 
the  Awaj  has  not,  lilie  tlie  Barada,  any  connexion 
with  the  city  itself.     It  does  not  approach  it  nearer 
than  8  miles,  and  is  divided  from  it  by  the  ridge 
of  the  Jebel  Aswad.     It  takes  its  rise  on  the  S.E. 
slopes  of  Hernion,  some  5  or  6  mil&s  from  Beit 
Jenn,  close  to  a  village  called  Arnij,  the  name  of 
which  it  bears  during  the  first  part  of  its  course. 
It  then  runs  S.E.  by  Kefr  Ilauwar  and  Sasa,  but 
soon  recovering  itself  by  a  turn  northwards,  ulti- 
mately  ends    in    the   Bahret   Hijaneh,    the   most 
southerly  of  the  three   lakes    or   swamps  of  Da- 
mascus, nearly  due  east  of,  and  about  40  miles 
from,  the  point  at  which  it  started.     The  Awaj  has 
been  investigated  by  Dr.  Thomson,  and  is  described 
l)y  him  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  May,  1849  ;  see 
also  Robinson  {B.  R.  iii.  447,  8).     It  is  evidently 
much  infeiior  to  the  Barada,  for  while  that  is  extra- 
ordinarily copious,  and  also  perennial  in  the  hottest 
seasons,  this  is  described  as  a  small  lively ''  stream, 
not  unfrequently  dry  in  the  lower  part  of  its  couise. 
On  the  maps  of  Kiepert  (1856)  and  Yan  de  Velde 
(1858)  the  name  of  Wadi/  Barbar  is  found,  appa- 
rently that  of  a  valley  parallel  to  the  Arrvj  near  Ac/;- 
Ilauwar;  but  what  the  authority  for  this  is  the 
wi-iter  has  not  succeeded  in  discovering.     Nor  has 
he  found  any  name  on  the  maps  or  in  the  lists  ot 

Dr.  Robinson  answering   to   Tauruh,   f^j^'   ^7 

which  Phaipar  is  rendered  in  the  Arabic  version  of 
t>  K.  V.  12. 

The  tradition  of  the  Jews  of  Damascus,  as  re- 
ported by  Schwarz  (54,  also  20,  27),  is  curiously 
subversive  of  our  ordinaiy  ideas  regarding  these 
streams.  They  call  the  liver  Fijch  (that  is  the 
Bai-ada)  the  Pharpar,  and  give  the  name  Aniana 
or  Kavmion  (an  old  Talmudic  name,  sec  vol.  i. 
p.  2  6)  to  a  stream  wliich  Schwarz  dwcribes  as 
running  from  a  ibuntain  called  el  Barady,  1  i  mile 
from  Beth  Djana  {Beit  Jenn),  in  a  N.E.  direction, 
to  Damascus  (see  also  the  reference  to  the  Nubian 


PHASELIS 


829 


geographer  by  Gesenius,  Thcs.  1132  a).  What  is 
intended  by  this  the  writer  is  at  a  loss  to  know.  [G.] 
PHAR'ZITES,  THE  Q'T^T] :  6  ^apeffl : 
Alex,  tape's :  Pharesitae).  Tlie  descendants  of 
Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah  (Num.  xxvi.  20).  They 
were  divided  into  two  branches,  the  Hezronites  and 
the  Hamulites. 

PHASE' AH  (niDS  :    *€cn9  ;    Alex,    (paiaii  : 
Phasea).     Paseah  2  (Neh.  vii.  51). 

PHASE'LIS  (*aiTt)Xis :  Phaselis).   A  town  on 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  on  the  confines  of  Lycia  and 
PamphyUa,  and  consequently  ascribed  by  the  ancient 
writers  sometimes   to   one    and   sometimes  to  the 
j  other.  .  Its  commerce  was  considerable  in  the  sj  ith 
I  century  B.C.,  for  in  the  reign  of  Amasis  it  was  one 
of  a  number  of  Greek  towns  which  carried  on  trade 
somewhat   in  the   manner   of   the   Hanseatic   con- 
federacy in  the  middle  ages.     They  had  a  common 
temple,  the  Hellenium,  at  Naucratis  in  Egypt,  and 
nominated  irpoaTa-rai  for  the  regulation  of  com- 
mercial questions  and  the  decision  of  disputes  arising 
out   of   contracts,  like   the   preud'hommes  of^  the 
Middle  Ages,  who  presided  over  the  courts  of  pie 
powder  (pieds  pondn's,  pe;llars)   at  the  different 
staples.    In  later  times  Phaselis  was  distinguished  as 
a  resort  of  the  Pamphylian  and  Cilician  pirates.    Its 
port  was  a  convenient  one  to  make,  for  the  lofty 
mountain  of  Solyma  (now  Tahhtalu),  which  backed 
it  at  a  distance  of  only  five  miles,  is  nearly  8000 
feet  in  height,  and  constitutes  an  admirable  land- 
mark from  a  gi-eat  distance.     Phaselis  itself  stood 
on  a  rock  of  60  or  1 00  feet  elevation  above  the  sea, 
and  was  joined  to  the  main  by  a  low  isthmus,  in 
the  middle  of  which  was  a  lake,  now  a  pestiferous 
marsh.     On  the  eastern  side  of  this  were  a  closed 
port  and  a  roadstead,  and  on  the  western  a  larger 
artificial  harbour,  formed  by  a  mole  run  out  into 
the  sea.     The  remains  of  this  may  still  be  traced 
to  a  considerable  extent  below  the   surface  of  the 
water.     The  masonry  of  the  pier  which  protected 
the  small  eastern  port  is  nearly  perfect.     In  this 
sheltered  position  the  pirates  could  lie  safely  while 
they  sold  their  booty,  and  also  refit,  the  whole 
rep-ion   having   been   anciently    so  thickly  covered 
with  wood  as  to  give  the  name  of  Pityusa  to  the 
town.     For  a  time  the   Phaselites  confined  their 
relations  with   the    Pamphylians   to  the_  purposi'S 
just  mentioned  ;  but  they  subsequently  joined  the 
piratical  league,  and   suffered   in  consequence  tlic 
loss  of  their  independence  and  theii-  town  lands  in 
the  war  which  was  waged  by  the  Itonian  consul 
Publius  Sen-ilius  Isauricus  in  the  years  77-75  B.C. 
But  at  the  outset  the  Romans  had  to  a  gieat  extent 
fostered  the  pirates,  by  the  demand  which  sprang 
up  for  domestic  slaves  upon  the  change  of  maunefs 
brought  about  by  the  sjioliation  of  Carthage  and 
Corinth.    It  is  said  that  at  this  time  many  thousand 
slaves  were  passed  through  Delos— which  was  the 
mart  between  Asia  and  Europe— in  a  single  dav  ; 
and  the  proverb  grew  up  theie,  "E^iTrope,  koto- 
irKevffov  f^iXov-  TravTa  iriirparai.     I>ut  when  the 
Cdiciaiis  had  aciuired  such  power  and  audacity  as 
to  swee))  the  seas  a-s  fiu-  as  the  It;iliaii  coast,  and 
interrupt  the  supjdies  of  corn,  it  became  time  to 
interfeie,  and  the  expedition  of  Servilius  commenced 
the   work    which    was    afterwarils    completed    by 
Pompey  the  Great. 


»  The  A  at  the  commenccinent  of  this  name  sHRgests 
the  Hebrew  (Jpruilte  urlicle  ;  but  no  trace  of  it  appears  in 
the  Hebrew  MSS. 


b  Such  is  tlie  meaning  of  the  word  I'harpar,  treated  as 
Hebrew,  according  to  Ucseiilus  and  Kiii-st.  Dr.  I'uscy. 
however  (f'o/niii.  on  Amos  i.  3),  renders  it  "crooked  " 


830 


PHASIRON 


It  is  in  the  interval  between  the  growth  of  the 
Cilician  piracy  and  the  Servilian  expedition  that  the 
incidents  related  in  the  Fii-st  Book  of  Maccabees 
occurred.  'l"he  Romans  are  represented  as  re- 
quiring all  their  allies  to  render  up  to  Simon  the 
high-priest  any  Jewish  exiles  who  may  have  taken 
refuge  among  them.  After  naming  Ptolemy,  De- 
metrius (king  of  Syria),  Attalus  (king  of  Pergamus), 
Ariarathes  (of  Pontus),  and  A rsaces  (of  Paithia),  as 
recipients  of  these  missives,  the  author  adds  that 
the  consul  also  wrote: — els  Trdcras  ray  X'^P"-^  '''" 
'S.afx^djxri  (Grotius  conjectures  Aajx^aKw,  and  one 
MS.  has  iHiffaviaari)  koL  'S.-irapridrais  koX  iU 
£^rj\ov  Kai  els  Mvvdou  koI  els  1,tKvwva  Koi  eis 
T7;j'  Kapiav  Kol  els  'Xdfj.oi/  koI  els  t7]u  Tla/J.(pv\iay 
Kid  els  tV  AvKiav  Kol  els  'AMKapuaa-ahv,  Kal 
els 'VoSov  KOi  els  ^acrriXiSa  koI  els  Kw  Koi 
els  'ZiOT]v  Kal  els  "Apadou  Ka\  els  r6pTvvav  Kal 
KviSov,  Kal  KvTTpov  Kal  Kvp-livrii' (l  Mace.  xv.  23). 
It  will  be  observed  tliat  all  tlie  places  named,  with 
the  exception  of  Cyprus  and  Cyi'ene,  lie  ou  the 
highway  of  marine  traffic  between  Syria  and  Italy. 
The  Jewish  slaves,  whether  kidnapped  by  their  own 
countrymen  (Ex.  xxi.  16)  or  obtained  by  raids 
(2  K.  V.  2),  appear  in  early  times  to  have  been 
transmitted  to  the  west  coast  of  Asia  Minor  by  this 
route  (see  Ez.  xxvii.  13;   Joel  iii.  6). 

The  existence  of  the  mountain  Solyma,  and  a  town 
of  the  same  name,  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood 
of  Phaselis,  renders  it  probable  that  the  descendants 
of  some  of  these  Israelites  formed  a  population  of  some 
importance  in  the  time  of  Strabo  (Herod,  ii.  178; 
Strab.  xiv.  c.  3  ;  Liv.  xxxvii.  23  ;  Mela,  i.  14;  Beau- 
fort, Karamania,  pp.  53-50).  [J.  W.  B.] 

PHAS'IRON  (<i>a(npa)j':  Phase ron  ;  Pasiron), 
the  name  of  the  head  of  an  Arab  tribe,  "  the  children 
of  I'hasiron"  (1  Mace.  ix.  66),  defeated  by  Jonathan, 
but  of  wliom  nothing  more  is  known.    [B.  F.  W.] 

PHAS'SAEON  {^aaaovpos:  Phasurius).  Pa- 
SHUR  (1  Esdr.  V.  25). 

PHE'BE.     [Phoebe.] 

PHENI'CE.  I.  See  Phoenice,  Phoenicia. 
II.  (*oiVi| :  Phoenice,  Acts  xxvii.  12),  more  pro- 
perly Phoenix,  though  it  is  probable  that  our 
translators  meant  it  to  be  pronounced  Phenice  in 
two  syllables,  whereas  the  woid  Phoenicia  {^olvikt). 
Acts  xi.  19)  is  of  course  Phoenice  in  three. 

Phenice  in  Acts  xxvii.  12  is  the  name  of  a  haven 
in  Crete  on  the  south  coast  (Ptolemy,  iii.  17,  §3  ; 
Strabo,  X.  4,  §3),  and  the  name  was  doubtless 
derived  from  the  Greek  word  for  the  palm-tree, 
which  Theophrastus  says  was  indigenous  in  the 
iskind.  [Palm-Tree.]  Both  Ptolemy  and  Strabo 
mention  a  town  <i>oiri| ;  while  Ptolemy  alone  men- 
tions a  haven,  of  a  similar  name,  which  he  calls 
in  the  accusative  "  voivMovvra."  Phenice  's  the 
haven  whither  the  vessel  which  carried  Paul  to- 
wards Rome  was  proceeding  when  it  encountered 
tlie  storm  which  occiisioned  its  shipwreck.  Mr. 
James  Smith,  in  his  work  on  the  Voi/age  and  Ship- 
wreck of  St.  Paul,  p.  48,  places  Phenice  at  the 
modem  Lutro,  of  which  a  drawing  on  stone  is  given 


^  It  is  certain  that  one  meaning  of  Kara,  with  the 
accusalive  is  "  opposite,"  or  "  over  against,"  as  it  is  cor- 
rectly translated  in  ver.  1  of  this  very  chapter.  Schweig- 
haeuser,  in  his  Lexicon  Herodoteum,  has  pointed  out  some 
very  instructive  instances  of  this  in  Herod,  ix.  31,  where 
Kara  is  iised  indiscriminately  with  ii'Tioi'  and  avria.  In 
this  sense,  jSAcVoi'Ta  Kara  At'^a,  &c.,  would  be  equi- 
valent to /SAcVoi/ra  irpbs  Ai'^a,  &c.;  a  phrase  as  to  the 


PHILADELPHIA 

in  the  fi-ontispiece  to  the  2nd  volume  of  Mr.  Pash- 
ley's  Crete.  In  this  lie  has  been  followed  by  Mr. 
Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  270  ;  and 
by  Baumgarten,  Apostelgeschichte,  iii.  405.  The 
harbour  of  Lutro,  however,  looks  toward  the  east. ; 
though,  in  accordance  with  the  received  translations 
in  numerous  languages,  the  Authorized  version  of 
Acts  represents  Phenice  as  "  lying  toward  the 
south-west  and  north-west."  In  order  to  lemove 
this  difficulty,  a  new  interpretation  has  been  sug- 
gested of  the  words  l3\eirovTa  Kara  Ai^a  Kal 
Kara  Xaipov,  viz.  that  they  mean  "  looking  dov:n 
the  south-west  wind  and  the  north-west  wind,  or 
toward  the  points  to  which  they  blow."*  This  would 
involve  a  new  translation  of  the  passage.  Plausible 
arguments  may  be  urged  in  favour  of  Lutro  as  the 
site  of  Phenice  ;  but  the  suggested  interpretation  of 
the  Greek  words  just  quoted  does  not  seem  admis- 
sible. [E.  T.] 

PHER'ESITES(*epeCa'0':  Pherezaei),  1  Esd. 
viii.  69;  =  Perizzites;  comp.  Ezr.  ix.  1. 

PHER'EZITE  ;  PHER'EZITES  {6  ^epe- 
^a7os  :  Pherezaeus;  Pherezaei),  Jud.  v.  16  ;  2  Esd. 
i.  21.  The  latter  of  these  passages  contains  a  state- 
ment in  accordance  with  those  of  Gen.  xiii.  7,  xxxiv. 
30  ;  Judg.  i.  4,  &c.,  noticed  under  Pebizzite. 

PHI'CHOL  (h'y^  ;  Samar.  ^3  ''3  :  *<X<^^  ; 
Alex.  4>i/coA  ;  Joseph.  ^IkoXos  :  Phichol),  chief 
captain  of  the  army  of  Abimelech,  king  of  the  Phi- 
listines of  Gerar  in  the  days  of  both  Abraham  (Gen. 
x.ti.  22,  32)  and  Isaac  (xxvi.  26).  Josephus  men- 
tions him  on  the  second  occasion  only.  On  the  other 
hand  the  LXX.  introduce  Ahuzzath,  Abimelech's 
other  companion,  on  the  first  also.  By  Gesenius  the 
name  is  treated  as  Hebrew,  and  as  meaning  the 
"  mouth  of  all."  By  Fiirst  {Ifandwb.  ii.  215  a),  it 
is  derived  from  a  root  ?3S,   to  be  strong.      But 

Hitzig  (Philistaer,  §57)  refers  it  to  the  Sanscrit 
pitschula,  a  tamarisk,  pointing  out  that  Abraham 
had  planted  a  tamarisk  in  Beersheba,  and  comparing 
the  name  with  Elah,  Berosus,  Tappuach,  and  other 
names  of  persons  and  places  signifying  different 
kinds  of  trees  ;  and  with  the  name  ^iyaKos,  a  vil- 
lage of  Palestine  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4,  §2),  and 
^lyaKia  in  Greece.  Stark  {Gaza,  &c.,  p.  96)  more 
cautiously  avoids  such  speculations.  The  natural 
conclusion  from  these  mere  conjectures  is  that 
Phichol  is  a  Philistine  name,  the  meaning  and  deri- 
vation of  which  are  lost  to  us.  [G"-] 

PHILADEL'PHIA  (r]  ^L\aSe\<peia:  Phila- 
delphia). A  town  on  the  confines  of  Lydia  and 
Phrygia  Catacecaumene,  built  by  Attalus  II.,  king 
of  Pergamus.  It  was  situated  on  the  lower  slopes 
of  Tmolus,  on  the  southern  side  of  the  valley  of  the 
Ain-e-ghiul  Sou,  a  river  which  is  probably  the  Co- 
gamus  of  antiquity,  and  falls  into  the  Wadis-tchui 
(the  Hermus)  in  the  neighbourhood  of  i^ari-Zr^/csi 
(Sardis),  about  25  miles  to  the  west  of  the  site  of 
Philadelphia.  This  latter  is  still  represented  by  a 
town  called  Allah-shehr  (city  of  God).  Its  elevation 
is  952  feet    above    the   sea.     The    region    around 


meaning  of  which  there  could  be  no  doubt  (Xenoph.  Mem,. 
iii.  8,  9).  Kara  with  an  accusative  also  often  signifies 
•'  down."  But  the  objection  to  translating  it  so  in  this 
passage  is,  that  it  would  thus,  with  extreme  awkwardness, 
inferentially  mean  the  exact  contrary  of  what  it  directly 
means  in  its  other  acknowledged  sense,  as  maiking  the 
local  relation  between  two  objects. 


PHILARCHES 

is  highly  volranic,  and  geologically  speaking  belougs 
to  the  district  of"  Fhrygia  Catacecaumeue,  on  the 
western  edge  of  which  it  lies.  The  soil  was  ex- 
tremely iavoui-able  to  the  growth  of  vines,  cele- 
brated by  Viigil  for  the  soundness  of  the  wine  they 
p'oduced;  and  in  all  probability  Philadelphia  was 
built  by  Attains  ;ls  a  mart  for  the  great  wuie- 
producing  region,  extending  tor  500  stades  in  length 
by  400  in  breadth ;  tor  its  coins  have  on  them  the 
head  of  Bacchus  or  a  female  Bacchant.  Strabo 
compares  the  soil  with  that  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Catana  in  Sicily ;  and  modern  travellers  describe 
the  appearance  of  tiie  country  as  res(jmbling  a 
billowy  sea  of  disintegi'ated  lava,  witli  here  and 
there  vast  trap-dykes  protruding.  The  original 
population  of  Philadelpiiia  seems  to  have  been 
Macedonian,  and  the  national  character  to  have 
been  retained  even  in  the  time  of  Pliny.  Tl)ei'e 
was,  however,  as  appears  from  Kev.  iii.  9,  a 
synagogue  of  Hellenizing  Jews  there,  as  well  as 
a  Christian  Church.  The  locality  continued  to  be 
subject  to  constant  earthquakes,  which  in  the  time 
of  ytrabo  rendered  even  the  town-walls  of  Phila- 
delphia unsafe;  but  its  inhabitants  held  pertina- 
ciously to  the  spot,  perhaps  from  the  profit  which 
naturally  accrued  to  them  from  their  city  being  the 
stiiple  of  the  great  wine-district.  But  the  expense 
of  leparation  was  constant,  and  hence  perhaps  the 
poverty  of  the  menibeis  of  the  Christian  Church 
[olSa  .  .  .  '6ti  /niKpav  ex^'^  S6vafj.iv,  llev.  iii.  8j, 
wiio  no  doubt  were  a  portion  of  the  urban  [wpu- 
lation,  and  heavily  taxed  for  public  purposes,  as 
well  as  subject  to  private  loss  by  the  destruction 
of  their  own  property.  Philadelphia  w;\s  not  of 
sufficient  importance  in  the  Roman  times  to  have 
law-courts  of  its  own,  but  belonged  to  a  jurisdiction 
of  which  Sardis  w;us  the  centre. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  that  Philadelphia 
occupied  the  site  of  another  town  named  Callatebus, 
of  wliich  Herodotus  sj)eaks,  in  his  account  of  Xer.\es's 
march,  as  famous  tor  the  production  of  a  sugar 
from  the  holcus  sorghum  and  sweetwort  (ev  ttj 
&vSpes  ST]fj.iOfpyol  fj.e\i  4k  fjivplKr]s  re  Koi  irvpov 
iroiivart,  vii.  31).  But  by  the  way  in  which  lie 
mentions  Callatebus  (of  winch  the  name  is  only 
known  from  hiraj  it  would  seem  to  have  been  not 
fiir  from  the  Maeander,  from  which  the  ruins  of 
Allah-skehr  cannot  be  less  distant  than  from  30  to 
40  miles,  wiiile  they  are  very  near  the  Cogamus. 
The  enormous  plane-tree,  too,  which  struck  Xerxes's 
attention,  and  the  abundance  of  the  fj-vpiKT],  point 
to  a  region  well  furnished  witli  springs  of  water, 
which  is  the  case  with  the  northein  side  of  the 
Maeaniler,  where  Xerxes  crosseil  it,  and  not  so  with 
the  vicinity  of  All((h-shehr.  At  the  -same  time  the 
i'eisian  king,  in  his  two  days'  man^ii  from  Cydrara 
to  Sardis,  must  have  passed  very  near  the  site  of 
the  future  I'hiladelphia.  (Strab.  xii.  c.  8,  xiii. 
C.4;  Virg.  Georj.  ii.  98;  Herod,  vii.  31;  Plin. 
//.  i\^.  v.  29  ;  Arundell,  Discoveries  in  Ania 
Minor,  i.  34  &c.  ;  Tchihatchetl',  Asie  Mincnre, 
p.  237  &c.  [J.  W.  B.] 

PHILAR'CHES  This  word  occurs  as  a  i)roper 
name  in  A.\'.  in  2  Mace.  viii.  .32,  where  it  is  really  tlie 
name  of  an  ()lli(;e  (6  <pv\a.pxt\^  =  f>  (pvAapxos,  "  tlie 
commander  of  tlie  cavalry."  The  (ircek  text  .seems 
to  be  decisive  as  to  the  true  rendering  ;  but  the  Latin 
version  ("et  Philarchen  qui  cum  Timotiieo  erat . . .  ") 
might  eiisily  give  rise  to  the  error,  which  is  very 
strangely  supported  by  Grimm,  ad  loc.    [B.  F.  W.] 

PHILE'MON  ^i\-iiij.wv:  Philemon),  the.  lv.\lu^' 


PHILEMON 


831 


of  the  Christian  to  whom  Paul  addressed  his  Epistle 
in  behalf  of  Onesimus.  He  was  a  native  probably 
of  Colossae,  or  at  ail  events  lived  in  that  city  when 
the  Apostle  wrote  to  him  ;  first,  because  Onesimus 
was  a  Colossiaa  (Col.  iv.  9)  ;  and  secondly,  because 
Archippus  was  a  Colossian  (Col.  iv.  171,  whom 
Paul  associates  with  Philemon  at  the  beginning 
of  his  letter  ( Philem.  1,  2).  Wieseler  {Chronologic, 
p.  452)  argues,  indeed,  from  Col.  iv.  17,  that 
Archippus  was  a  Laodicean ;  but  the  ejirare  in  that 
piissage  on  which  the  ])oint  turns,  refers  evidently 
to  the  Colossians  (of  whom  Archippus  was  one 
therefore),  and  not  to  the  church  at  Laodicaea 
spoken  of  in  the  previous  verse,  as  Wieseler  inad- 
vertently suppose?.  Theodoret  (Prooem.  in  E]Mst. 
ad  Phil.)  states  the  ancient  opinion  in  saying  that 
Philemon  was  a  citizen  of  Colossae,  and  that  his 
house  was  pointed  out  there  as  late  as  the  tilth 
century.  The  legendary  history  supplies  nothing 
on  which  we  can  rely.  It  is  related  that  Philemon 
became  bishop  of  Colossae  {Constit.  Apost.  vii.  40), 
and  died  as  a  martyr  under  Nero. 

It  is  evident  from  the  letter  to  him  that  Philemon 
was  a  man  of  piojierty  and  influence,  since  he  is 
represented  as  tlie  head  of  a  numerous  household, 
and  as  exercising  an  expensive  liberality  towards 
his  friends  and  the  poor  in  general.  He  was  in- 
debted to  the  Apostle  Paul  as  the  medium  of  his 
personal  participation  in  the  Gospel.  All  inter- 
preters agree  in  assigning  that  significance  to  treav- 
t6v  fj.01  Trpoao(pei\€is  in  Philem.  19.  It  is  not 
certain  under  what  circumstances  they  became 
known  to  each  other.  If  Paul  visited  Colossae 
when  he  passed  through  Phrygia  on  his  second  mis- 
sionary journey  (Acts  xvi.  6),  it  was  undoubtedly 
there,  and  at  that  time,  that  Philemon  heard  the 
gospel  and  attached  himself  to  the  Christian  party. 
On  the  contiary,  if  Paul  never  visited  that  city  in 
person,  as  many  critics  infer  from  Col.  ii.  1,  then 
tlie  best  view  is  that  he  was  converted  during 
Paul's  protracted  stay  at  Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  10), 
about  A.D.  54-57.  That  city  was  the  religions 
and  commercial  cajiital  of  Western  Asia  Minor. 
The  Apostle  laboured  there  with  such  success  that 
"  all  they  who  dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  word  of  the 
Lord  Jesus."  Phrygia  was  a  neighbouring  province, 
and  among  the  strangers  who  repaiied  to  Ephesus 
and  had  an  opportunity  to  hear  the  preaching  of 
Paul,  may  have  been  the  Colossian  Philemon. 

It  is  evident  that  on  becoming  a  disciple,  he  gave 
no  common  proof  of  the  sincerity  and  power  of  his 
faith.  His  character,  as  shadowed  forth  in  the 
epistle  to  him,  is  one  of  the  noblest  which  the  sacred 
record  makes  known  to  us.  He  w;is  full  of  faith 
and  good  works,  was  docile,  confiding,  grateful,  was 
forgiving,  sympathizing,  charitable,  and  a  man  who 
on  a  question  of  simj)le  justice  needed  only  a  hint 
of  his  duty  to  prompt  him  to  go  even  beyond  it 
(vTCfp  &  \4yco  TToi^creis).  Any  one  who  studies 
the  epistle  will  perceive  that  it  ascribes  to  him  these 
varied  qualities;  it  bestows  on  him  a  measure  of 
commendation,  which  forms  a  strikii.g  contiast 
with  the  ordinary  reserve  of  the  sacred  writers.  It 
was  through  such  believers  that  the  jirimitive 
Christianity  evinced  its  divine  origin,  and  spread 
so  rapidly  among  the  nations.  [H.  B.  H.] 

PHILE'MON.  THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL 
TO,  is  one  of  the  letters  (tlic  otliers  are  Kjihesians, 
Colossians,  Philippiaiis)  which  the  Apostle  wrote 
during  his  first  captivity  at  Rome.  The  argu- 
ments which  show  that  he  wrote  the  epistle  to  the 
Colossians  in  that  citij  and  at  that  period,  involve 


832 


PHILEMON,  THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO 


the  same  conclusion  in  "regard  to  this ;  for  it  is 
evident  from  Col.  iv.  7,  9,  as  compared  with  the 
contents  of  this  epistle,  that  Paul  wrote  the  two 
letters  at  the  same  time,  and  forwarded  them  to 
their  destination  by  the  hands  of  Tychicus  and 
Onesimus  who  accompanied  each  other  to  Colossae. 
A  few  modem  critics,  as  Schulz,  Schott,  Bottger,, 
Meyer,  maintain  that  this  letter  and  the  others 
assigned  usually  to  the  first  Roman  captivity,  were 
written  duiiug  the  two  years  that  Paul  was  impri- 
soned at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiii.  35,  xxiv.  27).  But 
this  opinion,  though  supported  by  some  plausible 
arguments,  can  be  demonstrated  with  reasonable 
certainty  to  be  incorrect.     [Colossiaxs,  Epistle 

TO  THE.] 

The  tiinc  when  Paul  wrote  may  be  fixed  with 
much  precision.  The  Apostle  at  the  close  of  the 
letter  expresses  a  hope  of  his  speedy  liberation. 
He  speaks  in  like  manner  of  his  approaching  deli- 
verance, in  his  epistle  to  the  Philippiaus  (ii.  23, 
24),  which  was  written  during  the  same  imprison- 
ment. Presuming,  therefore,  that  he  had  good 
reasons  for  such  an  expectation,  and  that  he  was  not 
disappointed  in  the  result,  we  may  conclude  that 
this  letter  was  written  by  him  about  the  year 
A.D.  63,  or  early  in  a.d.  64 ;  for  it  was  in  the 
latter  year,  according  to  the  best  chronologists,  that 
he  was  freed  from  his  tii-st  Romnn  imprisonment. 

Nothing  is  wanting  to  continn  the  genuineness 
of  this  epistle.  The  external  testimony  is  unim- 
peachable. It  is  not  quoted  so  often  by  the  earlier 
Christian  fathers  as  some  of  the  other  letters  ;  its 
brevity  and  the  fact  tliat  its  contents  are  not  di- 
dactic or  polemic,  account  for  that  omission.  We 
need  not  urge  the  expressions  in  Ignatius,  cited  as 
evidence  of  that  apostolic  Father's  knowledge  and 
use  of  the  epistle ;  though  it  is  difficult  to  regard 
the  similarity  between  them  and  the  language  in 
V.  20  as  altogether  accidental.  See  Kirehhofer's 
Qiiellensamnlung,  p.  205.  The  Canon  of  Jluratoi'i 
which  comes  to  us  from  the  second  century  (Ci  ed- 
ner,  Geschichte  des  Kanons,  p.  69 1,  enumerates 
this  as  one  of  Paul's  epistles.  Tei-tullian  men- 
tions it,  and  says  that  Marcion  admitted  it  into 
his  collection.  Sinope  in  Pontus,  the  birth-place 
of  Marcion,  was  uot  far  from  Colossne  where  Phile- 
mon lived,  and  the  letter  would  find  its  way  to  the 
neighbouring  churchesat  an  early  period.  Origen 
and  Eusebius  include  it  among  the  universally  ac- 
knowledged writings  {o/xoKoyovfieva)  of  the  early 
Christian  times.  It  is  so  well  attested  historically, 
that  as  De  Wette  says  {Fin/eitung  ins  Neue  Testa- 
ment, p.  278),  its  genuineness  on  that  ground  is 
beyond  doubt. 

Nor  does  the  epistle  itself  ofler  anvthing  to  con- 
flict with  this  decision.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive 
of  a  composition  more  strongly  marked  within  the 
same  limits  by  those  unstudied  assonances  of  thought, 
sentiment,  and  expression,  which  indiiate  an  author's 
hand,  than  this  short  epistle  as  compared  with 
Paul's  other  productions.  Paley  has  a  paragraph 
in  his  Horae  Paulinae,  which  illustrates  this  feature 
of  the  letter  in  a  very  just  and  forcible  manner.  It 
will  be  found  also  that  all  the  historical  allusions 
which  the  Apostle  makes  to  events  in  his  own  life, 
or  to  other  persons  with  whom  he  was  connected, 
harmonize  perfectly  with  the  statements  or  inci- 
dental intimations  contained  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  or  the  other  epistles  of  Paul.  It  belongs 
to  a  commentary  to  point  out  the  instances  of  such 
agi'ecment. 

Baur  (^Paulas,  p.  475)  would  divest  the  Epistle 


of  its  historical  character,  and  make  it  the  per- 
sonified ilhistration  from  some  later  writer,  of  the 
idea  that  Christianity  unites  and  equalises  in  a 
higher  sense  those  whom  outward  circumstances 
have  separated.  He  does  not  impugn  the  external 
evidence.  But,  not  to  leave  his  theory  wholly  un- 
supported, he  suggests  some  linguistic  objections  to 
Paul's  authorship  of  the  letter,  which  must  be  pro- 
nounced unfounded  and  frivolous.  He  finds,  for 
example,  certain  words  in  the  Epistle,  which  are 
alleged  to  be  not  Pauline ;  but  to  justify  that  asser- 
tion, he  must  deny  the  genuineness  of  such  other 
letters  of  Paul,  as  happen  to  contain  these  wonls. 
He  admits  that  the  Apostle  could  have  said  (Tir\dy- 
Xva  twice,  but  thinks  it  suspicious  that  he  should 
say  it  three  times.  A  few  terms  he  adduces,  which 
are  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  epistles;  but  to  argue 
from  these  that  they  disprove  the  apostolic  origin 
of  the  epistle,  is  to  assume  the  absurd  principle 
tliat  a  writer,  after  having  produced  tsvo  or  three 
compositions,  must  for  the  future  confine  himself  to 
an  unvarying  circle  of  words,  whatever  may  be  the 
subject  he  discusses,  or  whatever  the  interval  of 
time  between  his  different  writings. 

The  arbitrary  and  purely  subjective  character  of 
such  criticisms  can  have  no  weight  against  the 
varied  testimony  admitted  as  decisive  by  Christian 
scholars  ibr  so  many  ages,  upon  which  the  ainonicai 
authority  of  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  is  founded. 
They  are  worth  repeating  only  as  illustrating  Baur's 
own  remark,  that  modern  criticism  in  assailing  this 
particular  book  runs  a  greater  risk  of  exposing  itself 
to  the  imputation  of  an  excessive  distrust,  a  morbid 
sensibility  to  doubt  and  denial,  than  in  questioning 
the  claims  of  any  other  epistle  ascribed  to  Paul. 

Our  knowledge  respecting  the  occasion  and  object 
of  the  letter  we  must  derive  from  declarations  or 
inferences  fm-nished  by  the  letter  itself.  For  the 
relation  of  Philemon  and  Onesimus  to  each  other, 
the  I'eader  will  see  the  articles  on  those  names. 
Paul,  so  intimately  connected  with  the  master  and 
the  servant,  was  anxious  naturally  to  effect  a  recon- 
ciliation between  thein.  He  wished  also  (waiving 
the  avriKov,  the  matter  of  duty  or  right)  to  give 
Philemon  an  opportunity  of  manifesting  his  Chris- 
tian love  in  the  treatment  of  Onesimus,  and  his 
regard,  at  the  same  time,  for  the  personal  con- 
venience and  wishes,  not  to  say  official  authority, 
of  his  spiritual  teacher  and  guide.  Paul  used  his 
influence  with  Onesimus  (dvfirffxxl/a,  in  ver.  12)  tq 
induce  hiui  to  return  to  Colossae,  and  place  himself 
again  at  the  disposal  of  his  master.  Whether 
Onesimus  assented  merely  to  the  proposal  of  the 
Apostle,  or  had  a  desire  at  the  same  time  to  revisit 
his  former  home,  the  epistle  does  not  enable  us  to 
determine.  On  his  departure,  Paul  put  into  his 
hand  this  letter  as  evidence  that  Onesimus  was  a 
true  and  approved  disciple  of  Christ,  and  entitled 
as  such  to  be  received  not  as  a  servant,  but  above 
a  servant,  as  a  brother  in  the  faith,  as  the  repre- 
sentative and  equal  in  that  respect  of  the  Apostle 
liimself,  and  worthy  of  the  same  consideration  and 
love.  It  is  instructive  to  observe  how  entirely 
Paul  identifies  himself  with  Onesimus,  and  pleads 
his  ciiuse  as  if  it  were  his  own.  He  intercedes  for 
him  as  his  own  child,  promises  reparation  if  he  had 
done  any  wrong,  demands  for  him  not  only  a  re- 
mission of  all  penalties,  but  the  i-eceptiou  of  sym- 
pathy, affection.  Christian  brotherhood ;  and  while 
he  solicits  these  favours  for  another,  consents  to 
receive  them  with  the  same  gratitude  and  sense  of 
oliligatiou  as  if  they   were   bestowed  on   himself. 


PHILEMON,  EPISTLE  OP  PAUL  TO 

Such  was  the  purpose  ami  such  the  argument  of 
the  Epistle. 

The  result  of  tlie  apjieal  cannot  be  doubted.  It 
may  be  assiuiieil  from  the  cbai-acter  of  Philemon 
that  the  Apostle's  intercession  for  Onesimus  was 
not  unavailing.  Theie  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
agreeably  to  the  express  instructions  of  the  lettei-, 
the  past  was  forgiven ;  the  master  and  the  servant 
were  reconciled  to  each  other;  and,  if  the  liberty 
which  Onesimus  had  asserted  in  a  spirit  of  inde- 
pendence was  not  conceded  as  a  boon  or  right,  it 
was  enjoyed  at  all  events  under  a  form  of  servitude 
which  henceforth  was  such  in  name  only.  So  much 
must  be  regarded  as  certain ;  or  it  follows  that  tlie 
Apostle  was  mistaken  in  his  opinion  of  Philemon's 
character,  and  his  etlbrts  for  the  welfare  of  Onesi- 
mus were  frustrated,  (^hrysostom  declares,  in  his 
impassioned  style,  that  Philemon  must  have  been 
less  than  a  man,  must  have  been  alike  destitute  of 
sensibility  and  reason  (-koios  XiOos,  ■Ko'iov  Bripiov), 
not  to  be  moved  by  the  ai'guments  and  spirit  of 
such  a  letter  to  fulhl  eveiy  wish  and  intimation 
of  the  Apostle.  Surely  no  fitting  response  to  his 
pleadings  for  Onesimus  could  involve  less  than  a 
cessation  of  everything  oppressive  and  harsh  in  his 
civil  condition,  as  far  as  it  depended  on  Philemon  to 
mitigate  or  neutralise  the  evils  of  a  legalised  system 
of  bondage,  as  well  as  a  cessation  of  everything 
violative  of  his  rights  as  a  Christian.  How  much 
further  than  this  an  impartial  explanation  of  the 
epistle  obliges  us  or  authorises  us  to  go,  has  not 
yet  been  settled  by  any  veiy  general  consent  of 
interpreters.  Many  of  the  best  critics  construe 
certain  expressions  (rb  dyaOhv  in  ver.  14,  and  inrep 
t  \iyo3  in  ver.  21)  as  conveying  a  distinct  ex- 
pectation on  the  part  of  Paul  that  Philemon  would 
liberate  Onesimus.  Nearly  all  agree  that  he  could 
hardly  have  failed  to  cunfer  on  him  that  favour, 
even  if  it  was  not  requested  in  so  many  words, 
after  such  an  appeal  to  his  sentiments  of  humanity 
and  justice.  Thus  it  was,  as  Dr.  Wordsworth 
remarks  {St.  Paul's  Epistles,  p.  328),  "  by  Chris- 
tianising the  master  tliat  the  Gospel  enfranchised 
the  slave.  It  did  not  legislate  about  mere  names 
and  forms,  but  it  went  to  the  root  of  the  evil,  it 
s])oke  to  the  heart  of  man.  When  the  heart  of  the 
master  was  filled  with  divine  grace  and  was  wanned 
with  the  love  of  Christ,  the  rest  would  soon  follow. 
The  lips  would  speak  kind  words,  the  hands  would 
do  liberal  things.  Evoy  Onesimus  would  be  treated 
by  every  Philemon  as  a  beloved  brother  in  Christ." 

The  Epistle  to  Philemoti  has  one  peculiar  feature — 
its  aestheticnl  character  it  may  be  termed — which 
distinguishes  it  from  all  the  other  epistles,  and 
demands  a  special  notice  at  our  hands.  It  has  been 
admired  deservedly  as  a  model  of  delicacy  and  skill 
in  the  department  of  composition  to  which  it  belongs. 
'I'he  writer  had  peculiar  dillitulties  to  overcome. 
He  was  the  common  friend  of  the  parties  at  variance. 
He  must  conciliate  a  man  who  supposed  that  he 
had  good  reiison  to  be  oll'endeil.  He  must  conmiend 
the  offender,  and  yet  neither  deny  nor  aggravate 
the  imputed  fault.  He  must  assert  the  new  ideas 
of  Christian  equality  in  the  face  of  a  system  which 
hardly  recognised  the  humanity  of  tlie  enslaved. 
He  could  have  placed  the  question  on  the  ground 
of  his  own  j^ersoiial  rights,  and  yet  must  waive 
them  in  order  to  secure  an  act  of  si)ontain'ous  kind- 
ness. His  success  must  be  a  triumph  of  love,  p.nd 
nothing  be  demanded  for  the  s;d;p  of  the  justice 
which  could  have  claimed  everything.  He  limits 
his  request  to  a  forgiveness  of  the  alleged  wrong, 

VOL.  II. 


PHILETUS 


833 


and  a  restoration  to  favour  and  the  enjoyment  of 
future  sympathy  and  afTection,  and  yet  would  so 
guard  his  words  as  to  leave  scope  for  nil  tlxe  gene- 
rosity which  benevolence  might  prompt  towards 
one  whose  condition  admitte<l  of  so  much  allevia- 
tion. *  These  are  contrarieties  not  easy  to  har- 
monise ;  but  Paul,  it  is  confessed,  has  shown  a 
degi-ee  of  self-denial  and  a  tact  in  dealing  with 
them,  which  in  being  equal  to  the  occasion  could 
hardly  be  greater. 

There  is  a  letter  extant  of  the  younger  Plinv 
{Epist.  ix.  21)  which  he  wrote  to  a  fiiend  whose 
servant  had  deserted  him,  in  which  he  intercedes 
for  the  fugitive,  who  was  anxious  to  retui  n  to  hjs 
master,  but  dreaded  the  eflects  of  his  anger.  Thus 
the  occasion  of  the  cori'espondence  was  similar  to 
that  between  the  Apostle  and  Philemon.  It  has 
occurred  to  scholars  to  compare  this  celebrated 
letter  with  that  of  Paul  in  behalf  of  Onesimus ; 
and  as  the  result  they  hesitate  not  to  say,  that  not 
only  in  the  spirit  of  Christian  love,  of  which  Pliny 
was  ignorant,  but  in  dignity  of  thought,  argument, 
pathos,  beauty  of  style,  eloquence,  the  communica- 
tion of  the  Apostle  is  vastly  superior  to  that  of  the 
polished  Roman  writer. 

Among  the  later  Commentaries  on  this  Epistle 
may  be  mentioned  those  of  Ilothe  (Interpretaiio 
Historico-Exegetica,  Bremae,  1844),  Hageubach 
(one  of  his  early  eflbi'ts,  Basel,  1829),  Zhoch  (Ziirich, 
1846,  excellent),  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Ewald  (brief 
notes  with  a  translation,  Gottingen,  1857),  Allbrd, 
Wordsworth,  Ellicott,  and  the  Bible  Union  (U.  S.  A. 
I860).  The  celebrated  Lavater  preached  thirty-nine 
sermons  on  the  contents  of  this  biief  composition, 
and  published  them  in  two  volumes.     [H.  B.  H.] 

PHILE'TUS  (*i'A.7)Tos :  Philetus)  was  possibly 
a  disciple  of  Hymenaeus,  with  whom  he  is  associated 
in  2  Tim.  ii.  17,  and  who  is  named  without  him  in 
an  earlier  Epistle  (1  Tim.  i.  20).  Waterland  {Im- 
portance of  the  Doctrine  of  tlie  Hobj  Trinity,  ch. 
iv.,  ^Vorhs,  iii.  459)  condenses  in  a  few  lines  the 
substance  of  many  dissertations  which  have  been 
written  concerning  their  opinions,  and  the  sentfence 
which  was  inflicted  upon  at  least  one  of  them. 
"  They  appear  to  have  been  persons  who  believea 
the  Scriptures  of  the  0.  T.,  but  misinterpreted 
them,  allegorizing  away  the  doctrine  of  the  Resur- 
rection, and  resolving  it  all  into  figure  and  metaphor. 
The  delivering  over  unto  Satan  seems  to  have  been 
a  form  of  excommunication  declai-ing  the  person 
reduced  to  the  state  of  a  heathen;  and  in  the 
Apostoliad  age  it  was  accompanied  with  super- 
natural or  miraculous  ellects  upon  the  bodies  of  the 
persons  so  delivered."  Walchius  is  of  ojiinion  that 
they  were  of  Jewish  origin  ;  Hammond  connects 
them  with  the  Gnostics  ;  Vitringa  (with  less  pro- 
bability) with  the  Sadducees.  They  understood 
resurrection  to  signify  the  knowledge  and  profession 
of  the  Christian  religion,  or  regeneration  and  con- 
vei-sion,  according  to  J.  (i.  Waldiius,  whose  lengthy 
dissertation,  De  Ilymcnaco  ct  Phileto,,m  his  Mis- 
cellanea Sacra,  1744,  pp.  81-121,  seems  to  exhaust 
the  subject.  Amongst  writere  who  preceded  him 
may  be  named  Vitringa,  (>hserv..Sacr.  iv.  9,  pp. 
9"_'2-9;)i;i  ;  Buddaeus,  F.crlesia  Apostolira,  v.  pp. 
297-:>05.  See  also,  on  the  heresy,  llurton,  Bainpton 
Lectures,  and  Dean  Ellicott's  notes  on.the  Pastoi-al 
Epistles;  and  Potter  on  Church  Government,  ch.  v., 
with  reference  to  the  sentence.  The  names  of  Phi- 
letus and  Hymenaeus  occur  sepavaU'ly  among  tho.-e 
of  Caesar's  household  whcsc  relics  have  been  foiuul 
in  the  Columbaria  at  Rome.  [W.  T.  B.] 

:)  H 


834 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 


•  FUTLIF  {^i\nnros :  Phil/ppus).  1.  The  fnthcr 
of  Alexariiler  the  Great  (1  Mace.  i.  1  ;  vi.  '2),  king- of 
Macedonia,  B.C.  359-336. 

2.  A  Phrygian,  left  by  Autiochus  Epiph.  as 
oovernor  at  Jerusalem  (c.  B.C.  170),  whei'e  he  be- 
haved with  great  cruelty  (2  Mace.  v.  22),  burning 
the  fugitive  Jews  in  caves  (2  Mace.  vi.  11),  and 
taking  the  earliest  measures  to  check  the  growing 
power  of  Judas  Mace.  (2  Mace.  viii.  8).  He  is 
commonly  identified  with, 

3.  'I'lio  foster-brother  {crvvrpotpos,  2  Mace.  ix. 
29)  of  Antiochus  Epiph.,  whom  the  king  upon  his 
death-bed  appointed  regent  of  Syria  and  guaidian  of 
his  son  Autiochus  V.,  to  the  exclusion  of  Lysias 
(B.C.  1(54,  1  Mace.  vi.  14,  15;  55).  He  returned 
with  the  royal  forces  fi-om  Persia  (1  Mace.  vi.  56) 
to  assume  the  government,  and  occupied  Antioeh. 
But  Lysias,  who  'was  at  the  time  besieging  "  the 
Sanctuary"  at  Jerusalem,  hastily  made  terms  with 
Judas,  and  marched  against  him.  Lysias  stormed 
Antioeh,  and,  according  to  Josephus  {Ant.  xH.  9, 
§7),  put  Fliilip  to  death.  In  2  Mace.  Philip  is 
said  to  have  lied  to  Ptol.  Philometor  on  the  death 
of  Antiochus  (2  Mace.  ix.  29),  though  the  book 
contains  traces  of  the  other  account  (xiii.  23).  The 
attempts  to  reconcile  the  narratives  (Winer,  s.  v.) 

.  have  no  probability. 

4.  Pliilip  v.,  king  of  JIacedonia,  B.C.  220-179. 
His  wide  and  successful  endeavours  to  strengthen 
and  enlarge  the  Macedonian  dominion  brought  him 
into  conflict  with  the  Romans,  when  they  were  en- 
gaged in  the  critical  war  with  Carthage.  Desultory 
warfare  followed  by  h.ollow  peace  lasted  till  the  vic- 
toiy  of  Zama  left  the  li'oiiians  iv(i&  for  more  vigorous 
measures.  Meanwhile  Pliilip  had  consolidated  his 
power,  though  he  had  degenerated  mto  an  unscru- 
pulous tyrant.  The  first  campaigns  of  the  Romans 
on  the  declaration  of  war  (B.C.  200)  were  not  attended 
by  any  decisive  result,  but  the  arrival  of  Flamininus 
([i.e.  198)  changed  the  aspect  of  atlairs.  Philip 
was  driven  Irom  his  commanding  position,  and 
made  unsuccessful  overtures  for  peace.  In  the  next 
ye;ir  he  lost  the  fatal  battle  of  Cynoscephalae,  and 
was  obliged  to  accede  to  the  temis  diefated  by  his 
conquerors.  The  remainder  of  his  life  was  spent  in 
vain  endeavours  to  regain  something  of  his  former 
power;  and  was  embitteicd  by  cruelty  and  remorse. 
In  1  ]\Iacc.  viii.  5,  the  defeat  of  Philip  is  coupled 
with  that  of  Perseus  as  one  of  the  noblest  triumphs 
of  the  Romans.  [B.  F.  W.] 


Philip  V.  of  iMaccdon. 
Itidrachm  of  Philip  V.  (Attic  talent).   Obv. :  Head  of  king,  r,  bound 
with  fillet.      Kov.  :    BA^IAEfiS    ^lAlUnOY;     club  of 
ilercuies  :  all  within  wreath. 

PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE  (*/Ai7nros:  Phi- 
lipptis).  Tiie  Gospels  contain  comparatively  scanty 
notices  of  this  disciple.     He  is  mentioned  as  being 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 

of  Botlisaida,  the  city  of  Andrew  and  Peter*  (John, 
i.  44),  and  apparently  was  among  the  Galilaean 
peasants  of  that  district  who  floclced  to  hear  the 
preaching  of  the  Baptist.  The  manner  in  which 
St.  John  speaks  of  him,  the  repetition  by  him  of 
the  selfsame  words  with  which  Andrew  had  brought 
to  Peter  the  good  news  that  the  Christ  had  at  last 
appeared,  all  indicate  a  previous  friendship  with 
the  sons  of  Jonah  and  of  Zebedee,  and  a  consequent 
participation  in  their  Jlessianie  hopes.  The  close 
union  of  the  two  in  John  vi.  and  xii.  suggests  that 
he  may  have  owed  to  Andrew  the  first  tidings 
that  the  hope  had  been  fulfilled.  The  statement 
that  Jesus  found  him  (John  i.  43)  implies  a  pre- 
vious seeking.  To  him  first  in  the  whole  circle 
of  the  disciples'"  were  spoken  the  words  so  full  of 
meaning,  "  Follow  me"  (Ibid.).  As  soon  as  he  has 
learnt  to  know  his  Master,  he  is  eager  to  communi- 
cate his  discovery  to  anothei-  who  had  also  shared 
the  same  expectations.  He  speaks  to  Nathaiiael, 
probably  on  his  arrival  in  Cana  (comp.  John  xxi.  2, 
Ewald,  Gesch.  v.  p.  251),  as  though  they  had  not 
seldom  communed  together,  of  the  intimations  of 
a  better  time,  of  a  divine  kingdom,  which  they 
found  in  their  sacred  books.  We  may  well  believe 
that  he,  like  his  friend,  was  an  "  Israelite  indeed  in 
whom  there  was  no  guile."  In  the  lists  of  the 
twelve  Apostles,  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  his  name 
is  as  unilbrmly  at  the  head  of  the  second  group  of 
four,  as  the  name  of  Peter  is  at  that  of  the  first 
(Matt.  X.  3  ;  Mark  iii.  18  ;  Luke  vi.  14)  ;  and  the 
facts  recorded  by  St.  John  give  the  reason  of  this 
priority.  In  those  lists  again  we  find  his  name 
unifoniily  coupled  with  that  of  Bartholomew,  and 
this  has  led  to  the  hypothesis  that  the  latto-  is 
identical  with  the  Nathanaol  of  John  i.  45,  the  one 
being  the  personal  name,  the  other,  like  Barjonah 
01'  I'artimaeus,  a  patronymic.  Donaldson  {Jtishar, 
p.  9)  looks  on  the  two  as  brothers,  but  the  precise 
mention  of  "  rhv  jSioi/  &^eX<pov  in  v.  41,  and  it.s 
omission  here,  is,  as  Alford  remarks  (on  Matt.  x.  3), 
against  this  hypothesis. 

Philip  apparently  was  among  the  first  company 
of  disciples  who  were  with  the  Lord  at  the  com- 
mencement of  His  ministry,  at  the  marriage  of 
Cana,  on  His  first  appearance  as  a  prophet  in 
Jerusalem  (John'ii.).  When  John  was  cast  into 
prison,  and  the  woi'k  of  declaring  the  glad  ti<lings 
of  the  kingdom  required  a  new  company  of 
preachers,  we  may  believe  that  he,  like  his  com- 
panions and  friends,  received  a  new  call  to  a  more 
constant  discipleship  (Matt.  iv.  18-22).  When 
the  Twelve  were  specially  set  apart  for  tlieir  ofiiee, 
he  was  numbered  among  them.  The  first  three 
I  Gospels  tell  us  nothing  more  of  him  individually. 
I  St.  John,  with  his  characteristic  fullness  of  personal 
',  reminiscences,  records  a  few  significant  utterances. 
The  earnest,  simple-hearted  faith  which  showed 
itself  in  his  first  conversion,  requiied,  it  would 
seem,  an  education  ;  one  stage  of  this  may  be  traced, 
according  to  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iii.  25), 
in  the  history  of  Matt.  viii.  21.  He  assumes,  as  a 
recognized  fact,  that  Philip  was  the  disciple  who 
lu-ged  the  plea,  "  Suffer  me  first  to  go  and  bui-y  my 
father,"  and  who  was  reminded  of  a  higher  duty, 
perhaps  also  of  the  command  previously  given,  by 
the  command,  "  Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead ;  follow 


»  Greswell's  suggestion  (Dissert,  on  Harmony,  xxxii.) 
tli:it  the  Apostle  was  an  inhabitant  (an-b)  of  Bethsaida, 

hut  a  native  (tV)  of  Capernaum,  is  to  he  noticid,  but  j  the  abandonment,  for  a  time,  ol  his  wife  and  davightcr 
liardly  to  be  received. 


b  It  has  been  assumed,  on  the  authority  of  patristic 
tradition  (infr.),  that  his  call  to  the  apostleship  involved 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 

thou  me."  Wlien  the  Galilnean  crowds  had  halted 
on  their  way  to  Jerusalem  to  hear  the  preaching  of 
Jesus  (John  vi.  5-9),  and  were  faint  with  liunger, 
it  was  to  Philip  that  the  question  was  put,  "Whence 
shall  we  buy  bread  that  tlie.-e  may  eatV  "  "  And 
this  he  said,"  St.  .lohn  adds,  "  to  jirove  him,  for 
He  himself  knew  what  He  wouM  do."  The  answer, 
"  Two  hundred  pennyworth  of  bread  is  not  sufficient 
for  them  that  eveiy  one  may  take  a  little,"  shows 
how  little  he  was  prepared  for  the  work  of  divine 
power  that  followed.''  It  is  noticeabje  that  here,  as 
in  John  i.,  he  appears  in  close  connexion  with 
Andrew. 

Another  incident  is  brought  before  us  in  John  xii. 
20-22.  Among  the  pilgrims  who  had  come  to  keep 
the  passover  at  Jerusalem  were  some  Gentile  prose- 
lytes (Hellenes)  who  had  heard  of  Jesus,  and  desired 
to  see  Him.  The  Greek  name  of  Philip  may  have 
attracted  them.  The  zealous  love  which  he  had 
shown  ill  the  case  of  Nathanael  may  have  made 
him  prompt  to  offer  himself  as  their  guide.  But  it 
is  characteristic  of  him  that  he  does  not  take  them 
at  once  to  the  presence  of  his  Master.  "  Philip 
comtth  and  telleth  Andrew,  and  again  Andrew  and 
Philip  tell  Jesus.''  The  friend  and  fellow-townsman 
to  whom  probably  he  owed  his  own  introduction  to 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  to  introduce  these  strangers  also."* 

There  is  a  connexion  not  difficult  to  be  traced 
between  this  fact  and  that  which  follows  on  the  last 
recurrence  of  Philip's  name  in  the  history  of  the 
Gospels.  The  desire  to  see  Jesus  gave  occasion  to 
the  utterance  of  words  in  which  the  Lord  spoke 
more  distinctly  than  ever  of  the  presence 'of  His 
Father  with  Him,  to  the  voice  from  heaven  which 
manifested  the  Father's  will  (John  xii.  28).  The 
words  appear  to  have  sunk  into  the  heart  of  at 
least  one  of  the  disciples,  and  he  brooded  over 
them.  The  strong  cravings  of  a  passionate  but 
imeulightened  faith  led  him  to  feel  that  one  thing 
was  yet  wanting.  They  heard  their  Lord  speak  of 
His  Father  and  of  their  F'ather.  He  was  going  to 
His  Father's  house.  They  were  to  follow  Him 
there.  But  why  should  they  not  have  even  now  a 
vision  of  the  Divine  glory?  It  was  part  of  the 
child-like  simplicity  of  his  nature  that  no  reserve 
should  hinder  the  expression  of  the  craving,  "  Lord, 
.sliew  us  the  Father,  and  it  sufficeth  us"  (John  xiv.  8). 
And  the  answer  to  that  desire  belonged  also  specially 
to  him.  He  had  all  aU)ng  been  eagei-  to  lend  others 
to  see  Jesus.  He  had  been  with  Him,  looking  on 
Him  from  tlie  very  commencement  of  His  ministry, 
and  yet  he  had  not  known  Him.  He  had  thought 
of  the  gloiy  of  the  Fatlu'r  as  consisting  in  some- 
thing else  than  the  Truth,  ilighteousness.  Love  that 
he  had  witnessed  in  the  Son.  "  Have  I  been  so 
long  time  with  you,  and  yet  h;^st  thou  not  known 
me,  Philip?  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the 
Father.  How  sayest  thou,  Shew  us  the  Father?" 
No  other  fact  connc(-tcd  with  the  name  of  Philip  is 
)-ecorded  in  the  Gospels.  The  close  relation  in 
which  we  have  seen  him  .standing  to  the  sons  of 
Zebedee  and  Nathanael  might  lead  us  to  think  of 
him  as  one  of  the  two  unnamed  disciples  in  the  list 
of  fishermen  on  the  Sea  of  Tiberias  who  meet  us  in 
John  xxi.  He  is  among  the  company  of  disciples 
at  Jerusalem  after  the  Ascension  (Acts  i.  Hi),  and 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 

<:  Bcngcl  draws  from  this  narrative  the  inference  that 
it  was  part  of  I'liilip's  work  to  provide  for  tlie  daily 
sustenance  of  the  company  of  llie  Twelve. 

d  Tlie  national  pride  of  some  Spaniali  llieologlans  has 
led  them  to  claim  these  Imiuirers  as  lln'ir  countrymen, 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 


836 


After  this  all  is  uncertain  and  apocryphal.  He 
is  mentioned  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  as  having 
had  a  wife  and  children,  and  as  having  sanctioned 
the  marriage  of  his  daughters  instead  of  binding 
them  to  vows  of  chastity  {Strom,  iii.  52  ;  Fuseb. 
//.  E.  iii.  30),  and  is  included  in  the  list  of  tho.-e  who 
had  borne  witness  of  Christ  in  their  lives,  but  had 
not  died  what  was  commonly  looked  on  as  a  martp-'s 
death  {Strom,  iv.  73).  Polycrates  (Euseb.  //.  E. 
iii.  31),  bishop  of  Ephesus,  speaks  of  him  as  having 
fallen  asleep  in  the  Phrygian  Hierapolis,  as  having 
had  two  daughters  who  had  grown  old  unmarried, 
and  a  third,  with  special  gifts  of  inspiration  {iv 
'Ayitfi  Tlv^vixari  7roAiT6i/<ra/ieVrj),  who  had  died  a^ 
Ephesus.  There  seems,  however,  in  this  mention 
of  the  daughteis  of  Philip,  to  be  some  confusion 
between  the  Apostle  and  the  Evangelist.  Eusebius 
in  the  same  chapter  quotes  a  passage  from  Caius, 
in  which  the  four  daughters  of  Philip,  prophetesses, 
are  mentioned  as  living  with  their  father  at  Hieia- 
polis  and  as  buried  there  with  him,  and  himself 
connects  this  fact  with  Acts  xxi.  8,  as  though  they  re- 
ferred to  one  and  the  same  person.  Polycrates  in  like 
mtinner  refers  to  him  in  the  Easter  Controversy,  as 
an  authority  for  the  Quartodeciman  practice  (Euseb. 
H.  E.  v.  24).  It  is  noticeable  that  even  Augustine 
{Serin.  266)  speaks  with  some  uncertainty  as  to  the 
distinctness  of  the  two  Philips.  The  apocryphal 
'  Acta  Philijijii '  are  utterly  wild  and  fantastic,  and 
if  there  is  any  grain  of  truth  in  them,  it  is  probably 
the  bare  fact  that  the  Apostle  or  the  Evangelist 
laboured  in  Phrygia,  and  died  at  Hieropolis.  He 
arrives  in  that  city  with  his  sister  Blariamne  and 
his  fi'iend  Bartholomew.*  The  wife  of  the  pro- 
consul is  converted.  The  people  are  drawn  away 
from  the  worship  of  a  great  serpent.  The  priests  and 
the  proconsul  seize  on  the  Apostles  and  put  them  to 
the  torture.  St.  John  suddenly  appears  with  words 
of  counsel  and  encouragement.  Philip,  in  spite  of  the 
warning  of  the  Apostle  of  Love  reminding  him  that 
he  should  return  good  for  evil,  curses  the  city,  and 
the  earth  opens  and  swallows  it  up.  Then  his 
Lord  appears  and  reproves  him  for  his  vindictive 
anger,  and  those  who  had  descended  to  the  abyss 
are  raised  out  of  it  again.  The  tortures  which 
Philip  had  suffered  end  in  his  death,  but,  as  a  punish- 
ment for  his  offence,  he  is  to  remain  for  forty  days 
excluded  from  Paradise.  After  his  death  a  vine 
springs  up  on  the  spot  where  his  blood  had  fallen, 
and  the  juice  of  the  grapes  is  used  for  the  Eucha- 
ristic  cup  (Tischendorf,  Acta  Apocrypha,  p.  75- 
94).  The  book  which  contains  this  narrative  is 
ap]iareiitly  oidy  the  Last  chapter  of  a  larger  history, 
and  it  fixes  the  journey  and  the  de;tth  as  after  the 
eighth  year  of  Trajan.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the 
other  apocryphal  fragment  professing  to  give  an 
account  of  his  labours  in  Greece  is  part  of  the  same 
work,  but  it  is  at  least  equally  legendary.  He 
arrives  in  Athens  clothed  like  tlie  otiier  Apostles, 
as  Clirist  had  commanded,  in  an  outer  cloak  and  a 
linen  tunic.  Three  hundred  philosophers  dispute 
with  him.  They  find  thems^ves  baffled,  and  send  lor 
assistance  to  Ananias  the  high-priest  at  Jerusalem. 
He  puts  on  his  pontifical  robes,  and  goes  to  Athens 
at  the  head  of  five  Inuulreil  warriors.  They  attempt 
to  seize  ou  the  Apostle,  and  are  all  smitten  with 
blindness.     The  heavens  open  ;  the  fomi  of  the  Son 

and  so  to  explain  the  reverence  which  places  the  patron 
saint  of  so  many  of  tlieir  kings  on  a  level  with  Sant  lago 
as  the  patron  saint  of  the  people  (Ada  Sancturum,  May  1). 
*■'  The  union  of  the  two  iiaims  is  significant,  and  points 
to  ibo  Apostle. 

,^  H  2 


836     PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST 

of  Man  appears,  and  all  the  idols  of  Athens  fall  to 
the  ground  ;  and  so  on  through  a  succession  of  mar- 
vels, ending  with  his  remaining  two  j'ears  in  the 
city,  establishing  a  Church  there,  and  then  going 
to  preach  the  Gospel  in  Parthia  (Tischendorf,  Acta 
Apocr.  p.  95-104).  Another  tradition  lepreseuts 
Scythia  as  the  scene  of  his  labours  (Abdias,  Hist. 
Apost.  in  Fabricius,  Cod.  Apoc.  N.  T.  i.  7o9),  and 
throws  the  guilt  of  his  death  upon  the  Ebionites 
{Acta  Sanctorum,  May  1).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST.  The  first 
mention  of  this  name  occurs  in  the  account  of  the 
dispute  between  the  Hebrew  and  Hellenistic  disciples 
in  Acts  vi.  He  is  one  of  the  Seven  appointed  to 
superintend  the  daily  distribution  of  food  and  alms, 
and  so  to  remove  all  suspicion  of  partiality.  The 
fact  that  all  the  seven  names  are  Greek,  makes  it  at 
least  very  probable  that  they  were  chosen  as  be- 
lorfging  to  the  Hellenistic  section  of  the  Church, 
representatives  of  the  class  which  had  appeared 
before  the  Apostles  in  the  attitude  oi"  complaint. 
The  name  of  Philip  stands  next  to  that  of  Stephen  ; 
and  this,  together  with  the  fact,  that  these  are  the 
only  two  names  (unless  Nicolas  be  an  exception  ; 
comp.  Nicolas)  of  which  we  hear  again,  tends  to 
the  conclusion  that  he  was  among  the  most  pro- 
minent of  those  so  chosen.  He  was,  at  any  rate, 
well  reported  of  as  "  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
wisdom,"  and  had  so  won  the  affections  of  the  great 
body  of  believers  as  to  be  among  the  objects  of  their 
free  election,  possibly  (assuming  the  votes  of  the 
congregation  to  have  been  taken  for  the  different 
candidates)  gaining  all  but  the  higliest  number  of 
suffrages.  Whether  the  office  to  which  he  was 
thus  appointed  gave  him  the  position  and  the  title 
of  a  Deacon  of  the  Church,  or  was  special  and  ex- 
traordinary in  its  cliaracter,  must  remain  uncertain 
(comp.  Deacon). 

The  after-history  of  Philip  warrants  the  belief, 
in  any  case,  that  his  oilice  was  not  simply  that  of 
the  later  Diaconate.  It  is  no  great  presumption  to 
think  of  him  as  contributing  hardly  less  than  Ste- 
phen to  the  gi-eat  increase  of  disciples  which  fol- 
lowed on  this  fresh  organisation,  as  sharing  in  that 
wider,  more  expansive  teaching  which  shows  itself 
for  the  first  time  in  the  oration  of  the  proto-martyr, 
and  in  which  he  was  the  forerunner  of  St.  Paul. 
We  should  expect  the  man  who  had  been  his  com- 
panion and  fellow-worker  to  go  on  with  the  work 
which  he  left  unfinished,  an<l  to  break  through  the 
barriers  of  a  simply  national  Judaism.  And  so 
accordingly  we  find  him  in  the  next  stage  of  his 
history.  The  persecution  of  which  Saul  was  the 
leader  must  have  stopped  the  "  daily  ministrations  " 
of  the  Church.  Tlie  teachers  who  had  been  most 
prominent  were  compelled  to  take  to  fiight,  and 
Philip  was  among  them.  The  cessation  of  one  form 
of  activity,  however,  only  threw  him  forward  into 
another.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  city  of  Samaria 
is  the  first  scene  of  his  activity  (Acts  viii.).  He  is 
the  precursor  of  St.  Paul  in  his  work,  as  Stephen 
had  been  in  his  teaching.  It  fiiils  to  his  lot,  rather 
than  to  that  of  an  Apostle,  to  take  that  first  step  in 
the  victory  over  Jewish  prejudice  and  the  expansion 
of  the  Church,  according  to  its  Lord's  command. 
As  a  preparation  for  that  work  there  may  have 
been  the  Messianic  liopes  whicli  were  cherished  by 
the  Samaritans  no  less  than  by  the  Jews  (John 
iv.  25),  the  recollection  of  the  two  days  which  had 

*  The  verse  which  inserts  the  requirement  of  a  con- 
fession of  faith  as  the  condition  of  baptism  appears  to 
have  been  the  work  of  a  transcriber  an.\ions  to  bring  the 


PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST 

witnessed  the  presence  there  of  Christ  and  His  dis- 
ciples (John  iv.  40),  even  ])erhaps  tlie  craving 
for  spiritual  powers  which  had  been  roused  by  the 
strange  influeuce  of  Simon  the  Sorcerer.  The  scene 
which  brings  the  two  into  contact  with  each  other, 
in  which  the  magician  has  to  acknowledge  a  power 
over  nature  greater  than  his  own,  is  interesting, 
rather  as  belongiug  to  the  life  of  the  heresiarch 
than  to  that  of  the  Evangelist.  [Simon  Magus.] 
It  suggests  the  inquiry  whether  we  can  trace  through 
the  distortions  and  perversions  of  the  "  hero  of  the 
romance  of  heresy,"  the  influence  of  that  phase  of 
Christian  truth  which  was  likely  to  be  presented 
by  the  preaching  of  the  Hellenistic  Evangelist. 

This  step  is  followed  by  another.  He  is  directed 
by  an  angel  of  the  Lord  to  take  the  road  that  led 
down  from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza  on  the  way  to  Egypt. 
(For  the  topographical  questions  connected  with 
this  history,  see  Gaza.)  A  chariot  passes  by  in 
which  there  is  a  man  of  another  race,  whose  com- 
plexion or  whose  dress  showed  him  to  be  a  native 
of  Ethiopia.  Fiom  the  time  of  Psammetichus 
[comp.  Manasseh]  there  had  been  a  large  body 
of  Jews  settled  in  that  region,  and  the  eunuch  or 
chamberlain  at  the  court  of  Candace  might  easily 
have  come  across  them  and  their  sacred  books, 
might  have  embraced  their  faith,  and  become  by 
ciicumcision  a  proselyte  of  righteousness.  He  had 
been  on  a  pilgi'image  to  Jerusalem.  He  may  have 
heard  thei-e  of  the  new  sect.  The  history  that  fol- 
lows is  interesting  as  one  of  the  few  records  in  the 
N.  T.  of  the  process  of  individual  conversion,  and 
one  which  we  may  believe  St.  Luke  obtained,  during 
his  residence  at  Caesarea,  from  the  Evangelist  him- 
self. The  devout  proselyte  reciting  the  prophecy 
which  he  does  not  understand' — -the  Evangelist- 
preacher  running  at  full  speed  till  he  overtakes  the 
chariot — the  abrupt  question — the  simple-hearted 
answer — the  unfolding,  from  the  starting-point  of 
the  prophecy,  of  the  glad  tidings  of  Jesus — the 
craving  for  the  means  of  admission  to  the  blessing 
of  fellowship  with  the  new  society — the  simple 
baptism  in  the  first  stream  or  spring* — the  in- 
stantaneous, abrupt  departure  of  the  missionary- 
preacher,  as  of  one  carried  away  by  a  Divine 
impulse — these  help  us  to  repiesent  to  ourselves 
much  of  the  life  and  work  of  that  remote  past. 
On  the  hypothesis  which  has  just  been  suggested, 
we  may  think  of  it  as  being  the  incident  to  which 
the  mind  of  Philip  himself  recurred  with  most 
satisfaction. 

A  biief  sentence  tells  us  that  he  continued  his 
woik  as  a  preacher  at  Azotus  (Ashdod)  and  among 
the  other  cities  that  had  formerly  belonged  to  the 
Philistines,  and,  following  the  coast-line,  came  to 
Caesarea.  Here  for  a  long  period,  not  less  than 
eighteen  or  nineteen  years,  we  lose  sight  of  him. 
He  may  have  been  theie  when  the  new  convert 
Saul  passed  through  on  his  way  to  Tarsus  (Acts 
ix.  .30).  He  may  have  contributed  by  his  labours 
to  the  eager  desire  to  be  guided  further  into  the 
Truth  which  led  to  the  conversion  of  Cornelius. 
We  can  hardly  think  of  him  as  giving  up  all  at 
once  the  missionary  habits  of  his  life.  Caesai'ca, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  tlie  centre  of  his 
activity.  The  last  glimpse  of  him  in  the  N.  T.  is 
in  the  account  of  St.  Paul's  journey  to  Jerusalem. 
It  is  to  his  house,  as  to  one  well  known  to  them, 
that  St.  Paul  and  his  companions  turn  for  shelter. 


narrative  into  harmony  with  ecclesiastical  us;ige.   (Couip. 
Alford,  Meyer,  Tiscliendorl',  in  loc.) 


PHILIP 

He  is  still  known  as  "  one  of  tlie  Seven."  His  work 
has  gained  for  him  the  yet  liiy;her  title  of  Evangelist 
(comp.  Evangelist).  He  has  four  daughters, 
who  possess  the  gift  of  prophetic  utterance,  and 
who  apparently  give  themselves  to  the  work  of 
teaching  instead  of  entering  on  the  life  of  home 
(Acts  xxi.  8,  9).  He  is  visited  by  the  prophets  and 
elders  of  Jerusalem.  At  such  a  place  as  Caesarea 
the  work  of  such  a  man  must  have  heli^d  to  bridge 
over  the  ever-widening  gap  which  threatened  to 
separate  the  Jewish  and  the  Gentile  Churches. 
One  who  had  preached  Christ  to  the  hated  Sama- 
ritan, the  .swarthy  African,  the  despised  Philistine, 
the  men  of  all  nations  who  passed  through  the  sea- 
l>ort  of  Palestine,  miglit  well  welcome  the  arrival 
of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  (comp.  J.  P.  Lange, 
in  Herzog's  Beal-cncyclopiiJ.  s.  v.  "  Philippus"). 

The  traditions  in  which  the  Evangelist  and  the 
Apostle  who  bore  the  same  name  dre  more  or  less 
confounded  have  been  given  under  Philip  the 
Apostle.  According  to  another,  relating  more  dis- 
tinctly to  him,  he  died  Bisiiop  of  Tralles  (Acta  Sanct. 
June  6).  The  house  in  which  he  and  his  daughters 
had  lived  was  jiointed  out  to  travellers  in  the  time 
of  Jerome  {Epit.  Paulae,  §8).  (Comp.  Ewald, 
Geschic/ite,  y'l.  175, 208-2 1J-;  Baumgarten,  Apostcl- 
Geschichte,  §15,  16.)  [E.  H.  P.] 

PHILIP  HEKOD  I.,  II.     [Herod  ;  vol.  i. 

p.  794.] 

PHILIP'PI  (*iA(7r7roi :  I'hilippi).  A  city  of 
Macedonia,  about  nine  miles  fi  om  the  sea,  to  the 
N.  W.  of  the  island  of  Thasos,  which  is  twelve  miles 
distant  from  its  port  Neapolis,  the  modern  Kavalla. 
1 1  is  situated  in  a  plain  between  the  range-iof  I'angaeus 
and  Haemus.  St.  Paul,  when,  on  his  Hrst  visit  to  Ma- 
cedonia in  comjiany  with  Silas,  he  embarked  at  Troas, 
made  a  straight  run  to  Samothrace.  and  fi  om  thence 
to  Neapolis,  which  he  reached  on  the  second  day  (Acts 
xvi.  11).  This  was  built  on  a  rocky  promontory, 
on  the  western  side  of  which  is  a  I'oadstoad,  furnish- 
ing a  safe  i-efuge  from  the  Etesian  winds.  The  town 
is  cut  ofl'  from  the  interior  by  a  steep  line  of  hills, 
anciently  called  Symbolum,  connected  towards  the 
N.E.  witii  the  western  e.xtremity  of  Haemus,  and 
towards  the  S.W.,  less  continuously,  with  the  eastern 
e.\tremity  of  Pangaeus.  A  steep  track,  following 
the  couise  of  an  ancient  paved  road,  leads  over  Sym- 
bolum to  Philippi,  the  solitaiy  pass  being  about 
1600  feet  above  the  sea-level.  At  this"  point  the 
traveller  arrives  in  little  more  than  half  an  hour's 
riding,  and  almost  immediately  begins  to  descend 
I)y  a  yet  steeper  path  into  the  jjlain.  From  a  point 
near  the  watershed,  a  sinudtaneous  view  is  obtained 
both  of  Kavalla  ;md  of  the  ruins  oi  Philippi. 
Between  Pangaeus  and  the  nciu-est  ])iut  of  Sym- 
bolum the  plain  is  ve>y  low,  and  tlieie  ;ire  larg<' 
accumulations  of  water.  Between  the  foot  of  Sym- 
bolum and  the  site  of  Philinpi,  two  Turkish  ceme- 
teries are  passed,  the  gravestones  of  which  are  all 
derived  from  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city,  and  in 
tiie  immediate  ncighbourhoal  of  the  one  first  readied 
is  the  modern  Turkish  village  Bcrehctli.  Tins  is 
the  nearest  village  to  the  ancient  ruins,  which  are 
not  at  the  present  time  inhabited  at  all.  Near  the 
second  cemetery  are  .some  ruins  on  a  sliglit  emi- 
nence, and  also  a  khan,  kept  by  a  Greek  family. 
Here  is  a  large  monumental  block  of  marble,  12  feet 
high  iind  7  feet  sijuare,  ajtparently  the  pedestal  of  a 
statue,  as  on  the  top  a  hole  exists,  which  w;ls  ob- 
viously intended  for  its  reception.  This  hole  is 
pointed  out   liy  local   tradition   as   the  crii)  out  of 


PHILLPPI 


837 


which  Alexander's  hor.-^e,  Bucephalus,  was  accus- 
tomed to  eat  his  oats.  On  two  sides  of  the  block  is 
a  mtitilated  Latin  insciiption,  in  which  the  names 
of  Cains  Yibius  and  Cornelius  Quartus  may  be  deci- 
phered. A  stream  employed  in  turning  a  mill  bursts 
out  fioni  a  sedgy  pool  in  the  neighbom-hood,  and 
probably  finds  its  way  to  the  marshy  ground  men- 
tioned as  existing  in  the  S.W.  portion  of  the  plain. 

After  about  twenty  minutes'  ride  from  the  khan, 
over  ground  thickly  strewed  with  fragments  of 
marble  columns,  and  slabs  that  have  been  employed 
in  building,  a  river-bed  66  feet  wide  is  crossed, 
through  which  the  sti'eam  rushes  with  great  force, 
and  immediately  on  the  other  side  the  walls  of  the 
ancient  Philippi  may  be  traced.  Their  direction  'is 
adjusted  to  the  course  of  the  stream  ;  and  at  only 
350  feet  from  its  margin  thei'e  appears  a  gap  in  their 
circuit  indicating  the  former  existence  of  a  gate. 
This  is,  no  doubt,  the  gate  out  of  which  th'e  Apostle 
and  his  companion  passed  to  the  "  prayer  meeting" 
on  the  banks  of  a  river,  where  they  made  the  acquaint- 
ance of  Lydia,  the  Thyatiran  seller  of  purple.  The 
locality,  just  outside  the  walls,  and  with  a  plentiful 
supply  of  water  for  their  animals,  is  exactly  the^ne 
which  would  be  appropriated  as  a  market  for  itine- 
rant tradei's,  "  quorum  cophinus  foenumque  su- 
pellex,"  as  will  appear  from  the  parallel  case  of 
the  Egerian  fountain  near  Rome,  of  whose  desecra- 
tion Juvenal  complains  (Sat.  iii.  1.3).  Lydia  had 
an  establishment  in  Philippi  for  the  reception  of  the 
dyed  goods  which  were  imported  from  Thyatira 
and  the  neighbouring  towns  of  Asia  ;  and  were  dis- 
persed by  means  of  pack-animals  among  the  moun- 
tain clans  of  the  Haemus  and  Pangaeus,  the  agents 
being  doubtless  in  many  instances  her  own  co-reli- 
gionists. High  up  in  Haemus  lay  the  tribe  of  the 
Satrae,  where  was  the  oracle  of  Dionysus,^-not 
the  rustic  deity  of  the  Attic  vinedressers,  but  the 
prophet-god  of  the  Thracians  {6  Qprj^l  /navrts, 
Eunp.  Hecub.  1267).  The  "damsel  with  the 
s]iirit  of  divination "  (TroiSicTK-rj  exovcra  Trvevfxa 
TrvBouva)  may  probably  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
hierodules  of  this  estsiblishment,  hired  by  Philippian 
citizens,  and  frequenting  the  country-ma.rket  tc) 
practise  her  art  upon  the  villagers  who  brought 
livoduce  for  the  consumption  of  the  town.  The 
fierce  character  of  the  mountaineers  would  render 
it  imprudent  to  adinit  them  within  the  walls  of  the 
city;  just  as  in  some  of  the  towns  of  North  Africa, 
the  Kabyles  are  not  allowed  to  enter,  but  have  a 
market  allotted  to  them  outside  the  walls  for  the 
.sale  of  the  ]iroduce  they  bring.  Over  such  an 
assemblage  only  a  summary  jurisdiction  can  be  ex- 
ercised ;  and  hence  the  proprietors  of  the  slave, 
when  they  considered  themselves  injured,  and  hui- 
I'ied  Paid  and  Silas  mto  the  town,  to  the  agora, — 
the  civic  market  where  the  magistrates  {&pxovTfs) 
sat, — were  at  once  turned  over  to  the  military  au- 
thorities ((TTpaTTiyol),  and  these,  naturally  assum- 
ing that  a  stranger  frequenting  the  extra-mural 
market  must  be  a  Tliracian  mountaineer  or  an 
itinei'.ant  trader,  proceeded  to  inflict  upon  the  osten- 
sible cause  of  a  riot  (the  merits  of  which  they  would 
not  attempt  to  understand),  the  usual  treatment  in 
such  cases.  The  idea  of  the  Apostle  possessing  the 
lioman  franchise,  and  consequently  an  exemption 
from  corporal  outrage,  never  occurretl  to  the  rough 
soldier  who  ordered  him  to  he  scourged ;  and  the 
whole  transaction  seems  to  have  passed  so  rapidly 
(hat  he  had  no  time  to  jileal  his  citizenship,  of 
which  the  military  authorities  lirst  heard  the  next 
day.     But   the  illegal  treatment  [SPpis)  obviously 


838 


PHILIPPI 


made  a  deep  impressioa  on  the  mind  of  its  victim, 
as  is  evident,  not  only  from  his  refusal  to  take  his 
discharge  from  prison  the  next  morning  (Acts  xvi. 
37),  but  from  a  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Church  at  Thessalonica  (1  Thess.  ii.  2),  in  which 
he  reminds  them  of  the  circumstances  under  which 
he  first  preached  the  Gospel  to  them  ( TrpoTraOSi/res 
Koi  V fipiffOfVTes,  Kadws  o'/Sare,  iv  <l>iAi7nro(s). 
And  subsequently  at  Jerusalem,  under  parallel  cir- 
cumstances of  tumult,  he  warns  the  officer  (to  the 
great  surprise  of  the  latter)  of  his  privilege  (Acts 
xxii.  25). 

The  Philippi  wliich  St.  Paul  visited,  the  site  of 
which  has  been  described  above,  was  a  Roman  colony 
founded  by  Augustus,  and  the  remains  which  strew 
the  ground  are  no  doubt  derived  from  that  city. 
The  establishment  of  Philip  of  Macedonia  was  pro- 
bably not  exactly  on  the  same  site  ;  for  it  is  described 
by  Appian  as  being  on  a  hill,  and  it  may  perhaps 
be  looked  for  upon  the  elevation  near  the  second 
cemetery.  Philip  is  said  to  have  occupied  it  and 
fortified  the  position  byway  of  a  defence  against  the 
neighbouring  Thracians,  so  that  the  nucleus  of  his 
town,  at  any  rate,  would  have  been  of  the  nature 
of  an  acropolis.  Nothing  would  be  more  natural 
than  that  the  Roman  town  should  have  been  built 
in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  existing 
Greek  one,  on  a  site  more  suitable  for  architectural 
display. 

Philip,  when  he  acquired  possession  of  the  site, 
found  there  a  town  named  Datus  or  Datum,  which 
w;\s  in  all  probability  in  its  origin  a  factory  of  the 
Phoenicians,  who  were  the  first  that  worked  the 
gold-mines  in  the  moiuitains  here,  as  in  the  neigh- 
bournig  Thasos.  Appian  says  that  those  were  m'a 
hill  {\6cpos)  not  far  from  Philippi,  tliat  the  hill 
was  sacred  to  Dionysus,  and  that  the  mines  went 
by  the  name  of  "  the  sanctuary  "  [to,  aavXa).  But 
he  shows  himself  quite  ignorant  of  the  locality,  to 
the  extent  of  believing  the  plain  of  Philippi  to  lie 
open  to  the  river  Strymon,  whereas  the  massive  wall 
of  Paugaeus  is  really  interposed  between  them.  In 
all  piobability  the  "hill  of  Dionysus"  and  the 
•'  sanctuary "  are  the  temple  of  Dionysus  high  up 
the  mountains  among  the  Satrae,  who  preserved 
their  independence  against  all  invaders  down  to  the 
time  of  fleroJotus  at  least.  It  is  more  likely  that 
the  gold-mines  coveted  by  Philip  were  the  same  as 
those  at  Scapte  Hijle,  which  was  certainly  in  this 
immediate  neighbourhood.  Before  the  great  expe- 
dition of  Xerxes,  the  Thasians  had  a  number  of 
settlements  on  the  main,  and  this  among  the  number, 
which  produced  them  80  talents  a  year  as  rent  to 
the  state.  In  the  year  463  B.C.,  they  ceded  their 
possessions  on  the  continent  to  the  Athenians  ;  but 
the  colonists,  10,000  in  number,  who  had  settled  on 
the  Strymon  and  pushed  their  encroaclimeuts  east- 
ward as  far  as  this  point,  were  crushed  by  a  simul- 
taneous effort  of  the  Thracian  tribes  (Thucydides, 
i.  100,  iv.  102;  Herodotus,  ix.  75;  Pausanias,  i. 
29,  4).  From  that  time  until  the  rise  of  the  Mace- 
donian power,  the  mines  seem  to  have  remained  in 
the  hands  of  native  chiefs  ;  but  when  the  affairs  of 
Southern  Greece  became  thoroughly  embroiled  by 
the  policy  of  Philip,  the  Thasians  made  an  attempt 
to  repossess  themselves  of  this  valuable  territorv, 
and  sent  a  colony  to  the  site — then  going  by  the 
name  of  "  the  Springs ''  (Kp'jjvi'Ses).  Philip,  how- 
ever, aware  of  the  importance  of  the  position, 
expelled  them  and  founded  Philippi,  the  last  of  all 
his  creations.  The  mines  at  that  time,  as  was  not 
wonderful    under   the  circumstances,   had   become 


PHILIPPI 

almost  insignificant  in  their  produce  ;  but  theu'  new 
owner  contrived  to  extract  more  than  1 000  talents 
a  year  from  them,  with  which  he  minted  the  gold 
coinage  called  by  his  name. 

The  proximity  of  tlie  gold-mines  was  of  course 
the  origin  of  so  large  a  city  as  Philippi,  but  the 
plain  in  which  it  lies  is  of  extraordinary  fertility. 
The  position  too  was  on  the  main  road  from  Rome 
to  Asia,  the  Via  Egnatia,  which  fi-om  Thessalonica 
to  Constantinople  followed  the  same  course  as  the 
existing  post-road.  The  usual  course  was  to  take 
ship  at  Brundisium  and  land  at  Dyrrachium,  from 
whence  a  route  led  across  Epirus  to  Thessalonica. 
Ignatius  was  carried  to  Italy  by  this  route,  when 
sent  to  Rome  to  be  cast  to  wild  beasts. 

The  ruins  of  Philippi  are  very  extensive,  but 
present  no  striking  feature  exc-ept  two  gateways, 
which  are  consideied  to  belong  to  the  time  of  Clau- 
dius. Traces  of  an  amphitheatre,  theatre,  or  stadium 
— for  it  does  not  clearly  appear  which — are  also 
visible  in  the  direction  of  the  hills  on  the  N.E.  side. 
Inscriptions  both  in  the  Latin  and  Greek  languages, 
but  more  generally  in  the  fonmer,  are  found. 

St.  Paul  visited  Philippi  twice  more,  once  imme- 
diately after  the  disturbances  which  arose  at  Ephesus 
out  of  the  jealousy  of  the  manufacturers  of  silver 
shrines  for  Artemis.  By  this  time  the  hostile  rela- 
tion in  which  the  Christian  doctrine  necessarily 
stood  to  all  purely  ceremonial  religions  was  per- 
fectly manifest ;  and  wherever  its  teachers  appeared, 
popular  tumults  were  to  be  expecteJ,  and  the  jea- 
lousy of  the  Roman  authorities,  who  dreaded  civil 
disorder  above  everything  else,  to  be  feared.  It 
seems  not  unlikely  that  the  second  visit  of  the 
Apostle  to  Philippi  was  made  specially  with  the 
view  of  counteracting  this  particular  danger.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  which  was  written  to 
them  from  Rome,  indicates  that  at  that  time  some 
of  the  Christians  there  were  in  the  custody  of  the 
military  authorities  as  seditious  persons,  through 
some  proceedings  or  other  connected  with  their 
faith  {vjxiv  €xapi(r67j  rh  virhp  XpKTTOv,  oh  fxSvov 
tJ)  ety  aurhv  incTTeveLV  aWa  koI  rh  uTrep  avrov 
irdfTxeLV  rhv  avrhv  ayuiva  ex'"'''"*^ 
olov  etS  eT  e  i  v  i  fjLo),  Koi  vvv  aKOveTf 
4v  i/jLoi;  Phil.  i.  29).  The  reports  of  the  pro- 
vincial magistrates  to  Rome  would  of  course  descrilje 
St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Philippi  as  the  origin  of  the 
troubles  there;  and  if  this  were  believed,  it  would 
be  put  together  with  the  chaige  against  him  by  the 
Jews  at  Jerusalem  which  induced  him  to  appeal  to 
Caesar,  and  with  the  disturbances  at  Ephesus  and 
elsewhere ;  and  the  general  conclusion  at  which  the 
Government  would  arrive,  might  not  improbably  be 
that  he  was  a  dangerous  person  and  should  be  got 
rid  of.  This  will  explain  the  strong  exhortation  in 
the  first  eighteen  verses  of  chapter  ii.,  and  the  pe- 
culiar way  in  which  it  winds  up.  The  Philippian 
Christians,  who  are  at  the  same  time  suffering  for 
their  profession,  are  exhorted  in  the  most  earnest 
manner,  not  to  firmness  (as  one  might  have  ex- 
pected), but  to  moderation,  to  abstinence  from  all 
provocation  and  ostentation  of  their  own  sentiments 
{IxriSh  Kara  ipiBelav  /iijSe  KevoSo^iav,  ver.  3) 
to  humility,  and  consideration  for  the  interests  of 
others.  They  are  to  achieve  their  salvation  with 
fear  and  ti-embling,  and  without  quan-eling  and  dis- 
puting, in  order  to  escape  all  blame — from  such 
charges,  that  is,  as  the  Roman  colonists  would  bring 
against  them.  If  with  all  this  prudence  and  tem- 
perance in  the  profession  of  their  faith,  their  faith 
is  still   made  a   ])enal  offence,  the   Ajiostle  is  well 


PHILIPPI 

content  to  take  tlie  consequences, — to  pieccde  them 
in  niartyrilom  for  it, — to  be  the  libation  poure<l  out 
ujiou  them  tiie  victims  (el  koI  aTrevZofxaL  eTri  rij 
dvala  KoX  XdTovpyia  ttjs  nicmQis  vfxajv,  %aipa) 
Kal  (Tvyxaipu  Tracriv  vfjuv,\er.  17).  Of  course  the 
Jewisli  formalists  in  Philipjii  were  the  parties  most 
likely  to  misrepresent  the  conduct  of  the  new  con- 
verts ;  and  hence  (after  a  diijression  on  the  subject 
of  Epaphroditus)  the  Apostle  reverts  to  cautions 
against  ihcm,  such  precisely  as  he  had  given 
before, —  consequently  byword  of  mouth.  "Beware 
of  those  dogs  "—  (for  they  will  not  be  childien  at 
the  table,  but  eat  the  crumbs  underneath) — "  those 
doers  (and  bad  doers  too)  of  the  law — those  flesh- 
mang-lers  (for  circniiiciscd  I  won't  call  thern,  we 
being  the  true  cireumcision,  <S:c."  (iii,  2,  3).  Some 
of  these  enemies  St.  Paul  tbund  at  liome,  who  "  told 
the  story  of  Christ  insincerely  "  [KaT'iiyytiXav  ovx 
kyvais,  i.  17)  in  the  hope  to  increase  the  severity 
of  his  imprisonment  by  exciting  the  jealousy  of  the 
Court.  These  he  oj>poses  to  such  as  "preached 
Christ"  {eK'fipv^av)  loyally,  and  consoles  himself 
with  the  reflection  that,  at  all  events,  the  story 
circulated,  whatever  the  motives  of  those  who  cir- 
culated it. 

The  Christian  community  at  Philippi  distin- 
guished itself  in  liberality.  On  the  Apostle's  first 
visit  he  was  lios])itably  entertained  by  Lydia,  and 
when  he  afterwards  went  to  Thessalonii«,  where 
his  reception  ajjpears  to  have  been  of  a  very  mi.xed 
character,  the  Philippians  sent  him  supplies  more 
than  once,  and  were  the  only  Christian  community 
that  did  so  (Phil.  iv.  15).  They  also  contvibuteii 
readily  to  the  collection  made  for  the  relief  of  the 
poor  at  Jerusalem,  which  St.  Paul  conveyed  to 
them  at  his  last  visit  (2  Cor.  viii.  1-6).  And  it 
would  seem  as  if  they  sent  further  supplies  to  the 
Apostle  after  his  arrival  at  Rome.  The  necessity  for 
these  seems  to  have  been  urgent,  and  some  delay  to 
have  taken  place  in  collecting  the  requisite  fmids  ; 
so  that  EpaphrodituS)  who  carried  them,  risked  his 
life  in  the  endeavour  to  make  up  for  lost  time 
(fifXpi  Oavarov  ijyyiffev  Trapa^ovXevffafjLivos  rfj 
^vxfii  'iva  ava.-KKripw(Tri  rb  vfj.wi'  vm4prifji.a.  t^s 
irphs  jxk  AeiTovpyias,  Phil.  ii.  30).  The  delay, 
however,  seems  to  have  somewhat  stung  the 
Apostle  at  the  time,  who  fancied  his  beloved  flock 
had  forgotten  him  (see  iv.  10-17).  Epaphroditus 
fell  ill  with  fever  from  his  efforts,  and  nearly  died. 
On  recovering  he  beaime  home-sick,  and  wandering 
in  mind  (^aSr)iJ.ovwv)  from  the  weakness  which  is 
the  sequel  of  fever;  and  St.  Puil,  although  intend- 
ing soon  to  send  Timothy  to  the  I'hilippian  Church, 
thought  it  desirable  to  let  Epaphroditus  go  without 
del.ay  to  them,  who  had  already  heard  of  his  sickness, 
and  cany  with  him  the  letter  which  is  included  in  the 
Canon — one  which  was  written  after  the  Apostle's 
imprisonment'  at  Rome  had  lasted  a  considerable 
time.  Some  domestic  troubles  connected  with  leligion 
had  already  broken  out  in  the  community.  Euodias 
and  Syntyche,  who  appear  to  be  husband  and  wife, 
are  exhorted  to  agree  with  one  another  in  the  matter 
of  their  common  tiiith  ;  and  the  former  is  implored 
to  extend  his  sympathy  to  certain  females  (obviously 
familiar  both  to  St.  Paul  and  to  him),  who  did 
good  service  to  the  Apostle  in  his  ti  ials  at  Philii>])i, 
and  who  in  some  way  or  other  apjiear  to  be  the 
occasion   of  the   disagreement    between    the   pair. 


»  TertuUian  refers  to  it  in  the  same  way,  He  I'raescrip- 
tione,  xxxvi.,  naming  I'hillppi  as  one  of  those  Apostolic 
churches  "  in  which  at  this  day  [a.d.  2un]  the  very  scuts 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    839 

Possibly  a  claim  on  the  part  of  these  females  to 
superior  insight  in  spiritual  matters  may  have  caused 
siinie  irritation;  for  the  Apostle  immediately  goes 
on  to  remind  his  readers,  that  the  peace  of  God  is 
something  superior  to  the  highest  intelligence  {virep- 
fxovaa  TrdvTa  vovv). 

When  St.  Paul  passed  thiough  Philippi  a  third 
time  he  does  not  appeal-  to  have  made  any  consider- 
able stay  there  f  Acts  xx.  6).  He  and  his  companion 
are  somewhat  loosely  spoken  of  as  sailuig  from  Phi- 
lippi ;  but  this  is  because  in  the  common  apprehen- 
sion of  travellers  the  city  and  its  port  were  regarded 
as  one.  Whoever  embarked  at  the  Piraeus  might  in 
the  same  way  be  said  to  set  out  on  a  voyage  from 
Athens.  On  this  occasion  the  voyage  to  Troas  toorc 
the  Apostle  five  days,  the  vessel  being  probablv 
obliged  to  coast  in  order  to  avoid  the  contrary  wind, 
until  coming  off  the  headland  of  Sarpedon,  whence 
she  would  be  able  to  stand  across  to  Troas  with  an 
E.  or  E.N.E.  breeze,  which  at  that  time  of  year  (after 
Piaster)  might  be  looked  for.  (Strab.  Fragment, 
lib.  vii.;  Thucyd.  i.  100,  iv.  102;  Herod,  ix.  75; 
Diod.  Sic.  xvi.  3  seqq. ;  Appian.  Bell.  Civ.  iv. 
101  seqq.;  Pausan.  i.  28,  §4;  Hackett's  Journey 
to  Philippi  in  the  Bible  Union  Quarterly  for  Au- 
gust, 18G0.)  [J.  W.  B.] 

PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE. 
1.  The  canonical  authority,  Pauline  authorship  and 
integrity  of  this  Epistle  were  unanimously  acknow- 
ledged up  to  the  end  of  the  1 8th  century.  Marcioii 
(a.d.  140)  in  the  earliest  known  Canon  held  com- 
mon ground  with  the  Church  touching  the  autho- 
rity of  this  Epistle  (TertuUian,  Adv.  Marcion.  iv. 
5,  V.  2C»)  :  it  appears  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment 
(Routh,  Reliquiae  Sacrae,  i.  395) ;  among  the 
"acknowledged"  books  in  Eusebius  {H.  E.  iii. 
25)  ;  in  the  lists  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  a.d. 
365,  and  the  Synod  of  Hippo,  393  ;  and  in  all  sub- 
seiiuent  lists,  as  well  as  in  the  Peshito  and  later 
versions.  Even  contemporary  evidence  may  be 
claimed  for  it.  Philippian  Christians  who  had  con- 
tributed to  the  collections  for  St.  Paul's  support  at 
Ivome,  who  had  been  eye  and  ear-witnesses  of  the 
return  of  Epaphroditus  and  the  first  reading  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistle,  may  have  been  still  alive  at  Philippi 
when  Polycarp  wrote  (a.d.  107 ;  his  letter  to  them, 
in  which  (ch.  2,  3)  he  refers"  to  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
its  a  well-knovirn  distinction  belonging  to  the  Phi- 
lippian Church.  It  is  quoted  as  St.  Paul's  by 
Irenaeus,  iv.  18,  §4  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Paedaij.  i.,  6, 
§52,  and  elsewhere ;  TertuUian,  Ado.  Mar.  v. 
20,  De  Res.  Cam.  ch.  23.  A  quotation  from  it 
(Phil.  ii.  6)  is  found  in  the  Epistle  of  the  Churches 
of  Lyons  and  Vienne,  a.d.  177  (Eusebius,  //.  E. 
V.  2).  The  testimonies  of  later  writei-s  are  innu- 
merable. But  F.  C.  Baur  (1845),  followed  by 
Schwegler  (184ij),  has  argued  from  the  phraseology 
of  the  Epistle  and  otiier  internal  marks,  that  it  is 
the  work  not  of  St.  Paul,  but  of  some  Gnostic 
forger  in  the  2nd  century.  He  has  been  answered 
by  Liinemann  (1847),  Biiickner  (1848),  and  Resch 
(1850).  Even  if  his  iutereme  were  a  fair  conse- 
quence from  Baur's  premises,  it  would  still  be  neu- 
tralized by  the  strong  evidence  in  favour  of  Pauline 
authorship,  which  Paley,  Ilarae  Pnulinne,  ch.  7. 
has <lrawn  tiom  the  E])istle  as  it  stands.  The  argu- 
ments of  the  Tubingen  school  are  briefly  stated  in 
Reuss,    Gesch.  N.    T.    §130-133,   and   at   greater 

of  the  Apostles  preside  over  their  regions,  in  which  the 
authentic  epistles  themselves  of  the  Apostles  are  read, 
speaking  with  the  voice  and  representing  the  lace  of  each." 


840 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


lensth  ill  Wiesinger's  Commentary.  Most  pereons 
who  read  them  wiil  he  disposed  to  concur  in  the 
opinion  of  Dean  Alford  (iV.  T.  vol.  iii.  p.  27,  ed. 
I85G),  wlio  regards  them  as  an  mstance  of  the  in- 
sanity of  hyper-criticism.  The  canonical  authoi'ity 
and  the  authorship  of. the  Epistle  may  be  considered 
as  unshaken. 

There  is  a  break  in  the  sense  at  the  end  of  the 
second  chapter  of  the  Epistle,  which  every  careful 
reader  must  have  observed.  It  is  indeed  quite  na- 
tural that  an  Epistle  written  amid  exciting  circum- 
stances, pei'sonal  dangers,  and  various  distractions 
should  bear  in  one  place  at  least  a  mark  of  interrup- 
tion. Le  Moyne  (1685)  thought  it  was  anciently 
divided  into  two  parts.  Heinrichs  (1810)  followed 
by  Paulus  (1817)  has  conjectured  from  this  abrupt 
recommencement  that  the  two  parts  are  two  distinct 
epistles,  of  which  the  first,  together  with  the  con- 
clusion of  the  Ep.  (iv.  21-23)  was  intended  for 
pubhc  use  in  the  Church,  and  the  second  exclu- 
sively for  the  Apostle's  special  friends  in  Philippi. 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  sufficient  foundation 
exists  for  this  theory,  or  what  illustration  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Epistle  could  be  derived  from  it. 
It  has  met  with  a  distinct  reply  from  Krause  (1811 
and  1818)  ;  and  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  has  not 
been  questioned  by  i-ecent  critics.  Evvald  {Send- 
schreiben  des  A.  Faubis,  p.  431)  is  of  opinion  that 
St.  Paul  sent  several  epistles  to  the  Philippians  :  and 
he  refers  to  the  te.\ts  ii.  12  and  iii.  18,  as  partly 
proving  this.  But  some  additional  confirmation  or 
explanation  of  his  conjecture  is  requisite  before  it 
can  be  admitted  as  either  probable  or  necessary. 

2.  Where  written. — The  constant  tradition  that 
this  Epistle  was  written  at  Piome  by  bt.  Paul  in  his 
captivity,  was  impugned  first  by  Oeder  (1731), 
who,  disregarding  the  fact  that  the  Apostle  was  in 
prison,  i.  7,  13,  14,  when  he  wrote,  imagined  that 
he  was  at  Corinth  (see  Wolf's  Curae  Fhilulogicae, 
iv.  168,  270);  and  then  by  Paulus  (1799),  :>chulz 
(1829),  Bottger  (1837) 'and  Killiet  (1841),  in 
whose  opinion  the  Epistle  was 'written  during  the 
Apostle's  confinement  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.  23)  ; 
but  the  references  to  the  "palace"  (pi-aetorium, 
i.  13),  and  to  "  Caesar's  household,"  iv.  22,  seem 
to  point  to  Rome  rather  than  to  Caesai'ea  ;  and  thei'e 
is  no  reason  whatever  for  supposing  that  the  Apostle 
felt  in  Caesarea  that  extreme  unceitainty  of  life 
connected  with  the  approaching  decision  of  his 
cause,  which  he  must  have  felt  towards  the  eml 
of  his  captivity  at  Rome,  and  which  he  expresses 
in  this  Epistle,  i.  19,  20,  ii.  17,  iii.  10;  and  fur- 
ther, the  dissemination  of  the  Gospel  described  in 
Phil.  i.  12-18,  is  not  even  hinted  at  in  St.  Luke's 
account  of  the  Cacsarean  captivity,  but  is  described 
by  him  as  taking  place  at  Rome:  compare  Acts 
xxiv.  23  with  xxviii.  30,  31.  Even  Reuss  {Gesch. 
X.  T.  1860),  who  assigns  to  Caesarea  three  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles,  which  are  generally  considered  to 
have  been  written  at  Rome,  is  decided  in  his  con- 
viction that  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  was 
written  at  Rome. 

3.  Wicn  loritten. — Assuming  then  that  the 
Epistle  was  written  at  Rome  during  the  imprison- 
ment mentioned  in  the  last  chapter  of  the  Acts,  it 
may  be  shown  from  a  single  fact  that  it  could 
not  have  been  written  long  before  the  end  of  the 
two  yeai-s.  The  distress  of  the  Philippians  on  .ac- 
coLuit  of  Epaphroditus'  sickness  was  known  at  Rome 
when  the  Epistle  was  written;  this  implies  four 
journies,  separated  by  some  indefinite  intervals,  to 
or  from  Philippi  and  Rome,  between  the  commence- 


ment of  St.  Paul's  captivity  and  the  writing  of  the 
Epistle.  The  Philippians  were  informed  of  his  im- 
prisonment, sent  Epaphroditus,  were  informed  of 
their  messenger's  sickness,  sent  their  message  of 
condolence.  Furtlier,  the  absence  of  St.  Luke's 
name  from  the  salutations  to  a  Church  where  he 
was  well-known,  implies  that  he  was  absent  from 
Rome ^  when  the  Epistle  was  wiitten :  so  does  St. 
Paul's  declaration,  ii.  20,  that  no  one  who  remained 
with  him  felt  an  equal  interest  with  Timothy  in  the 
weltiireof  the  Philippians:  And,  by  comparing  the 
mention  of  St.  Luke  in  Col.  iv.  14,  and  Philem. 
24  with  the  abrupt  conclusion  of  his  narrative  in 
the  Acts,  we  are  led  to  the  inference  that  he  left 
Rome  after  those  two  Epistles  were  written  and 
before  the  end  of  the  two  years'  captivity.  La.stly, 
it  is  obvious  from  Phil.  i.  20,  that  St.  Paul,  when 
he  wrote,  felt  his  position  to  be  very  critical,  and 
we  know  that  it  beaime  more  precarious  as  the 
two  yeare  drew  to  a  close.  In  A.D.  62  the  in- 
famous Tigellinus  succeeded  Burrus  the  upright 
Praetorian  praefect  in  the  charge  of  St.  Paul's  per- 
son ;  and  the  man'iage  of  Poppaea  brought  his 
imperial  judge  under  an  influence,  which  if  exerted, 
was  hostile  to  St.  Paul.  Assuming  that  St.  Paul's 
acquittal  and  release  took  place  in  63,  we  may  date 
the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  early  in  that  year. 

4.  The  irriter's  acquaintance  with  the  Philip- 
pians.— -St.  Paul's  connexion  with  Philippi  was  of 
a  peculiar  character,  which  gave  rise  to  the  writing 
of  this  Epistle.  That  city,  important  as  a  mart  for 
the  produce  of  the  neighbouring  gold-mines,  and  as 
a  Roman  stronghold  to  check  the  rude  Thracian 
mountaineers,  was  distinguished  as  the  scene  of  the 
great  battle  fatal  to  Brutus  and  Cassius,  A.D.  42. 
About  ten  years  atterwards,  St.  Paul  entered  its 
walls,  accompanied  by  Silas,  who  had  been  with 
him  since  he  started  from  Antinch,  and  by  Timothy 
and  Luke,  whom  he  had  afterwards  attached  to 
himself;  the  foimcr  at  Derbe,  the  latter  quite  re- 
cently at  Troas.  It  may  well  be  imagined  that  the 
patience  of  the  zealous  Apostle  had  been  tried  by 
his  mysterious  repulse,  tii-st  from  Asia,  then  from 
Bithynia  and  ]\Iysia,  and  that  his  expect.itions  had 
been  stirred  up  by  the  vision  which  hastened  his 
departure  with  his  new-found  associate,  Luke,  from 
Troas.  A  swift  passage  brought  him  to  the  Eu- 
ropean shore  at  Neapolis,  whence  he  took  the  road 
about  ten  miles  long  across  the  mountain  ridge 
called  Symbulum  to  Phili]>pi  (Acts  xvi.  12).  There, 
at  a  greater  distance  from  Jerusalem  than  any 
Apostle  had  yet  penetrated,  the  long-restrained 
enei-gy  of  St.  Paul  was  again  employed  in  laying 
the  foundation  of  a  Christian  Church.  Seeking  first 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel,  he  went  on 
a  sabbath-day  with  the  few  Jews  who  resided  in 
Philippi,  to  their  small  Proseucha  on  the  bank  cf 
the  river  Gangitas.  The  missionaries  sat  down  and 
spoke  to  the  assembled  women.  One  of  them, 
Lydia,  not  born  of  the  seed  of  x\braham,  but  a  pro- 
selyte, whose  name  and  occupation,  as  well  as  her 
birth,  connect  her  with  Asia,  gave  heed  unto  St. 
Paul,  and  she  and  her  household  were  baptized, 
perhaps  on  the  same  sabbath-day.  Her  house  be- 
came the  residence  of  the  missionaries.  Many  days 
they  lesorted  to  the  Pioseucha,  and  the  result  of 
their  short  sojourn  in  Philippi  was  the  conversion 
of  many  persons  (xvi.  40),  including  at  last  their 
jailer  and  his  household.     Philippi  was  endeared  to 

b  Was  St.  Luke  at  Philippi?— the  "true  yokefeUow" 
mentioned  in  iv.  3? 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


841 


St.  Paul,  not  only  liy  the  hospitality  ot  Lydia,  the 
deep  sympatliy  ol'  the  con\-erts,  and  the  remarkable 
mii'acle  whicli  set  a  seal  on  liis  preaching,  but  also 
by  the  successful  exercise  of  his  missionary  activity 
after  a  king  suspense,  and  by  the  liappy  conse- 
quences of  his  undaunted  endurance  of  ignominies, 
which  remained  in  his  niemoiy  (Phil.  i.  30)  alter  a 
long  interval  of  eleven  years.  Leaving  Timothy 
and  Luke  to  watch  over  the  infant  church,  Paul 
and  Silas  went  to  Thessalonica  (1  Thess.  ii.  2), 
whither  they  wei-e  followed  by  the  alms  of  the  Phi- 
lippians  (Phil.  iv.  16),  and  thence  southwards. 
Timothy  having  probably  carried  out  similar  direc- 
tions to  those  which  were  given  to  Titus  (i.  5)  in 
Crete,  soon  rejoined  St.  Paul.  We  know  not  whether 
Luke  remained  at  Philippi.  The  ne.xt  six  years  of 
his  life  are  a  blank  in  our  records.  At  the  end  of  that 
period  he  is  foiuid  again  (Acts  xx.  6)  at  Phili]ipi. 

After  the  lapse  of  tive  yeais,  spent  chiefly  at 
Corinth  and  Ephesus,  St.  Paul,  escaping  I'rom  the 
incensed  woishippers  of  the  Ephesian  Diana,  passed 
through  Macedonia,  A.D.  57,  on  his  way  to  Greece, 
accompanied  by  the  Ephesians  Tychicus  and  Tro- 
pliimus,  and  probably  visited  Philipjii  for  the  second 
time,  and  was  there  joined  by  Timothy.  His  be- 
loved Philip])ians  i'ree,  it  seems,  from  the  contro- 
versies which  agitated  other  Christian  Churches, 
became  still  dearer  to  St.  Paul  on  account  of  the 
solace  which  they  afforded  him  when,  emerging 
i'rom  a  season  of  dejection  (2  Cor.  vii.  5),  oppressed 
by  weak  bodily  health,  and  anxious  for  the  stead- 
fastness of  the  churches  which  he  had  planted  in 
Asia  and  Achaia,  he  wrote  at  Philippi  his  second 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

On  returning  from  Greece,  unable  to  take  ship 
there  on  account  of  the  Jewish  plots  against  his 
life,  he  went  through  Macedonia,  seeking  a  favour- 
able port  for  embarking.  After  parting  from  his 
companions  (Acts  xx.  4),  he  again  found  a  refuge 
among  his  faithful  Philippians,  where  he  spent  some 
days  at  Easter,  A.D.  58,  with  St.  Luke,  who  accom- 
panied him  when  he  sailed  from  Neapolis. 

Once  more,  in  his  Pioman  captivity  (A.D.  62) 
their  cave  of  him  revived  again.  They  sent  Epa- 
phroditus,  bearing  their  alms  for  the  Apostk's  sup- 
port, and  ready  also  to  tender  his  personal  service 
(Phil.  ii.  25).  He  stayed  some  time  at  Rome,  and 
while  employed  as  the  organ  of  communication 
between  the  imprisoned  Apostle  and  the  Christians, 
and  inquirers  in  and  about  Piome,  he  fell  danger- 
ously ill.  When  he  was  sufficiently  recovered,  St. 
Paul  sent  him  back  to  the  Philippians,  to  whom  he 
was  very  dear,  and  with  him  our  Epistle. 

5.  Scope  and  contents  of  the  Epidle. — St.  Paul's 
aim  in  writing  is  plainly  this  :  while  acknowledging 
the  alms  of  the  Philippians  and  the  peisonal  ser- 
vices of  their  messenger,  to  give  them  some  informa- 
tion respecting  his  own  condition,  and  some  advici; 
respecting  theirs.  Perhaps  the  intensity  of  his 
feelings  and  the  distraction  of  his  prison,  prevenfed 
the  following  out  his  [)lan  with  undeviating  close- 
ness. Kor  the  preparations  for  the  departure  of 
Epaphroditus,  and  the  thonglit  that  he  would  soon 
arrive  .among  the  warm-hearted  Philipi)ians,  filled 
St.  Paul  with  recollections  of  them,  and  revived  his 
old  feelings  towards  those  fellow-lii'iis  of  his  hope  of 
glory  who  were  so  deep  in  his  heart,  i.  7,  and  so 
often  in  his  prayers,  i.  4. 

After  the  inscription  (i.  1-2)  in  which  Timothy 


as  the  second  father  of  the  Church  is  joineil  with 
Paul,  he  sets  forth  his  own  condition  (i.  3-26),  his 
prayers,  care,  and  wishes  for  his  Philippians,  with 
the  troubles  and  uncertainty  of  his  imprisonment, 
and  his  hope  of  eventually  seeing  them  again.  Then 
(i.  27-ii.  18)  he  exhorts  them  to  tiiose  particular 
virtues  which  he  would  rejoice  to  see  them  prac- 
tising at  the  present  time — fearless  endurance  of 
persecution  from  the  outward  heathen  ;  unity  among 
themselves,  built  on  Christ-like  humility  and  love  ; 
and  an  exemplary  life  in  the  face  of  unbelievers. 
He  hopes  soon  to  hear  a  good  report  of  them  (ii. 
19-30),  either  by  sending  Timothy,  or  by  going 
himself  to  them,  as  he  now  sends  Epaphroditus 
whose  diligent  service  is  highly  commended.  Re- 
verting (iii.  1-21)  to  the  tone  of  joy  which  runs 
through  the  preceding  descriptions  and  exhortations 
—as  in  i.  4,  18,  25, 1i.  2,  16,  17,  18,  28— he  bids 
them  take  lieed  that  their  joy  be  in  the  Lord,  and 
warns  them  as  he  had  often  jireviously  warned  them 
(probably  in  his  last  two  visits),  against  admitting 
itinerant  Judaising  teachers,  the  tendency  of  whose 
doctrine  was  towards  a  vain  confidence  in  mere 
earthly  things ;  in  contrast  to  this,  he  exhorts  them 
to  follow  him  in  placing  their  trust  humbly  but 
entirely  in  Christ,  and  in  pressing  forward  in  their 
Christian  course,  witli  the  Resurrection-day  *•'  con- 
stantly before  their  minds.  Again  (iv.  1-9),  ad- 
verting to  their  position  in  the  midst  of  unbelievers, 
he  beseeches  them,  even  with  personal  appeals,  to  be 
firm,  united,  joyful  in  the  Lord ;  to  be  full  of 
prayer  and  peace,  and  to  lead  such  a  life  as  must 
approve  itself  to  the  moral  sense  of  all  men.  Lastly 
(iv.  10-23),  he  thanks  them  for  the  contribution 
sent  by  Epaphroditus  for  liis  support,  and  concludes 
with  salutations  and  a  benediction. 

6.  Effect  of  the  Epistle.— \N<i  h.ave  no  account 
of  the  reception  of  this  Epistle  by  the  Philippians. 
Except  doubtful  traditions  that  Erastus  was  their 
firs>t  bishop,  and  with  Lylia  and  Parmenas  was 
martyred  in  their  city,  nothing  is  recorded  of  them 
for  the  next  fortj'-four  years.  But,  about  A.D.  107, 
Philippi  was  visited  by  Ignatius,  who  was  con- 
ducted through  Neapolis  and  Philippi,  and  across 
Macedonia  in  his  way  to  martyrdom  at  Rome.  And 
his  visit  was  speedily  followed  by  the  arrival  of  a 
letter  from  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  which  accompanied, 
in  compliance  with  a  characteristic  request  of  the 
warm-hearted  Philippians,  a  copy  of  all  the  letters 
of  Ignatius  which  were  in  the  possession  of  the 
Church  of  Smyrna.  It  is  interesting  to  compare 
the  Philippians  of  A.D.  63,  as  drawn  by  St.  Paul 
with  their  successors  in  A.D.  107  as  drawn  by  the 
disciple  of  St.  John.  Steadfastness  in  the  faith, 
and  a  joyful  sympathy  with  sufferers  for  Christ's 
sake,  seem  to  have  distinguished  them  at  both 
periods  (Phil,  i,  5,  and  Polyc.  Ep.  i.).  The  cha- 
racter of  their  religion  was  the  same  throughout, 
practical  and  emotional  latlier  than  speculative ;  in 
both  l';i)istles  there  are  many  practiail  suggestions, 
much  interchange  of  feeling,"  and  an  absence  of  doc- 
tiinal  discussion.  The  Old  Testament  is  scarcely, 
if  at  all,  quoted:  as  if  the  Philijipiau  Christians  had 
been  gathered  for  the  most  part  directly  from  the 
heathen.  At  each  period  tidse  teachei-s  were  seek- 
ing, ajjparently  in  vain,  an  entrance  into  the  Phi- 
lippian  Church,  first  Judaising  Christians,  seemingly 
jjutting  out  of  sight  the  iJesurrection  and  the  Judg- 
ment which  atlerwards  the  Gnosticising  Christians 


o  The  denial  of  an  actual  Resurrection  was  one  of  llm 
earliest  errors  in  the  Christian  Clmrcli.    (Sec  1  Cor.  xv.  12 ; 


2  Tim.  Ii.  18;  I'olycarp,  vii. ;  Ircnneiis,  11.  31;  and  the 
other  passages  quoteU  by  IVaii  Kllicott  on  2  Tim.  il.  18.) 


842 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


openly  denied  (Phil,  iii.,  and  Polyc.  vi.,  vii.).  At 
both  periods  the  same  tendency  to  petty  internal 
quarrels  seems  to  prevail  (Phil.  i.  27,  ii.  14, 
iv.  2,  and  Polyc.  ii.,  iv.,  v.,  xii.).  The  student 
of  ecclesiastical  history  will  observe  the  faintly- 
marked  organisation  of  bishops,  deacons,  and  female 
coadjutors  to  which  St.  Paul  refers  (Phil.  i.  1, 
iv.  ?>),  developed  afterwards  into  broadly-distin- 
guished priests,  deacons,  widows,  and  virgins  (Polyc. 
iv.,  v.,  vi.).  Though  the  Macedonian  Churches  in 
general  were  poor,  at  least  as  compared  with  com- 
mercial Corinth  (2  Cor.  viii.  2),  yet  their  gold- 
mines probably  exempted  the  Philippians  from  the 
common  lot  of  their  neighboui's,  and  at  first  enabled 
them  to  be  conspicuously  liberal  in  alms-giving, 
and  afterwards  laid  them  open  to  strong  warnings 
against  the  love  of  money  (Phil.  iv.  15;  2  Cor.  viii. 
3  ;  and  Polyc.  iv.,  vi.,  xi.). 

Now,  though  we  ciinuot  tract  the  immediate 
eflect  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle  on  the  Philippians,  yet 
no  one  can  doubt  that  it  contributed  to  form  the 
character  of  their  Church,  as  it  was  in  the  time  of 
Polycaip.  It  is  evident  from  Polycarp's  Epistle 
that  the  Church,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the 
guidance  of  the  Apostle,  had  passed  through  those 
trials  of  which  St.  Paul  warned  it,  and  had  not 
gone  back  from  the  high  degree  of  Christian  attain- 
ments which  it  reached  under  St.  Paul's  oral  and 
written  teaching  (Polyc.  i.,  iii.,  ix.,  xi.).  If  it  had 
made  no  great  advance  in  knowledge,  still  unsound 
teachers  were  kept  at  a  distance  from  its  members. 
Their  sympathy  with  martyrs  and  confessors  glowed 
with  as  warm  a  flame  as  ever,  whether  it  was 
claimed  by  Ignatius  or  by  Paul.  And  they  main- 
tained their  groinid  with  meek  firmness  among  the 
heathen,  and  still  held  forth  the  light  of  an  exem- 
plary, though  not  a  perfect  Christian  life."* 

.7.  The  Ckiirch  <it  Bome.~The  state  of  the 
Church  at  Rome  should  be  considered  before  enter- 
ing on  the  study  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians. 
Something  is  to  be  learned  of  its  condition  about 
A.D.  58  fiom  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  about 
A.D.  61  from  Acts  xxviii.  Possibly  the  Gospel  was 
planted  thei-e  by  some  who  themselves  received  the 
seed  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  10).  The 
converts  were  di-awn  chiefly  from  Gentile  proselytes 
to  Judaism,  partly  also  from  Jews  who  were  such 
by  birth,  with  possibly  a  few  converts  direct  from 
heathenism.  In  a.d.  58,  this  Church  was  already 
eminent  for  its  faith  and  obedience :  it  was  exposed 
to  the  machinations  of  schismatical  teacheis  ;  and  it 
included  two  conflicting  parties,  the  one  insisting 
more  or  less  on  observing  the  Jewish  law  in  addi- 
tion to  faith  in  Christ  as  necessary  to  salvation,  the 
other  repudiating  outward  observances  even  to  the 
extent  of  depriving  their  weak  brethren  of  such  as 
to  them  might  be  really  edifying.  We  cannot 
gather  from  the  Acts  whether  the  whole  Church  of 
Rome  had  then  accepted  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  as 
conveyed  in  his  Epistle  to  them.  But  it  is  certain 
that  when  he  had  been  two  years  in  Rome,  his  oral 
teaching  was  partly  rejected  by  a  party  which  per- 
haps may  have  been  connected  witli  the  former  of 
those  above  mentioned.  St.  Paul's  presence  in  Rome, 
the  freedom  of  speech  allowed  to  him,  and  the  per- 


<i  It  is  not  easy  to  suppose  that  Polycarp  was  without  a 
copy  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle.  Yet  it  is  singular  that  though 
he  mentions  it  twice,  it  is  almost  the  only  Epistle  of 
St.  Paul  which  he  does  not  quote.    This  fact  may  at  least 


sonal  freedom  of  his  fellow-labourers  were  the  means 
of  infusing  fresh  missionary  activity  into  the  Church 
(Phil.  i.  12-14).  It  was  in  the  work  of  Christ 
that  Ep^phroditus  was  worn  out  (ii.  30).  Mes- 
sages and  letters  passed  between  the  Apostle  and 
distant  Churches ;  and  doubtless  Churches  near  to 
Rome,  and  both  members  of  the  Church  and  in- 
quirere  into  the  new  faith  at  Rome  addressed  them- 
selves to  the  Apostle,  and  to  those  who  were  known 
to  be  in  constant  personal  communication  with 
him.  And  thus  in  his  bondage  he  was  a  cause  of 
the  advancement  of  the  Gospel.  From  his  prison, 
as  from  a  centre,  light  streamed  into  Caesar's  house- 
hold and  far  beyond  (iv.  22,  i.  12-19). 

8.  Characteristic  features  ■  of  the  Epistle. — 
Strangely  full  of  joy  and  thanksgiving  amidst  ad- 
versity, like  the  Apostle's  midnight  hymn  from  the 
depth  of  his  Philippian  dungeon,  this  Epistle  went 
forth  from  his  prison  at  Rome.  In  most  other 
epistles  he  writes  with  a  sustained  efibrt  to  instruct, 
or  with  sorrow,  or  with  indignation;  he  is  striving 
to  supply  imperfect,  or  to  correct  erroneous  teach- 
ing, to  put  down  scandalous  impurity,  or  to  heal 
schism  in  the  Church  which  he  addresses.  But  in 
this  Epistle,  though  he  knew  the  Philippians  inti- 
mately, and  was  not  blind  to  the  faults  and  ten- 
dencies to  fault  of  some  of  them,  yet  he  mentions 
no  evil  so  chai'acteristic  of  the  whole  Church  as  to 
call  for  general  censure  on  his  part,  or  amendment 
on  theirs.  Of  all  his  Epistles  to  Churches,  none 
has  so  little  of  an  official  chaiacter  as  this.  He 
withholds  his  title  of"  Apostle"  in  the  Inscription. 
We  lose  sight  of  his  high  authority,  and  of  the  sub- 
ordinate position  of  the  worshippers  by  the  river 
side;  and  we  are  admitted  to  see  the  free  action  of 
a  heart  glowing  with  inspired  Christian  love,  and 
to  hear  the  utterance  of  the  highest  friendship  ad- 
dressed to  equal  friends  conscious  of  a  connexion 
which  is  not  earthly  and  temporal,  but  in  Christ, 
for  eternity.  Who  that  bears  in  mind  the  condi- 
tion of  St.  Paul  in  his  Roman  prison,  can  read  un- 
moved of  his  continual  prayers  for  his  distant 
friends,  his  constant  sense  of  their  fellowship  with 
him,  his  joyful  remembrance  of  their  past  Christian 
course,  his  confidence  in  their  future,  his  tender 
yearning  after  them  all  in  Christ,  his  eagerness'  to 
communicate  to  them  his  own  circumstances  and 
feelings,  his  carefulness  to  prepare  them  to  repel 
any  evil  fiom  within  or  from  without  which  might 
dim  the  brightness  of  their  spiritual  graces  ?  Love, 
at  once  tender  and  watchful,  that  love  which  "  is  of 
God,"  is  the  key-note  of  this  Epistle:  and  in  this 
Epistle  only  we  hear  no  undertone  of  any  different 
feeling.  Just  enough,  and  no  more,  is  shown  of  his 
own  harassing  trials  to  let  us  see  how  deep  in  his 
heart  was  the  spring  of  that  feeling,  and  how  he 
was  refi'eshed  by  its  sweet  and  soothing  flow. 

9.  Text,  translation,  and  commentaries. — The 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  is  found  in  all  the  prin- 
cipal uncial  mauuscripts,  viz.  in  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F, 
G,  J,  K.  In  C,  however,  the  verses  preceding  i. 
22,  and  those  following  iii.  5,  are  wanting. 

Our  A.  V.  of  the  Epistle  published  in  1611,  was 
the  work  of  that  company  of  King  James's  trans- 
lators who  sat  at  Westminster,  consisting  of  seven 


by  the  Magdeburg  Conturiators,  and  by  Daille,  whom 
Pearson  answered  (  Vindkiac  Igiwt.  i.  5) ;  also  by  Semler ; 
and  more  recentlj'  by  Zeller,  Schliemann,  Bunsen,  and 
others:    of  whose  criticism  Ewald  says,  that  it  is  the 


be  regarded  as  additional  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  i  greatest  injustice  to  Pulycarp  that  nieu  in  the  present  age 
Polycarp's  Kpistlo.  No  forger  would  have  been  guilty  should  deny  that  this  Epistle  proceeded  fiom  him  (tfesc/t. 
of  such  an  omission.   Its  authenticity  was  first  questioned  |  Isr.  vii.  'J77,  ed.  I«59). 


PHILISTIA 

persons,  of  whom  I)r.  Hurlow,  ;ifti'r\varcls  Bishop  of 
K'ochester,  was  one.  It  is,  however,  substanti:illy 
the  same  as  the  trauslatioii  inade  by  some  univnown 
person  tor  Archbishoj)  Parlcer,  published  in  the 
Bishops'  Bible,  15(38.  See  Baxter's  Hexapla,  pre- 
face. A  revised  edition  of  the  A.  V.  by  Four  Clergy- 
men, is  published  (1861)  by  Parker  and  Bourn. 

A  complete  list  of  works  connected  with  this 
Epistle  may  be  found  in  the  Commentary  of  Rhein- 
wald.  Of  Patristic  commentaries,  those  of  Chry- 
sostom  (translated  in  the  Oxford  Lihranj  of  the 
Fiitliers,  1843),  Theodoret,  and  Theophylact,  are 
utill  extant ;  perhaps  also  that  of  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia  in  an  old  Latin  translation  (.^ee  Journ.  of 
Class,  ami  Sac.  I'hU.  iv.  302).  Among  later  works 
mav  be  mentioned  those  of  Calvin,  1539  ;  Estius, 
1614;  Daille,  1659  (translated  by  Sherman,  1843); 
Kidley,  1548  ;  kmy's  Sermons,  1618  ;  J.  Ferguson, 
1 656  ;  the  annotated  English  New  Testaments  of 
Hammond,  Fell,  Whitby,  and  Macknight ;  the  Com- 
mentaries of  Peirce,  1733  ;  Storr,  1783  (translated 
in  the  Edinburgh  Biblical  Cabinet) ;  Am  Ende,  1798 ; 
Kheinwald,  1827  ;  T.  Passavant,  1834;  St.Mattliies, 
1835;  Van  Hengel,  1838;  Holemaim,  1839;  Rilliet, 
1841  ;   De  Wette,  1847  ;   Meyer,  1847  ;   Neander, 

1849  (translated  into  English,  1851);  Wiesinger, 

1850  (translated  into  English,  1850)  ;  Kiihler, 
1855;  Professor  Eadie ;  Dean  EUicott,  1861,  and 
those  included  in  the  recent  editions  of  the  Greek  N.T. 
by  Dean  Alford  and  Canon  Wordsworth.   [W.  T.  B.] 

PHILISTIA  (nC'Ss,  Pelesheth  :  d\\6<pvKoi : 

alienigenac).  The  word  thus  translated  (in  Ps.  Ix. 
8;  Ixxxvii.  4;  cviii.  9)  is  in  the  original  identical 
with  that  elsewhere  rendered  Palestine.  [See  that 
article,  p.  660  6.]  "  Palestine  "  originally  meant 
nothing  but  the  district  inhabited  by  the  "  Phi- 
listines," who  are  called  by  Josephus  TVaKai.ar'Lvoi., 
"  Palestines."  In  fact  the  two  words  are  the  same, 
and  the  ditference  in  their  present  form  is  but  the 
result  of  gradual  corruption.  The  form  Philistia 
does  not  occur  anywhere  in  LXX.  or  Vulgate.  The 
nearest  approach  to  it  is  Luther's  Pliilistda.     [<■.] 

PHILISTINES  Cm^B:  ^v\i(rriei,x,  'A\- 

\6(j)v\ot :  Philistiim).  The  origin  of  the  Philistines 
is  nowhere  expressly  stated  in  the  Bible ;  but  as  the 
piophets  describe  them  as  "  tlie  Philistines  fi'om 
t'aphtor"  (Am.  ix.  7),  and  "the  remnant  of  the 
maiitime  district  of  Caj)litor  "  (Jer.  xlvii.  4),  it  is 
prima  facie  probable  that  they  were  tlie  "  Caph- 
torims  which  came  out  of  Caphtor"  who  expelled 
the  Avim  from  their  territory  and  occupied  it  in 
their  place  (Deut.  ii.  23),  and  that  these  again  were 
the  Caphtorim  mentioned  in  tlic  Mosaic  genealogical 
table  among  the  descendants  of  Mizraim  (Oen.  x. 
14).  But  in  establishing  this  conclusion  certain 
dilKculties  present  themselves :  in  the  first  place,  it 
is  observable  that  in  Gen.  x.  14  the  Philistines  are 
connected  with  the  Ca.sluhim  rather  tlian  the  Caph- 
torim.    It  has  generally  been   assumed    that    the 

b  The  iianio  is  derived  from  the  root  C?3  and  the 
Aolliiopic/atasd,  "  to  migrate ;"  a  term  which  is  said  to 
be  still  current  in  Abyssinia  (Knobel,  \olkert.  p.  281). 
In  Egyptian  monumcnis  it  appears  under  tlie  fomi  of 
I'oulost  (Brugsch,  Hid.  d'Kfjijpt.  p.  187).  The  rendering 
of  the  name  in  the  L.VX.,  'AAAd</)iiAot,  "strangers,"  is 
probably  In  refcrenci^  to  tlie  etymologicjU  meaning  of  the 
name,  tlioiigh  it  may  otherwi.se  be  regarded  as  having 
orisiinated  with  the  Israeliles.  (n  wIkhii  Ihr  I'liilislines 


PHILISTINES 


843 


text  has  suffered  a  transposition,  and  that  the  pa- 
renthetical clause  "out  of  whom  came  Philistim  " 
ought  to  follow  the  words  "and  Caphtorim."  This 
explanation  is,  however,  inadmissible:  for  (1)  there 
is  no  external  evidence  whatever  of  any  variation  in 
the  text,  either  heie  or  in  tlie  parallel  passage  in 
1  Chr.  i.  12;  and  (2)  if  the  transposition  were 
etfected,  the  desired  sense  would  not  be  gained  ;  for 
the  words  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  out  of  whom  "  » 
really  mean  "  whence,"  and  denote  a  local  move- 
ment rather  than  a  genealogical  descent,  so  that,  as 
applied  to  the  Caphtorim,  they  would  merely  indi- 
cate a  sojourn  of  the  Philistines  in  their  land,  and 
not  the  identity  of  the  two  races.  The  clause  seems 
to  have  an  appropriate  meaning  in  its  present  posi- 
tion :  it  looks  like  an  interpolation  into  the  original 
document  with  the  view  of  explaining  when  and 
where  the  name  Philistine  was  first  ajiplied  to  the 
people  whose  proper  appellation  was  Caphtorim. 
It  is  an  etymological  as  well  as  an  historical  memo- 
randum ;  for  it  is  based  on  the  meaning  of  the  name 
Philistine,^'  viz.  "  emigrant,"  and  is  designed  to 
account  for  the  application  of  that  name.  But  a 
second  and  more  serious  difficulty  arises  out  of  the 
language  of  the  Philistines;  for  while  the  Caph- 
torim were  Hamitic,  the  Philistine  language  is  held 
to  have  been  Semitic.'^  It  has  hence  been  inferred 
that  the  Philistines  vs'ere  in  reality  a  Semitic  race, 
and  that  they  derived  the  title  of  Caphtorim  simply 
from  a  residence  in  Caphtor  (Ewald,  i.  331  ;  Mo- 
vers, Phoeniz.  iii.  258),  and  it  has  been  noticed  in 
confirmation  of  this,  tliat  theii-  land  is  termed  Ca- 
naan (Zeph.  ii.  5).  But  this  is  inconsistent  with 
the  express  assertion  of  the  Bible  that  tliey  were 
Caphtorim  (Deut.  ii.  23),  and  not  simply  that  they 
came  from  Caphtor;  and  the  term  Canaan  is  applied 
to  their  country,  not  ethnologically  but  etymolo- 
gically,  to  describe  the  trading  habits  of  the  Phi- 
listines. The  difficulty  arising  out  of  the  question 
of  language  may  be  met  by  assuming  either  that 
the  Caphtorim  adopted  the  language  of  the  con- 
quered Avim  (a  not  unusual  circumstance  where 
the  conquered  form  the  bulk  of  the  population),  or 
that  they  diverged  from  the  Hamitic  stock  at  a 
period  when  the  distinctive  features  of  Hamitism 
and  Semitism  were  yet  in  embryo.  A  third  objec- 
tion to  their  Egyptian  origin  is  raised  from  the 
application  of  the  term  "  uncircuracised  "  to  them 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  26  ;  2  Sam.  i.  20),  whereas  the  Egyp- 
tians were  circumcised  (Herod,  ii.  36).  But  "this 
objection  is  answered  by  Jer.  ix.  25,  26,  where  the 
same  term  is  in  some  sense  applied  to  the  Egyptians, 
however  it  may  be  reconciled  with  the  statement 
of  Herodotus. 

The  next  question  that  arises  relates  to  the  early 
movements  of  the  Philistines.  It  has  been  verv 
generally  assumed  of  late  years  that  Caphtor  repre- 
sents Crete,  and  that  the  Philistines  migrated  trom 
that  island,  either  directly  or  through  Egypt,  into 
Palestine.  This  hypothesis  piosupjioses  the  Semitic 
origin  of  the  Philistines  ;  for  we  believe  that  there 


were  iAAdc^uAoi,  as  opposed  to  i>iJi6<j>v\oi.  (Stjirk's  Gaza, 
p.  67  IT.).  Other  derivations  of  the  name  Philistine  have 
been  proposed,  as  that  it  originated  in  a  transposition  of  the 

word  sheplwlah  (HT'SP').  applied  to  the  Philistine  plain  ; 
or,  again,  that  it  is  connectiii  with  Pclasgl,  as  Hitzig 
supposes. 

■^  Hilzig,  In  his  I'rgesduchted.  I'hiL,  however,  maintains 
that  the  language  is  liido-IOuropean,  with  a  view  to  prove 
the  Philistines  to  be  Pelasgl.  lie  is,  we  believe,  singithir 
ill  Ills  view. 


844 


PHILISTINES 


ai'e  no  traces  of  Hamitic  settlements  in  Crete,  and 
consequently  the  Biblical  statement  that  Caphtorim 
was  descended  from  Mizraim  forms  an  a  ^''wre  ob- 
jection to  the  view.  ]\Ioreover,  the  name  Caphtor 
can  only  be  identified  with  the  Egyptian  Cnptos. 
[Caphtor.]  But  the  Cretan  origin  of  the  Philis- 
tines has  been  deduced,  not  so  much  from  the  name 
Caphtor,<*  as  from  that  of  the  Chcrethites.  This 
name  in  its  Hebrew  .form  ^  bears  a  close  resem- 
blance to  Crete,  and  is  rendered  Cretans  in  the 
LXX.  A  furth'er  link  between  the  two  terms  has 
been  apparently  discovered  in  the  term  cdri,'  which 
is  applied  to  the  royal  guard  ('3  K.  xi.  4,  19),  and 
which  sounds  like  Carians.  The  latter  of  these 
arguments  assumes  that  the  Cherethites  of  David's 
guard  were  identical  with  the  Cherethites  of  the 
Philistine  plain,  which  appeal's  in  the  highest 
degree  improbable.8  With  regard  to  the  former 
argument,  the  mere  coincidence  of  the  names  cannot 
pass  for  much  without  some  corroborative  testi- 
mony. The  Bible  furnishes  none,  for  the  name 
occurs  but  thrice  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14;  Ez.  xxv.  16; 
Zeph.  ii.  5),  and  apparently  applies  to  the  occu- 
pants of  the  southern  district;  the  testimony  of 
the  LXX.  is  invalidated  by  the  fact  that  it  is  based 
upon  the  mere  sound  of  the  word  (see  Zeph.  ii.  6, 
where  ceroth  is  also  rendered  Crete):  and  lastly, 
we  have  to  account  for  the  introduction  of  the  clas- 
sical name  of  the  island  side  by  side  with  the  He- 
brew term  Caphtor.  A  certain  amount  of  testimony 
is  indeed  adduced  in  favour  of  a  connexion  between 
Crete  and  Philistia ;  but,  witli  the  exception  of  the 
vague  rumour,  recorded  but  not  adopted  by  Ta- 
citus *•  {Hist.  v.  3),  the  evidence  is  confined  to  the 
town  of  Gaza,  and  even  in  this  case  is  not  wholly 
satisfactory.'  The  town,  according  to  Stephanus 
Byzantinus  (s.  v.  Tafo),  was  termed  Minoa,  as 
having  been  founded  by  Minos,  and  this  tradition 
may  be  traced  back  to,  and  was  perhaps  founded 
on,  an  inscription  on  the  coins  of  that  city,  con- 
taining the  letters  MEINn  ;  but  tliese  coins  are 
of  no  higher  date  than  the  first  century  B.C.,  and 
belong  to  a  period  when  Gaza  had  attained  a  decided 
Greek  character  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  6,  §3).  Again, 
the  worship  of  the  god  Marna,  and  its  identity  with 
the  Cretan  Jove,  are  frequently  mentioned  by  early 
writers  (Movers,  Phoeniz.  i.  662) ;  but  the  name 
is  Phoenician,  being  the  maran,  "lord"  of  1  Cor. 
xvi.  22,  and  it  seems  more  probable  that  Gaza  and 
Crete  derived  the  worship  from  a  common  source, 


d  The  only  gi'ound  furnished  by  the  Bible  for  this  view 
is  the  application  of  the  term  rendered  "  island  "  to 
Caphtor  in  Jer.  xlvii.  4.  But  this  term  also  means 
maritime  district ;  and  "  the  maritime  district  of  Caphtur '' 
is  but  another  term  for  Philistia  itself. 

8  It  has  been  held  by  Ewald  (i.  330)  and  others,  that 
the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites  (2  Sam.  xx.  23)  were  Che- 
retliites  and  Philistines.  The  objections  to  this  view  are  : 
(1)  that  it  is  highly  improbable  that  David  would  select 
his  officers  from  the  hereditary  foes  of  his  country,  parti- 
cularly 80  immediately  after  he  bad  enforced  their  sub- 
mission ;  (2)  that  there  seems  no  reason  why  an  undue 
prominence  sliould  have  been  given  to  the  Cherethites  by 
placing  that  name  first,  Mid  altering  Philistines  into  Pe- 
lethites, so  as  to  produce  a  paronomasia;  (3)  that  the 
names  subsequently  applied  to  the  same  body  (2  K.  xi.  19) 
are  appellatives ;  and  (4)  that  the  terms  admit  of  a  pro- 
bable explanation  from  Hebrew  roots. 

h  Among  other  accounts  of  the  origin  of  the  Jews,  he 
gives  this  :— "  Judaeos,  Greta  insula  profugos,  novissima 
Libyae  insedisso :"  and,  as  part  of  the  same  tradition, 


PHILISTINES 

Phoenicia.  Without  therefore  asserting  that  migi'a- 
tions  may  not  have  taken  place  fiom  Ci'ete  to  Phi- 
listia, we  hold  that  the  evidence  adduced  to  prove 
that  they  did  is  insufficient. 

The  last  point  to  be  decided  in  connexion  with 
the  early  history  of  the  Philistines  is,  the  time 
when  they  settled  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  If  we 
were  to  restrict  ourselves  to  the  statements  of  the 
Bible,  we  .should  conclude  that  this  took  place  before 
the  time  of  Abraham  :  for  they  are  noticed  in  his 
day  as  a  pastoral  tribe  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Gerar  (Gen.  xxi.  32,  34,  xxvi.  1,  8 ) :  and  this  posi- 
tion accords  well  with  the  statement  in  Dent.  ii. 
23,  that  the  .\vim  dwelt  in  Hazerim,  i.  e.  in  nomad 
encampments  ;  for  Gerar  lay  in  the  south  country, 
which  was  just  adapted  to  such  a  life.  At  the  time 
of  the  exodus  they  were  .still  in  the  same  neigh- 
bourhood, but  grown  sufficiently  powerful  to  inspire 
the  Israelites  with  fear  (Ex.  xiii.  17,  xv.  14).  When 
the  Israelites  arrived,  they  were  in  full  possession 
of  the  Shephelah  from  the  "  river  of  Egypt "  {el' 
Arish)  in  tlie  south,  to  Ekron  in  the  north  (Josh.  xv. 
4,  47 ),  and  had  formed  a  confederacy  of  five  powerful 
citiesJ — Gaza,  Ashdod,  Ashkelon,  Gath,  and  Ekron 
(Josh.  xiii.  3).  The  interval  that  elapsed  between 
Abraham  and  the  exodus  seems  sufficient  to  allow  for 
the  alteration  that  took  place  in  the  position  of  the 
Philistines,  and  their  transtbi'mation  from  a  pastoral 
tribe  to  a  settled  and  powerful  nation.  But  such  a 
view  has  not  met  with  acceptance  among  modem 
critics,  partly  because  it  leaves  the  migi-ations  of 
the  Philistines  wholly  unconnected  with  any  known 
historical  event,  and  partly  because  it  does  not 
serve  to  explain  the  great  increase  of  their  power 
in  the  time  of  the  .Judges.  To  meet  these  two 
requirements  a  double  migration  on  the  part  of 
the  Philistines,  or  of  the  two  branches  of  that 
nation,  has  been  suggested.  Knobel,  for  instance, 
regards  the  Philistines  proper  as  a  branch  of  the 
same  stock  as  that  to  which  the  Hyksos  belonged, 
and  he  discovers  the  name  Philistine  in  the  oppro- 
brious name  Philition,  or  Philitis,  bestowed  on  the 
shepherd  kings  (Herod,  ii.  128) ;  their  first  entrance 
into  Canaan  from  the  Casluhim  would  thus  be  sub- 
sequent to  the  patriarchal  age,  and  coincident  with 
the  expulsicMi  of  the  Hyksos.  The  Ciierethites  he 
identifies  with  the  Caphtorim  who  displaced  the 
Avim ;  and  these  he  regards  as  Cretans  who  did  not 
enter  Canaan  before  the  period  of  the  Judges.  The 
former  part  of  his  theoi'y  is  inconsistent  with  the 


adds  that  the  name  Judaeus  was  derived  from  Ida,— a 
circumstance  which  suggests  a  foundation  for  tlie  story. 
The  statement  seems  to  have  no  more  real  weight  than 
the  reported  connexion  between  Hierosolyma  and  the 
Solymi  of  Lycia.  Yet  it  is  accepted  as  evidence  that  the 
Philistines,  whom  Tacitus  is  supposed  to  describe  as  Jews, 
came  from  Crete. 

•  The  resemblance  between  the  names  Aptera  and 
Caphtor  (Keil,  Einleit.  ii.  236),  Phalasarna  and  Philistine 
(Ewald,  i.  330),  is  too  slight  to  be  of  any  weight.  Added 
to  which,  those  places  lie  in  the  part  of  Crete  most  remote 
from  Palestine. 

j  At  what  period  these  cities  were  originally  founded, 
we  know  not :  but  there  are  good  gi'ounds  for  believing 
that  they  were  of  Canaanitish  origin,  and  had  previously 
been  occupied  by  the  Avim.  The  name  Gath  is  certainly 
Canaanitish :  so  most  probably  are  Gaza,  Ashdod,  and 
Ekron.  Ashkelon  is  doubtful ;  and  the  terminations  both 
of  this  and  Ekron  may  be  Philistine.  Gaza  is  mentioned 
as  early  as  in  Gen.  x.  19  as  a  city  of  the  Canaanites;  and 
this  as  well  as  Ashdod  and  Ekron  were  in  Joshua's  time 
the  asylum  of  the  Canaanitish  Anakim  (Josh.  xi.  22). 


PHILISTINES 

notices  of  the  Philistines  in  the  book  of  Genesis ; 
these,  therefore,  he  rejjards  as  additions  of  ii  later 
date''  {Volhert.  p.  218  ff.).  The  view  adopted  by 
Movers  is,  tliat  the  Philistines  were  airrieil  west- 
ward from  Palestine  into  Lower  Kgypt  by  the 
stream  of  the  Hyksos  movement  at  a  period  subse- 
quent to  Abraham  ;  from  Egypt  they  passed  to 
Ci'ete,  and  returned  to  Palestine  in  tlie  early  period 
of  the  Judges  (P/ioeniz.  iii.  258).  This  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  notices  in  Joshua.'  Ewald,  in  the 
second  edition  of  his  Geschichte  propounds  the  hypo- 
thesis of  a  double  immigration  from  Crete,  the  first 
of  which  took  place  in  the  ante^patriarchal  period, 
as  a,  consequence  either  of  the  Canaauitish  settle- 
ment or  of  the  Hyksos  movement,  the  second  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges  {Gesch.  i.  329-331).  We  can- 
not regard  the  above  views  in  any  other  light  than 
as  speculations,  built  up  on  very  slight  dita,  and 
unsatisfactory,  inasmuch  as  thev  fail  to  reconcile 
the  statements  of  Scripture.     For  they  all  imply 

(1)  that  the  notice  of  the  Caphtorim  in  Gen.  x. 
14  ajjplies  to  an  entirely  distinct  tribe  fiom  the 
Philistines,  as  Ewald  (i.  331,  note)  himself  allows; 

(2)  that  either  the  notices  in  Gen.  xx.,  xxvi.,  or 
those  in  Josh.  xv.  45-47,  or  perchance  both,  are 
interpolations;   and  (3)   that  the   notice  in  Deut. 

Ji.  23,  which  certainly  bears  marks  of  high  anti- 
quity, belongs  to  a  late  date,  and  refers  solely  to 
the  Cherethites.  But,  beyond  these  inconsistencies, 
there  are  two  points  which  appear  to  militate 
against  the  theory  of  the  second  immigration  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges:  (1)  that  the  national  title  of 
the  nation  always  remained  Philistine,  whereas,  ac- 
cording to  these  theories,  it  was  the  Cretan  or  Cho- 
I'ethite  element  Avhich  led  to  the  great  development 
of  power  in  the  time  of  the  Judges;  and  (2)  that  it 
remains  to  be  shown  wliy  a  sea-fiiring  race  like  the 
Cretans,  coming  direct  from  Caphtor  in  their  ships 
(as  Knobel,  p.  224,  understands  "  Cajjhtorim  liom 
Caphtor"  to  imply],  would  seek  to  occupy  tiie 
(luarters  of  a  nomad  race  living  in  encampments,  in 
the  wilderness  region  of  the  south.™  We  hesitate, 
therefore,  to  endorse  any  of  the  proffered  explana- 
tions, and,  wliile  we  allow  that  the  IMblical  state- 
ments are  remarkable  for  their  fragmentary  and 
parenthetical  nature,  we  are  not  prepared  to  fill  up 
the  gaps.  If  those  statements  cannot  be  received  as 
they  stand,  it  is  questionable  whether  any  amoimt 
of  criticism  will  supply  the  connecting  links.  One 
point  can,  we  think,  be  satisfactorily  shown,  viz., 
that  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  immigration  is  not 
needed  in  order  to  account  for  the  growth  of  the 
Philistine  power.  Their  geographical  position  and 
their  relations  to  neighbouring  nations  will  account 
for  it.  Between  the  times  of  Abraham  and  Joshua, 
the  Philistines  had  changed  their  quai ttrs,  and  had 
advanced  northwards  into  the  Shephelah  or  plain  of 
Philistia.  This  plain  has  been  in  all  ages  remark- 
able for  the  exti'eme  richness  of  its  soil ;  its  fields  of 
standing  corn,  its  vineyards  and  olive-yards,  are  in- 

k  The  sole  ground  for  questioninK  the  historical  value 
of  these  notices  is  thai  Abimclccb  Is  not  termed  king  of 
the  Philistines  in  xx.  2,  but  king  of  Gorar.  The  land  is, 
however,  tenned  the  f'liilistines'  land.  It  is  gratuitously 
assumed  that  the  latter  is  a  case  of  jn-olipafs,  and  that  the 
subsequent  ncjticc  of  (lie  king  of  the  Philistines  in  xxvi.  1 
is  the  work  of  a  lat<r  writer  who  was  misled  by  the 
prolepsis. 

I  The  grounds  for  doubling  the  genuineness  of  Josh.  .\v. 
45-17  arc:  (1)  the  oml.-ision  of  the  total  nuudxr  of  the 
towns;  and  (2)  tlie  notice  of  the  "daughters,"  or  de- 
pendent towns,  and  "  villayo.s."     The  second  oljiction 


PHILISTINES 


845 


cidentally  mentioned  in  Scripture  (Judg.  xv.  5)  ; 
and  ill  time  of  famine  the  land  of  the  Philistines 
was  the  hope  of  Palestine  (2  K.  viii.  2).  We  should, 
however,  fail  to  form  a  just  idea  of  its  capacities 
from  the  scanty  notices  in  the  Bible.  The  crops 
which  it  yielded  were  alone  sufficient  to  ensure  na- 
tional wealth.  It  was  also  adapted  to  the  growth 
of  military  power;  for  while  tlio  plain  itself  per- 
mitted the  use  of  war-chariots,  which  were  the  chief 
arm  of  oftence,  the  occasional  elevations  which  rise 
out  of  it  offered  secure  sites  for  towns  and  strontf- 
holds.  It  was,  moreover,  a  commercial  country ; 
from  its  position  it  must  have  been  at  all  times 
the  great  thoroughfare  between  Phoenicia  and 
Syria  in  the  north,  and  Egypt  and  Arabia  in  tl.e 
south.  Ashdod  and  Gaza  were  the  kej's  of  Egypt, 
and  commanded  the  transit  trade,  and  the  stores  of 
frankincense  and  myrrh  which  Alexander  captured 
in  the  latter  place  prove  it  to  have  been  a  depot  of 
Arabian  produce  (Pint.  Alex.  cap.  25).  We  have 
evidence  in  the  Bible  that  the  Philistines  traded 
in  slaves  with  Edom  and  southern  Arabia  (Am.  i. 
(3 ;  Joel  iii.  3,  5),  and  their  commercial  character  is 
indicated  by  the  application  of  the  name  Canaan  to 
their  land  (Zeph.  ii.  5).  They  probably  possessed 
a  navy  ;  for  they  had  ports  attached  to  Gaza  and 
Ashkelon ;  the  LXX.  speaks  of  their  ships  in  its 
version  of  Is.  xi.  14  ;  and  they  are  represented  as 
attacking  the  Egyptians  out  of  ships.  The  Phili- 
stines had  at  an  early  period  attained  proficiency  in 
the  arts  of  peace ;  they  were  skdfu!  as  smiths 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  20),  as  armourers  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5, 
6),  and  as  builders,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  pro- 
longed sieges  which  several  of  their  towns  sustained. 
Their  iinages  and  the  golden  mice  and  emerods 
(1  Sam.  vi.  11)  imply  an  acquaintance  with  the 
founder's  and  goldsmith's  arts.  Their  wealth  was 
abundant  (Judg.  xvi.  5,  18),  and  they  appear  in  all 
respects  to  have  been  a  prosperous  people. 

Possessed  of  such  elements  of  power,  the  Phili- 
stines had  attained  in  the  time  of  the  Judges  an 
important  position  among  eastern  nations.  Their 
history  is,  indeed,  almost  a  blank;  yet  the  few  par- 
ticulars preserveil  to  us  are  suggestive.  About 
B.C.  1209  we  find  them  engaged  in  successful  war 
with  the  Sidonians,  the  effect  of  which  was  so 
.seiious  to  the  latter  power  that  it  involved  the 
transference  of  the  capital  of  Phoenicia  to  a  more 
secure  position  on  the  island  of  Tyre  (Justin,  xviii. 
3).  About  the  ?ame  period,  but  whether  before  or 
after  is  uncertain,  they  were  engaged  in  a  naval 
war  with  Rameses  III.  of  Egypt,  in  conjunction 
with  other  Meiliterranean  nations:  in  these  wars 
they  were  unsuccessful  (Brugsch,  I/ist.  d'Egypte, 
p.  185,  187),  but  the  notice  of  them  proves  their 
importance,  and  we  cannot  therefore  l)e  .surprised 
that  they  were  able  to  extend  their  authority  over 
the  Israelites,  devoid  as  these  were  of  internal 
union,  and  harassed  by  external  foes.  With  regard 
to  their  tactics  and  the  objects  that  tliey  had  in 


fiu-nishcs  the  answer  to  the  first;  for  as  the  "daughters" 
ar(,'  not  enumerated,  the  totals  could  not  possibly  be  given. 
And  the  "  daughters  "  are  not  enumerated,  heaiuse  Ihey 
were  notactually  in  possession  of  liie  Jsraclitcs,  and  indeed 
were  not  known  by  name. 

■»  The  Avim  probably  lived  In  the  district  between 
Gerar  and  Gaza.  This  both  accnrds  best  with  the  notice 
of  their  living  in  hazerim,  and  is  also  the  district  in 
which  the  renuiant  of  them  lingered;  for  in  Josh.  xiii. 
3,  4,  the  words  "  fnmi  tin'  soutli  "  are  best  connected  with 
"  the  Aviles,"  as  in  the  Vulgate. 


846 


PHILISTINES 


view  in  their  attacks  on  the  Israelites,  we  may  form 
a  fair  idea  from  the  scattered  notices  in  the  books 
of  Judges  and  Samuel.  The  warfare  was  of  a  gue- 
rilla character,  and  consisted  of  a  series  of  raids 
into  the  enemy's  country.  Sometimes  these  ex- 
tended only  just  over  the  border,  with  the  view  of 
plundering  the  threshing-floors  of  the  agricultural 
produce  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  1);  but  more  generally 
they  penetrated  into  the  heart  of  the  country  and 
seized  a  commanding  position  on  the  edge  of  the 
Jordan  valley,  whence  they  could  secm-e  themselves 
against  a  combination  of  the  trans-  and  cis-Jordanite 
divisions  of  the  Israelites,  or  prevent  a  return  of  the 
fugitives  who  had  hurried  across  the  river  on  the 
alarm  of  their  approach.  Tlius  at  one  time  we 
find  them  crossing  the  central  district  of  Benjamin 
and  posting  themselves  at  Michmash  (1  Sam.  xiii. 
16),  at  another  time  following  the  coast  road  to 
the  plain  of  Esdraelon  and  reaching  the  edge  of  the 
Jordan  valley  by  Jezreel  (1  Sam.  xxix.  11).  From 
such  posts  as  their  head-quarters,  they  sent  out  de- 
tached bands  to  plunder  the  surrounding  country 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  17),  and,  having  obtained  all  they 
could,  they  erected  a  column  °  as  a  token  of  their 
supremacy  (1  Sam.  x.  5,  xiii.  3),  and  retreated  to 
their  own  country.  This  system  of  incursions  kept 
the  Isi'aelites  in  a  state  of  perpetual  disquietude : 
all  commerce  was  suspended,  from  the  insecurity  of 
the  roads  ( Judg.  v.  6)  ;  and  at  the  approach  of  the 
foe  the  people  either  betook  themselves  to  the 
natural  hiding-places  of  the  counti-y,  or  fled  across 
the  Jordan  (1  Sam.  xiii.  6,  7).  By  degrees 
the  ascendimcy  became  complete,  and  a  virtual  dis- 
armament of  the  population  was  effected  by  the 
suppression  of  the  smiths  (1  Sam.  xiii.  19).  The 
profits  of  the  Philistines  were  not  confined  to  the 
goods  and  chattels  they  carried  off  with  them.  They 
seized  the  persons  of  the  Israelites  and  sold  them 
for  slaves;  the  earliest  notice  of  this  occurs  in 
1  Sam.  si  v.  21,  where,  according  to  the  probably 
correct  reading  <>  followed  by  the  LXX.,  we  find 
that  there  were  numerous  slaves  in  the  camp  at 
Michmash :  at  a  later  period  the  prophets  inveigh 
against  them  for  their  traffic  in  human  flesh  (Joel 
iii.  6  ;  Am.  i.  6  )  :  at  a  still  later  period  we  hear 
that  "  the  merchants  of  the  country  "  followed  the 
army  of  Gorgias  into  Judaea  for  the  purpose  of 
buying  the  children  of  Israel  for  slaves  (1  Mace. 
iii.  41),  and  that  these  merchants  were  Philistines 
is  a  fair  inference  from  the  subsequent  notice  that 
Nicanor  sold  the  captive  Jews  to  the  "  cities  upon 
the  sea  coast"  (2  Mace.  viii.  11).  There  can  be 
little  doubt,  too,  that  tribute  was  exacted  from  the 
Israelites,  but  the  notices  of  it  are  confined  to  pas- 
sages of  .questionable  authority,  such  as  the  render- 
ing of  1  Sam.  xiii.  21  in  the  LXX.,  which  represents 


"  The  Hebrew  term  netzib,  which  iinplies  this  practice, 
is  rendered  "  garrison  "  in  the  A.  V.,  which  neither  agrees 
with  the  context  nor  gives  a  tnie  idea  of  the  Philistine 
tactics.  Stark,  however,  dissents  from  tliis  view,  and  ex- 
plains the  term  of  military  officers  (Gaza,  p.  164). 

"  nn2v,  and  not  Dnnj?. 

''  The  true  text  may  have  been  iT^JSn,  instead  of 

nmr\. 

"1  The  apparent  discrepancy  between  Jiidg.  i.  18,  iii.  3, 
has  led  to  suspicions  as  to  the  text  of  the  former,  which 
are  strengthened  by  the  rendering  in  the  LXX.,  koI  ovk 
eKKrjpovofmja-ev,  presupposing  in  the  Hebrew  the  reading 

*137  'N?1,  instead  of  "ii3??1.     The  testimony  of  the 
LXX.  is  weakened  by  the  circumstances  (1)  that  it  inter- 


PHILISTINES 

the  Philistines  as  making  a  charge  of  three  shekels  a 
tool  for  sharpening  them ;  and  again  the  expression 
"  Metheg-ammah  "  in  2  Sam.  viii.  1,  which  is  ren- 
dered in  the  Vulg.  frenum  tributi,  and  by  Sym- 
machus  t)]v  e^ovcriav  tov  (pSpov.f  In  each  of  the 
passages  quoted,  the  \'ersions  presuppose  a  te.\t  which 
yields  a  better  sense  tlian  the  existing  one. 

And  now  to  recur  to  the  Biblical  nai'rative : — 
The  territory  of  the  Pliilistines,  having  been  once 
occupied  by  the  Cauaanites,  formed  a  portion  of 
the  promised  land,  and  was  assigned  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  2,  12,  45-47).  No  portion, 
however,  of  it  was  conquered  in  the  lifetime  of 
Joshua  (Josh.  xiii.  2),  and  even  after  his  death  no 
permanent  conquest  was  etfected  (Judg.  iii.  3), 
though,  on  the  authority  of  a  somewhat  doubtful 
passage,"!  we  are  infonned  that  the  three  cities  of 
Gaza,  Ashkelon,  and  Ekron  were  taken  (Judg.  i. 
18).  The  Philistines,  at  all  events,  soon  recovered 
these,  and  commenced  an  aggressive  policy  against 
the  Israelites,  by  which  they  gained  a  complete 
ascendancy  over  them;  We  are  unable  to  say  at 
what  intervals  their  incursions  took  place,  as 
nothing  is  recorded  of  them  in  the  early  period  of 
the  Judges.  But  they  must  have  been  frequent, 
inasmuch  as  the  national  spirit  of  the  Israelites  was 
so  entirely  broken  that  they  even  reprobated  anjj 
attempt  at  deliverance  (Judg.  sv.  12).  Individual 
heroes  were  raised  up  from  time  to  time  whose 
achievements  might  well  kindle  patriotism,  such  as 
Shamgar  the  son  of  Anath  (Judg.  iii.  31),  and  still 
more  Samson  (Judg.  xiii.-xvi.) :  but  neither  of 
these  men  succeeded  in  permanently  throwing  off 
the  yoke.'  Of  the  former  only  a  single  daring  feat 
is  recorded,  the  effect  of  which  appears,  from  Judg. 
V.  (3,  7,  to  have  been  very  shortlived.  The  true 
series  of  deliverances  commenced  with  the  latter, 
of  whom  it  was  predicted  that  "  he  shall  begin  to 
deliver"  (Judg.  xiii.  5),  and  were  carried  on  by 
Samuel,  Saul,  and  David.  The  historj'  of  Samson 
furnishes  us  with  some  idea  of  the  relations  which 
existed  between  the  two  nations.  As  a  "  borderer" 
of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  he  was  thrown  into  frequent 
contact  with  the  Philistines,  whose  supremacy  was 
so  established  that  no  bar  appears  to  have  been 
placed  to  free  intercourse  with  their  country.  His 
early  life  was  spent  on  the  verge  of  the  Shephelah 
between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  but  when  his  actions 
had  aroused  the  active  hostility  of  the  Philistines 
he  withdrew  into  the  central  district  and  found  a 
secure  post  on  the  rock  of  Etam,  to  the  S.W.  of 
Bethlehem.  Thither  the  Philistines  followed  him 
without  opposition  from  the  inhabitants.  His 
achievements  belong  to  his  personal  history:  it  is 
clear  that  they  were  the  isolated  acts  of  an  indi- 
vidual, and  altogether  unconnected  with  any  na- 


polates  a  notice  of  Ashdod  and  its  suburbs  (nepicnropia, 
a  peculiar  term  in  lieu  of  the  opia  applied  to  the  three 
other  towns) ;  and  (2)  that  the  term  eKAr)povd(nr)(re>'  is 

given  as  the  equivalent  for  ^^7,  which  occurs  in  no 
other  instance.  Of  the  two,  therefore,  the  Greek  text  is 
more  open  to  suspicion.  Stark  (Gaza,  p.  129)  regards  the 
passage  as  an  interpolation. 

'  A  brief  notice  occurs  in  Judg.  x.  7  o-f  invasions  by  the 
Philistines  and  Ammonites,  followed  by  particulars  which 
apply  exclusively  to  the  latter  people.  It  has  been  hence 
supposed  that  the  brief  reference  to  the  Philistines  is  in 
anticipation  of  Samson's  histoiy.  In  Herzog's  Beal-Encyc. 
(s.  V.  "  Philister  ")  it  is  rather  unnecessarily  assumed  that 
the  text  is  imperfect,  and  that  the  words  "  that  year " 
refer  to  the  Philistines,  and  the  "  eighteen  years"  to  the 
Ammonites. 


PHTT.ISTINES 

tional  movement;  for  the  revenge  of  the  Fliilistiiies 
was  tlirougliout  directed  agaiiiirt.  Samson  personally. 
Under  Eli  there  was  an  organised  but  unsuccessful 
resistance  to  the  encroachments  of  the  Philistines, 
who  had    penetiated    into  tlie  central  district   and 
were  met  at  Apliek  (1  Sam.  iv.  1).     The  produc- 
tion of  the  ark  on  tliis  occasion  demonstrates  the 
greatness  of  the  emergency,  and  its  loss  marked  the 
lowest  depth  of  Israel's  degradation.    The  next  action 
took  place  under  Samuel's  leadership,  and  the  tide 
of  success  turned  in  Israel's  favour:  the  Philistines 
had  again  penetrated  into  the  mountainous  country 
near  Jerusalem :    at  Mizpeh   they  met  the  cowed 
host  of  the  Israelites,  who,  encouraged  by  the  signs 
of  Divine  favour,  and  availing  themselves  of  the 
panic   produced   by   a   tlnmdei'storm,   inflicted    on 
them  a  total  defeat.    For  the  first  time,  the  Israelites 
erected  their  pillar  or  "  stele  "  at  Eben-ezer  as  the 
token  of  victory.     The  results  were  the  recovery 
of  the  border  towns  and  their  territories  "from 
Ekron  even  unto  Gath,"  i.  e.  in  the  northern  dis- 
ti-ict.     The  success  of  Israel  may  be  partly  attri- 
buted to  their  peaceful  relations  at  this  time  with 
the  Amorites  (1  Sam.  vii.  9-14).      The  Israelites 
now  attributed  their  past  weakness  to  their  want 
of  unity,  and  they  desired  a  king,  with  the  special 
object  of  leading  them  against  the  foe  (1  Sam.  viii. 
20).     It  is  a  significant  fact  that  Saul  first  felt 
inspiration  in  the  presence  of  a  pillar  (A.  V.  "  gar- 
rison") erected  by  the  Philistines  in  commemoration 
of  a  victory  (1  Sam.  .x.  5,  10).     As  soon  as  he  was 
prepared  to  throw  ott'  the  yoke,  he  occupied  with 
his  army  a  position  at  Michnwsh,  commanding  the 
defiles  leading  to  the  Jordan  valley,  and  his  heroic 
general  Jonathan  gave  the  signal  for  a  rising  by 
overthrowing  the  pillar  which  the  Philistines  had 
placed  there.      The  challenge   was   accepted ;    the 
Philistines    invaded    the   central    district   with  an 
immense  force,'  and,  having  dislodged  Saul  from 
Michmash,  occupied  it  themselves,  and  sent  forth 
predatory    bands    into    the    surrounding   country. 
The  Israelites  shortly  after  took  up  a  position  on 
the  other  side  of  the  ravine  at  Geba,  and,  availing 
themselves  of  the  confusion  consequent  upon  Jona- 
than's daring  feat,  inflicted  a  tremendous  slaughter 
upon  the  enemy  (1  Sam.  xiii.  xiv.).     No-attempt 
was  made  by  the  i'hilistines  to  regain  their  supre- 
macy for  about  twenty-five  years,  and  the  scene  of 
the  next  contest  shows  the  altered  strength  of  the 
two  j)arties  :  it  was  no  longer  in  the  central  country, 
but  in  a  ravine  leading  down  to  the  Philistine  plain, 
the  valley  of  Elah,  the  position  of  whiili  is  about 
14  miles  S.W.  of  Jerusalem:  on  this  occasion  the 
prowess  of  young  David  secured  success  to  Isiaef, 
anil  the  foe  w:is  pursued  to  the  gates  of  Gath  and 
Ekron  (1  Sam.  xvii.).    The  power  of  the  Philistines 
wiis,  however,  still  intact  on  their  own  territory, 
as  proved  by  the  fiight  of  David  to  the  conit  of 
Achish  (1  Sam.  xxi.  10-15),  and  his  subsequent  abode 


PHILISTINES 


847 


•  The  text  states  the  force  at  30,000  chariots  and  6000 
liorsrmen  (1  Sam.  xiii.  5) :  these  numbers  are,  liowcver, 
ciuite  out  of  proponiiiM.  'I'hn  chariots  were  probably  1000, 
the  present  reading  biing  a  mlstjike  of  a  copyist  wlio  re- 
peated the  final  7  of  Israel,  and  thus  converted  the  num- 
ber into  30,000. 

'  'I'liiM-e  is  some  difliculty  in  reconciling  the  geogra- 
phical statements  in  the  narrative  of  this-  campaign. 
Instead  of  the  "  tielia  "  of  Sanniel,  we  have  "  Gibeon  "  In 
Chronicles.  The  latter  lies  N.W.  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  there 
iB  aGoba  in  the  same  nelghbourliood,  lying  nmre  to  the  K. 
But  the  valley  of  Riphaim  is  placed  S.W.  <il  .(eiusalcni, 
near  to  neilher  of  lliese  places,     riienius  ('lu  U.Sim,  v.  Is) 


at  Ziklag  (1  Sam.  xxvii.),  where  he  was  secured 
from  the  attacks  of  Saul.  The  border  warfare  was 
continued  ;  captures  and  reprisals,  such  as  are  de- 
scribed as  occurring  at  Keilah  (1  Sam.  x.xiii.  1-5), 
being  probably  fvequent.  The  scene  of  the  next 
conflict  was  far  to  the  north,  in  the  valley  of 
Esdraelon,  whither  the  Philistines  may  have  made 
a  plundering  incursion  similar  to  that  of  the  Mi- 
dianites  in  the  days  of  Gideon.  The  battle  on  this 
occasion  pioved  disastrous  to  the  Israelites :  Saul 
himself  perished,  and  the  Philistnies  penetrated 
across  the  Jordan,  and  occupied  the  forsaken  cities 
(1  Sam.  xxxi.  1-7).  The  dissensions  which  followed 
the  death  of  Saul  were  naturally  favourable  to  f^e 
Philistines :  and  no  sooner  were  these  brought  to  a 
close  by  the  appointment  of  David  to  be  king  over 
the  united  tribes,  than  the  Philistines  attempted  to 
counterbalance  the  advantage  by  an  attack  on  the 
person  of  the  king :  they  therefore  penetrated  into 
the  valley  of  Rephaipi,  S.W.  of  Jerusalem,  and  even 
pushed  forward  an  advanced  post  as  far  as  Beth- 
lehem (1  Chr.  xi.  16).  David  twice  attacked  them 
at  the  former  spot,  and  on  each  occasion  with  signal 
success,  in  the  first  case  capturing  their  images,  in 
the  second  piu'suing  them  "  from  Geba  until  thou 
CDme  to  Gazer"'  [2  Sam.  v.  17-25;  1  Chr.  xiv. 
8-16). 

Henceforth  the  Israelites  appear  as  the  aggi-essors : 
about  seven  years  after  the  defeat  at  liephaim, 
David,  who  had  now  consolidated  his  power,  at- 
tacked them  on  their  own  soil,  and  took  Gath  with 
its  dependencies  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1),  and  thus  (ac- 
cording to  one  interpretation  of  the  obscure  expres- 
sion "  Metheg-ammah  "  in  2  Sam.  viii.  1)  "  he  took 
the  arm-bridle  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Philistines " 
(Bertheau,  Comm.  011  1  Chron.),  or  (according  to 
another)  "  he  took  the  bridle  of  the  metropolis 
out  of  the  hand  of  the  Philistines  "  (Gesen.  T/ies. 
p.  113) — meaning  in  either  ciise  that  their  ascend- 
ancy ivas  utterly  broken.  This  indeed  was  the  case : 
for  the  minor  engagements  in  David's  lifetime  pro- 
bably all  took  place  within  the  borders  of  Philistia: 
Gob,  which  is  given  as  the  scene  of  the  second  and 
third  combats,  being  probably  identical  with  Gath, 
where  the  fourth  took  place  (2  Sam.  xxi.  15-22 ; 
comp.  LXX.,  some  of  the  copies  of  which  read  TfO 
instead  of  To'/S).  The  whole  of  Philistia  was  in- 
cluded in  Solomon's  empire,  the  extent  of  which  is 
described  as  being  "  from  the  river  unto  the  land 
of  the  Philistines,  unto  the  border  of  Egypt"" 
(1  K.  iv.  21;  2  Chr.  ix.  20),  and  again  "from 
Tij^sah  even  unto  Gaza"  (1  K.  iv.  24;  A.  V. 
"  Azzah").  The  several  towns  probably  remained 
under  their  former  governors,  as  in  the  case  of  Gath 
(1  K.  ii.  .39),  and  the  sovereignty  of  Solomon  was 
acknowledged  by  the  payment  of  tribute  (IK.  iv. 
21).  There  are  indications,  however,  that  his  hold  on 
the  Philistine  country  was  by  no  means  established  : 
for  we  find  him  securing  the  pa.sses  that  led  up 

transplants  the  valley  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem  ;  while 
Bertheau  (on  1  Cbr.  xiv.  IB)  identifies  Geba  with  the 
Gibeah  of  .Josh.  xv.  r>7,  and  the  Jeha'h  noticed  hy  Robinson 
(ii.  6,  10)  as  lying  W.  of  Hetlileliem.  Neither  of  these 
explanations  can  be  accepted.  We  nnist  assume  that  the 
direct  retreat  from  the  valley  to  the  plain  was  cut  off,  and 
that  the  I'hllistiues  were  compelled  to  flee  northwards, 
and  regained  Ihe  plain  by  the  passoflJethhoron,  which  lay 
between  Glbcon  (as  well  as  between  Geba)  and  Gazer. 

"  The  Hebrew  te.xt,  as  it  at  present  stands,  in  1  K.  iv. 
21,  will  not  bear  tile  seii.-ic  here  put  upon  it;  but  a  loni- 
parison  with  the  parallel  passage  in  '2  Chr.  shows  that  Ihe 
word  nyi  has  dr.ippid  out  before  the  "  land  of  the  I'." 


848 


PHILISTINES 


from  the  plain  to  the  central  district  by  the  fortifi- 
cation of  Gezer  and  Bethhoron  (1  K.  ix.  17),  while 
no  mention  is  made  either  of  Gaza  or  Ashdod,  which 
fully  commanded  the  coast-road.  Indeed  the  ex- 
pedition of  Pharaoh  against  Gezer,  which  stood  at 
the  head  of  the  Philistine  plain,  and  which  was 
quite  independent  of  Solomon  until  the  time  of  his 
marriage  with  Pharaoh's  daughter,  would  lead  to 
the  inference  that  Egyptian  influence  was  para- 
mount in  Philistia  at  this  period  (1  K.  ix.  16). 
The  division  of  the  empire  at  Solomon's  death  was 
favourable  to  the  Philistine  cause:  f!ehoboam  se- 
cured himself  against  them  by  fortifying  Gath  and 
other  cities  bordering  on  the  plain  (2  Chr.  xi.  8)  : 
the  Israelite  monarchs  were  either  not  so  prudent 
or  not  so  powerful,  for  they  allowed  the  Philistines 
to  get  hold  of  (jibbethon,  commanding  one  of  the 
defiles  leading  up  from  the  plain  of  Sharon  to 
Samaria,  the  recovery  of  which  involved  them  in  a 
protracted  struggle  in  the  reigns  of  Nadab  and 
Zimri  (1  K.  xvr27,  xvi.  15).  Judah  meanwhile 
had  lost  the  tribute ;  for  it  is  recorded,  as  an  oc- 
currence that  man-ked  Jehoshaphat's  success,  that 
"some  of  the  Philistines  brought  presents"  (2  Chr. 
svii.  11).  But  this  subjection  was  of  brief  duration : 
in  the  reign  of  his  son  jehoram  they  avenged  them- 
selves by  invading  .Judah  in  conjunction  with  the 
Arabians,  and  sacking  the  royal  palace  (2  Chr.  xxi. 
16,  17).  The  increasing  weakness  of  the  Jewish 
monarchy  under  the  attacks  of  Hazael  led  to  the 
recovery  of  Gath,  which  had  been  captured  by  that 
monarch  in  his  advance  on  Jerusalem  from  the 
western  plain  in  the  reign  of  Jehoash  (2  K.  xii. 
17),  and  was  probably  occupied  by  the  Philistines 
after  his  departure  as  an  advanced  post  against 
Judah  :  at  all  events  it  was  in  their  hands  in  the  time 
of  Uzziah,  who  dismantled  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  6)  and  pro- 
bably destroyed  it :  for  it  is  adduced  by  Amos  as 
an  example  of  Divine  vengeance  (Am.  vi.  2),  and 
then  disappears  from  history.  Uzziah  at  the  same 
time  dismantled  Jabneh  (Jamnia)  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  plain,  and  Ashdod,  and  further  erected 
forts  in  different  parts  of  the  country  to  intimidate 
the  inhabitants >=  (2  Cln-.  xx-vi.  6).  The  prophecies 
of  Joel  and  Amos  prove  that  these  measures  were 
provoked  by  the  aggressions  of  the  Philistines,  who 
appear  to  have  formed  leagues  both  with  the  Edom- 
ites  and  Phoenicians,  and  had  reduced  many  of  the 
Jews  to  slavery  (Joel  iii.  4-6  ;  Am.  i.  6-10).  How 
far  the  means  adopted  by  Uzziah  were  effectual  we 
are  not  informed;  but  we  have  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  Philistines  were  kejit  in  subjection  until 
the  time  of  Ahaz,  when,  relying  upon  the  difficulties 
jiroduced  by  the  Syrian  attacks,  they  attacked  the 
border-cities  in  the  Shephelah,  and  "  the  south  "  of 
Judah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  18).  Isaiah's  declarations 
(xiv.  29-32)  throw  light  upon  the  events  subse- 
quent to  this:  from  them  we  learn  that  the  Assy- 
)ians,  whom  Ahaz  summoned  to  his  aid,  proved 
themselves  to  be  the  "  cockatrice  that  should  come 
out  of  the  serpent's  (Judah's)  root,"  by  ravaging 
the  Philistine  plain.  A  few  years  later  the  Philis- 
tines, in  conjunction  with  the  Syrians  and  Assyrians 
("the  adversaries  of  Rezin"),  and  perhaps  as  the 
subject-allies  of  the  latter,  carried  on  a  series  of 
attacks  on  the  kingdom  of  Israel   (Is.  ix.  11,  12). 


«  The  passage  in  Zech.  ix.  5-7  refers,  in  the  opinion  of 
those  who  assign  an  earlier  date  to  the  concluding  cliap- 
ters  of  the  booli,  to  the  successful  campaign  of  Uzziah. 
internal  evidence  is  in  favour  of  this  view.  The  alliance 
with  Tyre  is  described  as  "the  expectation"  of  Ekron  : 
Gaza  was  to  lose  hor  king,  i.  e.  her  independence :  Ash- 


PHILISTINES 

Ilezekiah's  reign  inaugurated  a  new  policy,  in  whicli 
the  Philistines  were  deeply  interested:  that  monarch 
formed  an  alliance  with  the  Egyptians,  as  a  counter- 
poise to  the  Assyrians,  and  the  possession  of  Phi- 
listia became  henceforth  the  turning-point  of  the 
struggle  between  the  two  great  empires  of  the  East. 
Hezekiah,  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign,  re-established 
his  authority  over  the  whole  of  it,  "  even  unto 
Gaza"  (2  K.  xviii.  8).  This  movement  was  evi- 
dently connected  with  his  rebellion  against  the  king 
of  Assyria,  and  was  undertaken  in  conjunction  with 
the  Egyptians ;  for  we  find  the  latter  people  shortly 
after  in  possession  of  the  five  Philistine  cities,  to 
which  alone  are  we  able  to  refer  the  prediction  in 
Is.  xix.  18,  when  coupled  with  the  fact  that  both 
Gaza  and  Ashkelon  are  termed  Egyptian  cities  in 
the  annals  of  Sargon  (Bunsen's  Egypt,  iv.  603). 
The  Assyrians  under  'I'artan,  the  general  of  Sargon, 
made  an. expedition  against  Egypt,  and  took  Ashdod, 
as  the  key  of  that  country  (Is.  xx.  1,  4,  5).  Under 
Sennacherib  Philistia  was  again  the  scene  of  im- 
portant operations:  in  his  first  campaign  against 
Egypt  Ashkelon  was  taken  and  its  dependencies 
were  plundered ;  Ashdod,  Ekron,  and  Gaza  sub- 
mitted, and  received  as  a  reward  a  portion  of  Heze- 
kiah's  territory  (Rawlinson,  i.  477):  in  his  second 
campaign  othei-  towns  on  the  verge  of  the  plain, 
such  as  Libnah  and  Lachish,  were  also  taken  (2  K. 
xviii.  14,  xix.  8).  The  Assyrian  supremacy,  though 
shaken  by  the  failure  of  this  second  expedition,  wa.s 
restored  by  Esai'-haddon,  who  claims  to  have  con- 
quered Egypt  (Rawlinson,  i.  481);  and  it  seems 
probable  that  the  Assyrians  retained  their  hold  on 
Ashdod  until  its  capture,  after  a  long  siege,  by  the 
Egyptian  monarch  Psammetichus  (Herod,  ii.  157), 
the  effect  of  which  was  to  reduce  the  population  of  that 
important  place  to  a  mei'e  "  remnant "  (Jer.  xxv. 
20).  It  was  about  this  time,  and  possibly  while 
Psammetichus  was  engaged  in  the  siege  of  Ashdod, 
that  Philistia  was  traversed  by  a  va^t  Scythian  horde 
on  their  way  to  Egypt:  they  were,  however,  di- 
verted from  their  purpose  by  the  king,  and  retraced 
their  steps,  plundering  on  their  retreat  the  rich 
temple  of  Venus  at  Ashkelon  (Herod,  i.  105).  The 
description  of  Zephaniah  (ii.  4-7),  who  was  con- 
temporary with  this  event,  may  well  apply  to  this 
terrible  scourge,  though  more  generally  ref'ened  to 
a  Chaldaean  invasion.  The  Egyptian  ascendancy 
was  not  as  yet  re-established,  for  we  find  the  next 
king,  Neco,  compelled  to  besiege  Gaza  (the  Cadytis 
of  Herodotus,  ii.  159)  on  his  return  from  the  battle 
of  Megiddo.  After  the  death  of  Neco,  the  contest 
was  renewed  between  the  Egyptians  and  the  Chal- 
(faeans  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  result  was 
specially  disastrous  to  the  Philistines :  Gaza  w;is 
again  taken  by  the  former,  and  the  population  of 
the  whole  plain  was  reduced  to  a  mere  "  remnant " 
by  the  invading  armies  (Jer.  xhii.).  The  "  old 
hatred  "  that  the  Philistines  bore  to  the  Jews  was 
exhibited  in  acts  of  hostihty  at  the  time  of  the 
Babylonish  captivity  (Ez.  xxv.  15-17):  but  on  the 
return  this  was  somewhat  abated,  for  some  of  the 
Jews  manied  Philistine  women,  to  the  great  scandal 
of  their  rulers  (Neh.  xiii.  23,  24).  From  this  time 
the  history  of  Philistia  is  absorbed  in  the  struggles 
of  the  neighbouring  kingdoms.     In  B.C.  332,  Alex- 

kelon  should  bo  depopulated  :  a  "  bastard,"  i.  e.  one  who 
vras  excluded  from  the  congregation  of  Israel  on  the  score 
of  impure  blood,  should  dwell  in  Ashdod,  holding  it  as  a 
dependency  of  Judah :  and  Ekron  should  become  "as  a 
Jcbusite,"  subject  to  Judah. 


PHILISTINES 

ander  the  Great  traversed  it  on  liis  way  to  Esj.ypt, 
and  captured  Gaza,  then  held  by  the  Persians  under 
Betis,  after  a  two  months'  siege.  In  312  the  armies 
of  Demetrius  Poliorcetes  and  Ptolemy  fought  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Gaza.  In  198  Antiochus  the 
Great,  in  his  war  against  Ptolemy  Kpiplianes,  in- 
vaded Philistia  and  took  Gaza.  In  100  the  Phili- 
stines joined  the  Syrian  army  under  Gorgias  in  its 
attack  on  Judaea  (I  Mace.  iii.  41).  In  148  the 
adherents  of  the  rival  kings  Demetrius  II.  and 
Alexander  Balas,  imder  Apollonius  and  Jonathan 
respectively,  contended  in  the  Philistine  plain: 
Jonathan  took  Ashdod,  triumphantly  entered  Ash- 
kelon,  and  received  I'^kron  as  his  reward  (1  Mace. 
X.  69-89).  A  few  years  later  Jonathan  again  de- 
scended into  the  plain  in  the  interests  of  Antiochus 
VI.,  and  captured  Gaza  (1  Mace.  si.  60-02).  No 
further  notice  of  the  country  occurs  until  the  cap- 
ture of  Gaza  in  97  by  th&  Jewish  king  Alexander 
Jannaeus  in  his  contest  with  Lathyriis  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  13,  §3;  B.  J.  i.  4,  §2).  In  03  Pompcy 
annexed  Philistia  to  the  province  of  Syria  Mwi.  xiv. 
4,  §4),  with  the  exception  of  Gaza,  which  was  as- 
signal  to  Herod  (xv.  7,  §3),  together  with  Jamnia, 
Ashdod,  and  Ashkelon,  as  appears  from  xvii.  11, 
§5.  The  three  last  fell  to  Salome  after  Herod's 
death,  but  Gaza  was  re-annexed  to  Syria  (xvii.  11, 
§4,  5).  The  latest  notices  of  the  Piiilistines  as  a 
nation,  under  their  title  of  a\A6cpu\oi,  occur  in 
1  Mace,  iii.-v.  The  extension  of  the  name  from 
the  district  occupied  by  them  to  the  whole  country, 
under  the  tamiliar  form  of  Palestine,  has  already 
been  noticed  under  that  head. 

With  regard  to  the  institutions  of  the  Philistines 
our  information  is  very  scanty.  The  five  chief 
cities  had,  as  early  as  the  days  of  Joshua,  consti- 
tuted themselves  into  a  confederacy,  restricted, 
however,  in  all  pi'obability,  to  matters  of  oft'ence 
and  defence.  Each  was  under  the  government  ot'  a 
prince  whose  official  title  was  sereny  (Josh.  xiii.  3; 
Judg.  iii.  3  &c.),  and  occasionally  sdr^  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  30,  xxix.  0).  Gaza  may  be  regarded  as  hav- 
ing exercised  an  hegemony  over  tlie  others,  tor  in 
the  lists  of  the  towns  it  is  mentioned  the  tiist 
(Josh.  xiii.  3 ;  Am.  i.  7,  8),  except  where  there 
is  an  especial  grouml  for  giving  prominence  to 
another,  as  in  the  case  of  Ashdcjd  (1  Sam.  vi.  17). 
Ekron  always  sfcmds  last,  while  Ashdod,  Ash- 
kelon, and  (lath  interchange  places.  Each  town 
possessed  its  own  territory,  as  instiuiced  in  the 
case  of  Gath  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1),  Ashdod  (1  Sam. 
V.  6),  and  others,  and  each  possessed  its  dependent 
towns  or  "daughters"  (Josh.  xv.  45-47;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  1  ;  2  SanC  i.  20;  Ez.  xvi.  27,  57),  and  its 
villages  (.Josh.  /.  c).  In  later  times  (!.aza  had  a 
senate  of  five  hundred  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  13,  §3). 
The  Philistines  appear  to  have  been  deeply'  imlnied 
with  superstition :  they  carried  their  idols  with 
themon  tiieir  campaigns  (2  Sam.  v.  21),  and  pro- 
claimed their  victories  in  their  presence  (1  Sam. 
xxxi.  9).  They  also  cairied  alxiut  tiieir  ])ersons 
channs  of  some  kind  that  had  been  presented  before 
the  idols  (2  Mace.  xii.  40).  The  gods  whom  they 
chiefly  worshipped  were  Diigon,  who  possesse<i 
temples  both  at  Gaza  (Judg.  xvi.  23)  au<l  at  Ashdod 
(1  .Sam.  V.  :\-'->\  1  Chr.  .\.  10;  1  JIacc.  x.  8:1); 
Ashtaroth,  whose  temple  at  Ashkelon  was  far-famed 
(I  Sam.  xxxi.  10 ;    Herod,  i.  105) ;    Baal-zebub, 

''  piD.  Two  derivations  liave  been  proposed  for  Uiis 
\vord,vi7,. :  "lb*  by  Kwald  (i.  rm),  I^D,  "axle,"  byCe- 
scnius    (,Thes.  p.  972)  and    Keil   in   josli.   xiii.   3,   tlio 

VOL.  n. 


PHILOSOPHY 


849 


whose  fane  at  Ekron  was  consulted  by  Ahaziah 
(2  K.  i.  2-0) ;  and  Derceto,  who  was  honoured  at 
Ashkelon  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4),  though  unnoticed  in  the 
Bible.  Priests  and  diviners  (1  Sara.  vi.  2)  were 
attached  to  the  various  seats  of  worship.  (The 
special  authorities  for  the  history  of  the  Philistines 
are  Stark's  Gaza:  Knobel's  Volkertnfcl ;  Movers' 
Phoenizien;  andRitzig's  Urgeschichte.)  [W. L.  B.] 

PHILOL'OGUS  {^i\6\oyos:  Philologus).  A 
Chiistian  at  Rome  to  whom  St.  Paul  sends  his 
salutation  (Rom.  xvi.  15).  Origen  conjectures  that 
he  was  the  mastei-  of  a  Christian  household  which 
included  the  other  persons  named  with  him.  Pseudo- 
Hippolytus  {Da  LXX.  Apostolis)  makes  him  one  of 
the  70  disciples,  and  bishop  of  Sinope.  His  name  is 
found  in  the  Columbarium  "of  tJie  freedmen  of  Livia 
Augusta"  at  Rome;  which  shows  that  there  was  a 
Philologus  connected  with  the  imperial  household  at 
the  time  when  it  included  many  Julias.   [W.  T.  B.] 

PHILOSOPHY.  It  is  the  object  of  the  fol- 
lowing ai'ticle  to  give  some  account  (I.)  of  that  de- 
velopment of  thought  among  the  Jews  which  an- 
swered to  the  philosophy  of  the  West ;  (II.)  of  the 
recognition  of  the  prepaiatory  (propaedeutic)  office 
of  (ireek  philosophy  in  relation  to  Christianity  ; 
(III.)  of  the  systematic  progress  of  Greek  philosophy 
as  forming  a  complete  whole ;  and  (IV.)  of  the 
contact  of  Christianity  with  philosophy.  The  limits 
of  the  article  necessarily  exclude  everything  but 
broad  statements.  Many  points  of  great  interest 
must  be  passed  over  unnoticed  ;  and  in  a  fuller 
treatment  there  would  be  need  of  continual  excep- 
tions and  explanations  of  detail,  which  would  only 
create  confusion  in  an  outline.  The  history  of 
ancient  philosophy  in  its  religious  aspect  has  been 
strangely  neglected.  Nothing,  as  far  as  we  are  aware, 
has  been  written  on  the  pre-Christian  era  answering 
to  the  clear  and  elegant  essay  of  Matter  on  post- 
Christian  pliilosophy  {Histoire  de  la  Philosophic, 
dans  scs  rapports  avcc  la  Religion  xlcpv.is  fere 
Chretienne,  Paris,  1854).  There  are  useful  hints  in 
Carov^'s  Vorhalle  des  Christenthnms  (Jena,  1851), 
and  Ackerraann's  JDas  Christliche  im  Plato  (Hamb. 
1835).  The  treatise  of  Denis,  Histoire  des  Theo- 
ries ct  des  Idees  morales  dans  I'Antiquite  (Paris, 
1856),  is  limited  in  range  and  hardly  satisfactory. 
Dollinger's  Vorhalle  ziir  Gesch.  d.  Christenthnms 
(Kegensbg.  1857)  is  comprehensive,  but  covers  too 
large  a  field.  The  brief  survey  in  De  Pressense's 
Hist,  des  trois  premiers  Siecles  de  I' Eglise  Chre- 
tienne (Paris,  1858)  is  much  more  vigorous,  and 
on  the  wliole  just.  But  no  one  seems  to  have  ap- 
pi'ehended  the  I'eal  chara('ter  and  growth  of  Greek 
philosophy  so  well  as  Zeller  (though  with  no  special 
attention  to  its  relations  to  religion)  in  his  history  (Z>ie 
Phitosophie  der  Griechen,  2te  Aufl.  Tiib.  1850), 
which  for  subtlety  and  completeness  is  unrivalled. 

I.  TiiK  Philosophic  Disciplinio  of  tiik  Jews. 
Philosophy,  if  we  limit  the  word  strictly  to  de- 
scribe the  free  pursuit  of  knowledge  of  which  truth 
is  the  one  complete  end,  is  essentially  of  Western 
growth.  In  the  East  the  search  after  wisdom  has 
always  been  connected  with  practice:  it  has  re- 
mained there,  what  it  was  in  (Sreece  at  first,  a  jvirt 
of  religion.  The  history  of  the  Jews  otTers  no  ex- 
ception to  this  remark :  there  is  no  Jewish  philo- 

latlcr  bchig  supported  liy  tlie  analogy  of  an  Arabic 
exprossicm. 

•  -lb'. 

3  I 


860 


PHILOSOPHY 


sophy  properly  so  called.  Yet  on  the  other  hand 
speculation  and  action  meet  in  truth ;  and  perhaps 
the  most  obvious  lesson  of  the  Old  Testament  lies 
in  the  gradual  construction  of  a  divine  philosophy 
by  fact,  and  not  by  speculation.  The  method  of 
Greece  was  to  proceed  from  life  to  God  ;  the  method 
of  Israel  (so  to  speak)  was  to  proceed  from  God  to 
life.  The  axioms  of  one  s)'stem  are  the  conclusions 
of  the  other.  The  one  led  to  the  successive  abandon- 
ment of  the  noblest  domains  of  science  which  man  had 
claimed  originally  as  his  own,  till  it  left  bare  systems 
of  morality  ;  the  other,  in  the  fulness  of  time,  pre- 
pared many  to  welcome  the  Christ — the  Truth. 

From   what  has   been  said,   it  follows  that  the 
philosophy  of  the  .Tews,  using  the  word  in  a  large 
sense,  is  to  be  sought  for  rather  in  the  progress  of 
the   national    life    than  in   special   books.     These, 
indeed,  furnish  important  illustrations  of  the  growth 
of  speculation,  but  the  history  is  written  more  in 
acts  than  in  thoughts.     Step  by  step  the  idea  of 
the  family  was  raised  into  that  of  the  people ;  and 
the  kingdom  furnished  the  basis  of  those  wider  pro- 
mises which  included  all  nations  in  one  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  social,  the  political,  the  cosmical  relations 
of  man  were  traced  out  gradually  in  relation  to  God. 
The  philosophy  of  the  Jews  is  thus  essentially  a 
moral  philosophy,  resting  on  a  definite  conne.xion 
with  God.     The  doctrines  of  Creation  and  Provi- 
dence, of  an  Infinite-  Divine  Person  and  of  a  respon- 
sible human  will,  which  elsewhere  form  the  ultimate 
limits  of  speculation,  are  here  assumed  at  the  out- 
set.    The  difficulties  which  they  involve  are  but 
rarely   noticed.     Even    when   they   are  canvassed 
most  deeply,  a  moral  answer  drawn  from  the  great 
duties  of  life  is  that  in  which  the  questioner  finds 
repose.     The  earlier  chapters  of  Genesis  contain  an 
introduction  to  the  direct  trainiug  of  the  people 
which  follows.    Premature  and  partial  developments, 
kingdoms  based  on  godless  might,  stand  in  contrast 
with  the  slow  foundation  of  the  divine  polity.     To 
distinguish  rightly  the  moral  principles  which  were 
successively  called  out  in  this  latter  work,  would 
be  to  write  a  history  of  Israel ;  but  the  philoso- 
phical significance  of  the  great  crises  through  which 
the  people  passed,  lies  upon  the  sui-face.     The  call 
of  Abraham  set  forth  at  once  the  central  lesson  of 
faith  in  the  Unseen,  on  which  all  others  were  raised. 
The  father  of  the  nation  was  first  isolated  from  all 
natural  ties  before  he  received  the  promise :  his  heir 
was  the  son  of  his  extreme  age :  his  inheritance  was 
to  him  "as  a  strange  land."     The  history  of  the 
patriarchs  brought  out  into  yet  clearer  light  the 
sovereignty  of  God :   the  younger   was   preferred 
befoie  the  elder:  sufi'ering  prepared  the  way  for  safety 
and  triumph.     God  was  seen  to  make  a  covenant 
with  man,  and  his  action  was  written  in  the  records 
of  a  chosen  flimily.     A  new  era  followed.    A  nation 
grew  up  in  the  presence  of  Egyptian  culture.    Per- 
secution united  elements  which  seem  otherwise  to 
have  been  on  the  point  of  being  absorbed  by  foreign 
powers.     God  revealed  Himself  now  to  the  people 
in  the  wider  relations  of  Lawgiver  and  Judge.    The 
solitarj'  discipline  of  the  desert  famiharized  them 
with  His  majesty  and  His  mercy.     The  wisdom  of 
Egypt  was  hallowed  to  new  uses.     The  promised 
land  was  gained  by  the  open  working  of  a  divine 
Sovereign.     The    outlines    of   national    faith   were 
written  in  defeat  and  victory ;  and  the  work  of  the 
theocracy  closed.     Human  passion  then  claimed  a 
dominant  infiuence.     The  people  required  a  king. 
A  fixed  Temple  was  substituted  for  the  shifting 
Tabernacle.     Times  of  disruption  and  disaster  fol- 


PHILOSOPHY 

lowed  ;  and  the  voice  of  prophets  declared  the  spi- 
ritual meaning  of  the  kingdom.  In  the  midst  o< 
sorrow  and  defeat  and  desolation,  the  horizon  of 
hope  was  extended.  The  kingdom  which  man  had 
prematurely  founded  was  seen  to  be  the  image  of  a 
nobler  "  kingdom  of  God."  The  nation  learned  its 
connexion  with  "  all  the  kindred  of  the  earth." 
The  Captivity  confirmed  the  lesson,  and  after  it  the 
Dispersion.  The  moral  etl'ects  of  these,  and  the  in- 
fluence which  Persian,  Greek,  and  Roman,  the  inhe- 
ritors of  all  the  wisdom  of  the  East  and  West, 
exercised  upon  the  Jews,  have  been  elsewhere  no- 
ticed. [Cyrus  ;  Dispersion.]  The  divine  dis- 
cipline closed  before  the  special  human  discipline 
began.  The  personal  relations  of  God  to  the  indi- 
vidual, the  family^  the  nation,  mankind,  were  esta- 
blished in  ineHaceable  history,  and  then  other  truths 
were  brought  into  harmony  with  these  in  the  long 
period  of  silence  which  separates  the  two  Testa- 
ments. But  the  harmony  was  not  always  perfect. 
Two  partial  foi-ms  of  religious  philosophy  arose. 
On  the  one  side  the  predominance  of  the  Persian 
element  gave  rise  to  the  Kabbala :  on  the  other  the 
predominance  of  the  Greek  element  issued  in  Alex- 
andrine theosophy. 

Before  these  one-sided  developments  of  the  truth 
were  made,  the  fundamental  ideas  of  the  Divine 
government  found  expression  in  words  as  well  as 
in  life.  The  Psalms,  which,  among  the  other  in- 
finite lessons  which  they  convey,  give  a  deep  insight 
into  the  need  of  a  personal  appiehension  of  truth, 
everywhere  declare  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  God 
over  the  material  and  moral  woidds.  The  classical 
scholar  cannot  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  frequency 
of  natural  imagery,  and  with  the  close  connexion 
which  is  assumed  to  exist  between  man  and  natui'e 
as  parts  of  one  vast  Order.  The  control  of  all  the 
elements  by  One  All-wise  Governor,  standing  out  in 
clear  contrast  with  the  deification  of  isolated  objects, 
is  no  less  essentially  characteristic  of  Hebrew  as 
distinguished  fioin  Greek  thought.  In  the  world 
of  action  Providence  stands  over  against  fate,  the 
universal  kingdom  against  the  individual  state, 
the  tiue  and  the  right  against  the  beautiful.  Pure 
speculation  may  find  little  scope,  but  speculation 
guided  by  these  gi'eat  laws  will  never  cease  to  affect 
most  deeply  the  intellectual  culture  of  men.  (Com- 
pare especially  Ps.  viii.,  xix.,  xxix. ;  1.,  Ixv.,  Ixviii. ; 
Ixxvii.,  Ixxviii.,  Ixxxix.  ;  xcv.,  xcvii.,  civ. ;  cvi., 
cxxxvi.,  cxlvii.,  &c.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  same 
character  is  found  in  Psalms  of  every  date.)  For  a 
late  and  very  remarkable  development  of  this  philo- 
sophy of  Nature  see  the  article  Book  op  Enoch 
[vol.  i.  556];  Dillmann,  Das  B.  Henoch,  xiv.,  xv. 
One  man  above  all  is  distinguished  among  the 
Jews  as  "  the  wise  man."  The  description  which 
is  given  of  his  writings  serves  as  a  commentary  on 
the  national  view  of  philosophy.  "  And  Solomon's 
wisdom  excelled  the  wisdom  of  all  the  children  of 
the  east  country  and  all  the  wisdom  of  Egypt.  .  .  . 
And  he  spake  three  thousand  proverbs ;  and  his 
songs  were  a  thousand  and  five.  And  he  spake  ot 
trees,  from  the  cedar  that  is  in  Lebanon  even  unto 
the  hyssop  that  springeth  out  of  the  wall :  he  spake 
also  of  beasts,  and  of  fowl,  and  of  creeping  things, 
and  of  fishes"  (1  K,  iv.  30-33).  The  lesson  of 
practical  duty,  the  full  utterance  of  "  a  large  heart  " 
nbid.  29),  the  careful  study  of  God's  creatures: 
this  is  the  sum  of  wisdom."  Yet  in  fact  the  very 
practical  aim  of  this  philosophy  leads  to  the  revela- 
tion of  the  most  sublime  truth.  Wisdom  was  gra- 
dually felt  to  be  a  Person,  throned  by  God,  and 


PHILOSOPHY 

holding  converse  with  men  (Prov.  viii.).  She  was 
seen  to  stand  in  open  enmity  with  "  the  strange 
woman,"  who  sought  to  draw  tliem  aside  by  sen- 
suous atti-actions ;  and  thus  a  new  step  was  made 
towards  the  central  doctrine  of  Cliristianity — the 
Incarnation  of  the  Word. 

Two  books  of  the  Bible,  Job  and  Ecclesiastes, 
of  which  the  latter  at  any  rate  belongs  to  the  period 
of  the  close  of  tlie  kingdom,  approach  more  nearly 
than  any  others  to  the  type  of  pliilosophiciil  discus- 
sions. But  in  botli  the  problem  is  moral  and  not 
metaphysical.  The  one  deals  with  the  evils  which 
afflict  "  the  perfect  and  upright;"  tlxe  other  with 
the  vanity  of  all  the  pursuits  and  pleasures  of  earth. 
In  the  one  we  are  led  for  an  answer  to  a  vision  of 
"  the  enemy "  to  whom  a  partial  and  temporary 
power  over  man  is  conceded  (Job  i.  6-12);  in  the 
other  to  that  great  future  when  "  God  shall  bring 
every  work  to  judgment"  (Eccl.  xii.  14).  The 
method  of  inquiry  is  in  both  cases  abrupt  and  irre- 
gular. One  clue  after  another  is  followed  out,  and 
at  length  abandoned  ;  and  the  final  solution  is  ob- 
fciined,  not  by  a  consecutive  process  oi'  leason,  but 
by  an  authoritative  utterance,  which  faith  welcomes 
as  the  truth,  towards  which  all  partial  efforts  had 
tended.  (Compare  Maurice,  Moral  and  3Ieti(phy- 
sical  Philosophi/,  iii-st  edition.) 

The  Captivity  necessarily  exercised  a  profound 
influence  upon  Jewish  thought.  [Comp.  CVRUS, 
vol.  i.  p.  380.]  The  teaching  of  Persia  seems  to 
have  been  designed  to  supply  important  elements  in 
the  education  of  the  chosen  people.  But  it  did  yet 
more  than  this.  The  imagery  of  Ezekiel  (chap,  i.), 
gave  an  ajiparent  sanction  to  a  new  form  of  mystical 
speculation.  It  is  uncertain  at  what  date  this 
earliest  Kahhala  (i.  e.  Tradition)  received  a  definite 
form  ;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  two 
great  divisions  of  which  it  is  composed,  "  the  cha- 
riot "  {Mercabah,  Ez.  i.)  and  "  the  Creation " 
{Bereshith,  Gen.  i.),  found  a  wide  development 
before  the  Christian  era.  The  first  dealt  with  the 
manifesiation  of  God  in  Himself;  the  second  with 
His  manifestation  in  Nature;  and  as  the  doctrine 
was  handed  down  orally,  it  received  naturally,  both 
from  its  extent  and  form,  great  additions  fi'om 
foreign  sources.  On  the  one  side  it  was  open  to  the 
Persian  doctrine  of  emanation,  on  the  other  to  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  ;  and  the  tradi- 
tion was  deeply  impressed  by  both  before  it  was  first 
committed  to  writing  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  cen- 
tury. At  present  the  original  sources  for  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Ivabbala  are  the  Scpher  Jetzirah,  or  Book 
of  Creation,  and  the  Sepher  llazohar,  or  Book  of 
Splendour.  The  former  of  these  dates  in  its  present 
form  fi'om  the  eighth,  and  the  latter  from  the  thir- 
teenth century  (Zunz,  Gottesd.  Vortr.  d.  Jiidcn, 
165;  Jelliuek,  Moses  ben  Schemtob  dc  Leon, 
Leipsic,  1851).  Both  are  based  upon  a  system  of 
Pantheism.  In  the  Book  of  Creation  the  Cabba- 
listic ide;vs  are  given  in  their  simplest  term,  and 
oiler  some  points  of  comparison  with  the  system  of 
the  Pythagoreans.  The  book  begins  with  an  enu- 
meration ofthe  thirty-two  ways  of  wisdom  seen  in  the 
constitution  ofthe  world;  and  tlie  analysis  of  this 
number  is  supposed  to  contain  the  key  to  the  mys- 
teries of  Natui-e.  The  primary  division  is  into 
10  -|-  2'2.  The  number  10  represents  the  t<  u  Seji/ii- 
rotli  (figures),  whicli  answer  to  the  ideal  world  ;  'i'2, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  number  of  the  Hebrew  alpha- 
bet, answers  to  the  world  of  objects  ;  the  oljject  being 
related  to  the  idiMi  as  a  word,  formed  of  letters,  to  a 
number.    Twenty-two  again  is  equal  to  :?  -J-  7  +  1 2 ; 


PHILOSOPHY 


851 


and  each  of  these  numbers,  which  constantly  lecur 
in  the  0.  T.  Scriptures,  is  invested  with  a  peculiar 
meaning.  Generally  the  fundamental  conceptions 
ofthe  book  may  be  thus  represented.  The  ultimate 
Being  is  Divine  Wisdom  (Chocmuh,  a-ocpla).  The 
universe  is  originally  a  hamionious  thought  of 
Wisdom  (Number,  Sephirah) ;  and  the  thought  is 
afterwards  expressed  in  letters,  which  form,  as 
words,  the  germ  of  things.  Blan,  with  his  twofold 
nature,  thus  represents  in  some  sense  the  whole 
universe.  He  is  the  Microcosm,  in  which  the  body 
clothes  and  veils  the  soul,  as  the  phenomenal  world 
veils  the  spirit  of  God.  It  is  impossible  to  follow 
out  here  the  details  of  this  system,  and  its  develop- 
ment in  Zoliar ;  but  it  is  obvious  how  great  an  in- 
fluence it  must  have  exercised  on  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture.  Tlie  calculation  of  the  numerical 
worth  of  words  (comp.  Kev.  xiii.  18;  Gcmatria, 
Buxtorf,  Lex.  Eabb.  446),  the  resolution  of  words 
into  initial  letters  of  new  words  {Notaricon,  Bux- 
torf, 1339),  and  the  tiansposition  or  interchange  of 
letters  {Temurah),  were  used  to  obtain  the  inner 
meaning  of  the  text ;  and  these  practices  have  con- 
tinued to  aflect  modern  exegesis  (Lutterbeck,  Net(^ 
test.  Lehrbegriff,  i.  223-254  ;  Reuss,  Kabbala,  in 
Herzog's  Encyldop.;  Joel,  Die  Belirj.-P/nl.  d. 
Zohar,  1849;  Jellinek,  as  above  ;  Westcott,  Infrod. 
to  Gospels,  131-134;  Franck,  La  Kabbah;  1843 
Old  Testament,  B  §1). 

The  contact  of  the  Jews  with  Persia  thus  gave 
rise  to  a  traditional  mysticism.  Their  contact  with 
(ireece  was  marked  by  the  rise  of  distinct  sects. 
In  the  third  century  li.c.  the  great  doctor  Anti- 
gonus  of  Socho  bears  a  Greek  name,  and  popular 
belief  pointed  to  liim  as  the  teacher  of  Sadoc  and 
Boethus,  the  supposed  founders  of  Jewish  ration- 
alism. At  any  rate,  we  may  date  fi'om  this  time 
the  twofold  division  of  Jewish  speculation  which 
corres]ionds  to  the  chief  tendencies  of  practical  phi- 
losophy. The  Sadducees  appear  as  the  supporters 
of  human  freedom  in  its  widest  scope;  the  Pharisees 
of  a  religious  Stoicism.  At  a  later  time  the  cycle  of 
doctrine  was  completed,  when  by  a  natural  reaction 
the  Essenes  established  a  mystic  Asceticism.  The 
characteristics  of  these  sects  are  noticed  elsewhere. 
It  is  enough  now  to  point  out  the  position  which 
they  occupy  in  the  histoiy  of  Judaism  (comp.  Introd. 
to  Gospels,  pp.  60-66).  At  a  later  period  the  Fourtit 
Book  op  Maccabees  (q.  v.)  is  a  veiy  interesting 
example  of  Jewish  moral  (Stoic)  teaching. 

The  conception  of  wisdom  which  appears  in  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  was  elaborated  with  greater  detail 
afterwards  [Wisdom  of  Solomon], "both  in  Pa- 
lestine [Ecclesiasticus]  and  in  Egypt;  but  the 
doctrine  of  the  Word  is  of  greater  speculative  in- 
terest. Both  doctrines,  nideed,  sprang  from  the 
same  cause,  and  indicate  the  desire  to  find  some 
mediating  power  between  God  and  the  world,  and 
to  remove  the  direct  appearance  and  action  of  God 
from  a  material  sphere.  The  personification  of 
Wisdom  represents  only  a  secondary  powei-  in  rela- 
tion to  (iod;  the  Logos,  in  the  double  sense  of 
Keitson  {K6yos  epSiddeTos)  and  Word  <\uyos  irpo- 
(popiKSs),  both  in  relation  to  t!od  and  in  relation  to 
the  universe.  The  first  use  of  the  term  Word 
{Meinra),  based  ujwn  the  common  formula  of  the 
prophets,  is  in  the  Targ\un  of  Onkelos  (first  cent, 
li.c),  in  which  "  the  Woril  of  (iod  "  is  commonly 
substituted  f'or  God  in  His  immediate,  pcMsonal  rela- 
tions with  man  {fntrod.  to  Gospels,  p.  137);  and 
it  is  probable  that  round  this  traditional  rendering 
a  fuller  doitrine  grew  up.     But  there  is  a  clcir 

3  I  2 


852 


PHILOSOPHY 


diflerence  between  the  idea  of  the  Word  then  pre- 
valent in  Palestine  and  that  cm-rent  at  Alexandria. 
In  Palestine  the  Word  appears  as  the  outward  me- 
diator between  God  and  man,  like  the  Angel  of  the 
Covenant ;  at  Alexandria  it  appears  as  the  spiritual 
connexion  which  opens  the  way  to  revelation.  The 
preface  to  St.  John's  Gospel  includes  the  element 
of  truth  in  both.  In  the  Greek  apocryphal  books 
there  is  no  mention  of  the  Word  (yet  comp.  Wisd. 
xviii.  15).  For  the  Alexandrine  teaching  it  is  neces- 
saiy  to  look  alone  to  Philo  (c.  B.C.  20 — a.d.  50) ; 
and  the  ambiguity  in  the  meaning  of  the  Greek 
terra,  which  has  been  already  noticed,  produces  the 
gi-eate.st  confusion  in  his  treatment  of  the  subject. 
In  Philo  language  domineers  over  thought.  He 
has  no  one  clear  and  consistent  view  of  the  Logos. 
At  times  he  assigns  to  it  divine  attributes  and 
personal  action ;  and  then  again  he  affirms  decidedly 
the  absolute  indivisibility  of  the  Divine  nature. 
The  tendency  of  his  teaching  is  to  lead  to  the  con- 
ception of  a  twofold  personality  in  the  Godhead, 
though  he  shrinks  from  the  recognition  of  such  a 
doctiine  {De  Monarch.  §5 ;  De  Somn.  §37  ;  Quod, 
det.  pot.  ins.  §24-;  De  Somyi.  §39,  &c.).  Above 
all,  his  idea  of  the  Logos  was  wholly  disconnected 
from  all  Messianic  hopes,  and  was  rather  the  philo- 
sophic substitute  for  them.  {Introd.  to  Gospels, 
138-141 ;  Diihne,  Jud.-Alex.  Relig.-Philos.  1834 ; 
Gfrorer,  Philo,  &c.  1835  ;  Dorner,  Die  Lehre  v.  d. 
Person  Christi,  i.  23  fl'. ;  Liicke,  Comm.  i.  207,  who 
gives  an  account  of  the  earlier  literature.) 

II.  The  Patristic  PiECOgnition  of  the  Pro- 
paedeutic Office  op  Greek  Philosophy. 
The  Divine  discipline  of  the  Jews  was,  as  has 
been  seen,  in  nature  essentipJly  moral.  The  lessons 
which  it  was  designed  to  teach  were  embodied  in 
the  fomily  and  tlie  nation.  Yet  this  was  not  in 
itself  a  complete  discipline  of  our  nature.  The 
reason,  no  less  than  the  will  and  the  affections,  had 
an  office  to  discharge  in  preparing  man  for  the 
Incarnation.  The  process  and  the  issue  in  the  two 
cases  were  widely  different,  but  they  were  in  some 
sense  complementary.  Even  in  time  this  relation 
holds  good.  The  divine  kingdom  of  the  Jews  was 
just  overthrown  when  free  speculation  arose  in  the 
Ionian  colonies  of  Asia.  The  teaching  of  the  la.st 
prophet  nearly  synchronised  with  the  death  of 
Socrates.  All  other  diflercnces  between  the  disci- 
pline of  reason  and  that  of  revelation  are  implicitly 
included  in  their  fundamental  difference  of  method. 
In  the  one,  man  boldly  aspired  at  once  to  God,  in 
the  other,  God  disclosed  Himself  gradually  to  man. 
Philosophy  failed  as  a  religious  teacher  practicidly 
(Kom.  i.  21,  22),  but  it  bore  noble  witness  to  an 
inwai-d  law  (Rom.  ii.  14,  15).  It  laid  open  in- 
stinctive wants  which  it  could  not  satisfy.  It 
cleared  away  error,  when  it  could  not  found  truth. 
It  swayed  the  foremost  minils  of  a  nation,  when  it 
left  the  mass  without  hope.  In  its  purest  and 
grandest  forms  it  was  "  a  schoolmaster  to  bring  men 
to  Christ"  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  §28). 

This  function  of  ancient  philosophy  is  distinctly 
recognised  by  many  of  the  gTeatest  of  the  fathers. 
The  "principle  which  is  involved  in  the  doctrine  of 
Justin  Martyr  on  "  the  Seminal  Word  "  finds  a 
clear  and  systematic  expression  in  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria. (Comp.  Redepenning,  Origeues,  i.  p. 
i'M-9.)  "  Every  race  of  men  participated  in  the 
Word.  And  they  who  lived  with  the  Word  were 
.Christians,  even  if  they  were  held  to  be  godless 
(ideoi),  as  for  example,  among  the  Greeks,  Socrates 


PHILOSOPHY 

and  Heraclitus,  and  those  like  them"  (Just.  Mart. 
Ap.  i.  46;  comp.  Ap.  i.  5,  28;  and  "ii.  10,  13). 
"  Philosophy,"  says  Clement,  "  before  the  coming  of 
the  Lord,  was  necessary  to  Greeks  for  righteousness  ; 
and  now  it  proves  useful  for  godliness,  being  in 
some  sort  a  pieliminary  discipline  (irpoTraiSeia  tis 
ovcra)  for  those  who  reap  the  fruits  of  the  fiuth 
through  demonstration.  .  .  .  Perhaps  we  may  say 
that  it  was  given  to  the  Greeks  with  this  special 
object  {TrpoTiyovfievccs),  for  it  brought  {eiraiSa- 
ydoyei)  the  Greek  nation  to  Christ,  as  the  Law 
brought  the  Hebrews"  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  5, 
§28;  comp.  9,  §43,  and  16,  §80).  In  this  sense 
he  doK  not  scruple  to  say  that  "  Philosophy  was 
given  as  a  peculiar  testament  {Sia6r]Kriv\  to  the 
Greeks,  as  forming  the  basis  of  the  Christian  philo- 
sophy"(<S'i)'OOT.  vi.  8,  §67  ;  comp.  5,  §41).  Origen, 
himself  a  pupil  of  Ammonius  Saccas,  speaks  with  less 
precision  as  to  the  educational  power  of  Philosophy, 
but  his  whole  works  bear  witness  to  its  influence. 
The  truths  which  philosophers  taught,  he  says,  re- 
ferring to  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  were  from  God,  for 
"  God  manifested  these  to  them,  and  all  things  that 
have  been  nobly  said"  (c.  Cels.  vi.  3;  Philoc.  15). 
Augustine,  while  depreciating  the  claims  of  the 
great  Gentile  teachers,  allows  that  "  some  of  them 
made  great  discoveries,  so  far  as  they  received  help 
from  Heaven,  while  they  erred  as  far  as  they  weie 
hindered  by  human  frailty"  (Aug.  De  Civ.  ii.  7; 
comp.  De  Doctr.  Chr.  ii.  18).  They  had,  as  he 
elsewhere  says,  a  distant  vision  of  the  truth,  and 
learnt  from  the  teaching  of  nature  what  prophets 
learnt  from  the  Spirit  {Serm.  Ixviii.  3,  cxl.  &c.). 

But  while  many  thus  recognised  in  Philosophy 
the  free  witness  of  the  Word  speaking  among  men, 
the  same  writers  in  other  places  sought  to  explain 
the  paiiial  harmony  of  Philosophy  and  Revelation 
by  an  original  connexion  of  the  two.  This  attempt, 
which  in  the  light  of  a  clearer  criticism  is  seen  to 
be  essentially  fruitless  and  even  suicidal,  was  at 
least  more  plausible  in  the  first  centuries.  A  mul- 
titude of  writings  were  then  current  bearing  the 
names  of  the  Sibyl  or  Hystaspes,  which  were  obvi- 
ously based  on  the  0.  T.  Scriptures,  and  as  long  as 
they  were  received  as  genuine  it  was  impossible  to " 
doubt  that  Jewish  doctrines  were  spread  in  the  West 
before  the  rise  of  Philosophy.  And  on  the  other 
hand,  when  the  Fathers  ridicule  with  the  bitterest 
scorn  the  contradictions  and  errors  of  philosophers, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  they  spoke  often  fresh 
from  a  conflict  with  degenerate  professors  of  systems 
which  had  long  lost  all  real  life.  Some,  indeed, 
there  were,  chiefly  among  the  Latins,  who  con- 
sistently inveighed  agiiinst  Philosophy.  But  even 
Tertullian,  who  is  among  its  fiercest  adversaries, 
allows  that  at  times  the  philosophers  hit  upon 
trath  by  a  happy  chance  or  blind  good  fortune,  and 
yet  more  by  that  "  general  feeling  with  which  God 
was  pleased  to  endow  the  soul"  (Tert.  De  An.  2). 
The  use  which  was  made  of  heathen  speculation  by 
heretical  writers  was  one  great  cause  of  its  dis- 
paragement by  their  catholic  antagonists.  Irenaeus 
eudeavom's  to  reduce  the  Gnostic  teachers  to  a 
dilemma :  either  the  philosophers  with  whom  they 
argued  knew  the  truth  or  they  did  not;  if  they  did, 
the  Incarnation  was  superfluous;  if  they  did  not, 
whence  comes  the  agreement  of  the  true  and  the 
fixlse?  {Ado.  JIaer.  ii.  14,  7).  Hippolytus  follows 
out  the  connexion  of  different  sects  with  earlier 
teachers  in  elaborate  detail.  Tertullian,  with  clia- 
racteristic  energy,  declares  that  "  Philosophy  fiir- 
nishes  the  arms  and  the  subjects  of  heres}-.     What 


PHILOSOPHY 

(he  asks)  has  Athens  in  cnmmou  with  Jerasalem  ? 
the  Academy  with  the  (Jhuich  'i  heretics  with 
Christians?  Our  training  is  from  tlie  I'orch  of 
Solomon.  .  .  .  Let  those  look  to  it  who  bring  for- 
ward a  Stoic,  a  Platonic,  a  dialectic  Christianity. 
We  liave  no  need  of  curious  inquiries  after  the 
coming  of  Christ  Jesus,  uor  of  investigation  after 
the  Gospel"  (Tert.  De  Fraescr.  Haer.  7). 

This  variety  of  judgment  in  the  heat  of  contro- 
vei-sy  was  inevitable.  The  full  importance  of  the 
histoi-y  of  ancient  Philosophy  was  then  first  seen 
when  all  rivalry  was  over,  and  it  became  possible 
to  contemplate  it  as  a  whole,  animated  by  a  great 
law,  often  tiembling  on  the  verge  of  Truth,  and 
sometimes  by  tv  "  bold  ventuie  "  claiming  the  heri- 
fcige  of  Faith.  Yet  even  now  the  relations  of  the 
"  two  old  covenants  " — Philosophy  and  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures — to  use  the  language  of  Clement — have 
been  traced  only  imperfectly.  What  has  been  done 
inay  encourage  labour,  but  it  does  not  supersede  it. 
In  the  porticoes  of  Eastein  churches  Pythagoras 
and  Plato  are  pictured  among  those  who  prepared 
the  way  for  Christianity  (Stanley,  p.  41);  but  in 
the  West,  Sibyls  and  not  Philosophers  arc  the  chosen 
rejH'esentatives  of  the  divine  element  in  Gentile 
teaching. 

III.  The  Development  of  Greek  Philosophy. 

The  complete  fitness  of  Greek  Philosophy  to  per- 
form this  propaedeutic  office  for  Christianity,  as  an 
exliaustive  efibrt  of  reason  to  solve  the  great  pro- 
blems of  being,  must  be  ap])areut  after  a  detailed 
study  of  its  progress  and  consummation ;  and  even 
the  simplest  outline  of  its  history  cannot  fail  to 
preserve  the  leading  traits  of  the  natural  (or  even 
necessary)  law  by  which  its  development  was 
governed. 

The  various  attempts  which  have  been  made  to 
derive  Western  Philosophy  from  Eastern  sources 
have  signally  tailed.  The  external  evidence  in  favour 
of  this  opinion  is  wholly  insufficient  to  establish  it 
(Hitter,  Gesch.  d.  Phil.  i.  159  &c. ;  Thirl  wall,  Hist, 
of  Gr.  ii.  130;  Zeller,  Gesch.  d.  PIlH.  d.  Griechen, 
i.  18-34;  Max  Miiller,  On  Language,  84note),  and 
on  internal  grounds  it  is  most  improbable.  It  is 
true  that  in  some  degree  the  character  of  Greek 
speculation  may  have  been  influenced,  at  least  in  its 
Ciirliest  stages,  by  religious  ideas  which  were  ori- 
ginally introduced  ti'om  the  East ;  but  this  indirect 
influence  does  not  affect  the  real  originality  of  the 
great  Greek  teachei-s.  The  spirit  of  pui'e  philosophy 
is  (as  has  been  already  seen)  wholly  alien  from 
Eastern  thought ;  and  it  was  comj)aratively  late 
when  even  a  Greek  ventured  to  separate  philosophy 
from  religion.  But  in  Greece  the  separation,  when 
it  was  once  effected,  remained  essentially  complete. 
The  opinions  of  the  ancient  philosophers  might  or 
might  not  be  outwardly  reconcileable  with  the 
j)opular  faith  ;  but  philosophy  and  faith  were  in- 
dependent. The  veiy  value  of  Greek  teaching  lies 
in  the  fact  that  it  was,  as  far  a.s  is  possible,  a  result 
of  simple  IJetison,  or,  if  Faith  asserts  its  j)rerogative, 
the  distinction  is  sharply  marked.  In  this  we  have 
a  record  of  the  power  and  weakness  of  the  human 
mind  written  at  once  on  the  grandest  scale  and  in 
the  fairest  charactere. 

Of  the  various  cl.Tssifications  of  the  Greek  schools 
which  ha\'e  been  proposed  the  simplest  and  truest 
seems  to  be  that  which  divides  the  history  of  Phi- 
losophy into  three  great  periods,  the  first  reaching 
to  the  era  of  the  Sopliit-ts,  the  next  to  the  death  of 
Aristotle,  the  third  to  the  Cluistiau  era.     In  tlu; 


PHILOSOPHY 


853 


first  period  the  world  objectively  is  the  gj'eat  centre 
of  inquiry;  in  the  second,  the  "ideas"  of  things, 
truth,  and  being;  in  the  third,  the  chief  interest  of 
philosophy  falls  back  upon  the  practical  conduct  of 
life.  Successive  systems  overlap  each  other,  both 
in  time  and  subjects  of  speculation,  but  broadly  the 
sequence  which  has  been  indicated  will  hold  good 
(Zeller,  Die  Philosophie  der  Griechen,  i.  Ill  &c.). 
After  the  Christian  era  philosophy  ceased  to  have 
any  true  vitality  in  Greece,  but  it  made  fresh  eflbrts 
to  meet  the  changed  conditions  of  life  at  Alexandria 
and  Kome.  At  Alexandria  Platonism  was  vivified 
by  the  spirit  of  Oriental  mysticism,  and  afterwards 
of  Christianity :  at  Kome  Stoicism  was  united  With 
the  vigorous  virtues  of  active  life.  Each  of  these 
great  divisions  must  be  passed  in  rapid  review. 

1.  Tlie  2^>'e-8ocratic  Schools. — The  first  Greek 
philosophy  was  little  more  than  an  attempt  to 
follow  out  iu  thought  the  mythic  cosmogonies  of 
earlier  poets.  Gradually  the  depth  and  variety  of 
the  problems  included  in  the  idea  of  a  cosmogony 
became  apparent,  and,  aftei'  each  clue  had  been 
followed  out,  the  period  ended  in  the  negative 
teaching  of  the  Sophists.  The  questions  of  creation, 
of  the  immediate  relation  of  mind  and  matter,  weie 
pronounced  in  fact,  if  not  in  word,  insoluble,  and 
speculation  was  turned  into  a  new  direction. 

What  is  the  one  permanent  element  which  under- 
lies the  changing  forms  of  things? — this  was  the 
primary  inquiry  to  which  the  Ionic  school  endea- 
voured to  find  an  answer.  Thales  (cir.  B.C.  610- 
625),  following,  as  it  seems,  the  genealogy  of 
Hesiod,  pointed  to  moisture  (watei')  as  the  one 
source  and  supporter  of  life.  Anaxiuenes  (cir. 
B.C.  520-480)  substituted  air  for  water,  as  the  more 
subtle  and  all-pervading  element ;  but  equally  with 
Thales  he  neglected  all  consideration  of  the  force 
which  might  be  supposed  to  modify  the  one  primal 
substance.  At  a  much  later  date  (cir.  B.C.  450) 
Diogenes  of  Apollonia,  to  meet  this  difficulty, 
represented  this  elementary  "  air "  as  endowed 
with  intelligence  (vorjais),  but  even  he  makes  no 
distinction  between  the  material  and  the  intelligent. 
The  atomic  theory  of  Democritus  (cir.  B.C.  460- 
357),  which  stands  in  close  connexion  with  this 
form  of  Ionic  teaching,  offered  another  and  more 
plausible  solution.  The  motion  of  bis  atoms  in- 
cluded the  action  of  force,  but  he  wholly  omitted 
to  account  for  its  source.  Meanwhile  another 
mode  of  speculation  had  arisen  in  the  same  school, 
in  place  of  one  definite  element  Anaximander 
(Ji.C.  610-547)  suggested  the  unlimited  irh  ^.Treipov) 
as  the  adequate  origin  of  all  sjiecial  existences.  And 
somewhat  more  than  a  century  later  Anaxagoras 
summed  up  the  result  of  such  a  line  of  speculation  : 
"  All  things  were  together;  then  mind  (i'or;s)came 
and  disposed  them  in  order"  (Diog.  Laert.  ii.  6). 
Thus  we  are  left  face  to  face  with  an  ultimate 
dualism. 

The  Eleatic  school  starteil  from  an  ojiposite 
])oint  of  view.  Thales  saw  moisture  present  in  ma- 
terial things,  and  pronounced  this  to  be  their  fun- 
damentiil  principle:  Xenoimianes  (cir.  B.C.  530- 
50)  "looked  up  to  the  whole  heaven  ;uid  s;>id  that 
the  One  is  God"  (Arist.  Met.  i.  5,  tJ)  (V  dval 
(prjcTi  rhv  deSv).  "  Thales  siiw  gods  iu  all  things; 
Xenophiuics  saw  all  things  in  God"  (Thirlwall, 
Jlist.  of  Or.  ii.  136).  That  which  is,  according  to 
Xenophanes,  must  be  one,  eternal,  inlinite,  immo- 
vable, uni'hangeal)le.  I'AltllENlDES  of  Elea  (B.C. 
500)  substituted  alistract  "being"  for  "d'od"  iu 
file  system  of  Xenopii;uies,  and  distinguisheil  with 


854 


PHILOSOPHY 


precision  the  functions  of  sense  and  reason.  Sense 
teaches  us  of  "  the  many,"  tlie  false  (phenomena) : 
Reason  of  "  the  one,"  the  true  (the  absolute).  Zeno 
of  Elea  (cir.  B.C.  4.50)  developed  with  logical  inge- 
nuity the  contradictions  involved  in  our  perceptions 
of  things  (in  the  idea  of  motion,  for  instance),  and 
thus  formally  piepared  the  way  for  scepticism.  If 
the  one  alone  is,  the  phenomenal  world  is  an 
illusion.  The  sublime  aspiration  of  Xenophanes, 
when  followed  out  legitimately  to  its  consequences, 
ended  in  blank  negation. 

The  teaching  of  Heraclitus  (b.C.  500)  offers  a 
complete  contrast  to  that  of  the  Eleatics,  and 
stands  far  in  advance  of  the  earlier  Ionic  school, 
with  which  he  is  historically  connected.  So  far 
from  contrasting  the  existent  and  the  phenomenal, 
he  boldly  identified  being  with  change.  "There 
ever  was,  and  is,  and  shall  be,  an  everliviug  fire, 
unceasingly  kindled  and  extinguished  in  due  mea- 
sure "  (aTTTO/nej/oj/  (ueVpa  KcCi  airoa^euvv/xevov 
fxeTpa,  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  14,  §105).  Rest 
and  continuance  is  death.  That  which  is  is  the 
instantaneous  balance  of  contending  powers  (Diog. 
Laert.  ix.  7,  Sia  ttjs  ivavriorpo-Kris  T}pjx6a6aL  to, 
ovra).  Creation  is  the  2)lay  of  the  Creator. 
Everywhere,  as  far  as  his  opinions  can  be  grasped, 
Heraclitus  makes  noble  "  guesses  at  truth  ;"  yet  he 
leaves  "fate"  {elfj.apfj.tVT])  as  the  supreme  creator 
(Stob.  Eel.  i.  p.  59,  ap.  Ritter  &  Preller,  §42). 
The  cycles  of  life  and  death  run  on  by  its  lav  .  It 
may  have  been  by  a  natural  reaction  that  from 
these  wider  speculations  he  turned  his  thoughts 
inwards.  "  I  investigated  myself,"  he  says,  with 
conscious  pride  (Pint.  adv.  Col.  1118,  c.) ;  and  in 
this  respect  he  foresbailows  the  teaching  of  Socrates, 
as  Zeno  did  that  of  the  Sophists. 

The  philosophy  of  Pythagoras  (cir.  b.c.  840- 
510)  is  subordinate  in  interest  to  his  social  and 
political  theories,  though  it  supplies  a  link  in  the 
course  of  speculation ;  others  had  laboured  to  trace 
a  unity  in  the  world  in  the  presence  of  one  underly- 
ing element  or  in  the  idea  of  a  whole ;  he  sought  to 
combine  the  separate  harmony  of  parts  with  total 
unity.  IS'umerical  unity  includes  the  finite  and 
the  infinite ;  and  in  the  relations  of  number  there 
is  a  perfect  symmetry,  as  all  spring  out  of  the 
fundamental  unit.  Thus  numbers  seemed  to  Pytha- 
goras to  be  not  only  "  patterns  "  of  things  (raj^ 
ovToiv),  but  causes  of  their  being  (t^s  oiKrlas). 
How  he  connected  numbers  with  concrete  being  it 
is  impossible  to  determine ;  but  it  may  not  be 
wholly  fanciful  to  see  in  the  doctrine  of  transmi- 
gration of  souls  an  attempt  to  trace  in  the  succes- 
sive forms  of  life  an  outward  expression  of  a 
harmonious  law  in  the  moral  iis  well  as  in  the 
physical  world.  (The  remains  of  the  pre-Socratic 
philosophers  have  been  collected  in  a  very  con- 
venient form  by  F.  Mullach  in  Didot's  Biblioth.  Gr., 
Paris,  18G0.) 

The  first  cycle  of  philosophy  was  thus  com- 
pleted. All  the  great  primary  problems  of  thought 
had  been  stated,  and  typical  answers  rendered. 
The  relation  of  spirit  and  matter  was  still  unsolved. 
Speculation  issued  in  dualism  (Anaxagoras),  mate- 
rialism (Democritus),  or  pantheism  (Xenophanes). 
On  one  side  I'eason  was  made  the  sole  critin'ion  of 
truth  (Parmenides)  ;  on  the  other,  experience  (Hera- 
clitus). As  yet  there  was  no  rest,  and  the  Sophists 
prepaied  the  way  for  a  new  method. 

Whatever  may  be  the  moral  estimate  which  is 
formed  of  the  Sophists,  there  can  be  little  doubt  as 
to  the  importance  of  their  teaching  ;us  preparatory 


PHILOSOPHY 

to  that  of  Socrates.  All  attempts  to  arrive  at 
certainty  by  a  study  of  the  world  had  failed  :  might 
it  not  seem,  then,  that  truth  is  subjective?  "Mim 
is  the  measure  of  all  things."  Sensations  are 
modified  by  the  individual ;  and  may  not  this  hold 
good  universally  ?  The  conclusion  was  applied  t« 
morals  and  politics  with  fearless  skill.  The  belief 
in  absolute  truth  and  right  was  well-nigh  banished  ; 
but  meanwhile  the  Sophists  were  perfecting  the 
instrument  which  was  to  be  turned  against  them. 
Language,  in  their  hands,  acquired  a  precision 
unknown  before,  when  words  assumed  the  place  of 
things.  Plato  miglit  ridicule  the  pedantry  of  Pro- 
tagoras, but  Socrates  reaped  a  rich  harvest  from  it. 

2.  The  Socratic  Schools. — In  the  second  pei-iod 
of  Greek  philosophy  the  scene  and  subject  were 
both  changed.  Athens  became  the  centre  of  specula- 
tions which  had  hitherto  chiefly  found  a  home 
among  the  more  mixed  populations  of  the  colonies. 
And  at  the  same  time  inquiry  was  turned  from  the- 
outward  world  to  the  inward,  from  theories  of  the 
origin  and  relation  of  things  to  theories  of  our 
knowledge  of  them.  A  philosophy  of  ideas,  using 
the  term  in  its  widest  sense,  succeeded  a  philosophy 
of  nature.  In  three  generations  Greek  speculation 
reached  its  greatest  glory  in  the  teaching  of  Socrates, 
Plato,  and  Aristotle.  When  the  sovereignty  of 
Greece  ceased,  all  higher  philosophy  ceased  with  it. 
In  the  hopeless  turmoil  of  civil  disturbances  which 
followed,  men's  thoughts  were  chiefly  directed  to 
questions  of  personal  duty. 

The  fiimous  sentence  in  which  Aristotle  (^Met. 
M.  4)  characterizes  the  teaching  of  Socrates  (b.c. 
468-399)  places  his  scientific  position  in  the  clearest 
light.  There  are  two  things,  he  says,  which  we  may 
rightly  attribute  to  Socrates,  inductive  reasoning, 
and  general  definition  {jovs  T^iiraKriKohs  \6yovs 
Ka\  rh  opi^eaOai  Kad6\ov).  By  the  first  he  endea- 
voui'ed  to  discover  the  permanent  element  which 
underlies  the  changing  forms  of  appearances  and 
the  varieties  of  opinion :  by  the  second  he  fixed  the 
tiuth  which  he  had  thus  gained.  But,  besides  this, 
Socrates  rendered  another  service  to  truth.  He 
changed  not  only  the  method  but  also  the  subject 
of  philosophy  (Cic.  Acad.  Post.  i.  4).  Ethics 
occupied  in  Ins  investigations  the  primary  place 
which  had  hitherto  been  held  by  Physics.  The 
great  aim  of  his  induction  Wcis  to  establish  the 
sovereignty  of  Virtue;  and  before  entering  on  other 
speculations  he  determined  to  obey  the  Delphian 
maxim  and  "know  himself"  (Plat.  Phaedr.  229). 
It  was  a  necessary  consequence  of  a  first  effort  in 
this  direction  that  Socrates  regarded  all  the  results 
which  he  derived  as  like  in  kind.  Knowledge 
{iTnarrifiri)  was  equally  absolute  and  authoritative, 
whether  it  I'eferred  to  the  laws  of  intellectual 
operations  or  to  questions  of  morality.  A  conclu- 
sion in  geometry  and  a  conclusion  on  conduct  were 
set  forth  as  true  in  the  same  sense.  Thus  vice  was 
only  another  name  for  ignorance  (Xen.  Mem.  iii. 
9,  4;  Arist.  Eth.  End.  i.  5).  Everyone  was  sup- 
posed to  have  within  him  a  faculty  absolutely 
leading  to  right  action,  just  as  the  mind  necessarily 
decides  rightly  as  to  relations  of  space  and  number, 
when  each  step  in  the  proposition  is  clearly  stated. 
Socrates  practically  neglected  the  determinative 
power  of  the  will.  His  great  gloiy  was,  howevei-, 
clearly  connected  with  this  fundamental  error  in  his 
system.  He  aliirmed  the  existence  of  a  universal 
law  of  right  and  wrong.  He  connected  philosophy 
with  action,  both  in  detail  and  in  general.  On  the 
one  side  he  upheld  the  supremacy  of  Conscience,  on 


PHILOSOPHY 

the  other  the  working  of  Providence.  Not,  tlie 
least  fruitful  characteristic  of  his  teaching  was 
what  may  be  called  its  desultoriness.  He  formed 
no  complete  system.  He  wrote  nothing.  He 
attracted  and  impressed  his  readers  by  his  many- 
sided  nature.  He  helped  others  to  give  birth-  to 
thoughts,  to  use  his  favourite  image,  but  he  was 
barren  himself  (Plat.  Theaet.  p.  150).  As  a 
result  of  this,  the  most  conflicting  opinions  were 
maintained  by  some  of  his  professed  followers  who 
cai'ried  out  isolated  fragments  of  his  teaching  to 
exti'eme  conclusions.  Some  adopted  his  method 
(Euclides,  cir.  B.C.  400,  the  Mecjarians) ;  others  his 
subject.  Of  the  latter,  one  section,  following  out 
his  proj)osition  of  the  identity  of  self-command 
{iyKpirua)  with  virtue,  i)rotessed  an  utter  disregard 
of  everything  material  (Antisthenes,  cir.  B.C.  566, 
the  Cynics),  while  the  other  (Aristippus,  cir.  B.C. 
366,  the  Cyrenaics),  inverting  the  maxim  that 
virtue  is  necessarily  accompanied  by  pleasure,  took 
immediate  plejtsure  as  the  rule  of  action. 

These  "  minor  Socratic  schools  "  wei'e,  however, 
premature  and  imperfect  developments.  The  truths 
which  they  distorted  were  embodied  at  a  later  time 
in  more  reasonable  forms.  Plato  alone  (B.C.  430- 
347),  by  the  breadth  and  nobleness  of  his  te;iching, 
was  the  true  successor  of  Socrates  ;  with  fuller  detail 
and  greater  elaborateness  of  parts,  his  philosophy 
was  as  manysided  as  that  of  his  master.  Thus  it 
is  impossible  to  construct  a  consistent  Platonic 
system,  though  many  Platonic  doctrines  are  suffi- 
ciently marked.  Plato,  indeed,  possessed  two  com- 
maudnig  powers,  which,  though  apparently  incom- 
patible, are  in  the  highest  sense  complementary :  a 
matchless  destructive  dialectic,  and  a  creative  imagi- 
nation. By  the  first  he  refuted  the  great  fallacies 
of  the  Sophists  on  the  uncertainty  of  knovvledge  and 
right,  carrying  out  in  this  the  attacks  of  Socrates  ; 
by  the  other  he  endeavoured  to  bridge  over  the 
interval  between  a])])i'arance  and  re;ility,  and  gain  an 
approacli  to  the  etoinal.  His  famous  doctrines  of 
Ideas  and  Recollection  (afa/xfrjcn^)  are  a  solution  by 
imagination  of  a  logical  difficulty.  Socrates  had 
shown  the  existence  of  general  notions ;  Plato  felt 
constrained  to  attribute  to  them  a  substantive 
existence  (Arist.  Aid.  M.  4).  A  glorious  vision 
gave  completeness  to  his  view.  'J'he  unembodied 
spirits  were  exhibited  in  immediate  presence  of  the 
"ideas"  of  things  {J'haedr.  247);  the  law  of 
their  embodiment  was  sensibly  portrayed  ;  and  the 
more  or  less  vivid  remembrance  of  supramuudane 
realities  in  this  lite  was  traced  to  antecedent  facts. 
All  men  were  thus  supposed  to  have  been  face  to 
face  with  Truth  :  the  ol)ject  of  teaching  was  to 
bring  back  impressions  latent  but  nneft'aced. 

The  "myths"  of  Plato,  to  one  of  the  most 
famous  of  which  reference  has  just  been  made,  play 
a  most  ini))()rtant  part  in  his  system.  They  answer 
in  the  philosopher  to  Faith  in  the  Christian.  In 
dealing  with- immortality  and  judgment  he  leaves 
the  way  of  reason,  and  ventures,  :ls  he  says,  on  a 
rude  raft  to  brave  the  dangers  of  the  oce;iu  {F/iaed. 
85  D;  Oorff.  523  A).  ^"  The  peril  and  the  prize 
are  noble  and  the  hope  is  gieat "  (^J'hned.  114, 
0,  1)).  Such  tiiles,  he  admits,  may  seem  puerile 
and  ridiculous ;  and  if  there  were  other  surer  and 
clearer  means  of  gaining  the  desired  end,  the  judg- 
ment would  be  just  {Gonj.  527  A).  But,  as  it  is, 
thus  only  can  he  connect  the  seen  and  the  unseen. 
The  myths,  then,  maik  the  limit  of  his  dialectics. 
They  are  not  UK'rely  a  ixietical  picture  of  truth 
rdready   gained,    or   a   impular  illustration    of   his 


PHILOSOPHY 


855 


teaching,  but  I'eal  eflbrts  to  penetrate  beyond  the 
depths  of  argument.  They  show  that  his  method 
was  not  connnensurate  with  his  instinctive  desires ; 
and  point  out  in  intelligible  outlines  the  subjects  on 
which  man  looks  for  revelation.  Such  are  the 
relations  of  the  human  mind  to  truth  {Phacdr.  246- 
249)  ;  the  pre-existence  and  immortality  of  the 
soul  (71/eno,  81-3  ;  Fkacdr.  110-2;  Tim.  41); 
the  state  of  future  retribution  (^Gorg.  523-5:  Rep. 
X.  G14-6) ;  the  revolutions  of  the  world  {I'olit.  269. 
Compare  also  Sympos.  189-91;  2U3-5 ;  Zeller, 
I'hilos.  d.  Griech.  361-3,  who  gives  the  literature  of 
the  subject). 

The  gieat  ditlerence  between  Plato  and  Aristotlf 
(B.C.  384-322)  lies  in  the  use  which  Plato  thus  made 
of  imagination  as  the  exponent  of  instinct.  The  dia- 
lectic of  Plato  is  not  interior  to  that  of  Aristotle, 
and  Aristotle  e.xhibits  traces  of  poetic  power  not 
unworthy  of  Plato ;  but  Aristotle  never  allows 
imagination  to  influence  his  final  decision.  He 
elaborated  a  perlect  method,  and  he  used  it  with 
perfect  fairness.  His' writings,  if  any,  contain  the 
highest  utterance  of  pure  reason.  Looking  back  on 
all  the  earlier  etibrts  of  philosophy,  he  pronounced 
a  calm  and  final  judgment.  For  him  many  of  the 
conclusions  which  others  had  maintained  were 
valueless,  because  he  showed  that  they  rested  on 
feeling,  and  not  on  argument.  This  stern  severity 
of  logic  gives  an  indescribable  pathos  to  those 
passages  in  which  lie  touches  on  the  highest  hopes 
of  men  ;  and  perhaps  there  is  no  more  truly  atl'ect- 
ing  chapter  in  ancient  literature  than  that  in  which 
he  states  in  a  few  unimpassioned  sentences  the  issue 
of  his  inquiry  into  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 
Part  of  it  may  be  immortal,  but  that  part  is  im- 
personal (X'e  An.  iii.  5).  This  was  the  sentence 
of  reason,  and  he  gives  expression  to  it  without 
a  word  of  protest,  and  yet  as  one  who  knew  the 
extent  of  the  sacrifice  which  it  involved.  The 
conclusion  is,  as  it  were,  the  epitaph  of  free  specu- 
lation. I-aws  of  observation  and  argument,  rules 
of  action,  j)rinciples  of  government  remain,  but 
there  is  no  hope  beyond  the  grave. 

It  follows  necessarily  that  the  Platonic  doctrine  of 
ide;is  was  emphatically  rejected  by  Aristotle,  who 
gave,  however,  the  final  development  to  the  original 
conception  of  Socrates.  With  Socrates  "  ideas " 
(general  definitions)  were  mere  abstractions ;  with 
Plato  they  had  an  absolute  existence  ;  with  Aristotle 
they  had  no  existence  separate  from  things  in  which 
they  were  realized,  though  the  tbfm  {jxopcpri),  which 
answers  to  the  Platonic  idea,  was  held  to  be  the 
essence  of  the  thing  itself  (comp.  Zeller,  Fhilos.  d. 
Griech.  i.  119,  120). 

There  is  one  feature  conmion  in  essence  to  the 
systems  of  Plato  and  Aristotle  which  has  not  yet 
been  noticed.  In  both.  Ethics  is  a  part  of  Politics. 
The  citizen  is  prior  to  the  man.  In  Plato  this 
doctrine  finds  its  most  extravagant  development  in 
theory,  though  his  life,  and,  in  some  places,  his 
teaching,  were  directly  opposed  to  it  (e.  g.  Gorg. 
ji.  527  D).  This  practical  inconsequence  was  due,  it 
may  be  supposed,  to  the  condition  of  Athens  at  the 
time,  for  the  idea  was  in  comjilete  harmony  with 
the  national  teeling;  and,  in  fact,  the  absolute 
subordination  of  the  individual  to  the  Ijody  includes 
one  of  the  ciiief  lessons  of  the  ancient  world.  In 
ArLstotle  the  "  politiuil "  character  of  man  is 
defined  with  greairr  ]irecision,  anil  brought  within 
narrower  limits.  The  Imaking-uji  of  the  small  Greek 
slates  iiad  ])rip:ufd  tlu'  way  for  more  comprehen- 
sive views  of  human  l'ellowshi)i,  without  destrovin" 


856 


PHILOSOPHY 


the  t'uiidameiital  truth  of  the  necessity  of  social 
union  for  perfect  life.  But  iu  the  next  generation 
this  was  lost.  The  wars  of  the  Succession  oljliterated 
the  idea  of  society,  and  Philosophy  was  content  with 
aiming  at  individual  happiness. 

The  coming  change  was  indicated  by  the  rise  of  a 
school  of  scejitics.  The  scepticism  of  the  Sophists 
marked  the  close  of  the  first  period,  and  in  like 
manner  the  scepticism  of  the  Pyrrhonists  marks  the 
close  of  the  second  (Stilpo,  cir.  B.C.  290 ;  Pye- 
RHON,  cir.  B.C.  290).  But  the  Pyrrhonists  rendered 
no  positive  service  to  the  cause  of  Philosophy,  as  the 
Sophists  did  by  the  refinement  of  language.  Then- 
immediate  influence  was  limited  in  its  range,  and  it 
is  only  as  a  symptom  that  the  rise  of  the  school  is 
important.  But  in  this  respect  it  foreshows  the 
character  of  after-Philosophy  by  denying  the  foun- 
dation of  all  higher  speculations.  Thus  all  interest 
was  turned  to  questions  of  practical  morality. 
Hitherto  morality  had  been  based  as  a  science  upon 
mental  analysis,  but  by  the  Pyrrhonists  it  was 
made  subsei-vient  to  law  and  'custom.  Immediate 
experience  w:is  held  to  be  the  rule  of  life  (comp. 
Ritter  and  Preller,  §3.50). 

3.  The  imt-Socmtic  Schools. — After  Aristotle, 
Philosophy,  as  has  been  already  noticed,  took  a  new 
direction."  The  Socratic  schools  were,  as  has  been 
shown,  coimectcd  by  a  common  pursuit  of  the  perma- 
nent element  which  underlies  phenomena.  Socrates 
placed  Virtue,  truth  in  action,  in  a  knowledge  of 
the  ideas  of  things.  Plato  went  further,  and  main- 
tained that  these  ideas  are  alone  truly  existent. 
Aristotle,  though  differing  in  temis,  yet  only  fol- 
lowed in  the  same  direction,  when  he  attributed  to 
Form,  not  an  independent  existence,  but  a  fashion-, 
ing,  vivifying  powei"  in  all  individual  objects.  But 
from  this  point  speculation  took  a  mainly  personal 
direction.  Philosophy,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 
word,  ceased  to  exist.  This  was  due  both  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  time  and  to  the  exhaustion 
consequent  on  the  failure  of  the  Socratic  method  to 
solve  the  deep  mysteries  of  being.  Aristotle  had, 
indeed,  laid  the  wide  foundations  of  an  inductive 
svstem  of  physics,  but  few  were  inclined  to  continue 
his  work.  The  physical  theories  which  were  brought 
forward  were  merely  adaptations  from  earlier  phi- 
losophers. 

In  dealing  with  moral  questions  two  opposite 
systems  are  possible,  and  have  found  advocates  in 
all  ages.  On  the  one  side  it  may  be  said  that  the 
character  of  actions  is  to  be  judged  by  their  results  ; 
on  the  other,  that  it  is  to  be  sought  only  in  the 
actions  themselves.  Pleasure  is  the  test  of  right 
in  one  case ;  an  assumed,  or  discovered,  law  of  our 
nature  in  the  other.  If  the  world  were  perfect  and 
the  balance  of  human  faculties  undisturbed,  it  is 
evident  that  both  systems  would  give  identical 
results.  As  it  is,  there  is  a  tendency  to  error  on 
each  side,  which  is  clearl}^  seen  in  the  rival  schools 
of  the  Epicureans  and  Stoics,  who  piactically  divided 
the  suffrages  of  the  mass  of  educated  men  in  the 
centuries  before  and  after  the  Christian  era. 

Epicdrus  (B.C.  352-270)  defined  the  object  of 
Philosophy  to  be  the  attainment  of  a  happy  life. 
The  pursuit  of  truth  for  its  own  sake  ho  regarded 
as  superfluous.  He  rejected  dialectics  as  a  useless 
study,  and  accepted  the  senses,  in  the  widest  ac- 
ceptation of  the  term  [Epicureans,  i.  570],  as 
the  criterion  of  truth.      Physics  he  subordinated 


PHILOSOPHY 

entirely  to  Ethics  (Cic.  de  Fin.  i.  7).  But  he 
dillereil  widely  from  the  Cyrenaics  iu  his  view  of 
haj)piness.  The  happiness  at  whidi  the  wise  man 
aims  is  to  be  found,  he  s;ud,  not  in  momentary 
gratification,  but  in  lifelong  pleasure.  It  does  not 
consist  necessarily  in  excitement  or  motion,  but 
often  in  absolute  tranquillity  (aTapo|ia).  "  The 
wise  man  is  happy  even  on  the  i-ack  "  (Diog.  Laert. 
X.  118),  for  "virtue  alone  is  inseparable  from  plea- 
sure "  (id.  138).  To  live  happily  and  to  live 
wisely,  nobly,  and  justly,  are  convertible  phrases 
{id.  140).  But  it  followed  as  a  corollaiy  from  his 
view  of  happiness,  that  the  Gods,  who  were  assumed 
to  be  supremely  happy  and  eternal,  were  absolutely 
free  fiom  the  distractions  and  emotions  consequent 
on  any  care  for  the  world  or  man  {id.  1 39 ;  comp. 
Lucr.  ii.  645-7).  All  things  were  supposed  to  come 
into  being  by  chance,  and  so  pass  away ;  and  the 
study  of  Nature  was  chiefly  useful  as  dispelling  the 
superstitious  fears  of  the  Gods  and  death  by  which 
the  multitude  are  tormented.  It  is  obvious  how 
such  teaching  would  degenerate  iu  practice.  Tlu^ 
individual  was  left  master  of  his  own  life,  free  from 
all  regard  to  any  higher  law  than  a  refined  selfish- 
ness. 

While  Epicurus  asserted  in  this  maimer  the  claims 
of  one  part  of  man's  nature  in  the  conduct  of  life, 
Zeno  of  Citium  (cir.  B.C.  280),  with  equal  partiality, 
advocated  a  purely  spiritual  (intellectual)  morality. 
The  opposition  between  the  two  was  complete.  The 
infinite,  chance-formed  worlds  of  the  one  stand  over 
against  the  one  harmonious  world  of  the  other.  On 
the  one  side  are  Gods  regardless  of  material  things, 
on  the  other  a  Being  permeating  and  vivifying  all 
creation.  This  difference  necessarily  found  its  chief 
expression  in  Ethics.  For  when  the  Stoics  taught 
that  there  were  only  two  principles  of  things,  Matter 
(jh  iracrxov),  and  God,  Fate,  Reason — for  the  names 
were  many  by  which  it  was  fashioned  and  quickened 
[rh  iroiovv) — it  followed  that  the  active  principle 
in  man  is  of  Divine  origin,  and  that  his  duty  is  to 
live  conformably  to  nature  (rb  ojuoAoYOU/ueVws  [rp 
<p{iireC\  ^v).  By  "  Nature  "  some  understood  the 
nature  of  man,  others  the  natuie  of  the  universe  ; 
but  both  agreed  in  regarding  it  as  a  general  law  of 
the  whole,  and  not  particular  passions  or  impulses. 
Good,  therefore,  was  but  one.  All  external  things 
were  indifferent.  Reason  was  the  absolute  sovereign 
of  man.  Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  Stoics,  like  that 
of  Epicurus,  practically  left  man  to  himself.  But 
it  was  worse  in  its  final  results  than  Epicurism,  for 
it  made  him  his  own  god." 

In  one  point  the  Epicureans  and  Stoics  were 
agreed.  They  both  regarded  the  happiness  and 
culture  of  the  individual  as  the  highest  good.  Both 
systems  belonged  to  a  period  of  coi'ruption  and 
decay.  They  were  the  efforts  of  the  man  to  sup- 
port himself  in  the  ruin  of  the  state.  But  at  the 
same  time  this  assertion  of  individual  independence 
and  breaking  down  of  local  connexions  perfoniied 
an  important  work  in  preparation  for  Christianity. 
It  was  for  the  Gentile  world  an  influence  cor- 
responding to  the  Dis])ersion  for  the  Jews.  Jlen,  as 
men,  owned  their  fellowship  as  they  had  not  done 
before.  Isolating  superstitions  weie  shattered  by 
the  arguments  of  the  Epicureans.  The  unity  of  the 
human  conscience  was  vigorously  affirmed  by  the 
Stoics  (comp.  Antoninus,  iv.  4,  33,  with  Gatakcr's 
notes). 


"  This  Btatemcut,  which  is  true  generally,  is  open  to 
many  exceptions.    The  famous  hymn  of  Cleanthes  is  one 


of  the  no)>lost  expressions  of  belief  in  Divine  Power 
(Muliach,  Fnij/m.  rhilus.  p.  151). 


PHILOSOPHY 

Meanwhile  in  the  New  Academy  Platonism  de- 
fjenerated  into  scepticism.  Epicurus  found  au  au- 
thoritative rule  in  the  senses.  The  Stoics  took 
refuge  in  what  seems  to  answer  to  the  modern  doc- 
trine of  "  common  sense,"  and  maintained  that  the 
senses  give  a  dii-ect  knowledge  of  the  object.  Cak- 
NEADES  (u.C.  213-129)  combated  these  views, and 
showed  that  sensation  cainiot  be  proved  to  declare 
the  real  nature,  but  only  some  of  the  eH'ects,  of 
things.  Thus  the  slight  philosophical  basis  of  the 
later  schools  was  undermined.  iScepticism  remained 
as  the  last  issue  of  speculation ;  and,  if  we  may 
believe  tlie  declaration  of  ijeneca  {Quaest.  A'at.  vii. 
32),  Scepticism^  itself  soon  ceased  to  be  taught  as  a 
system.  The  great  teachers  had  sought  rest,  and 
in  the  end  they  found  unrest.  No  science  of  life 
could  be  established.  The  reason  of  the  few  failed 
to  create  an  esoteric  rule  of  virtue  and  happiness. 
For  in  this  they  all  agreed,  that  the  blessings  of 
philosophy  were  not  for  the  mass.  A  "  Gospel 
preached  to  the  poor  "  was  as  yet  unknown. 

liut  though  the  Greek  philosophers  fell  short  of 
tlieir  highest  aim,  it  needs  no  words  to  show  the 
work  which  they  did  as  pioneers  of  a  universal 
Ciiurch.  They  revealed  the  wants  and  the  instincts 
of  men  with  a  clearness  and  vigour  elsewheie  un- 
attainable, for  their  sight  was  dazzled  by  no  reflec- 
tions from  a  purer  faith.  Step  by  step  great  ques- 
tions were  proposed — Fate,  Providence — Conscience, 
Law — the  State,  the  Man — and  answers  were  given, 
which  ai'e  the  more  instructive  because  they  are 
generally  one-sided.  The  discussions,  which  were 
primarily  restricted  to  a  few,  in  time  influenced  the 
opinions  of  the  many.  The  preacher  who  spoke  of 
"  an  unknown  God "  had  an  audience  who  could 
understand  him,  not  at  Athens  only  or  Home,  but 
throughout  the  civilized  world. 

The  complete  course  of  Philosophy  was  run  before 
the  Christian  eia,  but  there  were  yet  two  mixed 
systems  afterwards  which  olleied  some  novel 
features.  At  Alexandria  Platonism  was  united 
with  various  elements  of  Eastern  specfilation,  and 
for  several  centuries  exercised  an  important  in- 
fluence on  Christian  doctrine.  At  Rome  Stoicism 
was  vivified  by  the  spirit  of  the  old  rep\iblic,  and 
exhibited  the  extreme  Western  type  of  Philosophy. 
Of  the  first  nothing  can  be  said  here.  It  mose  only 
when  Chi'istianity  was  a  recognised  spiritual  power, 
and  was  influenceil  both  positively  and  negatively 
by  the  Gospel.  The  same  remaik  applies  to  the 
elfoiis  to  quicken  afresh  the  forms  of  Paganism, 
which  found  their  climax  in  the  reign  of  Julian. 
These  have  no  indejiendent  value  as  an  expression 
of  original  thought;  but  the  Roman  Stoicism  calls 
for  brief  notice  from  its  supposed  connexion  with 
Christian  morality  (Seneca,  f  a.d.  65 ;    Eric- 

TETUS,  t  «'!■•  A.D.  115;  M.  AURELIOS  ANTO- 
NINUS, 121-180).  The  belief  in  this  connexion 
found  a  singular  expression  in  the  apocryphal  cor- 
respondence of  St.  Paul  and  Seneca,  which  was 
widely  received  in  tiie  early  Church  (Jerome,  Be 
Vir,  til.  xii.).     And  lately  a  distinguished  writer 


PHILOSOPHY 


85^ 


b  Citium,  the  birthplace  of  Zeno,  was  u  Phoenician  co- 
lony ;  H('rlllu3,  bis  pupil,  was  a  Carthaprinlim ;  Clirysippiis 
was  born  at  Soli  or  Tarsus ;  of  bis  scholars  and  successors, 
Zeno  and  Antipater  were  natives  of  Tnrsns,  and  Diogenes 
of  Babylonia.  In  the  next  generation,  rosidonius  was  a 
native  of  Apamra  in  Syria ;  and  Epictetus,  the  noblest  of 
Stoics,  was  born  at  llicrapolis  In  I'lirygia. 

<!  Seneca,  A';'.  5;t,  II  :  •'  Est  aliqiiid  quo  sapiens  ante- 
cedatDciini:  illebetielicio  naturae  non  timet, suos;ii)icns." 
Comp.  A^).  41.    Anton.  .\ii.  26,  6  indcTOv  vovi  Otos  kui 


(Mill,  On  Lihertij,  p.  58,  quoted  by  Stanley, 
Eastern  Ch.  Lect.  VI.,  ajjparently  with  approba- 
tion) has  speculated  on  the  "  tragical  fact "  that 
Constantine,  and  not  Marcus  Aurelius,  was  the  first 
Chiistian  emperor.  The  superficial  coincidences  of 
Stoicism  with  the  N.  T.  are  certainly  numerous. 
Coincidences  of  thought,  and  even  of  language, 
might  easily  be  multiplied  (Gafaker,  Antoninus, 
Praef.  pp.  xi.  &c.),  and  in  considering  these  it  is 
impossible  not  \o  remember  that  Semitic  thought 
and  phraseology  must  have  exercised  great  influence 
on  Stoic  teaching  (Grant,  Oxford  Essays,  1858, 
p.  82).''  P)ut  beneath  this  external  resemblance  of 
Stoicism  to  Christianity,  the  later  Stoics  were  fui)  ■ 
damentally  opposed  to  it.  For  good  and  for  evil 
they  were  the  Pharisees  of  the  Gentile  world. 
Their  highest  aspirations  are  mixed  with  the  thanks- 
giving "  that  they  were  not  as  other  men  aie  '* 
(comp.  Anton,  i.).  Their  worship  was  a  sublime 
egotism. «  The  conduct  of  life  was  regarded  as  an 
art,  guided  in  individual  actions  by  a  conscious 
I'eference  to  reason  {Aiiton.  iv.  2,  3,  v.  32),  and  not 
a  spontaneous  process  rising  naturally  out  of  one 
vital  principle.<*  The  wise  man,  "  wrapt  in  him- 
self" (vii.  28),  was  supposed  to  look  with  perfect 
indifference  on  the  changes  of  time  (iv.  49) ;  and 
yet  beneath  tiiis  show  of  independence  he  was  a 
prey  to  a  hopeless  sadness.  In  words  he  appealed 
to  the  great  law  of  fate  which  rapidly  sweeps  all 
things  into  oblivion  as  a  source  of  consolation  (iv. 
2,  14,  vi.  15);  but  there  is  no  confidence  in  any 
future  retribution.  In  a  certain  sense  the  elements 
of  which  we  are  composed  are  eternal  (v.  13),  for 
they  are  incorporated  in  other  parts  of  the  universe, 
but  ice  shall  cease  to  exist  (iv.  14,  21,  vi.  24, 
vii.  10).  Not  only  is  there  no  recognition  of  com- 
munion between  an  immortal  man  and  a  personal 
God,  but  the  idea  is  excluded.  Man  is  but  an  atom 
in  a  vast  universe,  and  his  actions  and  sufl'erings 
are  measured  solely  by  their  relation  to  the  whole 
{Ant07i.  X.  5,  G,  20,  xii.  26,  vi.  45,  v.  22,  vii.  9). 
God  is  but  another  name  for  "  the  mind  of  the 
universe"  (6  tov  oKov  vovs,  v.  30),  "  the  soul  of 
the  world"  (iv.  40),  "the  reason  that  ordereth 
matter  "  (vi.  1),  "  universal  nature  "  (jj  ray  oKwv 
(pva-ii,  vii.  33,  ix.  1 ;  comp.  x.  1),  and  is  even 
identified  with  the  world  itself  {tov  yevvftauvTos 
K6a/xov,  xii.  1  ;  comp.  Gataker  on  iv.  23).  Thus 
the  Stoicism  of  M.  Aurelius  gives  many  of  the 
moral  precepts  of  the  Gospel  (Gatalcer,  iV((c/. 
p.  xviii.),  but  without  their  foundation,  which  can 
find  no  place  in  his  system.  It  is  inipos-sible  to 
read  his  reflections  without  emotion,  but  they  have 
no  creative  energy.  They  are  the  Inst  strain  of  a 
dying  creed,  and  in  themselves  have  no  special 
affinity  to  the  new  faith.  Christianity  necessarily 
includes  whatever  is  noblest  in  them,  but  fhcy 
affect  to  supply  the  place  of  Chrislianity,  and  do 
not  lead  to  it.  The  real  elements  of  greatness  in 
M.  Aurelius  are  many,  and  truly  Komau  ;  but  the 
study  of  his  Meditations  by  the"  side  of  the  N.  T. 
can  leiive  little  doubt  that  he  could  not  have  helped 

iKeiSiv  erreppvrjKe,    Comp.  v.  10. 

<*  This  explains  the  well-known  reference  of  Marcus 
Anrelius  to  the  Christians.  They  were  ready  to  die  "  of 
mere  olwtinacy  "  (Kara  i^tArj;'  Traparof ti/,  r.  e.  faith) , 
whereas,  he  says,  this  readiness  ousht  to  come  "  from 
personal  judgment  after  due  calculation "  (omo  tStic^? 
icpiVew!  ....  AeAoyi<7/it'j'u)?  .:  .  .  xl.  a).  So  also  I'ipictcLus 
(Diss.  I.\.  1,  6)  conira.sts  the  fortitude  gained  by  "  liablt," 
by  thcGalilaeans,  with  the  true  fortitude  based  on  "  reason 
and  demonslratlou." 


868 


PHILOSOPHY 


to   give    a    national    standing-place   to   a    Catholic 
Church.« 

IV.  Christianity  in  contact  with  Ancient 
Philosophy. 

The  only  direct  trace  of  the  contact  of  Chris- 
tianity with  Western  Philosophy  in  the  N.  T.  is  in 
the  account  of  St.  Paul's  \4sit  to  Athens,  where 
"  certain  philosophers  of  the  Epiciyieans  and  of  the 
Stoics"  (Acts  xvii.  18) — the  representatives,  that 
is,  of  the  two  great  moral  schools  which  divided  the 
West — "  encountered  him  ;"  and  there  is  nothing  iu 
the  apostolic  writings  to  show  that  it  exercised  any 
important  influence  upon  the  early  Church  (comp. 
1  Cor.  i.  22-4.).  But  it  was  otherwise  with  Eastern 
speculation,  which,  as  it  \vas  less  scientific  iu  fonn, 
penetrated  more  deeply  through  the  mass  of  the 
people.  The  "philosophy"  against  which  the  Co- 
lossians  were  warned  (Col.  ii.  8)  seems  undoubtedly 
to  have  been  of  Eastern  origin,  containing  elements 
similar  to  those  which  were  afterwards  embodied  in 
various  shapes  of  Gnosticism,  as  a  selfish  asceticism 
and  a  superstitious  reverence  for  angels  (Col.  ii.  16- 
23);  and  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy,  addressed  to 
Ephesus,  in  which  city  St.  Paul  anticipated  the  rise 
of  false  teaching  (Acts  xx.  30),  two  distinct  forms  of 
error  may  be  traced,  in  addition  to  Judaism,  due 
more  or  less  to  the  same  influence.  One  of  these 
was  a  vain  spiritualism,  insisting  on  ascetic  observ- 
ances and  interpreting  the  resurrection  as  a  moral 
change  (1  Tim.  iv.  1-7  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  16-18) ;  the 
other  a  materialism  allied  to  sorcery  (2  Tim.  iii. 
13,  ySrires).  The  former  is  that  which  is  pecu- 
liarly "  false-styled  gnosis  "  (1  Tim.  vi.  20),  abound- 
ing in  "  profane  and  old  waves'  fables "  (1  Tim. 
iv.  7)  and  empty  discussions  (i.  6,  vi.  20) ;  the 
latter  has  a  close  connexion  with  earlier  tendencies 
at  Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  19),  and  with  the  traditional 
accounts  of  Simon  Blagus  (comp.  Acts  viii.  9),  whose 
working  on  the  early  Chm'ch,  however  obscure,  was 
unquestionably  most  important.  These  antagonistic 
and  yet  complementary  forms  of  heresy  found  a 
wide  development  in  later  times  ;  but  it  is  remark- 
able that  no  trace  of  dualism,  of  the  distinction  of 
the  Creator  and  the  Redeemer,  the  Demim'ge  and 
the  true  God,  which  fonned  so  essential  a  tenet  of 
the  Gnostic  schools,  occurs  in  the  N.  T.  (comp. 
Thiersch,  Versuch  zur  Herst.  d.  hist.  Standp,  &c., 
231-304). 

The  writings  of  the  sub-apostolic  age,  with  the 
exception  of  the  famous  anecdote  of  Justin  Martyr 
{Dial.  2-4),  throw  little  light  upon  the  relations 
of  Christianity  and  Philosophy.  The  heretical  sys- 
tems again  ai'e  too  oljscure  and  complicated  to  illus- 
trate more  than  the  general  admixture  of  foreign 
(especially  Eastern)  tenets  with  the  apostolic  teach- 
ing. One  book,  however,  has  been  preserved  in 
various  shapes,  which,  though  still  unaccountably 
neo'lected  in  Church  histories,  contains  a  vivid  deli- 
neation of  the  speculative  struggle  which  Christian- 
itv  had  to  maintain  with  Judaism  and  Heathenism. 
The  Clementine  Homilies  (ed.  Dressel,  1853)  and 
Recognitions  (ed.  Gersdorf,  1838)  are  a  kind  of 
Philosophy  of  Religion,  and  in  subtlety  and  rich- 
ness of  thought  yield  to  no  eai-ly  Christian  writings. 
The  picture  which  the  supposed  author  draws  of 
his  early  religious  doubts  is  evidently  taken  from 

e  The  writings  of  EpictetUs  contain  in  tlie  main  the 
same  system,  but  with  siiniewhat  less  arrogancn.  It  may 
be  remarlied  that  the  silence  of  Epictelus  and  M.  Auvelius 
on  the  teaching  of  Christianity  can  baldly  be  explained  by 


PHINEES 

life  (Clem.  Rccogn.  i.  1-3;  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.  i. 
43,  E.  T.)  ;  and  in  the  discussions  which  follow 
there  are  clear  traces  of  Western  as  well  as  Eastern 
philosophy  (Uhlhorn,  Die  Horn.  u.  Recogn.  d.  Clem. 
Ro77t.  pp.  404  &c.). 

At  the  close  of  the  second  century,  when  the 
Church  of  Alexandria  came  into  marked  intellectual 
pre-eminence,  the  mutual  intluence  of  Christianity 
and  Neo-Platonism  opened  a  new  field  of  specula- 
tion, or  rather  the  two  systems  were  presented  in 
forms  designed  to  meet  the  acknowledged  wants  of 
the  time.  According  to  the  commonly  received 
report,  Origen  was  the  scholar  of  Ammonius  Saccas, 
who  first  gave  consistency  to  the  later  Platonism, 
and  for  a  long  time  he  was  the  contemporary  of 
Plotmus  (a.d.  205-270),  who  was  its  noblest  expo- 
sitor. Neo-Platonism  was,  in  fact,  an  attempt  to 
seize  the  spirit  of  Christianity  apart  from  its  his- 
toric basis  and  human  elements.  The  separation 
between  the  two  was  absolute  ;  and  yet  the  splen- 
dour of  the  one-sided  spiritusilism  of  the  Neo-Pla- 
tonists  attracted  in  some  cases  the  admiration  of 
the  Christian  Fathers  (Basil,  Theodoret),  and  the 
wide  circulation  of  the  writings  of  the  pseudo-Dio- 
nysius  the  Areopagite  served  to  propagate  many  of 
then-  doctrines  imder  an  orthodox  name  among  the 
schoolmen  and  mystics  of  the  middle  ages  (Vogt, 
Neu-Platonismus  u.  Christenthinn,  1836  ;  Herzog, 
Encyklop.  s.  v.  Neu-Platonismus). 

The  want  which  the  Alexandrine  Fathers  endea- 
voured to  satisfy  is  in  a  great  measure  the  want  of 
our  own  time.  If  Christianity  be  Truth,  it  must 
have  points  of  special  connexion  with  all  nations 
and  all  periods.  The  ditlerence  of  character  in  the 
constituent  writings  of  the  N.  T.  are  evidently 
typical,  and  present  the  Gospel  in  a  form  (if  tech- 
nical language  may  be  used)  now  ethical,  now 
logical,  now  mystical.  The  varieties  of  aspect  thus 
indicated  combine  to  give  the  idea  of  a  harmonious 
whole.  Clement  rightly  maintained  that  there  is  a 
"  gnosis  "  in  Christianity  distinct  from  the  errors 
of  Gnosticism.  The  latter  was  a  premature  attempt 
to  connect  the  Gospel  with  earlier  systems ;  the 
foiTner  a  result  of  conflict  grounded  on  Faith  (Mijh- 
ler,  Patrologie,  424  &c.).  Christian  Philosophy 
may  be  in  one  sense  a  contradiction  in  tenns,  for 
Christianity  confessedly  derives  its  first  jjrinciples 
fi'om  revelation,  and  not  from  simple  reason ;  but 
there  is  no  less  a  true  Philosophy  of  Christianity, 
which  aims  to  show  how  completely  these,  by  their 
form,  their  substance,  and  their  consequences,  meet 
the  instincts  and  aspirations  of  all  ages.  The  expo- 
sition of  such  a  Philosophy  would  be  the  work  of  a 
modern  Origen.  [B.  F.  W.] 

PHIN'EES  {^ivees:  Phinees).  1.  The  son 
of  Eleazar  son  of  Aaron,  the  great  hero  of  the 
Jewish  priesthood  (1  Esdr.  v.  5;  viii.  2,  29;»  2 
Esdr.  i.  26  ;  Ecclus.  slv.  23  ;   1  Mace.  ii.  26). 

2.  Phmehas  the  son  of  Eli,  2  Esdr.  i.  2a:  but 
the  insertion  of  the  najiie  iu  the  genealogy  ot  Ezra 
(in  this  place  only)  is  evidently  an  eiTor,  since  Ezra 
belonged  to  the  line  of  Eleazar,  and  Eli  to  that  of 
Ithamar.  It  probably  ai'ose  from  a  confusion  of 
the  name  with  that  of  the  great  Phiuehas,  who  was 
Ezra's  forefather. 

3.  A  Priest  or  Levite  of  the  time  of  Ezra,  father 
of  Eleazar  (1  Esdr.  viii.  63). 


ignorance.   It  seems  that  the  philosopher  would  not  notice 
(in  word)  the  believer.  Comp.  Lardner,  )Vm-ks,  vii.  356-7. 
"  Here  the  LXX.  has  "topos. 


PHINEHAS 

4.  (*ivoe':  Sinonc)  1  EsJr.  v.  IJl.  [Paseah, 
2.]  [G.] 

PHIN'EHAS  (DnrS,  ».  e.  Pinchas :  ^ivees  ; 
but  once  in  Pent,  and  uuit'ormly  elsewhere,  4>eij/ee's  ; 
Jos.  4>ii'66'(T7}s  :  Phinees).  Son  of  Eleazar  and  giaud- 
6on  ot'Aaion  (Ex.  vi.  25).  His  mother  is  recorded 
as  one  of  the  daughters  of  Putiel,  an  unknown 
person,  who  is  identified  by  the  Kabbis  with  Jethro 
the  Midianite  (Targ.  I'scudojoii.  ou  Exod.  vi.  25. 
Wagenseil's  Sota  viii.  6).  Phinehas  is  memorable 
for  having  while  quite  a  youth,  by  his  zeal  and 
energy  at  the  critical  moment  of  the  licentious  idola- 
try of  Shittim,  appeased  the  divine  wrath  and  put  a 
stop  to  the  plague  which  was  destroying  the  nation 
l^Num.  XXV.  7).  For  this  he  was  rewarded  by  the 
special  approbation  of  Jehovah,  and  by  a  promise  that 
the  priesthood  sliould  remain  in  his  family  for  ever 
(10-13).  This  seems  to  have  raised  him  at  once  to 
a  very  high  position  in  the  nation,  and  he  was 
appointed  to  accompany  as  priest  the  expedition 
by  which  the  Midianites  were  destroyed  (xxxi.  G). 
Many  years  later  he  also  headed  the  party  who 
were  despatched  from  Shiloh  to  remonstrate  against 
the  Altar  which  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes  were 
reporteil  to  have  built  near  Jordan  (Josh.  xxii. 
l;i-32l.  In  the  partition  of  the  country  he  received 
an  allotment  of  his  own — a  hill  on  Mount  Ephraim 
which  bore  his  name — Gibeath-Pinchas.  Here  his 
father  was  buried  (Josh.  xxiv.  33). 

Uuiing  the  lite  of  Phinehas  he  appears  to  have 
been  the  chief  of  the  great  family  of  the  Korahites 
or  Korhites  who  giianled  the  entrances  to  the  sacred 
tent  and  the  whole  of  the  sawed  camp  (1  Chr. 
ix.  20).  After  Eleazar's  death  he  became  high 
priest — the  3rd  of  the  senes.  In  this  capacity  he 
is  introduced  as  giving  the  oracle  to  the  nation 
during  the  struggle  with  the  Benjamites  on  the 
matter  of  Gibeah  (Judg.  xx.  28).  Where  the  Ark 
and  tabernacle  were  stationed  at  that  time  is  not 
clear.  From  ver.  1  we  should  infer  that  they 
were  at  Mizpeh,  while  from  vers.  18,  20,  it  seems 
«([ually  probable  that  thc-y  were  at  Bethel  (which 
is  also  the  statement  of  Josephus,  Ant.  v.  2,  §11). 
Or  the  Hebrew  words  in  these  latter  verses  ma}' 
mean,  not  Bethel  the  town,  but,  as  they  m"e  rendeied 
in  the  A.  V.,  "  house  of  God,"  and  refer  to  tlie  t;xber- 
nacle  at  Shiloli.  But  wlierever  the  Ark  may  have 
been,  there  w;is  the  aged  priest  "  standing  before 
it,"  and  the  oracle  which  he  delivered  was  one 
which  must  have  been  fully  in  accordance  with  his 
own  vehement  temper,  "  Shall  we  go  out  to  battle  .  .  . 
or  shall  we  cease  ?"  And  the  answer  was,  "  Go  up : 
(or  to-morrow  1  will  deliver  them  into  your  hand." 

The  memory  of  this  champion  of  Jehovah  was 
very  dear  to  the  Jews.  The  narrative  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch presents  him  as  the  type  of  an  ardent  and 
devoted  priest.  The  numerous  references  to  him 
in  the  later  literature  all  adojjt  the  same  tone.  He 
is  commemorated  in  one  of  the  Psalms  (cvi.  30,  31) 
in  the  identical  ]ilirase  which  is  consecrated  for  ever 
by  its  use  in  reference  to  the  great  act  of  faith  of  Abra- 
ham ;  a  ])hrase  which  perhajRi  more  than  any  other 
in  the  Bible  binds  together  the  old  and  new  dispeu- 
.sations — "that  was  counted  to  him  fur  righteous- 
ness unto  all  generations  for  evei'more "  (comp. 
Gen.  XV.  G;  Rom.  iv.  3).  The  "covenant"  made 
with  him  is  put  into  the  same  rank  for  dignity  and 
cei  faiinty  with  that  )iy  which  the  throne  was  assured  I 
to  King  David  (Ecclus.  xlv.  25).  The  zeal  of 
Mattiithias  the  Maccabee  is  sutiicicnlly  praised  by 
a  comparison  with  tiiat  <if  "  Phinees  auainst  Zambri 


PHINEHAS 


859 


the  son  of  Salom  "  (1  Mace.  ii.  20).  The  priests 
who  returned  from  the  captivity  are  enrolled  in  the 
official  lists  as  the  sons  of  Phinehas  (Ezr.  viii.  2. 
1  Esdr.  V.  5).  In  the  Seder  Oktin  (eh.  xx.)  he  is 
identified  with  "  the  Prophet"  of  Judg.  vi.  8. 

Josephus  {Ant.  iv.  0,  §12),  out  of  the  venerable 
traditions  which  he  uses  with  such  excellent  cfl'cct, 
adds  to  the  narrative  of  the  Penfciteuch  a  statement 
that  "  so  great  was  his  courage  and  so  remarkable 
his  bodily  strength,  that  he  would  never  relinquish 
any  undertaking,  however  difficult  and  dangerous, 
without  gaining  a  complete  victory."  The  later 
Jews  are  fond  of  comparing  him  to  Elijah,  if  indeed 
they  do  not  regard  them  as  one  and  the  same  indi- 
vidual (see  the  quotations  in  Meyer,  Chron.  Hehr . 
845  ;  Fabricius,  Codex  pseudepig.  894  note). 
In  the  Targum  Pseudojonathan  of  Num.  xxv.  the 
slaughter  of  Zimri  and  Cozbi  is  accompanied  by 
twelve  miracles,  and  the  covenant  made  with  Phi- 
nehas is  expanded  into  a  promise,  that  he  shall 
be  "  the  angel  of  the  covenant,  shall  live  for  ever, 
and  shall  proclaim  redemption  at  the  end  of  the 
world."  His  Midianite  origin  (already  noticed)  is 
brought  forward  as  adding  greater  lustre  to  his  zeal 
against  Midian,  and  enhancing  his  gloi'ious  destiny. 

The  verse  which  closes  the  Book  of  Joshua  is  as- 
cribed to  Phinehas,  as  the  description  of  the  death 
of  Jloses  at  the  end  of  Deuteronomy  is  to  Joshua 
{Baba  Btdhra,  in  Fabricius,  893).  He  is  also  re- 
ported to  be  the  author  of  a  work  on  sacred  names 
(ibid.),  which  however  is  so  rare  that  Fabricius  had 
never  seen  it. 

The  succession  of  the  posterity  of  Phinehas  in 
the  high-priesthood  was  interrupted  when  Eli,  of 
the  race  of  Ithamar,  was  priest ;  but  it  was  resumed 
in  the  peison  of  Zadok,  and  continued  in  the  same 
line  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  [High 
Priest,  vol.  i.  809,  &c.]  One  of  the  members 
of  the  family — Manasseh  son  of  Johanan,  and  bro- 
ther of  Jaddua — went  over  to  the  Samaritans,  and 
they  still  boast  that  they  preserve  the  succession 
(see  theii'  Letter  to  Scaliger,  in  Eichhoru's  Reperto- 
rium,  xiii.  262). 

The  tomb  of  Phinehas,  a  place  of  great  resort  to 
both  Jews  and  Samaritans,  is  shown  at  Awertah, 
four  miles  S.  E.  of  Nablus.  It  stands  in  the 
centre  of  the  village,  enclosed  within  a  little  area  or 
compound,  which  is  overshadowed  by  the  thickly- 
trellised  foliage  of  an  ancient  vine.  A  small 
mosque  joins  the  wall  of  the  compound.  Outside 
the  village,  on  the  next  hill,  is  a  larger  enclosure, 
containing  the  tomb  of  Eleazar,  and  a  cave  ascribed 
to  Elijah,  overshadowed  by  two  venerable  terebinth 
trees,  surrounded  Ijy  arcades,  and  forming  a  retired 
and  truly  charming  spot.  'I'he  local  tradition  as- 
sei-ts  that  Awertah  and  its  neighbourhood  are  the 
"  Hill  of  Phinehas." 

In  the  Apocryphal  Books  his  name  is  given  as 
Phinees. 

2.  Second  son  of  Eli  (1  Sam.  i.  3;  ii.  34; 
iv.  4,  n,  17,  19;  xiv.  3.)  He  w:us  not  of  the 
same  line  as  his  illustrious  and  devoted  namesake, 
but  of  the  family  of  Ithamar.  [Eli.]  Phinehas 
was  killed  with  his  brother  l)y  the  Philistines  when 
the  ark  was  captured.  He  had  two  sons,  Ahitub, 
the  eldest — whose  sons  Ahijah  and  Ahimelech  were 
high-priests  at  Shiloh  and  Is'ob  in  the  time  of  Saul 
(xiv.  3) — and  Ichabod.  He  is  ifitroducetl,  apparently 
by  mistake,  in  the  genealogy  of  Ezra  in  2  Esdr.  i. 
2a.   [PiiiNEKS,  2.] 

3.  A  Levite  of  Ezra's  time  (Ezr.  viii.  33),  unless 


860 


PHISON 


the  memiing  be  that  Eleazar  was  of  the  family  of 
the  great  I'hinehas.  In  the  parallel  passage  of 
1  Esdr.  he  is  called  Phineks.  [G.] 

PHI'SON  (4>eio-a!j/  ;  Alex.  ^iiToiv  :  Phison). 
The  Greek  form  of  the  name  PiSON  (Ecclus.  xxiv. 
25J. 

PHLEG'ON  {^Kiyiov  :  Phlegon).  A  Christian 
at  Pome  whom  St.  Paul  salutes  (Pom.  xvi.  14). 
Pseudo-Hippolytus  {De  LXX.  Apostolis)  makes  him 
one  of  the  seventy  disciples  and  bishop  of  Marathon. 
He  is  said  to  have  suffered  martyrdom  on  April  8th 
(^Martyrologium  Romanum,  apud  Estium),  on  which 
day  he  is  commemorated  in  the  calendar  of  the 
Byzantine  Church.  [W.  T.  B.] 

PHOE'BE  (*oi;3jj :  Phoebe),  the  first,  and  one 
of  the  most  important,  of  the  Christian  persons  the 
detailed  mention  of  whom  fills  nearly  all  the  last 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  What  is 
said  of  her  (Rom.  xvi.  1,2)  is  worthy  of  especial  I 
notice,  because  of  its  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  | 
deaconesses  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  On  this  point  j 
we  have  to  observe,  (1)  that  the  term  ^mkovos,  [ 
here  applied  to  her,  though  not  in  itself  necessarily  ; 
an  official  term,  is  the  term  which  would  be 
applied  to  her,  if  it  were  meant  to  be  otlicial ; 
(2)  tliat  this  term  is  applied  in  the  Apostolical 
Constitutions  to  women  who  ministered  officially,  the 
deaconess  being  called  t)  StaKovos,  as  the  deacon  is 
called  6  StaKovos  ;  (3)  that  it  is  now  generally  ad- 
mitted that  in  1  Tim.  iii.  11,  St.  Paul  applies  it  so 
himself;  (4)  that  in  the  passage  before  us  Phoebe 
is  called  the  Smkovos  of  a  particular  church,  which 
seems  to  imply  a  specific  appointment;  (5)  that 
the  church  of  Cenchreae,  to  which  she  belonged, 
could  only  have  been  a  small  church :  whence  we 
may  draw  a  fair  conclusion  as  to  what  was  cus- 
tomary, in  the  matter  of  such  female  ministration, 
in  the  larger  churches ;  (6)  that,  whatever  her 
errand  to  Rome  might  be,  the  independent  manner 
of  her  going  there  seems  to  imply  (especially  when 
we  consider  the  secluded  habits  of  Greek  women) 
not  only  that  she  was  a  widow  or  a  woman  of 
mature  age,  but  that  she  was  acting  officially ; 
(7)  that  she  had  already  been  of  great  service  to 
St.  Paul  and  others  (TrpocrTaTis  xoAAaii',  Kol  i/xov 
avTOv),  either  by  her  wealth  or  her  energy,  or 
both;  a  statement  which  closely  corresponds  with 
the  description  of  the  qualifications  of  the  enrolled 
widows  in  1  Tim.  v.  10  ;  (8)  that  the  duty  which  we 
here  see  Phoebe  discharging  implies  a  personal  cha- 
racter worthy  of  confidence  and  respect.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PHOENI'CE,  PHOENICIA  {^olvIkv-  Phoe- 
nice :  rarely  in  Latin,  Phoenicia :  see  Facciolati's 
Lexicon,  s.  v.),  a  tract  of  country,  of  which  Tyre 
and  Sidon  were  the  principal  cities,  to  the  north  of 
Palestine,  along  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea  ; 
bounded  by  that  sea  on  the  west,  and  by  the  moun- 
tiiin  range  of  Lebanon  on  the  east.  The  name  was 
not  the  one  by  which  its  native  inhabitants  called 
it,  but  was  given  to  it  by  the  Greeks;  probably 
from  the  palm-tree,  ((>oIplI,  with  which  it  may 
then  have  abounded  ;  just  as  the  name  Brasil  was 
given  by  Europeans  to  a  large  territory  in  South 
America,  from  the  Brasil-wood  which  a  part  of  it 
supplied  to  Europe.  The  palm-tree  is  seen,  as  an 
emblem,  on  some  coins  of  Aradus,  Tyre,  and  Sidon ; 


PHOENICE,  PHOENICIA 

and  theie  are  now  several  p;ilm-trees  within  the  cii'- 
cuit  of  modern  Tyre,  and  along  the  coast  at  vai'ious 
points ;  but  the  tiee  is  not  at  the  present  day  one 
of  the  characteristic  features  of  the  country.  The 
native  name  of  Phoenicia  was  Keuaan  (Canaan)  or 
Kna,  signifying  lowland,  so  named  in  contrast  to  the 
adjoining  Aram,  i.e.  Higlj^and  ;  the  Hebrew  name 
of  Syria.  The  name  Kenann  is  pieserved  on  a  coin 
of  Laodicea,  of  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
whereon  Laodicea  is  styled  "  a  mother  city  in  Ca- 
naan," |y33n  DN  NDns'?^.  And  Kna  or  Chna 
(Xva)  is  mentioned  distinctly  by  Herodian*  tiie 
grammarian,  as  the  old  name  of  Phoenicia.  (See 
Tlepl  ixovi)povs  At^eais,  under  the  word  'Adrjva.) 
Hence,  as  Phoenicians  or  Canaanites  were  the  most 
powerful  of  all  tribes  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  its 
invasion  by  Joshua,  the  Israelites,  in  speaking  of 
their  own  territory  as  it  was  before  the  conquest, 
called  it  "  the  land  of  Canaan." 

The  length  of  coast  to  which  the  name  Phoenicia 
was  applied  varied  at  different  times,  and  may  be 
regarded  under  different  aspects  before  and  after 
the  loss  of  its  independence.  1.  What  may  be 
termed  Phoenicia  Proper  was  a  narrow  undulating 
plain,  extending  f'lom  the  pass  of  Pas  el-Beyad  or 
Abyacl,  the  "  Promontorium  Album  "  of  the  ancients, 
about  six  miles  south  of  Tyre,  to  the  Nahr  el-Auly, 
the  ancient  Bostrenus,  two  miles  north  of  Sidon  (Ro- 
binson's Bib.  Pes.  ii.  473).  The  plain  is  only 
28  miles  in  length,  and,  considering  the  great  im- 
portance of  Phoenicia  in  the  world's  history,  this 
may  well  be  added  to  other  instances  in  (neece, 
Italy,  and  Palestine,  which  show  how  little  the  in- 
tellectual influence  of  a  city  or  state  has  depended 
on  the  extent  of  its  territory.  Its  average  breadth 
is  about  a  mile  (Porter's  Handbook  for  Syria,  ii. 
396) ;  but  near  Sidon,  the  mountains  letreat  to  a 
distance  of  two  miles,  and  near  Tyre  to  a  distance  of 
five  miles  (Kenrick's  Phoenicia,  p.  19).  The  whole 
of  Phoenicia,  tlius  understood,  is  called  by  Josephus, 
{Ant.  V.  3,  §1),  the  great  plain  of  the  city  of  Sidon, 
rh  fx^ya  ireSiov  'XiSuvos  irSAeoi^.  In  it,  near  its 
northern  extremity  was  situated  Sidon,  in  the  north 
latitude  of  33°  34'  05"  ;  and  scarcely  more  than 
17  geographical  miles  to  the  south  was  Tyi'e,  in 
the  latitude  of  33°  17'  (Admiral  Smyth's  Mediter- 
ranean, p.  469) :  so  that  in  a  straight  line  those 
two  renowned  cities  were  less  than  20  English 
miles  distant  from  each  other.  Zarephath,  the  Sa- 
repta  of  the  New  Testament,  was  situated  between 
them,  eight  miles  south  of  Sidon,  to  which  it  belonged 
(1  K.  xvii.  9  ;  Obad.  2Q  ;  Luke  iv.  26).  2.  A  still 
longer  district,  which  afterwards  became  fairly  en- 
titled to  the  name  of  Phoenicia,  extended  up  the 
coast  to  a  point  marked  by  the  island  of  Aradus, 
and  by  Antaradus  towards  the  north ;  the  southern 
boundary  remaining  the  same  as  in  Phoenicia  Projjer. 
Phoenicia,  thus  defined,  is  estimated  by  Mr.  Grote 
(^History  of  Greece,  iii.  354)  to  have  been  about 
120  miles  in  length ;  while  its  breadth,  between 
Lebanon  and  the  sea,  never  exceeded  20  miles,  and 
was  generally  much  less.  This  estimate  is  most 
reasonable,  allowing  for  the  bends  of  the  coast ;  as 
the  direct  difference  in  latitude  between  Tyre  and 
Antaradus  (Tortosa)  is  equivalent  to  106  English 
miles  ;  and  six  miles  to  the  south  of  Tyre,  as  already 
mentioned,  intervene  before  the  beginning  of  the  pass 


"  Through  mistake,  a  sentence  of  Hcrodian,  to  Xva, 
ouTu)  yap  TTporepov  r)  ^oLvUr]  sKoAeiTO,  is  printed  iu  the 
Fragnuntc,  Historicorum  Graecorwni,  p.  17  (Paris,  1X41),  as 
an  extract  from  Hecataeus  of  Miletus,  and  is  usually  quoted 


as  from  Hecataeus.  It  is,  however,  iu  fact,  merely  the 
assertion  of  the  giauimariaii  himself;  though  it  is  most 
probable  that  he  had  in  his  mind  the  usage  of  Hecataeus. 


PHOENICE,  PHOENICIA 

of  Eds  el-Ahi/dd.  The  claim  of  the  whole  of  this 
district  to  the  name  of  Phoenicia  rests  on  the  ]iro- 
bable  i'act,  that  the  whole  of  it,  to  the  north  of 
the  great  plain  of  Sidon,  was  occupied  bv  Phoenician 
colonists ;  not  to  mention,  tliat  there  seems  to  have 
been  some  kind  of  political  connexion,  however 
loose,  between  all  the  inhabitants  (Diodorus,  xvi. 
41).  Scarcely  IG  geographical  miles  fartlier  north 
than  Sidon  was  Berytas ;  with  a  roadstead  so  well 
suited  for  the  purposes  of  modern  navigation  that, 
under  the  modern  name  of  Beirout,  it  has  eclipsed 
both  Sidou  anrl  Tyre  as  an  emporium  for  Syria. 
Whether  this  Berytus  was  identical  with  the  Be- 
rothah  and  Berothai  of  Ezekiel  xlvii.  16,  and  of 
2  Samuel  viii.  8,  is  a  disputed  point.  [Be- 
ROTiiAii.]  Still  farther  north  was  Byblus,  the 
Gebal  of  the  Bible  (Ez.  .\xvii.  9),  inhabited  by  sea- 
men and  calkers.  Its  inhabitants  are  supposed  to 
be  alluded  to  in  the  word  GUbini,  translated  "  stone- 
squarers "  in  the  authorized  version  of  1  K.  v. 
18  (32).  It  still  retains  in  Arabic  the  kindred 
name  of  Jehcil.  Then  came  Tripolis  (now  Tara- 
bulus),  said  to  have  been  tbunded  by  colonists  from 
Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Aradus,  with  three  distinct  towns, 
each  a  furlong  apart  from  one  anothei',  each  with 
its  own  walls,  and  each  named  from  the  city 
wliicli  supplied  its  colonists.  General  meetings  of 
the  Phoenicians  seem  to  have  been  held  at  Tri- 
polis (Died.  xvi.  41),  as  if  a  certain  local  jealousy 
had  prevented  the  selection  for  this  purpose  of 
Tyre,  Sidon,  or  Aradus.  And  lastly,  towards  the 
extreme  point  north  was  Aradus  itself,  the  Arvad  of 
G-en.  X.  18,  and  Ez.  xxvii.  8  ;  situated,  like  Tyre, 
on  a  small  island  near  the  mainland,  and  founded 
by  exiles  from  Sidon.  The  whole  of  Phoenicia 
Pioper  is  well  watered  by  various  streams  from  the 
adjoining  hills:  of  these  the  two  largest  are  the 
Khdsimij/eh,  a  few  miles  north  of  Tyre — the  ancient 
name  of  which,  strange  to  say,  is  not  certxriu, 
though  it  is  conjectured  to  have  been  the  Leontes — 
and  the  Bostrenus,  already  mentioned,  north  of 
Sidou.  The  soil  is  fertile,  although  now  generally 
ill-cultivated;  but  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sidon 
there  are  rich  gardens  and  orchards  ;  "  and  here," 
sa3's  Mr.  Porter,,  "are  oranges,  lemons,  tigs,  al- 
monds, plums,  apricots,  peaches,  pomegranates, 
pears,  and  bananas,  all  growing  luxuriantly,  and 
forming  a  forest  of  linely-tinted  tbliage"  {ffMidbook 
for  Syria,  ii.  398).  The  havens  of  Tyre  and  Sidon 
atforded  water  of  sufficient  depth  for  all  the  require- 
ments of  ancient  navigation,  and  the  neighbouring 
range  of  the  Lebanon,  in  its  extensive  forests,  fui- 
nished  what  then  seemed  a  nearly  inexhaustible 
supply  of  timber  for  ship-building.  To  the  north 
of  15ostrenus,  between  that  river  and  Beirout,  lies 
the  only  tileak  and  barren  part  of  Phoenicia.  It  is 
crossed  by  the  ancient  Tamyras  or  Damuras,  the 
modern  Nahr  ed-Ddmur.  From  Beirout,  the  plains 
are  again  fertile.  Tiie  principal  streams  are  tlie 
Lycus,  now  the  Nahr  cl-Kelh,  not  far  north  from 
Beirout;  the  Adonis,  now  the  Nahr  Ibrahim,  about 
five  miles  south  of  Gebal ;  and  the  Eleutherus,  now 
the  Nahr  cl-Kd'ir,  in  the  bend  between  Tripolis 
and  Antaradus. 

In  reference  to  the  period  when  the  Phoenicians 
had  lost  their  independence,  scarcely  any  two  Greek 
and  Roman  writers  give  precisely  the  same  geogra- 
phical boundaries  to  Plioenicia.  Herodotus  uses  an 
expression  which  seems  to  imply  that  he  regarded 
its  northern   extremity,  as  corresponding  with  the 

"  So  called  from  the  descendants  of  Sheni  ((Jon.  x. 
21-29);  nearly  nil  of  wliom,  as  reprofcnted  by  nations, 


PHOENICIANS 


861 


Myriandrian  Bay,  or  Bay  of  Issiis  (iv.  38).  It  is 
doiilitful  where  exactly  he  conceived  it  to  terminate 
at  tiie  south  ( iii.  5).  Ptolemy  is  distinct  in  making 
the  river  Eleutherus  the  boundary,  on  the  north, 
and  the  liver  Chorseus,  on  the  south.  The  Chorseus 
is  a  small  stream  or  torrent,  south  of  Mount  Caimel 
and  of  the  small  Canaanitish  city  Dor,  the  inha- 
bitants of  which  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  was  con- 
tessedly  unable  to  drive  out  (Judg.  i.  27).  This 
southern  line  of  Ptolemy  coincides  very  closely  with 
the  southern  boundary  of  Pliny  the  Elder,  who  in- 
cludes Dor  in  Phoenicia,  though  the  southern  boun- 
dary specilied  by  him  is  a  stream  called  Crocodilon, 
now  Nahr  Zarka,  about  two  miles  to  the  north  of 
Caesarea.  Pliny's  northern  boundary,  however,  is 
dilferent,  as  he  makes  it  include  Antaradus.  Again, 
the  geogi'apher  Strabo,  who  was  contemporary  with 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  aera,  differs  from 
Herodotus,  Ptolemy,  and  Pliny,  by  representing 
Plioenicia  as  the  district  between  Orthosia  and  Pelu- 
sium  (xvi.  21),  which  would  make  it  include  not 
only  Mount  Carmel,  but  likewise  Caesarea,  Joppa, 
and  the  whole  coast  of  the  Philistines. 

In  the  Old  Testament,  the  word  Phoenicia  does 
not  occur,  as  might  be  expected  from  its  being  a 
Greek  name.  In  the  Apocrypha,  it  is  net  defined, 
though  spoken  of  as  being,  with  Coele-Syria,  under 
one  military  commander  (2  Mace.  iii.  5,  8,  viii. 
8,  X.  11  ;  3  Mace.  iii.  15).  In  the  New  Testament, 
the  word  occurs  only  in  three  passages.  Acts  xi.  19, 
XV.  3,  xxi.  2  ;  and  not  one  of  these  affords  a  clue  as 
to  how  tar  the  wiiter  deemed  Phoenicia  to  extend. 
On  the  other  hand,  Josephus  possibly  agreed  with 
Strabo ;  for  he  expressly  says  that  Caesarea  is  situ- 
ated in  Phoenicia  {Ant.  xv.  .9,  §6)  ;  and  although 
he  never  makes  a  similar  statement  respecting  Joppa, 
yet  he  speaks,  in  one  passage,  of  the  coast  of  Syria, 
Plioenicia,  and  Egypt,  as  if  Syria  and  Phoenicia  ex- 
hausted the  line  of  coast  on  the  Mediterranean  Sea  to 
the  north  of  Egypt  (B.  J.  iii.  9,  §2).    [E.  T.] 

PHOENIC'LANS.  The  name  of  the  race  who 
in  earliest  recorded  history  inhabited  Phoenicia,  and 
who  were  the  great  maritime  and  commercial  people 
of  the  ancient  world.  For  many  centuries  they 
boie  somewiiat  of  the  same  relation  to  other  nations 
which  the  Dutch  bore,  though  less  exclusively,  to 
the  rest  of  Europe  in  the  17th  century.  They  were, 
moreover,  pre-eminent  in  colonization  as  well  as  in 
trade  ;  and  in  their  settlement  of  Carthage,  produc- 
ing the  gi-eatest  general  of  antiquity,  they  proved 
the  most  formidable  of  all  antagonists  to  Rome  in 
its  progiess  to  universal  empire.  A  complete  his- 
tory, therefore,  of  the  Phoenicians  would  occupy  a 
large  extent  of  ground  which  woidd  be  foreign  to 
the  objects  of  this  Dictionary.  Still  some  notice  is 
desiiable  of  such  an  important  people,  who  were  in 
one  quarter  the  nearest  neighbours  of  the  Israelites, 
and  indirectly  influenced  tlieir  history  in  various 
ways.  Without  dwelling  on  matters  which  belong 
more  strictly  to  the  articles  Tyrk  and  Sidon,  it 
may  be  proper  to  touch  on  certain  points  connected 
with  the  languac;e,  race,  trade,  and  religion  of  the 
Phoenicians,  which  may  tend  to  throw  light  on 
Bibliail  history  and  lilerature.  The  communica- 
tion of  letters  by  the  Phoenicians  to  the  Europe:m 
nations  will  likewise  deserve  notice. 

I.  The  Phoenician  language  belonged  to  that 
family  of  languages  which,  by  a  name  not  alto- 
gether five  from  objection,  but  now  generally 
adopted,  is  called  "  Semitic."*    Under  this  name  are 


are  known  to  have  spoki-n  cognate  languages.   There  have 
Ixcn  hitherto  two  objections  to  the  name :— 1st.  That  the 


862 


PHOENICIANS 


incluiled  three  distinct  branches: — 1st,  Arabic,  to 
which  belongs  Aethiopian  as  an  offshoot  of  the 
Southern  Arabic  or  Himyaritic.  2ndly,  Aramaic, 
the  vernacular  language  of  Palestine  at  the  time  of 
Christ,  in  which  tlie  few  original  words  of  Christ 
which  have  been  preserved  in  writing  appear  to  have 
been  spoken  (Matt,  xxvii.  46 ;  Mark  v.  4-1 ;  and  mark 
especially  Matt.  xvi.  1 8,  which  is  not  fully  significant 
either  in  G)eek  or  Hebrevv).  Aramaic,  as  used  in 
Christian  literature,  is  called  Syriac,  and  as  used  in 
the  writings  of  the  Jews,  has  been  very  generally 
called  Chaldee.  ordlv,  Hebrew,  in  which  by  far 
the  greatest  part  of  the  Old  Testament  was  com- 
posed. Now  one  of  the  most  interesting  points  to 
the  Biblical  student,  connected  with  Phoenician,  is, 
that  it  does  not  belong  to  either  of  the  two  first 
branches,  but  to  the  third ;  and  that  it  is  in  fact  so 
closely  allied  to  Hebrew,  that  Phoenician  and  He- 
brew, though  dilierent  dialects,  may  practically  be 
regarded  as  the  same  language.  This  may  be  shown 
in  the  following  way: — 1st,  in  passages  which  have 
been  frequently  quoted  (see  especially  Gesenius's 
Monumenta  Scripturae  Linguaeque  Phoeniciae,  p. 
231),  testimony  is  borne  to  the  kinship  of  the  two 
languages  by  Augustine  and  Jerome,  in  whose  time 
Phoenician  or  Carthaginian  was  still  a  living  lan- 
guage. Jerome,  who  was  a  good  Hebrew  scholar, 
after  mentioning,  in  his  Commentaries  on  Jeremiah, 
lib.  v.  c.  25,  that  Carthage  was  a  Phoenician 
colony,  proceeds  to  state — "  Unde  et  Poeni  sermone 
corrupto  quasi  Phoeni  appellantur,  quorum  lingua 
Hebraeae  linguae  magna  ex  parte  continis  est." 
And  Augustin,  who  w;w  a  native  of  Africa,  and  a 
bishop  there  of  Hippo,  a  Tyrian  colony,  has  left  on 
record  a  similar  statement  several  times.  In  one 
passage  he  says  of  the  two  languages,  "  Istae  linguae 
non  multum  inter  se  differunt"  {^Quaestiones  in 
ffeptateuchum,  vii.  16).  In  another  passage  he 
says,  "  Cognatae  sunt  istae  linguae  et  vicinae,  He- 
braea,  et  Punica,  et  Syra"  (In  Joann.  Tract.  15). 
Again,  on  Gen.  sviii.  9,  he  says  of  a  cei-tain  mode 
of  speaking  (Gen.  viii.  9),  "  Locutio  est,  quam 
propterea  Hebraeam  puto,  quia  et  Punicae  linguae 
familiarissima  est,  in  qua  multa  invenimus  Hebraeis 
verbis  consonantia "  (lib.  i.  locut.  24).  And  on 
another  occasion,  remarking  on  the  word  Messias, 
he  says,  "  quod  verbum  Punicae  linguae  consonum 
est,  sicut  alia  ffchraca  multa  et  poene  omnia" 
(Contra  liieras  Petiliani,  ii.  c.  104).  2ndly.  These 
statements  are  fully  confirmed  by  a  passage  of  Car- 
thaginian pi-eserved  in  the  Poemdns  of  Plautus, 
act  v.  scene  1 ,  and  accompanied  by  a  Latin  trans- 
lation as  part  of  the  play.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  Carthaginians  and  the  Phoenicians  were  the 
same  race ;  and  the  Carthaginian  extract  is  un- 
deniably intelligible  through  Hebrew  to  Hebrew 
scholars  (see  Bochart's  Canaan ;  and  especially  Ge- 
senius's Monumenta  Phoeniciae,  p.  357-382,  where 
the  passage  is  translated  with  notes,  and  full  justice 
is  done  to  the  previous  translation  of  Bochart). 
Srdly.  The  close  kinship  of  the  two  languages  is, 
moreover,  strikingly  confirmed  by  very  many  Phoe- 
nician and  Carthaginian  names  of  places  and  persons, 
which,  destitute  of  meaning  in  Greek  and  Latin, 


language  of  the  Elamites  and  Assyrians  (see  ver.  '22) 
belonged  to  a  different  family.  2ndly.  Tbat  tbe  Phoe- 
nicians, as  Canaanites,  are  derived  from  Ham  (Gen.  x.  6). 
If  the  recent  interpretations  of  Assyrian  inscriptions  are 
admitted  to  prove  the  identity  of  Assyrian  with  Aramaic 
or  Syrian,  tbe  objection  to  the  word  "  Semitic "  nearly 
disappears.  Mr.  Max  Miiller,  a  high  authority  on  such 
a  point,  regards  it  as  certain,  that  the  inscriptions  of 


PHOENICIANS 

through  which  languages  they  have  become  widely 
known,  and  having  sometimes  in  those  languages 
occasioned  false  etymologies,  become  really  signi- 
ficant in  Hebrew.  Thus  through  Hebiew  it  is 
known  that  Tyre,  as  Tzor,  signifies  "  a  rock,"  re- 
ferring doubtless  to  the  rocky  island  on  which  the 
city  was  situated :  that  Sidon,  as  Tziclon,  means 
"  Fishing ''  or  "  Fishery,"  which  was  probably  the 
occupation  of  its  first  settlers:  that  Cai'thage,  or,  as 
it  was  originally  called,  "  Carthada,"  means  "  New 
Town,"  or  ''  Newton  :"  and  that  Byrsa,  which,  as  a 
Greek  name,  suggested  the  etymological  mythus  of 
the  Bull's  Hide  (Aciieid,  i.  366-7),  was  simply  the 
citadel  of  Carthage — Carthaginis  arcem,  as  Virgil 
accurately  termed  it :  the  Carthaginian  name  of  it, 
softened  by  the  Greeks  into  Bup(ra,  being  mei-ely 
the  Hebrew  word  Botzi-ah,  "  citadel ;"  identical  with 
the  word  called  Bozrah  in  the  English  Version  of 
Isaiah  Ixiii.  1.  Again,  through  Hebrew,  the  names 
of  celebrated  Carthaginians,  though  sometimes  dis- 
figured by  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  acquire  a 
meaning.  Thus  Dido  is  found  to  belong  to  the 
same  root  as  David,''  "  beloved ;  "  meaning  "  his 
love,"  or  "  delight ;"  i.  e.  the  love  or  delight  either 
of  Baal  or  of  her  husband :  Hasdrubal  is  the  man 
"  whose  help  Baal  is :"  Hamilcar  the  man  whom 
the  god  "  Milcar  graciously  gi-anted "  (comp.  Ha- 
naneel ;  0e<J5copos) :  and,  with  the  substitution  of 
Baal  for  El  or  God,  the  name  of  the  renowned  Han- 
nibal is  found  to  be  identical  in  lorm  and  meaning 
with  the  name  of  Hanniel,  who  is  mentioned  in 
Num.  xxxiv.  23  as  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Jla- 
nasseh :  Hanniel  meaning  the  grace  of  God,  and 
Hannibal  the  grace  of  Baal.  4thly.  The  same  con- 
clusion arises  from  the  examination  of  Phoenician 
inscriptions,  preserved  to  the  present  day :  all  of 
which  can  be  interpreted,  with  more  or  less  cer- 
tainty, through  Hebrew.  Such  inscriptions  are  of 
three  kinds  :• — 1st,  on  gems  and  seals ;  2ndly,  on 
coins  of  the  Phoenicians  and  of  their  colonies  ; 
Srdly,  on  stone.  The  first  class  are  few,  unim 
portant,  and  for  the  most  part  of  uncertain  origin. 
The  oldest  known  coins  with  Phoenician  words 
belong  to  Tarsus  and  other  Cilician  cities,  and  were 
struck  in  the  period  of  the  Persian.domination.  But 
coins  are  likewise  in  existence  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  and 
other  cities  of  Phoenicia  ;  though  all  such  are  of  later 
date,  and  belong  to  the  period  either  of  the  Seleu- 
cidae,  or  of  the  Romans.  Moreover,  other  coins  have 
been  found  belonging  to  cities  in  Sicily,  Sardinia, 
Africa,  and  Spain.  The  inscriptions  on  stone  are 
either  of  a  public  oi-  a  private  character.  The 
former  are  comparatively  few  in  number,  but  relate 
to  various  subjects :  such,  for  example,  as  the  dedi- 
cation of  a  temple,  or  the  commemoration  of  a 
Numidiaii  victory  over  the  Romans.  The  private 
inscriptions  were  either  in  the  nature  of  votive 
tablets  erected  as  testimonials  of  gratitude  to  some 
deity,  or  were  sepulchral  memorials  engraven  on 
tombstones.  Phoenician  inscriptions  on  stone  have 
been  found  not  only  in  all  the  counti'ies  last  men- 
tioned, except  Spain,  but  likewise  in  the  island  of 
Cyprus  near  Citium,  in  Malta,  at  Athens,  at  Mar- 
seilles, and  at  Sidon.*^ 


Nineveh,  as  well  as  of  Babylon,  are  Semitic. —£€ciures  an, 
the  Science  of  Lav/juage,  p.  265. 

b  Movers  and  Fiirst,  supported  by  the  Etymologicnm 
Magnum,  adopt  "  nedida,"  or  "  nedidah,"  as  theetymo- 
logy  of  Uido,  in  the  sense  of  "  travel-tost,"  or  "  wanderer." 
Although  a  possible  derivation,  this  seems  less  probable  in 
itself,  and  less  countenanced  by  Hebrew  analogies. 

'■  In  lg3V  a  collection  of  all  Phoenician  inscriptions 


PHOENICIANS 

II.  Concerning  the  original  race  to  which  the 
Phoenicians  belonged,  nothing  can  be  known  with 
certainty,  because  thej'  are  found  already  established 
along  the  Meditei-ranean  Sea  at  the  eaiiiest  dawn  of 
authentic  liistory,  and  for  centuries  afterwards  there 
is  no  record  of  their  origin.  According  to  Herodotus 
(vii.  89),  they  said  of  themselves  in  his  time  that 
they  came  in  days  of  old  from  the  shores  of  the 
Red  Sea — and  in  this  there  would  be  nothing  in  the 
slightest  degree  improbable,  as  they  spoke  a  language 
cognate  to  that  of  the  Arabians,  who  inhaljited  the 
east  coast  of  that  sea ;  and  both  Hebrew  and  Arabic, 
a-s  well  ;is  Ai-amaie,  are  seemingly  derived  from 
some  one  Semitic  language  now  lost.  Still  neither 
the  truth  nor  the  falsehood  of  the  tradition  can  now 
be  proved  ;  for  language,  although  alibrding  strong 
presumptions  of  race,  is  not  conclusive  on  the  point, 
;is  is  shown  by  the  language  at  present  spoken  by 
the  descendants  of  the  Normans  in  France.  But 
there  is  one  point  respecting  their  race  which  can 
be  proved  to  be  in  the  highest  degree  probable,  and 
which  has  peculiar  interest  as  bearing  on  the  Jews, 
viz.  that  the  Phoenicians  were  of  the  same  race  as 
the  Canaanites.  This  remarkable  fact,  which,  taken 
in  connexion  with  the  language  of  the  Phoenicians, 
leads  to  some  interesting  results,  is  rendered  pro- 
bable by  the  following  circimistances : — 1st.  The 
native  name  of  I'hoenicia,  as  already  pointed  out, 
was  Canaan,  a  name  signifying  "  lowland."  [Phoe- 
nicia.] This  was  well  given  to  the  narrow 
slip  of  plain  between  the  Lebanon  and  the  Medi- 
terranean Sea,  in  contr;ust  to  the  elevated  mountain 
range  adjoining ;  but  it  would  have  been  inappro- 
priate to  that  ]jart  of  Palestine  conquered  by  the 
Israelites,  which  was  undoubtedly  a  hill-country 
(see  Movers,  Das  Phoenizkche  Alterthum,  Theil  1 
p.  5)  ;  so  that,  when  it  is  known  that  the  Israelites 
at  the  time  of  their  invasion  foimd  in  Palestine  a 
powerful  tribe  called  the  Canaanites,  and  from  them 
called  Palestine,  the  land  of  Canaan,  it  is  obviously 
suggested  that  the  Canaanites  came  originally  from 
the  neighbouring  yjlain,  called  Canaan,  along  the  sea- 
coast.  2ndly.  This  is  further  confirmed  through 
the  name  in  Africa  whereby  the  Caithaginian  Phoe- 
nicians called  themselves,  as  attested  by  Augustine, 
who  states  that  the  peasants  in  his  part  of  Africa, 
if  asked  of  what  race  they  were,  would  answer,  in 
Punic  or  I'hoenician,  "  Canaanites."  "  InteiTogati 
rustici  '.lostri  quid  sint,  Puiiice  respondentes,  Canani, 
corrupta  scilicet  sicut  in  fcdibiis  una  littera  (accu- 
rate enim  dicere  debebant  Chanani)  quid  aliud 
respondent  quam  Chananaei "  {Opera  Omnia,  iv. 
1235 ;  Exposit.  Epist.  ad  Horn.  §13).  3rdly. 
The  conclusion  thus  suggested  is  strongly  supported 
by  the  tradition  that  the  names  of  persons  and 
places  in  the  land  of  Canaan — not  only  when  the 
Israelites  invaded  it,  but  likewise  previously,  when 
"  there  were  yet  but  a  few  of  tliem,"  and  Abraham 
is  sai<^l  to  have  visited  it — were  Phoenician  or  He- 
brew: such,  for  example,  as  ,\bimelek,  "  Father  of 
the  king"  (Gen.  xx.  2);  Jlelchizeilek,  "King  of 
righteousness"  (xiv.  18);  Kirjath-sepher,  "city  of 
the  book"  (Josh.  xv.  15). 

then  known,  with  traiislutlons  and  notes,  was  publislied 
by  Uesenlus,  the  great  Hebrew  lexicographer,  who  l)y  liis 
vast  knowledge  and  unrivalled  cleamess  has  done  more 
than  any  one  scholar  since  Buxtorf  to  facilitate  the  study 
of  Hebrew.  His  opinion  on  the  relntlou  of  Pboenlcliin  to 
Hebrew  is:  "  Omnliio  hoc  tenendum  est,  pleraquc  ct  poene 
omnia  cum  Hebracis  convcuin-,  sive  radices  spectas,  give 
vorborum  et  formundorutn  c-t  flcctcndorum  nilionem " 
(.)/««.  I'koen.  p.  3^5). 

''  It  seems  to  bo  admitted  by  phllologoi-s  that  neither 


PHOENICIANS 


863 


As  this  obviously  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Hebrews  adopted  Phoenician  as  their  own  kngnage, 
or,  in  other  words,  that  wkit  is  called  the  Hebrew 
language  was  in  fact  "  the  language  of  Canaan,"  as 
a  prophet  called  it  (Is.  xix.  18),  and  this  not  merely 
poetically,  but  literally  and  in  philological  truth"; 
and  as  this  is  repugnant  to  some  preconceived  no- 
tions respecting  the  peculiar  people,  the  question 
arises  whether  the  Israelites  might  not  have  trans- 
lated Canaanitish  names  into  Hebrew.  On  this 
hypothesis  the  names  now  existing  in  the  Bible  for 
persons  and  places  in  the  land  of  Canaan  would  not 
be  the  original  names,  but  merely  the  translations 
of  those  names.  The  answer  to  this  question  is, 
1st.  That  there  is  not  the  slightest  direct  mention^ 
nor  any  indirect  trace,  in  the  Bible,  of  any  such  tians- 
lation.  2ndly.  That  it  is  contrary  to  the  analogy  of 
the  ordinary  Hebrew  practice  in  other  cases  ;  as,  for 
example,  in  reference  to  the  names  of  the  Assyrian 
monarchs  (pel  haps  of  a  foreign  dynasty)  Pul,  Tig- 
lath-Pileser,  Sennacherib,  or  of  the  Persian  monarchs 
Darius,  Ahasuerus,  Artaxerxes,  which  remain  un- 
intelligible in  Hebrew,  and  can  only  be  understood 
through  other  Oriental  languages.  3rdly.  That 
thei-e  is  an  absolute  silence  in  the  Bible  as  to  there 
having  been  any  dillerence  whatever  in  language 
between  the  Israelites  and  the  Canaanites,  although 
in  other  cases  where  a  difference  existed,  that  differ- 
ence is  somewhere  alluded  to,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Egyptians  (Ps.  Ixxxi.  5,  cxiv.  1),  the  Assyrians  (Is. 
xxxvi.  11),  and  the  Chaldees  (Jer.  v.  15).  Yet  in 
the  case  of  the  Canaanites  there  was  stronger  reason 
for  alluding  to  it;  and  without  some  allusion  to  it, 
if  it  had  existed,  the  narration  of  the  concjuest  of 
Canaan  under  the  leadership  of  Joshua  would  have 
been  singularly  imperfect. 

It  remains  to  be  added  on  this  point,  that  although 
the  previous  language  of  the  Hebrews  must  be 
mainly  a  matter  for  conjecture  only,  yet  it  is  most 
in  accordance  with  the  Penbiteuch  to  suppose  that 
they  spoke  originally  Aramaic.  They  came  throusjli 
Abraham,  according  to  their  traditions,  from  Ur  of 
the  Chaldees  in  Mesopotamia,  where  Aramaic  at  a 
later  period  is  known  to  have  been  spoken  ;  they 
are  instructed  in  Deuteronomy  to  say  that  an 
Aramae;tn  (Syrian)  ready  to  perish  was  their  father 
(x.wi.  5);  and  the  two  earliest  words  of  Aramaic 
contained  in  the  Bible,  Yeijar  snhudutiM,  are,  in 
the  liook  of  Genesis,  put  into  the  mouth  of  Laban, 
the  son  of  Abraham's  brother,  and  first  cousin  of 
Isaac  (xxxi.  47).^ 

III.  In  regard  to  Phoenician  trade,  as  connected 
with  the  Israelites,  the  following  points  are  worthy 
of  notice.  1.  Up  to  the  time  of  David,  not  one  of 
tiie  twelve  tribes  seems  to  have  possessed  a  single 
harbour  on  the  sea-coast:  it  was  impossilile  there- 
fore that  they  could  become  a  commercial  people. 
It  is  true  that  according  to  Judg.  i.  31,  combined 
with  Josh.  -xix.  2t>,  Accho  or  Acre,  with  its  excellent 
harbour,  had  been  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Asher ; 
but  from  the  same  ))assage  in  .Judges  it  seems  cer- 
tain that  the  tribe  of  Asher  did  not  really  obtain 
possession  of  Acre,  which  continued  to  be  held  by 

Hebrew,  Aramaic,  nor  Arabic,  is  derived  the  one  from  the 
iithor;  just  as  the  same  may  be  said  of  Italian,  Spanish, 
and  Portuguese  (see  Lewis,  On  the  limnance  Languages, 
p.  42).  Jt  is  a  question,  however,  which  of  the  three 
languages,  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  and  Arabic,  is  likely  to  re- 
semble most  the  original  Semitic  language.  Fiirst,  one 
of  the  best  Aramaic  scholars  now  living,  is  in  favour  of 
Aramaic  ({.eliigehiiude  <Ur  Aramiiisdun  Idiome,  p.  2).  • 
Hut  his  opinion  has  been  strongly  impugned  in  favour  of 
Hebrew  (Bleek's  Kiiileittntg  in  <Uis  J.  T.  p.  7C). 


864 


PHOENICIANS 


the  CanfUinit.es.  However  wistfully,  therefore,  the 
Israelites  might  regard  the  wealth  accruing  to  tlieir 
neighbours  the  Phoenicians  from  trade,  to  vie  with 
them  in  this  respect  was  out  of  the  question.  But 
from  the  time  that  David  had  conquered  Edom,  an 
opening  for  trade  was  aflbrded  to  the  Israelites. 
The  command  of  Ezion-geber  near  Elath,  in  the 
land  of  Edom,  enabled  them  to  engage  in  the  navi- 
gation of  the  Red  Sea.  As  they  were  novices, 
however,  at  sailing,  as  the  navigation  of  the  Red 
Sea,  owing  to  its  currents,  winds,  and  rocks,  is 
dangerous  even  to  modem  sailors,  and  as  the  Phoe- 
nicians, during  the  period  of  the  independence  of 
Edom,  were  probably  allowed  to  trade  from  Ezion- 
geber,  it  was  politic  in  Solomon  to  permit  the  Phoe- 
nicians of  Tyre  to  have  docks,  and  build  ships  at 
Ezion-geber  on  condition  that  his  sailors  and  vessels 
might  "^have  the  benefit  of  their  experience.  The 
results  seem  to  have  been  strikingly  successful. 
The  Jews  and  Phoenicians  made  profitable  voyages 
to  Ophir  in  Arabia,  whence  gold  was  imported  into 
Judaea  in  large  quantities ;  and  once  in  three  years 
still  loncrer  vovages  were  made,  by  vessels  which 
may  possiblv  have  touched  at  Ophir,  though  their 
imports  were  not  only  gold,  but  likewise  silver, 
ivory,  apes,  and  peacocks,  1  K.  x.  22.  [TarshiSH.] 
There  seems  at  the  same  time  to  have  been  a  great 
direct  trade  with  the  Phoenicians  for  cedar-wood 
(ver.  27),  and  generally  th.e  wealth  of  the  kingdom 
reached  an  unprecedented  point.  If  the  union  of 
the  tribes  had  been  maintained,  the  whole  sea-coast 
of  Palestine  would  have  atibrded  additional  sources 
of  revenue  through  trade;  and  perhaps  even  ulti- 
mately the  "  great  plain  of  Sidon"  itself  might  have 
formed  part  of  the  united  empire.  But  if  any  pos- 
sibilities of  this  kind  existed,  they  were  destroyed 
by  the  disastrous  secession  of  the  ten  tribes;  a 
heavy  blow  from  which  the  Hebrew  race  has  never 
yet  recovered  during  a  period  of  nearly  3000  years.* 
2.  After  the  division  into  two  kingdoms,  the 
curtain  falls  on  any  commercial  relation  between 
the  Israelites  and  Phoenicians  until  a  relation  is 
brought  to  notice,  by  no  means  brotherly,  as  in  the 
fleets' which  navigatal  the  Red  Sea,  nor  fiiendly,  as 
between  buyers  and  sellers,  but  humiliating  and 
exasperating,  as  between  the  buyers  and  the  bought. 
The  relation  is  meant  which  existed  between  the 
two  nations  when  Israelites  were  sold  as  slaves  by 
Phoenicians.  It  was  a  custom  in  antiquity,  when 
one  nation  went  to  war  against  another,  for  mer- 
chants to  be  present  in  one  or  other  of  the  hostile 
camps,  in  order  to  purchase  prisoners  of  war  as 
slaves.  Thus  at  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  when 
a  laro-e  army  was  sent  by  Lysias  to  invade  and  sub- 
due the  land  of  Judah,  it  is  related  that  "  the 
merchants  of  the  country,  hearing  the  fame  of 
them,  took  silver  and  gold  very  much  with  servants, 
and  came  into  the  camp  to  buy  the  children  of  Israel 
for  slaves"  (1  Mace.  iii.  41),  and  when  it  is  related 
that,  at  tlie  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Antiochus  Epi- 
i)hane,s,  the  enomious  nmnber  of  40,000  men  were 
slain  in  battle,  it  is  added  that  there  were  "  no  fewer 


■^  After  the  disruption,  the  period  of  union  was  looked 
back  to  with  endless  longing. 

f  In  Joel  iii.  6  (Heb.  iv.  6),  "  sons  of  the  lonians,"  i.e. 
of  the  Greeks,  is  tlie  most  natural  translation  of  Benei- 
Yaioanim.  Rut  there  is  a  Yawan  mentioned  in  Arabia 
Felix,  and  there  is  still  a  Yawan  in  Yemen:  and 
both  Crcdner  and  Flirst  think  that,  looking  to  Am. 
i.  9,  an  Arabian  people,  and  not  Grecians,  are  here 
alluded  to.  'the  threat,  however,  of  sellinj^  the  Phoe- 
nicians in   turn   to  the  Sabaeans,   "a  people  far  off," 


PHOENICIANS 

sold  than  slain"  (2  Mace.  v.  14;  Credner's  Joel, 
p.  240).  Now  this  practice,  which  is  thus  illus- 
trated by  details  at  a  much  later  period,  tnidoubt- 
ed!y  prevailed  in  earlier  times  (Odyssey,  xv.  427  ; 
Herod,  i.  1),  and  is  alluded  to  in  a  threatening 
manner  against  the  Phoenicians  by  the  prophets 
(Joel  iii.  4,  and  Am.  i.  9,  10),  about  800  years 
before  Christ.*  The  circumstances  which  led  to  this 
state  of  things  may  be  thus  explained.  After  the 
division  of  the  two  kingdoms,  there  is  no  trace  of 
any  friendly  relation  between  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
and  the  Phoenicians:  the  interest  of  the  latter 
rather  led  them  to  cultivate  the  friendship  of  the 
kingdom  of  Israel ;  and  the  Israelitish  king,  Ahab, 
had  a  Sidonian  princess  as  his  wife  (1  K.  xvi.  31). 
Now,  not  improbably  in  consequence  of  these  rela- 
tions, when  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah  endeavourcil 
to  restore  the  trade  of  the  Jews  in  the  Red  Sea,  and 
for  this  purpose  built  large  ships  at  Ezion-geber  to 
go  to  Ophir  for  gold,  he  did  not  admit  the  Phoeni- 
cians to  any  participation  in  the  venture,  and  when 
king  Ahaziah,  Ahab's  son,  asked  to  have  a  share  in 
it,  his  request  was  distinctly  refused  (1  K.  xxii. 
48,  49).  That  attempt  to  renew  the  trade  of  the 
Jews  in  the  Red  Sea  failed,  and  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoram,  Jehoshaphat's  son,  Edom  revolted  from 
Judah  and  estabhshed  its  independence;  so  that  if 
the  Phoenicians  wished  to  despatch  trading  vessels 
from  Ezion-geber,  Edom  was  the  power  which  it 
was  mainly  their  interest  to  conciliate,  and  not  Judah. 
Under  these  circumstances  the  Phoenicians  seem, 
not  only  to  have  purchased  and  to  have  sold  again 
as  slaves,  and  probably  in  some  instances  to  have 
kidnapped  inhabitants  of  Judah,  but  even  to  have 
sold  them  to  their  enemies  the  Edomites  (Joel, 
Amos,  as  above).  This  was  regarded  with  reason  as 
a  departure  from  the  old  brotherly  covenant,  when 
Hiram  was  a  great  lover  of  David,  and  subsequently 
had  the  most  friendly  commercial  relations  with 
David's  son  :  and  this  may  be  regarded  as  the  ori- 
ginal foundation  of  the  hostility  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets  towards  Phoenician  Tyre.  (Is.  xxiii. ;  Ez. 
xxviii.) 

3.  The  only  other  notice  in  the  Old  Testament 
of  trade  between  the  Plioenicians  and  the  Israelites 
is'  in  the  account  given  by  the  prophet  Ezekiel  of 
the  trade  of  Tyre  (xxvii.  17).  While  this  account 
supplies  valuable  information  respecting  the  various 
commercial  dealings  of  the  most  illustrious  of  Phoe- 
nician cities  [Tvre],  it  likewise  makes  direct  men- 
tion of  the  exports  to  it  from  Palestine.  These 
were  wheat,  honey  (_i.  e.  syrup  of  grapes),  oil,  and 
balm.  The  export  of  wheat  deserves  attention  (con- 
cerning the  other  exports,  see  Honey,  Oil,  Balm), 
because  it  shows  how  important  it  must  have  been 
to  the  Phoenicians  to  maintain  fi-iendly  relations 
with  their  Hebrew  neighbom's,  and  especially  with 
the  adjoining  kingdom  of  Israel.  The  wheat  is  ailled 
wheat  of  Minnith,e  which  was  a  town  of  the  Am- 
monites, on  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  only  once 
mentioned  elsewhere  in  the  Bible:  and  it  is  not 
certain  whether  Jlimiith  was  a  great  inland  empo- 


which  seems  to  imply  that  the  Yawanim  were  tint  "  far 
off,"  tends  to  make  it  improbable  that  the  Yawanim 
were  near  the  Sabaeans,  as  they  would  have  been  in 
Arabia  Felix. 

e  In  ver.  17  the  word  "  Pannag  "  occurs,  which  is  not 
found  elsewhere.  Opinions  are  divided  as  to  whether  it 
is  the  name  of  a  place,  like  Minnith,  or  the  name  of  an 
article  of  food ;  "  sweet  cake,"  for  example.  Perhaps  no 
one  can  really  do  more  than  make  a  guess  en  the  point, 
'the  evidence  for  cacli  meaning  is  inconclusive. 


PHOENICIANS 

riuin,  whei-e  large  purchases  of  corn  were  made,  or 
whethei-  the  wheat  in  its  neiglibourhood  was  pecu- 
liarly good,  and  gave  its  name  to  all  wheat  of  a 
certain  fineness  in  quality.     Still,   whatever  may 
be  the  correct  explanation  respecting  Minnith,  the 
only  countries  sjieciried  for  exports  of  wheat  are 
Judah  and  Israel,  and  it  was  through  the  territoiy 
of  Israel  that  the  wheat  would  be  imported  into 
Phoenicia.     It  is  suggested  by  Heeron  in  his  His- 
torical Researches,  ii.  117,  that  the  fact  of  Pales- 
tine being  thus,  as  it  were,  the  gi-anary  of  Phoenicia, 
explains  in  the  clearest  manner  the  lasting  peace 
that  prevailed  between  the  two  countries.     He  ob- 
serves that  with  many  of  the  other  adjoining  nations 
the  Jews  lived  in  a  state  of  almost  continual  war- 
fare ;  but  that  they  never  once  engaged  in  hosti- 
lities with  their  nearest  neighbours  the  Phoenicians. 
The  fact  itself  is  certainly  worthy  of  special  notice  ; 
and   is  the  more  remarkable,  as    there  were   not 
wanting  tempting  occasions  for  the  interference  of 
the  Phoenicians  in  Palestine  if  they  had  desired  it. 
When   Elijah    at    the    brook   Kishon,  at    the  dis- 
tance of  not  more  than   thirty  miles  in  a  straight 
line   from   Tyre,  put   to    death    450   prophets  of 
Baa^  (I  K.  xviii.  40),  we    can  well  conceive  the 
agitation  and  anger  which  such  a  deed  must  have 
produced  at  Tyre.     And  at  Sidon,  more  especially, 
which    was    only    twenty    miles    farther    distant 
from    the    scene   of   slaughter,   the   first   impulse 
of  the   inhabitants   must    have    been    to    march 
forth   at   once  in   battle  array  to  strengthen   the 
hands  of  Jezebel,  their   own    princess,    in    behalf 
of  Baal,  their  Phoenician  God.     When  again  after- 
wards, bv  means  of  falsehood  and  treachery ,  Jehu  was 
enabled  to  massacre  the  worshippers  of  Baal  in  the 
land  of  Israel,  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  intelligence 
was  received  in  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  the  other  cities  of 
Phoenicia,  with  a  similar  burst  of  horror  and  indig- 
nation to  that  with  which  the  news  of  the  Massacre  on 
St.  Bartholomew's  day  was  received  in  all  Protestant 
counti  ies ;  and  there  must  have  been  an  intense  desire 
in  the  Phoenicians,  if  they  had  the  power,  to  invade 
the  teriitories  of  Israel  without  delay  and   inflict 
signal  chastisement  on  Jehu  (2  K.  x.  18-28).     The 
fact  that  Israel  was  their  granaiy  would  undoubt- 
edly have  been  an  element  in  restraining  the  Phoe- 
nicians, even  on  occasions  such  as  these  ;  but  pro- 
bably still  deeper  motives  were   likewise   at  work. 
It  seems  to  have  been  part  of  the  settled  policy  of 
the   Phoenician  cities  to  avoid  attempts  to  make 
conquests  on  the  continent  of  Asia.     For  this  there 
were  excellent  reasons  in  the  position  of  their  small 
territoiy,  which  with  the  range  of  Lebanon  on  one 
side  as  a  barrier,  and  the  sea  on  the  other,  was 
easily  defensible  by  a  wealthy  power  having  com- 
mand   of    tlie    sea,   against   second   or    third-rate 
powers,  but  for  the  same  reason  was  not  well  situ- 
ated for  oU'ensive  war  on  the  land  side.     It  may 
be  added  that  a  pacilic  policy  wa.s  their  manifest 
interest  as  a  commercial  nation,  unless  by  war  they 
were  morally  certain  to  obtain  an  important  acces- 
sion of  territory,  or  unlass  a  warlike  policy  was  an 
absolute  necessity  to  prevent  the  formidable  pre- 
ponderance of  any  one  great  neighbour.     At  last, 
indeed,  they  even  carried  their  system  of  non-inter- 
vention in  contiiieutal  wars  too  tar,  if  it  would  have 
been  possible  for  them  by  any  alliances  in  Syria 
and  Coele-Syria  to   prevent  the  establishment  on 
the  other  snle  of  the  Lebanon  of  one  gr&at  emjjire. 
For  from  that  moment  their  ultimate  doom  was 
certain,  and  it  was  merely  a  (juestion  of  time  as  to 
the  arrival  of  the  fatal  hour  when  they  wouM  lose 

VOL.   II. 


PHOENICIANS 


865 


their  independence.  But  too  little  is  known  of  the 
details  of  their  history  to  warrant  an  opinion  as  to 
whether  they  might  at  any  time  by  any  course  of 
policy  have  raised  up  a  barrier  against  the  empire 
of  the  Assyrians  or  Clialdees. 

IV.  The  religion  of  the  Phoenicians  is  a  subject 
of  vast  extent  and  considerable  perplexity  in  details, 
but  of  its  general  features  as  bearing  upon  the 
religion  of  the  Hebrews  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
As  opposed  to  Jlonotheism,  it  was  a  Pantheistical 
personification  of  the  forces  of  nature,  and  in  its 
most  philosophical  shadowing  forth  of  the  Supreme 
powers,  it  may  be  said  to  have  represented  the 
male  and  female  principles  of  production.  In  its 
popular  form,  it  was  especially  a  worship  of  the  sun, 
moon,  and  five  planets,  or,  as  it  might  have  been 
expressed  according  to  ancient  notions,  of  the  seven 
planets — the  most  beautiful,  and  perhaps  the  most 
natural,  form  of  idolatry  ever  presented  to  the 
human  imagination.  These  planets,  however,  were 
not  regarded  as  lifeless  globes  of  matter,  obedient  to 
physical  laws,  but  -as  intelligent  animated  powers, 
influencing  the  human  will,  and  controlling  human 
destinies.  An  account  of  the  different  Phoenician 
gods  named  in  the  Bible  will  be  fiund  elsewhere 
[see  BAA.L,  ASHTAROTH,  AsHERAH,  &c.]  ;  but  it 
will  be  proper  here  to  point  out  certain  eHects  which 
the  circumstance  of  their  being  worshipped  in  Phoe- 
nicia produced  upon  the  Hebrews. 

1.  In  the  first  ])lace,  their  worship  was  a  constant 
temptation  to  Polytheism  and  idolatry.  It  is  the  gene- 
ral tendency  of  trade,  by  making  merchants  acquainted 
with  different  countries  and  various  modes  of  thought, 
to  enlarge  the  mind,  to  promote  the  increase  of 
knowledge,  and,  in  addition,  by  the  wealth  whii^h 
it  diffuses,  to  afford  opportunities  in  various  ways 
i  for  intellectual  culture.  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted 
that,  owing  to  these  circumstances,  the  Phoenicians, 
as  a  great  commercial  people,  were  more  generally 
intelligent,  and  as  we  should  now  say  civilized,  than 
the  inland  agricultural  population  of  Palestine. 
When  the  simple-minded  Jews,  therefore,  came  in 
contact  with  a  people  more  versatile  and,  appa- 
rently, more  enlightened  than  themselves,  but  who 
nevertheless,  either  in  a  philosophical  or  in  a  popular 
form,  admitted  a  system  of  Polytheism,  an  influence 
would  be  exerted  on  Jewish  minds,  tending  to  make 
them  regard  their  exclusive  devotion  to  their  own 
one  God,  Jehovah,  however  transcendant  His  attri- 
butes, as  unsocial  and  morose.  It  is  in  some  such 
way  that  we  must  account  for  the  astonishing  fact 
that  Solomon  himself,  the  wisest  of  the  Hebrew 
race,  to  whom  Jehovah  is  expressly  stated  to  have 
appeared  twice — once,  not  long  after  his  marriage, 
with  an  Egyptian  princess,  on  the  night  after  his 
sacrificing  1000  burnt  offerings  on  the  high  place 
of  Gibeon,  and  the  second  time,  after  the  consecra- 
tion of  the  Temple —should  have  been  so  far  beguiled 
by  his  wives  in  his  old  age  as  to  become  a  Poly- 
theist,  worshipping,  among  other  deities,  the  Phoe- 
nician or  Sidonian  goddess  Ashtaroth  (1  K.iii.  1-5, 
ix.  2,  xi.  1-5).  This  is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  so 
interpreted,  as  if  he  ever  ceased  to  worship  Jehovah, 
to  whom  he  had  erected  the  magnificent  Temple, 
which  in  history  is  so  generally  connected  with 
Solomon's  name.  Probably,  according  to  his  own 
erroneous  conceptions,  he  never  cexsed  tb  regard 
himself  ius  a  loyal  woi-shipper  of  Jehovah,  but  he  at 
the  same  time  deemed  this  not  incompatible  with 
sacrificing  at  the  altars  of  other  gods  likewise. 
Still  the  fact  remains,  that  Solomon,  who  by  his 
Temple   in    it.s  ultimate  results  did  so  much  for 

3   K 


866 


PHOENIOIAXS 


establishing  the  doctrine  of  one  only  God,  died 
himselt"  a  practical  Polytheist.  And  if  this  was 
the  case  with  him,  Polytheism  in  other  sovereigns 
of  inferior  excellence  can  excite  no  surprise.  With 
such  an  example  before  him,  it  is  rro  wonder  that 
Ahah,  an  essentially  bad  man,  should  after  his 
marriage  with  a  Sidonian  princess  not  only  openly 
tolerate,  but  encourage,  the  worship  of  Baal ;  though 
it  is  to  be  remembered  even  in  liim,  that  he  did  not 
disavow  the  authority  of  Jehovah,  but,  when  re- 
buked ly  his  great  antagonist  Elijah,  he  rent  his 
clothes,  iuid  put  sackcloth  on  his  flesh,  and  showed 
other  signs  of  contrition  evidently  deemed  sincere 
(1  K.  xvi.  31,  xxi.  27-29).  And  it  is  to  be  obsen-ed 
generally  that  although,  before  the  reformation  of 
Josiah  (2  K.  xxiii.),  Polytheism  prevailed  in  Judah 
as  well  as  Israel,  yet  it  seems  to  have  been  more 
intense  and  universal  in  Israel,  as  might  have  been 
expected  from  its  greater  proximity  to  Phoenicia : 
and  Israel  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  if  it  had  set 
the  bad  example  to  Judah  (2  K.  xvii.  19  ;  Jer.  iii.  8) : 
though,  considering  the  example  of  Solomon,  this 
cannot  be  accepted  as  a  strict  historical  statement. 

2.  The  Phoenician  religion  was  likewise  in  other 
respects  deleterious  to  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine, 
being  in  some  points  essentially  demoralizing.  For 
example,  it  sanctioned  the  dreadful  superstition  of 
burning  children  as  sacrifices  to  a  Phoenician  god. 
"  They  have  built  also,"  says  Jeremiah,  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  ''xix.  5),  "  the  high  places  of  Baal, 
to  bLirn  their  sons  with  fire  for  burnt  oU'erings  unto 
Baal,  which  I  commanded  not,  nor  spake  it,  neither 
came  it  into  my  mind"  (comp.  Jer.  xxxii.  35). 
This  hori'ible  custom  was  probably  in  its  origin 
founded  on  the  idea  of  sacrificing  to  a  god  what 
was  best  and  most  valuable  in  the  eyes  of  the 
suppliant  ;••  but  it  could  not  exist  without  having  a 
tendency  to  stifle  natural  feelings  of  atlcction,  and 
to  harden  the  heart.  It  could  scarcely  have  been 
first  adopted  otherwise  than  in  the  infancy  of  the 
Phoenician  race  ;  but  grown-up  men  and  grown-up 
nations,  with  their  moral  feelings  in  other  respects 
cultivated,  are  often  the  slaves  in  particular  points 
of  an  early-implanted  superstition,  and  it  is  worthy 
of  note  that,  more  than  250  years  after  the  death 
of  Jeremiah,  the  Carthaginians,  when  their  city  was 
besieged  by  Agathocles,  offered  as  burnt  sacrifices  to 
the  planet  Saturn,  at  the  public  expense,  200  boys 
of  the  highest  aristocracy;  and,  subsequently,  when 
they  had  obtained  a  victory,  sacrificed  the  most  beau- 
tiful captives  in  the  like  manner  (Diod.  xx.  14,  65). 
If  such  things  were  possible  among  the  Cartha- 
ginians at  a  period  so  much  later,  it  is  easily  con- 
ceivable how  common  the  practice  of  sacrificing 
children  may  have  been  at  the  time  of  Jeremiah 
among  the  Phoenicians  generally :  and  if  this  were 
so,  it  would  have  been  certain  to  prevail  among 
the  Israelites  who  worshipped  the  same  Phoenician 
gods ;  especially  as,  owing  to  the  interman-iages  of 
their  fbrefathei's  with  Canaanites,  there  were  pro- 
bably few  Israelites  who  may  not  have  had  some 
Phoenician  blood  in  their  veins  (Judg.  iii.  5). 
Again,  parts  of  the  Phoenician  religion,  especially 


h  Whatever  else  the  arrested  sacrifice  of  Isaac  sym- 
bolizes (Gen.  xxii.  ]3\  it  likewise  symbolizes  the  substi- 
tution in  sacrifices  of  the  inferior  animals  for  children. 
Faith,  if  commanded,  was  ready  to  sacrifice  even  children ; 
but  the  Hebrews  were  spared  this  dreadful  trial,  and  were 
permitted  to  substitute  sheep,  and  goats,  and  bulls. 

>  In  Hebrew  there  is  a  root  Kadam,  from  which  is 
Kedem,  a  noun  with  the  double  meaning  of  the  "ICast" 
and  "ancient  time."     With  the  former  sense,  Cadmus 


PHOENICIANS 

the  worship  of  Astarte,  tended  to  encourage  disso- 
luteness in  the  relations  of  the  sexes,  and  even  to 
sanctify  impurities  of  the  most  abominable  descrip- 
tion. Connected  with  her  temples  and  images 
there  were  male  and  female  prostitutes,  whose 
polluted  gains  foi-med  part  of  the  sacred  fund 
appropriated  to  the  service  of  the  goddess.  And, 
to  complete  the  deification  of  immorality,  they 
were  even  known  by  the  name  of  the  "  consecrated." 
Nothing  can  show  more  clearly  how  deeply  this 
baneful  example  had  eaten  into  the  hearts  and  habits 
of  the  people,  notwithstanding  positive  prohibitions 
and  the  repeated  denunciations  of  the  Hebrew  pi-o- 
phets,  than  the  almost  incredible  fact  that,  previous 
to  the  reformation  of  Josiah,  this  class  of  persons 
was  allowed  to  have  houses  or  tents  close  to  the 
temple  of  Jehovah,  whose  treasury  wj.s  perhaps 
even  replenished  by  their  gains.  (2  K.  xxiii.  7  ; 
Deut.  xxiii.  17,  18  ;  1  K.  xiv.  24,  xv.  12,  xxii.  46  ; 
Hos.  iv.  14  ;  Job  xsxvi.  14 ;  Lucian,  Lucius,  35, 
De  Bed  Syrd,  27,  51  ;  Gesenius,  Thesaurus,  s.  v. 
ti'lp,  p.  1196  ;  Movers,  Pkoenizier,  i.  p.  678,  kc.  ; 
Spencer,  De  Lcgibus  Hchraeorum,  i.  p.  561.) 

V.  The  most  important  intellectual  invention  of 
man,  that  of  letters,  was  universally  asserted  by 
the  Greeks  and  Romans  to  have  been  communicated 
by  the  Phoenicians  to  the  Greeks.  Tlie  earliest 
written  statement  on  the  subject  is  in  Herodotus, 
V.  57,  58,  who  incidentally,  in  giving  an  account  of 
Harmodius  and  Aristogeiton,  says  that  they  were 
by  race  Gephyraeans ;  and  that  he  had  ascertained 
by  inquiry  that  the  Gephyraeans  were  Phoenicians, 
amongst  those  Phoenicians  who  came  over  with 
Cadmus'  into  Boeotia,  and  instructing  the  Greeks  in 
many  other  arts  and  sciences,  taught  them  likewise 
letters.  It  was  an  easy  step  from  this  to  believe,  as 
many  of  the  ancients  believed,  that  the  Phoenicians 
invented  letters. 

"  Phoenices  primi,  famae  si  creditur,  ausi 
ilansuram  rudibus  vocem  signare  figuris." 

LucAx's  Fharsal.  iii.  220,  221. 

This  belief,  however,  was  not  universal ;  and  Pliny 
the  Elder  expresses  his  own  opinion  that  they  were 
of  Assyrian  origin,  while  he  relates  the  opinion  of 
Gellius  that  they  were  invented  by  the  Egyptians, 
and  of  others  that  they  were  invented  by  the 
Syrians  {Nat.  Hist.  vii.  .57).  Now,  as  Phoenician 
has  been  shown  to  be  nearlv  the  same  language  as 
Hebrew,  the  question  arises  whether  Hebrew  throws 
any  light  on  tb.e  time  or  the  mode  of  the  invention 
of  letters,  on  the  question  of  who  invented  them,  or 
on  the  universal  belief  of  antiquity  that  the  know- 
ledge of  them  was  communicated  to  the  Greeks  by 
the  Phoenicians.  The  answer  is  as  follows:  Hebrew 
literature  is  as  silent  as  Greek  literature  respecting 
the  precise  date  of  the  invention  of  letters,  and  the 
name  of  the  inventor  or  inventors ;  but  the  names 
of  the  letters  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet  are  in 
accordance  with  the  belief  that  the  Phoenicians 
communicated  the  knowledge  of  letters  to  the 
Greeks :  for  many  of  the  names  of  letters  in  the 
Greek  alphabet,  though  without  meaning  in  Greek, 


might  mean  "  Eastern,"  or  one  from  the  East,  like  the 
name  "Norman,"  or  "Fleming,"  or,  still  more  closely,  the 
"  Western."  or  "  Southern,"  in  English.  With  the  latter 
sense  for  Kedem,  the  name  would  mean  "Olden"  or 
"  Antient,"  and  an  etymological  significance  might  be 
given  to  a  line  of  Sophocles,  in  which  Cadmus  is  men- 
tioned : 

'n  TiKi'o.  KaSjJiov   Tou    IT  a.  \  a.  I,   via,  Tpo<J)i/. 

Oedij).  Tyr.  1. 


PHOENICIANS 

have  a  moaning  in  the  covresponding  letters  of 
Hebrew.  For  exannile :  the  four  first  letters  of 
the  Greek  alphaliet,  Alpha,  Bet;;,  Gamma,  Delta, 
are  not  to  be  explained  through  the  Greek  language  ; 
but  the  corresponding  four  first  letters  of  the  He- 
brew alphabet,  viz.  Aleph,  Beth,  Gimel,  Daleth, 
being  essentially  the  s;mie  words,  are  to  be  explained 
in  Hebrew.  Thus  in  Hebrew  Aleph  or  Eleph 
means  an  ox ;  Beth  or  Bayith  a  house ;  Gamal  a 
camel  ;  and  Deleth  a  door.  And  tlie  same  is 
essentially,  though  not  always  so  clearly,  the  case 
with  almost  all  the  sixteen  earliest  Greek  letters 
said  to  have  been  brought  over  from  Phoenicia  by 
Cadmus,  ABTAEFlKAMNOnPST;''  and 
called  on  this  account  Phoenician  or  Cadmeian 
letters  {Herodut.  1.  c.  ;  Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  vii.  57; 
Jelfs  Greek  Gram.  i.  p.  2).  Moreover,  as  to 
wilting,  the  ancient  Hebrew  letters,  substantially 
the  STime  as  Phoeniciiin,  agree  closely  with  ancient 
Greek  letters — a  fact  which,  taken  by  itself,  would 
not  prove  that  the  Greeks  received  them  from  the 
Phoenicians,  as  the  Phoenicians  might  possibly  have 
received  them  from  the  Greeks;  but  which,  viewed 
in  connexion  witli  Greek  traditions  on  the  subject, 
and  with  the  significance  of  the  letters  in  Hebrew, 
seems  reasonably  conclusive  that  the  letters  were 
transported  from  Phoenicia  into  Greece.  It  is  true 
that  modern  Hebrew  writing  and  the  later  Greek 
writing  of  antiquity  have  not  much  resemblance  to 
e;ich  other  ;  but  this  is  owing  partly  to  gradual 
changes  in  the  writing  of  Greek  letters,  and  partly 
to  the  fact  that  the  character  in  which  Hebrew  Bibles 
are  now  printed,  called  the  Assyrian  or  square  charac- 
ter, was  not  the  one  originally  in  nse  among  the  Jews, 
but  seems  to  have  been  learnt  in  the  Babylonian 
cjiptivity,  and  afterwards  gradually  adopted  by  them 
on  their  return  to  Palestine.  (Gesenius,  Geschichte 
der  Hehrdischen  Sprache  nnd  Schrift,  p.  156.) 

As  to  the  mode  in  which  letters  were  invented, 
some  clue  is  afibrded  by  some  of  the  early  Hebrew 
and  the  Phoenician  characteis,  which  evidently 
aimed,  although  very  rudely,  like  the  drawing  of 
very  young  children,  to  represent  the  object  which 
the  name  of  the  letter  signified.  Thus  the  earliest 
Alplia  has  some  vague  resemblance  to  an  ox's  head, 
Gimel  to  a  camel's  back,  Daleth  to  the  door  of  a 
tent,  Van  to  a  hook  or  peg.  Again,  the  written 
letters,  called  respectively.  Lamed  (an ox-goad),  Ayin 
(an  eye),  Qoph  (the  back  of  the  head),  lieish  or  Koash 
(the  head),  andTav  (across),  are  all  efforts,  more  or 
less  successful,  to  pourtray  the  things  signified  by 
the  names.  It  is  said  that  this  is  equally  true  of 
Egyptian  phonetic  hieroglyphics  ;  but,  however  this 
may  be,  there  is  no  difiiculty  in  understanding  in 
this  way  tlie  formation  of  an  alphabet ;  when  the 
idea  of  representing  the  component  sounds  or  half- 
sounds  of  a  word  by  figures  w;is  once  conceived. 
But  the  original  idea  of  thus  representing  sounds, 
though  jicculiarly  felicitous,  was  by  no  means 
obvious,  and  millions  of  men  lived  and  died  without 
its  occurring  to  any  one  of  them. 

In  conclusion,  it  may  not  be  unimportant  to 
observe  that,  although  so  many  lettei-s  of  the  (ireek 
alphabet  have  a  meaning  in  Hebrew  or  Phoenician, 

■t  The  siNth  letter,  aflerwards  disused,  and  now  gene- 
rally known  by  the  name  of  Digauuna  (t'roui  Dlonysius,  i. 
211),  was  unquestionably  the  same  as  the  Hebrew  letter 
Van  (a  hook). 

ni  The  strongest  argument  of  Cieseiilus  against  the 
Aramaic  invention  of  the  letters  is,  that  although  duuhtlcss 
many  of  the  nauips  are  both  Aramaic  and  Hebrew,  some 
of  them  are  not  Aramaic ;  at  least,  not  in  the  Hebrew 


PHOENICIANS 


867 


vet  their  Greek  names  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  or 
Phoenician,  but  in  the  Aramaic  form.     There  is  a 
peculiar  form  of  the  noun  in  Aramaic,  cidled  by 
grammarians  the  status  emphaticits,  in  which  the 
termination  d  (N  )  is  added  to  a  noun,  modii'ving 
it  according  to  certain  laws.     Originally  this  termi- 
nation  was   probably  identical   with    the   definite 
article  "  ha ;"  which,  instead  of  being  prefixed,  was 
subjoined  to  the  noun,  as  is  the  case  now  with  the 
definite  article  in  the  Scandinavian  languages.    This 
form  in  a  is  found  to  exist  in  the  oldest  specimen 
of  Aramaic   in    the   Bible,   Yeqar   suhadtitha.,  in 
Genesis   .xxxi.    47,  where  saJiaduth,  testimony,  is 
used  by  Laban  in  the  status  emphaticus.     Now  it 
is  worthy  of  note  tiiat  tlie  names  of  a  considerable 
proportion    of    the    "  Cadmeian    letters "    in   the 
Greek  alphabet   are   in    this   Aramaic  form,  such 
as  Alpha,  Beta,  Gamma,  Delta,  Et;i,  Theta,  Iota, 
Kappa,  Lamda ;  and  although  this  fact  by  itself  is 
not  sufficient  to  support  an  elaborate  theory  on  the 
subject,  it  seems  in  favour,  as  fiir  as  it  goes,  of  the 
conjecture  that  when  the  Greeks  originally  received 
the  knowledge  of  letters,  the  names  by  which  the 
several  letters  were  taught  to  them  were  Aramaic. 
It  has  been  suggested,  indeed,  by  Gesenius,  that  the 
Greeks  themselves  made  the  addition  in  all  these 
cases,  in  order  to  give  the  words  a  Greek  termina- 
tion, as  "they  did  with  other  Phoenician  words, 
as  melet,  juctXfla,  nevel,  vd^Ka."     If,  however,  a 
list  is  examined  of  Phoenician  words  naturalized  in 
Greek,  it  will  not  be  found  that  the  ending  in  a 
has   been  the  favourite   mode  of  accommodating 
them  to  the  Greek  language.      For  example,  the 
following    sixteen   words   are   specified    by    Bleek 
{Einleitimg  in  das  A.  T.,  p.  69),  as  having  been 
communicated    through    the    Phoenicians    to    the 
Greeks :    vdp'Sos  =  ncred  ;     Kivvdp(iii.i.ov  =  kinna- 
mon ;  ffdn<peipos  =  sapplr  ;  /.lippa,  /xvpoi/  =  mor  ; 
Karrla,     Kacraia.  =  ketziah  ;      vaawiTos  —  ezov  ; 
Ki^avos,  XipavwTSs  =  levou.ih ;   ^vaaos  =  biltz; 
Kvyuvov  =  kaninion ;  fxdvi/a  —  man  ;  (pvKos  =  puk ; 
ffvKdfiivos  =  shikniah;  vd^Xa  —  novel;  Kivvpa  — 
kinuor  ;    kcIjUtjAox  =  gamal  ;    appa^dv  —  eravon. 
Now  it  is  lemaikable  that,  of  these  sixteen,  only  four 
end  in  a  in  Greek  which  have  not  a  similar  tei mi- 
nation  in  Hebrew  ;  and,  of  these  four,  one  is  a  late 
Alexandrine   translation,    and   two   are    names   of 
musical  instruments,  which,  very  probably,  may 
first  have  been  communicated  to  Greeks,  through 
Syrians,  in  Asia  Minor.     And,  under  any  circum- 
stances, the  proportion  of  the   Phoenician  words 
which  end  in  a  in  Greek  is  too  small  to  warrant 
the  inference    that  any   connnon   piacfici,'  of  the 
Gi'ceks  in  this  respect  will  account  for  the  seem- 
ing fact  that  nine  out  of  the  sixteen  Cadmeian  letteis 
are  in  the  Aramaic  status  emphaticus.    The  infer- 
ence, therefore,    from   their  endings  in  o  remains 
unshaken.     Still  this  must  not  be  regarded  in  any 
way  as  proving  that  tiio  alphabet  was  invented  by 
those  wiio  spoke  the  Aramaic  language.    This  is  a 
wholly  distinct  question,  and  far  more  obscure ; 
though  much  deference  on  the  ])oint  is  due  to  the 
opinion  of  Gesenius,  who,  from  the  internal"  evi- 
dence  of  the  names  of  the  Semitic   letters,  has 


signification :  while  the  Syrians  use  other  words  to  express 
the  same  ideas.  Thus  apX  '"  Aramaic  means  only  1000, 
and  not  an  ox;  the  word  for  "door"  in  Aramaic  is  not 
Tw^'  but  yin  '■  while  the  six  following  nanus  of  Cad- 
meian letters  are  not  Aramaic :  'W,  1^1,  D">0,  J^Q  (Syr. 

D-13).  Flip,  in- 

3  K  2 


868 


PHOEOS 


arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  they  wei-e  invented 
by  the  Phoenicians  {Paldographie,  p.  294). 

Litendnre. — In  English,  see  Kenrick's  Plioe- 
niaia,  London,  1855  :  in  Latin,  the  second  part 
of  Bochart's  Geoijraphia  Sacra,  under  the  title 
"  Canaan,"  and  Gesenius's  work,  Scripturae  Lin- 
guneqwe  Phoeniciae  Monumenta  quotqnot  supersunt, 
Lipsiae,  1837  :  in  German,  the  exhaustive  work 
of  Jlovers,  Die  Phocnizier,  and  Das  Phoenizische 
Altcrtimm,  5  vols.,  Berlin,  1841-1856  ;  an  article 
on  the  same  subject  by  Movers,  in  Ersch  and  Grn- 
ber's  Enci/clopae'dia,  and  an  article  in  the  same 
work  by  Gesenius  on  Palaoqraphie.  See  likewise, 
Gesenius's  Geschichte  der  Hehrdischen  Sprachc  una 
Schrift,  Leipzig,  1S15  ;  Bleck's  Einleitumj  in  das 
Alte  Testament,  Berlin,  1860.  Phoenician  inscri]i- 
tions  discovered  since  the  time  of  Gesenius  have 
been  published  by  Judas,  £tiule  demonstrative  de 
la  lanijuc  Pheiiicienne  et  de  la  langue  Lihyque, 
Paris,  1847,  and  forty-five  other  inscriptions  have 
been  published  by  the  Abbe  Bourgade,  Paris,  1852, 
fol.  In  1845  a  votive  tablet  was  discovered  at 
Marseilte,  respecting  which  see  Movers'  Phoeni- 
zische Texte,  1847.  In  1855,  an  inscription  was 
discovered  at  Sidon  on  the  sarcophagus  of  a  Sidonian 
king  named  Eschmunazar,  respecting  which  see 
Dietrich's  Zn-ei  Sidonische  Insc/viften,  und  eine 
alte  Phoenizische  Koniijsinschrtft,  Marburg,  1855, 
and  Ewald's  Erkldrung  der  grossen  Phoenizischen 
Tnschrift  von  Sidon,  Gottingen,  1856,  4to. ;  from 
the  seventh  volume  of  the  Abhandlungen  der  Ko- 
niglicher  Gcsellschaft  zu  Gottingen.  Information 
re.'pecting  these  works,  and  others  on  Phoenician 
inscriptions,  is  given  by  Bleek,  pp.  64,  65.  [E.  T.] 

PHOR'OS  (*rfpo$  :  Phares,  Ford)  -  Parosh 
(1  Esdr.  V.  9,  ix.  26). 

PHRYG'IA  (*pu7ia:  Phnjgia).  Perhaps  there 
is  no  geograpliical  tinui  in  the  New  Testament  which 
is  less  capable  of  an  exact  definition.  Many  maps 
convey  the  impression  that  it  was  co-ordinate  with 
such  terms  as  Bithynia,  Cilicia,  or  Galatia.  But  in 
fact  there  was  no  Roman  province  of  Phrygia  till 
considerably  after  the  first  establishment  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor.  The  word 
was  rather  ethnologic^il  than  political,  and  denoted, 
in  a  vague  manner,  the  western  jiart  of  the  central 
region  of  that  peninsula.  Accordingly,  in  two  of  the 
three  places  where  it  is  used,  it  is  mentioned  in  a 
manner  not  intendeil  to  be  ]ii-pcise  {5ieX66vTes  rrjv 
^pvyia:/  Kol  Triv  ra\o.TLKi]V  x'^pav,  Acts  xvi.  6  ; 
SifOX'^H-^'^os  Ka0£|f)s  Tr]V  TaAaTiK^v  x'^f""'  'f ' 
^pvyiav,  Acts  xviii.  23),  the  former  having  reference 
to  the  second  missionary  journey  of  St.  Paul,  the  latter 
to  the  third.  Nor  is  the  remaining  passage  (Acts 
ii.  10)  inconsistent  with  this  view,  the  enumeration 
of  those  foreign  Jews  who  came  to  Jerusalem  at 
Pentecost  (though  it  does  follow,  in  some  degree,  a 
geographical  order)  having  no  reference  to  political 
boundaries.  By  Phrygia  we  must  understiuid  an 
extensive  district,  which  contributed  portions  to 
several  Roman  provinces,  and  varying  portions  at 
diffisrent  times.  As  to  its  physi&al  characteristics, 
it  was  generally  a  table-land,  but  with  considerable 
variety  of  appearance  and  soil.  Several  towns  men- 
tioned in  the  New  Testament  were  Phrygian  towns  ; 
such,  for  instance,  as  Iconium  and  Colossae :  but  it 
is  better  to  class  them  with  tlie  provinces  to  whicli 
they  politically  belonged.  All  over  this  district  the 
Jews  were  probably  numerous.  They  were  first 
introduced  there  by  Antiochus  the  Great  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  3,  §4)  :  and  we  have  abundant  proof  of  their 


PHUT,  PUT 

presence  there  from  Acts  xiii.  14,  xiv.  1,  19,  as  well 
as  from  Acts  ii.  10.  [See  Philip,  834  a.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

PHUD  (4>oi;S)  =  Phut  (Jud.  ii.  23;  comp.  Ez. 
xxvii.  10). 

PHU'RAH  (nnS:  ^apd:  Phard).  Gideon's 
sei'vant,  probably  his  armour-bearer  (comp.  1  Sam. 
xiv.  Ij,  who  accompanied  him  in  his  midnight  visit 
to  the  campof  tlie  Midiauites  (Judg.  vii.  lU,  11). 

PHU'RIM  {tSiv  ^povpai :  phurim),  Esth.  xi.  1. 
[PUKIM.] 

PHUT,  PUT  (D-12:  *ou5,  Aleves:  Phuth, 
Phut,  Lihyes,  Libya,  Africa),  the  third  name  in 
the  list  of  the  sons  of  Ham  (Gen.  x.  6  ;  1  Chr.  i.  8j, 
elsewhei'e  applied  to  an  African  country  or  peoi)le. 
In  the  list  it  follows  Cush  and  Mizraim,  and  pre- 
cedes Canaan.  The  settlements  of  Cush  extended 
from  Babylonia  to  Ethiopia  above  Egypt,  those  of 
Mizraim  stretched  from  the  Philistine  tei'ritory 
through  Egypt  and  along  the  noitheru  coast  of 
Africa  to  the  west ;  and  the  Canaanites  were  esta- 
blished at  first  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  but  after- 
wards were  spread  abroad.  The  order  seems  to  be 
ascending  towai'ds  the  north :  the  Cushite  chain  of 
settlements  being  the  most  southern,  the  Mizraite 
chain  extending  above  them,  though  perhaps  through 
a  smaller  region,  at  least  at  the  first,  and  the  Ca- 
naanites holding  the  most  northern  position.  We 
cannot  place  the  tract  of  Phut  out  of  Africa,  and  it 
would  thus  seem  that  it  was  almost  parallel  to  that 
of  the  Mizraites,.as  it  could  not  be  further  to  the 
north  :  this  position  would  well  agree  with  Libya. 
But  it  must  be  recollected  that  the  order  of  the 
nations  or  tribes  of  the  stocks  of  Cush,  Mizraim, 
and  Canaan,  is  not  the  same  as  that  we  have  in- 
ferred to  be  that  of  the  princijxil  names,  and  that  it 
is  also  possible  that  Phut  may  be  mentioned  in  a 
supplementary  manner,  perhaps  as  a  nation  or 
country  dependent  on  Egypt. 

The  few  mentions  of  Phut  in  the  Bible  cleaily 
indicate,  as  already  remarked,  a  country  or  people 
of  Africa,  and,  it  must  be  added,  probably  not  far 
from  Egypt.  It  is  noticeable  that  they  occur  only 
in  the  list  of  Noah's  descendants  and  in  the  pro- 
phetical Sciiptures.  Isaiah  probably  makes  men- 
tion of  Phut  as  a  remote  nation  or  country,  wheie 
the  A.  V.  has  Pdl,  as  in  the  Masoretic  text 
(Is.  Ixvi.  19).  Nahum,  warning  Nineveh  by  the 
fall  of  No-Amon,  speaks  of  Cush  and  Mizraim  as 
the  strength  of  the  Egyptian  city,  and  Phut  and 
Lubim  as  its  helpers  (iii.  9).  Jeremiah  tells  of 
Phut  in  Necho's  army  with  ('ush  and  the  Ludim 
(xlvi.  9).  Ezekiel  speaks  of  Phut  with  Persia  and 
Lud  as  supplying  mercenaries  to  Tyre  (xxvii.  10), 
and  as  sharing  with  Cush,  Lud,  and  other  helpers 
of  Egypt,  in  her  fall  (xxx.  5)  ;  and  again,  with 
Persia,  and  Cush,  perhaps  in  the  sense  of  merce- 
naries, as  warriors  of  the  aniiy  of  Gog  (xxxviii.  5). 

From  these  pass;iges  we  cannot  infei'  anything  as 
to  the  exact  position  of  this  country  or  jjeople ; 
unless  indeed  in  Nahum,  Cush  and  Phut,  Mizraim 
and  Lubim,  are  respectively  connected,  which  might 
in<licate  a  position  south  of  Egypt.  Tlie  serving  in 
the  Egyptian  army,  and  importance  of  Phut  to 
Egypt,  make  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  its  posi- 
tion was  very  near. 

In  the  aucient  Egyptian  inscriptions  we  fiml  two 
names  that  may  be  compared  to  the  Biblical  Phut. 
The  tribes  or  peoples  called  the  Nine  Bows,  IX 
PETU  or  IX  NA-PET(J,  might  partly  or  wholly 
represent  Phut.  Their  situation  is  doubtful,  and 
they  are  never  four.d  in  a  geographical  list,  but  only 


PHUT,  PUT 

in  the  general  statements  of  the  power  and  prowess 
of  the  kings.  If  one  people  be  indicated  by  them, 
we  may  compare  the  Naphtuhim  of  the  Bible. 
[Xaphtuhim.]  It  seems  unlii<eiy  that  the  Nine 
Bows  should  correspond  to  Phut,  as  their  name 
does  not  occur  as  a  geographical  tenii  in  use  in  the 
directly  historical  inscriptions,  though  it  may  be 
supposed  that  several  well-known  names  there  take 
its  place  as  those  of  individual  tribes;  but  this  is 
an  improbable  fxplanation.  The  second  name  is 
that  of  Nubia,  TO- PET,  "  the  region  of  the  Bow," 
also  called  TO-MEliU-PET,  "  tlie  region,  the  island 
of  the  Bow,"  whence  we  conjecture  the  name  of 
Meroe  to  come.  In  the  geographical  lists  the  latter 
form  occuis  in  that  of  a  peojjle,  ANU-MEItU-PET, 
found,  unlike  all  others,  in  the  lists  of  the  southern 
peoples  and  countries  as  well  as  the  northern.  The 
chaiacter  we  read  PET  is  an  unstrung  bow,  which 
tuitil  lately  was  read  KENS,  as  a  strung  bow  is 
found  following,  as  if  a  determinative,  the  latter 
word,  which  is  a  name  of  Nubia,  perhaps,  however, 
not  including  so  large  a  territory  as  thn  names 
belbre  mentioned.  The  reading  KENS  is  extremely 
doubtful,  because  the  word  does  not  signify  bow  in 
Egyptian,  as  tar  as  we  are  aware,  and  still  more 
because  the  bow  is  used  as  the  determinative  of  its 
name  PET,  which  from  the  Egyptian  usage  as  to 
determinatives  makes  it  almost  imjwssible  that  it 
should  be  employed  as  a  determinative  of  KENS. 
The  name  KENS  would  therefore  be  followed  by 
the  bow  to  indicate  that  it  was  a  part  of  Nubia. 
This  subject  may  be  illustrated  by  a  passage  of 
Herodotus,  explained  by  Mr.  Harris  of  Alexandria, 
if  we  premise  that  the  unstrung  bow  is  the  com- 
mon sign,  and,  like  the  strung  bow,  is  so  used  as 
to  be  tlie  symbol  of  Nubia.  The  historian  relates 
that  the  kmg  of  the  Ethiopians  unstrung  a  bow, 
and  gave  it  to  the  messengers  of  Cambyses,  telling 
them  to  say  that  when  the  king  of  the  Persians 
could  pull  so  strong  a  bow  so  easily,  he  might  come 
against  the  Ethiopians  with  an  army  stronger  than 
their  forces  (iii.  21,  22,  ed.  Rawlinson:  Sir  G. 
Wilkinson's  note).  For  the  hieroglyphic  names  see 
Bi'ugsch's  Geogr.  Inschr. 

The  Cojitic  Hl4)<5>I^T'  must  also  be  com- 
pared with  Phut.  The  first  syllable  being  the  article, 
the  word  nearly  resembles  the  Hebrew  name.  It  is 
applied  to  the  westein  part  of  Lower  Egypt  beyond 
the  Delta;  and  Champoilion  conjectures  it  to  mean 
the  Libyan  part  of  Egypt,  so  called  by  the  Creeks, 
comparing  the  Coptic  name  of  the  similar  eastern 

portion,  'f'^.p^.JS.I^.,    T^.pi.£.IA.,    the 

older  Arabian  part  of  Egypt  and  Arabian  Nome 
{L'L'iii/pto  sous  Ics  I'haraons,  ii.  pp.  28-31,  24o). 
Be  this  as  it  may,  the  name  seems  nearer  to 
NArnTUiiiM  than  to  Phut.  To  take  a  broad  view 
of  the  question,  all  the  names  which  we  have  men- 
tioned may  be  reasonably  connected  with  the  Hebrew 
Phut ;  and  it  may  be  sup])oscd  that  the  Naph- 
tuhim were  Mizraitcs  in  the  territory  of  Phut, 
I)erhaps  intermixed  with  peoples  of  the  latter  stock. 
it  is,  however,  leasonablc  to  suj)iiose  that  the  PET 
of  the  ancient  Egyptian;;,  as  a  geograi)hical  desig- 
nation, corresponds  to  the  Phut  of  the  Bible,  which 
would  theiefore  denote  Nubia  or  the  Nubians,  the 
former,  if  we  aie  strictly  to  follow  the  Egyptian 
ii>age.  This  identification  wouM  account  for  the 
position  of  Phut  after  Mizraim  in  the  list  in  (ie- 
•.lesi.s,  notwithstanding  the  order  of  the  other  names ; 
tor   Nubia   has   been   Irom  remote   times  a  depcnd- 


PI-BESETH 


869 


ency  of  Egypt;,  excepting  in  the  short  periotl  of 
Ethiopian  supremacy,  and  the  longer  time  of  Ethi- 
opian independence.  The  Egyptian  name  of  Cush, 
KEESH,  is  ap])lied  to  a  wider  region  well  corre- 
sponding to  Ethiopia.  The  governor  of  Nubia  in 
the  time  of  the  Phai-aohs  was  called  Prince  of 
KEESH,  perhaps  beamse  his  authoiity  extended 
beyond  Nubia.  The  identification  of  Phut  with 
Nubia  is  not  repugnant  to  the  mention  in  the  pro- 
phets :  on  the  contrary,  the  great  import<ance  of 
Nubia  in  their  time,  which  compiehended  that  of 
the  Etliiopiaii  supremacy,  would  account  for  their 
speaking  of  Phut  as  a  support  of  Egypt,  and  as 
furnishing  it  with  warriors. 

The  identification  with  Libya  has  given  rise  to 
attempts  to  find  the  name  in  African  geography, 
which  we  shall  not  here  examine,  as  such  mere  simi- 
larity of  sound  is  a  most  unsafe  guide.      [K.  S.  P.] 

PHU'VAH  (n-ia  :  ^ovd  :  Phua).    One  of  the 

sons  of  Issachar  (Gen.  xlvi.  13),  and  founder  of 
the  family  of  the  Punites.  In  the  A.  V.  of  Num. 
xxvi.  23  he  is  called  I'UA,  though  the  Heb.  is  tlie 
same;  and  in  1  Chr.  vii.  1,  Puah  is  another  form 
of  the  name. 

PHYGEL'LUS  {^vyeWos,  or  ^vyf\oi:  Phi- 
gelits),  2  Tim.  i.  15.  A  (Christian  connected  with 
those  in  Asia  of  whom  St.  Paul  speaks  as  turned 
away  from  himself.  It  is  open  to  question  whether 
their  repudiation  of  the  Apostle  was  joined  with  a  de- 
clension from  the  faith  (see  Buddaeus,  Eccl.  ApostoL 
ii.  310),  and  whether  the  open  display  of  the  feeling 
of  Asia  took  place — at  least  so  far  as  Phygellus  and 
Hermogenes  were  concerned — at  Rome.  It  was  at 
Rome  that  Onesiphorus,  named  in  the  next  verse, 
showed  the  kindness  for  which  the  Apostle  invokes 
a  blessing  on  his  household  in  Asia :  so  perhaps  it 
was  at  Rome  that  Phygellus  displayed  that  change 
of  feeling  towards  St.  Paul  which  the  Apostle's 
former  followere  in  Asia  avowed.  It  seems  unlikely 
that  St.  Paul  would  write  so  forcibly  if  Phygellus 
had  merely  neglected  to  visit  him  in  his  captivity 
at  Rome.  He  may  have  forsaken  (see  2  Tim.  iv. 
16)  the  Apostle  at  some  critical  time  when  his  sup- 
port was  expected :  or  he  may  have  been  a  leader* 
of  some  party  of  nominal  Christi;ms  at  Rome,  such 
as  the  Apostle  describes  at  an  earlier  period  (Phil, 
i.  15,  16)  opposing  him  there. 

Dean  Ellicott,  on  2  Tim.  i.  15,  who  is  at  variance 
with  the  ancient  Greek  commentatore  as  to  the 
exact  force  of  the  phrase  "  they  which  are  in  Asia," 
states  vaiious  opinions  concerning  their  aversion 
from  St.  Paul.  The  Apostle  himself  seems  to  have 
fbieseen  it  (Acts  xx.  30) ;  and  there  is  nothing  in 
the  fact  inconsistent  with  the  general  picture  of  the 
state  of  Asia  at  a  later  period  which  we  have  in  tiie 
first  three  chapters  of  the  Revelation.  [VV.  T.  B.] 
PHYLACTERY.  [Frontlets.] 
PI-BESETH  (npn-^2  :  Bui&acrro^  :  Bu- 
bastxs),  a  town  of  Lower  Egyi>t,  mentioned  but 
once  in  the  Bible  (Ez.  xxx.  17  i.  In  liieroglyphi<'s 
its  name  is  written  BAHEST,  P.AST,  and  H.\- 
BAHEST,  followed  by  the  determinative  sign  tor  an 
Egyptian  city,  which  was  prolwldy  not  pronounced. 

The  Coptic  forms  are   B^cf",  with   the  article 

ni  prefixed,  IToTE^-CTe,  ITo-r- 
^i-cf,  <i>o'r£^.coi.  Bo-vA.cT-1. 

rio')f<?^C'^,  and  the  (ireek,  Bov^aari^,  Bov- 
/3a<rTos.     The  first  and  second  hieioglyphic  names 


870 


PI-BESETH 


ai-e  tlie  same  as  those  of  the  goddess  of  the  place, 
and  the  third  signifies  tlie  abode  of  BAilE.ST,  that 
goddess.  It  is  probable  that  BAHEST  is  an  archaic 
mode  of  writing,  and  that  the  word  was  always  pio- 
nouuced,  as  it  was  sometimes  written,  BAST.  It 
seems  as  if  the  civil  name  was  BAHEST,  and  the 
sacred,  HA-BAHEST.  It  is  difficult  to  trace  the 
first  syllable  of  the  Hebrew  and  of  the  Coptic 
and  Greek  forms  in  the  hieroglyphic  equivalents. 
There  is  a  similar  case  in  the  names  HA-HESAR, 

RoTCipi,  rTcyCipi,  Boiffipis,  Busiris. 
Di-.  Brugsch  and  ^\.  Deveria  read  PE  or  PA,  in- 
stead of  HA  ;  but  this  is  not  proved.  It  may  be 
coujectured  that  in  pronunciation  the  masculine 
detiuite  article  PEPA  or  PEE  was  prefi.ted  to  HA, 
as  could  be  done  in  Coptic :  in  the  ancient  language 
the  word  appears  to  be  common,  whereas  it  is  mas- 
culine in  the  later.  Or  it  may  be  suggested  that 
the  first  syllable  or  first  letter  was  a  prefix  of  the 
vulgar  dialect,  for  it  is  frequent  in  Coptic.  The 
name  of  Philae  may  perhaps  atiiird  a  third  explana- 
tion, for  it  is  written  EELEK-T,  EELEK,  and 
P-EELEK  (Brugsch,  Geogr.  Inschr.  i.  156,  Nos. 
626,  627) ;  whence  it  would  seem  that  the  sign 
city  (not  abode)  was  common,  as  in  the  first  form  the 
feminine  article,  and  in  the  last,  the  masculine  one, 
is  used,  and  this  would  admit  of  the  reading 
PA-BAST,  "  the  [city]  of  Bubastis  [the  goddess]." 
Bubastis  was  situate  on  the  west  bank  of  the 
Pelusiac  or  Bubastite  branch  of  the  Nile,  in  the 
Bubastite  uome,  about  40  miles  from  the  central 
part  of  Jlemphis.  Herodotus  speaks  of  its  site  as 
having  been  raised  by  those  who  dug  the  canals  for 
Sesostris,  and  afterwards  by  the  labour  of  criminals 
under  Sabacos  the  Ethiopian,  or,  rather,  the  Ethio- 
pian dominion.  He  mentions  the  temple  of  the  god- 
dess Bubastis  as  well  worthy  of  description,  being 
more  beautiful  than  any  other  known  to  him.  ft 
lay  in  the  mitlst  of  the  city,  which,  having  been  raised 
on  mounds,  overlooked  it  on  every  side.  An  arti- 
ficial canal  encompassed  it  with  the  waters  of  the 
Nile,  and  was  beautified  by  trees  on  its  bank.  There 
was  only  a  narrow  approach  leading  to  a  lofty  gate- 
,  way.  'J"he  enclosure  thus  formed  was  surrounded 
by  a  low  wall,  bearing  sculptures  ;  within  w:is  the 
temple,  surrounded  by  a  grove  of  fine  trees  (ii. 
1.'57,  138).  .Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  observes  that 
the  ruins  of  the  city  and  temple  confinn  this 
account.  The  height  of  the  mounds  and  the  site 
of  the  temple  are  very  leraarkable,  as  well  as 
the  beauty  of  the  latter,  which  was  "  of  the 
finest  led  granite."  It  "  was  surrounded  by  a 
sacred  enclosure,  about  600  feet  square  .  .  .  beyond 
which  was  a  larger  circuit,  measuring  9-10  i'eet  by 
1200,  containing  the  minor  one  and  the  canal." 
The  temple  is  entirely  ruined,  but  the  names  of 
l.'ameses  11.  of  the  xixth  dynasty,  Userkeu  I.  (Osor- 
chon  I.)  of  the  xxiind,  and  Nekht-hai-heb  (Necta- 
iiebo  I.)  of  the  xxxth,  have  been  found  here,  as  well 
as  that  of  the  eponymous  goddess  BAST.  There 
are  also  remains  of  the  ancient  houses  of  the  town, 
and,  "  amidst  the  houses  on  the  N.W.  side  are  the 
thick  walls  of  a  foi't,  which  protected  the  temple 
below"  (Notes  by  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  in  Rawlinson's 
//e/wMMS,  vol.  ii.  pp.219, plmi, and  102).  Bubastis 
thus  liad  a  fort,  besides  being  strong  from  its  height. 


»  1.  D'St^'D,  from  n3^.  "behold,"  wnh  }2N  ;  Ak^o; 
(TKOTrds ;  insignis  lapis  ^Lev.  xxvi.  1);  A.  V.' "  figured 
stone"  (.\iim.  xxxiii.  52);  aKOTrid;  tilulus.  In  Kz.  viii. 
12,  witli  ~lTn  ;  KoLTuv  KpviTTos;  obscondHum  cubiculi\ 
A.  V".  "chamber  of  imagoiy ;"  LuUier,  schiinsten  kammer. 


PIECE  OF  GOLD 

The  goddess  BAST,  who  was  here  the  chief  object 
of  worship,  was  the  same  as  PESHT,  the  goddess 
of  fire.  Both  names  accompany  a  lion-headed  figure, 
and  the  cat  was  sacred  to  them.  Herodotus  con- 
siders the  goddess  Bubastis  to  be  the  same  as  Arte- 
mis (ii.  137),  and  that  this  was  the  cun-ent  opinion 
in  Egypt  in  the  Greek  period  is  evident  from  the 
name  Speos  Artemidos  of  a  rock  temple  dedicated 
to  PESHT,  and  probably  of  a  neighbouring  town 
or  village.  The  historian  speaks  of  the  annual  fes- 
tival of  the  goddess  held  at  Bubastis  as  the  chief 
and  most  largely  attended  of  the  Egyptian  festivals. 
It  was  evidently  the  most  popular,  and  a  scene  of 
great  licence,  like  the  great  Bluslim  festival  of  the 
Seyyid  el-Bedawee  celebrated  at  Taiiteh  in  the  Delta 
(ii.  59,  60). 

There  are  scarcely  any  historical  notices  of  Bu- 
bastis in  the  Egyptian  annals.  In  Jlanetho's  list 
it  is  related  that  in  the  time  of  Boethos,  or  Bochos, 
first  king  of  the  iind  dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  2470),  a 
chasm  of  the  earth  opened  at  Bubastis,  and  many 
perished  (Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd  ed.  pp. 
98,  99).  This  is  remarkable,  since  though  shocks 
of  earthquakes  are  frequent  in  Egypt,  the  actual 
earthquake  is  of  very  rare  occurrence.  The  nest  event 
in  the  list  connected  with  Bubastis  is  the  accession 
of  the  xxiind  dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  990),  a  line  of 
Bubastite  kings  (Ibid.  pp.  124,  125).  These  were 
either  foreigners  or  partly  of  foreign  extraction,  and 
it  is  probable  that  they  chose  Bubastis  as  their 
capital,  or  as  an  occasional  residence,  on  account  of 
its  nearness  to  the  military  settlements.  [MiG- 
DOL.]  Thus  it  must  have  been  a  city  of  great 
importance  when  Ezekiel  thus  foretold  its  doom : 
"  The  young  men  ot'  Aven  and  of  Pi-beseth  shall 
fall  by  the  sword:  aud  these  [cities]  shall  go  into 
captivity  "  (xxx.  17).  Heliopolis  and  Bubastis  are 
near  together,  and  both  in  the  route  of  an  invader 
from  the  East  marching  against  Memphis.  [R.  S.  P.] 
PICTUEE."  In  two  of  the  three  passages  in 
which  "picture"  is  used  in  A.  V.  it  denotes 
idolatrous  representations,  either  independent  images, 
or  more  usually  stones  "  poitrayed,"  i.e.  sculptured 
in  lo\V  relief,  or  engraved  and  coloured  (Ez.  xxiii. 
14;  Layard,  Nin.<y  Bab.  ii.  306,  308).  Movable 
pictures,  in  the  modern  sense,  were  doubtless  un- 
known to  the  Jews ;  but  coloured  sculptures  and 
drawings  on  walls  or  on  wood,  as  mummy-cases, 
must  have  been  familiar  to  them  in  Egypt  (see 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  277).  In  later  times  we 
read  of  portraits  {elK6vas),  perhaps  busts  or  intagli 
sent  by  Alexandra  to  Antony  (Joseph.  Ant.  -sw.  2, 
§6).  The  "pictures  of  silver"  of  Prov.  xxv.  11, 
were  probably  wall-surtaces  or  cornices  with  carv- 
ings, and  the  "apples  of  gold"  representations  of 
fruit  or  foliage,  like  Solomon's  flowers  and  pome- 
granates (1  K.  vi.,  vii.).  The  walls  of  Babylon 
were  ornaniented  with  pictures  on  enamelled  brick. 
[Bricks.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PIECE  OF  GOLD.  The  A.  V.,  in  rendering 
the  elliptical  expression  "sis  thousiuid  of  gold,"  in 
a  passage  respecting  Naaman,  relating  that  he 
"took  with  him  ten  talents  of  silver,  and  six  thou- 
sand of  gold,  and  ten  changes  of  raiment"  (2  K. 
V.  5) — supplies  "  pieces  "  as  the  word  understood. 
The  sirjilar  expression  respecting  silver,  in  which 


2.  n'SK',  from  same  root  (Is.  ii.  16) ;  Oca.  (ttAoioji-)  ko-K- 
Aous ;  quod  visa  pulchrum  est^  Prov.  xxv.  11,  "Apples 
of  gold  in  pictiu-es  of  silver  ;"  J,XX.  ev  bp;j.ic-Ka)  (rapSiuv  ; 
in  lectis  argenteis ;  Luther,  Scluilen. 


PIECE  OF  SILVER 

the  word  understood  appears  to  be  shekels,  probalily 
justifies  the  insertion  of  that  definite  word.  [PiKCii 
OF  Silver.]  The  same  expression,  if  a  weight 
of  gold  be  here  meant,  is  also  found  in  the  follow- 
ing passage :  "  And  king  Solomon  made  two  hun- 
dred targets  [of]  beaten  gold :  six  hundred  of  gold 
went  to  one  target"  (1  K.  x.  IG).  Here  the  A.  V. 
supplies  the  word  "  shekels,"  and  there  seems  no 
doubt  that  it  is  right,  considering  the  number 
mentioned,  and  that  a  common  weight  must  be 
intended.  That  a  weight  of  gold  is  meant  in 
Kaaman's  ca.se  may  be  inferred,  because  it  is  ex- 
tremely unlikely  that  coined  money  was  already 
invented  at  the  time  referred  to,  and  indeed  that 
it  was  known  in  Palestine  before  the  Persian  period. 
[Money  ;  Daric]  Kings  or  ingots  of  gold  may 
have  been  in  use,  but  we  are  scarcely  warranted  in 
supposing  that  any  of  them  bore  the  name  of  shekels, 
since  the  practice  Wii-s  to  weigh  money.  The  render- 
ing "pieces  of  gold"  is  therefore  very  doubtful; 
and  "shekels  of  gold,''  as  designating  the  value  of 
the  whole  quantity,  not  individual  pieces,  is  pre- 
ferable. [R.  S.  P.] 

riECE  OF  SILVER.  The  passages  in  the 
0.  T.  and  those  in  the  N.  T.  in  which  the  A.  V. 
uses  this  term  must  be  separately  considered. 

I.  In  the  0.  T.  the  word  "  pieces  "  is  used  in  the 
A.  V.  for  a  word  understood  in  the  Hebrew,  if  we 
except  one  case  to  be  afterwards  noticed.  The  phrase 
is  always  "  a  thousand  "  or  the  like  "  of  silver  " 
(Gen.  XX.  16,  xxxvii.  28,  xlv.  22  ;  Judg.  ix.  4,  xvi.  5  ; 
2  K.  vi.  25  ;  Hos.  iii.  2  ;  Zech.  xi.  12, 13).  In  similar 
passages  the  word  "  shekels  "  occurs  in  the  Hebrew, 
and  it  must  be  observed  that  these  are  either  in  the 
Law,  or  relate  to  purchases,  some  of  an  important 
legal  character,  as  that  of  the  cave  and  field  of 
Machpelah,  that  of  the  threshing-floor  and  oxen  of 
Araunah,  or  to  taxes,  and  the  like  (Gen.  xxiii.  15, 
16  ;  Ex.  xxi.  32  ;  Lev.  xxvii.  3,  6,  16  ;  Josh.  vii. 
21 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24 ;  1  Chr.  xxi.  25,  where,  how- 
ever, shekels  of  gold  arc  spoken  of;  2  K.  xv.  20; 
Neh.  v.  1 5  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  9).  Tliere  are  other  pas- 
sages in  which  the  A.  V.  supplies  the  word  "  she- 
kels" instead  of  "pieces"  (Deut.  xxii.  19,  29; 
Judg.  xvii.  2,  3,  4,  lU  ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  11,  12),  and 
of  these  the  first  two  require  this  to  be  done.  It 
becomes  then  a  question  wiiether  there  is  any 
ground  for  the  adoption  of  the  word  "  pieces," 
which  is  vague  if  actual  coins  be  meant,  and  in- 
accurate if  weights.  The  shekel,  be  it  remembered, 
was  the  common  weight  for  money,  and  therefore 
most  likely  to-  be  understood  in  an  elliptical  phrase. 
When  we  find  good  reason  tor  concluding  that  in  two 
passages  (Deut.  xxii.  19,  20)  this  is  the  word  under- 
stood, it  seems  incredible  that  any  other  should  be 
in  the  other  places.  The  exceptional  case  in  which 
a  word  corresponding  to  "pieces"  is  found  in  the 
Hebrew  is  in  the  Psalms,  where  presents  of  submis- 
sion are  i)!opliesicd  to  be  made  of  "  pieces  of  silver," 
ClD3-''-';i1  (Ixviii.  30,  Heb.  31).  The  word  |n^ 
which  occurs  nowhere  else,  if  it  j)ieserve  its  radical 
meaning,  from  |^V"1,  must  signify  a  piece  broken 

ofT,  or  a  fragment:  tliere  is  no  reiison  to  suppose 
that  a  coin  is  meant. 

II.  In  the  N.  T.  two  words  are  rondeied  by  the 
phrase  "  piece  of  silver,"  drachma,  dfiaxfJ-Tli  •I'ld 
apyvpiov.  (1.)  The  first  (Luke  xv.  8,  9)  shoidd 
be  represented  by  iliachma.  It  was  a  (ireek  silver 
coin,  equivalent,  at  the  time  of  St.  Luke,  fo  the 
Koman  denarius,  which  is  probably  intended  by  the 


PI-HAHIROTH 


871 


Evangelist,  as  it  had  then  wliolly  or  almost  super- 
seded the  former.     [Drachma.]     (2.)  The  second 
word  is  very  properly  thus  rendered.     It  occurs  in 
the  account  of  the  betrayal  of  our  Lord  for  "  thirty 
pieces  of  silver"  (Jlatt.  xxvi.  15,  xxvii.  3,  5,  6,  9j. 
It  is  dilhcdlt  to  ascertain  what  coins  are  here  in- 
tended.   If  the  most  common  silver  pieces  be  meant, 
they  would  be  denarii.      The  parallel  passage  in 
Zechariah  (xi.  12, 13)  must,  however,  be  taken  into 
consideration,  where,  if  our  view  be  con-ect,  shekels 
must  be  understood.    It  may,  however,  be  suggested 
that  the  two  thirties   may  correspond,  not  as  of 
exactly  the  same  coin,  but  of  the  chief  current  coin. 
Some  light  may  be  thrown  on  our  difficulty  by  the 
number  of  pieces.     It  am  scarcely  be  a  coincidence 
that  thirty  shekels  of  silver  was  the  price  of  blood 
in  the  case  of  a  slave  accidentally  killed  (Ex.  xxi. 
32).     It  may  be  objected  that  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  shekels  wei'e  current  in  our  Lord's 
time ;  but  it  must  be  replied  that  the  tetradrachms 
of  depreciated  A  ttic  weight  of  the  Greek  cities  of 
Syria  of  that  time  were  of  the  same  weight  as  the 
shekels  which  we  believe  to  be  of  Simon  the  Mac- 
cabee  [Mosey],  so  that  Josephus  speaks  of  the 
shekel  as  equal  to  four  Attic  drachmae  (Ant.  iii.  8, 
§2).    These  tetradrachms  weie  common  at  the  time 
of  our  Lord,  and  the  piece  of  money  found  by  St. 
Peter  in  the  fish  must,  from  its  name,  have  been  of 
this  kind.     [Stater.]     It  is  theretbre  more  pro- 
bable that  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  were  tetra- 
drachms than  that  they  were  denarii.     There  is  no 
difficulty  in  the  use  of  two   tenns,  a  name  de- 
signating the  denomination  and  "  piece  of  silver," 
whether  the  latter  mean  the  tetradrachm   or  the 
denarius,  as  it  is  a  vague  appellation  thai  implies 
a  more  distinctive  name.     In  the  received  text  of 
St.  Matthew  the  proi)hecy  as  to  the  thii'ty  ]iieccs  of 
silver  is  ascribed  to  Jeremiah,  and  not  to  Zechariah, 
and  much   controversy  has  thus  been  occasioned. 
The  true  explanation  seems  to  be  suggested  by  the 
absence  of  any  prophet's  name  in  the  Syriae  version, 
and  the  likelihood  that  similarity  of  style  would  have 
caused  a  copyist  inadvertently  to  insert  the  name  of 
Jeremiah  instead  of  that  of  Zechariah.       [K.  S.  P.] 
PIETY.     This  word  occurs  but  once  in  A.  V. : 
"  Let  them  learn  first  to  show  piety  at  home"  {rhv 
Klov  oIkov  evGi^elv,  better,  "  towards  their  own 
household,"  1  Tim.  v.  4).     The  choice  of  this  word 
here  instead  of  the  more  usual  equivalents  of  "  god- 
liness,"  "  reveience,"   and   the  like,  was  probably 
determined  by  the  special  sense  oi  i^ietcts,  as  "  erga 
parentes"   (Cic.  Partit.   22,  Eep.  vi.  15,  Inv.  ii. 
22).     It  does  not  appear  in  the  earlier  English  ver- 
sions, and  we  may  recognise  in  its  apjjlication  in 
this  jiassage  a  special  felicity.     A  word  was  wanted 
for  iixre^uu  which,  unlike  "  showing  godliness," 
would  admit  of  a  human  as  well  as  a  divine  objct't, 
and  this;M(%  supplied.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PIGEON.      [TUKTLE-DOVE.] 

pi-HAiu'EOTH  (m*nn  '•a,  m^nn:   h 

iiravXis,  rh  ffrdfia-  Elpu)0,  Elpw6 :  Phihaliirotli), 
a  place  before  oi-  at  which  the  Israelites  encamped, 
at  the  close  of  the  third  march  from  Kameses, 
when  they  went  out  of  Egypt.  Pi-hahiroth  was 
before  Migdol,  and  on  the  other  hand  were  Baal- 
zephon  and  the  sea  (Ex.  xiv.  2,  9;  Num.  xxxiii. 
7,  8).  The  name  is  probalily  that  of  a  natural  loca- 
lity, from  the  unlikelihood  that  there  should  have 
been  a  town  or  village  in  both  parts  of  the  country 
where  it  is  jilaced  in  addition  to  Migdol  and  Baal- 
/.ephon,  which  seem  to  have  been,  if  not  towns,  at 


872 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


least  militaiy  stations,  and  its  name  is  susceptible 
of  an  Egyptian  etymology  giving  a  sense  apposite 
to  this  idea.  The  first  part  of  the  word  is  appa- 
rently treated  by  its  omission  as  a  separate  prefix 
(Xum.  xxxiii.  8),  and  it  would  therefore  appear  to 
be  the  masculine  definite  article  PE,  PA,  or  PEE. 
Jablonsky  proposed  the  Coptic  ni"^^)(^I" 
PCOT",  "  the  place  where  sedge  grows,"  and  this, 
or  a  similar  name,  the  late  M.  Fulgence  Fresnel 
recognised  in  the  modern  Ghuweybet-el-boos,  "the 
bed  of  reeds."  It  is  remarkable  that  this  name  occurs 
near  where  we  suppose  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea 
to  have  taken  place,  as  well  as  near  Suez,  in  the 
neighbourhood  usually  chosen  as  that  of  this  miracle; 
but  notlnng  could  be  inferred  as  to  place  from  such 
a  name  being  now  found,  as  the  vegetation  it  desci'ibes 
is  fluctuating.     [Exodus,  the.]  [fl.  S.  P.] 

PI'LATE,  PONTIUS  {X16vtios  UiXaros  : 
Pontius  Pilatns,  his  praeiiomen  being  unknown). 
The  name  indiciites  that  he  was  connected,  by  descent 
or  adoption,  with  the  gens  of  the  Pontii,  tirst  con- 
spicuous in  Roman  history  in  the  person  of  C. 
Pontius  Telesinus,  the  gi eat  Sanmite  general. »  He 
was  the  sixth  Uoman  procurator  of  Judaea,  and 
under  him  our  Lord  worked,  suflered,  and  died,  as 
we  learn,  not  only  from  the  obvious  Scriptural 
authorities,  but  from  Tacitus  {Aim.  xv.  44, 
"  Christus,  Tiberio  imperitante,  per  procuratorem 
Pontium  Pilatum  supplicio  adfectus  erat).*"  A 
procurator  Utr'npoTvos,  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Caium,  and 
Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  9,  §-  ;  but  less  correctly  riyef^iiu. 
Matt,  xxvii.  2;  and  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1)  was 
generally  a  Roman  knight,  appointed  to  act  under  the 
governor  of  a  province  as  collector  of  the  revenue,  and 
judge  in  causes  connected  with  it.  Strictly  speaking, 
procuratores  Caesaris  were  only  required  in  the 
imperial  provinces,  i.  e.  those  which,  according  to 
the  constitution  of  Augustus,  were  reserved  for 
the  special  administration  of  the  emperor,  with- 
out the  intei'vention  of  the  senate  and  people,  and 
governed  by  his  legate.  In  the  senatorian  pro- 
v'inces,  governed  by  proconsuls,  the  corresponding 
duties  were  discharged  by  quaestors.  Yet  it  appears 
that  sometim&i procuratores  were  appointe'd  in  those 
provinces  also,  to  collect  certain  dues  of  the  fiscus 
(the  emperor's  special  revenue;,  as  distinguished 
from  those  of  the  aerarium  (the  revenue  administered 
by  the  senate).  Sometimes  in  a  small  territory, 
especially  in  one  contiguous  to  a  larger  province, 
and  dependent  upon  it,  the  procurator  was  head  of 

'"^  The  cognomen  I'ilatus  has  received  two  explana- 
tions. (I.)  As  armed  with  the  piZum  or  javelin;  comp. 
"  pilata  agmina,"  Virg .  Aen.  ^W.  \2,\ .  (2.)  As  contracted 
from  pileatus.  The  fact  tliat  the  pihus  or  cap  was  the 
badge  of  manumitted  slaves  (comp.  Suetonius,  Nero,  c.  57, 
Tioer.  c.  4),  makes  it  probable  that  the  epithet  marked 
him  out  as  a  libertus.  or  as  descended  from  one.— [E.  H.  P.] 

b  Of  the  early  history  of  Pilate  we  know  nothing; 
but  a  German  legend  fills  up  the  gap  strangely  enough. 
Pilate  is  the  bastard  son  of  Tyrus,  king  of  Mayence.  His 
lather  sends  him  to  Rome  as  a  hostage.  There  he  is  guilty 
of  a  murder;  but  being  sent  to  Pontus,  rises  into  notice 
f;s  subduing  the  barbarous  tribes  there,  receives  in  con- 
sequence the  new  name  of  Ponlitis,  and  is  sent  to  Judaea. 
It  has  been  .suggested  that  the  twenty-second  legion, 
which  was  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  was  afterwards  stationed  at  .Mayence,  niny 
have  been  in  this  case  either  the  bearers  of  the  tradition 
or  the  inventors  of  the  fable.  (Comp.  Vilmafs  Deutsdi. 
Nation.  Liter,  i.  p.  217).-  [E.  H.  P.] 

c  Herod  the  Great,  it  is  true,  had  placed  the  Roman 
eagle  on  one  of  his  new  buildings;  but  this  had  been  fol- 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

the  administration,  and  had  full  military  and  judicial 
authority,  though  he  was  responsible  to  the  governor 
of  the  neighbouring  province.  Thus  Judaea  was 
attached  to  Syria  upon  the  deposition  of  Archelaus 
(a.  d.  G),  and  a  procurator  appointed  to  govern  it, 
with  Caesarea  for  its  capital.  Already,  during  a 
temporary  absence  of  Archelaus,  it  had  been  in 
charge  of  the  procurator  Sabinus ;  then,  after  the 
ethnarch's  banishment,  came  Coponius  ;  tlie  thinl 
procm-ator  was  BI.  Ambi^nus ;  the  fourth  Annius 
Hufus ;  the  fifth  Valerius  Gratus ;  and  the  sixth 
Pontius  Pilate  (Joseph.  Antiq.  x\nii.  2,  §2),  who 
was  appointed  A.D.  25-6,  in  the  twelfth  year  of 
Tiberius.  One  of  his  first  acts  was  to  remove  the 
headquarters  of  the  army  from  Caesarea  to  Jeru- 
salem. The  soldiers  of  course  took  with  them 
their  standards,  bearing  the  image  of  the  emperor, 
into  the  Holy  City.  No  previous  governor  had 
ventured  on  such  an  outrage.'^  Pilate  had  been 
obliged  to  send  them  in  by  night,  and  there  were 
no  bounds  to  the  rage  of  the  people  on  discivering 
what  had  thus  been  done.  They  poured  down  in 
crowds  to  Caesarea  where  the  Procm-ator  was  then 
residing,  and  besought  him  to  remove  the  images. 
After  five  days  of  discussion,  he  gave  the  signal  to 
some  concealed  soldiere  to  surround  the  petitionere, 
and  put  them  to  death  unless  they  ceased  to  trouble 
him  ;  but  this  only  strengthened  their  determina- 
tion, and  they  declared  themselves  ready  rather 
to  submit  to  death  than  forego  their  resistance  to 
an  idolatrous  innovation.  Pilate  then  yielded,  and 
the  standards  were  by  his  orders  brought  down  to 
Caesarea  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1,  2,  B.  J.  ii.  9, 
§2-4).  Ou  two  other  occasions  he  nearly  drove  the 
Jews  to  insurrection  ;  the  first  when,  in  spite  of  this 
warning  about  the  images,  he  hung  up  in  his  palace 
at  Jerusalem  some  gilt  shields  inscribed  with  the 
names  of  deities,  which  were  only  removed  by  an 
order  from  Tiberius  (Philo,  ad  Caium,  §38,  ii.  589); 
the  second  when  he  appropriated  the  revenue 
arising  from  the  redemption  of  vows  (Corban  ; 
comp.  Mark  vii.  11)  to  the  construction  of  an 
aqueduct.  This  order  led  to  a  riot,  which  he  sup- 
pressed by  sending  among  the  crowd  soldiers  with 
concealed  daggers,  who  massacred  a  great  number, 
not  only  of  rioters,  but  of  casual  spectators'*  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  9,  §4).  To  these  specimens  of  his  administra- 
tion, which  rest  on  the  testimony  of  profane  authors, 
we  must  add  the  slaughter  of  certain  Galileans, 
which  was  told  to  our  Lord  as  a  piece  of  news 
' airayyeWoures,  Luke  xiii.  1),  and  on  which  He 


lowed  by  a  violent  outbreak,  and  the  attempt  had  not  been 
repeated  (P^wald,  Geschichte,  iv.  509).  The  extent  to  which 
the  scruples  of  the  Jews  on  this  point  were  respected  by 
the  Roman  governors,  is  shewn  by  the  fact  that  no  effigy 
of  either  god  or  emperor  is  found  on  the  money  toiued  by 
them  in  Judaea  before  the  war  under  j^ero  (ibid.  y.  33, 
referring  to  De  Saulcy,  Recherches  swr  la  Nuniismatique 
Judaique,  pi.  viii.  ix  ).  Assuming  this,  the  denarius  with 
Caesar's  image  and  superscription  of  Matt,  xsiii.  must 
have  been  a  coin  from  the  Roman  mint,  or  that  of  some 
other  province.  The  latter  was  probably  current  for  the 
common  purposes  of  life.  The  shekel  alone  was  received 
as  a  Temple-offering. — [E.  H.  P.] 

^  Kwald  suggest-i  that  the  Tower  of  Siloam  may  have 
been  part  of  the  same  works,  and  that  this  was  the  reason 
why  its  fall  was  looked  on  as  a  judgment  (Gescldchte,  vi. 
40;  I.uke -Xiii.  4).  The  Pharisaic  reverence  for  whatever 
was  set  apart  for  the  Corban  (Mark  vii.  11),  and  their 
scruples  as  to  admitting  into  it  anything  that  had  an 
itnpure  origin  (Matt,  xxvii.  6),  may  be  regarded,  perhaps, 
as  outgrowths  of  the  same  feeling. — [E.  H.  P.] 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

founded  some  remarks  on  the  connexion  between 
sin  and  calamit\-.  It  must  have  occuired  at  scime 
feast  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  outer  court  of  the  Teni|ile, 
since  the  blood  ot  the  worshippers  was  mingled  irith 
their  sacrijices  ;  but  the  silence  of  Josephus  about 
it  seems  to  show  that  riots  and  massacres  on  such 
occasions  were  so  frequent  that  it  was  needless  to 
recount  them  all. 

It  was  the  custom  for  the  procurators  to  reside 
at  Jerusalem  during;  the  great  feasts,  to  preserve 
order,  and  accordingly,  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's 
last  passover,  Pilate  was  occupying  his  official  resi- 
dence in  Herod's  palace ;  and  to  the  gates  of  this 
palace  Jesus,  condemned  on  the  charge  of  blas- 
phemy, was  brought  early  in  the  morning  by  the 
chief  priests  and  officers  of  the  Sanhedrim,  who 
were  imable  to  enter  the  residence  of  a  Gentile,  le-st 
they  should  be  defiled,  and  unfit  to  eat  the  passover 
(John  xviii.  28).  Pilate  therefore  came  out  to 
leani  their  purpose,  and  demanded  the  nature  of 
the  charge.  At  first  they  seem  to  have  expected 
that  he  would  have  carried  out  their  wishes  without 
further  inquiiy,  and  therefore  merely  described 
our  Lord  as  a  KaKoiroios  (disturber  of  the  public 
peace),  but  as  a  IJoman  procurator  had  too  much 
respect  for  justice,  or  at  least  understood  his  busi- 
ness too  well  to  consent  to  such  a  condemnation, 
and  as  they  knew  that  he  would  not  enter  into 
theological  qnestioiis,  any  more  than  Gallio  after- 
wards did  on  a  somewhat  similar  occasion  (Acts 
xviii.  14),  they  were  obliged  to  devise  a  new 
charge,  and  therefore  interpreted  our  Lord's  claims 
m  a  political  sense,  accusing  him  of  assuming  the 
royal  title,  perverting  the  nation,  and  forbidding 
the  papnent  of  tribute  to  Rome  (Luke  xxiii.  3  ;  an 
account  plainly  presupposed  in  John  xviii.  33).  It 
is  plmn  that  fiom  this  moment  Pilate  was  dis- 
tracted between  two  conflicting  feelings:  a  fear  of 
offending  the  Jews,  who  had  already  grounds  of 
accusation  against  him,  which  would  be  gi'eatly 
strengthened  by  any  show  of  lukewarmness  in  pun- 
ishing an  offence  against  the  imperial  government, 
and  a  conscious  conviction  that  .lesus  was  innocent, 
since  it  was  absurd  to  suppose  that  a  desire  to  free 
the  nation  from  Roman  authority  was  criminal  in 
the  eyes  of  the  Sanhedrim.  Moreover,  this  last 
feeling  was  strengthened  by  his  own  hatred  of  the 
Jews,  whose  religious  -scruples  had  caused  him 
frequent  trouble,  and  by  a  growing  respect  for  the 
calm  dignity  and  meekness  of  tiie  sutierer.  First 
he  examined  our  Lord  privately,  and  asked  Him 
whether  He  was  a  king'?  The  (juestion  which  He 
in  return  put  to  His  judge,  "  Sitijest  thou  this  of 
t/njself,  or  did  others  tell  it  thee  of  me '/  "  seems  to 
imply  that  there  was  in  Pilate's  own  mind  a  suspi- 
cion that  the  prisoner  really  was  what  He  was 
charged  with  being;  a  suspicion  which  shows  itself 
again  in  the  later  quesimi,  *^  Whence  art  thoiii" 
(John  xix.  8),  in  the  increasing  desire  to  release 
Him  (12),  and  in  the  refusal  to  alter  the  inscription 
on  the  cross  (22).  In  any  case  Pilate  accepted  as 
satisfactoi y  Clii-ist's  assurance  that  his  kiHijdoin  uiis 
not  of  this  tror'd,  that  is,  not  worldly  in  its  nature 
or  objects,  and  therefore  not  to  be  foundi'd  by  this 
world's  wea]Mms,  though  he  could  not  uiKli'istanil 
the  iissertion  that  it  Wivs  to  be  established  by  bearing 
witness  to  the  truth.    His  famoas  reply,  "  What  is 

"  Conip.  BARAiiitAs.  Kwald  suRgests  tliat  llio  insurrec- 
tion of  wliiili  St.  Mark  speaks  nuist,  liiive  l)ecii  lliat  con- 
nected with  the  apprcipriatlnii  of  the  Coiban  (supra),  and 
lliat  this  oNplaiiis  ihi-  eajfcrncss  wiih  whicli  ilic  pcDpIo 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


873 


truth'?"  was  the  question  of  a  worldly-minded  poli- 
tician, sceptical  becau.'^e  he  was  indifferent,  one  who 
thought  truth  an  empty  name,  or  at  least  could  not 
see  "  any  connexion  between  aKrideia  and  jSatriAcia, 
truth  and  policy  "  (Dr.  C.  Wordsworth,  Comm.  in 
loco).  With  this  question  he  brought  the  inteiview 
to  a  close,  and  came  out  to  the  Jews  and  declared 
the  prisoner  innocent.  To  this  they  replied  that 
His  teaching  h;id  stirred  up  all  the  people  from 
Galilee  to  Jerusalem.  The  mention  of  Galilee  sug- 
ge.sted  to  Pilate  a  new  way  of  escaping  from  his 
dilemma,  by  sending  on  the  case  to  tierod  Antipas, 
tetiarch  of  that  country,  who  had  come  np  to 
Jerusalem  to  the  feast,  while  at  the  same  time  this 
gave  him  an  opportunity  for  making  overtures  of 
reconciliation  to  Herod,  with  whose  jurisdiction  he 
had  probably  in  some  recent  instance  interfered. 
But  Herod,  though  propitiated  by  this  act  of 
courtesy,  declined  to  enter  into  the  matter,  and 
merely  sent  Jesus  back  to  Pilate  dressed  in  a 
shining  kingly  robe  (t'trfl^Ta  Aafxirpdv,  Luke  xxiii. 
11),  to  express  his  ridicule  of  such  pretensions,  and 
contempt  for  the  whole  business.  So  Pilate  was 
compelled  to  come  to  a  decision,  and  first,  having 
assembled  the  chief  priests  and  also  the  people, 
whom  he  jirobably  summoned  in  the  expectation 
that  they  would  be  favourable  to  Jesus,  he  an- 
nounced to  them  that  the  accused  had  done  nothing 
worthy  of  death,  but  at  the  same  time,  in  hopes  of 
pacifVing  the  Sanhedrim,  he  proposed  to  scouige 
Him  before  he  released  Him.  But  as  the  accusers 
were  resolved  to  have  His  blood,  they  rejected  this 
concession,  and  therefore  Pilate  had  recourse  to  a 
fre.-h  expedient.  It  was  the  custom  for  the  Roman 
governor  to  grant  every  year,  in  honour  of  the 
passover,  pardon  to  one  condemned  criminal.  The 
origin  of  the  practice  is  unknown,  though  we  may 
connect  it  with  the  fact  mentioned  by  Livy  (v.  13) 
that  at  a  Lectisternium  "  vinctis  quoque  dempta 
vincula."  Pilate  therefore  offered  the  jieople  their 
choice  between  two,  the  murderer  Barabbas,*  and 
the  prophet  whom  a  few  days  before  they  had 
hailed  as  the  Messiah.  To  receive  their  decision  he 
ascended  the  /Srjjua,  a  portable  tribunal  which  was 
carried  about  with  a  Roman  magistrate  to  be 
placed  wherever  he  might  direct,  and  which  in  the 
present  case  was  erected  on  a  tessellated  pavement 
(\i66a-Tpa>Toy)  in  front  of  the  palace,  and  called  in 
Hebrew  Gahbatha,  probably  fi'om  being  laid  down 
on  a  slight  elevation  (Hiil,  "to  be  high").  As  soon 
:us  Pilate  had  taken  his  seat,  he  received  a  mys- 
terious message  from  his  wife,  according  to  tradition 
a  proselyte  of  the  gate  (0eo(re/377s),  named  Procla 
or  Claudia  Procula  {Evany.  A'icvd.  ii.),  who  ha>l 
"  suffered  many  things  in  a  dream,"  which  impelled 
her  to  entreat  her  husband  not  to  condemn  the  Just 
One.  But  he  had  no  longer  any  choice  in  the 
matter,  for  the  rabble,  instigated  of  course  by  the 
]Mie.sts,  chose  Barabbas  for  pardon,  and  clamoured 
fiir  the  death  of  Jesus ;  insurrection  .seemed  immi- 
nent, and  Pilat«  reluctantly  yielded.  But,  before 
i.ssuing  the  fatal  order,  he  washed  his  hands  before 
the  multitude,  as  a  sign  that  he  was  innocent  of  the 
Clime,  in  imitation  probably  of  the  ceremony  en- 
joined in  Deut.  xxi.,  where  it  is  ordered  that  when 
the  perpetrator  of  a  murder  is  not  discovered,  the 
eldeis  of  the  city  in  which  it  occui-s  shall  wash 


demanded  his  release.  He  infers  further,  from  his  name, 
lliat  he  was  the  .son  of  a  Itahbi  (Abba  was  a  Rabbiiiic 
title  ol  honour),  mid  tlins  aeemnits  for  the  jiart  taken  in 
his  favour  by  the  nieiubers  of  the  Saiihedrini.— [K.  H.  P.] 


874 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


their  hands,  with  the  declaration,  "  Our  hands  have 
uot  shed  this  blood,  neither  have  our  eyes  seen  it." 
Such  a  practice  micjht  naturally  be  adopted  even  by 
a  Roman,  as  intelligible  to  the  Jewish  multitude 
around  him.  As  in  the  present  case  it  prod-.iced  no 
effect,  Pilate  ordered  his  soldiers  to  intlict  the 
scourging  preparatory  to  execution ;  but  the  sight 
of  unjust  suffering  so  patiently  borae  seems  again  to 
have  troubled  his  conscience,  and  prompted  a  new 
efibrt  in  favour  of  the  victim.  He  brought  Him  out 
bleeding  from  the  savage  punishment,  and  decked 
in  the  scarlet  robe  and  crown  of  thorns  which  the 
soldiers  had  put  on  Him  in  derision,  and  said  to  the 
jieople,  "  Behold  the  man !"  hoping  that  such  a 
spectacle  would  rouse  them  to  shame  and  compas- 
sion. But  the  priests  only  renewed  their  clamours 
for  His  death,  and,  fearing  that  the  political  charge 
of  treason  might  be  considered  insufficient,  returned 
to  their  first  accusation  of  blasphemy,  and  quoting 
the  law  of  Moses  (Lev.  xxiv.  16),  which  punished 
blasphemy  with  stoning,  declared  that  He  must  die 
"  because  He  made  himself  the  Son  of  God."  But 
this  title  vihs  deov  augmented  Pilate's  superstitious 
I'ears,  already  aroused  by  his  wife's  dream  (fiaWoy 
i<po^7]07},  John  six.  7)  ;  he  feared  that  Jesus  might 
be  one  of  the  heroes  or  demigods  of  his  own 
mythology ;  he  took  Him  again  into  the  palace, 
and  inquired  anxiously  into  his  descent  ("  Whence 
art  thou  ?  "j  and  his  claims,  but.  as  the  question  was 
only  prompted  by  fear  or  curiosity,  Jesus  made  no 
reply.  When  Pilate  reminded  Him  of  his  own 
absolute  power  over  Him,  He  closed  this  last  con- 
vei'sation  with  the  irresolute  governor  by  the 
mournful  remark,  "  Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at 
all  against  me,  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above; 
therefore  he  that  delivered  me  unto  thee  hath  the 
greater  sin."  God  had  given  to  Pilate  power  over 
Him,  and  power  only,  but  to  those  who  delivered 
Him  up  God  had  given  the  means  of  judging  of  His 
claims ;  and  therefore  Pilate's  sin,  in  merely  exer- 
cising this  power,  was  less  than  theirs  who,  being 
God's  own  priests,  with  the  Scriptures  before  them, 
and  the  woixl  of  prophecy  still  alive  among  them 
(John  xi.  50,  xviii.  14),  had  deliberately  conspired 
for  His  death.  The  result  of  this  interview  was 
one  last  effort  to  save  Jesus  by  a  fresh  appeal  to 
the  multitude ;  but  now  arose  the  formidable  cry, 
"  If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's 
friend,"  and  Pilate,  to  whom  political  success  was 
as  the  breath  of  life,  again  ascended  the  tribunal, 
and  finally  pronounced  the  desired  condemnation.' 

So  ended  Pilate's  share  in  the  greatest  crime 
which  has  been  committed  since  the  world  began. 
That  he  did  not  immediately  lose  his  feelings  of 
anger  against  the  Jews  who  had  thus  compelled  his 
acquiescence,  and  of  compassion  and  awe  for  the 


f  The  proceedings  of  Pilate  in  our  Lord's  trial  supply 
many  interesting  illustrations  of  the  accuracy  of  the 
Evangelists,  from  the  accordance  of  their  narrative  with 
the  known  customs  of  the  time.  Thus  Piiate,  being  only 
a  procurator,  had  no  quaestor  to  conduct  the  trial,  and 
therefore  examined  the  prisoner  himself.  Again,  in  early 
times  Roman  magistrates  had  not  bnen  allowed  to  t<ake 
their  wives  with  them  into  the  provinces,  but  this  pro- 
hibition had  fallen  into  neglect,  and  latterly  a  proposal 
made  by  Caecina  to  enforce  it  had  been  rejectnd  (J'ac. 
Ami.  iii.  33,  34).  Grotius  points  out  that  tlie  word 
di'cVe/ii/fer.  used  when  Pikate  sends  our  Lord  to  Herod 
(Luke  xxiii.  7)  Is  "propria  Romani  juris  vox:  nam 
remittitur  reus  qui  alicubl  comprehensus  mittitnr  ad 
judicem  aiit  originis  aut  habitationis "  (see  Alford,  in  locn). 
'I'he  tessellated  pavement  (Ai0oorTpMTOi')  was  so  necessary 
to  the  lorms  of  justice,  as  well  as  the  jS^/^a,  that  Julius 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

Sufferer  whom  he  had  umnghteouslv  sentenced,  is 
plain  from  his  curt  and  angry  refusal  to  alter  the 
inscription  which  he  had  prepared  for  the  cross 
'h  y€ypa(pa,  y4ypa(pa),  his  ready  acquiescence  in 
the  request  made  by  Joseph  of  Arimathaea  that  the 
Lord's  body  might  be  given  up  to  him  rather  than 
consigned  to  the  common  sepulchre  reserved  for 
those  who  had  suffered  capital  punishment,  and  his 
sullen  answer  to  the  demand  of  the  Sanhedrim  that 
the  sepulchre  should  be  guarded.s  And  here,  as  far 
as  Scriptiue  is  concerned,  otn-  knowledge  of  Pilate's 
life  ends.  But  we  learn  from  Josephus  {Ard.  xviii. 
4,  §1)  that  his  anxiety  to  avoid  giving  offence  to 
Caesar  did  not  save  him  from  political  disaster. 
The  Samaritans  were  unquiet  and  rebellious.  A 
leader  of  their  own  race  had  promised  to  disclose  to 
them  the  sacred  treasures  which  Moses  was  reported 
to  have  concealed  in  Motmt  Gerizim.  •"  Pilate  led 
his  troops  against  them,  and  defeated  them  easily 
enough.  The  Samaritans  complained  to  Vitellius, 
now  president  of  Syria,  and  he  sent  Pilate  to  Rome 
to  answer  their  accusations  before  the  emperor 
{Ibid.  §2).  When  he  reached  it,  he  found  Tiberiits 
dead  and  Caius  (Caligula)  on  the  throne,  A.D.  36. 
Eusebius  adds  [H.  E.  ii.  7)  that  soon  afVrwards, 
"  wearied  with  misfortunes,"  he  killed  himself.  As 
to  the  scene  of  his  death  there  are  various  traditions. 
One  is,  that  he  was  banished  to  Vienna  AUobrogum 
(Vienne  on  the  Rhone),  where  a  singular  monument, 
a  pyramid  on  a  quadrangular  base,  52  feet  high, 
is  called  Pontius  Pilate's  tomb  {Dictionary  of  Gco- 
graphi/,  art.  "  Vienna ").  Another  is,  that  he 
sought  to  hide  his  sorrows  on  the  mountain  by  the 
lake  of  Lucerne,  now  called  Mount  Pilatus ;  and  there, 
after  spending  years  in_  its  recesses,  in  remorse  and 
despair  rather  than  penitence,  plunged  into  the 
dismal  lake  which  occupies  its  summit.  According 
to  the  popular  belief,  "  a  form  is  often  seen  to 
emerge  tiom  the  gloomy  waters,  and  go  through 
the  action  of  one  washing  his  hands ;  and  when  he 
does  so,  dark  clouds  of  mist  gather  first  round  the 
bosom  of  the  Infernal  Lake  (such  it  has  been  styled 
of  old),  and  then,  wrapping  the  whole  upper  jtart 
of  the  mountain  in  darkness,  presage  a  tempest  or 
hurricane,  which  is  sure  to  follow  in  a  short  space." 
(Scott,  Amie  of  Geierstein,  ch.  i.)     (See  below.) 

We  learn  from  Justin  Martyr  (Apol.  i.  pp.  76,  84), 
Tertullian  {Apol.  c.  21),.  Eusebius  {ff.  E.  ii.  2), 
and  others,  that  Pilate  made  an  official  report  to 
Tiberius  of  our  Lord's  trial  and  condemnation  ;  and 
in  a  homily  ascribed  to  Chrysostom,  though  marked 
as  spurious  by  his  Benedictine  editors  {Horn.  viii. 
in  Pasch.  vol.  viii.  p.  968,  D),  certain  viroixu^ifxara 
{Acta,  or  Commentarii  Pilati)  are  spoken  of  as  well- 
known  documents  in  common  circulation.  That  he 
made  such  a  report  is  highly  probable,  and  it  may 


Caesar  carried  one  about  with  him  on  his  expeditions 
(.Suet.  Jul.  c.  46).  The  power  of  life  and  death  was  taken 
from  the  Jews  when  Judaea  became  a  province  (Joseph. 
Ant.  XX.  9,  $1).  Scourging  before  execution  was  a  well- 
known  Roman  practice. 

B  Matt,  xxvii.  C5,  eyeTe  KOvtTTioSlav  vnayere,  a.(7tj>a- 
Kia-acrde  us  oiSare.  Ellicott  would  translate  this,  "Take 
a  guard,"  on  the  ground  that  the  watchers  were  Roman 
soldiers,  who  were  not  under  the  command  of  the  priests. 
But  some  might  have  been  placed  at  their  disposal  during 
the  feast,  and  we  should  rather  expect  Ao^ere  if  the 
sentence  were  imperative. 

h  Ewald  (Geschiclite,  v.  43)  ventures  on  the  conjecture 
that  this  Samaritan  leader  may  have  been  Simon  Magiis. 
The  description  fits  in  well  enough ;  but  the  class  of  such 
impostors  was  so  large,  that  tliere  are  but  slij^ht  grounds 
for  fixing  on  him  in  particular. — [E.  H.  P.] 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

have  been  in  existence  in  Chi'ysostom's  time  ;  but 
the  Acta  Pilati  now  extant  in  Greek,  and  two  Latin 
epistles  from  him  to  tiie  emperor  (Fabric.  Apocr.  i. 
2.'!7,  29s,  iii.  Ill,  45G),  are  certainly  spmious. 
(For  t'urtlier  particulars  sec  below.) 

The  character  of  Pilate  may  be  sufficiently  in- 
ferred tVom  the  sivetch  given  alx)ve  of  his  conduct 
at  our  Lord's  trial.  He  was  a  type  of  the  rich  and 
corrupt  Romans  of  his  age  ;  a  worldly-minded  states- 
man, conscious  of  no  higher  wants  than  those  of  this 
life,  yet  by  no  means  unmoved  by  feelings  of  justice 
and  mercy.  His  conduct  to  the  Jews,  in  the  in- 
stances quoted  from  Josephus,  though  severe,  was 
not  thoughtlessly  cruel  or  tyrannical,  considering 
the  general  practice  of  Roman  governors,  and  the 
difficulties  of  dealing  with  a  nation  so  arrogant  and 
perverse.  Certainly  there  is  nothing  in  the  tacts 
recorded  by  profane  authors  inconsistent  with  his 
desire,  obvious  from  the  Gospel  narrative,  to  save 
our  Lord.  But  all  his  better  feelings  were  over- 
powered by  a  selHsh  regard  for  his  own  security. 
He  would  not  encounter  the  least  hazard  of  personal 
annoyance  in  behalf  of  innocence  and  justice  ;  the 
umighteous  condemnation  of  a  good  man  was  a  trifle 
in  comparison  with  the  fear  of  the  emperor's  frown 
and  the  loss  of  place  and  power.  While  we  do  not 
diilbr  from  Chrysostom's  opinion  that  he  was  irapd- 
yofios  (Chrys.  i.  8o2,  adv.  Judaeos,  vi.),  or  that 
recorded  in  tlio  Apostolical  Constitutions  (v.  14), 
that  he  was  avav^pos,  we  yet  see  abundant  reason 
for  our  Lord's  merciful  judgment,  "  He  that  deli- 
vered me  unto  thee  hath  the  greater  sin."  At  the 
same  time  his  history  furnishes  a  proof  that  world- 
liness  and  want  of  principle  are  sources  of  crimes 
no  less  awful  than  those  which  spring  from  delibe- 
rate and  reckless  wickedness.  The  unhappy  notoriety 
given  to  his  name  by  its  place  in  the  two  universal 
creeds  of  Christendom  is  due,  not  to  any  desire  of 
singling  him  out  for  shame,  but  to  the  need  of  fixing 
the  date  of  our  Lord's  death,  and  so  bearing  witness 
to  the  claims  of  Christianity  to  rest  on  a  historical 
basis  (August.  Dc  Fide  et  Symh.  c.  v.  vol.  vi.  p.  156  ; 
Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  pp.  239,  240,  ed.  Burt,  and 
the  authorities  quoted  in  note  c).  The  number  of 
dissertations  on  Pilate's  character  and  all  the  cir- 
cumstances connected  with  him,  his  "  facinora,"  his 
"Christum  servandi  stiidium,"  his  wife's  dream, 
his  supposed  letteis  to  Tiberius,  which  have  been 
])ublishcd  during  the  last  and  present  centuries,  is 
quite  overwlielming.  The  student  may  consult 
with  advantage  Dean  Alford's  Commentari/  ;  Elli- 
cott,  Historical  Lecttires  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord, 
sect.  vii. ;  Neander's  Life  of  Christ,  §285  (Bohn^ ; 
Winer,  Jlealu-Grterhnch,  art.  "  Pilatus  ;"  Ewalil, 
Ocschichte,  V.  30,  &c.  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 

Acta  Pilati. — The  number  of  extant  Acta 
Pilati,  in  various  forms,  is  so  large  i\s  to  show 
that  very  early  the  demand  created  a  supjily  of 
documents  manifestly  spurious,  and  we  have  no 
reason  for  looking  on  any  one  of  those  that  remain 
as  more  authentic  than  the  others.  The  taunt  of 
Celsus  that  the  Christians  circulated  spurious  or 
distorted  narratives  under  this  title  (Orig.  c.  CtVs.),' 
and  the  complaint  of  Eusebius  (//.  E.  ix.  5)  that 
the  heathens  made  them  the  vehicle  of  bhisphemous 
calumnies,  show  how  largely  the  machinery  of  falsi- 
fication was  used  on  either  side.  Such  of  these 
documents  as  arc  extant  are  found  in  the  collections 

i  This  reference  Is  given  in  an  article  by  Uyrcr  In  I  that  no  judgment  fell  on  Pilate  for  his  alleged  crime 
Heraog's  lieal-Jincyd.,  but  the  writer  lias  been  unable  to  I  (ii.  2S). 
verily  it.    Tlie  nearest  approach  sccins  to  Ije  the  assertion  | 


PILATE,  PONTIUS  875 

of  Fabricius,  Thilo,  and  Tischendorf.  Some  of  them 
ai-e  but  weak  paraphrases  of  the  Gospel  history.  The 
most  extravagant  are  perhaps  the  most  interesting, 
as  indicating  the  existence  of  modes  of  thought  at 
variance  with  the  prevalent  traditions.  Of  these 
anomalies  the  most  stiiking  is  that  known  as  the 
Paradosis  Pilati  (Tischendorf,  Evung.  Apoc.  p.  426). 
The  em]>eror  Tiberius,  startled  at  the  universal 
darkness  that  had  fallen  on  the  Roman  Empire  on 
the  day  of  the  Crucifixion,  summons  Pilate  to 
answer  for  having  caused  it.  He  is  condemned  to 
death,  but  before  his  execution  he  prays  to  the 
Lord  Jesus  that  he  may  not  be  destroyed  with  the 
wicked  Hebrews,  and  pleads  his  ignorance  as  an 
excuse.  The  prayer  is  answered  by  a  voice  from 
Heaven,  assuring  him  that  all  generations  shall  c^all 
him  blessed,  and  that  he  shall  be  a  witness  for 
Christ  at  His  second  coming  to  judge  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Isj-ael.  An  angel  receives  his  head,  and 
his  wife  dies  filled  with  joy,  and  is  buried  with 
him.  Startling  as  this  imaginary  history  may  be, 
it  has  its  counterpart  in  the  traditional  customs  of 
the  Abyssinian  Church,  in  which  Pilate  is  recog- 
nised as  a  sain't  and  martyr,  and  takes  his  place  in 
the  calendar  on  the  25th  of  June  (Stanley,  Eastern 
Church,  p.  13  ;  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  806j. 
The  words  of  Tertullian,  desciibing  him  as  "  jam 
pro  sua  conscientia  Christianus"  {Apol.  c.  21), 
indicate  a  like  feeling,  and  we  find  traces  of  it  also 
in  the  Apocryphal  Gospel,  which  speaks  of  him  as 
"  uncircumcised  in  flesh,  but  circumcised  in  heart" 
(Etang.  Nicod.  i.  12,  in  Tischendorf,  Evang.  Apoc. 
p.  236). 

According  to  another  legend  (Mors  Pilati.  in 
Tischeudorf's  Evang.  Apoc.  p.  432),  Tiberius,  hear- 
ing of  the  wonderful  works  of  healing  that  had  been 
wrought  in  Judaea,  writes  to  Pilate,  bidding  him 
to  send  to  Rome  the  man  that  had  this  divine 
powej'.  Pilate  has  to  confess  that  he. has  crucified 
him :  but  the  messenger  meets  A'eronica,  who  gives 
him  the  cloth  which  had  received  the  impress  of 
the  divine  features,  and  by  this  the  emperor  is 
liealed.  Pilate  is  summoned  to  take  his  ti'ial,  and 
piesents  himself  wearing  the  holy  and  seamless 
tunic.  This  acts  as  a  spell  upon  the  emperor,  and 
he  forgets  his  wonted  severity.  After  a  time  Pilate 
is  thrown  into  prison,  and  there  commits  suicide. 
His  body  is  cast  into  the  Tiber,  but  as  storms  and 
tempests  followed,  the  Romans  take  it  up  and  send 
it  to  Vienne.  It  is  thrown  into  the  Rhone ;  but 
the  same  disfisters  follow,  and  it  is  sent  on  to 
Losania  (Lucerne  or  Lausanne  ?).  There  it  is  smik 
in  a  pool,  fenced  round  by  mountains,  and  even  there 
the  waters  boil  or  bubble  strangely.  The  interest 
of  this  story  obviously  lies  in  its  presenting  an  e;irly 
foi'm  (the  existing  te.xt  is  of  the  14th  century)  of 
the  local  traditions  which  connect  the  name  of  the 
procurator  of  Judaea  with  the  Mount  Pilatus  that 
overlooks  the  Lake  of  Lucerne.  The  received  ex- 
planation (Ruskin,  Modern  Painters,  v.  p.  128)  of 
the  legend,  as  originating  in  a  distortion  of  the  de- 
scri|)tive  name  Mons  Pileatns  (the  "  iloud-capped  "), 
supplies  a  curious  instance  of  the  genesis  of  a 
mythus  from  a  false  etymology ;  but  it  may  be 
questioned  whether  it  rests  on  sufficient  giounds, 
and  is  not  rather  the  product  of  a  j)seudo-criticisni, 
finding  in  a  name  the  starting-point,  not  the  em- 
bodiment of  a  legend.     Have  we  any  evidence  that 


876 


PILDASH 


the  mountain  was  known  as  "  Pileatus  "  befoa-  the 
legend  ?  Have  we  not,  in  the  apocryphal  story  just 
cited,  the  legend  independently  of  the  name  ?  •'  (^comp. 
Vilmar,  Deutsch.  Nation.  Liter,  i.  217). 

Pilate's  wife  is  also,  as  might  be  expected,  pro- 
minent in  these  traditions.  Her  name  is  given  as 
Claudia  Procula  (Niceph.  H.  E.  i.  30 j.™  She  had 
been  a  proselyte  to  Judaism  before  the  CiTiciHxion 
(^E'oang.  Nicod.  c.  2).  Nothing  certain  is  known  as 
to  her  history,  but  the  tradition  that  she  became  a 
Christian  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Origen  {Horn,  in 
Matt.  XXXV.).  The  system  of  administration  under 
the  Republic  forbade  the  governors  of  provinces  to 
take  their  wives  with  them,  but  the  practice  had 
gained  ground  under  the  Empire,  and  Tacitus  {Ann. 
iii.  33)  records  the  failure  of  an  attempt  to  reinforce 
the  old  regulation.  (See  p.  874,  note  f.)    [E.  H.  P.] 

PIL'DASH  (C^"n^£) :  ^a\Us  ;  Alex.  *aA5<£s  : 

PliclJas).  One  of  the  eight  sonsof  Nahor,  Abraham's 
brother,  by  his  wife  and  niece,  Milcah  (Gen.  xxii.  22). 
The  settlement  of  his  descendants  has  not  been  iden- 
tified with  any  degree  of  probability.  Bimsen  {Bihel- 
wei'k.  Gen.  xxii.  22)  compares  Eipalthas,  a  place  in 
the  north-east  of  Mesopotamia  ;  but  the  resemblance 
of  the  two  names  is  probably  accidental. 

PIL'EHA  (Xn'pS  :  ^aXafi:  Phalea).  The  name 
of  one  of  the  chief  of  the  people,  probably  a  family, 
who  signed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  24). 

PILLAK.*  The  notion  of  a  pillar  is  of  a  shaft 
or  isolated  pile,  either  supporting  or  not  supporting 
a  roof.  Pillars  form  an  important  feature  in  Oriental 
architecture,  partly  perhaps  as  a  reminiscence  of  the 
tent  with  its  supporting  poles,  and  partly  also  from 
the  use  of  flat  roofs,  in  consequence  of  which  the 
chambei-s  were  either  narrower  or  divided  into  por- 
tions by  columns.  The  tent-principle  is  exemplified  in 
the  open  halls  of  Persian  and  other  Eastern  buildings, 
of  which  the  fronts,  supported  by  pillars,  are  shaded 
by  curtains  or  awnings  fastened  to  the  ground  out- 
side by  pegs,  or  to  trees  in  the  garden-court  (Esth. 
i.  6  ;  Chardin,  Voy.  vii.  387,  ix.  469,  470,  and 
plates  39,  81  ;  Layard,  Nin.  ^  Bah.  pp.  530,  648  ; 
Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  37).  Thus  also  a 
figurative  mode  of  desciibing  heaven  is  as  a  tent  or 
canopy  supported  by  pillars  (Ps.  civ.  2 ;  Is.  xl.  22), 
and  the  earth  as  a  fiat  surface  resting  on  pillars 
(1  Sam.  ii.  8  ;  Ps.  Ixxv.  3). 

It  may  be  remarked  that  the  word  "  place,"  in 
1  Sam.  XV.  12,  is  in  Hebrew  "hand."''  In  the 
Arab  tent  two  of  the  posts  are  called  yed  or  "  hand  " 
(Burckhardt,  Bed.  i.  37). 

The  general  practice  iu  Oriental  buildings  of  sup- 
porting fiat  roofs  by  pilhu's,  or  of  covering  open 
spaces  by  awnings  stretched  fi-om  pillais,  led  to  an 


k  The  extent  to  which  the  terror  connected  with  the 
belief  formerly  prevailed  is  somewhat  startling.  If  a  stone 
were  thrown  Into  the  lake,  a  violent  stonn  would  follow. 
No  one  was  alUiwed  to  visit  it  without  a  special  permis- 
sion from  the  authorities  of  Lucerne.  The  neighbouring 
shepherds  were  bound  by  a  solemn  oath,  renewed  annually, 
never  to  guide  a  strasiger  to  it  (Gessner,  Descript.  Mmit. 
I'ilat.  p.  40,  Zurich,  1555).  The  spell  was  broken  in  J5s4 
by  Johannes  Jiiillpr,  cure  of  Lucerne,  who  was  bold  enough 
to  throw  stones  and  abide  the  consequences.  (Gulbory, 
Univers  Pittwesque  de  Suisse,  p.  32V.)  It  is  striking  that 
traditions  of  Pilate  attach  themselves  to  several  localities  in 
the  South  of  France  (comp.  Mmray's  Bandbuok  ff  France, 
Uoute  125). 

"'  If  it  were  possible  to  attach  ivny  value  to.  the  Codt'.\ 
ol   St.   Matthew's  Gospel,  of  which  portions  have  lictii 


PILLAR 

extensive  use  of  them  in  construction.  In  Indian 
architecture  an  enormous  number  of  pillars,  some- 
times amounting  to  1000,  is  found.  A  similar 
principle  appears  to  have  been  carried  out  at  Perse- 
polis.  At  Nineveh  the  pillars  were  probably  of 
woo<l  [Cedar],  and  it  is  very  likely  that  the  same 
construction  prevailed  in  the  "  house  of  the  forest 
of  Lebanon,"  with  its  hall  and  poi-ch  of  pillars 
(1  K.  vii.  2,  6).  The  "chapiters"  of  the  two 
pillars  Jachin  and  Boaz  resembled  the  tall  capitals 
of  the  Persepolitan  columns  (Layard,  Nin.  ^  Bab. 
252,  650;  Nineveh,  ii.  274;  Fergusson,  Handbk. 
8,  174,  178,  J  88,  190,  196,  198,  231-233;  Ro- 
berts, Sketches,  No.  182,  184,  190,  198;  Euseb. 
Vit.  Const,  iii.  34,  38  ;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Ara- 
bia, i.  244,  245). 

But  perhaps  the  earliest  application  of  the  pillar 
was  the  votive  or  monumental.  This  in  early  times 
consisted  of  nothing  but  a  single  stone  or  pile  of 
stones.  Instances  are  seen  in  Jacob's  pillars  (Gen. 
xxviii.  18,  xxxi.  46,  51,  52,  xxxv.  14)  ;  in  the  twelve 
pillars  set  up  by  Moses  at  Mount  Sinai  (Ex.  xxiv. 
4) ;  the  twenty- four  stones  erected  by  Joshua  (Josh, 
iv.  8,  9;  see  also  Is.  xix.  19,  and  Josh.  xxiv.  27). 
The  trace  of  a  similar  notion  may  probably  be 
found  in  the  holy  stone  of  Mecca  (Buickhardt, 
Trav.  i.  297).  Monumental  pillars  have  also  been 
oomrnon  in  many  countries  and  iu  various  styles 
of  architecture.  Such  were  perhaps  the  obelisks  of 
Egypt  (Fergusson,  6,  8,  115,  246,  340;  Ibn  Ba- 
tuta,  Trav.  p.  HI  ;  Strabo,  iii.  p.  171, 172  ;  Herod, 
ii.  106  ;  Amm.  Marc.  xvii.  4;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  2,  §3, 
the  pillars  of  Seth). 

The  stone  Ezel  (1  Sam.  xx.  19)  was  probably  a 
terminal  stone  or  a  waymark. 

The  "place"  set  up  by  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  12)  is 
explained  by  St.  Jerome  to  be  a  trophy,  Vulg.  for- 
nicem  triumphalem  (Jerome,  Quaest.  Hehr.  in  lib.  i. 
Beg.  iii.  1339).  The  word  used  is  the  same  as 
that  tor  Absalom's  pillar,  Middsehdh,  called  by 
Josephus  x^'P"  {Ant.  vii.  10,  §3),  which  was  clearly 
of  a  monumental  or  memorial  chaiacter,  but  not 
necessarily  carrying  any  representation  of  a  hand  in 
its  structure,  as  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  case. 
So  also  Jacob  set  up  a  pillar  over  Riichel's  gi-avc 
(Gen.  xxxv.  20,  and  Robinson,  i.  218).  The  mono- 
lithic tombs  and  obelisks  of  Petra  are  instances  of 
similar  usage  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  422  ;  Roberts, 
Sketches,  105  ;  Irby  and  Mangles,  Travels,  125). 

But  the  word  Matstsebah,  "  pillar,"  is  more 
often  rendered  "statue"  or  "image"  {e.  g.  Deut. 
vii.  5,  xii.  3,  xvi.  22  ;  Lev.  sxvi.  1  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  24, 
xxxiv.  13  ;  2  Chr.  xiv.  3,  s.xxi.  1  ;  Jer.  xliii.  13  ; 
Hos.  iii.  4,  X.  1 ;  Mic.  v.  13).  This  agrees  with 
the  usage  of  heathen  nations,  and  pi'actised,  as  we 
have  seen,  by  the  patriarch  Jacob,  of  erecting  blocks 


published  by  Simonides,  as  belonging  to  the  1st  ceninry, 
the  name  of  Pempele  might  claim  precedence. 

'^  1.  ^I?PP  (1  K.  X.  12);  iJTrocrT7)pi7naTa;/«7tra,  from 
nyO,  "support;"  marg.  "rails." 

2.  n^-VO  ;  the  same,  or  nearly  so. 

3.  ri3-V?3,  from  3V3,  "place;"  o-nJAr) ;  titubis;  a 
pile  of  stones,  or  monumental  pillar. 

4.  3''V^  ;  (m;Ar;;  itofwa  (Gen.  xix  26),  ofl.ot's  will- ; 
from  same  root  as  2  and  3. 

5.  ~11V)0;  nerpa;  viuniilo;  "tower;"  only  in  Ihili. 
ii.  1 ;  elsewhere  "strong  city,"  i.  e.  a  plaie  of  defcnci-, 
from  ~|.'1^;,  "press,"  "confine." 

6.  I-U^y  ;  (TTu'Ao?;  colimna;  from  lOJ?,  "stand." 
*>     1    ;  xttpa;  finni(.im  iriumpl(0le:ii. 


PILLAR,  PLAIN  OF  THE 

or  piles  of  wood  or  stone,  which  in  later  times  grew 
into  orniimented  pillai-s  in  honour  of  the  deity 
(Clem.  Alex.  Coh.  ad  Gent.  c.  iv. ;  Strom,  i.  24'';. 
Instances  of  this  are  seen  in  the  Attic  Hermae  (Pans. 
iv.  .33,4),  seven- pillars  significant  of  the  planets 
(iii.  21,  9,  also  vii.  17,  4,  and  22,  2,  viii.  37) ;  and 
Arnobius  mentions  the  practice  of  poiu-ing  libations 
of  oil  upon  them,  which  again  recalls  the  case  of 
Jacob  I^Adv.  Gent.  i.  33.5,  ed.  Gauthier). 

The  termini  or  boundary-marks  were  originally, 
perhaps  always,  rough  stones  or  posts  of  wood, 
which  received  divine  honours  (Ov.  Fast.  ii.  G41, 
684).     [Idol,  p.  850  6.] 

Lastly,  the  figurative  use  of  the  term  "  pillar," 
in  reference  to  the  cloud  and  fire  accompanying  the 
Israelites  on  their  march,  or  as  in  Cant.  iii.  6  and 
Kev.  X.  1 ,  is  plainly  derived  from  the  notion  of  an 
isolated  column  not  suppoi-ting  a  roof.     [H.  W.  P.] 

PILLAR,  PLAIN  OF  THE  (n^P  ji'pK  : 
rfj  Pa\dvcj>  TTJ  eupeTp**  TTjy  (TTciiTecos  ;  Ales,  omits 
Tj?  evperfj :  quercum  quae  stabat),  or  rather  "  oak;<= 
of  the  pillar" — that  being  the  real  signification  of 
the  Hebrew  word  elon.  A  tree  which  stood  near 
Shechem,  and  at  which  the  men  of  Shechem  and 
the  house  of  Millo  as-sembled,  to  crown  Abimelech 
son  of  Gideon  (Jiidg.  ix.  6).  There  is  nothing  said 
by  which  its  position  can  be  ascertained.  It  possibly 
derived  its  name  of  Muttsdh  from  a  stone  or  pillar 
set  up  under  it ;  and  reasons  have  been  already 
adduced  for  believing  that  this  tree  may  have  been 
the  same  with  that  under  which  Jacob  buried  the 
idols  and  idolatrous  trinkets  of  his  household,  and 
under  wliich  Joshua  erected  a  stone  as  a  testimony 
of  the  covenant  there  re-executeil  between  the  people 
and  Jehovah.  [Meonenim.]  There  was  both 
time  and  opportunity  during  the  period  of  commo- 
tion which  followed  the  death  of  Joshua  for  this 
sanctuary  to  return  into  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites, 
and  the  stone  left  standing  there  by  Joshua  to  be- 
come appropriated  to  idolatrous  purposes  as  one  of 
the  Mattsebaks  in  which  the  religion  of  the  abori- 
gines of  the  Holy  Land  delighted.  [Idol,  p.  850.] 
The  terms  in  which  Joshua  speaks  of  this  very  stone 
(Josh.  xxiv.  27)  almost  seem  to  overstep  the  bounds 
of  mere  imagery,  and  woidd  suggest  and  warrant 
its  being  afterwards  regarded  as  endowed  with  mi- 
raculous qualities,  and  therefore  a  fit  object  for 
veneration.  Especially  would  this  be  the  case  if  the 
singular  expression, ."  it  hath  heard  all  the  words 
of  Jehovah  our  God  v^hich  lie  spake  to  us,"  were 
intended  to  indicate  that  this  stone  had  been  brought 
fiom  Sinai,  Jordan,  or  some  other  scene  of  the  com- 
munications of  Jehovah  with  the  people.  The  Sa- 
maritans still  show  a  range  of  stones  on  the  summit 
ofGei'izim  xs  those  brought  fi'om  the  bed  of  Jordan 
by  the  twelve  tribes.  [G.] 

PILLED  (Gen.  xxx.  37, 38) :  Peeled  (Is.  xviii. 
2;  Hz.  xxix.  18).  The  verb  "to  pill"  appears  in 
old  Eng.  as  identi(sil  in  meaning  with  "to  peel  = 
to  strip,"  •  and  in  this  sense  is  used  in  the  above 
passages  from  Gen.     Of  the  next  stage  in  its  mean- 

«  (njfiaiVei  o  <ttv\o<;  to  ai'tiKOi/io-TOi'  ToC  0tou. 
•>  A  tlouble  triinslatioii  of  Hie  Hel)n\v  word :   eiperjj 
originated  in  the  erroncims  iiliii  tliat  tlie  word  Is  con- 
nected nitli  X^'JO  "  '"  'hid." 

c  This  Is  given  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V. 
d  Comp.  "peeling  their  prisoners,"  Milton,  /'.  A',  iv. 
"  To  peel  the  cliiefs,  the  people  to  devour." 

Drydcn,  Uuiwr,  //«iJ  (llicliardson). 


PINNACI-E 


877 


ing  as  =  plunder,  we  have  traces  in  the  word  "pil- 
lage," pilfer.  If  the  diflerence  between  the  two 
foims  be  more  than  accidental,  it  would  seem,  as  if 
in  the  English  of  the  17tli  century  "peel"  was 
used  for  the  latter  signification.  The  "  peojile 
scattered  and  peeled,"  are  those  that  have  been 
plundered  of  all  they  have.<i  The  soldiers  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's army  (Ez.  xxix.  18),  however,  have 
their  shoulder  ixcled  in  the  literal  sense.  The  skin  is 
worn  otf  with  carrying  earth  to  pile  up  the  mounds 
during  the  protracted  siege  of  Tyre.         [E.  H.  P.] 

PIL'TAI  C'D^Q:  *6AeTi':  Fhcltiu  The  re- 
presentative of  the  priestly  house  of  Jloadiah,  or 
Maadiah,  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  sou  of  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  17). 

PINE-TREE.  1.  T2fttdr,«  from  a  root  signify- 
ing to  recolce.  What  tree  is  intended  is  not  certain. 
Gesenius  inclines  to  think  the  oak,  as  implying  du- 
ration. It  has  been  variously  explained  to  be  the 
Indian  plane,  the  larch,  and  the  elm  (Celsius, 
liiciob.  ii.  271).  But  the  rendering  "  pine,"  seems 
least  probable  of  any,  as  the  root  implies  either  cur- 
vature or  duration,  of  which  the  latter  is  not  parti- 
cularly applicable  to  the  pine,  and  the  former 
remarkably  othei-wise.  The  LXX.  rendering  in  Is. 
xli.  19,  PpadvSadp,  appears  to  have  arisen  from  a 
confused  amalgamation  of  the  words  berosh  and 
tidlidr,  which  follow  each  other  in  that  passage. 
Of  these  berosh  is  sometimes  rendered  "  cypress," 
and  might  stand  for  "juniper."  That  species  of 
juniper  which  is  called  savin,  is  in  Greek  PpaOv. 
The  word  Sadp  is  merely  an  expression  in  Greek 
letters  for  tidhdr.  (Pliny,  xxiv.  11,61  ;  SchleusEer, 
s.  v. ;  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  78.)     [FiR.] 

2.  Shemen'  (Neh.  viii.  15),  is  probably  the  wild 
olive.  The  cultivated  olive  w;is  mentioned  just 
before  (Ges.  p.  1437).  [H.  \V.  P.] 

PINNACLE  (t^  TTTepvytov ;  pinna,  j'inna- 
culuin:  only  in  JIatt.  iv.  5,  and  Luke  iv.  9).  The 
word  is  used  in  0.  T.  lo  render,  1.  Cdnaph,S  a  wing 
or  border,  e.g.  of  a  garment  (Num.  xv.  38  ;  1  Sam. 
XV.  27,  xxiv.  4).  2.  Snappir,  fin  of  a  fish  (Lev. 
xi.  9.  So  Arist.  Anim.  i.  5,  14).  .'!.  Kdtsdh,  edge; 
A.  V.  end  (Ex.  xxviii.  26).  Hesychius  explains  wt. 
as  aKpairriptof. 

It  is  plain,  1.  that  rh  imp.  is  not  a  pinnacle, 
but  the  pinnacle.  2.  That  by  the  word  itself  we 
should  understand  an  edge  or  border,  like  a  feather 
or  a  fin.  The  only  part  of  the  Temple  which  an- 
swered to  the  modern  sense  of  pinnacle  was  the 
golilen  spikes  erected  on  the  roof,  to  prevent  birds 
from  settling  there  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  5,  §6).  'i"o 
meet  the  sense,  therefore,  of  "  wing,"  or  to  use  our 
modern  word  founded  on  the  same  notion,  "  aisle," 
Lightfoot  suggests  the  porch  or  vestibule  which 
projected,  like  shoulders  on  each  side  of  the  Temple 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  V.  5,  §4 ;  Vitruv.  iii.  2). 

Another  opinion  fixes  on  the  royal  porch  adjoin- 
ing the  Temple,  which  rose  to  a  total  height  of 
400  cubits  above  the  vallevof  Jehoshaphat  (.loaeph. 
Ant.  .w.  n,  §5,  .\x.  9,  §7'). 

«  "in*l)^  ;  TTiVKij-,  pinus  (Is.  Ix.  13) ;  from  "im. 
"  revolve"  (Ges.   p.  323).      In   Is.  xli.   19,    /3pat*viadp, 

f  J'JC/ ;  ^vKov  KVTrapiaai.voi' ;  lii/nuin  j'utctttrrimuin. 
g  1.  f]3!3  ;  TTTtpi/'yioi' ;  anr/ulus. 

2.  "1*33D  ;  TTTcp. ;  pinnula. 

3.  nVp  ;  iTTep. ;  siimmiUis. 


878 


PINON 


Eusebius  tells  us  that  it  was  from  "  the  pinnacle" 
(rh  TTTep.)  that  St.  James  was  precipitated,  and  it  is 
said  to  have  remained  until  the  4th  century  (Euseb. 
H.  E.  ii.  23;  Williams,  ffolij  Citij,  ii.  388). 

Perhaps  in  any  case  rh  Trrep.  means  the  battle- 
ment ordered  by  law  to  be  added  to  every  roof.  It 
is  in  favour  of  this  that  the  word  Canaph  is  used 
to  indicate  the  top  of  the  Temple  (Dan.  ix.  27  ; 
Hammond,  Grotius,  Calmet,  De  Wette,  Liojhtfoot, 
H.  Hehr.  on  Matth.  iv.).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PI'NON  (jra:  ^eivdv:  Phiiion).  One  of  the 

"  dukes  "  of  Edom  ;  that  is,  liead  or  founder  of  a 
ti-ibe  of  that  nation  (Gen.  xxxvi.  41  ;  1  Chr.  i.  52). 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (^Onomasticon,  ^lvwv,  and 
"  Fenon")  the  seit  of  the  tribe  is  said  to  have  been 
at  PuNOX,  one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  in 
the  Wilderuess  ;  wiiich  again  they  identify  with 
Phaeno,  "  between  Petra  and  Zoar,"  the  site  of  the 
famous  Roman  copper-mines.  No  name  answering 
to  Piuon  appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered  in 
,  Araliic  literature,  or  amongst  the  existing  tribes. 

PIPE  l^'hn,  chain).     The  Hebrew  word   so 
rendered  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "to  bore, 
j)erforate,"  and  is  represented  with  sufficient  cor- 
rectness by  the  English  "pipe"  or  "flute,"  as  in 
the  margin  of  1  K.  i.  40.    It  is  one  of  the  simplest 
and  therefore,  pi-obably,  one  of  the  oldest  of  musical 
instruments,  and  in  consequence  of  its  simplicity 
of  form  there  is  reason  to  suppose  that  the  "  pipe  " 
of  the  Hebrews  did  not  differ  materially  from  that 
of  the  ancient  Egyptians  and  Greeks.     It  is  asso- 
ciated with  the  tabret  {toph)  as  an  instrument  of  a 
peaceful  and  social  character,  just  as  in  Shakspere 
(^Much  Ado,  ii.  o),  "  I  have  known  when  there  was 
no  music  with  him   but  the  drum  and   fife,  and 
now  had  he  rather  hear  the  tahor  and  the  pipe" — 
the  constant  accompaniment  of  meiriment  and  fes- 
tivity (Luke  vii.  32),  and  especially  characteristic 
of  "  the  piping   time   of  peace."      The  pipe  and 
tabret  were  used  at  the  banquets  of  the  Hebrews 
CIs.  V.  12),  and  their  bridal  processions  (Mishna, 
Baha  metsia,  vi.  1),  and  accompanied  the  simpler 
religious  services,  when  the  young  prophets,  return- 
ing from  the   high-place,  caught  tiieir  inspiration 
from  the  harmony  (1  Sam.  x.  5)  ;  or  the  pilgrims, 
on  their  way  to  the  great  festivals  of  their  ritual, 
beguiled  the  weariness  of  the  march  with  psalms 
sung  to  the  simple  music  of  the  pipe  (Is.  xxx.  29). 
When    Solmnon    was   proclaimed   king    the   whole 
people  went  up  after  him  to  Gihon,  piping  with 
pipes  (I   K.  i.  40j.     The  sound  of  the  pipe  was 
apparently   a   soft   wailing   note,   which    made   it 
appropriate  to  be  used  in  mourning  and  at  fiuierals 
(Matt.  ix.  23),  and  in  the  lament  of  the  prophet 
over  the  destruction  of  Moab  (Jer.  xlviii.  3(3).    The 
pipe  was  the  type  of  perfoiated  wind-instruments, 
as  the  harp  was  of  stringed  instruments  (1  Mace. 
iii.  45),  and  was  even  used  in  the  Temple-choir,  as 
appears  from  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  where  "  the  players  on 
instruments"  are  properly  "pipers."    Twelve  days 
in  the  year,  according  to  the  Mishna  {Amch.  ii.  3), 
the  pipes  sounded  before  the  altar:  at  the  slaying 
of  the  First  Passover,  the  slaying  of  the  Second 
Passover,  the  first  feast-day  of  the   Passover,  tlie 
first  feast-day  of  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  and  the  eight 
days'  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.      On  the  last- 
mentioned  occasion  tlie  playing   on   pipes   accom- 
panied the  drawing  of  water  from  the  fountain  of 
Siloah  (^S-uccah,  iv.  1,  v.  1)  for  five  ami  six  days. 
Tlie  pipes  which  were  played  before  tlie  altar  were 


PIPE 

of  reed,  and  not  of  copper  or  bronze,  because  the 
former  gave  a  softer  sound.  Of  these  there  were 
not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  twelve.  In  later 
times  the  office  of  mourning  at  funerals  became  a 
profession,  and  the  funeral  and  deathbed  were  never 
without  the  professional  pipers  or  flute-players 
(avX.7]Tds,  Matt.  ix.  23),  a  custom  which  still 
exists  (comp.  Ovid,  Fast.  vi.  660,  "  cantabat  fnoestis 
tibia  funeribus  ").  It  was  incumbent  on  even  the 
poorest  Israelite,  at  the  death  of  his  wife,  to  provide 
at  least  two  pipers  and  one  woman  to  make  lament- 
ation.    [Music,  vol.  ii.  p.  444  6.] 

In  the  social  and  festive  life  of  the  Egyptians  the 
pipe  played   as    prominent   .a   part  as  among  the 
Hebrews.    "  While  dinner  was  preparing,  the  paity 
was  enlivened  by  the  sound  of  music ;  and  a  band, 
consisting  of  the   harp,   lyre,  guitar,  tambourine, 
double  and  single  pipe,  flute,  and  othei-  instruments, 
played  the  favourite  airs  and  songs  of  the  country  " 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.   222).     In  the  different 
combinations    of    instruments    used    in    Egyptian 
bands,  we  generally  find  either  the  double  pipe  or 
the  flute,  and  sometimes  both  ;  the  former  being 
played  both  by  men  and  women,  the  latter  exclu- 
sively by  women.     The  Egyptian   single  pipe,  as 
described  by  Wilkinson  (J.«c.  Eg.  ii.  308),  was 
"  a   stiaight   tube,   without   any    increase   at  the 
mouth ;    and,   when   played,  was   held  with  both 
hands.     It  was  of  moderate  length,  apparently  not 
exceeding  a  foot  and  a  half,  and  many  have  been 
found  much  smaller ;  but  these  may  have  belonged 
to  the  peasants,  without  meriting  a  place  among 
the  instrumenis  of  the   Egyptian   band.  ,  .  .  Some 
have  three,  others  four  holes  .  .  .  and  some  were 
furnished  with  a    small   mouthpiece "   of  I'eed  or 
thick  straw.      This   instrument   must    have  been 
something  like  the  l^ng,  or  dervish's  flute,  which 
is  described  by  Mr.  Lane  (^Mod.  Eg.  ii.  ciiap.  v.)  as 
"a  simple  reed,  about  18  inches  in  length,  seven- 
eighths  of  an  inch  iu  diameter  at  the  upper  ex- 
tremity, and  three-quarters  of  an  inch  at  the  lower. 
It  is  pierced  with  six  holes  in  front,  and  general!}' 
with  another  hole  at  the  back.  ...  In  the  hands 
of  a  good  performer  the  luig  yields  fine,  mellow 
tones;  but  it  requires  much  practice  to  sound  it 
well."     The  double  pipe,  which   is  found  as  fre- 
quently in  Egyptian   paintings  as  the  single  one, 
"  consisted  of  two  pipes,  perhaps  occasionally  united 
together  by  a  common  mouthpiece,  and  played  each 
with  the  coiTesponding  hand.     It  was  common  to 
the  Greeks  and  other  people,  and,  from  the  mode 
of  holding  it,  received  the  name  of  right  and  left 
pipe,  the  tibia  dextra  and  sinistra  of  the  Romans : 
the  latter  had  but  '^6\\  holes,  and,  emitting  a  deep 
sound,  served  as  a  bass.    The  other  had  more  holes, 
and  gave  a  shaip  tone"  {WiXkmiXin,  Anc.  Eg.  ii. 
309,  310).     It  was  played  on  chiefly  by  women, 
who  danced  as  they  played,  and  is  imitiited  by  the 
modern   Egyptians   in    their   zummdra,  or  double 
leed,  a  rude  instrument,  used  principally  by  peasants 
and  camel-drivers  out  of  doors  (ibid.  pp.  311,  312). 
In  addition  to  these  is  also  found  in  the  earliest 
sculptures  a  kind  of  flute,  held  with  both  hands, 
and  sometimes  so  long  that  the  player  was  obliged 
to   stretch   his    arms   to    their   full   length    while 
playing. 

Any  of  the  instruments  above  described  would 
have  been  called  by  the  Hebrews  by  the  general 
term  chdlil,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  they 
might  have  derived  their  knowledge  of  them  from 
Egypt.  The  single  pipe  is  said  to  have  been  the 
invention  of  the  ICgyptians  alone,  who  attribute  it 


PIRA 

to  Osiris  (Jul.  Poll.  Onomast.  iv.  10),  and  as  the 
material  of  which  it  was  made  was  the  lotus-wood 
(Ovid,  Fast.  iv.  190,  "  horrendo  lotos  adunca  souo"j 
there  may  be  some  foundation  for  the  conjecture. 
Other  materials  mentioned  by  Julius  Pollux  are 
reed,  brass,  box-wood,  and  horn.  Pliny  (xvi.  66) 
adds  silver  and  the  bones  of  asses.  Bartenora,  in 
his  note  on  Arachin,  ii.  3,  above  quoted,  identifies 
the  chain  with  the  French  c/udimicau,  which  is  the 
German  schalmcie  and  our  shawm  or  shabn,  of 
which  the  clarionet  is  a  modern  improvement.  The 
shawm,  says  Mr.  Chappeli  (Pojo.  Mus.  i.  35,  note  6), 
"  was  played  with  a  reed  like  the  wayte,  or  hautboy, 
but  being  a  bass  instrument,  with  about  the  com- 
pass of  an  octave,  had  probably  more  the  tone  of  a 
bassoon."  This  can  scarcely  be  correct,  or  Dray- 
ton's expression,  "  the  shrillest  shawm  "  (Folijol.  iv. 
366),  would  be  inappropriate.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PI'RA  (ol  iK  rieipas),  1  Rsdr.  v.  19.  Appa- 
rently a  repetition  of  the  name  Caphira  in  the 
former  part  of  the  verse. 

PI'EAM  (DNia  :  ^iSuv;  Alex,  ^-epadix:  Pha- 

rarn).  The  Amorite  king  of  Jarmuth  at  the  time 
of  Joshua's  conquest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  x.  3).  With 
his  four  confederates  he  was  defeated  in  the  great 
battle  before  Gibeon,  and  tied  for  refuge  to  the  cave 
at  Wakkedah,  the  entrance  to  which  was  closed  by 
Joshua's  command.  At  the  close  of  the  long  day's 
slaughter  and  pursuit,  the  five  kings  were  brought 
from  their  hiding-place,  and  hangeil  upon  five  ti'ees 
till  sunset,  when  their  bodies  were  taken  down  and 
cast  into  the  cave  "  wherein  they  had  been  hid " 
(Josh.  X.  27). 

PIR'ATHON    (pny"]|  :     *apa0ciu  ;    Alex. 

^paaOdou  :  Fharathon),  "  in  the  land  of  Ephraim 
in  the  mount  of  the  Anialekite ;"  a  place  named 
nowhere  but  in  Judg.  xii.  15,  and  there  recorded 
only  as  the  burial-place  of  Abdon  ben-Hillel  the 
Pirathonite,  one  of  the  Judges.  Its  site  was  not 
known  to  Eusebius  or  Jerome;  but  it  is  mentioned 
by  the  accui'ate  old  traveller  hap-Parchi  as  lying 
about  two  hours  west  of  Shechem,  and  called  Fer'ata 
(Asher's  llenjaiiimof  Tiid:  ii.  426).  Where  it  stood 
in  the  14th  cent,  it  stands  still,  and  is  called  by  the 
same  name.  It  was  reserved  for  Dr.  Kobinson  to 
rediscover  it  on  an  eminence  about  a  mile  and  a  half 
south  of  the  road  from  Jaffa  by  Hableh  to  Nablus, 
and  just  six  miles,  or  two  houis,  from  the  last  (Ko- 
binson, iii.  134). 

Of  the  I'cmarkable  expression,  "  the  mount  for 
mountain  district)  of  the  Anialekite,"  no  explanation 
has  yet  been  discovere.l  beyoml  the  probable  fact 
that  it  commemorates  a  very  early  settlement  of  that 
roving  people  in  the  highlands  of  the  country. 

Another  place  of  the  same  name  probably  existed 
near,  the  south.  lUit  beyond  tlie  mention  of  PilA- 
RATHOMI  in  1  Jlacc.  ix.  50,  no  trace  has  been  found 

of  it.  [(.;.] 

PIRATHONITE  (^yiny-13  an.i  "-yniiis : 

^apaQwi'iTris,  ^apaBuvei,  (K  ^apadoiv  :  Phn- 
rathonitcs),  the  native  of,  or  dweller  in,  PiitATiiox. 
Two  such  are  named  in  the  Bible.  1.  Abdon  ben- 
Hillel  (Judg.  xii.  13,  15),  one  of  the  minor  judges 


PIRGAH 


879 


"  The  singular  miuincr  in  which  the  T^XX.  tnuislatois 
of  the  Pentateuch  liave  fluctuated  hi  theh-  rciulerinKS  of 
Pisgah  botwcen  the  proper  tiamc  aiul  llie  appellative,  loads 
to  the  infironco  that  their  Hebrew  text  was  different  in 
some  of  the  pass;i?;os  to  ours.  Mr.  W.  A.  Wrii^ht  1ms 
stlggcsted  that  in  the  hitler  o;isos  they  may  have  rpa<I 


of  Israel.  In  the  original  the  definite  article  is  pre- 
sent, and  it  should  be  rendered  "  the  Pirathonite." 
2.  From  the  same  place  came  "  Benaiah  the 
Pirathonite  of  the  chiMreu  of  Ephraim,"  captain 
of  the  eleventh  monthly  course  of  David's  armv 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  14)  and  one  of  the  king's  guard 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  30  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  31).  [G.] 

PIS'GAH(n|pSn,  with  the  def.  article:  ^aff- 

ya,  in  Deut.  iii.  17,  xxxiv.  1,  and  in  Joshua;  else- 
where rh  XeXa^evfievov '^  or  t]  Aa^evrri:  Phanja). 
An  ancient  topogi  aphical  name  which  is  found,  in  the 
Pentateuch  and  Joshua  only,  in  two  coimexions. 

1.  The  top,  or  head,  of  the  Pisgah  ('Bn  CNI), 

Num.  xxi.  20,  xxiii.  14  ;   Deut.  iii.  27,  xxxiv.  1. 

2.  Ashdoth  hap-Pisgah,  perhaps  the  spi-ings,  or 
roots,  of  the  Pisgah,  Deut.  iii.  17,  iv.  49  ;  Josh, 
xii.  3,  xiii.  20. 

The  latter  has  already  been  noticed  under  its 
own  head.  [Ashdoth-Pisgau.]  Of  the  former 
but  little  can  be  said.  "  'I'he  Pisgah  "  must  have 
been  a  mountain  range  or  district,  the  same  as,  or 
a  part  of  that  called  the  mountains  of  Abarim 
(comp.  Deut.  xxxii.  49  with  xxxiv.  1).  It  lay  on 
the  east  of  Jordan,  contiguous  to  the  field  of  Moab, 
and  immediately  opposite  Jericho.  The  fieW  of 
Zophim  was  situated  on  it,  and  its  highest  point,or 
summit — its  "  head" — was  the  Mount  Nebo.  If  it 
was  a  proper  name  we  can  only  conjecture  that  it 
denoted  the  whole  or  part  of  the  range  of  the  high- 
lands on  the  east  of  the  lower  Jordan.  In  the  late 
Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  Pseudojonathan,  Pisgah 
is  invariably  rendered  by  ramatha,^  a  term  in  com- 
mon use  tor  a  hill.  It  will  be  observed  that  the 
LXX.  also  do  not  treat  it  as  a  proper  name.  On 
the  other  hand  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomasticon, 
"Abarim,"  "  Fasga")  report  the  name  as  existing 
in  their  day  in  its  ancient  locality.  Mount  Abarim 
and  Jlount  Nabau  were  pointed  out  on  the  road 
leading  from  Livias  to  Heshbon  (i.  e.  the  Wadij 
Jlesban),  still  bearing  their  old  names,  and  close  to 
Moimt  Phogor  (Peor),  which  also  retained  its  name, 
ichcnce,  says  Jerome  (a  quo),  the  contiguous  region 
was  even  then  called  Phasgo.  This  connexion  be- 
tween Phogor  and  Phasgo  is  puzzling,  and  suggests 
a  possible  error  of  copyists. 

No  traces  of  the  name  Pisgah  have  been  met 
with  in  later  times  ou  the  east  of  .lordan,  but  in 
the  Arabic  garbof  i?(7S  el-Feshhah  (almost  identical 
with  the  Hebrew  Rosh  hap-pisgah)  it  is  attached  to 
a  well-known  headland  on  the  north-tccstovi  end  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  a  mass  of  mountain  bounded  on  the 
south  by  the  Wadij  cn-Nar,  and  on  tlie  north  by 
the  Wndii  Sklr,  0xv{  on  the  northern  part  of  which 
is  situated  the  great  Mussulman  sanctuary  of  Ncb'j 
Musa  (Moses).  This  association  of  the  names  or 
Moses  and  Pisgah  on  the  west  side  of  the  Dead  Sea 
— where  to  suppose  that  Moses  ever  set  foot  wo\ild 
be  to  stultify  the  whole  narrative  of  his  decease — is 
extremely  stiirtling.  No  explanation  of  it  has  yet 
been  offered.  Certainly  that  of  M.  De  Saulcy  and 
of  his  translator,''  that  the  Ras-cl- Fcshkah  is  iden- 
tical with  Pisgah,  cannot  be  entertained.  Against 
this  the  words  of  Deut.  iii.  27,  "  Thou  shalt  not  go 
over  this  Jordan,"  are  decisive. 

ri/DD  f"""  nJD3>  '''""'  7DD'  **  '^'•'wA  which  they  ac- 
tually translate  by  Aafeiieii'  in  ICx.  xxxiv.  1,4,  Deut.  X.  1. 

h  Probably  the  origin  of  iho  marginal  reading  of  tlio 
A.  v.  •'  the  hill." 

«  See  Do  Sanlcy's  Voyage,  &c,  and  the  notes  to  ii.  60-6(j 
of  the  ICngiisli  cnlition. 


880 


PISIDIA 


Had  the  name  of  Moses  alone  existed  heie,  it 
might  with  some  plausibility  be  conceived  that 
the  reputation  fiar  sanctity  hatl,  been  at  some  time, 
during  the  long  struggles  of  the  country,  transfened 
from  east  to  west,  when  the  ori;;inal  spot  was  out 
of  the  reach  of  the  pilgrims.  But  the  existence  of 
the  name  Feshkah — and,  what  is  equally  curious, 
its  non-existence  on  the  east  of  Jordan — seems  to 
preclude  this  suggestion.  [G.] 

PISID'IA  dlitriSia  :  Pisidia)  was  a  district  of 
Asia  Minor,  which  cannot  be  very  exactly  detined. 
But  it  may  be  described  sufficiently  by  saying  that  it 
was  to  the  north  of  Pampiiyi.ia,  and  stretched  along 
the  range  of  Taurus.  Northwards  it  reached  to,  and 
was  partly  included  in,  Phrygia,  which  was  simi- 
larly ari  indefinite  district,  though  far  more  extensive. 
Thus  Antioch  in  Pisidia  was  sometimes  called  a 
Phrygian  town.  The  occurrences  which  took  place 
at  this  town  give  a  great  interest  to  St.  Paul's 
first  visit  to  the  district.  He  passed  through  Pisidia 
twice,  with  Barnabas,  on  the  first  missionary  jour- 
ney, i.  e.  both  in  going  from  Perga  to  Iconium 
(Acts  xiii.  13,  14,  51),  and  in  returning  (xiv.  21, 
24,  25;  compare  2  Tim.  iii.  11).  It  is  probable 
also  that  he  traversed  the  northern  part  of  the 
district,  with  Silas  and  Timotheus,  on  the  second 
missionary  journey  (xvi.  6)  :  but  the  word  Pisidia 
does  not  occur  except  in  reference  to  the  former 
journey.  The  characteristics  both  of  the  country 
and  its  inhabitants  were  wild  and  rugged ;  and  it 
is  very  likely  that  the  Apostle  encountered  here 
some  of  those  "  perils  of  robbers  "  and  "  perils  of 
rivers  "  which  he  mentions  afterwards.  His  routes 
through  this  region  are  considered  in  detail  in  Life 
and  Epp.  of  St.  Paul  (2nd  ed.  vol.  i.  pp.  197-207, 
240,  241),  where  extracts  from  various  travellers 
are  gis-en.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PI'SON  (jiK'^a  :  ^eio-cij/:  Phison).  One  of  the 
four  "heads "  into  which  the  stream  flowing  through 
Eden  was  divided  (Gen.  ii.  11).  Nothing  is  known 
of  it ;  the  principal  conjectures  will  be  found  under 
I'^DEN  [vol.  i.  p.  484]. 

PIS'PAH  (nSpS:    ^acripi:    Phaspha).     An 

Asherite  :    one  of  the   sons  of  Jether,  or  Ithran 
(1  Chr.  vii.  38). 

PIT.  In  the  A.  V.  this  word  appears  with  a 
figurative  as  well  as  a  literal  meaning.  It  passes 
from  the  facts  that  belong  to  the  outward  aspect  of 
Palestine  and  its  cities  to  states  or  regions  of  the 
spiritual  world.  With  this  power  it  is  \ised  to  re- 
present several  Hebrew  words,  and  the  starting  point 
which  the  literal  meaning  presents  for  the  spiritual 
is,  in  each  ca;5e,  a  subject  of  some  interest. 

1.  S/ieol  (7X^),  in  Num.  xri.  30,  33;  Job 
xvii.  16.  Here  the  word  is  one  which  is  used  only 
of  the  hollow,  shadowy  world,  the  dwelling  of  the 
dead,  and  as  such  it  has  been  treated  of  under  Hell. 

2.  Skachath  (nriti').  Here,  as  the  root  T\W 
shows,  the  sinking  of  the  pit  is  the  primary  thoua;ht 
(Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.).  It  is  dug  into  the  earth  (Ps. 
ix.  1 6,  cxix.  85).  A  pit  thus  made  and  then  covered 
lightly  ovei",  served  as  a  trap  by  which  animals  or  ! 
men  might  be  ensnared  (Ps.  xxxv.  7).  It  thus  be- 
came a  type  of  sorrow  and  confusion,  from  which  a 
man  could  not  exti-icate  himself,  of  the  gi-eat  doom 
which  comes  to  all  men,  of  the  dreariness  of  death 
(Job  xxxiii.  18,  24,  28,  30).  To  "  go  down  to  the 
I'it,"  is  to  die  without  hope.     It  is  the  penalty  of 


PITCH 

evil-doers,  that  from  which  the  righteous  are  deli- 
vered by  the  hand  of  God. 

3.  Bor  ("113).  In  this  word,  as  in  the  cognate 
Beer,  the  special  thought  is  that  of  a  pit  or  well 
dug  for  water  (Gesen.  Tlies.  s.  v.).  The  process 
of  desynonymising  which  goes  on  in  all  languages, 
seems  to  have  confined  the  former  to  the  state  of 
the  well  or  cistern,  dug  into  the  lock,  but  no  longer 
filled  with  water.  Thus,  where  the  sense  in  both 
aises  is  figurative,  and  the  same  English  woid 
is  used,  we  have  pit  (beer)  connected  with  the 
"  deep  water,"  "  the  waterflood,"  "  the  deep  "  (Ps. 
Ixix.  16;,  while  in  pit  (=li2),  there  is  nothing 
but  the  "miry  clay"  (Ps.  xl.  2).  Its  dreariest 
feature  is  that  there  is  "  no  water"  in  it  (Zech.  ix. 
11).  So  far  the  idea  involved  has  been  rather  that 
of  misery  and  despair  than  of  death.  But  in 
the  phrase  "  they  that  go  down  to  the  pit"  ("li3), 
it  becomes  even  more  constantly  than  the  svno- 
nyms  already  noticed  {Sheol,  Skachath),  the  repie- 
sentative  of  the  world  of  the  dead  (Ezek.  xsxi.  14, 
16,  xxxii.  18,  24;  Ps.  xxviii.  1,  cxliii.  7).  There 
may  have  been  two  reasons  for  this  transfer.  1.  The 
wide  deep  excavation  became  the  place  of  burial. 
The  "  graves  were  set  in  the  sides  of  the  pit "  (bor) 
(Ezek.  xxxii.  24).  To  one  looking  into  it  it  was 
visibly  the  home  of  the  dead,  while  the  vaguer, 
more  mysterious  Sheol  carried  the  thoughts  further 
to  an  invisible  home.  2.  The  pit,  however,  in  this 
sense,  was  never  simply  equivalent  to  burial-place. 
There  is  always  implied  in  it  a  thought  of  scorn  and 
condemnation.  This  too  had  its  origin  apparently 
in  the  use  made  of  the  excavations,  which  had  either 
never  been  wells,  or  had  lost  the  supply  of  water. 
The  prisoner  in  the  land  of  his  enemies,  was  left  to 
perish  in  the  pit  (bor)  (Zech.  ix.  11).  The  greatest 
of  all  deliverances  is  that  the  captive  exile  is  released 
from  the  slow  death  of  stan-ation  in  it  (skachath, 
Is.  Ii.  14)  The  history  of  Jeremiah,  cast  into  the 
dungeon,  or  pit  (bor)  (Jer.  xxxviii.  6,  9),  let  down 
into  its  depths  with  cords,  sinking  into  the  filth  at 
the  bottom  (here  also  there  is  no  water),  with  death 
by  hunger  staring  him  in  the  face,  shows  how  ter- 
rible an  instrument  of  punishment  was  such  a  pit. 
The  condition  of  the  Athenian  prisoners  in  the  stone- 
quarries  of  Syracuse  (Thuc.  vii.  87),  the  Persian 
punishment  of  the  (tvSSos  (Ctesias,  Pers.  48),  the 
oubliettes  of  mediaeval  prisons  present  instiinces  of 
cruelty,  more  or  less  analogous.  It  is  not  strange 
that  with  these  associations  of  material  horror  clus- 
tering round,  it  should  have  involved  more  of  the 
idea  of  a  place  of  punishment  for  the  haughty  or 
unjust,  than  did  the  sheol  or  the  grave. 

In  Hev.  ix.  1,  2,  and  elsewhere,  the  "bottomless 
pit,"  is  the  translation  of  rh  (ppeap  Trjs  a^vaaov. 
The  A.  V.  has  rightly  taken  (ppiap  here  as  the  equi- 
valent of  bor  rather  than  beer.  The  pit  of  the 
abyss  is  as  a  dungeon.  It  is  opened  with  a  key 
(Rev.  ix.  1,  XX.  1).  Satan  is  cast  into  it,  as  a  pri- 
soner (xx.  2).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PITCH  (nST.  -lOn,  "lab  :  iriWr?  :  pix). 
The  three  Hebrew  terms  above  given  all  represent 
the  same  object,  viz.  mineral  pitch  or  asphalt,  in  its 
different  aspects :  zepheth  (the  zift  of  the  modern 
Arabs,  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  120)  in  its  liquid 
state,  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  flow  ;"  chenar,  in 
its  solid  state,  from  its  red  colour,  though  also  ex- 
plained in  reference  to  the  manner  in  which  it  boils 
up  (the  former,  however,  being  more  consistent  with 
the  appearance  of  the  two  terms  in  juxtaposition  in 
Ex.  ii.  3;  A.  V.  "  pitch  and  slime"; ;  and  copher. 


PITCHER 

in  referencft  to  its  use  in  overlaying  wood-Wdrlc 
(Gen.  vi.  14).  As])halt  is  an  opaque,  inflammable 
substance,  which  bubbles  up  from  subterranean 
fountains  in  a  liquid  state,  and  hardens  by  exposure 
to  the  air,  but  readily  melts  under  the  influence  of 
heat.  In  the  latter  state  it  is  very  tenacious,  and 
was  used  as  a  cement  in  lieu  of  mortar  in  Babylonia 
(Gen.  .\i.  3;  Strab.  xvi.  p.  743  ;  Herod,  i.  179),  as 
well  as  for  coating  the  outsides  of  vessels  (Gen.  vi. 
14;  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §4),  and  particularly  for 
making  the  papyrus  boats  of  the  Egyptians  water- 
tight (Ex.  ii.  o';  Wilkinson,  ii.  I'iO).  The  Baby- 
lonians obtained  their  chief  supply  fiom  spring's  at 
Is  (the  modern  Hit),  which  are  still  in  existence 
(Herod,  i.  179).  The  Jews  and  Arabians  got  theirs 
in  large  quantities  from  the  Dead  t^ea,  which  hence 
received  its  classical  name  of  Lacus  Asphaltites. 
The  latter  was  particularly  prized  for  its  purple  hue 
(Plin.  xxviii.  23).  In  the  early  ages  of  the  Bible 
the  slime-pits  (Gen.  xiv.  10),  or  springs  of  asphalt, 
were  apparent  in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  at  the  southern 
end  of  the  sea.  They  are  now  concealed  through 
the  submeigence  of  the  plain,  and  the  asphalt  pro- 
bably fbi'ms  itself  into  a  crust  on  the  bed  of  the  lake, 
whence  it  is  dislodged  by  earthquakes  or  othei-  causes. 
Early  writers  describe  the  masses  thus  thrown  up  on 
tiie  surface  of  the  lake  as  of  very  considerable  size 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §4  ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  6  ;  Diod.  Sic. 
ii.  48).  This  is  now  a  rare  occurrence  (Robinson,  i. 
517),  though  small  pieces  may  constantly  be  picked 
up  on  the  shoies.  The  inflammable  natuie  of  pitch 
is  noticed  in  Is.  xx.xiv.  9.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PITCHER.a  The  word  "  pitcher"  is  used  in 
A.  V.  to  denote  the  water-jars  or  pitchers  with 
one  or  two  hmidles,  useil  chiefly  by  women  for  car- 
rying water,  as  in  the  story  of  Rebecca  (Gen.  xxiv. 
15-20;  but  see  j\Iark  xiv.  13;  Luke  xxii.  10). 
This  practice  has  been,  and  is  still  usual  both  in 
the  East  and  elsewhere.  The  vessels  used  for  the 
purpose  are  generally  canied  on  the  head  or  the 
shoulder.  The  Bedouin  women  commonly  use 
skin-bottles.  Such  was  the  "  bottle  "  airried  by 
Hagar  (Gen.  xxi.  14;  Harmer,  Ohs.  iv.  246; 
Layard,  Nin.  ^  Bab.  p.  578  ;  Roberts,  Sketches, 
pi.  164;  Arvieux,  Trav.  p.  203;  Burckhardt, 
A'oten  OH  Bed.  i.  351). 

The  same  word  cad  is  used  of  the  pitchers  em- 
ployed by  Gideon's  300  men  (Judg.  vii.  16),  where 
the  use  made  of  them  marks  the  material.  Also 
the  vessel  (A.  V.  barrel)  in  which  the  meal  of  the 
Sareptan  widow  was  contained  (1  K.  xvii.  12), 
and  the  "  barrels  "  of  water  used  by  Elijah  at 
Mount  Carmel  (xviii.  33).  It  is  also  used  figu- 
ratively of  the  life  of  man  (Eccles.  xii.  6).  It  is 
thus  prol)able  that  earthen  vessels  were  used  by  the 
Jews  as  they  were  by  the  Egyptians  lor  containing 
both  liquids  and  dry  provisions  (Birch,  Anc.  Pot- 
tery, i.  43).  In  the  view  of  the  Fountain  of  Naza- 
reth [vol.  i.  p.  632],  may  be  seen  men  and  women 
with  pitchers  which  scarcely  differ  fioni  those  in 
use  in  Egyi>t  and  Nubia  (Roberts,  Sketches,  plates 
29,  164).  The  water-pot  of  the  woman  of  Samaria 
was  probably  one  of  this  kind,  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  much  larger  amphorae  of  the  marriage- 
feast  at  Cana.  [Fuuntain  ;  Culsk  ;  Buni,i; ; 
ELA(iON  ;  Put.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

"  1.  nS  ;  vSpCa;  hydria,  lagena\  akin  to  Sanskrit  kut 
and  Kafio?.  Also  "barrel"  (1  K.  xvli.  12,  xviil.  3:i). 
(Ges.  p.  660;  Kichoff,  Veryleich.ikr  Spradie,^.2l^.) 

2.  ^33  Jintl  T'33;  iyytioi';  vas;  A.V.  "bottle,"  only 
VOL.  11. 


PLAGUE,  THE  881 

PI'THOM  (DhS  :  ne(0a5 :  Phithom),  one  of 
the  store-cities  laiilt  by  the  Israelites  for  the  first 
oppressor,  the  Phaiaoh  "  which  knew  not  Josepli " 
(Ex.  i.  11).  In  the  Heb.  these  cities  ai-e  two, 
Pithom  and  Kaamses :  the  LXX.  adds  On,  as  a  third. 
It  is  probable  that  Pithom  lay  in  the  most  eastejii 
part  of  Lower  Egypt,  like  Raamses,  if,  as  is  reason- 
able, we  suppose  the  latter  to  be  the  Rameses  men- 
tioned elsewhere,  and  that  the  Israelites  were  occupied 
in  public  works  within  or  near  to  the  laud  of  Goshen. 
Herodotus  mentions  a  town  called  Patumus,  Ila- 
Tou/ios,  which  seems  to  be  the  same  as  the  Thoum  or 
'i'hou  of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus,  probably  the 
military  station  Thohu  of  the  Notitia.  Whether  or 
not  Patumus  be  the  Pithom  of  Scrij)ture,  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  the  name  is  identical.  The  first 
part  is  the  same  as  in  Bu-bastis  and  Bu-siris,  either 
the  definite  article  masculine,  or  a  possessive  pronoun, 
unless  imleeJ,  with  Brugsch,  we  read  the  Egyptian 
word  "  abode  "  PA,  and  suppose  that  it  commences 
these  names.  [Pi-beseth.]  The  second  part  ap- 
pears to  be  the  name  of  ATUM  or  TUM,  a  divinitv 
worshipped  at  On,  or  Heliopulis,  as  well  as  Ra,  both 
being  forms  of  the  sun  [On],  and  it  is  noticeable 
that  Thoum  or  Thou  was  very  near  the  Heliopolite 
nome,  and  perhaps  more  anciently  within  it,  and 
that  a  monument  at  Aboo-Keshei/d  shews  that  the 
worship  of  Heliopolis  extended  along  the  valley  of 
the  Canal  of  the  Red  Sea.  As  we  find  Thoum 
and  Patmnus  and  Rameses  in  or  near  to  the  land 
of  Goshen,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  we  have  here  a  correspondence  to  Pithom 
and  Raamses,  and  the  probable  connexion  in  both 
cases  with  Heliopolis  confirms  the  conclusion.  It 
is  remarkable  that  the  Coptic  version  of  Gen.  xlvi. 
28  mentions  Pithom  lor,  or  instead  of,  the  He- 
roopolis  of  the  LXX.  The  Hebrew  reads,  "  And 
he  sent  Judah  before  him  unto  Joseph,  to  direct 
his  face  unto  Goshen ;  and  they,  came  into  the 
land  of  Goshen."  Here  the  LXX.  lias,  KaO'  'Upuoii' 
ttSAlv,  fls  yriv  'Pa^eiro-f/,  but  the  Coptic,  P,^ 

np<LJUL<LCCH.  Whether  Patumus  and  Thoum 
be  the  same,  and  the  position  of  one  or  both,  have 
yet  to  be  determined,  before  we  aui  speak  positively 
as  to  the  Pithom  of  Exodus.  Herodotus  places  Pa- 
tumus in  the  Arabian  nome  upon  tlie  Canal  of  the 
Red  Sea  (ii.  48).  The  Itinerary  of  Antoninus  ])uts 
Thou  50  Roman  miles  from  Heliopolis,  and  48  fiom 
Pelusium  ;  but  this  seems  too  far  noith  for  Patu- 
mus, and  also  for  Pithom,  if  that  place  were  near 
Heliopolis,  as  its  name  and  connexion  with  Raamses 
seem  to  indicate.  Under  Raamses  is  a  discussion  of 
the  charactei-  of  these  cities,  and  of  their  inqiortance 
in  Egyptian  history.     [Ramksks.]  [K".  S.  P.] 

PI'THONdin^S:  <Pi0iiy:  Phithon).  One  of 
the  four  sons  of  Miaih,  the  son  of  Jleribbaal,  or 
IMephibosheth  (1  Chr.  vhi.  35,  ix.  41). 

PLAGUE,  THE.  The  disease  now  called  the 
Plague,  which  has  lavaged  Egypt  and  neighbouring 
countries  in  modern  times,  is  supposed  to  have  pre- 
vailed there  in  former  ages.  Manetho,  the  Egyptian 
historian,  speaks  of  "  a  very  great  plague  "  in  the 
leign  of  Seniempses,  the  seventh  king  of  the  first 


once  a  "pitcher"  (Lam.  iv.  2),  where  il  Is  joined  with 
Knn,  on  earthen  vessel  (Ges.  022). 

3.  In  N.  '1'.  Kepafj-iov,  twice  only  :  Mark  xiv.  13,  kujcna  ; 
Luke  xxii.  K),  amphora. 

3   L 


882 


PLAGUE,  THE 


dynast)',  B.C.  cir.  2500.  The  difficulty  of  deter- 
mining the  chaiacter  of  the  pestilences  of  ancient 
and  mediaeval  times,  even  when  carefully  described, 
warns  us  not  to  conclude  that  every  such  mention 
refers  to  the  Plague,  especially  as  the  cholera  has, 
since  its  modern  appearance,  been  almost  as  severe 
a  scourge  to  Egypt  as  the  more  famous  disease, 
which,  indeed,  as  an  epidenric  seems  there  to  have 
been  succeeded  by  it.  Moreover,  if  we  admit,  as 
we  must,  that  there  have  been  anciently  pestilences 
very  nearly  resembling  the  modern  Plague,  we  must 
still  hesitate  to  pronounce  any  recorded  pestilence  to 
be  of  this  class  unless  it  be  described  with  some 
distinguishing  particulars. 

The  Plague  in  recent  times  has  not  extended 
far  beyond  the  Turkish  Empire  and  the  kingdom  of 
Persia".  It  has  been  asserted  that  Egypt  is  its  cradle, 
but  this  does  not  seem  to  be  corroborated  by  the 
later  history  of  the  disease.  It  is  there  both  spo- 
radic and  epidemic ;  in  the  Hrst  form  it  has  appeared 
almost  annually,  in  the  second  at  rarer  intervals. 
As  an  epidemic  it  takes  the  character  of  a  pestilence, 
sometimes  of  the  greatest  severity.  Our  subsequent 
remarks  apply  to  it  in  this  form.  It  is  a  much-  j 
vexed  question  whether  it  is  ever  endemic:  that 
such  is  the  case  is  favoured  by  its  rareness  since 
sanitaiy  measures  have  been  enforced.  j 

The  Plague  when  most  severe  usually  appears  first  , 
on  the  northern  coast  of  Egypt,  having  previously  ! 
broken  out  in  Turkey  or  North  Africa  west  of  Egypt.  } 
It  ascends  the  river  to  Cairo,  rarely  going  much  j 
fiu-ther.    Thus  Mi-.  Lane  has  observed  that  the  great  { 
plague  of  1835   "  was  certainly  introduced  from  ; 
Turkey  "  {Modern  Egyptians,  6th  ed.  p.  3,  note  1).  ' 
It  was  first  noticed  at  Alexandria,  ascended  to  Cairo, 
and  further  to  the  southern  part  of  Egypt,  a  few 
cases  having  occurred  at  Thebes  ;  and  it  "  extended 
throughout  the  whole  of  Egypt,  though  its  ravages 
were  not  great    in    the   southern  parts"  {Ibid.). 
The  mortality    is  often   enormous,  and  Mr.  Lane 
I'emarks  of  the  plague  just  mentioned : — "  It  de- 
stroyed not  less   than  eighty  thousand  persons  in  j 
Cairo,  that  is,  one-third  of  the  jiopulation ;  and  far  j 
more,    I    believe,  than  two  hundred  thousand   in  : 
all  Egypt"    {Ibid.).^     The  writer  was  in  Cairo' 
on  the  last  occasion  when   this  pestilence  visited 
Egypt,  in  the  summer  of  1843,  when  the  deaths  , 
were  not  numerous,  although,  owing  to  the  Go-  j 
vernment's    jMsting    a    sentry   at    each    house    in  j 
which  any  one  had  died  of  the  disease,  to  entbrce  ' 
quarantine,  there  was  much  concealment,  and  the 
number  was  not  accurately  known    (Mrs.  Poole, 
Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  ii.   32-35).      Although 
since  then  Egypt  has  been  free  from  this  scourge, 
Benghazee  (Hesperides),  in  the  pashalic  of  'l'ri]X)li, 
was  almost  depopulated  by  it  during  part  of  the 
years  1860  and   1861.      It   generally   appears   in 
Egypt  in  mid-winter,  and  lasts  at  most  for  about  six 
months. 

The  Plague  is  considered  to  be  a  severe  kind  of 
typhus,  accompanied  by  buboes.  Like  the  cholera  ' 
it  is  most  violent  at  tlie  first  outbreak,  causing 
almost  iustant  death ;  later  it  may  last  three  days, 
and  even  longer,  but  usually  it  is  fatal  in  a  few 
hours.  It  has  never  been  successfully  treated,  except 
in  isolated  cases  or  when  the  epidemic  has  seemed  to 
have  worn  itself  out.  Depletion  and  stimulants 
have  been  tried,  as  with  cholera,  and  stimulants 
with  far  better  results.     Great  diflerence  of  opinion 

»  A  curi&us  story  connected  with  this  plague  is  given 
in  the  noces  to  the  Thousand  and,  One  Nirjhts,  cb.  iii. 


PLAGUE,  THE 

has  obtained  as  to  whether  it  is  contagious  or  nut. 
Instances  have,  however,  occurred  in  which  no 
known  cause  except  contagion  could  have  conveyed 
the  disease. 

In  noticing  the  places  in  the  Bible  which  might 

be  supposed  to  refer  to  the  Plague  we  must  bear 

j  in  mind  that,  unless  some  of  its  distinctive  charac- 

j  teristics  are  mentioned,  it  is  not  safe  to  infer  that 

I  this  disease  is  intended. 

;  In  the  narrative  of  the  Ten  Plagues  there  is,  as 
we  point  out  below  [p.  886rt],  none  corresponding 
to  the  modern  Plague.  The  plague  of  boils  has  in- 
deed some  I'esemblance,  and  it  might  be  urged,  that, 
as  hi  other  cases  known  scourges  were  sent  (their 
miraculous  nature  being  shown  by  their  opportune 
occurrence  and  their  intense  character),  so  in  this 
case  a  disease  of  the  country,  if  indeed  the  Plague 
anciently  prevailed  in  Egypt,  might  have  been 
employed.  Yet  the  ordinary  Plague  would  rather 
exceed  in  severity  this  infliction  than  the  contrary, 
which  seems  fatal  to  this  supposition.  [Plagues, 
THE  Ten.] 

Several  Hebrew  words  are  translated  "  pestilence  " 
or  "plague."  (1)  "13'^,  properly  "destruction," 
hence  "a  plague;"  in  LXX.  commonly  Odfaros. 
It  is  used  with  a  wide  signification  for  dilierent 
pestilences,  being  employed  even  for  murrain  in 
the  account  of  the  plague  of  murrain  (Ex.  ix.  3). 
(2)  niD,  properly  "  death,"  hence  "  a  deadly  dis- 
ease, pestilence."  Gesenius  compares  the  Schivarzer 
Tod,  or  Black  Death,  of  the  middle  ages.  (3)  tjJJ 
and  nQlO,  properly  anything  with  which  people 
are  smitten,  especially  by  God,  therefore  a  plague 
or  pestilence  sent  by  Him.    (4)  3t3p,  "pestilence" 

(Deut.  xxxii.  24,  A.V.  "destruction";  Ps.  xci.  6, 
"  the  pestilence  [that]  walketh  in  darkness  "),  and 
perhaps  also  3t3p,  if  we  follow  Gesenius,  instead  of 
reading  with  the  A.  V.  "destruction,"  in  Hos.  xiii. 
14.      (5)  5]K^"I,  properly  "  a   flame."   hence    "  a 

burning  fever,"  "  a  plague"  (Deut.  xxxii.  24  ;  Hab. 
iii.  5,  where  it  occurs  with  "13"^).  It  is  evident 
that  not  one  of  these  words  can  be  considered  as 
designating  by  its  signification  the  Plague.  Whether 
the  disease  be  mentioned  must  be  judged  from  the 
sense  of  passages,  not  fi-om  the  sense  of  words. 

Those  pestilences  which  were  sent  as  special 
judgments,  and  were  either  supernatuially  rapid  in 
their  eflects,  or  in  addition  directed  against  par- 
ticular culprits,  are  beyond  the  reach  of  human 
inquiry.  But  we  also  read  of  pestilences  which, 
although  sent  as  judgments,  have  the  characteristics 
of  modern  epidemics,  not  being  rapid  beyond  nature, 
nor  directed  against  individuals.  Thus  in  the  re- 
markable threateuings  in  Leviticus  and  Deutero- 
nomy, pestilence  is  spoken  of  as  one  of  the  enduring 
judgments  that  were  gradually  to  destroy  the  dis- 
obedient. This  passage  in  Leviticus  evidently  refers 
to  pestilence  in  besieged  cities  :  "  And  I  will  bring 
a  sword  upon  you,  that  shall  avenge  the  quarrel  of 
[my]  covenant :  and  when  ye  are  gathered  together 
within  your  cities,  I  will  send  the  pestilence  among 
you ;  and  ye  shall  be  delivered  into  the  hand  of  the 
enemy"  (xxvi.  25).  Famine  in  a  besieged  city 
would  occasion  pestilence.  A  special  disease  may 
be  indicated  in  the  prnvallel  portion  of  Deuteronomy 
(xxviii.  21 ) :  "  The  Lord  shall  make  the  pestilence 
cleave  unto  thee,  until  he  [or  "  it "]  have  consumed 
thee  from  off  the  land  whither  thou  goest  to  possess 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

it."  The  word  remleved  "  pestilence  "  niiiy,  how- 
ever, have  a  general  signification,  and  comprise  ca- 
lamities mentioned  afterwards,  for  there  follows  an 
enumeration  of  several  other  diseases  and  similar 
scourges  (xxviii.  21,  22).  The  first  disease  here 
mentioned,  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  Plague 
(Bunsen,  Bibe/werk).  It  is  to  be  remembered  that 
"  the  botch  of  Egypt"  is  afterwards  spoken  of  (27), 
by  which  it  is  probable  that  ordinary  boils  are  in- 
tended, which  are  especially  severe  in  Egypt  in  the 
pi'eseut  day,  and  that  later  still  '"all  the  diseases  of 
Egypt"  are  mentioned  (GO).  It  therefore  seems  un- 
likely that  so  giave  a  disease  as  the  Plague,  if  then 
known,  should  not  be  spoken  of  in  either  of  these 
two  passages.  In  neither  place  does  it  seem  certain 
that  the  Plague  is  specified,  though,  in  the  one,  if 
it  were  to  be  in  the  land  it  would  fasten  upon  the 
population  of  besieged  cities,  and  in  the  other,  if 
then  known,  it  would  probably  be  alluded  to  as  a 
terrible  judgment  in  an  enumeration  of  diseases. 
The  notices  in  the  prophets  present  the  same  diffi- 
culty ;  for  they  do  not  seem  to  afford  sufficiently 
positive  evidence  that  the  Plague  was  known  in 
those  times.  With  the  piophets,  as  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, we  must  suppose  that  the  diseases  threatened 
or  prophesied  as  judgments  must  have  been  known, 
or  at  least  called  by  the  names  used  for  those  that 
were  known.  Two  jiixssages  might  seem  to  be  ex- 
jilicit.  In  Amos  we  read,  "  I  have  sent  among  you 
tiie  jjestilence  after  the  manner  of  Egypt :  your  young 
men  have  I  slain  with  the  sword,  and  have  tiiken 
away  your  horses ;  and  I  have  made  the  stink  of 
your  camps  to  come  up  unto  your  nostrils"  (Am. 
iv.  10).  Here  the  reference  is  perhaps  to  the  death 
of  the  firstborn,  for  the  same  piinuse,  "  alter  the 
manner  of  Egypt,''  is  used  by  Isaiah  (x.  24,  26), 
with  a  reference  to  the  Exodus,  and  perhaps  to  the 
oppression  preceding  it ;  and  an  allusion  to  p;ist  his- 
tory seems  probable,  as  a  comparison  with  the  over- 
throw of  the  cities  of  the  plain  immediately  follows 
(Am.  iv.  11).  The  prophet  Zechariah  also  speaks 
of  a  plague  with  which  the  Egyptians,  if  lefusing 
to  serve  (iod,  should  be  smitten  (,xiv.  18),  but  the 
name,  and  the  dasciiption  which  appears  to  apply 
to  this  scourge  seem  to  show  that  it  caiuiot  be  the 
Plague  (12). 

Hezekiah's  disease  has  been  thought  to  have  been 
the  Plague,  and  its  fiital  nature,  as  well  as  the 
mention  of  a  boil,  makes  this  not  improbable.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  is  no  mention  of  a  pestilence 
among  his  people  at  the  time. 

Theie  does  not  seem,  therefore,  to  be  any  distinct 
notice  of  the  Plague  in  the  Bible,  and  it  is  most 
probable  that  this  can  be  accounted  for  hj  supposing 
either  that  no  pestilence  of  antiquity  in  the  East 
was  as  maiked  in  character  as  the  modern  Plague, 
oi-  that  the  latter  disease  then  frequently  liroke  out 
there  as  an  epidemic  iu  crowded  cities,  inste;id  of 
following  a  regular  course. 

(See  Kussell's  Nntural  Ilistori/  of  Aleppo  ;  Clot- 
Bey,  De  la  I'cstc,  aud  Apcri^u  General  sur  l'E(jijpte, 
ii.'348-:35().)  [K.  S,"P.] 

PLAGUES,  THE  TEN.  In  considering  the 
history  of  the  Ten  Plagues  we  have  to  iKitice  the 
l)lace  where  they  occurred,  and  the  occa>ion  on 
which  they  were  sent,  and  to  examine  the  narrative 
of  each  judgment,  with  a  view  to  ascertain  what  it 
was,  and  in  what  manner  Pharaoh  and  the  Egyp- 
tians were  punished  by  it,  as  well  as  to  see  if'  we 
can  trace  any  geneial  coimexion  between  the  several 
judgments. 

f.   The  Place. — Although  it  is  disfinrtlv  stated 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


883 


that  the  plagues  prevailed  throughout  Egypt,  save, 
in  the  case  of  some,  the  Israelite  territory,  the  land 
of  Goshen,  yet  the  descriptions  seem  principally 
to  apply  to  that  part  of  Egypt  which  lay  nearest  to 
Goshen,  and  more  especially  to  "  the  field  of  Zoan," 
or  the  tract  about  that  city,  since  it  seems  almost 
certain  that  Pharaoh  dwelt  in  Zoan,  and  that  ter- 
ritory is  especially  indicated  iu  Ps.  Ixxviii.  4.'3. 
That  the  capital  at  this  time  was  not  more  distant 
tiora  liamescs  than  Zoan  is  evident  from  tiie  time 
in  which  a  message  could  be  sent  from  Pharaoh  to 
Jloses  on  the  ocaision  of  the  Exodus.  The  descrip- 
tions of  the  first  and  second  plagues  seem  especially 
to  refer  to  a  laud  abounding  in  streams  and  lakes, 
and  so  rather  to  the  Lower  than  to  the  Upper 
Country.  We  must  therefore  look  especially  to 
Lower  Egypt  for  our  illustrations,  while  be;«-ing  in 
mind  the  evident  prevalence  of  the  plagues  thiough- 
out  the  land. 

II.  The  Occasion. — When  that  Pharaoh  who 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  oppressor  was  dead, 
God  sent  !Moses  to  deliver  Israel,  commanding  him 
to  gather  the  elders  of  his  people  together,  and  to 
tell  them  his  commission.  It  is  added,  "And  they 
sliall  hearken  to  thy  voice  :  and  thou  shalt  come, 
thou  aud  the  elders  of  Israel,  unto  the  king  of 
Egypt,  and  ye  shall  say  unto  him.  The  Lord  God 
of  the  Hebrews  hath  met  with  us:  and  now  let  us 
go,  we  beseech  thee,  three  days'  journey  into  the 
wilderness,  that  we  may  sacrifice  to  the  Lord  our 
God.  And  I  am  sure  that  the  king  of  Egypt  will 
not  let  you  go,  no,  not  by  a  mighty  hand.  And  I 
will  stretch  out  my  hand,  and  smite  Egypt  with 
all  my  wonders  which  I  will  do  in  the  midst 
thereof;  and  after  that  he  will  let  you  go  "  (Ex.  iii. 
18-20).  From  what  Ibllows,  that  the  Israelites 
should  borrow  jewels  aud  raiment,  and  "  spoil 
Egypt"  (21,  22),  it  seems  evident  that  they  were 
to  leave  as  if  only  for  the  purpose  of  sacrificing  ; 
but  it  will  be  seen  that  if  they  did  so,  Pharaoh,  by 
his  armed  pursuit  aud  overtaking  them  when  they 
had  encamped  at  the  close  of  the  third  day's  journey, 
released  Moses  fiom  his  engagement. 

When  Jloses  went  to  Pharaoh,  Aaron  went  with 
him,  because  Moses,  not  judging  himself  to  be 
eloquent,  was  diffident  of  speaking  to  Pharaoh. 
"  And  Moses  said  before  the  Lord,  Behold,  1  [am] 
of  uncircumcised  lips,  and  how  shall  Pharaoh 
hearken  unto  me?  And  the  Lokd  said  unto  Moses, 
See,  I  have  made  thee  a  god  to  Pharaoh:  and 
Aaron  thy  brother  shall  be  thy  prophet"  (Ex.  vi. 
30,  vii.  1  ;  comp.  iv.  10-16).  We  are  therefore  to 
understand  that  even  when  Moses  speaks  it  is  rather 
by  Aaron  than  himself.  It  is  perhaps  worthy  of 
note  that  in  the  tradition  of  the  Exodus  which 
Manetho  gives,  the  calamities  preceding  the  event 
are  said  to  have  been  caused  by  the  king's  consulting 
an  Egyptian  prophet;  for  this  suggests  a  course 
which  Piiaraoh  is  likely  to  have  adopted,  rendering 
it  probable  that  the  magicians  were  sent  for  as  the 
])riests  of  the  gods  of  the  country,  so  that  Moses 
was  exalted  by  contrast  with  these  vain  objects  of 
worship.  We  may  now  examine  tiie  narrative  of 
each  plague. 

III.  The  Plagues.— 1.  The  Pla.iw  of  Blood.— 
When  Moses  and  Aaron  came  before  Pharaoh,  a 
miracle  was  required  of  them.  Then  Aaron's  rod 
became  "a  seipent"  (A.  V.),  or  rather  ''a  croco- 
dile" (i'Dn).  Its  being  changed  into  an  animal 
reverenced  by  all  the  Egyptians,  or  by  .some  of  them, 
would  have  been  an  esjaecial  warning  to  Pharaoh. 
The  Egyptian  magicians  callcil  by  the  king  produced 

:;  L  2 


884 


PIAGUES,  THE  TEN 


what  seemed  to  be  the  same  wonder,  yet  Aaron's 
rod  swallowed  up  the  others  (vii.  3-l"2).  This 
passage,  taken  alone,  would  appear  to  indiaite  that 
the  magicians  succeeded  in  working  wonders,  but,  if 
it  is  compaied  with  those  others  lelating  their  oppo- 
sition on  the  occasions  of  the  first  three  plagues,  a 
contrary  inference  seems  more  reasonable.  In  this 
case  the  expression,  "  they  also  did  in  like  manner 
with  their  enchantments"  (11)  is  used,  and  it  is 
repeated  in  the  cases  of  their  seeming  success  on 
the  occasions  of  the  fii-st  plague  {'2'-),  and  the  second 
(viii.  7),  as  well  as  when  they  failed  on  tlie  occasion 
of  the  third  plague  (18).  A  comparison  with  other 
jiassages  sti'engthens  us  in  the  inference  that  the  magi- 
cians succeeded  merely  by  juggling.  [Magic]  Yet, 
even  if  they  were  able  to  produce  any  real  efi'ects 
b}'  magic,  a  broad  distinction  should  be  drawn 
between  the  geneial  and  powerful  nature  of  the 
wonders  wrought  by  the  hand  of  Moses  and  Aaron 
and  their  partial  and  weak  imitations.  When  Pha- 
raoh had  refused  to  let  tlie  Israelites  go,  Moses  was 
sent  again,  and,  on  the  second  refusal,  was  commanded 
to  smite  upon  the  waters  of  the  river  and  to  turn  them 
and  all  the  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood.  Tlie  miracle 
was  to  be  wrought  when  Pharaoh  went  forth  in  the 
mornnig  to  the  river.  Its  general  character  is  very 
remarkable,  for  not  only  was  the  watei'  of  the  Nile 
smitten,  but  all  the  water,  even  that  in  vessels, 
througliout  the  country.  The  tish  died,  and  the 
river  stank.  The  Egyptians  could  not  ilrink  of  it, 
and  digged  around  it  for  water.  This  plague 
appciU's  to  have  lasted  seven  days,  for  the  account 
of  it  ends,  "  And  seven  days  were  fuihlled,  after 
that  the  Lord  had  smitten  the  river"  (vii.  13-25), 
and  the  nariative  of  the  second  plague  immedi- 
ately ibllows,  as  though  the  other  had  then  ceased. 
Some  difficulty  has  been  occasioned  by  the  mention 
that  the  Egyptians  digged  tor  water,  but  it  is  not 
stated  that  they  so  gained  what  they  sought, 
although  it  may  be  conjectured  that  only  the  water 
that  was  seen  was  smitten,  in  order  that  the  nation 
'  should  not  perish.  This  plague  was  doubly  humi- 
liating to  the  religion  of  the  country,  as  the  Kile 
w;is  lield  sacred,  as  well  as  some  kinds  of  its  fish, 
not  to  speak  of  tlie  crocodiles,  which  probably  were 
destroyed.  It  may  have  been  a  marked  reproof  for 
the  cruel  edict  that  the  Israelite  children  should 
be  drowne<l,  and  could  scarcely  have  tailed  to  strike 
guilty  consciences  as  such,  though  Pharaoh  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  alarmed  by  it.  He  saw  what 
was  probably  an  imitation  wrought  by  the  magi- 
cians, who  accompanied  him,  as  if  he  were  engaged 
in  some  sacred  rites,  perhaps  connected  with  the 
worship  of  the  Nile.  Events  having  some  resem- 
blance to  this  are  mentioned  by  ancient  writers : 
the  most  i  emarkable  is  related  by  Manetho,  accord- 
ing to  whom  it  was  said  that,  in  the  reign  of  Ne- 
phercheres,  seventh  king  of  the  iind  dynasty,  the 
Nile  flowed  mixed  with  honey  for  eleven  days. 
Some  of  the  liistorical  notices  of  the  earliest  dy- 
nasties seem  to  be  of  very  doubtful  authenticity, 
and  Jlimetho  seems  to  treat  this  one  as  a  fable,  or, 
perliaps  as  a  tradition.  Nephercheres,  it  must  be 
remarked,  reigned  several  hnndied  years  before  the 
Exodus.  Those  who  have  endeavoured  to  explain 
this  plague  by  natural  causes,  have  referred  to  the 
changes  of  colour  to  which  the  Nile  is  subject,  the 
appearance  of  the  Ked  Sea,  and  the  so-called  rain 
and  dew  of  blood  of  the  middle  ages ;  the  last  two 
occasioned  by  small  fungi  of  very  rapid  growth. 
But  such  theories  do  not  explain  why  the  wonder 
happened  at  a  time  of  year  when  the  Nile  is  most 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

clear,  nor  why  it  killed  the  fish  and  made  the  water 
unfit  to  be  dnnik.  These  are  the  really  weighty 
points,  lather  than  the  change  into  blood,  which 
seems  to  mean  a  change  into  the  semblance  of 
blood.  The  emplovment  of  natural  means  in  ef- 
fecting a  miracle  is  equally  seen  in  the  passage  of 
the  Pied  Sea ;  but  the  Divine  power  is  proved  by 
the  intensifying  or  extending  that  means,  and  the 
opportune  occurrence  of  the  lesult,  and  its  fitness 
for  a  great  moral  purpose. 

2.  The  Pliigue  of  Frogs. — When  seven  days  had 
passed  after  the  smiting  of  the  river,  Pharaoli  was 
threateneil  with  another  judgment,  and,  on  his  i-e- 
fusing  to  let  the  Israelites  go,  the  second  plague  was 
sent.  The  river  and  all  the  open  waters  of  Egypt 
bi'ought  forth  countless  frogs,  which  not  only  covered 
the  land,  but  filled  the  houses,  even  in  their  diiest 
parts  and  vessels,  for  the  ovens  and  kneading- troughs 
are  specified.  The  magicians  again  had  a  seeming 
success  in  their  opposition ;  j^et  Pharaoh,  whose 
very  palaces  were  tilled  by  tlie  reptiles,  entreated 
Moses  to  piay  that  they  might  be  removed,  pro- 
mising to  let  the  Israelites  go;  but,  on  the  removal 
of  the  plague,  again  hardened  his  heart  (vii.  2.5, 
viii.  1-15).  This  must  have  been  an  especially 
trying  judgment  to  the  Egyptians,  as  frogs  wei-e 
included  among  the  sacred  animals,  probably  not 
among  those  which  were  reverenced  throughout 
Egypt,  like  the  cat,  but  in  the  second  class  of  local 
objects  of  worship,  like  the  crocodile.  The  frog 
Wiis  sacred  to  the  goddess  HEKT,  who  is  represented 
with  tlie  head  of  this  reptile.  In  hieroglyphics  the 
frog  signifies  "  very  many,"  "millions,"  doubtless 
from  its  abundance.  In  the  present  day  frogs 
abound  in  Egypt,  and  in  the  summer  and  autumn 
their  loud  and  incessant  croaking  in  all  the  waters 
of  the  country  gives  some  idea  of  this  plague.  They 
are  not,  however,  heard  in  the  spring,  nor  is  there 
any  record,  excepting  the  Biblical  one,  of  their 
having  been  injurious  to  the  inhabitants.  It  must 
be  added  that  the  supposed  cases  of  the  same  kind 
elsewhere,  quoted  from  ancient  authors,  are  of  very 
doubtful  authenticity. 

3.  T/ie  Plague  of  Lice. — The  account  of  the 
third  plague  is  not  preceded  by  the  mention  of  any 
warning  to  Pharaoh.  We  read  that  Aaron  was  com- 
manded to  stretch  out  his  I'od  and  smite  the  dust, 
which  became,  as  the  A.  V.  reads  the  word,  "lice" 
in  man  and  beast.  The  magicians  again  attempted 
opposition ;  but,  failing,  confessed  that  the  wonder 
was  of  God  (riii.  1(3-19).  There  is  much  difficulty 
as  to  the  animals  meant  by  the  term  DJS.  The 
Masoretic  punctuation  is  D33,  which  would  pro- 
bably make  it  a  collective  noun  with  D  fonnative  ; 
but  the  plural  form  D"'33  also  occurs  (ver.  1(5 
[Heb.  12];  Ps.  cv.  31),  of  which  we  once  find  the 
singular  |3  in  Isaiah  (li.  6).  It  is  therefore  reason- 
able to  conjecture  that  the  first  form  should  be 
punctuated  033,  as  the  defective  wiiting  of  D''33 ; 
and  it  should  also  be  observed  that  the  Samaritan 
has  D''33.  The  LXX.  has  crKvi<pes,  and  the  Vulg. 
sciniphes,  mosquitos,  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (ii. 
95),  and  Philo  {De  Vita  Mosi.'f,  i.  20,  p.  97,  ed. 
Mang.),  as  troublesome  in  Egypt.  Josephns, 
however,  makes  the  D33  lice  {Ant.  ii.  14,  §3), 
with  which  Bochart  agrees  {Hieruz.  ii.  572,  scqq.). 
The  etymology  is  doubtful,  and  peihaps  the  word 
is  Egyptian.  The  narrative  does  not  enable  us  to 
decide  which  is  the  more  probable  of  the  two 
renderings,  excepting,  indeed,  that  if  it  be  meant 


1 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

thiit  exactly  the  same  kind  of  animal  attacked  man 
and  beast,  mosquitos  would  be  the  moie  likely 
translation,  hi  this  case  the  plague  does  not  seem 
to  be  especially  directed  against  the  superstitions  of 
the  Egyptians  :  it',  however,  it  were  ot  lice,  it 
would  have  been  most  distressing  to  their  priests, 
who  were  very  cleanly,  apparently,  like  the  Mus- 
lims, as  a  religious  duty.  In  the  present  day  both 
mosquitos  and  lice  are  abundant  in  Kgypt :  the 
latter  may  be  avoided,  but  theie  is  no  escaj)e  from 
the  tbrnier,  which  aie  so  distressing  an  annovance 
that  an  increa.se  of  them  would  i-ender  life  almost 
insupportable  to  beasts  as  well  as  men. 

4.  The  Flctijue  of  Flies. — In  the  case  of  the 
fourth  plague,  as  in  that  of  the  first,  Moses  was 
commanded  to  meet  Pharaoh  in  the  morning  as  he 
came  forth  to  the  water,  and  to  threaten  him  with 
a  judgment  if  he  still  refused  to  give  the  Israelites 
leave  to  go  and  worship.  He  was  to  be  punished  by 
my,  which  the  A.  V.  renders  "  swarms  [of  flies]," 
"  a  swarm  [of  flies],"  or,  in  the  margin,  "  a  mixture 
[of  noisome  be;ists]."  These  creatures  were  to 
cover  the  people,  and  till  both  the  houses  and  the 
ground.  Here,  foi'  the  first  time,  we  read  that  the 
land  of  Goshen,  where  the  Israelites  dwelt,  was  to 
be  exempt  from  the  plague.  So  terrible  was  it 
that  Pharaoh  granted  permission  for  the  Israelites 
to  sacrifice  in  the  land,  which  Moses  refused  to  do,  as 
the  Egyptians  would  stone  his  people  for  sacrificing 
their  "  abomination."  'I'iien  Pharaoh  gave  them 
leave  to  sacrifice  in  the  wilderness,  provided  they  did 
not  go  far  ;  but,  on  the  plague  being  removed,  broke 
his  agreement  (viii.  20-32).  The  proper  meaning 
of  the  word  mj?  is  a  question  of  extreme  difliculty. 
The  explanation  of  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  14,  §3),  and 
almost  all  the  Hebrew  commentators,  is  that  it 
means  "  a  mixture,"  and  here  designates  a  mixture 
of  wild  animals,  in  accordance  with  the  derivation 
from  the  root  QIJ?,  "  he  mixed."  Similarly,  Je- 
rome rendei's  it  oiimo  genus  muscarum,  and  Aquila 
irdfjinvia.  The  LXX.,  however, and  Philo  {De  Vita 
Musis,  i.  23,  ii.  lul,  ed.  Mang.),  suppose  it  to 
be  a  dog-fly,  Kvy6fivia.  The  second  of  these  expla- 
nations seems  to  be  a  compromise  between  the  first 
and  the  third.  It  is  almost  certain,  from  two 
passages  (Ex.  viii.  29,  31  ;  Hebrew,  25,  27),  that 
a  single  creature  is  intended.  If  so,  what  reason  is 
there  in  favour  of  the  LXX.  rendeiing?  Oedmami 
(  Venn.  Smivnlmujen,  ii.  150,  ap.  Ges.  Thes.  s.  v.) 
projjoses  the  blatta  orientalis,  a  kind  of  beetle, 
justeatl  of  a  dog-fly  ;  but  Gesenius  oljects  that  this 
creature  devours  things  rather  than  stings  men, 
whereas  it  is  evident  that  the  animal  of  this  plague 
attacked  or  at  least  annojed  men,  besides  ap])arently 
injuring  the  land.  From  Ps.  Ixxviii.  45,  where  we 
read,  "  He  sent  the  3"iy,  which  devoured  them," 
it  must  have  been  a  creature  of  devouring  habits, 
as  is  observed  by  Kalisch  {^Comment,  on  Exod. 
p.  138),  who  siipports  the  theory  that  a  beetle  is 
intended.  The  Egyptian  language  might  be  hoped 
to  give  us  a  clue  to  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  and 
Philo.  In  hieroglyphics  a  fly  is  AF,  and  a  bee  SHEli, 
or  KlIEB,  SH  and  1\H  being  interchangeable,  in 
(liHerent  dialects ;  and  in  Coptic  these  two  words 
are  confounded  in  ^^,q,  ^.q,  ^.£.,  ^^.q, 
ninsca,  apis,  scarabaciis.  We  can  thercfuie  oidy 
judge  from  the  description  of  the  plague;  and  here 
Geseuius  seems  to  have  too  hastily  decided  against 
the  rendering  "beetle,"  since  the  beetle  sometimes 
;itt;icks  men.      Vet  oiu-  experience  docs  not  bear  out 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


885 


the  idea  that  any  kind  of  beetle  is  injurious  to  man 
in  Egypt ;  but  there  is  a  kind  of  gad-fly  found  in 
that  country  which  sometimes  stings  men,  thouidi 
usually  attacking  beasts.  The  diiKculty,  however, 
in  the  way  of  the  supposition  that  a  stinging  fly  is 
meant  is  that  all  such  flies  are,  like  this  one,  plagues 
to  beasts  rather  than  men;  and  if  we  conjecture 
that  a  fly  is  intended,  perhaps  it  is  more  reasonable 
to  infer  that  it  was  the  common  fly,  which  in  the 
present  day  is  probably  the  most  troublesome  insect 
in  Egypt.  That  this  was  a  more  severe  plao-ue  than 
those  preceding  it,  appears  from  its  eiiect  on  Pha- 
raoh, rather  than  from  the  mention  of  the  exemption 
of  the  Israelites,  for  it  can  .scarcely  be  supposed  that 
the  earlier  plagues  alfected  them.  As  we  do  not 
know  what  creature  is  here  intended,  we  cannot  say 
if  there  were  any  reference  in  this  case  to  the  Egyp- 
tian religion.  Those  who  suppose  it  to  have  been  a 
beetle  might  draw  attention  to  the  great  reverence 
in  which  that  insect  was  held  among  the  saci-ed 
animals,  and  the  consequent  distress  that  the  Egyp- 
tians would  have  felt  at  destioying  it,  even  if 
they  did  so  unintentionally.  As  already  noticed, 
no  insect  is  now  so  troublesome  in  Egvpt  as  the 
common  fly,  and  this  is  not  the  case  with  any  kind 
of  beetle,  which  flict,  from  our  geneial  conclusions, 
will  be  seen  to  favour  the  evidence  for  the  former. 
In  the  hot  season  the  flies  not  only  cover  the  food  and 
drink,  but  they  torment  the  people  by  settling  on 
their  faces,  and  especially  round  their  eyes,  thus 
promoting  ophthalmia. 

5.  The  Plague  of  the  Murrain  of  Beasts. — Pha- 
raoh was  next  warned  that,  if  he  did  not  let  the 
people  go,  there  should  be  on  the  day  following  "  a 
very  grievous  murrain,"  upon  the  horses,  asses, 
camels,  oxen,  and  sheep  of  Egypt,  whereas  those  of 
the  children  of  Israel  should  not  die.  This  came  to 
pass,  and  we  read  that  "all  the  cattle  of  Egypt 
died:  but  of  the  cattle  of  the  children  of  Isny^rdied 
not  one."  Yet  Pharaoh  still  continued  obstinate 
(Ex.  ix.  1-7).  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  expres- 
sion "all  the  cattle"  cannot  be  understood  to  be 
universal,  but  only  general,  for  the  narrative  of  the 
plague  of  hail  shows  that  there  were  still  at  a  later 
time  some  cattle  left,  and  that  the  want  of  universal 
terms  in  Hebrew  explains  this  seeming  difficulty. 
The  mention  of  camels  is  important,  since  it  appears 
to  favour  our  opinion  that  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus  was  a  foreigner,  camels  apparently  not 
having  been  kept  by  the  Egyptians  of  the  time  of 
the  Pharaohs.  This  plague  would  have  been  a 
heavy  punishment  to  the  Egyptians  as  falling  upon 
their  sacred  animals  of  two  of  the  kinds  sijecified, 
the  oxen  and  the  sheep ;  but  it  would  have  been 
most  felt  in  the  destruction  of  the  greatest  part  of 
their  useful  beasts.  In  modern  times  murrain  is 
not  an  uufrequent  visitation  in  Egypt,  and  is  sup- 
posed to  precede  the  Plague.  The  writer  witnessed 
a  very  severe  murrain  in  that  country  in  1842, 
which  lasted  nine  months,  during  the  latter  half  of 
that  year  and  the  spring  of  the  following  one,  and 
w;us  succeeded  by  the  Plague,  as  had  been  anticipated 
(Mrs.  Poole,  Knglishu-oman  in  J:'gi/pt,  ii.  32,  i.  59, 
1 14).  "  '  A  very  grievous  murrain,'  forcibly  re- 
minding us  of  that  which  visited  this  sjmie  country 
in  the  days  of  Moses,  has  prevailed  duiing  the  last 
three  months" — the  letter  is  dated  October  18th, 
1842 — ,  "and  the  already  di.-.tre.ssed  jieasanfs  leel 
the  calamity  severely,  or  rather  (1  slioiild  say)  the 
few  who  possess  cattle,  .■\moiig  the  rich  men  of 
the  country,  the  loss  lias  bwn  enormous.  During 
our  voyagi;  up  the  Nile  "  iu  the  July  preceding,  "  we 


886 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


obteneJ  several  dead  cows  and  buffaloes  lying  in 
the  river,  as  I  mentioned  in  a  former  letter  ;  and 
some  friends  who  followed  us,  two  months  after,  saw 
many  on  the  banks ;  indeed,  up  to  this  time,  cjreat 
numbers  of  cattle  are  dying  in  every  part  of  the 
country"  {Id.  i.  114,  115).  The  similarity  of  the 
calamity  in  character  is  remarkably  in  contrast  with 
its  diflerence  in  duration :  the  miraculous  murrain 
seems  to  have  been  as  sudden  and  nearly  as  brief  as 
the  destruction  of  the  firstborn  (though  far  less  ter- 
rible), and  to  have  therefore  produced,  on  ceasing, 
less  effect  than  other  plagues  upon  Pharaoh,  nothing 
remaining  to  be  removed. 

6.  Tlie  Plaijne  of  Boils. — The  next  judgment 
appears  to  have  been  preceded  by  no  warning,  ex- 
cepting indeed  that,  when  Moses  publicly  sent  it 
abioad  in  Egypt,  Pharaoh  might  no  doubt  have  re- 
pented at  the  last  moment.  We  read  that  Bloses 
and  Aaron  were  to  take  ashes  of  the  furnace,  and 
Moses  was  to  "  sprinkle  it  toward  the  heaven  in  the 
sight  of  Pharaoh."  It  was  to  become  "small 
dust"  throughout  Egypt,  and  "  be  a  boil  breaking 
forth  [with]  blains  upon  man,  and  upon  beast." 
Tliis  accordingly  came  to  pass.  The  magicimis  now 
once  more  seem  to  have  attempted  opposition,  for  it 
is  related  that  they  "  could  not  stand  before  Moses 
because  of  the  boil  ;  for  the  boil  was  upon  the  magi- 
cians, and  upon  all  the  Egyptians."  Notwithstand- 
ing, Pharaoh  still  refused  to  let  the  Israelites  go 
(ix.  8-r2).  This  plague  may  be  supposed  >to  have 
been  either  an  infliction  of  boils,  or  a  pestilence  like 
the  Plague  of  modern  times,  which  is  an  extremely 
severe  kind  of  typhus  fever,  accompanied  by  swell- 
ings. [Plague.]  The  former  is,  however,  the  more 
likely  explanation,  since,  if  the  plague  had  been  of  the 
latter  nature,  it  probably  would  have  been  less  severe 
than  the  ordinar}-  pestilence  of  Egypt  has  been  in 
this  nineteenth  century,  whereas  with  other  plagues 
which  can  be  illustrated  from  the  present  pheno- 
mena of  Egypt,  the  reverse  is  the  case.  That  this 
plague  followed  that  of  the  murrain  seems,  however, 
an  argurr^ent  on  the  other  side,  and  it  may  be  asked 
whether  it  is  not  likely  that  the  great  pestilence  of 
the  country,  probably  known  in  antiquity,  would 
have  been  one  of  the  ten  plagues ;  but  to  this  it  may 
be  replied  that  it  is  moie  probable,  and  in  accord- 
ance witli  the  whole  narrative,  that  extraordinary 
and  unexpected  wonders  should  be  etlected  than 
what  could  be  paralleled  in  the  history  of  Eg}-pt. 
The  tenth  plague,  moreover,  is  so  much  like  the  great 
Egyptian  disease  in  its  suddenness,  that  it  might 
rather  be  compared  to  it  if  it  were  not  so  wholly 
miraculous  in  every  respect  as  to  be  beyond  the 
reach  of  human  inquiry.  The  position  of  the  ma- 
gicians must  be  noticed  as  indicative  of  the  gradation 
of  the  plagues :  at  first  they  succeeded,  as  we  suppose, 
by  deception,  in  imitating  what  was  wrought  by 
Moses,  then  they  failed,  and  acknowledged  the  finger 
of  God  in  the  wonders  of  the  Hebrew  prophet,  and 
at  last  they  could  not  even  st;md  before  him,  being 
themselves  smitten  by  the  plague  he  was  commis- 
sioned to  send. 

7.  The  Plague  of  Hail. — The  account  of  the 
seventh  plague  is  preceded  by  a  warning,  which 
Moses  was  commanded  to  deliver  to  Pharaoh,  re- 
specting the  terrible  nature  of  the  plagues  that 
were  to  ensue  if  he  remaineil  obstinate.  And  first 
of  all  of  the  hail  it  is  said,  "  Behold,  to-morrow  about 
this  time.  I  will  cause  it  to  rain  a  very  giievous 
hail,  such  as  hath  not  been  in  Egypt  since  the  foun- 
dation thereof  even  until  now."  He  was  then  told 
to  collect  his  cattle  and  men  into  shelter,  for  that 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

everything  hailed  upon  should  die.  Accordingly,  such 
of  Pliaraoh's  servants  as  "  feared  the  Lord,"  brought 
in  their  servants  and  cattle  from  the  field.  We  read 
that  "Moses  stretched  forth  his  rod  toward  heaven: 
and  the  Lord  sent  thunder  and  hail,  and  the  fire  ran 
along  upon  the  ground."  Thus  man  and  beast  were 
smitten,  and  the  herbs  and  every  tiee  broken,  save 
in  the  laud  of  Goshen.  Upon  this  Pharaoh  acknow- 
ledged his  wickedness  and  that  of  his  people,  and  the 
lighteousness  of  God,  and  promiseil  if  the  plague 
were  withdrawn  to  let  the  Israelites  go.  Then 
Moses  went  forth  from  the  city,  and  spread  out  his 
hands,  and  the  plague  ceased,  when  Pharaoh,  sup- 
ported by  his  servants,  again  broke  his  promise 
(ix.  13-35).  The  character  of  this  and  the  follow- 
ing plagues  must  be  carefully  examined,  as  the 
warning  seems  to  indicate  an  important  turning 
point.  The  ruin  caused  by  the  hail  was  evidently 
far  greater  than  that  efl'ected  by  any  of  the  earlier 
plagues ;  it  destroye.d  men,  which  those  others  seem 
not  to  have  done,  and  not  only  men  but  beasts 
and  the  produce  of  the  earth.  In  this  case  Iiloses, 
while  addressing  Pharaoh,  openly  warns  his  servants 
liow  to  save  something  fiom  the  calamity.  Pharaoh 
for  the  first  time  acknowledges  his  wickedness.  We 
also  learn  that  his  people  joined  with  him  in  the 
oppression,  and  that  at  this  time  lie  dwelt  in  a  city. 
Hail  is  now  extremely  rare,  but  not  unknown,  in 
Egypt,  and  it  is  interesting  that  the  narrative  seems 
to  imply  that  it  sometimes  falls  there.  Thunder- 
storms occur,  but,  though  veiy  loud  and  accom- 
panied b}^  rain  and  wind,  they  rarely  do  serious 
injury.  We  do  not  remember  to  have  heard  while 
in  Egypt  of  a  person  struck  by  lightning,  nor  of  any 
ruin  excepting  that  of  decayed  buildings  washed 
down  by  rain. 

8.  The  Phg-ue  of  Locusts. — Pharaoh  was  now 
threatened  with  a  plague  of  locusts,  to  begin  the 
ne.xt  day,  by  which  everything  the  hail  had  left 
was  to  be  devoured.  This  was  to  exceed  any  like 
visitations  that  had  happened  in  the  time  of  the 
king's  ancestors.  At  last  Phaiaoh's  own  servants, 
who  had  before  supported  him,  remonsti'ated,  for 
we  read:  "And  Pharaoh's  servants  said  unto  him, 
How  long  sliall  this  man  be  a  snare  unto  us?  let 
the  men  go,  that  they  may  serve  the  Lord  their 
God :  knowest  thou  not  yet  that  Egypt  is  de- 
stroyed ? "  Then  Pharaoh  sent  for  Closes  and 
Aaron,  and  oS'eied  to  let  the  people  go,  but  refused 
when  they  required  that  all  should  go,  even  with 
their  flocks  and  herds :  "  And  Sloses  stretched  forth 
his  rod  over  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the  Lord 
brought  an  east  wind  upon  the  laud  all  that  day, 
and  all  [that]  night ;  [and]  when  it  was  morning, 
the  east  wind  brought  the  locusts.  And  the  locusts 
went  up  over  all  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  resteil  in 
all  the  coasts  of  Egypt:  very  gi'ievous  [were  they]  ; 
before  them  there  were  no  such  locusts  as  they, 
neither  after  them  shall  be  such.  For  they  covered 
the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  so  that  the  land  was  dark- 
ened ;  and  they  did  eat  every  herb  of  the  land,  and 
all  the  fruit  of  the  trees  which  the  hail  had  left : 
and  there  remaineil  not  any  green  thing  in  the 
trees,  or  in  the  herbs  of  the  field,  through  all  the 
laud  of  Egypt."  Then  Pharaoh  hastily  sent  for 
Moses  and  Aaron  and  confessed  his  sin  against  God 
and  the  Israelites,  and  begged  them  to  foigive  him. 
"  Mow  therefore  forgive,  I  i)ray  tliee,  my  sin  only 
this  once,  and  intreat  the  Lord  your  God,  that  He 
may  take  away  from  me  this  death  only."  Moses 
accordingly  prayed.  "  And  the  Lord  turned  a 
mighty  strong  west  wind,   which  took  away  the 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

locusts,  anil  cast  them  into  the  Red  sea ;  there  re- 
mained not  one  locust  in  all  the  coasts  of  Egypt." 
The  plague  being  removed,  Pliaraoh  again  would 
not  let  the  people  go  (x.  1-20).  This  plague  has 
not  the  unusual  nature  of  the  one  that  preceded  it, 
but  it  even  exceeds  it  in  seventy,  and  .so  occupies 
its  place  in  the  gradation  of  the  more  terrible  judg- 
ments that  form  the  later  part  of  the  series.  Its 
severity  can  be  well  understood  by  those  who,  like  the 
writer,  have  been  in  Egypt  in  a  part  of  the  country 
where  a  flight  of  locusts  has  alighted.  In  this  case 
the  plague  was  greater  than  an  ordinary  visitation, 
since  it  extended  over  a  far  wider  space,  rather  than 
because  it  was  more  intense  ;  for  it  is  impossible  to 
imagine  any  more  complete  destruction  than  that 
always  caused  by  a  swarm  of  locusts.  So  well  did 
the  people  of  Egypt  know  what  these  creatures 
effected,  that,  when  their  coming  was  threatened, 
Pharaoh's  servants  at  once  remonstrated.  In  the 
present  day  locusts  suddenly  appear  in  the  cultivated 
land,  coming  from  the  desert  in  a  column  of  great 
length.  They  fly  rapidly  across  the  country,  dark- 
ening the  air  with  their  compact  ranks,  which  are 
undistui-bed  by  the  constant  attacks  of  kites,  ci'ows, 
and  vultures,  and  making  a  strange  whizzing  sound 
like  that  of  fire,  or  many  distant  wheels.  Where 
they  aliglit  they  devour  every  gieen  thing,  even 
stripping  the  trees  of  their  leaves.  Rewards  are 
oflei-ed  for  their  destruction,  but  no  labour  can 
seriously  reduce  their  numbers.  Soon  they  con- 
tinue their  course,  and  disappear  gradually  in  a 
short  time,  leaving  the  place  where  the\'  have  been 
a  desert.  We  speak  from  I'ecoUection,  but  we  are 
permitted  to  extract  a  careful  description  of  the 
eflects  of  a  flight  of  locusts  from  iVIr.  Lane's  manu- 
script notes.  He  writes  of  Nubia:  "Locusts  not 
unfrequently  commit  dreadful  havock  inthiscountry. 
In  my  second  voyage  up  the  Nile,  when  before  the 
village  of  Boostkn,  a  little  above  Ibieem,  many 
locusts  pitched  upon  the  boat.  They  were  beau- 
tifully variegated,  yellow  and  blue.  In  the  follow- 
ing night  a  southerly  wind  brought  other  locusts,  in 
immense  swarms.  Next  morning  the  air  was  darlt- 
ened  by  them,  as  by  a  heavy  fall  of  snow;  and  the 
surface  of  the  river  was  thickly  sc<attered  over  by 
those  which  had  fallen  and  were  unable  to  rise 
again.  Gieat  numbers  came  upon  and  within  the 
boat,  and  alighted  upon  our  persons.  They  were 
difl'ereut  from  those  of  the  preceding  day ;  being  of 
a  bright  yellow  colour,  with  brown  marks.  The 
desolation  they  made  was  dreadful.  In  four  hours 
a  field  of  young  durah  [millet]  was  cropped  to  the 
ground.  In  another  field  of  durah  more  advanced 
only  the  sUilks  were  letl.  Nowhere  was  there  space 
on  the  ground  to  set  the  foot  without  treading  on 
many.  A  field  of  cotton-plants  was  quite  stripped. 
Even  the  acacias  along  the  banks  were  made  bare, 
and  palm-trees  were  stripped  of  the  fruit  and  leaves. 
Last  night  we  heard  tiie  creaking  of  the  .siikiyehs 
[water-wheels],  and  the  singing  of  women  driving 
the  cows  which  turned  them  :  to-day  not  one  siikiyeh 
was  in  motio!),  and  the  women  were  going  about 
howling,  and  vainly  attempting  to  frighten  away 
the  locusts.  On  tin;  jireceding  day  I  had  preserved 
two  of  the  more  beautiful  kind  of  these  creatures 
with  a  solution  of  arsenic :  on  the  next  day  some  of 
the  othei-  locusts  uto  tiieni  almost  entirely,  poisoned 
as  they  were,  unseen  by  me  till  they  had  nearly 
finished  their  meal.  On  the  third  day  they  were 
less  numerous,  asvi  gnuiually  disappeared.  Locusts 
are  eaten  by  most  of  the  Bedawees  of  Arabia,  and 
by  some  of  the  Nubians.     We  ate  a  few,  dressed  in 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


887 


the  most  approved  manner,  being  stripped  of  the 
legs,  wings,  and  head,  and  fried  in  butter.  They 
had  a  flavour  somewhat  like  that  of  the  woodcock, 
owing  to  their  food.  Tiie  Arabs  preserve  them  as  a 
common  article  of  provision  by  parboiling  them  in 
salt  and  watei-,  and  then  drying  them  in  the  sun." 

The  parallel  passages  in  the  projthecy  of  Joel 
form  a  remarkable  commentary  on  the  description 
of  the  plague  in  Exodus,  and  a  few  must  be  here 
quoted,  for  they  describe  with  wonderful  exactness 
and  vigour  the  devastations  of  a  swarm  of  locusts. 
"  Blow  ye  the  trumpet  in  Zion,  and  sound  an  alarm 
in  my  holy  mountain;  let  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  laiid  tremble:  for  the  day  of  the  Lord  cometh, 
for  [it  is]  nigh  at  hand  ;  a  day  of  darkness  and  of 
gloominess,  a  day  of  clouds  and  of  thick  darkness, 
as  the  morning  sjiread  upon  the  mountains:  a  great 
people  and  a  strong ;  there  hath  not  been  ever  the 
like,  neither  shall  be  any  more  after  it,  [even]  to 
the  years  of  many  generations.  A  fire  devoureth 
before  them  ;  and  behind  them  a  flame  burneth : 
the  land  [is]  as  the  garden  of  Eden  before  them, 
and  behind,  a  desolate  wilderness ;  yea,  and  nothing 
shall  escape  them.  The  appearance  of  them  [is]  as 
the  appearance  of  horses  ;  and  as  horsemen,  so  shall 
they  run.  Like  the  noise  of  chariots  on  the  tops  of 
the  mountains  shall  they  leap,  like  the  noise  of  a 
flame  of  Are  that  devoureth  the  stubble,  as  a  strong 
people  set  in  battle  array.  .  .  .  They  shall  run  like 
mighty  men ;  they  shall  climb  the  wall  like  men  of 
war,  and  they  shall  march  every  one  on  his  ways, 
and  they  shall  not  break  their  ranks.  .  .  .  The 
earth  shall  quake  before  them ;  the  heavens  shall 
tremble :  the  sun  and  the  moon  shall  be  dark,  and. 
the  stars  shall  withdraw  their  shining"  (ii.  1-5, 
7,  10;  see  also  0,  8,  9,  11-25,  Rev.  ix.  1-12). 
Here,  and  probably  also  in  the  parallel  passage  of 
Rev.,  locusts  are  taken  as  a  tyj^e  of  a  destroying 
ai'my  or  horde,  since  they  are  more  terrible  in  the 
devastation  they  cause  than  any  other  ci-eatures. 

9.  The  Plague  of  Darkness. — Alter  the  plague 
of  locusts  we  read  at  once  of  a  fresh  judgment. 
"  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Stretch  out  thine 
hand  toward  heaven,  that  there  be  darkness  over 
the  land  of  ligypt,  that  [one]  may  I'eel  darkness. 
And  Moses  stretched  forth  his  hand  toward  heaven  ; 
and  there  was  a  thick  darkness  in  all  the  land  of 
Egypt  tiiree  days :  they  saw  not  one  another,  neither 
rose  any  from  his  place  for  three  days :  but  all  the 
children  of  Israel  had  light  in  their  dwellings." 
Pharaoh  then  gave  the  Israelites  leave  to  go  if  only 
they  left  their  cattle,  but  when  Moses  required 
that  they  should  take  these  also,  he  again  lefused 
(x.  21-29).  The  expression  we  have  rendered  "  that 
[one]  niay  feel  darkness,"  accoiding  to  the  A.  V. 
in  the  mr.rgin,  where  in  the  text  the  freer  transla- 
tion "  darkness  [which]  may  be  felt"  is  given,  has 
occasioned  much  ditiiculty.  The  LX.X.  and  V'ulg. 
give  this  rendering,  and  the  motlerns  generally 
follow  them.  It  has  been  pioposed  to  read  "anil 
they  shall  grope  in  darkness,"  by  a  slight  change 
of  rendering  and  the  suj)position  that  the  particle 
3  is  undei-stood  (Kalisch,  Comin.  on  Ex.  p.  171).  It 
is  unreasonable  to  argue  that  the  forcible  words  of  the 
A.  V.  are  too  strong  for  Semitic  phraseology.  The 
dilliculty  is,  however,  rather  to  be  solved  by  a  con- 
sideration of  the  nature  of  the  plague.  It  ii;is  been 
illustrated  by  reference  to  the  Samoom  and  the  hot 
wind  of  the  Khamaseen.  'i'he  former  is  a  siuid- 
storni  >v"hi(ii  occui's  in  the  desert,  seldom  Listing 
according  to  Mr.  Lane,  more  than  a  quarter  of  an 
hour  or  twenty  minutes  (.l/orf.  Efj.  5tli  ed.  p.  2); 


888  PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

but  for  the  time  often  causing  tlie  darkness  of  twi- 
light, and  affecting  man  and  beast.  Mrs.  Poole, 
on  Sir.  Lane's  authority,  has  described  the  Samoom 
as  follows: — "The  '  t^amoom,'  which  is  a  very 
violent,  hot,  and  almost  sufl'ocating  wind,  is  ot 
moi'e  rare  occurrence  than  the  Khamdseen  winds, 
and  of  shorter  duration  :  its  continuance  being  more 
brief  in  pioportion  to  the  intensity  of  its  parching 
heat,  and  the  impetuosity  of  its  course.  Its  direc- 
tion is  generally  from  the  south-east,  or  south-south- 
east. Jt  is  commonly  preceded  by  a  fearful  calm. 
As  it  approaches,  the  atmosphere  assumes  a  yellow- 
ish hue,  tinged  with  red  ;  the  sun  .nppears  of  a  deep 
blood  colour,  and  gradually  becomes  quite  concealed 
before  the  hot  blast  is  felt  in  its  full  violence.  The 
sand  and  dust  raised  by  the  wind  add  to  the  gloom, 
and  increase  the  painful  effects  of  the  heat  and 
rarity  of  the  air.  Respiration  becomes  uneasy,  pei- 
spiration  seems  to  be  entirely  stopped  ;  the  tongue 
is  dry,  the  skin  parched,  and  a  prickling  sensation 
is  experienced,  as  if  caused  by  electric  sparks.  It 
is  sometimes  impossible  for  a  person  to  remain  erect, 
on  account  of  the  force  of  the  wind ;  and  the  sand 
and  dust  oblige  all  who  are  exposed  to  it  to  keep 
their  eyes  closed.  It  is,  however,  most  distressing 
when  it  overtakes  travellers  in  the  desert.  My 
brother  encountered  at  Koos,  in  Upper  Kgypt,  a 
samooni  which  was  said  to  be  one  of  tlie  most 
violent  ever  witnessed.  It  lasted  less  than  half  an 
liour,  and  a  very  violent  samoom  seldom  continues 
longei'.  j\Iy  brother  is  of  opinion  that,  although  it 
is  extremely  distressing,  it  can  never  prove  fatal, 
unless  to  persons  already  brought  almost  to  the 
point  of  death  by  disease,  fatigue,  thirst,  or  some 
other  cause.  The  poor  camel  seems  to  suffer  from 
it  equally  with  his  master;  and  will  often  lie  down 
with  his  back  to  the  wind,  close  his  eyes,  stretch 
out  his  long  neck  upon  the  ground,  and  so  remain 
until  the  storm  has  passed  over"  {Englisliwoman 
in  Egupt,  i.  96,  97).  The  hot  wind  of  the  Kha- 
maseen  usually  blows  for  three  days  and  nights, 
and  carries  so  much  sand  with  it,  that  it  pro- 
duces the  appearance  of  a  yellow  fog.  It  thus 
resembles  the  Samoom,  though  far  less  powerful 
and  far  less  distressing  in  its  effects.  It  is  not  known 
to  cause  actual  darkness ;  at  least  the  writer's  re- 
sidence in  Egypt  afforded  no  example  either  on 
experience  or  hearsay  evidence.  By  a  confusion  of 
the  Samoom  and  the  Khamdseen  wind  it  has  even 
been  supposed  that  a  Samoom  in  its  utmost  violence 
usually  lasts  three  days  (Kalisch,  Com.  Ex.  p. 
170),  but  this  is  an  error.  The  plague  may, 
however,  have  been  an  extremely  severe  sandstorm, 
miraculous  in  its  violence  and  its  duration,  for  the 
length  of  three  days  does  not  make  it  natural,  since 
the  severe  storms  are  always  veiy  brief.  Perhaps 
the  three  days  was  the  limit,  as  about  the  longest 
period  that  the  people  could  exist  without  leaving 
their  houses.  It  has  been  supposed  that  this  plague 
rather  caused  a  supernatural  terror  than  actual 
suffering' and  loss,  but  this  is  by  no  means  certain. 
The  impossibility  of  moving  about,  and  the  natural 
I'ear  of  darkness  which  affects  beasts  and  birds  as  well 
as  men,  as  in  a  total  eclipse,  would  have  caused  suffer- 
ing, and  if  the  plague  were  a  sandstorm  of  unequalled 
severity,  it  would  have  produced  the  conditions  of 
fever  by  its  parching  heat,  besides  causing  much 
distress  of  other  kinds.  An  evidence  in  favour  of 
the  wholly  supernatural  character  of  this  plague  is 
its  preceding  the  last  Judgment  of  idl,  the  death  of 
the  firstborn,  as  though  it  were  a  tenible  fore- 
shadowing of  that  great  calamity. 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

■  10.  The  Death  of  the  Firstborn.  —  Before  the 
tenth  ])lague  Moses  went  to  warn  Pharaoh.  "  And 
Moses  said,  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  About  midnight 
will  I  go  out  into  the  midst  of  Egypt:  and  all  the 
firstborn  in  the  land  of  Ecrvpt  shall  die,  from  the 
firstborn  of  Pharaoh  that  sitteth  upon  his  throne, 
even  unto  the  firstborn  of  the  maidservant  that  [is] 
behind  the  mill ;  and  all  the  firstborn  of  beasts. 
And  there  shall  be  a  great  cry  throughout  all  the 
land  of  Egypt,  such  as  there  was  none  like  it,  nor 
shall  be  like  it  any  more."  He  then  foretells  that 
Pharaoh's  servants  would  piay  him  to  go  forth. 
Positive  as  is  this  declaration,  it  seems  to  have  been 
a  conditional  waniing,  for  we  re^d,  "  And  he  went 
out  from  Pharaoh  in  heat  of  anger,"  and  it  is  added, 
that  God  said  that  Pharaoh  would  not  hearken  to 
Moses,  and  that  the  king  of  Egypt  still  refused  to 
let  Israel  go  (xi.  4-10).  The  passover  was  then 
instituted,  and  the  houses  of  the  Israelites  sprinkled 
with  the  blood  of  the  victims.  The  firstborn  of  the 
Egyptians  were  smitten  at  midnight,  as  Moses  had 
forewarned  Pharaoh.  "  And  Pharaoh  rose  up  in 
the  night,  he,  and  all  his  servants,  and  all  the 
Egy])tians ;  and  there  was  a  great  cry  in  Egypt ; 
for  [there  was]  not  a  house  where  [there  was]  not 
one  dead"  (xii.  30).  The  clearly  miraculous  nature 
of  this  plague,  in  its  severity,  its  falling  upon  man 
and  beast,  and  the  singling  out  of  the  firstborn,  puts 
it  wholly  beyond  comparison  with  any  natural  pesti- 
lence, even  the  severest  recorded  in  history,  whether 
of  the  peculiar  Egyptian  Plague,  or  other  like  epi- 
demics. The  Bible  affords  a  parallel  in  the  smiting 
of  Sennacherib's  army,  and  still  more  closely  in 
some  of  the  punishments  of  murmurers  in  the  wil- 
derness. The  prevailing  customs  of  Egypt  furnished 
a  curious  illustration  of  the  narrative  of  this  plague 
to  the  writer.  '•  it  is  well  known  that  many  ancient 
Egyptian  customs  are  yet  observed.  Among  these 
one  of  the  most  prominent  is  the  wailing  for  the 
dead  by  the  women  of  the  household,  as  well  as 
those  hired  to  mourn.  In  the  great  cholera  of 
1848  I  was  at  Cairo.  This  pestilence,  as  we  all 
know,  frequently  follows  the  course  of  rivers. 
Thus,  on  that  occasion,  it  ascended  the  Nile,  and 
showed  itself  in  gi'eat  strength  at  Boolak,  the  port 
of  Cairo,  distant  from  the  city  a  mile  and  a  half  to 
the  westward.  For  some  days  it  did  not  traverse 
this  space.  Every  evening  at  sunset,  it  was  our 
custom  to  go  up  to  the  terrace  on  the  roof  of  our 
house.  There,  in  that  calm  still  time,  I  heard  each 
night  the  wail  of  the  women  of  Boolak  for  their 
dead  borne  along  in  a  gi-eat  wave  of  sound  a  dis- 
tance of  two  miles,  the  lamentation  of  a  city  stricken 
with  pestilence.  So,  when  the  fii-stborn  were  smitten, 
'  there  was  a  great  cry  in  Egypt.' " 

The  history  of  the  ten  plagues  strictly  ends 
with  the  death  of  the  firstborn.  The  pursuit  and 
the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  are  discussed  elsewhere. 
[Exodus,  the;  Red  Sea,  Passage  of.]  Here 
it  is  only  necessary  to  notice  tliat  with  the  event 
last  mentioned  the  recital  of  the  wonders  wrought 
in  Egypt  concludes,  and  the  histoiy  of  Israel  as  a 
separate  people  begins. 

Having  examined  the  narrative  of  the  ten  plagues, 
we  can  now  speak  of  their  general  character. 

In  the  first  place,  we  have  constantly  kept  in 
view  the  arguments  of  those  who  hold  that  the 
plagues  were  not  miraculous,  and,  while  fully  ad- 
mitting all  the  illustration  that  the  physical  histoiy 
of  Egypt  has  afforded  us,  both  in  our  own  obser\'a- 
tion  and  the  observation  of  others,  we  have  found 
no  reason  for  the  naturalistic  view  in  a  sinHe  in- 


PLAINS 


889 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

stance,  wliile  in  many  instances  the  illustrations  from 
known  phenomena  have  been  so  different  as  to 
bring  out  the  miraculous  element  in  the  narrative 
with  the  greatest  force,  and  in  every  case  that 
element  has  been  necessary,  unless  the  narrative  be  i 
dejwived  of  its  rights  as  historical  evidence.  Yet 
more,  we  have  found  that  the  advocates  of  a  na- 
turalistic explanation  have  been  forced  by  their  bias 
into  a  distortion  and  exaggeiation  of  natural  phe- 
nomena in  their  endeavour  to  tind  in  them  an  expla- 
nation of  the  wonders  recorded  in  the  Bible. 

In  the  examination  we  have  made  it  will  have 
been  seen  that  the  Biblical  narrative  hixs  been  illus- 
trated by  reference  to  the  phenomena  t>f  I'^gypt  and 
the  manners  of  the  inhabiUmts,  and  that,  through- 
out, its  accuracy  in  minute  particulars  has  been 
remarkably  shown,  to  a  degree  that  is  sullicient  of 
itself  to  prove  its  historical  truth.  This  in  a  nar- 
rative of  wondei's  is  of  no  small  importance. 

Re:specting  the  character  of  the  plagues,  they  were 
evidently  nearly  all  miraculous  in  time  of  occurrence 
and  degree  rather  than  essentially,  in  accordance  with 
the  theory  that  God  gijnerally  employs  natural  means 
in  producing  miraculous  ett'ects.  They  seem  to  have 
been  sent  as  a  series  of  warnings,  eacli  being  some- 
what more  severe  than  its  predecessor,  to  which  we 
see  an  analogy  in  the  warnings  which  the  provi- 
dential government  of  the  world  often  puts  before 
the  sinner.  The  first  plague  corrujited  the  sweet 
water  of  the  Nile  and  slew  the  fish.  The  second 
filled  the  land  with  frogs,  which  corrupted  the 
whole  country.  The  third  covered  man  and  beast 
with  vei'min  or  other  annoying  insects.  The  fourth 
was  of  the  same  kind  and  probably  a  yet  seveier 
judgment.  With  the  fifth  plague,  the  mun-ain  of 
beasts,  a  loss  of  property  began.  The  sixth,  the 
plague  of  boils,  was  worse  than  tlie  earlier  plagues 
that  had  affected  man  and  beast.  The  seventh 
plague,  that  of  hail,  exceeded  those  that  went 
before  it,  since  it  destroyed  everything  in  the  field, 
man  and  beast  and  herb.  The  eighth  plague  w;is 
evidently  still  more  grievous,  since  the  devastation 
by  locusts  must  have  been  tar  more  thorough  than 
that  by  the  hail,  and  since  at  that  time  no  greater 
calamity  of  the  kind  could  have  happened  than 
fhe  destruction  of  all  remaining  vegetable  food. 
The  ninth  plague  we  do  not  sulllciently  undei'stand 
to  be  sure  that  it  "exceeded  this  in  actual  irrjury, 
but  it  is  clear  from  the  narrative  that  it  must  have 
caused  great  terror.  The  last  plague  is  the  only 
one  that  was  genei-al  in  the  destriu-tion  of  human 
life,  for  the  eti'ccts  of  the  hail  cannot  have  been 
comparable  to  those  it  produced,  and  it  completes 
the  climax,  unless  indeed  it  be  held  that  the  passage 
of  the  Ked  Sea  was  the  crowning  point  of  the  whole 
series  of  wonders,  rather  than  a  sejiarate  miracle. 
In  this  Ciise  its  magnitude,  as  publicly  destroying 
the  king  and  his  whole  army,  might  even  surpass 
that  of  the  tenth  jilague. 

'I'he  gradual  irrciease  in  severity  of  the  plagues 
is  perhaps  the  best  key  to  their  meaning.  They 
seem  to  have  been  sent  as  warnings  to  the  oppressor, 
to  all'oid  him  a  means  of  seeing  (^od's  will  and  an 
opporturrity  of  repenting  before  Kgypt  w;is  ruined. 
It  is  true  that  the  hardening  of  Pharaoh's  heart  is 

"  An  entirely  different  word  In  Hebrew  (ihough  idcn-  carvieiies,  a  term  derived  tlnoiigh  the  Arabic  from  the 
tical  in  Knglish)  Irom  the  name  of  tlie  sun  of  Adam,  ;  H"brow  cercm,  a  vineyard,  a  rlih  spot  —  a  Cannel. 
which  is  IfetKl.  I  Another  Semitic  word  iiatiualizcd  in  Spain  is  Seville  (see 

b  Kor  instance,  from  the  mountain  between  Zebc/aw//  ,  further  down,  No.  6).  lint  indeed  they  are  most  numerous, 
and  ISaalbcc,  half  an  horn-  piisl  tlie  Roman  bridge.  |  Kor  other  examples  see  (•'hsfciiie  dfS   Mots  Ks^paijnoU 

*-'  Kor  instance,  ihi'  larm-bouses  which  ■•si)arklo  amid     tfcrti'i^  tte  Z'^ilrabe,  par  Enaolmaiiii,  Ix^yden,  1861. 
the  eternal  vcrdiu'e  of  the  Vega  of  Granada'  arc  called  , 


a  mystery  which  St.  Paul  leaves  micxplained,  an- 
swering the  objector,  "  Nay  but,  0  man,  who  art 
thou  that  repliest  against  God  ?"  (Kom..  ix.  20). 
Yet  the  Apostle  is  arguing  that  we  have  no  right 
to  question  God's  righteousness  for  not  having  mercy 
on  all,  and  speaks  of  His  long-suffering  towards  the 
wicked.  The  lesson  that  Pharaoh's  career  teaches 
us  seems  to  be,  that  there  are  men  whom  the  most 
signal  judgments  do  not  affect  so  as  to  cause  any 
lasting  repentance.  In  this  respect  the  after-history 
of  the  Jewish  people  is  a  commentary  upon  that  of 
their  oppressor.  [K.  S.  P.] 

PLAINS.  This  one  term  does  duty  in  the 
Authorised  Version  for  no  less  than  seven  distinct 
Hebrew  words,  each  of  which  had  its  own  inde- 
pendent and  individual  meaning,  and  could  not  be — 
at  least  is  not — interchanged  with  any  other  ;  some 
of  them  are  proper  names  exclusively  attached  to  one 
spot,  aird  one  has  not  the  meaning  of  plain  at  all. 

1.  Abel'^  (?3N).     This  word    perhaps   answers 

more  nearly  to  our  word  "meadow"  than  nny 
other,  its  root  having,  accoi'ding  to  Gcsenius,  the 
force  of  moisture  like  that  of  grass.  It  occui-s  in 
the  names  of  Abel-maiji,  AisEL-iUiiiOLAH,  AuroL- 
SHITI'IM,  and  is  reirdered  "  plain"  in  Judg.  xi.  33, 
"  plain  of  vineyai'ds." 

2.  Bik'ah  (PiypS).  From  a  root  signifying  "  to 

cleave  or  rend  "  (Gesen.  Thes.  232;  Flirst,  Handirh. 
1.  212).  Fortunately  we  are  able  to  identify  the 
most  remarkable  of  the  Bikahs  of  the  Bible,  and 
thus  to  ascerta,in  the  foi-ce  of  the  term.  The  great 
Plain  or  Valley  of  Coele-Syria,  the  "  hollow  land  " 
of  the  Greeks,  which  separates  the  two  j-ancres 
of  Lebanon  and  Antilebauon,  is  the  most  r-emaik- 
able  of  them  all.  It  is  called  in  the  Bible  the 
Bika'ath  Aven  (Am.  i.  5),  and  also  piobably  the 
Bika'ath  Lebanon  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii.7;  and  Bika'ath- 
MizpeliJ^xi.  8),  and  is  still  known  throughout 
Syria  by  its  old  name,  as  el-lichaa,  or  Aid  el- 
Bckaa.  "  A  long  valley,  though  bi-oad,"  says  Dr. 
Pusey  {Commerd.  on  Am.  i.  5),  "if  seen  from  a 
height  looks  like  a  cleft ;"  and  this  L  eminently 
the  case  with  the  "  Valley  of  Lebanon  "  when  ap- 
proached by  the  or'dinary  roads  from  ninth  or 
south.''  It  is  of  great  extent,  more  than  LiO  mih's 
long  by  about  5  in  average  breadth,  aird  the  two 
great  ranges  shut  it  in  on  either  hand,  Lebairon 
especially,  with  a  very  wall-like  appearance.  Not 
unlike  it  in  this  effect  is  the  Jordan  Valley  at 
Jericho,  which  appears  to  be  once  mentioned  undir 
the  same  title  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  3  (A.  V.  "  the  valley 
of  Jericho  ").  This,  however,  is  part  of  the  Atabah, 
the  proper  name  of  the  .Jordan  A'alljy.  Besides 
these  the  "plain  of  Megiddo"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  22; 
Zech.  xii.  1],  A.  V.  "  valley  of  51.")  and  "  the  plain 
of  Ono"  (Neh.  vi.  2)  have  not  been  identilied. 

Out  of  Palestine  wc  tind  denoted  by  tlie  word 
Bik'ah  "the  plain  in  the  laird  of  Shiuar"  (Gen. 
xi.  2),  the  "  plain  of  Mesopotamia"  (Ez.  iii.  22,  23, 
viii.  4,  xxxvii.  1 ,  2),  and  the  "  plain  in  the  province 
of  Dura"  (Dan.  iii.  1). 

Bik'ah  perhaps  appears,  with  other  Arabic  "= 
Vfords,  in  Spanish  as   Vetja,  a  term  applied  to  well- 


890 


PLAINS 


watered  valleys  between  hills  (Ford,  Handbh.  sect, 
iii.),  and  especially  to  the  valley  of  Granada,  the 
most  extensive  and  most  fruitful  of  them  all,  of 
which  the  Moors  were  accustomed  to  boast  that  it 
^vas  larger  and  richer  than  the  Ghuttah,  the  Oasis 
of  Damascus. 

3.  Hac-Ciccar  ("IDSri).  This,  though  applied 
to  a  plain,  has  not  (if  the  lexicographers  are  right) 
the  force  of  flatness  or  extent,  but  rather  seems  to 
be  derived  from  a  i-oot  signifying  roundness.  In  its 
topographical  sense  (for  it  has  other  meanings,  such 
as  a  coin,  a  cake,  or  flat  loaf)  it  is  confined  to  the 
Jordan  valley.  This  sense  it  bears  in  Gen.  xiii.  10, 
II,  12,  xix.  17,  25-29;  Deut.  xxxiv.  3;  2  Sam. 
xviii.  23 ;  1  K.  rii.  46 ;  2  Chr.  iv.  17 ;  Neh.  iii. 
22,  xii.  28.  The  LXX.  translate  it  by  irepixa'pos 
and  TrepioiKos,  the  former  of  which  is  often  found 
in  the  i\.  T.,  wheie  the  English  reader  is  familiar 
with  it  as  the  "  region  round  about."  It  must  be 
confessed  that  it  is  not  easy  to  trace  any  connexion 
between  a  "  circular  form "  and  the  nature  or 
aspect  of  the  Jordan  valley,  and  it  is  difficult  not 
to  suspect  that  Ciccar  is  an  archaic  term  which 
existed  before  the  advent  of  the  Hebrews,  and  was 
afterwards  adopted  into  their  language. 

4.  Ham^Mishor  {~W''^r\).  This  is  by  the  lexi- 
cogi'aphers  explained  as  meaning  "  straightfoi-ward," 
"  plain,"  as  if  from  the  root  ydshar,  to  be  just  or 
upright ;  but  this  seems  far-fetched,  and  it  is  more 
jirobable  that  in  this  case  also  we  have  an  archaic 
term  existing  from  a  pre-historic  date.  It  occurs 
in  the  Bible  in  the  following  passages: — Deut.  iii. 
10,  iv.  43;  Josh.  xiii.  9,  16,  17,  21,  xx.  8;  IK. 
XX.  23,  25;  2  Chr.  sxvi.  10;  Jer.  xlvui.  8,  21. 
In  each  of  these,  with  one  exception,  it  is  used  for 
the  district  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Heshbon  and 
Dibon — the  Bclka  of  the  modern  Araljs,  their  most 
noted  pasture-ground ;  a  district  which,  from  the 
scanty  descriptions  we  possess  of  it,  seems  to  re- 
semble the  "  Downs  "  of  our  own  country  in  the 
regularity  of  its  undulations,  the  excellence  of  its 
turf,  and  its  fitness  for  the  growth  of  flocks.  There 
is  no  difficulty  in  recognising  the  same  district  in 
the  statement  of  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10.  It  is  evident  from 
several  circumstances  that  Uzziah  had  been  a  great 
conqueror  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  as  well  as  on  the 
shore  of  the  Blediterranean  (see  Ewald's  remarks, 
Geschichtc,  iii.  588  note),  and  he  kept  his  cattle  on 
the  I'ich  pastui'es  of  Philistines  on  the  one  hand,  , 
and  Ammonites  on  the  other.  Thus  in  all  the 
passages  quoted  above  the  word  Mishor  seems  to 
be  restricted  to  one  special  district,  and  to  belong 
to  it  as  exclusively  as  Shefelah  did  to  the  low  land 
of  PhiHstia,  or  Arahah  to  the  sunken  district  of  the 
Jordan  valley.  And  theiefore  it  is  puzzling  to  find 
it  used  in  one  passage  (1  K.  xx,  23,  25)  apparently 
with  the  mere  general  sense  of  low  land,  or  rather 
flat  land,  in  which  chariots  could  be  manoeuvred — 
as  opposed  to  uneven  mountainous  ground.  There  is 
some  reason  to  believe  that  the  scene  of  the  battle  in 
question  was  on  the  east  side  of  the  Sea  of  Gennesa- 
reth  in  the  yilain  of  Jauian  ;  but  this  is  no  explana- 
tion of  the  difficulty,  because  we  are  not  warranted 
in  extending  the  Mis/ior  further  than  the  mountains 
which  bounded  it  on  the  north,  and  where  the  dis- 
tricts began  which  bore,  like  it,  their  own  distinc- 
tive names  of  Gilead,  Bashan,  Argob,  Golan,  Hauran, 
&c.     Perhaps  the  most  feasible  explanation  is  that 


■1  Jerome,  again,  probably  followed  tbe  Targum  or  other 
Jewish  authorities,  and  they  usually  employ  tbe  render- 
ing above  mentioned.    Fiirst  alone  endeavours  to  find  a 


PLAINS 

the  word  was  used  by  the  Syrians  of  Diinia'^cus 
without  any  knowledge  of  its  strict  signification, 
in  the  same  manner  indeed  that  it  was  employed 
in  the  later  Syro-Chaldee  dialect,  in  which  meshra 
is  the  favourite  tenn  to  express  several  natural 
features  which  in  the  older  and  stricter  language 
were  denominated  each  by  its  own  special  name. 

5.  Ha-Arahah  (n3iyn).     This  again  had  an 

absolutely  definite  meaning — being  restricted  to  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan,  and  to  its  continuation  south 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  [See  Arabah,  vol.  i.  87,  88  ;  and 
for  a  description  of  the  aspect  of  the  region,  Pales- 
tine, vol.  ii.  674,  675.]  Ko  doubt  the  Arahah, 
was  the  most  remarkable  plain  of  the  Holy  Land — 
but  to  render  it  by  so  general  and  common  a  term  (as 
our  tianslators  have  done  in  the  majority  of  cases), 
is  materially  to  diminish  its  force  and  significance 
in  the  nai'rative.     This  is  equally  the  case  with 

6.  Ha-Shefelah  (ilT'SK'n),  the  invariable  desig- 
nation of  the  depressed,  flat  or  gently  undulating, 
region  which  intervened  between  the  highlands  of 
Judali  and  the  Mediterranean,  and  was  commonly 
in  possession  of  the  Philistines.  [Palestine,  672  ; 
Sephela.j  To  the  Hebrews  this,  and  this  only, 
was  The  Shefelah  ;  and  to  have  spoken  of  it  by  any 
more  general  term  would  have  been  as  impossible  as 
for  natives  of  the  Carse  of  Stilling  or  the  Weiild  of 
Kent  to  designate  them  differently.  Shefclnh  has 
some  claims  of  its  own  to  notice.  It  was  one  of  the 
most  tenacious  of  these  old  Hebrew  terms.  It  ap- 
peal's in  the  Greek  text  and  in  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion of  the  Book  of  Maccaljees  (1  Jlacc.  xii.  38), 
and  is  preseiTed  on  each  of  its  other  occurrences, 
even  in  such  corrupt  dialects  as  the  Samaritan  Ver- 
sion of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  Targums  of  Pseudo- 
jonathan,  and  of  Rabbi  Joseph.  And  although  it 
would  appear  to  be  no  longer  known  in  its  original 
seat,  it  has  transferred  itself  to  other  countries,  and 
apj)ears  in  Spain  as  Seville,  and  on  the  east  coast  of 
Africa  as  Svfala. 

7.  Elon  (|"17K).  Our  translators  have  uni- 
formly rendered  this  word  "plain,"  doubtless  follow- 
ing the  Vulgate,^  which  in  about  half  the  passages 
has  convaUis.  But  this  is  not  the  verdict  of  the  ma- 
jority or  the  most  trustworthy  of  the  ancient  ver- 
sions. They  regard  the  word  as  meaning  an  "  oak  " 
or  "  grove  of  oaks,"  a  rendering  supported  by  all,  or 
nearly  all,  tlie  commentators  and  lexicographers  of 
the  present  day.  It  has  the  advantage  also  of  being 
much  more  picturesque,  and  throws  a  new  light  (to 
the  English  reader)  over  many  an  incident  in  the 
lives  of  the  Patriarchs  and  early  heroes  of  the  Bible. 
The  passages  in  w  hich  the  word  occurs  erroneously 
translated  "  plain,"  are  as  follows: — Plain  of  Moreh 
(Gen.  xii.  6  ;  Deut.  xi.  30),  Plain  of  Mamre  (Gen. 
xiii.  18,  xiv.  13;  xviii.  1),  Plain  of  Zaanaim  (Judg. 
iv.  11),  Plain  of  the  Pillar  (Judg.  ix.  6),  Plain  of 
Meonenim  (ix.  37),  Plain  of  Tabor  (1  Sam.  x.  3). 

8.  The  Plain  of  Esdraelon  which  to  the  modern 
traveller  in  the  Holy  Land  forms  the  third  of  its 
three  most  remarkable  depressions,  is  designated  in 
the  original  by  neither  of  the  above  terms,  but  by 
emek,  an  appellative  noun  frequently  employed  in 
the  Bible  for  the  smaller  valleys  of  the  coun- 
try— "  the  valley  of  Jezreel."  Perhaps  Esdraelon 
mav  anciently  have  been  considered  as  consisting 
of  two  portions  ;  the  Valley  of  Jezreel  the  Eastern 


reason  for  it — not  a  satisfactory  one :  "  because  trees  fre- 
quent plains  or  meadows  "  {Ilandwb.  i.  90  6). 


PLASTER 

and  smaller,  the  Plain  of  Megiddo  the  Western  and 
more  extensive  of  the  two.  [G.] 

PLASTER."  The  mode  of  making  plaster- 
cement  has  been  described  above.  [Mohter.J 
Plaster  is  mentioned  thrice  in  Scripture:  1.  (Lev. 
xiv.  4-2,  48),  where  when  a  house  was  infected 
with  "  leprosy,"  the  priest  was  ordered  to  take 
away  the  portion  of  infected  wall  ami  re-plaster  it 
(Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  §211,  iii.  297-305,  ed. 
Smith).     [House  ;  Leprosv.]. 

2.  The  words  of  the  law  were  ordered  to  be  en- 
graved on  Mount  Ebal  on  stones  which  had  been 
previously  coated  with  plaster  (Deut.  xxvii.  2,  4 ; 
Josh.  viii.  32).  The  process  here  mentioned  was 
pi'obably  of  a  similar  kind  to  that  adopted  in  Egypt 
lor  receiving  bas-reliefs.  The  wall  was  first  made 
smooth,  and  its  interstices,  if  necessary,  filled  up 
witii  plaster.  When  the  figures  had  been  drawn, 
and  the  stone  adjacent  cut  away  so  as  to  leave  them 
in  relief,  a  coat  of  lime  wliitewash  was  laid  on,  and 
followed  by  one  of  varnish  after  the  painting  of  the 
figures  was  complete.  In  the  case  of  the  natural 
rock  the  process  was  nearly  the  same.  The  ground 
was  covered  with  a  thick  layer  of  fine  plaster,  con- 
sisting of  lime  and  gypsum  carefully  smoothed  and 
polished.  Upon  this  a  coat  of  lime  whitewash  was 
laid,  and  on  it  the  colours  were  painted,  and  set  by 
means  of  glue  oi'  wax.  The  whitewash  appears  in 
most  instances  to  have  been  made  of  shell-limestone 
not  much  burnt,  which  of  itself  is  tenacious  enough 
without  glue  or  other  binding  material  (Long, 
quoting  from  Belzoni,  Eij.  Ant.  ii.  49-50). 

At  Behistuu  in  Persia,  the  surface  of  the  inscribed 
rock-tablet  was  covered  with  a  varnish  to  preserve 
it  from  weather ;  but  it  seems  likely  that  in  the 
case  of  the  Ebal  tablets  the  inscription  was  cut 
wliile  the  plaster  was  still  moist  (Layard,  Nineveh, 
ii.  188  ;  Vaux,  Nin.  ^  Persep.  p.  172). 

3.  It  was  probably  a  similar  coating  of  cement, 
on  whicli  the  fatal  letters  were  traced  by  the  mystic 
liand  "  on  the  plaster  of  the  wall  "  of  Belshazzar's 
palace  at  Babylon  (Dan.  v.  5).  We  heie  obtain  an 
incidental  confinnation  of  the  Biblical  narrative. 
For  while  at  Nineveh  the  walls  are  panelled  with 
alabaster  slabs,  at  Babylon,  where  no  such  mate- 
rial is  found,  the  builders  weie  content  to  cover 
their  tiles  or  bricks  with  enamel  or  stucco,  fitly 
termed  p];ister,  fit  for  receiving  ornamental  designs 
(Lavard,  Nin.  and  Bah.  }).  529;  Diod.  ii.  8). 
[Bricks.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PLEIADES.  The  Heb.  word  (HD^S,  dmdh) 
so  rendered  occurs  in  Job  ix.  9,  xxxviii.  31,  and 
Am.  V.  8.  In  the  last  passage  our  A.  V.  has  "  the 
seven  Stars,"  although  the  Geneva  version  translates 
tlie  word  "  I'leiailes  "  as  in  the  other  cases.  In  Job 
the  I.XX.  has  UKftas,  the  order  of  the  Hebrew 
words  having  been  altered  [see  Oriox],  while  in 
Amos  there  is  no  trace  of  the  original,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  imagine  what  the  tranhlators  had  before 
them.  The  Vulgate  in  each  passage  has  a  dill'eient 
lendering:  IL/adcs  in  Job  ix.  9,  Pleiades  in  Job 
xxxviii.  31,  and  Arcturus  in  .Am.  v.  8.  Of  the 
other  versions  the  Peshito-Syriacand  Chaldee  merely 
adopt  the  Hebrew  word ;  Aqnila  in  Job  xxxviii., 
Symmachus  in  Job  xxxviii.  and  Amos,  and  Theo- 
dotion  in  Amos  give  "  Pleiades,"  while  with  re- 
markable incousistency  Aquila  iu  Amos  has  "  Arc- 

"  1.  "12,  T'll'  Cli.  X"l*il;  Koi'ia;  calx.  In  Is.  xxvii. 9, 
••  clialk-stuni'." 

2.  n^ti' ;  Koi'ia  ;  calx. 


PLEL\DES 


891 


turus."  The  Jewish  comnient<itoi's  are  no  less  at 
variance.  R.  David  Kimchi  in  his  Lexicon  says: 
"  R.  Jonah  wote  that  it  was  a  collection  of  stars 
called  in  Arabic  Al  T/iuraiyd.  And  the  wise  Rabbi 
Abraham  Aben  Ezra,  of  blessed  memorv,  wrote  that 
the  ancients  said  Cimah  is  seven  stars,  and  they 
are  at  the  end  of  the  constellation  Aries,  and  those 
which  are  seen  are  six.  And  he  wrote  that  what 
was  right  in  his  eyes  was  tjiat  it  was  a  sincrle  star, 
and  that  a  great  one,  which  is  called  the  letl  eve  of 
Taurus  ;  and  Cesil  is  a  great  star,  tlie  heart  of'  the 
constellation  Scorpio."  On  Job  xxxviii,  31,  Kimchi 
continues :  "  Our  Rabbis  of  blessed  memory  have 
said  (Berachoth,  58,  2),  Cirndh  hath  great  cold 
and  bindeth  up  the  fruits,  and  CesU  hath  great 
heat  and  ripeneth  the  fruits :  therefore  He  said,  '  or 
loosen  the  bands  of  CesU,'  for  it  openeth  the  fruits 
and  bringeth  them  forth."  In  addition  to  the  evi- 
dence of  K.  Jonah,  who  identifies  the  Hebrew 
cimdh  with  the  Arabic  Al  Thuraiyd,  we  have  the 
testimony  of  R.  Isaac  Israel,  quoted  by  Hyde  in 
his  notes  on  the  Tables  of  Ulugh  Beigh  (pp.  31-33, 
ed.  lG6o)  to  the  same  eHect.  That  Al  Thuraiija 
and  the  Pleiades  are  the  same  is  proved  by  the 
words  of  Aben  Ragel  (quoted  by  Hyde,  p.  33): 
"  Al  ThuraiyS,  is  the  mansion  of  the  moon,  in  the 
sign  Taurus,  and  it  is  called  the  celestial  hen  with  her 
chickens."  With  this  Hyde  compares  the  Fr.  pul- 
siniere,  and  Eng.  Jlen  and  chickens,  which  are  old 
names  for  the  same  stars  :  and  Niebuhr  {Descr.  de 
r Arable,  p.  101)  gives  as  the  result  of  his  inquiry 
of  the  Jew  at  Sanh,,  "  Eimeh,  Pleiades,  qu'on  ap- 
pelle  aussi  en  Allemagne  la  poule  qui  glousse." 
The  "Ancients,"  whom  Aben  Ezra  quotes  (on  Job 
xxxviii.  31),  evidently  understood  by  the  seven 
small  stars  at  the  end  of  the  constellation  Aries  the 
Pleiades,  which  are  indeed  in  the  left  shoulder  of 
the  Bull,  but  so  near  the  Ram's  tail,  that  their 
position  might  properly  be  definal  with  reference 
to  it.  With  the  statement  that  "  those  which  are 
seen  are  six  "  may  be  compai-ed  the  words  of  Didv- 
mus  on  Homer,  rSiv  Se  XIAeiaSoij/  oucr&y  eTrra, 
■n-dvv  aixavphs  6  h^SofJ.os  aari'ip,  and  of  Ovid 
{Fast.  iv.  170j  — 

"  Quae  septem  dlci,  sex  tanien  esse  solent." 

The  opinion  of  Aben  Ezra  himself  has  been  fre- 
quently misrepresented.  He  held  that  Chndh  was 
a  single  large  star,  Aldcbairm  the  brightest  of  the 
Hyades,  while  CesU  [A.  V.  "  Orion  "J  was  A>itares 
the  heart  of  Scoipio.  "  When  these  rise  in  the 
east,"  he  continues,  "  the  eflects  which  are  recorded 
appear."  He  describes  them  as  opposite  each  other, 
and  the  difference  iu  Right  Ascension  between  Al- 
debaran  and  Antares  is  as  nearly  as  possible  twelve 
hours.  Tlie  belief  of  Aben  Ezra  had  probably  the 
same  origin  as  the  rendering  of  the  V uU^;ite,  J/i/adrs. 

One  other  point  is  deserving  of  notice.  The 
Rabbis  as  quoted  by  Kimdii,  attribute  to  Cimdh 
groat  cold  and  the  property  of  checking  vegetation, 
while  CesU  works  the  contiary  clliects.  But  the 
words  of  R.  Isaac  Isiacl  on  .lob  xxxviii.  31  (quoted 
by  Hyde,  p.  72),  ai-e  just  the  i-e\erse.  He  says, 
"  the  stars  have  operations  in  the  ripning  of  the 
fruits,  and  such  is  the  operation  of  Cimdh.  And 
some  of  them  retard  and  delay  the  fruits  from  ripen- 
ing, and  this  is  the  operation  of  Cesil.  'I'lie  inter- 
pretation is,  '  Wilt  tliuu  bind  the  fruits  which  the 
constellation  Cimdh  ripcueth  and  openeth  ;  or  wilt 
thou  open  the  fruits  which  the  constellation  CesU 
contiacteth  and  bindeth  up  ?'  " 

On  the  whole  then,  though  it  is  impossible  to 


892 


PLEDGE 


arrive  at  any  certain  conclusion,  it  appears  that  our 
translatois  were  perfectly  justified  in  renderincr 
Cimah  by  "  Pleiiides."  The  "  seven  stars"  in  Amos 
clearly  denoted  the  same  cluster  in  the  language  of 
the  17th  century,  for  Cotgiave  in  his  French  Dic- 
tionary gives  "  Pleiade,  f.,  one  of  the  seven  stars." 

Hyde  maintained  that  the  Pleiades  were  again 
mentioned  in  Scripture  by  the  name  Succoth  Be- 
noth.  The  discussion  of  this  question  must  be 
I'eserved  to  the  Article  on  that  name. 

The  etymology  of  clindh  is  refeiTed  to  the  Arab. 

-    -J 
2Lc>J  ,  "a  heap,"  as  being  a  heap  or  cluster  of 
stars.     The  full  Arabic  name  given  by  Gesenius  is 

2^J        3  u  ^ 

L)  viJi  JsJis,  "  the  knot  of  the  Pleiades  ;"  and,  in 
accordance  with  this,  most  modern  commentators 
render  Job  xxxviii.  31,  "  Is  it  thou  that  bindest 
the  knots  of  the  Pleiades,  or  loosenest  the  bands  of 
Orion?"  Simonis  {Lex.  Ilehr.')  quotes  the  Green- 
land name  for  tliis  cluster  of  stars,  "  Killukturset, 
i.  e.  Stellas  colligatas,"  as  an  instance  of  the  existence 
of  the  same  idea  in  a  widely  diti'eient  language. 
The  rendering  "sweet  influences"  of  the  A.  V.  is  a 
relic  of  the  lingering  belief  in  the  power  which  the 
stai's  exerted  over  human  destiny.  The  marginal 
note  on  tlie  word  "  Pleiades"  in  the  Geneva  Version 
is,  "  which  starres  arise  when  the  sunne  is  in  Taurus, 
which  is  the  spring  tyme,  and  bring  flowers,"  thus 
agreeing  with  the  explanation  of  K.  Isa:ic  Israel 
quoted  above. 

For  authorities,  in  addition  to  those  already 
referred  to,  see  Michaelis  (^Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Ilehr. 
Xo.  1136),  Simouis  (Lex.  Ilehr.),  and  Gesenius 
{Thesaurus).  [W.  A.  W.] 

PLEDGE.    [Loan.] 

PLOUGH.     [Agriculture.] 

POGHER'ETH  (nnSS  :  ^axepiB  ;  Ale.x. 
^aKipaQ  in  Ezr.,  ^aKapaQ  ;  Alex.  ^axo-paO  in 
Neh. :  Phochereth).  The  children  of  Pocheieth  of 
Zebaim  were  among  the  children  of  Solomon's  ser- 
vants who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
57  ;  Neh.  vii.  59).  He  is  called  in  1  Esd.  v.  34, 
Phacareth. 

POETRY,  HEBREW.  Tlie  subject  of  Hebrew 
Poetry  has  been  treated  at  great  length  by  many 
wiiters  of  the  last  three  centuries,  but  the  results 
of  their  speculations  have  been,  in  most  instances, 
in  an  inverse  ratio  to  their  length.  That  such 
would  be  the  case  might  have  been  foietold  as  a 
natural  consequence  of  their  method  of  investic^a- 
tion.  In  the  16th  and  17th  centuries  the  influence 
of  classical  studies  upon  the  minds  of  the  learned 
was  so  great  as  to  imbue  tliem  with  the  belief  that 
the  writers  of  Greece  and  Itome  were  the  models  of 
all  excellence,  and  consequently,  when  their  learning 
and  critical  acumen  were  directed  to  the  lecords  of 
another  literature,  they  were  unable  to  divest  them- 
selves of  the  prejudices  of  early  education  and 
habits,  and  sought  for  the  same  excellences  which 
they  admired  in  their  favourite  models.  That  this 
has  been  the  case  with  regard  to  most  of  the  specu- 
lations on  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  and  that  the 
failure  of  those  speculations  is  mainly  due  to  this 
cause,  will  be  abundantly  manifest  to  any  one  who 
is  acquainted  with  the  literature  of  the  subject. 
But,  however  bari'en  of  results,  the  histoiy  of  the 
various  theories  which  have  been  framed  witli 
regard  to  the  external  tbrm  of  Hebrew  [icctry  is  a 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

necessary  part  of  the  present  article,  and  will  serve 
in  some  measure  as  a  warning,  to  any  who  may 
hereafter  attempt  the  solution  of  the  problem,  what 
to  avoid.  The  attributes  which  are  common  to  all 
poetry,  and  which  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  pos- 
sesses in  a  higher  degree  perhaps  than  the  literature 
of  any  other  people,  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  de- 
scribe. But  the  points  of  contrast  are  so  luimerous, 
and  the  peculiarities  which  distinguish  Hebrew 
piietry  so  remarkable,  that  these  alone  requii'e  a 
full  and  careful  consideration.  It  is  a  phenomenon 
which  is  universally  observed  in  the  literatures  of 
all  nations,  that  the  earliest  form  in  which  the 
thoughts  and  feelings  of  a  people  find  utterance  is 
the  poetic.  Piose  is  an  aftergrowth,  the  vehicle  of 
less  spontaneous,  because  more  formal,  cxpiession. 
And  so  it  is  in  the  literature  of  the  Hebrews.  We 
find  in  the  sober  narrative  which  tells  us  of  the 
fortunes  of  Cain  and  his  descendants  the  earliest 
known  specimen  of  poetry  on  record,  the  song  of 
Lamech  to  his  wives,  "  the  sword  song,"  as  Herder 
terms  it,  supposing  it  to  commemorate  the  dis- 
covery of  weapons  of  war  by  his  son  Tubal-Cain. 
But  whether  it  be  a  song  of  triumph  for  the  im- 
punity which  the  wild  old  chief  might  now  enjoy 
for  his  son's  discovery,  or  a  lament  for  some  deed 
of  violence  of  his  own,  this  chant  of  Lamech  has 
of  itself  an  especial  interest  as  connected  with  the 
oldest  genealogical  document,  and  as  possessing  the 
characteristics  of  Hebrew  poetry  at  the  earliest 
period,  with  which  we  are  acquainted.  Its  origin 
is  admitted  by  Ewald  to  be  pre-Mosaic,  and  its 
antiquity  the  most  remote.  Its  lyrical  character 
is  consistent  with  its  early  date,  for  lyrical  poetsy 
is  of  all  fbi  ms  the  earliest,  being,  as  Ewald  {Dicht. 
des  A.  B.  1  Th.  i.  §2,  p.  11)  admirably  describes 
it,  "  the  daughter  of  the  moment,  of  swift-rising 
powerful  feelings,  of  deep  stirrings  and  fiery  emo- 
tions of  the  soul."  This  first  fragment  which  has 
come  down  to  us  possesses  thus  the  eminently 
lyrical  chaiacter  which  distinguishes  the  poetry 
of  the  Hebrew  nation  from  its  earliest  existence  to 
its  decay  and  fall.  It  has  besides  tlie  further  cha- 
racteristic of  parallelism,  to  which  reference  will 
be  hereafter  made. 

Of  the  three  kinds  of  poetry  which  are  illustrated 
by  the  Hebrew  literature,  the  lyric  occu])ies  the 
foremost  place.  The  Shemitic  nations  have  nothing 
approaching  to  an  epic  poem,  and  in  proportion  to 
this  defect  the  lyric  element  prevailed  more  greatly, 
commencing,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  pre-Mosaic 
times,  flourishing  in  rude  vigour  during  the  earlier 
periods  of  the  Judges,  the  heroic  age  of  the  Hebrews, 
growing  with  the  nation's  growth  and  strengthening 
with  its  strength,  till  it  reached  its  highest  excellence 
in  David,  the  warrior-poet,  and  from  thenceforth 
began  slowly  to  decline.  Gnomic  poetry  is  the 
product  of  a  more  advanced  age.  It  arises  from 
the  desire  felt  by  the  poet  to  express  the  results 
of  the  accumulated  experiences  of  life  in  a  form  of 
beauty  and  permanence.  Its  thoughtful  character 
requires  for  its  development  a  time  of  )ieacefulness 
and  leisure ;  for  it  gives  expression,  not  like  the 
lyric  to  the  sudden  and  impassioned  feelings  of  the 
moment,  but  to  calm  and  philosophic  reflection. 
Being  less  spontaneous  in  its  origin,  its  form  is 
of  necessity  more  artificial,  'i'he  gnomic  poetry  of 
the  Hebrews  has  not  its  measured  flow  disturbed 
by  the  shock  of  arms  or  the  tumult  of  camps;  it 
rises  silentl}',  like  the  Temjile  of  old,  without  the 
sound  of  a  weapon,  and  its  groundwork  is  the  home 
life  of  the  nation.     The  jieriod   during  which  it 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

flourished  conespoiKis  to  its  domestic  and  settled 
character.  From  the  time  of  David  onwards 
through  tlie  reigns  of  the  earlier  kings,  when  the 
nation  was  quiet  and  at  peace,  or,  if  not  at  peace, 
at  least  so  firmly  fixed  in  its  acquired  territory 
tiiat  its  wars  were  no  struggle  for  existence, 
gnomic  poetry  blossomed  and  bare  fruit.  We  meet 
with  it  at  intervals  up  to  the  time  of  the  Captivity, 
and,  as  it  is  chiefly  characteristic  of  the  age  of  the 
monarchy,  E>yald  has  appropriately  designated  this 
era  the  "  artificial  period  "  of  Hebrew  poetry.  From 
the  end  of  the  8th  century  }5.o.  the  decline  of  the 
nation  was  rapid,  and  with  its  glory  departed  the 
chitjf  glories  of  its  literature.  The  poems  of  this 
period  are  distinguished  by  a  smoothness  of  diction 
and  an  external  polish  which  betray  tokens  of 
labour  and  art ;  the  style  is  less  flowing  and  easy, 
and,  except  in  rare  instances,  there  is  no  dash  of 
the  ancient  vigour.  After  the  Captivity  we  have 
nothing  but  the  ])oems  which  foi  nieil  part  of  the 
liturgical  services  of  the  Temple.  Whether  dranatlG 
[loetry,  properly  so  called,  ever  existed  among  the 
Hebrews,  is,  to  say  the  le.ist,  extremely  doubtful. 
In  the  opinion  of  some  writers  the  Song  of  Songs, 
ill  its  external  foim,  is  a  rude  drama,  designed  for 
a  simple  stage.  But  the  evidence  for  this  view  is 
extremely  slight,  and  no  good  and  sufficient  reasons 
have  been  adduced  wliich  would  lead  us  to  con- 
clude tiiat  the  amount  of  dramatic  action  exhibited 
in  that  poem  is  more  than  would  be  involveil  in  an 
animated  ])oetic  ilialogne  in  which  more  than  two 
persons  take  part.  Philosophy  and  the  drama 
appear  alike  to  have  been  peculiar  to  the  Indo- 
(iermanic  nations,  and  to  have  mmiifested  them- 
selves among  the  Shemitic  tribes  only  in  their 
crudest  and  most  simple  form. 

I.  Lyrical  Poetrij. — The  literature  of  the  He- 
brews aboumls  with  illustrations  of  all  forms  of 
lyi'ical  poetry,  in  its  most  manifold  and  wide- 
embracing  compass,  from  such  short  ejaculations  as 
the  songs  of  the  two  Lamechs  and  Pss.  xv.,  cxvii., 
and  others,  to  the  longer  chants  of  victory  and 
thanksgiving,  like  the  songs  of  Deborah  and  David 
(Judg.  v.,  Fs.  xviii.).  The  thoroughly  national 
character  of  all  lyricil  poetry  has  been  already 
alluded  to.  It  is  the  utterance  of  the  people's  life 
in  all  its  varied  phases,  and  expresses  all  its  most 
earnest  .strivings  and  impulses.  In  pj'oportion  as 
tills  expression  is  vigorous  and  animated,  the  idea 
embodied  in  lyric  s(jng  is  in  most  aises  narrowed 
or  rather  concentrated.  One  truth,  and  even  one 
side  of  a  truth,  is  for  the  time  investeil  wifch  the 
greatest  prominence.  All  these  characteristics  will 
be  found  in  perfection  in  the  lyric  ])oetry  of  the 
Hebrews.  One  other  feature  which  distinguishes  it 
is  its  form  and  its  capaijility  ihv  being  set  to  a 
musical  accompaniment.  The  names  by  which  the 
various  knids  of  songs  were  known  among  the 
Hebrews  will  supply  some  illustration  of  this. 

1.  T'tJ',  slur,  a  song  in  general,  adapted  for  the 
voice  alone. 

2.  niDTD,  iixizinor,  which  Ewald  considers  a  lyric 
song,  properly  so  calleil,  but  which  rather  seems  to 
cnrrospond  with  the  (ireek  ifaA.juof,  a  psalm,  or  song 
to  1)0  sung  with  any  instrnmenUd  accompaniment. 

;J.  riD'JJ,  niijhidh,  which  Fwald  is  of  opinion  is 
equivalent  to  the  (ireek  y^aKfxos,  is  more  probably  a 
melody  expressly  adapted  for  stringed  instrumeiiLs. 

4.  ?^3K'D,  nuts  a,  of  which  it  may  be  said  thrU 
if  Kwald's  suggest iiiTi  be  not  correct,  that  it  denotes 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


893 


a  lyrical  song  requiring  nice  musical  skill,  it  is 
difficult  to  give  any  more  probable  explanation. 
[Masciiil.] 

5.  DDpp,  mictdm,  a  tenii  of  extremely  doubtful 
meaning.     [JIichtam.] 

6.  p'jltJ',  shiggdyoii  (Ps.  vii.  1),  a  wild,  irregular, 
dithyrambic  song,  as  the  word  appears  to  denote  ; 
or,  according  to  some,  a  song  to  be  sung  with  va- 
riations. The  former  is  the  more  probable  meaning. 
[Shiggaion.]     The  plural  occurs  in  Hab.  iii.  1. 

But,  besides  these,  there  are  other  divisions  of 
lyriail  poetry  of  great  importance,  which  have  j-e- 
gard  lather  to  the  subject  of  the  poems  than  to  their 
form  or  adapt;\tion  lor  musical  accompaniments.  Of 
these  we  notice  : — 

1.  n?nr),  Wulldh,  a  hymn  of  praise.  The 
plural  tehillitn  is  the  title  of  the  Book  of  Psalms  in 
Hebrew.  The  14.jth  Psalm  is  entitled  "  David's 
(Psalm)  of  praise;"  and  the  subject  of  the  ps;dm  is 
in  accordance  with  its  title,  which  is  apparently 
suggested  by  the  concluding  verse,  "  the  praise 
of  Jehovah  my  mouth  shall  speak,  and  let  all  flesh 
bless  His  holy  name  for  ever  and  ever."  To  this 
class  belong  the  songs  which  relate  to  extraordinary 
deliverances,  such  as  the  songs  of  Jloses  (Ex.  xv.) 
and  of  Deborah  (Judg.  v.),  and  the  Psalms  xviii. 
and  Ixviii.,  which  have  all  the  air  of  chants  to  be 
sung  in  triumphal  processions.  Such  were  the 
hymns  sung  in  the  Temple  services,  and  by  a  bold 
figure  the  Almighty  is  apostrophised  as  "  Thou 
that  inhabitest  the  praises  of  Israel,"  which  rose  in 
the  holy  place  with  the  fragrant  clouds  of  incense 
(Ps.  xxii.  o).  To  the  same  class  also  Ewald  refers 
the  shorter  poems  of  the  like  kind  with  those  already 
quoted,  such  as  Pss.  xxx.,  xxxii.,  cxxxviii.,  and  Is. 
xxxviii.,  which  relate  to  less  general  occasions,  and 
commemorate  more  special  deliverances.  The  songs 
of  victory  sung  by  the  congregation  in  the  Temple, 
as  Pss.  xlvi.,  xlviii.,  xxiv.  7-10,  which  is  a  short 
triumphal  ode,  and  Ps.  xxix.,  v.hich  praises  Jehovah 
on  the  ocaision  of  a  great  natural  phenomenon,  are 
likewise  all  to  be  classed  in  this  division  of  lyric 
poctiy.    Next  to  the  hymn  of  praise  may  be  noticed, 

2.  nyjp,  hindh,  the  lament,  or  dirge,  of  which 
there  are  many  examples,  whether  uttered  over  an 
individual  or  as  an  outburst  of  grief  for  the  cala- 
mities of  the  land.  The  most  touchingly  pathetic 
of  all  is  perhaps  the  lament  of  David  tor  the  death 
of  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i.  19-27),  in  which 
passionate  emotion  is'  blended  with  touches  of  ten- 
derness of  which  only  a  strong  nature  is  capable. 
Compare  with  this  the  lament  for  Abner  (2  Sam. 
iii.  ,'53,  .'W)  and  for  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xviii.  o:{). 
Of  the  sjune  character  also,  doubtless,  were  the 
songs  which  the  singing  men  and  singing  women 
spake  over  Josiah  at  his  death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25), 
and  the  songs  of  mourning  for  the  disjisters  which 
betel  the  hapless  land  of  Judah,  of  which  Psalms 
xlix.,  Ix.,  Ixxiii.,  cxxxvii.,  are  examples  (comp.  Jer. 
vii.  29,  ix.  10  [9j),  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jere- 
miah the  most  niemoiaide  instances. 

•'''.  m'"!^  T'li',  shir  ijediddth,  a  love  song  (Ps. 
xlv.  1),  in  its  external  form  at  least.  Other  kinds 
of  poetry  there  are  which  occupy  the  middle  ground 
between  the  lyric  and  gnomic,  being  lyric  in  form 
and  spirit,  but  gnomic  in  snlject.  These  may  be 
classed  as 

A.  7V)2,  iiuUlidl,  properly  a  similitude,  and  then 
a  parable,  or  sententious  saying,  coiichcil  in  [loetic 


894 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


language."  Such  are  the  songs  of  Balaam  (Num. 
xxiii.  7,  18;  xxiv.  3,  15,  20,  21,  23),  which  are 
eminently  lyrical  in  character  ;  the  mocking  ballad 
in  Num.  xxi.  27-30,  which  has  been  conjectured  to 
be  a  fragment  of  an  old  Amorite  war-sons;  [Num- 
bers, p.  584  a]  ;  and  the  apologue  of  Jotha'm  ( Judg. 
ix.  7-20"),  both  which  last  are  strongly  satirical  Tn 
tone.  But  the  finest  of  all  is  the  magnificent  pro- 
phetic song  of  triumph  over  the  fall  of  Babylon  (Is. 
xiv.  4-27).  mTl,  chiddh,  an  enigma  (like  the 
riddle  of  Samson,  Judg.  xiv.  14),  or  "  dark  saying," 
as  the  A.  V.  has  it  in  Ps.  xlix.  5,  Ixxviii.  2.  The 
foi-mer  passage  illustrates  the  musical,  and  therefore 
lyric  character  of  these  "  dark  sayings  :"  "  I  will 
incline  mine  ear  to  a  parable,  I  will  open  my  dark 
saying  upon  the  harp."  Mdshdl  and  chkldh  are 
used  as  convertible  tenns  in  Ez.  xvii.  2.  Lastly, 
to  this  class  belongs  HVpO,  melitsdh,  a  mocking, 
ironical  poem  (Hab.  ii.  6). 

5.  n?ari,  tepMllah,  prayer,  is  the  title  of  Pss. 
xvii.,  Ixxxvi.,  xc,  cii.,  cxlii.,  and  Hab.  iii.  All  these 
are  strictly  lyrical  compositions,  and  the  title  may 
have  been  assigned  to  them  either  as  denoting  the 
object  with  which  they  weie  written,  or  the  use  to 
which  they  were  applied.  As  P^wald  justly  observes, 
all  lyric  poetry  of  an  elevated  kind,  in  so  far  as  it 
reveals  the  soul  of  the  poet  m  a  pure  swift  out- 
pouring of  itself,  is  of  the  natui-e  of  a  prayer ;  and 
hence  the  tei-m  "  prayer"  was  applied  to  a  collection 
of  David's  songs,  of  which  Ps.  Ixxii.  fonned  the 
conclusion. 

II.  Gnomic  Poetry. — The  second  grand  division 
of  Hebrew  poetry  is  occupied  by  a  class  of  poems 
which  are  peculiarly  Shemitic,  and  which  represent 
the  nearest  approaches  made  by  the  people  of  that 
race  to  anything  like  philosophic  thought,  lleason- 
ing  there  is  none:  we  have  only  results,  and  those 
rather  the  product  of  observation  and  reflection 
than  of  induction  or  argumentation.  As  lyric  poetry 
is  the  expression  of  the  poet's  own  feelino-s  and  im- 
pulses, so  gnomic  poetry  is  the  forni  in  which  the 
desire  of  communicating  knowledge  to  others  finds 
vent.  There  might  possibly  be  an  intermediate 
stage  in  which  the  poets  gave  out  their  experiences 
for  their  own  pleasure  merely,  and  afterwards  ap- 
plied them  to  the  instruction  of  others,  but  this 
could  scarcely  have  been  of  long  continuance.  The 
impulse  to  teach  makes  the  teacher,  and  the  teaoher 
must  have  an  audience.  It  has  been  already  re- 
marked that  gnomic  poetry,  as  a  whole,  requires 
for  its  development  a  period  of  national  tranquillity. 
Its  germs  are  the  floating  proverbs  which  pass  cur- 
rent in  the  mouths  of  the  people,  and  embody  the 
experiences  of  many  with  the  wit  of  one.  From 
this  small  beginning  it  arises,  at  a  time  when  the 
experience  of  the  nation  has  become  matured,  and 
the  mass  of  truths  which  are  the  result  of  such 
experience  have  passed  into  circulation.  The  flime 
of  Solomon's  wisdom  was  so  gi-eat  that  no  less  than 
three  thousand  proverbs  are  attributed  to  him, 
this  beuig  the  fomi  in  which  the  Hebrew  mind 
found  its  most  congenial  utterance.  The  sayer  of 
sententious  sayings  was  to  the  Hebrews  the  wise 
man,  the  philosopher.  Of  the  earlier  isolated  pro- 
verbs but  few  examples  remain.  One  of  the  eui-liest 
occm-s  in  the  mouth  of  David,  and  in  his  time  it 


1-  Lowth  (Is.  xiv.  4)  understands  mdshdl  to  be  "  the 
g>'neral  name  for  poetic  style  among  the  Hebrews,  in- 
cluding every  sort  of  it,  as  ranging  under  one,  or  other. 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

was  the  proverb  of  the  ancients:  "  from  the  wicked 
cometh  wickedness  "  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  13  [14]  j.  Later 
on,  when  the  fortunes  of  the  nation  were  obscured, 
their  experience  was  embodied  in  terms  of  sadness 
and  despondency :  "  The  days  are  prolonged,  and 
every  vision  faileth,"  became  a  saying  and  a  bv- 
word  (Ez.  xii.  22 j ;  and  the  fepling  that  the  people 
were  sufl:ering  for  the  sins  of  their  fathers  took  the 
form  of  a  sentence,  "  The  fathers  have  eaten  sour 
grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge" 
(Ez.  xviii.  2).  Such  were  the  models  which  the 
gnomic  poet  had  before  him  for  imitation.  These 
detached  sentences  may  be  tairly  assumed  to  be  the 
earliest  form,  of  which  the  fuller  apophthegm  is 
the  exi^ansion,  swelling  into  sustmned  exhortations, 
and  even  dramatic  dialogue. 

III.  Dramatic  Poetry. — It  is  impossible  to  assert 
that  no  form  of  the  drama  existed  among  the  He- 
brew people;  the  most  that  can  be  done  is  to 
examine  such  portions  of  their  literature  as  have 
come  down  to  us,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertainino- 
how  far  any  traces  of  the  drama  proper  are  dis- 
cernible, and  what  inferences  may  be  made  fi'om 
them.  It  is  unquestionably  trae,  as  Ewald  observes, 
that  the  Arab  reciters  of  romances  will  many  times 
in  their  own  persons  act  out  a  complete  drama  iu 
recitation,  changing  their  voice  and  gestures  with 
the  change  of  person  and  subject.  Something  of 
this  kind  may  possibly  have  existed  among  the 
Hebrews  ;  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  il  did 
exist,  nor  any  grounds  for  making  even  a  probable 
conjecture  with  regard  to  it.  A  rude  kind  of  fai'ce  is 
described  by  Wr.  Lane  {iMod.  Eg.  ii.  chap,  vii.),  the 
players  of  which  "  are  called  Mohhahhazee'n.  These 
frequently  perfoi  m  at  the  festivals  prior  to  weddings 
and  circumcisions,  at  the  houses  of  tlie  great ;  and 
sometimes  attract  rings  of  auditors  and  spectators 
in  the  public  places  in  Cairo.  Their  performances 
are  scarcely  worthy  of  description:  it  is  chiefly  by 
vulgar  gestures  and  indecent  actions  that  they  amuse 
and  obtain  applause.  The  actors  are  only  men  and 
boys :  the  part  of  a  woman  being  always  performed 
by  a  man  or  boy  in  female  attire."  Then  follows 
a  description  of  one  of  these  plays,  the  plot  of 
which  was  extremely  simple.  But  the  mere  fact 
of  the  existence  of  these  rude  exhibitions  among  the 
Arabs  and  Egyptians  of  the  present  day  is  of  no 
weight  when  the  question  to  be  decided  is,  whether 
the  Song  of  Songs  was  designed  to  be  so  represented, 
as  a  simple  pastoral  drama.  Of  coui-se,  in  con- 
sidering such  a  question,  reference  is  made  only  to 
the  extenial  form  of  the  poem,  and,  in  order  to 
prove  it,  it  must  be  shown  that  the  draiuatic  is  the 
only  form  of  representation  which  it  could  assume, 
and  not  that,  by  the  help  of  two  actors  and  a 
chorus,  it  is  capable  of  being  exhiliited  in  a  dramatic 
foim.  All  that  has  been  done,  in  our  opinion,  is 
the  latter.  It  is  but  fair,  however,  to  give  the 
views  of  those  who  hold  the  opposite.  Ewald 
maintains  that  the  Song  of  Songs  is  designed  for  a 
simple  stage,  because  it  develops  a  complete  action 
and  admits  of  definite  pauses  in  the  action,  which 
are  only  suited  to  the  drama.  He  distinguishes  it 
in  this  respect  from  the  Book  of  Job,  which  is 
dramatic  in  form  only,  though,  as  it  is  occupied 
with  a  sublime  subject,  he  compares  it  with  tragedy, 
while  the  Song  of  Songs,  being  taken  fiom  the  com- 
mon life  of  the  nation,  may  be  compared  to  comedy. 


of  all    the    characters,   of  sententious,  figurative,  and 
sublime." 


POETEY,  HEBREW 

The  one  comparison  is  probably  as  appropriate  as 
the  other.  lu  Ewald's  division  the  poem  falls  into 
13  cantos  of  tolerably  equal  length,  which  have  a 
certain  beginning  and  ending,  with  a  jtause  alter 
each.  The  whole  forms  four  acts,  for  which  three 
actors  are  sufficient :  a  hero,  a  maiden,  and  a 
chorus  of  women,  these  being  all  who  would  be  on 
the  stage  at  once.  The  following  are  the  divisions 
of  the  acts  : — 


POETEY,  HEBEEW 


895 


First,  Act,  i.  2— ii.  7    .  . 
Second  Act,  ii.  8— iii.  5. 

Tiiiid  Act,  iii.  6— vlii.  4 


f  1st  canto,  i.  2 — 8. 


t2nd 
)  ord 
(  4th 
5  til 
Gth 
7  th 
8lh 
9  th 

intu 

11th 
12  th 


17. 


i.  9 

ii.  8 
Iii.  1—5. 
iii.  6—11. 

iv.  1—7. 
iv.  8— V.  1. 

V.  2—8. 

V.  9— vl.  3. 

vi.  4 — vii.  1. 
vii.  2—10. 
vii.  lU — viii.  4. 


Fourth  Act,  vlii.  5—14  .  .      13th  canto. 

The  latest  work  on  the  subject  is  that  of  Bl. 
Kenan  (J,e  Cantique  des  Cautiqnes),  who  has  given 
a  spirited  translation  of  the  poem,  and  arranged  it 
in  acts  and  scenes,  according  to  his  own  theory  of 
the  manner  in  which  it  was  intended  to  be  repre- 
sented. He  divides  the  whole  into  16  cantos,  which 
form  five  acts  and  an  epilogue.  The  acts  and  scenes 
are  thus  aiTanged  : — 

I  Scene  1.         i.  2— 6. 
First  Act,  i.  2— ii.  7  .  .  .  .  •(     „      2.         i.  7—11. 

I     „      3.         i.  12— ii.  7. 

„        J  A   .    ••  o     •■■  =        (  Scene  1.       ii.  8— 17. 
Second  Act,  n.  8— ni.5.  .  <  2       iii  1—5. 

j  Scene  1.  iii.  6—11. 

Third  Act,  iii.  G-v.  1    •  •  <      „      2.  iv.  1—6. 

(      „      3.  iv.  7— v.  1, 

Fourth  Act,  v.  2— vi.  3 .  .  of  a  single  scene. 

I  Scene  1.  vi.  4-9. 

„.,,,    ,   .      ,              ,,2.  vi.  10— vii.  11. 

Fifth  Act,  VI.  4-vm.  7  .  .   <      '^      3_  vii.  12-viii.  4. 

(      „      4.     viii.  5—7. 
Epilogue,  viii.  8 — 14. 


P>ut  M.  Renan,  who  is  compelled,  in  accordance 
with  his  own  theory  of  the  mission  of  the  Shemitic 
races,  to  admit  tliat  no  trace  of  anything  approach- 
ing to  the  regular  drama  is  found  among  them,  does 
not  regard  the  Song  of  Songs  as  a  drama  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  products  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
theatres,  but  as  dramatic  poetry  in  the  widest  ap- 
plication of  the  term,  to  designate  any  composition 
conducted  in  dialogue  and  corresponding  to  an 
action.  The  absence  of  the  regular  drama  he 
attributes  to  the  want  of  a  complicated  mythology, 
analogous  to  that  possessed  by  the  Indo-European 
peoples.  Monotheism,  the  characteristic  religious 
belief  of  the  Shemitic  races,  stifled  the  growth  of  a 
mythology  and  checked  the  development  of  the 
drama.  Be  this  as  it  may,  dramatic  repioscntation 
appears  to  liave  been  alien  to  the  feelings  of  the 
Hebrews.  At  no  period  of  their  history  before  the 
age  of  Herod  is  there  the  least  trace  of  a  theatre  at 
Jerusalem,  whatever  other  foreign  innovations  may 
have  been  adopted,  and  the  bur.st  of  indignation 
which  the  high-prio.st  .Jason  incuried  for  attempting 
to  estabHsh  a  gymnasium  and  to  introduce  the 
Greek  gama<  is  a  significant  symptom  of  the  re- 
pugnance which  the  jjcople  felt  for  such  spectacles. 
The  same  antipathy  remains  to  the  pre.sent  day 
among  the  Arabs,  and  the  attempts  to  introduce 
tlu-atres  at  Beyrout  and  in  Algeiia  have  signally 
failed.  But,  says  M.  Renan,  the  Song  of  Songs  is  a 
dramatic  poem  :  there  wei  c  no  ])ublic  performances 
in  Palestine,  therefore  it  must  have  been  lepre- 
sented   in  private;    and   he   is   compelled   to   frame 


the  following  hypothesis  concerning  it:  that  it  is 
a  libretto  intended  to  be  completed  by  the  play  of 
the  actors  and  by  music,  and  represented  in  private 
families,  probably  at  marriage-feasts,  the  repre- 
sentation being  extended  over  the  several  days  of 
the  feast.  The  last  supposition  removes  a  dilKculty 
which  has  been  felt  to  be  almost  fatal  to  the  idea 
that  the  poem  is  a  continuously  developed  drama. 
Each  act  is  complete  in  itself ;  there  is  no  suspended 
interest,  and  the  structure  of  the  poem  is  obvious 
and  natural  if  we  regard  each  act  as  a  separate 
drama  intended  for  one  of  the  days  of  the  feast. 
We  must  look  for  a  parallel  to  it  in  the  middle 
ages,  when,  besides  the  mystery  plays,  there  were 
scenic  representations  sufficiently  developed.  The 
Song  of  Songs  occupies  the  middle  place  between 
the  regular  drama  and  the  eclogue  or  p;i;5toral 
dialogue,  and  finds  a  perfect  analogue,  both  as 
regai-ds  subject  and  scenic  arrangement,  in  the  most 
celebrated  of  the  plays  of  Arras,  7.1?  Jen  de  Robin 
ct  Marion,  Such  is  M.  Renau's  explanation  of  the 
outward  fonn  of  the  Song  of  Songs,  regarded  as  a 
portion  of  Hebrew  literature.  It  has  been  due  to 
his  gi-eat  learnmg  and  reputation  to  give  his  opinion 
somewhat  at  length  ;  but  his  arguments  in  support 
of  it  are  so  little  convincing  that  it  must  be  re- 
garded at  best  but  as  an  ingenious  hypothesis,  the 
groundwork  of  which  is  taken  away  by  M.  Renau's 
own  admission  that  dramatic  representations  are 
alien  to  the  spirit  of  the  Shemitic  races.  The 
simple  corollary  to  this  proposition  must  be  that 
the  Song  of  Songs  is  not  a  drama,  but  in  its 
external  form  partakes  more  of  the  nature  of  an 
eclogue  or  pastoral  dialogue. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  after  this  to  discuss  the 
question  whether  the  Book  of  Job  is  a  dramatic 
poem  or  not.  Inasmuch  as  it  represents  an  action 
ami  a  progress,  it  is  a  drama  as  truly  and  really  as 
any  poem  can  be  which  develops  the  working  of 
passion,  and  the  alternations  of  faith,  hope,  distrust. 
triumphant  confidence,  and  black  despair,  in  the 
struggle  which  it  depicts  the  human  mind  as  en- 
gaged in,  while  attempting  to  solve  one  of  the  most 
intricate  problems  it  can  "be  called  upon  to  regard. 
It  is  a  drama  as  life  is  a  drama,  the  most  powerful 
of  all  tragedies ;  but  that  it  is  a  dramatic  poem, 
intended  to  be  represented  upon  a  stage,  or  capable 
of  being  so  represented,  may  be  confidently  denied. 

One  characteristic  of  Hebrew  poetry,  not  indeed 
peculiar  to  it,  but  shared  by  it  in  common  with  the 
literature  of  other  nations,  is  its  intensely  national^ 
and  local  colouring.  The  writers  were  Hebrews  of 
the  Hebrews,  drawing  their  inspiration  from  the 
mountains  and  fivers  of  Palestine,  which  they  have 
immortalised  in  their  poetic  figures,  and  even  while 
utt#i-ing  the  sublimest  and  most  universal  truths 
never  forgetting  their  own  nationality  in  its  nar- 
rowest and  intensest  foim.  Their  images  and  meta- 
phors, says  Muuk  {Palestine,  p.  444-  a),  "  are  titkeii 
chiefly  from  nature  and  the  phenomena  of  Palestine 
and  the  surrounding  countries,  from  the  pastoral 
life,  from  agricultui-e  and  the  national  iiistory.  The 
stars  of  heaven,  the  sand  of  the  sea-shore,  are  the 
image  of  a  great  multitude.  Would  they  speak  of 
a  mighty  host  of  enemies  invading  the  country, 
they  are  the  swift  torrents  or  the  ro;u-ing  waves  of 
the  sea,  or  the  clouds  that  bring  on  a  tempest ;  the 
war-chariots  advance  swiftly  like  lightning  or  the 
whirlwinds.  Happiness  rises  as  the  dawn  and 
shines  like  the  daylight;  the  blessing  of  God  de- 
scends like  the  dew  or  tiie  bountiful  rain  ;  the  anger 
of  Heaven  is  a  devouring  fire  that  annihilates  the 


896 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


wicked  as  the  flame  which  devours  the  stubble. 
Unhappiness  is  likened  to  days  of  clouds  and  dark- 
ness; at  times  of  great  catastiophes  the  sun  sets 
in  broad  day,  the  heavens  are  shaken,  the  earth 
trembles,  the  stars  disappear,  the  sun  is  changed 
into  darkness  and  the  moon  into  blood,  and  so  on. 
'i'he  cedars  of  Lebanon,  the  oaks  of  Bashan,  are  the 
image  of  the  mighty  man,  the  palm  and  the  reed 
of  the  great  and  the  humble,  briers  and  thorns  of 
the  wicked ;  the  pious  man  is  an  olive  ever  gi'een, 
or  a  tree  planted  by  the  water-side.  The  animal 
liingdom  furnished  equally  a  large  number  of 
images:  the  lion,  the  image  of  power,  is  also,  like 
the  wolf,  bear.  &c.,  that  of  tyi-ants  and  violent  and 
rapacious  men ;  and  the  jiioLis  who  suffers  is  a 
feeble  sheep  led  to  the  slaughter.  The  strong  and 
powerful  man  is  compared  to  the  he-goat  or  the 
bull  of  Bashan:  the  kine  of  Bashan  figure,  in  the 
discourses  of  Amos,  as  the  image  of  rich  and  volup- 
tuous women  ;  the  people  wlio  rebel  against  the 
Divine  will  are  a  refractory  heifer.  Other  images 
are  borrowed  from  the  country  life  and  from  the 
life  domestic  and  social :  the  chastisement  of  God 
weighs  upon  Israel  like  a  waggon  laden  with 
sheaves ;  the  dead  cover  the  earth  as  the  dung 
which  covers  the  surface  of  the  fields.  The  im- 
pious man  sows  ciime  and  reaps  misery,  or  he  sows 
the  wind  and  reaps  the  tempest.  The  people  yield- 
ing to  the  blows  of  their  enemies  are  like  the  corn 
crushed  beneath,  the  threshing  instrument.  God 
ti-amples  the  wine  in  the  wine-press  when  He  chas- 
tises the  impious  and  sheds  their  blood.  The  wrath 
of  Jehovah  is  often  represented  as  an  intoxicating 
cup,  which  He  causes  those  to  empty  who  have 
merited  His  chastisement :  tei-rors  and  anguish  are 
often  comjiared  to  the  pangs  of  childbirth.  Peoples, 
towns,  and  states  are  lepresented  by  the  Hebrew 
poets  under  the  image  of  daughters  or  wives ;  in 
their  impiety  they  are  courtesans  or  adulteresses. 
The  historical  allusions  of  most  frequent  occuri-ence 
are  taken  from  the  catastrophe  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
moriha,  the  miracles  of  the  departure  fiom  Egypt, 
and  the  appearance  of  Jehovali  on  Sinai."  Examples 
might  easily  be  multiplied  in  illustration  of  this 
remarkable  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  poets :  they 
stand  thick  upon  every  page  of  their  writings,  and 
in  striking  contrast  to  the  vague  generalisations  of 
the  Indian  philosophic  poetry. 

In  Hebrew,  as  in  other  languages,  there  is  a  pccu 
liarity  about  the  diction  used  in  poetry — a  kind  of 
poetical  dialect,  characterized  byitirchaic  and  irie- 
gular  forms  of  words,  abrupt  constructions,  and 
unusual  inflexions,  which  distinguish  it  from  the 
cor.temporary  prose  or  historicjil  stylo.  It  is  rmi- 
versally  observed  that  aichaic  forms  and  usages  of 
woi'ds  linger  in  the  poetry  of  a  language  after  tHey 
have  fallen  out  of  ordinary  use.  A  tew  of  these 
forms  and  usages  are  here  given  fiom  Gesenius' 
Lekrgehdude.  The  Piel  and  Hiphil  voices  are  used 
intransitively  (.Ter.  li.  56  ;  Ez.  x.  7  ;  Job  xxix.  24) : 
the  apocopited  future  is  used  as  a  present  (Job  xv. 
33;  Ps.  .\i.  6  ;  Is.  .xlii.  6).  The  termination  T\-  is 
found  for  the  ordinory  feminine  n-  (Ex.  xv.  2  ;  Gen. 
xlix.  22  ;  Ps.  cxxxii.  4)  ;  and  for  the  plural  D*7  we 
have  P;  (Job  xv.  13;  Ez.  xxvi.  18)  and  »;  (Jer. 
xxii.  14;  Am.  vii.  1).  The  verbal  suffixes,  10, 
\0-,  and  ID-  (Ex.  xv.  9),  and  the  pronominal  suf- 
fixes to  nouns,  10-  for  Q-,  and  •liT'-  for  V-  (Hab. 
iii.  10),  are  peculiar  to  the  poetical  books;  as  are 
*ni(i's.''xvi.  12),  i!D''-(I)eut.  xxxii.37;  Ps.  xi.  7), 


POETRY.  HEBREW 

and  the  more  unusual  forms,  nOH''-  (Ez.  xl.  16), 

n^rf-  (Ez.  i.  11),  n:3''-  (Ez.  xiil.  20).    in  poetical 

language  also  we  find  \C)7  for  i?  or  DH?,  ID?  for 

h,  iD3  for  3,  iD3  for  3  ;  the  plural  forms  of  the 

prepositions,  ipK  for  7S,    '"'ly  for  ^y,    >7V  ;   and 

the  peculiar  forms  of  the  nouns,  "•Tin  tor  nn 

n-in  for  nn,  D''00J?  for  QiOy,  and  so  on. 

But  the  form  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  its  distinguish- 
ing characteristic,  and  what  this  form  is,  has  been  a 
vexed  question  fisr  many  ages.  The  Therapeutae, 
as  described  by  Philo  {ile  Vita  Contempl.  §3,  vol.  ii. 
p.  475,  ed.  Mang.),  sang  hymns  and  psalms  of  thanks- 
giving to  God,  in  divers  measures  and  strains ;  and 
these  were  either  new  or  ancient  ones  composed  by 
the  old  poets,  who  had  left  behind  them  measures 
and  melodies  of  trimeter  verses,  of  processional 
songs,  of  hymns,  of  songs  sung  at  the  ofliei'ing  of 
libations,  or  before  the  altar,  and  continuous  choral 
songs,  beautifully  measured  out  in  strophes  of  in- 
tricate character  (§10,  p.  484).  The  value  of  Philo's 
testimony  on  this  point  may  be  estimated  by  another 
pa.ssage  in  his  works,  in  which  he  claims  for  Moses 
a  knowledge  of  numbers  and  geometry,  the  theory  of 
rhythm,  harmony,  and  metre,  and  the  whole  science 
of  music,  practical  and  theoretical  (de  Vita  Mosis, 
i.  5,  vol.  ii.  p.  84).  The  evidence  of  Josephus  is  as 
little  to  be  relied  upon.  Both  these  writers  laboured 
to  magnify  the  greatness  of  their  own  nation,  and 
to  show  that  in  litei-ature  and  philosophy  the  Greeks 
had  been  anticipated  by  tiie  Hebrew  barbarians. 
This  idea  pervades  all  their  writings,  and  it  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind  as  the  key-note  of  tlieir 
testimony  on  this  as  on  other  points.  According  to 
Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  16,  §4),  the  Song  of  Moses  at  the 
Red  Sea  (Ex.  xv.)  was  composed  in  the  hexameter 
measure  [iv  e^afxerpo}  t6vi(i)  ;  and  again  (Ant.  iv. 
8,  §44),  the  song  in  Deut.  xxxii.  is  described  as  a 
hexameter  poem.  The  Psalms  of  David  were  in 
various  metres,  some  ti-imeters  and  some  penta- 
meters {Ant.  vii.  12,  §3).  Eusebius  (de  Praep. 
Evanj.  xi.  3,  p.  514,  ed.  Col.  1688)  characterises 
the  great  Song  of  Moses  and  the  118th  (119th) 
Psalm  as  metrical  compositions  in  what  the  Greeks 
call  the  heroic  metie.  They  are  said  to  be  hexa- 
meters of  sixteen  syllables.  The  other  verse  compo- 
sitions of  the  Ileljrews  are  said  to  be  in  trimeters. 
This  saying  of  Eusebius  is  attacked  by  Julian  (Cy- 
rill.  coutr.  Jul.  vii.  2),  who  on  his  pait  endea- 
voured to  prove  the  Hebrews  devoid  of  all  culture. 
Jerome  (Praef.  in  Hiob)  appeals  to  Philo,  Josephus, 
Origen,  and  Eusebius.  for  proof  that  the  Psalter, 
the  Lamenfcitions  of  Jeremiah,  and  almost  all  the 
songs  of  Scripture,  aie  composed  in  metre,  like  the 
odes  of  Horace,  Pindar,  Alcaeus,  and  Sappho.  Again, 
he  says  that  the  Book  of  Job,  from  iii.  3  to  xlii.  6, 
is  in  hexameters,  with  dactyls  and  spondees,  and  fre- 
quently, on  account  of  the  peculiarity  of  the  Hebrew 
language,  other  feet  which  have  not  the  same  syl- 
lables but  the  same  time.  In  Epist.  ad  Paulam 
(0pp.  ii.  709,  ed.  Martianey)  occurs  a  pass<ige  which 
shows  in  some  measure  how  far  we  aie  to  under- 
stand literally  the  terms  which  Jerome  has  borrowed 
from  the  verse  literature  of  Greece  and  l.'ome,  and 
apj>liod  to  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews.  The  conclu- 
sion seems  inevitable  that  these  terms  are  employed 
simply  to  denote  a  general  external  lesemblance, 
and  by  no  means  to  indicate  the  existence,  among 
the  j)Oetsof  the  Old  Testament,  of  a  knowledge  of  the 
laws  of  metre,  as  we  are  accustomed  to  imderstand 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

the  teiin.  There  are,  says  Jerome,  four  alphabetical 
Psalms,  the  110th  (111th),  1 1 1th  (ir2th),  118th 
(119th),  and  the  144th  (145th).  In  the  first  two, 
one  letter  corresponds  to  each  clause  or  versicle, 
which  is  written  in  trimeter  iambics.  The  others 
are  in  tetrameter  iambics,  like  the  song  in  Deutero- 
nomy. In  Ps.  118  (119),  eight  verses  follow 
each  letter:  in  Ps.  144  (145)  a  letter  corresponds 
to  a  verse.  In  Lamentations  we  have  foiu'  aljiha- 
betical  acrostics,  the  first  two  of  which  are  written 
in  a  kind  of  Sapphic  metre  ;  for  three  clauses  which 
are  connected  together  and  begin  with  one  letter 
(i.  e.  in  the  first  clause)  close  with  a  period  in  heroic 
measure  {Heroici  comma).  .The  third  is  written 
in  trimeter,  and  the  verses  in  threes  each  begin 
with  the  same  letter.  The  fourth  is  like  the  first 
and  second.  The  Proverbs  end  with  an  alphabetical 
poem  in  tetrameter  iambics,  beginning,  "  A  virtuous 
woman  who  can  find  ?"  In  the  Praef.  in  Citron. 
Euseb.  Jerome  compares  the  metres  of  the  Psalms 
to  those  of  Horace  and  Pindar,  now  running  in 
Iambics,  now  ringing  with  Alcaics,  now  swelling 
with  Sapphics,  now  beginning  with  a  half  foot. 
What,  he  asks,  is  more  beautiful  than  the  song  of 
Deuteronomy  and  Isaiah  ?  What  more  weighty 
than  Solomon?  What  more  perfect  than  Job? 
All  which,  as  Josephus  and  Origen  testify,  are  com- 
posed in  hexameters  and  pentameters.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  these  terms  are  mere  generalities, 
and  express  no  more  than  a  certain  rough  resem- 
blance, so  that  the  songs  of  Moses  and  Isaiah  may 
be  designated  hexameters  and  pentameters,  with  as 
much  propriety  as  the  first  and  second  chapters  of 
Lamentations  may  be  compared  to  Sapphic  odes. 
The  resemblance  of  the  Hebrew  verse  composition 
to  the  classic  metres,  is  expressly  denied  by  Gregory 
of  Nyssa  (1  Tract,  in  Psalm,  cap.  iv.).  Augustine 
{Ep.  131  ad  Numcrium)  confesses  his  ignorance  of 
Hebrew,  but  adds  that  those  skilled  in  the  language 
believed  the  Psalms  of  David  to  be  written  in  metre. 
Isidore  of  Seville  (Oriq.  i.  18)  claims  for  the  heroic 
metre  the  highest  antiquity,  inasmuch  as  the  Song 
of  Moses  was  composed  in  it,  and  the  Book  of  Job, 
who  was  contemporary  with  ]\Ioses,  long  before  the 
times  of  Pherecydes  and  Homer,  is  written  in  dactyls 
and  spondees.  Joseph  Scaliger  {Animadv.  ad  Ens. 
Chron.  p.  6  h,  &c.)  was  one  of  the  first  to  point  out 
the  fallacy  of  Jerome's  statement  with  regard  to  the 
metres  of  the  Psalter  and  the  Lamentations,  and  to 
assert  that  these  books  contained  no  verse  bound  by 
metrical  laws,  but  that  their  language  was  merely 
prose,  animated  by  a  poetic  spirit.  He  admitted 
the  Song  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy,  the  Proverbs, 
and  Job,  to  be  the  only  books  in  which  there  was 
necessarily  any  ti'ace  of  rhythm,  and  this  rhythm 
he  compares  to  that  of  two  dimeter  iambics,  some- 
times of  more,  sometimes  of  fewer  syllables  as  the 
sense  required,  (icrhard  Vossius  {de  Nat.  et  Const. 
Artis  Poet.  lib.  1,  c.  13,  §2)  says,  that  in  Job  and 
the  Proverbs  there  is  rhythm  but  no  metre ;  that 
is,  regard  is  had  to  the  number  of  syllables  but  not 
to  their  quantity.  In  the  Psalms  and  Lamentations 
not  even  rhythm  is  observed. 

But,  in  spite  of  the  opinions  pronounced  by  these 
high  authorities,  there  were  still  many  who  believed 
in  the  existence  of  a  Hebrew  metre,  and  in  the  possi- 
bility of  recoveiing  it.  The  theories  proposed  for 
this  purpose  were  various.  Gomarus,  professor  at 
Grijningen  [Davidis  Li/ra,  Lugd.  Bat.  1037),  advo- 
cated both  rhymes  and  metre ;  foi-  the  latter  he 
laid  down  the  following  rules.  The  vowel  alone,  as  it 
is  long  or  short,  determines  the  length  of  a  syllable. 

VOL.   II. 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


897 


S/ieva  forms  no  syllable.  The  periods  or  versicles 
of  the  Hebrew  poems  never  contain  less  than  a 
distich,  or  two  verses,  but  in  proportion  as  the 
periods  are  longer  they  contain  more  verses.  The 
last  syllable  of  a  verse  is  indifterently  long  or  short. 
This  system,  if  system  it  may  be  called  (for  it  is 
equally  adapted  for  prose),  was  supported  by  many 
men  of  note ;  among  others  by  the  younger  Buxtorf, 
Heinsius,  L.  de  Dieu,  Constantin  I'Empereur,  and 
Hottinger.  On  the  other  hand  it  was  vigorously 
attacked  by  L.  Cap]iellus,  Calovius,  Danhauer, 
Pfeitfer,  and  Solomon  Van  Til.  Towards  the  close 
of  the  17th  century  Marcus  Meibomius  announced 
to  the  world,  with  an  amount  of  pompous  assurance 
which  is  charming,  that  he  had  discovered  the  lost 
metrical  system  of  the  Hebrews.  By  the  help  of 
this  m3'sterious  secret,  which  he  attributed  to  divine 
revelation,  he  proposed  to  restore  not  only  the  Psalms 
but  the  whole  Hebrew  Scriptures,  to  their  pristine 
condition,  and  thus  confer  upon  the  world  a  know- 
ledge of  Hebrew  greater  than  any  which  had  existed 
since  the  ages  which  preceded  the  Alexandrine  trans- 
lators. But  Meibomius  did  not  allow  his  enthusiasm 
to  get  the  better  of  his  prudence,  and  the  condition 
on  which  this  portentous  secret  was  to  be  made 
public  was,  that  six  thousand  curious  men  should 
contribute  51.  sterling  a-piece  for  a  copy  of  his  book, 
wliich  was  to  be  printed  in  two  volumes  folio.  It 
is  almost  needless  to  add  that  his  scheme  fell  to  the 
ground.  He  published  some  specimens  of  his  res- 
toration of  ten  Psalms,  and  six  entire  chapters  of  the 
Old  Testament  in  1690.  The  glimpses  which  he 
gives  of  his  grand  secret  are  not  such  as  would 
make  us  regret  that  the  knowledge  of  it  perished 
with  him.  The  whole  Book  of  Psalms,  he  says,  is 
written  in  distichs,  except  the  first  Psalm,  which  is 
in  a  different  metre,  and  serves  as  an  introduction 
to  the  rest.  They  were  therefore  intended  to  be 
sung,  not  by  one  priest,  or  by  one  chorus,  but  by 
two.  Meibomius  "  was  severely  chastised  by  J.  H. 
Mains,  B.  H.  Gebhardus,  and  J.  G.  Zentgravius" 
(Jebb,  Sacr.  Lit.  p.  11).  In  the  last  century  the 
learned  Francis  Hare,  bishop  of  Chichester,  pub- 
lished an  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Psalms,  metrically 
divided,  to  which  he  prefixed  a  dissertation  on  the 
ancient  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  {Psalm,  lib.  in  versi- 
culos  mctrice  divisus,  &c.,  Lond.  1736).  Bishop 
Hare  maintained  that  in  Hebrew  poetry  no  regard 
was  had  to  the  quantity  of  syllables.  He  regarded 
Shc'oas  as  long  vowels,  and  long  vowels  as  short  at 
his  pleasure.  The  rnles  which  he  laid  down  are 
the  following.  In  Hebrew  poetry  all  the  feet  are 
dissyllables,  and  no  regard  is  had  to  the  quantitj'  of 
a  syllable.  Clauses  consist  of  an  equal  or  unequal 
number  of  syllables.  If  the  number  of  syllables  be 
equal,  the  verses  are  trochaic;  if  unequal,  iambic. 
Periods  for  the  most  part  consist  of  two  verses,  often 
three  or  four,  sometimes  more.  Clauses  of  the  same 
periods  are  of  the  same  kind,  that  is,  either  iambic  or 
trochaic,  with  veiy  few  exceptions.  Trochaic  clauses 
generally  agree  in  the  number  of  the  feet,  which  are 
sometimes  three,  as  in  Pss.  xciv.  1,  cvi.  1,  and  this  is 
the  most  frequent ;  sometimes  five,  as  in  Ps.  ix.  5. 
In  iambic  clauses  the  number  of  feet  is  sometimes  the 
same,  l)ut  they  generally  differ.  Both  kinds  of  verse 
ai'e  mixed  in  the  same  poem.  In  order  to  carry  out 
these  rules  they  are  supplemented  by  one  which 
gives  to  the  versifier  tlie  widest  licence.  Words  and 
veises  are  contracted  or  lengthened  at  will,  by  syn- 
cope, elision,  &0.  In  addition  to  this,  the  bishop 
was  under  the  necessity  of  maintaining  that  all 
grammarians  had  hitherto  erred  in  laying  down  the 

3'^M 


898 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


rules  of  ordinaiy  punctuation.  His  system,  if  it 
may  be  so  called,  can-ies  its  own  refutation  with  it, 
but  was  considered  by  Lowth  to  be  woithy  a  leply 
under  the  title  of  Metricae  Harianae  Brcvis  Confu- 
tatio,  printed  at  the  end  of  his  De  Sacra  Poes.  Heh. 
Praelectiones,  &c. 

Anton  (Conject.  de  Metro  Heh.  Ant.  Lips.  1770), 
admitting  the  metre  to  be  regulated  by  the  accents, 
endeavoured  to  prove  that  in  the  Hebrew  poems  was 
a  highly  artistic  and  regular  system,  like  that  of 
the  Greeks  and  Romans,  consisting  of  strophes, 
antistrophes,  epodes,and  the  like;  but  his  method  is 
as  arbitrary  as  Hare's.  The  theory  of  Lautvvein 
( Versuch  einer  rkhtifien  Theorie  von  der  hibl. 
Verskunst,  Tiib.  1775)  is  an  improvement  upon 
those  of  his  predecessors,  inasmuch  as  he  rejects  the 
measurement  of  verse  by  long  and  short  syllables, 
and  marks  the  scansion  by  the  tone  accent.  He 
assumes  little  more  than  a  free  rhythm  :  the  verses 
aie  distinguished  by  a  certain  relation  in  their  con- 
tents, and  connected  by  a  poetic  euphony.  Sir  W. 
Jones  {Comment.  Foes.  Asiat.  1774)  attempted  to 
apply  the  rules  of  Arabic  metre  to  Hebrew.  He 
regarded  as  a  long  syllable  one  which  terminated  in 
a  consonant  or  quiescent  letter  (N,  H,  '')  ;  but  he 
did  not  develope  any  system.  The  present  Arabic 
prosody,  however,  is  of  comparatively  modern  in- 
vention ;  and  it  is  not  consistent  with  probability 
that  there  could  be  any  system  of  versiticaiion 
among  the  Hebrews  like  that  imagined  by  Sir  W. 
Joues,  when  in  the  example  he  quotes  of  Cant.  i.  5, 
he  refers  the  first  clause  of  the  verse  to  the  second, 
and  the  last  to  the  fifteenth  kind  of  Arabic  metre. 
Greve  {Ultima  Capita  Johi,  &c.,  1791)  believed 
that  in  Hebrew,  as  in  Arabic  and  Syriac,  there  was 
a  metre,  but  that  it  was  obscured  by  the  false  ortho- 
graphy of  the  Masorets.  He  thei'elbre  assumed  for 
the  Hebrew  an  Arabic  vocalisation,  and  with  this 
modification  he  found  iambic  trimeters,  dimeters, 
and  tetrameters,  to  be  the  most  common  forms  of 
verse,  and  lays  down  the  laws  of  versification  ac- 
cordingly. Bellermann  (  Versuch  iiher  die  Metrik 
der  Hehrder,  1813)  was  the  last  who  attempted  to 
set  forth  the  old  Hebrew  metres.  He  adopted  the 
llasoretic  orthograph}'  and  vocalisation,  and  deter- 
mined the  quantity  of  syllables  by  the  accentuation, 
and  what  he  termed  the  "  Morensystem,"  denoting  by 
moren  the  compass  of  a  single  syllable.  Each  syl- 
lable which  has  not  the  tone  accent  must  have  three 
moren ;  every  syllable  whicli  has  the  tone  accent 
may  have  either  four  or  two,  but  generally  three. 
The  moren  are  reckoned  as  follows :  a  long  vowel 
has  two ;  a  short  vowel,  one  ;  every  consonant,  whe- 
ther single  or  double,  has  one  more.  Shewa  simple 
or  composite  is  not  reckoned.  The  quiescent  letters 
have  no  7nore.  Dagesh  forte  compensative  has 
one  ;  so  has  metheg.  The  majority  of  dissyllable  and 
trisyllable  words,  having  the  accent  on  the  last  syl- 
lable, will  thus  form  iambics  and  anapaests.  But 
as  many  have  the  accent  on  the  penultimate,  these 
will  form  trochees.  The  most  common  kinds  of  feet 
are  iambics  and  anapaests,  interchanging  with 
trochees  and  tribrachs.  Of  ver-^es  composed  of  these 
feet,  though  not  uniform  as  regards  the  numbers  of 
the  feet,  consist,  according  to  Bellermann,  the  poems 
of  the  Hebrgw  Scriptures. 

Among  those  who  believal  in  the  existence  of  a 
Hebrew  metre,  but  in  the  impossibility  of  recovering 
it  were,  Carpzov,  Lowth,  FfeifTer,  Herder  to  a  certain 
extent,  Jahn,  Bauer,  and  Bu.xtorf.  The  opinions  of 
Lowth,  with  regard  to  Hebrew  metre,  are  summed 
lip  by   Jebb  {Sacr.  Lit.  t^.  1G)   as   follows:  "He 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

begins  by  asserting,  that  certain  of  the  Hebrew 
writings  are  not  only  animated  with  the  true  poetic 
spirit,  but,  in  some  degree,  couched  in  poetic  num- 
bers ;  yet,  he  allows,  that  the  quantity,  the  rhythm, 
or  modulation  of  Hebrew  poetry,  not  only  is  un- 
known, but  admits  of  no  investigation  by  human 
art  or  industry ;  he  states,  after  Abarbanel,  that  the 
Jews  themselves  disclaim  the  very  memory  of  me- 
trical composition  ;  he  acknowledges,  that  the  arti- 
ficial conformation  of  the  sentences,  is  the  sole 
indication  of  metre  in  these  poems ;  he  barely  main- 
tains the  credibility  of  attention  having  been  paid 
to  numbers  or  feet  in  their  compositions ;  and,  at 
the  same  time,  he  confesses  the  utter  impossibility 
of  determining,  whether  Hebrew  poetry  was  modu- 
lated by  the  ear  alone,  or  according  to  any  definite 
and  settled  rules  of  prosody."  The  opinions  of 
Scaliger  and  Vossius  have  been  already  relerred  to. 
Vitringa  allows  to  Isaiah  a  kind  of  oratorial  measure, 
but  adds  that  it  could  not  on  this  account  be  rightly 
termed  poetry.  Michaelis  {A"ot.  4  in  Prael.  iii.) 
in  his  notes  on  Lowth,  held  that  there  never  was 
metre  in  Hebrew,  but  only  a  free  rhythm,  as  in 
recitative,  though  even  less  trammelled.  He  declared 
himself  against  the  Masorethic  distinction  of  long 
and  short  vowels,  and  made  the  rhythm  to  depend 
upon  the  tone  syllable ;  adding,  with  regard  to  fixed 
and  regular  metre,  that  what  has  evaded  such 
diligent  search  he  thought  had  no  existence.  On 
the  subject  of  the  rhythmical  character  of  Hebrew 
poetry,  as  opposed  to  metrical,  the  remarks  of  Jebb 
are  remarkably  appropriate.  "  Hebrew  poetry,"  he 
says  {Sacr.  Lit.  p.  20),  "is  universal  poetry:  the 
poetry  of  all  languages,  and  of  all  peoples :  the 
collocation  of  words  (whatever  may  have  been  the 
sound,  for  of  this  we  are  quite  ignorant)  is  primarily 
directed  to  secure  the  best  possible  announcement 
and  discrimination  of  the  sense  :  let,  then,  a  trans- 
lator only  be  literal,  and,  so  far  as  the  genius  of  his 
language  will  permit,  let  him  preserve  the  original 
order  of  the  words,  and  he  will  infallibly  put  the 
reader  in  possession  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  that  the 
Hebrew  text  can  give  to  the  best  Hebrew  scholar 
of  the  present  day.  Now,  had  there  been  originally 
metre,  the  c;ise,  it  is  presumed,  could  hardly  have 
been  such  ;  somewhat  must  have  been  sacrihced  to 
the  importunities  of  metrical  necessity;  the  sense 
could  not  have  invariably  predominated  over  the 
sound  ;  and  the  poetry  could  not  have  been,  as  it 
unquestionably  and  em|)hatically  is,  a  poetry,  not 
of  sounds,  or  of  words,  but  of  things.  Let  not  this 
last  assertion,  however,  be  misinteipreted :  I  would 
be  understood  merely  to  asseit  that  sound,  and 
words  in  subordination  to  sound,  do  not  in  itebrew, 
as  in  classical  poetry,  enter  into  the  essence  of  the 
thing  ;  but  it  is  happily  undeniable,  that  the  words 
of  the  poetical  Scriptures  are  exquisitely  fitted  to 
convey  the  sense  ;  anil  it  is  highly  probable,  that,  in 
the  lifetime  of  the  language,  the  sounds  were  suffi- 
ciently harmonious  :  when  I  say  sufficiently  harmo- 
nious, I  mean  so  harmonious  as  to  render  the  poetry 
grateful  to  the  ear  in  recitation,  and  suitable  to  musical 
accompaniment ;  for  which  purpose,  the  cadence  of 
well  modulated  prose  would  fully  answer  ;  a  fact, 
which  will  not  be  controverted  by  any  person  with 
a  moderately  good  ear,  that  has  ever  heard  a  chapter 
of  Isaiah  skilfully  read  from  our  authorised  transla- 
tion ;  that  has  ever  listened  to  one  of  Kent's  Anthems 
well  performed,  or  to  a  song  from  the  Messiah  of 
Handel." 

Abarbanel   Con  Is.  v.)  makes  three  divisions  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  including  iu  the  first  the  modern 


POETKY,  HEBREW 

poems  which,  in  imitation  of  the  Arabic,  are  con- 
structed accorJing  to  iiioilern  principles  of  versifica- 
tion. Among  the  second  class  he  an'anges  such  as 
have  no  meti-e,  but  are  adapted  to  melodies.  In 
these  occur  the  poetical  forms  of  words,  lengthened 
and  abbreviated,  and  the  like.  To  this  class  belong 
the  songs  of  Moses  in  Ex.  xv.,  Deut.  xxxii.,  the  song 
of  E)eborah,  and  the  song  of  David.  The  third  class 
includes  those  compositions  which  are  distinguished 
not  by  their  form  but  by  the  figurative  character  of 
their  descriptions,  as  the  tSong  of  Songs,  and  the 
Song  of  Isaiah. 

Among  those  who  maintain  the  absence  of  any 
regularity  perceptible  to  the  ear  in  the  composition 
of  Hebrew  poetry,  may  be  mentioned  Richard  Simon 
{Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  't.  i.  c.  8,  p.  57),  Wasmuth 
{Inst.  Ace.  Hebr.  p.  14),  Alstedius  {Enc.  Bibl.  c. 
27,  p.  257),  the  author  of  the  book  Cozri,  and  R. 
Azariah  de  Rossi,  in  his  book  entitled  Meor  Enayim. 
The  author  of  the  book  Cozi  i  held  that  the  Hebrews 
had  no  metre  bound  by  the  laws  of  diction,  because 
their  poetry  being  intended  to  be  sung  was  there- 
fore independent  of  metrical  laws.  K.  Azariah  ex- 
presses his  approbation  of  the  opinions  of  Cozri  and 
Abarbanel,  who  deny  the  existence  of  songs  in  Scrip- 
ture composed  after  the  manner  of  modern  Hebrew 
poems,  bat  he  adds  nevertheless,  that  beyond  doubt 
there  are  other  measures  which  depend  upon  the 
sense.  Mendelssohn  (on  Ex.  xv.)  also  rejects  the 
system  of  myiJITl  JT'Tn'*  (literally,  pegs  and 
vowels).''  Rabbi  Azariah  appears  to  have  antici- 
pated Bishop  Lowth  in  his  theory  of  parallelism : 
at  any  rate  his  treatise  contains  the  germ  which 
Lowth  developed,  and  may  be  considered,  as  Jebb 
calls  it,  the  technical  basis  of  his  system.  But  it 
also  contains  other  elements,  which  will  be  alluded 
to  hereafter.  His  conclusion,  in  Lowth's  words 
{Isainh,  prel.  diss.),  was  as  follows: — "That  the 
sacred  songs  have  undoubtedly  certain  measures  and 
proportions;  which,  however,  do  not  consist  in  the 
number  of  syllables,  perfect  or  imperfect,  according 
to  the  form  of  the  modern  verse  which  the  Jews 
make  use  of,  and  which  is  borrowed  from  tlw  Ara- 
bians (though  the  Arabic  prosody,  he  observes,  is 
too  complicated  to  be  applied  to  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage) ;  but  in  the  number  of  things,  and  of  the 
parts  of  things, — that  is,  the  subject,  and  the  pre- 
dicate, and  their  adjuncts,  in  every  sentence  and 
proposition.  Thus  a  phrase,  containing  two  parts 
of  a  proposition,  consists  of  two  measures ;  add  an- 
other containing  two  more,  and  they  become  four 
measures  ;  another  again,  containing  three  parts  of 
a  proposition,  consists  of  three  measures ;  add  to  it 
another  of  the  like,  and  you  have  six  measures." 

The  following  example  will  serve  for  an  illustra- 
tion : — 

Tliy-right-hanil,  O-.Teliovah,  is-glorious  in-power, 

Thy-right-hand,  0-Jchovah,  hath-crusliii.1  tlic-enemy. 

The  words  connected  by  a  hyphen  form  a  term,  and 
the  two  lines,  forming  four  measures  each,  may  be 
called  tetrameters.  ''  Upon  the  whole,  the  author 
concludes,  that  the  poetical  parts  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  are  not  composed  according  to  the  rules 
and  measures  of  certain  feet,  dissyllables,  trisyl- 
lables, or  the  like,  as  the  poems  of  the  modern 
,fews  are ;  but  nevertheless  have  undoubtedly  other 
measures  which  depend  on  things,  as  above  ex- 
plained.    For  which  reason  they  are  more  excellent 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


899 


•>  "in^  is  a  syllable,  simple  or  compound,  beginning 
with  a  consonant  bearing  moving  Shi'i'a  (Mason  and  Ber- 
nard's Heb.  dr.  ii.  2oa). 


than  those  which  consist  of  certain  feet,  according 
to  the  number  and  quantity  of  syllables.  Of  this, 
sa3's  he,  you  may  judge  yourself  in  the  Songs  of 
the  I'l'opbets.  For  do  you  not  see,  if  you  translate 
some  of  them  into  another  language,  that  they  still 
keep  and  retain  their  measure,  if  not  wholly,  at  least 
in  part?  which  cannot  be  the  case  in  those  verses, 
the  measures  of  which  arise  from  a  certain  quantity 
and  number  of  syllables."  Lowth  expresses  his 
general  agreement  with  R.  Azariah's  exposition  of 
the  rhythmus  of  things;  but  instead  of  regarding 
terms,  or  phi'ases,  or  senses,  in  single  lines,  as  mea- 
sures, he  considered  "  only  that  relation  and  propor- 
tion of  one  verse  to  another,  which  arises  from  the 
correspondence  of  terms,  and  from  the  form  of 
construction  ;  from  whence  results  a  i-hythmus  of 
propositions,  and  a  harmony  of  sentences."  But 
Lowth's  system  of  parallelism  was  more  completely 
anticipated  by  Schoettgen  in  a  treatise,  of  the  exist- 
ence of  which  the  bishop  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  aware.  It  is  found  in  his  Hoi-ae  Hehrcdcae, 
vol.  1.  pp.  1249-12G3,  diss,  vi.,  "  de  Exergasia 
Sacra."  This  exergasia  he  defines  to  be,  the  con- 
junction of  entire  sentences  signifying  the  same 
thing  :  so  that  exergasia  bears  the  same  relation  to 
sentences  that  synonymy  does  to  words.  It  is  only 
found  in  those  Hebrew  writings  which  rise  above 
the  level  of  historical  narrative  and  the  ordinary 
kind  of  speech.  Ten  canons  are  then  laid  down, 
each  illusti'ated  by  three  examples,  from  which  it 
will  be  seen  how  far  Schoettgen's  system  corre- 
sponded with  Lowth's.  (1.)  Perfect  exergasia  is 
when  the  members  of  the  two  clauses  correspond, 
each  to  each  ;  as  in  Ps.  xxxiii.  7  ;  Num.  xxiv.  17  ; 
Luke  i.  47.  (2.)  Sometimes  in  the  second  clause  the 
subject  is  omitted,  as  in  Is.  i.  18  ;  Prov.  vii.  19  ; 
Ps.  cxxix.  3.  (3.)  Sometimes  part  of  the  subject  is 
omitted,  as  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  30,  cii.  28  ;  Is.  liii.  5. 
(4.)  The  predicate  is  sometimes  omitted  in  the  second 
clause,  as  in  Num.  xxiv.  5;  Ps.  xxxiii.  12  ;  cxxiii.  (3. 
(5.)  Sometimes  part  only  of  the  predicate  is  omitted, 
as  in  Ps.  Ivii.  9,  ciii.  1 ,  cxxix.  7.  (6.)  Words  are  added 
in  one  member  which  are  omitted  in  the  other,  as  in 
Num.  xxiii.  18  ;  Ps.  cii.  29  ;  Dan.  xii.  3.  (7.)  Some- 
times two  propositions  will  occur,  treating  of  different 
things,  but  referring  to  one  general  proposition,  as 
in  Ps.  xciv.  9,  cxxviii.  3  ;  Wisd.  iii.  16.  (8.)  Cases 
occur,  in  which  the  second  proposition  is  the  con- 
trary of  the  first,  as  in  Prov.  xv.  8,  xiv.  1,  11. 
(9.)  Entire  propositions  answer  each  to  each,  al- 
though the  subject  and  predicate  are  not  the  same,  as 
in  Ps';  li.  7,  cxix.  168  ;  Jer.  viii.  22.  (10.)  Exergasia 
is  found  with  three  members,  as  in  Ps.  i.  1,  cxxx.  5, 
Iii.  9.  These  canons  Schoettgen  applied  to  the  in- 
terpretation of  Scripture,  of  which  he  gives  examples 
in  the  remainder  of  this  and  the  following  Disser- 
tation. 

But  whatever  may  have  been  achieved  by  liis 
predecessors,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  deli- 
very of  Lowth's  lectures  on  Hebrew  Poetry,  and  the 
subsequent  publication  of  his  translation  of  Isaiah, 
fiirmetl  an  era  in  the  literature  of  the  subject,  more 
marked  than  any  that  had  preceded  it.  Of  his 
system  it  will  be  necessary  to  give  a  somewliat  de- 
tailed account ;  for  whatever  may  have  been  done 
since  his  time,  and  whatever  modifications  of  his 
arrangement  may  have  been  introduced,  all  subse- 
quent writers  have  confessed  their  obligations  to  the 
two  works  abovementioned,  and  have  drawn  their 
inspiration  from  tliem.  Starting  with  the  alpha- 
betical poems  as  the  l)asis  of  his  investigation, 
because  that  in  them  flie  verses  or  stanzas  were 
3  M   2 


900 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


more  distinctly  marked,  Lowth  came  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  they  consist  of  verses  properly  so  called, 
"  of  verses  regulated  by  some  observation  of  har- 
mony or  cadence ;  of  measure,  numbers,  or  rhythm," 
and  that  this  harmony  does  not  arise  from  i-hyme, 
but  from  what  he  denominates  parallelism.  Paral- 
lelism he  defines  to  be  the  correspondence  of  one 
verse  or  line  with  another,  and  divides  it  into  three 
classes,  synonymous,  antithetic,  and  synthetic. 

1.  Parallel  lines  synonymous  correspond  to  each 
other  by  expressing  the  same  sense  in  diflerent  but 
equivalent  terms,  as  in  the  following  examples,  which 
are  only  two  of  the  many  given  by  Lowth : — 

"  0-Jehovah,  in-tby-strength  the-king  shall-rejoice ; 
And-in-thy-salvation  how  greatly  shall-he-exult  I 
The-desire  of-his-heart  thou-hast-granted  unto-him ; 
And-the-request  of-his-lips  thou-hast-not  denied." 

Ps.  xxi.  1,  2. 

"  For  the-moth  shall-consume-them  like-a-garment ; 
And-the-worm  shall-eat-them  like  wool : 
But-my-righteousness  shall-endure  for-ever; 
And-my-salvation  to-the-age  of-ages." — Is.  11.  7,  8. 

It  will  be  obseiTed  from  the  examples  which 
Lowth  gives  that  the  parallel  lines  sometimes  con- 
sist of  three  or  more  synonymous  tei^ms,  sometimes 
of  two,  sometimes  only  of  one.  Sometimes  the 
lines  consist  each  of  a  double  member,  or  two  pro- 
positions, as  Ps.  cxliv.  5,  6  ;  Is.  Ixv.  21,  22. 
Parallels  are  formed  also  by  a  repetition  of  part 
of  the  first  sentence  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  1,  11,  IG;  Is.  xxvi. 
.5,  (5 ;  Hos.  vi.  4) ;  and  sometimes  a  part  has  to  be 
supplied  from  the  former  to  complete  the  sentence 
(2  Sam.  xxii.  41 ;  .Job  xxvi.  5 ;  Is.  xli.  28).  Parallel 
triplets  occur  in  Job  iii.  4,  6,  9;  Ps.  cxii.  10;  Is. 
ix.  20;  Joel  iii.  13.  Examples  of  parallels  of  four 
lines,  in  which  two  di.stichs  form  one  stanza,  are 
Ps.  xxxvii.  1,  2;  Is.  i.  3,  xlix.  4;  Am.  i.  2.  In 
periods  of  five  lines  the  odd  line  sometimes  comes  in 
between  two  distichs,  as  in  Job  viii.  5,  G  ;  Is.  xlvi. 
7  ;  Hos.  xiv.  9  ;  Joel  iii.  16:  or  after  two  distichs 
closes  the  stanza,  as  in  Is.  xli  v.  2G.  Alternate 
parallelism  in  stjuizas  of  four  lines  is  found  in 
Ps.  ciii.  11,12;  Is.  xxx.  16  ;  but  the  most  striking 
examples  of  the  alternate  quatrain  are  Deut.  xxxii. 
25,  42,  the  first  line  forming  a  continuous  sense 
with  the  third,  and  the  second  with  the  fourth 
(comp.  Is.  xxxiv.  6  ;  Gen.  xlix.  6).  In  Is.  1.  10  we 
find  an  alternate  quatrain  followed  by  a  fifth  line. 
To  this  firet  division  of  Lowth's  Jebb  objects  that 
the  name  synonymous  is  inappropriate,  for  the 
second  clause,  with  few  exceptions,  "  diversifies  the 
preceiiing  clause,  and  generally  so  as  to  rise  above 
it,  forming  a  sort  of  climax  in  the  sense."  This 
peculiarity  was  recognised  by  Lowth  himself  in  his 
4th  Praelection,  where  he  says,  "  idem  iterant,  va- 
riant, augent,"  thus  marking  a  cumulative  force  in 
this  kind  of  parallelism.  The  same  was  obsei-ved 
by  Abp.  Newcome  in  his  Prefiice  to  Ezekiel,  where 
examples  are  given  in  which  "  the  following  clauses 
so  diversify  the  preceding  ones  as  to  rise  above 
them"  (Is.  xlii.  7,  xliii.  16;  Ps.  xcv.  2,  civ.  1). 
.lebb,  in  support  of  his  own  opinion,  appeals  to  the 
passages  quoted  by  Lowth  (Ps.  xxi.  12,  cvii.  38- 
Is.  Iv.  6,  7),  and  suggests  as  a  more  appropriate 
name  for  parallelism  of  this  kind,  cognate  parallelism 
{Sacr,  Lit.  p.  38). 

2.  Lowth's  second  division  is  antithetic  parnl- 
lelisun  ;  when  two  lines  coiTespond  with  each  other 
by  an  opposition  of  terms  and  sentiments ;  when 
the  second  is  contrasted  with  the  first,  sometimes 
in    expressions,   sometimes   in   seii.se  onlv,   so    th.it 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

the  degrees  of  antithesis  are   various.     As  for  ex- 
ample— 
"  A  wise  son  rejoiceth  his  father ; 

But  a  foolish  son  is  the  grief  of  his  mother." — Prov.  x.  1 . 
"  The  memory  of  the  just  is  a  blessing ; 
But  the  name  of  the  wicked  shall  rot." — Prov.  x.  1. 

The  gnomic  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  abounds  with 
illustrations  of  antithetic  parallelism.     Other  ex- 
amples are  Ps.  xx.  7,  8 : — 
"  These  in  chariots,  and  those  in  horses ; 

But  we  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  our  God  will  be  strong. 

They  are  bowed  down,  and  fallen ; 

But  we  are  risen,  and  maintain  ourselves  firm." 

Compare  also  Ps.  xxx.  5,  xxxvii.  10,  11;  Is.  liv. 
10,  ix.  10.  On  these  two  kinds  of  parallelism  Jebb 
appropriately  remarks  : — "  The  Antithetic  Faral- 
lelism  serves  to  mark  the  broad  distinctions  between 
truth  and  falsehood,  and  good  and  evil :  the  Cognate 
Parallelism  discharges  the  more  difficult  and  more 
critical  function  of  discriminating  between  different 
degrees  of  truth  and  good  on  the  one  hand,  of  false- 
hood and  evil  on  the  other  "  (Sacr.  Lit.  p.  39). 

3.  Synthetic  or  constructive  iMrallelism,  where 
the  parallel  "  consists  only  in  the  similar  form  of 
construction;  in  which  word  does  not  answer  to 
word,  and  sentence  to  sentence,  as  equivalent  or 
opposite  ;  but  there  is  a  coiTespondence  and  equality 
between  different  propositions,  in  respect  of  the 
shape  and  turn  of  the  whole  sentence,  and  of  the 
constructive  parts — such  as  noun  answering  to  noun, 
verb  to  verb,  member  to  member,  negative  to  nega- 
tive, interrogative  to  interrogative."  One  of  the 
examples  of  constructive  parallels  given  by  Lowth 
is  Is.  1.  5,  6:— 
"  The  Lord  Jehovah  hath  opened  mine  ear, 

And  I  was  not  rebellious ; 

Neither  did  I  withdraw  myself  backward —  ' 

I  gave  my  back  to  the  smitcrs, 

And  my  cheeks  to  them  that  plucked  off  the  liair ; 

My  face  1  hid  not  from  shame  and  spitting."  ! 

Jebb  gives  as  an  illu.stration  Ps.  six.  7-10 : — 
"  I'he  law  of  Jehovah  is  perfect,  converting  the  soul, 

The  testimony  of  Jehovah  is  sure,  making  wise  the 
simple,"  &c. 
It  is  instructive,  as  showing  how  difficult,  if  not 
impossible,  it  is  to  make  any  strict  classification  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  to  observe  that  this  very  passage  is 
given  by  Gesenius  as  an   example  of  synonymous 
parallelism,  while  De  Wette  calls  it  synthetic.    The 
illustration  of  synthetic  parallelism  quoted  by  Gese- 
nius is  Ps.  xxvii.  4 : — 
"  One  thing  I  ask  from  Jehovah. 
It  will  I  seek  after — 

My  dwelling  in  the  house  of  Jehovah  all  the  days 
of  my  life. 

To  behold  the  beauty  of  Jehovah, 
And  to  inquire  in  his  temple." 
In  this  kind  of  parallelism,  as  Nordheimer  {Gram. 
Anal.  p.  87)  observes,  "  an  idea  is  neither  repeated 
nor  followed  by  its  opposite,  but  is  kept  in  view 
by  the  writer,  while  he  proceeds  to  develope  and 
enforce  his  meaning  by  accessory  ideas  and  modi- 
fications." 

4.  To  the  three  kinds  of  parallelism  above  described 
Jebb  adds  a  fourth,  which  seems  rather  to  be  an 
unnecessary  refinement  upon  than  distinct  fi-om  the 
others.  He  denominates  it  introverted  parallelism, 
in  which  he  says,  "  there  are  stanzas  so  constructed 
that,  whatever  be  the  number  of  lines,  the  first  line 
shall  be  parallel  with  the  last ;  the  second  with  the 
penultimate  ;  and  so  throughout  in  an  order  that 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

looks  inward,  or,  to  borrow  a  military  phrase,  from 

tianks  to  centre"  {Sacr.  Lit.  p.  53).     Thus — 

"  My  son,  if  thine  heart  be  wise, 

My  heart  also  shall  rejoice ; 

Yea,  my  reins  shall  rejoice 

When  thy  lips  speak  right  things." 

Prov.  xxiii.  15,  16. 
"  Unto  Thee  do  I  lift  up  mine  eyes,  0  Thou  that  dwellest 
in  the  heavens ; 
Behold  as  the  eyes  of  servants  to  the  hand  of  their 

masters ; 
As  the  eyes  of  a  maiden  to  the  hands  of  her  mistress : 
Even  so  look  our  eyes  to  Jehovah  our  God,  until  he  have 
mercy  upon  us." — Ps.  cxxiii.  1,  2. 
Upon  examining  these  and  the  other  examples 
quoted  by  Bishop  Jebb  in  support  of  his  new  divi- 
sion, to  which  he  attaches  great  importance,  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  peculiarity  consists  in  the  structure 
of  the  stanza,  and  not  in  the  nature  of  the  paral- 
lelism ;  and  any  one  who  i-eais  Ewald's  elaborate 
treatise  on  this  part  of  the  subject  will  rise  from 
tlie  reading  with  the  conviction  that  to  attempt  to 
classify  Hebrew  poetry  according  to  the  character 
of  the  stanzas  employed  will  be  labour  lost  and  in 
vain,  resulting  only  in  a  system  which  is  no  system, 
and  in  rules  to  which  the  exceptions  are  more  nu- 
merous than  the  examples. 

A  few  words  may  now  be  added  with  respect  to 
the  classification  proposed  by  De  Wette,  in  which 
more  regard  was  had  to  the  rhythm.  The  four 
kinds  of  parallelism  are — 1.  That  which  consists  in 
an  equal  number  of  words  in  each  member,  as  in 
Gen.  iv.  23.  This  he  calls  the  original  and  perfect 
kind  of  parallelism  of  members,  which  corresponds 
with  metre  and  rhyme,  without  being  identical 
with  them  (Die  Psahnen,  Einl.  §7).  Under  this 
head  are  many  minor  divisions. — 2.  Unequal  paral- 
lehsm,  in  which  the  number  of  words  in  the  mem- 
bers is  not  the  same.  This  again  is  divided  into — 
a.  The  simple,  as  Ps.  Ixviii.  33.  h.  The  composite, 
consisting  of  the  synonymous  (Job  x.  1 ;  Ps.  xxxvi. 
7),  the  antithetic  (Ps.  xv.  4),  and  the  synthetic 
(Ps.  XV.  5).  c.  That  in  which  the  simple  member 
is  disproportionately  small  (Ps.  xl.  10).  d.  Where 
the  composite  member  grows  up  into  three  and 
more  sentences  (Ps.  i.  3,  Ixv.  10).  e.  Instead  of 
the  close  pai-allelism  there  sometimes  occurs  a  short 
additional  clause,  as  in  Ps.  xxiii.  3. — 3.  Out  of  the 
parallelism  which  is  unequal  in  consequence  of  the 
composite  charactei-  of  one  member,  another  is  de- 
veloped, so  that  both  members  are  composite  (Ps. 
xxxi.  11).  This  kind  of  parallelism  again  admits 
of  three  subdivisions. — 4.  Rhythmical  parallelism, 
.  which  lies  merely  in  the  external  form  of  the  dic- 
tion. Thus  in  Ps.  xix.  11  there  is  nearly  an  equal 
number  of  words : — 

"  Moreover  by  them  was  thy  servant  warned, 
In  keeping  of  them  there  is  great  reward." 
In  Ps.  XXX.  3  the  inequality  is  remarkable.  In 
Ps.  xiv.  7  is  found  a  double  and  a  single  member, 
and  in  Ps.  xxxi.  23  two  double  members.  De  Wette 
also  held  that  there  were  in  Hebrew  poetry  the 
beginnings  of  a  comjxisite  rhythmical  structure  like 
our  strophes.  Thus  in  Ps.  xlii.,  xliii.,  a  refrain  marks 
the  conclusion  of  a  larger  rhythmicjil  period.  Some- 
thing similar  is  observable  in  Ps.  cvii.  This  arti- 
ficial structure  appears  to  belong  to  a  late  period 
of  Hebrew  literature,  and  to  the  same  period  may 
probably  be  assigned  the  remarkable  gradational 
rhythm  whicli  appears  in  the  Songs  of  Degrees, 
c.  (J.  Ps.  cxxi.  It  nmst  be  observed  that  this  gra- 
ilational  rhythm  is  very  diflcrcnt  from  the  cumu- 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


901 


lative  parallelism  of  the  Song  of  Deborah,  which  is 
of  a  much  earlier  date,  and  bears  traces  of  less  etibrt 
in  the  composition.  Strophes  of  a  certain  kind  are 
found  in  the  alphabetical  pieces  in  which  several 
Masorethic  clauses  belong  to  one  letter  (Ps.  ix.,  x., 
xx.xvii.,  cxix.  ;  Lam.  iii.),  but  the  nearest  approach 
to  anything  like  a  sti'ophical  character  is  fomid  in 
poems  which  are  divided  into  smaller  portions  by  a 
refrain,  and  have  the  initial  or  final  verse  the  same 
or  similar  (Ps.  xxxix.,  xlii.,  xliii.).  In  the  opinion 
of  some  the  occui-rence  of  the  woid  Selah  is  supposed 
to  mark  the  divisions  of  the  strophes. 

It  is  impossible  here  to  do  more  than  refer  to  the 
essay  of  Koester  {Theol.  Stud,  und  Krit.  1831, 
pp.  40-114)  on  the  strophes,  or  the  parallelism  of 
verses  in  Hebrew  poetry  ;  in  which  he  endeavours 
to  show  that  the  verses  are  subject  to  the  same  laws 
of  symmetry  as  the  verse  members  ;  and  that  con- 
sequently Hebrew  poetry  is  essentially  strophical  in 
character.  Ewald's  treatise  requires  more  careful 
consideration ;  but  it  must  be  read  itself,  and  a 
slight  sketch  only  can  here  be  given.  Briefly  thus: 
— Verses  are  divided  into  verse-members  in  which 
the  number  of  syllables  is  less  restricted,  as  there 
is  no  syllabic  metre.  A  verse-member  generally 
contains  from  seven  to  eight  syllables.  Two  mem- 
bers, the  I'ise  and  fall,  are  the  fundamental  con- 
stituents :  thus  ( Judg.  V.  3) :  — 

"  Hear,  ye  kings !  give  ear,  ye  princes ! 
I  to  Jahve,  I  will  sing." 
To  this  all  other  modifications  must  be  capable  of 
being  reduced.  The  variations  whicli  may  take 
place  may  be  either  amplifications  or  continuations 
of  the  rhythm,  or  compositions  in  which  a  complete 
rhythm  is  made  the  half  of  a  new  compound,  or 
we  may  have  a  diminution  or  enfeeblement  of  the 
original.  To  the  two  members  correspond  two 
thoughts  which  constitute  the  life  of  the  verse,  and 
each  of  these  again  may  distribute  itself.  G  radations 
of  symmetry  are  formed — 1.  By  the  echo  of  the 
whole  sentence,  where  the  same  sen.se  which  is 
given  in  the  first  member  rises  again  in  the  second, 
in  order  to  exhaust  itself  more  thoroughly  (Gen.  iv. 
23 ;  Prov.  i.  8).  An  important  word  of  the  first 
member  often  reserves  its  force  for  the  second,  as  in 
Ps.  XX.  8 ;  and  sometimes  in  the  second  member  a 
principal  part  of  the  sense  of  the  first  is  further 
developed,  as  Ps.  xlix.  5  [6]. — 2.  When  the  thought 
trails  through  two  members  of  a  verse,  as  in  Ps. 
ex.  5,  it  gives  rise  to  a  less  animated  rhythm 
(comp.  also  Ps.  cxli.  10). — 3.  Two  sentences  may 
be  brought  together  as  protasis  and  apodosis,  or 
simply  to  form  one  complex  thought ;  the  external 
harmony  may  be  dispensed  with,  but  the  harmony 
of  thought  remains.  This  may  be  called  the  inter- 
mediate rhythm.  The  foi-ms  of  structure  assumed 
by  the  verse  are  many.  First,  there  is  the  single 
member,  which  occurs  at  the  commencement  of  a 
series  in  Ps.  xviii.  2,  xxiii.  1  ;  at  the  end  of  a  series 
in  Ex.  XV.  18,  Ps.  xcii.  9  ;  and  in  the  midtUe,  after 
a  short  pause,  in  Ps.  xxix.  7.  The  bimemlnal  verse 
is  most  frequently  found,  consisting  of  two  membere 
of  nearly  equal  weight.  Verses  of  more  than  two 
members  are  formed  either  by  increasing  the  num- 
ber of  members  from  two  to  three,  so  that  the 
complete  fiill  may  V>e  reserved  for  the  third,  all 
three  possessing  the  same  power ;  or  by  combining 
four  members  two  and  two,  as  in  Ps.  xviii.  7, 
xxviii.  1. 

The  varieties  of  tliis  structure  of  verse  are  too 
numerous  to  be  recounted,  and  the  laws  of  rhythm 
in  Hebrew  poetry  arc  so  free,  that  of  necessity  the 


902 


POETKY,  HEBREW 


varieties  of  verse  sti-ucture  must  be  manifold.  The 
gnomic  or  sententious  rhythm,  Ewald  remarks,  is 
the  one  which  is  perfectly  symmetrical.  Two  mem- 
bers of  seven  or  eight  syllables,  corresponding  to 
each  other  as  rise  and  fall,  contain  a  thesis  and  anti- 
thesis, a  subject  and  its  image.  This  is  the  constant 
form  of  genuine  gnomic  sentences  of  the  best  period. 
Those  of  a  later  date  have  many  members  or  trail 
themselves  through  many  verses.  The  animation 
of  the  lyrical  rhythm  makes  it  break  through  all 
such  restraints,  and  leads  to  an  amplification  or  re- 
duplication of  the  nonnal  foim  ;  or  the  passionate 
rapidity  of  the  thoughts  may  disturb  the  simple 
concord  of  the  members,  so  that  the  unequal  struc- 
ture of  verse  intrudes  with  all  its  varieties.  To 
show  how  impossible  it  is  to  attempt  a  classification 
of  verse  uttered  under  such  circumstances,  it  will 
be  only  necessary  to  quote  Ewald's  own  words. 
"  All  these  varieties  of  rhythm,  however,  exert  a 
perfectly  free  influence  upon  every  lyrical  song, 
just  according  as  it  suits  tlie  mood  of  the  moment 
to  vary  the  simple  rhythm,  'fhe  most  beautiful 
songs  of  the  flourishing  period  of  poetry  allow,  in 
fact,  the  verse  of  many  members  to  predominate 
whenever  the  diction  rises  with  any  sublimity ; 
nevertheless,  the  standard  rhythm  still  returns  in 
each  when  the  diction  flags,  and  the  different  kinds 
of  the  more  complex  rhythm  are  employed  with 
equal  freedom  and  ease  of  variation,  just  as  they 
severally  accord  with  the  fluctuating  hues  of  the 
mood  of  emotion,  and  of  the  sense  of  the  diction. 
Tlie  late  alphabetical  songs  are  the  first  in  which 
the  fixed  choice  of  a  particular  versification,  a  choice, 
too,  made  with  designed  art,  establishes  itself  firmly, 
and  maintains  itself  symmetrically  throughout  all 
the  verses"  {Dichter  des  A.  B.  i.  p.  83  ;  trans,  in 
Kitto's  Journal,  i.  p.  318).  It  may,  however,  be 
generally  observed,  that  the  older  rhythms  are  the 
most  animated,  as  if  accompanied  by  the  hands  and 
feet  of  the  singer  (Num.  xxi. ;  Ex.  xv. ;  ,Judg.  v.), 
and  that  in  the  time  of  David  the  rhythm  had 
attained  its  most  perfect  development.  By  the  end 
of  the  8th  century  B.C.  the  decay  of  versification 
begins,  and  to  this  period  belong  the  artificial  forms 
of  verse. 

It  remains  now  only  to  notice  the  rules  of  Hebrew 
poetry  as  laid  down  by  the  .lewish  grammarians,  to 
which  reference  was  made  in  remarking  upon  the 
system  of  R.  Azariah.  They  have  the  merit  of 
being  extremely  simple,  and  are  to  be  found  at 
length,  illusti'ated  by  many  examples,  in  Mason  and 
Bernard's  Hch.  Gram.  vol.  ii.  let.  .57,  and  accom- 
panied by  an  interesting  account  of  moilern  Hebrew 
versification.  The  rules  are  briefly  these  : — 1.  That 
a  sentence  may  be  divided  into  members,  some  of 
which  contain  tioo,  three,  or  even  four  words,  and 
are  accordingly  termed  Binary,  Ternnr;/,  and  Qua- 
ternary  members  respectively.  2.  The  sentences 
are  composed  either  of  Binary,  Ternary,  or  Qua- 
ternary members  entirely,  or  of  these  different 
members  intermixed.  3.  That  in  two  consecutive 
members  it  is  an  elegance  to  express  the  same  idea 
in  diflerent  words.  4.  That  a  word  expressed  in 
either  of  these  parallel  membei-s  is  often  not  ex- 
pressed in  the  alternate  member.  5.  That  a  word 
without  an  accent,  being  joined  to  another  word  by 
Makkiph,  is  generally  (though  not  always)  reckoned 
wth  that  second  word  as  one.  It  will  be  seen  that 
these  rules  are  essentially  the  same  with  those  of 
Lowth,  De  Wette,  and  other  writers  on  parallelism, 
and  from  their  simplicity  are  less  open  to  objection 
than  any  that  have  been  given. 


POISON 

In  conclusion,  after  reviewing  the  various  theories 
which  have  been  framed  with  I'egard  to  the  struc- 
ture of  Hebrew  poetry,  it  must  be  confessed  that 
beyond  the  discovery  of  very  broad  general  laws, 
little  has  been  done  towards  elaborating  a  satisfac- 
tory system.  Probably  this  want  of  success  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  there  is  no  system  to  discover,  and 
that  Hebiew  poetry,  while  possessed,  in  the  highest 
degree,  of  all  sweetness  and  variety  of  rhythm  and 
melody,  is  not  fettered  by  laws  of  versification  as 
we  understand  the  term. 

For  the  literature  of  the  subject,  in  addition  to 
the  works  already  quoted,  reference  may  be  made 
to  the  following: — Carpzov,  Intr.  ad  Lihr.  Can. 
Bihl.  pt.  2,  c.  1 ;  Lowth,  De  Sacra  Poesi  Hehrae- 
orum  Praelectiones,  with  notes  by  J.  D.  Michaelis 
and  Rosenmiiller  (Oxon.  1828);  the  Preliminary 
Dissertation  in  his  translation  of  Isaiah  ;  Herder, 
Geist  der  Ilehr.  Poesie  ;  Jebb,  Sacred  Literature  ; 
Saalschiitz,  T  o?i  der  Form  der  Hehr.  Poesie,  K6- 
nigsberg,  1825,  which  contains  the  most  complete 
account  of  all  the  various  theories ;  De  Wette, 
TIeher  die  Psalmen  ;  Meier,  Gesch.  der  poet.  Na- 
tional-Literatur  der  Hehrder ;  Delitzsch,  Com- 
ir(£ntar  uber  den  Psalter;  and  Hupfeld,  Die 
Psalmen.  [W.  A.  W.] 

POISON.  Two  Hebrew  words  are  thus  ren- 
dered in  the  A.  V.  but  they  are  so  general  as  to 
throw  little  light  upon  tlie  knowledge  and  practice 
of  poisons  among  the  Hebrews.  1.  The  first  of 
these,  n?3n,  chemah,  from  a  root  signifying,  "to 

be  hot,"  is  used  of  the  heat  produced  by  wine  (Hos. 
vii.  5),  and  the  hot  passion  of  anger  (Deut.  xxix. 
27,  &c.),  as  well  as  of  the  burning  venom  of  poisonous 
serpents  (Deut.  xxxii.  24,  33 ;  Ps.  Iviii.  4,  cxl.  3). 
It  in  all  cases  denotes  animal  poison,  and  not  veget- 
able or  mineral.  The  only  allusion  to  its  applica- 
tion is  in  ,lol)  vi.  4,  where  reference  seems  to  be  made 
to  the  custom  of  anointing  arrows  with  the  venom 
of  a  snake,  a  pi'actice  the  origin  of  which  is  of  very 
remote  antiquity  (comp.  Hom.  Od.  i.  261,262; 
Ovid,  Prist.  iii."lO,  64,  Fast.  v.  397,  &c. ;  Plin. 
xviii.  1).  The  Soanes,  a  Caucasian  race  mentioned 
by  Strabo  (xi.  p.  499),  were  especially  skilled  in  the 
art.  Pliny  (vi.  34)  mentions  a  tribe  of  Arab  pirates 
who  infested  the  Hed  Sea,  and  were  armed  with 
poisoned  aiTows  like  the  Malays  of  the  coast  of 
Borneo.  For  this  purpose  the  berries  of  the  yew- 
tree  (Plin.  xvi.  20)  were  employed.  The  Gauls 
(Plin.  xxvii.  76)  used  a  poisonous  herb,  limeum, 
supposed  by  some  to  be  the  "  leopard's  bane,"  and  the 
Scythians  dipped  their  an-ow  points  in  viper's  venom 
mixed  with  human  blood.  These  wei-e  so  deadly, 
that  a  slight  scratch  inflicted  by  them  was  fatal 
(Plin.  xi.  115).  The  practice  was  so  common  that 
the  name  To|iK(5r',  originally  a  poison  in  which 
arrows  were  dipped,  A^as  applied  to  poison  generally. 
2.  C*N"1  (once  CJ'h,  Deut.  xxxii.  32»),  rosh,  if  a 
poison  at  all,  denotes  a  vegetable  poison  primarily, 
and  is  only  twice  (Deut.  xxxii.  33;  Job  xx.  16) 
used  of  the  venom  of  a  serpent.  In  other  passages 
where  it  occurs,  it  is  translated  "gall"  in  the  A.  V., 
except  in  Hos.  x.  4,  where  it  is  rendered  "  hem- 
lock." In  the  margin  of  Deut.  xxix.  18,  our  trans- 
lators, feeling  the  uncertainty  of  the  word,  give  as 
an  alternative  "  rosh,  or,  a  jwisonfiil  herb."  Beyond 
the  fact  that,  whether  poisonous  or  not,  it  was  a 
plant  of  bitter  taste,  nothing  can  be  inferred.    That 


a  In  some  MSS.  this  reading  occurs  in  other  passages, 
of  which  a  list  is  given  by  Michaelis  {Suppl.  p.  2223). 


POLLUX 

'  bitterness  was  its  prevailing  characteristic  is  evident 
from  its  being  associated  with  •wormwood  (Deut. 
xxix.  18  [17];  Lam.  iii.  19;  Am.  vi.  12),  and 
from  the  allusions  to  "water  of  rosh"  in  Jer.  viii. 
14,  ix.  15,  xxiii.  15.  It  was  not  a  juice  or  liquid 
(Ps.  Ixix.  21  [22]  ;  comp.  Mark  xv.  23  j,  but  pro- 
bably a  bitter  berry,  in  which  case  the  expression 
in  Deut.  xxxii.  32,  "  grapes  of  rosh,"  may  be  taken 
literally.  Gesenius,  on  the  ground  that  the  word 
in  Hebrew  also  signifies  "  head,"  rejects  the  hem- 
lock, colocyuth,  and  darnel  of  other  writers,  and 
proposes  the  "  poppy  "  instead  ;  from  the  "  heads  " 
in  which  its  seeds  are  contained.  "  Water  of  rosh" 
is  then  "  opium,"  but  it  must  be  admitted  that 
there  appears  in  none  of  the  above  passages  to  be 
any  allusion  to  the  characteristic  effects  of  opium. 
The  effects  of  the  rosh  are  simply  nausea  and  loath- 
ing. It  was  probably  a  general  term  for  any  bitter 
or  nauseous  plant,  whether  poisonous  or  not,  and  be- 
came afterwards  applied  to  the  venom  of  snakes,  as 
the  corresponding  word  in  Clialdee  is  frequently  so 
used.     [Gall.] 

There  is  a  clear  case  of  suicide  by  poison  related 
in  2  Mace.  x.  13,  where  Ptolemeus  Macron  is  said  to 
have  destroyed  himself  by  this  means.  But  we  do 
not  find  a  trace  of  it  among  the  Jews,  and  certainly 
poisoning  in  any  form  was  not  in  favour  with  them. 
Nor  is  there  any  reference  to  it  in  the  N.  T.,  though 
the  practice  was  fat;illy  common  at  that  time  in 
Rome  (Suet.  Nero,  33,  34,  35  ;  Tib.  73;  Claud.  I). 
It  has  been  suggested,  indeed,  that  the  (papfiaKfia 
of  Gal.  v.  20  (A.  V.  "  witchcraft"),  signifies  poison- 
ing, but  this  is  by  no  means  consistent  with  the 
usage  of  the  word  in  the  LXX.  (comp.  Ex.  vii.  11, 
viii.  7,  18,  &c.),  and  with  its  occurrence  in  Rev. 
ix.  21,  where  it  denotes  a  crime  clearly  distinguished 
fiom  murder  (see  Rev.  x.xi.  8,  xxii.  15).  It  more 
probably  refers  to  the  concoction  of  magical  potions 
and  love  philtres. 

On  the  question  of  the  wine  mingled  with  myrrh, 
see  App.  A,  art.  Gall.  [W.  A.  W.] 

POLLUX.     [Castor  and  Pollux.] 

POLYGAMY.     [Marriage.] 

POMEGRANATE  (p?3-!,nm»ion:  pod,  'poid, 
poi'cTKOs,  KwSoiv :  vpdimi  punicum,  malum  gra- 
tmtum,  malouranatnm)  by  universal  consent  is 
acknowledged  to  denote  the  Heb.  rimmon,  a  word 
which  occurs  frequently  in  the  O.  T.,  and  is  used 
to  designate  either  the  pomegranate-tree  or  its  fi'uit. 
The  pomegranate  wa.s  doubtless  early  cultivated  in 
Egypt ;  hence  the  complaint  of  the  Israelites  in  the 
wilderness  of  Zin  (Num.  xx.  5),  this  "  is  no  place 
of  figs,  or  of  vines,  or  of  pomegranates."  The  tree, 
with  its  characteristic  calyx-crowne  1  fruit,  is  easily 
recognised  on  the  Egyptian  sculptures  (Anc.  Ef/i/pt. 
i.  36,  ed.  1854).  The  spies  brought  to  .loshua  "of 
the  pomegranates  "  of  the  land  of  Canaan  (Num. 
xiii.  23  ;  comp.  also  Deut.  viii.  8).  The  villages  or 
towns  of  Rimmon  (Josh.  xv.  32),  Gath-rimraon 
(xxi.  25),  En-rimmon  (Nob.  xi.  29),  possibly  do- 
rived  their  names  from  jwmegranate -trees  which 
grew  in  their  vicinity.  These  trees  suffered  occa- 
sionally from  the  devastations  of  locusts  (.loel  i.  12  ; 
see  also  Hag.  ii.  19).  Mention  is  made  of  "an 
orchard  of  pomegranates"  in  Cant.  iv.  13  ;  and  in 
iv.  3,  the  clieeks  (A.  V.  "temples")  of  the  Be- 
loved arc  compared  to  a  section  of  "  pomegranate 
within  the  locks,"  in  allusion  to  the  beautiful  rosy 
colour  of  the  fruit.  Carved  figures  of  the  pome- 
granate adorned  the  tops  of  tlie  pillars  in  Solomon's 


POMMELS 


903 


Temple  (1  K.  vii.  18,  20,  &c.);  and  worked  repre- 
sentations of  this  fruit,  in  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet, 
ornamented  the  hem  of  the  robe  of  the  ephcd  (Ex. 
xxviii.  33,  34).  Mention  is  made  of  "  spiced  wine 
of  the  juice  of  the  pomegranate  "  in  Cant.  viii.  2 ; 
with  this  may  be  compared  the  pomegranate-wine 
(po'iTTjs  olvos)  of  which  Dioscorides  (v.  34)  speaks, 
and  which  is  still  used  in  the  East.  Chardin  says 
that  great  quantities  of  it  were  made  in  Pei'sia,  both 
for  home  consumption  and  for  exportation,  in  his 
time  (Script.  Herb.  p.  399  ;  Harmer's  Obs.  i.  377). 
Russell  {Nat.  Hist,  of  Aleppo,  i.  85,  2nd  ed.)  states 
"  that  the  pomegranate  "  (rummdn  in  Arabic,  the 
same  word  as  the  Heb.)  "  is  common  in  all  the 
gardens."  He  speaks  of  three  varieties,  "  one  sweet, 
another  very  acid,  and  a  third  that  partakes  of  both 
qualities  equally  blended.  The  juice  of  the  sour  sort 
is  used  instead  of  vinegar :  the  others  are  cut  open 
when  served  up  to  table  ;  or  the  grains  taken  out, 
and,  besprinkled  with  sugar  and  rose-water,  are 
brought  to  table  in  saucers."  He  adds  that  the 
trees  are  apt  to  suffer  much  in  severe  winters  from 
extraordinary  cold. 


The  pomcgi-anate-tiee  {Punica  granatnm)  derives 
its  name  from  the  Latin pomwn granatnm,  "grained 
apple."  The  Romans  gave  it  the  name  o(  Punica,  a-s 
the  tree  was  introduced  from  Carthage ;  it  belongs 
to  the  natural  order  Jlfyrtaceae,  being,  however, 
rather  a  bush  than  a  tree.  The  foliage  is  dark  green, 
the  flowers  are  crimson  ;  the  fruit  is  red  when  ripe, 
which  in  Palestine  is  about  the  middle  of  October, 
and  contains  a  quantity  of  juice.  The  rind  is  used  in 
the  maimfacture  of  morocco  leather,  and,  together 
with  the  bark,  is  sometimes  used  medicinally  to 
expel  the  tape-woiin.  Pomegranates  without  seeds 
are  said  to  grow  near  the  river  Cabul.  Dr.  Royle 
(i\itto's  Cyc.  art.  "  Rimmon  ")  states  that  this  tree 
is  a  native  of  Asia,  and  is  to  be  traced  from  Syria 
through  Persia  even  to  the  mount;iins  of  Northern 
India.'  [W.  H.] 

POMMELS,  only  in  2  Chr.  iv.  12,  13.  In 
1  K.  vii.  41,  "bowls."  The  word  signifies  con- 
vex projections  belonging  to  tiie  capitals  of  pillars. 
[Bowl;  Ciiapitkr^]  [I I.  W.  P.] 


904 


POND 


POND.  Agdm.^  The  ponds  of  Egypt  (Ex.  vii. 
19,  viii.  5)  were  doubtless  water  left  by  the  inun- 
dation of  the  Nile.  In  Is.  xix.  10,  where  Vulg. 
has  qui  faciebant  lacunas  ad  capiemlos  pisccs, 
LXX.  has  01  rbv  (vOov  iroiovi/res,  they  who  make 
the  beer.  This  rendering  so  characteristic  of  Egypt 
(Her.  ii.  77  ;  Diod.  i.  34;  Strabo,  p.  799)  arises 
from  regarding  again  as  denoting  a  result  indicated 
by  its  root,  i.  e.  a  fermented  liquor.  St.  Jerome, 
who  alludes  to  beer  called  by  the  name  of  Sabaius, 
explains  again  to  mean  water  fermenting  from  stag- 
nation (Hieron.  Coin,  on  Is.  lib.  vii.  vol.  iv.  p.  292  ; 
Calmet;  Stanley,  S.  <f-  P.  App.  §57).    [H.  W.  P.] 

PON'TIUS  PILATE.     [Pilate.] 

PONTUS  (novTos),  a  large  district  in  the 
north  of  Asia  Minor,  extending  along  the  coast  of 
the  Pontus  Euxinus,  from  which  circumstance  the 
name  was  derived.  It  is  three  times  mentioned  in 
the  N.  T.  It  is  spoken  of  along  with  Asia,  Cappa- 
docia,  Phrygia,  and  Pamphylia  (Acts  ii.  9,  10),  as 
one  of  the  regions  whence  worshippers  came  to 
Jerusalem  at  Pentecost :  it  is  specified  (Acts  xviii.  2) 
as  the  native  country  of  Aquila  ;  and  its  "  scattered 
strangers"  are  addressed  by  St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  1), 
along  with  those  of  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  and 
Bithynia.  All  these  passages  agree  in  showing  that 
there  were  many  Jewish  residents  in  the  district.  As 
to  the  annals  of  Pontus,  the  one  brilliant  passage  of 
its  histoiy  is  the  life  of  the  great  Mithridates ;  but 
this  is  also  the  period  of  its  coming  under  the  sway 
of  Rome.  IMithridates  was  defeated  by  Ponipey,  and 
the  western  part  of  his  dominions  was  incorporated 
with  the  province  of  Bithynia,  while  the  rest  was 
divided,  for  a  considerable  time,  among  various 
chieftains.  Under  Nero  the  whole  region  was  made 
a  lioman  province,  bearing  the  name  of  Pontus. 
The  last  of  the  petty  monarchs  of  the  district  was 
Polemo  II.,  who  married  Berenice,  the  gi-eat-grand- 
daughter  of  Heiod  the  Great.  She  was  probably 
with  Polemo  when  St.  Paul  was  travelling  in  this 
neighbourhood  about  the  year  52.  He  saw  her 
afterwards  at  Caesarea,  about  the  year  60,  with  her 
brother,  Agrippa  II.  [J.  S.  H.] 

POOL.  L  ^.(7o7?i,  see  Pond.  2.  Berdcdh^  in 
pi.  once  only,  pools  (Ps.  Ixxxiv.  6).  3.  The  usual 
word  is  Berecdh,  closely  connected  with  the  Arabic 
Birkeh,  and  the  derived  Spanish  with  the  Arabic 
article,  Al-berca.  A  reservoir  for  water.  These 
pools,  like  the  tanks  of  India,  are  in  many  parts  of 
Palestine  and  Syria  the  only  resource  for  water 
during  the  dry  season,  and  the  failure  of  them  in- 
volves drought  and  calamity  (Is.  xlii.  15).  Some 
are  supplied  by  sjjrings,  and  some  are  merely  recep- 
tacles tor  rain-water  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  314). 
Of  the  various  pools  mentioned  iu  Scripture,  as  of 
Hebron,  Samaria,  &e.  (for  which  See  the  Articles  on 
those  places),  perhaps  the  most  celebrated  are  the 
pools  of  Solomon  near  Bethlehem,  called  by  the  Arabs 
el-Buruk,  from  which  an  aqueduct  was  carried  which 
still  supplies  Jerusalem  with  water  (Eccl.  ii.  6; 
Ecclus.  xxiv.  30,  31).  They  are  three  in  number, 
partly  hewn  out  of  the  rock,  and  partly  built  with 


"  D3X ;  e'Ao! ;  paliis ;  plur.  in  Jer,  Ii.  32 ;  A.  V.  "  reeds," 
i.  e.  reedy  places  ;  oTjo-T^/naTa  ;  paludes ;  also  "  pool." 

b  2.  n3"l3  ;  KoiAos ;  vallis. 

3.  nD"13  ;  Kprjvri ;  pisdiia,  aquaeductus  (Cant.  vii. 
4) ;  KoXvixPr'idpa,  Ai'/u""? ;  t''o™  ^^3,  "  fall  on  the  knees  " 
(see  Judg.  vii.  5,  (i).  In  N.  T.  Kokvjxfiri9pa,  only  in 
Jobu  v.  'J  ;  ix.  7. 


POOE 

masonry,  but  all  lined  with  cement,  and  formed  on 
successive  levels  with  conduits  leading  from  the 
upper  to  the  lower,  and  flights  of  steps  from  the 
top  to  the  bottom  of  each  (Sandys,  Trav.  p.  150). 
They  are  all  formed  in  the  sides  of  the  valley  of 
Etham,  with  a  dam  across  its  opening,  which  forms 
the  E.  side  of  the  lowest  pool.  Their  dimensions 
are  thus  given  by  Dr.  Robinson : — (1.)  Upper  pool, 
length  380  feet ;  breadth  at  E.  236,  at  W.  229  ; 
depth  at  E.  25  feet;  distance  above  middle  pool, 
160  feet.  (2.)  Middle  pool,  length  423  feet; 
breadth  at  E.  250,  at  W.  160  ;  depth  39  ;  distance 
above  lower  pool  248  feet.  (3.)  Lower  pool,  length 
582  feet ;  breadth  at  E.  207,  at  W.  148  ;  depth 
50  feet.  They  appear  to  be  sup]Dlied  mainly  from 
a  spring  in  the  ground  above  (Fountain  ;  Cis- 
tern ;  Jerusalem,  vol.  i.  p.  994 ;  Conduit  ; 
Robinson,  Res.  i.  348,  474).  [H.  W.  P.] 

POOR."  The  genera]  kindly  spirit  of  the  law 
towards  the  poor  is  sufficiently  shown  by  such  pas- 
sages as  D^ut.  XV.  7  for  the  reason  that  (ver.  11), 
"  the  poor  shall  never  cease  out  of  the  land,"  and  a 
remarkable  agreement  with  some  of  its  directions  is 
expressed  in  Job  xx.  19,  xxiv.  3,  foil.,  where  among 
acts  of  oppression  are  particularly  mentioned  "  taking 
(away)  a  pledge,"  and  withholding  the  sheaf  from 
the  poor,  vers.  9,  10  [Loan],  .xxix.  12,  16,  xxxi. 
17,  "eating  with"  the  poor  (comp.  Deut.  xxvi. 
12,  &c).  See  also  such  pas.sages  as  Ez.  xviii.  12, 
16,  17,  .xxiL  29;  .Jer.  x.xii.  13,  16,  v.  28;  Is.  x. 
2;  Am.  ii.  7  ;  Zeeh.  vii.  10,  and  Ecclus.  iv.  1,  4, 
vii.  32  ;  Tob.  xii.  8,  9.     [Alms.] 

Among  the  special  enactments  in  their  fiivoui- 
the  following  must  be  mentioned.  1 .  The  right  of 
gleaning.  The  "  corners "  of  the  field  wei'e  not 
to  be  reaped,  nor  all  the  grapes  of  the  vineyard  to 
be  gathered,  the  olive-trees  not  to  be  beaten  a 
second  time,  but  the  stranger,  fatherless,  and  widow 
to  be  allowed  to  gather  what  was  left.  So  too  if  a 
sheaf  forgotten  was  left  in  the  field,  the  owner  was 
not  to  return  for  it,  but  leave  it  for  them  (Lev.  xix. 
9,  10;  Deut.  xxiv.  19,  21).  Of  the  practice  in 
such  cases  in  the  times  of  tlie  Judges,  the  story  of 
Ruth  is  a  striking  illustration  (Ruth  ii.  2,  &c.). 
[Corner;  Gleaning.] 

2.  From  the  produce  of  the  land  in  sabbatical 
years,  the  poor  and  the  stranger  were  to  have  their 
portion  (Ex.  xxiii.  11 ;  Lev.  xxv.  6). 


"  1.  P''3i^  ;  TTTuxds;  pauper. 

2.  7"^  ;  TreVrjs ;  pauper. 

3.  nSpH  ;  muixos  ;  pauper. 

4.  jSpJD  ;  7re'ir/)s;  piauper ;  a  word  of  later  usage, 


connected  with 


,  ^aXai^^ 


probably  the  original  of  tties- 


chino,  mesquin,  &c.  (Ges.  p.  954), 

5.  n  JV,  Chald.  (Dan.  iv.  27) ;  n-eVjjs ;  pauper ;  from 
same  root  as, 

6.  *3y,  the  word  most  usually  "poor"  in  A.  V.; 
jrecixpbs,  wtioxos,  TreVrj?  ;  indiyens,  pauper.  Also  Ztcb. 
ix.  9,  and  Is.  xxvi.  6,  irpdv^  ;  pauper. 

7.  ^1,  part,  of  K'1"l  ;  TaTreLi>6i ;  pauper.    In  2  Sam. 

xii.  1,  E^N  I;  TreVrjs,  tttwxoj. 

8.  Poverty ;  11011)0  ;  ivStia  ;  cyestas.  In  N.  T., 
TTTwxos.  pnuper,  and  ttcVj)?  ;  egenus,  once  only,  2  Cor. 
ix.  9.  "  Poor"  is  also  used  in  the  sense  of  "afflicted," 
"  liumble,"  &c. ;  e.  ij.  Malt.  v.  3. 


POOR 

3.  Re-entry  upon  land  in  the  jubilee  year,  with 
the  limitation  as  to  town  homes  (Lev.  xxv.  25-30). 
[Jubilee.] 

4.  Pioliibition  of  usury,  and  of  retention  of 
pledges,  i.  e.  loans  without  interest  enjoined  (Lev. 
xxv.  35,  37;  Ex.  xxii.  25-27;  Deut.  xv.  7,  8,  xxiv. 
10-13).    [Loan.] 

5.  Permanent  bondage  forbidden,  and  manu- 
mission of  Helnew  bondsmen  or  bondswomen  en- 
joined in  the  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years,  even  when 
bound  to  a  foreigner,  and  redemption  of  such  pre- 
vious to  those  years  (Deut.  xv.  12-15;  Lev.  x.w. 
39-42,  47-54). 

6.  Portions  from  the  tithes  to  be  shared  by  the 
poor  after  the  Levites  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12,  13). 
[Tithes.] 

7.  The  poor  to  partfike  in  entertainments  at  the 
feasts  of  Weeks  and  Tabernacles  (Deut.  xvi.  11,  14  ; 
see  Neh.  viii.  10). 

8.  Daily  payment  of  wages  (Lev.  xix.  13). 

On  the  other  hand,  while  equal  justice  was  com- 
manded to  be  done  to  the  poor  man,  he  was  not 
allowed  to  take  advantage  of  his  position  to  ob- 
struct the  administration  of  justice  (Ex.  xxiii.  3; 
Lev.  xix.  15). 

On  the  law  of  gleaning  the  Rabbinical  writers 
founded  a  variety  of  definitions  and  refinements, 
which  notwithstanding  their  minute  and  frivolous 
character,  were  on  the  whole  strongly  in  favour  of 
the  poo)\  They  are  collected  in  the  treatise  of  Mai- 
monides  Mithnoth  Ainim,  de  jure  pauperis,  trans- 
lated by  Prideaux  (Ugolini,  viii.  721),  and  specimens 
of  their  character  will  appear  in  the  following  titles. 

There  are,  he  says,  13  precepts,  7  affirmative 
and  6  negative,  gathered  i'rom  Lev.  xix.,  xxiii. ; 
Deut.  xiv.,  XV.,  xxiv.  On  these  the  following  ques- 
tions are  raised  and  answered.  What  is  a  "coiner," 
a  "handful?"  What  is  to  "forget"  a  sheaf? 
What  is  a  "  stranger  "?  What  is  to  be  done  when  a 
field  or  a  single  tree  belongs  to  two  persons  ;  and 
further,  when  one  of  them  is  a  Gentile,  or  when  it 
is  divided  by  a  road,  or  by  water  ; — ^when  insects 
or  enemies  destroy  the  crop  ?  How  much  grain 
must  a  man  give  by  way  of  alms  ?  Among  prohi- 
bitions is  one  forbidding  any  pi'oprietor  to  frighten 
away  the  poor  by  a  savage  beast.  An  Israelite  is 
forbidden  to  bike  alms  openly  from  a  Gentile.  Un- 
willing almsgiving  is  condemned,  on  the  principle 
expressed  in  Job  xxx.  25.  Those  who  gave  less 
than  their  due  proportion,  to  be  punished.  Mendi- 
cants are  divided  into  two  classes,  settled  poor  and 
vagi'ants.  The  former  were  to  be  relieved  by  the 
authorised  collectors,  but  all  are  enjoined  to  maintain 
themselves  if  possible.  [Alms.]  Lastly,  the  claim 
of  the  poor  to  the  portions  prescribed  is  laid  down 
as  a  positive  light. 

Principles  similar  to  those  laid  down  by  Moses 
are  inculcated  in  N.  T.,  as  Luke  iii.  11,  xiv.  13  ; 
Acts  vi.  1 ;  Gal.  ii.  10 ;  Jas.  ii.  15.  In  later 
times,  mendiciuicy,  which  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  contemplated  by  Moses,  became  frequent.  In- 
stances actual  or  hypothetical  may  be  seen  in  the 
following  passages:  Luke  xvi.  20,  21,  xviii.  35  ; 
Mark  x.  4(3 ;  John  ix.  8  ;  Acts  iii.  2.  On  the  whole 
subject,  besides  the  treatise  above-named,  see  Mishna, 
Peak,  i.  2,  3,  4,  5;  ii.  7  ;  Fesach.  iv.  8  ;  Selilen, 
de  Jure  Natur.  vi.  (J,  p.  735,  &c. ;  Saaischiitz, 
Arch.  Hcb.  ii.  j).  250;  Micliaelis,  §142,  vol.  ii.  p. 
248 ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rahb.  p.  308.  [H.  W.  P.] 

*  Arbor  lac  emittcns  mellis  lustar,  quo  ct  sufJitus  fit : 
videtur  esse  Styiacis  arbor.  Kiim.  Pj.  Soc  I'lcylag, 
Iax.  Arab.  s.  v. 


POPLAR  905 

POPLAR  (n])37,  libnch:  crrvpaKivos,  in  Gen. 
xxx.  37  ;  Aeu/CTj,  in  Hos.  iv.  13  :  populus),  the  ren- 
dering of  the  above-named  Hebrew  word,  which 
occurs  only  in  the  two  places  cited.  Peeled  rods 
of  the  libneh  were  put  by  Jacob  before  Laban's  ring- 
streaked  sheep.  This  tree  is  mentioned  with  the  oak 
and  the  terebinth,  by  Hosea,  as  one  under  which 
idolatrous  Israel  used  to  sacrifice. 

Several  authorities,  Celsius  amongst  the  number 
(Hierob.  i.  292),  are  in  favour  of  the  render- 
ing of  the  A.  v.,  and  think  the  "  white  poplar  " 
(Populxs  alba)  is  the  tree  denoted  ;  others  under- 
stand the  "  storax  tree"  {Styrax  officinale,  Linn.). 
This  opinion  is  confirmed  by  the  LXX.  translator 
of  Genesis,  and  by  the  Arabic  version  of  Saadias, 

which    has    the    term    lubna   (  J^jJ),    i.  e.    the 
"  Styrax  tree."  " 

Both  poplars  ">  and  styrax  or  storax  trees  are 
common  in  Palestine,  and  either  would  suit  the 
passages  where  the  Heb.  term  occurs.  Dioscorides 
(i.  79)  and  Pliny  {N.  H.  xii.  17  and  25)  both 
speak  of  the  Styrax  officinale,  and  mention  se- 
veral kinds  of  exudation.  Pliny  says,  "  that  part 
of  Syria  which  adjoins  Judaea  above  Phoenicia  pro- 
duces storax,  which  is  found  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Gabala  {Jebeil)  and  Jlarathus,  as  also  of  Casius, 
a  mountain  of  Seleucia.  .  .  .  That  which  comes 
from  the  mountain  of  Amanus  in  Syria  is  highly 
esteemed  for  medicinal  purposes,  and  even  more  so 
by  the  perfumers." 


Styrax  oj/icinak. 

Storax  ((TT^pol)  is  mentioned  in  Ecchis.  xxiv.  15. 
togetiier  with  other  aromatic  substances.  The  mo- 
dern Greek  name  of  the  tree,  as  we  learn  from  Sib- 
tliorpe  [Flor.  Grace,  i.  275)  is  ffrovpaKi,  and  is  a 
common  wild  shrub  in  Greece  and  in  most  parts 
of  the  Levant.  The  resin  exudes  either  sponta- 
neously or  afte;-  incision.     This  property,  however. 


•>  "  I'opulus  alba  and  I'.  Kupkratica  1  saw.    1'.  dilatata 
and  iii'iira  are  also  sjiid  to  grow  in  Syria"  (J.  I>.  Hooker). 


90G 


rORATHA 


it  would  seem,  is  only  for  the  most  part  possessed 
by  trees  which  grow  in  a  warm  country  ;  for  English 
specimens,  though  they  flower  profusely,  do  not  pro- 
duce the  drug.  Mr.  Dan.  Hanbury,  who  has  discussed 
the  whole  subject  of  the  storax  plants  with  much 
care  (see  the  Pharmaceutical  Journal  and  Trans- 
actions for  Feb.  1857),  tells  us  that  a  friend  of  his 
quite  failed  to  obtain  any  exudation  from  Stijrax 
officinale,  by  incisions  made  in  the  hottest  part  ot 
the  summei'  of  1856,  on  specimens  growing  in  the 
botanic  garden  at  Montpellier.  "  The  experiment 
was  quite  unsucressful ;  neither  aqueous  sap  nor 
I'esinous  juice  flowed  from  the  incisions."  Still 
Mr.  Hanbury  quotes  two  authorities  to  show  that 
under  certain  firourable  circumstances  the  tree 
may  exude  a  fragrant  resin  even  in  France  and 
Italy. 

The  Styrax  officinxle  is  a  shrub  from  nine  to 
twelve  feet  high,  with  ovate  leaves,  which  are  white 
underneath  ;  the  flowers  are  in  racemes,  and  are 
white  or  cream-coloured.  This  ichite  appearance 
agrees  with  the  etymology  of  the  Heb.  libneh. 
The  liquid  storax  oi'  commerce  is  the  product  of  the 
Ziquidambar  Orientak,  Mill,  (see  a  fig.  in  Mr. 
Hanbury's  communication),  an  entirely  different 
plant,  whose  resin  was  probably  unknown  to  the 
ancients.  [W.  H.] 

PO'RATHA  (Nnni2  :  ^apaSadd;  Alex.  Bap- 

Sadd  :  T'horatha).  One  of  the  ten  sons  of  Haman 
slain  by  the  Jews  in  Shushan  the  palace  (Esth.  ix. 
8).  Perhaps  "  Poradatha"  was  the  fall  form  of  the 
name,  which  the  LXX.  appear  to  have  had  before 
them  (compare  Aridatha,  Parshandatha). 

POECH.  1.  Uhni,^  or  iilam.  2.  Misderon 
uldin,  strictly  a  vestibule  (Ges.  p.  43),  was  probably 
a  sort  of  verandah  chamber  in  the  works  of  ."^olomou, 
open  in  front  and  at  the  sides,  but  capable  of  being 
enclosed  with  awnings  or  curtains,  like  that  of  the 
royal  palace  at  Ispahan  described  by  Chardin  (vii. 
386,  and  pi.  39).  The  word  is  used  in  the  Talmud 
{Middoth,  iii.  7). 

Mis'd^ron  was  probably  a  corridor  or  colonnade 
connecting  the  principal  I'ooms  of  the  house  (Wil- 
kinson, A.  F.  i.  p.  11).  The  porch •>  (Matt.  xxvi. 
71),  was  probably  the  passage  from  the  street  into 
the  first  court  of  the  house,  in  which,  in  Eastern 
houses  is  the  mastdbah  or  stone-bench,  for  the  porter 
or  persons  waiting,  and  where  also  the  master  of 
the  house  often  receives  visitors  and  transacts  busi- 
ness (Lane,  3fod.  Eg.  i.  32  ;  Shaw,  Trav.  p.  207). 
[House.]  The  word  in  the  parallel  passage  (Mark 
xiv.  68)  is  TTpoavKiov,  the  outer  court.  The  scene 
therefoie  of  the  denial  of  our  Lord  took  place, 
either  in  that  court,  or  in  the  passage  from  it  to 
the  house-door.  The  term  crroa  is  used  for  the 
colonnade  or  portico  of  Bethesda,  and  also  for  that 

^  1.  D7-1X,  or  D7fc<  ;  aviAd/a ;  porticus  (1  Cbr.  sxviii. 
11)  ;  rao5  ;  porticus. 

2.  pTlpD  ;  Trapao-Tas  ;  porticus ;  only  once  used 
Judg.  iii.  23. 

<^  The  two  words  are  in  fact  quite  distinct,  being  derived 
from  different  roots.  "  Porter "  in  the  modern  sense  is 
from  the  French  porteur.  The  similarity  between  tlie 
two  is  alluded  to  in  a  passage  quoted  from  Watts  by 
Dr.  Johnson.  , 

''  ?^N  ;  TO  alepLoi' ;  frons. 

'  D?"'N  ;  Tix  alKdij. ;  vestibulum. 


POT 

of  the  Temple  called  Solomon's  porch  (John  v.  2, 
X.  23;  Acts  iii.  1 1 ,  v.  12). 

Josephus  describes  the  ])orticoes  or  cloisters  which 
surrounded  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  and  also  the 
loyal  portico.  These  porticoes  are  described  by 
Tacitus  as  forming  an  important  line  of  defence 
during  the  siege  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  3,  §9,  sv.  11, 
§3,5;  B.  J.  v.^5,  §2  ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  1 2).  [Temple  ; 
Solomon's  Porch.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PORCIUS  FESTUS.     [Festus.] 

PORTER.  This  word  when  used  in  the  A.  V. 
does  not  bear  its  modern  signification  of  a  carrier 
of  burdens,"^  but  denotes  in  every  case  a  gate-keeper, 
from  the  Latin  portarius,  the  man  who  attended  t« 
the  porta.  In  the  original  the  word  is  IJ^Iti',  shoer, 
from  "lyti',  sha'ar,  a  gate  :  BvpwpSs,  and  irvXcupSs  : 

portarius,  i^-ad  janitor.  Tliis  meaning  is  evidently 
implied  in  1  Chr.  ix.  21  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  19,  xxxv.  15  ; 
John  X.  3.  It  is  generally  employed  in  reference 
to  the  Levites  who  had  charge  of  the  entrances  to 
the  sanctuary,  but  is  used  also  in  other  connexions 
in  2  Sam.  xviii.  26;  2  K.  vii.  10,  11  ;  Mark  xiii. 
34;  John  x.  3,  xviii.  16,  17.  In  two  passages 
(1  Chr.  XV.  23,  24)  the  Hebrew  word  is  rendered 
"  doorkeepers,"  and  in  John  xviii.  16, 17,  ^  6vpoip6s 
is  "  she  that  kept  the  door."  [G.] 

POSIDO'NIUS  (UoffiUvioi:  Posidonius),  an 
envoy  sent  by  Nicanor  to  Judas  (2  Mace.  xiv.  19). 

POSSESSION.     [Demoniacs.] 

POST.  I.  1.  yl/z?,"*  a  word  indefinitely  rendered 
by  LXX.  and  Vulg.  Probably,  as  Gesenius  argues, 
the  door-case  of  a  door,  including  the  lintel  and 
side-posts  (Ges.  Thes.  p.  43).  Akin  to  this  is  aildm,'^ 
only  used  in  plur.  (Ez.  xl.  16,  &c.),  probably  a 
portico,  and  so  rendered  by  Symm.  and  Syr.  ^'ers. 
(,Ges.  p.  48). 

2.  Aniindh,^  usuallv  "  cubit,"  once  only  "post" 
(Is.  vi.  4). 

3.  Mezuzah,^  from  a  root  signifying  to  shine, 
i.  e.  implying  motion  (on  a  centre). 

4.  Saph,^  usually  "  threshold." 

The  ceremony  oi'  boring  the  eai'  of  a  voluntary 
bondsman  was  perfoiTned  by  placing  the  eai'  against 
the  door-post  of  the  house  (Ex.  xxi.  6  ;  see  Juv. 
Sat.  i.  103,  and  Plant.  Poen.  v.  2,  21).  [Slave  ; 
Pillar.] 

The  posts  of  the  doors  of  the  Temple  were  (if 
olive-wood  (IK.  vi.  33). 

,  II..  Pats,'  A.V.  "post"  (Esth.  iii.  13), elsewhere 
"  runner,"  and  also  "  guard."  A  courier  or  carrier 
of  messaf^es,  used  among  other  places  in  Job  ix.  25. 
[Angareuo.]  [H.  W.  p.] 

POT.  The  term  "  pot "  ^  is  applicable  to  so 
many  sorts  of  vessels,  that  it  can  scarcely  be  re- 


f  n?3N  ;  vTTepdvpov ;  superliminare. 
f-  HT-ITtD  ;  o-Toe;u.6s,  (/)Aia ;  postis,  from  \'!\'\,  mico. 
'>  PlD  ;  <^Aia ;   limen  ;   in  plur.  ra  irporrvXa ;  svper- 
Uminaria  (Am.  ix.  1). 

>  ]*"),  part,  ot  V.')"l,  "  run ;"  j3i^Aio<|)opos ;  cursor. 
"  1.  '?|-1DN  ;  ayyelov  (2  K.  iv.  2),  applied  to  oil. 

2.  J/'23  ;   KepafAtoc  ;  scyphus  (Jer.  xxxv.  5;   Ges. 
p.  260) ;  usually  "  bowl "  or  "  cup." 

3.  "l-'n  ;  Kotfuvoi ;  cvphinus ;  also  "  basket." 

4.  ''?3  ;  o-KcCo! ;  vas ;  usually  "  vessel,"  once  only 
"pot"  (Lev.  vi.  28). 


POTIPHAR 

stncted  to  any  one  in  particular.     [P>0^^■L ;  Cal- 
dron; Basin;  Cup,  &c.] 

But.  from  tlie  places  where  the  word  is  used  we 
may  collect  the  uses,  and  also  in  part  the  materials 
of  the  utensils  implied. 

1.  Aauc,  an  earthen  jar,  deep  and  narrow, 
without  handles,  probably,  like  the  Roman  and 
Egyptian  amphora,  inserted  in  a  stand  of  wood  or 
stone  (VVilicinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  47;  Sandys,  I'rav. 
p.  150). 

2.  Chores,  an  eartlien  vessel  for  stewmg  or 
seething.  Such  a  vessel  was  used  for  baking  (Ez. 
iv.  9).  It  is  contrasted  in  the  same  passage  (Lev. 
vi.  28)  with  a  metal  vessel  for  the  same  purpose. 
[Vessel.] 

3.  Dud,  a  vessel  for  culinarj^  purposes,  men- 
tioned (1  Sam.  ii.  14)  in  conjunction  with  "  cal- 
dron"  and  "kettle,"  and  so  perhaps  of  smaller 
size. 

4.  Sir  is  combined  with  other  words  to  denote 
special  vises,  as  basher,  "flesh"  (Ex.  xvi.  3);  ra- 
chntz,  "washing"  (Ps.  Ix.  8;  LXX.  has  Xe^Srjs 
T^s  iKwiSos)  ;  matsreph,  "  fining-pot "  (Prov. 
xxvii.  21). 

The  blackness  which  such  vessels  would  contract 
is  alluded  to  in  Joel  ii.  C. 

The  "  pots,"  gehiyim,  set  before  the  Rechabites 
(Jer.  XXXV.  5),  were  probably  bulging  jars  or 
bowls. 

The  water-pots  of  Cana  appear  to  have  been 
large  amphorae,  such  as  are  in  use  at  the  present 
day  in  Syria  (Fisher,  Views,  p.  56  ;  .Jollifte,  i.  33). 
These  were  of  stone  or  hard  earthenware;  but  gold, 
silver,  brass,  or  copper,  were  also  used  for  vessels 
both  for  domestic  and  also,  with  marked  preference, 
for  ritual  use  (1  K.  vii.  45,  x.  21 ;  2  Chr.  iv.  J  6, 
ix.  20  ;  Mark  vii.  4 ;  Heb.  ix.  4  ;  John  ii.  6  ; 
Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  §217,  iii.  335,  ed. 
Smith). 

Crucibles  for  refining  metal  are  mentioned  (Prov. 
xxvi.  23,  xx\ni.  21). 

The  watei-pot  of  the  Samaritan  woman  may 
have  been  a  leathern  bucket,  such  as  Bedouin  wo- 
men use  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  45). 

The  shapes  of  these  vessels  we  can  only  conjecture, 
as  very  few  remains  have  yet  been  discovered,  but 
it  is  certain  that  pottery  formed  a  branch  of  native 
■  Jewish  manufacture.    [Pottehv.]        [H.W.  P.] 

POT'IPHAR  ("IS^mQ:  neTi,ppr,s,  Herre- 
c^pijs,  litVTfippris  :  Putiphar),  an  Egyptian  pr.  n., 
also  written  yiD  '•DiS,  Potipiierah.  That  these 
are  but  two  foniis  of  one  name  is  shown  by  the 
ancient  Egyptian  equivalent,  PET-P-RA,  which  may 
have  been  pronounced,  at  least  in  Lower  Egypt, 
PET-PH-RA.  It  signifies  "  Belonging  to  the  Sun." 
Kosellini  remarks  that  it  is  of  very  frequent  occur- 
rence; on  the  l']gyptian  monuments  {Monumenti 
Storici,  i.  117,  ifS).  The  fuller  form  is  clearly 
nearer  to  the  Egyptian. 

Potijihar  is  described  as  "  an  odlcer  of  Pharaoh, 
chiefof  the  executioners  (D"'n3t3n  X'  HyiQ  Dnp), 
an  Egyptian  "  (Gen.  xxxix.  1  ;  comp.  xxxvii.  36). 
The  word  we  render  "  ollicer,"  as  in  the  A.  V.,  is 
literally  "  eunuch,"  and  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  so 
translate  it  here  ((nraSajj/,  cunuchus) ;  but  it  is  also 


5.  "l^p ;  Ae'/37j9 ;  olla  ;  used  witli  TODJ  (Jcr.  i.  13), 
"  a  socthing-pot." 

G.  ins  ;  xoAKeioi';  cacahus. 

1.  nJVJV;  o-Ta/ui'Os;  ra.<;(Ex.xvi.33;  Ileh.  i.x.4). 


POTTER'S-FIELD,  THE         907 

used  for  an  officer  of  the  court,  and  this  is  almost 
certainly- the  meaning  here,  as  Potiphar  was  mar- 
ried, which  is  seldom  the  case  with  eunuchs,  though 
some,  as  those  wliich  have  the  custody  of  the 
Ka'abeh  at  Jlekkeh  are  exceptions,  and  his  office 
was  one  which  would  not  usually  be  held  by  per- 
sons of  a  class  ordinarily  wanting  in  courage, 
although  here  again  we  must  except  the  occasional 
usage  of  Muslim  sovereigns,  whose  executioners 
were  sometimes  eunuchs,  as  Haroon  er-Rasheed's 
Mesroor,  in  order  that  they  might  be  able  to  carry 
out  the  royal  commands  even  in  the  harceras  of  the 
subjects.  Potiphar's  office  was  "  chief  of  the  execu- 
tioners," not,  as  the  LXX.  makes  it,  "  of  the  cooks  " 
(apxtfJ-dy^ipoa),  for  the  prison  was  in  his  house, 
or,  at  least,  in  that  of  the  chief  of  the  executioners, 
probably  a  successor  of  Potiphar,  who  committed 
the  disgraced  servants  of  Pharaoh  to  Joseph's 
charge  (xl.  2-4).  He  is  called  an  Egyptian,  though 
his  master  was  probably  a  Shepherd-king  of  the 
xvth  dynasty ;  and  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  his  name 
contains  that  of  an  Egyptian  divinity,  which  does 
not  seem  to  be  the  case  with  the  names  of  the  kings 
of  that  line,  though  there  is  probably  an  instance  in 
that  of  a  prince.  [Chronology,  vol.  i.  p.  322.] 
He  appears  to  have  been  a  wealthy  man,  having 
property  in  the  field  as  well  as  in  the  house,  over 
which  Joseph  was  put,  evidently  in  an  important 
post  (xxxix.  4-G).  In  this  position  Joseph  was 
tempted  by  his  master's  wife.  The  view  we  have 
of  Potiphar's  household  is  exactly  in  accordance  with 
the  representations  on  the  moiuiments,  in  which  we 
see  how  carefully  the  produce  of  the  land  was  regis- 
teied  and  stored  up  in  the  house  by  overseers,  <as 
well  as  the  liberty  that  the  women  of  all  ranks 
enjoyed.  When  Joseph  was  accused,  his  master 
contented  himself  with  casting  him  into  prison 
(19,  20),  probably  being  a  merciful  man,  although 
he  may  have  been  restrained  by  God  fi'om  acting 
more  severely.  After  this  we  hear  no  more  of 
Potiphar,  unless,  which  is  unlikely,  the  chief  of  the 
executioners  afterwards  mentioned  be  he.  [See 
Joseph.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

POTIPHE'RAH  (yns  ""piS :  U^T^ppTi,  Her- 
T€(/)p5),  TlevT€(pp7J,  TIePTe(ppi  :  Putipharc),  <an 
Egyptian  pr.  n.,  also  written  "IS^tO'lS,  Potiphar, 
corresponding  to  the  PET-P-RA,  "  Belonging  to  the 
Sun,"  of  the  hieroglyphics. 

Potipherah  was  priest  or  prince  of  On  (|'K  JHS), 
and  his  daughter  Asenath  was  given  Joseph  to  wife  by 
Pharaoh  (xli.  45,  50,  xlvi.  20).  His  name,  implying 
devotion  to  the  sun,  is  very  aj)propriate  to  a  Heiiopo- 
lite,  especially  to  a  priest  of  Heliopolis,  and  therefore 
the  rendering  "  priest "  is  preferable  in  his  case, 
though  the  other  can  scarcely  be  a.sserted  to  be 
untenable.    [On  ;  Asenath  ;  Joseph.]    [R.S.  P.] 

POTSHERD   (b"]!]  :    ocrrpaKov  :    testa,  vas 

fictile):  also  in  A.  V.  "  sherd"  {i.  e.  anything  di- 
vided or  separated,  from  share,  Richardson's  Diet.), 
a  piece  of  earthenware,  broken  either  by  the  heat 
of  the  furnace  in  the  manufacture,  by  fire  when 
used  as  a  crucible  (Prov.  xxvi.  23),  or  otherwise. 
[Pottery.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

POTTER'S-FIELD,    THE    {6    ayphs  toS 


8.  D^RQC  ;  K\ripoi;  cki-i;  "allotments  of  land." 

9.  C~)n  ;    (jKcOos    otTTpetKti'oi' ;    ivs  fictile   (I.cv. 

vi.  21  [2><ii.''' 


908        POTTER'S-FIELD,  THE 

Kepa/xeais  :  ago'  figuli).  A  piece  of  ground  which, 
accoi'ding  to  the  statement  of  St.  Matthew  ^xxvii.  7), 
was  purchased  by  the  priests  with  the  thirty  pieces 
of  silver  rejected  by  Judas,  and  converted  into  a 
burial-place  for  Jews  not  belonging  to  the  city  (see 
Alford,  ad  foe),  lu  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  the 
purchase  is  made  by  Judas  himself,  and  neither 
the  potter's  field,  its  connexion  with  the  priests, 
nor  its  ultimate  application  are  mentioned.  [ACEL- 
DAMA.] 

That  St.  Matthew  was  well  assured  of  the  accu- 
racy of  his  vereion  of  the  occurrence  is  evident  from 
his  adducing  it  (ver.  9)  as  a  fulfilment  of  an  ancient 
prediction.  What  that  prediction  was,  and  who 
made  it,  is  not,  however,  at  all  clear.  St.  Matthew 
names  Jeremiah :  but  there  is  no  passage  in  the 
Book  of  Jeremiah,  as  we  possess  it  (either  in  the 
Hebrew  or  LXX.),  resembling  that  which  he  gives  ; 
and  that  in  Zechariah,  which  is  usually  supposed 
to  be  alluded  to,  has  only  a  very  imperfect  likeness 
to  it.     This  will  be  readily  seen : — 


St.  Matt,  xxvii.  9. 
Then  was  fulfilled  that 
which  was  spoken  by  Je- 
remy the  prophet,  saying, 
"  And  they  took  the  thirty 
pieces  of  silver,  the  price 
of  him  that  was  valued, 
whom  they  of  the  children 
of  Israel  did  value,  and 
gave  them  for  the  potter's 
field,  as  the  Lord  ap- 
pointed me." 


Zeeh.  xi.  12. 
And  I  said  unto  them, 
"If  ye  think  good,  give 
my  price  ;  and  if  not,  for- 
bear." So  they  weighed 
for  my  price  thirty  pieces 
of  silver.  And  Jehovah 
said  unto  me,  "Cast  it 
unto  the  potter ;  a  goodly 
price  that  I  was  prised  at 
by  them  !"  And  1  took  the 
thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and 
cast  them  to  the  potter  in 
the  house  of  Jehovah. 

And  even  this  is  doubtful ;  for  the  word  above 
translated  "  potter  "  is  in  the  LXX.  rendered  "  fur- 
nace," and  by  modern  scholars  (Gesenius,  JFiirst, 
Ewald,  De  Wette,  Herxheimer — following  the  Tar- 
gum,  Peshito-Syriac,  and  Kimchi)  "treasury"*  or 


'^  T  YTn.    If  this  be  the  right  translation,  the  passage, 
instead  of  being  in  agreement,  is  directly  at  variance  wilb 


POTTERY 

"  treasurer."  Supposing,  however,  this  passage  to 
be  that  which  St.  Matthew  refers  to,  three  explana- 
tions suggest  themselves : — 

1.  That  the  Evangelist  unintentionally  substi- 
tuted the  name  of  Jeremiah  for  that  of  Zechariah, 
at  the  same  time  altering  the  passage  to  suit  his 
immediate  object,  in  the  same  way  that  St.  Paul 
has  done  in  Rom.  x.  6-9  (compared  with  Deut.  viii. 
17,  XXX.  11-14),  1  Cor.  xv.  45  (comp.  with  Gen. 
ii.  7).  See  Jowett's  .S'^.  Paul's  Epistles  (Essay  on 
Quotations,  &c.). 

2.  That  this  portion  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah — a 
book  the  different  portions  of  which  there  is  reason 
to  believe  are  in  different  styles  and  by  different 
authors  — was  in  the  time  of  St.  Matthew  attributed 
to  Jeremiah. 

3.  That  the  reference  is  to  some  passage  of  Jere- 
miah which  has  been  lost  from  its  place  in  his 
book,  and  exists  only  in  the  Evangelist.  Some 
slight  support  is  afforded  to  this  view  by  the  fact 
that  potters  and  the  localities  occupied  by  them  are 
twice  alluded  to  by  Jeremiah.  Its  partial  corre- 
spondence with  Zech.  xi.  12,  13,  is  no  argument 
against  its  having  at  one  time  formed  a  part  of  the 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah :  for  it  is  well  known  to  every 
student  of  the  Bible  that  similar  correspondences  are 
continually  found  in  the  prophets.  See,  for  instance, 
Jer.  xlviii.  45,  comp.  with  Num.  xxi.  27,  28,  xxiv. 
17  ;  Jer.  xlix.  27,  comp.  with  Am.  i.  4.  For  other 
examples,  see  Dr.  Pusey's  Commentary  on  Amos  and 
Micah. 

Tlie  position  of  ACELDAMA  has  been  treated  of 
under  that  head.  But  there  is  not  now  any  pot- 
tery in  Jerusalem,  nor  within  several  miles  of  the 
city.  [G.] 

POTTERY.  The  art  of  pottery  is  one  of  the 
most  common  and  most  ancient  of  all  manufactures. 
The  modern  Arab  culinary  vessels  are  chiefly  of 
wood  or  cojjper  (Niebuhr,  Toy.  i.  188);  but  it  is 
abundantly  evident,  both  that  the  Hebrews  used 


the  statement  of  Matt,  xxvii .  6,  that  the  silver  was  not  put 
into  the  treasuiy. 


Kg>i)tian  Poltci-)-.     (VViJkmson.) 


POUND 

earthenware  vessels  in  the  wikleiness,  where  there 
would  be  little  facility  for  making  them,  and  that 
the  potters'  trade  was  afterwards  caiTied  on  in  Pa- 
lestine. They  had  themselves  been  conceiued  in  the 
potters'  trade  in  Eg'vpt  (Ps.  Ixxxi.  6),  and  the  wall- 
paintings  minutely  illustrate  the  Egyptian  process, 
which  agrees  with  such  notices  of  the  Jewish  prac- 
tice as  are  found  in  the  Prophets,  and  also  in  many 
respects  with  the  process  as  pursued  in  the  present 
day.  The  clay,  when  dug,  was  trodden  by  men's  feet 
so  as  to  form  a  paste  (Is.  xli.  25  ;  Wisd.  xv.  7) 
[Bricks]  ;  then  placed  by  the  potter  *  on  the  wheel 
beside  which  he  sat,  and  shaped  by  him  with  his 
hands.  How  early  the  wheel  came  into  use  in 
Palestine  we  know  not,  but  it  seems  likely  that  it 
was  adopted  fi-om  Egypt.  It  consisted  of  a  wooden 
disc  *>  placed  on  another  larger  one,  and  turned  by 
the  hand  by  an  attendant,  or  worked  by  a  treadle 
(Is.  xlv.  9  ;  Jer.  xviii.  3 ;  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  29,  30  ; 
see  Tennant,  Ceylon,  i.  452).  The  vessel  was  then 
smoothed  and  coated  with  a  glaze,*-'  and  finally 
burnt  in  a  furnace  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eif.  ii.  108). 
We  find  allusions  to  the  potsherds,  i.  e.  broken  pieces '' 
of  vessels  used  as  crucibles,  or  burst  by  the  furnace, 
and  to  the  necessity  of  keeping  the  latter  clean 
(Is.  XXX.  14,  xlv.  9  ;  Job  ii.  8 ;  Ps.  xxii.  16 ;  Prov. 
xxvi.  23  ;  Ecclus.  u.  s.). 

Earthen  vessels  were  used,  both  by  Egyptians  and 
Jews,  for  various  purposes  besides  culinary.  Deeds 
were  kept  in  them  (Jer.  xxxii.  14).  Tiles  with 
patterns  and  writing  were  common  both  in  Egypt 
and  Assyria,  and  were  also  in  use  in  Palestine  (Ez. 
iv.  1).  There  was  at  Jerusalem  a  royal  establishment 
of  potters  (]  Chr.  iv.  21'.),  from  whose  employment, 
and  from  the  ft'agments  cast  away  in  the  process, 
the  Potter's  Field  perhaps  received  its  name  (Is. 
XXX.  14).  Whether  the  term  "potter"  (Zech.  xi. 
13)  is  to  be  so  interpreted  may  be  doubted,  as 
it  may  be  taken  for  "artificer"  in  general,  and. 
also  "  treasurer,"  as  if  the  coin  mentioned  were  to  be 
weighed,  and  perhaps  melted  down  to  be  recoined 
(Ges.  p.  619  ;  Grotius,  Calmet,  St.  Jerome,  Hitzig, 
Birch,  ffist.  of  Pottery,  i.  152  ;  Saalschiitz,  Ilebr. 
Arch.  i.  14,  11).  [H.  W.  P.] 

POUND.  1.  A  weight.  See  Weights  and 
Measouks. 

2.  (Mi/a.)  A  money  of  account,  mentioned  in 
the  parable  of  the  Ten  Pounds  (Luke  xix.  12-27), 
as  the  talent  is  in  the  parable  of  the  Talents  (Matt. 
XXV.  14-30),  the  comparison  of  the  Saviour  to  a 
master  who  entrusted  money  to  his  servants  where- 
with to  trade  in  his  absence  being  probably  a  fre- 
quent lesson  in  our  Lord's  teaching  (comp.  Mark 
xiii.  32-37).  The  reference  appears  to  be  to  a 
Greek  pound,  a  weight  used  as  a  money  of  account, 
of  which  sixty  went  to  the  talent,  the  weight  de- 
pending upon  the  weight  of  the  talent.  At  this 
time  the  Attic  t;xlent,  reduce<l  to  the  weight  of  the 
earlier  Phoenician,  which  was  the  same  as  the 
Hebrew,  ])revailed  in  Palestine,  though  other  sys- 
tems must  have  been  occasionally  used.  The  (ireek 
name  doubtless  came  eitlier  from  the  Hebrew  mnneh 
or  from  a  common  origin ;  but  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Hebrew  talent  containqd  but  lifly 
manehs,  and  that  we  have  no  authority  for  sup- 
posinsr  that  the  maneh  was  called  in  Palestine  by 
the  Greek  name,  so  that  it  is  most  reasonable  to 

•■'  1 .  ^^V,  purt.  of  1^'*,  " press ;"  icepa/jitu!  ;  Jitjulus. 

2.  ins,  only  ill  tlaii.  ii.  41 ;  figiclus. 
i>  D''32X,  lit.  "  two  stones ;"  Artoi ;  nda  (see  Gcs.  p.  16). 


PRAETORIUM 


909 


consider  the  Greek  weight  to  be  meant.    [Talent  ; 
Weights  and  Measures.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

PEAETO'RIUIVI  (TrpaiTdopwv).  The  head- 
quarters of  the  Roman  militaiy  governor,  wherever 
he  happened  to  be.  In  time  of  peace  some  one  of 
the  best  buildings  of  the  city  which  was  the  re- 
sidence of  the  proconsul  or  praetor  was  selected  for 
this  purpose.  Thus  Verres  appropriated  the  palace 
of  king  Hiero  at  Syracuse ;  at  Caesarea  that  of  Herod 
the  Great  was  occupied  by  Felix  (Acts  xxiii.  35)  ; 
and  at  Jerusalem  the  new  palace  erected  by  the 
same  prince  was  the  residence  of  Pilate.  This  last 
was  situated  on  the  western,  or  more  elevated,  hill  of 
Jerusalem,  and  was  connected  with  a  system  of  forti- 
fications, the  aggregate  of  which  constituted  the  irap- 
efj.Po\^,  or  fortified  barrack.  It  was  the  dominant 
position  on  the  Western  hill,  and — at  any  rate  on 
one  side,  probably  the  Eastern — was  mounted  by  a 
flight  of  steps  (the  same  from  which  St.  Paul  made 
his  speech  in  Hebrew  to  the  angiy  crowd  of  Jews, 
Acts  xxii.  1  seqq.).  From  the  level  below  the 
bai-rack,  a  terrace  led  eastward  to  a  gate  opening 
into  the  western  side  of  the  cloister  surrounding  the 
Temple,  the  road  being  carried  across  the  valley  of 
Tyropoeon  (separating  the  Western  from  the  Temple 
hill)  on  a  causeway  built  up  of  enormous  stone 
blocks.  At  the  angle  of  the  Temple  cloister  just 
above  this  entrance,  i.  c.  the  N.W.  corner  [see 
Jerusalem,  p.  1006,  and  p.  1023]  stood  the  old 
citadel  of  the  Temple  hill,  the  fiapis,  or  Byrsa, 
which  Herod  rebuilt  and  called  by  the  name  An- 
tonia,  after  his  friend  and  patron  the  triumvir. 
After  the  Roman  power  was  established  in  Judaea, 
a  Roman  guard  was  always  maintained  in  the  An- 
tonia,  the  commander  of  which  for  the  time  being 
seems  to  be  the  official  termed  crTpaTHy))^  tow 
Upov  in  the  Cospels  and  Acts.  The  guard  in  the 
Antonia  was  probably  relieved  regularly  from  the 
cohort  quartered  in  the  irape/xPoXT],  and  hence  the 
plural  form  a-Tparrjyol  is  sometimes  used,  the 
officers,  like  the  privates,  being  changed  every  watch; 
although  it  is  very  conceivalile  that  a  certain  num- 
ber of  them  should  have  been  selected  for  the  service 
from  possessing  a  superior  knowledge  of  the  Jewish 
customs,  or  skill  in  the  Hebrew  language.  Besides 
the  cohort  of  regular  legionaries  there  was  probably 
an  equal  number  of  local  troops,  who  when  on  seiTice 
acted  as  the  "supports"  (56|io'Aa/3oi,  cocerers  of 
the  right  flank.  Acts  xxiii.  23)  of  the  former,  and 
there  were  also  a  few  sqitadrons  of  cavalry ;  although 
it  seems  likely  that  both  these  and  the  local  troops 
had  se])arate  barracks  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  the 
-rrapefx^oX^,  or  praetorian  camp,  was  ajipropriated 
to  the  Roman  cohort.  The  ordinary  police  of  the 
Temple  and  tlie  city  seems  to  have  been  in  the 
hands  of  the  Jewish  officials,  whose  attendants 
[inrTjperai)  were  provided  with  dirks  and  clubs,  but 
without  the  regular  armour  and  the  disciiiline  of 
the  legionaries.  When  the  latter  were  requiied  to 
a.ssist  this  gendarmerie,  either  fiom  tlie  apprehen- 
sion of  serious  tumult,  or  because  the  service  was 
one  of  great  importance,  the  Jews  would  apply  to 
the  officer  in  command  at  the  Antonia,  who  would 
act  so  far  under  their  orders  as  the  commander  of  a 
detachment  in  a  manufacturing  town  does  under 
the  orders  of  the  civil  magistrate  at  the  time  of  a 
riot  (Acts  iv.  1,  v.  24).     But  the  power  of  life  and 

"■  XpiVfia  (I'^cclus.  /.  c). 

ii  tyn  ;  otrTpaKOi/ ;  testa.    Sec  Pot,  9  (note). 


910 


PRAETORIUM 


death,  or  of  regular  scourging,  rested  only  with  the 
praetor,  or  the  person  representing  him  and  com- 
missioned b}'  him.  This  power,  and  that  which 
would  ahvnys  go  with  it, — the  right  to  press  what- 
ever men  or  things  were  reqiiired  by  the  public 
exigencies, — appears  to  be  denoted  by  the  term 
i^ovala,  a  term  perhaps  the  translation  of  the  Latin 
imperium,  and  certainly  its  equivalent.  It  was  in- 
herent in  the  praetor  or  his  representatives — hence 
themselves  popularly  called  e^ovaiai,  or  i^ovn-'iat 
VTTfpTepai  (Rom.  xiii.  1,  3) — and  would  be  com- 
municated to  all  military  officers  in  command  of 
detached  posts,  such  as  the  centurion  at  Capernaum, 
who  describes  himself  as  possessing  summary  powers 
of  this  kind  because  he  was  vir'  i^ovala,  covered  by 
the  privilege  of  the  imperium  (aiatt.  v'iii.  9j.  The 
forced  purveyances  (Matt.  v.  40),  the  requisitions 
for  baggage  animals  (Matt.  y.  41),  the  summary 
punishments  following  transgression  of  orders 
(Matt.  V.  39)  incident  to  a  military  occupation  of 
the  country,  of  course  must  have  been  a  peipetual 
source  of  irritation  to  the  peasantry  along  the  lines 
of  the  military  roads,  even  when  the  despotic  au- 
thority of  the  Roman  officers  might  be  exercised 
with  moderation.  But  such  a  state  of  things  also 
afforded  constant  opportunities  to  an  unprincipled 
soldier  to  extort  money  under  the  pi-etence  of  a 
loan,  as  the  price  of  exemption  from  personal  services 
which  he  was  competent  to  insist  upon,  or  as  a  bribe 
to  buy  oH'  the  prosecution  of  some  vexatious  charge 
before  a  military  tribunal  (Matt.  v.  42 :  Luke 
iii.  14). 

The  relations  of  the  military  to  the  civil  autho- 
rities in  Jerusalem  come  out  very  clearly  from  the 
history  of  theCrucitixion.  When  Judas  first  makes 
his  proposition  to  betray  Jesus  to  the  chief  priests, 
a  conference  is  held  between  them  and  the  <TTpa- 
rriyol  as  to  the  mode  of  effecting  the  object  (Luke 
xxii.  4).  The  plan  involved  the  assemblage  of  a 
large  number  of  the  Jews  by  night,  and  Roman 
jealousy  forbad  such  a  thing,  except  under  the  sur- 
veillance of  a  militaiy  officer.  An  arrangement 
was  accordingly  made  for  a  military  force,  which 
would  naturally  be  drawn  from  the  Antonia.  At 
the  appointed  hour  Judas  comes  and  takes  with 
him  "the  troops," »  together  with  a  number  of 
police  (uir7j/>€TOs)  under  the  orders  of  the  high- 
priest^  and  Pharisees  (John  xviii.  3).  When  the 
apprehension  of  Jesus  takes  place,  however,  there 
is  scarcely  any  reference  to  the  presence  of  the  mili- 
tary. Matthew  ami  Mark  altogether  ignore  their 
taking  any  part  in  the  proceeding.  FromSt.  Luke's 
account  one  is  led  to  suppose  that  the  military 
commander  posted  his  men  outside  the  garden,  and 
entered  himself  with  the  Jewish  authorities  (xxii. 
52).  This  is  exactly  what  might  be  exjiected  under 
the  circumstances.  It  was  the  business  of  the 
Jewish  authorities  to  apprehend  a  Jewish  offender, 
and  of  the  Roman  officer  to  take  care  that  the  pro- 
ceeding led  to  no  breach  of  the  public  peace.  But 
when  apprehended,  the  Roman  officer  became  re- 
sponsible for  the  custody  of  the  offender,  and  accord- 
ingly he  woidd  at  once  chain  him  by  the  wrists  to 
two  soldiers  (Acts  xxi.  33)  and  auTj  him  off'.  Here 
St.  John  accordingly  gives  another  glimpse  of  the 
presence  of  the  military: — "the  trcojis  then,  and 
the  chiliarch  and  the  officers  of  the  Jews  apprehended 
Jesus,  and  pnt  him  in  hoiuls  and  led  him  away,  first 
of  all  to  Annas"  (xviii.  12).     The  insults  which 


»  Called  rrji'  trnelpav,  although  of  course  only  a  detach- 
ment from  the  cohort. 


PRAETORIUM 

St.  Luke  mentions  (xxii.  63),  are  apparently  the 
barbarous  sport  of  the  ruffianly  soldiers  and  police 
while  v^aiting  with  their  prisoner  for  the  assembling 
of  the  Sanliedrim  in  the  hall  of  Caiaphas  ;  but  the 
blows  inflicted  are  those  with  the  vine-stick,  which 
the  centurions  carried,  and  with  which  they  struck 
the  soldiers  on  the  head  and  face  (Juvenal,  Sat. 
viii.  247),  not  a  flagellation  ly  the  hands  of  lictors. 

When  Jesus  was  condemned  by  the  Sanhedrim 
and  accordingly  sent  to  Pilate,  the  Jewish  officials 
certainly  expected  that  no  enquiry  would  be  made 
into  the  merits  of  the  oise,  but  that  Jesus  would  be 
simply  received  as  a  convict  on  the  authority  of  his 
own  countrynripn's  tribunal,  thrown  into  a  dungeon, 
and  on  the  first  convenient  opportunity  executed. 
They  are  obviously  surprised  at  the  question,  "  What 
accusation  bring  ye  against  this  man?"  and  at  the 
apparition  of  the  governor  himself  outside  the  pre- 
cinct of  the  praetorium.  The  cheapness  in  w'hich 
he  had  held  the  life  of  the  native  population  on  a 
fonner  occasion  (Luke  xiii.  1),  must  have  led  them 
to  expect  a  totally  different  course  from  him.  His 
scrupulosity,  most  extraordinary  in  any  Roman, 
stands  in  striking  contrast  with  the  recklessness  of 
the  commander  who  proceeded  at  once  to  put  St. 
Paul  to  torture,  simply  to  ascertain  why  it  was 
that  so  violent  an  attack  was  made  on  him  by  the 
crowd  (Acts  xxii.  24).  Yet  this  latter  is  undoubt- 
edly a  typical  specimen  of  the  feeling  which  pre- 
vailed among  the  conquerors  of  Judaea  in  reference 
to  the  conquered.  The  ordering  the  execution  of  a 
native  criminal  would  in  ninety-nine  instances  out 
of  a  hundred,  have  been  regarded  by  a  Roman  mag- 
nate as  a  simply  ministerial  act, — one  which  indeed 
only  he  was  competent  to  perform,  but  of  which 
the  performance  was  unworthy  of  a  second  thought. 
It  is  probable  that  the  hesitation  of  Pilate  was 
due  rather  to  a  superstitious  fear  of  his  wife's 
dream,  than  to  a  sense  of  justice  or  a  feefing  of 
humanity  towards  an  individual  of  a  despised  race  ; 
at  any  rate  such  an  explanation  is  more  in  accord- 
ance with  what  we  know  of  the  feeling  prevalent 
among  his  class  in  that  age. 

When  at  last  Pilate's  effort  to  save  Jesus  was 
defeated  by  the  detei-mination  of  the  Jews  to  claim 
Barabbas,  and  he  had  testified,  by  washing  his 
hands  in  the  presence  of  the  people,  that  he  did  not 
consent  to  the  judgment  passed  on  the  prisoner  by 
the  Sanhedrim,  but  must  be  regarded  as  performing 
a  merely  ministerial  act, — he  proceeds  at  once  to 
the  formal  infliction  of  the  appropriate  penalty. 
His  lictors  take  Jesus  and  uiflict  the  punishment 
of  scourging  upon  Him  in  the  presence  of  all  ( Matt, 
xxvii.  2(3).  This,  in  the  Roman  idea,  was  the  neces- 
sary preliminary  to  aipital  punishment,  and  had 
Jesus  not  been  an  alien,  his  head  would  have  been 
struck  off  by  the  lictors  immediately  afterwards. 
But  crucifixion  being  the  customary  punishment  in 
that  case,  a  different  course  becoines  necessar3^ 
The  execution  must  take  place  by  the  hands  of  the 
military,  and  Jesus  is  handed  over  from  the  lictors 
to  these.  They  t<ike  Him  into  the  praetorium,  and 
muster  the  u-hole  cohort — not  merely  that  portion 
which  is  on  duty  at  the  time  (Matt,  x.xvii.  27  ; 
Mark  xv.  16).  While  a  centurion's  guard  is  being 
told  off'  for  the  purpose  of  executing  Jesus  and  the 
two  criminals,  the  rest  of  the  soldiers  divert  them- 
selves in  mocking  the  reputed  King  of  the  Jews 
(Matt,  xxvii.  28-30;  Mark  xv.  17-19;  John  xix. 
2-3),  Pilate,  who  in  the  meantime  has  gone  in, 
being  probably  a  witness  of  the  pitiable  spectacle. 
His  wife's  dream  still  haunts  him,  and  although  he 


TRAETORIUM 

]vAS  already  delivered  Jesus  over  to  execution,  and 
what  is  taiving  place  is  merely  the  ordinary  course,'' 
he  comes  out  again  to  the  people  to  protest  that  /le 
is  passive  in  the  matter,  and  that  thei/  must  take 
the  prisoner,  there  before  their  eyes  in  the  garb  of 
moclvery,  and  crucify  Him  (John  xix.  4-6).  On 
their  reply  that  Jesus  had  asserted  Himself  to  be 
the  Son  of  God,  Pilate's  fears  are  still  more  roused, 
and  at  last  he  is  only  induced  to  go  on  with  the 
militarij  execution,  fur  which  he  is  himself  respon- 
sible, by  the  threat  of  a  charge  of  treason  against 
Caesar  in  the  event  of  his  not  doing  so  (John  xix. 
7-1;-!).  Sitting  then  solemnly  on  the  bema,  and  pro- 
ducing Jesus,  who  in  the  meantime  has  had  His  own 
clothes  put  upon  Him,  he  formally  delivers  Him  up 
to  be  crucified  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it 
appear  that  he  is  acting  solely  in  the  discharge  of 
his  duty  to  the  emperor  (Joim  xix.  13-16). 

The  centurion's  guard  now  proceed  with  the  pri- 
soners to  Golgotha,  Jesus  himself  carrying  the  cross- 
piece  of  wood  to  which  His  hands  were  to  be  nailed. 
Weak  from  loss  of  blood,  the  result  of  the  scourging. 
He  is  unable   to  proceed ;    but  just   as   they  are 
leaving  the  gate  they  meet  Simon   the  Cyrenian, 
and    at   once    use   the   militaiy   right   of  pressing 
{ayyap^veiv)  him  for  the  public  service.     Arrived 
at  the  spot,  four  soldiers  are  told  oft'  for  the  business 
of   the    executioner,    the    remainder    keeping    the 
ground.    Two  would  be  required  to  hold  the  hands, 
and  a  third  the  feet,  while  the  fouith  drove  in  the 
nails.     Hence  the  distribution  of  the  garments  into 
four  parts.     The  centurion  in  command,  the  prin- 
cipal Jewish  officials  and  their  acquaintance  (hence 
probably  St.  John  xviii.  15),  and  the  nearest  rela- 
tions of  Jesus  (John  xix.  26,  27),  might  naturally 
be  admitted  within  the  cordon — a  square  of  perhaps 
loo  yards.     The  people  would  be  kept  outside  of 
this,  but  the  distance  would  not  be  too  great  to 
read  the  title,  "  Jesus  the  Nazarene,  the  King  of  the 
Jews,"  or  at  any  rate  to  gather  its  general  meaning.'^ 
■  The  whole  acquaintance  of  Jesus,  and  the  women 
who  had  followed   Him   from  Galilee — too  much 
aHlicted  to  mix  with  the  crowd  in  the  immediate 
vicinity,   and  too    numerous   to   obtain    admission 
inside  the  cordon — looked  on  from  a  distance  (airb 
fiaKpidiv^,  <loubtless  from  the  hill  on  the  other  side 
of  the  valley  of  Kedron — a  distance  of  not  more 
than  600  or  700  yards,  according  to  Mr.  Fergusson's 
view  of  the  site  of  Golgotha."*    The  vessel  containing 
vinegar  (John  xix.  29)  was  set  within  the  cordon 
for  the  beneKt  of  the  soldiers,  whose  duty  it  was  to 
remain  under  arms  (Matt,  .\xvii.  36)  until  the  death 
of  tlie  prisoners,  the  centurion  in  command  being 
responsible  for  their  not  being  taken  down  alive. 
Had  the  .Jews  not  been  anxious  for  the  removal  of 
the  bodies,  in  order  not  to  shock  the  eyes  of  the 
people  coming  in  from  the  country  on  the  following 
<lay,  Ihe  troops  would  have  been  relieved  at  the  end 
of  their  watch,  and  their  place  supplied  by  others 
until  death  took  place.     The  jealousy  with  which 
any  interference  with  the  regular  course  of  a  mili- 
taiy execution  was  rcgardetl  appears  from  the  ap- 
jilication  of  the  Jews  to  Pilate — not  to  the  centu- 
rion— to  have  the  prisoners  dispatched  by  breaking 


PEAYER 


911 


'"  Herod's  guard  had  pursued  precisely  the  same  brutal 
conduct  Just  before. 

c  Tbe  latter  supposition  is  perhaps  the  more  correct,  as 
the  four  Kvangellstii  give  four  different  forms. 

<i  The  two  first  Evangelists  name  Mary  Magdalen  anions' 
these  women  (Matt,  xxvii.  56;  Mark  xv.  4u).  St.  John 
names  hor,  togolher  with  the  Lonl's  mother,  and  Mary 
t'lopas,  iis  at  the  side  of  the  cross. 


their  legs.  For  the  jjerformance  of  this  duty  other 
soldiers  were  dispatched  (xix.  32),  not  merely  per- 
mission given  to  the  Jews  to  have  the  operation 
performed.  Even  for  the  watching  of  the  sepulchre 
recourse  is  had  to  Pilate,  who  bids  the  applicants 
"  take  a  guard  "  (Matt.  xx.vii.  65),  which  they  do, 
and  put  a  seal  on  the  stone  in  the  presence  of  the 
soldiers,  in  a  way  exactly  analogous  to  that  prac- 
tised in  the  custody  of  the  sacred  robes  of  the  high- 
priest  in  the  Antonia  f  Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  1 1 ,  §4). 

The  Praetorian  camp  at  Rome,  to  which  St.  Paul 
refers  (Phil.  i.  13),  was  erected  by  the  Emperor 
Tiberius,  acting  imder  the  advice  of  Sejaims.  Before 
that  time  the  guards  weie  billetted  in  different 
parts  of  the  city.  It  stood  outside  the  walls,  at 
some  distance  short  of  the  fourth  milestone,  and  so  . 
near  either  to  the  Salarian  or  the  Nomentane  road, 
that  Nero,  in  his  flight  by  one  or  the  other  of  them 
to  the  house  of  his  freedman  Phaon,  which  was 
situated  between  the  two,  heard  the  cheers  of  the 
soldiers  within  for  Galba.  In  the  time  of  Vespasian 
the  houses  seem  to  have  extended  so  far  as  to  reach 
it  (Tacitus,  Annul,  iv.  2 ;  Suetonius,  Tib.  37, 
Neron.  48;  Plin.  H.  N.  iii.  5).  From  the  first, 
buildings  must  have  sprung  up  near  it  for  sutlers 
and  others.  St.  Paul  appears  to  have  been  per- 
mitted for  the  space  of  two  years  to  lodge,  so  to 
speak,  "within  the  rules"  of  the  Praetorium  (Acts 
xxviii.  30),  although  still  under  the  custody  of  a 
soldier.  [J.  W.B.] 

PRAYER.  The  words  generally  used  in  the  O.T. 
are  \\IT\T\  (from  root  \yn,  "  to  incline,"  "  to  be 
gracious,''  whence  in  Hithp.  "to  entreat  gi-ace  or 
mercy"):  LXX.  (generally),  Se-naris  :  yi\]g.depre- 
catio:  and  n^QFl  (from  root  775,  "  to  judge," 
whence  in  Hithp.  "to  seek  judgment"):  LXX. 
Tzpoaevxh  •  Vulg.  oratio.  The  latter  is  used  to 
ex-press  intercessory  prayer.  The  two  words  point 
to  the  two  chief  objects  sought  in  prayer,  viz.  the 
prevalence  of  right  and  truth,  and  the  gift  of  mercy. 
The  object  of  this  article  will  be  to  touch  briefly 
on  (1)  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  as  to  the  nature 
and  efficacy  of  prayer  ;  (2)  its  directions  as  to  time, 
place,  and  manner  of  prayer ;  (3)  its  types  and 
examples  of  prayer. 

(1.)  Scripture  does  not  give  any  theoretical  ex- 
planation of  the  mystery  which  attaches  to  prayer. 
The  difficulty  of  understanding  its  real  efficacy  arises 
chiefly  from  two  sources:  from  the  belief  that  man 
lives  under  general  laws,  which  in  all  cases  must 
be  fulfilled  unalterably;  and  the  opposing  belief 
that  he  is  master  of  his  own  destiny,  and  need  pray 
for  no  external  blessing.  The  first  difficulty  is  even 
increased  when  we  substitute  the  belief  in  a  Per- 
sdnal  God  for  the  sense  of  an  Impersonal  Destiny; 
since  not  only  does  the  predestination  of  (iod  seem 
to  render  prayer  useless,  but  His  wisdom  and  love, 
giving  freely  to  man  all  that  is  good  for  liim,  appear 
to  make  it  needless. 

The  difficulty  is  familiar  to  all  philosophy,  the 
former  element  being  tar  the  more  important:  the 
logical  inference  from  it  is  the  belief  in  the  absolute 
us^lessness  of  prayer."     But  the  universal  instinct 

»  See  the  well-known  lines : — 

"  Permutes  ipsis  expcndcre  Numinibus,  quid 
Conveniat  nobis,  rebustiue  sit  utile  nostrls. 
Carior  est  Wis  homo  quam  sibi." 

Juv.  Sat.  X.  346-3J9. 

And  the  older  quotation,  referred  to  by  Plato  {Ak.  li. 
p.  151):- 


912 


PRAYER 


of  prayer,  being  too  strong  for  •  such  reasoning, 
generally  exacted  as  a  compromise  the  use  of  prayer 
for  good  in  the  abstract  (the  "  mens  sana  in  corpore 
sano  ")  ;  a  compromise  theoretically  liable  to  the 
same  difficulties,  but  wholesome  in  its  practical 
effect.  A  far  more  dangerous  compromise  was  that 
adopted  by  some  philosophers,  rather  than  by  man- 
kind at  large,  which  separated  internal  spiritual 
growth  from  the  external  circumstances  which  give 
scope  thereto,  and  claimed  the  former  as  belonging 
entirely  to  man,  while  allowing  the  latter  to  be  gifts 
of  the  gods,  and  therefore  to  be  Ht  objects  of  prayer.'' 

The  most  obvious  escape  from  these  difficulties  is 
to  fall  back  on  the  mere  subjective  effect  of  prayer, 
and  to  suppose  that  its  only  object  is  to  produce  on 
the  mind  that  consciousness  of  dependence  which 
leads  to  faith,  and  that  sense  of  God's  protection 
and  mercy  which  fosters  love.  These  being  the 
conditions  of  receiving,  or  at  least  of  rightly  entering 
into,  God's  blessings,  it  is  thought  that  in  its  en- 
couragement of  them  all  the  use  and  efficacy  of 
prayer  consist. 

Now  Scripture,  while,  by  the  doctrine  of  spiiitual 
influence,  it  entirely  disposes  of  the  latter  difficulty, 
does  not  so  entirely  solve  that  part  of  the  mystery 
which  depends  on  the  nature  of  God.  It  places  it 
clearly  before  us,  and  emphasizes  most  strongly 
those  doctrines'  on  which  the  difficulty  turns.  The 
reference  of  all  events  and  actions  to  the  will  or 
permission  of  God,  and  of  all  blessings  to  His  free 
gi'ace,  is  indeed  the  leading  idea  of  all  its  parts, 
historical,  prophetic,  and  doctrinal ;  and  this  general 
idea  is  expressly  dwelt  upon  in  its  application  to 
the  subject  of  prayer.  The  principle  that  our 
"  Heavenly  Father  knoweth  what  things  we  have 
need  of  before  we  ask  Him,"  is  not  only  enunciated 
in  plain  terms  by  our  Lord,  but  is  at  all  times 
implied  in  the  very  form  and  nature  of  all  Scrip- 
tural prayers ;  and  moreover,  the  ignorance  of  man, 
who  "  knows  not  what  to  pray  for  as  he  ought," 
and  his  consequent  need  of  the  Divine  guidance  in 
prayer,  are  dwelt  upon  with  equal  earnestness. 
Yet,  while  this  is  so,  on  the  other  hand  the  instinct 
of  prayei;  is  solemnly  sanctioned  and  enforced  in 
eveiy  page.  Not  only  is  its  subjective  effect  as- 
.serted,  but  its  real  objective  efficacy,  as  a  means 
appointed  by  God  for  obtaining  blessing,  is  both 
implied  and  expressed  in  the  plainest  terms.  As 
we  are  bidden  to  pray  for  general  spiritual  blessings, 
in  which  instance  it  might  seem  as  if  prayer  were 
simply  a  means  of  preparing  the  heart,  and  so 
making  it  capable  of  receiving  them  ;  so  also  are 
we  encouraged  to  ask  special  blessings,  both  spi- 
ritual and  temporal,  in  hope  that  thus  (and  thus 
only)  we  may  obtain  them,  and  to  use  intercession 
for  others,  equally  special  and  confident,  in  trust 
that  an  effect,  which  in  this  case  cannot  possibly 
be  subjective  to  ourselves,  will  be  granted  to  our 
players.  The  command  is  enforced  by  direct  pro- 
mises, such  as  that  in  the  Ijermon  on  the  Mount 
(Matt.  vii.  7,  8),  of  the  clearest  and  most  com- 
prehensive character  ;  by  the  example  of  all  saints 
and  of  our  Lord  Himself;  and  by  historical  records 
of  such  efl'ect  as  granted  to  prayer  again  and  again. 

Thus,  as  usual  in  the  case  of  such  mysteries,  the 
two  apparently  opposite  truths  are  emphasized,  be- 
cause they  are  needful  to  man's  conception  of  his 
relation  to  God ;  their  reconcilement  is  not,  perhaps 


Zev  (SacriAeO,  to.  ij.ev  icr9\a  Kai  eiixofieVois  Kal 

avevKTOis 
'Aji/ui  SCSoV  Ta  Si  Scwa  Kal  eu;<Ofxe'i'Ois  arraAefc 


PRAYER 

cannot  be,  fully  revealed.  For,  in  fact,  it  is  involved 
in  that  inscrutable  mystery  which  attends  on  the 
conception  of  any  free  action  of  man  as  necessary  for 
the  working  out  of  the  general  laws  of  God's  un- 
changeable will. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  clearly  implied  that  such 
a  reconcilement  exists,  and  that  all  the  apparently 
isolated  and  independent  exertions  of  man's  spirit  in 
prayer  are  in  some  way  perfectly  subordinated  to 
the  One  supreme  will  of  God,  so  as  to  form  a  part  of 
His  scheme  of  Providence.  This  follows  from  the 
condition,  expressed  or  understood  in  every  prayer, 
"  Not  my  will,  but  Thine  be  done."  It  is  seen  in 
the  distinction  between  the  granting  of  our  peti- 
tions (which  is  not  absolutely  promised),  and  the 
certain  answer  of  blessing  to  all  faithful  prayer  ; 
a  distinction  exemphfied  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul's 
prayer  against  the  "  thorn  in  the  flesh,"  and  of  our 
Lord's  own  agony  in  Gethsemane.  It  is  distinctly 
enunciated  by  St.  John  (1  John  v.  14,  15) :  "  If  we 
ask  any  thing  according  to  His  will,  He  heareth  ns  : 
and  if  we  know  that  He  hear  us,  whatsoever  we 
ask,  we  know  that  we  have  the  petitions  that  we 
desired  of  Him." 

It  is  also  implied  that  the  key  to  the  mystery 
lies  in  the  fact  of  man's  spiritual  unity  with  God 
in  Christ,  and  of  the  consequent  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  All  true  and  prevailing  prayer  is  to  be 
offered  "in  the  name  of  Christ"  (John  xiv.  13, 
XV.  16,  xvi.  23-27),  that  is,  not  only  for  the  sake 
of  His  Atonement,  but  also  in  dependence  on  His 
Intercession ;  which  is  therefoie  as  a  central  influ- 
ence, acting  on  all  prayers  offered,  to  throw  off 
whatever  in  them  is  evil,  and  give  efficacy  to  all 
that  is  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  will.  So  also 
is  it  said  of  the  spiritual  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
on  each  individual  mind,  that  while  "  we  know  not 
what  to  pray  for,"  the  indwelling  "  Spirit  makes 
intercession  for  the  saints,  according  to  the  will  of 
God"  (Rom.  viii.  26,  27).  Here,  as  probably  in 
all  other  cases,  the  action  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  ' 
soul  is  to  free  agents,  what  the  laws  of  nature  are 
to  things  inanimate,  and  is  the  power  which  har- 
monises free  individual  action  with  the  universal 
will  of  God.  The  mystery  of  prayer  therefore,  like 
all  others,  is  seen  to  be  resolved  into  that  great 
central  mystery  of  the  Gospel,  the  communion  of 
man  with  God  in  the  Incarnation  of  Christ.  Beyond 
this  we  cannot  go. 

(2.)  There  are  no  directions  as  to  pi-ayer  given 
in  the  Mosaic  law :  the  duty  is  rather  taken  for 
granted,  as  an  adjunct  to  sacrifice,  than  enforced  or 
elaboi-ated.  The  Temple  is  emphatically  designated 
as  "  the  House  of  Prayer  "  (Is.  Ivi.  7)  ;  it  could  not 
be  otherwise,  if  "  He  who  hears  prayer "  (Ps.  Ixv. 
2)  there  manifested  His  special  Presence ;  and  the 
prayer  of  Solomon  offered  at  its  consecration  (1  K. 
viii.  30,  35,  38)  implies  that  in  it  were  offered, 
both  the  private  prayers  of  each  single  man,  and 
the  public  prayers  of  all  Israel. 

It  is  hardly  conceivable  that,  even  from  the  be- 
ginning, public  prayer  did  not  follow  every  public 
sacrifice,  whether  propitiatory  or  euchaiistic,  as 
regularly  as  the  incense,  which  was  the  symbol  of 
prayer  (see  Ps.  cxli.  2  ;  Rev.  viii.  3,  4).  Such  a 
practice  is  alluded  to  as  common,  in  Luke  i.  10; 
and  in  one  instance,  at  the  offering  of  the  first- 
fruits,  it  was  ordained  in  a  striking  form  (Dent. 


^  "  Sed  satis  est  orare  Jovem,  quae  donat  et  aufert, 
Defvitam,  detopes;  aequum  ml  animum  ipse  parabo." 
HoR.  J<5).  i.  xviii.  Ill ;  conip.  Cic.  De  Nat.  Dear.  iii.  36. 


PRAYER 

xxvi.  12-15).  In  later  times  it  certainly  grew  into 
a  regular  service,  both  in  the  Temple  and  in  the 
Synagogue. 

But,  besides  this  public  prayer,  it  was  the  custom 
of  all  at  Jerusalem  to  go  up  to  the  Temple,  at  re- 
gular hours  if  possible,  for  private  prayer  (see  Lulce 
xviii.  10  ;  Acts  iii.  1)  ;  and  those  who  were  absent 
were  wont  to  "  open  their  windows  towards  Jeru- 
salem," and  pray  "  towards  "  the  place  of  God's 
Presence  (1  K.  viii.  46-49  ;  Dau.  vi.  10  ;  Vs.  v.  7, 
xxviii.  2 ;  cxxxviii.  2j.  The  desire  to  do  this  was 
possibly  one  reason,  independently  of  other  and 
more  obvious  ones,  why  the  house-top  or  the 
mountain-top  were  chosen  places  of  private  prayer. 

The  regular  hours  of  prayer  seem  to  have  been 
three  (see  Ps.lv.  17;  Dan.  vi.  10),  "  the  evening," 
that  is,  the  ninth  hour  (Acts  iii.  1,  x.  3),  the  hour 
of  the  evening  sacrifice  (Dan.  ix.  21);  the  "morn- 
ing," that  is,  the  third  hour  (Acts  ii.  15),  that  of 
the  morning  sacrifice ;  and  the  sixth  hour,  or  "  noon- 
day." To  these  would  naturally  be  added  some 
prayer  at  rising  and  lying  down  to  sleep ;  and 
thence  might  easily  be  developed  (by  the  love  of 
the  mystic  number  seven),  the  "  seven  times  a  day  " 
of  Ps.  cxix.  164,  if  this  is  to  be  literally  understood, 
and  the  seven  hours  of  prayer  of  the  ancient  Church. 
Some  at  least  of  these  hours  seem  to  have  been  ge- 
nerally observed- by  religious  men  in  private  piayer 
at  home,  or  in  the  midst  of  their  occupation  and  in 
the  streets  (Matt.  vi.  5).  Grace  before  meat  would 
seem  to  have  been  au  equally  common  practice  (see 
Matt.  XV.  36  ;  Acts  xxvii.  35). 

The  posture  ol'  pi'ayer  among  the  Jews  seems  to 
have  been  most  often  standing  (1  Sam.  i.  26  ;  Matt. 
vi.  5;  Mark  .xi.  25;  Luke  xviii.  11);  unless  the 
prayer  were  offered  with  especial  solemnity,  and 
humiliation,  which  was  naturally  expressed  by 
kneeling  (1  K.  viii.  54;  comp.  2  Chr.  vi.  13  ;  Ezr. 
ix.  5;  Ps.  xcv.  6;  Dan.  vi.  10);  or  prostration 
(Josh.  vii.  6  ;  1  K.  xviii.  42  ;  Neh.  viii.  6).  The 
hands  were  "lifted  up,"  or  "spread  out"  before 
the  Lord  (Ps.  xxviii.  2,  c.xxxiv.  2 ;  Ex.  ix.  33, 
&c.  &c.)  In  the  Christian  Church  no  posture  is 
mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  excepting  that  of  kneeling  ; 
see  Acts  vii.  60  (St.  Stephen)  ;  ix.  40  (St.  Peter)  ; 
XX.  36,  xxi.  5  (St.  Paul);  pei'haps  from  imitation  of 
the  e.xample  of  oin-  Lord  in  Gethsemane  (on  which 
^ccasion  alone  His  posture  in  prayer  is  recorded). 
In  after-times,  as  is  well  known,  this  posture  was 
varied  by  the  custom  of  standing  in  prayer  on  the 
Lord's-day,  and  during  tiie  period  from  Easter  to 
Whit-Sunday,  in  order  to  commemorate  His  resur- 
rection, and  our  spiritual  resurrection  in  Him. 

(3.)  The  only  P'omi  of  Prayer  given  for  per- 
petual use  in  the  0.  T.  is  the  one  in  Dent.  xxvi. 
5-15,  connet'ted  with  the  offering  of  tithes  and  first- 
fruits,  and  containing  in  simjtle  form  the  important 
elements  of  prayer,  acknowledgment  of  God's  mercy, 
self-dedication,  and  prayer  i'or  future  blessing.  To 
this  may  ])erhaps  be  added  the  threefold  blessing  of 
Num.  vi.  24-26,  couched  as  it  is  in  a  precatory 
form  ;  and  the  short  prayers  of  Moses  (Num.  x.  35, 
36)  at  the  moving  and  resting  of  the  cloud,  the 
former  of  which  was  the  germ  of  the  68th  Psalm. 

Indeed  the  forms  given,  evidently  with  a  view  to 
preservation  and  constant  use,  are  rather  hymns  or 
songs  than  prayers  properly  so  called,  although  they 
often  contain  supplication.  Scattered  through  the 
historical  books,  we  have  the  Song  of  .Moses,  tawiht 
to  the  children  of  Israel  (I)eut.  x.\.\ii.  1-43)  ;  his 
less  importuit  songs  after  the  passage  of  the  Ited 
Sea  (Ex.  xv.  1-19)  and  at  the  springing  out  of  the 

VOL.  II. 


PRAYER 


913 


water  (Num.  xxi.  17,  18);  the  Song  of  Deborah 
and  Barak  (Judg.  v.)  ;  the  Song  of  Hannah  in  1  Sam. 
ii.  1-10  (the  effect  of  which  is  seen  by  reference  to 
the  Magnificat; ;  and  the  Song  of  David  (Ps. 
xviii.),  singled  out  in  2  Sam.  xxii.  But  after 
David's  time,  the  existence  and  use  of  the  Psalms, 
and  the  poetical  form  of  the  Prophetic  books,  and 
of  the  prayers  which  tliey  contain,  must  have  tended 
to  fix  this  Psalmic  character  on  all  Jewish  prayer. 
The  effect  is  seen  plainly  in  the  form  of  Hezekiah's 
prayers  in  2  K.  xix.  15-19  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  9-20. 

But  of  the  prayers  recorded  in  the  0.  T.,  the 
two  most  remarkable  are  those  of  Solomon  at  the 
dedication  of  the  Temple  (1  K.  viii.  23-53J,  and  of 
Joshua  the  high-priest,  and  his  colleagues,  alter  the 
captivity  (Neh.  ix.  5-38).*  The  former  is  a  prayer 
for  God's  presence  with  His  people  in  time  of  na- 
tional defeat  (vers.  33,  34),  famine  or  pestilence 
(35-37),  war  (44,  45),  and  captivity  (46-50),  and 
with  each  individual  Jew  and  stranger  (41-43)  who 
may  worship  in  the  Temple.  The  latter  contains  a 
recital  of  all  God's  blessings  to  the  childien  of  Israel 
from  Abraham  to  the  captivity,  a  confession  of  their 
continual  sins,  and  a  fresh  dedication  of  themselves 
to  the  Covenant.  It  is  clear  that  both  are  likely 
to  have  exercised  a  sti-ong  liturgical  influence,  and 
accordingly  we  find  that  the  public  prayer  in  the 
Temple,  already  referred  to,  had  in  our  Lord's  time 
grown  into  a  kind  of  liturgy.  Before  and  during 
the  sacrifice  there  was  a  prayer  that  God  would 
put  it  into  their  hearts  to  love  and  fear  Him  ;  then 
a  repeating  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  of  the 
passages  written  on  their  phylacteries  [Front- 
lets] ;  next  three  or  four  prayers,  and  ascrip- 
tions of  glory  to  God  ;  and  the  blessing  from  Num. 
vi.  24-26,  "  The  Lord  bless  thee,"  &c.,  closed  this 
service.  Afterwards,  at  the  offering  of  the  meat- 
offering, there  followed  the  singing  of  psalms,  regu- 
larly fixed  for  each  day  of  the  week,  or  sjiecially 
appointed  for  the  great  festivals  (see  Bingham,  b. 
xiii.  ch.  V.  sect.  4).  A  somewhat  similar  liturgy 
fomied  a  regular  part  of  the  Synagogue  worship,  in 
which  there  was  a  regular  minister,  as  the  leader  of 

prayer  ("l-IS-'ifn    W?^,  "  legatus  ecclesiae")  ;  and 

public  prayer,as  well  as  private,  was  the  special  object 
of  the  Proseuchae.  It  appears  also,  from  the  question 
of  the  disciples  in  Luke  xi.  1,  and  from  Jewish  tra- 
dition, that  the  chief  teachers  of  the  day  gave  special 
forms  of  prayer  to  their  disciples,  as  the  badge  of 
their  discipleship  and  the  best  fruits  of  their  learning. 
All  Christian  prayer  is,  of  course,  based  on  the 
Lord's  Prayer ;  but  its  spirit  is  also  guided  by  that 
of  His  prayer  in  Gethsemane,  and  of  the  piayer 
recorded  by  St.  John  (ch.  xvii.),  the  beginning  of 
His  gi'oat  work  of  intercession.  The  first  is  the 
comprehensive  type  of  the  simplest  and  most  uni- 
versal prayer;  the  second  justifies  prayers  for  special 
blessings  of  this  life,  while  it  limits  them  by  perfect 
resignation  to  God's  will ;  the  last,  dwelling  as  it 
does  on  the  knowledge  and  glorification  of  (iod, 
and  the  communion  of  man  with  Him,  as  the  one 
object  of  prayer  and  life,  is  the  type  of  the  iiighest 
and  most  spiritual  devotion.  T/ie  Lord's  Prayer 
has  given  the  form  and  tone  of  all  oidiiiary  Chris- 
tian praj-er;  it  has  fixed,  as  its  leading  })iiiiciples, 
simplicity  and  confidence  in  Our  Father,  community 
of  sympathy  with  all  men,  and  practical  refeience 
to  our  own  life;  it  has  shown,  as  its  true  objects, 
first  the  glory  of  God,  and  next  the  needs  of  man. 


»  To  these  may  be  added  Dan.  ix.  4-19. 

3  N 


914 


PRESENTS 


To  the  intercessory  prayer,  we  may  trace  up  its 
trausceudental  element,  its  desire  of  that  commu- 
niou  through  love  with  the  nature  of  God,  which  is 
the  secret  of  all  individual  holiness,  and  of  all  com- 
munity with  men. 

The  influence  of  these  prayers  is  more  distinctly 
traced  in  the  prayers  contained  in  the  Epistles  (see 
Eph.  iii.  14-21;  Rom.  xvi.  25-27;  Phil.  i.  3-11  ; 
Col.  i.  9-15  ;  Heb.  .xiii.  20,  21 ;  1  Pet.  v.  10,  11, 
&c.),  than  in  those  recorded  in  the  Acts.  The  public 
prayer,  which  from  the  beginning  became  the  prin- 
ciple of  life  and  unity  in  the  Church  (see  Acts  ii. 
42  ;  and  comp.  i.  24,  25,  iv.  24-30,  vi.  6,  xii.  5, 
-xiii.  2,  3,  .\vi.  25,  xx.  36,  xxi.  5),  although  doubt- 
less always  including  the  Lord's  Prayer,  probably 
iu  the  first  instance  took  much  of  its  form  and  style 
from  the  prayers  of  the  synagogues.  The  only  form 
given  (besides  the  very  short  one  of  Acts  i.  24,  25), 
dwelling  as  it  does  (Acts  iv.  24-30)  on  the  Scrip- 
tures of  the  0.  T.  in  their  application  to  our  Lord, 
seems  to  mark  this  connexion.  It  was  pi'obably  by 
degrees  that  they  assumed  the  distinctively  Chris- 
tian character. 

In  the  record  of  prayers  accepted  and  granted  by 
God,  we  observe,  as  always,  a  special  adaptation  to 
the  period  of  His  dispensation,  to  which  they  belong. 
In  the  patriarchal  period,  thej''  have  the  simple  and 
childlike  tone  of  domestic  supplication  for  the  simple 
and  apparently  trivial  incidents  of  domestic  lite. 
Such  are  the  prayers  of  Abraham  for  children 
(Gen.  XV.  2,  3);  for  Ishmael  (xvii.  18);  of  Isaac 
for  Rebekah  (xxv.  21)  ;  of  Abraham's  servant  in 
Mesopotamia  (xxiv.  12-14)  ;  although  sometimes 
they  take  a  wider  range  in  intercession,  as  with 
Abraham  for  Sodom  (Gen.  xviii.  23-32),  and  for 
Abimelech  (xx.  7,  17).  In  the  Mosaic  period 
they  assume  a  more  solemn  tone  and  a  national 
bearing;  chiefly  that  of  direct  intercession  for  the 
chosen  people;  as  by  Moses  (Num.  xi.  2,  xii.  13, 
xxi.  7);  by  Samuel  (1  Sam.  vii.  5,  xii.  19,  23); 
by  David  (2  Sam.  x.\iv.  17,  18);  by  Hezekiah 
(2  K.  xix.  15-19) ;  by  Isaiah  (2  K.  xix.  4;  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  20);  by  Daniel  (Dan.  ix.  20,  21):  or  of 
prayer  for  national  victorv,  as  by  Asa  (2  Chr. 
xiv.  11);  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr."  xx.  6-12).  More 
rarely  are  they  for  individuals,  as  in  the  prayer  of 
Hannah  (1  Sam.  i.  12)  ;  in  that  of  Hezekiah  in  his 
sickness  (2  K.  xx.  2) ;  the  intercession  of  Samuel 
for  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  11,  35),  &c.  A  special  class 
are  those  which  precede  and  refer  to  the  exercise  of 
miraculous  power;  as  by  Moses  (Ex.  viii.  12,  30, 
XV.  25)  ;  by  Elijah  at  Zarephath  (1  K.  xvii.  20) 
and  Carmel  (1  K.  xviii.  36,  37)  ;  by  Elisha  at 
Shunem  (2  K.  iv.  33)  and  Dothan  (vi.  17,  18); 
by  Isaiah  (2  K.  xx.  11):  by  St.  Peter  for  Tabitha 
(Acts  ix.  40)  ;  by  the  elders  of  the  Church  (James 
V.  14,  15,  16).  In  the  New  Testament  they  have 
a  more  directly  spiritual  bearing ;  such  as  the 
prayer  of  the  Church  for  protection  and  grace 
(Acts  iv.  24-30) ;  of  the  Apostles  for  their  Sa- 
maritan converts  (viii.  15);  of  Cornelius  for  guid- 
ance (x.  4,  31) ;  of  the  Church  for  St.  Peter  (xii. 
5);  of  St.  Paul  at  Philippi  (xvi.  25)  ;  of  St.  Paul 
against  tlie  thorn  iu  the  flesh  answered,  althouCTh 
not  granted  (2  Cor.  xii.  7-9),  kc.  It  would  seem 
the  intention  of  Holy  Scripture  to  encourage  all 
prayer,  more  especially  intercession,  in  all  relations, 
and  for  all  righteous  objects.  [A.  B.] 

PEESENTS.     [Gifts.] 

PRESIDENT.     Sdrac,''  or  Sdrecd,  only  used 


*  "^I^D,  or  N3"1D  ;  TaKTiKos ;  princeps. 


PRIEST 

Dan.  vi.,  theChaldee  equivalent  for  Hebrew  Shoter, 
probably  from  Sara,  Zend,  a  "  head  "  (see  Strabo, 
xi.  p.  331).  'Sapairdpa^  =  Ke<j>a\oT6fios  is  con- 
nected with  the  Sanskrit  siras  or  ^iras,  and  is 
traced  in  Sanjon  and  other  words  (Eichoff,  Vergl. 
Spr.  p.  129,  415;  see  Her.  iii.  89,  where  he  calls 
Satrap  a  Persian  word).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PRIEST    (|ni3,    cohen :     Upeiis  :    sacerdos). 

Name. — It  is  unfortunate  that  there  is  nothing 
like  a  consensus  of  interpreters  as  to  the  etymology 
of  this  word.  Its  root-meaning,  uncert;un  as  tar  as 
Hebrew  itself  is  concerned,  is  referred  by  Gesenius 
( Thesaunis,  s.  v.)  to  the  idea  of  prophecy.  The 
Cohen  delivers  a  divine  message,  stands  as  a  me- 
diator between  God  and  man,  represents  each  to  the 
other.  This  meaning,  however,  belongs  to  the 
Arabic,  not  to  the  Hebrew  form,,  and  Ewald  con- 
nects  the  latter  with  the   verb  |''Dn  {hecin),  to 

array,  put  in  order  (so  in  Is.  Ixi.  10),  seeing  in  it 
a  reference  to  the  primary  office  of  the  priests  as 
arranging  the  sacrifice  on  the  altar  {Alterthiin.  p. 
272).  According  to  Saalschiitz  {Archdol.  dcr  Hehr. 
c.  78),  the  primary  meaning  of  the  word  =  minister, 
and  he  thus  accounts  for  the  wider  application  of 
the  name  {infra).  Bahr  (S[/mholik,  ii.  p.  15)  con- 
nects it  with  an  Arabic  root  =  mp,  to  draw  near. 
Of  these  etymologies,  the  last  has  the  merit  of 
answering  most  closely  to  the  received  usage  of  the 
word.  In  the  precise  terminology  of  the  law,  it  is 
used  of  one  who  may  "  draw  near"  to  the  Divine 
Presence  (Ex.  xix.  22,  xxx.  20)  while  others  remain 
afar  off,  and  is  applied  accordingly,  for  the  most 
part,  to  the  sous  of  Aaron,  as  those  who  were  alone 
authorized  to  offer  sacrifices.  In  some  remarkable 
passages  it  takes  a  wider  range.  It  is  applied  to 
the  priests  of  other  nations  or  religions,  to  Mel- 
chizedek  (Gen.  xiv.  18),  Potipherah  (Gen.  xii.  45), 
Jethro  (Ex.  ii.  16),  to  those  who  discharged  priestly 
functions  in  Israel  before  the  appointment  of  Aaron 
and  his  sons  (Ex.  xix.  22).  A  case  of  greater  diffi- 
culty presents  itself  in  2  Sam.  viii.  18,  where  the 
sons  of  David  are  described  as  priests  {Cohdniin), 
and  this  immediately  after  the  name  had  been 
ajjpliod  in  its  usual  sense  to  the  sons  of  Aaron. 
The  writer  of  1  Chr.  xviii.  17,  as  if  reluctant  to 
adopt  this  use  of  the  title,  or  anxious  to  guard 
against  mistake,  gives  a  paraphrase,  "  the  sons  oL 
David  were  first  at  the  king's  hand"  (A.  V.  "chief 
about  the  king  "  ).  The  LXX.  and  A.  V.  suppress 
the  difficulty,  by  translating  Cohdnhn  into  aiiXdp- 
Xaiy  and  "  chief  officers."  The  Vulgate  more  ho- 
nestly gives  "  sacerdotes."  Luther  and  Coverdale 
follow  the  Hebrew  strictly,  and  give  "  priests.''  The 
received  explanation  is,  that  the  word  is  used  here  in 
what  is  assumed  to  be  its  earlier  and  wider  meaning, 
as  equivalent  to  rulers,  or,  giving  it  a  more  restiicted 
sense,  that  the  sons  of  David  were  Vicarii  Regis  as 
tlie  sons  of  Aaron  were  Vicarii  Dei  (comp.  Patrick, 
Michaelis,  Rosenmiiller,  Hi  loc,  Keil  on  1  Chr.  xviii. 
17).  It  can  hardly  be  said,  however,  that  this  ac- 
counts satisfactorily  for  the  use  of  the  same  title  in 
two  successive  verses  in  two  entirely  different  senses. 
Ewald  accordingly  {Alterthiiin.  p.  276)  sees  in  it 
an  actual  suspension  of  the  usual  law  in  favour  of 
members  of  the  royal  house,  and  finds  a  parallel 
instance  in  the  acts  of  David  (2  Sam.  vi.  14)  and 
Solomon  (1  K.  iii.  15).  De  Wette  and  Gesenius,  in 
like  manner,  look  on  it  as  a  levival  of  the  old 
household  priesthoods.  These  theories  are  in  their 
turn  unsatisfactory,  as  contradicting  the  whole 
spirit    and   policy    of    David's   reign,    which    was 


PRIEST 

throughout  that  of  reverence  for  the  Law  of  Je- 
hovah, and  the  priestly  order  which  it  established. 
A  conjecture  midway  between  these  two  extremes 
is  perhaps  pennissible.  David  and  his  sons  may 
have  been  admitted,  not  to  distinctively  priestly 
acts,  such  as  burning  incense  (Num.  xvi.  40  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  18),  but  to  an  honorary,  titular  priesthood. 
To  wear  the  ephod  in  processions  (2  Sam.  vi.  14), 
at  the  time  when  this  was  the  special  badge  of  the 
order  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  to  join  the  priests  and 
Levites  in  their  songs  and  dances,  might  have  been 
conceded,  with  no  deviation  from  the  law,  to  the 
members  of  the  royal  house."  There  are  some  in- 
dications that  these  functions  (possibly  this  litur- 
gical retirement  from  public  life)  were  the  lot  of 
the  members  of  the  royal  house  who  did  not  come 
into  the  line  of  succession,  and  who  belonged,  by 
descent  or  incorporation,  to  the  house  of  Nathan  as 
distinct  from  that  of  David  (Zech.  xii.  12).  The 
very  name  Nathan,  connected,  as  it  is,  with  Nethi- 
nim,  suggests  the  idea  of  dedication.  [Nethinim.] 
The  title  Cohen  is  given  to  Zabud,  the  son  of 
Nathan  (1  K.  iv.  5).  The  genealogy  of  the  line  of 
Nathan  in  Luke  iii.  includes  many  names — Levi, 
Eliezer,  Malchi,  Jochanan,  Jlattiithias,  Heli — which 
appear  elsewhere  as  belonging  to  the  priesthood. 
The  mention  in  1  Esdr.  v.  5,  of  Joiakim  as  the 
son  of  Zerubbabel,  while  in  Neh.  xii.  10  he  appears 
as  the  son  of  Jeshua,  the  son  of  Josedek,  indicates, 
either  a  strange  confusion  or  a  connexion,  as  yet 
imperfectly  understood,  between  the  two  families.'' 
The  same  explanation  applies  to  the  parallel  cases  of 
Ira  the  Jairite  (2  Sam.  xx.  26),  where  the  LXX. 
gives  lepevs.  It  is  noticeable  that  this  use  of  the 
title  is  confined  to  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solo- 
mon, and  that  the  synonym  "  at  the  king's  hand  " 
of  1  Chr.  xviii.  17  is  used  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  2  of  the 
sons  of  Asaph  as  "  prophesying"  under  their  head 
or  father,  and  of  the  relation  of  Asaph  himself  to 
David  in  the  choral  service  of  the  Temple. 

Oriijin. — The  idea  of  a  priesthood  connects  itself, 
in  all  its  forms,  pure  or  corrupted,  with  the  consci- 
ousness, more  or  less  distinct,  of  ein.  Men  feel  that 
they  have  broken  a  law.  The  power  above  them  is 
liolier  than  they  are,  and  they  dare  not  approach  it. 
They  crave  for  the  intervention  of  some  one  of  wliom 


PRIEST 


915 


"  The  apocrypbal  literature  of  the  N.  T.,  worthless  as 
a  witness  to  a  fact,  may  perhaps  be  received  as  an  indi- 
cation of  the  feeling  which  saw  in  the  house  and  lineage 
of  David  a  kind  of  quasi-sacerdotal  character.  Joseph, 
though  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  is  a  priest  living  in  the 
Temple  {Hist.  Joseph,  c.  2,  in  Tischendorf,  Evang.  Apoc.). 
Tlic  kiiidi-cil  of  Jesus  are  recognized  as  taking  titliesof  the 
\i('i>\\\c  (Kvnwj.  Nirod.  i.  16,  ibid.).  In  wliat  approaches 
mure  nearly  to  history,  James  the  Just,  the  brother  of  the 
Lord,  l.s  admitted  (partly,  it  is  true,  as  a  Nazarite)  into 
the  Holy  Place,  and  wears  the  linen  dress  of  the  priests 
(llegcsipp.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  li.  23).  The  extraordinary 
story  found  in  Suidas,  s.  v.  Trjcrou^,  represents  the  priests 
of  Jenisillem  as  electing  the  "Son  of  Joseph"  to  a  vacant 
office  in  the  priesthood,  on  the  ground  that  the  two  families 
had  been  so  closely  connected,  that  there  was  no  great 
deviation  from  usage  In  ailniltting  one  of  the  lineage  nf 
David  to  the  privileges  of  the  sons  of  Aaron.  Augustine 
was  inclined  to  see  in  this  intermingling  of  tlie  royal  and 
priestly  lines  a  possible  explanation  of  the  apocrjTibal 
traditions  that  the  Mother  of  the  Lord  was  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi  (c.  Faust,  xxili.  9).  The  marriage  of  Aaron  him- 
self with  tiie  sister  of  the  prince  of  .ludah  (Kx.  vii.  2'S), 
that  of  Jehoiada  with  Jchoshabeath  (2  Chr.  xxii.  11),  and 
of  Joseph  with  one  who  was  "cousin"  to  a  daughter  of 
Aaron  (I/Uke  i.  .36),  are  historical  instances  of  this  con- 
nexion. The  statement  of  Eulychius  (=  Sayd  ibn  Batrik), 


they  can  think  as  likely  to  be  more  acceptable  than 
themselves.  He  must  offer  up  their  prayers,  thanks- 
givings, sacrifices.  He  becomes  their  representative 
iu  "  things  pertaining  unto  Ood."  =  He  may  be- 
come also  (though  this  does  not  always  follow)  the 
representative  of  (Jod  to  man.  The  functions  of 
the  priest  and  prophet  may  exist  in  the  same  person. 
The  reverence  which  men  pay  to  one  who  bears 
this  consecrated  character  may  lead  them  to  acknow- 
ledge the  priest  as  being  also  their  king.  The  claim 
to  till  the  office  may  rest  on  characteristics  belong- 
ing only  to  the  individual  man,  or  confined  to  a 
single  family  or  tribe.  The  conditions  of  the  priest- 
hood, the  office  and  influence  of  the  priests,  as 
they  are  among  the  most  conspicuous  facts  of  all 
relig-ions  of  the  ancient  world,  so  do  they  occupv 
a  like  position  in  the  history  of  the  religion  of 
Israel. 

No  trace  of  an  hereditary  or  caste-priesthood 
meets  us  in  the  worship  of  the  patriarchal  age. 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  perform  priestly  acts, 
offer  sacrifices,  "  draw  near"  to  the  Lord  (Gen.  xii. 
8,  xviii.  23,  xxvi.  25,  xxxiii.  20).  To  the  eldest 
son,  or  to  the  favoured  son  exalted  to  the  place  of 
the  eldest,  belongs  the  "goodly  raiment"  (Gen. 
xxvii.  15),  the  "coat  of  many  colours"  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  3),  in  which  we  find  perhaps  the  earliest 
trace  of  a  sacerdotal  vestment ''  (comp.  Bliuit,  Scrip- 
tural Coincid.  i.  1  ;  Ugolini,  xiii.  138).  Once, 
and  once  only,  does  the  word  Cohen  meet  us  as  be- 
longing to  a  ritual  earlier  than  the  time  of  Abraham. 
Melchizedek  is  "  the  priest  of  the  most  high  God  " 
(Gen.  xiv.  18).  The  argument  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  has  an  historical  foundation  in  the  fact 
that  there  are  no  indications  in  the  narrative  of  Gen. 
xiv.  of  any  one  preceding  or  following  him  in  that 
offi(;e.  The  special  Divine  names  which  are  con- 
nected with  him  as  the  priest  of  "  the  most  high 
God,  the  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth,"  render  it 
probable  that  he  rose,  in  the  strength  of  those  great 
thoughts  of  God,  above  the  level  of  the  other  inha- 
bitants of  Canaan.  In  him  Abraham  recognized  a 
faith  like  his  own,  a  life  more  entirely  consecrated, 
the  priestly  character  in  its  perfection  [comp.  Mel- 
chizedek]. In  the  worship  of  the  patriarchs  them- 
selves, the  chief  of  the  family,  as  such,  acted  as  the 


patriarch  of  Alexandria  (Selden,  De  Success.  Pont.  i.  13), 
that  Aristobulus  was  a  priest  of  the  house  of  David,  sug- 
gests a  like  explanation. 

''  Comp.  the  remarkable  passage  in  Augustine,  De  divers. 
Quaest.  Ixi. :  "  A  David  enim  in  duns  familias,  regiam  et 
sacerdotalem,  origo  ilia  distributa  est,  quaruni  duarum  fa- 
miliarum,  sicut  dictum  est,  regiam  descendens  Matthaous, 
sacerdotalem  adscendcns  Lucas  secutus  est,  ut  Domiuus 
nostcr  .Jesus  Christus,  rex  et  sacerdos  nostor,  et  cogna- 
tionem  duccret  de  stirpe  sacerdotal!,  et  non  essct  tamcn 
de  tribu  sacerdotal!."  The  cognatio  he  supposes  to  have 
been  the  marriage  of  Nathan  with  one  of  the  daughters 
of  Aaron. 

e  The  true  Idea  of  the  priesthood,  as  distinct  from  all 
other  ministerial  functions  like  those  of  the  l.cvites,  is 
nowhere  given  more  distinctly  tlian  in  Num.  xvi.  5.  The 
priest  is  Jehovah's,  Is  "  holy,"  is  "  chosen,"  "  draws  near  " 
to  the  Lord.  In  all  these  points  lie  represents  the  ideal 
life  of  the  people  (Ex.  xix.  3-G).  His  highest  act,  that 
which  is  exclusively  sacerdotal  (Num.  xvi.  40 ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  \h),  is  to  offer  the  incense  which  is  the  symbol  of 
the  prayers  of  the  worshippers  (I's.  cxli.  2  ;  Rev.  vili.  3). 

•>  In  this  sacerdotal,  dedicated  character  of  .losepli's 
youth,  we  find  the  simplest  explanation  of  the  words 
which  speak  of  him  as  "  tin?  separated  one,"  "  the  Na- 
zarite"  (Aa^tV),  among  his  brethren  (Gen.  xlix.  26;  Deut 
xxxiii.  16). 

3  N  2 


916 


PKIEST 


priest.  The  office  descended  with  the  birthright,  and 
iTiight  apparently  be  transferred  with  it.  As  tlie 
family  expanded,  the  head  of  each  section  probably 
stood  in  the  same  relation  to  it.  The  thought  of  the 
special  conseci'otion  of  tlie  first-born  was  recognized 
at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (infra).  A  priesthood  of 
a  like  kind  contiijued  to  exist  in  other  Semit'c 
tribes.  The  Book  of  Job,  whatever  may  be  its  date, 
ignores  altogether  the  institutions  of  Israel,  and  re- 
presents the  man  of  Uz  as  himself  "  sanctifying  " 
his  sons,  and  offering  bnrnt-ofi'erings  (Job  i.  5). 
Jethro,  is  a  "  priest  of  Jlidian  "  (Ex.  ii.  16,  iii.  1), 
Balak  himself  offers  a  bullock  and  a  ram  upon  the 
seven  altars  on  Pisgah  (Num.  xxiii.  2,  &c.). 

In  P^gypt  the  Israelites  came  into  contact  with  a 
priesthood  of  another  kind,  and  that  contact  must 
have  been  for  a  time  a  very  close  one.  The  mar- 
riage of  Joseph  with  the  daughter  of  the  priest  of 
On — a  priest,  as  we  may  infer  from  her  name,  of  the 
goddess  Neith— (Gen.  xli.  45)  [Asenath],  the 
special  favour  which  he  showed  to  the  priestly  caste 
in  the  years  of  famine  (Oen.  xlvii.  26),  the  train- 
ing of  Moses  in  the  palace  of  the  Pharaohs,  probably 
in  the  colleges  and  temples  of  the  priests  (Acts  vii. 
22) — all  this  must  have  impressed  the  constitution, 
the  dress,  the  outward  form  of  life  upon  the  minds 
of  the  lawgiver  and  his  contemporaries.  Little  as 
we  know  directly  of  the  life  of  Egypt  at  this  remote 
period,  the  stereotyped  fixedness  of  the  customs  of 
that  country  warrants  us  in  referring  to  a  tolerably 
distant  past  the  facts  which  belong  historically  to  a 
later  period,  and  in  doing  so,  we  find  coincidences 
with  the  ritual  of  the  Israelites  too  numerous  to  be 
looked  on  as  accidental,  or  as  the  result  of  forces 
which  were  at  work,  independent  of  each  other, 
but  taking  parallel  directions.  As  circumcision  was 
common  to  the  two  nations  (Herod,  ii.  37),  so  the 
shaving  of  the  whole  body  (ibid.)  was  with  both 
part  of  the  symbolic  purity  of  the  priesthood,  once 
for  all  with  the  Levites  of  Israel  (Num.  viii.  7), 
every  third  day  with  those  of  Egypt.  Both  are  re- 
stricted to  garments  of  linen  (Herod,  ii.  37,  81  ; 
Plutarch,  Z)e  Isid.  c.  4;  Juven.  vi.  533;  Ex.  xxviii. 
39  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  18).  The  sandals  of  byblus  worn 
by  the  Egyptian  priests  were  but  Little  removed 
from  the  bare  feet  with  which  the  sous  of  Aaron 
went  into  the  sanctuaiy  (Herod,  ii.  37).  For  both 
there  were  multiplied  ablutions.  Both  had  a  public 
maintenance  assigned,  and  had  besides  a  large  share 
in  the  flesh  of  the  victims  offei'ed  (Herod,  l.  c). 
Over  both  there  was  one  high-priest.  In  both  the 
law  of  succession  was  hereditary  (ibid. ;  comp.  also 
Spencer,  T)e  Leg.  Hehr.  c.  iii.  1,  5,  11  ;  Wilkinson, 
Ancient  Egyptians,  iii.  p.  116). 

Facts  such  as  these  leave  scarcely  any  room  for 
doubt  that  there  was  a  connexion  of  some  kind 
between  the  Egyptian  priesthood  and  that  of  Israel. 
The  latter  was  not,  indeed,  an  outgrowth  or  imita- 
tion of  the  former.  The  faith  of  Israel  in  Jehovah, 
the  one  Lord,  the  living  God,  of  whom  there  was 
no  form  or  similitude,  presented  the  strongest  pos- 
sible contrast  to  the  multitudinous  idols  of  the  poly- 
theism of  Egypt.  The  symbolism  of  the  one  was 
cosmic,  "  of  the  earth,  earthy,"  that  of  the  other, 


PRIEST 

chiefly,  if  not  altogether,  ethical  and  spiritual.  But 
looking,  as  we  must  look,  at  the  law  and  ritual  of 
the  Israelites  as  designed  for  the  education  of  a 
people  who  were  in  danger  of  sinking  into  such  a 
polytheism,  we  may  readily  admit  that  the  educa- 
tion must  have  started  from  some  point  which  the 
subjects  of  it  had  already  reached,  must  have  em- 
ployed the  language  of  symbolic  acts  and  rites  with 
which  they  were  already  familiar.  The  same  alpha- 
bet had  to  be  used,  the  same  root-forms  emplojred 
as  the  elements  of  speech,  though  the  thoughts 
which  they  were  to  be  the  instruments  of  uttering 
were  widely  different.  The  details  of  the  religion 
of  Egypt  might  well  be  used  to  make  the  protest 
against  the  religion  itself  at  once  less  startling  and 
more  attractive.* 

At  the  time  of  the  Exodus  there  was  as  yet  no 
priestly  caste.  The  continuance  of  solemn  sacrifices 
(Ex.  V.  1,  3),  implied,  of  course,  a  priesthood  of 
some  kind,  and  priests  appear  as  a  recognized  body 
before  the  promulgation  of  the  Law  on  Sinai  (Ex. 
six.  22).  It  has  been  supposed  that  these  were 
identical  with  the  "young  men  of  the  children  of 
Israel"  who  offered  burnt  -  oflerings  and  peace- 
ofterings  (Ex.  xxiv.  5)  either  as  the  first-born,'  or 
as  I'epresenting  in  the  freshness  of  their  youth  the 
purity  of  acceptable  worship  (comp.  the  analogous 
case  of"  the  young  man  the  Levite  "  in  Judg.  xvii., 
and  Ewald,  Altertlmm.  p.  273).  On  the  principle, 
however,  that  difference  of  title  implies  in  most 
cases  difference  of  functions,  it  appears  more  pro- 
bable that  the  "  young  men  "  were  not  those  who 
had  before  performed  priestly  acts,  but  were  chosen 
by  the  lawgiver  to  be  his  ministers  in  the  solemn 
work  of  the  covenant,  representing,  in  their  youth, 
the  stage  in  the  nation's  life  on  which  the  people 
were  then  entering  (Keil,  in  loc).  There  are  signs 
that  the  priests  of  the  older  ritual  were  already 
dealt  with  as  belonging  to  an  obsolescent  system. 
Though  they  were  known  as  those  that  "come 
near"  to  the  Lord  (Ex.  xix.  22),  yet  they  are  not 
permitted  to  approach  the  Divine  Presence  on  Sinai. 
They  cannot  "  sanctify  "  themselves  enoligh  to  en- 
dure that  trial.  Aaron  alone,  the  future  high-priest, 
but  as  yet  not  known  as  such,  enters  with  Moses 
into  the  thick  darkness.  It  is  noticeable  also  that 
at  this  transition-stage,  when  the  old  order  was 
passing  away,  and  tlie  new  was  not  j^et  established, 
there  is  the  proclamation  of  tlie  truth,  wider  and 
higher  than  both,  that  the  whole  people  was  to  be 
"a  kingdom  of  priests"  (Ex.  xix.  6).  The  idea  of 
the  life  of  the  nation  was,  that  it  was  to  be  as  a  priest 
•and  a  prophet  to  the  rest  of  mankind.  They  were 
called  to  a  universal  priesthood  (comp.  Keil,  Hi /oc). 
As  a  people,  however,  they  needed  a  long  discipline 
before  they  could  make  the  idea  a  reality.  Tiiey 
drew  back  from  their  high  vocation  (Ex.  xx.  18-21). 
As  for  other  reasons  so  also  for  this,  that  the  central 
truth  required  a  rigid,  unbending  form  for  its  out- 
ward expression,  a  distinctive  priesthood  was  to  be 
to  the  nation  what  the  nation  was  to  mankind. 
The  position  given  to  the  oi'dinances  of  the  priest- 
hood indicated  with  sufficient  clearness,  that  it  was 
subordinate,  not  primary,  a  means  and  not  an  end. 


e  For  a  temperate  discussion  of  the  connexion  between 
the  cuUus  of  Israel  and  that  of  Efiypt,  on  views  opposed 
1o  Sponcer,  see  BaUr's  Symholik;  Kinleit.  (^^4,  ii.  c.  i,  ^3); 
.md  Fairbairn's  Tijpology  of  Scripture  (b.  iii.  c.  .3,  }3). 

f  The  Targums  both  of  Bab.ylon  and  Jerusalem  give 
'  first-bom  "  as  an  equivalent  (Saubevt,  De  Sacerd.  Tlebr. 
In  Ugolini,  Thes.  xii.  2;  comp.  also  xiii.  135).    Jewish 


interpreters  (Saadias,  Rashi,  Aben-Ezra)  U\ke  the  same 
view ;  .and  the  Talmud  {.Sevach.  xiv.  4)  expressly  asserts 
the  priesthood  of  the  first-born  in  the  pre-Mosaic  times. 
It  has,  however,  been  denied  by  Vitringa  and  others. 
(Comp.  B&hr'a  SymboUk,  ii.  4;  Selden,  De  Synedr.  i.  16, 
De  Success.  Pont.  c.  i.). 


PRIEST 

Not  in  tlie  first  pioclamation  of  tlie  great  laws  of 
duty  iu  the  Decalogue  (Ex.  xx.  1-17),  nor  in  the 
applications  of  those  laws  to  the  chief  contingencies 
of  the  people's  life  in  the  wilderness,  does  it  find  a 
))lace.  It  appears  together  with  the  Ark  and  the 
'I'abernacle,  as  taking  its  position  in  the  education 
b}'  which  the  people  were  to  be  led  toward  the  mark 
of  their  high  GiUing.  As  such  we  have  to  con- 
sider it. 

Consecration. — The  functions  of  the  High-priest, 
the  position  and  history  of  the  Levites  as  the  con- 
secrated tribe,  have  been  discussed  fully  under  those 
lieads.  It  lemains  to  notice  the  characteristic  facts 
connected  with  *'  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron,"  as 
standing  between  the  two.  Solemn  as  was  the  sub- 
sequent dedication  of  the  Levites,  that  of  the 
priests  involved  a  yet  higher  consecration.  A  special 

word  (SJ'lp,  hadash)  was  appropriated  to  it.    Their 

old  garments  were  laid  aside.  Their  bodies  were 
washed  with  clean  water  (Ex.  xxix.  4;  Lev.  viii.  6) 
and  anointed  with  the  perfumed  oil,  prepared  after 
a  prescribed  Ibrmula,  and  to  be  used  for  no  lower 
purpose?  (Ex.  xxix.  7,  xxx.  22-33).  The  new 
garments  belonging  to  their  office  were  then  put  on 
them  (infra).  The  truth  that  those  who  intercede 
for  others  must  themselves  have  been  reconciled, 
was  indicated  by  the  sacriHce  of  a  bullock  as  a  sin- 
oHering,  on  which  they  solemnly  laid  their  hands, 
as  transferring  to  it  the  guilt  which  had  attached 
to  them  (Ex.  xxix.  10  ;  Lev.  viii.  18).  The  total 
surrender  of  their  lives  was  represented  by  the  ram 
slain  as  a  burnt-oftering,  a  "  sweet  savour  "  to  Je- 
hovah (Ex.  x.xix.  18;  Le\-.  viii.  21).  The  blood  of 
these  two  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  offered  to  the 
Lord.  The  blood  of  a  third  victim,  the  ram  of  cou- 
seci'ation,  was  used  for  another  purpose.  With  it 
Moses  sprinkled  tlie  fight  ear  that  was  to  be  open 
to  the  Divine  voice,  the  right  hand  and  the  right 
foot  tliat  were  to  be  active  in  divine  ministrations 
( Ex.  xxix.  20 ;  Lev.  viii.  23,  4).  Lastly,  as  they  were 
to  be  the  exponents,  not  only  of  the  nation's  sense 
of  guilt,  l)ut  of  its  praise  and  thanksgiving,  Moses 
was  to  •'  fill  their  hands  "^  with  cakes  of  unleavened 
bread  ami  portions  of  the  sacrifices,  which  they 
were  to  present  before  the  Lord  as  a  wave-offering. 
The  whole  of  this  mysterious  ritual  was  to  be  re- 
peated for  seven  days,  during  which  they  remained 
within  the  Tabernacle,  separated  from  the  people, 
and  not  till  then  was  the  consecration  perfect  (comp. 
on  tiie  meaning  of  all  these  acts  Bahr,  Symholik,  ii. 
c.  V.  §2).  Moses  himself,  as  the  representative  of 
the  Unseen  King,  is  the  consecrator,  the  sacrificer 
throughout  these  ceremonies  ;  as  the  channel  through 
which  the  others  receive  their  oilice,  he  has  for  the 
time  a  higher  priesthood  than  that  of  Aaron  (Selden, 
De  Si/nedr.  i.  l(j;  Ugolini,  xii.  3).  In  accordance 
with  the  principle  which  runs  through  the  history 
of  Israel,  he,  the  ruler,  solemnly  divests  himself  of 
the  priestly  office  and  transfers  it  to  another.     The 


PRIEST 


917 


g  The  sons  of  Aaron,  it  may  be  noticed,  were  simply 
sprinkled  wilh  the  precious  oil  (Lev.  viii.  3{i).  Over 
Aaron  liimself  it  was  poured  till  it  went  down  to  the 
skirts  of  his  clothing  (Ibid.  12  ;   I's.  c.xxxiii.  2). 

•>  Tills  appears  to  liave  been  regarded  as  the  essential 
part  of  the  consecration;  and  the  Hebrew,  "to  till  the 
Land,"  is  accordingly  used  as  a  synonymo  for  "  to  con- 
secrate" (Kx.  xxix,  9;  2  Clir.  xiii.  9). 

i  Kwald  {AUtrlhiim.  p.  280-291)  writes  as  If  the  cere- 
monies of  consecration  were  repeated  on  the  admission  of 
every  priest  to  tlie  performance  of  bis  functions ;  but 
this  is  on  the  assumption,  apparently,  that  Ex.  xxix.  and 


fact  that  he  hau  been  a  priest,  was  merged  in  hi.? 
work  as  a  lawgiver.  Only  once  in  the  language  of 
a  later  period  was  the  word  Cohen  applied  to  him 
(Ps.  xcix.  6). 

The  consecrated  character  thus  imparted  did  not 
need  renewing.  It  was  a  perpetual  inheritance 
transmitted  from  father  to  son  through  all  the  cen- 
turies that  followed.  We  do  not  read  of  its  being 
renewed  iu  the  case  of  any  individual  priest  of  the 
sons  of  Aaron.'  Only  when  the  line  of  succession 
was  broken,  and  the  impiety  of  Jeroboam  intruded 
the  lowest  of  the  people  into  the  sacred  oflice,  do 
we  find  the  re-appearance  of  a  like  form  (2  Chr. 
xiii.  9),  of  the  same  technical  word.  The  previous 
history  of  Jeroboam  and  the  character  of  the  worship 
,which  he  introduced  make  it  proljable  that,  in  that 
case  also,  the  ceremonial  was,  to  some  extent,  Egyp- 
tian in  its  origin. 

Dress. — The  "sons  of  Aaron"  thus  dedicated 
were  to  wear  during  their  ministrations  a  special 
apparel — at  other  times  apparently  they  wore  the 
common  dress  of  the  people.  The  material  Was 
linen,  but  that  word  included  probably,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Egyptian  priests,  the  byssus,  and  the 
cotton  stuffs  of  that  country  (Ex.  xxviii.  42  ;  comp. 
Cotton ).J  Linen  drawers  from  the  loins  to  the 
thighs  were  "  to  cover  their  nakedness."  The  vere- 
cundia  of  the  Hebrew  ritual  in  this  and  in  other 
places  (Ex.  xx.  26,  xxviii.  42)  was  probably  a 
protest  against  some  of  the  fouler  forms  of  nature- 
worship,  as  e.  g.  in  the  worship  of  Peor  (Maimo- 
nides,  More  Nevochim,  iii.  45,  in  Ugoliui,  xiii.  p. 
385),  and  possibly  also,  in  some  Egyptian  rites 
(Herod,  ii.  60).  Over  the  drawers  was  worn  the 
cetoneth,  or  close-fitting  cassock,  also  of  fine  linen, 
white,  but  with  a  diamond  or  chess-board  pattern 
on  it  (Biihr,  Syinb.  ii.  c.  iii.  §2).  This  came  nearly 
to  the  i'net  (TroSripris  X'^wy,  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  7, 
§1),  and  was  to  be  woven  iu  its  garment-shape  (not 
cut  out  and  tlien  sewed  together),  like  the  x'''"'^'' 
&ppa<pos  of  John  xix.  23,  in  which  some  inter- 
preters have  even  seen  a  token  of  the  priesthood  of 
him  who  wore  it  (Ewald,  Gesch.  v.  177  ;  Ugolini, 
xiii.  p.  218).''  The  white  cassock  was  gathered 
round  the  body  with  a  girdle  of  needlework,  into 
which,  as  in  the  more  gorgeous  belt  of  the  high- 
priest,  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet,  were  intermingled 
with  white,  and  worked  in  the  form  of  flowers 
(Ex.  xxviii.  39,  40,  xxxix.  2;  Ezek.  xliv.  17- 
19).  Upon  their  heads  they  were  to  wear  caps  or 
bonnets  (in  the  English  of  the  A.  V.  the  two  words 
are  synonymous)  in  the  form  of  a  cup-shaped  flower, 
also  of  fine  linen.  These  garments  they  might  wear 
at  any  time  in  the  Temple,  whether  on  duty  or 
not,  but  they  were  not  to  sleep  in  them  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  V.  5,  §7).  When  they  became  soiled,  they 
were  not  washed  or  used  again,  but  torn  up  to 
make  wicks  for  the  lamps  in  the  Tabernacle  (Selden, 
De  Si/nedr.  xiii.  11).  They  had  besides  them  other 
"  clothes  of  service,"  which  were  probably  simpler, 

Lev.  viii.  are  not  historical,  but  embody  the  customs  of  a 
later  period.  Biihr  (Si/mbolik,  1.  c.)  leaves  it  as  an  open 
qiiesdon,  and  treats  it  as  of  no  moment. 

i  The  reason  for  fixins  on  this  material  Is  given  in  Ez. 
xliv.  18;  but  the  feeling  that  there  was  something  un- 
clean in  clothes  made  from  the  skin  or  wool  of  an  animal 
was  cummon  to  other  nations.  Kgypt  has  been  already 
mentioned.  The  Arab  priests  in  the  time  of  Mahomet 
wore  linen  only  (Ewald,  AUcrth.  p  289). 

1=  Here  also  modern  Kastern  customs  present  an  analogy 
in  the  woven,  seamless  ihram  worn  by  the  Mecca  pilgrims 
(Ewald,  Mlirtli.  p.  289). 


918 


PRIEST 


Dre63  of  Egyptian  Priests.    (Wilkinson.) 


but  are  not  described  (Ex.  xsxi.  10 ;  Ez.  xlii.  14). 
In  all  their  acts  of  ministration  they  were  to  be  bare- 
footed." Then,  as  now,  this  was  the  strongest  recog- 
nition of  the  sanctity  of  a  holy  place  which  the  Oriental 
mind  could  think  of  (Ex.  iii.  5;  Josh.  v.  15),  and 
throughout  the  whole  existence  of  the  Temple  service, 


Dress  of  Egyptian  High-Priest 

even  though  it  drew  upon  them  the  scorn  of  the 
heathen  (Juveu.  Sat.  vi.  159),  and  seriously  aflected 
tlie  health  of  the  priests  (Ugolini,  viii.  p.  976,  xiii. 


■"  This  is  inferred  (1)  from  the  absence  of  any  direction 
ys  to  a  covering  for  tlie  feet ;  (2)  from  the  later  custom  ; 
(3)  from  the  universal  foeling  of  the  Kast.  Shoes  were 
\rora  as  a  protection  .against  defilement.  In  a  s;inctuary 
there  ^^as  nothing  that  could  defile. 


p.  405),  it  was  scrupulously  adhered  to.°  In  the 
earlier  liturgical  costunoe,  the  ephod  is  mentioned 
as  belonging  to  the  high-priest  only  (Ex.  xxviii.  6- 
12,  xx.xix.  2-5).  At  a  later  period  it  is  used  appa- 
rently by  all  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  and 
even  by  others,  not  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  engaged  in 
religious  ceremonial  (2  Sam.  vi.  14).     [Ephod.] 

Regulations, — The  idea  of  a  consecrated  life, 
which  was  thus  asserted  at  the  outset,  was  carried 
through  a  multitude  of  details.  Each  probably 
had  a  symbolic  meaning  of  its  own.  Collec- 
tively they  formed  an  education  by  which  the 
power  of  distinguishing  between  things  holy  and 
profane,  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean,  and 
so  ultimately  between  moral  good  and  evil,  was 
awakened  and  developed  (Ezek.  xliv.  23).  Be- 
fore they  entered  the  tabernacle  they  were  to  wash 
their  hands  and  their  feet  (Exod.  xxx.  17-21, 
xl.  30-32).  During  the  time  of  their  ministration 
they  were  to  drink  no  wine  or  strong  drink  (Lev. 
X.  9;  Ez.  xliv.  21).  Their  function  was  to  be 
more  to  them  than  the  ties  of  friendship  or  of 
blood,  and,  except  in  the  case  of  the  nearest  rela- 
tionships (six  degrees  are  specified.  Lev.  x.xi.  1-5  ; 
Ez.  xliv.  25),  they  were  to  make  no  mourning 
for  the  dead.  The  high-priest,  as  carrying  the 
consecrated  life  to  its  highest  point,  was  to  be 
above  the  distui'bing  power  of  human  sorrow  even 
in  these  instances.  Customs  which  appear  to  have 
been  common  in  other  priesthoods  were  (probably 
for  that  reason)  forbidden  them.  They  were  not 
to  shave  their  heads.  They  were  to  go  through 
their   ministrations  with   tlte  serenity  of  a  reve- 


■>  Biihr  (.S'vmboJiV.;,  ii.  c.  iii.^l,  2)  finds  a  mystic  meaning 
in  the  number,  material,  colour,  ."^hape,  of  the  priestly 
vestments,  discusses  each  point  elaborately,  and  dwells  in 
ij3  on  the  differences  between  them  and  those  of  the 
Egyptian  priesthood. 


PRIEST 

rential  awe,  not  with  the  orgiastic  wildness  which 
led  the  priests  of  Baal  in  their  despair  to  malce 
cuttings  in  their  flesh  (Lev.  xix.  28  ;  1  K.  sviii. 
28),  and  carried  those  of  whom  Atys  was  a  type 
to  a  more    terrible    mutilation    (Deut.    xxiii.    1). 
The  same  thought  found  expression  in  two  other 
forms   affecting   the   priests   of  Israel.     The   priest 
was  to  be  one  who,  as  the  representative  of  otlier 
men,  was  to  be  physically  as  well  as  liturgically 
perfect.  °      As    the    victim    was    to    be    without 
blemish  so   also  was  the   sacrificer  (comp.   Bahr, 
Symbol,  ii.  c.  ii.  §3).      The  law  speciried  in  broad 
outlines  the  excluding  defects  (Lev.   xxi.   17-21), 
and  these  were  such  as  impaired  the  purity,  or  at 
least  the  dignity,  of  the  ministrant.     The  morbid 
casuistry  of  the  later  rabbis  drew  up  a  list  of  not 
less  than  142  faults  or  infirmities  which  involved 
permanent,  of  22  which    involved  temporary  de- 
privation from  the  priestly  office  (Carpzov.  App. 
Critic,  p.  92,  93  ;   Ugolini,  xii.  54,  xiii.  903) ;  and 
the  original  symbolism  of  the  principle  (Philo,  Be 
Vict,  and  De  Monarch,   ii.   5)    was   lost   in    the 
prurient    minuteness    which,   here    as    elsewhere, 
often  makes  the  study  of  rabbinic  literature  a  some- 
what repulsive  task.     If  the  Christian  Church  has 
sometimes  seemed  to  approximate,  in  the  conditions 
it  laid  down  for  the  priestly  character,  to  the  rules 
of  Judaism,  it  was  yet  careful  to  reject  the  Jewish 
principles,  and  to  rest  its  regulations  simply  on  the 
grounds   of  expediency    [Constt.  Apost.  77,  78). 
The  maiTiages  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  were,  in  like 
manner,  hedged  round  with  special  rules.     There 
is,  indeed,  no  evidence  for  what  has  sometimes  been 
asserted    that    either    the   high-priest    (Philo,   De 
Monarch,  ii.  11,  ii.  229,  ed.  Mang. ;  Ewald,  Alterth. 
p.  302)  or  the  other  sons  of  Aaron  (Ugolini,  xii.  52) 
were  limited  in  their  choice  to  the  women  of  their 
ovra  tribe,  and  we  have  some  distinct  instances  to 
the  contrary.     It   is.  probable,  however,  that  the 
priestly  families  frequently  intermarried,  and  it  is 
certain  that  they  were  forbidden  to  marry  an  un- 
chaste woman,  or  one  who  had  been  divorced,  or  the 
widow  of  any  but  a  priest  (Lev.  xxi.  7,  14;   Ezek. 
xliv.  22).     The  prohibition  of  marriage  with  one  of 
an  alien  race  was  a.ssumed,  though  not  enacted  in 
the  law ;  and  hence  the  reforming  zeal  of  a  later 
time  compelled  all  who  had  contracted  such  marri- 
ages to  put  away  their  strange  wives  (Ezr.  x.  18), 
and  counted  the  offspring  of  a  priest  and  a  woman 
taken  captive  in  war  as  illegitimate  (Joseph.  Ant. 
iii.   10,  xi.  4;  c.  Apion.  i.  7),  even  though  the 
priest  himself  did  not  thereby   lose   his    function 
(Ugolini,  xii.  924).     The  high-priest  was  to  carry 
the  same  idea  to  a  yet  higher  point,  and  was  to 
marry  none  but  a  virgin  in  the  first  freshness  of 
her  youth  (Lev.  xxi.  13).     Later  casuistry  fixed 
the  age   within  the  narrow  limits  of  twelve  and 
twelve  and  a  half  (Carpzov.  App.  Crit.  p.  88).     It 
followed  as  a  matter  of  necessity  from  these  regu- 
lations, that  the  legitimacy  of  every  priest  depended 
on  his  genealogy.     A  single  missing  or  faulty  link 
would  vitiate  the  whole  succession.     To  those  gene- 
alogies, accordingly,  extending  b.ick    unbroken  for 
2000  years,  the  priests  could  point,  u])  to  the  time 
of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  (Joseph,  c.  Apion. 
i.  7).     In  later  times,  wherever  the  priest  might 
live — Egypt,  Babylon,  Greece — he  was  to  send  the 
register  of  all  marriages  in  his  family  to  Jerusalem 
(Ibid.).     They  could  be  relerred  to  in  any  doubtful 

o  The  Idea  of  the  perfect  body,  as  symbolising  the  holy 
soul,  was,  as  might  be  expected,  wide-spread  among  the 


PRIEST 


919 


or  disputed  case  (Ezr.  ii.  62  ;  Neh.  vii.  64).  In 
them  was  registered  the  name  of  every  mother  as 
well  as  of  every  father  (ibid. ;  comp.  also  the 
story  already  referred  to  in  Suidas,  s.  v.  'l7]ffovs). 
It  was  the  distinguishing  mark  of  a  ])riest,  not  of 
the  Aaronic  hne,  that  he  was  onrdTOjp,  aixi]Twp, 
ayeveaXSyriTos  (Heb.  vii.  3),  with  no  fathei  or 
mother  named  as  the  gi-ound  of  his  title. 

The  age  at  which  the  sons  of  Aaron  miglit 
enter  upon  their  duties  was  not  defined  by  the 
law,  as  that  of  the  Levites  was.  Their  oifice  did 
not  call  foi'  the  same  degree  of  pliysical  strength  ; 
and  if  twenty-five  in  the  ritual  of  the  Tabernacle 
(Num.  viii.  24)  and  twenty  in  that  of  the  Temple 
(1  Chron.  xxiii.  27)  was  the  appointed  age  for  the 
latter,  the  former  were  not  likely  to  be  kept 
waiting  till  a  later  period.  In  one  remarkable 
instance,  indeed,  we  have  an  example  of  a  yet 
earlier  age.  The  boy  Aristobiilus  at  the  age  of 
seventeen  ministered  in  the  Temple  in  his  pontifical 
robes,  the  admired  of  all  observers,  and  thus  stirred 
the  treacherous  jealousy  of  Herod  to  remove  so 
dangerous  a  rival  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  3,  §3).  This 
may  have  been  exceptional,  but  the  language  of  the 
rabbis  indioites  that  the  special  consecration  of  the 
priest's  life  began  with  the  opening  years  of  man- 
hood. As  soon  as  the  down  appeared  on  his  cheek 
the  young  candidate  presented  himself  before  the 
Council  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and  his  genealogy  was 
carefully  inspected.  If  it  failed  to  satisfy  his  judges, 
he  left  the  Temple  clad  in  black,  and  had  to  seek 
another  calling :  if  all  was  right  so  far,  another 
ordeal  awaited  him.  A  careful  inspection  was  to 
determine  whether  he  was  subject  to  any  one  of 
the  144  defects  which  would  invalidate  his  priestly 
acts.  If  he  was  found  free  from  all  blemish,  he 
was  clad  in  the  white,  linen  tunic  of  the  priests,  and 
entered  on  his  ministrations.  If  the  result  of  the 
examination  was  not  satisfactory,  he  was  relegated 
to  the  half-menial  office  of  separating  the  sound 
wood  for  the  altar  from  that  which  was  decayed 
and  worm-eaten,  but  was  not  deprived  of  the 
emoluments  of  his  office  (Lightfoot,  Temple  Service, 
c.  6). 

Functions. — The  work  of  the  priesthood  of  Israel 
was,  from  its  very  nature,  more  stereotyped  by 
the  Mosaic  institutions  than  any  other  element  of 
the  national  life.  The  functions  of  the  Levites — 
less  defined,  and  therefore  more  capable  of  expan- 
sion— altered,  as  has  been  shown  [Levites],  from 
age  to  age ;  but  those  of  the  priests  continued 
throughout  substantially  the  same,  whatever  changes' 
might  be  brought  about  in  their  social  position  and 
organization.  The  duties  described  in  Exodus  and 
Leviticus  are  the  same  as  those  recognized  in  the 
Books  of  Chronicles,  as  those  which  the  prophet- 
priest  Ezekiel  sees  in  his  vision  of  the  Temple  of 
the  future.  They,  assisting  the  Ifigh-priest,  were 
to  watch  over  the  fire  on  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offerings  and  to  keep  it  burning  evermore  both  by 
day  and  niglit  (Lev.  vi.  12,;  2  Chr.  xiii.  11),  to 
feed  the  golden  lamp  outside  the  veil  with  oil 
(Ex.  x.xvii.  20,  21  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  2),  to  offer 
the  morning  and  evening  sacrifices,  each  accom- 
panied with  a  meat-offering  and  a  drink-offering,  at 
tiie  door  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxix.  38-44). 
These  were  the  fixed,  invariable  duties;  but  their 
chief  function  was  that  of  being  always  at  hand 
to  do  the  priest's  office  tor  any  guilty,  or  penitent. 


religions  of  heathenism.    "  Sacerdos  non  integri  corporis 
quasi  mall  ominis  res  vitanda  est"  (Seneca,  Controv.  iv.  2). 


920 


PKIEST 


or  rejoicing  Israelite.  The  worshipper  might  come 
at  any  time.  If  he  were  rich  and  brought  a 
bullock,  it  was  the  priest's  duty  to  slay  the  victim, 
to  place  the  wood  upon  the  altar,  to  light  the 
fire,  to  sprinkle  the  altar  with  the  blood  (Lev. 
i.  5).  If  he  were  poor  and  brought  a  pigeon,  the 
priest  was  to  wring  its  neck  (Lev.  i.  15).  In 
either  eise,  he  was  to  burn  the  meat-oti'ering  and 
the  peace-offering  which  accompanied  the  sacrifice 
(Lev.  ii.  2,  9,  iii.  11).  After  the  birth  of  every 
child,  the  mother  was  to  come  with  her  sacrifice 
of  turtle-doves  or  pigeons  (Lev.  xii.  6  ;  Luke  ii. 
•22-24),  and  was  thus  to  be  purified  from  her 
uncleanness.  A  husband  who  suspected  his  wife 
of  unfaithfulness  might  bring  her  to  the  priest,  and 
it  belonged  to  him  to  give  her  the  water  of 
jealousy  as  an  oi'deal,  and  to  pronounce  the  formula 
of  execration  (Num.  v.  ll-ol).  Lepers  were  to 
come,  day  by  day,  to  submit  themselves  to  the 
priest's  inspection,  that  he  might  judge  whether 
they  were  clean  or  unclean,  and  when  ""hey  were 
healed  perform  for  them  the  ritual  of  purification 
(Lev.  -xiii.  xiv.,  and  comp.  Mark  i.  44).  All  the 
numerous  accidents  which  the  law  looked  on  as  defile- 
ments or  sins  of  ignoi'ance  had  to  be  expiated  by  a 
>acrifice,  which  the  priest,  of  course,  had  to  offer 
[Lev.  XV.  ly-33).  As  they  thus  acted  ;is  mediators 
for  those  who  were  labouring  under  the  sense  of 
guilt,  so  they  were  to  help  others  who  were  striv- 
ing to  attain,  if  only  for  a  season,  the  higher 
standard  of  a  consecrated  life.  The  Nazarite  was 
to  come  to  them  with  his  sacrifice  and  his  wave- 
oll'ering  (Num.  vi.  1-21). 

Other  duties  of  a  higher  and  more  ethical  character 
were  hinted  at,  but  were  not,  and  probably  could 
not  be,  the  subject  of  a  special  regulation.  They 
weie  to  teach  the  children  of  Israel  the  statutes  of 
the  Lord  (Lev.  x.  11;  Deut.  xxxiii.  10;  2  Chr.  xv. 
3  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  23,  24).  The  "  priest's  lips  "  (in 
the  language  of  the  last  prophet  looking  back  upon 
the  ideal  of  the  order)  were  to  "keep  knowledge" 
(Mai.  ii.  7).  Through  the  whole  history,  with 
the  exception  of  the  periods  of  national  apostasy, 
these  acts,  and  others  like  them,  formed  the  daily 
life  of  the  priests  who  were  on  duty.  The  thi-ee 
great  festivals  of  the  year  were,  however,  their 
seasons  of  busiest  employment.  The  pilgrims  wlio 
came  up  by  tens  of  thousands  to  keep  the  feast, 
came  each  with  his  sacrifices  and  oblations.  The 
work  at  such  times  was,  on  some  occasions  at  least, 
beyond  the  stiength  of  the  priests  in  attendance, 
'and  the  Levites  had  to  be  called  in  to  help  them 
'2  Chron.  xxix.  34,  xxxv.  14).  Other  acts  of 
the  priests  of  Israel,  significant  as  they,  were,  wei'S 
less  distinctively  sacerdotal.  They  were  to  bless 
the  people  at  every  solemn  meeting ;  and  that  this 
jjart  of  their  office  might  never  fall  into  disuse,  a 
special  formula  of  benediction  was  provided  (Num. 
vi.  22-27).  During  the  journeys  in  the  wilder- 
ness it  belonged  to  them  to  cover  the  ark  and  all 
the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary  with  a  purple  or  scarlet 
cloth  before  the  Levites  might  approach  them 
(Num.  iv.  5-15).  As  the  people  started  on  each 
day's  march  they  were  to  blow  "  an  alarm  "  with 


PRIEST 

long  silver  trumpets  (Num.  x.  1-8), — with  two  if 
the  whole  multitude  were  to  be  assembled,  with 
one  if  there  was  to  be  a  special  council  of  the 
elders  and  princes  of  Israel.  With  the  same  in- 
struments they  were  to  proclaim  the  commence- 
ment of  all  the  solemn  days,  and  days  of  gladness 
(Num.  X.  10)  ;  and  throughout  all  the  changes 
in  the  religious  history  of  Israel  this  adhered  to 
them  as  a  characteristic  mark.  Other  instruments 
of  music  might  be  used  by  the  more  highly  trained 
Levites  and  the  schools  of  the  Prophets,  but  the 
trumpets  belonged  only  to  the  priests.  They  blew 
them  in  the  solemn  march  round  Jericho  p  (Josh, 
vi.  4),  in  the  religious  war  which  Judah  waged 
against  Jeroboam  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12),  when  they 
simimoned  the  people  to  a  solemn  penitential  fast 
(Joel  ii.  1,  15).  In  the  service  of  the  second 
temple  there  were  never  to  be  less  than  21  or 
more  than  84  blowers  of  trumpets  present  in  the 
temple  daily  (Ugolini,  xiii.  p.  1011).  The  presence 
of  the  priests  on  the  field  of  battle  for  this  purpose, 
often  in  large  numbers,  armed  for  war,  and  sharing 
in  the  actual  contest  (1  Chr.  xii.  23,  27 ;  2  Chr. 
sx.  21,  22),  led,  in  the  later  periods  of  Jewish 
history,  to  the  special  appointment  at  such  times  of 
a  war-priest,  deputed  by  the  Sanhalrim  to  be  the 
representative  of  the  high-priest,  and  standing  next 
but  one  to  him  in  the  order  of  precedence  (comp. 
Ugolini,  xii.  1031,  Be  Sacerdote  Castrensi;  and 
xiii.  871).i 

Other  functions  were  hinted  at  in  Deuteronomy 
which  might  have  given  them  greater  influence  as 
the  educators  and  civilizers  of  the  people.  They 
were  to  act  (whether  individually  or  collectively 
does  not  distinctly  appear)  as  a  court  of  appeal  in 
the  more  difficult  controversies  in  sriminaj  or  civil 
cases  (Deut.  xvii.  8-13).  A  special  reference  was 
to  be  made  to  them  in  cases  of  undetected  murder, 
and  they  were  thus  to  check. the  vindictive  blood- 
feuds  which  it  would  otherwise  have  been  likely  to 
occasion  (Deut.  xxi.  5).  It  mu.st  remain  doubtful, 
however,  how  far  this  order  kept  its  ground  during 
the  storms  and  changes  that  followed.  The  judicial 
and  the  teaching  functions  of  the  priesthood  re- 
mained probably  for  the  most  part  in  abeyance 
through  the  ignorance  and  vices  of  the  priests. 
Zealous  reformers  kept  this  before  them  as  an  ideal 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  7-9,  xix.  8-10;  Ez.  xliv.  24),  but  the 
special  stress  laid  on  the  attempts  to  realize  it  shows 
that  they  were  exceptional.' 

Mainfenance. — Functions  such  as  these  were 
clearly  incompatible  with  the  common  activities  of 
men.  At  first  the  small  number  of  tlie  priests 
must  have  made  the  work  almost  unintermittent, 
and  even  when  the  system  of  rotation  had  been 
adopted,  the  periodical  absences  from  home  could 
not  tail  to  be  disturbing  and  injurious,  had  they 
been  dependent  on  their  own  labours.  The  serenity 
of  the  priestly  character  would  have  been  disturbed 
had  they  had  to  look  for  support  to  the  lower  indus- 
tries. It  may  have  been  intended  [supra)  that  their 
time,  when  not  liturgically  employed,  should  be  given 
to  the  study  of  the  Law,  or  to  instructing  others  in  it. 
On  these  grounds  thei  efbre  a  distinct  provision  was 


V  In  tliis  case,  however,  the  trumpets  were  of  rams' 
horns,  not  of  silver. 

'1  Jost  (Judenth.  i.  153)  regards  the  war-priest  as  belong- 
ing to  the  ideal  system  of  the  later  Kabbis,  not  to  the 
historical  constitution  of  Israel.     Deut.  -nx.  2,  however. 


the  war-priest  was  said  to  do  (1  Mace.  iii.  56). 

'  The  teaching  functions  of  the  priest  have  probably 
been  unduly  magnified  by  writers  like  JMichaelis,  who  uim 
at  bringing  the  institutions  of  Israel  to  the  standard  o 
modern  expediency  (Ccmim.  mi  Laws  of  Moses,  i.  35-52) 


supplies  the  genu  out  of  which  such  an  office  might  na-  |  as  they  have  been  unduly  depreciated  by  Saalschiitz  and 
tiirally  grow.    .ludas  Maccabaeus,  in  his  wars,  docs  wliat  '  Jahn. 


PRIEST 

made  for  them.  This  consisted » — (1)  of  one-tenth 
of  the  tithes  which  the  people  paid  to  the  Levites, 
one  per  cent.  i.  e.  on  the  whole  produce  of  the 
country  (Num.  xviii.  26-28).  (2;  Of  a  special 
tithe  every  third  year  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12). 
(3)  Of  the  redemption-money,  paid  at  the  fixed 
rate  of  five  shekels  a  head,  for  the  tirst-born  of  man 
or  beast  (Num.  xviii.  14-19).'  (4)  Of  the  redemp- 
tion-money paid  in  like  manner  for  men  or  things 
specially  dedicated  to  the  Lord  (1-ev.  xxvii.).  (5) 
Of  spoil,  captives,  cattle,  and  the  like,  taken  in  war 
(Num.  xxxi.  25-47).  (G)  Of  what  may  be  de- 
scribed as  the  perquisites  of  their  sacrificial  func- 
tions, the  shew-bread,  the  flesh  of  the  burnt- 
offerings,  peace-offerings,  trespass-offerings  (Num. 
xviii.  8-14;  Lev.  vi.  26,  29,  vii.  6-10),  and,  in 
particular,  the  heave-shoulder  and  the  wave-breast 
(Lev.  X.  12-15).  (7)  Of  an  undetined  amount  of 
the  first-fruits  of  corn,  wine,  and  oil  (Kx.  xxiii.  19  ; 
Lev.  ii.  14  ;  Deut.  xxvi.  1-10).  Of  some  of  these,  as 
"  most  holy,"  none  but  the  priests  were  to  partake 
(Lev.  vi.  29).  It  was  lawful  for  their  sons  and 
daughters  (Lev.  x.  14),  and  even  in  some  cases  for 
their  home-born  slaves,  to  eat  of  others  (Lev.  xxii. 
11).  The  stranger  and  the  hired  servant  were  in 
all  cases  excluded  (Lev.  xxii.  10).  (8)  On  their 
settlement  in  Canaan  the  priestly  families  had 
thirteen  cities  assigned  them,  with  "suburbs"  or 
pasture-grounds  tor  their  flocks  (Josh.  xxi.  13-19). 
Wliile  the  Levites  were  scattered  over  all  the 
conquered  country,  the  cities  of  the  priests  wei-e 
within  the  tribes  of  Judali,  Simeon,  and  Berrjamin, 
and  this  concentration  was  not  without  its  influence 
on  their  subsequent  history.  [Comp.  Levites.] 
These  provisions  were  obviously  intended  to  secure 
the  leligion  of  Israel  against  fhe  dangers  of  a  caste 
of  pauper-priests,  needy  and  dependent,  and  unable 
to  bear  their  witness  to  the  true  faith.  They  were, 
on  the  other  hand,  as  far  as  possible  removed  from 
the  condition  of  a  wealthy  order.  Even  in  the  ideal 
state  contemplated  by  tire  Book  of  Deuteronomy, 
the  Levite  (here  probably  used  generically,  so  as  to 
include  the  priests)  is  repeatedly  marked  out  as  an 
object  of  charity,  along  with  the  sti-anger  and  the 
widow  (Deut.  xii.  12, 19,  xiv.  27-29).  Dui-iirg  the 
long  periods  of  national  apostasy,  tithes  were  pro- 
bably paid  with  even  less  regularity  than  they  wer-e 
in  the  more  orthodox  period  that  followed  the 
return  from  the  Captivity  (Neh.  xiii.  10  ;  5Ial.  iii. 
8-10).  The  standard  of  a  priest's  income,  even  in 
the  earliest  days  after  the  settlement  in  Canaan, 
was  miserably  low  (Judg.  xvii.  10).  Large  por- 
tions of  the  priesthood  fell,  under  the  kingdom,  into 
a  state  of  abject  poverty  (comp.  1  Sam.  ii,;56).  The 
clinging  evil  throughout  their  history  was  not  that 
tliey  were  too  powei-ful  and  rich,  I)ut  that  they 
sank  into  the  stiite  from  wliich  the  Law  was  in- 
tended to  preserve  them,  and  so  came  to  "  teach  for 
hii-e"(Mic.  iii.  11 ;  comp.  Saalschiitz,  Archdolocjie 
dcf  Hebrder,  ii.  344-355). 

Classification  and  Sttdistics. — The  earliest  his- 
torical trace  of  any  division  of  the  priesthood,  and 
corresponding  cycle  of  services,  belongs  to  the  time 
of  David.  Jewish  tradition  indeed  recognizes  an 
earlier  division,  even  during  the  life  of  Aaron,  into 


PRIEST 


921 


'  The  later  Habbis  enirmerate  no  less  tban  twenty-four 
sources  of  emolument.  Of  these  the  chief  only  are  given 
Iiori!  (Ugoliiii,  .\iii.  1121). 

'  It  is  to  be  noticid  that  the  l,a\v,  by  rocoftniziiij;  the 
substitution  of  thelA'vites  for  the  first-:born,  and  orilering 
payment  only  for  the  small  nnnilipiul  the  latter  in  excess 


eight  houses  (Gem.  Hieros.  Taanith,  in  Ugolini, 
xiii.  873),  augmented  during  the  period  of  the 
Shiloh-worship  to  sixteen,  the  two  families  of  Eleazar 
and  Ithamar  standing  in  both  cases  on  an  equality. 
It  is  hardly  conceivable,  however,  that  there  could 
have  been  any  rotation  of  service  while  the  rrumber 
of  priests  was  so  small  as  it  must  have  been  during 
the  forty  years  of  sojourn  in  the  wilderness,  if  we 
believe  Aaron  and  his  lineal  descendants  to  have 
been  the  only  priests  officiating.  The  difficulty  of 
realizing  in  what  way  the  single  family  of  Aaron 
wer-e  able  to  sustain  all  the  burden  of  the  worship 
of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  sacrifices  of  individual 
Israelites,  may,  it  is  true,  suggest  the  thought  that 
possibly  in  this,  as  in  other-  instances,  the  Hebrew 
idea  of  sonship  by  adoption  may  have  extended  the 
title  of  the  "Sons  of  Aaron"  beyond  the  limit's  of 
lineal  descent,  and,  in  this  case,  theie  may  be  some 
tbundatiorr  for  the  Jewish  tradition.  Nowhet-e  m 
the  later  history  do  we  find  any  disproportion  like 
that  of  three  priests  to  22,000  Levites.  The  office 
of  supervision  over  those  that  "  kept  the  chai-ge  of 
the  sanctuary,"  entrusted  to  Eleazar  (Num.  iii.  32), 
implies  that  some  otliet-s  were  subject  to  it  besides 
Ithamar  and  his  children,  while  these  very  keepers 
of  the  sanctuary  are  identified  itr  ver.  38  with  the 
sons  of  Aaron  who  are  encamped  with  Closes  and 
Aaron  ou  the  east  side  of  the  Tabernacle.  The 
allotmeirt  of  not  less  than  thirteen  cities  to  those 
who  bore  the  name,  within  little  more  than  forty 
years  from  the  Exodus,  tends  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion, and  at  any  rate  indicates  that  the  priesthood 
were  not  intended  to  be  always  in  attetrdance  at  the 
Tabernacle,  but  were  to  have  homes  of  their  own, 
and  therefore,  as  a  necessary  consequence,  fixed 
periods  o;:ly  of  service.  Some  notion  may  be 
formed  of  the  number  on  the  accession  of  David 
from  the  fiicts  (1)  that  not  less  than  3700  tendered 
their  allegiance  to  him  while  he  was  as  yet  reigning 
at  Hebron  over  Judah  only  (1  Chr.  xii.  27),  and 
(2)  that  one-twenty-fouith  part  wer-e  sufficient  for 
all  the  services  of  the  statelier  and  more  frequented 
woi'ship  which  he  established.  To  this  reign  be- 
longed accordingly  the  division  of  the  priesthood 
iirto   the    four-aud-twenty    "  coiu'ses "    or    orders 

(nip?nO,  Siaipians,  ii>riixepiai,  1  Chr.  sxiv.  1-19; 

2  Chr.  xxiii.  8;  Luke  i.  5),  each  of  which  was  to 
serve  in  rotation  for  one  week,  while  the  further 
assignment  of  special  sei-vices  during  the  week  was 
determitred  by  lot  (Luke  i.  9).  Each  course  ap- 
peals to  have  commenced  its  work  on  the  Sabbath, 
the  outgoing  priests  taking  the  moining  sacrifice, 
and  leaving  thtit  of  the  evening  to  their  successors 
(2  Chr.  xxiii.  8  ;  Ugolini,  xiii.  319).  In  this  divi- 
sion, however,  the  two  great  priestly  houses  did  not 
stmrd  on  an  equality.  The  dcsceitdants  of  Ithamar 
were  found  to  have  fewer  representatives  th;m 
those  of  Eleazar,"  and  sixteen  courses  accordingly 
were  assigned  to  the  latter,  eight  only  to  the  former 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  4  ;  comp.  Caipzov.  App.  Crit.  p.  98). 
The  division  thus  instituted  was  confirmed  by  Solo- 
mon, and  continued  to  be  recognized  as  the  typictd 
number  of  the  priesthood.  It  is  to  be  noted,  how- 
ever, that  this  arraugemeirt   was   to   some  extent 


of  the  former,  deprived  Aaron  mid  liis  sons  of  a  large  sum 
which  would  otherwise  have  accrued  to  them  XNum.  iii. 
44-51). 

"  This  dimiimtion  m!iy  have  been  caused  partly  by  the 
slaughter  of  the  priists  who  accompanied  llophni  and 
Phineh-is  (IV.  lx.\viii.  64),  partly  by  the  massacre  at  Nob. 


922 


PRIEST 


elastic.  Any  priest  mis;lit  be  present  at  any  time, 
and  even  perform  priestly  acts,  so  long  as  he  did 
not  interfere  with  the  functions  of  those  who  were 
officiating  in  their  course  (Ugoliui,  xiii.  881),  and 
at  the  great  solemnities  of  the  year,  as  well  as  on 
special  occasions  like  the  opening  of  the  Temple, 
they  were  present  in  great  numbers.  On  the  return 
from  the  Captivity  thei-e  were  found  but  four 
com-ses  out  of  the  twenty-four,  each  containing,  in 
round  numbers,  about  a  thousand"  (Ezr.  ii.  36-39). 
Out  of  these,  however,  to  revive,  at  least,  the  idea 
of  the  old  organization,  the  four-and-twenty  courses 
were  reconstituted,  bearing  the  same  names  as 
before,  and  so  continued  till  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  If  we  may  accept  the  numbers  given 
by  Jewish  writers  as  at  all  trustworthy,  the  pro- 
portion of  the  priesthood  to  the  popnlatiou  of  Pales- 
tine during  the  last  century  of  their  existence  as  an 
order  must  have  been  far  greater  than  that  of  the 
clergy  has  ever  been  in  any  Christian  nation.  Over 
and  above  those  that  were  scattered  in  the  country 
and  took  their  turn,  there  were  not  fewer  than 
24,000  sfcitioned  permanently  at  Jerusalem,  and 
12,000  at  Jericho  (Gemar.  Hieros.  Taanith,  fol. 
67,  in  Carpzov.  App.  Grit.  p.  100).  It  was  a 
Jewish  tradition  that  it  had  never  fallen  to  the  lot 
of  any  priest  to  offer  incense  twice  (Ugolini,  xii. 
18).  Oriental  statistics  are,  however,  always  open 
to  some  suspicion,  those  of  the  Talmud  not  least 
so ;  and  there  is,  probably,  more  truth  in  the  com- 
putation of  Josephus,  who  estimates  the  total  num- 
ber of  the  four  houses  of  the  priesthood,  refeiTing 
apparently  to  Ezr.  ii.  36,  at  about  20,000  (c. 
Apnon.  ii.  7).  Another  indication  of  number  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  a  "  great  multitude  "  could 
attach  themselves  to  the  "  sect  of  the  Nazarenes" 
(Acts  vi.  7),  and  so  have  cut  themselves  off,  sooner 
or  later,  from  the  Temple  services,  without  any 
perceptible  effect  upon  its  ritual.  It  was  almost 
inevitable  that  the  great  mass  of  the  order,  under 
such  circumstances,  should  sink  in  character  and 
reputation.  Poor  and  ignorant,  despised  and  op- 
pressed by  the  more  powerful  members  of  their 
own  body,  often  robbed  of  their  scanty  maintenance 
by  the  rapacity  of  the  high-priests,  they  must 
have  been  to  Palestine  what  the  clergy  of  a 
later  period  have  been  to  Southern  Italy,  a  dead 
weight  on  its  industry  and  strength,  not  compen- 
sating for  their  unproductive  lives  by  any  services 
rendered  to  the  higher  interests  of  the  people.  The 
Kabbinic  classification  of  the  priesthood,  though 
belonging  to  a  somewhat  later  date,  reflects  the 
contempt  into  which  the  oider  had  fallen.  There 
were — (1)  the  heads  of  the  twenty-four  courses, 
known  sometimes  as  apx^fpeh  ;  (2)  the  large  num- 
ber of  reputable   officiating   but   inferior   priests ; 

»  The  causes  of  this  great  reduction  are  not  stated,  but 
large  numbers  must  have  perished  in  the  siege  and  storm 
of  Jerusalem  (I,am.  iv.  16),  and  many  may  have  preferred 
remaining  in  Babylon. 

y  Another  remarkable  instance  of  the  connexion  between 
the  Nazarite  vow,  when  extended  over  the  whole  life,  and 
a  liturgical,  quasi-priestly  character,  is  found  in  the  history. 
of  the  Rechabites.  They,  or  others  like  them,  are  named 
by  Amos  (il.  11)  as  having  a  vocation  like  that  of  the 
prophets.  They  are  received  by  Jeremiah  into  the  house 
of  the  Lord,  into  the  chamber  of  a  prophet-priest  (Jer. 
XXXV.  4).  The  solemn  blessing  which  the  prophet  pro- 
nounces (xxxv.  19)  goes  beyond  the  mere  perpetuation 
of  the  name.    The  term  he  uses,  "  to  stand  before  me  " 


Cis'? 


S?  *T?y))  is  one  of  special  significance.    It  is  used 


PRIEST 

(3)  the  pleheii,  or  (to  use  the  extremest  formula  of 
Rabbinic  scorn)  the  "  priests  of  the  people  of  the 
earth,"  ignorant  and  unlettered  ;  (4)  those  that, 
through  physical  disqualifications  or  other  causes, 
were  non-efficient  members  of  the  order,  though 
entitled  to  receive  their  tithes  (Ugolini,  xii.  18 
.Tost,  Judenthum,  i.  156). 

History. — The  new  priesthood  did  not  establish 
itself  without  a  struggle.  The  rebellion  of  Korah, 
at  the  head  of  a  portion  of  the  Levites  as  repre- 
sentatives of  the  first-born,  with  Dathan  and  Abiram 
as  leaders  of  the  tribe  of  the  first-bora  son  of  Jacob 
(Num.  xvi.  1),  showed  that  some  looked  back  to 
the  old  patriarchal  order  rather  than  fonvard  to  the 
new,  and  it  needed  the  witness  of  "  Aaron's  rod  tliat 
budded"  to  teach  the  people  that  the  latter  had  in 
it  a  vitality  and  strength  which  had  departed  from 
the  former.  It  may  be  th.at  the  exclusion  of  all  but 
the  sons  of  Aaron  from  the  service  of  the  Tabernacle 
drove  those  who  would  not  resign  their  claim  to 
priestly  functions  of  some  kind  to  the  worship  (pos- 
sibly with  a  rival  tabernacle)  of  Moloch  and  Chiun 
(Am.  V.  25,  26  ;  Ez.  xx.  16).  Prominent  as  was 
the  part  taken  by  the  priests  in  the  daily  march  of 
the  host  of  Israel  (Num.  x.  8),  in  the  passage  of  the 
Jordan  (Josh.  iii.  14,  15),  in  the  destruction  of 
Jericho  (Josh.  vi.  12-16),  the  history  of  Micah 
shows  that  within  that  century  there  was  a  strong 
tendency  to  relapse  into  the  system  of  a  household 
instead  of  an  hereditary  priesthood  (Judg.  xvii.). 
The  frequent  invasions  and  conquests  during  the 
period  of  the  Judges  niust  have  interfered  (as  stated 
above)  with  the  payment  of  tithes,  with  the  main- 
tenance of  worship,  with  the  observance  of  all 
festivals,  and  with  thjs  the  influence  of  the  pi-iest- 
hood  must  have  been  kept  in  the  back -ground.  If 
the  descendants  of  Aaron,  at  some  unrecorded  ci'isis 
in  the  history  of  Israel,  rose,  under  Eli,  into  the 
position  of  national  defenders,  it  was  only  to  sink 
in  his  sons  into  the  lowest  depth  of  sacerdotal 
cori-uption.  Eor  a  time  the  prerogative  of  the  line 
of  Aaron  was  in  abeyance.  The  rapture  of  the  Ark, 
the  removal  of  the  Tabernacle  from  Shiloh,  threw 
everything  into  confusion,  and  Samuel,  a  Levite, 
but  not  within  the  priestly  family  [Samuel], 
sacrifices,  and  "  comes  near "  to  the  Lord :  his 
training  under  Eli,  his  Nazarite  life,T  his  prophetic 
office,  being  regarded  apparently  as  a  special  con- 
secration (comp.  August,  c.  Faust,  xii.  33 ;  De 
Civ.  Dei,  xvii.  4).  For  the  priesthood,  as  for  the 
people  generally,  the  time  of  Samuel  must  have 
been  one  of  a  great  moral  reformation,  while  the 
expansion,  if  not  the  foundation,  of  the  Schools  of 
the  Prophets,  at  once  gave  to  it  the  support  of 
an  independent  order,  and  acted  as  a  check  on  its 
coiTuptions    and    excesses,   a    perpetual    safeguard 


emphatically  of  ministerial  functions,  like  those  of  the 
prophet  (1  K.  xvii.  1,  xviii.  15;  Jer.  xv.  19),  or  the 
priest  (Deut.  x.  8,  xviii.  5-7  ;  Judg.  xx.  28).  The  Targum 
of  Jonathan  accordingly  gives  this  meaning  to  it  here. 
Strangely  enough,  we  have  in  the  history  of  the  death 
of  James  the  Just  (Hegesipp.  in  Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  23)  an 
indication  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  blessing  in  this  sense. 
Among  the  priests  who  are  present,  there  is  one  "  belong- 
ing to  the  Rechabim  of  whom  Jeremiah  had  spoken." 
The  mention  of  the  house  of  Rechab  among  the  "  families 
of  the  scribes,"  in  1  Chr.  ii.  55,  points  to  something  of  the 
same  nature.  The  title  prcfixea  in  the  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
to  Ps.  Ixxi.  connects  it  with  the  "  sons  of  Jonadab,  the 
first  that  went  into  captivity."  Augustine  takes  this  as 
the  starting-point  for  his  interpretation  {Enarr.  in  Psalm 
Ixs.). 


PRIEST 

against  the  development  from  it  of  any  Egyptian 
or  Brahminic  caste-system  (EwalJ,  Gesch.  Isr.  ii. 
185),  standing  to  it  ia  much  the  same  relation 
as  the  monastic  and  mendicant  orders  stood,  each 
in  its  turn,  to  the  secular  clergy  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Though  Shiloh  had  become  a  deserted 
sanctuary,  Nob  (1  Sam.  xxi.  1)  was  made  for  a 
time  the  centre  of  national  worsliip,  and  the  sym- 
bolic ritual  of  Israel  was  thus  kept  from  being 
forgotten.  The  reverence  which  the  people  feel  for 
them,  and  which  compels  Saul  to  iiave  recourse  to 
one  of  alien  blood  (Doeg  the  Edomite)  to  carry  his 
murderous  counsel  into  act,  shows  that  there  must 
have  been  a  gi-eat  step  upwards  since  the  time 
when  the  sons  of  Eli  "  made  men  to  abhor  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord"  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17,  18).  The 
reign  of  Saul  was,  however,  a  time  of  sutl'ering  for 
them.  He  had  manifested  a  disposition  to  usurp 
the  priest's  office  (1  Sam.  xiii.  9).  The  massacre 
of  the  priests  at  Nob  showed  how  insecure  their 
lives  were  against  any  unguarded  or  savage  im- 
pulse.* They  could  but  wait  in  silence  for  the 
coming  of  a  deliverer  in  David.  One  at  least  among 
them  shared  his  exile,  and,  so  far  as  it  was  possible, 
lived  in  his  priestly  character,  performing  priestly 
acts,  among  the  wild  company  of  Adullam  (1  Sam. 
xxiii.  6,  9).  Others  probably  were  sheltered  by 
their  remoteness,  or  found  shelter  in  Hebron  as  the 
largest  and  strongest  of  the  priestly  cities.  When 
the  death  of  Saul  set  them  free  they  came  in  large 
numbers  to  the  camp  of  David,  prepared  apparently 
not  only  to  testify  their  allegiance,  but  also  to  sup^ 
port  him,  armed  for  battle,  against  all  rivals  (1  Chr. 
xii.  27).  They  were  summoned  from  their  cities 
to  the  great  lesto ration  of  the  worship  of  Israel, 
when  the  Ark  was  brought  up  to  the  new  capi- 
tal of  the  kingdom  (1  Chr.  xv.  4).  For  a  time, 
however  (another  proof  of  the  strange  confusion 
into  which  the  religious  life  of  the  people  had 
fallen),  the  Ark  was  not  the  chief  centre  of 
woi-ghip ;  and  while  the  newer  ritual  of  psalms 
and  minstrelsy  gathered  round  it  under  the  mini- 
stration of  t!ie  Levites,  headed  by  Benaiah  and 
Jahaziel  as  priests  (1  Chr.  xvi.  5,  6),  the  older 
order  of  sacrifices  was  carried  on  by  the  priests 
in  the  tabernacle  on  the  high-place  at  Gibeon 
(1  Chr.  xvi.  37-39,  xxi.  29  ;  2  Chr.  i.  3).  We 
cannot  wonder  that  first  David  and  then  Solomon 
sliould  have  sought  to  guard  against  the  evils 
incidental  to  this  separation  of  the  two  orders,  and 
to  unite  in  one  great  Temple  priests  and  Levites, 
the  symbolic  worship  of  sacrifice  and  the  spiritual 
oflering  of  praise. 

The  reigns  of  these  two  kings  were  naturally 
the  culminating  period  of  the  glory  of  the  Jewish 
priesthood.  They  had  a  king  whose  heart  w;is 
with  them,  and  who  joined  in  their  services  dressed 
as  they  were  (1  Chr.  xv.  27),  while  he  yet 
scrupulously  abstained  from  all  interference  with 
their  functions.  The  name  which  they  bore  was 
accepted  (whatever  explanation  may  bo  given  of  the 
fact)  as  the  highest  title  of  honour  that  could  be 
borne  by  the  king's  sous  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  supra). 
They  occupied  high  places  in  the  king's  council 
(1  K.  iv.  2,  4),  and  might  even  take  their  places, 
as  in  the  case  of  Benaiah,  at  the  head  of  his  armies 
(1  Chr.  xii.  27,  xxvii.  5),  or  be  recognized,  as 
Zabud   the   son  of  Nathan  was,  as   the  "  king's 

•  It  is  to  be  notieed  lliat  while  the  Hcb.  text  gives 
85  as  the  number  of  priests  slain,  the  LXX.  increases  it 
to  300,  Josephus  (.Ant.  vi.  12,  6)  tu  3S5. 


PRIEST 


923 


friends,"  the  keepers  of  the  king's  conscience  (IK. 
iv.  5  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  334). 

The  position  of  the  priests  under  the  monarchy 
of  Judah    deserves  a  closer   examination    than    it 
has   yet  received.      The   system   which    has   been 
described    above    gave   them    for    every   week    of 
service  in  the  Temple  twenty-three  weeks  in  which 
they  had  no  appointed  work.      Was    it   intended 
that  they  should  be  idle  during  this  period?     Were 
they  actually  idle  ?     They  had  no  territorial  pos- 
sessions to  cultivate.     The  cities  assigned  to  them 
and  to  the  Levites  gave  but  scanty  pasturage  to 
their   flocks.      To    what   employment   could   they 
turn  ?     (1)  The  more  devout  and  thoughtful  found, 
probably,  in  the  schools  of  the  prophets  that  which 
satisfied  them.     The  history  of  the  Jews  presents 
numerous  instances  of  the  union  of  the  two  offices. 
[Comp.  Levites.]     They  became  teaching-priests 
(2  Chr.  XV.  3),  students,   and   interpreters  of  the 
Divine  Law.     From  such  as  these,  men  might  be 
chosen  by  the  more  zealous  kings  to  instruct  the 
people   (2  Chrj.  xvii.   8),  or  to  administer  justice 
(2  Chr.    xix.    8).     (2)  Some  perhaps,    as   stated 
above,  served  in  the  king's  army.     We  have  no 
gi'ound    for   transferring   our   modern    conceptions 
of  the    peacefulness   of  the    priestly    life   to   the 
remote  past  of  the  Jewish  people.     Priests,  as  we 
have  seert,  were  with  David  at  Hebron  as  men  of 
war.      They    were    the    trumpeters    of   Abijah's 
army  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12).     The  Temple  itself  was  a 
great   aitnoury    (2    Chr.    xxiii.    9).      The    heroic 
struggles  of  the  Maccabees  were  sustained  chiefly 
by  their  kindred  of  the  same  family  (2  Mace.  viii. 
1).      (3)   A  few   chosen   ones   might   enter   more 
deeply   into  the  divine   life,  and   so    receive,   like 
Zechariah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  a  special  call  to  the 
ofllce  of  a  prophet.      (4)  We   can   hardly  escape 
the    conclusion  that  many  did    their  work  in  the 
Temple  of  Jehovah  with  a  divided  allegiance,  and 
acted  at  other  times  as  priests  of  the  high-places 
(Ewald,    Gesch.    iii.    704).       Not    only    do    we 
read  of  no  protests  against  the  sins  of  the  idola- 
trous kings,  except  from  prophets  who  stood  forth, 
alone  and  unsupported,  to  bear  their  witness,  but 
the  priests  themselves  were  sharers  in  the  worship 
of  Baal  (Jer.  ii.  8),  of  the  sun  and  moon,  and  of 
the  host  of  heaven  (Jer.  viii.  1,  2).     In  the  very 
Temple  itself  they  "ministered  before  their  idols" 
(Ez.  xliv.  12),  and  allowed  others,  "  uncircumcised 
in  hear.t,  and  uncircumcised  in  flesh,"  to  join  them 
(il)id.  7).     They  ate  of  unclean  things  and  polluted 
the  Sabbaths.     There  could  be  no  other  result  of 
this  departure  from  the  true  idea  of  the  priest- 
hood than  a  general  degi'adation.    Those  who  ceased 
to  be  true  shephei'ds  of  the  people  found  nothing 
in  their  ritual  to  sustain  or  elevate  them.     They 
became  as  sensual,  covetous,   tyrannical,    as   ever 
the  clergy  of  the  Christian  Church  became  in  its 
darkest    periods  ;    conspicuous    as   drunkards    and 
adulterers  (Is.  xxviii.  7,  8,  Ivi.  10-12).     The  pro- 
phetic order,  instead  of  acting  as  a  check,  became 
sharers  in  their  corruption  (Jer.  v.  31  ;  Lam.  iv. 
13;  Zeph.  iii.  4).     .For  the  most  part  the  few 
efforts  after  better  things  are  not  the  result  of  a 
spontaneous  reformation,  but  of  conformity  to  the 
wishes  of  a  reforming  king.     In  the  one  instance 
in  which  they  do  act  spontaneously — their  resist- 
ance to   the   usurpation   of  the   priest's  functions 
by  Uzziah — their  protest,  however  right  in  itself, 
was   yet  only  too   compatible  with  a  wrong   use 
of  the  office  which  they  claimed  iis  belonging  exclu- 
sively  to    themselves    (2   Chr.    xxvi.    17).      The 


924 


PRIEST 


discipline  of  the  Captivity,  however,  was  not 
without  its  fi-Liits.  A  large  proportion  of  the 
priests  had  eitlier  perished  or  were  content  to 
remain  in  tlie  land  of  their  exile ;  but  those  who 
did  return  were  active  in  the  work  of  restoration. 
Under  Ezra  they  submitted  to  the  stern  duty  of 
repudiating  their  heathen  wives  (Ezr.  x.  18,  19 j. 
They  took  part — though  here  the  Levites  were 
the  more  prominent — in  the  instruction  of  the 
people  (Ezr.  iii.  2  ;  Neh.  viii.  9-13).  The  root- 
evils,  however,  soon  reappeared.  The  work  of  the 
priesthood  was  made  the  instrument  of  covetous- 
ness.  The  priests  of  the  time  of  Malachi  required 
payment  for  every  ministerial  act,  and  would  not 
even  "shut  the  doors  "  or  "  kindle  fire  "  for  nought 
(Mai.  i.  10).  They  "  corrupted  the  covenant  of 
Levi "  (Mai.  ii.  8).  The  idea  of  the  priest  as 
the  angel,  the  messenger,  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts, 
was  forgotten  (Mai.  ii.  7  ;  comp.  Eceles.  v.  6). 
The  inevitable  result  was  that  they  again  lost 
their  influence.  They  became  "  base  and  con- 
temptible before  all  the  people"  (Mai.  ii.  9). 
The  ollice  of  the  scribe  rose  in  repute  as  that  of 
the  priest  declined  (Jost,  Judcnth.  i.  37,  148). 
The  sects  tliat  multiplied  during  the  last  three 
centuries  of  the  national  life  of  Judaism  were 
proofs  that  the  established  order  had  foiled  to  do 
its  work  in  maintaining  the  religious  life  of  the 
people.  No  great  changes  afiected  the  outward 
position  of  the  priests  under  the  Persian  govern- 
ment. When  that  monarchy  fell  before  the  power 
of  Alexander,  they  were  ready  enough  to  transfer 
their  allegiance.*  Both  the  Persian  government 
and  Alexander  had,  however,  respected  the  religion 
of  their  subjects ;  and  the  former  had  conferred 
on  the  priests  immunities  from  taxation  (Ezr.  vi. 
8,  9,  vii.  24;  Jos.  Ant.  xi.  8).  The  degree  to 
which  this  recognition  was  carried  by  the  imme- 
diate successors  of  Alexander  is  shown  by  the  work 
of  restoration  accomplished  by  .Simon  the  son  of 
Onias  (Ecclus.  1.  12-20);  and  the  position  which 
they  thus  occupied  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  not 
less  than  the  devotion  with  wliich  his  zeal  inspired 
them,  prepared  them  doubtless  for  the  great 
struggle  which  was  coming,  and  in  which,  under 
the  priestly  Maccabees,  they  were  the  chief  de- 
fenders of  their  country's  freedom.  Some,  indeed, 
at  that  crisis,  were  found  among  the  apostates. 
Under  the  guidance  of  Jason  (the  heathenised 
form  of  Joshua)  they  forsoolc  the  customs  of 
their  fathers  ;  and  they  who,  as  priests,  were  to 
be  patterns  of  a  self-respecting  purity,  left  their 
work  in  the  Temple  to  run  naked  in  the  circus 
which  the  Syrian  king  had  opened  in  Jerusalem 
(2  Mace.  iv.  13,  14).  Some,  at  an  earlier  period, 
had  joined  the  schismatic  Onias  in  establishino-  a 
rival  worship  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §4j.  The  ma- 
jority, however,  were  true-hearted ;  and  the  Mac- 
cabean  struggle  which  left  the  government  of  the 
country  in  the  hands  of  tlieir  own  order,  and. 
until  the  Roman  conquest,  with  a  certain  measure 
of  independence,  must  have   given   to   the   liigher 

*  A  real  submission  is  hardly  concealed  by  the  narrative 
of  the  Jewish  historian.  The  account  of  the  effect  pro- 
duced on  the  mind  of  the  Macedonian  king  by  the  solemn 
procession  of  priests  in  their  linen  cphods  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi. 
8),  stands  probablj''  on  the  s.ime  footing  as  Livy's  account 
of  the  retreat  of  Porsena  from  the  walls  of  unconquered 
Kome. 

b  It  deserves  notice  that  from  these  priests  may  have 
come  the  statemonts  as  to  what  passed  within  the  Temple 


PRIEST 

members  of  tne  order  a  position  of  security  and 
influence.  The  martyr-spirit  showed  itself  again 
in  the  calmness  with  which  they  carried  on  the 
ministrations  in  the  Temple,  when  Jerusalem  was 
besieged  by  Pompey,  till  they  were  slain  even  in 
the  act  of  sacrificing  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  4,  §3;  B.  J. 
i.  7,  §5).  The  reign  of  Herod,  on  the  other  hand, 
in  which  the  high-priesthood  was  kept  in  abey- 
ance, or  transferred  from  one  to  another  at  the 
will  of  one  who  was  an  alien  by  birth  and  half  a 
heathen  in  character,  must  have  tended  to  depress 
them . 

It  will  be  interesting  to  bring  together  the  few 
facts  that  indicate  tlieir  position  in  the  N.  T.  period 
of  their  history.  The  division  into  fbur-and-twenty 
courses  is  still  maint;iined  (Luke  i.  5  ;  Joseph.  Vii. 
1),  and  the  heads  of  these  courses  together  with 
those  who  have  held  the  high-priesthood  (the  office 
no  longer  lasting  for  lifej,  are  "chief  priests" 
{apxifpels)  by  courtesy  (Carpzov.  App.  Crit.  p. 
102),  and  take  their  place  in  the  Sanhedrim.  The 
number  scattered  throughout  Palestine  was,  as  has 
been  stated,  very  large.  Of  these  the  greater  num- 
ber were  poor  and  ignorant,  despised  by  the  more 
powerful  members  of  their  own  order,  not  gaining 
the  respect  or  afiection  of  the  people.  The  picture 
of  cowai'dly  selfishness  in  the  priest  of  the  parable 
of  Luke  X.  31,  can  hardly  be  thought  of  as  other 
than  a  representative  one,  indicating  the  estimate 
commonly  and  truly  formed  of  the  character  of  the 
class.  The  priestly  order,  like  the  nation,  was  di- 
vided between  contending  sects.  The  influence  of 
Hyrcanus,  himself  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life  a 
Sadducee  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  10,  §6),  had  probably 
made  the  tenets  of  that  party  popular  among  the 
wealthier  and  more  powerful  membeis,  and  the 
cliief  jiriests  of  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts,  the  whole 
apxtepariKhv  -yevos  (Acts  iv.  1,  6,  v.  17)  were 
apparently  consistent  Sadducees,  '  sometimes  com- 
bining with  the  Pharisees  in  the  Sanhedrim,  some- 
times thwarted  by  them,  persecuting  the  followers 
of  Jesus  because  they  preached  the  resuiTection  of 
the  dead.  The  great  multitude  (ox^os),  on  the 
other  hand,  who  received  that  testimony''  (Acts 
vi.  7)  nwist  liave  been  free  from,  or  must  liave 
overcome  Sadducean  prejudices.  It  was  not  strange 
that  those  who  did  not  welcome  the  truth  which 
would  have  raised  them  to  a  higher  life,  should 
sink  lower  and  lower  into  an  ignorant  and  ferocious 
fanaticism.  Few  stranger  contrasts  meet  us  in  the 
history  of  religion  than  that  presented  in  the  life  of 
the  priesthood  in  the  last  half-century  of  the  Tem- 
ple, now  going  through  the  solemn  sacrificial  rites, 
and  joining  in  the  noblest  hymns,  now  raising  a 
fierce  clamour  at  anything  which  seemed  to  them 
a  profanation  of  the  sanctuary,-  and  rushing  to  dash 
out  the  brains  of  the  bold  or  incautious  intruder,"-' 
or  of  one  of  their  own  order  who  might  enter  while 
under  some  cereuionial  defilement,  or  with  a  half- 
humourous  cruelty  setting  fii-e  to  the  clothes  of  the 
Levites  who  were  found  sleeping  when  they  ought  to 
have  been  watching  at  their  posts  (Lightfoot,  Temple 


at  the  time  of  the  Crucifixion  (Matt,  xxvii.  SI),  and  that 
these  facts  may  have  had  some  influence  in  determining 
their  belief.  They,  at  any  rate,  would  be  brought  into 
frequent  contact  with  the  teachers  who  continued  daily  in 
the  Temple  and  taught  in  Solomon's  porch  (Acts  v.  12). 

■^  It  belonged  to  the  priests  to  act  as  sentinels  over  the 
Holy  Place,  as  to  the  I^evites  to  guard  the  wider  area  of 
the  precincts  of  the  Temple  (Ugolini,  xiii.  1052). 


PRIEST 

Service,  c.  i.).  The  livalvy  which  led  the  Levites 
to  claim  privileges  which  had  hitherto  belonged  to 
the  priests  has  been  already  uotice<l.  [Levites.] 
In  the  scenes  of  the  last  tragedy  of  Jewish  history 
the  Older  p;isses  away,  without  honour,  "  dying  as 
a  fool  dieth."  The  high-priesthood  is  given  to  the 
lowest  and  vilest  of  the  adherents  of  the  fienzied 
Zealots  (Jos.  7?.  /.  iv.  3,  §(3).  Other  priests  appear 
as  deserting  to  the  enemy  (Ihid.  vi.  G,  §1).  It  is 
from  a  priest  that  Titus  receiver  the  lam]is,  and  gems, 
and  costly  raiment  of  the  sanctuary  (Ibid.  vi.  8,  §3). 
Priests  report  to  their  conquerors  the  terrible  utter- 
ance "  Let  us  depart,"  on  the  last  Pentecost  ever 
celebrated  iu  the  Temple  {Ibid.  vi.  5,  §3).  It  is  a 
priest  who  fills  up  the  degradation  of  his  order  by 
dwelling  on  the  fall  of  his  country  with  a  cold- 
blooded satisfliction,  and  finding  iu  Titus  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  0.  T.  {Ibid. 
vi.  5,  §4).  The  destiuction  of  Jerusalem  deprived 
the  order  at  one  blow  of  all  but  an  honorary  distinc- 
tion. Their  occupation  was  gone,  llany  families 
must  have  altogether  lost  their  genealogies.  Those 
who  still  prided  themselves  on  their  descent,  were 
no  longer  safe  against  the  claims  of  pretenders. 
The  jealousies  of  the  lettered  class,  which  had  been 
kept  under  some  restraint  as  long  as  the  Temple 
stood,  now  had  full  play,  and  the  influence  of  the 
Rabbis  increased  with  the  fall  of  the  priesthood. 
Their  position  in  mediaeval  and  moilern  Judaism 
has  never  risen  above  that  of  complimentary  recog- 
nition. Those  who  claim  to  take  their  place  among 
the  sons  of  Aai'on,  are  entitled  to  receive  the  re- 
demption-money of  the  first-Ijorn,  to  take  the  Law 
from  its  chest,  to  pronounce  the  benediction  in  the 
synagogues  (Ugohni,  xii.  48). 

The  language  of  the  N.  T.  writers  in  relation  to 
tlie  priesthood  ought  not  to  be  passed  over.  They 
recognize  in  Christ,  the  first-born,  the  king,  the 
Anointed,  the  representative  of  the  true  primeval 
priesthood  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek  (Heb. 
vii.,  viii.),  from  which  that  of  Aaron,  however 
necessaiy  for  the  time,  is  now  seen  to  have  been  a 
deflection.  But  there  is  no  trace  of  an  order  in  the 
new  Christian  society,  bearing  the  name,  and  exer- 
cising functions  like  those  of  the  priests  of  the  older 
Covenant.  The  Synagogue  and  not  the  Temple 
furnishes  the  pattern  for  the  organization  of  tlie 
Church.  The  idea  which  pervades  the  teaching  of 
the  Epistles  is  that  of  an  universal  priesthood.  All 
true  believers  are  made  kings  and  priests  (Rev.  i.  6  ; 
1  Pet.  ii.  9),  olier  spiritual  sacrifices  (Rom.  xii.  1), 


PRIEST 


925 


<•  The  history  of  language  presents  few  stranger  facts 
than  those  connected  witli  these  words.  Priest,  our  only 
equivalent  for  iepeu9,  comes  to  us  from  the  word  which 
was  chosen  because  it  excluded  the  idea  of  a  sacerdotal 
character.  Bishop  has  narrowly  escaped  a  like  perversion, 
occurring,  as  it  does  constantly,  in  Wyklyf 's  version  as  the 
translation  of  apxiepev^  (e.g.  John  xvili.  15,  Heb.  viii.  1). 

"  1.  jn3,  onlj' in  a  few  places;  commonly  "  priest." 

2.     I  JJ  ;    apxiav,   6  riyoviKvoi  ;    dux;    applied    to 
Messiah  (Dan.  ix.  25). 

3.  ^^nJ,  properly  "  willing,"  chiefly  in  poet.  (Ges.  p. 
853)  ;  dpx'fi' ;  princrps. 

4.  T'PX  from  "?]D3,  "prince,"  an  anointed  One;  apxiav, 
privceps;  also  in  A.  V.  "duke"  (Josh.  xiii.  21). 

5.  ti*t^*3,  verb.  adj.  from  ^?^^'3,  "raise;"  dpxwi' I'fyov- 
lucvos,  ^ye/noji',  /SacriAeu?  ;  princrps,  dux ;  also  in  \.  V. 
"ruler,"  "chief,"  "capUdn."  This  word  appears  on  the 
coins  of  Simon  Maccabaeus  (Ges.  917). 


may  draw  near,  may  enter  into  the  holiest  (Heb.  x. 
19-22)  as  having  received  a  true  priestly  consecra- 
tion. They  too  have  been  washed  and  sprinkled  as 
the  sons  of  Aaron  were  (Heb.  x.  22).  It  was  the 
thought  of  a  succeeding  age  that  the  old  classifica- 
tion of  the  high-priest,  priests,  and  Levites  was 
reproduced  in  the  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  of 
the  Christian  Church. "^  The  idea  wliich  was  thus 
expressed  rested,  it  is  true,  on  the  broad  analogy 
of  a  threefold  gradation,  and  the  terms,  "  priest," 
"  altar,"  "  sacrifice,"  might  be  used  without  in- 
volving more  than  a  legitimate  symbolism,  but 
they  brought  with  them  the  inevitable  danc^er  of 
reproducing  and  perpetuating  in  the  histoiy  of  the 
Christian  Church  many  of  the  feelings  which  be- 
longed to  Judaism,  and  ought  to  have  been  left 
behind  with  it.  If  the  evil  has  not  pioved  so  fatal 
to  the  life  of  Christendom  as  it  might  have  done,  it 
is  because  no  bishop  or  pope,  however  much  he 
might  exaggerate  the  harmony  of  the  two  systems, 
ha.s  ever  dreamt  of  making  the  Christian  priesthood 
hereditary.  We  have  perhaps  reason  to  be  thankful 
that  two  errors  tend  to  neutralize  each  other,  and  that 
the  age  which  witnessed  the  most  extravagant  sacer- 
dotalism was  one  in  which  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy 
wa.s  first  exalted,  then  urged,  and  at  last  enforced. 

The  account  here  given  has  been  based  on  the  be- 
lief that  the  books  of  the  0.  T.  give  a  trustworthy 
account  of  the  origin  and  history  of  the  priesthood 
of  Israel.  Tiiose  who  question  their  authority  have 
done  so,  for  the  most' part,  on  the  strength  of  some 
preconceived  theory.  Such  a  hierarchy  as  the  Pen- 
tateuch prescribes,  is  thought  impossible  in  the 
earlier  stages  of  national  lite,  and  therefore  the 
reigns  of  David  and  Solomon  are  looked  on,  not  as 
the  restoration,  but  as  the  starting-point  of  the 
order  (Von  Bohlen,  Die  Genesis,  KM.  §16).  It  is 
alleged  that  there  could  have  been  no  tribe  like  that 
of  Levi,  for  the  consecration  of  a  whole  tribe  is 
without  a  parallel  in  history  (Vatke,  Bibl.  Theol. 
i.  p.  222).  Deuteronomy,  assumed  for  once  to  be 
older  than  the  three  books  which  precede  it,  repre- 
sents the  titles  of  the  priest  and  Levite  as  standing 
on  the  same  footing,  and  the  distinction  between 
them  is  theiefore  the  work  of  a  later  period  (George, 
Die  (ilteren  Jild.  Feste,  p.  45,"51  ;  comp.  Baifir, 
Sijmbi)lik,  b.  ii.  c.  i.  §1,  whence  these  references 
are  taken).  It  is  hardly  necessaiy  here  to  do  more 
than  state  these  theories.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PRINCE,"  PRINCESS.  The  only  special 
uses  of  the  word  "prince"  are — 1.  "Princes  of 

*'•  I  ■?l^;  "PXIY"?,  'ipX''"';  princeps;  also  "captain" 
and  "  ruler." 

7.  3  J,  an  adj.  "  great,"  also  as  a  subst.  "  captain,"  and 
used  in  composition,  as  Rab-saris;  dpxaiv  TiyciJ.<ov;  optimus. 

8.  )  M,  part,  of  |T"I,  "  bear,"  a  poet,  word ;  o-arpaTnjs 
SuvaoTTj?  ;  princeps,  legum  comlitar. 

9.  >y  ;  ipxiav ;  princeps ;  also  in  A.  V.  "  captain," 
"  ruler."  prefixed  to  words  of  ofiicc,  as  "  chii^f-bakcr,"  &c.; 
niL/  ;  dpxov(Ta  ;  regiiia. 

10.  uy^,  "  ruler,"  "  captain  ;"  t^"'p"^  "  captain," 
"  prince ;"  Tpiind.-rq^ ;  dux. 

11.  Inplur.  only,  D^lDn"lS;  akin  toSanskr.i»-a(/iama, 
primvs  ;  eVSofoi ;  indiili  (lith.  1.  :!). 

12..  D  JJp  ;  apxoj'Tf!  ;  magistralus ;  usually  "nilcrs." 

13.  CllDtJ'n  ;  Trpe'a/Seis;  legati ;  only  in  I's.  lxvlii.31. 

14.  X^JSl-l-^tj'nN  and  D^iSl-l^t^'riN  ;  vTarot,  Sioi- 
ATjTa'';  salrapiie;  a  I'ersiaii  won!. 


926 


PRISCA 


provinces"  ^  (1  K.  xx.  14),  who  were  probably  local 
governors  or  magistrates,  who  took  refuge  in  Sa- 
maria during  the  invasion  of  Benhadad,  and  their 
"  young  men "  were  their  attendants,  TraiMpia, 
pedisseqid  (Thenius,  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  495). 
Josephus  says,  viol  twv  rjyefxSvwy  (^A7it.  viii.  14, 
§2).  2.  The  "princes"  mentioned  in  Dan.  vi.  1 
(see  Esth.  i.  1)  were  the  predecessors,  either  in  fact 
or  in  place,  of  the  satraps  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (Her. 
iii.  89).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PRIS'CA  (UpiffKa:  Prisca)  2  Tim.  iv.  19. 
[Priscilla.] 

PRISCIL'LA  {UpiffKiWa :  Priscilla).  To 
what  has  been  said  elsewhere  under  the  head  of 
Aquila  the  following  may  be  added.  The  name  is 
Prisca  (IIpitrKa)  in  2  Tim.  iv.  19,  and  (according  to 
the  true  reading)  in  Rom.  xvi.  3,  and  also  (according 
to  some  of  the  best  MSS.)  in  1  Cor.  xvi.  19.  Such 
variation  in  a  Roman  name  is  by  no  means  unusual. 
We  find  that  the  name  of  the  wife  is  placed  before 
that  of  the  husband  in  Rom.  xvi.  3,  2  Tim.  iv.  19, 
,ind  (according  to  some  of  the  best  5ISS.)  in  Acts 
xviii.  2(3.  It  is  only  in  Acts  xviii.  2  and  1  Cor.  xvi. 
19  that  Aquila  has  unequivocally  the  first  place. 
Hence  we  should  be  disposed  to  conclude  that  Pris- 
ci.Ua  was  the  more  energetic  character  of  the  two : 
and  it  is  particularly  to  be  noticed  that  she  took 
part,  not  only  in  her  husband's  exercise  of  hospi- 
tality, but  likewise  in  the  theological  instruction  of 
Ai'OLLOS.  Yet  we  observe  that  the  husband  and 
the  wife  are  always  mentioned  together.  In  fact 
we  may  say  that  Pi'iscilla  is  the  example  of  what 
the  married  woman  may  do,  for  the  general  service 
of  the  Church,  in  conjunction  with  home  duties,  as 
Phoebe  is  the  tvpe  of  the  unmarried  servant  of 
the  Church,  or  deaconess.  Such  female  minis- 
tration was  of  essential  importance  in  the  state  of 
society  in  the  midst  of  which  the  early  Christian 
communities  were  formed.  The  remarks  of  Arch- 
deacon Ev^ans  on  the  position  of  Timothy  at  Ephesus 
are  very  just.  "  In  his  dealings  with  the  female 
part  of  his  flock,  which,  in  that  time  and  country, 
required  peculiar  delicacy  and  disci  etion,  the  counsel 
of  the  experienced  Priscilla  would  be  invaluable. 
Where,  for  instance,  could  he  obtain  more  prudent 
and  faithful  advice  than  hers,  in  the  selection  of 
widows  to  be  placed  upon  the  eleemosynary  list  of 
the  Church,  and  of  deaconesses  for  the  ministry?" 
(Script.  Biog.  ii.  298).  It  seems  more  to  our 
purpose  to  lay  stress  on  this  than  on  the  theological 
learning  of  Priscilla.  Yet  Winer  mentions  a  mono- 
graph de  Priscilla.  Aquilae  tixore,  tanquam  femi- 
nariim  e  gentc  Judaicd  erudiiarum  specimine,  by 
G.  G.  Zeltner  (Altorf,  17(i9).  [J.  S.  H.] 

PRISON.^  For  imprisonment  as  a  punishment, 
see  Punishments.  The  present  article  will  only 
tieat  of  prisons  as  places  of  confinement. 


PROCONSUL 

In  Egypt  it  is  plain  both  that  special  places  were 
used  as  prisons,  and  that  they  were  under  the  cus- 
tody of  a  military  officer  (Gen.  xl.  3,  xlii.  17). 

During  the  wandering  in  the  desert  we  read  on 
two  occasions  of  confinement  "  in  ward "  (Lev. 
xxiv.  12;  Num.  xv.  34)  ;  but  as  imprisonment  was 
not  directed  by  the  Law,  so  we  hear  of  none  till 
the  time  of  the  kings,  when  the  prison  appears  as 
an  appendage  to  the  jialace,  or  a  special  part  of  it 
(1  K.  xxii.  27).  Later  still  it  is  distinctly  described 
as  being  in  the  king's  house  (Jer.  xxxii.  2,  xxxvii. 
21 ;  Neh.  iii.  25).  This  was  the  case  also  at 
Babylon  (2  K.  xxv.  27).  But  private  houses 
were  sometimes  used  as  places  of  confinement  (Jer. 
xxxvii.  15),  probably  much  as  Chardin  describes 
Persian  prisons  in  his  day,  viz.  houses  kept  by  pri- 
vate speculators  for  prisoners  to  be  maintained 
there  at  their  own  cost  {Voy.  vi.  100).  Public 
prisons  other  than  these,  though  in  use  by  the 
Canaanitish  nations  (Judg.  xvi.  21,  25),  were  un- 
known in  Judaea  previous  to  the  Captivity.  Under 
the  Herods  we  hear  again  of  royal  prisons  attached 
to  the  jialace,  or  in  royal  fortresses  (Luke  iii.  20 ; 
Acts  xii.  4,  10 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  5,  §2  ;  Machae- 
rus).  By  the  Romans  Antonia  was  used  as  a  prison 
at  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxiii.  10),  and  at  Caesarea  the 
praetorium  of  Herod  (ib.  35).  The  sacerdotal  au- 
thorities also  had  a  prison  under  the  superintendence 
of  special  officers,  heafjLo<pv\a.Kfs  (Acts  v.  18-23, 
viii.  3,  xxvi.  10).  The  royal  prisons  in  those  days 
were  doubtless  managed  after  the  Roman  fashion, 
and  chains,  fetters,  and  stocks  used  as  means  of  con- 
finement (see  Acts  xvi.  24,  and  Job  xiii.  27). 

One  of  the  readiest  places  for  confinement  was  a 
dry  or  partially  dry  well  or  pit  (see  Gen.  xxxvii.  24 
and  Jer.  xxxviii.  6-11);  but  the  usual  place  aji- 
pears,  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  and  in  general,  to 
have  been  accessible  to  visitois(Jer.  xxxvi.  5  ;  JIatt. 
xi.  2,  xxv.  36,  39  ;  Acts  xxiv.  23).        [H.  W.  P.] 

PROCH'ORUS  (Xlpoxopos).  One  of  the  seven 
deacons,  being  the  third  on  the  list,  and  named  next 
after  Stephen  and  Philip  (Acts  vi.  5).  No  fuither 
mention  of  him  is  made  in  the  N.  T.  There  is  a 
tradition  that  he  was  consecrated  by  St.  Peter  bishop 
of  Nicomedia  (Baron,  i.  292).  In  the  Magna  Biblio- 
theca  Patnim,  Colon.  Agripp.  1618,  i.  49-69,  will 
be  found  a  flibulous  "  Histoiia  Prochori,  Christi 
Discipuli,  de  vita  B.  Joannis  apostoli,"     [E.  H — s.] 

PROCONSUL.  The  Greek  aveviraros,  for 
which  this  is  the  true  equivalent,  is  rendered  uni- 
formly "deputy"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Acts  xiii.  7,  8, 
12,  xix.  38,  and  the  derived  verb  audviraTivu  in 
Acts  xviii.  12,  is  translated  "  to  be  deputy."  At 
the  division  of  the  Roman  provinces  by  Augustus 
in  the  year  B.C.  27,  into  Senatorial  and  Imperial, 
the  emperor  assigned  to  the  senate  such  portions  of 


i>  ni3*1D  ;  -j^iipa.!,;  provinciae. 
<^  1.  1-1 DX,  Aramaic  for  1'"lD5!5,  "a  chain,"  is  joined 
with  n^3,  and  rendered  a  prison;  oIkos  Sco-jhuik;  career. 

2.  n|?D,    N-1^3,   and  S*??,    with   n^3  ;  o?/<o?  ^v- 
XaK^s  (Jer.  xxxvii.  15). 

3.  DDSriD,  from   "^On,   "  turn,"    or   "  twist,"   the 
sloclts  (Jer.  xx.  2). 

4.  n"lt30  and  S"lt3D  ;  ^vKanri ;  career  ;Ges.  879). 

5.  "1!IDD  ;  Setr^KOTTJptoi/;  career. 

6.  "iDEi'O;  AuAaxri;  euslodia;  also  plur.  n"^J^t^'D  ; 
A.  V.  "hard." 


7.  "I^y  ;  angustia;  TaTreiVwcri?  (Ges.  1059). 

8.  mp"npQ  (Is.  Ixi.  1),  more  properly  written  in  one 
word;  ai'a^AeiJds ;  -apertio  (Ges.  1121). 

9.  "inD  ;  oxvpio/oia  ;  career:  properly  a  tower. 

10.  mpQn"n"'3  ;  olKla  fiuXioi-o!;  domus  carceris. 
ri^3  is  also  sometimes  "prison"  in  A.  V.,  as  Gen. 
xxxix.  20. 

11.  p3''V  ;  KarappaKTri^;  career;  probably  "  the  stocks  " 
(as  A.  v.)  or  some  such  instrument  of  confinement;  perhaps 
understood  by  LXX.  as  a  sewer  or  underground  passage. 


PROCURATOR 

territory  as  were  peaceable  and  could  te  held  with- 
out force  of  arms  (Suet.  Oct.  47 ;  Strabo,  xvii.  p. 
840  ;  Dio  Cass.  liii.  12),  an  arrangement  which  re- 
mained with  frequent  alteiations  till  the  3rd  cen- 
tury. Over  these  senatorial  pro.viuces  the  senate 
appointed  by  lot  yearly  an  ofHcer,  who  was  called 
"proconsul" (Dio Cass.  liii.  13),  who  exercised  purely 
civil  functions,  had  no  power  over  life  and  death, 
and  was  attended  b}"  one  or  more  legates  (Dio  Cass, 
liii.  14).  He  was  neither  girt  with  the  sword  nor 
wore  the  military  dress  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  13).  The 
provinces  were  in  consequence  called  "  proconsular." 
VVith  the  exception  of  Africa  and  Asia,  which  were 
assigned  to  men  who  had  passed  the  office  of  consul, 
the  senatorial  provinces  were  given  to  those  who 
had  been  praetors,  and  were  divided  by  lot  each 
year  among  those  who  had  held  this  ollice  five  years 
previously.  Their  term  of  office  was  one  year. 
Among  the  senatorial  provinces  in  the  first  arrange- 
ment by  Augustus,  were  Cyprus,  Achaia,  and  Asia 
within  the  Halys  and  Taurus  (Strabo,  xvii.  p.  840). 
The  first  and  last  of  these  are  alluded  to  in  Acts 
xiii.  7,  8,  12,  xix.  38,  as  under  the  government  of 
pi'oconsuls.  Achaia  became  an  imperial  province  in 
the  second  year  of  Tiberius,  a.d.  1 6,  and  was  go- 
verned by  a  procurator  (Tac.  Ann.  i.  76),  but  was 
restored  to  tiie  senate  by  Claudius  (Suet.  Claud. 
25),  and  therefore  Gallio,  before  whom  St.  Paul 
was  brought,  is  rightly  termed  "  proconsul "  in 
Acts  xviii.  12.  Cyprus  also,  after  the  battle  of 
Actium,  was  first  made  an  imperial  province  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  12),  but  five  years  afterwards  (B.C.  22) 
it  was  given  to  the  senate,  and  is  reckoned  by 
Strabo  (xvii.  p.  840)  ninth  among  the  provinces  of 
the  people  governed  by  crrpaTriyoi,  as  Achaia  is  the 
seventh.  These  (TTpaTT]yoi,  or  propraetors,  had  the 
title  of  proconsul.  Cyprus  and  Narbonese  Gaul 
were  given  to  the  senate  in  exchange  for  Dalmatia, 
and  thus,  says  Dio  Cassius  (liv.  4),  proconsuls  {av9- 
viraTOi)  began  to  be  sent  to  those  nations.  In 
Boeckh's  Corpus  rnscriptionum,  No.  2631,  is  the 
following  relating  to  Cyprus :  rj  ttSAls  KS'Cvrof 
^IovXlou  KSpSov  avQinrarov  ayveias.  This  Quintus 
Julius  Cordus  appears  to  have  been  proconsul  of 
Cyprus  before  the  12th  year  of  Claudius.  He  is 
mentioned  in  the  next  inscription  (Xo.  2632)  as 
the  predecessor  of  another  proconsul,  Lucius  Aunius 
Bassus.  The  date  of  this  last  inscription  is  the 
12th  year  of  Claudius,  A.D.  52.  The  name  of  an- 
other proconsul  of  Cyprus  in  the  time  of  Claudius 
occurs  on  a  copper  coin,  of  which  an  engraving  is 
given  in  vol.  i.  p.  877.  A  coin  of  Ephesus  [see 
vol.  i.  564]  illustrates  the  usage  of  the  word  dvd- 
v-iraros  in  Acts  xis.  38.  [VV.  A.  W.j 

PROCURA'TOR.  The  Greek  ijyefniu,'-  ren- 
dered "governor"  in  the  A.  V.,  is  appHed  in  the 
N.  T.  to  the  officer  who  presided  over  the  imperial 
province  of  Judaea.  It  is  used  of  Pontius  Pilate 
(Matt,  xxvii.),  of  Felix  (Acts  xxiii.,  xxiv.),  and  of 
Festus  (Acts  xxvi.  30).  In  all  these  cases  the 
V^ulgate  equivalent  is  praeses.  The  office  of  pro- 
curator {riyefjiovia)  is  mentioned  in  Luke  iii.  1,  and 
in  this  passage  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  is  more 
close  [prOGurnnte  Pontio  I'ilato  Judaenm).     It  is 


PROCURATOR 


927 


"  r\y(y.ixiv  is  the  general  term,  which  Is  applied  also  to 
the  governor  (^praeses)  of  the  imperial  province  of  Syria 
'■  Luke  ii.  2) :  the  Greek  equivalent  oiprocuratm-  is  strictly 
f  n-irpOTTO?  (Jos.  Ant.  XX.  6,  }2,  8,  ^5 ;  comp.  xx.  5,  ^1),  and 
his  ollice  is  called  eTriTpom)  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  5,  }1). 

i>  A  curious  ilUistrutlou  of  this  is  given  by  Tacitus 
{Ann.  xiii.  1),  where  ho  describes  tlie  poisoning  of  Jimius 


explained,  under  the  head  of  PROCONSUL,  that 
after  the  battle  of  Actium,  u.c.  27,  the  provinces 
of  the  Roman  empire  were  divided  by  Augustus 
into  two  portions,  giving  some  to  the  senate,  and 
reserving  to  himself  the  rest.  The  imperial  pio- 
vinces  were  administered  by  legates,  called  Icijati 
Augusti  pro  practore,  sometimes  with  the  addition 
of  consulari  potestate,  and  sometimes  Icgati  con- 
sularcs,  or  legati  or  consularcs  alone.  They  were 
selected  from  among  men  who  had  been  consuls  or 
praetors,  and  sometimes  from  the  inferior  senators 
(Dio  Cass.  liii.  13,  15).  Their  term  of  office  was 
indefinite,  and  subject  only  to  the  will  of  the  em- 
peror (Dio  Cass.  liii.  13).  These  officers  were 
also  called  praesides,  a  term  which  in  later  times 
was  applied  indifferently  to  the  governors  both  of 
the  senatorial  and  of  the  imperial  provinces  (Suet. 
Claud.  17).  They  were  attended  by  six  lictors, 
used  the  military  dress,  and  wore  the  sword  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  13).  No  quaestor  came  into  the  emperor's 
provinces,  but  the  property  and  revenues  of  the 
imperial  treasury  were  administered  by  the  Ra- 
tionales, Procuratores  and  Adores  of  the  emperor, 
who  were  chosen  from  among  his  freedmen,  or 
from  among  the  knights  (Tac.  Hist.  v.  9  ;  Dio 
Cass.  liii.  15).  These  procurators  were  sent  both 
to  the  imperial  and  to  the  senatorial  provinces  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  15'').  Sometimes  a  province  was  governed 
by  a  procurator  with  the  functions  of  a  pi'aeses. 
This  was  especially  the  case  with  the  smaller  pro- 
vinces and  the  outlying  districts  of  a  larger  province  ; 
and  such  is  the  relation  in  which  Judaea  stood  to 
Syria.  After  the  deposition  of  Archelaus  Judaea 
was  annexed  to  Syria,  and  the  first  procurator  was 
Coponius,  who  was  sent  out  with  Quirinus  to  take 
a  census  of  the  property  of  the  Jews  and  to  con- 
fiscate that  of  Archelaus  (Jos,  Ant.  xviii.  1,  §1). 
His  successor  was  Marcus  Ambivius,  then  Annius 
Kufus,  in  whose  time  the  emperor  Augustus  died. 
Tiberius  sent  Valerius  Gratus,  who  was  procurator 
for  eleven  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Pontius 
Pilate  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §2),  who  is  called  by 
Josephus  {Ayit.  xviii.  3,  §1)  rtyefxaiv,  as  he  is  in 
the  N.  T.  He  was  subject  to  the  governor  {praeses) 
of  Syria,  for  the  council  of  the  Samaritans  denounced 
Pilate  to  Vitellius,  who  sent  him  to  Rome  and  put 
one  of  his  own  friends,  Marcellus,  in  his  place ,( Jos. 
Ant.  xviii.  4,  §2).  The  head-quarters  of  the  pro- 
curator were  at  Caesarea  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  9,  §2 ; 
Acts  xxiii.  23),  where  he  had  a  judgment-.seat  (Acts 
XXV.  6)  in  the  audience  chamber  (Acts  xxv.  23'), 
and  was  assisted  by  a  council  (Acts  xxv.  12)  whom 
he  consulted  in  cases  of  difficulty,  the  assessores 
(Suet.  Galb.  14),  or  riyiii6ves,  who  are  mentioned 
by  Josephus  {B.  J.  ii.  16,  §1)  as  having  been  con- 
sulted by  Cestius,  the  governor  of  Syria,  wlien 
certain  charges  were  made  against  Florus,  the  pro- 
cuiator  of  Judaea.  More  important  cases  were  laid 
before  the  emperor  (Acts  xxv.  12  ;  comp.  Jos.  Ant. 
XX.  6,  §2).  The  procurator,  as  the  reprK^entttive 
of  the  emperor,  had  the  power  of  life  and  deatlt 
over  his  subjects  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  14;  Matt,  xxvii. 
26),  which  was  denied  to  the  proconsul.  In  the 
N.  T.  we  see  the  procurator  only  in  his  judicial 
capacity.     Thus  Christ  is  broiiglit  tiefore  Pontius 

Sllanus,  proconsul  of  Asia,  by  \\  Celer,  a  Roman  knight, 
and  Ilelius,  a  frpedniaii,  who  had  the  care  of  the  im- 
perial revenues  in  Asia  {rei  familiaris  principis  in  Asia 
impositi), 

<:  Unless  the  iKpoarripiov  (A.  V.  "place  of  hearing") 
was  the  great  stadium  mentioned  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  ii. 
9.  $2). 


928 


PROPHET 


Pilate  as  a  political  offender  (Matt,  xxvii.  2,  11), 
and  the  accusation  is  heard  by  the  procurator,  who 
is  seated  on  the  judgment-seat  (Matt,  xsvii.  19). 
Felix  heard  St.  Paul's  accusation  and  defence  fiom 
the  judgment-scat  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.),  which 
was  in  the  open  air  in  the  great  stadium  (Jos. 
B.  J.  ii.  9,  §2),  and  St.  Paul  calls  him  "judge" 
(Acts  xxiv.  10),  as  if  this  term  descriljed  his  chief 
functions.  Tlie  procurator  (7]yefj.(ov )  is  again  alluded 
to  in  his  judicial  capacity  in  1  Pet.  ii.  14.  He  was 
attended  by  a  cohort  as  body-guard  (IWatt.  xxvii.' 
27),  and  apparently  went  up  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  of  the  high  festivals,  and  there  resided  in  the 
palace  of  Herod  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  14,  §3 ;  Pliilo,  Be 
Leg.  ad  Caium,  §37,  ii.  589,  ed.  Mang.),  in  which 
was  the  praetorium,  or  "judgment-hall,"  as  it 
is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  (Matt,  xxvii.  27;  Mark 
XV.  16 ;  comp.  Acts  xxiii.  35).  Sometimes  it  ap- 
pears Jerusalem  was  made  his  winter  quarters 
(.Tos.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1).  The  High-Priest  was  ap- 
pointed and  removed  at  the  will  of  the  procurator 
(Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §2).  Of  the  oppression  and 
extortion  practised  by  one  of  these  officers,  Gessius 
Floras,  which  resulted  in  open  rebellion,  we  have 
an  account  in  Josephus  {Ant.  xx.  11,  §1 ;  B.  J.  ii. 
14,  §2).  The  same  laws  held  both  for  the  go- 
vernors of  the  imperial  and  senatorial  provinces, 
that  tiiey  couUl  not  raise  a  levy  or  exact  more  than 
an  appointed  sum  of  money  from  their  subjects, 
and  that  when  their  successors  came  they  were  to 
return  to  Rome  within  three  months  (Dio  Cass, 
liii.  15).  For  further  information  see  Walter, 
Gesch.  des  Bom.  Eechts.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PROPHET  (X''n3  :  irpocp-liTris  :  propheta). 
I.  The  Name.  —  The  ordinary  Hebrew  word  for 
prophet  is  na6«  (N''33),  derived  from  the  verb  N33> 
connected  by  Gesenius  with  y33,  "  to  bubble 
forth,"  like  a  fountain.  If  this  etymology  is  cor- 
rect, the  substantive  would  signify  either  a  person 
who,  as  it  were,  involuntarily  bursts  forth  with 
spiritual  utterances  under  the  divine  influence 
(cf.  Ps.  xlv.  1,  "  My  heart  is  hnhhling  up  of  a  good 
matter ")  or  simply  one  who  pours  forth  words. 
The  analogy  of  the  word  ?]D3  {ndtapJi),  which  has 
the  force  of  ''  dropping "  as  honey,  and  is  used  by 
Micah  (ii.  6,  llj,  Ezekiel  (.\xi.  2j,and  Amos  (vii.  16), 
in  the  sense  of  prophesying,  points  to  the  last  signi- 
fication. The  verb  X23  is  found  only  in  the  niplial 
and  hithpael,  a  peculiarity  which  it  shares  with 
many  other  words  expressive  of  speech  (cf.  loqui, 
fari,  vociferari,  concionari,  (pdeyyo/xai,  as  well  as 
fiavTeiofiai  and  vaticinari).  Bunsen  (Gott  in  Ge- 
schichte,  p.  141)  and  Davidson  [Intr.  Old  Test.  ii. 

»  In  1  Sam.  ix.  9  we  read,  "  He  that  is  now  called  a 
prophet  (^y&bi)  was  beforetime  called  a  seer  {Roeh) ;" 
from  whence  Dr.  Stanley  (/.erf.  on  Jewish.  Church)  has 
concluded  that  JloSk  was  •'  the  oldest  designation  of  the 
prophetic  office,"  "  superseded  l)y  ydhi  shortly  after 
Samuel's  time,  when  Ndbi  first  came  into  use  "  {Lect. 
xviii.,  .\ix.).  This  seems  opposed  to  the  fact  that  Xabi 
is  the  word  commonly  used  in  the  Pentatencli,  whereas 
Roeh  does  not  appear  until  the  days  of  Samuel.  The 
passage  in  the  book  of  Samuel  is  clearly  a  parenthetical 
insertion,  perliaps  made  by  the  ACibi  Nathan  (or  whoever 
was  the  original  author  of  the  book),  perhaps  .idded  at 
a  later  date,  with  the  view  of  Explaining  how  it  was 
that  Samuel  bore  the  title  of  ifoeVi,  instead  of  the  now 
usual  appellation  of  Ndbi.  To  the  writer  the  days  of 
Samuel  were  "  beforetime,"  and  be  explains  that  in  those 
ancient  days,  that  is  the  days  of  Samuel,  the  word  used 
for  prophet  was   Roeh,  not  Nubi.     Bui   that  does  not 


PROPHET 

430)  suppose  Ndbi  to  signify  the  man  to  lohom  an- 
novncements  are  made  by  God,  i.  e.  inspired.  But  it 
is  more  in  accordance  with  the  etymology  and  usage 
of  tiie  word  to  regard  it  as  signifying  (actively)  one 
liho  announces  or  piuurs  forth  the  declarations  of 
God.  The  latter  signification  is  preferred  by  Ewald, 
Havernick,  Oehler,  Hengstenberg,  Bleek,  Lee,  Pusey, 
M'Caul,  and  the  great  majority  of  Biblical  critics. 

Two  other  Hebrew  words  are  used  to  designa^te  a 
prophet,  nxn,  Roeh,  and  llTn,  Chozeh,  both  sig- 
nifying one  ivho  sees.  They  are  rendered  in  the 
A.  V".  by  "  seer ;"  in  the  LXX.  usually  by  ^Kiitwt 
or  opS>v,  sometimes  by  irpo^iiTrts  (1  Ghr.  .xxvi.  28  ; 
2  Chr.  xvi.  7, 10).  The  three  words  seem  to  be  con- 
trasted with  each  other  in  1  Chron.  xxix.  29.  "  The 
acts  of  David  the  king,  first  and  last,  behold  they 
are  written  in  tlie  book  of  Samuel  the  seer  (jffoeVj), 
and  in  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet  (^Nabi),  and 
in  the  book  of  Gad  the  seer  [Chozeh)."  Roeh  is  a 
title  almost  appropriated  to  Samuel.  It  is  only 
used  ten  times,  and  in  seven  of  these  it  is  applied  to 
Samuel  (1  Sam.  ix.  9,  11,  18,  19  ;  1  Chr.  ix.  22  ; 
xxvi.  28  ;  xxix.  29).  On  two  other  occasions  it  is 
applied  to  Hanani  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7,  10).  Once  it  is 
used  by  Isaiah  (Is.  xxx.  10)  with  no  reference  to 
any  particular  person.  It  was  superseded  in  gene- 
ral use  by  the  word  Ndbi,  wdiich  Samuel  (himself 
entitled  Ndbi  as  well  as  Roeh,  1  Sam.  iii.  20  j 
2  Clii-.  XXXV.  18)  appears  to  have  revived  after  a 
period  of  desuetude  (1  Sam.  ix.  9),  and  to  have 
applied  to  the  prophets  organized  by  him."  The 
verb  nN"l,  from  which  it  is  derived,  is  the  common 
prose  word  signifying  "  to  see;"  nTH — whence  the 
substantive  Htn,  Chozeh,  is  derived — is  more 
poetical.  Chozeh  is  rarely  found  except  in  the 
Books  of  the  Chronicles,  but  V\)T\  is  the  word  con- 
stantly used  for  the  prophetical  vision.  It  is  found 
in  the  Pentateuch,  in  Samuel,  iir  the  Chronicles,  in 
Job,  and  in  most  of  the  prophets. 

Whether  tliere  is  any  diffeience  in  the  usage  of 
these  till  ee  words,  and,  if  any,  what  that  difference 
is,  has  been  much  debated  (see  Witsius,  Iliscelt. 
Sacra,  i.  1,  §19;  Carpzovius,  Introd.  ad  Libros 
Canon.  V.  T.  iii.  1,  §2 ;  Winer,  Real-  Worterbuch, 
art.  "  Propheten  ").  Havernick  [Einleitioifi,  Th,  i. ; 
Abth.  i.  s.  56)  considers  Ndbi  to  express  the  title 
of  those  who  officially  belonged  to  the  prophetic 
order,  while  Roeh  and  Chozeh  denote  those  who 
received  a  prophetical  revelation.  Dr.  Lee  (Inspira- 
tion of  Holy  Scripture,  p.  543),  agrees  with  Haver- 
nick in  his  explimation  of  Ndbi,  but  he  identifies 
Roeh  in  meaning  rather  with  Ndbi  than  with 
Chozeh.     He  further  throws  out  a  suggestion  that 

implj'  that  Roeli  was  the  primitive  word,  and  that  I^'dbi 
first  came  into  use  subsequently  to  Samuel  (see  Heng- 
stenberg, Beitrage  zur  Ei)ileitnno  ins  A.  T.  iii.  335). 
Dr.  Stanley  represents  Chozeh  as  "  another  antique 
title."  But  on  no  sufficient  grounds.  Chozeh  is  first 
found  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  11 ;  so  that  it  does  not  seem  fo 
have  come  into  use  until  Roeh  had  almost  disappeared. 
It  is  also  fomid  in  the  books  of  Kings  (2  K.  xvii.  13) 
and  Chronicles  (frequently),  in  .4mos  (vii.  12),  Isaiah 
(xxix.  10),  Micah  (iii.  7),  and  the  derivatives  of  the  verb 
chdzdh  are  used  by  the  prophets  to  designate  their 
visions  down  to  the  Captivity  tcf.  Is.  i.  1 ;  Dan.  viii.  1  ; 
Zech.  xiii.  4).  The  derivatives  of  rd'uh  are  rarer,  and,  as 
being  prose  words,  are  chiefly  used  by  Daniel  (cf.  Ez. 
i.  1 ;  Dan.  x.  1).  On  examination  we  find  that  Ifdlxi 
existed  before  and  after  and  alongside  of  both  Roeh  and 
Chozeh,  but  that  Chozeh  was  somewhat  more  modem 
than  Boeh. 


PROPHET 

Chozeh  is  the  special  designation  of  the  propliet 
attached  to  the  royal  household.     In  2  Sam.  xxiv. 

II,  Gad  is  described  as  "the  prophet  {Nahi)  Gad, 
David's  seer  (^Chozeh)"  and  elsewhere  he  is  called 
"  David's  seer  {Chozeh)"  (1  Chr.  ,\xi.  9),  "  the  king's 
seer  (Chozeh)  "  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25).  "  The  case  of 
Gad,"  Dr.  Lee  thinks,  "  affords  the  clue  to  the  diffi- 
culty, as  it  clearly  indicates  that  attached  to  the  royal 
establishment  there  was  usually  an  individual  styled 
'  the  king's  seer,'  who  miglit  at  the  same  time  be  a 
Ndbi."  The  suggestion  is  ingenious  (see,  in  a'idition 
to  places  quoted  above,  1  Chr.  xxv.  b,  xxix.  29 ; 
'2  Chr.  xxix.  30,  xxxv.  15),  but  it  was  only  David 
(possibly  also  Manasseh,  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  18)  who,  so 
far  as  we  read,  had  this  seer  attached  to  his  person  ; 
and  in  any  case  there  is  nothing  in  the  w  ord 
Chozeh  to  denote  the  relation  of  the  prophet  to  the 
king,  but  only  in  the  connection  in  which  it  stands 
with  the  word  king.  On  the  whole  it  would  seem 
that  the  same  pei'sons  are  designated  by  the  three 
words  Ndbi,  Eo'eh,  and  Chozeh ;  the  last  two  titles 
being  derived  from  tiie  prophets'  power  of  seeing 
the  visions  presented  to  them  by  God,  the  first  from 
their  function  of  revealing  and  proclaiming  God's 
truth  to  men.  When  (Gregory  ISaz.  (Or.  2S)  calls 
Ezekiel  b  tS>v  fieydf^tvu  eirdnTijs  Kal  e|ij-y7jT^s 
fxvcrTrtpiwv,  he  gives  a  sufficiently  exact  translation 
of  the  two  titles  Chozeh  or  Roeh,  and  Nahi. 

The  word  Ndbi  is  uniformly  translated  in  the 
LXX.  by  Trpo(|)7)T7jj,  and  in  the  A.  V.  by  "  prophet." 
In  classiail  Greek,  npo(j)riTi]s  signifies  07ie  who 
speaks  fur  another,  specially  one  who  speaks  for  a 
god  and  so  inteiprets  his  will  to  man  (Liddell  & 
Scott,  s.  v.).  Hence  its  essential  meaning  is  "  an 
interpreter."  Thus  Apollo  is  a  irpocbTjTris  as  being 
the  interpreter  of  Zeus  (Aesch.  Eiim.  19).  Poets 
are  the  Prophets  of  tiie  J\Iuses,  as  being  their  in- 
terpreters (Plat.  Phaedr.  262  D).  The  irpocpriTai 
attached  to  heathen  temj)les  are  so  named  from  then- 
interpreting  tlie  oracles  delivered  by  the  inspired  and 
unconscious  fxavreis  (I'lat.  Tim.  72  B;  Herod,  vii. 

I II,  note,  ed.  Baehr).  We  have  IMato's  authority  for 
deriving  /xavrts  from  naifo/xai  {I.  c).  The  use  of 
the  word  7rpo(^T)T»)s  in  its  modern  sense  is  post- 
classical,  and  is  derived  from  tlie  LXX. 

From  the  mediaeval  use  of  the  word  irpocfyrireia, 
prophectf  passed  into  the  English  language  in  the 
sense  of  prediction,  and  this  sense  it  has  retained 
.13  its  popular  meaning  (see  Richardson,  s.  v.). 
The  lai'ger  sense  of  interpretation  has  not,  however, 
been  lost.  Thus  we  find  in  Bacon,  "  An  e.xercise 
commonly  called  prophesying,  which  was  this  : 
that  the  ministers  within  a  precinct  did  meet  upon 
a  week  day  in  some  principal  town,  where  there  was 
son>e  ancient  grave  ministei  that  was  president,  and 
an  auditory  admitted  of  gentlemen  or  other  persons 
of  leisure.  Then  every  minister  successively,  be- 
ginning with  the  youngest,  did  handle  one  and  tlie 
same  pai't  of  Scripture,  spending  severally  some 
(piai  ter  of  an  hour  or  better,  and  in  the  whole  some 
two  hoars.  And  so  the  exercise  being  begun  and 
concluded  with  })rayer,  and  the  president  giving  a 
text  for  the  next  meeting,  the  assembly  w;is  dis- 
solved" (Pacification  of  the  Church).     This  mean- 

i"  It  seems  to  be  iiicnrroct  to  say  that  the  Knglish  word 
was  "  originally  "  used  in  the  widar  sense  of  "  preaching," 
and  tliat  it  becjime  "  limllcd  "  to  the  meaning  of  "  pre- 
dicting," in  the  scvonteenth  century,  in  consequence  of  "  an 
etjaiiological  misUike  "  (Stanley,  l.ect.  xix.  xx.).  'I'he  word 
entered  into  the  Englisli  language  in  Its  sense  of  i)rodict- 
ing.  It  could  not  have  been  otherwise,  for  at  the  time 
of  the  formation  of  the  English  language,  the  word  npo- 
VOL.  II.  ' 


PROPHET 


929 


ing  of  the  word  is  made  further  familiar  to  us  by 
the  title  of  Jeiemy  Taylor's  treatise  "  On  Libeily 
of  Prophesying."  Kor  was  t];ere  any  lisk  of  the 
title  of  a  book  published  in  our  own  days,  "  On  the 
Piophetical  Office  of  the  Church"  (bxf.  18.'.8), 
being  misunderstood.  In  fact  the  English  word 
prophet,  like  the  word  inspiration,  has  always  been 
used  in  a  larger  and  in  a  closer  sense.  In  the  laro-er 
•sense  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  a  "  prophet,"  Jloses 
is  a  '■  prophet,"  Mahomet  is  a  "  projihet."  The 
expression  means  that  they  pi-oclaimed  and  pub- 
lished a  new  religious  dispensation.  In  a  similar 
though  not  identical  sense,  the  Church  is  said  to 
have  a  "  prophetical,"  «'.  e.  an  expository  and  intei- 
pretative  office.  But  in  its  closer  sense  the  word, 
according  to  usage  though  not  accoixiing  to  ety- 
mology, involves  the  idea  of  foresight.  And  this 
is  and  always  has  been  its  moi'e  usual  acceptation.'' 
The  difl'erent  meanings,  or  shades  of  meaning,  in 
which  the  abstract  noun  is  employed  in  Scripture, 
have  been  drawn  out  by  Locke  as  follows  : — ■"  Pro- 
phecy comprehends  three  things:  prediction;  sing- 
irig  by  the  dictate  of  the  Spirit ;  and  understanding 
and  explaining  the  mysterious,  hidden  sense  of 
Scripture,  bj'an  immediate  illimiinatiou  and  motion 
of  the  Spirit "  (^Paraphrase  of  1  Cor.  xii.  note, 
p.  121,  Loud.  1742).  It  is  in  virtue  of  this  hist 
signification  of  the  word,  that  the  prophets  of  the 
N.  T.  are  so  called  (1  Cor.  xii.):  by  virtue  of  the 
second,  that  (he  sons  of  Asaph,  &c.  are  said  to  have 
"prophesied  with  a  harp"  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3),  and 
Miriam  and  Deborah  are  termed  "  prophetesses." 
That  the  idea  of  potential  if  not  actual  prediction 
enters  into  the  conception  expressed  by  the  woid 
prophecy,  when  that  word  is  used  to  designate  the 
function  of  the  Hebrew  prophets,  seems  to  be  pioved 
by  the  following  passages  of  Scripture,  Dent,  xviii. 
22;  Jer.  xxviii.  9;  Acts  ii.  30,  iii.  18,  21  ;  1  Pet. 
i.  10  ;  2  Pet.  i.  19,  20,  iii.  2.  Etymologically,  how- 
ever, it  is  certam  that  neither  prescience  nor  predic- 
tion are  implied  by  the  term  used  in  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  or  English  huiguage. 

II.  Prophetical  Order. — The  sacerdotal  order 
was  originally  the  instrument  by  which  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Jewish  Theocracy  wei-e  fciught  and 
governed  in  things  spiritual.  Feast  and  fast,  sacri- 
fice and  offering,  rite  and  ceremony,  constituted  a 
varied  and  ever-recurring  system  of  training  and 
teaching  by  type  and  symbol.  To  the  priests,  too, 
was  entiusted  the  work  of  "  teaching  the  children 
of  Israel  all  the  statutes  which  the  Lord  hath 
spoken  unto  them  by  the  hand  of  Moses  "  ( Lev.  x. 
II).  Teaching  by  act  and  teaching  by  word  were 
alike  their  task.  This  task  they  adequately  ful- 
filled for  some  hundred  or  more  years  after  the 
giving  of  the  Law  at  Mount  Sinai.  But  during 
the  time  of  the  Judges,  the  priesthood  sank  into  u 
state  of  degeneracy,  and  the  peoi)lo  were  no  longer 
affected  by  the  acted  lessons  of  the  ceremonial 
.service.  They  required  less  enigmatic  warnings 
and  exhortations.  Under  these  circumstances  a 
new  moral  power  was  evoked  —  the  Prophetic 
Order.  Samuel,  himself  a  Levite,  of  the  fiunily 
of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  vi.  28),  and  almost  certainly  a 

<()r)Tci'a  liad,  by  usage,  a-^sumcd  popularly  the  meaning  of 
prediction.  And  we  find  it  ordinarily  employed,  by  early 
as  well  as  by  late  writers,  in  this  sense  (sec  Polydore 
Virgil,  Iluturij  of  Knyland,  iv.  161,  Camden,  ed.  1S46; 
Coventry  i/ysteries,  p.  ti,'),  Sliakspeare  Soc.  Kd.,  18-tl,  and 
Hichardson,  .<t.  v.).  It  is  probable  that  the  meaning  wjis 
"  limited  "  to  "  prediction  "  as  much  and  as  little  befuiv 
Uio  sevent<'pnth  i<"nturv  as  it  has  been  since. 

3  0 


030 


PROPHET 


priest,"!  nvas  the  instrument  used  at  once  for  effect- 
incj  a  reform  in  the  sacerdotal  order  (1  Chr.  ix.  22), 
and  for  giving  to  the  prophets  a  position  of  im- 
Y)ortance  which  they  had  never  before  held,  ^o 
important  was  the  work  wrought  by  liim,  that 
he  is  classed  in  Holy  Scripture  with  Moses  (Jer. 
XV.  1  ;  Ps.  xcix.  6;  Acts  iii.  24),  Samuel  being 
the  great  religious  reformer  and  organizer  of  the 
prophetical  order,  as  Moses  was  the  great  legislator 
and  founder  of  the  priestly  rule.  Nevertheless, 
it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Samuel  created  the 
prophetic  order  as  a  new  thing  before  unknown. 
'I'he  germs  both  of  the  prophetic  and  of  the  regal 
order  are  found  in  the  Law  as  given  to  the  Israelites 
by  Moses  (Deut.  xiii.  1,  xviii.  20,  xvii.  18),  but 
they  were  not  yet  developed,  because  there  was  not 
yet  the  demand  for  them.  Samuel,  who  evolved 
the  one,  himself  saw  the  evolution  of  the  other. 
The  title  of  prophet  is  found  before  the  legislation 
of  Mount  Sinai.  When  Abraham  is  called  a  prophet 
(Gen. I XX.  7),  it  is  probably  in  the  sense  of  a  friend 
of  God,  to  whom  He  makes  known  His  will;  and 
in  the  same  sense  the  name  seems  to  be  applied  to 
the  patriarchs  in  general  (Ps.  cv.  15)."^  Moses  is 
more  specifically  a  prophet,  as  being  a  proclaimer 
of  a  new  dispensation,  a  revealer  of  God's  will,  and 
in  virtue  of  his  divinely  inspired  songs  (Ex.  xv. ; 
Deut.  xxxii.,  xxxiii. ;  Ps.  xc),  but  his  main  work 
was  not  prophetical,  and  he  is  therefore  formally 
distinguished  from  prophets  (Num.  xii.  6)  as  well 
as  classed  with  them  (E)eut.  xviii.  15,  xxxiv.  10). 
Aaron  is  the  prophet  of  Moses  (Ex.  vii.  1)  ;  Miriam 
(Ex.  XV.  20)  is  a  prophetess  ;  and  we  find  the 
prophetic  gift  in  the  elders  who  "  prophesied " 
when  '■  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  rested  upon  them," 
and  in  Eldad  and  Medad,  who  "  prophesied  in  the 
camp"  (Num.  xi.  27).  At  the  time  of  the  sedi- 
tion of  Miriam,  the  possible  existence  of  prophets 
is  recognized  (Num.  xii.  6).  In  the  days  of  the 
Judges  we  find  that  Deborah  (Judg.  iv.  4)  is  a 
prophetess  ;  a  prophet  (Judg.  vi.  8)  rebukes  and 
exhorts  the  Israelites  when  oppressed  by  the  Mi- 
dianites;  and,  in  Samuel's  childhood,  "a  man  of 
God  "  predicts  to  Eli  the  death  of  his  two  sons,  and 
the  curse  that  was  to  fall  on  his  descendants  (1  Sam. 
ii.  27). 

Samuel  took  measures  to  make  his  work  of 
restoration  permanent  as  well  as  effective  for  the 
moment.  For  this  purpose  he  instituted  Com- 
panies, or  Colleges  of  Prophets.  One  we  find  in 
his  lifetime  at  Ramah  (1  Sam.  xix.  19,  20)  ;  others 


PROPHET 

aftei-wards  at  Bethel  (2  K.  ii.  3),  Jei-icho  (2  K.  ii. 
5),  Gilgal  (2  K.  iv.  38),  and  elsewhere  (2  K. 
vi.  1).  Their  constitution  and  object  were  similar 
to  those  of  Theological  Colleges.  Into  them  were 
gathered  promising  students,  and  here  they  were 
trained  for  the  office  which  they  were  afterwards 
destined  to  fulfil.  So  successful  were  these  insti- 
tutions, that  from  the  time  of  Samuel  to  the  clos- 
ing of  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  there 
seems  never  to  have  been  wanting  a  due  supply 
of  men  to  keep  up  the  line  of  official  prophets.^ 
The  apocryphal  books  of  the  Maccabees  (i.  iv.  46, 
ix.  27,  xiv.  41)  and  of  Ecclesiasticus  (xxxvi.  15) 
represent  them  as  extinct.  The  colleges  appear  to 
have  consisted  of  students  differing  in  number. 
Sometimes  they  were  very  numerous  (1  K.  xviii.  4, 
xxii.  6;  2  K.  ii.  16).  One  elderly,  or  leading 
prophet,  presided  over  them  (1  Sam.  .xix.  20), 
called  their  Father  (1  Sam.  x.  12),  or  Master 
(2  K.  ii.  3),  who  was  apparently  admitted  to  his 
office  by  the  ceremony  of  anointing  (1  K.  xix.  16  ; 
Is.  Ixi.  1;  Ps.  cv.  15>.  They  were  called  his 
sons.  Their  chief  subject  of  study  was,  no 
tloubt,  the  Law  and  its  interpretation  ;  oral,  as 
distinct  from  symbolical,  teaching  being  hence- 
forward tacitly  transferred  fiom  the  priestly 
to  the  prophetical  order.'  Subsidiary  subjects 
of  instruction  were  music  and  sacred  poetry, 
both  of  which  had  been  connected  with  ])iophecy 
from  the  time  of  Moses  (Ex.  xv.  20)  and  the 
Judges  (Judg.  iv.  4,  v.  1).  The  prophets  that  meet 
Saul  "  came  down  from  the  high  place  with  a 
psaltery  and  a  tabret,  and  a  pipe  and  a  harp  before 
them"  (1  Sam.  x.  5).  Elijah  calls  a  minstrel  to 
evoke  the  prophetic  gift  in  himself  (2  K.  iii.  15). 
David  "  separates  to  the  service  of  the  sons  of 
Asaph  and  of  Heman  and  of  Jeduthun,  who  should 
prophesy  with  harps  and  with  psalteries  and  with 
cymbals.  .  .  All  these  were  under  the  hands  of 
theii-  father  for  song  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  with 
cymbals,  psalteries,  and  harps  for  the  service  of 
tire  house  of  God"  (1  Chr.  xxv.  16).  Hym.ns,  or 
sacred  songs,  are  found  in  the  Piooks  of  Jonah 
(ii.  2),  Isaiah  (xii.  1,  xxvi.  1),  Habakkuk  (iii. 
2).  And  it  was  probably  the  duty  of  the  pro- 
phetical students  to  compose  verses  to  be  sung  in 
the  Temple.  (See  Lowth,  Sacred  Poetry  of  the 
Hehrcics,  Lect.  xviii.)  Having  been  themselves 
trained  and  taught,  the  prophets,  whether  still  re- 
siding within  their  college,  or  having  left  its  pre- 
cincts,  had    the    task   of  teaching  others.      From 


«  Dr.  Stanley  (tect.  xviii.)  declares  it  to  be  "doubtful 
if  he  was  of  Levitical  descent,  and  certain  that  he  was 
not  a  priest."  If  the  record  of  1  Chr.  vi.  28  is  correct, 
it  is  certain  that  he  was  a  Levite  by  descent  though 
an  Epbrathite  hy  habitation  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  There  is  every 
probability  that  he  was  a  priest  (cf.  1  Sam.  i.  22,  ii.  11, 
18,  vii.  5,  17,  X.  1,  xiii.  ll)-an(l  no  presumption  tn  the 
contrary.  The  fact  on  which  Dr.  Stanley  relies,  that 
Samuel  lived  "not  at  Gibeon  or  at  Nob  but  at  Ramah," 
and  that  "  the  prophetic  schools  were  at  liainah,  and  at 
Bethel,  and  at  Gilgal,  not  at  Hebron  and  Anathoth," 
does  not  suffice  to  raise  a  presumption.  As  Judge, 
Samuel  would  have  lived  where  it  was  most  suitable 
for  the  judge  to  dwell.  Of  the  three  colleges,  that  at 
Kamah  was  alone  founded  by  Samuel,  of  course  where 
he  lived  himself,  and  even  where  Ramah  was  we  do  not 
know :  one  of  the  latest  hypotheses  places  it  two  miles 
from  Hebron. 

'I  According  to  Hcngstenberg's  view  of  prophecy, 
Abraham  was  a  prophet  bcaiuse  he  received  revelations 
hy  the.  meavs  of  dream  and  vision  (Gen.  xv.  12). 

e  There  seems  no  sufficient  ground  for  the  connnon 


statement  that,  after  the  schism,  the  colleges  existed  only 
in  the  Israelitish  kingdom,  or  for  Knohel's  supposition 
that  they  ceased  with  Elisha  (^Prophetismus,  ii.  39), 
nor  again  for  Bishop  Lowth's  statement  that  "  they 
existed  from  the  earliest  times  of  the  Hebrew  republic" 
(Sacred  Poetry,  Lect.  xviii.),  or  for  M.  Nicolas'  assertion 
that  their  previous  establishment  can  be  inferred  from 
1  Sam.  viii.  ix.  x.  (Etudes  critiques  snr  la  Bible,  p.  365). 
We  have,  however,  no  actual  proof  of  their  existence 
except  in  the  days  of  Samuel  and  of  Elijah  and  Elisha. 

f  It  is  a  vulgar  error  respecting  Jewish  history  to 
suppose  that  there  was  an  antagonism  between  the 
prophets  and  the  priests.  There  is  not  a  trace  of  such 
antagonism.  Isaiah  may  denounce  a  wicked  hierarchy 
(i.  10),  but  it  is  becau.se  it  is  wicked,  not  because  it  is 
a  hierarchy.  Malachi  "  sharply  reproves "  the  priests 
(ii.  1),  but  it  is  in  order  to  support  the  priesthood 
(cf.  i.  14).  Mr.  F.  \V.  Newman  even  designates  Ezekiel's 
writings  as  "hard  sacerdotalism,"  "  tedious  and  unedify- 
ing  as  Leviticus  itself"  (flebr.  Monarch,  p.  330).  The 
I'rophetical  Oider  was,  in  truth,  supplemental  not  an- 
tjigonistic  to  the  Saccrdot^il. 


PROPHET 

the  question  addressed  to  the  Shunamite  by  her 
husband,  "  Wherefore  wilt  thou  go  to  him  to-day? 
It  is  neither  new  moon  nor  Sabbath"  (2  K.  iv. 
2;3),  it  appears  that  weei<ly  and  monthly  religious 
meetuigs  were  held  as  an  ordinary  practice  by  the 
prophets  (see  Patrick,  Cornm.  in  foe).  Thus  we 
iind  that  "  Elisha  sat  in  his  house,"  engaged  in  his 
olhcial  occupation  (cf.  Ezek.  viii.  1,  xiv.  1,  xx.  1), 
"and  the  elders  sat  with  him"  (2  K.  vi.  32), 
when  the  King  of  Israel  sent  to  slay  him.  It  was 
at  these  meetings,  probably,  tliat  many  of  the 
warnings  and  exhortations  on  moi-ality  and  spiritual 
religion  were  addressed  by  ttie  proj)h(!ts  to  their 
countrymen.  The  general  appearance  and  life  of 
the  prophet  were  very  similar  to  those  of  the 
Kastern  dervish  at  the  ))reseut  day.  His  dress 
was  a  hairy  garment,  girt  with  a  leathern  girdle 
(Is.  XX.  2;  Zech.  xiii.''4;  Matt.  iii.  4).  He  was 
married  or  unmarried  as  he  chose ;  but  his  manner 
of  life  and  diet  were  stern  and  austere  (2  K.  iv. 
10,  38  ;  1  K.  xix.  6  ;  Matt.  iii.  4). 

III.  The  Prophetic  Gift. — We  have  been 
speaking  of  the  Fi-ophetic  Order.  To  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order  and  to  possess  the  prophetic  gift 
are  not  convertible  terms.  There  might  be  mem- 
bers of  the  prophetic  order  to  whom  the  gift  of 
prophecy  was  not  vouchsafed.  There  might  be 
inspired  prophets,  who  did  not  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order.  Generally,  the  inspired  prophet 
came  from  the  College  of  the  Prophets,  and  be- 
longed to  the  prophetic  order ;  but  this  was  not 
always  the  case.  In  the  instance  of  the  Prophet 
Amos,  the  rule  and  the  exception  are  both  mani- 
fested. When  Amaziah,  the  idolatrous  Israelitish 
priest,  threatens  the  prophet,  and  desires  him  to 
"flee  away  into  the  laud  ofJudah,  and  there  eat 
bread  and  prophesy  there,  but  not  to  prophesy 
again  any  more  at  Bethel,"  Amos  in  reply  says, 
"  1  was  no  prophet,  neither  was  I  a  prophet's  son  ; 
but  I  was  an  herdsman,  and  a  gatherer  of  sycamore 
fruit;  and  the  Lord  took  me  as  I  followed  the  flock, 
and  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  Go  prophesy  unto  my 
people  Israel"  (vii.  14).  That  is,  though  called 
to  the  prophetic  office,  he  did  not  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order,  and  had  not  been  trained  in  the 
prophetical  colleges ;  and  this,  he  indicates,  was  an 
unusual  occurrence.  (See  J.  Smith  on  Prophecy, 
c.  ix.). 

The  sixteen  prophets  whose  l)ooks  are  in  the 
Canon  have  therefore  that  place  of  honour,  because 
they  were  endowed  with  the  prophetic  gift  as  well 
as  ordinarily  (so  tlir  as  we  know)  belonging  to  the 
])rnphctic  order.  There  were  hundreds  of  prophets 
contemporary  with  each  of  these  sixteen  yjrophets ; 
and  no  doubt  numbeiless  compositions  in  sacred 
poetry  and  numberless  moral  exhortjitions  were 
issued  from  the  several  schools,  but  only  sixteen 
books  find  their  place  in  the  Canon.  Why  is  this  ? 
because  these  sixteen  had  what  tlieir  brother- 
collegians  had  not,  the  Divine  call  to  the  ortice  of 
prophet,  and  the  Divine  illumination  to  enlighten 
tiiem.  It  was  not  sufficient  to  have  been  taught 
and  trained  in  preparation  for  a  future  call.  Teach- 
ing and  training  served  as  a  j)reparatioii  only. 
When  the  schoolmaster's  work  was  done,  then,  if 
the  instrument  w;is  worthy,  God's   work   began. 

B  Hishop  Lowth  "  esteems  the  whole  Huok  of  Isaiali 
poelical,  a  few  passages  exempted,  which,  if  brought 
together,  would  not  at  most  exceed  the  bulk  of  tive  or 
six  chapters,"  "  half  of  the  Muok  of  .leremiah,"  "  the 
greater  part  of  I'Jzekiel."  The  rest  of  thn  prophets  luo 
mainly  poetical,  but  llaggai  is  "pri>saic,"  anil  .lunah  and 


PROPHET 


931 


Moses  had  an  external  aiU  at  the  burning  bush 
(Ex.  iii.  2).  The  Lord  called  Samuel,  so  that  Eli 
perceived,  and  Samuel  learned,  that  it  was  the  Lord 
who  called  him  (1  Sam.  iii.  10).  Isaiah  (vi.  8), 
Jeremiah  (i.  5),  Ezekiel  (ii.  4),  Amos  (vii.  15), 
declare  their  special  mission.  Nor  was  it  sufficient 
for  this  call  to  have  been  made  once  for  all.  Each 
prophetical  utterance  is  the  result  of  a  communi- 
cation of  the  Divine  to  the  human  spirit,  received 
either  by  "  vision"  (Is.  vi.  1)  or  by  "  the  word  ol 
the  Lord  "  (Jer.  ii.  1).  (See  Aids  to  Faith,  Essay 
iii.,  "On  Prophecy.")  What  then  are  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  sixteen  proiihets,  thus  called  and 
commissioned,  and  entrusted  with  the  messages  of 
God  to  His  people  ? 

(1.)  They  were  the  national  poets  of  Judaea. 
We  have  already  shown  that  music  and  poetry, 
chants  and  hymns,  were  a  main  part  of  the  studies  of 
the  class  from  which,  generally  speaking,  they  were 
derived.  As  is  natural,  we  find  not  only  the  songs 
])reviously  specified,  but  the  rest  of  their  compo- 
sitions, poetical  or  breathing  the  spirit  of  poetry.s 

(2.)  They  were  annalists  and  historians.  A  great 
portion  of  Isaiah,  of  Jeremiah,  of  Daniel,  of  Jonah, 
of  Haggai,  is  direct  or  indirect  history. 

(3.)  They  were  preachers  of  patriotism ;  their 
patriotism  being  founded  on  the  religious  motive. 
To  the  subject  of  the  Theocracy,  the  enemy  of  his 
nation  was  the  enemy  of  God,  the  tiaitor  to  the 
public  weal  was  a  traitor  to  his  God  ;  a  denunciation 
of  an  enemy  was  a  denunciation  of  a  representa- 
tive of  evil,  an  e.xhortation  in  behalf  of  Jerusalem 
was  an  exhortatron  in  behalf  of  God's  Kingdom  on 
earth,  "  the  city  of  our  God,  the  mountain  of 
holiness,  beautiful  for  situation,  the  joy  of  the 
whole  earth,  the  citv  of  the  great  King "  (Ps. 
xlviii.  1,2). 

(4.)  They  were  preachers  of  morals  and  of  spiri- 
tual religion.  The  symbolical  teaching  of  the  Law 
had  lost  much  of  its  efl'ect.  Instead  of  learning  the 
necessity  of  purity  by  the  legal  washings,  the  ma- 
jority came  to  i-est  in  the  outward  act  as  in  itself 
sufficient.  It  was  the  work,  then,  of  the  prophets  to 
hold  up  before  the  eyes  of  their  countrymen  a  high 
and  pure  morality,  not  veiled  in  symbols  and  acts, 
but  such  as  none  could  profess  to  misunderstand. 
Thus,  in  his  first  chapter,  Isaiah  contrasts  ceremo- 
nial ol)servances  with  spiritual  morality :  "  Your 
r.ew  moons  and  your  appointed  feasts  my  soul 
hateth :  they  are  a  trouble  to  me ;  I  am  weary  to 

bear  them Wash  you,  make  you  clean  ;  put 

away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine  eyes  ; 
cease  to  do  evil ;  learn  to  do  well ;  seek  judgment ; 
relieve  the  oppressed,  judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for 
the  widow"  (i.  14-17).  He  proceeds  to  denounce 
God's  judgments  on  the  oppression  and  covetous- 
ness  of  the  rulers,  the  pride  of  the  women  (c.  iii.), 
on  grasping,  profligacy,  iniciuity,  injustice  (o.  v.), 
and  so  on  throughout.  The  system  of  morals  put 
fbrwanl  by  the  prophets  if  not  higher,  or  sterner, 
or  piu-er  than  that  of  the  Law,  is  more  plainly  d'> 
clared,  and  with  greatei',  because  now  more  needed, 
vehemence  of  diction.'' 

(5.)  They  were  extraordinary,  but  yet  authorized, 
exponents  of  the  Law.  As  an  instance  of  this,  we 
may  tjike  Isaiah's  description  of  a  true  fast  (Iviii. 

Daniel  are  plain  prose  (^Sacred  i'udry,  Lcct.  xxi.). 

>>  "  Magna  fides  et  grandis  audacia  Propheturimi,"  says 
St.  Jerome  {in  A'zel.-.).  This  was  their  geiicrul  character- 
istic, but  that  gifts  and  graces  miptht  be  dissevered,  is 
proved  by  the  Ciises  of  Uiilaani,  .fonah,  Caiuphas,  and  ihe 
dlsnhi'dicnt  pniphct  nfJudah. 

3   O  2 


932 


PEOPHET 


3-7) ;  Ezekiel's  explanation  of  the  sins  of  the  flither 
being  visited  on  the  children  (c.  xviii.)  ;  Micah's  pre- 
ference of  "  doing  justly,  loving  mercy,  and  walking 
humbly  with  God,"  to  "  thousands  of  rams  and  ten 
thousands  of  rivers  of  oil"  (vi.  6-8).  In  these 
as  in  other  similar  cases  (cf.  Hos.  vi.  6 ;  Amos 
V.  21),  it  Vi^as  the  task  of  the  prophets  to  restore 
the  balance  which  had  been  oveithrown  by  the 
Jews  and  their  teachers  dwelling  on  one  side  or  on 
the  outer  covering  of  a  truth  or  of  a  duty,  and 
leaving  the  other  side  or  the  inner  meaning  out  of 
sight. 

(6.)  They  held,  as  we  have  shown  above,  a 
pastoral  or  quasi-pastoral  office. 

(7.)  They  were  a  political  power  in  the  state. 
Strong  in  the  safeguard  of  their  religions  character, 
they  were  able  to  serve  as  a  counterpoise  to  the 
royal  authority  when  wielded  even  by  an  Ahab. 

(8.)  But  the  prophets  weie  something  more  than 
national  poets  and  annalists,  pi-eachers  of  patriotism, 
moial  teachers,  exponents  of  the  Law,  pastors,  and 
politicians.  We  have  not  yet  touched  upon  their 
most  essential  characteristic,  which  is,  that  they 
were  instruments  of  revealing  God's  will  to  man, 
as  in  other  ways,  so,  specially,  by  predicting 
future  events,  and,  in  particular,  by  foretelling  the 
incarnation  of  the  I^ord  J«sus  Christ,  and  the  re- 
demption effected  by  Him.'  There  are  two  chief 
ways  of  exhibiting  this  fact:  one  is  suitable  when 
discoursing  with  Christians,  the  other  when  argu- 
ir.g  with  unbelievers.  To  the  Christian  it  is 
enough  to  show  that  tJie  truth  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment and  the  truthfulness  of  its  authors,  and  of 
the  Lord  Himself,  are  bound  up  with  the  truth 
of  the  existence  of  this  predictive  element  in  the 
prophets.  To  the  unbeliever  it  is  necessary  to  show 
that  facts  have  verified  their  jiredictions. 

(a.)  In  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  the  first  chapter, 
we  find  a  quotation  fiom  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  "Be- 
hold a  virgin  shall  be  with  child,  and  shall  bring 
forth  a  son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Em- 
manuel;" and,  at  the  same  time,  we  find  a  state- 
ment that  the  birth  of  Christ  took  place  as  it  did 
"  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the 
Lord  by  the  prophet,"  in  those  words  (i.  22,  23). 
This  means  that  the  prophecy  was  the  declaration 
of  (iod's  purpose,  and  that  the  circumstances  of  the 
Wrth  of  Chiist  were  the  fulfilment  of  that  purpose. 
Then,  eitlier  the  predictive  element  exists  in  the 
Book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  or  the  authority  of  the 
Evangelist  St.  Matthew  must  be  given  up.  The 
same  Evangelist  testifies  to  the  same  Prophet  havino- 


'  Dr.  Davidson  pronounces  it  as  "  now  commonly 
admitted  that  the  essential  part  of  biblical  prophecy  does 
not  lie  in  predicting  contingent  events,  but  in  divining 
the  essentially  religious  in  the  course  of  history.  ...  In 
no  prophecy  can  it  be  shown  that  the  literal  predicting  of 
disiant  historical  events  is  contained.  ...  In  confomiify 
with  the  analogy  of  prophecy  generally,  special  predic- 
tions concerning  Christ  do  not  appear  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment." Dr.  Davidson  must  mean  that  this  is  "  now 
commonly  admitted"  by  writers  like  himself,  who,  fol- 
lowing Eichhorn,  resolve  "  the  pr«iphet's  delinealions  of 
the  future"  into  "in  essence  itotldng  but  forebodings 
— efforts  of  tlie  spiritual  eije  to  bring  up  before  itself 
the  distinct  form  of  the  future.  The  prevision  of  the 
prophet  is  intensified  presentiment."  Of  course,  if  the 
powers  of  the  prophets  were  simply  ''  forebodings  "  and 
"  presentiments "  of  the  human  spirit  in  "  its  pre- 
coiiscious  region,"  they  could  not  do  more  than  make 
indefinite  guesses  about  the  future.  But  this  is  not 
the  Jewish  nor  the  Christian  theory  of  prophecy.  Sec 
S.   Ba.sil  {in  Ksai.  iii.),    S.  Chrys.  (Uoni.    xxii.    t.    v. 


PROPHET 

"spoken  of "  John  the  Baptist  (iii.  3)  in  woids 
which  he  quotes  from  Is.  xl.  3.  He  say.<!  (iv.'l.'-!- 
15)  that  Jesus  came  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum, 
"that"  other  words  "  spoken  by"  the  same  Pro- 
phet (ix.  1)  "might  be  fulfilled."  He  says  (viii. 
17)  that  Jesus  did  certain  acfc>,  "  that  it  might  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet " 
(Is.  liii.  4).  He  says  (xii.  17)  that  Jesus  acteil  in 
a  particular  manner,  "  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet"  in  words 
quoted  from  chap.  xiii.  1.  Then,  if  we  believe  St. 
Matthew,  we  must  believe  that  in  the  pages  of  the 
Piophet  Isaiah  there  was  predicted  that  which 
Jesus  some  seven  hundred  years  afterwards  fulfilled.'' 
But,  further,  we  have  not  only  the  evidence  of  the 
Evangelist ;  we  have  the  evidence  of  the  Lord  Him- 
self. He  declares  (Matt.  xiii.  U)  that  in  the  Jews 
of  his  age  "  is  fulfilled  the  prophecy  of  Esaia^s,  which 
saith— ''  (Is.  vi.  9).  He  -says  (Matt.  xv.  7)  "  E.saias 
well  prophesied  of  them"  (Is.  xxix.  13).  Then,  if  we 
believe  our  Lord's  sayings  and  the  record  of  them, 
we  must  believe  in  prediction  as  existing  in  the 
Prophet  Isaiah.  This  prophet,  who  is  cited  be- 
tween fifty  and  sixty  times,  may  be  taken  as  a 
sample  ;  but  the  same  argument  might  be  brought 
forward  with  respect  to  Jeremiah  (Matt.  ii.  18; 
Heb.  viii.  8),  Daniel  (Matt.  xxiv.  15),  Hosea  (Matt. 
ii.  15;  Kom.  ix.  25),  Joel  (Acts  ii.  17),  Amos 
(Acts  vii.  42  ;  xv.  16),  Jonah  (Matt.  xii.  40),  Micah 
(Matt.  xii.  7),  Habakkuk  (Acts  xiii.  41),  Haggai 
(Heb.  xii.  26),  Zechariah  (Matt.  xxi.  5  ;  Mark  xiv. 
27;  Joh.  xix.  37),  Malachi  (Matt.  xi.  10;  Mark  i. 
2  ;  Luke  vii.  27).  With  this  evidence  for  so  many 
of  the  prophets,  it  would  be  idle  to  civil  with 
respect  to  Ezekiel,  Obadiah,  Nahum,  Zephauiah ; 
the  more,  as  "  the  Prophets "  are  frecjuently 
spoken  of  together  (Matt.  ii.  23 ;  Acts  xiii.  40  ;  xv. 
15)  as  authoritative.  The  Psjrlms  are  quoted  no 
less  than  seventy  times,  and  very  fiequently  as 
being  predictive. 

()3.)  The  argument  with  the  unbeliever  does  not 
admit  of  being  brought  to  an  issue  so  concisely. 
Here  it  is  necessary  (1)  to  point  out  the  existence 
of  ceitain  declarations  as  to  future  events,  the  pro- 
bability of  which  was  not  discernible  by  human 
sagacity  at  the  time  that  the  declarations  were 
made;  (2)  to  show  that  certain  events  did  after- 
wards take  place  corresponding  with  these  declara- 
tions; (3)  to  show  that  a  chance  coincidence  is  not 
an  adequate  hypothesis  on  which  to  account  tor 
that  correspondence. 

Davison,  in  his  valuable  Discourses  on  Prophecy, 

137,  ed.  1612),  Clem.  Alex.  (Strom.  1.  ii.),  Euseb.  (Hem. 
Evang.  v.  132,  ed.  1544),  and  Justin  Martyr  (ViaZ.  cum 
Tryph.  p.  224,  ed.  1636).     (See  Suicer,  s.  v.  Trpoi|)7)Tr;s.) 

^  This  conclusion  cannot  be  escaped  by  pressing  the 
words  'iva  ij-Xr^pmBrj,  for  if  they  do  not  moan  that  certain 
things  were  done  in  order  that  the  Divine  predestination 
might  he  accomplished,  which  predestination  was  already 
deelared  by  the  Piophet,  they  must  mean  that  Jesus 
Christ  knowingly  moulded  his  acts  so  as  to  be  in  accord- 
ance with  what  was  said  in  an  ancient  book  which  in 
reality  had  no  reference  to  him,  a  thing  which  is  entirely 
at  variance  with  the  character  drawn  of  him  by  St.  Mat- 
thew, and  which  would  make  him  a  conscious  impostor, 
inasmuch  as  he  himself  appeals  to  the  prophecies.  Further, 
it  would  imply  (as  in  Matt.  i.  22)  that  Uod  Himself  con- 
trived certain  events  (as  those  connected  with  the  birth 
of  Christ),  not  in  order  that  they  might  be  in  accordance 
wiih  His  will,  but  in  order  that  thi^y  might  be  agreeable 
to  the  declarations  of  a  certain  book — than  which  nothing 
could  well  be  more  absurd. 


PKOPHET 

fixes  a  '•  Criterion  of  Prophecy,"  and  in  accord- 
ance with  it  he  describes  "  the  conditions  which 
would  confer  cogency  of  evidence  on  single  ex- 
amiiles  of  prophecy,"  in  the  following  manner: 
first,  "  the  known  promulgation  of  the  prophecy 
prior  to  the  event ;  secondly,  the  clear  and  pal- 
pable fulHlnient  of  it;  lastly,  the  nature  of  the 
event  itself,  if,  when  the  prediction  of  it  was 
given,  it  lay  remote  from  human  view,  and  was 
such  as  could  not  be  foreseen  by  any  suppos- 
able  eiibrt  of  reason,  or  be  deduced  upon  princi- 
ples of  calculation  derived  from  probability  and 
experience "  (Disc.  viii.  p.  378).  Applying  his 
test,  the  learned  writer  finds  that  the  establishment 
of  the  Christian  Religion  and  the  person  of  its 
Founder  were  predicted  when  neither  reason  nor 
experience  could  have  anticipated  them ;  and  that 
the  predictions  respecting  them  have  been  clearly 
fulfilled  ill  history.  Here,  then,  is  an  adequate 
proof  of  an  inspired  prescience  in  the  prophets 
who  predicted  these  things.  He  applies  his  test  to 
the  prophecies  recorded  of  the  .Jewish  people,  and 
their  actual  state,  to  the  prediction  of  the  great 
apostiisy  and  to  the  actual  state  of  corrupted  Chris- 
tianity, and  finally  to  the  prophecies  relating  to 
Nineveh,  Babylon,  Tyre,  Egypt,  the  Ishmaolites, 
and  the  Four  Empires,  and  to  the  events  which 
have  beflillen  them  ;  and  in  each  of  these  cases  lie 
iinds  proof  of  the  existence  of  the  predictive  ele- 
ment in  the  prophets. 

In  the  Book  of  Kings  we  find  Micaiah  the  son  of 
Imlah  uttering  a  challenge,  by  which  his  jiredic- 
tivc  powers  were  to  be  judged.  He  had  pronoimced, 
bv  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  Ahab  should  fdl  at 
Kauioth-Gileud.  Ahab,  in  return,  commanded  ])ini 
to  be  shut  up  in  prison  until  he  came  back  in 
peace.  "  And  Micaiah  said.  If  thou  return  at  all  in 
peace "  (that  is,  if  the  event  does  not  verity  my 
words),  ''the  Lord  hath  not  spoken  by  me"  (that 
is,  I  am  no  prophet  capable  of  predicting  the  future) 
( 1  K.  xxii,  28).  The  test  is  sound  as  a  negative  test, 
and  so  it  is  laid  down  in  the  Law  (Deut.  xviii.  22)  ; 
but  as  a  positive  test  it  would  not  be  sufficient. 
Ahab's  death  at  Kamoth-Gilead  did  not  prove  Jli- 
ciiiah's  predictive  poweis,  though  his  escape  would 
have  disproved  them.  But  here  we  must  notice  a 
very  important  difti?rence  between  single  prophecies 
and  a  series  of  prophecy.  The  fulfilment  of  a 
single  prophecy  does  not  prove  the  proi)hetical 
power  of  the  prophet,  but  the  f'ulfihiient  of  a  long 
series  of  prophecies  by  a  series  or  number  of  events 
does  in  itself  constitute  a  p;of>f  that  the  projihecies 
were  intended  to  piedict  the  events,  and,  conse- 
quently, that  predictive  power  resided  in  the  pro- 
phet 01-  prophets.  We  may  see  this  in  the  so  far 
parallel  cases  of  satirical  writings.  We  know  for 
certain  that  Aristophanes  refers  to  Cleon,  Pericles, 
Kicias  (an<l  we  should  be  equally  sure  of  it  were 
his  satire  more  concealed  t"iian  it  isl  simply  from 
the  fact  of  a  number  of  satirical  hits  converging 
together  on  the  object  of  his  satire.  One,  two,  or 
three  strokes  might  be  intended  for  more  persons 
than  one,  but  the  addition  of  each  stroke  makes  the 
aim  more  apparent,  and  when  we  have  a  sufficient 
mntiber  before  us  we  can  no  longer  possibly  doubt 
his  design.  The  same  may  be  said  of  fables,  and 
still  more  of  allegories.  'I'he  fact  of  a  complicated 
lock  being  opened  by  a  key  shows  that  the  lock  and 
key  were  meant  for  each  other.  Now  the  Messianic 
picture  drawn  by  the  prophets  as  a  body  contains 
at  least  as  many  traits  as  these: — That  sjvlvation 
siiould  come  through  the  familv  of  Abraham.  Isa.ic, 


PROPHET 


9^.3 


Jacob,  .ludah,  l)avid  :  that  at  the  time  of  the  final 
absorption  of  the  Jewish  power,  Shiloh  (the  tran- 
quiUiser)  should  gather  the  nations  under  his  rule: 
that  there  should  be  a  great  Prophet,  typified  by 
Bloses ;  a  King  descended  fiom  David  ;  a  Priest  for 
ever,  typified  by  Melchisedek :  that  there  should  be 
born  into  the  world  a  diild  to  be  called  Mighty 
God.  Eternal  Father,  Prince  of  Peace :  that  there 
should  be  ,t  Righteous  Servant  of  God  on  whom  the 
Lord  would  lay  the  iniquity  of  all:  that  Messiah 
the  Prince  sliould  be  cut  off",  but  not  for  himself: 
that  an  e\'erlasting  kingdom  should  be  given  by  the 
Ancient  of  Days  to  one  like  the  Son  of  Man.  It 
seems  impossible  to  harmonise  so  many  a])parent 
contradictions.  Nevertheless  it  is  an  uiidoubteil 
fact  that,  at  the  time  seemingly  pointed  out  by  one 
or  more  of  these  predictions,  there  was  born  into 
the  world  a  child  of  the  house  of  David,  and  there- 
fore of  the  fmiily  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and 
Judah,  who  claimed  to  be  the  object  of  these  and 
other  predictions;  who  is  acknowledged  as  Piophet, 
Priest,  and  Iving,  as  Mighty  Ciod  and  yet  as  (Jod's 
Righteous  Servant  who  bears  the  iniquity  of  all ; 
who  was  cut  off,  and  whose  death  is  acknowledged 
not  to  have  been  for  his  own,  but  for  others'  good  ; 
who  has  instituted  a  spiritual  kingdom  on  earth, 
which  kingdom  is  of  a  nature  to  continue  for  ever, 
if  there  is  any  continuance  beyond  this  world  and 
this  life ;  and  in  whose  doings  and  sulferiugs  on 
earth  a  number  of  specific  predictions  we;  e  minutely 
fulfilled.  Then  we  may  say  that  we  have  heie  a 
series  of  prophecies  which  are  so  ap()licable  to  the 
jioson  and  earthly  life  of  Jesus  Christ  as  to  be 
thereby  shown  to  have  been  designed  to  apply  to 
Eini.  And  if  they  were  de^^igned  to  apply  to  Him, 
propheticiil  prediction  is  proved. 

Objections  have  been  urged: — 1.  Tagnenesf^. — It 
has  been  said  that  the  prophecies  are  too  darkly 
and  vaguely  worded  to  be  proved  predictive  by  the 
events  which  they  are  alleged  to  foretell.  This 
objection  is  stated  with  clearness  and  force  by  Am- 
mon.  He  says,  "  Such  simple  sentences  as  the  fol- 
lowing: Israel  has  not  to  expect  a  king,  but  a 
teacher  ;  this  teacher  will  be  born  at  Bethlehem 
during  the  reign  of  Herod ;  he  will  lay  down  his 
life  under  Tiberius,  in  attestation  of  the  truth  of 
his  religion  ;  through  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  the  complete  extinction  of  the  Jewish  state,  he 
will  spread  his  doctrine  in  every  quarter  of  the 
world — a  few  sentences  like  these,  expressed  in 
plain  historical  prose,  would  not  only  bear  the 
character  of  true  predictions,  but,  when  once  their 
genuineness  was  proved,  they  would  be  of  incom- 
parably greater  worth  to  us  than  all  the  oracles  of 
the  Old  Test;iment  talcen  together"  {Christ&logi/, 
p.  12).  But  to  this  it  might  be  answered,  and 
has  been  in  effect  answered  by  Hengsteid)erg — 1. 
That  God  never  forces  men  to  believe,  but  that 
there  is  such  an  union  of  deHniteness  an<l  vagueness 
in  the  prophecies  as  to  enable  those  who  are  willing 
to  discover  the  truth,  while  the  wilfully  bliiuf  are 
not  fbicibly  consti-ained  to  see  it.  2.  That,  had  the 
prophecies  been  couched  in  the  form  of  direct  de- 
clarations, their  fulfilment  would  have  thereliy 
beeti  ronderel  impossible,  or,  at  least,  capable  of 
frustration.  3.  That  the  elfect  of  prophecy  (i;.g. 
with  reference  to  the  time  ot  the  Messiah's  coming) 
woultl  have  been  far  less  beneficial  to  believers,  as 
being  less  adapted  to  keep  them  in  a  state  of  con- 
stant expeitation.  4.  That  the  Messiah  of  Kevehi- 
tion  could  not  be  so  clearly  ])ortrayed  in  his 
vaiitd  character  as  God  and  .Man, -us  Pro]>hct,  Priest, 


934 


PROPHET 


teacher  " 


an(L,  King,  if 
whrcli  is  all  that  Amnion  acknowledges  him  to  be. 
5.  That  the  state  of  the  Prophets,  at  the  time  of 
receiving  the  Divine  revelation,  was  (as  we  shall 
presently  show;  such  as  necessarily  to  make  their 
predictions  fragmentary,  figurative,  and  abstracted 
from  the  relations  of  time.  6.  That  some  portions 
of  the  prophecies  were  intended  to  be  of  double  appli- 
cation, and  some  poitions  to  be  understood  only  on 
their  fulfilment  (cf.  John,  si  v.  29;  Ez.  xxxvi.  33). 

2.  Obscwitij  of  a  part  or  parts  of  a  prophecji 
otherwise  clear. — The  objection  drawn  from  "  the 
unintelligibleness  of  one  part  of  a  prophecy,  as  in- 
validating the  proof  of  foresight  arising  from  the 
evident  completion  of  those  parts  which  are  under- 
stood" is  akin  to  that  drawTi  fioni  the  vagueness  of 
the  whole  of  it.  And  it  may  be  answered  with  the 
same  arguments,  to  which  we  n:ay  add  the  con- 
sideiation  urged  by  Butler  that  it  is,  for  the 
ai'gument  in  hand,  the  same  as  if  the  parts  not 
understood  were  written  in  cipher  or  not  written 
at  all : — "  Suppose  a  writing,  partly  in  cipher  and 
partly  in  plain  words  at  length ;  and  that  in 
the  part  one  understood  there  appeared  mention 
of  several  known  facts — it  would  never  come  into 
iuiy  man's  thought  to  imagine  that,  if  he  under- 
stood the  whole,  perhaps  he  might  find  that  these 
facts  were  not  in  reality  known  by  the  writer " 
{Analogy,  pt.  ii.  c.  vii.).  Furthermore,  if  it  be 
true  that  prophecies  relating  to  the  first  coming 
of  the  Slessiah  refer  also  to  his  second  coming, 
some  part  of  those  prophecies  must  necessarily  be  as 
yet  not  fully  understood. 

It  w^ould  appear  ti-om  these  considerations  that 
Davison's  second  "  condition,"  above  quoted,  "  the 
clear  and  pjalpahle  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy," 
should  be  so  far  modified  as  to  fcike  into  account 
the  necessary  difficulty,  more  or  less  great,  in  re- 
cognising the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy  which  re- 
sults from  the  necessary  vagueness  and  obscurity  of 
the  prophecy  itself. 

3.  Application  of  the  several  prophecies  to  a 
more  immediate  subject. — It  has  been  the  task  of 
many  Biblical  critics  to  e.xamine  the  diffeient  pjis- 
sages  which  are  alleged  to  be  predictions  of  Christ, 
and  to  show  that  tliey  were  delivered  in  reference  to 
some  person  or  thing  contemporary  with,  or  shortly  I 
subsequent  to,  the  time  of  the  writer.  The  con-  i 
elusion  is  then  drawn,  sometimes  scornfully,  some- 
times as  an  inference  not  to  be  resisted,  that  the 
passages  in  question  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  ] 
Messiah.  We  have  here  to  distinguish  carefully 
between  the  conclusion  proved,  anil  the  corollary 
drawn  from  it.  Let  it  be  granted  that  it  may  be 
proved  of  all  the  predictions  of  the  Messiah — it 
certainly  may  be  proved  of  many — that  they  pri- 
marily apply  to  some  historical  and  present  fact: 
in  that  case  a  certain  law,  under  which  God  vouch- 
safes his  prophetical  revelations,  is  discovered  ;  but 
there  is  no  semblance  of  disproof  of  the  further 
Messianic  interpretation  of  the  passages  under  con- 
sideration. That  some  such  law  does  exist  has  been 
argued  at  length  by  I\Ir.  Davison.  He  believes, 
howevef,  that  •'  it  obtains  only  in  some  of  the  more 
distinguished  monuments  of  prophecy,"  such  as  the 
prophecies  founded  on,  and  having  primary  reference 
to,  the  kingdom  of  David,  the  restoration  of  the 
Jews,  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ( 0«  Pro^:(Aec(/, 
Disc.  v.).  Dr.  Lee  thinks  that  Davison  "  exhibits 
too  great  reserve  in  the  application  of  this  important 
principle  "  {On  Inspiratiun,  Lect.  iv. ).  He  considers 
it  to  lie  of  universal  application;  mid   upon  it  he 


PEOPHET 

founds  the  doctrine  of  the  "  double  sense  of  pro- 
phecy," according  to  which  a  prediction  is  fulfilled 
in  two  or  even  more  distinct  but  ana'ogous  subjects : 
fii-st  in  type,  then  in  antitype;  and  after  that  per- 
haps awaits  a  still  further  and  more  complete  fulfil- 
ment. This  view  of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
seems  necessary  for  the  explanation  of  our  Lord's 
prediction  on  the  mount,  relating  at  once  to  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  end  of  the  Chiistian  dis- 
pensation. It  is  on  this  principle  that  Pearson 
writes :  ''  Many  are  the  prophecies  which  concern 
Him,  many  the  promises  which  are  made  of  Him; 
but  yet  some  of  them  very  obscure.  .  .  .  Where- 
soever He  IS  spoken  of  as  the  Anointed,  it  may  well 
he' first  understood  of  some  other  person;  except 
one  piace  in  Daniel,  where  Messiah  is  foretold  '  to 
be  cut  otf '  "  {On  the  Creed,  Art.  II.). 

Whether  it  can  be  proved  by  an  investigation 
of  Holy  Scripture,  that  this  relation  between 
Divine  announcements  for  the  future  and  certain 
present  events  does  so  exist  as  to  constitute  a  law, 
and  whether,  if  the  law  is  proved  to  exist,  it  is  of 
universal,  or  only  of  partial  application,  we  do  not 
pause  to  determine.  But  it  is  manifest  that  the 
existence  of  a  primary  sense  cannot  exclude  the 
possibility  of  a  secondary  sense.  The  question, 
therefore,  really  is,  whether  the  prophecies  are 
appliciible  to  Christ :  if  they  are  so  applicable,  the 
previous  application  of  each  of  them  to  some  histo- 
rical event  would  not  invalidate  the  proof  that 
they  were  designed  as  a  whole  to  find  their  full 
completion  in  Him.  Nay,  even  if  it  could  be 
shown  that  the  prophets  had  in  their  thoughts 
nothing  beyond  the  primary  completion  of  their 
words  (a  thing  which  we  at  present  leave  undeter- 
mined), no  inference  could  thence  be  drawn  against 
their  secondary  application ;  for  such  an  infei-ence 
would  assume,  what  no  believer  in  inspiration  will 
giant,  viz.,  that  the  prophets  are  the  sole  authors 
of  their  prophecies.  The  rule,  liihil  in  scripto 
quod  non  prius  in  scriptore,  is  sound  ;  but,  the 
question  is,  who  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  true  author 
of  the  prophecies — the  human  instrument  or  the 
Divine  Author?  (See  Hengstenberg,  Christology, 
Appendix  VI.,  p.  433.) 

4.  Miraculous  character.— It  is  probable  that 
this  lies  at  the  root  of  the  many  and  various  efforts 
made  to  disprove  the  predictive  power  of  the  pro- 
phets. There  is  no  question  that  if  miracles  are, 
either  physically  or  morally,  impossible,  then  pre- 
diction is  impossible ;  and  those  passages  which 
have  ever  been  accounted  predictive,  must  be  ex- 
plained away  as  being  vague,  as  being  obscure,  as 
applying  only  to  something  in  the  writer's  lifetime, 
or  on  some  otlier  hypothesis.  This  is  only  saying 
that  belief  in  prediction  is  not  com.patible  with  the 
theory  of  Atheism,  or  with  the  philosophy  which 
rejects  the  overruling  Providence  of  a  personal  God. 
And  this  is  not  to  be  denied. 

IV.  The  Proi'Hetic  State. — We  learn  from 
Holy  Scriptiue  that  it  was  by  the  agency  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  that  the  prophets  received  the  Divine 
communication.  Thus,  on  the  appointment  of  the 
seventy  elders,  "  The  Lord  said,  I  will  take  of  the 
Spirit  which  is  upon  thee,  and  will  put  it  upon 

them And    the    Lord  .  .  .  took   of  the 

Spirit  that  was  upon  him,  and  gave  it  imto  the 
seventy  elders ;  and  it  came  to  pass  that  when 
the  Spirit  rested  upon  them,  they  prophesied  and 

did  not  ce.".se And  Moses  said.  Would  God 

that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets,  and  that 
the  Lord  would  jiut  his  Spii-it  ujion  them  "  (Num. 


PROPHET 

xi.  17,  25,  29)..  Here  we  see  that  what  made 
the  seventy  prophesy,  was  their  being  endued  with 
the  Lord's  Spiiit  by  the  Lord  Himself.  So  it  is  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  which  made  Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  6) 
and  his  messengers  (1  Sam.  xix.  120)  prophesy.  And 
thus  St,  Peter  assures  us  that  "  pi-ophecy  came 
not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man,  but  liol}'  men 
of  God  spake,  moved  {(pep6iJ.svoi)  by  the  Holy 
Ghost"  (2  Pet.  i.  21),  while  false  prophets  are 
described  ;is  those  "  who  speak  a  vision  of  their 
own  heart,  and  not  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  " 
(Jer.  xxiii.  16),  "  who  prophesy  out  of  their  own 
hearts,  .  .  who  follow  their  own  spirit,  and  have 
seen  nothing"  (Ez.  xiii.  2,  B;."  The  prophet  held 
an  intermediate  position  in  communication  between 
God  and  man.  God  communicated  with  him  by 
His  Spirit,  and  he,  having  received  this  communi- 
cation, was  "the  spokesman"  of  God  to  man  (cf. 
Ex.  vii.  1  and  iv.  16).  But  the  means  by  which 
the  Divine  Spiiit  commmiicated  with  the  human 
spirit,  and  the  conditions  of  the  human  spirit  under 
which  the  Divine  communications  were  received, 
have  not  been  clearly  declared  to  us.  They  are, 
however,  indicated.  On  the  occasion  of  the  sedi- 
tion of  Miriam  and  Aaron,  we  read,  "And  the 
Lord  said,  Hear  now  my  words:  If  there  be  a 
prophet  among  you,  I  the  Lord  will  make  myself 
known  unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will  speak  unto 
him  in  a  dream.  My  servant  Moses  is  not  so,  who 
is  faithful  in  all  mine  house  :  with  him  will  I  speak 
mouth  to  mouth,  even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark 
speeches,  and  the  similitude  of  the  Lord  shall  he 
behold"  (Num.  xii.  G-8).  Here  we  have  an 
exhaustive  division  of  the  different  ways  in  which 
the  revelations  of  God  are  made  to  man.  1.  Direct 
declaration  and  manifestation,  "  I  will  speak  mouth 
to  mouth,  apparently,  and  the  similitude  of  the 
Lord  shall  he  behold."  2.  Vision.  3.  Dream.  It 
is  indicated  that,  at  least  at  this  time,  the  vision 
and  the  dream  were  the  special  means  of  conveying 
a  revelation  to  a  prophet,  while  the  higher  form  of 
direct  declaration  and  manifestation  was  reserved 
for  the  more  highly  favoured  Moses."  Joel's  pro- 
phecy appears  to  make  the  same  division,  "  Your  old 
men  shall  dream  dreams,  and  your  young  men  shall 
see  visions,"  these  being  the  two  methods  in  which 
the  promise,  "  your  sons  and  your  daughters  shall 
prophesy,"  are  to  be  carried  out  (ii.  2SJ.  And  of 
Daniel  we  are  told  that  "  he  had  understanding 
in  all  visions  and  dreams"  (Dan.  i.  17).  Can  i 
these  phases  of  the  projihetic  stjite  be  distinguished 
from  each  other  ?  and  in  what  did  they  consist  ? 

According  to  the  theory  of  I'hilo  and  the  Alex- 
andrian school,  the  propliet  was  in  a  state  of  entire 
unconsciousness  at  the  time  that  he  was  undo'  the 
influence  of  Pivine  inspiration,  "for  the  human 
understanding,"  says  Philo,  "  takes  its  departure  on 
the  arrival  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  and,  on  the  removal 
of  the  latter,  again  returns  to  its  home,  for  the 
mortal  must  not  dwell  with  the  immortal"  (Q(«s 
Her.  Div.  Haer.  t.  i.  p.  .511).  Balaam  is  described 
by   him    as   an    unconscious    instrument    through 

'"  Houce  the  emphatic  declarations  of  tlic  Great  Pro- 
phet of  the  Church  that  he  did  not  speak  of  Himself 
(Jolm  vii.  17,  Sec). 

"  Maimoiiidos  has  drawn  out  the  points  In  which  Moses 
is  considered  superior  to  all  other  prophets  as  follows: — 
"  1.  All  the  other  prophets  saw  the  prophecy  in  a  drtam 
or  in  a  vision,  but  our  Rabhi  Moses  saw  it  whilst  awake. 
2.  To  all  the  other  prophets  it  was  revealed  through  the 
medium  of  an  a.\vfi^\,  and  therefore  they  saw  that  which 
they  saw  in  an  alU'miry  or  enigma,  but  to  Moses  it  Is 
said;  With  him  will  1  speak  mouth  to  mouth  (Numb. 


PKOPHET 


935 


whom  God  .spoke  {Dc  Vita  Musis,  lib.  I.  t.  ii. 
p.  124).  Josephus  makes  Balaam  excuse  himself 
to  Balak  on  the  same  principle:  "  When  the  Spirit 
of  God  seizes  us,  It  utters  whatsoever  sounds  and 
words  It  pleases,  without  any  knowledge  on  our 
part,  .  .  .  for  when  It  has  come  into  us,  there  is 
nothing  in  us  which  remains  our  own"  {Antiq. 
iv.  6.  §5,  t.  i.  p.  216).  This  theory  identifies 
Jewish  prophecy  in  all  essential  points  with  the 
heathen  /xavriK^,  or  divination,  ;)s  distinct  from 
iri)o<priTeia,  or  interpretation.  Moutanism  atbpted 
the  same  view :  "  Defendimus,  in  causa  novae 
prophetiae,  gratiae  exstasin,  id  est  amentiam,  con- 
venire.  In  spiritu  enim  homo  constitutus,  prae- 
sertim  cum  gloriam  Dei  conspicit,  vel  cum  per 
ipsum  Deus  loquitur,  uecesse  est  e.xcidat  sensu, 
obumbratus  scilicet  virtute  divina  ;  de  quo  inter 
nos  et  Psychicos  (catholicos)  quaestio  est"  (Ter- 
tullian,  Adv.  Marcion.  iv.  22).  According  to  the 
belief,  then,  of  the  heathen,  of  the  Alexandrian 
Jews,  and  of  the  Jlontanists,  the  vision  of  the 
prophet  was  seen  while  he  was  in  a  state  of 
ecstatic  unconsciousness,  and  the  enunciation  of 
the  vision  was  made  by  him  in  the  same  state. 
The  Fathers  of  the  Church  opposed  the  Montanist 
theory  with  great  unanimity.  In  Eusebius'  His- 
tory (v.  17)  we  read  that  Miltiades  wrote  a  book 
Ttepl  Tov  fi))  ^iiv  Trpo^7)Trjv  iv  iKcrrafffi  XaAeTv. 
St.  Jerome  writes :  "  Non  loquitur  propheta  iv 
iKO-rda-et,  ut  Jlontanus  et  Prisca  Maximillaque 
dehrant,  sed  quod  prophetat  liber  est  visionis 
intelligentis  universa  quae  loquitur"  [Prolog,  in 
Nahuin).  And  again  :  "  Neque  vero  ut  Montanus 
cum  insanis  faeminis  somniat,  prophetae  in  ecstasi 
locuti  sunt  ut  nescierint  quid  loquerentur,  et 
cum  alios  erudirent  ipsi  ignorarent  quid  dicerent" 
[Prolocj.  in  Esai.).  Origen  [Co7itr.  Celsuin,  vii. 
4),  and  St.  Basil  {Commentary  on  Isaiah,  Prooem. 
c.  5),  contrast  the  prophet  with  the  soothsayer, 
on  the  ground  of  the  latter  being  deprived  of  his 
senses.  St.  Chrysostom  draws  out  the  contrast : 
ToCto  700  fidvTeojs  ISiov,  rb  i^eaTTjKivat,  rh 
v.vay)(r)v  vTrofXiVfiv,  rh  w6f7ff6ai,  to  eAKetrSoi, 
TO  ffvp€a6ai  tliffTTip  ixaiv6fj.evov.  'O  Se  iTpo(p7}Tr)s 
ovx  ovT'jis,  aWa  jxtTa  Siavoias  vri(povaris  kul 
<Ta>(ppovov(Trjs  Kara(n6.<T€WS,  ual  eiSoi?  &  <pQiy- 
'yiTui,  (prifflv  avavra-  w<m  Kol  irpo  t^s  (K^a- 
aeais  KavTfvdfv  yvcvpi^e  rhv  fiivTiv  KtA  rhv 
irpo^7]r7]v  {I/om.  xxix.  in  Epist.  ad  Corinth.). 
At  the  same  time,  while  drawing  the  distinction 
sharply  between  heathen  soothsaying  and  Mon- 
tanist prophesying  on  the  one  side,  and  Hebrew 
prophecy  on  the  other,  the  Fathers  use  expres- 
sions so  strong  as  almost  to  represent  the  Pro- 
phets to  be  passive  instruments  acted  on  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  Thus  it  is  that  they  describe 
them  as  musical  instruments, — the  pipe  (Athe- 
nagoYns,  Leg.  pro  Christianis,  c.  ix. ;  Clem.  Alex. 
Cohort,  ad  Gent.  c.  i.),  the  lyre  (Justin  Martyr, 
Cohort,  ad  Graec.  c.  viii. ;  Epliraeni  Syr.  Iihythm, 
xxix. ;  Chrysostom,  Ad  Pop.  Antioch.  Horn.  i. 
t.  ii.)  :   or  as   pens    (St.  Greg.  Magn.   Praef.  in 

xii.  8)  and  face  to  face  (Ex.  xxxlii.  11).  3.  All  the  other 
prophets  were  terrified,  but  with  Moses  it  was  not  so; 
and  this  is  what  the  Scripture  says:  As  a  man  speaketh 
unto  his  friend  (Ex.  xxxiii.  11).  4.  -\11  the  other  prophets 
could  not  prophesy  ut  luiy  time  that  they  wished,  but 
with  Moses  it  was  not  so,  but  at  any  time  that  he  wished 
for  it,  the  Holy  Spirit  Cimie  upon  him  ;  so  that  it  was  not 
necessary  ibr  him  to  prepare  his  mind,  for  he  was  always 
ready  for  it,  like  the  ministering  angels"  (fad  Uadia- 
zakah.  c.  vii.,  Bernard's  transl.  p.  116,  quoted  by  I^ee- 
p.  457). 


936 


PEOPHET 


PROPHET 


Mor.  in  Job).     Expressions  such  as -these  (many  i  visions  are  unconnected  and  fragmentary,  inasmuch 


of  which  are  quoted  by  Dr.  I,ee,  Appendix  G.) 
must  be  set  against  the  passages  which  were 
directed  against  the  Montanists.  Nevertheless, 
there  is  a  very  appreciable  dift'erence  between  their 
view  and  that  of  Tertullian  and  Philo.  Which  is 
most  in  accordance  with  the  indications  of  H0I3' 
Scripture  ? 

It  does  not  seem  possible  to  draw  any  very  pre- 
cise distinction  between  the  prophetic  "  dieam  " 
and  the  prophetic  "vision."  In  the  case  of  Abra- 
ham (Gen.  XV.  1)  and  of  Daniel  (Dan.  vii.  1),  they 
seem  to  melt  into  each  other.  In  both,  tlie  extei'nal 
senses  are  at  rest,  reflection  is  quiescent,  and  in- 
tuition energizes.  The  action  of  the  ordinary  fa- 
culties is  suspended  in  the  one  case  by  natural,  in 
the  other  by  supernatural  or  extraordinary  causes. 
(See  Lee,  Inspiration,  p.  173.)  The  state  into  which 
the  prophet  was,  occasionally,  at  least,  thrown  by 
the  ecstasy,  or  \'ision,  or  ti'ance,  is  described  poeti- 
cally in  the  Book  of  Job  (iv.  13-16,  xxxiii.  15), 
and  more  plainly  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  In 
the  case  of  Daniel,  we  find  first  a  deep  sleep  (viii. 
18,  X.  9)  accompanied  by  terror  (viii.  17,  x.  8). 
Then  he  is  raised  upright  (viii.  18)  on  his  hands 
and  knees,  and  then  on  his  feet  (x.  10,  11).  He 
then  receives  the  Divine  revelation  (viii.  19,  x.  12). 
After  which  he  fiills  to  the  ground  in  a  swoon  (x. 
15,  17);  he  is  faint,  sick,  and  astonished  (viii.  27). 
Here,  then,  is  an  instance  of  the  ecstatic  state ;  nor 
is  it  confined  to  the  Old  Testament,  though  we  do 
not  find  it  in  the  New  Testament  accompanied  by 
such  violent  effects  upon  the  body.  At  the  Trans- 
figuration, the  disciples  fell  on  their  face,  being 
overpowered  by  the  Divine  glory,  and  were  I'e- 
sto)-ed,  like  Daniel,  by  the  touch  of  Jesus'  hand. 
St.  Peter  fell  into  a  trance  (eKaraffis)  before  he 
received  his  vision,  instructing  him  as  to  the  ad- 
mission of  the  Gentiles  (Acts  x.  10,  xi.  5).  St. 
Paul  was  in  a  ti-ance  (eV  ^Kcrraffn)  when  he  was 
commanded  to  devote  himself  to  the  conversion'  of 
the  Gentiles  (Acts  xxii.  17),  and  when  he  was 
caught  up  into  the  third  heaven  (2  Cor.  xii.  1). 
St.  John  was  probably  in  the  same  state  {ev 
Trvevfx.aTi)  when  he  received  the  message  to  the 
seven  churches  (Rev.  i.  10).  The  prophe°tic  trance, 
then,  must  be  acknowledged  as  a  Scriptural  ac- 
count of  the  state  in  which  the' prophets  and  other 
inspired  persons,  sometimes,  at  least,  lecpived 
Divjne  revelations.  It  would  seem  to  have  been  of 
the  foUtowing  nature. 

(1.)  The  bodily  senses  were  closed  to  external 
objects  as  in  deep  sleep.  (2.)  The  reflective  and 
discursive  faculty  was  still  and  inactive.  (3.)  The 
spiritual  faculty  {irvevfjia)  was  awakened  to  the 
highest  state  of  energy.  Hence  it  is  tliat  revela- 
tions in  trances  are  described  by  the  prophets 
as  "seen"  or  "heard"  by  them,  for  the  spiritual 
faculty  energizes  by  immediate  perception  on  the 
part  of  the  inward  sense,  not  by  inference  and 
tiionght.  Thus  Isaiah  "  sa)o  the  Lord  sittin<?" 
(Is.  vi.  1).  Zechariah  "lifted  up  his  eyes  and 
saw"  (Zech.  ii.  1) ;  "the  word  of  the  Lord  which 
Mioah  snw''  (Mic.  L  1);  "the  wonder  which 
Habakkuk  did  see"  (Hab.  i.  1).  "Peter  saw 
heaven  opened  .  .  .  and  there  came  a  voice  to  him  " 
(Acts  x.  11).  Paul  was  "in  a  trance,  and  saio 
Him  saying"  (Acts  xxii.  18).  John  ''heard  a 
great  voice  .  .  .  and  saw  seven  golden  candlesticks  " 
(Rev.  i.  12).     Hence  it  is,  too,  that  the  prophets' 

"  This  view  is  advocated  also  by  Velthusen  (/>e  optica 
renimfntuvarum  descriptionc),  Jalm  {Einleit.  in  die  golt- 


as  they  are  not  the  subject  of  the  reflective  but  of 
the  pei'ceptive  faculty.  They  described  what  they 
saw  and  heard,  not  what  they  had  themselves 
thought  out  and  systematized.  Hence,  too,  suc- 
cession in  time  is  disregarded  or  unnoticed.  The 
subjects  of  the  vision  being,  to  the  prophets'  sight, 
in  juxtaposition  or  enfolding  each  other,  some  in 
the  foreground,  some  in  the  background,  are  neces- 
sarily abstracted  from  the  relations  of  time.  Hence, 
too,  the  imagery  with  which  the  prophetic  wi'itings 
are  coloured,  and  the  dramatic  cast  in  which  they 
are  moulded ;  these  peculiarities  resulting,  as  we 
have  already  said,  in  a  necessary  obscurity  and  diffi- 
culty of  interpretation. 

But  though  it  must  be  allowed  that  Scripture 
language  seems  to  point  out  the  state  of  dream  and 
of  trance,  or  ecstasy,  as  a  condition  in  which  the 
human  instrument  received  the  Divine  communica- 
tions, it  does  not  follow  that  all  the  prophetic 
revelations  were  thus  made.  We  must  acknowledge 
the  state  of  trance  in  such  passages  as  Is.  vi.  (called 
ordinarily  the  vision  of  Isaiah),  as  Ez.  i.  (called  the 
vision  of  Ezekiel),  as  Dan.  vii.  viii.  x.  xi.  xii.  (called 
the  visions  of  Daniel),  as  Zech.  i.  iv.  v.  vi.  (called 
the  visions  of  Zechariah),  as  Acts  x.  (called  the 
vision  of  St.  Peter),  as  2  Cor.  xii.  (called  the  vision 
of  St.  Paul),  and  similar  instances,  which  are  indi- 
cated by  the  language  used.  But  it  dfies  not  seem 
true  to  say,  with  Hengstenberg,  that  "  the  difference 
between  these  prophecies  and  the  rest  is  a  vanishing 
one,  and  if  we  but  possess  the  power  and  the  ability 
to  look  more  deeply  into  them,  the  marks  of  the 
vision  may  be  discerned "  (Christologi/,  vol.  iv. 
p.  417).°  St.  Paul  distinguishes  "revelations" 
from  "  visions"  (2  Cor.  xii.  1).  In  the  books  of 
Moses  "  speaking  mouth  to  mouth "  is  contrasted 
with  "visions  and  dreams"  (Num.  xii.  8).  It  is 
true  that  in  this  last-quoted  passage,  "  visions  and 
dreams "  alone  appear  to  be  attributed  to  the 
prophet,  while  "  speaking  mouth  to  mouth "  is 
reserved  for  Jloses.  But  when  Sloses  was  dead, 
the  cause  of  this  difference  would  cease.  During 
the  era  of  prophecy  there  were  none  nearer  to 
God,  none  with  whom  He  v/ould,  we  may  sup- 
pose, communicate  more  openly  than  the  prophets. 
We  should  expect,  then,  that  they  would  be 
the  recipients,  not  only  of  visions  in  the  state  of 
dream  or  ecstasy,  but  also  of  the  direct  revelations 
which  are  called  speaking  mouth  to  mouth.  The 
gicater  part  of  the  Divine  communications  we  may 
suppose  to  have  been  thus  made  to  the  prophets 
in  their  waking  and  ordinary  state,  while  the 
visions  were  exhibited  to  them  either  in  the  state 
of  sleep,  or  in  the  state  of  ecstasy.  "  The  more 
ordinary  mode  through  which  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
as  far  as  we  can  trace,  came,  was  through  a  divine 
impulse  given  to  the  prophet's  own  thoughts  " 
("Stanley,  p.  426).  Hence  it  follows  tliat,  while  the 
Fathers  in  their  opposition  to  Montanism  and  jxavia 
were  pushed  somewhat  too  far  in  their  denial  of 
the  ecstatic  state,  they  were  yet  peifectly  exact  in 
their  descriptions  of  the  condition  under  which  the 
greater  part  of  the  prophetic  revelations  were 
received  and  promulgated.  No  truer  descrij)t:on 
has  been  given  of  them  than  that  of  Hippolytus, 
and  that  of  St.  Basil :  Oh  yap  €|  ISias  Supdf^ecus 
fcpdeyyovTO,  ovBe  airep  avrol  i^ovAopro  ravra 
6K7ipuTToy,  otAAa  irpunov  /xiv  Sia  tov  A6yov 
f(ro(pi(^ovTO  opdcos,  iiretra   5t'    opa/xdraiv  irpoeSt- 


clien  Biichcr  des  A.  £."),  Iboluck  {Die  I'ropheten  und. 
ire  Weissaguvgcn). 


PROPHET 

SatTKOVTO  ra  fj.4WovTa  KaKais'  eW  ovtoj  ire- 
ireta'/xevoi  eKfyov  ravra  airep  avrols  "ftv  fiSvois 
cmh  rov  Qeov  a.TroKeKpvfifi.iva  (Hippol.  ]te  An- 
tichristo,  c.  ii.).  TlSis  ■Kpof(pr)Tivov  ai  KaOapal 
Ka\  Siavye7s  i/zux"'  j  oiov^l  KaToirrpa  yivofxeva 
Tf;s  @(ias  ivepyeias,  T7)i/  ^fjL<pa(nv  pau7)u  koX 
acrvyxvTOV  Kal  oiidfv  finQoKovfiivriv  e*c  toov 
iraQuiv  tiJs  aapKhs  f-n-eSelKVvvTo'  iraai  /xev  yap 
ndpeari  rh  "hyiov  \]uevfia  (St.  Basil,  Coinm.  in 
Usui.  Prooem.). 

Had  the  prophets  a  full  knowledge  of  that  wliich 
they  piedicted?  It  follows  from  what  we  have 
already  said  that  they  had  not,  and  could  not  have. 
They  were  the  "spokesmen"  of  God  (Ex.  vii.  1), 
the  "mouth"  by  which  His  words  were  uttered, 
or  they  were  enabled  to  view,  and  empowered  to 
describe,  pictures  pi-esented  to  their  spiritual  intui- 
tion ;  but  there  are  no  grounds  for  believing  that, 
contemporaneously  with  this  miracle,  there  was 
wrought  another  miracle  enlarging  the  understand- 
ing of  the  prophet  so  as  to  grasp  the  whole  of  the 
Divine  counsels  wliich  he  was  gazing  into,  or 
whicli  he  was  the  instrument  of  enunciating.  We 
should  not  e.xpect  it  beforehand  ;  and  we  have  the 
testimony  of  the  prophets  themselves  (Dan.  xii.  8 ; 
Zech.  ivi  5),  and  of  St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  10),  to  the 
fact  that  they  frequently  did  not  comprehend  them. 
The  passage  in  St.  Peter's  Epistle  is  very  instruc- 
tive :  "  Of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have 
enquired  and  searched  diligently,  who  prophesied  of 
the  grace  that  should  come  unto  you  :  searching 
what,  or  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
which  was  in  them  did  signify,  when  it  testified 
beforehand  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the  glory 
that  should  follow.  Unto  whom  it  was  revealed, 
that  not  unto  themselves,  but  unto  us  they  did 
minister  tlie  things,  which  are  now  reported  unto 
you  by  them  that  have  preached  the  gospel  unto 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  sent  down  from  heaven." 
It  is  here  declared  (1)  that  the  Holy  Ghost  through 
the  prophet,  or  the  prophet  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
testified  of  Christ's  sufl'erings  and  ascension,  and  of 
the  institution  of  Christianity  ;  (2)  that  after 
having  uttered  predictions  on  those  subjects,  the 
minds  of  the  prophets  occupied  themselves  in 
searching  into  the  full  meaning  of  the  words  that 
they  had  uttered  ;  (3)  that  they  were  then  divinely 
informed  that  their  predictions  were  not  to  find 
their  completion  until  the  last  days,  and  that  they 
tiiemselves  were  instruments  for  declaring  good 
things  that  should  come  not  to  their  own  but  to  a 
future  generation.  This  is  exactly  what  the  pro- 
phetic state  above  described  would  lead  us  to  expect. 
While  the  Divine,  communication  is  being  received, 
(he  human  instrument  is  simply  passive.  He  sees 
or  hears  by  his  spiritual  intuition  or  perception, 
and  declares  what  he  has  seen  or  heard.  Then  the 
reflective  faculty  which  had  been  quiescent  but 
never  so  overpowered  as  to  be  destroyed,  avv^akens  to 


PEOPHET 


93^ 


I'  See  Kcble,   Christian   i'ear,  13lh  S.  aft.  Trin.,  and 
Lee,  Insjiiration,  p.  210. 

"1  It  is  on  this  principle  rather  than  as  it  is  e.xplainrd 
by  Dr.  M'Caul  (Aids  to  Faith)  that  the  proiihecy  of  Hosea 
xi.  1  Is  to  bf  interpreted.  Ilosca,  we  nia>  well  believe, 
understood  In  his  own  words  no  more  than  a  reference  to 
the  historical  fact  that  the  children  of  Israel  came  out  of 
Kgypt.  But  Hosea  was  not  the  author  of  the  prophecy — 
he  was  the  instrument  by  which  it  was  promulgated. 
The  Holy  Spirit  intended  something  further— and  what 
this  something  was  Hrt  informs  us  by  the  Evangelist  St. 
Matthew  (Matt.  ii.  15).  The  two  facts  of  tlie  Israelites 
b"ing  led  out  of  Kgypt  and  of  Christ's  relurii  from  Kgypt  | 
appear  to    Professor  Jowclt  so   distinct  that  tl;e  refer-  I 


the  consideration  of  the  mes.sage  or  vision  received, 
and  it  strives  earnestly  to  understand  it,  and  more 
especially  to  look  at  the  revelation  as  in  instead  of 
out  of  time.  The  result  is  failure  ;  but  this  failure 
is  softened  by  the  Divine  intimation  that  the  time 
is  not  yet.P  The  two  questions,  What  did  the  pro- 
phet understand  by  this  prophecy  ?  and.  What  was 
the  meaning  of  this  prophecy  ?  are  tot^dly  different 
in  the  estimation  of  every  one  who  believes  tliat 
"  the  Holy  Ghost  spake  by  the  Prophets,"  or  who 
considers  it  possible  that  he  did  so  speak.  <) 

V.  Interpretation  of  Predictive  Pro- 
phecy.— We  have  only  space  for  a  few  rules,  de- 
duced from  the  account  which  we  have  given  of  the 
nature  of  prophecy.  They  are,  (1.)  Interpo.se  dis- 
tances of  time  according  as  history  may  show  them 
to  be  necessary  with  respect  to  the  past,  or  inference 
may  show  them  to  be  likely  in  respect  to  the  future, 
because,  as  we  have  seen,  the  prophetic  visions  are 
abstracted  from  relations  in  time.  (2.)  Distinguish 
the  form  from  the  idea.  Thus  Isaiah  (xi.  1.")) 
represents  the  idea  of  the  removal  of  all  obstacles 
from  before  God's  people  in  the  form  of  the  Lord's 
destroying  the  tongue  of  the  Egyptian  sea,  and 
smiting  the  river  into  seven  streams.  (3.)  Distin- 
guish in  like  manner  figure  from  what  is  repre- 
sented by  it,  e.g.,  in  the  verse  previous  to  that 
quoted,  do  not  understand  literally,  "  They  shall 
fli/  upon  the  slioulders  of  the  Phili.stines  "  (Is.  xi. 
14).  (4.)  Make  allowance  for  the  imagery  of  the 
prophetic  visions,  .and  for  the  poetical  diction  in 
which  they  are  expressed.  (5.)  In  respect  to  things 
past,  interpret  by  the  apparent  meaning,  checked 
by  reference  to  events ;  in  respect  to  things  future, 
intei'pret  by  the  apparent  meaning,  checked  by  re- 
ference to  the  analogy  of  the  faith.  (6.)  Interpret 
according  to  the  principle  which  may  be  deduced 
from  the  examples  of  visions  explained  in  the  Old 
Testament.  (7.)  Interpret  according  to  the  prin- 
ciple which  may  be  deduced  from  the  examples  ©f 
prophecies  interpreted  in  the  New  Testament. 

VI.  Use  of  Prophecy. — Predictive  prophecy  is 
at  once  a  part  and  an  evidence  of  revelation  :  at  the 
time  that  it  is  delivered,  and  until  its  fulfilment,  a 
part ;  after  it  has  been  fulfilled,  an  evidence.  St. 
Peter  (Ep.  2.  i.  19)  describes  it  as  "a  light  shining 
in  a  dark  place,"  or  "  a  taper  glimmering  where  there 
is  nothing  to  reflect  its  rays,"  that  is,  throwing 
some  light,  but  only  a  feeble  light  as  compared  with 
what  is  shed  from  the  Gospel  history.  To  this 
light,  feeble  as  it  is,  "  you  do  well,"  says  the 
Apostle,  "  to  take  heed."  And  he  warns  them  not 
to  be  offended  at  the  feebleness  of  the  light,  because 
it  is  of  the  nature  of  prophecy  until  its  fulHlmcnt — 
(in  the  case  of  Messianic  predictions,  j>f  which  he 
is  speaking,  describeil  as  "  until  the  day  dawn,  and 
the  day  stiir  arise  in  your  hearts") — to  shed  only  a 
feeble  light.  Nay,  he  continues,  even  the  prophets 
could  not  themselves  interpret  its  meaning,'  "  lor 


ence  by  St.  Matthew  to  the  Prophet  i.s  to  him  incxpUe- 
able  except  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  mistake  on  the  part  of 
the  Evangelist  (see  Jowett's  Essay  on  the  hiterprelatiim 
of  Scripture).  A  deeper  insight  into  Scripture  shows  that 
"  the  Jewish  people  themselves,  their  history,  their  ritual, 
their  government,  all  present  one  grand  prophecy  of  tlitf 
future  Kedecmer"  (Lee, p.  Iil7).  Consequently  "  Israel" 
is  one  of  the  forms  naturally  taken  in  the  prophetic  vision 
by  the  idea  "Messiah." 

■■  This  is  a  more  probable  meaning  of  tne  words  ISiai 
eTTiAuVeig;  oil  yiveraL  than  that  given  by  Pearson  (On 
the  C'rcci!,  art.  i.  p.  11.  Kd.  Biirlon),  "that  no  jivophccy 
did  so  proceed  from  the  prophet  that  he  of  himself  or  by 
his  own  instinct  did  open  his  mouth  to  prophesi'." 


938 


PEOPHET 


the  prophecy  cume  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of 
man,"  i.  e.  tlie  prophets  were  not  the  authors  of 
their  predictions,  "  but  holy  men  of  old  spake  by 
the  impulse  {(pepSy-evoi)  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  This, 
tlien,  was  the  use  of  prophecy  before  its  fulfilment, 
— to  act  as  a  feeble  light  in  the  midst  of  darkness, 
which  it  did  not  dispel,  but  through  which  it  threw 
its  rays  in  such  a  way  as  to  enable  a  true-hearted 
believer  to  direct  his  steps  and  guide  his  anticipa- 
tions (cf.  Acts  xiii.  27).  But  after  fulfilment, 
St.  Peter  says,  "  the  word  of  prophecy  "  becomes 
"  more  sure'  than  it  was  before,  that  is,  it  is  no 
longer  merely  a  feeble  light  to  guide,  but  it  is  a 
tiim  ground  of  confidence,  and,  combined  with 
tlie  apostolic  testimony,  serves  as  a  trustworthy 
evidence  of  the  faith  ;  so  trustworth}-,  that  even 
after  he  and  his  brother  Apostles  are  tlead,  those 
whom  he  addressed  will  feel  secure  that  they 
"  had  not  ibllowed  cunningly  devised  fables,"  but 
the  truth. 

As  an  evidence,  fulfilled  projihecy  is  as  satisfactory 
35  anything  can  be,  for  who  can  know  the  future 
iexcept  tlie  Kuler  who  disposes  future  events ;  and 
from  whom  can  come  prediction  except  from  Him 
who  knows  the  future  ?  After  all  that  has  been 
said  and  unsaid,  prophecy  and  miracles,  each  rest- 
ing on  their  own  evidence,  must  always  be  the 
cliief  and  dnect  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the  Di- 
vine character  of  a  religion.  Where  they  exist, 
a  Divine  power  is  proved.  Nevertheless,  they  i 
should  never  be  rested  on  alone,  but  in  combination 
with  the  general  character  of  the  whole  scheme  to 
which  they  belong.  Its  miracles,  its  prophecies,  its 
morals,  its  propagation,  and  its  adaptation  to  human 
needs,  are  the  chief  evidences  of  Christianity.  None 
of  these  must  be  taken  separately.  The  fact  of 
their  conspiiing  together  is  the  strongest  evidence 
of  all.  That  one  object  with  which  predictions  are 
delivered  is  to  serve  in  an  after  age  as  an  evidence 
on  which  faith  may  reasonably  rest,  is  stated  by 
our  Lord  Himself:  "  And  now  I  have  told  you 
before  it  come  to  pass,  that  when  it  is  come  to 
pass  ye  miijht  believe  "  (John  xiv.  29). 

VII.  Development  of  Messianic  Prophecy. 
- — Pie.diction,  in  the  shape  of  promise  and  threaten- 
ing, begins  with  the  Book  of  Genesis.  Immediately 
upon  the  Fall,  hopes  of  recovery  and  salvation  are 
held  out,  but  tlie  manner  in  which  this  salvation  is 
to  be  etlected  is  left  altogether  indefinite.  All  that 
is  at  first  declared  is  that  it  shall  come  through  a 
child  of  woman  (Gen.  iii.  15).  By  degrees  the  area 
is  limited :  it  is  to  come  through  the  family  of 
Shem  ((ien.  ix.  26),  through  the  family  of  Abra- 
ham (Gen.  xii.  3),  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.  18),  of  Jacob  j 
(Gen.  xxviii.44),  of  Judah  (Gen.  xlix.  lo).  Balaam 
seems  to  say  that  it  will  be  wrought  by  a  warlike 
Israelitish  King  (Num.  xxiv.  17^ ;  Jacob,  by  a  peace- 
ful Ruler  of  the  earth  (Gen.  xlix.  10)  ;  Moses,  by  a 
Prophet  like  himsell',  i.  e.  a  revealer  of  a  new 
religious  dispensation  (Deut.  xviii.  15  j.  Nathan's 
announcement  (2  Sam.  vii.  16)  determines  further 
that  the  salvation  is  to  come  through  the  house  of 
David,  and  through  a  descendant  of  David  who 
shall  be  himself  a  king.  This  promise  is  developed 
by  David  himself  in  the  Messianic  Psalms.  Pss. 
xviii.  and  !xi.  are  founded  on  the  promise  communi- 

s  The  modern  Jews,  in  opposition  to  tlieir  ancient 
exposition,  have  been  driven  to  a  non-Messiaaic  inter- 
pretatioa  of  Is.  liii.  Among  Christians  the  non-Messianic 
interpretation  commenced  with  Grotius.  He  applies  the 
chapter  to  Jeremiah.  According  to  Doederlciii,  Schuster, 
Stephani,    Eichhorn,    Koseiimiiller,   Hitzig,   Handewerk, 


PKOPHET 

cated  by  Nathan,  and  do  not  go  beyond  the  an- 
nouncement made  by  Nathan.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  Ps.  Ixxxix.,  which  was  composed  by  a  later 
writer.  Pss.  ii.  and  ex. "rest  upon  the  same  promise 
as  their  foundation,  but  add  new  features  to  it. 
The  Son  of  David  is  to  be  the  Son  of  God  (ii.  7), 
the  anointed  of  the  Lord  (ii.  2),  not  only  the  King 
of  Ziou  (ii.  6,  ex.  1),  but  the  inheritor  and  lord  of 
the  whole  earth  (ii.  8,  ex.  6),  and,  besides  this,  a 
Priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek  (ex. 
4).  At  the  same  time  he  is,  as  typified  by  his  pro- 
genitor, to  be  full  of  sufl'ering  and  affliction  (Pss. 
xxii.,  Ixxi.,  cii.,  cix.) :  brought  down  to  the  grave, 
yet  raised  to  life  without  seeing  corruption  (Ps. 
xvi.).  In  Pss.  xlv.,  Ixxii.,  the  sons  of  Korah 
and  Solomon  describe  his  peaceful  reign.  Be- 
tween Solomon  and  Hezekiah  intervened  some  200 
years,  during  which  the  voice  of  prophecy  was 
silent.  The  Messianic  conception  entertained  at  this 
time  by  the  Jews  might  have  been  that  of  a  King 
of  the  royal  house  of  David  who  would  arise,  and 
gather  under  his  peaceful  sceptre  his  own  people 
and  strangers.  Sufficient  allusion  to  his  prophetical 
and  priestly  offices  had  been  made  to  create  thought- 
ful consideration,  but  as  yet  tliere  was  no  clear 
delmeation  of  him  in  these  chaiacters.  It  was 
reserved  for  the  Prophets  to  bring  out  these  features 
more  distinctly.  The  sixteen  Prophets  may  be 
divided  into  tour  groups:  the  Prophets  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,— Hosea,  Amos,  Joel,  Jonah; 
the  Prophets  of  the  Southern  Kingdom, — Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Obadiah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakknk, 
Zephaniah  ;  the  Prophets  of  the  Captivity, — -Ezekiel 
and  Daniel;  the  Prophets  of  the  Pieturn, — Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  In  tliis  great  period  of  pro- 
phetism  there  is  no  longer  any  chronological  deve- 
lopment of  Messianic  Prophecy,  as  in  the  earlier 
period  previous  to  Solomon.  Each  prophet  adds  a 
feature,  one  more,  anotlier  less  clearly:  combine 
the  features,  and  we  have  the  portrait ;  but  it  does 
not  grow  gradually  and  )ierceptibly  under  the  hands 
of  the  several  artists.  Here,  therefore,  the  task  of 
tracing  the  chronological  progress  of  the  revelation 
of  the  Messiah  comes  to  an  end :  its  culminatini/ 
point  is  found  in  the  prophecy  contained  in  Is.  Iii. 
13-15,  and  liii.  We  here  read  that  there  should  be 
a  Servant  of  God,  lowly  and  desjiised,  full  of  grief 
and  suffering,  oppressed,  condemned  as  a  malefactor, 
and  put  to  death.  But  his  sufl'erings,  it  is  said, 
are  not  for  his  own  sake,  for  he  liad  never  been 
guilty  of  fraud  or  violence  :  they  are  spontaneously 
taken,  patiently  borne,  vicarious  in  their  character ; 
and,  by  God's  appointment,  they  have  an  atoning, 
reconciling,  and  justifying  efficacy.  The  result  of 
his  sacrificial  offering  is  to  be  his  exaltation  and 
triumph.  By  the  path  of  humiliation  and  expiatory 
suflering,  he  is  to  reach  that  state  of  glory  foreshown 
by  David  and  Solomon.  The  prophetic  character 
of  the  Messiah  is  drawn  out  by  Isaiah  in  other 
parts  of  his  book  as  the  atoning  work  here.  By 
the  time  of  Hezekiah  therefore  (for  Hengstenberg, 
Christolotj ij ,  vol.  ii.,  has  satisfactorily  disproved  tlie 
theory  of  a  Deutero-Isaiah  of  the  days  of  the  Cap- 
tivity) the  portrait  of  the  ©eavOpctiiros — at  once 
King,  Priest,  Prophet,  and  Redeemer — was  drawn 
in  all  its  essential   features.^     The  contemporary 


Kostcr  (ait<;r  the  Jewish  expositors,  Jarchi,  Abenezj'a, 
Kimchi,  Abarbanel,  Lipmaiin),  the  subject  of  the  pro- 
phecy is  the  Israelitish  people.  According  to  Ecker- 
mann,  Ewald,  Bleek,  it  is  the  ideal  Israelitish  people. 
According  to  Paulus,  Ammon,  Maurer,  Thenius,  Knobel, 
it  is  the  godly  portion  of  the  Israelitish  pe(^le.    Accord- 


PROPHET 

ami  later  Prophets  (cf.  Mic.  v.  2  ;  Dan.  vii.  9  ; 
Zecli.  vi.  13;  Mai.  iv.  2)  added  some  particulars 
and  details,  and  so  the  conception  was  left  to  await 
its  realization  after  au  interval  of  some  400  years 
fi-om  the  date  of  the  last  Hebrew  Pi  ophet. 

It  is  the  opinion  of  Hengstenberg  {Christology, 
i.  23,"))  and  of  Pusey  {Minor  Prophets,  Part  i. 
Introd.)  that  the  writings  of  the  Minor  Prophets  are 
chronologically  placed.  Accordingly,  the  former  ar- 
ranges the  list  of  the  Prophets  as  follows :  Hosea, 
Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micah,  Isaiah  ("the 
principal  prophetical  figure  in  the  tirst  or  Assyrian 
period  of  canonical  prophetism  "),  Nahum,  Habal\- 
kuk,  Zephaniah,  Jeremiah  ("  the  principal  pro- 
phetical figure  in  the  second  or  Babylonian  period 
of  canonical  prophetism"),  Ezekiel,  l)aniel,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Mal.ichi.  Calmet  {Diet.  Bihl.  s.  v. 
"  Prophet ")  as  follows :  Hose;i,  Amos,  Isaiah,  Jonah, 
Micah,  Nahum,  Jeremiah,  Zephaniah,  Joel,  Daniel, 
Ezekiel,  Habakkuk,  Obadiah,'  Haggai,  Zechariah, 
Malachi.  Dr.  Stanley  [Lect.  xix.)  in  the  follow- 
ing order  :  Joel,  Jonah,  Hosea,  Amos,  Isaiah, 
Micah,  Nahum,  Zechariah,  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk, 
■  Obadiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Isaiah,  Daniel,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  Whence  it  appears  that  Dr. 
Stanley  recognizes  two  Isaiahs  and  two  Zechariahs, 
unless  "  the  author  of  Is.  xl-lxvi.  is  regaMed  as  the 
older  Isaiah  transported  into  a  style  and  position 
later  than  his  own  time  "  (p.  423). 

VIII.  Prophets  of  thk  New  Testament. — 
So  far  as  their  predictive  powers  are  concerned, 
the  Old  Testament  prophets  find  their  New  Testa- 
ment counterjiart  in  the  writer  of  the  .Apocalypse 
[Revelations  ;  Antichrist,  in  Appendix  B]  ; 
but  in  then'  general  character,  as  specially  illumined 
revealeis  of  God's  will,  their  counterpart  will  rather 
be  found,  first  in  the  Great  Propliet  of  the  Church, 
and  his  forerunner  John  the  Baptist,  and  next  in 
all  those  persons  who  were  endowed  with  the 
extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  the  speakers  with  tongues  and  the  inter- 
preters of  tongues,  the  prophets  and  the  discerners 
of  spirits,  the  teachers  and  workers  of  miracles 
(1  Cor.  xii.  10,  28).  The  connecting-link  between 
the  0.  T.  prophet  and  the  speaker  with  tongues 
is  the  state  of  ecstasy  in  which  the  former  at 
times  received  his  visions  and  in  which  the  latter 
uttered  his  words.  The  O.  T.  prophet,  however, 
was  his  own  interpreter :  he  did  not  speak  in  the 
state  of  ecstasy:  he  saw  his  visions  in  the  ecstatic, 
and  declared  them  in  the  ordinary  state.  The 
N.  T.  discerner  of  spirits  has  his  jn'ototype  in  such 
as  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah  (1  K.  xxii.  22),  the 
worker  of  miracles  in  Elijah  and  Elisha,  the  teacher 
in  each  and  all  of  the  propliets.  The  prfiphets  of 
the  N.  T.  represented  their  namesakes  of  the  0.  T. 
as  being  expounders  of  Divine  truth  and  inter- 
preters of  the  Divine  will  to  their  auditors. 


PROPHET 


939 


Ing  to  I)e  Wette,  (Jesenius,  Sdienkel,  Unibreit,  Hofmann, 
it  is  tfie  proplielical  liuily.  Augusti  rcicrs  it  to  king 
U/./.iah;  Ivdiiym-iilmrg  luul  Ikiluiil.  to  Ilc/.ckiuli ;  Stiiiidlin 
to  Isaiah  himself ;  IJollfU  to  the  house  of  David.  Kwald 
thinks  that  no  liistorical  person  was  intended,  but  that 
the  author  of  the  chapter  lias  misled  his  readers  hy  insert- 
ing a  passage  from  an  older  book,  in  which  a  martyr  was 
spoken  of.  "'Ihis,"  he  says,  "(luite  spontimeously  sug- 
gested itself,  and  lias  Iniprcssi'd  itself  on  his  mind  more 
and  more;"  and  he  thinks  that  "  controversy  on  cliaji. 
liii.  will  never  cease  until  this  truth  is  acknowledged  " 
(^I'ropheten,  li.  S.  4U7).  Hengstenberg  gives  the  follow- 
ing list  of  German  commentators  who  have  maintained 
the    Messianic   exjilanation : — Dallie,    Henskr,    Koclicr, 


That  predictive  powers  did  occasionally  exist  in 
the  N.  T.  prophets  is  proved  by  the  ca.se  of  Agabus 
'Acts  -xi.  28 J,  but  this  was  not  their  characteristic. 
They  were  not  an  order,  like  apostles,  bishops  or 
presbyters,  and  deacons,  but  they  were  men  or  women 
(Acts  xxi.  9)  who  had  the  xap'O'MO  Trpocfijrefaj 
vouchsafed  them.  If  men,  they  might  at  the 
same  time  be  apostles  (1  Cor.  xiv.) ;  and  there 
was  nothing  to  hinder  the  difllsreiit  x°-p'^'^h'°-'^°-  f* 
wisdom,  knowledge,  faith,  teaching,  miracles,  pro- 
phecy, discernment,  tongues,  and  interpretation 
(1  Cor.  xii.),  being  all  accumulated  on  one  person, 
and  this  person  might  or  might  not  be  a  presbyter. 
St.  Paul  describes  prophecy  as  being  effective  for 
the  conversion,  apparently  the  sudden  and  imme- 
diate conversion,  of  unbelievers  (1  Cor.  xiv.  24), 
and  for  the  instruction  and  consolation  of  believers 
{lb.  ol).  This  shows  its  nature.  It  was  a  spiritual 
gift  which  enabled  men  to  understand  and  to  teach 
the  truths  of  Christianity,  especially  as  veiled  in 
the  Old  Testament,  and  to  exhort  and  warn  with 
authority  and  effect  greater  than  human  (see  Locke, 
Paraphrase,  note  on  1  Cor.  xii.,  and  Conybeare 
and  Howson,  i.  461).  The  prophets  of  the  N.  T. 
were  supernaturally-illuminated  expounders  and 
preachers. 

S.  Augustinus,  De  Civitate  Dei,  lib.  xviii.  c. 
xxvii.  et  seq.,  Op.  tom.  vii.  p.  508,  Paris,  1685. 
D.  J.  G.  Carpzovius,  Inirod.  ad  Libros  Canonicos, 
Lips.  1757.  John  Smith,  Select  Discourses:  On 
Prophecy,  p.  179,  Lond.  1821,  and  prefixed  in  Latin 
to  Le  Clerc's  Commentartj ,  Amst.  1731.  Lowth, 
De  Sacra  Poesi  Hebraeorum,Oxon.  1821,  and  trans- 
lated by  Gregory,  Lond.  1835.  Davison,  Discourses 
on  Prophecy,  Oxf.  1839.  Butler,  Analogy  of  Reli- 
gion, Oxf.  1849.  Horsley,  Biblical  Criticism, 
Lond.  1820.  Home,  Introduction  to  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, c.  iv.  §3,  Lond.  1828.  Van  Mildert,  Boyle 
Lectures,  S.wW.,  Lond,  1831.  Eichhorn,  Die  He- 
brdischen  Propheten,  Getting.  1816.  Knobel,  Der 
Prophetismus der  Hebraer,  P)resl.  1 837.  Koster,  Die 
Propheten  des  A.  %md  N.  T.,  Leipz.  1838.  Ewald, 
Die  Propiheten  des  Alien  Biindes,  Stuttg.  1840. 
Hofmann,  Weissagung  und  I'rjiilluug  im  A.  und 
N.  T.,  Nordl.  1841.  Hengstenberg,  Christology 
of  the  Old  Testamerd,  in  T.  T.  Clark's  Trans- 
lation, Edinb.  1854.  Fairbairn,  Prophecy,  its 
Nature,    Functions,    and    Pnterpretation,    Edinb. 

1856.  Lee,  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  Lond. 

1857.  Oehler,  s.  v.  Prophetenthnm  des  A.  T.  in 
Herzog's  Real  Encyclopadie,  Goth.  1800.  Pusey, 
The  Minor  Prophets,  Oxf.  1861.  Aids  to  Faith, 
art.  "  Prophecy"  and  "  Iiispiiation,"  Lond.  1861. 
K.  Payne  Smith,  Messianic  interpretation  of  the 
Prophecies  of  Isaiah,  Oxf.  1862.  Davidson, 
fntroduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  ii.  422,  On 
"  Prophecy,"  Lond.  1862.  Stanley,  Lectures  on 
the  Jewish  Church,  Lond.  1863.  [F;  M.] 


Koppe,  Mlchaelis,  Schmiedcr,  Storr,  Hansi,  Kriiger, 
.l:diii,  Steudel,  Sack,  Heinke,  'I'holuck,  lliivernick,  Stier. 
Hengstenberg's  own  exposition,  and  criticism  of  the  ex- 
positions of  others,  is  well  worth  consultation  {Chriito- 
lugy,  vol.  ii.). 

'  Obadiah  is  generally  considered  to  have  lived  at  a 
later  date  than  Is  compatible  with  a  chronological  arrange- 
ment of  the  canon,  in  consequence  ot  his  relereiice  to  the 
capture  of  Jerusalem.  Hut  ^uch  an  Inference  is  not 
necessary,  for  the  piopliot  might  have  thrown  himself  in 
imagination  forwanl  to  the  date  of  his  prophecy  (Heng- 
stenberg), or  the  «  ords  which,  as  translated  by  the  A.  V., 
are  a  remonstrance  as  to  the  past,  may  be  really  but  un 
imperative  as  to  the  future  (I'usey). 


940 


PROSELYTES 


PROSELYTES  (Dnj :  irpoo-^AuToi,  1  Chr. 

xxii.  2"2,  &c. :  yfidipai,  Ex.  xii.  19:  Pi-oseli/ti). 
The  Hebrew  word  thus  translated  is  in  the  A.  V. 
commonly  rendered  "stranger"  (Gen.  xv.  13,  Ex. 
ii.  22,  Is.  V.  17,  &c.).  The  LXX.,  as  above,  com- 
monly 2;ives  the  equivalent  in  meaning  <iTpoa'i]KvTOi 
oiTrb  Tov  iTpoffe\rj\vdevai  Kaivfj  Kal  (piKodew  ttoAi- 
reia,  Philo  and  Suidas,  s.  v.),  but  sometimes  sub- 
stitutes a  Hellenized  form  (yeiwpas)  of  the  Aramaic 
form  N-lii|.     In  the  N.  T.  the  A.  V.  has  taken  the 

word  in  a  more  restricted  meaning,  and  translated 
it  accordingly  (Watt,  xxiii.  15,  Acts  ii.  10,  vi.  5 1. 

The  existence,  through  all  stages  of  the  history 
of  the  Israelites,  of  a  body  of  men,  not  of  the  same 
race,  but  holding  the  same  faith  and  adopting  the 
same  ritual,  is  a  fact  wliich,  from  its  very  nature, 
requires  to  be  dealt  with  historically.  To  start  with 
the  technical  distinctions  and  regulations  of  the  later 
Kabbis  is  to  invert  the  natural  order,  and  leads  to 
inevitable  confusion.  It  is  proposed  accordingly  to 
consider  the  condition  of  the  proselytes  of  Israel  in 
the  five  great  periods  into  which  the  history  of  the 
people  divides  itself:  viz.  (I.)  the  age  of  the  patri- 
aiichs;  (II, )  from  the  Exodus  to  the  commencement 
of  the  monarchy  ;  (III.)  the  period  of  the  monarchy  ; 
(IV.)  from  the  Babylonian  raptivit)-  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem ;  (V.)  from  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  downwards. 

I.  The  position  of  the  family  of  Israel  as  a  dis- 
tinct nation,  with  a  special  religious  character,  ap- 
pears at  a  very  early  period  to  have  exercise!  a 
power  of  atti'action  over  neighbouring  races.  'I'he 
slaves  and  soldiers  of  the  tribe  of  whicli  Abraham 
was  the  head  (Gen.  xvii.  27),  who  were  included 
with  him  in  the  covenant  of  circumcision,  can  hardly 
jierhaps  be  classed  as  proselytes  in  the  later  sense. 
The  case  of  the  .Shechemites,  however  (Gen.  xxxiv.), 
presents  a  more  distinct  instance.  The  converts  ai'e 
swayed  partly  by  passion,  partly  by  interest.  The 
sons  of  Jacob  then,  as  afterwards,  require  circum- 
cision as  an  indispensable  condition  (Gen.  xxxiv.  14). 
This,  and  apparently  this  only,  was  required  of  pros- 
elytes in  the  pre-Mosaic  period. 

II.  The  lite  of  Israel  under  the  Law,  from  the 
very  first,  presupposes  and  provides  for  the  incor- 
poration of  men  of  other  races.  The  "  mixed  mul- 
titude "  of  Ex.  xii.  38  implies  the  presence  of  pros- 
elytes more  or  less  complete.  It  is  recognised  in 
the  earliest  rules  for  the  celebration  of  the  Passover 
(Ex.  xii.  19).  The  "stranger"  of  this  and  other  laws 
in  the  A.  V.  answers  to  the  word  which  distinctly 
means  "proselyte,"  and  is  so  translated  in  the  LXX., 
and  the  prominence  of  the  cl.iss  may  be  estimated 
by  the  frequency  with  which  the  word  recurs: 
9  times  in  Exodus,  20  in  Leviticus,  11  in  Num- 
bers, 19  in  Deuteronomy.  The  laws  clearly  point 
to  the  position  of  a  conveit.  The  "  stranger  "  is 
bound  by  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  .xx.  10,  xxiii. 
12;  Deut.  V.  14).  Circumcision  is  the  condition 
of  any  fellowship  with  him  (Ex.  xii.  48  ;  Num.  ix. 
14).  He  is  to  be  present  at  the  Passover  (Ex.  xii. 
19),  the  Fe;ist  of  Weelcs  (Deut.  xvi.  11),  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  (Deut.  xvi.  14),  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment (Lev.  xvi.  29).  The  laws  of  proliibited  mar- 
riages (Lev.  xviii.  26)  and  abstinence  from  blood 
(Lev.  xvii.  10)  are  binding  upon  him.  He  is  liable 
to  the  Fame  punishment  for  i\Iolech-worship  (Lev. 
XX.  2)  and  for  blasphemy  (Lev.  xxiv.  IG),  may 
claim  the  same  right  of  Jisylum  as  the  Israelites  in 
the  cities  of  refuge  (Num.  xxxv.  15  ;  Josh.  xx.  9). 
On  the  other  side  lie  is  subjected  to  some  draw- 


PROSELYTES 

backs.  He  cannot  hold  land  (Lev.  xix.  10).  He 
has  no  jns  connuhii  with  the  descendants  of  Aaron 
(Lev.  xxi.  14).  His  aindition  is  assumed  to  be,  for 
the  most  part,  one  of  poverty  (Lev.  xxiii.  22),  often 
of  sen'itude  (Deut.  xxix.  11).  For  this  j-eason  hf 
is  placed  under  the  special  protection  of  the  law 
(Deut.  X.  18).  He  is  to  sliare  in  the  right  of  trleaning 
(Lev.  xix.  10),  is  placed  in  the  same  categorv  as  tlie 
fatherless  and  the  widow  (Deut.  xxiv.  17,  19,  xxvr. 
12,  xxvii.  19),  is  joined  with  the  Levite  as  entitled 
to  the  tithe  of  every  third  year's  produce  (Deut. 
xiv.  29,  xxvi.  12).  Among  the  proselytes  of  this 
period  the  Kenites,  who  under  Houab  accom- 
panied the  Israelites  in  their  wanderings,  and  ulti- 
mately settled  in  Canaan,  were  probably  the  most 
conspicuous  (Judg.  i.  16).  The  presence  of  the  class 
was  recognised  in  the  solemn  declaration  of  blessings 
and  curses  from  Ebal  and  Gerizim  (Josh.  riii.  33). 

The  jieriod  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  was 
not  favourable  to  the  admission  of  proselytes.  The 
people  had  no  strong  flxith,  no  conmianding  position. 
The  Gibeonites  (Josh,  ix.)  furnish  the  only  instance 
of  a  conversion,  and  their  condition  is  rather  that 
of  slaves  compelled  to  conform  than  of  free  pros- 
elytes.    [Netiiinim.] 

III.  With  the  monarchy,  and  the  consequent  fame 
and  intlu  fence  of  the  people,  there  was  more  to 
attract  stragglers  from  the  neighbouring  nations, 
and  we  meet  accordingly  with  many  names  which 
suggest  the  jnesence  of  men  of  another  race  con- 
forming to  the  faith  of  Israel.  Doeg'  the  Edomite 
(1  .Sam.  xxi.  7),  Uriah  the  Hittite  (2  Sam.  xi.  3), 
Araunah  the  Jebusite  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  23),  Zelek  the 
Ammonite  (2  Sam.  xxi'ii.  37),  Ithmah  the  Moabite 
(1  Chr.  xi.  46) — these  two  in  spite  of  an  exjiress 
law  to  the  contrary  (Deut.  xxiii.  3) — and  at  a  later 
period  Shebna  the  scribe  (probably,  comp.  Alexander 
on  Is.  xxii.  15),  and  Ebed-iMelech  the  Ethiopian  ( Jer. 
xxxviii.  7),  are  examples  that  such  proselytes  might 
rise  even  to  high  offices  about  the  person  of  the 
king.  The  Cherethites  and  Pelethites  con- 
sisted probably  of  foreigners  who  had  been  attracted 
to  the  service  of  David,  and  wore  content  tor  it  to 
adopt  the  religion  of  their  master  (Ewald,  Gesch. 
i.  330,  iii.  183).  The  vision  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  of  a 
time  in  which  men  of  Tyre,  Egypt,  Ethiopia,  Phi- 
listia,  should  all  be  registered  among  the  citizens  of 
Zion,  can  liardly  fail  to  have  hail  its  starting-point 
in  some  admission  of  jiroselytes  within  the  memory 
of  the  writer  (Ewald  and  De  Wette  in  foe).  A 
convert  of  another  kind,  the  type,  as  it  has  been 
thouglit,  of  the  later  proselytes  of  the  gate  (see 
below)  is  found  in  Nnaman  the  Syrian  (2  K.  v.  15, 
18)  i-ecognising  Jehovah  as  his  God,  yet  not  binding 
himself  to  any  I'igorous  observance  of  the  Law. 

The  position  of  the  proselytes  during  this  period 
appears  to  have  undergone  considerable  changes. 
On  the  one  hand  men  rose,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
power  and  fortune.  The  case  for  wh'ch  the  Law 
jjrovided  (Lev.  xxv.  47)  might  actually  occur,  and 
the}''  might  be  the  crtxlitors  of  Israelite  debtoi-s, 
the  masters  of  Israelite  slaves.  It  might  well  be  a 
sign  of  the  times  in  the  later  days  of  the  monarchy 
that  they  became  "  very  high,"  the  "  head  "  and 
not  the  "tail  "  of  the  people  (Deut.  .vxviii.  43,  4). 
The  picture  had,  however,  another  side.  They  were 
treated  by  David  and  Solomon  as  a  subject-class, 
brought  (like  Perioeci,  almost  like  Helots)  under  a 
system  of  compulsory  labour  from  which  others 
were  exempted  (1  Chr.  xxii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  ii.  17,  18). 
The  statistics  of  this  period,  taken  probably  for 
that  purpose,  give  their  number  (probably,  i.  c.  the 


PROSELYTES 

number  of  adult  working;  nwles)  at  153,600  (ib.). 
They  were  .subject  at  other  times  to  wanton  inso- 
lence and  outrage  (Ps.  xciv.  6).  As  some  compen- 
sation for  tiieir  sufferings  tliey  became  the  special 
objects  of  the  care  and  sympathy  of  the  prophets. 
One  after  another  of  the  '•  goodly  fellowship  "  pleads 
the  cause  of  the  proselytes  as  warmly  as  that  of  the 
willow  and  the  fatherless  (Jer.  vii.  6,  xxii.  3;  Kz. 
xxii.  7,  29;  Zecli.  vii.  10;  Mai.  iii.  5).  A  large 
ticcessioa  of  converts  enters  into  all  their  hopes  of 
the  Divine  Kingdom  (Is.  ii.  2,  xi.  10,  Ivi.  3-6  ;  Mic. 
iv.  1).  The  sympathy  of  one  of  thein  goes  still 
further.  He  sees,  iu  the  far  future,  the  vision  of  a 
time  when  tlie  last  remnant  of  inti^riority  shall  be 
removed,  and  the  proselytes,  completely  emanci- 
jjated,  shall  be  able  to  hold  and  inherit  land  even  as 
tiie  Israelites  (Ez.  xlvii.  22).» 

iV.  Tlie  proselytism  of  the  period  after  the  cap- 
tivity assumed  a  different  character.  It  was  tor 
tlie  most  part  the  conformity,  not  of  a  subject  race, 
but  of  willing  adherents.  Even  as  early  as  the 
return  from  Babylon  we  have  traces  of  those  wlio 
were  drawn  to  a  faith  which  they  recognised  as 
holier  than  their  own,  and  had  "  separated  them- 
selves" unto  the  law  of  Jeliovah  (Neh.  x.  28). 
The  presence  of  m:my  foreign  names  among  the 
Nethinim  (iS'eh.  vii.  46-59)  leads  us  to  believe 
that  many  of  the  new  convei-ts  dedicated  themselves 
specially  to  the  service  of  the  new  Temple.  With 
the  conquests  of  Ale.xauder,  the  wars  between  Egypt 
and  Syria,  the  struggle  under  the  Maccabees,  the 
expansion  of  the  lloman  empire,  the  Jews  became 
more  widely  known  and  their  power  to  proselytise 
incruiwed.  They  had  sufltjred  lor  their  religion  iu 
the  persecution  of  Antiochus,  and  the  spirit  of  mar- 
tyrdom was  followed  naturally  by  propagandism. 
']' heir  monotheism  was  rigid  and  unbending.  Scat- 
tered through  the  East  and  West,  a  marvel  and  a 
portent,  wondered  at  and  scorned,  attracting  and 
repelling,  they  presented,  in  an  age  of  shattered 
creeds,  and  corroding  doubts,  the  spectacle  of  a 
faith,  or  at  least  a  dogma  which  remained  unshaken. 
The  influence  was  sometimes  obtained  well,  and  ex- 
eicised  for  good.  In  most  of  the  great  cities  of  the 
empire,  there  were  men  who  had  been  rescued  from 
idolatry  and  its  attendant  debasements,  and  brought 
under  the  power  of  a  higher  moral  law.  It  is 
possible  that  in  some  cases  the  purity  of  Jewish 
lite  may  have  contributed  to  this  result,  and  attracted 
men  or  women  who  shrank  from  the  unutterable 
contamination,  in  the  midst  of  which  they  lived. i" 
The  converts  who  were  thus  attracted,  joined,  with 
varying  strictness  (infra)  in  the  worsliip  of  the 
Jews.  They  were  present  in  their  synagogues  (Acts 
xiii.  42,  43,  50,  xvii.  4,  xviii.  7).  They  came  up 
as  pilgrims  to  the  great  feasts  at  Jerusalem  (Acts 
ii.  lO).  In  Palestine  itself  the  influence  was  often 
stronger  and  better.  Even  lioman  centurions  learnt 
to  love  the  conquered  nation,  built  synagogues  for 
thera  (Luke  vii.  5),  flisted  and  prayed,  and  gave 
alms,  after  the  pattern  of  the  strictest  Jews  (Acts 
X.  2,  ;>()),  ami  beaune  preachers  of  the  new  faith  to 
the  soldiers  under  them  (j6.  v.  7).  Such  men, 
diawn  by  what  was  best  iu  Judaism,  were  naturally 


PROSELYTES 


941 


"  Tlie  significance  of  this  passage  in  its  lilstorical  con- 
nexion with  I's.  Ixxxvii.,  ahvady  referred  to,  and  Its  spi- 
ritual fulfilm<>nt  In  the  lantaiafe  of  St.  Paul  (Kph.  11.  19), 
d'jsetve  a  fuller  notice  than  they  have  yet  received. 

b  This  influence  is  not  perhaps  to  be  altogether  e.\- 
cliidcd,  hut  it  lias  sometimes  been  enonnously  exaggerate  J. 
Comp.  Dr.  Temple's  '  ICssay  on  the  Education  of  tlie  World ' 
{Kssays  and  licvkas,  p.  V2). 


among  the  readiest  receivers  of  the  new  truth  which 
rose  out  of  it,  and  became,  in  many  cases,  the 
nucleus  of  a  Gentile  Church. 

Proselytism  had,  however,  its  darker  side.  The 
Jews  of  Palestine  were  e<iger  to  spread  their  faith 
by  the  same  weapons  as  those  with  which  they  had 
defended  it.  Had  not  the  power  of  the  Empire 
stood  iu  the  way,  the  religion  of  Moses,  stripped  of 
its  higher  elements,  might  have  been  propagated 
far  and  wide,  by  force,  as  was  afterwards  the  religion 
of  Mahomet.  As  it  w;)s,  the  Idumaeans  had  the 
alternative  offered  them  by  John  Hyrcimus  of  death, 
exile,  or  circumcision  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §3).  The 
Itiu'aeans  were  converted  iu  the  same  way  by  Aris- 
tobulus  (ib.  xiii.  11,  §3).  In  tlie  more  frenzied 
fanaticism  of  a  later  period,  the  Jews  under  Jo- 
sephus  could  hardly  be  restrained  from  seizing  and 
circumcising  two  chiefs  of  Trachonitis  who  had 
come  as  envoys  (Joseph.  Vit.  23).  They  conflpelletl 
a  Uoman  centurion,  whom  they  had  taken  prisoner, 
to  purchase  his  life  by  accepting  the  sign  of  the 
covenant  (Joseph.  B.J.  ii.  11,  §10).  Where  force 
was  not  in  their  power  (the  "  veluti  Judaei,  co- 
gemus"  of  Hor.  Sat.  i.  4,  142,  implies  that  they 
sometimes  ventured  on  it  even  at  Rome),  they  ob- 
tained their  ends  by  the  most  unscrupulous  fraud. 
They  appeared  as  soothsayers,  diviners,  exorcists, 
and  addressed  themselves  especially  to  the  fears  and 
superstitions  of  women.  Their  influence  over  these 
became  the  subject  of  indignant  satire  (Juv.  Sat. 
vi.  543-547).  They  persuaded  noble  matrons  to 
send  money  and  purple  to  the  Temple  (Josej)h.  Ant. 
xviii.  3,  §5).  At  Damascus  the  wives  of  nearlv 
half  the  population  were  supposed  to  be  tainted 
with  Judaism  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  10,  §2).  At  Kome 
they  numbered  in  their  ranks,  in  the  person  of 
Poppaea,  even  an  impeiial  concubine  (Joseph.  Ant. 
XX.  7,  §11).  The  converts  thus  made,  cast  off'  all 
ties  of  kindred  and  atli^ction  (Tac.  Hist.  v.  9). 
Those  who  were  most  active  in  proselytizing  were 
precisely  those  from  whose  teaching  all  that  was 
most  true  and  living  had  departed.  The  vices  of 
the  Jew  were  engrafted  on  the  vices  of  the  heathen. 
A  repulsive  arsuistry  released  the  convei-t  from 
obligations  which  he  had  before  recognised,'^  wliile 
in  other  things  he  was  bound,  hand  and  foot,  to  an 
unhealthy  superstition.  It  wa-s  no  wonder  that  he 
became  "twofold  more  the  child  of  Gehenna" 
(j\Iatt.  xxiii.  15)  than  the  Pharisees  themselves. 

The  position  of  such  proselytes  was  indeed  every 
way  pitiable.  At  Kome,  and  in  other  large  cities, 
they  became  the  butts  of  popular  scurrility.  The 
words  "curtus,"  "  verpes,"  met  them  at  every  corner 
(Hor.  Sat.  i.  4,  142  ;  Mart.  vii.  29,  34,  81,  xi.  95, 
xii.  37).  They  had  to  share  the  fortunes  of  the 
people  with  whom  they  had  c;\.st  in  their  lot,  might 
be  banished  from  Italy  (Acts  xviii.  2  ;  Suet.  C/aud. 
25),  or  sent  to  die  of  malaria  in  the  most  unhealthy 
stations  of  the  empire  (Tac.  Ann.  ii.  85).  At  a  later 
time,  they  were  bound  to  make  a  public  profession  of 
their  conversion,  and  to  pay  a  s]5ecial  tax  (Suet. 
Doniit.  xii.).  If  they  fixiled  to  do  this  mid  were  sus- 
pected, they  might  be  subject  to  the  most  degrading 
examination  to  ascertiiiu  the  fact  of  their  being  prose- 

"  The  Law  of  the  Corbau  may  serve  as  one  instance 
(Matt.  XV.  4-6).  Another  is  found  in  the  Habbinic 
teaching  as  to  marriage.  Circumcision,  like  u  new  birth, 
cancelled  all  previous  relationships,  and  unions  within 
the  nearest  degrees  of  WockI  were  therefore  no  longer 
incestuous  (Maimun.  ix  Jtbam.  p.  9!i2:  Selden,  de  Jure 
Nat.  et  Gent,  ii,  •),  Cxor  Hebr.  ii.  is). 


942 


PROSELYTES 


lytes  (ibid.).  Among  the  Jews  themselves  their  case 
was  not  much  better.  For  the  most  part  the  convert, 
gained  but  little  honour  even  from  those  who  gloried 
in  having  brought  him  over  to  their  sect  and  party. 
The  popular  Jewish  feeling  about  them  was  like 
the  popular  Christian  feeling  about  a  converted 
Jew.  They  were  regarded  (by  a  strange  f'ubbinic 
perversion  of  Is.  xiv.  1)  as  the  leprosy  of  Israel, 
"  cleaving  "  to  the  house  of  Jacob  {Jcbam.  47,  4  ; 
Kiddush.  70,  6).  An  opprobrious  proverb  coupled 
them  with  the  vilest  profligates  ("  proselyti  et  paede- 
rastae")  as  hindering  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
(Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heh.  in  Matt,  xxfii.  5).  It  became 
a  recognised  maxim  that  no  wis?  man  would  trust 
"a  proselyte  even  to  the  twentv-fourth  generation 
{Jalkuth  linth,  f.  163  a). 

The  better  Rabbis  did  their  best  to  guard  against 
these  evils.  An.xious  to  exclude  all  unworthy  con- 
verts, they  groupal  them,  according  to  their  motives, 
with  a  somewhat  quaint  classification. 

(1.)  Love-proselytes,  where  they  were  drawn  by 
the  hope  of  gaining  the  beloved  one.  (The  story 
of  Syllaeus  and  .Salome,  Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  7, 
§6,  is  an  example  of  a  half-finished  conversion 
of  this  kind.) 

(2.)  Man-for-VVoman,  or  Woman-for-Man  prose- 
lytes, where  the  husband  followed  the  religion 
of  the  wife,  or  conversely. 

(3.)  Esther-proselytes,  where  conformity  was  as- 
sumed to  escape  danger,  as  in  the  original 
Purim  (Esth.  viii.  17). 

(4.)  King's-table-proselytes,  who  were  led  by  the 
hope  of  court  favour  and  promotion,  like  the 
converts  under  David  and  Solomon. 

(5.)  Lion-proselytes,  where  the  conversion  ori- 
ginated in  a  superstitious  dread  of  a  divine 
judgment,  as  with  the  Samaritans  of  2  K. 
xvii.  26. 

(Gem.  Wkyos.  Kiddush.  65,  6;  Jost,  Jitdenth.  i. 
448.)  None  of  these  were  regarded  as  fit  for  admis- 
sion within  the  covenant.  When  they  met  with 
one  with  whose  motives  they  were  satisfied,  he  was 
put  to  a  yet  further  ordeal.  He  was  warned  that 
in  becoming  a  Jew  he  was  attaching  himself  to  a 
persecuted  people,  that  in  this  life  he  was  to  expect 
only  sutiiering,  and  to  look  for  his  reward  in  the 
next.  Sometimes  these  cautions  were  in  their  turn 
carried  to  an  extreme,  and  amounted  to  a  policy  of 
exclusion.  A  protest  against  them  on  the  part  of 
a  disciple  of  the  Great  Hillel  is  recorded,  which 
throws  across  the  dreary  rubbish  of  Rabbinism  the 
momentary  gleam  of  a  noble  thought.  "  Our  wise 
men  teach,"  said  Simon  ben  Gamaliel,  "  that  when 
a  heathen  comes  to  enter  into  the  covenant,  our 
part  is  to  stretch  out  our  hand  to  him  and  to  bring 
him  under  the  wings  of  God"  (Jost,  Judenth. 
i.  447). 

Another  mode  of  meeting  the  difficulties  of  the 
case  was  characteristic  of  the  period.  Whether  we 
may  transfer  to  it  the  full  fbrmsil  distinction  be- 
tween Proselytes  of  the  Gate  and  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness  (infra)  may  be  doubtful  enough,  but 
we  find  two  distinct  modes  of  thought,  two  distinct 
policies  in  dealing  with  conveits.  The  historv  of 
Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene,  and  her  son  Izntes, 
j>resents  the  two  in  collision  with  each  other.  They 
had  been  converted  by  a  Jewish  merchant,  Ananias, 
but  the  queen  feivred  lest  the  circumcision  of  her 
.son  should  disquiet  and  alarm  her  subjects.  Ananias 
.assured  her  that  it  was  not  necessary.  Her  sou  might 
wor.ship  God,   .study  the  law,   keep  the  command- 


PROSELYTES 

ments,  without  it.  Soon,  however,  a  stricter  teacher 
came,  Eleazar  of  Galilee.  Finding  Izates  readint; 
the  law,  he  told  him  steinly  that  it  was  of  little 
use  to  study  that  which  he  disobeyed,  and  so  woi'ked 
upon  his  fears,  that  the  young  devotee  was  eager  to 
secure  the  safety  of  which  his  uncircumcision  had 
deprived  him  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2,  §5 ;  Jost,  Ju- 
denth. i.  341).  On  the  part  of  some,  therefore, 
there  was  a  disposition  to  dispense  with  what 
others  looked  on  as  indispensable.  The  centurions 
of  Luke  vii.  (probably)  and  Acts  x.,  possibly  the 
Hellenes  of  John  xii.  20  and  Acts  xiii.  42,  are  in- 
stances of  men  admitted  on  the  fbimer  footing.  The 
phrases  ol  tre^ofievot  irpoaifXvroi.  (Acts  xiii.  43), 
ol  ffi^ofjL^voi.  {  xvii.  4,  1 7  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2 ), 
avSpis  (vXa^us  (Acts  ii.  5,  vii.  2)  are  often,  but 
inaccuratelv,  supposed  to  describe  the  same  class 
— the  Pro.selytes  of  the  Gate.  The  probability  is, 
either  that  the  terms  were  used  generally  of  all 
converts,  or,  if  with  a  specific  meaning,  were  applied 
to  the  full  Proselytes  of  Righteousne.ss  (comp.  a 
full  examination  of  the  passages  in  question  by  N. 
Lardner,  On  the  Decree  of  Acts  xv.;  Works  xi.  305). 
The  two  tendencies  were,  at  all  events,  at  work,  and 
the  battle  between  them  was  renewed  afler wards 
on  holier  ground  and  on  a  wider  scale.  Ananias 
and  Eleazar  were  represented  in  the  two  parties  of 
the  Council  of  Jerusalem.  The  germ  of  truth  hail 
been  quickened  into  a  new  life,  and  was  emancipating 
itself  from  the  old  thraldom.  The  decrees  of  the 
Council  were  the  solemn  assertion  of  the  principle 
that  believers  in  Christ  were  to  stand  on  the  footing 
of  Proselytes  of  the  Gate,  not  of  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness.  The  teaching  of  St.  Paul  as  to 
righteousness  and  its  conditions,  its  dependence  on 
faith,  its  independence  of  circumcision,  stands  out 
in  shai-p  clear  contiast  with  the  teachers  who  taught 
that  that  rite  was  necessary  to  salvation,  and  con- 
fined the  term  "  righteousness  "  to  the  circumcised 
convert. 

V.  The  teachers  who  carried  on  the  Rabbinical 
succession  consoled  themselves,  as  they  saw  the  new 
order  waxing  and  their  own  glory  waning,  by  de- 
veloping the  decaying  system  with  an  almost  micro- 
scopic minuteness.  They  would  at  least  transmit 
to  future  generations  the  full  measure  of  the 
religion  of  their  fathers.  In  pioportion  as  they 
cea.sed  to  have  any  power  to  proselytize,  they  dwelt 
with  exhaustive  fulness  on  the  question  how  pi'os- 
elytes  were  to  be  made.  To  this  period  accord- 
ingly belong  the  rules  and  decisions  which  are  often 
carried  back  to  an  earliei-  age,  and  which  may  now 
be  convenientlv  discussed.  The  precepts  of  the 
Talmud  may  indicate  the  piactices  and  opinions  of 
the  Jews  from  the  2nd  to  the  5th  centuiy.  They 
are  very  untrustworthy  as  to  any  eaidier  time. 
The  points  of  interest  which  present  themselves  tor 
inquiiy  are,  (l.)The  Chissification  of  Proselytes. 
(2.)  The  ceremonies  of  their  admission. 

The  division  which  h^s  been  in  part  antici- 
pated, was  recognised  by  the  Talmudic  Rabbis,  but 
received  its  full  expansion  at  the  hands  of  Mai- 
monides  (Hilc.  Mel.  i.  6).  They  claimed  for  it  a 
remote  antiquity,  a  divine  authority.  The  term 
Proselytes  of  the  Gate  ("ly^il  nil),  was  derival 
from  the  frequently  occurring  description  in  the 
Law,  "  the  stranger  ("lH)  that  is  within  thy  gates" 
(Ex.  XX.  10.  &x.).  They  were  known  also  as  the 
sojourners  (3t^in  Hi),  with  a  reference  to  Lev. 
XXV.  47,  &c.     To  them  were  referred  the  greater 


PKOSELYTES 

jiai  t  of  the  precepts  of  the  Law  ;\s  to  tlie  •'  stranger." 
The  Targums  of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  give  this  as 
the  equivalent  in  Dent.  xxiv.  21.  Converts  of  this 
cliuss  were  not  bound  by  circumcision  and  the  other 
special  laws  of  the  Mosaic  code.  It  was  enough 
for  them  to  observe  the  seven  precepts  of  Noah 
(Otho,  Lex.  Rahh.  "  Noachida  ;"  Selden,  De  Jur. 
Nid.  et  Gent.  i.  10),  i.  e.  the  six  supjiosed  to 
have  been  given  to  Adam,  (1)  against  idolatry, 
(2)  against  blaspheming,  (3)  against  bloodshed, 
(4)  against  uncleanness,  (5)  against  theft,  (6)  of 
obedience,  with  (7)  the  prohibition  of  "flesh  with 
the  blood  thereof"  given  to  Noah.  The  proselyte 
was  not  to  claim  the  privileges  of  an  Israelite,  might 
not  redeem  his  first-born,  or  pay  the  half-shekel 
(Leyrer,  ut  inf.).  He  was  forbidden  to  study  the 
Law  under  pain  of  death  (Otho,  I.  c).  The  later 
Itabbis,  when  .lerusalem  had  passed  into  other  hands, 
held  that  it  was  unlawful  for  him  to  reside  within 
the  holy  city  (Maimon.  Betli-haccher.  vii.  14).  In 
return  they  allowed  him  to  ofl'er  whole  bui'nt- 
ofFerings  for  the  prie>t  to  sacrifice,  and  to  contribute 
money  to  the  Corban  of  the  Temple.  They  held 
out  to  him  the  hope  of  a  place  in  the  paradise  of 
the  world  to  come  (Leyrer).  They  insisted  that 
the  profession  of  his  faith  should  be  made  solemnly 
in  tiie  presence  of  three  witnesses  (RLaimon.  Hilc. 
Mel.  viii.  10).  The  Jubilee  was  the  jiroper  season 
for  his  admission  (Miiller,  De  Pros,  in  Ugolini  xxii. 
841). 

All  this  seems  so  full  and  precise,  that  we  cannot 
wonder  that  it  has  led  many  writers  to  look  on  it  as 
representuig  a  realitv,  and  most  commentators  ac- 
conlingly  have  seen  these  Pioselytes  of  the  Gate  in 
tiie  (re06fj.evoi,  euAajSeis,  (po^oifx^voi  rhv  @ihv  of 
the  Acts.  It  remains  doubtful,  however,  whether 
it  was  ever  more  than  a  paper  scheme  of  what  ought 
to  be,  disguising  itself  as  having  actuallv  been. 
The  writei's  who  are  most  full,  who  claim  for  the 
distinction  the  highest  antiquity,  confess  that  there 
had  been  no  Proselytes  of  the  Gate  since  the  Two 
Tribes  and  a  half  had  been  carried  away  into  cap- 
tivity (Maimon.  Hilc.  Mela.  i.  6).  They  could 
only  be  admitted  at  the  jubilee  and  there  had  since 
then  been  no  jubilee  celebrated  (Miiller,  /.  c).  All 
that  can  be  said  therefore  is,  that  in  the  time  of  the 
N.  T.  we  have  independent  e\'idence  («i  supra)  of 
the  existence  of  converts  of  two  degrees,  and  that 
the  Talmudic  division  is  the  formal  systematising  of 
an  earlier  fact.  The  words  "  proselytes,"  and  ot 
(TfP6fj.evot  rhv  Qihv,  were,  however,  in  all  proba- 
bility limited  to  the  (circumcised. 

In  contrast  with  these  were  the  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness  (plVH  ^"15),  known  also  as  Pros- 
elytes of  the  Covenant,  perfect  Israelites.  By 
»ome.  writers  the  Talmudic  phrase,  proseli/ti  tracti 
(D'lnil)  is  applied  to  them  as  drawn  to  the  cove- 
nant by  spontaneous  conviction  (Buxtorf,  Lexio. 
s.  v.),  while  others  (Kimchi)  refer  it  to  those  who 
were  constrained  to  conformity,  like  the  (iibeonites. 
Here  also  we  must  receive  what  we  fiml  witii  the 
same  limitation  as  befoie.  All  seems  at  first  clear 
and  definite  enough.  The  proselyte  was  tirst  cnte- 
chiseil  as  to  his  motives  (Maimon.  nt  s'ipra).  If 
these  were  satistiutory,  he  was  first  instructed  as 
to  the  Divine  protection  of  the  Jewish  people,  and 
then  circumcised.     In  the  case  of  a  convert  already 


PROSELYTES 


943 


•i  This  thought  probably  had  its  starling-point  In  the 
language  of  Vs.  Ixxxvii.  There  also  the  proselytes  of  l)a- 
liylon  and  Kgypt  arc  registered  as  "  Iwrn  "  in  Zion, 


circumcised  (a  Midianite,  e.g.  or  an  Egyptian),  it 
was  still  necessary  to  draw  a  few  drops  of  "the 
blood  of  the  covenant  "  (Gem.  Bab.  Shabb.  f. 
135  a).  A  special  prayer  was  appointed  to  accom- 
pany the  act  of  circumcision.  Otten  the  j)roselyte 
took  a  new  name.  0{)ening  the  Hebrew  Bible  and 
accepting  the  first  that  c<mie  (Leyrer,  tit  infr.) 

All  this,  however,  was  not  enough.  The  convert 
was  still  a  "  stranger."  His  children  would  be 
counted  as  bastards,  i.  e.  aliens.  Baptism  was  re- 
quired to  complete  his  admission.  When  the  wound 
was  healed,  he  was  stripped  of  all  his  clothes,  in  the 
presence  of  the  three  witnesses  who  had  acted  as  his 
teachers,  and  who  now  acted  as  his  sponsors,  the 
"fathers"  of  the  proselyte  {Ketjibh.  xi.,  Ernbh. 
XV.  1),  and  led  into  the  tank  or  pool.  As  he  stood 
there,  up  to  his  neck  in  water,  they  repeated  the 
great  commandments  of  the  Law.  These  he  pro- 
mised and  vowed  to  keep,  and  then,  with  an  accom- 
panying benediction,  he  plunged  under  the  water. 
To  leave  one  liAud-breadth  of  his  body  unsubmerged 
would  have  vitiated  the  whole  rite  (Otho,  Lej\ 
Rabb.  "  Bai)tismus  ;"  Reisk.  De  Bapt.  Pros,  in 
Lfgolini  xxii.).  Strange  as  it  seems,  this  part  of 
the  ceremony  occupied,  in  the  eyes  of  the  later 
Rabbis,  a  co-ordinate  place  with  circumcision.  The 
latter  was  incomplete  without  it,  for  baptism  also 
was  of  the  fathers  (Gem.  Bab.  Jcbnm.  f.  4G1,  2). 
One  Rabbi  appears  to  have  been  bold  enough  to  de- 
clare baptism  to  have  been  sufficient  by  itself  {ibid.)  ; 
but  for  the  most  part,  both  were  reckoned  as  alike 
indispensable.  They  carried  back  the  origin  of  the 
baptism  to  a  remote  antiquity,  finding  it  in  the 
command  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxv.  2)  and  of  Moses 
(Ex.  xix.  10).  TheTargum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan 
inserts  the  word  "  Thou  shalt  circumcise  and 
baptise "  in  Ex.  xii.  44.  Even  In  the  Ethiopic 
version  of  Matt,  xxiii.  15,  we  find  "compass  sea 
and  land  to  baptise  one  proselyte"  (Winer,  Rwb. 
s.  v.).  Language,  foreshadowing,  or  caricaturing, 
a  higher  truth  was  used  of  this  baptism.  It  was 
a  new  birth.''  [Jebam.  f.  62.  1 ;  92.  1  ;  Maimon. 
Issur.  Rich.  c.  14;  Lightfoot,  Harm,  of  Gospels, 
iii.  14  ;  Exerc.  on  John  iii.).  The  proselyte  became 
a  little  child.  He  received  the  Holy  Spirit  {Jebam. 
f.  22  a,  48  6.).  All  natural  relationships,  as  we 
hav(!  seen,  were  cancelled. 

The  baptism  was  followal,  as  long  as  the  Temple 
stood,  by  the  offering  or  Corban.  It  consisted,  like 
the  offerings  after  a  birth  (the  analogy  apparently 
being  carried  on),  of  two  turtle-doves  or  pigeons 
(Lev.  xii.  18).  When  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
made  the  sacrifice  impossible,  a  vow  to  ofler  it  as 
soon  as  the  Temple  should  be  rebuilt  »vas  substi- 
tuted. For  women-proselytes,  there  were  only 
baptism*  and  the  Corban,  or,  in  later  times,  bapti.sni 
by  itself. 

It  is  obvious  that  this  account  suggests  manr 
questions  of  grave  interest.  Was  this  ritual  ob- 
served as  early  as  the  commencement  of  the  first 
century?  If  so,  was  tiie  baptism  of  .lohn,  or  that 
of  the  Christian  Church  in  any  way  derived  from, 
or  connected  with  the  baptism  of  proselytes?  It' 
nut,  was  the  latter  in  any  way  borroweil  from  the 
former  ? 

It  would  be  impossible  here  to  enter  at  all  into 
the  literature  of  this  controversy.  The  list  of 
works  named  by  Leyrer  occupies  nearly  a  page  of 

*  The  Gulllcan  female  proselytes  were  said  to  have  ob- 
Jcct(Hl  to  this,  as  causing  barrenness  (Winer,  Ueahub.). 


944 


PROSELYTES 


Herzog's  Eeal-Enciiclopadie.  It  will  be  enough  to 
sum  up  the  conclusions  which  seem  fairly  to  be 
drawn  from  them. 

(1.)  There  is  no  direct  evidence  of  the  practice 
being  in  use  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
The  statements  of  the  Talmud  as  to  its  having 
come  fiom  the  fathers,  and  their  exegesis  of  tlie 
0.  T.  in  conne.xion  with  it,  are  alike  destitute  of 
authority. 

(2.)  The  negative  argument  drawn  from  the 
silence  of  the  O.  T.,  of  the  Apocrypha,  of  Philo, 
and  of  Josephus,  is  almost  decisive  against  the  belief 
that  there  was  in  their  time,  a  baptism  of  pros- 
elytes, with  as  much  importance  attached  to  it  as 
we  Knd  iu  the  Talmudists. 

(3.)  It  remains  probable,  however,  that  there 
wa.s  a  baptism  in  use  at  a  period  considerably  earlier 
than  that  for  which  we  have  direct  evidence.  The 
symbol  was  in  itself  natural  and  tit.  It  fell  in 
with  the  disposition  of  the  Pharisees  and  others  to 
multiply  and  discuss  "washings"  (jSaTrricrjuol, 
Marie  vii.  4)  of  all  kinds.  The  tendency  of  the 
later  Rabbis  was  rather  to  heap  together  the  customs 
and  traditions  of  the  past  than  to  invent  new  ones. 
If  there  had  not  been  a  baptism,  there  would  have 
been  no  initiatory  rite  at  ail  for  female  proselytes. 

(4.)  The  history  of  the  N.  T.  itself  suggests  the 
existence  of  such  a  custom.  A  sign  is  seldom  chosen 
unless  it  already  has  a  meaning  for  those  to  whom 
it  is  addressed.  The  fitness  of  the  sign  in  this  case 
would  be  in  proportion  to  tlie  associations  already 
connected  with  it.  It  would  bear  witness  on  tlie 
assumption  of  the  previous  existence  of  the  pros- 
elyte-baptism, that  the  change  from  the  then  con- 
dition of  Judaism  to  tlie  kingdom  of  God  was  as 
great  as  that  from  idolatry  to  Judaism.  The  ques- 
tion of  the  Priests  and  Levites,  "  Why  baptizest 
thou  then?"  (John  i.  25),  implies  that  they  won- 
dered, not  at  the  thing  itself,  but  at  its  being  done 
for  Israelites  by  one  who  disclaimed  the  names 
which,  in  their  eyes,  would  have  justified  the  intro- 
duction of  a  new  order.  In  like  manner  the  words 
of  our  Lord  to  Nicodemus  (Johniii.  10),  imply  the 
existence  of  a  teaching  a.s  to  baptism  like  that  above 
referred  to.  He,  "  the  teacher  of  Israel,"  had  been 
familiar  with  "  these  things" — the  new  birth,  the 
gift  of  the  Spirit — as  woi-ds  and  phrases  applied  to 
heathen  proselytes.  He  failed  to  grasp  the  deeper 
truth  which  lay  beneath  them,  and  to  see  that 
they  had  a  wider,  an  universal  application. 

(5.)  It  is,  however,  not  improbable  that  there 
may  have  been  a  reflex  action  in  this  matter,  from 
the  Christian  upon  the  Jewish  Church.  The  Rabbis 
saw  the  new  society,  in  proportion  as  the  Gentile 
element  in  it  became  predominant,  throwing  off  cir- 
cumcision, relying  on  baptism  only.  They  could 
not  ignore  the  reverence  which  men  had  for  the 
outward  sign,  their  belief  that  it  was  all  but  iden- 
tical with  the  thing  signified.  There  was  everv 
thing  to  lead  them  to  give  a  fresh  prominence  to 
what  had  been  before  subordinate.  If  the  Nazarenes 
attracted  men  by  their  baptism,  they  would  show 
that  they  had  baptism  as  well  as  circumcision.  The 
necessary  aljsence  of  the  Corban  after  the  destruction 
of  the  Temple  would  also  tend  to  give  more  import- 
ance to  the  remaining  rite. 

Two  facts  of  some  interest  remain  to  be  noticed. 
(1.)  It  formed  part  of  the  Rabbinic  hopes  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah  that  then  there  should  be 
no  more  proselytes.  The  distinctive  name,  with 
its  brand  of  inferiority,  should  be  laid  aside,  and  all, 
even  the  Nethinim  and  the  Mamzerim  (children  of 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

mixed  man-iages)  should  be  counted  pure  (Schoett- 
gon,  Hor.  Heh.  ii.  p.  614).  (2.)  Partly,  perhaps, 
as  connected  with  this  feeling,  partly  in  conse- 
quence of  the  ill-repute  into  wliich  the  word  had 
fiillen,  there  is,  throughout  the  N.  T.  a  sedulous 
avoidance  of  it.  The  Christian  convert  from  hea- 
thenism is  not  a  proselvte,  but  a  i'e6<pVTOS  (1  Tim. 
iii.  6). 

Literature. — Information  more  or  less  accurate 
is  to  be  found  in  tlie  Archaeologies  of  Jahn,  Carp- 
zov,  baalschiitz,  Lewis,  Leusden.  The  treatises 
cited  above  in  Ugolini's  Thesaurus,  xxii. ;  Slenogt. 
de  P'-nselytis ;  Miiller,  de  Proselytis ;  Reisk.  de 
Bapt.  Jvdaeorum;  Danz.  Bapt.  Proselyt.,  &ve  aW 
of  them  copious  and  interesting.  The  article  bf 
Leyrer  in  Herzog's  Beal-Encyclop.  s.  v.  "  Prose- 
lyten,"  contains  the  fullest  and  most  satisfying  dis- 
cussion of  the  whole  matter  at  present  accessible. 
The  writer  is  indebted  to  it  for  much  of  the  materials 
of  the  present  article,  and  for  most  of  the  Talmudic 
references.  [E.  II.  P.] 

PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF.  1.  Title.  — -[hn 
title  of  this  book  iu  Hebrew  is,  as  usual,  ta.ken 
from  the  first  word,  ^7t^J3,  mishle,  or,  more  fullv, 
nto?tJ'  vti'D,  mishle  Shelomoh,  and  is  in  this  case 
appropriate  to  the  contents.  By  this  name  it  is 
commonly  known  in  the  Talmud  ;  but  among  the 
later  Jews,  and  even  among  the  Talmudists  them- 
selves, the  title  n?D3n  "ISD,  sepher  chocmah, 
"  book  of  wisdom,"  is  said  to  have  been  given  to  it. 
It  does  not  appear,  however,  from  the  passages  of 
the  Josephoth  to  the  Baha  Bathra  (fol.  14  6),  that 
this  is  necessarily  the  case.  All  that  is  there  said 
is  that  the  Books  of  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes  are 
both  "books  of  wisdom,"  with  a  reference  rather  to 
theii  contents  than  to  the  titles  by  which  they  were 
known.  In  the  early  Christian  Church  the  title 
irapoifiiai  'S.oXo/j.wutos  was  adopted  from  the  trans- 
lation of  the  LXX. ;  and  the  book  is  also  quoted  as 
(TO(pia,  "  wisdom,''  or  t)  travdpeTO?  (TO(pia,  "  wisdom 
that  is  the  sum  of  all  virtues."  This  last  title  is 
given  to  it  by  Clement  in  the  Ep.  ad  Cor.  i.  57, 
where  Prov.  i.  23-.31  is  quoted  with  the  introduc- 
tion ovrws  yap  Xfjet  ri  TravaptTos  (rocf)ia ;  and 
Eusebius  (77.  E.  iv.  22)  says  thnt  not  only  Hege- 
sippus,  but  Irenaeus  and  the  whole  band  of  ancient 
writers,  following  the  Jewish  unwritten  tradition, 
called  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  iravoipeTOV  ao^iav. 
According  to  Jlelito  of  Sardes  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  2i>), 
the  Proverbs  were  also  called  ffo<bla,  "  wisdom," 
simply ;  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  refers  to  them 
(Orat.  xi.)  as  ■7ra(5a7(i)7iK7)  aocpia.  The  title  in 
the  Vulgate  is  Liber  Proverbiorum,  quern  Hebraei 
Misle  ajjpellant. 

The  significance  of  the  Hebrew  title  may  here' 
be  appropriately  discussed.  7K'D,  mdshdl,  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  "by-word,"  "parable,"  "proverb," 
expresses  all  and  even  more  than  is  conveyed  by 
tliese  its  English  representatives.  It  is  derived  from 
a  root,  ?£J'JD,  rnashal,  "  to  be  like,"  *  and  the  pri- 
mary idea  involved  in  it  is  that  of  likeness,  com- 


»■  Compare    Arab.     Va»o,    matkala,    "  to    be    like  ;" 
So  i?.-- 

Vji.^,  iiiitlil,  "likeness;"   and  the  adj.    Vi.^,  matlial, 

"  like."    The  cognate  Aetliiopic  and  Syriac  roots  have 
the  same  meaning. 


PROVEEBS,  BOOK  OF 

pai'ison.  This  form  of  comparison  would  very  na- 
turally be  taken  by  tiie  short  pithy  sentences  which 
passed  into  use  as  popular  sayings  and  proverbs, 
especially  when  employed  in  mockery  and  sarcasm, 
as  in  Mic.  ii.  4,  Hab.  ii.  6,  and  even  in  the  more 
developed  taunting  song  of  triumph  for  the  fall 
of  Babylon  in  Is.  xiv.  4.  Probably  all  proverbial 
sayings  were  at  first  of  the  nature  of  similes,  but 
the  terai  mashul  soon  acquired  a  more  extended 
signiticauce.  It  was  applieil  to  denote  such  short, 
pointed  sayings,  as  do  not  involve  a  comparison 
directly,  but  still  convey  their  meaning  by  the  help 
of  a  figure,  as  in  1  Sam.  x.  12,  Ez.  xii.  22,  23, 
xvii.  2,  3  (comp.  TrapajSoA.??,  Luke  iv.  23).  From 
this  stage  of  its  application  it  j)assed  to  that  of  sent- 
entious maxims  geneially,  as  in  Prov.  i.  1,  x.  1, 
XXV.  1,  xxvi.  7,  9,  Eccl.  xii.  9,  Job  xiii.  12,  many 
of  which,  however,  still  involve  a  comparison  (Prov. 
XXV.  3,  11,  12,  13,  14,  &c.,  xxvi.  1,  2,  3,  &c.). 
Such  comparisons  are  either  expressed,  or  the  things 
compared  are  placed  side  by  side,  and  the  compar- 
ison left  for  the  hearer  or  reader  to  supply.  Next 
we  find  it  used  of  those  longer  pieces  in  which  a 
single  idea  is  no  longer  exhausted  in  a  sentence,  but 
foims  the  germ  of  the  whole,  and  is  woi ked  out 
into  a  didactic  poem.  Many  instances  of  this  kind 
occur  in  the  first  section  of  the  Book  of  Pioverbs  : 
others  are  found  in  Job  xxvii.,  xxix.,  in  both  which 
chapters  Job  takes  up  his  mashal,  or  "  parables,"  as 
it  is  rendered  in  the  A.Y.  The  "parable"  of 
Balaam,  in  Num.  xxiii.  7-10,  xxiv.  3-9,  15-19,  20, 
21-22,  23-24,  are  prophecies  conveyed  in  figures; 
but  mashal  also  denotes  the  "  parable  "  proper,  as 
in  Ez.  xvii.  2,  xx.  49  (xxi.  5),  xxiv.  3.  Lowth,  in 
his  notes  on  Is.  xiv.  4,  speaking  of  mashal,  says  : 
"  I  take  this  to  be  the  general  name  ibr  poetic  style 
among  the  Hebrews,  including  every  sort  of  it,  as 
ranging  luider  one,  or  other,  or  all  of  the  characters, 
of  sententious,  figurative,  and  sublime ;  which  are 
all  contained  in  the  original  notion,  or  in  the  use 
and  application  of  the  word  mashal.  Parables  or 
proverbs,  such  as  those  of  Solomon,  are  always  ex- 
pressed in  short,  pointed  sentences  ;  frequently  figur- 
ative, being  formed  on  some  comparison,  both  in 
the  matter  and  the  form.  And  such  in  general  is 
the  style  of  the  Hebrew  poetry.  The  verb  mashal 
signifies  to  rule,  to  exercise  authority  ;  to  make 
equal,  to  compare  one  thing  with  another ;  to  utter 
parables,  or  acute,  weighty,  and  powerful  sp^ches, 
in  the  form  and  manner  of  parables,  though  not 
properly  such.  Thus  Balaam's  first  prophecy. 
Num.  xxiii.  7-10,  is  called  his  mashal;  though  it 
has  hardly  anything  figurative  in  it:  but  it  is  beau- 
tifully sententious,  and,  from  the  very  form  and 
manner  of  it,  has  great  spirit,  ibrce,  and  energy. 
Thus  Job's  last  speeches,  in  answer  to  the  thiee 
fiiends,  chaps,  xxvii. -xxxi.,  are  called  mashals,  from 
no  one  pai  ticnlar  character  which  discriminates  them 
from  the  rest  of  the  poem,  but  from  the  sublime,  the 
figtu'ative,  the  sententious  manner,  which  equally 
prevails  through  the  whole  poem,  and  makes  it  one 
of  the  first  and  most  eminent  examples  extant  of  the 
truly  great  and  beautiful  in  poetic  style."  But 
the  Book  of  Proverbs,  according  to  the  introductory 
verses  which  describe  its  character,  contains,  besides 
several  varieties  of  the  mashal,  sententious  sayings 
of  other  kinds,  mentioned  in  i.  G.     The  fiist  of  these 

is  the  riTTI,  ch'iddh,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  dark 

saying,"  "dark  speech,"  "hard  question,"  "riddle," 
and  once  (Hab.  ii.  6)  "proverb."     It  is  applied  to 
Samson's  ridille  in  Judg.  xiv.,  to  the  haul  (|ueslions 
vol..  II. 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF  945 

with  which  the  queen  of  Shel)a  plied  Solomon  (1  K. 
X.  1 ;  2  (.;hr.  ix.  1),  and  is  used  almost  synonymously 
with  mashal  in  Ez.  xvii.  2,  and  in  Ps.  xhx.  4  (5), 
Ixxviii.  2,  in  which  last  passaijes  the  poetical  cha- 
racter of  both  is  indicated.  The  woid  appears  to 
denote  a  knotty,  intricate  saying,  the  solution  of 
which  demanded  experience  and  skill :  that  it  was 
obscure  is  evident  from  Num.  xii.  8.     In  addition 

to  the  chidah  was  the  PIVvO,  melitsah  (Prov.  i.  6, 
A.  V.  "  the  interpretation,"  marg.  "  an  eloquent 
speech"),  which  occurs  in  Hab.  ii.  6  in  connexion 
both  with  chiddh  and  tndshdl.  It  has  been  variously 
explained  as  a  mocking,  taunting  speech  (Ewald)  ; 
or  a  speech  dark  and  involved,  such  as  needed  a 
melits,  or  interpreter  (cf.  Gen.  xlii.  23  ;  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  31  ;  Job  xxxiii.  23  ;  Is.  xliii.  27);  or  ao-ain, 
as  by  Delitzsch  (^Der  prophet  Ilabakuk,  p.  59),  a 
brilli;mt  or  splendid  saying  ("  Glanz-  oder  WohU 
rede,  oratio  splendida,,clegans,  luminibus  ornata"). 
This  last  interpretation  is  based  upon  the  usage  of 
the  word  in  modern  Hebrew,  but  it  certainly  does 
not  appear  appropriate  to  the  Pi-overbs ;  and  the 
first  explanation,  which  Ewald  adopts,  is  as  little 
to  the  point.  It  is  better  to  understand  it  as  a  dark 
enigmatical  saying,  which,  like  the  mashal,  might 
assume  the  character  of  sarcasm  and  irony,  though 
not  essential  to  it. 

2.  Canonicity  of  the  book  and  its  place  in  the 
Canon. — The  canonicity  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs 
has  never  been  disputed  except  by  the  Jews  them- 
selves. It  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  points 
urged  by  the  school  of  Shammai,  that  the  contra- 
dictions in  the  Book  of  Pi'overbs  rendered  it  apocry- 
phal. In  tlie  Talmud  (Shabbath,  fol.  30  6)  it  "is 
said  ;  "  And  even  the  Book  of  Proverbs  they  sought 
to  make  apocryphal,  because  its  words  were  contra- 
dictory the  one  to  the  other.  And  wherefore  did 
they  not  make  it  apocryphal  ?  I'he  words  of  the 
book  Koheleth  [are]  not  [apociyphal]  we  have 
looked  and  found  the  sense:  here  also  we  must 
look."  That  is,  the  book  Koheleth,  in  spite  of  the 
apparent  contradictions  which  it  contains,  is  allowed 
to  be  canonical,  and  therefore  the  existence  of  similar 
contradictions  in  the  Book  of  Pioverbs  forms  no 
ground  for  refusmg  to  acknowledge  its  canonicity. 
It  occurs  in  all  the  Jewish  lists  of  canonical  books,  and 
is  leckoned  among  what  are  called  the  '•  writings" 
(Ccthubhn)  or  Hagiographa,  which  form  the  third 
great  division  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Their 
order  in  the  Talmud  (Baba  Bathra,  fol.  14  6)  is 
thus  given:  Ruth,  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Ecde- 
siastes.  Song  of  Songs,  Lamentations,  Daniel,  Esther, 
Ezra  (including  Nehemiah),  and  Chronicles.  It  is 
in  the  Tosephoth  on  this  passage  that  Proverbs  and 
Ecclcsiastes  are  styled  "  books  of  wisdom."  In  the 
German  MSS.  of  the  Ilrhrpw  0.  T.  the  Proverbs 
are  placed  between  the  Psalms  and  ,Iob,  while  in 
the  Spanish  ]\ISS.,  wiiich  follow  the  l\Iasorah,  the 
order  is.  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs.  This  latter  is  the 
order  observed  in  the  Alexandrian  MS.  of  the  LXX. 
Melito,  following  another  (ireek  MS.,  arranges  the 
Hagiographa  thus:  Psalms,  Proverl)s,  Ecclcsiastes, 
Song  of  Songs,  Job,  as  in  the  list  made  out  bv  the 
Council  of  Laodicea;  and  the  same  order  is  given 
by  Origen,  except  that  the  Book  of  Job  is  separated 
from  the  others  by  the  prophets  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
Daniel,  and  Ezckiel.  But  our  present  arrangement 
existed  in  the  time  of  .loiome  (.see  Praef.  in  libr. 
Negiim  iii.  ;  "  Tertius  ordo  ayi6ypa^a  pcssidet.  Et 
primus  liber  incipit  ab  Job.  Sccundus  a  Diivid. 
Tertius  est  Salomon,  tres  liliros  habens:    I'rnverbia, 

3  P 


946 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


quae  illi  parabolas,  id  est  Masaloth  a|ipellaiit : 
Ecclesiastes,  id  est,  Coeleth  :  Caiiticum  Canticorum, 
qiiem  titulo  Sir  Asirim  •  praenotant ").  In  the 
Peshito  Syriac,  Job  is  placed  befoie  Joshua,  while 
Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes  follow  the  Psalms,  and 
are  separated  from  the  Song  of  Songs  by  the  Book 
of  Kuth.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  apparently  fiom 
the  exigencies  of  his  verse,  arranges  the  writings  of 
Solomon  in  this  order,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Songs, 
Proverbs.  Pseudo-Epiphanius  places  Proverbs, 
Ecclesiastes,  and  Song  of  Songs  between  the  1  st  and 
2nd  Books  of  Kings  and  the  minor  prophets.  The 
Proverbs  are  frequently  quoted  or  alluded  to  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  canonicity  of  the  Book 
thereby  confirmed.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the 
principal  passages: — 

Prov.  i.  16  compare    Rom.  iii.  10,  15. 

iii.  7  „  Rom.  xii.  16. 

ili.  11,  12  „  Heb.  xii.  5,6;  see  also  Rev. 

iii.  19. 
iii.  34  „  Jam.  iv.  6. 

X.  12  „  1  Pet.  iv.  8. 

xi.  31  „  1  Pet.  iv.  18. 

xvii.  13  „  Rom.  xii.  17;  1  Tbess.  v. 

15;  1  Pet.  iii.  9. 
xvii.  27  „  Jam.  i.  19. 

XX.  9  ,,1  John  i.  8. 

XX.  20  ,,  Matt.  XV.  4;  Mark  vii.  10. 

xxii.  H  (LXX.)     „  2  Cor.  ix.  7. 

x.w.  21,  22  „  Rom.  xii.  20. 

xxvi.  11  „  2  Pet.  ii.  22. 

xxvii.  1  „  Jam.  iv.  13, 14. 

.*?.  Authorship  and  date. — The  superscriptions 
which  are  affixed  to  several  poi'tions  of  the  Book 
of  Proverbs,  in  i.  1,  x.  1,  xxv.  1,  attribute  the 
authorship  of  those  portions  to  Solomon,  the  son  of 
David,  king  of  Israel.  With  the  exception  of  the 
last  two  chapters,  which  are  distinctly  assigned  to 
other  authors,  it  is  probable  that  the  statement  of 
the  superscriptions  is  in  the  main  correct,  and  that 
the  m.njority  of  the  proverbs  contained  in  the  book 
were  uttered  or  collected  by  Solomon.  It  was 
natural,  and  quite  in  accordance  with  the  practice 
of  other  nations,  that  the  Hebrews  should  connect 
Solomon's  name  with  a  collection  of  ma.xims  and 
precepts  which  form  a  part  of  their  literature  to 
which  he  is  known  to  have  conti-ibuted  most  largely 
(IK.  iv.  32).  In  the  same  way  the  Greeks  attri- 
buted most  of  their  maxims  to  Pythacjoras;  the 
Arabs  to  Lokman,  Abn  Obeid,  Al  Wofaddel,  Mei- 
dani,  and  Zamakhshari ;  the  Persians  to  Ferid 
Attar  ;  and  the  northern  people  to  Odin.  But  there 
can  be  no  question  that  the  Hebrews  were  much 
more  justified  in  assigning  the  Proverbs  to  Solemon, 
than  the  nations  which  have  just  been  enumerated 
were  in  attributing  the  collections  of  national  maxims 
to  the  traditional  authors  above  mentioned.  The 
parallel  may  serve  as  an  illustration,  but  must 
not  be  carried  too  far.  According  to  Bartolocci 
(Bihl.  Rahb.  iv.  373  6),  quoted  by  Carpzov  (Introd. 
pt.  ii.  c.  4,  §4),  the  Jews  a.--ci-ibe  the  composition 
of  the  Song  of  Songs  to  Solomon's  youth,  the  Pro- 
verbs to  his  matuie  manhood,  and  the  Ecclesiastes 
to  his  old  age.  But  in  the  Seder  Olam  Rahba  (ch.  sv. 
p.  41,  ed.  Meyer)  they  are  all  assigned  to  the  end 
of  his  life.  There  is  nothing  unreasonable  in  the 
supposition  that  many,  or  mort  of  the  provei-bs 
in  the  first  twenty-nine  chapters  may  have  ori- 
ginated with  Solomon.  Whether  they  were  left 
by  him  in  their  present  form  is  a  distinct  question, 
and  may  now  be  considered.  Before  doing  so,  how- 
ever, it  will  be  necessary  to  examine  the  different 
parts   into   which   the   boolc  is  naturally  divided. 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

Speaking   roughly,  it   consists  of  three  main  divi- 
sions, with  two  appendices.     1.  Chaps,  i.-ix.  form 
a  connected  mdshdl,  m  which  Wisdom  is   praisetl 
and  the  youth  exhorted  to  devote  themselves  to  her. 
This  portion  is   preceded  by  an  introduction  and 
title  describing  the  character  and  general  aim  of  the 
book.     2.  Chaps,  x.  1-xxiv.,  with  the  title,  "  the 
Proverbs  of  Solomon,"   consist  of  three  parts: — 
X.  1-xxii.  16,  a  collection  of  single  proverbs,  and  de- 
tached sentences  out  of  the  region  of  moral  teaching 
and  worldly  prudence;  xxii.   17-xxiv.  21,  a  more 
connected  mdshdl,  with  an  introduction,  xxii.  17-22  , 
which  contains  precepts  of  righteousness  and  pi-u- 
dence:    xxiv.   23-34,  with  the  inscription,  "  t^iese 
also  belong  to  the  wise,"  a  collection  of  unconnected 
maxims,  which  serve  as  an  apjiendix  to  the  pre- 
ceding.   Then  follows  the  third  division,  xxv.-xxix., 
which,  according  to  the  superscription,  professes  to 
be  a  collection  of  Solomon's  proveibs,  consisting  of 
single  sentences,  which  the  men  of  the  court  of  Heze- 
kiah  copied  out.    The  first  appendix,  ch.  xxx.,  "  the 
words  of  Agur,"  is  a  collection  of  partly  proverbial 
and  partly  eiu'gmatical  sayings  ;  the  second,  ch.  xxsi., 
is  divided  into    two   parts,    "  the   words   of  king 
Lemuel"  (1-6),    and  an  alphabetical   acrostic   in 
praise  of  a  virtuous  woman,  which  occupies  the  rest 
of  the  chapter.     Rejecting,  therefore,  for  the  present, 
the  two  last  chapters,  which  do  not  even  profess  to 
be  by  Solomon,  or  to  contain  any  of  his  teaching, 
we  may  examine  the  other  divisions  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  whether  any  conclusion  as  to  their 
origin  and  authorship  can  be  arrived  at.     At  first 
sight  it  is  evident  that  there  is  a  marked  ditlerence 
between    the  collections  of  single  maxims  and  the 
longer  didactic  pieces,  which  both  come  under  the 
general  head  mdshdl.     The  collection  of  Solomon's 
pioverbs  made  by  the  men  of  Hezekiah  (xxv.-x.xix.) 
belongs  to  theformerchiss  of  detached  sentences,  and 
in  this  respect  corresponds  with  those  in  the  second 
main  division  (x.  1-xxii.  16).     The  expression  in 
xxv.  1,  "these  also  are  the  proverbs  of  Solomon," 
implies  that  the  collection  was  made  as  an  appendix 
to  another  already  in  existence,  which  we  may  not 
unreasonably   piesume    to    have  been   that   which 
stands  immediately  before  it  in  the  present  airange- 
ment  of  the  book.     Upon  one  point  most  modern 
critics  tae  agreed,  that  the  germ  of  the  book  in  its 
present  shape  is  the  portion  x.  1-xxii.  16,  to  which 
is  prefixed  the  title,  "  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon." 
At  what  time  it  was  put  into  the  form  in  which 
we  have  it,  cannot  be  exactly  determined.     Ewald 
suggests  as  a  probable  date  about  two  centuries 
after  Solomon.      The  collector  gathered  many  of 
that  king's  genuine  sayings,  but  must  have  mixed 
with  them  many  by  other  authois  and  from  other 
times,  earlier  and  later.     It  seems  clear  that  he 
must  have  lived  before  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  from 
the  expression  in  xxv.  1,   to  which   reference  has 
already  been  made.    In  this  portion  many  pioverbs 
are  repeated  in  the  same,  or  a  similar  form,  a  fact 
which  of  itself  militates  again.st  the  sup]iosition  that 
all  the  proverbs  contained  in  it  proceeded  fiom  one 
author.    Compai'e  xiv.  12  with  xvi.  25  and  xxi.  2"; 
xxi.  9  with  x.\i.  19 ;  x.  1»  with  xv.  2(J»;  x.  2^  with 
xi.  4'';  X.  15»  with  xviii.  11*;  xv.  33''  with  xviii. 
12'>;  xi.  21"  with  xvi.  !}*> ;  xiv.  31"  with  .wii.  5"; 
xix.  12»with  XX.  2*.     Such  repetitions,  as  Bertheau 
remarks,  we  do  not  expect  to  find  in  a  work  which 
proceeds  immediately  from  the  hands  of  its  author. 
But  if  we  suppose  the  contents  of  this  portion  of 
the  book  to  have  been  collected  by  one  man  out 
of  divers  sources,  oral  as  well  as  written,  the  repe- 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

titious  bpcoiue  intelligible.  Bertholdt  argues  that 
many  of  the  proveibs  could  not  have  proceeded 
from  Solomon,  because  they  presuppose  an  authoi- 
in  different  circumstances  of  life.  His  arguments 
are  extremely  weak,  and  will  scarcely  bear  examin- 
ation. For  example,  he  asserts  that  the  author 
of  X.  5,  xii.  10,  11,  xiv.  4,  xx.  4,  must  have  been  a 
■  landowner  or  husbandman;  that  x.  15,  points  to 
a  man  living  iu  want;  xi.  14,  xiv.  20,  to  a  private 
man  living  under  a  well-regulated  government;  xi. 
26,  to  a  tradesman  without  wealth ;  xii.  4,  to  a  man 
not  living  in  polygamy;  xii.  9,  to  one  living  in  the 
country  ;  xiii.  7,  8,  xvi.  8,  to  a  man  in  a  middle 
station  of  life ;  xiv.  1,  xv.  25,  xvi.  11,  xvii.  2,  xix. 
1.3,  14,  XX.  10,  14,  23,  to  a  mau  of  the  rank  of  a 
citizen;  xiv.  21,  xvi.  19,  xviii.  23,  to  a  man  of 
low  station;  xvi.  10,  12-15,  xix.  12,  xx.  2,  26, 
28,  to  a  man  who  was  not  a  king;  xxi.  5,  to  one 
who  was  acquainted  with  the  course  of  circum- 
stances in  the  common  citizen  life;  xxi.  17,  to  one 
who  was  an  enemy  to  luxury  and  festivities.  It 
must  be  confessed,  however,  that  an  examination  of 
these  passages  is  by  no  means  convincing  to  one 
who  reads  them  without  having  a  theory  to  main- 
tain.' That  all  the  proverbs  in  this  collection  are 
not  Solomon's  is  extremely  probable  ;  that  the  ma- 
jority of  them  are  his  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt, 
and  this  fact  would  account  for  the  general  title  in 
which  they  are  all  attributed  to  him.  It  is  obvious 
that  between  the  proverbs  in  this  collection  and 
those  that  precede  and  follovv  it,  there  is  a  marked 
dirt'eience,  which  is  sufficiently  apparent  even  in 
the  English  Version.  The  poetical  style,  says  Ewald, 
is  the  simplest  and  most  antique  imaginable.  ]\Iost 
of  the  pro\-erbs  are  examples  of  antithetic  paral- 
lelism, the  second  clause  containing  the  contrast  to 
the  first.  Each  verse  consists  of  two  members, 
with  generally  three  or  four,  but  seldom  five  words 
in  each.  The  only  exception  to  the  first  law  is 
xix.  7,  which  Ewald  accounts  for  by  supposing  a 
clause  omitted.  This  supposition  may  be  necessary 
to  his  theory,  but  cannot  be  admitted  on  any  true 
principle  of  criticism.  Furthermore,  the  proverbs 
in  this  collection  have  the  peculiarity  of  being  con- 
tained in  a  single  verse.  Each  verse  is  complete  in 
itself,  and  embodies  a  perfectly  intelligible  senti- 
ment; but  a  thought  in  all  its  breadth  and  definite- 
ness  is  not  necessarily  exhausted  in  a  single  verse, 
though  each  verse  must  bo  a  perfect  sentence,  a 
proverb,  a  lesson.  There  is  one  point  of  great  im- 
portance to  which  Ewald  draws  attention  in  con- 
nexion with  this  poition  of  the  book;  that  it  is  not 
to  be  regarded,  like  the  collections  of  pi-ovcrbs 
which  exist  among  other  nations,  as  an  accumulation 
of  the  popular  maxims  of  lower  life  which  passed 
current  among  the  people  and  were  gathered  thence 
by  a  learned  man  ;  but  i-ather  as  the  efforts  of  poets, 
artistically  and  scientifically  arranged,  to  compre- 
hend in  short  sharp  sayings  the  truths  of  religion  .as 
applied  to  the  infinite  cases  and  possibilities  of  life. 
While  admitting,  bciwcver,  this  artistic  and  scientific 
arrangement,  it  is  dillicndt  to  absent  to  Ewald's 
turther  theory,  that  the  collection  in  its  original 
shape  had  running  through  it  a  continuous  thread, 
binding  together  what  was  manifold  and  scattered, 
and  that  in  this  respect  it  dill'ered  entirely  from  the 
form  in  which  it  ajipears  at  present.  Heio  and 
tliere,  it  is  true,  wo  meet  with  voses  grouped 
together  apparently  with  a  common  object,  but 
tiiese  ai'e  the  exceptions,  and  a  rule  so  general  cannot 
1)6  derived  from  them.  No  doubt  tiie  original  col- 
lection of  Solomon's  proveiljs,  if  such  there  weie. 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF  947 

fj-om  which  the  present  was  made,  underwent 
many  changes,  by  abbreviation,  transposition,  and 
interpolation,  in  the  two  centuries  which,  according 
to  Ewald's  theory,  must  have  elapsed  before  the 
compiler  of  the  present  collection  put  them  in  the 
•shape  in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us;  but 
evidence  is  altogether  wanting  to  show  what  that 
original  collection  may  have  been,  or  how  many 
of  the  three  thousand  proveibs  which  Solomon  is 
said  to  have  spoken,  have  been  preserved.  There  is 
less  difficulty  in  another  proposition  of  Ewald's, 
to  which  a  ready  assent  will  be  yielded :  that  Solo- 
mon was  the  founder  of  this  species  of  poetry:  and 
that  in  fact  many  of  the  proverbs  here  collected 
may  be  traced  back  to  him,  while  all  are  inspired 
with  his  spirit.  The  peace  and  internal  tianquil- 
lity  of  his  reign  weie  fiivourable  to  the  growth  of  a 
contemplative  spirit,  and  it  is  just  at  such  a  time 
that  we  should  expect  to  find  gnomic  poetry  de- 
veloping itself  and  forming  an  epoch  in  literature. 

In  addition  to  the  distinctive  form  assumed  by 
the  proverbs  of  this  earliest  collection,  may  be  no- 
ticed the  occurrence  of  favourite  and  peculiar  words 
and  phrases.  "  Fountain  of  life"  occurs  in  Prov. 
X.  11,  xiii.  14,  xiv.  27,  xvi.  22  (comp.  Ps.  xxxvi. 
9  [10])  ;  "tree  of  life,"  Prov.  xi.  30,  xiii.  12,  xv. 
4  (comp.  iii.  18)  ;  "  snares  of  death,"  Prov,  xiii. 
14,  xiv.    27    (comp.   Ps.  xviii.   5   [6] )  ;  i^Qip 

marpe,  "healing,  health,"  Prov.  xii.  18,  xiii.  17, 
xvi.  24  (comp.  xiv.  30,  xv.  4),  but  this  expression 
also  occurs  in  iv.  22,  vi.  15  (comp.  iii.  8),  and  is 
hardly  to  be  regarded  as  peculiar  to  the  older  portion 
of  the  book ;  nor  is  it  fair  to  say  that  the  passages 
in  the  early  chapters  in  which  it  occurs  are  imita- 
tions ;  nnnO,  mec/dttdk,  "  destruction,"  Prov.  x. 
14,  15,  29,  xiii.  3,  xiv.  28,  xviii.  7,  x.\i.  15,  and 
nowhere  else  in  the  book;  IT'S*,  ydphiach,  which 
Ewald  calls  a  participle,  but  which  may  be  regarded 
as  a  future  with  the  relative  omitted,  Prov.  xii.  17, 
xiv.  5,  25,  xix.  5,  9  (comp.  vi.  19);  f]?D,  seleph, 

"  perverseness,"  Prov.  xi.  13,  xv.  4;  Pl?p,  silleph, 

the  verb  from  the  preceding,  Prov.  xiii.  6,  xix.  3, 

•L  > 

xxii.  12  ;   np3^  XT',  16  yinnahch,   "  shall  not  be 

acquitted,"  Prov.  xi.  21,  xvi.  5,  xvii.  5,  xix.  5,  9 
fcomp.  vi.  29,  xxviii.  20) ;  ^j'^l'l,  riddeph  "  pur- 
sued," Prov.  xi.  19,  xii.  11,  xiii.  21,  xv.  9,  xix.  7 
(comp.  xxviii.  19).  The  antique  expressions  ^y 
ny^il"lX,  'ad  an/t'dh,  A.  V.,  "  but  for  a  moment," 
Prov.  xii.  19;  T"?  "I*,  ydd  leijdd,  lit.  "hand  to 
hand,"  Prov.  xi.  21,  xvi.  5;  y^iirin,  hithgalla', 
"meddled  with,"  Prov.  xvii.  14,  xviii.  1,  x.v.  3; 
J]l"l3,  inrrjdn,  "  whisperer,  talebearer,"  Piov.  xvi. 
28,  xviii.  18  (comp.  xxvi.  20,  22),  are  almost 
confined  to  this  jwrtion  of  the  Proverbs.  There 
is  also  the  peculiar  usage  of  tJ'\  yesh,  "there 
is,"  in  Prov.  xi.  24,  xii.  18,  xiii.  7,  23,  xiv.  12, 
-wi.  25,  xviii.  24,  xx.  15.  It  will  be  observed 
that  tlie  use  of  these  words  and  phrases  by  no 
means  assists  in  deteimining  tlie  authorsliip  of  this 
section,  but  gives  it  a  distinctive  charactei'.  ' 

With  regard  to  the  other  collections,  opinions 
difTer  widely  both  as  to  their  date  and  authorship. 
Ewald  places  next  in  order  chaps,  xxv.-xxix.,  the 
superscription  to  wluch  fl.xes  their  date  about  the 
end  of  the  Slh  cniturv  n.c.     "These  also  are  the 

3  P  2 


948 


PUOVEEBS,  BOOK  OF 


proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  the  men  of  Hezekiah 
copied  out,"  or  compiled.  The  memory  of  these 
learned  men  of  Hezekiah's  court  is  perpetuated  in 
Jewish  tradition.  In  the  Talmud  { Baba  Batlira, 
fol.  15  a)  they  are  called  the  iiy^D,  si  ah,  "society" 

or  "academy"  of  Hezekiah,  and  it  is  there  said, 
"  Hezekiah  and  his  academy  wrote  Isaiah,  Proverbs, 
Song  of  Songs,  Eeclesiastes."  R.  Gedaliah  (Shalshe- 
leth  Hakkahhahak,  fol.  66  6),  quoted  by  Carpzov 
{Iiitrod.  part.  ii.  c.  4,  §4),  says,  "  Isaiah  wrote  his 
own  book  and  the  Proverbs,  and  the  Song  of 
Songs,  and  Eeclesiastes."  Many  of  the  provei-bs 
in  this  collection  are  mere  repetitions,  with  slight 
variations,  of  some  which  occur  in  the  previous 
section.  Compare,  for  example,  xxv.  24  with  x.\i. 
9  ;  xxvi.  13  with  xxii;  13;  xxvi.  15  with  xix.  24; 
xxvi.  22  with  xviii.  8;  xxvii.  13  with  .xx.  16; 
xxvii.  15  with  xix.  13 ;  xxvii.  21  with  xvii.  3 ; 
xxviii.  6  with  xix.  1  ;  xxviii.  19  with  xii.  11  ;  xxis. 
22  with  XV.  18,  &c.  We  may  infer  irom  this, 
with  Bertheau,  that  the  compilers  of  this  section 
made  use  of  the  same  sources  from  which  the  earlier 
collection  was  derived.  Ilitzig  ( Die  Spriiche  Sa- 
lomos,  p.  258)  suggests  that  there  is  a  proba- 
bility that  a  great,  or  the  greatest  part  of  these 
proverbs  were  of  Ephraimitic  origin,  and  that  after 
the  destruction  of  the  northern  kingdom,  Hezekiah 
sent  his  learned  men  through  the  land  to  gather 
together  the  fragments  of  literature  which  remained 
current  among  the  people  and  had  survived  the 
general  wreck.  There  does  not  appear  to  be  the 
slightest  ground,  linguistic  or  otherwise,  for  this 
■hypothesis,  and  it  is  therefore  properly  rejected  by 
Bertheau.  The  question  now  arises,  in  this  as  in 
the  former  section  ;  were  all  thfse  proverbs  Solo- 
mon's ?  Jahn  says  Yes  ;  Bertholdt,  No ;  for  xxv. 
2-7  could  not  have  been  by  Solomon  or  any  king, 
but  by  a  man  who  had  lived  for  a  long  time  at  "a 
court.  In  xxvii.  11,  it  is  no  monarch  who  speaks, 
but  an  instructor  of  youth  ;  xxviii.  IG  censures  the 
very  errors  which  stained  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
and  the  effect  of  which  deprived  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  the  ten  tribes;  xxvii.  23-27  must  have 
been  written  by  a  sage  who  led  a  nomade  life. 
There  is  more  force  in  these  objections  of  Bertholdt 
than  in  those  which  he  advanced  against  the  previous 
section.  Hensler  (quoted  by  Bertholdt)  finds  two 
or  three  sections  in  this  division  of  the  book,  which  he 
regards  as  extracts  from  as  many  different  writings 
of  Solomon.  But  Bertholdt  confesses  that  his  aro-u- 
ments  are  not  convincing. 

The  peculiarities  of  this  section  distinguish  it 
from  the  older  proverbs  in  x.-xxii.  16.  Some  of 
these  may  be  briefly  noted.  The  use  of  the  inter- 
rogation "seest  thou?"  in  xxvi.  12,  xxix.  20  (comp. 
xxii.  29),  the  manner  of  comparing  two  things  bv 
simply  placing  them  side  by  side  and  connecting 
them  with  the  simple  copula  "  and,"  as  in  xxv.  3 
20,  xxvi.  3,  7,  9,  21,  xxvii.  15,  20.  We  miss  the 
jjoiuted  antithesis  by  which  the  first  collection  was 
distinguished.  The  verses  are  no  longer  of  two 
equal  members;  one  member  is  frequently  shorter 
than  the  other,  and  sometimes  even  the  verse  is 


b  Hitzig's  tlipory  about  the  I?ook  of  Proverbs  in  its 
presenl  .sbupe  is  this  :  that  the  oldest  portion  consists  of 
chaps,  i.-ix.,  to  which  was  added,  probably  after  the  year 
750  B.C.,  the  second  part,  x.-xxii.  16,  xxviii.  17-xxix. : 
that  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  same  centuiy  the  anthology, 
xxv.-xxvii.,  was  formed,  and  coming  into  the  hands  of  a 
man  who  ab'eady  possessed  the  otlier  two  parts,  iiispiied 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

extended  to  three  members  in  order  fully  to  exhaust 
the  thought.  Sometimes,  again,  the  same  sense  is 
extended  over  two  or  more  verses,  as  in  xxv.  4,  5, 
6,  7,  8-10 ;  and  in  a  few  cases  a  series  of  connected 
verses  contains  longer  exhortations  to  morality  and 
rectitude,  as  in  xxvi.  23-28,  xxvii.  23-27.  The 
character  of  the  proverbs  is  clearly  distinct.  Their 
construction  is  looser  and  weaker,  and  there  is  no 
longer  that  sententious  brevity  which  gives  weight 
and  point  to  the  proverbs  in  the  pi-eceding  section. 
Ewald  thinks  that  in  the  contents  of  this  portion 
of  the  book  there  are  traceable  the  marks  of  a  later 
date;  pointing  to  a  state  of  society  which  had  become 
more  dangerous  and  hostile,  in  which  the  quiet  do- 
mestic life  had  reached  greater  perfection,  but  the 
state  and  public  security  and  confidence  had  sunk 
deeper.  Theie  is,  he  saj's,  a  cautious  and  mournful 
tone  in  the  language  when  the  I'ulers  are  spoken  of; 
the  breath  of  that  untroubled  joy  for  the  king  and 
the  high  reverence  paid  to  him,  which  marked  the 
former  collection,  does  not  animate  these  proverbs. 
The  state  of  society  at  the  end  of  the  8th  century 
B.C.,  with  which  we  are  thoroughly  acquainted 
from  the  writings  of  the'  prophets,  cori'esponds  with 
the  condition  of  things  hinted  at  in  the  proverbs 
of  this  section,  and  this  may  therefore,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  superscription,  be  accepted  as  the 
date  at  which  the  collection  was  made.  Such  is 
Ewald's  conclusion.  It  is  true  we  know  much 
of  the  later  times  of  the  monarchy,  and  that  the 
condition  of  those  times  was  such  as  to  call  forth 
many  of  the  proverbs  of  this  section  as  the  result 
of  the  observation  and  experience  of  their  authors, 
but  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  Avhole  section 
partakes  of  this  later  tone ;  or  that  many  or  most 
of  the  proverbs  may  not  reach  back  as  far  as  the 
time  of  Solomon,  and  so  justify  the  general  title 
which  is  given  to  the  section,  "  These  also  are  the 
proverbs  of  Solomon."  But  of  the  state  of  society  in 
the  age  of  Solomon  himself  we  know  so  little,  every- 
thing belonging  to  that  period  is  encircled  with 
such  a  halo  of  dazzling  splendour,  in  which  the 
people  almost  disappear,  that  it  is  impossible  to 
assert  that  the  circumstances  of  the  times  might 
not  have  given  birth  to  many  of  the  maxims  which 
apparently  carry  with  them  the  marks  of  a  later 
period.  At  best  such  reasoning  from  internal  evi- 
dence is  uncertain  and  hypothetical,  axid  the  in- 
ferences drawn  vaiy  with  each  commentator  who 
examines  it.  Ewald  discovers  traces  of  a  later  age 
in  chapters  xxviii.,  xxix.,  though  he  retains  them  in 
this  section,  while  Hitzig  regards  x.wiii.  17-xxix. 
27  as  a  continuation  of  xxii.  16,  to  which  they 
were  .added  probably  after  the  year  750  B.C.''  This 
apparent  precision  in  the  assignment  of  the  dates  of 
the  several  sections,  it  must  be  confessed,  has  very 
little  foundation,  and  the  dates  ai-e  at  best  but  con- 
jectural. All  that  we  know  about  the  section 
xxv.-xxix.,  is  that  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  that  is, 
in  the  last  quarter  of  the  8th  century  B.C.  it  was 
supposed  to  contain  what  tradition  had  handed  down 
as  the  proverbs  of  Solomon,  and  that  the  majority 
of  the  proveibs  were  believed  to  be  his  there  seems 
no  good  reason  to  doubt.     Beyond  this  we  know 


him  with  the  composition  of  xxii.  17-xxiv.  34,  which  he 
placed  before  the  anthology,  and  inserted  the  two  before 
the  last  sheet  of  the  second  part.  Then,  finding  that 
sxviii.  17  was  left  without  a  beginning,  being  separated 
from  xxii.  l-ic,  he  wrote  xxviii.  1-16  on  his  last  blank  leaf. 
This  wa-s  after  the  exile. 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

nothing.  Ewald,  we  have  seen,  assigns  the  whole 
of  this  section  to  the  close  of  the  Sth  century  B.C., 
long  before  which  time,  he  says,  most  of  the  pro- 
verbs were  certainly  not  written.  But  he  is  then 
compelled  to  account  for  the  fact  tiiat  in  the  super- 
scription they  are  called  "  the  provei  bs  of  Solomon." 
He  does  so  in  this  way.  Some  of  the  proverbs 
actnaliv  reacli  back  into  the  age  of  Solomon,  and 
those  which  are  not  immediately  traceable  to  Solo- 
mon or  his  time,  are  composed  with  similar  artistic 
flow  and  impulse.  If  tlie  earlier  collection  rightly 
bears  the  name  of  "  the  proverbs  of  Solomon"  after 
the  mass  which*  are  his,  this  may  claim  to  bear 
such  a  title  of  honour  after  some  important  ele- 
ments. The  argument  is  certainly  not  sound,  that, 
because  a  collection  of  proverbs,  the  majority  of 
which  are  Solomon's,  is  distinguished  by  the  general 
title  "the  proverbs  of  Solomon,"  therefore  a  col- 
lection, in  which  at  most  but  a  few  belong  to  Solo- 
mon or  his  time,  is  appropri.ately  distinguished  by 
the  same  superscription.  It  will  be  seen  afterwards 
that  Ewald  attributes  the  superscription  in  xxv.  1 
to  the  compiler  of  .xxii.  17-xxv.  1. 

The  date  of  the  sections  i.-ix.,  xxii.  17-xxv.  1, 
has  been  variousl}^  assignetl.  That  they  were  added 
about  the  same  peiiod  Ewald  iulijrs  from  the  oc- 
currence of  favourite  words  and  constructions,  and 
that  that  period  was  a  late  one  he  concludes  from 
the  traces  which  are  manifest  of  a  degeneracy  from 
the  purity  of  the  Hebrew.  It  will  lie  interesting 
to  examine  the  evidence  upon  this  point,  for  it  is  a 
remarkable  fact,  and  one  which  is  deeply  instructive 
as  showing  the  extreme  dilhculty  of  arguing  from 
internal  evidence,  that  the  same  details  lead  Ewald 
and  Hitzig  to  precisely  opposite  conclusions  ;  the 
former  placing  the  date  of  i.-ix.  in  the  first  half  of 
the  7th  centurv,  while  the  latter  regards  it  as  the 
oldest  portion  of  the  book,  and  assigns  it  to  the  9th 
century.  To  be  sure  those  points  on  which  Ewald 
relies  as  indicating  a  late  date  for  the  section,  Hitzig 
summarily  disposes  of  as  interpolations.  Among 
the  favourite  words  which  occur  iu  these  chapters 
are  niJODH,  chocmoth,  "wisdoms,"  for  "wisdom" 
in  the  abstract,  which  is  found  only  in  i.  20,  ix.  1, 
xxiv.  7;  mt,  zdrdh,  "the  strange  woman,"  and 
n*"133,  nocriyydh,  "  the  foreigner,"  the  adulteress 
who  seduces  youth,  the  antithesis  of  the  virtuous 
wife  or  true  wisdom,  only  occur  in  tlie  first  col- 
lection iu  xxii.  14,  but  are  frequently  found  in  this, 
ii.  16,  V.  3,  20,  vi.  24-,  vii.  5,  xxiii.  27.  Traces 
of  the  decay  of  Hebi-ew  are  seen  in  such  passages 
as  T.  2,  where  DTIQC,  a  dual  fem.,  is  constructed 
with  a  verb  masc.  pi.,  though  iu  v.  3  it  has  pro- 
jwrly  the  feminine.  The  unusual  plural  D^tJ"N 
(viii.  4),  says  Ewald,  would  hardly  be  found  iu 
writings  before  the  7th  century.  These  difficulties 
are  avoided  by  Hitzig,  who  regards  the  passages  in 
which  they  occur  as  interpolations.  When  we  come 
to  the  internal  historical  evidence  these  two  autho- 
rities are  no  less  at  issue  with  regard  to  their  con- 
clusions fiom  it.  There  ai'e  many  passages  which 
point  to  a  condition  of  things  in  the  highest  degree 
confused,  in  which  robbers  and  lawless  men  roamed 
at  large  through  the  land  an<l  endeavoured  to  draw 
aside  their  younger  contemporaries  to  the  like  dis- 
solute life  (i.  11-19,  ii.  12-15,  iv.  14-17,  x.xiv.  15). 
In  this  Ewald  sees  traces  of  a  late  date.  But  Hitzig 
avoids  this  conclusion  by  asserting  that  at  all  times 
there  are  individuals  who  are  reckless  and  at  war 
with  society  and  who  attach  themselves  to  bands 


PBOVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


949 


of  robbers  and  freebooters  (comp.  Judg.  ix.  4,  xi.  3  ; 
1  Sam.  xxii.  2;  Jer.  vii.  11),  and  to  such  allusion 
is  made  in  Prov.  i.  10  ;  but  there  is  nowhere  in 
these  chapters  (i.-ix.)  a  complaint  of  the  general 
depravity  of  society.     So  far  he  is  unquestionably 
correct,  and  no  inference   with   regard   to  the  date 
of  the  section  can  be  drawn  from  these  refennces. 
Further  evidence  of  a  late  date  Ewald  finds  in  the 
warnings  against  lightly  rising  to  oppose  the  public 
order  of  things   (xxiv.  21),  and  in  the  beautiful 
exhortation  (xxiv.  11)  to  rescue  with  the  sacrifice 
of  one's  self  the  innocent  who  is  being  dragged  to 
death,  which  points  to  a  confusion  of  right  per- 
vading the  whole  state,  of  which  we  nowhere  see 
traces  in  the  older  proverbs.     With  these  conclu- 
sions Hitzig   would   not   disagree,   for  he  himself 
assigns  a  late  date  to  the  section  xxii.  17-xxiv.  34. 
We  now  come  to  evidence  of  another  kind,  and  the 
conclusions  drawn  fi  om  it  depend  mainly  upon  the 
date  assigned  to  the  Book  of  Job.   In  this  collection, 
says  Ewald,  there  is  a  new  danger  of  the  heart 
warned  against,  which  is  not  once  thought  of  in 
the  older  collections,  envy  at  the  evident  prosperity 
of  the  wicked  (iii.  31,  .xxiii.   17,  xxiv.  1,  19),  a 
subject  which  for  the  first  time  is  brought  into  the 
region  of  reflection  and  poetry  in  the  Book  of  Job. 
Other  parallels  with  this  book  are  found  in  the 
teaching  thit  man,  even  in  the  chastisement  of  God, 
should  see  His  love,  which  is  the  subject  of  Prov.  iii., 
and  is  the  highest  argument  in  the  Book  of  Job  ; 
the  general  apprehension  of  Wisdom  as  the  Creator 
and  Disposer  of  the  world  (Prov.  iii.,  viii.)  appears 
as  a  further  conclusion  from  Job  xxviii. ;  and  though 
the  author  of  the  first  nine  chapters  of  the  Proverbs 
does  not  adopt  the  language  of  the  Book  of  Job,  but 
only  in  some  measure  its  spirit  and  te;iching,  yet 
some  images  and  words  appear  to  be  re-echoed  here 
from  that  book   (comp.   Prov.  viii.  25   with  Job 
xxxviii.  6;  Prov.  ii.  4,  iii.  14,  viii.  11,  19,  with 
Job  xxviii.  12-19;  Prov.  vii.  23  with  Job  xvi.  13, 
XX.  25  ;  Prov.  iii.  23,  &c.,  with  Job  v.  22,  &c.). 
Consequently  the  writer  of  this  section  must  have 
been  acquainted  with  the  Book  of  Job,  and  wrote  at 
a  later  (late,  about  the  middle  of  the  7th  century 
B.C.     Similar  resemblances  between  passages  in  the 
early  chapters  of  the  Proverbs  and  the  Book  of  Job 
ai'e  observed  by  Hitzig  (comp.  Prov.  iii.  25  with 
Job  V.  21  ;  Prov.  ii.  4,  14  with  Job  iii.  21,  22  ; 
Prov.  iv.  12  with  Job  .xviii.  7;  Prov.  iii.  11,  13 
with  Job  V.  17;   Prov.  viii.  25  with  Job  xv.  7), 
but  the  conclusion  which  he  derives   is  that  the 
writer  of  Job  had  already  read  the  Book  of  Pro- 
verbs, and  that  the    latter   is   the   more   ancient. 
Reasoning  from  evidence  of  the  like  kind  he  places 
this  section  (i.-ix.)  later  than  the  Song  of  Songs, 
but  earlier  than  the  second  collection  (x.  l-.xxii.  16, 
xxviii.  17-xxix.),  which  existed  before  the  time  of 
Mezekiah,  and  therefore  assigns  it  to  the  9th  cen- 
tuiy  B.C.   Other  arguments  in  support  of  this  early 
date  are  the   fact  that  idolatry  is  nowhere  men- 
tioned, that  the  olFerings  had  not  ceased  (vii.  14), 
nor  the  congiegations  (v.  14).    The  two  last  would 
agree  as  well  with  a  late  as  with  an  early  date,  and 
uo  argument  from  the  silence  with  respect  to  idolatry 
can  be  allowed  any  weight,  for  it  would  equally 
apply  to  the  9th  century   as  to  the  7th.     To  all 
appearances,  Hitzig  continues,  thoi  c  was  peace  in  the 
land,  and  commerce  was  kept  up  with  Egypt  (vii. 
16).      The  author  may  have  lived  in  .Jerusalem 
(i.  20,  21,  vii.  12,  viii.  3)  ;  vii.  1(3,  17  points  to 
the  luxury  of  a  large  city,  and  the  educated  lan- 
guage belongs  to  a  citizen  of  the  capital.     After  a 


950 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


careful  consideration  of  all  the  arguments  which 
have  been  adduced,  by  Ewald  for  the  late,  and  by 
Hitzig  for  the  early  date  of  this  section,  it  must  be 
confessed  that  they  are  by  no  means  conclusive,  and 
that  we  must  ask  for  further  evidence  before  pro- 
nouncing so  positively  as  they  have  done  upon  a 
point  so  doubtful  and  obscure.  In  one  respect  they 
are  agreed,  namely,  w'ith  regard  to  the  unity  of  the 
section,  which  Ewald  considers  as  an  original  whole, 
perfectly  connected  and  flowing  as  it  were  from  one 
outpouring.  It  would  be  a  well  ordered  whoje, 
says  Hitzig,  if  the  interpolations,  especially  vi. 
1-19,  iii.  22-26,  viii.  4-12,  14-16,  ix.  7-10,  &c., 
are  rejected.  It  never  appears  to  strike  him  that 
such  a  proceeding  is  arbitrary  and  uncritical  in  the 
iiighest  degree,  though  he  clearly  plumes  himself  on 
his  critical  sagacity.  Ewald  finds  in  these  chapters 
a  certain  development  which  shows  that  they  must 
be  regarded  as  a  whole  and  the  work  of  one  author. 
The  poet  intended  them  as  a  general  introduction 
to  tlie  Pioverbs  of  Solomon,  to  recommend  wisdom 
in  general.  The  blessings  of  wisdom  as  the  reward 
of  him  who  boldly  strives  after  her  are  repeatedly 
set  forth  in  the  most  charming  manner,  as  on  the 
other  hand  folly  is  represented  with  its  disappoint- 
ment and  enduring  misery.  There  are  tliree  main 
divisions  after  the  title,  i.  1-7.  (a.)  i.  8-iii.  35; 
a  general  exhortation  to  the  youth  to  follow  wis- 
dom, in  which  all,  even  the  higher  arguments,  are 
touched  upon,  but  nothing  fully  completed.  (6.)  iv. 
1-vi.  19  exhausts  whatever  is  individual  and  par- 
ticular ;  while  in  (c.)  the  language  rises  gradually 
with  ever-increasing  power  to  the  most  universal 
and  loftiest  themes,  to  conclude  in  the  sublimest 
and  almost  lyrical  strain  (vi.  20-ix.  18).  But,  as 
Bertheau  remarks,  there  appears  nowhere  through- 
out this  section  to  be  any  reference  to  what  follows, 
which  must  have  been  the  case  had  it  been  intended 
for  an  introduction.  The  development  and  progress 
which  Ewald  observes  in  it  are  by  no  means  so 
striking  as  he  would  have  us  believe.  The  unity 
of  plan  is  no  more  than  would  be  found  in  a 
collection  of  admonitions  by  diflerent  authors  re- 
ferring to  the  same  subject,  and  is  not  such  as  to 
necessitate  the  conclusion  that  the  whole  is  the 
work  of  one.  There  is  observable  throughout  the 
section,  when  compaied  with  what  is  called  the 
earlier  collection,  a  complete  change  in  the  form 
of  the  proverb.  The  single  proverb  is  seldom  met 
with,  and  is  rather  the  exception,  while  the  charac- 
teristics of  this  collection  are  connected  descriptions, 
continuous  elucidations  of  a  truth,  and  longer 
speeches  and  exhortations.  The  style  is  more 
highly  poetical,  the  parallelism  is  synonymous  and 
not  antithetic  or  synthetic,  as  in  x.  1-sxii.  16  ;  and 
another  distinction  is  the  usage  of  Elohim  in  ii.  5, 
17,  iii.  4,  which  does  not  occur  in  x.  1-xxii.  16. 
Amidst  this  general  likeness,  however,  there  is  con- 
siderable diversity.  It  is  not  necessary  to  lay  so 
much  stress  as  Bertheau  appears  to  do  upon  the 
fact  that  certain  paragraplis  are  distinguished  from 
those  with  which  they  are  placed,  not  merely  by 
their  contents,  but  by  their  exteinal  fonn  ;  nor  to 
argue  from  this  that  they  are  therefore  the  work 
of  different  authors.  Some  paragraphs,  it  is  true, 
are  completed  in  ten  verses,  as  i.  1(J-19,  iii.  I-IO, 
11-20,  iv.  10-19,  viii.  12-21,  22-31 ;  but  it  is  too 
much  to  assert  that  an  author,  because  he  some- 
times wrote  paragraphs  of  ten  verses,  should  always 
do  so,  or  to  say  with  Bertheau,  if  the  whole  weie 
the  work  of  one  author  it  would  be  very  remaik- 
able  if  he  oulv  now  and  then  bound  himself  by  the 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

strict  law  of  numbers.  The  argument  assumes  the 
strictness  of  the  law,  and  then  attempts  to  bind 
the  writer  to  observe  it.  There  is  mon;  force  in 
the  appeal  to  the  difference  in  the  formation  of  sen- 
tences and  the  whole  manner  of  the  language  as 
indicating  diversity  of  authorship.  Compare  ch.  ii. 
with  vii.  4-27,  where  the  same  subject  is  treated 
of.  In  the  former,  one  sentence  is  wearily  draggal 
through  22  verses,  while  in  the  latter  the  language 
is  easy,  flowing,  and  appropriate.  Again  the  con- 
nexion is  inteiTupted  by  the  insertion  of  vi.  1-19. 
In  the  previous  chapter  the  exhortation  to  listen  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  speaker  is  follovVtd  by  the  warn- 
ing against  intercourse  with  the  adulteress.  In  vi. 
1-19  the  subject  is  abruptly  changed,  and  a  series 
of  proverbs  applicable  to  different  relations  of  life 
is  introduced.  From  all  this  Bertheau  concludes 
against  Ewald  that  these  introductory  chapters 
could  not  have  been  the  product  of  a  single  author, 
forming  a  gradually  developed  and  consistent  whole, 
but  that  they  are  a  collection  of  admonitions  by 
different  poets,  which  all  aim  at  rendering  the 
youth  capable  of  receiving  good  instruction,  and 
inspiring  him  to  strive  after  the  possession  of  wis- 
dom. Tliis  supposition  is  somewhat  favoured  by 
the  frequent  repetitions  of  favourite  figures  or  im- 
personations :  the  strange  woman  and  wisdom  occur 
many  times  over  in  this  section,  which  would  hardly 
have  been  the  case  if  it  had  been  the  work  of  one 
author.  But  the  occurrence  of  these  repetitions, 
if  it  is  against  the  unity  of  authorship,  indicates 
that  the  different  portions  of  the  section  must  have 
been  contemporaneous,  and  were  written  at  a  time 
when  such  vivid  impersonations  of  wis  lom  and  its 
opposite  were  current  and  familiar.  The  tone  o 
thought  is  the  same,  and  the  question  therefore  to 
be  considered  is  whether  it  is  more  probable  that  a 
writer  would  repeat  himself,  or  that  fragments  of 
a  number  of  writers  should  be  found,  distinguished 
by  the  same  way  of  thinking,  and  by  the  use  of  the 
same  striking  figures  and  personifications.  If  the 
proverbs  spoken  by  one  man  were  circulated  orally 
for  a  time,  and  after  his  death  collected  and  ar- 
ranged, there  would  almost  of  necessity  be  a  recur- 
rence of  the  same  expressions  and  illustrations,  and 
from  this  point  of  view  the  argument  from  repeti- 
tions loses  much  of  its  force.  With  regard  to  the 
date  as  well  as  the  authorship  of  this  section  it  is 
impossible  to  pronounce  with  certainty.  In  its  pre- 
sent form  it  did  not  exist  till  probably  some  long 
time  after  the  proverbs  which  it  contains  weie 
composed.  There  is  positively  no  evidence  which 
would  lead  us  to  a  conclusion  upon  this  point,  and 
consequently  the  most  opposite  results  have  been 
arrived  at :  Ewald,  as  we  have  seen,  placing  it  in 
the  7th  century,  while  Hitzig  refers  it  to  the  9th. 
At  whatever  time  it  may  have  reached  its  present 
shape  there  appears  no  sufficient  reason  to  conclude 
that  Solomon  may  not  have  uttered  many  or  most 
of  the  proverbs  which  are  here  collected,  although 
Ewald  positively  asserts  that  wo  here  find  no  pro- 
veib  of  the  Solomonian  period.  He  assumes,  and 
it  is  a  mere  assumption,  that  the  fonn  of  the  line 
Solomonian  proverb  is  that  which  distinguishes  the 
section  x.  1-xxii.  16,  and  has  already  been  remarked. 
Bleek  regards  chaps,  i.-ix.  as  a  connected  mdshal, 
the  work  of  the  last  editor,  written  by  him  as  an 
introduction  to  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  which  fol- 
low, while  i.  1-6  was  intended  by  him  as  a  super- 
scription to  indicate  the  aim  of  the  book,  less  with 
reference  to  his  own  nidshdl  than  to  the  whole 
book,  and  especially  to  the  proverbs  of  Solomon 


PROVEEBS,  BOOK  OF 

contained  in  it.  Beitholdt  argues  against  Solomon 
being  the  author  of  these  early  chapters,  that  it 
was  impossible  for  him,  with  his  large  harem,  to 
have  given  so  forcibly  the  precept  about  the  bless- 
ings of  a  single  wife  (v.  18,  &c.)  ;  nor,  with  the 
knowledge  that  his  mother  became  the  wife  of 
David  through  an  act  of  adultery,  to  warn  so 
strongly  against  intercoui-se  with  the  wife  of  an- 
other (vi.  24,  &c.,  vii.  5-23).  These  arguments 
do  not  appear  to  us  so  strong  as  Bertholdt  regarded 
them.  Eichhorn,  on  the  contrary,  maintains  that 
Solomon  wrote  the  introduction  in  the  first  nine 
chapters.  From  thi#  diversity  of  opinion,  which 
be  it  remarked  is  entirely  the  result  of  an  exami- 
nation of  internal  evidence,  it  seems  to  follow  natu- 
rally that  the  evidence  which  leads  to  such  varying 
conclusions  is  of  itself  insufficient  to  decide  the 
question  at  issue. 

We  now  pass  on  to  another  section,  xxii.  17-xxiv., 
which  contains  a  collection  of  proverbs  marked  by 
certain  peculiarities.  These  are,  1 .  The  structure 
of  the  verses,  which  is  not  so  regular  as  in  the  pre- 
ceding section,  x.  l-xxii.  16.  We  rind  verses  of  eight, 
seven,  or  six  words,  mixed  with  others  of  eleven 
(xxii.  29,  xxiii.  31,  35),  fourteen  (xxiii.  29),  and 
eighteen  words  (xxiv.  12).  The  equality  of  the 
verse  members  is  very  much  disturbed,  and  there 
is  frequently  no  trace  of  paiallelism.  2.  A  sen- 
tence is  seldom  completed  in  one  verse,  but  most 
fiequently  in  two ;  three  verses  are  often  closely 
connected  (xxiii.  1-3,6-8,  19-21);  and  sometimes 
as  many  as  rive  (xxiv.  30-34).  3.  The  form  of 
address,  "  my  son,"  which  is  so  frequent  in  the 
first  nine  chapters,  occurs  also  here  in  xxiii.  19,  26, 
xxiv.  13;  and  the  appeal  to  the  hearer  is  often 
made  in  the  second  person.  Ewald  I'egards  this 
section  as  a  kind  of  appendix  to  the  earliest  col- 
lection of  the  proverbs  of  Solomon,  added  not  long 
after  the  inti'oduction  in  the  rirst  nine  chapters, 
though  not  hj  the  same  author.  He  thinks  it  pro- 
bable that  the  compiler  of  this  section  added  also 
the  collection  of  proverbs  which  was  made  by  the 
learned  men  of  the  court  of  Hezekiali,  to  which  he 
wrote  the  superscription  iu  xxv.  1.  This  theory  of 
course  only  atlects  the  date  of  the  section  in  its 
present  form.  When  the  proverbs  were  written 
there  is  nothing  to  determine.  Bertheau  maintains 
that  they  in  great  j)art  proceeded  from  one  poet,  in 
consequence  of  a  peculiar  construction  which  he 
employs  to  give  emphasis  to  his  presentation  of  a 
subject  or  object  by  repeating  the  pronoun  (xxii. 
19;  xxiii.  14,  15,  19,  20,  28;  xxiv.  6,  27,  32). 
'I'he  compiler  himself  apjtears  to  have  added  xxii. 
17-21  as  a  kind  of  introduction.  Another  addition 
(xxiv.  23-34)  is  introduced  with  "these  also  be- 
long to  the  wise,"  and  contains  apparently  some  of 
"  the  words  of  the  wise"  to  which  reference  is  made 
in  i.  6.  Jahn  regards  it  as  a  collection  of  proverbs 
not  by  Solomon.  Hensler  says  it  is  an  appendix  to 
a  collection  of  doctrines  which  is  entirely  lost  and 
luiknown ;  and  with  regard  to  tlie  previous  j)art  of 
the  section  xxii.  17-xxiv.  22,  he  leaves  it  uncerfciin 
whether  or  not  the  author  was  .i  teacher  to  whom 
the  son  of  a  distinguished  man  was  sent  for  instruc- 
tion.    Hitzig's  theory  has  already  been  given. 

After  what  has  been  said,  the  reader  must  be  left 
to  judge  lor  himself  whether  Keil  is  justiric<l  in 
asserting  so  positively  as  he  does  the  single  author- 
ship of  chaps,  i.-xxix.,  and  in  maintaining  that 
"  the  contents  in  all  jiarts  of  the  collection  shew 
one  and  the  same  historical  backgi-oimd,  correspond- 
ing only  to  the  relations,  ideas,  and  circunist;mces, 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


961 


as  well  as  to  the  progress  of  the  culture  and  expe- 
riences of  life,  acquired  by  the  political  development 
of  the  people  in  the  time  of  Solomon." 

The  concluding  chapters  fxxx.,  xxxi.)  are  in  eveiy 
way  distinct  from  the  rest  and  from  each  othei-. 
The  former,  according  to  the  superscription,  contains 
"  the  words  of  Agur  the  son  of  Jakeh."  Who  was 
Agur,  and  who  was  Jakeh,  aie  questions  which 
have  been  often  asked,  and  never  satisfactorily 
answered.  The  llabbins,  according  to  luishi,  and 
Jerome  after  them,  interpreted  the  name  symbo- 
lically of  Solomon,  who  "  collected  understandins; " 
(from  ^JN,  agar,  "to  collect,"  "  gather"),  and  is 
elsewhere  called  "  Koheleth."  All  that  can  be  said 
of  him  is  that  he  is  an  unknown  Hebiew  sage,  the 
son  of  an  equally  unknown  Jakeh,  and  that  he  lived 
after  the  time  of  Hezekiah.  Ewald  attributes  to 
him  the  authorship  of  xxx.  1-xxxi.  9,  and  places 
him  not  earlier  than  the  end  of  the  7th  or  beginning 
of  the  6th  cent.  B.C.  Hitzig,  a-s  usual,  has  a  strange 
theoiy  :  that  Agur  and  Lemuel  were  brothers,  both 
sons  of  the  queen  of  Massa,  a  district  in  Arabia,  and 
that  the  father  was  the  reigning  king.  [See  Jakeh.] 
Bunsen  i^Bibehcerk,  i.  p.  clxxviii.),  following  Hitzig, 
contends  that  Agur  was  an  inhabitant  of  Massa,  and 
a  descendant  of  one  of  the  rive  hundred  Simeonites 
who  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  drove  out  the  Ama- 
lekites  from  Mount  Seir.  All  this  is  mere  conjecture. 
Agin-,  whoever  he  was,  appears  to  have  had  for  his 
pu]iils  Ithiel  and  Ucal,  whom  he  addresses  in  xxx. 
1-6,  which  is  followed  by  single  proverbs  of  Agur's. 
Chap.  xxxi.  1-9  contains  "  the  words  of  king  Lemuel, 
the  prophecy  that  his  mother  taught  him."  Lemuel, 
like  Agur,  is  unknown.  It  is  even  uncertain  whe- 
ther he  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  real  personage,  or 
whether  the  name  is  merely  symbolical,  as  Eichhorn 
and  EwaM  maintain.  If  the  present  text  be  retained 
it  is  difficult  to  see  what  other  conclusion  can  be 
arrived  at.  If  Lemuel  were  a  real  personage  he 
must  have  been  a  foreign  neighbour-king  or  the 
chief  of  a  nomade  tribe,  and  in  this  ca-^e  the  pro- 
verbs attributed  to  him  must  have  come  to  the 
Hebrews  from  a  foreign  source,  which  is  highly 
improbable  and  contrary  to  all  we  know  of  the 
jioople.  Dr.  Davidson  indeed  is  in  favour  of  altering 
the  punctuation  of  xxx.  1,  with  Hitzig  and  Ber- 
theau, by  which  means  Agur  and  Lemuel  become 
brothers,  and  both  sons  of  a  queen  of  Massa.  I\ea- 
sons  against  this  alteration  of  the  text  are  given 
under  the  article  Jakeh.  Eichhorn  maintains  that 
Lemuel  is  a  figurative  name  appropriate  to  the 
subject.     [Lemuel.] 

The  last  section  of  all,  xxxi.  10-31,  is  an  alpha- 
betical acrostic  in  praise  of  a  virtuous  woman.  Its 
artificial  form  stamps  it  as  the  production  of  a  late 
period  of  Hebrew  li'terature,  perhaps  about  the  7th 
century  B.C.  The  colouring  and  language  point 
to  a  different  author  from  the  previous  section, 
xxx.  1-xxxi.  9. 

To  conclude,  it  appears,  from  a  consideration  of 
the  whole  question  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  arrived  at  its  present  shape,  that 
the  nucleus  of  the  whole  was  the  collection  of  Solo- 
moh's  proverbs  in  x.  l-xxii.  16;  that  to  this  was 
added  the  further  collection  made  by  the  learned 
men  of  the  court  of  Hezekiah,  xxv.-xxix.  ;  that 
these  two  were  put  together  and  united  with  xxii. 
17-xxiv.,  and  that  to  this  as  a  whole  the  intro- 
duction i.-i».  was  atiixeil,  but  that  whether  it  was 
compiled  by  the  same  writer  who  added  xxii.  16- 
xxiv.  cannot  be  determined.  Nor  is  it  possible  to 
assert  that  this  same  compiler  may  not  have  adde<i 


952 


PROVINCE 


the  concluding  chapters  of  the  book  to  his  previous 
collection.  With  regard  to  the  date  at  which  the 
several  portions  of  the  book  were  collected  and  put 
in  theii'  present  shape,  the  conclusions  of  various 
critics  are  uncertain  and  contradictory.  The  chief 
of  these  have  alieady  been  given. 

The  nature  of  the  contents  of  the  Book  of  Pro- 
verbs precludes  the  possibility  of  giving  an  outline 
of  its  plan  and  object.  Such  would  be  more  appro- 
priate to  the  pages  of  a  commeutiiry.  The  chief 
authorities  which  have  been  consulted  in  the  pre- 
ceding pages  are  the  introductions  of  Carpzov, 
Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  Jahn,  De  Wette,  Keil,  David- 
son, and  Bleek;  Rosenmiiller,  Scholia  ;  Ewald,  Die 
Diclit.  dcs  A.  B.  4  Til. ;  Bertheau,  Die  Spruche 
Saloinds  ;  Hitzig,  Die  Sprilche  Salomo's ;  Elster, 
Die  Saloinijiiischen  Spruche.  To  these  may  be 
added,  as  useful  aids  in  reading  the  Froveibs,  the 
commentaries  of  Albert  Schultens,  of  Eichel  in 
J\lendelssohn's  Bible  (perhaps  the  best  of  all),  of 
Loewenstein,  Umbreit,  and  Moses  Stuart.  There  is 
also  a  new  translation  by  Dr.  Noyes,  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, of  the  tliree  Books  of  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
and  Canticles,  which  may  be  consulted,  as  well  as  the 
older  works  of  Hodgson  and  Holden.     [W.  A.  W.] 

PROVINCE  (njnO  :  ewapxia,  N.  T.  ;  x^^pa, 

LXX. :  provincia).  It  is  not  intended  here  to  do 
more  than  indicate  the  points  of  contact  which  this 
word  presents  with  Biblical  history  and  literature. 

(1).  In  the  0.  T.  it  appears  in  connexion  with 
the  wars  between  Ahab  and  Benhadad  (1  K.  xx. 
14,  15,  19).  The  victory  of  the  fonner  is  gained 
chiefly  "  by  the  young  men  of  the  princes  of  the  pro- 
vinces," i.  e.  probably,  of  the  chiefs  of  tribes  in  the 
Gilead  country,  recognizing  the  supremacy  of  Ahab, 
and  having  a  common  interest  with  the  Israelites 
in  resisting  the  attacks  of  Syria.  They  are  specially 
distinguished  in  ver.  15  from  "  the  children  of  Israel." 
Not  the  hosts  of  Ahab,  but  the  youngest  warriors 
("  armour-bearers,"  Keil,  in  loc.)  of  the  land  of 
Jephthah  and  Elijah,  fighting  with  a  fearless  fliith, 
are  to  carry  otT  the  glory  of  the  battle  (comp.  Ewald, 
Gesch.  iii.  492). 

(2).  More  commonly  the  word  is  used  of  the 
divisions  of  the  Chaldaean  (Dan.  ii.  49,  iii.  1,  30) 
and  the  Persian  kingdoms  (Ezr.  ii.  1  ;  Neh.  vii.  6  ; 
Esth.  i.  1,  22,  ii.  3,  &c.).  The  occurrence  of  the 
word  in  Eccles.  ii.  8,  v.  8,  may  j^ssibly  be  noted 
as  an  indication  of  the  later  date  now  commonlv 
a.scribed  to  that  book. 

The  facts  as  to  the  administration  of  the  Persian 
provinces  which  come  within  our  view  in  these 
passages  are  chiefly  tliese  : — -Each  province  has  its 
own  governor,  who  communicates  more  or  less  re- 
gularly with  the  central  authority  for  instructions 
(Ezr.  iv.  and  v.).  Thus  Tatnai,  governor  of  the 
provinces  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  applies 
to  Darius  to  know  how  he  is  to  act  as  to  the  con- 
iiicting  claims  of  the  Apharsachites  and  the  Jews 
(Ezr.  v.).  Each  province  has  its  own  system  of 
finance,  subject  to  the  king's  direction  (HeroJ.  iii. 
89).  The  "  treasurer"  is  ordered  to  spend  a  given 
amount  upon  the  Israelites  (Ezr.  vii.  22),  and  to 
exempt  them  from  all  taxes  (vii.  24).  [Taxes.] 
The  total  number  of  the  provinces  is  given  at  127 
(Esth.  i.  1,  viii.  9).  Through  the  whole  extent  of 
the  kingdom  there  is  carried  soniethini;  like  a  postal 
system.     The    king's   couiiere    {Ptfi\L6<popoi,    the 


»  The  A.  V.  rendering  "  deputy  "  had,  it  should  be  re- 
membered, a  more  definite  value  in  the  days  of  Elizabeth 


PROVINCE 

&yyapoi  of  Herod,  viii.  98)  convey  his  letters  or 
decrees  (Esth.  i,  22,  iii.  13).  From  all  provinces 
concubines  are  collected  for  his  harem  (ii.  3). 
Horses,  mules,  or  dromedaries,  are  employed  on 
this  service  (%'iii.  10).  (Comp.  Herod,  viii.  98; 
Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6  ;  Heeien's  Persians,  ch.  ii.) 

The  word  is  used,  it  must  be  remembered,  of  the 
smaller  sections  of  a  satrapy  rather  than  of  the 
satrapy  itself.  While  the  provinces  are  127,  the 
satrapies  are  only  20  (Herod,  iii.  89).  The  Jews 
who  returned  from  Babylon  are  described  as  "  chil- 
dren of  the  province"  (Ezr.  ii.  1;  Neh.  vii.  6),  and 
have  a  separate  governor  ["Pirshatha]  of  their 
own  race  (Ezr.  ii.  63 ;  Neh.  v.  14,  viii.  9) ;  while 
they  are  subject  to  the  satrap  (DHS)  of  the  whole 
province  west  of  the  Euphrates  (Ezr.  v.  7,  vi.  6). 

(3).  In  the  N.  T.  we  are  brought  into  contact 
with  the  administration  of  the  provinces  of  the. 
Roman  empire.  The  classification  given  by  Strabo 
(xvii.  p.  840)  of  provinces  {iirapxiat)  supposed  to 
need  military  control,  and  therefore  placed  under 
the  immediate  government  of  the  Ca;sar,  and 
those  still  belonging  theoretically  to  the  republic, 
and  adniinisteied  by  the  senate;  and  of  the  latter 
again  into  proconsular  [inraTiKal)  and  praetoiian 
{arparriyiKal),  is  recognized,  more  or  less  distinctly, 
in  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts.  '  Cyrenius  (Quirinus) 
is  the  r^ye/xccv  of  Syria  (Luke  ii.  2),  the  word  being 
in  this  case  used  for  praeses  or  proconsul.  Pilate 
was  the  riyefj.aj/  of  the  sub-province  of  Judaea 
(Luke  iii.  1,  Matt,  xxvii.  2,  &c.),  as  procurator 
with  the  power  ofalegatus;  and  the  same  title  is 
given  to  his  successors,  Felix  and  Festus  (Acts  xxiii. 
24,  XXV.  1,  xxvi.  30).  The  governors  of  the  sena- 
torial provinces  of  Cyprus,  Achaia,  and  Asia,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  rightly  described  as  avdviraroi, 
proconsuls  (Acts  xiii.  7,  xviii.  12,  xix.  38).*  In 
the  two  formei  cases  the  province  had  been  ori- 
ginally an  imperial  one,  but  had  been  transferred, 
Cyprus  by  Augustus  (Dio  Cass.  liv.  4),  Achaia 
by  Claudius  (Sueton.  Claud.  25),  to  the  senate. 
The  ffTparriyol  of  Acts  xvi.  22  ("  magistrates," 
A.  v.),  on  the  other  hand,  were  the  duumviri,  or 
praetors  of  a  Roman  colony.  The  duty  of  the  legati 
and  other  provincial  governors  to  report  special  c;ises 
to  the  emperor  is  recognized  in  Acts  xxv.  26,  and 
furnished  the  groundwork  for  the  spurious  Acta 
Pilati.  [Pilate.]  The  right  of  any  Roman  citizen 
to  appeal  from  a  provincial  governor  to  the  emperor 
meets  us  as  asserted  by  St.  Paul  (Acts  xxv.  11). 
In  the  council  (ffvfji^ovKiov)  of  Acts  xxv.  12  we 
recognize  the  assessors  who  were  appointed  to  t<ike 
pai't  in  the  judicial  functions  of  the  governor.  Tlie 
authority  of  the  legatus,  proconsul,  or  procurator, 
extended,  it  need  hardly  be  said,  to  capital  punish- 
ment (subject,  in  the  case  of  Roman  citizens,  to  the 
right  of  appeal),  and,  in  most  cases,  the  power  of 
inflicting  it  belonged  to  him  exclusively.  It  was 
necessary  for  tlie  Sanhedrim  to  gain  Pilate's  consent 
to  the  execution  of  our  Lord  (John  xviii.  31).  The 
strict  letter  of  the  law  forbade  governors  of  pro- 
vinces to  take  their  wives  with  them,  but  the 
cases  of  Pilate's  wife  (Matt,  xxvii.  19)  and  Drusilla 
(Acts  xxiv.  24)  shew  that  it  had  fallen  into  disuse. 
Tacitus  (Ann.  iii.  33,  34)  records  an  unsuccessful 
attempt  to  revive  the  old  practice. 

Tlie  financial  administration  of  the  Roman  pro- 
vinces is  discussed  under  PUBLICANS  and  Taxes. 

[E.  H.  P.] 


and  James  than  it  has  for  us.    The  governor  of  Ireland 
was  olHcially  "  the  Lord  Deputy." 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

PSALMS,  BOOK  OF.  1.  The  Collection  as 
a  Whole. — It  does  not  appear  how  the  Psahns  were, 
ns  a  whole,  anciently  designated.  Their  present 
Hebrew  appellation  is  C^nn,  "  Praises."  But  in 
the  actual  superscriptions  of  the  psalms  the  word 
HTTin  is  applied  only  to  one,  Ps.  cxlv.,  which  is 
indeed  emphatically  a  praise-hymn.  The  LXX. 
entitled  them  "VaKfioi,  or  "  Psalms,"  using  the 
word  ^aKjxhs  at  the  same  time  as  the  translation 
of  TlJDTO,  which  signifies  strictly  a  rhythmical 
composition  (Lowth,  Praelect.  IIL),  and  which  was 
probably  applied  iu  practice  to  any  poem  specially 
intended,  by  reason  of  its  rhythm,  for  musical  per- 
formance with  instrumental  accompaniment.  But 
the  Hebrew  word  is,  in  the  0.  T.,  never  used  in 
the  plural ;  and  in  the  superscriptions  of  even  the 
Davidic  psalms  it  is  applied  only  to  some,  not  to  all ; 
probably  to  those  which  had  been  composed  most 
e.\pressly  for  the  harp.  The  notice  at  the  end  of 
Ps.  Ixxii.  has  suggested  that  the  Psalms  may  in 
the  earliest  times  have  been  known  as  nibsn, 
"  Prayers;"  and  in  fact  "  Prayer"  is  the  title  pre- 
fixed to  tlie  most  ancient  of  all  the  psalms,  that 
of  Moses,  Ps.  xc.  But  the  same  designation  is  in 
the  superscriptions  applied  to  only  three  besidt's, 
Pss.  xvii.,  Ixxxvi.,  cii. :  nor  have  all  the  psalms 
the  character  of  prayers.  The  other  special  designa- 
tions applied  to  particular  psalms  are  the  following  : 
"I^C',  "  Song,"  the  outpouring  of  the  soul  in  thanks- 
giving, used  in  the  first  instance  of  a  hymn  of  pri- 
vate gratitude,  Ps.  xxx.,  afterwards  of  hymns  of  great 
national  thanksgivmg,  Pss.  xlvi.,  xlviii.  Ixv.,  &c. ; 

T'''3t^D,  maschil,  "  Instruction "  or  "  Homily," 
Pss.  xxxii.,  xlii.,  xliv.,  &c.  (comp.  the  ']7''^t^'^5,  "  I 
will  instruct  thee,"  iu  Ps.  xxxii.  8) ;  DnSJO,  iiiieh- 
tam,  "  Private  Memorial,"  from  the  root  0713 
(perhaps  also  with  an  anagrammatical  allusion  to 
the  root  "^DD,  "  to  support,"  "  maintain,"  comp. 
Ps.  xvi.  5),  Pss.  xvi.,  Ivi.-lix. ;  DHy,  eduth,  "  Tes- 
timony," Pss.  Ix.,  Ixxx.  ;  arjd  JVJCi',  shiggaion, 
"  Irregular  or  Dithyrambic  Ode,"  Ps.  vii.  The 
strict  meaning  of  these  terms  is  iu  general  to  be 
gathered  from  the  earlier  superscriptions.  Once 
made  familiar  to  the  psalmists,  they  were  afterwards 
employed  by  them  more  loosely. 

The  Christian  Chuich  obviously  received  the 
Psalter  from  the  Jews  not  only  as  a  constituent 
portion  of  the  sawed  volume  of  Holy  Scripture, 
but  also  as  the  liturgical  hymn-book  which  the 
Jewish  Church  had  regularly  used  in  the  Temple. 
The  number  of  separate  psalms  contained  in  it  is, 
by  the  concordant  testimony  of  all  ancieut  autlio- 
rities,  one  hundred  and  fifty  ;  the  avowedly  "  super- 
numerary "  psalm  which  appears  at  the  end  of  the 
Greek  and  Syriac  Psalters  being  manifestly  apocry- 
phal. This  total  number  commends  itself  by  its 
internal  probability  as  having  proceeded  from  the 
last  sacred  collector  and  editor  of  the  Psalter.  In 
the  details,  howe\-er,  of  the  numbering,  both  the 
(ireek  and  Syriac  Psalters  differ  from  the  Hebrew. 
The  Greek  translators  joined  together  Pss.  ix.,  x. 
and  Pss.  cxiv.,  cxv.,  <and  then  divided  Ps.  cxvi.  and 
Ps.  cxlvii. :  this  was  per])etuated  in  the  versions 
derived  from  the  (ireek,  and  amongst  otheis  in  the 
Latin  Vulgate.  The  Syriac  so  fw  followed  the 
Greek  as  to  join  together  Pss.  cxiv.,  cxv.,  and  to 
divide  Ps.  cxlvii.  Of  the  three  divergent  systems 
of  numbering,  the  Hebrew  (:i3  followed  in  our 
A.  V.)  is,  even  on  internal  grounds,  to  be  preflMicd. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


963 


It  is  decisive  against  the  Greek  numbering  that 
Ps.  cxvi.,  being  symmetrical  iu  its  construction, 
will  not  bear  to  be  divided  ;  and  against  the  Syiiac, 
that  it  destroys  the  outward  correspondence  in  nu- 
merical place  between  the  three  great  triumphal 
psalms,  Pss.  xviii.,  Ixviii.,  cxviii.,  as  also  between 
the  two  psalms  containing  tlie  praise  of  the  Law, 
Pss.  xix.,  cxix.  There  are  also  some  discrepancies 
in  the  versual  numberings.  That  of  our  A.  V.  fre- 
quently differs  from  that  of  the  Hebrew  in  conse- 
quence of  the  Jewish  practice  of  reckoning  the 
superscription  as  the  first  verse. 

2.  Component  Farts  of  the  Collection. — Ancient 
tradition  and  internal  evidence  concur  in  parting 
the  Psalter  into  five  gieat  divisions  or  books.  The 
ancient  .Jewish  tradition  is  preserved  to  us  by  the 
abundant  testimonies  of  the  Christian  Fathers.  And 
of  the  indications  which  the  sacred  text  itself  con- 
tains of  this  division  the  most  obvious  are  the  do.x- 
ologies  which  we  find  at  the  ends  of  Pss.  xli.,  Ixxii., 
Ixxxix.,  cvi.,  and  which,  having  for  the  most  part 
no  special  connexion  with  the  psalms  to  whicli  they 
aie  attached,  mark  the  several  ends  of  the  first  lour 
of  the  five  Books.  It  suggests  itself  at  once  that 
these  Books  must  have  been  originally  formed  at 
dilierent  periods.  Thi^  is  by  various  further  consi- 
derations rendered  all  but  certain,  while  the  few 
ditficulties  which  stand  in  the  way  of  admitting  it 
vanish  when  closely  examined. 

Thus,  there  is  a  remai'kable  difference  between 
the  several  Books  in  their  use  of  the  divine  names 
Jehovah  and  Elohim,  to  designate  Almighty  God. 
In  Book  I  the  former  name  prevails :  it  is  found 
272  times,  while  Elohim  occurs  but  15  times.  (We 
here  take  no  account  of  the  superscriptions  or  dox- 
ology,  nor  yet  of  the  occurrences  of  Elohim  when 
inflected  with  a  possessive  suflix.)  On  the  other 
hand,  in  Book  II.  Elohim  is  found  more  than  five 
times  as  often  as  Jehovah.  In  Book  HI.  the  pre- 
ponderance of  Elohim  in  the  earlier  is  balanced  by 
that  of  Jehovah  in  the  later  psalms  of  the  Book. 
In  Book  I\'.  the  name  Jehovah  is  exclusively 
employed  ;  and  so  also,  virtually,  in  Book  V., 
Elohim  being  there  found  only  in  two  passages 
incorporated  from  earlier  psalms.  Those  who  main- 
tain, therefore,  that  the  psalms  were  all  collected  and 
arranged  at  once,  contend  that  the  collector  distri- 
buted the  psalms  according  to  the  divine  names 
which  they  severally  exhibited.  But  to  this  theory 
the  existence  of  Book  III.,  in  which  the  preferential 
use  of  the  Elohim  giadually  vields  to  that  of  the  Je- 
hovah, is  fatal.  The  large  appearance,  in  fact,  of  the 
name  Elohim  in  Books  II.  and  III.  depends  in  great 
measure  on  the  period  to  which  many  of  the  psalms 
of  those  Books  belong ;  the  period  from  the  reign  of 
Solomon  to  that  of  Hezekiah,  when  through  certain 
causes  the  name  Jehovah  was  exceptionally  disusfd. 
The  preference  for  the  name  Elohim  in  most  of  the 
Davidic  psalms  which  are  includeil  in  liook  II.,  is 
closely  allied  with  that  character  of  those  psalms 
which  induced  David  himself  to  exclude  them  from 
his  own  collection.  Book  I.;  while,  lastly,  the 
sparing  use  of  the  Jehovah  iu  Ps.  Ixviii.,  and  the 
three  introductoiy  psalms  wiiich  piecede  it,  is  de- 
signed to  cause  the  name,  when  it  occurs,  and 
above  all  Jah,  which  is  cmpbafic  for  Jehovah,  to 
shine  out  with  greater  force  and  splendour. 

This,  however,  biings  us  to  the  observance  of 
the  superscriptions  which  mark  the  authorship  of 
the  several  psalms;  and  here  again  we  find  the 
several  groups  of  psalms  which  form  the  respective 
S\\'c  Books  distinguished,  in  groat  measure,  by  their 


954 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


superscriptions  from  each  other.  Book  I.  is  ex- 
clusively Dav'idic.  Of  the  forty-one  psalms  of 
which  it  consists,  thirty-seven  have  David's  name 
prefixed;  and  of  the  remaining  four,  Pss.  i.,  ii.,  are 
probably  outwardly  anonymous  only  by  reason  of 
their  prefatory  character,  Pss.  x.,  xxxiii.,  by  reason 
of  their  close  connexion  with  those  which  they  im- 
mediately succeed.*  Book  II.  (in  which  the  apparent 
auonyniousness  of  Pss.  xliii.,  Ixvi.,  Ixvii.,  Lxxi.,  may 
be  similarly  explained)  falls,  by  the  superscriptions 
of  its  psalms,  into  two  distinct  subdivisions,  a 
Levitic  and  a  Davidic.  The  former  consists  of  Pss. 
xlii.-xlix.,  ascribed  to  the  Sons  of  Korah,  and  Ps. 
1.,  "  A  Psalm  of  Asaph :"  the  latter  comprises 
Pss.  li.-lxxi.,  bearing  the  name  of  David,  and  sup- 
plemented by  Ps.  Ixxii.,  the  psalm  of  Solomon.  In 
Book  III.  (Pss.  Ixxiii.-lxxxix.),  where  the  Asaphic 
psalms  precede  those  of  the  Sons  of  Korah,  the 
psalms  are  all  ascribed,  explicitly  or  virtually,  to 
the  various  Levite  singers,  except  only  Ps.  Ixxxvi., 
which  bears  the  name  of  David :  this,  however,  is 
not  set  by  itself,  but  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  rest. 
In  Books  IV.,  v.,  we  have,  in  all,  seventeen  psalms 
marked  with  David's  name.  'I'hey  are  to  a  certain 
extent,  as  in  Book  III.,  mixed  with  the  rest,  some- 
times singly,  sometimes  In  groups.  But  these 
Books  differ  from  Book  III.  in  that  the  non-Davidic 
psalms,  instead  of  being  assigned  by  superscriptions 
to  the  Levite  singers,  are  lett  anonymous.  Special 
attention,  in  respect  of  authorship,  is  drawn  by  the 
superscriptions  only  to  Ps.  xc,  "  A  Prayer  of 
Moses,"  &c. ;  Ps.  cii.,  "  A  Prayer  of  the  afflicted," 
&c. ;  and  Ps.  cxxvii.,  marked  with  the  name  of 
Solomon. 

In  reasoning  from  the  phenomena  of  the  super- 
scriptions, which  indicate  in  many  instances  not 
only  tlie  authors,  but  also  the  occasions  of  the 
several  psalms,  as  well  as  the  mode  of  their  musical 
performance,  we  have  to  meet  the  preliminary  en- 
quiry which  has  been  raised,  Are  the  superscrip- 
tions authentic?  For  the  affirmative  it  is  contended 
that  they  form  an  integral,  and  till  modem  times 
almost  undisputed,  portion  of  the  Hebrew  text  of 
Scriptui-e ;  '*  that  they  are  in  analogy  with  other 
biblical  super-  or  subscriptions,  Davidic  or  other- 
wise (comp.  2  Sam.  i.  18,  probably  based  on  an  old 
superscription ;  ib.  xxiii.  1  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  9  ;  Hab.  iii. 
1,  19);  and  that  their  diversified,  unsystematic, 
and  often  obscure  and  enigmatical  character  is  in- 
consistent with  the  theory  of  their  having  originated 
at  a  later  period.  On  the  other  hand  is  urged 
their  analogy  with  the  untrustworthy  subscriptions 
of  the  N.  T.  epistles ;  as  also  the  fact  that  many 
arbitrary  superscriptions  are  added  in  the  Greek 
version  of  the  Psalter.  The  above  represents,  how- 
ever, but  the  outside  of  the  controversy.  The  real 
pith  of  it  lies  in  this:  Do  they,  when  individually 
sifted,  approve  themselves  as  so  generally  correct, 
and  as  so  free  from  any  single  fatal  objection  to 
their  credit,  as  to  claim  our  universal  confidence  ? 
This  can  evidently  not  be  discussed  here.  We  must 
simply  avow  our  conviction,  founded  on  thorough 
examination,  that  they  are,  when  rightly  inter- 
preted, fully  trustworthy,  and  that  every  separate 
objection  that  has  been  made  to  the  correctness  of 
any  one  of  them  can  be  fairly  met.     Moreover, 


a  An  old  Jewish  canon,  which  may  be  deemed  to  hold 
good  for  the  earlier  but  not  for  the  later  Books,  enacts 
that  all  anonyriioiis  psalms  be  accounted  the  compo- 
sitions of  the  authors  named  in  the  superscriptions  last 
preceding. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

some  of  the  arguments  of  their  assailants  ob- 
viously recoil  upon  themselves.  Thus  when  it  is- 
alleged  that  the  contents  of  Ps.  xxxiv.  have  no  con- 
nexion with  the  occasion  indicated  in  the  super- 
scription, we  reply  that  the  fact  of  the  connexion 
not  being  readily  apparent  renders  it  improbable 
that  the  superscription  should  have  been  prefixed 
by  any  but  David  himself. 

Let  us  now  then  trace  the  bearing  of  the  supei- 
scriptions  upon  the  date  and  method  of  compilation 
of  the  seveial  Books.  Book  I.  is,  by  the  super- 
scriptions, entirely  Davidic ;  nor  do  we  find  in  it 
a  trace  of  any  but  Da^'id's  authorship.  No  such 
trace  exists  in  the  mention  of  the  "  Temple  "  (v. 
7j,  for  that  word  is  even  in  1  Sam.  i.  9,  iii.  3 
applied  to  the  Tabemacle  ;  nor  yet  in  the  pinase 
"  bringeth  back  the  captivity  "  (xiv.  7),  which  is 
elsewhere  used,  idiomatically,  with  great  latitude 
of  memiing  (.lob  xlii.  10;  Hos.  vi.  11;  Ez.  xvi. 
53) ;  nor  yet  in  the  acrosticism  of  Pss.  xxv.,  &c., 
for  that  all  acrostic  psalms  are  of  late  date  is  a 
purely  gratuitous  assumption,  and  some  even  of  the 
most  sceptical  critics  admit  the  Davidic  authorship 
of  the  partially  acrostic  Pss.  ix.,  x.  All  the  psalms 
of  Book  I.  being  thus  Davidic,  we  may  well  believe 
that  the  compilation  of  the  Book  was  also  David's 
work.  In  favour  of  this  is  the  circumstance  that 
it  does  not  comprise  all  David's  psalms,  nor  his 
latest,  which  yet  would  liave  been  all  included  in 
it  by  any  subsequent  collector  ;  also  the  circum- 
stance that  its  two  piefatory  psalms,  although  not 
superscribed,  are  yet  shown  by  internal  evidence  to 
have  proceeded  tiom  David  himself;  and  further- 
more, that  of  the  two  recensions  of  the  same  hymn, 
Pss.  xiv.,  liii.,  it  prefers  that  which  seems  to  have 
been  more  specially  adapted  by  its  royal  author  to 
the  temple-service.  Book  U.  appeal's  by  the  date 
of  its  latest  psalm,  Ps.  xlvi.,  to  have  been  compiled 
in  the  reign  of  King  Hezekiah.  It  would  naturally 
comprise,  1st,  several  or  most  of  the  Levitical 
psalms  anterior  to  that  date  ;  and  2ndly,  the  re- 
mainder of  the  psalms  of  David,  previously  uncom- 
piled.  To  these  latter  the  collector,  after  properly 
appending  the  single  psalm  of  Solomon,  has  atfi.xed 
the  notice  that  "  the  prayers  of  David  the  son  of 
Jesse  are  ended  "  (Ps.  Ixxii.  20)  ;  evidently  imply- 
ing, at  least  on  the  prima  facie  view,  that  no  more 
compositions  of  the  royal  psalmist  remained.  How 
then  do  we  find,  in  the  later  Books  III.,  IV.,  V., 
fuither  psalms  yet  marked  with  David's  name? 
Another  question  shall  help  us  to  reply.  How  do 
we  find,  in  Book  III.  rather  than  Book  II.,  eleven 
psalms,  Pss.  Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.,  bearing  the  name  of 
David's  contemporary  musician  Asaph?  Clearly 
because  they  pi'oceeded  not  from  Asaph  himself. 
No  critic  whatever  contends  that  all  these  eleven 
belong  to  the  age  of  David  ;  and,  in  real  truth, 
internal  evidence  is  in  every  single  instance  in 
favour  of  a  later  origin.  They  were  composed  then 
by  the  "sons  of  Asaph"  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13,  xxxv. 
1.5,  &c.),  the  members,  by  hereditary  descent,  of 
the  choir  which  Asaph  founded.  It  was  to  be  e.x- 
pected  that  these  psalmists  would,  in  superscribing 
their  psalms,  prefer  honouring  and  perpetuating  the 
memory  of  their  ancestor  to  obtruding  their  own 
personal   names   on   the   Church:   a  consideration 

h  Well  says  Bossuet,  Dissert.  }28 :  "  Qui  titulos  non  uno 
moilo  intelligant,  video  esse  quam  plurimos:  qui  de  titu- 
lorum  aucloritate  dubitarit,  ex  antiquis  omnino  ncmincm." 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  forms  an  exception. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

wliich  both  explains  the  present  superscriptions, 
and  also  renders  it  improbable  that  the  jieisou  in- 
tended in  them  could,  according  to  a  frequent  but 
now  waning  hypothesis,  be  any  second  Asaph,  of 
younger  generation  and  of  inferior  fame.  The  su- 
perscriptions of  Pss.  Ixxxviii.,  Ixxxix.,  '' Maschil  of 
Heman,"  "  Maschil  of  Ethan,"  have  doubtless  a  like 
purport ;  the  one  psalm  having  been  written,  as  in 
tiict  the  rest  of  its  superscription  states,  by  the 
Sons  of  Korah,  the  choir  of  which  Heman  was  the 
founder ;  and  the  other  (correspondingly  proceeding 
from  the  third  Levitical  choir,  which  owed  its  origin 
to  Ethan  or  Jeduthuu.  If  now  in  the  times  pos- 
terior to  those  of  David  the  Levite  choijs  prefixed 
to  the  psalms  which  they  composed  the  names  of 
Asaph,  Heman,  and  Ethan,  out  of  a  feeling  of  vene- 
ration for  theii-  memories  ;  how  much  more  might 
the  name  of  David  be  prefixed  to  the  utterances  of 
those  who  were  not  merely  his  descendants,  but 
also  the  representatives  for  the  time  being,  and  so 
in  some  sort  the  pledges,  of  the  perpetual  royalty 
of  his  lineage  !  The  name  David  is  used  to  denote, 
in  other  parts  of  Scripture,  after  the  original  David's 
death,  the  then  head  of  the  Davidic  family;  and 
so,  in  prophecy,  the  Jlessiah  of  the  seed  of  David, 
who  was  to  sit  on  David's  throne  (1  K.  xii.  IG; 
Hos.  iii.  5  ;  Is.  Iv.  3 ;  Jer.  xxx.  9  ;  Ez.  xxxiv.  23, 
24).  And  thus  then  we  may  explain  the  meaning 
of  the  later  Davidic  superscriptions  in  the  Psalter. 
The  psalms  to  which  they  belong  were  written  by 
Hezekiah,  by  Josiah,  by  Zerubbabel,  or  others  of 
David's  posterity.  And  this  view  is  confirmed  by 
various  considerations.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  cir- 
cumstance that  in  the  later  Books,  and  even  in 
Book  V.  taken  alone,  the  psalms  marked  with 
David's  name  are  not  grouped  all  together.  It  is 
confirmed  in  some  instances  by  the  internal  evidence 
of  occasion  :  thus  Psalm  ci.  can  ill  be  reconciled  with 
the  historical  circumstances  of  any  period  of  David's 
life,  but  suits  exactly  with  those  of  the  opening  of  the 
reign  of  Josiah.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  extent  to 
which  some  of  these  psalms — Pss.  Ixxxvi.,  cviii., 
cxliv. — are  compacted  of  passages  from  previous 
psalms  of  David.  And  it  is  confirmed  lastly  by  the 
tlict  that  the  Hebrew  text  of  many  (see,  above  all, 
Ps.  cxxxix.)  is  marked  by  grammatical  Chaldaisms, 
which  are  entirely  unparalleled  in  Pss.  i.-lxxii., 
and  which  thus  afford  sure  evidence  of  a  compa- 
ratively recent  date.  They  cannot  therefore  be 
David's  own:  yet  that  the  superscriptions  are  not 
on  that  account  to  be  rejected,  as  false,  but  must 
rather  be  properly  interpreted,  is  shown  by  the  im- 
probability that  any  would,  carelessly  or  presump- 
tuously, have  prefixed  David's  name  to  various 
psalms  scattered  through  a  collection,  while  yet 
leaving  the  rest — at  least  in  Books  IV.,  V. — altoge- 
ther unsuperscribed. 

The  above  explanation  removes  all  serious  diffi- 
culty respecting  the  history  of  the  later  Books  of 
the  Psalter.  Book  III.,  the  interest  of  which  centres 
in  the  times  of  Hezekiah,  stret<;hes  out,  by  its  last 
two  psalms,  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh  :  it  was  pro- 
bably compiled  in  the  reign  of  Josiah.  Book  W . 
contains  the  remainder  of  the  psalms  up  to  the  date 
of  the  Captivity;  Book  V.  the  psalms  of  the  Return. 
There  is  nothing  to  distinguish  these  two  Books 
from  each  other  in  respect  of  outward  decoration  or 
arrangement,  and  they  may  ha^'e  been  compiled 
together  in  the  days  of  Nehemiali. 

The  superscriptions,  and  the  places  which  the 
psalms  themselves  severally  occupy  in  f  he  I'sidter, 
are  thus  the  two  guiding  clues  liy  which,  in  con- 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


955 


junction  with  the  internal  evidence,  their  various 
authors,  dates,  and  occasions,  are  to  be  determined. 
In  the  critical  results  obtained  on  these  points  by 
those  scholars  who  have  recognized  and  used  these 
helps  theie  is,  not  indeed  uniformity,  but  at  least  a 
visible  tendency  towards  it.  The  same  cannot  be 
said  for  the  results  of  the  judgments  of  those,  of 
whatever  school,  who  have  neglected  or  rejected 
them  ;  nor  indeed  is  it  easily  to  be  imagined  that 
internal  evidence  alone  should  suffice  to  assign  one 
hundred  and  fifty  devotional  hymns,  even  approxi- 
mately, to  their  several  epochs. 

It  would  manifestly  be  impossible,  in  the  compass 
of  an  article  like  the  present,  to  exhibit  in  detail 
the  divergent  views  which  have  been  taken  of  the 
dates  of  particular  psalms.  There  is,  however,  one 
matter  which  must  not  be  altogether  passed  over  in 
silence :  the  assignment  of  various  psalms,  by  a 
large  number  of  critics,  to  the  age  of  the  Maccabees. 
Two  preliminary  difficulties  fatally  beset  such  pro- 
cedure: the  hypothesis  of  a  Maccabean  authorship 
of  any  portion  of  the  Psalter  can  ill  be  reconciled 
either  with  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  canon,  or  with 
that  of  the  translation  of  the  LX.\.  But  the  diffi- 
culties do  not  end  here.  How, — for  we  shall  not 
here  discuss  the  theories  of  Hitzig  and  his  followers 
Lengerke  and  Justus  Olshausen,  who  would  repre- 
sent the  greater  part  of  the  Psalter  as  Maccabean, — 
how  is  it  that  the  psalms  which  one  would  most 
naturally  assign  to  the  Maccabean  period  meet  us  not 
in  the  close  but  in  the  middle,  i.  e.  in  the  Second  and 
Third  Books  of  the  Psalter  ?  The  three  named  by  De 
Wette  {Ehil.  in  das  A.  T.  §270)  as  bearing,  appa- 
rently a  Maccabean  impress,  are  Pss.  xliv.,  Ix., 
Ixxiv. ;  and  in  fact  these,  together  with  Ps.  Ixxix.,  are 
perhaps  all  that  would,  when  taken  alone,  seriously 
suggest  the  hypothesis  of  a  Maccabean  date.  Whence 
then  arise  the  early  places  in  the  Psalter  wliich 
these  occupy  ?  But  even  in  the  case  of  these,  the 
internal  evidence,  when  more  narrowly  examined, 
proves  to  be  in  favour  of  an  earlier  date.  In  the 
first  place  the  superscription  of  Ps.  Ix.  cannot  pos- 
sibly have  been  invented  from  the  historical  books, 
inasmuch  as  it  disagrees  with  them  in  its  details. 
Then  the  mention  by  name  in  that  psalm  of  the 
Israelitish  tribes,  and  of  Moab,  and  Philistia,  is  un- 
suited  to  the  Maccabean  epoch.  In  Ps.  xliv.  the 
complaint-  is  made  that  the  tree  of  the  nation  of 
I  Israel  was  no  longer  spreading  over  the  territory 
that  God  had  assigned  it.  Is  it  conceivable  that  a 
Maccabean  psalmist  should  have  held  this  language 
without  making  the  slightest  allusion  to  the  Baby- 
lonish aiptivity ;  as  though  the  tree's  growth  were 
now  first  being  seriously  impeded  by  the  wild  stocks 
around,  notwithstanding  that  it  had  once  been  en- 
tirely transplanted,  and  that,  though  restored  to  its 
place,  it  had  been  weakly  ever  since?  In  Ps.  Ixxiv. 
it  is  complained  that  "  there  is  no  more  any  pro- 
phet." Would  that  be  a  natural  complaint  at  a 
time  when  Jewish  prophecy  had  ceased  for  more 
than  two  centuries  ?  Lastly,  in  Ps.  Ixxix.  the 
mention  of  "  kingdoms  "  in  ver.  0  ill  suits  the  Mac- 
cabean time  ;  while  the  way  in  which  the  psalm  is 
cited  by  the  author  of  the  First  Book  of  Macaibees 
(vii.  1(3,  17),  who  omits  those  words  which  are 
foieign  to  his  purpose,  is  such  ,as  wo\ild  have  hardly 
been  adopted  in  reference  to  a  contemporary  com- 
position. 

3.  Connexion  of  the  Psalnis  with  the  Israelitish 
history. — In  tracing  this  we  shall,  of  course,  assume 
the  truth  of  the  conclusions  at  which  iu  the  pre- 
viiius  section  we  have  arrived. 


956 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


The  psalms  grew,  essentially  and  gTadually,  out 
of  the  personal  and  national  career  of  David  and 
of  Israel.  That  of  Moses,  Psahii  xe.,  whicli,  though 
it  contributed  little  to  the  production  of  tlie  rest,  is 
yet,  in  point  of  actual  date,  the  e;irliest,  faithfully 
reflects  the  long,  weary  wanderings,  the  multiplieil 
provocations,  and  the  consequent  punishments  of 
the  wilderness ;  and  it  is  well  that  the  Psalter 
should  contain  at  least  one  memorial  of  those  forty 
years  of  toil.  It  is,  howevei',  with  David  that 
Israelitish  psalmody  may  be  said  virtually  to  com- 
mence. Previous  masteiy  over  iiis  harp  had  pro- 
bably already  prepared  the  way  for  his  future 
strains,  when  the  anointing  oil  of  Samuel  descended 
upon  him,  and  he  began  to  drink  in  special  mea- 
sure, from  that  day  forward,  of  the  Spirit  of  tlie 
Lord.  It  was  then  that,  victorious  at  home  over 
the  mysterious  melancholy  of  Saul  and  in  the 
held  over  the  vaunting  champion  of  the  Philistine 
hosts,  he  sang  how  from  even  babes  and  suck- 
lings God  had  ordained  strength  because  of  His 
enemies  (Ps.  viii.).  His  next  psalms  are  of  a 
diflerent  character :  his  persecutions  at  the  hands  of 
Saul  had  commenced.  Ps.  Iviii.  was  probably 
written  after  Jonathan's  disclosures  of  the  murder- 
ous designs  of  the  court:  Ps.  lix.  when  his  house 
was  being  watched  by  Saul's  emissaries.  The  in- 
hospitality  of  the  court  of  Achish  at  Gath,  gave 
rise  to  Ps.  Ivi. :  Ps.  xxxiv.  was  David's  thanks- 
giving for  deliverance  fi'om  that  court,  not  unmin- 
gled  with  shame  for  the  unworthy  stratagem  to 
which  he  had  there  temporarily  had  recourse.  The 
associations  connected  with  the  cave  of  Adullam 
are  embodied  in  Ps.  Ivii. :  the  feelings  excited  by 
the  tidings  of  Doeg's  servility  in  Ps.  Hi.  The  escape 
from  Keilah,  in  consequence  of  a  divine  warning, 
suggested  Ps.  xxxi.  Ps.  liv.  was  written  when  the 
Ziphites  officiously  infoi'med  Saul  of  David's  move- 
ments. Pss.  XXXV.,  sxxvi.,  recall  the  colloquy  at 
Engedi.  Nabal  of  Carmel  was  probably  the  original 
of  the  fool  of  Ps.  liii.;  though  in  this  case  the 
closing  verse  of  that  psalm  must  have  been  added 
when  it  was  further  altered,  by  David  himself,  into 
Ps.  xiv.  The  most  thoroughly  idealized  picture 
suggested  by  a  retrospect  of  all  the  dangers  of  his 
outlaw-life  is  that  presented  to  us  b)-  David  in  Ps. 
xxii.  But  in  Ps.  x.xiii.,  which  forms  a  side-piece 
to  it,  and  the  imagery  of  which  is  drawn  from  his 
earlier  shepherd-days,  David  acknowledges  that  his 
past  career  had  had  its  brighter  as  well  as  its  darker 
side  ;  nor  had  the  goodness  and  mercy  which  were 
to  follow  him  all  the  days  of  his  life  been  ever 
really  absent  from  him.  Two  more  psalms,  at 
least,  must  be  referred  to  the  period  before  David 
ascended  the  throne,  viz.  xxxviii.  and  xxxis.,  which 
naturally  associate  themselves  with  the  distressing 
scene  at  Ziklag  after  the  inroad  of  the  Amalekites. 
Ps.  xl.  may  perhaps  be  the  thanksgiving  for  the 
retrieval  of  the  disaster  that  had  there  befallen. 

When  David's  reign  has  commenced,  it  is  still 
with  the  most  exciting  incidents  of  his  history, 
private  or  public,  that  his  psalms  are  mainly  asso- 
ciated. There  are  norie  to  which  the  period  of  his 
reign  at  Hebron  can  lay  exclusive  claim.  But  after 
the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  his  psalmody  opened 
afresh  with  the  solemn  removal  of  the  ark  to  Blount 
Ziou  ;  and  in  Pss.  xxiv.-xxix.,  which  belong  together, 
we  have  the  earliest  definite  instance  of  David's 
systematic  composition  or  arrangement  of  psalms 
for  public  use.  Ps.  xxx.  is  of  the  same  date:  it 
was  composed  for  the  dedication  of  David's  new 
l)alace,  which  took  pkice  on  the  same  day  with  the 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OP 

establishment  of  the  ark  in  its  new  tabernacle. 
Other  psalms  (and  in  these  first  do  we  ti'ace  any 
allusions  to  the  promise  of  perpetual  royalty  now 
conveyed  through  Nathan)  show  the  feelings  of 
David  in  the  midst  of  his  foreign  wars.  The 
imagery  of  Ps.  ii.  is  perhaps  drawn  from  the  events 
of  this  period;  Pss.  Ix.,  Ixi.  belong  to  the  campaign 
against  Edom  ;  Ps.  xx.  to  the  second  campaign, 
conducted  by  David  in  person,  of  the  war  against 
the  allied  Ammonites  and  Syrians  ;  and  Ps.  xxi.  to 
the  termination  of  that  war  by  tlie  capture  of 
Kabbah.  Intermediate  in  date  to  the  last-mentioned 
two  psalms  is  Ps.  li.  ;  connected  with  the  dark 
episode  which  made  David  tremble  not  only  for 
him.self,  but  also  for  the  city  wliereon  he  had 
laboured,  and  which  he  had  partly  named  by  his 
own  name,  lest  God  should  in  displeasure  not 
permit  the  future  Temple  to  be  reared  on  Mount 
Zion,  nor  the  yet  imperfect  walls  of  Jerusalem  to 
be  completed.  But  rich  above  all,  in  the  psalms  to 
which  it  gave  rise,  is  the  period  of  David's  flight 
from  Absalom.  To  this  we  may  refer  Pss.  iii.-vii. 
(the  "  Gush  "  of  Ps.  vii.  being  Shimei)  ;  also  Ps.  1\-., 
which  reflects  the  treachery  of  Ahithophel,  Ps.  Ixii., 
which  possibly  alludes  to  the  falsehood  of  both 
Ziba  and  Mephibosheth,  and  Ps.  Ixiii.,  written  in 
the  wilderness  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Jordan. 

Even  of  those  psalms  which  cannot  be  referred  to 
any  definite  occasion,  several  reflect  the  general  his- 
torical circumstances  of  the  times.  Thus  Ps.  ix. 
is  a  thanksgiving  for  the  deliverance  of  the  land  of 
Israel  from  its  former  heathen  oppressors.  Ps.  x.  is 
a  prayer  for  the  deliverance  of  the  Ghurch  from  the 
high-lianded  oppression  e.xercised  from  within.  The 
succeeding  psalms  dwell  on  the  same  theme,  the 
virtual  internal  heathenism  by  which  the  Ghurch  of 
God  was  weighed  down.  So  that  there  remain  very 
few,  e.  g.  Pss.  xv.-xvii.,  xix.,  xxxii.  (with  its  choral 
appendage  xxxiii.),  x.xxvii.,  of  which  some  hiitorical 
account  may  not  be  given  ;  and  even  of  these  some 
are  manifestly  connected  with  psalms  of  historical 
origin,  e.g.  Ps.  xv.  with  Ps.  xxiv. ;  and  of  others 
the  historical  reference  may  be  more  reasonably 
doubted  than  denied. 

A  season  of  repose  near  the  close  of  his  reign 
induced  David  to  compose  his  grand  personal  thanks- 
giving for  the  deliverances  of  his  whole  life,  Ps.  xviii. ; 
the  date  of  which  is  approximately  determined  by 
the  place  at  which  it  is  inserted  in  the  history 
(2  Sam.  xxii.).  It  was  probably  at  this  period  that 
he  finally  arranged  for  the  sanctuary-service  that 
collection  of  his  psalms  which  now  constitutes  the 
First  Book  of  the  Psalter.  From  this  he  designedly 
excluded  all  (Pss.  li.-lxiv.)  that,  from  manifest 
private  reference,  or  other  cause,  were  unfitted  for 
immediate  public  use ;  except  only  where  he  so 
fitted  them  by  slightly  generalizing  the  language, 
and  by  mostly  substituting  for  the  divine  name 
Elohim  the  more  theocratic  name  .Jehovah  ;  as  we 
see  by  the  mstance  of  Ps.  xiv.  =  liii.,  where  both 
the  altered  and  original  copies  of  the  hymn  happen 
to  be  preserved.  To  the  collection  thus  formed  he 
prefixed  by  way  of  preface  Ps.  i.,  a  simple  moral 
contrast  between  the  ways  of  the  godly  and  the 
ungodly,  and  Ps.  ii.,  a  prophetical  picture  of  the 
reigu  of  that  promised  Kuler  of  whom  he  knew  him- 
self to  be  but  the  type.  The  concluding  psalm  of 
the  collection,  Ps.  xli.,  seems  to  be  a  sort  of  ideal 
summary  of  the  whole. 

The  course  of  Da^^d's  reign  was  not,  however,  as 
yet  complete.  The  solemn  assembly  convened  by 
him  for  the  dedication  of  the  materials  of  the  future 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

Temple  (1  Chr.  xxviii.,  xxix.)  would  naturally  call 
forth  a  renewal  of  his  best  eflbrts  to  glorify  the 
God  of  Israel  in  psalms  ;  and  to  this  occasion  we 
doubtless  owe  the  great  festal  hymns  Pss.  Ixv.- 
Ixvii.,  Ixviii.,  containing  a  large  review  of  the  past 
histoiy,  present  position,  and  prospective  glories  of 
God's  chosen  people.  The  supplications  of  Ps.  Ixix. 
suit  best  with  the  renewed  distress  occasioned  by 
the  sedition  of  Adouijah.  Ps.  Ixxi.,  to  which 
Ps.  Ixx.,  a  fragment  of  a  former  psalm,  is  intro- 
ductory, forms  lJa\-id's  parting  strain.  Yet  that 
the  psalmody  of  Israel  may  not  seem  finally  to 
terminate  with  him,  the  glories  of  tlie  future  are 
forthwith  anticipated  by  his  son  in  Ps.  Ixxii.  And 
so  closes  the  first  great  blaze  of  the  lyrical  devotions 
of  Israel.  David  is  not  merely  the  soul  of  it ;  he 
stands  in  it  absolutely  alone.  It  is  from  the  events 
of  his  own  career  that  thegi'eatcr  part  of  the  psalms 
have  sprung ;  he  is  tlieir  author,  and  on  his  harp 
are  they  first  sung  ;  to  him  too  is  due  the  design  of 
the  establishment  of  regular  choirs  for  their  future 
sacred  performance;  his  are  all  the  arrangements 
by  which  that  design  is  carried  out ;  and  even  the 
improvement  of  the  musical  instruments  needed  for 
the  jierforniance  is  traced  up  to  liim  (Amos  vi.  5). 

For  a  time  the  single  psalm  of  Solomon  remained 
the  only  addition  to  those  of  David.  Solomon's 
own  gilts  lay  mainly  in  a  different  direction ;  and  no 
sufficiently  quickening  religious  impulses  mingled 
with  the  generally  depressing  events  of  the  reigns  of 
Kehoboam  and  Abijah  to  raise  up  to  David  any  lyrical 
successor.  If,  however,  religious  psalmodv  were  to 
revive,  somewhat  might  be  not  unreasonably  antici- 
pated from  the  great  ;issembly  of  King  Asa  (2  Chr. 
.\v.)  ;  and  Ps.  1.  suits  so  exactly  with  the  circum- 
stances of  that  occasion,  that  it  may  well  be  assigned 
to  it.  Internal  evidence  renders  it  more  likely  that 
this  "  Psalm  of  Asaph  "  proceeded  from  a  descendant 
of  Asaph  than  from  Asaph  himself ;  and  possibly  its 
author  may  be  the  Azariah  the  son  of  Oded,  who 
had  been  moved  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  kindle  Asa's 
zeal.  Another  revival  of  psalmody  more  certainly 
occurred  under  Jehoshaphat  at  the  time  of  the 
Moabite  and  Ammonite  invasion  (2  Chr.  xs.).  Of 
this,  Pss.  xlvii.,  xlviii.  were  the  fruits;  and  we 
may  suspect  that  the  Levite  singer  Jahaziel,  who 
foretold  the  Jewish  deliverance,  was  their  author. 
The  great  prophetical  ode  Ps.  \lv.  connects  itself 
most  readily  with  the  splendours  of  .lehoshapliat's 
reign.  And  after  that  psalmody  had  tlius  definitely 
revived,  there  would  be  no  reason  why  it  should 
not  thenceforward  manifest  itself  in  seasons  of 
anxiety,  as  well  as  of  festivity  and  thanksgiving. 
Hence  Ps.  xlix.  Yet  the  ])salms  of  this  period  flow 
but  sparingly.  Pss.  xlii.-xliv.,  Ixxiv.,  are  best 
assigned  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz  ;  they  delineate  that 
monarch's  desecration  of  the  sanctuary,  the  sighings 
of  the  faithful  who  had  exiled  themselves  in  conse- 
quence from  Jerusalem,  and  the  political  humiliation 
to  which  the  kingdom  of  Judah  was,  through  the 
proceedings  of  Ahaz,  reduced.  Tiie  reign  of  Hoze- 
kiah  is  naturally  rich  in  psalmody.  Pss.  xlvi.,  Ixxiii., 
Ixxv.,  Ixxvi.,  connect  themselves  with  the  resistance 
to  the  supremacy  of  the  Assyrians  and  the  divine 
destruction  of  their  host.  The  first  of  these  psalms 
indeed  would  by  its  place  in  the  Psalter  more 
naturally  belong  to  the  deliverance  in  tlie  days  of 
Jehoshaphat,  to  whicli  some,  as  Delitzsch,  actually 
refer  it ;  but  if  internal  evidence  bo  deemed  to 
estiiblish  suflicienfly  its  later  date,  it  may  have 
been  exceptionally  permitted  to  appear  in  Book  II. 
on  account  of  its  similarity  in  style  to   Pss.  xlvii., 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


957 


xlviii.  We  are  now  brought  to  a  series  of  psalms 
of  peculiar  interest,  springing  out  of  the  political 
and  religious  history  of  the  separated  ten  tribes. 
In  date  of  actual  composition  they  commence  before 
the  times  of  Hezekiah.  The  earliest  is  probably 
Ps.  Ixxx.,  a  supplication  for  the  Israelitish  people  at 
the  time  of  the  Syiian  oppression.  Ps.  Ixxxi.  is  an 
earnest  appeal  to  them,  indicative  of  what  God 
would  yet  do  for  them  if  they  woidd  hearken  to 
his  voice:  Ps.  Ixxxii.  a  stern  leproof  of  the  internal 
oppression  prevalent,  by  the  testimony  of  Amos,  in 
the  realm  of  Israel.  In  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  we  have  a 
prayer  for  deliverance  from  that  extensive  con- 
federacy of  enem.ies  from  all  quarters,  of  which  the 
traces  meet  us  in  Joel  iii.,  Amos  1.,  and  which 
probably  was  eventually  crushed  by  the  contem- 
poraneous victories  of  Jeroboam  II.  of  Israel  and 
Uzziah  of  Judah.  All  these  ])salms  are  referred  by 
their  superscriptions  to  the  Levite  singers,  and  thus 
bear  witness  to  the  efforts  of  the  Levites  to  reconcile 
the  two  branches  of  the  chosen  nation.  In  Ps.  Ixxviii., 
belonging,  probably,  to  the  opening  of  Hezekiah's 
reign,  the  psalmist  assumes  a  bolder  tone,  and,  re- 
proving the  disobedience  of  the  Israelites  by  the 
parable  of  the  nation's  earliei-  rebellions,  sets  forth 
to  them  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  as  the  appointed 
centre  of  religious  worship,  and  the  heir  of  the 
house  of  David  as  the  sovereign  of  the  Lord's  choice. 
This  remonstrance  may  have  contributed  to  the 
partial  success  of  Hezekiah's  messages  of  invitation  to 
the  ten  tribes  of  Israel.  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  represents  the 
thanks  and  prayers  of  the  northern  pilgrims,  coming 
up,  for  the  first  time  in  two  hundred  and  fifty 
years,  to  celebrate  the  passover  in  Jerusalem : 
Ps.  Ixxxv.  may  well  be  the  thanksgiving  for  the 
happy  restoration  of  religion,  of  which  the  advent 
of  those  pilgrims  formed  part.  Ps.  Ixxvii.,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  the  lamentation  of  the  Jewish  Church 
for  the  tenible  political  calamity  which  speedily 
followed,  whereby  the  inhabitants  of  the  northern 
kingdom  were  carried  into  captivity,  and  Joseph  lost, 
the  second  time,  to  Jacob.  The  prosperity  of  Heze- 
kiah's own  reign  outweighed  the  sense  of  this  heavy 
blow,  and  nursed  the  holy  faith  whereby  the  king 
himself  in  Ps.  Ixxx^t.,  and  the  Levites  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii., 
anticipated  the  future  welcome  of  all  the  Gentiles 
into  the  Church  of  God.  Ps.  Ixxix.  (an  Asaphic 
psalm,  and  therefore  placed  with  the  others  of  like 
authiirsliip)  may  best  be  viewed  as  a  picture  of  the 
evil  days  that  followed  through  the  transgressions 
of  Manasseh.  And  in  Pss.  Ixxxviii.,  Ixxxix.  we 
have  the  pleadings  of  the  nation  with  God  under 
the  severest  trial  that  it  had  yet  experienced,  the 
aiptivity  of  its  anointed  sovereign,  and  the  apparent 
failure  of  the  promises  made  to  David  and  his 
house. 

The  captivity  of  Manasseh  himself  proved  to  be 
but  temporary ;  but  the  sentence  which  his  sins 
had  provoked  upon  Judah  and  .lerusalem  still 
remained  to  be  executed,  and  precluded  the  hope 
that  God's  salvation  could  be  revoali'il  till  after 
such  an  outpouring  of  His  judgments  as  the  nation 
never  yet  had  known.  Labour  and  sorrow  must 
be  the  lot  of  the  present  gcnei-ation  ;  through  these 
mercy  might  occasionally  gleam,  but  the  glory 
which  was  eventually  to  be  manifested  nuist  be  for 
posterity  alone.  The  psalms  of  liook  IN',  bear 
generally  the  impress  of  this  feeling.  The  Mosaic 
Psalm  xc,  Irom  whatever  aiuse  here  placed,  har- 
monizes with  it.  Pss.  .\ci.,  .xcii.  are  of  a  peaceful, 
simple,  liturgical  character;  but  in  the  series  of 
psalms    Pss.    xciii.-c,    which   foretell    the    future 


958 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


advent  of  God's  kingrdom,  the  days  of  adversity  of 
the  Chaldean  oppression  loom  in  the  foreground. 
Pss.  ci.,  ciii.,  "  of  David,"  readily  refer  them- 
selves to  Josiah  as  theii-  author;  the  foiTner  em- 
bodies his  early  resolutions  of  piety ;  the  latter 
belongs  to  the  period  of  the  solemn  renewal  of  the 
covenant  after  the  discovery  of  the  book  of  the  Law, 
and  after  the  assurance  to  Josiah  that  for  his  ten- 
derness of  heart  he  should  be  graciously  spared  from 
beholding  the  approaching  evil.  Intermediate  to 
these  in  place,  and  perhaps  in  date,  is  Ps.  cii.,  "  A 
Prayer  of  the  afflicted,"  written  by  one  who  is 
almost  entirely  wrapped  up  in  the  prospect  of  the 
impending  desolation,  though  he  recognizes  withal 
tlie  divine  favour  which  should  remotely  but 
eventually  be  manifested.  Ps.  civ.,  a  meditation  on 
the  providence  of  God,  is  itself  a  preparation  for 
that  "hiding  of  God's  face"  which  should  ensue 
ere  the  Church  were,  like  the  face  of  the  earth, 
renewed;  and  in  tlie  historical  Pss.  cv.,  evi.,  the 
one  the  story  of  God's  faitlifulness,  the  other  of  the 
people's  transgressions,  we  have  the  immediate  pre- 
lude to  the  captivity,  together  with  a  prayer  for 
eventual  deliverance  from  it. 

We  pass  to  Book  V.  Ps.  cvii.  is  the  opening 
psalm  of  the  return,  sung  probably  at  the  first 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Ezr.  iii.).  The  ensuing 
Davidic  psalms  may  well  be  ascribed  to  Zerubbabel ; 
Ps.  cviii.  (drawn  from  Pss.  Ivii.,  Ix.)  being  in 
anticipation  of  the  returning  prosperity  of  the 
Church  ;  Ps.  cix.,  a  prayer  against  the  efforts  of  the 
Samaritans  to  hinder  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple  ; 
Ps.  ex.,  a  picture  of  the  triumphs  of  the  Church  in 
the  days  of  the  future  Messiah,  whose  union  of 
royalty  and  priesthood  had  been  at  this  time  set 
forth  in  the  type  and  prophecy  of  Zech.  vi.  11-13. "^ 
Ps.  cxviii.,  with  which  Pss.  cxiv.-cxvii.  certainly, 
and  in  the  estimation  of  some  Ps.  cxiii.,  and  even 
Pss.  cxi.,  cxii.,  stand  connected,  is  the  festal  hymn 
.sung  at  the  laying  of  the  foundations  of  the 
second  Temple.  We  here  pass  over  the  questions 
connected  with  Ps.  cxi.x. ;  but  a  directly  historical 
character  belongs  to  Pss.  cxx.-cxxxiv.,  styled  in 
our  A.  v.  "  Songs  of  Degrees."  [Degrees,  Songs 
OF,  where  the  different  interpi-etations  of  tlie  He- 
brew title  are  given.]  Internal  evidence  I'efers^  these 
to  the  period  when  the  Jews  under  Nehemiah  were, 
in  the  very  fice  of  the  enemy,  repairing  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem ;  and  the  title  mny  well  signify 
"Songs  of  goings  up  (as  the  Hebrew  phrase  is) 
upon  the  walls,"  tiie  psalms  being,  from  their 
brevity,  well  adapted  to  be  sung  by  the  workmen 
and  guards  while  engaged  in  their  respective  duties. 
As  David  cannot  well  be  the  author  of  Pss.  cxxii., 
cxxiv.,  cxxxi.,  cxxxiii.,  marked  with  his  name,  so 
neither,  by  analogy,  can  Solomon  well  be  the  actual 
author  of  Ps.  cxxvii.  Th-eodoret  thinks  that  by 
"  Solomon  "  Zerubbabel  is  intended,  both  as  deriving 
his  descent  from  Solomon,  and  as  renewing  Solo- 
mon's work:  with  yet  greater  probability  we  might 
ascribe  the  psalm  to  Nehemiah.  Pss.  cxxxv., 
cxxxvi.,  by  their  ii;u'allolism  with  the  confession  of 
sins  in  Neh.  ix.,  connect  themselves  with  the 
national  fast  of  which  that  chapter  speaks.  Of 
somewhat  earlier  date,  it  may  be,  are  Ps.  cxxxvii. 
and  the  ensuing  Davidic  psalms.  Of  these, 
Ps.  cxxxix.  is  a  psalm  of  the  new  birth  of  Israel, 
from  the  womb  of  the  Babylonish  captivity,  to  a 


"-'  A  very  strong  feeling  exists  tbat  Mark  xii.  36,  &c., 
shew  Ps.  ex.  to  have  been  composed  by  David  himself.  To 
tlie  writer  of  this  article  it  appears,  that  as  our  .Saviour's 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OP 

life  of  righteousness;  Pss.  cxl.-cxliii.  may  be  a 
jiicture  of  the  trials  to  which  the  unrestored  exiles 
were  still  exposed  in  the  realms  of  the  Gentiles. 
Henceforward,  as  we  approach  the  clo.se  of  the 
Psalter,  its  strains  rise  in  cheerfulness ;  and  it 
fittingly  terminates  with  Pss.  cxlvii.-cl.,  which 
were  probably  sung  on  the  occasion  of  the  thanks- 
giving procession  of  Neh.  xii.,  after  the  rebuilding  of 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  had  been  completed. 

4.  Moral  Characterisiios  of  the  J'salnis.- — Fore- 
most among  these  meets  us,  undoubtedly,  the  uni- 
versal recourse  to  communion  with  God.  "My 
voice  is  unto  God,  and  I  will  cry"  (Ps.  l.xxvii.  1), 
might  well  stand  as  a  motto  to  the  whole  of  the 
Psalter ;  for,  whether  immersed  in  the  depths,  or 
whether  blessed  with  gi-eatness  and  comfort  on  every 
side,  it  is  to  God  that  the  psalmist's  voice  seems 
ever  to  soar  spontaneously  aloft.  Alike  in  the  wel- 
come of  present  deliverance  or  in  the  contemplation 
of  ])ast  mercies,  he  addresses  himself  straight  to  God 
as  the  object  of  his  praise.  Alike  in  the  persecutions 
of  his  enemies  and  the  desertions  of  his  friends,  in 
wretchedness  of  body  and  in  the  agonies  of  inward 
repentance,  in  the  hour  of  impending  danger  and  in 
tlie  hour  of  apparent  despair,  it  is  diiect  to  God 
that  he  utters  forth  his  supplications.  Despair,  we 
say  ;  for  such,  as  far  as  the  description  goes,  is  the 
p.'ialmist's  state  in  Ps.  l.xxxviii.  But  meanwhile  he 
is  praying;  the  apparent  impossibility  of  deliverance 
cannot  restrain  his  God-ward  voice ;  and  so  the 
very  force  of  communion  with  God  carries  him, 
almost  unawares  to  himself,  through  the  trial. 

Connected  with  this  is  the  faith  by  which  he 
everywhere  lives  in  God  rather  than  in  himself. 
God's  mercies,  God's  greatness  form  the  sphere  in 
which  his  thoughts  are  ever  moving :  even  when 
through  excess  of  affliction  reason  is  rendered  power- 
less, the  naked  contemplation  of  God's  wonders  of 
old  forms  his  effectual  support  (Ps.  Ix.xvii.). 

It  is  of  the  es.sence  of  .such  faith  that  the 
psalmist's  view  of  the  perfections  of  God  should  be 
true  and  vivid.  The  Psalter  describes  God  as  He  is: 
it  glows  with  testimonies  to  His  power  and  provi- 
dence, His  love  and  faithfulness,  His  holiness  and 
righteousness.  Correspondingly  it  testifies  against 
every  fonn  of  idol  which  men  would  substitute  in 
the  living  God's  place:  whether  it  be  the  outwai-d 
image,  the  work  of  men's  hands  (Ps.  cxv.),  or  whe- 
ther it  be  the  inw.u'd  vanity  of  earthly  comfort  or 
prosjserity,  to  be  purchased  at  the  cost  of  the 
honour  which  cometh  from  God  alone  (Ps.  iv.^. 
The  solemn  "  See  that  there  is  no  idol-way  (^11 
i^kj?)  in  me"  of  Ps.  cxxxix.,  the  striving  of  the 
heart  after  the  very  truth  and  nought  be.^ide,  is 
the  exact  anticipation  of  the  "Little  children,  keep 
yourselves  from  idols,"  of  the  loved  Apostle  in 
the  N.  T. 

The  P.salms  not  only  set  forth  the  perfections  of 
God :  they  proclaim  also  the  duty  of  worshipping 
Him  by  the  acknowledgment  and  adoration  of  His 
perfections.  They  encourage  all  outward  rites  and 
means  of  worship :  new  songs,  use  of  musical  in- 
struments of  all  kinds,  appearance  in  God's  courts, 
lifting  up  of  hands,  prostration  at  His  foot.stool, 
holy  apparel  (A.  V.  "  beauty  of  holiness  ").  Among 
tliese  lliey  recognize  the  ordinance  of  sacrifice  (Pss. 
iv.,  v.,  xxvii.,  li.)  as  an  expression  of  the  wor- 
shipper's consecration  of  himself  to  God's  sei'vice. 


argument  remains  the  same  from  whichever  of  Hisancestors 
the  psalm  proceeded,  so  His  words  do  not  necessarily  imply 
more  thiin  is  intended  in  the  superscription  of  the  psalm. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

But  not  the  less  do  they  repudiate  the  outward  rite 
when  separated  fiom  that  which  it  was  designed  to 
express  (Pss.  xl.,  Ixix.):  a  brolien  and  contrite  heart 
is,  from  errino;  man,  the  genuine  Siicritice  which 
God  requires  (Ps.  h.). 

Similar  depth  is  observable  in  the  view  taken  by 
the  psalmists  of  human  sin.  It  is  to  be  traced  not 
only  in  its  outward  manifestations,  but  also  in  the 
inward  woikings  of  the  heart  (Ps.  xxxvi.),  and  is  to 
be  primarily  ascribed  to  man's  innate  corruption 
(Pss.  li.,  Iviii.).  It  -shows  itself  alike  in  deeds,  in 
words  (Pss.  xvii.,  cxli.),  and  in  thoughts  (Ps. 
cxxxix.) ;  nor  is  even  the  believer  able  to  discern  all 
its  various  ramifications  (Ps.  xix.).  Connected  with 
this  view  of  sin  is,  on  the  one  hand,  the  picture  of 
the  utter  coiTuption  of  the  ungodly  world  (Ps.  xiv.)  ; 
on  the  other,  the  encouragement  to  geuuine  repent- 
ance, the  assurance  of  divine  forgiveness  (Ps.  xxxii.), 
and  the  trust  in  God  as  the  source  of  complete 
redemption  (Ps.  cxxx.). 

In  regard  of  the  law,  the  psalmist,  while  warmly 
acknowledging  its  excellence,  feels  yet  that  it  cannot 
so  eflectually  guide  his  own  unassisted  exertions  as 
to  preserve  him  fiom  error  (Ps.  xix.).  He  needs 
an  additional  grace  from  above,  the  grace  of  God's 
Holy  Spirit  (Ps.  li.).  But  God's  Spirit  is  also  a  free 
spirit  (lb.) :  led  by  this  he  will  discern  the  law, 
with  all  its  precepts,  to  be  no  arbitrary  rule  of 
bondage,  but  rather  a  charter  and  instrument  of 
liberty  fPs.  cxix.). 

The  Psalms  bear  repeated  testimony  to  the  duty 
of  instructing  others  in  the  wa3's  of  holiness  (Pss. 
xxxii.,  xxxiv.,  li.).  They  also  indirectly  enforce  the 
duty  of  love,  even  to  our  enemies  (Ps.  vii.  4,  xxxv. 
13,  cix.  4).  On  the  other  hand  they  imprecate,  in 
the  strongest  terms,  the  judgments  of  God  on  trans- 
gressors. Such  imprecations  are  levelled  at  trans- 
gressoi's  as  a  body,  and  are  uniformly  uttered  on 
the  hypothesis  of  their  wilful  persistence  in  evil,  in 
which  case  the  overthrow  of  the  sinner  becomes  a 
necessary  part  of  the  uprooting  of  sin.  They  are  in 
no  wise  inconsistent  with  any  efforts  to  lead  sinners 
individually  to  repentance. 

This  brings  us  to  notice,  lastly,  the  faith  of  the 
psalmists  in  a  righteous  recompense  to  all  men 
according  to  their  deeds  (Ps.  xxxvii.,  &c.).  They 
generally  expected  that  men  would  receive  such 
recompense  in  great  measure  during  their  own  life- 
time. Yet  they  felt  withal  that  it  was  not  then 
complete :  it  perpetuated  itself  to  their  children 
(Ps.  xxxvii.  25,  cix.  12,  &c.)  ;  and  thus  we  find  set 
forth  in  the  Psalms,  w;th  suthcient  distinctness, 
though  in  an  unmatured  and  consequently  imperfect 
form,  the  doctrine  of  a  retribution  after  death. 

5.  PropJietical  Character  of  the  Psalms. — The 
moral  struggle  between  godliness  and  ungodliness, 
so  vividly  depicted  in  the  Psalms,  culminates,  in 
Holy  Scripture,  in  the  life  of  tlie  Incarnate  Son  of 
(iod  upon  earth.  It  only  remains  to  show  that  the 
Psalms  themselves  definitely  anticipated  this  culmi- 
nation. Now  there  are  in  the  l's;ilter  at  least  three 
psalms  of  which  the  interest  evidently  centres  in  a 
pei-son  distinct  from  the  speaker,  and  which,  since 
they  cannot  without  violence  to  the  language  be 
interpreted  of  any  but  the  Messiah,  may  be  termed 
directly  and  exclusively  Messianic.  VVe  refer  to 
Pss.  ii.,  xlv.,  ex.;  to  which  may  perhaps  be  added 
Ps.  Ixxii. 

It  would  be  strange,  if  the.se  few  psalms  stood,  iu 
their  proplietical  signiiicance,  absolutely  alone  among 
the  I'est:  the  more  so,  imi-smuch  as  Ps.  ii.  forms 
part  of  the  preface  to  the  First  Book  of  the  Psalter, 


PSAL]MS,  BOOK  OF 


959 


and  would,  as  such,  be  entirely  out  of  place,  did  not 
its  general  theme  virtually  extend  itself  over  those 
which  follow,  in  which  the  interest  generally  centres 
in  the  figure  of  the  suppliant  or  worshipper  himself. 
And  hence  the  impossibility  of  viewing  the  psalms 
generally,  notwithstanding  the  historical  drapery  in 
which  they  are  outwardly  clothed,  as  sinijiiy  the  past 
devotions  of  the  historical  David  or  the  historical 
Israel.  Other  arguments  to  the  same  etlect  are 
furnished  by  the  idealized  representations  which 
many  of  them  present ;  by  the  outwmd  points  of 
contact  between  their  language  and  the  actual 
earthly  career  of  our  Saviour  ;  by  the  frequent 
references  made  to  them  both  by  our  Savioui-  Him- 
self and  by  the  Evangelists  ;  and  by  the  view  taken 
of  tliem  by  the  Jews,  as  evidenced  in  several  pass;iges 
of  the  Targum.  There  is  yet  another  circumstance 
well  worthy  of  note  in  its  bearing  upon  this  subject. 
Alike  in  the  earher  and  in  the  later  portions  of  the 
Psalter,  all  those  psalms  which  are  of  a  personal 
rather  than  of  a  national  character  are  marked  in 
the  superscriptions  with  the  name  of  David,  as  pro- 
ceeding either  from  David  himself  or  from  one  of 
his  descendants.  It  results  from  this,  that  while 
the  Davidic  psalms  are  partly  personal,  partly  na- 
tional, the  Levitic  psalms  are  uniformly  national. 
Exceptions  to  this  rule  exist  only  in  appearance: 
thus  Ps.  Ixxiii.,  although  couched  in  the  first  person 
singular,  is  really  a  prayer  of  the  .Tewish  faithful 
against  the  Assyrian  invaders;  and  in  Pss.  xlii., 
xliii.,  it  is  the  feelings  of  an  exiled  company  rather 
than  of  a  single  individual  to  which  utterance  is 
given.  It  thus  follows  that  it  was  only  those 
psalmists  who  were  types  of  Christ  by  external 
office  and  lineage  as  well  as  by  inward  piety,  that 
were  charged  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  set  forth  before- 
hand, in  Christ's  own  name  and  person,  the  suffer- 
ings that  awaited  him  and  the  glory  that  should 
follow.  The  national  hymns  of  Israel  are  indeed 
also  prospective ;  but  in  general  they  anticipate 
rather  the  struggles  and  the  triumphs  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  than  those  of  Christ  Himself. 

We  annex  a  list  of  the  chief  passages  in  the 
Psalms  which  are  in  anvwise  quoted  or  embodied 
in  the  N.  T. :— Ps.  ii.  l",  2,  7,  8,  9,  iv.  4,  v.  9, 
vi.  3,8,viii.  2,  4-6,  x.  7,  xiv.  1-3,  xvi.  8-11,  xviii. 
4,  49,  xix.  4,  xxii.  1,  8,  18,  22,  sxiii.  6,  xxiv.  I. 
xxxi.  5,  xxxii.  1,  2,  xxxiv.  8,  12-16,  20,  xxxv.  9, 
xxxvi.  1,  xxxvii.  11,  xl.  6-8,  xli.  9,  xliv.  22,  xlv. 
6,  7,  xlviii.  2,  li.  4,  Iv.  22,  Ixviii.  18,  ]xi.\.  4,  9, 
22,  23,  25,  Ixxv.  8,  Ixxviii.  2,  24,  Ixxxii.  6,  Ixxxvi. 
9,  Ixxxix.  20,  xc.  4,  xci.  11,12,  xcii.  7,  xciv.  11, 
xcv.  7-11,  cii.  25-27,  civ.  4,  cix.  8,  ex.  1,4,  c.\ii.  9, 
cxvi.  10,cxvii.  l,cxviii.  6,  22,  23,  25,  26,  cxxv.  5, 
cxl.  3. 

6.  Literature. — The  list  of  Jewish  commentators 
on  the  Psalter  includes  the  names  of  Saadiah  (who 
wrote  in  Arabic),  Jarchi,  Aben  Ezra,  and  Kimchi. 
Among  later  performances  that  of  Sforno  (f  15.")0) 
is  highly  spoken  of  (reprinted  in  a  Furth  Psalter 
ol'  1804);  and  special  mention  is  also  due  to  the' 
modern  German  translation  of  Mendelssohn  (f  1 786), 
to  which  again  is  appended  a  comment  by  Joel 
Bril.  In  the  Christian  Church  devotional  fami- 
liarity with  the  I'saltei-  has  rendered  tlie  number 
of  commentators  on  it  innnense ;  and  in  moilern 
times  even  the  number  of  private  translations  of  it 
has  been  so  large  as  to  preclude  enumeration  liere. 
Among  the  Greek  Fathers,  Theodoret  is  the  best 
commentator,  Chrysostom  the  best  homilist,  on  the 
Psiilms:  for  the  rest,  a  catena  of  the  <ireek  com- 
ments was  formed  by  the  Jesuit  Corderins.     In  the 


960 


rSALTEKY 


West  the  pithy  expositions  of  Hilary  and  the  ser- 
mons of  Augustine  are  the  main  patristic  helps. 
A  list  of  the  chief  mediaeval  comments,  which  are 
of  a  devotional  and  mystical  rather  than  of  a  critical 
chaiacter,  will  be  found  in  Neale's  Commentary 
(vol.  i.  1860),  which  is  mainly  derived  from  them, 
and  favourably  introduces  them  to  modem  English 
readers.  Later  Roman  Catholic  labourers  on  the 
Psalms  are  Genebrard  (1587),  Agellius  (1606), 
Bellarmine  (1617),  Lorinus  (1619),  and  De  Muis 
(1650):  the  valuable  critical  commentary  of  the 
last-named  has  been  reprinted,  accompanied  by  the 
able  preface  and  terse  aimotations  of  Bossuet. 
Among  the  Reformei-s,  of  whom  Luther,  Zwingle, 
Bucer,  and  Calvin,  all  applied  themselves  to  the 
Psalms,  Calvin  naturally  stands,  as  a  commentator, 
pre-eminent.  Of  subsequent  works  those  of  Geier 
(1668)  and  Venema  (1762,  &c.)  are  still  held  in 
some  repute ;  while  Rosenrniiller's  Scholia  give,  of 
course,  the  substance  of  others.  The  modern  Ger- 
man labourers  on  the  Psalms,  conmiencing  with 
De  Wette,  are  very  numerous.  Maui'er  shines  as 
an  elegant  grammatical  critic:  Y.^a\&  {Dichter  des 
A.  B.  i.  and  ii.)  as  a  translator.  Hengstenberg's 
Commentary  holds  a  high  place.  The  two  latest 
Commentaries  are  that  of  Hupfeld  (in  progress),  a 
work  of  high  philological  merit,  but  written  in 
strong  opposition  to  Hengstenberg,  and  from  an 
unsatisfactory  point  of  theological  view ;  and  that 
of  Delitzsch  (1859-60),  the  diligent  work  of  a 
sober-minded  theologian,  whose  previous  Symholae 
ad  Pss.  illiistr.  isagogicae  had  been  a  valuable 
contribution  to  the  external  criticism  of  the  Psalms. 
Of  English  works  we  may  mention  the  Paraphrase 
of  Hammond  ;  the  devotional  Commentary  of  Bishop 
Home,  and  along  with  this  the  unpretending  but 
useful  Plain  Commentary  recently  published  ; 
Merrick's  Annotations ;  Bishop  Horsley's  Transla- 
tion and  Notes  (1815,  posthumous);  Dr.  Mason 
Good's  Historical  Outline,  and  also  his  Translation 
with  Notes  (both  posthumous ;  distinguished  by 
taste  and  originality  rather  than  by  sound  judgment 
or  accurate  scholarship)  ;  Phillips's  Text,  with 
Commentary,  for  Hebrew  students ;  J.  Jebb's 
Literal  Tramlation  and  Dissertations  (1846); 
and  lastly  Thrupp's  Introduction  to  the  Psalms 
(1860),  to  which  the  reader  is  referred  for  a  fuller 
discassion  of  the  various  matters  treated  of  in  this 
article.  In  the  Press,  a  new  Translation,  &c.,  by 
Perowne,  of  which  specimens  have  appeared.  A 
catalogue  of  commentaries,  treatises,  and  sermons 
on  the  Psalms,  is  given  in  Darlings  Cyclop.  Biblio- 
graphica,  (subjects)  p.  374-514. 

7.  Psalter  of  Solomon. — Under  this  title  is  extant, 
in  a  Greek  translation,  a  collection  of  eighteen 
hymns,  evidently  modelled  on  the  canonical  psalms, 
breathing  Messianic  hopes,  and  forming  a  favourable 
specimen  of  the  later  popular  Jewish  literature. 
They  have  been  variously  assigned  by  critics  to  the 
times  of  the  persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
( Kwald,  Dillmann),  or  to  those  of  the  rule  of  Herod 
(  Movers,  Delitzsch).  They  may  be  found  in  the  Codex 
Pseudepigraphus  V.  T.  of  Eabricius.      [.J.  F.  T.] 

PSALTERY.  The  psaltery  was  a  stringed  in- 
strument of  music  to  accompany  the  voice.  The 
Hebrew  ^33,  nebel,  or  733,  nebel,  is  so  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  in  all  passages  where  it  occurs,  except 
in  Is.  v.  12,  xiv.  11,  xxii.  24  marg. ;  Am.  v.  23, 
vi.  5,  where  it  is  translated  viol,  following  the  Ge- 
nera Version,  which  has  viole  in  all  cases,  except 
2  Sam.  vi.  5;    1  K.  x.  12  ("psaltery")  ;  2  Esd.  x. 


PSALTERY 

22;  Ecclus.  xL  21  ("  psalterion ")  ;  Is.  xxii.  24 
("musicke");  and  Wisd.  xix.  18  ("  instrument  of 
musike ").  The  ancient  viol  was  a  si.x-stringed 
guitar.  "  Viols  had  six  strings,  and  the  position  of 
the  fingers  was  marked  on  the  finger-board  by  frets, 
as  in  the  guitars  of  the  present  day  "  (Chappell, 
Pop.  Mus.  i.  246).  In  the  Prayer  Book  version  of 
the  Psalms,  the  Hebrew  word  is  rendered  "  lute." 
This  instrument  resembled  the  guitar,  but  was  su- 
perior in  tone,  "  being  larger,  and  having  a  convex 
back,  somewhat  like  the  vertical  section  of  a  gourd, 
or  more  nearly  resembling  that  of  a  pear.  .  .  It 
had  virtually  six  strings,  because,  although  the 
number  was  eleven  or  twelve,  five,  at  least,  were 
doubled  ;  the  first  or  treble,  being  sometimes  a  single 
string.  The  head  in  which  the  pegs  to  turn  the 
strings  were  inserted,  receded  almost  at  a  right 
angle"  (Chappell,  i.  102).  These  three  instni- 
ments,  the  psaltery  or  sautry,  the  viol,  and  the  lute, 
are  frequently  associated  in  the  old  P3nglish  poets, 
and  were  clearly  instruments  resembling  each  other, 
though  still  dilferent.  Thus  in  Chaucer's  Flower 
and  Jjcaf,  337, — 

"  And  before  hem  went  minstreles  many  one. 
As  barpes,  pipes,  luta,  and  sautry," 

and  again  in  Diayton's  Polyolbion,  iv.  356: 

"  The  trembling  lute  some  touch,  some  strain  the  viol 
best." 

The  word  psaltery  in  its  present  form  appears  to 
have  been  introduced  about  the  end  of  the  16th 
century,  for  it  occurs  in  the  unmodified  form  psal- 
terion  in  two  passages  of  the  Gen.  Version  (1560). 
Again,  in  North's  Plutarch  (Them,  p.  124,  ed. 
1595)  we  read  that  Themistocles,  "  being  mocked 
...  by  some  that  had  studied  humanitie,  and  other 
liberall  sciences,  he  was  driuen  for  reuenge  and  his 
owne  defence,  to  aunswer  with  greate  and  stoutc 
words,  saying,  that  in  deed  he  could  no  skill  to  tune 
a  hai-pe,  nor  a  violl,  nor  to  play  of  a  psalterion ; 
but  if  they  did  put  a  citie  into  his  hands  that  was 
of  small  name,  weake,  and  litle,  he  knew  wayes 
enough  how  to  make  it  noble,  strong,  and  great." 
The  Greek  xf/aXr-l^piov,  from  which  our  word  is  de- 
rived, denotes  an  instrument  played  with  the  fingers 
instead  of  a  plectrum  or  quill,  the  verb  xf/dWeiv 
being  used  (Eur.  Bacch.  784),  of  twanging  the 
bowstring  (comp.  i\ia\fjLo\  tS^cov,  Eur.  Ion,  173). 
But  it  only  occurs  in  the  LXX.  as  the  rendering  of 
the  Heb.  nebel  or  nebel  in  Neh.  xii.  27,  and  Is.  v. 
12,  and  in  all  the  passages  of  the  Psalms,  except  Ps. 
Ixxi.  22  (if/aX/xSs),  and  Ps.  Ixxxi.  2  {KiOapa),  while 
in  Am.  v.  23,  vi.  5  the  general  term  upyavov  is 
employed.  In  all  other  cases  va^Ka  represents 
nebel  or  nebel.  These  various  renderings  are  suffi- 
cient to  show  that  at  the  time  the  translation  of  the 
LXX.  was  made,  there  was  no  certain  identification 
of  the  Hebrew  instrument  with  any  known  to  the 
translators.  The  rendering  i>dp\a  commends  itself 
on  account  of  the  similarity  of  the  Greek  word  with 
the  Hebrew.  Josephus  appears  to  have  regarded 
them  as  equivalent,  and  his  is  the  only  direct  evi- 
dence upon  the  point.  He  tells  us  {Ant.  vii.  12, 
§3)  that  the  ditierence  between  the  icivvpa  (Heb. 
"1133,  cinnar)  and  the  vd^Ka  was,  that  the  fonner 
had  ten  strings  and  was  played  with  the  plectrum, 
the  latter  had  twelve  notes  and  was  played  with 
the  hand.  l''orty  thousand  of  these  instruments, 
he  adds  {Ant.  viii.  3,  §8),  were  made  by  Solomon 
of  electrum  for  the  Temple  choir.  Rashi  (on  Is. 
V.  12)  s:iys  that  the  tiebcl  had  more  strings  and 


PSALTERY 

pegs  ttan  the  ciwior.  That  nabla  was  a  foreign 
name  is  evident  fioni  Stiabo  (x.  p.  471),  and  from 
Athcnaeus  (iv.  p.  175),  where  its  origin  is  said 
to  be  Sidoniaa.  Beyond  this,  and  that  it  was  a 
stringed  instrument  (Ath.  iv.  p.  175),  phiyed 
by  the  hand  (Ovid,  Art.  Am.  jii.  327),  we  know 
notliing  of  it,  but  in  these  facts  we  have  strong 
presumptive  evidence  that  nabld  and  nehel  are 
the  same;  and  that  the  nabla  and  jjsalterion  are 
identical  appears  from  the  Glossary  of  Philoxenus, 
where  nablio  =  if/dXTrfs,  and  nablizo  =  ^dWoj,  and 
from  Suidas,  who  malves  psalterion  and  nanla,  or 
nabla,  synonymous.  Of  the  Psaltei-y  among  the 
Greeks  there  appear  to  have  been  two  kinds.  The 
iTTjKTis,  which  was  of  Persian  (Athen.  xiv.  p.  636) 
or  Lydian  {ibid.  p.  635)  origin,  and  the  fiaydSis. 
The  former  had  only  two  (Athen.  iv.  p.  183)  or 
three  (ibid.)  strings  ;  the  latter  as  many  as  twenty 
(Athen.  .xiv.  p.  634).  though  sometimes  only  five 
{^ibid.  p.  637).  They  are  sometimes  said  to  be  the 
same,  and  were  evidently  of  the  same  kind.  Both 
Isidorus  (de  Origg.  iii.  21 )  and  Cassiodorus  (Praef. 
in  Psal.  c.  iv.)  describe  the  psaltery  as  triangular  in 
shape,  like  the  Greek  A,  with  the  sounding-board 
above  the  strings,  which  were  struck  downwards. 
The  latter  adds  that  it  was  played  with  a  plectium, 
so  that  he  contradicts  Josephus  if  the  psaltery  and 
nebel  are  really  the  same.  In  this  case  Josephus  is  the 
rather  to  be  trusted.  St.  Augustine  (on  Ps.  xxxii. 
[xxxiii.]  )  makes  the  position  of  the  sounding-board 
the  point  in  which  the  cithara  and  p<alteiy  differ ; 
in  the  former  it  is  below,  in  the  latter  above  the 
strings.  His  language  implies  that  both  were  played 
with  the  plectrum.  The  distinction  between  the 
cithara  and  psaltery  is  observed  by  Jerome  {Prol. 
in  Psal.').  From  these  conflicting  accounts  it  is 
impossible  to  say  positively  with  what  instrument 
the  nebel  of  the  Hebrew  exactly  corresponded.  It 
was  probably  of  various  kinds,  as  Kimchi  says  in 
his  note  on  Is.  xxii.  24,  dilfering  from  each  other 
both  with  regard  to  the  position  of  the  pegs  and 
the  number  of  the  strings.  In  illustration  of  the 
descriptions  of  Isidorus  and  Cassiodorus  reference 
may  be  made  to  the  diawings  from  Egyptian  mu- 
sical instruments  given  by  Sir  Gard.  Wilkinson 
{Anc.  Eg.  ii.  280,  287),  some  one  of  which  may 
correspond  to  the  Hebrew  nebel.^  Munk  {Palestine, 
plate  16,  figs.  12,  13)  gives  an  engi'aving  of  an 
instrument  which  Niebuhr  saw.  Its  form  is  that 
of  an  inverted  delta  placed  upon  a  i  ound  box  of  wood 
covered  with  skin. 

The  7iebel  'asor  (Ps.  xxxiii.  2,  xcii.  3  [4],  cxliv.  9) 
appeal's  to  have  been  an  instrument  of  the  psaltery 
kind  which  had  ten  strings,  and  was  of  a  trapezium 
shape,  according  to  some  accounts  (Forkel,  Gesch.  d. 
Mus.  i.  1 33).  Aben  Ezra  fon  Ps.  cl.  3)  says  the  nebel 
had  ten  holes.  So  that  ho  must  have  considered  it 
to  be  a  kind  of  pipe. 

From  the  fact  that  ncbcl  in  llpbrew  also  signifies  a 
wine-bottle  or  skin,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  the 
term  wlien  applied  to  a  musical  instrument  denotes 
a  kind  of  bagpipe,  the  old  \in%\\A\  cornamutc,  Fi'. 
cornemuse,  but  it  seems  clear,  whatever  else  may  be 
obscure  concerning  it,  that  the  nebel  was  a  stringal 
instrument,  in  the  Mishna  (Celim,  xvi.  7)  mention  is 
made  of  a  ca<o  (p^n  =  d-fiKi))  in  which  it  was  kept. 

Its  first  appearance  in  tlie  history  of  the  O.  T.  is 
in  connexion  with  tlie  "string"  of  prophets  who 


PTOLEMEE 


9H1 


"  Abraham  de  I'orta-Lcono,  the  author  of  .SAi/Je  Haggih- 
borim  (c.  5)  identifies  the  nebel  with  the  Ilaliau  liulo,  the 
lute,  or  rather  with  the  particular  kind  called  lii'to  cliitor- 
VOI,.  II. 


met  Saul  as  they  came  down  fi-om  the  high  place 
(1  Sam.  X.  5).  Here  it  is  clearlv  used  in  a  relit;ious 
service,  as  again  (2  Sam.  vi.  5;  1  Chr.  xiii'!  8), 
when  David  brought  the  ark  fiom  Kirjath-jearim. 
In  the  temple  band  organized  by  David  were  the 
players  on  psalteries  (1  Clir.  xv.  16,  20),  who  ac- 
companied the  ark  from  the  house  of  Obed-edom 
(1  Chr.  XV.  28).  They  played  when  the  ark  was 
brought  into  the  temple  (2  Chr.  v.  12);  at  the 
thanksgiving  for  Jehoshaphat's  victory  (2  Chr.  xx. 
28)  ;  at  the  restoration  of  the  temple  under  Heze- 
kiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25),  and  the  dedication  of  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem  after  they  were  rebuilt  by  Ne- 
hemiah  (Neh.  xii.  27).  In  all  these  cases,  and  in 
the  passages  in  the  Psalms  where  allusion  is  made 
to  it,  tlie  psaltery  is  associated  with  religious  ser- 
vice? (comp.  Am.  v.  23  ;  2  Esdr.  x.  22).  But  it 
had  its  part  also  in  private  festivities,  as  is  evident 
from  Is.  v.  12,  xiv.  11,  xxii.  24;  Am.  vi.  5,  where 
it  is  associated  with  banquets  and  luxurious  in- 
dulgence. It  appears  (Is.  .xiv.  11)  to  have  had  a 
soft  plaintive  note. 

The  psalteries  of  David  were  made  of  cypress 
(2  Sam.  vi.  5),  those  of  Solomon  of  algum  or 
almug-trees  (2  Chr.  ix.  11).  Among  the  instru- 
ments of  the  baud  which  played  before  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's golden  image  on  the  plains  of  Dura,  we 
again  meet  with  the  psaltery  (P"in3DQ,  Dan.  iii. 
5,  10,  15;    |nD3D3,  p&anienn). '  The  Chaldee 

word  appears  to  be  merely  a  modification  of  the 
Greek  ^a\T'f]piov.  Attention  is  called  to  the  fact 
that  the  word  is  singular  in  Gesenius  {Thes.  p. 
1116),  the  tei-mination  ^  .  corresponding  to  the 
Greek  -lov.  '  [W.  A.  W.] 

PTOL'EMEE  and  PTOLEIVIE'US  (nroXe- 
/jidios:  Ptolemaeus).  1.  "The  son  of  Dorymenes" 
(1  Mace.  iii.  38 ;  2  Mace.  iv.  45  ;  comp.  Polyb. 
V.  61),  a  courtier  who  possessed  great  influence 
with  Antiochus  Epiph.  He  was  induced  by  a 
bribe  to  support  the  cause  of  Menelaus  (2  Mace, 
iv.  45-50)  ;  and  afterwards  took  au  active  part 
in  forcing  the  Jews  to  apostatize  (2  Mace.  vi.  8, 
according  to  the  true  reading).  When  Judas  had 
successfully  resisted  the  first  assaults  of  the  Syrians, 
Ptolemy  took  part  in  the  great  expedition  which 
Lysias  organized  against  him,  which  ended  in  the 
defeat  at  Emmaus  (B.C.  166),  but  nothing  is  said 
of  his  personal  fortunes  in  the  campaign  (1  Mace, 
iii.  38). 

2.  The  son  of  Agesarchus  (Ath.  vi.  p.  246  C), 
a  Slegalopolitan,  surnamed  Macron  (2  Mace.  x.  12), 
who  was  governor  of  Cyprus  during  the  minority 
of  Ptol.  Philometor.  This  office  he  discharged 
with  singular  fidelity  (Polyb.  xxvii.  12);  but  after- 
wards he  deserted  the  Egyptian  service  to  join  An- 
tiochus Epiph.  He  stood  high  in  tlie  favour  of 
Antiochus,  and  received  from  him  the  government 
of  Phoenicia  and  Coele-Syria  (2  Mace.  viii.  8,  x. 
11,  12).  On  the  accession  of  Ant.  Eupator,  his 
conciliatory  policy  towards  the  Jews  brought  him 
into  suspicion  at  court.  He  was  deprived  of  his 
government,  and  in  consequence  of  this  disgrace  he 
poisoned  himself  c.  B.C.  164  (2  Mace.  x.  13). 

Ptol.  Macron  is  commonly  identified  \|ith  Ptol. 
"  the  son  of  Dorymenes,"  and  it  seems  likely  from  a 
comparison  of  1  Mace.  iii.  38  with  2  Mace.  viii.  8,  9, 


ronato  (the  Germ,  mandoline),  the  thirteen  strings  of  whicli 
were  of  gut  or  sinew,  imd  were  struck  with  n  quill. 

3  Q 


962 


PT0LEMAEU8 


that  they  were  confused  in  the  popular  account  of 
the  war.  But  the  testimony  of  Athenaeus  dis- 
tinctly separates  the  go\-eriior  of  Cyprus  fi'om  "  the 
son  of  Dorymenes"  by  his  parentage.  It  is  also 
doubtful  whether  Ptol.  Macron  had  left  Cyprus  as 
early  as  B.C.  170,  when  "the  son  of  Dorymenes" 
was  at  Tyre  (2  Mace.  iv.  4.5),  though  there  is  no 
authority  for  the  common  statement  that  he  gave 
up  the  island  into  the  hands  of  Antiochus,  who  did 
not  gain  it  till  B.C.  168. 

3.  The  son  of  Abubus,  who  married  the  daughter 
of  Simon  the  Jlaccabee.  He  was  a  man  of  i^reat 
wealth,  and  being  invested  with  the  government  of 
the  district  of  Jericho,  formed  the  design  of  usurp- 
ing the  sovereignty  of  Judaea.  With  this  view  he 
treacherously  murdered  Simon  and  two  of  his  sons 
( I  Mace.  xvi.  11-16  ;  Joseph.  Ani.  xiii.  7,  §4f  8, 
§1,  with  some  variations)  ;  but  Johannes  Hyicanus 
received  timely  intimation  of  his  design,  and  escaped. 
Hyrcanus  afterwards  besieged  him  in  his  strong- 
hold of  Dok,  but  in  consequence  of  the  occurrence 
of  the  Sabbatical  year,  he  was  enabled  to  make  his 
escape  to  Zeno  Cotylas  prince  of  Philadelphia 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  8,'§1). 

4.  A  citizen  of  .Jerusalem,  father  of  Lysimachus, 
the  Greek  translator  of  Hlsther  (Esth.  xiii.).  [Lysi- 
MACHOS  1.]  [B.  F.  W.] 


PTOI.EMAEUS 

PTOLEMAE'US  (in  A.  V.  PTOL'OMEE 
and  PTOLEME'US— nToA6Moros,  "  the  war- 
like," 7rT6Xefj.os  =  iT6\efJ.os),  the  d3'na.stic  name  of 
the  Greek  kings  of  Egypt.  The  name,  which  occurs 
in  early  legends  (11.  iv.  228;  Paus.  x.  5),  appears 
first  in  the  historic  period  in  the  time  of  Alexander 
the  Great,  and  became  afterwards  very  frequent 
among  the  states  which  arose  out  of  his  con- 
quests. 

For  the  civil  history  of  the  Ptolemies  the  student 
will  find  ample  references  to  the  original  authorities 
in  the  articles  in  t]\^  Dictionary  of  Biography ,\\. 
581,  &c.,  and  in  Pauly's  Real-Encyclopddie. 

The  literature  of  the  subject  in  its  religious 
aspects  has  been  already  noticed.  [Alex.\xdria  ; 
Dispersion.]  A  curious  account  of  the  literary 
activity  of  Ptol.  Philadelphus  is  given — by  Simon 
de  Magistris — in  the  Apologia  sent.  Pat.  de  LXX. 
Vers.,  appended  to  Daniel  sec.  LXX.  (Roraae, 
1772),  but  this  is  not  always  trustworthy.  More 
coniplete  details  of  the  history  of  the  Alexandrine 
Libraries  are  given  by  Ritschl,  Die  Alexandrinischen 
Bihliotheken,  Breslau,  1838;  and  Pai'they,  Das 
Alexandr.  Museum,  Berlin,  1838. 

The  following  table  gives  the  descent  of  the 
royal  line  as  far  as  it  is  connected  with  BibliGil 
history.  [B.  F.  W.] 


GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OF  THE  PTOLEMIES. 


1.  Ptolemaeus  I.  SoTER  (son  of  Lagus),  c.  B.C.  323-2R5. 


Arsinoe^2.  Ptol.  11.  PHiLADELPmjs  (B.C.  285-247)  =  3.  Arsinoe. 
I 


4.   PrOI,.  III.  EUERGKTES  1.  (B.C.  247-222). 
I 


5.  Bei-enire  — Antii.iclins  [I. 


6.  Ptol.  IV.  PmLOPATOB  (B.C.  222-205)  =  7.  Arsinoe. 


8.  ProL.  V.  Epiphanes  (b.c'.  205-181)  =  Cleopatra  (d.  of  Antiochus  M.). 


9.  Ptol.  VI.  PmLOMETOR 

(B.C.  181-146), 
=  Cleopatra  (11). 


10.  Ptol.  VII.  EcERGETES  II.  (Physcon)  =  1 1 .  Cleopatra. 

(B.C.  171-146-117)  =  (2)  Cleopatra  (14). 


I  I  I 

(12)  Cleopatra,  13.  Ptol.  Eupator.  14.  Cleopatra. 

=  Alex.  Balas. 
:=  Demetrius  II. 


15.  Ptol.  VIIL  Sotep.  H. 
(B.C.  117-81). 


PTOLEMAE'US  I.  SOTEE,  known  as  the 
son  of  Lagus,  a  Macedonia!!  of  low  rank,  was  geue- 
rally  supposed  to  have  been  an  illegitimate  son  of 
Philip.  He  distinguished  himself  greatly  during 
the  campaigns  of  Ale.xander ;  at  whose  death,  fore- 
seeing the  necessary  subdivision  of  the  empire,  he 
secured  for  himself  the  government  of  Egypt,  where 
he  proceeded  at  once  to  lay  the  foundations  of  a 
kingdom  (B.C.  323).  His  policy  during  the  wars 
of  the  succession  was  mainly  directetl  towards  the 
consolidation  of  his  power,  and  not  to  wide  con- 
quests. He  maintained  himself  against  the  attacks 
of  Perdiccas  (B.C.  321),  and  Demetrius  (B.C.  312), 
and  gained  a  precarious  footing  in  Sjn-ia  and  Phoe- 
nicia. In  B.C.  307  he  suffered  a  very  severe  defeat 
at  sea  off  Cyprus  from  Antigonus,  but  successfully 
defended  Egypt  against  invasion.  After  the  final 
defeat  of  Antigonus,  B.C.  301,  he  was  obliged  to 
concede  the  debateable  provinces  of  Phoenicia  and 
Coele-.'^yria  to  Selencus  ;  and  during  the  remainder 


of  his  reign  his  only  important  achievement  abroad 
was  the  recovery  of  Cyprus,  which  he  permanently 
attached  to  the  Egyptian  monarchy  (B.C.  295). 
He  abdicated  in  favour  of  his  youngest  son  Ptol.  II. 
Philadelphus,  two  years  before  his  death,  which 
took  place  in  B.C.  283. 

Ptol.  Soter  is  described  very  briefly  in  Daniel 
(xi.  5)  as  one  of  those  who  should  receive  part  of 
the  empire  of  Alexander  when  it  was  "  divided  to- 
ward the  four  winds  of  heaven."  "  The  king  of 
tlie  south  [Egypt  in  respect  of  Judaea]  shall  be 
strong  ;  and  one  of  his  princes  [Seleucus  Nicator, 
shall  be  strong]  ;  and  he  [Seleucus]  sh<ill  be  strong 
above  him  [Ptolemy],  and  have  dominion."  Seleu- 
cus, who  is  here  mentioned,  fled  from  Babylon,  where 
Antigonus  sought  his  life,  to  Egypt  in  B.C.  316,  and 
attached  himself  to  Ptolemy.  At  last  the  decisive 
victory  of  Ipsus  (B.C.  301;,  which  was  mainly 
gained  by  his  services,  gave  him  tlie  command  of 
an  empire  which  was  greater  than  any  other  held 


PTOLEMAEUS 

by  Alexander's  successors ;  and  "  his  dominion  wat: 
a  great  dominion"  (Dan.  I.  c.)." 

In  one  of  his  expeditions  into  Syria,  probably 
B.C.  320,  Ptolemy  treacherously  occupied  Jerusalem 
on  the  b'abbath,  a  tact  which  an-ested  the  attention 
of  the  heathen  historian  Agathaicides  (jip.  Jo>eiih. 
c.  Ap.  i.  22  ;  Ant.  xii.  1).  He  carried  away  many 
.Jews  and  Samaritans  captive  to  Alexandria ;  but, 
aware  probably  of  the  great  importance  of  the  good 
will  of  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine  in  the  event  of 
a  Syrian  war,  he  gave  them  the  full  privileges  of 
citizenship  in  the  new  city.  In  the  campaign  of 
Gaza  (B.C.  312)  he  reaped  the  fruits  of  his  libeial 
policy  ;  and  many  Jews  voluntarily  emigrated  to 
Egypt,  though  the  colony  was  from  the  first  dis 
turbed  by  internal  dissensions  (Joseph,  as  above  ; 
Hecat.  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  1.  c).  [B.  F.  W.] 


PTOLEMAEUS 


963 


Ptolemy  I.,  King  of  Egypt. 
Peutadrachra  of  Ptolemy  I.   (Alexandrian  talent).      Obv.   Head 
of   king,  r.  f.,   bound  with  fillet.      Rev.    IIIOAEMAIOY 
SflTHPOS.    Eagle,  1.,  on  tlimideibolt.    {Struck  at  Tyre.) 

PTOLEMAEUS  II.  PHILADEL'PHUS, 

the  youngest  son  of  Ptol.  I.,  was  made  liiiig  two 
years  before  his  death,  to  confiiin  the  irregular  suc- 
cession. The  conflict  between  Egypt  and  Syiia  was 
renewed  during  his  reign  in  consequence  of  the  in- 
trigue of  his  half-brother  Magas.  "  But  in  the  end 
of  years  they  [the  kings  of  Syria  and  Egypt]  jo«nec/ 
themselves  together  [in  friendship].  For  the  kinifs 
daughter  of  the  south  [Berenice,  the  daughter  of 
Ptol.  Philadelphus]  came  [as  bride]  to  the  king  of 
the  north  [.^ntiochus  II.],  to  make  an  agreement" 
(Dan.  xi.  6).  The  unhappy  issue  of  this  man'iage 
has  been  noticed  already  [AntiuCHUS  II.,  vol.  i. 
p.  74]  ;  and  the  political  events  of  the  reign  of  Pto- 
lemy, who,  however,  retained  possession  of  the  dis- 
puted provinces  of  Phoenicia  and  Coele-Syiia,  offer 
no  further  points  of  interest  in  connexion  with 
Jewish  history. 

In  other  respects,  however,  this  reign  was  a 
critical  epoch  for  the  development  of  Judaism,  as  it 
was  for  the  intellectual  history  of  the  ancient  world. 
The  liberal  encouragement  whicli  Ptolemy  bestowed 
on  literature  and  science  (following  out  in  this  the 
designs  of  his  father)  gave  birth  to  a  new  school 
of  writers  and  thinkers.  The  critical  faculty  was 
called  forth  in  place  of  the  creative,  and  learning  in 
some  sense  supplied  the  place  of  original  speculation. 
Eclecticism  was  the  necessary  result  of  the  con- 
currence and  comparison  of  dogmas ;  and  it  was 
impossible  that  the  Jew,  who  was  now  become  as 
true  a  citizen  of  tlie  world  as  the  (ireek,  should 
remain  passive  in  the  conflict  of  opinions.  The 
oriirin  and  influence  of  the  translation  of  the  LXX. 
will  be  considered  in  another  place.  [Septuagint.] 
It  is  enough  now  to  observe  the  greatness  of  the 
consequences  involved  in  the  union  of  Greek  lan- 

»  Jerome  (ad  Dan.  1.  c.)  very  stranccly  refers  the  latter 
clauses  of  the  verse  to  I'lol.  I'liiUuielplms,  "whose  rniph'o 
;iurpassc<l  that  of  his  father."     The  whole  touur  of  tlif 


euage  with  Jewish  thought.  From  this  time  the 
Jew  was  familiarized  with  the  great  types  of 
Western  iiteiature,  and  in  some  degree  aimed  at 
imitating  them.  Ezechiel  (o  rwv  'lovdaiK&v  rpa- 
ycxjSiciv  TToiriTiis,  Clem.  Ale.x.  Str.  i.  23,  §155) 
wrote  a  drama  on  the  subject  of  the  Exodus,  of 
which  considerable  fragments,  in  fair  iambic  verse, 
remain  (Euseb.  Praep.  En.  ix.  28,  29  ;  Clem.  Alex. 
I.  c),  though  he  does  not  appear  to  have  adhered 
strictly  to  the  laws  of  classical  composition.  An 
elder  Philo  celebrated  Jerusalem  in  a  long  hexameter 
poem — Eusebius  quotes  the  14th  book — of  which 
the  few  corrupt  lines  still  preserved  (Euseb.  Praep. 
Ev.  ix.  20,  24,  28)  convey  no  satisfactoiy  notion. 
Another  epic  poem,  "on  the  Jews,"  was  written 
by  Theodotus,  and  as  the  extant  passages  (Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  ix.  22)  treat  of  the  history  of  Sichem, 
it  has  been  conjectured  that  he  was  a  Samaritan. 
The  work  of  Aristobltlus  on  the  interpretation  of 
the  Law  was  a  still  more  important  result  of  the 
combination  of  the  old  faith  with  Greek  cultuie,  as 
forming  the  groundwork  of  later  allegories.  And 
while  the  Jews  appropriated  the  fruits  of  Western 
science,  the  Gieeks  looked  towards  the  East  with  a 
new  curiosity.  The  histories  of  Berosus  and  JManetho 
and  Hocataeus  opened  a  woild  as  wide  and  novel  as 
the  conquests  of  Alexander.  Tli.e  legendary  sibyls 
were  tat^ght  to  speak  in  the  language  of  the  prophets. 
The  name  of  Orpheus,  which  was  connected  with  the 
first  rise  of  Greek  polytheism,  gave  sanction  to  verses 
which  set  forth  nobler  views  of  the  Godhead  (Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  xiii.  12,  &C.).  Even  the  most  famous 
poets  were  not  free  from  interpolation  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  iv.  2d7,note).  Everywhere  the  intellectual 
approximation  of  Jew  and  Gentile  was  growing 
closer,  or  at  least  more  possible.  The  later  specific 
forms  of  teaching  to  which  this  syncretism  of  East 
antl  West  gave  rise  have  been  already  noticed. 
[Alexandria,  vol.  i.  pp.  47,  8.]  A  second  time 
and  in  a  new  fashion  Egypt  disciplined  a  people  of 
God.  It  first  impressed  upon  a  nation  the  firm 
unity  of  a  family,  and  then  in  due  time  reconnected 
a  matured  people  with  the  world  from  which  it 
had  been  called  out.  [B.  F.  W.] 


Ptolemy  11. 
Octodrachm  of  Ptolemy  II.    Obv.   AAEA*fiN.     Busts  of  Pto- 
lemy II.  and  Arsinoe,  r.     Rev.  ©EflN.    Busts  of  Ptolemy  I. 
atid  Berenice,  r. 

PTOLEMAEUS  III.  EUER'GETES  was 

the  eldest  son  of  Ptol.  Philad.  and  brotlier  of  Bere- 
nice the  wife  of  Antiochus  II.  The  repudiation  and 
murder  of  his  sister  furnished  him  with  an  occasion 
for  invading  Syria  (c.  B.C.  24G).  He  "s^oorf  up,  n 
branch  out  of  her  stock  [sprung  from  the  same  pa- 
rents] in  his  [father's]  estate ;  and  set  himself  at 
[the  head  of]  his  army,  and  came  against  the  for- 
tresses of  the  king  of  the  north  [Antiochus],  end  dealt 


passage  requires  the  contrast  of  the  two  kingdoms  on 
which  the  fortunes  of  Judaea  hung. 

3  Q  2 


D64 


PTOLHMAEUS 


ayaiiist  them  and  prevailed  "  (Dan.  .\i.  7).  He  ex- 
tended his  conquests  as  tar  as  Antioch,  and  then 
eastwards  to  Babylon,  but  was  recalled  to  Kgypt  by 
tidings  of  seditions  which  had  broken  out  there.  His 
success  was  brilHant  and  complete.  "  He  carried  cap- 
tive into  Egypt  the  gods  [of  the  conquered  nations] 
with  their  molten  images,  and  icith  their  precious 
vessels  of  silver  and  gold"  (Dan.  xi.8).  This  axpture 
of  sacred  trophies,  which  included  the  recovery  of 
images  taken  from  Egypt  by  Cainbyses  (Jerome, 
ad  foe),  earned  for  the  king  the  name  Eiiergetes — 
"  Benefactor  "—  from  the  superstitious  Egyptians, 
and  was  specially  recorded  in  the  inscriptions  which 
he  set  up  at  Adule  in  memory  of  his  achievements 
(Cosmas  Ind.  ap.  Clint.  F.  H.  382  n).  After  his 
return  to  Egypt  (cir.  B.C.  243)  he  sufl'ered  a  great 
part  of  the  conquered  provinces  to  fall  again  under 
the  power  of  Seleucus.  But  the  attempts  which  Se- 
leucus  made  to  attack  Egypt  teniiinated  disastrously 
to  himself.  He  first  collected  a  fleet  which  was  almost 
totally  destroyed  by  a  storm  ;  and  then,  "  as  if  by 
some  judicial  infatuation,"  "  he  came  against  the 
realm  of  the  king  of  the  south  and  [being  defeated] 
returned  to  his  oini  land  [to  Antioch]  "  (Dan.  xi.  9  ; 
Justin,  xxvii.  2).  After  this  Ftolew.y  "  desisted 
some  years  from  [attacking]  the  king  of  the  north  " 
(Dan.  .xi.  8),  since  the  civil  war  between  Seleucus 
and  Antiochus  Hierax,  which  he  fomented,  seciu-ed 
him  fi'om  any  farther  Syrian  invasion.  The  re- 
mainder of  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  seems  to  have  been 
spent  chiefly  in  developing  the  resources  of  the  em- 
pire, which  he  raised  to  the  highest  pitch  of  its 
prosperity.  His  policy  towards  the  Jews  was 
similar  to  that  of  his  predecessors,  and  on  his  occu- 
pation of  Syria  he  "  offered  sacrifices,  after  the 
custom  of  tlie  Law,  in  acknowledgment  of  his  suc- 
cess, in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  added  gifts 
worthy  of  his  victory"  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  5;.  The 
famous  story  of  the  manner  in  which  Joseph  the 
son  of  Tobias  obtained  fiom  him  the  lease  of  the 
revenues  of  .ludaea  is  a  striking  illustration  both  of 
the  condition  of  the  country  and  of  the  influence  of 
individual  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4).     [Onias.] 

[B.  F.  \V.] 


Ptoloiuy  HI. 
Octodrachm  of  Ptolemy  III.    (Egyiitian   talent).      Obv.    Bust  of 
king,  r.,  \ve.iringr  rndiate  diadem,  and  carrying  trident.     Rev- 
BASIAEliS  IITOAEMAIOY.     Kadiate  cornucopia. 

PTOLEMAE'US    IV.     PHILOPA'TOR. 

After  the  death  of  Ptol.  Euergetas  the  line  of  the 
Ptolemies  rapidly  degenerated  (Strabo,  xvi.  12,  13, 
p.  798).  Ptol.  Philopator,  his  eldest  son,  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  was  to  the  last  degree  sensual,  eflemi- 
nate,  and  debased.  But  externally  liis  kingdom 
retained  its  power  and  .splendour ;  and  wlien  cir- 
cumstances forced  him  to  action,  Ptolemy  himself 
showed  ability  not  unworthy  of  his  race.  The  de- 
scription of  the  campaign  of  iiaphia  (B.C.  217)  in 
the  Book  of  Daniel  gives  a  vivid  description  of  liis 

•  .Jerome  (ad  Dan.  xi.  14)  places  the  flight  of  Onias  to 
KgVlif  anil  the  foundation  of  the  temple  of  l.oontnpnlis  in 


PTOLEMAEUS 

character.  "  The  sons  of  Seleucus  [Seleucus  Ce- 
I'aunus  and  Antiochus  the  Great]  were  stirred  vp 
and  assembled  a  multitude  of  great  forces  ;  and  one 
of  them  [Antiochus]  came  and  overflowed  and 
passed  through  [even  to  Pelusium:  Polyb.  v.  62]  ; 
and  he  returned  [from  Seleucia,  to  which  lie  had 
retired  during  a  faithless  truce :  Polyb.  v.  6()]  ; 
and  theg  [Antiochus  and  Ptolemy]  were  stirred  up 
[in  war]  even  to  his  [Antiochus']  fortress.  And 
the  king  of  the  south  [Ptol.  Philopator]  was  moved 
with  choler,  and  came  firth  and  fought  with  him 
[at  Raphia]  ;  and  he  set  forth  a  great  mtdtitude ; 
and  the  multitude  was  given  into  his  hand  [to  lead 
to  battle] .  And  the  multitude  raised  itself  [})roudly 
for  the  conflict],  and  his  heart  was  lifted  vp,  and 
he  cast  down  ten  thousands  (cf.  Polyb.  v.  86);  but 
he  ions  not  vigorous"  [to  reap  the  fruits  of  his  vic- 
tory] (Dan.  .xi.  10-12;  cf.  3  Mace.  i.  1-5).  After 
this  decisive  success  Ptol.  Philopator  visited  tlie 
neighbouring  cities  of  Syria,  and  among  others 
Jerusalem.  After  oflering  sacrifices  of  thanksgiving 
in  the  Temple  he  •■ittempted  to  enter  the  sanctuary. 


Tetrartrachm  of  Ptolemy  IV.  (Eg^•ptinn  talent)  Obv.  Bu.^t  ol 
king,  r  .  bound  with  fillet.  Rev.  IITOAEM.^IOY  >HAO- 
IIATOP02.     Eagle,  1.,  on  thunderbolt.     (Struck  at  Tyre.) 

A  sudden  paralysis  hindered  his  design;  but  when 
he  returned  to  Alexandria  he  determined  to  inflict 
on  the  Alexandrine  Jews  the  vengeance  for  his  dis- 
appointment. In  this,  however,  he  was  again  hin- 
dered ;  and  eventually  he  confirmed  to  them  the 
full  privileges  which  they  had  enjoyeil  before. 
[3  jMaccabees.]  The  recklessness  of  his  reign 
was  further  marked  by  the  first  insurrection  of  tlie 
native  Egyptians  against  their  Oreek  rulers  (Polyb. 
V.  107).  This  was  put  down,  and  Ptolemy,  during 
the  rem.ainder  of  his  life,  gave  himself  up  to  un- 
bridled excesses.  He  died  B.C.  205,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  only  child,  Ptol.  V.  Epiphanes,  who 
was  at  the  time  only  four  or  five  years  old  (Jerome, 
^(c/i)rm.  .xi.  10-12).  [B.  F.  W.] 

PTOLEMAE'US  V.  EPIPH'ANES.    The 

reign  of  Ptol.  Epiphanes  was  a  critical  epoch  in  the 
history  of  the  Jews.  The  rivalry  between  the 
Syrian  and  Egyptian  parties,  which  had  for  some 
time  divided  the  people,  came  to  an  open  rupture 
in  the  struggles  which  marked  his  minority.  The 
.Syrian  faction  openly  declared  for  Antiochus  the 
Great,  when  he  advanced  ou  his  second  expedition 
against  Egypt ;  and  the  Jews,  who  remained  faith- 
ful to  the. old  alliance,  fled  to  Egypt  in  gre.at  num- 
bers, where  Onias,  the  rightful  successor  to  the 
high-priesthood,  not  long  afterwards  established  the 
temple  at  Leontopolis.a  [OiSiiAS.]  In  the  strong 
language  of  Daniel,  "  llie  robbers  of  the  people 
exalted  themselves  to  establish  the  vision"  (Dan. 
xi.  14) — to  confirm  by  the  issue  of  their  attempt 
the  truth  of  the  ])roplietic  word,  and  at  the  same 

the  reign  of  Ptol.  Epiphanes.  But  Onias  was  slill  a  yontb 
at  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  cir.  b.c.  171. 


PTOLEMAEUS 

time  to  I'urward  unconsciously  the  cslnbli^hment 
of  the  heaveuly  kingdom  whicli  they  sought  to 
anticipate.  'I'he  accession  of  Ptolemy  and  the  con- 
fusion of  a  disputed  regency  furnished  a  favourable 
opportunity  for  foreign  invasion.  "  Mami  stood  up 
a:jainst  the  kinq  of  the  south,"  under  Antiochus  the 
Great  and  I'hilip  III.  of  ^lacedonia,  who  formed  a 
league  for  the  dismemberment  of  his  kingdom.  "  So 
the  king  of  the  north  [Antiochus]  came,  and  cast 
up  a  mount,  and  took  the  most  fenced  citi/  [Sidon, 
to  which  Scopas,  the  general  oi'  Ptolemy,  had  fled: 
Jerome,  adloc.'],  and  the  arms  of  the  south  did  not 
withstand"  [at  Paneas,  B.C.  198,  where  Antiochus 
gained  a  decisive  victory]  (Dan.  xi.  14-,  15).  The 
interference  ot  the  Uonians,  to  whom  the  regents 
had  turned  for  help,  checked  Antiochus  in  his 
career  ;  but  in  order  to  retain  the  piovinces  of  Coele- 
Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Judaea,  which  he  had  recon- 
quered, really  under  his  power,  while  he  seemed 
to  comply  with  the  demands  of  the  liomnns,  who 
required  them  to  be  surrendered  to  Ptolemv,  "he 
(jnve  him  [Ptolemy,  his  daughter  Cleopatra]  a  young 
maiden"  [as  his  betrothed  wife]  (Dan.  x\.  17). 
But  in  the  end  his  policy  only  partially  succeeded. 
After  the  marriage  of  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra  was 
consummated  (li.C.  193),  Cleopatra  did  "  not  stand 
on  his  side,''  but  supported  her  husband  in  main- 
taining the  alliance  with  Kome.  The  disputed  pro- 
vinces, liowever,  remained  in  the  possession  of  An- 
tiochus ;  and  Ptolemy  was  poisoned  at  the  time 
when  he  was  preparing  an  expedition  to  recover 
them  from  Seleucus,  the  unworthy  successor  of 
Antiochus,  B.C.  181.  [B.  F.  W.] 


PTOLEMAEUS 


065 


Tcti-ailracliin  of  I'tolemy  V.  (Egj-ptian  talent).  Obv.  Rust  of  king, 
r.,  bnunrt  with  fillet  ailonicd  with  ears  of  wheat.  Rev. 
B.\2IAEnS  nTOAEM.\IOY.    Eagle,  I.,  on  thunderbolt 

PTOLEMAE'US    VI.     PHILOME'TOR. 

On  the  death  of  Ptol.  Epiphanes,  his  wife  (Cleopatra 
held  the  regency  for  her  young  son,  Ptol.  Philo- 
metor,  and  preserved  peace  with  Syria  till  she  died, 
B.C.  173.  The  government  then  fell  into  unworthy 
hands,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  recover  Syria 
(couip.  2  Mace.  iv.  21).  .\ntiochus  Epiphanes  seems 
to  have  made  the  claim  a  pretext  for  invading 
l']gypt.  The  generals  of  Ptolemy  were  defeated 
near  Pelusium,  probably  at  tlie  close  of  B.C.  171 
(^Clinton,  /■'.  IT.  iii.  :'A9 ;  1  .Mace.  i.  1(3  tf.);  and 
in  the  next  year  .\ntiochus,  having  secured  the  per- 
son of  tlie  young  king,  reduced  almost  the  wliole  of 
Egypt  (comp.  2  jMacc.  v.  1 ).  Meanwhile  Ptol.  Eiier- 
getes  II.,  the  younger  brother  of  I'tol.  Philometor, 
assumed  the  supreme  power  at  Alexandria;  and 
.\ntiochus,  under  the  pretext  of  recovering  the 
uown  for  I'hilometor,  besieged  .Mexandria  in  B.C. 
ll)9.  By  this  time,  however,  his  selfish  designs 
weie  apparent :  the  brothers  were  reconciled,  and 
Antiochus  was  obliged  to  acquiesce  for  the  time  in 


»  Others  reckon  only  three  campaigns  of  Antiochus 
against  Egypt  in  171,  170,  163  (Grlnim  on  I  Mace.  i.  1«). 
Yet  the  campaign  uf  I6'J  seems  clearly  distiimui.shfil  IVdm 


the  arrangement  which  they  made.  But  while 
doing  so  he  prepared  ibr  another  invasion  of  Egypt, 
and  was  already  approaching  Alexandria,  when  he 
was  met  hy  the  Roman  embassy  led  by  C.  Popillius 
Laenas,  who,  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  senate,  in- 
sisted on  his  immediate  retreat  (B.C.  168),  a  com- 
mand which  the  late  victory  at  Pydna  made  it  im- 
possible to  disobey.* 


I'tolemy  VI. 
Tetiadrachni  of  Ptolemy  VI.  (Egyptian  talent).      Obv.    Head  of 
king,  r.,  bound  with  fillet.    Rev.   IITOAEMAIOY    <l>IAO- 
.MHTOP02.     Eagle,  1.,  with  palm-branch,  on  thunderbolt 

These  campaigns,  which  are  intimately  connected 
with  the  visits  of  Antiochus  to  Jerusalem  in  B.C. 
170,  188,  are  briefly  de.scribed  in  Dan.  xi.  25-30: 
"  He  [Antiochus]  shall  sti'-  up  his  power  and  his 
courage  against  the  king  of  the  south  with  a  great 
army ;  and  the  king  of  the  south  [Ptol.  Philometor] 
shall  he  stirred  up  to  battle  with  a  very  great  and 
mighty  army  ;  hut  he  shall  not  stand :  for  they 
[the  ministers,  as  it  appears,  in  whom  he  trusted] 
shall  forecast  devices  against  him.  Yea,  they  that 
feed  of  the  portion  of  his  meat  shall  destroy  him, 
and  his  army  shall  melt  away,  and  many  shall  fall 
down  slain.  And  both  these  kings'  hearts  shall  he 
to  do  mischief,  and  they  shall  speak  lies  at  one 
table  [Antiochus  shall  profess  falsely  to  maintain 
the  cause  of  Philometor  against  his  brother,  and 
Philometor  to  trust  in  his  good  faith]  ;  but  it  shall 
not  jjrosper  [the  resistance  of  Alexandria  sliall  pre- 
serve the  independence  of  Egypt]  ;  for  the  end  shall 
be  at  the  time  appointed.  Then  shall  he  [.Antiochus] 
return  into  his  land,  and  his  heart  shall  he  against 
the  holy  covenant ;  and  he  shall  do  exploits,  and 
return  to  his  own  land.  At  the  time  appointed  he 
shall  return  and  come  towards  the  south  ;  b'(t  it 
shall  not  he  as  the  former  so  also  the  latter  time. 
[His  career  shall  be  checked  at  once]  for  the  ships 
of  Chittim  [comp.  Num.  xxiv.  24  :  the  Roman  fleet] 
shall  come  against  him:  therefore  he  shall  be  dis- 
mayed and  return  and  have  indignation  against 
the  holy  covenant." 

After  the  discomfiture  of  .\ntiochus,  Philometor 
was  for  some  time  occupied  in  resisting  the  am- 
bitious designs  of  his  brother,  who  made  two  at- 
tempts to  add  Cyprus  to  the  kingdom  of  Cyrene, 
which  was  allotted  to  him.  Having  effectually  put 
down  these  attempts,  he  turned  his  attention  again 
to  Syria.  During  the  brief  reign  of  Antiochus 
Eupator  he  .seems  to  have  supported  Philip  against 
the  regent  Lysias  (Comp.  2  Mace.  ix.  29).  After 
the  murder  of  Eupator  by  Demetrius  I.,  Philometor 
espoused  the  cause  of  Ale.\ander  Bala.s,  the  rival 
claimant  to  the  throne,  because  Demetrius  had  made 
an  attempt  on  Cyprus ;  and  when  Alexander  had 
defeated  and  slain  his  rival,  he  accepted  the  over- 
tures which  he  made,  and  gave  him  his  daughter 
Cleopatra  in  marriage  (B.C.  150  :  1  Macc.x.  51-58). 


those  in  the  years  before  and  alter;  though  in  the  de- 
scription of  Daniel  the  campaigns  ol  I7U  nnd  169  are  iiot 
noticed  separaloly. 


966 


PTOLEMAEUS 


But,  according  to  1  Mace.  xi.  1, 10,  &c.,the  alliance 
was  not  made  in  good  faith,  but  only  as  a  means  to- 
wards securing  possession  of  Syria.  According  to 
others,  Alexander  himself  made  a  tieacherous  attempt 
on  the  life  of  Ptolemy  (comp.  1  Mace.  xi.  10),  which 
caused  him  to  transfer  his  support  to  Demetrius  II., 
to  whom  also  he  gave  his  daughter,  whom  he  had 
taken  from  Alexander.  The  whole  of  Syria  was 
quickly  subdued,  and  he  was  crowned  at  Antioch 
king  of  Egypt  and  Asia  (1  Mace.  xi.  13),  Alexander 
made  an  effort  to  recover  his  crown,  but  was 
defeated  by  the  forces  of  Ptolemy  and  Demetrius, 
and  shortly  afterwards  put  to  death  in  Arabia.  But 
Ptolemy  did  not  long  enjoy  his  success.  He  fell 
from  his  horse  in  the  battle,  and  died  within  a  few 
days  (1  Mace.  xi.  18),  B.C.  145. 

Ptolemaeus  Philometor  is  the  last  king  of 
Egypt  who  is  noticed  in  Sacred  history,  and  his 
reign  was  marked  also  by  the  erection  of  the 
Temple  at  Leontopolis.  The  coincidence  is  worthy 
of  notice,  for  the  consecration  of  a  new  centre  of 
worship  placed  a  religious  as  well  as  a  political 
barrier  between  the  Alexandrine  and  Palestinian 
Jews.  Henceforth  the  nation  was  again  divided. 
The  history  of  the  Temple  itself  is  extremely  ob- 
scure, but  even  in  its  oiigin  it  was  a  monument  of 
civil  strife.  Onias,  the  son  of  Onias  III.,"  who  was 
murdered  at  Antioch,  B.C.  171,  when  he  saw  that 
he  was  excluded  from  the  succession  to  the  high- 
priesthood  by  mercenary  intrigues,  fled  to  Egypt, 
either  shoitly  after  his  father's  death  or  upon  the 
transference  of  the  office  to  Alcimus,  B.C.  162 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  9,  §7).  It  is  probable  that  his 
retirement  must  be  placed  at  the  later  date,  for  he 
was  a  child  (iraTs,  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1)  at  the 
time  of  his  father's  death,  and  he  is  elsewhere  men- 
tioned as  one  of  those  who  actively  opposed  the 
Syrian  party  in  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  1). 
In  Egypt  he  entered  the  sen-ice  of  the  king  and  rose, 
with  another  Jew,  Dositheus,  to  the  supi'eme  com- 
mand- In  this  office  he  rendered  important  ser- 
vices during  the  war  which  Ptol.  Physcon  waged 
against  his  brother  ;  and  he  pleaded  these  to  induce 
the  king  to  grant  him  a  ruined  temple  of  Diana 
(rrjs  dyplas  Bovfiaffrews)  at  Leontopolis,  as  the  site 
of  a  Temple,  which  he  proposed  to  build  "  after  the 
pattern  of  that  at  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  same  dimen- 
sions." His  alleged  object  was  to  unite  the  Jews 
in  one  body  who  were  at  the  time  "  divided  into 
hostile  factions,  even  as  the  Egyptians  were,  from 
their  differences  in  religious  services  "  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xiii.  3,  §!)•  In  defence  of  the  locality  which  he 
chose  he  quoted  the  words  of  Isaiah  (Is.  xix.  18, 
19),  who  sjwke  of  "an  altar  to  the  Lord  in  the 
midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,"  and  according  to  one 
interpretation  mentioned  "  the  city  of  the  Sun " 
(D^^^  T'V),  by  name.  The  site  was  granted  and 
the'  Temple  built ;  but  the  original  plan  was  not 
exactly  cai-ried  out.  The  Naos  rose  "  like  a  tower 
to  the  height  of  sixty  cubits"  (Joseph.  B.J.  xii.  10. 
§3,  ir{ip-y(f  irapaTTK'i](nov  .  .  .  els  e^-nKOura  ■K7)Xfis 
dvea-T7]K6Ta).  The  altar  and  the  offerings  were 
similar  to  those  at  Jerasalem  ;  but  in  place  of  the 
seven-branched  candlestick,  was  "  a  single  lamp  of 
gold  suspended  by  a  golden  chain."  The  service  was 
iperformed  by  piiests  and  Levites  of  pure  descent;  and 
the  Temple  possessed  considerable  revenues,  which 
were  devoted  to  their  support  and  to  the  adequate 

»  Josepbus  in  one  place  (S.  J.vii.  10,  ?2)  calls  lilm  "the 
son  of  Simon,"  and  lie  appears  wider  the  same  nani«'  in 
Jewish!  legends  ;  but  it  seems  certain  that  this  was  a  raore 


PTOLEMAEUS 

celebration  of  the  divine  ritual  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  10, 
§3  ;  Ant.  xiii.  3,  §3).  The  oljject  of  Ptol.  Philometor 
in  furthering  the  design  of  Oaias,  was  doubtless  the 
same  as  that  which  led  to  the  erection  of  the 
"golden  calves"  in  Israel.  The  Jewish  residents 
in  Egypt  were  numerous  and  powerful  ;  and  when 
Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Syrians,  it  be- 
came of  the  utmost  importance  to  weaken  their 
connexion  with  their  mother  city.  In  this  respect 
the  position  of  the  Temple  on  the  eastern  border  of 
the  kingdom  was  peculiarly  important  (Jost,  Gesch. 
d.  Judenthums,  i.  117).  On  the  other  hand  it  is 
probable  that  Onias  saw  no  hope  in  the  hellenized 
Judaism  of  a  Syrian  province ;  and  the  triumph  of 
the  Maccabees  was  still  unachieved  when  the  Temple 
at  Leontopolis  was  founded.  The  date  of  this  event 
cannot  indeed  be  exactly  determined.  Josephus 
says  (B.  J.  vii.  10,  §4)  that  the  Temple  had  ex- 
isted "  343  years  "  at  the  time  of  its  destruction, 
cir.  A.D.  71  ;  but  the  text  is  manifestly  corrupt. 
Eusebius  (ap.  Hieron.  viii.  p.  507,  ed.  Migne)  no- 
tices the  flight  of  Onias  and  the  building  of  the 
Temple  under  the  same  year  (B.C.  16"2),  possibly 
from  the  natural  connexion  of  the  events  without 
regard  to  the  exact  date  of  the  latter.  Some  time 
at  least  must  be  allowed  I'or  the  military  service  of 
Onias,  and  the  building  of  the  Temple  may  perhaps 
be  placed  after  the  con(;lusion  of  the  last  war  with 
Ptol.  Physcon,  (c.  B.C.  154),  when  Jonathan  "  began 
to  judge  the  people  at  Machmas"  (1  Mace.  ix.  73). 
In  Palestine  the  erection  of  this  second  Temple  was 
not  condemned  so  strongly  as  might  have  been  ex- 
pected. A  question  indeed  was  raised  in  later  times 
whether  the  service  was  not  idolatrous  (Jems.  Joma 
AM,  ap.  .lost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  i.  119),  but  the 
Mishna,  embodying  without  doubt  the  old  decisions, 
determines  the  point  more  favourably.  "  Priests 
wlio  had  served  at  Leontopolis  were  forbidden  to 
serve  at  Jerusalem  ;  but  were  not  excluded  from 
at'ending  the  public  services."  "  A  vow  might  be 
discharged  rightly  at  Leontopolis  as  well  as  at  Je- 
rusalem, but  it  was  not  enough  to  discharge  it  at 
the  former  place  only"  {Menach.  109a,  ap.  Jost, 
as  above).  The  circumstances  under  which  the  new 
Temple  was  erected  were  evidently  accepted  as  in 
some  degree  an  excuse  for  the  irregular  worship. 
The  connexion  with  Jerusalem,  though  weakened 
in  popular  estimation,  was  not  broken ;  and  the 
spiritual  significance  of  the  one  Temple  remained 
unchanged  for  the  devout  believer  (Philo,  de 
Monarch,  ii.  §1,  &c.).  [ALEXANDRIA,  vol.  i.  46.] 
The  Jewish  colony  in  Egypt,  of  which  Leon- 
topolis was  the  immediate  religious  centre,  was 
formed  of  various  elements  and  at  ditierent  times. 
The  settlements  which  were  made  under  the  (ireek 
sovereigns,  though  the  most  im]iort;mt,  were  by  no 
means  the  first.  In  the  later  times  of  the  kingdom 
of  Judah  many  "trusted  in  Egypt,"  and  took  lefuge 
there  (Jer.  xliii.  6,  7);  and  when  Jeremiah  was 
taken  to  Tahpanhes  he  spoke  to  "-all  the  Jews 
which  dwell  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  which  dwell  at 
Migdol  and  Tahpanhes,  and  at  Noph,  and  in  the 
country  of  Pathros"  (J-er.  xliv.  1 ).  This  colony, 
formed  against  the  command  of  God,  was  devoted  to 
complete  destruction  (Jer.  xliv.  27),  but  when  the 
connexion  wvis  once  formed,  it  is  probable  that  the 
Persians,  acting  on  the  same  policy  as  the  Pto- 
lemies,   encouraged    the    settlement    of  Jews    in 


eiTor,  occasioned  by  llie  patronymic  of  the  most  famous 
Onias  (comp.  Herzfeld,  Gesch.  Jud.  ii.  557). 


PTOLEMAIS 

Egypt  to  keep  in  check  the  native  popuhition. 
Alter  the  Return  the  spiiit  of  commerce  must  have 
contributed  to  increase  the  number  of  emigrants ; 
but  the  history  of  the  l']gyptian  Jews  is  involved  in 
the  same  deep  obscurity  as  th;it  of  the  Jews  of  Pa- 
lestine till  the  inveision  of  Alexander.  There  can- 
not, however,  be  any  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the 
power  and  influence  of  the  colony  ;  and  the  mere 
fact  of  its  existence  is  an  important  consideration  in 
estimating  the  possibility  of  Jewish  ideas  finding 
their  way  to  the  west.  Judaism  had  secured  in 
old  time*  all  the  treasures  of  Kgypt,  and  thus  the 
first  instalment  of  the  debt  was  repaid.  A  j)repa- 
ration  was  already  made  for  a  great  work  when  the 
founding  of  Alexandria  opened  a  new  era  in  the 
liistory  of  the  Jews.  Alexander,  according  to  the 
policy  of  all  great  conquerors,  incorporated  the  con- 
quered in  his  armies.  Samaritans  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xi.  8,  §6)  and  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §o;  Hecat. 
ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  22)  are  mentioned  among  his 
troops  ;  and  the  tradition  is  probably  true  which 
reckons  them  among  the  fir.st  settlere  at  Alexandria 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  18,  §7  ;  c.  Ap.  ii.  4).  Ptolemy 
JSoter  increased  the  colony  of  the  Jews  in  ligypt 
both  by  force  and  by  policy;  and  their  nuni- 
bere  in  the  next  reign  may  be  estimated  by  the 
statement  (.loseph.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §1)  that  Ptol.  Phi- 
ladelphus  gave  freedom  to  120,000.  The  position 
occupied  by  Joseph  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4)  at  the 
court  of  Ptol.  Eueigetes  1.,  implies  that  the  Jews 
were  not  only  numerous  but  inriuential.  As  we 
go  onwards,  the  legendary  accounts  of  the  persecu- 
tion of  Ptol.  Philojiator  bear  witness  at  least  to  the 
great  number  of  Jewish  residents  in  Egypt  (.3  Mace. 
iv.  15,  17),  and  to  their  dispersion  thioughout  the 
Delta.  In  the  next  reign  many  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Palestine  who  remained  faithful  to  the  Egyptian 
alliance  tied  to  Egypt  to  escape  from  the  Syrian  rule 
(comp.  Jerome  ad  Ban.  xi.  14,  who  is  however 
confused  in  his  account).  The  consideration  which 
their  leaders  must  have  thus  gained,  accounts  for 
the  rank  which  a  Jew,  Aristobulus,  is  said  to  have 
held  under  Ptol.  Philometor,  as  "  tutor  of  the  king" 
(5i5o(r/coAos,  2  Mace.  i.  10).  The  later  history  of 
the  Alexandrine  Jews  has  been  noticed  before  (vol. 
i.  p.  466).  They  retained  their  piivileges  under  the 
Romans,  though  they  were  exposed  to  the  illegal 
oppiession  of  individual  governors,  and  quietly  ac- 
quiesced in  the  foreign  dominion  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii. 
10,  §1).  An  attempt  which  was  made  by  some  of 
the  fugitives  from  Palestine  to  create  a  rising  in 
Alexandria  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  en- 
tiiely  failed ;  but  the  attempt  gave  the  Homans  an 
e.xcuse  for  plundering,  and  afterwards  (n.C.  71)  for 
closing  entirely  the  Temple  at  Leontopolis  CJoseph. 
B.  y.'vii.  10)"  [B.  F.  W.] 

PTOLEMA'IS(nTo\€/iafe:  Ftolcmuis).  This 
article  is  meielv  supplemental  y  to  that  on  Acc'llO. 
The  name  is  in  tact  an  interpolation  in  the 
histoiy  of  the  place.  The  city  which  was  called 
Accho  in  the  earliest  Jewish  annals,  and  which  is 
again  the  Akl;a  or  St.  Jean  d' Acre  of  crusading 
and  modern  times,  A'as  named  Ptolemais  in  the 
Mace<iinian  and  Roman  periods.  In  the  former  of 
the.se  periods  it  was  the  most  important  town  upon 
the  coast,  and  it  is  prominently  mentioned  in  tiie 
first  book  of  Maccabees,  v.  15,  55,  x.  1,  58,  (iO. 
xii.  48.  In  the  latter  its  eminence  was  far  out- 
done by  Herod's  new  city  of  Cai;sare.\.»     Still  in 


PUBLICAN 


967 


"  It  ts  worthy  of  notice  that  Herod,  on  his  rciurn  from 
Italy  toSyria,  landed  at  Ptolemais  (Joseph.  .(Ini.xlv.  15,(}1). 


the  N.  T.  Ptolemais  is  a  marked  point  in  St.  Paul's 
travels  both  by  land  and  sea.  He  must  have 
passed  thi-ough  it  on  .ill  his  journeys  along  the 
great  coast-road  which  connected  Caesarea  and  An- 
tioch  (Acts  xi.  30,  xii.  25,  xv.  2,  30,  xviii.  22); 
and  the  distances  are  given  both  in  the  Antonine 
and  Jerusalem  itineraries  (Wesseling,  Ttin.  158, 
584).  But  it  is  specifically  mentioned  in  Acts  xxi. 
7,  as  containing  a  Christian  community,  visited  for 
one  day  by  St.  Paul.  On  this  occasion  he  came  to 
Ptolemais  by  sea.  He  was  then  on  his  return 
voyage  from  the  third  missionary  journev.  The 
last  harbour  at  which  he  had  touched  was  Tyre 
(ver.  3).  From  Ptolemais  he  proceeded,  apparently 
by  land,  to  Caesarea  (vei-.  8),  and  thence  to  Jeru- 
salem (ver.  17).  [J.  S.  H.] 

PU'Adl-IS:  *oua:  Phud)  properly  Puvvah. 
Phuvah  the  son  of  Issachar  (Num.  xxvi.  23). 

PU'AH  (HN-IQ  :  *ovc£:  Phua).  1.  The  father 
of  'i'ola,  a  man  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  and  judge 
of  Israel  after  Abimelech  (Judg.  x.  1).  In  the 
Vulgate,  instead  of  "  the  son  of  Dodo,"  he  is  called 
"  the  uncle  of  Abimelech  ;"  and  in  the  LXX.  Tola 
is  said  to  be  "  the  son  of  Phua,  the  son  {vlis)  of  his 
father's  biother  ;"  both  versions  endeavouring  to 
render  "  Dodo"  as  an  appellative,  while  the  latter 
introduces  a  remarkable  genealogical  difilculty. 

2.  'i'he  son  of  Issachar  (1  Clir.  vii.  1),  elsewhere 
called  Phuvah  and  PuA. 

3.  (ny-lS).  One  of  the  two  midwives  to  whom 
Pharaoh  gave  instructions  to  kill  the  Hebiew  male 
children  at  their  birth  (Ex.  i.  Ijj.  In  the  A.  V. 
they  are  called  "  Hebrew  midwives,"  a  rendeiing 
which  is  not  lequired  by  the  original,  and  which  is 
doubtful,  both  from  the  improbability  that  the  king 
would  have  entrusted  the  execution  of  such  a  task 
to  the  women  of  the  nation  he  was  endeavouring  to 
destroy,  as  well  as  from  the  answer  of  the  women 
themselves  in  ver.  19,  "  for  the  Hebrew  women  are 
not  like  the  Egyptian  women  ;"  from  which  we 
may  infer  that  they  were  accustomed  to  attend  upon 
the  latter,  and  were  themselves,  in  all  probability, 
Egyptians.  If  we  translate  Ex.  i.  18  in  this  way, 
"  And  the  king  of  Egvpt  said  to  the  women  who 
acted  as  midwives  to  the  Hebrew  women,"  this 
difficulty  is  removed.  The  two,  Shiphrah  and  Puah, 
are  supposed  to  have  been  the  chief  and  repre- 
sentatives of  their  profession  ;  as  Aben  Ezra  says, 
"  They  were  chiefs  over  all  the  midwives  :  for  no 
doubt  there  were  more  than  five  hundreil  midwives, 
but  these  two  were  chiefs  over  them  to  give  tribute 
to  the  king  of  the  hire."  According  to  .lewish  tra- 
dition, Shiphrah  was  Jochebed,  and  Puah,  Miriam  ; 
"  because,"  says  liashi,  "  she  cried  and  talked  and 
muimuied  to  the  child,  after  the  manner  of  the 
women  that  lull  a  weeping  infant."  The  origin  of 
all  this  is  a  plav  upon  the  name  Puah,  which  is 
derived  from  a  root  signifying  '  to  cry  out,"  as  in 
Is.  xlii.  14,  and  used  in  I{;ibbinical  writers  of  the 
bleating  of  sheep.  [VV.  A.  W.] 

PUBLICAN  {reXdiv-ns  :  pMicanns).  The 
word  thus  tiauslated  belongs  only,  in  the  N.  T.,  to 
the  three  Synoptic  Gos])els.  The  class  designated 
by  the  Greek  word  were  employed  as  collectors  of 
the  Roman  revenue.  The  Latin  word  ft-oni  which 
the  English  of  the  A.  V.  has  been  taken  was  applied 
to  a  higher  order  of  men.  It  will  be  necessaiy  to 
glance  at  the  financial  administration  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  order  to  understnid  the  relation  of  the 
two  classes  to  each  other,  and  the  grounds  of  the 


968 


PUBLICAN 


hatred  and  scorn  which  appear  iu  the  N.  T.  U> 
have  fallen  on  the  foTner. 

The  Roman  senate  had  found  it  convenient,  at  a 
period  as  early  as,  if  not  earlier  than,  the  second 
Punic  war,  to  farm  the  vectiijalia  (direct  taxes) 
and  the  portoria  (customs,  including  the  octroi 
on  goods  carried  into  or  out  of  cities;  to  capitalists 
who  undertook  to  pay  a  given  sum  into  the  trea- 
sury [in  publicum),  and  so  received  the  name 
of  pablicani  (Liv.  xxxii.  7).  Contracts  of  this  kind 
fell  naturally  into  the  hands  of  the  equites,  as  the 
richest  class  of  Romans.  Not  unfrequently  they 
vk^ent  beyond  the  means  of  any  individual  capit<alist, 
and  a  joint-stock  company  {societas)  was  formed, 
with  one  of  the  paj-tners,  or  an  agent  appointed  by 
them,  acting  as  managing  director  (^magister  ;  Cic. 
ad  Div.  xiii.  9).  Under  this  officer,  who  resided 
commonly  at  Rome,  transacting  the  business  of  the 
company,  paying  profits  to  the  partneis  and  the 
like,  were  the  suh-majistri,  living  in  the  provinces. 
Under  them,  in  like  manner,  were  the  portitores, 
the  actual  custom-house  officers  (douaniers),  who 
examined  each  bale  of  goods  expoiied  or  imported, 
assessed  its  value  more  or  less  arbitrarily,  wrote  out 
the  ticket,  and  enforced  payment.  The  latter  weie 
commonly  natives  of  the  province  in  which  they 
were  stationed,  as  being  brought  daily  into  contact 
with  all  classes  of  the  population.  The  word 
TeXwvai,  which  etymologically  might  have  been 
hsed  of  the  publiomi  properly  so  called  (tsAtj, 
uviofj-ai),  was  used  populaily,  and  in  the  N.  T. 
exclusively,  of  the  portitores. 

'I'he  publicani  were  thus  an  important  section  of 
the  equestrian  order.  An  orator  wishing,  for  poli- 
tical purposes,  to  court  that  order,  might  describe 
them  as  "  flos  equitum  Romanorura,  ornamentum 
civitatis,  firmameutum  Reipublicae "  (Cic.  pro 
Plane.  9).  The  system  was,  however,  essentially 
a  vicious  one,  the  most  detestable,  perhaps,  of  all 
modes  of  managing  a  revenue  (comp.  Adam  Smith, 
Wealth  of  Nations,  v.  2),  and  it  bore  its  natural 
fruity.  The  publicani  were  banded  together  to 
support  each  other's  interest,  and  at  once  resented 
and  defied  all  interference  (Liv.  xxv.  3).  They 
demanded  severe  laws,  and  put  eveiy  such  law  into 
execution.  Their  agents,  the  portitores,  were  en- 
couraged in  the  most  vexatious  or  tiaudulent  exac- 
tions, and  a  remedy  was  all  but  impossible.  The 
popular  feeling  ran  sti'ong  even  against  the  eques- 
trian capitiilists.  The  Macedonians  complained,  as 
soon  as  they  were  brought  under  Roman  govern- 
ment, that,  "  ubi  publi&mus  est,  ibi  aut  jus  pub- 
licum vanum,  aut  libertas  sociis  nulla  "  (Liv.  xlv. 
18).  Cicero,  in  writing  to  his  brother  (ad  Quint, 
i.  1,  11),  speaks  of  the  difficulty  of  keeping  the 
publiciini  within  bounds,  and  yet  not  offending  them, 
as  the  hardest  task  of  the  governor  of  a  province. 
Tacitus  counted  it  as  one  bright  feature  of  the  ideal 
life  of  a  people  unlike  his  own,  that  there  "nee 
publicanus  atterit "  {Germ.  29).  For  a  moment 
the  capricious  libei-alism  of.  Nero  led  iiim  to  enter- 
tain the  thought  of  sweeping  away  the  whole  sys- 
tem of  portoria,  but  the  conservatism  of  the  senate, 
servile  as  it  was  in  all  things  else,  rose  in  arms 
against  it,  and  the  scheme  was  dropped  (Tac.  Arm. 
xiii.  50)  :  and  the  "  immodestia  publicanorum  " 
(ib.)  remained  unchecked. 


"  Amusing  instances  of  the  continuance  of  this  feeling 
niiiy  be  seen  in  tlie  extracts  from  Chrysostom  and  other 
writers,  quoted  by  Suicer,  s.  v.  rcXoivr)';.  In  part  these  are 
perhaps  rhetorical  amplifirations  of  what  they  fuund  in 


PUBLICAN 

if  this  was  the  case  with  the  directoi's  of  the 
company,  we  may  imagine  how  it  stood  with  the 
underlings.  They  overcharged  whenever  they  had 
an  opportunity  (Luke  iii.  13).  They  brought  false 
charges  of  smuggling  in  the  hope  of  extorting  hush- 
money  ( Luke  xix.  8).  They  detained  and  opened 
lettei-s  on  mere  suspicion  (Terent.  Phorm.  i.  2,  99  ; 
Plant.  Trinumm.  iii.  3,  64).  The  injuriae  porti- 
torum,  rather  than  the  portoria  themselves,  were 
in  most  cases  the  subject  of  complaint  (Cic.  ad 
Quint,  i.  1,  U).  It  was  the  basest  of  all  liveli- 
hoods (Cic.  de  Offic.  i.  42).  They  were  tlje  wolves 
and  bears  of  human  society  (Stobaeus,  Serin,  ii.  34). 
"  TlavTes  nXSwai,  iravT^s  apirayes"  had  become  a 
proverb,  even  under  an  earlier  regime,  and  it  was 
truer  than  ever  now  (Xeno.  Comic,  ap.  Dicaearch. 
Meineke,  Frag.  Com.  iv.  596).» 

All  this  was  enough  to  bring  the  class  into  ill- 
favom-  everywhere.  In  Judaea  and  Galilee  there 
were  special  ciicumstances  of  aggravation.  The 
employment  brought  out  all  the  besetting  vices  of 
the  Jewish  character.  The  strong  feeling  of  many 
Jews  as  to  the  absolute  unlawfulness  of  paying 
tribute  at  all  made  matters  worse.  The  Scribes 
who  discussed  the  question  (Matt.  xxii.  15),  for  the 
most  part  answered  it  in  the  negative.  The  fol- 
lowers of  JuuAS  of  Galilee  had  made  this  the 
special  grievance  against  which  they  rose.  In  addi- 
tion to  their  other  faults,  accordingly,  the  Publicans 
of  the  N.  T.  were  regarded  as  traitors  and  apostates, 
defiled  by  their  frequent  intercourse  with  the  hea- 
then, willing  tools  of  the  oppressor.  They  were 
classed  with  sinners  (Matt.  ix.  11,  xi.  19),  with 
harlots  (Matt.  xxi.  31,  32),  with  the  heathen 
(Matt,  xviii.  17).  In  Galilee  they  consisted  pro- 
bably of  the  least  reputable  members  of  the  fisher- 
man and  peasant  class.  Left  to  themselves,  men 
of  decent  lives  holding  aloof  fiom  them,  their  only 
friends  or  companions  were  found  iimong  those 
who  like  themselves  weie  outcasts  from  the  world's 
law.  Scribes  and  people  alike  hated  them  as  priests 
and  peasants  in  Ireland  have  hated  a  Roman  Ca- 
tholic who  took  service  in  collecting  tithes  or  evict- 
ing tenants. 

The  Gospels  present  us  with  some  instances  of 
this  feeling.  To  eat  and  drink  "  with  Publicans," 
seems  to  the  Pharisaic  mind  incompatible  with  the 
character  of  a  recognized  Rabbi  fMatt.  ix.  11). 
They  sjx)ke  in  their  scorn  of  Our  Lord  as  the  friend 
of  Publicans  (Matt.  xi.  19).  Rabbinic  writings 
furnish  some  curious  illustrations  of  the  same  feeling. 
The  Chaldee  Targum  and  R.  Solomon  find  in  "  the 
archers  who  sit  by  the  waters  "  of  Judg.  v.  11,  a  de- 
scription of  the  nXSivai  sitting  on  the  banks  of  rivers 
or  seas  in  ambush  for  the  wayfarer.  The  casuistry 
of  the  Talmud  enumei-ates  three  classes  of  men  with 
whom  promises  need  not  be  kept,  and  the  three  are 
murdeiers,  thieves,  and  publicans  {Nedar. iii.  4).  No 
money  known  to  come  tiom  them  was  i-eceived  into 
the  alms-box  of  the  synagogue  or  the  Corban  of  the 
Temple  { Baba  kama,  x.  1).  To  write  a  publican's 
ticket,  or  even  to  carry  the  ink  for  it  on  the  sab- 
bath-day was  a  distinct  breach  of  the  commandment 
{Shabb.  viii.  2).  They  were  not  fit  to  sit  in  judg- 
ment, or  even  to  give  testimony  (Sanhedr.  f.  25,  2  i. 
Sometimes  there  is  an  exceptional  notice  in  then- 
favour.     It  was  recorded  as  a  special  excelleuce  in 


the  Gospels ;  but  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  they  testify 
also  to  the  never-dying  dislike  of  the  tax-payer  to  the  tax- 
collector.  Their  vehement  denunciations  stand  almost  on 
a  footin!;  with  Johnson's  definition  of  an  exciseman. 


PUBLIUS 

the  father  of  a  Uabbi  tliat,  having  been  a  publican 
for  thirteen  years,  he  had  lessened  instead  of  in- 
creasing the  pressure  of  taxation  (ihid.))'  (The 
references  are  tal\en,  for  the  most  part,  tiom  Light- 
foot.) 

The  class  thus  practieally  excommunicated  fur- 
nished some  of  the  earliest  disciples  both  of  the 
Baptist  and  of  Our  Lord.  Liiie  the  outlying,  so- 
called  "  dangerous  classes"  of  other  times,  the\' 
were  at  least  tree  from  hypocrisy.  Whatever  mo- 
rality they  had,  was  real  and  not  conventional.  We 
may  think  of  the  Baptist's  preaching  as  having  been 
to  them  what  Wesley's  was  to  the  colliers  of  Kings- 
wood  or  the  Cornish  miners.  The  Publican  who 
cried  in  the  bitternegs  of  his  spirit,  "  God  be  meicifuj 
to  me  a  sinner  "  (Luke  xviii.  18),  may  be  taken  as 
the  representative  of  those  who  had  come  under  this 
influence  (Matt.  xxi.  32).  The  Galilaean  fisher- 
men had  probably  learnt,  even  before  their  JMaster 
taught  them,  to  .■vercome  their  repugnance  to  the 
Publicans  who  with  tliem  had  been  sharers  in  the 
same  baptism.  The  Publicans  (Matthew  perhaps 
among  them),  had  probiibl}'  gone  back  to  their  work 
learning  to  exact  no  more  than  what  was  appointed 
them  (Luke  iii.  13).  However  startling  the  choice 
of  Matthew  the  publican  to  be  of  the  number  of  the 
Tweh'e  may  have  seemed  to  the  Pharisees,  we  have 
no  trace  of  any  perplexity  or  offence  on  the  part  of 
the  disciples. 

The  position  of  Zacchaeus  as  an  apxtreKtiuris 
(Luke  xix.  2),  implies  a  gradation  of  some  kind 
among  the  persons  thus  employed.  Possibly  the 
balsam  trade,  of  which  Jericho  was  the  centre,  may 
have  brought  larger  profits,  possibly  he  was  one  of 
the  sub-maijistri  in  immediate  communiciition  with 
the  Bureau  at  Rome.  That  it  was  possible  for  even 
a  Jewish  publican  to  attain  considerable  wealth,  we 
find  from  the  history  of  John  the  reKdbuTis  (.Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  14,  §4),  who  acts  with  the  leading  Jews 
and  ofl'ers  a  bribe  of  eight  talents  to  the  Procurator, 
Gessius  Florus.  The  tact  that  Jericho  was  at  this 
time  a  city  of  tlie  priests — 12,000  are  said  to  have 
lived  there — gives,  it  need  hardly  be  said,  a  special 
significance  to  Our  Lord's  preference  of  the  house 
of  Zacchaeus.  [E.  H.  P.J 

PUB'LIUS  {nSirXios :  Puhlinn).  The  chief 
man — probably  the  governor — of  Melita,  who  re- 
ceived and  lodged  St.  I'aul  and  his  companions  on  the 
occasion  of  their  being  shipwrecked  off  tliat  island 
(Acts  xxviii.  7).  It  soon  appeared  that  he  was  en- 
tertaining an  angel  unawares,  for  St.  Paul  gave  jiroof 
of  his  divine  commission  by  miraculously  heal.ng 
the  father  of  Publius  of  a  fever,  and  afterwaixls 
working  other  cures  on  the  sick  who  were  brought 
unto  him.  Publius  possessed  property  in  Melita  : 
the  distinctive  title  given  to  him  is  "  the  first  of 
the  island  ;"  and  two  inscriptions,  one  in  Greek, 
the  othoi-  in  Latin,  have  been  foiuid  at  Cetta  Vecchia, 
in  which  that  app.iiently  official  title  occurs  (Alford). 
Publius  may  perhaps  have  been  the  delegate  of  the 
Roman  pj-aetor  of  Sicily  to  whose  jurisdiction  IMelita 
or  Malta  belonged.  The  liomau  ]\Iartyrologies  assert 
that  he  was  the  first  bishop  of  the  island,  and  that 
he  was  afteiwards  a])pointel  to  succeed  Dionysius  as 
bishop  of  Athens.    St.  Jerome  records  a  tradition  that 

b  We  have  a  singular  parallel  to  this  in  the  sUitucs 
Tu)  Ka\<os  TeAwtTjo-ai'Tt,  njenlloiied  by  Suetonius,  as 
erected  by  the  cities  of  Asia  to  Sabinus,  the  father  of 
Vespasian  (Suet.  Veap.  1 ). 

=  This  Tiinotliy  is  said  to  have  preached  the  Gospel  in 
Bruaiii. 


PUDENS 


969 


he  was  crowned  with  martyrdom  [Dv    \'iris  Illust. 
xix. ;  Baron,  i.  554).  [tl.  H — s.] 

PU'DENS  (Uovb-ns:  Pudens),  a  Christian 
friend  of  Timothy  at  Kome.  St.  Paul,  writing  about 
A.D.  G8,says,  "  Eubulus  grecfefh  thee,  and  Pudens, 
and  Linus,  and  Claudia"  (2  Tim.  iv.  21).  He  is 
commemorated  in  the  Byzantine  Chuix-h  on  April 
!4th;  in  the  Roman  Church  on  May  19th.  He  is 
included  in  the  list  of  the  seventy  disciples  given 
by  Pseudo-Hippolytus.  Papebroch,  the  Bollandist 
editor  [Acta  Sanctorum,  Maii,  torn.  iv.  p.  296), 
while  printing  the  legendary  histories,  distinguishes 
between  two  saints  of  this  name,  bofii  Roman 
senators ;  one  the  host  of  St.  Peter  and  friend  of 
St.  Paul,  martyred  under  Nero ;  the  otiier,  the 
grandson  of  the  former,  living  about  A.n.  150, 
the  father  of  Novatus,  Timothy,"  Piaxedis,  and 
Pudentiana,  whose  house,  in  the  valley  between 
the  Viminal  hiU  and  the  Esquiline,  served  in  his 
lifetime  for  the  assembly  of  Roman  Christians,  and 
afterwai'ds  gave  place  to  a  church,  now  the  church 
of  S.  Pndenziana,  a  short  distance  at  the  back  of 
the  Basilica  of  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore.  Earlier  writers 
(as  Baronius,  Ann.  44,  §61  ;  Ann.  59,  §18  ;  Ann. 
162)  are  disposed  to  believe  in  the  existence  of 
one  Pudens  only. 

About  the  end  of  the  16th  century  it  was  ob- 
served (F.  de  Monceaux,  Eccl.  Christianae  veteris 
Britannicae  incunabula,  Tournay,  1614;  Estius,  or 
his  editor ;  Abp.  Parker,  I)e  Antiquit.  Britann. 
Eccl.  1605;  M,  Alford,  Annaks  Ecc.  Brit.  1663; 
Camden,  Britannia,  1586)  tliat  Martial,  the  Spanish 
poet,  who  went  to  Rome  A.D.  66,  or  earlier,  in  his 
23rd  year,  and  dwelt  there  for  neaily  forty  years, 
mentions  two  contemporaries,  Pudens  and  Claudia, 
as  husband  and  wife  {Epiij.  iv.  13) ;  that  he  men- 
tions Pudens  or  Aulus  Pudens  in  i.  32,  iv.  29, 
V.  48,  vi.  58,  vii.  1 1,  97  ;  Claudia  or  Claudia  Rufina 
in  viii.  60,  xi.  53 ;  and,  it  might  be  added,  Linus, 
in  i.  76,  ii.  54,  iv.  66,  xi.  25,  xii.  49.  That  Timothy 
and  Martial  should  have  each  three  friends  bearing 
the  same  names  at  the  same  time  and  place  is  at 
least  a  very  singular  coincidence.  The  poet's  Pudens 
was  his  intimate  acquaintance,  an  admiring  critic 
of  his  epigrams,  an  immoral  man  if  judged  by  the 
Christian  rule.  He  was  an  LTmbrian  and  a  soldier: 
first  he  appeal's  as  a  centurion  aspiring  to  become 
a  primipilus ;  afterwards  he  is  on  military  duty  in 
the  remote  north ;  and  the  poet  hopes  that  on  his 
return  thence  he  may' be  raised  to  Equestrian  rank. 
His  wife  Claudia  is  described  as  of  Britisii  birth, 
of  remarkable  beauty  and  wit,  and  the  mother  of  a 
flourishing  family. 

A  Latin  inscription''  found  in  1723  at  Chichester 
connects  a  [Pud]ens  with  Britain  and  with  the  Ciau- 
dian  name.  It  commemorates  the  erection  of  a 
temple  by  a  guild  of  carpenters,  witli  the  sanction 
of  King  Tiberius  Claudius  Cogidubniis,  the  site  being 
the  gift  of  [Pudjens  tiie  son  of  Pudentinus.  Cogi- 
dubnus  was  a  native  king  appointed  and  supported 
by  Rome  (Tac.  Agricola,  14).  He  reigned  with 
delegated  power  probably  from  A.n.  52  to  A.n.  76. 
If  he  had  a  daughter  she  would  inherit  the  name 
Claudia  and  might,  perhaps  as  a  hostage,  be  educated 
at  Rome. 


•I  "  [Njeptuno  et  Minervae  teniplum  [pr]o  salute  domus 
divinae,  auctorilate  U'iberii  Claudii  [Cojgidubni  regis  lef;ati 
augusti  in  Brit.,  [coUeJglum  fabrorum  etqui  in  co  [a  sacrls 
sunt]dcsuode(liaiverunt,donantearpam[l'iHl]eiitc,  l^iden- 
tini  filio."  A  corner  of  the  stone  was  brnki'ii  off,  and  the 
letters  witliin  brackeis  have  tjcen  inserted  nti  conjecture. 


970 


PDHITES,  THE 


Another  link  seems  to  connect  the  Romanisins; 
Britons  of  that  time  with  Claudia  HuHna  and  with 
Christianity  (see  Musgrave,  quoted  by  Fabricius, 
Lux  Evangelii,  p.  702).  The  wife  of  Aulus  Plau- 
tiiis,  who  conmianded  in  Britain  from  a.d.  43  to 
A.D.  5'2,  was  Pomponia  Graecina,  and  the  Ruti  were 
a  branch  of  her  house.  She  was  accused  at  Rome, 
A.D.  57,  on  a  capital  cliarge  of  "  foreign  supersti- 
tion ;"  was  acquitted,  and  lived  for  nearly  forty 
years  in  a  state  of  austere  and  mysterious  melan- 
choly (Tac.  Ann.  siii.  32).  We  know  from  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  (xvi.  13)  that  the  RuH  were 
well  represented  among  the   Roman  Christians  in 

A.D.  58. 

Jlodern  researches  among  the  Columbaria  at  Rome 
appropriated  to  members  of  the  Imperial  household 
hiive  brought  to  light  an  insci'iption  iu  which  the 
name  of  Piidens  occurs  as  that  of  a  servant  of 
Tiberius  or  Claudius  (Journal  of  Classical  and  Sacred 
Philology,  iv.  76). 

On  the  whole,  although  the  identity  of  St.  Paul's 
Pudens  with  any  legendary  or  heathen  namesake  is 
not  absolutely  proved,  yet  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  these  facts  add  nothing  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  friend  of  Paul  and  Timothy.  Future  discoveries 
may  go  beyond  them,  and  decide  the  question.  They 
are  treated  at  great  length  in  a  pamplilet  entitled 
Claudia  and  Fiidens,  by  Archdeacon  Williams, 
Llandoveiy,  1848,  pp.  58  ;  and  more  briefly  by 
Dean  Alford,  Greek  Testament,  iii.  104-,  ed.  1856  ; 
and  by  Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  of  St.  Paul, 
ii.  594,  ed.  1858.  They  are  ingeniously  woven  into 
a  pleasing  romance  by  a  writer  iu  the  Quarterly 
Review,  vol.  97,  pp.  100-105.  See  also  Ussher, 
Eccl.  Brit.  Antiquitates,  §3,  and  Stillingfleet's  An- 
tiquities. [W.  T.  B.] 

PU'HITES,  THE  Cn-ISn  :    Mi(?.t0iV ;  Alex. 

'Hipideiv:  Aphuthei).  According  to  1  Chr.  ii.  53, 
the  "  Puhites  "  or  "  Puthites  "  belonged  to  the 
families  of  Kirjath-jearim.  There  is  a  Jewisn  tradi- 
tion, embodied  in  the  Tai'gum  of  R.  Joseph,  that 
these  families  of  Kirjath-jearim  were  the  sons  of 
!Moses  whom  Zippoiah  baie  him,  and  that  from 
them  were  descended  the  disciples  of  the  prophets 
of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 

PUL(?-153:  *ou5;  some  codd.  *oufl:  Africa), 
a  country  or  nation  once  mentioned,  if  the  Jlasoretic 
text  be  here  correct,  in  the  Bible  (Is.  l.wi.  19). 
The  name  is  the  same  as  that  of  Pul,  king  of  Assyria. 
It  is  spoken  of  with  distant  nations  :  "  the  nations 
(□;'ilin),  [to]  Tarshish,  Pul,  and  Lud,  that  draw 

the  bow,  [to]  Tubal,  and  Javan,  [to]  the  isles 
afar  off."  If  a  Mizraite  Lud  be  intended  [LuD, 
Ludim],  Pul  may  be  African.  It  has  accordingly 
been  compared  by  Bochart  {Phaleg,  iv.  26)  and  J.  1). 
Michaelis  {Spicileg.  i.  256;  ii.  114)  with  the  island 

Philae,  called  in  Coptic  HgX^-K,  THX^.K, 
niA^KP, ;  the  hieioglyphic  name  being  EELEK, 
P-EELEK,  EELEK-T.  If  it  be  not  African,  the 
identity  with  the  king's  name  is  to  be  noted,  as  we 
find  Shishak  {p^''^)  as  the  name  of  a  king  of  Egypt 
of  Babylonian  or  Assyrian  race,  and  Sheshak 
CqJJ'tJ'),  which  some  rashly  take  to  be  artificially 
formed    after   the   cabbalistic   manner   from  Babel 

»  Other  readings  of  this  name  are  iovd,  <tov\d,  and 


PUL 

(?32),  for  Babylon  itself,  the  dirt'erence  in  the  final 
letter  piobably  arising  from  the  former  name  being 
taken  fiom  the  Egyptian  SHESHEXK.  In  the  line 
of  Shishak,  the  name  T.\KELAT  has  been  com- 
pared by  Birch  with  forms  of  that  of  the  Tigris 

■pi^-in,   chaid.    n^j^,     (k^]^    Jj^^, 

XJLsii)  which  Geseniushas  thought  to  be  identical 

with  the  first  part  of  the  name  of  Tiglath  Pileser 
(Thes.  s.  v.). 

The  common  LXX.  reading  suggests  that  the  Heb. 
had  originally  Phut  (Put)  in  this  place,  although  we 
must  remember,  as  Gesenius- observes  {Thes.  s.  v. 
7-13),  that  *OTA  could  be  easily  changed  to  *OYA 
by  the  error  of  a  copyist.  Yet  in  three  other  places 
Put  and  Lud  occur  together  (Jer.  xlvi.  9  ;  Ez.  -\.\vii. 
10,  xxx.  5).  [Ludim.]  The  circumstance  that  this 
name  is  mentioned  with  names  or  designations  of  im- 
portance, makes  it  nearly  certain  that  some  great  and 
well-known  country  or  people  is  intended.  The  balance 
of  evidence  is  therefore  almost  decisive  in  favour  of 
the  African  Phut  or  Put.     [Phut.]       [R.'S.  P.] 

PUL  (>1S:  *ouA,  *oAc<;x:'  Phul)  was  an 
Assyrian  king,  and  is  the  first  of  those  monarchs 
mentioned  in  Scripture.  He  made  an  expedition 
against  Menahem,  king  of  Isi-ael,  about  B.C.  770. 
Menahem  appears  to  have  inherited  a  kingdom 
which  was  already  included  among  the  depen- 
dencies of  Assyria ;  for  as  early  as  B.C.  884,  Jehu 
gave  tribute  to  Shalmaneser,  the  Black-Obelisk 
king  (see  vol.  i.  p.  1296),  and  if  Judaea  was,  as 
she  seems  to  have  been,  a  regular  tributary  from 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of'  Amaziah  (B.C.  838), 
Samaria,  which  lay  between  Judaea  and  Assyria, 
can  scarcely  have  been  independent.  Under  the 
Assyrian  system  the  monarchs  of  tributary  king- 
doms, on  ascending  the  throne,  applied  for  "  con- 
tirniation  in  their  kingdoms  "  to  the  Lord  Para- 
mount, and  only  became  established  on  receiving 
it.  We  may  gather  from  2  K.  xv.  19,  20,  that 
Jleiiahem  neglected  to  make  any  such  application 
to  his  liege  lord,  Pul — a  neglect  which  would  have 
been  regarded  as  a  plain  act  of  rebellion.  Possibly, 
he  was  guilty  of  more  overt  and  flagrant  hostility. 
"Menahem  smote  Tiphsah"  (2  K.  xv.  16),  we  are 
told.  Now  if  this  Tiphsah  is  the  same  with  the 
Tiphsah  of  1  K.  iv.  24,  which  is  certainly  Thapsaeus, 
— and  it  is  quite  a  gratuitous  supposition  to  hold 
that  there  weie  two  Tiphsahs  (Winer,  Pealwb.,  ii. 
613),  —  we  must  regard  Menahem  as  having 
attacked  the  Assyrians,  and  depiived  them  for  a 
while  of  their  dominion  west  of  the  Euphrates, 
recovering  in  this  direction  the  boundary  fixed  for 
his  kingdom  by  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  24).  However 
this  may  have  been,  it  is  evident  that  Pul  looked 
upon  Menahem  as  a  rebel.  He  consequently  marched 
an  army  into  Palestine  for  the  purpose  of  punishing 
his  revolt,  wiien  Menahem  hastened  to  make  his 
submission,  and  having  collected  by  means  of  a  poll- 
ta.x  the  large  sum  of  a  thousand  talents  of  gold,  he 
paid  it  over  to  the  Assyrian  monarch,  who  con- 
sented thereupon  to  "  confirm  "  him  as  king.  This 
is  all  that  Scripture  tells  us  of  Pul.  The  Assyrian 
monuments  have  a  king,  whose  name  is  read  very 
doubtfully  as    Vul-lush  or   Iva-hish,  at  about  the 


b   This  is  perhaps  implied  in  the  words  "  the  kingdom 
was  confii-mcd  in  his  hand  "  (2  K.  xiv.  5  ;  comp.  xv.  10). 


PULSE 

period  when  Pul  must  have  reigned.  This  monarch 
is  the  grandson  of  Shalmaneser  (the  Black  Obelisk 
kinc;,  who  warred  with  Benhadad  and  Hazael,  and 
took  tribute  from  Jehu),  while  he  is  certainly  an- 
teiior  to  the  whole  line  of  monarchs  forming  the 
lower  dynasty — Tiglath-pileser,  Shalmaneser,  Sar- 
gon,  &c.  His  probable  date  therefore  is  R.c.  800-750, 
while  Pul,  as  we  hare  seen,  ruled  over  Assyria  in 
B.C.  770.  The  Hebrew  nan;e  Pul  is  undoubtedly 
curtailed  ;  for  no  Assyriiui  name  consists  of  a  single 
element.  If  we  take  the  "  Phalos  "  or  "  Phaloch  " 
of  the  Septuagint  as  probably  nearer  to  the  original 
type,  we  have  a  form  not  very  dili'erent  from  Vul- 
lush  or  Iva-lush.  If,  on  these  grounds,  the  identi- 
fication of  the  Scriptural  Pul  with  the  monumental 
Vul-lush  be  regarded  as  established,  we  may  give 
some  further  particulars  of  him  which  possess  con- 
siderable interest.  Vul-lush  reigned  at  Calah 
{Nimrud)  from  about  B.C.  800  to  it.c.  750.  He 
states  that  he  made  an  expedition  into  Syria,  wherein 
he  took  Damascus  ;  and  that  he  received  tribute 
from  the  Medes,  Armenians,  Phoenicians,  Samaritans, 
Damascenes,  Philistines,  and  Kdomites.  He  also 
tells  us  that  he  invaded  Babylonia  and  received  the 
submission  of  the  Chaldeans.  His  wife,  who  appears 
to  have  occupied  a  position  of  more  eminence  than 
any  other  wife  of  an  Assyrian  monarch,  bore  the 
name  of  Semiramis,  and  is  thought  to  be  at  once 
the  Babylonian  queen  of  Herodotus  (i.  184),  who 
lived  six  generations  before  Cyrus,  and  the  pro- 
totype of  that  earlier  sovereign  of  whom  Ctesias 
told  such  wonderful  stories  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4-20), 
and  who  long  maintained  a  great  local  reputation 
in  Western  Asia  (Strab.  xvi.  1,  §2).  It  is  not  im- 
probable that  the  real  Semiramis  was  a  Babylonian 
princess,  whom  Vul-lush  mairied  on  his  reduction 
of  the  country,  and  whose  son  Nabonassar  (accoid- 
ing  to  a  further  conjecture)  he  placed  upon  the 
Babylonian  throne.  He  calls  himself  in  one  inscrip- 
tion "  the  monarch  to  whose  son  Asshur,  the  chief 
of  the  gods,  has  granted  the  kingdom  of  Babylon." 
He  WAS  probably  the  last  Assyiian  monarch  of  his 
race.  The  list  of  Assyrian  monumental  kings,  which 
is  traceable  without  a  break  and  in  a  direct  line  to 
him  from  his  seventh  ancestor,  here  comes  to  a  stand ; 
no  son  of  Vul-lush  is  found ;  and  Tiglath-pileser, 
who  seems  to  have  been  Vul-lush's  successor,  is 
evidently  a  usurper,  since  he  makes  no  mention  of 
his  father  or  ancestors.  The  ciicumst;inces  of  Vtd- 
lush's  death,  and  of  the  revolution  which  established 
the  lower  Assyrian  dynasty,  are  almost  wholly  un- 
known, no  account  of  them  having  come  down  to 
us  upon  any  good  authority.  Not  much  value  can 
be  attached  to  the  statement  in  Agathias  (ii,  25, 
J).  119)  that  the  last  king  of  the  upper  dynasty  was 
succeeded  by  his  own  gardener.  [G.  R.] 

PULSE  (D''yiT,  <eroim,  and  D'';'yiT,  zer'dnim : 
uatrpia;  Thcod.  cnrepfxara:  Icgtani'nde }  oecws  only 
in  the  A.  V.  in  Dan.  i.  12,  IG,  as  the  translation  of 
the  above  plural  nouns,  the  literal  meaning  of  whicli 
is  "seeds"  of  any  kind.  The  zerohri  on  which 
"  the  four  children  "  thrived  for  ten  days  is  perhajjs 
not  to  be  restricted  to  what  we  now  understand  by 
"  pulse,"  i.  e.  the  grains  of  leguminous  vegetables : 
the  term  probably  includes  edible  seeds  in  general. 
Gesenius  translates  the  words  "  veget<ibles,  herbs, 
such  as  are  eaten  in  a  half-fast,  as  oj)posod  to  flesh 
and  more  delicate  food."  Probably  the  term  denotes 
uncooked  grains  of  any  kind,  whether  barley,  wheat, 
millet,  vetclies,  &c.  [W.  H.] 

PUNISPOIENTS.       Tiic    earliest    theory    of 


PUNISHMENTS 


971 


punishment  current  among  mankind  is  doubtless 
the  one  of  simple  retaliation,  "  blood  for  blood " 
[Blood,  Revenger  of],  a  view  which  in  a 
limited  form  appears  even  in  the  Mosaic  law. 
Viewed  historically,  the  fi)-st  case  of  punishment 
for  crime  mentioned  in  Scripture,  ne.\t  to  the  Fall 
itself,  is  that  of  Cain  the  first  murderer.  Kis  pun- 
ishment, however,  was  a  substitute  for  the  retalia- 
tion which  might  have  been  looked  for  from  the 
hand  of  man,  and  the  mark  set  on  him,  whatever  it 
was,  served  at  once  to  designate,  protect,  and  per- 
haps conect  the  criminal.  That  death  was  regaixled 
as  the  fitting  punishment  for  murder  appears  plain 
fiom  the  remark  of  Lamech  (Gen.  iv.  24).  In  the 
post-diluvian  code,  if  we  may  so  call  it,  retriLution 
by  the  hand  of  man,  even  in  the  case  of  an  offend- 
ing animal,  for  blood  shed,  is  clearly  laid  down 
(Gen.  ix.  5,  6) ;  but  its  terms  give  no  sanction  to 
that  "  wild  justice  "  executed  even  to  the  present 
day  by  individuals  and  families  on  their  own  behalf 
by  so  many  of  the  uncivilized  races  of  mankind. 
The  prevalence  of  a  feeling  of  retribution  due  for 
bloodshed  may  be  remarked  as  arising  among  the 
brethren  of  Joseph  in  reference  to  their  virtual  fra- 
tricide (Gen.  xlii.  21). 

Passing  onwards  to  Mosaic  times,  we  find  the 
sentence  of  capital  punishment,  in  the  case  of  murder, 
plainly  laid  down  in  the  law.  The  mui'derer  was 
to  be  put  to  death,  even  if  he  should  have  taken 
refuge  at  God's  altar  or  in  a  refuge  city,  and  the 
same  principle  was  to  be  carried  out  even  in  the 
case  of  an  animal  (Ex.  xxi.  12, 14,  28,  36  ;  Lev.  xxiv. 
17,  21  ;  Num.  xxxv.  31  ;  Deut.  xix.  11,  12  :  and  see 
1  K.  ii.  28,  34). 

I.  The  following  ofi'ences  also  are  mentioned  in 
the  Law  as  liable  to  the  punishment  of  death  : 

1.  Striking,  or  even  reviling,  a  parent  (Ex.  xxi. 

15,  17). 

2.  Blasphemy  (Lev.  xxiv.  14,  16,  23:  see  Philo, 
V.  M.  iii.  25  ;  1  K.  xxi.  10  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  65,  66). 

3.  Sabbath-breaking  (Num.  xv.  32-36  :  Ex.  xxxi. 
14,  xxxv.  2). 

4.  Witchcraft,  and  false  pretension  to  piophecy 
(Ex.  xxii.  18;  Lev.  xx.  27;  Deut.  xiii.  5,  xviii. 
20;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  9). 

5.  Adultery  (Lev.  xx.  10;  Deut.  xxii.  22:  see 
John  viii.  5,  and  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  12,  §1). 

6.  Unchastity,  a.  previous  to  marriage,  but  de- 
tected aftei-wards  ( Deut.  xxii.  21).  h.  In  a  betrothed 
woman  with  some  one  not  affianced  to  her  (ib.  vcr. 
23).  c.  In  a  priest's  daughter  (Lev.  xxi.  9). 

7.  Rape  (Deut.  xxii.  25). 

8.  Incestuous  and  imnatural  connexions  (Lev. 
XX,  11,  14,  16;  Ex.  xxii.  19). 

9.  Man-stealing  (Ex.  xxi.  16;  Deut.  xxiv.  7). 

10.  Idolatry,  actual  or  virtual,  in  any  shape 
(Lev.  XX.  2;  Deut.  xiii.  6,  10,  15,  xvii.  2-7:  see 
Josh.  vii.  and  xxii.  20,  and  Num.  xxv.  8). 

11.  False  witness  in  certain    cases    (^Deut.   xix, 

16,  19). 

Some  of  the  foregoing  arc  mentioned  as  being  in 
earlier  times  liable  to  capital  or  severe  punishment 
by  the  hand  either  of  (5od  or  of  man,  as  (6.)  Gen, 
xx.wiii.  24;  (1.)  Gen.  ix.  25;  (8.)  Gen,  xix., 
xxxviii.  10;   (5.)  Gen.  xii.  17,  xx.  7,  xsxix.  19. 

n.  But  there  is  a  large  number  of  offences,  some 
of  them  included  in  this  list,  which  are  named  in  the 
Law  as  involving  the  penalty  of  "  cutting »  ofi'  from 
the  people."     Gn  the  meaning  of  this  expression 


n"l3  ;  ^f oAc  eptvia. 


972 


PUNISPIMENTS 


some  controversy  has  ai-isen.  There  are  altogetlier 
thirty-six  or  thirtv-seven  cases  in  the  Pentateucli  in 
which  this  t'ormuhi  is  used,  which  may  be  tlius 
classified:  a.  Breach  of  Morals,  h.  Breach  of  Co- 
venant,    c.  Breach  of  Ritual. 

1.  Wilful  sin  in  general  (Num.  xv.  30,  31). 
*15  cases   of  incestuous   or    unclean   connexion 

(Lev.  -wiii.  '29,  and  x.x.  9-21). 

2.  *f  Uncircumcision  (Geu.  xvii.  14;  Ex.  iv.  24-j. 

Neixlect  of  Passover  (iS'um.  ix.  13). 
*KSabbath-breakiug  (Ex.  xxxi.  14). 

Neglect  of  Atonement-day  (Lev.  xxiii.  29). 
fWork  done  on  that  day  (Lev.  xxiii.  30). 
*tChildren  offered  to  Molech  (Lev.  xx.  3). 
*t Witchcraft  (Lev.  .xx.  6  ,. 

Anointnig  a  stranger  with  holy  oil  (Ex. 
XXX.  33). 
3.     Eating  leavened  bread  during  Passover  (Ex. 
xii.  15,  19). 
Eating  fat  of  sacrifice^  (Lev.  vii.  2.5). 
Eating  blood  (Lev.  vii.  27,  xvii.  14). 
*Eating   sacrifice   in   an  unclean    condition 
(;Lev.  vii.  20,  21,  .xxii.  3,  4,  9). 
Offering  too  late  (Lev.  xix.  8). 
Making   holy    ointment   for   private    use 

(Ex.  XXX.  32,  33). 
Making   perfume   for    private     use    (Ex. 

XXX.  38). 
Neglect  of  purification  in  general  (Num. 

-xix.  13,  20). 
Not  bringing  ottering  after  slaying  a  beast 

for  food  (Lev.  xvii.  9). 
Not  slaying  the  animal  at  the  tabernacle- 
door  (Lev.  xvii.  4). 
*'|''r°'J'^hing  holy  things  illegally  (Num.  iv. 
15,  18,  20 :  and  see  2  Sam.  vi.  7  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  21). 
In  the  foregoing  list,  which,  it  will  be  seen,  is 
classified  according  to  the  view  supposed  to  be  taken 
by  the  Law  of  the  principle  of  condemnation,  the 
cases  marked  with  *  are  (a)  those  which  are  ex- 
pressly threatened  or  actually  visited  with  death, 
as  well  as  with  cutting  off'.     In  those  (6)  marked 
t  the  hand  of  God  is  expressly  named  as  the  instru- 
ment of  e.xecution.     We  thus  find  that  of  (a)  there 
are  in  class  1,  7  cases,  all  named  in  Lev.  xx.  9-16. 
.   do.     2,  4  cases, 
do.     3,  2  cases, 
while  of  (6)  we  find  in  class  2,  4  cases,  of  which 
3  belong  also  to  (a),  and  in  class  3,  1  case.     The 
question  to  be  determined  is,  whether  the  phrase 
"  cut  off"  be  likely  to  mean  death  in  all  cases,  and 
to  avoid  that  conclusion  Le  Clerc,  Michaelis,  and 
others,  have  suggested  that  in  some  of  them,  the 
ceremonial  ones,  it  was  intended  to  be  commuted 
for  banishment  or  privation  of  civil  rights  (Mich. 
Laws  of  Moses,  §237,  vol.   iii.   p.  43*5,  trans.). 
Rabbinical  writeis  explained  "  cutting  oft"  to  mean 
excommunication,  and   laid  down  three  degrees  of 
severity  as  belonging  to  it  (Selden,  de  ^'(//i.  i.  fi). 
[Anathema.]  But  most  commentators  agree,  that, 
in  accordance  with  the  prima  facie  meaning  of  Heb. 
X.  28,  the  sentence  of  "cutting  off"  must  be  under- 
stood to  be  death-punishment  of  some  sort.     Saal- 
schiitz  explains  it  to  be  premature  death  by  God's 
hand,  as  if  God  took  into  his  own  hand  such  cases 
of  ceremonial  defilement  as  would  create  difficulty 
for  human  judges  to  decide.     Knobel  thinks  death- 
punishment  absolutely  is  meant.     So  Corn,  a  La- 
jiide  and   Ewald.     Jahn  explains,  that  when   God 
is   said   to  cut  olf,  an  act    of  divine  Providence   is 


PUNISHMENTS 

meant,  which  in  the  end  destroys  the  fiiniily,  but 
that  "cutting  off"  in  oreneral  means  stoning  to 
death  as  the  usual  capital  punishment  of  the  Law. 
Calmet  thinks  it  means  privation  of  all  rights  be- 
longing to  the  Covenant.  It  may  be  remarked, 
I  a)  that  two  instances  are  recoided,  in  which  viola- 
tion of  a  I'itual  command  took  place  without  the 
actual  infiictionofa  death-punishment:  (1.)  that  of 
the  p'ople  eating  with  the  blood  (1  Sam.  xiv.  32); 
(2.)  that  of  Uzziah  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  19,  21)— and  that 
in  the  latter  case  the  offender  was  in  fact  e.xcom- 
municatod  for  liti? ;  (6),  tliat  there  are  also  instances 
of  the  directly  contrary  course,  viz.  in  which  the 
offenders  were  punished  with  death  for  similar 
off^ences, — Nadab  and  Abihu  (Lev.  x.  1,  2),  Korah 
and  his  company  (Num.  xvi.  10,  33),  who  "pe- 
rished from  the  congregation,"  Uzzah  (2  Sam.  vi. 
7), — and  further,  that  the  leprosy  inflicted  on  Uzziah 
might  be  regarded  as  a  virtual  death  (Num.  xii.  12). 
To  whichever  side  of  the  question  this  case  may  be 
thouf^ht  to  incline,  we  may  perhaps  conclude  that 
the  primary  meaning  of  "cutting  oft"  is  a  sentence 
of  de;ith  to  be  executed  in  some  cases  without  remis- 
sion, but  in  others  voidable:  (1.)  by  immediate 
atonement  on  the  offender's  part;  (2.)  by  direct  in- 
terposition of  the  Almighty,  i.  e.  a  sentence  of 
death  always  "recorded,"  but  not  always  executed. 
And  it  is  also  probable,  that  the  severity  of  the 
sentence  produced  in  practice  an  immediate  recourse 
to  the  prescribed  means  of  propitiation  in  almost 
every  actual  case  of  ceremonial  defilement  (Num. 
XV.  27,  28 ;  Saalschiitz,  Arch.  Hehr.  x.  74,  75,  vol. 
ii.  299  ;  Knobel,  Calmet,  Corn,  a  Lapide  on  Gen. 
xvii.  13,  14;  Keil,  Bibl.  Arch.  vol.  ii.  264,  §153; 
Ewald,  Ocsch.  App.  to  vol.  iii.  p.  158 ;  Jahn,  Arch. 
Bibl.^lbl). 

III.  Punishments  in  themselves  are  twofold. 
Capital  and  Secondary. 

(n.)  Of  the  former  kind,  the  following  only  are 
prescribed  by  the  Law.  (1.)  Stoninj,  which  was 
the  ordinary  mode  of  execution  (Ex.  xvii.  4;  Luke 
XX.  6;  John  x.  31;  Acts  xiv.  5).  We  find  it 
ordered  in  the  cases  which  are  marked  in  the  lists 
above  as  punishable  with  death ;  and  we  may  re- 
mark further,  that  it  is  ordered  also  in  the  case  of 
an  offending  animal  (Ex.  xxi.  29,  and  xix.  13). 
The  false  witness  also  in  a  capital  case  would  by  the 
law  of  retaliation  become  liable  to  death  (Dent.  xix. 
19  ;  Maccoth,  i.  1,  ti).  In  the  case  of  idolatry,  and 
it  may  be  presumed  in  other  cases  also,  the  wit- 
nesses, of  whom  there  were  to  be  at  least  two,  wei'e 
required  to  cast  the  first  stone  (Deut.  xiii.  9, 
xvii.  7  ;  John  viii.  7  ;  Acts  vii.  58).  The  Rab- 
binical writers  add,  that  the  first  stbne  was  cast 
by  one  of  them  on  the  chest  of  the  convict,  and  if 
this  failed  to  cause  death,  the  byst<inders  proceeded 
to  complete  the  sentence  {Sanhedr.  vi.  1,  3,  4; 
Goodwyn,  3Ioses  and  Aaron,  p.  121).  The  body 
was  then  to  be  suspended  till  sunset  (Deut.  xxi.  23  ; 
Josh.  X.  26 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §24),  and  not 
buried  in  the  family  grave  {Sanhedr.  vi.  5). 

(2.)  Hanging  is  mentioned  as  a  distinct  punish- 
ment (Num.  XXV.  4;  2  Sam.  xxi.  6,  9);  but  is 
generally,  in  the  aise  of  Jews,  spoken  of  as  follow- 
ing death  by  some  other  means. 

(3.)  Burning,  in  pre-Mosaic  times,  was  the 
punishment  tor  unchastity  (Gen.  xxxviii.  24). 
Under  the  Law  it  is  ordered  in  the  case  of  a  priest's 
daughter  (Lev.  xxi.  9),  of  which  an  instance  is 
mentioned  (^Sanhedr.  vii.  2).  Also  in  case  of  incest 
(  Lev.  XX.  14)  ;  but  it  is  also  mentioned  as  following 
death    l)y  other    means  (Jush.   vii.   25  .  ami  some 


PUNISHMENTS 

have  thought  it  was  never  used  excepting  after 
death.  A  tower  of  burning  embers  is  mentioned 
in  2  Mace.  xiii.  4^8.  The  Rabbinical  account  of 
burning  by  means  of  molten  lead  poured  down  the 
throat  has  no  authority  in  Scripture. 

(4.)  Death  by  the  sicord  or  spear  is  named  in  the 
Law  (Ex.  xix.  13,  xxxii.  27;  Num.  xxv.  7;)  but 
two  of  the  cases  may  be  regarded  as  exceptional ; 
but  it  occurs  frequently  in  regal  and  post-Baby- 
lonian times  (1  K.  ii.  25,  34,  xix.  1 ;  2  Chr.  xxi.  4, 
Jer.  xxvi.  23  ;  2  Sam.  i.  15,  iv.  12,  xx.  22  ;  1  Sam. 
x\-.  33,  xxii.  18  ;  Judg.  ix.  5 ;  2  K.  Jc.  7  ;  Matt, 
xiv.  8,  10),  a  list  in  which  more  than  one  case  of 
a.-;sassination,  either  with  or  without  legal  forms,  is 
included. 

(5.)  Stranglinfi  is  said  by  the  Rabbins  to  liave 
been  regarded  as  the  most  common  Ijut  least  severe 
of  the  capital  punishments,  and  to  have  been  per- 
formed b)'  immersing  the  convict  in  clay  or  mud, 
and  then  strangling  him  by  a  cloth  twisted  round 
the  neck  ((;oodwyn,  M.  and  A.  p.  122  ;  Otho,  Lex. 
Rah.  s.  V.  "  Supplicia  ; "  Sanlicdr.  vii.  3  ;  Ker  Por- 
ter, Trm.  ii.  177  ;  C.  B.  Michaelis,  De  Judwiis, 
ap.  Pott,  ;S'///^  Coinm.  iv.  §10,  12). 

This  Rabbinical  opinion,  foimded,  it  is  said,  on 
oral  tradition  from  Moses,  has  no  Scripture  au- 
thority. 

(6.)  Besides  these  ordinary  capital  punishments, 
we  read  of  others,  either  of  foreign  introduction  or 
of  an  irregular  kind.  Among  the  former,  {\.) 
Crucifixion  is  treated  alone  I'vol.  i.  p.  369),  to 
which  article  the  following  remark  may  be  added, 
that  the  .Jewish  tradition  of  capital  punishment, 
independent  of  the  Roman  governor,  being  inter- 
dicted for  forty  years  previous  to  the  Destruction, 
appears  in  tact,  if  not  in  time,  to  be  justified 
(.John  xviii.  3],  with  De  Wette's  Comment.  ; 
Goodwyn,  p.  121;  Keil,  ii.  p.  2(54;  Joseph.  Ant. 
XX.  9,  §1). 

(2.)  Drownin'j,  though  not  ordered  under  the 
Law,  was  practised  at  Rome,  and  is  said  by  St. 
.Jerome  to  have  been  in  use  among  the  Jews  (Oic. 
pro  Sext.  Rose.  Am.  25 ;  Jerome,  Com.  on  Matth. 
lib.  iii.  p.  138  ;  Matt,  xviii.  6  ;  Mark  ix.  42). 

(3.)  Sawinij  asnnder  or  crushing  beneath  iron 
instruments.  The  former  is  said  to  have  been  prac- 
tised on  Isaiah.  The  latter  may  perhaps  not  have 
always  caused  death,  and  thus  have  been  a  torture 
rather  than  a  capital  punishment  (2  Sam.  xii.  31, 
and  perhaps  Prov.  xx.  20  ;  Hel).  xi.  .37  ;  Just.  Mart. 
Tri/ph.  120).  The  pi'ocess  of  sawing  asunder,  as 
practised  in  Barbary,  is  described  by  Shaw  ( Trav. 
p.  254). 

(4).  Poandinfi  in  a  mortnr,  or  liedtini/  to  death, 
is  alluded  to  in  Prov.  xxvii.  22,  but  not  as  a  legal 
punishment,  and  cases  are  described  (2  Mace.  vi. 
28,  30).  Pounding  in  a  mortar  is  mentioned  as  a 
Cingalese  punishment  by  Sir  E.  Tennant  {Ceylon, 
ii.  881. 

(5.)  Precipitation,  iittempted  in  the  case  of  our 
Lord  at  Nazaieth,  and  carried  out  in  that  of 
captives  from  the  Edomites,  and  of  St.  .James,  wlio 
is  .said  to  have  l)een  cast  from  "  the  pinnacle  "  of 
the  Temple.  Also  it  is  said  to  have  been  executed 
on  some  Jewish  women  by  the  Syrians  (2  Mace. 
vi.  10  ;  Luke  iv.  29  ;  Euseb.  //.  L\  ii.  23  ;  2  Chr. 
xxv.  12). 

Criminals  e.\ecuted  \>y  law  were  buried  outside 
the  city -gates,  and  heaps  of  stones  were  flung  upon 
their  gi-aves  (Josh.  vii.  25,  26  :  2  Sam.  xviii.  17  ; 
.Jer.  x.xii.  19).  Mohammedans  to  this  day  cast 
stones,  in  passing,  at  thi' >;n]>pnsed  loinli  of  AIismIoui 


PUKIFICATION 


973 


(Fabri,  Evagatoriam,  i.  409  ;  Saiidvs,  Tear.  p. 
189  ;  Raumer,  Pa/aest.  p.  272). 

(o.)  Of  secondari/  punishments  among  the  Jews 
the  original  princii)lcs  were,  (1.)  retaliation,  "  eve 
for  eye,"  &c.  (Ex.  x.xi.  24,  25  ;  see  Cell.  Noct.  Att. 
XX.  1). 

(2.)  Compensation,  identical  (lestitution)  or  ana- 
logous ;  payment  for  loss  of  time  or  of  power  (Ex. 
x.xi.  18-3(3  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  18-21 ;  Dent.  xix.  21).  The 
man  who  stole  a  sheep  or  an  ox  was  required  to 
restore  four  sheep  for  a  sheep  and  five  oxen  for  an 
ox  thus  stolen  (Ex.  xxii.  1).  The  thief  caught  in 
the  fact  in  a  dwelhng  might  even  be  killed  or  sold, 
or  if  a  stolen  animal  were  found  alive,  he  might  be 
compelled  to  restore  double  (Ex.  xxii.  2-4).  Damage 
ilone  by  an  animal  was  to  be  fully  compensated 
(ib.  ver.  5).  Fire  caused  to  a  neighbour's  corn  was 
to  be  compen.sated  (ver.  6).  A  pledge  stolen,  and 
found  in  the  thief's  posse.ssion,  was  to  be  com- 
pensated by  double  (ver.  7).  All  trespass  was  to 
pay  double  (vei-.  9).  A  pledge  lost  or  damaged 
was  to  be  compensated  (ver.  12,  13).  A  pledge 
withheld,  to  be  restored  with  20  per  cent,  of  the 
value  (Lev.  vi.  4,  5).  The  "  seven-fold"  of  Prov. 
vi.  31,  by  its  notion  of  completeness,  probably  in- 
dicates servitude  in  default  of  full  restitution  (Ex. 
xxii.  2-4).  Slander  against  a  wife's  honour  was 
to  be  compensated  to  her  parents  by  a  fine  of  100 
shekels,  and  the  traducer  himself  to  be  punished 
with  stripes  (Dent.  xxii.  18,  19). 

(.').)  Stripes,  whose  number  was  not  to  exceed 
foiiy  (Deut.  xxv.  3);  whence  the  Jews  took  care 
not  to  exceed  thirty-nine  (2  Cor.  xi.  24;  Joseph. 
Ant.  iv.  8,  §21).  The  convict  was  stripped  to  the 
waist  and  tied  in  a  bent  position  to  a  low  pillar, 
and  the  stripes,  with  a  whip  of  three  thongs,  were 
inflicted  on  the  back  between  the  shouldei's.  A 
single  stripe  in  excess  subjected  the  executioner  to 
punishment  {Maccoth,  iii.  1,  2,  3,  13,  14).  It  is 
remarkable  that  the  Abyssinians  use  the  same  num- 
ber (Wolff,  Trav.  ii.  276). 

(4.)  Scourging  with  thorns  is  mentioned  Judg. 
viii.  16.  The  stocks  are  mentioned  Jer.  xx.  2; 
passing  through  fire,  2  Sam.  xii.  31  ;  mutilation, 
Judg.  i.  6,  2  Mace.  vii.  4,  and  see  2  Sam.  iv. 
12  ;  pinching  out  hair,  Is.  I.  6  ;  in  later  times, 
imprisonment,  and  confiscation  or  exile,  Ezr.  vii. 
26;  Jer.  xxxvii.  15,  xxxviii.  G;  Acts  iv.  3,  v.  18, 
xii.  4.  As  in  earlier  times  imprisonment  formed 
no  part  of  the  Jewish  system,  the  sentences  were 
executed  at  once  (see  Esth.  vii.  8-10;  Selden,  De 
Sgn.  ii.  c.  13,  p.  888).  Before  death  a  grain  of 
frankincense  in  a  cup  of  wine  was  given  to  the  cri- 
minal to  intoxicate  him  (ib.  889).  The  command 
for  witnesses  to  cast  the  first  stone  shows  that  the 
duty  of  execution  did  not  belong  to  any  special  officer 
(Deut.  xvii.  7). 

Of  punishments  inflicted  by  other  nations  we 
have  th«  following  notices: — In  Egypt  the  power 
of  life  and  death  and  imprisonment  rested  with  the 
king,  and  to  some  extent  also  witli  officers  of  hi<rh 
rank  (Gen.  xl.  3,  22,  xlii.  20).  Death  might  be 
commuted  for  slavery  (xlii.  19,  xliv.  9,  33).  The 
law  of  retaliation  was  also  in  use  in  Egypt,  and  the 
punishment  of  the  bastinado,  as  represented  in  the 
paintings,  agrees  better  with  the  Mosaic  directions 
than  with  the  Rabbiniciil  (Wilkinson,  A.£.  ii.  214, 
215,217).  In  Egypt,  and  also  in  Babylon,  the 
chief  of  the  executioners,  Rab-TnUiachim,  was  a 
great  officer  of  state  (Gen.  xxxvii.  36.  xxxix.,  xl. ; 
Dan.  ii.  14;  Jer  xxxix.  13,  xii.  10,  xliii.  6,  Iii.  15, 
16:    Micliarlis,    iii.   412;    Joseph.    Ant.  x.   8,   §:, 


974 


PUNITES 


[Cherethim]  ;  Mark  vi.  27).     He  was  sometimes 
a  eunuch  (Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  b,  §4). 

Putting  out  the  eyes  of  captives,  and  other 
cruelties,  as  flaying  alive,  burning,  tearing  out  the 
tongue,  &c.,  were  practised  by  Assyrian  and  Baby- 
lonian conqueroi's  ;  and  paiallel  instances  of  despotic 
cruelty  are  found  in  abundance  in  both  ancient  and 
modern  times  in  Persian  and  other  history.  The 
execution  of  Haman  and  the  story  of  Daniel  are 
])ictures  of  summary  Oriental  procedure  (2  K.  xxv. 
7;  Esth.  vii.  9,  10;  Jer.  xxix.  22;  Dan.  iii.  6, 
vi.  7,  24;  Her.  vii.  39,  ix.  112,  113;  Chardin, 
Voy.  vi.  21,  118;  Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  3(39,  374, 
377,  Nin.  ^  Bah.  456,  457).  And  tlie  duty  of 
counting  the  numbers  of  the  victims,  which  is 
there  represented,  agrees  with  the  story  of  Jehu 
(2  K.  X.  7),  and  with  one  recorded  of  Shah  Abbas 
Jlirza,  by  Ker  Porter  {Travels,  ii.  524,  525  ;  see  also 
Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  57;  and  Malcolm,  Sketches 
of  Persia,  p.  47). 

With  the  Romans,  stripes  and  the  stocks,  irivn- 
avpiyyov  ^vKov,  nervus  and  coliiinbur,  were  in  use, 
and  imprisonment,  with  a  chain  attached  to  a  soldier. 
There  were  a^o  the  liberae  custodiae  in  pri\'ate 
houses  [Prison]  (Acts  xvi.  23,  xxii.  24,  x.xviii.  16  ; 
Xen.  Hell.  iii.  3, 11  ;  Herod,  ix.  37;  Plautus,  Bud. 
iii.  6,  30,  34,  38,  50;  Arist.  Eq.  1044  (ed. 
Bekker)  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  6,  §7,  six.  6,  §1  ; 
Sail.  Cat.  47  ;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  "  Flagmm  "). 

Exposure  to  u-ild  beasts  appears  to  be  mentioned 
by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  32  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  17),  but 
not  with  any  precision.  [H.  W.  P.] 

PU'NITES,THE(*J-"ISn:  b^ovai:  Phuciiiae). 
The  descendants  of  Pua,  or  Phuvah,  the  son  of 
Issachar  (Num.  xxvi.  23). 

PUN'ON  (p-IS,  i.  e.  Phunon  ;  Samarit.  P'D  : 
^iivdi;  Alex,  ^ii/co:  Phinon).  One  of  the  halting- 
places  of  the  Israelite  host  during  the  last  portion 
of  the  Wandering  (Num.  .xxxiii.  42,  43).  It  lay 
next  beyond  Zalmonah,  between  it  and  Oboth,  and 
three  days'  journey  from  the  mountains  of  Abarim, 
which  formed  the  boundary  of  Moab. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onoiwisticon,  ^ivSiv, 
"Fenon")  it  is  identified  with  Pinon,  the  seat 
of  the  Edomite  tribe  of  that  name,  and,  further, 
with  Phaeno,  which  contained  the  copper-rnines  so 
notorious  at  that  period,  and  was  situated  between 
Petra  and  Zoar.  This  identification  is  supported  liy 
the  form  of  the  name  in  the  LXX.  and  Samaritan  • 
and  the  situation  falls  in  with  the  requirements  of 
the  Wanderings.  No  tiace  of  such  a  name  appeais 
to  have  been  met  with  by  modern  explorers.    [G.] 

PURIFICATION.  The  term  "purification," 
in  its  legal  and  technical  sense,  is  applied  to  the 
ritual  observances  whereby  an  Israeli le  was  formally 
alsolved  from  the  taint  of  unclennness,  whetlier  evi- 
dence 1  by  any  overt  act  or  state,  or  whether  con- 
nected with  man's  natural  depravity.  The  cases 
that  demanded  it  in  the  former  instance  aie  defined 
in  the  Levitical  law  [UNCLEAN>fESs] :  with  legard 
to  the  latter,  it  is  only  possible  to  lay  down  the 
general  rule  that  it  was  a  fitting  pi  elude  to  any 
nearer  approach  to  the  Deity;  as.  tor  instance,  in 
the  admission  of  a  proselyte  to  the  congreg:ition 
[Proselyte],  in  the  bapti.sm  {KaBapLcrixos,  John 
iii.  25)  of  the  Jews  as  a  s  gn  of  repentance  [Bap- 
tism], in  the  consecration  of  priests  and  Levites 
[Priest  ;  Levite],  or  in  the  performance  of  special 
leligious  acts  (Lev.  xvi.  4;  2  CJir.  xxx.  19j.  In 
the  pre.sent  article  we  are  concerneil  solelv  with  the 


PURIFICATION 

foi  mer  class,  inasmuch  as  in  this  alone  were  the  ritual 
obsen'imces  of  a  special  (^haractei'.  The  essence  of 
purification,  indeed,  in  all  cases,  consisted  in  the  use 
of  water,  whether  by  way  of  ablution  or  aspersion ; 
but  in  the  majora  delicta  of  legal  uncleanness,  sacri- 
fices of  various  kinds  were  added,  and  the  ceremonies 
throughout  bore  an  expiatory  character.  Simple 
ablution  of  the  person  was  required  after  sexual 
intercourse  (Lev.  xv,  18;  2  Sam.  xi.  4):  ablution 
of  the  clothes,  after  touching  the  carcase  of  an  un- 
clean beast,  or  eating  or  carrying  the  carcase  of  a 
clean  beast  that  had  died  a  natural  death  (Lev.  xi. 
25,  40):  ablution  both  of  the  person  and  of  the 
defiled  garments  in  cases  of  gonorrhea  dormientinin 
(Lev.  XV.  16,  17j — the  ceremony  in  each  of  the 
above  instances  to  take  place  on  the  day  on  which 
the  uncleanness  was  contracted.  A  higher  degree  of 
uncleanness  resulted  from  prolonged  gonorrhea  in 
males,  and  menstruation  in  women;  in  these  cases 
a  probationary  interval  of  seven  days  was  to  be 
allowed  after  the  cessation  of  the  symptoms  ;  on  the 
evening  of  the  seventh  day  the  candidate  for  purifi- 
cation performed  an  ablution  both  of  the  person 
and  of  the  gamients,  and  on  the  eighth  otl'ei  ed  two 
turtle-doves  or  two  young  pigeons,  one  for  a  sin- 
offering,  the  other  for  a  burnt-offering  (Lev.  xV. 
1-15,  19-30).  Contact  with  persons  in  the  above 
states,  or  even  with  clothing  or  furniture  that  had 
been  used  by  them  while  in  those  states,  involved 
uncleanness  in  a  minor  degree,  to  be  absolved  by 
ablution  on  the  day  of  infection  generally  (Lev.  xv. 
5-11,  21-23;,  but  in  one  particular  case  after  an 
interval  of  seven  days  (Lev.  sv.  24).  In  cases  of 
childbirth  the  sacrifice  was  increased  to  a  lamb  of 
the  first  year  with  a  pigeon  or  turtle-dove  (Lev. 
xii.  6),  an  exception  being  made  in  favour  of  the 
poor  who  might  present  the  same  offering  as  in  the 
preceding  case  (Lev.  xii.  8;  Luke  ii.  22-24).  The 
purification  took  place  forty  days  after  the  birth  of 
a  son,  and  eighty  after  that  of  a  daughter,  the 
diflerence  in  the  interval  being  based  on  physical 
considerations.  The  uncleannesses  fdieady  specified 
were  comparatively  of  a  mild  character:  the  more 
severe  were  connected  with  death,  which,  viewed  as 
the  penalty  of  sin,  was  in  the  highest  degree  conta- 
minating. To  this  head  we  refer  the  two  cases  of 
(1.)  touching  a  corpe,  or  a  grave  (Num.  xix.  16), 
or  even  killing  a  man  in  war  (Num.  xxxi.  19) ;  and 
(2.)  leprosy,  which  was  regarded  by  the  Hebrews 
as  nothing  less  than  a  living  death.  The  ceremonies 
of  purifi<mtion  in  the  fiist  of  these  two  cases  are 
detailed  in  Num.  xix.  A  peculiar  kind  of  water, 
tei-med  the  ivater  of  uncleanness'-  (A.  "\''.  "  water 
of  separation "),  was  prepared  in  the  following 
manner : — An  unblemished  red  heifer,  on  which  the 
yoke  had  not  passed,  was  slain  by  the  eldest  son  of 
the  high-priest  outside  the  camp.  A  portion  of  its 
blood  was  sprinkled  .seven  times  towards  ^  the  sanc- 
tuary;  the  rest  of  it,  and  the  whole  of  the  carcase, 
including  even  its  dung,  were  then  burnt  in  the 
sight  of  the  officiating  pi  iest,  together  with  cedar- 
wood,  hyssop,  and  scarlet.  The  ashes  were  collected 
by  a  clean  man  aJid  deposited  in  a  clean  place  out- 
side the  camp.  Whenever  occasion  required,  a 
portion  of  the  ashes  was  mixed  with  spring  water  in 
ajar,  and  the  unclean  person  was  sprinkled  with  it 
on  the  third,  and  again  on  the  seventh  day  after  the 


"^  ''33  nDi"PX.      The  A.  V.   incorrectly   renders   it 
"  (liroetlv  iK'liire." 


PURIFICATION 

contraction  of  the  uncleanness.  That  the  water  had 
an  expiatory  efficacy,  is  implied  in  the  term  sin- 
offering'^  (A.  \'.  "purification  for  sin")  applied  to 
it  (Num.  xix.  9),  and  all  the  pniticulars  counected 
with  its  preparation  had  a  symbolical  significance 
appropriate  to  the  object  sought.  The  sex  of  the 
victim  (female,  and  hence  lite-giving),  its  led  colour 
(the  colour  of  blood,  the  seat  of  life),  its  unimpaired 
vigour  (never  having  borne  the  yoke),  its  youth, 
and  the  absence  in  it  of  spot  or  blemish,  the  cedar 
and  the  hyssop  (possessing  the  'qualities,  the  former 
of  incorruption,  the  latter  of  purity),  and  the 
scarlet  (again  the  colour  of  blood ) — all  these  sym- 
bolized lite  in  its  fulness  and  freshness  as  the  an- 
tidote of  death.  At  the  same  time  the  extreme 
virulence  of  the  uncleanness  is  taught  by  the  regu- 
lations that  the  victim  should  be  wholly  consumed 
outside  the  camp,  whereas  generally  certain  parts 
were  consumed  on  the  altar,  and  the  otfal  only  out- 
side the  camp  (comp.  Lev.  iv.  11,  12);  that  the 
blood  was  sprinkled  towards,  and  not  before  the 
sanctuary;  that  the  otficiating  minister  should  be 
neither  the  high  priest,  nor  yet  simply  a  pi'iest,  but 
the  presumptive  high-priest,  the  office  being  too 
impure  for  the  first,  and  too  important  for  the 
second ;  that  even  the  priest  and  the  person  that 
burnt  the  heifei  were  rendered  unclean  by  reason 
of  their  contact  with  the  victim ;  and,  lastly,  that 
the  purification  should  be  effected,  not  simply  by 
the  r.se  of  water,  but  of  water  mixed  witli  ashes 
which  served  as  a  lye,  and  would  therefore  have 
peculiarly  cleansing  qualities. 

The  purification  of  the  leper  was  a  yet  more 
formal  proceeding,  and  indicated  the  highest  ])itch 
of  uncleanness.  The  rites  are  thus  described  in 
Lev.  xiv.  4-32 : — The  priest  having  examined  the 
ieper  and  pronounced  him  clear  of  his  disease,  took 
tor  him  two  birds  "  alive  and  clean,"  with  cedar, 
scailet,  and  hyssop.  One  of  the  birds  w;xs  killed 
under  the  priest's  directions  over  a  vessel  filled  with 
spring  water,  into  which  its  blood  11,41 :  the  other, 
with  the  adjuncts,  cedar,  &c.,  was  dipped  by  the 
priest  into  the  mixed  blood  and  water,  and,  after 
the  unclean  person  had  been  seven  times  sprinkled 
with  the  same  liquid,  was  permitted  to  fly  away 
"  into  the  open  field."  The  leper  then  washed 
himself  and  h's  clothes,  and  shaved  his  head.  The 
above  proceedings  took  place  outside  the  camp,  and 
formed  the  first  stage  of  purification.  A  proba- 
tionary interval  of  seven  days  was  ttien  allowed, 
which  period  the  leper  was  to  pass  "  abroad  out  of 
his  tent  :"•'  on  the  last  of  these  days  the  washing  was 
repeated,  and  the  shaving  was  more  rigidly  per- 
formed, even  to  the  eyebrows  and  all  his  hair. 
The  second  stage  of  the  purification  took  place  on 
the  eighth  day,  and  was  performed  "  before  the 
Lord  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion." The  lejier  brought  thither  an  ofl'ering  con- 
sisting of  two  he-lambs,  a  yearling  ewe-lamb,  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil,  and  a  log  of  oil:  in  cases  of 
poverty  the  offering  was  reduced  to  one  lamb,  and 
two  turtle-doves,  or  two  yoimg  pigeons,  with  a  less 
quantity  of  fine  flour,  and  a  log  of  oil.  The  priest 
slew  one  of  the  he-lambs  as  a  trespass-ofl'ering,  and 
applied  a  portion  of  its  blood  to  the  right  ear,  right 


PURIFICATION 


075 


« nx;3n. 

^  The  Rabbinical  explanation  of  tills  was  in  conformity 
with  the  addition  in  the  Chaldoe  version,  "  et  non  acwdet 
ad  latus  iixorls suae."  The  wo^s  cannot,  however,  be  thus 
restricted :  they  are  designed  to  maric  the  partial  restora- 
tion of  the  leper — inside  the  camp,  but  outside  his  tout. 


tliumb,  and  gieat  toe  of  the  right  foot  of  the  leper: 
he  next  sprinkled  a  portion  of  the  oil  seven  times 
before  the  Lord,  applied  another  portion  of  it  to  the 
parts  of  the  body  already  specified,  and  poured  the 
remainder  over  the  leper's  head.  The  other  he- 
lamb  and  the  ewe-lamb,  or  the  two  birds,  as  the 
case  might  be,  were  then  offered  as  a  sin-offering, 
and  a  burnt-offering,  together  with  the  meat-offei- 
ing.  The  significance  of  the  cedar,  the  scarlet,  and 
the  hyssop,  of  the  running  water,  and  of  the  "  alive 
(full  of  life)  and  clean"  condition  of  the  birds,  is 
the  same  as  in  the  case  previously  described.  The 
two  stages  of  the  proceedings  indicated,  the  first, 
which  took  place  outside  the  camp,  the  re-admissiqp 
of  the  leper  to  the  community  of  men  ;  the  second, 
before  the  sanctuary,  his  re-admission  to  communion 
with  God.  In  the  first  stage,  the  slaughter  of  the 
one  bird  and  the  dismissal  of  the  other,  symbolized 
the  punishment  of  death  deserved  and  fully  remitted. 
In  the  second,  the  use  of  oil  and  its  application  to 
the  .same  parts  of  the  body  as  in  the  consecration  of 
priests  (Lev.  viii.  23,  24),  symbolized  the  re-dedi- 
cation of  the  leper  to  the  service  of  Jehovah. 

The  ceremonies  to  be  observed  in  the  purification 
of  a  house  or  a  garment  infected  with  leprosy,  were 
identical  with  the  first  stage  of  the  proceedings  used 
for  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  33-53). 

The  necessity  of  purification  was  extended  in  the 
post-Babylonian  period  to  a  variety  of  unauthorized 
cases.  Cups  and  pots,  brasen  vessels  and  couches, 
were  washed  as  a  matter  of  ritual  observance  (Mark 
vii.  4).  The  washing  of  the  hands  before  meals 
was  conducted  in  a  formal  manner  (Mark  vii.  3), 
and  minute  regulations  are  laid  down  on  this  subject 
in  a  treatise  of  the  Mishna,  entitled  Yadaim.  These 
ablutions  required  a  large  supply  of  water,  and 
hence  we  fiiul  at  a  marriage  teast  no  less  than  six 
jai's  containing  two  or  three  firkius  apiece,  prepared 
for  the  purpose  (John  ii.  6).  We  meet  with  refer- 
ences to  puiification  after  childbirth  (Luke  ii.  22), 
and  after  the  cure  of  leprosy  (Matt.  viii.  4 ;  Luke  xvii. 
14),  the  sprinkling  of  the  water  mixed  with  ashes 
being  still  retained  in  the  latter  case  (Heb.  ix.  13). 
What  may  have  been  the  specific  causes  of  unclean- 
ness in  those  who  came  up  to  puiify  themselves 
before  the  Passover  (John  xi.  55),  or  in  those  who 
had  taken  upon  themselves  the  Nazarite's  vow 
(Acts  xxi.  24,  26),  we  are  not  informed  ;  in  either 
case  it  may  have  been  contact  with  a  corpse,  though 
in  the  latter  it  would  lather  appear  to  have  been  a 
general  purification  preparatory  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  vow. 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  observed,  that  the  dis- 
tinctive feature  in  the  Mosaic  rites  of  purification  is 
their  expiatory  character.  The  idea  of  luicleanness 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jew  :  it  was  attached  by 
the  (ireeks  to  the  events  of  childbirth  and  death 
(Thncyd.  iii.  104;  Eurip.  Tph.  in  Taur.  383),  and 
by  various  nations  to  the  case  of  sexual  intercourse 
(Herod,  i.  198,  ii.  64;  Pers.  ii.  16).  Rut  with  all 
these  nations  simple  al)lution  sufliiod  :  no  s.acrifices 
were  deinanded.  'fhe  Jew  alone  was  taught  by  the 
use  of  expiatory  offerings  to  discern  to  its  full  extent 
the  connexion  between  the  outward  sign  and  the  in- 
ward fount  of  impurity.  [W.  L.  13.] 

"^  Various  opinions  juv  held  willi  rci;ai"d  to  the  term 
in/y/xjj.  The  meaning  "  with  the  fist "  is  in  accordance 
with  the  general  tenor  of  the  Rabbinical  usages,  the  hand 
used  in  washing  the  other  being  closed  lest  the  palm  should 
contract  uncleanness  In  the  act. 


976 


PURIM 


PUEIM  (Dn-IS:"  ^povpal:^  Phurim:  nlso, 
Dn-ISn  10;  (Esth.  i.v.  26,  31)  :  dies  sortium),  the 

annual  k'stival  instituted  to  commemorate  the  pre- 
servation of  the  Jews  in  Persia  from  the  massacre 
with  wliich  they  were  threatened  through  the 
machinations  of  Haman  (Esth.  ix. ;  Joseph.  J w^ 
xi.  6,  §13).  [Esther.]  It  was  probably  called 
Purim  by  the  Jews  in  iiony.  Their  great  enemy 
Haman  appears  to  have  been  verj-  superstitious  and 
much  given  to  casting  lots  (Esth.  iii.  7).  They 
gave  the  name  Purim,  or  Lots,  to  the  commemo- 
rative fe.^tival,  becau.se  he  had  thrown  lots  to  ascer- 
tain what  day  would  be  auspicious  for  him  to  cany 
iiito  effi'ct  the  bloody  decree  which  the  king  had 
issued  at  his  instance  (Esth.  i.x.  24). 

The  festival  lasted  two  days,  and  was  regularly 
observed  on  the  14th  and  15th  of  Adar.  But  if 
the  14th  happened  to  fall  on  the  Sabbath,  or  on  the 
second  or  fourth  day  of  the  week,  the  commence- 
ment of  the  festival  was  deferi'ed  till  the  ne.xt  day. 
It  is  not  easy  to  conjectuie  what  may  have  been 
the  ancient  mode  of  observance,  so  as  to  have  given 
the  occasion  something  of  the  dignity  of  a  national 
religious  festival.  The  traditions  of  the  Jews,  and 
their  modern  usage  respecting  it  are  curious,  it 
is  stated  that  eighty- five  of  the  Jewish  elders  ob- 
jected at  first  to  the  institution  of  the  feast,  when 
it  was  proposed  by  ^Mordecai  (Jerus.  Gem.  Megillah 
— Lightfoot  on  John  x.  21).  A  preliminary  fast 
was  appointed,  called  "  the  fast  of  Esther,"  to  be 
observed  on  the  13th  of  Adar,  in  memory  of  the 
fast  win'ch  Estlier  and  her  maids  observed,  and 
which  she  enjoined,  through  Mordecai,  on  the  Jews 
of  Shushaa  (Esth.  iv.  l(i).  If  the  13th  was  a 
Sabbath,  the  fast  was  put  back  to  the  fifth  day 
of  the  week  ;  it  could  not  be  lieM  on  the  sixth 
day,  because  those  who  might-  be  engaged  in 
preparing  food  for  the  Sabbath  would  necessarily 
have  to  taste  the  dishes  to  prove  them.  According 
to  modern  custom,  as  soon  as  the  stars  begin  to 
appear,  when  the  14th  of  the  month  has  com- 
menced, candles  are  lighted  up  in  token  of  rejoicing, 
and  the  people  assemble  in  the  synagogue.'  After  a 
short  prayer  and  thanksgiving,  the  leading  of  the 
Book  of  losther  commences.  The  book  is  written 
in  a  peculiar  manner,  on  a  roll  cidled  kut   i^oxrjv, 

«  the  i;oll  "  (n^jp,  Megillah)^  The  reader  trans- 
lates the  text,  as  he  goes  on,  into  the  vernacular 
tongue  of  the  place,  and  makes  comments  on  parti- 
cular passages.  He  reads  in  a  histrionic  manner, 
suiting  his  tones  and  gestures  to  the  changes  in  the 
subject  matter.  When  he  comes  to  the  name  of 
Haman  the  whole  congregation  cry  out,  "  May 
his  name  be  blotted  out,"  or  "  Let  the  name  of 
the  ungodly  perish."     At  the  same  time,  in  some 


*  The  word  ~|."13  (pur)  is  Persian.  In  the  modern 
language,  it  takes  the  form  of  pdreli,  and  it  is  cognate 
with  pars  and  pact  (Gesen.  Thes.).    It  is  explained,  Esth. 

iii.  T  and  ix.  24,  by  the  Hebrew  ?~\M  ;  Kkripoi ;  sortes. 

b  It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  conjecture  of 
the  editor  of  the  Coniphitensian  Polyglot  (approved  by 
Grotius,  in  Esth.  iii.  7,  and  by  Schleusner,  Xer.  in  LXX. 
s.  'Ppovpal)  is  correct,  and  that  the  reading  slioiiUi  be 
■toupai.  In  like  manner,  the  modern  editors  of  .Jo'sephus 
have  changed  ipoupaiot  into  <I>oupaioi  (Ant.  xi.  6,  }13). 
I'he  old  editors  imagined  that  Joscphns  connected  the 
word  with  (f>povptlv. 

■^  This  service  is  said  to  have  taken  place  in  former  times 
on  the  15th  in  walled  towns,  but  on  the  14th  in  the  country 
and  luiwallert  towns,  according  to  Ksth.  ix.  18,  19. 


PURIM 

places,  the  boys  who  are  pre.sent  make  a  gi'eat 
noise  with  their  hands,  with  mallets,  and  with 
pieces  of  wood  or  stone  on  which  they  have  written 
the  name  of  Haman,  and  which  they  rub  together 
so  as  to  obliterate  the  writing.  When  the  names 
of  the  sons  of  Haman  are  read  (ix.  7,  8,  9)  the 
reader  utters  them  with  a  continuous  enunciation, 
so  as  to  make  them  into  one  word,  to  signify  that 
they  were  hanged  all  at  once.  When  the  l\Iegillah 
is  read  through,  the  whole  congregation  exclaim, 
"  Ciu'sed  be  Hamarf;  blessed  be  Mordecai;  cursed 
be  Zoresh  (the  wife  of  Haman) ;  blessed  be  Esther  ; 
curbed  be  all  idolaters ;  blessed  be  all  Israelites,  and 
blessed  be  Harbonah  who  hanged  Haman."  The 
volume  is  then  solemnly  rolled  up.  All  go  home 
and  partiike  of  a  repast  said  to  consist  mainly  of 
milk  and  eggs.  In  the  morning  service  in  the 
synagogue,  on  the  14th,  after  the  prayers,  the  pas- 
sage is  read  from  the  Law  (Ex.  xvii.  8-16)  which 
relates  the  destruction  of  the  Amalekites,  the  people 
of  Agag  ( 1  Sam.  xv.  8),  the  supposed  ancestor  of 
Haman  (Esth.  iii.  1).  The  Megillah  is  then  read 
again  in  the  same  manner,  and  with  the  same 
responses  from  the  congregation,  as  on  the  preceding 
evening.  All  who  possibly  can  are  bound  to  hear 
the  reading  of  the  Megillah — men,  women,  childien, 
cripples,  invalids,  and  even  idiots — though  they 
may,  if  they  please,  listen  to  it  outside  the  syna- 
gogue (Mishna,  Bosh.  Hash.  iii.  7). 

The  14th  of  Adar,*  as  the  very  day  of  the  de- 
liverance of  the  Jews,  is  more  solemnly  kept  than 
the  13th.  But  when  the  service  in  the  svnagogue 
IS  over,  all  give  themselves  up  to  menymaking. 
Games  of  all  sorts  with  dancing  and  music  com- 
mence. In  the  evening  a  quaint  dramatic  entei- 
tainment,  the  subject  of  which  is  connected  with 
the  occiision,  sometimes  takes  place,  and  men  fre- 
quently put  on  female  attire,  declaring  that  the 
festivities  of  Purim,  according  to  Esth.  ix.  22,  sus- 
pend the  law  of  Dent,  xxii .  5,  which  forbids  one  sex 
to  vi'ear  the  dress  of  the  other.  A  dainty  meal  then 
follows,  sometimes  with  a  free  indulgence  of  wine, 
both  unmixed  and  mulled.  According  to  the  Gemara 
{Megillah,  vii.  2),  "  tenetur  homo  in  festo  Purim  eo 
usque  inebriari,  ut  nullum  discrimen  norit,  inter  ma- 
ledictionem  Ham;inis  et  benedictionem  Maidochaei."  ' 

Oa  the  ITjth  the  rejoicing  is  contuiued,  and  gifts, 
consisting  chiefly  of  sweetmeats  and  other  eatables, 
are  interchanged.  Ofl'erings  lor  the  poor  are  also 
made  by  all  who  can  afFoi-d  to  do  so,  in  proportion 
to  their  means  (Esth.  ix.  19,  22). 

When  the  month  A.dar  used  to  be  doubled,  in 
the  Jewish  leap-year,  the  festival  was  repeated  on 
the  14th  and  15th  of  the  second  Adar. 

It  would  seem  that  the  Jews  were  tempted  to 
associate  the  Christians  with  the  Persians  and 
Amalekites  in  the  curses  of  the  .synagogues     Hence 


d  Five  books  of  the  0.  T.  (Ruth,  Esther,  Ecclesiastes, 
Canticles,  and  Lamentations)  are  designated  by  the  Rab- 
binical writers  "the  Five  Rolls,"  because,  as  it  would 
seem,  they  used  to  be  written  in  separate  volumes  for  the 

use  of  the  synagogue  (Gesen.  Tlits.  s.  ??il).     [Esther, 

BCJOK  OF.] 

'  It  is  called  17  MopSoxaixT)  rip.epa,  2  Mace.  xv.  3B. 

f  Buxtorf  remarks  on  this  passage :  "  Hoc  est.  nesciat 
suT.putare  numerum  qui  ex  singiilarum  vocum  litcris  ex- 
struitur:  nam  literae  l^TjQ  ni"l3  *"'  1^^  Tt"IN  '" 
Gematria  eundem  numerum  conliciunt.  Perinde  est  ac 
si  diceretur,  posse  illos  in  tanlum  bibere,  ut  quinque 
manus  digitos  numerare  amplius  non  possint." 

s  See  Cod.  Theodos.  lilr  xvi.  tit.  viii.  18:  "  Judaeos, 
quodam  festivitatis  suae  solemni,  Aman,  ad  pocnae  quon- 


PUEIM 

probably  arose  the  popularity  of  the  feast  of  Piu'im 
in  those  ages  in  which  the  I'eeliug  of  enmity  was  so 
strongly  manifested  between  Jews  and  Christians. 
Several  Jewish  proverbs  are  preserved  which 
strikingly  show  the  way  in  which  Purim  was 
regarded,  sucli  as,  "  The  Temple  may  fail,  but 
Purim  never ;"  "  The  Prophets  may  fail,  but  not 
the  Megillah."  It  was  said  that  no  books  would 
survive  in  the  Jlessiah's  kingdom  except  the  Law 
and  the  Megillah.  This  aft'ection  for  the  book  and 
the  festival  connected  with  it  is  the  more  lemark- 
able  because  the  events  on  which  they  are  founded 
affected  only  an  exiled  portion  of  the  Hebrew  race, 
and  because  there  was  so  much  in  them  to  shock 
the  principles  and  prejudices  of  the  Jewish  mind. 

Ewald,  in  support  of  his  theory  that  there  was  in 
])atriarchal  times  a  religious  festival  at  every  new 
and  full  moon,  conjectures  that  Purim  was  originally 
the  full  moon  feast  of  Adar,  as  the  Passover  was 
that  of  Nisan,  and  Tabernacles  that  of  Tisri. 

It  was  suggested  first  by  Kepler  that  the  eopri] 
tSov  'lovSaiaiv  of  John  v.  1,  was  the  fo;\st  of 
Purim.  The  notion  has  been  confidently  espoused 
by  Petavius,  Olshausen,  Stier,  Wieseler,  Winer, 
and  Anger  (who,  according  to  Winer,  has  proved 
the  point  beyond  contradiction),  and  is  favoured 
by  Alford  and  Ellicott.  The  question  is  a  difficult 
one.  It  seems  to  be  general!}'  allowed  that  the  opi- 
nion of  Chrysostom,  Cj'ril,  and  most  of  the  Fathers, 
which  was  tiiken  up  by  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Beza, 
and  Bengel,  that  the  feast  was  Pentecost,  and  that 
of  Cocceius,  that  it  was  Tabernacles  (which  is  coun- 
tenanced by  the  reading  of  one  inferior  MS.),  are 
precluded  by  the  general  course  of  the  narrative, 
and  especially  by  John  iv.  35  (assuming  that  the 
words  of  our  Lord  which  are  there  given  were 
spoken  in  seed-time)  •>  compared  with  v.  1.  The 
interval  indicated  by  a  comparison  of  these  texts 
could  scarcely  have  extended  beyond  Nisan.  The 
choice  is  thus  left  between  Purim  and  the  Passover. 

The  principal  objections  to  Purim  are,  (a)  that  it 
was  not  necessary  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  keep 
the  festival ;  (6)  that  it  is  not  very  likely  that  our 
Lord  would  have  made  a  point  of  paying  especial 
honour  to  a  festival  which  appears  to  have  had  but 
a  very  small  religious  element  in  it,  and  which 
seems  rather  to  have  been  the  means  of  kecj)ing 
alive  a  feeling  of  national  revenge  and  hatred.  It 
is  alleged  on  the  other  hand  that  our  Lord's  attend- 
ing the  feast  would  be  in  harmony  with  His  deep 
sympathy  with  the  feelings  of  the  Jewish  people, 
whicli  went  further  than  His  merely  "fulfilling  all 
righteousness"  in  carrying  out  the  precepts  of  the 
Mosaic  law.  It  is  furtlier  urged  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John  is  best  made  out  by  supposing  that  the  inci- 
ilent  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  occurred  at  the  festival 
which  was  characterised  by  showing  kindness  to  the 
poor,  and  that  our  Lord  was  induced,  by  the  enmity 
of  the  Jews  then  evinced,  not  to  remain  at  Jerusalem 
till  the  Piissover,  mentioned  John  vi.  4  (Stier). 

'I'he  identity  of  the   Passover  with  the  feast  in 


PURSE 


977 


dim  recordatlonem  inccndcre,  ct  cruds  adsimulatam 
spociem  in  contoniptu  Christianac  fiiloi  s;icrilega  meiite 
cxurere,  I'rovineiarum  Uectorcs  proliiboant:  ne  locis  suls 
fidei  nostrae  signiim  Immisceant,  scii  riius  sues  intra  con- 
temptum  Cliristianao  legis  letineant,  amlssuri  sine  dnbio 
permissa  hactenus,  nisi  ab  illicitls  tcmperaverint." 

h  This  supposition  docs  not  appear  to  be  materially 
weakoned  by  our  taking  as  a  proverb  TeTpanijros  ecrnv 
Ka'i  6  9(pL<Tno^  fpxfTai.  Whether  the  expression  was  such 
or  not,  it  surely  adds  point  to  our  Lord's  words,  if  we 
suppose  the  figurative  lanttuage  to  have  been  suggested 
VOL.  II. 


question  has  been  maintained  by  Irenaeus,  Eusebius, 
and  Theodoret,  and,  in. modern  times,  by  Luther, 
Scaliger,  Gro'cius,  Heng.stenberg,  GresSwell,  Neauder, 
Tholuck,  Robinson,  and  the  majority  of  commen- 
tators. The  principal  difficulties  in  the  way  are, 
(rt)  the  omission  of  the  article,  involving  the  impro- 
bability that  the  great  festival  of  the  year  should 
be  spoken  of  as  "  a  feast  of  the  Jews ;"  (b)  that  as 
our  Lord  did  not  go  up  to  the  Passover  mentioned 
John  vi.  4,  He  must  have  absented  himself  from 
Jerusalem  for  a  year  and  a  half,  that  is,  till  the 
feast  of  Tabernacles  (John  vii.  '2^.  Against  these 
points  it  is  contended,  that  the  application  of  eoprii 
without  the  article  to  the  Passover  is  countenanced 
by  Matt,  xxvii.  15  ;  Luke  xxiii.  17  (comp.  John  xviii. 
39) ;  that  it  is  assigned  as  a  reason  for  His  staying 
away  from  Jerusalem  for  a  longer  period  than  usual, 
that  "  the  Jews  sought  to  kill  him  "  (John  vii.  1  ; 
cf.  V.  18;;  that  this  long  period  satisfactorily  ac- 
counts for  the  surprise  expresseil  by  His  brethren 
(John  vii.  3),  and  that,  as  it  was  evidently  His 
custom  to  visit  Jerusalem  once  a  year,  He  went  up- 
to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  (vii.  2)  instead  of  going 
to  the  Passover 

On  the  whole,  the  only  real  objection  to  the 
Passover  seems  to  be  the  want  of  the  article  before 
kopTT)}  That  the  language  of  the  New  Testament 
will  not  justify  our  regarding  the  omission  as  ex- 
pressing emphasis  on  any  general  ground  of  usage, 
is  proved  by  Winer  {Grammar  of  the  N.  T.  dialect, 
iii.  19).  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  difficulty  is 
no  small  one,  though  it  does  not  seem  to  be  sufficient 
to  outweigh  the  grave  objections  which  lie  against 
the  feast  of  Purim. 

The  arguments  on  one  side  are  best  set  forth  by 
Stier  and  Olshausen  on  John  v.  1,  by  Kepler 
(Eclogae  Chronk'ae,  Francfort,  1615),  and  by  Anger 
(ffc  temp,  in  Act.  Apost.  i.  24)  ;  those  on  the  other 
side,  by  Robinson  {Harmony,  note  on  the  Second 
Passover),  and  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  §143.  See 
also  Lightfoot,  Kuinoel,  and  Tholuck,  on  John  v.  1  ; 
and  Gresswell,  Diss.  viii.  vol.  ii. ;  Ellicott,  Led.  135. 

See  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  iii.  11 ;  Reland,  Ant.  iv. 
9  ;  Schickart,  Purim  sice  Bacchanalia  Jiulacorum 
(Crit.  Sao.  iii.  col.  1184)  ;  Buxtorf,  Sijn.  Jud.  xxix. 
The  Mishnical  treatise,  Megilla,  contains  directions 
respecting  the  mode  in  which  the  scroll  should  be 
written  out  and  in  which  it  should  be  read,  with 
other  matters,  not  much  to  the  point  in  hand,  con- 
nected with  the  service  of  the  synagogue.  Stauben, 
Za  Vie  Juive  en  Alsace ;  Mills,  British  Jens, 
p.  188.  [S.  C] 

PURSE.  The  Hebrews,  when  on  a  journey, 
were  provided  with  a  -bag  (variously  termed  civ,' 
tseror,  and  chdrit),  in  which  they  cairied  their 
money  (Gen.  xlii.  35;  Prov.  i.  14,  vii.  20;  Is. 
xlvi.  6),  and,  if  they  were  merchants,  also  their 
weights  (Deut.  xxv.  13  ;  Mic.  vi.  11).  This  bag  is 
described  in  the  N.  T.  by  the  terms  fiaKdvriov 
(peculiar  to  St.  Luke,  x.  4,  xii.  33,  xxii.  35,  36), 
and  yKcaffffSKOfjiov  (peculiar  to  St.  John,   xii.   6, 

by  what  was  actually  going  on  in  the  fie'ds  before  tl'.e  eyes 
of  Himself  and  His  hearers. 

'  Tischendorf  inserts  the  article  in  his  text,  and  Winer 
allows  that  there  is  much  anthority  in  its  favour.  But 
the  nature  of  the  case  seems  to  be  such,  that  the  Insertion 
of  the  article  in  later  MSS.  may  be  more  easily  accounted 
for  tlian  its  omission  in  the  older  ones. 

°  D^3,  li")V,  and  t2'''in.  The  last  occurs  only  in 
2  K.  v.  23  "b:\gs;"  Is.  iii.  22,  A.  V.  "  crisping-pins." 
The  latter  is  supposed  to  refer  to  the  long  roinid  form  ot 
the  pur.sc. 

3  R 


978 


PUTEOLI 


xiii.  29).  The  tuniier  is  a  classical  tenn  (Plat. 
Conviv.  p.  19o,  E,  (TvaTraa-Ta  ^aXdvTia) :  the  latter 
is  connected  with  the  classical  yXwffffOKOjxuov, 
which  originally  meant  the  bng  in  which  musicians 
carried  the  mouthpieces  of  their  instruments.  In 
the  LXX.  the  term  is  a])plied  to  the  chest  for  the 
offerings  at  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  8,  10,  11), 
and  was  hence  adopted  by  St.  John  to  describe  the 
common  purse  carried  by  the  disciples.  The  girdle 
also  sei-ved  as  a  purse,  and  hence  the  term  ^dvi] 
occurs  in  Matt.  x.  9,  Mark  vi.  8.  [Girdle.] 
Ladies  wore  ornamental  purses  (Is.  iii.  23).  The 
ftabbinists  forbade  any  one  jiassing  through  the 
Temple  with  stick,  shoes,  and  purse,  these  three 
being  the  indications  of  travelling  (Mishn.  Berach. 
9,  §5).  '      [W.  L.  B.] 

PUT,  1  Chr.  i.  8 ;  Nah.  iii.  9.     [Phut.] 

PUTE'OLI  (IIoTioAot)  appears  alike  in  Josephus 
(  Vit.  3  ;  Ant.  xvii.  12,  §1,  xviii.  7,  §2)  and  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  (^xxvii.  1.3)  in  its  characteristic 
position  under  the  early  Roman  emperors,  viz.  as 
the  great  landing-place  of  travelleis  to  Italy  from 
the  Levant,  and  as  the  harbour  to  which  the  Alex- 
andrian corn-ships  brought  their  cargoes.  These 
two  features  of  the  place  in  fact  coincided  ;  for  in 
tliat  day  tlie  movements  of  travellers  by  sea  de- 
pended on  merchant-vessels.  Puteoli  was  at  that 
jieriod  a  place  of  very  great  importance.  We  can- 
not elucidate  this  better  than  by  saying  that  the 
celebrated  bay  which  is  n(jw  "  the  bay  of  Naples," 
and  in  early  times  was  "  the  bay  of  Cumae,"  was 
tlien  called  "  Sinus  Puteolanus."  The  city  was  at 
the  north-eastern  angle  of  the  bay.  Close  to  it  was 
Baiae,  one  of  the  most  fashionable  of  the  Roman 
vyatering-places.  The  emperor  Cah'gida  once  built  a 
ridiculous  bridge  between  the  two  towns ;  and  the 
remains  of  it  must  have  been  conspicuous  when  St. 
Paul  landed  at  Puteoli  in  the  Alexandrian  ship  which 
brought  him  from  Malta.  [Castor  and  Pollux  ; 
Mklita;  Kiiegium  ;  Syracuse.]  In  illustration 
of  the  arrival  here  of  the  corn-ships  we  may  refer 
to  Seneai  (Ep.  77)  and  Suetonius  (Octav.  98). 

The  earlier  nnme  of  Puteoli,  when  the  lower 
pait  of  Italy  w;is  Greek,  was  Dicaearchia  ;  and  this 
name  continued  to  be  used  to  a  late  period.  Josephus 
uses  it  in  two  of  the  passages  above  reten-ed  to :  in 
the  third  (  Vit.  3)  he  .speaks  of  himself  'after  the 
shipwreck  wliich,  like  St.  Paul,  he  had  recently  gone 
throughj  as  SiaawdiU  els  tiju  AiKaiapxiau^  V 
noTL6\ov5  'iToAoi  KaKovaiu.  So  Philo,  in  de- 
scribing the  curious  interview  which  he  and  his 
fellow  Jewish  ambassadors  had  here  with  Calio-ula, 
uses  the  old  name  (Legat.  ad  Gaiuin,  ii.  52  Ij.  The 
word  Puteoli  was  a  true  lioman  name,  and  arose 
(whether  a  puteis  or  a  piitendo)  from  the  strong 
mineral  springs  which  are  characteristic  of  the 
place.  Its  Roman  history  may  be  said  to  have 
begun  with  the  Second  Pimic  War.  It  rose  con- 
tuinally  into  gieater  importance,  fi-om  the  causes 
abin-e  mentioned.  No  part  of  the  Campanian  shore 
was  moie  frequented.  The  associations  of  Puteoli 
with  historical  pei'sonages  are  very  numerous. 
Scipio  sailed  from  hence  to  Spain.  Cicero  had  a 
villa  (his  "  Putoolanum  ")  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Hero  Nero  planned  the  min-der  of  his  mother. 
Vespasian  gave  to  this  city  peculiar  jirivdeges,  and 
here  Hadrian  was  buried.  In  the  5th  century 
Puteoli  was  ravaged  both  by  Alaric  and  Genseric, 
and  it  never  afterwaids  recovered  its  former  emi- 
nence. It  is  now  a  fourth-rate  It^dian  town,  still 
iefciining  the  name  of  Pozzmli. 


PYGARG 

In  connexion    with   St.  Paul's   movements,  we 

must  notice  its  communieitions  m  Nero's  reign 
along  the  mainland  with  Rome.  The  coast-road 
leading  northwards  to  Sinuessa  was  not  made  till 
the  reign  of  Domitian  ;  but  there  was  a  cross-road 
leading  to  Capua,  and  there  joining  the  Appian 
Way.  [Appii  Forum  ;  Three  Taverns.]  The 
remains  of  this  road  may  be  traced  at  inten'als ; 
and  thus  the  Apostle's  route  can  be  followed  almost 
step  by  step.  We  should  also  notice  the  fact  that 
there  weie  Jewish  residents  at  Puteoli.  We  might 
be  sure  of  this  from  its  mercantile  importance;  but 
we  are  positively  informed  of  it  by  Josephus  [Ant. 
xvii.  12,  §1)  in  his  account  of  the  visit  of  the  pre- 
tended Herod- .Alexander  to  Augustus;  and  the  cir- 
cumstance shows  how  natural  it  was  that  the 
Apostle  should  find  Christian  "  brethren "  there 
immediately  on  landing. 

The  remains  of  Puteoli  are  considerable.  The 
aqueduct,  the  reservoirs,  portions  (probably)  of 
baths,  the  great  amphitheatre,  the  building  called 
the  temple  of  Serapis,  which  affords  very  curious  in- 
dications of  changes  of  level  in  the  soil,  are  all  well 
worthy  of  notice.  But  our  chief  interest  hei'e  is  con- 
centrated on  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  mole,  which 
is  formed  of  the  concrete  called  I'ozzolamt,  and  six- 
teen of  the  pie]S  of  which  still  remain.  No  Roman 
harbour  has  left  so  solid  a  memorial  of  itself  as  this 
one  at  which  St.  Paul  landed  in  Italy.    [J.  S.  H.] 

PU'TIEL  (!?N;''P-1S:  iovn^K:  Phwtiel).  One 
of  the  daughters  of  Putiel  was  wife  of  Eleazar  the 
son  of  Aaron,  and  mother  of  Phineh;is  (Ex.  vi.  25). 
Though  he  does  not  appear  again  in  the  Bible 
records,  Putiel  has  some  celebiity  in  more  modern 
Jewish  traditions.  They  identify  him  with  Jethro 
the  Midiauite,  "  who  fatted  the  calves  for  idolatrous 
worship"  (Targum  Psendojon.  on  Ex.  vi.  25; 
Gemara  ofSvta  by  W.-  genseil,  viii.  §6).  What  are 
the  gi-ounds  for  tlie  tradition  or  for  such  an  accusa- 
tion against  Jethro  is  not  obvious.   ■  [G.] 

PYGARG  (pC'n,  (Jishon :  -n-vyapyos :  pyg- 
argus)  occurs  only  (Deut.  xiv.  5)  in  the  list  of  clean 
animals  as  the  rendering  of  the  Heb.  dishon,  the 
name  apparently  of  some  species  of  antelope,  though 
it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  identify  it.  The  Greek 
Tzvyapyos  denotes  an  anim:J  with  a  "  white  rump," 
and  is  used  by  Herodotus  liv.  192)  as  the  name  of 
some  Libyan  deer  or  antelope.  Aclian  (vii.  19)  also 
mentions  the  irvyapyos,  but  gives  no  more  than  the 
name  ;  romp,  also  Juvenal  (Sat.  xi.  138).  It  '.s 
usual  to  identify  the  pi/garg  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  with  the  addax  of  North  Africa,  Nubia,  &<;. 
[Addajc  nasomaculatns)  ;  but  we  cannot  regard  this 
point  as  satisfactoiily  settled.  In  the  first  place, 
this  antelope  does  not  present  at  all  the  required 
characteristic  implied  b)^  its  name ;  and,  in  the 
second,  there  is  much  reason  for  believing,  with 
Riippell  {Atlas  zu  der  Eeise  im  Nord.  Afrik, 
p.  21),  and  Hamilton  Smith  (Griffith's  Cuvier's 
Anim.  King.  iv.  193),  that  the  Addax  is  identical 
with  the  Strepsiceros  of  Pliny  {N.  H.  xi.  37), 
which  animal,  it  must  be  observed,  the  Roman  na- 
turalist distinguishes  from  the  pygargus  i  viii.  53). 
Indeed  we  may  regard  the  identity  of  the  Addax  and 
Pliny's  Strepsiceros  as  established  ;  for  when  tliis 
species  was,  after  many  years,  at  length  rediscovered 
by  Hemprich  and  liiijipell,  it  was  found  to  be  called 
by  the  Arabic  name  of  akas  or  adas,  the  veiy  name 
which  Pliny  gives  as  the  local  one  of  his  Strepsiceros. 
The pyiiui-gus,  thei'efore,  must  be  sougiit  for  in  some 
nnimal  different  ftom  the  addax.    There  are  several 


QUAILS 

antelopes  wliich  have  tlie  cliaracteristic  white  croup 
requiiwl ;  many  of  which,  however,  are  inhabitants 
of  South  Africa,  such  as  the  Spring-bok  (Antidorcas 
euohore)  ami  the  Bonte-bok  {Damalis  pygargft). 
We  are  inclined  to  consider  the  -Kvyapyos,  or 
piigargus,  as  a  generic  name  to  denote  any  of  the 
white-rumped  antelopes  of  North  Africa,  Syi'ia,  &c., 
such  as  the  Ariel  gazelle  {Antilope  Arabica,  Heni- 
prich),  the  Isabella  gazelle  (Gazella  Isdbellina)  ; 
perhaps  too  the  mohr,  both  of  Abyssinia  {G.  Soem- 
meringii)  and  of  Western  Africa  ((?.  Mohr),  may 
be  included  under  the  term.  Whether,  liovvever, 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  are  correct  in  their  inter- 
pi-etation  of  dislwn  is  another  question  ;  but  there 
is  no  collateral  evidence  of  any  kind  beyond  the 
authority  of  the  two  most  important  versions  to 
aid  us  in  oui'  in\'estigation  of  this  word,  of  which 
various  etymologies  liave  been  given  from  which 
nothing  definite  can  be  learnt.  [W.  H.] 


QUAILS  (1?b',  selav ;  but  in  Keri  1  v'C  seldiv : 

6pTvyofj.T]Tpa :  cuturnix).  Various  opniions  have 
been  held  as  to  the  nature  of  the  Ibod  denoted  by 
the  Heb.  suldv,  which  on  two  distinct  occasions  was 
supplied  to  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  ;  see  Ex. 
xvi.  13,  on  which  occasion  the  people  were  between 
!Sin  and  Sinai ;  and  Num.  xi.  31,  32,  when  at  the 
station  named  in  consequence  of  the  judgment  which 
befel  them,  Kibroth-hattaavah.  That  the  Heb.  word 
is  correctly  rendered  "  quails,"  is  we  think  beyond 
a  shadow  of  doubt,  notwithstanding  the  dilleient  in- 
terpretations which  have  been  assigned  to  it  by 
several  writers  of  eminence.  Ludolf,  lor  instance,  an 
author  of  high  repute,  has  endeavoured  to  show 
that  the  scldv  were  locusts ;  see  his  Dissertatio  do 
Locustis,  cum  Diatriba,  &c.,  Franc,  ad  Moen. 
1694.  His  opinion  has  been  fully  advocated  and 
adopted  by  Patrick  {Comment.  onNum.  xi.  31,  32) ; 
the  Jews  in  Arabia  also,  as  we  leai'n  from  Niebuhr 
{Bcsohreib.  von  Arab.  p.  172),  '•  are  convinced  that 
the  birds  which  the  Israelites  ate  in  such  niunbers 
were  only  clouds  of  locusts,  and  they  laugh  at  those 
translators  who  suppose  that  they  found  quails 
where  quails  were  never  seen."  Rudbeck  ( Icht/iyol. 
Bibl.  Spec,  i.)  has  argued  in  favour  of  the  selav 
meaning  "  flying-fish,"  some  species  of  the  genus 
E.vocetus  ;  Micliaelis  at  one  time  held  the  same 
opinion,  but  afterwards  propeily  abandoned  it  (see 
Itosenmuller,  Not.  ad  Bochart,  lUeroz.  ii.  049). 
A  later  writer,  Ehrenberg  (Geogrnph.  Zcit.  ix.  85), 
fiom  having  observed  a  nimibor  of  "  flying-fish  " 
(gurnards,  of  the  genus  Trigla  of  Oken,  Dactj/lo- 
jkents  of  madavn  icthyologists),  lying  dead  on  the 
shore  near  Elim,  believed  that  this  was  the  food  of 
the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness,  and  named  the  fish 
"  Ti'igla  Israelitarum."  Hermann  von  der  Hardt 
supi)osed  that  the  locust  bird  {Pastor  Hoseus),  was 
intended  by  setdv  ;  and  recently  Mr.  Forster  (  Voice 
of  Israel,  p.  98),  has  advanced  an  opinion  that 
"  red  geese  "  of  the  genus  Casarca  are  to  be  under- 
stood by  the  Hebrew  term ;  a  similar  explanation 
has  been  suggested  by  Stanley  {S.  if  P.  p.  82)  and 
adopted  by  Tennent  (Ceylon,  i.  487  note):  this  is 
apparently  an  old  conceit,  for  Patrick  {Numb.  xi.  31) 
alludes  to  such  au  explanation,  but  we  have  been 
unable  to  trace  it  to  its  origin.  Some  writers, 
while  they  hold  that  the  original  word  denotes 
"quails,"  are  of  opinion  that  a  species  of  Saml-grousc 


QUAILS  979 

{Pterocles  nlchata),  fi-equent  in  the  Bible-lands,  is 
also  included  under  the  term  ;  sei'  Winer  {Pibl.  Peal- 
wort,  ii.  7T2)-  Hosenmiiller  {A^ot.  ad  Jlieroz.  ii. 
649)  ;  Faber  (ad  Harmer,  ii.  p.  442) ;  Uesenius 
{Thes.  s.  V.  Pb).  It  is  usual  to  refer  to  Hassel- 
quist  as  the  authority  for  believing  that  the  Kata 
(Sand-grouse)  is  denoted  :  this  traveller,  however, 
was  rather  inclined  to  believe,  with  some  of  the 
writers  named  above,  that  "  locusts"  and  not 
birds,  are  to  be  understood  (p.  443)  ;  and  it  is 
difficult  to  make  out  what  he  means  by  Tetrao 
Tsraelitarum.  Linnaeus  supposed  he  intended  by  it 
the  common  "  quail :"  in  one  paragraph  he  states 
that  the  Arabians  call  a  bird  "  of  a  gi-eyish  colour 
and  less  than  our  partridge,"  by  the  name  of  Katta. 
He  adds  "  An  Selaw  ?"  This  cannot  be  the  Pte- 
rocles alchnta. 


J  tei  -cle   nhJiata 

I'he  view  t;iken  by  Ludolf  may  be  dismissed 
with  a  very  few  words.  The  expression  in  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  27  of  "  feathered  fowl"  {f\:^2  f\)]}),  which 
is  used  in  reference  to  the  scldv,  clearly  denotes 
some  bird,  and  Ludolf  quite  fails  to  prove  that  it 
may  include  winged  insects  ;  again  there  is  not  a 
shadow  of  ^idence  to  support  the  opinion  that 
sdldv  can  ever  signify  any  "  locust,"  this  term  being 
used  in  the  Arabic  and  the  cognate  languages  to 
denote  a  "  quail."  As  to  any  species  of  "  flying- 
fish,"  whether  belonging  to  the  genus  Dactylo- 
pterus,  or  to  that  of  Exocetus,  being  intended,  it 
will  be  enough  to  state  that  "  flying-fish"  are 
quite  unable  to  sustain  their  flight  above  a  few 
jiundred  yards  at  the  most,  and  never  could  have 
been  taken  in  the  Hed  Sea  in  numbers  sufficient  to 
sup])ly  the  Israelitish  host.  The  interpretation  of 
seldii  by  "  wild  geese,"  or  "  wild  cranes,"  or  any 
"  wild  fowl,"  is  a  gratuitous  assumption  without  a 
particle  of  evidence  in  its  favour.  The  Casarca, 
with  which  Mr.  Forster  identifies  the  sSldv,  is  tlie 
C.  rutila,  a  bird  of  about  the  size  of  a  Mallard, 
which  can  by  no  means  answer  the  supposed  requi- 
site of  standing  three  feet  high  from  the  ground. 
"The  large  red-legged  cranes,"  of  which  Professor 
Stanley  speaks,  are  evidently  white  storks  {Ciconia 
alba),  and  would  fulfil  the  condition  as  to  height ;  but 
the  flesh  is  so  nauseous  that  no  Israelite  could  ever 
have  done  more  than  have  tastal  it.  With  respect  to 
the  Ptcrnclcs  alchata,  neither  it,  nor  indeed  any  other 
species  of  the  genus,  can  square  with  the  Scriptural" 
account  of  the  scVay  ;  the  Sand-grouse  are  birds  of 
strong  wing  and  of  unwearied  flight,  and  never 
could  have  been  captured  in  any  numbers  by  the 
Israelitish  multitudes.  We  much  question,  moreover, 
whether  the  people  would  have  eaten  to  excess — for 

3  K  2 


980 


QUAILS 


so  much  the  expression  translated  "  fully  satisfied" 
(Ps.  Ixxviii.  29)  implies — of  the  flesh  of  this  bird, 
for,  according;  to  the  testimony  of  travellers  from 
Dr.  Russell  {Hist,  of  Aleppo,  ii.  194,  2ud  ed.)  down 
to  ohseivers  of  to-day,  the  flesh  of  the  Sand -grouse 
is  hard  and  tasteless.  It  is  clear,  however,  that  the 
seldo  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  105th  Ps.  denotes 
the  common  "quail"  {Coturnix  dactijlisonans), 
and  no  other  bird.  In  the  first  place,  the  Heb.  word 
VPb'  is  unquestionably  identical  with  the  Arabic 

salica  (c?»JU«),  a  "  quail."  According  to  Schul- 
tens  {Orig.  Hch.  i.  231)  the  Heb.  I^K*  is  derived 
from  an  Arabic  root  "  to  be  fat ;"  the  round  plump 
form  of  the  quail  is  eminently  suitable  to  this 
etymology ;  indeed  its  fatness  is  proverbial.  The 
objections  which  have  been  urged  by  Patrick  and 
others  against  "quails"  being  intended  are  very 
easily  refuteil.  The  expression,  "as  it  were  two 
cubits  (high)  upon  the  face  of  the  earth"  (Num. 
xi.  31)  is  explained  by  the  LXX.,  by  the  Vulg., 
and  by  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  1,  §5),  to  refer  to  the 
height  at  which  the  quails  flew  above  the  ground, 
in  their  exhausted  condition  from  their  long  flight. 
As  to  the  enoiTnous  quantities  which  the  least  suc- 
cessful Israelite  is  said  to  have  taken,  viz.  "  ten 
homers,"  in  the  space  of  a  night  and  two  days,  there 
is  every  reason  for  believing  that  the  "  homers " 
here  spoken  of  do  not  denote  strictly  the  measure  of 
that  name,  but  simply  "  a  heap :"  this  is  the  ex- 
planation given  by  Onkelos  and  the  Arabic  versions 
of  Saadias  and  Erpenius,  m  Num.  xi.  31. 

The  quail  migrates  in  immense  numbers,  see 
Pliny  {H.  N.  x.  23),  and  Tournefort  ( Voyage,  i. 
329),  who  says  that  all  the  islands  of  the  Archi- 
pelago at  certain  seasons  of  the  year  are  covered 
with  these  birds.  Col.  Sykes  states  that  such 
quantities  were  once  caught  in  Capri,  near  Naples, 
as  to  have  afforded  the  bishop  no  small  share 
of  his  revenue,  and  that  in  consequence  he  has 
been  called  Bishop  of  Quails.  The  same  writer 
mentions  also  {Trans.  Zool.  Soc.  ii.)  that  160,000 
quails  have  been  netted  in  one  season  on  this  little 
island  ;  according  to  Temminck  100,000  have  been 
taken  near  Nettuno,  in  one  day.  The  Israelites 
would  have  had  little  difficulty  in  capturing  large 
quantities  of  these  birds,  as  they  are  known  to 
arrive  at  places  sometimes  so  completely  exhausted 
by  their  flight  as  to  be  readily  taken,  not  in  nets 
only,  but  by  the  hand.  See  Diod.  Sic.  (i.  p.  82, 
ed.  Dindorf)  ;  Prosper  Alpinus  {Eenim  Aegypt. 
iv.  1);  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  1,  §5).  Sykes  (?.  c), 
says  "  they  arrive  in  spring  on  the  shores  of 
Provence  so  fatigued  that  for  the  first  few  days 
they  allow  themselves  to  be  taken  by  the  hand." 
The  Israelites  "  spread  the  quails  roimd  about 
the  camp  ;"  this  was  for  the  purpose  of  drying 
them.  The  Egyptians  similarly  prepared  these 
birds:  see  Herodotus  (ii.  77),  and  Maillet  {Lettres 
sur  I'Egypte,  ix.  p.  21,  iv.  p.  130).  The  expression 
"  quails  from  the  sea,"  Num.  xi.  31,  must  not  be 
restricted  to  denote  that  the  birds  came  from  the 
sea  as  their  starting  point,  but  it  must  be  taken  to 
show  the  direction  from  which  they  were  coming  ; 
the  quails  were,  at  the  time  of  the  event  narrated  in 
.the  sacred  wj-itings,  on  their  spring  journey  of  migra- 
tion northwards,  an  interesting  proof,  as  Col.  Sykes 
has  remarked,  of  the  perpetuation  of  an  instinct 


QUAILS 

through  some  3300  years ;  the  flight  which  fed  the 
multitudes  at  Kibroth-hattaavah  might  have  started 
from  Southern  Egypt  and  crossed  the  Red  .Sea  near 
Ras  iMohammed,  and  so  up  the  gulf  of  Akabah  into 
Ai-abia  Petraea.  It  is  interesting  to  note  the  time 
specified,  "it  was  at  even"  that  they  began  to 
arrive  ;  and  they,  no  doubt,  continued  to  come  all 
the  night.  Many  observers  have  recorded  that  the 
quail  migrates  by  night,  though  this  is  denied  by 
Col.  Montagu  {Omitkol.  Diet.  art.  '  Quail  ')>  The 
flesh  of  the  quail,  though  of  an  agreeable  qualit)'',  is 
said  by  some  writers  to  be  heating,  and  it  has  been 
supposed  by  some  that  the  deaths  that  occurred  ■ 
fiom  eating  the  f6od  in  the  wilderness  resulted 
partly  from  these  birds  feeding  on  hellebore  (Pliny, 
H.  N.  X.  23)  and  other  poisonous  plants ;  see 
Winer,  Bib.  Eealwb.  ii.  773  ;  but  this  is  exceedingly 
impi'obable,  although  the  immoderate  gratification 
of  the  appetite  for  the  space  of  a  whole  month 
(Num.  xi.  20)  on  such  food,  in  a  hot  climate,  and 
in  the  case  of  a  people  who  at  the  time  of  the  wan- 
derings rarely  tasted  flesh,  might  have  induced  dan- 
gerous symptoms.  "  The  plague  "  seems  to  have 
been  directly  sent  upon  the  people  by  God  as  a 
punishment  for  their  murmurings,  and  perhaps  is 
not  even  in  a  subordinate  sense  to  be  attributed  to 
natural  causes. 


a'  "  On  two  successive  years  I  observed  enormous  flights 
of  quails  on  tbe  N.  coast  of  Algeria,  which  arrived  from 
the  South  in  the  night,  and  were  at  daybreak  in  such  num- 


The  quail  {Cotuniix  dactylisonans),  the  only 
species  of  the  genus  known  to  migrate,  has  a  very 
wide  geographical  range,  being  found  in  China, 
India,  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  and  England,  and, 
according  to  Temminck,  in  Japan.  See  Col.  Sykes's 
paper  on  "The  Quails  and  Hemipodii  of  India" 
{Trans,  of  Zool.  Soc.  ii.). 

The  opTvyofx-t]Tpa.  of  the  LXX.  should  not  be 
passed  over  without  a  brief  notice.  It  is  not  easy 
to  determine  what  bird  is  intended  by  this  term  as 
used  by  Aristotle  and  Pliny  {ortygomeira ) ;  accord- 
ing to  the  account  given  of  this  bird  by  the  Greek 
and  Latin  writers  on  Natural  History  just  men- 
tioned, the  ortygometra  precedes  tlie  quail  in  its 
migrations,  and  acts  as  a  sort  of  leader  to  the  flight. 
Some  ornithologists,  as  Belon  and  Fleming  {Brit. 
Aniin.  p.  98)  have  assigned  this  term  to  the  "  Land- 
rail" {Crex  pratensis),  the  Roi  des  Cailles  of  the 
French,    Re   di  Quaglie  of  the  Italians,   and   the 


bers  through  the  plains,  that  scores  of  sportsmen  had  only 
to  shoot  as  fast  as  they  could  reload  "  (IJ.  B.  Tristram). 


QUARTUS 

Wachtel-Koiiig  of  the  (!ermans,  but  with  what 
reason  we  are  uuable  to  say  ;  probably  the  LXX. 
use  the  teiin  as  a  synonym  of  oprv^,  or  to  ex])ress 
the  good  condition  in  which  the  birds  were,  for 
Hesychius  explains  oprvyofXTirpa  by  uprv^  iiirep- 
fifyfdrts,  i.  e.  "  a  quail  of  large  size." 

Thus,  in  point  of  etymology,  zoology,  history, 
and  the  authority  of  almost  all  the  important  old 
versions,  we  have  as  complete  a  chain  of  evidence 
in  proof  of  the  Quail  being  the  true  representative 
of  the  Seldv  as  can  possibly  be  required.      [\V.  H.] 

QUAR'TUS  (KovapTos  :  Quartus),  a  Christian 
of  Corinth,  whose  salutations  St.  Paul  sends  to  the 
brethren  at  Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  23).  There  is  the  usual 
tradition  that  he  was  one  of  the  Seventy  disciples ; 
and  it  is  also  said  that  he  ultimatelv  became  bishop 
of  Berytus  (Tillemont,  i.  334-).       "      [E.  H— s.] 

QUATERNION  (rerpdSwu:  quatemio),  a 
military  term,  signifying  a  guard  of  four  soldiers, 
two  of  whom  were  attached  to  the  person  of  a 
prisoner,  while  the  other  two  kept  watch  outside 
the  door  of  his  cell  (Vegetius,  Do  Ro  mil.  iii.  8  ; 
Polyb.  vi.  33,  §7).  Peter  was  delivered  over  to 
four  such  bodies  of  four  (Acts  xii.  4),  each  of  which 
took  charge  of  him  for  a  single  watch  of  the 
night.  [W.  L.  B.] 

QUEEN  (nS^D;  bi^  ;  nT33).  Of  the  three 
Hebrew  terais  cited  as  the  equivalents  of  "  queen  " 
in  the  A.  V.,  the  first  alone  is  applied  to  a  queen- 
regnant ;  the  firet  and  second  equally  to  a  queen- 
consort,  without,  however,  implying  the  dignity 
which  in  European  nations  attaches  to  that  position  ; 
and  the  third  to  the  queen-;noiAc;-,  to  whom  that 
dignity  is  transferred  in  Oriental  courts.  The  ety- 
mological foice  of  the  words  accords  with  their 
application.  Malcah  is  the  feminine  of  melech, 
"  king ;"  it  is  applied  in  its  first  sense  to  the  queen 
of  Sheba  (1  K.  x.  1),  and  in  its  second  to  the  wives 
of  the  first  rank,  as  distinguished  from  the  concu- 
bines, in  a  royal  harem  (Esth.  i.  9  IT.,  vii.  1  ff.  ; 
Cant.  vi.  8) :  the  term  "  princesses "  is  similarly 
used  in  1  K.  xi.  3.  Shegal  simply  memis  "  wife  ;" 
it  is  applied  to  Solomon's  bride  (I's.  xlv.  9),  and  to 
the  wives  of  the  first  rank  in  the  harems  of  the 
Chaldee  and  Persian  monarchs  (Dan.  v.  2,  3 ;  Neh. 
ii.  6).  Gehirah,  on  the  other  hand,  is  expressive  of 
authority  ;  it  means  "  powerful  "  or  "  mistress."  It 
would  therefore  be  ajijilied  to  the  female  who  exer- 
cised the  highest  authority,  and  this,  in  an  Oriental 


QUEEN  OF  HEAVEN  981 

reading  followed  in  the  LXX.,  n?'n!in,  "  the  elder," 


according  better  with  the  context.         [W.  L.  B.]    . 
QUEEN  OP  HEAVEN.      In  Jer.  vii.  18, 
xliv.  17,  18,  19,  25,  the  Heb.    ^''^O^'T]   nD^D, 

meleceth  hashsliamayitn,  is  thus  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  In  the  margin  is  given  "frame  or  work- 
manship of  heaven,"  for  in  twenty  of  Kennicott's 
MSS.  the  reading  is  03^713,  meleceth,  of  which 
this  is  the  translation,  and  the  san\e  is  the  case  in 
fourteen  MSS.  of  Jer.  xliv.  18,  and  in  thirteen  of 
Jer.  xliv.  19.  The  latter  reading  is  followed  by 
the  LXX.  and  Peshito  Syriac  in  Jer.  vii.  18,  but  in 
all  the  other  passages  the  received  text  is  adopted, 
as  by  the  Vulgate  in  every  instance.     Kimchi  says 

"  N  is  wanting,  and  it  is  as  if  713X70,  '  workman- 
ship of  heaven,'  i.  e.  the  stars  ;  and  some  interpret 
'  the  queen  of  heaven,'  i.  e.  a  great  star  which  is  in 
the  heavens."  Kashi  is  in  favour  of  the  latter; 
and  the  Targum  renders  throughout  "  the  star  of 
heaven."  lurcher  was  in  favour  of  some  con- 
stellation, the  Pleiades  or  Hyades.  It  is  genei'ally 
believed  that  the  "queen  of  heaven"  is  the  moon 
(comp.  "  siderum  regina,"  Hor.  Carm.  Sec.  35,  and 
"  regina  coeli,"  Apul.  Met.  xi.  657),  worshipped 
as  Ashtaroth  or  Astarte,  to  whom  the  Hebiew 
women  ofiered  c;\kes  in  the  streets  of  Jei-usalem. 
Hitzig  {Dcr  Proph.  Jeremja,  p.  64)  says  the 
Hebrews  gave  this  title  to  the  Egyptian  Neith, 
whose  name  in  the  form  Ta-nith,  with  the  Egyp- 
tian article,  appears  with  that  of  Baal  Hamman, 
on  four  Carthaginian  inscriptions.  It  is  little 
to  the  purpose  to  inquire  by  what  other  names 
this  goddess  was  known  among  the  Phoenician 
colonists :  the  Hebrews,  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah, 
appear  not  to  have  given  her  an}''  special  title. 
The  Babylonian  Venus,  according  to  Harpocration 
(quoted  by  Selden,  de  Dis  Syris,  synt.  2,  cap.  6, 
p.  220,  ed.  1617),  was  also  styled  "  the  queen  of 
heaven."  Mr.  Layard  identifies  Hera,  "  the  second 
deity  pientioned  by  Diodorus,  with  AstiU'te,  My- 
litbi,  or  Venus,"  and  with  the  "  '  queen  of  heaven,' 

frequently  mentioned  in  the  sacred  volumes 

The  planet  which  bore  her  name  was  sacred  to  her, 
and  in  the  Assyrian  sculptures  a  star  is  placed  upon 
her  head.  She  was  called  Beltis,  because  she  was 
the  female  form  of  the  great  divinity,  or  Baal  ;  the 
two,  there  is  reason  to  conjecture,  having  been  ori- 
nally  but  one,  and  androgyne.    Her  worship  pone- 


household,  is  not  the  wite  but  the  mother  of  the  :  trated  from  Assyria  into  Asia  Minor,  where  its 
master.  Strange  as  such  an  arrangement  at  first  !  Assyrian  origin  was  recognised.  In  the  rock  tiiblets 
sight  appears,  it  is  one  of  the  inevitable  results  of  :  of  Pterium  she  is  represented,  as  in  those  of  Assyria, 


polygamy :  the  number  of  the  wives,  their  social 
position  previous  to  marriage,  and  the  precariousness 
of  their  hold  on  tlie  affections  of  their  lord,  combine 
to  annihilate  their  influence,  which  is  transferred  to 
the  mother  as  being  the  only  female  who  occuj)ies 
a  fixed  and  dignified  position.  Hence  the  applica- 
tion of  the  term  gchirdh  to  the  queen-moi/ier,  the 
extent  of  whose  influence  is  well  illustrated  by  the 
narrative   of  the  interview  of  Solomon  and  liath- 


standing  erect  on  a  lion,  and  crowned  with  a  tower 
or  mural  coronet ;  which,  we  learn  from  Lucian, 
was  peculim-  to  the  Semitic  figure  of  the  goddess. 
This  may  have  been  a  modification  of  the  high  aip 
of  the  Assyrian  baa-relief's.  To  the  Shemitcs  she 
was  known  under  the  names  of  Astarte,  Ashtaroth, 
Mylitta,  and  Alitta,  according  to  the  various  dia- 
lects of  the  nations  amongst  wliicli  her  worship 
prevailed"  {Nineveh,  ii.  ]i\i.  454,  456,  457).     It  is 


sheba,  as  given   in    1  K.   ii.   19   II'.     The  term  is  !  so  difficult  to  separate  the  worship  of  the  moon- 
applied  to  M:\achah,  Asa's  mother,  who  was  deposed  '  goddess  from  that  of  the  jilanet  Venus  in  the  Assy- 


from  her  dignity  in  consequence  of  her  idolatry 
(1  K.  xv.  13;  2  Chr.  xv.  16);  to  Jezebel  as  con- 
tiasted  with  Joram  (2  K.  x.  13,  "  the  children  of 
the  king,  and  the  children  of  the  queen  ")  ;  and  to 
the  mother  of  Jehoiachin  or  Jeconiah  (Jer.  xiii.  18  ; 
compare  2  K.  xxiv.  12 ;  Jer.  xxix.  2).  In  1  K.  xi. 
19,   the   text    iirobably   reciuires   emendation,   the 


I 


'.an  mythology  when  introduced  among  the  western 
nations,  that  tlie  two  are  frequently  confused. 
Movers  believes  that  Ashtoreth  was  originally  the 
moon-goddess,  while acrording  to  liawliiison  {Herod. 
i.  521)  Ishtar  is  the  Babylonian  Venus,  one  of 
whose  titles  in  the  Sardanajialus  inscriptions  is 
"  the  mistress  of  heaven  and  eartii." 


982 


QUICKSANDS 


With  the  aikes  (D''>13,  cavvduim:  x""'^''^^) 
which  were  oHered  iu  her  iioiiour,  with  incense 
and  libations,  Selden  compares  the  iriTvpa  (A.  V. 
"  bran")  of  E]i.  of  Jer.  43,  which  were  burnt  by  the 
women  who  sat  by  tlie  wayside  near  tlie  idolatrous 
temples  lor  the  purposes  of  prostitution.  'i'hese 
irirvpa  were  offered  in  sacrifice  to  Hecate,  while 
invoking  her  aid  for  success  in  love  (Theocr.  ii.  33). 
The  Targum  gives  ptS-ITlS,  cardutin,  which  else- 
where appears  to  be  the  Greek  -^eipiSwrSs,  a  sleeved 
tunic.  Kashi  says  the  cakes  had  the  image  of  the 
god  stamped  upon  them,  and  Theodoiet  that  they 
contained  pine-cones  and  raisins.  [\V.  A.  W.] 

QUICKSANDS,  THE  (^  Si^pris:  Syrtis), 
more  properly  THE  Syrtis  (Acts  xxvii.  17),  the 
broad  and  deep  bight  ou  the  North  Afiican  co;ist 
between  Carthage  and  Cyrene.  The  name  is  derived 
from  So-t,  an  Arabic  word  for  a  desert.  For  two 
reasons  this  region  was  an  object  of  peculiar  dread  to 
the  ancient  navigators  of  the  Mediterranean,  partly 
because  of  the  drifting  sands  and  the  heat  along  the 
shore  itself,  but  chiefly  because  of  the  shallows  and 
the  uncertain  currents  of  water  in  the  bay.  Jose- 
phus,  who  was  himself  once  wrecked  in  this  part  of 
the  Mediterranean,  makes  Agrippa  say  (£.  J.  ii.  16, 
§4),  (pofiepai  /cat  To7i  aKovovcri  Svpreis.  So  noto- 
rious were  these  dangers,  that  tliey  became  a  common- 
place with  the  poets  (see  Hor.  Od.  i.  22,  5;  Ov.  Fast. 
iv.  499 ;  Virg.  Aen.  i.  1 11 ;  Tibull.  iii.  4,  91 ;  Lucan, 
Phars.  ix.  431).  It  is  most  to  our  purpose  here, 
however,  to  refer  to  Apollonius  Rhodins,  who  was 
tamiliar  with  all  the  notions  of  the  Alexandrian 
sailors.  In  the  4th  book  of  his  Argonaut.  1 232-1237, 
he  supplies  illustrations  of  the  passage  before  us,  in 
more  respects  than  one — in  the  sudden  violence 
{avaprdyS-rji'}  of  the  terrible  north  wind  (oAot; 
Bop4cu)  6ve\Ka),  in  its  long  duration  [ivvta  irdaas 
'NvKTas  OyuaJs  Kol  rSacra  (pip'  fi/xaTo),  and  in  the 
terror  which  the  sailors  felt  of  being  driven  into  the 
Syrtis  {Tlpoirph  fidx'  evSoBi  "Zvpriv,  '60"  oii/ceVt 
v6(Tros  OTTLffffa  N7,v(ri  TreXet).  [See  Clauda  and 
EOROCLTDON.]  There  were  properly  two  Syrtes, 
the  eastern  or  larger,  now  called  tiie  Gulf  of  Sidra, 
and  the  western  or  smaller,  now  the  Gulf  of  Cahes. 
It  is  the  former  to  which  our  attention  is  directed 
in  this  passage  of  the  Acts.  Tlie  ship  was  caught 
by  a  north-easterly  gale  ou  the  south  coast  of 
Crete,  near  Mount  Ida,  and  was  driven  to  the 
island  of  Clauda.  This  line  of  drift,  continued, 
would  strike  the  greater  Syrtis :  whence  the  natural 
apprehension  of  the  sailors.  [Suir.]  The  best  modern 
account  of  this  part  of  the  African  coast  is  that  which 
is  siven  (in  his  MeMoir  on  the  Mediterranean,  pp. 
87-91, 186-190)  by  Admiral  Smyth,  who  was  him- 
self the  fii-st  to  survey  this  bay  thoroughly,  and  to 
divest  it  of  many  of  its  terrore.  [J.  S.  H.] 

QUINTUS  MEMMIUS,  2  Mace.  xi.  34.  [See 
ManliusT.  vol.  ii.  228  6.] 

QUrVEK.  Two  distinct  Hebrew  terms  are 
represented  by  this  word  in  the  A.  V. 

(1.)  vF),  thelt.  This  occurs  only  in  Gen.  xxvii. 
3 — "take  "thy  weapons  (lit.  "thy  things"),  thy 
quiver  and  thy  bow."  It  is  derived  (by  Gesenius, 
T/ies.  1504,  and  Fiirst,  Handwh.  ii.  528)  from  a 
root  which  lias  the  force  of  hanging.  The  passage 
itself  aftbrds  no  clue  to  its  meaning.  It  may  there- 
fore signify  either  a  quiver,  or  a  suspended  weapon 
■ — for  instance,  such  a  swor<l  as  in  our  own  language 
was  formeih'  called  a  "  hanger."     Between  these 


QUIVER 

two  signiHcations  the  intei-preters  are  divided.  The 
LXX.,  Vulgate,  and  Targum  I'seudojon.  adhere  to 
the  ibrmer ;  Onkelos,  the  Peshito  and  Arabic  Ver- 
sions, to  the  latter. 


(2.)  nSEJ'N,  ashpah.  The  root  of  this  word  is 
uncertain  (Gesenius,  Thes.  161).  From  two  of  its 
occurrences  its  force  would  seem  to  be  that  of  con- 
taining or  concealing  (Ps.  cx.wii.  5  ;  Is.  xlix.  2). 
It  is  connected  with  arrows  only  in  Lam.  iii.  lo. 
Its  other  occurrences  are  Job  xxxix.  23,  Is.  xxii.  6, 
and  Jer.  v.  16.  In  each  of  these  the  LXX.  translate 
it  by  "  quiver  "  ( (paperpa),  with  tv.'o  exceptions.  Job 
xxxix.  23,  and  Ps.  cxxvii.  5,  in  the  former  of  which 
they  render  it  by  "  bow,"  in  the  latter  by  iTnOv/xia. 

As  to  the  thing  itself,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible 
to  indicate  either  its  form  or  material,  or  in  what 
way  it  was  cairied.     The  quivers  of  the  Assyrians 


Chariot  ivilh  yiiive 


RAAMAH 

are  rarely  shewn  in  the  sculptures.  When  thpy  do 
appear  they  are  worn  at  the  back,  with  the  to]) 
between  the  shoulders  of  the  wearer,  or  hung  at  the 
side  of  the  chariot. 

The  Egyptian  warriors,  on  the  other  hand,  wore 
them  slung  nearly  horizontal,  drawing  out  the 
aiTows  from  beneath  the  arm  (Wilkinson,  Pupnlar 
Account,  i.  354).  The  quiver  was  about  4  inches 
diameter,  supported  by  a  belt  passing  over  the 
shoulder  and  across  the  breast  to  the  opposite  side. 
When  not  in  actual  use,  it  was  sliifted  behind. 

The 'English  word  "quiver"  is  a  variation  of 
"  cover  " — from  the  Fiench  convrir  ■  and  therefore 
answers  to  the  second  of  the  two  Hebrew  words.   [G.] 


KABBAH 


983 


R 


EA'AMAH  (n»I?"l :  'Peyi^-d,  Gen.  x.  7  ; 
'PaiJ./j.d,  Ez.  xxvii.  22:  Begma,  lieema).  A  son  of 
Cush,  and  father  of  the  Cushite  Sheba  and  Dedan. 
The  tribe  of  Kaamah  became  afterwards  renowned 
as  traders;  in  Ezekiel's  lamentation  for  Tyi"e  it  is 
written,  "  the  merchants  of  Sheba  and  Kaamah, 
they  [wei'e]  thy  merchants ;  they  occupied  in  thy 
fairs  with  chief  of  all  the  spices,  and  with  all 
precious  stones  and  gold  "  (xxvii.  22).  The  general 
question  of  the  identity,  by  inteiTnarriage,  &c.,  of 
the  Cushite  Sheba  and  Dedan  with  the  Keturahites 
of  the  same  names  is  discussed,  and  the  27th  chapter 
of  Ezekiel  examined,  in  art.  Dedan.  Of  the  settle- 
ment of  Raamah  on  the  shores  of  the  Persian  gulf 
there  are  several  indications.  Traces  of  Dedan  are 
very  faint ;  but  liaamah  seems  to  be  recovered, 
through  the  LXX.  reading  of  Gen.  x.  7,  in  the 
■P67yua  of  Ptol.  vi.  7,  and  'Vriyna  of  Steph. 
Byzant.  Of  Sheba,  the  other  son  of  Raamah, 
the  writer  has  found  a  trace  iu  a  ruined  city  so 


named  (lA<i,  Sheba)  on  the  island  of  Awal  (Mardsid, 

s.  v.),  belonging  to  the  province  of  Arabia  called 
El-Bahreyn  on  the  shores  of  the  gulf.  [Sheba.] 
This  identification  strengthens  that  of  Raamah  with 
'Peyfid ;  and  the  establishment  of  these  Cushite 
settlements  on  the  Persian  gulf  is  of  course  im- 
portant to  the  theory  of  the  identity  of  these 
Cushite  and  Keturahite  triljes :  but,  besides  etymo- 
logical grounds,  there  are  the  strong  reasons  stated 
in  Dliran  for  holding  that  the  Cushites  colonized 
that  region,  and  for  connecting  them  commercially 
with  Palestine  by  the  great  desert  route. 

The  town  mentioned  by  Niebuhr  called  Reymeh 

( Js,jj  J,  Descr.  de  l' Arable)  cannot,  on  etymological 

grounds,  be  connected  with  Raamah,  as  it  wants  an 
equivalent  for  the  y  ;  nor  can  we  suppose  that  it  is  to 
be  probably  ti'aced  tiiree  days'  journey  from  San'i 
[Uzal],  the  aipital  of  the  Yemen.  [E.  S.  P.] 

KAAMI'ArKn^pyn:  '-PiiK^i;  FA  5a€^ia: 
Raamias).  One  of  the  chiefs  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  7).  In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called 
Reelaiah,  and  the  (Jreek  e(iuivalent  of  the  name 

"  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out  that  the  title  liahhi 
is  directly  derived  from  the  same  root. 

i>  In  Ucut.  ill.  5  it  is  TJ7  axpif  tmv  viCiv  'Kixfxiuv  in  both 
MSS.  In  Jdsh.  xiii.  25  the  Vat.  has'ApojSa  r)  iariv  Kara 
Trpoo-iiTrof  'ApdS,  where  the  lirst  and  last  words  ol"  tho 
sentence  seem  to  have  changed  places. 

c  The  statement  of  Euseblus  {Onom.  "  Annnan  ")  tliat 


in  the  LXX.  of  Neh.  appeal's  to  have  arisen  from  a 
confusion  of  the  two  readings,  unless,  as  Bnrrington 
{Geneal.  ii.  68)  suggests,  'PegAuci  is  an  error  of  the 
copyist  for  'PeeAaia,  tho  uncial  lettere  Ai  having 
been  mistaken  for  m.  In  1  Esd.  v.  2  the  name 
appears  as  Reesaias. 

RAAM'SES,  Ex,  i.  10.    [Rameses.] 

RAB'BAH.  The  name  of  several  ancient  places 
both  East  and  West  of  the  Jordan.  The  root  is 
rab,  meaning  "multitude,"  and  thence  "greatness,"  , 
of  size  or  importiince*  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1254; 
Fiirst,  Handwh.  ii.  347).  The  word  survives  iu 
Arabic  as  a  common  appellative,  and  is  also  in  use 
as  the  name  of  places — e.  </?-.  Rabba  on  the  east  of 
the'  Dead  Sea ;  Eahbah,  a  temple  in  the  tribe  of 
Medshidj  (Freytag,  ii.  107(() ;  and  perhaps  also 
Rabat  in  Morocco.  • 

1.  (nan :  ^  'Pa^Bde,  'Pa^de,  ri  'Pa^fid  :  Rabba, 
Rabbath.)  A  very  strong  place  on  the  East  of  Jordan, 
which  when  its  name  is  first  introduced  in  the 
sacred  records  was  the  chief  city  of  the  Ammonites. 
In  five  passages  (Deut.  iii.  11;  2  Sam.  xii.  26, 
xvii.  27  ;  Jer.  xlix.  2  ;  Ez.  xxi.  20)  it  is  styled  at 
length  Rahbath-bene-Ammgn,  A.  V.  Rabbath  of  the 
Ammonites,  or,  children  of  Ammon  ;  but  elsewhere 
(Josh.  xiii.  25  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  1,  xii.  27,  29  ;  1  Chr. 
XX.  1  ;  Jer.  xlix.  3 ;  Ez.  xxv.  5  ;  Amos  i.  14) 
simply  Rabbah. 

It  appears  in  the  sacred  records  as  the  single 
city  of  the  Ammonites,  at  least  no  other  bears  any 
distinctive  name,  a  fact  wiiich,  as  has  been  already 
remarked  (vol.i.  60  a),  contrasts  strongly  with  the 
abundant  details  of  the  city-life  of  the  Moabites. 

Whether  it  was  originally,  as  some  conjecture, 
the  Ham  of  which  the  Zuzim  were  dispossessed  by 
Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.  5),  will  probably  remain 
for  ever  a  conjecture.'^  When  first  named  it  is  in 
the  hands  of  the  Ammonites,  and  is  mentioned  as  con- 
taining the  bed  or  sarcophagus  of  the  giant  Og 
(Deut.  iii.  11),  possibly  the  trophy  of  some  suc- 
cessful war  of  the  younger  nation  of  Lot,  and  more 
recent  settler  in  the  counti-y,  against  the  more 
ancient  Rephaim.  With  the  people  of  Lot,  the!)- 
kinsmen  the  Israelites  had  no  quarrel,  and  Rabbath- 
of-the-children-of-Ammon  remained  to  all  appear- 
ance unmolested  during  the  first  period  of  the 
Israelite  occupation.  It  was  not  included  in  the 
territory  of  the  tribes  east  of  Jordan ;  the  border 
of  Gad  stops  at  "  Aroer,  which  faces  Kabbah " 
(Josh.  xiii.  25).  The  attacks  of  the  Bene-Ammon 
on  Israel,  however,  brought  these  jieacefiil  relations 
to  an  end.  Saul  must  have  had  oi'cupaticin  enough 
on  the  west  of  Jordan  in  attacking  and  reix?lliiig 
the  attacks  of  the  Philistines  and  in  ]iursuing  David 
through  the  woods  and  ravines  of  .ludah  to  prevent 
his  crossing  the  river,  unless  on  such  special  occa.sions 
as  the  relief  of  Jabesh.  At  any  rate  we  never  hear 
of  his  having  penetrated  so  far  in  that  direction  as 
Rabbah.  But  David's  ai'mies  were  often  engaged 
against  both  Moab  and  Ammon. 

His  first  Ammonite  laiiipaign  appears  to  have 
occurred  early  in  his  reign.  A  part  of  tho  army, 
under  Abishai,  was  sent  as  far  as  Rabbah  to  keep 
the  Ammonites  in  check  (2  Sam.  x.   10,  14),  but 

it  was  originally  a  city  of  the  Rei>liaim,  implies  that  it 
was  the  Ashteroth  Karnalm  of  Gen.  xlv.  In  agreement 
with  this  Is  the  fact  that  it  was  in  later  times 
known  as  Astaite  (Steph.  liy/,.,  qimted  liy  Kitter,  1155). 
Ill  this  case  the  dual  ending  of  Kaniond  may  point,  as 
guiiu!  have  coiijeiturcd  in  Jeriislmlai'm,  to  the  double 
nature  of  the  city— a  lower  town  and  a  citadel. 


984 


RABBAH 


the  main  force  under  Joab  remained  at  Medeba 
(I  Clir.  xix.  7).  The  following  year  was  occupied 
in  the  great  expedition  by  David  in  person  against 
the  Syrians  at  Helara,  wherever  that  may  have 
been  (2  Sam.  x.  15-19).  After  their  defeat  the 
Ammonite  war  was  resumed,  and  this  time  Rabbah 
was  made  the  main  point  of  attack  (xi.  1).  Joab 
took  the  command,  and  was  followed  by  the  whole 
of  the  army.  The  expedition  included  Ephraim 
and  Benjamin,  as  well  as  the  king's  own  tribe 
(ver.  11);  the  "king's  slaves"  (ver.  1,  17,  24); 
probably  David's  immediate  body  guard,  and  the 
thirty-seven  chief  captains.  Uriah  was  certainly 
there,  and  if  a  not  improbable  Jewish  tradition  may 
be  adopted,  Ittai  the  Gittite  was  there  also.  [Ittai.] 
The  ark  accompanied  the  camp  (ver.  11),  the  only 
time ''  that  w^  hear  of  its  doing  so,  except  that  me- 
morable battle  witli  the  Philistines,  when  its  capture 
caused  the  death  of  the  high-priest.  David  alone, 
to  his  cost,  remained  in  Jerusalem.  The  country 
was  wasted,  and  the  roving  Ammonites  were  driven 
with  all  their  property  (xii.  30)  into  their  single 
stronghold,  as  the  Bedouin  Kenites  were  driven 
from  their  tents  inside  the  walls  of  Jerusalem 
when  Judah  was  overrun  by  the  Chaldeans. 
[Reghabites.]  The  siege  must  have  lasted  nearly, 
if  not  quite,  two  years  ;  since  during  its  progress 
David  formed  his  connexion  with  Bathsheba,  and 
the  two  children,  that  which  died  and  Solomon, 
were  successively  born.  The  sallies  of  the  Am- 
monites appear  to  have  formed  a  main  feature  of 
the  siege  (2  Sam.  xi.  17,  &c.).  At  the  end  of 
that  time  Joab  succeeded  in  capturing  a  portion 
of  the  place — the  '-city  of  waters,"  that  is,  the 
lower  town,  so  called  from  its  containing  the  per- 
ennial stream  which  rises  in  and  still  flows 
through  it.  The  fact  (which  seems  undoubted) 
that  the  source  of  the  stream  was  within  the  lower 
city,  explains  its  having  held  out  for  so  long.     It 

was  also  called  the  "royal  city"  (^n3-1?0n   "l^V), 

perhaps  from  its  connexion  with  Molech  or  Milcom 
— the  "  king" — more  probably  from  its  containing 
the  palace  of  Hanun  and  Xahash.  But  the  citadel, 
which  rises  abruptly  on  the  north  side  of  the  lower 
town,  a  place  of  very  great  strength,  still  remained 
to  be  taken,  and  the  honour  of  this  capture,  Joab 
(with  that  devotion  to  David,  which  runs  like  a 
Ijright  thread  through  the  dark  web  of  his  character) 
insists  on  reserving  for  the  king.  "  I  have  fought," 
writes  he  to  his  uncle,  then  living  at  ease  in  the 
harem  at  Jerusalem,  in  all  the  satisfaction  of  the 
birth  of  Solomon — "  I  have  fought  against  ftabbah, 
and  have  taken  ^  the  city  of  waters ;  but  the  citadel 
still  remains :  now  therefoi'e  gather  the  rest  of  the 
people  together  and  come ;  put  yourself  at  the  head 
of  the  whole  army,  renew  the  assault  against  the 
citadel,  take  it,  and  thus  finish  the  siege  which  I 
have  carried  so  far,"  and  then  he  ends  with  a 
rough  banter f — half  jest,  half  earnest —"  lest  I 
take  the  city  and  in  future  it  go  under  my  name." 
The  waters  of  the  lower  city  once  in  the  hands  of 
the  besiegei-s  the  fate  of  the  citadel  was  ceitain, 
tor  that  tbrtress  possessed  in  itself  (as  we  learn 
from  the  invaluable  notice  of  Josephus,  Ant.  vii. 
7,  §o)   but  one   well  of  limited  supply,  quite  in- 

<•  On  a  former  occasion  (Num.  xxxl.  6)  the  "  holy- 
things  "  only  are  specified  ;  an  expression  which  hardly 
Deems  to  include  the  ark. 

<:  The  Vulgate  alters  the  force  of  the  whole  passage  by 
tendering  this  et  capienda  i:st  urbs  aquaram,  •'  the  city 


RABBAH 

adequate  to  the  throng  which  crowded  its  walls. 
The  provisions  also  were  at  last  exhausted,  and 
shortly  after  David's  arrival  the  fortress  was  taken, 
and  its  inmates,  with  a  very  gieat  booty,  and  the 
idol  of  Molech,  with  all  its  costly  adornments,  fell 
into  the  hands  of  David.     [Ittai  ;  Molech.] 

We  are  not  told  whether  the  city  was  demolished 
or  whether  David  was  satisfied  with  the  slaughter 
of  its  inmates.  In  the  time  of  Amos,  two  cen- 
turies and  a  half  later,  it  had  again  a  "  wall "  and 
"  palaces,"  and  was  still  the  sanctuary  of  Molech — 
"the  king"  (Am.  i.  14).  So  it  was  also  at  the 
date  of  the  invasion  of  Nebuchadnezzar  ( Jer.  xlix. 
2,  3),  when  its  dependent  towns  ("daughters")  are 
mentioned,  and  when  it  is  named  in  such  terms  as 
imply  that  it  was  of  equal  importance  with  Jeru- 
salem (I]z.  xxi.  20).  At  liabbah,  no  doubt  Baalis, 
king  of  the  Bene-Ammon  (Jer.  xl.  14),  held  such 
court  as  he  could  mu>ter,  and  within  its  walls  was 
plotted  the  attack  of  Ishmael  which  cost  Gedaliah 
his  life,  and  drove  Jei'emiah  into  Egypt.  [Ishmael 
6,  vol.  i.  p.  895  rt.]  The  denunciations  of  the  pro- 
phets just  named  may  liave  been  fulfilled,  either  at 
the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  five 
years  afterwards,  when  the  Assyrian  armies  overran 
the  country  east  of  Jordan  on  their  road  to  Egypt 
(Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7 ).    See  Jerome,  on  Amos  i.  41. 

In  the  period  between  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, Rabbath-Ammon  appears  to  have  been  a 
place  of  much  importance,  and  the  scene  of  many 
contests.  The  natural  advantages  of  position  and 
water  supply  which  had  always  distinguished  it, 
still  made  it  an  important  citadel  by  turns  to 
each  side,  during  the  contentions  which  raged  for  so 
long  over  the  whole  of  the  district.  It  lay  on  the 
road  between  Heshbon  and  Bosra,  and  was  the  last 
place  at  which  a  stock  of  water  could  be  obtained 
for  the  journey  across  the  desert,  while  as  it  stood 
on  the  confines  of  the  richer  and  more  civilized 
country,  it  formed  an  important  garrison  station, 
for  repelling  t'ue  incursions  of  tiie  wild  tribes  of  the 
desert.  Froin  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  (B.C.  285- 
247)  it  received  the  name  of  Pliiladelpheia  (Jerome 
on  Ez.  XXV.  I),  and  the  district  either  then  or  sub- 
sequently was  called  Philadelplfene  (Joseph.  B.  J. 
iii.  3,  §3),  or  Arabia  Philadelpheusis  (Epiphanius, 
in  Eitter,  Syrien,  1155).  In  B.C.  218  it  was  taken 
from  the  then  Ptolemy  (Pliilopator)  by  Antiochus 
the  Great,  after  a  long  and  obstinate  resistance  from 
the  besieged  in  the  citadel.  A  communication  with 
the  spring  in  the  lower  town  had  been  made  since 
(possibly  in  consequence  of)  David's  siege,  by  a  long 
secret  subterranean  passage,  and  had  not  this  been 
discovered  to  Antiochus  by  a  prisoner,  the  citadel 
might  have  been  enabled  to  hold  out  (Polybius,  v. 
17,  in  Ritter,  Syrien,  1155).  Ditring  the  struggle 
between  Antiochus  the  Pious  (Sidetesi,  and  Ptolemy 
the  son-in-law  of  Simon  Maccabaeus  icir.  B.C.  134), 
it  is  mentioned  as  being  governed  by  a  tyrant  named 
Cotylas  (^Ant.  xiii.  8,  §1).  Its  ancient  name, 
though  under  a  clou<l,  was  still  used;  it  is  men- 
tioned by  Polybius  (v.  71)  under  the  hardly  altered 
form  of  Rabbatdmana  ('PajS/Sara^uai/o).  About 
the  year  65  we  hear  of  it  as  in  the  hands  of  Aretas 
(one  of  the  Arab  chiefs  of  that  name),  who  retired 
thither  from  Judaea  when   menaced    by  Scaurus, 

of  waters  Is  about  to  be  taken."    But  neither  Hebrew  nor 
LXX.  will  bear  this  interpretation. 

f  Very  characteristic  of  Joab.     See  a  similar  strain, 
2  Sam.  xis.  6. 


RABBAH 


985 


Amman,  from  the  East ;  sin    .  i 


;il  dtreiun  and  part  of  the  citadel-hill.    From  a  sketch  by  Wni.  'npping,  Esq. 


Pompey's  general  (Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  6,  §3).  The 
Arabs  probably  held  it  till  the  year  B.C.  30,  when 
they  were  attacked  there  by  Herod  the  Great.  But 
the  account  of  Josephus  (i?.  /.  i.  19,  §5,  6)  seems 
to  imply  that  the  city  was  not  then  inhabited, 
and  that  although  the  citadel  formed  the  main 
point  of  the  combat,  yet  that  it  was  only  occupied 
on  the  instant.  The  w.iter  communication  above 
alluded  to  also  appears  not  to  have  been  then  in 
existence,  for  the  people  who  occupied  the  citadel 
quickly  surrendered  from  thirst,  and  the  wliole 
affair  was  over  in  si.x  days. 

At  the  Christian  era  Pliiiadelpheia  formed  the 
eastern  limit  of  the  region  of  Peraca  (B.  J.  iii.  3, 
§3).  It  was  one  of  the  cities  of  the  Decapolis,  and 
as  far  down  as  tlie  4th  century  wiis  esteemed  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  and  strongest  cities  of  the 
whole  of  Coele-Syi'ia  (Eusebius,  Onom.  "Amman;" 
Ammianus  Marc,  in  Hitter,  1157).  Its  magnificent 
theatre  (said  to  be  the  largest 5  in  .Syria),  temples, 
odeon,  mausoleum,  and  other  public  buildings  were 
probably  erected  during  the  '2iid  and  3rd  centuries, 
like  tlio.se  of  Jerash,  which  they  resemble  in  style, 
though  their  scale  and  design  are  grander  (Lindsay). 
Amongst  the  ruins  of  an  "  immense  temple  "  on  the 
citadel  hill,  Mr.  Tijjping  saw  some  prostrate 
columns  5  ft.  diameter.  Its  coins  are  e.xtant, 
some  bearing  the  figure  of  Astivrtc,  some  the  word 
Herakleion,  implying  a  worship  of  Hercules,  pro- 
bably the  continuation  of  that  ol'M<ilech  or  Milcom. 
From  Stephanus  of  Byzantium  we  loam  that  it  was 
also  called  Astarte,  doubtless  from  its  containing  a 
temple  of  that  goddess.  Justin  Martyr,  a  native 
of  Shechem,  writing  about  a.d.  140,  speaks  of  the 
city  as  containing  a  multitude  of  Ammonites  {Dial, 
with  Trypho),  though  it  would  probably  not  be  safe 
to  interpret  this  too  strictly. 

Philadelpheia  became  the  seat  of  aChristian  bishop, 

(t  Mr.  Tipping  gives  the  following  dimensions  In  his 
Journal.  Breadth  210  ft.;  height  42  stops  :  viz.,  first  row 
10,  second  14,  third  18. 


and  was  one  of  the  nineteen  sees  of,"  Palestina  ter- 
tia,"  which  were  subordinate  to  Bostra  (Reland, 
Pal.  228).  The  church  still  remains  "  in  excellent 
preservation  "  with  its  lofty  steeple  ( Lord  Lindsay). 
Some  of  the  bishops  appear  to  have  signed  under 
the  title  of  Bakatha ;  which  Bakatha  is  by  Epipha- 
nius  (himself  a  native  of  Palestine)  mentioned  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  imply  that  it  was  but  another 
name  for  Philadelpheia,  derived  from  an  Arab  tribe 
in  whose  posse.ssion  it  was  at  that  time  (a.d.  cir. 
400.)  But  this  is  doubtful.  (See  Keland,  Pal. 
612;   Ritter,  1157.) 

Ammdn^  lies  about  22  miles  from  the  Jordan 
at  the  eastern  apex  of  a  triangle,  of  which  Heshbon 
and  cs-Salt  form  respectively  the  southern  and 
northern  points.  It  is  about  14  miles  from  the 
former,  and  12  from  the  latter.  Jerash  is  due 
north,  more  than  20  miles  distant  in  a  straight 
line,  and  35  by  the  usual  road  (Lindsay,  278).  It 
lies  in  a  valley  which  is  a  branch,  or  perhaps  the 
main  course,  of  the  Wadij  Zerha,^  usually  iden- 
tified with  the  Jabbok.  The  Moid- Amman,  or 
water  of  Amman,  a  mere  streamlet,  rises  within  the 
basin  which  contains  the  ruins  of  the  town.  The 
main  valley  is  a  mere  winter  torrent,  but  appears 
to  be  perennial,  and  contains  a  quantity  of  fish,  by 
one  observer  said  to  be  trout  (see  Burckhardt,  358  ; 
0.  Robinson,  ii.  174;  "a  perfect  lishpond,"  Tip- 
ping). The  stream  runs  from  west  to  east,  and 
north  of  it  is  the  citadel  on  its  isolated  hill. 

When  the  Moslems  conquered  Syria  they  found 
the  city  in  ruins  (Abulfeda  in  Ritter,  1158  ;  and  in 
note  to  Lord  Lindsay) ;  and  in  ruins  remarkable  for 
their  extent  and  desolation  even  for  Syria,  the 
"  Land  of  ruins."  it  still  remains.  The  public 
buildings  are  said  to  be  Roman,  in  general  character 


^     ,L*>£>  essentially  the  same  word  as  the  Hebrew 

Amm6n. 

i  This  is  distinctly  stated  by  Abulfodu  (Hitter,  1158, 
Liuds;»y,  note  aT). 


986 


KABBAH 


EABBI 


like  those  at  Jerash,  except  the  citadel,  which  is  !  ancient  appellations.  Rahba  lies  on  the  highlands 
described  as  of  large  square  stones  put  together  I  at  the  S.E.  quarter  of  the  Dead  Sea,  between  Kerak 
without  cement,  and  which  is  probably  more  !  and  Jibcl  Shihdn.  Its  ruins,  which  are  unimportant, 
ancient  than  the  rest.  The  remains  of  private  I  are  described  by  Burckhardt  (July  15 J,  Seetzen 
houses  scattered  on  both  sides  of  the  stream  are  ]  (lieisen,  i.  411),  and  De  Saulcy  (Jan.  18). 
very  extensive.  They  have  been  visited,  and  de- j  3.  (n3"in,  with  the  definite  article:  2wSrj/3o; 
scribed  in  more  or  less  detail,  by  Burckhardt  (Syria,    ,^j^^._  j^^J^^  .  ^,.^,^j,^.^_^     ^  ^-^^  „f  j,,j^^^^  ^^^^^ 


357-360),  who  gives  a  plan;  Seetzen  [Beisen,  i 
396,  iv.  '212-214)  ;  Irbv  (June  14) ;  Buckingham, 
E.  Si/ria,  6S-82 ;  Lord^  Lindsay  (5th.  ed.  278-284)  ; 
G.  Kobinson  (ii.  172-178);  ]>ord  Claud  Hamilton 
(in  Keith,  Evid.  of  Proph.  ch.  vi.).  Burckhardt's 
plan  gives  a  general  idea  of  the  disposition  of  the 
place,  but  a  comparison  with  My.  Tipping's  sketch 
(on  the  accuracy  of  which  eveiy  dependence  may 
be  placed),  seems  to  show  that  it  is  not  correct  as 
to  the  proportions  of  the  different  parts.  Two 
views  are  given  by  Laboide  (  Vues  en  Sijrie),  one 
of  a  tomb,  the  other  of  the  theatre ;  but  neither 
of  these  embraces  the  characteristic  features  of  the 
place — the  streamlet  and  the  citadel.  The  accom- 
panying view  has  been  engi-aved  (for  the  first  time) 
from  one  of  several  careful  sketches  made  in  1840 
by  William  Tipping,  Esq.,  and  by  him  kindly 
placed,  with  some  valuable  information,  at  the 
disposal  of  the  author.  It  is  taken  looking  towards 
the  east.  On  the  right  is  the  beginning  of  the 
citadel  hill.  In  front  is  an  arch  (also  mentioned  by 
Burckhardt)  which  spans  the  stream.  Below  and 
in  front  of  the  arch  is  masonry,  showing  how  the 
stream  was  fonnerly  embanked  or  quayed  in. 

No  inscriptions  have  been  yet  discovered.  A 
lengthened  and"  excellent  summary  of  all  the  infor- 
mation respecting  this  city  will  be  found  in  Hitter's 
Erdkuadc,  Syrien  (1145-1159). 


Coin  of  PhilaUrlphia,  stiovvin;;  the  Tejt  or  Shrine  of  Herakles,  the  Greek  equivalent  to 
Molech.  Obv.:  A  V  TKAICM- AVPANTWNINV.  r.ust  of  M  Aurellus,  r. 
Rev.:  4«IAK0CYPHI'AKA610N  PMA  [A.V.C.  G90].  Shrine  in  quadriga,  r. 
[*lAAAfcA*enN  KOiAlIC  CYPIAC  HPAKA610N]. 

2.  Although  there  is  no  trace  of  the  flict  in  the 
Bible,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  name  of 
Iiabbah  w;is  also  attached  in  biblical  times  to  the 
chief  city  of  Moab.  Its  biblical  name  is  Ar,  but 
we  have  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  {Onomast. 
"  JNIoalj  ")  that  in  the  4th  century  it  possessed  the 
special  title  of  liabbath  !Moab.  or  as  it  appears  in  the 
corrupted  orthography  of  Stephanus  of  Byzantium, 
the  coins,  and  the  Ecclesiastical  Lists,  Hahathmoha, 
liabbathmoma,  andRatba  or Bobba Mo<(bitis  (Wehnd, 
957,  226  ;  Seetzen,  Beisen,  iv.  227  ;  Hitter,  122o  ,. 
This  name  was  for  a  time  displaced  by  Areopolis, 
in  the  same  manner  that  llabbath-Ammon  had  been 
by  Philadelpheia:  these,  however,  were  but  the 
names  impo.sed  by  the  temporary  masters  of  the 
country,  and  emplo3'ed  by  them  in  their  official 
documents,  and  when  they  passed  away,  the  original 
names,  which  had  never  lost  their  place  in  the 
mouths  of  the  common  j)eople,  reappeared,  and 
Jiabba  and  Aiiiiiu'in   still   remain    (o  testily    to   flic 


with  Kirjath-jearim,  in  Josh.  xv.  60  only.  Xo  trace 
of  its  existence  has  yet  been  discovered. 

4.  In  one  passage  (Josh.  xi.  8)  ZiDON  is  men- 
tioned with  the  affix  Rjibbah — Zidou-rabbah .  This 
is  preserved  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V'.,  though  in 
the  text  it  is  translated  "  great  Zidon."  [G.] 

EAB'BATH  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF 
AMMON,  and  R.  OF  THE  AMMONITES. 
(The  former  is  the  more  accurate,  the  Hebrew  being 
in  both  eases  J1QJ?  ""JH  TlBT :  r]  aKpa  tSov  vlaiv 
'Afifj-dv,  'Pa&^ad  vicou  'A/JL/Jicov  :  Eabbath  Jilionm 
Aminont.  This  is  the  full  appellation  of  the  place 
commonly  given  as  Rabbah.  It  occurs  only  in 
Dent.  iii.  1 1  and  Ezek.  xxi.  20.  The  th  is  merely 
the  Hebrew  mode  of  connecting  a  word  ending  in 
ah  with  one  following  it.    (Comp.  Kamath,  (ii- 

BEATH,  KlRJATH,  &C.)  [G.] 

RAB'BI  (^2"]  :  'Pa^ySi').  A  title  of  respect  given 
by  the  Jews  to  their  doctors  and  teachers,  and 
often  addressed  to  our  Lord  (Matt,  xxiii.  7,  8, 
xxvi.  25,  49;  Mark  ix.  5,  xi.  21,  xiv.  45;  John 
i.  39,  50,  iii.  2,  2G,  iv.  31,  vi.  25,  ix.  2,  xi.  8;. 
The  meaning  of  the  title  is  interpreted  in  express 
words  by  St.  John,  and  by  implication  in  St. 
Matthew,  to  mean  Master,  Teacher;  AiSaCKaAe, 
John  i.  39  (compare  xi.  28,  xiii.  13),  and  Matt. 
xxiii.  8,  where  recent  editors  (Tisch- 
endorf,  Wordsworth,  Altoid),  on 
the  authority  of  MSS.,  read  6  5t- 
^\\  SdffKaXos,  instead  of  6  Ka6T]yi}TT}s 
l^.j\\  of  the  Textiis  Keceptus.  The  same 
J^*\  interpretation  is  given  by  St.  John 
S  j  of  the  kindred  title  Rabboni,  'Pa;8- 
^'~'''  '■  jSowt  (.lohn  XX.  16),  which  also 
occurs  in  Mark  x,  35,  where  the 
Textus  Keceptus,  with  less  autho- 
rity, spells  the  word  'Va^fiovi.  The 
reading  in  John  xx.  16,  which  has 
perhaps  the  greatest  weight  of  au- 
thority, makes  an  addition  to  the 
common  text:  "  She  turned  herself 
and  said  unto  Him,  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue  ('E;Spai(7Ti'),  R;ibboni ;  which 
is  to  say.  Master."  The  *  which  is  added  to  these 
titles,  3~1  irab)  and  p3T  {rabbon),  or  p"]  {rabhan), 
has  been  thought  to  be  the  pronominal  affix  "  My;" 
but  it  is  to  be  noted  that  St.  John  does  not 
translate  either  of  these  by  ''My  Master,"  but 
simply  "  Master,"  so  tliat  the  »  would  seem  to 
have  lost  any  especial  signifiamce  as  a  jiossessive 
pronoun  intimating  appropriation  or  endearment, 
and,  like  the  "  my  "  in  titles  of  respect  among 
ourselves,  or  in  such  temis  as  J/onseigneur,  Mon- 
sieur,  to  be  merely  part  of  the  formal  address. 
Information  on  these  titles  may  be  found  in  Light- 
foot,  Harmony  of  the  Four  Evangelists,  John  i.  38  ; 
fforae  Hebraicae  et  Talmitdicae,  Matt,  xxiii.  7. 

The  Latin  translation,  Magister  (connected  with 
magnus,  magis),  is  a  title  formed  on  the  same 
principle  as  Rabbi,  fi-om  rab,  "  great."  Itnb  enters 
into  the  composition  of  many  names  of  dignity  and 
oilice.      [Kausiiakijii  ;   Uabsauis;   Uabmag.] 


RABBITH 

The  title  liabbi  is  not  known  to  have  been  used 
before  the  reign  of  Herod  the  Great,  and  is  thought 
to  have  taken  its  rise  about  the  time  of  tile  dis- 
putes between  the  rival  schools  of  Hillel  and 
Sliammai.  Before  that  period  the  prophets  and 
the  men  of  the  great  synagogue  were  simply  called 
by  their  proper  names,  and  the  first  who  had  a 
title  is  said  to  be  Simeon  the  son  of  Hillel,  who 
is  supposed  by  some  to  be  the  Simeon  who  took 
our  Saviour  in  his  arms  in  the  temple:  he  was 
called  Kabban,  and  from  liis  time  such  titles  came 
to  be  in  fashion.  Rabbi  was  considered  a  higher 
title  than  Rab,  and  Uabban  higher  than  Uabbi ; 
yet  it  was  said  in  the  Jewish  books  that  greater 
was  he  who  wa-s  called  by  his  own  name  than  even 
he  who  was  called  Kabban.  Some  account  of  the 
Rabbis  and  the  Mishnical  and  Talmudical  writings 
may  be  found  in  I'rideaux,  Connection,  part  i. 
bock  5,  under  the  year  n.c.  446  ;  part  ii.  book  8, 
Under  the  year  B.C.  37  ;  and  a  sketch  of  the 
history  of  the  school  of  rabbinical  learning  at 
Tlbei'ias,  founded  by  Rabbi  Judah  Hakkodesh,  the 
compiler  of  the  Mishnah,  in  the  second  century 
after  Christ,  is  given  in  Robinson's  Biblical  lie- 
searches,  ii.  391.  See  also  note  14  to  Burton's 
Bampton  Lectures,  and  the  authorities  there  quoted, 
lor  instance,  Bruker,  vol.  ii.  p.  820,  and  Basuage, 
Hist,  des  Juifs,  iii.  0,  p.  138.  [E.  P.  E.] 

KAB'BITH  (n"'3"]n,  with   the   def.  article.- 

Aa^€ipci)u;  Alex.  "Pal3l3wd  :  Babbith).  A  town  in 
the  territory,  perhaps  on  the  boundaiy,  of  Issachar 
(Josh.  xix.  20  only).  It  is  not  again  mentioned, 
nor  is  anything  yet  known  of  it,  or  of  the  places 
named  in  company  with  it.  [G.] 

EABBO'NI,  John  xx.  16.  [Rabei.] 
EAB-MAG  (i?9"lV.  'Pafi-f^dy,  'Pa^afidx: 
Bcbmaii)  is  found  only  in  Jer.  xxxix.  3  and  13.  In 
both  places  it  is  a  title  borne  by  a  certain  Nergal- 
sharezer,  who  is  mentioned  among  the  "  princes  " 
that  accompanied  Nebuchadnezzar  to  the  last  siege 
of  Jerusalem.  It  has  already  been  shown  that 
Nergal-sharezer  is  probably  identical  with  the  king, 
GiUed  by  the  Greeks  Neriglissar,  who  ascended  the 
throne  of  Babykn  two  years  after  the  death  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar. [Nergal-sharezkk.]  This  king, 
as  well  as  certain  other  ini])ortant  personages,  is 
found  to  bear  the  title  in  the  Babylonian  inscrip- 
tions. It  is  written  indeed  with  a  somewhat  different 
voailisation,  being  read  as  Rahii-Emiia  by  Sir  H. 
Rawlinson.  The  signification  is  somewhat  doubtful. 
Kabu  is  most  certainly  "great,"  or  •'chief,'  an 
exact  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  3"l,  wlience  Rabbi, 
"a  great  one,  a  doctor ;"  but  Mag,  or  Fmga,  is  an 
obscure  temi.  It  has  been  commonly  identifiid 
with  the  word  "  Magus  "  (Gesenius,  ad  voc.  30  ; 
(Salmet,  Commentaire  litteral,  vi.  203,  &c.)  ;  but 
this  identification  is  very  uncertain,  since  an  entirely 
ditl'erent  word — one  which  is  re.ad  as  Maijusn — is 
used  in  that  sense  throughout  the  Behistim  inscrij)- 
tion  (Oppert,  Expedition  Scientijique  en  Mcso- 
potamie,  ii.  209).  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  inclines  to 
translate  emija  by  "priest,"  but  does  not  connect  it 
with  the  Magi,  who  in  the  time  of  Ncriglissar  had 
no  footing  in  Babylon.  He  regards  this  rendering, 
however,  as  j)urely  conjectui-al,  and  thinks  we  can 
only  say  at  present  that  the  ollice  was  one  of  great 
power  and  dignity  at  the  Babylonian  court,  and 
))iol)ably  gave  its  possessor  sj)ecial  facilities  for 
jblaining  the  throne.  [<!.  K.  | 


EABSHAKEH 


987 


RAB  SAGES  ('Pa^^aKr^s  :  Ilabsaces).  Kab- 
SHAKEH  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  IS). 

EAB'-SARIS  'DnO-lT:  'Pa(pis;  Alex.  'Pafi- 
ffapes  :  PMbsaris,  liabsares).  1.  An  ofilccr  of  the 
king  of  Assyria  sent  up  with  Tartan  and  Rabshakeh 
against  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  K. 
xviii.  17). 

2.  {NafSovffapeis ;  Alex.  Na/3oiifapis.)  One  of 
the  princes  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  was  present  at 
the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  u.c.  588,  when  Zede- 
kiah.  after  endeavouring  to  escape,  was  fciken  and 
blinded  and  sent  in  chains  to  Babylon  (Jers  xxxix. 
3).  Rixbsaris  is  mentioned  afterwards  (ver.  13) 
among  the  other  princes  who  at  the  command  of 
the  king  were  sent  to  deliver  Jeremiah  out  of  the 
prison. 

Rabsaris  is  probably  rather  the  name  of  an  office 
than  of  an  individual,  the  word  signifying  chief 
eunuch  ;  in  Dan.  i.  3,  Ashjjcnaz  is  called  "the  master 
of  the  eunuchs  (Rab-sarisim).  Luther  ti'anslates 
the  word,  in  the  three  places  where  it  occurs,  as  a 
name  of  office,  the  arch-chamberlain  (der  Erzkiim- 
merer,  der  oberste  Kammerer).  Josephus,  Aiit.  x.  8, 
§2,  takes  them  as  the  A.  V.  does,  as  proper  names. 
The  chief  officers  of  the  court  were  present  attend- 
ing on  the  king  ;  and  the  instance  of  the  eunuch 
Narses,  would  show  that  it  was  not  impossible  for 
the  Rabsaris  to  possess  some  of  the  qualities  fitting 
him  for  a  nMlitary  command.  In  2  K.  xxv.  19,  an 
eunuch  (D''"}D,  Saris,  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V. 
"officer,"  in  the  margin  "eunuch")  is  spoken  of 
as  set  over  the  men  of  war ;  and  in  the  sculptures 
at  Nineveh  "  eunuchs  are  represented  as  command- 
ing in  war ;  fighting  both  on  chariots  and  on  horse- 
back, and  receiving  the  prisoners  and  the  heads  of  the 
slain  after  battle."  LayanV^  Nineveh,  vol.  ii.  325. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  in  Jeremiah  xxxix.  we 
have  not  only  the  title  of  the  Kabsaris  given,  but  his 
name  also,  either  Sarsechim  (ver.  3)  or  (ver.  13) 
Nebu-shasban  (worshipper  of  Nebo,  Is.  xlvi.  1),  in 
the  same  way  as  Nergal  Sharezer  is  given  in  the  same 
pjissages  as  the  name  of  the  Rab-mag.     [E.  P.  E.] 

RAB'SHAKEH  ((ni;5Cbl :  'Poi|/c{k7js,  2  K. 
xviii.,  xix.;  'Pa/ScraKijy,  Is.  xxxvi.,  x.xxvii. :  Eab- 
saces).  One  of  the  officers  of  the  king  of  Assyria 
sent  against  Jerusalem  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
Sennacherib,  having  taken  other  cities  of  Judah,  was 
now  besieging  Lachish,  and  Hezekiah,  terrified  at  his 
progress,  and  losing  for  a  time  his  firm  faith  in 
God,  sends  to  Lachisli  with  an  ofier  of  submission 
and  tribute.  This  he  strains  himself  to  the  utmost 
to  pay,  giving  for  the  purpose  not  only  all  the 
treasures  of  the  Temple  and  palace,  but  strijiping 
oil  the  gold  plates  witii  which  he  himself  in  the 
beginning  of  his  reign  had  overlaid  the  doors  and 
pillars  of  the  house  of  the  Lord  (2  K.  xviii.  10; 
2  Chr.  xxix.  3;  see  Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lectures, 
iv.  p.  141 ;  Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  145). 
But  Sennacherib,  not  content  with  this,  his  cu- 
pidity being  excited  rather  than  appeiised,  sends  a 
great  host  against  Jerusalem  under  Tart,nn,  Rabsaris, 
and  Rabshakeh  ;  not  so  much,  aj)parently,  with  the 
object  of  at  present  engaging  in  the  siege  of  the 
city,  as  with  the  idea  that,  in  its  present  disheai-lened 
state,  the  sight  of  an  army,  combined  with  the  threats 
and  specious  promises  of  R;ibshakeh,  might  induce  a 
surrender  at  once. 

In  Isaiah  xx.wi.,  xxxvii.,  Rabshakeh  alone  is  men- 
tioned, the  reason  of  wh.icli  would  seem  to  be,  that 
he  actetl  as  ambassiulor  and  sj)okcsm;ui,  and  came  so 


988 


RABSHAKEH 


much  more  promiiientl)'  before  tlie  people  tlian  the 
others.  Keil  -thinks  that  Tartan  had  the  supreme 
command,  inasmuch  as  in  2  K.  he  is  mentioned 
first,  and,  accordincjto  Is.  sx.  1,  conducted  the  siege 
of  Ashdod.  In  2  Chr.  xsxii.,  where,  with  tlie  addi- 
tion of  some  not  unimportant  circumstances,  there 
is  given  an  extract  of  these  events,  it  is  simply  said 
that  (ver.  9)  "Sennacherib  kinj;  of  Assyria  sent  his 
sei-vants  to  Jerusalem."  Rabshakeli  seems  to  have 
discharged  his  mission  wth  much  zeal,  addressincr 
himself  not  only  to  the  officers  of  Hezekiah,  but  to 
the  people  on  the  wall  of  the  city,  setting  forth 
the  liopelessness  of  trusting  to  any  power,  human 
or  divine,  to  deliver  them  out  of  the  hand  of  "the 
great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria,"  and  dwelling  on 
the  many  advantages  to  be  gained  by  submission. 
Many  have  imagined,  from  the  familiarity  of  Rab- 
shakeh  with  Hebrew,"  that  he  either  was  a  Jewish 
deserter  or  an  apostate  captive  of  Israel.  Whether 
this  be  so  or  not,  it  is  not  impossible  that  the 
assertion  which  he  makes  on  the  part  of  his  master, 
that  Sennacherib  had  even  the  sanction  and  com- 
mand of  the  Lord  Jehovah  for  his  expedition  against 
Jerusalem  ("  Am  I  now  come  up  without  the 
Lord  to  destroy  it?  The  Lord  said  to  me.  Go  up 
against  this  laud  to  destroy  it")  may  have  reference 
to  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (viii.  7,  8,  x.  5,  6)  con- 
cerning the  desolation  of  Judah  and  Israel  by  the 
Assyrians,  of  which,  in  some  form  more  or  less 
correct,  he  had  received  information.  Being  unable 
to  obtain  any  promise  of  submission  from  Heze- 
kiah, who,  in  the  extremity  of  his  peril  returning 
to  trust  in  the  help  of  the  lord,  is  encouraged  by 
the  words  and  predictions  of  Isaiah,  Rabshakeh  goes 
back  to  the  king  of  Assyria,  who  had  now  departed 
from  Lachish. 

The  English  version  takes  Rabshakeh  as  the  name 
of  a  person  ;  it  may,  however,  be  questioned  whether 
it  be  not  rather  the  name  of  the  office  which  he 
held  at  the  court,  that  of  chief  cupbearer,  in  the 
same  way  as  Rab-saris  denotes  the  chief  eunuch, 
and  Rab-Mag  possibly  the  chief  priest. 

Luther  in  his  version  is  not  quite  consistent, 
sometimes  (2  K.  .xviii.  17  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  2)  giving 
Rabshakeli  as  a  proper  name,  but  ordinarily  trans- 
lating it  as  a  title  of  office,  arch-cupbearer  (dej- 
Erzschenke). 

The  word  Rab  may  be  found  translated  in  many 
places  of  the  English  version,  for  instance,  2  K.  xxv. 
8,  20;  Jer.  xxxix.  11  ;  Dan.  ii.  14  (DTiati'm), 
Bab-tabhdchim,  "captain  of  the  guard,"  in  the 
margin  "  chief  marshal,"  "  chief  of  the  execu- 
tioners." Dan.  i.  3,  Rab-sarisini,  "  master  of  the 
eunuchs;"    ii.  48  (|''JJp"2']),  Rah-signin,  "chief 

"  The  difference  between  speaking  in  the  Hebrew  and 
the  Aramean,  "in  the  Jews'  language"  (^'^•1^'•,  J'- 
hudith),  and  In  the  "Syrian  language"  (^''P1^?,  Arainitb), 
would  be  rather  a  matter  of  pronunciation  and  dialect 
than  of  essential  difference  of  language.  Sec  for  the 
"  Syrian  tongue,"  Ezr.  iv.  7  ;  Dan.  ii.  4. 

b  in  this  name  c/i  is  sounded  lilve  hard  c,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  hebrew  caph.  In  Rachel,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  represents  chd.li,  and  should  properly  be  pro- 
nounced like  a  guttural  h  (see  A.  V.  of  Jer.  xxxi.  15). 

=  Thenius,  with  his  usual  rashness,  says  "  Uacal  is  a 
residuum  of  Carmel." 

<•  It  is  not  obvious  how  our  translators  came  to  spell 
the  name  711'^  as  they  do  in  their  final  revision  of  1611, 
viz.  Rachel.  Their  practice— almost,  if  not  quite,  inva- 
riable—throughout the  Old  Test,  of  that  cdiUou,  is  to  re- 


RACHEL 

of  the  governors;"  iv.  9,  v.  11  (pspin-n"]),  i2a&- 
chartummhi,  "  master  of  the  magicians  ;"  Jonah 
i.  6  ("pn'rin  3"]),  i?a6-/iac7to6e/,  "shipmaster."    It 

enters  into  the  titles.  Rabbi,  Kabboni,  and  the  name 
Rabbah.  [K.  P.  E.] 

EA'CA  CPa/ca),  a  term  of  reproach  used  by  the 
Jews  of  our  Saviour's  age  (Matt.  v.  22).  Critics 
are  agreed  in  deriving  it  fiom  the  Chaldee  term 
Npn   with  the  sense  of  "  worthless,"   but   they 

differ  as  to  whether  this  term  should  be  connected 
with  the  root  p-ll,  conveying  the  notion  of  empti- 
ness (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1279),  or  with  one  of  the 
cognate  roots  pp'S  (Tholuck),  or  J?p"l  (Ewald), 
conveying  the  notion  of  thinness  (Olshausen,  De 
Wetfe,  on  Matt.  v.  22).  The  first  of  these  views  is 
probably  correct.  We  may  compare  the  use  of  p''"l, 
"  vain,"  in  Judg.  ix.  4,  xi.  3,  al.,  and  of  Kivi  in 
Jam.  ii.  20.  [W.  L.  B.] 

RACE.    [Games,  vol.  i.  p.  650.] 

RA'CHAB  CPaxtiyS  :  Bahab).  Rahab  the 
harlot  (Matt.  i.  5). 

RA'CHALb  (^31:  Rachal).  One  of  the  places 

which  David  and  his  followers  used  to  haunt  during 
the  period  of  his  freebooting  life,  and  to  the  people 
of  which  he  sent  a  portion  of  the  plunder  taken 
from  the  Amalekites.  It  is  named  in  1  Sam.  xxx. 
29  only.  The  Vatican  LXX.  inserts  five  names  in 
this  passage  between  "  Eshtemoa"  and  "  the  Jerah- 
meelites."  The  only  one  of  these  which  has  any 
similarity  to  Racal  is  Carmel,  which  would  suit  very 
well  as  far  as  position  goes ;  but  it  is  impossible  to 
consider  the  two  as  identical  without  further  evi- 
dence."=  No  name  like  Racal  has  been  found  in  the 
south  of  Judah.  [G.] 

RA'CHEL  (^nV   "a  ewe;"  the  word  rahel 

■•   T 

occurs  in  Gen.  xxxi.  38,  sxxii.  14,  Cant.  vi.  6,  Is. 
liii.  7  :  A.  V.  rendered  "  ewe "  and  "  sheep :" 
'Paxv^  ■  Rachel).  The  younger  of  the  daughters  of 
Laban,  the  wife  of  Jacob,  the  mother  of  Joseph  and 
Benjamin.  The  incidents  of  her  life  may  be  found  in 
Gen.  xxix.-xxxiii.,  xxxv.  The  story  of  Jacob  and 
Rachel  has  always  had  a  peculiar  interest ;  there  is 
that  in  it  which  appeals  to  some  of  the  deepest  feelings 
of  the  human  heart.  The  beauty  of  Rachel,  the  deep 
love  with  which  she  was  loved  by  Jacob  from  their 
first  meeting  by  the  well  of  Haran,  when  he  showed 
to  her  the  simple  courtesies  of  the  desert  life,  and 
kissed  her  and  told  her  he  was  Rebekah's  son  ;  the 
long  servitude  with  which  he  patiently  served  for 


present  n.  the  hard  guttural  aspirate,  by  h  {e.g.  Halah  for 
pn);  the  ch  (hard,  of  course)  they  reserve  with  equal 


rh 


consistency  for  3.  On  this  principle  Rachel  should  have 
been  given  throughout  "  Kahel,''  as  indeed  it  is  in  one  case, 
retained  in  the  most  modern  editions — Jer.  xxxi,  15.  And 
in  the  earlier  editions  of  the  English  Bible  {e.g.  1540, 
1551, 156B)  we  find  Rahel  throughout.  It  is  difficult  not  to 
suspect  tiiat  Rachel  (however  originating)  was  a  favourite 
woman's  name  in  the  latter  part  of  ihe  16th  and  begin- 
ning of  the  l7th  centuries,  and  that  it  was  substituted  lor 
the  less  familiar  though  more  accurate  Rahel  in  deference 
to  that  fact,  and  in  obedience  to  the  rule  laid  down  for  the 
guidance  of  the  translators,  that  "  the  names  in  the  text 
are  to  be  retained  as  near  as  may  be,  accordingly  as  they 
are  vulgarly  used." 

Rachael  (so  common  in  the  literature  of  a  century  ago) 
is  a  corruption,  as  Rebecca  of  Rcbekah.  [G.j 


KACHEL 

her,  ill  wliich  the  seven  years  "  seemed  to  him  but 
a  few  days,  for  the  love  he  had  to  her ;"  their  mar- 
riage at  last,  after  the  cruel  disappointment  through 
the  fraud  which  substituted  the  elder  sister  in  the 
place  of  the  younger ;  and  the  death  of  Rachel  at 
the  very  time  when  in  giving  birth  to  another  son 
her  own  long-delaved  hopes  were  accomplished,  and 
she  had  become  still  more  endeared  to  her  husband ; 
his  deep  grief  and  ever-living  regrets  for  her  loss 
((!en.  xlviii.  7):  these  things  make  up  a  touching 
tale  of  personal  and  domestic  history  which  has 
kept  alive  the  memory  of  Kachel — the  beautiful, 
the  beloved,  the  untimely  taken  away — and  has 
preserved  to  this  day  a  reverence  for  her  tomb ;  the 
very  infidel  invaders  of  the  Holy  Land  having 
respected  the  traditions  of  the  site,  and  erected  over 
the  spot  a  small  rude  shrine,  which  conceals  what- 
ever remains  may  have  once  been  found  of  the 
pillar  first  set  up  by  her  mourning  husband  over 
her  grave. 

Yet  from  what  is  related  to  us  concerning 
Rachel's  character  there  does  not  seem  much  to 
claim  any  high  degree  of  admiration  and  esteem. 
The  discontent  and  fretful  impatience  shown  in  her 
grief  at  being  for  a  time  childless,  moved  even  her 
fond  husband  to  anger  (Gen.  xxx.  1,  2).  She  ap- 
pears moreover  to  have  shared  all  the  duplicity 
and  falsehood  of  her  family,  of  which  we  have  such 
painful  instances  in  Rebeiiah,  in  Laban,  and  not 
least  in  her  sister  Leah,  who  consented  to  bear  her 
part  in  the  deception  practised  upon  Jacob.  See, 
for  instance,  Rachel's  stealing  her  father's  images, 
and  the  ready  dexteritj'  and  presence  of  mind 
with  which  she  concealed  her  theft  (Gen.  xxxi.)  : 
we  seem  to  detect  here  an  apt  scholar  in  her 
father's  school  of  untruth.  From  this  incident  we 
may  also  infer  (though  this  is  rather  the  mis- 
fortune of  her  position  and  circumstances)  that  she 
was  not  altogether  fi-ee  from  the  superstitions  and 
idolatry  which  prevailed  in  the  land  whence  Abra- 
ham had  been  called  (Josh.  xxiv.  2,  14),  and  which 
still  to  some  degree  infected  even  those  families 
among  whom  the  true  God  was  known. 

The  events  which  preceded  the  death  of  Rachel 
are  of  much  interest  and  worthy  of  a  brief  con- 
sideration. The  presence  in  his  household  of  these 
idolatrous  images,  which  Ivachel  and  probably  others 
also  had  brought  from  the  East,  seems  to  have  been 
either  unknown  to  or  connived  at  by  Jacob  lor 
some  years  after  his  return  from  Haran  ;  till,  on 
being  reminded  by  the  Lord  of  the  vow  which  he 
had  made  at  Bethel  when  he  fled  from  the  face  of 
Esau,  and  being  bidden  by  Him  to  erect  an  altar  to 
the  God  who  appeared  to  him  there,  Jacob  felt  the 
glaring  impiety  of  thus  solemnly  appearing  before 
God  with  the  taint  of  impiety  cleaving  to  him  or 
his,  and  "  said  to  his  household  and  all  that  were 
with  him,  I'ut  away  the  strange  gods  from  among 
you"  (Gen.  xxxv.  2).  After  thus  casting  out  the 
polluting  thing  from  his  house,  Jacob  journeyed  to 
Bethel,  where,  .amidst  the  associations  of  a  spot 
consecrated  by  the  memories  of  the  past,  he  received 
from  God  an  emphatic  promise  and  blessing,  and, 
the  name  of  the  Su])pl;uiter  being  laid  aside,  he  had 
eiven  to  him  instc;id  the  holy  name  of  Israel. 
Then  it  was,  after  his  spirit  had  been  there  purified 
and  strengthened  by  communion  with  Goil,  by  the 


RACHEL 


989 


»  Hebrew  Cibrdh;  in  the  L.\.X.  here,  xlviii.  7,  ami  2  K. 
v.  19,  Xa^paOd.  This  seems  to  have  been  accepted  as 
the  name  of  the  spot  (Dometrins  in  Eus.  /'r.  A'l'.  ix.  21), 
anil  to  have  I)ceii  actually  cncnuntered  there  by  a  tra- 
veller in  the  )2th  cent.  (liiuclKird  de  StrasbuiK,  by  Saint 


assurance  of  the  Divine  love  and  favour,  by  the 
consciousness  of  evil  put  away  and  duties  performed, 
then  it  was,  as  he  journeyed  away  from  Bethel, 
that  the  chastening  blow  fell  and  I'lachel  died. 
These  circumstances  are  alluded  to  here  not  so 
much  for  their  bearing  upon  the  spiritual  discipline 
of  Jacob,  but  rather  with  reference  to  Rachel  her- 
self, as  suggesting  the  hope  that  they  may  have 
had  their  elfect  in  bringing  her  to  a  higher  sense  of 
her  relations  to  that  Great  Jeliovah  in  whom  her 
husband,  with  all  his  faults  of  character,  so  firmly 
believed. 

Rachel's  tomb. — "  Rachel  died  and  was  buried  in 
the  way  to  Ephrath,  which  is  Bethlehem.  And  Jacob 
set  a  pillar  upon  her  grave;  that  is  the  pillar  of 
Rachel's  grave  imto  this  day"  (Gen.  xxxv.  19,  20). 
As  Rachel  is  the  first  related  instance  of  death  in 
ohildbearing,  so  this  pillar  over  her  grave  is  the 
first  recorded  example  of  the  setting  up  of  a  sepul- 
chral monument ;  caves  having  been  up  to  this 
time  spoken  of  as  the  usual  places  of  burial.  The 
spot  was  well  known  in  the  time  of  Samuel  and 
Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  2) ;  and  the  prophet  Jei-emiah,  by 
a  poetic  figure  of  great  force  and  beauty,  represents 
the  buried  Rachel  weeping  for  the  loss  and  cap- 
tivity of  her  children,  as  the  bands  of  the  exiles, 
led  away  on  their  road  to  Babylon,  jxissed  near  her 
tomb  (.ler.  xx.xi.  15-17).  St.  Matthew  (ii.  17,  18) 
applies  this  to  the  slaughter  by  Herod  of  the  infants 
at  Bethlehem. 

The  position  of  the  Ramah  here  spoken  of  is  one 
of  the  disputed  questions  in  the  topography  of 
Palestine;  but  the  site  of  Rachel's  tomb,  "on  the 
way  to  Bethlehem,"  "  a  little  way  <=  to  come  to 
Ephrath,"  "  in  the  border  of  Benjamin,"  has  never 
been  questioned.  It  is  about  2  miles  S.  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  one  mile  N.  of  Bethlehem.  "  It  is  one 
of  the  shrines  which  Muslems,  Jews,  and  Chris- 
tians agree  in  honouring,  and  concerning  which 
their  traditions  are  identical."  It  was  visited  by 
Maimdrell,  1697.  The  description  given  by  Dr. 
Robinson  (i.  218)  may  serve  as  the  representative 
of  the  many  accounts,  all  agreeing  with  each  other, 
which  may  be  read  in  almost  every  book  of  Eastern 
travel.  It  is  "  merely  an  ordinary  Muslim  Wely, 
or  tomb  of  a  holy  person,  a  small  square  building 
of  stone  with  a  dome,  and  within  it  a  tomb  in  the 
ordinary  M.ahommedan  form,  the  whole  plastered 
over  with  mortar.  Of  course  the  building  is  not 
ancient:  in  the  seventh  century  there  was  here 
only  a  pyramid  of  stones.  It  is  now  neglected  and 
fiUliiig  to  decay,'  though  pilgi-images  are  still  made 
to  it' by  the  Jews.  The  naked  walls  are  covered 
with  names  in  several  hmguages,  many  of  them  iu 
Hebrew.  The  general  correctness  of  the  tradition 
which  has  fixed  upon  this  spot  for  the  tomb  of  iiachel 
cannot  well  be  drawn  in  question,  since  it  is  fully 
supported  by  the  circumstances  of  the  Scri]itural 
narrative.  It  is  also  mentioned  by  the  Ttin.  Ilicros., 
A.D.  333,  and  by  Jerome  (Hp.  Ixxxvi.,  ad  JSuatoch. 
Epitaph.  Paulae)  in  the  same  century." 

Those  who  take  an  interest  in  such  interpreta- 
tions may  find  the  whole  story  of  Ivachel  and  Leah 
allegorised  by  St.  Augustine  {contra  Faustnm  Mit- 
nickacuin,  xxii.  li.-lviii.  vol.  viii.  432,  &c.,  ed. 
Migne),  and  Justin  Jlartyr  {Dialogue  icith  Tn/pho, 
c.  134,  p.  3G0).  ' [K-  I'-  1^-] 

Genois,  p.  35),  who  gives  the  Arabic  name  of  Rnchers 
tomb  as  Caln-ata  or  Carbata. 

I  Since  llobinson's  last  visit,  it  has  been  enlarged  by 
the  addition  of  a  square  court  on  tho  east  side,  with  high 
walls  and  avclies  {Later  r:aea)xlies,  27:i). 


990 


RADDAI 


EAD'DAI  C"!")  :  Za55o(  ;  Alex.  Za/35ai  ; 
Joseph. 'PaijAos  :  IlnJdei).  Oneof  David's  brothers, 
fifth  son  of  Jesse  fl  Chr.  ii.  14).  He  does  not 
appear  in  the  Bible  elsewhere  than  in  this  list, 
unless  he  be,  as  Ewald  conjectured  {Geschichte,  iii. 
266  note),  identical  with  Hi:i.  But  this  does  liot 
seem  probable.  Fiirst  (^Handicb.  ii.  3o5  6)  considers 
the  final  i  of  the  name  to  be  a  remnant  of  Jah  or 
Jehovah.  [G.] 

EAGAU  ('Pa7au:  Sagaii).  1.  A  place  named 
only  in  Jud.  i.  5,  15.  In  the  latter  passage  the 
"  mountains  of  Ragau"  are  mentioned.  It  is  pro- 
bably identical  with  Eages. 

2.  One  of  the  ancestors  of  our  Lord,  son  of  Phalec 
(Luke  iii.  35).  He  is  the  same  person  with  Reu 
son  of  Peleg  ;  and  the  diflerence  in  the  name  arises 
from  our  translators  having  followed  the  Greek  form, 
in  which  the  Hebrew  J?  was  frequently  expressed 
by  y,  as  is  the  case  in  Eaguel  (which  once  occurs 
for  Keuel),  Gomonha,  Gotholiah  (for  Atholiah), 
Phogor  (for  Peor),  &c.  [^0 

EA'GES  CPdyyi,  'Pdyoi,  'Payav  :  Eages,  lia- 
ga>i)  was  au  imjioiiant  city  in  noi'th-eastern  Media, 
where  that  country  bordered  upon  Parthia.  It  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptui'es,  but  occurs 
ii-equeutly  in  the  Book  of  Tobit  (i.  14,  v.  5,  vi.  9, 
and  12,  &c.),  and  twice  in  Judith  (i.  5  and  15). 
According  to  Tobit,  it  was  a  place  to  which  some 
of  the  Israelitish  captives  taken  by  Shalmaueser 
(Enemessar)  had  been  transported,  and  thither  the 
angel  L'aphael  conducted  the  young  Tobiah.  In  the 
book  of  Judith  it  is  made  the  scene  of  the  great 
battle  between  Nabuchodonosoi'  and  Ari)haxad, 
wheiein  the  latter  is  said  to  have  been  defeated  and 
tdcen  prisonei'.  Neither  of  those  accounts  can  lie 
regarded  as  historic  ;  but  the  latter  may  conceal 
a  fact  of  some  importance  in  the  history  of  the 
city. 

liages  is  a  place  mentioned  by  a  great  number  of 
profane  writers.  It  appears  as  Ragha  in  the  Zen- 
davesta,  in  Isidore,  and  in  Stephen  ;  as  I\aga  in  the 
inscriptions  of  Darius  ;  Rhagae  in  Duris  of  Samos  (Fr. 
25),  Strabo  (xi.  9,  §1),  and  Arrian  (Exp.  Alex.  iii. 
20)  ;  and  Rhagaea  in  Ptolemy  (vi.  5).  Properly 
speaking.  Rages  is  a  town,  but  the  town  gave  name  to 
a  province,  which  is  sometimes  called  Kages  or  Rha- 
gae, sometimes  Rhagiana.  It  appears  from  the  Zen- 
dav&sta  that  here  was  one  of  the  earliest  settlements 
of  the  Arians,  who  wore  mingled,  in  Rhagiana,  with 
two  other  races,  and  were  thus  brought  into  contact 
with  heretics  (Bunsen,  I'hilosnphy  of  Universal 
History,  iii.  485).  Isidore  calls  liages  "  the  greatest 
city  in  Media"  (p.  G),  which  may  have  been  true 
in  his  day;  but  other  writers  commonly  regard  it 
as  much  inferior  to  Ecbatana.  It  was  the  place  to 
which  Frawartish  (Phraortes),  the  Median  rebel, 
fled,  when  defeated  by  Darius  Hystaspis,  and  at 
which  he  was  made  prisoner  by  one  of  Darius' 
generals  (Beh.  Inscr.  col.  ii.  par.  13).  [Media.] 
This  is  probably  the  fact  which  the  apocryphal 
writer  of  Judith  had  in  his  mind  when  lie  sjwke  of 
Arphaxad  as  having  been  captured  at  lutgau.  When 
Darius  Codomannus  fled  from  Alexander,  intending 
to  make  a  final  stand  in  Bactria,  he  must  have 
pa.ssed  through  Rages  on  his  way  to  the  Caspian 
Gates  ;  and  so  we  find  that  Alexander  arrived  there 
in  pursuit  of  his  enemy,  on  the  eleventh  day  after 
he  quitted  Ecbatana  (Arrian,  Exp.  Alex.  iii.  20). 
In  the  troubles  which  followed  the  death  of  Alex- 
ander, R;iges  appeal's  to  have  gone  to  decay,  but  it 
was  soon  after  rebuilt   )iy   Seleucus  I.  (Nicatoi-), 


EAGUEL 

who  gave  it  the  name  of  Europus  (Strab.  si.  13, 
§6  ;   Steph.  Byz.  ad  voc).     When  the  Parthians 

took  it,  they  called  it  Arsacia,  after  the  Arsaces  of 
the  day ;  but  it  soon  afterwards  recovered  its  ancient 
appellation,  as  we  see  by  Strabo  and  Isidore.  That 
appellation  it  has  ever  since  retained,  with  only  a 
slight  corruption,  the  ruins  being  still  known  by 
the  name  of  Rhey.  These  ruins  lie  about  five  miles 
south-east  of  Teheran,  and  cover  a  space  4500  yards 
long  by  3500  yards  broad.  The  walls  are  well 
maiked,  and  are  of  prodigious  thickness  ;  they  appear 
to  have  been  flanked  by  strong  towers,  and  are  con- 
nected with  a  lofty  citadel  at  their  north-eastern 
angle.  The  importance  of  the  place  consisted  in  its 
vicinity  to  the  Caspian  Gates,  which,  in  a  certain 
sense,  it  guarded.  Owing  to  the  barren  and  deso- 
late character  of  the  great  salt  desoi  of  Iran,  every 
aimy  which  seeks  to  pass  from  Bactria,  India,  and 
At^ghanistan  to  Media  and  Mesopotamia,  or  vice 
versa,  must  skirt  the  lange  of  moimtains  which 
runs  along  the  southern  shore  of  the  Caspian.  These 
mountains  send  out  a  rugged  and  precipitous  spur 
iu  about  long.  52°  25'  E.  from  Greenwich,  which 
runs  far  into  the  desert,  and  can  only  be  rounded 
with  the  extremest  difficulty.  Across  this  spur  is 
a  single  pass — the  Pylae  Caspiae  of  the  ancients — 
and  of  this  pass  the  possessors  of  Rhages  must  have 
at  all  times  held  the  keys.  The  modern  Teheran, 
built  out  of  its  ruins,  has  now  superseded  Rhey ; 
and  it  is  perhaps  mainly  from  the  importance  of  its 
position  that  it  has  become  the  Persian  capital. 
(For  an  account  of  the  ruins  of  Rhey,  see  Ker  Por- 
ter's Travels,  i.  357-364 ;  and  compare  Eraser's 
Khorassan,  p.  286.)  [G.  E.] 

EAG'UEL,  or  EEU'EL  (."^Kiyi) :  'Payovi,K). 

I.  A  prince-priest  of  Midiau,  the  father  of  Zipporah 
according  to  Ex.  ii.  21,  and  of  Hobab  according  to 
Num.  X.  29.  As  the  father-in-law  of  Moses  is 
named  Jethro  in  Ex.  iii.  1,  and  Hobab  in  Judg.  iv. 

II,  and  perhaps  in  Num.  x.  29  (though  the  latter 
passage  admits  of  another  sense),  the  prima,  facie 
view  would  be  that  Paguel,  Jethro,  and  Hobab 
were  different  names  for  the  same  individual. 
Such  is  probably  the  case  with  regard  to  the  two 
first  at  all  events,  if  not  with  the  third.  [Hobab.] 
One  of  the  names  may  represent  an  official  title, 
but  whether  Jethro  or  Raguel,  is  uncertain,  both 
being  appropriately  significant :  ^  Josephus  was  in 
favour  of  the  former  (toDto,  i.  e.  ^liQiyXalus,  ^v 
iiriKhrnjia  tw  "Payovr]\tf,  Ant.  ii.  12,  §1),  and  this 
is  not  unlikely,  as  the  name  Reuel  was  not  an 
uncommon  one.  The  identity  of  Jethro  and  Reuel 
is  supported  by  the  indiscriminate  use  of  the  names 
in  the  LXX.  (Ex.  ii.  16,  18);  and  the  application 
of  more  than  one  name  to  the  same  individual  was 
an  usage  familiar  to  the  Hebrews,  as  instanced  in 
Jacob  and  Israel,  Solomon  and  Jedidiah,  and  other 
similar  cases.  Another  solution  of  the  difficulty 
has  been  sought  in  the  loose  use  of  terms  of  rela- 
tionship among  the  Hebrews;  as  that  chothen^  in 
Ex.  iii.  1,  xviii.  1,  Num.  x.  29,  may  signify  any 
relation  by  mai'riage,  and  consequently  that  Jethro 
and  Hobab  were  brothers-in-law  of  Moses ;  or  that 
the  terms  ab'^  and  hatlt^  iu  Ex.  ii.  16,  21,  mean 
grandfather  and  granddaughter.  Neither  of  these 
assumptions    is   satisfactory,    the    former   in    the 


»  Jethro="  pre-eminent,"  from  IH*,  "  to  excel,"  and 
Raguel="  friend  of  God,"  from  ^N  -lyi. 


RAHAB 

absence  of  any  conoboi.ativy  eviiienco,  the  latter 
because  the  omission  of  Jethro  the  fatliei's  name 
in  so  ciicumstuitial  a  narrative  as  in  Ex.  ii.  is 
iuexjilicable,  nor  can  we  conceive  the  indiscriminate 
use  of  the  terms  father  and  grandfather  without 
good  cause.  Nevertheless  this  view  has  a  strong 
weight  of  authority  in  its  favour,  being  supported 
l)y  the  Targum  Jonathan,  Abou  Ezra,  Michaelis, 
Winer,  and  others.  [W.  L.  B.] 

2.  Another  transcription  of  tlie  name  IIkukl, 
occui'ring  in  Tobit,  wheie  llaguel,  a  pious  Jew  of 
"  Ecbatane,  a  city  of  Media,"  is  father  of  Sara,  the 
wife  of  Tobias  (Tob.  iii.  7, 17,  &c.).  The  name  was 
not  uncommon,  and  in  the  book  of  Enoch  it  is  applied 
to  one  of  the  great  guardian  angels  of  the  universe, 
who  was  charged  with  the  execution  of  the  Divine 
judgments  on  the  (material)  world  and  the  stars 
(cc.  XX.  4,  xxiii.  4,  ed.  Dillniann).         [B.  F.  W.] 

RA'HAB,  or  llA'CHAB  (nnT.  'Paxa)8,and 
'Pa<£;8 :  Eahab,  and  Eaab),  a  celebrated  woman  of 
Jericho,  who  received  the  spies  sent  by  Joshua  to 
spy  out  the  land,  liid  them  in  her  house  from  the 
pursuit  other  countrymen,  was  saved  with  all  her 
iimiily  when  the  Isiaelites  sacked  the  city  ;  and  be- 
came the  wife  of  Salmon,  and  the  ancestress  of  the 
]\Iessiah. 

Her  history  may  be  told  in  a  few  words.  At 
the  time  of  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan 
slie  was  a  young  umnarried  woman,  dwelling  in  a 
iiouse  of  her  own  alone,  though  she  had  a  father  and 
mother,  and  brothers  and  sisters,  living  in  Jericho. 
She  was  a  "  harlot,"  and  probably  combined  the 
trade  of  lodging-keeper  for  waytSiring  men.  She 
seems  also  to  have  been  engaged  in  the  manufac- 
ture of  linen,  and  the  art  of  dyeing,  for  which  the 
Phoenicians  were  early  famous;  since  we  find  the 
liat  roof  of  her  house  covered  witii  stalks  of  (lax  put 
tliere  to  dry,  and  a  stock  of  scarlet  or  crimson 
C'y^)  line  iu  her  house:  a  circumstance  which, 
coupled  with  the  mention  of  Bab3'lonish  garments  at 
vii.  21,  as  among  the  spoils  of  Jericho,  indicates 
the  existence  of  a  trade  in  such  articles  between 
Phoenicia  and  Mesopotamia.  Her  house  was  situated 
on  the  wall,  probably  near  the  town  gate,  so  as 
to  be  convenient  for  ^lersons  coming  in  and  going 
out  of  the  city.  Traders  coming  fiom  Mesopo- 
tamia or  Egypt  to  Phoenicia,  would  fie([uent]y 
pass  througli  Jericho,  situated  as  it  was  near  the 
fords  of  the  Jordan  ;  ami  of  these  many  would  re- 
sort to  the  house  of  Kaliab.  Kahab  therefore  had 
been  well  intbrmeil  witli  ri'gard  to  the  events  of  the 
Exodus.  She  had  heard  ol'  the  passage  through  the 
lied  Sea,  of  the  utter  destruction  of  Sihon  and  Og, 
and  of  the  iriesistible  progiess  of  the  Israelitish 
host.  The  eilect  u))on  her  luiud  had  been  what  one 
would  not  have  expected  in  a  i)eison  of  her  way  of 
life.  It  led  her  to  a  firm  faith  in  Jehovah  as  the 
true  God,  and  to  the  conviction  that  He  purposed 
to  give  the  land  of  Canaan  to  the  Israelites.  When 
therefore  the  two  spies  sent  by  Joshua  came  to  her 
house,  they  found  themselves  under  the  rocf  of  one 
who,  alone  piobalily  of  the  wliole  populat'on,  was 
friendly  to  their  nation.  Their  coming,  1  owever, 
was  ([uickly  known  ;  and  the  king  of  Jerichc,  having 
leceived  information  of  it,  while  at  supper,  accord- 
ing to  .losephus,  sent  that  very  evening  to  require 
her  to  deliver  them  up.  It  is  very  likely  (hat,  her 
house  ))eing  a  pul)lic  one,  some  one  who  resoited 
ll*re  may  have  seen  and  recognised  the  s)  ies,  and 
gone  off  at  once  to  report  the  m.itter  to  the  autho- 
rities.    But  not  without  awakening  Kahal/s  suspi- 


RAHAB 


l»i)l 


cions :  for  she  immediately  hid  the  men  among 
the  riax-stalks  which  were  piled  on  the  Hat-roof  of 
her  house,  and,  on  the  arrival  of  the  ollicers  sent  to 
search  her  house,  was  leaily  with  the  story  that 
two  men,  of  what  country  she  knew  not,  had,  it 
was  true,  been  to  her  house,  but  had  left  it  just 
before  the  gates  were  shut  for  the  night.  If  they 
pursued  them  at  once,  she  added,  they  would  be 
sure  to  overtake  them.  Misled  by  the  false  infor- 
mation, the  men  started  in  pursuit  to  the  forcls  of  the 
Jordan,  the  gates  having  been  opened  to  let  them  out, 
and  immediately  closed  again.  When  all  was  quiet, 
and  the  people  were  gone  to  bed,  Rahab  stole  up  to 
the  house-top,  told  the  spies  what  had  happened,  and 
assured  them  of  her  faith  iu  the  God  of  Israel,  and 
her  confident  expectation  of  the  capture  of  the  whole 
land  by  them  ;  an  expectation,  she  added,  which 
was  shai'ed  by  her  countrymen,  and  had  jiroduced  a 
great  panic  amongst  them.  She  then  told  them 
her  plan  for  their  escape.  It  was  to  let  them  down 
by  a  cord  from  the  window  of  her  house  which 
looked  over  the  city  wall,  and  that  they  should  dee 
into  the  mountains  which  bounded  the  plains  of 
Jericho,  and  lie  hid  there  for  three  days,  by  which 
time  the  pinsuers  would  have  retui-ned,  and  the 
fords  of  the  Joi'dan  be  open  to  them  again.  She 
asked,  in  return  for  her  kindness  to  them,  that  they 
should  swear  by  Jehovah,  that  when  their  country- 
men had  taken  the  city,  they  would  spare  her  life, 
and  the  lives  of  her  father  and  mother,  brothers  and 
sisters,  and  all  that  belonged  to  them.  The  men 
readily  consented,  and  it  was  agreed  between  them 
that  she  should  hang  out  her  scarlet  line  at  the 
window  from  which  they  had  esoiped,  and  bring  all 
her  family  under  her  roof.  If  any  of  her  kindred 
went  out  of  dooi-s  into  the  street,  his  blood  would 
be  upon  his  own  head,  and  the  Israelites  in  that 
case  would  be  guiltless.  The  event  proved  the 
wisdom  of  her  precautions.  The  pursuers  returned  to 
Jericho  after  a  fruitless  search,  and  tlie  spies  got  safe 
back  to  the  Israelitish  camp.  The  news  they  brought 
of  the  tenor  of  the  Canaanites  doubtless  inspiied 
Israel  with  fresh  courage,  and,  within  three  days  of 
their  return,  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  was  effected. 
In  the  utter  destruction  of  Jericho,  which  ensued, 
Joshua  gave  the  strictest  orders  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  Rahab  and  her  family;  and  accordingly, 
before  the  city  was  burnt,  the  two  sjjies  were  sent 
to  her  house,  and  they  brought  out  her,  her  father 
and  mother,  and  brothers,  and  kindred,  and  all  that 
she  had,  and  placed  them  in  safety  in  the  Israelitish 
cam]).  The  narrator  adds,  "  and  she  dwclli'tli  in 
Israel  unto  this  day;"  not  necessai-ily  iniiilying  that 
she  was  alive  at  the  time  he  wiote,  but  that  the 
fjunily  of  strangers  of  which  she  was  reckoned  the 
head,  continued  to  dwell  among  the  children  of 
Israel.  May  not  the  345  "childien  of  Jericho," 
mentioned  in  Ezr.  ii.  ,34,  Neh.  vii.  .'iG,  and  "  the  men 
of  Jericho"  who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  rebuilding 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  2),  have  been 
their  posterity  ?  Their  continued  sojourn  among 
the  Israelites,  as  a  distinct  family,  would  be  exactly 
.analogous  to  the  cases  of  the  Kenites,  the  house  of 
Pochab,  the  (jlibeonites,  the  house  of  Caleb,  and 
perhaps  others. 

As  regards  Ilahab  herself,  we  learn  from  Matt.  i. 
5,  that  she  became  the  wife  of  Salmon  the  son  of 
Naasson,  and  the  mother  of  Boaz,  Jesse's  grand- 
father. The  suspic  on  naturally  arises  that  Salmon 
may  have  been  one  of  the  sjiies  whose  life  she  s.aved, 
anil  that  gratitude  for  so  great  a  benefit,  led  in  his 
case  to  a  more  tender  passion,  and  obliteratecl  the 


992 


RAHAB 


memory  of  any  p  ist  disgrace  attaching  to  her  name. 
We  are  expressly  tolil  that  the  sjjies  were  "  young 
men"  (Josh.  vi.  23),  veavlcTKovs,  ii.  l.;LXX. ; 
and  the  example  of  the  former  spies  who  were  sent 
from  Kadesh-Barnea,  who  were  all  "  lieads  of 
Israel"  (Num.  xiii.  3),  as  well  as  the  importance 
of  the  service  to  be  perfoiTned,  would  lead  one  to 
expect  that  they  would  be  persons  of  high  station. 
But,  however  this  may  be,  it  is  certain,  on  the  au- 
thority of  St.  Matthew,  that  Kahab  became  the 
mother  of  the  line  from  which  .sprung  David,  and 
eventually  Christ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  it  was  so  stated  in  the  jjublic  archives  from 
which  the  Evangelist  extracted  our  Lord's  genealogy, 
in  which  onl}"-  four  women  are  named,  viz.  Thamar, 
Rachab,  Kutli,  and  Bathsheba,  who  were  all  appa- 
rently foreigners,  ,ind  named  for  that  reason. 
[Bath-Shua.]  For  that  the  Rachab  mentioned  by 
St.  Matthew  is  Rahab  the  harlot,  is  as  certain  as  that 
David  in  the  genealogy  is  the  same  person  as  David 
in  the  books  of  Samuel.  The  attempts  that  have 
been  made  to  prove  Rachab  diflerent  from  Rahab,^ 
in  order  to  get  out  of  the  chronological  difficulty, 
are  singularly  absurd,  and  all  the  more  so, 
because,  even  if  successful,  they  would  not  dimi- 
nish the  difficulty,  as  long  as  Salmon  remains  as 
the  son  of  Naasson  and  the  father  of  Boaz.  How- 
ever, as  there  are  still  found  *>  those  who  follow 
Outhov  in  his  opinion,  or  at  least  .speak  doubtfully, 
it  may  be  as  well  to  call  attention,  with  Dr.  Mill 
(p.  131),  to  the  exact  coincidence  in  the  age  of 
Salmon,  as  the  son  of  Nahshon,  who  was  prince  of 
the  children  of  Judah  in  the  wilderness,  and  Rahab 
the  harlot ;  and  to  observe  that  the  only  conceiv- 
able reason  for  the  mention  of  Rachab  in  St. 
Matthew's  gene;ilogy  is,  that  she  was  a  remarkable 
and  well-known  person,  as  Taniar,  Ruth,  and  Bath- 
sheba were."^  The  mention  of  an  utterly  unknown 
Rahab  in  the  line  would  be  absuid.  The  allusions 
to  "Rahab  the  harlot"  in  Heb.  xi.  31,  Jam.  ii.  25, 
by  classing  her  among  those  illustrious  for  their 
faith,  make  it  still  more  impossible  to  suppose  that 
St.  Matthew  was  speaking  of  any  one  else.  The 
four  successive  generations,  Nahshon,  Salmon,  Boaz, 
Obed,  are  consequently  as  certain  as  woids  can  make 
them. 

The  character  of  Rahab  has  much  and  deep  in- 
tei-est.  Dismissing  as  inconsistent  with  truth,  and 
with  the  meaning  of  HJit  and  iropv-rj,  the  attempt 
to  clear  her  character  of  stain  by  saying  that  she 
was  only  an  innkeeper,  and  not  a  harlot  {travSo- 
KevTpia,  Chrysostom  and  Chald.  Vers.),  we  may 
yet  notice  that  it  is  very  possible  that  to  a  woman 
of  her  country  and  religion  such  a  calliuf  mav  have 
implied  a  far  less  deviation  from  the  standard  of 
morality  than  it  does  with  us  ("  vitae  genus  vile 
magis  quam  flagitiosum,"  Grotius),  and  moreover, 
that  with  a  purer  faith  she  seems  to  have  entered 
upon  a  pure  life. 

As  a  case  of  casuistry,  her  conduct  in  deceivint'  the 
king  of  Jericho's  messengers  with  a  false  tale,  and, 
above  all,  in  taking  part  against  her  own  country- 
men, has  been  much  discussed.     With  regard  to 

0  Chiefly  by  Outhov,  a  Dutch  pnifessor,  in  the  Biblioth. 
llremens.  The  earliest  expression  of  any  doubt  is  by 
Theophylact  in  the  llth  century. 

^  Valpy's  Greeic  Test,  with  Eng.  notes,  on  Mali.  i.  5  ; 
Burrington,  On  the  Genealogies,  i.  192-4,  &c. ;  Kuinoel  on 
Matt.  i.  5  ;  Olshausen,  ib. 

•■  There  docs  not  seem  to  be  any  force  in  Bcngel's 
remark,  adupted  by  Olsliausen,  that  the  article  (««  7-^5 


RAHAB 

the  first,  sti'ict  truth,  either  in  Jew  or  heathen, 
was  a  virtue  so  utterly  unknown  before  the  pro- 
mulgation of  the  Gospel,  that,  as  far  as  Rahab  is 
concerned,  the  discussion  is  quite  superfluous.  The 
question  as  regards  ourselves,  whether  in  any  case 
a  falsehood  is  allowable,  say  to  save  our  own  life 
or  that  of  another,  is  difierent,  but  need  not  be 
argued  here.'*  With  legard  to  her  taking  part 
against  her  own  countrymen,  it  can  only  be  justified, 
but  is  fully  justified,  by  the  circimistance  that 
fidelity  to  her  country  would  in  her  case  have  been 
infidelity  to  God,  and  that  the  higher  duty  to  her 
Maker  eclipsed  the  lower  duty  to  her  native  land. 
Her  anxious  provision  for  the  safety  of  her  father's 
house  shows  how  alive  she  was  to  natural  affections, 
and  seems  to  prove  that  she  was  not  influenced  by 
a  selfish  insensibility,  but  by  an  enlightened  pre- 
ference for  the  service  of  the  true  God  over  the 
abominable  pollutions  of  Canaanite  idolatry.  If 
her  own  life  of  shame  was  in  any  way  connected 
with  that  idolatry,  one  can  leadily  understand  what 
a  further  stimulus  this  would  give,  now  that  her 
heart  was  purified  by  faith,  to  her  desire  for  the  over- 
throw of  the  nation  to  which  she  belonged  by  birth, 
and  the  establishment  of  that  to  which  she  wished 
to  belong  by  a  community  of  faith  and  hope.  Any- 
how, allowing  for  the  diiference  of  circumstances, 
her  feelings  and  conduct  were  analogous  to  those  of 
a  Cliristian  Jew  in  St.  Paul's  time,  who  should 
have  preferred  the  triumph  of  the  Gospel  to  the 
triumph  of  the  old  Judaism  ;  or  to  those  of  a  con- 
verted Hindoo  in  our  own  daj's,  who  should  side 
with  Christian  Englishmen  against  the  attempts  of 
his  own  countrymen  to  establish  the  supremacy 
either  of  Brahma  or  Mahomet. 

Tins  view  of  Rahab's  conduct  is  fully  borne  out 
by  the  references  to  her  in  the  N.  T.  The  author 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  tells  us  that  "  by  faith 
the  harlot  Rahab  perished  not  with  them  that  be- 
lieved not,  when  she  had  received  the  spies  with 
peace"  (Heb.  xi.  31);  and  St.  James  fortifies  his 
doctrine  of  justification  by  works,  by  asking,  "  Was 
not  Rahab  the  harlot  justified  by  works,  when  she 
had  received  the  messengers,  and  had  sent  them  out 
another  way?"  (Jam.  ii.  25.)  And  in  like  manner 
Clement  of  Rome  says  "  Rahab  the  harlot  was  saved 
for  her  faith  and  hospitality"  {ad  Corinth,  xii.). 

The  Fathers  generally  (miro  consensu,  Jacobson) 
consider  the  delivei-ance  of  Rahab  as  typical  of  sal- 
vation, and  the  scarlet  line  hung  out  at  her  window 
as  typical  of  the  blood  of  Jesus,  in  the  same  way  as 
the  ark  of  Noah,  and  the  blood  of  the  paschal 
lamb  weie  ;  a  view  which  is  borne  out  by  the  ana- 
logy of  the  deliverances,  and  by  the  language  of 
Heb.  xi.  31  (rots  h.vii6i\ffajnv,  "  the  disobedient"), 
compared  with  1  Pet.  iii.  20  {aireidriaaaiu  Trore). 
Clement  (ad  Corinth,  xii.),  is  the  first  to  do  so. 
He  says  that  by  the  symbol  of  the  scarlet  line  it 
was  "  made  manifest  that  there  shall  be  redemption 
through  the  blood  of  the  Lord  to  all  who  believe 
and  ti-ust  in  God  ;"  and  adds,  that  Rahab  in  this 
was  a  prophetess  as  well  as  a  believer,  a  sentiment 
in  which  he  is  followed  by  Origen  (in  lib.  Jcs.,  Horn. 
iii.).    Justin  Martyr  in  like  manner  calls  the  scarlet 


'PaxdjS)  proves  that  Eahab  of  Jericho  is  meant,  seeing 
that  all  tlie  proper  names  in  the  genealogy,  which  are  in 
the  oblique  case,  have  the  article,  though  many  of  them 
occur  nowhere  else ;  and  that  it  is  omitted  before  MapCas 
in  ver.  16. 

d  The  question,  in  reference  both  to  Eahab  and  to  Chns- 
tians,  is  well  discussed  by  Augustine  contr.  Meiulacium 
{0pp.  vi.  33,  34  :  conip.  Bullingor,  2rd  Dec.  fferm.  iv.). 


EAHAB 

line  "the  symbol  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  by  which 
those  of  all  nations,  who  once  were  harlots  and  un- 
righteous, are  saved  ;  "  and  in  a  like  spirit  Irenaeus 
draws  from  the  story  of  Rahab  the  conversion  of 
the  Gentiles,  and  the  admission  of  publicans  ami 
harlots  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  through  the 
symbol  of  the  scarlet  line,  which  he  compares  with 
the  Passover  and  the  Exodus.  Ambrose,  Jerome, 
Augustine  (who,  like  Jerome  and  Cyril,  takes  Ps. 
Ixxxvii.  4  to  refer  to  Kahab  the  harlot),  and  Theo- 
doret,  all  follow  in  the  same  track ;  but  Origcn, 
as  usual,  carries  the  allegory  still  further.  Irenaeus 
makes  the  singular  mistake  of  calling  the  spies 
three,  and  makes  them  symbolical  of  the  Trinity ! 
The  comparison  of  the  i-carlet  line  with  the  scarlet 
thread  which  was  bound  round  the  hand  of  Zarah 
is  a  favourite  one  with  them.^ 

The  Jews,  as  might  perhaps  be  expected,  are 
embarrassed  as  to  what  to  say  concerning  Rahab. 
They  praise  her  highly  for  her  conduct ;  but  some 
Rabbis  give  out  that  she  was  not  a  Canaanite,  but 
of  some  other  Gentile  race,  and  was  only  a  sojourner 
in  Jericho.  The  Gemara  of  Babylon  mentions  a 
tradition  that  she  became  the  wife  of  Joshua,  a  tra- 
dition unknown  to  Jerome  [adv.  Juviii.),  and  eight 
persons  who  were  both  priests  and  prophets  sprung 
fi'om  her,  and  also  Huldah  the  prophetess,  men- 
tioned 2  K.  xxii.  14  (see  Patrick,  ad  toe).  Josephus 
describes  her  as  an  innkeeper,  and  her  house  as  an  inn 
(Karaywyiov),  and  never  applies  to  her  the  epithet 
irSpvT],  which  is  the  te]m  used  by  the  LXX. 

R^hab  is  one  of  the  not  very  numerous  cases  of 
the  calling  of  Gentiles  before  the  coming  of  Christ ; 
and  her  deliverance  from  the  utter  destruction  which 
fell  upon  her  countrymen  is  so  beautifully  illus- 
trative of  the  salvation  revealed  in  the  Gospel,  that 
it  is  impossible  not  to  believe  that  it  was  in  the 
fullest  sense  a  type  of  the  redemption  of  the  world 
by  Jesus  Christ. 

See  the  articles  Jkricho  ;  Joshua.  Also  Bengel, 
Lightfoot,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  and  Olshausen  on 
Matt.  i.  5;  Patrick,  Grotius,  and  Hitzig  on  Josh,  ii.; 
Dr.  Mill,  Descent  and  Parentage  of  the  Saviour; 
Kwald,  Geschic/ite,  ii.  320,  &c.  ;  Josephus,  Ant.  v. 
1 ;  Clemens  Kom.  ad  Corinth,  cap.  xii. ;  Irenaeus, 
C.  Her.  iv.  XX. ;  Just.  Mart,  contr.  Tryph.  p.  11; 
Jerome,  adv.Jotin.  lib.  i. ;  Epist.  xxxiv.  ad  Nepot. ; 
Breciar.  in  Ps.  Ixxxvi. ;  Oiigen,  Horn,  in  Jcsnni 
Nave,  iii.  and  vi. ;  Comm.  in  Matth.  xxvii.  ;  Ciiry- 
sost.  Hum.  3  in  Mattk.,  also  3  in  £p.  ad  Rom.  ; 
Ephi-.  Syr.  Rhythm  1  and  7  on  Nativ.,  Rhythm  7 
on  the  Faith;  Cyril  of  Jerus.,  Catechct.  Lect.  ii.  9, 
X.  11  ;  BuUinger,  I.  c.  ;  Tyndale,  Doctr.  Treat. 
(Parker  Soc),  pp.  119,  120;  Schleusner,  Lexic. 
N.  T.  s.  T  irSpv-n.  [A.  C.  H.] 

EA'HABinn"):    'PaayS :   Rahah),   a   poetical 

name  of  Egypt.     The  same  word  siguiHes  "fierce- 
ness, insolence,  pride;"  if  Hebrew  when  applied  to 
Egypt,   it  would  indicate  the  national  chaiacter  of 
the  inhabitants.     Gesenius  thinks  it  was  j)robably 
of  Egyptian  origin,  but  accommodatal  to  Hebrew, 
although  no  likely  equivalent   h;is   been  found   in  i 
Coptic,  or,  we  may  add,  in  ancient  Egyptian  (  Thcs.  I 
.s.  v.).     That  the  Hebrew  moaning  is  alluded  to  in 
connexion  with  the  proper  name,  does  not  seem  to  ' 
prove  that  the  latter  is  Hebrew,  but  this  is  rendeied 
very  probable  by  its  apposite  character,  atid  its  sole  ' 
use  iu  poetical  books. 

"  BuUinger  (5th  Dec.  Scrm.  vl  )  views  the  line  as  a  sign 
and  seal  of  the  covenant  between  tlie  Israelites  and  Hahab. 


RAIN 


993 


This  word  occuis  in  a  passage  in  Job,  where  it  is 
usually  translated,  as  in  the  A.  V.,  instead  of  being 
treated  as  a  proper  name.  Yet  if  the  passage  be 
compared  with  parallel  ones,  there  can  scarcely  be  a 
doubt  that  it  refers  to  the  Exodas,  "  He  divideth 
the  sea  with  His  power,  and  by  His  understanding 
He  smiteth  through  the  proud"  [or  "Rahab"] 
(xxvi.  12).  The  prophet  Isaiah  calls  on  the  arm 
of  the  Lord,  "  [Art]  not  thou  it  that  hath  cut 
Hahab,  [and]  wounded  the  dragon  ?  [Art]  not  thou 
it  which  hath  dried  the  sea,  the  waters  of  the  great 
deep  ;  that  hath  made  the  depths  of  the  sea  a  way 
for  the  ransomed  to  pass  over?"  (Ii.  9,  10  ;  comp. 
15.)  In  Ps.  Ixxiv.  the  division  of  the  sea  is  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  breaking  the  heads  of  the 
dragons  and  the  heads  of  Leviathan  (13,  14).  So 
too  in  Ps.  Ixxxix.  God's  power  to  subdue  the  sen 
is  spoken  of  immediately  before  a  mention  of  his 
having  "  broken  Rahab  in  pieces"  (9,  10).  Rahab, 
as  a  name  of  Egypt,  occurs  once  only  without  re- 
ference to  the  Exodus ;  this  is  in  Psalm  Ixxxvii., 
where  Rahab,  Babylon,  Philistia,  Tyre,  and  Cush, 
are  compared  with  Zion  (4,  5).  In  one  other 
passage  the  name  is  alluded  to,  with  reference  to 
its  Hebrew  signification,  where  it  is  prophesied  that 
the  aid  of  the  Egyptians  should  not  avail  those  who 
sought  it,  and  this  sentence  follows :  DH  3n~l 
n!lt^,  "Insolence  \i.  e.  'the  insolent'],  they  sit 
still "  (Is.  XXX.  7),  as  Gesenius  reads,  considering  it  to 
be  undoubtedly  a  proverbial  expression.    [R.  S.  P.] 

RA'HAM  (DHT  :  'Pae>  :  Raham).  In  the 
genealogy  of  the  descendants  of  Caleb  the  sou  of 
Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  44),  Raham  is  described  as  the 
son  of  Shema  and  father  of  Jorkoam.  Rashi  and 
the  author  of  the  Quaest.  in  Rural.,  attributed  to 
Jerome,  regaid  Jorkoam  ;is  a  place,  of  which  Raham 
was  founder  and  prince. 

KA'HEL  (^riT:  'PoxtjA:  Rachel).  The  more 
accurate  form  of  the  familiar  name  elsewhere  ren- 
dered Rachel.  In  the  older  English  versions  it  is 
employed  throughout,  but  survives  in  the  Au- 
thorized Version  of  1611,  and  in  our  present  Bibles, 
iu  Jer.  xxxi.  15  only.  [G.] 

RAIN.  ntOO  (mdtdr),  and  also  DE^il  (gcsheni), 
which,  when  it  differs  from  the  more  common  word 
100,  signifies  a  more  violent  rain  ;  it  is  also  used 
as  a  generic  term,  including  the  eaily  and  latter 
rain  (Jer.  v.  24 ;  Joel  ii.  23). 

Early  Rain,  the  rains  of  the  autumn,  HIV 
(yorch),  part,  subst.  fnm  H"!*,  "  he  scattered" 
(Deut.  xi.  14;  Jer.  v.  24);  also  the  hiphil  part. 
ni'lD  (Joel  ii.  23)  :  verbs  irp(ii>os,  LXX. 

Latter  Rain,  the  rain  of  spring,  K'lppD  {mal- 
/;6sh),  (Prov.  xvi.  15;  Job  xxix.  23;  Jer.  iii.  3  ; 
Hos.  vi.  3;  Joel  ii.  23;  Zech.  x.  1):  vtrbs  6\l/tiJ.os. 
The  early  and  latter  rains  are  mentioned  together 
(Deut.  xi.  14  ;  Jer.  v.  24  ;  Joel  ii.  23  ;  Hos.  vi.  3  ; 
James  v.  7). 

Another  word,  of  a  more  poetical  character,  is 
D''3''31  {rehtbhn,  a  j)lural  form,  connccte«l  with 
rab,  "  many,"  from  the  multitude  of  the  drops), 
translated  in  our  version  "  showere  "  (Deut.  xxxii. 
2;  Jer.  iii.  3,  xiv.  22;  Mic.  v.  7  (Heb.  ti)  ;  Ps. 
Ixv.  10  (Heb.  11),  Ixxii.  6).  The  Hebrews  have 
also  the  woid  D"IT  {zerem),  expressing  violent  raiu, 

3  S 


994 


RAIN 


storm,  tempest,  accompanied  with  hail — in  Job 
xxiv.  8,  the  lieavy  rain  which  comes  down  on 
mountains ;  and  the  word  T'lJD  {sagrir),  whicli 
occurs  only  in  Prov.  xxvii.  15,  continuous  and  heavy 
raia,  ev  vfJiipa  x^^t-'-^l'^yji- 

In  a  country  comprising  so  many  varieties  of 
elevation  as  Palestine,  there  must  of  necessity  occur 
corresponding  varieties  of  climate  ;  an  account  that 
might  con-ectly   describe  the   peculiarities  of  the 
district  of  Lebanon,  would  be  in  many  respects  in- 
accurate when  applied  to  the  deep  depression  and 
almost  tropical  climate  of  Jericho.     In  any  general 
statement,  therefore,  allowance  must  be  made  for 
not  inconsiderable  local  variations.     Compared  with 
England,   Palestine  would  be  a  country  in  which 
rain  would  be  much  less  frequent  than  with  our- 
selves ;  contrasted  with  the  districts  most  familiar 
to  the  childi'en  of  Israel  before  their  settlement  in 
the  land  of  pi-omise,   Egypt  and  the  Deseit,  rain 
might  be  spoken  of  as  one  of  its  distinguishing  cha- 
racteristics (Deut.  xi.  10,  11  ;   Herodotus,  iii.  10). 
For  six  months  in  the  year  no  rain  ialls,  and  the 
harvests  are  gathered  in  without  any  of  the  anxiety 
with  which  we  are  so  familiar  lest  the  work  be  in- 
terrupted by  unseasonable  storms.     In  this  respect 
at  least  the  climate  has  remained  unchanged  since 
the  time  when  Boaz  slept  by  his  heap  of  corn  ;  and 
the  Bending  thunder  and  rain  in  wheat  harvest  was 
a  miracle  which   filled  the  people  with  fear  and 
wonder  (1  Sam.  xii.  16-18);  and  Solomon  could 
speak  of  "  rain  in  harvest  "  as  the  most  forcible  ex- 
pression for  conveying  the  idea  of  something  utterly 
out  of  place  and  unnatural  (Prov.  xxvi.  1).     There 
are^  however,  very  considerable,  and  perhaps  more 
than  compensating,  disadvantages  occasioned  by  this 
long  absence  of  rain :  the  whole  land  becomes  dry, 
parched,  and  brown,  the  cisterns  are  empty,  the 
springs  and  fountains  fail,  and  the  autumnal  rains 
are  eagerly  looked  for,  to  prepare  the  earth  for  the 
reception  of  the  seed.     These,  the  early  rains,  com- 
mence about  the  latter  end  of  October  or  beginning 
of  November,  in  Lebanon  a  month  earlier:  not  sud- 
denly but  by  degrees ;   the  husbandman  has  thus 
the  opportunity  of  sowing  his  fields  of  wheat  and 
barley.     The  rains  come  mostly  from  the  west  or 
south-west  (Luke  xii.  54),  continuing  for  two  or 
three  days  at  a  time,  and  failing  chiefly  during  the 
night ;  the  wind  then  shifts  round  to  the  north  or 
east,  and  several  days  of  fine  weather  succeed  ( Prov. 
XXV.  23).     During  the  months  of  November  and 
December  the  rains  continue  to  fall  heavilv,  but  at 
inten'als ;   afterwards  they  return,  only  at  longer 
intervals,  and  are  less  heavy ;   but  at  no   period 
duimg  the  winter  do  they  entirely  cease.     January 
and  February  are  the  coldest  months,  and  snow 
falls,  sometimes  to  the  depth  of  a  foot  or  more,  at 
Jerusalem,  but   it  does  not  lie    long;  it  is  very 
seldom  seen  along  the  coast  and  in  the  low  ]ilains. 
Thin  ice  occasionally  covers  the  pools  for  a  fewdavs, 
and  while  Porter  was  writing  his  Handbook,  the 
snow  was  eight  inches  deep  at  Damascus,  and  the  ice 
a  quaiter  of  an  inch  thick.     Rain  continues  to  fall 
more  or  less  during  the  month  of  March  ;  it  is  veiy 
j-are  in  April,  and  even  iu  Lebanon  the  showers  that 
occur  are  generally  light.     In    the   valley  of  the 
Jordan  the  barley  harvest  begins  ;is  eaily  as  the 
middle  of  April,  and  the  wheat  a  fortnight  later  ;  in 
Lebanon  the  grain  is  seldom  ripe  before  the  middle 
of  June.      (See  Robinson,  Biblical  Rescardies,   i. 
429  ;  and  Porter,  Handbook,  xhiii.)    [Palf.stini;, 
p.  692.] 


RAIN 

With  respect  to  the  distinction  between  the  early 
and  the  latter  rains,  Robinson  observes  that  there 
ai-e  not  at  the  present  day  "  any  particular  periods 
of  rain  or  succession  of  showers,  which  might  be 
regarded  as  distinct  rainy  seasons.  The  whole  period 
from  October  to  March  now  constitutes  only  one 
continued  season  of  rain  without  any  regularly  in- 
tervening term  of  prolonged  fine  weather.  Unless, 
therefore,  there  has  been  some  change  in  the  climate, 
the  early  and  the  latter  rains  for  which  the  hus- 
bandman waited  with  longing,  seem  rather  to  have 
implied  the  first  showers  of  autumn  which  revived 
the  parched  and  thirsty  soil  and  prepared  it  for  the 
seed  ;  and  the  later  showers  of  spring,  which  conti- 
nued to  refresh  and  forward  both  the  ripening  crops 
and  the  vernal  products  of  the  fields  (James  v.  7  ; 
Piov.  xvi.  lo)." 

In  April  and  May  the  sky  is  usually  serene ; 
showers  occur  occasionally,  but  they  are  mild  and 
refreshing.  On  the  1st  of  jlay  Robinson  experienced 
showers  at  Jerusalem,  and  "at  evening  there  was 
thunder  and  lightning  f which  aie  frequent  in  winter), 
with  pleasant  and  reviving  rain.  The  6th  of  May 
was  also  remarkable  for  thunder  and  for  several 
showers,  some  of  which  were  quite  heavy.  The 
rains  of  both  these  days  extended  far  to  the  north 
.  .'  .  but  the  occurrence  of  lain  so  late  in  the  season 
was  regarded  as  a  very  unusual  circumstance." 
{B.  E.  i.  4.30  :  he  is  speaking  of  the  year  1838.) 

In  1856,  however,  "  theie  was  very  heavy  rain 
accompanied  with  thunder  all  over  the  region  of 
Lebanon,  extending  to  Beyrout  and  Damascus,  on 
the  28th  and  29th  May ;  but  the  oldest  inhabitant 
had  never  seen  the  like  before,  and  it  created,  says 
Porter  {Handbook,  xlviii.),  almost  as  much  asto- 
nishment as  the  thunder  and  rain  which  Samuel 
brought  upon  the  Israelites  during  the  time  of 
wheat  harvest." 

During  Dr.  Robinson's  stay  at  Beyrout  on  his 
second  visit  to  Palestine,  in  1852,  there  were  heavy 
rains  in  March,  once  for  five  days  continuously, 
and  the  weather  continued  variable,  with  occasional 
heavy  rain,  till  the  close  of  the  first  week  in  April. 
The  "latter  rains"  thus  continued  this  season  for 
nearly  a  month  later  than  usual,  and  the  result  was 
afterwards  seen  in  the  very  abundant  crops  ot 
winter  grain  (Robinson,  B.  R.  iii.  9). 

These  details  will,  it  is  thought,  better  than  any 
generalized  statement,  enable  the  reader  to  form  his 
judgment  on  the  "former"  and  "latter"  rains  of 
Sci'ipture,  and  may  serve  to  introduce  a  remark  or 
two  on  the  question,  about  which  some  interest  has 
been  felt,  whether  there  has  been  any  change  in  the 
frequency  and  abundance  of  the  rain  in  Palestine, 
or  in  the  periods  of  its  supply.  It  is  asked  whether 
"  these  stony  hills,  these  deserted  valhys,"  can  be  the 
land  flowina:  with  milk  and  honey  ;  the  land  which 
God  cared  for ;  the  land  upon  which  were  always 
the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  from  the  beginning  of  the  year 
to  the  end  of  the  year  (Deut.  xi.  12).  As  f;u-  as 
relates  to  the  other  considerations  which  may 
account  for  diminished  fertility,  such  as  the  de- 
crease of  population  and  industry,  the  neglect  ot 
teiTace-culture  and  irrigation,  and  husbanding  the 
supply  of  water,  it  may  suffice  to  refer  to  the 
article  on  AGRICULTURE,  and  to  Stjiuley  {^Sinai 
and  Palestine,  120-123).  With  respect  to  our 
more  immediate  subject,  it  is  urged  that  the 
very  expression  "flowing  with  milk  and  honey' 
implies  abundant  rains  to  keep  alive  the  grass  for 
the  pasture  of  the  numerous  herds  su))plying  the 
milk,  and  to  nourish  the  flowers  clothing  the  now 


RAIN 

bare  hill-sides,  fiom  whence  the  bees  might  gather 
their  stores  of  honey.  It  is  urged  that  the  supply 
of  rain  in  its  due  season  seems  to  be  promised  as 
contingent  upon  the  fidelity  of  the  people  (Deut. 
-xi.  13-15;  Lev.  xxvi.  "-5),  and  that  a.s  from  time 
to  time,  to  punish  the  people  for  their  transgressions, 
"the  shdwers  have  been  withholden,  and  there  hath 
been  no  latter  rain"  (Jer.  iii.  3  ;  IK.  xvii.,  xviii.), 
so  now,  in  the  great  and  long-'continued  apostasy 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  there  has  come  upon 
even  the  land  of  their  forfeited  inheritance  a  like 
long-continued  withdrawal  of  the  iavour  of  God, 
who  claims  the  sending  of  rain  as  one  of  His  special 
prerogatives  (Jer.  xiv.  22). 

The  early  rains,  it  is  urged,  are  by  comparison 
scanty  and  interrupted,  the  latter  rains  have  alto- 
gether ceased,  and  hence,  it  is  maintained,  the  curse 
has  been  fulrilled,  "  Thy  heaven  that  is  over  thy 
head  shall  be  brass,  and  the  earth  that  is  under 
thee  shall  be  iron.  The  Lord  shall  make  the  I'ain 
of  thy  land  powder  and  dust"  (Deut.  xxviii.  23, 
24;  Lev.  xxvi.  19).  Without  entering  here  mto 
the  consideration  of  the  justness  of  the  interpreta- 
tion which  would  assume  these  predictions  of  the 
withholding  of  rain  to  be  altogether  different  in  the 
manner  of  their  infliction  from  the  other  c:\lamities 
denounced  in  these  chapters  of  threatening,  it 
would  appear  that,  as  far  as  the  question  of  fact 
is  concerned,  there  is  scarcely  sufficient  reason  to 
imagine  that  any  great  and  marked  changes  with 
respect  to  the  rains  have  taken  place  in  Palestine. 
In  early  days  as  now,  rain  was  unknown  for  half 
the  year ;  and  if  we  may  judge  from  the  allusions 
in  Piov.  xvi.  15  ;  Job  xxix.  23,  the  latter  rain  was 
even  then,  while  greatly  desired  and  longed  for, 
that  which  w'as  somewhat  piecarious,  by  no  means 
to  be  absolutely  counted  on  as  a  matter  of  couise. 
If  we  are  to  take  as  conect,  our  translation  of  Joel 
ii.  23,  "  the  latter  rain  in  the  first  (month  »),"  i.  e. 
Nisan  or  Abib,  answering  to  the  latter  part  of 
March  and  the  early  part  of  .April,  the  times  of  the 
latter  rain  in  the  days  of  the  prophets  would  coin- 
cide with  those  in  which  it  falls  now.  The  same  con- 
clusion would  be  airived  at  from  Amos  iv.  7,  "  I 
have  withholden  the  rain  from  you  when  there 
were  yet  three  months  to  the  harvest."  The  rain 
here  spoken  of  is  the  latter  rain,  and  an  interval  of 
three  months  between  the  ending  of  the  rain  and 
the  beginning  of  harvest,  would  seem  to  be  in  an 
avei-age  year  as  exceptional  now  as  it  was  when 
Amos  noted  it  as  a  judgment  of  God.  We  may 
infer  also  from  the  Song  of  Solomon  ii .  11-13,  where 
is  given  a  poetical  description  of  the  bursting  forth 
of  vegetation  in  the  spring,  that  when  the  "  winter" 
was  past,  the  rain  also  was  over  and  gone :  wo  can 
hardly,  by  any  extension  of  the  term  "  winter," 
bring  it  down  to  a  later  period  than  that  during 
which  the  rains  still  fall. 

It  may  be  added  that  travellers  have,  perhaps 
unconsciously,  exaggerated  the  barrenness  of  the 
land,  from  contining  themselves  too  closely  to  the 
southern  poi  tion  of  Palestine ;  the  northern  por- 
tion, Galilee,  of  such  peculiar  interest  to  the 
readers  of  the  Gospels,  is  fertile  and  beautiful  (see 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  chap,  x.,  and  Van  de 
Velde,  there  i-iuoted),  and  in  his  description  of  the 
valley  of  A'aW"S,   tlie  ancient  Shecheni,   iiobinson 


RAINBOW 


995 


"  The  word  "  month  "  Is  supplied  by  our  translators, 
and  their  rcnilerinB  Is  not  siipjiorted  by  either  the  LXX. 
(KaSu)?  fii.Tvpo<r6iv)  ur  the  Vuls-  (^sicut  in  principio). 
Anotlier  interpretation  is  indeed  eriUiiliy  probable;  but 


(5.  R.  ii.  275)  becomes  almost  enthusiastic  :  "  Here 
a  scene  of  luxuriant  and  almost  unparalleled  verdure 
burst  upon  our  view.  The  whole  valley  was  filled 
with  gardens  of  vegetables  and  orchards  of  all  kinds 
of  fruits,  watered  Ijy  several  fountains,  which  burst 
forth  in  various  parts  and  flow  westward  in  refresh- 
ing streams.  It  came  upon  us  suddenly,  like  a  scene 
of  fairy  enchantment.  We  saw  nothing  like  it  in 
all  Palestine."  The  account  given  by  a  recent  lady 
traveller  {Egyptian  Sepulchres  and  Siii-ian  Shrines, 
by  Miss  Beaufort)  of  the  luxuriant  fruit-trees  and 
vegetables  which  she  saw  at  Meshullam's  farm  in 
the  valley  of  Urtas,  a  little  south  of  Bethlehem 
(possibly  the  site  of  Solomorf's  gardens,  Eccl.  ii.  4-6), 
may  serve  to  prove  how  much  now,  as  ever,  may 
be  effected  by  irrigation. 

Plain  frequently  furnishes  the  writers  of  the  Old 
Testament  with  forcible  and  appropriate  metaphors, 
varying  in  their  character  according  as  they  regard 
it  as  the  beneficent  and  fertilizing  shower,  or  the 
destructive  storm  pouring  down  the  mountain  side 
and  sweeping  away  the  labour  of  years.  Thus 
Prov.  xxviii.  3,  of  the  poor  that  oppresseth  the 
poor;  Kz.  xx.xviii.  22,  of  the  just  punishments  and 
righteous  vengeance  of  God  (compare  Ps.  xi.  6;  Job 
XX.  23).  On  the  other  hand,  we  have  it  used  of 
speech  wise  and  fitting,  refreshing  the  souls  of  men, 
of  words  earnestly  waited  for  and  heedfully  listened 
to  (Deut.  xxxii.  2 ;  Job  -x.xix.  23) ;  of  the  cheering 
favour  of  the  Lord  coming  down  once  more  upon 
the  penitent  soul ;  of  the  gracious  presence  and  in- 
fluence for  good  of  the  righteous  king  among  his 
people ;  of  the  blessings,  gifts,  and  graces  of  the 
reign  of  the  Messiah  (Hos.  vi.  3  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  4  ; 
Ps.  lx.xii.  6).  [E.  P.  £.] 

RAINBOW  (nK^I?  (».  e.  a  bow  with  which  to 
shoot  arrows).  Gen.  ix.  13-16,  Ez.  i.  28:  T6i,ov.,  so 
Ecclus.  xliii.  11 :  areus.  In  N.  T.,  Rev.  iv.  3,  x.  1, 
Tpis).  The  token  of  the  covenant  which  God  made 
with  Noah  when  he  came  forth  from  the  ark,  that 
the  waters  should  no  more  become  a  flood  to 
destioy  all  flesh.  With  respect  to  the  covenant 
itself,  as  a  charter  of  natural  blessings  and  mercies 
("the  World's  covenant,  not  the  Church's"),  re- 
establishing the  peace  and  order  of  Physiad  Nature, 
which  in  the  flood  had  undergone  so  great  a 
convulsion,  see  Davison  On  Prophecy,  lect.  iii. 
p.  76-80.  With  respect  to  the  token  of  the  cove- 
nant, the  right  interpretation  of  Gen.  ix.  13  seems 
to  be  that  (Jod  took  the  rainbow,  which  had  hitherto 
been  but  a  beautiful  object  shining  in  the  heavens 
when  the  sun's  rays  fell  on  falling  rain,  and  conse- 
ciated  it  as  the  sign  of  His  love  and  the  witness  of 
His  promise. 

The  following  passages.  Num.  xiv.  4;  1  Sam. 
xii.  13  ;  1  K.  ii.  35,  are  instances  in  which  jflJ 
{ndtlian,  lit.  "give"),  the  word  used  in  Gen.  ix. 
13,  "  I  do  set  my  bow  in  the  cloud,"  is  employed 
in  the  sense  of '•  constitute,"  "appoint."  Accord- 
ingly there  is  no  i  eason  for  concluding  that  ignorance 
of  the  natmal  ciiuse  of  the  rainbow  occasioned  the 
account  given  of  its  institution  in  the  Book  of 
Genesis. 

The  figurative  and  symbolical  use  of  the  rainbow 
as  an  emblem  of  God's  mer<  y  and  faithfulness 
must  not  be  passed  over.     In  the  wondrous  vision 

the  following  passages.  Gen.  vlii.  13,  Num.jx.  5,  Ez.  xxix. 
17,  xiv.  18,21.  justify  the  rendering  ptJ'N'13  "  In  the 
first  (month). " 

3  S  2 


996 


RAISINS 


shown  to  St.  John  in  tho  Apocalypse  (Ifev.  iv.  3), 
it  is  said  that  "  there  was  a  rainbow  round  about 
tlie  throne,  in  sight  lil?e  unto  an  emerald :"  amidst 
the  awful  vision  of  surpassing  glory  is  seen  the  sym- 
bol of  Hope,  the  bright  emblem  of  Meicy  and  of 
Love.  "  Look  upon  the  rainbow,"  saith  the  son  of 
Sirach  (Ecclus.  xliii.  11,  12),  "and  praise  Him 
that  made  it :  very  beautiful  it  is  in  the  bright- 
ness thereof;  it  compasseth  the  heaven  about  with 
a  glorious  ci)cle,  and  the  hands  of  the  most  High 
have  bended  it."  [E.  P.  E.] 

RAISINS.    [Vine,] 

RA'KEM  (Dj?"],  in  pause  Dpi:  'PokS/j.;  om. 
in  Alex. :  Becen).  Among  the  descendants  of  Machir 
the  son  of  Mauasseh,  by  his  wife  Maachah,  are  men- 
tioned Ulam  and  liakem,  who  are  apparently  the 
sons  of  Sheresh  (1  Chr.  vii.  1(3).  Nothing  is  known 
of  them. 

RAK'KATH  (njJT  :  ['n^a0a]5o/c€0  :  Aie.x. 
'PeKKaO :  Eeccath).  One  of  the  fortified  towns  of 
Naphtali,  named  between  Hammath  and  Chin- 
NERETH  (Josh.  xi.x.  35).  Hammath  was  probably 
at  the  hot  springs  of  Tiberias ;  but  no  trace  of  the 
name  of  Kakkath  has  been  found  in  that  or  any 
other  neighbourhood.  The  nearest  approach  is 
Kerali,  formerly  Tarichaeae,  thiee  miles  further 
down  the  shore  of  the  lake,  close  to  the  embouchure 
of  the  Jordan.  [G.] 

RAK'KON  (I'lpnn,  with  the  def.  article: 
'IfpoLKoiv:  Arecon).  One  of  the  towns  in  the  in- 
heritance of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  46),  apparently  not 
fiir  distant  from  Jo]ipa.  The  LXX.  (both  MSS.) 
give  only  one  name  (that  quoted  above)  for  this 
and  Me-jarkon,  which  in  the  Hebrew  text  precedes 
it.  This  fact,  when  coupled  with  the  similarity  of 
the  two  names  in  Hebrew,  suggests  that  the  one 
may  be  mei  ely  a  repetition  of 
the  other.  Neither  has  been 
yet  discovered.  [*'•] 

RAM  (D"l :  'Apa.fl ;  Alex. 
'Appdv  in  Ruth  ;  'Opd/j.  and 
'Apd/j.  in  1  Chr. :  Arum).  1. 
Son  of  Hezion  and  father  of 
Amminadab.  He  was  born  in 
Egypt  after  Jacob's  migration 
there,  as  his  name  is  not  men- 
tioned in  Gen.  xlvi.  4.  He 
first  appears  in  Ruth  iv.  19. 
The  genealogy  ui  1  Chr.  ii.  9, 
10,  25,  adds  no  further  infor- 
mation concerning  him,  except 
that  he  was  the  second  son  ot 
Hezrou,  Jeiahmeel  being  the 
first-born.  He  appears  in  the 
N.  T.  only  in  the  two  lists  of 
the  ancestry  of  Christ  (Matt.  i. 
3,  4;  Luke  iii.  33),  where  he 
is  called  Aram,  after  the  LXX. 
and  Vulgate.  [A  jimixadab  ; 
Nahsiion.J  [a.  C.  H.] 

2.  {'Pan:  Earn.)  The  first- 
born of  Jerahmeel,  and  therc*- 
ibre  nephew  of  the  preceding 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25,  27).  He  had 
three  sons,  Maaz,  Jamin,  and 
Eker. 

3.  Elihu,  the  son  of  Bara- 
chel  tlie  Buzite,  is  described  as 
"  of  the  kindred  <jf  Ram  "  (Job 


RAM,  BATTERING 

xxxii.  2).  Rashi's  note  on  the  passage  is  curious: 
"  '  of  the  family  of  Ram  ;'  Abraham,  for  it  is  said, 
'  the  greatest  man  among  the  Anakim  '  (Josh,  xiv.)  ; 
this  [is]  Abraham."  Ewald  identifies  Ram  with 
Aram,  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxii.  21  in  connexion  with 
Huz  and  Buz  (Gesch.  i.  414).  Elihu  would  thus 
be  a  collateral  descendant  of  Abraham,  and  this 
may  have  suggested  the  extraordinary  explanation 
given  by  Rashi.  [W.  A.  W.] 

RAM.    [Sheep;  Sacrifices.] 

RAM,    BATTERING   (13:     Pex6(rTaa-i^, 

xdpa^ :  aries).  This  instrument  of  ancient  siege 
operations  is  twice  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  (Ez.  iv. 
2,  xxi.  22  [27])  ;  and  as  both  references  are  to  the 
battering-rams  in  use  among  the  Assyrians  and 
Babylonians,  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  describe 
those  which  are  known  from  the  monuments  to 
have  been  employed  in  their  sieges.  With  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  there  is  but 
little  doubt.  It  denotes  an  engine  of  war  which 
was  called  a  ram,  either  because  it  had  an  iron  head 
shaped  like  that  of  a  ram,  or  because,  when  used 
for  battering  down  a  wall,  the  movement  was  like 
the  butting  action  of  a  ram. 

In  attacking  the  walls  of  a  fort  or  city,  the  first 
step  appears  to  have  been  to  tbrm  an  inclined  plane 
or  bank  of  earth  (comp.  Ez.  iv.  2,  "cast  a  mount 
against  it"),  by  which  the  besiegers  could  bring 
their  battering-rams  and  other  engines  to  the  foot  of 
the  walls.  "  The  battering-rams,"  says  Mr.  Layard, 
"  were  of  several  kinds.  Some  were  joined  to 
moveable  towers  which  held  warriors  and  armed 
men.  The  whole  then  formed  one  great  temporary 
building,  the  top  of  which  is  represented  in  sculp- 
tures as  on  a  level  with  the  walls,  and  even  tur- 
rets, of  the  besieged  city.  In  some  bas-ieliefs  the 
battering-ram  is  without  wheels ;  it  was  then  per- 


Bauering  lijun. 


RAMA 

haps  constructed  upon  the  spot,  and  was  not  in- 
tended to  he  moved.  The  moveable  tower  was 
probably  sometimes  unprovided  with  the  ram,  but 
I  iiave  not  met  with  it  so  represented  in  the  sculp- 
tures  When  the  machine  containing  the 

battering-ram  was  a  simple  framework,  and  did  not 
form  an  artiticial  tower,  a  cloth  or  some  kind  of 
drapery,  edged  with  fiinges  and  otherwise  orna- 
mented, appears  to  have  been  occasionally  thrown 
over  it.  Sometimes  it  may  have  been  covered  with 
hides.  It  moved  either  on  four  or  on  six  wheels, 
and  was  provided  with  one  ram  or  with  two.  The 
mode  of  working  the  rams  cannot  be  determined 
from  the  Assyrian  sculptures.  It  may  be  presumed, 
fi'om  the  representations  in  the  bas-reliefs,  that  they 
were  partly  suspended  by  a  rope  fastened  to  the 
outside  of  the  machine,  and  that  men  directed  and 
impelled  them  from  within.  Such  was  the  plan 
adopted  by  the  Egyptians,  in  whose  paintings  the 
warriors  woiking  the  ram  may  be  seen  through 
the  fratne.  Sometimes  this  engine  was  ornamented 
by  a  carved  or  painted  figure  of  the  presiding 
divinity,  kneeling  on  one  knee  and  drawing  a  bow. 
The  artificial  tower  was  usually  occupied  by  two 
wari'iors :  one  discharged  his  arrows  against  tlie 
besieged,  whom  he  was  able,  from  his  lotty  posi- 
tion, to  harass  more  eflectually  than  if  he  had  bpen 
below  ;  the  other  held  up  a  shield  for  his  com-^ 
paniou's  defence.  Warriors  are  not  unfrequently 
represented  as  stepping  from  tlie  macliine  to  the 

battlements Archers  on  the  walls  hurled 

stones  from  slings,  and  discharged  their  arrows 
against  the  warriors  in  the  artificial  towers  ;  whilst 
the  rest  of  the  besieged  were  no  less  active  in  en- 
deavouring to  frustrate  the  attempts  of  the  assail- 
ants to  make  breaches  in  their  walls.  By  dropping 
a  doubled  chain  or  rope  from  the  battlements,  they 
caught  the  ram,  and  could  either  destroy  its  efficacy 
altogether,  or  break  the  force  of  its  blows.  Those 
below,  however,  by  placing  hooks  over  the  engine, 
and  throwing  their  whole  weight  upon  them, 
struggled  to  retain  it  in  its  place.  The  besieged,  if 
unable  to  displace  the  battering-ram,  sought  to 
destroy  it  by  fije,  and  threw  lighted  torches  or  fire- 
brands upon  it ;  but  water  was  poured  upon  the 
flames  through  pi])es  attached  to  the  artificial  tower" 
( Nineveh  and  Us  Remains,  ii.  367-370).  [VV.  A.  W.] 

RA'MA  ('Pa//a:  Rama),  Matt.  ii.  18,  referring 
to  .Jer.  xxxi.  15.  The  original  passage  alludes  to  a 
massacre  of  Benjamites  or  Ephraimites  (comp.  ver. 
9,  18),  at  the  Kamah  in  Benjamin  or  in  Mount 
Ephraim.  This  is  seized  by  the  Evangelist  and  turned 
into  a  touching  reference  to  the  slaughter  of  the 
Innocents  at  Bethlehem,  near  to  which  was  fand  is) 
the  sepulchre  of  l\;ichel.  The  name  of  Kama  is 
alleged  to  have  been  lately  discovered  attached  to  a 
spot  "close  to  the  sopulchie.  If  it  existed  there  in 
St.  Matthew's  day,  it  may  have  prompted  his  allu- 
sion, though  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  this,  since 
the  point  of  the  quotation  does  not  lie  in  the  name 
liamah,  but  in  the  lamentation  of  Uachel  for  the 
children,  as  is  shown  by  the  change  of  the  viols  of 
the  original  to  TtKva.  [Ci .] 


■  So  Sir  H.  C.  Rawlinson,  In  Athenaeum,  No.  1799, 
p.  530. 

b  Its  place  in  the  list  of  Jo.shua  (monllonecl  above), 
viz.  between  Gibeon  and  Beeroili,  suits  the  present  Ham- 
Allah;  but  tlie  cunsiderations  named  in  the  text  m.ike 
it  very  difficult  to  identity  any  otlier  site  with  it  tbau 
er-IJdiii. 

"!  In  his  commentary  on  Hos.  v.  8,  Jerome  mentions 


RAMAH  997 

RA'MAH  (nO"in,  with  the  definite  article, 
excepting  a  few  cases  named  below).  A  word 
which  in  its  simple  or  compound  shape  forms  the 
name  of  several  places  in  the  Holy  Land  ;  one  of 
those  which,  like  Gibeaji,  Geba,  Gibeon,  or  Mizpeh, 
betrays  the  aspect  of  the  country.  The  lexico- 
graphers with  unanimous  consent  derive  it  fiom  a 
root  which  has  the  general  sense  of  elevation — a 
root  which  produced  the  name  of  Aram,"  "  the  high 
lands,"  and  the  various  modifications  of  Item,  Ramah, 
Kamath,  Ramoth,  Remeth,  R:\mathaim,  Arimathaea, 
in  the  Biblical  records.  As  an  appellative  it  is  found 
only  in  one  passage  (Ez.  xvi.  24-39),  in  which  it 
occurs  four  times,  each  time  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
"  high  place."  But  in  later  Hebrew  rurntha  is  a 
recognized  word  for  a  hill,  and  as  such  is  employed 
in  the  Jewish  versions  of  the  Pentateuch  lor  the 
rendering  of  Pisgah. 

1.  ('Pa^a;  'Paa^S ;  Ba^ua,  &c. ;  Alex.  la/xa, 
'Pa/j.fj.av  ;  'Po^uo  :  Rama.)  One  of  the  cities  of  the 
allotment  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  25),  a  member 
of  the  group  which  contained  Gibeon  and  Jeru- 
salem. Its  place  in  the  list  is  between  Gibeon  and 
Beeioth.  There  is  a  more  precise  specification  of 
its  position  in  the  invaluable  catalogue  of  the  jilaces 
noi th  of  Jeiusalem  which  Me  enumerated  by  Isaiah 
as  disturbed  by  the  gradual  approach  of  the  king  ot 
Assyria  (Is.  x.  28-32).  AtMichmash  he  crosses  the 
ravine  ;  and  then  successively  dislodges  or  alarms 
Geba,  Ramah,  and  Gibeah  of  Saul.  Each  of  these 
may  be  recognized  with  almost  absolute  cei'tainty  at 
the  present  day.  Geba  is  Jcba,  on  the  south  brink 
of  the  great  valley  ;  and  a  mile  and  a  half  beyond 
it,  directly  between  it  and  the  main  road  to  the 
city,  is  er-Rum  (its  name  the  exact  equivalent  of 
ha-Ramah)  on  the  elevation  which  its  ancient  name 
implies. b  Its  distance  from  the  city  is  two  hotirs, 
i.  e.  five  English  or  six  Roman  miles,  in  perfect 
accordance  with  the  notice  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
in  the  Onomasticon  ("Rama"j,'=  and  nearly  agree- 
ing with  that  of  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  12,  §3j,  who 
places  it  40  stadia  north  of  Jerusalem. 

Its  position  is  also  in  close  agreement  with  the 
notices  of  the  Bible.  The  palm-tree  of  Deborah 
(Judg.  iv.  5)  was  "between  Ramah "^  and  Bethel," 
in  one  of  the  sultiy  valleys  enclosed  in  the  lime- 
stone hills  which  compose  tliis  district.  The  Levite 
and  his  concubine  in  their  journey  from  Bethlehem 
to  Ephraim  passed  Jerusalem,  and  piesscd  on  to 
Gibeah,  or  even  if  possible  beyond  it  to  K'amah 
(Judg.  xix.  13).  In  the  struggles  between  noith 
and  south,  which  followed  the  disruption  of  the 
kingdom,  Ramah,  as  a  frontier  town,  the  possession 
of  which  gave  absolute  command  of  the  north  road 
from  Jerusalem  (1  K.  xv.  17),  was  taken,  foititied, 
and  retaken  (ibid.  21,  22  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  1,  6,  (i). 

After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  it  ajipears  to 
have  been  used  as  the  depot  for  the  prisoners  (Jer. 
xl.  1) ;  and,  if  the  well-known  passage  of  Jeremiah 
(xx.xi.  15),  in  which  he  introduces  the  mother  of 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin  weejiing  over  tlie  loss  of  her 
children,  alludes  to  this  Kamah,  and  not  to  one 
nearer  to  her  sepulchre  at  Bethlehem,  it  was  pro- 
Rama  as  "juxta  Gabaa  in  septimo  laptde  a  lerosulymis 
slta." 

•1  'I'heTargum  on  this  passape  substitutes  for  the  Palm 
of  Deborah,  Ataroth-Deborali,  no  duubt  referring  to  the 
town  of  Ataiotli.  'Ibis  has  everything  In  its  favour, 
since  'Aidra  is  still  foiuid  on  the  IcH  hand  of  the 
north  road,  very  nearly  midway  between  er-iidm  oud 
BeUin. 


998 


RAMAH 


bably  also  the  scene  of  the  slaughter  of  such  of  the 
captives  as  from  age,  weakness,  or  poverty,  were 
not  worth  the  long  ti-ansport  across  the  desert  to 
Babylon.  [Rama.]  Its  proximity  to  Gibeah  is  im- 
plied in  1  Sam.  xxii.  (3»;  Hos.  v.  8;  Ezr.  ii.  26; 
Neh.  vii.  30  :  the  last  two  of  which  passages  show 
also  that  its  people  returned  after  the  Captivity.  The 
Ramah  in  Neh.  xi.  33  occupies  a  dili'eient  position  in 
the  list,  and  may  be  a  distinct  place  situated  further 
west,  nearer  the  plain.  (This  and  Jer.  xxxi.  15  are 
the  only  passages  in  which  the  name  appears  with- 
out the  article.)  The  LXX.  find  an  allusion  to 
Eamah  in  Zech.  xiv.  10,  where  they  render  the 
words  which  are  translated  in  the  A.  V.  "  and  shall 
be  lifted  up  (riDXI),  and  inhabited  in  her  place," 
by  "  Eamah  shall  remain  upon  her  place." 

Er-Ram  was  not  unknown  to  the  mediaeval 
travellers,  by  some  of  whom  (e.  gr.  Brocardus, 
Dcscr.  ch.  vii.)  it  is  recognized  as  Rimah,  but 
it  was  reserved  for  Dr.  Robinson  to  make  the  iden- 
tification certain  and  complete  {Bib.  Res.  i.  576). 
He  describes  it  as  lying  on  a  high  hill,  commanding 
a  wide  prospect — a  miserable  village  of  a  few  halt- 
deserted  houses,  but  with  remains  of  columns, 
squared  stones,  and  perhaps  a  church,  all  indicating 
former  importance. 

In  the  catalogue  of  1  Esdr.  v.  (20)  the  name 
appeals  as  Cirama. 

2.  {"ApfxaeaiiJ.  in  both  MSS.,  except  only  1  Sara. 
XXV.  1,  xxviii.  3,  where  the  Alex,  has  'Poyua).  The 
home  of  Elkanah,  Samuel's  father  (1  Sam.  i.  19, 
ii.  11),  the  birth-place  of  Samuel  himself,  his  home 
and  official  residence,  the  site  of  his  altar  (vii.  17, 
viii.  4,  XV.  34,  xvi.  13,  xix.  18),  and  finally  his 
burial-place  (xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3).  In  the  present 
instance  it  is  a  contracted  form  of  Ramathaim- 
ZOPHIM,  which  in  the  existing  Hebrew  text  is  given 
at  length  but  once,  although  the  LXX.  exhibit 
Armathaim  on  every  occasion. 

All  that  is  directly  said  as  to  its  situation  is 
that  it  was  in  Mount  Ephraim  (1  Sam.  i.  1),  and 
this  would  naturally  lead  us  to  seek  it  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Shechem.  But  the  whole  tenor 
of  the  narrative  of  the  public  life  of  Samuel  (in 
connexion  with  which  alone  this  Puimah  is  men- 
tionedj  is  so  restricted  to  the  region  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  and  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Gibeah  the 
residence  of  Saul,  that  it  seems  impossible  not  to 
look  for  Samuel's  city  in  the  same  locality.  It 
appears  from  1  Sam.  vii.  17  that  his  annual  func- 
tions as  prophet, and  judge  were  confined  to  the 
narrow  round  of  Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Mizpeh — the 
first  the  north  boundary  cf  Benjamin,  the  second 
near  Jericho  at  its  eastern  end,  and  the  third  on  the 
ridge  in  more  modei'n  times  known  as  Scopus,  over- 
looking Jerusalem,  and  therefore  near  the  southern 
confines  of  Benjamin.  In  the  centre  of  these  was 
Gibeah  of  Saul,  tlie  royal  residence  during  the  reign 
of  the  first  king,  and  the  centre  of  his  operations. 
It  would  be  doing  a  violence  to  the  whole  of  this 
part  of  the  history  to  look  for  Samuel's  residence 
outside  these  narrow  limits. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  boundaries  of  Mount 
Ephraim  are  nowhere  distinctly  set  forth.     In  the 


RAMAH 

mouth  of  an  ancient  Hebrew  the  expression  would 
mean  that  portion  of  the  moimtai-nous  district  which 
was  at  the  time  of  speaking  in  the  possession  of 
the  tribe  of  Ephraim.  "  Little  Benjamin  "  was  for 
so  long  in  close  alliance  with  and  dependence  on  its 
more  powerful  kinsman,  that  nothing  is  more  pro- 
bable than  that  the  name  of  Ephraim  may  have 
been  extended  over  the  mountainous  region  which 
was  allotted  to  the  younger  son  of  Rachel.  Of  this 
there  are  not  wanting  indications.  The  palm-tree 
of  Deborah  was  "  in  IMount  Ephraim,"  between 
Bethel  and  Hamah,  and  is  identified  with  great 
plausibility  by  the  author  of  the  Ta)gum  on  Judg. 
iv.  5  with  Ataroth,  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
south  boundary  of  Ephraim,  which  still  survives 
in  'Atara,  2^  miles  north  of  Ramaii  of  Benjamin 
{er-Rdin).  Bethel  itself,  though  in  the  catalogue 
of  the  cities  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  22),  was 
appropriated  by  Jeroboam  as  one  of  his  idol 
sanctuaries,  and  is  one  of  the  "  cities  of  Mount 
Ephraim"  which  were  taken  from  him  by  Baasha 
and  restored  by  Asa  (2  Chr.  xiii.  19,  xv.  8).  Jere- 
miah (ch.  xxxi.)  connects  Ramah  of  Benjamin  with 
Mount  Ephraim  (vers.  6,  9,  15,  18). 

In  this  district,  tradition,  with  a  truer  instinct 
than  it  sometimes  displays,  has  placed  the  residence 
of  Samuel.  The  earliest  attempt  to  identify  it  is  in 
the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius,  and  was  not  so  happy. 
His  words  are,  "  Ai-mathem  Seipha :  the  city  of 
Helkana  and  Samuel ;  it  lies  near'  {i:\r\(riov)  Dios- 
polis :  thence  came  Josej.ih,  in  the  Gospels  said  to  be 
from  Arimathaea."  Diospolis  is  Lydda,  the  modern 
Ludd,  and  the  reference  of  Eusebius  is  no  doubt  to 
Ratnleh,  the  well-known  modern  town  two  miles 
from  Ludd.  But  there  is  a  fatal  obstacle  to  this 
identification,  in  the  fact  that  Ramlch  ("  the 
sandy " )  lies  on  the  open  face  of  the  maritime 
plain,  and  cannot  in  any  sense  be  said  to  be  in 
Mount  Ephraim,  or  any  other  mountain  district. 
Eusebius  possibly  lefers  to  another  Ramah  named 
in  Neh.  xi.  33  (see  below.  No.  6). 

But  there  is  another  tradition,  that  just  alluded  to, 
common  to  Moslems,  Jews,  and  Christians,  up  to  the 
present  day,  which  places  the  residence  of  Samuel  on 
the  lofty  and  remarkable  eminence  of  Neby  Saniwil, 
which  rises  four  miles  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem, 
and  which  its  height  (greater  than  that  of  Jeru- 
salem itself),  its  commanding  position,  and  its  pe- 
culiar shape,  render  the  most  conspicuous  objei't 
in  all  the  landscapes  of  that  district,  and  make  the 
names  of  Ramah  and  Zophim  exceedingly  appro- 
priate to  it.  The  name  first  appears  in  the  travels 
of  Arculf  (a.d.  cir.  700),  who  calls  it  Saint  Samuel. 
Before  that  date  the  relics  of  the  Pi-ophet  had  been 
transported  from  the  Holy  Land  to  Thiace  by  the 
emjieror  Arcadius  (see  Jerome  contr.  Vigilantimn, 
§5j,  and  Justinian  had  enlarged  or  completed  "a 
well  and  a  wall"  for  the  sanctuary  (Procopius,  rfe 
Aedif.Y.ca.'p.  9).  True,neitherofthese  notices  names 
the  spot,  but  they  imply  that  it  was  well  known,  and 
so  far  support  the  placing  it  at  Neby  Setmwil.  Since 
the  days  of  Arculf  the  tradition  appears  to  have  been 
continuous  (see  the  quotations  in  Rob.  B.  R.  i.  459  ; 
Tobler,  881,  &c.J.  The  modern  village,  though 
miserable  even  among  the  wretched  collections  of 


"  This  passage  may  either  be  translated  (with  Junius, 
Michaells,  De  Wette,  and  Bunsen),  "  Saul  nbode  in  Gibeah 
under  the  tamarisk  o>\  the  height"  (in  which  case  it  will 
add  one  to  the  scanty  number  of  cases  In  which  the  word 
is  used  otherwise  llian  as  a  proper  name),  or  il  may 
imply  that  Ramah  was  inchnlcd  within  the  precincts  of 
the  king's  city.     The  LXX.  read  Kama  for  Kamah,  and 


render  the  words  "  on  the  hill  under  the  field  in  Bama." 
Eusebius,  in  the  Onomasticon  ("Pajao),  characterizes  Ramah 
as  the  "city  of  Saul." 

f  Jerome  agrees  with  Eusebius  in  his  translation  of  this 
passage;  but  in  the  Fpilapliium  I'anlac  (Epist.  cviii.)  lie 
connects  Ranileh  with  Arimathaea  only,  and  places  it 
haud  pivcul  a  l.yddd. 


KAMAH 

hovels  which  crown  the  hills  in  this  neighbour- 
hood, bears  marks  of  antiquity  in  cisterns  and  other 
traces  ot"  former  habitation.  The  mosque  is  said  to 
stand  on  the  foundations  of  a  Christian  church,  pro- 
bably that  which  Justinian  built  or  added  to.  The 
ostensible  tomb  is  a  mere  wooden  box ;  bat  below 
it  is  a  cave  or  chamber,  ai)paiently  excavated,  like 
that  of  the  patriarchs  at  Hebron,  from  the  solid 
rock  of  the  hill,  and,  like  that,  closed  against  all 
access  except  by  a  narrow  aperture  in  the  top, 
through  which  devotees  are  occasionally  allowed  to 
transmit  their  lamps  and  petitions  to  the  sacred 
vault  below. 

Here,  then,  we  are  inclined,  in  the  present  state 
of  the  evidence,  to  place  the  liamah  of  Samuel. 8 
And  there  probably  would  never  have  been  any 
resistance  to  the  traditional  identification  if  it  had 
not  been  thought  necessary  to  make  the  position 
of  Kamah  square  with  a  passage  with  which  it 
does  not  seem  to  the  writer  to  have  necessarily 
any  connexion.  It  is  usually  assumed  that  the 
city  in  which  Saul  w,as  anointed  by  Samuel  (1 
Sara.  ix.  x.)  was  Samuel's  own  city  Kamah.  Jose- 
phus  certainly  {Ant.  vi.  4,  §1)  does  give  the 
name  of  the  city  as  Armathem,  and  in  his  version 
of  the  occurrence  implies  that  the  Prophet  was 
at  the  time  in  his  own  house  ;  but  neither  the 
Hebrew  nor  the  LXX.  contains  any  statement 
which  confirms  this,  if  we  except  the  slender  fact 
that  the  "  land  of  Zuph "  (ix.  5)  may  be  con- 
nected with  the  Zophim  of  Kamathaim-zophim. 
The  words  of  the  maidens  (ver.  1 2)  may  equally 
imply  either  that  Samuel  had  just  entered  one  of 
his  cities  of  circuit,  or  that  he  had  just  returned  to 
his  own  house.  But,  however  this  may  be,  it 
follows  from  tjie  minute  specification  of  Saul's 
route  in  1  Sam.  x.  2,  that  the  city  in  which  the 
interview  took  place  was  near  the  sepulchre  of 
Rachel,  which,  by  Gen.  xxxv.  16,  19  and  other 
reasons,  appears  to  be  fixed  with  certiiinty  as  close 
to  Bethlehem.  And  this  supplies  a  strong  argu- 
ment against  its  being  Kamathaim-zophim,  since, 
while  Mount  Ephraim,  as  we  have  endeavoured 
already  to  show,  extended  to  within  a  few  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem,  there  is  nothing  to  warrant  the 
supposition  that  it  ever  i-eached  so  far  south  as 
the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem.  Saul's  route 
will  be  most  conveniently  discussed  under  the  head 
of  Saul;  but  the  question  of  both  his  outward 
and  his  homeward  journey,  miiuitely  as  they  are 
detailed,  is  beset  with  difficulties,  which  have  been 
increased  by  the  assumptions  of  the  commentators. 
For  instance,  it  is  usually  taken  for  granted  that 
his  father's  house,  and  therefore  the  starting-point 
of  his  wanderings,  was  Gibeah.  True,  Saul  himself, 
after  he  was  king,  lived  at  Gibeah;  but  the  resi- 
dence of  Kish  would  appear  to  iiave  been  at  Zela  ■" 
where  his  family  sepulchre  was  (2  Sam.  xxi.  I4\ 
and  of  Zela  no  trace  has  yet  been  foun<l.  The 
Authorized  Version  has  added  to  the  difliculty  by 
introducing  the  word  "  meet  "  in  x.  I!  as  the  trans- 
lation of  the  term  which  they  have  more  accu- 
rately rendered  "find"  in  the  preceding  ver.se. 
Again,  where  was  the  "hill  ol' God,"  the  (jibeath- 


KAMAH 


999 


Elohim,  with  tlie  netdb^  of  the  Philistines?  A 
netsib  of  the  Philistines  is  mentioned  later  in  Saul's 
history  (1  Sam.  xiii.  .S)  as  at  Geba  opposite  Mich- 
mash.  But  this  is  three  miles  north  of  Gibeah 
of  Saul,  and  does  not  at  all  agree  with  a  situation 
near  Bethlehem  for  the  anointing  of  Saul.  The 
Targum  interprets  the  "hill  of  God"  as  "the 
place  where  the  ark  of  God  was,"  meaning  Kiijath- 
jearim. 

On  the  assumption  that  Kamathaim-zophim  was 
the  city  of  Saul's  anointing,  various  attempts  have 
been  made  to  find  a  site  for  it  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Bethlehem.  (a)  Gesenius  {Then.  1276<()  sug- 
gests the  Jehel  Fureidis,  four  miles  south-east  of 
Bethlehem,  the  ancient  Herodium,  the  "  Frank 
mountain"  of  more  modern  times.  The  drawback 
to  this  suggestion  is  that  it  is  not  suppoi'ted  by 
any  hint  or  inference  either  in  the  Bible,  Josephus 
(who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  Herodion),  or 
more  recent  authority.  (6)  Dr.  Kobinson  (Bib.  Ees. 
ii.  8)  proposes  Soba,  in  the  mountains  six  miles 
west  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  possible  representative  of 
Zophim:  but  the  hvpothesis  has  little  besi<les  its 
ingenuity  to  recommend  it,  and  is  virtually  given 
up  by  its  author  in  a  foot-note  to  the  passage,  (c) 
^'an  de  Velde  [Syr.  ^  Pal.  ii.  50),  following  the 
lead  of  Wolcott,  argues  for  Rameh  (or  Ramet  el- 
Khalil,  Rob.  i.  216),  a  well-known  site  of  ruins 
about  two^and  a  half  miles  north  of  Hebron.  His 
main  argument  is  that  a  castle  of  S.  Samuel  is 
mentioned  by  F.  Fabri  in  1483''  (apparently)  as 
north  of  Hebron  ;  that  the  name  Rainah  is  iden- 
tical with  Ramah  ;  and  that  its  position  suits  the 
requirements  of  1  Sam.  x.  2-5.  This  is  also  sup- 
ported by  Stewart  {Tent  and  Khan,  247).  {d) 
Dr.  Bonar  {Lcmd  of  Promise,  178,  554)  adopts 
er-Ram,  which  he  places  a  short  distance  north  of 
Bethlehem,  e;ust  of  Rachel's  sepulchre.  Eusebius 
{07wm. 'Pa^eSe)  says  that  "Kama  of  Benjamin" 
is  near  (Trepl)  Bethlehem,  where  the  "voice  in 
ffama  was  heard ;"  and  in  our  times  the  name  is 
mentioned,  besides  Dr.  Bonar,  by  Pjokesch  and 
Salzbacher  (cited  in  Rob.  P.  R.  ii.  8  note),  but  this 
cannot  be  regarded  as  certain,  and  Dr.  Stewart  has 
pointed  out  that  it  is  too  close  to  Rachel's  monu- 
ment to  suit  the  case. 

Two  suggestions  in  an  opposite  direction  must  be 
noticed :  — 

(a)  Thnt  of  Ewald  (Geschichte,  ii.  550),  who 
places  Kamathaim-zophim  at  Ram-allah,  a  mile 
west  of  el-Bireh,  and  nearly  five  north  of  Nehy 
Sninwil.  The  chief  ground  for  the  suggestion 
appears  to  be  the  affix  Alluk,  as  denoting  that  a 
certain  sanctity  attaches  to  the  place.  This  would 
be  more  certainly  within  the  limits  of  Mount 
Ephraim,  and  merits  investigation.  It  is  men- 
ticincd  by  Mr.  Williams  {Diet,  of  Geogr.  "  Ra- 
matha")  who,  however,  gives  his  decision  in  favour 
of  Nebij  Siimwil. 

(b)  That  of  Schwarz  (152-158),  who,  starting 
from  Gibeah-of-Saul  as  the  home  of  Kish,  fixes 
upon  Rameh  north  of  Samaria  and  west  of  Sanur, 
which  he  supposes  also  to  be  Kamolh  or  Jarmuth, 


i  "  Bethhoron  and  her  suburbs"  were  allotted  to  the 
ICobathlte  Levilcs,  of  whom  Samuel  was  one  by  descent. 
Perhaps  the  village  on  the  top  ot  Ni-liy  S»n\wil  may  have 
hetn  dependent  on  the  more  regularly  fortified  Ucthhoron 
(1  K.  ix.  17) 

I'  Zela  cypV)  '^  quiti'  a  distinct  name  IVum  Zelzach 
(n^?V^'   "'"'    "■'''';•'    sonic   would    identify   il  (e.  yr. 


Stewart,  Tent  and  Khan,  247 ;  Van  <lo  "Velde,  Memoir, 

8;c.  Sic). 

'  The  meaning  of  this  word  is  uncertain.  It  Ujjiv 
signify  a  garrison,  an  ollicor,  or  a  commemoration  colnmn 
— a  trophy. 

'  In  the  time  of  Bonjamin  ofTudcla  It  was  known  as 
the  "  houBC  of  Abraham  "  (B.  of  'I'.,  cd.  Asher,  II.  93;. 


1000 


RAMAH 


the  Leviticnl""  city  of  Issachar.     Schwaiz's  argu- 
ments must  be  lead  to  be  appreciated. 

3.  ("Apo^A.;"  Alex.  'Pafia:  Amma.)  One  of 
the  nineteen  fortified  places  of  Naphtili  (.losh. 
xix.  3(5)  named  between  Adamah  and  Hazor.  It 
would  appear,  if  the  order  of  the  list  m;iy  be 
accepted,  to  have  been  in  the  mountainous  coimtry 
N.W.  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth.  In  this  district 
a  place  bearing  the  name  of  Rameh  has  been  dis- 
covered by  Dr.  Robinson  {B.  R.  iii.  78),  which  is 
not  improbably  the  modern  lepresentative  of  the 
Ramah  in  question.  It  lies  on  the  main  track 
lietween  Akka  and  the  north  end  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee,  and  about  eight  miles  E.S.E.  oi' Stfc'd.  It 
is,  perhaps,  worth  notice  that,  though  the  spot  is 
distinguished  by  a  very  lofty  brow,  commanding 
one  of  the  most  extensive  views  in  all  Palestine 
(Rob.  78),  and  answering  perfectly  to  the  name  of 
Ramah,  yet  tliat  the  village  of  Ikcmeh  itself  is  on 
the  lower  slope  of  the  hill. 

4.  ('Po/uo:  Honna.)  One  of  the  landmarks  on 
the  boundaiy  (A.  V.  "coast")  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix. 
29),  apparently  between  Tyre  and  Zidon.  It  does 
not  appear  to  be  mentioned  by  the  ancient  geogra- 
phei-s  or  ti-avellers,  but  two  places  of  the  same 
name  have  been  discovered  in  the  district  allotted 
to  Asher;  the  one  eastofTyie,  and  within  about 
thi'ee  miles  of  it  (Van  de  Velde,  Map,  Memoir), 
the  other  more  than  ten  miles  off,  and  south-east  of 
the  same  city  (Van  de  Velde,  Maj) :  Robinson, 
B.  R.  iii.  64-).  The  specification  of  the  boundary 
of  Asher  is  very  obscure,  and  nothing  can  yet  be 
gathered  from  it ;  but,  if  either  of  these  jilaces 
lepresent  the  Kamah  in  question,  it  certainly  seems 
safer  to  identify  it  with  that  nearest  to  Tyre  and 
the  sea-coast. 

5.  ( 'Pefifiaid,  Ales.  'PafiwB  ;  'Pa/xd  in  both  cases : 
Ramoth.)  By  this  name  in  2  K.  viii.  29  and 
2  Chr.  xxii.  fi,  only,  is  designated  Ramoth-Gilead. 
The  abbreviation  is  singular,  since,  in  both  cases,  the 
full  name  occurs  in  the  preceding  verse. 

6.  A  place  mentioned  in  the  catalogue  of  those 
le-inhabited  by  the  Benjamites  after  their  i-eturn 
from  the  Captivity  (Neh.  xi.  .33).  It  may  he  the 
Rarnah  of  Benjamin  (above.  No.  1)  or  the  liamah 
of  Samuel,  but  its  position  in  the  list  demote  from 
Geba,  Michmash,  Bethel,  ver.  31,  comp.  Ezr.  ii. 
26,  28)  seems  to  remove  it  further  west,  to  the 
neighbourhood  of  Lod,  Hadid,  and  Ono.  There  is 
no  further  notice  in  the  Bible  of  a  Ramah  in  this 
direction,  but  Eusebius  and  Jejome  alhule  to  one, 
though  they  may  be  at  fault  in  identifying  it  with 
Riimathaim  and  Arimathaea  {Onom.  "  Armatha 
Sophim;"  and  the  remarks  of  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii. 
239).  The  situation  of  the  modern  Ram/eh  agrees 
very  well  with  this,  a  town  too  impoitiuit  and  too 
well  jilaced  not  to  have  existed  in  the  ancient 
times."  The  consideration  that  Ramlch  signifies 
"sand,"  and  Ramah  "a  height,"  is  not  a  valid  ar- 
gument against  the  one  being  the  legitimate  suc- 
cessor of  the  other.  If  so,  half  the  ideatiHcations 
of  modern  travellers  must  be  reversed.  ]Uit-ur 
can  no  longer  be  the  representiitive  of  Beth-lioron, 
because   ur    means    "  eye,"    while    horon    means 


»  But  Ramoth  was  allotted  to  the  Gersbonites,  while 
Samuel  was  a  Kohathile. 

n  For  the  preceding  name  —  Adamab  —  they  give 
'Ap/u.oi9. 

°  This  is  evidenced  by  the  attempts  of  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  and  others  to  make  out  Ramleb  to  he  Gath, 
Gezer.  &c. 


EAMATH  OF  THE  SOUTH 

"caves;"  nor  Beit-lahm,  of  Betlilehem,  because 
lahm  is  "  flesh,"  and  Ichem  "  bread ; "  nor  el-Aal, 
of  Klealeh,  because  cl  is  in  Arabic  the  article,  and 
in  Hebrew  the  name  of  God.  In  these  cases  the 
tendency  of  language  is  to  retain  the  sound  at  the 
expense  of  the  meaning.  [G.] 

EA'MATH-LEHI  Cn^  n»n :  'hvalpeais 
ffiaySvos  :  Ramathlechi,  quod  interpretatur  elcvatio 
maxillae).  The  name  which  purports  to  have  been 
bestowed  by  Samson  on  the  scene  of  his  slaughter 
of  the  thousaird  Philistines  with  the  jaw-bone  (Judg. 
XV.  17).  "He  cast  away  the  jaw-bone  out  of  his 
hand,  and  called  that  jilace  '  Ramath-lehi,'  " — as  if 
"  heaving  of  the  jaw-bone."  In  this  sense  the  name 
(wisely  left  untranslated  in  the  A.  V.)  is  rendered 
by  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  (as  above).  But  Gesenius 
has  jiointed  out  {Thes.  Ih'la)  that  to  be  consistent 
with  this  the  vowel  points  should  be  altered,  and 

the  words  become  TO  T\t2r\ ;  and  that  as  they  at 

present  stand  they  are  exactly  parallel  to  Ramath- 
mizpeh  and  Ramath-negeb,  and  mean  the  "  height 
of  Lechi."  If  we  met  with  a  similar  account  in 
ordinaiy  history  we  should  say  that  the  name  had 
already  been  Ramath-lehi,  and  that  the  writer  of 
the  narrative,  with  that  fondness  for  paronomasia 
which  distinguishes  these  ancient  records,  had  in- 
dulged himself  in  connecting  the  name  with  a  pos- 
sible exclamation  of  his  hero.  But  the  fact  of  tlie 
positive  statement  in  this  case  may  make  us  hesitate 
in  coming  to  sucli  a  conclusion  in  less  authoritative 
records.  [G.] 

RA'MATH-]\IIZTEH  (nQVSn  DOT,  with 
def.  article  :  'ApajScwfl  Kara  tV  Macrffrjipa, ;  Alex. 
'Pajxaid^  K.  T.  Ma(T(pa :  Ramath,  Misphe).  A  place 
mentioned,  in  ,!osh.  xiii.  26  only,  in  the  specifica- 
tion of  the  territory  of  Gad,  apparently  as  one  of 
its  northern  landmarks,  Heshbon  being  the  limit  on 
the  south.  But  of  this  our  ignorance  of  the  topo- 
graphy east  of  the  Jordan  foibids  us  to  speak  at 
present  with  any  certainty. 

Theie  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  it  is  the  same 
jilace  with  tliat  early  sanctuary  at  which  Jacob  and 
Laban  set  up  their  cairn  of  stones,  and  which  re- 
ceived the  names  of  Mizi'Eii,  Galeed,  and  Jegar 
Sahadutha :  and  it  seems  veiy  piobable  that  all 
these  are  identical  with  Ramoth-Gilead,  so  notorious 
in  the  later  history  of  the  nation.  In  the  Books  of 
Maccabees  it  probably  appeals  in  the  gaib  of  Mas])lia 
(1  Mace.  v.  35),  but  no  information  is  afforded  us 
in  either  Old  Test,  or  Apoci'vpha  as  to  it-s  position. 
The  lists  of  places  in  the  districts  north  of  cs-Salt, 
collected  by  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  and  given  by  Dr.  Ro- 
binson (i?.  R.  1st  edit.  App.  to  vol.  iii.),  contain 
several  names  which  may  retain  a  trace  of  Ramath, 
viz.  Rumeimin  (1676),  Reimun  (166((),  Rumrdma 
(165a),  but  the  situation  of  these  places  is  not 
accurately  known,  and  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether 
they  are  appropriate  to  Riimath-Mizpeh  or  not. 

[G.] 

RA'MATH  OF  THE  SOUTH  (333  riDT : 

Ba^jikd  Kara  Ai/3a ;  Alex,  by  double  transl.  Oep-qp- 


*  This  reading  of  Bamoth  for  Ramath  is  countenanced 
by  one  Hebrew  MS.  collated  by  Kennicott.  It  is  also  fol- 
lowed by  the  Vulgate,  whicli  gives  Bamoth,  Masphe  (the 
reading  in  the  text  is  from  the  Benedictine  Edition  of  the 
BiUiutheca  Divina).  On  the  other  hand  there  is  no  war- 
rant whatever  for  separating  the  two  ivords,  as  if  belong- 
ing to  distinct  places,  as  is  dune  in  both  the  Latin  texts. 


RAMATIIAIM-ZOPHIM 

panfuaO  .  .  .  lafieB  k.  A. :  Ramath  contra  mstralem 
plagam),  :nore  acuurately  Kaniah  of  the  South. 
One  of  the  towns  in  the  allotment  of  Simeon  fjosh. 
xix.  8),  apparently  at  its  extreme  south  limit.  It 
apjiears  from  this  passage  to  have  been  another 
name  for  Baalath-Bicer.  R;imah  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  list  of  Judah  (comp.  Josh.  xv.  21-32), 
nor  in  that  of  Simeon  in  I  Chr.  iv.  28-33,  nor  is  it 
mentioned  by  I'^usebius  and  Jerome.  Van  de  Vekle 
(Memoir,  342)  takes  it  as  identical  with  Ramath- 
Lehi,  which  he  finds  at  Tell  el-Lekii/eh  ;  but  this 
appears  to  be  so  far  south  as  to  be  out  of  the  circle 
of  Samson's  adventures,  and  at  any  rate  must  wait 
for  further  evidence. 

It  is  in  all  probability  the  same  place  as  South 
Ramoth  (1  Sam.  XXX.  27),  and  the  towns  in  com- 
pany with  which  we  find  it  in  this  passage  confinii 
the  opinion  given  above  that  it  lay  very  much  to 
the  south.  [G.] 

EAMATHA'IM-ZO'PHIM  (n^QI^'  D^nDnn  = 

' Ap/xadaiiJ.  2et(|)d ;  Alex.  A.  'S.dKpitJ. :  Rainathaiin 
Sophin).  '{"he  full  form  of  the  name  of  the  town 
in  which  Elkanah,  the  father  of  the  prophet  Samuel, 
resided.  It  is  given  in  its  complete  shape  in  the 
Hebrew  te.\t  and  A.  V.  but  once  ( 1  Sam.  i.  1).  Else- 
where (i.  19,  ii.  11,  vii.  17,  viii.  4,  xv.  34,  xvi. 
13,  xix.  18, 19,  22,  23,  xx.  1,  xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3)  it 
occurs  in  the  shorter  form  of  Ramah.  [Ramah,  2.] 
The  LXX.,  however  (in  both  M.'^S.),  give  it  through- 
out as  Armathaim,  and  insert  it  in  i.  3  after  the 
words  "  his  city,"  where  it  is  wanting  in  the  He- 
brew and  A.  V. 

Kamatiiaim,  if  interpreted  as  a  Hebrew  word,  is 
dual — "  the  double  eminence."  This  may  point  to 
a  peculiarity  in  the  shape  or  nature  of  the  place,  or 
may  be  an  instance  of  the  tendenc}',  familiar  to  all 
students,  which  e.\ists  in  language  to  forte  an 
archaic  or  foreign  name  into  an  intelligible  form. 
Tiiis  has  been  already  remarked  in  the  case  of  Jeru- 
salem (vol.  i.  982a) ;  and,  like  that,  the  present 
name  appears  in  the  form  of  Ramathem,  as  well 
as  that  of  Ramathaim. 

Of  the  force  of  "  Zophim "  no  feasible  explana- 
tion has  been  given.  It  was  an  ancient  name  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  (Num.  xxiii.  14),  and  there,  as 
heie,  was  attached  to  an  eminence.  In  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan,  Ramathaim-zophini  is  rendered  "  Ka- 
matha  of  the  scholars  of  the  prophets ;"  but  this  is 
evidently  a  late  interpretation,  arrived  at  by  regard- 
ing the  prophets  as  watchmen  (the  loot  of  zophim, 
also  that  of  viizpeh,  having  tlie  force  of  looking 
out  afar),  coupled  with  the  fact  that  at  Naioth  in 
Ramah  there  was  a  school  of  jirophets.  It  will  not 
escape  observation  that  one  of  the  ancestors  of 
Elkanah  was  named  Z(jphai  or  Zuph  (1  Chr.  vi. 
26,  35),  and  that  when  Saul  approached  the  city 
in  which  he  encountered  Samuel  he  entered  the 
land  of  Zuph ;  but  no  connexion  between  these 
names  and  that  of  Ramathaim-zophim  has  yet  been 
established. 

Even  without  the  testimony  of  the  LXX.  there 
is  no  doubt,  from  the  narrative  it4;elf,  that  the 
Ramah  of  Samuel — where  he  lived,  built  an  altar, 
died,  and  was  buried — was  the  same  place  as  the 
Ramah  or  Rauiatliaini-Z')phim  in  which  he  was 
born.  It  is  implied  by  Josephus,  and  atlirmed  by 
Eusebius  and  .lerome  in  the  Onoiiuistkon  ("  Arma- 
them  Seipha"),  nor  would  it  ever  have  been  ques- 
tioned had  there  not  been  other  liamahs  mentioned 
in  the  sacred  history. 

Of  its  position  nothing,  or  next  to  nothing,  can 


RAMATHITE,  THE 


1001 


be  gathered  from  the  nan-ative.  It  was  in  Mount 
Ephraim  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  It  had  apparently  at- 
tached to  it  a  place  called  Naioth,  at  which  the 
"  company"  (or  "  school,"  as  it  is  called  in  modern 
times)  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  was  maintained 
'xix.  J  8,  &c.,  XX.  1  i ;  and  it  had  also  in  its  neighbour- 
hood (probably  between  it  and  Gibeah-ot-SauI)  a 
great  well  known  as  the  well  of  Has-Sechu  (xix.  22). 
[Sechu.]  But  unfortunately  these  scanty  particulars 
throw  no  light  on  its  situation.  Naioth  and  Sechu 
have  disappeared,  and  the  limits  of  Mount  Ejjhraim 
are  uncertain.  In  the  4th  century  Ramathaim- 
Zophim  [Onomasticon,  "  Armatha-sophim")  was 
located  near  Diospolis  (Lyddaj,  probably  at  Ramleh  ; 
but  that  is  quite  untenable,  and  quickly  disappeared 
in  favour  of  another,  probably  older,  certairdy  more 
feasible  tradition,  which  placed  it  on  the  lofty  and 
remarkable  hill  four  miles  N.W.  of  Jerusalem, 
known  to  the  early  pilgrims  and  Crusaders  as 
Saint  Samuel  and  Mont  Joye.  It  is  now  universally 
designated  Neby  Samwil — the  "  Prophet  Samuel"; 
and  in  the  mosque  which  crowns  its  long  ridge 
(itself  the  successor  of  a  Christian  church),  his 
sepulchre  is  still  reverenced  alike  by  Jews,  Moslems, 
and  Christians. 

There  is  no  trace  of  the  name  of  Ramah  or 
Zophim  having  ever  been  attached  to  this  hill  since 
the  Christian  era,  but  it  has  borne  the  name  of  the 
great  Prophet  certainly  since  the  7th  century,  and 
not  improbably  from  a  still  earlier  date.  It  is  not 
too  far  south  to  have  been  within  the  limits  of 
Mount  Ephraim.  It  is  in  the  heart  of  the  district 
where  Saul  resided,  and  where  the  events  in  which 
Samuel  took  so  large  a  share  occurred.  It  com- 
pletes the  circle  of  the  sacred  cities  to  which  the 
Prophet  was  in  the  habit  of  making  his  annual 
circuit,  and  vv'hich  lay — Bethel  on  the  north, 
Mizpeh"  on  the  south,  Gilgal  on  the  east,  and  (if 
we  accept  this  identification)  Ramathaim-zophim  on 
the  west — round  the  royal  city  of  Gibeah,  in  which 
the  King  resided  who  had  been  anointed  to  his 
office  by  the  Prophet  amid  such  universal  expecta- 
tion and  good  augury.  Lastly,  as  already  remarked, 
it  has  a  tradition  in  its  favour  of  early  date  and  of 
great  persistence.  It  is  true  that  even  these  grounds 
are  but  slight  and  shifting,  but  they  are  nioie  than 
can  be  brought  in  support  of  any  other  site;  and 
the  task  of  proving  them  fallacious  must  be  under- 
taken by  those  who  would  disturb  a  tradition  so  old, 
and  which  has  the  whole  of  the  evidence,  slight  as 
that  is,  in  its  favour. 

This  subject  is  examined  in  greater  detail,  and  in 
connexion  with  the  reason.->  commonly  alleged  agsiinst 
the  identification,  under  Ramau,  No.  2.  [G.] 

RA'MATHEM  ('PaflajuW^,  Mai  and  Alex.; 
Joseph. 'Po;ua0a :  haiii'dhan).  One  of  the  tinee 
"  governments"  {vofj.oi  and  TOTrapx'O'l  which  were 
added  to  Judaea  by  king  Demetrius  ^;ic;ltor,  out  of 
the  country  of  Samaria  (1  Mace.  xi.  34)  ;  the  othei-s 
were  Apherema  and  Lydda.  It  no  doubt  derived 
its  name  from  a  town  of  the  name  of  Ramathaim, 
)ii  obably  that  renowned  as  the  birthplace  of  Samuel 
the  Prophet,  though  this  cannot  be  stated  with  cer- 
tainty. [G.] 

RA'MATHITE,  THE  (^HO^n  :  i  ^k  'Pa^A ; 
Alex.  6  'PafiaBaios  :  Ronwthites).  Shimei  the  lia- 
mathitc  had  cliarge  of  the  royal  vineyards  of  King 
David  (1  (.:hr.  xxvii.  27).    The  name  implies  that  he 


"  On  the  ridge  of  Scopus,  according  to  the  opinion  of  tUe 
writer  (see  Mutah,  p.  389). 


1002  EAMESES 

was  native  ot' a  place  called  Ramah,but  of  the  various 
Kamahs  mentioned  none  is  said  to  have  been  le- 
marifable  for  vines,  nor  is  there  any  tradition  or 
other  clue  by  which  the  particular  Riimah  to  which 
this  worthy  belonged  can  be  identified.  [G.J 

EAM'ESES  (DpOyT  :  'Pafj.€(rav  :  Ramesses), 
or  RAAM'SES  (DOpj?"]  :  'Paf^ea-crrj :  Ramesses), 
a  city  and  district  of  Lower  E£;v])t.  There  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  same  city  is  designated 
by  the  Rameses  and  Ra;mises  of  the  Heb.  text,  and 
that  this  was  the  chief  place  of  the  land  of  Rameses, 
all  the  passages  referring  to  the  same  i-egion.  The 
name  is  Egyptian,  the  same  as  that  of  several  kings 
of  the  empire,  of  the  xviiith,  xixtb,  and  xxth  dy- 
nasties, in  Egyptian  it  is  written  RA-JIESES  or 
RA-MSES,  it  being  doubtful  whether  the  short 
vowel  understood  occurs  twice  or  once:  the  first 
vowel  is  repieseuted  by  a  sign  which  usually  corre- 
sponds to  the  Hebrew  ]},  in  Egyptian  transcriptions 
of  Hebrew  names,  and  Hebrew,  of  Egyptian. 

The  tii-st  mention  of  Rameses  is  in  tlie  narrative 
of  the  settling  by  Joseph  of  his  father  and  brethren 
in  Egypt,  where  it  is  related  that  a  possession  was 
given  them  "  in  the  land  of  Rameses"  (Gen.  xlvii. 
11).     This  land  of  Rameses,  DD?0J;T  pX,  either 

corresponds  to  the  land  of  Goshen,  or  was  a  distiict 
of  it,  more  probably  the  former,  as  appears  from  a 
comparison  with  a  parallel  passage  (6).  The  name 
next  occurs  as  that  of  one  of  the  two  cities  built  for 
the  Pharaoh  who  first  oppressed  the  children  of 
Israel.  "  And  they  built  for  Pharaoh  treasure 
cities  (niiSpD  ^liy),  Plthom  andRaamses"  (Ex. 
i.  11).  So  in  the  A.  V.  The  LXX.,  however, 
reads  irSXeis  6)(vpds,  and  the  Vulg.  urbes  taherna- 
culoruia,  as  if  the  root  had  been  ptJ'.  The  signifi- 
cation of  the  word  ni33DD  is  decided  by  its  use 
for  storehouses  of  corn,  wine,  and  oil,  which  Heze- 
kiah  had  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  28).  We  should  therefore 
here  read  store-cities,  which  may  have  been  tlie 
meaning  of  our  translators.  The  name  of  Pithoji 
indicates  the  legion  near  Heliopolis,  and  therefore 
the  neighbourhood  of  Goshen  or  that  tract  itsell', 
and  there  can  therefore  be  no  doubt  tliat  Raamses 
is  Rameses  in  the  land  of  (loshen.  In  the  narrative 
of  the  Exodus  we  read  of  Rameses  as  the  starting- 
point  of  the  journey  (Ex.  xii.  37  ;  see  also  Num. 
xxxiii.  o,  5). 

If  then  we  suppose  Rameses  or  Riiamses  to  have 
been  the  chief  town  of  the  land  of  Rameses,  either 
(joshen  itself  or  a  district  of  it,  we  have  to  endea- 
vour to  determine  its  situation.  Lepsius  supposes 
that  Aboo-Kesheyd  is  on  the  site  of  Rameses  (see 
Map,  vol.  i.  p.  598).  His  reasons  aie,  that  in  the 
LXX.  Heroopolis  is  placed  in  the  land  of  Rameses 
(Kad'  'Hpdtitiiv  Tz6\iv,  iv  yy  'PafKcraij ,  or  els 
yrii/  'Paixecrari),  in  a  passage  where  the  Heb.  only 
mentions  '"tlie  land  of  Goshen  "  (Gen.  xlvi.  28), 
and  that  there  is  a  monolithic  gioup  at  Aboo-Ke- 
siieyd  reiMesentingTum,  and  Rs»,  and,  between  them, 
Rameses  IL,  who  w<is  probably  there  worshipped. 
There  would  seem  therefore  to  be  an  indication  of 
the  situation  of  the  district  and  city  from  thisnien- 
tion  of  Heroopolis,  and  the  statue  of  Rameses  might 
mark  a  place  named  after  that  king.  It  must,  how- 
ever, be  remembered  (a)  that  the  situation  of  He- 
roopolis is  a  matter  of  great  doubt,  and  that  there- 
fore we  ciin  scarcely  take  any  proposed  situation  as 
an  indication  of  that  of  Rameses  ;  (6)  that  the  land  of 
Rameses  niav  be  that  uf  Goshen,  as  alre^itly  remarked, 


BAMOTH 

in  which  case  the  passage  would  not  aflbrd  any 
more  precise  indication  of  the  position  of  the  city 
Rameses  than  that  it  was  in  Goshen,  as  is  evident 
from  the  account  of  the  Exodus  ;  and  (c)  that  the 
mention  of  Heroopolis  in  the  LXX.  would  seem  to 
be  a  gloss.  It  is  also  necessary  to  consider  the  evi- 
dence in  the  Biblical  narrative  of  the  position  of 
Rameses,  which  seems  to  point  to  the  western  part  of 
the  land  of  Goshen,  since  two  full  marches,  and  pait 
at  least  of  a  third,  brought  the  Israelites  from  this 
town  to  the  Red  Sea;  and  the  narrative  ajjpears  to 
indicate  a  route  for  the  chief  ]iart  diiectly  towards 
the  sea.  After  the  second  day's  journey  they  "  en- 
camped in  Etham,  in  the  edge  of  the  wilderness" 
fE.x.  xiii.  20),  and  on  the  third  day  they  appear  to 
have  turned.  If,  however,  Riimeses  was  where 
Lepsius  places  it,  the  route  would  have  been  almost 
wholly  through  the  wilderness,  and  mainly  along 
the  tract  bordering  the  Red  Sea  in  a  southerly 
direction,  so  that  they  would  have  turned  almost 
at  once.  If  these  difliculties  are  not  thought  insu- 
j)erable,  it  must  be  allowed  that  they  render  Lep- 
sius's  theory  extremely  doubtful,  and  the  one  fact 
that  Aboo-Kesheyd  is  within  about  eight  miles 
of  the  ancient  head  of  the  gulf,  seems  to  us  fatal 
to  his  identification.  Even  could  it  be  j^roved 
that  it  was  anciently  called  Rameses,  the  case 
would  not  be  made  out.  for  there  is  good  reason  to 
suppose  that  many  cities  in  Egypt  bore  this  name. 
Apart  from  the  ancient  evidence,  we  may  mention 
that  there  is  now  a  place  called  "Remsees'"  or 
"  Ramsees"  in  the  Boheyreh  (the  great  province  on 
the  west  of  the  Rosetta  branch  of  the  Nile),  men- 
tioned in  the  list  of  towns  and  villages  of  Egypt  in 
De  Sacy's  •'  Abd-aUatif"  p.  664.  It  gave  to  its 
district  the  name  of  ' '  H6f-!!emsees  "  or  "  Ramsees." 
This  "  Hof "  must  not  be  confounded  with  the- 
"  Hof"  commonly  known,  which  was  in  the  district 
of  Bilbeys. 

An  arsjument  for  determining  under  what  dynasty 
the  Exodus  happened  has  been  founded  on  the  name 
Rameses,  which  has  been  supposed  to  indicate  a 
royal  builder.  This  argument  has  been  stated  else- 
wheie :  here  we  need  only  repeat  that  the  highest 
date  to  which  Rameses  I.  can  be  reasonably  assigned 
is  cousistent  alone  with  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the 
Exodus,  and  that  we  find  a  prince  of  the  same  nnme 
two  centuries  earlier,  and  theiefore  at  a  time  perhaps 
consistent  with  Ussher's  date,  so  that  the  place 
might  have  taken  its  name  either  from  this  prince, 
or  a  yet  earlier  king  or  prince  Rameses.  [Chrono- 
logy ;  Egypt;  Pharaoh.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

EAMES'SE  ('Pa^eo-o-^:  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
Rajikses  (Jud.  i.  9). 

EAMI'AH  (n;P"}:  'Pa^ui'o:  Remcia).  A  lay- 
man of  Israel,  one  of  the  sous  of  Parosh,  who  put 
away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x. 
25).     He  is  called  Hiekmas  in  1  Esd.  ix.  26. 

EA'MOTH  <  niDNT :  v  'Pafj-dd :  Earnoth).  One 
of  the  four  Levitical  cities  of  Issachar  according 
to  the  catalogue  in  1  Chr.  (vi.  7^).  In  the 
parallel  list  in  Joshua  (xxi.  28,  29),  amongst  otlier 
variations,  Jarmuth  appeal's  in  place  of  Ramoth. 
It  appears  impossible  to  decide  which  is  the  correct 
reading;  or  whether  again  Reiieth,  a  town  of 
Issachai",  is  distinct  from  them,  or  one  and  the 
same.  No  place  has  been  yet  discovered  which  can 
be  plausibly  identified  with  either.  [G.] 

EA'MOTH  (nim  :  Mrj/iwi/ ;  Alex.  'Prj/uae  : 
Rnmoth).    An  Israelite  layman,  of  the  sous  of  Bani ; 


RAMOTH  GILEAD 

who  had  taken  a  strange  wife,  and  at  Ezra  s  iiisti- 
gatiou  agreed  to  separate  from  her  (Ezr.  x.  29). 
In  the  parallel  passage  of  I  Esdras  (ix.  30)  the  name 
is  given  as  HiERKMOTH.  [G.] 

RA'MOTH  GIL'EAD  (ny^5  nbT:  'Vft^ixad., 
'Pe/ijui)0,  and  "Pa/j-wd,  TaXadS  ;  'Epefj.aeya\aa6  ; 
Alex. 'Pa/njU£i>9 ;  Joseph. 'ApayuaSa:  limndth  Galaad) 
the  "  heights  of  Gilead."  One  of  tiie  great  fast- 
nesses oa  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  the  key  to  an 
important  district,  as  is  evident  not  only  from  the 
direct  statement  of  1  K.  iv.  IH,  tliat  it  commanded 
the  regions  of  Argob  and  of  the  towns  of  Jair,  but 
also  from  the  obstinacy  with  wliich  it  was  attacked 
and  defended  by  the  Syrians  and  Jews  in  the  reigns 
of  Ahab,  Ahaziah,  and  Jovam. 

It  seems  probable  that  it  was  identical  with 
Ramath-Mizpeh,  a  name  which  occurs  but  once 
(Josh.  xiii.  26),  and  which  again  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe  occupied  the  sjiot  on  which  Jacob 
had  made  his  covenant  with  Laban  by  the  simple 
rite  of  piling  up  a  heap  of  stones,  which  heap  is  ex- 
pressly stated  to  have  boi-ne  tiie  names  of  both 
Gilead  and  Mizi'Eii,  and  became  the  great  sanct- 
uary of  the  regions  east  of  Joi'dan.  Tlie  variation 
of  Ramoth  and  Rimath  is  quite  feasible.  Indeed, 
it  occurs  in  the  case  of  a  town  of  Judah.  Probably 
from  its  comm:mdiitg  position  in  the  territory  of 
Gad,  as  well  as  its  ^sanctity  and  strength,  it  was 
chosen  by  Moses  as  the  City  of  Refuge  for  that 
tribe.  It  is  in  this  capacity  that  its  name  is  first 
introduced  (Deut.  iv.  43;  Josh.  xx.  8.  xxi.  38). 
We  next  encounter  it  as  the  residence  of  one  of 
Solomon's  commissariat  officers,  Ben-geber,  whose 
authority  extended  over  the  important  region  of 
Argob,  and  the  no  less  important  district  occupied 
by  the  towns  of  Jair  (I  K.  iv.  13). 

In  the  second  Syrian  war  Rmioth-Gilead  played 
a  conspicuous  part.  During  the  invasion  relatcil 
in  1  K.  XV.  20,  or  some  subsequent  incursion,  this 
important  place  had  been  seized  by  Benhadad  I. 
from  Omri  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  15,  §3).  Ahab  had 
been  too  much  occupied  in  repelling  the  attacks  of 
Syria  on  his  interior  to  attempt  the  recovery  of  a 
place  so  distant,  but  as  soon  as  these  were  at  an 
end  and  he  could  secure  the  assistance  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  the  great  and  prosperous  king  of  Judah, 
he  planned  an  attack  (1  K.  xxii.  ;  2  Chr.  xviii.). 
The  incidents  of  the  expedition  are  well  known  :  the 
attempt  failed,  and  Ahab  lost  his  life.  [Jezkeel; 
MiCAiAH  ;  Naaman  ;  Zedekiah.] 

During  Ahaziah's  short  reign  we  hear  nothing  of 
Hamoth,  and  it  probably  remained  in  possession  of  the 
Syrians  till  the  sujipression  of  the  Moabite  rebellion 
<;ave  Joram  time  to  renew  the  siege.  He  allied  himself 
for  the  purpose  as  his  father  had  done,  and  as  he 
himself  had  done  on  his  late  campaign,  with  liis 
relative  the  king  of  Judah.  He  was  more  fortunate 
than  Ahab.  Tlie  town  was  taken  by  Israel  (.Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  6,  §1),  and  held  in  spite  of  all  the  ellorts 
of  Hazael  (who  wiis  now  on  the  throne  of  Damascus) 
to  regain  it  (2  K.  ix.  14).  During  the  encounter 
.(oram  himself  narrowly  escaped  the  fate  of  liis 
fathei-,  being  (as  we  learn  from  the  LXX.  version 
of  2  Chr.  xxii.  G,  and  from  Josephus)  wounded  by 


RAMOTH  IN  GILEAD        1003 

one  of  the  Syrian  arrows,  and  that  so  severely  as  to 
necessitate  his  leaving  the  army  and  retiring  to  his 
palace  at  Jezreel  (2  K.  viii. '28,  ix.  15;  2  Chr. 
xxii.  6).  The  fortress  was  left  in  charge  of  Jehu. 
But  he  was  quickly  called  away  to  the  more  im- 
portant and  congenial  task  of  rebelling  against  his 
master.  He  drove  off  from  liamoth-Gilead  as  if  on 
some  errand  of  daily  occurrence,  but  he  did  not 
return,  mid  does  not  appear  to  have  revisited  the 
place  to  which  he  nuibt  mainly  have  owed  his 
lepufcition  and  his  advancement. 

Henceforward  Ramoth-Gilead  disappears  from  our 
view.  In  the  account  of  tlie  Gileadite  campaign 
of  the  Maccabees  it  is  not  recognizable,  unless  it  be 
under  the  name  of  Maspha  (Mizpeh).  Carnaim 
appears  to  have  been  the  great  sanctuary  of  the  dis- 
trict at  that  time,  and  contained  the  sacred  close 
{r4fj.fvos)  of  Ashtaroth,  in  which  fugitives  took 
refuge  ( 1  Mace.  v.  43). 

Eiisebius  and  Jerome  specify  the  position  of  Ra- 
moth as  15  miles  from  Philadelphia  {Aimndn). 
Their  knowledge  of  the  country  on  that  side  of  the 
Jordan  was  however  very  imperfect,  and  in  thisc;ise 
tliev  are  at  variance  with  each  other,  Eusebius  placing 
it  west,  and  Jerome  east  of  Philadelphia.^  The 
latter  position  is  obviously  untenable.  The  former 
is  nearly  that  of  the  modern  town  of  cs-Salt,^  which 
Gesenius  (notes  to  Burckhardt,  p.  10(jl)  proposes 
to  identify  with  Ramoth-Gilead.  Ewald  (Gesch. 
iii.  500  note),  indeed,  proposes  a  site  further 
north  as  more  probable.  He  suggests  licimun, 
on  the  northern  slopes  of  the  Jebel  Ajlun,  a  few 
miles  west  of  Jerash,  and  between  it  and  the 
well-known  fortress  of  Kulat  er-Rubud.  The 
position  assigned  to  it  by  Eusebius  answers  toler- 
ably well   for  a  site   bearing  the  name   of  Jel'dd 

(.iLsJo*),  exactly  identical  witli  the  ancient  He- 
brew Gilead,  which  is  mentioned  by  Seetzen  {Beisen, 
March  11,  1806),  and  marked  on  his  map  (/6ic/., 
iv.)  and  that  of  Van  de  Velde  (1858)  as  four  or 
five  miles  north  of  es-Salt,  And  probably  this 
situation  is  not  very  far  from  the  truth.  If  Ra- 
moth-(;ilead  and  Ramath-Mizpeh  are  identical,  a 
more  northern  position  than  es-Salt  would  seem 
inevitable,  since  Ramath-Mizpeh  was  in  the  northern 
portion  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh.  xiii.  26).  This 
view  is  supported  also  by  the  Arabic  version  of  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  which  gives  Ram  th  cl-Jcresh,  i.  c. 
the  (ierasa  of  the  classical  geographers,  the  modern 
Jerash  ;  with  which  the  statement  of  the  careful 
Jewish  traveller  Farchi  agrees,  who  says  that 
"  Gilead  is  at  present  ^  Djerash"  (Zunz  in  Asher's 
lienjamin,  405).  Still  the  fact  remains  tliat  the 
name  oi'  Jebel  Jifad,  or  Moiuit  Gilead,  is  attached 
to  the  mass  of  mountain  between  the  Wadij  S/iu'eib 
on  the  south,  and  Wad;/  Zerka  on  the  north,  the 
highest  i>art,  the  Itimoth,  of  which,  is  the  Jcbel 
Osha.  [G.] 

RA'MOTH  IN  (ilL'EAD  Ov)lll  nb^-) : 
7}  'Po^ojfl  eV  FaAoaS,  Afi-q/xwO,  'Pf/x/^iad  TaAoaS  ; 
Alex.  'Pafifiud,  'Po/ua)0:  Ranmth  in  Galaad i,  Deut. 
iv.  43;  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  38;  1  K.  xxii.  3.<:  Else- 
where tiie  shorter  furni,  liAMOTH  GiLEAD,  is  used. 


•  lis  Salt  appears  to  be  an  Arabic  appropriation  of  the 
ecclesiastical  name  Sallmi  /tiVra<ico»i— the  sacred  forest— 
which  occurs  in  lists  ofthi-  episcopal  cities  on  the  East  of 
Jordan  (Reland,  I'al.  315,317).  It  has  now,  as  is  usual 
in  such  casos,  acqnired  a  new  meaning  of  Its  own—"  the 
bruad  Sua-."    (Compare  Ki.eai-EII.) 

li  111  thisconucctioM  it  is  curious  tliat  the  Jews  should  di.'- 
rivr  J  crash  (wliich  tln'y  "liU' t;'13).  ''>'  contraction,  iroiii 


XrinnCnj''.  ■Ictwr  Siihadutlm,  one  of  the  names  con- 
ferred on  Jlizpeh  ^/.UllZ,  as  above). 

'  The  '•  in"  in  this  last  passage  (tliougli  not  distiuRulshed 
by  italics)  is  a  mere  interpolation  of  the  translator :  the 
Hebrew  words  do  not  contain  the  prejiositlon,  as  they  do 
in  the  three  other  i>assj>gcs,  but  are  exactly  those  which 
elsewhere  arc  rendered  "  Uamoth-tiikud" 


1004 


RAMS   HORNS 


RAMS'  HORNS.     [Coiuvet  ;  Jubilek.] 
RAMS'  SKINS  DYED  RED  (D^V'^  ""^'V 
D^P"tNp,  'oroth  elim  meodddmim :  Sepfiara  KpiSiv 

iipv6poSavujfjiei/a:  pelles  arietnm  nihricatae)  formed 
pai't  of  the  nicaterials  that  the  Israelites  were  ordered 
to  present  as  offerings  for  the  making  of  the  Taber- 
nacle (Ex.  xxv.  5)  ;  of  which  they  served  as  one  of 
the  inner  coverings,  there  being  above  the  rams' 
skins  an  outer  covering  of  badgers'  skins.  [But  see 
Badger,  App.  A.] 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  A.  V.,  following  the 
LXX.  and  Vulgate,  and  the  Jewish  interpreters,  is 
correct.  The  original  words,  it  is  true,  admit  of 
being  rendered  thus — "  skins  of  red  rams,"  in  which 
case  meodddmim  agrees  with  elim  instead  of  'oroth 
(see  Ewald,  Gr.  §570).  The  red  ram  is  by  Ham. 
Smith  (Kitto,  CycL  s.  v.)  identified  with  the 
Aoudad  sheep  {Ammotragus  Traijelaphus  ;  see  a 
figure  in  App.  A),  "  whose  normal  colour  is  red, 
fi'om  bright  chestnut  to  rufous  chocolate."  It  i< 
much  nioie  probable,  however,  that  the  skins  were 
those  of  the  domestic  breed  of  rams,  which,  as 
Rashi  says,  "  were  dyed  red  after  they  wei-e  pre- 
pared." [W.  H.] 

RATHA  (HQl :    'Va^aia  :   Rapha).     Son  of 

Binea,  among  the  descendants  of  Saul  and  Jonathan 
(1  Chr.  viii.  37).  He  is  called  Rephaiah  in 
1  Chr.  ix.  43. 

RAPH'AEL  ('Pa(/)a7jA.  =  ^ND"l,  "the  divine 
healer ").  "  One  of  the  seven  holy  angels  which 
....  go  in  and  out  before  the  glory  of  the  Holy 
One"  (Tob.  xii.  15).  According  to  another  Jewish 
tradition,  Poiphael  was  one  of  the  four  angels  which 
stood  round  the  throne  of  God  (Michael,  Uriel, 
Gabriel,  Raphael).  His  place  is  said  to  have  been 
behind  the  throne,  by  the  standard  of  Ephraim 
(comp.  Num.  ii.  18),  and  his  name  was  interpreted 
as  foresliadowing  the  healing  of  the  schism  of  Jero- 
boam, who  arose  from  that  tribe  (1  K.  xi.  26  ; 
Buxtorf,  Lex.  liabb.  p.  47).  In  Tobit  he  appears 
as  the  guide  and  counsellor  of  Tobias.  By  his  help 
Sai-a  was  delivered  from  her  pl;igue  (vi.  16,  17), 
and  Tobit  from  his  blindness  (xi.  7,  8).  In  the 
book  of  Enoch  he  appears  as  '■  the  angel  of  the 
spirits  of  men"  (xx.  3;  comp.  Dillmann,  ad  foe). 
His  symbolic  character  in  the  apocryphal  narrative 
is  clearly  indicated  when  he  describes  himself  as 
"  Azarias  the  son  of  Ananias"  (Tob.  v.  12),  the 
messenger  of  the  Lord's  help,  springing  from  the 
Lord's  mei-cy.  [Tobit.]  The  name  occurs  in 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  7  as  a  simple  proper  name.  [Re- 
PHAEL.]  [B.  F.  W.] 

RAPHA'IM('Pa^o-Iv  =  n''N3"l,  Raphdm,  Ra- 
phain).  The  name  of  an  ancestor  of  Judith  (Jud. 
viii.  1).  In  some  MSS.  this  name,  with  three  others, 
is  omitted.  [B.  F.  W.] 

RA'PHON  {"Paipeidiv ;  Alex,  and  Joseph.  'Po- 
^wv  :  Pesh.  ^-^2»  :  Raphon).  A  city  of  Gilead, 
under  the  walls  of  which  Judas  Maccalaeus  defeated 
Timotheus  (1  Mace.  v.  37  only).  It  appears  to  have 
stood  on  the  eastern  side  of  an  important  wady, 
and  at  no  great  distance  from  Carnaim — piobably 
Ashteroth-Karuaim.  It  may  have  been  identical 
with  Raphana,  which  is  mentioned  by  Pliny  ( N.  II. 
V.  16)  as  one  of  the  cities  of  the  Decapolis,  but  with 
no  specification  of  its  position.  Nor  is  there  any- 
thing in  the  narrative  of  1  Mace,  of  2  Mace,  (xii.), 


RAVEN 

or  of  Josephus  {Ant.  xii.  8,  §3),  to  enable  us  to 
decide  whether  the  torrent  in  question  is  the  Hiero- 
ma.v_,  the  Zurka,  or  any  other. 

In  Kiepert's  map  accompanying  Wetzstein's  Haii- 
ran,  &c.  (I860),  a  place  named  Er-Rafe  is  marked, 
on  the  east  of  Wady  Hrer,  one  of  the  branches  of 
the  Wadij  Mandhnr,  and  close  to  the  great  road 
leading  to  'Sanamein,  which  last  has  some  claims 
to  be  identified  with  Ashteroth  Carnaim.  But  in 
our  present  ignorance  of  the  district  this  can  only  be 
taken  as  mere  conjecture.  If  Er-Rafe  be  Raphana 
we  should  expect  to  find  large  ruins.  [G.] 

RA'PHU  (N-1Q"1 :  'Pa<?)oD:  Raphu).  The&ther 

of  Palti,  the  spy  selected  from  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
(Num.  xiii.  9). 

RAS'SES,  CHILDREN  OF  {vloX  'Va<r(Tus : 
filii  Tharsis).  One  of  the  nations  whose  country 
was  ravaged  by  Holofernes  in  his  approach  to  Judaea 
(Jud.  ii.  23  only).  They  aie  named  next  to  Lud 
(Lydia),  and  apparently  south  thereof.  The  old 
Latin  version  reads  Tldras  et  Rasis,  with  which 
the  Peshito  was  probably  in  agreement  before  the 
present  corruption  of  its  text.  Wolff  {Ucts  Bitch 
Judith,  1861,  pp.  95,  96)  restores  the  original 
Chaldee  text  of  the  passage  as  Thars  and  Rosos,  and 
compares  the  latter  name  with  Rhosus,  a  place  on 
the  Gulf  of  Issus,  between  the  Rus  el-Khamir 
(Rhossicus  scopulus)  and  Iskenderun,  or  Alexan- 
dretta.  If  the  above  restoration  of  the  original  text 
is  correct,  the  interchange  of  Meshech  and  Rosos, 
as  connected  with  Thar  or  Thiras  (see  Gen.  x.  2), 
is  very  i  emarkable ;  since  if  Meshech  be  the  original 
of  Muscovy,  Rosos  can  hardly  be  other  than  tliat 
of  Russia.     [RosH.]  [G.] 

RATH'UMUS  {'Vievixos  ;  Alex.  '-Padvos : 
Rathimus).  "  Rathumus  the  story  writer"  of  1  Esd. 
ii.  16,  17,  25,  30,  is  the  same  as  "  Rehum  the 
chancellor"  of  Ezr.  iv.  8,  9,  17,  23. 

RAVEN  {yy,  'oreb  :  KSpa^  :  corvus),  the 
well-known  bird  of  that  name  which  is  mentioned  in 
various  passages  in  the  Bible.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the  Heb.  'oreb  is  cori'ectly  translated,  the  old 
versions  agreeing  on  the  point,  and  the  etymology, 
from  a  root  signifying  "  to  be  black,"  favouring  this 
rendering.  A  raven  was  sent  out  by  Noah  fiom  the 
ark  to  see  whether  the  waters  were  abated  (Gen. 
viii.  7).  This  bird  was  not  allowed  as  food  by  the 
Mosaic  law  (Lev.  xi.  15):  the  word  'oreb  is  doubt- 
less used  in  a  generic  sense,  and  includes  other 
species  of  the  genus  Corvus,  such  as  the  crow  ( C. 
corone),  and  the  hooded  crow  ( C.  cornuc).  Ravens 
were  the  means,  under  the  Divine  command,  of 
suppoiting  the  prophet  Elijah  at  the  brook  Cherith 
(1  K.  xvii.  4,  6).  They  are  expressly  mentioned 
as  instances  of  God's  protecting  love  and  goodness 
(Job  xxxviii.  41,  Luke  xii.  24,  Ps.  cxlvii.  9). 
They  are  enumerated  with  the  owl,  the  bittern,  &c., 
as  marking  the  desolation  of  Edom  (Is.  xxxiv.  11), 
"The  locks  of  the  beloved"  are  compared  to  the 
glossy  blackness  of  the  raven's  plumage  (Cant. 
V.  11).  The  raven's  carnivorous  habits,  and 
especially  his  readiness  to  attack  the  eye,  are 
alluded  to  in  Prov.  xxx.  17. 

The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  differ  materially  from  the 
Hebiew  and  our  Authorised  Version  in  Gen.  viii.  7, 
for  whereas  in  the  Hebi  ew  we  read  "  that  the  raven 
went  forth  to  and  fio  [from  the  ark]  until  the 
waters  wei'e  dried  up,"  in  the  two  old  versions 
named  above,  togethei-  with  the  Syriac,  the  raven 


BAZIS 

is  represented  as  "  not  returning  until  the  water 
was  dried  from  off  the  earth."  On  this  subject  the 
reader  may  refer  to  Houbigant  {Not.  Crit.  i.  12), 
Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  801),  Roseumiiller  {Schol.  in  V. 
T.),  KaMsch  (^Genesis),  and  'Putrick  {Commentarij), 
who  shews  the  manifest  incorrectness  of  the  LXX. 
in  representing  the  raven  as  keeping  away  fiom  tlie 
ark  while  the  waters  lasted,  but  as  returning  to  it 
when  they  were  dried  up.  The  expression  "  to  and 
fro  "  cleai-Iy  proves  that  the  raven  must  have  re- 
turned to  the  ark  at  intervals.  The  bird  would 
doubtless  have  found  food  in  the  floating  carcasses 
of  the  Deluge,  but  would  require  a  more  solid 
resting-ground  than  they  could  afford. 

The  subject  of  Elijah's  sustenance  at  Cherith  by 
means  of  ravens  has  given  occasion  to  much  fanci- 
ful speculation.  It  has  been  attempted  to  shew 
that  the  'orebim  ("ravens")  were  the  people  of 
Orbo,  a  small  town  near  Cheiith  ;  this  theory  has 
been  well  answered  by  Reland  {Palaest.  ii.  913). 
Others  have  found  in  the  ravens  merely  merchants  ; 
while  Michaelis  has  attempted  to  shew  that  Elijah 
merely  plundered  the  ravens'  nests  of  hares  and 
other  game!  Keil  {Comment,  in  K.  xvii.)  makes 
the  following  just  observation :  "  The  text  knows 
nothing  of  bird-catching  and  nest-robbing,  but  ac- 
knowledges the  Loid  and  Creator  of  the  creatures, 
who  commanded  the  ravens  to  provide  His  servant 
with  bread  and  flesh." 

Jewish  and  Arabian  writers  tell  strange  stories  of 
this  bird  and  its  cruelty  to  its  young ;  hence,  say 
some,  the  Lord's  express  care  for  the  young  ravens, 
after  they  had  been  driven  out  of  the  nests  by  the 
pai-ent  birds  ;  but  this  belief  in  the  raven's  want  of 
affection  to  its  young  is  entirely  without  founda- 
tion. To  the  tact  of  the  raveu  being  a  common 
bird  in  Palestine,  and  to  its  habit  of  flying  rest- 
lessly about  in  constant  search  for  tbod  to  satisfy  its 
voracious  appetite,  may  perhaps  be  traced  the 
reason  for  its  being  selected  by  our  Lord  and  the 
inspired  writers  as  the  especial  object  of  God's 
pioviding  care.  The  raven  belongs  to  the  order 
Insessores,  family  Corvidae.  [VV.  H.] 

EA'ZIS  {"PaCeis :  Pumas).  "  One  of  the  elders 
of  Jerusalem,"  who  killed  himself  under  peculiarly 
terrible  circumstances,  that  he  might  not  tiill  "  into 
the  hands  of  the  wicked  "  (2  Mace.  xiv.  37-40). 
In  dying  he  is  reported  to  have  expressed  his  tiiith 
in  a  resurrection  (ver.  46) — a  belief  elsewhere  cha- 
racteristic of  the  Maccabaean  conflict.  This  act  of 
suicide,  which  was  wholly  alien  to  the  spirit  of  the 
Jewish  law  and  people  (Evvald,  Altertli.  198  ;  John 
viii.  22;  comp.  Grot.  De  Jure  Belli,  II.  xix.  .5),  has 
been  the  subject  of  considerable  discussion.  It  was 
quoted  by  the  Donatists  as  the  single  tiict  in  Scrip- 
ture which  supported  their  fanatical  contempt  of 
life  (Aug.  Ep.  104,  6).  Augustine  denies  the  fit- 
ness of  the  model,  and  condemns  the  deed  as  that 
of  a  man  "  non  eligendae  mortis  sapiens,  sed  ferendae 
humilitatis  impatiens"  (.^ug.  I.  c.  ;  comp.  c.  Gaud. 
i.  36-39).  At  a  later  time  the  favour  with  which 
the  writer  of  2  Mace,  views  the  conduct  of  llazis — 
a  fact  which  Augustine  vainly  denies — was  urged 
rightly  by  Protestant  wiiters  ;us  an  argument  against 
the  inspiration  of  the  book.  Indeed  the  whole  nar- 
rative breatiies  the  spirit  of  pagan  heroism,  or  of  the 
later  zealots  (comp.  Jos.  B.  J.  iii.  7,  iv.  1,  §10),  and 


REBEKAH 


1005 


the  deaths  of  Samson  and  Saul  offer  no  satisfactory 
parallel  (comp.  Grimm,  ad  loo.').  [B.  F.  W.j 

RAZOR.*  Besides  other  usages,  the  practice 
of  shaving  the  head  after  the  completion  of  a  vow, 
must  have  created  among  the  Jews  a  necessity  for 
the  special  trade  of  a  barber  (Num.  vi.  9,  18,  viii. 
7  ;  Lev.  xiv.  8;  Judg.  xiii.  5;  Is.  vii.  20;  Ez.  v.  1  ; 
Acts  xviii.  18).  The  instruments  of  his  work  were 
probably,  as  in  modern  times,  the  razor,  the  biusin, 
the  mLiror,  and  perhaps  also  the  scissors,  such  as 
are  described  by  Lucian  {Ado.  Indoct.  p.  395,  vol. 
ii.  ed.  Amst. ;  see  2  Sam.  xiv.  26).  The  piocess  of 
Oriental  shaving,  and  especially  of  the  head,  is  mi- 
nutely described  by  Chardui  ( Voy.  iv.  144).  It 
may  be  remarked  that,  like  the  Levites,  the  Egyp- 
tian priests  were  accustomed  to  shave  their  whole 
bodies  (Her.  ii.  36,  37).  [H.  W.  P.] 

REAI'A  (iTNl :  'Ptjx"  =  -Sei«).  A  Keubenite, 
son  of  Micah,  and  apparently  prince  of  his  tribe 
(1  Chr.  V.  5).     The  name  is  identical  with 

REAI'AH  (  n^NI :  'Pa5o;  Alex. 'Peia:  Rata). 
1.  A  descendant  of  Shubal,  the  son  of  Judah  (1 
Chr.  iv.  2). 

2.  ('Paia,  Ezr.  ;  'Paata,  Neh. :  Radia.)  The 
children  of  Reaiah  were  a  tiunily  of  Nethinim  who 
returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
47;  Neh.  vii.  50).  The  name  appears  as  AiRUS 
in  1  Esd.  v.  31. 

RE'BA  (yai:  'PojSJk  in  Num.,  'PojSe  in  Josh. : 
Rehe).  One  of  the  five  kings  of  the  Midianites  slain 
by  the  children  of  Israel  in  their  avenging  expe- 
dition, when  Bakuun  fell  (Num.  xxxi.  8  ;  Josh.  xiii. 
21).  The  ditlerent  equivalents  for  the  name  in  the 
LXX.  of  Numbers  and  Joshua  seem  to  indicate  that 
these  books  were  not  translated  by  the  same  hand. 

REBECCA  ('Pe^eKKo  :  Rebecca).  The  Greek 
form  of  the  name  Rebekah  (Rom.  ix.  10  only). 

REBEK'AH  (ni^an,  i.e.  Ribkah:  'Pe/Se/cKo: 

Rebecca),  daughter  of  Bethuel  (Gen.  xxii.  23)  and 
sister  of  Laban,  marriied  to  Isaac,  who  stood  in 
the  relation  of  a  first  cousin  to  her  father  and  to 
Lot.  She  is  fii-st  presented  to  us  in  the  account  of 
the  mission  of  Eliezer  to  Padan-aram  (Gen.  xxiv.), 
in  which  his  interview  with  Rebekah,  her  consent  and 
marriage,  are  related.  The  whole  chapter  has  been 
pointed  out  as  uniting  most  of  the  circumstances  of 
a  pattern -marriage.  The  sanction  of  parents,  the 
guidance  of  God,  the  domestic  occupation  of  Rebekah, 
her  beauty,  courteous  kindness,  willing  consent  and 
modesty,  and  success  in  retaining  her  husband's 
love.  Kor  nineteen  years  she  was  childless:  then, 
after  the  prayers  of  Isaac  and  her  journey  to  in- 
quire of  the  Lord,  Esau  and  Jacob  were  born, 
and  while  the  younger  was  more  particularly  the 
companion  and  tiivouritu  of  his  mother  (xxv.  19-28) 
the  elder  beciune  a  grief  of  mind  to  her  (xxvi.  35). 
When  Isaac  was  driven  by  a  famine  into  the  lawle.-^s 
country  of  the  Philistines,  Rebekah's  beauty  be&mie, 
as  was  apprehended,  a  source  of  danger  to  iier  hus- 
band. But  Abimelech  was  restrained  by  a  'sense 
of  justice  such  as  the  conduct  of  his  predecessor 
(xx.)  m  the  aise  of  Sarali  would  not  leiul  Isaac  to 
exjwct.  It  was  piobably  a  considerable  time  after- 
wards when  Rebekah  suggested  the  deceit  that  was 


*  1 .  miD  ;  o-iSrjpo!,  fupoi' ;  novacula,  ferrupi :  from 
mD,  "  scrape,"  or  "  sweep."  Gcseuius  connects  it  with 
the  root  NT,  "  to  fear"  (7'Aes.  819). 


2.  lypl ;  pofiij)oi'tt ;  gladius. 

3.  aPS  ;  Kovpev<;i  ionsor  (2 Sam.  XX. S).    IntheSyriac 
Vers,  of  2  Sam.  xx.  8,  paUibo  is  "  a  razor  "  (Ues.  p.  283). 


1006 


EECHAB 


practised  by  .Tncob  on  his  blind  father.  She  directed 
and  aided  him  in  carrying  it  out,  foresaw  the  pro- 
bable consequence  of  Esau's  anger,  and  prevented  it 
by  moving  Isaac  to  send  Jacob  away  to  Padan-arani 
(xxvii.)  to  her  own  kindred  (xxix.  12).  The  Targum 
Pseudojoii.  .--tatos  (Gen.  sxxv.  8)  that  the  news  other 
death  was  brought  to  Jacob  at  Allon-bachuth.  It 
has  been  conjectured  that  she  died  during  his 
sojourn  in  Padan-aram  ;  for  her  nurse  appears  to 
have  left  Isaac's  dwelling  and  gone  back  to  Padan- 
aram  before  that  period  (compare  xxiv.  59  and 
.XXXV.  8),  and  Piebekah  is  not  mentioned  when  Jacob 
returns  to  his  father,  nor  do  we  hear  of  her  burial 
till  it  is  incidentally  mentioned  by  Jacob  on  his 
deathbed  (xlix.  31). 

St.  Paul  (I'lom.  ix.  10)  refers  to  her  as  being 
made  acquainted  with  the  purpose  of  God  regarding 
her  children  before  they  were  born. 

For  comments  on  the  whole  history  of  liebekah, 
see  Origen,  Horn,  in  Gen.  x.  and  xii. ;  Chrysostom, 
Horn,  in  Genesin,  48-54.  Kebekah's  inquiry  of 
God,  and  the  answer  given  to  her,  are  discussed  by 
Deyling,  Obser.  Sac.  i.  12,  p.  53  seq.,  and  in  an 
essay  by  J.  A.  Schmid  in  Mv.  Thes.  Theol.-Phi- 
lolog.  i.  IBS.  [W.T.  B.] 

EE'CHAB  (331  =  "  the  horseman,"  from 
3D"),  rdc(i6,  "  to  ride "  :  'Prixdfi:  Eechah).  Three 
pei-sons  bearing  this  name  are  mentioned  in  the 
0.  T. 

1.  The  father  or  ancestor  of  Jehonadab  (2  K.  x. 
15,  23;  1  Chr.  ii.  55;  Jer.  xx.w.  6-19),  identified 
by  some  writers,  but  conjecturally  only,  with  Hobab 
(Arias  Montanus  on  Judg.  i.;  Sanctius,  quoted  by 
Calmet,  Diss,  sur  Ics  Eecliabites).   [Rechabites.] 

2.  One  of  tlie  two  "captains  of  bands"  {riyov- 
fxivoi  <rv(rTpe/j.fidTa!v,  prlncipes  latronum),  whom 
ishboslieth  took  into  his  service,  and  who,  when  his 
cause  was  failing,  conspired  to  murder  liim  (2  Sam. 
iv.  2).  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  2,  §1)  calls  him  Qdvvos. 
[BaANAII  ;   ISHBOSIIKTU,  vol.  i.  p.  891.) 

3.  The  father  of  Malchiah,  ruler  of  part  of  Beth- 
haceerem  (Neh.  iii.  14),  named  as  repairing  the 
dung-gate  in  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem  under 
Nehemiah.  [E.  H.  P.] 

EE'CHABITES  (D''33n :  'hpxa^eiv,  'AAxa- 
^eiv  :  Eechahitae).  The  tribe  thus  named  appears 
before  us  in  one  memorable  scene.  Their  history 
before  and  after  it  lies  in  some  obscurity.  We  are 
left  to  search  out  and  combine  some  scattered  notices, 
and  to  get  from  them  wliat  light  we  can. 

(I.)  In  1  Chr.  ii.  55,  the  house  of  Rechab  is 
identified  with  a  section  of  the  Kenites,  who  came 
into  Canaan  with  the  Isi-aelites  and  letained  their 
nomadic  habits,  and  the  name  of  Hammath  is 
mentioned  as  the  patriarch  of  the  whole  tribe. 
[Kenites  :  Hemath.]  It  has  been  inferred  from 
this  passage  that  the  descendants  of  ifechab  be- 
longed to  a  branch  of  the  Kenites  settled  tioni  the 
first  at  Jabez  in  Judah.  [Jehonadah.]  The  tiict, 
however,  that  Jehonadab  took  an  active  part  in  tlie 
revolution  which  placed  Jehu  on  the  throne,  seems 
to  indicate  that  he  and  his  tribe  belonged  to  Israel 
rather  than  to  Judah,  and  the  late  date  of  1  Chr., 
taken  together  with  other  facts  (infra),  makes  it 
more  probable  tliat  this  passage  refers  to  the  locality 
occupied  by  the  Rechabites  after  their  return  from 
the  captivity.^    Of  Rechab  himself  nothing  is  known. 


"  In  confirmation  of  this  view,  it  may  be  noticed  tliat 
the  "shearing-house"  of 2  K.x.14  was  probably  the  known 


RECHABITES 

He  may  have  been  the  father,  he  may  have  been  the 
I'emote  ancestor  of  Jehonadab.  The  meaning  of  the 
word  makes  it  jirobable  enough  that  it  was  an 
epithet  passing  into  a  proper  name.  It  may  have 
pointed,  as  in  the  robber-chief  of  2  Sam.  iv.  2,  to 
a  conspicuous  fonn  of  the  wild  Bedouin"  life,  and 
Jehonadab,  the  son  of  the  Rider,  may  have  been,  in 
part  at  least,  for  that  reason,  the  companion  and 
friend  of  the  fierce  captain  of  Israel  who  drives  as 
with  the  fury  of  madness  (2  K.  ix.  20). 

Another  conjecture  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
name  is  ingenious  enough  to  merit  a  disinterment 
from  the  forgotten  learning  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury. Boulduc  (De  Eccles.  ante  Leg.  iii.  10)  infers 
from  2  K.  ii.  12,  .xiii.  14,  that  the  two  great  pro- 
phets P]lijah  and  Elisha  were  known,  each  of  them 
in  his  time,  as  the  chariot  (33"^,  RecheV)  of  Israel, 
i.  e.  its  strength  and  protection.  He  infers  from 
this  that  the  special  disciples  of  the  prophets,  who 
followed  them  in  all  their  austerity,  were  known  as 
the  "  sons  of  the  chai-iot,"  B'ne  Rcccb,  and  that 
afterwards,  when  the  original  meaning  had  been  lost 
sight  of,  this  was  taken  as  a  patronymic,  and  re- 
ferred to  an  unknown  Rechab,  At  present,  of  course, 
the  different  vowel-points  of  the  two  woids  are 
sufficiently  distinctive;  but  the  strange  reading  of 
the  LXX.  in  Judg.  i.  19  (oVt  'Ptjxo'/S  StfcmiAaTu 
avTo7s,  where  the  A.  V.  has  "  because  they  had 
chariots  of  ii'on ")  shows  that  one  word  might 
easily  enough  be  taken  for  the  other.  Apart  from 
the  evidence  of  the  name,  and  the  obvious  proba- 
bility of  the  fact,  we  have  the  statement  iraleat 
quantum')  of  John  of  Jerusalem  that  Jehonadab 
was  a  disciple  of  Elisha  {De  Instit.  MIonach.  c.  25). 

(II.)  The  personal  history  of  Jehonadab  has 
been  dealt  with  elsewhere.  Here  we  have  to  notice 
the  new  character  which  he  impressed  on  the  tribe, 
of  which  he  was  the  head.  As  his  name,  his 
descent,  and  the  part  which  he  played  indicate,  he 
and  his  people  had  all  along  been  worshippers  of 
Jehovah,  circumcised,  and  so  within  the  covenant 
of  Abraham,  though  not  reckoned  as  belonging  to 
Israel,  and  probably  therefore  not  considering  them- 
selves bound  by  the  Mosaic  law  and  ritual.  The 
worship  of  Baal  introduced  by  Jezebel  and  Ahab 
vvcvs  accordingly  not  less  offensive  to  them  than  to 
the  Israelites.  The  luxury  and  licence  of  Phoeni- 
cian cities  threatened  the  destruction  of  the  sim- 
plicity of  their  nomadic  life  (Amos  ii.  7,  8,  vi.  3-6). 
A  protest  was  needed  against  both  evils,  and  as  in 
the  case  of  P]lijah,  and  of  the  Nazarites  of  Amos  ii. 
11,  it  took  the  forai  of  asceticism.  Thei-e  was  to 
be  a  more  rigid  adhoence  than  ever  to  the  old  Arab 
life.  What  had  been  a  traditional  habit,  was  en- 
forced by  a  solemn  command  from  the  sheikh  and 
prophet  of  the  tribe,  the  destroyer  of  idolatry, 
which  no  one  dared  to  transgress.  They  were  to 
drink  no  wine,  nof  build  house,  nor  sow  seed,  nor 
plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any.  All  their  days  they 
were  to  dwell  in  tents,  as  remembering  tliat  they 
were  strangers  in  the  land  (Jer.  xxxv.  6,  7).  This 
was  to  be  the  condition  of  their  retaining  a  distinct 
tribal  existence.  Eor  two  centuries  and  a  half  they 
adhered  faithfully  to  this  rule  ;  but  we  have  no 
record  of  any  pait  taken  by  them  in  the  history  of 
the  period.  We  may  think  of  them  as  presenting 
the  same  picture  which  other  tribes,  uniting  the 
uomade  life  with  religious  austerity,  have  presented^ 
in  later  periods. 

rendezvous  of  tlie  nomade  tribe  of  the  Kenites,  with  Ihui? 
flocks  of  sheep.     [Sheaking-uol'se.] 


RECHABITES 

The  Nabathaeans,  of  whom  Diodorus  Siculus 
speaks  (xix.  94)  as  neither  sowing  seed,  nor  planting 
fi'uit^tree,  nor  using  nor  building  house,  and  enforc- 
ing these  transmitted  customs  under  pain  of  death, 
give  us  one  striking  instance.''  Another  is  found 
in  the  prohibition  of  wine  by  Mahomet  (Sale's 
Koran,  Prelim.  Diss.  §5).  A  yet  more  interesting 
parallel  is  found  in  the  rapid  growth  of  the  sect 
of  the  Wahabys  during  the  last  and  present  cen- 
turies. Abd-ul-Wahab,  from  whom  the  sect  takes 
its  name,  reproduces  the  old  type  of  character  in  all 
its  completeness.  Anxious  to  protect  his  country- 
men from  the  revolting  vices  of  the  Turks,  as 
Jehonadab  had  been  to  protect  the  Kenites  from 
the  like  vices  of  the  Phoenicians,  the  Bedouin  re- 
former felt  the  necessity  of  returning  to  the  old 
austerity  of  Arab  life.  What  wine  had  been  to  the 
earlier  preacher  of  righteousness,  the  outwai'd  sign 
and  incentive  of  a  fatal  corruption,  opium  and 
tobacco  were  to  the  later  prophet,  and,  as  such, 
were  rigidly  proscribed.  The  rapidity  with  which 
the  Wahabys  became  a  formidable  party,  the  Puri- 
tans of  Islam,  presents  a  striking  analogy  to  the 
strong  political  influence  of  Jehonadab  in  2  K.  x. 
16,  23  (comp.  Burckhardt,  Bedouins  and  Wahabys, 
p.  283,  &c.). 

(III.)  The  invasion  of  Judah  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
in  B.C.  607,  drove  the  Rochabites  from  their  tents. 
Possibly  some  of  the  previous  periods  of  danger 
may  have  led  to  their  settling  within  the  limits 
of  the  territory  of  Judah.  Some  inferences  may 
be  safely  drawn  from  the  facts  of  Jer.  xxxv.  The 
names  of  the  Rechabites  show  that  they  continued 
to  be  worshippers  of  Jehovah.  They  are  already 
known  to  the  prophet.  One  of  them  (ver.  3)  bears 
the  same  name.  Their  rigid  Nazarite  life  gained 
for  them  admission  into  the  house  of  the  Lord,  into 
one  of  the  chambers  assigned  to  priests  and  Levites, 
within  its  precincts.  They  were  received  by  the 
sons  or  followers  of  a  "  man  of  God,"  a  prophet 
or  devotee,  of  special  sanctity  (ver.  4).  Here  they 
are  tempted  and  aie  proof  against  the  temptation, 
and  tlieir  steadfastness  is  turned  into  a  reproof  for 
the  unfaithfulness  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  [Jere- 
miah.] The  history  of  this  trial  ends  with  a 
special  blessing,  the  full  import  of  which  has,  for 
the  most  part,  not  been  adequately  apprehended : 
"  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  shall  not  want  a  man 
to  stand  before  me  for  ever"  (ver.  19).  Whether 
we  look  on  this  as  the  utterance  of  a  true  prophet, 
or  as  a  vaticinium  e.r  eventu,  we  should  hardly 
expect  at  this  precise  point  to  lose  sight  altogether 
of  those  of  whom  they  were  spoken,  even  if  the 
words  pointed  only  to  the  pei-petuation  of  the  name 
and  tribe.     They  have,  however,  a  higher  meaning. 

The  words  "to  stand  before  me"  (^iS?  T^'V),  are 

b  The  fact  that  the  Nabathaeans  habitually  drank  "  wild 
honey"  (jiihi  ayptof)  m\\eii  with  water (DioJ.  Sic.  xlx.94), 
and  that  the  Bedouins  as  habitually  still  make  locusts  an 
article  of  food  (Burckhardt,  Bedouins,  p.  270),  shews  very 
strongly  that  the  Baptist's  life  was  fashioned  after  the 
Kechabite  as  well  as  the  Nazarite  type. 

0  It  may  be  worth  while  to  refer  to  a  few  authorities 
agreeing  in  the  general  interpretation  here  given,  though 
differing  as  to  details.  Vatablns  {Crit.  Sac.  in  loc.)  mcn- 
iiiiua  a  Jewish  tradition  (R.  Judah,  as  cited  by  Klmchi ; 
comp.  Sailiger,  FAench.  Trihaeres.  Scrrar.  p.  26)  that  the 
daughters  of  the  Rechabites  married  Levites,  and  that 
thus  their  children  came  to  minister  in  the  Temple. 
Clarlus  (Ibid.)  conjectures  that  the  Rechabites  themselves 
were  chosen  to  sit  in  tbe  great  Couircil.  Sunctius  and 
Cdlmet  suppose  them  to  have  ministered  in  the  same 


RECHABITES 


1007 


essentially  liturgical.  The  tribe  of  Levi  is  chosen 
to  "stand  before"  the  Lord  (Dent.  x.  8,  xviii.  5,  7). 
In  Gen.  xviii.  22  ;  Judg.  xx.  28  ;  Ps.  cxxxiv.  1 ;  Jer. 
XV.  19,  the  liturgical  meaning  is  equally  prominent 
and  unmisfctkeabie  (comp.  Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v. ;  Grotius 
in  loc).  The  fact  that  this  meaning  is  given  ("  minis- 
tering before  me  ")  in  the  Tai-gum  of  Jonathan,  is  evi- 
dence (1)  as  to  the  received  meaning  of  the  phrase; 

(2)  that  this  rendering  did  not  shock  the  feelings 
of  studious  and  devout  Rabbis  in  Our  Lord's  time  ; 

(3)  that  it  was  at  least  probable,  that  there  existed 
representatives  of  the  Rechabites  connected  with 
the  Temple  services  in  the  time  of  Jonathan.  This 
then,  was  the  extent  of  the  new  blessing.  The 
Rechabites  were  solemnly  adopted  into  the  families 
of  Israel,  and  were  recognised  as  incorporated  into 
the  tribe  of  Levi."  Their  purity,  their  faithfulness, 
their  consecrated  life  gained  for  them,  as  it  gained 
for  other  Nazarites  that  honour  (comp.  Priests). 
In  Lam.  iv.  7,  we  may  perhaps  trace  a  reference  to 
the  Rechabites,  who  had  been  the  most  conspicuous 
examples  of  the  Nazarite  life  in  the  prophet's  time,  . 
and  most  the  object  of  his  admiration. 

(IV.)  It  remains  for  us  to  see  whether  there  are 
any  traces  of  their  after-history  in  the  Biblical  or 
later  writers.  It  is  believed  that  there  are  such 
traces,  and  that  they  confirm  the  statements  made 
in  the  previous  paragraph. 

(1.)  We  have  the  singular  heading  of  the  Ps. 
Ixxi.  in  the  LXX.  version  (t^  AaviS,  vlwf  'Icuj/a- 
5a/3,  Kol  Twv  irpdirwv  aixi^oi.\coTL(T6evrci>y),  evi- 
dence, of  course,  of  a  corresponding  Hebrew  title  in 
the  3rd  century  B.C.,  and  indicating  that  the  "  sons 
of  Jonadab"  shared  the  captivity  of  Israel,  and 
took  their  place  among  the  Levite  psalmists  who 
gave  expression  to  the  sorrows  of  the  people. ■* 

(2.)  There  is  the  significant  mention  of  a  son 
of  Rechab  in  Neh.  iii.  14,  as  co-operating  with  the 
priests,  Levites,  and  p-inces  in  the  restoration  of 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem. 

(3.)  The  mention  of  the  house  of  Rechab  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  55,  though  not  without  difficulty,  points, 
there  can  be  little  doubt,  fo  the  same  conclusion. 
The  Rechabites  have  become  Scribes  (D'•^QiD,  »So- 

phertni).  They  give  themselves  to  a  calling  which, 
at  the  time  of  the  return  from  Babylon  was  chiefly 
if  not  exclusively,  in  the  hands  of  Levites.  The 
other  names  (Tirathites,  Siiimeathites,  nnd 
SuCHATiiiTES  in  A.  V.)  seem  to  add  nothing  to 
our  knowledge.  The  Vulg.  rendering,  however 
(evidence  of  a  traditional  Jewish  interpretation  iu 
the  time  of  Jerome),  gives  a  translation  based  on 
etymologies,  more  or  less  accurate,  of  the  proper 
names,  which  strikingly  confirms  the  view  now 
taken.  "  Cognationes  quoque  Scribanmi  habitan- 
tium  in  Jabes,  c;iuentes  atque  resonantes,    et   in 

way  as  the  Nethlnlm  (Calmet,  Diss,  sur  les  liichab.  in 
Comm.  vi.  p.  xviii.  1726).  Serrarius  (Trihaeres.)  idniiifies 
them  with  the  Esseiies ;  Scaligcr  (?■.  c.)  with  the  Cliasidim, 
in  whose  name  the  priests  offered  special  daily  sacrifices, 
and  who,  in  this  way,  were  "  standing  before  the  Lord  " 
continually. 

•i  Neither  Ewald,  nor  Hengstenberg,  nor  De  Wette, 
notices  this  inscription.  Kwald,  however,  refers  the  Psalm 
to  the  time  of  the  captivity.  Hengstenberg,  who  asserts 
its  Davidlc  authorship,  indicates  an  alpliahctlc  relation 
between  it  and  I's.  Ixx.,  which  is  at  least  presumptive  evi- 
dence of  a  later  origin,  and  points,  with  some  fair  proba- 
bility, to  Jeremiah  as  the  writer.  (Comp.  1jAMi;ntations.) 
It  Is  noticed,  however,  by  Augustine(/;}u(rr.  in  I's.  Ixx.  »)2), 
and  Is  referred  by  him  to  the  lU'chabltcs  of  Jer.  xxxv. 


1008 


RECHABITES 


tabeinaculis  commorantes."  ^  Thus  intei'preted,  the 
passage  points  to  a  resumption  of  the  outward  form 
of  their  old  life  and  its  union  with  their  new  func- 
tions. It  deserves  notice  also  that  while  in  1  Chr. 
ii.  54,  55,  the  Keohabites  and  Netophathites  are  men- 
tioned in  close  connexion,  the  "  sons  of  the  singers  " 
in  Neh.  xii.  28  appear  as  coming  in  large  numbers 
from  the  villages  of  the  same  Netophathites.  The 
close  juxtaposition  of  the  Hechabites  with  the  de- 
scendants of  David  in  1  Chr.  iii.  1,  shows  also  in 
how  honourable  an  esteem  they  were  held  at  the 
time  when  that  book  was  compiled. 

(4.)  The  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  James 
the  Just  given  by  Hegesippus  (Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  23) 
brings  the  name  of  the  Hechabites  once  more  before 
us,  and  in  a  very  strange  connexion.  While  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  were  stoning  him,  "one  of 
the  priests  of  the  sons  of  Rechab,  the  son  of  Re- 
chabim,  who  are  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  the  pro- 
phet," cried  out,  protesting  against  the  crime.  Dr. 
Stanley  (Sermons  and  Essays  on  the  Apostolic  Age, 
p.  333),  struck  with  the  seeming  anomaly  of  a 
priest,  "  not  only  not  of  Levitical,  but  not  even  of 
Jewish  descent,"  supposes  the  name  to  have  been 
used  loosely  as  indicating  the  abstemious  life  of 
James  and  other  Nazarites,  and  points  to  the  fact 
that  Epiphanius  {Haer.  Ixxviii.  14)  ascribes  to 
Symeon  the  brother  of  James  the  words  which 
Hegesippus  puts  into  the  mouth  of  the  Rechabite, 
as  a  proof  that  it  denoted  merely  the  Nazarite 
form  of  life.  Calmet  (Diss,  snr  Ics  Bcchah.  1.  c.) 
supposes  the  man  to  have  been  one  of  the  Rechabite 
Nethinim,  whom  the  informant  of  Hegesippus  took, 
in  his  ignorance,  for  a  jiriest.  The  view  which  has 
been  here  taken  presents,  it  is  believed,  a  more 
satisfactory  solution.  It  was  hardly  possible  that 
a  writer  like  Hegesippus,  living  at  a  time  when 
the  details  of  the  Temple-ser\'ices  were  fresh  in  the 
memories  of  men,  should  have  thus  spoken  of  the 
Rechabim  unless  there  had  been  a  body  of  men  to 
whom  the  name  was  commonly  applied.  He  uses  it 
as  a  man  would  do  to  whom  it  was  familiar,  without 
being  struck  by  any  apparent  or  real  anomaly.  The 
Targum  of  Jonathan  on  Jer.  xxxv.  19,  indicates,  as 
has  been  noticed,  the  same  fact.  We  may  accept 
Hegesippus  tlierefore  as  an  additional  witness  to  the 
existence  of  the  Hechabites  as  a  recognized  body  up 
to  the  tlestruction  of  Jerusalem,  sharing  in  the  ritual 
of  the  Temple,  partly  descended  fiom  the  old  "  sons 
of  Jonadab,"  partly  recruited  by  the  incoi'poration 
into  their  ranks  of  men  devoting  tiiemselves,  as  did 
James  and  Symeon,  to  the  same  consecrated  life. 
The  form  of  austere  holiness  presented  in  the  life 
of  Jonadab,  and  the  blessing  pronounced  on  his 
descendants,  found  their  highest  representatives  iu 
the  two  Brothers  of  The  Lord. 

(5.)  Some  later  notices  are  not  without  interest. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in  the  12th  century  (Edit. 
Asher,  1840,  i.  112-114),  mentions  that  near  El 
Jubar  ( =  Pumbeditha)  he  found  Jews  who  were 
named  Hechabites.     They  tilled  the  ground,  kept 


e  The  etymologies  on  which  this  version  rests  are,  it 
must  be  confessed,  somewhat  doubtful.  Scaliger  (Elench. 
Trihaer.Serrar.  c.  23)  rejects  them  with  scorn.  Pellican  and 
Calmet,  on  the  other  hand,  defend  the  Vulg.  rendering,  and 
Gill  {in  he.)  does  not  dispute  it.  Most  modern  interpreters 
follow  the  A.  V.  in  taking  the  words  as  proper  nanips. 

f  A  paper  "  On  recent  Notices  of  the  Rechabites,"  by 


RED-HEIFEE 

flocks  and  herds,  abstained  from  wine  and  flesh, 
and  gave  tithes  to  teachers  who  devoted  themselves 
to  studying  the  Law,  and  weeping  for  Jerusalem. 
They  were  100,000  in  number,  and  were  governed 
by  a  prince,  Salomon  han-Nasi,  who  traced  his 
genealogy  up  to  the  house  of  David,  and  ruled  over 
the  city  of  Thema  and  Telmas.  A  later  traveller. 
Dr.  Wolff,  gives  a  yet  stranger  and  more  detailed 
report.  The  Jews  of  Jerusalein  and  Yemen  told 
him  that  he  would  find  the  Rechabites  of  Jer.  xxxv. 
living  near  Mecca  (Journal,  1829,  ii.  334).  When 
he  came  near  Senaa  he  came  in  contact  with  a  tribe, 
the  Beni-Khaibr,  who  identified  themselves  with  the 
sons  of  Jonadab.  With  one  of  them,  Mousa,  Wolfl' 
conversed,  and  reports  the  dialogue  as  follows : 
"  1  asked  him,  '  Whose  descendants  are  you  ? ' 
Mousa  answered,  '  Come,  and  I  will  show  you,' 
and  read  from  an  Arabic  Bible  the  words  of  Jer. 
xxxv.  5-11.  He  then  went  on.  '  Come,  and  you 
will  find  us  60,000  in  number.  You  see  the  words 
of  the  Prophet  have  been  fulfilled,  Jonadab  the  son 
of  liechab  shall  not  want  a  man  to  stand  before 
me  for  ever"'  (ibid.  p.  335).  In  a  later  journal 
{Jonrn.  1839,  p.  389)  he  mentions  a  second  inter- 
view with  I\Iousa,  describes  them  as  keeping  strictly 
to  the  old  rule,  calls  them  now  by  the  name  of  the 
B'ne-Arhab,  and  says  that  B'ne  Israel  of  the  tribe 
of  Dau  live  with  them.f  [E.  H.  P.] 

RE'CHAH  (HDT  :  'Pj/xa/S  ;  Alex.  "P-r)(pd : 
Recha).  In  1  Chr.  iv.  12,  Beth-rapha,  Paseah,  and 
Tehinnah  the  father,  or  founder,  of  Ir-nahash,  are 
said  to  have  been  "  the  men  of  Rechah."  In  the 
Targum  of  H.  Joseph  they  are  called  "  the  men 
of  the  great  Sanhedrin,"  the  Targumist  apparently 
reading  UST. 

RECORDER  (1''3tO),  an  officer  of  high  rank 

in  the  Jewish  state,  exercising  the  functions,  not 
simply  of  an  annalist,  but  of  chancellor  or  pi'esident 
of  the  privy  council.  The  title  itself  may  perhaps 
have  reference  to  his  office  as  adviser  of  the  king : 
at  all  events  the  notices  prove  that  he  was  more 
than  an  annalist,  though  the  superintendence  of  the 
records  was  without  doubt  entrusted  to  him.  In 
Da\'id's  court  the  recorder  appears  among  the  high 
officers  of  His  household  (2  Sam.  viii.  16,  xx.  24; 
1  Chr.  xviii.  15).  In  Solomon's,  he  is  coupled  with 
the  three  secretaries,  and  is  mentioned  last,  probably 
as  being  their  president  (1  K.  iv.  3).  Under  Heze- 
kiah,  the  recorder,  in  conjunction  with  the  prefect 
of  the  palace  and  the  secretary,  represented  the  king 
(2  K.  xviii.  18,  37) :  the  patronymic  of  the  recorder 
at  this  time,  Joah  the  son  of  Asaph,  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  he  was  a  Levite.  Under  Josiah  the 
recorder,  the  secretary,  and  the  governor  of  the 
city  were  entrusted  with  the  superintendence  of  the 
repairs  of  the  Temjile  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8).  These 
notices  are  sufficient  to  prove  the  high  position  held 
by  him.  [W.  L.  B.] 

RED-HEIFER.     [Six-Offering,  p.  1324.] 

Signer  Pierotti,  has  been  read,  since  the  above  was  in 
type,  at  the  Cambridge  Meeting  of  the  British  Association 
(October,  1862).  He  met  with  a  tribe  calling  themselves  by 
that  name  near  the  Dead  Sea,  about  two  miles  S.E.  from  it. 
They  had  a  Hebrew  Bible,  and  said  their  prayers  at  the 
tomb  of  a  Jewish  Puibbi.  They  told  him  precisely  the  same 
stories  as  had  been  told  to  Wolff  thirty  years  before. 


END  OF  THE  SECOND  VOLUME. 


LONDON:    PKINTEn   HV   W.   CLOWES  AND  SON.-i,   STAJIF(^RD  STREET,   AND  CnARING   CROSS. 


